No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1fl I ! ·---... §1.L ... lll ff I I [II ill 811 /§II <{ II r-n : II ! II . .:yi. ~ '~ LAKE WASHINGTON SPECIAL DREDGE ELEVATION CONTROL AREA FOR PROTECTION OF METRO SEWER --- ,,.,, ~ \~~ -·-···--;!" r Q<U i ~ \\\ 1 \ [._I ___ ,35·--__c___1~-~ \.\ ,o\· R ' ' f..f---------210·------'-;c','.--+- SITE PLAN LEGEND, -- 0 30 60 -···-···-ORDINARY HIGH WATER (OHW) NOTES 1. OUTER HARBOR LINE NOT SHOWN, LOCATED NORTH BEYOND AREAS SHOWN ON PLAN. I COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN STREET. SUITE lOJ E0t.A0N0S, WA 96020 PH 425-778-2542 SCALE IN FEET CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT SITE PLAN APPLICATION 8Y: CITY Of RENTON PRQPosrn~ MAINTENANCE DREDGING UP TO 1B,OOO CY !.tt. LAKE WASHINGTON AI:.. CITY OF RENTON .couNIX;_ KING SHEET 2 OF 3 llAli;_ 1 /3 /13 " ~ ·~ ~ ~ a ! V, i "' 0 " u ~ ~ 0 ~ 1 0 .... / 8 NOTES: 1. HYDROGRAPHI C SURVEY CONDUCTED ON FEBRUARY 17, 2012. 2. VERTICAL OA TUM: CO RPS OF EN GINEERS LOCK DA TUM 3. WA TER LEVELS : ORDINARY HIGH = 22.0 ' ORD INARY LOW = 20.0' PROJECT CONTROL POINT NO. FND . 3" SURFACE BRASS. ELEVATION = 26.96 FEET OVERALL SITE PLAN 0 60 120 Ii------1 ! SCALE IN F EET !I I I I I I HOfftL,~ I I I ~ I crrv OF RENTON I ·:~1r I " u DESIGNED BY JD ~T.: AS NOTED I ENTERED BY TM .., VERIFY SCALE ., CHECKED BY SP .., 0 -; PROJECT ENGINFFR .In ".). PROJECT MANAGER SP 3 13 lL ~UN~t~IUAL ~UH Ht~tW IM C: DATE REVISION BY BAA IS ONE INctl ~ 22xJ6 I . ___ .. v-I I I I 0383 I "~~;-: .. ~~ ~-'\;o:.''::'o~r h.... .... ...... .--.... -••. -----· --··· -·. CONl'RACT NO. SCALES ACCORDIHCLY JOB NUweER 0 ,. SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PRruECT EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 10.3 EDMONDS, WA 98020 PH 425-778-2542 SITE PLAN 0 100 200 I-------1 ' SCALE IN FEE T CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP APP U CA TlON BY: CITY OF RENTON ( PROPOSED· MAINTENANCE DREDGING UP TO 16,000 CY [li;_ LAK E WASHINGTON AL. CITY OF RENTON ~ KING SHEET 1 Of 3 ~ 1/3/13 EXISTING BULKHEAD '" ls a! '" § 0: C ti; '" T.O. DREDGE SLOPE EXISTING FLOATING DOCK ANO PILE SECTION EXISTING GROUND SURFACE 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE AREA TO BE DREDGED EXISTING FLOATING DOCK ANO PILE '" '" 0. a. g 0 "' a! '" '" @ " C '" 0: 0: C C L,. ci 0 f-' ~ g j i wa a ~ 1g ·:;:;:;/},;;~y,;2\/:\?X':;:.'-;~--'.-::~·:(~;-,.,,_//,:>,:;;::;;::~--\>>:~-:;.;,;,;:;:~~--/'. ,;;,/~~:-'" fi ~ t;: g g t . 5 1" OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE -5 z i!i-10 -100 ;:J~ ~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~--~ =~~; ci 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 2+00 2+25 2+50 2+75 3+00 3+25 3+50 3+75 4+00 4+25 d DISTANCE, FT SECTION NOTES: 0 30 60 1. ES TIM A TEO DREDGE VOLUME: 16,000 CY INCLUDING 1-Fi OVERDREDGE ALLOWANCE. SCAt.£ IN FEET PURPOSE· TO RESTORE SAFE NAVIGATION ANO USABILITY OF SEAPLANE BASE FACILITY I OCADON· LAT:47' 30' 2.44. LONG:122' 13' 06.14" ~ CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOCK DATUM ADJACENT PBOPERIY OWNERS· 1. CITY OF RENTON (SOUTH) 2. BILL COLACVRCIO JR. (WEST) 3. WIWAM COLACURC10 (WEST) CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT lYPICAL SECTIONS APf'IJCA.110N BY'1 CITY OF RENTON PRQPOSEP· MAINTENANCE DREDGING UP TO 16,000 CY lli.;_ LAKE WASHINGTON AB_ CHY OF' RENTON = KING SHEET 4 OF' 5 llAIE.. 3/26/12 :--, I 382' 332' 282' 4,000' 232' 1e2· >//'--' -c __ r-___ / '--c_ ~/ _____ ;) ~- I AIRPORT I ELEVATION .52' WSL ~\JV/ R10,000' 1- I I -r-~ r ti ' I ~ ,1=r<cJ1 \; .L I I ~ e'.XISTING ~1' \ NON-PRECISION APPRAOCH ~ l~'j 7 9 J 4_J/- (10,0,00') 10Y ,· )~~ 34: 1 SLOPE ( (XISTING ....,_: ..... ¥.000· HORIZOmAL SURFACE 162' ~SL 181' 332" 382" NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURF/1,CE (10,000') SLOPE 34:1 PRll.1.1.RY SURFACE (S,779') -1 ~aaa:::==~----+----~---~~=~===~=======~TOP OF CONICAL SURFACE (382' MSL) -,- HORIZOMIAL SURFACE (182' MSL) B.~7 9 4 6: 11 L10 \'{-,','., '• !;j I I . j r ). j (. -----"~-\_ ... -1- -17.-· I I _·.· . I,_ f; ~-(v-- --1 ' l~f" ~ I~ -__j -.1 FUTURE -PRECISION APPROACH (10.000') --+--i 34:1 SLOPE FUTURE NON-PRECISION APPROACH SURFACE (10,000") SLOPE 34:1 EXISTING VISUAL APPROACH SURfACE (s.ooo') SLOPE 20:1 -:"' -- ,' 1...:. ,,_, _ _,· CONICAL SURFACE (4,000') SLOPE 20:1 PLAN VIEW PROFILE VIEW FAR PART 77 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS ITE~ RUNWAY !6 RUNWAY 34 l,fQN-PR[IJ90N INSTRUMENT OTHER N'PAOACH ~ UTILfTY. \IIS16'UTY Ml•,ID,jUl,OS lilSUAL OTHER Tfl!W UTIUIY GFOTIR T>W< J/4-~ll[ N'PROACK SLOP( N'PROACK SURF/iCE INNrR ll'IOTH "' ~, w, ~oo· 1.500· 5,ooo· ------ N'PfWACH SURFACE OUTER W1DTH 3,500" 10,000 ------------·-·--- N'Pll'OJIC~ SURFACE LENGTH PRIIJAAY SURFACE W,QT!i R0.111\JS Of MORIZOl'ITAL SuArACE soo 10~000 OBSTRIJCTION DATA TABLE• (5,382" RUNWAY LENGTH) , ITEM LICl<TST,oJ,IDAAO 2 h_1~.!__S_!_-':N_~ J Bl/GI FEl'ICE (OL) < COl'ITROL TOWER (DL) 5 .o.ERODYt1£ H,U,,iCAA (OL) 5·-OOEIN(; ~JHOO,R (OL) ..,,----8HC ~-(al) • • FENCE ~-LIGHT(OL) 10 ~-l!G?!(9l)_ Tl iSOET~C ~,:;.,;;: (OL) EL PNTR CORRECTIVE ACTION RE!,IOV(D REl,00\IED -ffiBE LOWERE:0 --------- TO REl,AIN TO REI.IAJN , TO REl#,iN TO R[WJN RE .. OVED TO R[la/J~ . TO R[w.J~ TO RtWJN OBSTRUCTIONS LISTED ARE ESTlt.lAT[S ONLY FURTHER FIELD SURVEYS ARE REQUIRED TC IDENTIFY ALL OBSTRUCTIONS EL ~ ELEVATION PNTR ~ AMOUNT OF OBJECT PENETRATION IN~O PART 77 SURFACE OL ~ 08SIRUCTION LIGHT SI-\AOING INDICATES AREAS IN WH 1CH TERRAIN PENETRATES lt.lAGINARY SURFACES NOTES ELEVAllON IN Fffl ABOVE t.lfAI'< SEA LE\lf.L (t,,iSL) AT rap OF OBJECT THIS VALUE INCLUDES \ 5 Ft f T ADDED TO NON-INTERSTATE ROADWAYS. 17 r[[T ADDED TO INTERSTATE HIGHWAYS, AND 23 FEET ADDEO TO RAILROADS 2 US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS) DIGITAL RASTER GRAPHIC (DRG) PROJECTED IN Ult.I NAO 27, 7.5 t.11'-IUTE QUAD uses t.lAPS DATED 1994. GROUND PENETRATION C:::::::: 2000 0 2000 4000 HORIZONTAL SCALE IN FEET 400 0 400 800 ~ VERTICAL SCALE IN FEET REVISIONS NO DESCRIPTION av APe DATE FAR PART 77 AIRSPACE PLAN RUNWAY 16-34 u-{t~Y rJ .~~ 1$l~ + -~P;, RENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT/ CLAYTON seen FIELD URS 1501 4TH AVENUE SUITE 1400, SEATILE, WASHINGTON 9B101 (206) 438-2700 DESIGNED BY: ALO DATE: DECEMBER 2009 DRAWN BY: ALO CHECKED BY: JJY SHEET 3 OF 7 PROJECT MANAGER: JJY PAGE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: August 6, 2013 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. ,..;;.:.:;;,,;.:~==~---------------------------- ' Project Name: I LUA {file) Number: i Cross-References: i AKA's: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUA-13-000517, ECF, SME ·------------------------------------1 Project Manager: f Acceptance Date: If Applicant: Owner: Contact: I I PID Number: l ERC Decision Date: / ERC Appeal Date: I Administrative Approval: ; Appeal Period Ends: ! Public Hearing Date: ! Date Appealed to HEX: ! By Whom: i HEX Decision: Vanessa Dolbee May 8, 2013 City of Renton William Colacurcio, Jr. Ben Dahl 0723059096; 1180000285; 0723059007; 1180008400 July 8, 2013 July 26, 2013 July 10, 2013 Date: i Date Appealed to Council: , By Whom: l Council Decision: Date: 1------------------------------------ 1 Mylar Recording Number: , Project Description: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline I Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, : Renton Municipal Airport. i Location: ; Comments: 1 North end of the Renton Municipal Airport along the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project crosses into King County •,..,,,.. ________ , ________________________ _ Denis Law Mayor August 6, 2013 - . Ben.Dahl Renton Municipal Airport 616 W Perimeter Road, Unit A Renton, WA98057 Cityo / .. -., --------r L ------,. -- (~ , _1 ll]J;Jlfil Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. "Chlp"Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUA13-000S17, ECF, SME Dear Mr. Dahl: This Jetter is to inform you that the appeal period ended July 26,. 2013 for the Environmental . Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenc~d project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination therefore, this decision is final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. The applicant must comply with all ERC Mitigation Measures outlined in the Report and Decision dated, July 8, 2013. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7314. - For the_ Environmental Review Committee, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner . cc: William Colacurcio, Jr./ Owner{s) Samuel Stokes/ Party(ies) of Record . . Renton City Hall • 1 osS South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 ... "rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ________ ....... r; ~Cityroif ft . ·r:\ r " . [ , i -· ----_,'::..;/ __ PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: APPLICANT: CONTACT: PROJECT LOCATION: July 10, 2013 LUAB-000517, ECF, SME Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Ben Dahle, Renton Municipal Airport 616 W Perimeter Road, Unit A Renton, WA 98057 NAME INITIAUDATE North end of the Renton Municipal Airport along the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project crosses into King County. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project area is 76,000 square feet located waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of the Lake Washington Shoreline in the Seaplane Base. The project is located in the aquatic habitat of Lake Washington near the area designated as Shoreline High Intensity, Lake Washington Reach J of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Overall the project would span four parcels (0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285, and 1180008400) including property leased to the City of Renton from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and two parcels located in King County. This Shoreline Exemption would only apply to the parcels located in the City of Renton. King County is conducting a separate review for those parcels located in their jurisdiction, as of the date of this report King County has not yet issued a permit. Under existing conditions the Seaplane Base consists of a taxi channel and basin, two floating docks for passenger boarding and offloading and a launch/retrieval ramp. The existing Seaplane Base consists of approximately 3,620 SF of floating docks. The two existing docks are configured in an L-shape, the first dock extends approximately 40 feet parallel to the shore and approximately 70 feet perpendicular to the shore and the second dock extends approximately 190 feet parallel to the shoreline. The existing shoreline along the Airport is lined with a sheet DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT MANAGER: APPLICANT: CONTACT: PROJECT LOCATION: July 10, 2013 LUAB-000517, ECF, 5ME Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Ben Dahle, Renton Municipal Airport 616 W Perimeter Road, Unit A Renton, WA 98057 North end of the Renton Municipal Airport along the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project crosses into King County. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project area is 76,000 square feet located waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of the Lake Washington Shoreline in the Seaplane Base. The project is located in the aquatic habitat of Lake Washington near the area designated as Shoreline High Intensity, Lake Washington Reach J ofthe Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Overall the project would span four parcels (0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285, and 1180008400) including property leased to the City of Renton from the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and two parcels located in King County. This Shoreline Exemption would only apply to the parcels located in the City of Renton. King County is conducting a separate review for those parcels located in their jurisdiction, as of the date of this report King County has not yet issued a permit. Under existing conditions the Seaplane Base consists of a taxi channel and basin, two floating docks for passenger boarding and offloading and a launch/retrieval ramp. The existing Seaplane Base consists of approximately 3,620 SF of floating docks. The two existing docks are configured in an L-shape, the first dock extends approximately 40 feet parallel to the shore and approximately 70 feet perpendicular to the shore and the second dock extends approximately 190 feet parallel to the shoreline. The existing shoreline along the Airport is lined with a sheet • • pile wall adjacent to the seaplane dock. From the seaplane ramp to the mouth of the Cedar River the shoreline is armored with riprap. The purpose of the project is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events, notably November 2006 and January 2009. The proposed dredging would remove recent sediment deposits from under the floating docks and up to the edge of existing structures to restore the Seaplane Base access and mooring basin to required depths for safe operations. The proposed dredge area and depths were determined based on historical areas of operation and minimum requirements as outlined by the FAA standards for Seaplane Base Operations. Pursuant to the FAA Guidance AC 150/5359-1(3)(22) a minimum depth of 6 feet of water is needed to support most seaplane operations. The project has been limited in design to restoring historic land use function and complying with the FAA requirements. If the maintenance dredging is not conducted the use of the Seaplane Base would continue to be limited until the accrued sediment prevents seaplanes from utilizing the Renton Seaplane Base. As such, a total estimated volume of 16,000 cubic yard of dredged material is proposed to be removed from the project area. The dredged sediment is proposed to be disposed at the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. Historic dredging data was obtained from a 1986 AT&T plan sheet, attached. Using this historic information the applicant has determined the historic dredge depth is approximately at 9 feet elevation (22 ft. OHWM -13 ft.= 9 ft.). The applicant has proposed to dredge to a lakebed elevation of 9.5 feet, which is 0.5 feet above the historic dredge depth. Sediment would be dredged from a 48,000 square foot area to reach the 9.5 foot elevation adjacent to the seaplane base. Approximately 2 to 9 feet of sediment would be dredged from this area. An additional area of approximately 28,000 square feet would be dredged in order to create the 4:1 side slope required. The project has incorporated a 1-foot over dredge allowance, which could result in a dredge depth of 8.5 feet, if over dredge occurred. It is estimated by the applicant that the over dredge depth is consistent with the historic dredging information provided on the AT&T plan set, because the depth of 9 feet was derived from an average depth. As shown on the historic plan set the area labeled "City of Renton Dredge Area" identifies sediment depths at 8 feet elevation and more below the OHWM (22 ft. OHWM -14 ft.= 8 ft.). The maintenance dredging work is proposed to be conducted from the waters of Lake Washington utilizing floating equipment including a spud barge for the clamshell dredge and two barges for receiving dredge material. Portions of the floating docks and upland bulkhead within the project area would be temporarily removed to conduct the dredging work and would be reinstalled upon completion of the project. In addition, it is anticipated that the project would require the temporary removal and reinstallation of at least one 12-inch steel pile. The applicant has indicated that vibratory pile driving activities are anticipated to take no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days within the in-water work window. The project does not include the construction of new structures or facilities. The applicant submitted a Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013, attached. The Lake Study concludes that the project would result in temporary increases to Page 2 of 8 turbidity as a result of the dredge process; overall the project would have no long term effects on shoreline ecologic functions such as fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. In addition the project would have no long term effect on shoreline processes including but not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; and nutrient and pathogen removal. Furthermore, the report concludes that the proposed maintenance dredge is likely to maintain all existing functions at their current level and is not anticipated to have any long term impacts and/or have any significant detrimental impact to the project area or the watershed system. Finally, the report identifies that the project is not anticipated to impact shoreline processes or result in net loss of shoreline ecological function. Pursuant to RMC 4-3-090F.3.b. Dredging Limited, dredging is permitted only in cases where the proposal, including any necessary mitigation, will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions and maintenance dredging of established navigation channels and basins shall be restricted to maintaining previously dredged and/or existing authorized location, depth, and width. Based on the provided Lake Study and Biological Assessment as explained above, the project would not result in a loss of shoreline ecological functions. The subject maintenance dredging project is intended to allow for the continued operation of an existing legally established navigation channel for the Seaplane Base. The dredging design and depths are in compliance with FAA standards and would not exceed historic dredge depths; therefore the project dredging project would be permitted. RMC 4-3-090F.3.d, establishes review criteria for dredging projects, the applicable criteria is addressed below: 1) All proposed dredging operations shall be designed by an appropriate State-licensed professional engineer. A stamped engineering report and an assessment of potential impacts on ecological functions shall be pr_epared by qualified consultants and shall be submitted to the Renton Planning Division as part of the application for a shoreline permit. Staff Comment: Project is compliant with the above standard, see attached reports and drawings. 2} The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposed dredging operation. Staff Comment: Without the proposed maintenance dredge, the existing established seaplane base would become non-operational as the FAA minimum depth standards for seaplanes would not be met due to the sediment accumulation. Therefore, in order to continue the operation of the Seaplane Base, the applicant shall conduct the maintenance dredge. 3} The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate that: (a) There will be no net loss of ecological functions including but not limited to adverse effect on aquatic species including fish migration. Page 3 of 8 Staff Comment: As mentioned above, the Lake Study concludes that the project is not anticipated to impact shoreline processes or result in net loss of shoreline ecological function. (b) There will be no adverse impact on recreational areas or public recreation enjoyment of the water. Staff Comment: The maintenance project would not change public access, which is currently only permitted as it relates to the Renton Municipal Airport operations. The site does not contain recreotionol areas; therefore there would be no adverse impacts on recreational areas or public recreation enjoyment of the water. 4) Adjacent Bank Protection: (a) When dredging bottom material of a body of water, the banks shall not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary. The responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out practices to protect the banks. Staff Comment: The shoreline bank would nat be disturbed as a part of the maintenance dredging project. A 4:1 slope is proposed around the perimeter of the dredging depths to provide stability on the lake bottom. (b) If it is absolutely necessary to disturb the adjacent banks for access to the dredging area, the responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out a method of restoration of the disturbed area to a condition minimizing erosion and siltation. Staff Comment: Bank disturbance is not proposed or anticipated. 5) Avoidance of Adverse Effects: The responsibility rests with the applicant to demonstrate the proposed dredging will avoid conditions that may adversely affect adjacent properties including: (a) Creating a nuisance to the public or nearby activity. Staff Comment: The applicant submitted a construction mitigation description, which indicates the dredge effort would require 20 days to complete and would generally operate from 7 am to 7 pm Monday through Friday during the in water work window. The project may require additional work hours from 7 pm ta 10 pm or work on Saturday and/or Sunday in order to complete the work within the in water work window. The construction mitigation description identifies that all relevant noise regulations provided in WAC Chapter 173-60 would be complied with. Due to the short duration of the construction project it is not anticipated that the dredging would create a nuisance to the public or nearby activities. (b) Damaging property in or near the area. Staff Comment: The project has been designed by a professional engineer and it is not anticipated that the dredging would result in any damage to property in or near the area. (c) Causing substantial adverse effect to plant, animal, aquatic or human life in or near the area. Page 4 of 8 Staff Comment: See response above under 3.a. (d) Endangering public safety in or near the area. Staff Comment: The maintenance dredging operations would be conducted primarily from a barge in an area controlled by the Renton Airport and Seaplane Base. Dredge materials would generally be brought from the project site by barge to the open water disposal site. Borges and other vessels transporting materials to and from the project site would follow all relevant water transport rules and are not anticipated to adversely affect water traffic or public safety in the area. 6) The applicant shall demonstrate control of contamination and pollution to water, air, and ground through specific operation and mitigation plans. Staff Comment: The applicant has submitted a Biological Assessment (BA} with the application, prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. The BA addresses water quality among other things. The BA has identified the potential for short-term impacts to water quality as a result of increased turbidity during the extraction/installation of piles and/or the removal of recently deposited sediment from the seaplane base. These activities would result in the re-suspension of sediments; increasing turbidity. The BA has indicated that the sedimentation/turbidity impacts are not expected to exceed the water quality standards set forth in the 401 permit from the Department of Ecology (DOE} due to the nature of sediment being dredged and the dredging methods employed. A water quality monitoring plan would be prepared which would include the following elements: description of equipment, method, frequency, location and depth of water quality sampling; personnel responsible for performing the monitoring the work and contact information; turbidity monitoring report will be sent to the permit coordinator on a weekly basis; and the City and contractor would notify the permit contractor within 24 hours if an exceedance occurs. Beyond the water quality monitoring plan, the BA includes a list of additional BMPs and contingency measures that may be employed in the event of an exceedance. In addition to recommendations to reduce turbidity, the BA identifies best management practices for the dredging project to prevent violations of surface water quality due to project activities and ensure the project site would be protected from spills and releases of dangerous waste, problem water, petroleum products, and/or hazardous substances. 7) Disposal of Dredge Material: The applicant shall demonstrate that the disposal of dredged material will not result in net loss of ecological functions or adverse impacts to properties adjacent to the disposal site. (a) The applicant shall provide plans for the location and method of disposing of all dredged material. (b) Dredged material shall not be deposited in a lake, stream, or marine water except if approved as habitat enhancement or other beneficial environmental mitigation as part of ecological restoration, a contamination remediation project approved by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies, or is approved in accordance with the Puget Sound Dredged Disposal Page 5 of 8 Analysis evaluation procedures for managing in-water-disposal of dredged material by applicable agencies, which may include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers pursuant to Section 10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) and Section 404 (Clean Water Act) permits, and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval. (c) In no instance shall dredged material be stockpiled in a shoreland area that would result in the clearing of native vegetation. Temporary stockpiling of dredged material is limited to one hundred eighty (180) days. (d) If the dredged material is contaminant or pollutant in nature, the applicant shall propose and carry out a method of disposal that complies with all regulatory requirements. (e) Permanent land disposal shall demonstrate that: (1) Shoreline ecological functions will be preserved, including protection of surface water and groundwater. (2) Erosion, sedimentation, flood waters or runoff will not increase adverse impacts to shoreline ecological functions or property. (3) Sites will be adequately screened from view of local residents or passersby on public rights- of-way. (4) The site is not located within a channel migration zone. Staff Comment: The dredged sediment is proposed to be disposed at the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. The identified disposal site has been approved during the review of the required federal permits for the subject porject. As such, disposal of the dredge material to the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site would be consistenat with the above review criteria. SEC-TWN-R: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWN-R: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWN-R: SE07-23-5 PORTION CW #2 LOCATED ON W BANK OF CEDAR RIVERINE 1/2 OF SECTION 07-23-05 & MORE PARTICULARY DESCRIBED AS TRACTS 1 THRU 6 AS SHOWN ON CITY OF RENTON ENGINEER MAP B 92-50 DATED MAY 23, 1957 TGW BLOCK A & B OF LAKE WASHINGTON SHORE LANDS 3RD SUPL NW07-23-5 BRYN MAWR ADD POR OF TR DESIGNATED PARK & VAC ST WITHIN N 120 FT OF S 420 FT OF THAT POR OF PLATE OF ST RD & N OF VAC EMERSON ST & 2ND CLASS SH LDS ADJ BET N & S LNS PROD DUE E LESS PORTO CITY OF RENTON VOL 2813 PG 368-SEE TAX LOT 7 SEC 7-23-5 SE07-23-5 Page 6 of 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWN-R: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: POR SECS 7 & 18-23-5 & POR TOBINS DC INCL POR PLATTED & VAC STS LY WLY OF COMM WW# 2 N OF N LN DIXIE AVE & ELY OF STATE HWAY # 5 & ELY & SLY OF FOLG LN BEG ON ELY MGN SD HWAY AT PT 5 FT S OF N LN OF LOT 8 BLK 18 BRYN MAWR THE 89.23 FTTH N 05-16-51 E 438.90 FTTH N 40-09-47 E 188.55 FTTH N 60 FT TH N 29-00-40 W 197.07 FT TH S 88-27-28 E 90.83 FT TH N 01-32-32 W 40 FT TH S 88-27-28 E 234.53 FT TH S 35-00-00 E 142.41 FT TH E 403.70 FT LESS LOTS 19 TO 22 INCL BLK 4 RENTON REAL ESTATE COS 1ST ADD LESS PORTION FOR LANE HANGAR CONDOMINIUM NW07-23-5 BRYN MAWR ADD POR OF BLKS 5 & 6 & VAC LAKE ST & VAC ALLEY WITHIN THE S 180 FT OF N 240 FT OF THAT POR OF PLATE OF ST RD & S OF N LN LOT 4 BLK 6 & SD LN PROD DUE E TO MOR LN & 2ND CLASS SH LOS ADJ LESS FOLG-BEG ON N LN OF SD DESC TR WH PT IS 335 FT ELY FR C/L OF ST HWY # 5 TH SEL Y TO A PT ON S LN SD TR WH PT IS 175 FT ELY FR ELY MGN OF SD HWAY TH WLY ALG S LN SDTRTO ELY MGN SD HWY TH NLY ALG ELY MGN TO INTERS WITH N LN SD TR TH ELY ALG N LN TO POB WATER BODY/ WETLAND: Lake Washington An exemption from a Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit is hereby approved on the proposed project in accordance with Maintenance and Repair: Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. a. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. b. Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to the shoreline resource or environment. c. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development including, but not limited to, its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment and for the following reasons: The subject project is a maintenance dredge and therefore would be considered regular maintenance and repair. The proposed development is Consistent or Inconsistent with: Page 7 of 8 Consistent Consistent Consistent Policies of the Shoreline Management Act. The guidelines of the Department of Ecology where no Master Program has been finally approved or adapted by the Department. The City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. SIGNATURE & DATE O DECISION: £ C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrato Attachments: cc: Vicinity/Neighborhood Detail Map Site Plan Typical Sections AT & T Historic Dredging Information Biological Assessment Lake Study Renton Municipal Airport Ben Dahle/ Contact Samuel Stokes/ Party of Record William Colacurcio, Jr. / Owner City of Renton/ Applicant July 10, 2013 Date Page 8 of 8 COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 103 EDMOl\'DS, WA 98020 PH 425-778-2542 0 100 200 SCAL[ IN rcn CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP APPLICATION BY: Cl'Y OF RENTON ( P'.'{OP_Q_SE.2:_ MAINTENANCE DREDGING UP TO 16,000 CY .l!':.t. LAKE WASHINGTON AT: CITY OF R:=:NTON C_QUt,l_IT;,_ KING SHEET 1 or .3 QAIE;_ 1/3/13 LAKE WASHINGTON I / Ii ' ·-~~ \' ,p ··.\~ SPECIAL DREDGE ELEVAllON CONTROL AREA FOR PROTECTION OF METRO SEWER ----- LIMITS OF BOTTOM Of DREDGE CUT, TYP. ----- 92' -------11.L ... gl J ~// JI! \~\\ i I "-------135' ----'---II ,,.... __ .., j// 811 /§II ""Ii r-n : " ! " • ' 0 \.:\ 90\' ~ . ' f+----------210· ___ _,e','<----'~ FLOA ~NG CONCRETE DOCK ~. k" coNCRETE BULKHEAD l, ,~~-" -~~-~si;·:;: . . ~-.-_-:·J;1STI~-G CONCRETE olJlfAU].:-·· "."·. ,.•---;: APPROX. LOCA llON OF 12N SD : OUTFALL. NOTCH fill BELOW P!PE SITE PLAN 0 30 60 SCALE IN FEET NOTES 1. OUTER HARBOR LINE NOT SHO~. LOCATED NORTI-i BEYOND AREAS SHOWN ON PLAN. I COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN STREET, SUITE 103 EDMONDS, WA 98020 PH 425-778-2542 CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT SITE PLAN APPLICATION BY; CITY OF RENTON ----- ------- LEGEND, -:·---~-~ OR01NARY,HIGH WATER (OHW) . PROPOSfP· MAINTENA~CE DREDGING UP-TO.J_6._0_g·p CY I.ti;_ LAKE WASHINGTON AI:.. CITY OF RENTON .c.o..u.tfIX:._ KING SHEET 2 Of J llAil:;. 1/3/13 EXISTING BULKHEAD w [I; --' VI w c., B "' 0 ~ w 0 ,-. NOTES: T.O. DREDGE SLOPE EXISTING FLOATING DOCK AND PILE 0 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE B.O. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' AREA TO BE DREDGED SECTION B.O. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE AREA TO BE DREDGED EXISTING FLOATING DOCK AND PILE SECTION JO 60 w a. 0 --' VI "' c., B "' 0 LL 0 ~ 1. ESTIMATED DREDGE VOLUME: 16,000 CY INCLUDING 1-FT OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE. SCALE IN FEET P\IRPOSf· TO RESTORE SAFE NAVIGATION AND USABIUTY OF SEAPLANE BASE FACILITY IQCADON· LAT:47' 30' 2.#• LONG:122· 13' 06.14" QAIUM.. CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOCK DAlUM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWERS· 1. OTY Of RENTCJ< (SOUlH) CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT TYPICAL SECllONS PBPPOSEO· MAlNlENANCE DREDGiNG UP TO 16,000 CY lit. LAKE WASHINGTON A.Ii. CITY OF RENTON .cllUtITi;_ KING w a. g VI w c., 0 w 13 0 ,-: 2. BILL COLAOJRCIO ..... (WEST) 3. WILUAM COLACURCIO {WEST) APPUCATION BY'1 CITY OF RENTON SHEET 4 OF 5 llAlf;. J/26/12 i 'l 8/o fl,,, 4• ..... s,J ... --... ~ ... - k;K"E.. Pf:ef1l..E. ~-~=~~"· ·.-,..- ' o::t' 1- 1-f co 1-f :c >< w j \ ·t :,:. \ IJ " ,., REYISIOI .. (l'f~ OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-MJ POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS Of AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Wlll Ros•rS-Wllr,Pollt M•rnl>riol S.opl•n• p.,. M•lnttinani:t! o,..,dsl"&" PROJECT NUMBER: LUW-000517, ECF, SME LOCATION: llorth and irl ti,,, R•nlon Alrpor'l, ""'"' of lh• Cedar Rlwr Mir th1 south•rn sllon of \.lllw Wai.hinJ"ln, t!K pro~rt utends Into 1(1111 County to the West. OESQIIPTION: The appllant hu rwqllfltad SEJIA Envlronlffllnt.11 1\tl>1l1w and • Shonilln• Exemption ror the Snplllne SaH m1lntenance d'"11n1, logited at 6U West Perl""Rr Road, Rtnton Munldpal Alfl>Ort. Tl>e """"'"" w,:,uld be ID<rted In LaU Woshl"II"" ]wt off th• north shon In the 511pl1na a .... Tho, pro]«t INII 11 76,DOD 1q11&N1 fut across fOllr parul<J two el<lendlnJ Into lllnr County and ONR le;,sed land, The pu.,.,.., of the proJa~ Is to •ll1vlat1 oJar,tlonal pn,bl..,.. uwad by sediment fllllni;: the Hlslln1 S.1plant1 a ... approach chann.l 1nd moorlrc basin that hH oci;urrtd durlnJ prevlollS m1lor 1torn, e,,enb, TIie lot1I estlmatad ¥olU"" Df d'"lff mattrlal1 Is 16,IXJO cubic vanh. Mlllarlal1 would bl daposll•d at tM Elllatt &ay OJan W111r dlspoHI ,1111. With Iha 1ppHcatlon a Blo1o1lcal Assasment and a Lake Stucly has bftn proYld.cl. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMlnEE (EI\C) HAS DETERMINED TflAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of th! enYlronmenhll dmrmln;rtlon muJt be filed In wrltins on or before 5:00 p.m. on Julv 16, 201.3, toeether with the required fee with: HNrlns Elulmlnei-, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 980S7. Appear, to the Examln1r are go11emed by City of RMC 4-11-110 and Information reprdln.1 the 1ppnl proi:ess mey be obtelned from the Rentol\ City Clerk's Offlr;e, [4251 430-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 43()..7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION P\..EASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. CERTIFICATION I, ::d\.1ffi ~ )v:\c::: , hereby certify that :$ copies of the above document were posted in __ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: ~ er d Q 13 STATE OF w:~ING~ON ) COUNTY OF KING ) ) Signed:,_d;....µ...41-JfY\_,____,,d,...,,._, .._O ~-dv]--'-'..,9->=-~---=--.=c-c._· • ss I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that L, bJ 11-,5 n aw signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. 13 1:IcA ~ Notary Public in~the State of Washington Notary (Print): _ ___..H.1-LA.l...!..... _,G::.Lr::::=:.1.b"":&:::""------- My appointment expires:._~A=cvw~µ' ''-''-'f _ _,_d,"'-'-'1r-L;:Jo1SL.<c..l_3L---- \J J CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT· PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 9th day of July, 2012, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Dave Sandstrom Kin County DPER Ben Dahl Contact William Colacurcio, Jr. Owner City of Renton Owner/ Applicant Samuel Stokes Party of Record (Signature of Sender): ~-'A.f! Jn ... 111/"J&v """'"11111, ... ~ ,,, () $~ ~""'e ,,, .:: t-· 1'.'''''"" " ~,i) ,,,I. -............. N ,,, 'I. STATE OF WASHINGTON -~~-~·· ' = $ ,, I. : = o1A,t ~ ~ , : .. "J., ""~ ~ ) ) ss ... ... -~ -,, ) ~ :;;u -• -~ , ., ., ., , ~ ;z, ~ ~ ~ ~ : : COUNTY OF KING ~ ~\ 11 .... ~.lR:: 'f h k h · f 'd h k \ -, ··~ 8 ·29-' $" ,. ::: I cert1 y t at I now or ave sat1s actory ev1 ence t at Stacy M. Tue er ~ ~,,,,1111"""''''"' ~,., g signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary ac'tifjOit!~iR-1$?urposes mentioned in the instrument. 1111111"""'''" Dated: -ff*'""~"'-~+--'4.,_,· -""'V"'-, '-' 3..,__ Notary Pulk in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): /-1 A. -----~-~=="-'----------------My appointment expires: , 70 ~ "'~J k,~ x·1 1 .)0 I) Project Na.me: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project Number: LUA13-000517, ECF, SME template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology ** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., M5-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers* Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: $EPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY {DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW • Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office * 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -17i'd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172°d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City of Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunlt@ecy.wa.gov template • affidavit of service by mailing OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE· MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: Will Rogers-WIiey Post Memorlal Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUA13-000517, ECF, SME LOCATION: North end of the Renton Airport, west of the Cedar River near the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project extends into King County to the West. DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels; two extending into King County and DNR leased land. The purpose of the project is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events. The total estimated volume of dredged materials is 16,000 cubic yards. Materials would be deposited at the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. With the application a Biological Assessment and a Lake Study has been provided. THE CITY Of RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. r Denis Law ct r·· . ¢ City of • - -=M==ayoc ____ ___.,,,,,,. r .· J ! ~.\. \ •r· 'l' r/w·· • .. ·,r• ·, ., ' \~\. \ ,:·/~. '. ' : : '. '\ } : : l ' ,_.. •,,,,,;:;. ,;;,,,,_.~ ···,J; ' . ,.;_, - July 9, 2013 Department of Community and Economic Development Ben Dahle Capital Project Coordinator Renton Municipal Airport 616 West Perimter Road, Unit A Renton, WA 98057 C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAi THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUA13-000517, ECF, SME Dear Mr. Dahle: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination. must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties notified. If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, ~-DJbe.P_ Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosure cc:, William Colarcurcio, Jr., City of Renton/ Owner Samuel Stokes/ Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor July 9, 2013 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 rt tf /~ity(olf'/[i fur\ . ·r/· .• . r \ ·.-. --."' ··.· . -.• ·. . . .. , \"·. .. . ;. • i,~ ·~,-.,~-'-~/,.~ ',~," ~--~ Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAi THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on July 8, 2013: SEPA DETERMINATION: PROJECT NAME: Determination of Non-Significance Mitigated (DNSM) Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000S17, ECF, SME Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before S:00 p.m. on July 26, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwamish Tribal Office US Army Corp. of Engineers Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COi UNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED {DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000S17, ECF, SME APPLICANT: City of Renton, Renton Municipal Airport PROJECT NAME: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels; two extending into King County and ON R leased land. PROJECT LOCATION: The north end of the Renton Airport, west of the Cedar River near the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project extends into King County to the west. LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Assessment, prepared by City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED {DNS-M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000517, ECF, SME APPLICANT: City of Renton, Renton Municipal Airport PROJECT NAME: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels; two extending into King County and DNR leased land. PROJECT LOCATION: The north end of the Renton Airport, west of the Cedar River near the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project extends into King County to the west. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable sign iii cant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2013. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 105S South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: ' ( . _, L--\,---~ Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department July 12, 2013 July 8, 2013 ? ) <-6)13 ~~___,,__· -'------0-~_<J___-· - Mark Peterson, Administrator Date Fire & Emergency Services Date c.£.u. --+ C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development Date "J:-(t ( 11 Date DEPARTMENT OF COI.. ... UNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -----1Pr~mi~@illl 0 TO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager MEETING DATE: TIME: LOCATION: Monday, July 8, 2013 3:00p.m. Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 Will Rogers·Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dregdging (Vanessa Dolbee) LUA13-000517, ECF, SME Location: North end of the Renton Airport, west of the Cedar River near the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project extends into King County to the west. Description: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels; two extending into King County and DNR leased land. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer D. Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator-Transportation C. Long, Economic Development Director • N. Watts, Development Services Director• L. Warren, City Attorney• Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal" J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUI tr .. Cityof, ---------1{ s!SJ LOSl AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEETING DA TE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: Owner/Applicant: Contact: Project Location: Project Summary: Exist. Bldg. Area SF: Site Area: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: July 8, 2013 Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUAB-000517, ECF, SME Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner City of Renton, Renton Municipal Airport, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Ben Dahle, Capital Project Coordinator, Renton Municipal Airport, 616 West Perimeter Road, Unit A, Renton, WA 98057 The north end of the Renton Airport, west of the Cedar River near the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project extends into King County to the west. The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels; two extending into King County and DNR leased land. The purpose of the project is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events. The total estimated volume of dredged materials is 16,000 cubic yards. Materials would be deposited at the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. With the application a_Biological Assessment and a Lake Study has been provided. 27,363 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): 76,000 SF Total Building Area GSF: None None 27,363 SF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M). Project Location Map ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ BACKGROUND nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-0D0517, ECF, SME Page 2 of 10 The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project area is 76,000 square feet located waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of the Lake Washington Shoreline in the Seaplane Base. The project is located in the aquatic habitat of Lake Washington near the area designated as Shoreline High Intensity, Lake Washington Reach J of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Overall the project would span four parcels (0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285, and 1180008400) including property leased to the City of Renton from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and two parcels located in King County. The City is the SEPA lead agency for the overall project, however the applicant has applied to King County for a separate Shoreline Exemption. Under existing conditions the Seaplane Base consists of a taxi channel and basin, two floating docks for passenger boarding and offloading and a launch/retrieval ramp. The existing Seaplane Base consists of approximately 3,620 SF of floating docks. The two existing docks are configured in an L-shape, the first dock extends approximately 40 feet parallel to the shore and approximately 70 feet perpendicular to the shore and the second dock extends approximately 190 feet parallel to the shoreline. The existing shoreline along the Airport is lined with a sheet pile wall adjacent to the seaplane dock. From the seaplane ramp to the mouth of the Cedar River the shoreline is armored with riprap. The purpose of the project is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events, natably November 2006 and January 2009. The proposed dredging would remove recent sediment deposits from under the floating docks and up to the edge of existing structures to restore the Seaplane Base access and mooring basin to required depths for safe operations. The proposed dredge area and depths were determined based on historical areas of operation and minimum requirements as outlined by the FAA standards for Seaplane Base Operations. Pursuant to the FAA Guidance AC 150/5359-1(3)(22) a minimum depth of 6 feet of water is needed to support most seaplane operations. The project has been limited in design to restoring historic land use function and complying with the FAA requirements. If the maintenance dredging is not conducted the use of the Seaplane Base would continue to be limited until the accrued sediment prevents seaplanes from utilizing the Renton Seaplane Base. As such, a total estimated volume of 16,000 cubic yard of dredged material is proposed to be removed from the project area. The dredged sediment is proposed to be disposed at the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. Historic dredging data was obtained from a 1986 AT&T plan sheet (Exhibit 4). Using this historic information the applicant has determined the historic dredge depth is approximately at 9 feet elevation (22 ft. OHWM -13 ft. = 9 ft.). The applicant has proposed to dredge to a lakebed elevation of 9.5 feet, which is 0.5 feet above the historic dredge depth. Sediment would be dredged from a 48,000 square foot area to reach the 9.5 foot elevation adjacent to the seaplane base. Approximately 2 to 9 feet of sediment would be dredged from this area. An additional area of approximately 28,000 square feet would be dredged in order to create the 4:1 side slope required. The project has incorporated a 1-foot over dredge allowance, which could result in a dredge depth of 8.5 feet, if over dredge occurred. It is estimated by the applicant that the over dredge depth is consistent with the historic dredging information provided on the AT&T plan set, because the depth of 9 feet was derived from an average depth. As shown on the historic plan set the area labeled "City of Renton Dredge Area" identifies sediment depths deeps at 8 feet elevation and more below the OHWM (22 ft. OHWM -14 ft.= 8 ft.). ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEA, , BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 Environmental Review Committee Report WA13-000517, ECF, SME Page 3 of 10 The maintenance dredging work is proposed to be conducted from the waters of Lake Washington utilizing floating equipment including a spud barge for the clamshell dredge and two barges for receiving dredge material. Portions ofthe floating docks and upland bulkhead within the project area would be temporarily removed to conduct the dredging work and would be reinstalled upon completion of the project. In addition, it is anticipated that the project would require the temporary removal and reinstallation of at least one 12-inch steel pile. The applicant has indicated that vibratory pile driving activities are anticipated to take no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days within the in-water work window. The project does not include the construction of new structures or facilities. I PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures C. 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Assessment, prepared by City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Neighborhood Detail Map Site Plan Typical Sections AT&T Historic Dredging Information US NOAA Letter US Fish and Wildlife Service Letter Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments City Response to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Comments Lake Study Biological Assessment D. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development WILL ROGERS· WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 1. Earth nvironmental Review Committee Report WA13-000517, ECF, SME Page 4 of 10 Impacts: The subject project would result in the removal of 16,000 cubic yards of dredge materials from the bottom of Lake Washington in the vicinity of the Seaplane Base. Based on the SEPA Checklist provided with the application, the steepest slopes within the project area are approximately 1 to 3 percent. The applicant has indicated in the checklist that the substrate west of the dock consists of 80% sand and 20% silt while substrate east of the dock is 90% sand, 5% gravel, and 5% silt. Furthermore, the applicant has identified the following best management practices (BMP's) would be followed to reduce turbidity during dredging in combination with Washington Sate water quality standards and permit requirements that limit the amount of turbidity within the Project area. Proposed BMP's: • Implementation of a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) and Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan. • Containment and disposal of all debris large than 24 inches in any dimension off-site at an approved disposal site. • Not overloading the barge or transfer barges. • Providing on-site qualified personnel to monitor turbidity during the removal/installation of pilings and during all dredging activities to ensure compliance with the standards outlined within the 401 Water Quality certificate • For all dredging, each cycle of clamshell bucket shall be complete and there shall be no stockpiling of material in the water. • Leveling of the completed dredging surface by dragging a beam or clamshell bucket is not permitted. • Erosion control measures would be installed on material barges to filter water returning to the lake from the dredged material stockpiled on the barge. • In addition, potential impacts to state and federal threatened and endangered species would be avoided by scheduling in-water work appropriately. The provided Biological Assessment has indicated that the bathymetry within the Lake Washington portion of the project area is gently rolling with elevations ranging from 8 feet to 23 feet (Vertical Datum: USACE 1919). Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The project is located in the aquatic habitat of Lake Washington near the area designated as Shoreline High Intensity, Lake Washington Reach J of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). All work is proposed within the aquatic portion of the lake, with the exception of some portion of the airport property which would be temporary utilized for construction staging. The applicant submitted a Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013. The Lake Study describes the aquatic plants located within Lake Washington including hornwort, pondweeds and invasive Eurasian water milfoil and fragrant water lily. However, the study ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Jmic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-00D517, ECF, SME Page 5 of 10 concludes that vegetation within the project area and surrounding area is minimal and the proposed dredge is not anticipated to adversely impact the aquatic plants within Lake Washington. The project is located in the aquatic habitat of the lake; therefore it would not impact any upland trees or vegetation. The applicant also submitted a Biological Assessment (BA) with the application, prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. The BA addresses water quality among other things. The BA has identified the potential for short-term impacts to water quality as a result of increased turbidity during the extraction/installation of piles and/or the removal of recently deposited sediment from the seaplane base. These activities would result in the re-suspension of sediments; increasing turbidity. The BA has indicated that the sedimentation/turbidity impacts are not expected to exceed the water quality standards set forth in the 401 permit from the Department of Ecology jDOE) due to the nature of sediment being dredged and the dredging methods employed. A water quality monitoring plan would be prepared which would include the following elements: Description of equipment, method, frequency, location and depth of water quality sampling; personnel responsible for performing the monitoring the work and contact information, turbidity monitoring report will be sent to the permit coordinator on a weekly basis, and the City and Contractor would notify the permit contractor within 24 hours if an exceedance occurs. Beyond the water quality monitoring plan, the BA includes a list of additional BMPs and contingency measures that may be employed in the event the possibility of an exceedance were to occur. In addition to recommendations to reduce turbidity, the BA identifies best management practices for the dredging project to prevent violations of surface water quality due to project activities and ensure the project site would be protected from spills and releases of dangerous waste, problem water, petroleum products, and/or hazardous substances. Based on the recommendations included in the BA, staff recommends as mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations in the Biological Assessment. The Lake Study concludes that the project would result in temporary increases to turbidity as a result of the dredge process; overall the project would have no long term effects on shoreline ecologic functions such as fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. In addition the project would have no long term effect on shoreline processes including but not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; and nutrient and pathogen removal. Furthermore, the report concludes that the proposed maintenance dredge is likely to maintain all existing functions at their current level and is not anticipated to have any long term impacts and/or have any significant detrimental impact to the project area or the watershed system. Finally, the report identifies that the project is not anticipated to impact shoreline processes or result in net loss of shoreline function, as such no mitigation is proposed. Staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendation including in the Lake Study. Mitigation Measures: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Assessment, prepared by City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Shoreline Master Program ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-000517, ECF, SME Report of July 8, 2013 Page 6 of 10 3. Vegetation Impacts: See aquatic vegetation discussion above under "Wetlands, Streams, and Lakes". Mitigation Measures: N/A Nexus: N/A 4. Wildlife Impacts: The applicant submitted with the application a Biological Assessment (BA), prepared by the City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. The report was prepared by the applicant for local and federal permitting requirements. The subject project has received concurrence from the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW). Furthermore, the project underwent Section 7 consultation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Both letters (Exhibit 6 and 5 respectively), identify that the project is not likely to adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat and Bull Trout, a listed species. The BA has identified that there is critical habitat for the Coastal/Puget Sound bull trout and Puget Sound salmon within the aquatic portion of the projects action area. The following conclusions are included in the BA as it relates to occurrence of species in the project action area and designated critical habitat: • Coastal/Puget Sound distinct population segment (DPS) of Bull Trout: No known viable population of bull trout is known to inhabit Lake Washington as such, it is unlikely they would be present within the aquatic action area at the time of in-water work or any time of the year. • Puget Sound evolutionary significant unit {ESU) of Chinook salmon: The NMFS species list indicates that Chinook salmon may be present within the aquatic portion of the action area. Juveniles are known to both rear within and outmigrate through Lake Washington on their way to the ocean. Therefore, the lakeshore area near the Cedar River mouth appears to be an important nursery area of juvenile Chinook. At the time of in-water work (Nov. 16-Dec. 31) it is not anticipated that Chinook salmon would be present within the aquatic portion of the action area as adults would have migrated to freshwater tributaries to spawn and juveniles would have already outmigrated to the ocean. • Puget Sound DPS of Steelhead Trout: The NMFS species list indicates that steelhead trout may be present within the aquatic portion of the action area. Both juvenile and adult steelhead may be present in the aquatic portion of the action area during the time of proposed in-water work. • Critical Habitat: Critical habitat for the Puget Sound ESU of Chinook salmon and coastal/Puget Sound DPS of bull trout has been designated in the aquatic portion of the action area. The BA included a table summarizing the effect determinations for all listed species and designated critical habitats within the action area: Species Effect Determination Coastal-Puget Sound DPS of Bull Trout May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect Bull Trout Critical Habitat May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Jmic Development nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-000517, £CF, SM£ WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 Page 7 of 10 Puget Sound ESU of Chinook Salmon May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect Puget Sound DPS of Steelhead Trout May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect The BA indicates that potential impact to listed species may result from a possible increase in sedimentation/turbidity during the removal/placement of dredged materials and vibratory pile extraction/installation. Elevated sound pressure levels are also anticipated during pile installation/extraction. However, conservation measures such as erosion control best management practices, a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan and a designated in- water work window have been incorporated into the project in order to minimize and/or avoid project impacts. The BA has determined the pile driving would be minimal as it would occur for no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days. In addition to the above recommendations for conservation, the BA includes other project mitigation including but not limited to the following: • The contractor would submit a debris containment plan prior to the start of construction. • The dredging limits would be surveyed prior to the start of construction and a global positioning system, on-board the dredge, would be used to ensure dredging occurs within the proposed limits. • Qualified personnel would be on-site monitoring for turbidity during all in-water work. If at any time turbidity level exceed those permitted, project actions would cease until a time that turbidity decreases to near background levels. • Dredging activities would be limited to the in-water work window of July 16th to July 31" and November 16th to December 31't. • The proposed clamshell dredge would use the appropriate bucket size practical for site conditions to minimize the number of dredge bites in order to minimize turbidity. Based on the recommendations in the BA, it appears the project may affect but would not adversely affect listed species. However, to ensure the effects are limited/minimal staff recommends a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Assessment. The City received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe on May 31, 2013 (Exhibit 7).The comments primarily addressed concerns related to juvenile Chinook and their associated habitat. The response to the comments is located in Exhibit 8. Primarily, the City has proposed the following mitigation measures to address the Muckleshoot's concerns: 1) A dredging monitoring plan that includes pre-dredge elevations, dredging elevation measurements during construction, and post-project dredging elevations. In addition, as proposed in the project's BA, a dredging and dredged materials handling plan will be developed by the contractor in coordination with the City prior to the start of construction. This plan will include a description of the dredging activities, locations, BMP measures to be used, progress surveying, dredge elevation control, and water quality protection measures. The dredging contractor wilr also be required to attend a pre-dredge conference prior to starting the work to discuss and confirm the details of the plan. ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & imic Development 1vironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-000517, ECF, SME WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 Page 8 of 10 2) The dredging work will be conducted during daylight hours as much as possible. No other permanent lighting changes are proposed as part of this project. 3) The graded areas around the dredging limits will not be steeper than a 4:1 slope which may create additional shallow water habitat and reduce impacts to the dredge area. A 4:1 slope is the minimum slope that can maintain slope stability, approved disposal volumes, and FAA design guidelines. 4) Softening of the shoreline adjacent to the runway is being considered by the City as part of a City-wide mitigation/restoration plan. This would be implemented under a separate project. 5) The removal of invasive vegetation along the shoreline is a proposed as a shoreline improvement. 6) The City-wide mitigation/restoration plans also include stormwater management upgrades. Work to upgrade the airport's stormwater drainage and treatment systems may be conducted as part of a separate project and will aid in improving the quality of stormwater discharged to Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Biological Assessment, prepared by City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations, Shoreline Management Program. a. Noise Impacts: The project is anticipated to result in temporary construction noise for the limited duration of the project. Based on the provided construction mitigation description, the project is anticipated to require 160 hours of work over 20 days to complete and activities would generally operate from 7 am to 7 pm Monday through Friday during the in water work window (July 161h - July 31'' and November 16'h to December 31''). The applicant has indicated that expanded construction hours may be needed in order to complete the project within the permitted in water work window. In the event extended hours are needed, the applicant has indicated that additional hours would extend to 10 pm and/or could include work on Saturday and/or Sunday. The provided Biological Assessment evaluated the impacts of noise on wildlife. According to the noise calculations performed, using WSDOT guidance, increased dBA's created from vibratory pile driving activities would become indistinguishable from ambient levels of 55-dBA, approximately 3,459 feet (0.66 mile) from the proposed piles within the surround area. The pile driving activity is a small portion of the overall project. The steel pile vibratory extraction and installation would occur for no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days. Do to the project limited duration and minimum pile driving, significant noise impacts are not anticipated. The BA addresses noise impacts in the aquatic zone of the project. The proposed removal of and installation of piles during the reconstruction of the dock and the removal of recently deposited sediment from the seaplane base would require in-water work which could potentially impact listed species by frightening fish away from the area; temporarily increasing localized competition for resources. The BA utilized the practical spreading loss model to determine where underwater sound pressure levels (SPLs) created from the vibratory pile extraction/installation would become indistinguishable from ambient levels. Based on the model, it was determined that vibratory pile ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & )mic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 nvironmental Review Committee Report LUA13-000517, ECF, SME Page 9 of 10 driving construction noise would become indistinguishable at approximately 706 feet (0.13 mile) from a pile being extracted/installed. The BA concludes that noise levels would be elevated within 706 feet from a pile being extracted/installed piles within Lake Washington the SPLs would not be elevated within the Cedar River. Moreover, the BA concludes that the effect to fish created by these actives is discountable as it occurs over a short duration and in a very limited space. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 5. Transportation Impacts: The project is located in the aquatic habitat of Lake Washington. Temporary construction staging may occur at the Renton Municipal Airport; however, the primary work would be water word of the OHWM. The application has proposed to barge dredged material from Lake Washington, through the Lake Washington Ship Canal, into Puget Sound and south to the Elliott Bay Open Water disposal site. As such, truck traffic impacts are not anticipated as a result of the project. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A E. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." ,/ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2013. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7'h Floor, (425) 430-6510. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes ore provided as information only, they ore not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi-family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday ERC Report 13-000517.docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEA 'BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING Report of July 8, 2013 r::nvironmental Review Committee Report WA13-000517, £CF, SM£ Page 10 of 10 through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. ERC Report 13-000517.docx COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN STREET, SUll:C 103 EDMOl'.'DS, WA 98020 PH 425--778-2542 SITT: PLAN 0 100 ,oo SCAl_E IN FEET CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT ----- NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP APPUCAllON BY: Cl-:-Y OF RENTON ( PRO~OSED: MAINTf:NANCE DREDGING UP TO 16,0'JO CY [tL LAKE WASHINGTON AT: C'TY OF RENTON ~ K1NG S"1EET 1 OF 3 .MlE... 1/ J/13 ..-i I- I-I cc 1-1 :c X w LAKE WASHINGTON SPECIAL DREDGE ELEVATION CONTROL AREA FOR PROTECTION OF METRO SEWER LIMITS OF BOTTOM OF DREDGE CUT, f'l'P. // / / "' ·---... § 1.L ... ------- ---.:\~ ------ "•,~;:;,1'6> EL +9.5' \~q, ~I I !; I I l\' 8/f \'~ ~ ~~ w ···-···-···-···-···-~·S'0 r ~"iso . ,---135' __ l, __ H,,___ ----6 \~\\ \ " " . ( •, \\ 90\' ~ ~// '< Ii :·-T I : // i // // // / / // I I . ' H----------210· -----';-'--s--,- . . . . ·EX1s·liN~ :co.NCRi:TE: ou~AI..L-:: · CITY oF RENTON PROPER.TY LINE ·. APPROX. LOCATION OF 12" SD OUTFALL. NOTCH FILL BELOW PIPE SITE PLAN --------- -- '\\·. \ ·.,-~\ TOP OF DREDGE SLOPE, TYP. ·. '\ l ,\ TOE OF DREDGE SLOPE, TYP. \rnSSNG\ ' PARKING_.\._ ''@.=.._-:.:::-::-- --- LEGEND, 0 30 60 -···-···_:_ ORDINARY,HIGH WATER (OHW) NOTES 1. OUTER HARBOR LINE NOT SHO'NN, LOCATED NORTH BEYOND AREAS SHOWN ON PLAN. COAST & HARBOR ENGINEERING 110 MAIN SlREET, SUITE 1DJ EDMONDS, WA 98020 PH 425-77B-2542 SCALE IN F£ET CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT SITE PLAN APPLICATION BY: CITY OF RENTON PROPQSEP· MAINTENANCE DREDGING .. UP-·rn_ 16,_()g:D CY lli.;_ LAKE WASHINGTON AL.. CITY OF RENTON .QQ!.l.tiit_ KING SHEET 2 OF 3 llAlL. 1 /3 /13 -~--···-""'---~---~ EXISTING BULKHEAD NOTES: T.O. DREDGE SLOPE EXISTING FLOATING DOCK ANO PILE 0 EXISTING GROUND SURF ACE 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.S' AREA TO BE DREDGED SECTION 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.S' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE EXISTING FLOATING OOCK ANO PILE SECTION 30 60 w ll. 0 .., V) w " f;l "' 0 ... 0 ~ >- 1. ESTIMATED DREDGE VOLUME: 16,000 CY INCLUDING 1-FT OVERDREOGE ALLOWANCE. SCALE IN FEET PURPOSE· TO RESTORE SAFE NAVIGATION AND USABILITY OF SEAPLANE SASE FACILITY I QCATION· LAT:47' 30' 2.+4H LONG:122' 13' 06.14" llAlliMi. CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOCK DA TUM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS; 1. C,T'f OF RENTON (SOUTH) 2. BILL COLACURC,O JR. (WEST) CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT TYPICAL SECTIONS PROPOSED· MAIN1ENANCE DREL .... , .. - UP TO 16,000 CY lli.;_ LAKE WASHINGTON Ali. CITY OF RENTON ~ KING w ll. 0 .., V) w " 0 w "' 0 ci >' 3. WILLIAM COLACURC,O {WEST) Af'f\JCATION BYi QTY OF RENTON SHEET 4 OF 5 llAlf;_ 3/21:,/12 © I~ BG .. fcr Q!Ui!,'1 &,. 6•<1'1·~· ... ""'"'°' L<~ ... - ,. ( r , I '! ' " . ' ' llfVISIDN flU5 IEI I-Al" NMFS Tracking Nos.: 2012/04582 Science Kilner Acting Regional Environmental Officer FEMA Region X U.S. Department of Homeland Security 130. 228th Street SW Bothell, WA 98021-9796 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE Northwest Region 7600 Sand Point Way N.E., Bldg. 1 Seattle, Washington 98115 October 31, 2012 Re: Endangered Species Act Section 7 Informal Consultation and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation for Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base (Renton Municipal Airport) Dredging (6th Field HUC 171100120302 Cedar River (Lake Washington), FEMA- 1817-DR-WA, PW 1905) Dear Ms. Kilner: On October 4, 2012, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) received your request for written concurrence that the proposed funding to the City of Renton under the Public Assistance Infrastructure Program by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is not likely to adversely affect (NLAA) species listed as threatened or endangered or critical habitats designated under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The NMFS prepared this response to your request pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, implementing regulations at 50 CFR 402, and agency guidance for preparation of concurrence letters. 1 The NMFS also reviewed the proposed action for potential effects on Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), including conservation measures and any determination you made regarding the potential effects of the action. This review was pursuant to section 305(b) of the MSA, implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920, and aJ;ency guidance for use of the ESA . consultation process to complete EFH consultation.-Because FEMA determined that the action will not adversely affect EFH, consultation under the MSA is not required for this action. 1 Memorandum from D. Robert Lohn, Regional Administrator, to ESA consultation biologists (guidance on informal consultation and preparation ofletters of concWTence) (January 30, 2006). 2 Memorandum from William T. Hogarth, Acting Administrator for Fisheries, to Regional Administrators (national finding for use of Endangered Species Act section 7 consultation process to complete essential fish habitat consultations) (February 28, 2001 ). II) I- t-,! co """ :c >< w This letter complies with the Data Quality Act (44 U.S.C. 3504 (d)(l) and 3516), and underwent pre-dissemination review using standards for utility, integrity and objectivity. Consultation History The NMFS received FEMA's request for infonnal consultation and concurrence on October 4, 2012. The FEMA made NLAA effects determinations for threatened Puget Sound (PS) Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha)(70 FR 37160) and their designated critical habitat (70 FR 52630), and threatened PS steelhead (0. mykiss) (72 FR 26722). The rationale for FEMA's effects determination is provided in the Biological Assessment (BA) submitted with the consultation request. FEMA also determined, that the proposed action would not adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat for Chinook salmon or coho salmon. On October 10, 2012 NMFS had a discussion with Ben Dahle, the Renton Airport Capital Improvement Program Coordinator, to clarify the size of the project and selected Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be used to reduce potential adverse effects. A complete record of this consultation is on file at the NMFS's Washington State Habitat Office in Lacey, Washington. Desc.-iption of the Proposed Action and the Action Area The FEMA proposes to transfer funds to the City of Renton to partially pay for dredging of sediments in Lake Washington at the City ofRenton's Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base. Sediments were deposited during two federally-declared disasters (FEMA- 1671-DR-WA in 2006 and FEMA-1817-DR-WA in 2008). These sediments impinge on access and use of the sea plane float area. FEMA proposes to fund that part of the dredging attributable to the declared disasters, about 6,200 out of 16,000 cubic yards. The applicant proposes to dredge approximately 1. 75 acres at the sea plane base about 300 feet west of the mouth of the Cedar River at the south end of Lake Washington. Two to nine feet of sediment will be removed around the sea plane dock using a barge-mounted clamshell dredge. Following dredging, the lake depth will be between 11.5 and 13.5 feet. Dredge materials will be deposited on barges fitted to prevent materials from getting back into the water. Dredge materials will be barged through the Lake Washington ship canal to the Puget Sound Dredge Disposal Analysis site (PSDDA) in Elliot Bay. Disposal of dredge material was considered in a prior NMFS consultation (20 I 0106456) under the auspices of the Corps of Engineers. Other components of the project include removal of decking from existing docks to gain access to the dredge area, replacement of the decking with grated decking and replacement of one-12 inch diameter steel pile. 2 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Washington Fish and Wildlife Office 5 JO Desmond Dr. SE, Suite 102 Lacey, Washington 98503 In Reply Refer To: OlEWFW00-2013-1.0005 Mark Eberlein, Regional Environmental Officer U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) DR-1817-WA 130 2281b Street SW Bothell, Washington 98021-9796 Dear Mr. Eberlein: Subject: FEMA # Applicant: DR-1817-WA, PW# 1905 Renton Seaplane Base Dredging NOV -8 2012 This is in response to your October 1, 2013, letter requesting our concurrence with your determination that the proposed action in the City of Renton, King County, Washington, would "not likely adversely affect" federally listed species. A photocopy from your transmittal document(s) describing the proposed action is enclosed. Specifically, you requested informal consultation pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) for the federally listed species identified below ( only those species that have been checked are addressed in this consultation request (See Enclosure). [8J Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) [8J Bull trout critical habitat Based on the information provided in and/or with your cover Jetter and any additional information, we have concluded that effects of the proposed action to the above-identified federally listed resources would be insignificant and/or discountable. Therefore, for the reasons identified in the enclosures to this Jetter, we concur with your determination that the proposed action is "not likely to adversely affect" the above-identified federally listed resources. This letter and its enclosures constitute a complete response of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to your request for informal consultation. Michelle Walker This concludes consultation pursuant to the regulations implementing the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR 402.13). This project should be re-analyzed if new information reveals effects of the action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner, or to an extent, not considered in this consultation. The project should also be re-analyzed if the action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to a listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in this consultation, and/or a new species is listed or critical habitat is designated that may be affected by this project. Our review and concurrence with your effect determination is based on the implementation of the project as described. It is the responsibility of the Federal action agency to ensure that projects that they authorize or carry out are in compliance with the regulatory permit and/or the ESA, respectively. If a permittee or the Federal action agency deviates from the measures outlined in a permit or project description, the Federal action agency has the obligation to reinitiate consultation and comply with section 7(d). If you have any questions about this Jetter or our joint responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act, please contact the consultation biologist identified below, of this office. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation Biologist(s): [gj Shirley Burgdorf (360 / 534-9340) Sincerely, ~L-~ ,kt' Ken S. Berg, Manager Washington Fish and Wildlife Office Enclosures Appendix 1 Checklist(s) 2 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE W ASIDNGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OFFICE BULLTROUT ENDANGEREDSPECIFSACT SECTION 7 INFORMAL CONSULTATION CONCURRENCE RATIONALE Applicant/Project Name: FEMA# DIRECT EFFECTS Renton Seaplane Base Dredging DR-1817-WA, PW# 1905 I. Bull trout may be in the action area despite the application of an in-water work window. The proposed action would occur during the following in-water work window (July 16 to November 1) when bull trout are expected to occur in low numbers. The timing restriction reduces but does not eliminate the potential for exposure of bull trout to project effects. However, direct effects of the proposed project to bull trout are expected to be insignificant because of the following: [8J Piles would only be driven using a vibratory pile driver and no proofing of the piles is proposed. This installation method is not anticipated to produce sound pressure levels that would measurably affect bull trout. Additionally, the level of sediment generated and the duration of the proposed pile driving are not anticipated to measurably affect bull trout. [81 Other: The proposed project includes dredging of 16.000 cubic yards of accumulated sediments near and around the existing docks and disposing of dredged material in the approved open water disposal site in Elliott Bay. To minimize effects of the project. 1) a clamshell bucket will be used. 2) turbidity monitoring will occur and. 3) best management practices for erosion and spill prevention will be incorporated. The proposed project would result in the suspension of sediment and increased turbidity. Although bull trout may be exposed to the sediment and increased turbidity, the concentration and duration of this exposure are not at levels that would result in a measurable effect to bull trout. INDIRECT EFFECTS 1. Bull trout may or may not occur in the action area; however, effects to bull trout via their prey resources would be insignificant because of the following: [81 The proposed action would not impact a documented or potential forage fish spawning area and would occur during the recommended work window for the project area (July 16 to November I) when bull trout prey species are not likely to be affected to any appreciable degree (i.e., some fish may be affected). Therefore, effects to bull trout via reduced forage fish abundance are not expected to be measurable. Bull Trout -Page I 2. Bull trout occur in the action area; however, with regard to other indirect effects ~ Recreatio~al use of watercraft that would result from the proposed project would not exceed nonnal background sound levels in the project area Therefore, effects are expected to be insignificanL Consulting Biologist: Concurrence approved by: Shirley Burgdorf FWS Project Biologist M.~~ <k""5<=: Federal Activities Branch Supervisor Date: November 5. 2012 Note: The rationale expressed in this infonnal section 7 concurrence rationale checklist . represents our current understanding of the effects of some commonly pennitted federal actions to bull trout. This document does not express all possible rationale for insignificant or discountable effects to buII trout. This document is subject to change at any time due to the collection of new infonnation or the need to clarify our rationale. However, any future changes to this concurrence rationale document would not be expected to necessitate reinitiation on previously completed consultations. Please see the "reinitiation" paragraph of the cover letter for a discussion of reinitiation triggers. BullTrout -Page 2 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE WASHINGTON FISH AND WILDLIFE OfflCE BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SECTION 7 INFORMAL CONSULTATION CONCURRENCE RATIONALE Applicant/Project Name: FEMA# Renton Seaplane Base Dredging DR-1817-WA, PW# 1905 The final revised rule designating bull trout critical habitat (75 FR 63898 [October 18, 20101) identifies nine Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) essential for the conservation of the species. BULL TROUT CRITICAL HABITAT We have examined the anticipated effects of the proposed action on the applicable PCEs below. [gl The proposed action would impact bull trout critical habitat; however, effects to the Primary Constituent Elements (PCE) applicable to the action area are expected to be insignificant based on the following rationale: Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water connectivity (hyporheic flows) to contribute to water quality and quantity and provide thermal refugia. 12:1 . The proposed action would not impact springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and/or subsurface water via extraction of water, interruption or inhibition of subsurface water movement, or introduction of contaminants. Therefore, no effects to this PCE are anticipated. Migration habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to permanent, panial, intermittent, or seasonal ba"iers. 12:1 The proposed action may temporarily impact the migratory corridor and/or habitats as a result of suspended sediment releases, diversion of flows, and/or isolation of the work area during construction; however, impacts to the migratory corridor would be short- term and are not expected to measurably affect bull trout migration or movement through the action area. No other physical, biological, and/or water quality barriers to the migratory corridor are anticipated as a direct or indirect result of the proposed action. Therefore, effects to this PCE are expected to be insignificant. Bull Trout Critical Habitat Page I of3 An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish. ~ The proposed action may impact the food base of the bull trout through a small reduction of prey individuals, degradation of freshwater or marine habitat, and/or removal or alteration of riparian vegetation. However, the impacts are not expected to be appreciable due to the inclusion of Best Management Practices, conservation measures, mitigation, and/or other components of the project design that are expected to avoid, reduce, or compensate for the effects from these impacts. Therefore, effects to this PCE are expected to be insignificant. Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline aquatic environments, and processes that establish and maintain these aquatic environments, with features such as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and unembedded substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure. ~ The proposed action would not include any activities that would increase or decrease channel complexity in the action area. No large woody debris or other habitat-forming components would be removed from the stream, and the project would have no measurable effect on any existing side channels, pools, undercut banks, embedded substrates, or other features in the action area that provide complex habitat for bull trout or their prey species. Therefore, effects to this PCE are expected to be insignificant. Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 °C (36 to 59 °F), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures that exceed the upper end of this range. ~ The proposed action would not include any activities that would directly or indirectly alter water temperature, such as the release of heated or cooled water, the extraction or addition of water, the increase or decrease of water depth, or the removal of shading vegetation. Therefore, no effects are anticipated to this PCE. In spawning and rearing areas, substrate of sufficient amount, size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. ~ The proposed project site is located in a lake. This PCE is not present in the action area for the project A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows within historic and seasonal ranges or, if flows are controlled, minimal flow departure from a natural hydrograph. ~ The proposed action would not alter the natural or regulated hydrograph of the water body. No water would be added or withdrawn as a direct or indirect result of this project, and the project is not expected to measurably affect surface or subsurface flows to the waterbody via runoff from impervious surfaces, stonnwater flows, watershed alteration, or other sources. Therefore, no effects to this PCE are anticipated. Bull Trout Critical Habitat Page2of3 Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited. ~ The proposed action may impact water quantity and/or water quality via the addition/extraction of water, introduction of contaminants or other pollutants (e.g., suspended sediments), high water temperatures, or other pathways. However, the impacts are not expected to be appreciable due to the inclusion of Best Management Practices, conservation measures, and/or other components of the project design that are expected to avoid, reduce, or compensate for the effects from these potential impacts. Therefore, effects to this PCE are expected to be insignificant. Sufficiently low levels of occurrence of nonnative predatory (e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass); interbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competing (e.g., brown trout) species that, if present, are adequately temporally and spatially isolated from bull trout. C8] The proposed action will not result in the introduction of additional nonnative predatory, interbreeding, or competitive species. Therefore, the anticipated effects of the proposed action on this PCE are considered to be insignificant Consulting Biologist: Shirley Burgdorf FWS Project Biologist Concurrence approved by: f:1""11.ct ::T WS:'= Federal Activities Branch Supervisor Date: November 6. 2012 Date: II /g· / 1 L Note: The rationale expressed in this informal section 7 concurrence rationale checklist represents our current understanding of the effects of some commonly permitted federal actions to bull trout critical habitat. This document does not express all possible rationale for insignificant or discountable effects to bull trout critical habitat. This document is subject to change at any time due to the collection of new information or the need to clarify our rationale. However, any future changes to this concurrence rationale document would not be expected to necessitate reinitiation on previously completed consultations. Please see the "reinitiation" paragraph of the cover letter for a discussion of reinitiation triggers. Bull Trout Critical Habitat Page 3 of3 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner City of Renton CED-Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 -172nd Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752 May 23,2013 RE: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, LUA13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Ms. Dolbee: The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program has reviewed the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination ofNon-Significance, Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Renton Municipal Airport proposal to dredge 16,000 cubic yards of sediments in the vicinity of existing seaplane docks and to dispose of dredged material in Elliott Bay. Since 2005, we have been involved in discussions about this proposal and potential mitigation measures cooperatively with the Airport staff. Unfortunately, the project, as proposed, does not include any mitigation necessary to address our concerns identified during the Corps permitting process. These concerns are discussed below in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty-protected fisheries resources. Project impacts and issues Removal of Existing Shallow Water Habitat Per Sheet 2, the project will remove approximately I 00,000 square feet of existing shallow water habitat (i.e. less than 4' depths) and substrate types preferred by juvenile Chinook in an area immediately adjacent to the Cedar River. This area of Lake Washington is heavily used by juvenile Chinook from the Cedar River (see Tabor and Celedonia, attached and http://www. gov link.org/watersheds/8/pdf/L WGI SalmonSyn 123108.pdt). In general,juvenile Chinook exit the mouth of the Cedar River, turning left or right to migrate and rear along the lake shoreline in shallow water. Those turning left (likely half the juvenile Chinook population from the Cedar) migrate into this project site. These Chinook fry prefer shallow, gently -sloped shoreline areas with relatively fine-grained substrates, which is the type of existing habitat proposed to be removed from the dredged area. As noted in the Biological Assessment (Renton September 2012), the project will remove 2 to 9 feet of sediment deepening water surrounding the seaplane dock to 11.5 to 13.5 feet. We Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUA!3-0005!7, MDNS May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 4 remain concerned that the dredging activity (including any potential overdredging) will deepen adjacent areas currently used by juvenile Chinook without mitigation. The project should be required to mitigate for the resulting loss of shallow water habitat that exists today. Facilitation of Elevated Predation Another concern is the extent of artificial night lighting from the airport on juvenile Chinook habitat. The Renton Airport is currently a major source of artificial light shown to disrupt sockeye fry migration in the lower Cedar River in Renton which led to increased in predation mortality of sockeye fry and potentially Chinook juveniles in the lower Cedar River and in Lake Washington (see Tabor et al. 2010, attached). We recognize that lighting is essential for the safe operation of the airport; however, opportunities for light reduction and modification along the lower river and the lakefront likely exist and should be implemented as partial mitigation for the loss of shallow water habitat due to the dredging project. Modifications could include shielding, changing fixtures, and use oflighting with the correct wavelength and color to avoid adverse behavioral and environmental effects on fish, wildlife, and people (see attached aiticle). Poor Riparian and Lake Shoreline Aquatic Habitat The airport has generally poor shoreline habitat conditions for juvenile salmon including riprap invasive plants including knotweed. We understand that airport operations and airplane access requirements at the Boeing property to the west limit the opportunity to fully restore the shoreline and riparian area at the mouth of the Cedar and the south lake shoreline. However, part of the airport seaplane dock runs parallel along the beach shoreline and adversely affects aquatic habitat for juvenile Chinook. While the project may not be removing any existing vegetation, it also lacks any proposed vegetation enhancement measures that would benefit juvenile chinook and potentially offset some of the losses of shallow water habitat. The shoreline should be enhanced with native trees and plants that can be allowed to grow given the airport constraints. Enhancing the shoreline along the airport would partially mitigate for the project- related loss of shallow water habitat, as well as and add to the shoreline vegetation benefits derived from the Boeing North Cedar River bridge replacement project immediately adjacent to the airport. Long Term Dredging The details about any future maintenance dredging are lacking. Given that dredging has been proposed after two fairly recent flood events (i.e. 2006 and 2009) and the location of the seaplane base on the Cedar River delta, it is likely that re-dredging will be proposed at some point this site. The details of future dredging including area, frequency and when future dredging will occur should be discussed and analyzed so that cumulative impacts can be assessed and mitigated as needed. Mucklcshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUAJ3-000517, MDNS Mitigation recommendations May 23, 2013 Page 3 of 4 Currently, the project fails lo identify mitigation for the project impacts identified above. To address these concerns, we recommend the following: 1. A dredging monitoring plan that includes pre-dredging elevations, dredging elevation measurements during construction and post-project dredging elevations is needed and should be sent to the MITFD. 2. The dredging activity should be conducted solely during daylight hours to avoid the need for nighttime construction lighting that can increase predation impacts. 3. The applicant should identify opportunities and implement measures to reduce existing airport nighttime light to the fullest extent possible. These measures should include eliminating direct light spillage onto the water's surface and any unnecessary or unintended skyward reflection using methods such as shielding and redirecting light fixtures, using motion sensors to turn lights on/off where appropriate, eliminating any nonessential lights, reducing height oflights, reducing wattage, changing luminaries to those with wavelengths known to reduce environmental effects and taking any other actions as appropriate to reduce direct and reflected light on Lake Washington and the Cedar River. 4. The 4: 1 proposed sloped area rimming the dredge area should be modified by extending this sloped area so that it is less steep to the fullest extent possible in all areas with the goal of creating water depths no greater than 3 feet to suppo1i juvenile Chinook using shallow water habitats. 5. Similarly to recommendation 4, the project should construct a Chinook beach along the shoreline and/ soften the existing riprap shoreline to create preferred habitat conditions for juvenile Chinook. This mitigation was previously proposed for the project back in 2008. An example is provided in the attached drawing that was proposed previously for this project (see attachment labeled Figure I). 6. Remove all invasive plants along the shoreline and plant and native willows, dogwood, and other native vegetation overhanging waterward to improve juvenile Chinook habitat conditions. 7. Modify/reduce the overwater coverage from the existing seaplane dock parallel to the shoreline. The existing dock that extends waterward can be modified to accommodate seaplane moorage at the site, as proposed previously by the airport. The attached drawing labeled S l shows the removal of part of the dock that is parallel to the shoreline and the extension of the perpendicular dock waterward. 8. The airport should take measures to improve the quality of storm water leaving the site and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUA! 3-000517, MDNS May 23, 2013 Page4 of4 entering into Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River as heavy metals and other pollutants can harm juvenile salmon. All of the proposed mitigation measures above are needed to offset the unavoidable dredging impacts to juvenile Chinook and other salmon that use the dredged area. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to working with you and the applicant to resolve these concerns. Please let me know if you have any questions or call me at 253-876- 3116 to set up a meeting to discuss these concerns further. Sincerely, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Attachments Cc: Bill Kerschke, FEMA Region X Matt Longenbaugh, NOAA Fisheries, Habitat Division Ryan McReynolds, USFWS Larry Fisher, WDFW Region 4 Vivian Hawkins, WDNR, Aquatic Lands Ben Dahle, Renton Airport Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Tuesday, July 02, 201310:10 AM 'Karen Walter Cc: Doug Jacobson; Ben Dahle Subject: RE: MITFD Habitat Program comments to Renton Airport Seaplane dredging project, LUA13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed MONS Attachments: Muckleshoot SEPA response bpd 062713 -July 2.docx Karen, Thank you for your comments on the Seaplane dredging project. Please find attached the City's response to your comments. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you, 'Vanessa (J)olEee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:33 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Kerschke, William; Matthew Longenbaugh -NOAA Federal; McReynolds, Ryan; Fisher, Larry D (DFW); HAWKINS, VIVIAN (DNR); Ben Dahle Subject: MITFD Habitat Program comments to Renton Airport Seaplane dredging project, LUA13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed MDNS Vanessa, I am sending you the MITFD Habitat Program comments in response to the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated materials for the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project referenced above. The comment letter attachments are included a separate attachments to this email. A signed hard copy of the comment letter is in the mail for your files. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to meet to discuss these comments further. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 1 Vanessa, The following is provided as a proposed response to the comments from Karen Walter of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, dated May 23, 2013 regarding her review of the notice of application for the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project. Her comments are given below followed by our response. Al Removal of Existing Shallow Water Habitat Comment: Per Sheet 2, the project will remove approximately 100,000 square feet of existing shallow water habitat (i.e. less than 4' depths) and substrate types preferred by juvenile Chinook in an area immediately adjacent to the Cedar River. This area of Lake Washington is heavily used by juvenile Chinook from the Cedar River ... We remain concerned that the dredging activity (including any potential overdredging) will deepen adjacent areas currently used by juvenile Chinook without mitigation. The project should be required to mitigate for the resulting loss of shallow water habitat that exists today. Response: The maintenance dredging project will return the lakebed to the previously authorized elevation of 8.5 feet in areas of open water; this includes the I-foot over-dredge allowance. It will restore the water levels to pre-flood conditions. Areas closer to the shore will be graded to create shallower water levels and preserve the shallow water habitat. To ensure dredging occurs within the proposed limits, the horizontal and vertical dredging boundaries will be surveyed prior to the start of, during, and at the end of construction. A GPS survey instrument on board the dredge or survey vessel will be utilized during dredging activity to follow the surveyed limits. The use of a I-foot over-dredge allowance is standard practice for navigation dredging projects. The allowance is necessary to ensure the dredging contractor does not remove material below historical maintenance dredging elevations while also ensuring the required clearance for seaplane access. Any material removed by the contractor below the I-foot over-dredge elevation will not be paid for by the owner and will be subjectto a monetary penalty and/or requirement to backfill to specified grades. fil Facilitation of Elevated Predation Comment: Another concern is the extent of artificial night lighting from the airport on juvenile Chinook habitat. The Renton Airport is currently a major source of artificial light shown to disrupt sockeye fry migration in the lower Cedar River in Renton which led to increased in predation nwrtality of sockeye fry and potentially Chinook juveniles in the lower Cedar River and in Lake Washington ( see Tabor et al. 2010, attached). We recognize that lighting is essential for the safe operation of the airport; however, opportunities for light reduction and modification along the lower river and the lakefront likely exist and should be implemented as partial mitigation for the loss of shallow water habitat due to the dredging project ... Respcnse: The proposed project does not include any additional lighting structures since it only involves dredging and work to the floating docks. There is no existing lighting on the docks. Any long term changes to the existing lighting off-site is not part of the scope of this project. Maintenance dredging operations will be conducted during daytime hours to the maximum extent possible. However, due to the short duration of the work window and limited amount of daylight hours during the work window (November 16-December 31), some dredging and re-handling work will need to occur during the night and involve artificial lighting. Construction will be limited to occur between 7 am and 10 pm, in accordance with the City's construction noise ordinance unless emergency situations require work at other times. In addition to the project, the City has undertaken ill Long Term Dredgi1 Comment: The details about any future maintenance dredging are lacking. Given that dredging has been proposed after two fairly recent flood events (i.e. 2006 and 2009) an.d the location of the seaplane base on the Cedar River delta, it is likely that re-dredging will be proposed at some point this site. The details of future dredging including area, frequency and when future dredging will occur should be discussed and analyzed so that cumulative impacts can be assessed and mitigated as needed. Response: This project proposes to dredge enough material to ensure seaplane access is maintained in the event of future flood and sediment deposition events in the short term. The City of Renton will maintain the seaplane base to ensure that the basin has the required clearance to maintain safe seaplane operations. Standard maintenance dredging last occurred in 2001 at this site and may need to be performed at a similar interval (every 10-15 years), depending on natural sedimentation rates and the intensity of future flood events. ID Mitigation recommendations Comment: Currently the project fails to identify mitigation for the project impacts identified above. Response: The following mitigation/minimization measures recommended by Ms. Walter will be incorporated into the project: 1) A dredging monitoring plan that includes pre-dredge elevations, dredging elevation measurements during construction, and post-project dredging elevations. In addition, as proposed in the project's BA, a dredging and dredged materials handling plan will be developed by the contractor in coordination with the City prior to the start of construction. This plan will include a description of the dredging activities, locations, BMP measures to be used, progress surveying, dredge elevation control, and water quality protection measures. The dredging contractor will also be required to attend a pre-dredge conference prior to starting the work to discuss and con.firm the details of the plan. 2) The dredging work will be conducted during daylight hours as much as possible. See response in item B above. No other permanent lighting changes are proposed as part of this project. This would have to be further coordinated with the airport. 3) The graded areas around the dredging limits will not be steeper than a 4: 1 slope which may create.additional shallow water habitat and reduce impacts to the dredge area. A 4: I slope is the minimum slope that can slope stability, approved disposal volumes, and FAA design guidelines. See response in item A above. 4) Softening of the shoreline adjacent to the runway is being considered by the City as part of a City-wide mitigation/restoration plan. This would be implemented under a separate project. See response in item C above. More information regarding potential shoreline enhancement projects can be requested from Doug Jacobson. 5) The removal of invasive vegetation along the shoreline is a proposed as a shoreline improvement. See response in item C above. 6) The City-wide mitigation/restoration plans also include stormwater management upgrades. Work to upgrade the airport's stormwater drainage and treatment systems may be conducted as part of a separate project and will aid in improving the quality of stormwater discharged to Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River. I can provide more information regarding potential stormwater facility improvement projects if needed. Please contact me at 425-430-7476 or bdahle@rentonwa.gov. These measures address the concerns outlined by the Tribe and no other mitigation measures have been required by FEMA as part of their review of the biological assessment prepared for this project. . WILL ROGERS-WILEY POST MEMORIAL SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING LAKE STUDY RENTON, WA TAX PARCEL NUMBERS: 0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285 and 1180008400 PREPARED FOR: BEN DAHLE CITY OF RENTON AIRPORT 6) 6 WEST PERIMETER ROAD, UNIT A RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057 PREPARED BY: GRETTE ASSOCIATES LLC 2102 NORTH 30rn, SunEA TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98403 (253) 573-9300 ~. Grette AssociatesLLC V ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTAN_!~- en ~ """ ca """ ::c >< w TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 2 PROJECT SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1 3 LAKE ASSESSMENT NARRATIVE .................................................................................... 1 3.1 Lake Classification ........................................................................................................... 1 3.2 Vegetative cover ............................................................................................................... I 3.3 Existing Ecological functions and project impacts .......................................................... 2 3.4 Observed fish and wildlife use and project impacts ......................................................... 3 3 .5 Vegetation/free Protection .............................................................................................. 3 3.6 No Net Loss ...................................................................................................................... 3 4 LAKE STUDY SUPPLEMENT AL INFORMATION .......................................................... .4 4.1 Analysis of Alternatives ................................................................................................... 4 4.2 Impact Evaluation ............................................................................................................ 5 5 MITIGATION .......................................................................................................................... 5 6 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 6 1 INTRODUCTION The City of Renton Airport and Seaplane Base has contracted with Grette AssociatesLLC to generate a Lake Study pursuant to the requirements specified in RMC Section 4-8-120D for the purposes of submitting for a Shoreline Exemption to conduct a maintenance dredge. The parcels within which maintenance dredge activities will occur, identified as King County tax parcels 0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285 and 1180008400, are within the northeast and northwest quarter section of Section 7, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, WM and are located primarily within the City of Renton in King County, WA. 2 PROJECT SUMMARY The purpose of the maintenance dredging is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base Approach Channel and Mooring Basin that has occurred during previous major storm events such as those occurring in November 2006 and January 2009. The proposed maintenance dredging will remove recent sediment deposits from under the floating docks and up to the edge of existing structures to restore the Seaplane Base access and mooring basin to required depths for safe operations. Refer to Sheet 2 of 3. The proposed maintenance dredge depths are based on historical dredging areas and Federal Aviation Administration design standards for seaplane operations. A total estimated volume of 16,000 cubic yards of dredged material will be removed from a 76,000 square foot area within the facility. The dredged sediment will be disposed ofat the Elliot Bay Open Water disposal site. 3 LAKE ASSESSMENT NARRATIVE 3.1 Lake Classification The proposed maintenance dredge project will occur in an aquatic overlay district adjacent to a shoreline high intensity overlay district. 3.2 Vegetative cover The proposed maintenance dredge project will occur within Lake Washington. Aquatic plants commonly found within Lake Washington include homwort, pondweeds, and the invasive Eurasian water milfoil and fragrant water lily. However, vegetation within the project area and surrounding area is minimal. The proposed dredge is not anticipated to adversely impact aquatic plants within Lake Washington. The vegetation within the upland area adjacent to the proposed maintenance dredge project, including I 00 feet on either side of the property boundaries, includes ornamental trees and shrubs and maintained lawn areas. The project does not include upland work, but may include the utilization of upland portions of the airport property for the storage of equipment. If Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Lake Study I January 2013 equipment storage does occur upland, it will be stored in areas that are currently gravel, asphalt, or some other form of impervious surface and will not impact upland vegetation. 3.3 Existing Ecological fnnctions and project impacts The existing ecological functions and processes of the site are described in detail with the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012) and are summarized in Table 1 as provided below. Table 1: Pathway and indicator matrix for Lake Washington within the aquatic action area* PATHWAYS: INDICATORS Temperature Sediment/ Turbidity Chemical Contaminants/ Nutrients Substrate Embeddedness in Rearin Areas Large Woody Debris Refugia Road Density and Location Disturbance Regime ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE X X X X X X X X EFFECTS OF THE ACTIONS Restore I X X (long- term) X (long- term) X X X X X Degrade X (short- term) X (short- Riparian Reserves X X • This summary table was originally provided as Table 2 within the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). As shown in this table, the proposed maintenance dredge project is anticipated to maintain existing function but may have short term impacts to turbidity as a result of the dredge process. The dredge Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Lake Study 2 January 2013 material has been determined to be clean and suitable for open water disposal and as such any impacts from chemical contaminates and/or nutrients as a result of this dredge process are exceedingly unlikely even on a short term basis. For further analysis of existing ecological functions and anticipated project impacts, refer to the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). 3.4 Observed fish and wildlife use and project impacts The observed fish and wildlife use of the site are described m detail with the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). Table 2 below summarizes results of the Biological Assessment review and includes a list of project relevant Endangered Species Act listed species and designated critical habitat within the action area as well as the project effect determination. Table 2: ESA species and Project Effect Determination Summary Soecies Coastal-Puget Sound DPS* ofBull Trout !Salvelinus confluentus) Bull Trout Critical Habitat Puget Sound ESU** of Chinook Salmon ( Oncorhvnchus tshawvtscha) Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat Puget Sound DPS* ofSteelhead Trout (Oncorhvnchus mvkiss) *Distinct population segment **Evolutionarily significant unit Effect Determination May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect Overall, project impacts to endangered fish species will be accomplished by conducting work during approved USACE in-water work windows designated during the permit process, anticipated to be (July 16 through July 31 and November 16 through December 31). For further analysis of the observed fish and wildlife use and project impacts, refer to the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). 3.5 Vegetationffree Protection As noted in Section 3.2, this project will be conducted within Lake Washington and will not impact any upland trees or vegetation and is not anticipated to adversely impact aquatic vegetation. 3.6 No Net Loss Pursuant to RMC 4-3-090(D)(2) and RCW 90.58.020, shoreline projects must demonstrate that they are "carried out in a manner that prevents or mitigates adverse impacts to ensure no net loss Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Lake Study 3 January 2013 of ecological functions and processes in all development and use. Permitted uses are designed and conducted to minimize, in so far as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment" This project has been designed to restore existing historical use and remove sediment that was deposited as a result of two flood disasters. Although the project will result in temporary increases to turbidity as a result of the dredge process (Refer to Section 3.3 and the attached Biological Assessment), overall the project will have no long term effects on shoreline ecologic functions such as fish and wildlife habitat, food chain support, and water temperature maintenance. In addition the project will have no Jong term effect on shoreline processes including but not limited to, water flow; erosion and accretion; sediment delivery, transport, and storage; large woody debris recruitment; organic matter input; and nutrient and pathogen removal. For further analysis, refer to the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). 4 LAKE STUDY SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 4.1 Analysis of Alternatives Shoreline project may impact shoreline function. As such, it is prudent to analyze a proposal to determine if an alternative exists that may be less impactful than the project as proposed. RMC 4-8-120 identifies specific alternatives that must be addressed as part of this analysis. The remainder of this section identifies the five required alternatives, bulleted and in italics, and directly followed by project relevant justification of that alternative: • Avoid any disturbances to the stream, lake or buffer by not taking a certain action, or by moving the action. The proposed maintenance dredge is located within the boundaries of the functioning City of Renton Airport and Seaplane Base and is being conducted to restore a previously existing navigable channel and as such cannot be located elsewhere. The Seaplane Base is already experiencing reduced functionality as a result of the sediment deposited by the 2006 and 2009 flood events. If the proposed maintenance dredge is not conducted continued sediment deposition resulting from future flood events is likely to continue to limit and eventually prevent future Seaplane base operations. • Minimize any stream, lake or buffer impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce the impacts. The proposed maintenance dredge has been designed to limit the degree and magnitude of the project by focusing on restoring existing historical function of the previously existing navigation Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Lake Study 4 January 2013 channel. The proposed maintenance dredge does not serve to increase the area utilized by the Seaplane Base use or modify the location of the previously existing use. • Rectifying the impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected area. The proposed maintenance dredge is not anticipated to have any long term impacts. Refer to Section 3.3. The temporary impacts associated with the dredge activity, such as increased turbidity, are anticipated to be temporary and highly localized. • Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations over the life of the action The proposed maintenance dredge is not anticipated to have any long term adverse impacts. • Compensate for any stream, lake, or buffer impacts by replacing, enhancing, or providing similar substitute resources or environments and monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. The proposed maintenance dredge is not anticipated to have any long term adverse impacts. Short term impacts that may occur during maintenance dredge activities, such as temporary increases in water turbidity, will be monitored to ensure that state and federal water quality standards are not exceeded. 4.2 Impact Evaluation The functional values of the project site are described both in Section 3.3 of this document and within the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012). The proposed maintenance dredge is likely to maintain all existing functions at their current level and is not anticipated to have any long term impacts. The project has been limited in design to restoring historic land use function and complying with current federal aviation requirements. If maintenance dredging is not conducted, use of the Seaplane Base will continue to be limited until the accrued sediment prevents seaplanes from utilizing the Renton seaplane base. This project is not anticipated to have any significant detrimental impacts to the project area or the watershed system. 5 MITIGATION The proposed maintenance dredge project is not anticipated to impact shoreline processes or result in net loss of shoreline function. As such, mitigation is not proposed for this project. Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Lake Study 5 January 2013 6 REFERENCES City of Renton, 2012. Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base: Biological Assessment. Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Biological Assessment North facing view of the Renton Municipal Airport and Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base (Panoramio 2011 ). April 2012 STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal Advertising Representative of the Renton Reporter a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King County, Washington. The Renton Reporter has been approved as u Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a: Public Notice was published on July 12, 2013. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $105.00. ? ,/ .•. ,-;;.,, /;:1<"' ,)/n,/,,, 'i"/_&V(_ / I #" /t£..,_, ,ywda M. Mills · Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscribed and sworn to me this 12th day of July, 2013. /~l}Z-1-A{u "-(} Stu/uud. ~~ Kathleen C. Sherman, Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Buckley, Washington '-,. .............. ,,,,;,,.,'\'-'''''-\\\ \\\~t1 ~-~,s;-, G. SH,,_ ,,, .:'":' (,,-',.-' ..::~''""'1'11 '~ ,,, E ., .... _., .. .::;'t;. \OH .E1~.!i1 ~ -,,,. :;: ,...f: ::.::-_,_,,o ""'°11/~ 1' ::: -34:~ oi AF? ~'11 ?A 'l. ::: <.(";:~ ~ J.,, ·,;....1; t,, ~ ~ X Jd "<; 'Ol~ ~ ~ ~o -• -'§ ~ ~ ~ <> ::.: ~ 1 " ,c:,U°"\" ::z.:: '/ '11 u" : 0 =: 1, \j\. ,,, 4 1 ., \ (o ~ /..:.. = 1 1 /' 111 -l.d~ .... ~ 0 = \/1 !'I:'-Hin\\\\, •• ,,,,-:'}.~ .ff l/1 <: Qr 'J J.,· c:, 1\1 r ,.. p.J ..._,' l \\\\\\\\\,,,,, ...... ~' NOTICE OF E'<VIRO'<MENTAL DETERMINATION [i'\VIRO:\MENTAL REV!l;W COMMITTH REl\"TOS, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Detenni- nation of Non-S1gmficancc M1t1- gated (DNS-M) for the following project under the authority of the Renton municipal code. Will Rogers Wiley Post Memo- rial Seaplane Base Mainte· nanct! Drt!dging LUA 13-000517 Location: North end of the Renton Municipal Airport along the southern shore of Lak; Washington, the project crosses into King County. The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline ExemptlOn for the Scaplant! Base maintenance dredging. localed at 616 West Perimeter Road. Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located m Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76.000 square foet across four parcels two extcnd111g into Kmg County and DNR leased land. Appeals of the DNS !\'I must he filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 26, 2 0 I 3 . Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee wilh: Hei:lring Examiner c/o City Clerk. City of Renton, l 055 S Grady \.Vay, Renton. WA 98057 Appeals to the Hearing Examin- er arc governed by RMC 4 8 110 and more inl'om1ation m:1y be obtained from the Renton City Clcrk·s Oflicc. 425-430-6510. Published in Rtnton Reporter on July 12. 2013. #830541 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Karen, Vanessa Dolbee Tuesday, July 02, 2013 10:10 AM 'Karen Walter' Doug Jacobson; Ben Dahle RE: MITFD Habitat Program comments to Renton Airport Seaplane dredging project, LUA 13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed MDNS Muckleshoot SEPA response bpd 062713 -July 2.docx Thank you for your comments on the Seaplane dredging project. Please find attached the City's response to your comments. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you, 'Vanessa <Do{6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:33 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Kerschke, William; Matthew Longenbaugh -NOAA Federal; McReynolds, Ryan; Fisher, Larry D (DFW); HAWKINS, VIVIAN (DNR); Ben Dahle Subject: MITFD Habitat Program comments to Renton Airport Seaplane dredging project, LUAB-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed MDNS Vanessa, I am sending you the MITFD Habitat Program comments in response to the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated materials for the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project referenced above. The comment letter attachments are included a separate attachments to this email. A signed hard copy of the comment letter is in the mail for your files. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to meet to discuss these comments further. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 1 Vanessa, The following is provided as a proposed response to the comments from Karen Walter of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, dated May 23, 2013 regarding her review of the notice of application for the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project. Her comments are given below followed by our response. Al Removal of Existing Shallow Water Habitat Comment: Per Sheet 2, the project will remove approximately 100,000 square feet of existing shallow water habitat (i.e. less than 4' depths) and substrate types preferred by juvenile Chinook in an area immediately adjacent to the Cedar River. This area of Lake Washington is heavily used by juvenile Chinook from the Cedar River ... We remain concerned that the dredging activity (including any potential overdredging) will deepen adjacent areas currently used by juvenile Chinook without mitigation. The project should be required to mitigate for the resulting loss of shallow water habitat that exists today. Response: The maintenance dredging project will return the lakebed to the previously authorized elevation of 8.5 feet in areas of open water; this includes the I-foot over-dredge allowance. It will restore the water levels to pre-flood conditions. Areas closer to the shore will be graded to create shallower water levels and preserve the shallow water habitat. To ensure dredging occurs within the proposed limits, the horizontal and vertical dredging boundaries will be surveyed prior to the start of, during, and at the end of construction. A GPS survey instrument on board the dredge or survey vessel will be utilized during dredging activity to follow the surveyed limits. The use of a I-foot over-dredge allowance is standard practice for navigation dredging projects. The allowance is necessary to ensure the dredging contractor does not remove material below historical maintenance dredging elevations while also ensuring the required clearance for seaplane access. Any material removed by the contractor below the I-foot over-dredge elevation will not be paid for by the owner and will be subject to a monetary penalty and/or requirement to backfill to specified grades. fil Facilitation of Elevated Predation Comment: Another concern is the extent of artificial night lighting from the airport on juvenile Chinook habitat. The Renton Airport is currently a major source of artificial light shown to disrupt sockeye fry migration in the lower Cedar River in Renton which led to increased in predation mortality of sockeyefry and potentially Chinook juveniles in the lower Cedar River and in Lake Washington (see Tabor et al. 2010, attached). We recognize that lighting is essential for the safe operation of the airport; however, opportunities for light reduction and modification along the lower river and the lakefront likely exist and should be implemented as partial mitigation for the loss of shallow water habitat due to the dredging project ... Response: The proposed project does not include any additional lighting structures since it only involves dredging and work to the floating docks. There is no existing lighting on the docks. Any long term changes to the existing lighting off-site is not part of the scope of this project. Maintenance dredging operations will be conducted during daytime hours to the maximum extent possible. However, due to the short duration of the work window and limited amount of daylight hours during the work window (November 16-December 31), some dredging and re-handling work will need to occur during the night and involve artificial lighting. Construction will be limited to occur between 7 am and 10 pm, in accordance with the City's construction noise ordinance unless emergency situations require work at other times. In addition to the project, the City has undertaken a city-wide light reduction r-~n to cover all city lights with LEDs. Th.." .. ill reduce the light footprint produced by the City. If you would like more information about this effort please contact Doug Jacobson at 425-430-7242 or DJacobson@Rentonwa.!!ov. In practice, the airport reviews proposed lighting improvements to ensure that lighting is only used when necessary and shields are used if needed to reduce nighttime glare for pilots. The airport will continue to review projects to only allow necessary light and reduce glare. Reducing glare is a component of maintaining a safe airport on a daily basis as identified as a sustainable action in the airport's Sustainable Management Plan. Reducing unnecessary light on the airport is a key component of energy consumption reduction identified as a sustainable action in the airport's Sustainable Management Plan. The airport will send letters to Boeing and other tenants with lighting structures to request they review existing lighting, with the airport, to determine if they have any unnecessary lighting or if glare reduction measures can be taken to reduce unnecessary light or glare on the airport. Q Poor Riparian and Lake Shoreline Aquatic Habitat Comment: The airport has generally poor shoreline habitat conditions for juvenile salmon including riprap invasive plants including knotweed. We understand that airport operations and airplane access requirements at the Boeing property to the west limit the opportunity to fully restore the shoreline and riparian area at the mouth of the Cedar and the south lake shoreline. However, part of the airport seaplane dock runs parallel along the beach shoreline and adversely affects aquatic habitat for juvenile Chinook. While the project may not be removing any existing vegetation, it also lacks any proposed vegetation enhancement measures that would benefit juvenile chinook and potentially offset some of the losses of shallow water habitat. The shoreline should be enhanced with native trees and plants that can be allowed to grow given the airport constraints. Enhancing the shoreline along the airport would partially mitigate for the project related loss of shallow water habitat, as well as and add to the shoreline vegetation benefits derived from the Boeing North Cedar River bridge replacement project immediately adjacent to the airport. Response: As mentioned in the comment, the project will not disturb any terrestrial vegetation as all work will be performed from the barge, the existing docks, or from the airport apron. The project has been reviewed by FEMA, the lead federal agency, and they have not recommended additional shoreline revegetation. In the past, the airport periodically removes invasive species from the shoreline of the lake and riparian areas of the river. The airport will increase the frequency of continue these maintenance activities. These activities are directly related to recommendation no. 6. Shoreline enhancement is currently being considered under City-wide mitigation/restoration plans. One option being reviewed is the placement of appropriately sized lakebed material on top of existing riprap along the shoreline at the end of the runway. Though the existing riprap cannot be entirely removed, the placement of lakebed substrate will soften the shoreline and enhance the shallow water habitat conditions in the area. Thls would occur at a later time, as part of a separate project. These activities are directly related to recommendation no. 5.This effort would also include the removal of invasive vegetation along the shoreline. The airport is currently installing new stormwater treatment facilities to treat runoff from the taxiway on the east side of the airport that is conveyed to the river. These new treatment facilities will improve storm water quality discharged from the airport and is identified as a sustainable action in the airport's Sustainable Management Plan. These improvements are directly related to recommendation no. 8. ill Long Term Dredgi ,, Comment: The details about any future maintenance dredging are lacking. Given that dredging has been proposed after two fairly recent flood events (i.e. 2006 and 2009) and the location of the seaplane base on the Cedar River delta, it is likely that re-dredging will be proposed at some point this site. The details of future dredging including area.frequency and when future dredging will occur should be discussed and analyzed so that cumulative impacts can be assessed and mitigated as needed. Response: This project proposes to dredge enough material to ensure seaplane access is maintained in the event of future flood and sediment deposition events in the short term. The City of Renton will maintain the seaplane base to ensure that the basin has the required clearance to maintain safe seaplane operations. Standard maintenance dredging last occurred in 2001 at this site and may need to be performed at a similar interval (every 10-15 years), depending on natural sedimentation rates and the intensity of future flood events. fil Mitigation recommendations Comment: Currently the project fails to identify mitigation for the project impacts identified above. Response: The following mitigation/minimization measures recommended by Ms. Walter will be incorporated into the project: 1) A dredging monitoring plan that includes pre-dredge elevations, dredging elevation measurements during construction, and post-project dredging elevations. In addition, as proposed in the project's BA, a dredging and dredged materials handling plan will be developed by the contractor in coordination with the City prior to the start of construction. This plan will include a description of the dredging activities, locations, BMP measures to be used, progress surveying, dredge elevation control, and water quality protection measures. The dredging contractor will also be required to attend a pre-dredge conference prior to starting the work to discuss and confirm the details of the plan. 2) The dredging work will be conducted during daylight hours as much as possible. See response in item B above. No other permanent lighting changes are proposed as part of this project. This would have to be further coordinated with the airport. 3) The graded areas around the dredging limits will not be steeper than a 4: 1 slope which may create additional shallow water habitat and reduce impacts to the dredge area. A 4: 1 slope is the minimum slope that can slope stability, approved disposal volumes, and FAA design guidelines. See response in item A above. 4) Softening of the shoreline adjacent to the runway is being considered by the City as part of a City-wide mitigation/restoration plan. This would be implemented under a separate project. See response in item C above. More information regarding potential shoreline enhancement projects can be requested from Doug Jacobson. 5) The removal of invasive vegetation along the shoreline is a proposed as a shoreline improvement. See response in item C above. 6) The City-wide mitigation/restoration plans also include stormwater management upgrades. Work to upgrade the airport's stormwater drainage and treatment systems may be conducted as part of a separate project and will aid in improving the quality of stormwater discharged to Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River. I can provide more information regarding potential storm water facility improvement projects if needed. Please contact me at 425-430-7476 or bdahle@rentonwa.gov. These measures address the concerns outlined by the Tribe and no other mitigation measures have been required by FEMA as part of their review of the biological assessment prepared for this project. Any other long term chang_c o existing airport structures (i.e. the do , lighting structures) as requested by the Tribe would be outside the funding capabilities of this project. The existing decking is open grating; it will be removed to facilitate the dredging and then reinstalled. Other minimization measures proposed during construction such as dredging methods, techniques, and timing were already addressed in the project's BA and have been addressed in previous correspondence with the Tribe. Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Vanessa, Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Thursday, May 23, 2013 1 :33 PM Vanessa Dolbee Kerschke, William; Matthew Longenbaugh -NOAA Federal; McReynolds, Ryan; Fisher, Larry D (DFW); HAWKINS, VIVIAN (DNR); Ben Dahle MITFD Habitat Program comments to Renton Airport Seaplane dredging project, LUA13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed MONS Renton airport seaplane base dredging project MONS comments.pdf; habitat_use_of_chinook Tabor and Celedonia power point presentation.pd!; Tabor, Celedonia, and Brown Artificial lighting in Lare Wasington research Oct 14 201 O.ppt; Falchi et al. 20 11 Light Pollution, Journal of Environmental Management.pdf; Figure 1 Proposed Habitat Bench for Renton Seaplane Base.pdf; Figure S1 Float Relocation Plan.pd! Follow up Flagged I am sending you the MITFD Habitat Program comments in response to the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated materials for the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project referenced above. The comment letter attachments are included a separate attachments to this email. A signed hard copy of the comment letter is in the mail for your files. Please let me know if you have any questions or would like to meet to discuss these comments further. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 1 • MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 -172nd Avenue SE• Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner City of Renton CED-Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 May 23, 2013 RE: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, LUA13-000517, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated Ms. Dolbee: The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program has reviewed the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Renton Municipal Airport proposal to dredge 16,000 cubic yards of sediments in the vicinity of existing seaplane docks and to dispose of dredged material in Elliott Bay. Since 2005, we have been involved in discussions about this proposal and potential mitigation measures cooperatively with the Airport staff. Unfortunately, the project, as proposed, does not include any mitigation necessary to address our concerns identified during the Corps permitting process. These concerns are discussed below in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty-protected fisheries resources. Project impacts and issues Removal of Existing Shallow Water Habitat Per Sheet 2, the project will remove approximately I 00,000 square feet of existing shallow water habitat (i.e. less than 4' depths) and substrate types preferred by juvenile Chinook in an area immediately adjacent to the Cedar River. This area of Lake Washington is heavily used by juvenile Chinook from the Cedar River (see Tabor and Celedonia, attached and http://www.govlink.org/watersheds/8/pdf/L WGJ SalmonSyn 123108.pdt). In general, juvenile Chinook exit the mouth of the Cedar River, turning left or right to migrate and rear along the lake shoreline in shallow water. Those turning left (likely half the juvenile Chinook population from the Cedar) migrate into this project site. These Chinook fry prefer shallow, gently -sloped shoreline areas with relatively fine-grained substrates, which is the type of existing habitat proposed to be removed from the dredged area. As noted in the Biological Assessment (Renton September 2012), the project will remove 2 to 9 feet of sediment deepening water surrounding the seaplane dock to 11.5 to 13.5 feet. We ', Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUA I 3-000517, MDNS May 23, 2013 Page 2 of 4 remain concerned that the dredging activity (including any potential overdredging) will deepen adjacent areas currently used by juvenile Chinook without mitigation. The project should be required to mitigate for the resulting loss of shallow water habitat that exists today. Facilitation of Elevated Predation Another concern is the extent of artificial night lighting from the airport on juvenile Chinook habitat. The Renton Airport is currently a major source of artificial light shown to disrupt sockeye fry migration in the lower Cedar River in Renton which led to increased in predation mortality of sockeye fry and potentially Chinook juveniles in the lower Cedar River and in Lake Washington (see Tabor et al. 2010, attached). We recognize that lighting is essential for the safe operation of the airport; however, opportunities for light reduction and modification along the lower river and the lakefront likely exist and should be implemented as partial mitigation for the loss of shallow water habitat due to the dredging project. Modifications could include shielding, changing fixtures, and use of lighting with the correct wavelength and color to avoid adverse behavioral and environmental effects on fish, wildlife, and people (see attached article). Poor Riparian and Lake Shoreline Aquatic Habitat The airport has generally poor shoreline habitat conditions for juvenile salmon including riprap invasive plants including knotweed. We understand that airport operations and airplane access requirements at the Boeing property to the west limit the opportunity to fully restore the shoreline and riparian area at the mouth of the Cedar and the south lake shoreline. However, part of the airport seaplane dock runs parallel along the beach shoreline and adversely affects aquatic habitat for juvenile Chinook. While the project may not be removing any existing vegetation, it also lacks any proposed vegetation enhancement measures that would benefit juvenile chinook and potentially offset some of the losses of shallow water habitat. The shoreline should be enhanced with native trees and plants that can be allowed to grow given the airport constraints. Enhancing the shoreline along the airport would partially mitigate for the project- related loss of shallow water habitat, as well as and add to the shoreline vegetation benefits derived from the Boeing North Cedar River bridge replacement project immediately adjacent to the airport. Long Term Dredging The details about any future maintenance dredging are lacking. Given that dredging has been proposed after two fairly recent flood events (i.e. 2006 and 2009) and the location of the seaplane base on the Cedar River delta, it is likely that re-dredging will be proposed at some point this site. The details of future dredging including area, frequency and when future dredging will occur should be discussed and analyzed so that cumulative impacts can be assessed and mitigated as needed. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUA13-0005 I 7, MDNS May 23, 2013 Page 3 of4 Mitigation recommendations Currently, the project fails to identify mitigation for the project impacts identified above. To address these concerns, we recommend the following: 1. A dredging monitoring plan that includes pre-dredging elevations, dredging elevation measurements during construction and post-project dredging elevations is needed and should be sent to the MITFD. 2. The dredging activity should be conducted solely during daylight hours to avoid the need for nighttime construction lighting that can increase predation impacts. 3. The applicant should identify opportunities and implement measures to reduce existing airport nighttime light to the fullest extent possible. These measures should include eliminating direct light spillage onto the water's surface and any unnecessary or unintended skyward reflection using methods such as shielding and redirecting light fixtures, using motion sensors to tum lights on/off where appropriate, eliminating any nonessential lights, reducing height of lights, reducing wattage, changing luminaries to those with wavelengths known to reduce environmental effects and taking any other actions as appropriate to reduce direct and reflected light on Lake Washington and the Cedar River. 4. The 4: I proposed sloped area rimming the dredge area should be modified by extending this sloped area so that it is less steep to the fullest extent possible in all areas with the goal of creating water depths no greater than 3 feet to support juvenile Chinook using shallow water habitats. 5. Similarly to recommendation 4, the project should construct a Chinook beach along the shoreline and/ soften the existing riprap shoreline to create preferred habitat conditions for juvenile Chinook. This mitigation was previously proposed for the project back in 2008. An example is provided in the attached drawing that was proposed previously for this project (see attachment labeled Figure 1 ). 6. Remove all invasive plants along the shoreline and plant and native willows, dogwood, and other native vegetation overhanging waterward to improve juvenile Chinook habitat conditions. 7. Modify/reduce the overwater coverage from the existing seaplane dock parallel to the shoreline. The existing dock that extends waterward can be modified to accommodate seaplane moorage at the site, as proposed previously by the airport. The attached drawing labeled S 1 shows the removal of part of the dock that is parallel to the shoreline and the extension of the perpendicular dock waterward. 8. The airport should take measures to improve the quality of stormwater leaving the site and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to Renton Airport Dredging LUAl3-000517, MONS May 23, 2013 Page 4 of4 entering into Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River as heavy metals and other pollutants can harm juvenile salmon. All of the proposed mitigation measures above are needed to offset the unavoidable dredging impacts to juvenile Chinook and other salmon that use the dredged area. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to working with you and the applicant to resolve these concerns. Please let me know if you have any questions or call me at 253-876- 3116 to set up a meeting to discuss these concerns further. Sincerely, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Attachments Cc: Bill Kerschke, FEMA Region X Matt Longenbaugh, NOAA Fisheries, Habitat Division Ryan McReynolds, USFWS Larry Fisher, WDFW Region 4 Vivian Hawkins, WDNR, Aquatic Lands Ben Dahle, Renton Airport Migration of juvenile Chinook out of the Cedar River and into Lake Washington; based on WDFW fry/smolt traps at the mouth f~ ,i_..-- ~ __ .. -- 0 ...... en C: ·- Juvenile Chinook may avoid structures at night to avoid interaction with abundant sculpin e e ,\ 'I ;I ! l ~J l. , ~- 1., " .,, , ... -' .,, .. , ,,,,..,r,r.,!r, al .·o.o-m·2·•1 .. (t1>,<:ani.bi~.nti·•J. .s.·· .•••.•....•• ~.::)··r··-····:······:m1r 3 .. :-.32 \IU><xirfheavyJ.:hihOokafeijs r';] < .. ,, ': .''".>.:;;.· :c:,: ·': .. '.' 'y, ·,•.:: -_ ;.,,: ,. .. ·::,--c',_':, , .. _·' '. :-.. ' < ", " ---1-:~.:·:,_,.: ,'1t ' : '• Jou1 ndl of Enviro11mentdl M<lndgement 92 (2011) 2714-2722 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Environmental Management journal ho mcpag e: www .el sevi er .co m/1 ocate/jenvma n Limiting the impact of light pollution on human health, environment and stellar visibility Fabio Falchi a .•• Pierantonio Cinzano a. Christopher D. Elvidge b' David M. Keith c. Abraham Haim ct •tstituto di Scirnza r Tecno/ogia deltlnquinamento Luminoso, Via Roma 13, I-36106 Thiene, Jtaly b NOM Notional Geophysical Dutu Center, Boulder, Co/omdo, USA c Mars/tall Design Inc~ Boulder, Colorado, USA d The Israeli Center for Interdisciplinary Srudies in Chronobiology, U11iversity of 1-faifa, 1-faifa 31905, l5rue/ ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 20 December 2010 Received in revised form 14 May 2011 Accepted 3 June 20ll Available on line 13 July 2011 Keywords: Light pollution light technology Sustainable lighting Health and light at night 1. Introduction ABSTRACT ---------------------------------- Light pollution is one of the most rapidly increasing types of environmental degradation. Its levels have been growing exponentially over the natural nocturnal lighting levels provided by starlight and moonlight. To limit this pollution several effective practices have been defined: the use of shielding on lighting fixture to prevent direct upward light, particularly at low angles above the horizon: no over lighting, i.e. avoid using higher lighting levels than strictly needed for the task. constraining illumination to the area where it is needed and the time it will be used. Nevertheless. even after the best control of the light distribution is reached and when the proper quantity of light is used. some upward light emission remains, due to reflections from the lit surfaces and atmospheric scatter. The environmental impact of this "residual light pollution", cannot be neglected and should be limited too. Here we propose a new way to limit the effects of this residual light pollution on wildlife. human health and stellar visibility. We performed analysis of the spectra of common types of lamps for external use. including the new LEDs. We evaluated their emissions relative to the spectral response functions of human eye photoreceptors, in the photopic, scotopic and the 'meltopic' melatonin suppressing bands. We found that the amount of pollution is strongly dependent on the spectral characteristics of the lamps, with the more environ- mentally friendly lamps being low pressure sodium, followed by high pressure sodium. Most polluting are the lamps with a strong blue emission, like Metal Halide and white LEDs. Migration from the now widely used sodium lamps to white lamps (MH and LEDs) would produce an increase of pollution in the scotopic and melatonin suppression bands of more than five times the present levels, supposing the same photopic installed nux. This increase will exacerbate known and possible unknown. effects of light pollution on human health, environment and on visual perception of the Universe by humans, We present quantitative criteria to evaluate the lamps based on their spectral emissions and we suggest regulatory limits for future lighting. © 2011 Elsevier Ud. All rights reserved. Light pollution is the alteration of natural light levels in the night environment produced by introduction of artificial light. Due to the continuous growth of nighttime artificial lighting, this problem is increasingly debated and many localities have devel- oped regulations to constrain the wasteful loss of light into the sky and environment. the usually dark hours. This increasing use is driven by what seems common sense, and by the lighting industry with justifications that at first may seem correct. With few exceptions, everything we build is lit at night. This includes streets, roads, bridges, airports, commercial and industrial buildings, parking lots, sport centers and homes. Outdoor lighting continues to expand as more infrastruc- ture is built. Lighting levels are often set high with one or more secondary objectives in mind. For instance, building exteriors are often lit for a merely aesthetic effect. Shopping centers are typically heavily lit to attract shoppers and create a lively environment designed to stimulate spending. Lighting levels in public areas are often set high as a deterrent against crime, even though studies have not proven this to have any effect on crime rates (Marchant, 2004, 2005, 2006). Indeed the cores of our urban centers are The expanding use of light at night is due to the fact that humans are diurnal animals that are trying to extend activities into * Corresponding author. E-mail address: falchi@lightpollution.it (F. Falchi). 0301-4797 /S -see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.06.029 E 1'11/rhi ct al./ jm1m11l of Envirrmmrntul Management 92 (2011) 2714-2722 2715 bathed in light and the resulting light pollution can extend more than a hundred kilometers out from the city's edge. There is reliable evidence that this artificial extension of the day produces serious adverse consequences to human health and environment. The impact of light pollution on the night sky has been described in depth by Cinzano, Falchi and Elvidge (Cinzano et al., 2001 ). In the First Atlas of Artificial Night Sky Brightness they showed that more than 60% of world population lives under light polluted skies (99% of the population of USA and Europe) and almost one-fifth of world terrain is under light polluted skies. In regards to human, to date there are no doubts that exposure to light at night (LAN) decreases pineal melatonin (MLT) production and secretion and are not only a source for phase shift in daily rhythms. Apart of timing and exposure duration, the two light variables responsible for the suppression ofMLT production are: 1) light intensity and 2) wavelength. Therefore, it seems that the combination of both variables should be considered for the threshold of LAN. Light intensity levels found to suppress MLT production are decreasing as research progresses. During the eighties of last century, it was shown that bright light at an order of thousands of lux was requested for abolishing the secretion (Lewy et al., 1980). The discovery of a novel photoreceptor, the Non Image Forming Photoreceptors (NIFPs). and the photopygment melanop- sin gave an opportunity for a better understanding of light perception by humans and showed the effects of spectrum in the human high response to LAN exposure (Thapan et al., 2001 ; Brainard et al., 2001; Hankins and Lucas, 2002; He et al., 2003; Berman and Clear, 2008; Leonid et al., 2005). The results of a study (Cajochen et al., 2005), in which the impact of wavelength on humans was assessed by measuring melatonin, alertness. ther- moregulation and heart rate draw the attention to the significant role of wavelength. It was shown that exposure of 2 h to mono- chromatic light at 460 nm in the late evening significantly sup- pressed melatonin secretion while under the same intensity, exposure timing and duration but at wavelength of 550 nm such effects were not observed. Already Wright et al. (2001) showed that even illuminance as low as 1.5 Jux affects circadian rhythms. Moreover, recently it as shown that bedroom illumination, typical of most homes in the evening, is sufficient to reduce and delay MLT production (Gooley et al., 2011 ). From the results of these studies it can be noted that MLTsuppression by lJ\N is wavelength depended and intensities can be much lower than those used several decades ago. Alteration of the circadian clock may cause performance, alert- ness, sleep and metabolic disorders. Exposure to light at night suppresses the production of the pineal hormone melatonin, and since melatonin is an oncostatic or anti-carcinognenic agent. lower levels in blood may encourage the growth of some type of cancers (Glickman et al., 2002; Stevens et al., 2007; Klooget al., 2008, 2009; Bullough et al.. 2006; Haim et al., 2010). MLT seems to have an influence on coronary heart disease (Brugger et al.. 1995). LAN acts directly on physiology, or indirectly by causing sleep disorders and deprivation, that may have negative effects on several disorders such as diabetes, obesity and others (Haus and Smolensky, 2006; Bass and Turek, 2005). For a brief review of physiological, epide- miological and ecological consequences of LAN see Navara and Nelson (Navara and Nelson, 2007). Therefore, the increase in light intensity on the one hand and the wide use of "environmentally friendly bulbs" with a short wavelength emission on the other, are probably having severe negative impact on health through the suppression of MLT production. In the natural environment, animals and plants are exposed to light at night levels that vary from about 5 x 10-5 lux of the overcast sky, to I x 10 4 lux by the starry sky on a moooless night, to 2 x 10··2 1ux at the quarter moon, to 0.1-0.3 lux during the week around full moon. The artificial light of .i typical shopping mall, 10-20 lux, is up to 200 thousand times brighter than the illumi- nance experienced in the natural environment around new moon. No wonder that it has become apparent that light at night has strong environmental effects in behavioral. population and community ecology (in foraging, mating, orientation, migration, communication, competition, and predation) and effects on ecosystems. For a review of ecological consequences of light pollution see (Navara and Nelson, 2007; Rich and Longcore, 2004, 2006; Longcore, 2010; Kempenaers et al., 2010). This strong evidence of the adverse effects of artificial light at night on animals and on human health should be b<1lanced against the supposed positive effects on safety and security. Fortunately it is possible (and also simple in theory, if those involved in lighting collaborate) to limit the light pollution effects and, at the same time, allow for the lighting that is usually perceived as a need by people. Practical ways to limit the effects of light pollution on the night sky and the night environment are well known and verified (Cinzano, 2002): a) Full Shielding: Do not allow luminaires to send any light directly at and above the horizontal, with particular care to cut the light emitted at low elevations (in the range gamma = 90-135° above the downward vertical, i.e. 0-45° from the horizon plane). In practice, light in this range travels long distances through the atmosphere and enhances the additive property of light pollution (Cinzano and Castro, 2000; Luginbuhl et al., 2009), an effect that compounds the problem, especially in densely populated areas. An additional limitation on the light leaving the fixture downward (in the range gamma = 80-90" from the downward vertical, i.e. 0·--10" below the horizon plane) should also be enforced. This is because the nearly- specular reflection of asphalt at grazing incidence consider- ably increases the amount of light at low angles above the horizontal (although this reflected light is much more subject to screening by surrounding vegetation and buildings). This limitation will also improve the comfort and visual perfor- mance of road users by lowering the direct glare from fixtures. b) Limiting the Area of Lighting: Carefully avoid wasting downward light flux outside the area to be lit. Such waste is not only a main cause of increase of installed flux per unit surface (and in turn a main cause of increase in energy expense), but some of this light is also reflected upward from these surfaces. Even if Lambertian diffusion from horizontal surfaces is less effective in sending light at low elevations than direct emission by luminaires. nevertheless when the direct emission is elimi- nated, the diffuse reflection remains as an appreciable source of pollution. c) Eliminate Over lighting: Avoid luminances or illuminances greater than the minimum required for the task, and dim lights when the application allows it. d) Shut Off Lights When Not in Use 1: It makes sense to turn the lights off when you leave the room, or for the lights to tum off automatically, but in outdoor lighting these options are rarely available (in Italy. for example, almost all the parking lots of shopping malls are lit all night long, and likewise for the industrial/artisan/commercial areas, whether or not there are workers at night). 1 Even a great reduction (l/10th of the full values) of lighting levels could be advised. but safety norms don't allow for this. 271G F. Fa/clu er al./ Journal of E11v1rom11eriral Managemeur 92 (JOll) 27 !4-)122 e) Limit Growth in Installed Lighting: Limits to the increase of the new installed flux should be implemented. A 1 % yearly increase could be allowed at first for each administrative area, followed by a halt in the increase of total installed flux, and then by a decrease. This does not mean that no new installation will be allowed, but simply that if you want to install new lights you have to decrease the flux in the existing overlighted areas. To these basic prescriptions, some others could substantially improve lighting quality (e.g. a requirement that the lighting installation he designed by a professional lighting designer. although this might not be feasible in poorer countries nor advisable for smaller installations. provided they respect the code) or to take account of specific kinds of installations (e.g. signs or historical buildings). Most of these prescriptions are already implemented in some of the most advanced anti-light-pollution laws such as Lom- bardia (Italy) Regional Law n.17 of March 27, 2000 with its subse- quent additions and modifications. Twelve other similar regional laws followed in Italy, and most Italian territory and population are now protected by these laws. Slovenjia adopted a similar law in year 2007. Falchi (2011) found that despite an almost doubling in the outdoor installed flux, in two studied sites in Lombardia, the artifi- cial sky brightness did not increase over the last twelve years. This is probably due to the adoption of laws against light pollution in the surroundings of the sites. A full enforcement of the prescriptions could probably make a substantial improvement in the quality of the night sky and environment. In fact, the same research shows that in six studied sites, on average, 75% of the artificial sky brightness is produced by light escaping directly from fixtures and only 25% from the reflections off lighted surfaces. This implies that, all the rest being equal, a complete substitution of the installed fixtures with fully shielded ones could lower the artificial sky brightness to 1 /4 of present levels. In two of the studied sites, more than 90% of the artificial sky brightness derived by direct light. These sites would presumably have a 90% decrease in light pollution as a result of retrofitting fixtures to fully shielded in the surrounding territory that produce light pollution, i.e. a circle of at least 100 km radius. Nevertheless, even when the best control of the light distribu- tion is reached and when the proper quantity of light is used, some upward light emission remains, due to reflection from the properly lighted surface. This is an unavoidable by-product of the lighting operation. even when measures a), b) and c) have been achieved: lighting is installed just to produce reflections of light. However. after the light has performed its useful function, it is then dispersed into the environment. Due to its near-Lambertian behavior, this reflection is frequently less effective at low elevations than at large elevations. so the effect on the night sky tends to be confined largely to the vicinity of the source. In any case, the environmental impact of this residual light pollution cannot be neglected. Limitation of this residual pollution requires limits not only on "how" nighttime lighting is arranged according to prescriptions a) and b ), but also "how much" nighttime lighting is made. Typically it has been proposed to limit the growth rates of installed flux in each city, or to limit the .average density of installed light flux ( e.g. installed flux per hectare or acre). However, following the example of the radio portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, there is an additional way to limit this residual pollution: by preferential use of light sources with spectral characteristics that have the least impact on star visibility and human and wildlife health, while maintaining a given degree of visibility in areas that need artificial lighting. This would allow reduction of the negative astronomical and biological effects without impairing essential night lighting. This solution has been applied for decades whenever Low Pressure Sodium (LPS) and High Pressure Sodium (HPS) lamps have been requested in place of Mercury Vapor (MV) or incandescent lamps. The arrival of new LED light sources for nighttime outdoor lighting and widespread use of broad spectrum Metal Halide (MH) lamps even where they aren't the best option enhances the need to define a more quantitative prescription, applicable to any kind of lamp and capable of giving precise indications to the lighting industry on the way to proceed in light source development or improvement (e.g. how to filter or tailor the spectrum of the emitted light). The prescription should: (i) be as effective as possible in protecting the night environment from the adverse effects of light pollution: (ii) take account of existing nighttime lighting habits in order to minimize the impact on human activities; (iii) allow easy identification of non-compliant light sources; and (iv) aHow easy measurement in the field, when needed. In this paper we discuss the problem, we recognize two different quantitative parameters, we devise a prescription and we investigate how it could be enforced. 2. Methods The possibility of limiting the residual light pollution, avoiding the need to limit nighttime outdoor lighting itself, is based on the different response with wavelength of the two main classes of eye receptors and the action spectrum of circadian rhythm disruption for rodents, monkeys and humans (Brainard and Hanifin, 2005). In a schematic way and for the purposes of this paper, we can distinguish the photopic response of cones and the scotopic response of.rods. The eye response is fully photopic, i.e. cones fully determine it, for luminances over 3 cd/m2 whereas the eye response is fully scotopic, i.e. rods fully determine it, under about 0.01 cd/m2 • In the range between these two limits, called mesopic, the eye response goes from scotopic to photopic, depending on the relative contributions of the two classes of receptors, which in tum depend on the luminances in view. (Fig. 1). Standard rules, e.g those on road safety lighting, usually require road luminance to be in the range from 0.3 to 2 cd/m 2 but, even where laws against light pollution prohibit exceeding values sug- gested by standard rules, in practice new installations rarely have an average maintained luminance under 0.75 cd/m 2, the prescribed luminance of the ME4b class of the European Norm EN 13201. Eye response at these luminances is predominantly photopic:2 (see discussion below). In fact when we look at artificially-lit outdoor areas and recognize colors, which is a property of cones, it indicates that our cone vision is functioning. In some cases colors could be distorted by lamp spectra but in any case they are recognized. Otherwise, we could use monochromatic lamps like Low Pressure Sodium lamps everywhere and there would be no reasons to use white light. Moreover, the 0.3-2 cd/m 2 prescribed range is for the luminance of the road surface, usually dark asphalt, while the night scene in a city is also full of other lights and surfaces that usually have far higher luminances; the direct lights from fixtures, light colored objects, vehicle lights, billboards and shop windows. So our eyes are not fully dark adapted in a typical city night scene (see Fig. 2). In observation of the starry sky, where the natural luminance of the sky is about 200 µcd/m 2, the response is scotopic. except when 2 Even the Lighting Research Center recommends using the usual photopic lumen at luminance greater than 0.6 cd/m2 instead of their proposed Unified Luminance that take into account for the blue content of the lamps in the mesopic range (Rea and Freyssinier, 2009). F. Falchi et al./ Journal of Environmental Management 92 (2011) 2714 ·2722 2717 Scotopic Mesopic Photopic 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Luminance {cd/mA2) Fig. 1. Approximate luminance ranges ot"scotopic (rods), rnesopic (rod/cone transition region) and photopic (cones) response of the human eye. looking at a few bright stars. This difference gives us a way of separating the primary polluting effects of the light from its lighting capabilities. Unfortunately the scotopic and photopic response curves overlap in part, as shown in Fig. 3. This prevents us from fully separating these two effects. This means that we cannot use the spectra of lamps to limit light pollution in place of fully shielded fixtures and the other prescriptions. Even monochromatic lamps emitting at the maximum of photopic response, e.g. LPS lamps, contribute consistently to the scotopic response pass band. So the a), b) and c) prescriptions listed in the introduction are still required in practice. However we can use this differential response to diminish pollution, subject to all the usual precautions to limit the amount of light pollution. At luminances under 0.5 cd/m2 the contribution of mono- chromatic rods to eye response could be relatively larger, but we are aware that there are very few new installations with average maintained luminance so low in Italy, even if standard rules allow 0.3 cd/m2 for local roads. The Lighting Research Center recom- mends using the usual photopic values at luminance higher than 0.6 cd/m2 (Rea and Freyssinier, 2009). Lewis (1999) claimed that under a photo pie luminance of 0.1 cd/m2 some MH lamps emitting strongly in the scotopic pass band can produce a reaction time only slightly worse than that obtained with some HPS lamps at 1 cd/m 2• In a study on mesopic visibility Orrevetelclinen (2005) investigated reaction times in seeing different color targets in peripheral vision. He found no differences at 1 cd/ni2, very small differences at 0.1 cd/ m 2 and evident differences only at 0.01 cd/m2 , where the blue and cyan targets were detected earlier than warmer color targets. Lewis (1999) showed that for a luminance of 1 cd/m 2 MH lamps emitting consistently in the scotopic band still produce a slightly greater contrast than HPS. However, better visibility in the peripheral field Fig. 2. A typical town night scene. The lowest luminance is on the ground and on the street where it should be about 1 cd/mi_ Its luminance is even lower than the night sky in big cities. Most of the rest of the scene has a far higher luminanre. romplerely in rhe photopic range of our eyes. (Photo by Bruce Kingsbury). 1 . ': 0.8 ,. ' ' ' • ' :, ~ 0.6 ' ., :, 0 . ' "' ' m : • ' "' 0.4 . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 0.2 ' ' .. ' ' ' .. ,, ...... .:~. " . 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 Wavelength (nm) Fig. 3. Photopic (dashed line) and scotopic (solid line) normalised responses for comparison with the spectral power distribution of an HPS lamp (dotted line). at the edge of streetlight obtained with bluer light should be evaluated along with the strong decrease in eye lens transparency of blue wavelengths with age. Brainard et al. (1997) found that at 450 nm the transmittance of the lens of 60-69 year old is half that of 20-29 year old adults. At 425 nm it is one third. At 555 nm it is only a few percent less while it is equal at 600 nm and above. Studies on vision should use a variety of subjects of different ages, to take into account the increasing population of elder drivers. A migration toward bluer lamps, such as MH and LEDs, will exacer- bate the difference in vision performance between y_oung drivers and old drivers, penalizing the latter even as they become a greater fraction of the driving population. One additional observation should be made concerning high- blue-content lamps. Road surface materials, either asphalt and concrete, reflect less short wavelength radiation compared tq long- wavelength radiation, as seen in Figs. 4 and 5. This implies that lamps that emit more long-wavelength radiation, such as LPS or HPS, will have more light reflected by these roads. On the other hand, lamps that emit more in shorter-wavelengths are less effec- tive in producing luminance from these road surfaces. We computed that at equal photopic output white LED lighting produces 6%-11 % less luminance from roads than HPS, depending 0, 1 4 ---·-··-···· D, 12 ;: 0, l · . ~ 0,09 0 ~ o, oto --····::·co,,-,'-'···'····,,.;............................................................................................. i o, 04 420 HO ~Go ~so :ooo s20 =-~o S60 sso 600 620 '>~a s5'>o 630 100 Wavelength {nml Port11md" Fig. 4. Spectral reflectance of four asphalt surfaces. Data from NASA{Jet Propulsion Laboratory ASTER Ubrary (Baldridge et al., in press) and Portland Cement Association (Adrian and Jobanputra, 2005). 2718 I: Fair/Ii er al./ Joumul of Environmrnrul Munc1grn1enl 92 (2011) 2714-2722 -. " C I .. " C, < 0, 35 o,' 0, 2S ,, ' 0, lS HO HO "160 ~ao :;oo 520 540 560 sao 600 n20 6~o 660 680 100 wavelength (nflll Fig. 5. Spectral reflectance of five concrete surfaces. Data from NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory ASTER library (Baldridge et al., 2009). on the type of surface. The spectra of these lamps are shown in Fig. 7. The spectral reflectivity of roads reduces the blue contribu- tion of the lamps by one half or more, lowering the effects on the environment but also lowering the supposed visual benefits. Moreover, if fixtures are not suitably shielded, this lowering in the reflection of blue light is negligible, due to the dominant contri- bution of direct light to sky luminance outside of cities. Replacement of HPS lamps with MH lamps and white LEDs - with an accompanying reduction of luminance to 0.1 cd/m2 -does not seem immediately applicable because (a) existing rules do not allow such small luminances and typically require a very time- consuming process to be changed, {b) existing studies do not seem sufficiently complete and convincing to justify these practices. As new studies on the negative effects of artificial light at night will be produced, a lowering of the external lighting levels would probably be advisable even in the case of a demonstrated decrease of visibility on roads. Accumulated evidence of the demonstrated negative effects of light at night may well outweigh the positive ones. Moreover, most of the positive effects used to justify the huge expenses to build, maintain and power external lighting are based on anecdotal indications or poor statistical analysis (Marchant, 2004, 2005, 2006). Even for the road safety effect there is a lack 1 ' ,, ) ,, ; I ' " ,, 0.8 ,, ',! I ,, ,, ,, ,, ' ,, ,, ,, \ ' ,, ,, ,, '' ,, '' m ,, ' ' ,, '. 0.6 .. ' .. •• '. m '. • • ' ' § • ' ( 0. '. ,, • • ,, ' ,., m ,, • ' "' 0.4 ' ' ' " ' ' : ' ., '' ' ' ' ,, ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,, ,·, ' : ' ' " 0.2 1-., '' ': ' ,. ' ',1 I ' r :•~'1 I ,, "' -~ ,., ----~ 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 Wavelength {nm) Fig. 6. The protected 440·-540 nm range (solid line) compared with the scotopic response (short dashed line) Jnd the spectral power distributions of an HPS lamp (solid line) and a mercury vapor lamp (dashed line). ,...._ 0,08 i.l ·2 0,Ql " >, 0.06 ,---·--· ,,,,,, .. ,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,_ ----·--- " "' j 0,05 ·rl -e 0,04 • 0.03 ; QJ ,·, t:::: /\\~,~ 0 f------"-"-'.,L-..L __ _c:c',,,=a-""'";c'--~ JOO 400 500 GOO 700 Wavelength (nm) 600 ,oc Fig. 7. Spectral power distributions of a white-LED (solid line) and an HPS lamp {dotted line) with equal photopic lumen output. of studies using randomised controlled trials. A public registration of protocols and trials is suggested, lowering the problem of publication bias (Copas, 2005) by ensuring that 'against lighting' results remain as visible as 'for lighting' ones. 2.1. The wavelengths that cause the worst light pollution For nearly a hundred years the specification and characterization of light has been based on the wavelength-dependent sensitivity of the two recognized types of photoreceptors ( rods and cones) in the human eye. Rods are solely responsible for scotopic or night vision which is black and white. The cones are solely responsible for color vision. There is a wavelength sensitivity to the vision provided by the rods or cones. The photopic band is a spectral representation of the sensitivity of the just the cones, and is centered in the green portion of the spectrum. When under dim lighting conditions there is insufficient light for activation of any cones. the rods are still able to provide black and white vision. This is scotopic vision, which has peak sensitivity in the blue-green (Fig. 3). Early in this decade {Thapan et al., 2001; Brainard et al., 2001; Hankins and Lucas. 2002; He et al., 2003; Berman and Clear, 2008) a third photoreceptor in the human eye was recognized -a circadian photoreceptor with wavelength sensitivity centered in the blue (Thapan et al., 2001: Brainard et al., 2001 ). As noted earlier, exposure to lighting with a high blue component disrupts the normal melatonin rhythms. commonly leading to insomnia, stress and increased risk for a wide range of medical maladies and even cancer. Preventing the blue component from reaching the eye by means of filters blocking wavelengths under 530 nm. preserves nocturnal melatonin production in humans (Leonid et al., 2005). This implies that the blue component of light has the severest consequences for the environment and human health. A second reason that blue light contributes more to light pollution than green or red light is that blue light is more readily scattered in the atmosphere -as you can see from the blue sky of daylight hours. This .. blue sky" effect arises from Rayleigh scattering which is inversely proportional to tbe fourth power of wavelength, meaning that shorter wavelength radiation -blue light -will scatter in the atmosphere more than longer wavelength radiation - green and red light (Benenson et al., 2002). The Sun at sunset and sunrise appears orange because the blue component of its light has been redirected by the atmosphere. But this style of scattering also applies to light emitted by cities and towns at night. Green and red light emitted upward are scattered less than blue light, so a higher portion of the long-wavelength light tends to continue on toward space. More of the blue light is scattered in the atmosphere, contributing to the sky brightness that we call light pollution. F. Falc/ii et al./ Journal of Environmental Management 92 (2011) 2714-2722 2719 2.2. Scotopic to plwtopic ratio The first way to minimize the impact of residual light pollution is to use lamps that, for a given amount of photopic light flux. produce a minimal amount of scotopic light flux. In fact, lighting installation design and standard rules are based on photopic luminance. At parity of photopic performance, we can sacrifice the small and usually unknown scotopic contribution, and in exchange we gain the chance of lowering the light pollution effects substantially. The photopic luminous flux is defined as (CIE, 2001 ): <l>v ~ Km j <!>,.,_V(!c)d) 0 (I) where V(A) is the photopic response (CIE, 1926), ¢le.A is the spectral radiant flux of the source and Km "C"C 683 lm/W is the photometric efficacy, i.e. the standard lumen per watt conversion factor, for photopic response (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures. 2007). The scotopic luminous flux is defined as (CIE, 2001): <l>v· ~ K;,, j <t>,,.V'())d) (2) 0 where V(A) is the scotopic response (CIE. 1951) and K'm = 1699 lm/ W is the photometric efficacy, i.e. the standard lumen per watt conversion factor, for scotopic response (Wyszecki and Stiles, 2000). Then the scotopic to photopic ratio Rsp, commonly used in lamp performance comparisons. is: R,p <l>v· <l>v K;,, j <t>,.l V'())d) 0 Km j <t>,.,V())d) 0 (3) It gives the scotopic light flux of a lamp for unit photopic light flux. The ratio of radiant fluxes in the scotopic and photopic spectral ranges will generally vary and are of little value for the present purpose. We used standard CIE responses, neglecting more recent and accurate photopic responses known as Judd Uudd, 1951) modified V(,),Judd-Vos modified VM(,)(Vos, 1978) and Stockman and Sharpe (Stockman and Sharpe, 2000) v; (A), because for now standardiza- tion of the ratio has priority over accuracy. Setting an upper limit on the scotopic/photopic ratio could help to control or prevent the strong growth of artificial night sky scotopic luminance that would be produced by a migration from the current population of HPS lamps to MH or LED lamps promoted by the lighting industry because of their white output. 2.3. Protected spectral band for visual astronomy Due to the above mentioned overlap of the photopic and scotopic luminosity curves. minimizing the scotopic to photopic ratio might not provide enough protection for the night sky ln the short wavelength part of the visible spectrum. Hence a more specific wavelength-based restriction on the emissions from lighting is appropriate. Let's consider a hypothetical lamp with a given ratio of scotopic to photopic light flux and a given radiant flux in each of the two bands. Now let's assume that we are able to move the spectral flux (;'mitted in the wavelength range 440-540 nm to the blue side of the scotopic band, below 440 nm. Let's finally assume that we are able to tune this flux and the remaining photopic flux in order to maintain the same scotopic and photopic fluxes as before so that the eye will perceive the same quantity of light in scotopic and photopic pass bands. The color of the lamp will change slightly, due to the shift. However now the range 440-540 nm is much darker. The artificial night background produced by the considered lamp will be negligible when observing the night sky with a filter that blocks any wavelength outside this range. Given that stellar visibility in unpolluted conditions is limited by eye sensitivity, it is necessary that the "protected" wavelength range be centered on the maximum of the scotopic response curve and as large as possible (at least 100 nm) in order that the impact of the filter on limiting stellar magnitude be kept as small as possible. Otherwise the reduction in the eye's scotopic sensitivity with the filter will annul any advantage of filtering out the artificial part of skyglow. We choose the scotopic protected interval, hereafter called P-band, in the range 440-540 nm in place of the range 450-550 nm in order to leave the mercury emission line at 546 nm unaffected. This range bounds 79 percent of the area under the scotopic curve. In practice, we cannot '"move" light of a lamp toward redder or bluer wavelengths but we can make a good start by using lamps that have a relatively weak output in the P-range. We also need to devise a way to filter out the light in the 440-540 nm range of every lamp, e.g. using absorbing pigments on the lamp glass or on the fixture's cover glass. This could lead to design of a lamp (i) with whiter light than HPS thanks to emission lines in the blue that tend to balance the emissions over 540 nm; (ii) leaving the peak of the scotopic response unpolluted; and (iii) maintaining the same scotopic to photopic ratio as HPS lamps of today. Lumen is not defined in bands different than scotopic and photopic, so we need to define a parameter in terms of energy flux. The radiant flux in the photopic band <Pe,v is: <l>,,v ~ j <t>,,. V(;)d, 0 (4) where V(A) is the photopic response of CIE and <ll('). is the spectral radiant flux of the source. The radiant flux <Pep in the protected band A0 -A 1 is: ff>e.P (5) The P-band radiant flux to photopic luminous flux ratio Rp, hereafter called P-ratio, is: Rp j <l>,,;V())d) 0 (6) It gives the energy emitted in the "protected" band by a lamp emitting unitary luminous flux in the photopic response pass band and, in practice, measures the lamp impact on the protected band. An effective upper limit on the P-ratio is a practical way of protecting stellar visibility from harm caused by artificial radiant flux in the spectral range 440-540 nm. Following this approach :nw F. Falchi er al./ Journal of E11virom11e11tal Managemem 92 (2011) 2714-2722 could at least make the w.welength range near the maximum of scotopic sensitivity minimally polluted (Fig. 6). 3. Measurements Emission spectra were acquired using an ASD, Inc. FieldSpec 3 spectroradiometer equipped with an 8" field of view foreoptic. The instrument had been radiometrically calibrated and spectra were acquired in radiance (W/m2 /µm/sr) mode over the 350-2500 nm range. Each lamp was warmed up prior to measurement and the spectra were acquired from one lamp at a time in a dark room. The measured light sources included the following classes 1) liquid fuel lamps, 2) pressurized fuel lamps, 3) incandescent, 4) quartz halogen, 5) metal halide, 6) high pressure sodium, 7) low pressure sodium, and 8) light emitting diodes (LED). Given the limited number of lamps and manufacturers in the market, the P-ratios should be provided by manufacturers for each lamp, calculated from the spectral power distribution, or measured. It would be futile to leave this to lighting installers to do. A quick check of installed lamps in the field by competent technicians will determine if the type of lamp installed satisfies the P-ratio limit discussed below. The scotopic to photopic ratio can be obtained by dividing the illuminances measured using luxmeters with interchangeable filters available on the market. A scotopic luxmeter can also be purchased directly or obtained by replacing the photopic filter in a suitable luxmeter with a scotopic filter and calibrating it. An energy measurement of the P-ratio can be obtained with an irradiance-meter provided with an interference filter for the range 440-540 nm, and calibrated in irradiance with the filter in place. Such filters are commercially available, and some irradiance meters are already provided with photopic and scotopic filters. The cali- bration can be made using one of the many spectral calibration standards available on the market. There is no need for lighting installers to acquire such equipment provided that manufacturers' data are reliable, but it could be a good idea for environmental control organizations to acquire the equipment. Table 1 shows actual ratios for some cases of interest in external lighting. Scotopic to photopic ratios have been measured at LPlAB by Cinzano (2003), or calculated. Average scotopic to photopic ratios for HPS and MH lamps are taken from Knox and Keith (2003). P-ratios have been computed with synthetic photometry from spectra taken by Cinzano with WASBAM (Cinzano, 2004) and from spectra measured by Elvidge and Keith. What upper limits should we set for the previous ratios? In principle. lamps with minimum ratios should be adopted. By far, the least polluting lamps in the P-band are the Low Pressure Sodium, with a Rp ratio about 2% of the second best lamps, High Pressure Sodium. Unfortunately, LPS lamps have the disadvantages of long length and poor color rendition, along with diminishing availability. In many applications color rendition is unimportant or unnecessary, but LPS lamps have been abandoned by the lamp manufacturers in favor of other popular lamp types. An LPS lamp should be first choice, with others used only if strictly necessary. However, following the compromise position of individuals and organizations working against light pollution, we suggest that the upper limits be set equal to the actual maximum ratios of most common HPS lamps. Lamps with still larger ratios should be used only in those cases when strong reasons for "whiter" light are demonstrated. We are in a phase similar to when catalytic converters were introduced in the car market. They didn't stop pollutants totally (as in an ideal world), but started to do so in a way compatible with the technology of the time. Similarly, setting a limit compatible with HPS will start controlling the blue content. while not upseting the current habits of the market. Due to the overwhelming importance of our health Table 1 Ratios fur some lamps and !amp classes. wmp LP5a HPS 70 wa Average HPSb HPL 80 W (Hg vapor)" ClE Illuminant N QTH 3100 Ka Average MHb Aat spectrumc LED 'natural white'c • R,p measured. b R,p from Knox & Keith Uudd, 1951 ). c R,p calculated. R,, 0.20 0.55 0.66 1.18 1.41 1.56 1.60 1.86 3.5 0.0027 o.n 0.27 0.51 0.58 0.46 0.93 0.87 over the "necessity" to use white or blue-rich light, even applica- tions other than road lighting should follow our prescription. These top limits could be enforced by law as obligatory, because voluntary quality goals may not suffice. Table 1 also shows that a migration from the current population of HPS lamps to MH or, worse, blue-rich white LED lamps could produce a growth of artificial night sky brightness by 2.5--5 times, as perceived by the dark adapted human eye. Such large increases, combined with the usual growth of installed flux. may produce a tenfold increase of the scotopic sky brightness in the next ten years or so. Fig. 7 shows the spectral power distributions of a white LED and an HPS lamp with equal photopic lumen output. The far higher emission of blue by the LED is evident. The same order of magnitude increase is expected on the melatonin suppression action spectrum. This action spectrum is shown in Fig. 8. The peak sensitivity is from 440 nm to 500 nm. A tenfold decrease in sensitivity over the 460-470 nm peak is shown at the 410 nm and 540 nm wavelength. As seen in Table 2, given the same photopic lumen output, MH and LED lamps emit 3-7 times more energy in the 440 nm-500 nm band compared to HPS. Considering the full range of the action spectrum, the results are similar. Given the uncertainties in the spectrum itself, we can summarize that MH is about three times more polluting in this band than HPS. Natural white LED has more than double the content of MH. A migration from HPS lamps to MH lamps and white LEDs could produce far worse effects on human health than today's lighting does. This will impair and negate worldwide efforts toward better and less polluting lighting practices. LEDs have anyway a great potential, they could be tuned and produced with very different spectra, so it is advisable that industry research be pushed toward the production ofless polluting warm LEDs, with no blue emissions. .§' 0,01 .i ... ······-·-"'"'-,-------,----,·-· -,o~·-·----;-····--c···--·-------'--- 380 400 420 440 460 -4&1 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 Wavelength !nm) Fig. 8. Action spe<:trum of melatonin suppression by light (Hollan, 2004). F Falchi rt al./ Journal of E11viro11me11tal Management 92 (2011) 2114-Ll.D 2721 Table 2 440 nm-500 nm energy ratios (second column) and melatonin supprr~\ion efficiency (third column) for some common lamps. Lamp type HPS LPS Metal Halide Natural White LED Incandescent 65 W 4. Proposed limits Energy rel,nivt> ro 1-!PS. 440-500 nm band 0.02 2.7 7.0 2.S Mel,Itunin suppression effect (relative to HPS) 1 0.1 3.4 5.4 2.S Residual light pollution is that produced by reflected light. after direct upward emission has been accurately minimized. over lighting has been avoided, and the flux wasted illuminating outside surfaces has been minimized. It would remain to be dealt with after laws or regulations have required zero direct emission above the horizontal by lighting fixtures. limited the luminance or illumi- nance to the minimum required by security rules, minimized as much as possible the fraction of light wasted downward outside the surface to be lighted, and banned the use of mercury vapor3 in every type of lamps. The international Agency for Research on Cancer has recently added to the list of group 2A (probably carcinogenic to humans) shiftwork that involves circadian disruption (Straif et al., 2007). As seen, circadian disruption is also induced by light exposure at night and light at night is becoming a public health issue (Pauley, 2004; Stevens, 2009). Light pollution has to be recognized as a hazard to our envi- ronment and our health and not. as commonly believed, as just a problem for astronomers. This view is supported by the recent resolution of the American Medical Association (2009) where it is said that light pollution is a public health hazard. We recommend a total ban of the outdoor emission of light at wavelengths shorter than 540 nm to reduce the adverse health effects of decreased melatonin production and circadian rhythm disruption in humans and animals. The relatively low emissions of HPS lamps in this spectral range could be set as the limit4 on what is acceptable in terms of the balance between photopic and meltopic emission ratios. So, this rule should be use as standard. The wavelength range of the visible light spectrum under 540 nm. corresponding to high sensitivity of the melatonin suppression action spectrum, should be established as a protected range. tamps that emit an energy flux in the protected range larger than that emitted by the standard HPSs lamp on a basis of equal photopic output should not be installed outdoors 6. The following prescription aims to limit residual light pollution in the scotopic band and should be used only in the limited number of cases where there is the absolute necessity to have accurate color perception and the previous rule cannot be followed. The wavelength range of the visible light spectrum between 440 and 540 nm. corresponding to the maximum sensitivity of the scotopic 3 These lamps must be prohibited anyway due to their mercury content and tow efficacy. 4 This limit is a compromise due to the available types of lamps on the market. It could be lowered in future. but it is anyway sufficient to .stop rhe growth of the blue light content in the environment due to the LEDs and MH lamps. .'i HPS energy flux varies with the power of the lamp. So, for each lumen output of the lamp to be evaluated, it is to consider the immediate lower power HPS lamp. For example. in evaluating .i I4 000 Im lamp, it must be rnmpared to a 100 W HPS lamp that typica11y produces 9500 lm instead of a 150 W HPS lamp that emits about 16 000 Im. 6 Regulamentation of indoor lighting lies outside the purposes of this paper. vision of the human eye, should be estublished as a protected range. Lamps should nut be installed outdoors if (a) their emission in this wavelength range exceeds 15 percent of the energy flux emitted in the photopic response pass band, measured in watts/ and (b) their emission in the scotopic response pass band exceeds two-thirds of that emitted in the photopic response pass band, measun·d in lumens.8 In the authors· opinion. lamp producers should follow these rules as a minimum precaution in order to minimize the impact of their products on human health and on the environment, even in the absence of laws or regulations. Following the actual market trend toward more, brighter and whiter light may expose lamp producers and the lighting industry to extensive litigation for illness caused by toxic products, as has already happened with the tobacco and asbestos industries. A regulation. to be studied, for lamps for interior use during night could be introduced too. 5. Conclusions In this paper we analysed the different energy and luminous fluxes in the melatonin suppression action spectrum and in the scotopic band for several types of lamps. We found that huge differences exist in the blue emissions of the lamps, for the same photopic luminous flux. Due to the fact that night vision and our health are impaired more by blue light, we proposed two limits to be followed in the adoption of lamps for external use. The first should be used everywhere, as a standard. in order to reduce emissions within the melatonin suppression band at night, as much as possible. The second rule should be used only in a very limited number of situations where better colour rendition is indispensable for the task. Therefore. an effective law to control light pollution should implement this set of rules: -do not allow luminaires to send any light directly at and above the horizontal; do not waste downward light flux outside the area to be lit: avoid over lighting; shut off lights when the area is not in use; aim for zero growth of the total installed flux; strongly limit the short wavelength 'blue' light. Application of all these prescriptions would allow for proper lighting of our cities and, at the same time, protect ourselves and the environment from the more adverse effects of light pollution. Acknowledgments We acknowledge Dr. Barry AJ. Clark and Dr. Jan Hollan for very interesting discussions and suggestions and consequent improve- ment of this work. We acknowledge also Dr. Steven W. Lockley and Dr. Paul Marchant for help given in their respective fields. References Adrian, W., Jobanputra, R., 2005. Influence of Pavement Reflectance on Lighting for Parking Lots. Portland Cement Association. R&D Serial No. 2458. American Medical Association, House of Delegates, 2009. Resolution 516 -Advo- cating and Support for Light Pollution Control Efforts and Glare Reduction for Both Public SJfety and Energy Savings. Online at. http://www.ama-assn.org/ amal/pub/upload/mm/475/a-09-ref-comm-e-annotated.pdf. Baldridge, AM., Hook. S.j.. Grove. CI., Rivera G .. 2009. The ASTER Spectral Library Version 2.0. Remote Sensing of Environment, vol 113. pp. 711-715. 7 i.e. Rp ratio lower than 0.15. 8 i.e. R,r ratio lower than 0.66. 2722 F. Falchi et al./ Jouma! of Environmental Marmgeme11t 92 (2011) 2714-2122 Bass, J., Turek, F.W., 2005. Sleepless in America: a pathway to obesity and thf' metabolic syndrome? Arch. Intern. Med. 165, 15-16. Benenson, W., Harris, W.J., Stocker, H., Lutz, H., :m02. H.rndbook of Physics. Springer-Ver!.1g. ISBN 0-387-95269-1. p.376. Berman, S.M .. Clear, R.D., 2008. Past visu,11 studies can support a novel human photoreceptor. Lighr Eng. 16 (2), 88-94. Brainard, G.C., Hanifin, J.P., 2005. Photons, clocks, and consciousness. J. Biol. Rhythm. 20, 314-325. Brainard, G.C., Rollag, M.D., Hanifin, J.P., 1997. Photic regulation of melatonin in humans: ocular and neural signal transduction. J Biol. Rhythm. 12, 537-546. Brainard, G.C., Hanifin, J.P., Greeson, J.M., Byrne, B., Glickman, G., Gerner, G., et al., 2001. Action spectrum for melatonin regulation in humans: evidence for a novel circadian photoreceptor. J. Neurosci. 21 (16), 6405-6412. Brugger, P., Marktl, W., Herold, M., 1995. Impaired nocturnal secrelion of melatonin in coronary heart disease. Lancet 345, 1408. Bullough, J.D., Rea, M.S., Figueiro, M.G., 2006. Of mice and women: light as a circadian stimulus in breast cancer research. Cane Causes Contr 17, 375-383. Bureau International des Poids et Mesures, 2007. SJ Brochure Appendix 2. Practical Realization of the Definition of the Candela. http://wwwl.bipm.org/utils/en/ pdf/S1App2 _cd_en.pdf. Cajochen. C., Munch, M., Kobialka, S .. Krauchi, K., Steiner, R .. Oelhafen, P., Orgul, S., Wirz-Justice, A., 2005. High sensitivity of human melatonin, alertness, ther- moregulation, and heart rate to short wavelength light. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 90, 1311-1316. OE, 2001. The CIE System of Physical Photometry Draft Standard 010.2/E. CIE, 1951. Sec 4; Vol 3. In: Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage Proceedings, vol. t. Bureau Central de la CIE, Paris, p. 37. OE, 1926. Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage Proceedings 1924. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Cinzano, P., 2002. In Light Pollution and the Protection of the Night Environment. In: Cinzano, P. (Ed.). JSTIL www.lightpollution.it/istilfVenice/. pp. 193-205. Cinzano, P .• 2003. A laboratory for the photometry and radiometry of light pollu- tion. Memor. Soc. Astrom. Ital. Supplement 3, 312. Cinzano, P .. 2004. A portable spectrophotometer for light pollution measurements. Memor. Soc. Astrom. Ital. Supplement 5, 395. Cinzano, P., Castro,j.D., 2000. Mem. SA!t-J ltal. Astronom. Soc. 71 (I), 251-256. Cinzano, P., Falchi, F .. Elvidge, C.D .. 2001. The first world atlas of the artificial night sky brighmess. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 328. 689-707. 0035-8711. Copas, J .. 2005. The downside of publication. Significance 2 (Issue 4), 154. Falchi, F~ 2011. Campaign of sky brightness and extinction measurements using a portable CCD camera. Mon. Not Roy. Astron. Soc. 412, 33-48. Glickman, G .. Levin, R., B1,1inard, G.C. 2002. Ocular Input for human melatonin regu- lation: Relevance to breast cancer. Neuroendocrinol. Lett 23 {suppl 2), 17-22. Gooley.JJ., Chamberlain, K., Smith, K.A., Khalsa, S.B .. Rajaratnam, S.M., Van Reen, E., Zeitzer, J.M., Czeisler, CA, Lockley, S.W., 2011. Exposure to room light before bedtime suppresses melatonin onset and shortens melatonin duration in humans. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab 96, 463-472. Haim, A, Yukler, A, Harel. 0., Schwimmer, H., Fares, F., 2010. Effects of chronobi- ology on prostate cancer cells growth in vivo. Sleep Sci. J. 3 ( 1 ), 32-35. Hankins, M.W., Lucas, R.j., 2002. The primal)' visual pathway in humans is regulated according to long-term light exposure through the action of a nonclassical photopigment Curr. Biol. 12 (3), 191-198. Haus, E., Smolensky, M., 2006. Biological clocks and shift work: circadian dysre- gulation and potential long-tenn effects. Cane. Causes Contr. 17, 489-500. He, Shigang,. Dong, Wei. Deng, Qiudong, Weng, Shijun. Sun. Wenz hi, 2003. Seeing more clearly: recent advances in understanding retinal circuitry. Science 302, 408-411. Holl.1n, J., 2004. Metabolism-influencing light: measurement by digital cameras, Poster at cancer and Rhythm Oct 14-16, 2004, Graz, Austria. Judd, D.B., 1951. Proceedings of the Twelfth Session of the CIE. Bureau Central de la CIE, Paris. 11. Kempenaers. B., Borgstrom, P., Loes, P., Schlicht E., Valcu, M., 2010. Artificial night lighting affects dawn song, extra-pair siring success, and lay date in songbirds. Curr. Biol. 20 (19), 1735-1739. Kloog, I., Haim, A., Stevens, R.G~ Barchana, M., Pormov, B.A., 2008. Light at night co- distribute-s with Incident breast but not lung cancer in the Female population of Israel. Chronobiol. Jnt. 25 ( l ), 65-81. Kloog. J., Haim, A., Stevens, R.G .. Portnov, BA, 2009. Global co-distribution of light at night (LAN) and cancers of prostate, colon, and lung lll men. Chrunublol. Int. 2G(l), 108-125. Knox J.F., Keith D.M. (2003) Sources, surfaces .1nd .itmospheric scattering: the Rayleigh Scatter Index. Presented at the 2003 Meeting or lhe Int. Dark-Sky Assoc., Tucson, USA. Online at http:lfresodance.com/ali/scatter.p<l[ Leonid. K., Casper, R.F .. Hawa, R,J., Perelman, P., Chung, S.H., S0k,1lsky. S., Shapiro, C.M., 2005. Blocking low-wavelength light prevents nocturnal mel.1- tonin suppression with No adverse effect on performance during Simulated shift work. J. Clin. Endocrin. Merabol. 90 (5), 2755···2761. Lewis, A., 1999. Visual performance a.~ a function of spectral power distribution of light sources at luminances used for General outdoor lighting.]. lllum. Engineer. Soc. North Am. 28 (1) Winter 1999. Lewy. AJ., Wehr, T.A., Goodwin, F.K., Newsome, DA, Markey, S.P., 1980. Light suppresses melatonin secretion in humans. Science 210, 1267-1269. Longcore, T .. 2010. Sensory ecology: night lights Alter Reproductive behavior of blue Tits. Curr. Biol. 20 (Issue 20), R893-R895. Luginbuhl, CB., Walker, C.E., W.1inscoat. RJ., 2009. Phys. Today 62 (12), 35. Marchant, P.R., 2004. A Demonstration that the Claim that Brighter Lighting Reduces Crime is Unfounded. Br. J. Criminal. 44, 441--447. http://bjc. oupjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/44/3/441. Marchant, P.R., 2005. What works? A Critical Note on the Evaluation of crime reduction Initiatives. Crime Prev. Community Saf. lnt.J 7, 7-13. Marchant, P.R.. 2006. Shining a Light on Evidence Based Policy: Street Lighting and Crime, Criminal Justice Matters No. 62 Uses of Research P18. The Centre for Criminal Justice Studies. Kings College, London. http://www.crimeandsociety. org.uk/opus33/Marchantfinal.pdf. Navara, K.j., Nelson, RJ .. 2007. The dark side of tight at night: physiological, epidemiological. and ecological consequences. J. Pineal. Res. 43, 215-224. Orrevetelainen, P .. 2005. Models for Spectral Luminous Efficiency in Peripheral Vision at Me-sopic .1nd Low Photopic Luminance Levels. Helsinki University of Technology. Lighting L.Jboratory, Espoo. Report 37, ISBN: 95l227857X. Pauley, S.M., 2004. Lighting for the human circadian dock: recent research indicates that lighting has become a public health issue. Medical Hypotheses 63, 588-596. Rea, M.S .. Freyssinier, J.P., 2009. In: Outdoor Lighting: Visual Efficacy. ASSIST Recommends. vol. 2, issue 2. Lighting Research Center and Rensselaer Poly- technic Institute Jan 2009. Rich, C., Longcore, T., 2004. Ecological light pollution. FroQt. Ecol. Environ. 2 (4), 191-198. Rich, C., Longcore, T., 2006. In: Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting. Island Press. Stevens, R.G., 2009. Light-at-night, circadian disruption and breast cancer: assess- ment of existing evidence. Int. J. Epidemiol.. doi:10.1093/ije/dyp17S. Stevens, R.G .. Blask, E.D .. Brainard, C.G., Hansen, J .. Lockley. S.W., et al., 2007. Meeting Report: the role of environmental lighting and circadian disrup- tion in cancer and other diseases. Environ. Health Perspect. 115 (9), 1357-1362. Stockman. A., Sharpe, LT., 2000. The spectral sensitivities of the middle-and long- wavelength-sensitive cones derived from measurements in observers of known genotype. Vis. Res. 40, 1711-1737. Straif, K., Baan, R., Grosse, Y., Secretan, B., El Ghissassi, F., Bouvard. V., Altieri, A, Benbrahim-Tallaa, L, Cogliano, V .. 2007. carcinogenicity of shift-work, painting. and fire-fighting. 2007 Dec. Lancet Oncot. 8 (12), 1065-1066. PubMed PMID: 19271347. Thapan, K_ Arendt, J., Skene, D.J., 2001. An action spectrum for melatonin suppression: evidence for a novel non-rod, non-cone photoreceptor system in humans. J. Physiol. 535. 261-267. Vos. J.J., 1978. Colorimetric and photometric properties of a 2" fundamental observer. Color Res. Appl. 3, 125-128. Wright Jr., K.P., Hughes, R.J., Kronauer, R.E., Dijk, D.J., Czeisler, C.A., 2001. Intrinsic near-24-h pacemaker period determines limits of circadian entrainment ro a weak synchronizer in humans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. LI.SA 98 (24), 14027-14032. Wyszecki, G .. Stiles, W.S., 2000. Color Science: Concepts and Methods, Quantitative Data and Formulae, second ed. John Wiley and Sons. 25 C 10.0 '" SC-ALE Ir-. FEET ~; :,, :1 -__2_ __ -----cc_-__ . cc ·.e o --------------------~ ,c J+'JC· '>C', O+b 0~15 r,.70 U<2o HABITAT BENCH ---~ SECTION ,-JU U•35 C••4C ill Figure 1 Renton Seapl<1ne Base Proposed Habitat Bench Renton, WA ~ ' ,.:, -> ,,~ P_; ~, ]• _,o, I ic> I,, i ;! C, Al )> "Tl -I 11 ii Ii ~ ~ ;u m r 0 " l> --1 6 z ,, \; z ----- ----..--i1~®ml~@illl e NOTICE OF APPLICATION ANO PROPOSED OETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Appl/cation has been filed and accepted with th ~CE~/-Pl;innlng DMs/on of the city of Ranton. The folloo::~rlrt~nt of Ccmmunlty & Economic Oe""lopment u cApproval•-e V descrlbes lhe apJ>/lcatlon and the necassa,y DATE OF NOTICE Ol'A!'PUCATION: May a, 2013 tAND USE NUMBER: LUA13-000517, ECF PROJECT NAME: Will Rogers-Wnev Post M<!m-0r1al seaplane Ba.re M . t PROJ~DESCRll'TION: The ap;,rrcant has "'" en•n,e Dredging ~:mpt,on for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging. 7oq"'::ied s:PA Envjro,,mental Rewlew and a Shoreline ~rt. The project would b,e located In Lale Washington,; ff ~t 16 Wert Perimeter Road, Remon Munl;Jpal area•• 76,000square feet across four reels . 0 1 e oorth shore Jn the Seaplane Base Th J>"OJect Is to alle\/iate operation a/ ~~mi c.i':d":' 1 e=~~!lnti" ~/1ng County and DNR /eased land. Toe ~rpo:::~J:~ mooring basin that ha, oct:u~d during previous ma r en fi ngthe existing Seaplane Base appro,,ch d,anne! end ~ 1i6'0;'0 cubic yards. Materials would be deposltef.t ;~:~11;:;ts-~e total esUmated volume of dredged materials o cg,col Assessment and a Lake Study have been provided. ay J><!n Water disposal site. Wlth tMe apPlication a PRO.ll:CrLOCATJON: North end of 1he Rent . Washlrl8ton, the project cro:ae, 1nto King County on MunJclpal Airport along the southern shore of lake oPTIONAl DETERMINATION OF NON-Sl6NJFICANCE, MITIGATED deter'.'11ned that s/gnifi<ant environmental Im acts (DNS-MJ: As the Lead Agency, tfie Olyof Renton has p,,rm11ted under tile new 43.21C.110, theoty :fne.,: 1~"!~~1v 10 res~lt from the proposed pro)l!ct. Thereforn, 85 M Is llkel1 to_ be IMued. Comment periods for the r . B the Dpt,onal ONS-M proce,s togr;e notice that• DNS- comment pen°?. There will be no comment pedod fo 1~= and the proposed DNS-M are lnte1rated Into a s/ng[e Slgnlfl<;ance-M1t1gated !DNS-MJ. A l<klay appe•I period will fonl~o!•' ••,uance of the Threshold Determination of Non-e ssua= of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: April 29, 2013 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION, APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: M•Y8, 2013 Permlls/Rev!ewReqlff!st~, Other Permits which maybe .,,quired: Reqlltlsled Studies: 1.o<atlun whereappNi:atlon may be rtVlewed\ PlJBLIC HEARING; Etlvironmental (SEPA/ Review, ~:;Ut Projeq As,prov.a/ {HPA), Ft!deral Permit,,, ard Coriruuct!ofl Blolor;:lcal Asse=ne1tt DepartmentofCommu ltv& E le Dlvlsk>n, Sb:th flour Re~tun ~~':~ lO~~="entd{CEII/-Plannilljl 9l!OS7 .. ra rWay,Renton, WA N/A If V(Xj would ~ke to be m,de a party of record to recer;e furth . form and return to:CltyofAentcn, CEO-Planning Division 105;~n:m;:at,on on thi, proposed project, complete this Name/FIi N ' · ra yWay,Rentcn, WA980S7 e o.: Will Rogers-WIiey Post Memorial Seaplane Base M.tlntanance Ored"ging/l.UA1~17, ECF NAME: MAll/NG~A~O~O,~~;,~,_::_::_::_::_::_-:_-:_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-:_-_-_-_-:_-:_-_-_-_::_-_-:----------------- T£lEPHONENO.: ------------Cfty/State/llp-. ________ _ CONSISTfNCV OVERVIEW: zoning/Landu,..,: En~ironmenbl Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Oevefopment llegu/a!lons us.ea For Project Mltitatlon: Proposed Mitigation Measures: The subject site ls designated Com me '3 . of Renton Comprehensive l.lnd U ~c I/OH,ce/Resldentl.tl (COR) on the City Oty's Zoning Mop. se ap and Medium lr.dustrial IIM) on the Erw/ronmental (SCPA) Ch<,cklisl The project win be SUbJect to the City' . applia,b/e codes and feJ!ulations as •p~~:::.;~~rn•=, RMC 4-!l-070 and other Toe following Mitlgatjon Measures will lik 1 . project Thl!S<! recommended Mi!" 11 e Y be imposed on the proposed Ct:Nered bye~lsting codes and reK:tl~n M@•:e• address pm)l!ct Impacts not The applicant shall comply w!th the /l!J us"' d above. A,sociatesLLC, datedJanuary:WlJ. recammendatloll!J Included !n the lake Study, prepared by Grette The applicant shall o:,mplywlth the reco Renton Public Works Department,dated~:~~~~ns Included In the Critical Areas Report, prepared by City of Ccmmenl! on the illKiva ;ippllcation must b ub • DM•lon, 10S5 south Grady Way Renton .,; 5 m!tted In wntl,ig to Vaness:. Dolbee, S.nfar Planner CED proposal orwl,h to be made a ~rty of ,:CO! •9n8:5~~e~eS:!PM on M~ Z3, 2013-If you have que~tions -;!:"i"!! Nl)'cne who submit, wrftten comments will automatically b tlona! nolilka!lon by mail, contact the Project Mana er on this projec:t. ecome a P•rtv or record and wm be notified of any dect!.~ CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Dolbee S • vdoJbee@rentonwa.gov ' enror Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7314~ Em/: PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CAlll NG FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION CERTIFICATION I, ll1nB sv U /he ..e.__ • hereby certify thatg copies of the above document were posted in::g' conspicuous places or nearb~ibed property on o.,,.6/q/L3 ,;,., . ~ aJ;Ur{/Lfl/rz4.__ STATE OF WASHINGTON l COUN1Y OF KING l ss } I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that \; ,co e s 7 c, 1) ~ \ '<, £¢ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and ~~w.es mentioned in the instrument. ":!<.,,,~ '''•1 • ...;i~R ,, . , , , Da ::'f"' ~ '\ '!t4,!\-?, ---"-J-\.s.J<Cfic:.,_--'='~P.' ... '/Ju'.'G.:.,·1~----------# .,,,J:i.b~;,,~, ~ "1c Notary Publkln and for the State of Washington = ff( §"iF ... ~fl>fl'f \ 0 ~ --1 , " ~ ,:: 0 " t"'"~ .,]:$ z • U .,,n, ~ ~-.. ~ ~i""' .... , 'to •"":::z:= ~ ~ i.> pUV~, 5 ~ := "' ,, ~ :"of,, -"I,, i ... ..:-o,= \ ;•,""""'"''"''~'t' ,f My appointment expires : ___ .:.J.,1.,. •. 5.,.... "'' c..,:k._....:'2,cCf...,....ci"'u"°"'l .,~'-------- 1,,, 1",1 TE 0~ -i-" I 1111 ~,.;:.. It\\\\\\"'-'' Notary (Print): 1-1 A CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 9th day of May, 2013, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter, Notice of Application, Environmental Checklist, Reduced Site Plan documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Ben Dahl, Renton Municipal Airport Owner/Applicant/Contact 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached (Signature of Sender): .}1;,/, m\ /1/1,b~- u ,,,"'""'"''''' '\ .::::-'' ,, STATE OF WASHINGTON .c-~Be~ ''i ) .:: C, .,.,,,"-~,,~, /IL \ ) SS ="' ~~~-E~\. "\ \ COUNTY OF KING ) f X f/ o"~~ \ S \J ~ :::a .z ."' ~ 0 .,,,. :::o .. ,.. , ... 1 ~" ~ n,I g -s I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker t \, ""i(t·":..! # J signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and vdl'>J)~'.&,$~tS and purposes ,, if-... f!"~ mentioned in the instrument. '1111 • ir: Of ,.-$" •11111\\\""''" Dated: ~ q ao,3 I f::ct~ Pu~dlor the State of Washington Notary (Print) : ___ __,1:: .... 1~4""""--"-&_,_r""a.h""'-'-t«'f ___________ _ My appointment expires: ~ W + fl. q c :2.0 (J Project Nam.e: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project Number:, LUA13-000517, ECF template ~ affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology** Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LEITER MAILING {ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 . KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 s. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OIW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015172°d Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AlCP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City oflukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 "'Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template -affidavit of seivice by mailing 9564800102 7200043 7200171 KEODARA HOPE STORWICK RICHARD ALLEN+FREY CHIEM MY THU+DAT H LU 101 NW 6TH ST CAROLJEAN 665 PASCO PL 1510 9TH ST RENTON, WA 98057 ANACORTES, WA 98221 RENTON, WA 98059 7200108 7200078 7200179 YANG ANDREWLA N DESPUIG ERLINDA D REDLIN BRIAN D 502 S TOBIN ST 416 S TOBIN ST 1727 HARBOR SW #N402 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATILE, WA 98126 7200045 7229300630 7200167 DAWSON JAMES D+RENEE E REYNOLDS GLENN D NICKELS PAUL M 10838 LAKERIDGE DR S 55 LOGAN AVE 1901 47TH AVE SW SEATILE, WA 98178 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATILE, WA 98116 7200032 7200031 7229300635 JPC PROPERTIES LLC EDMAN GEORGE D FOSTER LUIDA R+EDDIE D 15826 SE 141ST ST 2104 28TH AVCT SW 51 LOGAN AVES RENTON, WA 98059 PUYALLUP, WA 98373 RENTON, WA 98055 7200041 7200110 7200176 BONNER ROBERT G JR CHAU BILL+ANN TOBACCO ENTERPRISES LLC 1507 JONES AVE NE 500 S TOBIN ST 1701 LAKESIDE AVES RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 7200155 7200079 7200030 CHEN TOMMY & SHU-MEI H VICERAL EZRA FELIAS+FLORENCE SALVATION ARMY THE 8125 144TH AVE SE VILA-111 QUEEN ANNE AVE N #300 418 S TOBIN ST NEWCASTLE, WA 98059 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATILE, WA 98109 7200029 7200039 7200038 TOBIN BUSINESS PARK LLC SCHUMSKY DONALD W+MARGARET JACQUES JAMES H 4565 165TH AVE SE 2019 JONES AVE NE 6833 RIPLEY LN N ISSAQUAH, WA 98077 RENTON, WA 98056 RENTON, WA 98056 7200214 7200037 7200033 NGUYEN TODD Q+XUAN VUONG SMITH ROBERT C HEALY MARTIN+ANNE 311 S TILLICUM ST 402 S TOBIN ST 314 S TOBIN ST RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 7229300600 7229300595 7229300490 HEITMAN-BODEN SANDRA FRASIER CHRISTINE SOS PARTNERSHIP SEVERYNS WILLIAM ATIN: PANELLI KELLY A 50 LOGAN AVES PO BOX 836 8580 SE 76TH PL RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 7229300100 7229300073 7229300065 BENZEL & YARNELL LLC PHILLIPS MANIO AHN & SON COMPANY INC 4532 160TH AVE SE 613 S 16TH ST 203 AIRPORT WAYS ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 7229300035 UNG KEENE PO BOX 20335 SEATILE, WA 98102 4204400355 HARBOR OLYMPIC LAND 6530 LL 1440 PUYALLUP AVE TACOMA, WA 98421 4202401335 MOSS ROAD L L C 6923 40TH AVE SW SEATILE, WA 98036 82000000 HOGLEY MIRIAM A 406 TAYLOR AVE NW UNIT #A RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 BROWN SCOTIA Y 410 TAYLOR AVE NW #B RENTON, WA 98055 4182300000 THOMAS w scan 5612 MATIERHORN PL NW ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 4182300000 WOOD GEOFFREY P+JILL JACOBI 5424 SAND POINT WAY NE SEATILE, WA 98105 4182300000 TILDEN BRADLEY D+DANIELLE Y 4733 194TH AVE SE ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 4182300000 CREISLER VINCENT L 13241 SE 261ST ST KENT, WA 98042 723059046 BOEING COMPANY THE PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 3707 M/C 20-00 SEATILE, WA 98124 1823059237 BURKHEIMER FAMILY L.L.C THE 1326 5TH AVE STE 708 SEATILE, WA 98101 4204400263 POPE LACHLAN 21005 46TH AVE SE BOTHELL, WA 98021 82000000 MUCKERHEIDE WILLIAM M 406 TAYLOR AVE NW #B RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 NGUYEN JUDY+LU TAM THI 404 TAYLOR AVE NW UNIT #A RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 PIE DAPHNE A 404 TAYLOR AV NW UNIT #B RENTON, WA 98055 4182300000 PESCHEL BRIAN+KIM 8696 ISLAND DRS SEATILE, WA 98118 4182300000 GOODFELLOW MALCOLM 3308 FUHRMAN AVE E SEATILE, WA 98102 4182300000 BUEHLER ANDREW PO BOX 817 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 4182300000 LANE COMPANY THE PO BOX 937 RENTON, WA 98057 9564800026 ANDERSON ERIN LEE 664 TAYLOR AVE NW RENTON, WA 98057 7229300615 F & K INVESTMENTS LLC 13810 152ND AVE SE RENTON, WA 98059 4204400115 GAVIN DANIEL G 100 NW 3RD PL RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 TRAN TONG 410 TAYLOR AVE NW #A RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 CHING MAILE J 402 TAYLOR AVE NW #A RENTON, WA 98055 82000000 BROWN NYESHA 402 TAYLOR AVE NW #B RENTON, WA 98055 4182300000 BUEHLER WALTER & INGRID 5344 232ND AVE SE ISSAQUAH, WA 98029 4182300000 BUEHLER BEN PO BOX 1228 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 4182300000 CAPRON WILLIAM+ALLEN HUGH 13840 SE 5TH ST BELLEVUE, WA 98005 4202401305 CHRISTOPHERSON R LEE 503 RAINIER AVE N RENTON, WA 98055 9564800025 CHIN SANDRA 670 TAYLOR AVE NW RENTON, WA 98055 4202401175 4204400071 4204400070 CARPENTER DAVID LOUIE ANGELA & DONNA BRYANT JASON M+LEAH Y 3012 145TH AVCT E PO BOX 33594 8918 S 122ND ST SUMNER, WA 98390 PORTLAND, OR 97292 SEATILE, WA 98178 4204400068 4204400066 4204400065 VU HAI VAN ABBOTI ALBERT ABBOTI AF 5246 145TH PL SE 8925 S 121ST ST 8925 121ST S BELLEVUE, WA 98006 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 4268200065 4268200055 1180002795 HOLMS DANIEL E+J ANTHONY HO HU MIAO DAN LEE EDDIE Q 2567 39TH AVE W 212 OAKESDALE AVE SW 2349 12TH AVE S SEATILE, WA 98199 RENTON, WA 98057 SEATILE, WA 98144 1180002765 1180000285 7567600092 FAKHARZADEH AMIR COLACURCIO WILLIAM SPJ INVESTMENTS L L C 11226 AUBURN AVES 522 BOURBON ST 8741 S 113TH ST SEATILE, WA 98178 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 SEATILE, WA 98178 7567600080 7567600070 7567600065 GARMAN DAVID M HARER ROSALIE E HOUSER LINDA J+MERLE C PO BOX 1650 8730 S 113TH ST 1500 HARRINGTON AVE SE RENTON, WA 98057 SEATILE, WA 98178 RENTON, WA 98058 7567600060 9564800170 1181000000 HANSEN ELEANOR JPJD LLC YIRGA RAHAIL+KASSA ABREHAM 8722 S 113TH 95 S TOBIN ST #201 11600 RAINIER AVES # 104 SEATILE, WA 98178 RENTON, WA 98057 SEATILE, WA 98178 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 MILLER GEORGIA FREELEY TRAN SEAN X VU JENNIE Y 1329 S FERRIS CT 11604 RAINIER AVE S #401 11604 RAINIER AVES #202 SPOKANE, WA 99202 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 TEMPLE MARIAN FAIT ROSE M ACORD MICHAEL 11600 RAINIER AVES #206 11604 RAINIER AVES #301 11600 RAINIER AVE S #306 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 WARNER JUSTIN J+JENNY MELLOTI DARRYL ALEJANDRO FELIPE & AILEEN 11600 RAINIER AVE S UNIT 403 1758 ORANGE BLOSSOM WAY 11600 RAINIER AVE S #404 SEATILE, WA 98178 ENCINITAS, CA 92024 SEATILE, WA 98178 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 CLYMER MARY+MOSKOWITZ MICHA DEMPSTER ROBERT !+DIANE W FLIGHT ANTONIO F 11600 RAINIER AVES UNIT 405 11600 RAINIER AVE S #406 11604 RAINIER AVES SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 EIDSON LARRY K BROOKS STEPHEN M WHIT ·HOLLOMAN JUANITA 11604 RAINIER AVE S #302 2327 ROYAL OAKS DR 22330 M EYLER ST # 6 SEATTLE, WA 98178 ALAMO, CA 94507 TORRANCE, CA 90502 1181000000 1181000000 1181000000 JUDY KAREN R BLOOM ANDREA H BRYN MAWR 203 LLC 11600 RAINIER AVES #204 11604 RAINIER AVES #102 7027 S LAKERIDGE DR SEATTLE, WA 98178 SEATTLE, WA 98178 SEATTLE, WA 98178 1181000000 4202401500 4204400215 MALCOLM PAMELA G CHANG BROTHERS INC BARRON BRENT +CYNTHIA 11600 RAINIER AVES UNIT 402 6301 NE 204TH DR NE 310 HARDIE AVE NW SEATTLE, WA 98178 REDMOND, WA 98030 RENTON, WA 98055 4204400120 9564800175 9564800031 HOLM JOHN R AKIYAMA-HOLM MARIKO SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PA KRUZICH BOYD WM+ANGELA M 4611 130TH AVE SE 5950 4TH AVE S 257 QUINCY AVE NE BELLEVUE, WA 98006 SEATTLE, WA 98108 RENTON, WA 98059 1180000290 1180000280 7229300625 BRYN MAWR BEACH PARK LLC PATINA REAL TY LLC LEI YING KIET +MENG LIAN 11326 RAINIER AVES 195 W SUNSET WAY 191119TH AVES SEATTLE, WA 98178 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 SEATTLE, WA 98144 7229300380 4204400261 4204400210 AMBROSE KL KRANZ RAINIER AVENUE PROPER POLOTANU FLORINEL 21 LOGAN AVES 22710 SE 456TH WAY 17401 NE 2ND PL RENTON, WA 98057 ENUMCLAW, WA 98022 BELLEVUE, WA 98008 4204400100 4202401400 1180001715 BUCHAN BROS INVESTMENT PROP SENECA REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS LAKESHORE 2630 116TH AVE NE #100 254 SENECA AVE NW 400 UNION ST BELLEVUE, WA 98004 RENTON, WA 98057 SEATTLE, WA 98101 4202401255 7567600076 U-HAUL REAL ESTATE COMPANY 9564800103 FISHER RONALD B DBA U-HAUL CO/ WESTERN WA BURWELL COREY N+ANGIE L THO 8740 S 113TH ST 701.49 107 NW 6TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98178 PO BXO 29046 RENTON, WA 98057 PHOENIX, AZ 85038 9564800110 4100200000 372000140 KING COUNTY-PROPERTY SVCS FURER HARRY !+MARCIA AJH ENTERPRISES LL C ADM-ES-0800 6325 57TH AVES HONG JOSAPHAT 500 4TH AVE SEATTLE, WA 98118 6215 NE 4TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98104 RENTON, WA 98059 372000135 372000050 372000130 VUONG KIMBERLY H ALBANESE MIKE H APOSTOL EDWARD GUACEN 4878 BEACON AVE S 11447 88TH AVES 12223 86TH CT S SEATTLE, WA 98108 SEATTLE, WA 98178 SEATTLE, WA 98178 372000060 372000065 372000070 BREWIN JAMES S CLARK HENRY A+GWENDOLYN S SHELTON CARLE 11435 88TH AVES 11429 88TH AVES 11425 88TH AVE S #A SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 372000075 372000076 372000005 NGUYEN MINH BINH 88TH AVENUE SOUTH LLC LARSON ROGER+AIKO 11419 88TH AVES 2120 RAINIER AVE S 6713 156TH AVE SE SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98144 BELLEVUE, WA 98006 372000115 372000094 4136800205 SHAMBAUGH RICHARD E+PRISCIL SOLTERO EXEQUIEL+KARLA M LE HUYEN CHI 15521 E SHORE DR 9447 RAINIER AVE S 16217 205TH PL SE LYNNWOOD, WA 98087 SEATILE, WA 98118 RENTON, WA 98059 4136800200 4136800195 4136800240 SALMINEN JED APPLIN RAIN! A+POLLOCK NICHOLAS LANDON-SUSON JEAN V 8819 S 116TH PL 8815 S 116TH PL 9719 S 244TH PL SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 KENT, WA 98030 1180002685 1180002705 4136800210 STEHMAN CRAIG G+THAYER MARK WALKER JEFFREY L+WHITNEY P MT DEVELOPMENT LLC 8736 S 117TH PL 8811 S 117TH ST 11625 RAINIER AVE S #202 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 SEATILE, WA 98178 7229300545 1180008400 9564800071 ANDERSON BUSY BEE INC COLACURCIO BILL JR OLA BABATUNDE 5015 RAINIER AVES 508 BOURBON ST 1813 NW 6TH ST SEATILE, WA 98118 NEW ORLEANS, LA 70130 RENTON, WA 98057 9564800072 723059053 1180002940 FACILITIES & OPERATION CTR PUBLIC STORAGE INC ORN BEN+SARI G OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIR C/0 THOMSON REUTERS PTS 102 NW 6TH ST RENTON, WA 98057 300 SW 7TH ST PO BOX 847 RENTON, WA 98055 CARLSBAD, CA 92018 1180002755 1180002820 903000000 JARVIS PATRICIA SNYDER LEROY J& SANDRA D RADCLIFF ZENOVIA PO BOX 1056 1915 S 375TH ST PO BOX 822 RENTON, WA 98057 FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 FOX ROBERT J HENDRICKSON CAROL R BATIISTI JARRET A 8705 BAINBRIDGE LOOP NE 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-236 14515 152ND PL SE LACEY, WA 98516 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98059 903000000 903000000 903000000 WINKEL ALLAN G CRISANTO JOSIE A GODWIN AMY D 801 RAINIER AVE N #6110 801 RAINIER AVE N #6312 801 RAINIER AVE N #E-323 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 GREEN REBEKAH L EVANS VICTOR D KAHSSAI TSION 801 RAINIER AVE N #Gl37 801 RAINIER AVE N #A201 801 RAINIER AVE N #A-304 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 REICHERT SHADLEY G SANTOR SAMANTHA K CARPENTER MILDRED B 801 RAINIER AVE N #B112 801 RAINIER AVE N #B305 801 RAINIER AVE N #C216 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 ZHONG CHU TICE FLORENCE DESHURLEY CANDICE L 801 RAINIER AVE UNIT Dll 7 801 RAINIER AVE N #E227 801 RAINIER AVE N #E325 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 CRUZ BERNADETTE WINES SUSAN NORTON STEPHANIE 801 RAINIER AVE N #E-327 801 RAINIER AVE N #A104 801 RAINIER AVE N #C316 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 BUTKIEWICZ ORAWAN LUU NGHIEP V RAY JACK R 801 RAINIER AVE N #D120 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-231 801 RAINIER AVE N #G 340 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 ADAMS ODETIE M EVANS JAYDA S SMITH KIANA M 801 RAINIER AVE N #A204 801 RAINIER AVE N #B-212 801 RAINIER AVE N #C213 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 NHAM TUYEN CAM+DUC THI PHU KELLER LESLIE ANNE M MCCULLOUGH MICHAEL F 801 RAINIER AVE N #D318 816 SW 3RD PL 81 RAINIER AV N G-234 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 BELL MARGARET MORNINGSTAR SARAH MICHELLE RAFUSE JEFFREY K 801 RAINIER AVE N #B211 801 RAINIER AVE N #B307 801 RAINIER AVE N #F330 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 FREGIA DARRELL L+AKIL H RICKETTS-CISNEROS LINDA DENISON STACEY 9251 RENTON AVES #D319 3080 MOJAVE DR 801 RAINIER AVE N #B306 SEATILE, WA 98118 W SACRAMENTO, CA 95691 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 NGUYEN KHANG+BACH OKA STANLEY RAY+BEVERLY A SACRAMENTO REYNALDO A 801 RAINIER AVE N #C-115 75-417 HOENE ST 801 RAINIER AVE N #E322 RENTON, WA 98055 KAILUA-KONA, HI 96740 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 HENRY IVANS CHANG PETER+ZHI FEN XIE KINZEBACH KEITH+SHANNON 801 RAINIER AVE N #A202 801 RAINIER AVE N #C31 801 RAINIER AVE N #E126 RENTON, WA 98005 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 PHAM CHUONG VAN LOMAX FAYE H GALAL MOHAMED A 801 RAINIER AVE N #E127 801 RAINIER AVE N #A-302 801 RAINIER AVE N #B310 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 GROVER SHAWNA R HE SHI MING TERADA MARVIN 801 RAINIER AVE N #C116 801 RAINIER AVE N #C214 801 RAINIER AVE N #C215 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 TRAN CHAN TO+DELOVINO APOLO PFLEGER WILLIAM J SHEPARD JONAS DAMIAN 801 RAINIER AVE N #C313 801 RAINIER AVE N #E 228 1208 W 22ND ST #2 #E324 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SAN PEDRO, CA 90731 903000000 903000000 903000000 ALEMAN ROBERT A GONZALEZ SALVADOR AUSTIN KADIA 801 RAINIER AVE N #Gl39 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-237 801 RAINIER AVE N #B208 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 TAM CAROL HENDRY THEA L+STREETER WILL SPENCER SEAN D 801 RAINIER AVE N #B-308 801 RAINIER AVE #D-218 801 RAINIER AVE N #D-219 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 STOKES SAMUEL L SANCHEZ JERRY O+SUSAN SCHEE FISCHER RICHARD J 801 RAINIER AVE N #E222 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-230 PO BOX 1797 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 ANDERSON SANDRA L CHEA SOPHEAK+KIMBERLY K LAWRENCE MEGAN 801 RAINIER AVE N #G138 1542 SINCLAIR DR PO BOX 1423 RENTON, WA 98055 DUPONT, WA 98327 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 NICHOLAS JAMES+JEAN MEAS VANNAK+OUK CHANTHA ALEXIS RUPERTA 314 VIEWMONT DR 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-335 5309 S FERDINAND ST YAKIMA, WA 98908 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE, WA 98118 903000000 903000000 903000000 GIRMAY MEBRAT H KERSHAW NICOLE J JENSEN LINDA D 801 RAINIER AVE N #B 210 801 RAINIER AVE N #B311 801 RAINIER AVE N #C-113 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 LEWIS CARLA Y HAYES GEORGE M SELIGMAN BETTY 801 RAINIER AVE N #E-125 105 PARK ST 801 RAINIER AVE N #E224 RENTON, WA 98055 ADAIRSVILLE, GA 30103 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 SALVADOR DIONE P HARRIS TAI O+MIRIAM R O'CONNOR-KRISS SARA KATE 36955 SE 91ST ST 801 RAINIER AVE N #A 103 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-130 SNOQUALMIE, WA 98065 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 DELIMA SHAYNE K MARTIN ANDREW A SCHMEICHEL MARVIN+FRITIS MA 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-329 801 RAINIER AVE N #F332 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-240 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 WONGPA PAWIN JOHNSON MARIA C T +OKA LOREL BENJAMIN ANDRE+AMBRA 801 RAINIER AVE N #A301 801 RAINIER AVE N #D-118 801 RAINIER AVE N #E-223 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 TAZUMA ROY SEIJI+GRACE RIE ZABEL KARIN TRUONG CHI Q 801 RAINIER AVE N #A-203 801 RAINIER AVE N #Blll 801 RAINIER AVE N #D217 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 FALK CARY WILLIAMS DAVID T HALEY THOMAS E 801 RAINIER AVE N #E226 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-229 801 RAINIER AVE N #G333 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 FOX JONATHAN MICAH CARANDANG EVELYN M JUE CHRISTOPHER K 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-131 801 RAINIER AVE N #B209 801 RAINIER AVE N #B309 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 SEATILE, WA 98057 903000000 903000000 903000000 SMITH AARON M HUBER COREY F+KATHERINE L PHAM ALEXIS 801 RAINIER AVE N #F-132 2513 N QUANTICO ST 801 RAINIER AVE N #B109 RENTON, WA 98057 ARLINGTON, VA 22207 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 CULLISON ROBERT +SAM W+BETH COOK SIGMUND K STYLES COLLEEN G 801 RAINIER AVE N #G235 801 RAINIER AVE N #G338 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-339 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 903000000 903000000 RUSSAK JEFFERY AHO RACHEL CASTILLO ELVIE S+PETERSON L 801 RAINIER AVE N #B-205 18138 97TH AVE E 801 RAINIER AVE N #C-314 RENTON, WA 98055 PUYALLUP, WA 98375 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 TEDDY RANDAL M 801 RAINIER AVE N #G233 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 SINNED NICHOLAS J 801 RAINIER AVE N #D320 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 WHITE JAMES DARRELL+DONNA G 801 RAINIER AVE N #D119 RENTON, WA 98055 4204400225 KNEE ARVID 1102 SW 142ND ST BURIEN, WA 98166 9564800007 PHAM DYLAN PHAM TAMMY 9367 MARCUS AVE S SEATILE, WA 98118 903000000 LEIVA JUAN CARLOS+LILIANA 801 RAINIER AVE N #D220 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 ARNUCO LAURO 801 RAINIER AVE N #G238 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 PHILLIPS DAVID+ANGELA 11515 84TH AVES SEATILE, WA 98178 9564800176 MILLER WAYNE PO BOX 58187 RENTON, WA 98058 • 903000000 MADEIRA GERALDINE 801 RAINIER AVE N #D317 RENTON, WA 98055 903000000 NELSONS RON 801 RAINIER AVE N #G-334 RENTON, WA 98057 903000000 CLEVELAND BEN J 6700 39TH AVE SW SEATILE, WA 98136 1823059234 MCDONALDS CORP 046-0017 PO BOX 182571 COLUMBUS, OH 43218 NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Plannlng Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: LAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: May 8, 2013 LUAB-000517, ECF Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested SEPA Environmental Review and a Shoreline Exemption for the Seaplane Base maintenance dredging, located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton Municipal Airport. The project would be located in Lake Washington just off the north shore in the Seaplane Base. The project area is 76,000 square feet across four parcels two extending into King County and DNR leased land. The purpose of the project is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events. The total estimated volume of dredged materials is 16,000 cubic yards. Materials would be deposited at the Elliot Bay Open Water disposal site. With the application a Biological Assessment and a Lake Study have been provided. PROJECT LOCATION: North end of the Renton Municipal Airport along the southern shore of Lake Washington, the project crosses into King County OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS- M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated (DNS-M}. A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance ofthe DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: April 29, 2013 May 8, 2013 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Ben Dahle, Renton Municipal Airport; 616 W Perimeter Road, Unit A; Renton, WA 98057 Permits/Review Requested: other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), Federal Permits, and Construction Permit Biological Assessment Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 N/A If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Name/File No.: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging/LUAB-000517, ECF NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip:----------- TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: The subject site is designated Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Medium Industrial (lM) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-9-070 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Lake Study, prepared by Grette Associates LLC, dated January 2013. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Critical Areas Report, prepared by City of Renton Public Works Department, dated April 2012. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, CED-Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on May 23, 2013. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Tel: (42S) 430-7314; Eml: vdolbee@rentonwa.gov I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I Denis Law Mayor Mays, 2013 Ben Dahle Capital Project Coordinator Renton Municipal Airport 616 W Perimeter Road, Unit A Renton, WA 98057 r t, - Cityo( .~JJWJJ Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging LUA13-000517, ECF Dear Mr. Dahle: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on June 3, 2013. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at {425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~--DolbeJL Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law - _ _:May:or _____ ,,,,,, .... r, t\ May 7, 2013 __, Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator KC. Department of Permiting & Environmental Review Attn: SEPA Section 35030 SE Douglas St., Suite 210 Snoqualmie, WA 98065 Subject: Notice of SEPA Lead Agency Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, LUA13-000S17 Dear SEPA Official: The City of Renton recently received an application for SEPA Environmental Review and Shoreline Exemption from the Renton Municipal Airport for maintenance dredging at the Seaplane base. The City of Renton has determined under WAC 197-11-926 that we are the SEPA lead agency for this proposal because this project is a City initiated project. Following this letter your department will receive standard SEPA notification typically provided by the City of Renton including a copy of the SEPA Checklist and a project proposal. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Renton Municipal Airport/ Owner/Ap_plicant . Ben Dahle/ Contact Gregg Zimmerman/ ERC Chair Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: City of Renton, Renton Municipal Airport PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ADDRESS: The Renton Municipal Airport is located at 616 West Perimeter Road in Renton, WA. The project will occur at the north end of the airport, west of the Cedar River, on the CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 southern shore of Lake Washington. KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): TELEPHONE NUMBER: (425) 430-7471 0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285 and 1180008400 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: Same as owner EXISTING LAND USE(S): Aviation COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S): No change. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: ADDRESS: Land Use designation is Employment Area Industrial EA-I. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CITY: ZIP: (if applicable) No chanae EXISTING ZONING: Medium Industrial TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): No change. SITE AREA (in square feet): Total Parcel (0723059007, NAME: Ben Dahle, Capital Project Coordinator 0723059096, 1180000285 and 1180008400) 8,002,298 sf; Proiect 76,000 sf SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE COMPANY (if applicable): Renton Municipal Airport DEDICATED: None. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: ADDRESS: 616 West Perimeter Road, Unit A None. CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): N/A TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N/A (425) 430 -7476 bdahle@renotnwa.gov NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A H:\File Sys\AIR -Airport, Transportation Services Division\03 Projccts\02 Capital Improvement Projects\Maint Dredging and Shoreline Mitigation projcct\2013 Permits\City Shoreline Exemption and SEPA\CHh"'\Renton Seaplane Ba.~e Dredge Master App bpd RI .doc -1 - ' p J ECT INFORMAT~IO_N_--'---(c=----=o--'---'n-'-'-t '-'--=e=-=-d_,__) ______ _ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: $1,250,140 N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 27,363 sq. ft. -the project does not include modification to non-residential buildinQs. NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA D GEOLOGIC HAZARD D HABITAT CONSERVATION D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 76 000 D WETLANDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY /Attach leaal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the followina information included) sq_ ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. sq. ft. SITUATE IN THE _NE, NW QUARTER OF SECTION _7_, TOWNSHIP _23N_, RANGE _SE_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Ben Dahle, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) __ the current owner of the property involved in this application or _x __ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ·~-1=~~L~-:....:Y~--:..._~-4--~~=------1+ttz~v.:,~ ;;;;:;z Owner/Representative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date g STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that J::,e n J"'-""€ n r'. De,.. h !c:__ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their fr and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. 1 1-'" ,, 111!'://f/,r#..r-,,,, \ " _LJ __ --~<?~i ... · _._r~---~I --~-__:;~---. ·':' i -· _::··::;\'.·t~'.~/~,~s;;:-~:a-:-~e-::---:::-7---:-~\~'.t?·"""'"-------- Dated :--.. __ ,•,•v-0\ -:tJota inand-fortheStateofWaslilngton t (; ::; ,i;~~,·:~;'j ") E io&ry (Print) _C.,.\~'-,a~l--'l "c,._::\-"---'-h-"-"1'wk~-~Q='--_._(j_._'\__,-"c,.,.,.+-1-""'----- • · .• -J:.,t· ... / (') ,, ''--~>/·-.n-. :::;;~~~:~tment expires: ------"8'--'-'/. ... ::f'--J,_,_! .... ae=)Li Y-+---------- ..... ·--,.,r-iJJJ -•J/.' .. •.f//1- H:\File Sys\AIR -Airport, Transportation Services Division\03 Projects\02 Capital Improvement Projects\Maint Dredging and Shoreline Mitigation project\2013 Permits\City Shoreline Exemption and SEPA \CHE\Rcnton Seaplane Base Dredge Master App bpd RI .doc -2 - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT DATE: TO: CC: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M April 23, 2013 Vanessa Dolbee Ryan Zulauf Ben Dahle~ Shoreline Permit for Airport Maintenance Dredge Project The airport is submitting the enclosed SEPA and SM E to the City of Renton following the City's guidelines with the understanding that the project permitting for the shoreline is still being negotiated and may change. The airport understands that some of the area proposed for dredging may be in the shoreline jurisdiction of King County. The City is currently working with King County and Ecology to determine the most appropriate method for permitting the project. h:\file sys\air -airport, transportation services division\03 projects\02 capital improvement projects\maint dredging and shoreline mitigation project\2013 permits\city shoreline exemption and sepa\sepa and sme memo to dolbee.doc PLANNING DIVISION WAIVEL JF SUBMITTAL REQUIR ENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS •·•· LANbUsei?E'.RJ',UtstieMrti'AillH ••••••••• WAlVe:i:> < t•••••••••·•·•••••··••• ~gµ1R~M~ijf~f > <••·n••••• ••••·• $xi•••• ••••·•·•· a,<••••••••• Calculations 1 Density Worksheet 4 , 91 ~i~~~9r>m\fpi•ei~ri••···••···•·•·•·:··· < >······--- ~ Drainage Report 2 gi~$\1crn~: ;b,i-pffiit~pty/~i~~JJf • > Environmental Checklist 4 () @~ii\%pHris#/ R~#Ar\~~~~i•••••••••·•·•·• >•·•••-···----- Grading Plan, Conceptual 2 ~r~11mr/R1ijb<P$~11~~f r < Habitat Data Report 4 'rnm/9ijm~iP~t~rrt¥1f n >··-·---- Irrigation Plan 4 firn~·sw~m1iA~§~~~#t~·M~#•inW1~~in~*it~~·••••·••••·••·•· Landscape Plan, Conceptual, ~~HW#P~P~ R1~n\ p~t~1i~~i•••··•••• ?•••<··--- Legal Description 4 M## 9f~x1#\iH~ §it~RRh~l*pn~)···············---- Master Application Form 4 ~µii\$h\t~ii!$ iiiM~ /ipimPfJ~/n~fol\••••••••r•·•··•··-·------ Neighborhood Detail Map 4 1f.#~,rn~: ht#RRfffil~~·~•s~rn~#P~Pirn~i~1x#/,;•+•••·•·• Plan Reductions (PMTs) 4 if<i#/ Pfiifi~:APi>rpf~I•·••··••· <·•·•····-·-- This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building PROJECT NAME:0ec.c gc1Af.. '6aJe.. 111 qn/eranu DATE:Dre,)!J'r} · to/18//Z.. r I 4. Planning H:\C ED\Data\Forms-T emplates\S elf-Help Handouls\P!an n ing\waiverofsubmittalreqs.xls 06/09 PLANNING DIVISION WAIVEI, JF SUBMITTAL REQUIR .... JIENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Plat Name Reservation 4 o Traffic Study 2 tf~~@p~:mi@~n~ qi~~ri~~:Mi~m {•••<• .. ····•·················· · Urban Design Regulations Analysis 4 ... y\,1H,~~ p1~r:•i,i@~r~ii~@ f : Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final 4 w~i~®~ r.,1,1ij#/iW~ t11¥1/ FiJi@1r~rxf < Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND, Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND, Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area , AND 3 Photosimulations 2AND, This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review PROJECT NAME:~@bOJ<. /rloJhkmflCR. DATE:Vrd(5i~ .LD/l't}/12.. 3. Building 4. Planning H:\C ED\Data\F orms-T em plates\Self-Help Handouls\Plan ning\waiverofsubm ittalreqs .xis 06/09 Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Project Narrative 1. Project nome, size, and location of site Project Name: Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Total Area: 8,002,298 square feet (parcels: 0723059007, 0723059096, 1180000285, and 1180008400) Project Size: 76,000 square feet Location of Site: The Renton Municipal Airport is located at 616 West Perimeter Road. The project will occur at the north end of the airport, west of the Cedar River, on the southern shore of Lake Washington. 2. Brief Description of proposed work The purpose of the dredging is to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base Approach Channel and Mooring Basin that has occurred during previous major storm events such as those occurring in November 2006 and January 2009. The proposed dredging will remove recent sediment deposits from under the floating docks and up to the edge of existing structures to restore the Seaplane Base access and mooring basin to required depths for safe operations. Refer to Sheet 4 of 5. The proposed dredge area and depths were determined based on historical areas of operation and minimum requirements as outlined by the FAA standards for Seaplane Base Operations. These standards provide a minimum dimensions for taxi channel width and depth for the "design" plane size (e.g. pontoon draft and wing width). Pursuant to Federal Aviation Administrative Guidance AC 150/5359-1(3)(22) a minimum depth of 6 feet of water is needed to support most seaplane operations. A total estimated volume of 16,000 cubic yards of dredged material will be removed from a 76,000 square foot area within the facility. The dredged sediment will be disposed of at the Elliot Bay Open Water disposal site. The maintenance dredging work will be conducted from the waters of Lake Washington utilizing floating equipment including spud and tow barges. Portions of the floating docks and upland bulkhead within the project area will be temporarily removed to conduct the dredging work and will be reinstalled upon completion of the project. This work is also anticipated to involve the temporary removal and reinstallation of at least one 12- inch steel pile. Vibratory pile driving activities are anticipated to take no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days within the in-water work window. The National Marine Fisheries Service has consulted on this project and has determined that effects to listed fish species resulting from this project are "expected to be insignificant" (Kilner 2012). 3. Basis for the exemption request This project is normal maintenance and repair of an existing development. Historic lakebed elevations were obtained from 1986 (see attached AT&T plan sheet). Water levels out to areas of open water (at the 200 foot mark on the horizontal axis of the AT&T sheet profile) were approximately 13 feet deep. The lake surface of that profile drawing can be correlated to the Ordinary High Water (OHW) line of the current section drawings, dated 3/26/12, (attached). Using the 22-foot elevation of OHW, the historic dredging elevation was estimated to be 22' -13' = 9' deep. The proposed project will dredge to 0.5 feet higher than this, and will dredge to a lake bed elevation of 9.5 feet. The one foot over-dredge allowance would result in a final elevation of 8.5 feet, if over-dredge is utilized. The proposed elevation depth would therefore be within the historic dredging prism and consistent with typical maintenance dredging projects. 4. Anticipated dates of work The project is anticipated ta occur in 2013 during approved work windows. However, actual start dates will be contingent upon permit approvals. 5. Other permits requested for this project Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) Washington State Department of Natural Resources: Aquatic Use Authorization Washington State Department of Ecology: Section 401 Water Quality Certification United States Army Corps of Engineers: Section 404 and Section 10 King County Shoreline Exemption 6. Current and proposed use af the site The current and proposed used of the site is a municipal airport and seaplane base. 7. Special site features (i.e. wetlands, water bodies and steep slopes) The project area is located within Lake Washington to the west of the Cedar River. The project is not adjacent or within areas containing wetlands or steep slopes. 8. Statement addressing soil type and drainage canditians The substrate to be dredged consists of sand and silt with small amounts of gravel. Drainage conditions are not applicable for this project. 9. Total estimated construction cast and estimated fair market value of the proposed project Estimated fair market value of the proposed project is $1,250,140.00. 10. Estimate quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed This project includes the removal of approximately 16,000 cubic yards of sediment which primarily consists of sand and silt with small amounts of gravel. No fill is proposed for this project. 11. Number, type and size of any trees to be removed No trees are to be removed as a result of this project. 12. Distance from closest area of work to the Ordinary High Water Mark of the Shoreline. Work will occur within Lake Washington, waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark. Refer to Sheets 1 through 3. 13. Nature of the existing shoreline (e.g. high bank, naturalize, rip-rap, bulkhead, etc.) The shoreline adjacent to the project is developed and has been used by the Renton Airport and Seaplane base since the 1940's. 14. If the proposed project exceeds a height of 35 feet above the average grade level, discuss the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view. The proposed project does not include the construction of any new structures and will not obstruct any existing views. •• . . EXISTING BULKHEAD w ~ @ w " B "' 0 is "' g NOTES T.O. DREDGE SLOPE EXISTING FLOATING DOCK ANO PILE 0 EXISTING GROUND SURFACE 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' SECTION 8.0. DREDGE CUT EL +9.5' EXISTING GROUND SURFACE AREA TO BE DREDGED EXISTING FLOATING DOCK AND PILE SECTION 30 60 w a. 0 ~ (ll w " 0 w 0: 0 Lo. 0 l'J .... 1. ESTIMATED DREDGE VOLUME: 16,000 CY INCLUDING 1-FT OVEROREDGE ALLOWANCE. SCALE IN FEET PURPOSE· TO RESTORE SAFE NAVIGATION ANO USABILITY OF SEAPLANE BASE FACILITY I QCA]ON· LAT:47' 30' 2.44"' LONG:122" 1.3' 06.14" .ctAJJJM;_ CORPS OF ENQNEERS LOCK DATUM ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS· 1. CITY OF RENTON (SOUTH) CITY OF RENTON SEAPLANE BASE MAINTENANCE DREDGING PROJECT TYPICAL SECTIONS PBOPOSEO· MAINTENANCE DREDGING UP TO 16,000 CY lli;. LAKE WASHINGTON Ali.. CITY OF RENTON .cllUIIIl'.;. KING w ~ ~ "' ts 0 "' "' 0 0 >-' 2. BILL COLACURCIO JR. (WEST) 3. WILLIAM COLACURCIO (WEST) APPUCA.llCN &YI CITY OF RENTON SHEET 4 OF 5 llAlfi. 3/26/12 l! /YI, _,t, ~,, l~' "{8J Cot,...15~1otJ t-.lo'Tl!~; ~ 0 P\...b.U 11,o LhJ.E..,l,,L i='l!.E..'T" ~ $ ,~ Pl~ L~ tC 5"'1t'l!L .::,a.sn,.t6 M 00, 1. GOwgi,,,11-r hJ.. ~ 'Tb e,e. ~ ""'\-n,l "T·,..u,:e...oll!.o ~. \C',Ot,.l PIP'I!. G<tt,.Pl!o. I .Z., MAlw"T"A,11.J. 2,d.• GOJ'E.111:. e>~ MWO Ln,JE. I "~'"'- ... E.t4££,LL1,::" 1,.....,1"1"5, 01" Oln!!i::>•1 ... .d,~ (Fe" C::<T'V'-~ .... ~"'"' ",*.'!§,-~ ....... . -"~ .. ~-"·=-... I I: ~ Ir .-la~s,:. ajpll,J<: ·""""'·· 1 I Prz_ !So1.!"': I 11 ""c -------------------1------+l l'U.C~ 1-a1.:.. .. 4•t.:. .. ,_,,.;_ t<\,l,,.W,~11!. I.IIT\,,l -!,t.,'" se. ,='R,,i,.M'lt. .l!i, GOV1!.f! ® "--. ' PD--.~ .C0.U:.A"'1o<~• ------~II ti'-·"· ~-I ---' C) ":r. C,"J":: C:0 10 "'-'='O Do<::C: AAP L«.KI~ l!Ol..f,;a,r; UTlL.rT'r' \IAU...I co. •4AM"T'i:.A.. © ~f>Otj;.£0 A."{""41Te.l.EP\,,l,ot,.L'I!. ~ M 1-4'" Pv£ (<:.:::iu.::. £W,£A..<&E.o) © f'l-6C.e 10 L.I". OF 5-~• 1-D. Gr.l.r. (&OloK.11:::lli!.TE E"'1"""!i-l!.O) / "I 8(o l+T-+T """'"" --.... -"Ill. __ ' ~ RE.MOVE-E)(1':ITIN6 ~~12.1 ~ Tirll!>E:F..!:> P..E.PLAGE: 1-J/ ----_ t,11;1,.1,C.)l:E:JoTE TJl:E:ATtcD ~"""7 4'• 12:' TIMe..E~S. ~/ ~Y- LA.G BOLTe.. I e=== TroJce...+- & .6.·~'"3,::,' e. !x> . .o' L• ,4&, e,d =·- LINE$ / U• llL. 11.H' ~.:: .. ~ A n . .u.so' ~•,.• ...... llLA.CA~ .. _ .. _......._ - t."•l'I' u:..-- -- i<EST',o.,.J!Z'/l,.UT ,~~: ,_p' 4' r~;,~-::f'~o " J i • 1\~ -. ~ ' 4' MA.><. 1-2.'Sl"'E.l:L ~ .... s,t-J• ('lt."WN.L.~) ,.,,... "'"" CO...U:..2'E:'re A!::14:t:¥?e. D£rA\L ~-1"•1'-o" •. LA K E. S\.Jlc'FJ...c::E --- ,,. ,:::. ITV OF Ee.~TOM OIZED&.E=.. ~E ...... -·,4/0IC-(.ld.t.."',I 1-11-e.-.h) - ....._,.~-~a!:- ,,,.._;.-4~,#.f.A (,.?61..1'!) - 04~,. ,. ~ 'i: • ~--~ .. :;;, ... , .... .. ~_-,,_...... u "':' (..-..1'1",) ,~ LAKE PRDFII-E. SG,1,LE." ~""' 2&>' i,tc:::,1:i!:1:t.. 1".-$. ve.rr. R J-~H~,,.,. P('Wl'- (?tl , ..... ) .. • • -• {ff.\ -• -a _,. -~ ~f ¥-1f"/ir SEATTLE MAORONA no SUTTLE. r.::e lELLEVUE S.E. 115TH STREET t (TO BELLEVUE) ~ S.E. 40TH ST. (Tq NORTH BENO) ,-- SITE TELEPHONE CABLE CROSSING RENTON _.IFIPORT RENTON (10 PU'l'ALLUP} VICINITY MAP SCALE IN FEET 0!5I020 &I 100 t;>b 5,,,,..- ~4'-~ ,,;,,; .. REVISIONS NOTES-THE. (..DNT~AC.TO~ 'SHALL. NOTIFY Wt> Bt:~~T~OM AT 2.35 2C.'?I .0.. r111J1N\UM 01" 48 HRP. f>E':f"O~E CONSTJO?:Ut'-]ION I':> Pl'o'!o!')o?E-D TO SCl---lEDULE A. 91'?:C:: • <:.DN"':>"'Tl<':VC..TiON ME-CTIN0 "N/ GITY OF l"!.ENIDN NORTH SCALE' PROPRIETARY IUSE PtJR'SUANT TO O'.lloll'ANY INSTRUCTIONS SPEC. NO. JsnMAi'E. PREPARED FOR RECORD =:;El'O<,~"'--""'~""Q~ .. c,a,-c0c•'"~ ·-Cllll't'Ff-............. ~,-, ....... 0 ............. -........... 00_,,..,,.,. ........................ _._ ............ . .. ..... _, ....... ... , -=-AT&T 11.Ul,!VIIS I A~H1o1T€S COMMUNICATIONS """'-=""" Western ReQlon SEATTLE TO RATTLESNAKE LEDGE L/GHTGUIDE SYSTEM WASHINGTON CONTRACTC CABLE ROUTE 2 DAYS BEfOAE fOU OIC CALL TOLL FR[( 1·800·424-5555IWR-33631 ~~-~~! nnnt; ~~g ~~i uuu~~ ,1 ]I 1 , •I-, 111 · Ji~, ~I ~ ~ ~ I Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging Construction Mitigation Description 1. Proposed Construction Dates (begin and end) The project is anticipated to occur in 2013 during USA CE approved work windows, July 16th to July 31st and November 16th to December 31st. 2. Hours and Days of Operation It is anticipated that dredge efforts will require 20 days to complete. Dredging activities will generally operate from 7 am to 7 pm Monday through Friday during the work window. Additional hours per day (e.g. from 7 pm to 10 pm) or work on Saturday and/or Sunday may occur to ensure the work is completed on schedule and within the allocated work window. Dredge efforts will comply with relevant noise regulations provided in WAC Chapter 173-60. 3. Proposed hauling and transportation routes Upland hauling of dredge material will not occur for this project. Dredge material will be barged from Lake Washington, through the Lake Washington Ship Canal, into Puget Sound, and south to the Elliot Bay Open Water Disposal Site. 4. Measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic, and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise and other noxious characteristics The project will include the implementation of a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC} and Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan. These plans will incorporate the below actions: • Containing and disposing all debris (larger than 24 inches in any dimension) off-site at an approved disposal site. • Maintaining a longer dredge cycle time that will reduce the velocity of the loaded bucket through the water column and thus reduce the potential ta wash sediment from the bucket • Avoiding multiple dredge bites • Not stockpiling any materials in the water • Utilize the maximum clamshell bucket and barge size for the site in order to minimize the number of dredge bites and trips • Not overloading the barge or the transfer barges • Providing on-site qualified personnel to monitor turbidity during the removal/installation of pilings and during all dredging activities and ensure compliance with the standards outlined within the 401 water quality certification. , ' • Containing sediment on the barge with appropriate BMPs such as straw boles and silt fencing where applicable. • Utilizing a floating debris boom to capture floating debris and contain suspended sediment if determined ta be required during water quality monitoring 5. Any special hours proposed for construction or hauling (i.e. weekends, late nights) Dredge materials may be transported to the open water disposal site after dredge activities are completed for the day, e.g. from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Vessels transporting dredge materials shall follow all relevant water transport rules. 6. Preliminary traffic control plan This project will occur within area controlled by the Renton Airport and Seaplane base is not anticipated to impact upland transportation operations (e.g. traffic and/or pedestrian utilization). Dredge materials will generally be brought from the project site by barge to the open water disposal site. Barges and other vessels transporting materials to and from the project site will follow all relevant water transport rules and are not anticipated to adversely affect water traffic. PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS {part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, .plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. -1 . C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Will Roger-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging 2. Name of applicant: Ben Dahle, P.E.; Capital Project Coordinator 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Renton Airport I Clayton Scott Field 616 West Perimeter Road, Unit A Renton, Washington 98057 425-430-7476 Office 425-430-7472 Fax 4. Date checklist prepared: July 27, 2012 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Current Planning Section 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The project is anticipated to occur in 2013 during approved work windows. However, actual start dates will be contingent upon permit approvals. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. City of Renton Public Works Department, April 2012. Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base: Biological Assessment. Grette Associates, December 2012. Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base Dredge Project: Lake Study. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. There are no known applications pending for governmental approval of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by this proposal. -2 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppDala\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Aenton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Shoreline Permit: Shoreline Exemption Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) Washington State Department of Natural Resources: Aquatic Use Authorization Washington State Department of Ecology: Section 401 Water Quality Certification United States Department of the Army permits (USA CE): Sections 404 and Section 10 King County Shoreline Exemption 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. The purpose of this project is to remove the excess sediment at the seaplane base to restore seaplane occess. The dredge prism, including the side slope areas, is approximately 76,000 square feet in size. The silty sand substrate was deposited near the mouth of the Cedar River during the November 2006 and January 2009 flood events which were declared federal disasters. The project will bring the lakebed back down to pre-flood conditions, approximately 8.5 feet above Corps of Engineers Lock Datum, and restore the water level to that which is required for safe seaplane operation. In order to accomplish this dredge project, a portion of a dock must be temporarily removed in order to dredge the area. The dock will be reconstructed within the same footprint. Completion of this project will not change the existing use of the site. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The Renton Municipal Airport is located at 616 West Perimeter Road, Renton, WA, 98057. The section, township, range for this project is as follows: SE723N05E. The project will occur at the north end of the airport, west of the Cedar River, on the southern shore of Lake Washington. Refer to Sheet 1 supplied with the JAR PA application materials. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one);@ rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other . Refer to Sheet 3 for existing ground surface of the dredge prism. All disturbed areas are submerged and located on the lake bed. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The steepest slopes within the project area are approximately 1 to 3 %. . 3. C:\Users\bdahte\AppData\Locat\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Substrate west of the dock consists of approximately 80% sand and 20% silt while substrate east of the dock has approximately 90% sand, 5% gravel, and 5% silt. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No fill activities are associated with this project. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion is not expected to occur during or after the project. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No changes to impervious surfaces will occur as a result of project construction. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: No erosion or other similar impacts to earth are expected as a result of this project. To reduce turbidity during dredging, the selected dredge contractor will adhere to standard best management practices (BMPs) including Washington State water quality standards and permit requirements that limit the amount of turbidity within the Project area. These BMPs shall include, but are not limited to: • Implementation of a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Contra/ (TESC} and Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC} Plan. • Containment and disposal of all debris larger than 24 inches in any dimension aft-site at an approved disposal site. • Not overloading the barge or transfer barges. • Providing on-site qualified personnel to monitor turbidity during the removal/installation of pilings and during all dredging activities to ensure compliance with the standards outlined within the 401 Water Quality Certificate. • For all dredging, each cycle of the clamshell bucket shall be complete and there shall be no stockpiling of material in the water. • Leveling of the completed dredging surface by dragging a beam or clamshell bucket is not permitted. • Erasion contra/ measures will be installed an material barges to filter water returning to the lake from the dredged material stockpiled on the barge. -4 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Locat\Microsoft\Windows\Tempora,y Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 2. AIR In additian, Potential impacts to state and federal threatened and endangered species would be avoided by scheduling in-water work appropriately. a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. In the short term, exhaust emissions would be generated from construction equipment typically associated with the dredging. The amount and type of emissions are not expected to exceed that which normally occurs a part of currently daily airport function. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emissions that would affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Contractors would be required to comply with the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's (PSCAA's) regulations. The proposed project would have no significant, long-term impact on air quality in the vicinity. All contractor equipment will have factory-installed emission controls in good working condition. 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The project will occur within Lake Washington. The mouth of the Cedar River is located approximately 175 feet to the east of the project area. Refer to Sheet 1. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The dredge prism and associated dock is located within Lake Washington. Refer to Sheets 1 through 3. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Approximately 16,000 cubic yards of sediments will be removed from the dredge prism depicted on Sheet 1. No fill material is associated with the project. . 5. C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\D4MSRD0E\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06109 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This proposal does not require surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. The project does not lie within the 100-year-flood-plain. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. The proposal does not involve the discharge of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water will be withdrawn and no water will be discharged to ground water as a result of this project. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable}, or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. The project does not involve any discharge of waste materials to ground water. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known}. Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, if so, describe. The project is located entirely waterward of the ordinary high water mark. No changes to runoff will occur as a result of this project. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No waste materials will enter ground or surface waters as a result of this project. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: This project is located waterword of the ordinary high water mark only. No intertidal or upland work will be completed for this project. A water quality control plan for the in- water work will be developed in accordance with requirements for Section 401 certification and other aquatic permit requirements. The selected dredge contractor will adhere to all state and federal water quality standards and permit requirements that limit dredge turbidity. . 6. C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Fites\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Aenton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: __ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other __ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs __ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ ~ts: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other --~water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation Aquatic plants commonly found in Lake Washington include hornwort, pondweeds, Eurasian mi/foil and fragrant water lily; however, aquatic vegetation in the dredge area is very minimal. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Minimal aquatic vegetation, as listed in Item 4a, may be removed as part of the dredge process. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. S. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle,~other ________ _ Mammals: deer, bear elk, beaver, other---------- Fish: bass~@, herring, shellfish, other------- b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Chinook salmon and winter steelhead trout may be on or near the site. As noted in the Biological Assessment (City of Renton 2012} the project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" these species. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain As identified in the Biological Assessment (City of Renton April 2012), the site may be used by adult Chinook salmon on their way to spawn in the Cedar and Sammamish Rivers and by juvenile Chinook salmon for outmigration to the Puget Sound. In addition, winter steelheod trout moy also travel through the action area as they migrate through Lake Washington. -7 - C:\Users\bdahle~ppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Aenton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The project will comply with all federol, state, and local permit requirements including project work windows and turbidity mixing zone limitations. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. The completed project will not have energy needs. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. A diesel or gasoline spill could occur during equipment refueling or operation, although this is highly unlikely to occur. All dredging activity would be conducted under standard BM P's as well as all conditions identified during the permitting process. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Construction-related accidents or injuries may require response from local fire, police, air units, or ambulances. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: All requirements imposed by city, state, and federal codes would be met. -8 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppOata\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Tempora,y Internet Files\Content.Outlook\04MSADOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06109 b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? No noise exists in the area which is likely to affect the project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During the dredge period, equipment will generate noise on site. However, this noise is not expected to be louder or more impactful than that experienced as a result of existing airport operations. Construction hours will occur in accordance with permit requirements. This work is also anticipated to involve the removal of at least one 12-inch steel pile. Vibratory pile driving activities are anticipated to take no more than four hours over a period of no more than two days within the in-water work window. The National Marine Fisheries Service hos consulted on this project and has ·determined that effects to listed fish species resulting from this project are "expected to be insignificant" (Kilner 2012}. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The contractor would be required to perform dredging activities in compliance with applicable federal, state, and local environmental noise regulations. In addition, vibratory installation ond removal of pile will be used for this project as opposed to impact pile driving. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The current use of the site it the City of Renton Airport and Seaplane base. Adjacent properties include the Renton Boeing facilities on the east side of the Cedar River. The properties adjacent to the site on the west are used as a retirement community and a mobile home park. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. The project site is aquatic. Structures adjacent or within the project area include two floating docks for passenger boarding and offloading and a launch/retrieval ramp. Adjacent to the seaplane dock, the shoreline is lined with sheet pile walls. No other airport related structures are within the project limits. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No structures will be demolished as a result of this project. -9 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Current zoning of the site is Industrial Medium. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The current comprehensive plan designation for the site is Employment Area Industrial (EAi}. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The site's shoreline master program designation is Shoreline High Intensity and the parcel contains two segment designations {LW-J and CR-A). h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Lake Washington hos been mapped as part of the Bull Trout Critical Habitat and the Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat. As noted in the Biological Assessment (City of Renton April 2012), this project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" this habitat. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Project is maintenance ond does not modify existing fond use. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. This project will not provide housing units. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: -10- C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklisl draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 Not applicable. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. No new structures are proposed as part of this project. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposal may utilize lights to conduct dusk and night time work. The project is not anticipated to produce glore. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Lights utilized to allow for dusk and night time work will be directed at the project area and will not be directed towards adjacent residential parcels. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The immediate vicinity of the project area is part of a 1,500 feet restricted area associated with airport function. As such, there are na designated or informal recreational opportunities in the immediate vicinity. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The project would not displace any existing recreation uses. -11 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\LocaJ\Microsolt\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not opplicoble. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. There ore no places or objects listed on, or proposed for national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. There are no landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the airport is obtained by Airport Woy South and Shattuck Avenue South. The proposed project will not require modification or additions to the existing street system. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The airport does not hove o bus stop directly in front of it. However there is a King County Metro Transit System stop within 2,000 feet of the Airport entrance. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? The proposal will not require any new roads or streets or improvements to existing roads or streets. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. -12 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRDOE\Renton Seaplane Base Environmental Checklisl draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 The project is within the area owned and or managed by the City of Renton Airport and as such is in the immediate vicinity of air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The completed project is not anticipated to generate additional vehicular trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Completed project will not have transportation impacts. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project would not result in an increased need for public services. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Nat applicable. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. The project area, e.g. the dredge prism, does not have or require utility service. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent Signature: ~ . ~ .. J-:, ~/\.cf· I Name Printed: \SeviJ<>""eV'\ ? J)o.1,,\-e,.,. Date: 1/-o,t L d'5 , .;l_o 1'3 I -13 - C:\Users\bdahle\AppData\Local\Microsolt\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\D4MSRD0E\Renlon Seaplane Base Environmental Checklist draft 042513 clean.doc 06/09 Federal Emergency Management Agency WashiilgtoIJ., D.C. 20472 .. CERTIFil:!D MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED . . . . . ' The Hon9rable Kathy Keolker Mayor, City of Renton .1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 · ·. DeiirMaj,or Keolker: FEB 16 2007 Community: Cityof~ton, WA Community No.: 530088 RECE\VED FEB 2 G 11'' ' . CIT{ ornEN'ION LrtiLrr\' SVSTEMS This responds to a'r.e~ ofMap Revision (LOMR) request dated June 5, 2Q06 (Case N~. 06~10-B569P), from Mr. -Ronald Straka; P.E., Surface Water Utilities Supei""(lisor, Public WorbDepartment, City of Renton, that the Department of Homeland Secwity's Federal Emergency Management-Agency (FEMA) ·evaiuatethe effects thai updated Jlood hazard data-fur the CedarRivei"froJ!I-theconfluencewith Lake Washington to just upstreamofl49th Avenue would have on the.flood hazard information.shown on the effective Flood illllllPlllCC Rate Map (FIRM).for your community. The Fl1U,!: panels affected by the updated data include the fullowiug; Panels 53033C0664 F; 53033C0977 F, 53033C0981 F, 53033C0982 F, 53033C0983 F, and 53033C0984 F. This letter is based oil the best available Jlood hazard in.formation and is intenaed to improve upon that shown. on the effective FIRM. · . . . . We reviewed the submitted data enclosed in. the application package entitled "Flood Insurance Mapping ~tudy of the Cedar Rfyer, Lake. Was!rlngton to Renton City Limits," prepared for the City of Renton by Northwest Hydraulic CoDSU!taqts, dated April 2006, and the undated supporting report entitled ''Techrii~ . Support Data Notebook (TSDN) for Cedar River, Rentm). Washington," also prepared by Northwest · . Hydraulic Consultants. We have determined that the Sllbwittcd data meet the minimum floodplain management criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFiP), but FEMA c;1Dnot issue a LOMR or Physical ,Map Re-vision_ at this time. · Until such time as FEMA can physically revise the F109d Insurance Study (FIS) report and FIRM, we encollillgC your community to reasonably use the draft wcik map entitled "City ofRenton Work Map,'' prepared by Northwest Hydraulic Con.sultants, dated April 7, 2006, as the pest available data fur floodplain management pUipOses, in accordance with Paragraph 60,3(b)( 4) of !he NFJP-regubitions ( copy enclosed} -· and·Fioodplain Management Bulletin l-98, entitled. ''Use of Flood Insurance Study (FIS) Dsta as Available Data" ( copy enclosed). Bulletin 1-98 provides guidance to COJilronoitic.s_ on the use of FEMA draft or . preliminary FIS data as available data for regulating floodplain. development We are preparing a revised FIRM and FIS report for King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas. Prel.imioaiy copi!'& of du: revised countywide FIRM and FIS report will be di.stn"but<;d for review in .approximately 8 months. We will inco.rpo~ the modifications dcscn'bed in"the aforementioned submitted data in.to the Preliroinary coUillyWide FIRM before it is distn"buted. , · · . . . . . ·' . This letter is based on minimum floodplain management criteria esmbljshed under the NFIP. Your community is responsible for appro1!ing_all floodplain development and for'epsuring all necessaiypermits ,equhed by Federal or Sll!te !aw bave·been received. State, county, and COIDillll1llty oflicia!s, based on i i I -Q~ . JS): . NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM ~~.t, FEMA NATIONAL SERVICE PROVIIlER ':_<.i,.,o ,~"© December 4, 2006 Mr. Ronald Straka, P,!i City of Renton . Public Works Department I 055 South Qrady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Straka: CITY O:;; ;-fl:N7CN UlJUTY S"tSTEr~m IN REPLY REFER TO: Case No.: 06'10-B569P Comm~ity: -CityofRcnt~n, WA Community No~: 530088· · 316-ACK This responds to your submittal dated November 17, 2006, concerninga June 5,.2006, request that the . · Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issue a revision to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) fu,r King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas . .Pertinent - .. information abbut the request is listed below .. Identifier: Flooding Source: . FIRM Panel(s)·Affected: Cedar River LOMR Cedar River 530DC0664 F, 0977 F, 09s' I f, 0982F, 0983 F and09!!4F. . We ha.ve completed anfoveritory of ihe items you submitted. Our review oft!ie.submitted data indica~ we have the minimum data required to perfonn a detailed technical review of your request. If additional data are · required or if delays are encountered, we will inform you within 60 days cif the date of this ietter. '. ' , .• ~J As you may know, FEMA has implemented a procedure to recover costs ;;sociated with reviewing and ·processing requests for modii'ications .to publishe/1 flood information and inaps. Howevi,r, because your request is based on ilood hazard information meant to improve upon th•t. shown oo the ilood map or within the flood stndy and does not partially or wholly incorporate manrnade modifications within ihe Special Flood Hazard Arel!, no fees will be assessed for our review. Please direct questions concerning your request to us at the address shown at the bottom of this page. For identification purposes, please include the case nwnber referenced above on all _correspondence. If you have general questions about your request, FEMA policy, or the National Flood Insurance Program, please call the FEMA Map Assistance Center, toll free, at 1-877-FEMA MAP (l-877-336-2627). If you have specific questions concerning your request, please call the Revisions Coordinatorfor your State, Ms. Jennifer- Wmtm, who may be reached at (720) 514-1107. cc: Mr. Erik Rowland, P. E. · Pro'ect En · eer Norihwest Hydraulic Consultants Sincerely, ~ Sheila M. Norlin, CFM National LOMC Manager Michael Baker Jr., Inc. 3501 Eisenhower Avenue, Alenndrl1t, VA 223lU-5425 PH:1-B77-FEMA· MAP. FX: 703.l~0.~12$ The Mapping on D!mand Team, under contract with the Faderal"Emargency Management Agency, Is the Natfona, Service Provider for the National Flood. ktsuranc~ .Program 2 knowledge oflocal conditions 'and in the interest of safety, may set higher standards for coJ,lStru.ction in the Special Flood Hazard Area, the area 81¥'iect to inundation by the base flood. If the State, COilll;ty, or cemmunity has adopted more restrictive or comprehensive floodplain management criteria, these criteria take precedence over the minimum NF1P criteria . · If you have· any qu~ons regarding fl~odplain management ·regulations for your community ·or the NFIP in general, please contact the Consultation Coordination Officer (CCO) for your community. JnfuµDation on the CCO for your community may be obtained by calling the Dir<;ctor, Federal Insura11ce and Mitigation Pivision ofFEMA in Bothell, Washington, at (425) 4874682. If you have any questions regaroing this · letter, please call onr'Map Assistance Center, toll free, at 1-877-FEMA MAP (1-877-336-2627). -Sincerely, · · -Allyson Lichtenfels, Project Engineer. · Engineering Management Section Mitigation Division · . · Enclosures cc: The Honorable Lairy Gossett Chair, King· County Council Mr. Ronald Straka, P .E. Surlace Water Utilities Supervisor Public Wodcs Department City of Renton Mr. Steve Bleifuhs Flo_od Hazan! Reduction Services Manager King County Mr. Erik Rowland, P .E. Pro. ect Engin ~ ~Ls _ Northwest Hydnwlic Consultants For. William R.. Blanton Jr.,· CFM, Chief Engineering Management Section . Mitigation Division · ···-· -··- RIGHT OF ENTRY Project: Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging The GRANTOR, Max Nathan, Jr., as Executor of the Estate of William Colacurcio, Jr., also known as Bill Colacurcio Jr., under King County Superior Court Cause No. 12-4- 06186-3 SEA (hereinafter known as "Owner") does hereby grant and convey unto the GRANTEE, City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation, a right to enter the following described land for the purpose of conducting surveying, dredging, general engineering functions and water ingress and egress in accordance with the following agreements: It is hereby agreed as follows: I. The Owner represents and warrants that, to his knowledge, he is the owner(s) of that certain parcel(s) of land, situated in King County, State of Washington, more particularly described as follows (the "Property"): Tax Parcel: 118000-0285-06, 118000-8400-09 Parcel A: That portion of Blocks 5 and 6, Bryn Mawr Addition, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, Page 58, and vacated Lake Street and vacated alley lying within the south 180 feet of the north 240 feet of that portion of said plat lying south of the north line of Lot 4, Block 6, and said line produced east to the meander line of Lake Washington, including 2nd class shore lands adjacent thereto; Except the following described parcel: Beginning at a point of the north line of said above described parcel, which point is 335 feet easterly from the centerline of secondary State Highway No. 5 (Rainier Avenue); Thence southeasterly to a point on the south line of said parcel, which point is 175 feet easterly from the easterly margin of Rainier Avenue; Thence northerly along the easterly margin of said Rainier Avenue to an intersection with the north line of said tract; Thence easterly along the north line of said tract to the point of beginning. Parcel B: That portion of the tract designated "Park" and of vacated Lake Avenue in Bryn Mawr, according to the plat thereof, recorded in Volume 5 of Plats, Page 58, in DWT 20588003v5 0096962.000001 King County, Washington, and second class shorelands adjoining, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the easterly line of the Seattle-Renton and Southern Railway right of way with the produced north line of Lot 4, Block 6 of said plat; Thence southeasterly along said right of way line a distance of 152.76 feet to a point of curve; Thence along said curve to the right, having a radius of733.22 feet, an arc distance 180.79 feet to the true point of beginning; Thence continuing along said curve to the right an arc distance of 136.32 feet, more or less, to a point on a line which is parallel with and 300 feet north of the north line of Bowling Street (formerly Emerson Avenue); Thence east on said parallel line a distance of770 feet, more or less, lo the inner harbor line; Thence northwesterly along said harbor line to a point east of the beginning; Thence west a distance of 750 feet, more or less, to the beginning; Except therefrom any portion conveyed to the City of Renton by deed recorded under Recording Number 3871482. 2. City of Renton is about to conduct surveying, dredging, general engineering functions and water ingress and egress on the Property (the "Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging"). 3. Said surveying, dredging, engineering functions and water ingress and egress will be conducted (a) entirely within the shorelands area of the Property, except for incidental use of the upland area for pedestrian and vehicular access to the water, (b) in compliance with all federal, state, local and other permits required for the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, (c) in compliance with any easements and rights of way affecting the Property, (d) without adversely impacting any utilities located within such easements and rights of way, (e) without adversely impacting access to or use of the docks and boat slips on the Property, and (I) without undue disruption of the upland areas of the Property. No dredged material will be dewalered or disposed of on the Property. 4. The Owner(s) shall allow City of Renton, its employees and agents the right to ingress, egress and remain on the Property, in a reasonable manner, for the above mentioned reasons to work at all reasonable times. 5. In consideration for the grant made herein, the City of Renton shall indemnify, defend, protect and save harmless the Owner(s), his successors and assigns from and against any and all expenses, losses, actions, injuries, claims, damages, loss of or destruction of property, whatsoever, including attorneys' fees ("Claims"), suffered by the Owner(s), his successors, assigns, tenants, licensees and invitees caused by or arising out of said surveying, dredging, engineering functions and DWT 2058800JvS 0096962-00000! water ingress and egress in connection with the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging or caused by or arising out of City ofRenton's failure to comply with this Right of Entry; however, City of Renton shall not be so obligated to the extent such Claims are caused by the negligence of the Owner(s), his/her/their successors and assigns, tenants, licensees and invitees. City ofRenton's obligations under this Right of Entry shall not be limited by any worker's compensation, benefits or disability Jaws, and City of Renton waives any immunity that City of Renton may have under the Industrial Insurance Act, Title 5 I RCW, or similar workers' compensation, benefits or disability laws for the purposes of the indemnification provided in this section. The foregoing waiver was mutually negotiated by the parties as shown by City ofRenton's and Owner's initials: City of Renton: & :Z::: Owner: 711//1? 1/.f,{,bttt Ji 6. City of Renton shall upon completion of said surveyin~~:~ine~ring functions and water ingress and egress in connection with the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, promptly remove all equipment and debris and restore any affected upland portions of the Property as nearly as possible to the condition immediately prior to City ofRenton's entry thereon excepting any modifications or improvements made as a part of the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging. The terms of this agreement shall be binding on the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties and shall be a covenant running with the land until February 28, 2014, when this agreement shall automatically expire without further action required by the parties; provided however, that City of Renton 's obligations under this Right of Entry shall survive expiration of this Right of Entry. If City of Renton does not complete the Seaplane Base Maintenance Dredging, by February 28, 2014, City of Renton will immediately supply Owner with copies of all studies and information available to City of Renton at no cost. Owner: 1'f1.Alt: ~<'it<{ Q. ~&wftv Max Nathan, Jr. as Exe6utor of the Estate of William Colacurcio, Jr. DWT 20588003v5 0096962-000001 City of Renton: STATEOFLOUISIANA ) 'vAArsiJ )SS CQUNT¥ OF {it21..·vASS ) On this q'l"!: day of ]:ot>~<..r~ , 20Jj, before me personally appeared Max Nathan, Jr .. as Executor of the Estate b William Colacurcio, Jr. to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledge that he signed the same as his free and voluntary act and in the capacity and for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. under my hand and official seal the day and year last above written. Printed name Notary Public in and for the State of Louisiana, residing at: Afe>,J dtltldftv~ L6u1s,11...,A City and State' My appointment expires :,,,,/-171b de .. ./J-L ERIC M. SCHORR NOTARY P(JBUC-LSBA NO. 28218 PARISH OF ORLEANS STATE OF LOUISIANA MY COMMISSION IS FOR LIFE DWf 2058800Jv5 0096962-000001 f!LED 12 tiOV .,5 ~ II; 2:, K\t;'.j COUN i Y SUPERIOR COUIH Cl.ERK . ,SEA11LE.WA IN 11IE SUPERIOR COURT FOR TIIE STATE OF WASHINGTON COUN1Y OF KING IN RE 11IE ESTATE OF WILLIAM COLACURCIO, JR. DECEASED NO: 12-4-06186-3 SEA LETTERS TESTAMENTARY {LTRTS) The last will of the above named decedent was duly exhibited, proven and filed on November 5, 2012. It appears in and by said will that: MAX NA THAN, JR. is named Executor(s) and by order of this court is authorized to execute said will according to law. WITNESS my band and seal of said Court: November 5, 2012. STATE OF WASHINGTON) County of King ) · or Court Clerk I, BARBARA MINER, Clerl<oftbe Superior Court oftbe State of Washington, for the County of King, do hereby certify Iha! I have compared the furegoing copy with the original instrumellt as the same appear, on file and of record in my office, and that the same is a true and perfect transcript of said original and of the whole thereof IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my band and affixed the Seal of said Superior Court at my office at Seattle on this date NOV 9 5 2012 ~---°"' B . , Deputy Clede • NOT OFFlCW. WITHOUT SEAL• RCW 11.28.140; 11.28.280 L:\ftmns\cashicJs\downrown cashlers\Lotl.er.; TestllillCnta,y-!ill in SCOMIS code: LTRTS rovis<d: 03/01 ------------·--.. ···--------------------------------'---+----+----'-a ~-'i"' i: i' -. ' >1i ~~ ~ ~ !I ~ ... · ... ,_ 3i a ,. 0 ,, li -'l -', j,;§ ~c. 1, _, ~-.: s . t ' ,;;::: I S::; l_ ~ -' ' ' ' I ; ' l ' • ; ~ ;i.;;-I _;~~ ·!:: ~~ s, .8~ ~2 -· ~'>; ~; ---~! ,! ,, _!';~ ,, -l 1~ ,; B ' • ' I " ijl :;I ' .!.!' ·~i7 I 'I s/ ~' ·I ~I I ' I ' ·+ • ;i ~' I ~:S,:rl ~Y~i'£ >i';/lt,'l,l~f IN C•ff .. l)< ll?~SS CIIS< ~.'IJ 1'1,0,CN P-'~' IIIL~ S'J'l""•C£ ~,ri, A..C S. <I 5'.. Ull>I NG!11kM: 1-'&•U It USIING 12i$!1J1.ei!: F.:v"(l Jiff !/:" flUM. C 15 !.JJ,~ !i(JR-·~~l•lf: c,sr.,t. U97JM.09 FOOi/() 10/i] 5C,',Lf ·-,. 500 ~ ""' ~~srs t:F S!•~,,,,~, 1$ ,,,..,"lt,/11· ~,.:we •, I><( C(NIXRUN£ ~ !kr RLl'lll'Ar ,. \ .... j''rnl s,o.,. /,'.<UJ/111 YlQN/TY A.UP NOT 10 SC,',LE INDEX IN SECnON 7 & !8, TZJN, R5!, W.M. () 0 Q 0 w .0 0 0 0 D "" ~R=~= ... ,=f~'l';~=,s=:_~=~:.=~~=,=··,_=:~;;~:=vi=-=._:"= .. .-t_=·-.,=;,=;}=;;=,.=.====;-;==========R=f=c=,r=o=;=D=o=~=-F=R=~::N=u.::~=~=N-E::Y=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=·===;-::!e=· :-:1==,=,=~=-,=,~,-,=~:=.,=::=-.= .. =.-:-1~ ' ~·« ··,:,.J.V I'·'::, ., ... /)(, --~==< REN TON AIRPORT I ~f[Hf;tj:~/Z~~~ CE:l:~=/=;::o~·=~=~:-;=f~.=·=-==~=~~:C·c~~~~~=~-=-=·=-=-=~=~-=:=:=;=~~=~=·=~=:=::=.======'='="=]=:=;=;'='=·='='='='====T.=1=·;·=···=···;;=~-~='··=,·;=:·'=:;=~=:='.=:=.t=Jg=r=~=·=·~:=====~~-'_'_i~-~-~-~_:_"_~_~_,~J~ --=.-;-;t-. ''·.~- ' -,:_, ;, '·--~·: ~ CITY OF RENTON RECORD OF SURVEY REN TON AIRPORT 1ND£X W stcnoo '7 & 18, T2JN. RX, W.M. fl~'ll,IJ ~~ ~R!2' l'(L '4<'!i)3.SJ ~9.;,; -----, .1.1~11,H£;t/JJ.1Hlftll ,,-"."\~~c-. ro\x (~;:,~,~~, 1l!N', I '"~··,· -..• -.lfll' 1t'lf'A:1nc CO'll I ~0-'ii,'<'~;: ;;,,,; : I -----· ---- .) ) :) J J .· .. ' '\ \·, ~ ·-:.'., ~-.. ,., .--::.... -. ·-• ........ t) JND(,'( IN st.CTI~ l & i6. T2JN, f?5f, W.1,1. fA5fMfNI5 \ A"8ffMf"NTS \ RIGifTS R'SIBICIIQNS \ l[ASfS· P[R PAQF/C NQ.9TH\\:fST nnr COYPANY QRQFR NO 321290 I !<IC/•·~ ,..,_;5)~·~,;;:;,, [J;;/l'!~t .:;.oiA~•.:£ ("C"";,. "'"·"'•~ff,,_,; ,i <>v~ pq •re.....,;,.~~ M'!,(,;;;,-,2sni;1 •••1 ,_ 19·; co;,,.~,~'" 11!:rr'l!h:;r 12i "'=''~ ,,,;,· f•::,~·, 1 nrcr<i,~ m,,::,,.~s,:~ ,wr r,srurt.1 ,~<,ii£ C!,aC,L;;J, "':!.•'•L·,(H (S:) 5T ~,c,. R • ~,cc,,;;:~; NV,,~i:.V ;J1~•r;, N.r If ri•• •tF~CnUH[ Lr.:'>M'< r~;. .... J ur,rq,~ 1p_._~,,,,5s,:s c,v.,..t~r ,~A~'1:£ "'-'Zl ~oa;'<l;" P'J•[~ ,t !.JC.Cr CCJIJ"''" •CC?<~:,;; lll'U;;~ H"-...,l. Si~!l~~C· !. r;;:1 l:»"Rtt. t.·:;rr 9-'=. < 1'IC"1': tp,•,!OJ.~,._ I•!!"("' i;;i•~ir, "~~rs;._,,, _..,.r~ oc :/-"'r co.,~,~, ,,,-;pc"': N•'"o<~ 2•:Jrc:.. gnc .... ..,;• ,. ;;;,, ,;~uo1 tU• !;.)I, S'-0'"' "'~"~ ,·Jr ~.~t•·z, , nc:r,,, .R,ss.,,.;Y-., :,,i::.-:,,:i: r, r,r.A IX c,r,,:,. z.r~ 0~-~•NC( ~JV!!f.~ )~!i~ .• v,, i. !>JQ 100' ..-,;t S,,.,;, •1 !>-1~"< ,-11,r.,i r~;;:.,..ur U5!~><D BY J. C ... n:~ ... >:) .. u~, '" ~,,u ~,,;;,;i:w; w~u~ ,~~t7J,, ,,,~,~ .. _ ,~i, aNr.os or c;;c;:;:~r• flJ1 I-•r::.;,t:, ~s !1-;:,,,., 1 ~,re~ "Rmsu,st:.,-,,sr"(''' ~~,.,,rrr c,:, o. ll"J./~,,. ~ "'-"'".:,.,,,. c:,p ifCC0,'1;11.~ ~cYJ!q :;~!•~!!. ~~~"-<. ,,J, A:i !.>10"'' •I'?,!;, lO:.ac,, ~,,;,-R:>'c~ ~ fl.fC1'lt~ '11,.,.':l,(,S~;,· CAS::w(:a r c:..1Nru ,,,, ,Y SCAP:f. A jl(,>,"("''· ::I.'!? ~fC'O'<c'l><C r;c·~;f~ ;61,.,,;, "" I, ,~)• •> ~--o,,., 1 cct,-..;..: ;r,.,"-',~i::.--, C•S!wr~, c.-,,,,._ 1"" c,r-OE sor:i.c • .~,~.:-,-.1 re,,~ ,.:.:c...,::,1/~ ,,,:u;;i~./1<)11'. "'' 11. ,,1, A$ S,.QW lit l,.GPO £•5!:Y(~f i;.:,.i.r.c. sr;:r r;;-.. u,,·.~~.::~ /;!CQ"fJ;~; ~Ji.t,,i.'i-~>v,;.,, . .,,,_. •. ;~<~ •~ SHO""' It c • ..,,. l»F'f l:•!t11!r.t UA~f[!.$TA1! Cl'" ••s.<--,,St,:,/ ~,cDP.:,,s ~~"lltJt J•t>:'•n . .,,, • ,,,~ ;5 5'"'"" ,, 51.e>"f , • .,,,,,,, ,~,~,u-5r,:r c,r ;.,:;,..;,ere--, ~,~,:.,N~ 1/t/·,~<.~·Jt;i,~:. "'" 9. -~•.J HS-..()11'' 'J 5!.CFi (<Se•J!l,1 a~,,,,c-~"" ,;,-w,s,-,~;;1,;-. ~;;cr:,;,c.,~-~ ,.,u,,.;.,. 1,,-.,n, 1,,r l ;;•o •S s,,o,.-... "-s,c,,;: ,,x.,c,r ,;,;,.Mff. Sl•/f GI~•;>,>;/,-. R/CC..Ca\> ,1,YC(I! .•1~;-;J•, .,,i, l '5•1 H s,o••. ri ~ere r,;c:,,r.,r GP,-_,·,rt· ~Ui< fY ~<$1,•1~:<,e .. ,,~~;:,;·,:; ~·,,,ic~ ;;5~;J2 . .t.<.• 1 ·~ ;,;a..,. ,i. ~""r f,,,.,i.~r "'-'-~r..·t sr, ~ « Ms~.,i.,~ ~;:c;;•;,."; ~--"~CJ> .!]\~U• . ..,,;: I. 1'J!J_ •5 ;,,~- ~.~2.?!f:,~"J~\.',s..1.~ra, .:· 1f~~~ ~c·y,r;, .!mm ~-~~ t· .. ,_1•2 ;a, Sr.¢-"t" (•Sf,.fN; ~~,.,,,,r,s;-,,.: r ~,s,,w;r;~ uc~:,,i,.~ ,~v,ic:q ~J>NJI. =• ,. ,1,~ •5 s,,,;-,..., . ~ •. ~7"s~:,r~~~,,,.;,;~~~ ·.·,\ .. , ~f:::,;,:,:.'IC ,;,.•.Y!e• ~lj,)2)>;_, ... -v I •• A$ SriC',H\, ,. M !)./)Pf 0"1:.,(~' 1,~1~r:~;~ ~;~.;J}";,,., ,ik __ 2, i,::,;,r c.<m,c.,•r : ~;~~ 1~.j;;~ '~~;'.,-{Z,,cus· ·~,-'.~:2. ;SS><f.i''-"i .. 2J ~OX £•Sfi,tvr ~V>1'1;£ !T .. °:!: ~ •·•~~,.-er,;,, ~::~l;~;:;;:~;:• : .. n. 'i!O "£~""°""' i""JiR·fl&!~ ~•Y7, :;,- N~; rJ1< r~ ·~gr,' .. t~' .. ,~.\.' : i5 n.~~;-<1/C ll'A~U.s:J"b<-< l:l'.i;LJ'!~T f;0f-[~t~lJ?16t~l>1!.~{;;;)°~~-~ ~LJl?t;li]if{~Iit?;tY.tr,;;,' 5C1'Jfs:O!U'-l;F <II!• SO·~•"'·· · . .,, :1:1"-o}~~Q.~f~; . • ~li·~rt(. ~,( ~,c~.:: rHCPl•C:,,( .... , ri.;(>-'•P~ :{~';'.~ H.'<lC/fS .1.JJ?s•O. 5(~;,'<1/H H '1•.! :,_:.. ~t.:·~ii~~giiz!~~~~-:· ,s~e:, ,IJ_ ; -..iR;l.:,;,,,r, ,,_..,5£1> J/c~·,~: _,_,v :a ,;o •• 'S'rC•"I . ~. or..rq ,.,,~,m '7J.N~! ~""' "''" C•S!..,~,C: S!"!f! iH'l>.C ~ffe4'J,.~(, 1;~\1!1(;/·79-(}}~C?!I. l(;~~ARr ;;;, ,;79 ·~ 5~~ .... JO 5[11t~ (A'.iioJ[.,T ;·· ... C<l<N!!f f~rn.i,;~,;-L .. £'1if.~ S.•~~ D-!'~,C'' ~Uull-;J,.:.~ '·\.'"IIC"·flC~tMl!I. ,,,, .. \0. •i;~'< A$ )k~1,,." "' • .,_ .. . J1 •=rvr,,r-Ri:<f'-',Y oo· o,~~Gi"f-q[c,fl;;,Nc ,~i: ai~ffl.~!''[;~~.;~.~~;';'.;~~.~CJ.~ v}~ ,;,r,;d;l1)<11a w"!CA·:rl~ro. \l.,:.<.,_qiq •• .19~! '101."=·~ J&: '""'!"P" li~t-'SC :)". c,.,~::cs-P.G~~;;,i:; lh[ ,~."I!~,..., 11".'..L~f .. ,~,...,.~;u,,. , .-.:r• /1t:'-f{H ~ .. ·,,.-w.,,i S.,::, Ul..A :1;:,~0~1,;.MMf'ic.~~!ltll~, t[~;U!fi~ ;~, 1n~ 1,, •,~'(,::.c,,-rrR.~.r~ . ~.~r~:r:g~ m~ ; 1 '1!:~C-.~~ l<'l<if!~.'7J.l~•:6!!, ·=~~1 • ,s ~·;;.~,· ·• -. . ,·:·.: ... ~ ~,s,.,,e:oo,,!~:-,.,~ 110•r rl,i,r,;:,1 ~g;;~f.,/~~Rsc;;,V",c~1.\c~. ·~·c •S !,~, ,·.·.;-• ., -;·: " i>tw··rJf.Ril!•~'"i~ ,.,,.;;.,;, us, c.<~ r«< .-c1,1ss,--..,. ·=f ··~l'O!I' -.:~ ~=:~~.~~.m-\t~3~~·{ .. 1~9;,w ,;g~~-,,,,: ,r,:~.'l:;R 1.t,•>X>!<, •~~.:I. W. /]>! ;iw:r~;~?;:;~·h-~<;'"· ViY .. ,w ;•~:;g,_~j~mt;~~,;i~:,~~1:.t( ISi] !..-:\il! >.,q;Mr """'"'~" <J .::~tll>> P,::-,15 ':>11 IHC'I/"'' IX ,;,;,;,~ere,, ·.. •t::O•l'-".•/G' 1(~11.•(ij, l<t:11'-.lll r 1•. 19M .. ,; ~~""' .. <i ,u,f'I<!. llir:n,s re,, n,c sr~,i: er ~c,$-Jl,:10,. ... ~tcc,c:vr. .. ~u·,~,~ l<l'.al•ie, -'-'''-'UY,._ ,;1, ·,t,5 s,,,:..., ,~·:..,,'.'<•Jo:. R,~:.5 ~c,i "'~ n.:i Cl' ,,,.5~1,c•o.,· -"!:CC•O..,:: >1:,11g;-q )ii<•>~4, ,.,-o~ ! ISJ• >S s,,~.,r, \,s_r.<j.~q;.1. fi.WS t'Jl!'l,;'1'{; sr,r, r:, ·~,~·.,i:r-;.~ "f~c•c-~G :r~11-'£4. ~•M."<7. _,.•,r ,,. lJ!7 •s. s~:,,i-, ,.,i:. ,...,,'!:'f.<i.. 1u,,;rs r~ "'( !1Aff ()[ H~.·:~,i_.., ;!co,D'~,: .~:.i~dlq. ,1,«oi. ."l:M .. n !"~ . .., '"' ~.::;..,,-,;;-~·,, o.:rP 'CJ!< :11£ s•,rr c.-~-,~.~·c,:.w 'ltr~~o:K: "~y,;:~ ~!;,n "'"· "· '": .;" "'-'1SOC ;>R:Jl>C~rt. ~:,t P,;.., !• c,.;is11~ <Y , o:•r)~ ~-L•,o••l ~:-,;,,-J,q.;:, U/ !,.~ s,c:"" ,,A">S ro. fo> s~ORiJ ,.,.·~;: !~ R,c;,<' <;' !hi: s"IE c-· ,,,s..,,,:icw" .,,or, n«r _,,,,,r... . .r ""· "' -r,.,;: f'll°"'q,-y ~!lf::r., D£5:!lat~ ~~ :r t·ts ~"~· :,,, 1~:c ,:,-~,c·rHr ~.{:.~ urr~ ..,.. AJ1• p1;0,,·~'"'~ :i: "~ i,,.,r,rn:w C' ~s. c,;CUP>,,~1 "'1 "-"'PJ<.1:.,rN; or r,c i>," ~c,;,: . ...a me~ ThC ,,~11 er "'r •vB.•r 3" 'l.~,R.,.~ o,-,,f,c:; ,a >'»!" """ P~~nc.~ """c'" ,5 NJw o; ,.,, ili"l~ ,v, .. f-'<r ce,r;;;:, ~, ~-,,,~ !7 LIJ.'1';:SS Pe~'I .\H> U. ;;,~:,\.;Sf~!• (\.".'I ."!"ca C' ni·: .. r n;u,.,,5,,~·~:~; •c• r n:, >!~:>,. S,.,$ •t•r r< O,.',A'IA.~</)".£ M VAi!i~S llt'.'G-' "" BC J;>JS(l(;>f~ av• Pi;".'(.> t;F ,. ,,,. ::,~, lll1 cw~·,y c<::,w-,,cr: ~"':~ ~•r ~.:Jr <;~o;,~r:i:' ,~ r~;:_ G'rf!:£ ,:.· r'-,f cCtJ•Tr ~c'Vo•o<'! •,. ~;. P;;c:/'.;~rr u,1.r:no-x:,-:,! ,5 r,c.,or. ··,··:. ~I '""!J(O !!':~Cur ,.,.OL!"" ;~.,,s,,:""!G ;-!) • r,,,7!,! !•~rr.-. .,. <>s::,,Hrr u,,;1:;J'.J.5-<;,}(11-(!.j ,s f>'t""' .. ~LJJ "CV::l ~r:: .. c a«•,a.r ~ T'!.-sr,~~!O -;c: > "f~~•.! t.r,i, H lOSf (US!!. ~•-·= W•;'[N'IO•i' ~(5"""'"r cw;,.., ,:,, ;~c;::;r;; 1'VUH" 7M6'.)1;C5H '°';""_~ •. 1''1' '<·,, u ,r,sc / ·:, .. :, -., !.£5:iH. ~,,,., ~N,:-( ,~•HJ"'.~'5. "''="· ",. :imr~i sm~ :m~mit~~;~ twi_ -" •cc::,,~,~~ .,~,,,i:~ ~1Ci:9n!rn, sC'l!~"8!:~ ,,. ,!1'9?:r -~•~-~! """OCR, ~+l;?G§l•J9, 5£Ptt:•,<~ ~. 11?' .. •Eee<rG:N; ~UMF{R t·~~:;,o,..i . .I.Ji. y M:, ·r~· ;m::;~-;~ ~~~~:: t1~im~· t.1ir~~;~~;-t ,m l[c;,,;.-,,c NL'-'~" ~fh.'60~. O.C!,..~[R n·-t~!· ;~cg:;~ ~""°';i ~,1:10,.,1,,"~~"9!"P n. 1,~t• H l!~S!" ·•e, l!"S"!l'C .l';!!J'li :, ,_.,,t. .A ".. _': · F!C~;,<.~~ NW'<i~ ,n,~6,.:J> ..... ~-,u;, ,_. .:ii:c~.a:;.,.,·c ,,c"<'SC!f.!10~;,;r]JO, ~rm,Rl" :m. 111! ~~~B}E ~~:· :;p~::~~t'iW?",;a'f' ,,!, ~1i~111!·wttf j~t~(:; ~£C'fo.,'~~ .-.~Sf~ ·,-,;s,~:~r~.-""'f ,~. rti• ;~~;~i .w~m· ''"~r:;,i; '+,~ ~~:'·:~ll'.; iW~1~t~~~~r-s,iJ1~01.:~~~h.;? .. .- iliriG*i¥~*11:: ft2,J,t:m~~ r '-~tc;)'?!)!,,~ """r~ ~~~ )111~~ ~,,,,,~11> ,, 11~~ ,s.,?'o,,., su 1.J.? /;:, fr,J{ .. · ·.. ~WJ.f~~~/t{~-Jg:,~if'~ls't:.i":ll_''ft,u ··· .. •i·c:>"...,.,; '"4'!CR. ~:X,2~>:•l<. fi:.3q:JMI~ J. ljliC :m:~~ ::;::"~c. :;:.~·1111;i ·:~~~~~:.· :.~ •ic,.,.~s ,.,,,.,~l'-·.1:,01~,J!~. ,••:;:"'" 1. ,;n H ~~b;,':I ·', :Es'Jr~,~--~= '<!:-0/1:,,;,:;' ''""""~ ~J:r.nw~. r;[ _/~"'~ ,. •HJ ~rro-;:,.,.: """a'A· 11,n:or.~. ,.o-.(,,N< ,~ ·~~J H S'<J~H P. l,""1:CO'l~!D l~,~~::..a!." L\Cl". 'l'~~CJ 0/ ;~NvOIJS ao H'll.X~S r.; s;cu;,r, c~:r~rs~ o., P!'R.!C-'')' o~,:,,r.;,-y ~;! f',J.LrD """' .!<•J "~oP.:RI' µI{! ~,::Hl:5 Or r{M~:!I ,; ~: .. ;;,•,r r;>•,! •·,ti,.>!S A, ri,c l'.xl>>'IA~D'-1 W r..-. 1,~.., l_j C () C) w 0 0 ·, ) 11111111111 11111 2006122000 9 4 ~ . Y OF RENTON LE 62 .ee 981 OF 131 I 21/Zee& 11:53 KING COUNTY, I.IA Plea,eprudor information WASHINGTON STATE RECORDER'S Cover Sheet RCW65.04J Document Title(s) (or transactions contained therein): (all areas applicable to your document must be filled in) 1. ~ ua/ic.. /4&/5 lea 6e.. ),/o. ~ ... ~~,._~::.A=qu.ooA.ll.-12,.,c,._ _____ _ 3. 4. -------------- Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference #'s on page _J_ of document Grantor(s) (Las\ narne~rst name, il}i,tials} l. WM ti'i rljiM Ve.pf "..,; N,dvea) , csR..11:<es:,,W'2ii:i.wc<1,,1;C5.;.;a_ _____ _ 2-~-----=------------' ~------------~ Additional names on page _J_ of document. Additional names on page __ of document. Assessor's Property Tax ParceUAccount Number D Assessor Tax # not yet assil!!!l'd · 07a30S:Cft;(X7 The Auditor/Recorder will rely on the information provided on the form. The staff will not read the document to verify the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein. I am requesting an emergency nonstandard recording for an additional fee as provided. in RCW 36.18.010 .. I understand that the recording processing requirements may cover up or otherwise obscure some part of the text of the original document. ----~----------------Signature of Requesting Party ) STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DOUG SUTHERLAND, Commissioner of Public Lands AQUATIC LANDS LEASE (Commercial) TABLE OF.CONTENTS LAG-06-019 SECTION PAGE BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................. 1 I. PROPERTY ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Property Defined .................................................................................... ;..................... I 1.2 Survey, Maps, and Plans.: ........................................................................................... 1 1.3 Inspection ..................................................................................................................... I 2. USE ........................................................................................................................................ 2 2.1 Pennitted Use .............................................................................................................. 2 2 .2 Restrictions on Use ..................................................................................................... 2 2.3 Coilfonnance with Laws ............................................................................................. 2. 2.4 Liens and Encumbrances ............................................................................................. 2 3. TERM ................. : ........ : ......................................................................................................... 2 3.1 Tenn ·Defined ............................ : ..................... : ..................................................... ,.: ... 2 3 .2 Renewal of the Lease ............. ;, ................................................................................... 3 3.3 Delay .in Delivery of Possession ................................................................................. 3 3.4 End of Tenn ................................................................................................................. 3 3.5 Hold Over ............................................................................... ; .................................... 3 4. RENT .................................................................................................................................... .3 4.1 Annual Rent ................................................................................................................ 3 4.2 Payment Place ....................................................................................... , ..................... 3 4.3 Adjustment Based on Use ........................................................................................... 4 4.4 Rent Adjustments for Water-Dependent Uses ............................................................ 4 4.5 Rent Adjustment Procedures ........... , ............................ : ................ : ............................. 4 Fonn Date: May, 2005 Commercial Lease 22,A90012 5. OTHER EXPENSES ............................................................................................................ .4 5. I Utilities ........................................................................................................................ 5 5.2 Taxes and Assessments ............................................................................................... 5 5.3 Right to Contest ........................................................................................................... 5 5.4 Proof of Payment ........................................................................................................ 5 5.5 Failure to Pay ................ : ............................................................................................. 5 6. LATE PAYMENTS AND OTHER CHARGES .................................................................. .5 6.1 Late Charge ............... , ................................................................................................. 5 6.2 Interest Penalty for Past Due Rent and Other Sums Owed ......................................... 5 . 6.3 No Accord and Satisfaction ........................................................................................ 5 6.4 No Counterclaim, Setoff, or Abatement of Rent. .................................... , .................. 6 7. IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................................ 6 7 .1 Existing Improvements ............................................................................................... 6 7.2 Tenant-Owned Improvements .................................................................................... 6 7.3 Construction ................................................................................................................ 6 7.4 Removal ......................................................... : ............................................................ 6 7.5 Unauthorized Improvements ................................................................. , ..................... 7 8. ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY/RISK ALLOCATION ................................................... 7 8. I Definition .................................................................................................................... 7 8.2 Use of Hazardous Substances ..................................................................................... 7 8.3 Current Conditions, Duty of Utmost Care, and Duty to Investigate ........................... 7 8.4 Notification and Reporting ......................................................................................... 8 8.5 Indemnification ........................................................................................................... 9 8.6 Cleanup ...................................................................................................................... 10 8. 7 · Sampling by State, Reimbursement, and Split Samples ........................................... 10 8.8 Reservation of Rights ................................................................................................ 11 9. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING ................................................................................ 11 9.1 State Consent Required ............................................................................................. 11 9.2 Event ofAssignment ................................................................................................. 12 9.3 Rent Payments Following Assignment ..................................................................... 12 · 9.4 Tenns of Subleases ................................................................................................... 12 9 .5 Routine Subleasing of Moorage Slips ....................................................................... 13 10. INDEMNITY, FINANCIAL SECURITY, INSURANCE ................................. , ............... .13 10.1 Indemnity .................................................................................................................. 13 10.2 Financial Security ..................................................................................................... 13 10.3 Insurance ................................................................................................................... 14 10.4 State's Acquisition ofinsurance ................................................................................ 16 I 0.5 Self Insurance ............................................................................................................ 16 11. MAINTENANCE AND REP AIR .......................................................................... ; ........... .17 1 I. I State's Repairs ............................................................................... ; ........................... 17 11.2 Tenant's Repairs, Alteration, Maintenance and Replacement .................................. I 7 12. DAMAGE ORDESTRUCTION ....................... ; ................................................................. 17 13. CONDEMNATION ............................................................................................................. 18 13.1 Definitions ................................................... , ................................................... ; ......... 18 Fonn Date: May, 2005 ii Commercial Lease 22-A90012 · l 13.2 Effect of Taking ........................................................................................................ 18 13.3 Allocation of Award ................................................................................................. 18 14. DEFAULT AND REMEDIES ............................................................................................. 19 15. ENTRYBYSTATE ............................................................................................................ 20 16. DISCLAIMER OF QUIET ENJOYMENT ......................................................................... 20 17. NOTICE ............................................................................................................................... 20 18. MISCELLANEOUS ............................................................................................................ 21 18.1 Authority ................................................................................................................... 21 18.2 Successors and Assigns ............................................................................................. 21 18.3 Headings ................................................................................................................... 21 18.4 Entire Agreement ...................................................................................................... 21 18.5 Waiver ....................................................................................................................... 21 18.6 Cumulative Remedies ............................................................................................... 21 18.7 Time is of the Essence .............................................................................................. 21 18.8 Language ................................................................................................................... 21 18.9 Invalidity .................................................................................................................... 21 18.10 Applicable Law and Venue ....................................................................................... 22 18.11 Recordation ............................................................................................................... 22 18.12 Modification .............................................................................................................. 22 EXHIBIT A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND SURVEY EXHIBIT B: PLAN OF OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Fonn Dille: May, 2005 · iii Commercial Lease 22-A90012 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DOUG SUTHERLAND, Commissioner of Public Lands AQUATIC LANDS LEASE (Commercial) AQUATIC LANDS LEASE NO. 22-A900I2 THIS LEASE is made by and between the STATE OF WASHINGTON, acting through the Department of Natural Resources ("State"), and the CITY OF RENTON, a government agency/entity, ("Tenant"). BACKGROUND Tenant desires to lease the aquatic lands commonly known as Lake Washington, which is a harbor area located in King County, Washington, from State, and State desires to lease the property to Tenant pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Lease. THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: SECTION! PROPERTY 1.1 Property Defined. State leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from State the real property described in Exhibit A together with all the rights of State, if any, to improvements on and easements benefiting the Property, but subject to the exceptions and restrictions set forth in this Lease (collectively the "Property''). This Lease is subject to all valid interests of third parties noted in the records of King County, or on file in the office of the Commissioner of Public Lands, Olympia, Washington; rights of the public under the Public Trust Doctrine or federal navigation servitude; and treaty rights of Indian Tribes. Not included in this Lease are any right to harvest, collect or damage any natural resource, including aquatic life or living plants, any water rights, or any mineral rights, including any right to excavate or withdraw sand, gravel, or other valuable materials. State reserves the right to grant easements and other land uses on the Property to others when the easement or other land uses will not unreasonably interfere with Tenant's Permitted Use. 1.2 Survey, Maps, and Plans. In executing this Lease, State is relying on the surveys, plats, diagrams, and/or legal descriptions provided by Tenant. Tenant is not relying upon and State is not making any representations about any survey, plat, diagram, and/or legal description provided by State. 1.3 Inspection, State makes no representation regarding the condition of the Property, improvements located on the Property, the suitability of the Property for Tenant's Permitted Use, Form Date: May, 2005 I of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 • compliance with governmental laws and regulations, availability of utility rights, access to the Property or the existence of hazardous substances on the Property. Tenant has inspected the Property and accepts it "AS IS." SECTION 2 USE 2.1 Permitted Use. Tenant shall use the Property for seaplane moorage (the "Permitted Use"), and for no other pwpose. The Permitted Use is described or shown in greater detail in Exhibit B, the terms and conditions of which are incorporated by reference and made a part of this Lease. The parties agree that this is a water-dependent use. 2.2 Restrictions on Use. Tenant shall not cause or permit any damage to natural resources on the Property. Tenant shall also not cause or permit any filling activity to occur on the Property. This prohibition includes any deposit ofrock, earth, ballast, refuse, garbage, waste matter (including chemical, biological or toxic wastes), hydrocarbons, any other pollutants, or other matter in or on the Property, except as approved in writing by State. Tenant shall neither commit nor allow waste to be committed to or on the Property. If Tenant fails to comply with all or any of the restrictions on the use of the Property set out in this Subsection 2.2, State shall notify Tenant and provide Tenant a reasonable time to take all steps necessary to remedy the failure. If Tenant fails to do so in a timely manner, then State may take any steps reasonably necessary to remedy this failure. Upon demand by State, Tenant shall pay all costs of such remedial action, including but not limited to the costs of removing and disposing of any material deposited improperly on the Property. This section shall not in any way limit Tenant's liability under Section 8, below. The prohibitions in this section against damage to natural resources, filling, deposition of any unapproved materials, and waste, shall also apply to protect state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the Property from any of Tenant's activities related to Tenant's occupation of the Property. All obligations imposed by this section on Tenant to cure any violation of the prohibited activities in this section shall also extend to state-owned aquatic lands adjacent to the Property when the violation arose from Tenant's activities related to Tenant's occupation of the Property. 2.3 Conformance with Laws. Tenant shall, at all times, keep current and comply with all conditions and terms of any permits, licenses, certificates, regulations, ordinances, statutes, and other government rules and regulations regarding its use or occupancy of the Property. 2.4 Liens and Encumbrances. Tenant shall keep the Property free and clear of any liens and encumbrances arising out of or relating to its use or occupancy of the Property. SECTION 3 TERM 3.1 Term Defined. The term of this Lease is thirty (30) years (the ''Term"), beginning on the I '1 day of April, 2006 (the "Commencement Date"), and ending on the 31st day of March, 2036 (the "Termination Date"), unless tenninated sooner under the terms of this Lease . . Fonn Daie: May, 200S 2of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 3.2 Renewal of the Lease. Tenant shall have the option to renew this Lease for zero (0) additional tenns ofN/ A years each. The initial Tenn of this Lease, and all renewal tenns, shall not exceed thirty (30) years in the aggregate. Tenant shall exercise this option by providing written notice of its election to renew at least ninety (90) days prior to the Tennination Date of the initial Tenn or any renewal tenn of this Lease. Tenant shall not be entitled to renew ifit is in default under the terms of this Lease at the time the option to renew is exercised. The tenns and conditions ef any renewal tenn shall be the same as set forth in this Lease, except that rent shall be recalculated, the required amounts of financial security may be revised, and provisions dealing with hazardous waste or impacts to natural resources may be changed at the time of the renewal. · 3.3 Delay in Delivery of Possession. If State, for any reason whatsoever, cannot deliver possession of the Property to Tenant on the Commencement Date, this Lease shall not be void or voidable, nor shall State be liable to Tenant for any loss or damage resulting from the delay in delivery of possession. In such event, the date of delivery of possession shall be the Commencement Date for all purposes, including the payment of rent. In the event Tenant takes possession before the Commencement Date, the date of possession shall be the Commencement Date for all purposes, including the payment of rent. If the Lease Term commences earlier or later than the scheduled Commencement Date, the Termination Date shall be adjusted accordingly. 3.4 End of Term. Upon the expiration or tennination of the Tenn or extended tenn, as applicable, Tenant shall surrender the Property to State in the same or better condition as on the Commencement Date, reasonable wear and tear excepted. 3.5 Hold Over. If Tenant remains in possession of the Property after the Termination Date, the occupancy shall not be an extension or renewal of the Term. The occupancy shall be a month-to-month tenancy, on terms identical to the tenns of this Lease, which may be tenninated by either party on thirty (30) days written notice. The monthly rent during the holdover shall be the same rent which would be due if the Lease were still in effect and all adjustments in rent were made in accordance with its terms. If State provides a notice to vacate the Property in anticipation of the termination of this Lease or at any time after the Termination Date and Tenant fails to do so within the time set forth in the notice, then Tenant shall be .a trespasser and shall owe the State all amounts due under RCW 79.01.760 or other applicable law. SECTION 4 RENT 4.1 Ann1-al Rent. Until adjusted as set forth below, Tenant shall pay to State an annual rent of Two Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Seven Dollars and Ninety One Cents ($2,277.91) related to the water-dependent use. The annual rent, as it currently exists or as adjusted or modified (the "Annual Rent"), shall be due and payable in full on or before the Commencement Date and on or before the same date of each year thereafter . .4.2 Payment Place. Payment is to be made to Financial Management Division, 1111 Washington St SE, PO Box 47041, Olympia, WA98504-7041. Form Dal!': May, 200S 3 of25 Commercial Lease 22·A90012 4.3 Adjustment Based on Use. Annual Rent is based on Tenant's Permitted Use of the Property, as described in Section 2 above. If Tenant's Permitted Use changes, the Annual Rent shall be adjusted as appropriate for the changed use. 4.4 Rent Adjustments for Water-Dependent Uses. (a) Inflation Adjustment. State shall adjust water-dependent rent annually pursuant to RCW 79.105.010 -902, except in those years in which the rent is revalued under Subsection 4.4(b) below. This adjustment shall be effective on the anniversary of the Commencement Date. (b) Revaluation of Rent. State shall, at the end of the first four-year period of the Term, and at the end of each subsequent four-year period, revalue the water-dependent Annual Rent in accordance with RCW 79.105.010-.902. (c) Rent Cap. After the initial year's rent is determined under Subsection 4.1, rent may increase by operation of Subsection 4.4(a) or 4.4(b). If application of the statutory rent formula for water-dependent uses would result in an increase in the rent attributable to such uses of more than fifty percent (50%) in any one year, the actual increase implemented in such year shall be limited to fifty percent (50%) of the then-existing rent, in accordance with RCW 79.105.260. The balance of the increase determined by the formula shall be deferred to subsequent years and added to the next and subsequent years' rental increases until the full amount of the increase is lawfully implemented. 4.5 . Rent Adjustment Procedures. (a) Notice of Rent Adjustment. Notice of any adjustments to the Annual Rent that are allowed by Subsection 4.4(b) shall be provided to Tenant in writing no later than ninety (90) days after the anniversary date o~_the Lease. (b) Procedures on Failure to make Timely Adjustment. In the event the State fails to provide the notice required in Subsection 4.5(a), it shall be prohibited from collecting any adjustments to rent only for the year in which it failed to provioe notice. No failure by State to adjust Annual Rent pursuant to Subsection 4.S(a) shall affect the State's right to establish Annual Rent for a subsequent lease year as if the missed or waived adjustment had been implemented. The State may adjust, bill, and collect Annual Rent prospectively as if any missed or waived adjustments had actually been implemented. This includes the implementation of any inflation adjustment and any rent revaluations that would have been authorized for previous lease years. · SECTION 5 OTHER EXPENSES During the Term, Tenant shall pay the following additional expenses: Fonn Date: May, 2005 4 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 5.1 Utilities. Tenant shall pay all fees charged for utilities in connection with the use and occupancy of the Property, including but riot limited to electricity, water, gas, and telephone service. 5.2 Taxes and Assessments. Tenant shall pay all taxes (including leasehold excise taxes), assessments, and other governmental charges, of any kind whatsoever, applicable or attributable to the Property, Tenant's leasehold interest, the improvements, or Tenant's use and enjoyment of the Property. 5.3 Right to Contest. Tenant may, in good faith, contest any tax or assessment at its sole cost and expense. At the request of State, Tenant shall furnish reasonable protection in the form of a bond or other security, satisfactory to State, against any loss or liability by reason of such contest. 5.4 Proof of Payment. Tenant shall, if required by State, furnish to State receipts or other appropriate evidence establishing the payment of any amounts required to be paid under the terms of this Lease. 5.5 Failure to Pay. If Tenant fails to pay any of the amounts due under this Lease, State may pay the amount due, and recover its cost in accordance with the provisions of Section 6. SECTION 6 LATE PAYMENTS AND OTHER CHARGES 6.1 Late Charge. If any rental payment is not received by State within ten (10) days of the date due, Tenant shall pay to State a late charge equal to four percent (4%) of the amount of the payment or Fifty Dollars ($50), whichever is greater, to defray the overhead expenses of State incident to the delay. 6.2 Interest Penalty for Past Due Rent and Other Sums Owed. If rent is not paid within thirty (30) days of the date due, then Tenant shall, in addition to paying the late charges determined under Subsection 6.1, above, pay interest on the amount outstanding at the rate of one percent (1%) per month until paid. If State pays or advances any amounts for oron behalf of Tenant, including but not limited to leasehold taxes, taxes, assessments, insurance premiums, costs of removal and disposal of unauthorized materials pursuant to Section 2 above, costs of removal and disposal of improvements pursuant to Section 7 below, or other amounts not paid when due, Tenant shall reimburse State for the amount paid or advanced and shall pay interest on that amount at the rate of one percent (1%) per month from the date State notifies Tenant of the payment or advance. · 6.3 No Accord and Satisfaction. If Tenant pays, or State otherwise receives, an amount less than the full amount then due, State may apply such payment as it elects. In the absence of an election, the payment or receipt shall be applied first to accrued taxes which State has advanced or may be obligated to pay, then to other amounts advanced by State, then to late charges and accrued interest, and then to the earliest rent due. State may accept any payment in any amount without prejudice to State's right to recover the balance of the rent or pursue any other right or remedy. No endorsement or statement on any check, any payment, or any letter accompanying any check or payment shall constitute or be construed as accord and satisfaction. Fonn Date: May, 2005 5 of25 Coll)Jilercial Lease 22-A90012 6.4 No Counterclaim, Setoff, or Abatement of Rent. Except as expressly set forth elsewhere in this Lease, rent and all other sums payable by Tenant pursuant to this Lease shall be paid without the requirement that State provide prior notice or demand, and shall not be subject to any counterclaim, setoff, deduction, defense or abatement. SECTION 7 IMPROVEMENTS 7.1 Existing Improvements. On the Commencement Date, the following improvements are located on the Property: floating dock, and approximately six (6) galvanized steel pilings ("Existing Improvements"). The improvements are not owned by State. 7.2 Tenant-Owned Improvements. So long as this Lease remains in effect, Tenant shall retain ownership of all Existing Improvements, and all authorized improvements and trade fixtures it may place on the Property (collectively "Tenant-Owned Improvements"). Tenant- Owned Improvements shall not include any construction, reconstruction, alteration, or addition to any Unauthorized Irn.provements as defined in Subsection 7.5 below. No Tenant-Owned Improvements shall be placed on the Property without State's prior written consent. 7 .3 Construction. Prior to any construction, alteration, replacement, removal or major repair of any improvements (whether State-Owned or Tenant-Owned), Tenant shall submit to State plans and specifications which describe the proposed activity. Construction shall not commence until State has approved those plans and specifications in writing and Tenant has obtained a performance and payment bond in an amount equal to 125% of the estimaJed cost of construction. The performance and payment bond shall be maintained until the costs of construction, including all laborers and material persons, have been paid in full. State shall have sixty (60) days in which to review the proposed plans and specifications. The plans and specifications shall be deemed approved and the requirement for State's written consent shall be treated as waived, unless State notifies Tenant otherwise within the sixty (60) days. Upon completion of construction, Tenant shall promptly provide State with as-built plans and specifications. State's consent and approval shall not be required for any routine maintenance or repair of improvements made by the Tenant pursuant to its obligation to maintain the Property in good order and repair that does not result in the construction, alteration, replacement, removal, or major repair of any improvements on the Property. 7.4 Removal. Tenant-Owned Improvements shall be removed by Tenant by the Termination Date unless State notifies Tenant that the Tenant-Owned Improvements may remain. If the State elects for the Tenant-Owned Improvements to remain on the Property after the Termination Date, they shall become the property of State without payment by State (if the provisions of RCW 79.125.300 or RCW 79.130.040 apply, Tenant shall be entitled to the rights provided in the statute). To the extent that Tenant-Owned Improvements include items of personal property which may be removed from the leasehold premises without harming the Property, or diminishing the value of the Property or the improvements, the State asserts no ownership interest in these improvements unless the parties agree otherwise in writing upon termination of this Lease. Any Tenant-Owned Improvements specifically identified as personal property in Exhibit A or B shall be treated in accordance with this provision. Tenant shall notify State at Form Date: May, 2005 6 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 least one hundred eighty (180) days before the Termination Date ifit intends to leave the Tenant- Owned Improvements on the Property. State shall then have ninety (90) days in which to notify Tenant that it wishes to have the Tenant-Owned Improvements removed or elects to have them remain. Failure to notify Tenant shall be deemed an election by State that the Tenant-Owned Improvements will remain on the Property. If the Tenant-Owned Improvements remain on the Property tttl:er the Termination Date without State's actual or deemed consent, they still will become the property of the State but the State may remove them and Tenant shall pay the costs of removal and disposal upon State's demand. 7.5 Unauthorized Improvements. Improvements made on the Property without State's prior consent pursuant to Subsection 7.3 or which are not in conformance with the plans submitted to and approved by State ("Unauthorized Improvements") shall immediately become the property of State, unless State elects otherwise. Regardless of ownership of Unauthorized Improvements, State may, at its option, require Tenant to sever, remove, and dispose of them, charge Tenant rent for the use of them, or both. If Tenant fails to remove an Unauthorized Improvement upon request, State may remove it and charge Tenant for the cost of removal and disposal. SECTION 8 ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITY/RISK ALLOCATION 8.1 Defmition. "Hazardous Substance" means any substance which now or in the future becomes regulated or defined under any federal, state, or local statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or other law relating to human health, environmental protection, contamination or cleanup, including, but not limited to, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., and Washington's Model Toxics Control Act ("MTCA"), RCW 70.IOSD.010 et seq. 8.2 Use of Hazardous Substances. Tenant covenants and agrees that Hazardous Substances will not be used, stored, generated, processed, transported, handled, released, or disposed of in, on, under, or above the Property, except in accordance with all applicable laws. 8.3 Current Conditions, Duty of Utmost Care, and Duty to Investigate. (a) State makes no representation about the condition of the Property. Hazardous Substances may exist in, on, under, or above the Property. With regard to any Hazardous Substances that may exist in, on, under, or above the Property, State disclaims any and all responsibility to conduct investigations, to review any State records, documents or files, or to obtain or supply any information to Tenant. (b) Tenant shall exercise the utmost care with respect to both Hazardous Substances in, on, under, or above the Property as of the Commencement Date, and any Hazardous Substances that come to be located in, on, under, or above the Property during the Term of this agreement, along with the foreseeable acts or omissions of third parties affecting those Hazardous Substances, and the foreseeable consequences of those acts or omissions. The obligation to exercise utmost care under this Subsection 8.3 includes, but is not limited to, the following requirements: Fonn Date: May, 2005 7 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A900l2 (]) Tenant shall not undertake activities that will cause, contribute to, or exacerbate contamination of the Property; (2) Tenant shall not undertake activities that damage or interfere with the operation of remedial or restoration activities on the Property or undertake activities that result in human or environmental exposure to contaminated sediments on the Property; (3) Tenant shall not undertake any activities that result in the mechanical or chemical disturbance of on-site habitat mitigation; (4) If requested, Tenant shall allow reasonable access to the Property by employees and authorized agents of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Washington State Department of Ecology, or other similar environmental agencies; and (5) If requested, Tenant shall allow reasonable access to potentially liable or responsible parties who are the subject of an order or consent decree which requires access to the Property. Tenant's obligation to provide access to potentially liable or responsible parties may be conditioned upon the negotiation of an access agreement with such parties, provided that such agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld. (c) It shall be Tenant's obligation to gather sufficient information concerning the Property and the existence, scope, and location of any Hazardous Substances on the Property, or adjoining the Property, that allows Tenant to effectively meet its obligations under this lease. 8.4 Notification and Reporting. (a) Tenant shall immediately notify State if Tenant becomes aware of any of the following: (1) A release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances in, on, under, or above the Property, any adjoining property, or any other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property; (2) . . Any problem or liability related to, or derived. from, the presence of any Hazardous Substance in, on, under, or above the Property, any adjoining property, or any other property subject to .use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property; (3) Any actual or alleged violation of any federal, state, or local statute, .ordinance, rule, regulation, or other law pertaining to Hazardous Substances with respect to the Property, any adjoining property, or any other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property; Fonn Date: May, 2005 8 of25 Commercial Lease 22·A90012 (4) Any lien or action with respect to any of the foregoing; or, (5) Any notification from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) that remediation or removal of Hazardous Substances is or may be required at the Property. (b) Upon request, Tenant shall provide State with copies of any and all reports, studies, or audits which pertain to environmental issues or concerns associated with the Property, and which were prepared for Tenant and submitted to any federal, state or local authorities pursuant to any federal, state or local permit, license or law. These permits include, but are not limited to, any National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System Permit, any Army Corps of Engineers permit, any State Hydraulics permit, any State Water Quality certification, or any Substantial Development permit. 8.5 Indemnification. (a) Tenant shall fully indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless from and against· any and all claims, demands, damages, natural resource damages, response costs, remedial costs, cleanup costs, losses, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, lawsuits, other proceedings, costs, and expenses (including attorneys' fees and disbursements), that arise out of, or are in any way related to: (1) The use, storage, generation, processing, transportation, handling, or disposal of any Hazardous Substance by Tenant, its subtenants, contractors, agents, employees, guests, invitees, or affiliates in, on, under, or above the Property, any adjoining property, or any other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property, during the Term of this Lease or during any time when Tenant occupies or occupied the Property or any such other prqperty; (2) The release or threatened release of any Hazardous Substance, or the exacerbation of any Hazardous Substance contamination, in, on, under, or above the Property, any adjoining property, or any Fonn Date: May, 2005 other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property, which release, threatened release, or exacerbation occurs or occurred during the Term of this Lease or during any time when Tenant occupies or occupied the Property or any such other property, and as a result of: (i) Any act or omission of Tenant, its subtenants, contractors, agents, employees, guests, invitees, or affiliates; or, (ii) Any foreseeable act or omission of a third party .unless Tenant exercised the utmost care with respect to the foreseeable acts or omissions of the third party and the foreseeable consequences of those acts or omissions. · 9of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 (b) In addition to the indemnifications provided in Subsection 8.5(a), Tenant shall fully indemnify State for any and all damages, liabilities, costs or expenses (including attorneys' fees and disbursements) that arise out of or are in any way related to Tenant's breach of the obligations of Subsection 8.3(b). This obligation is not intended to duplicate the indemnity provided in Subsection 8.5(a) and applies only to damages, liabilities, costs, or expenses that are associated with a breach of Subsection 8.3(b) and which are not characterized as a release, threatened release, or exacerbation of Hazardous Substances. 8.6 Cleanup. If a release of Hazardous Substances occurs in, on, under, or above the Property, or other State-owned property, arising out of any action, inaction, or event described or referred to in Subsection 8.5, above, Tenant shall, at its sole expense, promptly take all actions necessary or advisable to clean up the Hazardous Substances. Cleanup actions shall include, without limitation, removal, containment and remedial actions and shall be performed in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, ordinances, and permits. Tenant's obligation to undertake a cleanup under this Subsection 8.6 shall be limited to those instances where the Hazardous Substances exist in amounts that exceed the threshold limits of any applicable regulatory cleanup standards. Tenant shall also be solely responsible for all cleanup, administrative, and enforcement costs of governmental agencies, including natural resource damage claims, arising out of any action, inaction, or event described or referred to in Subsection 8.5, above. Tenant may undertake a cleanup pursuant to the Washington State Department of Ecology's Voluntary Cleanup Program, provided that: (1) Any cleanup plans shall be submitted to State (DNR) for review and comment at least thirty (30) days prior to implementation ( except .in emergency situations), and (2) Tenant must not be in breach of this lease. Nothing in the operation of this provision shall be construed as an agreement by State that the voluntary cleanup complies with any laws or with the provisions of this Lease. 8. 7 Sampling by State, Reimbursement, and Split Samples. (a) State may conduct sampling, tests, audits, surveys, or investigations ("Tests") of the Property at any time to determine the existence, scope, or effects of Hazardous Substances on the Property, any adjoining property, any other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property, or any natural resources. If such Tests, along with any other information, demonstrates the existence, release, or threatened release of Hazardous Substances arising out of any action, inaction, or event described or referred to in Subsection 8.5, above, Tenant shall promptly reimburse State for all costs associated with such Tests. (b) State's ability to seek reimbursement for any Tests under this Subsection shall be conditioned upon State providing Tenant written notice of its intent to conduct any Tests at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to undertaking such Tests, unless such Tests are performed in response to an emergency situation in which case State shall only be required to give such notice as is reasonably practical. Form Pate: May, 2005 10 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 (c) Tenant shall be entitled to obtain split samples of any Test samples obtained by State, but only if Tenant provides State with written notice requesting such samples within twenty (20) calendar days of the date Tenant is deemed to have received notice of State's intent to conduct any non-emergency Tests. The additional cost, if any, of split samples shall be borne solely by Tenant. Any additional costs State incurs by virtue of Tenant's split sampling shall be reimbursed to State within thirty (30) calendar days after a bill with documentation for such costs is sent to Tenant. (d) Within thirty (30) calendar days ofa written request (unless otherwise required pursuant to Subsection 8.4(b), above), either party to this Lease shall provide the other party with validated final data, quality assurance/quality control information, and chain of custody information, associated with any Tests of the Property performed by or on behalf of State or Tenant. There is no obligation to provide any analytical summaries or expert opinion work product. 8.8 Reservation of Rights. The parties have agreed to allocate certain environmental risks, liabilities, and responsibilities by the terms of Section 8. With respect to those environmental liabilities covered by the indemnification provisions of Subsection 8.5, that subsection shall exclusively govern the allocation of those liabilities. With respect to any environmental risks, liabilities, or responsibilities not covered by Subsection 8.5, the parties expressly reserve and do not waive or relinquish any rights, claims, immunities, causes of action, or defenses relating to the presence, release, or threatened release of Hazardous Substances in, on, under, or above the Property, any adjoining property, or any other property subject to use by Tenant in conjunction with its use of the Property, that either party may have against the other under federal, state, or local laws, including but not limited to, CERCLA, MTCA, and the common law. No right, claim, immunity, or defense either party may have against third parties is affected by this Lease and the parties expressly reserve all such rights, claims, immunities, and defenses. The allocations of risks, liabilities, and responsibilities set forth above do not release either party from, or affect either party's liability for, claims or actions by federal, state, or local regulatory agencies concerning Hazardous Substances. SECTION 9 ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING 9.1 State Consent Required. Tenant shall not sell, convey, mortgage, assign, pledge, sublet, or otherwise transfer or encumber all or any part of Tenant's interest in this Lease or the Property without State's prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably conditioned or withheld. (a) In determining whether to consent, State may consider, among other items, the proposed transferee's fmancial condition, business reputation and experience, the nature of the proposed transferee's business, the then-current value of the Property, and such other factors as may reasonably bear upon the suitability of the transferee as a tenant of the Property. Tenant shall submit information regarding any proposed transferee to State at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of the proposed transfer. · Fonn Date: May, 2005 llof25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 (b) State reserves the right to condition its consent upon: (1) changes in the terms and conditions of this Lease, including the Annual Rent and other terms; and/or (2) the agreement of Tenant or transferee to conduct Tests for Hazardous Substances on the Property or on other property owned or occupied by Tenant or the transferee. ( c) Each permitted transferee shall assume an' obligations under this Lease, including the payment of rent. No assignment, sublet, or transfer shall release, discharge, or otherwise affect the liability of Tenant. 9.2 Event of Assignment. If Tenant is a corporation, a dissolution of the corporation or a transfer (by one or more transactions) of a majority of the voting stock of Tenant shall be deemed to be an assignment of this Lease. If Tenant is a partnership, a dissolution of the partnership or a transfer (by one or more transactions) of the controlling interest in Tenant shall be deemed an assignment of this Lease. 9.3 Rent Payments Following Assignment. The acceptance by State of the payment ofrent following an assignment or other transfer shall not constitute consent to any assignment or transfer. 9.4 Terms of Subleases. All subleases shall be submitted to State for approval and shall meet the following requirements: (a) The sublease shall be consistent with and subject to all the terms and conditions of this Lease; (b) The sublease shall confirm that if the terms of the sublease conflict with the terms of this Lease, this Lease shall control; ( c) The term of the sublease (including any period of time covered by a renewal option) shall end before the Termination Date of the initial Term or any renewal term; ( d) The sublease shall terminate if this Lease terminates, whether upon expiration of the Term, failure to exercise an option to renew, cancellation by State, surrender or for any other reason\ ( e) The subtenant shall receive and acknowledge receipt of a copy ofthis Lease; (f) The sublease shall prohibit the prepayment to Tenant by the subtenant of more than one month's rent; (g) The sublease shall identify the rental amount to be paid to Tenant by the subtenant; Fonn Date: May, 2005 12 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 (h) The sublease shall confirm that there is no privity of contract between the subtenant and State; (i) The sublease shall require removal of the subtenant's improvements and trade fixtures upon termination of the sublease; and, (j) The subtenant's permitted use shall be within the Permitted Use authorized by this Lease. 9.5 Routine Subleasing of Moorage Slips. In the case of routine subleasing of moorage slips to recreational and commercial vessel owners for a term of one year or less, Tenant shall not be required to obtain State's written consent or approval pursuant to Subsection 9.1 or Subsection 9.4. Tenant shall be obligated to ensure that these moorage agreements conform to the sublease requirements in Subsection 9.4. SECTION 10 INDEMNITY, FINANCIAL SECURITY, INSURANCE 10.1 Indemnity. Tenant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless State, its employees, officers, and agents from any and all liability, damages (including bodily injury, personal injury and damages to land, aquatic life, and other natural resources), expenses, causes of action, suits, claims, costs, fees (including attorneys' fees), penalties, or judgments, of any nature whatsoever, arising out of the use, occupation, or control of the Property by Tenant, its subtenants, invitees, agents, employees, licensees, or permittees, except as may arise solely out of the willful or negligent act of State or State's elected officials, employees, or agents. To the extent that RCW 4.24.115 applies, Tenant shall not be required to indemnify, defend, and hold State harmless from State's sole or concurrent negligence. Tenant's liability to State for hazardous substances, and its obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold the State harmless for hazardous substances, shall be governed exclusively by Section 8. 10.2 Financial Security. (a) At its own expense, Tenant shall procure and maintain a corporate surety bond or provide other financial security satisfactory to State (the "Bond") in an amount equal to Five Hundred Dollars ($500), which shall secure Tenant's full · performance of its obligations under this Lease, with the exception of the obligations under Section 8 (Environmental Liability/Risk Allocation) above. The Bond shall be in a form and issued by a surety company acceptable to State. State may require an adjustment in the amount of the Bond: (I) At the same time as revaluation of the Annual Rent; (2) As a condition of approval of assignment or sublease of this Lease; (3) Upon a material change in the condition of any improvements; or, .Fonn Date: May, 2005 13 of25 Commercial Lease 22-J\90012 ( 4) Upon a change in the Permitted Use. A new or modified Bond shall be delivered to State within thirty (30) days after adjustment of the amount of the Bond has been required by State. (b) Upon any default by Tenant in its obligations under this Lease, State may collect on the Bond to offset the liability of Tenant to State. Collection on the Bond shall not relieve Tenant of liability, shall not limit any of State's other remedies, and shall not reinstate or cure the default or prevent termination of the Lease because of the default. 10.3 Insurance .. At its own expense, Tenant shall procure and maintain during the Term of this Lease, the insurance coverages and limits described in Subsections I0.3(a) and (b) below. This insurance shall be issued by an insurance company or companies admitted and licensed by the Insurance Commissioner to do business in the State of Washington. Insurers must have a rating of B+ or better by "Best's Insurance Reports," or a comparable rating by another rating company acceptable to State. If non-admitted or non-rated carriers are used, the policies must comply with Chapter 48.15 RCW. (a) Types of Required Insurance. (I) Commercial General Liability Insurance. Tenant shall procure and maintain Commercial General Liability insurance and, if applicable, Marina Operators Legal Liability insurance covering claims for bodily injury, personal iaj ury, or property damage arising on the Property and/or arising out of Tenant's operations. If necessary, commercial umbrella insurance covering claims for these risks shall be procured and maintained. Insurance must include liability coverage with limits not less than those specified below: FonnD~: May, 2005. . Description Each Occurrence General Aggregate Limit $1,000,000 $2;000,000 State may impose changes in the limits of liability: · (i) As a condition of approval of assignment or sublease of this Lease; (ii) Upon any breach of Section 8, above; (iii) Upon a material change in.the condition of the Property or any improvements; or, (iv) Upon a change in the Permitted Use. 14 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 . New or modified insurance coverage shall be in place within thirty (30) days after changes in the limits of liability are required by State. (2) Property Insurance. Tenant shall procure and maintain property insurance covering all real property located on or constituting a part of the Property in an amount equal to the replacement value of all improvements on the Property. Such insurance may have commercially reasonable deductibles. (3) Worker's Compensation/Employer's Liability Insurance. Tenant shall procure and maintain: (i) State of Washington Worker's Compensation coverage, as applicable, with respect to any work by Tenant's employees on or about the Property and on any improvements; (ii) Employers Liability or "Stop Gap" insurance coverage with limits not less than those specified below. Insurance must include bodily injury coverage with limits not less than those specified below: Each Employee By Accident $1,000,000 Policy Limit By Disease $1,000,000 By Disease $1,000,000 (iii) Longshore and Harbor Worker's Act and Jones Act coverage, as applicable, with respect to any work by Tenant's employees on or about the Property and on any improvements. (4) Builder's Risk Insurance. As applicable, Tenant shall procure and maintain builder's risk insurance in an amount reasonably satisfactory to State during construction, replacement, or material alteration of the Property or improvements on the Property. Coverage shall be in place until such work is completed and evidence of completion is provided to State. (5) Business Auto Policy Insurance. As applicable, Tenant shall procure and maintain a business auto policy. The insurance must include liability coverage with limits notless than those specified below: Description Bodily Injury and Property Damage Each Accident $1,000,000 (6) Aviation Liability Insurance. Tenant shall procure and maintain insurance covering liability arising from ownership, maintenance or use of aircraft, including liability assumed under an insurance contract •. The insurance must include liability coverage with limits not Jess than those specified below: FormDate: May, 2005 15 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 General Description Per Seat Bodily Injury and Property Damage $1,000,000 Aggregate $5,000,000 (b) Terms oflnsurance. The policies required under Subsection 10.3 shall name the State of Washington, Department of Natural Resources as an additional insured (except for State of Washington Worker's Compensation coverage, and Federal Jones' Act and Longshore and Harbor Worker's Act coverages). Furthermore, all policies of insurance described in Subsectionl0.3 shall meet the following requirements: (I) Policies shall be written as primary policies not contributing with and not in excess of coverage that State may carry; (2) Policies shall expressly provide that such insurance may not be canceled or nonrenewed with respect to State except upon forty-five ( 45) days prior written notice from the insurance company to State; (3) To the extent of State's insurable interest, property coverage shall expressly provide that all proceeds shall be paid jointly to State and Tenant; (4) All liability policies must provide coverage on an occurrence basis; and (5) Liability policies shall not include exclusions for cross liability. ( c) Proof of Insurance. Tenant shall furnish evidence of insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance satisfactory to the State accompanied by a checklist of coverages provided by State, executed by a duly authorized representative of each insurer showing compliance with the insurance requirements described in section 10, and, if requested, copies of policies to State. The Certificate of Insurance shall reference the State of Washington, Department of Natural Resources and the lease number. Receipt of such certificates or policies by State does not constitute approval by State of the terms of such policies. Tenant acknowledges that the coverage requirements set forth herein are the minimum limits of insurance the Tenant must purchase to enter into this agreement. These limits may not be sufficient to cover all liability losses and related claim settlement expenses. Purchase of these limits of coverage does not relieve the Tenant from liability for losses and settlement expenses greater than these amounts. 10.4 State's Acquisition of Insurance. If Tenant fails to procure and maintain the insurance described above within fifteen (15) days after Tenant receives a notice to comply from State, State shall have the right to procure and maintain comparable substitute insurance and to pay the premiums. Tenant s_hall pay to State upon demand the full amount paid by State, together with interest at the rate provided in Subsection 6.2 from the date of State's notice of the expenditure until Tenant's repayment. FC11111 Date: May, 2005 ,, ; 16 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 10.5 Self Insurance. Tenant warrants that it has the capacity to self insure for the risks and coverages specified in Section 10. Tenant's obligations under Section 10 may be met by providing evidence of self insurance that is acceptable to State. Any acceptance of Tenant's proof of self insurance by State must be obtained in writing. The decision to accept, or reject, Tenant's proof of self insurance is within the sole discretion of the State. Tenant must provide State with proof of continuing ability to provide self insurance within thirty (30) days of any written request by State for such proof. Tenant shall also provide State with written notice within seven (7) days of any material change in its ability to self insure, or to its program of self insurance. If Tenant elects to discontinue its program of self insurance, or if State provides written notice withdrawing its acceptance of Tenant's proof of self insurance, Tenant shall be subjected to the requirements of Section 10. Tenant shall be in compliance with the requirements of Section 10 prior to exercising an election to terminate self insurance coverage and shall comply with those requirements within thirty (30) days of receipt of any notice from State withdrawing its consent to self insurance. All sublease agreements must comply with the provisions of Section 10. SECTION 11 MAINTENANCE AND REP AIR 11.1 State's Repairs. State shall not be required to make any alterations, maintenance, replacements, or repairs in, on, or about the Property, or any part thereof, during the Term. 11.2 Tenant's Repairs, Alteration, Maintenance and Replacement. (a) Tenant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep and maintain the Property and all improvements (regardless of ownership) in good order and repair, in a clean, attractive, and safe condition. (b) Tenant shall, at its sole cost and expense, make any and all additions, repairs, alterations, maintenance, replacements, or changes to the Property or to any improvements on the Property which may be required by any public authority. ( c) All additions, repairs, alterations, replacements or changes to the Property and to any improvements on the Property shall be made in accordance with, and ownership shall be governed by, Section 7, above. (a) (b) SECTION 12 DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION In the event of any damage to or destruction of the Property or any improvements, Tenant shall promptly give written notice to State. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, Tenant shall promptly reconstruct, repair, or replace the Property and any improvements as nearly as possible to its condition immediately prior to the · ~age or destruction. Tenant's duty to reconstruct, repair, or replace any damage or destruction of the Property or any improvements on the Property shall not be conditioned upon the . availability of any insurance proceeds to Tenant from which the cost of repairs maybe paid. Fonn Date: May, 200S 17 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 ( c) Unless this Lease is terminated by mutual agreement, there shall be no abatement or reduction in rent during such reconstruction, repair, and replacement. ( d) Any insurance proceeds payable by reason of damage or destruction shall be first used to restore the real property covered by this Lease, then to pay the cost of the reconstruction, then to pay the State any sums in arrears, and then to Tenant. (e) In the event Tenant is in default under the terms of this Lease at the time damage or destruction occurs, State may elect to terminate the Lease and State shall then have the right to retain any and all insurance proceeds payable as a result of the damage or destruction. SECTION 13 CONDEMNATION 13.1 Definitions. (a) Taking. The term "taking," as used in this Lease, means the taking of all or any portion of the Property and any improvements thereon under the power of eminent domain, either by judgment or settlement in lieu of judgment. Taking also means the taking of all or a portion of the Property and any improvements thereon to the extent that the Permitted Use is prevented or, in the judgment of State, the Property is rendered impractical for the Permitted Use. A total taking occurs when the entire Property is taken. A partial taking occurs when the taking does not constitute a total taking as defined above. (b) Voluntary Conveyance. The terms "total taking" and ''partial taking" shall include a voluntary conveyance, in lieu of formal court proceedings, to any agency, authority, public utility, person, or corporate entity empowered to condemn property. (c) Date of Taking. The term "date of taking" shall mean the date upon which title to the Property or a portion of the Property passes to and vests in the condemnor or the effective date of any order for possession if issued prior to the date title vests in the condemnor. 13.2 Effect of Taking. If during the Term there shall be a total taking, the leasehold estate of Tenant in the Property shall terminate as of the date of taking. If this Lease is terminated, in whole or in part, all rentals and other charges payable by Tenant to State and attributable to the Property taken shall be paid by Tenant up to the date of taking. If Tenant has pre-paid rent, Tenant will be entitled to a refund of the pro rata share of the pre-paid rent attributable to the period after the date of taking. In the event of a partial taking, there shall be a partial abatement of rent from the date of taking in a percentage equal to the percentage of Property taken. 13.3 Allocation of Award. State and Tenant agree that in the event of any condemnation, the awardsha!I be allocated between State andTenant based upon the ratio of the fair market value ofTenruit's leasehold estate and Tenant-Owned Improvements on the Property and State's Forril J:l~: May, 2005. 18 of25 Commercial Lease 22·A90012 interest (a) in the Property, (b) in the reversionary interest in Tenant-Owned Improvements, and ( c) in State-Owned Improvements. In the event of a partial taking, this ratio will be computed on the basis of the portion of Property or improvements taken. If Tenant and State are unable to agree on the allocation, it shall be submitted to binding arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association. SECTION 14 DEFAULT AND REMEDIES (a) Tenant shall be in default of this Lease on the occurrence of any of the following: (I) Failure to pay Annual Rent or other expenses when due; (2) Failure to comply with any law, regulation, policy, or order of any lawful governmental authority; (3) Failure to comply with any other provision of this Lease; (4) Two or more defaults over a period of time, or a single serious default, that demonstrates a reasonable likelihood of future defaults in the absence of corrective action by Tenant; or (5) Proceedings are commenced by or against Tenant under any bankruptcy act or for the appointment of a trustee or receiver of Tenants' property. (b) A default shall becom~ an event of default ("Event of Default") if Tenant fails to cure the default within sixty ( 60) days after State provides Tenant with written notice of default, which specifies the nature of the default. (c) Upon an Event of Default, State may terminate this Lease and remove Tenant by summary proceedings or otherwise. State may also, without terminating this Lease, relet the Property on any terms and conditions as State in its sole discretion may decide are appropriate. If State elects to relet, rent received by it shall be applied: (1} to the payment of any indebtedness other than rent due from Tenant to State; (2) to the payment ofany cost of such reletting; (3) to the payment of the cost of any alterations and repairs to the Property; and, ( 4) to the payment of rent and leasehold excise tax due and unpaid under this Lease. Any balance shall be held by State and applied to Tenant's future rent as it becomes due. Tenant shall be responsible for any deficiency created by the reletting during any month and shall pay the deficiency monthly. State's reentry or repossession of the Property under this subsection shall not be construed as an election to terminate this Lease or cause a forfeiture of rents or other charges to be paid during the balance of the Tenn, unless State gives a written notice of termination to Tenant or termination is decreed by legal proceedings. State may at any time after reletting elect to terminate this Lease for the previous Event of Default. Fonn Date: May, 200S . 19 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 SECTION 15 ENTRY BY STATE State shall have the right to enter the Property at any reasonable hour to inspect for compliance · with the terms of this Lease. SECTION 16 DISCLAIMER OF QUIET ENJOYMENT As indicated in Section 1.1, this Lease is subject to all valid recorded interests of third parties, as well as rights of the public under the Public Trust Doctrine or federal navigation servitude, and treaty rights ofindian Tribes. State believes that its grant of the Lease is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine and that none of the identified interests of third parties will materially and adversely affect Tenant's right of possession and use of the Property as set forth herein, but makes no guaranty or warranty to that effect. Tenant and State expressly agree that Tenant shall be responsible for determining the extent of its right to possession and for defending its leasehold interest. Consequently, State expressly disclaims and Tenant expressly releases State from any claim for breach of any implied covenant of quiet enjoyment with respect to the possession of the Property. This disclaimer includes, but is not limited to, interference arising from or_in connection with access or other use rights of adjacent property owners or the public over the water surface or in or under the water column, including rights under the Public Trust Doctrine; rights held by Indian Tribes; and the general power and authority of State and the United States with respect to aquatic lands, navigable waters, bedlands, tidelands, and shorelands. In the event Tenant is evicted from the Property by reason of successful assertion of any of these rights, this Lease shall terminate as of the date of the eviction. In the event of a partial eviction, Tenant's rent obligations shall abate as of the date of the partial eviction, in direct proportion to the extent of the eviction, but in all other respects, this Lease shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 17 NOTICE Any notices required or permitted under this Lease may be personally delivered, delivered by facsimile machine, or mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses or to such other places as the parties may direct in writing from time to time: State: DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Shoreline District Aquatics Region Tenant: 950 Farman Avenue North Enumclaw, WA 98022-9282 CITY OF RENTON 616 West Perimeter Road Renton, WA 98022 A notice shall .be deemed given and delivered upon persohal delivery, upon receipt of a confirmation report if delivered by facsimile machine, or three (3) days after being mailed as set forth above, whichever is applicable. · _Fonn Dale: May, 2005 20 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 ) SECTION 18 MISCELLANEOUS 18.1 Authority. Tenant and the person or persons executing this Lease on behalf of Tenant represent that Tenant is qualified to do business in the State of Washington, that Tenant has full right and authority to enter into this Lease, and that each and every person signing on behalf of Tenant is authorized to do so. Upon State's request, Tenant will provide evidence satisfactory to State confinning these representations. This Lease is entered into by State pursuant to the authority granted it in Chapters 79.105 to 79.145 RCW and the Constitution of the State of Washington. 18.2 Successors and Assigns. This Lease shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties, their successors and assigns. 18.3 Headings. The headings used in this Lease are for convenience only and in no way define, limit, or extend the scope of this Lease or the intent of any provision. 18.4 Entire Agreement. This Lease, including the exhibits and addenda, if any, contains the entire agreement of the parties. All prior and contemporaneous agreements, promises, representations, and statements relating to this transaction or to the Property, if any, are merged into this Lease. 18.5 Waiver. The waiver by State of any breach or default of any term, covenant, or condition of this Lease shall not be deemed to be a waiver of such term, covenant, or condition; of any subsequent breach or default of the same; or of any other term, covenant, or condition of this Lease. State's acceptance of a rental payment shall not be construed to be a waiver of any preceding or existing breach other than the failure to pay the particular rental payment that was accepted. 18.6 Cumulative Remedies. The rights and remedies of State under this Lease are cumulative and in addition to all other rights and remedies afforded to State by law or equity or otherwise. 18,7 Time is of the Essence. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE as to each and every provision of this Lease. 18.8 Language. The word "Tenant" as used in this Lease shall be applicable to one or more persons, as the case may be. The singular shall include the plural, and the neuter shall include the masculine and feminine. If there is more than one Tenant, their obligations shall be joint and several. The word "persons," whenever used, shall include individuals, firms, associations, and corporations. 18;9 Invalidity. If any provision of this Lease shall prove to be invalid, void, or illegal, it shall in no way affect, impair, or invalidate any other provision of this Lease. Form D~: May, 2005 21 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 ) 18.10 Applicable Law and Venue. This Lease shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Any reference to a statute shall mean that statute as presently enacted or hereafter amended or superseded. Venue for any action arising out of or in connection with this Lease shall be in the Superior Court for Thurston County, Washington. 18.11 Recordation. Tenant shall record this Lease or a memorandum documenting the existence of this Lease in the county in which the Property is located, at Tenant's sole expense. The memorandum shall, at a minimum, contain the Property description, the names of the parties to the Lease, the State's lease number, and the duration of the Lease. Tenant shall provide State with recording information, including the date of recordation and file number. Tenant shall have thirty (30) days from the date of delivery of.the final executed agreement to comply with the requirements of this subsection. If Tenant fails to record this Lease, State may record it and Tenant shall pay the costs of recording upon State's demand. 18.12 Modification. Any modification of this Lease must be in writing and signed by the parties. State shall not be bound by any oral representations or statements. Fonn Date: May, 2005 22 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 ) THIS AGREEMENT requires the signature of all parties and is executed as of the date of the last signature below. Dated: ---+~---,-r.l:.._ __ Approved as to Form May, 2005 by Joe Panesko Assistant Attorney General State of Washington Fonn Date: May, 2005 Tenant: CITY OF RENTON Title: Mayor Address: 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Attest: &Atµ'y/. uJa.//Ay Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT FNA U"IXL Title: Address: 23 of2S Commissioner of Public Lands Shoreline District Aquatics Region 950 Farman Avenue North Enumclaw, WA 98022-9282 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 ) REPRESENTATIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ) ) ss County of J<.-p1 J ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that KA TIIY KEOLKER is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that she signed this instrument, on oath stated that she was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Fonn Date: May, 200$ · 24 of25 (Sig/atwe) d A. Sc.ii, (Print Name) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at 6.n fqy1 I My appointment expires (p-Z 9-Zoo 9 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 • STATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss County of lh.u...rs t-c,r) ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that DOUG SUTHERLAND is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Commissioner of Public Lands, and ex officio administrator of the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Washington to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: q · ?-0 · 0 (p ---"'-----"------ (Signature) 6~n I rn I< Hi t..,L, (Print Name) Notary Public in and for the State of w~~~ My appointment expires 5 · I q -0 Cf Fonn Date: May, 2005 25 of25 Commercial Lease 22-A90012 • EXHIBITB PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT, OPERATION, AND MAINTENANCE Lease No. 22-A90012 City of Renton 616 West Perimeter Rd. Site Description and Present Use The City of Renton lease is located on the southern shore of Lake Washington,just west of the mouth of the Cedar River. The waters of Lake Washingto.n are used for recreational purposes such as boating, swimming, and fishing. The following fish are found in Lake Washington; sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), coho salmon (0. kisutch), steelhead salmon (0. mykiss), chinook salmon (0. tshawytscha), and trout. The Boeing Company is located to the east of the leasehold and a small boat moorage facility is located to the west of the leasehold. The City of Renton runs a seaplane base at this site. The floating dock is made of untreated wood with metal grating on the walkway allowing light to penetrate to the lake bottom. The dock is lined with tires to prolong its life. Future Use and Condition The City of Renton may expand their floating dock in the future. Tenant must notify the State of any plans for changes to their leasehold and the State must approve these changes. Any expansion or decrease in the leasehold area will require an amendment to the lease. SECTION 2 USE 2.1 · Permitted Use. Tenant is pennitted to use the 15,006 square foot leasehold for seaplane illoorage, which includes a floating dock that rises and falls with the lake level on approximately six galvanized steel pilings. All seaplanes must be moored in a manner that ensures that they are located within the leasehold · area. The area needed for ingress and egress from the leased premises is included in the leasehold area Exhi!,itB I of2 Lease No. 22-A90012 ' SECTION 7 IMPROVEMENTS 7.2 Tenant-Owned Improvements. The "Tenant-Owned Improvements" currently located on the site include: floating dock and approximately six galvanized steel pilings. SECTION 11 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR 11.2 Tenant's Repairs, Alteration, Maintenance and Replacement. Maintenance of the floating dock includes periodic structural and safety inspections. Routine maintenance of the tires, wood planks, metal grating, cleaning (including power washing), and repair of all portions of the dock occur at periodic intervals or when necessary to assure the safe operation of the dock. Over water seaplane maintenance such as washing and engine maintenance is not permitted. SECTION IS ENTRY BY STATE SITE INSPECTION Monica Durkin, of the Washington State Department ofNatural Resources (DNR), conducted an inventory and a site inspection of the dock on July 7, 2005. SECTION 16 DISCLAIMER OF QUIET ENJOYMENT . For purposes of abatement of rent in Section 16 of this lease, the phrases "date of eviction" and "date of partial evi~n''.shall mean that date Tenant is stopped from all use of the property by reason of an assertion bfihe-~ts described in Section 16 of this lease. .. SECTION 17 NOTICE ,, ...... ,.~r .. v . :_. . The City of Renton shJl'~ignate a contact person for the Department of Natural Resources . . This person has the responsibility of notifying the DNR of the status of the lease. The current contact person is: Bruce Fisher City of Renton Airport 616 West Perimeter Rd. Renton, WA 98055 (425) 430-7471 The current contact for the Department of Natural Resources is: ExhibitB Snoqualmie Land Manager 950 Farman Avenue North Enumclaw, WA 98022 (360) 825-1631 2of2 Lease No. 22-A90012 ll !'I : • I I {\ : "-I :"f : "'( I ,:~ ti PnJ G I' 1·11· ; f( } ,i .. ·;iffl i In~ ~ p df§ f . I ra!i~ i;t 'l 1 • If ra E : 11~1 "'( I , 1 J;;i : I I • I " I . ,, ' I I I I I I 1f,r ii I . .___;.;...:..&.~~....;.,......_~~~~~~~~~--~~~....._~--- I . l __________ ----------·----·-------------------------·----------.--.--------------------------~--J f Billing Invoice EG0000761 GL Number: 422.725080.016.594.46.63.000 BILLING CONTACT City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Phone:() - REFERENCE NUMBER LUA13-000517 Seaplane Base maintenance dredging in order to alleviate operational problems caused by sediment filling the existing Seaplane Base approach channel and mooring basin that has occurred during previous major storm events. Nort end of the Renton Municioal Airport alono the souther shore of (' 1 r : t f '~ '""'"'"" ~ 4 Department: CED -Planning AR: Eden Invoice: FEE NAME PLAN. Environmental Review 000.000000.007.345.81.04.000 Technology Fee 503.000000.004.322.10.00.000 SUB TOTAL TOTAL Created On: 4/2912013 9:48:00AM Prepared By: Vanessa Dolbee 425-430-7314 Amount Due $1,000.00 $30.00 $1,030.00 $1,030.00 Page 1 of 1 • DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: D t epar men tCh aree d Account Number 422.725080.016.594.46.63.000 FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM April 26, 2013 Casaundra Commodore, Finance & Information Services Department Ben Dahle Re: INTERFUND TRANSFER REQUEST Instructions: Please note that failure to provide all digits will result in processing delays. All Signatures and correct documentation must be included. Please prepare the following inter-fund transfer: Project, function, task, sub-task Description Amount Seaplane Maintenance Dredge Capital City permit processing fee $1,030.00 Project, SEPA and SME permits (SEPA) Total $1,030.00 *Charged Department Authorization* APPROVALSIGNATURE: ~ -~h Printed Name CREDIT: Account Number Project, function, task, sub-task Description Amount 000.000000.007.345.81.00.007 Seaplane Maintenance Dredge Permits SEPA Environmental $1,000.00 Review 503.000000.004.322. 10.00.011 . 3% Technology Fee $30.00 Total $1,030.00 Reas9n: City permit processing fee (SEPA) and 3% Technology Fee Note: Documentation to support this transfer request must be attached and all signatures are required. Cash Transfer Form/Finance/bh Revised 01/09