No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA81-056BEGINNINU OFFILOFtIMED FILETITLE Ob6 - v f F tl=/Y,\ f1 Ck IU 0 1619' • >- P Q 3• I'' I I I TR — `tirNON{ r- .r'- R- O. 1,4t. tirs w fit i 1 i i I • c,e•er.t'•w, . / 67.0 ..j-r t, t• , t a f 00 h t I L_ _--_—__ h_- — GO7/f?h v 6LOCK Q RIMLATit45C a j •I ter ......—I U ,LAWS tM3 NJ.70.1 Rw - l a L 1.r r— fit/ ,. r'` ` . a 3n wwM aro..• y — E N w fit ,,. r J fft. my •.• w.. 10 O. }• ---. I` t,= No SI •` 1 iS J._ 1+' e'.erg ,w,,w._ .•- cii,..)t)')'. orw ..a . s . . err W. e Y nor,.4ir.,R.T BEN Tp V JOIN ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES PS, INC. H I i r' Q 10 June 1981 tiQ jANN1NG Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Gentlemen: The property in question is zoned "G", General Classification Districts, following annexation of the property into the City of Renton as required by Renton Zoning. The purpose of the "G" classification following annexation is "to prevent un:ontrolled and scattered intrusion of business, industrial , and similar uses which would be in conflict or incompatible with existing or planned future land uses". The "G" classification would, of course, remain until the property was rezoned to it's best use, therefore, the rezoning of this property following annexation is a natural at tinely step. We are asking to rezone the property to "B-1", Business District, which is consistent with the City of Renton' s comprehensive plan for this area. We have included preliminary plans to show how we plan to use this site and the steps we have taken to lessen the impact of development on the residential district to the west. The building is being held back from the front property line 20 feet which seems most appropriate along this busy street. The building is stepped hack at each floor to lessen the apparent height of the building. It is also set down into the grade and back into the hill to reduce it's impact. The back of the building will be approximately on grade at the roof level with the hill climbing approximately 4C feet above this level . This change in grade will allow the residences to the west tc look over the building. Due to the crest in the hill it should prove difficult to even see the top of the building. The clearing that will be required on the lower pertion of the site should open up the view from the top of the hill . The upper pertion of the site will be left as native as possible and those areas disturbed by construction will be replanted upon completion of the work. Business zoning seems to be the best use of this area. Due to the noise, and traffic on Rainier Avenue, the noise of the airport, and the commercial feeling in the area, it would not be suitable for residential use. Very truly yours , RCNALD R. HEALEY RFH: lh 106'0 H.E. 8th • Bellevue, Washington 98004 • (206) 454-3096 To Date Time WHILE , OU WERE T 17.740. v` o f J2 2 5, / /,U// lPhone 7r'2 -,( /I 7I 9'/ 7" TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN WANTS TO SEE YOU RUSH RETURNED YOUR CALL Message Operator A mozzi Applicant STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. File No. R-056-61 Project Name SAt1E Property Location Vicinity of 700 Rainier Ave. N. HEARING EXAMINER: Date 12-21 -81 Recommendation Denial Req./Rec. Date Received Date Response Appeal - Date Received Council Approval - Date Ordinance/Resolution # Date Mylar to County for Recording Mylar Recording # Remarks: e2vNr T 4 056-e( F - RAINIER AVENUE PROJECT RAINIER AVENUE RENTON, WASHINGTON CERT. NO. 814-8G t. -• RED O o IA AU111 f.-7_) rirlinTON G181 981 UILD1NG DEPARTA I CASC F. TESTING LABORATORY. INC. I TEST;N INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS t': 14120 N.E. 21st STREET SEATTLE (206/525-6700 BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 95007 2061 641-2573 EVERETT (206/259-0517 June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G U Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. P.O. Box 964 Renton, WA 98055 Attention: Mr. Sigi Ulirich Reference: Rainier Avenue Project Rainier Avenue Renton, Washington Gentlemen: We are pleased to submit herewith our final analysis and soils engineering report for the proposed office structure to be construc- ted at the -above referenced project site. Based upon the encoun- tered s(ihsnr. i. ce soil types and conditions, we oFFcr the Following recommended foundation soil design criteria and recommended general developmental procedures . It is our understanding that the proposed project is to consist of constructing a four (4) story structure, utilizing reinforced con- crete. The dimensions of the project is approximately sixty-four 64) feet by three hundred forty-four (344) feet. The lower two floors are designed as automobile parking and access driveways . The upper two levels are designed for offices and will have approxi- mately 22, 000 sq. ft. of floor space. The concrete structure will be sited immediately west of Rainier Avenue South to a maximum horizon- tal distance some eighty-five (85) feet west of the easterly pro- perty line. The westerly wall is to be designed as a retaining structure resisting the upslope soil pressures . Y CASCADE TESTING LABORATC_..,., INC. Tt5i1NG GL INSFCTIUN/tNGINEER /GEOLOC.'ISTS June 9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G F . Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 2 The purpose of our investigation was to assess the presently existing surface and subsurface soil types and conditions as they relate to development of the property. Included in our analysis are pertinent geotechnical and soil engineering data to aid in the structural designs . Specifically our study included: 1 . Extensive visual reconnaissance of the surficial soils and existing slope condition. 2. Examination and classification of the subsurface soils through utilization of test borings and backhoe test pits . 3 . An evaluation of the stabilityof the site proper.P P I. 4. Laboratory testing on collected soil samples . 5. Geotechnical analysis of the soil data and presentation of soils engineering information. 6. General developmental procedures . Authorization to proceed with our study was granted byMr. Sigi9 Ullrich representing Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. , on April 1, 1981 .1 . FIELD EXPLORATION Field testing and exploration completed for this report consisted of extensive visual reconnaissance of the subject area and adjoining properties. Within the site a series of eight (8) test borings and six (6) backhoe test pits were performed. All test borings were performed to a minimum of nineteen (19) feet below the elevation of Rainier Avenue South. t I CASCAQE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. II LC.I IUN/ Cil_ULC)GIS f`_a June 9 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 3 1 .Termination depths of our backhoe test pits were determined by the limited backhoe reach or to refusal on the dense subsurface soils. 1.The field work for this project was performed from April 15, 1981, through April 21,9 p1981, and April 27. and April 29, 1981 . (Please see enclosed site map for test boring and test pit locations . ) TEST BORINGS All test borings were performed utilizing a rotary drill advancing a three and three-eighths (3-3/8) inch inner diameter hollow stem auger. Standard penetration data (ASTM D-1556) was obtained with a two (2) inch outer diameter split spoon sampler drive by a oneI --hundred forty (140) pound hammer falling thirty (30) inches . Eigh- teen (18) inch long samples were obtained at standard intervals of a five (5) feet with additional sampling at two and one-half (2-1/2) feet where deemed necessary. PIEZOMETERS To accurately determine groundwater elevations within the substrata, groundwater observation instrumentation was installed in several of the test borings . The instruments consist of a three-quarter (3/4) inch PVC pipe lowered into the test boring holes. A hydrotip wasjsecuredtotheendofthepipetoallowentryofthegroundwater into the pipe. Due to the potential for more than one groundwater elevation, two piezometers were installed in four of the test bor- ings . The lowest piezometer was set at the base of the test boring, with the upper piezometer set at an elevation indicating a higher water bearing strata. Groundwater levels may be read at any time prior to or after construction, providing the piezometers have not been removed during site development. 1 I CASCADE TESTING LABORATuHY. INC. TESTING tit INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOL.OGISTS I June 9 , 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 4 GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS I The following groundwater elevations were recorded on April 27, I1981, and June 16, 1981. Surface 4-27-81 6-16-81 Test Elevation Elevation of Elevation Elevation Boring of Test Piezometer of of Boring Tip (Hydrotip) Groundwater Groundwater TB-1 (a) 130 31 No Water No Water b) 130 100 107 104 ITB-3 (a) 100 31 55 56 b) 100 85 93 93 ITB-4 (a) -125 31 No Water No water b) 125 90 103 103 TB-5 50 31 45. 5 Vandalized TB-6 (a) 50 21 42. 5 43 .5 b) 50 45 48. 5 Vandalized TB-7 50 35 37 . 5 37 . 5 ITB-8 50 31 40. 5 40 TEST PITS I_ All test pits were excavated using a rubber-tired, tractor mounted 1 backhoe. This portion of our testing was performed under the direc- tion of an engineering geologist from our firm. F ELEVATIONS I_ All references to elevations and/or relative grades mentioned in this report are approximate, based on observed topography at the I time of our field investigation and information derived from a topo- grahic survey by Kenneth Oyler, dated 12-15-80. I - • L : CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING tle INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 5 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located immediately west of Rainier Avenue for approximately one hundred eighty-five 185) feet and between r N.W. 7th Street and South 120th Street in Renton, Washington. At present, the site slopes down from the west toward the east from 41-47%. Two (2) well defined bench features are evident along the upper portions of the property, toward the south and north. Also, along the lower elevations , smaller angled benches were observed. However, in general the site has a very uniform change in relief from the upper to lower elevations. Vegetation cover consists of abundent alders, maples and thick ground mat of bushes, vines and weeds. Immediately north of S . 121st, at the east end of that roadway, a residence has been emptying water onto the property at two (2) loca- 1 tions. The first location is immediately east of a small swimming pool. The second outfall is about half way down slope and east of the residence. The origin of the second drain system is uncertain. STRATIGRAPHY The encountered subsurface soil types and conditions are best illus- trated on the enclosed test boring and test pit logs . 1 I I r CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. TESTING INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTSJJune9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. ji Page 6 l • In summary, the site is underlain by a firm to hard grey clayey silt with scattered very fine sand layers and lenses and- minor sand and gravel. The upper elevations in the clayey silt show marked deformation in beddingplanes and lenses, with the lenses becomingbcoming more horizontal with depth. It is our interpretation that the non- uniform nature in the clayey silts indicates soft sediment deforma- tion due to overriding by one or more glacial advances at least 2, 000 feet thick." D. R. Mullineaux mapped the lower unit as gla-f. - cial or nonglacial clays . We are of the opinion that two features of the unit indicate a glacialmarine despositional environment. First, the unit effervesces in contact with a weak acid solution and secondly, the scattered sands and gravels found at random throughout our sampled sections. The scattered sands and gravels were probablyY derived from glacial ice float in a marine environment. The eleva- tions where we encountered the clayey silts was between elevation ninty-one (91) (TB-4) and elevation ninty-seven (97) (TB-11) down to the termination depth of our test borings . The strata overlying the basal clayey silts varied from a very dense gravelly silty sand to a fine to medium sand. The moisture content at each sample interval was variable, however, it generally in- creased with depth. This upper strata is mapped as kame terrace deposits over glacial till. The kame terrace deposits would corre- late with this unit, however the existance of a true glacial till is uncertain. It appears that the very dense gravelly silty sand C till-like soils) are located near the upper elevations of the test borings ; near elevation 120 (TB-1, TB-4) and elevation 97 (TP-5) . The full depth of this granular strata ranged between elevation 91 to 125 (TB-4) , to elevation 97 to 124 (TB-1) . 1 . "Geologic Map of Renton Quadrangle, D. R. Mullineaux, 1965. I. CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G f . I Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 7 The surficial soils in TB-1 were fill soils. The depth of the fill was found to be approximately six (6) feet. Also near TB-2 and TB-3, fill soils were indicated covering the upslope areas to the top of the bank. It appears that the upper elevations (above eleva- i- tion 100) have been utilized as a waste site by the local resi- dences. This debris material ranges from a gravelly silty sand to lawn cuttings and covers the natural soils as a thin veneer. AERIAL PHOTO INTERPRETATION Acquired aerial photos of the study area were viewed in the attempt I .• to formulate conclusions regarding past earthwork along the slope and determine if obvious instability is indicated between the period 1936-1981 . i. The 1936 area photo expresses a wider more gentle slope configura- tion than presently exists at the study site. The top of slope break appears to be situated in the_ same location in 1936 as in 1980. However, the land immediately east of the slope break shows definite cutting and regrading between the 1936 and 1941 photo. i During widening of Rainier Avenue, the relatively gentle slope 1936) was cut back, benched and resloped to accommodate the new roadway course. In talking to some local long time residents of this area, the project area was resloped in an attempt to reduce slides that occurred when the old Rainier Avenue alignment was being utilized. The presently existing benches along the slope appear to be the remnants of cuts and haul roads us ed during the resloping process and later abandoned upon completion. Due to natural erosional pro- cesses these benches now appear rounded and less obvious . I. E.CASCADE TESTING L \BORA1 Y, INC. TESTING tk INSPECTION/EN .INEER5/vcv OGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 8 1 Based upon our detailed analysis of the obtained aerial photos, we 1.are of the opinion that large scale sliding has not occurred at this site in recent history. I CONCLUSIONS Subsequent to our thorough studyandg review of obtained soil data, laboratory test data, aerial photo interpretations and the under- stood scope of this project, it is our opinion that development of this property is feasible and compatible, provided construction pro- 1 ceeds as recommended by the architect, structural engineer and soils engineer. The undisturbed natural soils offer outstanding strength characteristics and are expected to provide very good foundation support over the life of the structure. We would like to stress early that the foundation soils are not only extremely sensitive to excess moisture, but they are also extremely sensitive to dessica- tion (drying) . In simpler terms the ideal situation is to maintain the foundation soils at their natural moisture content throughout construction of the foundation. Excess moisture may create soft subgrade conditions while drying may cause shrinkage cracks in the layey silts. Bot h of these conditions translate into a critical reduction in the recommended maximum soil bearing value. RECOMMENDATIONS t The following recommendations are divided into specific sections . Each section has definite areas of concentration judged to be appro- priate and necessary for the successful completion of this project. These sections include: I . . I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING 8,INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G E .Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 9 1 . Bank retainage system. 2 . Recommendations for structural support. 3 . Surface and subsurface water control 4. General developmental procedures. Bank Retainage System In reviewing the proposed building location, subsurface groundwater and soil types and conditions and maximum depth of excavation neces- sary to set the structure in place, we conclude that a soldier pile- tie back soil retainage system would provide adequate restraint against the upslope soil pressures thus guarding against a potential slope failure. Such a system is placed prior to performing any building excavations in order to establish a stable slope condition. Subsequent to setting the soldier piles at their design locations, partial excavation of the building site is initiated. The purpose of the excavation is to allow the tie back anchors to be drilled, placed and cured. After proper curing, the anchors are tensioned to 125 percent of their design load to verify adequate anchor strength. Any anchors found defective should be reset and retested as pre- viously stated. Upon the successful placement and testing of all anchors, tie off the anchor bars to the soldier piles at their design loads . Fill the void between the anchor grout and the soldier piles with a very low strength grout, thus sealing off the surrounding soil mass from Ithe drill hole. CASCADE TESTING LABORA1 vrc f. INC. TESTING FA INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 10 Final excavation into the remaining soil mass may proceed follow- 1.ing the successful setting and testing of all soldier piles and tie back anchors. The exposed cut soils between the soldier piles are extremely sensi- tive to wetting and drying. Too much moisture may lead to surficial erosion and sloughing, whereas drying of the soil surface may pro- duce dessication cracking.To protect the exposed soils from adverse changes in moisture, we recommend utilizing a soil sealer between the soldier piles at the earliest possible time after exca- vation of the building area . We strongly recommend that all phases of the soldier pile installa- tion be performed under the direct observation and testing of the soils engineer. Of special concern is maintaining minimum influence on the upslope soils and slopes due to existingresidential struc- tures uc tures and property lines. I Structural Support Recommendations The natural undisturbed basal clayey silts exhibit superior strength characteristics at their existing moisture content. As previouslyt mentioned, variation in moisture content from the presently existing moisture content will have a marked reduction in the soils ability to adequately support the structural loadings. Provided that all of the following recommendations and construction procedures are complied with, a maximum safe allowable soil bearing value of 6, 000 PSF may be utilized in the foundation design. This value assumes that: I I . . 1 I CASCADE TESTING LABORAT '. INC. TESTING S INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 11 1 . All footings are sized such that the maximum allowable soil i bearing value is not exceeded. I2. All footing concrete is placed to bear on and against natural undisturbed cut soils free of sloughed, water loosened or dessi- Icated soils . •To minimize potential problems associated with soils very sensitive to changes in moisture content, all footing jtrenchesorexcavationsmustbemaintainedtopreventexcessive drying or the accumulation of water during construction. 3. All footing excavations should be inspected by the soils engi- neer to insure adequate bearing soils are at the excavation base prior to placing any footing concrete. I.We can not overemphasize the soils susceptibility to changes in moisture content. The contractor and subcontractors should be made aware of this fact and should gear their work accordingly. Continued heavy equipment travel across the grey clayey silts mayI . have an adverse effect on the strength characteristics of the travelled areas . Should soil deterioration become apparent due to wet or dry weather conditions and heavy equipment loadings the use of a rock mat haul road may become necessary during certain phases I' of the project. Garage Floor Slab The parking garage floor slab should not bear directly on the natural clayey silts due to the soils fine grained consistency and damp subgrade condition. To allow for a suitable capillary break I . I. . I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING t4 INa-ECTION/LNG'NEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd.1 .Page 12 between the natural soils and the floor slab, we recommend the use of a minimum four (4) inch thickness subslab blanket of- pea gravel or building sand used in conjunction with a vapor barrier. This rock mat is not intended to bridge soft soil conditions in the foundation area and it should only be utilized as specified. All crushed material should comply with the standards and specifications set forth in Section 9-03. 9(3) , Base Course, Washington State Highway Standard Specifications .A dense crushed rock mat so established would reduce the chances of distressing the sensitive- foundation soils during the course of construction. We would further recommend that control joints be situated between all column footing pads and the garage floor slab to allow for effects of differential loadings. Surface and Subsurface Water Control During installation of the soldier piles narrow excavations along the upper midsection of the property will he necessary to allow access of equipment. Piezometer readings indicated perched ground- water at and above the uppermost elevations of the proposed soldier piles.Anyy cuts intercepting saturated soil zones should be expected to deteriorated rapidly and should be dealt with as the situation dictates . Due to the fact that the precise roadcut eleva- tion for placement of the soldier piles has not been established at this time, it would be premature to state conclusively that ground- water will have a significant effect on the cut slope areas . When I I . . I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING tt.INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 13 the final cut elevations have been determined, we would request that this office be provided the opportunity to review the proposed elevations and submit potential and recommend drainage systems . We do not anticipate that the foundation excavation will produce a Csubstantial inflow •of water. As determined by our field testing program, groundwater appears to be confined above the undisturbed I -basal clayey silts in the granular soils and surficial slough zone along the lower slope of the property (see test pit logs and ground- water elevation information) .During excavation of the site, saturated soil zones will become apparent and should be properly drained to avoid deterioration of the moisture sensitive clayey silts. 1. Foundation and Roof Drains Due to the potential presence of groundwater within the building area and the soils extremely low permeability rate, we recommend that all foundation areas have adequate drainage to prohibit excess moisture from being retained within the foundation area . All drain- age should be directed by tightline system into a proper drainage course. tt All roof drainage should be directed within a tightline system independent of the foundation drainage into a proper drainage course. 1 I 1 . . I. CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 14 General Development Procedures We would recommend during all phases of construction that the natural slopes and cut slopes be protected from excess moisture originating from any source. This may necessitate intercepting water perched above the basal clayey silts at and above elevation ninty (90) . However, only during construction will precise groundwater conditions be realized. Each seepage should be dealt with as it becomes apparent and necessary. We recommend that all intercepted upper slope water be routed via tightline system down to Rainier Avenue and that permanent drainage systems be incorporated into the final site design. During placement of the soldier piles, access roadways are expectedP to be cut in near elevation ninty (90) . It is our recommendation 1.that cuts for the access roadway not exceed five (5) feet in height. We would further recommend that the excavation work not waste any icut soils down over the lower slopes . All excess material should be totally removed from the site to an appropriate dump site. Through the course of construction, open cuts are anticipated for access roadways, construction of the retainage system and general earthmoving procedures . We would strongly recommend that all cuts be maintained less than five (5) feet in height along the slope or at the slope toe. Under the direction and verification of the soils engineer open cuts of up to eight (8) feet may be excavated and left 1 open for short periods of time. I . ' E. CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING &INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G 4 Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 15 Careful and prudent construction techniques are highly recommended at this site. The contractor should fully understand all soil con- ditions and potential problems , prior to commencing with any earth- work . It is requested that the soils engineer be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design and specifications to confirm that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications . We do further request that the soils engineer inspect all phases of site preparation, soldier pile installations , earthnoving and foundation !' placement. Through this inspection, any necessary modifications to our recommendations or apparent problem soil conditions could be resolved immediately, with an appropriate solution. Although we do fully expect the subsurface soil conditions to reflect our findings, some local variations are possible. Should conditions other than those described herein be encountered, the soils engineer should be contacted immediately to determine if addi- tional or alternative recommendations are required. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Sigi Ullrich for specific application to the Rainier Avenue Project as described herein, in accordance with generally accepted foundation and soil engineering practices . No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. I I . . i CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENG'NEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 16 1 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this pro- ject and look forward to our working together again. . Should you have additional questions or require further assistance, please feel Cree to contact us at any time. f - Sincerely, l CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 4a0.4. Charles C . May, P . I , .. . f?7i.did', 4a/-/-14.• ••• Ronald A. Parker Engineering Geologist RAP :mjg 1• ' I. I I I I i . . Renton City Council 1/11/82 Page 2 Consent Agenda - Continued Appointment Letter from Mayor Shinpoch appointed Mrs . Marge Richter, 300 Board of Meadow Ave. N, to Position No. 4 on the Board of Adjustment to Adjustment complete the unexpired term of James Dalpay who has resigned. Appointment effective to 9/6/82. Other Board Members: Position 1 Felix Campanella; Position #2 David M. Young; Position #3 Francis A. Holman; Position #5 William F. Anderson; Position #6 Kenneth Swanigan; Position #7 Barbara Lally. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Court Case Superior Court Writ of Certiorari #81-2-17564-3 was filed by Clarkrich, Inc. vs City regarding environmental review of build- ing permit for property located at the northwest intersection of SE 6th St. and Pierce Ave. SE. Refer to City Attorney. S:irskey Holdings Letter from Hearing Examiner Fred Kaufman recommended denial of Rezone Denied rezone application R-056-81 for Stirskey Holdings ; property G to B-1 located at 700 Rainier Ave. N. ; proposed three story office building. Council concur in denial . Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS Approval PRESENTED. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Council Member Stredicke gave notice that next Monday Council 1 ,825,000 Bond would be requested by bonding counsel to call for bids for the Sale for Park final stage work approved by voters for Coulon Memorial Lake Washington Beach Park and committee to be presenting ordinance. Garbage Collection Council Member Stredicke questioned garbage collection during the period of snow and also during the holidays . Mayor Shinpoch explained the garbage company policy of refunding up to l/4 of month'sbilling when pick-up missed and citizen hauls own garbage: or extra bags/cans will be collected without extra fees. StredickE urged specs reflect policy re inclement weather. Council President Clymer felt one week was too long a delay in pickup and a burden to homeowners. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND CLYMER, SUBJECT MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRATION FOR REPORT BACK. CARRIED. Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented Development committee report re allowing mobile home uses in single family Committee zones and recommended that no action be taken on the matter. Mobile/Modular MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND HUGHES, CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION OF Homes THE COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Short Plat The Planning and Development Committee considered requirement of Sewer Requirements hooking up to sanitary sewers in Short Plats and recommended that Section 9-1108 (14) (c) be amended to provide major subdivisions with sanitary sewer installations at no cost to the City of Renton and that also in the case of Short Plat Subdivisions , the Sub- divider provide for installation of complete saniary sewer system if public sewer main if located within 200 ft. The committee further recommended approval of septic tank and disposal field installations be conditioned upon approval by the health agencies and upon execution of covenants (running with the land) for connec- tion and payment for any later developer extensions of public sewer lines adjoining the subdivision. The report also recom- mended referral to the Ways and Means Committee for legislation. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND HUG-HES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDA TION OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, SUBJECT OF SINGLE FAMILY INDIVIDUAL SEWER CONNECTIONS BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. F .U.D. Filing The Planning and Development Committee report noted consideration 1pecifications of Planned Unit Development filing requirements and recommended that Code Section 4-2710 be amended to include documentation within the Preliminary PUD Plan Application. Referral to Ways and Means Committee recommended. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND DEVELOP- I I MENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting January 11 , 1982 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL H. CLYMER, Council President; THOMAS W. TRIMM, NANCY L. COUNCIL MEMBERS MATHEWS, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, RANDALL ROCKHILL AND ROBERT J. HUGHES. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN W. REED. CARRIED. CITY OFFICIALS BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE DELORES A. MEAD, City Clerk; MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; RICHARD HOUGHTON, Public Works Director; LT. PERSSON, Police Department. PRESS Jan Hinman, Renton Record Chronicle. MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND STREDICKE, APPROVE COUNCIL MINUTES OF JANUARY 4, 1982 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Joseph Thiel , 1506 South Puget Drive, asked re LID No. 322, LID No. 322 improvements to South Puget Drive, noting his $9,580.56 assessment S. Puget Drive reduced from $24,000) , that his property is only single family Improvements residence within the improvement district , his home too small for his family, sale restricted by the L. I .D. and asked for a fair settlement. Public Works Director Houghton explained history of the LID and method of assessment, noting large apartments and condominiums had signed agreements with the city for participa- tion in the improvements , that Thiel 's property had been covenanted by previous owner at time of short platting. Houghton explained final costs are unknown until fall , construction bids will be received 1/12/82. City Attorney Warren noted Council ' s right to discuss method of assessment , that Council sits as Board of Equalization at final hearing for the entire project. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND CLYMER, REFER MATTER TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE FOR STUDY AND REPORT BACK. CARRIED. Students Present Mayor Shinpoch welcomed students from Lindberg High School , Mr. Little's Government Class. CONSENT AGENDA The following business matters are adopted by one motion which follows the items included. Garbage Rates Letter from Finance Director Bennett requested amendment to Ordinance Ordinance 3522 increasing garbage collection rates effective with the January collection. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. King County Letter from the Executive, Personnel and Finance Departments, Medical Agreement requested review of the retroactive premium agreement with King County Medical for employee and dependent benefit program. The letter explained the city would pay a 14% rate increase effective 1/1/82 and allow King County Medical to recover an additional amount according to group loss ratio at contract end. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for recommendation. Fund Transfer Letter from Mayor Shinpoch and Finance Director Bennett requested Salary Increases a resolution for transfer of funds for 1982 salary and benefit increases for Local 21-R employees, Management, Supervisory and exempt employees, along with Fire Chief, and Battalion Chiefs. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Borrowing Funds Letter from Finance Department requested a resolution be drafted to borrow funds in the amount of $500,000 from Street Forward Thrust pending receipt of tax revenues. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. (See later resolution. ) For Use By City Clerk's Office Onl A. I . AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTING Dept./)iv./Bd./Comm. Land Use Hearing Examiner For Agenda Of January 11 , 1982 Meeting Date) Staff 'Contact Marilyn Petersen Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: File No. R-056-81 ; Stirskey Holdings , Consent X Public Hearing Ltd. : Request for Rezone Correspondence Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. Examiner 's Report , 12-21 -81 Other B. C Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A X COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Denial Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A x Other Clearance FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required $ Amount $ Appropriation- $ Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) Attach additional pages if necessary. ) The appeal period for the attached Examiner 's Report and Recommendation expired on January 4, 1981 , and the matter is hereby forwarded to the City Council for review and final disposition. PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: See page 4 of the attached report. SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. OF ! iv 4.) P z THECITY OF RENTON 4;, "` { R llP<!C!P!i."_ !;UILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. :`.8055 halt BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR 0 LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER SEP-O'`4eiQ co- FRED J. KAUFMAN. 2 E - : January 7, 1981 Mr. Ron Healey John Anderson, Assoc. , Architects 10512 N.E. 25th Bellevue, WA 98004 RE: File No. R-056-81 ; Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. ; Request for Rezone. Dear Mr. Healey: The Examiner's Report and Recommenation regarding the referenced request has not been appealed within the time period established by ordinance. Therefore, this matter is being submitted to the City Clerk this date for transmittal to the City Council for review and disposition. You will receive notification of the City Council 's final action regarding this matter from the City Clerk's office. If further assistance or information is desired, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Building & Zoning Department For.Use by City Clerk's Office Of y I A. I . # AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm, Land Use Hearing Examiner For Agenda Of January 11 , 1982 Meeting Date) Staff Contact Marilyn Petersen Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: File No. R-056-81 ; Stirskey Holdings, Consent X Ltd. : Request for Rezone Public Hearing Correspondence Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. Examiner's Report , 12-21-81 Other B. C. Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A X COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Denial Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A x Other Clearance FISCAL IMPACT: Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Required $ audgeted $ Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior a .tion and effect of implementation) Attach additional pages if necessary.) The appeal period for the attached Examiner's Report and Recommendation expired on January 4, 1981 , and the matter is hereby forwarded to the City Council for review and final disposition. PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: See page 4 of the attached report. SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING State of Washington) County of King i Marilyn J. Petersen being first duly sworn, upon oath disposes and states: That on the 21st day of December 19 81 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. d.) .6,„/ Subscribed and sworn this A\ day of becQ VA,Abef , 19 U tA. ,r l • h. Notary Public in and for th,k State of Washington, residing at evro„ Application, Petition or Case: Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. ; R-056-81 The minute's contain a £ist ob the pan.i.e4 06 necond. ) December 21 , 1981 0 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLiCANT: Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. FILE NO. R-056-81 LOCATION: Vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks a rezone of the subject site from G to B-1 for future construction of a three-story office building. SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval with restrictive covenants RECO1MENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Denial PLAN\IING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by REPORT: the Examiner on December 9, 1981 . PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on December 15, 1981 at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, presented the Planning Department report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents 1 Exhibit #2: King County Assessor's Map Exhibit #3: Topographic Map showing footprint of building on site Exhibit #4: Architectural Rendering (not binding on city or applicant) Mr. Blaylock described Exhibit #3, which illustrates the limitations of the building and site development problems, and Exhibit #4, which shows the intent to create a retaining wal of the structure to support the embankment. Because the elevation on the site varie from 50 feet at Rainier Avenue to up to 125 feet at the western edge of the property, the ERC had recommended that the westerly half of the site should remain undisturbed. Referencing the geotechnical report included in the file, Mr. Blaylock noted a critical con,;ern regarding the sensitive nature of the soil to either excess moisture, which creates a soft consistency, or dessication, which causes shrinkage and cracking of the soil , thereby creating a different pressure load on the retaining wall . Due to these specific site problems, the ERC had restricted approval of the declaration of non- significance to a specific building design, and any other development without the retaining wall and erosion and drainage control plan would not be appropriate. Mr. Blaylock also indicated that the proposal should be conditioned upon execution of restrictive covenants to require reversion of the zoning if development does not occur within five years of approval . This decision had been based upon future availability of 3-1 and L-1 zoned property, and changes in technological information which may affect proposed development beyond the next five years. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Ron Healey John Anderson, Assoc. , Architects 10512 N.E. 25th Bellevue, WA 98004 Mr. Healey displayed a model of the proposed building on the steeply sloped site to illustrate the function of the rear of the building as a retaining wall . He noted that the height of the building will not exceed the top of the cut, and therefore the four stcry, 40-foot high building will not block views of residents located west of the site. Methods of construction were described by Mr. Healey, and it was noted that due to the sensitivity of the soil to water, a very costly and complicated drilling process will be R-056-81 Page Two 411 employed in boring holes and setting steel pilings prior to construction. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding technical and economic feasibility of constructing the proposal on the subject site, and if the city would be jeopardized by losing the hill , Mr. Healey indicated that several engineers would be participating in the development, and adherence to their recommendations would be mandatory. The Examiner stated that concern on the part of the city would require assurance of completion of the project once it is commenced. Mr. Healey indicated that the matter had been discussed with the applicant and while an unconditioned rezone would be preferable to them, they did not object to the conditions of the ERC. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the estimated cost of the completed project, Mr. Healey stated that half of the two million dollar project would be associated with construction of the retaining wall . The Examiner entered the building model into the record as follows: Exhibit #5: Model of Proposed Project Since there were no further comments , the hearing regarding File No. R-056-81 was closed by the Examiner at 9:30 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The applicant, Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. , filed a request for a reclassification of approximately 58,000 square feet of property from G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) to B-1 (Business/Commercial ) . 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Planning Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 4. All existing utilities are available and in close proximity or may be extended to the property. 5. The subject property is located on the west side of Rainier Avenue N. in the vicinity of N.W. 7th Street (Renton) and S. 121st Street (King County) . 6. Pursuant to environmental review, a specific site plan, preliminary architectural and engineering specifications, and a geotechnical report were developed. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the declaration of non-significance based on these specific documents, preservation of the natural vegetation on the western half of the hillside, and use of the property for commercial rather than residential purposes. 7. The subject site is almost entirely composed of steep slope which ranges from about 41 to 47%. The higher westerly portions of the subject site are about 75 feet above Rainier Avenue N. The project architect indicated that while the slope doesn' t appear steep, it is, in fact, very steep. 8. A special geotechnical report prepared for the subject site details the physical nature of the slope and soil composition of the site. The report indicates that the site has potential for development only if very strict , specific engineering principles of construction coincide with slope stabilization. Careful and prudent construction techniques are highly recommended at this site. The contractor should fully understand all soil conditions and potential problems prior to commencing with any earthwork." (Page 15, Rainier Avenue Project , Cert. No. 814-8G) Special difficulties arise concerning the water content of the soils. The current structural integrity of the soils depends on maintaining the existing water content , and the report indicates that this is crucial , as the load bearing strength of the site could be lessened. The clay-like soils may either become soft with additional moisture or dessicated and cracked if allowed to dry out. As previously mentioned, variation in moisture content from the presently existing moisture content will have a marked reduction in the soils ability to adequately support the structure loadings." (Page 10, Ibid) I 1 R-056-81 Page Three The report indicates that either of these dry/wet conditions would happen under normal development procedures, and special precautions must be used to prevent either possibility from occurring. We cannot overemphasize the soil 's susceptibility to changes in moisture content. The contractor and subcontractors should be made aware of this fact and should gear their work accordingly." (Page 11 , Ibid) 9. The applicant 's project architect estimated that the cost of constructing the proposed building would be approximately $2 million with about half of that cost necessary to build the partial retaining wall . Any termination of the project leaving incomplete structural components would jeopardize the stability of the hillside. The characterization of the project by the representative indicated the costs were not those ordinarily associated with similar office-type proposals, and that the proposal was extremely expensive. Architectural analysis indicates that the proposed office building is a necessary and structural component of the retaining wall and the wall itself and/or partial construction would not adequately support the slope. The project is more generally described as an "all or none" project. Either the slope is left undeveloped or under the current state of the art the entire building including both surface and subsurface water control systems must be completed. The structural integrity of the hillside can be maintained by partial excavation and special reinforcing techniques more fully described in the special report which is part of Exhibit #1 . The following recommendations are divided into specific sections. Each section has definite areas of concentration judged to be appropriate and necessary for the successful completion of this project." (Page 8, Ibid) (Emphasis supplied.) 10. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of commercial uses. The commercial designation generally follows Rainier Avenue N. on the west side. 11 . The zoning in the area consists of a mix of zoning categories including the large P-1 (Public/Quasi-Public) zone to the east in which the Renton Municipal Airport is located, the G zone in which the subject site is located, the B-1 zone fronting along the western side of Rainier Avenue N. , and the extensive single family zone to the west of the subject site located in King County. 12. The applicant has submitted the engineering geotechnical report and preliminaryarchitecturaldrawingbuthasnotindicatedwillingnesstobeboundbythesubmitted proposal . The applicant 's architect indicated that the applicant wanted to remain free to use the property for any B-1 use, which would include residential uses, and not be bound by the submitted plans. 13. Single family homes are located at the top of the slope and Rainier Avenue N. is located at the toe of the slope. Slippage of the hillside could jeopardize both areas. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The proponent of a rezone must demonstrate that the request is in the public interes and will not impair the public health, safety and welfare in addition to compliance with at least one of the three criteria listed in Section 4-3014 which provides in part that: a. The subject site has not been considered in a previous area rezone or land use analysis; or b. The subject site is potentially designated for the new classification per the Comprehensive Plan; or c. There has been material and substantial change in the circumstances in the area in which the subject site is located since the last rezoning of the property or area. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that the proposed reclassification of the subject site is in the public interest. R-056-81 Page Four 2. The burden of demonstrating that the request should be granted is upon the applicant and the applicant has only demonstrated that westerly portions of Rainier Avenue are generally designated for commercial development. The topography of the site is extremely sensitive and only limited development is technically feasible at this time. Specific reference to the site and its physical characteristics must be made prior to any reclassification. The Comprehensive Plan alone, where site constraints are established, is not the sole criterion. 3. The topography of the site is such that under current engineering standards , development, while conceivable, is limited, and the applicant has not demonstrated willingness to be bound by the geotechnical report or architectural plans . 4. The applicant who requests reclassification of property must show that the reclassification will not only benefit the applicant, but will serve the public interest , and, specifically, will not jeopardize that interest or other property rights. The stability of the hillside and slope above Rainier Avenue and the integrity of the properties west of the site and Rainier Avenue N. must be protected, and for the moment, the only reasonable structure and method of construction is presented in the geotechnical report. Until the applicant presents specific plans and indicates an intention to be bound by those plans, the reclassification should be denied. If the applicant believes other proposals are viable, then such plans supported by detailed information similar to that submitted should be produced. A general reclassification to B-1 without more is certainly insupportable in light of the data now available. 5. Plans and contracts should be presented in some form which compels the applicant to complete the project once begun or enable the city to complete the project (some form of bond or other security) in a cost-effective manner since the record indicates that a partially constructed structure will not support the hillside. Cuts in the slope must be treated quickly and in a special fashion, and abandonment in mid-stream cannot be tolerated geologically. Once the hillside is cut, the chances for sloughing because of a change in moisture content is a likely result unless the detailed precautions are followed. 6. Since the record is devoid of any indication of the applicant 's intention to proceed with plans the project architect described as exceptionally costly, it would be inappropriate for the City Council to approve any reclassification of the subject site. The request should be treated as untimely. Only upon submission of a contract and covenants totally committing the applicant to the course of action described in the reports or other proposals similarly supported and with assurances that all work on the project can be completed, should the Council even consider the reclassification. RECOMMENDATION: The requested reclassification of the subject property should be denied. ORDERED THIS 21st day of December, 1981 . Fred J. ufman Land Use earing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 21st day of December, 1981 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Ron Healey, John Anderson, Assoc. , Architects, 10512 N.E. 25th, Bellevue, WA 98004 Gloria Bird, 8722 S. 121st, Seattle, WA 98178 TRANSMITTED THIS 21st day of December, 1981 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director David Clemens, Policy Development Director Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Members , Planning Commission Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle R-056-81 Page Five Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015of the City's Code, request for reconsideration mustyq be filed in writing on or before January 4, 1981 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost in said department. t 1 ri, !im 7 lot TITI I I I .,__. , cl eT --•--- - ---- s .., t..r•, r a';. , -- ii V + ECIrmI . 2...... , 0 2 14,Si . . . , t 1.. 11i.L.......J` TJ J I Al• 1 ._ -- - ‘'l 6° Afri \ \\ 73 E p W' p5gEq,„N:r„i .1_. 04', k2 err s. n 1 5,..w..1. . ., ,. ti-,u. L._`;1...:.i..l .1t.:.,., ifi.... L.= ! • rad n n•7 Is " TT .. 1I7 r'T t 71 T".-'^`r, I>iler "a".-'•"41'I ! 113 rz:!,4 J-i 1 ' il Q 1 c .ST 4y.TT i i . _. -.41,:jaarli.r,>,zi....„.0.la i, 1 it iii"-1 •••••61"/ • Tt..ii i f• _2,•. J j ' N 1 L.:1;... . 1. 1:. T O;. y-., , •A c• ll • "• t:,.. 1,y°r-- - [ek My l i 4' -L'' ` 9 1 e 1 .. ., 2 ,Rt. to i a• div 1 S f I - - MJ 1'•^ 1 1 C---- J, Z ..,rh! ' - . -. .- rp/ ,,_ Lam' e . . . • if p. / TT.+'. •WCr-.. Jr.Jna' 9Thi.i arr '.asYiC I 1. .a I1 1_ . T a 1_r. A A ZIF..•1 E: I •...'L Ire 7 . I 7 4 ,N. N t rl lltrtll a-.sr.era nm•E..aroma. STIRSKEY HOLDING LTD. REZONE, File R-056-81 APPLICANT TOTAL AREA +58,000 sq. ft.STSRGKF.Y -HOLDING I.TI2, PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Rainier Ave. North EXISTING ZONING G" - General Classification District EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Future construction of three-story office -building. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial COMMENTS 1 1 I . I i 1 i : RAINIER AVENUE PROJECT F . RAINIER AVENUE 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON CERT. NO. 814-8G 1 t • I, I t..- t 711'0>e? \, 1 I: s,,, . ,,,-$ .,„ 7,\' S r r ., 37 1 E . .40 F . I \ I CASCADE STING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING & INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS I L 14120 N E. 21st STREET SEATTLE (206)525-6700 BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98007 206)641-2573 EVERETT (206)259.0817 June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G F Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. P.O. Box 964 Renton, WA 98055 Attention: Mr. Sigi Ullrich Reference: Rainier Avenue Project I Rainier Avenue Renton, Washington Gentlemen: We are pleased to submit herewith our final analysis and soils I . engineering report for the proposed office structure to be construc- ted at the -above referenced project site. Based upon the encoun- tered subsurface soil types and conditions, we oFCer the Col.lowincj recommended foundation soil design criteria and recommended general developmental procedures . F. .. It is our understanding that the proposed project is to consist of constructing a four (4) story structure, utilizing reinforced con- crete. The dimensions of the project is approximately sixty-four 64) feet by three hundred forty-four (344) feet. The lower two floors are designed as automobile parking and access driveways. The upper two 'levels are designed for offices and will have approxi- mately 22, 000 sq. ft. of floor space. The concrete structure will be sited immediately west of Rainier Avenue South to a maximum horizon- tal distance some eighty-five (85) feet west of the easterly pro- perty line. The westerly wall is to be designed as a retaining I structure resisting the upslope soil pressures . 1 1 r. ASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. I. TLb TING Lk T70N/tNGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS s ' June 9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 2 The purpose of our investigation was to assess the presently existing surface and subsurface soil types and conditions as they relate to development of the property. Included in our analysis are pertinent geotechnical and soil engineering data to aid in the structural designs. Specifically our study included: 1. Extensive visual reconnaissance of the surficial soils and 1 existing slope condition. 2 . Examination and classification of the subsurface soils through utilization of test borings and backhoe test pits . 3 . An evaluation of the stability of the site ro er.P P r =4. Laboratory testing on collected soil samples . J5. Geotechnical analysis of the soil data and presentation of soils engineering information. 6. General developmental procedures . Authorization to proceed with our study was granted by Mr. Sigi Ullrich representing Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. , on April 1 , 1981 . FIELD EXPLORATION Field testing and exploration completed for this report consisted of extensive visual reconnaissance of the subject area and adjoining properties . Within the site a series of eight (8) test borings and fsix (6) backhoe test pits were performed. All test borings were h.performed to a minimum of nineteen (19) feet below the elevation of Rainier Avenue South. I I U CASCADE_ TESTING LABORATORY. INC. I L .I INC.IL IN:-.1'LL I IC/N/LNt:IN L.LI lS/ f June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 3 Termination depths of our backhoe test pits were determined by the limited backhoe reach or to refusal on the dense subsurface soils . The field work for this project was performed from April 15, 1981, through April 21, 1981, and April 27. and April 29, 1981 . (Please see enclosed site map for test boring and test pit locations . ) TEST BORINGS All test borings were performed utilizing a rotary drill advancing a three and three-eighths (3-3/8) inch inner diameter hollow stem auger. Standard penetration data (ASTM D-1556) was obtained with a two (2) inch outer diameter split spoon sampler drive by a one hundred forty (140) pound hammer falling thirty (30) inches . Eigh- tteen ( 18) inch long samples were obtained at standard intervals of five (5) feet with additional sampling at two and one-half (2-1/2) feet where deemed necessary. P I EZ OMETE RS To accurately determine groundwater elevations within the substrata, groundwater observation instrumentation was installed in several ofI- the test borings . The instruments consist of a three-quarter (3/4) inch PVC pipe lowered into the test boring holes. A hydrotip was secured to the end of the pipe to allow entry of the groundwater into the pipe. Due to the potential for more than one groundwater elevation, two piezometers were installed in four of the test bor- ings . The lowest piezometer was set at the base of the test boring, with the upper piezometer set at an elevation indicating a higher water bearing strata. Groundwater levels may be read at any time prior to or after construction, providing the piezometers have not been removed during site development. I 1 F CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING tie INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 4 GROUNDWATER ELEVATIONS I- ' The following groundwater elevations were recorded on April 27, 1981, and June 16, 1981 . Surface 4-27-81 6-16-81 Test Elevation Elevation of Elevation Elevation Boring of Test Piezometer of of Boring Tip (Hydrotip) Groundwater Groundwater i 'TB-1 (a) 130 31 No Water No Water b) 130 100 107 104 TB-3 (a)100 31 55 56 b) 100 85 93 93 TB-4 (a) -125 31 No Water No water b) 125 90 103 103 1 . TB-5 50 31 45. 5 Vandalized TB-6 (a) 50 21 42.5 43 . 5 b) 50 45 48. 5 Vandalized TB-7 50 35 37 .5 37 . 5 ITB-8 50 31 40. 5 40 LTEST PITS All test pits were excavated using a rubber-tired, tractor mounted 1... backhoe. This portion of our testing was performed under the direc- tion of an engineering geologist from our firm. Ii. ELEVATIONS IAll references to elevations and/or relative grades mentioned in this report are approximate, based on observed topography at theI: this of our field investigation and information derived from a topo- grahic survey by Kenneth Oyler, dated 12-15-80. I. -- i I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. E - TESTING' t9 INSPECT ION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 5 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located immediately west of Rainier Avenue for approximately one hundred eighty-five 185 feet and betweenPPY N.W. 7th Street and South 120th Street in Renton, Washington. At present, the site slopes down from the west toward the east from 41-47%. Two (2) well defined bench features are evident along the upper portions of the property, toward the south and north. Also, along the lower elevations, smaller angled benches were observed. However, in general the site has a very uniform change in relief from the upper to lower elevations . I • Vegetation cover consists of abundent alders, maples and thick ground mat of bushes, vines and weeds . Immediately north of S . 121st, at the east end of that roadway, a residence has been emptying water onto the property at two (2) loca- ltions. The first location is immediately east of a small swimming j pool. The second outfall is about half way down slope and east of the residence. The origin of the second drain system is uncertain. STRATIGRAPHY The encountered subsurface soil types and conditions are best illus- trated on the enclosed test boring and test pit logs . I t. l I I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. TESTING et INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 6 I . In summary, the site is underlain by a firm to hard grey clayey silt with scattered very fine sand layers and lenses a nd• minor sand and gravel. The upper elevations in the clayey silt show marked deformation in bedding planes and lenses, with the lenses becoming more horizontal with depth. It is our interpretation that the non- uniform nature in the clayey silts indicates soft sediment deforma- tion due to overriding by one or more glacial advances at least f -2, 000 feet thick.' D. R. Mullineaux mapped the lower unit as gla- cial or nonglacial clays . We are of the opinion that two features of the unit indicate a glacialmarine despositional environment. First, the unit effervesces in contact with a weak acid solution and secondly, the scattered sands and gravels found at random throughout our sampled sections . The scattered sands and gravels were probably derived from glacial ice float in a marine environment. The eleva- Itions where we encountered the clayey silts was between elevation ninty-one (91) (TB-4) and elevation ninty-seven (97) (TB-il) down to the termination depth of our test borings . The strata overlying the basal clayey silts varied from a very dense gravellysiltysand to a fine to medium sand. The moisture content at each sample interval was variable, however, it generally in-t_ creased with depth. This upper strata is mapped as kame terrace deposits over glacial till. The kame terrace deposits would corre- late with this unit, however the existance of a true glacial till is uncertain. It appears that the very dense gravelly silty sand till-like soils) are located near the upper elevations of the test borings ; near elevation 120 (TB-1, TB-4) and elevation 97 (TP-5) . The full depth of this granular strata ranged between elevation 91t_ to 125 (TB-4) , to elevation 97 to 124 (TB-1) . 1 . "Geologic Map of Renton Quadrangle, D. R. Mullineaux, 1965. CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING S INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd.I • Page 7 The surficial soils in TB-1 were fill soils. The depthofp the fill was found to be approximately six (6) feet. Also near TB-2 and TB-3 fil l soils were indicated covering the upslope areas to the topof the bank. It appears thatpp the upper elevations (above eleva- tion 100) have been utilized as a waste site by the local resi- dences. This debris material ranges from a gravelly silty sand to lawn cuttings and covers the natural soils as a thin veneer. AERIAL PHOTO INTERPRETATION Acquired aerial photos of the study area were viewed in the attempt to formulate conclusions regarding past earthwork along the slope and determine if obvious instability is indicated between the period 1936-1981 . The 1936 area photo expresses a wider more gentle slope configura- tion than presently exists at the study site. The top of slope break appears to be situated in the same location in 1936 as in 1980. However, the land immediately east of the slope break shows definite cuttingand regrading between the 1936 and 1941 photo. During widening of Rainier Avenue, the relatively gentle slope 1936) was cut back, benched and resloped to accommodate the new roadway course. In talking to some local long time residents of this area, the project area was resloped in an attempt to reduce slides that occurred when the old Rainier Avenue alignment was being utilized. IThe presently existing benches along the slope appear to be the i remnants of cuts and haul roads used during the resloping process and later abandoned upon completion. Due to natural erosional pro- cesses these benches now appear rounded and less obvious . 1 I ASCADE TESTING L \BORATORY. .• TESTING to iNSYECTION/EN::INEERS/GEOLOv. June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 8 Based upon our detailed analysis of the obtained aerial photos, we are of the opinion that large scale sliding has not occurred at this site in recent history. CONCLUSIONS r 1 Subsequent to our thorough study and review of obtained soil data, `I laboratory test data, aerial photo interpretations and the under- stood scope of this project, it is our opinion that development of this property is feasible and compatible, provided construction pro- ceeds as recommended by the architect, structural engineer and soils engineer. The undisturbed natural soils offer outstanding strength characteristics and are expected to provide very good foundation support over the life of the structure. We would like to stress early that the foundation soils are not only extremely sensitive to excess moisture, but they are also extremely sensitive to dessica- tion (drying) . In simpler terms the ideal situation is to maintain the foundation soils at their natural moisture content throughout construction of the foundation. Excess moisture may create soft subgrade conditions while drying may cause shrinkage cracks in the clayey silts . Both of these conditions translate into a critical reduction in the recommended maximum soil bearing value. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are divided into specific sections. Each section has definite areas of concentration judged to be appro- priate and necessary for the successful completion of this project. These sections include:1- 1 CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 9 1 . Bank retainag e system. 2. Recommendations for structural support. 3. Surface and subsurface water control 4. General developmental procedures .1 Bank Retainage System In reviewing the proposed building location, subsurface groundwater and soil types and conditions and maximum depth of excavation neces- sary to set the structure in place, we conclude that a soldier pile- j tie back soil retainage system would provide adequate restraint against the upslope soil pressures thus guarding against a potential slope failure. Such a system is placed prior to performing any building excavations in order to establish a stable slope condition. Subsequent to setting the soldier piles at their design locations, partial excavation of the building site is initiated. The purpose of the excavation is to allow the tie back anchors to be drilled, placed and cured. After proper curing, the anchors are tensioned to 125 percent of their design load to verify adequate anchor strength. Any anchors found defective should be reset and retested as pre- viously stated. Upon the successful placement and testing of all anchors, tie off the anchor bars to the soldier piles at their design loads . Fill the void between the anchor grout and the soldier piles with a veryii low strengthgrout, thus sealingoff the surroundin g soil mass from the drill hole. I -- CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. .. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS Ir-June 9 , 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 10I. . Final excavation into the remaining soil mass may proceed follow-I ing the successful setting and testing of all soldier piles and tie back anchors. U The exposed cut soils between the soldier piles are extremely sensi- tive to wetting and drying. Too much moisture may lead to surficial erosion and sloughing, whereas drying of the soil surface may pro f' ' duce dessication cracking.To protect the exposed soils from adverse changes in moisture, we recommend utilizingsoil sealera between the soldier piles at the earliest possible time after exca- vation of the building area . We stronglx recommend that all phases of the soldier pile installa- tion be performed under the direct observation and testing of the soils engineer. Of special concern is maintaining minimum influence on the upslope soils and slopes due to existing residential struc- tures and property lines . 1. tStructural Support Recommendations 1. The natural undisturbed basal clayey silts exhibit superior strength characteristics at their existing moisture content. As previously mentioned, variation in moisture content from the presently existing moisture content will have a marked reduction in the soils ability to adequately support the structural loadings. Provided that all of the following recommendations and construction procedures are complied with, a maximum safe allowable soil bearing value of 6, 000 PSF may be utilized in the foundation design. This value assumes that: CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. .. TESTING 8.INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 314-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. 1 .Page 11 1 . All footings are sized such that the maximum allowable soil bearing value is not exceeded. 2. All footing concrete is placed to bear on and against natural undisturbed cut soils free of sloughed, water loosened or dessi- cated soils . -To minimize potential problems associated with soils very sensitive to changes in moisture content, all footing trenches or excavations must be maintained to prevent excessive drying or the accumulation of water during construction. 3. All footing excavations should be inspected by the soils engi- neer to insure adequate bearing soils are at the excavation base prior to placing any footing concrete. I 'We can not overemphasize the soils susceptibility to changes in moisture content. The contractor and subcontractors should be made , aware of this fact and should gear their work accordingly. Continued heavy equipment travel across the grey clayey silts may have an adverse effect on the strength characteristics of the travelled areas . Should soil deterioration become apparent due to wet or dry weather conditions and heavy equipment loadings the use of a rock mat haul road may become necessary during certain phases of the project. 1 Garage Floor Slab IThe parking garage floor slab should not bear directly on the natural clayey silts due to the soils fine grained consistency and damp subgrade condition. To allow for a suitable capillary break I- 7 1 CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING C.INSPECTION/ENG'NEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 12 between the natural soils and the floor slab, we recommend the use of a minimum four (4) inch thickness subslab blanket of pea gravel or building sand used in conjunction with a vapor barrier. This rock mat is not intended to bridge soft soil conditions in the foundation area and it should only be utilized as specified. All crushed material should comply with the standards and specifications set forth in Section 9-03. 9(3) , Base Course, Washington State Highway Standard Specifications . A dense crushed rock mat so established would reduce the chances of distressing the sensitive- foundation soils during the course of construction. We would further recommend that control joints be situated between all column footing pads and the garage floor slab to allow for 1 effects of differential loadings . Surface and Subsurface Water Control During installation of the soldier piles narrow excavations along 1 the upper midsection of the property will he necessary to allow access of equipment. Piezometer readings indicated perched ground- water at and above the uppermost elevations of the proposed soldier piles.Any cuts intercepting saturated soil zones should be expected to deteriorated rapidly and should be dealt with as the situation dictates . Due to the fact that the precise roadcut eleva- tion for placement of the soldier piles has not been established at this time, it would be premature to state conclusively that ground- water will have a significant effect on the cut slope areas . When 1 I - I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING tS INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 13 I the final cut elevations have been determined, we would request that this office be provided the opportunity to review the proposed elevations and submit potential and recommend drainage systems . We do not anticipate that the foundation excavation will produce a substantial inflow 'of water. As determined by our field testing program, groundwater appears to be confined above the undisturbed r basal clayey silts in the granular soils and surficial slough zone j along the lower slope of the property (see test pit logs and ground- water elevation information) .During excavation of the site, saturated soil zones will become apparent and should he properly drained to avoid deterioration of the moisture sensitive clayey isilts. I . Foundation and Roof Drains Due to the potential presence of groundwater within the building area and the soils extremely low permeability rate, we recommend that all foundation areas have adequate drainage to prohibit excess moisture from being retained within the foundation area . All drain- age should be directed by tightline system into a proper drainage course. All roof drainage should be directed within a tightline system independent of the foundation drainage into a proper drainage course. I l CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING tk INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 14 General Development Procedures We would recommend during all phases of construction that the natural slopes and cut slopes be protected from excess moisture originating from any source. This may necessitate intercepting water perched above the basal clayey silts at and above elevation ninty (90) . However, only during construction will precise groundwater conditions be realized. Each seepage should be dealt with as it becomes apparent and necessary. We recommend that all intercepted upper slope water be routed via tightline system down to Rainier Avenue and that permanent drainage systems be incorporated into the final site design. Duringplacement of the soldierpiles, access roadways are expectedYP to be cut in near elevation ninty (90) . It is our recommendation that cuts for the access roadway not exceed five (5) feet in height. We would further recommend that the excavation work not waste any cut soils down over the lower slopes . All excess material should be totally removed from the site to an appropriate dump site. Through the course of construction, open cuts are anticipated for access roadways, construction of the retainage system and general t earthmoving procedures . We would strongly recommend that all cuts C be maintained less than five (5) feet in height along the slope or at the slope toe. Under the direction and verification of the soils engineer open cuts of up to eight (8) feet may be excavated and left open for short periods of time. I. I I CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. INC. TESTING&INSPECTION/ENGINEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9 , 1981 Cert. No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings , Ltd. Page 15 Careful and prudent construction techniques are highly recommended at this site. The contractor should fully understand all soil con- --' Iditions and potential problems, prior to commencing with any earth- work. It is requested that the soils engineer be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design and specifications to confirm that earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications . We do further request that the soils engineer inspect all phases of site preparation, soldier pile installations, earthmoving and foundation placement. Through this inspection, any necessary modifications to our recommendations or apparent problem soil conditions could be resolved immediately, with an appropriate solution. Although we do fully expect the subsurface soil conditions to reflect our findings, some local variations are possible. Should conditions other than those described herein be encountered, the soils engineer should be contacted immediately to determine if addi- tional or alternative recommendations are required. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Mr . Sigi Ullrich for specific application to the Rainier Avenue Project as described herein, in accordance with generally accepted foundation and soil engineering practices . No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. I El CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY. ING. TESTING 8x INSPECTION/ENG'NEERS/GEOLOGISTS June 9, 1981 Cert . No. 814-8G Stirskey Holdings, Ltd. Page 16 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this pro- ject and look forward to our working together again. - Should you have additional questions or require further assistance, please feel free to contact us at any time. 1 Sincerely, CASCADE TESTING LABORATORY, INC. afg, Charles C . May, P . Ronald A. Parker Engineering Geologist RAP :mjg I L L_ I PLANNINGING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE .EARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING DECEMBER 15 , 1981 APPLICANT: STIRSKEY HOLDING, LTD. FILE NUMBER: R-056-81 A. SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks a rezone of the subject site from G" to B-1 for future construction of a 3-story office building. B. GENERAL I FO'Nl iA TION 1 . Owner of Record: ULLRICH, MARILYN N. 2. Applicant : STIRSKEY HOLDING, LTD. 3. Location: Vicinity Map Attached) Vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N. 4 . Legal Description : A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property: 58,000 square feet 6. Access:Via Rainier Avenue N. 7 . Existing Zoning: G" , General Classification District; Minimum lot size 35,000 square feet. 8. Existing Zoning in the Area : R-1 , R-2, B-1 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Daily Record Chronicle on November 30, 1981 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance on December 4 , 1981 . C. 1STO l I ACKG •U D : The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance 3527 of April 29, 1981 at which time the present zoning classification was applied. r PRELIMINARY REPORT 7 HE HEARING EXAMINER STIRSKEY HOLDING, LTD. DECEMBER 15, 1981 PAGE TWO D. ySICAL R G'A*UIID: 1 . Topography: The subject site slopes downward from west to east at a 41-47% grade. 2. Soils': Alderwood gravelly sandy loan, 6-15% slopes AgC) . Premeability is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and very slow in the substratum. Available water capacity is low. Runoff is slow to medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil is used for timber, pasture, berries and row crops and for urban development. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 15-30% slopes (AgD) . Runoff is medium and the erosion hazard is severe. This soil is used mostly for timber. Some areas on the lower parts of slopes are used for pasture. 3. Vegetation: The vegetation consists of alder and maple above a thick ground cover of blackberries and weeds. 4 . Wildlife: The existing vegetation provides suitable habitat for birds and small mammals. 5. Water: No surface water was observed on the subject site (December 4 , 1981 ) . 6. Land Use: The subject site is undeveloped at this time. Scattered single family dwellings are to the west and north while the Renton Airport is to the east and to the south is a car lot. E. SIG: : O' OOD CHARACTERISTICS: The surrounding properties are a combination of scattered commercial and residential uses. F. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1 . Water and Sewer: A 16" water main runs north-south on Rainier Avenue N. adjacent to the subject site while an 8" sanitary sewer is located on the same street approximately 300' to the south. 2. Fire Protection : Provided by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: METRO Transit Route #107 operates along Rainier Avenue N. adjacent to the subject site. 4. Schools : Not Applicable 5. Recreation : Not Applicable G. APPLICABLE SECTIi N S OF THE ZONING CODE: Section 4-729, "G" ; General Classification District Section 4-711 , B-1 ; Business District. H. APPLICA I LR SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFtICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: Policy 5.A, Commercial Areas Objective, p. 11 , Policies Element; Comprehensive Plan. PRELIMINARY REPORT THE HEARING EXAMINER STIRSKEY HOLDING, LTD. DECEMBER 15 , 1981 PAGE THREE I . IMPACT ON THE NATO 1 OR ENVIRONMENT: 1 . Natural Systems : Development of the subject site will remove the vegetation, disturb the soils, increase storm water runoff, and have an effect on traffic and noise levels in the area. Through proper development controls and procedures (including the specific reasons for the declaration of non-significance) , however, these impacts can be mitigated. 2. Population/Employment : Construction of the proposed facility may provide some additional employment opportunities for area residents. 3. Schools: Not Applicable. 4 . Social: Increased opportunities for social interaction would result for the employees of the proposed structure. 5. Traffic : These impacts may be better addressed at the time of specific site development. J. 1 NVIRON"i N ThL ASSESSwwT/THRES0OLD DET'E N INATION: Pursuant to the City of Renton ' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended, RCW 43-21C, a final declaration of non-significance was issued for the subject proposal on September 7, 1981 by the ERC. K.AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED: 1 . City of Renton Building Division. 2. City of Renton Engineering Division. 3. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. 4 . City of Renton Utilities Division. 5. City of Renton Fire Department. L. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . The proposed rezone to B-1 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of commercial for the subject site and generally compatible with existing land uses in the vicinity. (Section 4-3014C-1b) . 2. An office building is proposed for the subject site. Set back into a hill, it will consist of first floor parking with two floors of offices above. This will require excavation of approximately 10, 000 cubic yards of material. 3. The Environmental Review Committee issued a declaration of non-significance for the subject proposal based upon the rezone being limited to specific site plans as a result of the environmental conditions of the property. This restricts development of the site to the 3-story office structure with a retaining wall constructed to standards recommended in the geological study. (Attached) In addition, the western one-half of the site is to be retained in its natural state. To insure this , restrictive covenants should be applied to the proposal for the retention of the natural area and construction of the building. PRELIMINARY REPOR 0 THE HEARING EXAMINER STIRSKEY HOLDING, DECEMBER 15 , 1981 PAGE FOUR 4 . A latecomer ' s agreement for water will be required as per Utilities Engineering Division comment. Systems development charges for water and sewer will apply and sewer and water plans must be submitted for approval. Hydrant locations will require Fire Department approval and a fire flow analysis is necessary. M. IDEP I rvil y''FAL R.EC.nA liv'IPATIONS Based upon the above analysis , it is recommended that the rezone request be approved subject to filling of restrictive convenants to specifically limit the building design approved by the Environmental Review Committee and preserve the western half of the subject site as a natural buffer. 4.- ....---c---- 7577 ,, ,.„ . in, -_,:_,_ r,-- s•• ....,,, nr_ ST .---.r----, CI" E.a_1 1 , ,. iil:.l 1 ui..L iiJ r,1 \ i eowuwo T ?,_, B ie, di ; ;\'\v3 G 110,__. .._. ;7;.1-t",, ;ez., 1.1,14.,;,;.; , ;,ri ; 1 .4..""„, 5 , 4 Is_ 4, 5 - .1,1 •• 'i41 .ITT I, T r 0 1U L z 11 :\/ 1 Ilirlr ' • . 1 I a ll 1 I;. . ..l .1 . 4.. I 1111111 .1111111111 I r; 'i' $ ''1 1 a . 0 1\j/4,,),,.....2. . 11NIIIHIMIIIH F.A:, LJ t -• • , 7 I T a... STI e. i t , cf ' a Ti rt'_t' 9$ t 'f If 1..s.• i.lu.i .....11lll.yp.1.. l_.:.P.,..;.ii.. 1.LL 1 :iyt 1rilf':...1T..*r ... ? I1T+,1.,..... • r'^ r.- rtil ;l Tti'1 11.W 1 ,.li...._, 1 1 Tli.s 1 1- 1+ iT I ' --' • t ,'r uil 1 i 11iiw IiL..., i ris 'y f 1 1L •e PL ' - . rST _G. 1,:1.Il.ulli' lll i '•44 i 6.. wwN 1llA!!A eE+e r z 1\\ ' IFS• k• r ., ee 4 4 -`0 El an -,10-,•c„...,. ,,,A, a ... . . G ON .-' ee o ow l I, - • i s. . . o Uivact a 1 5>•AG,IJ ti' ji_, r y. 1'll ram- . iiis '.^ 7 eL L G on Ofateno` .' 7 r'Jr t , ,.., J 1. .'Nv6 . ...,r s r T, i. Z 4Si} 1 i li r i is ._F ,.e.•.F•, , 4{- L :8> . . iI'Ji.\ , 1c\ CAL =i-1 .e ., w L•' •t j A1R O"T o \A'4 J . P\ i f.'n.Lq lf..r .r,T.sa>• as w o. Lal4i"r 1r'47 IT r•,a ,f , 1..TT_-r T T-_T T' ` w.w-. tinLam`lJ -T t. ' B- '"-•J i rT t.a 21 2f0 I T1 4 nE"' ISTIRSKEYHOLDINGLTD. REZONE, File R-056-81 moor APPL I CANT STTRS,KFV Hj)LDTNG LTD TOTAL AREA +58,000 sq. ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Rainier Ave. North 1 E X I ST I NG ZONING G" - General Classification District EXISTING USE_ _ Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Future construction of three-story office "building. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial J COMMENTS 1 1 1 Wel farRevision3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET i Application : Jer ,& (RiOS6 .gj) 7p teas• suAi eel 41- a II% 11 k . a • a• lit • t Location: with, Pal/tiler k,. dieW Applicant: T.577jrake NO/Cien L .r TO:Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 44/25//L Traff'rt Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: /If/ !pti"tilities Eng. Division 2 ire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON d/30 f9/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ?l/CL' Approved approved with Conditions Not Approved hive O/}L c / 41 i L' /sA; Cci/V S'7774ec io.L, DATE: 7c 1, / Signature of Director or Authorized R re entative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: tT/L/Ty 4-N&(ti/ E/e/N Approved [ pproved with Conditions Not Approved See reverse. 1 Mil 6/l6/SDATE: l Signatur• of Director or Authorized Representative 1 s• UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT T01 CO - .23 - ki LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • DATER yos , 1/_ s2/ LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • SEWER No SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - MATER FS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT R•:? CHB?GE • WATER Nb SPECIAL ASS:SSEIN A-ZA .;;IARi;E SEWER No APPROVED WATER PLkJJ Yes APPROVED SEER PLAN YESAPPROVEDFIRENYDRANILOCATIONS BY FIRE DEPT. yrs FINE FLOW ANALYSIS YES 3 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/nTVISION: Approved 0 Approved with Conditions 'Not Approved q S 5/ 1 4-e DATE: G//9/,7SignatureofDirectororAuthoriedepresentative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVI ION: J 0 Approved 0"Approved with Conditions J Not Approved l z4 , _, -DATE: /Z2/e/Signature of Director or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION :_ 1 Approved Approved with Conditions [] Not Approved DATE:( 4 , Signature of Director or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POLICE Approved ® Approved with Conditions [] Not Approved 1) That a special permit be required for any removal of fill from the site. This is necessary as special conditions will be needed for the safe removal of material as the site fronts Rainier Ave. and the nature of the material itself. i Lt. e'rsson DATE: 7/6/81 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved 0 Approved with Conditions 0Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : R-056-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-062-81 Description of Proposal: Rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a 3 story office building with basement. Proponent : STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. Location of Proposal: Vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. Lead Agency: CITY OF RENTON This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on June 23, 1981 and August 26, 1981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Planning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Richard Houghton Gary Norris Ronald Nelson SteveMunson Roger Blaylock David Clemens Donald Persson Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-062-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Roger Blaylock DATED: June 21 , 1981 2) Applications : R-056-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance were received from Fire Department, Building Department and the Traffic and Utilities Divisions of the Public Works Department. The Engineering Division and Planning Department requested more information. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C.030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: 1 . The rezone is limited to site specific plans as a result of the environmental conditions of the subject site. The plans specifically provide for a 3 story office structure over a basement garage with a retaining wall constructed to standards recommended in geological study. 2. Retention of the western one halt of the site in natural vegetation. 3. The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial. 2 Signatures : C. NA. &ft_R nald G. Nelson Davi R. Clemens Actingg Building Director Planning Director Zarc . h?49PublicWorksDire DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 7, 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: September 21 , 1981 OF 124,11, THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 omagas.BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH. MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9A co' 235- 2550 1 SEP1I November 24, 1981 Marilyn N. Ullrich Stirskey Holding, Ltd. 321 Burnett Ave . S . Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mrs . Ullrich : On November 20, 1981, this department notified your office of a public hearing scheduled for your rezone application R-056-81) to be held on December 8 , 1981 . Unfortunately, this date will have to be postponed to December 15 , 1981 , due to an error in publication of the street name . If you have questions regarding this change , call this department at 235-2550 . Very truly yours , gree.4•vt4lePyt, Steve Munson Assistant Planner SM:wr cc : Hearing Examiner \ 71%#:3Sck‘%\' 1°C) \\ 1 U 30N 1619a1 a 7) IIki2, I 1 p y i r 1 I . . tVII r + `tV Ntusf 6 S ; M o. id i 4 t I A a Is I .Jo•n,,s-w • . I M f tw' c>,e rjr C N di?.s'w I= Mw.... j. w breM I I yy 1 I/O.1', w 'JOW \\ .I 4a r S. MO a . 1.w.E6 N(a( f` ice - ' / 4I _-_ - F _sum"RA. "'_ "\ _ N er roo a ivH LA r/a e ti[Ara,' WAS M67aV Puy— _ I Sy - r 3R 1 ' d " S N ' 7f —j _ i• 1 f.. d (• m ' • . t,ny' ado A I s4 3. Z 1 l I• 4--.7 _ Yf uvt!'JO.+s!CB rls —.).tee.iIr.. 1 Y >/I w. ..,/ for ,t.•rrve +r,•»•, r A.•o R:M.. a... s.•,r.::i-..4 1'. . L„,00 i 1 I ,,,,,,,,,. m. ',,440,,,,,,, .,-A ,s.,44.',,:',1,,,,,,v;Ar•-4, 4 , • 144-44 i 7 ',.- ,;it''',.-:. ti, 4-. 6-;,...... ...'::;. ,-. : 0y1. 1, 44 4., 11,.?1 .I 44 gi:i. '.4. '•'7,;fe.:1,47,7„0.:it?, r,;.;,- N4,,,,,,„,,,,. s,. • . . , I,.:, vt,s. 41! is.s.,.' *.4,•,:ii'lkity;, ..1 t ti;,•Y'''-..,'•-'''.. ." . ,,';'• -'4'''..•":-":40;t:' ,,:Zi:•:AS 1.,,:.:010i'.•,iti..$4,,Mi,:?Nii'• i 1 7'...' i`'''. r":" .* nr'''`` ITI" 41411,04 ,,,,„NC e, "17..lt, ' T'- t.,..4,6Y,10 i,(kIWA 1' 40.,,, 4 -' ''''.•..i.,la ":4A C IN ITY OI 700 ILA 1 N 2 `12;i?, AVENUE NORTH r C4A L ElfElettiCRIP' Tit ON FI IX 1 N TE ITN i ...,,,,:,' *ow 14g fiii***114 ;41 Aitt7; ' ; Air'! L''''', .. '','..::'. ''''' fr''.....,£!— L*" 4, t :-: ' • :'-' • 6':',. . r-;.,,,,,, ,,,, ,; „ -- : I.. w,,, 2,..„,,i, ,..,,, -.„,te, „ - .. , ,.S. ' -;•••,,,," lt, ;P'! L••-•-•'''.,. 41i' IVA/ kg ..-. .4-,!t,,.-.q, .-!,::' ' itii ro ME HELD IN CITY- COUNCIL CHAiNtiEik'P' MUIV I 4.71 PAL BUILDING iN LECEMBER 15, 1081 BEGINNING AT 9 :00 Al 1. F3' .r i. 0,.., 1, la 1 ikfrie •-,.' CL, RivN ''. ' ITEM f.. " 4 - 4f1:..:,,,:,.... :.. -,'..: ... ',.‘ ,: .T.,i!..::; ' (. 1 TO `B-1 , n..,E R-056-8 • T' ) ' .: 4 41' ^''.. AIV:' "...Me:, .''''' '. r ;'.. !:''' 'I . It t. '. 'Er4.,.., :. ..: .,, ,I 447011 -«Iwzr.,4:'.•-.,-.•.: .'-'%:-,;,i',6',442 :i144.. . ti Nil,' ' ! ''' - .,' 1 fos,I c.„k.E.;rat! r 4P* P Prl'illic:)ViittAk r fr P '!!E,,,, r.;,, - ' r , .„ „,,, . Alik* .. t. a , g f PLAT / :Lw* - L,,,'„*•-0I, 4+, LAi lr N4117"1.t,'*'"'`.4.4". aV-rl' 1a. 1P' a1:..1?.,--N., " ,u,,fee! .1.1..-,:.4.,-=-•,,k‘t ., or':vow .7'' '46/ '' is416.74,1 dat Iv 1,1:-;-.4,,,,„„,41 0 ,,,...4 .,;;_—.:'44 F ,. „.; T.:,.,.,4,,,, ,, L...;,24 Lo,, N IP •,.R•. ,,,&• W.,.41444 ",' i ti.,..51.-4-1xe ik.,-...1i,•4 CI L. WI • larioiNPF4CINrvervi'''NTA L r--. ,,. --,-- Li*. raktitAl . -i ,,1 4 z,„ tal.,,, • 4 it;, 2.4kel.... I0SIClir-`41!PIC; iiikTvcr r.1 NI ON.."-ZiGN i FICAN, , ; 1 3 i 4,ECT AP A E-7...,.A 4.LI3 T'it.74 Til a H ,ik" A"' AR i.:01,1ThiER IN;t0PKION CALL THU CITY OF 'AIENTrat- L.AN N fru CI t.`,..''C w.2:i64 al'Oili 0 fr'ii T 2,:`T. 2.r3ET:-.2516C,, 2 . .. 11,,`' 411* ICE NOT TO BE REMOVED ER i'AUTHOP°ZATIOIN.1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON DECEMBER 15, 1981 , AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. Application for rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a three-story office building with parking to be on the first floor, file R-056-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N. HALSEN, BOBBY Application for three-lot short plat approval, file 092-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 1718 Talbot Road S. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 15, 1981 , AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: November 30, 1981 DAVID R. CLEMENS ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 25th day of November, 1981 . SIGNED: j,IZZ-4.? "24.64,071- OF RA, y © ° THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9 ts' 235— 2550 0 917. 0 SEPI& C" November 24, 1981 Marilyn N. Ullrich Stirskey Holding, Ltd. 321 Burnett Ave . S . Renton , WA 98055 Dear Mrs . Ullrich : On November 20 , 1981, this department notified your office of a public hearing scheduled for your rezone application R-056-81) to be held on December 8 , 1981 . Unfortunately, this date will have to be postponed to December 15 , 1981 , due to an error in publication of the street name . If you have questions regarding this change , call this department at 235-2550. Very truly yours , 24; n7ree,(014400PY1_, Steve Munson Assistant Planner SM:wr cc : Hearing Examiner pF R4,1/ o „ © z THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 oBARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 235- 2550 U,9 TFO SEP1E434P November 20, 1981 Marilyn N. Ullrich Stirskey Holding Ltd. 321 Burnett Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Application for rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a three-story office building with parking to be on the first floor, file R-056-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. Gentlemen: The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on June 23, 1981 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for December 8, 1981 at 9 : 00 a.m. Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present. All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing. If you have any further questions, please call the Renton Planning Department, 235-2550. Very truly yours, Roger J. Blaylock Associate Planner NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON DECEMBER 8, 1981 , AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. Application for rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a three-story office building with parking to be on the first floor, file R-056-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. DALY, SHAWN Application for three-lot short plat approval, file 087-81 , variance from Subdivision Ordinance regarding pipestem lots, file V-088-81 , and waiver of off-site improvements, file W-089-81 ; property located at 3702 and 3708 Park Avenue No. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Planning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON DECEMBER 8, 1981 , AT 9 :00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: November 23 , 1981 DAVID R. CLEMENS ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I , STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 20th day of November, 1981 . SIGNED: /SL- W *..,.. .,? ti, TYI c,ift....NE A sva. A Ix ' ' ,T 40 1., . it4.1. ,l'''''", 46 ' i111111i* g wit Pc --- 0 ,,,li,hyr:, ' '' '',''._ . , A v 4 ' flar .44,,.., ,...1' 4 4 1104207 Lid /. 4 • GINFRAL LOCATIt3 .. 4: .4 it/ • ,-, 1 t v I c I .si ITY oF 'i UO R A IN I r..t AVENUE N. w. I. LE:GAL r:ESCRIPTEW ON FILE IN -r-k4ri REENTON IOLAPONIN 0 DEPAPTIVIENT0 r, IS PCISTEC) TO NCITIP-Y PROPERTY OWNe TO rz HELD I IV L.'"ITV" COUNCIL. CiiAISIIIVi;', a 1IVIUNICIPAL. ELI IL4:31NIC or sJi DECL .IBER _., _ .8 198 1. BEG IN irti I r4 ci AT 9'''t'(' CONCERNiiVe iTEIV, G TO B-1., FILE R-056- "--.11 1 11 Bc:ICsAL PERMIT SITE APPROVAL StiblOR Fti AT z Ctk Ir irn Jot i-1 alTtor47WL.:41•Iricti7 ill T,,ei Nkme7.4 r -5m. '' . or .D ':-'1111L 44154.' NNEri '*: 'INkl DE., , EL,Ctfri. NkstlF" , n El dr Tit "VierQ,71,1,144 kW...4r4MX* IRONMENTAL L'iti-wriql AVtP, il 0 SIGN IFIC ANT kaoskrir . 0 I rIFI.:CT APPEALS TO Ti/7 HEAR ir,-4 c 1 At:AIM!Cki LI IR BY ._ ,..,... _,.._,....._ _.... 7:ref.1 11:,,PA*1-0-0E 0 It-i:::43reaviAT: -3r c 0.LL 'I'et.'r r.f V k., Cal AFir•Itn:: 4, PLA Li4N1114113 Pifzi,FITKolirirk..5'r zivr 21 -50. r'r, .. * c',:,,,,, NOT Tr: BF RFPACIVPItit VA/ Tl- t.f,:'.2gA'''' '4 041 .,, - s' s' e; ''' En':CialliP ' P At i 4*1.41f2RIZATIflt" Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. Roe being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that $he is the Cpli of Clerk of THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(6)times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Daily Record Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, Washington.That the annexed is a A .O ti.ce..R6713 Public Notice Public Notii NOTICE OF garding these action' s a ENVIRONMENTAL ailable in the Planni 1 Deasitwaspublishedinregularissues(and DETERMINATION partment, Municipal 3uilcnotinsupplementformofsaidnewspaper) once each issue for a period ENVIRONMENTAL ing, Renton, Wash gtorREVIEWCOMMITTEE235-2550. Any apl; al cRENTON, WASHINGTON ERC action must b files of 1 consecutive issues,commencing on the Thd Environmental Re- with the Hearing Ex nine view Committee (ERC) has by September 14, 19 1. issued a final declaration of Published in the Dr Re 31 day of 1,U U S t 19 `'- ,and ending the non-significance subject to cord Chronicle Augi. t 31 conditions for the following 1981. R6713 project: STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, day of 19 ,both dates LTD. (ECF-062-81) inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- Application for rezone from scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee • G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a three-story office building with charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $1 • •' which to be on the firstf parking floor,fileR has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the 056-81; properly located in first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent the vicinity of 700 Rainier insertion. Avenue N.W. The ERC has further con- sidered and issued a pro- posed declaration of signifi- cance for the following Gi.erk project: SUPERSTRUCTURE ECF-071-81) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31 day of Application for site approval in B-1 zone to construct 30- p' unit housing project for the 19....81 City of Renton Housing Au- di- thorny, file SA-066-81; C• pro- perty located in the vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,Further information re- residing at HMV, King County. Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C.Form No.87 Rev.7-79 FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : R-056-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-062-81 Description of Proposal: Rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a 3 story office building with basement. Proponent: STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. Location of Proposal: Vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. Lead Agency: CITY OF RENTON This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on June 23, 1981 and August 26, 1981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Planning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Richard Houghton Gary Norris Ronald Nelson SteveMunson Roger Blaylock David Clemens Donald Persson Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-062-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Roger Blaylock DATED: June 21 , 1981 2) Applications: R-056-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance were received from Fire Department, Building Department and the Traffic and Utilities Divisions of the Public Works Department. The Engineering Division and Planning Department requested more information. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does not have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C.030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: 1 . The rezone is limited to site specific plans as a result of the environmental conditions of the subject site. The plans specifically provide for a 3 story office structure over a basement garage with a retaining wall constructed to standards recommended in geological study. 2. Retention of the western one halt of the site in natural vegetation. 3. The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial. Signatures : R nal G. Ne sonon Davifl lemensA Acting Building Director Planning Director R' hard C. oug on, ing Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 7, 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: September 21 , 1981 Date circulated : _, /49/9/ Comments due : 67-23/g/ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 64,A - $/ APPLICATION No (s ) . R-t'S4 81 PROPONENT : 6WrSker 9 PROJECT TITLE : gEl-0//6- Brief Description of Project : keyves4 yettor=OKe Sa4JeS,S,ye Ybiv% "G.117 D I?*-1 r fully ne e0nsfrueke 6Z4i cc .5/0 7 o ref,e e le/4 LOCATION : 7oo /Qaln;er Ave . 4/Ai SITE AREA : 1 5 /0 00 BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life: V/ 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : pU„c',c / 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health: V 18) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : V COMMENTS : Recommendation : NSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : Title : Date 2 3/F) R)/A Li). 1. O.5.t=n! 4j E146I l ,E-eir(. S?.c, :jS; FORM: ERC-06 1 UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO p- .23 - 27 LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • EATER YE S W-,$4 LATE COMERS AGREEMENT SEWER vp SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - WATER NM'S SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - SEWER y45 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT t 74 CHARGE WATER Afp SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - SEWER AID APPROVED WATER PLAN APPROVED SEWER PLAN Y.cS APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS I BY FIRE DEPT. y5 FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS vES A ision 3/1981 9ft/ RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: eg2/Vr ikROS6•gj R!'e*esf ie, re.,,,.. s ,.<<('S, 1e1 4r fPhi (lc je le 84 $+r ue, 6v, deinft,ttry Seem of * 3-s!er y "see.,Wdt , Location: 760 Pm tKrcr Ave. IVW Applicant: Slirskey H0icIIt , Z.Al TO:Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 6/20M Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:,/'f//9/ Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department P s Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON d/3o/8/ 7 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 2JCJ (=> Approved 0 Approved with Conditions Not Approved C'DATE: Signat of Director or Au h rized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 4 Approved ['Approved with Conditions [' Not Approved r DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 1 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT Revision 3/1981 bpi 7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET i Application:j OWLWE eR DSISk levrifel7 la teas'', seJA/cc; _,,s irbM 'i6" to j.l lE+r <Id ewe da_swk s irv•teeek., of 14. 1. .S.ir o{ •<<i Idr Location: wipe) 0201,L ret•' Ate, Applicant: ShirSkey H,/i t LAl. a OPublic Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: gft /® /Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: // Sr Utilities Eng. Division D Fire Department Ej Parks Department 11B lding Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED INWRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P.M. ( N e/30f8/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POLICE Approved ® Approved with Conditions J Not Approved 1) That a special permit be required for any removal of fill from the site. This is necessary as special conditions will be needed for the safe removal of material as the site fronts Rainier Ave. and the nature of the material itself. Lt. ex ;;;7rsson DATE: 7/6/81 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions ONot Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 1 Revision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Ap7lication:_eg7NE (Pai) kerzerte- 7 , reaos+P SeiZiee 4rbM I fa 5.1 fie.- °Csdit,e glipt s leer of 0. .?-346r o ,•.e Location: 70Qpatjt 1 er t, Applicant: Sii /"Skey 4/1 n I/d. TO Public Works Department E ineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 44/250 raffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE.741/1 "`Utilities Eng. Division 77 Fire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WR]TING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P.M. N 40130 RE\ IEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVSION: d c 4,7 Approved 'Approved with Conditions Not Approved pp Ad e`tUaf 44° T 51- reef reczLP i`o Jic ', C d-r-e CJ j a/ p -- Li i-e g V i Y e i t e- e i C y C I Ca e cf nit, \a L- `-- Ave ., Ltd I. I I `} -e ,'en,- - © h S free_ f" DATE: /zz/EJSignatureofDirectororAutorizedRepresentative , REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative blip ',Revision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: RO2,440VE OS6414) Re flier/- re;tom SedAtiec tow+ "6" to orti , v•,• 1 f dit ?-s/.r o ffeite A Location: Applicant: SiirSkey Neaniti t TO Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 0.y4 y4TrafficEng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING 21 DATE: l tilities Eng. Division ire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: CONMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. N REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DI VIS ION: CL Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved DATE: ‘'e lam/Signature of Director or Authorized R re entative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: UTiL/Ty 4-.N67ti/,EIe/Nc, Approved [ pproved with Conditions [' Not Approved See reverse. 114 DATE:j 2f Signatur• of Director or Authorized Representative I UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO G - a 3 - LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WATER S 14/_ -5 / LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • SEWER Ak) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CrIARGE - WATER yRS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT P A CHAISE - WATER ND SPECIAL A.SSI•SSMC el A=:€A ;nARGE - SEWER NO APPROVED WATER PLAN Y°S APPROVED SEER PLAN ks APPROVED FIRE NYORAN] LOCATIONS yy BY FIRE DEPT. YFs FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS YRS RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT Revision 3/1981 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Ap 1ication: p2A E Q6• p t7 , reao,40, st,14<<C '.. A M t 1® " Ito 5 tCsT uCtilb_ t Kt faietilhn ADf - 3"3Se; ocf-Orp e I La,ation Applicant: ! Irskel Neat/ b I.r p TO Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:_04 /Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:?//r/ JUtilitiesEng. Division[' Fire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ' WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. N I REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions 'Not Approved 4.`_it y ate_ DATE: 67/9/67SignatureofDirectororAuthoriedepresentative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 8/Date circulated : b/8 8 Comments due : b 3 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET E C F - 40- - $1 APPLICATION No (s ) . 6—®.S6-6',/ PROPONENT : gVerckey' 190/447/ 2711. PROJECT TITLE : g ENS v Brief Description of Project : Apes"' A }`eg-oKe So4jec11,,SY ctbrh it n 8-1 115ti 1re eons -tru or, el a 3,s/ory 01486/ee d 4. LOCATION : --100 a.,n,er AVe• 4/I/ SITE AREA : --2SgjO664 BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes: 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : I 3) Water & water courses: 4 ) Plant life : V 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north: east : south: west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : r r i 9) Natural resources : 1,/ 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : I 13 ) Trip ends ( HE ) :: traffic impacts: 14) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities: 17 ) Human health: 18) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation: S +%OS More Information Reviewed by : z Title : Date :6/2 4 ( FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : W//818/ Comments due : e/Z3/8i ENIVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - Qo . - 81 APPLICATION No (s ) . R—OSS4-6/ PROPONENT : gTir!h ey' l4 /c ' 7 L PROJECT TITLE : ge2,4 (E Brief Description of Project :] eyves7 71t) pezone Svbje i.St*e from UGa 08'/ 6r-'Allure ei,PLS1rUdel61,, ol 547 oY tP:ee & , LOCATION : ?OO Ra.jn jer- Ave. 4'I/ SITE AREA : 2S$1O0O9S6 BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (o) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : X- 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses: 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : t X 10) Risk of upset : 1 11 ) Population/Employment : X 12 ) Number of Dwellings : X 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services : l cs15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities : 17) Human health: 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : Title : z,0,; b(6' Date : FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : sq/4/9J Comments due : 6V23 ENVIROINMEINTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 51 APPLICATION No (s ) . R-O. 6-81 PROPONENT : g7Lsr5ke r TT0t/4,-/ ,, L4' f PROJECT TITLE : OZ EIM7 Brief Description of Project : keperi pezDKe S€04frei.Stj1,e, from 11G-IITDB /4r1CflLre eoms-t"u tort Q't'ca ..?..57Qry 4 ,ee &4. LOCATION : '7OO _Rajn ie r Dive. SITE AREA : itS$/QOOt` BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life: 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8) Land Use ; north: east : south: west : Land use conflicts: View obstruction : 9) Natural resources: 10 ) Risk of upset: 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13) Trip ends CITE) : --Z747 % 33 . cye aXe). 33O Velf,eIP traffic impacts :e°_P7' ab 14) Public services : I i - 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities: 17) Human health: 18) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation: 20) Archeology/history :, COMMENTS : Recommendation: ONSI DOS More Information c Reviewed by : ei,,kt-zi 1, Title :y-Sp J • c 2 %s/ Date : 6/2 0-/ FORM: ERC-06 I Date circulated : _, lie)),8/ Comments due : ‘//23/5// ENVIRONWENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 46a - 51 APPLICATION No (s ) . IR-0S6-6Y PROPONENT : SYtrch e y j4O/c•17` L PROJECT TITLE : 61ZE2Q,/6"' Brief Description of Project leyueS 7i texDKe Sv6JCoi.St' csro, k IIG-'I leo l r-lrulti e 4,r1S-fruSte li 614 et _7-.5 7'0 7 oW,e e &4 LOCATION : "WO /Q4 jai ier live. /Vi/ SITE AREA : -r5$1QCO91) BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (°b) : 1 IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes: 1/ 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : v 5 ) Animal life : 1/ 6 ) Noise : t/ 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : v 9) Natural resources : i./ 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities: 17 ) Human health: 18) Aesthetics: 19 ) Recreation : 1 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : 5--o 4rN-Q Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information `--- 7 Reviewed by : C5' Title : Date : 7 / 9/e/ FORM: ERC-06 Date circulate V/9/9J Comm due : , h3e9i ENVIROMHE a L CHECKLIST REVIEW SH! ET ECF - LY,a - 8` APPLICATION No (s) . Rj-0.56'46/ PROPONENT : 11Di 'c7T:.l'Shef tt L711. PROJECT TITLE : gZE=2.Q4/6' Brief Description of Project :,eyuesit 745pex.Dite SoZjec./.S'( un' 1Q e.3 f ic &4. LOCATION: "WO A 'e . /Vct/ SITE AREA: 7S$/OOO° BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1) Topographic changes: 2) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life: 5) Animal life: 6) Noise: 7) Light & glare : 8) Land Use; north: east: south: H., West : Land use conflicts: r' View obstruction : 9) Natural resources: 10) Risk of upset: t 11) Population/Employment : L 12 ) Number of Dwellings: 13) Trip ends CITE) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services: 15) Energy • 16) Utilities: 17) Human health: 18) Aesthetics: l 19) Recreation: 20) Archeology/history:V COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information L- Reviewed by : ej-„, 13 Title : / 0 Date : tnnqi k-C1 / FORM: ERC-06 NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G TO B-1 TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE CONSTRUCTION OF 3-STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH PARKING ON FIRST FLOOR - FILE R-056-81 (ECF-062-81) GENERAL LOCATION AND OR ADDRESS VICINITY OF 700 RAINIER AVENUE N.W. POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE t E.R.C.] HAS DETE INED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION, EJDOES GOES NOT, HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON- MENT. A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, DWILL ILL NOT, BE REQUIRED. AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., SEPTEMBER 14, 1981 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Vg\ CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 ON\ IDONOTREMOVETHISNOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance subject to conditions for the following project : STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. (ECF-062-81) Application for rezone from G to B-1 to allow for future construction of a three-story office building with parking to be on the first floor, file R-056-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. The ERC has further considered and issued a proposed declaration of significance for the following project : SUPERSTRUCTURE (ECF-071-81) Application for site approval in B-1 zone to construct 30-unit housing project for City of Renton Housing Authority, file SA-066-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 2821 N.E . 4th Street . Further information regarding these actions is available in the Planning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550 . Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by September 14 , 1981 . Published : August 31 , 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AUGUST 19 , 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 1 PENDING BUSINESS RaMAC, INCORPORATED: (ECF-061-81 ) LYLE PICKLE : (ECF-069-81 ) CARACCIOLI , JULIUS AND STELLA: (ECF-074-81 ) RENTON PROPERTIES, INC. : (ECF-075-81 ) - B-258 OLD BUSINESS ECF-062-81 STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. R-056-81 Application for rezone from 'G ' to B-1 to allow for the future construc- tion of a three story office building with parking to be on the first floor; property located approximately 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. . NEW BUSINESS ECF-057-81 CHURCH OF CHRIST SP-071 -81 Application for special permit to allow a 1200 ' addition to existing church and landscaping, paving, and parking improvements in a R-3 zone; property located in the vicinity of 2527 N. E. 12th Street between Edmonds Avenue N.E. , and Harrington Avenue N.E. ECF-076-81 TERRA NORTHWEST HOMES, INC. (COTTAGE LANE) 2U-072-81 Application for Conditional Use V-073-81 Permit for 7 duplex units in P-1 zone and variance to permit variable setback within the required 20 ' setback; property located on the west side of Monroe Avenue N. E. between Sir Cedric Condominiums and the Seventh Day Adventist Church. i 114 : II i 1 ribs 11 I ZIAENVIRONMENTALREVIEWCOMMITTEElat,AUGUST 19, 1981 Ila 4,i4 - ii Aim t‘LE )_2 Iwto LAKE Ira 1 VUASHINGTON low i r kt AIN& 1,1 41.46-tupprig ,..git; OVArie _imp _ ORCH OF CHRIST 3 COTTAGE L1111) Palitt° link .P114 l'.:::71j311714, 1111 tiel isANE ' U 1r 17‘1114013. 4: 97 i N 1--- CillFstaiti Ilk : num iimpuresA ..... . 7 - 1 I. gib;„--47.11.! ....... 4170ii 11 4:070. 411171!„.______... 7. . - j v- 1111111,0111111..ek.qpIril b I : I I litOr 9 ' 1 1‘ 17-Mib:**Tia. ,::;''''illitAA \'' V- - lal I rL'."- 4----M4-- 1'" t.m1ioll!10•- r•. 1...1."....Zt.--li-ikA1741dI1lsrN- 1 0-' t1iA=M viiFli l\. 6. -• 1-! 1!r- t dill/ a .0O3N6A,Z- R-4„ f 11 1E( L ; 0 41iiiir1 411 I i it„ .-.11111111POnmi...41.6"1' II I AIM a 1 wPIIImii•- ..,,,, 7 l MIII% .... 1 -------. ---1...... rIA r IN IIIbitii 1 dill .. II1111 11/LAKE1 ( Li ':I YOUNGS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JUNE 24 , 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A.M. THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM FENDING BUSINESS: HIGHLAND VILLAGE, LINCOLN PROPERTIES; (ECF-053-81) DEW BUSINESS: ECF-061-81 RaMAC, INCORPORATED B-255 Application for building permit to allow construction of Park Place, an office building; property located on North 3rd Street and "old" Bronson Way. ECF-062-81 STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. F-056-81 Application for rezone from 'G' to B-1 to allow for the future construc- tion of a three story office building with parking to be on the first floor; property located approximately 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. . CASCADIA ANNEXATION/CONSULTANT SELECTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (E. I. S. ) iii _ aIvino 1 1 auirriti 1 - 1 i___ Lrn,pg2,14,infigomm 1 1 1 i i 1 I ' ) 4llIIr to ibareN‘k m ....__sii_.....,..„,„.....__________ I I ILi= Nfii r 0 ,\ LAKE i,Nii!,v_ rnii- WASHGTON IM'N 1ik_.: off C ‘1t•i.0.114bi die II., c ' \ ill EIMPA liftbAlril r mr.L. ........ t. vz......,,,.......4„....,,,a1--- x nrall:MHO D r ==01 \ i r1ri1 'il' mil --- STIRSKEY HOLDINGS,LTD. I II s-- 1 ` AIIY . i , CASCADIA ANNEXATION iT i, -i' Mill=ie ilIKA1 I 1 1 4,11.: to lirdiniiiri/Arr4, il •1 -1 I 1 1 runtRaMAC, INC. . 1 1t. n !w Ali WAIT l 'i%i i Vi 1 ems; ,,P- in it iiV1116, ii. HIGHLAND VILLAGE 4 # _--J''.11 I . - 1 INAktude ,,, .., . , 11 . tolerant* • / , 1 i l'i gni . 4. - 4ll votomm i-a, ... 1 figiviswilue-VIE!......es- - - i-- - - , -7.- ellifferMikl 7* inilopm rgif- 44 J 1 t r mi LL,...... - .4i— its 41 I \—,I 1 I.LAKE YOl1NG5 MN L J List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. The building will be set back into the hill with the roof level approximately at gr, e level at the rear of the building. The building will step back to reduce it's apparent height. The lower floor will be set below grade to help reduce the impact f the lower level parking. Most of the parking will be covered. The upper portion o: the site will be left as natural as possible and after construction is complete, it wil be replanted to act as a buffer to the single family residences to the west of the site. The natural grade change will also act to reduce the impact. The single family residences to the west will be able to look over the top of the building. i i- L 01 .... i "..". .• i •0". • . .--•• i . . 1' ..` •.• : ' • •' s', „ 4,........., , • o. I 2 '',I•' , '. •"'i...<'' .R:r 11 '. ''.. k. ‘. 4 0 i.• 1'.-",-i .17••••.• ' . 7. . ,, . A • . (ql i P:.•'• . ••I, . , • I 1 .. • .Or k.„..\14k-•.‘i a .` ‘ • '" i r ... t 1,-•.• I, , I I iCt 1.":1,' -1,0 i A ta. ' ,• .,....• .r. 5 ,•-•--..,I I"-••" 4 rr...1........1P•I p •••••••••••••••••.em. I )..,14-44 4 -t‘r.! •.‘. . .i.1./..I::....-•• .." .?."1 ... • . r 1...____4______. .___. . • 7w.....a. 1 4 •,,• • . - t • I f I --• it -, ;;. 4 ,I• ..• i 1 tl I 1 i• ,• ,. Mir ob50-tir • 1 le.. ( ft*.'"-- Nmei.••... I• 1 a• I . t X 4" n -e.-4 - „.....-..---•-- ill' 1.. er . re.4 .•••••• -.--- ----.... ft I ) i 4 efi 4 Z I i 47.4 ‘....1,.... II. t• ) I .1. .• .00.0,5.-,v „ock, • • X'r.'•e's41 11 w . i..____i_______d•I••••.;;;. .t.../r. .• 0, 00%, / A. t . t A 4 1.10.ririN ,i01.10 s•••••••,. • 424 .. it---- t I . • ! S.. 1.1.......• 0. / 1.464111, f•If_ i t.et.:j.... t II i 14 I i 0 - ! -•-• - I -- ---- .. " h ---- -- -Ler le ...--. --- -.--- 0% Jr:.,t' -- t.r- . 4`. At' • . ..."•%,.....--'""'-- ••••......_ • N.. i •-• ' ' 1 II& • " / / IZ - i - -- -'-iS°C t. 401--"'""*•-• •—ar I' •-• - ) II . .4 -- i 4 ecorAL,14; -01A4s. 4 A/417-4JII Lis----ritt; .......-4........-......... 1 _- ......-- I fer ..,-.1 V . 3 .."•••• 61 I "•-•.- 11...1 1.'. 11 T I. _.- i__.... •••• ' 1, 4.1..c.1:•-• __!...Si•0•04.... .• 00... 0 I r r..,,,jizo:••,. • ri r -- N. II. ' • ‘ N i rir own,;...,• its..... 1 •-• •-- j, Pc..‘ ilfr.1 7-----1 1.•••••••e.“*.w.--...--..; __-__.-- 1--- M..et-'•• • 1 O.,J.+.-- _ . ..._ I‘ 4: i t 2 _„............."-' "' namnemraio•rnm=':r•-..:m............ ... J.------- T4 o.!...a.•••••-•• ___-- s 4 L ...-. -- ____-- 11,---------1.4i 1.---r- ,---- 1,N.. E--rn---'---- N. sq. i - mi.1.4.-.--------- N p.ofm,4- •-- 1 ... 0....„ 1... I ' Pl2aLIM14:klay ' r0,.,r.,,,. r_ Ter.:1711.11:77---i4.7..; I--- f i'.1 4. , I- -••••Y20_,--_,....tyt.......!•-y_ 7, ... ,,.. . pt..*:••••••. .. .-...-,.. •••, i A.& $el..P./.ye PId* •r••••4 • Mr/.. 11P-0,!•-••7;-"..-••••••-...r.rw, --.- a• ' 4 i I ti;1 JOHN ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATES PS. INC. 10 June 1981 r* A /! rrP,IIAG -r Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Gentlemen: The property in question is zoned "G", General Classification Districts, following annexation of the property into the City of Renton as required by Renton Zoning. The purpose of the "G" classification following annexation is "to prevent uncontrolled and scattered intrusion of business, industrial , and similar uses which would be in conflict or incompatible with existing or planned future land uses' The "G" classification would, of course, remain until the property was rezoned to it° best use, therefore, the rezoning of this property following annexation is a natural nd timely step. We are asking to rezone the property to "B-I", Business District, which is consistent with the City of Renton's comprehensive plan for this area. We have included preliminary plans to show how we plan to use this site and the steps we have taken to lessen the impact of development on the residential district to the west. The building is being held back from the front property line 20 feet which seems most appropriate along this busy street. The building is stepped back at each floor to lessen the apparent height of the building. It is also set down into the grade and back into the hill to reduce it's impact. The back of the building will be approximately on grade at the roof level with the hill climbing approximately40feetabovethislevel . This change in grade will allow the residences to the west to look over the building. Due to the crest in the hill it should prove difficult tc even see the top of the building. The clearing that will be required on the lower portion of the site should open up the view from the top of the hill . The upper portion of the site will be left as native as possible and those areas disturbed by construction will be replanted upon completion of the work. Business zoning seems to be the best use of this area. Due to the noise, and traffic on Rainier Avenue, the noise of the airport, and the commercial feeling in the area, it would not be suitable for residential use. Very truly yours, RONALD R. HEALEY RRH:lh 4 or ITL- y:,, CITY OF RE UN REZONE APPL ATM 16 1981 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY LANDY,nJSE NEARING 4, APPLICATION NO. /! `0 6 11 EXAMq1,jp 'S ACTa'A nr APPLICATION FEE $ /oj'O c APPEAL`F`,f'L> pP RECEIPT NO / .2 CITY COUNCIL ACTION FILING DATE 4-//.11,2_, ORDINANCE NO. AND DATE ARING DATE APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : 1. Name c1 14-0 Phone I • Co 303 Address 321 Burnett Avenue South 7ov 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located orb Rainier Avenue North between S. 122nd Street and S. 120th Street A,,;//eee/ r/4'e- 4 . Square footage or acrerage -of property 58,000 square feet 5. Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet) see attached 6 . Existing Zoning G Zoning Requested B-1 NOTE TO APPLICANT: The following factors are considered in reclassifying property. Evidence or additional information to substanti to your request may be attached to this sheet. (See Applicat on Procedure Sheet for specific requirements . ) Submit this f rrr in duplicate. 7. Proposed use of site There are plans to construct an office building (3 stories with basement) ; basement and first floor will be aarkino with two_ floors of offices above the parking. 8. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. see attached 9 . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? Construction should hegin within six months of rnmplatinn of this rozone. 10 . Two copies of plot plan and affidavit of ownership are required. Planning Dept. 1-77 8 . List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the :.,urrounding area. Thi. building will be set back into the hill with the roof level approximately at grade le/el at the rear of the building. The building will step back to reduce it's ap)arent height. The lower floor will be set below grade to help reduce the impact of the lower level parking. Most of the parking will be covered . The upper portion of tl. site will be left as natural as possible and after construction is complete, it will be replanted to act as a buffer to the single family residences to the west of the site. The natural grade change will also act to reduce the impact. The single family residences to the west will be able to look over the top of the building . 1/g' oF FN RECFIUED C? JUN 1 g 198114\ 9. jNG DEP`.<.,, 1 AFFIDAVIT it CI` 1g6 z fru ct-j Q being duly /cfi',. dec that I am the owner of e property involved in this applicatidn 'Attnhethe foregoing stat ents and answers herein contained and the animation herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this /6-,( day of 9/ L 19 / , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at 1114( Name ' f Not y Public) ig atu a of Owner) S -%Rc 3L.0fti CS t—t-0 Address) P/4 74A) Address l\1101.J WA ( City) State) Co3O3 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received 19 By : Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 5. Legal description of property Becinning at the northeast corner of Lot 11 , Lenz Farmette Tracts, as recorded in Vol . 37, page 36, records of King County, Washington, located in Section 7, Township 23, Rarge 5 W.M. ; Thence westerly along the northerly line of said Lot 11 to the northwest corner of said Lot 11 ; Thence southerly along the westerly line of said Lot 11 to the southwest corner of said Lot 11 ; Thence easterly along the southerly line of said Lot 11 , 32.00 feet; Thence southerly along the easterly line of the west 32 feet of Lot 12, Lenz Farmette Tracts as recorded in Vol . 37, page 36, records of King County, Washington, a distance of 67. 10 feet to a point on the southerly line of said Lot 12; Thence easterly along the southerly line of said Lot 12) 38.00 feet more or less , to a point on the southerly line of said Lot 12 and the extension of the centerline of vacated 90th Avenue South; Thence southerly along the centerline of vacated 90th Avenue South and it 's extensions to a point on the centerline of vacated South 122nd Street; Thence easterly along the centerline of vacated South 122nd Street to a point on the westerly right-of-way line of Rainier Avenue North; Thence northerly along the westerly right-of way line of Rainier Avenue North to the true point of beginning ; Less South 121st Street right-of-way. of RtNT,A Ic PVIREO C?, JUN 16 1981 ' 7( ........................ CIT'( OF RENTON, 'WASHINGTON RON ENTHL CHECKLIST FORM RENDT I1S' L14/ 1ggl FOR OFF CE USE ONLY • iV J N 6 .• Zi Applica :ion No. 20,.d O / om/ Environmental Checklist No. 4NNJhrG PROPOSE), date:FINAL , date: Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS : Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , Chapter 43.21C , RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS he prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine wnether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required , or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers shoulc include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed , even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now , with- out dtplicatino paperwork in the future. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals . Many of the questions may not apply to your lroposal . if a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next cuestion. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: P. 0. BOX 964 Renton, Washington • 98055 telephone - (206)271-6303 3. Date Checklist submitted 4. Agency requiring Checklist Renton Planning Department & BuiLding Department 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements , and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : Upon rezone of the subject property we are planning to build an office building which will be set back into_ the hill _ It 147l1 rnnSiSt of basemont ' and first floor parking with two floors of nffires ahnva this The front of the building will ci- p hark to caf e the Le.ight of th1 building. The roof wit] be a.p oxir>a:ely on grade at the rear of th3 building with the hill raising another 40 feet above the building. 2- b- 7 Location of proposal (describe the physical setting or one proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The property is located off Rainer Avenue across from Renton City Airport. The site is steep hillside rising approximately 80' above Rainier Avenue It is covered with small and medium sized deciduous trees and brush. Development will be only on the front part of the site with the upper part Iett undisturbed as possible. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : 1983 S . List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state and local --including rezones) : City of Renton i nn r i ty nf_.geutoa, City of Rea-ton Building PenuLt, 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal ? If yes , explain: No 11, Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal ? If yes , explain: No 12, Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed , but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: Annexation into City of Renton (see attached form) II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 11) Earth. Will the proposal result in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic X substructures? YES MAYBE TO— b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or over- X covering of the soil?YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X ES MAYBE iU d) The destruction , covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X YES MAYBE NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , X either on or off the site? YES MAYBE NO f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation , deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X YES YBE NM Explanation: The proposed structure will be cut back into the hill requiring the displacement of 10,000 cubic yards of earth and covering of 21 ,000 square feet of the site with building, drive, and parking. The building will be used to help stabilize the hill, making the hi l 1_side more ctahle_ 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in : a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YES MAYBE NO b) The creation of objectionable odors?X YES MAYBE NO c) Alteration of air movement , moisture or temperature , or any change in climate , either locally or regionally? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 13) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters?X YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rate drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water -runoff? C YES MAYBE NO c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?xx YES MAYBE N0 d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water X body? YES MAYBE NO e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to X temperature , dissolved oxygen or turbidity. YES MAYBE NO f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? y YES MAYBE NO h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection , or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria , or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available X for public water supplies?YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Soil investigations are hhLn.j performer drainage patterns and how best to handle any runoff on the site. 4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees , shrubs , grass , crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? X YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora? YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area , or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing X species? YES MAYBE NO d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Landscaping will be required which will introduce new flora to the site. i Fauna. Mill the proposal result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles , fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , X insects or microfauna)? YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement X of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 16) Noise. Will the proposal, incre exi-stins}.noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation : 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or X glare? YES MAYBE tf Explanation: The development will .probably Ceciire the addition of more street lighting along Rainier Avenue. 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The present land use is a "G" (Geng_ral flaccif•rat7 which will be changed to a "B-1" ( Business Classific.at _on,) h.i.rhJs consistent with the long range plaani ng,® n_r_tbis ar-ea- 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X YES MAYBE NO b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Natural resour troa tion as well as after c m • etc. 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including , but not limited to , oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location , distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? YES M YBE N Explanation: 5_ 1?) Housing. Will the posal affect existing housing , create a demand for additional housing? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in : a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? X YES MAYBE NO b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand X for new parking? YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YES MAYBE NO d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? YES MAYBE N0 e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? YES MAYBE NO f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The-addition of an_office building will probably genersa.re some new vehicular movement in this area and with more traffir _cages an increase in traffic hazards. Rainier Avenue is sufficient to hanrilP_ traffic. On-site parking will be provided. ___^ 14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon , or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : a) Fire protection? X YES MAYBE NO b) Police protection? X YES MAYBE NO c) Schools? YES MAYBE NO d) Parks or other recreational facilities? X YES MAYBE NO e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? X YES MAYBE NO f) Other governmental services? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Fire and police protection will be required. The ex isrinr services should he adequate to handle this incr ase with little or rto effects 115) Energy. Will the proposal result in: a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? XL YES MAYBE NO b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require Xthedevelopmentofnewsourcesofenergy? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: It will utilize existing sources of energy. 16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities : a) Power or natural gas? X YES MAYBE NO b) Communications systems? X YES MAYBE NO c) Water? X__ YES MAYBE NO 6- d) Sewer or septiL Links? X YES MAYBE NO e) Storm water drainage? X YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: TF1ese services r,rP ^V^•Il^hle to the city cn the mnrlifiratinns to them should be small . 1-) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? YES MAYBL NO Explanation: 13) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to,4ie;public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aestfteta-caily offensive site open to public' view?X_ YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?YES MAYBE Explanation:p O) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical Wrsite, structure, object or building? YES " MAYBE . XX Explanation: III. SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best \of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that th lead ag cy \may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue i relia uppn this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willfu ack oil disclosure on my part. V Proponent: iisiigned) 1' r12l c4 name printed) City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 RECENED JUN 16 1981 9y~•LNG DEpa# c* CITY OF RENTON No. 18662 FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 G 19 RECEIVED OF i>t01.AU o Q-- A\ O Q O oo TOTAL a 60 00 GWEN E. MARS ALL FI ANCE DIRECTOR BY ENDING ' OF FILE Fig TIME 056 - 81