Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA81-066BEir1NIi4G OF FILE FILE TITLE SA aletc: ICROFILMED I r 4 SUPERSTRUCTURE 5616 — 118th Avenue S. E. Bellevue, Washington 98006 206) 746-5582 May 3, 1982 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Subject: Community Building and Berm, Renton Housing Authority Gentlemen: Superstructure, Renton Housing Authority, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the City of Renton have been actively engaged in the planning process of the above referenced project for well over a year. The above project has undergone numerous modifications during the planning process. The major modifications were defined in my letter to the Environmental Review Committee dated April 20, 1982. The most recent modification to the project has been the proposal to provide a 50' x 50' covered play area at the south end of the site to mitigate the loss of covered area originally contained in the community building. The concept of providing a 50' x 50' covered play area was first proposed at the Environmental Review Committee meeting of April 21, 1982. Subsequent to April 21, 1982, input from one or more of the aforementioned organizations has produced the following proposal: I) As an alternative to providing a 50' x 50' covered play -area at the south of the site, we propose to provide a covered, multi—purpose area adjacent to the community building as shown on the attached drawing. The reasoning for providing an enclosed area adjacent to the community building is as follows: A) Our current recreation plan is designed to focus as much recreation as possible in the center of the site. The primary reason for increasing the amount of recreation in this area was to draw the younger children away from N. E. 3rd Street. It is our opinion that N. E. 3rd Street may present a potential hazzard to young, unsupervised children. We feel that the construction of a covered City of Renton May 3, 1982 Renton, Washington 98055 Page Two: play area at the south end of the site will have a tendency to attract these younger children toward N. E. 3rd Street during periods of inclement weather, thereby increasing the possibility of a vehicle—pedestrian accident. Since our plan is to focus recreation in the center of the site we feel that a centrally located covered play area may provide a safer recreation area. B) In addition to the location of the covered area, we would like to address the issues of "use" and "design". The proposal being presented would provide for a concrete slab immediately adjacent to the south end of the community building. With this slab in place, the roofline of the community building would be extended to the south to provide a roof over the slab. In addition to being centrally located, it is felt that an extended" community building will: 1. Provide the potential for an open—air picnic area. 2. Provide shelter for parents while supervising the recreation of the younger children in the adjacent children's play area. 3. Provide the Housing Authority with the opportunity to enclose this space at a later time, if desired. 4. Provide architectual continuity of design. The "extended" community building will be more ascetically appealing than a separate structure, thereby providing a less crowded feeling. 5. Provide greater utilization of the covered area because of the multi—purpose character of the structure. The nature of this area will be to promote recreation and other social function: during periods of good weather and bad weather. The type of socialization involved will range from athletic activities, to dances, to picnics to community gatherings. In our view, this multi—purpose definition will provide excellent opportunities for generating a more positive living environment by involving the whole family in a multitude of different types of recreation. City of Renton May 3, 1982 Renton, Washington 9$055 Page Three: If the design of this space were to have a central theme, the theme would be to create a family oriented space that would help to encourage family activities; something that many social scientists say is lacking in our society. The second issue to be discussed involves screening of the site on the eastern boundary from N. E. 3rd to N. E. 4th streets. The initial concerns of all parties were to effect a permanent barrier which would separate the site from possible uses which may occur on adjacent properties. In order to accomplish this screening we proposed a com- bination of berming and fencing. Initially, we were satisfied with this solution. More recently, we have engaged in final reviews of our project with the Housing Authority, H.U.D. and the City of Renton. Various departments within these organizations have expressed concern about the berm along the eastern portion of the site extending from N. E. 3rd Street to N. E. 4th Street. Following is a brief summary of those concerns: It has been brought to our attention that a project of this nature has a special orientation. Specifically, this is a low-moderate income family project. In order to reside within this project you must have a modest income and you must have children. Generally speaking, a project of this nature will be characterized by a high percentage of single parent households with very young children. Accordingly, greater emphasis should be placed on planning for young families and young children. Our site plan indicates that the buildings along the eastern boundary of the site are setback 10' from the property line. The construction of a berm is expected to use about 50% to 75% of this space. Concern has been expressed that the construction of a berm on the eastern boundary of the site will totally eliminate any individual backyards. The elimination of the backyard has introduced a conflict between the structure and the site plan. Currently, the floor plan of each unit is designed with the kitchen and/or living room at the back of the unit, overlooking the deck and play areas. The reasoning for this orientation is to allow a parent to stay occupied inside the working/living areas of the unit while still being able to maintain supervision of youngsters. In addition to better supervision, a usable backyard is necessary to encourage the children to stay away from the parking areas at the front of the unit. After having reviewed the above concerns it appears to us that the berm on the eastern side of the site is causing a negative impact with regard to supervised recreation of young children. City of Renton May 3, 1982 Renton, Washington 98055 Page Four: Aside from the recreational aspect, concern has been expressed that a drainage problem will be caused by the berm. It is felt that heavy rains will have a tendency to "run-off" the berm and concentrate water near the buildings. Although storm drainage systems are currently being revised to help mitigate this problem, it is a problem that could be entirely eliminated with the removal of the berm. Concern has also been expressed about the eventual success of the landscaping in this area. It is felt that the berm will make it difficult to establish a healthy landscaped area because of the tendency for water to run off of the berm. The tendency would be to not get enough water to the trees and shrubs on the slope of the berm and to get too much water at the base of the berm. Additionally, it is felt that the immediate construction of a 6' berm and a 6' fence may eliminate sufficiant sunlight necessary to establish new growth. In addition to the preceding, concern has also been expressed with regard to maintenance, air flow, and ascetic attributes of the berm. The question has been raised as to whom, if anyone, will maintain the portion of the berm on the east side of the fence. The possibility of stagnant air has been raised, as well as the lack of architectual continuity being introduced into the project. More importantly, several_organizations have expressed the opinion that a six foot berm and a six foot fence create a caged in" feeling associated with institutionalism. As previously stated, the occupants of this project will have many similar attributes. A certain degree of sensitivity has to be exercised in order to not infringe on the selfrespect of its occupants. In view of the many concerns expressed by the various participants in this project we would like to revise our landscaping and fencing program in order to mitigate the concerns raised by all parties. The program, as shown on the attached drawing, will retain the fence while eliminating the berm on the eastern side of the property from N. E. 3rd to N. E. loth streets. The berm will be replaced by extremely dense landscaping. The introduction of a very dominant landscape theme appears to be the best solution. It will create at least 50% more useable space, eliminate potential drainage problems, help assure the long-term survival of plant life, provide additional recreation space, be more ascetically appealing and provide a higher and more effective screen from adjacent properties. On behalf of the various organizations that have an interest in this project I would like to request approval of the preceding. Very truly yours, 17 V its\P(ksiffSL &cce £vec Daniel L. Hutsell 44...0..,/' - W i`) I OF o THE CITY OF RENTON o 4$ © z. MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 ma BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 4 235- 2550 0, 9q o SEP-Cts4, O August 31, 1981 Mr. Daniel L. Hutsell, President Superstructure Development Ltd. 125 South Oregon Street #208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 RE: PROPOSED DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/RENTON LOW COST HOUSING PROJECT Dear Mr. Hutsell: The Environmental Review Committee has considered the proposal by Superstructure Development Ltd. to construct a 30 unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority between N.E. 3rd and N.E. 4th Streets and found that there exists probable significant impacts in the following areas: 1) incompatibility of uses, (2) traffic , (3) On and off-site recreation, (4) pedestrian safety, and (5) public services. Specifically, the site plan does not show any buffer of existing or potential uses adjacent to the site. The State gravel pit site to the west of the subject site is a major existing condition that the proposal should screen for both asethetics and safety reasons. The vacant property to the east of the site is zoned B-1 which would allow the construction of commercial buildings up to a height of 95 feet directly on the property line. Please address the concern of how the project will be designed to be compatable with present and future adjacent developments. The second point of concern is traffic . At the present time the N.E. 4th Street corridor is near peak hour capacity. The proposal must obtain approval from the City Council to allow the additional traffic onto this corridor. Recreation is a major concern to the City. If no or limited on-site recreation is proposed the new residents will have a greater impact on the existing public systems, which are presently below the established goal for the community. The proposal must show how it plans to meet the recreational needs of the new residents. a • page 2 Letter to D.L. Hutsell August 31, 1981 With the location of any residential development adjacent to a major arterial, the question of pedestrian safety arises. The new residents will probably be utilizing the services of the King County Health facility on the south side of N.E. 3rd Street thus increasing pedestrian movements. This problem should be reviewed in light of the existing traffic situation and the specific nature of the proposal. The fifth item is the impact on public services; primarily the impact on the fire and police departments. Does the proposal include such things as interior sprinklers, dead bolts, or security systems to help lessen the impacts? The Environmental Review Committee is requesting this information prior to their issuing a final environmental determination. The material should be submitted prior to September 25, 1981 for them to make a decision on September 30th. If you can provide the information at an earlier date the Committee will be able to respond sooner. If I can be of any further assistence, please contact me at 235-2550. Sincerely, 144C(7I.E? 6"r-1 Roger J. layloc Associate Planner cc. Tony Ladner, Renton Housing Authority Steve Clark, Stepan & Associates OF RA,, t• © 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 omall BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9° O FRED J. KAUFMAN, 235-2593 091T D SEP P March 8, 1982 TO: Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator FROM: Fred Kaufman, Hearing Examiner RE: File No. SA-066-81 ; Superstructure. The matter you have presented to me is not now before me in a forum of a public hearing, and this office has no power to issue any recommendation or decision on the matter. The agency which oversees the implementation of plans and assures that buildings are constructed in accordance with approved plans is the Building and Zoning Department. I suggest you contact the City Attorney's office for further advice if you believe improper implementation may result. Since the City Council and Mayor were both involved in site selection proceedings, I have taken the liberty of forwarding your memorandum to those officials. OYOFRNT MAR $ - 1982 cc: Mayor City Council City Attorney 1.1`J'Lr31NC,' JfVlNr DEPT, Renton Housing Authority r t HOUSING ASSISTANCE PROGRAMPAYMENTS an information sheet WHAT I? IS: HAP is designed to enable and encourage low- income families to go out and seek their own housing needs, enter into lease agree- ments with owners and assume normal responsibil- ities as a lessee. The resident ' s rent , pro- portionate to his income, will be determined by the Renton Housing Authority and paid directly by the resident to the owner. The tnWn Housing Authority will be responsible for any subsidy needed to bring the rent payment to current fair market value. MOM Tr WOftXS: Applicants who are determined eligible by the Renton , Housing Authority will attend orientation and counseling sessions held by the HAP staff. They will then receive a Certificate of Family Participation, and begin seeking suitable housing. They will negotiate with owners , make their own inspections and write up a lease. After these prerequisites are completed, the resident is re- sponsible for contacting the HAP office to arrange an inspection by a staff member and to request lease approval. If, at that time, the unit passes inspection and the lease is approved, the owner and Renton Housing Authority will enter into a subsidy con- tract for the remainder of the rent. HOUSING AUIlIORiTY OF THE CITY OF Ran HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS PROGRAM - 226-1850 - 226-0495 RESPONSIBILITIES: The major responsibilit'_es of owners under this program are: MAINTENANCE: The unit must be maintained in a decent , safe, sanitary condition in order for subsidies to be paid. RENT COLLECTION: A portion of the rent is paid to the owner each month by the resi- dE dent. The subs`.dy payment will be sent EQUAL HOUSI G di-rectly to the owner by RFA. OPPORTUNITY U'*ILYTIES : All owners are required to pay garbage , water and sewer. Fair market rents determiner' by HUD +rnlude payment of all utilities. The HAP office will list available properties at Owner' s request; however, the responsibility of locating housing :.a ',laced solely on the applicant. Owners will have the same management responsibil- ities and perform the srie services as for other tenants. Resident selection .s the owner' s pre- rogative, as long as state laws regarding disarim ination are met. BSHBFIT$: The Rousing Assistance Payments Program provides the owner with an income on his tor( -)erty for the period of the lease, as long es federal funding is available and the r-operty is occupied by an approved ;ow-income rest-sent. The Program benefits the community through the incentive it provides for the improvement of poorly maintained or sub-standard housing. It benefits low-income families in providing assistance to meet the rising cost of today's lousing, and yet allows them to play a vital part in . andlord-tenant relationships. THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF RENTON The Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program - Existing Housing Income Limits Effective October 1, 1981 Family Composition Very Low Lower 1 person 10,900 15,250 2 people 12,500 17,400 3 people 14,050 19,550 4 people 15,600 21,750 5 people 16,850 23,100 6 people 18, 100 24,450 7 people 19,350 25,850 8 or more people 20,600 27,200 2 BDRM.3 BDRM.4 BDRM. CITY OF RENTON 394 493 539 MOBILE HOME SPACE Single-Wide - $111 Double-Wide - $157 Rents for double-wide spaces will be permitted only for families of 5 or more persons. MAXIMUM GROSS RENTS CITY OF RENTON Single Family Houses Only 591 646 Including Duplexes) NOTE: In special circumstances Fair Market Rents may be adjusted upward. V ~ HOUSING AUTHORITY CITY OF RENTON 970 HARRINGTON AVENUE N. E. RENTON, WASHINGTON 98056 For Information call: Carol Degner, 226-0495 226-1850 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Beginning Monday, November 30, 1981, the Housing Authority, City of Renton will accept applications for certificates in the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program. Under the program, persons qualifying and receiving the Section 8 certificates would be able to seek a rental unit in the private sector and not pay more than 25% (percent) of the family's income for rent and utilities. The balance would be paid by the Housing Authority, City of Renton through federal funds. Persons seeking rental units of two, three, four, or more bedrooms may make application. Landlords interested in renting their units through the program may also inquire. No applications are being accepted for single bedroom rentals. The authority does not have certificates for one bedroom units. Persons applying will be interviewed and will he given pre-application packets. Completed applications must be returned to the Renton Housing Authority Office. An order of priority is given only when completed applications are submitted. Forms for participation in the rental assistance program are available at 970 Harrington Avenue N. E. Housing Authority, City of Renton has been allocated fifty-one (51) leases, we will only be accepting 200 applications on the first come, first served basis. Persons on waiting lists for other low-income housing programs must apply separately for the Section 8 program, but application will not effect other requests or priority listing. Pre-application packets can be picked up daily from 9:00 -- 11:30 A.M. and 1:30 - 3:30 P.M. , Monday through Friday. OF R IP BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 0, 9 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 o9' Et) SEP-V . 1?) BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH M E M O R A. N DU MMAYOR March 4, 1982 TO: FRED KAUFMAN, LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER FROM:(- 5ROGER J. BLAYLOCK, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR RE:SUPERSTRUCTURE, SA-066-81 The City of Renton Housing Authority has reviewed the anticipated budget for the proposed low income multiple family housing development reviewed under SA-066-81 by the firm of Superstructure, Inc. Based upon this cost they have directed Superstructure to eliminate the recreational facility. The recreational facility was clearly shown on Exhibit No. 5, which was approved by the Examiner. Does elimination of this recreational facility require a new public hearing? Or, can a building permit be issued excluding the recreational facility? OF I U t, z THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9 FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235 -2593 09q t60 S E P1 E O P November 9, 1981 Mr. Daniel L. Hutsell President , Superstructure Development , LTD 125 S. Oregon Street, Suite 208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 RE: File No. SA-066-81 ; Superstructure Development , LTD. Dear Mr. Hutsell : The Examiner's Report regarding the referenced application which was published on October 21 , 1981 has not been appealed within the 14-day period established by ordinance. Therefore, this matter is considered final and is being transmitted to the Planning Department this date for filing. Please feel free to contact this office if further assistance or information is required. Sincerely, k4r,4A V40", Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Planning Department AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING State of Washington) County of King Marilyn J. Petersen being first duly sworn, upon oath disposes and states: That on the 21st day of October 1981 , 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. A.e,tapnlior, Subscribed and sworn this .Z day of C)L-p\peAr 19 q/ tr\ Notary Public in and for to State of Washington, residing at tpn Application, Petition or Case: Superstructure Development, LTD; SA-066-81 The minuted contain a Uo.t of the panties necond. ) 5 October 21 , 1981 c OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER GaJigk) CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION . APPLICANT: Superstructure Development, LTD. FILE NO. SA-066-81 LOCATION: Vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant requests site plan approval for a 30-unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority. SUMMARY OF ACTION:Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on October 8, 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 October 13, 1981 at 9:45 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, presented the Planning Department staff report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Site Plan with staff comments Exhibit #3: Tino Cugini Short Plat Map Exhibit #4: Short Plat 384-79, Tino Cugini Short Plat II by reference) Mr. Blaylock corrected the directional word, "west," contained in Section D.6 of the report to read, "north." He also corrected the last line of Section M. from "of 75 feet. . ." to of 65 feet. . .". The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Daniel L. Hutsell President, Superstructure Development, LTD 125 S. Oregon Street, Suite 208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 The history of the project progress was reviewed by Mr. Hutsell , who noted that it is a quasi-public development coordinated with the Renton Housing Authority, HUD, the City of Renton and the applicant. He advised that Exhibit #2 is a revision of the original site plan in response to city staff concerns, and reflects limited access to N.E. 3rd Street with provision of a gate, additional screening, berming and fencing. Further revisions to improve accessibility of the property were discussed, and Mr. Hutsell advised that configuration of the buildings is currently under review by the three aforementioned agencies and city staff to mitigate concerns and reduce the number of proposed units from 30 to 28 or 26. He objected to Mr. Blaylock's recommendation to redefine the site boundaries, and expressed concern that the applicant does not have the authority to adjust lot lines. Responding in support as a representative of the applicant was: Steve Clark Director of Planning Stepan & Associates 930 S. 336th, Suite A Federal Way, WA 98003 Mr. Clark cited Section 4-3014.D, authority of the Examiner to require conditions to SA-061110 Page Two to provide compatibility in development; however, he expressed his opinion that redefinition of the property is not a viable alternative in the Examiner's scope. The Examiner concurred t ' 't while the Planning Department could have recommended denial of the project, lot line adjustments are not appropriate at this point of the procedure. Mr. Clark submitted a revision of Exhibit #2, which was entered as follows by the Examiner: Exhibit #5: Alternative Site Plan The plan reflects the mitigating measures required by the Environmental Review Committee and conditions recommended by various city departments with respect to landscaping, berming and inclusion of necessary turnaround radius. Mr. Clark discussed the proposed reduction of density resulting from the requirement to provide a 45-foot turning radius and entrances into the property primarily from N.E. 4th Street; and noted provision of amenities such as berming and landscaping to separate the residential areas from N.E. 3rd Street. A gate located approximately 40 feet off of N.E. 3rd has been proposed for fire access which would eliminate the need for the Fire Department vehicles to stop on N.E. 3rd Street in order to open the gate and enter the site. He advised that if Exhibit #5 is approved, approxima- tely 75 feet of separation would be provided between N.E. 3rd and the residential areas on site. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the interface between the property on the east and southeast, Mr. Clark advised that a six-foot landscaping berm as well as a six-foot fence and supplemental landscaping are proposed on those boundaries as suggested by the applicant and accepted by the ERC as mitigating measures. Responding to the Examiner' s concern regarding the maximum size of the berm to meet sound engineering standards, Mr. Clark stated that acquisition of a landscaping easement from adjoining property owners is under consideration, but it is anticipated that a six-foot berm can be provided. The Examiner requested testimony in support or opposition to the proposal . Responding was: Gary Norris Traffic Engineer, City of Renton Mr. Norris indicated that although he was not speaking in opposition to the proposal , he wished to comment regarding traffic and circulation adjacent to the site. He supported testimony by the applicant and his representative regarding revision of lot lines, and noted that from a traffic standpoint it would not be beneficial to the traffic circulation along N.E. 3rd Street to have a commercial development located directly adjacent to that roadway. In terms of driveway access, that proposal would create additional safety problems resulting from limited sight distance and heavy traffic volumes at that point. He indicated his concern that access on N.E. 3rd Street is ensured for fire vehicles only, and access from adjacent property to major arterials is minimized. The Examiner requested final comments from the Planning Department. Mr. Blaylock made the following points: 1 ) that the Planning Department feels that the fact that HUD is responsible for reviewing the site is irrelevant to site approval and should not receive special consideration; 2) that the B-1 zone allows structures up to 95 feet in height adjacent to the complex on the property line and supports the rationale for buffering; 3) the alternative site plan submitted by Mr. Clark is an appropriate solution to site problems in providing buffering to the commercial areas as well as to N.E. 3rd Street; and 4) issue is taken with Mr. Norris' testimony regarding access to N.E. 3rd Street since the four lots could not be denied access to N.E. 3rd, but in changing lot lines, the location of curb cuts could be lengthened. He summarized by recommending approval of the modified site plan, Exhibit #5, as submitted. Since no further comments were offered, the hearing regarding File No. SA-066-81 was closed by the Examiner at 10:25 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The applicant, Superstructures Development, LTD, filed a request for site approval for a 30-unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority. The applicant lowered the number of units to 28 prior to the hearing. 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. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , RCW 43.21C, as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) , responsible official . 4110 SA-066-81 Page Three 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. i existing utilities are available and in close proximity and may be extended to the subject site. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required setbacks, lot coverage and height requirements of Sections 4-711 (Business/Commercial ) and 4-712 (Light Industry) of Title IV, Ordinance No. 1628, Code of General Ordinances. 7. The subject site is located just west of the intersection of N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street in the vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street. The site is level and is primarily covered with scrub grasses. 8. An existing duplex structure is located in the northeasterly quadrant of the subject site. 9. The subject site is zoned both B-1 and L-l . Multifamily residential complexes may be constructed in such zones pursuant to Sections 4-712(A) (1 ) and 4-711 (A) (1 ) . 10. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject property is located as suitable for the development of commercial uses. 11 . The applicant proposes establishing 28 one, two and three bedroom units in seven separate buildings. The subject site is approximately 90,000 square feet or just over two acres in size. 12. The project will be screened from the adjoining properties which are also zoned B-1 and L-1 by berms along the northern, eastern and southern boundaries, and by fences along all boundaries. The berms will also be six feet in height. The applicant proposes providing some on site recreational amenities, including basketball and volleyball courts. 13. The proposal , with the exception of the fire emergency access, will preclude access to N.E. 3rd Street. Access to the site will be via N.E. 4th Street. The emergency access will be via N.E. 3rd near the southwest corner of the site. 14. The project will be landscaped both along its perimeter, at the berm locations, and internally. 15. The applicant submitted alternative site plans in response to the Planning Department's concerns regarding location of residential units along the heavily traveled N.E. 3rd Street corridor. 16. The Planning Department also recommended that the subject property, consisting of three lots of a four lot short plat, should be reconstructed using the fourth lot. 17. ' The approval of the site plan was a condition of the aforementioned short plat Short Plat 384-79) . The major concern at that time was the buffering of the single family uses north of the subject site. This area is zoned R-1 and SR-1 , both single family residence districts. 18. The Vantage Point Condominium complex is located west of the subject site. The proposed Terrace multifamily complex is located southwest of the site. 19. The Traffic Engineering Division indicated that the proposed use would eliminate the potential access problems associated with commercial development of the subject site and thereby avoid up to six curb cuts for driveways. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The site plan as revised and generally represented by Exhibit #5 appears to serve the public use and interest. The site, while designated for commercial purposes under the map element of the Comprehensive Plan, is located just south of a single family community. This fact was a major consideration in the review of the short plat and resulted in the imposition of a site plan review. The residential utilization of the site will provide a more appropriate buffer for the single family neighborhood to the north than would either commercial or industrial uses which are otherwise permitted by the B-1 and L-1 zoning on the subject site. 2. Additionally, the subject site as proposed will limit access to N.E. 3rd Street, a major arterial , whereas commercial development of the three lots could have resulted 41110 SA-066-81 Page Four in up to six driveways breaking into the arterial flow. The only access to N.E. 3rd will be a fire emergency access. Maneuvering space will be provided on site so that emergency apparatus will be removed from the arterial flow. 3. The Planning Department recommendation that the configuration of lots be changed does not properly address the proposal submitted by the applicant. The applicant proposed a specific development of the subject site, and the review should be reasonably limited to the applicant's proposal and property. It is inappropriate to suggest the applicant redesign the plan utilizing property not within the subject site. If the project is inappropriate for the subject site then the Planning Department should recommend disapproval or recommend a modified site plan for the subject site and not suggest that the applicant exchange lots with the adjoining property. If the applicant were not satisfied with a recommended denial , the applicant could suggest property exchanges or other modifications. 4. The berming and fencing will not only provide separation and privacy for the residents of the subject proposal but will , in addition, provide a screen and buffer between the subject property and the less intense single family uses to the north. 5. The revised plan has relocated the southernmost residential building to the north and away from the noise and congestion on N.E. 3rd Street which meets a major concern of the Planning Department. DECISION: Exhibit #5 is approved subject to approval of the Fire Department and approval of landscaping and berming by the appropriate city official . ORDERED THIS 21st day of October, 1981 . Fred J. Ka man Land Use H ring Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 21st day of October, 1981 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Daniel L. Hutsell , President, Superstructure Development, LTD 125 S. Oregon Street, Suite 208, Ontario, (`regon 97914 Steve Clark, Director of Planning, Stepan & Associates, 930 S. 336th, Suite A, Federal Way, WA 98003 Gary Norris, Traffic Engineer, City of Renton Tony Ladner, Renton Housing Authority, PO Box 2316, Renton, WA 98051 TRANSMITTED THIS 21st day of October, 1981 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director David Clemens, Acting Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Commission Chairman and Members, Planning Commission (8) Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City' s Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before November 4, 1981 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact , error in judgement, 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. b PLANNINGNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO TUE BEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OCTOBER 13, 1981 APPLICANT: SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, LTD. FILE NUMBER: SA-066-81 • A. SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant requests Site Plan Approval for a 30-unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority. B. GENERAL IRPOR 1AT ION: 1 . Owner of Record: Superstructure Development, Ltd. 2. Applicant: Superstructure Development, Ltd. 3. Location: Vicinity Map Attached) Vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street 4 . Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property : 89, 974 Square Feet. 6. Access : Via N.E. 4th Street 7. Existing Zoning: B-1 , Business Use 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: B-1 ; L-1 , Light Industry; R-1 , SR-1 , REsidence Single Family; "G" , General Classification District. 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Daily Record Chronicle on September 28, 1981 and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance on September 25, 1981 . C. :ISTORY/BACKGROUND : The subject site was annexed into the City by Ordinance 1549 of June 14 , 1956. It was rezoned to B-1 by Ordinance 1573 of October 9, 1956 and subdivided in the Tino Cugini Short Plat No. 384-79 on August 17, 1979. PRELIMINARY REPOR' '0 THE HEARING EXAMINER SUPERSTRUCTURE DE' OPMENT, LTD. OCTOBER 13, 1981 PAGE TWO D. PHYSICAL :: GROUND: 1 . Topography: The site is level. 2. Soils : Arents, Everett material (An) . Permeability is rapid, and available water capacity is low. Runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is used for urban development. 3. Vegetation: Scrub grasses exist on the site. At sometime in the past, all natural vegetation was removed. 4 . Wildlife: Some rodents and small birds undoubtedly live on the site. 5. Water: No surface water was observed on the subject site (September 25, 1981 ) . 6. Land Use: The subject site is undeveloped except for an older duplex structure in the northeasterly portion of the property. To the north are the Vantage Point condominiums while properties to the east, south and west remain undeveloped. E. IGHBO OOD CHARACTERISTICS: The area is in transition from generally undeveloped and low intensity land uses to a mixture of multiple family, commercial and light industrial. F. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1 . Water and Sewer: A 16" water main runs along N.E. 3rd Street in a northeasterly-southwesterly direction and a 3" main runs east-west on N.E. 4th Street to Index Avenue N.E. An 8" sanitary sewer is located on N.E. 4th Street within 500 feet to the east of the subject site. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: METRO Transit Route #107 operates along Monroe Avenue N.E. within a mile to the east of the subject site. 4 . Schools : The Highlands Elementary School is within 2 mile to the north of the subject site while McKnight Junior High School is approximately one mile north and Hazen Senior High School is 1; miles to the northeast. 5. Recreation: Windsor Hills Park is within a mile to the northeast of the subject site. G. APPLICABLE SECTI S'N S OF THE ZONING CODE: 1 . Section 4-711 , B-1 ; Business Use. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF 1 ,:u:: COMP xm l,1 SIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1 . Policy Element, Comprehensive Plan, Section 4.A-5, p. 8, Neighborhoods Policy. PRELIMINARY RE: T TO THE HEARING EXAMINEF SUPERSTRUCTURE VELOPMENT, LTD. OCTOBER 13, 1981 PAGE THREE I. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL OR HUMAN ENVIRONMENT: 1 . Natural Systems : Development of the subject site will remove the vegetation, disturb the soils, increase storm water runoff, and have an affect on traffic and noise levels in the vicinity. Through proper development controls and procedures, however, these impacts can be mitigated. 2. Population/Employment: Construction of the proposed 30-units would result in a population increase of approximately 75 persons in the immediate area. 3. Schools : The school population would normally increase by 7 - 8 students; however, the anticipated resident profile would suggest that 20% of the units would be occupied with families having 2 to 3 children. Therefore, we could expect 15 to 25 children, half of which would be pre-school ages. 4 . Social: Increased opportunities for social interaction among the future residents would result with construction of the project. 5. Traffic : The subject proposal will result in the addition of 162 vehicle trips per day to the area street system. This increase is not significant. J. 231VINIglooTAI. ASSESS ENT/ I :ry,'5:OLD DETERMINATION: 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 by the Environmental Review Committee on September 21 , 1981 . K. AGENCIES/DEPOTS 0'"'T1 D: 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. PLYING DEPART ANALYSIS: 1 . The proposal is not specifically consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial and the present zoning of B-1 , Business Use and L-1 , Light Industry. 2. The proposal will introduce 30 multiple family dwelling units into a potential commercial area. The Environmental Review Committee' s concerns about separation_ of incompatable uses 2) traffic 3) Recreation 4) pedestrian safety and 5) public services were addressed in Mr. Hutsell ' s letter of September 9, 1981 . The Committee agreed with the revised proposal, except for the proposed landscape buffer on the west property boundary, which they wanted deleted, and the addition of a walkway segment along N.E. 4th Street between the subject site and the Vantage Point Condominiums. PRELIMINARY REPOR' 0 THE HEARING EXAMINER SUPERSTRUCTER DEV___PMENT, LTD. OCTOBER 13 , 1981 PAGE FOUR The project proposal was specifically modified to include: 1 ) a 6 foot high berm along with a 6 foot wooden fence along the northern, eastern and southern boundaries. 2) A 6 foot high wooden fence along the western property line. 3) Inclusion of a basket ball hoop and volleyball court in the area designated a fire lane. 4) Contribution of $50. 00 per unit to the City of Renton ' s Park and Recreation Fund for mitigation of off-site improvements. 3. The proposal will occupy Lots #1 , #2 and #3 of Cugini 's Short Plat #2. Site plan approval was required as a condition of the short plat approval to assure compatability with single family uses to the north. The density of approximately 14. 5 units per acre is within the allowable density of the R-4 Zone. The intrusion of residential uses into a commercial zone is not supported by the Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan, pages 6, 7, 10 and 11 , even though it is allowed in the zoning code. In addition, the short platting of the property did not consider possible use of the site for multiple family residents. Generally, shape and access needs vary greatly from residential to commercial developments. Placement of residential buildings immediately adjacent to a major arterial with a traffic volume of over 23, 000+ vehicle trips per day is not in the public interest. In the nearby case of the Terrace, the developer placed the buildings over 100 feet from the existing arterial. The value of the remaining commercial property is impacted by the underlying short plat. A reasonable solution, which would appear to benefit the developer and seller and most importantly the future tenants would be to modify the shape of the property and have it fronting solely on N.E. 4th Street. The Hearing Examiner under Section 4-3014 (D) "may require of the applicant such conditions, modifications and restrictions as the Examiner finds necessary to make the application compatible with its environment and carry out the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, the Subdivision Ordinance, the Codes and Ordinances of the City of Renton, and the approved preliminary plat, if applicable. " 4 . Responses from the various City Departments do not specifically draw the conclusion that the site plan is awkward and not in the public interest. However, we find an unusual situation where both the Building Department and Police Department recommend substantial screening along N.E. 3rd Street. The site plan is so limited that modifications requested by the Fire Department for turning radius will eliminate 3 parking spaces and drop the proposal to 28 units. PRELIMINARY REPOR CO THE HEARING EXAMINER SUPERSTRUCTURE DE.__,OPMENT, LTD. OCTOBER 13, 1981 PAGE FIVE 5. Emergency access off of N.E. 3rd Street is also awkward as a result of traffic volumes, the slope and a lack of a left turn lane. Plus if a gate was used at the property line the fire truck would have to stop in traffic before entering the site. This can be overcome by moving the gate 40 feet to the north of the southern property line. 6. The Public Works Department advises that all off-site improvements on N.E. 3rd and N.E. 4th Street will be required in addition to 1 ) on-site storm water retention/detention 2) water line extension, and 3) closing the westerly driveway entrance and enlarging the second driveway entrance to 30 feet. M. DEPARTMENTAL Poi r sI DATI 0"e1 S Based upon the above analysis, it is recommended that the Hearing Examiner approve the site plan subject to modification of the configuration of the subject site to front on N.E. 4th Street and be a minimum distance of 75 feet from N.E. 3rd Street. n 74" pat ' n I t Y- ti (is lz a .f'r • t fP>kz•At A ti 6"7-:- 1:i,.,_. i Q a W 1.4. 3,.*. nl # n .._:- .6 ."k. v n tUri.' la 41 a•. Qf ip.-3 ri,1 - _ a:st V4413 . ti 1-• I --4g • t• R4I ir, a L;4. . R_GS 1m cii,t4III 4" w .I.l• :odAre +" ' r• ' 1Pir 1, 1 a'06}; ti.. .f .,rtl f•' arith: :E. o It. t r • ••.RBI vs • • *„1 AVIMr . / 011 ISittYlli©e e,a•...+..- L and ni•1nla t r•",•i.• '' nalla ,. _ f. t}B ilk TdIH. • . . IDA& mot.. t O0eldi tIt iJ! . lal t N» ITII Q ft: la I... i.`l•I '1 l 1'1"M' 1 f f Z' e`Ama" mwmo 14V m°° '` SR I RI--I eee e. Beet e . © I a + RO, a. •. kw,k t R'a uz 1 t% '4g J R 3' . m t Z I I Iil10 -- `4 iiii •Si o— —J 1 ' h .t 3 _ 11 ' Ih' L` I A F G ! IT ,i LCIR.qENW OOD 1 ill GS-I . 6 : , ate; 1 CEMETERY IIIII6 i„r 44 . I I•J 1 4, I 1 a t • -- - 1: — I i 1I ., I, SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, LTD. SA-066-81 APPLICANT SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, LTOTAL AREA +89, 974 Sq Ft. PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via N.E. 4th Street EXISTING ZONING B-1 , Business Use EXISTING USE Undeveloped PROPOSED USE Housing project of 30-units for Renton Housing Authority COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Commercial COMMENTS M.m,:,,u-marana,..._ US..-.-A t r-.•,-.:.. 12.311,61 vision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: 517E APActw/4M. 61A- 646-e0 fl..p..i.4 lo01 eke c•7e 30-on.'tAvs;ri pare - r #.e CI'? y /Q`J##er *eA o r.'T Location: UtcMM j 17 De as,x! Ape c'j '. Applicant : Sevier Srucluire 12:OPublic Works Department D Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: eg/fo219/ 1Traf is Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: 49/2.5-/g/ 1letiilities Eng. Division ti, Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department El 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 9/40/4/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 0Approved 0 Approved with Conditions ElNot Approved 4 pe.c.iEurre, Ocorinevi is z'O.Ue F474) /1CC't SS -44:3 t.4 y. i eS ek c 4 co e4 s Az-i-v..lA y O.J yJ i M. f ,t Z-T 1 O ieQ 1QE-, ,rs,i fr'ir7imum 74,--nir,i rad,u; i eg o/r c'44,X 0 i 41/;,innlI'l GJ:"a//. 4cci"l .Fo4ou)4y ". d"'-' TO Tic 0/0e"A)a,0 ,uor. seCJAce) T NE Ro Sd'r 8,,c_A / //;,,,u )'EA e.. /-/'r),'rI y tii)E xe.'T ',Cr'S fCCe-SS TO y'E-A) 4AA' .-Qa//144E•tir; 7,,6Q6A). [.d/c_c. OUIPPe'P A ./4nwa syS"fa1.11 . S/re- Gc,)/L c: /'E dl e' f/i'/'i ri,, c. l c//; .e <Sy.ITEti! AN.0 f fRd r3 g6l'Alen — DATE: c// Signature of Director or Authorized prese tative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : (/r%L/Ty - D77›•7-• , 0 Approved [ ‘proved with Conditions :pot Approved r-- 1 DATE: V14-/• Signature of Dir 'ctor or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIV--7ON: Approved [A Approved with Conditions Not Approved v c/ 0` Se'G i/ YG i-/ddt4 DATE: Verf Signature of Director or Authorized Repr sentative 1I.x_our TALC- ilnni-o mum. tm.Ir tLZ LS-Aaz.a- REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: E A1 - - /44 Approved pproved with Conditions Not Approved r c t4-J— msJl( /A NE 3 ilk? e65, ti-toS 1-0 co —dfive G0a7 -. -.cP 7z l.u /- "7T-''! : 'tom-S i--` G A/E / fi J `r 1 . 1 c' ATE: Y/ e/ Signature o irector or Authorized Re re ti vetveg 41&, REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:ijD6 E Approved El Approved with Conditions • [] Not Approved Sck 6s+p,N1-)A L.. 5c_R. /V/-<.) 5,4/0 t-P QQ cJ t Xo 3 oeb DATE: Ps-P3 -12J Signature of D. 'c or or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions []Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : SA-066-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-071-81 Description of Proposal: Construction of 30-unit housing project for the City Housing Authority. Proponent: Superstructure Development, Ltd. Location of Proposal: N.E. 3rd Street and Index Place N.E. Lead Agency: City of Renton This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on September 16, 1981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the PlanningDepartment. Oral comments were accepted from: Richard Houghton, Roger Blaylock, Ronald Nelson, Gary Norris, David Clemens, Steve Munson, James Matthew, Don Persson. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedingsoftheERConapplicationECF-071-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Steve Munson DATED: August 10, 1981 2) Applications: SA-066-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Fire Department, Building Department, Traffic EngineeringDivision, Utilities Engineering Division, Engineering' Division. Recommendations for a declaration of significance: Planning Department, Police Department. 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 bytheleadagencyofacompleteenvironmentalchecklistand other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: The declaration is issued subject to provision of the mitigatingmeasuresasproposedbytheapplicantinletterofSeptember9,1981 , plus construction of a sidewalk on N.E. 4th west of the site. Signatures: n R nald G. Nelson avid R. Clemens, ActingBuildingDirectorPlanningDirector e 6 e.6,1 VI: t.1(6' 1.1 i.chard C. Houghton, ,JctingPublicWorksDirector DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 21 , 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: October 5, 1981 9/eVpj rision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : sj'r€ APJAQwi4L .5 -646-e0 /9.0p04*//o1ro# sere c y 30-orisilovs:n pappe-t-6r iiik e C,'tly No oe.ri•gr 4v YA0a.1.7 Location : Us-C nj f7 o a$ -1 lye cry(. Applicant : Soper ri.c"Al re I :liDPublic Works Department n Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ,,,42/8/ Traf 'c Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:_g cigi tilities Eng. Division re Department nParks Department Building Department Police Department Li 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 9/401/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: e= Approved El Approved with Conditions al Not Approved/4a- F' Ej_L;i_ti, 20/17rp/i/s L'O„tJce/'4J //Ccr sc ' 'A.0c,-14I. P/2 si1Jc 4c0G s 2o-P fp r co -.i lo r /Lai•?' F,O eC 4 i l'EM 2 J1S, . 4 /eft 7ire1A4 VG/-19ir,4 i-,,i/u; re 0 oil--cl AI;Ai a7tl ' /YI,/I./yl.;a.t 'Ai.'0%AI(. 4cCLLl /?o4D eA a y A".'u d/ieer, re.) .g (,,,e-A,ere T 5el:ti e.o. V NE s7' " 5E T .17Hc-K "--/,?.).4 1VE -P/',eV-1--.i y L/,O ,er'srz'/C rs Access -sn A 4AV' CQJieic-1E-.Jr, P -i/6nJ. L.d.'4.1..., UW/.i fr Al_A/7.At sysiaAA . S/1-- - 6c)/1 . /'F '/.- ,412,,-':ri, ,A, c- idel r2e 5)/ui i /4 N v flier-, t7W.O/'/iJ TS tom. > DATE: ;F /,1)1 Signature of Director or Authorized prese tative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : &r/L/ry D7>T' Approved Dikpproved with Conditions ID Not Approved L_ DATE: VI410 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO I g r LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • WATER (A- 193 DIES !x U.g• '), PP ST- EATE COMERS AGREEMENT - SEWER KID SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • SEWER Com"'I• FAG• GoNty•G146- • SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE • WATER /.,(p SPECIAL ASSESSME;I1 AREA CHARGE. • SEA NO p R APPROVED WATER PLAN yRs (i1)4rrEie.LMJ /ylc7ALG6P /Ai FieONT or/ r 'L - (S7'1 APPROVED SEER pm Ins As way Ag, I3o2 rote:, W44.44" S APPROVED FIRi ;' -'.40- '. . '; __ BY rr- Y i. TES I Nor rtow A •. 1 ? 1/1., td 1,? d-A.,..t.- I rision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: SITE APP1460014 (SA`Q454t-ei) / .p.s*/i reii ef pt 30-tmitA u sitii papper6or 0 e Ci•r //o`Ji.' ,4r 'A0a,,• Location: W40 17 be cag eil 4'E le g-,..t. j '' Applicant: sbplr drLHd U,, TO: Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 4Wv149/ Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: 5:490/ Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department Parks Department Build' Department 1-2 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 10/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: police Approved ® Approved with Conditions 0 Not Approved 1) A hedge and fence buffer should be built along the N.E. 3rd side to protect the residents from noise & glare. 2) Only emergency access to the site from N.E. 3rd. 3) Agree to participate in the improvement on N.E. 3rd (two way left hand turn lane) 4) In placement of units consideration be given to the possibility of cars loosing control on the corner of N.E. 3rd & N.E. 4t1QATE nci running into Signature of Director or Authorized Representative the apartment buildings. This is a current problem as several cars have gone into this vacant property as well as hitting the neighboring house. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved [Approved with Conditions :Dot Approved 5) N.E. 4th be improved from Jefferson N.E. to the West so that N.E. 4th is improved from the Vantage Point Condos. to Jefferson N.E. 6) All units be pre-wired for intrusion alarms ( cost is minimual during const. to pre-wire so if tenant wants alarm they can install at reasonable cost. ) 7) Solid core doors and security locks he installed DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 8) Outside lighting in the parking lot be place so it shines inward and not out onto the street. This is especially critical in this area due to its location next to cbne of the atitiesraveled streets in Renton. 1 T I XC Dcrccnt, / 52 /1 A /521 ision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : SITE APP W/4C. 694-644-EI) iSey20J41i cool Very d p 30-eiri s;r1 przloci-6r e ("elk( No -: et p /f rtA.,,,, Location : +G(Il $ Qt ye c porre. Applicant : Siper ryCskre LQ.: Public Works Department El Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 8/A2/9/ Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:_ i&Vgi_ DUO 1 i ties Eng. Division Fire Department n Par 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 9/1/0/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION :cis 6-D 6 Approved Approved with Conditions [] Not Approved SCA 6s-/1-)A L s e c,/-Q C 5/1c p rceo"7-, /J 612 DATE: Signature of D. c or or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions [i] Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 14146/42/ I ision 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : ..s-,'TE AP 6i4 . 65-/4-664-90 {1.0,04034a.(.164-0 1skeef o 30-enay-A0t,sin pre50Ci 6r ysi.e C'ey NQ`.700141r610.,17 Location: Ut'Clnt 'w it ot as -1 ive Lt. j7`. Applicant: speddeveicire IQ: Public Works Department n Engi ing Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: /1a $j affic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:_ s V Utilities Eng. Division n Lire Department nParks Department n 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 9/4/41/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 7-4 ---%C £ / EF.e/ek• Approved [I Approved with Conditions Not Approved 0 c70 oc'74_ y Qw Ps f c, - _ve 4.,,.c.-e, cf) #7, 0 j f-a -,- S c1 A S. r,i &uff'--. )A‘-/ -:!v4-rz-Jvie-1; t 4 ,S..M-t/ 14,) e i,-1 \ c+\rt-et- I r.,. v-c)a-e--,. ATE: 1"/S Signature o rector or Authorized Represe five 2 ` 74/471V REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions 0 Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative f sion 3/1981 RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application : S'TE APPROVAL 5P-o 6-19 {mp.Jw./i oi+srtic'/ a 340-on.1 do s;itprbppeti feC r e CC`]' y Noa.si"p 41,14A 0-I.?, Location : ICtI1 of a Sit •Al ,ye j,e, Applicant : Sigoe dr')Cetfj Public rks Department ngineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 8/477/8/ Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE:_ 57c / Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department nParks Department EBui1ding Department Police Department I I 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 97/0/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved E Approved with Conditions E] Not Approved iGie DATE: 27 --- Signatu- re of Director or Authorized Repr sentative L REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved Approved with Conditions El Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. Vi.01e1P ii4 a being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that.T7he is the C I1 of v .er k 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 G.tice•...L713 Public Notice Public Notice NOTICE OF garding these actions isENVIRONMENTALcitableinthePlanningasitwaspublishedinregularissues(and DETERMINATION aartment, Muni_ipal Bnotinsupplementformofsaidnewspaper) once each issue for a period ENVIRONMENTAL ing, Renton, WashingREVIEWCOMMITTEE2352550. Any appeaRENTON,WASHINGTON ERC action must be of 1 consecutive issues,commencing on the ... ThA Environmental Re- with the Bearing ExamviewCommittee (ERC) has by September 14, 981.issued a final declaration of Published in the Daily31dayofAugust1981 ,and ending the non-significance subject to cord Chronicle August conditions for the following 1981. R6713 Oct: tNGS, day of 19 ,both dates L .' 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 • 0 to B-1 to allow for future' construction of a three-story 1 3office building with.parkingchargedfortheforegoingpublicationisthesumof5...f.0.4%, which • to be QIl the first floor,file FR-`has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the O654t'property located infirstinsertionandperfolioofonehundredwordsforeachsubsequentthevicinityof700F.ainierinsertion.Avenue N.W. The ERC has further con- C -- sidered and Issued a pro- pose.declaration of signif canoe for the following ah1.IBtf....Cclark SUUPERSTRUCTURE 31 tECF-071-81) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of Application for site approval In B-1 zone to construct 30- unit housing project for theI.1.16LIs•t 19....81 City of Renton Housing Au- thority file SA-066-81; ,ro-iet,resetzie.t.e.414 perty located in the vicinity of 4121 N.E.4th Street. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, I)9urther information re- residing at Wit, King County. IL:'.2'11 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 OF 4 © 0 THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 oma ksumBARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 5)co' 235- 2550 0, 9gr 0 SEP1E" 04 September 25, 1981 Mr. Daniel L. Hutsel, President Superstructure Development, Ltd. 125 South Oregon Street #208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 Re: Application for site approval in B-1 zone to construct 30-unit housing project fpr City of Renton Housing Authority; property located in the vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street. Sir : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on September 16, 1981 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for October 13 , 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, 41.. GA, Roger J. B aylock Associate Planner cc : A. J. Ladner, Renton Housing Authority Steve Clark, Stepan & Associates 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 October 13 , 1981 , AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . BLENCOE, H.A. AND JANET Applications for site approval in P-1 zone to allow expansion of medical/dental facility through second floor addition, file SA-017-81 , and variance from Parking and Loading Ordinance regarding parking requirements , file V-018-81 ; property located at 138 , 200 and 206 South 3rd Place. 2 . SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD. 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. 3 . PICKERING, DRURY Application for three-lot short plat approval (Pick ' s No. 2) , file 076-81 ; property located in the vicinity of 421 Union Avenue N.E. 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 OCTOBER 13 , 1981 , AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: September 28, 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 25 day of September, 1981 . SIGNED: ,20k.rill7ne.C4.440101 5u perstrac>u IC, NOTICE THIS PROPERTY GENERAL LOCATION: AND, OR ADDRESS: PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF 2821 N.E. 4TH STREET LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I S POSTED TO NOTIFY PROPERTY OWNERS OF A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD IN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL BUILDING ON OCTOBER 13, 1981 BEGINNING AT 9.00 A.M. P.M. CONCERNING ITEM (?( TI REZONE fI SPECIAL PERMIT CSITE APPROVAL IN 8-1 NE TO CONSTRUCT 30-UNIT HOUSING PROJECT FOR RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY I WAIVER El SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE - DIRECT APPEALS TO HEARING Qv EXAMINER BY OCTOBER 5, 1981 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL 235 2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION OF RA, a„ o THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 o NIL BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT co, 235- 2550 0, 947. SEP1OP September 17, 1981 Mr. Daniel L. Hutsell, President Superstructure Development, Ltd. 125 South Oregon Street #208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 RE: FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE/RENTON LOW COST HOUSING PROJECT Dear Mr. Hutsell: The Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton has considered the mitigating measures proposed in your letter of September 9th and hasdeterminedthattheseareacceptablemeasurestomitigatethepointsof concern that were raised. There may be problems resulting from the implementation of the measures, specifically the one dealing with the creation of a berm. A berm six feet high would have to be at least 15 feet wide to provide suitable slopes and it does not appear that there is sufficient area to do this. It may be necessary for you to obtain a land- scaping easement from the Cugini property lying to the east. The Committee did not believe that a berm was warranted on the west side of the property. In addition, the Committee has required, to mitigate the pedestrian impacts, that the segment of sidewalk along N.E. 4th Street between the subject site and Vantage Point Condominiums be constructed. At this point, I will schedule the public hearing for Tuesday, October 13, 1981, before the Land Use Hearing Examiner. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at 235-2550. Sincerely, C) ,ut4,1 Roger Blaylock Associate Planner cc: Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor A. J. Ladner, Renton Housing Authority rICTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION PROPOSED ACTION CONSTRUCTION OF 30-UNIT HOUSING PROJECT FOR THE CITY OF RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY ECF-071-81/SA-066-81 GENERAL LOCATION AND OR ADDRESS N.E. 3RD STREET AND INDEX PLACE N.E. POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTNON. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE t E.R.C. 3 HAS DETE INED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION, LJDOES ES NOT, HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON- MENT. A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, QWILL ILL NOT, BE REQUIRED. AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., OCTOBER 5, 1981 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2311-2550 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE iWITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance for the following projects : 1 . SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, LTD. (ECF-071-81) Application for site approval to allow construction of 30-unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority, file SA-066-81 ; property located at N .E . 3rd Street and Index Place N.E . 2 . CLARK-RICH, INC . (ECF-079-81) Application for building , permit (B-263 ) to allow construction of 3 , 500 sq. ft . 8-unit apartment building; property located in Maple Valley Heights Short Plat , file 033-81 , Parcel #2 , approximately 150 feet west of northwest corner of Pierce Ave . S . E . and S .E . 6th St . 3 . CLARK-RICH, INC . (ECF-080-81) Application for building permit (B-264) to allow construction of 3 , 500 sq. ft . 8-unit apartment building; property located in Maple Valley Heights Short Plat, file 033-81 , Parcel #3 , approximately 150 feet west of northwest corner of Pierce Ave . S . E . and S . E . 6th St . 4 . McLENDON ' S HARDWARE (ECF-084-81) Application for building permit (B-265) to allow construction of new retail facility (approximately 36, 000 sq. ft . ) ; property located on the north side of South Second Street between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South Further information regarding this action is available in the Planning Department , Municipal Building , Renton, Washington , 235-2550 . Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by October 5 , 1981 . Published : September 21 , 1981 FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No (s) : SA-066-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-071-81 Description of Proposal : Construction of 30-unit housing project for the City Housing Authority. Proponent: Superstructure Development, Ltd. Location of Proposal : N.E. 3rd Street and Index Place N. E. Lead Agency: City of Renton This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on September 16, 1981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Planning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Richard Houghton, Roger Blaylock, Ronald Nelson, Gary Norris, David Clemens, Steve Munson, James Matthew, Don Persson. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-071-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Steve Munson DATED: August 10, 1981 2) Applications : SA-066-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Fire Department, Building Department, Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Engineering Division, Engineering Division. Recommendations for a declaration of significance: Planning Department, Police Department. 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: The declaration is issued subject to provision of the mitigating measures as proposed by the applicant in letter of September 9, 1981 , plus construction of a sidewalk on N.E. 4th west of the site. Signatures : R nald G. Nelson vid R. Clemens, Acting Building Director Planning Director Zriiiii (1 CVfc< r1l! / µ, Richard C. Houghton, PActing Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 21 , 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: October 5, 1981 a, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SEPTEMBER 16 , 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS : RaMac, Incorporated : (ECF-061-81) Renton Properties , Inc . : (ECF-075-81) -B-258 Sea-Port Dozing, Inc . : (ECF-587-80) - B-236 OLD BUSINESS : ECF-013-81 HOMECRAFT LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC . SA-010-81 THE TERRACE) Modification of conditons #3 and #4 of the ERC per letter of July 20, 1981) as remanded by Hearing Examiner ' s decision of September 8 , 1981 ECF-071-81 SUPERSTRUCTURE SA-066-81 Letter from Daniel L . Hutsell , President , Superstructure , dated September 9 , 1981 , responding to proposed declaration of significance ECF-079-81 CLARK-RICH, INC. B-263 Application to construct an 8-unit apartment building (Maple Valley Heights - Short Plat 033-81 , Parcel #2 ) ; property located at Pierce Avenue S .E . and S . E . 6th Street ECF-080-81 CLARK-RICH , INC . B-264 Application to construct an 8-unit apartment building (Maple Valley Heights - Short Plat 033-81 , Parcel #3 ) ; property located at Pierce Avenue S . E . and S. E . 6th Street NEW BUSINESS : ECF-084-81 McLENDON ' S HARDWARE B-265 Application by Alex Cugini , Jr . , for building permit to construct new facility (+36 , 000 sq . ft . ) for McLendon ' s retail center; property located on South Second Street between Williams Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South t . ., 'Its% I I I lia i I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 111111t"i SEPTEMBER 16 , 1981 v 1 c I# 1, lie e is (...L,....:_ ,= 4 w ..LAKE r I• WASHINGTON — 4 f'--- 1 Nigro 4,...10::::;-* _ ....,. . - 40",. FITA10411111111 ...! 1E1- ap _ Niikii;, N , ritat. ,\\ k Agii :111014 ' -':---"' Zui \1 s"") ' tigilliall NM r----H c - JY Lifil I, i 1 lndfc \14r - 1 SUPERSTRUCTURE 71 1 I J ''1 SIIUI//. THE TERRACE 1 u- McLEONDON's P- f > 11 1_ i J.:1 7- riellr p, i f l l ofor ii, 7,,:, , , C..,,LARK, - -.17Z-C' i-17-11:1-1 i1 _ 7______ -..%":„,a1,00s- 40. ! •.• \ i '0 --\ 1 esle---;/ ' 47; '''7 11111.111111111.1". 1 1.--- ... r 111171.1 6 linkt,:1111:.. . , a!, .'A frA ValialLAL P' , j i1i=DNS s f 1 i• imil UPI ' raV roil i A Eh , I v,. / • 101 f,/ 1,1,, i 1 71EN(-'---;''— 1(r LAKE Il YOUNGS 1 1 J r OFivI O BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS • RENTON, WASHINGTON40Z i eel MUNICIPAL BUILDING • 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH • RENTON,WASHINGTON 98055 • 235-2569 O 90 co. 09- e0 sEP1 '° September 9, 1981 Superstructure 125 S. Oregon - Suite 208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 Attention: Mr. Daniel L. Hutsell, President Subject: Deferral of Off-Site Improvements, Tino Cugini Plats Jefferson Ave. N.E. and N.E. 4th St. - Renton Dear Mr. Hutsell: The Board of Public Works reviewed your request at today's meeting. It was determined that Mrs. Cugini's deferral would be up on October 4, 1981. This was a two-year deferral. The ordinance only allows defer- rals for a period of two years; however, the Board has agreed to extend the deferral until the Board's first meeting in 1982 which will be on January 6, 1982. The City will retain the bond amount until such time as the improve- ments are installed. If you have any questions, please give us a call. Very truly yours, Ri and C. Houghton, C man Board of Public Works jt cc: Mike Parness Board Members Mrs. Emma Cugini BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS 9/9/81 -- Page Two S. REFERRALS FRC1 DEPARTMENTS a. RequesL for Additional Deferral, Tino Cugini Short Plat, 2;'14 N.E. 4th Street by Superstruction Construction, Inc. - .'report from Engineering Division noted no objection to the deferral. It was noted that the deferral had already been extended for the two years. Mr. Clemens noted the ordinance only allowed a two-year deferral on plats. The Letter of Credit posted by Mrs. Cugini had been called in by the City. Moved by CLEMENS, seconded by NELSON, the off- site improvements would be deferred until the first meeting of the Board in January, on the 6thand advise Mrs. Cugini that the deferral is up. MOTION CARRIED. b. Variance for Sign Placement, Wendy's Old Fashioned Hamburgers, 230 Rainier Ave. S. - A representative for the company was not present at the meet- ing. It was noted that a letter had been written advising 'of the meeting. Moved by CEISSLER, seconded by NELSON, to postpone until the meeting of September 23, 1981, or Zet the company advise the Board when it could meet with them. MOTION CARRTEL. e. A-2plicatinn Lor Business Licenses: i. Rainier Janitorial, 2201 Maple Valley Hwy. , #77 - Reports from the departments were read. Moved by CLEMENS, seconded by NELSON, the application be approved subject to standard conditions. MOTION CARRIED. ii. Inspirations, 4108 N.E. 22nd Place, Party Planning & Catering - No reports were received on this application so the matter was postponed for one week. 6. NEW BUSINESS a. Street Tree Ordinance Review - It was noted that spraying should possibly be taken out of the ordinance as people would not want to come in for a permit for this. It will be a no-fee permit. Prohibition of certain kinds of trees was noted, and possibly the addition to the list of alders and elm trees. Discussion followed regarding the enforcement of the ordinance, it being noted that it was generally designed more for commercial areas. b Flower Stalls - Mr. Nelson commented that the License Diwii ion was hay.ng probl ; with the company installing flower stalls all around he City and although they 3 a license, it did not permit moving locations. 7o D 3USINESS - None 8. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - Mr. Norris commented that hi had been invited t a m( ang in Seattle as the C' ty of Seattle is evaluating a proposal to eliminate one trough lane on Rainier Avenue between McClellan and Hend<eon. It has been let' lined that about 30% of the traffic on nier is Ahrou; h traffic and they wan M divert these ears to different routes. Th y will have a study session next Tuesday. The residents along Rainier Avenue -e tired of it )eing a through art( 'ial. Comment was made that it has always been through '.erial. 9. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjourned at 9: 50 a.m. SUPERSTRUCTURE y 125 S. OREGON SUITE 208 I 11AL ONTARIO,OREGON 97914 RECEIVED 503)889-8983 SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT, LTD. OC Lam\ L SEP 1 1 1981 SUPERSTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION. LTD. C'.V? CrE1,1.,D CITY OF RENTON September 9 , 1981 MAYOR'S OFRCE SEP 1 1 1981 City of Renton A .................. 4 I Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South VjNG pEQQF` Renton, Washington 98055 Subject: Proposed Declaration of Significance, 30-Unit Housing Project for Renton Housing Authority Gentlemen: This letter is in response to the city ' s letter dated August 31, 1981, addressing the following concerns with regard to the above-mentioned project: (1) incompatibility of uses, 2) traffic , (3) on and off-site recreation, (4) pedestrian safety, and (5) public services. 1. Incompatibility of Uses. Existing Conditions. Please refer to Exhibits A, B, and C, which depict zoning, existing land use, and comprehensive plan for the adjacent pro- perties. The parcel of property on the west side of the proposed project is currently a State of Washington gravel pit. The gravel pit was operational from approximately 1948 to 1965 . Since 1965 , the gravel pit has been inactive. Currently the site is used as a storage and distribution center for gravel extracted from other locations. Mr. Jim Olson of the Washington State Department of Transportation, Highway Division, has advised us that the proposed future use of this site is not scheduled to change in the foresee- able future. The active operation of the gravel pit during the years 1948 to 1965 has resulted in a lowering of the level of the pit approximately 30 feet below the level of the adjacent properties. As such, any activity within the former pit is effectively screened from the surrounding neighbors . Additionally, it should be noted that a cyclone fence eight (8) feet in height surrounds City of Renton September 9 , 1981 Page 2 the former gravel pit. The property located to the east of our proposed pro- ject is currently vacant, zoned B-1 . The property is triangular in shape, containing approximately 2 .3 acres. The owner of the property is Emma Cugini. Mrs. Cugini has stated that she has no development plans for this property. The property is being held for investment purposes. Several potential uses for the site have been discussed with the most probable use being a neighbor- hood shopping area with convenient type stores. Due to the size and location of the property, any future development of the property would probably be one story in height. Mitigations. Superstructure proposes to construct a six-foot high earthen burm around the entire perimeter of the project. There- after we propose to build a wooden fence of six feet in height on top of the burm to provide additional screening from adjacent uses. Furthermore, the landscaping plan will be modified to provide for additional conifer trees which will attain a height of approximately 40 feet. It is felt that the aforementioned remedies will provide an effective barrier from the adjacent properties. 2 . Traffic. Existing Conditions. The existing traffic conditions present on N.E. 3rd Street and N.E. 4th Street are acknowledged by the city, as well as Superstructure. For additional data with regard to current and future traffic flows, I refer you to a transportation study pre- pared by the Transpo Group for the Homecraft Land Development Company' s Terrace project. The complete text or the study appears in Appendix C of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement dated June, 1981. Superstructure has reviewed this study and basically agrees with its findings with regard to the existing conditions. In order to assess the demand placed on local streets by our project, the following conditions must be analyzed: A. Nature of development; B. Occupant profile; and C. Size of development. City of Renton September 9 , 1981 Page 3 A. Nature of Development. The proposed development is to construct 30 units of housing for low-moderate income familities. The project is administered by the Housing Authority of the City of Renton, as well as the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (H.U.D. ) . The proposed project is funded by H.U.D. under its public housing program. The purpose of the public housing program is to provide reasonably priced housing for economically disadvantaged families. B. Occupant Profile. This project is unlike a private development because of the social and income limitations of the public housing pro- gram. Following is a listing of the general type of criteria that applies to the occupants of public housing programs: Family The program is designed for at least one adult and one child per household. Approximately 80% of all public housing is occupied by a female adult and two or three children. Approximately 20% of the households are occupied by couples with children. Age . The age of the adults ranges from 18 years of age and up. The vast majority of public housing households are occupied by adults ranging from 18 to 30 years of age with the average approximately 24 years of age. The age of the children is commensurate with the age of the adults, with a high percentage of preschoolers. Employment. Because of family and educational factors, approxi- mately 50% of the occupants of public housing are not employed. Furthermore, it is estimated that about 40% of those occupants that are employed are employed in jobs which do not conform to the standard office hours of 8 : 00 a.m. to 5: 00 p.m. Most of these people are employed in service occupations, such as, grocery stores, gas stations, waitresses, or they work in light industry, usually on night shifts or grave-yard shifts due to their relative inexperience and general lack of employment seniority. City of Renton September 9, 1981 Page 4 Income. The maximum gross income levels that can be earned by an occupant vary depending on the size of the family and the location of the project. For example, a family of eight people could be expected to be disqualified from participation after their gross income exceeds approximately $17 , 000, annually. Similarly, a typical family of four people could be disqualified when gross income exceeds $13 ,500 , annually. Practically speaking, a public housing household can be expected to earn gross income of $3, 000 to $6 , 500 , annually. Net Worths. Most housing authorities require that occupants have total net worths of less than $15 , 000 to $25, 000 , in order to qualify for public housing. Number of Vehicles. It is estimated that fewer than 5% of the households will own more than one vehicle (because of income and net worth limitations, it is not possible to own two vehicles) . Further- more, it is estimated that 15% of the households will not own a vehicle. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a 30-unit project will have approximately 25 to 28 vehicles. C. Size of Development. Based upon the preceding information, a 30-unit project can be expected to hold approximately 25 to 28 vehicles; of the 28 vehicles, approximately 14 will not be used for work or other peak hours usage. Of the approximated 14 vehicles which are used by occupants which are employed, approximately 40% , or six vehicles, will be used by persons who do not work traditional 8 : 00 a.m. to 5: 00 p.m. shifts. Therefore, it is estimated that of the 28 total vehicles present, approximately eight vehicles can be expected to be used during peak hour time periods. The proposed project is a 30-unit housing project. The preceding discussion adequately demonstrates that a public housing project will result in less impact than a similar size project constructed for the general public, due to the special limitations that govern qualification for public housing. Addi- tionally, it must be recognized that this 30-unit project is not sufficiently large enough to create a significant traffic impact. City of Renton September 9 , 1981 Page 5 3 . Recreation. Existing - On Site. The proposed site provides for 30 units of housing on approximately 2 . 1 acres. The townhouse style of construction is designed to conserve as much open space as possible. Our pro- posed site plan provides for three recreation areas. One area is located in the center of the site. The other areas are located in the southwest corner of the site. Mitigation - On Site. We propose to modify the fire lane/recreation area to include basketball hoop, volleyball court and other appropriate on site recreation as may be agreed to between Superstructure and the City of Renton. Existing - Off-Site. A need for additional off-site recreation is acknowledged. Mitigation. Superstructure proposes to contribute $50 per unit to the city' s recreation and parks fund. 4 . Pedestrian Safety. Existing. The site is currently undeveloped with relatively unestablished pedestrian traffic patterns. Since the project will be surrounded by a burm and fence, access to the site will be con- trolled. Access to N.E. 3rd Street will be limited. Furthermore, there will be little, if any, use of N.E . 3rd Street, due to the lack of nearby development. Very simply, there are no services or attractions on N.E . 3rd Street that could be considered to be attractive nuisances" ; or, in other words, a type of development that would have a tendency to attract children or adults. The vast majority of pedestrian traffic will result from access to the public bus, school bus, neighborhood park, and adjacent single family residences north of N.E . 4th Street. City of Renton September 9 , 1981 Page 6 Mitigation Curbs and sidewalks will be provided on N.E . 3rd and 4th Streets to provide for pedestrian traffic . It is antici- pated that any pedestrian traffic utilizing the public health facility will be either an adult, or an adult accompanying a child. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the pedestrian traffic will exit the north boundary of the project and proceed eastward along N.E. 4th Street, thereby crossing N.E. 3rd Street at the appropriate intersection. Although an occasional pedestrian trip to the public health clinic is anticipated, this type of pedestrian traffic will be minimal . 5 . Public Services. Existing. A 30-unit housing project can be expected to result in a minimal increase in police and fire protection. Mitigation. The project will be constructed in accordance with the Uniform Building and Fire Codes, City of Renton Building Codes, and H.U.D. Minimum Property Standards (M.P.S . ) . The M.P .S . regulations are mandated nationally for every H.U.D. sponsored project. Significant research has been done by H.U.D. in order to establish strict building requirements, so as to guarantee quality construction" . The M.P .S . will be monitored during construction by three (3) independent architects. A public housing project is the most highly scrutinized type of construc- tion project, for its size, in this country. Although M.P .S . is far too comprehensive to cite, it should be noted that: A. All windows will be double paned, with approved security latches; B. All doors will be metal with a peep hole; C. All locks will be Schlage (the best lock available) ; D. Doors will be drilled and fitted with dead bolts; E. Smoke detectors will be provided in each unit; F. Two (2) fire extinguishers will be provided in the community building; City of Renton September 9 , 1981 Page 7 F. Orientation of buildings provides maximum opportunity for neighborhood watch programs. Additionally, it should be noted that any inconveniences caused by normal construction activities, will be discussed with the appropriate department and minimized accordingly. In analyzing the viability of this project, we need to con- sider the total impact this project will have on the City of Renton. The foregoing discussion has focused on specific issues involved in the public works area. The issues are well taken and Superstructure appreciates the opportunity to respond. Also at issue is the public ' s need for this housing project. After having spoken to representatives of the Renton Housing Authority, representatives of H.U.D. , and after having driven throughout the entire City of Renton, I am convinced that the city needs new, energy efficient, quality housing to replace the antiquated dwellings remaining from the World War II era. The quality of housing being proposed is the "Cadillac" of public housing in this country. The materials are of the finest quality. The construction specifications provide for demanding requirements in terms of insulation and energy conservation. Complete land- scaping and recreational facilities are provided. In short, people of modest incomes are given an opportunity to live in a decent and clean environment. Because of the proposed location of this project, many families currently residing in Renton will be given the opportunity to move out of low income neighbor- hoods to a new neighborhood in which, new construction is taking place. The new construction taking place in this neighborhood will be attracting middle income people. The mixture of lower income and middle income people is the thrust of the public housing program. The point being that the lower income people will have an opportunity to associate with and become a part of a neighborhood which does not breed poverty and failure. In addition to the overwhelming need for this project, I think it is also necessary to speak of the urgency involved in this situation. The federal fiscal year end is September 30 . This project is feasible only if the federal government is willing to provide the financing. The fiscal limitations facing the State of Washington and the federal government have been the subject of much discussion lately. With the change in political leadership and the budget cuts that have been proposed, this project has to proceed in a timely manner in order to avoid the possibility of the program being eliminated by federal budget cuts. k City of Renton September 9, 1981 Page 8 Furthermore, I would like to make the city aware of the expiration date of the real estate option pertaining to this property. The option is currently due to expire on September 30 , 1981. It is expected that the option can be extended for a short period of time. Since city approval of this project is a requisite of exercising the option to purchase the property, I would like to request that the city notify us of the acceptability of this project prior to September 30, 1981. Because of the urgency of this program, I would be willing to appear at any council meetings or other meetings to more fully explain the benefits that this program offers to the City of Renton. Your expedient reply is greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, SUPERSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT, LTD. , Partner biA:2:Te14104-144. DANIEL L. HUTSELL President DLH: lw Encls. cc: Steve Clark Stepan & Associates Renton Housing Authority Attn: A. J. Ladner A I'trimming! . .......,:5,... . .1 4 .:. .‘• . 74\r • iii.1.••• j'A;',". 7.-!" ''?.4'..:4.:.:. 7`:. C ; 1 -...41 : -,-:;4 .i L.' 4.-- qk. 4.4•••• 5 . '• • . 0 ..l• ••-e i" . .4 .Z4-.1 .....r:I'll.--44 4:i:r..., .-.. 2.te • 'ik.::: '.7...--1•••••-• ';•;;i•--, p 1 RIPE% . ••r li.r•T 9''• • 1 r ---"i • ' ‘9 , ..-4-4., ,•'' 9%••••••••• ,...• . • 1•.7ot_l, ±2. 1,-; : ,,,. -• •• it • • . 4,0i ii ..• tk.. •.•••e,;;;.•,•:.::: . ••••.. L-1.- . • ... Iiii 1r,...1.1....•.... .111 i I I i 6 ?.:,....,!:., „.14.2.....:„,....--L_.#4,-47 r.,.., .,...,.. A-LA- .. 2... ,..,IA 1 cl 11 • - 31 v...7:-....., F,-;,..,• •11 I•1 •. igt s.m... . , .. 0,..?..11....,.... ....7‘...,..,. ,_ ,, jg r_.... . ,..... 1.. - .er•..i_.....j 9 9;-•.! ' R-2 ,,- 4.-. ,.:, v,. -ti-ii.:; - ..64; r:-.-t. .-.. ..__ .,16, • •,!7_ .--„ i.. vat...._.,..,25_,...____, 1 v f.... 1„e'•.:• `04-1 • • •,/;•11. .. • ' ' ,• ..,1 rc'''1 , h \ 4 k.,•' ,.. 4. . .. • ••14/.1 1 1I1 .1 ••••4 1,.9••• •••••'.• 1 -•91...••',, il •; „ 1 Ikli/ i '. 41.:"3;)'• ',.4,:j .• •••'."--e 4.--7"-.;.- 4.4%:'• ......*: ::j ....:-:i. I ':,. 4.,4.. :„ I . 1• I7 :Ns:._. talliali •1:_,• '•• ';#0.?" ' 1 • ' .: • , 4i •• • .. •1 1. •• •; r‘. ok.... ... ,.., ..1, ,!...7, ,, ... ... •. .II I. i • i I • .., ••;0.'1 .4.4.1-' •••••••. •.. .\,„ ..1!.•. ''', .j.‘ • .• g• ' •;.•.47 .11, • 4, 11.I ._ID 1 0; II 1 i I \.14• ; ..••1. .......1....„.1...zt 11-el..2..... • 7.7,••• . , .4111171• • •4„, , . . 1. I. iv oN "s. • • • • ••,4 •-• I I . • 11 ' \1:7?•••••• ; 4----i•-•:-:;',=;.il"--"-1 4. .''' 14.4. • • •,'' b • • 4••••••••• • ''• ••i . i• 9_J\ ... j.•,,. .,. . , ' 6. 04. __LA....Ast 5. i ..,.•144.XI,, ) • .-"li,•- e i \ I ver•-•-•01,P I •\••••••,-....4.--1.--=-, ft-1' •?*-•--' ' -1 I1.....;\i, • '!t . t. • ..',. .• -- . z.... . ./ •' ,_ •• ' ‘`.......:' .6'n 'li . :\, 4 i . i.,,..• - . -47 4 v -....-':*.'.'- -'•--f •-•• -,• -- 44.- 77‘1 f 1 T I •; • s,.. ..••••••• 41 !. 1 f 44,114 ii fl. ' A.. . rt- . ..?. . i 1 . !: •..k .• •••• . A. R ... •• . • ; , I s r ,', 4.-c," 1 .. ..";;,-1.1 -I . ' • I • PA...IFIC. CAR . , '-L.---'400.1 . .• * e.,04.•\ \,. ...‘••/,..JC..rdr;• ...• I•4 C),...A4DR.N.' (.0 t• - 1, ‘.),.s - ... ,.,,,• • - . . . 1- 7.•-- .9 .., orI, •: . *i. ...1 ''...% \ 04?"•/ • • ;' • 1 'N R-4 Jo •I i .c.;:i.jt .,;4 I 6115.1 •4. • .,.., I 1 7 co t r , •1,...44....\. -\------- . I. . _ •._ .,.. 4. , . 11' • / L-IAi W. • GS-1 joa •prosb..% _ ,:_•. . 4_.. . • , 1 ,. i/ L.ii4....... u-7 --*--- 1 7. • ./ t e 1 / C 1 L-I 7 . 9 1 ,It • ' 1 All.......r- Iniril' Y i ,,4 . , J 0.... 4.•._:, .....e.s. 5 Ire / ,7. 11 , , -.. y S71_11 . \s•-4 . 7.' fi/e / Th•`";,i\:, Rr r 1,/ ,.,..' ,../ \ s B-I rlifl14--. • ,• ...1 41., v/ A, c1... • .. -,. v• I .: r N I \ \It._744,11 1,.:A )/ 4.1:•; 1,i na ri RY e • • 6-7-7-r"• / Av., •i ' i ' r LI\\ I I ../ 4. MIIIMMIIIIIIMMia.4-'........._........... 1.,.'' 1•04"...../.."':'' 2......, I../INZ.. 6...•\1\R.44N.-,... ---- 1/ / ki: I11SGMI M tamlb p , 10K....,' 1 I. • le 8-1reR_I • 1 AMMO.,H GIMP I i 1 IL, 3•- •7 .• Nvalarm \ 1.4..ft.a. 1 ' • • . ip. I. illrlbsikli I ZONING MAP) 1 1 . I 11 Jil:::::.1.:;:::::.:;.i;:...1:'.::.::,i...:::::0:.....'..:::.:.,...,:::(:: :!......:::.:4.:::::.::::.::..:::::::::::...;::::::.::::::::..:::::.: 1 1 i I LLi' i i i 1I 7• I i I I J....•••::.: E...:::::i........':•:::::!ij.....1..::::.;.. Ki,. i. ...".::::Ate::::f.:(11:(1 i,1.,...'):::§•:.:6.....::::::::::......i.:•::::. *:........i....:. .2. .;...'... ...:...........•;:::::7.'.....11..11:....::::1;;;;',FT......:.: I V.:.. •';'i.f.:';',.:....p.........:1:•::•;•;•;;I:::.. ...... ..:...::.::.:1:::•:::•:•:;%1.11.i:: "1/.•'!;:••••• •••' ::.:..•••••.::::*: 141.1:.•:?iii a 1;i r".71:7. ,t,.-.4-,-...,......-..*,..........:.7.,........:.. . - ..:::::::::fi c'd ..:.'....:•••••.:::•:;:i:1::...2;;:::'..•.!•:;;:i::'')i...••••••;:•...::.:.1 1.:;:;1%.••• :1.• i) ;.::::1'....::.::::•••...::::,......:..:4... 11....!..::••••••••:;.:......................!..:..1..?1.11.11:' 5.1:( 4151'.. 1::::.:*:::,:....::::::...g.::........:;•...:11:.:::.;:fi:1•:::.::7........J.• 77.......:"4Nl ti, i l e 1lliill r5r} t.J a I.i."..::........ .....5.:.:•1;'.......',...;:ii:N.):::.....:. :i....•1:..i.sil.::::':i.:;:::::::1;:...1.;....irig. h V • J v i;": 99 a 1.J ( II_ iMM / i i Y •Y r Y r M Y r r Y r r ```" ..r x M/ r 1 /\1, 1 In r 1 Y I •M i/\ .\' ri M ' i MrY\/I\I a M Y x x Mx r Y. a r M.„.. , rMM aM • \ i. JD 0:7.-„.....,/.„-_‘,/-5, .....‘„,.....,......-.. . 1 _,‘ . • ,7,_::,:,., ..._., , • " " . " 1 I 1.i' i • x r r' a r t • • r Y Y M a x+ , M M x r r x r / M x Y L • s i r X r r r r Y x r r • 1 x r Y Y Y r 1 i a i Y M rM• 1 r M•r r x • Y x / r i M r • Y ,r M M 1' ll 1 r • r i M r M r r i i M Y • i M i i XNXXXXMM M M M M'• r r . t 1I Y r Y i x r r r M 1 1.1 M M s x :. r M r r M x r i x r I p" y: x r r Y r r M r L r i r Y r r M r r r x r M r r Y r a i r Y K,'IJ•.'4y`l x F 7I. 1 .: : ff.:::r.' .1 \/I r r r Y Y r r a x r Y i Y r r r r 1;}::, r r r r a a x Y Y r r i_x i r•("ice1t}! / :05, Y :f 1\ \/ f\, i x a Y i a r r x r Y x a r 01{- L •e^\ Y Y . Y x Y x r i r r Y r M r x M i i x i r r r i • G..Cr e',^•1 • M 1\ \\/ 1 Y r a r r r a n M a r r • ir.• SINGLE FAMLIY RES. X v MULTI FAMILY RES. CEDAR \ ....,...___ RivER N. i HEAVY INDUSTRY COMMERCIAL arr., . 'r ; * PARK AND GREENBELT 1'1' PUBLIC & QUASI PUBLIC r r x I.M rrrrMM UNDEVELOPED EXISTING LAND USE MAP t.,%•‘• 4'',, T )11\ i , 1111 . LL, 4 1.-. 4..'i ''''. '''1.);•• i),Ce0.%-•!/) .4. ' '•‘ 1,....,ii i••••1 _,,, 57 :/f4.41.::•.;41°,•,%..../III r 14.; 14:_/::::tird;4•11/L."---. 1 -..4'.',',e','..;f:d"......•‘, r, . . , II r.;••/ i \ t • • • ‘ o.....,i I- " • — i . Ilk 4 1,..„i6iii II I Mli MIL II 1 •rt re • I 1 1k hisibus C • • sr Ilt XXXI. X • I III X • • X III X D IMM111.10111. 1111.1• 1& OM 17 X X X 1- 11‘'•'• 1. X aI*LI '" • 11 1::, 1` t_.•:: I /...... ,....1 -., 1 4 .'nt.1e 4:1,)c?(• II 1fircr, ••:•:•;,..1.':•:,:,••,:i:::.:::,::••---.:••••i••:••••••••::•:.../., `•\ ••••-••••• \ t %./N.,. •••./ "••gil iji i I I•...........It v.:•:::•;:',:;::::::::':: ::::':::f:':•!:•::/4:::::•!:::i;iN::;:.::*:::::•:::: :•:•:•4 :•::::::•:.zif:'/••::.iiifs**/*- :1::. ••••:... .-I t 7=-7,1 ri-- -- ,•-, ii :;:::::::: ..........:•:::.;::::::;:.. I i 1 s. —% ,i- .:.- \— „—, _.., .., I //fi Pi .......:1:'iP..::.:,.,M1: ::::::•:::.:::!:....:..::::::i::.:::::::::;...i:iy....::::;:::::: :::::::.iig::3.:::.:i.::** *.f..,...'„:::....::•:).::"....:E.::::..::. c.:.:.,:::,, j,.:*** „.,.,74;:,....."5;•1-.5.:lizi....2( r•= 1-, 7%,—..‘',1--,,,-,-,2iri.. ,.....1,..,4„,r).,:10.,-,,,.,.. k, /0, _, . .../ ...., .p •:.ii*.I.: :•.iii.......-..:.::: iiiik.::.....iii:::.:.i.:ii::•if...ifi:::::::::if,....•••••••• ,I:.,,. .,..i.,..,„i, :;/....;:?,,,,,&r.,;..1.0...,;.,.,,--,0::- f....--,1...‘1-_-, ...,--z,/,--,'..., %_,111 '.....;::i.:::: ./g.i...:f.::•::::s. INIW°1 do 4 , ,,,.))4.1)1*.A) .1",) •,.r__Ia.:, l•-trl• !,..% --r• 1;0- _ %_/ 1,,i li 1 A:, i%;'"iit:14:,if.:".ail ie4a17.,...4i 14 0. 1.i,:• ca.. ..4cri..%).{:,,,,,,,:s.::,J S. cy,?.,,4..-,a7r).,..-.:;.....,_\I\/....‘/7\ 1 1/.....1 t 1_,..%7.:,..\\,....\_:v...,(-;t4. 1...A.: 11111 lid 1 11 1,01!;i1,!;i11111111 7%-:,„1..).. ;;4,..,..N.-7..tie:.).A. t.as..i#:•1 ,1,1. .. ‘,1 ‘,44.* 4'^1••77.3: .r.:If'1.tl'IJ-Ix-.111 ` 1worm a.:1 /....‘/ i I • x ',I j..4,. .,.14. .,.•.A. T?e„e.,-,1_..)_,./........i.•..;.1•- s— i. i.--:. • Il 11111111111 r-",'7.1- `';).4.)':-?"'4..)•.,,,P,':-,,,,, i-r-r.v.)....4-;',.;-;-• -;,,— ,-,--/..Je1111111111ss is.\7.,\;72 7 72i...‘I/Tii•LIji,•;::):::,):::."0::14 gr.).i';' . Ni..374,.‘i".c'''V\.."i./ 1.:74%'‘471.3;':".I.:111 ••••4S.....,;47. ,... ,/ , rius•ma4. . s.-r.. x .:f.., j-• •.:ve4,4-• ;)•••• ,,:;,,34,4-.::i:: %,- '- i.....-ss9,--1,:r. 4,,,,,,, HFiOsir ..4'54'7,;.:\I.iiii..;D 1- 1:1-1 1.....%%,%,'-',"•4,...'4..,,..:';•• : -,...,,,,;'.'1„.4.;.,...154. .,$.,;','\,: s' al. d. 4.;:-.3.- ta•-. Ni...-7,...1.4.'„--,,L'..,..)/1,:ti- 3_, A..4'..),-1..)--c4..,..,.:-. s, ,,,o ,,,,,..„...).:,„...,:,.,....,,..,......,s‘1,.:07.,,,, „?.. i.4„. ij.,:l. ..„ 4:$,...,„45...);):.1,,i•,..s,.;.,./,..).3..,6ceix,.,..,:j.„ r 4,-. I i \ i..,/ ,:,..,,1/4 . 440 t. 9 ' 4.,,,• ,r. .0, •.... lja• : 1.'4 •''''4)-,evbii....r. " :: ;,.4,.....3••••‘• .s.•.IIIIIIIIIIII II :.''.111-• 11111 i/-/-/- -",`L/0,..:7 .i4:ifir.:,_74,.• ...4 •k•'.• • 1...5 kill....bi J-44,- •::1 3. ' * ...4.t> i? t'i'•:4A•1 .1• ‘f 11::: 1%,i'1—%!i ti''1..?.+A.:3:..4.1:•A'?It•:4-5+4,44?.4.0*i.: ...j-ir A:ti. .....10.)...)-44,•::i ' • - .. • .1 SINGLE FAMILY 111 1. LOW DENSITY MULTI—FAMILY111 • Pt , MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI—FAMILY 111 00"----N..., _ N...._ s\ 1*:1:.;.*:::';':::':.:;%:.:1::..S.:.:.:.:.:.•%.::.:. 2„ V'' HIGH DENSITY MULTI—FAMILY COMMERCIAL III LIGHT INDUSTRY OR M.P. HEAVY INDUSTRY II 4•:,...1....-7-.17-7-:.r_fft,, ., ri RECREATION s ..,, PUBLIC ll COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP_ii. PROPOSED DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : SA-066-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-071-81 Description of Proposal: Construction of 30-dwelling unit housing project for the City Housing Authority. Proponent : SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD. Location of Proposal: N.E. 3rd Street and Index Place N.E. Lead Agency: CITY OF RENTON This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on August, 26, 2981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Planning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Ronald Nelson Gary Norris Steve Munson Richard Houghton Roger Blaylock Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-071-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Steve Munson DATED: August 10, 1981 2) Applications: SA-066-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance were received from the Fire Department, Building Department, and Traffic Utilities and Engineering Divisions of the Public Works Department. The Police Department and Planning Department recommended a declaration of significance. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is 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 the _proposed declaration of environmental significance: 1 . The proposal does not specifically comply with Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial. 2. The proposal will impact (a) adjacent uses, (b) traffic, c) on and off-site recreation, (d) pedestrian safety, and (e) public services, ie: police and fire. Measures , if any, that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a declaration of non-significance. 1 . Buffering of both existing and potential adjacent uses. 2. Provide both on and off-site recreation suitable for type of development. 3 . Address traffic and pedestrian safety question and suggest internal design or off-site construction which could mitigate the known impacts . 4 . Design the structure to reduce demands on fire and police departments, ie: deadbolts, security systems , etc. Signatures : RA° t J.) onald G. Nelson David R.lemens Actin Building Director Planning Director 71 R' hard C. Ho ght Acting blic Works Dire r DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 7, 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: September 21 , 1981 NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL IN B-1 ZONE TO CONSTRUCT 30-UNIT HOUSING PROJECT FOR CITY OF RENTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, FILE SA-066-81 (ECF-071-81) GENERAL LOCATION AND OR ADDRESS VICINITY OF 2821 N.E. 4TH STREET POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CE.R.C. ) • AS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION, l • DES DDOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADV RSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON- MENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, revatmi WILL 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 1616- 14 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION O 25 CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON x PLANNING DEPARTMENT v 235-2550 VV 1 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE 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-i 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 PROPOSED DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Application No (s) : SA-066-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-071-81 Description of Proposal: Construction of 30-dwelling unit housing project for the City Housing Authority. Proponent : SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD. Location of Proposal: N.E. 3rd Street and Index Place N.E. Lead Agency: CITY OF RENTON This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on August 26, 2981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Planning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Ronald Nelson Gary Norris Steve Munson Richard Houghton Roger Blaylock Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-071-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Steve Munson DATED: August 10, 1981 2) Applications : SA-066-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance were received from the Fire Department , Building Department, and Traffic Utilities and Engineering .Divisions of the Public Works Department. The Police Department and Planning Department recommended a declaration of significance. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is 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 the _proposed declaration of environmental significance: 1 . The proposal does not specifically comply with Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial. 2. The proposal will impact (a) adjacent uses, (b) traffic, c) on and off-site recreation, (d) pedestrian safety, and (e) public services, ie: police and fire. Measures, if any, that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a declaration of non-significance. 1 1 . Buffering of both existing and potential adjacent uses . 2. Provide both on and off-site recreation suitable for type of development. 3. Address traffic and pedestrian safety question and suggest internal design or off-site construction which could mitigate the known impacts. 4 . Design the structure to reduce demands on fire and police departments, ie: deadbolts, security systems , etc. Signatures : onald G. Nelson DayR. lemens Actin41 Building Director Planning Director t1 R' hard C. Ho ght Acting blic Works Dire r DATE OF PUBLICATION: September 7, 1981 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: September 21 , 1981 Date circulated : c/ /A/ Comments due : //Ofg/ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIIEW SHEET ECF - p 7/ - 8/ APPLICATION No (s ) . 5/1-O056-g/ PROPONENT : JG/pers/rvcfUre PROJECT TITLE : S/TE 117932.0U/9-e _ Brief Description of Project : 7ofOOS,014g c7€c Sig / v e, 4 C—r'-7 A vs/7 4v7 sri LOCATION : 0 'g;:z SITE AREA : fig? g74/0' BUILDING AREA (gross ) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : -- IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 7 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : S;nf(e f. iiI'y east : Undeve(ope4 / south : 1/ west : Condovrtbit um 5 Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : l/ 10 ) Risk of upset : f' 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : /,(h 4y ,,./?,,O5A,, f 6". ps( w,I1 k3Our,ci5) traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS I/ More Information Reviewed by : ccXKe.rgei sere l itle : 1$5,W(r-in 74)((ce ,eA-- DaDate : WA/g/ FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :r Comment_ _u : O ENUIROXNE iiAE COIEECLIST G1EVI.E3 SHEET ECF ow - 8/ APPLICATION No (s ) . Q•8 PROPONENT :. „Stper3f rvdbvrqie PROJECT TITLE : ,jire f PpoloviAL Brief Description oi' Project : f,op s . ( Q 4ottSfruc+ G O•+C.Jn t 40uSi roiec& 'hDr f Cl us :n ilkditort47 LOCATION : tea eLe Sf2th Sf. SITE AREA : fi 89,975/46 BUILDING AREA (gross ) ....." n*" DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : m"".m- IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct /Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare :4 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : c/ 11 ) Population/Employment : a v 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : v 1 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : c/ COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information// Reviewed by : C---_,litle : Dote : f 747 FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : s/d( Comments due : ;0514/ ENVIRO'a1ENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE1' SHEET ECF APPLICATION No (s ) . 54.. O 6'R/ PROPONENT : 3/Up4Ir3fruclVIC PROJECT TITLE : .$/ TEE Mr/10VAL Brief Description of Project : Proposal 40 eAmdrut# a 3o-cu1tj t A/WS/AV ecl.4r ! C t f y XofiitJ LOCATION : c B? f AIE4/1 4s1. SITE AREA : f gt,g7Y46 BUILDING AREA (gross ) "' h DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : doms 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 ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : xxxx 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOSxxxx More Information_ Reviewed by : L T PerssonY litle : Date : 8/14/81 FORM: ERC-06 6 Date circulated :r QQd Comment iuc : 4V4rW___. EiA1VllMEENIAZ EhEL CL.IST 6?[VIE0 S;cEE1 CCF -- 4I99 j . ' 8/ APPLICATION No (s ) . S4fO 6" PROPONENT : 15uQersf ruCIV e' PROJECT TITLE : ,„5 ire Are oV L Brief Description of Project :Proposo Q (Ansf1 O Qsi, p retied— 4r- tive_Coly lious ;n1 111,640.-01, LUCA1IUN :__ K 7 S'f SITE AREA : 2 e_Te tUUILDING AREA (gross ) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : ...' IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO r--1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : s y 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : tl ) Land Use ; north : east : suuth : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) traffic impacts : w 14 ) Public services : v- 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : I COMMENTS : Recommendat ion : SI DOS More Information Reviewed by : 1 it le : LO Ek44424A,6 S C. Date : g/14-/S‘t FORM: ERC-06 6 Date circulated : ` /Sl Comment ue : W490/49/ EINi9IRflMEINTAL CHECKLIST REV"IE'3 SHEET Cr ._ sow - 8I APPLICATION No (s ) . $4- 064-8/ PROPONENT : 6/ip!°r frVCfilr' PROJECT TITLE : 7"E AP?i oVsL ` Brief Description of Project : eropaS . I "/0 40"sfrtic+ Z.. U' -IJnt t Aousini projec'f 4r- ( C1 us :.t Aallord7 I_UCATIL'N : &8A1,lE 4/S']L. SITE AREA : * 99,57T 46 BUILDING AREA (gross ) 111".1""` DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (a) : "NNE" IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : ti 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :VT 3 ) Water & water courses : v 4 ) Plant life : V 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : v 7 ) Light & glare : 1 V -l 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 1 i 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : J 13 ) Trip ends ( I TE ) cj,JsQterr<a//e , L/- traffic impacts : :iN -t` //c 1 c:zccess yj hit .3r's' 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : l 17 ) Human health : I 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : TS o se ocresc /-v?<2-)C oe no le ///rt/i'1Cj s rexr X jrlC's /iv C+tSS fro r+o1 h L)A n,9, .Q lo.e-i'v St/s -1 t7- / .4v r e j /ap-e Recommendation . DNSI !DOS More Information Reviewed by . _Gj' litle : nato : FORM: ERC-06 6 0 Date r.irculated : ,./8/ Comment _ Joe : lJ 51/4:9f ENVIltilk'GaE TkiL CHE NCLIST GtEVIE°J SHEET CCF -D?1 - 8/ APPLICATION No (s ) . 54— O6618/ PROPONENT : i5uperSilettettir a PROJECT TITLE : _ITE APPACWAL Brief Description of Project : Pvopa5ottQ CO"Sitie'* 40 use n, to raj ec&{or tivZ C04.4...A121?s :st Av( ori /y SITE AREA : 2 99 er7r46 BUILDING AREA (gross ) 4.""1".4 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 : k' 10 ) Risk of upset : n 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : K 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : r K 16 ) Utilities : t 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : x 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : NSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : y2iu— title : (1441- (e)(4"6 I K Date : 77`AD Y FORM: ERC-06 6 I 4 Date circulated : / 8 Comment. due :. 5,1 1 ElNVIt?O%NU UAL CiiE LIST REVIE0 S4:EE d Cr .- 47I - 81 APPLICATION No (s ) . QQ94V PROPONENT : Soper sir svcl1 rle PROJECT TITLE : s5ITE A1ptgoVAL Brief Description of Project : Ppo5 .( 4® eor,sirticf 4,-cr,,;t a_v_giAs. proiecf4i- Hug Cei4Agy, s in orI' LOCATION : SITE AREA : 14 99f77Y95 BUILDING AREA (gross ) '...."' DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : +'""' IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : r- 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : L. 4 ) Plant life : S ) Animal life : f 6 ) Noise : L 7 ) Light & glare : L 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : L 10 ) Risk of upset : L 11 ) PopulaLion/Cmpioymont : l/ 12 ) Number of Dwellings :L/ 13 ) Trip ends ( l1E ) : 162) VehicJLay `V"i_5 traffic impacts : 7 , ;.ie e4.-. . :./`- .4-.-1/4-,v v- .y //:sigf t' 31pdie,`_`, tQ ., cD ro i ,4i 7?a fy,, ,e/Dal e b of z tc i lie-45" 14 ) Public services : I / 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 1 Ii" 17 ) Human health :I---1 18 ) Aesthetics : J`" 19 ) Recreation : _ _ 2—' 20 ) Archeology/history : ___ e.'/''- I j COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : G-,--7-' ) 1 i t l e : /9` D 647 4ercitsi Date : i / / FORM: ERC-06 INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Date AUGUST 1 10R1 TO: STEVE - PLANNING DEPT. FROM:ENGINEERING DEPT . SUBJECT: LEGAL DESCRIPTION (SA-066-81 ) WE HAVE REVISED THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS SUBMITTED ON THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL SA-066-81 . ATTACHED PLEASE FIND A COPY OF THE REVISED LEGAL DESCRIPTION . Mom"' ABDOUL GAFOUR ENGINEERING SPECIALIST PG /SF ATTACHMENT LEGAL DESCRIPTION SA-066-81 ) LOTS 1 ,2 AND 3 OF CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT NO . 384-79 , RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR' S FILE NO . 7910189001 , RECORDS OF KING COUNTY , WASHINGTON. k`i WILSON CROWDER y ARCHITECTS PLANNERS ifs% l U 8710 OVERLAND BOISE,IDAHO 83709 4J, ,i July 30, 1981 Mr. Roger Blaylock Associate Planner Municipal Building 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. Blaylock: Re: 30 Unit Turnkey Family Housing Project Housing Authority of the City of Renton Project No: WA-19-P011-005 Dear Mr. Blaylock: Enclosed please find three (3) prints of the Site Plan/Landscape Plan, and nine (9) prints of the Building Elevations for the above referenced project, which are submitted as requested. Please understand that these should be considered as preliminary drawings and minor modifications will almost certainly be made prior to completion of the Project. If further information or clarification is needed, please contact me. Sinc Ray Crowder, AIA Wilson Crowder Architects. sh FRENTS I w ENVIRONMENTAL REW/IEY COMMITTEE AUGUST 26 , 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A .M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS RaMAC , INCORPORATED: (ECF-061-81) LYLE PICKLE : (ECF-069-81) 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- t tion of a three story office building with parking to be on the first floor ; property located approximately 700 Rainier Avenue N.W. SA-066-81 SUPERSTRUCTURE ECF-071-81 Application for site approval in B-1 zone to construct 30-unit housing project for City of Renton Housing Authority ; property located in the vicinity of 2821 N .E . 4th Street. c t 11110. 1 visor Ir0 - ----- 110,et p I • • 1--f A L---- 4 Al - li im IL \\.\\ 4110 ; 111,t, I \\ LAKE li _ I,,.. , WASHINGTON ff- Atit'Sli N, I STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. iiiii I 1,ji0 13 11 I1111 tahMe/tubi‘li r fllum /j, SUPERSTRUCTURE Nat r l Ilwli'/.iell 7-71 m 6, tn`4',: L.,- Ili a mit\ ?I• aritiiii drr 1......„ 11 IP- 11111111111i allIPASUIr lOh iI 1 ill f mil ( Iif.,. ..::::•.Tht> 7' ' lr<4.\:frill 1117460i, I'.) siiilliiii 1 tmaip;r.--- 11.' l t . mistriars CAM Allem ID\ MI,1. 1IiI t I ah, Vil Li 7 limmili. - II C I 1 '''',7-. 1 r fr IMEWLLAKE A I roUNGs OF R. 6 © THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 omi BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9.0 235- 2550 P0, 914-0 sEPIellO. August 14 19819r Beverly L. Kottke Department of Housing and Urban Development Arcade Plaza Building 1321 Second Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 RE: Project WA19-P011-005, Renton Housing Authority Dear Mrs. Kottke: Mayor Shinpoch has asked me to respond to your letter of June 29 , 1981 , regarding the above referenced project for the Renton Housing Authority. The City of Renton has reviewed this specific application, along with the remaining six under consideration by the Housing Authority. The subject application meets the minimum requirements of the City of Renton with regard to zoning and access. Due to the location of this proposal, the City of Renton does have concerns relating to access of residents of this project to shopping and other convenience services. The existence of the Metro Transit Routes 107 and 108 adjacent to the site does help to relieve some of these concerns. As you are probably aware, the City of Renton strongly supported the previous application of the Renton Housing Authority for the project to be located at the intersection of Kirkland Avenue N.E. and N.E. 16th Street due to its proximity to a variety of shopping and other convenience activities. Although the current application does not meet many of these objectives, the City of Renton again strongly supports the application of the Housing Authority due to the demonstrated need for family housing proposed in this application. It is our hope that the Department of Housing and Urban Development will give similar favorable recommendation to the Housing Authority 's application. Very truly yours, 1611-41 • 4a,/ s-r David R. Clemens Acting Planning Director cc: Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Richard M. Stredicke, Council President Members of the City Council A. J. Ladner, Housing Authority ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AUGUST 12 , 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A. M. THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS : RaMAC, INCORPORATED : (ECR-061-81) STIRSKEY HOLDINGS, LTD. : (ECF-075-81 - B-258) LYLE PICKLE : (ECF-069-81) NEW BUSINESS : STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPT. OF GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE Proposal for one-story office building (13,416 square feet) and parking for 77 cars to be utilized by Employment Security Department; property located at N.E. 10th Street and Index Avenue N.E. ECF-071-81 SUPERSTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD. SA-066-81 Application for site approval for a 30-unit housing project for the Renton Housing Authority; property located in the vicinity of 2821 N.E. 4th Street ECF-072-81 STEWART, VINCENT AND IRIS R-067-81 Application for rezone from G to B-1 to bring into conformance with Comprehensive Plan; property located on west side of Duvall Avenue N.E. approxi- mately 300 feet north of Sunset Blvd. N.E. ECF-073-81 FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP SA-068-81 Application for site approval for construction of claims office in M-P zone; property located in Koll Business Center, northeast corner of S.W. 43rd Street and Lind Avenue S.W. ECF-074-81 CARACCIOLI, JULIUS AND STELLA R-069-81 Application for rezone from G to L-1 for future office, warehouse, and material storage uses; property located on the west side of East Valley Road approximately 320 feet south of S.W. 16th Street 1 .11 lii1 1 I t. 1 I i ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A c AUGUST 12, 1981 e4 1 1l./A' ei 1 i \1, 1= 4 m i k imerri i. ilk-i---_,.....„ ______, 6 ray , LAKE i}k ir !''' o%• a A' \ "" 1111111i'Airftl Pill gTEWART14= WASHINGTON \ 'i . e 0 \liwaii„ 1 _OA . 3 Amt. STATE EMPLOYMENT NAT :lin! ijahg)010il r• _ 1111,, • 1 R TR.CTUREL_ ' r l/IIIM \ SUPS s U s ILL I.. voili11.1_ll/ : Ill -_,___,-zi iii--14.10h*IiillIfililt4 II EL - i ie. 5-Atte,,441 an eilli e r gig:, -- -.1. '-'"'....IL mi 4 aurt,.r.f.-iii..-.....amh,""T.lied -.• ...;' ......IA" . .. _ i( A‘i,xmai. kr , ir--,... '\. Oi 6 5907 k.....ssti !lit"1 1411 g..„.... 7.... ....... ,11CARACCIOLI a viiriati i ,----.....i,,..‘ 1 I 111. 17' lip Jro . ...PI . , .,..,,-,P;:.,1_,:-..- 7 .---..,T;„,-,)• ..„i4Lico'"' ., 131,--1. 1- .......... 7 Ars we I11 41 1 i le v" 5111111KCIM "*.....\-- - 4• Wq10 r1 Nor II FARMERS fi _)' i I ifit Soittal A LAKE L to YOUNGS f- a CP 1\;, CITY OF RENTON J`) 19a1 I, APPLICATION 1 SITE APPROVAL q FOR OFFICE USE ONLY File No. SA- Q4o4;- g/ Filing Date / -27,P/ pO Application Fee $ /M. ( Receipt No. 9-2der Envir nmental Review Fee $ dp, ,c. /., C FCgNS e APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : 1 . Name Superstructure Phone (503) 889-8983 Address125 South Oregon St. #208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 2 . Property location 2821 NE 4th Street, Renton, WA and the property extending from Ne 3rd to Ne 4th Streets 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) Tracts 1, 2 and 3 of Short Plat No. 384-79 Recorded under Recording No. 791018-9001, Situated in the County of King, State of Washington 4. Number of acres or square feet89' 974 Sq. Ft. Present zoning B-1 5 . What do you .proposeto develop on this roperty? a 30 unit housing project for the Housing Authority of the City of Renton 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application : A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other factors limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20' B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan 1" = 10 ' C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels) 1" = 200 ' to 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) 7. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER ACTION : Date Approved Date Denied Date Appealed Appeal Action Remarks Planning Dept. Rev, 1-77 pF RF/i'j; AFFIDAVIT JUL 27 rw: 71 -r,.r.rrrr• 4/ Daniel L. Hutsell, President of Superstructure Development Ltd. I , being duly sw re that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 27 day of July 1981 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at ,SF41T1 ( (- t Name= o Notary P blic) Signature of Owner) Superstructure Development Ltd. t (art N. 125 South Oregon St. #208 Address) Address) Note• See attached Ontario Oregon 97914 Exhibit A, City) State) Option Agreement 503) 889-8983 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 11 OPTION FOR PURCHASE OF REAL ESTATE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE !'RESENTS, That EMMP CrlGm-ty= the *party of the lirst part, for and in consideration of ._l"—($.- 1;4 VARNAiiitIE a.p.,LSjpe to,.) ®_ Dollars, to the first party paid, do lu'rehy bargain,give and grant to SUpERSTRUCTURE DLVEIAPMFNT, LTD. , and SUPERSTRUCTURE CONI'HUCTION III% d/b/a SUPERSTRUCTURE the *party of the second part, for a period of 180 .clays fran 4f? i, i91, from the date hereof. the sole, exclusive and irrevocahle right and option to purchase that certain real estate situate.y lying and being in the County of _ /eil and Srate of It)44)10-r gaI' more particularly bounded and described as follows, to-wit: Lo-c Il a Pod 3 C''`9 N; Rddth- stZ (-ftb,e- p1i 4 Mc Orly '&74,4 ao a.rlvh•423 of 8997 y xe krt. Sr2 041Q t b ck_ U t..t rvT,a +e Q en31.14, .S-ro Ez.• s t,,c»2 , 1.4C.Ccrv.b E. u v . 3 gii5 . +. CIA.9 t0; 410 f e4,3; 4. cAA4.8 i 4 wAe. ¢ s c/et,,q ik a.) NE Cbe-err rl 2 rAa 5 7 1 n E : LT '5 11 1 tz. h.'n\"!ce'el j`..eef h.e,,e \,. at and lot the agreed price of Dollars to be paid (if the said party of the second part shall elect to purchase hereunder) in manner and form as follows, to-wit:( 11'ItitC44Az CyL -1,D Ai d----A --r ni-- Alm zar g+ ^' ec.g4kef o,- ea fz. p n Rr\mac, r 5 )9F3 2 1 1 tL) bz 2 X[.a+' t' 1t" T 1Z .J b‘ \„)) . ry. 7 11,1'` `' ,( n,(T Cmrr.or,e,n ` S",..1 ; 1\1\ `.? l c 7 ,c`A 1,, 1 T\f Y\v i `1 7 STEVEN 1. Pir:RcF. 1-rOHNEY t I'I. VIM.THARP A.PIERCE 503)889.7603W.THIRD STREET P.O.BOX 576 ONTARIO.OREGON 97914 aryl in c:t.e said p:.Itt• „f the second part .hall etc, I he purchase •:eu1 pre•nu•e, hi, under and s11:4! pay said consid- e•ration :stud sir/ivt•r ant docunle•nt• to said lner t al the first part, in (saxes niantr••r and form as hereinhefore specified, then the .aid party „i the first p:Nt ;14w,, fortlucsth to come). .aid ptertri.e. free of all evrcurohrnnce. except . ENE tee salt/ party tat the. sr•can! part by l;oew/ and suflien•nt died With 1 ,t' rants set 1s•arranty,ta,etlicr with title UP-waiter nsurirull 1;,)e+d ttrarketable title; hilt in case .aril party of the .econe/ pail •hall not within said period elect to pur- chase said premise. .s. :eforesaid then this atireeliu nt shall at the c\1,er:ihon of -.ant periodd hueonu• at tertce null and raid, and the said party of the first part may and shall retain tee first perty's anvil use and henelit all :Hoary before that finle paid hereunder. Done at i&^t7D4 r.... W/311#4, ! __// this /yTv day of MfriRC.04 19..4/...e IlIfexecutedbyacorporation, affix corporate soot m 4 I i EMMP CAA 9r.; leg,i4d By: _ C /GL - i President STATE OF U.A. 0 iNISI0 .J STATE OF County o! ss.NISI-0 ss. 19 County of . Ki^.; n )Ma2G 4 1'f /9 a Personal appeared and Personally appeared tire above natured who. lr inh+ duly sworn, each for Pima•!! and not .one for the other, did say that the, homer is theEn1tIIAGA9;.s: president and that the latter is the secretary of a corporation. rid acknowledged the foregoing instils- and that flu. seal ally,! III the. hsret;oind instrument is the corporate seal merit to be fsse_- voluntary act and deed. of said corporal' and that said instrument was signed and sealed in be- half of said corporation try authority ill its board ut directors; and each ofBeforeme: them acknowled e,l said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed.OFFICIAL r 13efure nee: SEAL) Notary Public for r i Notary Public tor OFFICIAL Lot l My commission expires: My commission expires: 4....TEN) O Us0' Qa'gNNING O " IMPORTANT 1'OTt(4:'11 the one who gives the above option .o a rred,eor and +he one to whom it ,s gwon is a eutlomer as shwa. words are defto.ei in the Trv$h-in-lending AO and Regulelion 1. legal odvece should he ohto,evd as to whether D,selosures rind other nolues cre o'r uieed—und when For o Nohee el Rigid el Rrtc,ssion tee Slovens-Ness Feem No 1301 end foe a Noe,ee of Non Resc,ss,ors, form No. 130]. 1r7 ff /v _1?a; JD-5090 Ferro Ac;ro.e_ Rey. 11 72 O.MB e. c3— u. . DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DE•s.,,PMENT LOW-RENT PUBLIC HOUSING PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION LOCA7i0N OF PROJECT: CENSUS TRACT PROJECT NO. Renton , Washington WA19-P011-005 I. STREET NUNIBERISI 2. ST'ic£T 3. MUNICIPALITY 4. COUNTY S. STATE j N.E. 4th Street j Renton King Washington SITE INFORMATION: (If separable sites, separate sheets shall be furnished for each site) 6. DIMENSIONS Ft. by_____ Ft. _ _ or 89,944 S . Ft. 7. ZONING (If reeenth changed. submit evidence) 8. NO. PARKING SPACES B.-1 45 9. UNUSUAL SITE FEATURES a. i=: Cuts d. [] Rock Formations g. L Retaining Walls b. Fills e. El High Water Tcb;e h. Non- c.. i= Poor Drainage f. r-. Erosion i. [i Other (Specify) BUILDING INFORMATION: (In the event that more than one type of structure (sce Items I i and 14) is proposed, a scpura:e sheet shall be furnished for each type 0. NO. UNITS II. NO. BUILDINGS 112. NO. STORIES I13. (Cheek applicable boxes. II I a. _i Pow b. _r—_• Detached i... • 1 and 2 i c. L.y., Semi-Detached 14. MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS 15. GROSS FLOOR AREA OF OWELL'NG UNITS—TOTAL a. = Elevator b. LJ Walkup 33,466 sq. ft. IS. NONOWELLING BUILDINGS OR SPACES (l.i.t use's) i 17. GROSS FLOOR AREA NONOWELLING I BUILDINGS OR cPACES—TOTAL Community Center with Laundry 9Qn__5_g—f , 18. STRUCTURAL SYSTEM 119. EXTERIOR FINISH 20. HEAT;NG—AIR CONS. SY,STEM 1 1 Wood Frame i Brick Veneer f Electric Baseboard EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY !MA: 21. TYPE a. 1.7 Ranges t tis or l'leetrie) . d. f ; Disposal g. 1 Other(Specify) b. L.:72 Refrigerators (Gas ,rr Elec.) e. ( _j Drapes c. L-] Kitchen Exhaust Fon f. (X 1 Laundry Facilities NOTE: Kitchen range, refrigerator, range hood, kitchen shades by Developer. I I Signed Dote 1 i 1 23820C•P R..- 11. 7?HUD-Wash., D.0 I4.10-5097 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT form Approved ape 1 e1 7• OMB NO. 63-R 13110 ec tobev)972 01 _ __NE SPECIFICATION ocal Authority r Developer superstructure Project No. WA19-P011-005 Project Name Housing Authority of the City of Renton Architect Wilson Crowder Architects Location Renton, Washington Date March 30, 1981 l%'STRUCTIO,\S: Describe all materials and equipment to be used. include no alternates or equivalents. Show extent of work and typical details on drawings. Attach additional sheets if necessary to completely describe the work. The Cost Estimate will recognize quality products and materials in excess of acceptable minimums, when specified. Certain parts of the work cannot be put in their proper classification until more information about their materials and construction is known; therefore describe, under suitable categories below, the following: main service and other stairs, treads, risers, handrails, balusters, etc.; sound insula- tion of partitions and floors separating apartments and between apartments and public spaces; utility conduits and tunnels, water proofing and drainage, utilities, and related insulation; retaining walls; garages and accessory buildings; and off-site improve- ments required to serve the project such as roads, curbs, walks, utilities, storm sewers, planting, etc. I. GENERAL- REQUIREMENTS: This project shall include the general construction , mechanical WO electrical and other miscellaneous work as required to complete the facilities indicated on the drawings as prepared by the Architects . Contractor to provide all temporary facilities required for construction. 2. SITE WORK: Type of Soil Clay Bearingif 2000 psf. (minimum) Material and thickness of fill and base course.minus grav i f required at footings . Demolition: Construction of structures to be demolished and materials to be reused. Other land improvements. Storm Drainage: Culverts, pipes, manholes, catch basins, downspout connection (dry well, splash blocks, storm sewer). Site Preperotion: Tree protection, surgery, wells, walls, topsoil stripping, clearing, grubbing, and rough grading. Strip and store topsoil . .all sites to be cleared of weeds and organic material in all areas of new construction. Curbs and Gutters: Type and material. Concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks to city spec. wherever required by City w/ramps for handicapped access. Pavement: Material and thickness of base and wearing surface for drives, parking areas, streets, alleys, courts, walks, drying yards and ploy areas. Steps, handrails, checkwalls. Asphalt surface: 2" mat on 6" base of 3/4" gravel . 4" thick. 4' -0" wide entry walk at each unit_ Concrete at PntriPC and patio slabs ; 4" with 24" deep frost wall at front edge Equipment for Special Areas and Enclosures: Ploy equipment, benches, fences. Sand play area; playground with natural playground materials, i .e. earth beams . boulders, etc. : and 'Rig Toy' or equal pl a.21grnund equipment Fncloctlrt- at earh unit fnr narhage cans. central enclosures for tit rpcterc Finish Grading: Approximate existing depth and method of improving topsoil. Extent of finish grading. Topsoil to be 5" deep at lawn areas and a' -0" deep at trees and olanting areas. All - topsoil to be shaped and graded for seeding. Lawns and planting: Type, size, quantity end location of lawn, ground cover and hedge material, trees, shrubs, etc. Trees and shrubs as shown on the drawings. Iiinimum 11/2 caliper deciduous trees and evergreen snrubswith 2' to 4 ' spread at planting at each site. Lawn in ail unim- proved portions of each site. NOTE: This Outline is based on the "Uniform System"for Construction Speciticotions, Data Filing, and Cost Accounting developed by AIA, CSI, and AGC. 1 SG97 abet IV / CONCRETE: Concrete strength for exterior walls below and above grade, interior walls and portitions, piers, footings, col- umns and girders. Size, thickness and location on drawings. Note portions hoving reinforcing steel on drawings. Location, size and material of footing drains and outlet. 52 bag mix for all concrete. Reinforcing as indicated on the drawings. Structural system of concrete floors at basement, other floors and roof. Thickness of slabs and strength of concrete. Attached exterior concrete steps and porches. If more than one type of construction is used, list separately and state locations. 4" concrete slab with 24" frost 1'L it at all ext' rinr riPrkc 4" concreto slab floor at community building with 6x6 10-10 w.w.m. on _c1O6 mil vapor barrier 4" concrete slab floor at exterior storave areas. Slob Perimeter Insulation; 2" rigid ' styrofoam' or Aqua1 _ 2' Hoop r4ASONRY: Material and thickness of exterior wolfs above and below grade, interior walls and partitions, fire walls, stair, hall and elevator enclosures, chimneys, incinerators, veneer, sills, copings, etc. Brick veneer to be common brick manufactured by an approved manufacturer_ 2 2" x 3 z" x 7-5/8". AETALS: Miscellaneous Iron: Material and size of items such as: Access Doors ri•A- Area Gratings N.A.Lintels.. Size as determined by calculations. Fire Escapes N.A. Foundation Vents 4" x 16" with bug screen. Structural Steep Framing or structural system used. N.A. CARPENTRY: Size, spacing, and grade of lumber to be used for floor, roof, exterior walls above grade and interior partition fronieg, subfloor, s ieotioing, underlcyment and exterior finish materials (wood siding, shingles, asbestos siding, etc.). Standard and better D fir studs : 2x4 2 16" o.c. Floors : Ii-R at 16" r Rrof: Manufactured wood trusses 0 24" o.c. , trusses designed for foil insulation_ at perimeter. tirade and sr'.eci es for-h nt?ri or and exterior rl ni sh .cork. Sills : Rer'.jood r, P" s Treat F;: :i,/sealer; -She=: Hin ,t:- ply'. ood; Floor: 5/8 particleboard on 5/8" CD T r; r _ HUD.S087 Page 3 al.7• October 1972 7. MOISTURE PROTECTION: Materials and method of waterproofing wolfs and slobs below grade, location, thickness or number of plies. Type of permanent protection of waterproofing (parging) if used. Method of dompproofing above grade. Flashing materials if other than sheet metal. Spandrel watatprocfing. 006 Visqueen at crawl spaces. Building paoer on 154 felt at Pxtprinr walls 15# felt at roof; .006 Visqueen at floor slabs. Thermal Insulation: Thickness and type of material. Method of installation. Exterior walls R=19 (Batt Insulation (fb" .lo]us Lj¢id insulation) Ceiling below Roof R=30 Blow-in insulation Roof Other R=11 Batt (fiberglass) in floors. Roofing: Roof covering materials and method of application, weight of shingles, number of felt plies, bitumen, etc. 235# asphalt comp. shingles , 12" x 36" over felt,_apJ f—Staling_ Sheet Metal: Material and weight or gauge far ;lashing's, copings, gutters and downspouts, roof ventilators, scuppers, etc. 26 ga. G. I. flashing. Roof vents and cable e;is. nts as rPgttireyd_ 26 ga rnn- tinuous gutters and downspouts (3" ) with Concrete splash blocks_ Caulking: Silicone seal . 8. DOORS, WINDOWS AND GLASS: Windows and Frames: Type and Material. Special construction features or protective treatment. Bronze anodized frames. Class A qua 1 i tv. Fentron Seri PS 720 or adtta 1 Glazing: Thickness, strength and grade of glass and method of glazing. Ontuhie strength irtct,letPH glass Metal Curtain Walls: N.A. Doors and Frames: Exterior: Thickness, material and type at all locations. All exterior doors to be 1-3/4" inculatpri rinnrc peace, aeachtree,. ual with head flashing and weatherctrippinn Interior: Thickness, material and type for public halls and stairs, cpertments (entrance and interior), boiler rooms, fire doors and other locations. 1-3/4" honeycomb core - birch pre-finished. All closet doors to be bi-pass doors .Minimum 3Z" door at all Batnrooms. Interior trim to be pre-finished fir or hemlock. Finish Hardware: Material and finish of exterior and interior locksets, :Ildtng cr,o f;,Edtng door hord..nre, w.n4v. and cabinet hardware, door closers, door knockers, numbers, etc. Passage sets on interior doors; privacy sets at bathroon and orimary te'ironm. ,'ems lr•...to be Stanley RD 741 U54 3 " x 3'". Hardware t ,a o rs.r pnu7,1 r'ha RUsswin or equal . 1'z x 4 butts at exterlor .^,rc. Lodes.eCs to bp S' nl?rn Cer;=-,c A or equal with integral deadlatch. Interior hardware - Sch1ft2e Series A Fylor-'nr doors to have peep-hole. r . of 7 1972 Weatherstripping: Material and Type. Weatherstrip 1ng: Eel t Windows Factory installed Exterior Doors Factory installed magnetic Thresholds Aluminum. Screens: Type and material of mesh and frames. No window screens. P. FINISHES: Grade material, and thickness of all finishes. All unit interior spaces to receive 5/8" gypsum board, taped and smooth textured. Doors stained and 2 coats of varnish. Painting: Type and number of coots. Exterior Interior Wood 2 coats latex paint or oil stain wood Pref;ni shed Metal Metal Masonry Silicone sealer Walls & Ceilings I coat primer. 1 coat flat latex Kitchen & Both, 1 coat primer, 1 coat flat latex Tile and Ccromic Bathroom Accessories: Floor and Wall Covering Materials: Thickness, grade, finish and wainscot height. MATERIAL LOCATION FLOORS 15/8" WALLS All living units 1 .090 pa. vinyl oyo. bd. Laundry/Stor. Bldq. 090 ga. vinyl W.P. on gyp. bd. c. Shower stall Shower/tub combination a.p. gyp. bd. d. Stairways Full width rubber stair 8/8" gyp. bd. treads Bathroom Accessories: Material and Quantity. 24" grab bars (3 locations) at each handicapped unit. Attached Chrome 24" towel bars (2) , shower rod (tyo. each unit) , soap dish, grab bar • Recessed _ T.P. recessed holder; medicine cabinet (tyo. each unit) Resilient Flooring: Location, type and gauge, for all materials. 090 ga. vinyl - Armstrong Vinyl Corlon or equal w/4" rubber coved base. D. SPECIALTIES: List Significant Items. Cool Chutes Interior partitions other than concrete, masonry or wood. M1+J-S081 Page :ai Oc+eber 1972 Medicine Cabinets: Material, size and type. Permabilt B5318 or equal . Mail Boxes, Package Receivers.AS hy local postal authority; 4" _unit n.imhprs. Packaged Incinerators. 11. EQUIPMENT: Refrigerators: Capacity for each size of living unit. All units and Community Room: Hotpoint SSD 14 CB Kitchen Ranges: Size and type for each size of living un:r. 30" drop-in range at all handicapped units. 30" Hotpoint RB 525T at all standard units and Community Room. Kitchen Cabinets: Detail on drawings. Wall Units: Material Diamond Oak Classic Del tx inish Factory Bose Units: Material fliamond Oak Classic fel'i;eFinish Factory Counter Top and Backsplosh Materiol-ElaStiC laminate w/self-edge and backsplash. 15" nonflam- Other cabinets and built-in storage units: mable bac.ksplash at range. Post—formed Plastic laminate. Formica oracle 10 or equal . top Equipment: Garbage disposal units, dishwashers, clothes washers and dryers. Washers and dryers by Housing Authority. 12. FURNISHINGS: Shades: Type of shades, venetian blinds or other devices for privocy and control of natural-light. Backing at each window for future drapery rods. Provide 6 mil vinyl shades at all windows. 13. SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION: Incinerators — Job constructed. 14. CONVEYING SYSTEMS: Elevators: Attach letter from manufacturer whose elevator installation is proposed, containing a brief comprehensive spec- ification for the complete elevator installation, and the manufacturer's statement that the number of elevators proposed and the installation described will provide adequate service, and that manufacturer maintains an effective service organization in the project locality. 15. MECHANICAL: Plumbing and Hot Water Supply: Fixtures: Material, size, fittings, trim and color. Sink 21" x 32" stainless steel Shower over tub Lavatory .18" enamel on steel Stall Shower Water Closet China Laundry Trays Fiberglass ' Fiat' or equal . Bathtub 5' tub w/one-piece plastic lam. Other enclosure. Faucets to be American -Standara or equal . HJD.5O87 foie eot7 3c,ob., 1972 Piping: Material and type: Soil LinesARS/iron par rr d.r . Gas Lines 1 .A Waste LinesABS/iron p-r code Standpipes 1_A Vents ABS Srhpdttle an Interior Downspouts rj_Q Water Type I (.upper; 2 fr'e7e proru_nose h4hht at each unit Valve Shutoff for Servicing Stnp and waste at each .ur_t S.utnff per MPS Domestic Water Heating: Direct fired: Type, capacity and recovery rate. Electric. 52 gallon at 2-bedroom units; 65 gallon @ 3 & 4 bedroom units; Five year guarantee. Indirect fired: Separate boiler or combined with space heating boiler. StJraye and recovery capacity.N.A. Insulation: Type and thickness of insulation on water lines and water heating equipment. N.A. Heating: Kind of System: Hot water, steam, forced warm air, gravity warm air, etc. Electric baseboard Fuel Used: Electricity Calculated Load: N.A. Heating N.A. Domestic Hot Water t`I •A• Total N.A. Equipment: Make and Model Model number and size as required per each unit. Input (per hr.): Coal (lbs.) N.A. oil (gals.) N.A. gas (BTUH) N.A. Output (BTUH) N.A. Distribution System: Baseboard Insulation: Type and thickness of insulation on heating equipment and distribution system. QS required Room Heating Units: Baseboard units, radiators, convectors, registers, etc. Rasehnarri heat all units . all areas Space Heat Sr s: A Type, make, model, location and output of heating systems such as wall heaters, floor furnaces and unit heaters. IV. . Temperature Controls: Individual unit, zone, central, etc. Individual unit - Honeywell or equal . Ventilation: Location, capacity and purpose of ventilating fans. Range hoods and bathroom exhaust fans vented to exterior. Attic vents as required. Exhaust fans to be Nutone or equal . Air Conditioning: Unitary Equipment: Self Contained or packaged units. Calculated load: N.A. 10D-5c87` -r- o;e 7 0l 7 lc'ob.• t972 Equipment: Make, model, operating voltage and capacity in BTUH for each size serving individual rooms, apartment units, or zone. N.A. Central System: Calculated load: N.A. Equipment: Make, model capacity, etc., of compressor, condenser, cooling tower, water chillers, air handling equipment, and other components which make up the complete system. N.A. Utilities On-Site: Material for distribution system for all piped utilities. Water Supply: Fire hydrants, yard hydrants, lawn sprinkler systems, exterior drinking fountains. All main water lines to be per MPS and City and State regulations. Gas: Sanitary Sewerage: Treatment plants, pumping stations, manholes. City system. 6. ELECTRICAL: Electric Wiring: Type of wiring and load centers, number of circuits per unit, individual unit metering or project metering, spare conduit for future load requirements, radio or TV antenna systems. Show receptacles, light outlets, switches, power outlets, telephone outlets, door bells, fire alarm systems, etc., on drawings. Smoke detector in each unit. Wiring per NEC, State and local electrical codes. HRC and MPS. TV Antenna in attic soace of each building with (2) jacks at each unit_ Telephone rough-in at living room and master bedroom. Electric Fixtures: Type for various locations. t rh entry. ( 1) Host mounted light at each building. Ceiling mounted light at bath , bPrirnnm kitrtian hail living. dining. storage, Site lights shall. bo vanri l rPcictnnt and chiPlrlrrl =rem Clare. Stairway lighting to be wall mounted. Electric light standards for lighting grounds, streets, courts, etc. Underground or overhead service. Electric service to be underground. Each unit to be individually metered. All items of construction, equipment and finish, together with all incidentals, which ore essential to the completion of the protect will be provided whether or not specifically included in the exhibits and will be of a type, quality and capacity acceptable to HUD and appropriate to the character of the project. 111111r, Signed)l`, r/i , RI. -iii in/hid-it) l)rrrinprr i' 6N tb(/' 0 ENTO ii• 0,,, ,, U 2 Is I By -i_f0,_,,t Irrhitrrr a P o 9 39.01 1 DE1Q of , — TY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON k fOrt , 1la ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM v is JUL 27 ail FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ti/ Nd DES Application No. Environmental Checklist No. e,C-. O 0j—ii PROPOSED, date: 7/ FINAL , date: 0 Declaration of Significance El Declaration of Significance 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 be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent Superstructure 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: 125 South Oregon Street #208 Ontario, Oregon 97914 503) 889-8983 3. Date Checklist submitted July 27, 1981 4. Agency requiring Checkl i stCity of Renton — Planning Dept. 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Housing Authority — City of Renton 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) : See Attached Exhibit B 2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The proposed site is a 'O.cant lot, except for one older duplex unit, with the vegetation consisting of Scotch broom, brush and weeds. Existing development is present in this area bordered by NE 3rd and NE 4th Streets. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Start Construction September 15, 1981 Finish June 30, 1982 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state and local --including rezones) : Federal- Housing and Urban Development, Project Approval Local- City of Renton, Land use 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: No II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic X substructures? YES MAYBE NO b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over- X covering of the soil? YES MAYBE NO c) Change in topography or ground surface relief X features? YES MAYBE NO d) The destruction, covering or modification of any X unique geologic or physical features? YES MAYBE NO e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? X YES MAYBE NO f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the X bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Items II (1) (b) and (c) will be impacted M YBE NO Explanation: due to normal grading and drainage activity associated with a res zdentiat Project No determintal affects of construction activity will remain after landscaping is completed. Please refer to drawings. 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in : a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air X quality? YES MAYBE NO b) The creation of objectionable odors? X YES MITE NO c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate , either locally or regionally? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation : 3) Water. Will the proposal result in : a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? X YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or X the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES MAYBE NO c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X YES MAYBE NO d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water X body? YES MAYBE NO e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES MAYBE NO f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of X ground waters? YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through X interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? YES MAYBE NO h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection , or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria , or other substances into the ground waters? X YES MAYBE NO i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available X for public water supplies?YES MAYBE NO Items II (3) (b) and (f) are affected Explanation: by the normal storm Drainage Systems which accompany all Housing Projects. No unusual conditions are forseen. Please refer to drawings. 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 , x microflora and aquatic plants)?FA-TEE 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 X d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? YES MAYBE NO Items II (4) (a) and (c) surface vegetation and Explanation: soil will be removed to allow construction. Subsequent thereto, a complete landscaping will take place as specified in the drawings. 4- 5 ) Fauna. v+ill 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 X endangered species of fauna? YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement x of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: X 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? YES MAYBE NO Explanation : 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or X glare? YES MAYBE N Explanation: 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the X present or planned land use of an area?YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in : X a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO X b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including , but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) X in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri - bution, density, or growth rate of the human population X of an area?s.— MAYBE au— The impact of 30 units of housing will not largely Explanation: affect the area due to an approximate 17 acre undeveloped area approximately 1/4 mile west of the proposed site. 5- K....' ( 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing , or X create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: See item 11 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 for new parking? YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YES MAYBE NO d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X YES MAYBE NO e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X YES MAYBE NO f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , X bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Items (13) (a) , (b) , (c) and (f) will result in normal impacts on transportation systems which would reasonably be expected for a small development of this size 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 X 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: A housing project will result in the movement of families from inadequate housing within the city to adequate housing. Therefore, no additional services will be needed. The new services will simply replace the existing 15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: services. a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X YES MAYBE NO b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require X the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE WU— Explanation: 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 X b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO X c) Water? YES MAYBE NO 6- T---T d) Sewer or septic tanks? X YES MAYBE NO X e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The project will affect items (16) (a) thru (f) in accordance with the normal utilities required by the city of Renton for a 30 unit project. Please refer to drawings. 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding X metal health)? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public , or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive X site open to public view? YES MAYBE NO The site will be extremely . aepthetica1ly appealing Explanation: 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the X quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 20) ArcheologicalfHistorical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical X site, structure, object or building? YES MATTE- NO Explanation: III. SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willf til lack of full 'sclosure on my part. Proponent: `L P signed) Superstructure, name printed) By Daniel L. Hutsell, Pres. Superstructure Development Ltd, partner City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 LMDING OF FILE FILE TITLE Gike 451 066 --81