Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA81-100Application for Rezone
THE
LAKESIDE
PROPERTY
Richard Carothers Associates
APPLICATION FOR REZONE
THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY
Lake Washington Boulevard
Renton, Washington
Prepared for:
Lincoln Property Company. N.C. , Inc.
11400 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 220
Bellevue, Washington 98004
By:
Richard Carothers Associates
Planners/Landscape Architects/Urban Designers
814 East Pike Street
Seattle, Washington 98122
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
Rezone Application Cover Letter 9
Rezone Application 2
Environmental Checklist
Project Description 2
Environmental Impacts - Discussion 4
Appendices
A. Environmental Checklist Form 6
B. Full Body of Traffic Study 19
C. Full Body of Soils Study 21
D. Affidavits 6
E. Site Map 1
F. Purchase Contract Agreements 13
Richard Carothers Associates
December 4, 1981
REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER
APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie
L. Lotto
The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for
a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of
Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension
presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving
range on a lease basis.
In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density
multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per
acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres, thus permitting in the
vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are,
however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units
will be constructed on the site. This R-3 application is being sought, in part, to
expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with
the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would
likely fall below the threshold otherwise necessitating the preparation of an
environmental impact statement occasioned by project size.
The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro-
perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the
City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro-
perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable
multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due
to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall
rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near
the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton
as well as many other cities.
Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the
greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access
to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many
areas east of I-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has
created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and
projected levels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth
to the west .
The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential
project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash-
ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and
visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled
below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes
provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses
Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500
Offices Seat+le.Washington / Boise. Idaho / Reston.Virginia / Portland.Oregon
Rezone Application
December 4, 1981
Page 2
to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act
as a defacto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area.
The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developing
Gene Coulon Park and the Lake Washington waterfront areas. This amenity is partic-
ularly valuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have
limited access to outdoor spaces of their own.
The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is
undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash-
ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with
the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way.
As previously discussed, traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward
concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton
and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy
conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is
close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed
project suits this end particularly well .
Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that
all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that
sufficien#
3
reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size
proposed.
Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application.
Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop-
mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact
upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community.
1
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29,
1981 .
2
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
3
Don Monihan, Department of Public Works, City of Renton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
Richard Carothers Associates
0
December 7, 1981
Mr. Roger Blaylock
Planning Department
City of Renton
Municipal Building
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, WA 98055
RE: REZONE APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF
THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY
Dear Roger:
Enclosed herewith you will find duplicate originals of Lincoln
Property Company's Application for Rezone on the Lakeside Property.
Along with the applications themselves, we have enclosed six addi-
tional cover letters together with six additional site maps as
requested.
Roger, as we discussed over the telephone on Friday, December 4,
I want to emphasize the fact that it is our intention that the
final product of this Rezone Application will be a contract type
rezone. In other words, it is our desire to limit the intensity
and scope of our development via the rezone document. It is also
ourintention to work closely with the various departments within
the City of Renton, including the Environmental Review Committee,
to predefine the nature and extent of the development itself so
as to satisfy not only our development goals, but the concerns of
the City of Renton as well .
At your request, we have included a number of additional items not
ordinarily called for in the Rezone Application. These are:
A. A Lake Washington Boulevard Traffic Study;
B. A complete Soils Report, and;
C. Our findings relative to the availability of utility
services to the site. (For this item I have enclosed
a recent letter from our civil engineer addressing
available options in the area of utility services ,
most notably water and sewer. )
meow;PROPERTY cammanY n.c., inc. THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 96004 206-455-481 3
Page 2
Mr. Roger Blaylock
December 7, 1981
It is my hope that the attached application, together with all the
supportive information and documentation, will assist the Environ-
mental Review Committee in their review of the project from an
environmental standpoint.
If I can provide any further assistance to you please don't hesi-
tate to call me.
Very t ly yours
Scott B. Springe
SBS:co
Enclosures
cc: David Hepp
DODDS ENGINEERS, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
i
December 7, 1981
DEI PROJECT NO. 80010
Lincoln Property Company
11400 S.E. Sixth Street
Suite 220
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Scott Springer
Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton
Dear Mr. Springer:
At your request we have researched the availability of utilities (water,
sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete
discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade-
quate fire flows is contained in the report. of 20 April 1981 by RH2
Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be
upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by
one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is
therefore available to the site.
Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives.
An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the
east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the
potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be
served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk
which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd.
There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd.
which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show
these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed
flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses"
so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will
depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is
certainly there.
In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing
utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities
will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements
required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the
developer.
Very truly yours, Z;Ligci.
Bruce J. Dodd- P.
BJD/jk
1 B50-130TH AVE.N.E.,BELLEVUE,WA 98005 • [206)885-7877 OR 454-3743
April 20, 1981
S106.1 .0
RECEIVED
HNR231981
LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC.
515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEER'' Ih2C.
Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. »IL —
Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D.
Subject:. Water system improvement alternatives
for the proposed Lakeside development
Dear Mr. Springer:
This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing
various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow)
at the proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow
levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining
20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance
Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development
elevation of 100 feet.
The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow
levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900
lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These
two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing
12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length
at 3700 feet, consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can
provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4, which can provide 2700 gpm,
consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park
Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake
Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased
to 12 inches from 8 inches. This alternative, although more expensive than
Alternatives 1 and 2, could obtain participation by other property owners
and the City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the
least expensive alternative.
The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following
table:
300 - 120th Avenue N.E. Suite 219. Bellevue. Wa. 98005 (206) 451-05E5
Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc.
April 20, 1981
Page 2
Current
Alternative Lsti.:,ated Cost
1 or 2 3500 gpm
1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter
pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600
1A or 2A 4200 gpm
Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter
pipe 95,800
3 3500 gpm
3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe
and a pressure reducing station 132,400
4 2700 gpm
Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent
pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici-
crossing pation)
Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow
required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then
Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci-
sion. (Degree of others' participation should be established).
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional
information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your
planning efforts.
Sincerely,
r
Richard H. Harbert, ' P.E.
RHH:jw
cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers
RECEIVED
APR 23 1981
DODDS ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB NO.
4-I'D`4/ E1
1
I
992
I1I1--.1
1
a
r
1-: Il
I
i :........,...i..
I
IC12992I , •
y i :.. IotiHS‘INA
ii•—
r
f?••
1:
r:;,.'
147..-.,•
1.,.!.,
i:,.
1.
fT:_
1-.'
f:*•.'
r.-,:_...:.;.';
I1!•-
1-
1'.
i••
6,_
C_
I-
s;
6•_-.
I
1""•:":
t7:•-::,-,
6-
a:,
4;-,.,: •
2';:.•;.•-
t.•...-_.-.".-
1-.._.•<',x„;:.-•:•,
i1-t,••:
0•
iNt-oo
1.
i._
ty---,.:!7I•-_-.-__:-.--.. O4-• T•.y
R
l"-
131.
1
11
iI: •7 —
L /Ic
ri
F -- i __ ••
i/)
r
Li " .
i ,1
01? 1
991I6ZLvt
V
i\:.. :...
1
s
s.....:.,......
H.\ .
1 ), 7; " 02/74_ L —F..
I- 1/
1..' . .' i :•:' ! :1 \:•... :14......•.: —
IF
I
1
07CGrt
1. .--(-1 , 5R2762
t. .••• 1\
1 --; "••:- - ", i
2.".1 ...
I.....
i
I -.• -
I -
1---ri• 1//:iiz
1_1_ _ I______ 111-- •::•:;lzv ••I]Ioc
1 ----- 1
1 ‘•) --
2 ,t7.57. ..:•;.iA,,, iii .1- .—pi- I
ri,, . 6fe `?.
I'l1r.-Ir2...61I-' ,e'''-‘
ace ''t• •
Lc•T1:.
rt+,. 1\ 11 I -
11
OCC
r)2CI-2c92 _.tC,2gEtc
1.• /
AA
e
I—ice
t
N \
ii -
1i6I
nr....1.1.X• .4,
re-- , p ,
t,,,,, ',A,/ 44
44\ ‘
k. k
Ric4\ E
5[2
7,-
4
ii
I
r--LLZ
CIoa
r
I
1hIt1 :,z!. .
4.1::.el
1
T ''' ‘\ \
1.-, : •-• ;:\-zi:vri1 •:: ( ':11... . i1,4
1k
TI i -I1Jdi-ki14: ...
I1.000S .
11:1
icvvt, ct' 141I11_1111111111-11-1-MTi1,1lilt iIII - - - - - , - 11 -r-4:3= 'i-.AWYPIVITOi ... . IllTEM1111111 .11111E1.IA11.111[2_2
vo, .30,-3-2........,-,-- ..?:.,,%... .31rominx.
1,
WICZ-- S -6
lt, liropkWFT11Ili11 [ 111111711111-14TITIT111
T1r611111111_1E.1-111111r1111
I - 557.-VsZ.Tit-Tri• 1,
1\1cr14• Zs
1I
4
4
1
1
A
CITY OF RENTON
1;E7O"IE APPLICATION
OFFICE USE ONLY
LAND USE HEARING
PPLICATION NO. ;12 (}O - (S{ /
EXAMINER 'S ACTION
PPLICATION FEE $ APPEAL FILED
rECEIPT NO. CITY COUNCIL ACTION
ILING DATE ORDINANCE NO. AND DATE
TEARING DATE
PPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 :
Name Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lotthone 455-4813
c/o Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. , Inc .
Address 11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220, Bellevue, WA 98004
property petitioned for rezoning is located on Lake Washington Boulevard
bats,L?en south of N. 24th Street Rd
Square footage or acreage of property 9.0 acres -+
Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a
separate sheet)
Lots 35, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 357, 358 and 359 of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden
of Eden Addition to Seattle.
C
8. L- st the measures to be taken to reduce the impact on the surrounding area.
a. Slopes: Limit vegetation clearing, grading and construction to less
steep portions of site in accordance with recommendations of the soils
consultant and civil engineer. Upper portions of major slopes to be
left in natural condition.
b. Drainage: Prepare drainage and erosion control measures to comply
with City of Renton standards for runoff control , detention and
entrapment of suspended hydrocarbons.
11
c. Landscape: Develop landscape plans to screen proposed project and
enhance its visual character, both within site and from surroundings ,
in compliance with City of Renton landscape provisions.
d. Traffic: Develop plans to ease traffic flow in and out of project by
appropriate on-site roadway improvements. Coordinate implementation
of said improvements through the City of Renton Traffic Engineer, in
accordance with the attached traffic study.
e. Lighting: Provide effective lighting design to reduce nighttime
impact of site on adjacent areas.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
PROPON :NT
Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. al . , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie L.
Lotto
Care of their Representative:
Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. Inc.
11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220
Bellevue, Washington 98004
455-4813
CHECKLIST SUBMITTED
AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST
Renton Planning Department
BACKGR(UND
I .6 Nature and Description of the Proposal :
Proposal site is approximately 10 acres. The proposed zoning would
allow not more than 186 dwelling units to be built. Conceptual design
work has started, but will not be completed pending final rezone
approval . Development would not approach maximum density allowed under
proposed zoning. Sufficient on-site parking would be provided, as well
as resident amenities, including swimming pool , recreation building,
sauna, jacuzzi and lush landscaping.
I .7 Location of Proposal :
The proposal site lies uphill from Lake Washington Boulevard, above Gene
Coulon Park. Well upslope from the project, to the east, is
Interstate-405. The bulk of the project is a gently sloping terrace,
currently in use as a golf driving range. This portion of the site is
largely open, in grass or pavement. Approximately one-quarter of the
site is on steep slopes, covered with brush and dense tree growth. Much
of this portion of the site would be left in its undisturbed condition
by the proposed rezone development. The site has views across Lake
Washington to the west.
I.8 Estimated Date for Completion of Proposal :
The estimated date for completion is 12 months following project
initiation.
1
I.9 List of Permits, Licenses and Government Approvals:
Rezone to R-3; Building Permit; Street Access Permit; Right-of-Way
Access Permit, Burlington Northern Railroad (sewer) ; Storm Drainage
Connection Permit.
I.10 No future additions, expansions or further activity related to this
proposal is planned.
I.11 Applicant has no knowledge of any plans by others which may affect the
property covered by the proposal .
I.12 Rezone application is being submitted concurrently with this form.
Future applications will be made as required for approvals listed under
I .9, above.
2
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION
See Appendix A for Checklist portion of Application Form)
II.1 Earth
Existing Conditions : The site has previously been used for a quarry
operation. The upper substrata over much of the site is granular fill
material left by this operation. The native soils below are a mix of
sandy silts, gravelly and silty sands and similar compact, but
unconsolidated, materials. See Appendix C for the complete text of the
Preliminary Geotechnical Study prepared for the site.
Impacts : Development of residential units would modify the topography
to provide suitable grades for parking and building pads. This
modification will include disruptions, compactions and covering of
existing soils in those developed portions of the project.
Mitigating Measures : The preliminary report (Appendix C) reveals no
unusual or difficult problems related to earthwork development on the
site. Conventional building practices, coupled with regulated control
of runoff collection and release, will allow for development without
creation of hazardous or unstable conditions. On-site cut and fill is
projected to be roughly in balance. Excess cut would be disposed of
off-site at an approved location. Moderate amounts of imported select
fill will likely be needed to prepare suitable, stable subgrades for
structures.
II.2 Air
Impacts : The addition of auto traffic generated by the project would be
the only significant source of air pollutants from the proposal .
Traffic volumes are addressed in the Appendix B, Traffic Analysis.
Temporary particulate emissions are to be expected during construction.
Mitigating Measures : No measures for auto emissions other than
providing for smooth flow of traffic into and within the project are
foreseen. Dust from construction work can be minimized by good
operational technique as required by local regulations.
II.3 Water
Existing Conditions: There are no perennial or intermittent streams on
the project site. The site is well vegetated, so runoff is well
controlled and is largely limited to minor overland sheet flow.
Substantial volumes of water are reabsorbed on the site.
Impacts : Existing runoff and absorption patterns would be altered by
removal of vegetation during site preparation and development of
impervious surfaces. Absorption would be reduced and the rate and
volume of runoff would increase.
3
Mitigating Measures: Detention and control of increased runoff would
comply with City requirements (Title IV, Chapter 29) , including
development of a drainage plan and submission for review and approval .
II.4 Flora
Existing Conditions: The site, at present, is vegetated, the lower and
more level areas mostly in grasses; the upland slopes in brush and
trees.
Impacts: The proposal requires a major alteration to the more level
portions of the site. Peripheral tree and shrub masses adjacent to
property lines and Lake Washington Boulevard would be retained wherever
possible. The steep forested slopes would be left largely undisturbed.
Mitigating Measures: The proposal envisions generous relandscaping of
the site, both for internal amenity and as screening at property lines.
This landscaping would potentially increase the overall floral diversity
of the site.
II.5 Fauna
Existing Conditions: No survey has been done of existing fauna but the
site has suitable habitat for numerous common animals and birds of the
Puget Sound area.
Impacts: Habitat destruction would largely be limited to the areas
currently in use as the golf driving range, a habitat of limited
diversity and productivity. Overall faunal diversity and quantity may
decrease.
Mitigating Measures: Landscape development could provide new or
modified habitat. Upslope forest and habitat edges would be maintained
and largely undisturbed.
II .6 Noise
Impacts: Proposal would somewhat increase local traffic noise. Whether
an increase would be measurable is unknown. There would be temporary
increases in noise levels during construction.
Mitigating Measures : On-site mechanical equipment and construction
equipment should be muffled and maintained. Construction work could be
restricted to 7 AM to 5 PM hours.
II.7 Lights and Glare
Existing Conditions : Golf driving range has lighting for night
operation.
4
Impacts : May be reduced by proposed change in land use.
Mitigating Measures: Any site lighting for proposal would be designed
to minimize off-site glare.
II.8 Land Use
Proposal would alter present land use from golf driving range to use in
accordance with the local Comprehensive Plan.
II .9 Natural Resources
No effect on natural resources identified.
II.10 Risk of Upset
No risks forseen.
II .11 Population
Impacts: The proposal would add not more than 186 dwelling units to a
property which is not currently residential in character. Except as a
component of current growth being experienced by the City of Renton,
proposal should have no role as a target or trigger for additional
growth or relocation in the area.
II.12 Housing
Impacts : The proposal will add to the number of dwelling units
available in the Renton area, potentially reducing housing pressure on
other units in the area.
II.13 Transportation/Circulation
Existing Conditions : Refer to Appendix B, Traffic Analysis, for
thorough review of the existing traffic situation and impacts. No
public transit currently operates on Lake Washington Boulevard.
Mitigating Measures : The traffic study prepared for this proposal
concludes no noticable increase in traffic volume on the surrounding
streets as a result of the proposed development. Recommended measures
are limited to regulating and easing flow in and out of the project with
on-site roadway design.
II.14 Public Services
Existing Conditions : The site is within the jurisdictional area of the
Renton Fire and Police Departments and within the Renton School
District. The site contains a golf driving range available to the
public and is adjacent to the newly expanded recreational facilities of
Gene Coulon Park.
5
Impacts: The proposal would generate slight impacts on the Renton Fire
and Police Departments. No special problems of significant demands are
foreseen, nor would proposal effect current levels of service elsewhere
in the community. The impact on school populations would depend upon
the eventual population mix in the developed units, but would probably
be limited. The proposal would add potential user population of park
facilities in the Renton area.
II .15 Energy
Impacts: The proposal would increase demand on energy utilities for
residential usage.
II. 16 Utilities
Existing Conditions : Water and sewer facilities are available in the
site area, although they present some access difficulties. No storm
drainage system is presently developed in the area. Reserve capacity of
the utilities is reported as sufficient for project needs by the Public
Works Department.
Impacts : No major problems are, therefore, expected in utility
acquisition.
II.17 Human Health
No impacts foreseen.
II . 18 Aesthetics
No degradation of aesthetics foreseen for proposed changes .
II.19 Recreation
Existing Conditions : Golf driving range currently occupies a major
portion of the site.
Impacts : Range would be eliminated. No other significant recreational
impacts foreseen.
II.20 Archeological/Historical
No known archeological or historical resources occur on the site.
6
APPENDICES
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
f
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Application No. OC
Environmental Checklist No. t'CF—/ C' - `% 1
PROPOSED, date:FINAL , date:
0 Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance
0 Declaration of Non-Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance
COMMENTS :
Introductioi 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 A:
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 fh'
agencies irvolved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with-
out unnecessary delay. ry.
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. ti;P'
lnral ananriaa in the State ids
SdG d `NU1SSfl'JS1U - SiJVdWI 1tl1N3WNO JIAN3 - 1SI1NO3H0 1V1N3WNOdIAN3 aaS
uot4PuPIdx3
X
38AVW S3A
X Za)Ie I .ro 4a Iu I. ',Crq cue Jo ueaoo ayp go paq
ayq .ao weaJls .ao JanL.a P to Iauueyo ayq. i'j.ipow A2w
yoiq, uoisoaa .io uoi1isodep ' uoile3lis ui sa6uptp
Jo ' spues yoeaq go UOLsoJa JO uotq.tsodap ul sa6ueyg (g)
ON 3EAVW S3A
X 44o ao uo .aatyg}a
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 ) :
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PROJECT DESCRIPTION_ Pages 1-2
8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal :
See ENVIRONMFNTAI CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2
9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal
federal , state and local--including rezones) :
SPP ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PRO,IFCT OFSCRTPTTON, Pages 1-2
10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion , or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal ? If yes , explain:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2
11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by
your proposal? If yes, explain:
SPP FNVTRONMFNTAI CHFCKI TST - PRO,IFCT fFSCRTPTT(lN, Pages 1-2
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro-
posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future
date, describe the nature of such application form:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2
II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required)
1) Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
YES MBE NO
b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or over-
covering of the soil? X
YES MAYBE NO
c)
J
Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
MAYBE WO—
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features? X_.
YES MAYBE NO
0) Any inrroaca in winrl nr untaM arneinn n4 enile
3-
2) Air. Will the proposal result in:
a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality? X
YES M!B NO
b) The creation of objectionable odors?
YES MAf9E NO
c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature ,
or any change in climate, either locally or
regionally? X._
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI IMPACTS - DISCl1SSTON, Par3Pc
3-C
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? 1L_
YES MAYBE NO
b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or
the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X
YES MAYBE NO
c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
YES MAYBE NO
d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
YES MAYBE N-O
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 NT?
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters?
YES MAYBE NO
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either
through direct additions or withdrawals , or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
YES MAYBE NO
gam£ Sv6!3 "NU15S JS1U - 51JVd1.41 1tl1N3WNOUTAN3 - 1SI1)!3 H3 1tl1N3WNOiiIAN3 ddS
uo!.;PUPldx3
ON ; BAVW SBA
X ZPa.1P UP 30
uo pP 1ndod uewnq ayq 4.0 aqe.! to.Mo.16 .l0 'lCIA.suap 'uo pnq
uopPooL ayl aauP lesodo.ld aye llP,1 •uopei ndod (Ti )
uopPuPLdX3
II ON ; BAVW S3)
77 cunt iniln± Imctltl 1n 1mtaninno 11n 1n nuata au? um
4-
5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
a)' Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of
any species of fauna (birds , land animals including
reptiles , fish and shellfish, benthic organisms ,
insects or microfauna)? X
YES MAYBE NO
b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of fauna? X
YES MAYBE NO
c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area,
or result in a barrier to the migration or movement
of fauna?
YES MAYBE NO
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
YES MAYBE NO
V Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6
6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION. Pages 3-6
7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or
glare? y
X
77
IE3 . MAYBE ' ,N F Y ,,,,
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6
8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area?
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
4___ See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI IMPACTS - nTSCUSSION, Pages 3-6
9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? L
YES MAYBE NO
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)
5- Y
12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or
reate a demand for additional housing? X___
YES MAYBE NO
xplanation:
1 Y _
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAI IMPACTS - DISCIISSifN, Paget 3-6
13) transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in :
i
a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? A 4
YES MAYBE NO
b) Effects on existing parking facilities , .or demand
for new parking?
YES MAYBE NO
c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? y
YES MAYBE NO ,_
d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
YES MAYBE _ NO
e) Alterations to waterborne, rail .ar air traffic? L
YrS MAYBE NO 4
f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles ,
bicyclists or pedestrians? X
YES MAYBE NO
r.
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6
1
14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or
result in a need for new or altered governmental services t
in any of the following areas :
a) Fire protection? r _X__
YES MAYBE NO i
i
b) Police protection? X
YESMAYBEBE NO
f. (c) _Schools? X
r+::
f Y
c } `
r ; ,- }-
u l
YES MAYBE NO
4
luawl.i daO 5upuueld i
uoluaa i.o it1.1.0
N S
r
Pa2uiad aweu)
I,?1A/- L1 Ii ,. ri 11
J S ry f
6-
d) Sewer or septic tanks? X
YES MAYBE NO 1
e) Storm water drainage?
YES MAYBE NO
f) Solid waste and disposal?X
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
SPP FNVTP.IlNMFNTAI _CHFCKJ TST _ FNVTR(INMFNIAI_ TMPArTS - fTSCUCSION, Pages 3.6
17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)? X
YES MAYBE
Explanation:
F
18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of
any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation _of an aesthetically offensive
site open to public viewT X
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the
quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - nTsruss TnN, paOPq 1-6'
20) Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an
alteration of a significant archeological or historical
site, structure, object or building?
YES NO
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DLSC!LSSLON, Pages 3-6
III. SIGNATURE
I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge th above information 1
is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla-
ration of non-significance that it might issue in r lianc upon ti checklist should f
there be any willful misrepresentation or willful 1 ck o ,full di c osure on my part.
i
Proponent:
signed) k 1 .i
THE LAKESIDE
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Prepared for :
Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc.
11400 S. E. 6th Street - Suite #220
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Prepared by:
Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc.
1126 108th Avenue N. E. , Bellevue, Washington 98004
December, 1981
THE LAKESIDE
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
DECEMBER 1981
Project Description
The Lakeside is a proposed residential development consist-
ing of a maximum of 186 multifamily units. A mix of one and two
bedroom units will be constructed in two and three story build-
ings. Recreational facilities such as a swimming pool and a
club-house will also be provided for residents. Construction is
expected to begin in the spring of 1982 and be completed in
early 1983 . The occupancy of residence units is expected to be-
gin in late 1982 and the development will be fully occupied in
1983.
The Lakeside site is located on the east side of Lake Wash-
ington Boulevard North, approximately 0. 6 miles north of North
Park Drive in Renton. Most of the site is presently occupied by
the Renton Golf Range. The street network shown on Figure 1 is
the study area for this traffic analysis, except for Interstate
Highway 405 and its interchanges, which are shown for reference
only.
The proposed vehicular access to the site will be via two
driveways onto Lake Washington Boulevard, one near each end of
the site. The driveways will intersect a loop roadway through
the site which will also serve as the aisle between rows of per-
pendicular parking stalls convenient to the buildings. Parking
stalls will be provided at a ratio of 1 1/2 stalls per residence
unit, with a minimum of 279 stalls provided, 186 of which will
be covered. Also, proposed as part of this project is the vaca-
tion of portions of two existing unimproved street rights-of-
way. These two rights-of-way are identified on the plat map as
Lake View Boulevard, running approximately north/south through
the site, and Third, running approximately east/west through the
site.
Existing Conditions
Figure 1 illustrates the functional roadway classifica-
tions, traffic control signal and stop sign locations, and perti-
rent roadway characteristics of the existing street network.
The functional roadway classifications shown in Figure 1 are
those adopted by City of Renton Resolution #2345. Speed limits
are posted for 35 MPH on Lake Washington Boulevard, and
30 KPH on Park Drive, while the remainder of the streets shown
in l'igure 1 have 25 MPH speed limits.
The traffic signal at the intersection of Lake Washington
Boulevard North, Garden Avenue North, Park Avenue North, and
North Park Drive presently operates in a four-phase fully-
actuated mode, with one phase for each approach (with green
arrows for left turns ) . Lake Washington Boulevard has three ap-
pro,ich lanes ( left only, left or through, right only) , Garden
Avenue has two approach lanes (left or through or right, right
only) , the east leg has four approach lanes ( left only, left or
through, through only, right only) , and the west leg has three
approach lanes ( left only, through only, through or right) .
Lake Washington Boulevard North has one through lane in
each direction, with a northbound left turn lane into the
present entrance to Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, and a
southbound left turn lane into Houser Way. The Beach Park
contains a well-used small boat launchig ramp. The Burlington
Nor :hern Railroad operates approximately two trains per day on
the single-track railroad line located between Lake Washington
BouLevard and the Lake. The railroad crossing of Lake
Washington Boulevard immediately south of Houser Way is
sig zalized.
Figure 2 shows 1980 average daily traffic volumes in the
vicinity of the Lakeside site. Figures 3 and 4 show existing AM
and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the pertinent street inter-
sec:ions in the vicinity of the site. Truck traffic volumes
within the study area are generally low. Several Metro Transit
rou:es use North Park Drive and provide convenient bus service
into the Renton Central Business District and beyond. Some bicy-
cli3ts use Lake Washington Boulevard as a commuter and
recreational route. There is relatively little pedestrian traf-
fic.
Table 1 shows peak hour levels of service calculated for_
pertinent existing and proposed intersections along Lake Washing-
ton Boulevard North. This street serves as a commuter route for
workers from Boeing and other nearby industrial plants. Because
of the proximity of these industrial plants and the distinct
employee shift-change times, Lake Washington Boulevard
experiences relatively high traffic volume peaking trends.
Almost 20 percent of the daily traffic on Lake Washington
Boulevard occurs during the PM peak hour. Because of the
relatively high peak hour traffic volumes, and the long
distances between gap-creating traffic control devices, vehicles
turning onto Lake Washington Boulevard from side streets, such
as Burnett Avenue North, experience some delays . However,
during the off-peak times , traffic volumes on Lake Washington
Boulevard are low and delays are minimal. City of Renton
accident records indicate that the recent traffic accident
history of the streets within the study area has not been
unusually serious.
Future Conditions Without the Lakeside
Several arterial street improvement projects have been pro-
posed within the vicinity of the Lakeside . The Gene Coulon
Memorial Beach Park Extension project, currently under
construction, will create a new driveway access into the parkoffofLakeWashingtonBoulevard, approximately one block south
of the Lakeside site. This new park driveway will include two
exit lanes and one entrance lane across the railroad tracks.
The park extension project will also include the widening of
Lake Washington Boulevard at this new driveway entrance, in
order to provide a northbound left-turn lane.
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT )
has recently reconstructed the I-405 freeway interchange at
North 30th Street. The street overpass across the freeway has
been widened and is now open to traffic. The Department of
Transportation expects construction on the new overpass and free-
way ramps to be completed by spring of 1982.
The City of Renton Six Year Transportation Improvement Prog-
ram (1981 to 1986 ) lists several proposed street improvement
projects in the vicinity of the Lakeside site. One proposed
project would improve Lake Washington Boulevard from North Park
Drive to the north city limits, with drainage, paving, curbs,
sidewalks, illumination, and channelization. Other proposed
projects would improve Burnett Avenue North, North 30th Street,
and Park Avenue North with similar types of roadway
improvements. All of these projects have been assigned low
priorities by the City of Renton and none of the projects are
funded.
Figure 5 shows projected 1983 Average Daily Traffic Volumes
for the study area, without the Lakeside. These traffic volumes
are based on the 1980 average daily traffic volumes plus 3 per-
cent annual traffic growth, as recommended by the City of
Renton. The traffic volumes shown in Figure 5 also include an
estimated 1000 additional vehicle trips generated by the Beach
Park Extension project on a summer weekday with sunny weather,
based on information from the Beach Park Extension project Final
EIS. Figures 6 and 7 show projected 1983 AM and PM peak hour
traffic volumes without the Lakeside.
Table 1 shows 1983 peak hour levels of service calculated
for the street intersections in the study area, without the Lake-
side. Somewhat higher traffic volumes on Lake Washington Boule-
vard due to the park extension and normal traffic during the
peak periods growth will cause somewhat longer delays to side
street traffic during the peak periods, such as at Burnett
Avenue. However, traffic conditions will still be tolerable and
probably will not be noticeably worse than the present
conditions.
Impacts of the Lakeside
It is estimated that approximately 1135 vehicular trips
would be generated by the Lakeside on an average weekday at full
occupancy. A vehicular trip is defined as "A single or one-
direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination
exiting or entering ) inside the study site" (Trip Generation -
An Informational Report, Institute of Transportation Engineers,
Second Edition - 1979 ) . As shown in Figure 8, this estimate is
based on 186 multifamily units and a rate of 6. 1 vehicular trips
per unit per average weekday. Approximately 113 trips (10% of
the total ) would occur during the AM peak hour, with about 80%
of them leaving the site. Approximately 130 trips (11. 5% of the
total ) would occur during the PM peak hour, with about 67% of
them entering the site.
Figure 8 shows the estimated distribution of the site-
generated traffic onto the street network. Most of the site gen-erated traffic will be oriented south toward the industrial area
and the Renton Central Business District. The most-used route
will probably be I-405 via the interchange at N.E. Park Drive,
while some site-generated traffic will also use the I-405 inter-
changes at North 30th Street and at North 44th Street.
Figure 9 shows projected 1983 average daily traffic volumeswiththeLakesidefullyoccupied. Figures 10 and 11 show pro-jected 1983 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with the Lake-
side, for the pertinent street intersections within the study
area. These peak hour traffic volume projections are conserv-
atively high, because they assume that the peak generation hours
for the site coincide with the on-street traffic peak hours.
Because of the many industrial plant commuters, the on-street
peak hours occur earlier than normal, perhaps actually before
the Lakeside site traffic generation peak hours. Computed
levels of service for these intersections, assuming the pro-jected traffic volumes, are shown in Table 1.
The traffic generated by the Lakeside is not expected to
cause any major traffic capacity problems. Though traffic vol-
umes will increase somewhat, the signalized intersection of Lake
Washington Boulevard, Garden Avenue, and Park Drive will con-
tinue to operate at level of service D, with little change in
traffic conditions noticeable to motorists. Vehicles turning on-to Lake Washington Boulevard during the peak hours will continue
to experience delays, including those vehicles at Burnett Avenue
and at the proposed site driveways. Because of the relativelylowvolumeswhichwillturnleftfromLakeWashingtonBoulevard
into the site driveways, left turn lanes will not be necessaryonthearterialattheselocations. Extremely few left turns in-
to the site will occur during the morning peak. Slightly more
left turns will occur during the evening peak, but the PM
southbound through traffic volumes delayed by left turning
vehicles will be relatively low.
The proposed vacation of portions of the two undeveloped
rights-of-way identified on the plat map as Third and Lake View
Boulevard will restrict access to some undeveloped lots immediat-
ely south and east of the Lakeside site. After the proposed
vacation, lots 344, 345 and 346 apparently would still have
access via the undeveloped Lake View Boulevard and Morgan Avenue
rights-of-way. However, this would be a circuitous route to
Lake Washington Boulevard and may not be practical because of
the terrain.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The traffic generated by the Lakeside is not expected to
cause any major traffic problems. The slightly increased traf-
fic volumes in the area probably will not be noticeable to
motorists or residents. Increased volumes on Lake Washington
Boulevard will somewhat increase the difficulty of turning onto
this arterial during the peak hours, but conditions will still
be tolerable.
The delays expected for motorists waiting to turn from the
site driveways onto Lake Washington Boulevard during the peak
hours could be minimized by providing enough driveway width so
that right and left turning vehicles would not impede each
other. Driveway widths of about 35 feet (approximately 32 feet
minimum) would allow a right turning vehicle and a left turning
vehicle to wait side by side, with another lane for traffic en-
tering the site. The driveways and adjacent landscaping should
be designed to provide good motorist sight distances.
The restriction of access to adjacent lots (#344, 345, and
346 ) due to street vacations could possibly be mitigated with ac-
cess agreements. These lots could be granted access to Lake
Washington Boulevard via the Lakeside site circulation roadway.
r
FLNCTIONAL ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION,
FREEWAY
MAJOR ARTERIAL i
SECONDARY ARTERIAL r
COLLECTOR ARTERIAL N
LOCAL ACCESS m /
APPROX.
S.E 80TH ST.SCALE.
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES O
TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL A in=1600
INTERSECTIONS
SIGNS AT MAJOR
CO
N. 40TH ST.
NOTE: ALL LOCAL ACCESS ie(2)
STREETS STOP AT y N
ARTERIALS i
RCADWAY CHARACTERISTICS j z•"
36T"ST N
0' APPROX. PAVEMENT WIDTH 1
zi --2) NO. OF LANES z
P
I
IPAVEDSHOULDERS
1
G GRAVEL SHOULDERS L,N6---II
N NO. SHOULDERS iI 11
c CURBS 1
I N.30TH ST2L
r24(2)2'P
IT
1
NE.?7T_ ST
k
C.').,
Q THE
V LAKESIDE"
SITE
m
i \
i
11
Z
1y
GENE CCULON L 11\
MEMORIAL qR=.,
08'/•,....
BEACH PARK
40(2)C
1(y
BOEING j k 4.. .
1, 82'(7)6'P J
EXISTING STREET NETWORK FIGURE- \
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 1
S
SOURCE:
C=:TY OF RENTON 1980 illT]' FFIC FLOW MAP mI di N
APPROX.11 S.E.BOTH ST. SCALE
r 1"=1600'
ZF
0.
0.
N. 40TH ST.T.'
1
a`
N.36TH 3T O
z O
i1(,
44 co
O
a
1 I N
N.*-
0
ST
1t
01780 5310
N.
7TH ST
s .L
0
QW
v LAKTHEESIDEilL.SITE
20,930 13
m
0
fil
AGENECOUPON
MEMORIAL HF
BEACH PARK PAR4S...`"
0
BOEING
cn it AN
1980 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (ADT) FIGURE
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 2
V0 N. 36TH ST.
n ri
if knMO N
o / NOT TO
o '°° SCALE
a
2
v I__ a IO g
If / 11. y -23 N.30TH t---/ St
w 3 - - r
O tD _et
M
O cp
lwW
cr
6% 0 m
04,o
i.o.
R
AA Dc34)
1
62 k4y
2
1931 AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (6 :45 - 7 : 45 AM) FIG V I
IPA 3
THE LAKESIDE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
m 1
aIP ‘C agr---
I4(/'
4
ti
N. 36TH ST.
aN- N
NOT TO
SCALE
a
7
r
i-
35
y
N.30TH L--1 ST
ui 4 •— i i
J 0—•Ak tam
COON
z
SOURCES :
MANU1,L COUNTS BYriVTHECITYOFRENTON
T.1'. & E.
to
aio
O
m
DR.
115
41
6 Ilr ....
ly4y
a.
P 0
9y` / c910
F2
1931 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (3 :45 - 4 : 45 PM) F1GUe
IR 4
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
1
I
II N
A P
Tr
S.E.80TH ST. SCALE
i I"=1600'
ZF
0.
o.
Q N. 40TH ST.
N.36TH STy _,
h
r
v/ I
Y "
6
tI N
N.30 :I ST. ji
0210 5970TT a
Nk N
1' N.E' 27TH ST
kl 1°.v
HEvQ
illi
LA ESIDE"
SITE
m
23,200 Zip
At
GENE COULON it t
MEMORIAL F
BEACH PAR<PAR.
N
Y
BOEING o t
PROJECTED 1983 ADT `S WITHOUT "THE LAKESIDE"
IR
FIGVQ`
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5
I
eoy
A7‘t I
if 0
N., 36TH ST.
n ri
lI "1MO N
o' o,//( . NOT TO
cV "' °° > SCALE
a
O2 Nti
4
5
N ) /' L. -24 N.30TH v - + ST
Foui3 -r
OfON
J '
Ofow
AJ
gyp\ —
pO
V
V
O
iD 1
DR.
P
7P
ot*
6'
a \\*. \/
gyp
S
1t/, c9t
QP
1
PRCJECTED 1983 AM PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT 1IGURi'
THE LAKESIDE" IR -
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS i \
V
J
b
A ,(
A.__
4
N. 36TH ST.
2 Ir v--
to N
o- o/% NOT TO
471 ^
O.'o > SCALE
a
irn L_71- _N N
I i' tai r'-43 N.30TH 1 I S7
cz
4)
W 4 —ow I r
r \
Y M—In
J
2 —
mm
1
Z
o
s\
4er \
tom e
I
ii DR.
6
S I `'
a kqr
04, S'P\
2
PROJECTED 1983 PM PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT FIGURE
THE LAKESIDE" h1E 7
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
ESTIMATED LAKESIDE APARTMENTS
TRIP GENERATIONiii
APPROX. 186 UNITS (MAX. ) X 2Q4.- N
6 . 1 VEHICLE TRIPS/UNIT*
11 APPROX.
APPROX. 1135 TRIPS/AVERAGE S E BOTH ST. SALE
WEEKDAY
r I"=1600'
m
SOURCE : Q N. 40TH ST.
TUIP GENERATION-AN
I'1FORMATIONAL REPORT 4P
I .T.E. , 2ND EDITION, 1979 .
f N.36TH ST
1 /
4(
s):
0(
iftel t
Y
NTH ST.
S
0 115 ( 10%)
1/4
TH
N E 27ST
Q
O
Q S.'
THE
vlilt
LAKESIDE
SITE
1135 {100°A°)
510 (45%) %
ha
GENE COULON itMEMORIAL Aip
BEACH PARK `
PAR '
0 %
BOEING N2t 4, v it
ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC 1-FIG U Ri\
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 8
144-
N
lb
c A PPROX.
S.E.8OTH ST. SCALE
I +I"=1600'
I
0
0
Q N. 40TH ST.
1
4 N.D6TH ST_
J
Y I
lc-
x3I
N.3TH_
y
ST
kin 2225 60854(::(
N s q.
N' :
ti
v LAKESIDE"
SITE
23,710
ipi
h
rn
m
GENE COULON it `MEMORIAL Ilk . 1!F
BEACH PARK P A R "'
s
BOEING l
PROJECTED 1983 ADT 'S WITH "THE LAKESIDE" iFIGuQE-..\
IR"THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 9
dlti.
rC)If °N. 36TH ST.
I 1 A
i zr
InM0 N
o.
hb0 W
NOT TO
SCALE
a
2 a
0 - ti
f- 4
26y--N.30TH J ST
ui 03 —0, tr
J '
0 N
0 R
W
Os ue' 4
m N
WW 11
v125
1 "
THE
la' LAKE-N
SIDE"
pa N_16
lit 38
DR
b eP1°
L-
a
v-1
s
03`fi"' c9'
po
F2
PRJJECTED 1983 AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH FIGU RE
THE LAKESIDE" 0 O
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
4)
a0)
CPC
I
3
N. 36TH ST.
if)
o_ NOT TO
N`
O-tio > SCALE
N
N IL_ 7
1
N 52
N.30TH ST
W 4 — I
a 2 "--"
A 01 m
OTr
cr
sp O 8
wo
t r"THE
5 ASIDEE'
r\b..
is
tr
G c4.
041'
h* qr
J
PF OJECTED 1983 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH 6IGUR E
THE LAKESIDE"
THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
OM
TABLE 1
Street Intersection Levels of Service
During Street Traffic Peak Hours
1981 1983 1983
Intersection Without With
All on Lake Existing The Lakeside The Lakeside
Washington Blvd. N. ) AM PM AM PM AM PM
Burnett Ave. N. * C to D D D D To E D E
south intersection)
north site driveway** A/A/C C/B/E
south site driveway** A/A/D C/B/E
N.E. Park Drive and
Garden Drive D D D D D D
Signalized)
Level of service for left turn from Burnett only.
Individual levels of service shown for right turns from driveway (assumed STOP sign)/
left turns from Lake Washington Boulevard/
left turns from driveway (assumed STOP sign) .
Description of Levels of Service: Primary Reference:
A Little or no delay Interim Materials on Highway Capacity
B Short traffic delays Transportation Research Circular No. 212,
C Average traffic delays Transportation Research Board,
D Long traffic delays January 1980, p. 37.
E Very long traffic delays; congestion
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY
PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX
LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD NORTH
RENTON, WASHINGTON
E-1625
FOR
LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY
A :4.:
3 -- Earth
Consultants inc.
Geotechnical Engineering and Geology
Ear
Consu
Inc.Or-Geotechnical Engineering and Geology
1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 101, Bellevue, Washington 98005
Phone: (206) 643-3780 /Seattle (206) 464-1584
August 24 , 1981 E-1625
Mr. Dean Henry
Lincoln Property Company
The Overlake Building
11400 S. E. 6th Street, Suite 220
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study
Proposed Apartment Complex
Lake Washington Boulevard North
Renton, Washington
Dear Mr. Henry:
In accordance with your request and within the scope of our
proposal dated July 29, 1981 this report presents the results of our
Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study for the subject project.
The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface soil condi-
tions in order to provide preliminary recommendations for site prepar-
ation, foundation and retaining wall design. The scope of our study
included test pits, laboratory tests, geotechnical engineering
analyses and the preparation of this report.
Our preliminary study indicates that the site is underlain by
medium dense native soils at relatively shallow depths. In the
relatively level western portion of the site, the native soils are
overlain by medium dense granular fills ranging in depth from about
three (3) to eight (8) feet. In the southeastern section of the site
including the locations of Buildings A, B, C and P ( see Plate 1) , up
to fourteen (14 ) feet of fill was encountered. The proposed struc-
tures may generally be supported on conventional spread footings bear-
ing on the existing granular fills, firm native soils, or on structur-
al fill. In the southeastern area of the site where the depth of
fill approached fourteen (14 ) feet, we recommend additional explora-
tion once plans are finalized. For planning purposes, it may be
assumed that building areas in this portion of the site will need to
be overexcavated to a depth of about four (4 ) feet and replaced by
structural fill.
The following sections describe the study and explain our recom-
mendations in greater detail.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
At the time our study was performed, the site and proposed build-
ing locations were as shown schematically on the Test Pit Location
Plan, Plate 1. This is based on an undated preliminary Site Plan byGoes, Guthrie & Associates.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
Aujust 24, 1981 Page 2
It is planned to construct a multi-unit apartment complex on the
site. At the time of our study, the project was in the planning
stage. Seventeen (17) apartment buildings are tentatively planned .
The buildings will be two to three story conventional wood-frame
structures with relatively light foundation loads. Typical loads for
this type of construction are on the order of 2000 pounds per lineal
foot for perimeter walls, and column loads of 25 kips, dead plus live
loads. Cuts and fills will be dependent on final grades which had
not. been developed at the time of our study. Buildings planned along
the eastern margin against the hill may require cuts and retaining
wails from about five ( 5) to ten (10 ) feet in height.
The above design criteria are preliminary. Once final plans
become available we should be consulted to review the recommendations
contained in this report. In any case, it is recommended that Earth
Consultants, Inc. be provided the opportunity for a general review of
final design.
FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our field exploration was performed on August 12, 1981. The sub-
surface conditions were explored by excavating twelve test pits to a
ma), imum depth of fifteen ( 15) feet below the existing surface at the
approximate locations shown on Plate 1.
The locations of the test pits were approximately determined by
pacing from estimated property corners. Elevations of test pits were
approximately determined by interpolation between plan contours.
Hence, the locations and elevations of the test pits should be consi-
dered approximate only.
The field exploration was continuously monitored by a field engi-
neer from our firm who classified the soils encountered, maintained a
log of each test pit, obtained representative bulk soil samples , mea-
sured in-situ strengths and observed pertinent site features. Shear
strengths of undisturbed soils were measured where practical in the
field with a penetrometer. These results are recorded on the test
pit logs at the appropriate depth. Soils were classified visually in
the field according to the Unified Soil Classification System which
is presented on Plate 2, Legend . Logs of the individual test pits
are presented on Plates 3 through 9, Test Pit Logs. The final logs
represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of
the laboratory examination and tests of field samples.
Representative soil samples from the test pits were placed in
closed containers and returned to our laboratory for further examina-
tion and testing. Visual classifications were supplemented by index
tests such as sieve and hydrometer analyses on representative sam-
ples. Field moisture determinations were performed on each bulk sam-
ple. Results of moisture determinations together with classifica-
tions, are shown on the test pit logs included in this report. The
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 3
results of the sieve and hydrometer analyses are illustrated on
Plates 10 and 11.
SITE CONDITIONS
Surface
The site is located at and around the existing Renton Golf Range
on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard in the 2000 block. The
site covers an area of about eight (8) acres with a trailer court to
the north and undeveloped land to the east and south. The golf range
occupies the central portion of the site.
The site has been used as a fill area for a quarry operation
which previously existed on the site. Steep bluffs from the quarry
operation still exist in the northeastern site margin and southeast
of the southern site margin. The site generally slopes to the west.
In the extreme eastern portion slopes are as steep as 0. 5:1 (Horizon-
tal :Vertical) , with the relief for the eastern quarter of the site on
the order of seventy ( 70) feet. The western three-quarters of the
site is nearly level with a relief of approximately thirty ( 30 ) feet.
A trailer and a number of structures with utilities associated
with the golf driving range are present in the west central area.
Recent fills have been deposited south of the golf range.
No flowing water was observed at the time of our field explo-
ration. A small pond of still water is located east of the southern
site margin in a low area.
Subsurface
Subsurface conditions in the central and northern areas of the
site occupied by the golf range are fairly uniform. These areas are
immediately underlain by medium dense miscellaneous granular fills
ranging in depth from about one (1) foot to nine (9) feet as observed
in Test Pits TP-1 through TP-6. Beneath the fills are native soils.
The native soils are medium dense to dense slightly silty sand and
gravelly silty sand. In Test Pit TP-4 , the top four (4 ) feet of the
native soil is a very dense slightly sandy silt.
The southwestern portion of the site is immediately south of the
golf range and parallel to Lake Washington, is underlain by native
soils to the depth explored. The soils are a medium dense sand with
varying amounts of silt and gravel.
In the southeastern site area south of the golf range the quarry
operation evidently continued deeper. Test Pits TP-9 and TP-12 en-
countered miscellaneous fills ranging in depth from about eight and
one-half ( 8-1/2) to fourteen ( 14 ) feet, respectively. The fill is a
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 4
medium dense gravelly silty sand containing some debris. Portions of
the fill in Test Pit TP-12 contained large amounts of debris includ-
ing organics, with moderate groundwater seepage in the last one foot
of the fill. Beneath the miscellaneous fills are medium dense silty
gravelly sand in Test Pit TP-9 and medium dense slightly silty sand
in Test Pit TP-12.
In the northeastern and east central area, the site extends into
the hill. Test Pits TP-7 and TP-8 excavated in this area encountered
medium dense silty gravelly sand and hard slightly sandy silt. In
the bluff along the northern site margin the silty gravelly sand and
hard silt can be observed with approximately ten (10 ) feet of glacial
till as a cap.
Moderate groundwater seepage was observed in Test Pits TP-7 and
TP-12.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
General
Based on our preliminary field exploration, laboratory testing
and engineering analyses, it is our opinion that the site is suitable
for the proposed construction. The proposed structures may be sup-
ported on conventional spread footings bearing on the existing granu-
lar fills, firm native soils, or on structural fill. The fills exist-
ing over most of the site are generally sufficiently compact to sup-
port the planned building loads without reworking. However, some
recompaction of these fills may be required in localized areas. In
the southeastern portion of the site, including the possible loca-
tions of Buildings A, B, C and P, the existing fills are deeper and
contain significant amounts of debris. At these locations, it will
most likely be necessary to overexcavate about four (4 ) to five ( 5)
feet of the existing fills and replace them by structural fill. We
recommend that additional exploration be conducted in this area once
building and grading plans have been finalized. The southeastern
area where the fill is deeper, should receive additional investiga-
tion as building plans are finalized.
The following sections of this report present more detailed
recommendations for various geotechnical engineering aspects of the
project which should be incorporated into the project design and
construction. This report has been prepared for specific application
to this project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices for the exclusive use of the Lincoln Property
Company and their representatives. No other warranty, expressed or
implied, is made.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 5
Foundations
Based on the design parameters outlined in the Project Descrip-
tion section of this report, it is our opinion the proposed struc-
tures may be supported on continuous and individual spread footings
bearing on the existing granular fills, firm native soils or struc-
tural fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation section of
this report. For Buildings A, B, C and P, foundations may be support-
ed on a structural fill mat extending to a depth of three (3) feet
below the footing bottoms, placed after removing the existing fills.
Structural fill should extend a distance beyond footing perimeters
equal to the depth of fill placed.
Perimeter footings should extend to a minimum depth of eighteen
18) inches below the lowest adjacent final grade and may be designed
for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2000 ) pounds
per square foot (psf) , for dead plus live loads. Continuous footings
should have a minimum width of sixteen (16) inches. Isolated spread
footings may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of
two thousand (2000 ) psf, but should have a minimum width of eighteen
18) inches. A one-third increase in allowable bearing pressures is
permissible when considering lateral loads due to wind and earth-
quakes.
Because of possible variations in the existing fill on the site
it is recommended that all foundation excavations be thoroughly tamp-
ed to detect any possible areas of loose soils. Loose soils, if
present, should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill or
crushed rock.
We recommend that all footing excavations be examined by a repre-
sentative from Earth Consultants, Inc. to observe compliance with the
design concepts presented in this report.
Floor Slabs
Floor slabs may be supported on the recompacted existing fills
or firm native soils,or on structural fill placed in accordance with
the Site Preparation section of this report. The top four (4 ) inches
should be a free draining sand or gravel to act as a capillary break.
This requirement may be waived if the fill is free draining or
moisture infiltration will not be a problem.
In areas where moisture is undesirable a vapor barrier may be
placed beneath the slab. One (1) to two ( 2) inches of sand may be
placed over the membrane for protection during construction. The
slab may be isolated from foundations to reduce the detrimental
effects of differential settlements between the footings and floor
slab.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 6
Settlements
For the anticipated building loads, we expect that total settle-
ments on the order of one-half ( 1/2) to one ( 1) inch will occur, with
about half this amount occurring as differential settlements between
spread and continuous footings, and between slabs and foundations.
It is expected that this settlement should occur during construction
with the remaining portion during the initial loading of the slab.
Lateral Forces
Short term wind or seismic forces may be resisted by passive
pressures, and/or friction between concrete and the supporting sub-
grade. The passive resistance may be considered as an equivalent
fluid load of two hundred fifty ( 250 ) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) .
This value assumes that all footing backfill is compacted in accor-
dance with the Site Preparation recommendations in this report. A
coefficient of friction of three tenths ( 0. 30 ) may be considered
between concrete and soil.
Basement and Retaining Walls
Basement and retaining walls should be designed to resist late-
ral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these struc-
tures. Walls that are free to rotate one-thousandth of their height
at the top should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures im-
posed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five ( 35)
pcf. If walls are restrained from free movement at the top, they
should be designed for an additional uniform pressure of one hundred
100 ) psf.
The above pressures assume a maximum wall height of ten (10 )
feet and that no surcharge slopes or loads will occur above the
walls. If deviations from these criteria are expected, we should be
contacted for the appropriate design parameters.
All walls should be provided with adequate provisions for subsur-
face drainage.
Slopes
Varying heights of cuts will be required along the eastern site
margin depending on final building locations.
We recommend all temporary slopes be cut at 3 : 2 (Horizontal :Ver-
tical) . Permanent slopes should be sloped at 2: 1. We recommend that
all excavated slopes be examined by a representative of Earth Consul-
tants, Inc. to evaluate the stability of the exposed soils. The
existing slopes appear generally stable and should not be disturbed.
However, all permanent exposed slopes should be vegetated to reduce
erosion.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 7
Moderate groundwater seepage was encountered at depth in only
two test pits which were excavated during a relatively dry period.
Although we encountered only minimal groundwater, groundwater seepage
may be expected from cuts during rainy periods. If present, ground-
water should be controlled as outlined in the following section.
Groundwater Control
The subject site contains fine grained soils that will make grad-
ing operations difficult during wet weather. For this reason, it is
important that groundwater be controlled wherever possible. Seepage
should be anticipated from cuts during rainy weather. Surface inter-
ceptor ditches may have to be placed along the top of all cuts. Sub-
surface drains may have to be placed either along the toe or top of
all cuts, whichever location appears to be more feasible. We suggest
that appropriate locations of drains be established during grading
operations by a representative of Earth Consultants, Inc. , at which
time the seepage areas, which if present, will be more clearly
defined. The site should be graded to drain at all times and all
loose surfaces sealed at night to prevent the infiltration of rain
into the soils. After a rainfall, equipment should remain off the
soils until they have had a chance to dry sufficiently.
Site Preparation
All building and pavement areas should be cleared of all struc-
tures, utility lines, pavements and debris, large vegetation, brush
and other deleterious matter. In all areas that will receive build-
ings or pavements, the subgrade should be proofrolled under the obser-
vation of a representative of Earth Consultants, Inc. This procedure
should indicate the presence of any exceptionally loose or unstable
areas which, if present, should be overexcavated and replaced by
structural fill or crushed rock.
All structural fill should be placed in eight (8) to ten (10 )
inch thick loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent rela-
tive compaction as determined by ASTM D-1557-70 (Modified Proctor) .
The near surface site soils contain an excessive amount of fines
which when wet may be difficult to compact. We therefore do not rec-
ommend their use during wet weather. If any of the grading is to be
conducted during wet weather, we recommend that granular materials
with a maximum size of three ( 3) inches, containing less than 5 per-
cent fines, be used for structural fill. During dry weather, other
granular materials may be used provided they can be properly com-
pacted. Imported fill samples should be submitted to Earth Consul-
tants, Inc. prior to bringing on the site. The placement of the
structural fill should be observed and tested by Earth Consultants,
Inc.
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lincoln Property Company E-1625
August 24, 1981 Page 8
Pavement Areas
Pavement areas may be supported on the recompacted subgrade or
on structural fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation
section of this report. The upper six (6) inches of pavement sub-
grade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum den-
sity. Below this level a compactive effort of 90 percent would be
adequate. The pavement section for lightly loaded traffic or parking
areas should consist of two (2) inches of Asphalt Surfacing over four
4 ) inches of Crushed Rock Base or three (3) inches of Asphalt
Treated Base (ATB) . Heavier loaded traffic areas will require
thicker sections.
Additional Services
Because of the preliminary nature of this investigation, it is
recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be provided the opportunity
for a general review of the final design and specifications in order
that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly inter-
preted and implemented in the design and construction. It is also
recommended than when final design is available, that additional
field work be performed to delineate the extent of the fill and it' s
condition in the south eastern area and develop specific recommenda-
tions for building in this area.
The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are
based upon preliminary the data obtained from the test pits. The
nature and extent of variations between test pits may not become evi-
dent until construction. If variations then appear evident, Earth
Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to reevaluate the recommendations
of this report prior to proceeding with the construction.
It is also recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be retained
to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to
observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or rec-
ommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface
conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of con-
struction.
The following plates are included and complete this report:
Plate 1 Test Pit Location Plan
Plate 2 Legend
Plates 3 through 9 Test Pit Logs
Plates 10 and 11 Grain Size Analyses
Earth Consultants, Inc.
Lircoln Property Company E-1625
August 24 , 1981 Page 9
We trust the information presented herein is adequate for your
recuirements. If you need additional information or clarification,
plEase call.
Il%BUTq Respectfully submitted,
r wasleiPo bi
c` \ EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC.
r ~ a
o
O
i\
to
e°/ST P` t''
Anil Butail, P. E.
NNAL ',00r Chief Engineer
JRL/AB/jb
Earth Consultants, Inc.
MMUS
11111,0-
Property
0 TP-8
O SITE i
Line ,
WitiD Lake
Approximate Scale
Washington
MIN TP 7 TP 4
I
o ao Bo Isotr.
I
1\--P
TP 6
T ,
VICINITY LEGEND
MAP.,
i C" O TP-3 Approximate Test Pit
Location
0 Possible Building
vJ Property Site
N
iiii\
LineTPII
ill TP-2 TP-12
Z.......... °TP-5
Reference
Preliminary Site Plan
1/ 4 TP-I By Goes, Guthrie 6 Associates, Inc.
J
Undated
TP9
4011.44.
1
TP-I0
1 Earth I
n re Consultants Inc.
GEOIECNNICAL ENGINEERING 8 GFOLOGV
Test Pit Location PlanLAKEWASHINGTONBLVD. N.
Apartment Site
Renton, Washington
Proj No 1625 IDate Aug '81 !Plate 1
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GRAPH LETTER
TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS
SYMBOL SYMBOL
0. • 00•
000• d GW
N(U.-MAD(0 MArtLS,SAND
SRAY[L 00• 0 MATUR(!, UTTLI OR NO FINES
MOCLEAN MAW(L$ v
0' '0 u 0
II/IN •• •• f'•.41
RAAALLY K •.4: `
4. .•,i • FOORLY-SRAOU SRAKLI, SRAv(L-
SOILS GP SAMO WXTUN(S, UTTLC ON NO FIN[!
coARSt
P. •: •: :•
at!m a t 0 f
GM
11+
TSaLs
Mw( TNYI SO%t it 11
GM
SALTY MASILLT•clot TU(lSAMD-
OF COARSE FRAC- GRAVELS 'ITN I1MS 1T
TION R(TAiNCO Smi/4••MM. •1•409 0
ON NO• MY( lh•••) CLATCY sRAv(L!, aRAr(L-sANO-
GC CLA MIXTURE!
f
LL-MAO(A SA. . . . NOD, aRAr[LL
a SW SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINE!lAMO
CLEAN SANG •••••
ANO
Mull •• r f14.41 •f• . - ••
SOILS POORLY-MAO(0 SANOS, SRAv[LLT
ION( TNAM 50%I SP LMO/, LITTLE OR NO FINES
01 MATERIAL IS
LA*sea TNAM NO. 12•i.ti.,
200 Steve WC
MORE TNAM SO%
I SM Mr" SAMOA, SAND-SILT MIxTURtS
ANDS MTN FIN[!
lion NSSIN•
rim)
NO. 4 SKYE dd
SC CLAr[T 5AN00, SAND-cur MIXTURES
ffll .'
liORILMIC SILTS Aw0 PERT FINE
ML
SA/IO•, ROM FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY neg SANDS ON CLAYEY
IILT1 fins 1LMIT FLXSTICITY
FINE SILTS f INOR4IMC CUTS OF LOW TO MMus.
UOWO O YS,
5RAU•(0 AMA
MIT CL SAMOY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,
A
LIAM
SOILS CLAY!
LESS IMAM !CIj // CLAY!
OL
OR•ANIC SILTS MO ORSAIMC
SILTY CLAYS OF LOW FLASTKITY
INMOAMIC SM.T1, MICACtous OR
MH a r AMAroAccoosFINESO OR
SILTY SOILS
II OR[ TNAM SOS SILTS
W M)C/ MATERIAL IS
AUG
UN• LIMIT / CH SASAMIC CLAYS OF NISN
SMALLER TNAM NO
CLAYS
SR( NAATERTM s0
f7
FLASTICI TY, FAT CLAYS
100 SIEY( SIL[
ORSAUIC CLAYS OF M[DIIAI TO NISN
OH PLASTIC/TT, ORSAMIC SILTS
a. -'.
PT
FEAT, NLAS/S, SM kA 3a l!
NW/LT DRSANIe SOILS y .=':
ITN NISN ONSAMIC CONTENTS
INr
TOPSOIL Humus and Dutf Layer
r-
I Uncontrolled with
FILL Highly Variable Constituents
NOTE: DUAL SY•SOLS ARE UllE0 TO INDICATE SORO(RLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
T141 DISCUS31OM IN TNL TUT OF nos REPORT IS NECESSARY FOR A PROPER UM0(RSTAMOIM
OF INC "wrung of root MAr[RIAL M(SENT[0 IN TNL ATTACN(D LOSS
I 2`0.D.Split Spoon Sampler
1 Ring or Shelby Sample
P Sampler PushedI WOEarth40SampleNotRecoveredConsultantsInc.
V Water Level (date)
Ts Torvane Reading LEGEND
qu Penetrometer Readings
i Water Observation Well Proj.No.1625 Date Aug: '81 jPfate 2
TEST PIT NO. _I
Logged By JRD
Date 8/12/81 Elev. 57±
Depth W
ft.) USCS Soil Description 96)
0 —
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, moist
11FILL)
5 -- f
I Sil Brown to gray SAND with gravel and silt, medium
EI:•:•:::: SP dense to dense, moist
6
10 —,
Test Pit terminated at 10.5 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15 —
Logged By JRD
Date 8/12/31 TEST PIT NO. __ L_ Elev• 65±
0 .. -
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to
4
4'
moist (FILL)
fir ::t
5
f$,
ti
r }t
1.
Il•. SM Gray gravelly silty SAND grading to gravelly SAND
SP with silt, medium dense to dense, moist
9
10 —ri i:i:i::
Test Pit terminated at 11 .0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
i
TEST PIT LOGS
I APARTHIENT SITE
Earth I 0RENTON, WASH I NGTON
Consultants Inc.
GEI)TECHNICAL ENGINEERING a GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 I Date Aug. '81 'Plate 3
TEST PIT NO.
Logged By JRD
late 8/12/81 Elev.. ±
Depth yy
ft.) USCS Soil Description 96)
0 —'
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, moist 11
FILL)
6 SM Brown silty SAND with gravel , medium dense, moist 15
11SMBrownSANDwithsilt, medium dense, moist
10 —%: :' : SP
Test Pit terminated at 11.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
logged By JRD
oats 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. Elev. 81±
0 ;O• SM Brown gravelly silty SAND,medium dense,moist (FILL)
21 q =4.5
ML Tan SILT with sand, hard, moist
u
tsf
5 -
E....; 16
rr
SM Brown silty fine SAND, medium dense, moist
10 20
Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
TEST PIT LOGS
41140 l APARTMENT SITE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Ccarth nts Inc.
I'
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 1 Date Aug. '81 !Plate 4
TEST PIT NO.
I.ogged By J RD
I')ate 8/12/81 Elev. 67±
Depth yy
ft.} USCS Soil Description 96)
0 - -
8
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to
5
moist (FILL)
12
10
SM Brown SAND with silt and gravel , medium dense, 14
SP moist
Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
Logged By JRD
la
Elev. 74±
lute 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. —
0
8
5 SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to 13
moist (FILL)
J' l•
l
10
SM Brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist
1: :1:: 26
Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
TEST PIT LOGS
0;Earth
APARTMENT SITE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
l Inc. '
GEO TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 1Date Aug. '81 'Plate 5
TEST PIT NO. _.I__
Logged By JRD
hate 8/12/81 Elev. 100±
Depth W
ft.) USCS Soil Description
0 1.i. .
9
Jl JJ
J !
I
5 t:l+ SM Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense to dense,ti"
dry to moist 12
10
22
ML Tan SILT with sand, very hard, moist 22 g74.5
tsf
Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet. Moderate
15 groundwater seepage observed between 8.5 and 10.5' .
Logged By JRD
Date 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. .13_ Elev. 109±
0 6" loose gravelly silty SAND)
21 qu=4.5
tsf
ML Tan SILT with sand to sandy SILT, moist, hard
5 --
27
10 `ti SM Tan silty fine SAND, dense, moist 18
fr
I
ML Tan SILT with sand, hard, moist 25 qi?4.5
tsf
Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet.
15 No groundwater seepage observed.
TEST PIT LOGS
I APARTMENT SITE
EarthRENTON, WASHINGTONA -.Cc+nsultants Inc. 0
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Prof. No. 1625 [Dat. Aug. '81 1t. 6
TEST PIT NO. --a_
Logged By JRD
Date 8/12/81 Elev. 45±
Depth W
ft.) USCS Soil Description 96)
0 — •.*.
13
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to
5 —. •• moist (FILL)
10
10
r3 SM Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense, moist 9
Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15 —'
Logged By JRD
Data8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. —IQ._ Elev. 45±
0
6
At
5 •E:4 SM Brown SAND with gravel and silt, loose grading to
6x: SP medium dense, dry to moist
10 --..a.:::: 5
Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15 —
TEST PIT LOGS
APARTMENT SITE
RENTON, 41ASH I NGTONEarth4.Gmnsultants Inc.
GEC TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Pro). No. 1625 [Date Aug. '81 'Plate 7
TEST PIT NO. , II
Logged By JRD
Date 8/12/81 Elev. 70±
Depth W
ft.) USCS Soil Description
0.
4
5 _ SM Tan SAND with silt and gravel , loose to medium
SP dense, dry to moist
13
10
22
Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet.
No groundwater seepage observed.
15
TEST PIT LOGS
1 APARTMENT SITE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
CEasnsuitants Inc.1111
GEC TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 I Date Aug. '81 'Plate 8
TEST PIT NO.
Logged By. J RD
pie 8/12/81
Elev. 58±
Depth yy
ft.) USCS Soil Description 96)
7
OV
5
SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to
moist, with some organic debris and asphalt (FILL)
17
10 — %,
21
15 — 1 H SM Tan SAND with silt, medium dense, wet 33
Test Pit terminated at 15.0 feet.
Moderate groundwater seepage at 14.0 feet.
20—
i TEST PIT LOGS
APARTMENT SITE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
Consultants Inc.
r
GE')TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 J Data Aug. '81 [Plate 9
SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSISSIZEOFOPENINGININCHESINUMBEROFMESHPERINCH. U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM
0 0
0 p O O O O O OgMOtDaC) N M t .- C.) a N a (0 O OO O O O OIGlnA100,I I I
rti
0,
nH 90
10Z02
m 4.6 80
20
zy
m
2L1 T 70 0
m
m rZ 2 30 XI
m • Om
IN-
III
O Z 40 ""1
czo m c
m 50 D
O CO i 50
r
o Cn
O
I m
40 t
m so
p CO
30 1
70
m
O 20 L
L')
80 „-1
z 0
o
10
I-. 90
rn
N 70 c
i zn 70 0 1 Li 1 1 I I I fill 11 1 1 1 I111 1 1 1 1 I 111_1
0 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 O O lD st C) N p <D c D) N 7 O CD ty 2 N O O M N
100
I .--' 0 0 0 W fD O C) N
O O
QoC) N O O O 0 0 0 O O O O
0 z GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o 0 0 0 0 0
CD
CD
V ? '-'
COBBLES
COARSE l FINE COARSE 1 MEDIUM I FINE
FINESI. z
Fil r...1 GRAVEL SAND
3> (o --I
C =
0 I-. (/) z
I KEY Boring or DEPTH
USCS DESCRIPTION MoistureTestPitNo. (ft.) Content (%) LL PLco —i m
z m 13-- TP-1 2 SM Gravelly silty SAND 11
o-- TP-5 6 SM Gravelly silty SAND 12a,— TP-9 2 SM Gravelly silty SAND 13
TP-11 7 SP/SM SAND with gravel and silt 13
0
SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES 1 NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH. U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE
r r I I 1 1 11 1
IN
MMMI l I t1VCdNCOCrI-OOO ONO 0
M
O OO O O O O
OOOOO OOtDeMN .- M V e- C.) V' N p omAloosI 1 gffi r 1 J
m imp A%
H 90 10
S• fi
W Aso 20
O 0 IllmN
Z '„i m 70 30 n
m 2 mRI
2
z TI 60 40
O
P m 0
m • 73 50 50li!!! corm
o
400 60
m_CO
GI
30 70
r m
G)
20 80 =o 1
Z
0
10
No 90
cm
NJ
U' 70
m 70 0 I 1 I l i l i 1 1 I HI I.11 1 1 1 I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 I I II I I 10o
z n _r O 0 O O O O O O O CD CD O f`') N r- CO (D O M N 7 2 8 M N 00 /D s• M N
CJ Z
0 0 0 CO tD V M N O O O O O O O O O O O E.
N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o 0 0 0 0 0
rt I N COARSE I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE
CD
T. z m
COBBLES
GRAVEL SAND
FINES
cn —1
c m
n z " 1. Boring or DEPTH Moisture
r- KEY Test Pit No. (ft.)
USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) LL PL
o —I m -<
z N C1--TP-12 8 SM Gravelly silty SAND 17
IIIMMIIIIII
1:3 o— TP-8 2,ML Sandy SILT 21Et7
CDCD
I
AFFIDAVIT
Marjorie L. Lotto, individually, and as
Personal Rep. for Estate of M. W. Lotto , being duly sworn, declare that I
am the owner of tEie 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 s day of September 19 81
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at Y.)
l)))ll Estate of. M. W. Lo to
By
r
Y
N e of Notary Public)Sid' Fe°f g;Individuall
6, 6 21771 S .E. 259thTAdress)Address)
Maple Valley, WA 98038
City) State)
206)432-9977
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
AFFIDAVIT
1 , Anna Phinney being duly sworn, declare 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 9th day of April 1981 ,
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing at Renton 1
LIOY(40-- "7/,elelaziNamefet.r Pu• is Signature of Owner)
0e-. I. LEWIS Anna Phinney c/o her representative
P.O. Box 273 Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc.
Renton, Wa. 98055 Attn: Scott B. Springer
515 116th Ave. N.E. , Suite 158
Address) Address)
Bellevue, WA 98004
City) State)
206) 455-4813
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
AFFIDAVIT
I, Bruce Larson being duly sworn, declare that I
am the lessee 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 3rd day of April 19 81 ,
Notary Public in and for the tate of
Washington, residing at
N oZet L-•/
NotaryPublic)Signature of Lessee)Bruce Larson, Partner - Renton Driving
Range c/o their representative
Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc.
ATTN: Scott B. Springer
15 116th ve. N.E. . Suite 158
Address) Address)
Bellevue, WA 98004
City) State)
206) 455-4813
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
Ia'"1i. l.O"' I 1 qeJ" YC V. 0: •s
PAP' 4 0 1 ' ; ' ill I/i.i 11 il.•:'3' °I# l'i A.
11E , / '/,pE yd i • Q4
C! tY Gi • ' • . Q 1r" 0.
1 i O
I 44 , t •i0.s e
6 G.76
ji,('•p tra
1 •grelre...*-6.-
1.0" •—•"_---i-
ril
JA
rI
1.,. .0 4' nimturnimillittil .
10 4 T H
Y
t 04% te . \‘ ‘
i (1)'"V
r.0.1 tr• '
A rs I rk‘ IP
1 ._L _. 0
II '‘ kifj
tat:‘
i '6 11 1
1 14it'I
r13. I).,.-..N
ar
Ti:-‘,-...7.-„-
e. .
uo••e U w p h L
O N.
R,,,.e h
m 1
1
Act!>/3 77f .Qe ifTpN.,!l.t70 !NO•MY T7Y//t !
to Iq 1
rats.• p 5«u, r° --
a.,.+ 1 r°•4r'.• o w
i PRIM ---
1—i tl-r - _ —'--f rt @---T.
1 a..,,w.
1 i_--
Jr TATE HWv 10. 2-A) l RENT04•TO KENNYDALE . ?lam~ (HIGH AVE. • 11
r. (
FLY. SEC S s.y+. A•/ROVEQ APRIL It,I1•{r.... rfrfr...-••.N4•2i•••:
P r, +
sass n
4 " ^
r-. J ii J
i
r ..yV.'ryfab'.7...il1ii 7./
n\. iw 1 a.Vir
est 3 01 V Opr(y 1/445M 1: t k Aafr+r• ej...." Y
4„
t ono /, . .-.
1:
D.
3 •
30 t it: or La e t t 4' 1 ,),,•-t . % (
1, N L I \ !Y 1 d103) l N •AN J • • -N• ":1 t ..• ` ..
ADDENDUM C
REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
WITH EARNEST MONEY PROVISION)
This contract controls the terms of sale of
the property. Read carefully before signing.
Bellevue Washington _ Octo5er 3G.19 8Q
Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. Purchaser")
hereby agrees to purchase,and the undersigned Seller agrees to sell,the followin real estate located in the Cityy of Renton
countyof Kim]Stzte of Washington, commonly known as 16.25 acres - Lots 340, 341 , 342, 343
359
nd legally described as:Proper legal description to be attached by Seller's agent
prior to Sellert's acceptance hereof.
ERNS OF SALE
Ei ht Hundred Twenty Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars($ 825,000.00 .
1. The sr, price is g a
payabbllee aass fellows: $ 30,000.00 as an Earnest Money Deposit (Deposit"),which sum is in the form of
promissory note and which Deposit,together with this Agreement,shall be held by Agent for
the benefit of the Darties hereto. The balance of the purchase price shall be payable as follows:
a. The- pr ' 11 be adjusted up or down as per Purchaser's curve o
100,( 00 per acre, pro
uste upward only if any
ACIP ,C ui1Cjrahle. in Purchaser's so e r_. P.
S`e1ler shall fun ish to Purchaser at Seller's expense a«'ashineton and Tit Asssoc tion standard form of Purchaser's Policy of
Title Insurance. As soon as reasonably possible following Purchaser shall be furnished with a Preliminary
Commitment f 31 the issuance of such a policy of title insurance covering the subject property,together with full copies of
any Exception set forth therein. Title of Seller is to be free of encumbrances or defects except:
Those acceptable to Purchaser.
Purchaser shall have Sixty 60 ) days after receipt of said Preliminary Commitment within which to notify Seller
and Escrow in writing of Purchaser's disapproval of any Exceptions shown in said Preliminary Commitment;provided,however,
that rights reserved in Federal patents or State deeds,building or use restrictions general to the district,existing easements not
inconsistent w th Purchaser's intended use,and building or zoning regulations or provisions shall not be deemed Exceptions which
Purchaser may disapprove. In the event of disapproval of any Exceptions as set forth in the Preliminary Commitment,Seller
shall have unti the date for closing of escrow within which to attempt to eliminate any disapproved Exception (s) from the Policy
of Title Insurance to be issued in favor of Purchaser and,if not eliminated,the escrow shall be cancelled unless Purchaser then
elects to waive its prior disapproval. Failure of Purchaser to disapprove any Exceptions within the aforementioned time limit
shall be deemed an approval of said Preliminary Commitment. Agent shall not be responsible for delivery of title.
5 ronr year rents_insurance,interest,mortgage reserves,water,oil,gas and other utilities constituting liens as well
6.
7.
9.
r '
15. Upon removal of all contingencies in writing, including zoning contingency,
Purchaser shall convert the $30,000 Note to cash and the same shall be de-
posited into escrow with Transamerica Title Insurance Company - Bellevue,
Washington. Closing of the transaction shall take place not later than
Sixty (60) Days from the removal of all said contingencies by Purchaser.
Copies of all documents are to be furnished to Seller's attorney for ap-
proval at least three (3) working days before they are to be signed by
Se- l er.
16. During the course of this agreement, Seller agrees to cooperate fully with
Purchaser in obtaining any and all Federal , State, County, and Municipal
approvals necessary to develop the property, including but not limited to
the rezone application, and Seller will sign all documentation required by
the aforesaid authorities where necessary.
17. Purchaser and Seller are aware that the property is currently improved as
a !golf driving range and that the operator of the golf driving range has a
lease on the property with a remaining term of approximately Thirteen (13)
Years. Seller is aware that Purchaser is currently in negotiation with the
lessee for the purpose of purchasing the leasehold interest. In the event _
slid' interest is assigned to Purchaser, then, during the term of this
Purchase and Sale Agreement, Purchaser will assume secondary responsibility
for payment of the monthly lease amount to Seller, provided that said amount
does not exceed $415 per month. This transaction is subject to release of lessee's
contingent option to purchase the premises.
18. The parties agree that it would be diffic& to determine damages in the
event Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder. Therefore,
upon removal of all contingencies as aforesaid and upon full tender of per-
foinance by Seller, if Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder
then the forfeiture of said earnest money deposit shall be the sole remedy
available to Seller, and the same earnest money shall constitute liquidated
dariages to Seller. Seller hereby expressly waives all other remedies,
including the right to sue for specific performance.
14. Tine is of the essence With. this Agreement.
ADDENDUM D
s
Tracts 340, 341, 342, 343, and 359, all in
C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden,
No. 5, as recorded in Volume 11 of plats, page 83,
records of King County, TOGETHER WITH that portion
of Southeast 104th Street vacated by Order of the
County Commissioners which attached thereto by
operation of law; EXCEPT that portion of vacated
Tract 359, conveyed to King County for road bydeedrecordedunderAuditor's File No. 1029408;
TOGETHER WITH that portion, if any, of Government
Lot 5, Section 5, Township 23 North, Range 5 East,
W.M. , lying between 104th Avenue Southeast and
Renton-Kennydale-Newport Road and north of Tract 359
as delineated on Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Wash-
ington Garden of Eden Division No. 5, according
to plat thereof recorded in Volume 11 of PLATS, page83, records of said County, all situated in the CityofRenton, County of King, State of Washington.
I
ct!
ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT
WITH EARNEST MONEY PROVISION)
This contract controls the
assignment of the lease for
the property. Read carefully
before signing.
Bellevue, Washington January Z9 , 1981
Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. ("Purchaser") hereby agrees to
purchase, and the undersigned Seller agrees to sell and assign that "lease
attached hereto as Addendum B (with the exception of any right of first re-
usal conta:.ned therein) and the buildings and leasehold improvements found
in the real estate located in the City of Renton, County of King, State of
Washington, commonly known as 8. 25 acres - Lots 340, 341, 342, 343 and 359,
nd legally described as:
Proper legal description to be attached
by Seller' s agent prior to Seller' s
acceptance hereof. (See attached Addendum Dr
TFRMS OF SALE:
The purchase priceis Two Hundred Fifty Thousand and Nn/1 rill Dollars(S 290 .001)_ 00 )
payable as id ows: S 20 , 000. 00
as an Earnest Money Deposit(Deposit'),which sum is in the form of_a_.
tDromi s s c ry note and which Deposit,together with this Agreement,shall be held by Agent for
ie benefit of the p,rties hereto. The balance of the purchase price shall be payable as follows:
a. All cash at closing, less any earnest money payments advanced prior to
closing.
b. Purchaser shall have Sixty (60) business days from the date of the
acceptance of the attached Addendum C by the Seller referenced therein
Phinney) (if that time has not already expired) in which to conduct
nrPliminary development investigations. Such investigations shall be
As a condition of tl; agreement the Seller 1•ist - in Ar^e d L (Ph • rw )
s s`,all fan is h to Purchaser at :doe's cxpcnsz a Waslinrton nd Tit c Ares ;ion nand rd lormo! Drover a roll: of
Title Insuranc As soon as reasonably possible follo•-int5F.iii Purchaser tall be furnished with a Preliminary
Commitment far the issuance or such a policy of title irsurancs covering the subject property,to:ether with full copies of
any Exception: set forth therein. Title of Seller is to be fret of encumbrances or defects except:
Those acceptable to Purchaser.
her ' n un yPurchaser's
xty -60 ) days after receipt of said Preliminary Commitment within which to notify Seller
an now L o rchasef s disapproval of any Exceptions shown Ice said Preliminary Commitment;provided,howerer,
That rights rese-ved in Federal patents or State deeds,building or use restrictions general to the district,existing easements not
inconsistent with Purchaser's intended use,and building or zoning regulations of provisions shall not be deemed Exceptions which
Pur Lscarsnry die pprove. In the anent of disapproval of any E.xrxptions as set forth in the Preliminary Commitment,Seller here
s hzflhavehave'unUf date for dosing of escrow within which to attempt to eliminate any disapproved Exception(s)from the Policy
of Title Insure irx to be issued in favor of Purchaser and,if not eliminated,the escrow shall be cancelled unless Purchaser then
elects to waive its prior disapproval. Failure of Purchaser to disapprove any Exceptions within the aforementioned time limit
dull be deemed an approval of said Preliminary C.amndtmenL Agent shall not be responsible for delivery of tick.
Seller herein warrants that all leasehold interests past and present, actual
and contingent.will be conveyed and assigned to assignee in this assignment -
and sale.
1
Taxes for the r srrrent year,rents,Insurance,interest,mortgage rearm,water,all,gas and other utilities constituting liens as;well
shall other liens of income and expense shall be pro-rated as of date of dosing.
Purchaser slhai. be entitled to possession on date of dosing,
7. lr4?xci: xexx:ika:peg; taRi•Ttr : S4k pax x tkwpfxxtAgt x mixolc t [a
gtxxx lctzk xe#:d 4ke L x 1t :extut' lxIx xxe.,: xk x acns Est 1-:ri t?:>;a xis C4l4xtccxetc
1 3; xxb:ttXthftxattx ic; yrxi-t 4> a :AKylxtak, xxk cxxx ;trxxv > tccxxv oiglttxxx
mImlv.15voiAolvyticilwPi,rrtaaca'- ffcrc to nnrrhaq_o f•hP n•-nprf-y rpgarr7lpec of f•hp
condition of the buildings or leasehold imerovements t.heseon.
itCc x i axxtK
7,:ry:I4LY:a3tsCfi YtTiX5F4am t iK21 K. 2.1a7zY aMiliAidX1 CM-Ii {t .X yxX ,Zq ";
I,.
I
1' :
1'
ADDENDUM A
15. Upon removal of all contingencies in writing, including zoning
contingency, Purchaser shall convert the $20, 000. 00 Note to cash
and the same shall be deposited into escrow with Transamerica
Title Insurance Company - Bellevue, Washington. Closing of the
transaction shall take place not later than Sixty (60) Days from
the removal of all said contingencies by Purchaser. Copies of
all documents are to be furnished to Seller' s attorney for ap-
proval at least three (3) working days before they are to be
signed by Seller.
16. During the course of this agreement, Seller agrees to cooperate
fully with Purchaser in obtaining any and all Federal, State,
County, and Municipal approvals necessary to develop the prop-
erty, including but not limited to the rezone application, and
Seller will sign all documentation required by the aforesaid
authorities where necessary.
17. The Seller herein shall keep all lease payments on the lease
obligation current, through and including the actual date of
closing.
18. The parties agree that it would be difficult to determine damages
in the event Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder;
therefore, upon removal of all contingencies as aforesaid and upon
full tender of performance by Seller, if Purchaser fails to per-
form its obligations hereunder then the forfeiture of said earnest
money deposit shall be the sole remedy available to Seller, and
the same earnest money shall constitute liquidated damages to
Seller. Seller hereby expressly waives all other remedies, in-
cluding the right to sue for specific performance, provided that
Purchaser pays into escrow the face value of the promissory note
20, 000. 00) for the benefit of the Seller within seven (7) days
of Purchaser' s removal of contingencies. In the event Purchaser
fails to pay into escrow the face value of the promissory note
20,000. 00) for the benefit of Seller within seven (7) days of
Purchaser' s removal of contingencies, then all legal remedies,
i r,r•l tirai nrr crc r i fi r r cr t-srm. cln=l l cocci rrrsrw
C
Seller: Buyer:
LINCOLN PROPERTY N.C. , INC.
BRUCE E. LARSON
tv(?064._,By:
DEAN HENRY, ' e President
PAMELA D.O. LARSON
RICHARD L. LAR ' N
i%
FRANCES A. LARSON
RICHARD C. LARSON
SHARON Y. ,LARSON
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is between the ESTATE OF M. W. LOTTO and
MARJONIE L. LOTTO, a single person , ( "Seller" ) and LINCOLN PROPERTY
COMPANY N. C . , INC . , ( "Purchaser") , and is made of the purpose of
purchase and sale of the following described real property .
In consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter
made , the parties agree as follows :
1 . Description of Property: Purchaser agrees to purchase
from seller , and Seller agrees to sell unto Purchaser , the following
described real property commonly known as unimproved property in
1O400 block of Lake Washington Boulevard , Renton , King County ,
Washington , and referred to in this Agreement as "the premises" :
Lots 357 and 358 , C. D. Hillman ' s Lake Washington
Garden of Eden , Division No . 5 , situate in King
County , Washington .
Purchaser hereby authorizes the insertion over his signature of the
correct legal description of the above-designated property if
unava: lable at time of signing , or to correct the legal description
previously entered if erroneous or incomplete .
2 . Earnest Money : Purchaser hereby deposits Five Thousand
Dollars ( $5 , 000 . 00) in the form of a promissory note , as earnest
money which shall be held by Warren & Kellogg , P. S. , Attorneys for
the Seller , for the benefit of the parties , receipt of which is
acknowledged by Seller .
3. Purchase Price : The purchase price of the property shall
4. 1 Purchase Price : The condition mentioned in Paragraph 3
above relating to the determination of the purchase price . In the
event of the termination of this Agreement at the option of Seller
as a result of the failure of this condition , then the earnest money
and all other deposits paid by Purchaser to Seller shall be refunded
to Purchaser .
4 . 2 Development Investigation : Approval by Purchasers within
thirty ( 30) days of this Agreement of preliminary development
investigations , which shall include a survey of the premises in
order to ascertain and fix the purchase price . Such investigations
shall be at the Purchaser ' s expense . Purchaser shall be given
access to the property to conduct all necessary engineering and
other investigative studies . In the event that the Purchaser elects
not to proceed with the purchase of the property as a result of the
investigations , then Purchaser shall notify the Seller in writing of
suchdecision , and the earnest money deposited herein shall be
refunded to Purchaser and this Agreement shall be null and void .
Purchaser further agrees in such event to transmit to the Sellers
all of the studies , including but not limited to , engineering and
soils investigations , and survey, relating to the premises and to
the adjacent parcels of real estate owned by Cook and the driving
range , at no expense to the Seller . In the event that the Purchaser
fails to notify the Sellers of Purchaser ' s election not to proceed
prior to the expiration of thirty ( 30) days from the date of this
Agreement , then Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have
furnish and deliver to Purchaser a WLTA standard form policy of
title insurance , and as soon as practicable prior to closing , a
preliminary commitment therefor issued by Transamerica Title
Insurance Company. The parties authorize the closing agent to apply
for such title insurance upon the removal of all contingencies to
this transaction . Seller agrees to assume any cancellation fee for
the respective commitments or policies . The title policy to be
issued shall contain no exceptions other than those provided in this
standard form plus the encumbrances or defects noted in this
paragraph . If title is not so insurable as above provided and
cannol, be made so insurable by the termination date set forth
herein , this Agreement shall be terminated .
6 . Conveyance : Transfer of Seller ' s interest in the
premises shall be by Statutory Warranty Deed .
7. Prorations : Taxes for the current year , rents ,
insurnce , interest , mortgage reserves , water and other utilities
constituting liens on the property shall be prorated as of date of
closing .
8. Closing : This purchase shall be closed in the office of
Transamerica Title Insurance Company , Bellevue office , within 30
days after removal of all contingencies unless extended pursuant to
this paragraph . The parties will deposit in escrow with the closing
agent all instruments and moneys necessary to complete this purchase
in accordance with this Agreement . The cost of escrow shall be paid
one-half ( 1/2 ) each by the parties . If for any reason the Purchaser
10 . Condition of Property : The Purchaser agrees to accept
the premises in their present condition on the terms noted herein .
Seller warrants that to the best of its knowledge the premises and
the improvements thereon do not materially violate the applicable
building or zoning regulations and that they are unaware of any
material defect in the premises or improvements thereon .
11 . Default : The parties agree that it would be difficult to
determine damages in the event Purchaser fails to perform its
obligations hereunder . Therefore , upon removal of all contingencies
and upon tender of full performance by Seller , if Purchaser fails to
perform its obligation under this Agreement then the forfeiture of
the earnest money and other deposits for extension of the closing as
liquidated damages shall be the sole remedy available to Seller .
Seller expressly waives all other remedies , including the right to
sue fcr specific performance .
12 . Miscellaneous : Notices given under this Agreement shall
be in writing and shall be delivered personally with written receipt
therefor , or sent by certified mail , return receipt requested , to
the fcllowing addresses :
Seller :
c/o Daniel Kellogg
Attorney at Law
P. 0. Box 626
100 South Second Street
Renton , WA 98057
Piirnh 7 cor •
The commission shall be divided equally between Century 21 Homeco
Realtcrs , as listing agent , and Wallace and Wheeler , Inc . , as
selling agent . In the event that this transaction shhall fail to
close for any reason , then no commission shall be due under this
Paragraph . The provisions of this paragraph are accepted by the
realtors as evidenced by the execution of this Agreement below.
Dated : May 1981 .
Seller : Purchaser :
ESTATE OF M. W. LOTTO LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N. C . ,
INC.
By //By
JDRI L. LO
f/lG,
W. DEAN HENRY,
Pers3na Representative Vice-President
27.
MA JO E L. L TTO , individually
Listin ; Agent : Selling Agent :
CENTUR ( 21 HOMECO, INC . WALLACE AND WHEELER , INC .
By By. , ,// //L!•. /// /Z(Cit 7!-
BEGINNING
OF FILE
ii.-
f" fdOFR MED
FILE TITLE
If100 - 81
it4 icttejt;
swim /
71(X rooJ Car-I
i53-S000
61s. mar;//
ao%ehs&--
X.
1 ' ,
1.r $ t
4‘
Kr x
pra.,
h 44t*
vor
1
Applicant LTNCOTN PROPERTY
File No. R-100-81
Project Name
Property Location Lake Washington Blvd. No. , north of
North Park Drive
HEARING EXAMINER: Date
Recommendation
Req./Rec. Date Received Date Response
Appeal - Date Received
Council Approval - Date
Ordinance/Resolution # Date
Mylar to County for Recording
Mylar Recording #
Remarks: Building and Zoning letter attached.
No further action needed.
OF R ,/
1/
CD° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR
Z o
09 co
MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
09gT
D SEP-C '°
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
MEMORANDUM
September 10, 1984
TO: Maxine Motor, City Clerk
FROM: Jeanette Samek, Zoning Research Technician
SUBJECT: Transmittal of Closed File, R-100-81
The applicant, Lincoln Properties, has resubmitted their rezone
application. Therefore, I am transmitting this file to your
office for placement with the permanent records.
JS/dm
f 0
June 3, 1982
CITY OF RENTON
Mr. Roger J. Blaylock JUN - 4 1982
Zoning Administrator
Building & Zoning Department
BUILOING/ZONiNGD:±FT.City of Renton
Munidpal Building
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, WA 98055
RE: LAKESIDE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND REZONE
Dear Roger:
Pursuant to our meeting of this date with you and Ron Nelson , please be
advised that Lincoln Property Company is hereby requesting that the
Environmental Review Committee reconsider its previous issuance of the
Declaration of Significance for our Lakeside project.
We believe that there are several reasons why the committee should
recorsider its determination and issue a Declaration of Nonsignificance.
1 . The primary underlying reason expressed by the committee for
its prior decision was that of "public disclosure". Under-
standably, the committee wishes to allow the opportunity for
public input on important issues, especially those pertaining
to design sensitivity and asthetics. We agree that interested
parties should indeed have such an opportunity for input.
However, during the rezoning of the property there will be one
or more public hearings whereby such a forum will be available.
Moreover, interested parties can be invited to a "courtesy
hearing" prior to the hearing of the rezone. Such a courtesy
hearing should be of record and would require the attendance of
the developer and the developer's consultants in order to respond
to any and all questions brought up by those in attendance. While
this procedure may take two to three weeks in order the make the
arrangements and give proper notice, this is in contrast to an
Environmental Impact Statement which would take approximately five
to six months.
We believe that this approach would show a sensitivity to the
timing and needs of the landowners and developer while, at the
same time, giving the citizens an opportunity to be heard,
thereby satisfying full disclosure requirements.
wearily PROPER; +L amPana n.e., MC. THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 98004 206-455-481 3
Page 2 June 3, 1982
s < "Mr. Roger J. Blayloci`
2. Other areas of concern previously expressed by the Environmental
Review Committee, namely traffic, utilities , slopes and soils,
have been previously addressed in studies submitted to the commit-
tee. It is our understanding that non, of the facts set forth in
the studies presented a significant adverse environmental effect
which would necessitate the requirement of an Environmental Impact
Statement.
3. As you have suggested, it would be reasonable for the committee to
identify any specific areas where mitigating measures might be appro-
priate so that the developer could adhere to same.
As the aforegoing discussion suggests, we believe that the ERC has been
presented with sufficient technical information, a willingness to cooper-
ate in the identification and implementation of mitigating measures, and
alternatives for gathering additional citizen input so that an Environmental
Impact Statement should not be necessary on the facts. If, however, the ERC
were still to determine that a Declaration of Significance is in order, then
we wculd request that the developer be permitted to complete an EIS which is
a document independent of any EIS which may be required for the Lake Terrace
Mobile Home Park. There are a number of reasons for taking this approach.
1 . Lincoln Property Company is a developer and will seek to rezone
the property, obtain financing and commence with the construction
of a residential project on the site. This will take place in the
fairly short term. However, the Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park is
a group of investors who are not developers and have no clear cut
intention of pursuing a specific development scheme within the near
future. Rather, they are seeking to rezone property which they
already own so that its value will be enhanced thereby. Thus , the
the respective proponents' timing and objectives are highly dissimilar.
The public policy issues relative to the displacement of long term
residents at an established mobile home park will be very signifi-
cant. In view of the fact that our development will involve the
voluntary displacement of an existing business (the driving range) ,
there will be no public policy issues in this very sensitive area.
A case in point cited by you and Ron Nelson was the Hub Trailer Park
matter which resulted in significant media coverage and time delays
due to litigation. We do not believe it would be equitable to expose
our development plans to the similar issues which will surround the
Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park.
Roger , will you please present these matters to the Environmental Review
Committee for its consideration at their next meeting. Please emphasize
the fact that it is our desire to seek a sensitive and equitable resolution
of thus matters at hand.
Yours truly,
Scott B. Springer
SBS:co
cc: Bruce Larson Rick Acton Tom Phinney
Kathleen Mohseni Paul Zane Roger Lewis
T7-jTn2
CITY®F RC,VTON
Ed IF
MAR 2 5 1982
March 24, 1982
BUILDING/ZONING DEPT.
Mr. Steve Monson, Asst. Planner
City of Renton
Zoning Department
Municipal Building
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, WA 98055
RE: LAKESIDE REZONE APPLICATION
Dear Steve:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation of this date, please be advised
that Lincoln Property Company is hereby withdrawing its Application for
Rezone on the above project.
Briefly stated, we are withdrawing the application because of the City's
insistence upon a joint Environmental Impact Statement in conjunction
with the mobile home park to the North of our project. We believe that
such a requirement would prejudice our environmental review process and
the expeditious processing of our Rezone Application as well .
If, for any reason, the City determines that concurrent but separate
Environmental Impact Statements would be acceptable please don't hesi-
tate to let me know.
Very trul yours ,
Scott B. Springer
SBS:co
cc: Estate of M. W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lotto
c/o Mr. Daniel Kellogg
Ms. Anna Phinney - c/o Mr. Roger I. Lewis
Mr. Bruce Larson
Iiincabn PROPERTY company n.c., mc, THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 98004 206-455-481 3
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND ZONING
EIS CONSULTANT SERVICES
The Renton Building and Zoning Department will consider Letters of
Interest and a Statement of Qualifications from consulting firms
interested in providing environmental consulting services for the
following project:
LAKE TERRACE MOBILE HOME PARK REZONE, R-090-81
LINCOLN PROPERTIES REZONE, R-100-81
This project involves the preparation of a draft environmental impact
statement that concentrates on the issues of traffic, soils, public
services, and affect on adjacent residential and public uses for a
combined 21.5 acre rezone, which could ultimately allow a development
of 645 multiple family dwelling units.
Selection of a consultant will be based on interviews with the best
qualified firms. Letters of Interest should clearly indicate present
capabilities and past experience in projects of similar scope and
magnitude. Supporting materials such as brochures and photos are not
required.
Letters of Interest should be mailed to Zoning Administrator, Renton
Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055.
Cut off date for receipt of this material is March 5, 1982. Additional
information may be obtained from the Zoning Administrator at 235-2550.
The City of Renton is an equal employment opportunity employer. In-
volvement of minority business enterprises will be one of the criteria
used in consultant selection.
Ro er J, Blayladk
Zoning Administrator
Published: February 23, 1982
Date circulated :/ //J/Si Comments due : 41/ 87/9,
ENVIRONWENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE11 SHEET
ECF - /09 -
APPLICATION No (s ) . Rr,C0'13j
PROPONENT : LiAcdsi fhper 41'Q TaKy
PROJECT TITLE :
Brief Description of Project : lteflie tiore261/1e .SialeeMM
ir,,6 "
3 G 'ufy to m offige r dev.hsp ed-ebti f$6 rar.4s
LOCATION :E.SideOil. WasAi1tg7O i Bliti /r• sot.fAOf I..ZS tbf7
SITE AREA : l -jacre s BUILDING AREA (gross )
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : y-
3 ) Water & water courses : y/
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise : 1/
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 :
15 ) Energy :
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health : v
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
e
0. 0,,,.a ,i .y.
o..• Cr,[.... .
4 7&t &..ti-.J,
Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information
Reviewed by : {.tear-
t
Date :
FORM: ERC-06
1
Revision 3/1981 WNW
RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Application:_2DME A 10010 A' w f LLest.rez_ [e_al l e_fA "
6"!_i_o___A!!_a___Ar47ctivre.ntubiAkfasotitydftelebid-40860
Location :Lzitie dft L•... /AutitestiQ_etVd EV. S&PJ it 7 V 64
Applicant :_
TO :Public Works Department
Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:AA
Traffic Eng. Division
SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //s`/ 9fUtilitiesEng. Division
ire Department
Parks Department
Building Department
Police Department
Others:
COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN
WRTTINGG. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON
4(2 4
RLVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
Approved (rApproved with Conditions Not Approved
DATE:
Signature of Director r Aut rized Representative
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
Approved ApprJved with Conditions fl Not Approved
DATE:
S ;gnature of Director or Authorized representative
Revision 3/1981 / f///49,
RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Application: PrZ i CR' 6 ' ; e t• ecr.
P-10 "6" io A3
Location: E.Side df L...leA_ife .4.18lvd•N. soot-Aire ay ask
Applicant:_LMo4 A
Public Works Department
Eriiittring Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: l.1//p/
rj•Wrraffic Eng. Division
SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //i/6i
Utilities Eng. Division
Fire Department
Parks Department
Building Department
Police Department
Others:
COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN
WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON
47lal4l411/
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ne/41, ,F ITC 1GIN E EIzIIL
Approved [I-Approved with Conditions Not Approved
w t fv 131id , -road LJ J 48jace. 4
r e, .a.r- +Nr c_,v r b v e r 6
j
5 c e IIt J''
a j( 9 ',, ,z r E C „tiff igk
V
l tit S4"a 'd
4 I :se e aid-a wctie+n.±',
c-Azvv. 7 DATE: / h'510
Signature of Director or Authorized Represese tGr
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
Approved ['Approved with Conditions ['Not Approved
DATE:
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
1,04.,%;%,
t,is vIrr 44%;1?, .5 35A.c..,... (3\- srv,t3 .146. (le'''.lk%-, —5k%)
s
aVt6 ra9k
i1 es,41,A40\4"1VOSha."11.%* F.+. tli• "Z" ''Ir %Siri
141 f4 IbtiVAZ •i k N.tkek*ft rek4V11 . .
Ntos; .t
1
REZONE DEVELOPMENT
THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY
Due to the poor projected traffic service levels at the following
critical locations, the Traffic Engineering Division requests that
funding for the following traffic improvements be provided to improve
traffic conditions as follows to accommodate the projected growth by
the new development:
1 . Lake Washington Blvd. between Park Drive and Houser Way --
provide 15 percent of the construction funds to widen 800
linear feet of Lake Washington Blvd. at its approach to
the intersection of North Park Drive. Width of roadway
widening would require approximately 9 to 10 feet.
2. Provide 15 percent of the funds to update the traffic signal
control at the intersection of Lake Washington Blvd. and
North Park Drive.
3. Provide total cost of installing a center lane left-turn
opposite the south entrance to the Lakeside site.
4. Provide 6% of the cost for improving the intersection of
Burnett Ave. North and Lake Washington Blvd. to accommodate
left turn cross traffic southbound toward the proposed
development.
Date circulated :AA/!J/M Comments due : /?/Isig'
ENIVIRONMENITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
ECF - /09 - ft/
APPLICATION No (s ) . Rqao—ral
PROPONENT : Lo',Icdfrt P. erly iptipasy
PROJECT TITLE : RE24*AlC
Brief Description of Project : RefUesf re26ae $i4e'QneM ram/ ' "
40 R•3 461-f't ivre inutiege devvlepai. i* f 186 n:fs
LOCATION :t,Sj4'Cif 1• WatAilibriB/ I. Nsa fitbf N..Zytbir7
SITE AREA : { "acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 'mil
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :
3 ) Water & water courses : r
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise : l/
7 ) Light & glare :
8 ) Land Use ; north :
east :
south :
west :
Land use conflicts :
View obstruction :
7
9 ) Natural resources :
10 ) Risk of upset : I
11 ) Population/Employment :
12 ) Number of Dwellings :
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : I TYi E d
traffic impacts T -- r W4v+ S -lata 41,417a.. 1-.o '
P w crL >art- w -L -r n 1 e--a.b S S' f;5 0
14 ) Public services :
15 ) Energy :
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health : v`
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information
Reviewed by : t'' I:L T G rd l itle : j7,-=c i a i •5
Date : / //6
t
e j
FORM: ERC-06
Revision 3/1981 /42J'//e9/
REN-ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Application:_ t tgLr Cam_zoote SI'/efee
Sti_v sw_ 3 4eiw. tobi'j(e f it ' eni ii
Location : of L,.ifeey4 8lve . xi&SAcet N. V b.S
Applicant :_4l cdr_-e,O ,r ----- - ------------7
Pub c Works Department
Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:la/44P/
Traffic Eng. Division s/SiSCHEDULEDNEARINGDATE:
Utilities Eng. Division
U Fire Department
Parks Department
Building Department
Police Department
Others: -
COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN
WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
Approved .0 Approved with Conditions Not Approved
et.1- 5
1
3 A#1, zi-c iy } s "' „e et--
wvfo W C. P:43 Yam- a <iC o'er .r./ G r4S lip Q?/v.Q
w•, - se C«.1 04 a,/b ) op/
w-s cK(o e 9". ox Jet wis s
3/ P-e 7 ATE:
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION :
Approved ['Approved with Conditions n Not Approved
p
1, t., S,'-tL e•.._ H-t Irk'
DATE: t2../<s/
Signature of Di ctor or Author z Representative
Revision 3/1981 A uilly
RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Application: Pexi . t .._.jQQ.1I qptuf e_z_o _e Sty/e cr& 1
Ali' 1_1_6 3____Ar4).dvr_entalksiettlittlystel 41._ te.J(96
Location : Liyek.ce 4.-/ e 1ly• xdoc, ete Avavaus
Applicant :_ r_ /rofrer .._ Cif",n ---
ID:Public Works Department
Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:1///4/
Fl]Traffic Eng. Division
SCHEDULED NEARING DATE:
Utilities Eng. Division
Fire Department
Parks Department
ph. ing 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
RLvIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POT,TCE
Approved [ Approved with Conditions [ Not Approved
The police dept. can not handle the increased calls that this development will
generate. However if the complex is allowed to continue then the following would
be necessary so that the police could respond without having to make a major cut
in response time to other parts of the city.
1) All units equiped with burglar alarms, security doors , windows & locks.
2) Lk. Wash. Blvd. be increased in width to five lanes from the complex to
Park Dr. No. w/out this no emergency equip could respond during Boeing rush hail]
DATE:
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
3) Parking_lots have security lighting- & lights_be so positioned that thy are on _
the outside edges of-the-parking--lot--shining-inward.
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
Approved Approved with Conditions O Not Approved
4) During construction hours of work would be: Mon. thru. Fri. 0700--1800 hrs.
No work on Sat. or Sun.
5) No stero or other loud electronic equip. to be allowed on the site. Workmen
now try & play the music louder than the skilsaw & then we get calls.
6) $3, 000 street cleaning bond be posted prior to any site preparation, or haulinc_
of fill material in or out of site.
DATE:
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
7) parking lot & driveways be paved prior to the building of any units so
workers do not track d o to roadway, adjoining streets be kept clean
at ail times.
Lt. D.R.sson 12/15/81
Revision 3/1981 /42J11/49/
RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Applicati on : UICLEYfZ" /0_0700 !f.LC
1/5_?_6_Arn_a_iorer_
i Cithirg.nioRojellatilycieylitopme"teisno
Location :L s,*Qf e_•.4*thins Net N. SI, tet N. V 6.S
Applica.it : inatl_erpfrerirastAdi ny
Publ i c Works Department
ElEn. 'neering SCHEDULED ERC DATE:la/400
pi affic Eng. Division
SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //SAWdrAUtilitiesEng. Division
BI Firt Department
Parks Department
Q 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
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
D Approved Ipproved with Conditions (] Not Approved
ALJ 'JZ/
d/ l L , T g? iS 4 C SS ,ec5-d cv e-r3,
frZat4grAio
DATE: /.2 44/Signatu - o 'Director or Author're• Representative
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: UT/t-/TY
Approved [ pr.ved with Conditions fNot Approved
SO REVERSE 5/IDA
jg..._DATE:j2 --_/¢
S ;gnature of Direct r or Authorized Representative
AMA's,'uALQ 1.._OLSE
UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO 2'41•0/
LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WATER
LATE COMERS AGREEMENT - SEWER NO
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • WATER Comm. PAC. roNN• CA*.
SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • SEWER
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - WATER istio
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - SLIVER vo
APPROVED WATER PLAN ES ,
APPROVED SEWER PLAN
APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS
BY FIRE DEPT. PS
FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS yEs
Date circulated :L41JJM8/Comments due : /cf 1S/9'
E\IVIRO\HE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
E C F - /08 - 8i
APPLICATION No (s ) . R-IQ0-131
PROPONENT : Liircdpi errerIfy OVAItk
PROJECT TITLE : RE2dAtE
Brief Description of Project : Ref uestlarezewesif e' ,'i P-/ ett6
4o R•3 iCarfuivre n fi f'i lr develvmeated /96 can 4.c
LOCATION :6'.gat.tiF . Wdtlli R* '1 B/ I• ' SOif of N.2 t/16bar7f
SITE AREA : { 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) ""'
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : -+
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :
3 ) Water & water courses :
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise :
7 ) Light & glare :
8 ) Land Use ; north :
east :
south :
west :
Land use conflicts :
View obstruction :
9 ) Natural resources :
10 ) Risk of upset :
11 ) Population/Employment :
12 ) Number of Dwellings :
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) :
traffic impacts :
14 ) Public services : xxxx
15 ) Energy :
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health :
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
The police dept. is currently operating at capacity and
can not continue to absorb the calls for service that come with major
developments without cutting back on services.
Recommendation : DNSI DOS xxxx More Information
Reviewed by : Lt‘ . Persson title :
Date : 12/15/81
FORM: ERC-06
Date circulated :/ L/l//S/Comments due : /?f Jj /9/
EKVIROXHE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
ECF - /09 - R/
APPLICATION No (s ) . R lQo ff
PROPONENT ; LjIirdL roioer 64Nye N
I y
PROJECT TITLE : P&2dAJ'E
Brief Description of Project : Refuestlereeewesileerer" P. I . 6
4, R`3 r'FU t o IM liwitir i L i ty deveI t p/'M P*n( 196"r
LOCATION : .5%efdef 1. WatAjR 'i if so bE 4'tST
SITE AREA : f 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) "'r
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :ye
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :
3 ) Water & water courses : 1'
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise : ve
7 ) Light & glare :
8 ) Land Use ; north :
east :
south :
west :
Land use conflicts :
View obstruction :
9 ) Natural resources : I
10 ) Risk of upset : ye
11 ) Population/Employment :
12 ) Number of Dwellings :
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) :
traffic impacts :
l
14 ) Public services : I v
15 ) Energy : t/
16 ) Utilities : V
17 ) Human health : of
18 ) Aesthetics : V(
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation : NSI DOS More Information
Reviewed by :g Title : aralry
Date : DECiitiASER AL 982
FORM: ERC-06
Date circulated :/ /// Y Comments due : /?/457/9/
EXVIROXME\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
ECF - /09 - 8/
APPLICATION No (s ) . R-100.-I31
PROPONENT : LaAirdpL gap early ooa.1y
PROJECT TITLE : &2Q//E
Brief Description of Project : Ref esfferezeae _Sife Ml'+/
r,I 6 "
4D k 3 rfvuute m te'FGo d, elevehommtek 196brafs
LOCATION :E.sae Q'F1. WAtAi SDtolL teE 1/.2yft&rs7f
11. 11SITEAREA :1 ,CreS BUILDING AREA (gross ) '1'
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : ewe
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 : indb;/eesi.o
east : liar
south : MOS-44y U 'erD._` pf
west : `. .,_Ik#l [ ,(X l'1*r k
Land use conflicts :
View obstruction :
9 ) Natural resources :
10 ) Risk of upset :
11 ) Population/Employment :
J
12 ) Number of Dwellings :
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : 113s4-,3r
traffic impacts :
14 ) Public services : I
15 ) Energy :
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health :
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information_
Reviewed by :,,AL 1 1 i t 1 e : lJr, 1-//7/I eI—
Date : 0-lNNig/
FORM: ERC-06
Date circulated :0L/11/R Comments due : /pali "/9i
E\VIROXHE\'TAL CHECKLIST REVIEII SHEET
ECF - /Dg - y
APPLICATION No (s ) . R—/00—e/
PROPONENT : Ls,icc6i ti• a CQMpQyM
PROJECT TITLE : RE2e)AtE
limy
Brief Description of Project : Retuesfferezewexile et / • 6
41112afarfiduzLnafige'Gouty developotemfet !86tiAi4.c
LOCATION ,sideoi . Las CAij 1D,t BARI #SOto14of N.2 gitto.$31
4 eaSITEAREA : " t,Cres BUILDING AREA (gross ) .".
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :
3 ) Water & water courses :
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise :
7 ) Light & glare :
8 ) Land Use ; north :
east :
south :
west :
Land use conflicts : 7
View obstruction :obstruction :
9 ) Natural resources :
10 ) Risk of upset : x
11 ) Population/Employment :
12 ) Number of Dwellings : x
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) :
traffic impacts :
14 ) Public services : I
Energy : 15
l
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health :
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation : ' DNSI DOS More Information_
Reviewed by : eJ/ 6- 1 itle : j 017
Date :
FORM: ERC-06
Date circulated :i //J/$/Comments due : / fis/9/
E1 6UIR0XHE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
E C F - /08 - RI
APPLICATION No (s ) . R",t04,"13f
PROPONENT : LiArdP ProJer7ewOMy,any
PROJECT TITLE : Rig24144,E
J
Brief Description of Project : RetueS( larezellesile4LIA "./ f,"6''
o R-3 4 Glut,dev Ibpw i* iE /96 Uri;fs
LOCATION :6.6;40e(L, kiatAil,//loci &VI #SDOA De 1/.gtare
SITE AREA : 9a,Crs BUILDING AREA (gross ) `"+
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : •r
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality :
3 ) Water & water courses : t
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise :
7 ) Light & glare :
8 ) Land Use ; north :
east :
south :
west :
Land use conflicts :
View obstruction :
i
9 ) Natural resources : t/
10 ) Risk of upset :
11 ) Population/Employment :
12 ) Number of Dwellings : I
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) :
traffic impacts :
14 ) Public services : I
15 ) Energy : t
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health :
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation :
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation : DNSI x DOS More InformationC
Reviewed by : litle :
Date
FORM: ERC-06
Date circulated :`p&11J/I Comments due : /?/js/8,
ERVIR0I HENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
ECF - /l - IV
APPLICATION No (s ) . R-Ioo-cal
PROPONENT : Liiiirdh gopter eO QM
7'y
PROJECT TITLE : RE2(2doe
Brief Description of Project : Ref yeti'lare hRen,4e MA or'I 6 "
40 R-3.Ceir folur e malt*'Goal dmorel ebifef /96, .-fs
LOCATION :e.Sae Coif 1, Wit tAiilAiln B/j. Al SDbTAeof N2 /I J7
SITE AREA : f 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 'mm+
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes :
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : X
3 ) Wat"er & water courses :
4 ) Plant life :
5 ) Animal life :
6 ) Noise :
l/
7 ) Light & glare : t./
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 : i
T
15 ) Energy : 1
16 ) Utilities :
17 ) Human health : f
18 ) Aesthetics :
19 ) Recreation : f
20 ) Archeology/history :
COMMENTS :
Recommendation :6fl SI / DOS ^ More Information_
I
Reviewed by : r-; -- T— o it l e : = 7e/= 54.40 zA
Date : /_J/y///
FORM: ERC-06
Revision 3/1981 ARAtiPs'
RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
Application:_2 ,Y QQ' j f vettmZa/le St• ec
A__j_f__ 6_'
am
Locaticn: i L.,41AttiI Net LLhi el(lZv1
App 1 i cant :_ mar Dp_pri - __an&tut_
IIl:Public Works Department
Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: / //O/
Traffic Eng. Division tiSCHEDULEDHEARINGDATE:
Utilities Eng. Division
Fire Department
i arks 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
4-42941
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: -L1
j Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved
DATE: 1/
Siyna of Director or uthorized Representative
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION:
A roved ['Approved with Conditions IPpppNotApproved
DATE:
S ;gnature of Director or Authorized Representative
OF RA,A
o © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
riL RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR
o09 co
MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
o9,4 ft
SEPIE
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
March 12 , 1982
Jon Potter
R. W. Thorpe & Associates
815 Seattle Tower
Seattle, Washington 98101
RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE
TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES
Dear Mr. Potter:
The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews
for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule.
In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must
be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your
presentation fills the time allocated.
Sincerely,
9:—.86.1theARogerJ. Blaylock
Zoning Administrator
RJB:ci
OF I
A.
BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTORma20
O MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
O44>. SEP E,1%
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
March 12 , 1982
Tom Hauger
Triad Associates
11415 N.E. 128th Street
Kirkland, Washington 98033
RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE
TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES
Dear Mr. Hauger:
The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews
for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule.
In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must
be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your
presentation fills the time allocated.
Sincerely,
t?ell.Ae.. • AI We
Roger J. Blaylock
Zoning Administrator
RJB:cl
OF R4,4, II
oy BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR
MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
0,
94,
SEP1E.
O
P
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
March 12 , 1982
William Derry
Wilsey & Ham
Central Park Building
1980 112th Avenue N.E.
Bellevue; Washington 98004
RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE
TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES
Dear Mr. Derry:
The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews
for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule.
In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must
be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your
presentation fills the time allocated.
Sincerely,
Ccrelede .-8(.4.1,Loc.
Roger J. Blaylock
Zoning Administrator
RJB:cl
OF RA,
y 4 ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR0
09 co
MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
Ao9
TFD SEP1Gt,10
BARBARA V. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
March 12 , 1982
Lyn Keenan
Sea Engineers/Planners
33811 9th Avenue South
Federal Way, Washington 98003
RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE
TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES
Dear Mr. Keenan:
The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews
for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule.
In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must
be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your
presentation fills the time allocated.
Sincerely,
Ver1/2.4q.:-BLett
Roger J. Blaylock
Zoning Administrator
RJB:cl
OF R4,
BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR
O MUNICIPAL BUILCING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-254090o•
0,
9gTD SEP1 ;
3
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
March 12 , 1982
John E. Anthony
Ch2M Hill
1500 114th Avenue S.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98004
RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE
TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES
Dear Mr. Anthony:
The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews
for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule.
In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must
be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your
presentation fills the time allocated.
Sincerely,
e. Wtc
Roger J. Blayloc
Zoning Administrator
RJB:cl
OF
y © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
aL
RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR
UNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540
P
94T O SEPS• February 19, 1982
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
Lyn Keenan
SEA, Engineers & Planners
33811 9th Avenue South
Federal Way, Washington 98003
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS - DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT PREPARATION
Dear Mr. Keenan:
You are invited to present a proposal for the provision of Environmental Consulting
Services in connection with the following rezone applications:
1) Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park
T" to R-3 (12.5 acres)
2) Lincoln Properties
G" to R-3 (9.0 acres)
We have supplied herewith a copy of the Scope of Work and the procedure established
under Resolution No. 2186 of the City of Renton. Letters of Interest should be mailed
to:
Zoning Administrator
Renton Municipal Building
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, Washington 98055
The cut-off date for receipt of this material is 5:00 p.m., Friday, March 5, 1982.
Additional information may be obtained from Roger Blaylock at 235-2550.
Sincerely,
Roger J. Blaylock
Zoning Administrator
RJB:cl
Enclosure
Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING ss.
G i.nx y- .Rab.aga being first duly sworn on
oath,deposes and says that
she
is the
chief clerk
of
THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(6)times a Public Noticeweek.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, ECF-100-81)
printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper Application for Shoreline '
published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is Management Substantial
now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the Development Permit to al-
aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Daily Record low construction of mechan-
Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior ical boat lift which sets on
Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, lake bottom(Lake Washing-
ton)adjacent to 75'dock at a
Washington.That the annexed is a Notice or E vjronmgn al single family residence, file
SM-097-81; property lo-
Determination R6904 cated at 3 71 7 Lake
Washington Boulevard
North.
The Environmental Re-
as it was published in regular issues(and view Committee (ERC) has
not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period also issued a final declara-
tion of significance for the
following project:
LINCOLN PROPERTY
of consecutive issues,commencing on the NOTICE OF ECF-108-81)
ENVIRONMENTAL Application for rezone
11 fihday of January DETERMINATION from P-1 and G to R-3 to
19 82 ,and ending the ENVIRONMENTAL allow future multiple family
REVIEW COMMITTEE development of 186 units,
RENTON,WASHINGTON file R-100-81; property lo-
The Environmental Re- cated on the east side of
day of 19 both dates view Committee (ERC) has Lake Washington Boulevard
inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- issued a final declaration of North south of North 24th
scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee non-significance for the fol- Street.
lowing projects: Further information re-
27 0(( CITY OF RENTON(ECF- garding these actions is avchargedfortheforegoingpublicationisthesumof $ • , 'Cvhich
099-81) ailable in the Building and
has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the Application for Shoreline Zoning Department,first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent
insertion. Management Substantial Municipal Building, Renton,
Development Permit to al- Washington,235-2550.Any
low construction of altera- appeal of ERC action must
ing
to and
Cedar
f park- be file withy
th Hearing
ing on the Cedar River Trail Examiner by January 25,
adjacent to Riverside Drive 1982.
ch aF i3 erk near the mouth of the Cedar Published in the Daily Re-
River,file SM-096-81.cord Chronicle January 1 1,
th
UNGER, CHARLES R. 1982. R6904
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of
January 82
19
Notary Public in and f the State of Washington,
resi ing at Mgt King County.
Federal 'way
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
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:
CITY OF RENTON (ECF-099-81)
Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit
to allow construction of alterations to and paving of parking on the
Cedar River Trail adjacent to Riverside Drive near the mouth of the
Cedar River, file SM-096-81.
UNGER, CHARLES R. (ECF-100-81)
Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit to
allow construction of mechanical boat lift which sets on lake bottom
Lake Washington) adjacent to 75' dock at a single family residence,
file SM-097-81; property located at 3717 Lake Washington Boulevard
North.
The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has also issued a final declaration
of significance for the following project:
LINCOLN PROPERTY (ECF-108-81)
Application for rezone from P-1 and G to R-3 to allow future multiple
family development of 186 units, file R-100-81; property located on
the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard North south of North 24th
Street.
Further information regarding these actions is available in the Building and
Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any
appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by January 25,
1982.
Published: January 11, 1982
1
1
NOTICE
ENVIRONMENTAL
DECLARAT I O N
PROPOSED ACTION REQUEST TO RF7ONF SITF FROM P-1 & G To R-3
FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF 186 MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS
GENERAL LOCATION AND OR ADDRESS
EAST SIDE OF LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD , N . , SOUTH OF N . 24TH STREET
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED
PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL
ACTION.
THE CITY OF RENTO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
44COMMITTEE [ E.R.C. AS DETERMINED THAT THE
PROPOSED ACTION, DOES pDOES NOT, HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON-
MENT.
AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, ILL
WILL NOT, BE REQUIRED.
AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY
BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER
BY 5:00 P.M., JANUARY 25, 1982
FOR FURTHEI- INFORMATION
CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
235-2550
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE
WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
mac
FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE
Application No(s) : R-100-81
Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-108-81
Description of Proposal: Request to rezone site from
P-1 & G to R-3 for future
development of 186 multiple
family units.
Proponent: Lincoln Property
Location of Proposal:East side of Lake Washington
Blvd. N. , south of N. 24th
Street.
Lead Agency: Building & Zoning Department
This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on December 30, 1981 ,
following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Building
Zoning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Ronald
Nelson, Richard Houghton, David Clemens, James Matthew, Roger
Blaylock, Steve Munson and Gary Norris.
Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings
of the ERC on application ECF-108-81 are the following:
1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by:
Steve Munson DATED: December 14 , 1981
2) Applications : R-100-81
3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance:
Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Engineering
Division, Building Department, and Design Engineering
Division.
Recommendations for a declaration of significance:
Police Department and Zoning Administration.
More information: Fire Department and Parks & Recreation
Department.
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 declaration of environmental significance:
The proposal will have major impacts upon (1 ) topography,
2) drainage, (3) noise, (4) population and employment, (5)
number of dwellings, (6) traffic, (7) utilities, and (8)
recreation.
Signatures :
7
I
irl 100431te t ill<
7
Ro al G. Nelson vid R. Clemens
Building Official Policy Development Director
PR ' hit/HoU hton
blic Works Directo
DATE OF PUBLICATION: January 11 , 1982
EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: January 25, 1982
Date circulate December 11 , 1981 Comm......s due :
December 15, 1981
ENVIRO!WME TAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET
ECF - 108_ 81
APPLICATION No(s) . R-100-81
PROPONENT : Lincoln Property
PROJECT TITLE : Rezone
Brief Description of Project : Request to rezone site from P-1 & G
to R-3 for future development of 186 multiple family units.
LOCATION : East side of Lake Washington Blvd N. , south of N. 24th Street.
SITE AREA : + 9. 0 acres BUILDING AREA (gross)
DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) :
IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE
INFO
1 ) Topographic changes : X
2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : X
3 ) Water & water courses : DRAINAGE
4 ) Plant life : X
5 ) Animal life : X
6 ) Noise : X
7 ) Light & glare : X
8 ) Land Use ; north : Mobile Home Park
east :I-405
south : Mostly undeveloped
west : Lake Washington Beach Park
Land use conflicts : X
View obstruction : POSSIBLE
9 ) Natural resources : X
10 ) Risk of upset : X
11 ) Population/Employment : X
12 ) Number of Dwellings : X*
13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : 1135 average daily trips
traffic impacts : Lake w„hjngtnn Blvd, Park N. 405
14 ) Public services : I X
15 ) Energy : X
16) Utilities: X
17) Human health: X
18) Aesthetics: X
19) Recreation : X
20) Archeology/history : X
COMMENTS :
Density not consistent with Comprehensive Plan = implications
on housing supply, location, transport tion, energy
Signatures:and public services. EIS ' to be c mbined with Terrace
Mobile Home Park. City select co 17tant as per State
law.
onald G. Nelson vid R. Clemens
Building Official Policy Development Director
Richard C. Houghton,
Public Works Director
ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW COMMITTEE
DECEMBER 30, 1981
AGENDA
COMMENCING AT 10:00 A.M.
THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
NEW BUSINESS
ECF-101-81 KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT
SA-094-81 Application for site approval to locate four (4)
one-story buildings (12-15) on the subject site
to be used as a business park or for light
warehousing; property located at the southwest
corner of S.W. 7th Street & Powell Avenue S.W.
ECF-102-81 KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT
SA-095-81 Application for site approval to locate five (5)
one-story buildings (1-5) on the subject site to
be used as a business park or for light
warehousing; property located at the northwest
corner of Powell Avenue S.W. & S.W. 7th Street
ECF-108-81 LINCOLN PROPERTY
R-100-81 Application for rezone from P-1 and "G" to R-3
for future multiple family development of 186
units; property located on the east side of Lake
Washington Blvd. N. , south of North 24th Street
OLD BUSINESS
ECF-095-81 LAKE TERRACE PARK ASSOCIATES (Steve Harer)
R-090-81 Application to rezone site from "T" to R-3 for
future development as condominiums or adult
apartments; property located in the vicinity of
2100 Lake Washington Blvd. N. (Purpose is to
discuss EIS consultant selection. )
110RG
I AE +- DECEMBER 30, 1981
7 m
r rg1i
mortibi . 1,me ,.......
4.17 ed
1
1 LAKE TERRACE PARK ASSOCIATES
1 L -
T
i"\ LAKE
LINCOLN PROPERTY s !
1 jam
1 WASHINGTON i r- +
imp -- 4, ;-- maim • -; , L
1 4N,
N , MO 1411
Siiire lip'121111111.11 IL
till.°
n•, i .• killgi .m b.
i AllmlamorP-
T____ --- 7•, 4 ---'• Ihtri; '1-7) -------1 ri".
407, Inc : v r is
D. \,__ KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT ',lr ,. i
T-7--- n F TIM. i
L
KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT
1 I4.2 - gintielfli*VP.,.. 'v
LT
7\\' / 1 --"IIIIIIIIIII- . allik I ..'--7.) '
I:
1ttfer ,_ 111, \; ,!
sX [ _ ag 1. lel 41.-"±:
si,,,‘ dilligirilt‘ ilk
air
U.. p1i1 — ,i' 11II -
a P-\\ c-
7' ./ 1 ''''\ 4-1:11 7-Z '
i
AKE
I
1 li l
Lf, Y0UNG5
1
j 1
EM 1 ALLr REVIEWIENW COMMITTEE
DECEMBER 16, 1981
AGENDA
COMMENCING AT 10: 00 A.M. :
THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
NEW BUSINESS
ECF-104-81 AUSTIN COMPANY
SP-097-81 Application for special permit to fill
subject site in the amount of +118 , 000
cubic yards to prepare for future commercial
development; property located at the
southwest corner of S.W. 19th Street
and East Valley Road.
ECF-105-81 McCARTHY, TERRANCE C.
CU-098-81 Application for conditional use premit
to allow use of a condominium unit, located
in a R-4 zone, as a professional office;
property located at 1425 Puget Drive
S. E. , Suite 204 .
ECF-106-81 MOBILE OIL CORPORATION
SP-099-81 Application for special permit to fill
site in the amount of +12 ,000 cubic yards
in building a roadway for fire access
and protection; property located in the
vicinity of 2423 Lind Avenue S.W.
ECF-108-81 LINCOLN PROPERTY
R-100-81 Application for rezone from P-1 and "G"
to R-3 for future multiple family development
of 186 units; property located on the
east side of Lake Washington Blvd. N. ,
south of N. 24th Street.
CANDLEWOOD RIDGE
Proposal for a planned unit development
for 406 multiple-family dwellings; property
located north of S.E. Petrovitsky Road
and between 148th Avenue S. E. and 152nd
Avenue S.E. (CF/CHG Associates Number
Three) .
Ina °il \i
1• "Ir I
ill 40,
l' IIIIII fi %
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 4- "rt I
COMMITTEE 6b IC
n,r1114 'DECEMBER 1 6, 1 981 1 I.
14/ / ."-I J
S._,....2..\*%... Am. L 1
ti
4
I
LAKE LINCOLN PROPERTY ill
1 lik _ 1 P
B Or.%• -••\ WASHINGTON t 1 N. I 1-- 1
rg t! a% & _ ,il , 03 ,,lAlla
REF 7 611
IMPMR -110•E=1, ' .--\ ". - \\ r ‘..4 -V, 4 r -
a ilwaill
twc,..4 • ....zErt., 0, 1=1 - : ! ' i-i-4ksm..,
i VII ' ',2=_
J-I
1 11111111n
lin !,..;`, ,- A k . i - 1 i 171
III ,,,,1 -' ,-i
P\ ....,."Alliitoblinvi IF ' Ilinifiri r7- i_Ti1 ' 121-......
W ..)-
1'. . Weillilir
7.4* 411111bNile hillit114114 titiV1*. 1 i II.............. L.,- -1 ,)
1 0 j
1- • —
IlAfresill4111.111 I 1111% =
4,416. L 11*- - in. nil - , . ,
4:1 ,c_2: d in iadi . N4.,111P1,..A._ . '1 51111 -',, ,- lW : 'AESOP ' . S ..-- ---- -.-1 11%
R'''..:,' ' - 'fit,.
7.--. .---------- .-
1.0111L_ --..-A . I -
Mil 0 ' ---• , 1..0" A
41,.......,..b.. 11:.gi 11_ I417.- AUSTIN COMPANYliffI '
i
Aln McCARTHY y) ',.. • .
t MOBILE OIL CORPORATION I
41.1
r---"ath, s'.
T-1 1 1.7-, . n j 4s.
i II , ...... .,A4 i
i ilk, tb_L • _ 1.3..1\ I
sit
CANDLEWOOD RIDGE - - ----
4
t i
1
i I
1
1 t.. ...i...1
i_ ..._)
4____.....\---,---,
r------/ I r-,
1
L 14
T1 -- 1
I --• Ir - t-T---- I. 1 LAKE1:
you.,Gs,
l• 1 1
4=1(2 II4i - II Olt...A Fi I_. I .
A
O kf
4b o THE CITY OF RENTONUtill0Z
POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 0z , 0235 2552
9 "4, MUNICIPAL OUILD!NG 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055
co-
O e4' December 11, 19819'
TFD SEPT00
BARBARA Y, SHINPOCH
MAYOR
Mr. Ron McConnell, Acting Manager
Building and Land Development Division
450 King County Administration Building
Seattle, Washington 98104
RE: CANDLEWOOD RIDGE - A PUD
406 MULTI-FA:4ILY DWELLINGS
Dear Mr. McConnell:
The City of Renton has just received the "SEPA Register" and noted that a proposeddeclarationofNON-significance has been issued for the above project. Having notreceivedanyotherreferralbyKingCounty, we are very concerned about the implica-tions of this decision.
Due to the short notice, the City's Environmental Review Committee has not had theopportunitytoconsiderthisproposal. However, in light of past actions in thisvicinity (Carriagewood and Shadowood) , this department must strongly recommend an
environmental impact statement to consider the following potentially adverse effects:
1. Traffic and associated impacts (noice and air quality)2. Public services, particularly police and fire
3. Project scale
4. Impacts upon the site
5. Storm drainage
6. Ut_Llities, particularly sewers and water
7. Recreation
We believe that the items above have "more than a moderate" effect upon the environ-ment, and thus the project requires evaluation and full public disclosure through anEIS. This matter is set for Environmental Review Committee review on December 16,at which time a formal City position will be formulated.
Very ,uly you,.
Accif il
David R. Clemens
Policy Development Director
DRC:wr
cc: Mayor
Council
Environmental Review Committee
a.-mat- e
e 1 vat y
Page 2 - Week of Nov. 30-Dec. 4. 1981 eangvi1ondeista,1 A-95•
Date End of'i:
Policy G -
CH 7 Lead Agency ao o_a_
PROPOSED DECLARATIONS
Issued Review
S//1
41.O F N 0 N S I C N I F I CAN C E(2)
t G—
I Whatcom County
reunit renideatlal condominium,
er;
l2/1/E1 12';7'r:rra.r..r..ras+eeere++ae:r
directly east and south of Lntersectton
Published weekly in accordance with WAC 197-10-831. Listings fee public a;w;u
of Iyee Dr. and APA Rd. (Point RobertsinthisRegistershouldbesenttotheDepartmentofEcolnry, Er.vir,n- -cal Yacht Basin Realty, Inc.)
Review Section, Mail Stop Pt'-II, Olympia, WA 9850... Photo: (:0b) .15)_t..•I Wh tcom County Expansion of a nonconforming use by 12/I/61 i:'!7!B:eeeeeeeaeH+e'esi
addition of 24x56 ft. to an existing
building used fur commercial purposes
Doc-rents Received During Week of Nov. 30-7)e:. 4. 1981 in an Agricultural zoned area (Valley
Pl,aabing I F.lertrir)
3 Port of Skagit Co. a Conner Mart,.a Master Plan Ii/23 8:
A-95•Nye En' ;f‘.,
M IP Lead Agee,'_ Proposal Ins,_ kevl,: 5 King Count- Two 60:100-ft, warehouse buildings and 11/24!81
four underground fuel storage tanks,
DRAFT E I Ss 11525..E. Marglnal.Way S. (Harbor Island
Investments)
S Ling County Dry Boat Storage Facility, 7 one-st-ry I:'./B1 l'9i92 5 King County Candlevond Ridge, • pl.^ned unit'1l/25'8' 1: 14'u'buildings with a capacity far 382 boats, development for 406 multLple-familyanoffice, caretaker's accommodations,
dwellings, north of SF. Petroviteky Rd.
aid between 148th Ave. SE and 1525 ve.boat lifts and parking, Kenmore Community,
east of 68th Ave. NE and south of NE St-f It-both-am tcnd .{soc es175thSt. at 7007 NE 175th -_. (Plywood Number Three)
Supply Inc.). S King County Kingsgrove, a subdivision of 37.07 11/:S1l 12'19/8:5 City of Bellevue Evergreen Highlands SubareA Plan, 12/1/81 1!5/S2 acres into 121 lots, vest of Kit Cor-
adoption of a land use and annexation
ner Rd. S. between S. 376th St. and S. plan for t'a Evergreen Highlands Sub- 390th St. (if both extended' (Deon Corp.)area
S King County Panther Lake North, • planned unit 11/25/81 2718'8:9 7.5. Army Corps Wynoochee Hydrapover/Fish Hatchery, 12/3/81 1/31/82 development for 77 townhouses andofEngineers10.2-megawatt hydropower addition to
apartments, north of SE 200th St. on NWWynoocheeDamanda396,000-pound side of Panther Lake. 650 ft. east ofhatcheryforanadromnusfish, 35 mi. 108th Ave. SE (SR 515) (Charles
north of Montesano in Grays Harbor Henderson Co., Inc.)County 5 King County Terra Glen, a subdivision of 14.63 \-11/25/81 12/15'8127PendOreilleCountySullivanCreek6,draelectric Project, 12/1/81 1/4/f: acres Into 58 lots, vest side of 124thP.C.'. No. I and construct a new dam near the cun-
Ave. SE, between SE 203d and 205th Ste.WA State Dept. of fluence of Sullivan and Outlet Creeks if both extended) (Bruits Zinc andEcologyforgenerationof18mg, near Town of Mildred Carmichael)
Xetalfoe Falls
5 King County Construct a 38.5-ft. high dish antenna 12/3/81 12/23'8:
FINAL II Ss and an equipment building, 1550 ft.Se
rest of Issaquah Hobart Rd. SE, wet of
the BPA easement and south of SE 111th5Cit. ' Poulsbo Liberty Bat' Marina, installation of a 1''81 St. (Western Yele-Connunicatiooa, Inc.)marine complex to include both land-
based and floating structures end S King County Eart Station Antenna ,
support
System, 37.5-1t. 12/3!91 12t23
activities, 250 ft. NW of ]unction of high microwave antenna. support
3d Ave. with 6th St. (Earl L. riillec) structure and irterconnect! g cabling
occupying 400 sq. ft., 1000 ft. east of10ThuostcnCountyReplatofCapitolCityEstatesto11/251B1
91st Ave. SW, 500 ft. north of SW 159thcreate7lots. 5 for single-family
St. (Fisher Broadcasting,attached townhouse-style units and 2 Inc.)
for commercial lots, south of Yelm Hwy.
an! east of Rainier Rd. (Lyle Anderson/
Associates) 2) Only proposed declarations of oonsignificance for proposals wtere tho Department24CityofSpokaneNorthRiverbankUrbanDesignPlan,12'2/S! of Ecology 1s an agency with jurisdiction are required to be transmitted to c'r.e
guidelines for public and private Department of Ecology. Environmental EAa) received from a Federalactionandincentivesfordevelopmentagencyarealsolisted.
1) These dates are supplied by the lead agency. Requests fur infareat.on or
subeftcal of comments should be directed to the lead agency.
The SETA Guidelines provide for a 35-dsy review of draft CISe and a 15•d an
review of proposed declarations of non.ignificance. This time period say
be extended by the lead agency.
These numbers refer to the number of the A-95 Clearinghouse within whose
jurisdiction the project lies.
1 --
K.,e)gT Or•OKT V-2-4,
1I /1
e.
tp
f
I ti
7?"
ill
C
i
I
I--)
1
i
1
Ill N,
111 '
1
1
1 ;
I
1
j-a .,....:..........
1,
If 0' ....
5\V 21""trKee,:r
etvo. E.3
M-0C K. a•
4 . Z.,..t, .7' f`ssi .'. .r.,........
SITE PLAN &FILL SECTIQNSejTHEAUSTIN - !
46
vaLL" °f-rict01-KtvinuALPARg-- c-z
RENTQN WASH.A
2.1......•Er•owinv•S•instts0•11
rit
II
N.Lii i[!'..
i 1
fKw w[
LIllI
SW 16M ST H'r
r _ .__i NI•fOwN«.S.T.D.Tills., «Gar a•ns ae1r terd a CI.T•(Su...N.I.I.n IS. I. r
I
CI.moo..In wl.•n ..•f rl•a., M..
2210
a w[µtw yIw[TlM[,C...Wll.••'•[Manes w...,,..n.ft.e..
City• r..tt 1•,TI•Nas T•,I.•.m aly I
1
y,
co .Tr I„ —._
two..I.w1•r u..y a L.lip o.LeT.
f-7 c T CJ p,
IS
I
u• auw-
T \
C t- r
T
Q
I O N WU
c 7 [- r_ I ZOi j o:iu i WaM.w a cava moi ae[m+tOw a a.c.
1 C- r= `7 ' I a4tarW 0
woof
a.00.01.WIDI AL(KIST.OAT RT.WI,
W lCat•aoTa W.a.LtRTTa,r[alaw.wDOTI1O1OTITT UCniJ1=7 L dl Z i T•aaTIYTI•ra•RI..ILL O.TR•Taf.f"C J j 4.ILLT«ALL...LACED•<C•af.CTT*TO LLSV.T.Orm$.
I a"..ra.o•Tae.LL DRCRT a.•Dw eo.a.LTTIDw[+TR.awa
i N wiw.011'iN OleDIN& CO{.0"iRl.[a iR«.LwtwrOM•LTw.LIWII+o WO.[T..wr..w.a.aJwfa D.awo•w,clOaT•C•l!
J
W wTIMITTA.ti.T SAIO..T.•A444.4144.J.d•.[wiwww[•ti.r"'i•airiTC[
T..LI.tIKIC RD•DwTT.w.crwr To AND MOVIo-wO AtMACSSW19ISST1Om.T TITT Tway M•••ws.ITO*I•CLEAN...CcT•.
1
I
w+arraw.
t,
1
11 CIT.
y
ti D[a
aim coma
ep[w.ow `
X
Ia7a.ar[
I IVi•.TI
l.• I moo.MIMI SRAM mDDR
t T'
I
RYAS.WON mnDR
I a
rI' SW SW ST
1
I.
Ps
I ISCa..1 1a to..1
Dov
oCt'••w.w•
lat..) 1
s
l w
snow Lt.
YIaLLA tT11t.D1 }T8['[L_--}f_Jn oo ..... VICINITY PLAN e 73
OITHE AUSTIN ."•'
VALLEY OiFILE_S NDUITW PARK_ r-- COMPANY 64. —
K•T.6 AENTO11. a1. 6.--AoT.a•wlnf'e.o.m.am •mot...-cots
OC-ccmpuier Icf ,,ping, inc.
142 uget driv n 20 5-4599pQS.Q. S'_.? _ 4 fl-cfltC n, ;^ '
ltJB'xS3fr3t''Sa'.:'.. t .:. ,.r: .. ... _ s • 4 ....
v,.. y
mcm; November 4 8
L: .C 1 9 1 20c, 271-50cX;
Mr. Roger Blaylock
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Municipal Building
200 Mill Road South
Renton , WA 98055
Dear Roger :
Enclosed are two copies of the completed Application for SpecialPermit , two copies of the Affidavit of Ownership and two copiesoftheEnvironmentalChecklistForm.
We have not encluded a site plan , since all of the building plansfortheBensonCondominiumarecurrentlyonfileattheCityofRenton , and no physical changes are planned.
Our request for a conditional use permit , is under the provisionsoftheCityofRentonzoningordinances (4-7094 ) wherein premiseszonedforresidentialusemaybeusedforprofessionalofficesparagraphA3(a) ) .
The professional office will be occupied by Pacific ComputerLeasing , Inc . (PCL) of which I am the President , and sole shareholder.PCL , as the name implies , arranges financing for medium and largeIBMcomputersystemsinthenorthwest. These financial servicesrequire (1 ) marketing , which is my responsibility and which takesplaceoutsideoftheunit , and (2) administration which is donebytheonlyotheremployeeattheunit.
Our offer to purchase the unit from its previous owner was made
subject to The Benson Board of Directors approving our occupancyasaprofessionaloffice , which c;a„ given prior to the sale .letter attached)
The unit appears to meet the commercial code in terms of its fireseparationbarriersandloadingrequirements . The Fire Marshallforseesnoproblemswithourutilization.
Please call if you have any questions .
Ve y tr ly yours ,
T.C. McCarthy
President
cc : George Akers
Montgomery , Purdue , Blankinship 6, Austin
LETTER OF UNDERSTA.'N'DING
May 12, 1981
Mr. Terrance C. McCarthy
c/o Mr. Dave Ballard
The Benson Sales Office
1425 S. Puget Dr. , Unit 1/401
Renton, Washington 98055
Dear Mr. McCarthy:
As a condition of your closing, you have requested permission from The
Benson Condominium Board of Directors to establish an office within
condominium Unit 11204 in The Benson condominium project. Given the
facts in your case, we therefore grant permission for you to establish
an office within your unit as long as the following conditions are ob-
served:
1. No signage is to be displayed which is visible from the
outside of the unit.
2. Any walk-in traffic which may be associated with the
office is to be discouraged. Such traffic, if there
is any, shall be restricted to no more than normal
traffic from invited guests and acquaintances.
3. Noise levels associated with the proposed office
shall not create a threat to the quiet enjoyment of
the other residents in the project.
4. Any special electrical or other equipment needed
shall not constitute an immediate or continual
hazard to other residents and shall be inspected
by management prior to operation and from time
to time as requested by the Board of Directors.
5. Such office shall be in compliance with local
zoning ordinances.
Please sign below and return the original to Ralph D. Brinton & Associates,
Inc. , c/o Richard P. Dunn, 46D South Tenth East, Suite 300, Salt Lake City,
Utah 84102.
Signed:
BENSON CONDOMINIUM BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Date By:
ire or (Ire behalf of enson
oar of Directors)
ACKNOWL GED:
By:— R/k.rcE: (14 C-
y..l
20, 1a4?I
DC NOS ENDINEE IS, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
December 7, 1981
DEI PROJECT NO. 80010
Lincoln Property Company
11400 S.E. Sixth Street
Suite 220
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Scott Springer
Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton
Dear Mr. Springer:
At yourrequest we have researched the availability of utilities (water,
sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete
discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade-
quate fire flows is contained in the report of 20 April 1981 by RH2
Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be
upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by
one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is
therefore available to the site.
Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives.
An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the
east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the
potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be
served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk
which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd.
There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd.
which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show
these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed
flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses"
so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will
depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is
certainly there.
In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing
utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities
will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements
required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the
developer.
Very,-truly yours,
Ctj
Bruce J. Dodd P.
BJ D/j k
1050-13OTH AVE. N.E..BELLE VUE.WA 98OO5 • 1206)885-7B77 OR 454-3743
r
ff
April 20, 1981
S1061 .0
RECEIVED
23 1981
LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC.
515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEERS It"C
Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. 8761U
Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D.
Subject: Water system improvement alternatives
for the proposed Lakeside development
Dear Mr. Springer:
This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing
various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow)
at tne proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow
levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining
20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance
Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development
elevation of 100 feet.
The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow
levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900
lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These
two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing
12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length
at 3700 feet , consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can
provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4 , which can provide 2700 gpm,
consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park
Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake
Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased
to 12 inches from 8 inches . This alternative, altnour,h more expensive than
Alternatives 1 and 2 , could obtain participation by other property owners
and tne City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the
least expensive alternative.
The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following
table:
300 - 120th Avenue N E Suite 219 psflievue. Wa. 92005 (206) 451-05E5
Lincoln Property Ce ny N.C. , Inc .
April 20, 1981
Page 2
Current
Alternative Estimated Cost
l or 2 3500 gpm
1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter
pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600
lA or 2A 4200 gpm
Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter
pipe 95,800
3 3500 gpm
3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe
and a pressure reducing station 132,400
4 2700 gpm
Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent
pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici-
crossing potion)
Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow
required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then
Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci-
sion. (Degree of others ' participation should be established).
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional
information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your
planning efforts.
Sincerely,
Richard H. Harbert, P.E.
RHH:jw
cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers
RECEIVED
APR 23 1981
DODCS ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB NO._
1 kall .
1':VA..4!!!!. :._ 5
i:
Trritr'litiri 1 FITITITII 111 1 1-1-11 yr rl rf NL=._. _ if 1,1.1,1_1,1.1.1 f
i,121,114.111 I 1 LI 11 LI LI [ I LLLL11.1 II 11 40 41 42 ‘
I\ /
7°."
1tl. .!;4.
killt1IIMIC .'"••L_CT—C.:(JA-__5- 11 'ri FT -rt 1-I 1 I 1 F[Irri 1 1 1 ril t; , CL L/.1[NUM' '' .------.
1, I ::i1.21'!1,1[5 ri I Ili 11_1111111111111111 43 .14 45
li •
5C-HOOL 4 Ir
I
7- . _.:_. ::'.:'.11.•.:_..
z : 1
111.'ii I:
l:'-
i:.'...:
7;
77.
1• , '
i...;1''i.i.." ' 5--1-,--17-\
c4_, 1
z ° _ --.:1 1:). I.:1:
Z79 11 .
1
s 42. a
27d cl
Z77
z 16
I --
I i
c_ _ _. _ • 1
b%\%• -\ .,.\,\\ ,
1., , \_I 1.1 ', .: v:-...*; A — •
13 -
t,.. :':..fft, 2 5
D f c1
N -\\ •%,‘\ -,.....
n..
s.
14;.../
4.,./'?;47----s-i---, ,
4 -!...
i3:FiZ-1
II ' —I A) a
4
28 In
1
t•II d
Z 95 202 •:/4 t
1 4 •
40 LI --i I
1t.
1 1L__--
III i — 3s....-
iA\ 11 il
A 0 C II II I1:\132. 1 331
4
J
I )4 2t3 213
339
r)
I r•I' Ii7 ...'IIiI/
I 1 I— ;-- --.1 \ --*- - -
1'-% • "-
t • 1
11-11., II1 1: - :• \ . 444 1
i . I r• z ,
1.\\\, ''-.<11
t,\\.,,,\ .;:i 29Z 2 b 5 /.;,,,,. , i• -- i
1 \ •
H S'45
I, f•-•-t. - !
I A ,..\,„it_‘,
7--... ...„- ,.,....:.:.- , ,,: -...:., .,i. 352.„\. .
316.1 1
3.(
1.' '' \ '':::•.*::\ \ ‘'
t"•> '
t irri 4.7.
1 \
I\
71 1-
1
51 266 -.1-
ti \- \
34,
l......;I .\;;;;).\••• .
C.: 11.".
o...i I . I) 1
7.1 .--
8 1
1
n. i.4
0
r 1 .0:. qt\.. ,‘ \\ \\ , 7
1.1:
1,,
z• 21- - 4.
1 4 .I •;: •:' -i...1 4 - 1
1 I/
s
11:.
11. 5so
1
3 34,
EB 0: - -.pi
I.-I.•
flc7314 \
7
L7,h - i
1
s-d'
s -.•
2--
e
I•
I -/
s '•!$s-?!,...•-.••
l-
Richard Carothers Associates
December 4, 1981
REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER
APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie
L. Lotto
The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for
a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of
Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension
presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving
range on a lease basis.
In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density
multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per
acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres , thus permitting in the
vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are,
however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units
will be constructed on the site. This R- 3 application is being sought, in part, to
expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with
the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would
likely fail below the threshold otherwise necessitating th? preparation of an
environmental impact statement occasioned by project size.
The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro-
perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the
City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro-
perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable
multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due
to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall
rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near
the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton
as well as many other cities.
Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the
greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access
to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many
areas east of 1-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has
created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and
projected lgvels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth
to the west .
The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential
project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash-
ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and
visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled
below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes
provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses
Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500Jtl(.eS +tstl' WH'.r'(j,r fS , ,r• LJ;i r, {b-slip yrun.:f :,
Rezone Application
December 4, 1981
Page 2
to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act
as a defacto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area.
The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developingGeneCoulonParkandtheLakeWashingtonwaterfrontareas . This amenity is partic-
ularly valuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have
limited access to outdoor spaces of their own.
The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is
undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash-
ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with
the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way.
As previously discussed , traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward
concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton
and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy
conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is
close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed
project suits this end particularly well .
Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that
all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that
sufficient reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size
proposed.
Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application.
Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop-
mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact
upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community.
1
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29,
1981 .
2
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Penton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
3
Con Monihan, Department of Public Works , City of Renton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
Richard Carothers Associates
t= •
L 14e, OFI,r,;%/ ` k 3 a
1 era
i ` i •
y`',
f{ • T)<IIIiTIT177iE1• •
o---
Isit.a—tom! t
r • T'4 I 0 4 T H AVE.
1/.v N 1 l 1. 14.
e:1i2e-- - - I ‘ 1 * , -Ha
1 ..
1110i si t. % ‘,
iott-".' - • ...- - 0."...1, 0
s
i‘
C) \ 04441,
v
pleR-•
ED-1. 16r, ___----0-Vjr
w
it t
ittp,_ .tit s -
i ' • f:N.
o i 1.
V , n }.
iftI7r
il
1.
44)'
1 A t.
r 1.,
i1.4
J_ u,0
of Y.4.,o
O f,
j-
r-r--7,-7T'T'7TT7 T T7TTT)• < 7i' /
Y>' 7t17< 7,,, s7 ,, < 7i ,7 r,
1 __
ir
ii .6 ,„,
1/`
L. 1'.
I • I Wr'7
f`111 )
7.,riffs
P. j,f•/11 •- i., ,. 0 4
I•n 1 N
srY'
ACGL 3 ,I, 410 "r0oV/gI O !Ne•WI 77YYt y ki
r••.. 1 f p(.
e•.,w f''
PRIM---
1.
HIGHWAY - - - ttile.,...
J (Flv SEC ST E NWY AENTO .TO KENNYDALE ;
h
e fWO2- )•
es., •4 Q,% (HIGH AVG. • N•
AMROYLQ APRIL IR,MO
I- 7 C
I
Jam.
D • I
Sheol 3 of 6 aryi t —
Trt., ,..
1...,f\ 4 (I h n....•. ogee.... r
A rr.rY mac. `
S e4
t<c<t..- — cl
t..f-7 {` itti N l.e7 AAI
V
J
I
N
ere 0
w11 ,11.--. I A/i. I
N N
r
N N N• N j i r...-r
V t q4 •It:•E1 / . .
0
December 7, 1981
Mr. Roger Blaylock
Planning Department
City of Renton
Municipal Building
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, WA 98055
RE: REZONE APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF
THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY
Dear Roger:
Enclosed herewith you will find duplicate originals of Lincoln
Property Company's Application for Rezone on the Lakeside Property.
Along with the applications themselves, we have enclosed six addi-
tional cover letters together with six additional site maps as
requested.
Roger, as we discussed over the telephone on Friday, December 4,
I want to emphasize the fact that it is our intention that the
final product of this Rezone Application will be a contract type
rezone. In other words, it is our desire to limit the intensity
and scope of our development via the rezone document. It is also
our intention to work closely with the various departments within
the City of Renton, including the Environmental Review Committee,
to predefine the nature and extent of the development itself so
as to satisfy not only our development goals, but the concerns of
the City of Renton as well .
At your request, we have included a number of additional items not
ordinarily called for in the Rezone Application. These are:
A. A Lake Washington Boulevard Traffic Study;
B. A complete Soils Report, and;
C. Our findings relative to the availability of utility
services to the site. (For this item I have enclosed
a recent letter from our civil engineer addressing
available options in the area of utility services ,
most notably water and sewer. )
incaLn PRUPeRTY camPany n.c., /nc. THE OVERLAKE BLDG.. 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE.WA 96004 206-455-481 3
Page 2
Mr. Roger Blaylock
December 7, 1981
It is my hope that the attached application, together with all the
supportive information and documentation, will assist the Environ-
mental Review Committee in their review of the project from an
environmental standpoint.
If I can provide any further assistance to you please don't hesi-
tate to call me.
Very t 1 y yours ,
Scott B. Springe
SBS:co
Enclosures
cc: David Hepp
DDDDS ENGINEErtS, INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
December 7, 1981
DEI PROJECT NO. 80010
Lincoln Property Company
11400 S.E. Sixth Street
Suite 220
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Scott Springer
Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton
Dear Mr. Springer:
At your request we have researched the availability of utilities (water,
sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete
discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade-
quate fire flows is contained in the report. of 20 April 1981 by RH2
Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be
upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by
one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is
therefore available to the site.
Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives.
An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the
east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the
potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be
served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk
which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd.
There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd.
which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show
these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed
flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses"
so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will
depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is
certainly there.
In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing
utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities
will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements
required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the
developer.
Very,-truly yours, {
K ) f <A,C.. -- Ck.
Bruce J. Dodd- P.
BJD/jk
11350-130TH AVE.N.E.,BELLEVUE.WA 98005 • [206J 885-7877 OR 454-3743
April 20, 1981
S 106.1 .0 4S,1\1TO`''
RECEIVED
MFR 23 1981
LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC.
515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEERS
Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. 81E)JJ
Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D.
Subject:. Water system improvement alternatives
for the proposed Lakeside development
Dear Mr. Springer:
This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing
various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow)
at the proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow
levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining
20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance
Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development
elevation of 100 feet.
The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow
levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900
lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These
two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing
12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length
at 3700 feet, consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can
provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4, which can provide 2700 gpm,
consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park
Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake
Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased
to 12 inches from 8 inches. This alternative, although more expensive than
Alternatives 1 and 2, could obtain participation by other property owners
and the City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the
least expensive alternative.
The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following
table:
300 - 120th Avenue N.E. Suite 219. Bellevue. Wa. 98005 (206) 451-05E-15
Lincoln Property Cc ny N.C. , Inc.
April 20, 1981
Page 2
Current
Alternative Estimated Cost
1 or 2 3500 gpm
1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter
pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600
IA or 2A 4200 gpm
Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter
pipe 95,800
3 3500 gpm
3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe
and a pressure reducing station 132,400
4 2700 gpm
Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent
pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici-
crossing pation)
Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow
required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then
Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci-
sion. (Degree of others' participation should be established).
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional
information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your
planning efforts.
Sincerely,
Richard H. Harbert, P.E.
RHH:jw
cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers
RECEIVED
APR 23 1981
DODDS ENGINEERS, INC.
JOB NO.
i11i
atJ
a
lfrINVM.
IIFT
FL[
LI
I
111
III
I -
11
FI [
I
I]
1 .
KiltSi?..
2_
55
1 : :-.....:•_ -. ..
1-, : ..-.•. • — .••- -
Ir-
7'
7
7 .
I
1[
1'
1114'
1A
I
I
I
LI
I
LW
II
Ii
LLL1111
11
40
41
4E
II
54. ._ ..
1..
1,
i
7
Dr_ _ _ _
a9
it __
i .
K11110DALE '* , ...------
00C.
CoAS7'
lc
irri.,-
1 [
1 '
id
1 [
r1
in
Fl
I
1
I [
I
m
I
LI
IP — — .
7.
i !
camiNTAky * .
9;
1' -------
i'
7 - . -
7,_ -
7 "
1[
21,
11,
k
Li
11E111111
11
I
I
I
LI
I
I
I
I
111
41_
4LallaulaL1111111............
4--.
4.,
o. .__.. _ _ _
pc, _
45
44
45
li *
a
SCHOOL
e
1-,,
SI.
52
11
I .
11
1
C —--
7
4
I1 •
i
I
A
0
ztll
0
1-••-•
I ,..
i:: ,;•:.. .,-,:.:.!::.:::
A
i
am
I
it•
0 .... ..;...,
i, -
k' ..
je...
t. ..
p. .
4:
0, -------......
e.
gr-
7--,
izi;...,
A
0 " .
1
u:
A
1
8 '
N. •
itr'.
17-
7.
8
14
0
A
11
t
d
295
2oZ
2/
4
4
s
r-
B
7 .
i!
VTIL
iu
11
k
Ala
C11
i
32.
231
ttt
it\. \, ,
273
262
i
0
0 .
ei\\
c.,,.,•
i ..,
i
It
1....
i
t\
C
339 :
1'
d
1
i-
v (, , .‘
c..„:
2, ,,,,
1 , \ .
or.
1
2 ... .. ..1.7
1) \
000. •
I •-----"\--,.\\•
1
8„.
24. .
7 \ \\,.
11.
1,---
1-
2 .
3 .:'
1..
1._
1_:)..- ;
L . .:
Id--
1....
F.. •.....:,..)..::. Z9Z
IA
i. :
345
I ''."‘
1....i
v !
4.:
MID
35,>
1.
k ,
711r2),-
L:
i.:•._
1
Yk., ‘
347
tn \F,
i \
1110".
31
I)
i?.
1 ' ‘
333
I
A
1,=
I
0
A
3.
2 — -
1.- _. „, .... .,....___,,.,., ,_,
4., ,
4
I. . \ ..';
2. \ \ „ „
4‘ \
vt. -• • . : .,. -:. :: •'.
A !..",:
i„.
F.
2)
C..,;..
E_
4
s. .; $... •
se ,
s
1,,.;!:...
i!
294
0 .--
5.,•..'
s•-. ., ,
1
I .--
b
to ... •..
E
0
t
I- -''•."
7"
2
I
1-^
117
I
Lig.
v
tfi
9
i.
1,..,
t!"
i—••••
J ^.-----.
4
I •
s.
f„...
13,
34, .
I [
I') •••••.• .:
I
I
L
A.
i<
E
W—
ASH. •
S
1
1%
0
I
i)
cl
d
I
7
i
bb
314
b.
0
I--
I
I :
FiE.-
Ac..
ti
i
Richard Carothers Associates
December 4, 1981
REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER
APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie
L. Lotto
The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for
a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of
Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension
presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving
range on a lease basis.
In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density
multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per
acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres, thus permitting in the
vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are,
however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units
will be constructed on the site. This R-3 application is being sought, in part, to
expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with
the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would
likely fall below the threshold otherwise necessitating thq preparation of an
environmental impact statement occasioned by project size.
The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro-
perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the
City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro-
perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable
multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due
to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall
rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near
the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton
as well as many other cities.
Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the
greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access
to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many
areas east of I-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has
created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and
projected lvels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth
to the west'.
The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential
project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash-
ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and
visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled
below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes
provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses
Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500
Offices Seat'le,Washington / Boise, Idaho / Reston.Virginia / Portland.Oregon
Rezone Application
December 4, 1981
Page 2
to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act
as a de'acto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area.
The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developing
Gene Coulon Park and the Lake Washington waterfront areas. This amenity is partic-
ularly ialuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have
limited access to outdoor spaces of their own.
The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is
undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash-
ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with
the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way.
As previously discussed, traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward
concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton
and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy
conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is
close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed
project suits this end particularly well .
Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that
all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that
sufficien#
3 reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size
proposed.
Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application.
Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop-
mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact
upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community.
1
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29,
1981 .
2
Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
3
Don Monihan, Department of Public Works, City of Renton, Telephone
communication of May 14, 1981 .
Richard Carothers Associates
vt, V , 1 r - • . - sow •...
1 I 5S I . , f h.1 i ' LC. O
e, IIj I I 5 C r.
op, ' H.
T Nsi I Fa1t1i ? r fir-- t
fil 4.t L.;'CI ..,1:1,'%It tleet4
il
i'a, t
0.0,
0!
r
r PN iI%l:i._ `,• i Q a
Syr" r ' / / ^,e9C S - '• ; •i\ " OO® ,i -.. "+ i _64.,:,,,,,. s
r /' /
rrr//rr r'
r/ /
rr •'
L'.
iii
f, •'YtC °
r0,, i af) •
i^." •
1, kt
I / r ram l
pi =,,I EI2)
77,. .. .4::
11 0101 Off°_...„.........,'--"--,__r * ‘ s-1'-- . ... LA,:1 v• p,.4.;
I)I iii4,-.:_tlit.
f. r , . ..: it.$ 1 Rialilia. i•
e 1 I.:*•';
I o 4 T H AVE. 5if .e,"07 __._____:0. .
6.„14 \. : 1 " , _-,.bee
Y ts
0 „ oce ---4 , 4 ill v. ,..1r d3 i yam q <"/ vLI
it; 11 0'7
t..,U l'.., 11 .• lei t* 114
I % ''
A'-‘7 C) i
ICA
Y-
off•
e - -_-_
N • \"`
S'S/J/
M a i 0
cv
1--i.zsi...7 .;;11:
N.V% 1.
r5:"
a.
T.
a/,.is
tip D o•..' LAA
a %I` ` 71 I
R.41Ia I/ N ACCLa.! 7b deg PA'bN/A/t70 .4.01 V TWitt
L/I+ • / /'A I
1 _ '-- — NO. II ,vn•w»' W ..•
PRIMi-----1 ---- --
i.
I-I STATE HWY 1J0. 2-A) JJ) RENT.. ' KENNYDALE vti (HIGH AVE. a N •
O r, (
FLV. SEC 5..,
N
7
a.• _ _ __ j()) ••T•J Ll...AM'110VEq A IIIL It,1 i0
Z I",
r ' y r
P
n . i I
Sheet .;Of s
1
Lpyiy LM IN
1 y : `/k,hwr+r• o/.w.N. r
i • ORO /S 4,
2l LI c[ -L--/V'.T1i.. ,
i•,2 hN • J N
i
I L7•
V
nl I Ia _
i
J14)1. II;
j ti ui 4y
I
l::/ 00 li r 1 \i:l INI_ ' da) 1 AI .I KI
I - •
N• \
CITY OF P,,ENTON
OR OFFICE USE ONLYREAMAPPLIC4TJON
PPLICATION NO. LAND USE HEARINGf - /
EXAMINER 'S AC
PPLICATrON FEE $
TION
APPEAL FILED
RECEIPT NO.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
117ILING DATE
ORDINANCE NO. AND DATETEARINGDATE
CPPLICA'JT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 1 J ;
Name Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lot phone 455-4813c/o Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. , Inc .Address 11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220, Bellevue, WA 98004
S. property petitioned for rezoning is located on Lake Washington Boulevard
bQt a south of N. 24th Street a.Ad
Square footage or acreage of property 9,0 acres -IL Legal description of pro ert
separate sheet)
P Y (if more space is required , attach a
Lots 35, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 357, 358 and 359 of C.D. Hil lman'ss Lake Washington Garden
of Eden Addition to Seattle.
I
I
I
Existing Zoning P-1
Zoning Requested R-3
TOTE TO APPLICANT: The following factors are considered in reclassifyingproperty. Evidence or additional information to substantiateyourrequestmaybeattachedtothissheet. (See ApplicationProcedureSheetforspecificrequirements . ) Submit this forminduplicate.
Proposed use of site Multi-family residential development
I
i. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area.
In brief, the apparent major issues would be dealt with as follows: (Please see
attached sheet) .
How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site?
Development would be initiated within 6 months .
Two copies of plot play and affidavit of ownership are required.
Planning Dept.
1-77
1
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY •
Application No. DO ; 5-/
Environmental Checklist No. /=CIF - /0: -5-/
PROPOSED, date:FINAL , date:
Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance
QDeclaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance
COMMENTS:
Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requiresallstateandlocalgovernmentalagenciestoconsiderenvironmentalvaluesbothfortheirownactionsandwhenlicensingprivateproposals . The Act also requires that an- EIS be
Thepreppurposefor oflthisl ,checklist
actions
isitoihelpnthtlye agencies
affecting involvthe edldeitytermf ineewhethernornnt.ot aproposalissuchamajoraction,
r•, •
Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the informationpresentlyaeaflabletoyou. Where explanations of your answers are required, or whereyoubelieveanexplanationwouldbehelpfultogovernmentdecisionmakers , include yourexplanationinthespaceprovided, or use additional pages if necessary. You shouldincluderefarencestoanyreportsorstudiesofwhichyouareawareandwhicharerele-vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help allagenciesinolvedwithyourproposaltoundertaketherequiredenvironmentalreviewwith- out unnecessary delay.
The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for whichyouarecurrentlyapplyingortheproposalforwhichapprovalissought. Your answersshouldincludetheimpactswhichwillbecausedbyyourproposalwhenitiscompleted,even though completion may not occur until some'..ime in the future. This will allow alloftheagencieswhichwillbeinvolvedtocompletetheirenvironmental ,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 StateofWashingtonforvarioustypesofproposals. Many of the questions may not apply toyourproposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to thenextquestion.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
I . BACKGROUND
1. -- Name-of- Proponent Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Logo & Marjorie L. Lotto
2. Address and phone number of Proponent:
c/o their representative: Lincoln Property Co. , N_C_ , Inc_
11400 S. E. 6th. Suite 220
Bellevue, WA 98004 455-4813
3. Date Checklist submitted
4. Agency requiring Checklist Renton Planning Department
5. Name of proposal , if applicable:
6. Niture and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to itss• ze, general design elements , and other factors that will give an accurateunderstandingofitsscopeandnature) :
SEe ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2
f'
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 ) :
See ENVIRONMENTAL. a KL_LST PROJECT DESCRIPTLQN. Pages 1-2
8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal :
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pagee 1-2
9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals rr*quired for the proposal
federal , state and local--including rezones) :
SPp JNVIRONMFNTAI_ CHFCKI TST -• PROJECT DESCRIPTION_ Paget T-2
IO- Oo you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity
reiatee to or connected with this proposal? If ycs , explain:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2
11t .DO you'know' of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by
your proposal? If yes. explain:
SPp FNVTRONMFNTAI CHFCKI TST - PRn,1FCT OFSCRTPTTON, Pagac 1-2 -
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 sore future
date, describe the nature of such application form:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required)
11) Earth. Will the proposal result 'in:
a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geclogic
substructures?
YES MAYBE ri
b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over-
covering of the soil? X
YES- MAYBE WT—
CO' Change in topography or ground surface relief
features?
Y 5 FI A Y B E w-
d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features?
FED MAYBE. N0
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of sous ,
either on or off the site? X
YES MAYBENE-
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which
may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
YES MAYBE
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - CTSCtISSTnN pa ac_
3
3-
2) Air. Will the proposal result in:
1 a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
X
quality?YES MAYBE NO
b) The creation of objectionable odors?
YES RAT NO
c) Alteration of air mover• Int, moisture or temperature,
or any change in climate , either locally or
regionally?
YES (CBE N
IExplanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - FNVTRONMFNTAI TMPACTS - DISCUSS1nN, Pagec
I
I 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?
11
Tn.- MAYBENO
b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or
the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X
c) , Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
YES- MAYBE No
X
YES Wilt' NO
d) . Change In the amount of surface water in any water
ybody? YES MAYBE NO
e) Discharge into surface waters, ,or in any alteration
II surfaca water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X
y-_- MAYBE 57
f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
II ground waters?YES MAYBE NO
Il
g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either
through direct additions or withdrawals , or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
Yam_ MAYBE NO
I h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through
dire t injection, or through the seepage of leachate,
phosphates, detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria,
or other substances into the ground waters?
YES MAYBE NO
I
i ) reduction in the amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies? r- MAYBE f
ill Explanation:
III
SPP FNVTRfNMFNTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAI TMPAcTS - nTSCUSSION,
Paps 3- 6
I
Flora. Will the proposal result in:
a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any
species of flora (including trees , shrubs, grass , crops ,
microflora and aquatic plants)?yam-
II
o) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare oi
endangered species of flora?
YES MAYBE N0
c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or
in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing
X
species? TE'S— MAYBE
d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
Y- — MAYBE NO
Expl anati oh:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION,
Paps 3-C
4- n.
5 ) Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of
any species of fauna (birds , land animals including
reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms ,
insects or microfauna)? X
YES MAYBE 0
b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
Xendangeredspeciesoffauna?
Y'E°S MAYBE Mr
c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area,
or result in a barrier to the migration or movement
of fauna?
MT" MAY N
d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
YES MAYBE Nb-
Explanation:
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION_ Parpc 1-F
6) Noise Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? -X
YES M YBT
Explanation:
See _ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION_ Parrc 3-6
7) Light and Glared Will the proposal produce new- light or
glare? X
YE' _ MAYBE Ntr
Expl.a.nation:
See. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:- DISCUSSION., pagpc 376
i
81-T Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area?
Ter um Y
See_ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI TMPACTS _ nrcrncs.LQN., Pages 3.6 .
9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
YE- MAYBE N
b,) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
YES MAYBE r•
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)
in the event of en accident or upset conditions? X
E S MAYBE 0—
Explanation:
11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri-
bution, density, or growth rate of the human population
of an area? 'X
YES MAYBE AO--
Explanation:
Spp ENVIRONMENTAL- CHECKLIST - FNVIRONM NTA IMPACTS nTSrttccrnm 6
r
12)- Housing. 1411 e proposal affect existing, hou , or
create a demand for additional housing? r
YES MAYBE NO
t y.. .
Explanation:
B
See ENVIRONMENTAL CHE .K IST - NVIRONMENTAI TMPAf TS flTSCIISSIflN1 P g c fi
I 3) Transportati ovE/Ci rcul ati on. Will the' propo5.al resul t` i n ter ''1
a) GIllenerationofaddftionalvehicularmovement? x
O Y E S . M Y-B ti
Effects on existingr
parking facilities, or' demand` a
for new parking?. i
Y N / $01
J ay'Nil
f R ,1 ,
c), Impact upon existing transportat{on systems' f ay
R ';;
r ' '
t
MAY BE
tee,
1 (dr Alterations to present patterns of ci rcul at.ion or ;_ r t. . ccl't 'e ;
y
tix ( f movement of. people and/or coops?
1- r y:a ; „x y7 x
r •. ,
y s- •, -. ' ,- , ;- >.,. , , f
Spa
x
y.
t, „,a
4:r iterations for waterborne, .rail_ar al r traff icl s-I tit'` ;x t
rr -"
II
n i" 'R">ri` t t ;e til t 3i-'r1e' :h,
1 a+ ara q f¢ ., + „., , t
r." }'°
k,k' t YES a M fin
IIIY }}` - '7 rncrehSe id traffic hazards motor`vehiclesr s
r+'^ s"_
y,, `4`
r•' " ''V
i F e .hi e.lzi;sts or pedestartares? + gi,-,, ~ r s ,
i,..„: ' ,
a 1F '"' a t w 3,,,t ''v.. c r ti ; ,-weap5 s,
y .rQ , ..••• "'t" , Ag 7 1 ,`(•• - f tr e, • YES MA-Y E r „
y ? ..
I'li•b
S'
4.,"a '' „ SOa•" ', t .;t • rr
S tk• ,f >•:•
Y 3 iN• 1'. S t•
II ,- .x } Explanation:a :
f
e.'
xo tj See- NVIRb VMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL:-IMPACTS - Dl.SctlscthN1 pages 1 6r ..
y . 14 fir+ µk'lt+S,y p 4
ar `` ';''. 1,.+ .:,
t. * S N•' •,. N,p.''..iti'• r s ,7 .:
4.,,
f4'"* i 'i c,,,,, c i .ti,,•-Y 'eaa ; - h ^•„.. i'as' t` 4
e \ P y, r .1q,-.yt• .c
S
a'
a"wa:5. .4 ` ?.i. .'.1. • •,i+. ...'^r 'i '
t'
4, x
li ,'' ; ('141 '{ Ptibiit aerv'Ytcess-k-+ 1itT.. "the-propGosal have- an effect upon,.•or'‘* ti'; -,•%wrk1 4-
Tresult:in a -need'. for new. or altered,governmental services a ; ',:t' i•
r ' ' in any .of-the following areas: r
A w
a) Fire protection?•
r-,
NI , , ,' . : r t: YES _ _MAYBE Nam' '^`"? 4• '•
i dt, palf'ce protection? k, G . ,
s . 4•.47 r .. .
s ' a ' ,
v; tg r y . tx " 7 t i•• i f
y
Y
r
4 i',1 •7: y% ,
L 4
AY BE rt }.,;'
1i.
1 !
ate + qq
r ti,
Yp'y
r y.
t
r. ' L ti••ilr
1 Y (
c) S C h o o1 s P •" _,J.
1 i
P.-
ya
r
r. 71 + '.i
i .'`
i
x ."
3:f•"?*4 •Y'44' +`r tZ.
f
4*-- "
r 7t'.
A. ,
i,
4 a r x r " 1c''ti r i k tvMAYBE N(Ts, " r.
i +f..t•'';.- via }` :8ryf
d) Parks r other recr a i n I f0etoa acil ityyies
S MAY NQ
IF,..Yam.
e) Maintenance of public facilities, inctudin roads? X r,
I
1
@ AYES . MAYBEr N ''`'
3 e
II f) Other governmental services?' x
y d,+
NO zr-
r.
Explanation: - '
Y1 See` ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL,'IMPACTS bISC11SSrON_ PagP 3'-6
z S 15) Energy. .Will 'the proposal ,result i n: -
a) Use of. substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
irrr. MAYBE NO
b) Demand' upon ,existing sources of' energy, or -require _
1 c' ,, r •• the !level opment.,;of_ new sources of ,energy? X
r MAYBE Vr.
Explanation: ;
See FNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST -- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - nrcr..iiccrpN, page 3-6
16) U4ilities. Will' the proposal -result in a need for new„, "
r ';L,
systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
I
s
1•
a)/ '• Power or natural gas?
YES - , MAYBE N3 -s`'i x;
b) . Communications 's stems? XYr
i } T MAYBE N
g
c)' ' Water?' r
ti YES MAYBE NO__
5•,.6-
a_.„7.,- ,. -1.41. . . r.
L'- ..-____. XX . : '... .•.;.
d) Sewer or septic tanks?
Vrr- MAY BE NO,•
e) Storm water drainage?
TM MAYBE( EY-
y , - • ' 7 -'
f1 Solid waste and disposal?
4- ‘. 4, ,, • '* • 4•;...15r. ".**-• S. MAYBE
s_.--' • • .• ,i-. •-. , s.• - . . ,..,
4....•:.i.„...s..,_04,4,.....,... „... . ,.. :... .I. ..
4felefiattiV:1 Ici0' 1..."' .
4 , & .1,i „
Explanation:
Spp FNVIPIINMFNTAI ri4Fcxt TST _ FNVIRM•IMFNTAI TMPACTS- • •-,L, - DISrliC.SION, Pages 3 .6
1
4...'•14•z
LT)\.•.Human' Health. Will the proposal resuI t .in the creation of'i.': --'..;!•;'41.‘'17#:.?..,,,
c. ;,:4:11C. ........,...,.,,. .
any• heal th hazard, or- potential health hazard (excluding •• . .,-,-_---,,,,'•,,, • ,-, , •„.":'7:k. . cjc-'..'''',•:-....f'--,"?.-.;.-meatil health)?_ 1,.•, .. ,•..4,:1...4-••:s....,,,,1/2.1.,,,44,,,I,i -,,<„,,,i.,....,.4.c. . . t . . 4,„- . ,
4,;.',. 's,'.'....,"-',...' '
vtV,..4:4,',•,r,•,,,-.,-firip,•„:2 .•••i--. •••‘'--is.i,ii...4i..4 .,--7:4.W.,...,'.'-'4,1.'t'# 4tiT.i . ., ,W Trr NunT .71.4i•s. .,,...1 fn' a....--„,• ,,,,-:.•,5.-..,t,• •if4t,-,..4,4,......Lot_14,-,e.r., :NI,„....,,,,• a.,:i,i,...1...0;...,4, .Nr-!•-;.12t„, ,z,4,:; . 4 :.„,..,,cp..0.,....IL,,:., :4,4, •...,.. .,
L.-; -,••••.,:,',',,
i,T..•• ,fl......-...,"4,1F...•-•.F..,"\,0,,,.. -51-,',19z-- - Jp.7• 1...,,,_••4. ',1.'A tv,e14,tA.4 ( ...... .‘.4s,',•-!?, , ,s ,-1.4 ,.-1"1,,,Ii;•...s .',
017„,.."''4,f•••V -,
s• -7-,--'7.. :-..;',---"`•,-11,..,';!';''''' r.'-•• .,..•-,',.. ..* ...,!,..c.,..."...,3•
4'....,, 4 ,..‘Zr..ii4 ,,,,.•:,-4m.74,1-,'.,,,,.,*,.,,,,:-.1..,'lir.' t,;,.',..1•••,'"',., y'?"-..-i-,',.-•:":*•"Irkt-z•;',A. -- ':i• "•-• : xp 1 anati on: : -. -..- .-,,-- .--- -,..:-., ••# —--•••. ,- , • .. , .
4.-•. , , •-,,,,,, •-•-.:':,,,..„„:,.-,-..z.lsf,-. .),..,...,,,i;#1014,,-tis.',,- -„ , • ji,40-.,6,44'.1.4`k‘E-4..1,:-"v.lii..-..:104-eit,,0),..i."...,•,,,•:::• :.P4-sitt4,(4•At '-''',.. -f- - -ite-•-••••-.,,..:,••;••••=1,'",,.0.,; :::.47.4-qtrAT.ri:c--,T.,iirg2,,..,-.,,.......,,,,,,,,-,7,p , ,,, . ..r.v..,4„..4...-f-f, 1*,,,c.;,.s ,:,'-. .^,, %, 7.p <1,4,A ...r.--, •-:::1- ,... -. . , 4,4,.. vo.
74",,1 c-' --.4 ..•f.14,•"':gi.•;.1"*;:,•:',* '•.1 rr6"..'-, ''''.1-Al'-':'•",-,;Ai tilt' ...... •`' "1. 4.;.:44;,-,, r.-..,,,.., .....,.:-0-_-4:-:.'''..,_:-',.-4,-,,,....: i-kt,r...,4'..,'...,-,,,,,
i,", •*".1,,**,• '47.it''''‘fi-r":'1/41.-' ?,'‘ VI"i'' 'Ac.., s si7ti,t'IV't••• •,'1* (41.1t.'-{•.' •1;‹,,,,*• •-,Jrr- ..41`..-•.,'!",,i,... -.1"^ 1 ':eft'17,"...' '•••-*, 4tk••, • -4,-..r,-i ..•ist'.4;•••",t;•""eit,..'*•%, ;J' '.c. ' _i - .. -
t, tv174**4 ,,•/..„ . !•1.,/:,,04.•!vs,:ttki,f...***.'* 4,*..(E•k:. r.,.„re‘.:‘40..;,.Ar.i$*t'., '.,iii4,1-i.,-. ,:.: ...--'`•••'''''''‘'' '.''1* f.'.,1''''''''••'' '' :^".:;''' iAti‘..'rb1.4:::27:4;,.,..z0'1'..te,,5 t V311r.:Aesthetics.- .,:s`-'Wf llT--.the, protioser result In-\the obstruction,of i-..i.,,,m,',4-W.c ..,•.,,,„. .- ..3i.: {Y„,,,any scenic vista or view open..,'titi the'pub 1,1 c...,.or wi I T...thsv' ......--..-•-•' ,•:•,411t,....r?;:elt::,,...
t,„..,,,•
4:41;t7,,.t,ft, ....,
4%.. .-41',P:74 4'.:'
s;`.
140.,,,,;.proposal reset In' the creation of an aesthetically offensive - •-•:,,,.„'.44'."„-.',.--c': •i'...i,
t' •
s,,i-IL1' :.'. **v.'', ".-, •;'• -ye',rj Si te open to peel 1 c:vialvrr.k.. ,-'; :.''
l '-t
r,it'.
1 ' ,„:;!...S 1.„,e- .441.4)s44$'. '4";;'•'%,-`"--tliir.!'
k•
7,.- • .--
i.44:..,74-4-, 1:
4,...:,,,:;„,-,--.
4:„• ,-.4.4„:,,....74 „.'4.4.,,,,,,-4.",„;,,I.s. ,,,,,,
i,
4r..::. =7„,--- -kl! "r1.0.7---
toy RE, .: m ,f .4,..,„ '-`.1,4,4,1"t-,3•. •,-';1•`;',41.01.4•:k.-`,4•-•0^:.74. -,,_.- ..„7 • #
44
t-",.544.,_,.•,,, ,:r44.- ' ' ,.`,.....4.-,, , ,e7.-1/44*** ,,g, ''' '' '''' ' .. - i'}'•:., 1.,t'''•,„)P 1. !.-^'`:-.''''1.*:'c,47it:PtIti:','0••• .e..s'. '-'70,••7: ',..• ..4:0Vit.4,,,,,-!:"V'‘' ,,.t.srWt•./.21-17.•rtz.''''•.N ' '-,47‘:tkitolit • ..'1,,, - .0-,', .,.1"i".'iti'V.,,i•-if:,*-"N4,.,,,,-Isei 0,,,,.,,‘„, ..4-,,,4.t,,r , _.4.,,,Ti-krt.-4.0.,z...,1. A'' ..,",irst.;'.17/ .:4! 4. •''''-CX a nat. 0 FT'''.;.,;::....'. ..'. ..•'''''"C.,,e,.44'1'•••-•.•-.'•••"'''':'''''''''')1, .:.'.N..'. "." ' . .' '
5"-:'-'.; :•'-=•.:.(4.' Aki'k):.„4.14-'411,.=4'• 'Aillitiiii,44.:,-,;=x44-.1,•10P=',,::',h-Yi=' ,7-,•:•••,",--, :*-.=','•. '4''q.•:`'.. ''•'-;-.... ''114` ak,;•-•:ff;:,'11,,ftg., : .„t.,,,,,,w,,,,,,,40 4*' ,gtz.•2•14.!"7,,r .•. ,;t•,,,•!•..s,".:..73', „ 4..4*,..•.,,,-."•• ,,,,,' .,.."-',+'•"' 1 ` •":"-`
4• • . `••^ • . - L ` -" • ' .•
4"`':•
14.:te.:t.,:-,•:",*•44•1.
A :14(....Ss.4.41Tatip.e...;,-/,....i4P-14,103zkirit.t...'y,`,..... , ,,'::-,--. .--, ,,:',.,tivt-,-- '4 r4 .• - •-•!•-7,.. .... . , , .,- 3i-e --A - =- .. = -, ..,,,,,. -, --, .
r,,,,,v.,-..-,,..."•„,,,)•;-•,4.„-,„;=o, ,, .:Jtkl'!.:17. .-•,-,`..,!,v,t,r4.* *,47,f--,.? ,,73t,,',! *-'4,-,,..,ti ‘,, ..,0N;.-.t1.,,„-,. ,.•,- .--• ....,.„':),-}',„•:..„,,,-."''7.; ".k.: .i.-,4,1 ','..,•':';,.,".'r •-AA,N".„,. 5,....,r. •...,. . ^: - .;.-,'„.t. : ,-,•..... --:, , :
t .•:. ,., •i -:' , .•t,' . _. ,...: . ' . • ' .
A191 Recreation Will the proposal result In an impact upon the ..
ti;-,.. ::'.,4..,-•.•r.:-•,:,•,..-•;:
jti
i., tm>1..,...,. .>:f:'•!.•*,...,*%..•%'•'",
r quantity of existing.recreational oppOrtuni ties? t. , •, '' - ••• ,,,....,
1
4,.,--`.,.. •-.).-._,--.,..,...., .:., -,...,-,•,•,..-
7-,..•••,•.,:•••'... •-: ‘,.,-•,•,..-,.0..,...,-..•:-. •- ,".....-.• . .si,• -..-,-.,- .•.;•• ,, . '. '.•. „, ,... •:-...YES ,.. !• MAYBE. . NO .., ...;..`7,-••• ', ----,•,:•‘;',..ur•:7•-•••sie.. f,-', *47 ...`";It,°).,•••• '.;`,`"--'14••,. ...:'7;--;r-,..;ck--1 ,.-1.-..'
i.,-. .-
r."-„..'""v, ,-ti ,T1',',.„..",..,'• ,,......,
or,1-..‘.,...,,,..:,...,,.
2„,,--,. u,,,i,..„4.44...b.„.,..s....e,„,,,,.„. „„ ,0 '...,.
1:-..(?!.:!..4,.."'•:• +'' ' ':"';;;
4.•""I'try't;‘`;14,04-N '14.- ','"••;;;‘'1".,;
ateAtt4,41,1.1*
V•.:kf,sr, ?,r,*14,,,,t,.....,'yjo°,,,,„v"- ;
1,..r.,,.':,' '.,.,,'., . •'.1,:`..;-":..•`•:,
r ,•,,,c". ,,,,,,,,..x...7".., -.1;"*„..„,•,,,k „.,-;":4,gr,-•,r",*,, , 4,,,,,......1,0,,•,-...,,,*/*. ..-:! -'•••-''',.. "-'!' ,,'-':.'":." •,..,-0,744V,-*."'irlil, -ko`..i,;(,,,,t, -,
r
q'.. f '$.., . . , ,.ti,, ,,.., ,... t ,. ,,,...; ,, . 4, t -.•
46..N,„/-•7E1,0'•'•' -Explanati on t..-•%'A' . .--,-`'. '''''' '''''''' '•'• '''''' ‘-' '''' '''''•• '''''''" ' '' ''' '' ' ' • ' ' ' ' •
1 Y•C -)k;•;9,.4. :
z •.....
1.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENV IRONMFNTAT IMPACTS -- RIScInSInft,.. Zig/3c /.. t4se.:,!,,,eieli 411,;.•-
4,, '''• .I.,•,;e', :,..,3‘.'4,''',. ''. ...,,,,j,,i 'i„,,49:4,„•-•'...=;,„........ ..„--,.--;`,, .. •.4'. : ',--4i,-„:.:,-..)1..„.--;',•,'e.--.;/ '.--'.... - 4.!.- .-1, ',.,?r•
t, ''. ''‘.,
9) "1.---
s--.
t,•,,,---.,-. -,-.'4.•=-.i''''-***'• '''''''-.46'';.;* .••':7t \e -*'''''A'-).e'r*7.""'''')14'f• -'4,"*I'e.:
X••:,;•Ai`4"-..,At'.'.:.%;-•,'..7•:•:.”,t '''''.1". ..1*‘-'7•••7-: • '''•*)**' . ' -- ..^:''T' * - -•`. ,:' * "'• -t. ' ••- •,`,.`'.f.**,""4-.....: " ' "" - , -,. - -`• .
i.:-",•.,.-,,:,•,.-•••,,,,;-!..-.-...,.,.'K'..
f.(
t,
i)zo,...,'
a p„-
A.-
E'
s;•
Ar che-„o, l.o gicarif,i,storicar ITT t heproposal result n,;-a.;.n.:..•-;.,, ..•-.,,.,.,
5,e.;..(..to.o...t.$•,
T--•''•,
7ri--x..alteration of a significant archeological or historical i
site, structure' object or building?
7,•••'
v.••. L'.;'..-.
i4-'•„•t"---
1. , ..,, ,,-; .„ .,„4-,,...:.-•r,.....-, i,•,.. . .4., :r. •:•,,,•ir..- 1...•, -;:, ...„..., :. ..: • ..,.1 i.,,•:.• - .-.,f,...' ' TarT1.1AYBE M7.;':..-,ty...-'o''..;4-v•,•'• ,-,•,-..-
e-•: **.i4A-,,iki,94.4)r--; .i•,.'.t•-•••,•'pi " • -il,t),..,%
L.A'...Y..;•-•-'..-itt,)••% .: „,,,,,.,-.- : •..., ...,,,, . . :.,.. .,: - • .• , - - ,."'.4
M"7.4'..'cz" ..0.1ii.Vt. 'Wt4•14r.i.e*.in'-'*"r, •.*-"*r' : -.. ' '• "• * " ;it'. '1,:'•• .i ,,• 2*.:,1•."* i "-ill'.%*• -i',I4'...7•'''' '. l'
J. .,'c'' *':;^ t'.` .";‘:' .'''• '''-:-,,;-^". ' ' 1'
4'..".
i4e;•.** Explanation , 1. .: - - \ - ,., -- ,..••
fSee 'ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLISTENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS — orsctissrnN. pagps 1_6A.'4',,.4.c.:•. ,:,.,-..
i t',... ,
i'• , ' . ' ,,,...N,
SIGNATURE- - . s .• ..--; .. ,,. .- ..•„- .•••• .:. , , : ;
s. ... . - .• -.
I the•undersigned, state that to the. best of my,.kn wledge th above information
is. true and, ;_pmpl te. , It is understood that the ,le d ag cy may w thdraw any decl•a
ration' of non-significance that it might issue in r 1 ianc •upon-• 1 checklist should
there be any willful misrepresentation or willful l a o full di osure on my part, 1
I. . ,••
1. .
1......,
3 - J‘. '.. =•-• .-•'.'''''', '.: . . . --..:''' ..':.
P..roponent:
s gne • jk . .
V . I-- ii-- .PY14tyi,, ;-_, :.,....., '-.-.,..,_
s•4 -....,•• --.4,_ .•• .•-, :• (name printed) .,
10;9.. ';'.,' '''''''';., -.'kr,- t ..,'i'..)..41 . • ,.-. *.,..,-.,.. • • '••
73.:7‘;.:;1 cet:-.'''.. • i •.*• .. ...,,.., ,,.., " . • -
r.
s.:,1/4...-.1.f.':
s,.;''. ',.,- '' *. :
1 • '\' ' !,
1,-; ,,^ ' '- ' '
4 ,..'', • . ..,:,•'...),"-if',.....-7.„,. , , .., „._-
1- • -,, „,"
e ' ' ' '.' • ' : ' '''';-:' ' ''... •:.'' City of Rentons,- - • - • , - : •• ._'• -
7 .-. '. Planning -Department • -"sirAz.
5-76 ., ,.• ' . , - . •,_-,-403.'v,ti . • ._ 2 - ,. ' )„, . ...,'"Vsi.7,2t;
f."
s
eceipt #
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NAME ICOUJ 1 1 o//c/iOT/ DATE /z/8,/81
PROJECT & LOCATION ccvP_ C"--7 b &'-3,119/K -S:2-V&A f /ti/95f12&6TaLl 15411,0
Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total
c -
64 / Lc, i IUO. Zvo. oc;
Environmental Checklist v- 4
Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee 4189, 00
fyB?Ooco
TOTAL FEES 27 7'/ o'
Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor.
Thank you.
eceipt #
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NAME DATE
PROJECT E LOCATION Q 4. iel ? / fra/./tr " ii,,,
Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total
Environmental Checklist
Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee
TOTAL FEES
Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor.
Thank you.
ENDING '
OF FILE
FILE nru:
fi - IDD ôI