HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP-91-074 - 4+SP-074-91 4+
Mr. Donald Erickson
City of Renton
October 25, 1991
Page Five
approximately 35% of the liner in Phase V and have tied the
existing man holes I and II into the new man hole as
identified in the plan of operations, and installed the
transmission line into the Leachate Pre -Treatment Building.
The balance of the grading has been performed in Phase V and
we are awaiting permits prior to installing the liner.
Phase VI of the project has been approximately 25% completed.
We have excavated approximately 40% of the material required
to place liners in Phase VI of the project. We have installed
20% of the liner and installed a main leachate collection line
along the eastern portion of the newly installed liner.
I-F Adiacent North and East Properties
The adjacent interface of the proposed new cut-off wall has
been addressed in the drawings as prepared by R.W. Thorpe and
Associates 11SP-074-91 1-A, Cross Section Drawings". With
regards to the stability of the reclamation land fill in areas
where no retaining walls are proposed, I have been told by our
consultants; that the slopes proposed and existing have
adequately been designed to maintain overall stability.
2-A Conceptual Drainage Plan
Please see enclosed a conceptual drainage report as prepared
by Ms. Marlene Ford with David Evans and Associates dated
10/25/91 labeled "SP-074-91 2-A, Conceptual. Drainage Report".
2-B Cross Section Drawings for Cut -Off Wall III
Please see enclosed the cross section drawings for Cut -Off
Wall III as prepared by Kristi Evans with R.W. Thorpe and
Associates dated 10/1�1 labeled 11SP-074-91 1-A, Cross Section
Drawings".
2-C Pipe. Drainage, Leachate Containment and Liner Information
Please see enclosed a letter from Ron J. Owns of Harding
Lawson Associates dated October 24, 1991 labeled 11SP--074-91 1-
C, Cost Data and Leachate Containment and Liner Information".
2-D Landscapg Plans
Please see enclosed a landscape drawing as prepared by Thomas
V. Rengstcrf of Thomas V. Rengstorf & Associates, Sheet L-1
dated August 10, 1990 labeled 11SP-074-91 2-E Landscape
Plans". Mr. Erickson, please keep in mind that ..-1 of this
Mr. Donald Erickson
City of Renton
October 25, 1991
Page Six
drawing has been approved by the City of Renton for
installation of landscaping located within the public right of
way and the newly constructed Cut -Off Walls I and II and the
Leachate Pre -Treatment Building. Landscape drawing L-2 as
provided to the City in June, 1991 is an overall extension of
the landscaping already approved as identified earlier in this
paragraph.
2-E Finished Slopes
Please see enclosed a letter from Mr. James S. Dransfield of
RZA-AGRA Engineering and Environmental Services dated October
1, 1991 labeled "SP-074-91 1-B, Stability and Settling".
Mr. Erickson, I apologize for the time delay in responding to your
letter of September 26, 1991 but the information requested in your
letter required three to four weeks for preparation.
I am in receipt of your letter dated October 18, 1991 and I am hand
delivering three copies of this letter and its enclosures to the
Planning Department for the City of Renton later this afternoon.
I would appreciate it if additional information is required after
review of my letter and enclosures, you would please contact me
with any additional items necessary in order for the environmental
review committee to meet and discuss this project on Wednesday,
November 6, 1991.
Thanking you in advance for your immediate attention and
cooperation in this matter I wish to at this opportunity thank you
and the City staff for meeting with representatives of F.N.W., our
consultants and engineers on September 17, i991 at tae Mt. Olivet
Land Reclamation project. I remain;
4Sin erely,
John W. McKenna, Jr.
Vice President
cc: Greg Montgomery - Danielson, Harrigan
Ron Owes HLA
James Dransfield - RZA-AGRA
Marlene Ford - David Evans & Associates
Kristi Evans - R.W. Thorpe & Associates
Jim Colt - Ainerican Memorial Services
JWM:j1
0
RZA-AGRA
1 October 1991
FNW
PO Box 66826
Seattle, Washington 98166
Attention: Mr. John McWna
Subject: Response to Review Comments
City of Renton
26 September 1991 Letter
Mount Olivet Land Reclamation
Renton, Washington
Dear John:
_ SP-074-91 1-B
0STABILITY AND SETTLING
STY OF F&RON
RECEIVED
OCT 2 5 1991
BUII..D!NG DIVISION
W-5425-1
Per your request, we are writing this letter to respond to specific review comments in the
above referenced letter.
Item B, Stability; Settling
According to the Solid Waste Landfill Design Manual of the Washington State
Department of Ecologv, page 7�-3, the landfill mass would be expexted to typically settle
from 10 to 30 percent of it original thickness under its own weight. Based on our
previous experience with organic materials and settlement, we would anticipate that the
majority of the settlement would occur within the first few years, with the remainder
occurring slowly at an ever decreasing rate over the following 10 to 20 years.
Under item e of the Current Status, we understand that maximum finished slopes would
be no steeper than 2.5h:1 V. This is in accordance with our previous recommendations
regarding site stability and retaining wall design.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or we can
provide further information, please do not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted, -
r`'p7S-DR -
RZA-AGRA, INC. , �•- ' ;,FG :,�„�) a` _.._ .___ __ .
o
0 O T A
James S. Dransfield, P
LPFt S r E C c,
Associate
/A
SP-014-91 1-C
�LOSURE h POST CLOS?'RE
TRUST FUND AGREEMENT
CLOSI. RE AND POST -CLOSURE FEr_
;�,V �TRliST FUND AGREEMENT
( BUILL:,I 3 DIVtSIp{�
TRUST AGREEMENT, ("Agreement") entered into as of 1991 by and among Ame_
rican Memorial Services, Inc., a Washington corporation
("AMS"), Fiorillo North West Incorporated, a Washington corporation ("FNW") and
Metropolitan Federal Savings & Loan Association of Seattle ( 'Met Fed").
RRc itaJ
A. AMS is the owner and FNW is the operator of the Mt. Olivet Land
Reclamation facility in Renton, Washington, and hold all necessary permits to operate a
demolition debris land t11 at that location. AMS and FNW are .jointiy referred to
herein as "Grantors."
B. The Washington, State Department of Ecology "WOE," an agency of
the Washington State Government, has established certain regulations requiring that the
permit holder of a solid waste facility shall provide assurance that funds will be
available when needed for closure and/or post -closure care of the facility, as described
in WA(' 173-304-467.
C. Grantors have elected to establish a trust to provide such hnancial
assurance for the Mt. Olivet facility.
D. Grantors, acting through their duly authorized officers, have selected the
Trustee to be the trustee under this Agreement, and the Trustee is willing to act as
trustee.
E. Therefore. the Grantors and the Trustee have made the following
agreement.
Agreement
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Agreement:
(a) The term "Grantors" means the ANTS and FNW and any
successors or assigns of either of them.
(b) The term "Trustee" means %vfet Fed and any successor to Met Fed
or any swcessor Trustee.
(C) The term "Jurisdictional Health Department" means the Seattle -
King County Department of Public Health or any successor health agencv which has
Junsdiction over the lift. Oil et facility.
ecti n 2. (dentificatiQn of Facilities and Cost Estimates. This Agreement
pertains to the facilities and cost estimates Identified on attached appendix A.
Section 3. Establishment of Fund. The Grantors and the Trustee hereby
establish a trust fund, the "Fund" for the benefit of the Grantors and the Jurisdictional
Health Department. The Grantors and the Trustee intend that the Jurisdictional Health
Department have access to the Fund as herein provided. The Fund is established
initially as a cash demand &posit account at the main branch of the Trustee, to be
supplemented by additional deposits by the Grantors from time -to -time in amounts
equal to Fifty Cents ($0.50) per cubic yard of debris accepted for dumping at the Mt.
Olivet facility. Such deposits and any other property subsequently transferred to the
Trustee, together with all eamings and profits thereon, less anv payments for
distributions made by the Trustee pursuant to this Agreement, shall be and constitute
part of the Fund. The Fund shall be held by the Trustee, IN TRUST, on the terms
hereinafter provided. The Trustee shall not be responsible, nor shall it undertake any
responsibility for, the amount or adequacy of the Fund, nor shall the Trustee have a
duty to collect fron the Grantors any payments necessary to discharge anv liabilities of
the Grantors established by the Jurisdictional Health Department or WDOE pursuant to
the Revised Code of Washington or the Washington Administrative Code.
Section 4. Pavment for Closure and Post-Clostire re. CaThe Trustee shall
make payments from the Fund as the Grantors shall direct in writing, according to the
approved Closure aAll"or Post -Closure Plan, to provide for the payment of the costs of
closure and.ior post -closure care of the facilities covered by this Agreement. The
Trustee shall reimburse the Grantors or other persons as specified in the approved
Closure and/or Post -Closure Plan from the Fund for closure and/or post -closure
expenditures in such amounts as specified in the approved plans. In addition, the
Trustee shall refund to the Grantors such amounts as the Jurisdic"io^al Health
Department specifies in writing. Upon refund, such funds shall no longer constitute
part of the Fund as defined herein.
Section 5. Payments Comprising the Fend. Payments made to the Trustee for
the Fund shall consist of cash or securites acceptable to the Trustee.
Section 6. Trustee Mgnazement. The Trustee shall invest and reinvest the
principal and income of the Fund as a single fund, without distinction between the
principal and income, in accordance with the general investment policies and guidelines
which the Grantors may communicate in writing to the Trustee from time to time,
subiect, however, to the provisions of tris Section and of the following Section 7. In
investing, reinvesting, exchanging, selling, and managing the Fund, the Trustee shai)
discharge its duties with respect to the trust fund solely in the interest of the beneficiary
and with the care, skill. prudence, and diligence under the circumstances then
prevailing which persons or prudence, acting in a like capacity and familiar with such
matters, would use in the conduct of an enterprise of like character and with like aims;
gxceflcthgl:
(a) Securities or other obligations of the Grantors, or anv other
permit holder of the facilities, or anv of their affiliates as defined in the Investment
Company Act of 1940, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 83a-2(a), shall not be acquired or held,
unless they are securities or other obligations of the Federal or a State government;
(b) The Trustee is authorized to invest the Fund in time or demand
deposits of the Trustee. ,o the extent ;nsured by an agency of the Federal or State
government; and
(c) The Trustee is authonzed to hoid cash awaiting investment or
distribution uninvested for a reasonable tame and without liability for the payment of
interest thereon.
10.45-,903'N! Page 2
0
Section 7, Commm-lincr and Investment. The Trustee is expressly authorized
in its discretion:
(a) To transfer from time -to -time anv or all of the assets of the Fund
to any common, commingled, collective trust fund created by the Trustee in which the
Fund is eligible to participate, subject to all of the provisions thereof to be commingled
with the assets of other trusts participating therein; and
(b) Investment of the assets or the Fund shall be restricted to those
investments authorized for investment of public funds as provided in Revised Code of
Washington Sections 39.59.020, 39.59.030, 39.60.010 or 39.60.020, as those statutes
now exist or may hereafter be amended or supplanted.
Secttcn 3. Express Powers of Trustee Without in any way limiting the powers
and discretions conferred upon the Trustee by the other provisions of this Agreement or
by law, the Trustee is expressly authorized and empowered:
(a) To sell, exchange, convey, transfer, or otherwise dispose of any
property held by it, by public or private sale. No person, dealing with the Trustee shall
be bound to see to the application of the purchase money or to inquire into the validity
or expediency of any such sale or other disposition;
(b) To make, execute, acknowledge, and deliver any and all
documents of transfer and conveyance and any and all other instruments that may be
necessary or appropriate to carry out the powers herein ;ranted;
(c) To register any securities held in the Fund own name or in
the name of a nominee and to hold any security in bearer form or in book entry, or to
combine certificates representing such securities with certificates of the same issue held
by the Trustee in other fiduciary capacities, or to deposit or arrange for the deposit of
such securities in a qualified central depository even though, when so deposited, such
securities may be merged and held in bulk in the name of the nominee of such
depository with other securities deposited therein by another person, or to deposit or
arrange for the deposit of any securities issued by the United States Government, or
any agency or instrumentality thereof, with a Federal Resen-e Bank, but the books and
records of the Trustee shall at all times show that all such securities are part of the
Fund;
(d) To deposit any cash in the Fund in interest-bannng accounts
maintained or savings certificates issued by the Trustee, in its separate corporate
capacity, or in any other banking institution affiliated with the Trustee, to the extent
irsured by an agency of the Federal or State government: and
(e) To compromise or otherwise adjust all claims in favor of or
against the Fund.
peon 9. Taxes end Expenses. All taxes of any kind that may be assessed or
levied against or in respect of the Fund and all brokerage commissions incurred by the
Fund shall be paid frorn the Fund. All other expenses incurred by the Trustee in
connection with the administration of this Trust, including fees for legal services
rendered to the Trustee, the compensation of th-- Trustee to the extent not paid directly
by the Grantors, and all other proper charges and disbursements of the Trustee shall be
paid from the Fund.
'JA&ni10" '9' Page 3
Section 10. Annual Valuation. The Trustee shall annually, at least 30 days
prior to the anniversary date of establishment of the Fund, furnish to the Grantors and
the Jurisdictional Health Department a statement confirming the value of the Trust.
Any securities in the Fund shall be valued at market value as of no more than 60 days
prior to the anniversary date of the establishment of the fund. The failure of the
Grantors to object in writing; to the Trustee within 90 days after the statement has been
furnished to the Grantors and the Jurisdictional Health Department shall constitute: a
conclusively binding assent by the Grantors, barring the Grantors from asserting any
claim or liability against the Trustee with respect to matters disclosed in the statement:.
Section 11. Tnastee Compensation, The Trustee shall be entitled to reasonable
compensation for its services as agreed upon in writing from time to time with !:he
Grantors.
Section 12. Successor Trustee. The Trustee may resign or the Grantors may
replace the T. rustee, but such resignation or replacement shall not be effective until the
Grantors have appointed a successor Trustee and the successor accepts the appointment.
The successor tru_'-e shall have the same powers and duties as those conferred upon
the Trustee hereunde..
Upon the successor trustee's acceptance of the appointment, the Trustee shall
assign, transfer, and pay over to the successor trustee the funds and properties then
constituting the Fund. If for any reason the Grantors cannot or do not act in the event
of the resignation of the Trustee, the Trustee may appi.y to a court of competent
jurisdiction for the appointment of a successor trustee or for instructions. T'he
successor trustee shall specify the date on which it assumes administration of the trust
in a writing sent to the Grantors, the Jurisdictional Health Department, and the present
Trustee by certified mail 10 days before such change becomes effective. Any expenses
ncurred by the Trustee as a result of any of the acts contemplated by this Section shall
be paid as provided in Section 9.
Section 13. Instructions to the Trustee. All orders, requests, and instructions
by the Grantors to the Trustee shall be in writing, signed by such persons as are
designated in Appendix A or such other designees as the Grantors may designate by
amendment to Appendix A, and copies of all such orders, requests and instructions
shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid,
and addressed to the Jurisdictional Health Authority, as follows, (or to such other
address or addressee as the Jurisdictional Health Authority may hereafter designate in
writing):
Health Officer
Seattle -King County Department of Public Health
Attn: Chuck Kleeberg
Room LJ1, Smith Tower
Seattle, WA 98104
No portion of the Fund shall be disbursed by the Trustee until approved in
iting writing by the Jurisdictional Health Department, or until the expiration of thirty (:i0)
days after the Jurisdictional Health Department has received of notice, given in the
manner aforesaid, of the proposed disbursement. If within that thirty -day period, the
Jurisdictional Health Department shall have objected in writing to the proposed
disbursement, the disbursement shall not be made by the Trustee unless and until the
Jurisdictional Health Department shall later consent thereto in writing. If the
Jurisdictional Health Department fails either to approve or disapprove the proposed
11MSU_`X031:91 Page 4
0
0-sbursement within the thirty -day period, the proposed disbursement shall be deemed
approved, and the Trustee may make the requested disbursement.
Subject only to the requirement that requests for disbursement be submitted to
the Jurisdictional Health Department for approval or disapproval in the manner stated
above, the Trustee shall be fully protected in acting without inquiry in accordance with
the Grantors' orders, requests, and instructions. All orders, requests, and instni-tions
by the Jurisdictional Health Department to the Trustee shall be in writing, signed by the
Health Officer, or its designees, and the Trustee shall act and shall be fully protected in
acting in accordance with such orders, requests, and instructions. The Trustee shall
have the right to assume, in the absence of written notice to the contrary, that no event
constituting a change or a termination of the authority of any person to act on behalf of
the Grantors or Jurisdictional Health Department hereunder has occurred. The Trustee
shall have no duty to act in the absence of such orders, requests, and instructions from
the Grantors and/or Jurisdictional Health Department, except as provided for herein.
Section 14. Notice of Nonoavment. The Trustee shall notify the Grantors and
the Jurisdictional Health Department, by certified mail within 10 days following the
expiration of the 30-day period after the anniversary of the establishment of the Trust,
if no payment is received from the Grantors during that period. After the pay -in period
is completed, the Trustee shall not be required to send a notice of nonpayment.
Section 15. Amendment of Agreement. This afire: meat may be amended by an
instrument in writing executed by the Grantors. the Trustee, and the Jurisdictional
Health Department, or by the Trustee and the Jurisdictional Health Department if the
Grantors ceases to exist.
Section lamIrrevocability an 'Termination. Subject to the right of the parties
to amend this Agreement as provided in Sectioa 16, this Trust shall be irrevocable and
shall continue until terminated at the written agreement of the Grantors, the Trustee.,
and the Jurisdictional Health Department, by order of a court of competent jurisdiction,
or by the Trustee and the Jurisdictional Health Department, if the grantors ceases to
exist. upon termination of the Trust, all remaining trust property, less final --rust
administration expenses, shall be delivered to and shall become the property of the
Grantors or their successors and assigns.
Section 17. Immunity and Indemnificalion. The Trustee shall not incur
persona' liability of any nature in connection with any t,- or omission, made in good
faith, in the administration of this Trust, or in carrying out any directions by the
Grantors or the Jurisdictional Health Department issued in accordance with this
Agreement. The Trustee shall be indemnified and saved harmless by the Grantors or
from the Trust Fund, or both, from and against any personal liability to which the
Trustee may be subjected by reason of any act or conduct in its official capacity,
including all expenses reasonably incurred in its d,--fense in the event the Grantors fails
to provide such defense.
Section 18, Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be administered, construed,
and enforced according to the laws of the State of Washington.
cti n 19_Interpretation. As used in this Agreement, words in the singular
include the plural and words in the plural include the singular. The descriptive
headings for each section of this Agreement shall not affect the interpretation or the
legal efficacy of this Agreement.
AM"L.R0)1`9I Page 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hpve ,;ausfd this Agreement to be
executed by their respective officers duly authonz x ;- of tl ; date first above written.
AMERICAN MEMORIAL SERVICE, INC.
By
Its
FIORILLO NORTHWEST INCORPORATED
Its
METROPOLITAN FEDERAL SAVINGS &
LOAN ASSOCIATION
1z
I
SEA'ITLE-KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC HEALTH
Its
'I'mS WA031 19! Page 6
a
=R
Earl Clymer, Mayor
October 18, 1991
Is CIT'%&F R.ENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Lynn Guttmann, Administrator
John W. McKenna, Jr.
Fiorillo Northwest, Inc.
PO Box 66826
Seattle, WA 98166-0826
SUBJECT: Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
ECF; SP-074-91
Dear Mr. McKenna:
The :eft. Olivet Land Reclamation project has been tentatively scheduled for consideration by the
City of Renton Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on Wednesday, November 6, 1991. This
meeting date is contingent upon the receipt of the written materials (requested in my September
26, 1991 correspondence to you) by October 25, 1991. As stated in that letter, we are "planning on
presenting the project for a preliminary environmental threshold determination within two weeks of
receipt of the requested data."
Once your sutmittal is received, staff will evaluate the materials and develop its report and
recommendations for presentation to the city's "responsible official", the ERC. if you are not able
to meet the submittal deadline then the project will have to be rescheduled for an ERC meeting on
either November 13, 20, 27, or a meeting date later if necessary. Generally, staff requires a
minimum of seven (7) to ten (10) calendar days to prepare, re,!;ew, and revise reports to ERC.
Please alert me at 277-5582 or Jennifer Toth Henning at 277-6186 if you will not be able to submit
the requested data by October 28, 1991 to meet the November 6th tentative ERC schedule. Thank
you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
(�-
Donald K. Erickson, AICP
Zoning Administrator
dke:jth
cc: Zanetts Fonts
Greg Montgomery
Jim Hanson
Jennifer Toth Henning
Earl Clymer, Mayor
• Ll l 19jr ImitiA! l Vir
Planning/Building/Public Works Depanmer t
Lynn Guttmann. Administrator
September 26, 1991
Mr. John McKenna
Fwrdlo Norttrwest, Inc.
P.O. Sox 66826
Seattle, WA 98
Subject: Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
File No. E('.F; SP-074-91
Dear Mr. McKenna:
We are writing to respond to Greg Montgomery's letter to Zanetta Fontes of September 3, 1991. In
his letter, Mr. Montgomery states that there have been repeated inquiries by City staff about issues
which are fully explained in the materials already submitted to the City. After careful review, we
beg to differ. The materials City staff has in hand for this development application include:
1) A Plan of Operation (Harding Lawson Associates, November 1, 19%);
2) Project drawings G1, C', C2, C3, C4, C5, C6, C7 and Technical Specifications S1, S2
and S3 (all by Harding Lawson Associates October 18, 19%);
3) A context map showing the location of immediately adjacent properties and the
Monterey Terrace neighborhood;
4) Project drawings for thi3 wall and leachate building by Miles Consulting Engineers C-1
(May 1990), C-2 (January 1990), C-3 (January 1990), C-4 (February 1990), C-5 (June 1990);
5) Project landscape drawing L-2 by Keystone Construction Company Inc. dated
September 20, 1990;
6) Results of the subsurface exploration and geotechnical recommendations by
Rittenhouse -Zeman and Associates, Inc. (October 16, 1989 and January 8, 1990);
project;
7) City of Renton Master Application and Environmental Checklist. for the proposed
8) Certification of Notification of Property Owners; and,
9) Letter from the applicant to Don Erickson, dated June 12, 1991, which describes the
proposed project.
During staffs preliminary internal environmental review of the application, several questions were
raised by staff members which prompted letters to the you and your attorney. As we continue our
review and receive correspondence from the yottr attomeys, additional concems are brought to
light. This exploration and response process is typical of all major projects. Staffs letter to you
(September 3, 1991) for example, summarizes an information request made by the City's Technical
200 'Mill Avenue Souch - Renton, Washington 98055
Mr. John McKenna •
ECF; SP-074-91
September 26, 1991
Page 2
Advisory Committee (TAC). Prior to being able to make a recommendation to the Errvironmental
Review Committee (ERC), the TAC (in the September 3rd letter) asked you to provide the City with
more 61omm dIon. SEPA Rules (WAC 197011435) state that: 'the lead agency shaA make its
threshold determination based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the
environmental impact of a proposal (197-11M5(2) and 197-11-060(3)).' SEPA allows the lead
agency to require an applicant to submit more information on subjects in the checklist in order to
make its threshold determination. The information we are requesting is within the boundaries of
SEPA with the exception of Cost Data (ltrm C)) and this is allowed under Judge Noy s
Memoraduum Opinion (May 21, 1991) which states that the SEPA review must b9 'balanced,
reasonable and fully aware of ecc.nomical feasibilities-' It woUd appear to be in the your as well as
our best interest to have 3s questions answered now rather than having them possibly delay the
project in the form of conservative ERC mitigation conditions later on.
We appreciate the site visit you conducted for our staff and the Technical Advisory Committee on
Tuesday, September 17, i 991. Although a number of questions were addressed during this field
trip, the answers people heard are open to individual interpretation and could subsequently vary. It
is for this reason, and the fact that thu information imparted is not a part of the public record, that
we are requesting written answers at this time.
In light of Mr. Montgomery's letter, if the information requested has already been included as a part
of this application, we seek assistance from you in identifying its location in the above referenced
documents. The concerns raised in my letter of September 3, 1991 to you are summarized below:
A) Height/Aesthetic3
We c; :) not have a topographic map or cross -sections illustrating the appearance of the landfill in
relation to surrounding property owners (within 300 feet of the subject site).
According to page 2-6 of the Plan of Operation, 'a minimum of 6 inches of topsoil will be placed
above the final cover, and grass will be planted and maintained on the topsoil.' This indicates that
the final use of th, site, beyond the project, is as a grassy slope. The City requests that you as
applicant or the under -lying property owner state the most probable ultimate use of the site,
beyond the closure of the project in order to determine the finished height for the protect. If the
ultimate height of development on this site is to be 333 feet, we need to know what the ultimate use
would be so that we can cut back the finished height of this grade and fill application to
accommodate the height of such development. Since the City does not want developments on the
prominent hill that will visually clash with surrounding land forms and development, it may have to
assume a worse case scenario in the absence of reasonable dlsdosure and subsequently reduce
the finished grade on this project to reflect such ultimate development.
B) Stabllity/Settling
The only reference we have found which addresses settlement is contained in a letter from Greg
Montgomery to Zanetta Fontes dated August 2-2, 1991. On page 2, under the sub -heading 'Long-
term site mairmtenance' the letter states that 'FNW Is advised by its consultants that the site should
stabilize within ten years of completion of the project and closure of the site.'
Is there another reference in the materials submitted with this application; if so, would you be so
kind to reference 4 for us.
Mr. John McKenna • •
ECF; SP-074-91
September 26, 1991
Page 3
C) Cost Data
So that we can consider the economic feasibility of the project in relation to height and aesthetic
considerations, the City has requested a rate schedule. Furthermore, cost estimates for the third
cut-off wall have also been requested in order to consider economic feasibility. We do know from
the City's Master Application that the total estimated value of the proposed project i3
approximately $100,000. Is this still considered to be an accurate assessment since you have
indicated that the sewer extension cost about W,000. We also request a summary of Fiorillo
Northwest's expenses to date and what they are projected to be with completion of the proposed
project.
In discussions with the Seattle/King County Health Department, we have been told that the post -
closure fund for the 20-year maintenance has not yet been finalized. Further, while a 20-year
maintenance plan is required by the State of Washington, King County employs a more stringent
30-year maintenance plan. We would like written assurance from Fiorillo Northwest that the
funding is in place for a 30-year post -closure maintenance plan.
D) Sguth Wall
We have only one note referencing the mausoleum wall (Sheet C-0 of the October 18, 19W project
drawings). We would like to know if this is considered to be a part of the pending application. If it
is, we will need full submittal drawings for the improvement and the submission of an application
for a Conditional Use Permit per Section 4-31-36 (0) of the City's Building Regulations.
E) Closure Status
The Plan of Operation does discuss the phases of the project that have been completed. We have
received some follow-up information from you via telep►lone conversations, but would like to
confirm the status of closure in a written correspondence fur our files.
F) Adiacent North and East Properties
The City is concemed with the aesthetic interface of the proposed cutoff wall and new fill with
surrounding properties. We are also concerned about the stability of the landfill in areas where
retaining walls are not now proposed.
CURRENT STATUS
The TAC also met again to discuss the proposed project yesterday (September 24, 1991).
Substantial progress was made in reviewing the application. However, as noted above, it is
necessary to obtair the above -referenced Information in the form of a written submittal from Fiorillo
Northwest in order to proceed with the review of the project in a timely manner. Based on the TAC
discussions yesterday, the following is also being requested In order to continue the technical and
environmental reviews necessary before this project goes on to the ERC.
a) ConCeetusl Drainage Plan.,
A conceptual drainagF plan will be required prior to finalizing any
environmental threshold determination per the requirements of the City (Section 4-22-5) and the
1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual (see attachment 'A'). The site visit demonstrated
Mr. John McKenna
ECF: SP-074-91
September 26, 1991
Page 4
that site slopes are steep and composed of a compacted clay soil that has been hydroseeded.
The City is concerned with the on -site and off -site drainage as this layer is generally imperrr ale.
b) Crosa-Seational Drawings for Cut-O Wall 3• The City or a private developer will probably
need to Improve Blaine Avenue North East et some future time. If widening is necessary, Staff is
concerned that the structural integrity of the wall could be compromised. Further, site landscaping
may be impacted by road widening. We request that you provide cross -sectional drawings of the
roadway. These drawings should show the requested information at 50-foot intervals, and are to
include the elevation at the base of the proposed wall, elevation at the property line, elevation at
the roadway center line, and elevation at 25 fleet back from the property line. Since these drawings
will also be used by the TAC to evaluate visual impacts of the proposed project, the cross sections
should extend from the center line of Blaine Avenue NE through the finished slope to the highest
point of the landfi.'l.
c) Pipe. Drainage, t eaghate Containment and Liner Information Since the site is located
within Zone 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area, the City needs additional information in order to
ascertain the potential impacts of the project on the aqufer. The City requests that you provide
rm infoation and specifications on pipeline materials, stcrmwater facility liners, and leachate
containment.
dj Landscape Plane. The City is in possession of landscape Plan Sheet L-2 (Keystone
Construction Company - September 20, 1990). A complete landscape plan is needed prior to
finalizing the City's review. The City requests that Fiorillo provide Sheet L-1 of the landscape
drawings and any other drawings or specifications available for site landscaping.
el Finished Slopes. Sheet CA of the Harding Lawson project drawings (10/18/90) indicates that
side slopes of the proposed project would be 2.5:1. Please confirm in writing the finished
maximum slope for all slopes of the project.
This project is complex and requires careful consideration. Wh;1e we accepted the application on
July 17, 1991; additional information is necessary prior to completing our staff review and making a
recommendation to the City's "responsible official'. You need to know that this application stands
alone and does not incorporate by reference materials submitted for previous applications on the
property.
We appreciate your attention tc this data request. We are anxious to more your project ahead in a
timely manner and are currently planning on presenting the project for a preliminary
environmental threshold determination within two weeks of receipt of the requested data.
If you have any questions about the information requested in this letter please contact either me at
277-5580 or Jennifer Toth Henr Ing, tho project planner, at 277-6186.
Sincerely,
Donald K Erickson, AICP
Zoning Administrator
• Mr. John McKenna •
ECF; SP-074-91
September 26, 1991
Page 5
DKE: jth
cc: Zanetta Fontes, Esq
Greg Montgomery
Ron Owes
Jennifer Toth Henning
Dick Anderson
Jim Hanson
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
STAFF REPORT
September 24,1991
A. BACKGROUND:
APPLICANT:
Fiorillo Northwest, Inc.
PROJECT:
Mt. Olive, Land Reclamation
APPLICATION NOS.
ECF.SP-074-91
�DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
Expansion of the Mt. Olivet Land Reclamat!on onto the
four adjoining residential lots to the south 8 west of the 1
existing landfill. The prciect would construct a third
cut-off wall that would vary In height, but which would
be up to 12 font in height. Landscaping would be
installed at the base of the wall in a five-foot wide
ntanting strip (possibly :)n City property), and would
consist of nativa ornamental trees, shrubs and
grounc;covers . The project would add about 83,000
cubic yards of construction debris fill to the site and
would include closure of all six phases of the landfill.
Construction and closure would take about six months
from initiation of project activity.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
2325 N i hird St
Lr ACINATE PRETREATMENT
BUILDING (SEE NOTE I) —
EXISTING
LEACNATE
COLLLCTION POND
(SEE NOTE 2I —
EXIS IING
sETTLING
'NO 2
EXISTING
SETTLING
POND 3
Technical Advisory Aee Staff Report •
PAT 01�-et land Rgciarnation
September 24 199!
Page:
B. ISSUES:
BACKGROUND
Tlw applicant seeks a Special Permit to exrand and complete the fail ara! grade operation beyur,
under Special Permit in
! ANC USE
Whether the proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan zoning
designation and with the Goals, Policies and Objectives set forth in the Plan?
The Renton Comprehensr.e Plan Land Use Map designates the pr'�ect site as
Public/ Quasi -Public uses The Mt (..Net Landfill is riot consistent with this designation
due to its potential for heary truck traffic. noise odor and the proximity of the project to
the adjacent single family residential neighborhood (Monterey Te(race)
2. Whether the proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and
other applicable regulations/standards?
The project site is desigriated as General (G•1) on the t ty of Renton Zoning Map The G-i
Zone has been established to provide and protect suitable environments for low density
single-'amily residential dwellings The intent of the zone Is to prohibit the development 0
Inc. mpahble uses that are detrimental to the r-,sxdentiai environment The landfill is not an
expressly permitted or prohibited land t-se under th.s zone and would require an approval
by the City's Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner :s required to make a
determination that the activity would not be unreasonably detrimental to the surrounding
area.
3. Whether the proposed development is compatible with vicinity land uses.
Surrounding land uses include e Mt Olivet Cemetery, directly adjacent and located to
The south and east, and the A' , itwey Terrace single family residential neighbortv--od,
directly to the west. The propox � -tion Is consistent with previous activity of the project
site. Construction. activity assix..+ted with the Gre ie and Fill permit would be
incompatible with the adjacent single-family residentid, uses ('.Aonterey Terrace),
throughout the duratic,l of a,i struction (approximatley 6 months)
ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Whether the applicant has adequately identified arid addressed the followi-tg
environmental impacts likely to occur in conjunction with the proposed development.
a. Aesthetics/Lend Use
Impacts Under the proposal, the landfill would be finished and closed at a height
of 335 feet and would be higNy visible from the Monterey Terrace neighborhood,
Liberty Park, Jones Park, downtown rent n,%, Rainier Avenue South and iiYest Hill.
The landfill is located on top of a plateau 11.31 sits abov, a slope rising from the
valley floor. Generally, elevations on :hvs plateau average from 200 to 300 feet in
height and are densely covered by deciduous and evcryr;,cn trees Portions of
the landfill are at heights up to 335 feet Under the proposed plan, much of this f0I
would be expanded and reconfigured, such that 1`ie 335 fact height would not be
exceeded, but the coverage at this height would exparxd horizontally The
appearance of the larxdfal when viewed from oif-site areas 'would contrast
substantially with surrounding landfcrm aryl established vegetative [;patterns
The project would result in the removal of the four existing singie family residential
dwellings which presently abut the existing landfill site on the west. These homes
would either be relocated or demolished and pushed into the landfill Potential
reiocation sites have not yet been identified A third cut off wall for methane arPJ
leachate migration would then be constructed and the fill rapacity of the site
increased extending Into the fo,-mer site of the tour residences. A board and
batten, poured -in -dace finish would be used on this third concrete cut-off wall to
Technw:al Advisory l'W'L ee Staff Repo
Kilt - Olivet Land Reclamation
September 24. 1991
Page 3
be in keeping with the appearance of extstling waAs The applicant has proposed
to hydroseed the slope. landscape the at --a in front of he wal (possibly on City
Property) with tees and shrubs and maintain the landscaping fur a Deriod of
twee; y years.
The propcieed height of this cut-off w-J world allow for the additim of the
proposed vdurne of fits As "ed above, the resr.Ring grass -covered nnaxYJ
would be highly v-sfbte from IocatYns to the west hdudrng downtawm Rerito n.
West HA, the C1vic Center area a:x- ririnier Avenue South Prnposed Isndscaping
woxtd dfer it appearance with the natural appearance d other hilts in the area
Aesthetic impacts rzay also occur due to the height of the propos4id wail
Corcerrs have been raLsed by Staff over the possibility that the wail would be a
target for graffiti The proposed 13ndscaping and maintenance plan does not
appear adequate tc mitigate the Dc-tertial visual impacts ^f ihn project
M_ Action Measu� See Recommendations 1 through 4
Policy Nexus Mir, ng, Excavation and GradirAj Ordinance. Environmental Rcr-iew
Ordinance 4 b.
b. Earth
ImpaYy3 The project sire is an extension of an existing tandfit facility which
accepts constriction; demolition debris The applicant has applied for a Special
Permit, it accordance with Section 4-31-27 of tree Renton !Municipal Code, fix the
required grading on the site to expand the facility by adding approxicratley
84,000 cubic yards ql RI: remove existing structures. construct cut-off and
retaining walls, and, to complete firal closure of the site Finished sicpes would
to installed and maintained at a 3 1 (horizontal vertical) slope
Staff is concerned about potential Impacts including erosion, slope stability and
the potential for contaminated soils being accept& ..ito the landfill
M tig tic an MeaSWP$ See Recommendations 5. 6 and 7
jxW Renton Municipal Code
C. Air
Imogt� Usual cr4)struction retailed Impacts are expected to occur Including
dust. and odor from leachate The greatest impact is expected to be to the
adocent Monterey Terrace residential neighborhood directly across Blaine
Avenue (Mt. Olivet Drive) to the west A requirement to accept 'dean' fil only
would minimize odors (As defined by the State of Washington Minimum
Functional Standards for Solid Waste Handling (WAC 173-304, Nov 19851
derrx-AiAon waste ,s defined as 'slid waste. largely inert waste, restlt6ng form the
dernrdAlon or razing of bididngs, roads and other man-nmide structures
Demolltlon waste consists of but is not Ifmned to. concrete. brick, bOuxnlnous
concrete, wood and masonry, comoosilk>n roofing and roofing paper, ste4, and
minor amounts of other metals liek capper Plaster 11 e , sheet rock or piaster
board) or any other material other than wood that Is likely to produce gases (W a
ieachate during the decomposnion process and asbestos wastes are not
considered to be demolition waste for the purpos+s of this regulation ' Mt Olivet
no longer accepts concrete, whrh was formerly cr,-shed prior to being added tc
the landfill )
M01,10tign MeaW!Z See Recommendation 8
FVr_y NexU3 Comprehensive Plan - Erroronmental Elements. Envircxr-*Weal
Rev,ew Ordinance 4-6
Technical Advisory Cee Staff Report
Mt Olivet Land Reclamation
September 24. 1991
Pdge 4
d. Water
ImDaCts The project is located within Zone 2 of the City's Aquifer Protection Area.
This area is sensitive in that k is within the zone of capture for recharge of the
City's sole source aquifar. Potential impacts Include the potential for
comaminatfon ersering the Cey's Sole Source Aquifer frrxn the leachate
conveyance system, truck wash or drak%Xp faciikies.
Mil 1LiQn lvteasurM See Recommendations 9 and 10.
Pdk"r Nen Mining, Grading and Exca-mtiorl Ordinance; Ernvironmental Review
Ordinance. Model Toxics Cordroi Ad; Comprehensive Plan - Environmental
Elements
e. Natural Environrnent
Imnm,15 The project as proposed would potentially impact existing coniferous
trees located or the Mt OIKet Cemetery, directly south of and adjacent to the
project site Filling and grading to a0leve the proposed finished slope could
impact the root zone of the trees A fill is placed within the drip line.
Mitigation Measures See Recommendatlon 11 and 17.
Lard CJearing and Tree -Cutting Ordinance.
Traffic
Impact., Hauling of construction workers and materials to the project site :o
reiocatejdemotir.h four residences and construct the third cut-off wall wood
contribute to excessive wear and damage to the Chi 's roadways due to the use of
heavy truces Further, the filling operation woi: ;enerate approximately 250 to
300 trips per day for a construction period of a, oximately six months. Traffic
capacity on NE 4th Street will be reduced during the construction of the 1-405 S-
curves project, H these projects are occurring at the same time, cumulative Laffic
impacts would result
The base of the proposed wall would be at a much greater elevation than the
adjacent roadwa/, Blaine Avenue NE. When it becomes necessary to widen
Blaine Avenue NE for development access, beyond the subject property, the
roadway vvidenhng would remove the support for the proposed wall as well as
landscaping installed for the proposed project. The wall would require iedesign
with the supports Installed at a lower elevation to mitigate this impact
Mitigation Measure.S: See Recommendations 12 and 13.
Policy Nexus Mining, Grading and Excavation Ordinance, Environmental Review
Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan - Environmental Elements.
9. Public Services/UtUities
Fire;'Police Services
imLacts Emergency services has concerns regarding site access and
the handling or use of hazardous chemicals during constructlon. Pdir;e
services report adequate resources to provide anticipated services to the
site during construction
Mitigation MeasurU� See Recommendation 14
P-Q[ir�Nex0 Uniform Fire Code, Article 80
Storm Water Management
impacts The City is conceineo due tc the sensitr.ity of the area as it is
located in Zone 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area, and because of drainage
problems observed and documented over time
Techriical Adv;sory Aee Staff Report
Mt. Ofivet Land Redanrat: n
Septemhar 24, 1991
Page 5
Mhiclation MgggQrogs: See Notes to Applicant
Policy Nex'is: 1990 King County Storm and Surface Water Manual;
Comprehensive Plan - Environmental Elements: Environmental Review
Ordinance 4-6; Renton Municipal Code 4-22-5.
Sanitary Sewer
Imrrsct1: The she is within Lower Cedar River Sanitary Sewer Collection
Basin and the South Highlands Sub -basin. Minimum requirements of the
Department of Ecology, METRO, and City of Renton would need to be
met as a condition of approval.
Mitlgation FAea&M: See Recommendation 15
POliry Nexus: NIA
Construction
Impacts: Usual construction related Imparts are expected, Including, but not
limited to noise, dust, truck traffic, and odors. Umfting the fours of operation
would limit the length of time residents would be exposed to noise, dust and traffic
impacts. The expected 250 to 300 trip,: per day during the construction period
would Impact local and regional roadways. Limiting hours would alleviate some
potential traffic Impacts.
Mitigation Measure5 See Recommendation 16 and 17
Policy Nexus: Environmental Review Ordinance 4-6
I C. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the ERC issue a Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated with the
following conditions:
1. The appliant shall decrease the overall height of the landfill based upon determinations of
view studies in order to diminish visual Impacts to the surrounding land uses and vlew
impacts from areas to the west. Including downtown, West Hit, Cfvfc Center and Lake
Washington.. The applicant shall also round and feather finished slopes in order to blend
the project slopes In with the natural appearance of surrounding landforms.
2 The applicant shall decrease the height of the proposed cut -oft wall proposed under this
permit in order to reduce the amount of fill added to the she and thus diminish the visual
impact of the proposed project on off -site areas. Prior to pudic hearing, the applicant
shall provide ratkxtale (environmental and economic) justifying the proposed helght of the
cut-off wall.
3 The applicant shall supplement the proposed landscape plan to inr_lude coverage of the
slope with native trees, shrubs and grasses in order to improve the aesthetic appearance
of the project and for erosion control purposes The applicant shall revise their
Management Plan to meet the requirements of the Seattle,'King County Health Department
for a 30-year plan. The applicant shall also submit to the City proof of their financial ability
to maintain project landscaping over the course of the 30.year plan.
4 Revise the she landscape plan to Include native trees and shrubs on the slopes which
would be visible from Monterey Terrace and lowland areas west of the project site All
landscape plans will be subject to review and approval of the City staff
5. The applicant shall submit a temporary erosion control plan for the proposed fill acl�/ity
and construction of the proposed wall. The applicant shall also provide a permanent
erosion control system for closure activity to City staff for review In order to mitigate
potential erosion impacts
6. The applicant shall agree to accept only 'dean' fill (e g minimal amounts of organic
matter, with a maximum diameter of eight Inches or less, no soluble poisons or other
Technical Advisory A ee Staff Report
Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
September 24, 1991
Page 6
leachable materials, no petroleum based substances, including distillates and asphalt) to
minimize odors and protect the aquifer.
7. The applicant shall modify their final grading plant to ensure that site slopes will be limited
to a maximum 3:1 slope (horizontal to vertical) on all finished slopes.
8. The applicant shall, in order to control dust, water down the construction area of the site
twice daily during construction and more often on days when winds exceed 15 miles per
hour for more than one-half hour. The applicant shall require haul truck operators to use
effective covers to reduce wind-blown dust and debris throughout construction activities.
Hydroseeding and replanting shall occur immediately upon completion of construction of
ells or phases.
9 The applicant shall provide additional Information to the Development Services Division
prior to the public hearing, such that City staff can determine and ensure that the leachate
conveyance system does not leak and that the leachate collection system efficiently
collects and treats all leachate. Drainage facilities shall not allow infiltration prior to
treatment (tight -fining of treatment facility, blofiltration, lined ponds should occur)
Stormwater must be treated prior to infiltration. Methods of leachate treatment shall be
approved by both City staff and the Seattle/King County Health Department.
10. The applicant shall deposit sufficient funds with the City so that it can retain a qualified
professional geotechnical engineer through the environmental review process. The
consultant shall provide the City with quarterly reports (or more frequently depending cn
the activity). These reports will include results of site inspections and monitoring and
Include descriptions of activity at the truck wash facility, leachate collection and treatment
facilities, drainage facilities, and ground water monitoring results, and status of site such as
the area being worked, type of till used, etc.
Groundwater, leachate and soils monitoring shall be conducted by qualified contractors
hired by the City and paid by the applicant with fees provided by the applicant. The
applicant shall provide quarterly reports prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineering
firm, In a timely manner, providing a detailed description of fill material used (composition,
source, etc,) during the quarter, the results of fill testing, the status of drainage and
recharge facllities, and the results of leachate sampling tests. The applicant shall
undertake on -site analysis including sail samples to be taken on site on a quarterly basis.
Sampling shall take place in areas where fill was placed during that quarter. The number
of samples and spacing shall be adequate to cover the area filled and to determine quaf3y
of the fill in that area. Any samples exceeding the Model Toxics Control Act limits shall be
tested again. If the second round of testing shows that limits still are exceeded, then that
material shall be removed until remaining sobs Is below stated limits. Groundwater
monitoring shall be conducted at all six of the monitoring wells on a quarterly bac.ls. In
addition, organics and heavy metals should be tested on a quarterly basis.
Leachate monitoring shall include, but riot be limited to: TOC, BTEX, TOX, total coliform
bacteria, lurbid4y, specific conductance, nitrate, pH, VOC, heavy metals and other
probable contaminants. Soils monitoring shell include, but no: be limited to: heavy
metals, TOC, VOC, TPH, and other probable contaminants.
Consultants hired by the City through funding provided by the applicatn shall conduct she
Inspections at a frequency of once each week. Site inspections shall Included walking the
entire site to check the status of drainage facilities, leachate collection and conveyance
systems, and truck wash facilities. In addition, ground water monitoring shall tie
conducted as a condition of project approval.
11 The applicant shall avoid the drip line and root zone area of the coniferous trees on the
southern boundary of the property during grading activity to protect the existing trees.
The applicant shall finish slopes at 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) and shall avoid any
construction activity and within the drip line area (including filling, storage of equipment, ei
use of heavy equipment within the o, ip line).
12. The applicant shall provide a renewable $ 10,000 bond for street cleaning alone. haul
routes and along Blaine Avenue (Mi. Olivet Drive) prior to The
applicant shall also provide a performance bond or similar guarantee acceptable to the
City Attorney for an amount of $ to cover street dean -up or excessive wear or
damage to vehicles attributed to the proposed use. These bonds shall be subject to the
satisfaction of the City Attorney
0
Technical Advisory Committee Staff Report
'At. Olivet Land Reclamation
September 24, 1991
Page 7
13. The applicant shall provide cross -sectional drawings of the proposed cut-off wail and Its
relaton to Blaine Avenue In order to assess poient'al Impacts to the roadway. These
drawings shall be provided at 50-toot intervals which show- the elevation of the base of
the proposed wall; elevation at the property line: and, the elevation at the center line of
Blaine Avenue NE. !f approved, the applicant shall Install the proposed cut-off wa8 at an
eievatkxt of 1.5 feet below the roadway grade for Blaine Avenue NE to protect the integrity
of the wail support. The top eleva'icn of the wall wo+id not change.
14 The applicant shall maintaln emergency access to the site during project co: structlon
15 The applicant shall meet all Department of Ecology and Metro requirements and all of the
City of Rentor.'s requirements for connections to Sanitary Sewer mains.
16 The applicant shall agree to lime the hours of construction to 8 30 a.m to 3 30 p m ,
Monday through Friday in order to mitigate noise and traffic impacts In the area. This
agreement shall be submitted to and be to the satisfaction of the Development Services
Division..
17. The applicant shall revise the Grading Plan prior to public hearing to ensure that no
grading occurs within the drip line of coniferous trees on the south side of the property.
The applicant shall fit and finish the filled slopes to avoid the drip line aoc: roc. zone of
these trees. No heavy equipment or trucks shall be allowed by the applicant by the
applicant to work above or or top within the drip line of these trees.
NOTE #': Hazardous chemicals will be handled by the applicant in conformance with the
Uniform Fire Code.
NOTE #2: A minimum Levei 1 stormwater analysis shall be pertomred and surrrbitted City
Staff for review prior to project approval.
NOTE #3: All plans shall be completed In compliance with the 1990 King County surface
Water Drainage Manual, In particular, the core requirement for Off -Site Analysis and for an
Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan In addition, a conceptual drainage plan should be
submitted to the City for approval prior to site plan approval, per City Code 4-22-5.
D. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS:
j
j Various City departments have reviewed and commented upon the project These comments are
attached. J
tJ i i Mw� \J A. 1. %► iJ 1 7 i V 1 1
Piarming/Building/Public Works Uepa=ent
Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Gun=nn, Administrator
Septerntar 3, 1991
John W. McKerma, Jr.
F*nllo Northwest, Inc.
P.O. Box 66M
Seattle, WA 98166.OM
SUBJECT: Mt. Olivet land Reclamation
Fie No. I=CF;SP-074-91
Dear Mr. McKenna:
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) reviewed the above -referenced project on August 27, 1991. They
have a number of concsms which they would like to have addressed before the project is submitted to the
Environmental Review Committee (ERC) for the environmental determination.
TAC is concerned about the current height of the landfill and the appearance of the slope (existing and
proposed). If the project site were eventually used fcr another use (such as a cemetery), there is concern
that the height would 'increase further as additional so4s presumably wouid have to be imported, adding to
the site's height
Another unresolved issue surfaced during the TAC discussion, the height of the landfill may be in conflict
with the Renton Municipal Airport Obstruction Area. Heights in the Airport Obstruction Area (east and west
of the airport) are limited to 179 feet. Even though existing terrain exceeds 179 feet in some areas, the
audition of fit or structures above the natural contours could be construed as an impact on the airport's
flight/safety patterns. The Mt Olivet Landfill is within this Airport Obstruction Area. and a Notice of
Proposed Construction would need to be prepared and submitted to the Renton Municipal Airport for
review. The Akpcxt wouid then circulate the Notice of Proposed Construction to the Federal Aviation
Administratk)n (FAA) .or an advice letter.
TAC also has concerns about wear and tear on local roads, and the potential impacts to traffic flow on
Northeast 3rd Street. The addition of up to 30C trips per day could affect rc,ad surfaces and traffic flow
during peak hours.
Since the project site is located in the City's Aquifer Protection Zone 2, TAC has concerns with regard to
drainage and leachate treat-^crt and discharge. Slope stability is also considered to be an unresolved
issue at this point.
Because of these and other concerns,. the Technical Advisory Committee requests that the applicant
provide more information regarding the following questiom:
Heiaht /Aesthetics
(a) How wit the project relate to topography and appearance of the surrounding landform and
terrain? In order to evaluate the finished height and contours, please submit a map
showing the subject property in relation to adjacent and surrounding properties. This map
should indicate 10-foot contour intervals both on ttoe project site and surrounding
properties within a 300' radius of the site.
(b) How will! the larxffM appear to adjacent properties foilovAng closure? The applicant should
provide cross -sectional drawings NuWadng the Phase 6 cut-off wall and fAi and their
relationship to the Monterey Terrace neighborhood.
(c) Wit additional fil be added following closure as a direct result ultimate use of the site?
For example, I the site were used to expand the adjacent cemetery, would several feet of
topsoil need to be added to the protect site for cemetery use?
200 SGI Avenue South - Renton. Washington 98055
Mr. John McKenna, Jr.
ECF;SP-074-91
Seoternber 3, 1991
Page 2
2- StaWit;/Settling. What is the anticipated amourrt of Settierrrent that is expected to occur and over
what time frame? How many inches or feet world the site be expected to settle over the course of
the first year following dossing after two years; after 10 years, after 20 years?
(a) How much will haulers be charged to bring construction/derrofflon material to the project
site? This request wi assist us in aratyzing the economic feasibility of the proposed
project in compliance with the Courts direction.
(b) What is the estimated cost of the pr000sed Third Cut -Off WaO aria the 20-foot high wall
shown on Sheet C-3 of the project drawings pocated at the southern edge of the project
site?)
(c) Has the Post-Closurs Trust Fund been finalized with the Seattle/King County Health
Department? Would the hind cover ttw! 20-year maintenance period as required by the
State of Washington and the 30-year period required by the local health jurisdiction?
Would the Trust Fund be used for local repairs to City roads'? Would this fund provide for
any kind of traffic impact mitigation?
South Wd. Please provide a description of the proposed 20-foot wag illustrated on Sheet C-3 of
the project drawings. Is this wail considered to be part of the application that is before the City cf
Renton at this time? Provide cross -sectional drawings indicating the relationship of the wag to the
adjacent Mt. Olivet Cemetery. Would fill (other than what is indicated on the drawings) be placed
behind the wag? If so, wh type of fig would be used?
5. Closure ,Status. Which phases of the project are considered to be dosed at this time? Whdt
percentage of closure has been achieved in the remaining phases?
6. AdiaAq North and East Proverties How does the project interface with the adjacent properties
to the north and east? How is runoff herded and lesehate collected in this area?
If you have any questions about the Technical Advisory CommAtee concerns, please call me at 235-2550.
The Development Services Division would like to resolve the concerns raised by the Technical Advisory
Cot nmittee.
Donald K Erickson, AICP
Zoning Adn*dstrator
DKE: jmt
cc: Zanetta Fontes, Esq.
Ron Nelson
Jim Hanson
Jennifer Toth
c +EQ P"TGOERT
VIA . _. :,COPIER
Zanetta Fontes,
Warren, Kellogg,
i Fontes
P.O. Box 626
LAW OMCEs
DANIELSON HARRIGAN a TOLLEFSON
A r^A'NC+rLN+P MCLUCINO P*:r656KJMK CCROOMAT,pN{
A40C PAST INTERSTATE CENTER
SEATTLL, WA6M1MGTQtw 96104
i20C1 C23 - I700
September 3, 1991
Esq.
Barber, Dean
Renton, WA 98057
Re: Mt. Olivet Reclamation Project
Dear Zanetta;
y rof�R NTONN
SEp - 5 1991
RECEIVED
TELEX Z84 501 QH5T 6A
FACSIMILEJiCOb 523.8717
I an writing to follow up on our telephone conversation last
week and to confirm the matters we discussed. As you know, we
have become increasingly dismayed at the lack of progress by
Renton in processing FNW's permit application. It is our
understanding that as of today, more than two and one-half months
after the permit was submitted, its review by the Technical
Advisory Committee has yet to be completed. From our vantage
point, there appear to be two primary reasons why so little
progress has been made: 1) a lack of communication or
appreciation of agreements reached in June concerning the scope
of Vie review; and 2) an inability or unwillingness on the part
of Renton staff to master the materials already submitted by FNw
with the prmit application.
Despite the tact that several key members of Renton staff
were present at our .une 11, 1991, ml-teting, they apparently
failed either to comprehend or to communicate two decisions made
at that meeting regarding the scope of Renton's review. During
that meeting we agreed that FxW wouln Aiat be requAxod to apply
for a conditional use permit in conjunction with its grade and
fill application. Yet processing of FNW's permit application,
submitted within a week of this meeting, was delayed until
another City staffperson could get an answer from your office as
to whether a conditional use permit would be necessary. We also
agreed at our June 11, 1991, meeting that the scope of the City's
review would be limited to the incremental difference between the
project as approved in the 1967 settlement stipulation and the
project as proposed through the 1990 plans. Despite this, it
appears to us that significant time is being spent by Renton's
T
Lanettu Fontes, Esq.
September 3, 1991
Page 2
staff inquiring into aspects of the Mt. Olivet reclamation
project which have existed well before the 1987 Settlement
Stipulation. WO now understand that your office has onca again
clarified for the City the scope of its review of this prcject.
Hopefully, this will eliminate any further waste of time and
effort by City staff pursuing issues which are irrelevant to the
review of this permit application. It is, however, evident that
if this permit application is to progress at all, your office is
going to have to be more actively involved in the processing to
assure that City staff is aware of they parameters of its review.
The other apparent source of delay in processing the permit
application appears to be that City staff is either unable or
unwilling to spend the time to understand the materials already
submitted in conjunction with this permit application. There
have been repeated inquiries by staff about issues which are,
fully explained in the materials already submitted to the City.
If, as it appears, City staff is incapable or unwilling to
attempt to understand the materials on their own, then John is
willing to meet with City staff and respond to their inquiries so
that this permit may move forward.
We would appreciate hearing within the next couple of days
what measures the City has taken to assure that it is able to
understand the information that has been submitted to it so that
there can be proYn
ress made on this permit review. 'hank you for
your assistance moving this along rapidly, consistent with
Judge Noes memorandum opinion and the City's representations.
very truly yours,
DANIELSON HARRICAN & TOLLEFSON
Greg Montgomery
mia
cc: John McKenna, Jr.
Lawrence B. Ransom, Esq.
it t 5—d 1 1 t1U b:41
WARXEN, KELLOGG
FAX NO, 12062555474
PLANNING DIb'' "M
CITY OF REN-i ` :'
VtiARREN, KELLCOG, BARBER,
DEAN 6 FONTES, P.S.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
,:06) - -976
PC` OFFICE SOX 6'6•:.. SAUTE( SECOND STREET
RENTO!:, x; cHI]`GTON 9,V57
FAX N UMBER:
206-235-5474
TO: &A.)
TRANSMITTAL MEMO
We have enclosed the following document(s):
SEp - 5 " -'
RECEIV cn
Method of Delivery
( ) Mail
( ) Bawd Delivered
P%I'Fax
( ) Other
DATE:
R1r: /�j, Q�iVi�.
DATE DE$CRIprI0llf
.k�k<FOR YOUR I.NFOR1dAT10N
( ) FOR SIGNATURE AND RCTL:R\
( ) FOR REVIEW .4.ND COMMENT
{ ) FOR NECESSARY ACTION
( } FOR YOUR HLES
( ) FOR YOUR APPROVAL
( ) APPROVED AS W)Tr.0
( ) PFR YOUR RCQUFST
( ) PER OUR CONVERSATION
( ) PER OL'R AGREEMENT
( ) Srr REMARKS RELOW
FOR FAX TRANSWMAI,
This transmission consists of _a___ pages, including this cover page. If for some reason
you do not receive all of the pages, or it is not legible, please contact our office immediately.
Remarks:
0 hu
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 29, 1991
TO: Don Erickson
FROM: Jennifer �nt�
SUBJECT: Mt. Oliv( Lan Il ( F; AP-074-91); Airport
Horizonta_ , tru ction Zone
I spoke with Gail Reed of the Renton Municipal Airport this morning regarding the
height of the Mt. Olivet Landfill. Gail informed me that the landfill is within the
179-foot horizontal obstruction zone (as measured above sea level) that is located
on the west side of Renton's East Hill. Any structures within this area require a
Notice of Proposed Construction subject to Airport review. The Airport then
forwards the Notice of Proposed Construction to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) for a determination. The FAA may or may not consider the
project to be an obstruction. If it is determined to be an obstruction then an FAA
Advisory is issued that may require changes in airport approach or visibility
requirements.
The City enforces the 179-foot height limitation through the Zoning Code. By
allowing the project to exceed this limit we may be liable in the event of aircraft
obstruction.
Gail said that the Notice of Proposed Construction is considered based on
reasonableness. That is, if the project exceeds the height, yet is still below the
average level of the surrounding landforms/structures, then it would probably be
allowed.
The Mt. Olivet Landfill was originally permitted to reach a height of 310 feet, but
currently has a top elevation of 335 feet Since the site's ultimate use may be a
cemetery, this could result in the addition of up to six to eight feet of topsoil and
landscaping, the elevation could be over 340 feet. Generally, the elevation of
landforms in the vicinity of the site is approximately 300 feet (based on the USGS
map). The Mt. Olivet landform ,.s the highest point of land within approximately
one mile. Clearly further analysis is needed, but this appears to be an issue that
warrants concern and scrutiny.
cc: Zanetta Fontes, Esq.
Jim Hanson
Ron Nelson
IW « vl I IIV 1 J - /. J AlNUU-111 In.1.LW%1 I nn IN• 1GYNGJTJn I !
WARREN, KELLOGG BARBEK1
DEAN b FONTFA P.S.
•
ATTORNEYS AT LAW PL NAn
CA) 155-itiv PCIT OfICi NOX f'��� :x MTN SCDC*D MIMT � RFNTMUDIVI�Method r ��
() )AA11
RENTOK vtvu*;CTor1 -eos; N ( ) Bsed Dellrsre,
Ali z t�; r.:
2 f,49' ( ) Other
FAX NpKfLR: �/r/'�
ZW255-5474 `a. "
TRA143MITTAL MEMO
TO' Jennifer Toth
rROK Za1iu L Ld Fo11 Le s
We bsve enclosed :be following document(-i):
DATZ
( ) FUR YUL:R I..NFURKATiU\
( ) FOR SIGNATURE kvD RETL R.N
( ) IFUK Kt'ltw ti',u LUM.Mt:'% 1
( ) FOR N•BC&95.-,;kV .%CTIO,
{ ) FUK YULK t11 tb
( ) FOR YULR ,%PPROV.%L
( ) AF►RO%,T.D AS VOTED
DATE: August 21, 1991
RE:
DESCRIPTION
Letter from Greg Montgomery
(X3 PER lOLR REOLVT
{ ) PER nt:R r04%TxcAT10X
( } PER OVR AOR EMENT
( ) SFF REii.�Rkt RF1 r1W'
f()R rAX TRANJIU'I'TAL
Thic r•ancm;c6nn enneicrc r,f 5 pages, inclu� ,ag this cover page. I( for soMe reason
you do not receive all of the pages, or it is noL legible, please contact our office immediately
Remarks-
1 . V(-
ALS U 191 WjSS DMT MG 62-1-AM? ! P. L4
uw Arr%=
DANIIELSM HARKIAN & TOU.EFSOV
A PJRMUSP MIOLLft* PIOOOOK CORP M710l1!
*ON P40h AW WWxWX own
slou w0owsow Sow
poop ad174P
Tu" W1 "I ow UR
FAX OM 604717
DATE 8 / 2I/9 I
TU: _ sanotta ron -^, Esau
COWANY: -- WArren Kellogg
TELE00M NO. 255-5474
FlUe NO, 440 5 - r
NUMBER OF PAGES FOLLOWING THIS PAGE; 3
H them are any problems n rocd* p this message, plem cal:
juy Abrohow at M) 03.1700.
ComftwWo"r ftrmstion:
MIC 22 191 M: S1 WT MG Q2 6Y 7
DAMILL30" MAMIOM 6 TOLLEF30%
. w, 61 C ca M Q -3..L
04W rMT WTMWJ! CG�RLA
94ATTL9. 04104
August all 1091
Via telaeapiar
Saatta Font". ESQ.
fl"IMft, w1oyq, barber, 09=
a pvntss
P. 0. Door 324
canton, 111 98037
Re: Mt. Olivet Reclamation deject
Dear EanettaI
The Pupa" of this letter is to proves additiat al
ingermtion which ve t *Uvtand may be of assist&pft to the...
T`edwii la�i"ry Cosstittee in reviewing TW's pwALnq
As an introenetnry latter, ve vish is emphasise
!, in aceordanea with the agrsearrat rs<ohad jUM 11 asOmq
canton, AM and INW, what is beirq submitted for s+sviby pApton
is the increaental ditrsreaoe betvsan the project a sow ppro.ea
pursuant to the 1917 settlaaaat stipulation eAd tag pr9jeat as
Proposed to include alevatlons t0 335 feet w d the tour lots.
Deesasa ?1111 aesirGe to keep the perait review prooess avvinq, it
is villinq to provide additional intormation pertinent to aspeats
of the realaaation projeat wwolated to this inns tal
diffar&nft. However, sine so doing, PNW does not inter"A to
aoquissae it &AY saepansion of the agrood soaps or review of the
Dojo in e6Meetion With the pi►esaat ppe�snit apDliaatioa.
Consistsat with Um agreed sovpe of teviow of the project under
the i ayplioation, a"ten aanaot utilise the present perait
application as a vshiels for icDosinq conditions en the prujoct
based apoa aspaots of tba projects other than the incraental
differesms dasesribed above.
With this undarstanding, I have bean authorised by rnw to
ps:ovids you the follovinq additional inforaation on the specified
subjectss
AM M Oft W,52 2W 623-M? P.3/4
Raretta rontes, tsq.
Augoot 22, 1991
Fagg 2
a. lamb 1= . The traak wash has existed in its
Present � the trdak wash flew to the. Usto t�Ntti t
pond fsaa shish water disdbaryss into a Stara drainage ditch with
bolas and rhsak dam every 106 feet.
2.
Under state regalati0l'as,
the purpose of post-ozoews smuts nanos s solid waste ftaility
t: to assay twat saiaatsaano• mud marfitor "a activitiss at the
Kacii3t oontin�n V=J Us facility has, stabilised, L.G. , 0AWN
is 1ML or no s ttlsspt, gad yVo action or leachate
�•ration. oaoa a solid wash facility has stabilised, the
isdietioual health department ear autheriaa disrAmtinuanca of
all Post-Clasum maintstMWe and monitoring activity. The pest-
aloausre plan ps'epeood �lry� 7M acmes a 20-year ywt-clasura
iateasaoa and aanitarinq program. In fact, 11111 is sdviss,d by
is oonsultanU that the Tito i6bow4d stabilise within to years
of eamplation of the project and closure of the site.
3. ultbae me. As you knows m operates the projoat
undos contract with the cc=, American Memorial eearviaas. As
far as 7W is COnd4rhod, the nitimte use of th6 property is
depicted in its 1990 plans. ones rn, s r. w1aaQtion of the site
Ls oewletsd, wo presuze any further use of the site would be
PUXO tnt to applicable lo;al regulation.
a• We are not two what is meant to be
included within groundwater tlw. Szca for far below the
synthetic liner aced wAsrndath tba rill, there is no
subsurface gjtOstar flow in Me area of tZko reclanatift
Proisot. N ttce water floes ao indicated on the drawings
Prvrided to gars -lined swales and leaves the site throuo a
manhole conneated with the sanitary se.wer north of catvfr walls 1
and 2.
S. 22mnrt of warlais. ON anticipates that it allowed
to complete recla"tivn of the site pursuant to its 1990 puns,
there will be m e.iqpott of materials from the site. All
materials exoavated will be utilised for liner placauent and cap
and cover.
s. dp�g. Cho landsgepia�y which will be placed by
FNW will be equivaiant in appearance to that already installed.
we hope that the foregaing is of assistanoe in allowing the
Te.alf�fioal viao�y cowittao to vvmplote its remit x1eviow amtransmit thentKpj�lination on to the Znviavrasestal Aeviav
Caitt , If there is adclitioaal information which you teal
would ba helpful in eeneludirfg this portion of the permit s•viov
.
ZWWtta yantca, 8sq.
A"Uft 22, 1991
ft" 3
Coaraa, plea" let =know imadiately an4 we vill rur!liM it.
r" kOgw, it ie M's avatttdIm desire to oaf e A the pftait
rRAP2AV proosss as soon a. Dosaible. In that aregazd, Y` Ur etgore•
to Uours that the psssit review Drumvp aayss torvard
s!liaift*ly are greatly appreciated.
Very truly yours,
Dot mEtOON R1iR]tTGA:1 ZOLLbTi4X
Crag Montgc eery
cis: ja
oC: JGM W- NcRanna, Jr.
JeAniter Toth, City or Menton (via talscapiery
i.axts:►oe a. Raraoe, seq.
i WOU
;= 22 '91-16:45 DHfS&T 206 623-674 7
LAW OFFK',ES
DANIELSON HARRIGAN & TOLLEFSON
A P.AATN£RSW INCLUONQ t3F"ESSION0kk CORPORATIONS
44TH FLOOR FW N TEASTATUCENTEA
SEATTM WASHNOTON Soil%
PM ex3-17W
TEM: 2" 501 W6T UR
FAX: (-6} 623.8717
1'7
TELECOPIER TRANSMITTAL • LOCAL
DATE: 8/22/91
TO: Jennifer Toth
COMPANY: City of Renton
TELECOPIER NO.
235-2513
FROM: Greg Montgomery
FILE NO. 4405-1.
NUMBER 01 PAGES FOLLOWING THIS PAGE: 1
If there are any problems in receiving this message, please call:
P.1/2
PLANNING DIVISION
CITY OF RENTQN
AW 2 31991
RECEIVED
Joy Abraham at (206) 623-1700.
Comments/Other Information:
LAW arrtcas
DANIELSON HARRIGAN rL TOLLEFSON
A PAVOOMBMW MSCLUO" 0Q0FCWSJCAL4& COP ORATTOMS
4100 fW"T WTERSTWX Est
S"TTLt. iAMS1 XGT" Ya104
• i.2EG 1101[TOdffiRY •.. . 't�0�l3•rJO�- - .
AUgU&t 22, 1991
Via telecopier
Zanetta Fontes, Esq.
Warren, Kellogg, Barber, Dean
6 Fontes
P.O. Box 626
Renton, WA 98037
Rs: Mt. Olivet Reclamation Project
Dear Zanetta:
TCLtJc AS-4 $.2i C++ UP
rAz51"JLvi204& 013•0�f7
It occurs to me that I may have omitted additional
information on one further topic of interest to the Technical
Advisory Committee. It is M's understanding that American
Memorial Services intends to relocate the four existing homes at
the want end of the project if it' oan find -lots for" these homes
in Renton or King County. In the event that American Memorial
Services is unable to relocate thee* houses on lots within Renton
or King County, it is FNWIs understanding that they will become
part of the fill.
Very truly yours,
DANIELSON HARkIGAN & TOLLEFSON
Greg Montgome
GMsja
cc: John W. McKenna, Jr.
Jennifer Toth, City of Renton (via telecopier)
Lawrence B. Ransom, Esq.
GREG IMTQWRY
Via telecopier
235-2513
LAW 001FiCCg
OANIELSON HARRIGAN & TOLLEFSON
• 4.RTWJW,6.0P n.CL:A+NCi PFV-WESS004AL CCRF0047�0%3
•A00 FIRST INTERSTATE CENTER
SEATTLE. WAS►4:NGION 98104
,2081 623 '700
August 20, 1991
Mr. Dor. Erickson
Zoning Aftinistrator
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Dept.
200 Mill Avenue South
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Xt. Olivet Reclamation Project
Dear Mr. Erickson:
TELEX 28A 501 DHST UP
"ACSIMILE .206, 623-8717
PLAN nF FFwoH
07 � 199!
I an writing in response to your letter of ,_Agust 9, 1991,
which, unfortunately, was received in our office last week while
I was on vacation. I trust that my inability to respond last
week has not resulted in any further delay in the processing of
FNWIs pending application for the Mt. Olivet reclamation project.
On the mausoleum issue, American Memorial Services entered
into a consent decree with the State of Washington in 1984
pursuant to which it was required to construct th& mausoleum as
depicted on its master development plan. The Settlement
Stipulation between American Memorial Services and the City of
Renton expressly incorporated that aspect of the consent decree
and required Renton to cooperate with AMS in fulfilling these
requirements of the consent decree. Although it is not my role
to debate this issue with you, it is certainly not my
understanding that AIMS will require a conditional use permit to
construct a mausoleum on property that is presently being used
for cemetery purposes.
Finally, on May 17, 1990, with the express approval of Ron
Nelson, FNW placed liner over existing fill in the southeast
portion of the site. It then proceeded to place additional fill
on top of this liner to the present height of 335 feet. It is my
understanding that the existing fill beneath this liner installed
by FNW was placed substantially prior to the 1987 Settlement
Stipulation and is not underlain by any synthetic liner such as
that placed by FNW throughout the remainder of the site.
Mr. Don Erickson
August 20, 1991
Page 2
We recognize and accept that the overriding environmental
concern of Renton in reviewing M's permit application is the
protection of Renton's drinking water supply. Because of the
environmental protection mechanisms placed by FNW since it took
over operating the site in 1987, the site does not presently pose
any threat to Renton's drinking water supply. My letter of
August 2, 1991, was intended to convey the simple observation
that, under these circumstances, it would hardly be an
environmentally astute action for the City of Renton to require
disturbance of vast quantities of this "entombed" fill, thereby
substantially increasing leachate generation from the site in
what may well be a fruitless effort to address some vague
aesthetic concern.
Very truly yours,
DANIELSON HARRIGA.N i TOLLEFSON
C,
Greg Montgomery
GM: ja
cc: John W. McKenna, Jr.
Lawrence Ransom, Esq,
Zanetta Fontes, Esq. (via telecopier)
M579.022
Earl Clymer, Mayor
UIT Y WF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Lynn Guttmann, Administrator
August 9, 1991
Mr. Greg Montgomery
Danielson Harrigan & Tollefson
4400 First Interstate Center
Seattle, Washington 93104
Re: Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation Project
Dear Greg:
In order to expedite our review of Fiorillo's pf-nding application for the Mt. Olivet
Landfill we are submitting comments on your letter of August 2, 1991 to Zanetta
Fontes who is on vacation. The City is concerned with the environmental impacts of
the proposed project, and is currently reviewing Fiorillo's application and SEPA
checklist. In-house reports are being prepared for presentation to the City's
Technical Advisory Cornmi,tee; following their review, the project will be referred
to the Environmental Review Committee for a SEPA determination.
As noted in your letter, the. City is interested in potential aesthetic quality impacts
resulting from the project, specifically view impacts as seen from off -site locations
At its current height of 235 feet, the landfill is visible from several public areas
including downtown Renton, Liberty Park, and Rainier Avenue South. The site is
currently 25 feet higher than original elevations (310 feet) disclosed in plans given to
the City prior to the Stipulated Settlement from July 24, 1987. Final closure
drawings submitted as part of the current application do not show a reduction in the
final height of the landfill. The City may determine that some reduction in the
height of the landfill is appropriate, but that is purely speculative at this point. In
the event that a reduction is mandated, then the current project site may be targeted
for potential relocated fill material.
Regarding the issue of the mausoleum wall, we would like to request verification of
the said approval given to American Memorial Services regarding the right, to
construct a mausoleum on the adjoining cemetery property as expressed in your
August 2nd letter? We have no record of approval of the mausoleum or wall, either
of which would require an application for a Conditional Use Permit.
The City also has concerns regarding slope stability, erosion and potential
contamination of the aquifer from leachate. We would like to request clarification
on the following statement from page 2 of your letter: "It is worth noting that in this
area of the site. there is no liner beneath the old underlying fill material." As you
are aware, the project site overlies Zone 2 of the City's Aquifer Protection Area
(APA) and is within one -quarter mile of APA Zore 1. Protection of the City's sole
source of drinking water is vital in preservation of the public health and safety.
200 Wll Avenue South - Renton. Washington 98055
If you have questions regarding this memo, please direct them to me at 235-2550 or
to my stiff contact, Jennifer Toth at 277-6186.
Don Erickson
Zoning Administrator
jt:de
cc: Zanetta Fontes, Esq.
Ron Nelson
Richard Anderson
Lys Hornsby
Mary Lynne Meyer
0
LAw OFFICES
DANIELSON HARRIDAN 6 TOLLEFSON
A FMIRTNER^.. IP INCLUDING PROF--5 CNAL CORPORATIONS
4400 F ,RST INTERSTATE CENTER
SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98104
GREG ". TGONFRY 206) 623 1700 TELEX: 284 501 OHST UP
FACSIMILE (2061623-8717
August 2, 1991 PLANNING gIMION
CITY OF RENTON
"anetta Fontes,
Warren, Kellogg,
& Fontes
P.O. Box 626
Esq.
Barber, Dean
Renton, WA 98057
Re: Mt. Olivet Reclamation Project
Dear Zanetta:
AUG - 5 1991
RECEIVED
I an writing in behalf of FNW to provide Renton with
additional information pertinent to resolving issues relating to
the existing elevation of fill at the Mt. Olivet reclamation
site. As you doubtlessly recall, Judge Noe, in concluding that
there needed to be further environmental review of certain
aspects of the project, stated:
It should be recognized that although the
environmental issues must receive priority,
the decision based on a SEPA review must also
be balanced, reasonable and fully aware of
economic feasibility.
Reduction of the height of existing fill at the Mt. Olivet
project to 310 feet is neither environmentally advisable nor
economically feasible. On the basis of recent survey work
conducted at the site, F" has determined that the amount of fill
at elevations above 310 feet exceeds 83,000 cubic yards. Based
upon this same survey work, the remaining capacity of the rite,
if allowed to proceed to completion pursuant to the 1990 revised
plan, is somewhere between 82,000 and 84,000 cubic yards. In
short, if Renton requires that t-ie existing fill levels at the
site be lowered, it will render any further work at the site
economically unfeasible.
Nor are there any environmental benefits to be realized by
reducing the height of the existing fill at the site. We
understand Renton's environmental concerns to be primarily
aesthetic. As we have discussed on numerous occasions, these
concerns may be addressed by landscaping requirements at the west
end of the site. Even if Renton decides that the height of the
fill should be lowered for aesthetic reasons, AMS still retains
the right to construct a mausoleum on the adjoinin t
cem
rA
Zanetta Fontes, Esq.
August 2, 1991
Page 2
property. Based upon
that the foundation of
310 feet with the roof
neighborhood of 330 to
that the existing Zill
well be trading a view
stark 25 foot concrete
trial testimony and exhibits, we understand
the mausoleum would be at approximately
eventually reaching a height in the
335 feet. Thus, if it were to require
levels at the site be lowered, Renton may
of a grass covered slope for 3 view of a
wall.
Beyond aesthetic concerns, disturbance of the fill above 310
feet can only enhance the potential for adverse environmental
impact. As you know, before fill!ng above the 300 foot level in
the southeast portion of the site, FNW prepared the subgrade and
installed liners, leachate collection and transmission lines.
The subsequent fill was then placed in lifts with each subsequent
lift being separated from the former by compacted clean soil.
Uncovering and moving this material will rc.ault in a substantial
increase in leachate generation from the site, not only as a
result of the material being moved but also as a result of re -
exposing the underlying material. It is worth noting that in
this area of the site, there is no liner beneath the old
underlying fill material.
We have been attempting to contact Ron Owes and obtain from
him a letter explaining more fully the environmental drawbacks of
moving existing fill which has been "entombed." Ron travels
extensively and thus we have had some difficultly contacting him,
but as soon as we are able to, we will provide you with his
opinion as to the environmental drawbacks of moving entombed
fill.
Please call if you have any questions.
GM: ja
cc: John McKenna, Jr.
Lawrence Ransom, Esq.
Jennifer Toth, Project
Don F. ickson
Richard Anderson
Ron Nelson
9563.022
very truly yours,
DANIELSON HARRIGAN & TOLLEFSON
Greg Montgomery
Manager, Renton
A Special Permit Appiicath has been fled and accepted with the Development Services Division of the
City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals.
PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Mt. Olivet Land ,Reclamation
ECF;SP-074-91
DESCRIPTION: Expansion of the W. Olivet Land Reclamation (Phase VI) onto the
four adjoining reslderxiai iota to the south d west of the existing
landfill. Three of the four houses will be relocated within the City
of Renton or King County and one house will be demolished. The
project would construct a third cut-off wag and install landscaping
at the base of the wall. In addition, the project would include
closure and post -closure of the entire six phases of the site.
GENERAL LOCATION:
PUBLIC APPROVALS:
2325 N Third St
Erwironmentai Review
Special Permit Approval
Building Permit
Tne application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the third floor of Renton
City Hal. Comments wig be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings, or prior to
an administrative site plan app+oval. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a
PARTY OF RECORD and recove additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental
determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the
Development Services Division at 2M-2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper
file i *01c atfon.
Ut rLNI)ING
APPLICATION
at
DESCRIPTION:
MT. OLIVET LAND RECLAMATION
ECF;SP-074-91
EXPANSION OF THE MT. OLIVET LAND RECLAMATION (PHASE VI) ONTO
THE FOUR ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO THE SOUTH & WLST OF
THE EXISTING LANDFILL. THREE OF THE FOUR HOUSES WILL BE
RELOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON OR KING COUNTY AND ONE
HOUSE WILL BE DEMOLISHED. THE PROJECT WOULD CONSTRUCT A
THIRD CUT-OFF WALL AND INSTALL LANDSCAPING AT THE BASE OF
THE WALL. IN ADDITION, THE PROJECT WOULD INCLUDE CLOSURE
AND POST -CLOSURE OF THE ENTIRE SIX PHASES OF THE SITE.
GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS:
2325 N THIRD ST
PUBLIC APPROVALS REQUIRED:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL
BUILDING PERMIT
PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE RECEIVED
BY THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
ANYTIME PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON
BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550
THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED
WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
CERTIFICATION
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT _COPIES OF
THE ABOVVE DCCUMENT WERE
POSTED BY ME IN
CONSPICUOUS
•• OR NEARBY THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY ON
Al.
;:ram•._ r_
,1r 0 SEFI� 4er
OF PENDING
� APPLICATION
DESCRIPTION:
MT. OLIVET LAND RECLAMATION
ECF;SP-074-91
EXPANSION OF THE MT. OUVET LAND RECLAMATION (PHASE VI' ONTO
THE FOUR ADJOINING RESIDENTIAL LOTS TO THE SOUTH & WEST OF
THE EXISTING LANDFILL. THREE OF THE FOUR HOUSES WILL BE
RELOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF RENTON OR KING COUNTY AND ONE
HOUSE WILL BE DEMOLISHED. THE PROJECT WOULD CONSTRUCT A
THIRD CUT-OFF WALL AND INSTALL LANDSCAPING AT THE BASE OF
THE WALL. IN ADDITION, THE PROJECT WOULD INCLUDE uLOSURE
AND POST -CLOSURE OF THE ENTIRE SIX PHASES OF THE SITE.
GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS:
2325 N THIRD ST
PUBLICAPPROVALS REQUIRED:
ENVIPJNMENTAL REVIEW
SPECIAL PERMIT APPROVAL
BUILDING PERMIT
PUBLIC COMMENT'S WILL BE RECEIVED
BY THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT
ANYTIME PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARINGS
AND DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS.
A; 0 CIT9 OF RENT0N
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Earl Clymer, Mayor Lyni, Guttmann, Administrator
July 17, 1991
John'& McKenna, Jr.
Fiorillo Northwest, Inc.
PO Box 66826
Seattle, WA 98166-0826
SUBJECT: Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
ECF:SP-074-91
Dear Mr. McKenna:
The 09volopment Planning Section of the City of Renton has formally ac--epted the above -reference)
application for preliminary review.
It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Technical Advisory Committee on August 6, 1991.
Following that review, you will be notified that: 1) your application is complete and has been scheduled for
environmental review and determination, gr 2) that additional information is required to continue
processing your application for environmental review.
Please contact me, at 235-2550, if you ha%a any questions.
Sincerely,
__�Qnnifer T
Project Manager
cc: American Memorial Services
PO Box 547
Renton, WA 98057
OWNER
NAME:
American Memorial Services
ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 547
CITY: ZIP:
Renton, Washington 98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
(206) 255-0323
CONTACT PERSON/APPLICANT
NAME:
Fiorillo Northwest Inc.
ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 66826
CITY: Z! P:
Seattle, 'Washington 98166-0826
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
(20f) 241-2600
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION-
2325 North Third Street
Renton, Washington 98057
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
9143-08, 9125,00, 9127-08, 9128-07
EXISTING LAND USE(S):
Single Family
EXISTING ZONING:
PROPOSED LAND USE(S):
Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
PROPOSED ZONING:
G-1
SITE AREA (SO. FT. OR ACREAGE):
Approximately 1.75 Acres
TYPE OF APP
REZONE
$
_
SPECIAL PERMIT
$_
_
TEMPORARY PERMIT
$
r_ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
$
SITE PLAN APPROVAL
$
_
SPECIAL PERMIT
$
_
X GRADE & FILL PERMIT
$
(NO. CU. YDS: 40,000 _)
VARIANCE
$
r (FHOM SECTION: _)
WAIVER
$
_
ROUTINE VEGETATION
r MANAGEMENT PERMIT
$
BINDING SITE PLAN
$
SHORELINE PERMIT:
SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT
$
_
CONDITIONAL USE
$_
_
VARIANCE
$ _.
_
EXEMPTION
_
REVISION .
SUBDIVISION:
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
$
_
SHORT PLAT
$
— TENTATIVE PLAT
$_
~_ PRELIMINARY PLAT
$
FINAL PLAT
$
_
N0.OF LOTS:
_
PLAT NAME:
PLANNEC UNIT DEVELOPMENT:
$
PRELIMINARY
_
FINAL
MOBILE HOME PARKS:
$
TENTATIVE
_
PRELIMINARY
_
FINAL
X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
$
PROJECTVALUE: $ 100,000.00
SENSITIVE AREA:
APA: 1 2 OTHER
N/A
_ _
SEWER MORATORIUM AREA:
YES NO
TOTAL FEES:
$_
POSTAGE PROVIDED: ,YES
—NO
AFFIDAVIT
1, John W. McKenna, Jr. , being duly sworn, declare that I am
representative to act for the (Please check one) x the authorizad
Property owner, the owner of the property Involved in this application anti 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 Wiel.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS
12 DAY OF June 1991
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON, RESIDING AT:
Auburn, Washington
(Name of Not ry ?t,►�;;c)
P.O. Box 66826
(Address)
i
/ U 019Nture olUwner)
P.O. Box 66826
Aress)
Seattle, Washington 98166-0826
(City/State/Zip)
t Inc \ 1 / 1
Seattle, Washington
(City/State/Zip)
98166-0826
YAI T 8�TRV E 1AT 1'j1sT(f gr C PAGE 26,566
TRY REAL ESTATE lNFCTI.eJ4TlON SEdr�8`0E� isAi]C S 1t(TJFt1AELOY TO E3E COR"=DOESNOt 1iARRAVI (TS ACCIACY.
THIS [RiOPLMATION IS LRC� fiEta.NS 1+E �ROP'RTe OF TRY 1P. jSIAT I:10PX4TtON SERVICES.
•ITY PAA - t A 1 R TT 0 i T434-90 ��lT[C:`i
U172WS-UWLAT 1 ED
GRID: U SEC:17 fk?:23 6NG:05
ACCT-NO TAXPAr R/WN R _Kw L SSI(� ADDS US—IONING-- LWT
._..-ML A R 6_ Q- ��.:.� _�� w�------�E
SM-DAT�/PRR4 LAND -AY IMP -AY TQI_AL-AY lSTr
4_i�3ra�P-1" N --- YY_-1_919ii_!�9YOsi_i�-Sy
SOFT YR
W
91301 t TT�Y��!_QE LI AyE S% E,iTC� W 8R8n�ilT23-OS
Cli [�py�
�2 R-1
POR OF S 4dS FT OF15" 0102t Q 253.6C0
`�itt11 l
CA
9131. 1 NER TN 016 g-OOiHRE�1 eN YA 98055
____
2201 iTU-NE-17_23-05 H AYE
--.__--------------_-------------��-p-------,-p-per---_---_---
i07 R-1
� ME i/4 OF NE UFO AT�2100 666"�
2.0
2ZCM� 59
9132-Q1BOic 653•AEYTC71 W %OSS
i>y20 T E Yli�
i2S �_-_-OI
�PCE-.R02 NE 1/i @EG 331�9TOIN7 d2i9ZI . 1f�33
5.08
9134& % M_ WAAVENNE•SEATrLE YA 98115
a30 RIYER�SID_�7-23-05
262 — 02�
760715 OM NELf v� OFf CViZRedSatitQ� 3829.37
d,0
9t6T
U182305-UNPLATTED
= ' - .: �-_
. - GRID:
USE C :18 - TNP : 23 ' :
RNG
: 05
9136�7 TOB�IN AY �RP ipV W 98CSS
615 YILU SE-18 23S 5
104 ll- i
PGR CF SW 1/4 OF SWI SEC '2
132M
2 0
2�300
U172305-UNPLATTED7 = :
GRID:
U
SE_C :1 7_TNP:23
: RNG:05
9137-Q¢ HPMSEERT9
605 YILLTTAASY
10i--�--L1
030
735��
9�CO 2f #Ci
I3JS 1?
2.0
_
073
6WILLIAMS O1 WA S55
1
01192H
i
913 "SERA AJJ1NiC�1 W
2205
SEAM ElE7VAl,l�S
_i
112 :. 3-1 21
75G125
000
a 383 _tCH
- MN9
1rR
3 0
TY
;3055
I190 E LAN"�
91 PO B R 6S3•REMtON Y� 9a055
2201
SEU "SE-'17 2�-OS .'112
. 8-1 24
POA2GL 8 BEd NYN E 48,000SSa33521�Q
5�22
1YR
34 0•
9140-0j5 PSOUTHSPIJGITSORIVE RA_4*REVTON WA
99J55
SEU�SE 17-23-0
424 , _..8-1
RCR1GL
8 OAF BEG r'.t12S' �11G 32188
114.
:mod
91411TH 01 A BLDDGG E 14tH i EUCLIO CCLLEVELAHD Ow114 NU-SSE-0-h-0S
931 T
30 FT STRIP LY SLY Gt 9 AN 2100
16'700
167CO
)2BLGE 4TREDCELL�OGi
DIIVE
— __)3-05
E1
- Y~+
1�DH=UQ
pGR CF
Su 1/4 OF SE NOOLY 21 CO
10f,,22
2.10
91431 American Memorial Services
.142 IK 11KE Ay-
SFD G1 1
2 j0p 36
A
1.0
1 61
BLAINE AVE WtIENTON WA 95055
U-NE-5-23-05
FOR CF
SE 1/4 OF NEW DAF
T76�
1I'M
9144�T 778RA 0x 6S3•REvTCH WA 98055 �
66+1A�—((-----
2205
SE�M�L1TV23L05
I -----8-1 21
750925BEG AT
I190 000F E12N'OMG13532100
6C41j47
1YR
11183, -
-- —----_—_----_—�____
2201
SEUMSE ET-2LLU5
--------------------
112 8-1 40
BEG
SS - 2- CUq
HTS►i0Of 1N46iCGL_4542
_
b6Q�
66
121�b•
PO BOX-653•RENTON WA 98055
I017
E Q0
7T5f52�i
1YR
— -- -`2201
9146-05PO 613•AENTCr�
SEUWL1T%LQ5
112 81 32
-AT
75102
DAf-8i
114f5.—
�x UA 98CSS
G21
G8a126NTS4642i00
b976�57
1rR
914714 5 PSOUTHSPUG TSORIYE 0-0RENTCN UA
gJ8�
SE �LFTV2LLU5
251 9-1
POR GL
8-8EG, AOT•INT?N'Of E 154A
MM
IYR
IM �
M.
F 13
113
�1989 COPYRIGHT BY TRJ R-AL ESTATE INFppR&T1QN¢ScR''(F5 PAGE 26,565
�:t AN�OVcR PARK Si R TLE VA. 98188 0 1 5y�-,1^0 �T VARQAv1 ITS ACCURACY.
TRY REAL STAT- NFORlrATiON SEAV E5 BELir'YES THE NFEi- AT.CV 3ELN TO BE CJaR CT 'r1 WpF pJ�e 1
HIS WORWION IS LEASED FRCA AND REPAINS THE FRCPERTY OF TR+J REAL STATE !1►FOR:SWON SERVICES. +
KING C JNTY PAR T Y
-----------4�4_�1�A _�-4LTn1.TD—_--_-------------------- __--1984:90_�DItICiW
U172305-UNPLATTED GRID: U SEC:17 TW-.21 RNG:05
ACCT-NO TAXPAYER/WNFRS-WE L SiTUS ADDRESS USE--IONING-- UNT SAL`-DATF/PRICE LAND -AV IMP -AV TOTAL -AV #STY SOFT YR
-----MAi�j_a_A0+2R(jS--------- - - ------ --�- O- SST^Ry0T�3LK ------ 15 Ec _s,_D�_CRIPTION------------Ltyr--199-8S-AX--C���__sOTS� _V
_--..
9106-03 MT 51YET CE►�EtERY
PO BOX 5 -R WON w1.98057
lt-NE-17-23-05
901
Gl
u 526..',
41,1500
FT OF SE 1/ OF NE
2100
48
612M
21R 3.95 _
9107-02� 653*RE.4TO JA 98055
1;5 NE wE 17-23-05
901
R-I
----------
82GR 4
--------------
!/2Z000NEf1/4t-
------�e---------------3---0-0---------------
aEG M
2100
121064
42410
E t____.-------
r M PACIFIC HWY S�EUITE i1iiESEArrLE
—___ _--------
v009sE WLE -05
923
G1
BEG1AT
c�A?`R OF
SF OF
P OO
06i051
3YR
0 22070 MILL AVE StRENTON NA 98055
J� _
2610 SE rSPL17Y23�05
y32 .
H_1
POR OF
GL • Z VL, POR OFF GL
2100
39,9QC
1,83
- At�q--____---__ -- ---
9.1111 113 416iH AvERE•VGRT1t 9EaD �A 48,LS
-- ` c
333 Sl?1UcyE917 23=0,
---
532
----------------
L'1
------;
R JF
-4 ----E
hti13�i Oi
-----------;---Q--p----------
N 7 %40AS
11�1
42OWCC.
66
= 5 ►56
— — - -- — -----
9112�Q VuE i PL hlE`R .YTCs+ ':A 9?056
----- —
353 '+LEU-NNE_1 2J-OS
-------------------
SFD
L1
—-------
1 FOR OF
------
A '/4 OF
-----zz--------
NE18%40nEG
--p-p-----��—gg
10�t00
-�-pp---------------
1645.31
1.083?7��0 63
-- — ---
9113-04 DOBSON DAVID T
REED-908SCN MARrELLEN•909 1ST N-3ENi�?N
-----------__
909 N 1ST Si
WA 9 U-MJ-17-23-OS
SFD
___—_-----
P-2
-i------
1 841(0*
Nc'_Y
--y---------MSEG--------
;L,;00 19,8C0
^ Fr �'F N%A. 1 FT OF
31 7
21_'
----------------
51 7GQ
54.9
1.08 1160 23
40E0
9114-Q3 g�(E zEVIN 1•XATHY 0
921 N 1ST ST*RENTGV .A 93055
921 N 1ST ST
U-Nu•-17-23-05
SFD .•
R-2
1 86052Z 5?,500 23 400
NE;.i !73 FT OF wo 66 FT 0
43 500
2100
66 900
91,91
1.58 1910 22
6798
91150O
BOXHM-RENTCN WA 98055
U-4E-17-23-05
901
i1
8
OR1O4
SEZW4OF
NE21%404r
2100
2 f520
-�-
1.68
---_
9117-M SHAN' DANIEL C
PO BOz 65�-RENr(:ti WA 98055
1102 r:PLE VALLEY HVY
1t-NE-17 2--OS
92-1
�I
------------------------
820125
POa OF
= ��::0
S� i1. Of
9 400
NE ti4 BEG
---------------------------------
2110
9 <00
114.99
6250
-------------------------------
9118-09 GIULIANI 1OHN R
340 SUNSET BIVO•RENTCN VA 98v5S
340 SLa+SEr eL N
U-NE1-V4 3-05
251
L - 1
P7•! QF
-------
hY 1/4 OF
-------
NE :%4CEEIi
------------------------..----
87�100
K
5
20c0
Z'0 10102 1
---------------------------------------
9-08 BPNNj Tr u 5/DEPUTY FINANCE 11Z30 NE 3RD �T
CITY 0 R NTON- 00 MILL AVE S•RENTGN VA 9 0 U-NE-1 e -23-05
911
--------------
G-1
PCR SE
1/4 OF NE
--
1,000
1/1.LY NLY
2100
1,000
-------------------------3----------
9120�5 GPAC IFIC WJYCSCUTHOSIJIT> 111-SEATTLE6li U-NE-17523-05
dyy000--((-------------
-------------------------------------------------p-g-2--(-----------------
91j
R-
POR2t�E
1/436F7NE
1e�2:0mJ 1
2100
1I25g�3e
4.50
_. ---------------l-------------------------------------------------------0-4---------------66-----
91214717 132NDCAVESE BEILEVUEAVA 99CC6
354 SI:NSUE_yE917N23-05
----- ----
c25
-------------------------------
L-1
?O06O7
.NE30%oOCAF-BEG ATJIN
------------
1;2°$�
8db0°°o
1rR 570i 60
----------------------------------------
91ZZ4132GCEBLEA
r0AVSbELEVUWA 98OC6
352 SUNSET
UNE7,23-05
357
-"1
POR NE
0��T
i,46A8EG AINTSN
-
3t40 ------b�--p-p17
2108
9.66-----------
IYR 1604 60
-----M-----11-_--_---------------------------------
9125PC BOx 547�RENTONNIJAA1BOERYiCES
--------------------------EE----------------------------••----------------------------2-p-p-------g------------ll-qq------
--EE----------
154 BLAUNNEAI7-2 -05
.
SF)
- -----------------------cc--oo-------•-------p-p-----6--------------14
G1
1
BEG 2AT
Pfe7480So
FT2V,,tN 0
432100
'.3SS�1
----
1 0 13200 53 ,
---------�po----EE-----------0-0a---
9127PPO Boxi5471-RENrGN WAE930, INC
150 BLAUNNEAI�-23-OS
SF(
-
SI
---
1 BEG4A3
PT,NH E
FT21J 010-02
352iG4
71 .6644
2tR 152 4 53
------A---I-----f-------------------------------------E--E------
9TZ8 P18634 7�RENTON�WAA48S�7VICES
146 BLAUNNE-IT-23-05
-
S:
--------
0'
--------G-----
1 p9G7U459-A5-1f�'J
--z-----------------•------_-----g-----
791.86 0T
28210
NA,
1.0 1417� 53
----------------------0------------------
9129-066 PIEROTTI EMILIO
. 3412-E- VALLEY -HVY*RENTON 'JA 98055 -----
------------•------
330 SUNSET B` N
--,_--U-NE_i7_23_CS----
— ------------------------------------
403
-------
L-I
-----
7,C;v8
- -PCa Y
n'J 1/4 OF
---------------------[----------------
j47 pp00
v I EEG
1 00
21
�48 OF
165.61
117b 59
24.03
N
Eli
1.1 I Y UP KIN I UN
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Purme of Checklist:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental
agencies to consider the environmental imi,acts of a proposal before making decisions. An
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probably
significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is
to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to
reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide
whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for Applicants:
This environmental checklist ask you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of
Your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly,
with the most precise `i0ot'mati4n known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer -each question accurately and carefully, to the best of you, knowledge. In
most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project
plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question
does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to
the questions now inay avoid uttntcessary delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental
agencies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a
period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will
help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency tc which you submit this
checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably
related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts.
Use of_hecklist for Nonproject Proposals: (Please Type or Print Legibly)
Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does
not apply". IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SKEET FOR NONPROJECT
ACTIONS (part D).
For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the
references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be
read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
A. BACKGROUND
Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation
2. Name of applicant:
Fiorillo NorthWest Inc.
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
P.O. Box 66826, 131 Southwest 156t,h Street, Seattle,
�. Date checklist prepared:
June 12, 1991
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Renton Planning Department
Washington 98166, 241-2600
John W. ;McKenna, Jr.
PLANNING DIVIS",t
CEN OF 9prrOP!
JUL 0 91991
--- j- ,c +guy Maus for luiure aaat tons, expansions, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
This proposal includes expansion into the four (4) residential lots adjoining
the landfill, closure and post -closure of the entire si:: phases of the site.
See attached Exhibit B, Mt. Olivet Land Reclamation Plan of Operation dated 11-1--90
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
We have filed an abbreviated envirnmental checklist in March, 090.
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other
proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No.
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if
known.
1. SEPA Review and Declaration of Non -Significance.
2. City of Renton Building Permit.
3. Grade and Fill Permit.
%!. Give brief, complete dzscription of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the
size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask
you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those
answers on this page.
Please see Exhibit B, Mt. 011.1,et Land Reclamation Plan of Operation dated
11-1-90.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the
precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section,
township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide
the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal descr`.ption, site plan, vicinity
map, and topography map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans
required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans
submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist.
Please see attached vicinity map for location of the Mt. Olivet Land
Reclamation. The property is located South of North Third Street in Renton,
and East of Blaine Avenue, commonly referred to in the drawings as Mt. Olivet
Way. The on site job address is 2325 :North Third Street, Renton, WA 98057.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep,rslopes,
mountainous, other
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)
1' Horizontal
1' Vertical 1-1 Slope
C. What gen-.ral types of soils are found on the site (for example, scaly, sand,
gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify
them and note any prime farmland.
See attached Soils Report as prepared by Rittenhouse Zeman. and
Associates dated October 16, 1989, Exhibit C.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate
vicinity? If so, describe.
None
� -_ ._�_�___ 1.�.-..-�-�.. .., .tea ....v vb• i� iv
expected all of the on site cuts will be made and all fills material will be
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, utilized
generally describe. on site
Yes, errosion may possibly occur due to clearing and stripping for
of sod for co:struction of the proposed cut off walls. closure.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
There will impervious surface on site. The existing asphalt hail road
will be demolished prior to closure.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any: We will install filter fabric feAcing along all areas exposed
to cuts that would be susceptible to water runoff. This should prevent
2. AIR sediment laden waters from entering into the City of Renton storm sewer.
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust,
automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the
project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities
if known. The air em�3sions will be either from dust or exhaust from the
equipment necessary o complete constructica of the cut off walls,
placement of fills, and final closure.
b. Are there any off -site sources of emission?
No.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
If dust becomes a problem, we wlll control the dust with water visa
use of our water truck.
3. WATER
a. Su. face:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, po,rds, wetlands)?
If yes, describe type and provide names. if appropriate, state what stream or
river it flours into.
We are within 200' of the Mt. Olivet pond, commonly known, as Olivet Creek.
2) li ill the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
The proposed work will. be within 200' of the Mt. Olivet pond located
just East of Blaine Avenue, commonly referred to in the drawings as
Mt. Olivet Way, and South of North Third Street.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that Could be placed in or
removed from surface water or wetlands snd indicate the area of tine site that
would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material.
None.
4) Will the proposal require surface water vvithdranals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
None.
5 Does the proposal Ire within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on fire
site plan.
No.
n
2) Describe waste material
that will be
discharged
into the ground from septic
tanks or other sources,
if any (for
example:
Domestic sewage; industrial,
containing the following
chemicals...;
agricultural;
etc.). Describe the general
size of the system, the
number of such
systems,
the number of houses to be
served (if applicable). or the number
of animals
or humans the system(s) are
expected to serve.
None.
C. Witer Runoff (including storm water):
Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection
and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other waters. If so, describe.
The storm water runoff will be controlled in our existing storm water
sediment ponds and ditches, grass lined swales, ditches with check dams.
Z) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
No.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water
impacts, If any:
Continue to monitor the rock dams and straw bales located within our
existirg storm drainage ditches and replace as needed.
Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
_ X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
X evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
X shrugs
X grzss
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk
cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfuil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amou-:t of vegetation will be removed ur altered?
Some deciduous and evergreen trees along with ordinary vegetation,
grass, etc.
c
re
5 Animals
List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None.
Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measure to preserve or
enhance vegetation un the site, if any:
None.
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or
are known to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
%tAmmals: deer. bear. elk_ I1r.11vrr nihor
Robbins, Blackbirds, and Sparrows.
Nnnp