Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA86-108 •1 o/ ••-' 1 rV AP. . ..X. .,;.• :, ,rO i le 'ae®fie 0,17 S' ♦ ...% i. • -,. n �F gyp 1. o y�•yy ` ,0 '�,i % �• C it y ' rt i '• s:`pt'1'<76 t r '! ,� N 9. jir i 3 - '1 ive,:• ' ,..., y,:40 iir4,f.el ...",,- A •.2f��•IG aC• er 3.SO(T t °.i •.i• i►f... Ns 6• 4.'4,C e'z4": 1 y/� "`7' r.' ti° --:'etre.#':‘"Ctr. 7..;f6ii:••.. -44. 6 ..eirce151.4 t tVA i• .41 g - 1 f".7r. _ „I •10•d• Trki . • _.....mg .e. __.0,........ ...,....----..,,,,.4,- ,..... ,,.,, ,,,,,, g it .• ... 0 i., 6 _%)....._ • idt �D,h.::;d�-r !�o: : `.v.- e • se�,�Y�1 j rKa�• � f� i �. •5 f• •���� i ? Z, p. 'F._ •l i 'b��•/t� •gig • 1••••m*•Ufr-iArr / • C• ,n�•. ��'t ,7•C.C•`.w .O� -'''-,. CC2k r `de% Ya i+GFi1 f �•- f.•� ���1i���:, ./Ai o J i} ,'_ ` s "WI �80�� • r (7 - \ I p .Yp-,� +� I p ,,,d..mu ... l{�' ,�r►�f,�Q wi_�'V� ef','a ! yio'ken� `'�'-. ld � - r • �-'a/ I� imam•...w ,per , p (� ° �/� ;/ a sc �►', .of:•7A4 r 1 `r:S�p -.�' 8.,n 1tr' :01;frT''ct a j \ C1 ) Cr�O^�V_ '/ y- • 0�6 • �`` - / . Q,yrc14. � C 3;• • ' . '•tk � r�'7�. V £,• ' �; ` r e..,e.o..an..� ' • •WW �! ��j/S� ToWaoe �• 4 :eo /3' L i M...', ' r O o/ •�/ -(yi".�_ -r .•1`'e .:?. e'�• unt � '.sp 1 i /�!• �-+• _ �i• "t>_,f)�4w'� J�" • -,- / 9y s7,z,% `(''�•0Q�- ^C�^�,,. {i��~^ - �X`•�� ,.t°L'�:s t� :, r. off• ti • .' r•J FYI? isI c _ ( �+l..J e,�_ J �'C� � `y. [�YJ-�JTT� 7► :� s\,�•i�c'• a ; 1ll c .0 �"1 e .0-w 1 'ii .. lc,:. 1 — -— ,c.,h,434 fi: � b ' --`a- ?t f r ` . •l 4• s� . •,_5 a_ �ii,.;•1 'B C_1�• It s f 4 s i e fVV/ V f • • v n.4 r.1 �• p c'�Y /°•1 �`� TJ �� 'Y 7o G f Yt. .;, ya ^+l t 4it • •4%.,.4) >b 1{ ` • r' 463 ,:. =Yg.' tl : � 4,�c� ,AnJ `n,, • --..s,„„-- '9,.-.1.--$ - '• gt- j:z i V., gi:e, -4;_. '.p :•., 00.4,- .., -70,--5: %_____"" ..z ... „. . . . .,..., ,..,. _. , . . . , . • . • •. . " 7 •:i7.i.v..N,-- -7.•.s..,_,'.....„..,;,--'',.,,.:„..-..........47,..,7,`:•:.:..:2,...- . .1 ow E • Qr September 18, 1986 9.4 .R '� ,. - - 2t/ 1 . - Number Number Floors Type Site Building �;i. i, a jS �. _ n I 1 1 1 sto office 180.344 S.F. 9.500 S.F. 1� !• . {` � ���� tl r , • 2 1 story office fflcoiJ4 U1 !SII ftro150216 5 F_ .e..af n••a•(1rw147600 S.F_ +� ile• 183150 S.F. w.• firr �'fice 403084 S.F. ••�•~ v 1' t ' 9 office 41.000 S.F. T `. }. _ 7 it 1 story office 298,780 S.F. 18.636 S.F. 12 1 story office 18.636 S.F. BLACKRIVE� e.w.arnoos 3Y� ° '�"' -"=-=y::::, -J:�` A 1 13 1 story office i VD 15.540 S.F. 829.173 S.F, Joliet � -c -- .Corpora$e Parl - - 7:.. . 14 1 story office i R/D 17,410 S.F. . y v_. ;t 15 3 stories office 683,912 S.F. 69,150 S.F. • I" is �'_S ' i 16 4 stories office 64.000 S.F. RENTON, WASHINGTON '• 1 ,L. a---! , .- 17 3 stories office 48.000 S.F. :1 i • `� C� .fir ,•*. o 18 2 stories office 39.972 S.F. It 1r; A 19 5 stories office 1521.275 S.F. 80,365 S.F. FIRST �y MUTES 1 .p +we i e„ 7� �` 'A 20 4:tortes office 64.292 S.F. .,n•.,..,.. J l�15 -:j :; �s 21 3/4 :tortes office 55,469 S.F. 55,469 S.F. •,.« •� ... 1 11' u `i.k +.4 Aoc - i .11'•e - ♦ 1 arm'•-,. __ ASON_POMEROY NORTHWEST INC. �'•\ '• Q` E•• _ ,•, 22 1 story MI 1158.884 S.F, 23,163 S.F. _ _ _ i f aS. i.F 24 2/ltstort.% of ••�•n`.«....�. �1 ��•,• t• 1•0..., �.?5` _ .w..a._.4a. 5 1 stow Q // 128.004 S.f. 31.46�pp 5$ F. ClEll. NELSON GROUP INC. 1 A 26 2 stories office 1266,000 S.F. 26.160 S.F. .••••...:.�. ... .. ,, 27 2 stories office 26,160 S.F. ;{:I 1 1 �o i8 3 stories office __ 39.240 S.F - BUSH ROE) i HTCHl1GS INC. wI r y ` g storff-_ office /132.000 S, ~i4 i70 S.F. 690.688 S.F. •••....• . A��, • 1 30 stories ifes 540,000 S.F. 47,000 S.F. e o 31 3 stories office 48,l00 S.F. `'p,° •Ij •t 32 3 stories office 48.800 S.F. _ C� 33 2 stories office 47.000 S.F. F� D ;' 34 2%tortes office / 168,553 S.F. 26.240 S.F. ' ' 1 "• • i, 15 ?Sprits offtre 27.440 S.F. 1 �J L_J ' •;. 36 4/2 stories office 1263.035 S.F. 90.760 S.F. •0•^I •eas .• •// ft� 1.575.330 S.F. ~• 1}'r 1 Approximate Site Areas -/ ...-- o t • Architecture and Planning Lemon Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 TRANSMITTAL'; ,i • TO: City o;f Renton DATE: October22, 1986 Department of Building/Zoning 200 Mill Avenue S. PROJECT: Bl ackRiver Corporate Park Renton WA 98055 Infrastructure _ PROJECT NO: NW 85014 ATTN: Jerry .Lind/Jeanette Samek-MacKague t1, RE: I, NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 Affidavit of Publication: Notice of Application for Shoreline Mgmt. Substantial Development. (Certified Original ) pi • is REMARKS: For your records, as required by city, the above notice was published on the same day of two consecutive weeks. 1�L' :. its �Lrl YI \ uJ �� I`li i Ci I i '1, L= ij '� ° 1 OCT 2 31966 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. i 0 By: Y. Ken; K. Chin ri cc. Barbara Moss , First City Equities Royce !iBerg . 51216 • NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION SUBSTANTIAL riDEy LOPME FPEirRMIT NoCity Equities has filed an application for a AudreyDeJoie substantial development permit for the , being first duly sworn on oath states that construction or development of The is the Chief Clerk of the Infras- tructures for BlackRiver Corporate Park- he/sheFormerly Valley 405 Business Park:road- ways, landscape improvements, jogging paths,exercise stations,nature walks,and VALLEY NEWSPAPERS signage.Located at:BlackRiver Corporate Park Formerly Valley 405 Business Park; North of S.W. Grady Way,along S.W.7th • Daily News Journal, Daily Record Chronicle, Daily Globe News - Daily newspapers published six (6)times a week.That said newspapers Street and future S.W.Oakesdale Avenue are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six and S.W.Naches Avenue within Section(s) 13 and 24 of Township 23N, Range 4E, months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published W.M., In the City of Renton,King County, in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King Washington. Said development is pro- posedCount Washington. ValleyNewspapers have been approved as legal c tot be within(See Below')and/or its Y, gPP g associated wetlands. newspapers by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Any person desiring to express his views King County. or to be notified of the action taken on this application should notify the Building and Zoning Department, Renton Municipal The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Daily News Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055 in writing of his interest Journal , Daily Record Chronicle, Daily Globe News , (and within thirty(30)days of the last publication of this notice. not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its Published in the Valley Daily News subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice a October 12 & 19, 1986. R1871. Notice of Application was published -- on October 12 and 19, 1986 R1871 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $ 38.00 PREPAID „ f7 F--, c is 5 --, OCT 2 31986 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 20th day of Oc t 19 86 p .pT. No y Public for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington. VN#87 Revised 10/84 aligg/EaVig OCT 211986 LPN Architects & Planners • .2Ho1'V�ick, Dereget, -Koeri:nd,: °1 ;Damson/Birtcher':Fund - 't.. 'Perry., John H • - ' '."123,0 "•:0aknead•:_Pkwy: r': ,-,�`• h•n'•3,: , t• ; ' c/o •Bi rtct _er:Property Commerical !I: Perry_.Bros:- 'Inc: • ' h u 0, .. Powell Ave•. 'S.W: -Suite' 210','i, ,.ssr .a: :', 11400' SE' 6,.t St., S ite. 12 900 'P -Bunn? val.e; '`=.0 . • . ' •e-2- „_L':_ _�-e .▪:i.t. �v,,, ,LL,_t_. f -`-, ",- --,=.�,-Y"_-'•-_.-_; ,NIPS:^:`1f- n` 'e-1 nfr Y,. - _ - _ - _ "• .. - --' ~ t .� - - -_ _ •:':,',',�,-'A'-'.`;ij , i , 7'.'L{t t-a.''.:':)t. '-C t..,., , - •. i~', h. • .� � .t ".ki-r>Fro'duc,ts.''.& ,Chemi,cals.:''.Inc. • Burl ington Northern Inc: - Casey, M _ ' - ;;P`a,0'�r Boxy '53•8 : 810 3rd.,Ave':.' . ' ' c/:o•,-,Seattl e-ist National •Bank «Al'4Ventown, •PA: >18105- : 208 Central ,Bl dg. ' . P:0. .'Box 3586 •. ' ;!:„-4. Seattle, .WA 98104' Seattle; ,WA 98124' t.,-k-- =..,. _ - - -- — -. , , - •' _-- __ _Iru Sti'R/E:. _ ,• , - „ - .• -;- . Puge:VSo"un'd Power .& Ligh't'Co. King County City of Renton ' Pug'et.:;Power. Bldg..'-,; 500 A King County 200 Mill Avenue`South `OSC `-,""11N = • ,: Administration Bldg. • Renton, WA 98055" ',.Bell evue:, WA 98009 Seattle,' WA 98104 ;•-••C'F/CHG.Associates - '. Fairview Pointe Associates Seventh• Avenue Company - ; 200''S.':333rd st. c/o Junta Dale, ' P.O.' Box-"'598 ' Federal Way, WA •.98003• • 26360 Aric Lane Bel 1 evu'e,;`WA • 98006 •• . •• • .+_£, :,t= Los Altos Hit l s, CA 94022 • Container. Corp. of America Metro - City` of Seattle ' , -I • °1' Fi rst.`National Plaza : Seattl a/Metro .' ,City' Comptroller' . :•' .Chii'=ca o 'IL 60670 . , 9821 2nd: Avenue 600 4th Avenue, Roomi101 !,='r':"` :- - Seattle, WA 98104 Seattle; WA 98104 ':Bl'ackRiwer Quarry Hawk, James L & :Mary Jo Hawk, James' L:. Sr: .680.8:,'.140th, St. 22435 S.E.228th - ' 6808 S. 140th- :Seattle, .WA 98104 Kent, WA • ,98024 Seattle, WA •.981'78 :;, - _ .. '4--- , • - -.- — , _'--- --'---- --- --- _ - . • • • '4.Un:inon�•''Paci-fic Corp. 'Puget Western' Inc. . ' ' 0 ' -Box• 2500• • Puget'Power B1 dg: •• ••. ';B rolom:-field,,• CO 80020 10608 N:E.",4th ' ' . ' • - ' , Bellevue, WA 98009 ? er' \ . 'j / 6 . • ' .V.:t_v, -u--.-. ,--.. .„, ., . ::‘,:',..,c..L.,„.•'.. 1• s t: (e'� • • • •• • • frX `6 • 'OCT• , -t` - •I . y7. (, , INGlzC '� _ 4 m ., ...:,,.•,,, , sa r' vCuN, - T Y i •i . 1 1L� '4a P f J' ir .ri''' , v,Y' - !,S 1! is ' r:�: 7`N' :N; Ii t .- 1. we% ' . _ t _1 ", ++ • f"rS• f ' y w : 'i j'y :v.'P p rflr ".. •tii• ,%' - •Z • :' i..`:}.,: _ �,.,fir..ry .% • ,r,:ice r °1 �s', "� .1 S, .: •4 ,� ;,i. `'�1 1• n �: 3 r�l 2' i' - r s-Y ay _/t - 1 i �FS!ry} � J. ra. Ir 5' v, i l'' i � I ...3- f y ':,,,,,•, i-r ipr.. , '"t • ^, Y- .. q 1 7. � !t- t -fir • 4Y = ' ', if • ,'a: �`J 4�1.?» q •1 , :'pe '.ce r 'It e. - P ▪ • 1 7 k 1. i it % O ...„'��1 c,S. ~ •. ■ ay, "•-,:, .1�R•••6'-,�clo tO-bc fa CI 7 'S .;` a' r f/rI Vi a`'} d ,�r'^+ .e —�� -' 1a,,•. -} ', 4 d` .\ ,.• G �f. '.s.jr 0 • .e • ley •• •V'Tiff �• w1 . , `w3�"• . i k 1e4,0" t � g to _ ,'''it •''fie,• e,......• '• • ► ' t �p ' s T+ 91 ,95 03- • • • /; / e•• •s • cc'Yp • • -\ ` � ,� �..s4!�w F..,. @ FR7 r ,f 7�17+.( Is�� K�Ore ,e „�` y.. ae..., ,'• e Oy r- • - •i,'f ��♦1� l 24 •gig. (6 ji :, e .E.-tm.'}? ` ff t• e a `.i.c(y O 4.3.• •.• , I v.:free••`. /•'j}., • 43 .rt • w a M, O / F� ,Af If • •• IJ •� •1 ,..i1•. a �•H-,.e•,: •t�,�,•• �." e ( /i Un ' O lam' '1jo., �, ;.c'♦ �ti Ij `'' ,,,> •� to., . ���. '/,� • `•, Iiiiiii,,--eovz, die Flay ;i/ ,1► ` �•r, �1 Cite; • �{ 4Pe . _�.. •,e.w eTana. Z(.� , _ 1 i 1 i42�. ,e► • �•�,.. o •'d. .. C O C,.,� C O ()()� / 1^-� /i e Ley a �� j9r 41•.1.�Mv/ J 1 �•' 1. „;1; ,� •J•�!�1 tie o 'eo• ;fir ••l' LT!z ' -4 tie > ,0.... WM. •" n WgZ ram. ,:ol a 7` �� � ^ > • •1g�; "'1" ,' vSi ?� �" � r. � �^ ?yi g- � � • hoc • , O y :3�+ s•`�N" i e ��pp�, \ • 1. y Y �, ' 1't /, f�+.NgvL�''3. `rt ^r''r - t e •;r e•f. a J• t � 0i S•':�x `; 1, y�'�j % r ` •. Gy4H1 U� _1e , O 9 / 11,43„o-r 6 , `"J , ,,, .,:1/40:•S•is E• .4 r :s: • ,t41' % ` 6 f l•• p . tiR ,: ,:::::. ,.,- .3, �..C�,ci? �s�(I ',: -tA,,,„.,....}p,a. °•.� 'eS�'y":. c. i,,F 'a6 • C/�� 1 ,? ;lr, �f- '�sti ?.' - / ___ _ . • cr. •� _�► �r „„may; .:"t • ' I • c.(� ,r l " . ,, s `mar• 'ti 44ruka 1',,'. ' e•� .Lam:.,\ "yam'^=I•:( 'i; r1 t- '--`' C.> .%;;16ert.441:wzkta_, VP'\: VV., ' ..'r ''' LI Fr— ____ ., i — r, r • \ .. "� i{ September 18. 1986 . ', d '1, i 't_$,._ : ' Bldg. .41 S.F. S.F. t ti a, ` CO ' `� S>r a r•� Mrtier Mwabtr Floors Type Site Building I 1 ~4•�•� t DIr I I 1 1 story office 180.344 S.F. 9,500 S.F. y == ��,t+� '�s1F►, 13 2 1 story oJL ce 6.400 S.F. Lt f1 �6 •-,�C- . 7 _z-. .. ,l 1 stow oce 26.400 S.F. 1 ]stories rstories•tor/•s oce . . , ,90 S. .tories . re 40.640 S.F.ce 103,084 S.F. 71,832 S.F. �•,1, �i\ a• 6 2 p ~ 9 2 stories office 41.000 S.F. 1t f � _ • e W � .: ;•'� 10 2 stories office 41,D00 S.F. BLAC KRIVER �a /� • 11 1 story office 298,780 S.F. 18,636 S,F. � �. .� Y r v �n 12 1 story office 18,636 S.F. 13 1 story office i R/D 15,540 S.F. 829,171 S.F. f « •x�11$31211:t:::`:,''.4.-f.:4.,...:::177..1.,:1",.. ,, • '- .� ...,..t, „,11 1 story office i R/0 15.540 S.F. Corporate Park -$' / •44 __ - �- --r15 l stories office 683.912 S.F. 69,150 S.F. �� • •.'� tiA " e , 1; 816 4 stories office 64,000 S.F. RENTON WASHINGTON / • -+F ^1T ]atones efflce 48,000 S.F. , C o-'18 2 stories office 39.972 S.F. ;' - 19 5•tortes office 1521.275 S.F. 80,365 S.F. FitST CRy EOlRTE3 jT �. , ,., .n•e a20 4 stones efflce 64,292 S.F. CY .Jy C.. • ',, �4 �y i .`.21 3/4 storl•s office 55.469 S.F. 55,469 S.F. , ,rr. �3 _LEASON POSAE710Y NOgTNN/E5'•T INC. ,: _ Qu:,^ I.• 22 1 story R/D / 158,881 S.F. 21,161 S.F. • ` 1rf t3 tory R/P 22.600 S F , M`E :k�C}g _ '` �" 24 )A stories otft � F--i41.100 SF. ZZZSS 1 stow R!!D 128.004 S.F. 31.450 $$ F iRTC11Ety NELgp4 GROUP INC. . �`1;% t ""`;...-►4 26 2 stories office 1266,000 S.F. 26.1•, S.F. ,., . ; ' ,may 27 2 stories office 26.160 S.F. to 3 stars• office 39,240 S.F. BUSHIM FIOE0, a FtrTCNNGs INC- ., f ( {{``, V I 9 ;storHs office / 132 000 S tt 770 S.F. 690,688 S.F. •" —2 stories office 540.000 S.F. 47.000 S.F. •;;Q G 31 3 stories ' office 48,800 S.F. fe�.�=o;c ,� 32 3 stones office 48.1,00 S.F. M 33 2 stories office 47.000 S.F 34 2 storNs office / 168,553 S.F. 26,240 S.F. Ln_r- D t15 2}tortes office 27.440 S.F. 76 1/Z•tortes office /263.035 S.F. 90,760 S.F. • wu r• 1 s 1.575.330 S.F. ••/ 9 llppresfw•te Site Areas - o BEGINNING OF FILE FILE TITLE MICROFILMED 8AIL della / 3R .- 108ftaw86 eI lad • ARsaT April 15 , 1987 EoUITIES i �._; .... ; i _; ti —}�` r+, I ' J APR j( I r� ! I i 1 Mr. Donald Erickson • ! + Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON 3 r ' a � '�` l'�," ' u'PT• Planning and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Withdrawl of Infrastructure Submittal ECF-090-86 SA-108-86 • V-109-86 • SM-005-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: Per. the City of Renton' s Environmental Review Committee' s request, First City Equities is formally requesting withdrawal of the infrastructure development applications including environmental checklist form ECF-090-86, site plan approval SA-108-86, variance V109-86, and the shoreline management permit application SM-005-86. • It is our intent to include the trail network, monument signage, Naches Road and associated landscaping with individual phases of development on the property. It is also possible we will be able to use the overall site plan approval ordinance pending in • order to achieve our goal of clearly defining the location of the roadway network and associated landscaping and placement of ` identifying monument signs. With regards, FIRST CITY EQUITI vdeaoui,- • • • Barbara E. Moss . . Director of Planning . • • BEM/bc . • cc: ERG Members Project Team Members . 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments \N :n If ,/ FIRSTCITY �w EQUITIES f.":1 A :,, u :_ �,�-� April 15, 1987 , �� ,�l ,ll E1.PP, 2 0\B87 �/ Mr. Donald Erickson Zoning Administrator r,c Ga„ ,,�,a� ,,; DT. CITY OF RENTON tv'1 �; .;•a � '� u_• Planning and Zoning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Withdra;wl of Infrastructure Submittal ECF-0901-86 SA-108 1186 V-109-86 SM-005 r86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: Per the Ci- y of Renton' s Environmental Review Committee' s request, First City Equities is formally requesting withdrawal of the infrastructure development applications including environmental checklist form ECF-090-86, site plan approval SA-108-86, variance V109-86, and the shoreline management permit application SM-005-86 . It is our 4ntent to include the trail network, monument signage, Naches Road and associated landscaping with individual phases of development on the property. It is also possible we will be able to use the overall site plan approval ordinance pending in order to achieve our goal of clearly defining the location of the roadway network and associated landscaping and placement of identifying monument signs. With regards, FIRST CITY; EQUITI ‘*541-% Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM/bc cc: ERC Members Project Team Members 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments Architecture and Planning. - ? '?. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A l A„114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 TRANSMITTAL TO: Mr. Roger Blaylock DATE: April 7, 1986 City of Renton Planning Dept. 200 Mill Avenue South PROJECT: Valley 405 Business Park Renton, WA 98055 PROJECT NO: NW 85014 ATTN: RE: NUMBER DESCRIPTION 1 Copy DRAFT of CC&Rs for Valley 405 Business Park 1 Copy Landscape Guidelines .. REMARKS: For : your use. �c. APR 8 ' Rs HAND DELIVERED BY: Royce A. Berg CC. Barbara Moss w/encl . • 1.() LANDSCAPE GUIDELINE:; DRAFT The landscape consists of elements that give form to exterior spaces. Thus, the character of the landscape is created by elements such as signing, site lighting, walkways, arid plant materials, arid arrangement of major functional elements such as project entrances, parking lots, buildings, service areas, etc. Given that project architecture and building sites within Valley 405 will most likely be of varying types and sizes, landscaping as a design element will play the key role in creating arid conveying the overall character of Valley 405 as a "park-like" working environment. The purpose, them, of these Landscape Guidelines, is to provide design criteria which will help to insure that Valley 405 achieves an image that, is distinctive, clearly understandable and unified. 1.1 INTRODUCTION TO TIIE VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PART{ LANDSCAPE CONCEPT As part of the Valley 405 master plan, a master landscape plan has been conceived to organize, unify and create a distinctive character for the whole Valley 405. The master landscape plan recognizes that. Valley 405 consists of three prominent, zones, namely, the streetscaape; zone, the common parkway zone and the interior zone. An understanding of the nature of these zones is important to understanding the landscape guidelines and their intent. 1.1.1 S treetseape Zone The Streetscape zone is the primary image setting zone and it includes all arterial and collector roads. Ail improvements within this corridor will have the greatest degree of control. This zone includes the areas from behind the curb to the setback line established by City Zoning. Common elements within this area include walkways, planting, irrigation, street lighting, project signing, traffic signing and project entries. This area will be planned as an unit, installed and maintained by an Owner/Occupant association. 1.1.2 Streetscape Zone Design Concept The sLreetscape within Valley 0 Business Park will consist of a unified single image as presented by the landscape master plan, namely, a six foot. lawn between the curb and a five foot sidewalk, sixteen feet. of lawn with deciduous trees producing a large canopy exit her in a straight row or regularly staggered rows. Beyond this la SIY will be a four foot, mass shrub planting to 4 adjacent parked cars. j\I FEB 2 7 1986 .. LPN Architects& Planners . ' l Street trees shall be a minimum of three inch caliper of the species and configurations called for in Lhe landscape master plan. • • Seeded lawn or sod shall be a common single mix. Major entry monuments and plantings will be provided at Oakesdale and Grady, Powell and Grady and Oakesdale. Minor monuments, plazas and plantings will be provided at the intersections of Oakesdale and 7th and at Nachos and 7th. 1.1.3 Common Parkway Zone The common Parkway Zone includes areas under the jurisdiction of the SCS, City of Menton and areas with the ft. parcel setback which will be planned, installed and maintained as a k common parkway. This zone generally boarders waterways. 1.1.4 Common Parkway Zone Design Concept The common parkway will consist of a park-like landscape plan which will act as a well-maintained, unified buffer between undeveloped natural areas and the developed areas of the interior zone. Ammenities within the common parkway will be roiling lawns with large shade and conifer trees, mass shrub planting to frame and enhance views, landscape irrigation, an eight foot jogging path with physical exercise stations, water features and wildlife viewing platforms or areas. The plan for the common parkway zone is presented in the landscape master plan. 1.1.5 interior Zone The interior zone encompasses all exterior elements from the streetscape or common parkway to the building setbacks. This zone is subject to the needs of each Owner and Occupant and is meant to have a greater flexibility than either the streetscape or common parkway zones. Common concerns within this zone include: parking lot arrangements and landscaping, site lighting, regulatory and directional signing, and service areas screening. 1.1.6 Interior Zone Design Concept- It is intended that the interior zone of Valley 405, consisting primarily of parking lot Iandscaping, be -planted in geometric patterns. (Refer to Section 1.2.5.c for plant types.) Subtle light levels, restrained graphics and screening of service areas will all contribute to reinforcing the Valley 405 landscape design concept. 2 1.2 LANDSCAPE DESIGN G'l1[D1:1.INHS 1.2.1 Assessment District Installation and Maintenance Agreement. 1. All landscape improvements within the streetscape and common parkway will be installed by the Grantor. • 2. The Grantor has entered into a five year maintenance agreement to maintain the streetscape and common parkway zones. Landscape maintenance will be paid for through Assessment District revenues. Following the expiration of • the five year maintenance, all maintenance will be assumed by the Owner and Occupant of individual development parcels and will be paid for through the continuation of an Assessment District. 1.2.2 • Maintenance of Unimproved Sites. 1. Sites that are not improved or built upon shall be maintained in a clean and neat appearance by the Owner and Occupant. Weeds, brush and trash will be removed twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall, or more often as required to maintain a high quality appearance. The Grantor and their representative have • the right to perform the necessary maintenance and charge the individual Owner and Occupant as necessary. 1.2.3 Landscape Coverage • • 1. A minimum of (20) percent of the area within the property lines of a development site shall be devoted to landscape materials unless otherwise approved in writing by the Grantor. The majority of landscaping shall be on the street frontage zone to establish the greatest visual benefit to the business park. 1.2.4 Street Frontage Zone Design Guidelines l � 1.2.4a Definition of Street Frontage Zone 1. The street frontage zone is defined as that portion of the site which fronts on the streetscape zone and/or is visible from the street. 1.2.4.b Specific Design Limitation within the Street Frontage Zone • • 1. Grading: Finish- grading for each site shall meet the existing grade at the streetscape zone and where applicable common parkway zone boundary. Transition slopes in this zone shall not exceed 4:1. Berms shall be shaped with naturally flowing contours and smooth transitions. When grass is used, the maximum slope shall be 4:1, and where ground cover is used, the maximum slope 3 • • will• be 3:1. Berms shill be at least three feet high unless side slopes exceed the maximum. • 2. Service Areas: Service areas within this zone are to be enclosed with solid walls and screened with the appropriate Iandscape material. See landscape material list for "screening shrub" types. 3. Screening Shrubs: The following shrubs, in combination with walls or fences, have been selected to aid in eye level screening of service areas. Planting areas shall be a minimum width of four feet. All planting areas • exceeding four feet shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. Screening shrubs shall be 5-gallon or 22" in height at time of planting, whichever is greater. Plant Name Max. Spacing Comments Photinia fraseri 5' on center Cotoneaster franchetti 4' " " Cotoneaster lac:tea 4, II II Viburnum tinus 4' " " Viburnum rytidophyllum 4' " " Mahonia aquifolim 3' " " Vacciniuin ovat.um 3' If Prunus lustanica 5' " " must be clipped Arbuteus unedo 4' " Pieris japonic:a 3' " Ligustrum japonicum 3' " 1' "Texanum" Thuja occidentalis 2 1/2 ' Buxus sempervirens 3' If " must be clipped Rhododendron varieties 4' " 1.2.5 Parking Lot Landscape Requirements 1.2.5a Tree Planting Requirements 1. Two types of trees are identified for the parking lot planting. (Refer to Section 1.2.5c Plant Material List.) Type A: End of Parking Column Planting Type B: Interior Parking Lot Planting • (modify sketch) Type A: These trees shall be planted at the ends of parking columns. A single tree specie, with a a 3" caliper and shall be planted throughout the Owner and Occupant's entire parking. lot compound. Type B: These trees shall be planted in the parking lot interior. A single tree specie, with a 2" 4 • caliper shall be planted every third stall. The tree specie may be different in separated parking lots within the compound. Trees must be planted in the immediate vicinity of parking stalls; credit will not be given for perimeter edge tree planting. 2. Tree wells and planter areas within paved parking areas . shall provide a minimum 4 foot clear planting space. ;' 3. Planting areas shall have a 6 inch curb on all sides. :. 1.2.5.b Parking and Pedestrian Circulation 1. Parking location and layout should facilitate easy and ?'• safe pedestrian circulation. s,L 2. If the parking layout is more than one row deep, walking space with a minimum width of 4 feet between stalls should be provided at key locations. 3. If parking lots exceed two rows in depth, the alignment of the aisles should be in the direction of the pedestrian movement. • 1.2.5.c Parking Lot Plant Material List 1. The following lists are recommendations. Other trees will be considered for use providing they conform to size, habit and disease resistance. If special soil or site conditions prevent the use of the recommended trees, the Owner and Occupant should suggest an alternative to the design review committee. Do not use Prunes species. Ash, Hawthorn and Locust are not recommended. Tree List for Parking Compounds The following list of trees have been selected to create a park-like appearance in the parking compound. • Type A Trees: End of Parking Column Planting Plant Name: Acer platanoides Acer rubrum • Acer pseudoplatanus Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Auercus coccinia . Quercus borealis Fraxinus pennsylvanica lanceolata Gleditsia triacanthos* . • 5 • Minimum Size: 3" caliper Comments: Limb to 6' min. *Thornless varieties only, "Skyline, " Shademaster" Type B Trees: Interior Parking Lot Planting Plant. Name: • Magnolia grandiflora • Styrax japonica' Pyrus calleryana Minimum Size: 2" caliper Comments: Limb to 8' min. 1.2.6 Vehicular Access Drive Design Guidelines 1.2.6.a Location Criteria 1. Major access drives are to be located as described in Access and Drive Location Guidelines. 2. Access drives for "right turn only" ingress and egress should be located by the Owner and Occupant according to city standards. 1.2.6.b Limited Use Area at Primary and Secondary Access Drives 1. The "limited use area" is defined as the,area extending 10 feet on either side of art access drive and in that area of the first 10 feet extending from the curb line of the public street. 2. All objects higher than 30 inches above the the top of the curb at the access drive curb opening, including but not limited to, shrubs, trees, signs and earth berms shall be located outside of the limited use area. 1.2.7. Guidelines for Interior Property Lines and Landscape Areas 1.2.7.a Side and Rear Yard Requirements 1. A 5 foot minimum planting strip is to be provided continuously along and adjacent to all interior property lines. • 2. All site drainage shall be directed away from the 5 foot zone. Drainage within the 5, foot. zone may flow to an adjacent property. 3. A maximum slope of 3:1 is allowed within the 5. foot planting zone. A 1 foot minimum flat transition shall be provided at the top and bottom -of all slopes, within this zone. 6 • 4. Where the two properties adjoin, there shall be a 10 foot minimum zone created by the two 5 foot minimum required landscape planting strips on each side of a property line. All planting areas exceeding the 5 foot minimum shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. • 5. No walls or fences exceeding 30 inches in height shall be permitted within a required 5 foot minimum planting zone. Walls or fences separating adjoining parcels may, be permitted when located at the property line. 1.2.7.b Side and Rear Yard Landscape Requirements 1. Either shrub or tree planting shall be required in the 5 foot zone. Where two properties adjoin, shrub plantings with groundcover is required on one side of the property Iine and tree plantings with groundcover is required on the other. The first Owner and Occupant to receive plan approval shall be required to plant the required trees and ground cover. The second Owner and Occupant must then plant the required shrubs and ground cover. 1.2.7.c Plant Material Requirements - Interior Property Lines 1. Trees: Shall be located 4 feet from curb or 1 foot from the property line. The trees selected for interior property lines must be species that have been used somewhere else on the Owner and Occupant's property. Refer to Sections 1.2.5c Plant List. 2. Shrubs: Shall be located 3 feet from the property line or 2 feet from the curb, and planted with a maximum spacing of 5 feet on center. 3, Groundcover: Shall be placed 24 inches on center maximum • • spacing, covering all ground surfaces. If the Owner and Occupant selects lawn as a ground cover sod must be installed. 1.2.7.d Planting and Irrigation Det:-ciIs and Specifications I. Ail planting and irrigation details and specifications shall conform to City of Renton , Washington Design Standards and the highest standards of the American Association of Nurserymen, the American Landscape Contractors Association and the irrigation industry. 2. It shall be the Owner and Occupant's responsibility to provide a I year guarantee against all defects of materials and workmanship for all planting and irrigation. The Owner and Occupant, and Grantor or their representative has accepted the work as 100 percent complete. • DRAFT DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS THIS DECLARATION, made this day of , 1986 by First City Equities, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"; WITNESSETH: • WHEREAS, the Grantor is the Owner of (or has an equitable interest in) real property described in the Declaration; and WHEREAS, Grantor is desirous of subjecting said real property to the protective covenants hereinafter set forth, each and all of which is and are for the benefit of said property and for such subsequent Owner and Occupant thereof; NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor hereby declares that the real property herein referred to as Valley 405 Business Park, Phase I & II elsewhere identified in this declaration as Valley 405 and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference, shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, leased, subleased and occupied subject to the conditions, covenants, restrictions, easements and reservations hereinafter set forth. The following restrictions and requirements are imposed on the property subject to this Declaration and are binding on all Owners and Occupants, and may be enforced against such Owners and Occupants jointly and/or severally. I. PURPOSE OF THIS DECLARATION This declaration is made to require development, Improvement and use of Valley 405 so as to: a) protect the Owners and Occupants of Building Sites against such use of neighboring Building Sites as might depreciate the value of their property; b) encourage the erection of attractive, permanent Improvements appropriately located to insure harmonious appearance and functions; c) assure adequate off-street parking space and off-street truck loading and maneuvering facilities; d) encourage the development of aesthetic architectural and engineering design, including compatible landscaping, and, in general, provide a harmonious development that will promote the general welfare of the Owners and Occupants of Valley 405. 1 II. DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms and words are defined for use herein as follows: a) Building — shall mean and include, but not be limited to the main portion of a structure built for permanent use and all projections or extension thereof, including but not limited to garages, outside platforms and docks, storage tanks, carports, enclosed malls and porches; b) Building_Site — shall mean a tract of real property within Valley 405 as determined by the legal description in a conveyance or lease from Grantor. If fee simple title to two (2) or more adjacent Building Sites, as defined hereinabove, is acquired by the same Owner such commonly—owned Building Site may, at the option of said Owner, be combined and treated as a single Building Site for the purpose of this Declaration, provided that the location of the Improvements on such combined Building Site shall be subject to prior written approval by Grantor; c) Declaration — shall mean this Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, together will all of the provisions contained herein; d) Improvements — shall mean and include, but not be limited to, buildings, out buildings, driveways, exterior lighting, fences, landscaping, lawns, loading areas, parking areas, retaining walls, roads, screening walls, signs, utilities and walkways located on a Building Site; e) Landscaping — a space of ground covered with lawn and/or ground cover combined with shrubbery, trees and the like which may be complemented with earth berms, masonary or similar materials, all harmoniously combined with themselves and with other Improvements on the Building Site; f) Lawn — a space of ground covered with grass, kept neatly mown and maintained; g) Occupant — shall mean an entity, whether it be an individual , corporation, joint venture, partnership or association, which has purchased, leased, rented or has otherwise legally acquired the right to occupy and use any Building or Building Site, whether or not such right is exercised; h) Owner — shall mean an entity, whether it be an individual, corporation, joint venture, partnership or association, which is record owner of any fee simple estate, or which has an equity of redemption in a Building Site; i) Sign — shall mean and include every advertising message, announcement, declaration, demonstration, display, illustration, 2 insignia, surface or space erected or maintained in view of the observer thereof for identification, advertisement or promotion of the interest of any person, entity, product or service. The definition of Sign shall also include the Sign structure, supports, lighting system and any attachments, ornaments or other features used to draw the attention of observers. This definition does not include any flag, badge or ensign of any government or governmental agency erected for and used to identify said government or governmental. agency; ` j) Street — shall mean any public street or highway, whether presently constructed, dedicated by plat map or contemplated in the future, under a street plan approved by any public authority. III. LAND USE Building Sites within Valley 405 shall be used for high quality Office Park, commercial, industrial, and business park purposes. The foregoing shall not, however, prevent Grantor from constructing, owning, operating, leasing or conveying real property within Valley 405 for facilities consistent with the purposes of this Declaration. IV. RESTRICTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS ON IMPROVEMENTS The following restrictions and requirements are imposed on the property subject to this Declaration: a) Temporary Structures — No temporary Buildings or other temporary structures shall be permitted on any Building Site; provided, however, trailers, temporary Buildings and the like shall be permitted for construction purposes during the construction period of a permanent building. Such structures shall be placed as inconspicuously as practicable, shall cause no inconvenience to Owners or Occupants of other Building sites, and shall be removed not later than thirty (30) days after the date of substantial completion for beneficial occupancy of the Building(s) in connection with which temporary structure was used; b) Building Setbacks — All Buildings shall be setback from appropriate property lines as follows: 1 ) Front Yards — all Buildings shall setback from front yard property lines a minimum distance of 60 feet. 2) Side Yard on Flanking Street of Corner Lot — All buildings shall setback from the side yard on a flanking street of a corner lot a minimum of 60 feet from the property line; 3) Side Yards — All Buildings shall be setback a minimum of 20 feet from all side yard property lines except where greater 3 side yard setbacks are imposed by Grantor to comply with building or fire code requirements; 4) Rear Yard — All Buildings shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the property line; c) Lot Coverage — Buildings and structures, but not parking areas, shall not cover more of the site than the following percentage of the total area of a building lot: 1 ) Light Warehousing — Forty—five percent (45%) 2) Business — park — Thirty—five percent (35%) 3) Office Park — Thirty—five percent (35%) d) Height — No building or structure shall exceed a height of Seventy five (75) feet unless otherwise approved by the Grantor. e) Parking Loading and Unloading Areas — No parking shall be permitted on any Street or drive, or any place other than parking areas located upon Building Sites. Each Owner and Occupant shall be responsible for compliance by its employees and visitors. Parking count shall comply to City Ordinance, except Business Park use shall provide a minimum of one car per 350 square feet of gross building area, unless approved otherwise by the Grantor. Landscaped earth berms shall be constructed to be consistent with the Landscaping Guidelines around all parking areas visible from public roads, also said areas shall be buffered as well as practicable by the use of other landscaping materials. All driveways and areas for parking, maneuvering, loading and unloading shall be paved with asphalt, concrete or similar materials. Off—street loading space shall be designed to include an additional area or means of ingress and egress which shall be adequate for maneuvering; f) Screening of Service Facilities and Storage Areas — Garbage and retuse containers sha`II be contained within Buildings, or shall be concealed by means of screening walls of materials similar to and compatible with that of the Building. Fuel and other storage tanks shall be installed underground. Such improvements shall be integrated with the concept of the Building Plan, be designed so that as not to attract attention, and shall be inconspicuously located. Unless specifically approved in writing for display and . similar purposes, no materials, supplies or equipment shall be stored in any area on a Building Site except inside a closed Building, or behind a visual barrier which screen such areas so they are not visible from neighboring Building Sites or Streets; the materials used for said screening barriers shall be wood, concrete or masonary in type and must be similar to and compatible 4 • with those materials used on the Building. Outside screened storage areas must not project beyond the front face of the principal Building on any site, or into any required Building setback area. Outside stored materials shall not exceed a height of twelve (12) feet. • g) Landscaping — No construction or installation of any Landscaping may be commenced without written approval by Grantor of the plans for such construction or installation. Grantor shall either approve or disapprove plans submitted in writing within thirty (30) days from the date on which they are received, and failure to either approve or disapprove within this period shall constitute approval of said plans. • All Building Sites shall be landscaped in conformance with the Landscape Guidelines and Masterplan and attached as Exhibit B and Exhibit C respectively. h) Exterior Materials Colors — Architecturally and aesthetically suitable building materials shall be applied to or used on all sides of a Building which are visible to the general public and to be harmonious and compatible with colors of the natural surroundings and other adjacent Buildings. Building design and colors shall be approved by the Grantor, and meet the following requirements: • 1) Exterior walls shall be of concrete, glass, or masonry. 2) No raw concrete unless sandblasted or textured. 3) No wood except at soffits, as entry accents, or in protected locations. • 4) All colors are to be of a earth tone "Natural" range. Primary or accent colors may be used with restraint. 5) Prefabricated metal buildings are prohibited. i) Utilities Mechanical Equipment Roof Projections — All utility lines including electrical shall be underground. Pad—mounted transformers, switchgear and similar equipment which must be installed above ground line, shall be screened with suitable Landscaping consistent with safety and other regulations of the utility companies. All mechanical equipment shall be located or screened so as not to be visible from the street view of, the general public or from the front view of other building sites. Penthouses and mechanical equipment screening walls shall be of design and materials compatible with those of the Building. Antennae shall be visually masked to the extent practicable and consistent with electromagnetic considerations; j) Pollutants — No trades, services or activities shall be conducted in Valley 405, nor shall anything else be done therein which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the Owners or Occupants 5 by reason of unsightliness or excessive emission or fumes, odors, glare, vibration, gases, radiation, dust, liquid wastes, smoke, debris or noise. k) Exterior_Lighting — All exterior and security lighting shall have underground service and shall be designed, erected, altered and maintained in accordance with plans and specifications approved in writing to the end that lighting shall be compatible and harmonious throughout Valley 405. 1) Signs — Design and placement of signs shall meet the following criteria: 1 ) Individual development signs shall identify only the name and/or product of the establishment. 2) No bare bulb or neon illumination of signs shall be allowed. except neon accents. Indirect illumination, floodlighting or internal illumination shall be the only allowable means of illumination of signs. 3) No flashing or animated signs shall be allowed. 4) Each individual development shall be limited to one free standing sign with the maximum total area for all faces of one hundred (100) square feet and a maximum height of eight (8) feet unless approved otherwise by Grantor. 5) Each individual development shall be limited to building face signs as specified below: aa. Where a single building or development site contains a single tenant, signs on building faces shall be limited to a single sign for each building face, which shall not extend above the wall line of the building, nor more than (one) foot from the face of the' building. Each building face sign shall be allowed a maximum total area of one hundred (100) square feet. The total area of all building face signs on a single development site shall not exceed two hundred (200) square feet. bb. Where a single building on a development site contains multiple tenants, each tenant may have a single building face sign which shall not extend above the wall line of the building, nor more than (1) foot from the face of the building. Each sign shall be limited to a maximum total area of thirty (30) square feet. 6) Graphics or supergraphics utilized for advertising purposes shall meet the size limitations specified for building face signs herein. Graphics or supergraphics utilized for 6 • aesthetic enhancement or decoration shall not be restricted by the provisions herein. 7) Private traffic signs, direction signs, and public convenience signs may be allowed where a public need is served. m) Fences — All fences shall be erected behind the landscaped areas required in paragraph "g". n) Maintenance — Each Owner and Occupant of Valley 405 shall be responsible for keeping its Building Site or Sites, whether or not improved, buildings and other improvements including lawn and landscaping to street curb, maintained in a safe, clean, neat and orderly condition and shall prevent rubbish, dunnage, replaced equipment or machinery and the like from accumulating on its Building Site. All exterior painted surfaces shall be maintained in sound condition and shall be repainted at least once every seven (7) years. If in the event the Owner or Occupant fails to comply with the maintenance provision of this Declaration (at the sole discretion of the Grantor) Grantor shall notify said Owner or Occupant of such conditions, in writing, and shall detail , in writing, any and all work which must be performed by said Owner or Occupant to bring said Building or Building site into compliance with the maintenance provision of this declaration and Grantor shall allow sixty (60) days from said date of notification in which said Owner or Occupant must perform said work. If said Owner or Occupant fails to perform said work within sixty (60) days, then in that event, Grantor may perform or cause to be performed any and all necessary maintenance work and submit all charges pertaining thereto to said Owner or occupant for prompt payment. If said Owner or Occupant fails to promptly reimburse the Grantor for said work performed, the Grantor may collect said charges through any appropriate proceeding at law or in equity or may file against the property of said Owner or Occupant a real property lien in an adequate amount to recover damages incurred by Grantor in connection with said maintenance work performed. Common area maintained for street medians, jogging, paths, monument signs, plazas and fountains, and street signage not within property lines but part of Valley 405, shall be accomplished by Grantor and property owners through an assessment district • established for such maintenance. o) Reciprical Easements — Reciprical crossover easements for access and utilities shall be required for certain phases of development to protect and provide emergency access, circulations, and connection of storm drainage, sewer and water line utilities. 7 V. APPROVAL OF PLANS No construction or exterior alterations of any Building or other Improvements including Signs may be commenced without written approval by Grantor of the plans for such contruction or alternation. Grantor shall either approve or disapprove plans submitted in writing within thirty (30) days from the date on which they are received, and failure to either approve or disapprove within this period shall consititute approval of said plans. Wherever approval in writing is required by the terms of this Declaration, such requirement shall mean written approval of Grantor in the following manner: a. All applications to Grantor shall be addressed as follows: First City Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 or to any such address as the Grantor shall herafter designate in writing, addressed to Owners and Occupants; b. Grantor shall exercise its best judgment to see that all buildings and improvements constructed within Valley 405 conform to the purposes and requirements of this Declaration; provided, however, Grantor and its employees or agents shall not be liable to any Owner or Occupant or to anyone submitting plans for approval, or to any other party by reason of a mistake in judgment, negligence or non—feasance arising out of or in connection with the approval, disapproval or failure to approve any such plans; c. Upon receipt of approval of plans, Owner or Occupant shall diligently proceed with the commencement and completion of all approved construction. Unless work on the approved construction shall be commenced within one (1) year from the date of such , approval and diligently pursued thereafter, then the approval shall automatically expire, unless Grantor has given a written extension of time; - d. Approval of plans by the Grantor may be secured prior to acquisition of a Building Site pursuant to the terms of a sale contract. VI. CONFLICTS Zoning ordinances, building codes and regulations, and any other governmental restrictions and requirements shall be observed. In the event of any conflict between this Declaration and any such governmental codes, regulations, restrictions and requirements, the more . restrictive standards shall apply. Any approval of Grantor required in this Declaration, does not in any way relieve Owners and • 8 Occupants from obtaining approvals required by any governmental body having jursidiction. VII. NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY OWNERS Any Owner of Building Site within Valley 405 who shall transfer to another entity, whether such entity be an individual, corporation, joint venture, partnership or association, any title, interest in or right of occupancy to such Building Site or portions thereof, shall give actual notice of the requirements of this Declaration of Covenents, Conditions and Restrictions to such entity. VIII. ENFORCEMENT Enforcement of the provisions of this Declaration shall be by any appropriate proceeding at law or in equity against any person, corporation or other entity violating or attempting to violate said provisions, either to restrain such violation, to enforce liability, or to recover damages, or by any appropriate proceeding at law or in equity against the land to enforce any lien or charge arising by virtue thereof. Grantor shall not be liable for enforcement of or for failure to enforce said provisions and failure of Grantor or of any Owner. or Occupant to enforce any of the provisions of this Declaration shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. IX,. MORTGAGES — DEEDS OF TRUST Breach of any of the foregoing convenants shall not defeat or render invalid the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value within Valley 405 but said covenants shall be binding upon and effective against any Owner of said premises whose title thereto is acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale or otherwise. X. DURATION, MODIFICATION AND TERMINATION The conditions, Covenants, Restrictions and Reservations set forth in this Declaration shall run with and bind the land within Valley 405 and shall be and remain in effect, and shall inure to the benefit of, and be enforceable by Grantor or the Owner of any property subject to this Declaration, their heirs, successors and assigns for a term of twenty (20) years from the date this Declaration is recorded; provided, however, that this Declaration may be amended or terminated by 'Grantor by an instrument in writing, property executed, acknowledged and filed with the King County Recorder; and provided further that such amendment or termination shall not adversely affect any Owner's or Occupant's rights to use its Building Site for purposes consistent with this Declaration. 9 XI. SEVERABILITY Invalidation of any one or more of the provisions of this Declaration by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any of the provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. XII. LIABILITY Grantor shall exercise its own judgment to insure compliance of the provisions of this Declaration. The Grantor and its employees or agents shall not be liable to any Owner, Occupant or to any other party by reason of a mistake in judgment, negligence or non— enforcement of any of the provisions of this Declaration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has caused this instrument to be signed by the duly authorized officers on the date first above written. FIRST CITY EQUITIES, a Washington State Partnership BY: • David M. Schuman, Partner FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. , a Washington Corporation BY: • 10 • STATE OF COUNTY OF • I, a Notary Public in and for the county and state afcresaid, DU HtIKtbY LhRTIFY that and of First City Equities who (is) (are) personally known to me to be the same person(s) whose name(s) (is) (are) subscribed to the foregoing instrument appeared before me this day in person and acInowledged that (he) (they) signed, sealed and delivered the said instrument as (his) (their) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes th rein set forth. Gi en under my hand and notarial seal, this day of 1986. Notary Public PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ) COUNTY OF VANCOUVER ) ss On the day of 1986, before me, the undersigned, personnally appeared to me known to be of First City Developments Corp. , a Co—general partner of First City Equities, the partnership that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of the said general partnership, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he is authorized to execute the said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. A Notary Public in and for the Province of British Columbia OF R4,A � U :: ,"-- .. ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' V` Z RONALD G. NELSON — DIRECTOR Z belL ,., , 9 `''' �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 -o o9gTeo SE01°# I BARBARA Y. .HINPOCH MAY s R April 3, 987 Barbara Doss Director lof Planning First Cit Equities 800 Fifth Avenue,, Suite 4170 Seattle, A 98104 RE: Ap lication for Site Plan Approval of Infrastructure Concept Plan;SA=1�08-86 Dear Bar ara: At its re•ular meeting of March 25, 1987, the Environmental Review Committee, after reviewino pending projects, asked that I write you and ask you again to withdraw the Infrastru ture Concept Plan. We cannot process your application without issuing a Determin-tion of Significance because of the environmental issues already raised, and furtherm ore, the development on the northern shoreline of the Forebay is in conflict with our Shoreline Master Program (ref. WAC 197-11-330 (3)(e)). Since this item has been pending for a number of months, the Committee is anxious to either make a decision or have the applicant withdraw the application at this time. Since you have already stated that the -pplication will have to be modified, this should not poise any different time constrain s for you. It is my nderstanding that you are waiting, as we are, for the Department of Ecology to carry ou their review of the associated wetlands on the site. After this review is complete. and concurrence from other agencies is obtained on the extent of these areas and our shoreline designation for this area is clarified, you may wish to resubmit your concept p an for environmental review and preliminary site plan approval. As you know, a shorelines substantial development permit application would have to be made at the same time. If we can answer any questions you may have in this regard please, feel free to contact me or Ms. Jeanette Samek-McKague. 9 . r o , AICP Zoning Ad inistrator DKE:3638 OF R44. O m� W z BUILDING . ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR ) a ,r rn MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 a 235-2540 09g1-6-0 SE-1°# BARBARA Y. HINPOCH MAYOR April 3, 1987 Barbara oss Director f Planning First Cit Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Application for Site Plan Approval of Infrastructure Concept p Plan, SA-108-86 Dear Bar are: At its re ular meeting of March 25, 1987, the Environmental Review Committee, after reviewing pending projects, asked that I write you and ask you again to withdraw the Infrastruc-ure Concept Plan. We cannot process your application without issuing a Determination of Significance because of the environmental issues already raised, and furthermo'e, the development on the northern shoreline of the Forebay is in conflict with our Shoreline Master Program (ref. WAC 197-11-330 (3)(e)). Since this item has been pending f r a number of months, the Committee is anxious to either make a decision or have the pplicant withdraw the application at this time. Since you have already stated that the application will have to be modified, this should not poise any different time constraint for you. It is my uiderstanding that you are waiting, as we are, for the Department p ment of Ecology to carry out their review of the associated wetlands on the site. After this review is completed and concurrence from other agencies is obtained on the extent of these areas and our s oreline designation for this area is clarified, you may wish to resubmit your concept pl-n for environmental review and preliminary site plan approval. As you know, a shorelines ubstantial development permit application would have to be made at the same time. If we can -nswer any questions you may have in this regard please, feel free to contact me or Ms. eanette'Samek-McKague. y. / • • .• :r on, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:3638Z F / •-.. ao , 6,1 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 'r "�""'i RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR z s11 4.. 92 09 ' ' MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 O 235-2540 09*ED SE•le°c3P BARBARA Y. .HINPOCH MAY R March 13, 1 87 Vernon C. ook Chief, Oper Lions Division Departmen of the Army Seattle Dis rict, Corp of Engineers P.O. Box C 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-2255 RE: Black River Corporate Park Development Environmental and Shoreline Review Coord nation Meeting, Thursday, March 19, 1987. Dear Mr. C ok: As you pro ably are already aware, the City of Renton is currently going through an on-going en ironmental and shoreline review for a 130 acre office park development near the Green iver, between I-405 and Sunset Highway (SR 9001) in the City of Renton. This developmen surrounds the City's P-1 Channel drainage forebay at the King County pump station and includes wetlands and a reparian forest of Cottonwoods along the north shore of the site. Because of its value as a wildlife habitat and its shoreline designation as "natural" there has been a grea deal of interest raised by a number of jurisdictions and agencies about how the site is to e developed. In response to this interest as well as the need for greater coordinatio , we are scheduling a meeting on Thursday, March 19, 1987, at 2:00 PM for agencies in olved and City staff to discuss the status of this project and how we should proceed wit it. This meeting will be held in the City of Renton Municipal Building's fourth floor confer nce room (to the right as one gets off the elevator). We would hope that you or someone representing your agency can attend this meeting next week. Hop:fully, by having all major agencies represented, we can reach some sort of consensus a• to what still needs to be done to bring this project into compliance with federal, stet:, and local laws. Thank you f•r your continued interest. Sincerely, • -G'�-t.... r Ron Nelson Building & Z.ning Department RN:DE:3551 ' y. .l rvt r OF kf, -= ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT . z .a1L ,, RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09A MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 A 235-2540 0,914.0 SE''1°4' BARBARA Y. HINPOCH MAY R a March 13, 987 Vernon C. Cook Chief, Ope ations Division Departmen of the Army Seattle Dis rict, Corp of Engineers P.O. Box C 3755 Seattle, W 98124-2255 i RE: Black River Corporate Park Development Environmental and Shoreline Review Coor ination Meeting, Thursday. March 19. 1987. 4 1 Dear Mr. C ok: . As you pr bably are already aware. the City of Renton is currently going through an 2 on-going a vironmental and shoreline review for a 130 acre office park development near the Green iver. between I-405 and Sunset Highway (SR 9001) in the City of Renton. This i developme t surrounds the City's P-1 Channel drainage forebay at the King County pump 1 station and includes wetlands and a reparian forest of Cottonwoods along the north shore of 1 the site. Because of its value as a wildlife habitat and its shoreline designation as "natural" there has been a gre t deal of interest raised by a number of jurisdictions and agencies about how the site is to be developed. In response to this interest as well as the need for greater coordination, we are scheduling a meeting on Thursday, March 19, 1987. at 2:00 PM for agencies in,olved and City staff to discuss the status of this project and how we should proceed with it. This meeting will be held in the City of Renton Municipal Building's fourth floor conference room (to the right as one gets off the elevator). tWe would h pe that you or someone representing your agency can attend this meeting next 1 week. Hop fully, by having all major agencies represented. we can reach some sort of consensus .s to what still needs to be done to bring this project into compliance with federal. sta e, and local laws. . Thank you f•r your continued interest. . Sincerely. Ron Nelson Building & oning Department RN:DE:3551Z 14 OF R4,47 0 4o�,�� � ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT , ' '? i� RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09 v " �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 O91rE0 SEP k�Q BARBARA Y. HINPOCH MAYO March 12, 1987 Rod Den- erder Soil Conse vation Service 140 Raini r Ave. S.' Renton, W 98055 RE: Blac River Corporate Park Development Environmental and Shoreline Review Coo dination Meeting, Thursday. March 19, 1987. Dear Mr. en-Herder: As you p obably are already aware, the City of Renton is currently going through an on-going nvironmental and shoreline review for a 130 acre office park development near the Green River, between I-405 and Sunset-Highway (SR 9001) in the City of-Renton. This developm nt surrounds the City's P-1 Channel drainage forebay at the King County pump station an includes wetlands and a reparian forest of Cottonwoods along the north shore of the site. Because of its value as a wildlife habitat and its shoreline designation as "natural" there has been a gr at deal of interest raised by a number of jurisdictions and agencies about how the site is t be developed. In response to this interest as well as the need for greater coordinat'on, we are scheduling a meeting on Thursday, March 19, 1987, at 2:00 PM for agencies nvolved and City staff to discuss the status of this project and how we should proceed ith it. This meeting will be held in the City of Renton Municipal Building's fourth floor conf rence room (to the right as one gets off the elevator). We would hope that you or someone representing'your agency can attend this meeting next week. H pefully, by having all major agencies represented, we can reach some sort of consensus as to what still needs to be done to bring this project into compliance with federal, state, and local laws. Thank yo for your continued interest. Sincerely, 7 , /Ron Nelson Building & Zoning Department RN:DE:3"51Z 11. /A {` .1? ye4 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY _ , rt, /4'T 1:Z\� SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS jpi 44 `y .,I��II, -- , + P.O. BOX C-3755 `',,', Wit' i / SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-2255 •.ro," .1, RVLYTO MAR 4 1987 -_Tql/t_01,P'- ATTENTION Or ' I ' Regulatory Branch +: t Ms. Barbara Moss Director of Planning First City Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 Reference: Black River Technological Park Dear Ms. Moss: I This is in response to your February 27, 1987 letter concerning Black River Technological Park. W have reviewed the information that you provided in your February 27, 1987 ettero Based upon the information provided, it appears that a significant amount of work has already been conducted on the site. This work took place under the direction of our December 16, 1985 letter which said he work was not subject to Section 404 jurisdiction and Department of the Army authorization was not required to place fill on the site. Accordingly, we have determined that the work may be completed under the Decemk�er 16, 1985 authorization and no further coordination is required with this office. If you have any questions, you may contact myself or Mr. Sam Casne at 764-3495. Sincerely, (,-: (:;7/ .f----,7 -- Vernon E. Cook Chief, Operations Division I ' `,`; Rl f, ®► BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z 021L, f -. o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 0 c. MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o 235-2540 09gT6.0 SEP.1 -' BARBARA JY. SHINPOCH M YOR F bruary 24, 1987 B le & Ga tes ates Te Bank of California Center Seattle, Washington 98164 A tn: Charles R. Blumenfeld S CT: SPECIAL PERMIT SP-024-86 D ar Mr. Blumenfeld: I received your letter February 23, 1987, in which you question the City's authority to stop the work covered by special permit SP-024-86. I met with the City Attorney, Larry Warren and reviewed with him the reasoning and authority which is the section in the Mining and Grading Ordinance and the WAC 197-11-340. The new information received indicates probably significant adverse environmental impacts and to proceed would be detrimental to all concerned. The Environmental Review Committee has cosen to withdraw their Determination ot Non-Significance per WAC 197-11-340,3a. The Committee is also studying these issues and may ask the Hearing Examiner to help resolve these new and unanswered issues by having a fact finding hearing. Sincerely, 4-7 Ronar"d G. Nelson, Building & Zoning Director RGN:plp cc: Ms. Barbara Moss Mayor Shinpoch City Attorney, Larry Warren ERC Committee •TATE O_F WASHINGTON Cass 0 II 111 IV GENERAL )EP-ARTL1ENT OF '. U 1V SPECIAL IATURAL RESOURCES '+ I FOREST PRACTICE APPLICATION 0 NOTIFICATION ; • I HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL EXTENSION NEEDED ❑ENEWAL YES 0 NO NUMBER > NOTE: DO NOT WRITE IN SHADED AREAS • PRESS HARD —YOU ARE WRITING 5 COPIES . DATE RECEIVED 2.)AT(e DUE S. APPLI TION/NOTIFICATION NUMBER 4. SHUTDOWN ZONE 6, 1 140 PERMIT ZONE NAME E OOFFe��OPERATOR �/J� 7. RAmE OF NDOWNEait. • 6 NAt�IE OF TIMBER OWNER ':OA / /A..A7'v`s'II L71.�V city.- ./ 1,�...,- VI + 154 ODRESS A RESS RE S I01_$ Sty_ i-010+%) 0 ����777777���Ey�SO • :ITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP CI Y • STA IP - WA) ['5)631 '�gseu_ t ee AJ 9,r/® °wa ►tom 4 �►/O e2/ 'HONE NUMB R PHONE NUMBER �-(� `'i.2...... PHONE NUMBER to 2-st- s G 1-4-4- —1�13 THE FOREST EXCISE TAX (TIMBER TAX) WILL BE PAID BY: 10. COUNTY 11. LAND PLATTED AFTER JAN. 1, 1060 NAME V•I 81_,,4 • /*II11 C 0 YES ❑NO 2 CITY. TOWN (INCORP.) 13. PUBLIC PARK (WITHIN 500') NAME OF PUBLIC PARK 1 1 ❑ YES ❑NO ' '4. LEGAL SUBDIVISION SEC. TWP. RGE. 16• SLOPE • A. r S. J• • I S 2• 4 39%OR LESS ✓ e 40.70% B. t 1 S.•1 f 3 -2.3 -L4- 71°%oORMORE C. • UNSTABLE• (•sEE CONDITIONS) D. 16. STATE END DATE • i7. TYPE OF 18. METHOD OF OPERATION 19. ACREAGE OR OPERATION_ AND TYPE OF EQUIPMENT MILES INVOLVED 2 -1.1 —8 7 3-3 /— ,Ia. �' • 20. PARTIAL CUT A TAen'4 1 e Art— I—®f D et_ 36 ese.+� % VOLUME VOLUME/ACRE B. 70%) C. D. d ?1.,LtOCATiON OF WATER O1 OR NEAR THE OPERATION . 11E OPERATION IS WITHIN: ❑ 0.25 FEET 0 25.50 FEET ❑50.200 FEET 200 OR MORE FEET OF'ANY TYPE 1-4 WATER 2 200 FEET OF ANY SHORELINE OF STATE-WIDE SIGNIFICANCE OR SHORE LINES OF THE STATE (TYPE +1 OR 1, CONTACT LOCAL GOVT.) SKETCH THE LOCATION OF ALL WATERS ON THE ATTACHED MAP NDICATE ALL ACTIVITIES PLANNED WITHIN ORDINARY HIGH-WATER MARK OF ANY WATER 0 OPERATE EQUIRMENT 0 INSTALL CULVERTS ❑BRIDGES ❑FELL TIMBER ❑YARD TIMBER NONE 31VE APPROXIMATE STARTING AND END DATES FOR THIS WORK: START END 22. METHOD OF DEBRIS DISPOSAL (check one) ❑BROADCAST BURN ❑PILE AND BURN OLOP AND SCATTER DATE COMPLETED � 1 ,a1 ° Concentrations 1 OTH R Specify, use"addiIionnaal sheet(s)).� Post harvest site preparation will be completed by Name 3. METHOD OF REFORESTATION 0 PLANTING 0 ARTIFICIAL SEEDING ❑NATURAL SEEDING 0 OTHER(Specify on additional sheet(s)). REFORESTATION SPECIES STOCKING SIZE PROPOSED STEMS PER ACRE IF NATURAL: ❑SEED TREES ❑ SEED BLOCKS(SHOW ON MAP) METHOD TO CONTROL VEGETATION: 4 THE LANDOWNER INTENDS TO CONVERT THIS LAND TO OTHER THAN COMMERCIAL TIMBER PRODUCTION.(READ THE CONVERSION SUBSECTION, 76.09 060 RCW,OF THE FOREST PRACTICES ACT AND WAC 222-20-050 OF THE FOREST PRACTICES RULES.) 0141YES ENO (IF YES,A SEPARATE STATEMENT MUST BE ATTACHED CONTAINING DETAILS 9S OUTLINED IN THE INSTRUCTIONS.LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY REQUIRE F RTHER DETAILS.) 5. WE AFFIRM'THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IIN IS TRUE TO OU'• 4'.OWLEDGE AND UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PROPOSED FOREST PRACTICE IS SUBJECT TO THE CURRENT RULc 's , . ATION Ij'.j • �.'0- ACTICES ACT. JPE-ATO-'S SI , TURF .:rer !r!ij y" /I' / �i� �illr OWNER'S SIGNATURE .. CONDQNS: F c RI DEPARTMENT,i N . ,-- • { OO '' WRITE SOW THIS LINE .. ' • NE '• . •(TI • . : THIS APPLICATIO APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: HYDRAULIC PRO APPROVAL NEED'D OYES ONO .WATER TEMPERATURE SENSITIVE DYES ONO INDICATE EXCLUSION CRITERIA ' DIFFICULT REGENERATION AREA OYES ONO (IF YES, DETAILED REFORESTATION PLAN REQUIRED) AERIAL APPLICATION t-.0 INTAKE, 25 FT. BUFFER REQUIRED ON TYPE 4 WATER 0 YES 0 NO AREA OF WATER SUPPLY INTEREST!: ���-,14,�G !. 4,' , ., .4z-- _.-- C�." APPROVED PART NT QF NATURAL RESOURCES TITLE DATE I: IIISAPPROVED BY: /4/44.1." 4eAa ji%-,---71,--ii I. ' AGENCY COPIES SENT - ` I FINAL COPIES SENT _ EXPIRATION DATE `.: z..-.AREA INITIALS 21.s - DATE P INITI ' DATE tte 3 i WHITE—AREA • CANARY—LOCAL !TANAGER • BLUE—ECOLOGY • GREEN—FISHERIES • PINK—GAME / CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL FOR FOREST PRACTICE APPLICATION No. FP-09-10246 • 1 ) Within a 200 foot radius of the heron's nest , only hand work will be allowed. . No machinery is allowed. No cutting of trees is permitted. 2) Within another zone surrounding the 200 foot radius outward, an additional 500 feet , (total of a 700 foot radius from the nest) yarding of previously felled trees will be allowed. No further tree felling or clearing will be' permitted. 3) The activities outlined in #1 and #2 above, are permitted only through March 6, 1987. No activity may resume until August 1, 1987 or whenever the young herons leave the nests. 4) Outside the 700 foot radius zone falling, yarding and clearing may continue in a manner that is consistent with the site drawings approved by the City of Renton. • • • • • • • if is is possible znat anau aun0 17566 VW %.v..vwe ,ww. ow rJ •wu......� --_ ____.. —�_. yeers, contact the County. :,For a period of up to oiu (6) year. after the date of the lorestt •Practice Applicatiol he County. City or regional lomental entities mel deny ._:any_-Or all applications fo: Permits or approvals, ancludinb _gilding permits and subdivision approvals relating to non-forestry uses of lend subject to the application. (RCW 76.09.060) For further information contact your County Planner or Department of Community Development. SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR ITEM 023 CONVERSION STATEMENT the property owner of the area covered by the Forest Practice Application, intend to convert this land to: A. Agricultural Use 1. How will the logging slash and debris be cleared or abated: Pile and Burn Broadcast Burn Natural Deterioration 2. What is the general purpose that this agricultural land will be used for: Pasture Crops 3. By what year will the land be in production? B. Residential Use 1 . Single Family Multi Family . Short Plat Sub-Division 2. What year will this conversion be completed? • 3. What is the estimated month and year of home construction? • 4. PLEASE READ AND COMPLETE. SECTION D C. OtheT A. Gravel Pit B. Industrial Area C. Recreation Park D. Roads for Other Than Forestry Purposes E. !..---Commercial Business F. Other • 1. What Is the intended month and year this conversion will be completed? 2. PLEASE READ AND COMPLETE SECTION D D. Other Agency Permits 1 . Have the appropriate local government development permits been applied for? Yes PermIt 0 :nd approximate date of approvalvple.01.440P.. If the County has required an Environmental Checklist, please submit a copy of the Checklist and County's Declaration with the Forest Practice Application. 2. Have the appropriate local government development permits been applied for? No - Please contact your local government prior to submitting your Forest Practice Application. Under the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) 9 local government is the lead agency for proposals requiring SEPA action. Your Forest Practice Application may be denied until you have received local government approval for SEPA related proposals. I UNDERSTAND THAT IF THIS LAND IS NOT CONVERTED IN YEARS, I MAY T EN BE REQUIRED TO REFOREST. RCS+ 76.09.060 na e o ndowner Z Date 11•��' } _ �r•�r►�µ,igit to IY ji ). ,-,./ dr, 00, ----1,i,.,...,-417.000"-- - It ; ,-. . .:.. ., tp 3 .i j'a•_ .r+ �',j ;, 4 ,. „ ,..g,'_'^ ,,.y -•; +1. ,• , rt, o • e , ..,-- fi: �.,,:.�i�„'• �,. - ,..r�.„r °11 o^gyp Y r4 O bA • • p� lt Alr f Q B .L Y, ,.�yJ >f�td�4,f 1+.� i ' &ni�i'x§M ` • }( p ;'A ' '�m4 "��'v^ +ice 'I ,```wJJ'jl cyy? f +Jn i ,...I li . *4'\Af-,-,.-re•''' -r,b-4, A k . . , ' ,r,......„............. tidy ,,,,,,14,,,,. 44,•,;,,,,rt:.,,„ 4, .,,..-7 .,... 1 ' ) s ,,,,,'''':' . R. 4 1 1-R A / \ i 1 yi.: 1 '',0 te ..... . 44:41 ".%.4 ;' ' ,., il ///' ' ,;/ ,i. d.m, it,. ka ,,,,. , ,, — ...., ,, I I : .---,____-...,....i. ••P.At--. . II � t.. } , 1`� `�'s ICY • la' ... t". ,:n.%..)''4''''''. . t 5 k) t) 4 S 0....C., 1 _ 2,3 _ 4 I b L � • 1 ►; .� • • 170 . Y K4.v'} b n 410 • a'T' .. ..' s Y `f rik,„,•- .„,.,,,,,./„..., IR.t,; -.4.t:1-.,-...,,,,-,:l.,4,,,, ` 3,x • k. .. .-4',',04.1,,;„1„,,.., ', F,4•4! • 44 ',..,;,,...S.!,,,.,..„,,...:..:V„qt„il'�'.I,A%.,I,,,1 1 r., za-,,:.,,;Sv 3 u , , , ..„,...,, ....„ C ' s c t. aC. s Aa _ . 4 l„ r. se fA:5 yr Fr,aro k . [r . ik „tv FIRST CITY EQUITIES . � ; -� ,^. `_ � - • , : ,; ,.�.:.;: February 27, 1987 11 AJ `, 1 Mr. Donald K. Erickson / ' fir`4 Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200' Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Grading Permit SP-100-86 (Valley 405 Business Park) Phase IV Site Plan Approval SA-0.01-87 Infrastructure Site Plan Approval SA-.108-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Mr.. Erickson: Per your request, for an explanation of how Mr. Rex Van Wormer determined the boundary of the restricted area affecting the blue heron rookery, please find enclosed a letter addressing these issues from Mr. Van Wormer dated February 17, 1987. This information is pertinent to the Grading Permit currently . under review for the Valley 405 portion of the Blackriver Corporate Park (SP-100-86) and should, therefore, be included in the record for that review by Mr. Fred Kaufman, the Hearing Examiner, on Tuesday, March 3, 1987. Since Mr. Van Wormer is explaining how he arrived at the restricted area outlined on his map #2 included in his previous submittal, this information should also be applied to review of the Phase IV Site Plan Approval (SA-001-87) currently being reviewd by the Environmental Review Committee at this time. Further, since it addresses the heron issue and since the heron issue is of possible concern with our Infrastructure Site Plan Approval (SA-108-86) , please include this letter in the record for review of the Infrastructure Site Plan Approval with the City of Renton also. • 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments r + ` ---\ Mr. Donald K. Erickson February 27 , 1987 Page Two Enclosed, also please find a copy of a letter prepared by David Morency. dated February 20, 1987 responding to the U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service letter dated February 4, 1987 in regards to storm water impact concerns raised 'on the Valley 405 portion of the property. David points out that the storm water impacts were addressed properly through the original Environmental Impact Statements and the SEPA documents submitted on the property. Further, First City Equities is implementing adequate storm water/erosion control safeguards in conjunction with the proposed grading permit for - the site. Under the circumstances, I am providing copies of Mr. Van Wormer' s letter and David Morency' s letter to all members of the E.R.C. as well as to Mr. Fred Kaufman for their consideration. Since I have not received a staff report to the Hearing Examiner for the public hearing on March 3 , 1987, I presume none has been or will be issued. Sincerely, FIRST CITY EQUITI S - -C*11-441" ' 7-)14-4". 1 Barbara E. Moss ' ���' 'l;` Director of Planning hii i i i fftt 11 BEM/bc ;..i i_.f: w �J��C �i..,l/ Enclosures II �f' :, ,4 I � -!?'i �.,1-,ti f°"-�'`13 . cc: Fred Kaufman w/encl. E.R.C. Members w/encl. Charles Blumenfeld, Esq. w/encl Royce Berg w/encl David Schuman w/encl Robert Roed w/encl. Elliott Severson Greg Byler HAND DELIVERED 2/27/87 TO: Donald K. Erickson Fred Kaufman E.R.C. Members Charles Blumenfeld Royce Berg Robert Roed r i.tx I EMORANDUM L 11 TDo,D,° To ry Al .S �r/�� /' d c'�, Date /9 9From es/L2.:'"-) -.Af Subject A'mt O Pc /9rS . - rg 4 r-1 ?%v cR-, PG//<- Ti1 C�- J uG/eLr ?(" CtSe rc v1. 4, i rioW C`tos\J ./ a 1° Li r IJ `v J FEB 20 j7 GUI LDING/ZON1N(.: DEPT. _ • �t..1 ��� TT�°� DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY q7 gA z SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS W' + ca H P.O. BOX C-3755 c:/' I��%v M \•�� � �_.../) SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98124 ;r �, FEB ( 8 1987 5 tiff i �' Regulatory Branch RECEIVED FEB 1 9 1987 Ms. Barbara E. Moss ENGINEERING DEPT. Director of Planning CITY OF RENTON First City Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 Reference: Black River Technology Park Dear Ms. Moss: On November14, 1985, personnel from the Seattle District inspected the referenced property to determine if a proposed develop- ment would require a Department of the Army permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. This inspection revealed that wetlands, as defined by Department of the Army permit regulations, exist on the property. Using permit regulations effective at that time, we deter- mined that this wetland was not a water of the United States; and thus, the Corps of Engineers had no jurisdiction over the referenced development. Our March 12, 1986, letter to you reflects this determination. In late 1986, the Corps of Engineers published new permit regu- lations which became effective January 12, 1987. These regulations provide a clarification by the Environmental Protection Agency of the definition of waters of the United States and now include waters: a. Which are or would be used as habitat by' birds protected by Migratory Bird Treaties; or b. Which are or would be used as habitat by other migratory birds which cross state lines. This clarification is significant because it expands the Corps Section 404 jurisdiction. The wetlands on the referenced property are now considered to be waters of the United States and subject to ` Department of the Army permit requirements under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Under Section 404, authorization is required for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the'United States, including wetlands. We request you contact this office regarding permit procedures if you still propose to fill the site. A copy of the Department of i } • -2- the Army permit pamphlet is enclosed to assist you in making appli- cation, if appropriate. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. 3am Casne, telephone (206) 764-3495. Sincerely, Vernon E. Cook Chief, Operations Division Enclosure cc: City of Renton I Irvin Lloyd Environmental Protection Agency LAW OFFICES BOGLE & GATES A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS I 1 THE BANK OF CALIFORNIA CENTER + 4107 I.......' SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98164 CABLE°BOGLE SEATTLE' TELEX: 32.1087 FAX:(206)623-4326 'T• (206)682.5151 ANCHORAGE OFFICE BELLEVUE OFFICE WASHINGTON,O.C.OFFICE SUITE 600 SUITE 1500 SUITE 900 PORTLAND FEOF CENTERL 510 L STREET 1600 WI1 S W SAL N 10900 N.E.4rx ONE THOMAS CIRCLE,N.W. 121 S.W.SALMON ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99501 BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98004 WASHINGTON,D.C.20005 PORTLAND,OREGON 97204 TELEX:090.26-695 FAX:(907)276.4152 FAX:(206)462.0811 TELEX:89.7410 FAX:(202)293.5825 FAX:(503)227.2207 (907)276.4557 (206)455.3940 (202)293-3600 (503)222.1515 CHARLES R. BLUMENFELD PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE FILE: 0 9 7 2 0/3 4 2 3 2 February 20, 1987 HAND DELIVERED Mr. Ronald G. Nelson Director, Building and Zoning Department • City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Special Permit - SP-024-86 Dear Mr. Nelson: We are writing as counsel for First City Equities ("FCE") with regard to the stop work order which you issued on February 19 , 1987. It is our opinion that you have no authority under the Renton City Code to issue such an Order, since FCE is operating in full compliance with the grading permit referenced above, and the conditions attached thereto and the provisions of the Title IV, Chapter 23 of the Code. It is essential that you lift your unlawful Order. If it is not lifted immediately we will be forced to file an action to compel you to lift the Order and for damages which FCE has suffered as a result of the work stoppage. See J&B Development Company v. King County, 100 Wn. 2d 299 (1983) . Please let us know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, BOGLE & GATES C4U-a-a.U410-44,- — Charles R. Blumenfeld tucii cc: Ms. Barbara Moss Larry Warren, Esq. ( ANT Of T P ,r of l United States Department of the interior n' C H .v1r, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 2E' CITY OF RENTON `t..:�""'• MAYORS OFFICE :0- Olympia � 2 otia•.ti�.'0' Olympia Field Off�icr• �gO V'�S 2625 Parkmont Lane SW, B-3 Olympia , Washington 98502 206/753-9440 FTS 434-9440 February 4 , 1987 FEB 5 198 CITY OF HIVTON Mike W. Parnessgl 13 I Vg E Administrative Assistant. , City of Renton ,`` F Renton Municiple Building 200 Mill Avenue South FEB .01997 .-r. Reston , Washington 98055 ©UIL®ING/ZDPdING DEPT. Dear Mr. Parness : This letter concerns a potential development project that is apparently under the jurisdiction of the City of Renton . • The project could have significant adverse environmental impacts . We have recently been informed that a development called the Black River Corporate Park/Valley 405 Business Park has been proposed for construction in or near the Renton City limits . The protect consists of large buildings , roads , parking lots and trails . It is to be located adjacent to the U. S . Soil Conservation Service ' s P-1 Pond which is part of their Green River Watershed, Eastside Project . • We request that . you delay issuing any permits for project construction until nr have had an opportunity o ma e a ormal review o t ,ject . Such a review is necessary to ensure a tee.der7 s ndards are met for conservation of fish and wildlife resources and their habitat . The P-1 Pond and adjacent area contains' valuable fish and wildlife habitat i . e. wetlands , forested wetlands , forested uplands , and open fields . The pond is used as resting, wintering and probably breeding habitat by substantial numbers of waterfowl such as mallards , canvasbacks and ruddy ducks . A great blue heron rookery has become established along the eastern end of the pond. Migratory passerine and raptorial birds could be expected to use the forests and fields that surround the pond. The pond is also used by. anadromous salmonids and resident fish. Approximately 150 adult coho salmon spawn in the tributaries above the pond. The Washington State Department of Fisheries annually plants 80 , 000 coho salmon juveniles in suitable areas above the pond. The surviving population of these fish move through the pond during their seaward migration . The degree to which these young fish use the pond for rearing purposes is unknown at this time. • A ODPAid ?• • 1 • • kir • .t ) 6eCcl 5511001 I ...)teeofror 4 . -,. • • • • Construction of the proposed Black River Corporate Park/Valley 405 Business Park will adversely impact fish and wildlife habitat • in the area . It appears that much of the forested area ( including some forested wetland) and open fields that surround the pond will be destroyed and replaced with buildings , roads , parking lots and trails . Consequently there will- be a sharp reduction in existing wildlife values of the P-1 Pond . This is because there is an ecological linkage between the pond and surrounding habitat . Examples of this linkage follow. 1 . The undeveloped vegetated space that surrounds the P-1 Pond } serves to buffer the adverse effects of human disturbance on wildlife of the pond. • 2 . Waterfowl may feed on terrestrial insects produced on vegetation that surrounds the P-1 Pond. This vegetation also supplies detrital material ( leaves , twigs , etc. ) that energize the food web which produces aquatic macroinverte- brates . These macroinvertebrates are fed upon by waterfowl and fish. 3 . Waterfowl that depend upon tree cavities for nesting purposes may use suitable trees throughout the forest that is adjacent to the P-1 Pond. The preferred management strategy is to maintain natural cavities as opposed to construction of artificial nesting structures . 4 . Great blue herons depend on trees in the adjacent forest for nesting and perching. In addition, the project could produce significant quantities of stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff is noted for transporting various pollutants such as petroleum based products . These pollutants would adversely impact fish and wildlife resources and their habitat in the project area. In summary, construction of the P-1 Pond has produced valuable fish and wildlife habitat . This habitat is of particular importance to substantial numbers of waterfowl in their annual migratory cycles . Furthermore this habitat is within an urbanized/industrialized setting and should be of high value as a conservation education area for nearby schools and as a birdwatching area for local citizens . Our goal is that the full ecological value of the Pond be maintained so that fish and wildlife resources are conserved. Please supply us with any information that you have concerning the Black River Corporate Park/Valley 405 Business Park project . Thank you for your consideration of this matter. If you have any questions please cal] me at (206) 753-9440 . Sincerely 0,L„e, C.( Charles A. Dunn Field Supervisor c: EPA SCS (Lines) • WDF (Robel ) 1 WDG (Mueller , Zigler) BUILDING & ZO NI.rDi AECi?PYkAGx pR .A 4EtV'¢ , 'U ... Z; yu ,`ti Z .% RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR o o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o 23 -,o co• 5 2540 O { P 9�r'0 SEPTE�O� BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR February 24, 1987 Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning First City Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: Phase IV Environmental Review for a 74,000 sq. ft. office building and at grade parking lot Dear Ms. Moss: As . a follow-up to our phone conversation last week regarding whether or not the Environmental Review Committee would take testimony from First City Equities while it was in the midst of its fifteen (15) day comment period, I am writing you to let you know that the Committee will reconsider this item as soon as it can after the Hearing Examiner's scheduled hearing on March 3, 1987. Since you correctly point out in your letter that some of the mitigation measures adopted by the Committee pertain to herons and possibly other water-fowl, we believe it is appropriate to await the outcome of the March 3rd hearing before reconsidering any of these measures or issuing a final threshold determination for this project. Also, since other parties of record will obviously be interested in the resolution of these mitigating measures, we will probably also have to schedule this at another public meeting so that all interested parties can attend. I would also like to take this opportunity to respond to your letter of January 30, 1987, in which you state that it is FCE's intent to proceed with the infrastructural elements at this time. As you may recall, in my letter of January 9, 1987, to you I noted to you that it might be preferable if you withdrew your site plan approval application since: 1) we had no vehicle to approve it, i.e. preliminary site plan approval; and 2) your application was apt:to change because of new environmental information that had been raised. 1 1 • upNdren incorrectly, that because of al he new environmental • 7 • information suggesting th, he trail system would likely have be modified (as well as the possible location of "viewing areas associated with it) and that the timing of construction might also have to be modified so as to minimize impacts on certain species of wildlife habitating the site, that you understood that we would await resolution of some these matters before the Hearing Examiner on March 3, 1987, before proceeding further with your application. Since you also state in your "modification of the plan would thus occur prior to a threshold determination" we8th, that ought you were also awaiting resolution of some of these matter before proceeding. Since this item has not been scheduled for review at this time by the Environmental Review Committee, and no staff report has been prepared, I did not think it necessasry to notify you of this in writing. I hope this letter helps clarify things a bit for you. I'm sorry you feel that we have not been as responsive as you would like. We are, however, endeavoring to balance your interests with those of others who have also expressed concerns which we are mandated to take into consideration too. If you have further questions, please feel free to give me a call. -raV (7/ • Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DE:3517Z:wr • • • FIRST CITY rylc; EQUITIES , g 18 D February 11, 1987pg7 BUILDI Mr. Larry M. Springer Mr. Richard C. Houghton Mr. Ronald G. Nelson Environmental Review Committee CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Phase IV Site Plan Approval 74,000 Sq.. Ft. , Three Story Office Building BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Committee Members: I am in receipt of the Environmental Review Committee's preliminary determination of non-significance with conditions outlined in Donald Erickson' s letter of February 6, 1986 (sic) , and am writing to respond briefly to it. It is not clear to me whether the review of this application was conducted without benefit of information contained in Mr. Rex Van Wormer' s January 31, 1987 letter report addressing the blue heron issues which we provided at the request of Fred Kaufman in his review of our grading permit (SP 100-86) . For example, conditions 1, 2, 3 , 6, and 13 are specifically intended to mitigate heron impacts, although Mr. Van Wormer' s report excludes the Phase IV site from the recommended restricted work area. (See -attached map #2 from Mr. Van Wormer' s report. ) Further, clarification of several conditions including 9 and 10 is needed before we can agree to them. I also have other concerns about several conditions included in the proposed mitigation. We believe there are enough issues raised from different departments as well as staff and ourselves to warrant a discussion of mitigation for this building and we request, therefore, an opportunity to meet with the. Environmental Review Committee at their regularly scheduled February 18 meeting. As • 800 Fiffh Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments Environmental Review Committee February 9, 1987 Page Two there is a 15 day comment period which ends February 23, a meeting on the 18th would be timely. ..Without the opportunity to meet With the committee, First City Equities will be unable to agree to the mitigation conditions as presently suggested. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES 5-4114%-14- A/21-62- Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc Enclosure cc: Donald Erickson Charles Blumenfeld, Esq. Royce Berg Rex Van Wormer Ted Holden Robert Roed David Schuman Greg Byler Elliott Severson HAND DELIVERED k5 BUILDING '& zoNi 'iG u�T-gar r-.' - � U t.' ' rtr' .._ RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 0 ' , 2 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 0 235-2540 II 40-c0 SEP-1 ' BARBARA Y. SHINPOGH i(; MAYOR I January 23. 1987 .`1 Barbara,E. Moss c I` Directeor of Planning First City Equities B00 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 1: Seattle, Wa. 98104 RE: Infrastructure Development r t i r; Dear Barbara: I it. Thank you for your letter of January 16, 1987 requesting an additional two weeks in order to determine whether you wish to withdraw your Infrastructure Site Plan and Environmental Checklist. We will postpone any action on your application until after hearing,back from you on January 30, 1987. The main reason I am writing to you today is in response to a memorandum from Y. Ken Chin to Dee Beetle of my staff regarding Naches Avenue S.W. improve- ments. Since you do not yet have an approved site plan approval for the Infra- structural Plan it would be in violation of our subdivision and platting ordinances since no formal review and acceptance by the Hearing Examiner or the Council has been given. Furthermore, there has been no ;; site plan approval granted either. ?' p' • Although we would probably be stretching things a bit. we could probably argue that in light of the fact that you had previous site plan approval for the Admac site. you probably could argue that the Environmental Review Committee had approved. in principle. the , , configuration of Naches Avenue S.W. as far north as the edge of that site. Since overall approval of the infrastructural element has not yet been given, there may be some risk . with proceeding with Naches this far north without further site plan approval. j The intent of this letter is to let you know of our concerns so that there will be no , 1 misunderstanding as to our position further down the line. Whereas it is true that the 1 l Building and Zoning Department do not issue road construction permits, it is also true that Public'Works does not issue site plan approvals. Obviously. it is in no ones interest to see this thing reversed or appealed later on. ti . ;I "s, v9 0(• v ATEp SEP1 i. BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR i January 9, 1986 , 1 Barbara E. Moss 11� 1I Director of Planning i First City Equities ;, 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 il Seattle, Wa. 98104 h ; RE: Application for Site Plan Approval of Infrastructe Concept, SA-108-86. i. 1,.I, Dear Barbara: Since we have not received any indication from you on whether or not yoi decided ; to withdraw the above application I am assuming you have not. I thought you had mentioned the possibility of withdrawing it since we cannot consider it under the current Site Plan Approval provisions. As you know these do not distinguish between phased developments such as yours and final site plans where individual building footprints, etc. are known. As I mentioned to you before the Holidays, we are proposing the concept of a Preliminary Site Plan Approval for larger projects such as yours. We have discussed the concept with both the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning and Development Committee of Council, both of which have endorsed it in principle. Enclosed is a copy of these possible new provisions in their first draft form. I would appreciate recieving your comments on this draft with an eye as to whether or not you think this approach will give you the direction your are seeking, without triggering more definitive Final Site Plan Approval. We will probably also be adding language that would require an applicant to apply for Final Site Plan Approval for at least their first phase within six (6) months of their obtaining Preliminary Site Plan Approval. The existing language in , Section, 4-738(J) pertaining to phasing would remain applicable. From our standpoint it would be preferable if you withdrew your site plan i, approval application since we cannot handle it in its present form. Although t. 1 we could proceed with the environmental checklist and a threshold (d determination for the proposed infrastructural elements this does not appear M' ,; to make much sense if these are apt to change. Also, as you know our initial ';, findings would suggest that there could be significant impacts occuring from i pf , , i the filling operation and = trail`-i i-B— , v. this is so the Environmental Review cam it = �r ... �' ;, ': lew Committee would �' %' �. "° ' Determination of Significance. th@^ aak�$y.,s guy�, ;'.` � ° ;� ;f ` " If I were you, I think I would withdraw both applications of the environmental isssues relatinginpending birdelulife situation. This may also effect what particular to the life yur submittal for Preliminary Site Plan approval (I am assuming ou owe will have in terms fthis tool shortly). Please let me know how you want proceed. If I don't within a week we will proceed with ouro threshold determination.ear .back from you If you have any questions please give me a call. i !9 1 d Dona K. Erickson, AICP 0 ! Zoning Administrator DKE:3365Z 1 il R r f i i 1 1 It t rel it I 03/ /NI AA 14044 It,g9114'?9 M 1 ; J '6I L lI�m. S'. �� `af t„J14 li ,Y , P1 1 • z ., _ • J � • CiTV OF RENTON RIWEInifF {I ,� �a_ �,9AN : 01987 FIRST CITY BUILDING /ZONING DEPT. EQUITIES January 30, 1987 Mr. Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval • SA-108-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: Per my previously agreed condition t• respond to the City of Renton with direction for site plan =pproval of the infrastructure concept for Blackriv-r Corporate Park, I am writing with that clarification. n your letter of. January 9, 1986 (sic) you indicated reluct- ►ce to act on our proposed infrastructural elements as ,did not "appear to make much / sense if these are apt to change" . As it is our intent to //, ` construct the infrastructural elements as proposed (unless they / ; , t need to be changed in order to mitigate environmental impacts) ,. /, we are asking you to proceed as quickly as possible with our' previously submitted proposal. It is my understanding based on your letter that a Declaration of Significance is likely to be required due to the possible "significant impacts occurring from the filling operation and trail system on wildlife in the immediate area. " Pursuant to WAC197-11-350, if your staff report to the Environmental Review Committee recommends a Declaration of Significance, First City Equities would like the opportunity to revise our proposal in order to mitigate those environmental impacts and thus allow the Environmental Review Committee to issue a Declaration of Non-Significance. Modification of the plan would thus occur • prior to a. threshold determination. • 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments ir Mr. Donald K. Erickson January 30 , 1987 Page Two Please provide me with your staff report as quickly as possible in order to provide adequate response time for our submittal to the Environmental Review Committee. Sincerely, FIRST CITY EQUIT ES \41411 YA-1/-4" Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: Charles Blumenfeld, Esq. Lawrence Warren, Esq. ERC Members: Ronald Nelson Richard Houghton Lawrence Springer HAND DELIVERED 1/30/87 • r :1107r CITY OF RENTON FIRST CITY iJii J q , 0 i9 7 EQUITIES BUILD1 G /ZON1NG DEPT. January 30 , 1987 Mr. Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval SA-108-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: Per my previously agreed condition to respond to the City of Renton with direction for site plan approval of the infrastructure concept for Blackriver Corporate Park, I am writing with that clarification. In your letter of January 9 , 1986 ( sic) you indicated reluctance to act on our proposed infrastructural elements as they did not "appear to make much sense if these are apt to change" . As it is our intent to construct the infrastructural elements as proposed (unless they need to be changed in order to mitigate environmental impacts) , we are asking you to proceed as quickly as possible with our previously submitted proposal. It is my understanding based on your letter that a Declaration of Significance is likely to be required due to the possible "significant impacts occurring from the filling operation and trail system on wildlife in the immediate area. " Pursuant to WAC197-11-350 , if your staff report to the Environmental Review Committee recommends a Declaration of Significance, First City Equities would like the opportunity to revise our proposal in order to mitigate those environmental impacts and thus allow the Environmental Review Committee to issue a Declaration of Non-Significance. Modification of the plan would thus occur prior to a threshold determination. 800 Fifth Avenue Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments Mr. Donald K. Erickson January 30 , 1987 Page Two Please provide me with your staff report as quickly as possible in order to provide adequate response time for our submittal to the Environmental Review Committee. Sincerely, FIRST CITY EQUIT ES"kig5411- Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: CharlesiBlumenfeld, Esq. Lawrence Warren, Esq. ERC Members: Ronald Nelson Richard Houghton Lawrence Springer HAND DELIVERED1/30/87 1 4 Architecture and Plar .'.k Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 MEMORANDUM TO: Ms. Dee Beetle DATE: January 21, 1987 Department of Building & Zoning City of Renton PROJECT: Naches Avenue S.W. 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 PROJECT NO: NW 85014 and NW 85024 SUBJECT: Naches Avenue S.W. This is to confirm our telephone conversation of January 20, 1987. The following notes were per our discussion: 1. The Building and Zoning Department does not handle road construction permits if building structures are not involved. 2. Pursuant to your discussions with Don Monaghan and Ron Olsen of engineering, Public Works will issue permit for road construction permit upon completion of their review. *Note: Our previous conversations with Don Monaghan confirms the same. 3. Jerry Lind has not completed his review of the revised landscape and irrigation for the north and south portions of Naches Avenue as sub- mitted on December 9, 1986. Please do not hesitate to call if there are any questions. .c L'' ,---12 CITY OF RiEP'TON JAN 22198i J) BUiL[J;;\:a / ZONING DEPT. BY: Y. Ken K. Chin cc. Jim Hanson Jerry Lind Don Monaghan Ron Olsen Barbara Moss Greg Byler Robert Darrow Ted Holden Jerry McCann t;d L A „r i:Is..y� !1 FIRST CITY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES VVVIN01 Mr. Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON JA)4, Municipal Building r 200 Mill Avenue South ©UIL01NG/ZONING DEPT. Renton, WA 98055 • • RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval • No. SA-108-86 '. • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK . Dear Don: In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) I :am . writing to request an additional two weeks, in-which time, I • will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities' vested rights and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES (Itefe/i/t1A4E /4472 .4..../ Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg . Ted Holden Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler . Elliott Severson David Schuman . 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments II // N . II 1/ FIRST CITY EQUITIES • January 16, 1987 m'ICITY OF:RRNTON Mr. Donald K. Erickson I'll le; 0 W ED Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON J4J4 2 0 17 Municipal Building / I 200 Mill Avenue South • BUILDING/ZONING DEPT, Renton, WA 198055 II RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval . No. SA-108-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: II In response to your letter of January 9 , 1986, • ( sic) I •am writing to request an additional two weeks, in which time, I will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities ' vested rights and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. i will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance In the process. Warm regards, . FIRST CITY EQUITIES i 1 /e Barbara E. Moss Director of� Planning !I BEM:bc II i cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Jeffrey0Leppo w/enclosure Charles,; Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman - 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments {s ti;rr `gym ,. r. w°i}„,�`'th.'i fi n.a.14i' ER" • FIRSTCFTY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES CITY NTON Mr. Donald K. Erickson ftt ?h j•Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON JAN Municipal Building ` �� 200 Mill Avenue South DUILDING/ZONINGIDEPT. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval No. SA-108-86 '' • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Don: • In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) I 'am writing to request an additional two weeks, in•which time, I • will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities' vested rights and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time • for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES (544>A-/-44.44:724/ea.e...., Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc • • cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden S Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler . Elliott Severson ' David Schuman 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments ' Ali gaigl' • 41.l.k ,,,L.,‘tETUTI FIRST CITY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES ' \ CITY :RENTON • . Mr. Donald K. Erickson D I • 0 W. R. Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON JA 2 o i 7 : . Municipal Building 1 .1! .. • 200 Mill Avenue South SU1LD1NG/ZONIN 'DEPT. • Renton, WA 98055 l •RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval . • No. SA-108-86 '• . . • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK ' •0 ' • Dear Don: In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, • (sic) Iam ' • writing to request an additional two weeks, in-which time, I . will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ; ascertain First City Equities' vested rights .and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental . . • • Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will . . respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site . Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. Warm re• gards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES ' (544>A,/,64.45720e24,e,/ . Barbara E. Moss Director .of Planning BEM:bc • cc: ;Royce Berg ' , •• .. -. . , ' Ted Holden , Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure ' ' . Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure • Greg Byler . r Elliott Severson David Schuman . . 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 • Real Estate Development and Investments KrR' pSti �J EST 41.4 %d a.V»;ter .FY FIRST CITY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES CBTYQf RENT®N Mr. Donald K. Erickson . . MZoning Administrator " CITY OF RENTON LIDJAN 2 o , Municipal Building J 200 Mill Avenue South BUILDING/ZONING)DEPT. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval No. SA-108-86 ' BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK . Dear Don: • In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) I .am writing to request an additional two weeks, in which time, I • will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities ' vested rights and approvals on: the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. . Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES . Barbara E. Moss - Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg " Ted Holden Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments • ,trqsrrAt) FIRST CITY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES plegi941111016 ' , Mr. Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON JA21117 Municipal Building .� 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 • DUILOING/ZONINEPT,' RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval No. SA-108-86 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK `Dear Don: In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) I `am ' writing to request an additional two weeks, in which time, I will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities' vested rights and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time : for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. Warm regards, V FIRST CITY EQUITIES Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg , Ted Holden , Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure . • Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman V 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 V Real Estate Development and Investments g0i AILtiW r ,r a9 NIA ,t44=YR7.9 FIRST CITY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES f )' CITY7RENTON Mr. Donald K. Erickson Q W11 . Zoning Administrator CITY OF RENTON JAt' Z Municipal Building .1 • 200 Mill Avenue South • ©UILDING/ZONIN DEPT. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval No. SA-108-86 '• BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK • Dear Don: In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) , I am writing to request an additional two weeks, in which time, I - will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities' vested rights and approvals on : the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental • Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. • Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES Barbara E. Moss Director .of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden • Jeffrey` Leppo w/enclosure Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman 800 Fiffh Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments ry m� qk.{} p frwy F RST CFTY January 16, 1987 EQUITIES CTY 'RENTON Mr. Donald K. Erickson 51\ , r Zoning Administrator 1 I ,.. CITY OF RENTON JA 20 177 Municipal Building i . 200 Mill Avenue South / J ®UILDING/ZONIN ,DBPT, Renton, WA 98055 • , • RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval No. SA-108-86 0 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK { Dear Don: • In response to your letter of January 9, 1986, ' (sic) I am writing to request an additional two weeks, in which time, I • will be conferring with my project team and attorney to ascertain First City Equities' vested rights and approvals on the above referenced project. I do not want the Environmental Review Committee to issue a threshold determination at this time • for our site plan approval on the infrastructure. I will respond back to you by January 30, 1987, with our final request for either proceeding or withdrawing the Infrastructure Site Plan approval on the project. Thanks for your input and assistance in the process. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIES ' (54/i/4-4Vee- /i7Aa-0,4:-.1 Barbara E. Moss Director •of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Jeffrey Leppo w/enclosure 0 5 Charles Blumenfeld w/enclosure Greg Byler 5 Elliott Severson David Schuman • . 800 Fiffh Avenue Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments r - rl�k 3 ti9 ry.•`4r t 'sYkf.-t•-` n.t 2 r .•,; , ' J;h Architecture and'Planning . ' r , Lemon Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Don Monogham DATE: January 14, 1987 City of Renton Department of Engineering PROJECT: BlackRiver Corporate Park - Naches 200 Mill Avenue South Avenue S.W. Renton, Washington 98055 PROJECT NO: NW 85058 SUBJECT: BlackRiver Corporate Park - Naches Avenue S.W. Pursuant to our telephone conversation of January 13, 1987, a construction permit for Naches Avenue S.W. north of the drain- age swale and separate of the ADMAC building may be obtained if the drawings for the street has been approved by Public Works. 't • Please do,.not- hesitate to call if there are any questions or comments. • e JAN16 Tn.; DE,P'1. BY: Y. Ken K. Chin cc. Kier, Barbara Moss Greg Byler OF �� ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR NAL 0 � MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 • 235-2540 o9�TE0 SEPS��O4P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR January 9, 1986 Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning First City Equities 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Wa. 98104 RE: Application for Site Plan Approval of Infrastructe Concept, SA-108-86. Dear Barbara: Since we have not received any indication from you on whether or not you decided to withdraw the above application I am assuming you have not. I thought you had mentioned the possibility of withdrawing it since we cannot consider it under the current Site Plan Approval provisions. As you know these do not distinguish between phased developments such as yours and final site plans where individual building footprints, etc. are known. As I mentioned to you before the Holidays, we are proposing the concept of a. Preliminary Site Plan Approval for larger projects such as yours. We have discussed the concept with both the Environmental Review Committee and the Planning and Development Committee of Council, both of which have endorsed it in principle. Enclosed is a copy of these possible new provisions in their first draft form. I would appreciate recieving your comments on this draft with an eye as to whether or not you think this approach will give you the direction your are seeking without triggering more definitive Final Site Plan Approval. We will probably also be adding language that would require an applicant to apply for Final Site Plan Approval for at least their first phase within six (6) months of their obtaining Preliminary Site Plan Approval. The existing language in Section 4-738(J) pertaining to phasing would remain applicable. From our standpoint it would be preferable if you withdrew your site plan approval application since we cannot handle it in its present form. Although we could proceed with the environmental checklist and a threshold determination for the proposed infrastructural elements this does not appear to make much sense if these are apt to change. Also, as you know our initial findings would suggest that there could be significant impacts . occuring- from -2- the filling operation and trail system on wildlife in the immediate area. If this is so the Environmental Review Committee would then likely issue a Determination of Significance. If I were you, I think I would withdraw both applications pending resolution of the environmental isssues relating in particular to the bird life situation. This may also effect what you do in terms of your submittal for Preliminary Site Plan approval (I am assuming we will have this tool shortly). Please let me know how you want us to proceed. If I don't hear .back from you within a week we will proceed with our threshold determination. If you have any questions please give me a call. - Oaiv _ Dona K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator - DKE:3365Z - DRAFT (G) Contents of Application: Each application for site plan review shall include an original plus six (6) copies of required forms together with seven (7) copies of all plans and supplemental information. 1. Preliminary Site Plan Approval. a. A completed site plan application form. Information on the application - shall include the title, location, and legal description of the proposed developmemt together with the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the recorded owners of the land and the applicant, and when applicable, the name, address, telephone number and seal of any architect, planner, designer or engineer responsible for the preparation of the plan and any authorized representative of the applicant. b.. A.completed environmental checklist when required. c. A vicinity map at a scale of 1" = 200' showing site boundaries, existing streets and roads, location of existing structures, parking areas, open space, landscaped or treed areas, etc. d. A narrative discussion addressing scope of proposal, its conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and existing land use regulations, site organization concept including areas identified as suitable for development, areas identified as unsuitable for development such as environmentally sensitive areas, proposed uses and their breakdown by area, interrelationships of uses, circulation, landscaping and open space treatment, probable environmental impacts and mitigation measures, if any. e. A preliminary site development plan showing , those areas deemed suitable for development including a differentiation by use and building type, where appropriate, as well as areas for parking, open space, etc. Areas deemed unsuitable for development because of their environmental sensitivity or otherwise having limited development potential should also be shown. - f. A preliminary circulation plan showing all points of ingress and egress to the site, generalized location of proposed streets and roads, pedestrian circulation routes, pathways and trails, etc. as appropriate to the proposal. g. Proposed development and/or performance standards for buildings, open spaces, parking areas, user amenitiy features, landscaping, etc. 2. Final Site Plan Approval a. A completed site plan • CFI CT' ITTC FIRSTCITY FT) 1 (� i7 EQUITIES Ec•2 31 December 19 1986 E,V1..DING/ZOW.1,3 DEPT, Mr. Ronald Nelson Planning Director CITY OF RENTON Municipal B$ilding 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: BLACKRI7ER CORPORATE PARK Fill Material Dear Ron: First City Equities is working with several dirt contractors to identify available sources of fill material for use at the Blackriver torporate Park (both the Valley 405 Business Park site and th? Black River Technology Park site) . One questioi which has been raised is whether or not dirt coming from the I- 0 tunnel can be used on our properties due to a possible di `tinction of wetlands. My understanding is that the Washington State Department of Transportation has determined that no dirt coming from the I-90 tunnel can be placed on properties $hich may have wetland designations. We are wanting a final. determination from the City of Renton as to the possibilitylof placing dirt from the tunnel on our Renton site, and it is for this reason that I am writing. I was thinking that possibly because the Army Corps of Engineers issued us a letter denying jurisdiction for the Black River Technology Park property that perhaps that would make our site eligible to .receive this fill material. (A copy of the letter is enclosed. ) Thank you for checking into this for me. Warm regards, FIR T CITY QUIT S . 4?;41-,44,,/ Barbara E. oss Director of Planning cc: Greg Byler 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments r • • �♦.• • . DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY M SEATTLE DISTRICT. COHI'S OF ENGINEERS P.O. 13OX C•3755 ", = SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 9 8 1 2 4-225 5 • ,4►[id 6 •ILV Te DEC 1 6 R15 A 111N110N O. Regulatory Branch ,...._} cr ;•-; .C..1 ! I!J 1' II 1 : �I t1•: . n �' QEC 2 31986 Delton J. Bonds, President • �.;; ( !�rr4i�� ;:;,�; i1 DE! Alterra Corporation • 710 Cherry Street Seattle, Washington 98104 Dear Mr. Bonds: This is in reply to your letter of November 7, 1985, concerning proposed fill in wetlands at Renton, Washington. You inquired whether the site to be filled is considered a wetland under Corps of Engineers regulatory authority. A Department of the Army permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act is required for the discharge of any dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, including adjacent wet- lands. The term "wetlands" means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. The Corps of Engineers has the respon- sibility for determining whether a specific wetland area is within Section 404 jurisdiction. We have reviewed the information you furnished as well as data gathered during our onsite inspection on November 14, 1985. We determined that wetlands are present on the project site. However, these wetlands are not considered adjacent wetlands under our regulatory authority. A Department of the Army permit will not be required to place fill into this area. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Rudolf Pojtinger, telephone (206) 764-3495. • • Sincerely, • arr E. Baxter / Chief, Regulatory Branch r ` ("" -N\ •• c- ,pc awl '4; • ayr • . • .fi• • • FIT iTrT2TcGr:1 -FIRST CITY CI a D EQUITIES • 3;Jflr if G/ '`�,lffye p€fai'. December 16, 1986 Mr. Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner CITY OF RENTON • Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton., WA 98055 RE: File #SP-100-86 Grading Permit BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK) Dear Mr. Kaufman: In response to your report and decision -dated December 4, 1986, in which you denied our request for a Special Permit to fill and grade approximately 43 acres of the 'Blackriver Corporate Park • site, I am writing to supply you with the requested specific information for your consideration. Per your instructions, we are submitting this information within 30 days of the date of your decision and thus request that you reopen the public hearing for subsequent review. ' The work to be accomplished under the requested grading permit will be divided into four phases. (See phasing plan attached. )- ' 'Each phase would be filled and graded to a level at or above the 100 year flood plain of elevation - 15 feet. A phase must be completed, including the seeding of erosion-resistant grasses, prior to commencing the next phase. All phases will be completed within two years of the date of. the permit issuance. The four phases are defined as follows:" Phase I An area of 6 acres being the easterly half of Tract B of the plat of Washington Technical Center lying north of S.W. 7th Street, west of Naches Avenue S.W. , and south of the old Black - River Channel. Phase I will require 23 ,000 cubic yards of imported-fill. • • 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments .Mr. Fred Kaufman December 16 , 1986 Page Two Phase II An area encompassing an area of 16.5 acres and being Tract B of the Washington Technical Center plat, lying south of S.W. 7th Street and east of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Phase II will require 41,000 cubic yards of imported fill. • Phase III An area of 8. 5 acres being the westerly half of Tract B adjacent and westerly of Phase I and lying northerly of S.W. 7th Street and easterly of the P-1 channel. Phase III would require 32,000 cubic yards of imported fill. Phase IV • An area encompassing 12 acres and being all of Tract A of the Washington Technical Center plat and the adjoining Burlington Northern Tract lying northerly of Oakesdale Avenue. Phase IV would require 18,000 cubic yards of imported fill material. During the filling operation of each phase, drainage settling basins and diversion ditches will be constructed to control and contain the silt laden surface water runoff from leaving the site until the water will be as free of sediment as can be. handled by a sediment pond. ,The sedimentation collection facilities will be installed to . ; insure sediment laden water does not enter the natural drainage , system. The system will be in operation prior to clearing or other construction and will be maintained until grading is complete and potential for on-site erosion has passed. In addition, silt fences will be erected around the perimeter of the phased area to .aid in protecting the natural drainage courses and adjacent property from silt laden water during the grading operation. ' I Upon completion of grading to contours shown on the plan . submitted with the grading application, the areas filled will be seeded with erosion-resistant grasses within 30 days of the 1 completion of the grading operation. 'Mr. Fred Kaufman December 16 , 1986 Page Three In summary, we have tried to address your concerns raised in your report and decision dated December 4, 1986. Although I am unable to provide specific information regarding haul routes, number of trips, and source of material at this time we will provide this detailed information on a phase by phase basis prior to the start of each operation as required to receive the ' annual license. We have agreed, additionally, to complete all grading operations on the property within two years, and have clarified that each operation will bring the property up to the 100 year flood level or higher before filling subsequent phases. Our program of hydro-seeding will occur immediately following each grading operation. It is in First City Equities ' best interest, as well as the City of Renton' s, to maintain this property in its most marketable state, avoiding unsightliness as much as possible. We agree to complete 1000 of the grading operations within a two year period and agree with your conclusion #7 that under a two year permit we can work with the City of Renton staff to finalize details in a reasonable fashion. I look foward to your review of our submittal and notification of a pending hearing date for final review and decision. Respectfully submitted, FIRST CITY EQUITIES A - Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc Enclosure cc: Robert Roed Royce Berg Ted. Holden Greg Byler Elliott Severson D David Schuma Dan Erick Jeanette McKague 7 OEC r ^ n 7 5 c S Y A8b y \At, New England Neptune 410,04041110 \)14.>"_ 40,1112-)e,„67j4„orieW- • rig i; Ia CityEn or.f RerOivc';on ri !` Environmental Review Committee CITY OF FIEN;O's1 12/6/86 City of Renton D I n I I �/ - D 200 Mill Street Renton, Wa. 98055 oEG o D E C 8 1936 91��' . 8UJL.DJAIG/ZOI IjJUG DEPT. Ladies/Gentlemen: In discussion with Shelley Anderson of the Soil Conservation District, Mrs. Anderson informs me that you have requested a viability study of Great Blue Heron colonies in King County in an attempt to determine the future of the Renton Heron colony. Data for three of the colonies in King County are as follows: (1) Laske Sammamish State Park, Issaquah, nest increase from seven, 1984, to 17, 1986. (2) Dumas Bay County Park, Dash Point, 24 nests, 1986. (3) Duwamish Waterway, 16 nests. The remaining six in King County, numbering from 11 down to one nests are either in a state of decline or threatened by development and resultant loss of food supply. Two, the Black Diamond and Seahurt colonies (Burien) are in question so they remain as listed until more data is available. Food supply is the major reason for establishing colonies and points to the success of those numbered. Other factors contributing to the success of colonies are: (1) Lack of predation from Bald Eagles and Great Horned Owls. (2) Freedom from heavy competition for food. (3) Freedom from human intrusion during nesting. (4) Ample trees to extend the colony as the young mature and join the group to nest. The Black River Ponds have, in my opinion, a good chance to expand, at least matching the nest count of Dumas Bay. Food supply is apparently good and ample cottonwoods, thickly clustered, are present to the left of the nine-nest colony. Any development behind this cluster might preclude growth. It is good to know that you are applying careful consideration for the Heron. I might add that on 11/2/86 my husband and I observed 28 pair of Bufflehead and approximately 200 wild Mallards breaking formation from flight to land in the ponds. One seldom sees wild Mallards in urban areas. (2) The Renton colony has been duly entered into the Colonial Bird Register at Cornell University and in the Non-game Data System of the Washington Department of Game. Sincerely, Member Cooperative Research Group Marty Murphy Laboratory of Ornithology 229 210th Pl. N.E. Cornell University Redmond, Wa. 98052 cc: Shelley Anderson Architecture and Planning Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 A CC [I V 1 4� MEMORANDUM U.C �; �986 j BUILDING / ZO NIp,'G DEPT. TO: City of Renton DATE: December 8, 1986 Building & Zoning Department Environmental Review Committee PROJECT: BlackRiver Corporate Park 200 Mill Street Renton, WA 98055 PROJECT NO: NW 85058 SUBJECT: Infrastructure Applications: SA-108-86 VA-109-86 SM-005-86 Outline Summary of First City Equities' participation in development of BlackRiver Corporate Park. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK Property is owned by First City Equities and is an accumulation of property formerly known as Earlington Industrial Park, Valley 405 Business Park, and BlackRiver Technology Park. The following is a brief description of approvals, dedication of properties, and costs assumed, or incurred by First City Equities in order to develop these properties. VALLEY 405 (EARLINGTON PARK) Environmental Impact Statement — February 1981 Prepared for City of Renton by R.W. Thorpe & Associates. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit — SM-90-81 (Earlington Industrial Park) Traffic Impact Analysis for Valley 405 Business Park — August 1985 by Transpo Group Right of Access Easement to dump soils excavated in P-1 Channel onto adjacent FCE property granted to City of Renton. Provided temporary access easement to Metro facilities through FCE property. City of Renton Page Two December 8, 1986 Dedicated 17.5 acres of property for P-1 Channel and detention basin to City. Dedicated .58 acres of easement for drainage along northern property line of (Valley 405). Dedicated 9.51 acres for 0akesdale LID, SW 7th, Powell and Naches to City of Renton for roads. 0akesdale LID participation by First City Equities with Burlington Northern property is projected at over two million dollars. BLACKRIVER TECHONOLOGY PARK Environmental Impact Statement — April 1983 for City of Renton prepared by R.W. Thorpe & Associates. Traffic Impact Analysis for BlackRiver Technological Park — June 1986 by Transpo Group. Fill Permit SP-090-84 to fill BlackRiver site. Fill Permit SP-024-86 to fill BlackRiver site. Expanding and enhancing drainage areas for biofiltering drainage from adjacent sites and FCE properties. Dedicated 20 acres of easement of land for Riparian Forest Preserve, wildlife areas, and open space reserve along detention pond areas. First City Equities' participation in traffic mitigation measures is projected to cost eight hundred thousand dollars. COTV OF RENTON [WIEFV [ D By: Ro ce A. Berg U t C 81986 cc: Barbara E. Moss BUILDING / ZONING DEPT. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 FIRST CITY EQUITIES • November 25,, 1986 Mr. Richard C. Houghton Mr. Larry M. Springer Mr. Ronald G. Nelson ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE • CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Av nue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Gentlemen: I am writing, in order to clarify First City Equities:'' intent regarding our Infrastructure Site Plan Approval for the Blackriver Corporate Park property prior to your meeting to, review the roject. ECOLOGY Regarding Mi. Marty Murphy' s concerns for the Blue Heron raised in his November 1, 1986, letter to the ERC, First City Equities ' design team is. fully appreciative of the Blue Heron nests on the property an , of their significance in the area. The one large cottonwood tree noted by Mr. Murphy on the island is definitely within the °@iparian forest preserve area. . From our observation, most of the nests and trees are included in the 20 acres of preserved a 'ea already being saved on the property. Additionally length of .the P-1 , , the Blue Herons have the entire len channel to Inhabit and to use as a food source. The wetlands themselves ill remain intact and be a continual source for food for the Blue Heron population in the area. First City Equities, in dedicating the 20 acres to the City of Renton., has already provided for extensive wetland preservation and protection for the variousIspecies of animals living within the wetlands. (I might add that it has been shown at Shilshole• Bay that Blue Herons can and do adapt very well to human encroachment. There seem to be is many Blue Herons inhabiting that .bay as there are enthusiastic boaters and that is without a 20 acre preserve wetland area to serve as a supportive habitat. ) 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)62479223 . • Real Estate Development and Investments , ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November. 25, 1986 Page Two Nevertheles my point is that we are saving as many significant trees as ponsible on our site and between the forest preserve, the P-1 channel, and the additional trees, the Blue Heron , population 1ln the valley will be well protected. The Heron rfiokery is actually centered within the forest area and thus thI herons are adequately buffered. The additional trees we arel saving will be used as additional perch trees. The drainage4 ditches that we are enhancing will provide additional eeding areas for the herons. This is an extended habitat that is not available to them now because of the dense tree cover, heavy blackberry cover and seasonality of water. Our pumping design will maintain water levels in the ditches year-round. Our biologi al consultant, Rex Van Wormer, is working closely with our landscape architect, Ted Holden, in carefully designing ecologicallil supportive enhancements along the preserve areas and drainage ditches. As an aside, Mr. Joe Roble of the Department of Fisheries, has reviewed ouf enhancement plans and is gratified to see the protection we have designed into our plans for the fish and animal wildlife., TRAFFIC ENGNEERING I have met Vith Bob Bergstrom and Gary Norris to arrive at an understanding whereby First City Equities is responsible for mitigating traffic impacts caused by the Blackriver Technology, Park property (northern half of Blackriver Corporate Park property. ) The specific way in which First City Equities will mitigate the impacts has not been finally determined by the City of Renton. I understand that this discussion will be addressed this week to determine cost sharing and final agreed upon amounts. F 'om my point of view, we are willing to provide the necessary mitigation as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis foa' Blackriver Technology Park dated June, 1986, prepared by the Transpo Group. I note that Bob Bergstrom has indicated on his review sheet that all signs and bollards should be located off of the city right-of-wa4. In a subsequent discussion with him, I explained that our bollards are break-a-way bollards designed to snap off on impact. Bob indicated to me that that would be acceptable. r ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25) 1986 Page Three, It was what he had originally directed us to design in an early meeting we had with the city. Additionally, the bollards are not within the right-of-way as currently designed. A third ite I noted under Traffic Engineering's comments referred tolthe request for a bond for the traffic signal at S.W. 7th Street and Naches. Gary Norris requested this bond, as well as latecomers fees for two traffic signals installed by Holvick deRegt Koering. I question the. need for either of these items under this particular application, since I am not building any structures but rather installing roadway, landscaping, jogging paths, and monument signage. It seems more appropriate to have the ]traffic signal bond and latecomers fees assessed at the time th t we submit fdr site plan approval and building permits for actual structures. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Brooke Owen Crime Prevention Coordinator with the Police Department, 'provided several comments which are of concern to us. She indicated the jogging paths must be well lighted during all hours of darkness and must have frequent escape routes for joggers in 4istress, as well as access points for police officers;., 'the question of lighting the jogging paths was one which our design team addressed and rejected for a number of reasons.. For• safety reasons, First City Equities does not want to encourage use of the jogging paths- at night. We are, concerned that if we light the jogging paths, we will be encouraging Ijoggers to use the paths at night, which we feel could be asking for trouble, particularly since the paths run. along the r'!parian forest areas of the property. So our decision tolnot light the paths was made in an effort to discourage use of the paths at night. Additionally, we could post signs Indicating hours of operation, further discouraging use of the paths at night. Regarding the comments to have frequent escape routes and access points for Rolice officers, I do not fully understand why the police depairtment feels they do not have adequate access to the trail in th11 first place. This trail is not intended for vehicle usej it will be a five foot wide path which is easily accessible at all points. Regarding t1ie comment about the path' s operation during non-business hours, we do not intend necessarily to have the paths closed during non-business hours, as we feel there will be use of those trails after work in the spring and summer when it stays lightllonger. The purpose of the paths is to provide recreationai activities for the public and tenants of the park during daylght hours. The only curtailing of use, we feel, should be after daylight hours. . . ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25,11986 Page Four Brooke Owen also included several traffic related comments in her report teo the ERC. I have discussed these issues with Gary Norris and Bob Bergstrom. They indicated: to me that traffic mitigation flor the: Blackriver Technology Park property would be no more thanilthat which is outlined in the traffic analysis mentioned previously. . I have addressed all of the comments which I have received which caused me sc4e concern. However, I would like to offer to meet with the Environmental Review Committee and staff members along with our entire design team in order to explain our intent for the infrastructure approval. If such a meeting would be of interest to the Committee, we would address the overall design concept, the schedule for construction, the wetland enhancement program, review the staff comments raised in their reports, and be available for questions and answers from the Committee and staff members. At such a meeting I would bring our architect, Royce Berg of LPN Architects; the landscape architects, Ted Holden and Lauchlin Bethune of Mitchell Nelson Group; our biological cipnsultant, Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services; Bob Roed, our civil engineer, of Bush, Roed & Hitchings; and Greg Byler, First City, Equities Director of Construction. I believe such a meeting would be informative and would lend a, cer•tain level of comfort to the Environmental Review Committee in as much as our proposal is somewhat unique in the history of the City of Renton. Please contact me to arrange the meeting at your convenience should you decide to accept our olffer. In the event you do not wish to meet with us, I hope that the foregoing comments will be of service in clarifying our intent. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIE Barbara E. Moss Director of lanning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Lauchlin Bethune Bob Roed Rex Van Wormer Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman . it 1 • • • i FIRSTCITY ' • • . • . . • EQUITIES . • . , . November 251 1986' Mr. Richard 'CC. Houghton Mr. Larry' M � Springer Mr. Ronald G. Nelson ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 198055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval . BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Gentlemen: I • I am writing in order to clarify First City Equities' intent regarding our Infrastructure Site Plan Approval for the Blackriver Corporate Park property, prior to your meeting to review the project. i ECOLOGY_ a' Regarding Mr. Marty Murphy' s concerns for the Blue Heron raised in his Nove ber 1, 1986, letter to the ERC, First City Equities' design teamjis fully appreciative of the Blue Heron nests on the property and of their significance in the area. The one large cottonwood tree noted by Mr. Murphy on the island is definitely within the riparian forest preserve area. From our observation, most of theLnests and trees are included in the 20 acres of preserved area already being saved on the property. Additionally, the Blue Herons have the entire length of the P-1. channel to inhabit and to use as a food source. The wetlands themselves will remain intact and be a continual source for food for the Blue Heron population in the area. First City Equities, • in dedicating the 20 acres to the City of' Renton, has already provided for extensive wetland preservation and protection for- the variousjjspecies of animals living within the wetlands. (I might add that it has been shown at Shilshole Bay that Blue Herons can and do adapt very well to human encroachment. There seem to be as many Blue Herons inhabiting that bay as there are enthusiastic boaters and that is without a 20 acre preserve wetland area to serve as a supportive habitat. ) 1 800 Fiffh Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 ii Real Estate Development and Investments lE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25, 1986 Page Two Nevertheless my point is that we are saving as many significant trees as possible on our site and between the forest preserve, the P-1 channel, and the additional trees, the Blue Heron population in the valley will be well protected. The Heron rookery is actually centered within the forest area and thus the herons are adequately buffered. The additional trees we arepsaving will be ,used as additional perch trees. The drainage ditches that we are enhancing will provide additional feeding areas for the herons. This is an extended habitat that' is not available to them now because of the dense tree cover, heavy blackberry cover and seasonality of water. Our pumping "design will maintain water levels in the ditches year-round. Our biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer, is working closely with our landscape architect, Ted Holden, in carefully designing ecologically; supportive enhancements along the preserve areas and drainage ditches. As an aside,; Mr. Joe !Roble of the Department of Fisheries, has reviewed ou enhancement plans and is gratified to see the protection whe have designed into our plans for the fish and animal wildlife. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING'' I have met with Bob Bergstrom and Gary Norris to arrive at an understanding whereby First City Equities is responsible for mitigating traffic impacts caused by the Blackriver Technology Park property (northern half of Blackriver Corporate Park property. ) The specific way in which First City Equities will mitigate thei impacts has not been finally determined by the City of Renton. I understand that this discussion will be addressed this week to determine cost sharing and final agreed upon amounts. From my point of view, we are willing to provide the necessary mitigation as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis forl Blackriver Technology Park dated June, 1986, prepared by the Transpo Group. I note that Bob Bergstrom has indicated on his review sheet that all signs and bollards should be located off of the city right-of-way. In a subsequent discussion with him, I explained that our bOlards are break-a-way bollards designed to snap off on impact. ;Bob indicated to me that that would be acceptable. a ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25) 1986 Page Three It was what he had originally directed us to design in anearly ' meeting we had with the city. Additionally, the bollards are not within 1,he right-of-way as currently designed. A third item I noted under Traffic Engineering's comments referred to the request for a bond for the traffic signal at S.W. 7th Street and Naches. Gary Norris requested this bond, as well as lat comers fees for two traffic signals installed by Holvick deRIgt Koering. I question the need for either of. these items under !this particular application, since I am not building any structues but rather installing roadway, landscaping, jogging paths, and monument signage. It seems more appropriate to have the traffic signal bond and latecomers fees assessed at the time that we submit for site plan approval and building permits for actual structures. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Brooke Owen, Crime Prevention Coordinator with the Police. Department, provided several comments which are of concern to us. She indicated the jogging paths must be well lighted during all hours of darkness and must have frequent escape routes for joggers in distress, as well as access points for police ; officers. The question of lighting the jogging paths was one • which our design team addressed and rejected' for a number of reasons. For safety reasons, First City, Equities does not want to encourage use of the jogging paths at night. We are concerned that if we light the jogging paths we will be encouraging joggers to use the paths at night, which we feel could be asking for trouble, particularly since the paths run along the riparian forest areas of the property.. So our decision tolnot light the paths was made in an effort to discourage use of the paths at night. Additionally, we could post signs iIndicating hours of operation, further discouraging use of the iiaths at night. Regarding the comments to have frequent escape routes and access points for police officers, I do not fully understand why the police department feels they do not have adequate access to the trail in the first place. This trail is not intended for vehicle us01 it will be a five foot wide path which is easily accessible at all points. Regarding the comment about the path' s operation during non-busines hours, we do not intend necessarily. to have the paths close during non-business hours, as we feel there will be use of those trails after work in the spring and summer when it stays light longer. The purpose of the paths is to provide recreationa activities for the public and tenants of the park during daylight hours. The only curtailing of use, we feel, should be after daylight hours. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25, 1986 Page Four Brooke Owen also included several traffic related comments in her report to the ERC. I have discussed these issues with Gary . Norris and Bob Bergstrom. They indicated to me that traffic mitigation for the Blackriver Technology Park property would be no more thanLthat which is outlined in the traffic analysis mentioned previously. I have addressed all of the comments which I have received which caused me some concern. However, I would like to offer to meet with the En4ronmental Review Committee and staff members along with our entire design team in order to explain our intent for the infrastructure approval. If such a meeting would be of interest to the Committee, we would address the overall design concept, theischedule for construction, the wetland enhancement program, review the staff comments raised in their reports, and be available for questions and answers from the Committee and staff members. At such a meeting I would bring our architect, Royce Berg of LPN Architects; the landscape architects, Ted Holden and Lauchlin Bethune of Mitchell Nelson Group; our biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services; Bob Roed, our civil engineer, of Bush, Roed & Hitchings; and Greg Byler, First City Equities Director of i Construction:, I- believe such a meeting would be informative and would lend ascertain level of comfort to the Environmental i Review Committee in as much as our proposal is somewhat unique iin the history of the City of Renton. Please contact me to arrange the meeting at your convenience should you decide to accept our offer. In the event you do not wish to meet with us, I hope that the foregoing comments will be of service in clarifying our intent. Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIE Barbara E. Moss Director of Planning BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Lauchlin Bethune Bob Roed, Rex Van Wormer Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman FRSTCFiY 'ECJITIES November 25, 1986 Mr. Richard C. Houghton Mr. Larry M. Springer Mr. Ronald G. Nelson ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Gentlemen: I am writing in order to clarify First City Equities' intent. regarding our Infrastructure Site Plan Approval for the Blackriver Corporate Park property, prior to your meeting to review the project. ECOLOGY Regarding Mr. Marty Murphy' s concerns for. the Blue Heron raised in his November 1, 1986, letter to the ERC, First City Equities' design team is fully appreciative of the Blue Heron nests on the property and of their significance in the area. The one large cottonwood tree noted by Mr. Murphy on the island is definitely within the riparian forest preserve area. From our observation, most of the nests and trees are included in the 20 acres of preserved area already being saved on the property. Additionally, the Blue Herons have the entire length of the P-1. channel to inhabit and to use as a food source. The wetlands themselves will remain intact and be a continual source for food for the Blue Heron population in the area. First City Equities, in dedicating the 20 acres to the City of Renton, has already provided for extensive wetland preservation and protection for the various species of animals living within the wetlands. (I might add that it has been shown at Shilshole Bay that Blue . Herons can and do adapt very well to human encroachment. There seem to be as many Blue Herons inhabiting that bay as there are enthusiastic boaters and that is without a 20 acre preserve wetland area to serve as a supportive habitat. ) 0 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25, 1986 Page Two Nevertheless my point is that we are saving as many :significant , trees as possible on our site and between the forest preserve, the P-1 channel, and the additional trees, the Blue Heron population in the valley will be well protected. The Heron rookery is actually centered within the forest area and thus the herons are adequately buffered. The additional 0 trees we are saving will be used as additional perch trees. 0 The drainage ditches that we are enhancing will provide additional feeding areas for the herons. This is an extended habitat that is not available to them now because of the dense tree cover, heavy blackberry cover and seasonality of water. _ Our pumping design will maintain water levels in the ditches year-round. Our biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer, is working closely with our landscape architect, Ted Holden, in carefully designing ` ecologically supportive enhancements along the preserve areas . and drainage ditches. As an aside, Mr. Joe Roble of the Department of Fisheries, has. reviewed our enhancement plans and is gratified to see the . - protection we have designed into our plans for the fish and' " animal wildlife. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING I have met with Bob Bergstrom and Gary Norris =to •.arrive at an 0 -understanding whereby First City Equities is responsible for. ' mitigating traffic impacts caused by the Blackriver Technology Park property (northern half of Blackriver Corporate Park - property. ) The specific way in which First City Equities will mitigate the impacts has not been finally determined by the City of Renton. I understand that this discussion will be addressed this week to determine cost sharing and final agreed upon amounts. From my point of view, we are willing to provide the ' necessary mitigation as identified in the Traffic Impact ' -Analysis for Blackriver Technology Park dated June, 1986, prepared by. the Transpo Group. . I note that Bob Bergstrom has indicated on his review sheet that all signs and bollards should be located off of the city' right-of-way. In a subsequent discussion with him, I explained that our bollards are break-a-way bollards designed to snap off on impact. Bob indicated to me that that would be acceptable. ; . ,ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE •' . November 25, 19 8 6 ' . Page Three . ,. • , . . - It was what he had originally directed us to design in• an early , • meeting we had with .the• city. Additionally, the bollards are • not within the right-of-way as currently designed. • - A third item I noted under Traffic Engineering's comments • • referred to the request: for a bond ..for the traffic signal at . • S.W. 7th Street and: Naches. Gary Norris requested this bond,. as • • well as latecomers fees for two traffic. signals installed by • • Holvick deRegt Koering. I question the need for either of .these- • items under this particular application, since I •am not building . any structures but rather installing roadway, landscaping, . , jogging paths, and monument signage. It seems more appropriate • to have the traffic signal bond and latecomers fees assessed at the .time • that we submit for site plan approval and building . • permits for actual structures. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Brooke Owen, Crime Prevention Coordinator with the Police ' Department, provided several comments which are of concern to • • us. She indicated the jogging paths must be well lighted during ' all hours of .darkness and must have frequent escape routes for joggers in distress, as well as access points, for police - - officers. The question of lighting the jogging paths was 'one ' • .' . _ . which our design team addressed and rejected for a number of - - ' - reasons. For safety reasons, First City Equities does not want. ' • . • to encourage use of the jogging paths at night. We are. concerned that if we light the jogging paths we will be _ encouraging joggers to use the paths at night, which we. feel. . : - - -. .. could be asking for trouble, particularly since the paths run. . • along the riparian forest areas of the 'property. • So' �our: . . . " • ' decision to-.not light the paths was made in an effort. to . " • : ' " - discourage use of the paths' at night. Additionally, we could -.__: post signs indicating hours of operation, further discouraging • . use of the paths at night. _ ' • Regarding the comments to have frequent escape r• • outes and access • points for police officers, I do not fully understand why the police department feels they do not. have adequate access to the . • trail in the first place. This trail is not intended for . ----- - vehicle use; -it will be a five foot. wide path which is. easily . - . - accessible at all points. . . • • ' Regarding the comment about the path's operation during • . non-business hours, we do not intend necessarily. to have the paths closed during' non-business hours, as we- feel there will1be ' use of those trails after work in the spring and summer when it • . stays light longer. The purpose of the paths is to provide " • ' recreational activities for the public and tenants of the park ' '. during daylight hours. The only curtailing of use, we feel, '. - • should be after daylight hours. . ' ' - , • a ... '— .. I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE '' November 25, 1986 Page Four Brooke Owen also included several traffic related comments in her report to the ERC. I have discussed these: issues with Gary Norris and Bob Bergstrom. They indicated to me that traffic mitigation for the Blackriver Technology Park property would be '- no more than that which is outlined in the traffic analysis mentioned previously. I have addressed all of the comments which I have received which caused me some concern. However, I would like to offer to meet with the Environmental Review Committee and staff members along with our entire design team in order to explain our intent for the infrastructure approval. If such a meeting would be of interest to the Committee, we would address the overall design concept, the schedule for construction, the wetland enhancement program, review the staff comments raised in their reports, and be available for questions and answers from the Committee and - staff .members. At such a meeting I would bring our architect, Royce Berg of LPN Architects; the landscape architects, Ted Holden and Lauchlin Bethune of Mitchell Nelson Group; our - biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services; Bob Roed, our civil engineer, of Bush, Roed & Hitchings; and Greg By.•ler, First City Equities Director of . : . Construction. I` believe such a meeting would be informative and would lend a certain level of comfort to the Environmental Review Committee in as much as our proposal is somewhat unique in the history of the City of Renton. Please contact me to. . arrange the meeting at your convenience should you decide to. accept our offer. _ In' the event you do not wish to meet with us, I hope that the foregoing comments will be of service in clarifying our intent. _.. _..: Warm regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIE C541,14,4_4,/ , _ Barbara E.. Moss - Director of Planning _ - BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Lauchlin Bethune . Bob Roed Rex Van Wormer = Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman 00 fAV Vaite FIRS GTY . EI:!UT!ES. 1 November 25, 1986 Mr. Richard C. Houghton . Mr. Larry M. Springer . Mr. Ronald G. Nelson ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 V , , RE: Infrastructure Site Plan Approval BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK • Gentlemen: . I am writing in order to clarify First City Equities' intent regarding our Infrastructure Site Plan Approval for the Blackriver Corporate Park property prior to your meeting to review the project. ECOLOGY Regarding Mr. Marty Murphy's concerns for. the Blue Heron raised in his November 1, 1986, letter to the ERC, First City Equities' - design team is fully appreciative of the Blue Heron nests on the V property and of their significance in the area. The one large cottonwood tree noted by Mr. Murphy on the island is definitely within the riparian forest preserve area. From our observation,., most of the nests and trees are included in the 20 acres of ' preserved area already being saved on the property. Additionally, the Blue Herons have the entire length of the P-1 V channel to inhabit and to use as a food- source: The wetlands- themselves will remain intact and be a continual source for food - for the Blue Heron population in the area. - First City Equities, . in dedicating the 20 acres to the City of Renton, has already provided for extensive wetland preservation and protection for • the various species of animals living within the wetlands (I . might add that it has been shown at Shilshole Bay that Blue:. :.- Herons can and do adapt very well to human encroachment. There - seem to be as many Blue Herons inhabiting that bay as there are enthusiastic boaters and that is without a 20 acre preserve ' wetland area to serve as a supportive habitat. ) 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments 6 • ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25, 1986 p.. e.._. Page Two Nevertheless my point is that we are saving as many significant• trees as possible on our site and between the forest preserve, the P-1 channel, and the additional trees, the Blue .Heron' population in the valley will be well protected. The Heron rookery is actually centered within the forest area and thus the herons are adequately buffered. The additional trees we are saving will be used as additional perch trees. The drainage ditches that we are enhancing will provide additional feeding areas for the herons. This is an extended habitat that is not available to them now because of the dense tree cover, heavy blackberry cover and seasonality of water. Our pumping design will maintain water levels in the ditches year-round. Our biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer, is working closely with our landscape architect, Ted Holden, in carefully designing ecologically supportive enhancements along the preserve areas and drainage ditches. As an aside, Mr. Joe Roble of the Department of Fisheries, has. reviewed our enhancement plans and is gratified to see the:: protection we have designed into our plans for the fish and animal wildlife. TRAFFIC ENGINEERING I have met with Bob Bergstrom and Gary Norris to .arrive at an- understanding whereby First City Equities is responsible for mitigating traffic impacts caused• by the Blackriver Technology ' - Park property (northern half of Blackriver Corporate Park property.) The specific way in which First City Equities will mitigate the impacts has not been finally determined by the City' of Renton. I understand that this discussion will be addressed. = this week to determine cost sharing and final agreed upon - - amounts. • From my point of view, we are willing to provide the necessary mitigation as identified in the. Traffic Impact - Analysis for Blackriver Technology Park dated June, 1986, - -. • prepared by the Transpo Group. I note that Bob Bergstrom has indicated on his review sheet that all signs and bollards should be located off of the city right-of-way. In a subsequent discussion with him, i explained that our bollards are break-a-way bollards designed to snap off on impact. Bob indicated to me that that would be acceptable. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 25, 1986 Page Three • I"t was what he had originally directed us to design in an early • meeting we had with'.the' city. Additionally, the bollards are ' not within the right-of-way as currently designed. • A third item I noted under Traffic Engineering's comments . - referred to the request for a bond for the traffic signal at S.W. 7th Street and: Naches. Gary Norris requested this bond,. as . • well as latecomers fees for two traffic signals installed by Holvick deRegt Koering. I question the need for either of these items under this particular application, since I am not building any structures but rather installing roadway, landscaping, , jogging paths, and monument signage. It' seems more appropriate to have the traffic signal bond and latecomers fees assessed at the .time that we submit for site plan approval and building permits for actual structures. • POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Brooke Owen, Crime Prevention Coordinator with the Police Department, provided several comments which are of concern to us. She indicated the jogging paths must be well lighted during all hours of darkness and must have frequent escape routes for . joggers in distress, as well as access points for police officers. . The question of lighting the jogging paths was one which our design team addressed and rejected for a number of - reasons. - For safety reasons, First City, Equities does not want to encourage use of the jogging paths at night.. . We are. ' .. • concerned that if we light the jogging paths we will be encouraging joggers to use the paths at night, which we feel' . could be asking for trouble, particularly since the paths run. along the riparian forest areas of the property. So our • ' decision to not light the paths was made in an effort, to" '.-. _- discourage use of the paths- at night. Additionally,' we could ' -- post signs indicating hours of operation, further discouraging • :,.:. - use of the paths at night. Regarding the comments to have frequent escape routes- and access': ` : points for policeofficers, I do not fully understand why the police department feels they do not have adequate access to. the , ' trail in the first place. • This trail is not intended for, - : vehicle -use; it will be a five foot wide path which is easily , -. accessible at all points. Regarding the comment about the path's operation during ' non-business hours, we do not intend necessarily- to have the - - paths closed during non-business hours, as we feel there will be ;_ use of those trails after work in the spring and summer when it . stays light longer. The purpose of the paths is to provide recreational activities for the public and tenants of the park during daylight hours. The only curtailing of use, ,we . feel, , should be after daylight hours. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE • November 25, 1986 , . Page Four Brooke Owen also included several traffic related comments in her report to the ERC. I have discussed these issues with Gary , Norris and Bob Bergstrom. They indicated to me that traffic . mitigation for the Biackriver Technology Park property would be no more than that which is outlined in the traffic analysis mentioned previously. I have addressed all of the comments which I have received which caused me some concern. However, I would like to offer to meet with the Environmental Review Committee and staff members along with our entire design team in order to explain our intent for the infrastructure approval. If such a meeting would be of interest to the Committee, we would address the overall design concept, the schedule for construction, the wetland enhancement program, review the staff comments raised in their reports, and be available for questions and answers from the Committee and .. staff members. At such a meeting I would bring our architect, Royce Berg of LPN Architects; the landscape architects, Ted Holden and Lauchlin Bethune of Mitchell Nelson Group; our • biological consultant, Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services; Bob Roed, our civil engineer, of Bush, Roed & - Hitchings; and Greg Byler, First City Equities Director of Construction. I believe such a meeting would be informative and would lend a certain level of comfort to the Environmental Review Committee in as much as our proposal is somewhat unique in the history of the City. of Renton. Please contact me to arrange the meeting at your convenience should you decide to accept our offer. • -In the event you do not wish to meet with us, I hope that the.. foregoing comments will be of service in clarifying our intent. - Warm_regards, FIRST CITY EQUITIE Barbara E. Moss- -Director of Planning - BEM:bc cc: Royce Berg Ted Holden Lauchlin Bethune Bob Roed Rex Van Wormer _ - - - Greg Byler Elliott Severson David Schuman .i' a' • -3326Z BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NO: ECF-090-86 APPLICATION NO.(S): SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for site plan approval of the infra-structure concept unifying signing, landscaping, streets, paths and exercise areas to integrate phased . development with controlled and related parameters. Shoreline development permit applications to allow said development within 200 feet of Springbrook Creek, and variance to allow an off-premise sign and to allow signage within 20 feet of the property line. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Located north of I-405 and S.W. Grady Way, east of Oakesdale Avenue, S.W. and Metro, south of Burlington Northern Railroad and west of Powel Avenue S.W. AGENCY: City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department. SITE AREA: 16.94 acres of a 130 acre site. ISSUES: Whether the proposed action will adversely impact wildlife ' or habitat identified on the site. Whether sufficient information on phasing and other mitigating measures to minimize impacts on wildlife has been provided. The applicant proposes several improvements to the site to enhance the natural area easement, area which increases and enhances habitat areas for existing wildlife. The applicant proposes the following improvements (see attached map): • Area 1: Water will have to be recirculated or pumped through the stream in times of dry weather. At present, stormwater flows through the ditch during the rainy season only. The stream depth would be such to keep the water cool and inhibit algae growth during the warm season. The 60 ft. wide strip with its meandering stream would be revegetated with trees, shrubs, and ground cover plants relocated from the soon-to-be-developed Black River Business Park. The stream and its riparian edge would be planted to cattails and other native aquatic plants to act as a biofilter to remove heavy metals from stormwater before entering the P-I channel. A trail with crushed cinder surface is proposed alongside and at places crossing this stream to allow pedestrian access into and through this area without trampling vegetation. Area 2 - Grade stream channel and introduce a system of weirs to impound runoff water and create a system of basins (average depth would be 4'-5'. to keep the water temperature cool to prevent algae growth). c Revegetate the riparian zone and side slopes with trees, shrubs and ground vegetation transplanted from areas in the : business park which will be developed as parking and structures. • Basins will be planted with native aquatic plants (biofilters) to remove heavy metals from stormwater runoff. • • North side of channel will be graded to stop future erosion and eliminate blackberry roots. BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT PAGE 3 • All significant trees would be maintained and pruned (to improve structure and eliminate dead or broken branches. • Install crushed cinder pedestrian trail on and at times crossing the natural area. Purpose: 1) Prevent people walking throughout site, making multiple trails and trampling the vegetation; and 2) divide the border between the natural vegetation and the urban landscaping. Area 3 - (Natural Preserve Area: Should have as little human encroachment as possible.) • Minor pruning of dead material hanging from mature trees and presenting safety hazards. • Blackberry and nettle plants would be left untouched. • "Nature walk" proposed immediately bordering the P-1 channel side slopes. (raised boardwoak with wood side rails to keep people out of the vegetated area 'and allow animals and birds uninhibited access to the water. Discussion - Overall the applicant's proposed measures will enhance the wildlife habitat in the area. However, one species of bird, the Great Blue Heron, has located on the site. According to information provided by Mary M. Anderson of the soil conservation service, the Great Blue Heron is a protected species by the federal "Migratory Bird Treatry Act" and by various state RCW's and WAC's. This legislation requires that "nests not be disturbed, nest trees not cut down, and colonies protected." She had counted 23 herons in the area last spring. In 1983 when the pond was under construction, she had counted 4 herons in 2 colonies, whereas today, there are now 3 colonies. The attached map shows the heron location. Ms. Anderson believes that this is a valuable site for the herons, which if given protection, will increase establishing a permanent colony. Presently in King County there are 6 recorded colonies with 3 other colonies in the process of being recorded. The herons are very tolerant of people during their non-nesting season (July to December). However, during their nesting season (January-June 30), the birds are very sensitive to disturbances. She recommended the movement of central buildings in the project area; that the City consider requiring a bond to ensure that the Riparian Preserve and other non-disturbed areas are not intruded into; and that construction not occur until end of June, 1st of July. Finally, in telephone conversation with Ms. Anderson on December 16, 1986, she indicated that biologists with Fish and Game (Bob Ziegler and Steve Perland) indicated that there should be a 660 feet arc around the area in the northeast portion of the . A letter was to be sent to the City but to date has not been prepared. Marty Murphy, associated with Cornell University, stated in a letter dated November 1, 1986, that the Great Blue Heron is "as much a part of our natural heritage as Mt. Rainier . . ." She is also concerned that large groups of migratory birds seek the ponds for food and rest, and thus need protection since the ponds are part of a Federal project (thus protected by the Federal Migratory Acts and State law). A study of the migratory birds will be conducted in March-April of 1987 and a list presented to the City. Finally, Ms. Murphy pointed out that shell casings have been found on-site during a field visit in October, 1986. She recommended that "No Hunting" signs be posted by the property owner (particularly during water-fowl hunting season October-January). - B'UJILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT PAGE 4 The Environmental Impact Statement does not specifically mention the need to protect the herons. The impact statement only merely mentions herons as "probably being rare on the site". This informatin was apparently based on information in two publications rather than field studies. Nor does the applicant's checklist specifically address the heron matter even though there is documentation that herons are nesting on the site. The applicant does, however, provide several measures to enhance the natural habitat, but some measures should be given to minimizing impacts on the Great Blue Herons since they are rare in the area and are a natural resource to the City. Another issue has to do with the location of the boardwalk for viewing the birds and the pond areas. The applicant has proposed two alternatives: 1) that the walk be located along the bank of the P-1 channel or 2) wind through the existing tress in a north-south direction between the pedestrian path on the north preserve and dead-end at a view platform overlooking the P-1 channel and pond to the south. The applicant has chosen the latter which, while overall proving the least intrusion in the sensitive area, does "threaten" the rasberries on-site near the platforms. Steps should be taken to minimize this intrusion. Whether the proposed action has a reasonable chance of being completed within a two year period. The question arises as to whether the applicant can install all the trails and landscaping as proposed. The applicant has indicated that this project could be completed within the two year period. However, there may be conflicts with fill and grade activities on the site. If a conflict does arise, the applicant may be able to obtain a maximum two year extension by the Hearing Examiner (see section 4-738). In addition, to minimize the noise and traffic impacts and intrusion on the rasberries, that the applicant should phase construction over a two, possible three year period. Should traffic mitigation measures be applied to the infra-structure project? The Traffic Engineering Division has proposed several traffic mitigating measures. The subject project, however, does not warrant the application of these measures since the infra-structure project itself is not generating the number of trips necessary to warrant the recommended conditions. These conditions need to be tied directly to the actual construction of buildings. In addition to the various City staff comments, METRO has also reviewed the project with the following recommended conditions to ensure water quality in the area: • Construction timing and staging; • Methods to prevent toxic materials, petrochemicals, debris from construction, and other pollutants from entering the surface waters (e.g. , oil/water separators, grassy swales, and/or discharging wastewaters into sewers); • Methods to prevent slope erosion and sediment addition to the creek. Recommended Conditions: • Noisy operations are not to be conducted concurrently. • Phase development should be planned which would reduce the size of movements of construction noise. • Construction equipment should be operated only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7: p.m., Monday through Friday. • No development will occur within the 50 foot setback from the top of the bank of the Black River Channel. BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT PAGE 5 • Either close the boardwalk from January 1 to June 30th or eliminate the viewing platforms entirely. • Limit construction activity to the months of June (last two weeks) to December. o The applicant shall provide linkages to other trail systems adjacent to their property to assist the City in achieving an integrated trail system throughout the City. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING AGENCIES: Various City Departments have reviewed and commented upon the project. Some of the more pertinent comments are as follows: Parks and Recreation: Recommended DNS. Commented that development will have a positive impact on recreation and aesthetics; that much thought has been put into how the site can be developed with a park-like setting. Engineering Division: Recommended DNS. ' 4 Fire Prevention Bureau: Recommended DNS. Utility Engineering: Recommended DNS. Police Department: Recommended mitigated DNS based on the following requirements: 1. Jogging paths must be well lighted during all hours of darkness. 2. Jogging paths should have frequent (a) escape routes for joggers in distress; (b) access points for police officers. 3. Will paths be closed during non-business hours; if so, no trespassing signs should be posted. 4. Traffic related comments: a. Active signalization with left turn lanes should be required on Sunset W. (in County) at its intersection with 68th S. b. Heavy additional traffic loads might be anticipated for S. 7th St. (already taxed). New signalization might be required along that street. c. Consider extending another street into Sunset S.W. from S. 7th (Lind Ave.?) Zoning Division: Did not make a recommendation. The staff asks for additional information on how to maintain/preserve blue heron nesting areas around the site. Policy Development: Recommended a mitigated DNS based on the following comments: t , BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT THRESHOLD DETERMINATION STAFF REPORT PAGE 6 1. It is vital that it be clearly understood by all City Departments just exactly what approval of this site approval application constitutes. This should be throughly discussed by ERC and clearly communicated to all affected reviewing staff. 2. As proposed, the impacts to the water, environment in general, and transportation network would all be positive. We would advise a mitigated DNS subject to implementation of the infra-structure concept as presented and in conformance with existing city codes and policies. Traffic Engineering: Recommended a mitigated DNS based on the following: 1. More information on transportation. 2. All signs and billboards be located off of the City right of way. 3. See attached comments. , ,s..prer •• „.s ,..4.,,..,, ., . :.-1- ••..{, ' ,, i • ',. - • .• ., j I t .L.,v-i• % -- - Iiiit, --- t•T P',.. ' n Ella ' • _ . • , . , , 0,'" iim..., -. —,.. aim 0,,, ,„0, _, • , , , ...:.. ... .. . .... . _ . •_ , ....,,,, . .. ,... .„ ... .„. .•,.. .f:VA 400 . 4, ,.. .4- ' • ,1* I ( .. i • a- OS . .4.."..,,.%•„t?,...t.-:-7-....*'v.,`..,' , ..,..^:', ft,':4' ...'. ., . ' 1 . . . . .., -V, ' ,.....'•-,4, -=• ..., ,• --i'- --- '1, 7 •1•3 -,2, ...2,.-‘'... ..*.i. • ,-4 At; .: -""-- ••it c•••-••-.,..t... -•,-. ----••‘....•"'..,—, , •-- - '' ,-,. . - -....-- • . N;.'•-----.' = --t--• -.:-..i...ffrtr -- - - . -1,,•• ••• --"-- ' --- - .-.- , '-- -',411‘, _. , • • . ....,,,a.-4‘ . 1,.;L .3, ,., _ , . , •1 .1,3. -;:i5; '`,'C'''`,••••<-•;,.., L.,,NO.,.!,,,,'" $01V 111•01...."; !. " I .1,- ' if " g madam.. .4116". "1...1."' _ g.g•it.sumo f'i', .'-'----..' 1 ' .-...1 'Ili..- 41, •-• ''; .' , r. ,..fit--:,••itt,. . ,'7;11,A..1"1:Y•4.,...:••,:;0..-LI,, , /,. ..4.,',..., L. :.. -...- -•:-4 :7,-., ...-1.-,7, • , ":,%?-,,,441(i.43;_„1••-,, :t:,,,,,I.. ..!:;f,5-T-47'",1,- ,r.:.---t-, •• -,,,-,,,,_ . .,„ vv.-4,4", , ,,, 4>-7-:•,,.. .40.-. 4VP i todi ,- ,,xs — ,,,, ,,,,.. . ,-- ,.-, ,,,,,, glow ce e a P....4_-_,- •dildite , a \Di ,:,,..4i. ,,,, -. i • --,,,, ,;o. •IL, •.: -. ••••=:•;.,, -- -- —...--t. 40; '''- .' - ''" '' /. . ,. . ... ., . .- •,_, . AI., ft,.. . , •..c.; . . -* , , _,..,,, •„.e. ." lb II\-.t..V A ' 'ff;').6 '''.--- . '''. 4.s.7,'".;-(4:0;•.:4 iir.v. . --,,, ,,,,,I.. 0„,..e•,... ,o* ; • /..424 `z. ..e."' . Ai ••,- ',.. "i7,.,.11. ' ...,,.,,,,., : —•lit•--de . ‘411 , •'_'. '4:4,',., ,, • ii, • - . th. 4-4 ,ft ,_• # . ,.,• ,,,,-*"14...-7*-,,,,,....%„- .'";-.7', , g o • .. r liniummil. , • ,., . ""*.x4.".,,,, -4,'L'''. ,_ - . ..t.'.... •,4:::. ..,„,.. ..:, • ':-?.."',1',:k . ,) •,'. , " , ' ' ' '. ' .. ' *4'-...1'ir-'•!' t"...;::!%:", '''' ..'''"'• ,- . - il : : 7• ,4't.- ":•.,-..."kit- — -; "-- -• , ' . a ,.• . 1 . Ve A-• .',k.. : ' .. .. t .. . - -Ni.'',.:' I . • - --- t,,.0i• ,44.„,,-4 , ....._. -, 1 / , • , ... . , , . . 6 6,• , 000 _ \ i . ..,. . - 1 .414, El ...... ... ..i, , 000s BLACKRIVER -, ,, , Corporate Park RENTON WASHINGTON 0 ti P - - .• "-- ' f.1ST CITN F 0111'13S ' 3 . , I E',API POMP TIOY NORTH VI SI ,,c ti,----- , - -4 } 1 't . .: 97::*.: C-r-, .`:.t "....F.p/M i_ri , ,_ • - I ,... .1, ' I • 1. '''' i ..• t 1: -'. - . Ii 91C N 0 V 1 01986 Lij . ql•Yi ROE(1 5 1111'0114C3. trir '. -- u ,.: -,- r - • _- - .,, ..... 4 Se 41010 ' ' J FIRST CITY EQUITIES (BLACK RIVER CORP. PARK) LI 1. Applicants have applied for three items: 1) site plan approval of the infra-structure of the Black River Office Park; 2) shoreline development permit application to allow development within 200 feet of Springbrook Creek; and 3) a variance to allow an off-premise sign and to allow signage within 20 feet of the property line. 2. Although the applicants have identified the infra-structure component has been the first part of a phase master development• "with controlled and related parameters", there has been no site plan review or approval granted by the City for this "master plan". Indeed, the applicants are the first to admit that it is purely illustrative in nature and is no way intended to be binding from their standpoint. 3. The Office Park District zoning, Section 4-718: (c) Site Plan Approval states: "Site plan approval shall be required for all developments within the 0-P Zone.", and "Each building or other development permit issued shallobe in conformance with the approved site plan". 4. For projects having over one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet Z,/• of gross floor area in the M-P zone or other zones in the Valley Planning Area or exceeding ten (10) acres in size, a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner shall be required (Section 4-738(c)8, Site Plan Review) . 5. The subject proposal has a site of + 140 acres and proposes to accommodate more than 800,000 square feet of development. 6. "Purpose and Intent" of the Site Plan Review Section clearly states that the . purpose of site plan approval is to "assure that the site plan of proposed uses is compatible with existing and. potential uses and complies with plans, policies and regulations of the City of Renton. In addition, this section states that site plan elements subject to review shall include (but not be limited to) : site layout; building orientation; pedestrian and vehicular access; signage; landscaping; natural features of the site; screening and buffering; parking and loading arrangements; and illumination. 410 7. Since there is no "approved site plan" for this project, it is difficult to see how permits can be issued for major infra-structural improvements (roads, trails, nature viewing areas, signs, etc. at this time and meet the spirit of Title IV, Building Regulations. 8. The Hearing Examiner should be requested to schedule a public hearing pursuant to Section 4-738(c)8. at the earliest possible date to consider ; the applicants site plan application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. That any elements of the infra-structure component requiring development or building permits be deferred pending Hearing Examiner approval of the applicants site plan. 2. That the. Committee proceed with making a threshold determination of Non-significance - Mitigated for the proposed infra-structural elements. 3. That traffic mitigation measures be tied to actual development proposals where traffic impacts can be ascertained. 4. That the Committee recommend that Section. 4-738, Site Plan Review, be amended to allow "preliminary site plan approval" of major developments that would focus less on actual building layouts and more on levels of development by use, degree of amenity and open space to be provided, etc. so that overall levels of impact can be assessed and addressed. Such provisiop would allow many of the 'issues raised by this application to address prior to actual building permits being requested. -ATTACHMENT A. ILLUSTRATIVE AMENDMENTS RE: PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN REVIEW 4-738 SITE PLAN REVIEW: 4-738 (j) Phasing: The Hearing Examiner may grant site plan approval for large projects planned to be developed or redeveloped in phases over a period of years ... (k) The Hearing Examiner may also grant site plan approval for projects which are submitted for "preliminary" site plan review prior to their being submitted for "final" site plan review. Preliminary site plans are encouraged for larger development projects as well as potentially complex projects such as mixed-use projects or those having many unresolved issues. Preliminary site plans shall include a breakdown of all proposed land uses including: general open space; usable open space; footage of trails, pathways and walkways; square footage of amenity facilities and maximum building heights and coverage. Preliminary site plans shall comply with items G.1.-G.4. of this section as well as items G.5.(a)-(d) and (h)-(k). Items G.5.(e), (f) and (g) and G.6. and G.7. shall be provided to the extent this information is known, applicable and/or appropriate to the proposal at hand. Once a project receives "preliminary" site plan approval, it (or phased portions of it) shall be submitted for final site plan approval within six (6) months. Projects submitted for "final" site plan review shall comply with all the provisions of items G.l.-G.10. Generalized architectural elevations (item G.6.) should be at a scale of at least 1/8" = 1'-0" and indicate exterior materials, colors, and finishes. (1) Appeals: The final decision by the Environmental Review Committee on whether a site plan application requires a public hearing may be appealed within fourteen (14) days to the Hearing Examiners to 3328Z )':,. :a,• f y .'!e` :..1: .;.;:. YF�. . ` .. ,.,L. n_, . .... .c�, , ..), ...'ti .:a srt I,. ,. P. MITIGATION • Traffic impacts from the Black River Technology Park are most significant in the immediate vicinity of the project where new roadways are proposed to serve this project and traffic from adjacent new developments. Traffic oriented east and south from the site will use existing facilities which are currently at or near capacity during peak periods. The purpose of mitigation for this project is two fold: (1) to reduce site-generated vehicle trips, and (2) to significantly improve project site access. A transportation management plan for the project will be developed by the project proponent with the aim of reducing vehicle trips, and a list of improvements to the transportation network are presented which are expected to mitigate project impacts. 1 Transportation Management Plan 1 The developer is committed to working with Metro Transit and Commuter Pool to develop a transportation management plan for the project which will I encourage ridesharing and attempt to reduce project vehicle trips. The trans- 1 portation management plan (or IMP) may consist of any or all of the following i items: • Work with METRO to establish a new bus route or modify an existing bus route to pass through the project. • If bus service is modified to be convenient, encourage employers to consider transit pass subsidies as a company or office/tech park benefit. • First City Development Corp. will provide a contact person for the 10 office/tech park as a liaison between Metro and the tenants. i • First City Development Corp. agrees to work with Metro to determine I the viability of vanpools financed in order to reduce the project il vehicle trip generation. , • Office park management should advise tenants and their employees of the advantages of fleet ride, vanpool and carpool programs through a package of information provided at initial occupancy for each tenant, and through periodic promotional displays within the leasing office. -24- • As much as practical , office park management should encourage employers to initiate a flextime work schedule so peak period traffic can be distributed more evenly over the 3:30 PM to 5:30 PM peak period. • Notification of employer occupancy dates and resulting estimated employee numbers on an ongoing basis. Transportation Network Improvements The construction of Oakesdale Avenue from Grady Way to Monster Road will provide access to the Black River Technology Park. However, this single roadway is not enough to provide good access to the project from any direction. Peak period congestion along Rainier Avenue to the east of the site is ' an ;# obstacle for traffic which is difficult to remove, as the intersections are , currently designed near the maximum in lane configuration and operation. Improvements in the access network must then come from another source or focus on another area. 's{ 0akesdale Avenue Corridor. It is proposed to construct Oakesdale Avenue, from SW 43rd to Sunset Highway (SR 900) (along Monster Road and 68th Avenue S) , although scheduled construction is from SW 16th to Monster Road. Approxi- mately 10 percent of Black River traffic is estimated to use Monster Road and 68th Avenue S to access Sunset which, when added to Valley 405 Business Park traffic on the route and current traffic, would increase daily traffic on 68th Avenue S from 800 trips in 1984 to approximately 10,180 trips in 1995. Traffic from the Black River development will represent approximately 14 percent of the total in 1995. The existing two-lane minimal design facility should be improved to a two-lane facility with shoulders and 11-12 foot lanes. The project proponent will agree to participate in an improvement district to construct the extension of Oakesdale to the Sunset Highway. Naches Avenue Design. Naches Avenue, the proposed on-site roadway serving Black River, will be constructed initially as a cul-de-sac, to be extended the full length to Oakesdale/Monster Roads as the Black River development progresses. The length of cul-de-sac which would provide a single access to Black River (aside from Powell Avenue to building 24) with acceptable operation was analyzed. Naches Road will operate satisfactorily as a cul-de-sac with STOP control F' at 7th Street through the construction and occupation of Building 25 in 1987. Subsequently, an all-way STOP will be required at 7th and Naches to permit . -25- • MITIGATION Traffic impacts from the Black River Technology Park are most significant in the immediate vicinity of the project where new roadways are proposed to serve this project and traffic from adjacent new developments. Traffic oriented east and south from the site will use existing facilities which are currently at or near capacity during peak periods. The purpose of mitigation for this project is two fold: (1) to reduce site-generated vehicle trips, and (2) to significantly improve project site access. A transportation management plan for the project will be developed by the project proponent with the aim of reducing vehicle trips, and a list of improvements to the transportation network are presented which are expected to mitigate project impacts. Transportation Management Plan The developer is committed to working with Metro Transit and Commuter Pool to develop a transportation management plan for the project which will encourage ridesharing and attempt to reduce project vehicle trips. The trans- portation management plan (or TMP) may consist of any or all of the following items: • Work with METRO to establish a new bus route or modify an existing bus route to pass through the project. • If bus service is modified to be convenient, encourage employers to consider transit pass subsidies as a company or office/tech park benefit. • First City Development Corp. will provide a contact person for the office/tech park as a liaison between Metro and the tenants. • First City Development Corp. agrees to work with Metro to determine the viability of vanpools financed in order to reduce the project vehicle trip generation. • Office park management should advise tenants and their employees of the advantages of fleet ride, vanpool and carpool programs through a package of information provided at initial occupancy for each tenant, and through periodic promotional displays within the leasing office. -24- • As much as practical , office park management should encourage employers to initiate a flextime work schedule so peak period traffic can be distributed more evenly over the 3:30 PM to 5:30 PM peak period. • Notification of employer occupancy dates and resulting estimated employee numbers on an ongoing basis. Transportation Network Improvements The construction of Oakesdale Avenue from Grady Way to Monster Road will provide access to the Black River Technology Park. However, this single roadway is not enough to provide good access to the project from any direction. Peak period congestion along Rainier Avenue to the east of the site is ' an obstacle for traffic which is difficult to remove, as the intersections are currently designed near the maximum in lane configuration and operation. Improvements in the access network must then come from another source or focus on another area. Oakesdale Avenue Corridor. It is proposed to construct Oakesdale Avenue, from SW 43rd to Sunset Highway (SR 900) (along Monster Road and 68th Avenue S) , although scheduled construction is from SW 16th to Monster Road. Approxi- mately 10 percent of Black River traffic is estimated to use Monster Road and 68th Avenue S to access Sunset which, when added to Valley 405 Business Park traffic on the route and current traffic, would increase daily traffic on 68th 't Avenue S from 800 trips in 1984 to approximately 10,180 trips in 1995. Traffic from the Black River development will represent approximately 14 percent of the total in 1995. The existing two-lane minimal design facility should be improved to a two-lane facility with shoulders and 11-12 foot lanes. The project proponent will agree to participate in an improvement district to construct the extension of Oakesdale to the Sunset Highway. Naches Avenue Design. Naches Avenue, the proposed on-site roadway serving Black River, will be constructed initially as a cul-de-sac, to be extended the full length to 0akesdale/Monster Roads as the Black River development progresses. The length of cul-de-sac which would provide a single access to Black River (aside from Powell Avenue to building 24) with acceptable operation was analyzed. Naches Road will operate satisfactorily as a cul-de-sac with STOP control at 7th Street through the construction and occupation of Building 25 in 1987. Subsequently, an all-way STOP will be required at 7th and Naches to permit -25- • '} u � 101986 -._) The Environmental Review Committee BU{LDiNGlHNmievStPT. City of _Renton _ _ Subject: The Black River Corporate Park, 405 Business Park. Committee Members, I have some environmental concerns about The Black River Corporate Park I want to share with you. Hopefully these concerns will result in "on the ground" improvements through actions by you and First West. Due to the nature of my work I have been at the development site and have observed the total environment there for four consecutive years, 1983-1986. I know specifically about the bad erosion areas, the landscaping, habitat, wildlife, and various environmental concerns. I feel that parts of the plans for the development will be very destructive to the exsisting blue heron rookeries in the area. I feel quite sure that it is in the public' s interest to preserve these rookeries as the top priority for this area. Blue heron are losing habitat at an increasing rate in the King County area, reference A. ' It is a protected species by both the federal "Migratory Bird Treaty Act" and various state RCW's and WAX. These act 's require that nests not be disturbed, nest trees not cut down, and colonies protected. In 1979 The Green River Technical Committee voted to support The City of Renton in the secondary purpose of the P-1 Pond as wetland and wildlife enhancement. Since construction in 1983 the blue heron have taken a real liking to this area. Last spring I counted 23 heron at the area. This is a tremondous resource for The City of Renton to preserve. In 1983 during pond construction only 4 heron lived here in 2 colonies. There are 3 colonies in this area now. Colony #one as shown on enclosed map has been there since 1983. It is a small (1 family) colony. The Blackriver Corporate Park Plan depicts an exercise station at or very near the base of these two or three trees. There is also a jogging trail which runs between these trees and the pond, about 50 ft. inland from the pond. Both of these should be moved or this rookery will probaly be abandoned. The building #36 is very close to the nest -also, it would be desirable if it could be moved back towards Naches Ave and native vegetation left. There are two other colonies which are of great concern not only because of their size, but the potential for permanent colonies to be established here. In King County there are only 6 colonies recorded. These 3 are being recorded this year to total about 9 ° in the county, reference B. A biologist from Wa. Conservation Fisheries Corp. thought these 3 colonies could be supporting nesting for a large part of the county's heron population. ` J • Page 2 Blue heron are very tolerant of people during their non-nesting season (July to Dec. ) . The various public cabana, exercise stations, and jogging trails are probaly not a threat during non-nesting times. During nesting season they will not tolerate these repeated human disturbances. These intrusive areas are marked 4-8 plus the jogging trail around the cul-de -sac from building #28 around to #32. Nesting season (Jan. to June) requires some privacy for these birds. The adults will abandon their young if disturbance occurs. The exercising stations, cabana, jogging trail, and observation points can easily be moved to accommidate the requirements of these birds. Blue heron need nesting, and perching trees. The area around a colony needs to accommidate space for the adults to watch their young in the rookery trees from perching trees.Blue heron colonize to raise their young. In Jan. and Feb . there is active nest building. Feb. and March bring about mating rituals and mating. March through May their young develop and about June 1 the young begin to fly, reference C. Colony #2 is located between the pond and bldg. #29. This colony has grown to 4 to 5 nests since 1983. It will not survive the closeness of bldg #29, 31 or #32. I would think that with some additional cost these bldgs could be moved to the other side of the pond near bldgs #20, #21, and #19 or just moved way back towards Naches Ave. and underground parking installed. This would also benefit colony #3, which houses about 10 15 nests. This colony too will probaly abandon the area without bldgs #28, #29, #31, #32 and the jogging trail removed or moved back. Also the #6-#8 extra features need to be removed and other more suitable locations found. Colony #3 is a young colony growing at a tremendous rate. One or two nests in 1983 has grown to at least 10 to 15 since. The area around colonies #2 and #3 from the south side of bldg #28 to the south side of bldg #32 needs a much larger buffer between the shoreline and any human activity. The back of the bldgs is the best side to be facing the pond but these bldgs need to be moved 300 ft. + back away from the pond, reference D. Some ideas the developer may consider are moving these bldgs back towards Naches Ave with underground parking. Possible moving one or two bldgs to the other side of the pond would be another alternative. After talking to Ivan Lines, a wildlife biologist involved with this area a long time, he proposed the following idea. Taking part of the "Riparian Forest Preserve" as depicted by the enclosed copy from The Blackriver Corporate Park brochure and moving the most northern part to add buffer to the cul-de-sac area. Then the plan can be changed to accomidate more bldg space on that side of the pond. I have tried to depict this change with the overlay enclosed. I also have some concerns about the street run-off and its effect on the water quality in the P-1 Pond. Will proper oil seperators and filters in storm drains be used and who will maintain them? Page 3 Possible it, would be in the City's and the public' s interest to issue a bond to ensure that the developer not disturb the Riparian Preserve and other non-disturbed areas. The bond would need to be enough to replace potential destruction. A path has already been bulldozed through around the cul-de-sac at or within the pond's exsisting 50 ft. bufer zone. A very serious concern is not allowing any construction or excessive people disturbance during the nesting season (Jan. to June) . Usually most construction doesn' t start until May so one month is not that long to avoid abandonment of their young. An EIS Checklist was prepared by Alterra Corp. with no mention of the herons on site. Possible a more recent checklist exsists that I could not find. I want to acknowledge and commend the developer and landscape designer on a beautiful plan for developement. I really think that a little more planning and a few design changes can retain the beauty that the developer wants and retain the thriving great blue heron rookeries. I want to offer my assistance to The City of Renton and The Mitchell + Nelson Group in any way regarding on the site inventories, design or other related matters. Sincerely Yours, Nam , Mary M. nderson References: A,B,C: Cornell University • Laboratory of Ornithology Co-op Research Group D:Wa. State Dept. of Game recommends a 660 ft. arc around this cul-de-sac. • r7��4- 22 SC • MArcH Ne , 7 W32 3d • z9 NAc HES AVE.S.W • too fv Pa�i�aN oRESTRESERv@ 6# 'rZ8 , -(6\Ift ' i.' d� i'-1 PaN� iCiV ® i(4 8 � V O rz FE '"%n...*".."44%.,i) ., #ZI . —SoGG INS TRIM. LI - - < a 1 it • 5los-kiNefi1/4 il CoRpolkoi-e. Po.ikK S PRING BRooK 'A-n CREEK ' , \I .•4 r f__:_ , • . .,_, 0, 1:.; t A§. , .'!v 101966 - . ,�Q 1 • • t e`' ' .; . 14.0 MuT,N L$NE • /k(t�A Tv sty A.--itaill) e'pN.r INT° 4 FOR•e.s 1T S AREA . PR2 E2�f� To TAK E ola.r ' of•RIPA iAN s 1. FDRL'Sr PRE5e2J'E . a 40,1 AREAS SttOlM.P E QAct1. . • IN , 561 .FT. • • • ! - k • J Gti.. S ii+ii • 1:;12)v 1 01986 C o ?oroJre � _ ol., ,-, VJ1LC11 �:v1�111tl�1 L._ ..'.. „ ",fir November 8,1986 • Jeanette McKeague Acting Zoning Administrates r..'Ire v, 'r r .a Environmental Review Committee 7? D 11 1,'17 r 5 FT') Li, City of Renton Building and Zoning Department '__ I m s 200 Mill Ave. South �� ;r rIOU Renton, WA 98055 Regarding : Blackriver Corporate Park Dear Jeanette McKeague: This letter is in response to the Blackriver Corporate Park's future development plans surrounding the Soil Conservation Service's flood storage and wildlife habitat project on the Black River.This proposed project is adjacent to the unique Black River Forest, an important wetland remaining in the Green River Valley. In addition,this valuable wetland is an important nesting site for several Great Blue Herons, a species listed as a proposed monitor species by the Washington Department of Game. The Rainier Audubon Society is very concerned about the proposed development in this area. We are opposed to the present proposed development as shown in their master plan concept for the following reasons: 1) Valuable wetlands would be lost. 2) A designated 50 foot buffer from the shoreline does not provide adequate protection for nesting great blue herons. In 1981,the City of Renton issued a wetlands study. This report recognised this site as the most important wetland in the study area, yet the City allowed a preliminary permit to develop 77% of the riparian forest. "Wetlands are vital areas that constitute a productive and valuable public resource,the unnecessary alteration or destruction of which should be discourged as contary to the public interest" U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 33 CFR 320.4 (b) (1). A Section 404 Permit is required from the Corps for any fill in wetlands such as this one. The proposed development calls for a 50 foot setback from the top of the Black River Channel's bank. The shoreline is protected by the Shoreline Management Act to all lands within 200 feet from either side of the Black River Channel and includes all associated wetlands. Under the Shoreline Management Act, the Washington Department of Ecology and the City of Renton have jurisdiction over all substantial developments occurring along the shoreline. As stated in the final EIS on the project in 1981 , "site development permit can be conditioned upon preservation of vegetative buffers adjoining the Black River Channel". It is appropriate in this situation to apply the maximum shoreline distance in order to protect the associated wetlands as required by the Shoreline Management Act. Numerous wildlife species are using this pond created by the SCS. The pond is enhanced by the existing riparian forest,the last remaining example of a climax forest in the lower Green River Valley. Because of the uniqueness of the area,the great blue herons are nesting here in greater and greater numbers. Up to nine nests have been indentified on one of the SCS's created islands. This nesting colony needs to be protected. In addition, numerous species of waterfowl are present during migration periods. Several types of ducks are known to nest in the pond. Numerous other species of wildlife are present including hawks, owls, shorebirds, and songbirds. This pond needs protection by providing adaquate buffer widths of 200 feet. It is felt that the City of Renton is not requiring adequate protection for the loss of prime wetlands and wildlife habitat, including a great blue heron rookery. It is time the City of Renton adopt a policy to protect these wetlands. All the jurisdictions surrounding the City of Renton, such as Seattle, Bellevue, Kent, and King County would provide protection of this wetland. I am directing a copy of this letter to both the Washington Department of Ecology and the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers to make these agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands resources aware of the issues at this site. I hope you choose to respond to these comments by providing additional protection to these valuable wetlands and heron nesting area. Thankyou for your time. Sincerely, Tina Miller Wetlands Biologist Conservation Chairman Rainier Audubon 27203 II4th S.E. Kent, WA 98031 cc:Mary Burg, Ecology Sam Casne,Corps a o {m �, or: ,c h i r+eT "'1 I ) • Y.!) ''I 1 ) 1 01986 f } v i )) 11 g� The Environmental Review Committee BUILCii JG/ ONINGBLItt'T. City of Renton 3 Subject: The Black River Corporate Park, 405 Business Park. Committee Members, I have some environmental concerns about The Black River Corporate Park I want to share with you. Hopefully these concerns will result in "on the ground" improvements through actions by you and First West. Due to the nature of my work I have been at the development site and have observed the total environment there for four consecutive years, 1983-1986. I know specifically about the bad erosion areas, the landscaping, habitat, wildlife, and various environmental concerns. I feel that parts of the plans for the development will be very destructive to the exsisting blue heron rookeries in the area. I feel quite sure that it is in the public's interest to preserve these rookeries as the top priority for this area. Blue heron are losing habitat at an increasing rate in the King County area, reference A. ' It is a protected species by both the federal "Migratory Bird Treaty Act" and various state RCW's and WAX. These act's require that nests not be disturbed, nest trees not cut down, and colonies protected. In 1979 The Green River Technical Committee voted to support The City of Renton in the secondary purpose of the P-1 Pond as wetland and wildlife enhancement. Since construction in 1983 the blue heron have taken a real liking to this area. Last spring I counted 23 heron at the area. This is a tremondous resource for The City of Renton to preserve. In 1983 during pond construction only 4 heron lived here in 2 colonies. There are 3 colonies in this area now. Colony #one as shown on enclosed map has been there since 1983. It is a small (1 family) colony. The Blackriver Corporate Park Plan depicts an exercise station at or very near the base of these two or three trees. There is also a jogging trail which runs between these trees and the pond, about 50 ft. inland from the pond. Both of these should be moved or this rookery will probaly be abandoned. The building #36 is very close to the nest -also, it would be desirable if it could be moved back towards Naches Ave and native vegetation left. There are two other colonies which are of great concern not only because of their size, but the potential for permanent colonies to be established here. In King County there are only 6 colonies recorded. These 3 are being recorded this year to total about 9 in the county, reference B. A biologist from Wa. Conservation Fisheries Corp. thought these 3 colonies could be supporting nesting for a large part of the county's heron population. • Page 2 Blue heron are very tolerant of people during their non-nesting season (July to Dec. ) . The various public cabana, exercise stations, and jogging trails are probaly not a threat during non-nesting times. During nesting season they will not tolerate these repeated human disturbances. These intrusive areas are marked 4-8 plus the jogging trail around the cul-de -sac from building #28 around to #32. Nesting season (Jan. to June) requires some privacy for these birds. The adults will abandon their young if disturbance occurs. The exercising stations, cabana, jogging trail, and observation points can easily be moved to accommidate the requirements of these birds. Blue heron need nesting, and perching trees. The area around a colony needs to accommidate space for the adults to watch their young in the rookery trees from perching trees.Blue heron colonize to raise their young. In Jan. and Feb. there is active nest building. Feb. and March bring about mating rituals and mating. March through May their young develop and about June 1 the young begin to fly, reference C. Colony #2 is located between the pond and bldg. #29. This colony has grown to 4 to 5 nests since 1983. It will not survive the closeness of bldg #29, 31 or #32. I would think that with some additional cost these bldgs could be moved to the other side of the pond near bldgs #20, #21, and #19 or just moved way back towards Naches Ave. and underground parking installed. This would also benefit colony #3, which houses about 10 15 nests. This colony too will probaly abandon the area without bldgs #28,#29, #31,#32 and the jogging trail removed or moved back. Also the #6-#8 extra features need to be removed and other more suitable locations found. Colony #3 is a young colony growing at a tremendous rate. One or two nests in 1983 has grown to at least 10 to 15 since. The area around colonies #2 and #3 from the south side of bldg #28 to the south side of bldg #32 needs a much larger buffer between the shoreline and any human activity. The back of the bldgs is the best side to be facing the pond but these bldgs need to be moved 300 ft.+ back away from the pond,reference D. Some ideas the developer may consider are moving these bldgs back towards Neches Ave with underground parking. Possible moving one or two bldgs to the other side of the pond would be another alternative. After talking to Ivan Lines, a wildlife biologist involved with this area a long time, he proposed the following idea. Taking part of the "Riparian Forest Preserve" as depicted by the enclosed copy from The Blackriver Corporate Park brochure and moving the most northern part to add buffer to the cul-de-sac area. Then the plan can be changed to accomidate more bldg space on that side of the pond. I have tried to depict this change with the overlay enclosed. I also have some concerns about the street run-off and its effect on the water quality in the P-1 Pond. Will proper oil seperators and filters in storm drains be used and who will maintain them? • • Page 3 Possible it would be in the City's and the public's interest to issue a bond to ensure that the developer not disturb the Riparian Preserve and other non-disturbed areas. The bond would need to be enough to replace potential destruction. A path has already been bulldozed through around the cul-de-sac at or within the pond's exsisting 50 ft. bufer zone. A very serious concern is not allowing any construction or excessive people disturbance during the nesting season (Jan. to June) . Usually most construction doesn' t start until May so one month is not that long to avoid abandonment of their young. An EIS Checklist was prepared by Alterra Corp. with no mention of the herons on site. Possible a more recent checklist exsists that I could not find. I want to acknowledge and commend the developer and landscape designer on a beautiful plan for developement. I really think that a little more planning and a few design changes can retain the beauty that the developer wants and retain the thriving great blue heron rookeries. I want to offer my assistance to The City of Renton and The Mitchell + Nelson Group in any way regarding on the site inventories, design or other related matters. Sincerely Yours, Mary M. nderson References: A,B,C:Cornell University • Laboratory of Ornithology Co-op Research Group D:Wa. State Dept. of Game recommends a 660 ft. arc around this cul-de-sac. MftrGH wNa liSd giAi i 29 N ACHES Ale SW. - P Ag.1 NV lit Fo REST o 4 PRESERVE 6 *03 •4,'( Lys P-1 POND V0 II Th'"---.......„ lif06%-if"\ f""'5000 I N G- - ..; • L CpR FOR o e. Po. x . \ . , i , SPRING BRoo1c CREEK S > K. \Ili . . ,.. .. .ro lir :ti •i - I i. • .. : On F t ?ii i :,., - -Ft '-:7 •-1 • M4T40 LINE ray. a� AREA To 1 t�KT INhD : , 41.41111)- Fozz.s r WA � PR2 sER�lE :: To TAKE OK.r of As PAAIAN V .y ARMS Stiou4.Vp eQ �� IP . SQ.FT. k: . Y r ` I :;. I . 'JA'pF' „;r le`9 6 . _ �. f:7 t =1 '^ 11 .t: :. -_ 911LC1443/-Lcr'stiu" C_ n. ' fir. I 11//1//8,6 I! 1.F 1" i i.":1 I r.' Environmental Review Committee NOV 5 U f l City of Renton +, �� 200 Mill Street Renton, Wa. 98055 '= ' '' pi• In the process of conducting research on Great Blue Heron colonies in seven counties of Washington State for the Cooperative Research Group, Lab gyratory of Ornithology, Cornell University and for the Department , of�5 n-gam�e7y was advised of the colony in your city at the u l>1 ,Can6e.M ya �pbfids,. It is my understanding that substantial develosapment will occur here. Nests were noted in one large cottonwood tree on an island. It is believed that other nests exist near this tree, namely in the row of tall cottonwoods west and east. .This deduction was made by observing Heron flying to the interior of these trees. I have estimated, therefore, a colony of possibly 20 nests. It is respectfully requested that the following factors be given consideration before a master site plan approval (1) In a 2,235 square mile radius of King County there are, to my knowledge, only nine Heron colonies including Renton's. We refer to "sideways movements" as four long-established colonies have been abandoned due to development and the Heron seek other nesting sites. (2) The loss of Renton Marsh and wetlands in King County have con- tributed substantially in,-stressing Heron as they seek ever-decreasing habitat. I (3) Great Blue Heron feed not only fish from streams and ponds or lakes, but upon snakes, lizards, frogs and other food sources within wetlands. • (4) Great Blue Heron behavior in Washington state is as follows: (a) Nest repair-nest building, December-January (b) Mating and egg laying, February-March (c) Incubatiion, March-April (d) Brooding, May (e) Fledging, early June (f) Human intrusion, i.e. , too close to the nests, construction, loud radios, pounding, may cause abandonment of the eggs or young. (g) Fledged Heron remain near the nests for approximately one month - or into July. Thereafter they increase their hunting territory. (h) Adult Heron travel from approximately July through October, joing other Heron sometimes east of the Cascades, south to Oregon or north to Padilla Bay. Some remain all year long near the nest sites. (i) Beginning November-December more Heron become visible as Murphy - Heron - 2 adults return to guard their colonies either at the sites or in roosting trees nearby. (j ) The mating ceremony takes place at the nests, consisting of wing- movements by the male and touching and rubbing of necks in duo. Ardeas herodius is a Concern species in Washington State. These birds of the Pleistocene are as much a part of our natural heritage as Mt. Rainier and it is my considered thought that they must be recognized in this way. There is another problem of equal concern. It has been reported* that large groups of migratory birds seek these ponds for food and rest during spring migration. Migratory birds are protected in this instance by both Federal Migratory Acts (since the ponds are a Federal project) and by Washington State Statute RCW 77.16.120. Protection here would mean in order to rest, feed and/or nest withouth harm. An assessment will be made of these migrating species in March-April, 1987, and a list will be presented to you. It is respectfully recommended that No Hunting signs be posted by the property owner(s) , particularly during water-fowl hunting season, usually October-January. Shooting has been reported here, and some shotgun casings were noted during my first visit to the site in early October, 1986. Marty,Murphy Member Cooperative Research Group 229 210th Pl. N.E. Laboratory of Ornithology Redmond, Wa. 98052 Cornell University 392-1455 V //7/P FIRST CITY EQUITIES (BLACK RIVER CORP. PARK) 1. Applicants have applied for three items: 1) site plan approval of the infra-structure of the Black River Office Park; 2) shoreline development permit application to allow development within 200 feet of •Springbrook Creek; and 3) a variance to allow an off-premise sign and to allow signage within 20 feet of the property line. 2. Although the applicants have identified the infra-structure component has been the first part of a phase master development "with controlled and related parameters", there has been no site plan review or approval granted by the City for this "master plan". Indeed, the applicants are the first to admit that it is purely illustrative in nature and is no way intended to be binding from their standpoint. 3. The Office Park District zoning, Section 4-718: (c) Site Plan Approval states: "Site plan approval shall be required for all developments within the 0-P Zone.", and "Each building or other development permit issued shall be in conformance with the approved site plan". 4. For projects having over one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet of gross floor area in the M-P zone or other zones in the Valley Planning Area or exceeding ten (10) acres in size, a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner shall be required (Section 4-738(c)8, Site Plan Review) . - 5. The subject proposal has a site of + 140 acres and proposes to accommodate more than 800,000 square feet of development. 6. "Purpose_ and Intent" of the Site Plan Review Section clearly states that the purpose of site plan approval is to "assure that the site plan of proposed uses is compatible with existing and potential uses and complies with plans, policies and regulations of the City of Renton. In addition, this section states that site plan elements subject to review shall include (but not be limited to) : site layout; building orientation; pedestrian and vehicular access; signage; landscaping; natural features of the site; screening and buffering; parking and loading arrangements; and illumination. 7. Since there is no "approved• site plan" for this project, it is, difficult to see how permits can be issued for major infra-structural improvements (roads, • trails, nature viewing areas, signs, etc. at this time and meet, the spirit of Title IV, Building Regulations. 8. The Hearing Examiner should_ be requested to schedule a public hearing pursuant. to Section 4-738(c)8. at the earliest possible date to consider the applicants site plan application. • STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. That any elements of the infra-structure component'requiring development or building permits be deferred ' pending Hearing Examiner approval of the applicants site plan. 2.. That the Committee proceed with making a- threshold determination of Non-significance ' Mitigated for the .proposed,infra-structural elements. 3. That traffic mitigation measures be tied to actual development_proposals where traffic impacts' can be ascertained. , 4. That the ' Committee recommend that Section. 4-738,, ' Site • Plan Review, be amended to allow '"preliminary ' site, plan approval" of major development's that would focus less ,on actual building layouts and more on levels of .development by use, 'degree of aminity and open space to be provided, etc. so that overall levels of impact' can be assessed and' addressed. . Such a provision, would allow many of .the 'issues raised by:.•this. application to address 'prior to actual building permits being requested.' ' • F rat I if� F�� t•',1 l;f ;1 a1) .: .! NOV101986 ,_-) ; The Environmental Review Committee 1 -8�6 City of Renton BUILDING/c NII\iv & I. Subject: The Black River Corporate Park, 405 Business Park. Committee Members , I have some environmental concerns about The Black River Corporate Park I want to share with you. Hopefully these concerns will result in "on the ground" improvements through actions by you and First West . Due to the nature of my work I •have been at the development site and have observed the total environment there for four consecutive years , 1983-1986. I know specifically about the bad erosion areas , the landscaping, habitat , wildlife, and various environmental concerns . I feel t'hat 'parts of the plans for the development will be very destructive to the exsisting blue heron rookeries in the area. I feel quite sure that it is in the public' s interest to preserve these rookeries as the top priority for this area. Blue heron are losing habitat at an increasing rate in the King County area, reference A. It .is a protected species by both the federal "Migratory Bird Treaty Act" and various state RCW' s and WAX. These act ' s require that nests not be disturbed, nest trees not cut down, and colonies protected. In 1979 The Green River Technical Committee voted to support The City of Renton in the secondary purpose of the P-1 Pond as wetland and wildlife enhancement . Since construction in 1983 the blue heron have taken a real liking to this area. Last spring I counted 23 heron at the area. This is a tremondous resource for The City of Renton to preserve. In 1983 during pond construction only 4 heron lived here in 2 colonies. There are 3 colonies in this area now. Colony #one as shown on enclosed map has been there since 1983. It is a small (1 family) colony. The Blackriver Corporate Park Plan depicts an exercise station at or very near the base of these two or three trees .. There is also a jogging trail which runs between these trees and the pond, about 50 ft. inland from the pond. Both of these should be moved or this rookery will probaly be abandoned. The building #36 is very close to the nest -also, it would be desirable if it could be moved back towards Naches Ave and native vegetation left . There are two other colonies which are of great concern not only because of their size, but the potential for permanent colonies to be established here. In King County there are only 6 colonies recorded. These 3 are being recorded this year to total about 9 in the county, reference B. A biologist from Wa. Conservation Fisheries Corp. thought these 3 colonies could be supporting nesting for a large part of the county' s heron population. 4 Page 2 Blue heron are very tolerant of people during their non-nesting season (July to Dec. ) . The various public cabana, exercise stations, and jogging trails are probaly not a threat during non-nesting times . During nesting season they will not tolerate these repeated human disturbances. These intrusive areas are marked 4-8 plus the jogging trail around the cul-de -sac from building #28 around to #32. Nesting season (Jan. to June) requires some privacy for these birds. The adults will abandon their young if disturbance occurs. The exercising stations, cabana, jogging trail, and observation points can easily be moved to accommidate the requirements of these birds . Blue heron ne d nesting, and perching trees. The area around a colony needs to accommWdate space for the adults to watch their young in the rookery trees from perching trees . Blue heron colonize to raise their young. In Jan. and Feb. there is active nest building. Feb. and March bring about mating rituals and mating. March through May their young develop and about June 1 the young begin to fly, reference C. Colony #2 is located between the pond and bldg. #29. This colony has grown to 4 to 5 nests since 1983 . It will not survive the closeness of bldg #29, 31 or #32. I would think that with some additional cost these , bldgs could be moved to the other side of the 'pond near bldgs #20 , #21 , and #19 or just moved way back towards Naches Ave. and underground parking installed. This would also benefit colony #3 , which houses about 10-15 nests . This colony too will proba y abandon the area without bldgs #28, #29, #31 , #32 and the jogging trail removed or moved back. Also the #6-#8 extra features need to be removed and other more suitable locations found. Colony #3 is a young colony growing at a tremendous rate. One or two nests in 1983 has grown to at least 10 to 15 since. The area around colonies #2 and #3 from the south side of bldg #28 to the south side of bldg #32 needs a much larger buffer between the shoreline and any human activity. The back of the bldgs is the best side to be facing the pond but these bldgs need to be moved 300 ft . + back away from the pond, reference D. Some ideas the developer may consider are moving these bldgs back towards Naches Ave with underground parking. Possible moving one or two bldgs to the other side of the pond would be another alternative. After talking to Ivan Lines , a wildlife biologist involved with this area a long time, he proposed the following idea. " Taking part of the "Riparian 1 Forest Preserve" as depicted by the enclosed copy from The Blackriver Corporate Park brochure and moving the most northern part to add buffer to the cul-de-sac area. Then the plan can be changed to accomidate more bldg space on that side of the pond. I have tried to depict this change with the overlay enclosed. I also have some concerns about the street run-off and its effect on the water quality in the P-1 Pond. Will proper oil seperators and filters in storm drains be used and who will maintain them? ' Page 3 Possible it would be in the City' s and the public' s interest to issue a bond to ensure that the developer not disturb the Riparian Preserve and other non-disturbed areas. The bond would need to be enough to replace potential destruction. A path has already been bulldozed through around the cul-de-sac at or within the pond' s exsisting 50 ft . bufer zone. A very serious concern is not allowing any construction or excessive people disturbance during the nesting season (Jan. to June) . Usually most construction doesn' t start until May so one month is not that long to avoid abandonment of their young. An EIS Checklist was prepared by Alterra Corp. with no mention of the herons on site. Possible a more recent checklist exsists that I could not find. I want to acknowledge and commend the developer and landscape designer , on a beautiful plan for developement . I really think that a little more planning and a few design changes can retain the beauty that the developer wants and retain the thriving great blue heron rookeries . I want to offer my assistance to The City of Renton and The Mitchell + Nelson Group in any way regarding on the site inventories , design or other related matters. Sincerely Yours , MOLA, \I\C\ A -4)S, L)°\''' Mary M.-Anderson References : A,B,C: Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology Co-op Research Group D:Wa. State Dept. of Game recommends a 660 ft. arc around this cul-de-sac. • • • . 'a+roJoc� 21.0D. -- - 996LO ALLi1 • • • • • • '1:_1 b�- N T ' _ ' ,• .1� j .Q-i,1ON5 •. S '32134 • . - :3J`?1532ld., 5.�?JOj • .Nk1+?1-Vd'y.•-do . . . • 7T?13s �d . „ .}/3?J}f •. . • . ,� :: -, -1s"3wa3 • ; _ cvci+?J'd d+� ' ssIpp .. ?Nil NasoW ; i` _ . . �; a • , -„t i,',r'=.,g 1:rv`? ,Jn .1t•,_ - r �' •- f _ _ • ' %Oh i /M.N. n)G 32 43i NO fie 29 NACNES NE.S.W• R Po?El PN ST t p(ZESERVE. 6 *28 "— -16-Aiti.00 �j F-1 POND OO .... ...... )4 oil" 8 V V . ..s...... OOt#ZI 4—SoGG INS T R R 1 t. ---k. / ^.---- .(*J. OAH s „9 C rri 510.c.ki,,jet� CoRFoRa`-e_ PARK SPRING BRooK CREEK 1 f 1 4 I I • ,,.:. ' • 1 1 . I , 1 i 1 , .,fr•' $ A 1 , tf q 1 :o ff ; ) i ; I 4 f ! i r - ,,• , i J ., , ,:r 4.• C-err t". e % I il - -- ..- Zi. ,;„,' 'vv-",,,, ;, f! I y.. 1 441 A,ir••• , ,, '1 ,.;,',...,.; • . . ki '")t f I V;;# el!" i, 1i . I e• e, i ,-,-• ,„,..e.,,,,%„---,,,... . ... .. . ,...- .....7...„,-..,.:.$ • .„ . ? - .. ? •- I • f 1,-, -..: ..,,.... v p t . 4* f t . ..0 . - .. ; •, .,;-• -,' • •,.. . , i , -• .. .I i i • It t . f i .,.....• ... ..I , • .<..,' t. , -, . ,,,,..••^0 ' , - )1-,----4.•;', ',... 4 1 --.... ..e.'"'' • "'"' •,,,.. ' " 4 :: • ,',• ''• . , t• ..f,% i •-' .n, 4. . r'' .4 i 4,•".'..:\ •',,..40 ' ". ' 4. ' e . f f .. ... . , ...,„' • °,. , -.. ..-," 'I4 . 4A.....).s..„...... .. ••••r ,,,..,_ .‘"4.4e ' ":. •••. .", ; • Ili. *, •.i L" — —... • '.., 1/4N. ' — , t " ^• 4,...": (. ..,"..., • . — f . 'I . $ , , . . ........, . ..,. :.. , i ..... -- • t-, .... , , .,..... II ••••.....,;....,,. ".1..' ". 1 4"•' ' • . • 1 '...--...... ,r• . i ..., ....,.. ..., ,,,' .... '''••••...... -' • i A I .., BLACK RIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK Re: Traffic Engineering Review Comments 1 . Implement traffic management plan as stated in the Traffic Impact Analysis for Black River Technology Park. See attached copy of TMP. 2.. Should the intersection of SW 7th Street and Naches warrant a traffic signal before or after completion of the Technology Park, the Developer is required to participate in the cost up to their fair share now estimated to be 67.4 percent as stated in the traffic analysis study. To insure participation of the developer if required, bonding for the estimated cost of the traffic signal should be on file with the City. 3. Off-site improvements are to include but not be limited to the following: a) Street name signs per city standards. b) Stop sign if warranted per MUTCD. c) Street lighting per City standard. 4. Developer to agree to participate in cost of developing Oakesdale Avenue corridor from SW 43rd Street to Sunset Highway along Monster Road & 68th Avenue South. This participation would be through an improvement district. 5. The traffic analysis should include recommendation on how to bring all the listed intersections below F LOS up to a service level D. Service Level Change a) Rainier Ave. S & S Grady Way F to D b) SW 7th Street & Rainier Ave. S F to D c) SW Grady Way & Lind Ave. SW E to D d) SW 7th Street & Lind. Ave. SW A/F to D Left/Thru/Right from Lind F to D 6. The Developer would be required to participate in the cost of the intersection improvements up to the percentage of traffic generated through the intersections. 7. The above intersections must be improved to a service level D before this office will recommend approval of additional development. This may be accomplished through a latecomer's agreement. BLACK RIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK Re: Traffic Engineering Review Comments 1 . Implement traffic management plan as stated in the Traffic Impact Analysis for Black River Technology Park. See attached copy of TMP. 2. Should the intersection of SW 7th Street and Naches warrant a traffic signal before or after completion of the Technology Park, the Developer is required to participate in the cost up to their fair share now estimated to be 67.4 percent as stated in the traffic analysis study. To insure participation of the developer if required, bonding for the estimated cost of the traffic signal should be on file with the City. 3. Off-site improvements are to include but not be limited to the following: a) Street name signs per city standards. b) Stop sign if warranted per MUTCD. c) Street lighting per City standard. 4. Developer to agree to participate in cost of developing Oakesdale Avenue corridor from SW 43rd Street to Sunset Highway along Monster Road & 68th Avenue South. This participation would be through an improvement district. 5. The traffic analysis should include recommendation on how to bring all the listed intersections below F LOS up to a service level D. Service Level Change a) Rainier Ave. S & S Grady Way F to D b) SW 7th Street & Rainier Ave. S F to D c) SW Grady Way & Lind Ave. SW E to D d) SW 7th Street & Lind Ave. SW A/F to D Left/Thru/Right from -Lind F to D 6. The Developer would be required to participate in the cost of the intersection improvements up to the percentage of traffic generated through the intersections. 7. The above intersections must be improved to a service level D before this office will recommend approval of additional development. This may be accomplished through a latecomer' s agreement. BLACK RIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK Re: Traffic Engineering Review Comments • 1 . Implement traffic management plan as stated in the Traffic Impact Analysis for Black River Technology Park. See attached copy of TMP. . . 2. Should the intersection of SW 7th Street and Naches warrant a traffic signal before or after completion of the Technology Park, the Developer el is required to participate in the cost up to their fair share now pot-Al estimated to be 67.4 percent as stated in the traffic analysis study. o go 0 To insure participation of the developer if required, bonding for the l estimated cost of the traffic signal should be on file with the City. /��� ISP et 3. Off-site improvements are to include but not be limited to the following: a) Street name signs per city standards. b) Stop sign if warranted per MUTCD. c) Street lighting per City standard. 4. Developer to agree to participate in cost of developing Oakesdale Avenue corridor from SW 43rd Street to Sunset Highway along Monster Road & 68th Avenue South. This participation would be through an improvement district. 5. The traffic analysis should include recommendation on how to bring all the listed intersections below F LOS up to a service level D. Service Level Change a) Rainier Ave. S E S Grady Way F to D - b) SW 7th Street & Rainier Ave. S F to D • c) SW Grady Way & Lind Ave. SW E to D d) SW 7th Street & Lind Ave. SW A/F to D ' Left/Thru/Right from Lind . F to D 6. The Developer would be required to participate in the cost of the intersection improvements up to the percentage of traffic generated through the intersections. 7.. The above intersections must be improved to a service level 0 before this office will recommend approval of additional development. This may be accomplished through a latecomer's agreement. �� 2,1 /,� F' X 117ZZ =4/6, 93.G( g -� ��--- �— 'sr -e-. t,.r 7'`'� T" ,-�.r o . ) i-0 Y 1- � �—� 1 C k 4 c e G-� rod / ) / � C- '' rxa •p-• S;.{,^rs .1 �'r. ;ir:r.• SJ.: :5"i' wyir•I' _ .aS..: v ,7]ai T; Y:1 T •rr 2;��• } �t� f r •�� 1 C• .' •'f• i S ¢r •,. ,r-�� 'R•-� T f .._ r 6 1 :MEMORANDUM i DATE: October 29, 1986 • � CITY or N T o:.t, ' • F. .. (p s;_ `-� j' i 3 .-.^� TO: Jim Hanson, Building & Zoning �t IIL.. 'i,i(�) k,c; ii \_/ I. IiL FROM: Gary Norris, Traffic Engineering ' OCT 2 91986 SUBJECT: ;: ack River Corporate Park SA-108-86, v-109-86, SM 005-86 • i . ¢ Please be advised o -additional information which should be made part of a the above-referenced application. 1 a Item 2 of the application's attachment: Bonding for the traffic signal at SW 7th Street & Neches is to be $150,000. if after complete occupancy of the project a traffic signal installation does not meet MUTCD signal warrants, the 4 bonding would be released. 1 Bondingbe to provided before a permit is issued. • 1 i Item 8 of the application's attachment: j This is a new item for a latecomer's fee at the following intersections: SW-7th St. .& Hardie .Ave. SW • $2.1.8/trip •generated x 4,722/trips = $10,293.96 - . SW Grady Way & Powell Ave. SW $3.69/trip generated .x 1 ,424/trips = $5,254.56 • The above fees are to be collected before the permit is issued and a copy of the collection provided to this office. The fee collected is for Holvick deRegt Koering's latecomer's agreement with the 'City. . . _ mi.. 7 CEM:ad g i i • DATE: December 15, 1986 g TO: Environmental Review Committee i FROM: Gary Norris, Traffic Engineer i Y' SUBJECT: Black River Technology Park - Traffic Engineering Requirements i 3 Based on the traffic study for the subject development, I recommend the following conditions for a mitigated DNS: 1. The proposed Transportation Management Plan as identified in the traffic study be implemented. 2. All intersections identifed in the traffic report operating at LOS D or I better shall be maintained at their 1986 LOS, i.e. , S.W. 7th and Rainier, S.W. 7th and Hardie, Grady Way and Lind Avenue, Grady Way and Powell I Avenue S.W. , S.W. 7th and Lind. 3. All intersections operating below LOS D shall have improvements identified necessay to bring the intersection to an LOS D. First City Equities shall insure that a mechanism is in place to provide the identified improvements prior to final occupancy. The intersection of Rainier and Grady is the only one within this category. 4. Participation in the projects identified in the traffic report as follows: Est. Project % FCE Total FCE Location Action Cost Participation Cost SW Grady Way- Lint to Rainer Add EB three Lane $ 250,000 7.7 $ 19,250 SW 7th and Lind SW Install signal $ 100,000 • 16.1 $ 16,100 SW 7th and Powell SW Install signal $ 100,000 28.8 $ 28,800 SW 7th and Naches Rd Install signal $ 100,000 100.0 $100,000 Monster Rd/68th Ave S Improve 2 Lane Rd $4,960,000 13.7 $679,520 TOTAL COST TO FCE $843,670 -2- 5. Participation in the latecomers agreements for the traffic signals at SW 7th and Hardie Avenue SW at $2.18/trip x 4722 trips = $10,293.96 SW Grady and Powell Avenue SW at $3.69/trip x 1424 trips = $ 5,254.56 $15,548.52 GN:cb:3321Z . MITIGATION Traffic impacts from the Black River Technology Park are most significant in the immediate vicinity of the project where new os are roadways proposed p p ed to serve .this project and traffic from adjacent new .developments. Traffic oriented ill - east and south from the site will use existing facilities which are currently at or near capacity during peak periods. The purpose. of mitigation for this project is two fold: (1) to. reduce site-generated vehicle trips, and (2) to significantly improve project site access. A transportation management plan for the project will be developed by the project proponent with the aim of reducing vehicle. trips, and a list of improvements to the transportation 111 network are presented which are expected to mitigate project impacts. Transportation Management Plan I The developer is committed to working with Metro Transit and Commuter Pool to develop a transportation management plan for the project which will encourage ridesharing and attempt to reduce project vehicle trips. The trans- it' management plan (or TMP) may consist of any or all of the following • items: 111 • Work with METRO to establish a new bus route or modify an existing bus route topass through g the project. . . . . • . If bus service is modified to be convenient, encourage employers to consider transit pass subsidies as a company or office/tech park - - k benefit. • - • First City Development Corp. will provide a contact person for• the office/tech park as a liaison between Metro and the tenants.. • I First City Development Corp. agrees to work with Metro to determine the viability of vanpools financed in order to reduce'the project vehicle trip generation. -. _. __ _ • Office park management should advise tenants •and their employees of the advantages of fleet ride, vanpool and carpool programs through a package of information provided at initial occupancy for each tenant, and through periodic promotional displays within the leasing office. 11 1 . -24- . . Ilit jillo As much as practical, office park management should encourage employers to initiate a flextime work schedule so peak period traffic can be Id distributed more evenly over the 3:30 PM to 5:30 PM peak period. • Notification of employer occu occupancy dates and resulting P Y estimated employee numbers on an ongoing basis. Transportation Network Improvements The construction of Oakesdale Avenue from Grady Way to Monster Road will provide access to the Black River Technology Park. However, this single roadway is not enough to provide good access to the project from any direction. ;:. Peak period congestion along Rainier Avenue to the east of the site is ' an :`. - obstacle for traffic which is difficult to remove, as the intersections are 1111 currently designed near the maximum in lane configuration and operation. Improvements in the access network must then come from another source or focus imil RAI on another area. Oakesdale Avenue Corridor. It is proposed to construct Oakesdale Avenue, . I ... from SW 43rd to Sunset Highway (SR 900) (along Monster Road and 68th Avenue S), although scheduled construction is from SW 16th to Monster Road. Approxi mately 10 percent of Black River traffic is estimated to use Monster Road and 68th Avenue S to access Sunset which, when added to Valley 405 Business Park traffic on the route and current traffic, would increase daily traffic on 68th Avenue S from 800 trips in 1984 to approximately 10,180 trips in 1995. Traffic from the Black River development will represent approximately 14 percent of '� the total in 1995. The existing two-lane minimal design facility should be improved to a two-lane facility with shoulders and 11-12 foot lanes. The Emil IIII project proponent will agree to participate in an improvement district to construct the extension of Oakesdale to the Sunset Highway. Naches Avenue Design. Naches Avenue, the proposed on-site roadway serving IIIBlack River, will be constructed initially as a cul-de-sac, to be extended the full length to 0akesdale/Monster Roads as the Black River development progresses. ilThe length of cul-de-sac which would provide a single access to Black River (aside from Powell Avenue to building 24) with acceptable operation was analyzed. 1. Naches Road will operate satisfactorily as a cul-de-sac with STOP control at 7th Street through the construction and occupation of Building 25 in 1987. IIISubsequently, an all-way STOP will be required at 7th and Naches to permit la -25- left-turning traffic to exit the Black River development. By 1989, under the proposed build-out scheme, a traffic signal may be warranted at this intersec- IIIItion. The project proponent agrees to pay their proportionate share for traffic control at this intersection. Network Improvements. The following is a list' of problem areas within the project study area which need to be addressed on a subarea basis. Congestion d , at many locations in Renton is a function of area growth, new developments and bypass or thru traffic, therefore funding for these projects should be shared 11 ! among those groups involved. ::'.1;:;, Percent 4, ,. Project Location Action Traffic `F:;t, Grady Way @ Lind Avenue Add third eastbound thru lane 7.7 to Rainier SW 7th @ Lind Avenue Install signal 16.1 - SW 7th @ Powell Avenue 4-way STOP, as left turns from 28.8 ..;. Powell become intolerable. Install signal when warranted. Lip. !IIISW 7th @ Naches Road Install signal 67.4 Monster Road/68th Avenue S Improve 2-lane roadway 13.7 igli .. - - :. In • ill .. U 11 -26- 11/1/86 Environmental Review Committee NOV F. 1986 City of Renton W 200 Mill Street Renton, Wa. 98055 In the process of conducting research on Great Blue Heron colonies in seven counties of Washington State for the Cooperative Research Group, Laboratory of Ornithology, Cornell University and for the Department of won-game was advised of the colony in your city at the Soil Conser- vation ponds. It is my understanding that substantial develoipment will occur here. Nests were noted in one large cottonwood tree on an island. It is believed that other nests exist near this tree, namely in the row of tall cottonwoods west and east. This deduction was made by observing Heron flying to the interior of these trees. I have estimated, therefore, a colony of possibly 20 nests. It is respectfully requested that the following factors be given consideration before a master site plan approval (1) In a 2,235 square mile radius of King County there are, to my knowledge, only nine Heron colonies including Renton's. We refer to "sideways movements" as four long-established colonies have been abandoned due to development and the Heron seek other nesting sites. (2) The loss of Renton Marsh and wetlands in King County have con- tributed substantially in stressing Heron as they seek ever-decreasing habitat. (3) Great Blue Heron feed not only fish from streams and ponds or lakes, but upon snakes, lizards, frogs and other food sources within wetlands. (4) Great Blue Heron behavior in Washington state is as follows: (a) Nest repair-nest building, December-January (b) Mating and egg laying, February-March (c) Incubatiion, March-April (d) Brooding, May (e) Fledging, early June (f) Human intrusion, i.e. , too close to the nests, construction, loud radios, pounding, may cause abandonment of the eggs or young. (g) Fledged Heron remain near the nests for approximately one month - or into July. Thereafter they increase their hunting territory. (h) Adult Heron travel from approximately July through October, joing other Heron sometimes east of the Cascades, south to Oregon or north to Padilla Bay. Some remain all year long near the nest sites. (i) Beginning November-December more Heron become visible as Murphy - Heron - 2 adults return to guard their colonies either at the sites or in roosting trees nearby. (j ) The mating ceremony takes place at the nests, consisting of wing- movements by the male and touching and rubbing of necks in duo. Ardeas herodius is a Concern species in Washington State. These birds of the Pleistocene are as much a part of our natural heritage as Mt. Rainier and it is my considered thought that they must be recognized in this way. There is another problem of equal concern. It has been reportede that large groups of migratory birds seek these ponds for food and rest during spring migration. Migratory birds are protected in this instance by both Federal Migratory Acts (since the ponds are a Federal project) and by Washington State Statute RCW 77.16.120. Protection here would mean in order to rest, feed and/or nest withouth harm. An assessment will be made of these migrating species in March-April, 1987, and a list will be presented to you. It is respectfully recommended that No Hunting signs be posted by the property owner(s) , particularly during water-fowl hunting season, usually October-January. Shooting has been reported here, and some shotgun casings were noted during my first visit to the site in early October, 1986. Marty,Murphy Member Cooperative Research Group 229 210th Pl. N.E. Laboratory of Ornithology Redmond, Wa. 98052 Cornell University 392-1455 MEMORANDUM DATE: October 29, 1986 CITY OF S:LNTO:•i ( (� '-1' Il \,i TO: Jim Hanson, Building & Zoning r) 1_ti 19 IC, 1I OCT 2 91gga FROM: Gary Norris, Traffic Engineering SUBJECT: ack River Corporate Park SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM 005-86 Please be advised o --additional information which should be made part of the above-referenced application. Item 2 of the application's attachment: Bonding for the traffic signal at SW 7th Street & Naches is to be $150,000. If after complete occupancy of the project a traffic signal installation does not meet MUTCD signal warrants, the bonding would be released. Bonding to be provided before a permit is issued. Item 8 of the application's attachment: This is a new item for a latecomer' s fee at the following intersections: SW 7th St. & Hardie Ave. SW $2. 18/trip generated x 4,722/trips = $10,293.96 SW Grady Way & Powell Ave. SW $3.69/trip generated x 1 ,424/trips = $5,254.56 The above fees are to be collected before the permit is issued and a copy of the collection provided to this office. The fee collected is for Holvick deRegt Koering' s latecomer' s agreement with the City. CEM:ad FIRSTCITY ,. v„ „, ,: f 'w'(j� n ;; " EQUITIES 111 I._. ?Ct 3 1 1986 October 28, 1986 The Environmental Review Committee Mr. Ron Nelson Mr. Larry Springer Mr. Richard Houghton CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Department of Game BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Gentlemen: In a spirit of cooperation, I have contacted Mr. Bob Zeigler of the Department of Game, per Ron Nelson' s request, and have subsequently provided him with our master plan for the Blackriver Corporate Park project. Since the Department of Game is at least interested in our property at this time and although we understand they do not actually have jurisdiction, I feel it would be prudent to ensure that all SEPA Notices of Action have been properly published in the past. I would appreciate it if the Environmental Review Committee could supply me with copies of published notices of action for all previous approvals on the Valley 405 and Blackriver properties. Although I am wanting to cooperate with the Department of Game, I am hoping that my future project approvals will not be conditioned upon Department of Game requirements. We feel our company and the previous owners of the Black River property have given the Department of Game adequate opportunity to assess the impacts and to establish those conditions in the past, not the least of which mitigation was accomplished through our preserving the Riparian Forest, deeding land for the P-1 channel and the 17 acre retention pond to accommodate storm water in the valley. Those three issues alone provide considerable mitigation for wildlife habitat and we feel should sufice as far as formal conditions are concerned. There are beautiful trees 800 Fifth Avenue Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments Date ‘ te * OTO: Jim Hanson Jerry Lind _ Ken Bindara Pat Bill Evans Dee Brent Richards Jeanette Roger Blaylock FROM: RONALD G. NELSON SUBJECT: Review and report back See me Route and return Prepare response for my signature Take appropriate action Prepare special report Set up meeting For your information File P � • I Environments! Committee October 28, 1986 Page Two on the Blackriver site, which First City Equities is hoping to save and, inlfact, which we are designing around wherever possible at this time. But I would like the certainty of knowing thatlit is not mandatory that I preserve additional trees beyondl' the many that are being preserved by virtue of the Riparian Forest, easement areas and a number of preserved areas spotted onsite. Please give me a call to discuss this issue should you have any questions orlconcerns. Warm regards', FIRST CITY EIQUITIE d Barbara E. Moss Director of 'Planning BEM:bc cc: David Schuman Greg Byer Royce Berg Jeffery +Leppo aj Il { I► Ia, 1,T1 BUILDING & ZONING PA• MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET (if RENTON ECF - 090 _ 86 OCT 13 1986 APPLICATION NO(S) ; SA-108-86, V-109-86; SM-005-86 POLICY tRiFI eQI1ApUT nrp? PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION ; P SIGNAGE J1+LITFL20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORTH_ OF I-4115 AND SJ L. GRAPY MAY. FAST OF OAKFSDAIF AVFNUF S1L AND METRO. SOUTH OF ryBURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO: • Lii PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION Li TRAFFIC ENG, DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : II UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION ® FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ® PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT fl POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Li OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 1Y 5: 00 P.M. ON , REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 46(C `( AVELdiii1 e 7---- APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED 6(TC D PPP-OV64 L , eeyparec, "Mep • e)4.a,-,.. 1A>exe (ol . • g(A64,s4e,/ (7" 4 ,,a A01A d +1.-1.4 - - ,��✓emu^ �✓ur�?� .01-1024;±1, -- • • eLt:t= / .1") sizet4-414e • -7apK.0.-4:4 / Yee • a Fti s --. s ;d6 ,c4„Trle 0-Pe:arvt-P � .w �S FLELi�.c� v►-tGmT PE m kr—( Ehe�"`��'�'"' c `''� (NO SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZEDDATE: J��19 PRESENTATIVE � REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 -y F IIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVI4,9 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: SDV Li c-`uf DATE CIRCULATED: OCTORFR 13, ME COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 Ls i i' Ufr kENTON APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 f 1 3 1986 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATEP PARK. POLICY nEPT BRIEF DESCRIPTIONOF PROJECT: OFPT A�LACKE T Ay �' OV F T N -S R PHASEDTDEopVNNELTTOPMENTGWITHNCONOT10 r�E TA IIftEL T22:ODOTPQRAM TERSSND HOR CrI4EAnFVFIfIPMFNTEFERMII OPAiiOWIAN (IOFFAPRFMTSFIDTD�VANDP`o ALLOWHSiGNAGEFWITH0IN 20RFEETROFFKTHEEPROPERTYVLINENCE LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I=405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, •EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.,94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and .Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: 4 � 4e-,„rat,4 - ci .4 A,�c ,/te-e.1.4277. Akkr-e4 (44,;X.:6 Cal4 tS-etc-1:-(2:4- RECOMMENDATION: El DNS EI MITIGATED DNS Q EIS REVIEWED BY:6:40e f V luvv5orrx TITLE: 2/1 5-a-J- ([4hkuev, DATE: .. _ !/ / ' c = FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 R rON BUILDING & ZONING D ARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET EC F e 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86; SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES ?ROJECT TITLE : .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- OCATION ° PREMISE SIGN AND TO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORTH OF I-4115 AND SiL. GRADY WAY. _FAST OF OAKFSDAI F ALFIIUF la, AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : r-] PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION El TRAFFIC ENG, DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : r] uTILITIES ENG , DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU fl PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT TaB-U-T-ZTXI:N-G & ZONING DEPARTMENT ri POLICE DEPARTMENT ® POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M, ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : fl APPROVED 0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS IJ NOT APPROVED DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVJi SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 2�4EIED 1 N DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 13. 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. PTfArrAKF T': Pt . OV F T N -SR BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OPp CCEEEDTDEEMETWT NGGOO A RE ED RRAATHTES HER EAMINAT E TERI TPlIOWIONTFRFc DNLWHI2OOpFEITN2RVERFKE AND VARIANCE AN nFF-PMTFSTG, ANTOALOSGNAGEWHI 0FETOF THE PROPERTYLNE.LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, •EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants . X. 5) Animals J 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare . 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: Y\4\ N N J/ P R€5 R J bLOc 1 � kJ Pc11,0u NIc 114E 11 RECOMMENDATION: n DNS 0 MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: ‘\.. e..AUA,\ 'T'- ( A.An TITLE: DATE: FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 ' R ,_. ,TON BUILDING & ZONING [ 1ARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • EECF - _Q90 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. • APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED _DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS, SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISE SIGN AND IO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORTH OF I-400 AND S.W_ GRADY WAY, AST OF OAK SDA AV Nl W. AND METRO. SOITH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : El] PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION ri TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG , DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU fl PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT LI BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT ® POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVI ION : ! :(APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ❑ NOT APPROVED !I?� `�((lC 2e�c( COnN. v-(cc��J 10- Lb-�� IL�_ C' 1. !'�t�TIV e 510�b..,Q Z �o v (�l`rtl �-��� �'i9�� lGcl,c�S S�Cac�Cc1 �4 12e G?cn r cf o cs� S l9 It S�U-E- ( �. l V. COO l42 � l�S I•-CA-Lurs cC41 J (L)k141 s , 2 \Y c13o _ `0.C(C�Ck-A o -crSk �t rc���c_ l 9cti-S lM.k41 1�]Q G� ..7F cltCLre,"7, 2 S_ 7t' -. ( Qh TCc X to) �s�w s tc l Zc to w l e ,41e Sul V ocQ ( ,1,(9la.0 S�C'ee Z. ebt,sufi,uav- Q lc��,�.c�rvt at,i t.,, ez-h t o a,Se+ S & .::. DATE: J �7 S -- �1 "RE OF DIRECTOR' AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Fnrm 1 FS2 FiFr_I'TON BUILDING & ZONING [. 'ARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 090 86_ APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-8.6 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED J EVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISE S.IDN AND TO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITI-L 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORTH OF I-4O AND S_L�I_ GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO. SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION ® TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ® UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION ® FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Li PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT Li BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT EPOLICE DEPARTMENT ® POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ® OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVI ION : '=;` APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS fl NOT APPROVED 1-4-1-60( Co rat AA c i 10-L b—k6= L4_ C(Z �,- 1. PeCC1 e ► �, zc �� ( )l` t Le i �'u�� �Gc��S SLO(J(Q L YzCQOcr-CCP o S t, �s�-E- �. iv- Coo L. c -- C 1 1/4-CA-UrS cc t o l (v.54 s , 2 CQ� c caCk La_ .occ.(XS vMAcL- a 'lCtre c€ Tcil. &. 7 S�. CC ie 4 cd) �cw ��ck�c� �_c 'to �a6 �je ee G u% a� C lc9 X S r ee± 3. e_ov.3sL.84.e.v• �\A' V QtAd.© %-4-y J o g01A sc+ 5�CS c�tti, Se, ( _- , tR CQ kesC - / DATE: ,0 " - 17 °RE OF DIRECTOR' AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Fnrm 1R2 ,• , • . . . ' . . • . , . , _., . , . , • , .., .....___ . . . . ., . . . ,--- / ',,f•:;v7?-,277/-... ,,.) ',e--V47(.:X.',77z-- - - G., ,,:2-/-C,„-<.i' . -?-3-72-_ -,7,- . /(-9. 7- '',:-2 -;•,7,----- ;=';'--7-v--. (r /,,-?;9/ ' • 't, - ..: . .. ...:•:'...,„ 7-7-r-,z?.-- - ,,-- ,2,-)>-•.:', ' - .. ;:.,7. '.•,' ,,1,2., ---- , .-.-2-.a-r-,--- '?,2722: •-:•-2/2.7-d /./_. V2(.7'1," -------7 ,:t '..•'':'? •':,,if', . :7.' -7-0 . •`r:•.,:!. I,_,-,' z,', //...,;/ ",./f :,: 1;:.4:',P,'''' . f.,', . 27 ?7--- <)'<.'71--X------ •';- , -4-17' 'e-71. --,,./1--V-i07 4.,./.22-0,---Y-;:c_2---2-(--2 — ,_____ ,i. ,.,ii,j•ii,i:,:.[,, ,., ..,-_.._ !, : . ,c.;i.!„•:,I1.•.;,.4) , • ::::,,i.;,!, i/ i ' ) :1•.:H!.';4 i' '':':i: : ?'4'..:•f :).if;•10iIY,i' • ;f. . • .... • .-f-.. -,27-77(2 -1'-',- 6.4'.•7'2- .1-0._ ,,,. . . — . . . . . ' . . . .. . _ ..--,... .., .... ' ,- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE', HEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: C-G DATE CIRCULATED: -- OCTOBER 13, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK'RIVER CORPORATE PARK. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: O-2P7TArrAF opRRI VSSERIITOF�LLI C� qP A1O�iNq 4rOIFFNH MPA A MERN CCHADTDVEOMETTHCOOT ppSSCAANNftE EDTARAAA RSD O NFARREAASITTMNTEERAATT TPAwIpUFAPFMSFIDEVELOP JITHN2 FEETO AND LLIJM S Tu FETOTHE TY LINE LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air • 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: /' Ze / 7/ 7 /-17 r2-‘ _ cx/e/42--e- tAfi RECOMMENDATION: El DNS f MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY_:_ 7--;R TITLE: (12%, / G%24��, DATES - FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 .. R_ SON BUILDING & ZONING £ ARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - -090 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-8.6 PROPONENT ; FIRST CITY 'EQUITIES • PROJECT TITLE : .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. • APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED. AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISFSIGN AND TO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITJ-L?0 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED _NORTE OF 1-4_ 5 AND _S_W__ I RADY WAY. FAST OF OAKFSDAI F AVENUE SAL AND METRO. SOUTR OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. -CO: ri PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION flTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ij UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION ri FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT EBUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ri POLICE DEPARTMENT LII POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • ri OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT V 5: 00 P .M, ON , REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISI N ; (.4 /Ty ri"//P/A/p,;.e/A/6 ® APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT . - 'R1.i• If . .„,„- ._... .1_�t SUBJECT TO_ T. NMEEIYENT-WATER L No W ANT-SEWER y..Es'5-323 fp ZE14e-h. /ate f04Z/ � /• /72 MN • . CHARGE-WATER ��y� Se4ect fo e'.D -47.. T. �s et a/#fd. Y e/deve/'A s $YST�A CHARGE-SEWER y,Es Su,�/�t�'+SPD•O� �•Q•FT• ...As eac4,%1 Qvce/deke./ees SPECK 1111111111=AREA CHARGE-WATER ivp SPECK f AREA CHARGE-SEWER �t) APPROVE! 'UM 7� ��� APPROVED SEWER PUN `, 44..�'�-6eJ.�c-,�---� APPROVED RAE IIIDRANT LOCATIONS u).0,2 .e_i_ ,, r„ BY ARE DEPT. '. i r FIRE FLO:7 ANALYSIS ti________ DATE; / - 2Z -�l� SIGNATURE OF D RECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE' SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: LA I i 0 DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER'13, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATEP PARK. BRIEF DESCRIPTIONOF PROJECT:GG OFPTHEABFACKFR T ppqq?TTyASS P' EOXUEERRCcISSFEET '=EEgqSSN TT -ISNNR ^STER PHASEDTAFIELTTOPMENTGWITHNCONiTE�O _ME TA JIBE 0DT0PARERMETERSSND SPRINGBROOKSHORECiNEA�FUFIO�MFNTE�E MI1� NCE TOPAZIOIJIAN oFF-PRFMTcF STD DNVANDPTON All UW SIGNAGEFWITHIN 2ETOF THE EPROPERTY AND VLINE. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services / 16) Utilities �/ COMMENTS: 9°111113 RECOMMENDATION: NS Q MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: vg/VG-/A/p,E,L://1/�- DATE: //e) - a- — 340 FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 RI rON BUILDING & ZONING D ARTMENT � b DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET EC F - 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) ; SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE ; .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. • APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING .SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DFVELQPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION ; PREMISE SIGN AND TO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORTH OF I-4Il5 AND S_1L GRADY WAY. EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S i L AND METRO. SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO: El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 Li ENGINEERING DIVISION ETRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION Er FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ® POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ® OTHERS ; COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT • BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWI G DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : APPROVED 111 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ❑ NOT APPROVED DATE: C /hi /p11it A T . OF DIREC11c AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIL__ JHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: FY_1E\IEN) N l V>2) DATE CIRCULATED: OCTfRFR 11, 1986 [J1, e- COMMENTS DUET NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 [ APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86'; SM-005-86 -� PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PA BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: TflEABLA K RI T �A ,51P� OV F T N -S R O�P TTUUBREE CCpoNNCCEEPPT OF UNIFYING SIGNINGG RR:EETSS "pppp�� AND EEXXEERRCCIISSEE ACRREEqSS TT IINN ERRSTgqETTREE PHASED• DEVELTTO OPMENT WITH CONOTO__ A 3 IIEL T_D halo RS. SHORHHE RFVFI O�MFNT FERMII- TOPAICOWIAN OFF-PRFMTSFISIGNVANOPMnnN WITHI JOO N GEFWITHOIN 20RFEETROFFKTHEEPROPERTY VARIANCE NE. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation / 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: 7rDNS Q MITIGATED DNS El EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: 2; DATE: .. c14 /y /9/C FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 F/r'//) rON BUILDING & ZONING DI ARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET FCF _ 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : •BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLIED AN[LRELATED PARAMETERS- SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TC ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISE SIGN AND TO ALLOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED _(ORTH OE L-405 AND _Lit. GRAD.Y WAY. FAST OF QAKESDALE AVFNUF SL AND METRO. SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ow ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : El UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : APPROVED fl APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED ' --_ / //7,PC ifIP DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE__ _MEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: �� 1 &�� I ��� Z`V DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 13, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. TATTAKF UT OV FT N -SR ^STEKBRIEFDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OPp mEDTDELMTWTroT 0 A RE ARAgISRSD iiiiEU FAH 1TATEONAl 1 APPLICATIONCE FFMScNAPJNLIN220ppFETN2RNERFKE TVIWN f1FF-PRTF T� NDO 'UUW SIGNAGEWIHI 0FETOF THE PROPERTYLNE. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. '°GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS - MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water ✓ 4) Plants ✓ 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use ✓ 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation ✓ 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation ✓ 14) Transportation 0 ✓ 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: DNS Q MITIGATED DNS Q EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: DATE. ._. //4//k FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 RE__ DN BUILDING & ZONING DE ►RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET CCF - 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) ; SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE ; .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED D�.yELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TO ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISE SIGN AND 1O ALLOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LL.ATFO NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY. FAST OF OAKFSDAIE AVENUF S.W_. AND METRO. SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : EI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 El ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU SPARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT • BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT • POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE, PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; • APPROVED ` APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS EI NOT APPROVED 4reref �/� �/ aGiefs ae&vi, 6e c%is 4r" /de ltt G' vie idr74- �atiI ?G�Je /// ,/- Oetfe ,each ( Qre u.4d �u e beers ej-j- i, /`L "Z.4 `C 14921. Ve".."1 thi Lva,t/e' A c To Cc of di /e //s Ci s / vc/ ,O DATE : G G `V IKJ SIG URE OF b R CTOR 0► THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 I \ <L, _ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW, :ET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Qf T�� f . 1 DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 13, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. PTTCA77AKFpp T AA ) OOV FT = N -SR T yR kBRIEFDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OP MEPDKOMTGWNCpGG)TIO_ A REL EEDTRRAqq RSD S NFAHgqSSIMNTEGM TOA MIR TTFA4O11TAIDT1A ®PTONTWSGAEFWITHN 20RFEETROFKTHEEPROPERTYVLINENCE LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: 1 �G,,ve/ melt L /( hide A- argil vC' /"dye cJ O ✓i /-ecreoe,/ rA- 2 Gt dertAA/iC-s M 74Av4lez 7` hef .see 1 f ,a'i/ `f o cal 'le .r7/c ale ipe/ w f� w a�`c /�e re/i4 i r RECOMMENDATION: Ed DNS Q MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: ()Wm_ AUe177 TITLE:_____ ea4,'/,/Pe0 DATE: /////7/46 FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 • - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW EET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: e---)(A l 11'C1) I 1 DATE CIRCULATED: -- OCTOBER 13. 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE CORPORATEPAARK. NTATAKF T7..?„ A P) OV FT N -SR IyEkkBRIEFDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF CCDADTDEEOENTTHCROTIO_ ARAMESSRSD EISH EAR ITTMTTEMAli APPLICATION 0FAPCSVPT LWH FH ERFKE VARIANCE ANFPFFMJ IGNANDOALOSIGNAGE 2. FETOFTHEPROPERTYLNE. AND LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACT INFORMATION 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: • RECOMMENDATION: El DNS . Q MITIGATED DNS n EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: DATE: FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 FL , 'TON BUILDING & ZONING L __ ARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET- ECF - 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : •BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING ;SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED _DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE D.EyELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TC ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : P_gEMISE SIGN AND TO ALLOW SiGNAGE WITH-I 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED N.ORTFLOF I-405 AND SjL_ GRADY NAY. FAST OF OAKFSDAIF AVFNllE S.R. AND METRO. SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 ENGINEERING DIVISION OTRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ® UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU LI PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT fl POLICE DEPARTMENT Ei POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • OTHERS COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 7f17-2 '/G APPROVED ® APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS i7/4. NOT APPROVED 14/g4, yafteri cr-cacuas 5.1.011 lord off dile *J. b4y\--r- DATE: ` 676611/6 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REV]_.. SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: KAITWJ r)11/4. DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 7, 1986 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 14, 1986 ECF - 090 - 86 APPLICATION NO(s). SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATEPp PARK. BRIEF DESCRIPTIONOF PROJECT:GG OFPTHABCAC FRQ ssT ppqq? HHSS P' EOXXV gqCCIOSSFEET EEqqN TTpp-ISNNR gqGGSTER P�ASEDTDDVELMPAENTGWITHNROT10 A ) FIEL T NTPARAM TERSND SH RECINFA�FV IOPMFNTEPERMIi TPIIWIOPRFMSFISfNVDPNaLWHI FEET ETRFKE AND VLEO AOAN UFF- T TANTOLOSGNAGEWHIN 24 FEO THE PROPERTYIN . LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF I-405 AND S.W. GRADY WAY, EAST OF OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND METRO, SOUTH OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. SITE AREA: 16.94 ACRES OF A 130 ACRE BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A SITE. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS MINOR MAJOR MORE IMPACT IMPACCTT INFORMATION 1) Earth v 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants ��.. 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities Lam' COMMENTS: laMD r Di e-c21- 1�.42-3J L GSJ Mt 09.A. 4-(e4ti arek 4-44_ od-yRA,„ RECOMMENDATION: El DNS MITIGATED DNS 17 EIS 1 � REVIEWED BY: TITLE: DATE: / 9/2 /& 101110 FORM #14 REVISED 9/10/85 RI rON BUILDING & ZONING D u iARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET EC F - 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASED DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROLLED AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION TC ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : PREMISE SIGN AND TO ALIGN SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATFD NORTH_ OF I-405 AND SA. GRADY WAY. FAST OF OAKFSDAI F AVFNUF S.W. AND METRO. SOUTH OF {BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO: Eil PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION DTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : El UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT iiil' BUILDING & DEPARTMENT 0 POLICE DEPARTMENT LI POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 0 OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : El APPROVED [1] APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED (4 0,4 -le- 0,e(?) --//4--1— e. 6 ci F./CS „.„2/ DATE; 16-71.7---/ SIGNATURE OF DIRryOR THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 :..; Form 182 BLACK RIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK Re: Traffic Engineering Review Comments I . Implement traffic management plan as stated in the Traffic Impact Analysis for Black River Technology Park. See attached copy of TMP. 2. Should the intersection of SW 7th Street and Naches warrant a traffic signal before or after completion of the Technology Park, the Developer 8 is required to participate in the cost up to their fair share now p ` estimated to be 67.4 percent as stated in the traffic analysis study. �� , �� To insure participation of the developer if required, bonding for the 41p4aestimated cost of the traffic signal should be on file with the City. 0i" L 3. Off-site improvements are to include but not be limited to the following: a) Street name signs per city standards. b) Stop sign if warranted per MUTCD. c) Street lighting per City standard. 4. Developer to agree to participate in cost of developing Oakesdale Avenue corridor from SW 43rd Street to Sunset Highway along Monster Road & 68th Avenue South. This participation would be through an improvement district. 5. The traffic analysis should include recommendation on how to bring all the listed intersections below F LOS up to a service level D. Service Level Change a) Rainier Ave. S & S Grady Way F to D b) SW 7th Street & Rainier Ave. S F to D c) SW Grady Way & Lind Ave. SW E to D d) SW 7th Street & Lind Ave. SW A/F to D Left/Thru/Right from Lind F to D 6. The Developer would be required to participate in the cost of the intersection improvements up to the percentage of traffic generated through the intersections. 7. The above intersections must be improved to a service level D before this office will recommend approval of additional development. This may be accomplished through a latecomer' s agreement. (? ,,,• 4, 5- Ali r.,3 69 /i Way Gr a.d r -e.Q.Q - S �.5/4,, s off._d 1-0 1-4 k L-vic k � e rok" /2, l IJ � REN ION BUILDING & ZONING D1 ARTIVIENT • DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 090 _ 86 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-108-86, V-109-86, SM-005-86 PROPONENT : FIRST CITY EQUITIES PROJECT TITLE : : ' .BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK. ' APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE INFRA-STRUCTURE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: OF THE BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK WHICH ENCOMPASSES A MASTER CONCEPT OF UNIFYING SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, STREET, PATHS AND EXERCISE AREAS TO INTERGRATE PHASEC DEVELOPMENT WITH CONTROIJFD AND RELATED PARAMETERS. SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION 1 ALLOW SAID DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 200 FEET OF SPRINGBROOK CREEK AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF- LOCATION : pREMLSE SIGN AND TO AI LOW SIGNAGE WITH 20 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. LOCATED NORM OF I-405 AND S_W_. GRADY NAY. FAST OF OAKFSDALF AVFNUF S.iL AND METRO. SOUTR OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD AND WEST OF POWELL AVENUE S.W. TO : r PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 11/19/86 n n ENGINEERING DIVISION 1ITRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION I� FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU I ( PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT I ( .BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • n OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY .5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : s / 1'17. 4; c�t1-� ��rl'-� n APPROVED n APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS II NOT APPROVED 5 sirc2e.._t2 14-1e-t"i )-„:7 tyc.1,-(Cri L 1-c_e_e_q-c„...j —��e-t)/ 71-S V))( - DATE: /" e/‘4. SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 Architecture and Planning. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle;WA 98121(206)728-5771 TRANSMITTAL' TO: Department of Building/Zoning DATE: October 3, 1986 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South PROJECT: B1 ackRiver Corporate Park Renton, WA 98055 Infrastructure PROJECT NO: NW 85014 ATTN: Jerry Lind RE: B1ackRiver Corporate Park Infrastructure NUMBER DESCRIPTION 20 Mailing Labels 20 22it Postage Stamps , REMARKS: , For your use to notify adjacent property owners of our action. Please do not hesitate to call us if there are any questions. Off Y ��ts rot OCT 7 . 986 BY: - Y. Ken, K. Chin $UILDING/ZONING DEFT, CC. Barbara Moss, First City Equities .4(cY- o ( - TY OF RENTO FILE NO(S): 4FA—UR— (Q Cif, BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 1� —l vcl-�� YP ,e' MASTER APPLICATON55 NOTE TO APPLICANT: Since this is a comprehensive application form, only those items related to your specific type of application(s) are to be completed. (Please print or type. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) APPLICANT 1 I TYPE OF APPLICATION NAME F First City Equities Q REZONE*(FROM TO ) E"'\\\\ ADDRESS 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 SPECIAL PERMIT* CITY ZIP 0 TEMPORARY PERMIT* Seattle, WA 98104 Q CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT* MR SITE PLAN APPROVAL TELEPHONE 0 SPECIAL PERMIT FOR GRADE AND FILL (206) 624-9223 No. of Cubic Yards: CONTACT PERSON VARIANCE* From Section: /502_ NAME * Justification Required Barbara E. Moss (Director of Planning) ADDRESS SUBDIVISIONS: 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 0 SHORT PLAT CITY ZIP Q TENTATIVE PLAT Seattle, WA 98104 PRELIMINARY PLAT TELEPHONE Q FINAL PLAT 0 WAIVER (Justification Required) OWNER NO. OF LOTS: NAME PLAT NAME: First City First City Equities/ DevelopmentsCorp. ADDRESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 ' 0 PRELIMINARY CITY ZIP 0 FINAL Seattle, WA 98104 P.U.D. NAME: TELEPHONE (206) 624-9223 Q Residential Q Industrial Commercial Q Mixed LOCATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: PROPERTY ADDRESS east of Powell:, TENTATIVE west of 0akesdale; north of Grady Way EXISTING USE PRESENT ZONING PRELIMINARY Vacant MP FINAL PROPOSED USE Infrastructure for paths, signs, PARK NAME: landscaping for master planned development NUMBER OF SPACES: of office industrial facilities. 11` " fJl'1Yoe% ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE q elOS I10.19--acres - _ AREA: ,. (tj, [JGi� ILA 1�a97 TOTAL FEES 1.�a2.4�`70 , CITY cy F{gi,;):0•STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING DATE 'V I °J 114 11 0 P4 APPLICATION RECEIVED BY: � �„ti �� APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: �;�n OCT 2 1996 156 Accepted BUILDING/ZONING 9ERT, Cl Incomplete Notification Sent On By: (Initials) DATE ROUTED ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED BY: APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: QAccepted EDIncomplete Notification Sent On By: (Initials) ROUTED TO: U] Building laa, Design Eng. C2K1Fire tti, Parks tA-Police In Policy Dev. L` I Traffic Eng. La Utilities Legal description of property (if more space Is required, attach a separate sheet). See attached. • AFFIDAVIT • I, ALA , being S duly sworn, declare that I am El authorized representative to act for the property owner,Zlowner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS a!`s DAY OF 19 NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WA INGTON,, ',.nn RESIDING AT • (Name of Notary Public) (Signature of Owner) 04" M• 5Cf/UNJ194/ • ,PST e/4f £110/77�S 4 - 11 4D+ & . 0,00fiff /e/vL surr� 41/70 (Address) (Address) oaing, 99/0c' (City) (State) (Zip). 6z406). 6-V-92L3 (Telephone) Acceptance of this application and required filing fee. does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other materials required to constitute a complete application are listed in the "Application Procedure." Form #174 Architecture and Planning Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg A.I.A.,114 Vine Street(2nd&Vine)Seattle,WA 98121(206)728-5771 • TRANSMITTAL , TO: City of Renton DATE: October 2, 1986 Department of Building And Zoning PROJECT: B1ackRiver Corporate Park- Infrastructure PROJECT NO: NW 85014 ATTN: . RE: Site Plan Approval NUMBER DESCRIPTION -,1 Original / 9 Copies ,Master Application _ Shoreline Master Application (SDP) Sign Variance Drawings 2 Copies Traffic Impact Analysis 10 Attachments for above Applications (Comb-bind) 1 Application Fee Ck#13583 REMARKS: Submittal for Site Plan Approval , Substantial Development permit . ' for Shoreline variance application for signs. eitir av Woe- _ NMNIIT 0 . . [2 . BY: Ken Chin/Royce A. Berg OCT �9�6 cc. Barbara Moss - BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. , / • N.49r_ (0-6- . cd fl) c (4 A i C'e,u(et Apptic„' I. Pec-1/14t e6 Soo + (15 - c).) )(014 )s4-,7c3 2, .e.tek t- + X A *CoGoo f2146 Rt:q6r Cree4. ave, tyl4t,reylek. A.( _ 74„9-67,,,77.-rveTh< area, ee.. 1.3 c-rcase, 4 19 e22— A to' 25OQo io , co) ) los D.RL' cvreA H-14;%., /2,co kt of SIA.6(6.CL, 1( z,56 /21000,000 - foov,ov 0(2-470 -1.50 1 )) 4 , •4-3 .1 •tt 2167C:2 f."-. L-D11" •-•'-c. • - 1() aTV F17,Moig , CIMUU OCT 2 1986 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. • / o =---% 1 1 ,, - 0398Z CITY OF RENTON * Building & Zoning Department (206) 235-2550 SHORELINE MASTER APPLICATION APPLICATION FOR: OFFICE USE ONLY: �r.0 .�� �� / `aqr Application No. : Yl � 8(o 4 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT ECF No. : Ecx J Uc.O-B� PERMIT _ SEC-TWP-R: I_I CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Date Approved: II VARIANCE Date Denied: _ Publication Date: I_I EXEMPTION' Comprehensive Plan: I_I REVISION Zoning: Water Body: e1/4 6��`ra-_*- CAreeAre._ STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING liA lication Received B® r " Application Determined To Be OCT 2 i"886 _„_. ■ Accepted o Incomplete Notification Sent On: BUILDING/ZONING DEPT, By ( Initials) : Date Routed: Additional Material Received by: Application Determined To Be: ' o Accepted o Incomplete Notification Sent On: By (Initials) : In addition to the information below, the applicant should include a site map and any other pertinent information which will assist in the review of this application. The Building= and Zoning Department reserves the right to require additional information needed to evaluate the application. APPLICANT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REQUIRED IN ITEMS 1-10 THROUGH 14-16 BELM: INFORMATION: 1. Applicant Owner X Purchaser Name: First City Devel opments Corporation Lessee Other Mailing 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 ' Address Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 624-9223 2. Name of Property Owner First City DevelopmentsCorporation Mailing 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Address Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 624-9221 3 . Contact/ LPN Architects & Barbara Moss of First City Devel.opmentsCorp. Consultant: Mailing 800 .Fifth Avenue;_-Suite 4170 Address Seattle,_..WA__'98104" Phone: 624-9223 : 728-5771 PROJECT INFORMATION: ' - 4. General location of proposed project (give street address if any or nearest street and intersection) North 405 freeway, north of Grady Way, west of Metro sewage treatment plant, east of Powell Avenue, and south of Burlington Northern Railroad line above P-1 Channel detention basin. 5. Legal Description (if lengthy, attach as separate sheet) : See attached. 6. Name of adjacent water area or wetlands: Old Black River, Springbrook Creek, P-1 Channel 7. Current use of property and existing improvements : Undeveloped old golf course with existing office and- industrial facilities. 8. PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY and proposed improvements (be specific) : Develop network of paths, boardwalks, exercise areas, signing . (and ultimate • development of office and industrial buildings.) 9 . Proposed construction costs and schedule: A. Total construction cost and fair market value of proposed project include additional developments contemplated but not included in this application: $6,000,000 B. Construction dates (month/year) for which permit is requested: Begin October 1986 (summer months) End November. 1988 10. List any other permits for this project from state, federal, local governmental agencies or the City of Renton for which you have applied or will apply, including the name of the issuing agency, whether the permit has been applied for, and if so, the date of -the application, whether the application was approved or denied and the date of same, and number- of the application or permit: Shoreline Permit SM 90-81. Issued for Valley 405 section of property (Earlington Industrial Park) by City of Renton. Fill permit issued for Black River property north of detention pond by C:i-ty of Renton. Building permits by City of Renton will be applied for as phases develop. Fill Permit #SP-024-86, License 3-12252 ITEMS 11, 12, AND 13 TO BE COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL: 11. NATURE OF THE EXISTING SHORELINE. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp, flood plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material, such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any) : - 12,. . In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will ' exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above the average grade level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view. • 13 . If the application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or. in the case of a variance, from which the variance is being sought. ITEMS 14, 15, AND 16 TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: 14. If applying for a variance or a conditional use, complete the variance or conditional use form. 15. Project Maps: Attach to application accurate site plan and vicinity maps. Refer to application instruction handout for map requirements. 16 . Additional information (If necessary, attach as separate sheet) : See Attachments. • STATE OF WASHINGTON I CITY OF REWTON ) SS I. - Pukn'a 1 , being duly sworn, certify that I am the above-named applicant for a permit to con- struct a substantial development pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and that the foregoing statements, answers, and information are in all respects true and correct to the best f my knowledge and belief. S na ure Subscribed and sworn to me this a2-4 day of &rot Notary Public in and - -r "tthe State of Wash. gton, residing-11atH Aft `:did f,1` FORM 177 OF .J t$ z VARIANCE APPLICATION o CITY OF RENTON amm 4o' AO Q' BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 4"ED SEPS0�� (206) 235-2550 s NOTE: TO APPLICANT: Please OFFICE USE ONLY read instructions on back of this form Application NO. : carefully before Associated File(s) : preparing your appli- Date cation for VARIANCE. Received: Date Accepted: Approved: ❑ ) CITY OF RENTON Denied: ❑ )DATE: 1[EMNOCE [13 Publication Date: Affidavit:' OCT 2 1986 Comprehensive Plan BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Zoning: ***************** ►********************** r** ****** rat1*** r** r************* In edition to the information below, the applicant should include a site map and any other pertinent information which will assist in the review of this application. The Building & Zoning Department reserves the right to require additional information needed to evaluate the application (note Variance Application Procedure on the last pace) . 1. Name of Applicant: First City Developments Corporation , 2. Mailing Addreess: 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 /Telephone No. : '694-g22,1 3. APPLICANT IS: [XI Owner ❑ Lessee Q Contract Purchaser L] Other (Specify) 4. Name and address of owner, if other than applicant: • /'Telephone NO.: 5. General location of proposed project (give street address if any or nearest street and intersection) : BlackRiver Corporate Park; North of S.W. Grady Way North and East of Future 0aksdale Ave S.W. 6. Legal Description (if lengthy, attach as separate sheet) : 7. State EXACT VARIANCEREQUESTED/SPECIFY CODE SECTION: Variance from code Section 4-1918 (E) 1; to allow project signage within twenty feet (20' ) of property line. And (Code Section 4-1918 (E) 2. ) to allow off . remises sign on contiguous property being landscaped and up-graded. -1- 8. Why can't the property be developed within the requirements of the ordinance? • See attached variance justification. AFFIDAVIT I, David M. Schuman , being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Owner avid . Schuman, Ueneral Partner 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Address Seattle, WA 98104 City, State, and Zip Code Number) Telephone No. (206) 624-9223 Subscribed and sworn before me this day of Stpkinlee,r , 19.p, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at l t0Lniel/td,. !,"? Name if`.ANatar Public Address ked.01Mtr oc.. q k'O5'� • -2- v .��"r ter°'twin.*** ''..414f r *.1 • —G;F 4 o •• 1 .,r y,'!•+ r �� - 61111.• 4r ... .--e, 4 '1 -ai- 4f� ' • 'I�s. s. c r N.,:-N'ki„" 1 w 17'y7 0 r�i ^'X.3 • %er * �• �' �c rs, e' y•i r 1 V i F-t a e1 ,. �' "-:, 44,' ..' ; ::'-` S-7 .- ,:- ~- C`11.. 4Tf,i: a n_ ll�e y - P. •• • .... ' s • M1i •y0 .}A._r,` t6;`1 ,.. z'F,_it.,,,j s-,i 111-1-4..-"1 - .,4;.""'..e2b "?.'# -..;.t?0•°. 4 4.2 ,-../1 .,..:Go., ""fe,,,, " 4 it vi.-51.3,,, lt:t -;.• -ef ,x, •.4:. ......-% 46 ' ,,,1•-•. - .1. r ,..--,9 , - , —, - @ 6 ••• .1 : - : Ed g %'es-0 ", ' �if Z•(� U ,0�, ;'14 CO MYo!3jgV e'.'\�* 6�• +';•�•• • /' ♦;r C,.5 �fJ 1.'z'zsc •• W • �i C,�Mt G1 'I$Ij v_ _-. 0. s,, �fiQ'yj ..e, ,,,,,. a /'� r < Cym .+ +f +C�. - ,�; ,rf�I S_ ^�;� �: " b • , /�.� * s, ...gym #�dr FI 1g �:i *61'o � � a^tP '' '•� °ram. '�•1,ek9 /':•- g \ 4!, t •. :z�i+�'1 �1�,' ,� ./��!•w b oo�.,i'z'°�iri in .r C •'• 1i-JO _ e° ♦ O ••e•[oa°r _ ��••�� } Y 1 .r.• '•�T ijp�Zf.+vnr vy. Cl) m I • • (ri3� �13' icy• .gr !1i41; : r ,4i'; a 3 r":'.'tiM i s t sr \ 'a ) �� I V— •, •�79747V', • _'tip, /• .oe4s;� 4r�`'' �e ' x;'- .17 t si Illin# [�***co- �Q 4` r • x`. - r,. e -T"� ''':• tt•. 5 i , `3.1 i .: (le .. . -.�'► tj - > : - 'S _43. • % • � ".I .. `'. Qt Lam_ ,a.' s•to .$'�2� la��gq �,4 w*TP�.•�l �' �? ^":6� _ e . \`_'`, =a FY .. �,,t,. ,. 4 -----.•` .iit1 , S--- -` /yet/ ^^ -•2 �. CZ g_G f ,�r c J— n , . _ _,.. • (kr\ (.!„.• . ...,:' . - - ''. ... --- --`1-- . .."'",' ' ,..-----v ..Air.......o.f.' 51 A 1 , ,,, . eifIto : ' CA �O @ I Cy �ti \ .» �" .�,"�e'''-e1e�� a�,,; �,.- of� / cow d T• = •.�; x�!i ��1st:7 �( /� � l-�9 0� G V�J� c 3 _ SeDte=bey 18. 1496 , \• `t-' 5P4 !" 4..�k ; II ty `v M:�_ , Bldg. S.F. S.F. v •c~ :p,. ,, ; ,. s; t3 -g i. t 1 1` 1 - • Uri 1 •Bl dg.r ti,siber Floors Typo S.F. &�s-r• 7\`' Q. .. - 1 1 story office 160,344 S.F. 9,500 S.F. il. s1 ' x'...s= r4. r2 1 story offtco 9.500 S.F. '*' 4 +,� --+ '3 1 story offlca 26.400 5,F. �LZ { � L`o t'►`e- •�.t r�4 3[t,rrt•: nfftro 150-716 5_F_ 4lL900 S_F, ///��� '5 _ r` f �' "�� A v r' 2 storlrt office 191.600 S.F_ 67.600 S.F.S.F, v '°�` • s i -•f ® (^� 6 3%Loris% office 183,150 S.F. 36,900 S.F. 7 2%tortes off ice 40.640 5.F. { �. _ 8 3 stories office 403.084 S.F. 71.832 S.F. `���% '�`5,' @ * �; ��• 9 2 storias office 41,000 S.F. • 10 2%Lori%, offleg 41,000 S.F. riY o* ,t• a Y re 0* 1a., a . .i• ' I ;� :r 11 1 story offtco 298,780 S.F. 18.636 S.F. ,:� r ?. ry „ , S1 t1.��71.tv ?� C�Cz�r 1.1. `s,. f 1 . xe,�J.'• 12 1 story office 18,636 S.F. s +. lZ.14/ � Uat ' .: y,c�..t3c� -. `t 13 1 story office 6 R/D 15.540 S.F. 629.173 S.F. Corporate Park :'?' �rf2t i- ~--,--':.:3 �y 14 1 story office 6 R/D 17,110 S.F. j ,.+....iS 3 stories office 683.912 S.F. 69,150 S.F. •e j s• ;t Q , f 16 4 stories office 64,000 S.F. �1` .. .. ., v :II- 17 3 stories office 64,000 S.F. RENTON, WASHINGTON % `,\ $ to '' 18 2 stories offtco 39,972 S.F. x� `� s ? C .+ •y�rR „•s, 20 4 stories office 0 521,275 S.F. 80ce .365292 S.F. FffS^F Cffr ,..j t1'.� y.`•\ ..• ..r ''.i ±`r`" 4� ,- 21 3/4 stories office 55.469 S.F. 55.469 S.F. n •�""' , '4 el. 1k. C1 .. ` 4 LFASON PO. ROY NORTHWEST SiC. Si'"\ t "' 22 1 story R/0 9 158,884 S.F, 23.163 S.F. o -y $3 1}}tort R/D 22,600 s F. .. ....• �' i +a '..4. .. `.:, 24 2!1 'torten office 6T 1� �41.145 S�• � 4:% .i_s ;- --_t _ ,,i_: 5555 1 story R/D 12E1.004 S.F. 71.450 gg F, NFTC11ELL NELSON GROUP INC. 44. . 26 2 stories office 0 266.000 S.F. 26.160 S.F. i 1 n ;.1.1mi,.. 27 2 stories offtco 26,160 S.F. {• - LD4� • 28 3 stories of flea 39,240 S.F BUSH ROED & NfTCH59GS ENC. _� ` 9 f -- - .4 770 S.E. 690.688 S.F. l7; 0 at office 40.000 S.F.- q.000 S.F. •.- / V 31 3 stories ' office 48.800 S.F. D '4 'o, : 'J 1/32 3 stories office 48.800 S.F. t� 34 2 stories officeice 47.000 S.F. MI � I - y '3 713< 2 stories offtco / 168.553 S.F. Y6.210 S.F. .� '• C-V 75 2 tortes Oft co 27.440 S.F. 36 4/2 stenos offtco 1 263,035 S.F. 90,760 S.F. mane c •' si i a 1s 4 . 1.575030 S.F. ) e ~� /Approximate Site Mee / �� �' '� // }-6 D,eA srofe eAF 64,41 Tel ok-a t f .; • 0-br2ni kLL% Lvb425rTL/ LE -iAL DESCRIPTIC BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (Formerly Valley 405 Business Park) Phase I Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA-008-84 as recorded in Book 41 of Surveys, page 239, Records of King County, Washington, together with the west 10.00 feet of the south 249.00 feet of Lot 10, Washington Technical Center as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, pages 98 through 102, records of said county and the east 80.00 feet of the south 425.00 feet of the north 884.00 feet of that portion of Tract B, said Washington Technical Center, lying south of Lot 7 thereof. Portion of Tract B to be conveyed for Lot Line Adjustment: The east 80.00 feet of the south 425.00 feet of the north 884.00 feet of that portion of Tract B, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, pages 98 through TAB, records of King County, Washington, lying south of Lot 7 thereof. NEW LOT 1: Phase IL THAT PORTION, OF LOT 11, WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS,• PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.A. 008-84 , FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8409179003, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF LOT 12, SAID WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER, DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.A. 004-83, FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NUMBER 8309309001, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, AND THAT PORTION OF TRACT B, SAID WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT 11 WHICH IS SOUTH 1'14'28" WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE 176.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 111 THENCE NORTH 08'45'32' WEST 59.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 1'14'28" WEST 347.61 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 3, SAID CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.A: 004-83; THENCE NORTH 77'27'27' EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE THEREOF 75.47 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID'• TRACT B; THENCE NORTH 12'32'30' WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 60.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1'14'28' EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 271.36 FEET TO BEGINNING. LE' AL DESCRIPTIO. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (Formerly Valley 405 Business Park) DESCRIPTION TRACT B, PLAT OF WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AS MODIFIED AND KNOWN AS LOT 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LLA 001-86 FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8609179004, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH 650.00 FEET THEREOF LYING EAST OF THE 80.00 FOOT ROAD EASEMENT SHOWN IN SAID TRACT B; ALSO TRACT A OF THE PLAT OF WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 24, AT A POINT NORTH 1°05'00" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE 1804.20 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE NORTH 89°16'47" WEST 1033.53 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, FORMERLY COUNTY ROAD NO. 8 (ALSO KNOWN AS THE CHARLES MONSTER ROAD); THENCE NORTH 1°26'34" WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN 404.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°16'47" EAST 200 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°43'13" EAST 300.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°16'47" WEST 86.42 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO METRO AND DESCRIBED IN DEED FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8207300283, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND ON A CURVE, OF WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 56°16'42" EAST 722.96 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 142.43 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22°26'02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 56.79 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE SOUTH 87 °26'40" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 341.02 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID METRO TRACT, SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE BEING ALSO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT A, WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 TO 102, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND ON A CURVE OF WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 55°39'29" EAST 422.96 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 87.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22°26'02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 263.09 FEET TO A LINE DESIGNATED "PERMANENT EASEMENT BOUNDARY" ON U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE MAP, SHEET 1 OF 3, ENTITLED "LAND RIGHTS WORK MAP, P-1 CHANNEL, EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WPP, CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON"; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE AND ON A CURVE, THE RADIUS POINT OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 5°24'02" EAST 165.04 FEET A DISTANCE OF 112.06 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE, THE RADIUS POINT OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°18'11" WEST 172.96 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID REVERSE CURVE AND SAID LINE 133.74 FEET; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID LINE 367.02 FEET TO A LINE WHICH BEARS NORTH FROM A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 13 WHICH IS 1271.76 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 143.95 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 89°16'47" WEST FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°16'47" EAST 125.40 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. LL'AL DESCRIPTI�_ _I BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL At ' THAT PORTION OP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN RING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AND THAT PORTION , OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY Or SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 or PLATS, PAGE 75, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OF LAW; AND OF C.L. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41 AND OP THAT PORTION OF TRACT 26, RENTON SHORELANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH - SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OF 884.84 PEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 382.60 FEET/ THENCE NORTH 70'54'02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OP 73.50 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING/ THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 70'54'02' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 281.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73'56'01" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 130.08 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41'6'07' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 316.18 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO RING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO TUE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 627.46 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 434.70 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39 '41'39'; THENCE NORTH A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; THENCE WEST A DISTANCE OP 280.69 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; THENCE SOUTH 59'53'47' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY DISTANCE OP 377.52 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74'13'19' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY A DISTANCE• OF 443.31 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD, THENCE NORTH 34'18'31' WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 43.46 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTE LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 06'34'41' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.00 PEET, AN AAC DISTANCE OF 45.43 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03'44'25' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 10'19'06' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,055.00 FEE . AN ARC DISTANCE OF 209.95 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'24'08' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE/ THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 21'43'14' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 727.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE or 214.77 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16'55'35' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE,THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 38'38'49" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 206.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07'32'02' TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 43'49'09' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 97.17 FEET TO A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 42'43'18' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.89 PEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 40.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03'17'45"; THENCE NORTH 50'34'27' EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 248.50 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'25'33' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.58 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 93.64 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07'55'47' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 31'29'46' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 428.64 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 73.32 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'48'04' TO A POINT OP REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 41'17'50' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 2,580.74 PEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 437.40 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'42'39' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE • RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'35'11' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 2,790.19 PEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 789.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16'12'39" TO THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE SOUTH 01'24'04' NEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OP 950.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. L�.GAL DESCRIPT. N BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL S1 • • THAT PORTION of C.E. IRONNELL'1 DONATION CLAIM NO, 41, MO or TVS ' CONTINUING ALONG 1AI0 ♦OUTM LINE ON A CUM 141 LNG AMP, GNU SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER Of SECTION 11, . CENTER Of WINCH BEARS SOUTH 01'32'03" EAST WAVING A RADIUS Of TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN RING • 1165.01 PERT, AN ARC DISTANCE Of 1097.05 PEST THROUGH A CENTRAL COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ANGLE OP 53'57'00' TO A POINT Of TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING 'ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 37'35'036 EAST A DISTANCE OF 301.70 BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 131 THENCE, FEET TO A POINT or CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE NORTH 00.51'21' EAST ALONG THE NORTH - SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID ON A CURVE'TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER Of WHICH BEARS NORTH 52'21'57' SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OP 014.04 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER Of EAST HAVING A RADIUS or 1005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 43.12 TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1955; PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE or 02'36'411 TO A LINE 35 FEET THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTHERLY OF AHD PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OP THE EXISTING TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 312.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70.54'02' WEST MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILNAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY Of TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 73.50 FEET TO PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACES; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 41; NORTH 40'11'44' WEST A DISTANCE OF 126.24 FEET TO A POINT Ol THENCE NORTH 01'24'04' EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO IROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41 A DISTANCE OF 950.50 FEET TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 49'41'16' WEST HAVING A A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF RADIUS OF 1121.71 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE Of 309.67 FEET THROUGH A THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'41'41'1 THENCE NORTH 1901I'32' WEST ALONG PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 167.07 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE OM A CURVE TO THE THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 15.22'32' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF LEFT, THE CENTER or WHICH BEARS SOUTH 10'06'21' WEST HAVING A 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 719.44 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL RADIUS Of 1102.46 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OP 107.11 FEET THROUGH A ANGLE Of 16.12'39' TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41'56'16' TO A POINT Of COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAIQ PARALLEL LINE OH A CURVE TO THE LEFT. THE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'35'11' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP CENTER Of WHICB BEARS SOUTH 01'50'11' EAST WAVING A RADIUS Of 2510.74 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE Of 437.40 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL 2750.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 651.24 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09.12'39' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ANGLE Of 13.32'14' TO THE TRUE POINT OF HEGIHNING. ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 41'17'50' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 421.64 PEET, _ AN ARC DISTANCE OF 73.32 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 01'41'04' TO A POINT or REVERSE CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LIME ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'29'46' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.55 FEET, AN ARC . DISTANCE Of 93.64 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE Of 07.55'47' TO A POINT or TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 50'31'27' WEST A DISTANCE OF 245.50 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE OH A CURVE TO THE LEFT, TUC CENTER or WHICH BEARS SOUTH 29'25'11' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.69 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 40.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE Of 03'17'45' TO THE SOUTH LINE Of THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 43'49'09' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 173.13 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 46'10'51' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 4030.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02.41'32' TO A POINT Of COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE • CENTER Of WHICH BEARS SOUTH 11'22'19' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1153.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 114.75 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'01'11' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER O/ WHICH BEARS SOUTH 37'21'01' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 10543.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 106.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF O1'00'49' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHIC■ BEARS SOUTH 36'20'12" EAST HAVING A RADIUS or 1657.00 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 193.91 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'12,20' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 29.37'52' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 6731.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 197.76 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'40'54' TO A POINT Of COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 27'56'51' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1761.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OI 114.45 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'11'06' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 21'31'32' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 5603.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 201.54 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'21'44" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH SEARS SOUTH 20'17'01' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1922.10 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 171.79 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 05'19'16' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 14'57'22' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2114.13 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE or 659.42 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'23'19' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; .THENCE LEGAL DESCRIPTI 41 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL C. THAT PORTION OP TRACT 25, RENTON SHORELANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL; AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OP SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH - SOUTH CENTERLINE OP SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 804.84 PEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OP RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OF 382.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70'54'02' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OP 73.51 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OP THE . CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE NORTH 01'24'04' EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 950.58 FEET TO A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OP AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OP THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OP AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK, ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 15'22'32' EAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 659.24 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'32'14' . TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 01'50'18' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,102.46 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 807.11 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41'56'46"; THENCE SOUTH 49'53'32' EAST, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 167.07 FEET; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, HAVING A RADIUS OP 1,829.78 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 309.67 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'41'48'; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE, SOUTH 40'11'44' EAST, A'DISTANCE OF 126.24 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OP THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH . LINE, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 49'48'16' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 1,005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 549.02 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 31'17'19" TO A POINT TANGENT ON SAID SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, SOUTH 71'29'03' EAST ALONG A LINE 50 FEET SOUTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EXISTING SOUTHBOUND TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 826.56 PEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 71'29'03' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 85.52 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OP THE SOUTH 650 FEET OP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER QP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OP SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 89'10'25' NEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OP SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 81.57 PEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, THENCE NORTH 88'15'00' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 650 PEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OP 2,261.41 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 25 OF RENTON SHORE LANDS, 1958; THENCE NORTH 33'07'25' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 154.51 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTH 27'21'32' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A•DISTANCE OF 387.32 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTH 93'17'25' NEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 171.17 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 46'21'22' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 324.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OP 76.33 FEE? TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. LE,„AL DESCRIPTIC, I BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK • . EXHIBIT 5 PARCEL B-2' •THAT PORTION OP THE SOUTH HALF OP SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OP SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OP PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, AND OP C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH00'58'28• EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68'03'54' EAST 224.45 PEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF• BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68'03'54' WEST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72'04'34' WEST 389.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68'06'46' WEST 429.32 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 85.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 126'52'10', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 132.86 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53'07'50'' EAST 199.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 53'59'30', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 188.47 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72'52'40' EAST 290.00 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39'08'S1' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'58'29' EAST 380.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31'27'12' EAST 204.86 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 165,263 SQUARE FEET OR 3.794 ACRES MORE OR LESS. • EXHIBIT 6 TO PARCEL B-1 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HAM OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OP PLATS, PAGE 75,.RECORDS OP SAID KING COUNTY, AND OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM N0. 41, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 0'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68'03'54' WEST 351.11 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 68'03'54' EAST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 12'01'00' WEST 40.75 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 77'39'00' WEST 133.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE. TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OP 230.00 PEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27'47'31' AN ARC DISTANCE OP 111.56 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THE CENTER OP SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 15'46'31' EAST 160.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, 'THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 70'48'19' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82'15'00' WEST 67.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31'32'22' WEST 71.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81'11'35' WEST 193.00 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 82'13'00' WEST 92.99 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 35'29'30" WEST 143.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74'44'00' WEST 84.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60'16'00' WEST 67.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12'16'00' EAST 97.35 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68'06'46' EAST 53.79 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 72'04'34' WEST PROM THE TRUE POINT or BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 72'04'34' LAST 389.92 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 182,206 SQUARE FEET OR 4.1829 ACRES MORE OR LESS. • • LE'JAL DESCRIPTILM BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK EXHIBIT 7 TO PARCEL B-4 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THAT PORTION OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OF LAN, AND OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13) THENCE NORTH 00'S8'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 884.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26, RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS 1958; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST 382.60 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26) THENCE NORTH 70'54'02' WEST 354.53 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26; THENCE SOUTH 73'36'O1' WEST 130.08 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT'.IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26) THENCE SOUTH 41'16'07' WEST ALONG THE' SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 316.18 FEET TO•THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39' WEST 627.46 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39'41'39') AN ARC DISTANCE OF 434.70 FEET; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 25.00 FEET) THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 245.69 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING) THENCE NORTH 156.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'39'19' EAST 330. 21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33'00'54' WEST 109.47 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, SAID POINT BEING A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'23'00' EAST 1853.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 3'59'19', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 129.00 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 43'22'19' EAST 4030.00 PEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2'48'32', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.57 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 43'49'09' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH MARGIN 271.00 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1571.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7'32'02', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 206.57 FEET TO A POINT•OF COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 38'38'49' WEST 727.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16'55'35', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 214.77 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 21'43'14' WEST 1055.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'24'08', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 209.95 FEET TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE; THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 10'19'06' WEST 696.00 PEET) THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'44'25', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 45.43 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 34'18'31' EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN 43.46 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER . KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786p THENCE NORTH 74'13'19' EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 443.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 59.53'47' EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 377.52 FEET; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 114,401 SQUARE PEET OR 2.626 ACRES MORE OR LESS. LE( kL DESCRIPTIO:. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK EXHIBIT 8 TO PARCEL a-3 THAT PORTION OP THE SOUTH RALF OP SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.M. IN RING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AND OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF•SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID RING COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OP LAW; AND OP C.E. BROWNELL'S' .DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, AND OP TRACTS 25 AND 26, RENTON SHORE LANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS 1958, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; • BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68903'54' EAST 224.45 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER CALLED 'POINT A'; THENCE SOUTH 68903'54' WEST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72'04'34' WEST 389.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68906'46" WEST 429.32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 85.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00.FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 126952'10', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 132.86 FEET; THENCE .NORTH S3'07'50" EAST 199.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGI,E OF 53'59'30', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 188.47 FEET; THENCE SOUTH • 72'52'40' EAST 290.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39'08'51', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'58'29' EAST 380.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31927'12' EAST 204.86 FEET TO AFOREMENTIONED 'POINT A'; THENCE NORTH 80904'48' EAST 232.00 FEET; 'THENCE SOUTH 42'06'08' EAST 215.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31914'O5' WEST 358.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'10'01' EAST 71.34 PEET; THENCE EAST 114.27 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 68.91 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT 2S; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACTS 25 AND 26, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES; NORTH 88915'00" WEST 180.65 PEET; NORTH 33'07'25' WEST 154.51 FEET; NORTH 27'21'32' EAST 387.32 FEET; NORTH 13917'25' WEST 171.17 PEET; SOUTH 46.22'22" WEST 324.66 FEET; SOUTH 72937'52' WEST 458.93 FEET; NORTH 70954'02' WEST 354.53 FEET; SOUTH 73'56'O1' WEST 130.08 PEET; AND SOUTH 41916'07' WEST 316.18 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO RING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER RING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39' WEST 627.46 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39'41'39', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 434.70 FEET; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 25.00 FEET; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 245.69 PEET; THENCE NORTH 156.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'39'19' EAST 330.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78°41'24' EAST 160.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, RAVING A RADIUS OP 19341 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 78941'24', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 267.83 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 382,725 SQUARE PEET OR 8.786 ACRES MORE OR LESS. L' GAL DESCRIPTION.-. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK SITE IS SUBJECT TO?SS FOLLOWING EASEMENTS OP RECORD MCI ARE MOT ►LOTIAELit • 1. BASEMENT AND TSB TERMS ANII CONDITIONS THEREOF, • RESERVED STI RICHARD S. OGILVIS, NOT AS AN. •INDIVIDUAL BUT BOLELY AS TRUSTER OF THE PROPERTY or CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AID PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. • PURPOSE, COMMUNICATION LINE. • DATED: FEBRUARY 12, 1960 ' RECORDED, OCTOBER 21, 1911 RECORDING IRMMSER, 4110210021 AREA AFFECTED' PARCEL C 10 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT TOR COMMUNICATION LIME-AS IT MOW EXISTS ACROSS PROPERTY OR AS TO BE RELOCATED ACROSS SAID PROPERTY. ALSO MINERAL RIGHTS WITHOUT THE RIGHT CO SURFACE ENTRY • 2. EASEMENT AND TIE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE, CITY OF RENTON. A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ►URPOSE, RIGHT TO ENTRY TO PLACA EARTH FILL AREA A►FECTI01 PARCELS A, B AND C ' DATED, • SEPTEMBER 22, 1951 • RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 30, 1917 RECORDING NUMBERS /309300711 2. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREO►t RESERVED SYI RICHARD B. OGILVIE, MOT AS AN • INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF • THAT PROPERTY OP CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. • PURPOSE: 10 FOOT EASEMENT POI COMMUNICATION LINE AS IT NOW EXISTS ACROSS • • PROPERTY OR A! TO BE RELOCATED ACROSS PROPERTY. ALSO MINERAL RIGHTS EXCEPT RIGHT TO SURFACE ENTRY. DATED, MARCH 10, 1017 RECORDED, JUNI 6, 1917 RECORDING NUMBER, 630606007 ARIA AFFECTED, A PORTION OF SAID PARCEL A • 1. EXCEPTIONS AND RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN DEEDS PROM, RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AM INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THAT PROPERTY OF CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. PURPOSE, MINERAL RIGHTS - LESS RIGHTS, TO SURFACE ENTRY. • DATED, MARCH 10, 1917 RECORDED, JUNE 0, 1912 RECORDING NUMBER, • 110606000 • •AREA AFFECTED, A PORTION OF SAID"PARCIL A S. EASEMENT AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF, RESERVED SYI RICHARD B. OGILVIE, MOT AS AN • INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THE PROPERTY OF CHICAGO. MILWAUREE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. PURPOSE, 10 FOOT COMMUNICATION LINO EASEMENT AHD MINERAL RIGHTS LESS RIGHT TO SURFACE ENTRY DATED, AUGUST 21, 1110 RECORDED, SEPTEMBER 20. 1910 RECORDING NUMBER, 1009200609 AREA AF/ECTED, PARCEL A 1« EXCEPTIONS AND RElIRIIATIONE CONTAINED IN DEED, FROM, RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AM INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THE • PROPERTY OF CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. DATED, MARCH 10. 1917 RICORDEDI JUNE 1, 1962 RECORDING NUMBER, II06010001 AS FOLLOWS, GRANTOR RESERVES TO HIMSELF AND TO HIS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, ALL MINERALS Or ANY MATURE WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO COAL, IRON, NATURAL GAS AND OIL, EXCEPT SAND AND GRAVEL. WHICH MAY SE IN OR UPON SAID DESCRIBED LANDS. TOGETHER WITH THE SOLE, EXCLUSIVE AND PERPETUAL RIGHT TO'EIPLORE FOR AND DISPOSE OF SAID MINERALS BY ANY MEANS OR METHODS SUITASLE TO TIME GRANTOR AND HIS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, RUT WITHOUT ENTERING UPON OR USING THE SURFACE OF S AID LANDS AND IN SUCH MANNER AS NOT TO DAMAGE THE SURFACE OF SAID LANDS OR TO INTERFERE WITH TIME USE THEREOF MY THE GRANTEE, AND MY ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. SAID RESERVATIONS ALSO APPEAR UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS S306010007. S002220297, 5001200609. AFFECTS, PARCELS A AND R ' I CITY itIk M OCT12 2 1996 • BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. FIRST CITY I EQUITIES October 14.! 1986 Mr. Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner CITY OF RENTON Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA' 98055 RE: Signage Variance BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Mr. Kaufman: First City, Equities has designed a comprehensive masterplan for the infrastructure, trail network and identifying elements for the Blackriver Corporate Park as a context within which each phase of development will occur. During our, overview of the project, we have encountered certain problems relating to the existing City of Renton signage code and its application to our site. ;I I have attempted to outline in this letter the justification for our request for a sign code variance on two specific issues: (1) off-premise signs and (2) signage setback requirements. A. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES The special circumstances surrounding this development include the fact that we are dealing with such a large parcel of land ( 130 acres) that comprehensive planning is mandated. Unfortunately, the City' s zoning code controlling signage was intended for use by smaller developments on individual lots as a way to identify tenants. It was not designed with the large user in mind who would need to not only identify tenants but who would also need to identify the office park itself. To do such a large project justice requires a more detailed overall design plan, and requires project identification apart from actual tenant identification. This problem emerges specifically in two areas: (1) in designing unifying standards for graphics and identity which are not addressed by the sign ordinance; and (2) in providing for extensive site amenities which in the strictest interpretation of the zoning code do not conform. 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170•Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 1 Real Estate Development and Investments Mr. Henry Kaufman Hearing Examiner CITY OF RENTON October 1, q1986 Page Two A. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES (Cont'd) 1. Off-Premise Signage a) Proposed Action: The shape and topography of the site leaves areas of contiguous residual land belonging to other property owners between the business park and public streets. Due to the small size or nature of ownership (public, private, utility) , these contiguous residual properties would probably never be developed or finished. We propose to place several of the business park' s public identification (monument) signs on these contiguous residual properties. One sign at the intersection of Powell Ave. S.W. and S.W. Grady Way and another at the intersection of S.W. Oakesdale Ave. and Naches Ave. S.W. Along with placement of these identification signs on the contiguous residual properties, we propose to landscape the existing unsightly terrain with maintained rolling lawn and conifer trees providing a visual amenity and finished entrance to the park. bl) Problem: The sign code does not permit off-premise signage. it c;) Hardship: Due to the size, shape and topography of the property, the business park' s identification cannot be seen from the major arterials servicing the property. Approval of the variance request is necessary in order to locate the monument signs effectively. 2. Water Feature Setbacks a) Proposed Action: We propose at the intersection of SI.W. Oakesdale Ave. and S.W. 7th St. , two water features. The water features are visual amenities and sculptural statements which, as part of the landscape, integrate the natural water and vegetation existing on tChe site with the man-made or built elements of the business park. 1) Problem: The Zoning Code states that no "!structures" be placed in the setback areas from public streets other than off-street parking and loading, driveways, entrance roads, lawn sprinklers, walkways, 1'andscaping, ordinary and necessary utility service • Mr. Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner CITY OF RENTON October 1, 1986 Page Three ', 2. Water Feature Setbacks b), Problem (cont'd facilities, utility poles, lighting fixtures, identifying and directional signs and underground installations accessory to permitted use. By the strictest definition of "structures" , as stated in the Zoning Code, elements of our proposed water features are not allowed in the setback area. 1 2. Water Feature Setbacks (Cont'd) i I' c) Hardship; Other properties in. the vicinity have such items as benches, planters, arbors or trellises, bollards, play structures, etc. , which can also be classified as structures in the strictest sense but are allowed within the setback as part of the landscape design or more specifically, the "hardscape" which enhances the landscape amenity. Additionally, the aesthetic impact intended with the sculptural water fountains would be lost if they were not located at the road intersection. This is the "heart" of the project ' and requires special attention be given at that location. Without approval of the variance request, we are unable to provide the distinctive water features. B. PUBLIC WELFARE The granting of a variance will not be detrimental or injurious to the pul?,lic welfare or other improvements in the vicinity but in actuality, will upgrade the appearance of the entire area. Location and surroundings are unique and require flexibility in design and in restrictions to provide a complete and finished project for private and public benefit. The signing and landscaping become part of the comprehensive design concept for this planned business development and the unifying element establishing the quality and identity of the park. C. SPECIAL PRIVILEGE This is not a grant of special privilege, as it meets the intent of the sign and zoning ordinances by control, but allows flexibility in creating quality signing and landscaping on a unique site with unique circumstances. Mr. Fred Kaufman Heaing Examiner CITY OF RENTON October 1, !,1986 Page Four i D. MINIMUM VARIANCE The approval of the variance would provide the minimum variance for the sign and zoning ordinances to accomplish and establish finished perimeters, uniform sign identity, and unique landscaping with strong visual appeal for the large planned development. Warm regards, P FIRST CITYiEQUITIES C514age :Coe-• A1/472/44 Barbara E. pMoss Director of Planning BEM:bc i!!! II lIi I I li it it Il LI aAL DESCRIPTI(a :_ 1 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (Formerly Valley 405 Business Park). Phase I Lot 1 of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. LLA-008-84 as recorded in Book 41 of Surveys, page 239, Records of King County, Washington, together with the west 10.00 feet of the south 249.00 feet of Lot 10, Washington Technical Center as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, pages 98 through 102, records of said county and the east 80.00 feet of the south 425.00 feet of the north 884.00 feet of that portion of Tract B, said Washington Technical Center, lying south of Lot 7 thereof. Portion of Tract B to be conveyed for Lot Line Adjustment: The east 80.00 feet of the south 425.00 feet of the north 884.00 feet of that portion of Tract B, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, pages 98 through 162., records of King County, Washington, lying south of Lot 7 thereof. NEW LOT 1: Phase II THAT PORTION OF LOT 11, WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS,• PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.A. 008-84 , FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8409179003, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF LOT 12, SAID WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER, DESCRIBED AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.A. 004-83, FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NUMBER 8309309001, RECORDS OP SAID COUNTY, AND THAT PORTION OF TRACT B, SAID WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT 11 WHICH IS SOUTH 1'14'28' WEST ALONG SAID WEST LINE 176.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 11; THENCE NORTH 88'45'32" WEST 59.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 1'14128' WEST 347.61 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 3, SAID CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. L.L.P. 004-83; THENCE NORTH 77'27'27' EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE THEREOF 75.47 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT B; THENCE NORTH 12'32'30' WEST ALONG SAID 'EASTERLY LINE 60.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 1'14 '28' EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE 271.36 FEET TO BEGINNING. CITYOr onn RE@ uu OM 1986 U BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Lf SAL DESCRIPTIC BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (Formerly Valley 405 Business Park). DESCRIPTION TRACT B, PLAT OF WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AS MODIFIED AND KNOWN AS LOT 2 OF CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LLA 001-86 FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8609179004, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH 650.00 FEET THEREOF LYING EAST OF THE 80.00 FOOT ROAD EASEMENT SHOWN IN SAID TRACT B; ALSO TRACT A OF THE PLAT OF WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 THROUGH 102, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH; THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, SAID TOWNSHIP AND RANGE, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 24, AT A POINT NORTH 1°05'00" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE 1804.20 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE NORTH 89°16'47" WEST 1033.53 FEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 72ND AVENUE SOUTH, FORMERLY COUNTY ROAD NO. 8 (ALSO KNOWN AS THE CHARLES MONSTER ROAD); THENCE NORTH 1°26'34" WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN 404.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°16'47" EAST 200 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°43'13" EAST 300.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89°16'47" WEST 86.42 FEET TO AN INTERSECTION WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO METRO AND DESCRIBED IN DEED FILED UNDER RECORDER'S NO. 8207300283, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND ON A CURVE, OF WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 56°16'42" EAST 722.96 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 142.43 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22°26'02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 56.79 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 24; THENCE SOUTH 87°26'40" EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE 341.02 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID METRO TRACT, SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE BEING ALSO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF TRACT A, WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 122 OF PLATS, PAGES 98 TO 102, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE AND ON A CURVE OF WHICH THE RADIUS POINT BEARS NORTH 55°39'29" EAST 422.96 FEET, A. DISTANCE OF 87.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22°26'02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHWESTERLY LINE 263.09 FEET TO A LINE DESIGNATED "PERMANENT EASEMENT BOUNDARY" ON U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE MAP, SHEET 1 OF 3, ENTITLED "LAND RIGHTS WORK MAP, P-1 CHANNEL, EAST SIDE GREEN RIVER WPP, CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON"; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE AND ON A CURVE, THE RADIUS POINT OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 5°24'02" EAST 165.04 FEET A DISTANCE OF 112.06 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE, THE RADIUS POINT OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 44°18'11" WEST 172.96 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID REVERSE CURVE AND SAID LINE 133.74 FEET; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID LINE 367.02 FEET TO A LINE WHICH BEARS NORTH FROM A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 13 WHICH IS 1271.76 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 143.95 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY LINE TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 89°16'47" WEST FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 89°16'47" EAST 125.40 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. L GAL DESCRIPT N BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL A; THAT PORTION OP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AND THAT PORTION , OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OP LAW; AND OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41 AND OF THAT PORTION OP TRACT 26, RENTON SHORELANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH - SOUTH CENTERLINE OP SAID SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OF 884.84 PEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 382.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70'54'02' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 73.50 PEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41 AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 70'54'02' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OP 281.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73'56'O1' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 130.08 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41'6'07' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OP 316.18 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 627.46 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OP 434.70 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39 '41'39'; THENCE NORTH A DISTANCE OP 25.00 PEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; THENCE WEST A DISTANCE OF 280.69 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; THENCE SOUTH 59'53'47' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY DISTANCE OP 377.52 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 74'13'19' WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY A DISTANCE OP 443.31 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OP THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD, THENCE NORTH 34'18'31' WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN A DISTANCE OF 43.46 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 06'34'41' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.00 PEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 45.43 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03'44'25' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 10'19'06' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,055.00 FEE''. AN ARC DISTANCE OF 209.95 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 11'24'08" TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 21'43'14' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 727.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE CO 214.77 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16'55'35" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE,THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 38'38'49" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,571.00 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 206.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07'32'02' TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE NORTH 43'49'09" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OP 97.17 FEET TO A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 42'43'18' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.89 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 40.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 03'17'45'; THENCE NORTH 50'34'27' EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 248.50 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'25'33° EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.58 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 93.64 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07'55'47' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 31'29'46" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 428.64 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 73.32 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 09'48'04' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE OH A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 41'17'50' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,580.74 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 437.40 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 09'42'39' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'35'11' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 789.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 16'12'39' TO THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE SOUTH 01'24'04' WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 950.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. L GAL ®ESCRIPT _' N BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL Si: THAT PORTION OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM N0. 41, AND OP THE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH DINE ON A CURVE TO TEE RIGHT, THS SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13. • CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH O1'32'03' EAST HAVING A RADIUS 0/ TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING 1165.09 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1097.05 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: ANGLE OF 53'57'00' TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING 'ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 37'35'03' EAST A DISTANCE OP 308.70 BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE D NORTH 00'58'28" EAST ALONG THE NORTH - SOUTH CENTERLINE OP SAI ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 52'24'57' SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OF 884.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OP EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 1005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 45.82 TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958; FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02'36'I1: TO A LINE 35 FEET THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID SOUTHERLY OP AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 382.60 PEET; THENCE NORTH 70'54'02" WEST MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OP THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 73.50 FEET TO PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE THE EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; NORTH 40'11'11" WEST A DISTANCE OF 126.24 FEET TO A POINT OF THENCE NORTH 01'24'04' EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41 A DISTANCE OP 950.58 FEET TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 49'48'16' WEST HAVING A A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OP AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF RADIUS OF 1829.78 PEET; AN ARC DISTANCE OF 309.67 FEET THROUGH A THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. CENTRAL ANGLE OP 09'41'48"; THENCE NORTH 49'53'32' WEST ALONG PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 167.07 PEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 15'22'32' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 40'06'28' WEST HAVING A 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 789.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL RADIUS OF 1102.46 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 807.11 FEET THROUGH A ANGLE OF 16'12'39' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41'56'46' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT. THE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'35'11' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 01'50'1B' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2580.74 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 437.40 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL 2790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 659.24 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'42'39' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ANGLE OF 13'32'14' TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 41'17'50' WEST HAVING A RADIUS OP 428.64 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 73.32 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'41'04' TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LIME ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31'29'46' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.58 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 93.64 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07'55'47' TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE SOUTH 30'34'27' WEST A DISTANCE OF 248.50 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, TUE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'25'33" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.09 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 40.09 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 03'17'45" TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE NORTH 43'49'09' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OP 173.83 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 46'10'S1' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 4030.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 197.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 02'48'32' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 43'22'19' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1053.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 191.75 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'01'18' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 37'21'01' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 10543.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 186.51 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'00'49' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 36'20'12' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 1657.00 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OP 193.93 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'42'20' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 29'37'52' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 6738.00 PEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.76 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 01'40'54' TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 27'56'S8' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1768.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 194.45 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06'18'06' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 21'39'52' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 8603.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 204.54 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE Ol 01'21'44' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE • CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 20'17'01' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OP 1922.10 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 178.79 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05'19'16' TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 14'57'22' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2814.93 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 659.42 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13'25'19" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE L"aAL DESCRIPTILYN BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PARCEL Cs' THAT PORTION OP TRACT 25, RENTON SHORELANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL; AND • THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAM,ETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH — SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 884.84 PEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL NAPS, 1958, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OF 382.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70'54'02' WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OF 73.51 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OP THE . CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE NORTH 01'24'04' EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 950.58 FEET TO A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE 35 PEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK, ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 15'22'32' EAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 659.24 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 13'32'14' . TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 01'50'18' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,102.46 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OP 007.11 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41'56'46"; THENCE SOUTH 49'53'32' EAST, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 167.07 FEET; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,829.78 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 309.67 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09'41'48'; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARALLEL LINE, SOUTH 40.11'44' EAST, A'DISTANCE OF 126.24 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OP WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH .LINE, THE CENTER OP WHICH BEARS NORTH 49'48'16' EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 549.02 PEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31'17'19' TO A POINT TANGENT ON SAID SOUTH LINE OP THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, SOUTH 71'29'03" EAST ALONG A LINE 50 FEET SOUTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE EXISTING SOUTHBOUND TRACT, A DISTANCE OF 826.56 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OP SAID SECTION 18; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 71'29'03' EAST, A DISTANCE OF 85.52 PEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 650 FEET OP THE SQUTHWEST QUARTER QP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 89'10'25" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OP SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OP THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 81.57 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 88'15'00' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 650 PEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 2,261.41 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT OH THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 25 OF RENTON SHORE LANDS, 1958; THENCE NORTH 33'07'25' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OP 154.51 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTH 27'21'32' EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 387.32 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTH 83'17'25' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 171.17 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 46'22'22' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 324.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52° WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 76.33 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. LEGAL DESCRIPTION1 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK . EXHIBIT 5 PARCEL B-2 • THAT PORTION OP THE SOUTH HALF OP SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, AND OP C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTHOO'S8'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 68'03'54' EAST 224.45 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF, BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68'03'54' WEST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72'04'34' WEST 389.92 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68'06'46' WEST 429.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OP 60.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 126'52'10°, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 132.86 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53'07'50'' EAST 199.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OP 200.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53859'30', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 188.47 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72'52'40' EAST 290.00 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 197.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 39'08'51', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 67'58'29' EAST 380.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31'27'12' EAST 204.86 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 165,263 SQUARE FEET OR 3.794 ACRES MORE OR LESS. EXHIBIT 6 TO PARCEL 8-1 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HAM OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75,.RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, AND OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 0'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68'03'54' WEST 351.11 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 68'03'34' EAST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 12'01'00' WEST 40.75 FEET;. THENCE SOUTH 77'59'00' WEST 133.01 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 230.00 PEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 27'47'31' AN ARC DISTANCE OF 111.56 PERT TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVATURE; THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 15'46'31' EAST 160.00 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, 'THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 70'48'19' AN ARC DISTANCE QP 197.73 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82'15'00' WEST 67.68 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31'32'22' WEST 71.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 81'11'35' WEST 193.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82'1S'00' NEST 92.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 35929'30° WEST 143.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74'44'00' WEST 84.85 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60'16'00' WEST 67.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12'16'00' EAST 97.35 . FEET; THENCE NORTH 68'06'46' EAST 53.79 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 72'04'34' WEST PROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 72'04'34' EAST 389.92 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OP BEGINNING. CONTAINING 182,206 SQUARE FEET OR 4.1829 ACRES MORE OR LESS. L aAL DESCRIPTIt �1 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK EXHIBIT 7 TO PARCEL B-4 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, N.N. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THAT PORTION OP JUNCTION ADDITION TO CITY OF SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OF LAW, AND OF C.E. BROWNELL'S DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 884.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OP TRACT 26, RENTON SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS 1958; THENCE SOUTH 72'37'52' WEST 382.60 PEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OP SAID TRACT 26; THENCE NORTH 70'54'02' WEST 354.53 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26: THENCE SOUTH 73'56'O1' WEST 130.08 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT'!IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26/ THENCE SOUTH 41'16'07' WEST ALONG THE' SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 316.18 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OP LAND DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786: THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39' WEST 627.46 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 39'41'39'; AN ARC DISTANCE OF 434.70 FEET; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 25.00 FEET; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 245.69 PEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING/ THENCE NORTH 156.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'39'19' EAST 330. 21 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33'00'54' WEST 109.47 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, SAID POINT BEING A POINT ON A CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'23'00' EAST 1853.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALQNQ.SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIS AND CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'59'19', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 129.00 FEET TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER OF SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 43'22'19' EAST 4030.00 FEET/ THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE LEFT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 2'48'32', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.57 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE SOUTH 43'49'09' WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH MARGIN 271.00 FEET TO A POINT OP CURVE/ THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1571.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 7'32'02', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 206.57 FEET TO A POINT•OP COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 38'38'49' WEST 727.00 PEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16'55'35', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 214.77 FEET TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 21'43'14' WEST 1055.00 PEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'24'08', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 209.95 FEET TO A POINT OP COMPOUND CURVE; THE CENTER WHICH BEARS NORTH 10'19'06' WEST 696.00 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND CURVE TO THE RIGHT THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3'44'25', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 45.43 PEET TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF THE CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 34'18'31' EAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN 43.46 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OP SAID TRACT DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER . KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE NORTH 74'13'19' EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 443.31 FEET; THENCE NORTH 59'53'47' EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 377.52 FEET; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 35.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 114,401 SQUARE PEET OR 2.626 ACRES MORE OR LESS. LL SAL DESCRIPTIL : I BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK EXHIBIT 8 TO PARCEL 8-3 THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AND OF JUNCTION ADDITION TO THE CITY OF.SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, RECORDS OF SAID KING COUNTY, TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTACH TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OF LAW; AND OF C.S. BROWNELL'S' .DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, AND OF TRACTS 25 AND 26, RENTON SHORE LANDS 2ND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS 1958, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: • BEGINNING AT THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OP SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH00'58'28' EAST ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE THEREOF 1092.82 FEET; THENCE NORTH 6843'54" EAST 224.45 FEET TO A POINT HEREINAFTER CALLED "POINT A"; THENCE SOUTH 68.03'54" WEST 575.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 72'04'34" WEST 389.92 PEET; THENCE SOUTH 68.06'46" WEST 429.32FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 85.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 60.00.FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 126.52'10', AN ARC DISTANCE OP 132.86 FEET; THENCE NORTH 53.07'50' EAST 199.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53.59'30', AN ARC DISTANCE OF 188.47 FEET; THENCE SOUTH • 72'52'40" EAST 290.00 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OP 197.00 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 39608'51", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 134.60 PEET; THENCE NORTH 67.58'29" EAST 380.92 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31'27'12" EAST 204.86 FEET TO AFOREMENTIONED "POINT A"; THENCE NORTH 80.04'48' EAST 232.00 PEET; •THENCE SOUTH 42606'08' EAST 215.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 31.14'05" WEST 358.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'10'O1" EAST 71.34 FEET; THENCE EAST 114.27 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 68.91 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT 25; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID TRACTS 25 AND 26, THE FOLLOWING COURSES AND DISTANCES: NORTH 88.15'00' WEST 180.65 FEET; NORTH 33'07'25" WEST 154.51 PEET; NORTH 27'21'32" EAST 387.32 FEET; NORTH 83.17'25" WEST 171.17 FEET; SOUTH 46'22'22" WEST 324.66 FEET; SOUTH 72'37'52" WEST 458.93 FEET; NORTH 70.54'02" WEST 354.53 PEET; SOUTH 73'56'01' WEST 130.08 PEET; AND SOUTH 41'16'07" WEST 316.18 FEET TO THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NUMBER 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39'41'39" WEST 627.46 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39.41'39", AN ARC DISTANCE OP 434.70 FEET; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 25.00 FEET; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY 245.69 FEET; THENCE NORTH 156.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'39'19" EAST 330.21 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78'41'24" EAST 180.00 PEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OP 195.Q1 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OP 78'41'24", AN ARC DISTANCE OF 267.83 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 382,725 SQUARE PEET OR 8.786 ACRES MORE OR LESS. L_ GAL DESCRIPTIO _ BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK MI IS SUBJECT TO TEE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS OF RECORD WHICH ARE NOT PLO/TABLE' • 1. CASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF' . • RESERVED RYt RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THE PROPERTY OF CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. PURPOSE' COMMUNICATION LINE. DATED' FEBRUARY 12, 1980 RECORDED' • OCTOBER 21. 1981 RECORDING SUMSEX' 8110210021 AREA AFFECTED' PARCEL C 10 FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR COMMUNICATION LINE AS IT NOW EXISTS "• ACROSS PROPERTY OR AS TO BE RELOCATED ACROSS SAID PROPERTY. ALSO MINERAL RIGHTS WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO SURFACE ENTRY 2. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF' • GRANTEE' CITY OF AUTOS. A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE, RIGHT TO ENTRY TO PLACE EARTH FILL AREA AFFECTED' PARCELS A. B AND C DATED: SEPTEMBER 22, 1983 RECORDED, SEPTEMBER 30, 1983 RECORDING NUMBER: 8309300741 3. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF' RESERVED BY: RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF TEAT PROPERTY Of CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. • PURPOSE' 10 FOOT EASEMENT FOR COMMUNICATION LINE AS IT NOW EXISTS ACROSS • PROPERTY OR AS TO BE RELOCATED ACROSS PROPERTY. ALSO MINERAL RIGHTS EXCEPT RIGHT TO SURFACE ENTRY. DATED, MARCH 10, 1083 RECORDED' JUNE 6, 1983 RECORDING NUMBER' 830606007 • AREA AFFECTED, A PORTION OF SAID PARCEL'A 6. EXCEPTIONS AND RESERVATIONS CONTAINED IN DEEDS PROM: RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THAT PROPERTY OP CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. PURPOSE' MINERAL RIGHTS - LESS RIGHTS TO SURFACE ENTRY. • DATED' MARCH 10. 1983 RECORDED' JUNE 6, 1983 • RECORDING NUMBER: • 130606006 AREA AFFECTED: A PORTION OF SAID PARCEL A S. EASEMENT AND TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF' RESERVED BY' RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AN • INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THE PROPERTY OP CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. PURPOSE' 10 FOOT COMMUNICATION LINE EASEMENT AND MINERAL RIGHTS LESS RIGHT TO SURFACE ENTRY DATED' AUGUST 21. 1980 RECORDED' SEPTEMBER 30, 1980 • RECORDING NUMBER' 8009300609 AREA AFFECTED' PARCEL A 6.. EXCEPTIONS ANS RESERV'ATIONE CONTAINED IN DEED' FROM' RICHARD B. OGILVIE, NOT AS AN INDIVIDUAL BUT SOLELY AS TRUSTEE OF THE • PROPERTY OF CHICAGO. MILWAUKEE, ST. • PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD CO. DATED: MARCH 10, 1983 RECORDED' JUNE 6, 1983 RECORDING NUMBER' 8306060006 AS FOLLOWS' GRANTOR RESERVES TO HIMSELF AND TO HIS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, ALL MINERALS OF ANY NATURE WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO COAL. IRON, NATURAL GAS AND OIL, EXCEPT SAND AND GRAVEL, WHICH MAY BE IN OR UPON SAID DESCRIBED LANDS, TOGETHER WITH THE.SOLE, EXCLUSIVE AND PERPETUAL RIGHT TO'EXPLORE FOR AND DISPOSE or SAID MINERALS BY ANY MEANS OR METHODS SUITABLE TO THE GRANTOR AND HIS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, BUT WITHOUT ENTERING UPON OR USING THE SURFACE OF SAID LANDS AND IN SUCH MANNER AS NOT TO DAMAGE THE SURFACE OF SAID LANDS OR TO INTERFERE WITH THE USE THEREOF BY THE GRANTEE, AND BY ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. SAID RESERVATIONS ALSO APPEAR UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 1306060007, 1002220257, 8009300609.' AFFECTS' PARCELS A AND B • • CERTIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS/SITE PLAN • • * * *FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY** * CITY off RENTON Li31/RMM11 PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: • uu OCT 2 1986 APPLICATION NUMBER: BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. The following is a list of adjacent property owners and their addresses. A notification of the pending site plan application shall be sent to these individuals as prescribed by Renton City Code. Chapter 7 Section 38 of. Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 relating to site plan approval. ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER • • Hoivick,Dereget,Koe.ring 1230 0aknead Pwy 918800007000 Suite 210 918800006002 Sunnyvale, CA 94086 918800005004 918800004007 Damson/Birtcher Fund 11400 SE 6th St. 918800008008 c/o Birtcher Property— Suite 120 • Commerical Bellevue, Wa. 98004 Perry, John H. 900 Powell Ave S.W. 214610001502 Perry Bros. Inc. Renton, WA 98055 Air Products, & Chemicals P.O. Box 538 214610001007" Inc.., Allentown, PA 18105 Burlington Northern Inc. 810 3rd Ave : 242304909904 208 Central Bldg. 132304900703 Seattle, WA 98104 Casey, M. P.O. Box 3586 334040710009 c/o' Seattle-1st- National Seattle, WA 98124 Bank, Trust R/E Puget Western Inc. Puget Power Bldg. 2423049004 10608 NE 4th Bellevue, WA 98009 Puget Sound Power _ Puget. Power Bldg. 2423049110 and Light Company OBC — 11N 2423049104 Bellevue, WA 98009 2423049107- 2423049108- King County 500 A King County 24230491107 Admins. Bldg. 132304907802 ' Seattle, WA 98104 7229500281- City of Renton 200 Mill Ave South 242304909805 Renton, WA 98055 9188000150 - 3779200090 CF/CHG Associates 200 S 333rd St. 214370228006 Federal Way, WA 98003 132304902506 214370224500 Fairview Pointe Assoc. 26360 Aric Lane 8T1900001009 to c/o Junta Dale Los Altos Hills CA 94022 811900064009 • ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS ' PARCEL NUMBER Seventh Ave Co. P.O. BOX 598 182305903607 Bellevue, WA 98006 Container Corp. 1 First National Plaza 2423049008 of America Chicago, IL 60670 Metro 821 2nd Avenue 242304909706 Seattle/Metro Seattle, WA 98104 7106030382 2423049078 City of Seattle 600 4th Ave Rm 101 242304911108 City Comptroller Seattle, WA 98104 Black River Quarry '6808 140th ST. 722950032002 Seattle, WA 98104 377920015007 377920017003 Hawk, James L & Mary Jo 22435 SE 288th 377920012004 Kent, WA 98024 377920005602 • 377920005305 3779200001007 132304900609 132304901003 Hawk, James L. Sr. 6808 S 140th 377920000504 Seattle, WA 981.78 Union Pacific Corp P.O. Box 2500 3779200160 Broomfield, CO 80020 377920014505 CERTIFICATION • I. YKevl{''at;"4. hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property owners and their„,„,/ addresses were taken from the records of the King County Assessor as prescribed by law. '' • ` 'r, ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me. a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing at on the a3ya day of h�Yr r dj y: / SIGNED: / +'. .�; • CERTIFICATION OF MAILING I. hereby certify that notices of the public meeting on the subject site plan approval were mailed on . to each listed adjacent property owner as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me. a Notary Public, In'and for the State of Washington residing at on the day of SIGNED:. CITY OF I ENTTON UEMEOWIEll uu OCT 2 1986 BUILDING/MINI @BST. OF R4 • A � ECF: I eCr—(U`(O—n t$ 0 z City of Renton `u' ��—tc���8� S0N-oc� -SK(C) o NIL ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 0,9ge1:0 sEPSE" Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for allproposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality. of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal. if it can be,done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each• question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist-you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your,answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. • Use of Checklist 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 SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project." "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: BlackRiver' Corporate Park Valley 405 Business Park 2. Name of applicant: First City Equities 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Barbara E. Moss First City Equities 800 5th Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 624=9223 4. Date checklist prepared: August 11, 1986 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton Building & Zoning 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Construction phased: Summer 1986/Summer 1987/ Summer 1988 CITY OF RENTON NRIM [E OCT2 1986 D BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? if yes, explain. Not for infra-structure but for developments within, which would be submitted and processed as phased and developed. B. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Original E. I.S. for total project for Earlington Park by RW Thorpe & Associates for First City Equities and City of Renton; February 1981 and E.I.S. for Black River Office Park by Thorpe, April 1983. Shoreline Permit SM-90-81. 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. City of Renton Building Permit, Site Plan Approval , and Sign Permits. Shoreline Substantial- Development permit for north half of property. State Flood Control permit for bridge crossing. 11. Give brief, complete description 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. Infra-structure proposal which incorporates approximately .130 acres of land, easements and rights-of-way. It encompasses a master concept for unifying signing, landscaping, streets, paths and exercise areas to integrate phased development within controlled and related parameters. • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topography map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps o.r detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Located in an existing area of development in Renton, Washington (north of Interstate 405, west of Oakesdale LID and Metro, south of Burlington Northern Railroad, north of Grady Way and east of Powell Avenue. ) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); 422, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 3-6% adjacent railroad. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, caly, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland... Sand, silt, gravel and organic materials. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. - 2 - e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Fills and grading under other permits and approvals. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing. construction, or use? If so. generally describe. Site is flat, minor erosion of surface could occur on site. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? This proposal would have limited impervious surface. .However, approximately 80% of the developable site, exclusive of dedicated buffers and easements, could be impervious. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Siltation and erosion control per. City Standards. 2. AIR 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. Normal emissions from dust, auto and truck equipment. 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: • Water site to reduce dust during construction. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater. lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. P-1 drainage channel and drainage ditches flowing into channel . 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes, minor clearing and grading to accommodate paths and exercise stations, boardwalks and minor grading for proper drainage and erosion control . 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Under separate contracts for major fill. Infra-structure would only require minor clearing and no. fill . Minor dredging and clearing would occur west of Naches to provide adequate drainage and flow to enhance biofilter.ing process and prevent severe erosion as a result of increased water flows directed by City of Renton off Naches. - 3 - • 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximately quantities if known. No, one area of drainage in a ditch will be regraded and meandered east of Naches to match existing' conditions. To west and east of Naches, water is proposed to be recirculated during dry seasons. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes.. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. None. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and appaoximately quantities if known. None. 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. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water into storm drainage system and into detention area at P-1 Channel per City approvals. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. - 4 - d. Proposed moaDures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: �1 N/A for this proposal . Regraded areas will be planted and revegetated to prevent erosion and bio-filter water. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ;0; deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other cottonwood ❑ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other XX Shrubs xx grass ❑ crop or grain xx Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ❑ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other xk other types of vegetation blackberry b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Select clearing and removal of blackberries and scrub alder in areas of ditch and paths (see Environmental Report attached) Existing Riparian and water plants to be augmented to increase biofiltering process. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. • • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Grass lawn areas, transplanted native shrubs, trees, and ground cover. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk,(ror eagle, songbirds, other seagulls, sparrows, ducks Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No. - 5 - d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Addition of new trees and landscaping and preservation of existing preserves with additional landscape areas to extend the existing preserves. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of-energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used, to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. N/A b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A • 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. - 6 - 2) What types ana levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction noise from normal work hours 7-5 for a short term basis. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None; noise not significant in relation to existing adjacent uses. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Undeveloped site with adjacent undeveloped and developed properties. Adjacent properties developed;Metro Treatment P1an,;.business park, railroad tracks with railroad car storage. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. • c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? • No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? MP f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? MP-MO-0 g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Black River, Springbrook Creek area. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Certain areas have been designated as Riparian Forest and Preserve areas. These areas are defined by previous agreements between City and property owners. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? N/A for infra-structure. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N%A - 7 - 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Use is compatible with adjacent uses. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Integrate signing and patch networks into landscaping. Landscape and signage concepts with trails and boardwalks are integrated into a cohesive, aesthetically designed environment. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light from street lighting at night and lights on monument signs and plazas. b. Could light or glare from the finished *project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Control of light patterns at signing and plazas to prevent glare. - 8 - 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Use is compatible with adjacent uses. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any 'proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Integrate signing and patch networks into landscaping. .Landscape and signage concepts with trails and boardwalks are integrated into a cohesive, aesthetically designed environment. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Light from street lighting at night and lights on monument signs and plazas. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Control of light patterns at signing and plazas to prevent glare. - 8 - 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? King County Recreational Park to west of site (Ft. Dent). b. Would the proposed_ project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Would supplement with new jogging trails and exercise stations, for public use. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. Provide links to other jogging paths in area. • • 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Archaeological dig by University of Washington on adjacent site. Funded by FCE, completed 1981. Site released for development (no.t part of submittal ) . c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A • 14. Transportation • a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Direct access to Powell Avenue SW, SW 7th Street, Naches Avenue and ultimately to Interstate 405 with on/off ramps at Interurban to the west and Old Rainier Avenue to the east. Also access to Oakesdale LID. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximately distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, approximately 3/4 mile c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Parking would be defined for each phase of development.-,Outside of infra-structure. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Require improvement and extension of Naches Avenue SW. Would ultimately, require expansion and improvement of Naches Avenue SW to connect to Oakesdale - Monster Road. Naches and Oakesdale are designed to City Standards for dedications to City of Renton.. - 9 e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. •How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A for this application; to be provided as development phases. See Transportation Report provided. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Transit bus use and Transportation Manag.ernent program,: (provided) . 15. Public Services a._ Would the project result in 'an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection. health dare, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Project will require normal fire protection and police protection already serving the area. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. Utilities • a. Circle utili ices currently available at the site: a ectricity. natural gas. (water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer septic system, o her. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. ' U1 timately: Elec. power, gas, water, sewer, telephoner All utilities are directly accessible at the site and at the adjacent street requiring minor excavation to extend to the building. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that .to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that. the,,.lead agency . may withdraw any declaration of non-significance .that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Barbara E. Moss 10 - *176 11-8-84 i �: Gg." rJ• 6-Jo. +1<u a ,.� tea '. .. :.;:a y y. op"• ::.7 ,_ l�:;• �•y fir ! . . '••G `o?r C it, ' 3' '';'Aar J tY sc 0 1U.�?ee`S� Se ti' r.:4 •;.r'�,t,.. 0. .��7. P� a^ I:I.il� :, : :HI .17,6 Ili rie,{ .N e,/ .i..:f•. IIIIII 14 /Of 1e.r(wttiIgi tG.._.•• U'".•� OO•' ' ��, •'.• ..►!' .o .. s •'i. . ./..':' •1. fe etc,* t �b1 Pao O f, ..�a je9ll�.Ole s:4 , �s ���let'77Ma e. • A tt'° `�^°' • r�• e r)•,C. •.Ser ;• -...,..a........... �•p e n.4 ,;�A rt 'a ;:� L#j� jv0 11��11 �/ • 137;.. �ipi{ ^.go / ,r• F-----•,,,,, .1... O • e. f . e r..•.i.4i4. •/ • , 4 K.0.` } �D �2 .' 2 e c..e' .0 • �s o !f CQj�.,yT��,r- ..... ? r 1✓�....,�e� •�,f ��.:.Bw.• _ ''J' �-SwT� �".� r ........„ •..... �� /'1' `s1� t-i '� p f sr a _•tii�• '>/ �f1 a(�.,,, 47s fri . , LC % ` • .• �•r.lefsee 1• C. .•i�,.\ f r A ° 3 a .•.rts,o r,.yr, p ti�e., ....4..,,_':.- s... . . �- yea,' `' 1 • i MQ t!� 7><a.. QI .-o _ .00 ,,. ,�Ve `„'pJ� o "^ fr ® ., ^ ., p F /81 ill .` Ov1 ►� �i7� �. i ,4a . �40% r -it _ • • 4. ,''; tii it - .� • t + y'S �S't C (/���•{Jd a Re T,i.S 47. °q'�'y ,1 'i*3 gbh, .. : .._ ��` _ ��•...3 C<^SYr t ,•'I��1 • °•s,ye ` 4d' �� Z. -�� t '.I Alp __1; 'tic • .tea Site -- ,,p,.�./` 3 `.1 .v r C . ' i',C, d 0 =1 7°¢, `v�(� .: :tA.27 rj i:,. ti '`O:__�QY 'e� • �ei)q• i ,i- :,... ,,�(jf froa( .•`i t3 me4. µ+ q e t> C•V/ �_.._. cjr.- •.v::;,:i .,-.-:.-t e-,.,,-.z:..-I...4-.p...-.-_-t.11 t,_k,i_r t.z7-,. ccoe 19 1 .' -^,, tee•. .... .- `;,\•=...1--i` .4 +� 1 - l ii,,i/j()) - - •t4.>.-'.. v Vim,. _... -- __.-_ kLA0 i 'September 18, 1986 \' 4.. t f. . '�+` tom+ t _ .. 9 lei) . ...,,,,-we_sa_...-4 4 .) t ell= - 9 } eldq. S.F. S.F. �`�''' t 1 -c Uri 1 Reber limber noon Type Site Building \ Yys `� ,�`+� �_�,� $,,...r.- 17 t i story office 180.344 S.F. 9.500 S.F. , . �'�� - ..-...•'Zy�f_r���� i f 2 1 story office 9.500 S.F. . ` f ( ' ;,� 7 v : 4 t stories riffle. 150.716 S F_ 4R MI S• a J� .e........ 11•,. F 1. ,O y .40,S.F. 9. _ s ►� „. 7 2 stories office 40.640 S.F. 1 •0 r J , a• ]t8 8 3 stories office 403.084 S.F. 71,832 S.F. � ' ' '� ,� �4.1 9 2 stories office 41,000 S.F. °+. :; 10 2 stories office 41,000 S.F. , 4 .1'.�•s ' s I .'�, 11 1 story office 298,780 S.F. 18,636 S.F. ..e.,..woe _ 12 1 story office 18.636 S.F. BLACKRIVER} ` yYU �_ .. . :, = ": -y 13 1 story office& R/0 17.410 S.F. 829,173 T.F. Corporate Park • �.�•is m �.f_. Cyr;�.� +e;� ' 14 1 story office i R/0 15.540 S.F. : J ,�/1 15 3 stories office 683.912 S.F. 69,150 S.F. j 9 '�/ 1 • I 16 4 ,tortes office 64,000 S.F. /• •• .. �_ r , .. .-J 17 3 stories office 48.000 S.F. RENTON, WASHINGTON i :` l '' Z=Q ••l'- MC+:C�� !=- �' ,� 18 2 stories office 39.972 S.F. \ ;'yC . `it�rs.,�_'i 4 19 5 stories office 1 521.275 S.F. 80,365 S.F. FAT �y ^OUIT7ES J .c .. '•;y„� ;4 ..,......i, , R=`...� % Y. 21 4 stories office 55.469 S.F. •-•--•••-• "-•••• ,,•tit. \ ', �,•Qtie _ -_ ra21 3/4 stories office 55,469 S.F. 55,469 S.F.22 1 sto R/0 1 158.884 S.F. 23,163 T.F. LJISON F Ot4E7eOI SST tNC. ` �+ _3 1�torryy R/D 22.600 S F, / �® •ro l •Y ti •• •." 4 2/1 :tortes office i� �/1.145 S %16 . 1-•r •;,rti�� S 1 story Rh f 128.004 S.F. 31.45�0p 5.1 sUTCNE1.. NELSON GROUP 9+C. 1;:I :I ,V Ft _ l ekg:tiP.- 26 2 stories office I 266.000 S.F. 26.160 S.F. .�.�..:«":;:.`;'.,'^.""`• - • 27 2 stories office 26.160 S.F. J4{� ,, •( • RAA-12_7 �Y/11/�11 //��(/nZ79 3 stories office "--_44,270 S.F BtlStl• tiDED A tRCtoNGS 84C. �� t_ / Y \v/ �4 stories office F. 47.000 S.F. 690,688 S.f. "' `0 ,tortes offtee 540,000 S.F. 17.000 S.F. '"= • 31 3 stories office 48,800 S.F. • .• . .rj 32 3 stories office 48.800 S.F. MI I 33 �tori.s office 47.000 S.F. - p0 14 2 stories office (168,553 S.F. 26.240 S.F. 7 y ^ 75 2 tortts offtct 27.440 S.F e !. ICJ 36 4/2 stories office 1 263.035 S.F. 90.760 S.F. •°•'" •� / �j' •� e N. i 1.575.330 S.F. ) ` ~- 1 Approstute Site Areas / \ r �' ' -�� TSleo Poem- -Tcotil 5TvOcES 4 ..._________ -----. ......-------3'. 0t2AT6fe t-5F O4AIl TW k-(36.t_f • , • y c,e1j LL U.1 ivt- 5tT--/ ti Traffic Impact Analysis For BLACK RIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK EDJune 1986 r Prepared for: First City Development Corporation 'I Prepared by: The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 14715 Bel-Red Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98007-3940 elTYOrnON10 [1.11AMNPY1N- 0 , OCT 2 1986 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. lUA Jam' c3clS-c�(n -j i TABLE OF CONTENTS -. r- Page 1 ' INTRODUCTION 1 L ,1. Project Description 1 Report Organization 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 I; Street and .Roadway Conditions 4 Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service 7 11\ Transit Service 9 ,__: Planned Improvements 11 ' FUTURE CONDITIONS • 14 Future Non-Project Traffic 14 Project Traffic 17 1 ,' Trip Generation 17 Total Traffic with Project 22 '` • MITIGATION 24 Transportation Management Plan 24 Transportation •Network Improvements 25 SUMMARY 27 r-�. ` ' LIST OF FIGURES 1. Vicinity Map 2 r 2. Site Plan 3 3. Street and Roadway Characteristics 5 n 4. 1986 Traffic Volumes 8 �_ 5. Reconfiguration of Southcenter/Grady/I-405/Interurban 13 6. Estimated 1995 Traffic Volumes Without Project 15 7. Project Trip Distribution 20 1� j 8. Project Traffic Assignment: 1995 21 Y 9. Estimated 1995 Traffic Volumes With Project J 23 ,yl L LIST OF TABLES I! . 1.' Existing PM Peak Levels of Service 10 2. Future Non-Project PM Peak Levels of Service 16 3. Project Trip Generation 18 —, 4. 1995 PM Peak Levels of Service 22 61 �1� \ `\ C\ 11> ,. INTRODUCTION This report is an analysis of traffic impacts related to the development of the Black River Technology Park in Renton. An Environmental Impact State- ment (EIS) was published in 1982 in which the Black River project was only j1k, vaguely identified 'as an office park with rail-served warehousing and the transportation impacts briefly described in terms of a range of 9,070 to 34,030 vehicle trips per day. The project has since been defined as a tech- nology park with office' and research and development facilities on-site. Full development of Black River is expected to occur by 1995, and this traffic analysis focuses on 1995 for comparison between project and non-project condi- tions. 1 II Project Description The Black River Technology Park is a development proposed by First City ' f Development Corp. It consists of a mixture of office space and research and development (R&D) facilities. The Tech Park is planned to develop from 1987 to 1995 as buildings are constructed generally from east to west over the project site, which is located in Renton adjacent to two recent developments on the Earlington Golf Course: the Valley 405 Business Park and the Washing- ton Technical Center. Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the project location within the Renton area and Figure 2 shows the Black River project site along with building size, function, and estimated completion. Major access to Black River is provided by Naches Avenue SW, a 5-lane roadway from SW 7th to Build- 1 ing 25, and a 2-4 lane roadway continuing north, then west to 0akesdale/Monster Road. I r 1 -1- r 1 __ --. m•. ... - _ 2i 7 _ .... I ,.a/MISMOMMMM 1 \.7..7.• Oa. ammi • •••=0.1MMEN • eaMONMONNO=• ...... .. . LS'NN.......... ..... . ..... ,.., ....,... ......,,,... WOOD A EDMONDS/ . __.... .......... ............. " ....., , ....... ... ........ -- . ... ... Si? NORTH —. — — . .11 ••••••• • . ..., . =ft •=. • . imam : • POULSED ... .... Ia. OMB •1111••• MN gimis ...m...... . I • , . • MM101M•..'..M1•.= E.1•I• .•A ma)014=-....Z.i ..-%. 7. . , —___ • 11;*."41''1'1'1...•• BELLEVUEli .s.1 •u04-I .•)- / 520 %...••I..•m..11••. m11•1,1 •1 16 =— IM..-. .. .. ,..., . ... , k SEATTLE ... . ... . ... . — ._ , .., N3 1 : "... -... = = . Im•••••. . 10•1 ••• • ••••• ••••••===.. .. In •••• •=mk. ... . ..,. I ^...MMEM 0 NINIMIN=MN .. Z I .... ....... . 1. 'S ' 1.' 1M BREMERTON 4 . ..—.. •:: = = 90 --- ---rjf . )....,....... ._ _ 0 . ••••=m ammo 4. ISSAQUAH * jowir. • RENTON IIII am... .... . ONIM• • immmmi.or . 11111111 AMIE • PROJECT • s SITE ion A= .., -, • • w 7 4)_______ • • , • BLACK RIVER . . • Figure 1 MVI . , TECHNOLOGY . VICINITY MAP • . ' PARK . crt 1.1r. • • / 34 \• NORTH • . � 3 1 �C P� 35 L11 32 30tP % • / � 33� 00 297 26 \ / P PROJECT SITE /7 12 28// ...)e 25 %N - __ , . 1 - n 27 24rH _ - N // A...(u� SW 7TH AVE 0<- OAKSDA`E A,_ SW 1 Q- W i N W Q BLDG.,, 'FLOORS TYPE S.F. J 24 1 STORY R/D 20.500 W 25 3/1 STORIES OFFICE L R/D 140.000 3 26 1 STORY R/D 26.650 O O 27 3 STORIES OFFICE 31,500 y 28 4 STORIES OFFICE 51.500 N 29 3 STORIES OFFICE 35,700 0 30 3 STORIES OFFICE 43.050 31 2 STORIES OFFICE 42,500 m 32 3 STORIES OFFICE 48.350 y 33 3 STORIES OFFICE 48.350 Z. m 34 2 STORIES OFFICE 42.500 35 2 STORIES OFFICE L R/D 62.800 N£ 36 3 STORIES OFFICE 107.600 .� q �P GIIp,0 1-405 BLACK RIVER Figure 2 lfl TECHNOLOGY N SITE PLAN G rou j e, . =�, Report Organization . . The report begins with a description of the existing transportation system: streets and intersections, traffic volumes, peak hour congestion, and transit service. This will be a summary of information gathered from field visits and '' recent traffic analyses of adjacent developments. Existing conditions are presented as the basis for estimating future traffic conditions along with planned improvements to vicinity roadways and intersections. Non-project traffic volumes are forecasted for 1995 and `--, summarized, along with levels of service. F __' Project traffic at full development is estimated for 1995 for daily and PM peak hour periods. Project traffic is then superimposed on non-project traffic for 1995 for an analysis of future conditions with Black River, based on total traffic volumes. The impacts of the project are identified through comparison `\, between non-project and total traffic conditions. u The report concludes with discussion of possible mitigating measures `V designed to improve conditions in the study vicinity to acceptable levels. , .--1 EXISTING CONDITIONS - i, • The Black River Technology Park is located in a growth area of Renton near the west city limit. Streets and intersections in the project study area •s\ • currently experience peak period congestion and the City of ,Renton is studying r ways to improve traffic flow through the cityand through the 9 g project study • area. A summary of study area existing conditions follows which includes street and roadway conditions, traffic volumes, peak hour intersection levels of r , service, transit service and planned improvements. Documentation of existing li conditions provides a basis for future year conditions and for an assessment of relative -impact due to the project development. Street and Roadway Conditions Figure 3 defines the boundary within which project-related impacts will be considered. Beyond the area shown, project traffic is well dispersed if .112 -- ' -- i. ,r___. _ __ ,,,,.7.... /. N. 4L. 48'. 2' MEDIAN Z A WINUIN(, AM) 446 6-8' srLDEaL. Sq SS Ms�iw45IDEWALKS > SOME O l NORTH HILLY °00 / GOODD C0313 CC 6L. 60-70' ALIGWENT • CO 2L. 22' 4L. 48' POOR- PROJECT • SIDEWALKS CC S. 3rd St. NARROW BRIDGE FAIR SITE - GOOD-EXC. .. " - di I TON LIMIT , 5 MPH4 0\J 2L. 20' ' Z //// Sunset �T SL, o . /- 1 c ieEwm // ° Rd W POOR 7L / �G�e�" ��1 %� 4L. 4AL48' 35 AucS N /�� SIOEWAUCS e `/ %� ��/,�j/,,.', FAIR-GOOD ; 1 I' V ' 1 SW 7th St. NO ll •J L 12L. 20-22' CC 1 co• 0 Ito P&R °y 4 6L • 0-2' DIRT Slip. /0\ E . •1• to T t°dy SIDEWALKS ` rylaVERY POOR t IC 0 • < 35 ► I-. • Id8JER O. 17 < `c�Y'1 t a ,i GOOD cr,9 4°° DESIGN s 1 - +7-81 1 i5L. 48-60' I /• a+ CO >I �� K[ 5IDEWALKS , / * < 20-22' \��Qb A de‘ . '4 G wr+ ~J • BR 1 DGE 1 I I NARROW BR 1 OGE_ .. • ` �� `,� U1 1 20-22' fGaADr) i Olk • " � 4L FREEWAY r� / ' I SW. 181h 'Sl. ,, SO VOW'. O N STD I 0-2' SOFT SHLD. G'�cen7•r 9I��� • '.1� + < 6'•GRAVEL'SrLO. _I v ` • 20-22 FAIR V \ 25 FPH (OPERATES AS- A • 405 1. .158th St. POOR-VERI, POOTt FOUR-WAY-STOP cc ' 4L FREEWAY I f l I L • (— - GRADY WAY,WEST OF LIND ,. ,' • • 4L. 44-48' I /- 2L. 20-22' W e SOFT SHLD. '� _ LEGENG o 0-8' SHLDS. 40-50MPH 7 T aL. a8', tiEDIAN 0 GOOD .i4,1 35 MPH GRADY WAY; LINO TO RAINIER SIGNAL : o FAIR-POD<t \ • ' 6-8' PAVED SHLD. ,4 4-6L. 40-70+' • 55 MFM. -4 STOP SIGN 1 SIDEWALKS \ to FAIR-GOOD 21 2 LANES 33 - 1 SHLD SHOULDER Co 3L, 36-40' SOME SIDEWALKS I 35 MPH -• CD GOOD-EXC. -' BLACK RIVER Figure 3 Irks TECHNOLOGY STREET AND ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS h.-.. • PARK _ Gt-®J47' throughout the regional travel network. Figure 3 also illustrates pertinent k. characteristics of the streets and highways serving the project site. The major facility through the study area is Interstate 405 (I-405) which is a four-l.ane freeway which runs from Tukwila at Interstate 5 (I-5) , just fljr west of the project area, north to Lynnwood at I-5 in Snohomish County. I-405 provides a north-south connection to the growing suburban communities east of Lake Washington and Seattle, and also is a direct connection west to Tukwila and I-5, which is the, primary north-south freeway in the Puget Sound region. Within the study area, access to I-405 is limited to two locations: a full cloverleaf interchange at Rainier Avenue (also known as SR 167) and a U hybrid cloverleaf/diamond interchange at Interurban Avenue (SR 181) . As shown in Figure 3, I-405 runs approximately east-west south of the project site. u East of the project, Rainier Avenue, north of I-405, is a five to six-lane primary arterial in Renton which also continues north through commercial and residential districts to Seattle. South of I-405, SR 167, or the Valley Freeway, is a controlled-access freeway leading to Kent, Auburn and Puyallup. rilWest of the project site, additional north-south capacity is provided by Interurban Avenue/West Valley Highway (SR 181) . This four to five-lane facil- I`; ity generally parallels the East Valley Freeway/Rainier Avenue, and offers alternate access to Seattle, Kent, Auburn and Puyallup. Sunset Highway, SR 900 (alternately known as Empire Way S in King County) is located north of the site and provides a third arterial connection between Renton and Seattle. Access to Sunset from Black River is possible via SW 7th and either Rainier Avenue or Edwards/Hardie Road and via an indirect connec- L, tion to Monster Road and 68th Avenue S. The proposed construction of 0akesdale Avenue from GradyWayto Monster Road (scheduled for mid-1987) will provide an improved connection from SW 7th to Sunset. ? I Monster Road is a two-lane roadway of low-type design which provides access from SW 16th Street under I-405 and Grady Way to Metro's Renton waste ? l treatment plant and to Container Corporation facilities in Renton. Heading ' north, Monster Road becomes 68th Avenue S, which ends at Sunset Highway (SR 900) at a stop-controlled T-intersection. The roadway is hilly and windy �F with little or no shoulder area, limited sight distance at times, two at-grade railroad crossings and substantial truck traffic. Within a quarter-mile of the proposed junction of Monster Road with 0akesdale Avenue, a narrow two-lane bridge has a weight restriction of 15 tons. Repairs or replacement of this 1 -6- bridge are identified by Renton Public Works staff as necessary,, but the r j `; schedule is uncertain. Improvements to this corridor from Oakesdale north would necessarily include bridge repair, at a minimum, if not replacement, in addition to improved signing or signalization of the railroad crossings. South of the project site, Grady Way provides an important east-west connection between Renton and Tukwila. East of Lind Avenue, Grady has four or more travel lanes. Between Lind and its terminus at Interurban Avenue, Grady is a narrow, two-lane highway in generally poor condition (see later section on Planned Improvements) . Within the immediate project vicinity, SW 7th and 10th Streets and Powell and Lind Avenues SW are the most important facilities: These are the streets that move traffic from the developing office/industrial project area to the regional facilities. All have benefited from recent developer-sponsored improvements, and are in good to excellent condition. Lind Avenue extends south of I-405' to SW 43rd Street. Figure 3 also. illustrates intersection control in the vicinity. Inter.sec- tions on. SW 7th and 10th Streets in the immediate vicinity of the site are STOP controlled, with the thru movement granted to the .higher volume facility. 1 Intersections on Grady Way and Rainier Avenue are signalized. Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service • (emu Project area traffic volumes for 1986 are noted in Figure 4. These volumes are based on data collected in 1985 by TRANSPO and City of Renton staff (as referenced in the Valley 405 Business Park traffic analysis by TRANSPO), and reflect estimated growth over the past year. Traffic generated by recent developments in the immediate vicinity has been incorporated in these esti- mates of 1986 conditions. Several buildings of the Washington Technical i ' Center campus are complete and leased in addition to three buildings of the Fl Valley 405 Business Park. Daily volumes in the vicinity range from 76,600 vehicles per day (vpd) on the Valley Freeway to 4,700 vpd on Powell Avenue SW just north of Grady Way.- 1 I. In the immediate project vicinity, volumes on Grady Way vary between 12,500 and 16,200 vpd. Farther to the west, Grady carries over 20,000 vpd, a very heavy volume for this two-lane facility. On SW 7th Street, daily volumes approximately double from 7,300 vpd near the site to 14,400 vpd near Rainier -7- PI77/ ' „- ,, \ ik \/ Stied z A Of H,Dh 23.800 ; ,Dr. 33,500 .'0 2.360 < 3.310 S�q M NORTH 800 800 m C C 80 CC S. 3rd St. 1 .100 PROJECT 1.695 SITE \J�. d� SUII6°t 7777- 24,700 8,900 2,450 Z 9 3.200 7L •G ����/� 7,300 14.400 13.900 /� 730 1 .440 p 1,380 10,300 �fi//%/ 0• 1.010 GG a�� �; 30.700 i7�G �� i_ ` I �; SW 7th St. J0 yr i2.950 �< 9,500 0 • c • 700 P&R soy �� 950 < E • I,% i co G� 28.800 • •l C� p m < . 32.600 2.560 C•k CC I o , St < 3.230 39.300 47.900 �O 42- ■I ; �l" 3,900/ 4.740 9 ■ a ' . 17,200 lk C yla,7oo 1,700 ■ CO 0 2a,100 Y 470 J I 2,390 p I i'�� 6 ° "VII" D 21.000 2.080 I ' I SW, lath St. 76,600 7,590 S, ,• : 0• I 13,200 0or L Y o 1.300 "Cen0ter 1vo �, 4-, < I ■ 12,500 t-AO5 S.158th St. i 1,2ao _ s. I 15.700`_ 17,500 ,� 1.560 L 1,730 •y ■ • A ■ LEGEND 28,840 I ILO • Z 2,860 a* I v e 17.000 AVERAGE WEEKDAY VOLUME t 1,700 PM PEAK VOLUME • • 1 SOURCES' COI CITY OF RENTON 7) (A WSDOT . p THE TRANSPO GROUP CO BLACK RIVER Figure 4 MA TECHNOLOGY 1986 TRAFFIC VOLUMES I:" • PARK G'oir r Avenue. Volumes during the PM peak hour average about 10 g percent of total 1 daily volumes. These peak hour traffic volumes form- the basis of level of service (LOS) analysis for intersection in the project vicinity. The analysis also takes Linto account intersection geometry, lane configuration, signal/STOP control , truck and bus presence in the traffic stream, pedestrian volumes at the inter- section, and the relative evenness of demand throughout the hour. Levels of service are designated with letters ranging from A to F. LOS A indicates excellent operating conditions with essentially all vehicle queues clearing on each signal phase. LOS F indicates extreme congestion and that the number of vehicles entering the intersections exceeds the theoretical capacity. For signalized intersections, calculations have been made in accordance with critical movement summation techniques presented in Interim Materials on Highway Capacity (Transportation Research Circular 212, January 1980). In this case, the total volume of entering vehicles (V) is compared to the theo- retical - intersection capacity (C) ; the resulting V/C ratio is then related to a level of service. STOP-controlled intersections have been analyzed in Iaccordance with techniques in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation q7, Research Board Special Report 209) . A "reserve capacity"4i_ ' (i .e. , unused oppor- tunity) for each movement is related to' level of service. l Table 1 describes existing (1986) levels of service at intersections I \ within the project impact area. The intersections of Rainier & Grady and Interurban & Grady are acknowledged problem areas. As can be seen on preceding figures, vehicles traveling to I-405 from the project vicinity must pass through one of these two intersec- tions. The only alternative access to I-405 is circuitous, and would require travel eastwards on South 3rd or northwards on Rainier to the north Renton I interchange. Other intersections noted above are operating at levels con- sidered ff satisfactory under urban peak hour conditions. I Transit Service 1 The project site is not well served by transit at the present time, although service to some points within a half mile is excellent. A single Metro route It N- operates within reasonable walking distance of the project site: Route 241, which provides peak hour service only, traveling from Kenmore to Southcenter -9- -1 T Table 1 Existing PM Peak Levels of Service Intersection V/C LOS Rainier Avenue & Grady Way 1.01 F Interurban Avenue & Grady Way 1.02 F .7th Street & Rainier Avenue 0.83 D 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie)1 0.63 B } Grady Way & Lind Avenue 0.87 D Grady Way & Powell Avenue 0.40 A 7th Street & Lind Avenue N/A A/B on 7th B-D on Lind2 1. Calculated V/C is deceptive because backups from the 7th Street & Rainier intersection frequently block this one. :J 2. This intersection is STOP-controlled, and the north leg is a private drive. Traffic on 7th is unimpeded; vehicles proceeding through or turning left from Lind experience significant delay. • -10- 1. r-� in the AM and from Southcenter to Kenmore in the PM. The 241 travels on SW 7th between Rainier and Lind, proceeding south on Lind. According to Metro staff, when construction on Grady Way is complete (see next section), some routes that have been running on I-405 will return to Grady. Also, if 7th is improved east of Rainier, Metro would likely route several buses north on Lind from Grady, then east on 7th to the existing park- and-ride. This re-route would serve to bypass the Grady/Rainier intersection. The result of these changes would be bringing several routes to the SW 7th/Lind intersection. All but one of the potentially-affected routes would offer peak hour service only. Transit service to the project site will — be somewhat improved as a result of these changes, but not to a significant degree. Planned Improvements Various roadway and intersection improvement needs have been identified by vicinity agencies. In some instances, funding sources have been identified so that the improvements may be definitely scheduled. Four agencies were con- tacted to update the list of projects and scheduled completion: City of Renton Public Works, City of Tukwila Public Works, King County Public Works and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) . The following vicinity improvements are presently scheduled for completion prior to 1990: Anticipated Completion Date • Grady Way: - Five-lane bridge extending west to Interurban 10/86 - Five-lane roadway from Lind Avenue to bridge 6/87 Add eastbound right-turn lane at Rainier unknown • SW 7th: extend five lane roadwayfrom west of Powell to 0akesdale. 8/87 • 0akesdale Avenue, new construction: Cr. - Five-lane roadway from Grady Way to SW 7th 8/87 - Five-lane roadway from SW 7th to Monster Road 11/87 - Five-Lane roadway and underpass from Grady Way to SW 16th Street 12/87 - Five-lane roadway from SW 28th to. SW 16th unknown -11- t • Traffic signals will be installed on Oakesdale Avenue at Grady Way and at• SW 7th as part of the new construction. 1 Major improvements to Monster Road and 68th Av enue S north of Oakes- dale at Monster Road to Sunset are proposed but not scheduled or funded. r , Anticipated Completion Date • Lind Avenue SW: - 'Five-lane roadway to bridge over I-405 from Grady Way to SW 16th Street (dependent upon the Oakesdale ._..} underpass) . 6/88 • Sunset Boulevard between Rainier Avenue and the west city limits. Add two-way, left-turn lane and improve \I signalization. unknown F-c SW 16th Street between Lind Avenue and Oakesdale Avenue. Li Complete upgrading with curb, gutter and sidewalk, repaving, and channelization. unknown _r • SW 27th between Oakesdale and the West Valley Highway. U New construction. t--- unknown ri • Southcenter Boulevard/Grady Way/I-405/Interurban Avenue interchange. Reconstruction and reconfiguration. �e J f See Figure 5. unknown j f • • I-405 HOV lanes. The final segment (Renton S-curves) is scheduled for 1989. unknownLJ rTh L ( i -12- . 1. A . cr 1 NORTH ° ‘" dot- - 10 • , , iI r -1 To MonslotI libillillibw Road 4 % Grady Way (A) So Jthc 6��� / °�"( 1-406 7 mi \ t_a05 50 • LEGEND NOT TO SCALE 4'' OSIGNAL u STOP SIGN I BLACK RIVER Figure 5 TECHNOLOGY RECONFIGURATION OF SOUTHCENTER/ , . ,.„ . PARK GRADY/1-405/INTERURBAN GrAlr L r- rjFUTURE CONDITIONS r. Analysis of future conditions is achieved by first, estimating future traffic volumes in the study area without the project, second, estimating r_ project travel characteristics at full development, third, estimating future . LJ volumes with project. and fourth, evaluating changes or impacts in the future system due to the project. Black River is expected to reach full development in 1995, thus this analysis of future conditions is focused on 1995. I-' Future Non-Project Traff i c r Future traffic volumes comprise three distinct elements: (1) existing L_1 volumes as the underlying basis, (2) new traffic- generated by nearby projects 7 scheduled for development, and (3) additional annual growth attributed to . L.: scattered development throughout the region. This is the typical procedure . followed in impact studies: i .e. , to define project traffic above and beyond an underlying base condition. - . Two major developments- in the immediate vicinity of the Black River Tech- Fr! Park have been identified and development has, started 'for both the ! Valley 405 Business Park and the Washington Technical Center. Analysis of Cr traffic impacts for these two projects indicates that the Valley 405 Business `-' Park would be fully developed by 1990 and that the Washington Technical Center 1 -1 would be complete by 1987. Estimated traffic volumes generated by these 1 developments are included in the forecast of 1995 traffic volumes within the study area. ' In addition to the known developments above, regional growth would result in further traffic volume increases on vicinity streets and highways. This f y�f increase has been . based on recent trends (1980 to 1985) in traffic volumes, and upon population and employment forecasts done by Puget Sound. Council of LiGovernments (PSCOG) . Annual growth has been estimated at 3 percent on a daily basis, and at 2 percent during the PM peak. Figure 6 shows total non-project traffic volumes estimated for vicinity streets. ----' With daily volumes projected to increase by 3 percent per year, 1995 daily n volumes would be 30 percent higher than 1986. Because peak hour volumes are Li expected to grow somewhat more slowly, 1995 PM volumes are estimated to be 20 percent higher than 1986 PM peak volumes. -14- 1 ii n Sunset • h,964,43, ® ao SR 8,790• Bop < 0: NORTH 1,080 .C CO CO S. 3rd Sr. _ PROJECT SITE m /////,/r //, Sunmet A / //� R• f' i�// 2,930 v 54,050 1L //�i�G���� � 300 17,190 O i7' /�1L� 1' //���/1J�1 1.610 3 m v ,////� / , o • Ga '1 — ` `` '3 c�0• 60 J ; , sw Tin st. J� 5� / cri s 7 5.890• ‘) 4.200 a . O 26,010 y 800 S E OIv. 0> 2,385 aWtdi • 420 < o > N < cri 9 2.500 71 1 v 26,530 22,570 Y 21,840 J 2.47. ite �' �07•' 2,570 0 10,250 2,070 I ®. 0 1,010 1-406 (Ti 33 0. g SW.27 184h000•St. 21.sso S �'h 0 N 2,390 1,985 o4' , Y • center 8tv6_00.. t o < 3 0 405 3.158th St. > r r < o f ..c. 0• v c � at • r'• • w '• S_ • O O -• 1 LEGEND • 26,840 AVERAGE WEEKDAY VOLUME I r • 2,570 PM PEAK VOLUME CO 1 CO33 • ESTIMATED FROM CH2M HILL Cw 9 STUDY . 1986 RENTON STY DATA a . 01 v BLACK RIVER Figure 6 irkO TECHNOLOGY ESTIMATED 1995 TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1 • `.1 0 PARK - WITHOUT PROJECT Gr-®tir 1 Traffic assignments for 1995 have been made assuming that the new Oakes- : i dale Avenue would be complete. It is difficult to estimate future traffic volumes on Oakesdale Avenue for either daily or PM' peak periods. Based upon rough estimates of daily volumes (EADT) , two signals would be warranted on Oakesdale by 1995 (without the Black River Project) at Grady and at SW 7th. Operation of these signals is expected to be at LOS C or better without the project. No estimate has been made for 1995 volumes at the Grady Way/Interurban/ Southcenter intersections because of the planned reconstruction project. It would be very difficult to reasonably estimate the rerouting of traffic that would result. ` Level of service analysis was repeated for vicinity intersections under future non-project conditions. Table 2 illustrates the results, with existing levels of service included for comparison. Table 2, Future Non-Project PM Peak Levels of Service Levels of Service Intersection 1986 1995 11Rainier Avenue and Grady Way F F Interurban Avenue and Grady Way F N/A1 1 f7 7th Street and Rainier Avenue D F 7th Street and Edwards Road (Hardie)2 B C ;. , Grady Way and Lind Avenue3,4 D D Grady Way and Powell Avenue3 A B 7th Street and Lind Avenue Left turns from 7th A/B A/F Thru, right and left from Lind B-D F 1. Planned reconstruction of intersection makes a reliable estimate impossible. 2. Back-ups from the 7th and Rainier intersection will frequently affect operation at this one. 3. Improvements to Grady Way presumed complete in 1987. :4. Improvements to Lind Avenue presumed complete in 1988. -16- i 1 The intersection of Rainier and Grady will continue to approach or exceed H.-% theoretical capacity. The Interurban and Grady intersection will be extremely congested by 1987; the likely result will be a lengthened peak period and possibly a greater traffic diversion to alternate I-405 access. To some extent, traffic can be expected to even out through the area as drivers learn to avoid trouble spots. In this area, however, all routes to the regional freeway system will be troublesome. By 1995, non-project traffic will result in deterioration to LOS E or worse at two intersections: 7th and Rainier, and 7th and Lind. These inter- ' sections, as well as Rainier and Grady, will be in need of improvement, even ' without the added impacts of the Black River Technology Park. rl , i ; Project Traffic 1 Project-related traffic has been estimated in four steps. Trip generation is the estimation of total trips generated by the project at full development. Mode Split is a process ,of estimating the percentage of project trips made by ij each of the various transportation modes available near the site. Trip distribution is theprocess of predicting the origins and destinations of trips to and from the project. Traffic assignment is the process of deter- 1\ mining specific routes for the daily and peak hour trips, so that impacts upon roadways and intersections may be identified. Trip Generation. Table 3 summarizes estimated vehicle trip generation for the project, by building and completion date. Daily and peak hour trip rates are based on averages and assumptions reported in the ITE Trip Generation � 1 manual (Third Edition). In 1995, combined floor space of 701,000 gross square feet (GSF) is pro- r( posed to be complete, with 572,730 GSF for office use and 128,270 GSF for research and development (R&D) use. Total generation is estimated at 13,887 �-�l vehicles per day (vpd) and 1,589 vehicles per hour, (vph) during the PM peak. Mode Split. Many traffic analyses include an additional step at this -i point, whereby total trips generated by a project are divided among the vari- H ous available travel modes. Depending upon 'the project location, this process i has more or less significance. For example, considerable numbers of I r- I-- -17- { Table 3 Project Trip Generation Ir Offic R&D Total Spacel Space2 Space Daily PM Pk Pk In Pk Out Bldg # Yr Open (1K GSF) (1K GSF) (1K GSF) Trips Trips Trips Trips t.- 24 1990 -- 20.50 20.50 297 34 5 29 25 1987 84.00 56.00 140.00 2576 295 44 251 26 1991 -- 26.65 26.65 386 45 7 38 27 1989 31.50 -- 31.50 662 76 11 64 28 1989 51.50 -- 51.50 1082 124 19 105 F-'' 29 1991 35.70 - -- 35.70 750 86 13 73 { 30 1991 43.05 -- 43.05 904 103 15 88 31 1992 42.50 -- 42.50 893 102 15 87 32 1992 48.35 -- 48.35 1015 116 17 99 33 1993 48.35 -- 48.35 1015 116 17 99 34 1993 42.50 -- 42.50 893 102 15 87 35 1994 37.68 25.12 62.80 1156 133 20 113 36 1995 107.60 -- 107.60 2260 258 39 220 i Total Office Space, 1000 GSF 572.73 Total R&D Space, 1000 GSF 128.27 Total Space, 1000 GSF 701.00 Total Daily Trips, Full Development 13887 Total PM Pk Hr Trips, Full Development 1589 , Total PM Pk Hr Trips In, Full Development 238 /I Zi Total PM Pk Hr Trips Out, Full Development 1351 1/ 1. Trip generation for office space from ITE Trip Generation, 3rd Edition for Office Park. Daily: 21 trips/1000 Gross Square Feet (GSF); PM Peak: 2.4/1000 GSF. .:// 2. Trip generation for research & development (R&D) space estimated by 50% of space = office, 25% = warehouse, and 25% = assembly. Warehouse - Daily: 6 trips/1000 GSF; PM Peak: 0.9/1000 GSF. Assembly - Daily: 10 trips/1000 GSF; PM Peak: 1.0/1000 GSF. Resulting R&D rates: Daily: 14.5 trips/1000 GSF; PM Peak: 1.675/1000 GSF. r -18- workers at an office building in downtown Seattle could be expected to commute via public transit. Also, the proximity of restaurants, banks, and shops and other would encourage midday pedestrian trips. On the other hand., a suburban office/technical park like Black River Technology Park does not present employees and visitors with the same oppor- rtunities for transit and walk trips. As stated earlier, the project site is t not at present well served by transit. Even if Metro incorporates all poten- tial routing changes, the nearest bus stops will be on Lind Avenue, Grady Way, and SW 7th east of Lind. Further, opportunities for pedestrian trips will be limited unless/until restaurants and shops develop nearby. A worst case traffic analysis is presented in this report where no allow- ance has been made for transit or walk trips to the project site. An aggres- sive ridesharing incentive program may reduce project vehicle trips by 2-5%, but for this worst case analysis, all trips to and from, the site are assumed to be made by vehicle with minimal ridesharing, as reflected in ITE trip estimates. Trip Distribution. Figure 7 illustrates the general origins and destina- tions of trips generated by the Black River Technology Park project, as developed by TRANSPO for the Valley 405 Business Park. The distribution has been based on two data sources. First, the travel distribution prepared in 1981 for the Bellevue Long Range Transportation Study was examined. Second, regional forecasts of employment and population prepared in March 1984 by the Puget Sound Council of Governments were considered. Daily and peak hour distributions vary somewhat. During the peak hour, project traffic is dominated by employee work-to-home trips. Throughout the day, project travel is oriented to other offices, to retail facilities, and to the regional freeway system. Traffic Assignment. Figure 8 illustrates the assignment of project traffic to vicinity streets and highways in 1995. A total of 13,887 vpd and 1,589 vph are assigned to the vicinity street system. Figure 8 includes the new Oakesdale Avenue, its connection to the West Valley Highway, and the extension of SW 7th to Oakesdale. Within the development itself, Naches Avenue from SW 7th to 0akesdale/Monster Road is shown. Also noted is the 1 realignment of the Grady/ Interurban/Southcenter area. -19- -OZ- • 1 -gym xx z i � ww xD O � � n �� aR w- 0 < 03 gt bs ' o CO v`Leo 0 4 �J .� CO o t81 HS - l�s yco 01r' Re11s� M 0 Ptil ,e •4, „ .\ o N Jackson a •N. D Ave.SW N. D I m Oaksdale RdCO • % .=! 91 . • pa N MS •AV p el' syso to N �� • v_ CD y •mas —1 T c SW. __I o' Seneca c C 1AviSW c •o -. 0 O Lind ve. SW g ? Z Ul be bg w ad. East Valle Road `IIIII 41111111161HaintestRAives; I N. ;_1 v1,7r LO► S ' AsM,ea141Ce11sA —'J` w O a i .. Co al al • "! • V JI e. - __-��� _ F I l 11111 I sin °t I y,Dhw°y > V A1.389 `4R < ^rc 972 NORTH 191 00 0 80 O • PROJECT Cr_ s' 3rd St. SITE 61 3.398 // ‘46 389 //��/ • „' „ 10.19 Sunset 695 S /�//�f.R R. // 1.167 297 C 63 7L /�/�fGv���//� %�j/ 34 4.722 695 �O 1.667 7 '` // I��/,%/./44•2,.. 44 vp 143 m `J /� / M -5,000 ; 2.360 G �j� 4Z6 477SW th St. 4 254 ett � _ /) • 3 °o Q <3.4z9 `�'� N e 3 o m �278 P&R Nr c 3.429 394 �l41 6.377 > E (A c •• co 32 n01.61 • 394 640 < O •• to t 2.223l do / f% 6.075 IC 1.424 o hL- t > 286 417 9 �pC 760 • A 163 10�h St < 1.806 48 0 v 238 f1 m 695 3•430 Y 3.055 J Argilelp • 1.702 334likl 2.499 1--• 32 0 179 h406 1 � � 224 694 SW. lath St. I • 695 So 32 78 o 695 01h 1 • • 159 c"t°r c d� ± < v o ix 4-405 S.158th St. o. 1 • i 2.361 • G 366 i 4 • , 2 W el • T • • • • I 4 LEGEND 03 31 3.750 AVERAGE MEEKDAY VOLUME CA 430 PM PEAK VOLUME 00 a a a J BLACK RIVER Figure 8 TECHNOLOGY PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT . • .•1. • PARK : 1995 Groflr Total Traffic with Project Figure 9 shows future traffic volumes for 1995 including project-generated traffic. The volumes shown represent the sum of non-project and project _) volumes for both daily and PM peak periods, from Figures 6 and 8. Also shown are percentage figures which indicate the portion of total traffic generated by the project. -J In 1995, traffic from Black River Technology Park project is estimated to account for 12 percent of the total daily traffic on Powell Avenue SW, for 60 percent of the total daily traffic on SW 7th between Powell and Oakesdale, and for 47 percent of the estimated total daily traffic on Oakesdale Avenue north of Grady Way. Project traffic is expected to make up 12 percent of total daily traffic on Grady Way west of Oakesdale. Project contributions to PM peak hour traffic for these streets are similar to that for the daily traffic. Project impact lessens with distance from the site. Table 4 shows PM peak hour levels of service (LOS) for key intersections within the project study area for 1995 both with and without project traffic. _1 Decreased LOS due to the project will be noted at Grady Way and Lind Avenue and at Grady Way and Powell Avenue. :1 Table 4 1995 PM Peak Levels of Service 1995 1995 Intersection 1986 Without Project With Project .LOS LOS V/C LOS V/C Rainier Avenue & Grady Way F F 1.23 F 1.26 SW 7th & Rainier Avenue. D F 1.13 F 1.26 SW 7th & Edwards Road (Hardie)1 B C 0.72 C 0.73 Grady Way & Lind Avenue D D 0.86 E 0.95 Grady Way & Powell Avenue A B 0.63 C 0.73 SW 7th & Lind Avenue Left turn from 7th A/B A/F N/A A/F N/A Left/thru/right from Lind B-D F N/A F N/A 1.; Back-ups from the 7th and Rainier intersection will frequently affect operation at this one. -22- 11: — __I- Cil - se, nest Z hi why m m Q 10,180 14X --Sp 900 o 1,660 12X • cr co NORTH 13.123 78% 1 w 1.467 80% ¢ S. 3rd St. 8.926 PgOJC ET 1,067 SITE 3,398 61 X \�16. 0 389 67% /////// //, Sunset 9S 54,997 3% S ///////R. • ///////// 94,193 3% jsc)�/ // / / // 22,190 23% '� //�/��I/Lf" / !! i 2.087 23%I// 4/‘ ////&,,, 2 SW 7th Std 9,319 37X� �� : N30• '73 *61 ' 6.599 52% 1.194 332 ?4 r • o 0 c 0 3 2.830 16% 61 784 50% dt 10.577 •�> N IS Gee s 24.980 24% 1.060 = L • - < 028,753 8% CC 1.044 3,260 23% 60% • F- < t0th cat. > 2,756 1' • 0 100 • 602 p 11.674 12% ii tL y k 1,1-73 14X c �p Y 24,895 12% 1 1i� 30,590 12% w 2.404 14X IN.) s, 3,000 14% 0 1-405 �� w a - SW. 16th St. ,I I I I I P..------------.:-.;°°.e.#°°i°I I I 1 ill I '.22.275 ' c 3% SD 27.700 3X `thc•nt•r 9� ; • ` Cl) 2,550 6X • Q t-A°b 8.1158th St. a ,• < • • i w > • 13 7. 4. Ti • i • .t .• 2 O .< O 'n LEGEND • i s is ° 1.044 AVERAGE WEEKDAY VOLUME •� • 100 PM PEAK VOLUME CO 1 21 CO X CONTRIBUTION BY PROJECT , 9 OF TOTAL TRAFFIC 0 J J 0 BLACK RIVER Figure 9 714 TECHNOLOGY . . 6:1• 0 PARK ESTIMATED 1995 TOTAL TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT rod � • r t_ rMITIGATION Traffic impacts from the Black River Technology Park are, most significant in the immediate vicinity of the project where new roadways are proposed to serve this project and traffic from adjacent new developments. Traffic oriented east and south from the site will use existing facilities which are currently at or near capacity during peak periods. The purpose of mitigation for this project is two fold: (1) to reduce site-generated vehicle trips, and (2) to significantly improve project site access. A transportation management plan for the project will be developed by the project proponent with the aim of reducing vehicle trips, and a list of improvements to the transportation network are presented which are expected to mitigate project impacts. f Transportation Management Plan The developer is committed to working with 'Metro Transit and Commuter Pool to develop a transportation management plan for the project which will encourage ridesharing and attempt to reduce project vehicle trips. The trans- portation management plan (or IMP) may consist of any or all of the following items: 4 • Work with METRO to establish a new bus route or modify an existing bus route to pass through the project. • If bus service is modified to be convenient, encourage employers to consider transit pass subsidies as a company or office/tech park benefit. 1 w • First City Development Corp. will provide a contact person for the office/tech park as a liaison between Metro and the tenants. • First City Development Corp. agrees to work with Metro to determine the viability of vanpools financed in order to reduce the project vehicle trip generation. • Office park management should advise tenants and their employees of the advantages of fleet ride, vanpool and carpool programs through a package of information provided at initial occupancy for each tenant, m and through periodic promotional displays within the leasing office. -24- Ti • As much as practical , office .park management should encourage employers rt to initiate a flextime work schedule so peak period traffic can be distributed more evenly over the 3:30 PM to 5:30 PM peak period. • Notification of employer occupancy dates and resulting estimated 1 employee numbers on an ongoing basis. Transportation Network Improvements The construction of Oakesdale Avenue from Grady Way to Monster Road will flprovide access to the Black River Technology Park. However, this single Y roadway is not enough to provide good access to the project from any direction. Peak period congestion along Rainier Avenue to the east of the site is an obstacle for traffic which is difficult to remove, as the intersections are currently designed near the maximum in lane configuration and operation. Improvements in the access network must then come from another source or focus on another area. , Oakesdale Avenue Corridor. It is proposed to construct Oakesdale Avenue, r- from SW 43rd to Sunset Highway (SR 900) (along Monster Road and 68th Avenue S) , although scheduled construction is from SW 16th to Monster -Road. Approxi- mately 10 percent of Black River traffic is estimated to use Monster Road and } + 68th Avenue S to access Sunset which, when added to Valley 405 Business Park traffic on the route .and current traffic, would increase daily traffic on 68th Avenue S from 800 trips in 1984 to approximately 10,180 trips in 1995. Traffic L" from the Black River development will represent approximately 14 percent of the total in 1995. The existing two-lane minimal design facility should be improved to a two-lane facility with shoulders and 11-12 foot lanes. The � project proponent will agree to participate in an improvement district to Li construct the extension of Oakesdale to the Sunset Highway. ��. Naches Avenue Design. Naches Avenue, the proposed- on-site roadway serving 1 ` Black River, will be constructed initially as a cul-de-sac, to be extended the full length to 0akesdale/Monster Roads as the Black River development progresses. The length of cul-de-sac which would provide a single access to Black River (aside from Powell Avenue to building 24) with acceptable operation was analyzed. Naches Road will operate satisfactorily as a cul-de-sac with STOP control at 7th Street through the construction and occupation of Building 25 in 1987. Subsequently, an all-way STOP will be required at 7th and Naches to permit -25- left-turning traffic to exit the Black River development. By 1989, under the proposed build-out scheme, a traffic signal may be warranted at this intersec- tion. The project proponent agrees to pay their proportionate share for traffic control at this intersection. 1 i Network Improvements. The following is a list of problem areas within the '- t project study area which need to be addressed on a subarea basis. Congestion at many locations in Renton is a function of area growth, new developments and bypass or thru traffic, therefore funding for these projects should be shared among those groups involved. Percent Project Location Action Traffic Grady Way @ Lind Avenue Add third eastbound thru lane 7.7 to Rainier SW 7th @ Lind Avenue Install signal .16.1 SW 7th @ Powell Avenue 4-way STOP, as left turns from 28.8 Powell become intolerable. Install signal when warranted. . SW 7th @ Naches Road Install signal 67.4 Monster Road/68th Avenue S Improve 2-lane roadway 13.7 • l 4. -26- SUMMARY Traffic impacts of the Black River Technology Park are significant in the local area bounded by Rainier Avenue, Grady Way, Monster Road, and the Sunset Highway. Levels of service are g y• projected to be poorest in the east side of the study area even without the project along Rainier Avenue. Construction of 4- the project contributes to a further degradation of that level of service to the extent that peak periods will lengthen. The City of Renton has hopes that the construction of 0akesdale Avenue from south of 43rd up to SR 900 via the 68th Avenue S alignment may provide some relief for Rainier Avenue. No studies have yet been done to demonstrate i the amount of diversion that might occur. Yet it is obvious that additional roadway facilities must be built. Five road and intersection improvements have been identified which will be significantly impacted by this project. Each improvement can mitigate the project impact to provide level of service D or better. The percentage the project contributes to the 1995 traffic at those locations has been estimated. Such a contribution estimate could be used as a consideration in determining cost sharing for the improvements. -27- The Transportation Planning & Traffic Engineering Consultants °MAN SPO Grove • September 9, 1985 First City Equities -1i SEP13 1985 Roger Blaylock Building and Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Subject: VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Dear Roger: Attached are volume to capacity (V/C) ratios corresponding to levels of service (LOS) reported in our August 1985 traffic impact analysis. Please call if there are questions, or if I can provide additional information. Sincerely, t The TRANSPO Grou , Inc. ZIA 'WC( Norma Pennock Transportation Engineer NTP:jb i Attachment cc:"Barbara Moss fogsawn SEP 1 LPN Architects & Planners The TRANSPO Group, Inc. •23- 148th Avenue SE, Bellevue, Washington 98007• (206)`641-3881 L_ .The TRANSPO .Group �11 .'7 --pm ` s oc ✓ice ovd. V/c Ra.41.oc c • 19 '7 j - I tq5 LVi frojec* W/A'ojec ' i &iu GYa.d V . O. R7 E I.01 F 1, 63 F • -, •`7 41 Ra.4►1,i t o, i a D 0,k 1 b D, ' .b 7A.4 EA way dS • o, 60 13 0,63 $ ' 0.67 8 &radi Livid o.cb b 0, �' b O.q3 E . C,rali Poux-I1 o,sa A 0.37 A 0, (94 E. U Grad ri 'KAYLjba-41 1.ol F 1. 04- F 1, 3 F ,J� L c4 FvoM7A s 143 A/B A/D I1 Lec+-theu-rigkf�am Lind 1B-1) D-F -F ('FI PPP+I I/ [1 . . • • 1_ - . • . L - • i . . • . . II . it r • u w o �1A -nA .-, dIV gill 9/V L `'tt° tfrl i F411 IP41-L / v/N V/N J I0 'I -- - ostr) 1 ftpoJ!) V L.5'0 V 0-17 '0 V es It i bo'I 3 06'0 q 19) '9 Pull " J d I -0 2Lo g Lq•0 9 09.0 siorroif73 it, ,,. d -bo'I 4 c 'o q ev0 r i I roj J I I 'I A LO'I 3 Lb'q 677vA.91 aI ur -1:)arp,1/01 Plo j o/c —Obb1 -__> 5b1 : 1 11 - +Oo ,� : ./: ►-- :' I1J''3a :sly.'�d ,9 : : ; - - v J dR®A OdS ' , m� f The SPO 5 Grovp 1 ., .L_, il. 1 : ; j ' ' •• 14'10 Ph els of GeyLIlce. . .V.A- W�.. ►. 8la lack. RI, . - : a lq j ��- o `f', t god ec� ROJ�,�- Rile✓ 4 Gvallci 0,97 e I, 0V F 1. II r 7 th Rth,4' 0,'a D a .90 E I,07 F 7Ih d, F.du.tds D. roo g p. 6 0.74- C Grad 4 L,hd 0,�b D 0,94- 1, 10 F- '' ` GI* � itt.uf I 0,6a A 0,43 A o, 6 D B ,or F . A A 11) �� � Iii-6(tkeicam _I N f 1�� -1 ' 4, Lind • trf-I- Rom 7 A/8 A/F A/F - l. 4-bra- f cyh} from Lind 0-D F F . • 4, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK • August 1985 Prepared for: First City Equities and The City of Renton Prepared by: The TRANSPO Group, Inc. ± TABLE OF CONTENTS f 3 Page n INTRODUCTION 1 Project Description 2 . ' I' Report Organization 2 �_ i`'' EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 ,- Street and Roadway System 6 r Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service 8 �, � Transit Service' 11 Planned Improvements 11 FUTURE NON-PROJECT TRAFFIC 14 PROJECT TRAFFIC 18 Trip Generation ' 18 Mode Split 20 A Trip Distribution 21 Traffic Assignment 21 TOTAL TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT 25 1987 25 Air 1990 Without Black River 27 1990 With Black River 27 El DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 32 • \fl 1987 33 1990 Without Black River 34 1990 With Black River 34 Signalization of. 7th & Oakesdale 34 i�/ Cost Sharing 35 .1 -' ADDITIONAL EFFECT OF TOTAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 37 ' SUMMARY 38 LIST OF FIGURES Page 1. Site Plan 3 2. Development Schedule 4 3. Street and Roadway Characteristics 7 4. 1985 Traffic Volumes 9 5. Existing PM Peak Levels of Service 10 6. Reconfiguration of Southcenter/Grady/I-405/Interurban 13 7. Future Traffic Without Project 16 8. Future Non-Project PM Peak Levels of Service 17 9. Vehicle Trip Generation 19 10. Project Trip Distribution 22 11. Project Traffic Assignment: 1987 23 12. Project Traffic Assignment: 1990 24 13. Total Traffic - 1987 26 14. 1987 PM Levels of Service 25 15. Total Traffic - 1990 Without Black River 28 16. 1990 PM Peak Levels of Service, Without Black River 29 17. Total Traffic - 1990 With Black River 30 18. 1990 PM Peak Levels of Service, With Black River 31 19. Proportionate Impact and Mitigation 36 -- INTRODUCTION The following report is an analysis of traffic impacts related to the development of Valley 405 Business Park in Renton. This project has a fairly 1 long history; an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was published in late 1980. The project was identified at that time as Earlington Park. Since then, changes in the nature of the proposed development have necessitated a re-examination of traffic impacts identified in the EIS. In 1980, the project sponsor (First City Equities) envisioned a develop- 1 ment comprising 1,980,000 square feet (SF) of warehousing, business park, and office park. It was thought that a combination of heavy and light warehousing would constitute 1,150,000 SF or nearly 60 percent of the total development. Current projections are quite different, calling for a total of 1,182,530 SF .,j of office, warehousing, business park, and research and development (R&D) . The total includes 162,000 SF that are already developed, although not com- --` pletely occupied. Of this new total , only 70,000 SF (6 percent) is projected to develop as warehousing. Ir An additional change since the 1980 EIS has been in ownership of the property. Originally, First City Equities (FCE) was the sole developer. Later, approximately 26 acres of developable property were sold to Holvick deRegt Koering (HdK) . Development of the property is now proceeding separ- ately under the two ownerships. FCE' s portion of the property is known as Valley 405 Business Park; HdK's is called Washington Technical Center. There have also been changes to the transportation system in the vicinity since the EIS was published. These include the extension of Powell Avenue SW to Grady Way and signalization of two intersections: Powell and Grady, and SW 7th Street and Edwards Road (Hardie) . Two main issues are addressed in this report: 1. Does the development currently proposed by FCE and HdK result in different impacts than those identified in the 1980 EIS? 2. In light of the above-discussed changes in the development scenario and the transportation system, are there additional impacts, and in turn addition mitigation? If so, how should costs for that miti - gation be distributed? fi C U., In most cases, a traffic analysis like this one would focus upon a single future year for impact assessment. In this case, impacts are discussed for both 1987 and 1990. This has been done to provide additional information for FCE and HdK, so that they may equitably assign responsibility for cost-sharing among themselves. (Also see following section Project Description. ) City staff will find the examination of 1990 conditions most helpful , as it pro- vides the most logical comparison to the original EIS and focuses on build-out of the entire development. 1 Project Description Figure 1 illustrates the project site and immediate surroundings. Owner- ship of the individual parcels is indicated. As shown, HdK's property is Y north of SW 7th Street and west of Powell Avenue SW. It is divided into 9 separate lots, not all of which are uniquely bounded in Figure 1.. FCE's property lies west of Powell and east of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue. SW; it 12 is divided into six areas. Figure 1 shows several street segments that do not yet exist, but will be constructed as adjacent development dictates. These include the westerly extension of SW 7th Street, which presently terminates at Powell Avenue SW; northerly extensions of Powell and Thomas Avenues SW; Nache,s Avenue SW; and Oakesdale Avenue SW. r- Development on some portions of the site is already complete, with some occupied buildings. On HdK's property, Lots 2, 8 and 9 (partial ) are already occupied. On FCE's property, a portion of Area I is already occupied. Figure 2 outlines the present development plan. As shown, HdK proposes to fully develop its property by 1987, while FCE' s schedule calls for staged development through 1990. Early stages will have access via SW 7th Street and Powell . Avenue SW; FCE' s post-1987 schedule is dependent upon completion of Oakesdale Avenue SW for access. For these reasons, the following impact assessment focuses upon both 1987 and 1990 as target years. Report Organization The report begins with a description of the existing transportation system: streets and intersections, traffic volumes, peak hour congestion, and 1 -2- . 4,7 trv/7- v7^ • SW h St V; / N. 1_ v• 1Pk4I. - 4, / — ti1/4\ e / 4 . 4. 89 ; . • / 3 • a • s • t • E e + o I to Co 1 c• . ?• " $w ,p1p Si \ \till\ ---N4 sw Grad', War • 1-4O6 LEGEND 1(K PARCELS (WASHINGTON TECt NICAL CENTER) SW 1111h St `\ FCE PARCELS (VALLEY 405) \ A . 0 500 1000 NORTH SCALE IN FEET VALLEY 405 Figure 1 U BUSINESS PARK SITE PLAN ' a 1`1• • GI I.M.J1, Figure 2 Development Schedule Proposed Size/Type of Development Completion Date FCE l Area I 45,600 SF business park1,2 1985 Area II 48,350 SF office 1986 Area III 39,650 SF office 1986 37,450 SF R&D3 1987 Area IV 67,600 SF office 1987 85,880 SF office 1988 149,600 SF office • 1989 Area V 88,000 SF office and R&D3 1988. 128,000 SF office 1989 Area VI 144,000 SF office 1990 Total 834,130 SF HdK Lot 1 64,000 SF business park2 1985-1987 Lot 24 16,000 SF business park2 1985-1987 Lots 3, 4 60,000 SF business park2 1985-1987 Lots 5, 6 48,000 SF office 1985-1987 Lot 7 60,000 SF office 1985-1987 Lots 8, 95 100,400 SF office 1985-1987 Total 348,400 SF 1. Approximately 8,100 SF of office space occupied as of June 1985. 2. Business park = 25% office, 75% warehouse (as per FCE and HdK) . 3. R&D = 50% office, 25% assembly, 25% warehouse (as per FCE) . 4. 100% occupied as of June 1985. 5. 67% occupied as of June 1985. -4- a transit service. These elements of the transportation system are most per- tinent for present needs, i .e. to compare impacts of this project to those defined earlier in the Earlington Park EIS. Planned improvements to vicinity roadways and intersections are listed; this is necessary for analysis of future conditions. Next, future travel conditions without the project are summarized. Both 1987 and 1990 non-project traffic volumes and levels of service are included. This is followed by estimates of project-related travel for 1987 and 1990; traffic generated by FCE and HdK is listed separately. Next, project traffic is superimposed upon non-project traffic so that analysis of future conditions is based upon total traffic volumes. The impacts of the project are thus identified by means of the comparison between non-project and total traffic conditions. The report concludes with discussion of measures that would improve condi- tions to acceptable levels. A basis for cost-sharing among contributing developments is offered for consideration by City staff. • -5- EXISTING CONDITIONS This section of the report is a documentation of existing transportation conditions in the project vicinity. This establishes a basis for future year conditions and for assessment of relative impacts. Street and Roadway System Figure 3 defines the boundary within which project-related impacts will be considered. Beyond the area shown, project traffic is well dispersed through- out the regional travel network. Figure 3 also illustrates pertinent charac- teristics of the streets and highways serving the project site. The major facility is I-405, which is a 4-lane freeway through Renton. There is a full cloverleaf interchange at Rainier Avenue N (SR 167) and a partial cloverleaf at Interurban Avenue (SR 181) . Rainier Avenue extending north from I-405 is a 5-lane primary arterial in Renton; additionally, it provides a connection to Seattle to the north. South of I-405, SR 167 is called the East Valley Freeway; it is a 4-lane highway with partial access , control. It leads to Kent, Auburn and Puyallup. West of the project site, additional north-south capacity is provided by Interurban Avenue/West Valley Highway (SR 181) . This 4-5 lane facility generally parallels the East Valley Freeway/Rainier Avenue, and offers alternate access to Seattle, Kent, Auburn and Puyallup. North of the site, the Sunset Highway (SR 900) provides a third arterial connection to Seattle. From the project site, it may be accessed via Rainier Avenue or via Monster Road, a winding, hilly, narrow rural road. There is no direct connection from the site to Monster Road; a vehicle must travel west on Grady Way, circle under I-405 to the north Longacres entrance, and then pro- ceed north on Monster Road. South of the project site, Grady Way provides an important east-west connection between Renton and Tukwila. East of Lind Avenue, Grady has 4 or more travel lanes. Between Lind and its terminus at Interurban Avenue, Grady is a narrow, 2-lane highway in generally poor condition (see later section on Planned Improvements) . L.. -6- -- '----, e"--" r `1_r-^---,ter'-'--�-.-a---1.— '-1 r--'-'^_(- -Th__ 1 .1—r----_-y.l r--Th ^---'% ; - - Linea / 4L, 48'.2' MEDIAN Z /D/) 6-8' SHOULDER - -oh. Ivey `S 55 MPH > is aD A 900 C'�' Q 6L. 60-70' CO ....N2L. 22' m CC S. 3rd st. FAIR o e Sunset Project Site ��� 0 0 • St... 60' 4L. 48' 4L, 44-48' • 35DEAiLKS 'fl SIDEWALKS SIDEWALKS CC O WINDING AND O 0 GOOD 35 MPH 4 1 O• HILLY ALIGNMENT ;`?':� fi00D-EXC. FAI -GOOD 'A s /... : 4,'' SW 7th St. u> =a. co o, 3 En 4 0-2'2DIRT SHLD. ':' `' to co % m T Ka64 SIDEWALKS VERY POOR ,.. ) L > Q d• G 35 MPH %N - 2L. 40-44' :::;•...' !- Q ��h St Q .• GOOD SOW SIDEWALKS:, /. • NO SIDEWALKS _. +7-8 X ( GOOD t"/"1::-. ! � t'w 20-22' t.(y05 --J 40 RPH SR I DGE • 1 GOOD 1116r NARROW t3R1DGE= 01120,0,00011111111 - . 20-22' (GRAOV) i: 4L FREEWAY Q SW. 161h St: 11 por... /� 4-WAY 2L, 22' SO c O N STOP 0-2' SOFT SHLD. G4h A h m 2L, 20-22' FAIR Center gIV ` . :1 co Q 6' GRAVEL S-LD. 13 �••••••••••-- S \ 25 MPH co t,g05 l o S.158th St. POOR-VERY POOR r 4L FREEWAY m m S <p Co > i G GRADY WAY,WEST OF LIND W r LEGEND 4L, 44-48' 2L, 20-22' w SOFT SHLD. pHL 0-8 ' SDS. O tiIGNAI .n 4L, 48'.2' MEDIAN — Tea SIr,N 4C'pO�OMPH f� 35 MPH GRADY WAY, LIND TO RAINIER m 6-8' PAVED SHLD. 'i 2 LAMES • — FAIR-POOR 4-6L; 40-70+' f 55 MPH. SIDEWALKS m +tD :itA.l.YH N FAIR-GOOD 73 1 -' 3L, 36-40' 1 p A 0 1000 2000 3000co SOME SIDEWALKS 1 35 MPH Cb NORTH SCALE IN FEET GOOD-EXC. r Figure 3 fh VALLEY 405 • t. ID BUSINESS PARK STREET AND ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS Gre p r ,r-s Within the immediate project vicinity, SW 7th and 10th Streets and Powell and Lind Avenues SW are the most important facilities. These are the streets that move traffic from the developing office/industrial project area to the regional facilities. All have benefited from recent developer-sponsored improvements, and are in good to excellent condition. Lind Avenue extends south of I-405 to SW 43rd Street. , ; Figure 3 also illustrates intersection control in the vicinity. Inter- sections on SW 7th and 10th Streets in the immediate vicinity of the site are STOP controlled, with the thru movement granted to the higher volume facility. Intersections on Grady Way and Rainier Avenue are signalized. Since the Earlington Park EIS was published in 1980-81, some developer- !_) sponsored street improvements have been made. These include: the extension of Powell Avenue SW south to Grady Way, signalization of the resulting inter- section, and signalization of the SW 7th and Edwards Road (Hardie Avenue) intersection. Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service r- LJ 1985 traffic volumes are noted in Figure 4. Both daily and PM peak hour i__ volumes are shown.. In each case, the volumes represent total one-way trips ( i.e. , vehicles traveling in both directions) .. Sources for the reported volumes vary; some are actual recent counts provided by City of Renton staff, some are estimates based on past counts and recent growth trends, and others are 1985 peak hour counts conducted expressly -for this project. } Daily volumes in the vicinity range from 74,400 vehicles per day (vpd) on the East Valley Freeway to 4,000 vpd on Powell Avenue SW just north of Grady r-, Way. In the immediate project vicinity, volumes on Grady Way vary between 12,000 and 16,000 vpd. Farther to the west, Grady carries 20,000 vpd, a very � heavy volume for this 2-lane facility; On SW 7th Street, daily volumes double - from 7,000 vpd near the site to 14,000 vpd near Rainier Avenue. Volumes during the PM peak hour average about 10 percent of total daily volumes. Most of the peak hour volumes reported in Figure 4 are those observed during manual counts made in June. Ir -8- --- --- _� i� �', SVn, Z e • f y,Dh W 23,100 o 0 32,500 Iy -Si? 2,310\__ < cc 900 o co c -116.600 CC S. 3rd St. 1,660777:.,1. Project Site 0vi6' 24,000 o Sunset 2.400 9.200 13,500 +i 920 ct 1.350 37.800 6.900 14,000 3,150 690� I.400 C �• ^`t ..® 10,000 6 t'.- 29.800 9^ C.'': ::;i) I :T.. .,, is 1 \\ 3-o 990 V...' :^j ,...:...: .:,. SW 7th St. 2,890 Q �� /..;...:.,::.i::r:;:;t.. :::...:...:t::, at es 0 �7,000 1r 0� • �.'i'":r:! "".`::.::'r:::..:..'"'Z:' c 3 700 26.000 p'9 7 ® • N m N 2.510 Gib 410 %%';: zr:...-..:>::...:.:: .. 0 N 31.700 tr.::.,..!Xr:,..::: j 3.170 �''t:i;:;_:;:`' } F- < 10th :< 38,200 ip 15,700 "`::?=Ls::, ... 3,820 9 1.570 t%i.r,.;.`; a i 23.400 g;_:'.''..- 1 C 16.700 Ilk 2.340 4:r7.'':c=; r J 1.670 �` 'D l ✓ 05 46,500 fr 4.650 2,040 SW. tethS . c 1; 12.800 74,400 So ,4 O N 1,280 7,440 `n • ccen1er 81:4 ,• . < 12,200 c 1.220 CC t-405 5.158th St. s. I. 15.300 a • 17,000 1.530 1,700 G 28,000 s 2.800 e 4.• .t • w e I' 41 7 LEGEND - A es °..c f A .., 17,000 AVERAGE WEEKDAY VOLUME 1 1.700 PM PEAK VOLONE CA 1 NORTH M N J T SOIRCESI CITY OF RENTOCo N J 0 1000 2000 3000 WSOOT 0 d - THE TRANSPO GROI.P SCALE IN FEET Figure 4 VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK 1985 TRAFFIC VOLUMES wco�r These peak hour counts form the basis of level of service (LOS) analysis for intersections in the project vicinity. The analysis also takes into account intersection geometry, lane configuration, signal/STOP control , truck and bus presence in the traffic stream, pedestrian volumes at the intersec- tion, and the relative evenness of demand throughout the hour. Levels of service are designated with letters ranging from A to F. LOS A indicates excellent operating conditions with essentially all vehicle queues clearing on each signal phase. LOS F indicates extreme congestion and that the number of vehicles entering the intersections exceeds the theoretical capacity. L_ For signalized intersections, calculations have been made in accordance with critical movement summation techniques presented in Interim •Materials on Highway Capacity (Transportation Research Circular 212, January 1980). In this case, the total volume of entering vehicles (V) is compared to the L theoretical intersection capacity (C) ; the resulting V/C ratio is then related to a level of service. STOP-controlled intersections have been analyzed in accordance with techniques in Proposed Chapters for the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Circular 281, June 1984). A "reserve capacity" (i .e. , unused opportunity) for each movement is related to level of service. Figure 5 describes existing (1985) levels of service at intersections within the project impact area. Figure 5 Existing PM Peak Levels of Service Intersection V/C LOS Rainier Avenue & Grady Way 0.97 E Interurban Avenue & Grady Way 1.01 F 7th Street & Raini.er Avenue 0.82 D 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie) 0.601 A-B Grady Way & Lind Avenue 0.86 D Grady Way & Powell Avenue 0.52 A 7th Street & Lind Avenue N/A A/B on 7th B-D on Lind2 1. Calculated V/C is deceptive because backups from the 7th Street & Rainier 1 intersection frequently block this one. 2. This intersection is STOP-controlled, and the north leg is a private drive. Traffic on 7th is unimpeded; vehicles proceeding thru or turning left from Lind experience significant delay. -10- The results above are confirmed by actual peak hour observation. The intersections of Rainier & Grady and Interurban & Grady are acknowledged problem areas. As can be seen on preceding figures, vehicles traveling to I-405 from the project vicinity must pass through one of these two inter- sections. The only alternative access to 1-405 is circuitous, and would require travel eastwards on South 3rd Street or northwards on Rainier to the north Renton interchange. Other intersections noted above are operating at . levels considered satisfactory under urban peak hour conditions. Transit Service The project site is not well served by transit at the present time, al- though service to some points within a half mile is excellent. A single Metro route operates within reasonable walking distance of the project site: Route 241, which provides peak hour service only, traveling from Kenmore to South- center in the AM and from Southcenter to Kenmore in the PM. The #241 travels on SW 7th between Rainier and Lind, proceeding south on Lind. Metro's service planner responsible for the Renton area has said that several routes will undergo routing changes in the near future. When con- struction on Grady Way is complete (see next section) , some routes that have been running on I-405 will return to Grady. Also, if 7th is improved east of Rainier, Metro would likely route several buses north on Lind from Grady, then east on 7th to the existing park-and-ride. This re-route would serve to bypass the Grady/Rainier intersection. The result of these changes would be bringing several routes to the SW 7th/Lind intersection. All but one of the potentially-affected routes would offer peak hour service only. Transit service to the project site will be somewhat improved as a result of these changes, but not to a significant ti degree. Planned Improvements Various roadway and intersection improvement needs have been identified by vicinity agencies. In some instances, funding sources have. been identified so that the improvements may be definitely scheduled. Plans of three agencies were reviewed: City of Renton Public Works, City of Tukwila Public Works, and -11- Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) . The following vicinity improvements are presently scheduled for completion prior to 1990 (the most distant analysis year in this report) : • Sunset Boulevard between Rainier Avenue and the west city limits. Add two-way, left-turn lane and improve signalization. • SW 16th Street between Lind Avenue and Monster Road. Complete up- __ grading with curb, gutter and sidewalk, repaving, and channelization. • 0akesdale between SW 28th Street and the Sunset Highway. New roadway construction as far as the Monster Road junction; then major improve- , ments. • Intersection of Rainier Avenue and Grady Way. Addition of a right- turn lane eastbound on Grady. • SW 27th between 0akesdale and the West Valley Highway. New construc- tion. • Southcen.ter Boulevard/Grady Way/I-405/Interurban Avenue interchange. Reconstruction and reconfiguration. See figure 6. • I-405 HOV lanes. The final segment (Renton S-curves) Is scheduled • r for 1989. ( An additional major project is underway at present. When it is complete, Grady Way west of Lind will be expanded from two lanes to four. This project tand the improvements to the Rainier/Grady intersection are the only ones that will be complete by 1987. • L. • -12- a ` 0� b1 .I 4 Mo�t R°ad / Grady Way s°u` Ge0`e{ e��d 1_q0_ 41111111/111A111116' 4� SB LEGEND NoT TO SCALE 1, 5TOP NORTH Figure 6 VALLEY 405 RECONFIGURATION OF SOUTHCENTER/ •BUSINESS PARK GRADY/I-405/INTERURBAN roAt Gr FUTURE NON-PROJECT TRAFFIC Future traffic volumes comprise three distinct elements: (1) existing volumes as the underlying basis, (2) new traffic generated by nearby projects that are scheduled for development, and (3) additional annual growth attri- buted to scattered development throughout the region. This is the typical procedure followed in impact studies; i .e.., to define project traffic above and beyond an underlying base condition. Two known developments in the immediate vicinity of Valley 405 Business Park have been identified. The first is a warehouse/office of 21,500 SF located on Seneca Avenue SW. The project is called Northwest Handling and should generate 170-200 vehicles per day (vpd) and 25-40 vehicles per hour (vph) during the PM peak hour. The second project is the Black River Technology Park.. Covering more than 70 acres, this project is located north of and adjacent to the FCE/HdK devel- - opment. Although an Environmental Impact Statement was published in 1982, a detailed traffic analysis was not included. Because specific development plans were undefined, the EIS included broad ranges of traffic impact that could result. According to Renton land use officials, no better information has yet been made available. For use in the present analysis, traffic from the Black River Technology Park has been estimated on a per acre basis, in direct proportion to that estimated for FCE/HdK (see following report section) . Accordingly, the project is estimated to generate 20,980 vpd and 2,410 vph during the PM peak, at such time as development is complete. This is roughly equal to traffic that will be generated in 1990- by the project that is the subject of this report. Current plans on file at Renton City Hall show that the Black River Technology Park will have access via Powell Avenue SW and the street immediately west of Powell (to be known as Naches Avenue SW) . It will not have direct access to Monster Road. The timing of development of Black River Technology Park is very uncertain. At present, the property is being platted, but no specific development proposals have been offered by the owner for City review. Accordingly, the most reason- able expectation for development has been assessed by First City Equities for use in this analysis. Based upon market conditions, the existing stage of Black River development ( i .e. , platting) , and the history of First City Equities ' progress with a project of similar scale ( i .e. , Valley 405 Business -14- Park) , it has been determined that the Black River project would not achieve more than 20 percent of full development by 1990. This would represent 4,200 vpd and 480 vph in the PM peak. Because even the 20 percent estimate is indefinite, the analysis that follows will illustrate three separate cases: 1. In 1987, FCE and HdK will develop as outlined in the following chapter. It is presumed that no development will occur at Black River by 1987. 2. In 1990, FCE and HdK will develop as outlined. In this case, it is presumed that no Black River development occurs. 3. In 1990, FCE and HdK will develop as outlined. In addition, it is presumed that 20 percent of Black River' s projected development will be in place. In addition to the known developments above, regional growth would result in further traffic volume increases on vicinity streets and highways. This increase has been based on recent trends (1980 to 1985) in traffic volumes, and upon population and employment forecasts done by Puget Sound Council of ( Governments (PSCOG) . Annual growth has been estimated at 3 percent on a daily basis, and at 2 percent during the PM peak. Figure 7 shows total non-project traffic volumes estimated for vicinity streets. , Non-project volumes are noted for each of the three cases described above. With daily volumes projected to increase by 3 percent per year, 1987 daily volumes would be 6 percent higher than 1985, and 1990 daily volumes would be 16 percent higher than 1985. Because peak hour volumes are expected to grow somewhat more slowly, 1987 and 1990 PM volumes will be 4 percent and 10 per- cent higher (respectively) than 1985 PM peak volumes. Additional traffic generated by Black River Technology Park has its great- est impact on Powell. Avenue, SW 7th Street and Grady Way. The effects of Black River may be noted directly from Figure 7 as the difference between the last two sets of numbers for each roadway. Traffic assignments for 1990 have been made assuming that the new Oakes- dale Avenue would be complete. No estimate has been made for 1990 volumes at the Grady Way/Interurban/Southcenter intersections because of the planned reconstruction project. It would be very difficult to reasonably estimate the j rerouting of traffic that would result. -15- sin+• i 16,60017,60019,300 19.400 rs ' H/Dhw 1.660 1.730 1.830 1,840 0 o 14.000 14,90016,200 17,600 9r 'So < ¢ 1.400 1,460 1,540 1.680 • °O0 ® M - G cc S. ST6 St, BLACK RIVER - TECHNOLOGY PARK �\�6. 0 Project Site Sunset 37,80W.0,100,4 3,800 44,300 ® 1111111111 3,150 3.280 3,470 3.520 y l • .eta'":; s;� so W h St. c S 7t 6 !'`':j Is:�<;e:;z'::>%`:s>::<;: :�>:r:>1�• • Vlie...._NCOTHWEST ;'tHANDLING 7 L:<>:: :.:tea m4,100 4,300 4,800 5,70, m y C 64.•6 70 017 700 19 a00 20.200 Qt"%'Utz'`3�?�`'>s'':...7 m 410 430 450 550 >::z`-:<:i;>;"<::<;.:<::�(. E y 1.670 1.740 1,840 1,930 15,70016,70018,20019,400 p ti `Ei:at""`C.( 1,570 1,630 1,730 1,860 m 9 eeg.66.11. . ' 1-40b 23,400 24,800 N/A N/A �� 2,340 2,440 Sw, Sth St. iilooppoo„..../Ii;(1°1111111 0 th SOG,hc•nr•r 9t•d el < 15,300 1,530 16.200 1.590 1 1,690 1 1,710 0 Q rA 0b S.16®th St. e m 1 • 12,800 13,600 14,800 15.700 o • 1.280 1,330 1.410 1,510 L a e i m .4 w • • xtii T A* som LEGEND WITHOUT WITH .4 BLACK BLACK N t NORTH RIVER RIVER 13 N 1985 1987 1990 1990 A ADT ADT ADT APT co 1985 1987 1990 1990 0 1000 2000 300 PM _ Pt4 _ PH PM SCALE 1N FEET . • • • VALLEY 405 Figure FUTURE TRAFFIC WITHOUT PROJECT I BUSINESS PARK Gro�t) Level of service analysis was_ repeated for vicinity intersections under future non-project conditions. Figure 8 illustrates the results , with exist- ! ing levels of service included for comparison. Figure 8 Future Non-Project PM Peak Levels of Service Levels of Service 1990 Without 1990 With Intersection 1985 1987 Black River Black River Rainier Avenue & Grady Way E E F F F Interurban Avenue & Grady Way F F N/A1 N/A1 7th Street & Rainier Avenue D D D E 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie)2 A-B B B B Grady Way & Lind Avenue3 D D E E Grady Way & Powell Avenue3 A A A A 7th Street & Lind Avenue Left turns from 7th A/B A/B A/B A/F Thru, right and left from Lind B-D D E F 1. Planned reconstruction of intersection makes a reliable estimate impossible. 2. Back-ups from the 7th & Rainier intersection will frequently affect oper- ation at this one. 3. Improvements to Grady Way presumed complete in 1987. The intersection of Rainier & Grady will continue to approach or exceed theoretical capacity. The Interurban & Grady intersection will be extremely congested by 1987; the likely result will be a lengthened peak period and possibly a greater traffic diversion to alternate I-405 access. To some extent, traffic can be expected to even out through the area as drivers learn to avoid trouble spots. In this area, however, all routes to the regional freeway system will be troublesome. By 1990, non-project traffic (without the addition of any Black River traffic) will result in deterioration to LOS E or worse at two intersections : Grady & Lind and 7th & Lind. If 20 percent of Black River' s eventual total development is added, then 7th & Rainier will also fall to LOS E. These intersections, as well as Rainier & Grady, will be in need of improvement, even without the added impacts of Valley 405 Business Park. -17- PROJECT TRAFFIC Project-related traffic has been estimated in three separate steps. Trip generation is the estimation of total vehicle trips generated by the project in each analysis year. Trip distribution is the process of predicting the origins and destinations of trips to and from the project. Traffic assignment is the process of determining specific routes for the daily and peak hour trips, so that impacts upon roadways and intersections may be identified. Trip Generation Figure 9 summarizes estimates of vehicle trip generation for the project. Daily and peak hour trip rates are based upon averages reported in the ITE Trip Generation manual. The rates are unchanged from those used in the 1980 EIS for Earlington Park. Figure 9 does not include development parcels that are already occupied, because the purpose of the present analysis. is eval- uation of additional traffic beyond what already exists. Trips have been estimated separately for FCE and HdK portions of the development. In 1987, combined floor space of 495,705 SF is proposed to be complete. Of this total , 230,505 SF (47 percent) will be FCE's. Total generation is estimated at 9,415 vehicles per day (vpd) and 1,085 vehicles per hour (vph) during the PM peak. Since HdK proposes to reach full development by 1987, trip generation added after that year is attributed solely to FCE properties. Between 1987 and 1990, FCE proposes to develop an additional 595,480 SF of space, 98 per- cent of which will be office space. Total additional trip generation result- ing from that development will be 12,350 vpd and 1,410 vph during the PM peak. In summary, the total project being evaluated in this report consistsof 1,091,185 SF of proposed office, warehouse, and assembly area. Of the total , 93 percent will be office and 7 percent will be warehouse or assembly area. The project is estimated to generate 21 ,765 vpd, 43 percent of which will be generated by 1987. Total PM peak hour generation is estimated at 2,495 vph, again with 43 percent generated in 1987. i4 -18- Figure 9 Vehicle Trip Generation) PM Daily Peak Office2 Warehouse3 Assembly4 Trips5 Trips6 DEVELOPMENT 1985-1987 HdK Lot #1 48,000 16,000 1,105 130 3,4 45,000 15,000 1,035 125 5,6 48,000 1,010 115 7 60,000 1,260 145 9 33,200 700 80 Total 234,200 31,000 . 5,110_ 595 FCE Area I 17,660 19,800 490 55 II 48,350 1,015 115 III 58,375 9,360 9,360 1,380 160 IV 67,600 1,420 160 Total 191,985 29,160 9,360 4,305 490 TOTAL 1985-1987 426,185 60,160 9,360 9,415 1,085 DEVELOPMENT 1987-1990 FCE Area IV 235,480 4,945 565 V 204,000 6,000 6,000 4,380 500 VI 144,000 3,025 345 TOTAL 1987-1990 583,480 6,000 6,000 12,350 1,410- PROJECT TOTAL 1,009,665 66,160 15,360 21,765 2,495 1. Trip rates figured per 1,000 square feet (SF) of building area. Reference: Trip Generation : An Informational Report, 3rd Edition, 1982, The Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2. Daily rate: 21/1 ,000. PM rate: 2.4/1,000. Rates are based on presump- tion that office park could include some support services such as banks, restaurants , and service stations. 3. Daily rate: 6/1 ,000. PM rate: 0.9/1 ,000. 4. Daily rate: 10/1,000. PM rate: 1.0/1 ,000. Estimate based upon several rates listed in Trip Generation. 5. Total one-way vehicle trips occurring over a 24-hour period on an average weekday. 6. Total one-way vehicle trips occurring during the peak 60-minute period on an average weekday. 85 percent of total trips are assumed to be exiting. In Mode Split • Many traffic analyses include an additional step at this point, whereby total trips generated by a project are divided among the various available travel modes. Depending upon the project location, this process has more or less significance. For example, considerable numbers of workers at an office building in downtown Seattle could be expected to commute via public transit. ° Also, the proximity of restaurants, banks, shops and other offices would 1 I encourage midday pedestrian trips. s On the other hand, a suburban office/business park like Valley 405 Business Park does not present employees and visitors with the same oppor- 1 tunities for transit and walk trips. As stated earlier, the project site is not at present well served by transit. Even if Metro incorporates all poten- tial routing changes, the nearest bus stops will be on Lind Avenue., Grady Way, and SW 7th east of Lind. Further, opportunities for pedestrian trips will be limited unless/until restaurants and shops develop nearby. For these reasons, no allowance has been made for transit or walk trips to the project site. In fact, there will be some trips made by other than auto and truck modes, but the numbers would be insignificant. Reducing the esti- I -, mated vehicle trips to account for a switch to transit or walk would not be justified. A further comment about mode split concerns the proportion of trucks i ? expected in the overall traffic. In the original Earlington Park EIS, it was estimated that up to 30 percent of the total daily trips could be truck trips: It will be recalled that warehousing constituted nearly 60 percent of the total proposal. The proposal currently under study is largely office;. daily truck trips would not be expected to exceed 16 percent of total daily vehicle trips. During the PM peak, no more than 5 percent of project traffic would be truck trips. Although total daily trips generated by the present proposal are roughly equal to the number estimated in the Earlington Park EIS, the practical impact of many of those trips is less because of reduced truck trip generation. -20- Trip Distribution Figure 10 illustrates the general origins and destinations of trips gener- ated by the Valley 405 Business Park project. The same distribution has been used for 1987 and for 1990. The distribution has been based on two data sources. First, the travel distribution prepared in 1981 for the Bellevue Long Range Transportation Study was examined. Second, regional forecasts of employment and population prepared in March 1984 by the Puget Sound Council of Governments were considered. The resulting distribution shown in Figure 10 does not differ markedly from that reported in the Earlington Park EIS. Daily and peak. hour distributions vary somewhat. During the peak hour, project traffic is dominated by employee work-to-home trips. Throughout the day, project travel is oriented to other offices, to retail facilities, and to w'Ny� the regional freeway system. Traffic Assignment 1Figures 11 and 12 illustrate the assignment of project traffic to vicinity streets and highways. Figure 11 represents 1987 conditions. The FCE and HdK properties generat- ing new traffic in 1987 are noted in Figure 11. A total of 9,415 vpd and 1,085 vph are leaving the project via Powell Avenue SW and SW 7th Street. As shown, the street system is essentially unchanged from existing conditions. Figure 12 illustrates total project traffic in 1990, not just the incre- ment between 1987 and 1990. However, site areas outlined on the figure are only those generating the incremental traffic. A total of 21 ,765 vpd and 2,495 vph are assigned to the vicinity street system. Figure 12 includes the new Oakesdale Avenue and its connection to the West Valley Highway. Within the development itself, the extension of SW 7th Street to Oakesdale is shown. Also noted is the realignment of the Grady/Interurban/Southcenter area. • -21- Suo+e Z '' 1°h" O°y _SR Q 15% 10% aoo . m (0 15% P i'''' 5% 1m . cc; S. 3rd St. _ Project Site 046' / Sun 1 0% • ct 10%P 1 �; ':i''''! i.i&�;:;;;>..::..;; SW 7 t h St. v0 ei IFF co C o y •A. V m N v 35% '- 1-406 _ ,1611410, 30% n(I\ IIIIIIIIIIIIIk SW. 16th St. eproo.„/'''*-''':'e;;;-.:°°°°°° . c3 So o m 1-4p6 S.168th St. >, • rn c • + • C 1 • • W m C M • 1 • LEGEND •c 1 0% • 15% P A PERCENT DISTRIBUTION � L 0% 25%?+� 13 J 3 5% DAILY TRIPS —• 0 1000 2000 3000 • 3 0% PM PEAK HDIR TRIPS SCALE IN FEET Figure 10 'MS VALLEY 405 • BUSINESS PARK PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION Gr°fir' S unae i AO Dh 4, o m •y .-SR 270 < cc 900 20 o w .: c m cc S. 3rd S . t. 0\45. 0 Sunset . 710 s 50 1070 .9 3385 3,030 0 95 0 325 290 '0 1070 i Co P 95 , T_. .*J j7j ;4 • •7 • V r 1610 `2t®� L 1 E ai g in 1es We'di • 4-- o ® < • I- < 10th St. > 230` ' N 9 3955 ^C\.1 535 I. 445 Lo 2075 50 890 225 1-405 gl.°..frT 105 SW. 18th St. c ; '90 , w e 890 hC"Or $_ . : < 0 124 -) o cr OS 1-- 5.158th St. T t L ® O 445 4. 4 50 s e to m w S • LEGEND c -n z t 1965 DAILY ONE-WAY VEHICLE TRIPS mQ 215 PM PEAK ONE-WAY VEHICLE TRIPS fn M NORTH fA I I- K PROPERTYco 0 1000 2000 3000 CO 771 FCE PROPERTY SCALE IN FEET VALLEY 405 Figure 11 ITDa . BUSINESS PARK PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT : 1987 ' '` • .J- �' a t �3. c__-4 __I Soo Z ee o �' hiDhw > m ay -sq ¢ 000 m co • c .m-----'%.N. ¢ S. 3rd St. - 6. • 0 Sunset 0 - 1060 •# 9 75 2555 it 2125 7875 It 220 290 755 O 2555 o � -� 7.235 O 2 0 i7 •O ;\\.�\\\\\� �_-., 685 ; \�\VVV r., .• SW 7th St. • • `\":\Y\ Y.!.1 . u V) 4040 `C.el . 1 , j O N C ' I. 440 Gtedy c. E • m 4255 N 5740---\ 635 \\ \jt 10th < 640 0. 75 c m ,\ \I 1,060 i -51 1,16111, J 4810 75 elmev 1 525 I-106 Ifplilltr ' sw. lath St. O N SO�rh * Y o 5255 Ce-rep e d. • < 555 • • o 1,405 S.16Bth St. r • m f ® n 1065 ___ZL A 245• m . .t W m % - o` - '^ m m * 4 LEGEND co ‘ 13 1065 DAILY ONE-WAY VEHICLE TRIPS Cl) 73 245 PM PEAK ONE-WAY VEHICLE TRIPS 0 A _. 02 0 1000 2000 3000 FCE PROPERTY - NORTH SCALE IN FEET ' VALLEY 405 Figure 12 lr PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT : 1990 BUSINESS PARK Grov. TOTAL TRAFFIC WITH PROJECT 1987 Figure 13 shows total future traffic, including project-generated traffic. The volumes shown represent the sum of non-project and project volumes shown earlier. Also shown are percentage figures which indicate the portion of total traffic that is contributed by the project. For example, if the total were 100 and the project had contributed 10, the appropriate figure would be 10 percent. In 1987 the combined Valley 405 Business Park/Washington Technical Center project will account for 58 to 64 percent of total traffic on Powell Avenue SW. Project contributions will be notable on Grady Way west of Powell : 19 percent of daily and 25 percent of PM peak hour traffic. On SW 7th Street, west of Edwards Road (Hardie) , project traffic will be 18 percent of total traffic. Project impact lessens with distance from the site. For example, it is estimated that project traffic will constitute only 3 percent of total traffic on Rainier Avenue north of SW 7th Street. Figure 14 shows PM peak hour levels of service, both with and without the additional project-generated traffic. Decreased level of service due to project traffic will be noted at Grady & Lind, Grady & Powell , and 7th & Lind. At other intersections, project traffic will not cause a deterioration in measured level of service, although increased volumes will result. Figure 14 1987 PM Levels of Service 1987 1987 1985 Without Project With Project Rainier Avenue & Grady Way E F F 7th Street & Rainier Avenue D D D 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie) B B B Grady Way & Lind Avenue D D E Grady Way & Powell Avenue A A B Grady Way & Interurban Avenue F F F 7th Street & Lind Avenue Left-turn from 7th A/B A/B A/U Left/thru/right from Lind B-D D E-F -25- — 1 _ `- -,,it ,, 1 - .,- -- _ - _ --- --- —f - _- - 00a® i r h/ •fah Ir o m ®y ,S < co M S. 3rd S ..4, Project Site et46' 41.235 3% Sunset 3.380 3% 1. IA18,115 18% 2 jIO.315 58% \ 1.770 18% III 00 1.185 64% \ 4V 64 m t; a E o > N Gas • t• L ;.: ;1 1.5 < ,p1h St > 19.405 9% N 20,680 19% t 1.940 10% 9 t c -- 2. 160 25% ..3j is ilk b.1 h. 25,740 ax L••••• rn 2,550 4% I-405 Ilkilfr . SW. 18 St. . `s � I51,5865 15s ►0rh0e J o^fe01v:• CC 1-A06 S.158th St. 16.675 3% r 1,645 3% m m f — m d G > r s _ L e v m ul 2 'e. p -n 1 E m LEGEND f 1 .4 ADT X OF ADT THAT M 1 NORTH IS PROJECT RELATED N 2 PM % OF PM THAT IS ! ® 0 1000 2000 3000 r PEAK PROJECT RELATED SCALE 1N FEET Figure 13 Ina VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK TOTAL TRAFFIC - 1987 GrOtf' 1990 Without Black River Figure 15 shows total 1990 traffic, without Black River traffic but with project-related traffic. In general , the project will account for relatively greater shares (percentages) of total volumes, except on Powell Avenue. With completion of 0akesdale, a lesser share of project traffic will be routed over Powell than in 1987. The volumes noted in Figure 15 do not presume a general shift in traffic pattern after construction of 0akesdale. Some project traffic has been assigned- to 0akesdale, but no attempt has been made to estimate diversion of other traffic. Similarly, the reconstruction of the Grady/Interurban/South center/I-405 interchange area may cause significant diversions. Because these changes in travel patterns cannot be reasonably estimated within the scope of this study, existing patterns are presumed to continue. Project traffic will represent 16 to 28 percent of total traffic on Grady Way between Monster Road and Rainier Avenue. On Powell Avenue SW just north of Grady Way, 50 to 54 percent of total traffic is attributed to the project. On SW 7th Street east of Lind Avenue, 31 percent of total traffic will be contributed by the project. As in 1987, project impacts are less notable as distance from the site increases. As before, PM peak hour volumes were used to estimate levels of service. Figure 16 illustrates the results. The addition of project traffic in 1990, without any generation presumed for Black River Technology Park, would result in decreased level of service at 7th & Rainier, 7th & Edwards, Grady & Lind, ' and 7th & Lind. At other vicinity intersections, no change in LOS would be expected. 1990 With Black River Figure 17 illustrates total traffic volumes expected under the following conditions: Valley 405 Business Park and Washington Technical Center are completely developed, and Black River Technology Park in on-line with 20 percent of its total expected development. Note that volumes attributed to Black River are incorporated in to the non-project volumes that underlie project-generated traffic. • -27- ' .off /oh - c W. m -Sq QOO < CC • vl c m M S. 3rd St. -4. Project Site e"e. 6,410 6X gunset 143,695 6XJ o s 23,600 31% 0 2.240 31X •4 23,.100 16% ®^ o. 1t / -_-o 4 / 2,365 22X1 I / �,_ I SW 7th\Sl. .� ® / 1 •1 c. rn1 ; c 41 E . c • 3 / o61 37 tl E o N Gt c , o 9 19.950 50%1 % y 10 • 975 54% �% v m 4,080 24X __ _.--- - Adiellis/bb z,4os 28% I-405 ' SW. t81fi St. 1 t S , O N I o� ► • 19,590 24% rnco^Ior 6V , o < 1,935 27X �e o V-405 S.1581h St. 18.790 6X 1,815 7% ® s G . - • - 4 s m v ,c o W Z .4 O T 7 m e NQ t< ADT X DF ADT THAT IS N % NOP 7 H PROJECT RELATED M_ N m PM X OF PM THAT IS J m 0 oo; <✓JJ )QJC • PEAK PROJECT RELATED -+ �� SCKE IN FEET VALLEY 405 Figure 15 �?� BUSINESS PARK TOTAL TRAFFIC — 1990 11 WITHOUT BLACK RIVER - � � Figure 16 1990 PM Peak Levels of Service, Without Black River 1985 1990 Without With Project Project Rainier Avenue & Grady Way E F F 7th Street & Rainier Avenue D D F 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie) B B C Grady Way & Lind Avenue D E F Grady Way & Powell Avenue A A A 7th Street & Lind Avenue Left turn from 7th A/B A/B A/F Left/thru/right from Lind B-D D-E F -29- Of cc SA 900 m h 25.000 30% c 2,380 29% m M S. 3r0 St. °;t. Project Site S"n'°t e 0 cc ` 46.910 6% 'P 4 3.745 6% o° ,',,i 4F,.;lr;:y r J>.`:t ::a` %;fi>; ;a.N.;a SW 7 t h .t. J> _'<;;, :10 a �, c gay :;� 10` • 10,490 46X rs, t;: 2 leShiiiz._ ... L..) I-.05 CD 25,280 232 �� 23.900 15% III 27% 2.455 21% SW. 18th St. c 3 0 Cl) 20.490 23X S°c,fh f . o 2.035 26% c°nl°: 131 . 4 o cr 1-A05 S.158th St. >, m m 18,990 6X • 1.835 7% - z. n m ® m •4 W m S. O T 7 m 0 n LEGEND 1 to 1 NORTH ADT X OF ADT THAT 33 N IS PROJECT RELATED 13 as J ! co 0 1000 20M X OF PM THAT IS 0= P 3000 PEAK PROJECT RELATED SCALE IN FEET Figure 17 iy VALLEY 405 TOTAL TRAFFIC — 1990 TRANS1 BUSINESS PARK WITH BLACK RIVER -rQYw Overall volumes are slightly higher, and relative project impacts are slightly less than shown previously in Figure 15. This is because the FCE and HdK projects combined will add 21 ,765 daily vehicle trips to the region, as compared to 4,200 added by Black River. The results of LOS analysis for this case are shown in Figure 18. Project traffic would result in decreased LOS at 7th & Rainier, 7th & Edwards, Grady & Lind, and Grady & Powell . Figure 18 1990 PM Peak Levels of Service, With Black River 1985 1990 Without With Project Project Rainier Avenue & Grady Way F F F 7th Street & Rainier Avenue F E F 7th Street & Edwards Road (Hardie) C B C Grady Way & Lind Avenue E E F Grady Way & Powell Avenue E-F A B 7th Street & Lind Avenue • Left turn from 7th A/B A/F A/F Left/thru/right from Lind B-D F F -31- f . • DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION • As stated in the introduction to this report, the major issues to be addressed were: • 1. . Does the currently proposed FCE/HdK development result in projected • impacts different than those identified in the 1980 Earlington Park EIS? 2. Considering changes in the development scenario, additional vicinity development and changes _in the transportation system, are there . additional impacts that would require additional mitigation? If so, how should costs associated with that mitigation be equitably distri- buted? Concerning the first major issue; i.e. , .wheth'er the present FCE/HdK pro- L posal differs from the proposal studied in earlier EIS: 'the appropriate answers are both yes and no. Because the development scenario. was' so altered in character, from mostly warehouse to nearly total office development, over- all daily trip generation increased from 19,825 vehicles per day (vpd) to 23,505 vpd. (The latter total includes trips estimated for FCE/HdK parcels already occupied. ) However, because the overall area of buildings proposed was reduced by 800,000 SF, and because offices generate a lower percent of i..' daily trips during the PM peak than do.warehouses, increase in PM peak hour trips was relatively insignificant. The EIS estimate was 2,650 vehicles per hour (vph) ; the present -estimate is 2,700 vph. Also, the make-up of trips generated is expected to be quite different because offices generate fewer truck trips. Up to 30 percent of total daily trips 'in the original• EIS were identified as truck trips. Under the present proposal , no more than 16 per- cent of daily trips (and. 5 percent of PM trips) would be attributed 'to trucks. Therefore, if all other factors were held constant (neighboring develop- i ments, baseline traffic) , the impacts of the present proposal would be .no • greater than those identified in the 1980 EIS. Most importantly, the level of service does not drop more significantly when comparing existing conditions with future conditions. - In those areas where reductions in level of service are observed, mitigation is listed. It 'should be noted that City staff have typically used project trip gener- ation as the sole criteria for determining whether or not the staged develop= r- ment fell within the scope of analysis of the 1980 EIS. While trip generation -32- is one criteria, it should be evaluated in context of growth in background traffic volumes and road improvements that have been made since 1980. The analysis concept of level of service is used because it serves to integrate these factors into a single measure of effectiveness. It is therefore suggested that level of service be used as a measure of impact when evaluating this and any subsequent stages of development for this project. A new element in 1990 analysis (and a major area of difference between this report and the 1980 EIS) is the proposed Black River Technology Park. City staff felt that this project should be included as a part of baseline, non-project traffic during the present analysis. Because Black River is just now in the subdivision stage of development, a realistic analysis of the sequence of impacts is not likely to result from the presumption that full Black River development will precede full FCE development. Based upon the development history of FCE and HdK's projects, it is esti- mated that 20 percent (at most) of Black River's eventual project could be occupied by 1990. The present analysis has identified project impacts for either case; i .e. , with or without Black River development. In either case, improvements to the vicinity street system will be necessary to provide accep- table operating conditions. Suggested mitigating actions are outlined below. 1987 Four vicinity intersections will be at LOS E or worse by 1987 with the inclusion of project traffic. The Grady Way/Interurban intersection will be at LOS F, as it is now and will be in 1987 without this project. No miti- gation is suggested, because the scheduled reconstruction and realignment of that intersection and the Southcenter Boulevard intersection will alter traffic flow in that area. No mitigation is suggested for the Rainier & Grady intersection, although LOS F conditions will be in effect by 1987 before the addition of project traffic. Level of service at Rainier and Grady Way will not be noticeably enhanced by local intersection/signalization improvements. Mitigation on the larger scale required is beyond the ability of a single developer or even a group of developers to provide. Increasing the overall capacity of the regional transportation network is a problem more appropriately addressed on a regional or sub-regional level by the State DOT and/or locally affected public agencies. Therefore, no improvements for this intersection are offered. -33- Project traffic will cause deterioration from LOS D to LOS E at Grady Way & Lind. The addition of left-turn lanes on the north and south legs and full • signal activation would improve conditions to LOS C. The intersection of 7th & Lind is STOP-controlled 'at present. Project traffic will cause decreased peak hour LOS. The appropriate mitigation is signalization, which may or may not be fully warranted by 1987. The intersec- tion should be monitored starting in late 1986 or early 1987, if development proceeds as scheduled, and the signal should be provided when warrants are met. 1990 Without Black River' If FCE and HdK developments proceed as scheduled, but Black River Technology Park does not develop at all , the two improvements described above would still be required. In addition, project traffic will cause .LOS• at 7th & Rainier to decrease from LOS D to LOS F. To mitigate this condition, it is suggested that one eastbound thru lane be changed to a shared left/thru lane. This would also require reconfiguration of the signal phasing sequence. With these improvements, LOS would improve from LOS F to LOS D. . 1990 With Black River The addition of traffic generated by Black River Technology Park would not • necessitate additional mitigation beyond that outlined above. Signalization of 7th & Oakesdale It is not apparent that signalization of this intersection will be required { by 1990. The combination of Oakesdale construction, Grady Way widening, I-405 • HOV lane construction, and Grady/Southcenter realignment at Interurban have. . such potential to alter vicinity traffic patterns that no attempt has been made to predict total traffic at Oakesdale & 7th. After 'Oakesdale is completed,. the intersection should be monitored so that signalization may be provided when (and if) warranted. At that time, some cost sharing agreement will likely be negotiated by the City and vicinity developers. -34- • • 1 1 Cost Sharing • Figure 19 illustrates one method of assessing proportionate shares of impact/mitigation responsibility. The mitigation outlined above must be considered in light of improvements already paid for or committed to by FCE and HdK. Either credit for these projects should be applied to costs asso- ciated with the future mitigation measures outlined above or some cost reim- bursement program for future mitigation should be developed. FCE and/or HdK have already participated in or agreed -to participate in the following , projects: extension of Powell Avenue SW to' Grady Way, signalization of the Powell and Grady intersection, signalization of the 7th• and Hardie intersec- tion, and construction of Oakesdale Avenue between Monster Road and- Grady Way. In addition to specific ,improvements outlined above and in 'Figure 19, ` certain policies may instituted to help' alleviate future traffic impacts. • Any policy that will actively encourage a change in commute, mode. to 'transit or high occupancy vehicle .(HOV) .may be a potentially powerful influence upon traffic' conditions. These policies should include: 1. Developers and/or eventual owners/lessees to work with Metro Commuter • Pool to disseminate information on ri'deshare, ridematch services, etc. 2. 'Developers to work with. Metro to investigate- the potential for bring-, ing transit. service closer to the Valley 405 Business Park/Washington. Technical Center' campuses. Metro intends to run several buses on Lind; perhaps the vicinity would be better served if the routes could run on Oakesdale or Powell instead. ' To facilitate implementation of such service, the developers could participate in construction of passenger shelters. • -35- r-- Figure 19 Proportionate Impact and Mitigation FCE HdK B.R. 4 Grady Way and Lind s: _ r• Add northbound and southbound left-turn lanes; switch to fully • activated signalization. 1987 7% 9% --- 1990 w/o Black River 23% 7% --- 1990 w/Black River 22% 7% 6% 7th and Lind Provide signalization when warranted. 1987 13% 15% --- 1990 w/o Black River 38% 12% --- 1990 w/Black' River 36% 12% 10% 7th and Rainier Alter eastbound lane assignments and reconfigure signal phasing sequence. 1987 --- --- 1990 w/o Black River 4% 1% --- 1990 w/Black River 4% 1% 1% Notes - Percentage contributions are based upon the critical volumes from LOS calculations, and upon the mitigated condition. - FCE = First City Equities HdK = Holvick deRegt Koering B.R. = Black River -36- • ADDITIONAL EFFECT OF TOTAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT The preceding analysis has documented the effects of traffic generated by a largely office development. Figure 9, shown earlier, illustrates the pro- posed breakdown in site utilization between office, warehouse and assembly areas. As shown, 93 percent of total building area was identified as office. This scenario led to estimates of impact and mitigation as described in the preceding section. It is useful to examine the potential increased impact that would result if the FCE/HdK property should develop entirely as office. Again with refer- ence back to Figure 9, it may be seen that a total of 66,160 SF of warehouse and 15,360 SF of assembly area was presumed. If this total of 81,520 SF were instead identified as office, additional trip generation would amount to 1,155 vehicles per day (vpd) and 120 vehicles per hour (vph) during the PM peak hour. The effect of 120 additional peak hour vehicles distributed throughout the vicinity would not be significant or even noticeable. In terms of level of service analysis, resulting increases in V/C would not exceed 2 percent._ -37- SUMMARY Based on the analysis presented in this report, the following conclusions can be made relative to the two issues that have been addressed. 1. The peak hour trip generation associated with this current proposal (trip generation is typically used • to determine level of impact and in turn mitigation) will not change significantly from the trip generation estimated for the original proposal . Furthermore, the character of the traffic will result in a decrease in the proportion II� of trucks and in turn and increase in the intersection capacity. Thus, holding the other factors presented in the 1980 EIS constant, there would be no change in the impacts generated by the proposed change in use. ( 2. Considering the changes in development conditions that have occurred since the 1980 EIS was written, there will be additional impacts that could not be anticipated in 1980. These have been listed previously, -11 and an approach for cost sharing/crediting has been forwarded for consideration by the City and affected applicants. • li I,�' -38 • - • GUIDELINES .FOR THE . . • TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN OF • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK - RENTON The property shown on the photograph, which is hereto attached and incorporated by reference , is commonly known as BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (BCP ) . This Transportation Management Plan (TMP ) is designed to address BCP ' s transportation needs , and their impact on the City of Renton. BCP is collectively owned by First City Equities ( FCE) , a Washington State General Partnership, and First City Developments Corporation. ( FCDC ) , a Washington State Corporation. The intent of the TMP is to encourage the reduction of single-occupant vehicle trips to and from the site during peak hours and, as a result , reduce daily vehicle trips impacting the roadway system in the vicinity of the park. It has been determined that the following Guidelines for • implementation are consistent with the foregoing objectives . FCE shall periodically consult with King County Metro Commuter Pool Staff to provide services and assistance in implementing elements of the TMP. ADMINISTRATION Ii FCE shall administer the TMP. The TMP shall be coordinated and directed by an individual designated by FCE. Initially, said individual will be Kathye Allen , Property Manager for . ri BCP , Kathye Allen will:hereinafter be referred to as Employee Transportation Coordinator . (ETC ) . The ETC of the TMP may exercise all those duties and functions which are specified or implied by this TMP. The powers shall r-I include establishing and/or revising reasonable guidelines of the TMP, with the cooperation of the City of Renton and Metro. • The ETC will request each lessee to designate an individual as the lessee's Transportation Coordinator (TC) , who will be asked to provide information as requested by the ETC. Duties of the TC are outlined below. If, ,at some time in the future, FCE determines the need and chooses to select a Management Committee , it shall have the I power to do so. When the Management Committee is selected, the tenants shall be offered the opportunity to serve on it , at least in an advisory and representational capacity. At that time , the selection process , size and scope of the Management Committee shall be determined by FCE. The Management Committee . shall be coordinated and directed by the individual chosen - 'j by FCE as the ETC . I . DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES' EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR (ETC ) 1. Shall incorporate the following information in the Tenants Manual: A. Information covering alternative transportation methods ; ( i.e . , location of Metro bus stops and routes , ride • f i share information, etc. ) . • B. Ride-matching applications for the carpool program, to be provided by Metro. . C. A memo, incorporating information provided by. Metro, which encourages employers to consider: 1 . transit pass subsidies as .an employee bonus; and 2 . fleetride , in which an employer allows company cars to be used by employees for commuter carpools during the morning and afternoon. rT D. Memo itemizing the benefits of flex-time. E. Memo which encourages employers to participate in dedicated and/or subsidized vanpool or paratransit programs , to the extent such programs exist . 2 . Work with Metro to establish new bus routes or modify existing bus routes to pass by or through BCP. 3 . Provide Metro notification of employer occupancy dates and resulting estimated employee numbers on an ongoing basis . 4 . Cooperate with Metro in Metro ' s efforts to provide , install, and maintain at least one ( 1 ) "Commuter Information Center" !— (CIC ) in an accessible and highly visible common area. The CIC will provide information on transportation alternatives . , The location of the CIC shall be chosen solely by the ETC. 5 . Survey employers and employees on an annual basis to determine ( 1 ) the effectiveness of the TMP, and ( 2 ) provide Metro with the number of employees using H.O.V. (High Occupancy Vehicle ) modes . The ETC shall reveal the results of said survey to Metro. a - p . METRO • • 1. Provide information materials to the ETC as well as stock the CIC. 2 . Provide technical assistance, and training in developing information systems, parking management programs , flex- time benefit information and promotional programs. 3 . When requested, advise the ETC of surveying,'"monitoring I(- and evaluating program's effectiveness. 4 . Make public vanpools (paratransit ) available on a first- , L-_i come , first-served basis when they are available and when demand is present'. 5. Provide ride-matching information and services for cars/ vanpools . 6. Investigate the potential coordination of employees of nearby sites for participation in a collective TMP, if desired or necessary. TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR (TC ) i 1. Maintain and provide ETC with a list of companies ' times of operation and employee count . This will assist the ETC and Metro in their efforts to monitor BCP 's public transit needs . • 2 . Distribute an opinion survey, provided by Metro, to determine. the 'demand for vanpool and other transit modes annually. 3 . Periodically distribute information which encourages employers to consider transit pass subsidies as an employee bonus as well as the benefits of flex-time work schedules . 4 . Provide Metro ' s ride-match applicatons to employees on I , • a periodic basis . • MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE The duties, powers and responsibilities of the Management Committee shall be determined and outlined at the time that FCE determines a committee .is• viable. It is agreed that FCE shall have the sole power to modify and implement this TMP. However, FCE agrees that , if and when it modifies this TMP, FCE will: 1. keep the spirit of this TMP in mind, and 2 . consult with Metro for its input on the modifications. To the extent that FCE and/or FCDC sell all or part of the BCP to other parties , the new owners shall not be bound to comply with the terms of this TMP.. However, FCE agrees that it will explain the benefits of this TMP and encourage any new owners to cooperate with Metro in incorporating a similar document for their purchased property. i • • • • • • • 0 1'; • <1 a:q t, V ' 'y, __,) \,\' ' di d r !' " ..1 . . ; ,.. , ,,,,••. , „....•., 0. r►�e.•.••. • ��r;' a Q� •�� :.. . �•� i,' 1 . I: 0,0. . • � .•r ':•fie '> e V • ,A'1')••►.a ', iait.-4'.4 .."': . .° • -------• V • ,.. •:.; .":":'. f'• in• Alr• 41, - • 7 % •• '.. �ti�•,�1 lr �f .I.— 1.. .. /Ttu� •�•,• ?•tom\?:l WA.� �t�} .. \ -aal 11 1`. A ,4 1. 1 { n 1 'trl)5 �r nigh Zi q ,v 1(2,4,04. c.6..le_1(./ ! ...1sCt.•.e.. ,, 6 .:. • e. . .. .,,,,, •1-. .. .-li 4iv.,, A.‘ '‘.;..)0). „1.4).. :. 11 .b .. ..,.�dio • ���q�:ww.w�':i+++r•.I• t a, iglrl �f.1•. ! • .11 • H •.T • ry4?',�•, r4o'`r�� ...,a✓ A • ,i ...041414 •1�'�r'•'I;" • •.i wr• .w. ..• '1' Iti.. •J'Q'`�1 L.�-0'.�f. •n o u)' '9!.� ' i ii k` --+w'. y, — op .} � ••J Q..•.!•�• - r.�G:"i*'a • :r .�:• .n;Yi!ii•:',�W�•elre �� 1, iocop.� • 4 ,..r i O A1'51: ♦, + .° (• I' /•'' ,d'"•. " , •5 u „,, b'U.y� 1 1o•it c�1 S (J' . 7' ��•i� p cam/ . 1 E• ✓ • •. ,e/ : r F.1,�• • 1p l.� •� '� t . Veg.yew-.? .,% 1:: y,--- .gyp 'O f_.J' i•' fi -le•..;v�+' `�.•j, � ..99 �•'•'1i rr.n ( ^:= r►.,.,� r• •.:. W �.• �,a• + 6 rP J •C"J ►•. t'.• i tnr.".�.aw 1 u Vie.. �t p,dir.�... • '�• ��� � 4 ��✓w rl'+ �,nnYt , Mere .-�� ���>.'i /. �•, • .il• Itt ..•-t 4 0'0°I�{ .04\ a 9 \ +% CO . u t •• 1.p i% /cif'• .. ,iv�er 'Cq'. „In w r . / 0 gal' 4 S •1' e {'.� r.�-"a" yJIMV'4, .�. 4/,� VqP sw14,1,1►t V 4P\v,� r;. ,..;;It r ii• �• `�., t•�`�• ..,p.o/yif �.-&-,-.' ~ _ - \ l I`1' 1�•P �% d;, • ••rys,a: 4; . tl . `., `{t�T f • R • wok q%.I' 0: .�•.o-. ♦K e7• f �►�' '\ IIP= •1,• r _4 ..• 1 , Y G 'W A. .."ea,`A t� ,''14; •• ,L Tel 1 r 1' gli •6. •..p. . • :\ + / \ 'rvie a 4.•Nei �r ''i�t ct. 'r , tia . i ���T G. • I, 4 ;4"xrr,...o ,,TJ *0,. {-//�.�5l-/gip\�.(t.1{ •- . •7.4 i.;,•.YLIa�t d (.� .1i y 0 i , r, , . • • t&leo 'C,og ker .:. .•t' ,t ; ..•1//. _ 1 ••t; :-�I J �Q7�41 r- i C V 1 1 • • ..,,,,.,._,c. hi.,47ts. .42s. ''.. v- irT\ 11 II '':..7'/11k.,?''' As\' ''',0„,,,e4): ,11 I Is,. t, ;..cr: .. ,, , ,.:,. • i• .. ..:_. .. 1,—. .9 to • i • ,e„ii , lip .. ..w,,..t...., , ,, ,,.. ,.... , . . ,..... _emu.. ..4Cr..." : 'r. * .d• % • ` '� � , . :.Yd ta, \ ,.e • .s.O. it.,214‘,0 .8;,. ., . , ivil . D. t• •>7M� �r q. ®r ao•. 1 t� b i I]1• .•�, Q \`` � ' , �'I ck: :.: :a '1 0:11971S 1. I.r. .... ,t...A''•., . ., rti '''' „ LI • Fes. Z t; 8 i % •,,, , .;.'oll—.91.1.4./..." 1 . ) \;,. ,...:, 4. ,. ''‘ It' --=,_ •*—,,,,68.'ue%,1 j4 v ...;• • } lj . 0°4 O' .. i _lYi �iii di El • ~4'- %' ' '> • v . tipilt 1 '� 1 1 4q 0 K 1 I c ^ c Lip O N -0 8 0 c.J mica: fiLmED ci„ 0 ..„ 0) U C L L O U Q aS U C O cn v) O .Q U 4- _C O E cii sitt.CX "'- r-TV�! Park..J1 cn orpc ti to P rk O fl ToN, WASI Uty"ION FOR FW T CITY EsZUMES N./ .. ... .el BLACKRIVER Corporate Park RENTON, WASHINGTON • OWNER/DEVELOPER: FIRST CITY EQUITIES 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-9223 ARCHITECT: LPN/ROYCE A. BERG ARCHITECTS 114 Vine Street Seattle, Washington 98121 (206) 728-5771 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP 2033 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98121 (206) 441-6644 ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANT: INDEPENDENT ECOLOGICAL SERVICES R.L. "Rex" Van Wormer Biological Consultant 1514 Muirhead Olympia, Washington 98502 (206) 943-0127 CIVIL ENGINEER: BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102 (206) 323-4144 CONTENTS Master Application (separate enclosure) Legal Descriptions (separate enclosure) Shoreline Master Application (separate enclosure) Environmental Checklist (separate enclosure) Variance Application (separate enclosure) Consultant Team 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photograph of Site 3. Design Intent 4. Design Intent 5. Design Intent 6. Roadways 7. Landscaping 8. Jogging Trail, Fitness Station, Nature Walk 9. Signs - Water Feature 10. Environmental Report 11. Environmental Report • 12. Environmental Report 13. Environmental Report 14. Environmental Report 15. Environmental Report 16. Infrastructure - Site Plan 17. Street Section A 18. Street Section B 19. Street Section C 20. Street Section D 21. Street Section E 22. Graphics & Signs Design Package 23. Oakesdale & 7th Avenue Feature 24. Type "8" Sign 25. 7th & Naches Feature 26. Grady Way & Powell Feature, Sign 27. Grady Way & Powell Feature, Sign 28.. Tenant Signs & Bollards 29. Type A Sign • 30. Swale - Development - Site Plan (East Naches) 31. Swale - Development - Site Plan (East Naches) 32. Swale - Development - Site Plan (West Naches) 33. Swale - Survey 34. Swale - Survey 35. Swale - Survey 36. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract B 37. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract B 38. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract A & Tract B li ,1 39. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — Valley 405, BN Parcel 40. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 41. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 42. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 43. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 44. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 45. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 46. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 47. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 48. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 49. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 50. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 51. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 52. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 53. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 54. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 55. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines • - o / Map 2 VALLEY COMPREHENSW E PLAN 12/11/85 LAND USE ELEMENT Single Family Commercial 1 1 LoWMuItlgFamily Office /Office Park III Modiumlti DensitFamayy E.{ . 1 Public/Quasi-Public Mu Fri High Density egt Light Industrial Multi-Family 'r� Recreation Heavy Industrial __= n Greenbelt Manufacturing Park __ _ / Multiple Option P /� �{� 4,'�.�Q- 00000, - ------ -- - - 00000. at" Ns ay /• ���.�i'. ----_ 00000000000000 0' .-:_- _ _ —_•�- - 1S car a -___= o000000000 • _-__- tt3= _ r • ,' 'I,SS - ••- 00000000000•.c f! _____ _ -_...... �o000000000a000 �o0000000000000o P;r•1+'c" • i I!IPd-� I , i .<4 . .e""• . 6 6 ll tiC"- • •o•a0o0o0o0o00000000 • - _ 0i lc/I i'Zasf a1/•1-2•!�•MI - -_- A 1 .:„ .1.. . . .: • .:...: .., ____- _____ . < MIN 41.4114 • • • 'III1 uorswop E 111 / ‘••••.• nu. I11r1•u•••' I. fp ■••11I • 1111.1 ■•, 000C wok 1 • • • 161 �1U:J.. OOOC--_ r •M1111 :=0000•-�� 1e').''lii. U11••i 11IcII•••••••n1.�1•• _1="111111•••1 ,,• II1•II .11•�01 _- �•:`!wr i- -\171111 ▪ •IIu11►� Lu••11•n a -- --- - •C• - Iiclili� 1.1\. 11••11••I - - : �iu rin•C nI •`' ___ _ .? � .-.ter �111�1•■ S J•• ,'I Mauve..LDLZ _. o 'Oaloi -yen . -, -___ _ _ = •\air .c•1 — — — 2• 4 1,••= •111f11111111fi •' • .:-. •...-_—-_- _ -___ __- •'.4 r'''.:';'","••--lll ----- ': r:- .."..•'. --- -- ------ --- •• • 4 —_----------.------I _-I :5 • • j�''---- ----L-----_ -- - - Ji• • • • :5'Gt_------r----- • ---------� --- '(P. . • _ __ (( ______ - �11•11 ••00000. 0 000 o c _ �11M0 00000[+ --_ -- pQ_ _ __ _- 11.111�1.11' �' o 0 0 0 0 0. •�'�C FFFr` f - L -TlCi1l� r== 11 000°ooi 000000 I L-•.� _ ■1. •o0000c . l 0000. 0000. •0000. /�� �` _ •0000. \\ .00000 •00000. I •0000. , , -\ , - 0. , . . , 0 s-r41,;' .4 ,,.# ,'• . '',..', 0 '0-Pri 'tit-ii .,,_...,. ‘0. 0 r • 4 . 0, . , f • ' '4. , ,' 4 ' li(44, „ ,st,• ,_ J °' r 7 . ...lb b? ,,,4,'. ..,..1.'i ,. t,,,,,. . s ' ' '.i.' i„f: , '.4 . I 'i," IA4 ..• ' 4 — i t toe, '...i ,4 .1.1 j-lik • k ..,`.` I , 4'.'' 0,./.'• , ' ' 0 d..,. `. d e . . - 1 441 rk,'. Ii .4,• ,_I 4 r .. - • -4 --",lift -- • -.• . ---. 1,,- ,.'i' ' . ' %-, ,.,, .." '.,_. • .',. 't • K 1,t, ., . ,,. , , ..,lii,t ‘ , 1,,,._ . ,,,-, :„..,41, / . r• .1,,,,,, .:21 . , ..„; ., ,,,, , \\. ‘..: . 44:: ::„,. ,;:::..„..::: . . .,,,' ,..Vii:...,..2.',. ,,.. ,.,.. '''''• ,41,,',..•.1: ,,r,'° . , :: \... '.. .: ' ;: ,,,,; ..i.4: . ,• 1:- •_!. :'. -i-•i\ _ ..4,,ati- ,,-• : .' . • ,i -,,,,..,, , • . . .\:,'\ . - „ (..,... .., •. • . .., , , 0,1,- • ,•••'.; ' ty: ,40,44.04# 11010mmer ..- 71: lit:rt. t:. I , ,li ; -"," , '., al. 1.• 4--lb ,, T•,, '''. ,,r. ' .f....E.Ir:„: 14,.,,.14: N . t.,-f:•:# '‘.I , .r -1 ,4"4-.1 • . vr.**1 • r•411, , : ,, r. , I Aft.\ . \ , .,.. ,.1r... ,),- 14 ,, ,11 . • , k' ' 214eir . sir,4111 , ''l . ' ,, , r.,,,,,...... -..L... I 11, 4. 4. • i'''1.,....‘ `,.4 ,"\.; 11' t* a'IV ' • ,-4_71, '-',...•- - , ' - eit •) ',_-',- ,''' '4,ib r.„,., I. '4.1 .•-." ,, ,. ki.4.•••1' 1,5 , • 411. , it • .,,%VIA • ' . I r' ) IT' A• • . 1 4./1 r t,'11 b ilit. I . 1 •'1 ' I • ,.!. ' ' ' SA :/',. •, '. I'•, 1 I 4 , .. ' I-q,ilt. , //e• , • . , x! \4', ' '1k„ , •,,,,f., ., 0,;,.:1L . --, . ,..;?Lit it . - - .• ,, .. ••- -i•T, ., • i ' \, ,. , " '4 I : _,1 ‘ -•,,,".. . ' 7, I r- '4:, .. , Y, ,' 4, 4-, , , . 14 ;•,, .if •, .,., 4, - ,.. +A• , I ', 4.. , ' ' 'Y ' "" ?. b' , ..' '' t . q !.; ' . '• . Ix 4?. ... tAkE J ti 1 • . \ .... •. .,-- .4. _,' , \ . ‘• 1, 444m ..,44 ,r ,-,.., ',,,,:,t •,ilr .4 ,-; _ 1,- '4'.,..-A..• „,..- 'A?, t ' • ' .ti 1 (, 4.,..4. , ,,',,,,,,,,,,, ' ,„, ! ,.`1, -,.' ' • "14 1,',I,PL.4 r I -, 11 . 1 ' , \ 1 "i 1' - • ', i ,,-- let ,, -" ' i. %I% , . ..., ip.--;-,•,,f • -I .., • 's. • ,,, , ' ‘i• -4„ •e-".-.,4; • j -t• , '•,'". 'i Ie.:. ).gq•A• ; .- •.ti) w , 1 - • , •• .... • • • - ef t...4,,•• -V. .*•... ; • 1 .•• 9, ,i-e.ivy! , , -- • ' V * ' 'S '. --, wl., . , ,.. - . Ntliko.....ii , , , ,. 14 la ' ' 'ti t- 1 \'`• :e t' .- 'I ^.'', '. I o \ • 111111111i Iti r o, .1 4,":`,,„ 13, ro., ,„% , ,--"f 1 • ,...# 1 , , \ '': ,• ', • r t r • 4 •.\' I (f. r• i'• 19 1 111 ' i, '',,,,,,.; '4 . -',',..'1,0) ). . ' .,' 46 . • - • 1 • . twii4 ,---_____ ,-. . , , , , • -, .-.- ,• •,... -,-1 , , - ,,,. • , . . . ,,.. - •.' 't• • . ,-(.. . ._, . --:....•,-. ' li 1 —",-. ....4---t '• s o 000u0000 ... ,i .4,-7 -Tkl--- 1 ,,„_. 1 ''''' ',.'i'., . ' • -. , ''' q ' '`' 14113 ,1 t i: k •;* • ; t• i *4... ' • .Sor ' , I.,. '" ii.,4-•1 . .. , ,. I p '. ' .i- '• ,,on000000m I '' 'it ., . t ,I ,ir, ., 1 4 r,.% ' •• •••''' * •", i, ' 1 • ' IL 11:: ; - • — . /./'• 411 ; t.t •,,,..,, # • . - ,, ,1 , 1','.: . ''''' Si ' ' 4 '•V I _,---2 't ' 1 °.'• . - \ . ' -'Tic ' ' I .• ilk t . I :•VtrVOL• ''' ' - • .1. - " - rt. ,A • t• , , ' , ,, .. \ • a, --mr ‘ ,4 r '- i . ,i- •^4 4 -, ..4 * T.,-;.'t I . ,L, p'" - — . • - • -f--'',T: . , ': I•'. le il. 'f'!..Pr' ' , i t„ ,„ .,. , ,,,, t,f .,, - ..c,. 1 1., 4)c,, I , . ..„.. A• *,1 al, . .,f;. .0 L. I I tt , 0,4.•t.. it ' 1 4 ' '11 1 • 't , " 1,., ,,, 4. t ,, -I i 1' 1... ', 4-it, 0 .• I* i...,- • ,,.. .. ,#,1,C; ,,,," •,!" ; ' r I c .4. i.— I irk,. , I A# '•. . L ..,. • . vt ),..,., •; A, , • ... , - ---,.. .. .......0.1 • . .d. 11 '.1.i4 .1, I i- t: - .,„ • • , 1 ..)1 • i. I. 4/. . , '.,1,4 II '.1. E'l .4 1 'of 101 • Ot, ,/4,-, ° ,A. ' d ) , , s., , ,I • \ _, , I ,{t,,_ 1 I '`PI t o E t . t V ` '3;i 'r.' ' 1 k ' 4 ,'! ' 1'. . I % , ',.. re'•-• • 10 ' t \ I '4( ' I . A . .1 ,, tfq\c„li , , . 1 41 , , I I, .', 14; A I., • , • 1. 1;4 s ,- #: ,,,, # .- ."'' 4'. A} , ,, i•--4.44 4 I : l''' / , li' .111• #J.A1 " '.•l.t . 1, • '4-4% ' )' ,-.N '1 . ,4111, -e- ki i, \i-'4''''., ' f A 'Nfi y-,.•;,•.,t).,,; 1-' ) ,. • • , , )7, ir ' 11 li 1,‘..,T''.., :'f('• ) .• .,w _.,"?\' ' ,' , 1 -f i , 411 , { ( ': • li , ); . . , 0 I 1, ,:/ '91 41011,41,,\ ,''Y '-- • \v . [ , . ,/ P. it • ' Or I ; / , ' ii-40 (4 t t. 4'' • 1 . ' 11/1 '' S.- ' ' \ (.\ 1 ,, . „ ,,,, ., t -4) ' 1i, ' , ( .,- )1.11fr •41.,:ii . r r . ,.Ij I ',. lt, • f . , • ,,,,,..if r. 1,71i,•% ' ti •! ,#,,. ,? :)., A4, .: 4 .,.. • , .0.i.r. r, i t00 fi i . 1 L -• ' i ,. ,• I 41111 i ' t; , ,4 4 r:. 4,/,/1"9:7 ' • ;111-044 ..11::1;:;:. 'I.' / • • - ( ?!. , '1 t \fa - /1,,, f'- ' • • I. ' ) "Ii• : ''''4,•f• ., t , • At jr • j .r t,t.r4 . ',;,,,.' Pr'' ' ', Vti .';1- • 4 ,. . .1 -4 7 )' 1 4, --4•-" t'' '' -. -1 \la i '` ' 'eh-' /1,,,,,:i 1 , . ‘'' e",,ii r t,1 1. ‘' ii • , ,, • 4. . , . . .. ,# '/ \ # \ , , p'• ?r,I," 4 ' • ,1 1‘,. t 1,IA ; • . . ; .. 6 4,i • , •,,, .'01 _ , i' • !- N, :','?"1 ' ' 1, ' . If ' . ' . 4 410.: • • rt ,: i . ., , 4 , • 141 #t - I ' ,. ,f?'N 0:11 i ; /1( ' ,it, ,ja ' / ,t_ J'• „%; . c... I / , ', ' '''' •t , .4 ' ,'IY1r-vritlifi'1. r Ir.'I 4 .1 , , , ,4...tA4fp', _ „, •,, , .,1,,L, : * ,44 _ '4 4 * i A ,p,A vAliyi , ,-,..0, , - ,/ , c. 1 . - '_-, , 4 4. .Srieli ' '- v:t`dit ' l• il 1,:' r '',., 'I ii'' '-v;'• ''',Ii-:,;.4:"! • ' • ; '', t''', .ii.›.'• I- ,i '1 k ,i '11.‘,1,I'kph ''''' LiG1.91 ,/ i cl Co,. 1- 4 ,,4, . -ii Jit ..... --44,,,N.,......,„?.,"4/', '„t. •;,',:'-'," '''' .., t...s ,,,.•.4,/ " /, It* .. I't 1 -. \ it.r.t" ..ral,A,A, /- , I' 'rc .*,,/,' -.., 1, lir 4'4, `.4 ''tjj.04 I -.. _ .,,e4,, .'" , . .. .. it4t,',,J.. ' y ' ,,, < ,X tt ot < 4„:`, lc ' ' 1, ' i /1,,Vir ore'NFTV /I fri ' 6 414''I' ' o'.1 -lc 1!:;.•11t/ (., . ' ' ‘': • .44 •44,, ', • .14.% ?'$'„ • l':// ,r ‘" '-‘ \ - - 41' i' , V ..) itl.,)'-fil,}i /, -./ ' 'Ir L 111 ' 1 4 • kt.' - -4'.'4 ' Pfi.,..' •, ,• ,.....-ti, - 4.--t,'' -' r z, ' ::)I vv. r VI < -',. pl'-'01, / I ti , —, . ,c11,. ei ,I. )9) .., , • „,.\ , ,, z• V•I /4 e , ' , . , , , .4'- ; -, - I .A-i;. - ,% - i-' T' `, -' 1,4 , '• 0., - •.._ -,‘1. '... I ,--..:.$if; , tLoil,J-4-p.-, li - . , (IT 4 ii,P1- -,' •(' .1•'. , 1 'k_,-;;;-..4-! , - , 4, ,..•••, •ti 6,44iii Irik. I. t ,',40•••, 11,2 *,,4,,,•. ,'1'' % ' ' ' ' f )45,,,„, .5..v. L.,. ilikk:i4 , 6 "4.1,7"‘, gl;ff , i, •I• , , ..— • .,; .74,4 7„ ;1 ,,,-- • ,-.#,Ir' . ,i'...,t-A, L..1 ', %, /,- / •, -;c- 11 1 (•,:t AC,11,11 4.2 1 '1'Or" " '' ' ' •.' A' . ''.`4‘' '1 A- rli ' ...1 0,'inp,10-1..± ,,,, .i, --- 4'g,I.TALI.V tl , ' , . Li. % ."- ',",,,J.1 r .L. k ,.....e'ty,r • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK DESIGN INTENT Provide a comprehensive design approach for unifying 130 acres of property known as Blackriver Corporate Park (Valley 405 Business Park, Earlington Industrial Park, Blackriver Technology Park). The infrastructure area of this property relating to this *proposal amounts to about 16.94 acres. The intent for the infrastructure is to predetermine and establish site plan and related approvals for an integrated network of roadways, landscape improvements, jogging paths, exercise stations, nature walks, and signage as a context within which to develop the business park. As the project is irregular in shape, numerous residual areas of non—owned if ', property (public, private, utilities) are incorporated into this design concept. These properties are all contiguous and due to the size and nature of ownership would probably never be developed or finished to the extent of landscaping. This design affords the opportunity to complete the landscaping, trails and roads.. We desire to establish a. quality business environment. In order to attract the stable corporate users we seek, it is necessary to provide the features we propose to reinforce the park—like, natural setting. We agree with the City's intent to encourage a greater degree of corporate office uses within and around the City and are actively pursuing this objective by creating an environment which will best attract these users. I. ROADWAY A. Naches Naches. Avenue, a three lane roadway, will extend from the temporary cul—de—sac north of SW Seventh to intersect with Oakesdale Avenue. The planned roadway will be dedicated as a public right—of—way and will include the design of a bridge crossing at the P—i Channel west of the King County pump station. First City Equities intends to design the roadway in conjunction with the City of Renton and in accordance with City of Renton • design standards and to supplement the minimum landscaping requirements with landscaping on private property (see Section II, Landscaping). i - • ILA -1 YI B. Oakesdale L. I.D. FCE is currently working with the Oakesdale L. I.D. project design team to supplement the basic roadway design with high quality .enhancements. The enhancements are complimentary to the overall concept and intent for the BlackRiver Corporate Park and include jogging paths and additional landscaping, within private property and the L. I.D. II. LANDSCAPING A. General Landscaping is designed to unify the project, to reinforce visually the roadway system, and to enhance the native planting along the P-1 Channel and within the nature preserve. B. Roadways Landscape planting on private property will reinforce the roadway system. Plantings will be primarily lawn and deciduous "street trees". All trees will be planted as per City of Renton safety standards for visibility and obstruction. Between Naches and the railroad tracks to the north of the site, a row of columnar deciduous trees will be planted to provide a visual screen from the trackage. All landscaping associated with roadways will be irrigated. C. Natural Areas Landscape plantings to enhance natural areas with native planting by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) along the P-1 Channel will be augmented with larger and greater quantity of like native plant materials to produce a more immediate effect and wildlife habitat. Some areas in the Public Natural Easement have been damaged by construction of the P-1 Channel (see Environmental Report), . ( erosion, and firewood poaching. These areas will be re—vegetated. with native plant materials (most relocated from future construction areas of the BlackRiver Corporate Park). The intent L ' of enhancing these natural areas is to restore the damaged areas quickly, provide a habitat to attract and maintain wildlife and to provide an amenity for the enjoyment of the residents of the City and the BlackRiver Corporate Park. The existing drainage on site will be improved, enhanced and tied to. the P-1 Channel and riparian areas. i III. JOGGING PATHS/FITNESS STATIONS/NATURE WALKS A. Jogging Paths/Fitness Stations Jogging paths and "par course" fitness—stations around the P-1 r Channel and on the periphery of the natural areas will provide the opportunity for both the public and Corporate Park employees to exercise without having to contend with the roadway environment. f - The jogging paths will be constructed of crushed cinder which not (? , only provides an excellent running surface, but has a minimum impact on drainage and the environment. These jogging paths will , provide an important link in the City of Renton's trail system. B. Nature Walk It is human nature to be attracted to_ wildlife and the water's edge. Uncontrolled public access, however, can interrupt the delicate ecological balance. In order to facilitate the • inevitable desire of the public to interact closely with the natural areas, we intend to construct carefully routed nature paths and elevated boardwalks terminating at strategically placed r- viewing platforms overlooking the P-1 Channel pond. IV. SIGNAGE/WATER FEATURE A. Signage The signage for BlackRiver Corporate Park has been designed not only to meet the functional requirements of place identification but. also to communicate and reinforce the natural character and quality of the development. A signage hierarchy has been n established to orient the public and establish an identity of ,( quality. Materials have been selected to ,complement the natural environment and to unify the development. B. Water Feature The water feature at the intersection of Oakesdale and Seventh will be a sculptural statement about the BlackRiver Corporate Park. The integration of water, landscape, and man—made materials reflects the theme of the entire development. Here is the heart of the project: a point where the man—made environment and nature • harmoniously meet to create a place where people can work and enjoy the benefit of both. r,2 , RAILROAD TRACKS • -- �---- -- • / ` NACRES AVE. SW .`• . ' -.` BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK ‘'`'• -+^'� ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) ' ,i,:/;';'• r-----r\\ -----\ '.i.'i.f:: PUBLIC NATURAL TEMPORARY ' i_:�' AREA EASEMENT CUL DE !AC .\. .i.t.,,,, __�-- �;` ‘,_.../V •--/ 1 ----__________. i ili. P-1 POND Q.� -- -- -- �-PUIMP STATION• �---` - /� , ...4 .___.--Z---<:.i.•,._.';:( I - 0.:';:-:::::.:-::: . 'BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK ' 1 ( VALLEY 406 BUSIII II PARK ). ) / /1 . 1 , \ /1` __ i LSWTTNST. • I C \ . s / \\ .x , • . I t ties;. ter.:- J '->; -} ?:. Pry R.`. \_..t W1 L-- I O .4a. s p _ . 7t � . �_ Corporate Park i Ve. ,o�H st. RII;99TO WA SI TON - .. \\ . \........... ---\ , ° 0 FOCI " r. s'� ROADN6fAVS I . >//\ RAILROAD TRACK „,,.,.;:,,r: , , „„'--♦ • / ACHES AVE.'SW --,.. �-"/: '-./ ! , BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK I X; ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) • / / 7----- ss-••••;—..—— • ......-:-:.:.::::::igiii:: . ,,_ PUBLIC NATURAL : '' '�t"'•' AREA EASEMENT / :3 :•:;,..i':::`. y:•.'::$:` • / P 1 POND CO9 ... -. }.:: f% •,••: s:z: i : ::E'`` i:< _ ,�,: wN I . PUMPSTATIONSTATION ''"' ``'' • fh' - f :� ` BLACKRIVE PATE PA r- R CORN PATE PARK. ( VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK• ) ... ..•- "-.\:, :~ i 1 5• - /1/ C \ ;; f IL • 2 , CC co Z RoadwayAii.:7,,,, •. L____, . . . : ....,...„.., . . ., . „:.:...,,. , 1 . • „.•,.....,..,.. ... , al i. ml . L__ a, P+ns ili _. >... „.„....„. ... 0 0 . . . Natural Area Landscaping ' • v.v: 0 _ ` f W . , • t - BLACKRIVER • _ y - . _ Corporate Park - i 3 • `�y s St RENTON, WASHINGTON , C ; • " • _.----", `---- -_ • • ,...t; CK IsPoN NORTH ° + �'� LANDSCAPING 1 • I% . / f . RAILROAD TRACKS / '" MACNES AVE. SW - -- ''•\-- ' r • - BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK \-2N\ . � ( SLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) V —MUSS STATION yN / _� PUBLIC NATURAL .... \ \ \ fa 71111 A.j'' . • /' 'I.... 0..� AREA EASEMENT , :� . ' a.,. 0 • • _ •ILLTURE WALK • ;, \ . . r JOGGING TRAIL 1 \ , .4t. / ....,,,.„''....- ••1 .•,.._._,,, f. P-1 POND O .� � • \:. E-PUMP STATION • �"-' •••••...r•'•••• : ' '' ?S1e !Ky1. % ) . -, \ . V . ( . I;• • FITNESS STATION 1 . ------- ::..... ..."---- ....... \ . t/ ../ . 1 p • �� 1' / SW 7TN ST. . 1 ____ /1 ---- to . \ O � Z (\ J it a •••••••••..... Jogging Trail ,-'" t Fitness Station - - • L -- iii 3 _ Q .Nature Walk- - - �' . ° 4 • O 1 la 1 BLACKRIVER ' ` : 1, to • Corporate Park :u _ \ ;,3 sw ,o,�H st. RENTON, WASHINGTON �' - • �,J u ' -- JOGGING TRAIL- • t' -3 __JOGGING TRAIL . n, . .M0 FITNESS_STATION S� NORTH a0 a� A WIC 0 RAILROAD TRACKS • /i NACHES rIVE. S1/ BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK\%, ‘\ ,. � ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) \ • • i --—X\ ''.-____-7,-------N i I i PUBLIC NATURAL �` 1 , . AREA EASEMENT �� ---___________ - 0 ii, .7.---„,........„. 1 1 ------------- i� �' P-1 POND OQ �"- -- n -- -- I - \ / (-PUMP STATION r" - , , oat --------.,\ / K!ARY2 .4iillIlO eC- \ - I i �__ J i / L / SW 7TH ST. (:::\t___ i cc cc W 1 F co _ \ L____I . O N3, . . ._ o Signs By Type l -- W . _ � d► � ---- Water Feature W� d 00 BLACKHIBB W • Cor orate Park ` s ;a - O.�N :1' p w , li..-' RENTON, WASHINGTON e, `' 0. ' 1Q- SIGNS-WAS t FEATURE. 11,2 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR BLACK RIVER AND VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARKS ia On March 11, 1986 Mr. "Rex" Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services and Mr. Ted Holden of Mitchell Nelson Group, Inc. visited the adjacent Valley 405 Business Park and Black River Business Park sites with Dave Schuman and representatives of First City Equities. The purpose of the site visit was to establish existing conditions of both sites and the intermediate "public natural area easement" and also to determine development or enhancement possi- bilities. The results and findings of this site visit are as follows: Existing Conditions It appears that the Black River site is undergoing a transition. A survey con- ducted by TRIAD Associates on February 18, 1981 shows extensive ponding and wet areas. The site visit conducted on. March 11 found no ponds or standing water. The soil condition, however, was moist. The existing vegetation also shows evi- dence of transition. Whereas there is a predominance of moisture-loving plants, there are also dry soil-loving plants beginning to establish and encroach into the area. A list of plants observed on site is attached as Exhibit A. Exhibit B depicts damaged natural areas and other observed existing conditions. The vegetation in areas bordering the P-I channel have undergone change pri- marily due to grading operations of the channel and side slopes, access to the area by construction vehicles and, the cutting of trees.. The results of this construction activity is that the existing .vegetation was destroyed and the soil disturbed. The higher levels of sunlight, due to the tree canopy removal, has encouraged an abundance of Black Cottonwood and Red Alder saplings to sprout and also blackberry and nettles to reach growth levels which are invasive to bordering undisturbed areas. As a result of the heavy rains experienced in the Puget Sound area in January, the existing grasses and riparian vegetation along the drainage channel have been eroded. High winds have broken tops and branches from several major exis- ting trees, causing access points for disease and insects, and structural weakness. The broken branches or tops which have remained "hanging" in the tree present a hazard to humans and animals. The large Black Cottonwood tree on the island in the P-I channel contained seven heron nests. While walking around the site, six blue herons were observed. The P-I channel and immediate riparian areas provide a habitat which encourages the presence of Canada geese, various ducks and other waterfowl. Objective It is the expressed objective of First City Equities to treat the P-I channel and bordering riparian zones, the public natural area easement, and adjacent 1 . i-' natural areas as an ammenity and focal area for the developing business parks. The natural areas should be maintained, and where possible, enhanced to provide a habitat indigenous to the area and condusive to attracting and supporting , wildlife. Given that the natural areas will be virtually surrounded by urban development, their preservation requires providing the public restricted physical [ access to and. through some areas and only visual access to others. - Recommendations The "public natural area easement" and adjacent natural areas to be preserved on private lands can be separated into three areas. Each area has a different recommended development or enhancement. The areas are depicted in Exhibit C. o Area 1 - A recreated natural area on private lands. The public will have physical access to and through this area as a link between the "public natural area easement" and Ft. Dent Park to the west and proposed public pedestrian trails east of the Valley 405 and Black River Business Parks connecting to downtown Renton. The boundaries to Area 1 can be defined as a 60 ft. wide corridor between Powell Blvd. on the east, the "public natural area easement" on the west, the Black River Business Park to the north and the Valley 405 Business Park on the south. The area is bisected by Naches Avenue. The existing condition of this area is a 6'-8' wide drainage ditch with intermittent flowing water. The area's vegetation was cleared for construction of the ditch and now consists of a thick new growth of Black Cottonwood saplings, Himalayan Blackberry and natural grasses. There does exist on the borders of this 60 ft. wide strip some semi-mature Red Alder and Black Cottonwood. The ditch will be regraded to resemble a meandering stream with undulating terrain to the sides. The stream's side slopes will be graded to prevent surface erosion. Water will have to be recirculated or pumped through the stream in times of dry weather. At present, stormwater flows through the ditch during `7, Ithe rainy season only. The stream depth would be such to keep the water (cool and inhibit algae growth during the warm season. The 60 ft. wide strip with its meandering stream would be revegetated with trees, shrubs, and ground cover plants relocated from the soon-to-be-developed Black River Business Park. The stream and its riparian edge would be planted to cattails and other native aquatic plants to act as a biofilter to re- move heavy metals from stormwater before entering the P-I channel. A trail with crushed cinder surface is proposed alongside and at places crossing this stream to allow pedestrian access into and through this area without trampling vegetation. o Area 2 - An enhanced natural area within the public easement. Due to the narrow width of the public easement between the water's edge and private property, the construction operations of the P-I channel have greatly distrubed the existing natural vegetation. A few existing mature trees remain, but most of the pre-construction shrubs and groundcover vegeta- tion has been destroyed and replaced with native grasses, stinging nettles, blackberry and sapling Black Cottonwood and Red Alder. Within this area we recommend grading the stream channel and introducing a r- system of weirs to impound runoff water and create a system of basins. The average depth of the basins would be 4'-5' to keep the water temper- ature cool to prevent algae growth. In times of dry weather the water 2 i in the basins would either be recirculated or aerated. The basins would also act as settling areas for suspended particles in the runoff water prior to reaching the P-I channel. The riparian zone and side slopes would be revegetated with trees, 'shrubs and groundcovers transplanted from areas of the business parks which will be developed as parking or structures. The basins themselves would be planted with native aquatic plants (biofilters) to .remove heavy metals from stormwater runoff. The north side of the channel would be graded to stop future erosion and also to eliminate blackberry roots. All significant trees would be maintained and pruned, if necessary, to improve structure and eliminate dead or broken branches. We also recommend the introduction of a crushed cinder pedestrian path on the perifery and in some cases crossing this natural area. The pedes- trian path would serve two purposes. First, it would facilitate the public's access to and around the water basins and through the natural - ' vegatation, preventing multiple trails and trampling of vegetation. Second, it would work as a dividing line or border between the natural vegetation and the highly maintained ornamental landscaping on the abut- ting,private property. o Area 3 - A natural preserve. The large size of this existing area, rela- ti evessmall percentage of damage from the P-I channel construction, and the existence of several Blue Heron nests warrants leaving this area as is with very`little human encroachment. We recommend only minor pruning of dead material hanging from mature trees, as a result of storm damage. All snags, unless leaning and presenting a safety hazard, would be left. They attract grubs and insects which are part of the food chain for birds and small animals. In this area even the noxious plants like blackberry and nettles would be left.. hic\ To provide some public access. to the water in this area immediately bordering the P-I channel side slopes, we recommend a "nature walk". This walk would be in the form of a raised boardwalk with wood side rails to help prevent people from wandering into the natural vegatation but allowing them visual access. The physical implications of this raised boardwalk are very slight. .The walk would ride on posts well above __ existing vegetation, which would be disturbed very little during construc- tion. The boardwalk would give animals and birds uninhibited access to the water's edge. Two alternatives exist for the route of the nature walk. One would run along the bank of the P-I channel, thus allowing the public complete access around the banks of the channel and ponds with all the activity of the waterfowl. The other alternative would be to wind between the exis- ting trees in a north-south direction between the pedestrian path on the north of the preserve and dead-ending at a view platform overlooking the P-I channel and ponds south of the preserve. The second alternative would prevent a lot of through traffic. To the north of this area we again wish to introduce a crushed cinder pedestrian path. The path would run along the easement line and create the separation between the natural vegetation of the preserve and the highly maintained landscapes of the individual properties. 3 EXHIBIT A Native plants found in the upland or adjacent to the. sloughs but not in the sloughs. Trees Black cottonwood Populus trichocarpa - River or black willow Salix lasiandra Soft willow Salix sessifolia Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia Osoberry Osmoronia cerasiformis Red alder Alnus rubra • Shrubs .L Hawthron Crataegus spp. Salmonberry Rubus spectablis Red current Ribes triste .. / Twinberry Lonicera involucrata Wild rose. . . . . . ... . . . . . ..• Rosa nutkana Devils Club. . . . ..... . ..... . . . . .., Opolanax horridum Snowberry Symphoricarpos-_. albus � I Red elderberry. . . . . . . . .. Sambucus aborescens Blue el.derberry Sambucus racemosa Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium Vines, and ground cover . forbs `ld Japanese knbtweed Polognum cuspidatum � Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus Pig-a-back plant Tolmeia menzieii Stinging nettle, Urtica dioica Lonicera ciliosa Atropa bellodona Ranunculus repens Phalaris arundenacea Holcus mollis Honeysuckle Deadly nightshade \ \ Buttercup Grasses Reed canarygrass Velvet grass Wild rye Elymus spp. 4" Bentgrass Agrostis spp. r/ / .1 , _----------7 — ' I -/---.----------- ' .............. Black River Business Park ........................................-.".--- 4allifigimpiffigHilii:TqiiiiEiiiiiiiiiiiitippl .................................„............„..................- 7-\ . ............. .............. ........ ........ ... , ........................................--------- ----a •••..--.../1„,.......77:11:;57:\ \ ................---•---------------------.......r .............................:::------:""----:'....- ... .;::.......:::::::::::::-•-•••::::::::::--••••:::::::::*--4::''':- - ..i:E.:E:E::" ....... Public Natural .ftf , .. ."""...uti,i:iinii.:::::isir::::::: ::::,i,i,i,:..:ii,::ii,i,ii,i,i,ii,ig,iii, Aloe Sasm•nt .- .......::- .., . dif!.iiiii.iiiiii::::''. lglih.:::;iiiiiiilfigilliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiike -,.. .. ,,, ...:::''''.::::°•::.:".. .:i:E:,. / 0 Ili:i if i il..r4::::::.:_irir:.::::.:..::':"........i Ii.1':.:::.:::: :::::;:i.i..:.i.::1.•:...,1.•.:::i:1:..:.i:.:1.i:ii 1:sli.:1:.1.1i..!i:Ei..1.::..::i.:*:.:::..:.:.:..i.:.•i.-::-:.,....i....1..1.:;.1.lifif i i a u..i, . .:.:.::::imi.*:1:::::::.,.::.. c) ,:.;:ifigliiiii:::::: ::?.. .1.1.100„.::' tc7) ........... c:=• , „:: t • .... - . ....,.......,.....-- it ..s-s,:::...•••••::3::::if:.• ,it .......„. ..,.........,...• ••••••y-*:. .....,. ......,:f.'.1'.......... ...-si.---.--y•y-s• -•......::,..•••?.... , .•-•-•:aci:t..,,77.7.77.7 ..A--y •-••••••••••••.. ........................................................ ••••••••• ..•••••••••••.•-•-••••-•-------------..••••••.. ..................................................... .. - 1 1 ....4.'.g.... ..s,.........-..... -.--------------- --------------- .1:::.'-....1.:.*:.-.....1.:***8:1•1•8N:gsg...•:...V:Zsi.2.;•§:4:§:::....:.•j-:•i.g....,t:Q.:.*:-$4...•4.:•e..::.$$:N•sz.4 .2.::..:.§.:...3 ::...a.....;:,:.. ..::.......".....::.4...x 7 • •••••••• •••••••••••• •••••••••:5••••.s......................................•;:.............:;.....•...........:..............................::::......-:......i....1."::..........i....1...............:................................i..............i.i............i.::::.:..............i....;3.............s..............33,.........:....... .N...sa...........................,,,,......,,•::....:..'........:.:„..-:;:... ......4§.§g§.g..t, .......„....... ......s.............5...y;:::y.....§§.::::......:§: ;gg.:2•SESNAINN:ga.g.$. ....01:Ogw Valley 405 Bu 'teas Park ' •••••••••••••••••::••••••••••••.,:.?.•:::•••••s•.,.••.,....••••.,,V0 .•:S .s%gq.,.g.;FiyA.qZy.. g..N§yig...yiy g•:-., f.......:,.....y...............;v .44••.••••••.-.,.•,...-•••.?....,.-•:?.,:-.5•.--.,::%-•:•••••-..--.•- •s:.*•-.V..••.••.••:v.",..xs•.•-;-..•: :•.y.,.yx•..:•.....?.,•-•s:.... .....„J ,....„....„,.....,.,..••.„-....:::::. .."".---,.......„_ .......**"•••••••::.-::4;:.:.•2.;•::::::::.'4....V.-.3.:;•a::...p.g. ::..,..*•.%;C%:••Y;Fg:•:cX,Y .:::gq.f:X•••• :: .••y.. ••••;•: .••!!..,;•;-•Vg•.:::.• L_. A ....... ....,............5.....,.........s.. :.. .....,..;.........w....,:;............ .A .0.....0.5......-..... s..As-...E: --.4. .42:•••••••••••• •••••• ••••••••••••• • +.4__.._.......__'*.s.*:•••••••St•%•§0.:;.:.$::.$3§$2.;§g.;§.§§.•:.X.7 .§::::...y:::,. ••5:0.5.ygi: . -‘.4-44.;::-.4...:::.:ii:i:41f.::::::.:;...,1•‘.....;%. .4 :.*:.3. ....;:....11.........:::...:;::::::::::::::::::::::11;...:::.....;.......::..1....:..... 7th • ,0- Iri/ .......•..•••• .•.•••••••.•. .•••••...•• ,/Z\ I - ••••••••••.••..... •...••••.••••....•••••.•.........••••••••••.•••.....•.•.. \ _i• • . . .......: 65.':: ::;Fg .......,.. - ••••'*....S••••:••••:••••••::•vs.•••, ....s...4.:.A.: ..... ... - ....i.:Mg.g .•••••::-Y•.*:.8.:... NORTH I . ,........ --............0 -0,....... ,,,.............. .., ••••••....• ...•..•.....•..•.. ,• ---.. ....•••••••••••••••• .• , . — Area where natural vegetation ',I 1111-i 1/— .10E15Z' ....es .,%; .. disturbed due to ditch construc- tion. •••••!...4............T Area where natural vegetation . ,L, disturbed due to P-1 Channel ' construction. • • _ •••••••••• •••••••••••••••••• ---- ••••••.••. .••.••.••••••.••.•• ..•.. . •••••.•.. .•......•..•...... ...... - .• . • • • • .•.. . .. •:-::-:::: •••••••••••••••• •- % .. WggaYgi '''.... ••••••••••••• •••••••*••.--:s.s....A.-551 .g.,•Ys••. ..y.y;si-ai:.-...cs..Aisr.... 1 - • . / .. We Vgaii3.§.A %.,X ...:-.•••••••••::::••••••::::••••:::: Exhibit it 1 .. !,. 14 i r • _ _______________ _ ____----- , ... , ,.,-, . . \ . a Black River Business Park / .: -7-v/P\ • - ir,:.i":41.3.7 7.,:c"41::::.S.:.'.s,.^.13,:::::;.",57?ei.:c1,..e.:,.:;:::". ..:::•• \ . x.:iii::...:...:...•.7...i.:..i..i...:...::•::.. .1:.(t)::.rico!...e.,r';.:1;%.4,rj:.tye.t.145•11,;:::::;03'b‘T.Ci:Ft.C4.,*(F.,.t?" ..:.:::..:•.. r 1 s ;l;;� i.,Y ,� ;., �� �) e) uor Public easement line. ,.tl' t ra �. ti A ...:.::.;Le; !.) r,t!fl..t.• a•atl ••li i.)`1rL(v`.rt• - `\'\_ .1 fl h V::: :i*iii . 1::::•:•::at• •/ / •••••is.** P- 1 Channel LJ - Z 7 \ i 1 / Valley 405 Busin s Park • \ I / I 1 \...---- J 1 L _ _ , -,,„ .\ , , _ \ _........... _i _ _,.. -_---iiii.. _ _ , ------,,_ , _.. ---- - - z , ______ _____ __ '( hi ____ __I , • _ ____ / \ . _ - Area 1: Retreated natural NORTH • area on private o property. I i a� . .A . L __I , . ..........:.:?........:„:„. - Area 2: Enhanced natural - iii area within Public li: _ ':::11:•:::_•:•:::•• •::::i, • . -easement. • :,v .) -Area 3: 'Public natural area • Exhibit C 'ill. . _ . IS 0 00 i ` •/ 1-' .•. t _ - L ram_ O .,, - O _ •1 r///ram rJ ,t /�==� -/ s r w►nwK AREA n essone�' .� •44` K 4 • y ; F ,. o 0 . ~= -".fie. ••• .`" 1: —*/- ti ''�; =ne D ' !'-1 CHANNEL D� ••+ S� �• • • �i�17�� yj_ y Q •i s MCP STATION .. f/i;OR..:L• 1�. ,. • .��� d•Z�+74.>+ •• •'r J .\ .-@ "'°iv V� - - -- "" -� '� IMT1i1AL AREA EAR i ,,.:� , I IMP' .•'• \ �•• AOOfMO FAIN, e • . 7Q}�.-T,,i� �p� \ MOAN 1. t CJ t ,4 ,/7�d4. 'W'W�O�' Z.�t Mr h�a�i \ •' 1), �l�11•,JQ� ) , S.•• •.t TYPE'A'SIGN ~`�` \ *f i TrPE'S'SIGN l .1� tit `_ T1IRCAL sECTION C } J �!!: ''•,lifi ?'s: .._• OAKESDALE AVE do�� _,...ik +o . 7.TH STREET FEA 4 - - -- ' Atti'e 0 1 . -� _ .�. -k AL sE :{ y t. } 107011.110 \ T Taa.erATOCIR '1 wTO.K :.� 1 �. �` �' .� •I 'e s. --'• ?'t, MO 1;`rt[1`,u{ SECTION -- r;-- i C1. pOO1NO PATH Y ''1. � . BLACKRiVEB ' �n. ° _� Corporate Park .-'`""`°�` •,x.:,,--,I. f-t a. - �"` RENTON, s�� ` . WASHINGTON � li,\ � - I.EnsoN noMEar�r NORTHWEST ac ;y; . i yy))QQp�11, fflClELL NELSON GRt� pG �s�: - a -_.,;t' iL I , W.NL�.•w�r { , , �� }ram f ` H ROE.�°.Si ISTaS+as WC. `_"" di: • (`, �' Z' ` J TYPE V SIGN ; e J j® D TYPE'A'SIGN II ' . ........---^ 1..„.._\ ..?.. f,--t l . �/; l �/j I(6. 1' A • 1• I (01 aj < - c i couwz+atil hrk > . i .Z9\ • 4- _ 1 i \r ! ii, . .1--to-I-I100)-ka 05b-&10-io **I \ 1 ,. • . / t-WP-i—i .-// e/irf, i d r — . \\: / ./-- -5 . • , i , 40101 II Go is 8 0 i •k-0 l�- d_ V4-0 _(0—1 tiS-ti II'0 \ i51-a" b01-42" 00,4 ,i, ' 161-0" `z°- 11‘ . SECTION A ^. . r i • . " e i \), .)-ly - + irrr Tg . ( , /- ,. . w illot , \ 1, ,� i pn i.�,�,1 roe r7 KO,' • SECTION B - �4iNta �a `,, 11low 0 1 i_ , - - A1 A H ç, ,4 /4 i 17.4...A. (______._-../4).66w_w rad w *eAR,ia,ik7 fr-4201,r -rrie-i - k . l ri**4 1 . ///,_ j imi*,.. .A • \ . 47-, _ . '14 --- fri- . . . W rl l 'I Imm il 16I1:PU Ill DU i pkil VII'd°I co yi Od �`> �� �III � �'�". it \ _-----....--- /1. IIM \ -, - - --- 4= ° . • -SECTION C Ida Nvl�f-fw f �, . _ , kr'491113,7,' Is. iiiwti.,---- \,_,\T)i., .__ _I . - , , A _ _.,4 . si ---vw0-350-2 -iir450-r-riere•47 — . ) , /?, 1-0,0110, gil t-i-r-ir4- • Nj / ;3-- -• . „ , , 1, 4 ..„,„ \ , . _ __ , , . . , . I Ind _" — - VI u ,i( 40' -1_,,,, Is V4-412-- Gi-c gad \ __ SECTION D Loci4-6 Horolii I'L 101-o'' • 3Jvl 1 f 7 1 ( 110ai a � y 4� , ♦, • r V % rft\ \t 1) <--- ---1"1 t /ii2/160/1 - - 1 .\\' ,41 ref,iPl'i000hlb 1 '''' A .( 1 ; . ; • \\I . 4p 1, & • -. .k. I 1. .5 -uAeft, frrirlr05- - t ,, 1. . 4 .,0 i / , .4.4 ,,. _. , l - iii t .. . • . V I ;1;-‘ •L •go' If ,.,.. V/ . Nt kl 41 • I jt>i ' i ,.. 11-0%) 610" �' �' el-a" - ICI I iZ�'' 'III _- o wrer* 1r/ fiCisPeoP 4z41° . 'SECTION E. 1— oAk ✓Oga 7. (_. I • 1 The• Mitchell Nelson Group t,,corpor.kt,,i BLACKINIVER Corporate Park • ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHICS & SIGNS DESIGN PACKAGE • • . , ,_ . . , .... __ .- • _ ;-— ; , , _ , J . - .' ._. . •--- • • The Mitchell , • • i Nelson Group l ' '. Incorporated I 4 ,11r,(00(-111. e,_A-4-'ir..-Ki 2011,01 Ase,S1I.i 1 i i Se.le.1,4uolgtom qx1:.1 1ffi.1111.4.1 4 — t 4.-47fe.49 • s %, ' . \..,•"-• -41 „ i 3 . • e- . ._, 1c • . . . • - implitw • —,.4004- ,t?t,- 4:( r19-1 ,•-c,* ' ... s.V'1,7 Q. ,;.i...,,,,.c.„7,-; • UJ sj-rrrirj:flt//6:fr, i,....0,--i..- _ — • 0.1.11.-• • I—' ....,. -r 7 .4( -tirric.1 , ..c.f..4-1--- ,..,,,-,,rt,--,-ra-e.. A.,. ' ;i /p4e/ , cp..5co&-r2 .vo•cF-Fr-A4-4.- - - c'----E-7. • / it.. lit.' - • 0 Fivi-c-4-1/gops-r,.......K.442,/- pr _. CC E cn 0 a - - --- . a 5 • , sr,,-.1.4p.mp cor-ic.,46-1-e .1 - `,211JITI . cp-o,,,,,4-...e.,40; , ., • w.>cc , %i-r---- - _ t-.1S'-11-.ED \\*14'4 411%....14.1...10107.... p (...) " • . //:.; ,, . . . 3K4-----e.):A Fl N I c3P-I C..C2f--I'..:FZEra . . _ _ ,,...H4,1,. .• .. . 4 -1-4,-.- 42 r..,2,-11., Vi•Or car---1- 4-I-trE• P, • e /.4.,, r' 1!: . . . a IMPACT SAFETY ZONE „,..„.., /. ......m.fi - ill I.. ''., 1,1 I , •- CO : -_-..• 2'-0" I 1-_____ /i --_____ 1 ------- . i . • ,c4-1(... pno, ••••••--e=0. . -..: . , . . .1 . I el.. - --! /I- -N MI! 1114AVOl el .A, I 1--M -- . . —7, I oi .. ;0 1_co • • -, . iH ii..4%-0 u.21--,c, ea-4r . • ,, ,tat-ce.4 • -_, . . .,,1 ,, , • • 1 i I • • 1 I -i,.-4.10- cr..4.-,-r— ..x1 - --64(r&-• , ..• . Os . . 1 , . so .„- ii_c,,, • ,- • OAKESDALE & 7TH _____ .. _ • ‘._- . ..FEATURE . . . - . I . I . ,- - , , . . . ... ... Th .1 , Mitchel fii4,-* lit. ---', Nelsoi • . . ..•. -7-fr4Of -rr-rr, .r,.. e-f- le . rb- 3 - • Grou % ,, - Incorporate , ! r •"--.,5, .21.1-6*-1-- 1 - . . , + : .• \ \\\If/ ,•••,.., a.,.1-11. .1.11 frifP.1-'1F0f2 \(12-1401 .. M i 1 k . I 1 u 4111151.-Alte- ....4,11, 4,- ,71,1-41., ... • .. . , , ......,..,—.,_. . . , „p, 1 1,, 1111101..:... 111 illill 1 .I111! ii lig , • 'V1// • <cc ....... • . • L . J . ITIV.#A,A • \ I. ..• _____--—.-... , . . . ... , i . ILI 20 F .: --- . . 111.cii. o . _ . ..'•. - , E CC 01-- -17----"", , _ • for-off, rt (aro, . . . , . . •I'. /I,•I/ /Ii,(\//\.\/K/'•, .‘1;\ _'.._•_%>., /-•i' t'''-•i.%• .1•/\ ‘-. /•\y„.i' i •0:.. ... , --__.- _ iI ._ / / I 1 t ) : ,_ . AH •\ \ i . 1 _ / ' \ > : . \ 4 • -,32zLi,us.;.:00(00c:u>C4-1rcCi..1 zg,:o1z- IMPACT SAFETY ZONE fr-e ts.-/1- .-.64-1. ,..,,e _ 1 r9 JAL.71 rti, No Itt VI..11/11 1/.11 111111 1114,/11 4../.-4-, 0 ,!. ...-•... • 1.111,1 I/Ile 11111 t.11/ _------- - 0 \ ' — IS 5.Z. V\ N H CONC.. . --------------------1::. -- \ -S-INIF-..7..2 C-C9NG, 19)-4:- Carel -. -11-le ...-//epli.A*.:.ex-KOP-t-I I'L,P,N 1 \1\ - \/ /--...- N-T-- _-{ //0 ,-,111-1 f2A-0,-{; _._ _ . _----- .---- \ R.PH e, I"-I'-P" ,21-1e•-r 1 10 = ST -rge: il..<>4--111H41 _.-- . . • TYPE B SIGN ,r<v, l• 7TH & NACHES 2 ....,, ...v,e. ,..,..„.., . . ._ • , ,--- ---„, r r`1, ! ; . • J - 1 - ---, ,- - i ---- i' -- — ! f- --- 1 , i . , ._.. , . . The Mitchell Nelson kviVi Group rn, p., A, .,,r, N-1--.4 ,• . r. vs ''... :4 -r;. (fir2.--,. )9, JA • Incorporated V ,I • .• h., , ...vi? fr, r ••i'; ele' ' 1.-':( 7.. 6 I.. .r'' er:(r' ir 5. y . f I r: ' • • ti'. ' ...• r r r • . 1.• ki, - r, „,,!'..', 1 6•7 AI t 4 4. . ., ... , ; ;•-i. k . ,,.... ,-, ... 4 '1 1,1 . r ir 4., ; , • e ,i _,....„ ts 4 ct — , , f,? . —7/ - • ;-1./ ••=/,'-- ..7..... . .''',,, , .. . , • i.„-- ‹. ---1-. •.- -,.. ..--e-,-.. -....../ k---y,--i> 1 -, ‘•, Z a. - . ,,,,,, .......",„.. • , ,. _,,./ , g ,, , . .,, /-2 • . ,5 11 T ' 5.•:----1 -'..-- . ... _ .4'' '''', ', •• '''4•%,,,ty. k 1'. .., -=','l, S k f e ..-2-'1--"..., ••=/„.&,.......'..-"")(J, ‘A,......,?, .............;;;„1 , ..„,• -'' - .• ,i. 4,, '''•1.i-*' .'4, rt. I— ' V ••(•"'....., '7 .''' •‘-- -... - ..,--ie , •,••>--- --, ___,..•N:A ‘!-•_._. ,? '.11 z ,. ..c....,-:4,, • ,.t4:' ' " ----,-...- -'"v-----. ., ,..,..`•,.--rre, ,A - x'- --4 ej , P CC t, ‘.li''',' :,, .. ,-c.-;AX , ,„_ 4 1-,1 , 4 -''••- . r° " qt.*, ,r-rn•- •-..,- .;.... ,;-••'- vi.. . 0 7-1,, `'. -'' ' --.-7-- •- ..• ..-- .• . (,) if! i . , ,, • . .. . . . , , I, . . • CC 4 I- -0-1r-1 Yea'All f3"4*5••••C'0 4-8,--41E61-I .,.____ ..,„r.„..„„.„,„„... = (0 ,a,e4e- re..v...• ...4,4P.,c. ,..4-..... ...//raitenragn .,-,,,,fte-g- ri.,..k.. eT CC tcl W OAKESDALE & 7TH FEATURE . > . %. -1,P4-1 4,,/,6,-.1.- Aro-O.-nor-I -- ete0,44,111.1-1 c; < 1 . CC— • . J,..,' e•• - ,,,, 1 ,,,,-- ,-. fl;-.1-, (1_, ,..ryi, 4,-kt r.-•-r^ )...I..„ Pf.'44\. 'VASA ril' • '- .'\C.-`1.--,. r••r t `l,, 0 r , A •., ,... & 1 , 1::- !' - ' 1 1:.• ,_., 1Zr' 3,1 1: ii .P; • ''..4' t?..•' ri', : V\ir,:.‘a ...•- ') l'•L W tk-r r, ^,r-. - -1, 1 ,-1 ,7,. •\ ...,- ; ci. .... ,-. r ' ,-• r ' * ft 1- (,,,., , 11, rr sq-I, •, r .1 4. . ., •L . - -4 . • ,- .1.,Lt . ...:' ,3 ' • ' i :21 A 1' S 1, /r,- • , i /it. . .. 1 , V CO r ... ,j. '• ,.• / , 1- , 1 r I(' • .,• ee •A ,f ) I _ ,-• A t , tl. r :* ,.." 'I c,,,. •'4 ./. .,., ,•, :•• ;/ . „ it 7 r• ''.1 .5 ., . . • , ''';/ C' .,:- - A c! -•• k, I.', •') . •. , • „ , .• ,•• 1 (7 ,,,, ,.. 5 r , . 1 . . t. i ': . ,- , ..) • . .:- q, s,!.; ' fr „ • )2 '- • i ''; -*1- • ..'• ,, .- J• r , i 1 I •.1 ' • ' ‘ '..1: ', ' k• t: , iL• - ..) •/ ' , . ,:',' ' ' . - .f ._, . A A, , .1. y ., ._ f. I. • I , . • ; ") , I . .. . 7. . r t*.c e - ,.• r 's• • NI, MVM. DAH ') ) ' , , , 1 ...• ,• i - - N . .. if , .14); .c3.: '. I . * . , • ' ) Dim imAvir! 1,1-Ar! i . ...,, • ' - C• .N., i• I •!!! 1111AWN .C. ' c'.. ( , •P , 'I. ' .. c.1$1,.nl .... j 5 .. '6 • - ••• . .1 -..... \, = , . . .,, , ,. , •• , i i ,.. (.-. - --\-- - • 1 ' . i • -1 . , : •' ' • . ' I BLIICIMIVER • : • r'., V-(' ')- " -•-• .. • . ,Carimate Path ' . ' 'i,: \, ' 1 Ni. 1 . .Sw , _ i___ 4,1 --+ \ • \•' - (, , \ . 1"..‘ ",... 1.• ,: .--- . ,1, \,z : '''-' . ..' , •• \ ',..Y , .. . . • : •• .... - o . . .'• ' / . .-..' 1 's ',. ,.. c .: -- i • . • •• • ,,......„„... .... ,., ... ..... ... . ..... .. .. --. ..... . ..... . .,. ....... _ ...,.. .. . _ .......-4.15-0.1 T ,,ii....• f, ...2P.,1 ••71-1-0 y4,4,---' —r -rr ul-i, ,..-e _ .....-A-1 fw-ri -r14-i",..;:// .....1.:4A., -1611 0.A....-ry- -r/A-vwfr-ft fr-41-e4.. fo-‘4447e .,- -T-, 0- r=1,7"-A-4--wn I r-1%;1-11.1c-q01-1-1- i--)1(al-1 • _7TH & NACHES FEATURE 3 • _ . ._ - _ - - - ..... _ 1 . I . , , , . , j_ _ ,_ ......,, , _ ... _ , .• . __ _ 1 . , -1 1 -- • • • • . . . The Mitchell Nelson -. - • /I Group Incorporated . - pr,..,:ag.i.itaa2 ,-;1-4Uttil- --FtEe...47 — / ' V t• • • .• . . / ‘ / . • 7\--''.,.. I. '•• " ›f:7•. -.„ .., ,), ,. . .. ... . . "•• . , i.. , • I , .. \ \,. ....., / . re' • / r"-/<:.. / -...... )... ( 1. ..... , . Li.x . \ • . . .4 e N 4 1 „.., --...„.._,..,.x, .....:. • ., 76 1.......,., . • (1.-Igtf--13tW riekt-K-...1.-i0— •. ..\" — - 10111••• 1 ...,. \ t•-.... ',rik j/•.-.-2k.---. \ 1 ; ....---'t : ) / —"4"Ff..1.-1.,r{,I*2-rewPr,,,/.0.,43.,1711>fAlz._-a'' / / z • 7./7,01,,,,_/.57....-..„..0. i.....,, __,.._ii.7._•-a_. ;- N T CC tuc - . • ,e 1 I „ 01111111k 4° Ilit / . :-.1.razW....n 9.,,, 0" - --•'H ' , / / t., ..,/ .:•':y 2,, ••--. .:z__,I,-.:• -.4.-‘-'7'.•,1-.\ t'l /_ cc . 0\ . 1 I\,,.__Zil.5 711p0 . • •:: _ < // 0 _ _.- 'H..k.-- - <04.3'7 / , .s.‘,•,. ' •..,044....... •. / -'S'/-.,. . 1/1. II I .. -1 ea . i',,--: -' ' -,.. '-•-- •-----•A •, , ,,0 „:Tit' .• ' ---\-N ,.• 4itY /• '• ..,-' ' >0,1 _.. •...*. •'.... • OPAct - ?WM firield •://-e..,--AO. -,..,,. ' : t •-"ve..., 1,1.,- eitIP'*T.,_ '•ri'41" .. .. ..:. --loi- vg.. _;, -. S•yETY ZO ...11, 20'-'"VC'. -, X A-i „r,--r.-, .a,-,...,.:‘,... -•-1--- - . ..!!- • — ,f--/-r-- ----_.7.- s• •:- .. _,....i__.-,_ st,„ ..0.7, ,r,b • -- 'S 'TLAtefr- Ift • / .. :-7- —1----e. . ..''' \-----•oc..-41`14-t--"l'''.- Z.--.i.'-`14,•, ,--,-tE, y •,if dfig • _./_ r ` - =--. • • . , . . ..„.., '-. A.. O. . . / ............ , / ‘..---. ,.•..f.."... :.er. ,i05 . #,— •_____ —_-- • -- ••.• ,:ii•I' . / . --—_.— -...... .• .. • • II • / .-a.. .F-- •1 •..• .. •. •. • • He, re 0 I . • ............... 7 ......„..s --......._ ....-' . . GRADY & POWELL FEATURE • TYPE C SIGN . 4 . . _ . • , I :. ----I. —. ••-•.--- ., • .,„ . . --3 ' . . 3 ,, • , .. . . . • • . - . . It( I . . - . • . . . , v-----: ,k4A.t.t • . . . .. Fi.. q .1 •'. .,4,;:: ::. ,..( . '.-. • , • , ', i'•. .1.., ',...:74 s' ite...,,,c (, 1( ....It', H 11. . '6 41:,:S's • '•L t.. ':'••' IS. .1 vrt_. . . ,1 . ... k . s„ t.t: , Icr - . k • , • ,k t' , 1 .., ,.... Z i •' • -3q\ C;:. ' Y ..1/4 .-\•' .I ' ' •''•;•It• ( '•6 ( '.. .,. .,...\> - . ,. .\\' ..k. -. • A •L `k • . ..... . .. , \.. i. I • 'It\ 1 41'C - • . . : , :,-,„ %. ,,,,,, ,„ ,s, t • , , ' •' i A ,_. \ 1 1 1,..:' It-•( '",\':f .71,-.. e ! ,.,i it \- -_ ., :_i ' i It) • . 7 ‘6‘it, 1,.'il.liikl;k1('‘ ' " ' - ' •• . r--, ' 6 '.7i.• • ,;:6",6'. ,•:.,\A„. ' I .1 t.: , •.1 . '',-. ‘k 1.% ' ; i . L : I , .4.: •,:,.; :i,,, ' . . i t_ko-1 1 ; l'- ItAkl\, ,.,)-' , . . ... , . . % • 1 . ... i , i, 1 ' - ' ' .. . : .L i • %I : - N : (q( / • . . , I' • '....•. .... '1 4...,... .,i . A.\ ,. '(.s..',,,, . ''''.•N„fo...; r:,,,,,I,f,.. • . , .;. . •. ,,. _. ,t. .\ ., . , t , 1 A , , ; 14 ..__; 1 _Lii i - ;',,' • , ,i - \ i N t . r r. ‘ V Otkfl \t .4 '''•' I.....• ' • \ /41/ .."i • , . . , ,I : ri• r '',j...-... ..r- r 1 _ „Le _....c , • , ,, „ , --s -•,..1...,..........„.„, • -Ns • 4:4 . ."...s.* . , , A • . ., I ...., __.7.____,_ 1..lic .4.•,.: . , irit . 1 . : . .1, . , I . , , 1/4„;....., ?(• . \__ • .1A- I 1., , --, ,.. t -f-- k, -1, . ,.. C..) : 104' ! , . . LI s pt lati.. va:x1 , y %. . _ ,.... . . Mal „„0 n ,,,' ....--, ••• ,- —•4 •--., , :7 4.. • ,, , r.r. t. -....,,. _ ._e_ -... ..... - .7-• , . ' * 1°M •.• " 'r 6., \ `:-• 6 .s: ' . :'ill- •• , ... haft 93.4 - s , - vz • ., __ (.. . A Z — '•-.. t• • rms. ,• . \ ,... ... .-.A : , • ,. ,• up • - .„ Is;'• ,‘ , . .. -. 1 . , • .• ... , ' 's , . . . . .rj• 7 . :,__,, • _„: ..I1 • . . 1_9‘-e,''.4____.5.?" ;,' -4 4 I? , . . .. il r r_ K\ 3'7: ' • ' . ‘, tE k Cnt N ' ' = i 1= II ati ' i • •••,\.., - 0 _ tt 1 . , , , ....,... . . g 1 - _. , ,.... , ....... . 1 . • .. ,., ,. . „ , , . FIRST CITY EQUITIES i )4 -F ,• - - T'• 7\ . • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK • y , RENTON, WASHINGTON , ._ ,. .. _ ,- r i-------, F---r r , .., ---_, , , , , - , --, ---r _.........._._..._ i ,_. , r I . _r ,, r __„.; , L _ 1 1 1_. _, -:-- - . . . . . _. . - , . . _ . . The Mitchell - - - Nelson Group Incorporated ' •. . . . . • ' . . • ' . .•• . . ••••.. ... • " . . .0,) _.D99,B A/ . ,•,...,"...4 •••••c NEW ....-11.. 1117.•=1".."." -•."--.% 0 ----''f.: I - • . IL_;yea-Zits. '0"""........z, ......1.......-.1....ab I . , -.' -if).1 •:•• ... . . . . 1 .- . •.. . . . .. . • - • ..1 .r.,.....t.,,, r, ......e. .,..... . ... . I ..- .. ' t , -• .--.,-- I) .. .. < At ' EN.10-- ' ....//..a.10,-;?... I. rri . • P .II-------_____ •.•.: . -1,..o....-rf - I • 4. . ..r-e..-1, 4....e..%-le.-A--(,...,4- -,(....".( . . . . I •‘ -4/ ,t1t5....0.-/-1.-6 0•411,1:, . .' .. ' .. , • • • • . . . •• a _ . 0 „.,.„......- .4,6. r.pre - •. . . . . . . . . - ''-' --).' •• . ' . .' --- ..e.....,e•-,7 ....,...-t —\-- I 1111. ........••-• ' . ....r..' ISI . le Ill'AMMINI11 .......111111111111"1""1611111111144' I i - • ir •• ••(- --,*•••,...{.., (...,,,,,--.. 6, cc 1.9, t.....v.;,-..r44111111W......*PriMplieiii. **.•NO Apr.'s's a -I., 4 . . . .. g'...., :lima Utill./sa rar..- arin winta.:-.. ...;11104.6.a:-.7". ...16.,-, a. . . . ,) . .7.1' ..--" . .. .. , 1k . --.2--ztee---- Ir,c,Grft,t"..'sz..,a,ir-,,,....rs • - 11 • ' . : u4.1-1 -.4/ , - III .dcg,.../ . .. • ••----1,, ....fir' W i'el.,- •-•,/e..e, :•-F-1,''.,,,,•• •• I— .-10.../W ....,462. ' • . ' an< .. . . ' - r- -; .. ,• - . . . . , , - . ....a.-1 ./1 ---/ 01 \' . • . -! - -•F- ' ) . . . i . • I --1 . ' ' . li ' ,'ILI I . . _ ,. • - " . -.37:- - . • . •.• • . ' . • - I i .... I _ /.1..y1 .,-I Pl...-6(..,---r...-,...-‹* 1 •1/4- .. . CC 0./...,-.1 -.V 4..,-.14.-..e..-(141 . . .. -4,11,-^ei.11' ,/,',-1 ; 7,:;`,:.- -...1.6.4.r.cc • (..) `- ." , . • ... . ‘ 1 NG .• . _•,•,,..1 r..f.v•P il ..e.-r•4.,1 •. • .' . -'',i•;:i',,:a,•-1.:;-%C.r.-n.4...;:r.,•-•-' -J 03 \i *H ITACH I . . ."( ,., .. , . ........ •,,,,,,,,,,,, ,.,.-.. _ .;,. or. .. , ... . . ,. ., , i 1 • •. ,,.........-,,..r•-s, _...,r I 1 • .•. • . . . ., se . i ...,% •, i C.,,,,,R,A, ........,..'".r .:i _..,..., 64.0",.., 'O....K..11-.. •4.,......... . - ' ( --'----' - . .. . . . • • / e-G,G,r....:--..42 r.i.t.G-S- •/ --'7. '• :- 1116M11101,111.---41110111111111111011111211aii.Ili • / „ . otatihogge gisalvairamor mom a 0, „ . • . , ... . . :4•,, i • , , . I •, , . . . , •,.\ .-aiiblitstwit. Siitiltrigilr-Ab a , _,... .. ... ,... . . .._ 4. _ . . . ' --r-•••• •-' ,, G .. .A.S1 r, _ .. . -4/4......,--Tr f.,-A--,,, c.:I.....,af-F2 _e--...-c?.•-•->-----'"i. . 1.-•35e......6...,/,>•••-112--I . . ,..t,•,.. . ' ,,..., .b•-rri" /-21.A-1 _ . 4..- -1 %1..-....4-r•-••0 . _ •-..,..,:, .--......,..,-- - 7=, --•,..2-...,., • 6 • . . , • . , \ _ ......_ - • , . , . . ' I , • _ : , _ • . . •. . -• '.. . . The ..•.. q° • oa 49...) - -- - • • Mitchell N. t ,. 2--e . ---- .1110.,-1•01..0110 tlii. • Nelson ..11Fame•111. Group _ .. . . -- Incorporated • . . . . ..... . . .. . -.'• . .. • • • . •,.. •••... '''"'"';,i!..!:':',;;;;..... . . _ ........11-..-. .. • •. .. ,•,.. L .• • • . . • . .• . • .• • -"".".:,...:,..;•:.7...... . . . • .r _ • . . • ./-- i !.....•:.-......• ..•.••• , •. 1 . ---- -.. '-... - 1-- ..' • . ... . - -s-, . . • '_ ,,,a.,I.-1 ci .. I--, . . . . ' • . . . .. ' • .. . . • . , -r , 4PJ0. . .• • , \.. • . •.•.•.... . . . I. ,.1,4••., . .... .,• • .._..1,,A.,6 y..5, „ . • -.... ...•, ,-r4---,--. —I •• w. - ,,,,e. ,._.o-_..0..''4',... .:.. . ,-,•• • • . . ..s.. ......./.1 -- 7 ›.4-1 - .. . . . . • • . • sWI•aix:- ex_ _ _ . - " •- -- - .- - _ •,,,,.-0'. . \ E cc 8 ee-d ... ... .. . titec•-,r .r.,,, ,. -1 —c.o..,..rf ..,-,,. ed...-! . 45 0 i 0 ',.....r.-•,-..r-f4;k.,'...0 _..0-r-ri*-1;.1, F 1- Z 1[ - r - ,'.1—-I , r .r.4..... ,Tg.cucj t2 7 .1: Corporate Park .,. ! . . . ______ . . . . . o_.. 4,,_........,....,,_ -J BLACKRIVER /• . • co . . . • • . r_. • , (.N , . i I I- i J .• • _____ ,,.,, i 1 n, --- .. .. _. ._.. . . . •— • . • , • —_•.•__ _____.... . , ' - ' . • ' ' . i‘i/PN, ,,,firwir.--- ‘4111[411004011.111 ,111.0.11Sit-;__3 _ 101104lltIalt--. eplircirm. —;---mit-,-.-q:- ' • "OK llowligeolm. l',..--:714,041k .prgiolig,_.,44,,--ftr-Th.,.. *viravis, • ilialt-2644°- . , 1 . "11,..111111,1•11W 11111:0111:bitt -V4,11filrovi .4.. 'AN-jA7Ja4P. 10- -Will- 4640.10,011. %XII- iikillitvii.., IN, .. ,b,.. ,, ,,,.,„,,Ldstvi„glirogt*-1.u..10b.,:._ vir ttw_._ _lboblogivo•••1 . ..,, . q-, 11 i•' madaigit. wair• 2 sfibarlisimik,..4,-. .- ...: , ..,.,...: • ...,:•.,,. -,g •i,-7-1,''=s.---.-----../..,,-- -1 --/,.-2--,Ar---17--r-r" •=2.1ari . • ,. ...;,, . . . - • TYPE 'A SIGN 7 . ...... , . . . ._ so' 1 sd a0 50' so' S0' e .. r - j .L — 1_ Lo _ 1 Mitchell }II( riWVo - - / - -L\ - _ Group i` , __ - -r\ i - Incorporated L • 10 b __ __ _-_ . - Land Manna, 4nd..c.pe AnMlnrun • Urban Design 5 ______._.___—_�.____- ___-. 5 I 5 20,11 Snab Aye,Sulk 1111 SEGTOH 0000E 5E.41'IO14 3+50 6 SECTION 4+00 B. Sea11r,Washington 5a131 • 13141411.41 `SEE COAL. 61-1G<INEEVJN4 PIANs I I'40 4 oPHCT TH15 6.165ao..p he e 0.5 6 10.0 CC -0 6.0 Q ,v 15! t a 1w 142 ' * Tv If ♦ T 34 \ •__'�@•"/ \ 1/ d mvT 1 wv e.o 3l�� 6 lev 10.5 \ 6 rv.1 4.0 + ,and w A 44 III W e$ Y f� 44\\ v .�.w' e.o it>g eV ao .�� n NwQ Z W<O = — - +S--emu Q F Tee 10 J C7 N IGo +1a �. _ ___ r I /�• ON aA el,i 18.5 __ �/Q 111 pm = 1 r i B • errT 'n W"a W 15 1 Tc IS.ov / rL 44 r".NO'b5 1E 0 �y Q / I.E.air e.�ro _}, \/ O I �/ I- `T I505 Y.15.6 '(V/I5.0 TL 15.0/ TL 5A 1G 15.4 it IZ — Z r_- c 14.0 I 7 By ao �Z Q U�Z e W M J I SEE- EUSN,itOEO IWKWrYYS.iNL. f.Ii O �0+,44,sToo,or-on.3ure co ,W I 51acT e�5ts�455.0 LL---5-54 NOTE: ALL STONE KBJE1r1EN-( TO 6E I iy WJez.To I'`/EL-T. > 'R co W al7.I Foa Fl1-le l(TRaol.lc{ "Mb neF4.)^. —. v IL, 4,I H. _ LEC-1- -III KDY IX NMI— pE.-1Y BJ1Js O4}' j • .V—I44o1-0cao L01-1Towe -/4--- 644IS711.44 CONT04e. W J S J J (2.01=1,1DO S101.-1E Bev511-IENT fTor oG b/AsL CObl..04 C B1.04. 10 T1Gv E R,W ease. oG ♦VL.LL O ® 6KIS1. 10E6 TO KEM4IN CIL r101E:'06a.CO1AL SGOLE ON SELTIONS Is p'I".e -o: • vE 11L0L 50,4,E n EtacTCTEG4TE0 3 Ill-4Es. So' d so'_ 50' so' >O' EO_-_-- NO REVISION DATE 0 r _ ___.__ _ I • ao I____ _—____—____ .___I_- T to ___.__-�- _ - —_ _ T b DATE DRAWN C.1. _-.—___-._____ -__-oP.I • I DRAWN By TJu `\ - �1s� - 15 '. Ea15t: 1. __ _ O la' rd 4o' ep Ito CHECKEDBY TJ4 \-. ___. 10 10 / _-.--._ _ _ 10 Scale ' O r Fp JOB NO L/ N th IVVV/\\II _-7------7.-------:-..-1-:_ - _. .—.7 _.\./ -_------______===_-__-__ 5 ____ _.__LI_ .- __- - --_ 5 .____ I 5 • ...sr .> s,,.., La �I�11 560410,4 4.50E SECTION 51-00 E b ELTIO H 5450E I4nTC4 LI4ES- ��� _ ////G -SP21NCTE[opr,pNU JJ C�I1- Lc + 30' - __ SO --- -to SO-- 50 s0 30,._1- 14' __ —I----'' - __1O ✓ . 1 \.1 Pr-on I \ \ 2 _1a1 15 /- �\ '- cJKT.___ _ _- i5 '1\ _ 1S O ��- __- ♦♦?</ ,� 1c .\\\ /r, aye. _ - ---._ 1B - - -_ � -__--ielw 1D ® Lp"� d� -,�ID�= �� a v. _ _ _-__T_ !'. • I. NIASE III _ __ __ __ 7L 4 SECTION 6.00 E 9EL710H 6150 E SE'CYION 7i00H KEY MAP Q� • • • The Mitchell LEGrEhIp • Nelson —_-- 1 RO EKT( o�Kr Group 7— rooroSEri col-rtouK - Incorporated ---It--- SXBT11-1 T CONIOUK [And I'LnsnK 0410NE KENS-R-1E4r I.nd..p.Annn.�ln.. (J� U.1unlMvgn TC, 1Or op NARD `5E5 CIVIL E'-14IMEEKII 14 rLLI-•+ SWx S,.IM1 Are.Su,le illl TO' '(OP OF vaLL FOR-4¢'•VW4 TN, s.80$. S.a11k,Wn'II�nsI.s9l xl 55/ Gld 5 OF\v4LL +6 E71I41. 18.5E 10 REI-16.IN I I • IC I1wJLo / 5 NL CC W ! % ! + Q ♦y`( • 1 ♦ w • ( 1''i1 IeJ..6 i� ® 1 I / e ice ------ fi 111 • I � .ANN�a.. LIJ Wb -`� —a1 Pm 8 8 0 z • �R N \ rN la o // V F ' 1l1 k `c L p" BO J:1]/ trciL! Z O T, Q CC N W 6- E.EE-EULN,rOSu u1icH11+4••.Nc. z wc','Nup.S Fl Erxm.x.caE m �R i- 41 CC ^ In- FoeEF.isH yvic.cEi>iu1,.°Le.1.Gn� 1I W `/ LL T (--. ------) 4•.„ 1 I S,,,,.0 e_—_, - j :.--, e 11 7---\ ,c .o / Ca r.---,-•— — --- N 5 z LL OTE 1 A 5101-fE 0805IMo-ri 10 GE I11 HOet Tp I'VEKt SEGT10,-1 0*50E 000110N Ii�S So' 0' So' • i5 // lc. / \ 'anuy,;—�'°- — 14 NO NLVISION DATE / ,5 / � -_ \\ .� _-- DATE DRAWN 4 IS-OC• 'c \ / -- Ic \ //O • ,o DRAWN BY TJN �• \•/ ' e t� 0 Ip 201 901 80' 1201 C1IECKLU BY TJN _ _ I North FOR NO s SEC SELTIOr+ I+SO E 4 TION 2+OO E ! 1 SC810 Vz20-O �� 30' _40' ac I -1 - —_T ly IMtGf --\ zN6ci L.A. - 2`\�I��(1 /J^� I s o NOTE: NOILIZOUTPI. 6tdLE R,-, SFLT1uws yq/L P¢Io-1(T6r�0K Rxuv \ p�1✓3 ,5 GrtISiluv 15 h I'•ZO=O"aVERTILnl.zrnLE IS (�04sTC03TMe5. \1/ / tea yy� 5 ` s �0 O 1`O LID O v il[ SE0110N 2+50E /��yp (((��� v,y �2 1 PW+E III . KGB MAP CJQ� � L 3 1 DS ,.. - •„_ CI 13 -_,. . I I ..--.,--,---,-•-,_:,.:.-„,„..,--.....„, _____ -'--:-•••-_-:z--'•---'--.•,--1---s,-----Z.---,-----•-=--'---_,----=---------- '-...=•..--z-----°-:.----- ---:•--3-_-_-,r-----_-;•.•'-- -,:::_---..-_-_-, . Z ,. r.r::-'- -------- -- -', • -__ ---_------,N--.. \ Z , • I--\ m _-•- - . \ ))1/I I i .r- - I - _ --:::-_--------------_- /,,y'//i . _..: \4rA /- ))9 ,,,,, '/„,„-,,.., ..„... -- : ., • , .4/../././ ... ..._. ,........_ • A ,,o/ , - _- _-- - 1 -, ?,1 ._---- , .,. , ,. 74' • ,,,,/ 44‘7‘ -S'. i k. -..• • \- /2,4.,/././y /,./,/ i I,. . . `.S,•i .-.-"------------- 1 p ,--- • i ' i,\ i --- — \'Af., ' 1 liA,' ;--- i f , ___-•,- ..,. -: !!1 : --- ---- t ,,-aigr.da J! -- - * -iilgososagongl , ', . , . ,•• • • li 1/7:21\ 0 . - t dillyill • ;1111iiiiy _ A 1/1/ 111111111,14 , : ( A 11)1,1;111 • • 7: ( i i INA! - . • I 1 ( -,.. ' il,,111.1„,, Iltillik • - / :/01,4 \ • — — — • — r" r--- „ ,k / • i \ • \,\ / /( . / \ -: . • / , i, ./ ./ i ' . \\ , ,.' // \;-,-V / - --..-, .,,, / _------,- ,L,.,:-.:-.H--- --_-- -7) (7,/ , (-----g -•\N ____,*___ _ ///' \ .\ ! :( 4,‘ -,) • ., ,,, --- Siyit \ :\\\ ------. -:. -.Th -';•':. \ \\\. s._.-:— '\ Th\ . \ --=. --.,.. '-----!7;'- **/ iiiii '-- N‘ \\\ %.,• ' / / / .•'' 'i . . . \\ ( I . , ‘ .....E, 1 , li • , ..,././ , . . • / / , . . . _ .. . NACHES AVE. _, 'al -s. ct The Mitchell Nelson Group _ Incorporated • 1.,.I'Nnnu, mo S4th A.e..Sidle 1D) Suede•W•ahIngtan MIL Iml N14.4. • 10 �(�/,I/[• _-- . s �5 en i. - I•II - `I' i p q - ° Y f 9 1N L NY � p Y' -/ ) \ 1/1 - IY \ - lye / I♦ ' s ✓If I�°/ i \Y _ -iI I hLr/of (I,. e_ ' /6 / I '" Y,.. , s\ \ / a ao' l ia o /A Ytiref-o,•>•oo.,. \ •/ / / It m� m � � �`or a : r? f r' I o<.,n,.�E es.;> � Y m / /eiace W ,� - i� '!r<`e.-con a 1�-.e. ."r 3 1N815'0 O'W`0 . .16 . ✓ 9 QI t /. NQJ � -�=_d,9 -- v_ V YeiA q/ er In 730.15. � � /— _ I. W9=-._ _IYQ\ ly �- '9♦ I) /°i Fr/ I" , --�� OY - _ - /o. ) - � ' _- I�) -c >ii - � = - - Y1 ee,._o.«!e -eV- _r _ _ 04 °e —3 ___ )— - _ —___- Y Q,c t �__- � _I _ -. � e' 'm CD HYOi- o -== i ec 1 H)a_ ` Y ° /Ve I P 40/e _- _ -- -+r_ - I J9. roP _e I -_�-__-_L= - -.14c____-ro."a_cc -= _ - - __!!-_.__ ---. _ V _ -6__ ' _ I5" __'Sri-,4-'' .• a 2)eI / If. IYr )♦ - )/5 IA )i _ -As,• I)r . s fiI* Ib )i IP ~ccZw yW iii R- '2o A� // se Q 1 // e m a ' Z . > • d ^ . 3 0 0. NO REVISION DATE DATE DRAWN --------—._ __- ___ DRAWN BY p V. yJ ,a' ed IlO' r—,�/17t^-� CHECKED BY North IV//II\\VI JOB NC • —') - I Scale 1'_2O'-0' 'I IIUII \I / • Me11c611n.. rORO GRAf"11Y BY Jy SprinpGrook pon0, I Jy • ."11•'.Wµi4 asn.�o:o nc�1^as�lsc. • 3 . ((655 1 40 • =N I Phase III Io S ` `- �RJ} mI ( � KEY MAP . [� 4 61p1/. -...-_......_ JOB NO.8523506 DATE 4-30-86 f . DRAWN BY JT' I • The . • 3 Mitchell 0 Nelson y Group . e lotorporated I Q I..I•„.I a Ce I 47) I MI:SUN Ave.,Suite III t Staole•Washington WON V MN 411.6.11 W Z I e o b r' K'.a':er<<ow.+ I. e • 1 oe.�o I e t 6 Lic I Y ; 1/o r'-G 1 i \o ' e, �e�,c- f I Y r. ""� ' Ip. \l 1\IUa r°� j4• Ip. If. • -_�15. �'�'t\-+?..era�Ipl <au IY' L^o�" __ oiYEor G r<oc< /o .C.,,,•+,,.. .,�.f ~�•.�`wc a.v \ 4 <� or.-r ezorm.vw000 q p / //�� O a/� +c.v _�` �. _ j5—;__ ___ CC � 1 r f/ ♦U f<\r PO rowcx</ I \ /i•wi«awl Y ',IP Y /Q �_i // / If n / It*\ O.' .m"0sc� u6 U ..«ae< ~01! I Y: /I\J I IL. 1y.If Ih IL /i ///u l =.=\•`\a.V r.' .<o<s ��/ \\ ccow� �� ...« w....„_.w , ;C-pg; CO •.:ro.e.v Y W 6_��,6_- ` \ \,�\\ </� I fY c Yh�r/`'_ w \ / e rvi« wi' �.- I /L or/.Acc ESMT. f' O f IY f• o<:rn cv gg yaI o \ I —� 0, \ 1 r 1���; �w� IY' '( ``1 I. w /\ IY�) , o _ Y..I„r,. ..H,%o 4 „.. 8 ,„n ! J P. N Q o I9 Y I f Y.----1: _ _- N88 15 Od W 9 _ ::... —_ W�/' \ ��i l= I_/<--. . o_ . _ _ 11 i3 /< /2 �5= /t ly _ _ -_ Qf�•6r�j 3 �� p __ r - - - O z / 14 <t /I• / A - o D.l- _-- _ _1e_ -._ _.:g._ i--g „."J_-p' ,e_ B•__ _ WLi. 1 "-` � 1 \ \�i5✓i/ j5- __If"_==_ -L p.-.--__/s _ iu I-- 0' _ _Ip` /c / ._15.R- _ /a if.1 0 CC(1) '—I 5�.. 1 \\�/., z /jI,Y� /L_--_�I _ _ -_--_ _TY_ ___L i0-'_ -=_=_7 I _-' s FO? .. \Ni) / _� �a_arm— —11 L.-I.-PA..- 'Ie.— "--II.'—<_- ---' '�'_--" i�'• _._ - ;6'L 0 U pe l''� --R..'(:� �\ 0 e<v o/ LL/ pl'--r� 4----�e nor -_ -_ __-- _ -- 5.: ia___ wk. __ /� 1 /s Z Z /I_ _ q l:� e \'�-\ wwor<4 �1l_ _��Y14 �_r. ib: • f 5' F �O Vt�-� e/ cov rno,v 5 R\ ll �jo-< �--- --/� so<c ) `� orro.•w<Y+o f- r l <`� ,GEC P TJ\\ '% +` 6-- I ,h. % I ;W Z illP im e �\ `, I1—\\ 1`` >a•...a� Y ao' ao' Pf IIL W , c CC \ \ \ �\\ \ ,\�lJ I�..<orroN o mCC K.oper\Y sue- 0-44?4,..r. Ip•\I— — V�X'-\,\\�' 4 c\c Y`\I,``A (° <o> 16 I 5.' I.° U N c1 m\ Lj , <r rir �a1a l4-( \6 /<.rY ESMT. 1 I J CO T z I V 10 REVISION DAIL . I DAIL DRAWN • BY 0 b' LO' �10I �I , ,1 ��'�IIII����'////',,,�eee,����e\\\��,\��I� CHECKED IlJOBl North y/p\y DRAWN I C I Scale 1•=20'-O" - Mafchlino. t BMSR Sprinp Drook PonO �I; TO PO GH APNY BY A 1 F OED♦r B'na.r...D rir• t I •Phop•111 ; I %II MIS KEY MAP_ _ � a ^•"-^•^^•- JOB NO.85235.06 DATE 4-30-86 DRAWN BY Jf i The Mitchell Nelson Group - Incorporated I unJ I'Hnn�ng IlrhJn I4�gn Springbrook Pond Seattle.S.rtM1 Are.,Suae 1111 • We.hinghoncglil ° \ \\\Hoar Ag=i' -� 5 \ � .4< ,oI LI 1 ^ 7 h 5 ,• n y ���K/`�: - ° ° °`b � V ° \ 1�\ \\'�) Yo� IIr I col \15• \ \f' <o or Q.s14 19♦ - Li, IL. `11I Y. 1 ' • / \ CC il/,\Y--1u�\\\ 16\ \, `�c.• �st\\�' M \ S \ IIII I I cat,I _,l vJ °" //l /\\\ \_ fI; e__ I-==. \ _ r�<„ ,< .I :0,_.,: ,11.4 f3$////// ° // 1 0=. .\\\0 oNV°\ 5 _ rJ<' c<o i^>N 1� 0 I '�` �• ri \ N 66"15 00 W BO65 -_ �. °_/f:a eo.aT'•^e��e�\ I° ��.`—�f ` 5 °f' o $�-e_—= r 4.•f//I/c4\ \/ O1\\ ��\\Y° \ ��Y;%/ .m 4resc<vLOA TO co ry 1 b° w,rN�� U I�i(A Il 1 1 I :: \ c. \� \ / ✓��I PCcavaro.v hf! '� }O a• I '° i 1 \▪\_ _iec�„ ..� )t.-.,-:---;_i. Y___ `_ Iy - 1 ZV Z) 1 . 1 Imo. r1- _S-°�--'� s_� ° u° -. = O :,...;-,...74,., v' °� 1CC / /iii5.i. 0 I� w l• la. ,__._-m—'...?-<e°.�,\� -lee-c -.\_r g - cs 1 ,a is I _ y \ / r IVB� 6q'.ao^_ _ - Y-,a.e � i°1 r* if% - �c Z iff/ / I \ ` �'�c'a{`i.a`;;;, ror� •rn4 co I. ' < Z '��-cy'-r- I J ��W`Y rrs •{- !•_, 5t4-_ I �-cerrm..v000 e , r LLO N M4o' I a -c., cr `e\C �„ C x5 ��°4$ t<ore-cori Via,- W Yrl 11 u u a<Kr.r o,,.,e I �F 9�6 a'ire cor. eon 1� ,"noo co. .e-' r r r �\ /�d ' I Ibt IY♦ 14♦ II4. :4<oei eO,5.`;"co�'( 1_l-`<or� e 5o m: ter- _Y'!�_`�e ar c h.�"e�rr.- N V PV�N �1 __ _ I_ LC/.cor. A• L �J' • ,o cor 110 �/�` c 15=c.2eyoco.h, _ Y IEAST__-274.74•:' c_ __ _ _ _ _ _ - I - { f— — e ar,<,Y o43oti,<N m 1' I 1 l 7\ • `7xx\ NO NLVISION (JAIL 1111 DAIL DRAWN • DRAWN Ely - a IOI 2VI ,id Iw CIIL l.KI 0 W. C^ North //'�\ .ION No Scale 1"�20'-l)" ( 1_ \ Malehllneo rO PO Gk APIIY FAY Springbrook Pond J \ IRMOPS v.11,.JIaERS v..2•Ini OED:HITC'ING%IINC I la 4 Et MAW�. . • I s»W `� Phase 111 ; Ar- t _ I I l �\II lu\4 0_ KEY MAP_ (LI -^•^-^•^^•- JOB NO B5235.06 • DATE 4-'3O-N6 DRAWN BY JT • ;- $ $ . ' . ' $ . . ' - •. . . • --.. . "....„, • I.A _I 3 I C) : . 4r '.. .-:CP.'- - --e'-',:ka:ZiZr:Ati-' 1..4,....,.....r.,,,.. ., , ”.......1..",...,... .., -7,711.717w 2.9.00 -.,-.7,'",nt..7--6----,,T27,.....Rano EASEMENT 9. ' ••=••••$-,-••••••-•••- •-••-•• '::-.71717$$;"'L''''' ''-••1‘ - ' -"'"‘.*.'" \ -__ I' —71—I I 1 _____ I --•——----<.:-"7'--,--z— ' ---7't'-- t , ,.— --n— - . . ——LT—, .,e,...'•:::•-,-- --7_::...; i rr,....! ..-); 7,,..\-- \ .,..14'29.W 459 00 ..„. ... al iTe.tg=e.....g. oZ:-.‘1 1 ) I 1 1 \ ' '', '1'S, •au,...K ,al...pis..." ,C,,... ,..-".--'----..." S'al . _. ' A N I.14.2trE 341 61 '''''''''''''-:,.1 '':\i .r.......' Vaftrw--_-..•/..'"12,.........-----'"..__--------. .../ LI '' Li ..:.'('',4 p:;73-.:f___-,--_---::-::::------.-.'---. / \ ea 7'.---. 1J L:...::.,— - Z N. '. / L_,C.---•.''''--' —'--..-=;-7,4'.-'•----'- - ro.....Toa...0/ <0,re..17,....... 7f,../ .. ._ I --\ `___°_-1?---"°----- T \. A, !,1.,,,,-, ,, ...,, _., , ,„ ,,. ., ,,,..,., , , --e/c---- -,... ''Uli 4----, 11. '"'''' " ' A \ " ;, .• ill \ . — I. .:'...•._. .0 \_ . ----_ .---,-,- ..,,,„,...,.., ..-'" \_\\V.,,.A\.'.-\.•';,\-,.'1 1,.).,,,„ _.\_ / - -EASEMENT /.,4A,ee ,09. - - - . - - - . - - \ \ „ o \ \ -i.•.. .11,,,, \ \ I -- -- ..- __ ..-".... . \ $ . \ " , ..'.1. . ' . _---------- -"L- . , 1 0I\K SpAl- .-• ___. _ _------ '. -7''' c„L•;',1'',V$$$:„ttu\__________. --- S1 RE a.......,$•••••, ' -VORE1 __-------- -'-- F 0 ' VI ------"' -- - --P •,1 ''6.2"."." '.• , - ..• . , . . .._ _ • mm......-- —SM. 111•;1' -, ,i,CH te 14' VALLEY 405 2:. \ ,,•, ,,,,, BUSINESS PARK Z• •tt' i tt FIRST CITY EQUITIES .....\ I.'ZrasS \7\ \ Pi'll'413E1's"Irail,ItalhiVNEYORS SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS 1"•SO'iv,22,19851 MA 4 1'73'5063 1 .• • 03 „ r‘ • ecA,seoo sow ...,,ET o:ronw DRAMA. A<eA-` o= o :<F«r Ay •i..n r ucA<P�ESc ���-�� J^ ��--- - 5 ^ E.sEwE /Ccr/crfa rl .%. _ \i o e$o.- AGA'EF /`—E15EwEn-_ -- - =- n` —= ols - fl----------- -- _--_ r..r _.� _�\ _ � �`' r lr _--mil.- _ -_ ° z=-- -- _ - -_- =___� - - ?; . . .'.z-7:.---;../77-1,,,.-_-: :'�I—s ma,rr EnsEwE NI \, E\\`,` a m\ — • " „,.,I�71::1 , \._-____________ epee aE.moe��e _— ������¢,l' 111 I' \ J^ l '' - _ /�/ /'.� y� 'I 1'1,1 yy il .,--_\___ \ ',... LJ ✓Au AeEA. s.vH,� so✓i<c f<er/Pecse.vr•s'c)/`/ \ / ., ��\ JI < eA- zoo,ram= sorr ee reer.ee.G,,.A...ve 7a;, - J-r s Sri- 11 •. 1 iw �' I r ? TFCIB w 1 0...�.., a I� / , �` ';G' \ &FFSS3 y1 ✓..veG- .4eA•6415, /e sore ee sEEfG,fPefzeur' 1i e wm� +..," -�' / / S�t5� N. \;1.7. J. 2 ill I --- 17:4:::±171w`a ��— v ,�, , I \\ \ kee �_ � . ��� _ ',1� ) 0 �� j I r� El�rEw ��� wex�.,,.E�, i t,e o�, .. ...., `(/F'�wp,��u • a � s��_ ,,rwe'•'i' �I�..e+�` ,y-.-_ y_ r� _ �..��- eronn.w..ry -J a � ` A be" y • .w4�' — 5 W. 7TH ST \ e j^\ '..* , k -, ..„.-....,-..4,-- .......,..,. xl`ew -� \ . 'vim l . i „o b.o,LWE�s :/ cJ r.,. p d, �:• /��'.---2 _,.5 r r, E.sEwEnr, L o r 7 I r s l• A4\5 ��� �� xE ,o. rvo.x x w., �J }—�:;s� "\^ � — /� \ VALLEY 405 �/ � 1 I / I aJ `� BUSINESS PARK a G FIRST CITY EQUITIES T kl,,, 11ma BUSH,ROED&HRCHINGS,INC. I ` +4 e"i`s a e I I CIVIL ENGINEERS&LAND SURVEYORS w t,""7-- � MATCHLINE sE.rr,E..• vse' SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEE IS I••50•IEPRIL?2,1965I.MAJ I 8506] Le N W 4 _ . - — . -..•••• . , ' ''.., ..“ ,..:: \ / . •,.°? - \ ,,..- .., \ .1,1:-. ) • ...,..-/-'"‘ • •:i . , ,,___---------.------- \ \ .•• i I •. ij• , ..----- 1 , \ „ \ . • • 0 „ , , ,,„11. ) .„. / ( N 1.%-•'7- T R \C Tr A .,- -. - / .r. / / 11 ."'-' . 2 -.-^•.".‘” co...e.cse,r,,,,cr) ,t V !.' '''a,, .' ‘.4,4,` / i2 ,+. < 0 '*, / 7//iii?' / . - , 15•1.11./1,EASEMENT .„,...,,,.......,..... ---_—„,_ \ '''•-• • ,, \ • i, I . •^,,:___,,, \ ----'- ^,,,,,,,, ,,\ • / / al \,, ,.,) //,,,,/ // *. ^-•,_ _,,, ;1;\//i.?./ '. • /. 1 „ , , - if ( •:, ,/ .. ^ , / •'' / •-•-. , -- ••'''• TR\ACT B \\ \ ( (i' i?'r.._ii ( i _1 t .:‘,..„ i —..-.. ... \ -•- —------.-- i- .4••":. 2,---- -- --,. -'••••..5^-•••,-..„ 1:----- —\ 7 . Vrejli '<.•r•••.:/y...:ti;:.,,i,..,.“=, \\ A \ y.„..,...,..„ / ., ",---...,--- -------_ d•____.-r- . ,,, -----.'---,..-- ...--f---:,°.F!'_-: t-"ip ".'4e-ttow----..•'''.-"\---\ - '-,-\--------- - ---7 ,.^ - I .- .... .- .,,,,...„.„ . ... VALLEY 405 rilf BUSINESS PARK FIRST CITY EQUITIES b........, BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS&LAND SURVEYORS SH•FaIrCe. SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS 'lc'1'•50'PRIL 22,1985r." MAJ 1.750 6 3 T . M , N . p II'S L " L' i Jirushinpron :s T � ",I I" .4.Ilf�f;h�,r1riv_I- :, _---- 1 .4„,.7,y,,,;,,,rig5.'11,Lirqtc.,12.--,:,,..., .,___,. 1.--''..---\1 .-lTt' ..ifix " "1!1,1:a''. 'l.ri. `I, ^ 'i1�, — _ L%``, ,Z.It:�: ,,SlklT.-.. Wl . ..,,,, _ N • Al ''r,A4, y j • `,.i_:§ 'fi@� r_ ...*, b-_�'ll ds 11 - ' ' �1� 1]y6 o�W')O,6 N suu,;W, •{� ��= PROJECTJ LOCATION MAP z ,{ o 0'O 0m WEST 29069 gg eT 33?yx 1 .:.° r[x[[ z a.ssJa6 . 3 h 6 O p =.n ' Ur+ N GSON E� I =� U R`\ cHPNN al i, Ito B AA361 ORPIN isO e.exx '/�/Aj/) Wlr st<j319 v+ OUN1Y P? wiie°•_\.� _ - J / __-�;° cc-, K1NGG _ J_ _-___- --s - 'Tx- _'�_-?x A5�'. "'q' � a emu; RENt°N -='"'_'-_ ^ / KING COUNTY /. _ e 3' ,x.,." . '. 2 u `� ,r«OO C11V OF e �-Itn_�se-' . o�'e"\ "n 1 ^'e ° e , co _ z,.e%: ;_'' 'f[^ PARCEL — a�,°r �-„0 s<NxW,xe a Vie. y / ,.°[e.or �.+ :•�; m \.r, — - �/ -ire ^^oV ° • , eExcx,,.nx • ° . d; =- ____ S 19� .._"a�e-- n,w vue.ic arras vex �E�ioie �� p EAST __- ]6>02 t `°- -• 9 • __ .%e - 'iicu.vwwTx cr e^' a �/ \\ � \y\ - '_f '- ^ ///'/ \ I6°o -ral:"v,eer m-\' '' -- -,e -- c f,• 13]J4 `X' ' _ e •,a M `\�\A `' � _ _ � , �- =�cnn �,^_/ r 's'�` k'-'Tie°^ [nsr en�'a• � yP iur. 11 1� \i- >� . ;�'e*- 6� �� •e-- i> >[R"; -f_—m.�.- 1.`",g;� � _ ,xoxx m e6,xo a n`P al :• 1 u S1.•_ qDs. LEh om W �° [ �` '-^ ems_ "--�,,d_ �� :-,e tVF`^ '. �'c^ 'o-.\[ 6��"'w(l.�h'y - i e ,,,,xx,a _ o 5wr.x.N[O"OE<a, •' ,- —„—ry e,-it—,ec �' <Ox[n�r So ° 0� \k^., �°:,,,, , A .„ `�"` (n N -- exs1;1 FE L.iIT°° 1:fIn8 . b�. A36'15 za'R266ma.� ra, t/ 'a! v ,r°[L,o ro.e.55"oxx,_ n°[,«,.>t"o«" CHAR LES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD °eEr f\ t, °.I^ ., °r..Er ,." e)/ o W w sr, Ben ' ��n > BN°I PACIFIC COASTRR e" *''o rc — j t7 ,F3as e� 4\��°\ °e I> ) /i k.PARCEL, + D Lj i , ad'.� te,- 4. ° �, , a c. 2. ,uf t�p,,e �t�\ d,, Z LL 6ew woes, a R .`C ° "� �,,v , .. ,^ �'_' a A.c. wnuce [o"""' I, or v`-ems°/ 11542011.42294 Z Q isTiie \ 'i d .r r• 1,6r91 1 / 1 _, Y c.[. cnzcx a s[n n.c. r°c.olo.{ncnwnmtVERTICAL OMNI BEGINNING DEXIGN NAPA NAS BRASS DISC IJ-304 SLR IN ,9L ur c.wn \\\ \\� •' A �t.// U < —.— _ - ER xAltnono a c[OssLw me e 1 exnxx[t L[ucE WLveEI etevATLON F 1 \ . • ,,\ m 341 03 ,1 ,O r = Ricx2 or WAY 1x.36. d W D -.—.-cxALx Llxa Bence x>W TELEPHONE sexr[r erORAxr,see suRN[el aevnn°x•lf.se. ieR BOLT Ox rue ,n,>,°.[ � " ''' >? ^ , ,.i O F- c.x.e. ieO nerAt eenRLncs A•2)52'S1 N•31649\A ,,NN.0 '�A• Al 162296 '. ae P&%' ly vfreV" i.e. TOP ELEVATION L•15400 t "L'wi et..X2X' 1 243 .a (' — W c.e. coxcW A[rEA rO nLxc cooxix AENIAt s5xvev OniA. \io JIy�t2•n,PLrw�lfxx3,�` wwn srsE rnxufx6 TIe)6f 6 vwe BEET OA f.[t uRu. 'r.r>,ni t" '•\ , �1--1 - _- - LL o srlw slRVex re UTILITY BOLE -- --- -- - - _,--' IC 1 rine ni6uxT . WWATER ATER VALVE oAe[,ocATiox Axo EAse uL x,s aoA,A ron ,f O �`, \\ ?'° _ �'- ^ } _I t- On ANCHOR EMMEN POST NOTE PnAixace a ei.L e - >. `e r T° ,° n _ J 1 e On AN HOmrAr+on exnnaen ` ..ie5,e lr \\+ i •j o.' , I,T • + • , • , • .0. — .I nus°aeO onrA ' n I a',. 1�\6916'4YW "12 5 41 -4 .M4 S.A H ', I I • 1 50'3-17-86 nrzn IO car -). ?-1 � r _ w°L's�,oi°v e'r s 85235 04 r :x 1II METRO A PARCEL I D 1 I • fIt 235.05 _ 1 . \ ,_=\----- ' \• 'j' :- 5. N ` mac' j�` 0�z� ' "4-\-• f//�`'+^, + �' 4'561'IS \ ..7 • ' --":"::O's > 1;, '''' !� ✓ P 4.� '7' \� i'' I I pl o d °/ I+ v %p 1. PARCEL A s /II ` c 0 1-:5 L•73.32' 1;. �Q„ q' // / s' c 2 ,. •- I c °D¢ R.67658\ y0�••„_'�^. `9:%/ ^ /l �1�e. W 1.11 0;(1.07'S5'47•` 0 /`e. 9. a. s s __�' __-_ 1 ^ -�.c j 0 L•93.64 p' :%� 0 ( + /� / N60.16'00E 01 �w • N.L ° 7 ", ^� � /\ �:8°41.24. 18p ... .I e n.,..`^ V m ii oo ...,.,+\ f` /• *:%,••,`.. /. " .„.__-___„.", -- ^ s5 1 s \ 97�5 C_l' .a...d E GI. m .•. �„ °: '\ got., ', ° •�"aI e ' I �. Li „w�1 . ��,s!•Pam\/ ;• �;. , , .�1 a� \ rle .�/: p'"'✓;;•- ,- •r�a9/•/‘�j� '\ a "\ •` < 6 P>"• '� c�1t C[\ p\G \•°.°.o3n4s' / ��� / II'I��/\ `rLC)OD CONTROL W oN r-IQ L•40.09 y /1 I 'PROPER f"Y „^ ,;:\\ 4 W_ p_, \ / N I Pt\RCEL 8-3 1 ° ' ,_ w �� s '.:yJ° 1jl j j�� XH\61T NO FS ``,�\ ( �` o ��J� ~ 6 \' ,. �.., ._. , j� ma. � ti\ ^ ( , °.,°° ... �� ��,�Ir ,........ ( : ; ,_ ri j3o ,,W O o f1' �I ,� z /`�; C �� e•» sao l 11:\, \\ >,_ / / R. \\\1i r'1 '"°' �', ' / 1}• _w 6000 ! / �°1 l� s. �' 280.69•_ / .: p.126'S2'10"-1 1.: 1 ♦ ..`ate.......,.,,.,o.,J` , R. ow c f, �` �K� �1� ♦� WEST 1 //��'C� L.132.86 ' 20000 w ' \. ac.....cc.e.co.Y'.,..'' /0 O°� nY`G/U.�'T�sl .� ✓• .I',,,2a', I• d _- 1 �/ / /R. z]J6 a 1�\\\\ 'y j A.53.59'30' •1 r l •2 eL i. .In_\en ,I1 I N 34°19'34.W , f\ p ... '' i• ' •• .f"�� �u� p '0 / O Cr Y • r 8•03�4,25� •-"I%'' /". y //� // .n re u.zisee Q 'l/ ,r _L•15.43 Ci // J I ����- . m D.1S240'. '.J.6436C. _/y /a!°� . y \ 1, R•1ff.2•'13°19��.I� �����/' .. u.. tea.. ice' j ;e.K 59 —MONSTER ROAD , . 1 . - • , - - - - i Z55.05- - :..1922.10\ I. ..?,..,1„.r.,.'-7.'..:•'%Z.r:._ -'5"'"----''-'•- . _------------ ,. • L•659.4 2 _ --- 3 : ar.--32.----"3. ..."'"*".3.5=---4.• • -------__„..,,.:_.k.„::„....... • A.05'19'46' I R.2 8 ..,:___,4.93.2.4,___--___„0 ---•,;' f•-•3_,:,:. -.3P-_77- -V,A!" '';';' ''''' •••?-'I.% .,...3 1:....--'-<-`r73" i'., " N L•18.79 , ‘;•-_-_--"_---_,Z•__-.-,--,-- .17 ." • s„.. .../ .‘„.- ...... ,-,......_. a=1"--.7,t,,, '6St --'.....-7. '''''- ',„ 0- \ _,...... - R•5693 00v-t • .•••A!!!!!!• •• ---:::'-.----"', ' :3,..a.1.9; L t,659.2:427 -,-e _ 1/ • : - ,.„,,:r. ••01•21'4/i- 111'`"------- C't I- bb' p.13.3Z,"..." ' 7,-;matt-a...a°....art., - i y"---rt.-170, ' .:',1' • .......--....._'----`-- ‘. - L•204.54 As. _---":?- :"„•••''P A ,,A790.19„,,---7i-Y------ : v....,,,,,o,..,...,-,,.. 1,,-.111/1_____ ..,,,- i k „5.-.;‘,4 6 „.4. .„.,,, t,,,.. .s j. ''''',"</./ ...--- •• ..., -- "."-"---,-..--!---:-.E."---S„ .-.t4. •'4, .- - ... •.`//,'/: _ " __4: 96- ' -„•"'----..„ ...., . 4:1 I A2.3j-ii."-'-%...--- -•---" I •'-' - !' • :. 1 3/ .----''' - ' ! ... /.. ' '.t". ••••...--------. \ (. ' -..:"-„._ , ''''„ \\ 4, 1-<0.--.'.:t'-----::;'-/ , . ......-.4.:-=',,-,-- --\ -....7__,__,_,------.. _4___ --a ____ a____=,_•-__-70---_ _`=7-___ 7,-_.-s--:-..„: .. _:-..,_4';',;`C. \ °O.> ''',C. -,-..:e. <: ' - IT:..'=:::",...= ---- s,- _-,-,,,.;:...../.." ,"A„, !‘„_,,,,,,_,_, ,-____ __,„_. 7,„....,,,_• _____,„,„..___„,..ay,-___.„_,-____.-- 6...,...,_, ,,,,-„-,..,±.-,_..,•__-,- =?7,'....-- ' t''' ) V_ " --•- ' "/""' • • -',--- - -• .."2' • 4 ; "' '--t '"/'/ ' ' '6.2' ''' --"'.- "3-(• __-.3----=1--..------___,---"" ----•- \ \ . CC '0:: 9-1' .%, • . ,sf„, • ..-!"...-..,":----7.7/ ' ---- . . •,'..-e,••• ••• ( •-...-- -_-,,,•••---„-, , ,,, •• ___•- _...-,,!-::,----\ if•. -,,,,,,,,,-•'-••.:',:--,.,:'----- -..< \ 1 i• : -." , 1 c---\r) \ \ ,!.:•-•,-;?- ' „-••• ,,,, \ . A .,,• . _,•• .p-.:r\ • ,'"•%••••. , to. ,..r_._ . 4-.'" ----.. ks'.:. '''-----'' '' '• '':.•:\ . ,, .., ,..,-,-:k...„,,, - „, .0--, • Aft. \N .. , •'-: - -.----r- C/ c., ,..., ''''•''.,,'' "1. i s, klik.‘1.7.: , / • .t.' ,n .„,. '''' !,/ ' ,q:•• f ' -e- . I:• 1 ii‘ -,-. / .s.,.- c „.." ., '-,-::-__.-:-.5;,'"\\. ,-,,,,,, ,e;.` •,•0 K ti '' ., • c.,:: ,' o \ qbA.0 4_11 • .- `.. ''''' ,..• + r.j..,,,,.,2 .,. 1 .4.: \\ Tp, •, p / .. , ei ,.., 541 i , I , ga ' .\.,./' ,•'' r PARCEL C ,- R•160.00 ,\ • /• 21 4.70.49'19' , , CeZ "N 1•••"! r.-;7:.----7 . ' .. r w C ., •., .1,..0 L•197.73 ,0 l.I (4 t/ --------- -,_ - ,r 1./ Z 1 ----> ••,... - - , „ • . .1S '7';•.'-^ \ ...„.„„,„s ,:' ..9.' ' R•230.00 / C-•••\ , . L•111.56 I 4 If ° ... z., t). ____,,.,...s:_cs- ,......-,....-t4-8„--62-..91.0,,• sz,.,,,,:.:-.A...;'' T,..9:0---":"82.115:.°68 E' • ..'' CA °9 ..-"}c75r. •"P';',...-'1 1 Li '1. 6C75. r.st. "7 n w ( .- ' '4%e't‘(__0"'"•"!-' r'" "•+ ilU \.2 ,.." ,,.,,„:,;/.,,,, • , :'! ,---.. Cr,1--74,4ton. (?..-rte,tm-rueu / J.--,/--.- (tt-..R.t.,4 I. '-'47 ,C2...,T.o.:;,1 s,„.._,, .,1• ,..„, •- ...• Ill A ">>,. ° ' ".•• ''.' ' ''''' /5•",;(? • „„ .,r "77r7.5.'..... . aS1 5:52..T.'".4.4E7E/'.--".. v<%;„,A.. :.• o_ ..:.',.. - ..- -, ••_,, ,(2 '.0a.a.,°°•E: 0. ----,.......t.1 ,,t, ---•----,, 7// 232. a t. 7 a. GREE NBE."LT (re".2. 7 _ 2in i ----. -•• PARCEL B-1 ----!' _rSbrf3-""‘"-•""••••••="!. \`.. •IL 'f"--.11""•••• _______,________„,,,,_ _ _, o 0,s. • .. 4.,, ,..Z.--- .. /..,-,,,\,. /"." ''''-• -- !;`' XHIBJT N 0.8 ,.' ..••••• , • ct . , ... 2 1 ---';'-') 0\""1..4.'•/- .." ' ,-.4;,------ ..,_----- ,..7 '''3•3. / /..:b(- .... . : ------_,-/74:1? W... '''' ,\ °•'.. f •/.") j Gli -v .4, , , 1 ,* . ) N.,.. • , °4'.2• -/-:-.).:' • -3.1' E.': _.•:„.•.,,-7,-..„-,-„•_.,, „.. .. t _ \6/51 •••• • ..' 4:,O.: ,‘""... /,./.- ,...-A.,r;"5-:.\\.,,\!'•..4 .A.32.i. „.. ., • _.,/ • A ti ',I__ •••• '3'' . , < „._ - 4.IV c!..../'...4-,........) c k.' '-`,. o'S /•C -'EP .,•'%,, \ ' \-1 / ) ..„, • a• '-'''' •:'') / * - _ NC -----/' ';A5'.-- c) •'' ,A,1 eck-cci.‘- 0•• . (339) ,•,.., ,„..." 6 CL 5 .,- /•• N,,..„ / ,• , P.W < ,-,-.\I c• , ,,,"" ..Nis,‘„\__\9.,....-----/4,., ‘,..0:7„-`32 yi------,___.--__..-.,, z.,',,,..." ‘:' '..):.L 41 Fe , ti P' ^ (t -\ I) \ .."'' ,-t .• -z------,„, -..,,,,, „- ,,,,, "5sr,.2,, __.•_•, c). - _./. -_, re,/ / /G.,' ' / -,-- ".,- , -'.. j \,.. ,- --- '- .- I'D 0 ' ---z,--''''FL..r•----, 29Q00 ,,e; , '' -ai-?'-<.\\53\1^----- ..7.---:`-:-/r '''. "/ " X% _4' .• ,^ ; .._,,,,z,-.!: :-.. ., e 4.7./ •"../s.`"?....„..,....."--',_... ....„:„..._ ----,-_ ,..•.,:s, --,,,,DA,_\\,,,t, ,• .,,,, --___,r? .------,,-,-..___•e,-_3/....--_,. .-_,b-e..91 , ' T.•o e. , ,t, Z • C'' .1v._.: :..--.....1.:-.....- ., , ' I•-• ..' •-•-•-.'",":\ PI? A !__---ckcc--,--_,,v. ••;,evi-- i • --"" , - 2 --.')0 . ,..• '-•:- ( • - --3„,_,--...v,.„, _-.c.),-,t,,_----_-_VP___2.-- --,...37- 1 /''.' / I./•:'/)1 i ' „.„ ,./ "• !-i'.>- ow L„ _ •A „ 72••••''' / ./ ''''\ 2 0 I Cr !? R•1 97.00 .11 .." 3.3 (. /,,• • W ,,,on•Iut.,.orro....rano,, A•39.05'51' \ „••4_,'„i _.. . .3 :::;?,-:-..-.7.2:::,-,---;,..,..‘,..- L•13 4.60 \1-.t,7 f' .v-V.z •3 .^ \ •• /I ! '7 . > •.- 5'. :.:!:'\• ,:,`'S!,,l,k..)y., ••c•C:?`?").. EAST 11127 V..2. 3- -' ! I If• • I A V) Cr ..--='-.'`',\' \,..‘A\••, '"""..../•1 ,..1,2.......... 'r ( - ' 0 '.14 ,3 3.:-"T,_"..' y! :."'3,......3..:,.._ ...;‘,,,,.., (. ; Cr fi 0- ....., , y . (1 r •-•\ -,,,,,, .-!-----,-.::::,-leo 65 -..":--_-__-"---:21,...:,_22=,,L._-,-...,-_!!'i:.„---7.-__,,,,:----___.•,.-,, 5 t0/\ -I '''"`"`"•••"".• ,T,2--‘"--- ----_,,:„,":_--,---.-F?..=-:-....7,\7----: ____1, ±•• ••:'• , ,/,/,',.. \•• ./ 03 ' .5:......'`.P'5.:-='::'-='!ir,11.•.\ ![ ----<"--_,-. -----:----;':z:._--- _ilg, __ __--n-0.-..z.z.li-.•it.'- -:"- --:,..4:,----P.4:::"="-- .. ':;--- '1-:. - .--•• . 1 .----....,.-..,-!,....-------,r•----t_.ff-t.F.'..f-,. ...__ „ ..„... \`,„ 'T...'1(71ii., .....=. :,..--- ':. ' .........'"'........•....T..- ---.. , .4 a 0 %•i I _ ... ..... ”IlS OS . . - ---------___ -... ' -. . ... . LI co r Fi i 0 0% MATCH TO SHEET 2 OF 3 V q / • .'J,.. '', ,o • - ''., -, , t 'A,' ,'-.):-x:.-:b''• // . •,../ /' • /5.._-..--%.,75'..4V 7 1 :11111 .:\:„il.tit:'....47--•., II irii117.t'. ,., ,a \ '''' _ _..,... ' r,J. ..: . \.../''.. i .— ..- 1., 5 - '-•1.'<- Q',-•a'-‘A•1 / I, : .." ,,,.- •5;' •-• \)i,....,n r, „.„,?,.(141 ",,,/,..... ,,,,X ;;; '/Iiier'('.:. 4 11;%*•7. 1-V'',.. . \ -- ' .t....- FV., , .f. /0' r>"•* . li ill/ .j.P.6 ..., .'el', ! • :.'\ 11. ,^:',, '/4/ ,Z.,.,, 1111 1?i- . .°---, I/ '', ,.. • '''' ' /" ;7 t-------/VA' ,/‘/"-/.4,41->52c' 0,1' 1,1 ii1 , '''''-N.., ,....,-,•• (-11 ,i cf, "aE; 8a.l1li I,lj - -''-N /'•---)' ki-s' 2-▪-1 ,12 41\ 0, ,5.• 9c ----- ',//' , !'''' %:g'''' •;`. . "/i'I r ,,1.4 not.C'C' 7'. :i 1 11', ". ' ./.,,../ ,,, > ',/," ' ,,, ,k. ill11511911TITT!r 1111111:N 11 9.!11(1 11 1 1 4, gg. se,) . ,, . 4„/".. 1 :,', ,,,,,_;./..•° //'..4„,,r- .\,,,,, \. ,:,„! ; ! -4. -,‘,z;.: '''.\ -„. .91.> Vt, !1?!!.i•- MI j-f ' Lla.a°'. / :a!IA, .1-;';'PliOlif qklill!..010:1!'i il 9..ad Pliii „ ,--\ „ - \ ''';''' Atlilier;aillil:P1:1!!://hiiiiii i/ir, I al lill ‘,-------\\', ' '. '''> ''s, .I//f//'y: V,'' p 111;;FiVfill iiirPgl'i'PH:111 P i!•ei 1 in q ''.I IMP Nera'aal:/1110146;41!1 ;°,1 Ili / , \ '''''/9/t'( \ • I qi. 5 )', 1-1 ,,,.?? ,,,''1111. il, "*.•,. . ,, . i 1 1911.3110111.11 I 1 ill 111 1"I il 112 13 11111 11 i 11 1°I ,=1111;01°1E=1ill Y.11;1.41111 F' i /1 4 ... ; .44, t.I., I ,' '/• ),'1.‘4-//"./,_ . cp... % '.Ag 2'61.9' •Lt:', q:11.!111E4011.16ii 0.66-I E; il . :: Ei , .. 44/ . 4 51 :59IiiiigNiiiral,.11111211 !It I, LI 1; '44.121:;' (--:")s'i U •k:.,` I /:•,;., 4,(,,, *%,,,,, k-J,-; , ,, .../, .11,.•, p:, •i ii'---------....›- (--- ‘1 ' .` ..!f ill t- -;------2•• \ ..- • , ,,, ,/ - ----- -- -•-----•-••• , • a.-, - I r lg man al•v.:gap 00,iddi00000 ' :'i '//''''‘ , 5,11M1 NI RENNA$41111d91AMP01411!ITI JO; OOP:iiq.blq:Mg ,.' ' • ' .••• t e 'd I'd! % 0 ,,, 4 •,,-,,, ...„:„...,.....-,....!.T.,i,i1.;!,011;*;1!...11:14Flii.!i:1.1i'pw R:ii'lii;$41':!11: •-•„..,\,...., '',,' ' '..',:k------ ./ , :/6it'•,, -. . „. ,.r 5:,..i.1:„.11,14-3,,:4`p rigeNE.'Ag E“di:i„,E.T.9"sj,I;f: -;17.‘`' '''''' '-'' Li''''' 77,7/1'..'.‘ ' NMI! 6%Ei 1 li/1 116 lijelLglilliiiiililijr.lilgillEiNill iliii 11;65;1:1,41Filiiiii!!g . N P.11 ",, ' 1,.8 ..'t' '."' .1' //r°/ i'111;--01.i5.1 i 1115 it!1 1110.111150;11!11711111'1q11/11111 111 iy 1-31;!..i'air!1,jaii .1; ."1. , i1117111!!'111.!11i! 1! ;1: PE!i!ilt/E,1911'!Iiii!i% !/1!' ! 1! !1.!111411111!111 11111!i 111!1i , 1!1!!1'J i/11 11 111;!111.11111.11191;4 ,. 'Ci'' r 1 ii '?,,•.., ./11..- . 4#.....a..... 4. 4. ' ,''' 'I.''I/ , e' 7 . ...,..1,-1; ' it/A ti/ ,, / y /g/r . /01.,„/„, 1;!;ii; 1;1;,;;;;;II;;;;;1111 111 1I1/117;11:1F.0.117/i111/;/1:!1111,5;174:1111 1 111!1 1 1 1 11111111:1!11101 ° y!,111 i y l'ilii.i.ill IN I ;i:ilop;p0;ilir54;14 l,iii;Viiiii.IF 0: i;: 4;5hilgilqiiiiiliiiiIt'i:.?:!iiii Ili lif_iroly y, 1 ii!!;1 1 ;:i!Iii'ji J!!!lil i ''l liPiiiii: .0:;!!!!!iliiihh Mil \ ',,„,'‘.4.:/// II he i I,Fol.!!114 C.:0, id;FA ::11-1,.1:4'40.,iii”„:409Pd.15,”dr.:Pit,i .g.4 I. 4.1 1,i ghleigg. ; IlEllii' egag!!!!!10151:ii.01 'le .3,;telli.01!!!,,531 ... . \\ ',7 ./ii * ' • .41 f .fa. 4 gi a...4;a,,5Flea!Pg. 11 lg!i ! !!!!;!!.1!;05 MA g.E.g! ..-4,1-i•-1515.11!e!'01,F 1116!,1.!1 1. 1 !I 1!irli!5!"1,!!i! giPi a 44alpil 14,11.1.,:...!,IP-1,24.1114 -. r,24,1P2/''';'".4 .1.°.,- .24,...17,RW,.:.1:;!- - ,...' 1 .,.q.E.4.'i..i, if'i.41E.1;li N 1;1.1 fhil!i!.ilz;Lqi; il!q ,!fl;• , \ ' ::0::;ii:•!,Mi i!'! i!.41 giliggvaill'P. , T. !g°45,4•11iliii.1.!!!!3 4 P.55.1!P.% grigiq ilfq 't 11 71111 ' 11;!1.1'1111 111 11i1 - 11111.:-.111f111111!111111.11111 iti 116 ..., -----..________'• , t 0,.t i'g 6 4,. r•, 1 Mill!!!!ii!IPTIM666N ill 6! ;ig,. 1!!imiiiiiIirimpiiimmiliT Ilill 1 lip! I 1.1„.i,;$11;!1,7„ ,, 1,3,;111i#1*!idli:!li!!i:T; al!gi;lilp,ipi:piti, i! i1i! ;!!!11041!ii;;!:lipgilio:liikylipli.i I pi: i :4141 1::pi!11 -::•_) „, ,,, )//4./.,„, f i EA'l!li:ErNii!:1;"6"!: .., 0,„:„. I,,,„,., iliili!!IP,401iilliii! i iir,5:4;I: ::5 i.e,iiii l!'gi%:,11,45 .1 el E ii:11: ! Elild.!iE!'i EE \ 4, „ /71 ; 61!!;1411;1!i PTI:iiliE4E 1.:6;Ei 11;q666 1 i l'•4IIEIE:.1.!..%1$E1:: !.! ill:Ellii!:!"3!1 14E:1 1 7:161'411141:6.:i 1;1:4:i.I!"11!: ;1 II;1!;'1611Ei.1.ilTd. id iliiill!ii;E:IE r:.!YI: 6 '"!ir..:44;!1!:.' W..'!:4!!fEr -1 '1'.9!:1!ifil!.;!6.1!Ef ;pEgil 1 IlipliEf,6;!:!; ' III' . i!.:41;!.iiififnilE*014!0:IN!..... :-444 i i ,..: . , .74',,.., !t : 4;:!P!! ; (4 i ! 'Y;11111 0!1;iiii:Ii;!;;!i!iiii 11;1; is? Ail.:t.it:siE:11ii!l''''.1" 1,ni. ---;▪ lq 7 ''. .` -._ -; _J .1 1 • ; . '.., „: '-\.7 \ !!!1 i i 111 i . . . _ _ '1! • I i :::; e•,/;., 1 i 11!1011111 111'11 1111 1 11 1111 1 11 1111 1 11 1111111 11111 11 i, i IN • ag gr-. 4 i aa g , r \ s,z 7i —.. .•„, --- . . IIIIT14:i1ii1.i i1 1i IIII::4i1ii5!1i i!i ll li!ii!:i 1\1', 0 ,r ,, \ a/;/ , S— °5Il Ii1lI6fii!c l !1!!: a .1 ;1!5 i e- - , I i i .1:' -' ' 11 r;i qr 1 ,.., !i!! El' nty ''41j; P.Ii E;= Ed ::!...3 1____, • BOUNDARY 8.TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PREPARED FOR ...,4 4 v k•I , F— . _ FIRST CITY EQUITIES off"..`"_ BUSH,ROED 8,HITCHINGS,INC. 11:-.---Nr.,..... .... DM,ENG,NEERS 6 LAND SaJaNETORS SEAL 4°P1 i I ..,. BLACKRIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK B1=ii ,,-.--,--,,,, i-- ' s 0' PHASE I .. 4 , _. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES 1. 0 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES The landscape consists of elements that give form to exterior spaces. Thus, the character of the landscape is created by elements such as signing, site lighting, walkways, and plant materials, and arrangement of major functional elements such as project entrances, parking lots, buildings, service areas, etc. Given that project architecture and building sites within Blackriver Corporate Park will most likely be of varying types and sizes, landscaping as a design element will play the key role in creating and conveying the overall character of Blackriver Corporate Park as . a "park-like" working environment. The purpose, then, of these Landscape Guidelines, is to provide design criteria which will help to insure that Blackriver Corporate Park achieves an image that is distinctive, clearly understandable and unified. 1. 1 INTRODUCTION TO BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK LANDSCAPE CONCEPT As part of the Blackriver Corporate Park master plan, a master landscape plan has been conceived to organize, unify and create a distinctive character for the whole Blackriver Corporate Park. The master landscape plan recognizes that Blackriver Corporate Park consists of three prominent zones, namely, the streetscape zone, the common parkway zone and the interior zone. An understanding of the nature of these zones is important to understanding the landscape guidelines and their intent. 1. 1. 1. Streetscape Zone The streetscape zone is the primary image setting zone and it includes all arterial and collector roads. All improve- ments within this corridor will have the greatest degree of control. This zone includes the areas from behind the curb to the setback line established by City Zoning. Common elements within this area include walkways, planting, irri- gation, street lighting, project signing, traffic signing and project entries. This area will be planned as a unit, installed and maintained by an Owner/Occupant association. parking--le mass shrub planting L--T N\NN'tS • to 111111..ah"r#1111111111111111141641. CO• . . . . .. . 5' sidewalk lawn area 1. 1.2. Streetscape Zone Design Concept The streetscape within Blackriver Corporate Park will con— sist of a unified single image as presented by the landscape master plan, namely, a six foot lawn between the curb and a five foot sidewalk, fifteen feet of lawn with deciduous trees producing a large canopy either in a straight row or regularly staggered rows.. Beyond this lawn and tree area will be a five foot mass shrub planting to visually screen adjacent parked cars. Street trees shall be a minimum of three inch caliper of the species and configurations called for in the landscape master plan. ` Seeded lawn or sod shall be a common single mix. Major entry monuments and plantings will be provided at Oakesdale and Grady Way, and Oakesdale and Monster. Minor monuments, plazas and plantings will be provided at the intersections of Oakesdale and 7th, at Naches and 7th, and at Powell and Grady. J 1 • jogging trail - - arterial or collector transition zone--�- -ARC 4106.11 1��"Vol �i ny''m�q'�jy/n1fl �11 lntlln Ji!iluul ninull6 l LLlitn,u in m mtlnul NllmSJ , public parkway � I 1. 1.3. Common Parkway Zone The common parkway zone includes areas under the jurisdic- tion of the SCS, City of Renton and areas with the 20 foot parcel setback which will be planned, installed and main- -. tained as a common parkway. This zone generally boarders waterways.. 1. 1.4. Common Parkway Zone Design Concept The common parkway will consist of a park-like landscape plan which will act as a well-maintained, unified buffer between undeveloped natural areas and the developed areas of the interior zone. Ammenities within the common parkway will be rolling lawns with large shade and conifer trees, mass shrub plantings to frame and enhance views, landscape irrigation, an eight foot jogging path with physical exer- cise stations, water features and wildlife viewing plat- forms. The plan for the common parkway zone is presented in the landscape master plan. i_ 1. 1.5. Interior Zone The interior zone encompasses all exterior elements from the streetscape or common parkway to the building setbacks. This zone is subject to the needs of each Owner and Occupant and is meant to have greater flexibility than either the streetscape or common parkway zones. Common concerns within this zone include; parking lot arrangements and land- scaping, site lighting, regulatory and directional signing, and service areas screening. J _ • 1. 1. 6. Interior Zone Design Concept It is intended that the interior zone of Blackriver Corpor- ate Park, consisting primarily of parking lot landscaping, be planted in geometric patterns. (Refer to Section 1. 2.5c for plant types. ) Subtle light levels, restrained graphics and screening of service areas will all contribute to rein- forcing the Blackriver Corporate Park design concept. 1 . 2 LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINGS 1. 2. 1. Assessment District Installation and Maintenance Agreement 1. All landscape improvements within the streetscape and common parkway will be installed by the Grantor. 2. The Grantor has entered into a maintenance agreement to maintain the streetscape and common parkway zones. Landscape maintenance will be paid for through Assess- ment District revenues. Following the expiration of the maintenance agreement , all maintenance will be assumed by the Owner and Occupant of individual development parcels and will be paid for through the continuaton of an Assessment District . 1. 2. 2. Maintenance of Unimproved Sites Sites that are not improved or built upon shall be main- tained in a clean and neat appearance by the Owner and Occupant. Weeds, brush and trash will be removed twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall, or more often as required to maintain a high quality appearance. The Grantor and their representative have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and charge the individual Owner and Occupant as necessary. 1.2. 3. Landscape Coverage A minimum of (20) percent of the area within the property lines of a development site shall be devoted to landscape materials unless otherwise approved in writing by the Grantor. The majority of landscaping shall be on the street frontage zone to establish the greatest visual benefit to Blackriver Corporate Park. 1 . 2.4. Street Frontage Zone Design Guidelines 1. 2.4a Definition of Street Frontage Zone The street frontage zone is defined as that portion of the site which fronts on the streetscape zone and/or is visible from the street. A . • Se:`'.,,,aw...>;yr,,;,.�..,.•w.y,_.;,,_,,.,,_.;..:r. building _—_ J streetscape zone property lineI I _ street frontage zone LJL I side and rear yards • 1 . 2 . 4b Specific Design Limitations within the Street Frontage Zone 1 . Grading: Finish grading for each site shall meet the existing grade at the streetscape zone and where applicable common parkway zone boundary. Transition slopes in this zone shall not exceed 4: 1 . Berms shall be shaped with naturally flowing contours and smooth transitions . When grass is used, the maximum slope shall be 4: 1 , and where ground cover is used, the maximum slope will be 3 : 1 . Berms shall be at least three feet high unless side slopes exceed the maximum. • 2 . Service Areas : Service areas within this zone are to be enclosed with solid walls and screened with the appropriate landscape material. See landscape material list for "screening shrub" types . " ?"r-c?. ` „.e; �` e 4:1 max. slope where ? ,Q grade change is required 3'avg. sight line — 3'min. aim nmwmaa nr..■ ■nunu •.■+n■n..rn.+urc•mn.u■u ■nmu■nur...I•. parking arterial or collector transition zone` streetscape zone • 3. Screening Shrubs: The following shrubs , in combination with walls or fences , have been selected to aid in eye level screening of service areas. Planting areas shall be a minimum width of four feet . All planting areas exceeding four feet shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. Screening shrubs shall be a 5-gallon or 22" in height at time of planting, whichever is greater. Plant Name Max. Spacing Comments Photinia fraseri 5' on center Cotoneaster franchetti 4' " " Cotoneaster lactea 4' " " Viburnum tinus 4' " " Viburnum rhytidophyllum 4' " " Mahonia aquifolium 3' Vaccinium ovatum 3' " Prunus lusitanica 5' " " must clip Arbutus unedo 4' " " Pieris japonica 3' " " "Texanum" Thuja occidentalis 2 1/2 " Buxus sempervirens 3 " must clip Rhododendron varieties 4 " " 1.2.5. Parking Lot Landscape Requirements 1. 2.5a Tree Planting Requirements 1. Two types of trees are identified for the parking lot planting. (Refer to Section 1.2.5c Plant Material List. ) Type A: End of Parking Column Planting Type B: Interior Parking Lot Planting J Ilrfr: _______________ perimeter planting type A +-- type B . .-(4. / i ,,Cv V 1 , ,,,?: . . . • ;_. fal�."�` 411� �►^ 5'min. r • -t- df Art ! ft* - ,,,. liPt" . .)A -."4\-- .:4:7;la - - -. -- lir: f 5'min. 49'typ.: Type A: These trees shall be planted at the ends of parking columns. A single tree species, with a 3" caliper and, shall be planted throughout the Owner and LL Occupant's entire parking lot compound. Type B: These trees shall be planted in the parking lot interior. A single tree species, with a 2" caliper shall be planted every 25' to 30' . The tree species may be different in separated parking lots within the compound. Trees must be planted in the immediate vicinity of parking stalls; credit will not be given for perimeter edge tree planting. A , k2 . Tree wells and planter areas within paved parking areas shall provide a; minimum 4 foot clear planting space. 3 . Planting areas shall have a 6 inch curb on all sides . _I parking lot compound lz--- iTf 1TT 1 end of column . 1 1 1 .2 I type A: species used ( II throughout compound ,_ r. _. '- - interior planting type B: species may vary : 3_ from lots 1 2 or 3 _--_---: I 1 P 0 .• g 1 i -_-_-_----S I • ------------ �-i 10 o OPn 1 . 2. 5b Parking and Pedestrian Circulation 1 . Parking location and layout should facilitate easy. and safe pedestrian circulation.. _ 2 . If the parking layout is more than one row deep, walking space with a minimum width of 4 feet between stalls should be 'provided at key locations . . walkway Ott AIWA ‘117.1. ANL. -: AID • ( 2 aisles or less I I ql._14' typ. 41k 4'typ. • 3. If parking lots exceed two rows in depth, the alignment of the aisles should be in the direction of the pedestrian movement. _ di/14 I :;a''i�i�a �;�I�Alm! , 1 rl 1 aisle 1 I 1 I( —pedestrian I 2 aisles or more 1 corridor —>I I 1 lt1ii al 1 ile 1 i II 4 .& N • , • .• : • _,. e aisle 2 1 I 1 1 • 1. 2.5c Parking Lot Plant Materials List The following lists are recommendations. Other trees will he considered for use providing they conform to size, habit and disease resistance. If special soil or site conditions prevent the use of the recommended trees, the Owner and Occupant should suggest an alternative to the design review committee. Do not use Prunus species. Ash, Hawthorn and Locust are not recommended. - Tree List for Parking Compounds: i The following list of trees have been selected to create a park— like appearance in the parking compound. __- Acer platanoides Acer rubrum Acer pseudoplatanus i Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Quercus coccinea Auercus borealis Fraxinus pennsylvanica `I.anceolata' Gleditsia triacanthos Minimum Size 3" caliper Comments: Limb to 6' min. - Type B Trees : Interior Parking Lot Planting Plant Name: Magnolia grandiflora Styrax japonica Pyrus calleryana Minimum Size: 2" caliper Comments : Limb to 8' min. 1 . 2 . 6. Vehicular Access Drive Design Guidelines 1 . 2 . 6a Location Criteria 1 . Major access drives are to be located as described in Access and Drive Location Guidelines . 2 . Access drives for "right turn only" ingress and egress should be located by the Owner and Occupant according to city standards . 1 . 2 . 6b Limited Use Area at Primary and Secondary Access Drives 1 . The "limited use area" is defined as the area extending 10 feet on either side of an access drive and in that area of the first 10 feet extending from the curb line of the public street . 2 . All objects higher than 30 inches above the top of the curb at the access drive curb opening, including but not limited. to, shrubs , trees , signs and earth berms shall be located outside of the limited use area. access drive — limited use area 10' 10' cu• rb la I I T I '4 � � .: 1. 2. 7. Guidelines for Interior Property Lines and Landscape Areas 1. 2. 7a Side and Rear Yard Requirements 1. A 10 foot minimum planting strip is to be provided continuously along and adjacent to all interior property lines except where vehicular access is required or over— lapping parking planned. 2. All site drainage shall be directed away from the 5 foot zone. Drainage within the 5 foot zone may flow to an adjacent property. 3. A maximum slope of 3: 1 is allowed within the 5 foot planting zone. A 1 foot minimum flat transition shall be provided at the top and bottom of all slopes within this zone. Interior property One 1/— vim, drainage -� 1 4' 4' 1 4. Where the two properties adjoin, there shall be a 10 foot minimum zone created by the two 5 foot minimum required landscape planting strips on each side of a property line. All planting areas exceeding the-5 foot minimum shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. 5. No walls or fences exceeding 30 inches in height shall be permitted when located at the property line. 1.2. 7b Side and Rear Yard Landscape Requirements Either shrub or tree planting shall be required in the 5 foot zone. Where two properties adjoin, shrub plantings with ground cover is required on one side of the property line and tree plantings with ground cover is required on the other. The first Owner and Occupant to receive plan approval shall be required to plant the required trees and ground cover. The second Owner and Occupant must then plant the required shrubs and ground cover. • _ -'-s7 s/� ,_ azip Al. interior property line trees and ground cover ._ - \ I shrubs and ground cover lria'"y 1' 3' 5' 5' ♦ ♦ • 1.2.7c Plant Material Requirements — Interior Property Lines 1. Trees: Shall be located four feet from curb or one foot from the property line. The trees selected for interior property lines must be species that have been used somewhere else on the Owner and Occupant's property. Refer to Section 1. 2.5c Plant List. it 2. Shrubs: Shall be located three feet from the property line or two feet, from the curb, and planted with a maximum spacing of five feet on center. 3. Ground cover: Shall be placed 24 inches on center maximum spacing, covering all ground surfaces. If the Owner and Occupant select lawn as a ground cover, sod must be installed. I ' 1 . 2. 7d Planting and Irrigation Details and Specifications 1. All planting and irrigation details and specifications shall conform to City of Renton, Washington Design Standards and the highest standards' of the American Association of Nurserymen, the American Landscape Contractors Association and the irrigation industry. 2. It shall be the Owner and Occupant's responsibility to provide a 1 year guarantee against all defects of materials and workmanship for all planting and irrigation. The Owner and Occupant shall replace plants not in normal, healthy growing condition at end of guarantee period with same species and size. The guarantee period shall begin when the Owner and Occupant, and Grantor or their representa- tive has accepted the work as 100 percent complete. ENDING OF FILE FILE TITLE Sj(ikt g 140 / 0 , 0 illig ......., y� Ti E I. ,..,.. 5,,..„, ,.,,.,.....u.,", „__ II 0 cf.) (D Q 5 (-) CD > Q _ cD- (D 5 n E- d- (D D N Q FQ V N Q OD p V c) BLACKRIVER Corporate Park RENTON, WASHINGTON OWNER/DEVELOPER: FIRST CITY EQUITIES 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 624-9223 ARCHITECT: LPN/ROYCE A. BERG ARCHITECTS • 114 Vine Street Seattle, Washington 98121 (206) 728-5771 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: THE MITCHELL NELSON GROUP 2033 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98121 (206) 441-6644 ECOLOGICAL CONSULTANT: INDEPENDENT ECOLOGICAL SERVICES R.L. "Rex" Van Wormer Biological Consultant 1514 Muirhead Olympia, Washington 98502 (206) 943-0127 CIVIL ENGINEER: BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102 (206) 323-4144 i • CONTENTS Master Application (separate enclosure) Legal Descriptions (separate enclosure) Shoreline Master Application (separate enclosure) Environmental Checklist (separate enclosure) Variance Application (separate enclosure) Consultant Team 1. Vicinity Map 2. Aerial Photograph of Site 3. Design Intent 4. Design Intent 5. Design Intent 6. Roadways 7. Landscaping 8. Jogging Trail, Fitness Station, Nature Walk 9. Signs - Water Feature 10. Environmental Report 11. Environmental Report • 12. Environmental Report 13. Environmental Report 14. Environmental Report 15. Environmental Report 16.. Infrastructure - Site Plan 17. Street Section A 18. Street Section B 19. Street Section C 20. Street Section D 21. Street Section E 22. Graphics & Signs Design Package 23. Oakesdale & 7th Avenue Feature 24. Type "B" Sign 25. 7th & Naches Feature 26. Grady Way & Powell Feature, Sign 27. Grady Way & Powell Feature, Sign 28. Tenant Signs & Bollards 29. Type A Sign 30. Swale - Development - Site Plan (East Naches 31. Swale - Development - Site Plan (East Naches) 32. Swale - Development - Site Plan (West Naches) 33. Swale - Survey 34. Swale - Survey 35. Swale - Survey 36. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract B 37. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract B 38. Boundary & Topographic Surveys - Valley 405, Tract A & Tract B 39. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — Valley 405, BN Parcel 40. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 41. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 42. Boundary & Topographic Surveys — BlackRiver 43. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 44. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 45. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 46. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 47. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 48. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 49. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 50. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 51. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 52. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 53. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 54. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines 55. BlackRiver Corporate Park Landscape Guidelines Map 2 VALLEY C®MPREHENS VE PLAN 12/11/85 LAND USE ELEMENT Single Family Commercial 1----1 Low Density ` Multi-Family Office /Office Park Medium Density • 1 Multi-Famay public/Ouasl-Public 1 •i High Density BE Light Industrial :sc'' , Multi-Family M.. Recreation �•'•�• Heavy industrial -____.. Greenbelt Manufacturing Park __ / Multiple Option cl : - MQ- • MP/• �� way .0000000d r ,� ---- 0000000000 ---• - - adli G ••�t ri Cr.1 (! --- 00000000000•� --_- - ------ _ S �• '•000000000000••C --• _ �--- - -� • . -••0000000000000•'% ----- - o�' C ��-. 00000000000000• ----- ajte - �r•+'r ' • o00000000000000 `brit Qo ., . .0000000000000 • = t,— K'A� 1-40 C r� oa000000000•- \i_ '•� • 00000. • •' , . _.11, ..,:_;y...,.-5.-.1--,..7.\\-_--_--_-wp MI 11051■i:..■N1i -- _-,_ -- --___ a • ■■1111• �•••• J• iL ■._• _ _ 000•--- 1 .y.. .10/1111 _ •000•- __ IIIMII `41 11■■■■I 111111 I. it' - -- ---- t—.."�■11■■■11 {• 111.1 I. _ -_-- ----- I •-1:3: .. -.-- -- iif-iM■=, •iliminnw • ppl■■.- II■■■■/■I�;.. -- �''�r: meambSizeirlananowast I.Al..I••.77 III moanBi■■■O■;0 _ • ty ,a • .. .NI.C_ IIIII c•,-— ---_- - .1. I■■■I•1■■ -Ill ------ •- �i;% 11u■N■11 dd •.1■ ■YI c II ••�- ---•- - .o `111111111./1111 \1JI•.•C: I _ 2� NIP • ;;r•. •. .: 0..''1:'' . ce r--- - --- _ - 11 •• • .• ---mot _� _-- -- -- •t±�• • • • - _ _-_------ •oo00._. .__ t ---=_ •a- _----__ --------- --_=-/�ii/iI .00000. •00000c M■p■1_�. _: .....:..•�.•r •o =_= Ypyk10= J-___ -_____ t1fit• 4, •00000000000 , I PZEYC r:Vr - -'r=_-_�ei�� _ 1 ■■m1■■s■I000000000. _ � - _-_-_-,-_�-- ---_ 1■ ■■■■■a/ •00000000000c -__: r:=r �-- -3't��� -----_ = h�^ •000000000 II 1 •0000. 0000c 0000. 00000 /� 'i '000000 1 \ •00000• •0000c • , . • ., .i:,1,!,' 1 ' ' J'iri ,I. ', ' 1,4 Fli • ii _,:;.. . 11.'-, i .ri. •.? ,....71 , 4 'yAA,,'Ws 'f \ 14 , ' *flr"trl 41' : .' " ii, • sa lAn " ' ' i , • )11c.•4- 2 aI i Ilr 1 e1 1 / \ `\ •1 ff d,i 13,, i - lif' ':.4j1-!If ; •.-- til „oi,,, I , , , Yt: . . , . A , 44: ,i" r . - 4'. 1 I.: f,..1_ n ��. \ '• I• •'V:ft , ,- olgon Ic .. I '{,.r`r, i i s r !. N'i I ' 1 „1: )1 I. ' ir . k . iii,4„,i4;t1.4, ,/f/;#°, . . , 0 fit • • 2 % 4 ,. I. it. ' 111,: : 1 t 1 f I- , ,, . ' i"stf e. : 1 4 ,' ..:,•ti, I!I, ,.. ,Arl '11,,. ;7 . . \ ii i .), "‘\ • -• .i,',,. lir 1 .. I - . t- b. , , . rig , . f I r `1 • i II IF—,:j • h l ti I' 1. t 'IF ' f i' .r 1 )r1'�')r{ I "R Ih' S a �t1+ ,1n lY f�;' , `* . '•.1,. `r! .. 1 � .1 S f >> • 'a fl} Zj ,1 `'"�t�sry. r ,. :1+. _ ,. •y , t 1,`[T.r 1ia:; • .0 f• '`r L �`14 ! �►�\ .4t t. �.' . ,. I • r3 f'� i • ,�1,� , ,“1.. slif.i. �` �f• Ckrr, 1 _ —-.' I '' • a{vf CYO:7,k.irk `t 3 - „'% ! { .,r. rilk •• icy t Y+ +^ ' . ;1,,, , "C j. :4' . ,it i•g„,,, , ..., -4,. it f• . ' ..it, '''1j.C.:; ..•)' ' ' 1 ' , ...:..!a's--i.'vi-,1 IP??Ilt. ‘.•,, . I • Y . •` ..t, r... ' .. .otR". .1 r'r • ...,,- , itpi 4,„„ ‘, • ...,... . e• 0, I1,k, 5 ;.t , p r • {� ,- : q-ii:it,..C:Zi y.Vit;t.'s r, -,,.. :1;...1•V ' • ''•..' 4 , ' .,"%dr/ • :- . iii % :', , l',', .1.1!? '' .f:. ./.41"' ' • • i b 1. ..q i. / , •i l li I. '` 1�1 F i \\ a �':'"`}I � * '�'I:J .'• ,1 k• � ►°.� C'`r _' \ t.. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK DESIGN INTENT Provide a comprehensive design approach for unifying 130 acres of property known as Blackriver Corporate Park (Valley 405 Business Park, Earlington Industrial Park, Blackriver Technology Park). The infrastructure area of this property relating to this proposal amounts to about 16.94 acres. The intent for the infrastructure is to predetermine and establish site plan and related approvals for an integrated network of roadways, landscape improvements, jogging paths, exercise stations, nature walks, and signage as a context within which to develop the business park.. . As the project is irregular in shape, numerous residual areas of non—owned property (public, private, utilities) are incorporated into this design concept. These' properties are all contiguous and due to the size and nature of ownership would probably never be developed or finished to the extent of landscaping. This design affords the opportunity to complete the landscaping, trails and roads. We desire to establish a quality business environment. In order to attract the stable corporate users we seek, it is necessary to provide the features we propose to reinforce the park—like, natural setting. We agree with the City's intent to encourage a greater degree of corporate office uses within and around the City and are actively pursuing this objective by creating an environment which will best attract these users.. I. ROADWAY A. Naches Naches Avenue, a three lane roadway, will extend from the temporary cul—de—sac north of SW Seventh to intersect with Oakesdale Avenue. The planned roadway will be dedicated as a public right—of—way and will include the design of a bridge crossing at the P-1 Channel west of the King County pump station. First City Equities intends to design the roadway in conjunction with the City of Renton and in accordance with City of Renton design standards and to supplement the minimum landscaping requirements with landscaping on private property (see Section II, Landscaping). • B. Oakesdale L. I.D. • • FCE is currently working with the Oakesdale L. I.D. project design team to supplement the basic roadway design with high quality enhancements. The enhancements are complimentary to the overall concept and intent for the BlackRiver Corporate Park and include jogging paths and additional landscaping, within private property and the L. I.D. r II. LANDSCAPING r-- A. General Landscaping is designed to Unify the project, to reinforce visually the roadway system, and to enhance the native planting along the P-1 Channel and within the nature preserve. i_' B. Roadways • Landscape planting on private property will reinforce the roadway system. Plantings will be primarily lawn and deciduous "street r, trees". All trees will be planted as per City of Renton safety standards for visibility and obstruction. Between Naches and the railroad tracks to the north of the site, ,a row of columnar deciduous trees will be planted to provide a visual screen from the trackage. All landscaping associated with roadways will be irrigated. C. Natural Areas Landscape plantings to enhance natural areas with native planting by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) along the P-1 Channel will be augmented with larger and greater quantity of like native plant • materials to produce a more immediate effect and wildlife habitat. Some areas i-n the- Public Natural Easement have 'been damaged 'by 1 - construction of the P-1 Channel (see Environmental Report), erosion, and firewood poaching. These areas will be re-vegetated with native plant materials- (most relocated from future construction areas of the BlackRiver Corporate Park). The intent of enhancing these natural areas is to restore the damaged areas quickly, provide a habitat to attract and maintain wildlife and to provide an amenity for the enjoyment of the residents of the City and the BlackRiver Corporate Park. The existing drainage on -site will be improved, enhanced and tied to the P-1, Channel -and riparian areas. • • • it • • III. JOGGING PATHS FITNESS STATIONS/NATURE WALKS A. Jogging Paths/Fitness Stations Jogging paths and "par course" fitness—stations around the P-1 ) Channel and on the periphery of the natural areas will provide the opportunity for both the public and Corporate Park employees to exercise without having to contend with the roadway environment. The jogging paths will be constructed of crushed cinder which not only provides an excellent running surface, but has a minimum impact on drainage and the environment. These jogging paths will provide an important link in the City of Renton's trail system. B. Nature Walk It is human nature to be attracted to wildlife and the water's . edge. Uncontrolled public access, however, can interrupt the delicate ecological balance. In order to facilitate the inevitable desire of the public to interact closely with the natural areas, we intend to construct carefully routed nature paths and elevated boardwalks terminating at strategically placed viewing platforms overlooking the P-1 Channel pond. r-, IV. SIGNAGE/WATER FEATURE A. Signage The signage for BlackRiver Corporate Park has been designed not only to meet the functional requirements of place identification but also to communicate and reinforce the natural character and quality of the development. A signage hierarchy has been established to orient the public and establish an identity of quality. Materials have been selected to complement the natural environment and to unify the development. B. Water Feature • The water feature at the intersection of Oakesdale and Seventh will be a sculptural statement about the BlackRiver Corporate Park. The integration of water, landscape, and man—made materials reflects the theme of the entire development. Here is the heart of the project: a point where the man—made environment and nature harmoniously meet to create a place where people can work and enjoy the benefit of both. r- 1 RAILROAD TRACKS /fif -:- NACHES AVE. SW `:';:: :::: • ...;: : ,..:::7 : BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK , ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) --_� ".` /r. , .... ',.:,,,i, c"-- PUBLIC NATURAL TEMPORARY . ..,:ii'l;;:r: ° - AREA EASEMENT / 11\ CUL DE SAC „ --�- �� i \_ _ /� -•'-" • P-1 POND QQ -- --.--. -- - -- /l';':-4,4CPUMPTATION �C� y` 'BLACKRIVER CORPORATE__ O I I $I E PARK . - -- %I ( VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK ) ) / /I i -------- --s--\,,..... %,‘\ . 1 I Ak___ I _../ ._..._. , ___--- L. v � J� L . SW T7H S?. tO __ / f� : N // 0 / j . ,/-- , . . • N / ID I ----1 : . ..... ............ ........ Proposed Roadway _. L -- . ____ W ..„- , :i.W _ ______ - . ______ ________._ ‘ . . ,, W, 74 _ .. -- BLACKIUVER 0__ ,\ O Corporate Park i \ w 1®'�M 0. RENTON, WASHINGTON �, Sw 11. — ,.. .........- -11,.............j C 3 ._:. ...... 'II'S - oaPe� . . NORTH +"I ROADWAYS .. RAILROAD TRACKS ,�' . ACHES AVE. SW ,,. . . , . -.. .... ... . / • ' BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK • ' ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) • \ / / --✓ • \ • / PUBLIC NATURAL : :z:;z.:;:s. :>;::.` /'',:—/11...:1:::r... .... AREA EASEMENT .. ........:.......:...:..... ......:............:....../.::4........::: i . .:;.';'::::::7::.......... "*.?:: ;••••••••••••••' __ . .., _ POND9 r�>S" .� .. �.., — •.:•.t , : - P—I �.:: (—PUMP STATION :_• : - s :.........:.:,xr•; ...- <:y 'rs, ...:..,. ... .. ..._ ..,.. -- :. —r r' ::•.:. BLACKRIVER COR RATE ..«. ::: � PARK ' •,041010 : 'ffF ( VALLEY 406 BUSINESS PARK ) • ' , - S, i �. 1 1 I -- -/.--•••......., _..5.".::::.• -f,•::.::3;.:„., . // . W ' :i sslrf• ,•/ 1 ter'/ . stv. l •ram' / - ,'/'/ .':1;".•- . ' -- -- ---2---- -- 1 it / �� Roadway Landscapin•g — <;. . . .4:1.. .• 0 L a Naturai Area Landscaping -'. la a.. . `ice: 0 BLACKRIVER �_ Ws1. ` �. c Corporate Park •;; ; . S, jO1% St• 1 RENTON, WASHINGTON 0 ' % `/ O. •-, . ,----", C . : 3 . . . . . . ........., • • . w� NORTH ' S�, ....'::::::::".::., ' -- i. oa LANDSCAPING • 1 RAILROAD TRACKS NACRES AVE. SIR BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) FITNESS STATION \ . -.v' -et. /'- • \ \ _ PUBLIC NATURAL J •�•• ` tI \ • , .� ��"'••••., AREA EASEMENT . •'• ' . • _ MATURE WALK. • 9. a • •• � :It-JOAGING TRAIL \ i' �� P-1 POND ®• ck ��''•;. � ..� ."! ...•._�;alle .•.a,, •- -- --`--,_,... /Al E- PUMP STATION •....... -' .•••"••.f•''••• • BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK ' Ill _ � � ( VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARK ) ' \ \` •0 FITNESS STATION \V. 1 1 : /1 SW 7TN ST. W Z I - . O \ w •It , ; .� M L 1 El ••..•••••.....••' Jogging Trail" - I > • _Fitness Station •t L __ as Nature Walk �` o a.. • at _ t a BLACKRIVER it '` e� o Corporate Park :i , ,,;p 1DT0 el. w RENTON, WASHINGTON •�. �� .\ r ti , „ : C --�'� JOGGING TRAIL i \\ ---- V _. NQ TRAIL - . ill`I FITNESS STATION ww NORTH c. 0MAT=WM.K ....._____________.------1 % , - • a RAILROAD'..TRACKS /,/ POACHES AVE. SW --*--.. \-- , BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK - \ \ ( BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK) --_�.`�- _-_\ / \\ • _ PUBLIC NATURAL ��) • /' AREA EASEMENT �� / `. )------ - (2 , 0 ,,y--- i� .� P-1 POND O Izz:'===c70 -- - _______ E-PUMP STATION I -- -_ , -- '� ' BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK �`_Nimille (' . II II ,� \IIII ( VALLEY 406 BUSINESS PARK ) �^J \ I \ ‘% / i \ I / �� s i o �, ' SW TTH ST. �_ 0 /,‘ \ , 0 Stuns By Type ou • wF Water Feature /It\ L_____i oud.BLACKRIVER Corporate Park sw ,o.�Hs'�• RENTON, WASHINGTON v� _ _____--\ i C +tr NORTH 7..— Oil°e SIGNS-WATER FEATURE. 9 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT FOR BLACK RIVER AND VALLEY 405 BUSINESS PARKS On March 11, 1986 Mr. "Rex" Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services and Mr. Ted Holden of Mitchell Nelson Group, Inc. visited the adjacent Valley 405 Business Park and Black River Business Park sites with Dave Schuman and representatives of First City Equities. The purpose of the site visit was to establish existing conditions of both sites and the intermediate "public natural area easement" and also to determine development or enhancement possi- bilities. The results and findings of this site visit are as follows:. Existing Conditions It appears that the Black River site is undergoing a transition. A survey con- ducted by TRIAD Associates on February 18, 1981 shows extensive ponding and wet areas. The site visit conducted on March 11 found no ponds or standing water. The soil condition, however, was moist. The existing vegetation also shows evi- dence of transition. Whereas there is a predominance of moisture-loving plants, there are also dry soil-loving plants beginning to establish and encroach into the area. A list of plants observed on site is attached as Exhibit A. Exhibit B depicts damaged natural areas and other observed existing conditions. The vegetation in areas bordering the P-I channel have undergone change pri- marily due to grading operations of the channel and side slopes, access to the area by construction vehicles and the cutting of trees.. ' The results of this construction activity is that the existing vegetation was destroyed. and the soil disturbed. The higher levels of sunlight, due to the tree canopy removal, has encouraged an abundanceof Black Cottonwood and Red Alder saplings to sprout and also blackberry and nettles to reach growth levels which are invasive to bordering undisturbed areas.. As a result of the heavy rains experienced in the Puget Sound area in January, the existing grass9s and riparian vegetation along the drainage channel have been eroded. High winds have broken tops and branches from several major exis- ting trees, causing access points for disease and insects, and structural weakness. The broken branches or tops which have remained "hanging" in the tree present a hazard to humans and animals. The large Black Cottonwood tree on the island in the P-I channel contained seven heron nests. While walking around the site, six blue herons were observed. The P-I channel and immediate riparian areas provide a habitat which encourages the presence of Canada geese, various ducks and other waterfowl. Objective It is the expressed objective of First City Equities to treat the P-I channel and bordering riparian zones, the public natural area easement, and adjacent natural areas as an ammenity and focal area for the developing business parks. The natural areas should be maintained, and where possible, enhanced to provide a habitat indigenous to the area and condusive to attracting and supporting wildlife. Given that the natural areas will be virtually surrounded by urban development, their preservation requires providing the public restricted physical access to and, through some areas and only visual access to others. Recommendations The "public natural area easement" and adjacent natural areas to be preserved on private lands can be separated into three areas. Each area has a different. recommended development or enhancement. The areas are depicted in Exhibit C. o Area 1 - A recreated natural area on private lands. The public will have physical access to and through this area as a link between the "public natural area easement" and Ft. Dent Park to the west and proposed public pedestrian trails east of the Valley 405 and Black River Business Parks connecting to downtown Renton. The boundaries to Area 1 can be defined as a 60 ft. wide corridor between Powell Blvd. on the east, the "public natural area easement" on the west, the Black River Business Park to the north and the Valley 405 Business Park on the south. The area is bisected by Naches Avenue. The existing condition of this area is a 6'-8' wide drainage ditch with intermittent flowing water. The area's vegetation was cleared for construction of the ditch and now consists of a thick new growth of Black Cottonwood saplings, Himalayan Blackberry and natural grasses. There does exist on the borders of this 60 ft. wide strip some semi-mature Red Alder and Black Cottonwood. The ditch will be regraded to resemble a meandering stream with undulating terrain to the sides. The stream's side slopes will be graded to prevent surface erosion. Water will have- to be recirculated or pumped through the stream in times of dry weather. At present, stormwater flows through the ditch during the rainy season only. The stream depth would be such to keep the water cool and inhibit algae growth during the warm season. The 60 ft. wide strip with its meandering stream would be revegetated with trees, shrubs, and ground cover plants relocated from the soon-to-be-developed Black River Business Park. The stream and its riparian edge would be planted to cattails and other native aquatic plants to act as a biofilter to re- move heavy metals from stormwater before entering the P-I channel. A trail with crushed cinder surface is proposed alongside and at places crossing this stream to allow pedestrian access into and through this - area without trampling vegetation. o Area 2 - An enhanced natural area within the public easement. Due to the narrow width of the public easement between the water's edge and private property, the construction operations of the P-I channel have greatly distrubed the existing natural vegetation. A few existing mature trees remain, but most of the pre-construction shrubs and groundcover vegeta- tion has been destroyed and replaced with native grasses, stinging nettles, blackberry and sapling Black Cottonwood and Red Alder. Within this area we recommend grading the stream channel and introducing a system of weirs to impound runoff water and create a system of basins. The average depth of the basins would be .4'-5' to keep the water temper- ature cool to prevent algae growth. In times of dry weather the water 2 V , 1 in the basins would either be recirculated or aerated. The basins would also act as settling areas for suspended particles in the runoff water prior to reaching the P-I channel. The riparian zone and side slopes would be revegetated with trees, shrubs and groundcovers transplanted from areas of the business parks which will be developed as parking or structures. The basins themselves would be planted with native aquatic plants (biofilters) to remove heavy metals from stormwater runoff. The north side of the channel would be graded to stop future erosion and also to eliminate blackberry roots. All significant trees would be maintained and pruned, if necessary, to improve structure and eliminate dead or broken branches. We also recommend the introduction of a crushed cinder pedestrian path on the perifery and in some cases crossing this natural area. The pedes- trian path would serve two purposes. First, it would facilitate the public's access to and around the water basins and through the natural vegatation, preventing multiple trails and trampling of vegetation. Second, it would work as a dividing line or border between the natural vegetation and the highly maintained ornamental landscaping on the abut- ting private property. o Area 3 - A natural preserve. The large size of this existing area, rela- tiveessmall percentage of damage from the P-I channel construction, and the existence of several Blue Heron nests warrants leaving this area as is with very little human encroachment. We recommend only minor pruning of dead material hanging from mature trees, as a result of storm damage. All snags, unless leaning and presenting a safety hazard, would be left. They attract grubs and insects which are part of the food chain for birds and small animals. In this area even the noxious plants like blackberry and nettles would be left. To provide some public access to the water in this area immediately bordering the P-I channel side slopes, we recommend a "nature walk".. This walk would be in the form of a raised boardwalk with wood side rails to help prevent people from wandering into the natural vegatation but allowing them visual access. The physical implications of this raised boardwalk are very slight. The walk would ride on posts well above • existing vegetation, which would be disturbed very little during construc- s tion. The boardwalk would give animals and birds uninhibited access to the water's edge. Two alternatives exist for the route of the nature walk. One would run along the bank of the P-i channel, thus allowing the public complete access around the banks of the channel and ponds with all the activity of the waterfowl. The other alternative would be to wind between the exis- ting trees in a north-south direction between the pedestrian path on the north of the preserve and dead-ending at a view platform overlooking the P-I channel and ponds south of the preserve. The second alternative would prevent a lot of through traffic. To the north of this area we again wish to introduce a crushed cinder pedestrian path. The path would run along the easement line and create the separation between the natural vegetation of the preserve and the highly maintained landscapes of the individual properties. 3 i� . EXHIBIT A Native plants found in the upland or adjacent to the sloughs but not in the sloughs. Trees Black cottonwood Populus trichocarpa River or black willow Salix lasiandra Soft willow Salix sessifolia Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia Osoberry Osmoronia cerasiformis Red alder Alnus rubra Shrubs Hawthron Crataegus spp. Salmonberry Rubus spectablis • Red current .Ribes triste Twinberry Lonicera involucrata Wildrose... . ... . . . ... . . . . : Rosa nutkana Devils Club Opolanax horridum Snowberry Symphoricarpos--. albus Red elderberry Sambucus aborescens Blue elderberry. . ... . . . . . .. Sambucus racemosa Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium Vines, and ground cover . forbs Japanese kn Stweed Polognum cuspidatum Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus • Pig-a-back plant • Tolmeia menzieii Stinging nettle • Urtica dioica Honeysuckle Lonicera ciliosa ' Deadly nightshade Atropa bellodona Buttercup Ranunculus repens Grasses Reed canarygrass Phalaris arundenacea Velvet grass Holcus mollis Wild rye Elymus spp. Bentgrass Agrostis spp. • Black River Business Park :i :'eici:.••'i:'E''Ec•=•••...::::e::::::::::iEciEieEiccecicccciccicEiicicEfi� 1 ............. :::::: €°°°'°°::::;=€ ;€€€€€€€ €€€€€?€€ Public Natural ;.: • .:fl \ i,igifil.1:1,11:;1171;::::::" -- -.. ........................--....... ::...v:•.: •: Eroded channel _................ _................................ stream p A ..:•: —/ ::: :::::::: ..:.. P- 1 Channel - .o.-,� .....::::: /^' ..:.i .i ....=iti:';..:.iii:iii.::�:'•.i:• ....;:i •• .. . 7 - °� Valley 405 Bu n e s s Park / a • Y .....:•,.....,...,v.....-:•- p:.-.-- --s:.•- •-•••••-s-•,.. .;:-.%-- ..--..s..y•-:-.. ..!-..-:,-x-s .....-:,..;••• ••-•y• -•.-.0•:•-• _\, , ___i : ::.tt:;::;;.;;;:l .:�::i'..�tt:. ::..: .:::: .�•:d:::t .:::tit_ -. g•:� 7th ---.7•::•::;;;:g•• ••••:•• •••••••s ••••••••••••s•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••s••••••••••••:ft //Z\ i,, i ... \ --1 , v.,........... . - .....•••.•:.•-.•....•..•••••.•.••.••..•..•-. NORTH s 7 .s'e,b= ', - Area.where natural vegetation i 5.`k4 disturbed due to ditch construe- • L_ 7 _ , „ s i .s.„„ ..... ,....,s : '1%::::::?...::::':-:::::::::::::ni.•;.:::!..!...::.:-...:........;:s.i.::.;...*.y•....;,..•..*.i‘•••:..:::.:.•.:}::-::;::::::-:-....:,.......y...::........:-i:........:.:,::.;.....-..-.:,..!..!................:::.........::........:!.....,...;%.....:::.....::-::...::::....:....:...............:;..............:...-!...:3....---.--;:-.1::;..1."..::................:. 1 . ,• - Area where natural vegetation `` _��' disturbed due to P-1 Channel .. .... ,.. construction. -•..:::::::::••. 1 i Y* ; ` :.' `1, • Exhibit B 14 1 - . \ . _ I g B.lack River Business Park i Z 1 ' ...r;:N \ . <'f /�')"ram„ Cy y) t :.•:•:: (/ '>I t..�, S s �`.� i?,;,'F.;;;;;;. }, ,,. �) .'`*..v,..*',) to*� P ubh c easement line. a s) .i n n•.t .0 9L al,. 'F) ) CDQ / 1::::::::::iiii::i::i; - P- 1 Channel b •' r _ / A \ ) Valley 405 Busin s Park ' i_ i ,-- 1 / t . I_ \ 1 i 2%\__._._ i_..' __._......_ L.......... _ A 7th r— I • L._.-7 • ,_ .- Area 1: Retreated natural 1 n NORTH \ a. 1 area on private • o • property. L __Il . • E;: ; -Area 2: Enhanced natural _ ,:. . - -• area within Public r, \ 1 . - easement. • • —7'-- ` 4 Area 3 Public natural area I ' \ . I �, Exhibit C IS -.2••••...- Tim&NICTI71/41)1 ' ; --:. d • /Jl�f`^� :/01-2.-----° �iC376�:1114O '• ter /�` � c30 1 •` �(�• Y t Y C .!• ems.. , 'lc° `.�� O • •'• A' � y 1�1 00 rt ,t 0 / ' 1 i ,,�i s r nay AREA w�seavei's-''`6 1:, 4v. .� 412211i ,e _ 1 - �• ,w Oo.1lowAUAowo� '.�'� \" C ( reeslmRAiraev `I i SWALE '' ' aNY Mime _ QO h1 awreEl D19 � ' �A ca•'C ipj•` . �i �. . % 1 .1 r � ��q•-r .1 f.as ;fir r - ..,_ j.,� Q z. �; *� �il:!'liR. L ��.�' > .jam[\ \• .+ ( Ys`i�\ G O1 Ih7r .�,Jv.l��11i.�'% a� 1f30;Q _. �\ ve7.--; '►Z NATURAL AREA EASEMENT �,« i. t i �� O V 1 3.1211111-1111{? oill Tt I II I .a''M �Do®ImDOII 1______..3„.....\,., C9 J - '5‘..5• warld.1 =4,4.,....1 _ 1..:.)\ 1 , ; 1 11 t ... •-� :�1:, - TYPE A'SIGN k \• t' 1 `�` i' ' L 1 TYPE�B SIGN ' �O` tl r l:y`I 4� r e tjoi •_3�lye;TYPICAL SECTION iRR�iG • AICESDALE AVE dl 1�1' ° 7TH STREET FEATU' - _ —- 1 f______ fl•-,.. % %10Ni. F TYPICAL SE — ii/ . i NATC10.00 _ 1 �` .ate n , • YTWI! WTOl1E • 1 ' '.` �-1 IlAroa.a d I___. ti'�t Lti ti �� - f..._ {`t.e ..•/ . . SECTION 7 i -I' , I,S p-1 CHANNEL Nli ' "' V . ''''''.'4111W Corporate Park VIA .! RENTON, WASHINGTON :t t`t, wj : f' +^.=J _ k; y' f n tea 1�°• : Min! .1 { ,•� ' W 'Ai.6010•410.,59 ma sumo. • TYPE'C'SIGN N _ ..� E'A'SIGN IONA t NW • • i 1'. vc. H er)1/4 ‘,. k / . 41 • i A <—-—-'fr-frhl'ir&a C:V tea,1 Wr-at 0 0 IT kflgeOr. 11W..4'7 I fr ) ) 1 i \r. / _ 't- IIVA-ka -1i t4 IA \ , ____k--- ' / I, - 1--Gt-ir,f, ii *A-flOr- GPI y d r" 4 h I 1-1W>fri ,-// t/11?-f, i \� / +✓'- d. y � I I, - 410? . i u it , i� r i ,� i i �I-�o P-osl, ? -o ��- 0' \ ?st-o � 1,_, 4,1, I I-o • \ I<'oII wiien --- ---- 1610" SECTION A . , Ooell : 420`,10 a HNC t ft4:1 H 1f1 IIi,O,o,J i r ti1,3 ty t . ,.., i \ \ • < .potAra,t700 ,./..rriroo.r. -wok, . . � \ -i . \ lc 161.00 \ 4‘ 1 '01 . i 1 II 44-14ge • . 6otivii gia4-/ . Oge- . SECTION B `�� i 1l A Iv'S , . ‘ih, 14 ` , : , 1"711/- tjj\ 4 / r k ./Ai/.. 1 1 //) 41°-, '.-1 .--"e4'ller' . gl el(dt'elr — 7- /-.1 \ . A za *. . ... --., \ z_. ___.ki. ... • , .ar -- W rl 1G�-r>" II'-a" 4,11 vil-ad lay y� pd I, • ��r .P� ���� rL - 4W , SECTION C . 1-), /,, a6v(-01?>4.- A- -yrt--.1f,10 Nor ,/ rf i� _� • �� �` • 4 IN44. . - ./7._, ,40 _ •• \ _ \,: gre, ___:),\____ / A. -.trioAc2*-2 <7.iroo-r-rized-7 — . . • N.,Y \ . :A iv' �`.. __ E _ r• _ 1 4 e f(A--' rk, gl 01(4-r-fme-- .., ,.. . • •-/ . <. • i Iv- , ,cI1 I • e 0 , wis 1, 16,i-Q"\ . \\ ,i, v ,k_\,‘ xi-a" VrPl-4 1 2-fr.° 1 0 =115` .1` . x2.-0 gad \ \ __ SECTION D ►aAq-6, He - 10.910 1-00 . • i . I ti, q, r 7 111 4 1, , Y tll t-, r . r' V r % i ' \t iip <------ tr.e.tig.tao Prizoori -WO vet 1 f V 1-1 11\ . ."3 *6111411*4 .fr'401A-1 - . ,, •%. ' % • 4p .11 ' .( .:.,/: .‘ . \ • - ; gill i ({41 t lb, A I i '1,4 ' • ,"qv kl i 1 114%) , jPt ;' .„ ' • ill • 'SECTION E. pk400 </+ FYI v a _ - - V _J; air ' The Mitchell Nelson Group Incorporated • BLACKRIVER Corporate Park ENVIRONMENTAL GRAPHICS & SIGNS DESIGN PACKAGE — • _ _ _ _J> _ � '- ., ___ I_ -- I I — - r 4 The Mitchell Nelson .• Group I , 1 Incorpora led 1��W�alr An luln 1u,r II�MnIk.�An o. \ r ' ~ -f",is�12✓�1 71.1' 5ra Ir„N'nJ'inl;l,II(t!1 / M.1.11 eeN • `� f f9�-4�rj�Irl �I.LrJ7 a\ •I iH .Ne .__ ilk...,. ..c4mmottvtr. cc 4 � ■- a • ".,.t•"`!, W St.rr-r.yvi/o inta-I..pow `-- • f1� c I�I I � f � `' ty o ",✓�rI I / F ZOo■�' � • L w =y IL.�, llNa 1 u 2 STpviP�P CG�t��1Gyl-�1E)-E/ \ 1 • 1,�S ¢W W 4. CC I-0-ITED 5O1.44225 ------ _ // lam. �r1 \ i V �O,r �D 'T-Ili 0Pf:1 (a,Q6�I %1NW1-11-1- ETA • ___ .'�C 'fir II __ .1 • , wr Corr-ram+-+— i ;', B� '�' -- _� IMPACT SAFETY ZONE �/° I it Q m P —�'�. �� U i o.tir IN ?vai rOn[, Va. i0 n 1.11 L. . fj G" T • •1044..G— t..r.Af— I t(-e,- '-'Pi / • 311 0 1I_Od • OAKESDALE & 7TH FEATURE • i Thl li Mitchel Nelsoi - r -i rI�+i-m Uzi • "_ Groul orate 6.&-rfK� _./O H •, Inalrp1IS. n V'��1� I,n.l I'Ln„u . ..7H / _ r• IanJvalr Anhn..n. If/ II,Fan I4.�I 1� bill 11.1h A:.•.rul4.11 % '� � r4'�1(•Ri%i�! • 1`\`1/ Senlle,N'url�inKlun rnl iiii IAIe1 441. �,�i I lift I I I I II i„ill! rI(J�I,i, �/ Eli'llix . ,, • 44 a 2O, ; ,. i ` I 1z I , wao I I ., E./i I , i r 1 / 'a 0 = 3 w • , • S. . ; I, 1.-=-1 x zi >O :cc.. /' 1 u U /'' i i' • • �� 1 I .,, / , _ _ _ ,,,,rtrr� xYtr4 LL W i '4( \ Pry.oYv7 h ,ara.,0-o - • _ `/. . / : /-,i E �`• 1 �`' , 1- • \.>.` IMPACT SAFETY ZONE CO fvoc'7f .rn-Ic. ,AP \ • \ - �� N Vf+_ d.- ♦ .: .,P 1q` ' \ —1"o+Jf-1 .,1/IOW/i.-1:'h( ,Ic, mv1:�l,m unu . }A'•.':•' �.\X I,A11 111,,u 4•4-:4 I. tic, `/0� \ \ xfeW WSA F 1 N ,-I GONG. \ .—. _ S—PNPcP GIJNG, VD4 = oP' Xh"?I-Il�i .l Co�F4?'17H� .(�E�1. _= YR lo /-icN Pao rt-1 - 1'I-I•o1hH J !�y—v 1 VAV I II = io1 -c' �f \ SA. I T gv).4-1y0-(61 r TYPE B SIGN�. 7TH & NACRES 2 -- ..... . .. _...... ,._,___ .., _.... ) 1— 71', • Y . ,, —. , • - J L I _I ' 1 '). 'II__ i„ _::_k , _ _ 1 ) ( , . i I _ ___ . _ -- _... ., The Mitchell rr, , . A) i " Nelson Grout ..- /: 1 1., 111,, cri9Els"-. "i! ,S.•1")". n IA Incorporatec el ' fi`-‘'.. , .._ (,- ; 11)3 : ,- „r • • . -. --4 r ,•• , _ ., . A. ‘r'‘i l'i 1 , •,, , ,( . , : 11 ' c•A 1 14 yr f .- --C. 'A...i I ic- 6 If: I ?1 1'5 _ ,•-• ",”.. \. ' -. • ,,,.,r if 3-.' 'r "? , . y - •r, rxr- ,. 1 • ,. ''.., • 'i', Vi ; re _ ,- ,• ,t• - i ?‘. , ,..; , 1 - ,...k / sL;e• i,.,. Y • ..4.. • •-• • i 9. . i -., .,-'5. 4 t {,, ,.., t.i• r 9 .,, - -.c i , s, .,. .,"'4-4. Ls <CC c.- c I ' - • A • .....,-• -• .._ C,L--44 ‘211' - te --e-t . • - t...,-..., •,..:„ " ',"'-- --t•-- ...,/ ‘17--:.-V .. ‘.; . CL • •-t„..", 7::- ' ...- .,-. ,._-_-....i -r-,. .--, ...., ••••••,:„..„.„ - 4,11 :-. l'14.4*.i _ , . •%. 1...-,, kr.7„1.,,,... ”'"?l./, '"--.. f . I ) . !..--......, -- --'1,..7...p • 71%-•-..'"-- - ‘•••=-I ••••• •••• ..,- •";- ll -''''.1,.-. ''' '''• ''''•• -1I,‘..,*''' -#.1"..1tV 4'i.. ' - )W 1 7-r' lt ce 1— .., 1'1''''• , ,,-_-1.174,-'!..,'- • ,t1:-• • ' ''. "-:;--.t.• '4—.7 s•-',e2-'• -,A -- v..- ---f 17-,,..-14,AX A2c. -„, •, _,-.,--•. • ,-- y 17 CC I-, r!lilt, 41,k.-1-, ' ,..r.'')1, .r"r.•."- ---. '''''.Li- —,, .,-"' ^ a 0 Z IP 4i 4.H. •.,-..., • ',1 . ' '. 1 .."1 ,,, .' , cl!'" ‘,,,r.:—"' . . •=e— . n . 1 . i ,,,, ' t . • - • -• • '.. -TFR,NN . • CC 't • 4, J 0 1-9 -fr•rool....ir VO-flitor.Wp,11-1 el....{. .....e6 ruty-i&l.=ILO",-4iWi I '--- t,"0.6......rr Al.& •-e0+7408-1-i 2 t- -(Fri.P•••ri fan4....-29-go ,-44%-T-v ,.......e.A. tv, ,,,,,rfa. -....,.... ..//emiteh-G-41, ri vftelf- it.. t'l CC i12 r-if.t. Jr,....-•-er...- iT. Ili • ••1•41-1.-11P-1-1 1,...0.,..-L- .... i,2,-1 OAKESDALE& 7TH FEATURE > 01,40,0<ar-I c% •,--A- 0,1-- 1 CC - • 11,_ii,,rr ,..)...-• 1/1.. -, -.•' •:i, I Ft."' . 1 /.., tr,N ! .., ,l....."' ,I j. " ",\ \ l3;.-- L.2 C 1•", ,I i....n !rig _fv; i ,.."--?\1.1 ... re'41\1. .I-1 r., PIC\4., ,,,,f, i\r Y ___r , 1,-- ,. - i ,:• ,..., fz.,,, di fi/ / Py- . '''' N.. i R v\y-, ,.:. ,r ,,5- 1,6 r,r Is'.• ,..r., ',.t C) .., -).',.., t' i,./ ,'•/..- ', :6- ,i; (4.,..•.. , 4,. ,. .i t• e, , ty,':' r '" ' \' is 4 vi, ,, . • I".. • 1 '') • I . .,;. , .. 1:. , (' „ !...1 ...3 • ,i :1, ••• 1 S ,. '? 7 / 7- ' ,1 r ,, • /1,. . , i ri t, -`r- I , ' ' f 1, •.)' iLJ, . cy. . (.7 03 . '5 • 1 .,:' -, •- .1 •t 1: i• . ,i'• '.' - 11., .rx `if- \ )i , ..".• •v - i Y i, ‘•:', s , , . p "....,. i - • _ ,), •• ' • I 1 0. i.. ;r -' '. 1 r , i . i J ':-. , . s' . t.0 ';... 4 :',• ),k ,i?" e; V' '.' • .1,1 . 17 .• • •. 1 -1. .1• ..... . /1.! • • . C... ,. . f 4' \ . .-- I ...i 1 ., . • , . •A • .1: -4)‘. ,• .." , ;,... 0 / ) , ' ' ' •- - ' ' I ;• s,. .., „;„, • : '.... f • ,I._ %. r.c .1. , ke •.•.., le 'y NO ./II VISII IN DA I I • . 1 '1 . .... , . s• - ' N t'- ' i t .. . K. ' 1 •-• • II IIIIA.I1 i•I.A. , I) I ..1 /. .:, .. ,..,:t. 't• 0, ..,.. k''.' I:.' 1 • ' 1 .... ' '.. /". ..,. ... , , . S^ , ;7 ..1 ,•, , , , , '<, i. -1 - '-'• \• i- 1 . ; i A . i .."! ; .. Lttc• •-T ' "0- \..,)r .% II III III/ ! ., • r 'j , -• - .. . • i'l ,. . . i . ) ,... ' , .'..,, ' • • ,' I II_L4CIIIIIVEll .I • .. i ., • ••-• .Co potato Pah ' , ' -,11; Il• + \ Is N? '.. -1 \* ) , .., ,. ‘ .. • cz.• :g, „..____ _t_y,___ t . J.• -i . ..• ,I•L, . - T - ., H .. ,. .• " - • .,,....••••• ..•• ••••• .. ...... . . . ..... ..., •••• • ...... , .. .... . -••••• . .....• .. . ,-...+1,,T. ... . ,, , .. 7 ).., -Ki1-0 —rre,,r , ,, z-r ... . 20....,)0 i-lo-o-le-t-ri <-716At-1 _7TH &NACHES FEATURE -r-mf•-•• ',';' -,,.-•-4 r_-443.0.11cm•-, or,:, -r- _............._ • . 1 1 . __ _ ___ L. 1. ___} 1 _ .2 i.. ._--- •-....___--1 . . ._ . _ _ ) t I f_ __,, t _A F i i- -1 '' i------1, 1 -- ; ( --- - -,- 1 ) , ._ _ ,____ ...„J , _...1 - - - -- .__,• - - . . _ . • The Mitchell . • /. . ••: . Nelson . , X , '. • '. • . • in V / c,G,rprooraut,rd FW-IRkir-14-7 ,7714wkl- Igoe-4/ - . —. Is • \----,...,_ 7 *. ---:......,.... I _ .4*:,. ... . •,,,• / . 0‘ . . - , . : .. . • 7/ / . •'.:.•.•'- ../ 1,:. , i /...........1:.. • 1:.::: .. • ..: II\. \ CL i. ,_• • 11., . • . • UJ , r—I-_ I --8.. ,-. . , / fi.cti-- g r.. , ,/..: ..... . .. Az\ i ( , .,..If : .. ..,.\ , 1•...,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.fo,451-1-1,"---.u.4-I,- .,^-4 0 V Z \ - ‘a,..11F:-- ' •••• ." • . ' -> 4.4:11,2.•iv..... . -...ity. -..t.0 z.;e) i• . - 0 / / ....-N.. .- , = . t2 cr 'tic • ..: / 7.-- .z.a.5---, .1i I 1=11.......... 1:1 4, • .7. u j . .:•••‘-.44-10•-n 9.i.,w- .•-•+i-1 — • / ' / af=roar i p NO. , 1 i , 7 .._ i / , • 7.- •.• :z.z __,.-- ---;t ,:agimP., ,•i- Fi • V 0, . _ __J.-, 21:0- -:*;\-:-,,WHil/ Z..Z).5- \ - 0 i , f , .• •,... ", if • . . _ V • " - Ir •.-- / . ic % jil :-2111 1 • •=C -J • / ', ••.: 19• --i 4-. • CO . ir..,,z., -••• ,-` fAti..-.. -.. i-......•-•:...: . •.•.: . • . . • •-•, • • -•- /- .\• '..' 4-• ' '. 'I.'01\--..:'...4"411t7. \ `,\•-,_ • . . ,,:.. ., •;Ay •- i'fr.r4 al:T.1,h? .:m-it.•-,1 , _,-...7;..ve,._,:,14_-:, • ;" •, -.;. . - ••s' -levy.- ___..) '-• s, y zo ••-PA- . —_ —_-- --•'-'1-"- c7 I-.._ . - ...•• z-L4.--7,---1 ...,,, . . . I I ,...... ___.-- --r---: ilk-- e,:If* •/ .. A ' ._ ----------../ . • '':. \---n1:... .t, -1r-i ,,,,,,,, ,,,,,, .....,-,..,••• i •/ -..."f ', -------- ' i/ n14. 4c ir - _../_ --00 w-r.,,, ,...-, 1,pr ,riE,..-1- / "7\ " - F.•..t.- ., •'-_,Itrolor,,••, Oil; • .,-_f .-', , . . --_____._— \__ "• . / ,---6,,,- . - ,..„.05 - _.1.6 •.••'•.:T^910k l'.....-- -.. .-.. .. -- -- -,-- -- •." • ______--— - f;1•,g1•.,!. ' / \ • • . . .. .. • .• .. •. •.•.•. 0 / ---A.,,,,--i-e,-- •;"•••ha-y" --Idr•••-•1,-, I .. ----- -------. -----.... 7 A---z••••/. ::::..0..p.--,T9--r ,„;:::......f" ------- Zo ---'' -___ ..---- • GRADY & POWELL FEATURE . .. . TYPE C SIGN , . .. . '1 f . ., . ,-- - • I 1 • I__11 / . . • • • • • II - I 1 ' • •:-......- k . :di, , . • ..• .: . • . i .—'`k,f,-.i]:'-,• .14-•/. -.:I ' •'',.x1.,.?•1'.1.•,•i. •:.\.::• C.tA. ‘,. , ,?,,!.' itv , . . . • ..,.,. • . \\. f ‘/ i J1 c i\. . , e . 0 ... ( '-11 rl V 1 ' ‘‘.% ' ' ,. .• t • . tl:i. ,.. \NI:pr.,. - k . ) v, - • . . • ,k t4 ( •.1 1 -' • "• . ''.;-- -4' i ' k' -''' • • .: ':.:J. ' • . . , .i, : , . ‘• ..„!.....,.: .'. • . fl. . \ '-1. • '•1/4A L---I --_ .‘ X\ I -I .'''.%It... -•••'...4 It! tr 'e • •••\ L • , I , Ii!....., - (1 .Lit :. ,i , .1.): . :, • • • ‘. • , = ?, - -77-7 1 ! ' ; 'N' iii:-. iki:.';'‘ -.N : . • --.:'!..". ..4 , .. • . - • . ) . ."-,. % • /....A-- . . . • . ..T . 0 I_..:._.__ii • ii. ,• . : .- -,\ A v\f,l-t1 . • - 1-I • 1 . i..i, ! / v ks k‘ • . 1 1 1 . •i i t , t, ' . ' \ : •' 4 6 r • , " , : - • u . . Nor\ivir 4 . . . : . i - • \ - ,,..1.,„ ...•.„,,•;.f!,..,,111.. .. . i,••,. • • .__4 ' •C‘ 1 '1 ' •1 ‘; .1.‘ 1•'..i.. :' 1 • • il ...\ k 1.' I ' .%!4" • " ' 'tT 1; ! .., ...L.:11 A ..,, • , ric \ . ,,,,.., , r • , --- , '. ii • . . i . ,' -/ • . . . (-1• •r —r - • . r,.1 ; . ,, - •,-... z ...-..41. % I ... : 1111•:..4:------ 1 --,st \,N:---S.-.. .•"'-•"r•K•' i .• 'a.t4; . •,,, ,., Ark . . .• ... (-v....,_ )„..„..\ IA, ,..N . ' n . im.,. . , , . ,..,,.. • ..t.,,. ., •,,.• . LI, ,.• ! ii-A. '1 ..'- '.".\-'‘'''' . • . 1 ; AI • ____., • ,,011., •'y :v i _el . 1 --,.. I. IC' ' '•( 4, ' , r`r I. '• iild 1 • . -- ,i).-- • ' -.14 i • tin . • .i. * I • = - '-'" • -1` , U , ties'• ; ffe. \ f I •. II pta. ; icom k- . ' -- ..- n - ; le' '- '.-, :Ofi . • : W . Ito= .• ' ' \ _ ( 1 14,1 i via, s • . . t___. .. _ _ -.4114i N .! 1.1:11 •••• '‘‘c,-- \.. " - (-• • EtItor . ray ;.. ',,,.‘ ,. . . s S,., • • r-' . '1 . " • i' ' , ; Y %. ' li I • OP( . •:.•,'. , ij,k f r ,••, . I' s -,--1 • Olt, - - • . . lit . 4 , . . •---1, lit 7 - •M . -- • A " • U' 4 .... . . • •ti -.':_ ; .i°.''' .4 r( -4. •s A ' --E- ".. • Ili Cnk F IA k__-t A,-, • 11 RIP ' •.' i .tl • ,-,—.)-t.; * ....-.- = ) I 1 3 P . . . • . k 1 ' ) I 1 t FIRST CITY EQUITIES ':',.? E 5 . In -i,-- '..7 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK al RENTON, WASHINGTON t:.; ',.:,( 17, _ c-- —1 , . _._. 1 ,_ __J ...,_ i, L__ _ 1 ? ' i I ---1Y L__ j _ ,-• i IT ,- 1 C i , i 1- l• __I LI ,--- - —..___ ._ . "The Mitchell Nelson - Group In.°worm., , ••••PI '. ........„,.. ....11.- —„- -4.013 - • III . •, . i ..•• •.• . . . (s, • . , ,,,=•?") •-,,t.,e' .s-,.. .....,/,-.C. s - 1- -I ' • .,.•. I •.• .. ‘'----1--.--- <•. 00 -i...-/-i .../7 Irl.•41.4.,,i ye.........g.„04-,-15:1-,•-fr • I 1 I I .•. • . . • . , ...,/ .-es.....,•:•.-6 ..:--f•-,..,.-.-, . . . . .:,' • • < e•-•,---,-,,,,,- 4,... Are . .‘,..1_,:,..Z---Ge,,,,..;&,, -•••••-rr ___,_. • aq -ir 4-----..,..-4,--,-.; ..../.,, _-. .•,--...: ix , et. c 4- c._.-yy , .. -,...r...,,....., tf,,F...,...,•-••••' - • "• - •-E.._. 4.........A0:4,11 ' . a. AL_ ....-/-4 -.// ;•••,,,a. - 11 • ill f?..---;-1 ---JAro,/ • • .• —-1.44 ,r ,, WA-104..., ;AL, ..,/4.,q, II • • I . • • .< • i I-- -; • `L.CC g cc E of...c...-1 ,/, .../ ..1 . • • 1 • i ! .,I I • •.. ....-:- 11.1 1 , _ ' I ; ! ., 1 — CC ' N\ • \ , - . ..%....,.,,1..,,,,, .ct.i•...,e 7 0 . i . 1_ I _ HITACHI . .—C.1OJ• -- —,,......,... ....,—.-r ..,-,...i .,•._, _ _ I Lt... .......Nst..-1....1-G•4,-..... --C.....,....:02 -•-4..1. , ...,.-I.•4% 6-•,,t1 L _ • / ' Alt°311114Par 11"11.1101111111k1P1 711 gi I I jig'Ilk I l 01 AV I 41111 411 I 0 1110111110100 4001;111111111411 NI ' •_..___..-....,,,.....---L2 f-f.,,t% • ' • / I \ ‘-' -. -Arta" I -'N \L-4.,. • 11/1116111111161117111/11111.111ifral 111/1 ,- -, .-- 1 .--2. 111_111111 i i •-\ ->---- '- -•:-.--k,-6,./.5,11.21-1 .---.' hi A--I .. -- -14'`-'W . .---4P--(--f7 •.,, -•••••.;,_,^" - .--, ---,...—..., ,..-..— •L.-..,- 6 , _ _ .'tea .. The ---- 'm• �_—aa — - _ ;� Mitchell 11��,^ — — _ Nelson 1 �,�..�_ Group • r — if , T, • NCT fc - cc • • :*ti•,il.:`.r... .. ._.,p •Ma N-frvi ,.'ri..: >i:� ',.-� •• T W ra , 2b° I I w a.y .--7........‹ .H.. ...:-. - .-i ay,•e :0 �,e, ' 50o or•:.-uF1 a..o .G�-ram¢a, F ,. IJ a_CCs 1 • LL : / in - ...,. = ---- Y _. • / > CO :' BLACKRIVER I / Corporate Park ,'r , -' N - • 1111r 1 j � � � ' �1114* �Ile a i1 �wwt�"'4a� r� .•�'�. sue' -�� loi_ _ p I !I aw . ft , obvoilito". ..,t,.......- ..4ip /rota .2 s _*---. __, __, ,...„:„...... ,-, il 1 a iiikaatiita llio. isommir - , , ,,....:t. _r r �r•N,r,JAY; r� �•.�� µ A ��-.•���-1 I ri,.. rJ 1 TYPE A SIGN 7 .. ... . . z. - - - • • • Dd ' 5'J 50 1 50' g 50` ^'e - era-- . - �A — Nelson 5 \ or.4 _ 'e --- - EY15r. Group \ �.��f - i\ .j -ZYliti - r % \� i- •: to \ / _ _ _ -to '\ / w Incorporated . Land Mann, Urban UnrLn _-. 5 -_--.-___�._, ._____ T 5 I ,5 $LLII SiJh Arv,butte 1111 SEL'IION 3400 E tO TIOH 3#50 6 SECTION 4 h00 E_ Seattle.WA.b,ncwn vnl_I Ibinl111.6611 • I SEE LVIL EV 4 11-14 111`S roe il'40i.-r.iHt t41S GICE . / ��is.: �- N • — n 10.5 T 0.0 CC A. 5 0.0 w—b.o 1w .5 a 0 i425 * iww IS U \+ NI 3O+ \ �_� ' /;', , W y , t $ 4 #4 4+\ $T"' e.o $ ev ao '/ 3/ 'n Z \ ,, a °< W Q pm 1— . - N co tt / /h l D. Q..•TZ l Dv 1E.0 •..,'s D +3.5 ' 9 Wi .E J ZE.r.Y w 1., • �R T ' _ rs _ -• ._ _ C 1 ri —_Es'iK+ro'ro.wnEE rn wQ W V CC Q 1 / I.E T e.]O I YL I1 r -I \TG 1506 R.15.6 j 16.I i. TV 15.0 t6 15.0/ YG 5,0 YL 15.+ TG 17�— — �D Z f O I a la.o _/ I I • ev ao ,L Q 0 Z e. c5EE. E115N,I—eultGw.kr5.1�,. W Q F�o W I Y OS Nast IQ NOTE: ALL S7oNE KEJETMENI f0 6E I 0000.TO la vE2T. > cc W W eNEGT>I eSr/55..0 6-9-56 `` I FOR R'-15N[r11.6eaa<{ THIS ceE>J 14 LL/ cc N I J - '- cc L EG7 E V-J 1� / J - _ — ---— PKOYEIGTY 0,061 o 5.'? Ll IT] 1 31 ---2 EKISTIN(; C9n1T04e W J JO S7 NE ¢E ETI�IEHT Q WC-. G BLPC� p CO i. TL TOr OP G4Etl I TL 10r oG WPLL W Ls>se aG San.LL O 5 EXIST. 10OW TO 6'E oWs- al I-+01E: n0E!30r-I1PL SL>LE 0,4 SECTIONS IS I"-L0=0,'' vEI61tCa1-500.0 1s E000 rCt0e.A.TEo 3 111-S. 30 _ Do DO'__�}111'. SO' 30' }}�� FD_ --_— NO REVISION DAZE xo I ___ I. - xo I___ - .l_--.---_ __ [c __ } j v I so - DATE DRAWN 6-ram G4 IS-/ - - ' -� 1$ .L/ .\. '_-Gyls,; - - - - I N BY 5rN - 15 _ - 0 10 f� ao DD lrlj DRAWN CHECKED — -1--- - - - \ - -_ __ _ - North M aloe No ---- - _- 5 _- -• =— -—t-----____---- L. 5 _ 1 5 SN t L-D sNECT L n NP� • SECTION a"50 E SECTION 5100E SECTION 5#50 E \ f> g �, —SPen{(TGLOOK I,. n J GW E - �1 Lo } 30' So� 20 5— 5O, GO 30, 2_.._ y� I N S 47 i5 \'\ i _ si ---___ 15 !-_ _., a — _-cJrSf� —_ _—. IS I', --_ ,S O 1 I ,I a, Y/�Eas- \ IP: i ota ofVL NA\ \ — �- • G- --_-_i114T.— - �Y°L rA�ti� � r Q E,e.1, . _. - .\±- . 4" _ 0 �.!' q w= __- __ --\`� G = to I-W `aC-`-'vvW • ___. _ - _ .__— ____ __- I _. _ _.__ _ ._.___._ PRASE III 1 SECTION 6ro0 6 5 SECTION 6a50 E 5 SECTION 7+00E 5 • � L 4 KEY MAP LI� The Mitchell LEGTEH,D Nelson ---- 1'YOYEKTY �,,,w,.2, Group 7— resFOSEO LaHTOUE Incorporated ---.t--- 6.XIS1I1-2t2/- 2.07,9100.92 land Ilann.ng [ 101-IE�1 K 6vETME-11 Urban l IJ�I„• /wh�k.i n ge 1L Tor OP 01.020 ',00 civil-E.-IC(IHEE•0PYI PLal+'• bl„Sixth Ave..Suite 1111 1\V TOV OP v0LL FOR 412250HN4 1N, SCE., Stall',wa+Ibe ltun at ISv e...•6 OP NALL. -O EKIs1. less TO 021'IC.94 I L IS-IIQ �5 .CH O I1q \\\`4} �/ i 7 3 i l : 11s 9 • �IzCr 1 is l iit) rvl I f a i1a11'• WI ) ,77,121' 7----------- ',. ILI 8 y/,. L�E y�____________ Ni W z Q 0 1 r14_.. is — CL W Cc= rN T�+14O l � �� C'f , V3 W kA rc Isa oa eo Tt'23/ - Tc 143 Q U i I. ' W0 ( `Tc l_ \7c 155 -1 B I-M St C EEE-0441 COEv e...1a4E.a-L 1 /r yUi Z1 4eanu4O.STO EYcu.an4Cbanbbej. W 0 LL` Z gFN S C- // .JI �; .—� rO¢ 4veAO4s Tug,. _ C. L. ,1—_3G .II SO• o -- -0/ --50,-- = l l J f 1_ r T v n, E J IS 03 ,. , T ,o j d O , • // \fir - - _ l 190TE$ ALL STONE 2EVEIHEHT TO EL 14 H0e2.TO I'VEet 5 SEGTIOH 0,50 E SECTION 1i006 so so - / I / `� I. 1 \\ �--_•ice N- —•Is < / _� \ /'IIIL NO REVISION DALE / �_�_— O/ 1 DATE OHAWN 5. $5-6G. //// \ Ea' DRAWN BY TJH • •, \ / ' ` to \ /�i io \./ V pa'tO' O 17' 20' 10 eo' 1201 CHECKED BY TJH = North //�I� JOB NO r SELTIO.4 1950 E S SECTION 2+00 E r ( I� _ '- • T Scale 1�=2U'-U" I I c J^ I - w 1MiGH,1E.5--� sNECT L-a t!!) 8F / H016$ NOe1>aN PL 5tdl-E 0aa sEG1$0,5 pE11-1415FOGY loalo J „ h r....O".VEt11cu-S.ALE I6 ./(I \ ^ E,I�s11uLa ,z Ew+L10TE4+TC0 S TIMES, \ 3 / .G \ / it A Y W PS o d SECTION 2050E s �lJ / yp,W/" (�-� 1 �J __ �y PRO. ID �1�� _..._ __ [LJS KGB'MAP L 3 • • • ) j ! ! I • P-1 `` 1 , \J I 1 \ / I. CHANNEL ;.`'`\ p`; I I ,.,. ti.„7-.-,---,-:-- \ . ,''' \. ,\ lk,\*____L-_-_-- _____ -----------'---------- - - '11 ‘ ; , i ii \.\\,...:, zyt,,:-_-_ ---..„.„.„-_________---_-_-_,------1.„,,,,... ..-4 ./4/1; -7,,,,,,..--- ...-i--- .--------------7:-/T. ----:'') ; fw.--------,,,.:.\\ v-..,;;N:;,.. ilk. --- -----,...------. -.....7___---- ins --____-___ ___ ),.,... -,...--,:::„.„_>---„#.-- 7:...----k.s.......-------,.._ . 1 , 111 ; 4 - '.--- / -., \,:s.z., . -__ ..- • ., ,,,„--,_:___ _ //4'Mi./ r-------,u,, : * \\ _ L--.41,24 1 • / /.4.7/,I \\ ),V4. - a 1 y ,.._.....,- _ , , , i �-- '�•,1 ) a!/ ---:=N > ..,, (�—, ,, • .,..., � ,........., _ . ......_ u) 1 „,7/' _ ' ' A,,.-:::•-•••\ 1 K.C.;:ri-'____j (c___--z-:--4"" ,..- 4 %ii,-.; ,.:<,----__ _„_-_ ______„,;/, '7417.- II CIF/ ;-� , 1 r it - — --- --.- `�': 6;\ _ ���/.;•� `i- ' ��� +- nor `--�. \�"` 1 �_ < =4-7 1 4 yi , 4..t+jiihkw4 , ., tif 1 , . , ;--.....4% \ .\;,III1' t \ \ \ \ \\ \ a �• is'•Ik.; \ N\N. „ \ ,.: 1 i) ) 1) \------ _.d'P/I/ • 1FK• iBi • • • N , ' 3 The Mitchell Nelson • Group Incorporated • 1 aml Mann, • 1 arWwap•An ha.%lure • UNvn I lr.r,n • • • BM Sixth Are.Suite llli Stank.WdJn,t 1.111 11,0 1464 .I°I , _ _it + p _ 1 • le _ 0 Y i,ear. M1'N/1 NO ' IY_/f g A r ! t \ 1+1 ,bl \\ 1 / 1/I \l 1°/` /1,./// ,�-- 1+. • _ •1 /4 - U. eC�Y� / y/.`a / 11 l ..e� ,. IIY.s a¢ I ddf+� /✓�� mr li o of.��a c rrw ( Y I+. uN. co T is\ 8 O<t,NAGG LSMT. + i // «C l°`•\Ire ( peu• m / ,I%�`N•eor.hQ p ,/�•eer, -mar_ _� + '�v,., „„.�> t °,i cor. i 0.1,5: . 1 r _I�J I E W Z —i _ 1 d �----- t 1. y -_ I = __ i 730.15 L_ 1 NB815rOO�V 0 f 5• /+ / ! p 'Y�! p yl— II ,s --I+� �-I,`_ ,. !_ I+ -- 1. _/i - _—__ ---_ 0- V CC E— �' -11 — rer ac_=-iVL_— __ --a�� _sT— 1== •• -__ q a ! _ - -- _ -PS° p / d 0 1-V Z. / 1 I°• —f, • I/f - - /s 14f ,4� 14 0' 1,- ji. .III'_!i•� r o •• A. _ CO �W` Z Nui In X Y./CC ff-to4-2o lc. ,..14..0— �Z W ESIle a 1 �� m a Z > 01) 111 0 • NO REVISION DATE DATE DRAWN . -- —— ——- - DRAWN BY p ,p' t,' 42' ed 110' CHECKED BY North. Joe NC • // 1 Scale 1'c2o'-O' I/ 11 11 ,/ YotleAllnnA� • TOP��G�APIIY f7Y _-• �. Jr SpAnpOropk pond, t J, l �j �" t{eCQ-.{(2 BSNO�B:NRCU1n9«INC' • .... t • r< • ICt .=t�=4�..u.... i�j �• VIN • • Nem III Ai 4 e.,•,..\ • KEY MAP : tllmoa� ---"--- JOB NO B523506 DATE 4-30-86 ' j T • DRAWN BY JT • I The 3 Mitchell u) Nelson a) Group CInclrplwaled I > ". I 4 .ui. Nrl.•rrl . a) I Qf I Ae1SI..Ave,Suit.1111 • s..Ui.•W..hmet°°rein t o IID514.114b1. W Z - 1 1 u\ 6 °s: 1 I y /D "�- A , \0n,n� 'a 1 es-.e' f e �ro ^�1 ,e' 1p1 Lo 1 ��yy,Y; e. Ij: 1°4 ojer/� h.+f <e..`aew' ly. �� i,r T br`^' '-- 4\ <, °,`c%rfL <oc< .., ,o �AY,<,.°.s I�I .,<- .<.e,. he CC ,h r°° 1 - �o''Y� ev--.<�c,. _ /� a-Kew•Jxe�e- ,«ow r. "-- ..-r corroNwooa / ° / o , y'1 to.v ,- - — -- - w,«c - - -------- - y F - -- ------ >\� Y ,--- / aY 1 .'. `r 15`,9) / r-5 D ro.<oc<� 'Y -�\ I , `���- `�i• ,lor y; , Q a 1 1 ( I f ^ - i/ /I♦\ ''r .s a ���B 1�,i-n<dee 9. IV / I\• ,� �/� a. ',a��I o, aivncc arc T.' ivc �° II// \ 9 owe - ` (('o� 'wi«ow i /!°"w,«ow 1 V/ e -5 _ \ 5 \ < ,Y I� _is. _ so sree...oee.wace esMr. L� W �\ \\\ �'�//� .. If. ee.reti� ( 1 l w 1'...,,, : 1 S $ D J. �: p_ $ l I $f C Q I —� _ D\\ a-c f1 1 1 D 9 —;:ro--=__ 5 �M �� �' �11_ i .���1 9 y c<N BB°15'Od'W 1 e 1Y A I N r-- IN 1— � -4r 9.11 d }e� ✓Ir - -- -_I-,<--- ---- ly -------�I° --- _ - 1 I' n" L',1 - -. •,� ,a= ,a -"em ' ._ I F"�°~ e\ { �`q\ �Il� ��1�-_ -,a- _-_--D.� _, _ _._.q e__- __ - _8•_ r4__k ce<ec.J_D`_ _ __--8'___ - - -. ,o W�. _ ��, r=ems .— — s D R .. �'a \u.i-� \ /� �b�" - I —�_P . _—_ _ 1.. - I - P s_ I!` A.- -,5`- 's s 0. ' • e cep p..� \\. , <c� Td \1•/ I_91 /0 —- _ __- _"___-9 - ,s Z Z ,o r e . o eti r✓eacc� I \ � �per --_ _ —\ 1 15 r. re - 9 �/ I - —�a \j l 1 nmr �\ r / 6e mo,_ - ,5:- 15 I 046 5` CC O at." ;,'�', �o�,r°w �,, I— <°4< 5� `, or °rra�w000 F ►- CO CC coif \ \\\\� \ 1� \ \\ (�Ayc� / 40 . 40 i ft"-'v heir_ _� ��` caTrovwoao '"'� n"f Y,,°ror,Y c 7�V1 \\, f \\ *\,\ fa/\ii. 9 I D 10 \ ° -car. IY~\ off\�\ \1. 4.�Q\C Y \,5 11Yr I ozi'boy �. 5 y 5: �` —Ts�r,< I..' i V N F R4 1 arm., ESMT. I J m • . T • n' I� NO IlLVISION DATE I • DAIL DRAWN DRAWN UY O la' Dog i101 ea' 1201 CHECKED 09 N•orth JOB NO I = Scale 1 2O'-l)' MB9chllao I •iSPr1oB.rook Pond ro POOR APIIY BY USHR O[as H'uwCiulnv[Su HC. j I B N3 v.rru..r..nu ° .r.. • <I.•: 4%. 0 a 04, E•L ps 9 c I •Ph•.a III ; (r. rI1(in O_ KEY MAP _ �] -""-""'"'- JOB NO 135235.06 DATE 4-30-B6 DRAWN BY JT L f • The I Mitchell Nelson Group Incorporated - I I.n.11'4nnrnK I en.l�alrr•Ar.lrirnlnr. llrl+rn lF.rArr Springbrook Pond 2011 51.ln Ave.sr,rl.Ill Set°,W,.nlnAmnvxln IIDnIH18611 ° \\(\.. oc.oe 4 N �, - k �- 6 \�'� '1aa �T° y I. �,01 • \15' \ \A' ro 4.c 4. ,. °�6.' ° ; \\ \ \ot �1l/;�Il_ ate°x It, o» w000 C•- //�] '•_ /// \\\`\\''' .{I.,�r<s 15 \ \ \ �� — —— —� n,. r< r I \7NC / il.'s \\ N�` �t'z`.'`""`\ I, \ \ I III I � �`,j a � D 1 e-- -'�___ /emu I• «/1 151 i'=_ ?0!/�° /I/ loi roar. \‘‘,.. �Y Po,.,o 0�` n u _____.- _— I _`^•~Kam - r 11•._. "_ �1_ -- I p LW U p /I - I e �•°\� '��. I .5_ +�.c c'.v / y 4�.r� -N m Y er a/// ///ti� y%�`` Y o \ •� v♦_\ �n.`' -_-�y_ ---- - .e .it_.:...n:.<-_.<.o�-- Dr - - I - . Y oar o �'��,-N881500W 5 180.65. s —o• a-°= 41427 W/y lot ki# /1//7 / \� rv<r�<L L- O / I ca,\\ 7 v Y / -co _ • ro ec \• 5 0 _ o W 2 e<cr.ao�';,r ° lm \�. y / p ':! -m r,sec<r6v N 5•9.c a.r.w.,«� V Ill 1 o \ ��\_ --_\ 5"° � I �� P«r, 5 l V 3 • I ���<�_� m D y p� i° v � 11P 11 1 \1-_s�ier�..�n:f .L��y-- - x 9- eY 2• 1 1 �\ Iv♦ ,ri..-.7.-;-\ `tc1,.. J�9�.i=-cor__� - ¢ ,i �* 1,ysY ' �,.. y W O/ I/ /4/1"/ �` u'�5,.r(,°B �mr b co __ - Y ,:„c 01 15� 5r I __,e �/� y Z I _„_--/ q 1� r o>�ta_i�/`o-oe_� 5,4_ ` I�f a 2 0. -cerravn•eoo o sco `e Vl LL/� c / �MLA,.N MI<C or, l >,auwea0 rc •e-c Wica_n-c .�_ X CC <ro ,e el` `c \ jam,,,-<or r ,3r o�o,a>..c ,�`; i ri ` ie,or �v: 1v« Iv: III:A=" "ET. \i514.' �y Lo n6-:;ror- '1161 1,2 o> ti d `�yI @ __ fit;.coyap -c 15,`g'-/ - Q ' EAST 274.74 --__ ._—____ o_ -_ _ _ I __ _ _ _ I .,. ' — -- ,s✓r,<,rr cascAacwrJ m ' I I ]T t NO DIVISION DAIL DAIL DRAWN • J ..�J J DLIAWN BY a ,a'' to' `-✓ er Imo/ aaC'KLO Dr. Iorth JDD NO ))) l Scale 1';°20Nr-o' I\ J I O ^RlY HY vNPNNN e Vj #N 61 o• • o I Phase III ; • 1 w . -a 11 T KEY MAP-_r. -'"-'"""" _ JOB NO 11523506 DATE 4-30.-86 DRAWN BY JT ,- ........ - / + _ i + . , i 1_ _..i ___ ... _ ___. 1 . }---'4 '---------------- 1--- ‘-*- . '?A -•.,. ..- , _.,..r.\_. L.. 1 ..,., \ , ,•,* .--,......„.__, - _____.2„-•--.,-',, -----,z,e•- — ,-„,- g.F,, , • ,. . /-•/ ..• __,,_„., ./ ,;,_ -,------___----,-..2.--------- ,_,_/ c,-_ - . z--- j.,"1. _. •••••• \ en •..v,v., „•,,,:., . . /2 2-\,...,..--,-_-_,-,1,--:-_--_-:•_.--:.--- / ,- ,s,, .....,..-----;,•.=,fi),.'.,\; ., 47, \ 2,. - ---1-j' .0,---- t•;.--' , ._,..6_ ---- ,- = H . / ,,..•-----7- ,^ i \ ,.---......, 0 L.) . • •,,,, ,. , , 0 •,=;g1' , . . \ WI 4.....„...,,..„, \ \••.A,1',:,••\• \ ' „..,.;/--,-,...------ c,j,..,F1;•:.-f:.:1.1),,,, ,, - 1\ ,\ \\\• _ , . / 1'ic&-\C-1-' B ,,, ,„ '•,-:,..,,' .,, - . s.L.,,,-,___ . c-- ,\•-,, .,„ , - - -\';!,, ,... • ,-, 7 • 147,5.UTIL I I Y .5E14.1 /aaa.,ea- 0,004-70a,eq.! .soawe,00E7/,700s0.,or A.,07.1 --• --- : k% 0•.' , _„„ --- --- •,\\\!e \t,,,,, \it\ 1, I ( ' .•, _,..- --- --- '• '''' I ti..•,. %.,, . '. ______ •:,'' i,- 1 :-- --i'.1.::: ' l' - z• .,.,,, -- • ?.., • \ . ,•:\ ,gs _ - -,.-,j3\-- - - •1\ II - -\ \----\- I' te \ \ \ ' • i ' c, \ I , ..„,__. ------- - / \ ./ N . ., . _------- 1---- ---- ,,,, ------ ------- . E)0...' .. . ---- ,' s•T R 6E:,,,,,,,,,,/ ,,,„ 1 ---- . .0.....,..--..., "" r---, ..,•''. .. -- ,-- , - Z--• - -- _ ..' _ . ' •••'•••• '"•,-• •' ."•'••• :.- VALLEY 405 • ,,,,••H tc, U".4'' BUSINESS PARK fe4,'it• FIRST CITY EQUITIES . . 1. ' ,,,,, , ., - SHEET 1 OF 3 SHEETS BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS&LAND SURVEYORS u“... , -r•50'DIAL 22,1985r"MAJ re.°506 3 3. . P _. . LIT? i -. ' r-- -I , 1 , t .___ ' L 3 i , - -, , - I t _ . .) _ _, ...__ „ _ ,_) , __, , _ ..! ... __ ' I. ..„.• _ - • .••-;'/-7--r--"' --11 - . ,,,..„....;._\__ , „.., „..,...-.4 C 04•J400 SO MI C4-,....E r „,,,,,-,-:"Amrue....Ae4-ae-R.,•-)„,), •••••„::L_LI:___ _____.___,„Tli?,i,.,.___c, ____. ..t,l,t"tr.'. . 1 , --_,---,,-- xce-..•.87 00,. _..., .`:.:1„ _________,..?:_:::::________,_'...25P7L,...,....\<----Z:... ,,s,,,,\,....__-..,,,%_.„-=-- -- _ _ _____ „ ..--____- _----._----•-=•:=3F. —_----- _--=,--A':---_-:,---=L=-----V---.-—8.--=----•=-- --',-----.:---•-------=---s---- f., •-• ''.•-. ..' , . ..---;41.---1&z.__. --:_---,-----_ -\ ---t: „, \. ,,,,11 -_,:: . _____,-- -.„-_-_-____1...._7=—__ _;,_____=„,„___ *--_,..,._1_' - ---- --1-1- 1i--- 2---7 '-r-'''''''''--T-..,W- • ''', ,t, ----r_ s•Pf,T'' _ , • ,,, ., , .., - ..._. `t•t„...,,, \l'sy-\—-1-<-/-r - \r\ . 0 .. ,-- . ---.„--- ____,- ::.... .,,s„,, , .. , ./.''' \:."..!:•"-}-• ..," -.,.--....._„--___..-,......._. -......_„_, \ r..7=---'--"-\----\----\.,/.../.\•;:;,tJI-V t•/I'1_i•i i•iI•i1\l_i"sg—:L• :,;•1•I I,'.))l i/,v,',s _;,,, )-.,,\\ •••\ • / \ i\ _.—%----- --N'-./--- ,,,--.-,.,...---.;.:-,T...,42,,,-ilI•'i' ‘--. ,-;;P.-, • i, v .- LLI 1 i - \ / ‹,74''' -)\I( 1\ 7.= , `,%1 '.i.:I ./.1n. ' Iff.1:'Z4= .,','"::::';1.71:,':;,,`='.,;`,5y-A„ LOT 5 \ ,, P.,, N. , ..., ,. ..' - 4,1 DT 7 ( ,•^1/1 , . I!v r rq\A-)(----r--___)P '' • "— • ,, / \.,. \ II • \ 7-A - -------------- J \ -..„........... A ' 0 t ,,' ''s .^;\, ,,,,.....fr-r-eL, -I, / / • • - ..../...,.e.. 4.4,A•665,9.,.. souw.e.•-<-4-r-, Ages., ' • Z „.'1..• .\51,_A-t-i7 I -(4.---- 0.„...„, /--.------- --,17 - ,... ,.. i -- 0---," ui 1 1 (1,., , ••••• •', '- '‘ ,\. ,r" ," 11 (,:fr:,_,,,,;,„=„•-- I 1_11 4;" ----------_\ '.•',,.. - L.,. 'I \ l'\T- _ .l , 8 LOT E.") • I' ''''"s '="---.-1-..-_-- „ •— , ... ______-----------' _i --..\•!. 11 UT / I 11 • L L A• I \ \_.‘‘C.;* •-- .-_,,,_ / ,qs,24,,D.,,R r cr.•%' ., ,,,% IN.1<1.M.R 1.,,,...e.1 • 0 .............., - ,, '-'r 1__‘.\,,:'•:\_'_r__.4.-.a‘••-e±::,;,•.•:.`3•,;_•-V,___-_•'_:,-_---------:4---..-F:,-27-•,-••'.--‘,-)-,7..,._-_—•_,•,__,_u,_a-a-,le.,s.m----u-r--.--_---_z".I/5Vti•I?•11 .----. .-------- ---.... •"---....,,j / 4•-• •\XL.i!. \'\ ''''':- ,_;•-).'.-....L-..... - . _ r•:'',''i''l-,f•1•';-•_" :.;.,:-•:•1-."•:.: •••"•'-""-- - ) IL ..1 c..e..... '''n"*.''''1.' j ..',•...•.,_,_r •k.E,_,.' cr.1,f•EL.4 . , ,IL)6:' '-'“N•...•N Jo a o"'-----''' '7;."...''' e.;. .:r---. = -' -- ------r'-:'--"----- W----As -7:-= --., TX7..;:..___ - ""'""'"'` •."--."\ '' '''' .;,.. „=,-ir''''''''' -- '' - "- S W. 7 TH ST ___ • N \ , :‘,"•-•-":----2-i e-\7-7-7-----.. ., ..„._> / 466' 0-----„N c___,_ ,_;.,,,, )0 p, ........ ..-- ,,,..-_,-!--• , :••,\ -.',,7^44z.‘vg;"'""' .,......., I__ ________.,,, ( ,^ N s/ ?,, .."------;;;; ,,: - -0,, z % '( \ I i \ _. "z4,,,,,,7 .0 ,. 7 I I • -,-1 --';;,g ) I *jr,,-, • __----- - t'-,'.. •HUT.TV LASLMENTS L o T 7 • _.,___._ sg.nna e.''' 7----7, L Or 8 -----__ • ''Us.t.,7.-Id• ,, ..,C.'C// / _" s ,•P' / (7'22 _ , I I , '''.; \ 7/ \ / l>9 // 0 / REV 10•tla.WM/.1,0.0.r IRMA P 1.1A I '•. \\ Ni:<_, y I 00.,,.,.._.._ __.,...---:-....••••••••••s L.36 68/07 \ i VALLEY 405 T,Y - / \ / \ .4•C‘.L.:4.1 BUSINESS PARK ,. •,,, ______, • k IN. \ i,,, FIRST CITY EQUITIES I BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. t V 'N'.44111191 unoi I • 6-.Ci-',/I CIVIL ENGINEERS 8 LAND SURVEYORS ' ‘ ••• 1 ••- c--MATCHL INE 1 SHEET 2 OF 3 SHEE TS SEATTLE td•Shao3TON Ii>41.1 I.•50.P11.22,19651 MAJ rir5063 ') ii 13 4 . . _ r _ _ )L L _ __ i - i _ _ l _ __ / . • ..' • .." ', \ i . ''' C '-.••--- °-!.., --, -I \ / ''''. ' ------..'T N'T '• • --- __---- •,/---: ) \ \ /I/ \‘,-_-_,- ---- \ "-••••;-- \.1;7, .•'. %------ / .. li \ . .:,, i Iii r // 1.( 1 A N , A, .--''' \ 7.-- en,..e.ea,ar o...7) \ ,. -„,,, ,i /p y,? ....„ ,z ----- ,- <„, _ .,„ . 2 -....._. \ / / •..I/ I I..1 ''1: ,,,/,,)) / ,,,,, tii -,....,.. \ \ \.„.. t ,lit\/1/ , ' C.' I i z i • / '' I iCl/ i / L \ . •/ '., \ (''' (I! l'' ',1 ''''' I I I I 'TRACT B --' 1 ..\.„..., \ , ---__ , vr..,...k I\ \li\ (!--,-1 i IST WATERLINE EASEMENT_r --•-•::_: ..............- ,t,-. •••••,-,, --------__ ...--• '---,:-..--- ...,•-. ----C.--- ____. / - - =-- - - - ••- *----k--... • i Q-:;) . •-...______ ,... -... . ... . . VALLEY 405 . . '1 BUSINESS PARK it.Irc5,,, • FIRST CITY EQUITIES ' i ''4110S BUSH.HOED&HITCHINGS:INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS It LAND SURVEYORS ....... • SHEET 3 OF 3 SHEETS l'•50'PAIL 22.1955r. MAJ PI N P .. . . - ,-- - , ,- - -1 ---3 _ . _ . . . ___._ _ 1 •, 7.it.0.1. • ' • 7:L.'"::',,l'-'1;:1::4177......•• ...:2-1°L"li ...----70.i I .• - -4 A-4J,,,r41-....., - ---,5.4 iai T --.L.;.N- . IVashinkton X),. ::.j...4.;•,.1:1:4",V);11'.1'.',.„' .!.:.. . il'P'.:I..'•. ''. ),•'..,C1111.:Ii... ;:.:q::•,-,----- ---------F:7-. --.F: f-,-.- ,•,•)1.,,ii,L,r1.,.;. --,-, k • , ,LN.ii!"'S. :•:.,1:::::', 1•`,.:;.: i•16.:ZI.I. "i'"4-•.r.I 'r.cD• :..--' ..•••• '', • , V-'...e.:j.,-'7.'f''''''.1'--•••••• ''''I''.2-.-'15'171)'1‘:' .-.24' .'l . "C-4't•r'S .Vrt!,' :ar2'''.7'•hi':-;-sr.,--..f.:::1 1,\\ ---- ,,cr.' l'Iii14:•A .4.V.,,f' .;:$ ;ff)._,VY4fr''.• .,•••• `'. '''l' \ __N-__ ::. ' .s.:,-.I.i!-41',1,.;;;Irf.:;;?:: -.:... -.;',..:.,:.'--4,'?. Eitb.....,' -,?ii• ',R1i, • i'.'{i .f.'-'i,•%(!•-'...,.''''...--.-t•Er i IL.'-•• -,. - ' . ' ...t.,,N•4jp, t. , .:•.7,',It4.44... V :, •7.-• . <4., _f • ,,---Atil,,i.c„...-z-...x:ii.-:-• -r_ts•-....\%. _-„_. ..i.,glso,,,..f,,,.-Ii,I.Liit-ft--1.-c - • .111.1" .......t- . ,P' :•'''.' .I. i il; ,''':• '7 • ' . 'q-\'' ' sIS'• 'Po, ".•'•-.. •)•••PROJ EC T—/ 4,,•;,,,,...,..,5T ________ LOCATION MAP --.,—. • ra •,,.., 'A, V9 WEST 2130 69 If•8 .(6 l' eG.. .•)9.4,•,„ - -727. i----•-w,........-- g '9.6.,,..„ •‘, . ,' 0 '?•' :2 (3. , '.°-,;. I-1 • ,,,G•104 ea..1• • C"C ,,.j- .4.41.,C2'. -,7 ..---,'"---1=---: .7-- - 12------ - ; solOt‘-'' KING COUNTY ..„-• ,,, f,-..„:.•_-,0-.,, .,,-.,-.. -1- ,:, -0 • c-A •'' `i• . 1.so,so•-..`'`%-17.--=------=---,---.11"---ior-‘,. ,7- , . u) ;Wr.r°2 2titrA" o'i°V ,--..-2,------ %•---?"-- ' ./. ,-. •i PARCEL .• , ., M• ,,,.•S.,,,,, ---- ',:2;'," --_,-:,'"-..,''''"'''------z-.:---1:0'"- ,------;::-;:,,.-,,/,-N.,,.. :-:::.„.-:„-,:--F-1.4,7„,--21--_-.=•°_72LI.:„.:'°:.. ._-'1. _ - • la, co..,.?•$<'`'''' ''"""" ..-.2.-,"..--,-_,-------,-----_,,--‘,"-- ,•••a.• --•- .•:\a. ....lac..0....a,, ''' \ '-- • . •",:a;,'„.'4•Vria`K----ffa'.r.7:e __--,--_,,a.-....----____-....„-,1,--is ...„,... ... ,.-----_rt.!,---- , „...,.,,, ,w c,„.„,,,„,,,,,, li:mg .," .••••• :‘,. .."-'fA.sr"0-- • 362 02,--'0..--,0 l'I., .N ,T • , D ,.\\ \ \' -,-.•,1-'"•••=--,9:•:‘,1,----••• "••-,i' • , L'''W Pl="T"' 17.M•AVAIV" D,,,„ ....71,,,,, ,,.. 0•49.18.11.N•17203 - . ------'. L•133 7N s .\\02",\..,0,----1-'-,'--.1.---., : ---.1i-----3-:ie ,. c.--ii3L-A0N PAT DID.15•2 1, R., PI* R.. RI.' Di..e• - / ' .I. I'r ./ - ,e ':':' ', i al ,0,,., •-„. -4,74,--,-e.... -_.7_-- :_-..--- ,-, ,_, „.. ,..:,...„...,. . ,,.. t: , --"Tz:1,_sittt - ------.3- -,,-...,_-,,...:.,--,-,-_-_,..., - ,. t..., , v/ATEN I•AIN 'I '.'T"'".V... A•3O'S-3:0.2 11%1050-1` . .0... ' '''-.•“k.e. .. 0" :-'.; ,Y40 ---.'0--I:4z--=1), igi--.."-2.;,1,-..--k._---s1Z--(7---- -- - ---r'-' t-1,-- -, ,. N'::',,,,nr.' ''• '' ',;-„, --•_7s.,%-•-P,-,',7 --,-Pot;a"'''',,-P_'_ .j",;,1___„_.-.:*7- E7-77-- _ Ce.'1.::;• 4 LI, ,s--..:1:, A,,,, • ,,,, -- :,.,,,”,!. \ :dr tuL- o' FZI'ag`FEt: - 1.,7,f; .,'':',7;.‘'.st-- ---.-"4.1,-,,,-- .1==i•--.7--- ---w1;"-7------:=-1.'-- ---',..1--..=: ••-`2"--=-T. ---• °.!" -`--".-------%- -7.'v -,•4,•.A' '''.141''''' ; * 'iaoya`fci,:r..:11:„ ' ---,,'•,.-...--,_----..-=_,-_-_2.,,1._.=-„.-'.:',,-,,-,7t.--r-_...F-__f-A,:4B,......,,_*i_i__-7_—F-i.N.•t,o..w,•0_21.-•,:,7..4•-•,1:1-e-i• 1v./7'il'f-i-l.Y--ri"...•:!,6 F-.—7.• ,....,2•61i.ti.f. '—.:11 ' 1•,,i,i,i,,i,'N°• . ,-i-f--.Z;3.!I---S:T't:.,,,'-,--'",',,,.7-1.,,,-,,,-L,4•v"•e•-c,1A,.,'".."...4p„.„2','_&-'”"°T'.4-..-...'„it.A Li:^r..,i.;..;-.f-.-A-4...'•.°-..,.--:..,".3,-‘:11\1\'A•,'f,\-,,..,,,\',-''.,1;.''-\%-\...\.0 3''.`1L,:,''\•,I 0,i2\,v0 d"1-t 12 H"2,..0.83..:1(k6/..,0.*.9 8'„. 'CA.,'C"OP,A f iS T R„„t• ,„ "2•,• V. ,r ':,/ ;i:•l i •• cIW-) CHARLES MONSTER COUNTY ROAD \ - °z 2 - •A 113ag '''-' '.:' '‘ \ I j ,./ ••• PARCEL, I I ,‘',..>,I•••,..`.••"..! 4" ...--- •:: '. \ ••• .•" ..' ..'" •' e" :" :' a D d I i •• '""`"' - ' , giiirlr\-\k,: x (-1,x'-'''' '' .' -'" ..'• ''' i'' ''' .‘"' .'" ''' ' cil '• •-\,,,- \•',, ,.. ..-- ,,.., ,, ,. ,,,, ,,., \ ,,,, ,,, ,,, ,,, ,,•• ,, i_ ar. 0 LAZA 0 Co'"' DATA 1r0 lif:51 74 \ \4"o, ELEVATIONS Co Co Co0.S.O. .E.AA IFINITED STATES COAT 6 "'.'"Xl; • •\ B.A. sums MA P.V.C. TOLD VIAL GALA... MATTO SANAA INA/SMARM TO A MOD,.(NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM.NEGINNING NAA AAA 1,0AS ERAS DISC 1.1-104 SET IN -7/... '''-C. \\ .. sv../P ,0' T," " I, R. ) .0" ,it• „' „' ,;' .ay• Y. 6 C.P. CATC11 ASIA Ai NAO.DATA MATTE FOOTAG A VIE ILE.CORNEA OP TOE CONCRETE POATION OP cr‘ ri 81.26%10 W -0° TEL BRIDGE CROSSING TNT P..1 CANNEL MAGA AAA ELEVATION. D,t‘''' —--Fif=roltr. PP AILROAD 'r N'A.:&N'Igi,-_,. A\ "C'A ROI XIGHT-OP-AT ANA NARA s.,P011 STA USE WAS TOP OP OAT.BOLT ON PIA NP.•:'' —,•---•—AAA LINA FAA AAA.ISA SAVA/ELEVATION•.25.511. ' Z..*:\•,,..',„." ::.'' IA'. l''. 'Is' .... •I''' ''" ''' ..:•:•;•''' P Ct " • AAP..SATAT BEARINGS A•27.5251.11•218 40— . .. 430 \\.N . A•11.17 10 1,22298 L•1SC 00 ...-. , TO ZIA COUNTY ALAAL SAVA DATA. \P'•'A-7.-41'."^c2-1q'±2:11- 1.1_il..1.2t=v1.0,s,..,,..;::....,,,„ .. '. \C.P. COMMA PIPE T.P. TO?A PIPE _ AA • Y..„,,I •"— -\--R•71:i ".___%......'•,,;._,;:-'7,' ."'A"A-7.•-.;° . --'-'bt 11- c' . 2211,1;""" • UTILITT PAL SITE CONTAINS All.l05,SONARS,..,OA 5.01 AAA. . •\ ..,V.',•,,,P\..Z,,,r. ,N p- .1, , i+ 4,,..,.!! _ 57! . ; •1, -.• • Li 'N PIA AAA/ • NAT.VALVE \.\''\Nk. s,:;‘`;. ',..7. ;- ,°-'.- .0) ." : ' •!: 4 id GAS VALVE -----AAR NOTE SEE sons..ass.0•.[DIDD IN 15,5,LAST ADVISED ON...A. .4 \;,...\.-.-..--_ ..••' le? .-...! - •e•'- -4..' •••e:- --.:: ,0 s... • ARIA POST 01 e—• GUI ACADIA /;:ILII.NADLOSIC,/....OLASDALE 1.11OAT,ON•M1D LAAMATS•DAT•PA ft.i'rgr IA. TAUT ELEVATION ° 'CITZE'RAL" ' . Inl AMATO DATA I I n 1 —I '• ,-,50'3.17-86 • :ii..Ircir. . -').'t-I\IL 1 r i - :.i.F4VVI.-' ... 85235 04 PLR NO AAA ) I I MET RO PARCEL a)) . 0 1 i '- ` i235.o5 -- _ _.___ _ _ _ _ _ _ :K • \y �\ •ate^' ya 1,✓ 11. \\s 0 ,tx,,, ...,,,,,,,,,,,,:..;,.,..7, ,.....^_,,,.°''.::_1;1::,.7.•:....--fl';1:_:,,,,c::;9';.,..:\x'' ((/,'/,./ick,,,,,,;"::::''-‘ ....T.„ ___ __ kge.-CI_ i . • ,..,"' 6,70'......,,fr yi (,,," ' ' • �9 ' /r- o11 /1 IIJ'•V`,•u`..c// �p GO i ��'P wa.nu `• •(s U P^ p23V) � / 9n/'' n Yk , / I (�' I co O\s `s J �° ✓ \ P• ✓ �pO -° `�I. u. S ` • •.5•09.48.04• O W�1fa•3 / "/./- 9°/1\ Y N E.5 /lrL.73.32' . R•676.58\ eP.•• u // a w / • ^ N! o R 0, „ rr- 4Sn,.., W LLz L.9364 .. tee\ • v•y// J — _°L/ N60•i600"E. U S' ' C • .y�•'r v ` 8.zs \ ` 51YI6.00_E/i a GI. IZ....�.,.....LL a w.,....^.\r / •t~����• / ' '/� -r '6_• w. a 50j •. .,..„--...: 1,-,,,,,f.,,,,../ s,--,-,-;-,-q,-,-:—.. ,, , ., ., „ . \,.., \ .). / R.69fiB9 '"/P -� •y��J wa',�l r'�\�° \ Y�\g•.. e J •6•. 6 ,?F\i;;e ! Y w, A•03'17'45• 19':.% /l.�` � I�I 8,. FLOOD CONTROL ',,-'.'°" w -" %' � V� Q *.40.09 r '"// .,„ e' •�I II' \. �_ -....."PR O?ERTY ;;\''"1' \ •` �_ ow a JT /(' I j_ ->EXHI\T N0. s.,11,1 .� �'` ; aF' \, `4. >/ '.�p'f 0' . •.J\ O / 1 u IIn (I tw ))l )y I ;.,�:,...�,°(y,J °'�% '"/ J'') w W O '1 �b :J°' mv. �•!35e• 'o \\• \\ _ �� 5 R.6000 II\11I ly •'. i•// 11 U _ / yy .,+y\/�yti• .1/ ♦' WEST 280.69• -"_ p.126'S2'10' :: .�% °:yi 0•/ / n r W O v �J^ :'° I L•132.86 R•20000 - W ol �•.u.w,co.�1....�mc \ r ��'�`1��� �ar+�. j ,.2 / I ,�-' )N'' (I ,• •-:� R.6 6 `\\\' a° ���/ 0.53'S9'30' qr ~Q �I /y-•. nY II ,> .///,— / 2�q ) L°I8B 47 "'V/�� S S 0�ice`\ /J`g11' , I ' 7" \��/l/� 4.39. \.\�." u4'%•%'' a V R P \ 9- 6 W I.: �1& .77" /r/ ;.; -,;:,r./. /9 b' p//7 \�^ I \°vim. .u......° = I u.a,.ud..u,.n n..-- 2,, y ' .. 'hp/ >a jN3435 19 34-W �f /�� ° aen � /// I O e.. q•).>0 ° %% �� I 1"••R.69600 _ �r•-v' •� ,2�'•\'' ...,. �• ./'X�• 4" mLL Q _ /.. mow? /• I _L•45.43 ✓ '° .• jam �/ J _ R•1055.L•20�99F v5,,9•Y!� ^ ��//�// ?•`'. . .au a•,nee �g :di " �T�:.- —MONSTER ROAD °""°' __ . .• I 1 _ . . ii ---_--_-_-_-_. .... \ 1, 49T,..,.....,rf-r°I;72.‘".‘4". "-I°°'--- I -.- - • --.----------:"‘-...- . 4 --__.12'•1922.10 e,25,4.93 4•05'19'46' "3.252".i 9. 65--,T.--.-9.4 2;.;‘,--7.,-.7.7-..-°-',,,, -."---•V•---r-''''.7°:"...\.„.. 4,-----,.-----: L•1'121.79 "----2---• 4°s------a-.--4.„, 2 .2 - --- 9.'7 '-`4,,,'•• _ .-- ',--_4„-,-------, • - „, -i -.47 --, °_ '‘`------k4-; -----t--.-,c. '65 -'-'' '.',:.,,,, 0 _ .} ':--'''---- ----=--' ' '' .659.24 '., , ?fir;l't44,,,,,,,.„.....•00 R•6699 OCr----, --- --. ----t L Es•' - .1('• '-•" -",:„ : ;fr, - ,, A? 2,.."----- ,. ...,..,7„„___,-4,,,,pp, 7790.16•_--7,- ' 47..----- '4,,,,,,,..,,,,,,l• ,. _--* , __---',2---' '-----2., ,, 6.,...',:"..--•r -7•;77.---._ . '. ,,,,2_____,,,,-•_ .„,.---v" .,r -.:2__•-•_. 2$ 4 '4°-----___=-_-__7"!..' B .1 _- - -,4---4•47. "4" ."...C, .•3.3,. ' . ..,7,, - ..„......A,•-•_-____,!-,r4,, „......, 1-2. ' _- .„ 7/../ . 4 46- ` „›..-"•......„.,°°' -1,s,„„. ..9,.,. I.? / ---4' - •' ---T-- t\.-..•---.„:_•._.,„...-----._....... ..A.N...9e4.-4°'- '1”•.- ... ,4' 1 ;EWA 4I:/--••-:.-c. :';-------._, A.-------. -I I -% i < ' ...7"-, ` "9,, '`., 4, -•,-..--,,, ,,---......... 1%---,-;.:!7,--""--` ' ,-•:-- , ,:IL...„-„-- -z,"-\.221-----.,i--_-:-_-_--• ____-_,_----_::-_-_._____4_-_,---___,V- -----1 , --------__- , -_-_,,----"-'- ' ' -' ---. --,,,-)- .'9 •, . ../z)'- 7' .'' ., , ,„,„ ,, , ..:z.r--=•:: --__:7-----_,__,:t---,------t-_-- , - .--;--(-,-)y ( (.:-- ••,:::::,----,s,"/•- ,, , \ I ,,,,(7?--".., •,,- . _ _ __.-- , --, • - N. -,..2-2-.% -..\ '.. -W4 O.''''''..,"O',------''-'': .... '',O:;:''''''' ,.•''* ..* , '1'. 'le ) 1.. , 4-.- "/"' , .• 2./ . „- _. ',..,... ''',. O' a . •I-,,'. --'.--- ' okN,I''''.•. ''''' ''',.",, s s.'"\ ' - . . . -,.. . =. -, , • • .,.'..V___---_,..--'-fr-/;•' ' /;-•.4) :....' _ 0 .el c•I‘ ,"_ 4, ' ' ...,.I": • „., ? . ... \ •,.. _ ,„i , .. A '' 4•%° • ------..• 2 ' .. -- ', .•,° r '''' ''. Fog _ •--- -.._ ____ -- _.;1 ./.-/ -- 'N--•,..-,.. .. • •,--. -- ., ---- :••-' zz \ P .", ga \ / O' / -.Z,"-'>•.. 41: ::1 a a a.'..- ;? \‘ , \ .''S .,....,a'''''. a' •••.. a" „-- , •,, -- ''' -N`.4..'f. • 2„f NN0Z „.• .., r PARCEL C ,.. , R•160.00 •\ 0.70.48'19- r- 7" .r. J.. t • ,, •rP v.° • :----?, .... - L•797.73 .3• ,, .... g_., -;...,.._I / /(2.--,-," f..›----',,,--.-------.'..7•71.),,'S I --.______ -----Th . "a . • 0' . '5 -- -_. - •" ,.2 \ 11:: r... •---1-;82"50CrE, 0," ' R•230.00 / J. • .• .•I•\ ui`O e rn I\\ ,,, ,'" G.,;.,:,•-. ' ,. -.1.17;:....=)(,---- # 67.66,„, \ ( , ) - i ,. • ..;°7,.)_. rt._, ___,.. xZ a•-• ( 0.27'47'31' , v' L•111.56 _rr -,1>i--*/ - r"-}....',4, ,• k, ,..,-,,,,, :.° ---, I'--) "`"""""-•ID. „,_,./ ' \.. (..-\ -1'5'----.' ,,, - a//' i'' U. . - ...- ,,,,,.6.,.„,,,,.....,„ . . 7.--,N) q724•4.4,,,4 -- 40.7L. ,... /V: ...• 0 0 ItI 1-1 ILI g r-',- o 0,•\•.,T.r Ns •..- ,,,,‘„•• 4, .,../.,,...,,••7 a ,..-.-: o'2 :., _- • \iN,.,,. ,'\,.,,.4/.1 5•-.2!.4,?..:,:-...1,,,',,/;":,"',,,4,,4:"r,e,:,"',,,4-...r"_-„,.„,-.,.',/,7/_4? .'.'3-4','1:..9',1-0.,.-..!.0.pJ1'2!.4.s..:/*2.-_v-“"_:-_;7-_,__V,/-• 0-2'.•3-0,2 4-P'--,4=--6;N-).'\:-e"E: ./•74.,.-,I''-'•.1'4 ' <1,'t'S. (, " " _ . -,-.K.7A„1-.•..-.'..?'-...";_._ .)i-. •.I':-I-'' '.,7 k,...",, 1 / 6 / \ ° , 6e ,/ \ I / - ) 1Z3899 " 0s . 9IV2014ltl1 .G u0LUDC.1))•g._:NcE-'iI0E,C;;i.,. -.. , 4' • a \J.' ,.•-:".. ... . -•.-- ....". ° ..'' ./a „- ._ . • ,, ) .) ,,.,. • ,,Y•-- .../• ,47--/ . %;?, . r, / l-., / 4 /,.. '/-7/ 1/ , . 290.00 ,‘,,,,,, .9 7-----%-- C). -.___-.4,./ (7/7 7 4‘.., 'A,'4,,,,' , .., .. 4' ,!" .- • . ..- , , • • ,''.'D 0 •9 ,S.',...?„....----"...,\(„....... J. p -.„..--:,-,..-,00.:0 / ......"-°.:',.......-',.,\A\P..:_--• .„.----°,--,• •!..,.(../ ‘`'. 437 'I.. • 't • '''c.:7 --',, -) .'.",- ,..„-.).- . . . ,. . • II.,..0 _,!---7"/-„:---.7--,---„ 3-: -----8•95- '''' \ ti ,_ 07 '-.-,\ --,-, 1......,........,.. " -."-- •-- ,2- ,- ,,- , .., ..;!w 0 --'0•5•4.1 ,3,•0;--.-_q.-cied,, •,-' • ; z //, 87 ,/)d '' .-34--":K.,:: 'QqA.tj.?..--.".,-;-_rj,5---%.-"--'-•72,37-5 e .. '53;°,....I.--,:-;'---.-..f.‘1-- -------• S- \\,, II / II/••9 1 ' 7 IF,5iFgE111.14;tre / , 51- LLILL'n' _._ // .P.A7 ' ,'( i,/: • \. • , . ) , s. 20 crI il I - rr-, ( - / , R•197.00 J.- 4. 4\ / " \ 12 lil ,7,47=,',.%1-,•...:21-'="..2.-7 ,s,3908'51' L.134.60 '\,,,\7'" ''' .7 ' v° ' • 7•4? ,• 41 ..• J,4 1 / \ ... ' ti / '• te F• - 1 ,'''..'•......''''''O'...f.. \\. . ''''',!).. EAST 11'4'27 I. -- P ' -- .,•::CP::4: :-.. •-•°TA Et,EJ,,IINT. i aco,ts: g,U) Cr M.4r NC • \ ‘4•\'N'k\. `7`,„ '"":"' -'.,----A-3.... (c., -. , • -A ,,' / - \\.-2..--:-_-,_:•• ----,--_---:------.,...,1_-_::_, r"2. -;•'s.'4:'`..5.> °--1•4'_ • ' ...Lf \,:\ • ---.65- -''''-':'-.SZ-`,-.--V- _-___?---'--.-,_-=-7-_-;==,__----L-'•-------,..„,- • )sr\ ..- ,-') -.1 I ,,,,,.„‘„,A, ----,-,-•,_::- - ---- ----_,-,.._.---- -,---!-----:4!. _ ,,,c,1... N--- - 03 ....,.q,';.,--,,,,,.r14,',"--- ------,5----------' gr "...,s-iL .A.-.---,:--;k:,\N .(:::--'-i7.-7,- -,-;,..,.......- = ,.,,--•=._,__:_.. ______4________ :----'1-------- ----------- -------- -;g-----_,-- ,.--,.E_,.:,21,tf;',f,t,,:•'.\f'.*,sii'ar:=1"'"'-!'--;',! ,i-. ,7:i'-f-- .-.... ....... • I _..,- - -,-------.“..‘,..- -- e------1- <-,------- -,,--.. . . \• V(, 4--- _2_1 ; ,..- -. .... ,.. s \\ J r- •-• - _ ____ ---------1 I .41 • .... f•f, co le- - Ft I ., MATCH TO SHEET 2 or 3 . _. ____,7 ' ''..3 ''''-:-.'",-.•.— ---ig_,F .\ ,, /:01',„ ;- ."/": ,/ ',./ . N.,,..:)..,. ',\„. ':';';/','''''),,'''•',// , ,,7 .., ., • ' ---- ,-,&"/0\',,,"b,//"- ,,, ,/iiit',11::,31;• ; —1, '''s z, ' • • ,,,/s/ ,",, . ,,,1'' . , '". '' ' '\,, '\c., ‘-- s.„.--.`0, i .s0,,!•;.//P.,1•14 - ,. _. ,,e,.:', 4/ •:' A/0,0 ic - ., ,:rif ',,:',,t• . \ --- '‘'-, '' \':,.:' 'n'.4.` ,,,r",,,t,c5/ ,(-4,.`'`,,' p f1 - -- •-• 1141 fi, .. '-----_,:i -> ''-, . ! 5; '-'. rl'is• -',°, ' ''•- ,, , 2; . A .. ,!\./ `..2"/X•",,>'s ,;5••, N t' ' ://l1J11 §”.i " '':'' A '-,s, /, A il ' /...;,,, ,...-' 41',,5•• . y,,,‘ -0. . -1,-;5-,--,- '4-0`• - '. „, •x,,, , 4 4, ..' te Ara. \ ci'.I'c4 • ! 7g->-%, ,/.. ..,- -,- , _ ;, .L., , i!tlli 7 P ,,, '', 1%,` f'r. 8 ' ,•:/:A',T,V A.N.ciVt.."\...,...:'. : ' i,54° i .4>. ,,' pl.s0 i'IllIi:iIIiM-ill:1il4lii/191101!9;;1!1 g;1:1it111rfl:3ii!l-,q';1I1.A!II iIIl!l 1' '-- -\ INii!:%41,,1111Elill'i4!1:h.Ni. 11 l!I::1.' • Yi l!ii!lilisf.!1 loll::!filial.i.:,1!15 11.I....1 1 ! ih' IV-... •,);`,1.111(jui, i \..„,. ' ‘1:',''''' ,, ) • '7// ' i' z"<"-..„ ‘, 51 5v-5.i.mm11.1155..4:0 il.1 11 li'!1;5[11;11;1141.1.;1!1111.1iiiii 11 1,1 ill 1 / r8 \c2:46,,-• ,/ • ;;. -.'•'.., i /'/ ,,,)..,i.,A,,,,, -, 64.,, ' 4,', 718 S•;.! 2 C'' '21"1 •h"—'41!ASV'r:e L.I1 ii: - ; :: 4 ;:iiiiiI11741.1:114 hi!!i!i!!'1,111 1 i !! .) iia!!!th ,,,,r. ; (--)-',, 1/ l.. "'• 1 /(' "k,(0, \ -c j h' N__~.-z ---,', .---xL , I t. .--,-_-_____, I/ •._.y •,,e 10 1 ---,1-.. ( ,--- ..'f il s N /'-i:, 1;WIT NAligrlittil!!Iii 4t- 1, • \\: I% 'a, s, ',' „ ,2.,I/ ,,,, 'z'31'.13.1iN1 Wi'z'1141P;g1;111.1gq-i!PFV_Ielaili1,i-:11s1'kiiiNi iill1g1igAi! 'ii1E:iElis5iis 14'4 186814'figill 1;4iiiii'4;iv^lii;11,2 111!PepiWil;iiii Ell!1!!!119;iirl,i ii:P!,54119Pilsi;Pi g 0; s.:12:3. - ss-3ss i,, 1 R e!rig.;v.,.z...,,i !. z 7.•z-;:01 ,4;.;:i IliMPi Pil!!11!ilifliliiig-6Ii1111;:111,11/ilii!IP11g1 ii!! MI!Irig!;11,41141ii:si; .-, •t•-,,-.\,fi>? -,n74* •,, i;oi;' 4? / '.'..-4,•• .... iXiI8Ii!!'e';I;l;i•;.;i;s.if.•: 1'.iA.„g.zPi;.iIPa.. .,1 ;.'i:.4.0v.„i.i5O a1.i!E..s:Ei-.5.;3...5 n!." T / i /W .J_, o. A , I !,II iqu,I:911 IIIVIIIIM1 lillpii[IM:IPIIII5 iii!!Ii9 MP i RI Ti NliPIMINI 1°Pill 1 1:1!4..rio-AT 1 FE4:1 0!,1:;/!.g!i;1 1.:1!'qi0Figr;; rg,\.4 i‘-,.,., ..1,1K/ :r:ii ' Ci;i'all!Ti;g:11:;gice;T:Sgl:,M:ilf;!ilii: ifli!i1,1;!1 .!;iii!li r,;.,1:1,::,,1-::.! 1,:, lirtlai/i:INN:pi,; i:T.:. \ \--"" '''.• 'y il.';'!..e ., 1 ip..1 , yibpj:iigl 1 l',i;',r qi 19ii::n1 ig11;!!! !!ifihriillepi !i'e ;;.8! giN 188V;;Ij!,1 ", ,/ . 11 1!::1 i ! i;P'0::g11111g;11 15 ig1;;;41;g1I.; q 1; ;11141,10i 141149 / 1101"'Aili=lt: 'f.111! ia,i'L Tg'i j!!,°1ii .P1141-1!°1:141.i.FEIM 11 ii :4.4: -2°E;s.iegig!iiii;i447,is,62:76:8;inic, 11'1 °:!i!'8;01:1:1 le e'li!• : 5. !;1.:41;!..ge 1,11! liligigg!!!ggiiil 3;1WIT1,z511gli°1!.111g1ggi -°'t ''‘, \ 61,-..,;','.'s• ,qz'- ° !I i;ig4.1;1;;2;1;s1' 1.1,i;149ggli :;gq;a1:1;Z11;:!idizqiij,11; !;5,1i144-.:ii!i!i:i ! ,;1 ii!fi!i'lli iii!! i i , :511!Iiii!!!1;ifi!piN: i,,ii !!! e:12...!!!;li,; --,. i Iliii 1 1:0111Piiii IN !Fl..:,. .0 1,•,.„,„11E.„gyal..g...gn:01..sit II ,g•g 10Ip!:,. Ng!.1iikiliiii!:r.°B1:1!i'ffe:!!6:1fliial 3D;I i \ . 6 r .,o• ;1.F " :::_, 1 Milig!liiiiiill!iini:T1;31!1!iliiii 1 1 Ilig ilitilipTilllii;?IITINIiiilliTil 1;!!!1 1 IINTIgliqii! / e,5 3 1"!*Iiill 'i3 gii;i!T'lli!le!!!!1 1 ii1;4;114'2011;1411 1:!!;,;;;;PINOE ° 1 Milil pi: ;!ili:1$151 4 igf6; 'r;i. ° 14110gi'1.:1!.1114;r-110:1;i4lilliii;'1 1:E: i ;61!°;ii!:4! ,'..../ f s i liqi igi2;;;3%i!1;;°;!'Ff..!;1,:.iiiii, i Ali!t!li,W,;11;:ii Ofli'iTillii;ii;!!!;;!Ir.'1 1 !;;Pi,' ., .0 qi i !!!!!i.ii!,M!,!IpOlil i4e1 rill ! 111 lifil 11:4i,..11:1°;10°'°; ;;Jiill:. i$!`''i!'!15 i'4 ,., •:!3' s.a..1,,-!:!,,1.-- ;;! ,- 5;z:SE,. . 1151..,., ,. . 1 ! !igir4 gii;i:1 g1lil 11111:11g111 II:.e.,1 :ET::;1 2:11‘.5;FF;g1 ;51:1:i :;;;;;;;I:11 I gEz a- • ;;gi;•.!!.]1;az ''s t "•, /,'': .1.,;; -i.1 zs :.;z .z -;:s...s... Izz- ; • .551....,!.. illi12:13-1g0i 1 litily;elligiAl!g;N;!,1 14;11-Allii I s ,4 / i 110;:1!1NiNgiff;:!:;11 1111!!!PC;idi ;ni!ii1'11T1 e1PIi:!1 114i111X1111!iligl: i 1, ''.•:is /'' Igi ila!;;I!ii4ii!1 i1Iiiii i l!si,:li .11411111 iAlizligki;11;iiii1CP;iii :iill! - !IN Iiii idi i; , - '7-..' _/ • r ! , ;:.• ,--.:';/ ...-•\:,, !ii,:i 11E'll il • - .- - • -gg 1____, ! Ii; ' 1 Iii lirli iii IHIP I 11 !IP 1 IHIP 1 Higni ip Hu . __., , ,pr, , \ i!i . ill_. ,v,„.• . I ,, ; ,,,! s, ,.. .,, r,, \ i 1 at!^ °ila!;Ir. 1 h : tiiii.4 i 1 i 1 ;.!!„i i 1 i !!;i,i, p!Illii IIIIIIi!fill imilif iiiiimili;:lin limp 11,11,!, 1 , ,. ..... v.,...3 Kili 4 4;3°1-.1 1:filini'l !Till° ,11 ' . • • e ,-.10, 131i1 •,-- .!!! , .I.,I I, z.5c 1.;!I ' .; •••4; gi s.z n1 —..—Z—.Mom.. Z;.;ii.,I; ,i1P, i-11L110 . .14 -,i5;14 ,, g isCI3i a I;6 ,g piint g...11 giTi 1 0511 I it; ;g:5I Of 1..1 HI ; ! ; ;;I 41 41i11g 11;° ;44; ' ii!';'! ii1;11!1;* Eg. gl 1, !Ph' ' i --- * • 14 .C.i 1 _ . , _ BOUNDARY &TOPOGRAP..IC SURVEY PREPARED FOR k V ' .. .,,'"•...,FIRST CITY EQUITIES p"...%•___ BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. p.7-- .„,..--- Co,-EN&NEEPS&L.,•ND SCR,EN ORS SEAL i 1 : BLACKRIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK r= ----•,., = - . , PHASE 1 BRH 1.i ..._ 1 ... 2 7 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES 1. 0 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES The landscape consists of elements that give form to exterior spaces. Thus, the character of the landscape is created by elements such as signing, site lighting, walkways, and plant materials, and arrangement of major functional elements such as project entrances, parking lots, buildings, service areas, etc. Given that project architecture and building sites within Blackriver Corporate Park will most likely be of varying types and sizes, landscaping as a design element will play the key role in creating and conveying the overall character of Blackriver Corporate Park as a "park-like" working environment. The purpose, then, of these Landscape Guidelines, is to provide design criteria which will help to insure that Blackriver Corporate Park achieves an image that is distinctive, clearly understandable and unified. 1. 1 INTRODUCTION TO BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK LANDSCAPE CONCEPT As part of the Blackriver Corporate Park master plan, a master landscape plan has been conceived to organize, unify and create a distinctive character for the whole Blackriver Corporate Park. The master landscape plan recognizes that Blackriver Corporate Park consists of three prominent zones, namely, the streetscape zone, the common parkway zone and the interior zone. An understanding of the nature of these zones is important to understanding the landscape guidelines and their intent. 1. 1. 1. Streetscape Zone The streetscape zone is the primary image setting zone and it includes all arterial and collector roads. All improve- ments within this corridor will have the greatest degree of control. This zone includes the areas from behind the curb to the setback line established by City Zoning. Common elements within this area include walkways, planting, irri- gation, street lighting, project signing, traffic signing and project entries. This area will be planned as a unit, installed and maintained by an Owner/Occupant association. parking mass shrub planting \,, •• • • .• .. - . 911 . Apli AIN" T I • • • . .. . 5' sidewalk lawn area 1. 1. 2. Streetscape Zone Design Concept The streetscape within Blackriver Corporate Park will con— sist of a unified single image as presented by the landscape master plan, namely, a six foot lawn between the curb and a five foot sidewalk, fifteen feet of lawn with deciduous trees producing a large canopy either in a straight row or regularly staggered rows. Beyond this lawn and tree area will be a five foot mass shrub planting to visually screen adjacent parked cars. Street trees shall be a minimum of three inch caliper of the species and configurations called for in the landscape master plan. Seeded lawn or sod shall be a common single mix. Major entry monuments and plantings will be provided at Oakesdale and Grady Way, and Oakesdale and Monster. Minor monuments, plazas and plantings will be provided at the intersections of Oakesdale and 7th, at Naches and 7th, and at Powell and Grady. • jogging trail -4 --- -: : arterial or collector transition zone—s- d 411 SST p., ��� �tultvu�itvu UTIULlIll clu HI 11111100 IMMIMI public parkway 1. 1.3. Common Parkway Zone The common parkway zone includes areas under the jurisdic- tion of the SCS, City of Renton and areas with the 20 foot parcel setback which will be planned, installed and main- tained as a common parkway. This zone generally boarders waterways. 1. 1.4. Common Parkway Zone Design Concept The common parkway will consist of a park-like landscape plan which will act as a well-maintained, unified buffer between undeveloped natural areas and the developed areas of the interior zone. Ammenities within the common parkway will be rolling lawns with large shade and conifer trees, mass shrub plantings to frame and enhance views, landscape j ; irrigation, an eight foot jogging path with physical exer- cise stations, water features and wildlife viewing plat- forms. The plan for the common parkway zone is presented in the landscape master plan. 1. 1.5. Interior Zone The interior zone encompasses all exterior elements from the streetscape or common parkway to the building setbacks. This zone is subject to the needs of each Owner and Occupant and is meant to have greater flexibility than either the streetscape or common parkway !zones. Common concerns within this zone include; parking lot arrangements and land- scaping, site lighting, regulatory and directional signing, and service areas screening. Ii 1. 1. 6. Interior Zone Design Concept It is intended that the interior zone of Blackriver Corpor- ate Park, consisting primarily of parking lot landscaping, be planted in geometric patterns. (Refer to Section 1. 2.5c for plant types. ) Subtle light levels, restrained graphics and screening of service areas will all contribute to rein- forcing the Blackriver Corporate Park design concept. 1. 2 LANDSCAPE DESIGN GUIDELINGS 1. 2. 1. Assessment District Installation and Maintenance Agreement 1. All landscape improvements within the streetscape and common 'parkway will be installed by the Grantor. 2. The Grantor has entered into a maintenance agreement to maintain the streetscape and common parkway zones. Landscape maintenance will be paid for through Assess- ment District revenues. Following the expiration of the maintenance agreement , all maintenance will be assumed by the Owner and Occupant of individual development parcels and will be paid for through the continuaton of an Assessment District. 1. 2. 2. Maintenance of Unimproved Sites Sites that are not improved or built upon shall be main- tained in a clean and neat appearance by the Owner and Occupant. Weeds, brush and trash will be removed twice a year, once in the spring and once in the fall, or more often as required to maintain a high quality appearance. The Grantor and their representative have the right to perform the necessary maintenance and charge the individual Owner and Occupant as necessary. 1.2. 3. Landscape Coverage A minimum of (20) percent of the area within the property lines of a development site shall be devoted to landscape materials unless otherwise approved in writing by the Grantor. The majority of landscaping shall be on the street frontage zone to establish the greatest visual benefit to Blackriver Corporate Park. 1 . 2. 4. Street Frontage Zone Design Guidelines 1. 2.4a Definition of Street Frontage Zone The street frontage zone is defined as that portion of the site which fronts on the streetscape zone and/or is visible _, from the street. 1,5S:::ivtii .:3..v.::.' :x'4"m�"� RMa. r. building ——— J streetscape zone 1 -li property line — y r I street frontage zone i I i --- 1 LJL____J side and rear yards It.__.....7..._——7=___J • 1 . 2 . 4b Specific Design Limitations within the Street Frontage Zone ^� 1 . Grading: Finish grading for each site shall meet the existing grade at the streetscape zone and where n. applicable common parkway zone boundary. Transition slopes in this zone shall not exceed 4: 1 . Berms shall be shaped with naturally flowing contours and smooth --, transitions . When grass is used, the maximum slope shall be 4: 1 , and where ground cover is used, the �.- maximum slope will be 3: 1. Berms shall be at least three feet high unless side slopes exceed the maximum. • 2 . Service Areas : Service areas within this zone are to be enclosed with solid walls and screened with the appropriate landscape material. See landscape material list for "screening shrub" types . � Li -21;, 12 -,, __,, —'-_vii __ .-- •_ � _ --x::=0 ...lot_ -,r.:...iet__ _ ....;;;; •_,,, _ ,...,53.-- -_-..z.. -"ko-_,...... it-.1 .......„, ...„,...v.... ......f.„. .... _ _ ,w- 4:1 max. slope where ? ,Q v ' 1 grade change is required T 3'avg. sight line — 3'min. r �:=---- �' t� sue] • parking arterial or collector Ltransition zone streetscape zone • • _1 3. Screening Shrubs: The following shrubs , in combination with walls or fences, have been selected to aid in eye level screening of service areas. Planting areas shall be a minimum width of four feet . All planting areas exceeding - four feet shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. Screening shrubs shall be a 5-gallon or 22" in height at time of planting, whichever is greater. Plant Name Max. Spacing Comments Photinia fraseri 5 ' on center Cotoneaster franchetti 4' " " Cotoneaster lactea 4' " Viburnum tinus 4' " " Viburnum rhytidophyllum 4' " " II Mahonia aquifolium 3' Vaccinium ovatum 3' " " Prunus' lusitanica 5' " " must clip Arbutus unedo 4' " " Pieris japonica 3' " If "Texanum" Thuja occidentalis 2 1/2 " Buxus sempervirens 3 " " must clip Rhododendron varieties 4 " " 1.2.5. Parking Lot Landscape Requirements I.2.5a Tree Planting Requirements 1. Two types of trees are identified for the parking lot planting. (Refer to Section 1. 2.5c Plant Material List. ) Type• A: End of Parking Column Planting Type B: Interior Parking Lot Planting • Lj 1I / ,___ '),(1'1111%. - '4°1A- ' perimeter planting _______________ type A type B 1 _ • �Cis .. •. . l'Avit.p0 A., 14r2r .<i'min. c 4M11.1 t 0 t ijk- - ,I., . 0,i( ' 'f, ___ •ti` -N\— t.tri, ci[ NleP _ sioF...........('t �,g,„ iiiii ____.... .n jai. 7-- ... ..._.,.... ‘...„.. , • ,l. .1, 5'min. 1169'typ.: ? a 1 j Type A: These trees shall be planted at the ends of parking columns. A single tree species, with a 3" caliper and, shall be planted throughout the Owner and Occupant's entire parking lot compound. Type B: These trees shall be planted in the parking lot interior. A single tree species, with a 2" caliper ! I shall be planted every 25' to 30' . The tree species may be different in separated parking lots within the compound. Trees must be planted in the immediate vicinity of parking stalls; credit will not be given for perimeter edge tree planting. i 2 . Tree wells and planter areas within paved parking areas . shall provide a minimum 4 foot clear planting space. 3 . Planting areas shall have a 6 inch curb on all sides . . __ parking lot compound ' r ,. end of column I 1 I 11 type A: species used 1 throughout compound , Qom romp -,..-2.,j Iwiw ' Isaim now j _ _-"- interior planting _--'--_= __ I 0 a 0 type B: species may vary 3 . from lots 1 2 or 3 „ I @ G 0 .4 g 1 __ ___ _. _ ___ 1 ' 1 ___ - • ------------ `_ g j °' v c i=========.7-4-__:_:_-_-__-_-_=_7ztzf L _ ___ • __ 1 1 . 2 . 5b Parking and Pedestrian Circulation 1 . Parking location and layout should facilitate easy and safe pedestrian circulation. . 2 . If the parking layout is more than one row deep, walking space with a minimum width of 4 feet between stalls should be provided at key locations . . 1 j walkway _ Orst Alik AIM.. AIL_ -:Alb _ ■I .. . - C 2 aisles or less I I il,i14' type ii-*k 4'typ. • 3. If parking lots exceed two rows in depth, the alignment of the aisles should be in the direction of the pedestrian movement. 1 411, I /SW,. al/D1., 1 AID aisle 1 I � 1 pedestrian 1 2 aisles or more 1 corridor -�--} 1 1 1 dmt ,QI 1 ! . aisle 2 1. 2.5c Parking Lot Plant Materials List The following lists are recommendations. Other trees will he considered for use providing they conform to size, habit and disease resistance. If special soil or site conditions prevent the use of the recommended trees, the Owner and Occupant should suggest an alternative to the design review committee. Do not use Prunus species. Ash, Hawthorn and Locust are not recommended. Tree List for Parking Compounds: The following list of trees have been selected to create a park- like appearance in the parking compound. Acer platanoides Acer rubrum Acer pseudoplatanus Liquidambar styraciflua Liriodendron tulipifera Quercus coccinea Quercus borealis Fraxinus pennsylvanica 'Lanceolata' Gleditsia triacanthos Minimum Size 3" caliper Comments: Limb to 6' min. Type B Trees : Interior Parking tot Planting Plant Name: Magnolia grandiflora Styrax japonica Pyrus calleryana Minimum Size: 2" caliper Comments : Limb to 8' min. 1 . 2 . 6. Vehicular Access Drive Design Guidelines 1 . 2 . 6a Location Criteria 1 . Major access drives are to be located as described in Access and Drive Location Guidelines . 2 . Access drives for "right turn only" ingress and egress should be located by the Owner and Occupant according to city standards . 1 . 2 . 6b Limited Use Area at Primary and Secondary Access Drives 1 . The "limited use area" is defined as the area extending 10 feet on either side of an access drive and in that area of the first 10 feet extending from the curb line of the public street . 2. All objects higher than 30 inches above the top of the curb at the access drive curb opening, including but not limited to, shrubs , trees , signs and earth berms shall be located outside of the limited use area. access drive limited use area 10 10' curb 1. 2. 7. Guidelines for Interior Property Lines and Landscape Areas 1. 2. 7a Side and Rear Yard Requirements 1. A 10 foot minimum planting strip is to be provided continuously along and adjacent to all interior property lines except where vehicular access is required or over— lapping parking planned. 2. All site drainage shall be directed away from the 5 foot zone. Drainage within the 5 foot zone may flow to an adjacent property. 3. A maximum slope of 3: 1 is allowed within the 5 foot planting zone. A 1 foot minimum flat transition shall be provided at the top and bottom of all slopes within this zone. interior property One - r 101- v` drainage 1 4' 4' 1 1 4. Where the two properties adjoin, there shall be a 10 foot minimum zone created by the two 5 foot minimum required landscape planting strips on each side of a property line. All planting areas exceeding the-5 foot minimum shall also conform to these landscape guidelines. 5. No walls or fences exceeding 30 inches in height shall be permitted when located at the property line. 4 1.2. 7b Side and Rear Yard Landscape Requirements Either shrub or tree planting shall be required in the 5 foot zone. Where two properties adjoin, shrub plantings with L ground cover is required on one side of the property line and tree plantings with ground cover is required on the other. The first Owner and Occupant to receive plan approval shall be required to plant the required trees and ground cover. The second Owner and Occupant must then plant the required shrubs and ground cover. . •,,' „i . .4:4i.c. v-24; #%..—,ar knterior property line trees and ground cover - 1 I . ` shrubs and ground cover i %--• • 5' 5' ♦ ♦ • 1.2. 7c Plant Material Requirements — Interior Property Lines 1. Trees: Shall be located four feet from curb or one foot from the property line. The trees selected for interior property lines must be species that have been used somewhere else on the Owner and Occupant's property. Refer to Section 1. 2.5c Plant List. 2. Shrubs: Shall be located three feet from the property line or two feet from the curb, and planted with a maximum spacing of five feet on center. 3. Ground cover: Shall be placed 24 inches on center __ maximum spacing, covering all ground surfaces. If the Owner and Occupant select lawn as a ground cover, sod must be installed. 1. 2.7d Planting and Irrigation Details and Specifications 1. All planting and irrigation details and specifications shall conform to City of Renton, Washington Design Standards and the highest standards' of the American Association of Nurserymen, the American Landscape Contractors Association ' j and the irrigation industry. 2. It shall be the Owner and Occupant's responsibility to provide a 1 year guarantee against all defects of materials and workmanship for all planting and irrigation. The Owner and Occupant shall replace plants not in normal, healthy growing condition at end of guarantee period with same species and size. The guarantee period shall begin when the Owner and Occupant, and Grantor or their representa— tive has accepted the work as 100 percent complete. • I