No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA78-129 ,t OF I - . o THE CITY OF RENTON - U Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 � `kf ' rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT ° 235- 2550 O9gT�D August 22, 1980 Joan L . Lesser Irell & Manella 1800 Avenue of the Stars Suite 900 Los Angeles , CA 90067 RE : [ARLINGTON WOODS , R-129-78 Dear Ms . Lesser : Both this office and the office of the City Attorney has reviewed your letter of August 13 , 1980 . The conclusion of both of these departments is that neither department can bind' the City nor make a definitive interpretation of the restrictive covenants in question . Only the City Council could bind the City in this regard. The opinions of this department with regards to the two questions identified in your letter of August 13th should be construed as nothing 'more than the opinion of this department . Further, an independent evaluation of the legal issues involved should be made. Your local Counsel should evaluate the restrictive covenants in light of the vested rights doctrine of zoning as it is interpreted in the State of Washington. The preliminary plan application for the Phase III area has been received by this 'Department . /. t such time as this applications determined to be complete and ,exceptable , we will notify both CHG and yourselves . Very truly yours,. V223242y�a� Gord 'Y . Eric sen Pla ning Dirpc o gay .)-'�� i('a vWClem ' 's m‘0A Senior Planner ��/ C\.B :S OFF‘C�c,� DRC :yb �"�� cc : City Attorney City Clerk Randy Potter , CHG International 1 & o THE CITY OF RENTON U to �' Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 z Ei 0 . • CHARLES J. DELAURENTI ► MAYOR ® LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER '0 o �R- L. RICK BEELER , 235-2593 �4tfO SEP1�0 March 3, 1978 TO: Larry Warren, City Attorney FROM: L. Rick Beeler, Hearing Examiner , • SUBJECT: Spot Zoning relative to C.H.G. International Rezone Application, R-129-78 • The attached map, extracted,from the Planning ,Department's staff report • (Exhibit #1) , shows the proposed rezone and the properties that are not involved. At the southerly approximate center of Parcel B are located three separate single family residences that are not a part. of the application. In .the public hearing, the applicant stated that purchase of these lots was not intended. These lots would become islands within the proposed R-3 multiple family development. It appears that this situation constitutes spot zoning in reverse if only the proposed application is considered. and acted upon. In this case the area surrounding islands of property would be rezoned to a more intense use for the exclusive benefit of the applicant without showing of benefit to the public as a whole. Therefore, it appears that further action is • necessary, e.g. , rezoning of the three individual lbts at the same time as the application or providing appropriate transition surrounding the three lots. No application has been filed for rezoning of these three lots to my knowledge. Therefore, I am prevented from initiating any kind of action. But the. City Council can initiate the action if it desires. My only action could be to recommend rezoning Parcel B to R-3 (if that is my final recommendation) subject to rezoning the three individual lots to R-3 as well. In your opinion do you agree that spot zoning would occur in this proposal? And if so, what course of action should I take to prevent implications of . spot zoning? My recommendation is due March 14, 1978 so your response would be needed and appreciated by March 8, 1978 if at all possible. Si. ely, . `/ Rick Beeler Hearing Examiner Attachment • . ri i . . ..'-: 7. . • ..." 111-118 i/ ; I. -t sli0"..-'.e-c,,,,ir I? , ,-•\ L6, - .... ` -.\ ;S' ` dO. 'ram 17c: a Q - '- / r ! / s)s L c ♦. . "c 41 - =C - O a •' 'r LS•is t+ ^I iI;1 / 2 - 7 s �w ': ar` !' 7 IL \ f T �S l"/ (I ti t I i e ,'�i (I g I p• a [!j yg J. �. q'. p�q0: bs i. r. `�\— V • ` f 2CAD •' 4TH • ^.! P• ;//�, • 4�.fix 9,1r1 sT r "Q �' .z ,,.v O 1 oa Act. + 1' CHICA,� �IILWaUK B P� -' 41( ! -i, .. -i® e 12,0:• :4_ f arax `I w[nAr N. aetw p• �reri sT PAUL 8 PACIFIC R.R. _ CbO. - J . , �' •i- �. 1,• �..•1' SETe _ ••S s <� •� , ,, ��,` a5 O 5UN rAticEL. 8 S.W. 4�.�.C 4i b 4 �.1 Q$p� (�,‘_ ___ -- `�' lac ..„..._.ii„ii, co. ,,,,,,07. .,zr L I qs,� _ p� , _.4�all.k „J17;z !---.�14 7,e ' V,i5�d y •c8; 11.. Ste: OVI B i SW. , y a L �1e__ /C;3 r �J EdGs r:. yf�t. " o` S A S � —_ — S — a; v , zfu ro'9WY IIINNN999ra" TL16_ ni. l„ Y2J\ eQ ,� Govf' Lot3 Ty i a n, 1 /8 lc. \\ S" • s 14 21.26 Acres J o sT• r° � ,•s<�'m n a �- E •Ql- • `` t � • `R• \\`. ,3 O .rc t;Ac 6 I 4.® < t :, • CO S_ - - ' i3?q:23 = / k-° rl.. SEARS t ROEBUCKCOw s 9" - _ ,�Sp ` ; I.- _/ S z = � f-11 aibr�• � �1,�z J ., ------1-- ,` � \. ..<.z •�H�CAGO-MILWAUKEF ST cAUL �•. �J STH 1.1 <v _ Q;i''LRCr 'y~ \`� ® (\ A+L •.C'aIC RAILROAD ` A J rl:' Q 1 , u S• ,/ y CHILAGO MIIWAUNEE d-_ -- •- • • t re! I f Y Y i. � sr vauL R R. ,� t 20 Lei ctii �\ r.fa ..S kt,ST .,iS 17 !B`\ ' s l-1 [y�t r L,. J __-iL4sc T\ SO tP�\`\\` 'l§ c'�4•cw H,p or. I. l I�'LJt21 /31 .`I7 — ________ \ 9�:•, `\ i 1 "fvFc.rr \ t L.2:J I .� S, , ; • ®O ' GO Lot \ '' .-'a \ i. •I. 44C2 `.` I i %2<Lti• _ 7 �> _ tAPCei� V CreS Y C9 ,- 'r= S CH ICAGO MILW/-.L;K-E Sr O:UL r''-�r: 4 l.•'d la/P./ 7 �' 5.36 Ac ..�_ ;_- 7. . g PAC'cIC RAILROAD °,_....., rr ro's (�//.1 STH Nin--- -amizt.- ....:4:. 71 ^ _DP-fa' 0 - i{:� as:.c �v,,, i -•� 7 r W 1 , - Y - Sr4'3 Jl jc; �� •�• CM 5TP T6 23 ,4 `F,�b - ,.. i �I, _ - /tom. d \,� - p , •d�'�..- "n-=�.t wita l; Y 91f`A,s l J 5 ,` '=_- lC�'.� e{1M L.L-MI dfl iaA1•T' '. ! a< ZZ I Gout LO r uKEE. } �30.10 ! `wooO IL rr.<r r, ti�l0 F C� L -IC CCAST RAILROAC CO. � ! B N INC. d urr. 0�P —�+ // OssAc i�, jI L GEO.A HORMEL t TRACT B • Q i ' EDGE E N.RBAGIL; r ... $p{, t ..R. i e�:-�RENTO.,, 00 _ � _ ?)Z . / • Pa R NC ' .nR .e4 4 ;r <s..7RA� �sr a I ROBLRT EDWARDI LI S -1- -cw'r g I/ ROBERT L EDWARDS i .:.c W 355Ac 171k o- tNk //fUs .r [<.253 V • O r< •r, rLw ruw,c '- nzs, _IL /,2s: i 4..... ° .-�._.CW--7T _._-c.._._._.—.1 R3 /8 Y .•. . • '( ' | T. �T-I 44 11 ' 0 FT LJ Usk Us � | _ — � x ~ L � Y , - 'R[I0N'[: !C'H.G' INTERNATIONAL, APPLl�ATlON FOR RE7 N[ FROM GS-1 TO R-I, R-1 .TO R-3, AND 3-1 TO 8-1, File No. R7129-78; property located on H��die Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue)'east of South l4Oth Street between S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. C.H.G. INTERNATIONAL AREA ±46 acres xpP�i�xwr TOTAL n PRINCIPAL ActEss Via S.W. Sunset Blvd. and Edwards Ave. S.W. GS l R-1 EXISTING ZowIws ^ and ��l- " -- ^ sxIsrIws USE � pnopnuso USE Mulfi-fam1ly and Comm~rcial _ ' compnsnswsIvs LAND USE pLxw High Density Multi-family and Commercial u}mMsNTs -- ` March 14, 1978 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICANT: C.H.G. International FILE NO. R-129-78 LOCATION: Located west of Hardie Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval of rezone from GS-1, General Classification Suburban Residence District and R-1 Single Family Residence District, and S-1 Suburban Residence District to B-1 Business District. This is to allow the development of the site for multi-family residential and business/commercial purposes in the form of a Planned Unit Development. ,SUMMARY OF Planning Department: Approval with conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Hearing Examiner: Approval with conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department staff report was received by the REPORT: Examiner on February 21, 1978. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on February 28, 1978 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were sworn. It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report, and the report was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. The Examiner also entered and read the following exhibit: Exhibit #2: Memorandum to the Hearing Examiner from Del Bennett, Deputy Public Works Director, dated February 27, 1978, regarding rezone proposal. Michael Smith, Planning Department, reviewed Exhibit #1 and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #3: Site Map with staff notes. Exhibit #4: Site Map as submitted. Mr. Smith reported that recommendations noted in Exhibit #2 would be added to the Planning Department report, Exhibit #1. He also stated that a requirement for Traffic Engineering studies should be incorporated into Section 0.3 of Exhibit #1, and he clarified recommended density requirements of Section P.2 to be limited to 16 units per acre. The Examiner asked the applicant if he concurred in Exhibit #1. Responding was: Paul Berger • C.H.G. International 1 Washington Plaza Tacoma, WA 98402 Mr. Berger indicated his concurrence in the report. He introduced the consultant for the development who subsequently responded: Randy Blair Wilsey & Ham, Inc. , Engineers 631 Strander Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 R-129-78 Page Two Mr. Blair indicated his concurrence in the report and commended the Planning Department staff on the thoroughness of its presentation. He noted that the specific purpose of the hearing was to review the rezone, although the applicant would provide traffic studies and other required data at subsequent public hearings held for the purpose of reviewing the Planned Unit Development application. The Examiner asked for testimony in favor of the application. There was no response. The Examiner then asked for testimony in opposition to the application. The following parties of record responded: Rene Fabre 438 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Fabre objected to the proposed development because of potential increase in crime, traffic, and negative impact upon existing wildlife and quality of living in the Earlington area, and inquired if the proposed dwelling units would be comprised of low cost housing. He reviewed the physical characteristics of the subject site and reported the existence of large stands of trees and vegetation; ponds and bogs; and birds, mammals and aquatic life. He encouraged preservation of the area for wildlife habitat. Mr. Fabre felt that the proposed development would be incompatible with existing residential uses and questioned the placement of multiple family dwellings in close proximity to existing railroad tracks. Responding was: Steven Fabre 11652 S.E. 164th Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Fabre discussed the existing self-sufficient ecological cycle on the subject site and reviewed types of wildlife and location of ponds currently existing in the area. He expressed concern that consideration be given to the existing natural habitat and that a decision to allow development not be based upon economic factors. Responding was: Michael Shaw 625 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Shaw reported the prior elimination of a large pond in the vicinity of the subject site and inquired about proposed landfill as part of the development. He objected to the proposed density allowed and increased traffic generation as a result of the project, and noted existing crowded condition of schools and school buses. Regarding the proposed 150-foot buffer area in the R-2 zone, he inquired about Section P.3 ,of Exhibit #1, and designated the location of his home on Exhibit #3. Mr. Smith reviewed the recommendation and explained density, height limits and setback requirements to mitigate impact to existing residences. Responding was: Kenneth Crabtree 423 Lind Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Crabtree objected to the proposal because of creation of increased traffic and trip generation which he reported would total 2800 trips per day from the proposed project. He reviewed problems with existing narrow streets containing sight-obscuring steep grades and incurred costs for road improvement imposed upon existing residents. He suggested that Lind Avenue S.W. and Maple Avenue S.W. be blocked to prevent future access. Responding was: Nancy Shaw 625 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Shaw reported that Earlington Elementary School currently has inadequate capacity for increased enrollment and objected to the proposed development on that basis. Responding was: Bob Losey 808 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Losey questioned the proposed signalization at Thomas Street and reported that the street contains a steep grade. He testified that the subject site had been in a deteriorating condition for a lengthy period of time and indicated his approval of R-129-78 Page Three improvements created by the proposal, but expressed concern that traffic circulation and signalization be studied and improved prior to development. He also noted that school children had been bused to Earlington Elementary School from other Renton areas for a number of years to provide increased enrollment for the school. Responding was: Winona Losey 808 S.W. 4th Place Renton, WA 98055 In response to Mrs. Losey's inquiry regarding type and quality of proposed dwellings, the Examiner indicated that the question would be referred to the applicant during the period of rebuttal. Responding was: Lucy Osbolt 430 Maple Avenue S.W. Renton, WA 98055 Mrs. Osbolt reported concerns with heavy traffic, narrow streets, location of proposed traffic signals, and costs to residents for street improvements, and suggested that the subject site be utilized for light industrial uses to limit generation of traffic. The Examiner explained that the Traffic Engineering Division would provide a detailed traffic study to determine location of signals, costs of roadway improvements would be borne by the developer, and that subsequent public hearings would be held during the Planned Unit Development process to provide further review and input for the proposed development. Mr. Rene Fabre reported that elderly homeowners in the vicinity had been pressured to sell their homes in the past. He noted that due to removal of these older homes, few residences remain in the area. Mr. Steven Fabre objected to potential increased crime and vandalism induced by the development and noted that such problems had been nonexistent in the past. The Examiner called a recess at 10:20 a.m. The hearing was reconvened at 10:35 a.m. Mr.. Berger requested that the Examiner allow additional testimony in favor of the proposal by Mr. Losey with whom he had conferred during the recess. Regarding earlier testimony, Mr. Losey reported burglaries committed at his home in recent years amounting to losses of $15,000 and felt that the increased density created by the proposed development would decrease the incidence of crime in the area. He also indicated that existing problems with rodents would be eliminated with improving and upgrading a deteriorating area. He expressed approval of the development which he felt would be well-designed and maintained, but encouraged detailed review of traffic circulation and road conditions. The Examiner asked the applicant to respond to several inquiries made by parties in opposition to the request, although he noted that the request for a rezone did not require a site development plan or traffic studies at this stage. Mr. Berger responded that the development would consist of high-quality, middle-income housing consisting of either apartments or condominiums dependent upon the current housing demand at the time of construction. He advised that although some surface soil and clay would be removed from the site, plans were not contemplated to remove or provide large amounts of landfill and existing topography would remain in its present contour. He envisioned more than one 'access onto Thomas Street, but advised that the comprehensive traffic study would determine locations of access streets and traffic signalization. Mr. Berger reviewed aspects of, other developments constructed by his company such as Springtree Apartments on Sunset Boulevard N.E. noting preservation of vegetation and trees and creation of quality development. He assured residents that the existing pond in the western portion of the site would remain along with creation of additional ponds. Regarding school capacities, Mr. Berger advised that a representative of the Renton School District had been contacted and had reported that because of a recent decline in school enrollment, new development was encouraged in the area. He stated that the project will be completed within two years, the site will be properly lighted to meet Renton city standards, and extensive traffic studies will be completed in coordination with the City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division to provide a quality development which will fulfill the current demand for housing in the city. Mr. Shaw reported that incidences of vandalism or burglary had not occurred in the vicinity of his residence, and expressed concern that Sartori Elementary School, which had been closed several years ago and now utilized by senior citizen groups, would be reopened to accommodate increased enrollment and thereby deprive senior citizens of a meeting place. • . r R-129-78 Page Four Mr. Steve Fabre expressed concern that proper values were not utilized in evaluation of the property and felt that the ecologically-balanced wildlife habitat was not in a state of deterioration. He also questioned the location of proposed dwelling units in close proximity to the existing railroad tracks. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding total proposed density, Mr. Smith reported that the applicant's proposal for density would total 582 dwelling units within the R-3 area at 16 units per acre or 728 dwelling units at 20 units per acre. However, he noted that under the P.U.D. concept, the Planning Department recommended R-2 zoning for the 150-foot, seven-acre, buffer area adjacent to the existing R-1 zoned property along the northerly portion of the subject site which would allow a total of 77 dwelling units. He reported that the remaining R-3 area, utilizing the P.U.D. concept at 30 units per acre,would allow 666 units which would total an allowable density of 743 units, but would compute to 20 units per acre. Because of these figures, Mr. Smith stressed that a maximum allowable density be established to limit density to 16 units per acre or a total of 582 dwelling units on the site. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding protection of existing single family residences located internally on the site, Mr. Smith reported that proposed setbacks, buffer areas and landscaping would create a compatible situation for existing homes, and that these proposals would be reviewed during subsequent applications for site approval under the P.U.D. concept. The Examiner noted that the subject of protection of existing wildlife had been discussed and asked Mr. Smith if the matter had been considered during environmental review. Mr. Smith advised that a complete inventory of wildlife and vegetation existing on the site would be provided prior to development on the site, and that mitigation of wildlife could occur through certain developmental criteria, conditions and protection of natural-state areas. He noted that the pond located in the western portion of the site would be retained along with imposition of certain controls for retention of large stands of trees and vegetation. In response to the Examiner's inquiry regarding compatibility of the railroad tracks with the proposed development, Mr. Smith advised that the Planning Department recommendation should be revised to require a certain amount of buffering along the tracks and the matter would be reviewed during site development to assure that the project would provide a liveable and environmentally compatible area. The Examiner asked Mr. Berger if consideration had been given to establishment of a buffer area adjacent to the railroad tracks. Mr. Berger indicated that the proposal will be taken into consideration during the P.U.D. process and site development review. He advised that he had contacted each homeowner residing within the site and that the proposal had been met with approval by the residents. He reported that the homes will be incorporated into the area and not purchased by the company. The Examiner noted that testimony relating to wildlife should be incorporated into the environmental impact review and asked Mr. Smith for final comments. Mr. Smith reported that a complete inventory of wildlife and vegetation should be included with future environmental and site review plans to assure compatible circulation patterns and placement of structures within the environment. He recommended preservation of the pond at the western end of the site and preservation of 600 feet of the western end of the site in its existing GS-1 zoning which he felt would not be detrimental to the development and the proposed density. The Examiner asked Mr. Smith to designate with red pen the protected GS-1 zoned area on Exhibit #3. Mr. Smith also reported that a requirement under the drainage ordinance to provide on-site storm water retention could be fulfilled by utilization of natural, open pond retention systems surrounded by landscaping to further mitigate existing wildlife. He also recommended the addition of a provision for a buffer area along the railroad tracks as well as buffer areas to separate the proposed B-1 zone from the proposed residential area. Mr. Smith reviewed requirements for street improvements and provision of a comprehensive traffic study to mitigate traffic impact on the other properties in the area, noting that costs of such improvements would be borne by the developer. Although not a departmental recommendation, he also suggested that the matter of a reversion clause be researched by the Examiner to allow the property to revert to original zoning if development did not commence within a two-year period. In response to concerns expressed by Mr. Shaw regarding senior citizen facilities, Mr. Smith reported that Sartori School would be vacated by the senior citizens groups upon completion of a new center located near the Cedar River. The Examiner expressed hope that Mr. Rene and Mr. Steven Fabre would be contacted for— input during the environmental review on the site. Mr. and Mr. Fabre indicated they would be amenable to the suggestion. The Examiner asked for further comments. Since there were none, the hearing on Item #R-129-78 was closed by the Examiner at 11:32 a.m. f R-129-78 Page Five FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The request is for approval of a rezone of approximately 46 acres from GS-1 to R-3, R-1 to R-3 and S-1 to B-1 with development per a P.U.D. at a multifamily density of 16 to 20 units per acre. 2. The Planning Department report accurately sets forth the issues, applicable policies and provisions, findings of fact, and departmental recommendations in this matter, and is hereby attached as Exhibit #1 and incorporated in this report by reference as set forth in full therein. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, as amended by R.C.W. 43.21.C. , a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by Gordon Y. Ericksen, responsible official. 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. All existing utilities are available and in sufficient proximity, but of insufficient capacity. Connection of water and sewer to existing mains off-site is required. 6. The proposal is compatible with the required lot area and height requirements of Sections 4-709.A (R-3) and 4-711 (B-1) of Title IV, Ordinance No. 1628, Code of General Ordinances. 7. The specific site was considered in 1968 during the area land use analysis of the Comprehensive Plan (Section 4-3014. (A) ) . 8. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates the property to potentially be high density multifamily and commercial (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . 9. Since the previous land use analysis, the Renton Shopping Center has grown and the Earlington Industrial Park was completed (Section 4-3014. (C) ) . 10. With some exceptions, the application encompasses the entire area bounded by Edwards Avenue S.E. , S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern right-of-way. Three isolated parcels within the boundary of the proposal are not a part of the proposal. Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 9, Earlington, lie outside of the boundary of the proposal but are a part of it. .Within the area of the application exists scattered single family residences. 11. A large pond exists at the northwestern portion of the site. Other seasonal ponds exist on other portions of the site, principally just west of Maple Avenue S.W. Wildlife of various species are known to inhabit these ponds and the existing vegetation on the site. This was new information to the staff and would be incorporated into the environmental review of the P.U.D. 12. Traffic impact as a result of the proposal was of major concern to the parties testifying in the hearing as well as staff. In Exhibit #2, the Deputy Director of Public Works Department recommended a traffic circulation plan be submitted. The Planning Department added that this study be made a part of the review criteria of the P.U.D. application. 13. Abutting the southeastern portion of the site is B-1 zoning. . Across the railroad tracks and south of the property is located M-P zoning. Along the southwestern portion of the site is G zoning. Zoning of GS-1 exists at the westerly end of the property. North of the site is principally R-1 zoning with isolated, small areas of B-1 and R-2 which lie on the north side of S.W. Sunset Boulevard. 14. Parcel A of the proposal consists of approximately 9.9 acres and is intended for B-1 zoning. This parcel orients to and is approximately at the same grade elevation as the Renton Shopping Center which abuts the eastern portion of this parcel. Maple Avenue S.W. abuts the western edge of Parcel A and is for the most part of a higher elevation than the parcel. Parcels B and C consist of 36.4. acres which orient to the railroad and the Earlington Industrial Park. The elevation of Parcel B is substantially greater than the elevation of the industrial park and the railroad. Parcel C contains very diverse topography of which some lies below the railroad but most lies considerably above the elevation of the industrial park and railroad. Some areas of severe slope and soil limitations exist on Parcel C which pose the greatest limitations for development. R-129-78 Page Six 15. Storm water drainage and oil separation facilities will be required and evaluated during the P.U.D. review process. 16. On the north side of S.W. 4th Place is a small parcel which is separated from Parcel B by that street and is surrounded by existing single family residences which are currently zoned R-1. 17. The applicant testified that the final contour of the property as a result of grading and filling will be close to the existing contour. It was also stated that the existing pond at the westerly portion of the site would be retained, that the existing vegetation would be kept, and that a traffic study would be prepared. The development is targeted for middle income people and will consist of apartments or condominiums depending upon the demand in the marketplace. It was estimated that completion of the project would occur within two years from final approval of the P.U.D. Purchase was not intended of the three isolated homes within but not a part of the proposal. 18. Under the proposal an overall density of from 582 to 728 dwelling units is possible. The staff recommendation was for a maximum of 582 units. 19. The staff and the applicant favored consideration in the P.U.D. review process of a buffer to separate the proposal from the railroad tracks. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposal conforms to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map (Section 4-3014. (B) ) ; however, the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan must also be applied. The most pertinent goals and objectives are: "SUMMARY: It is the plan and policy of the City of Renton, through its physical, economic, and cultural development, to encourage the appropriate use of land throughout the municipality. To this end, the City will encourage proper employment of construction methods and land use principles, and promote the coordinated development of undeveloped areas. It will further give consideration to the prevention of overcrowding of land; the avoidance of undue concentrations of population; and provision for adequate light and air by securing open arrangements of carefully spaced buildings and building groups. It will be important for the City to reserve appropriate allotments of land in new developments for all the requirements of community life. At the same time, the conservation and restoration of the natural beauty of the community's cultural and natural resources will be a primary goal. As these goals are achieved, the formation of functional, natural neighborhood and community units will result." (Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area, pages 9 and 10.) "Residential. The successful utilization of land for low density residential development will depend on the availability of easily accessible areas which are relatively free of recurring or potential hazards such as floods, slides, and land subsidence. Residential districts should be free of manufacturing or commercial uses which would be detrimental to the community and its residents. The natural features and amenities that may exist or can be developed should be utilized to best advantage for the use and benefit of the community. Convenience to place of employment, shopping districts, schools, parks and other cultural activities, should be inherent features of the location. In medium and high density residential use districts the proximity to major employment centers, shopping districts, financial districts and office centers is important, as is convenient access to major arterials and highways. The nearby convenience of a larger variety of cultural features such as libraries, museums, parks, theaters and other forms of entertainment and relaxation is a desirable feature which may distinguish high density from low density residential districts. Other compatible or complementary intensive uses may include research and office centers, shopping districts and other functions which are not detrimental to the maintenance of desirable living conditions. While commercial or industrial uses are not easily adapted to hillside locations, residential development may be successfully planned to take good advantage of the amenities which such locations often provide. Natural features such as rock out-croppings, streams, stands of native trees, and the views often available from these locations should be used to greatest advantage. 1 I ' ." R-129-78 Page Seven Commercial. Major commercial centers are dependent for continuing growth and expansion upon locations which are central to a relatively large population. Access to the major circulation system is of paramount importance. The terrain for a commercial center should be relatively flat and large enough to provide potential expansion. An important factor in assuring the economic success of such districts are locations adjacent to or convenient to developed residential districts and other compatible uses of a complementary nature. Minor retail centers or neighborhood shopping districts commonly will be located near the perimeters of several neighborhoods and at the intersection of major roads and arterials. In contrast with the major shopping districts which provide comparison shopping, the neighborhood shopping centers should serve as convenient outlets for a limited number of goods and services. Such locations will normally contain grocery, drug, and hardware stores, restaurants, and other related shops and personal services." (Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, page 11.) "1. Prevent blight by protecting residential and other exclusive districts from the unwarranted infiltration of incompatible uses which would contribute to premature decay and obsolescence, and prevent the development of orderly growth patterns. 2. Increase community livability by improving environmental factors which are closely related to the residential districts and other community areas. The incorporation of park and open spaces throughout the community plan will aid materially in avoiding overcrowding and achieving this goal. 3. Provide opportunities for employment of the City's residents within convenient walking or commuting distance. 4. Protect property values within the community for the benefit of its residents and property owners, through the effective control of land use and the enforcement and application of building and construction codes. 6. Encourage the development and utilization of land to its highest and best use in such a way as to promote the best interest of the community and contribute to its overall attractiveness and desirability as a place in which to work, shop, live, and play. " (Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, Objectives, pages 17 and 18. ) Parcel A orients to the Renton Shopping Center, separated from the property by only Edwards Avenue S.W. , and to Earlington Industrial Park, separated from the property by the railroad tracks. This site is relatively flat, except for the northerly tip of the parcel. In terms of land use this parcel is clearly an extension or expansion of the existing commercial retail center or neighborhood shopping facility (B-1) (page 11, Commercial, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) .. Such commercial uses will provide employment opportunities for the. community as well as existing and future residents of the adjacent neighborhoods (Objective No. 3, Page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . In addition, the commercial zone will contribute to the best interest of the community and its desirability for residence, working and shopping (Objective No. 6, Page 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . Therefore, it is concluded that the rezoning of Parcel A to B-1 would conform to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . Parcel B is a hillside of gentle slope with the exception of the area immediately west of Maple Avenue S.W. and the area at the northwestern tip of the parcel. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates this parcel as high density multifamily which appears to conform to the general goals of close proximity to shopping, work, and major arterials and highways outlined for residential uses on page 11 of the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report. Furthermore, the Report also states the preference in hillside locations for residential development (Ibid, page 11) . The proposed B-1 zone on Parcel A can potentially be compatible with multifamily development through appropriate design and site planning (Ibid, page 11) . The multifamily zone would form an appropriate transition, given the specific circumstances of this site, from the intensive southerly, adjacent M-P zone and railroad (Objective No. 1, page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . This land use would represent an orderly growth pattern (Ibid, and page 11, Residential, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . Such an action would constitute ". . .effective control of land use. . . " (Ibid, Objective No. 4, page 18) . In addition, this would be in the best interest of the community and neighborhood and contributory to the attractiveness and desirability of the site for residence and recreation (Ibid, Objective No. 6, page 18) . Therefore, it is concluded that the reclassification R-129-78 Page Eight of Parcel B to R-3 conforms to the goals ana objectives of the Comprehensive Plan (Section 4-3014. (B) ) . Based upon the aforementioned goals and objectives, the proposed density of 16 units per acre is reasonable for this parcel. Parcel C contains the most physical constraints for development due to soil conditions, surface water and slope. The abutting G zone would require buffering and transition. And sufficient evidence was entered in the record to indicate that the existing pond on the parcel contains significant wildlife, such that it was a neighborhood natural resource requiring preservation (Summary, page 9, Comprehensive Plan, Renton Urban Area and Residential, page 11, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . It would appear that low density residential use of the parcel may even be doubtful because of the physical limitations of the site (Residential, page 11, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . Objective No. 2, Page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report, would indicate that some of the site may be most suitable for preservation as open space. This would also contribute to the attractiveness and desirability of the proposed development (Ibid, Objective No. 6, page 18) . Therefore, it seems that the proposed rezone of Parcel C to R-3 may not conform to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan (Section 4-3014(B) ) . Instead, it appears more in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan for the westerly 700 feet of Parcel C to be open space including the existing pond. The remainder of the parcel would more appropriately be zoned R-2 in response to the R-3 of the adjacent Parcel B and the railroad. This would be compatible with the G zone to the south across the railroad tracks and westerly of the site. The topography of the site will inherently limit the density to something less than the allowed 11 units per acre (Special Permit) , but it appears appropriate due to the physical constraints present on the site to limit the density of any development on the site to a total maximum of 60 units (about 6.3 units per acre) . This density represents a reasonable compromise of density and is nearer to the density of R-2 development without a special permit. In Parcels A and B consideration needs to be given to the adjacent single family R-1 development along the northerly and easterly perimeter of the proposal. The applicant testified that purchase of additional property was not intended, therefore, some transition is required to protect these existing single family homes (Objective No. 1, 4 and 6, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . The Planning Department's recommendation of a 150-foot strip of R-2 along the northerly portion of the proposal seems an appropriate transitional device together with the recommended additional setback, building height and landscape screening requirements. In Parcel B, consideration is also required of the three existing single family residences that are not a part of the proposal. In effect, these residential lots become islands within the proposed development and the recommended R-3 zone. Either a rezone application is indicated for these three lots or the proposal contains appropriate and sufficient transition and/or buffering between the two zones. The same rationale for the R-2 buffer in Parcel B applies in this instance as well since R-3 is not appropriate adjacent to single family. A 150-foot strip of R-2 should be located surrounding the existing R-1 properties (Objectives No. 1, 4 and 6, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . This R-2 zone buffer could be removed if the three lots were rezoned to R-3 similar to the remainder of Parcel B. The isolated part of Parcel B (portions of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 9 of Earlington) represents a narrow projection of proposed R-3 into the existing R-1 zone. S.W. 4th Place separates the part from Parcel B, thereby implying spot zoning. It also appears that this projection actually represents an intrusion into the R-1 from the rest of Parcel B (Objective No. 1, page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . Therefore, it seems appropriate that this part of Parcel B should remain R-1. 2. The property appears well suited to application of the P.U.D. Ordinance, Chapter 27, in view of the purpose outlined in Section 4-2702. The proposed land uses seem to meet the purposes of this section (Objective No. 1, 2, 4 and 6, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . 3. A landscape and/or berm buffer strip should separate the residential uses in the proposal from the railroad tracks. In more detail this can and should be evaluated during the P.U.D. review process. The need should also be reviewed during that process of a buffer strip to separate or provide transition between the proposed residential uses and commercial uses (Objective No. 1 and 2, page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . j . R-129-78 Page Nine 4. Because of the existence of single family residences along the northerly portion of the site, it seems in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan that the duplex (R-2) structures be limited to a building height of 25 feet. This limitation will provide additional transition between the single family and multifamily uses (Objectives No. 1, 2, 4, pages 17 and 18, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . To further assist in accomplishing this transition, the applicant has agreed to the staff recommendation that structures in the R-2 zone be set back 50 feet from the property line and that within this setback the 30 feet adjacent to single family property be utilized for a landscape screening buffer. 5. Due to the potential traffic impact within the property and upon abutting streets, a traffic circulation study should be completed and submitted with the P.U.D. application (Objective No. 2, page 17, Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Report) . As part of this study should be provision of one major access road to or from the proposal on S.W. Sunset Boulevard, east-west internal circulation road connecting to Edwards Avenue S.W. , and connection of Edwards Avenue S.W. to S.W. 7th Street per the recommendation of the Traffic Engineering Division in Exhibit #2. 6. Due to the soil conditions outlined in the staff report, Exhibit #1, and the topography of the site, it is appropriate that cutting or clearing of existing vegetation or grading of the site not occur until after approval of a preliminary P.U.D. development plan. 7. Compliance with utility and storm drainage requirements can be better addressed during review of the P.U.D. RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the record, testimony, findings and conclusions, it is the recommendation of the Examiner that the City Council approve the reclassification of the subject property as follows and per the following conditions: 1. Parcel A be rezoned to B-1, subject to: a. Provision of a substantial landscape screening buffer along the westerly boundary which may include the right-of-way of Maple Avenue S.W. b. Reasonable attempts to connect Edwards Avenue S.W. to S.W. 7th Street. 2. Parcel B rezoned to R-3, except for Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 9 of Earlington, and except that the 150 feet abutting R-1 property be rezoned to R-2 subject to: a. In the R-2 zone, structures be limited to a building height of 25 feet and set back 50 feet from the property line. Within this setback the 30 feet abutting a single family zone shall be constructed a landscape screening buffer. b. Provision of a substantial landscape screening buffer and/or berm along the southerly boundary of Parcel B. 3. Parcel C be rezoned to R-2, except for the westerly 700 feet, subject to: a. Retention of the westerly 700 feet as open space. b. Maximum density of 60 units. c. Provision of a substantial landscape screening buffer and/or berm along the southerly boundary of the parcel. d. Retention and preservation of the existing pond in the westerly corner of the parcel. 4. Development of the site as a Planned Unit Development per Chapter 27. 5. Submittal of traffic circulation study with the P.U.D. application for vehicular circulation within the site and on abutting streets. 6. Cutting or clearing of existing vegetation or grading of the site is not to occur until after approval of a preliminary P.U.D. development plan. 7. Total residential density on the total site will be a maximum of 582 units. The permitted density of 11 units per acre will not be exceeded within the R-2 zoned portions of the property and as specified for Parcel C. 4 R-129-78 Page Ten 8. Provision of an east-west access connecting to Edwards Avenue S.W. 9. Provision of a major access point on S.W. Sunset Boulevard. 10. Reversion to S-1 (Parcel A) , R-1 (Parcel B) and GS-1 (Parcel C) if a P.U.D. application for the entire site is not submitted within two years and construction is not substantially begun within three years following execution of restrictive covenants. It is further recommended that the Planning Department investigate the possibility of rezoning the three isolated lots of Parcel B to R-3 similar to the remainder of Parcel B. ORDERED THIS 14th day of March, 1978. . . .1 -tee er Land Use Hearing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of March, 1978 by_Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Paul Berger, C.H.G. International, 1.Washington Plaza, Tacoma, WA 98402 Randy Blair, Wilsey & Ham, 631 Strander Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 Rene Fabre, 438 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Steven Fabre, 11652 S.E. 164th, Renton, WA 98055. Michael Shaw, 625 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Kenneth Crabtree, 423 Lind Avenue S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 Nancy Shaw, 625 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Bob Losey, 808 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Winona Losey, $08 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Lucy Osbolt, 430 Maple Avenue S.W., Renton, WA 98055 K. W. Jacobsen, 4327 S. 181st, Seattle, WA 98188 Jeff Martin, 617 S.W. 4th Place, Renton, WA 98055 Doug Varner, 4653 130th S.E. , Bellevue, WA 98006 Jack Morris, 366 Earlington Avenue S.W. , Renton, WA 98055 TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of March, 1978 to the following: Mayor Charles J. Delaurenti • Councilman George J. Perry Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Warren C. Gonnason, Public Works Director Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director Ron Nelson, Building Division Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before March 28, 1978. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the City Clerk's office, first floor of City Hall, or same may be purchased at cost in said office. • c ++\ yl CO "�e�r'•+ r T d. Pt. ,`• c /laY ; -/ ts' -'r �j � ;_"k rG r0 � rr ,y o�% "- e�' b i6�•16'51 1 . 4' _* ( ! `'JO Os ,• / / •� \ ti • O aF �, r,T �,, �, • 4, ;' \\ -. •5,y � + � e • 6u " aA o. • JO. • ,n 1, \ Y ` !'� lN. s ". _ f •I.8•2J is a "u�1'' B�' ...c'.. i \\, _ sr .0,_ d PAC'c-IC R R CYO • - j � � 'r •-.® ®�l '. ./ f ,'L • a ' `� �1 I n[n•r r \ CCC,,, c�'.1 ''• \ PA S.W. �� 5 f • /T \ S.y L 'oY I \y pF 04 i 3 --• ' ,, Ht:; ,Jp1r® S. 'y' /a OA: rr y g 18 A fYs 3o'-it Lot3 SrN " - a °i'i:ed t, ` gsc t °'' ��' Sj - 2if d° n v 6 i w �' .\ - 2..26 Acreskillr all ,�, '� +ri S. jy / 2Cr., PIS1 SEARS a ROEBUCK c w a per' Z jj �•t 7 '1f „E13• k p �Y f;. :N.CAGQ MIL.N.:,UK ST �'AUL '�11 A:• STN - D?e Q ,,it: iC ' L >� ' . r ► � 03 v E4+u66 MILWAONEE c \1 y _ r� ss S 1,5 i e,n , T sr vAUL N N _ - '� •t ��'ft. - 1)�t r, S i 'h,• !k ') m. Q •jl ' - --�- _-- Go Lot \ I ' • • .°- - - " • l , ,CHICkGC MILWi-L:KiE ST P•UI b Sr,rN -.Is f t\j RAC'e IC RAI LROA7 cu..re •9 / % ' /� . . r. lR� O I Gov't Lo F.1�..,. ',, A` y� •`'- - -UR`t sr"" + •' �t �e 30.10 •E �.`N uc�.,.'c r- Q•1 h 3 25'oaCI. r.T— .1s4.,./- . yQ/ t 6 NG v ry E: %, I -- Re 1c CCA.T Ra;�nOt: CO ' - -.- /,-.__ DSSAc 0 n 6E0 A 00AMEL j I iMCi 9•' rift.. i • / w E N Rgac y• j0 'REN• TO SHORE 'N 1�; - [ENTAIL \ :•: . 6 2,7E17 g,rra c E /! PO6E7 INC - -__.?!n " ' ',`R" ,; R08Cni EDWARM t 1 _ /- �� S f - -{- �� a ��y I/ RORER7 L EOWAROS0.711 y \. VIS' - 0 .-L._.CW--7r-_.—.c•C_._._.— 4a if r _cW ' i n • ''i „ . - ._-. gyp. -LL _4.. i___\U L.L.l ., 1.1_, ,..L1 1 i 1.], I . ,- ._-:-._ Li., Tom,J w L I . _ ',2 1.;1 t T Zn ! ?-1• (,',T.',r. .T�. 1. r rTF7‘ -!j}$! i ! �f r1 4. . �o' ' r • } ,. I 11'._:1:1.. 1 1: ..T,....,,, . I it,..,,,,:r........ 014.411:14411:8441:0!,aptii 7.2, ,....1,-, i --f-- L,---- 4 7-- .i. 1 i {1 1- '• , , ' .--/ t - _- -- ---, 4\L 1 j it ii,„..., -41at,r,!geti ills g lir .r/lir , �, /// yin br., •J 110e • , - / - --' / 4” 1 k Ai It . A/ iiii b st pis_ r 1 11;11 dojo,. .. ,-, , _,,„ .., A,,,,,olfipt.,,-7,..A.,,siL-4,4i\ icioT fr i.\\ \\___ . . 1 41r Akot d eii% il ''' \\ .,\ , ii..., —-— \ \ I I li / 13.--1 in- 1 ,,,,,,\ I o -. . :,M41 11 i ccc ,a.� 11ulU. IIIU lIIIINl7�� I _I l` i .' , . � Il„I1M1 f I l l \ , !� . ' .ouI 1r• - bol( - • _ — a ' REZONE: C.N.G. INTERNATIONAL, APPLICATION FOR. REZONE FROM GS-1 TO R-3, R-1 . TO R-3, AND S-1 TO B-1, File No. R-129-78; property located on Hardie Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. APPLICANT C.N.G. INTERNATIONAL TOTAL AREA ±46 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via S.W. Sunset Blvd. and Edwards Ave. S.W. EXIS1ING ZONING GS-1, R-1, and S-1 EXISTING USE _ PROPOSED USE Multi-family and Commercial COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN High Density Multi-family and Commercial _ COMMENTS — .� �.. MEMORANDUM DATE: February 27, 1978 TO: Rick Beeler, Land Use Hearing Examiner FROM: Del Bennett, Deputy Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Request for Rezone by C.H.G. International The Traffic Engineering Division has studied the traffic impact that the proposed development would impose on the existing surrounding roadway network. This division recommends the following conditions be imposed on the rezone. This will soften some of the traffic impact problems that will be generated by the proposed development. 1. Installation of one (1) major access road from the development at Stevens Ave. SW and SW Sunset Blvd. or one that may be approved by the Traffic Engineering Division. This installation includes all intersection work and all roadway work such as signalization, channelization and intersection lighting. This will provide for the safe movement of traffic entering and leaving the proposed site. 2. Installation of a new roadway linking the proposed development west side area and Edwards Ave. SW. This would help the traffic circulation by providing an additional ingress/egress. 3. The existing public right-of-way on Edwards Ave. SW stops at a point just south of the railroad overcrossing and from there on to SW 7th Street is private owned roadway. The right-of-way problem should be worked out with the property owner (Renton Shopping Center) and the developer' to assure that future access will not be hindered or in question at a future date. 4. The developer is to provide details of the proposed internal roadway network indicating use, of existing right-of-way and or any proposed new right-of-way. An approved traffic circulation plan should be a part of the rezone conditions. i CEM:ad RECEDV6 cc: Planning Department CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED HEAR1i4G EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON EXHIBIT NO. FEB 10 '" HEARING EXAMINER AM F E B 2 81978 TJTEM k_NO. 7,8,9,10,11o12,1,2'3,4'5,6 /� PIS C` i ,LAC i, �/ 71 , b Q` � b19 Jf�ll6,5 Q I"� 4% • is, - •-,ViF /a� ^ �Ls. i r�� 5� p 's�� ; 1R\ ,\ s` -•1-� ` I 7.-- 8_ ...Z'-T2 a - �` �y. fir! ' / ,�a: . D `'s'�' r _ .t" ��. - _ -• Lr' _ L` I r 0 •^•_, -. !E Q y ' `^ r i / „ 33s a 1= p •e�' r ' "� G'1'SF j. ,"� J? 0 �' t'2< TA PiYl? ! i 1 ,i �l �; qar + `• • } I1�IS `.5;Ns! - =� Q.i} .c• /, ~4 ./5y/0 1r/ f 1 fit% ' 7f �O. O I t,L7 IM '. \ 4 U �lii / ((L iI ) il�y':z 1 116 '. f°a /ii Z� 1`�� �iRc% �'� •t ;uN5 ° ,.r+`` ,.`�\ +� 4.- x 1. t g \fir elf 17 • � * „'++Y•°-"13fs;' Qp I _ tt � n^s?Ages:112 d • r..,,r.w .,. �� ..:717- «'' /�j 17� !. l�r 6L l A�� i, y e•p.. I I ��Y 6 s l7 \ itrnill • l' I 8 A vn- 5�'�/ � !ra b i - 14 /3 :®' - I. f_ 7 3.iti" '6 I': . � FZ ' A I c.S Gov't Lot3 \ -- — Sr/y 2Si .%TI /2 h/!0 g S+•0: r' fa 1. . } Zu6 sn .rltPA' Y �\ t oQs off:. 21.26 Acres • o �/n r �s , „ E 2 . o -� j .F t:_ Sy. • B - 2� :JCL S 1R.x.,#y::-. s:- 1r e t �O e' • ..{ §5?r > ; ® f1 a I :Tl! .�' :-..y.: '� .,Cy7tl \ fI ', �� 4‘27 ..,5 ▪ C� S r�11T3•� = 6�y �` .6 S S r J/ SEARS E ROEBUCK L CO �t +'_ '•�5, \� !� 1- �\7 d 's �! "4 ZS (Vv�l � /: !l! 1s \ 'fs P ,rt.z1 3 .MILWAUKE 6- - , I Q. �` ''?; e0 '4C'rIC R1ILRJAO - a, LR...). T 7' f21 �, A. -` `S;,* d y -t., A : CHICAGO MILWAUKEE E �� �� �� .u_ \ r', iS � Txl•a"-.. • �`% 9 a'/u `�''wr- B "4i� I� ST PAUL R.R. - -- � • 'Z•\ � - _ SAY q-` i /1/�` 0 I cy_< � "'". ,.�� /''' --- " -464AL j S ��' 1 °co a a H, • l /'/20.2/ TZ 3 p /. - / — >�sr P f t 4 •t ' ✓ C 4v/rEf .4 /42 I ro, S l r / 24 s ;,. 20 Q •?j:1 _'--- Go{I:r Lit ' 2 '•.,' � ' • f�n 1 t- "/ �! i 1 1� 19 ' . 16 44� a /' ...'`' r •r - fI . "..M • , , ''r f•.'R' .r • , - CfeS D '. CHICAGO MILWAUK=E ST. P'eUL /�'�;' :c ''3 / / r �ls I '�it vi' / y ,„ .vt,` '` ,�•, n 11 _ l9 s.36 Ac• �.c �------7 ,. � 8 PAC'wIG RAILROAD w+c ,0. //0/9 , 1 1 • S fy+ ,, ail . V. r`�'E/ �S' ;r �a AC. -� . _ .._ . _ _ . __ .. . . .______________ _ ,, - ..,„A: c M.ST P SM. s� ! �. % y QY Pi '� w_. Al oil • D • ^.s , grF. 7 6 ~ rs,s # ,;-. "- -, PAUL j ,aO 1 S-1 Sr 3G/�OVt LO`r «,.� ,3 - „a� r _ .X' uaEE 7 r [eg `� fJV.�O ••� a ti,S,+ „. ''° t'c.:tr :' qx,.:•x 14 ILAbDr�M IL' Tt rxs Y .... o O r B N INC. ,t%44411.1.1111"11111141414010".....- :.,1. -4.. * , •• " (.� / _ IC COAST RA!LFOAC CO. ' Y ztzt, 0vp OSSAc. /' I ` c L �a LP . . .. i .01.. GEO A HORMEL E - - /! T +CT�9`, r • P E. E�1 EUG E H•RBACK . / 2,3.5 .N rr / 11iy RENTO „SHO!#E . P a R I w 6` 1 % " * `!I K TRACT�`r.o 9 j. . �q `�` r7"_• CENTRAL I / �et,t rt,,,„ f t , PUGET INC - ,5,7 !_.off' I / �E"tl'_� I ROBERT L EDWAR�S as,_ai _ _ !.. 18 i • a. 4 I, i --�'- AKn / ROBERT L EDYlARDS rc36 tg 1 335Ac 4TT Ac '<� 1.64 Ac I.%Ac T.tS3 ® .••1 rt,x • ZL36 TLZSA�n ,� �� TL1N T.L252 - I -•c w -- ter _.—.cm--.— — — a i3 ter• • 03 RECEWED CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT HEARING EXAMINER FEB 281978 PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER AM PM 71819il01dlil211'2i3441516 PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 28, 1978 APPLICANT: C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL EXHIBIT N . J FILE NO . : R-129-78 , REZONE ITEM NO. " /2q- 7I A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval- of rezone from GS-1 , General Classi - fication Suburban Residence District and R-1 Single Family Residence District , and S-1 Suburban Residence District to B-1 Business District. This is to allow the development of -the site for multi -family residential and business/commercial purposes in the form of a Planned Unit Development . B . GENERAL INFORMATION : • 1 . Owner of Record : MILWAUKEE LAND COMPANY 2 . Applicant : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL 3 . Location : Located west of Hardie Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue) east of South 14Oth Street between S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. 4 . Legal Description : A detailed legal description is on file in the Renton . Planning Department. 5. Size of Property : Approximately 46 acres/1. 6. Access : Via S . W. Sunset Boulevard and Edwards Avenue S . W. 7 . Existing Zoning : GS-1 , General Classification Suburban Residence District ; R-1 , Single Family Residence District ; S-1 , Suburban Residence District 8. Existing Zoning in G , General Classification District ; the Area : R-1 , Single Family Residence District; M-P Manufacturing Park District ; B-1 , Business District 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan : High Density Multi -family Residential and Commercial east of Maple Avenue S . W. 10. Notification : The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date . Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in at least three (3 ) places on or near the site as • L required by City Ordinance. 4; C . PURPOSE OF REQUEST: . ; 1 The purpose of the request is to provide zoning consistent with a proposed multi -family `:'and commercial use . ' t iiif i t:i , PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 • PAGE TWO RE : C . H. G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE; R-129-78 D . HISTORY/BACKGROUND : • The westerly 13 acres of the site was annexed into the City by ammended Ordinance No . 1928 on December 22 , 1961 . The remainder • of the site was annexed to the City in July 8 , 1.948 through Ordinance No . 1320. E . PHYSICAL BACKGROUND : _ • . 1.. Topography : The interior of the site is fairly level with the eastern two-thirds (2/3 ) of the site experiencing a slight (3 percent ) slope to the south. The western one-third ( 1/3 ) of the subject site slopes steeply to the south at approximately 18 to 23 percent. 2. Soils : The subject site is . composed of two (2 ) primary soil types : Beausite Gravelly Sandy Loam (BeC ) and Beausite Gravelly Sandy Loam (Bed . ) Beausite (BeC ) , permeability is moderately rapid , available water capacity is low. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate . This soil is used for timber and pasture and for urban development . Beausite (Bed ) , runoff is. rapid and the hazard of erosion is severe . This soil is • used for timber and pasture. 3. Vegetation : The site primarily consists of dense ground cover in the form of scrub bushes and grass . Stands of deciduous . trees are alsoscattered throughout the site . 4 .. ', Wildlife : The thick vegetation is a suitable environrpent for native mammals and birds . 9 5. ' Water : No surface water is evidenced on the site._ 6. ; Land Use : The .surrounding area is primarily a mixture of commercial , single-family residences and undeveloped uses . . Directly east of the site is Renton Shopping Center, while . • to the north a small mixture of commercial and single-family uses exist . The site itself contains large portions of undeveloped land with a scattering of single-family residences . ;The existing railroad track line and Earlington Industrial ' Park are located directly south of the subject site. F . NEIG'HBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS : The subject site is located in an area of mixed uses . Abutting the site on the east is the Renton Shopping Center while to the north a small mixture of commercial and single-family uses exist along S . l•!. , Sunset Boulevard . The site itself consists of primarily. undevel - oped . land with a few single-family residences scattered throughout the site. G . PUBLIC SERVICES : • 1 . Water and Sewer : An existing four (4 ) inch water main runs : along Sunset Blvd . S . W. , a six (6 ) inch main runs along Stevens Avenue. S . W. onto the site itself , and twelve ( 12 ) inch water . . main is located, along S .W. 7th Street approximately 450 feet 1 • south of the . subject site. An eight (8 ) inch sanitary sewer • is available along Sunset Blvd . S . W. and along Lind Avenue S .W. A forty-eight (48 ) inch storm sewer is located along Edward jl Avenue S . W ._ , ; • • PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLI'C. HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28, 1978 PAGE THREE RE : C . H. G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE; R-129-78 2 . Fire Protection : Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements . Any future development of the site will be subject to City of Renton standards . 3 . Transit : Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd . S .W. to the north of the subject site . 4.' Schools : The site is located approximately one-half (z) mile to the south of Earlington Elementary School and one-half. (1/2) • mile to the west of Renton High. School . 5. Parks : The site is located approximately one and one-half ( 12) miles to the west of Cedar River Park and Liberty : Park and within three-quarters (3/4 ) mile to the south of • ' Skyway Park. H. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE : 1 . Section 4-725; Amendments 2 . ; Section 4-706; R- 1 Residence Single Family 3 . ' Section 4-707 ; S-1 Suburban Residence District 4 . Section 4-709A; R-3 Residence District 5. i Section 4-711 ; B-1 Busines's District I . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Land ' Use Report , 1965 , Residential , page 11 , and objectives pages 17 and 18 . J . IMPACTS ON THE NATURAL SYSTEM : The' rezoning of the site itself will not cause any impacts upon existing natural systems . However , the proposed future development of the site will cause an increase in storm water runoff , traffic movement , noise levels , and disturb soil and vegetation . K. SOCIAL IMPACTS : Once the site is developed into commercial and multi -family resi '. dential uses , the potential increase in social interaction is great. L . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION : Pursuant to the City of Renton ' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended , RCW 43. 21C , a Declaration of non-significance has been issued for the subject rezone ;further environmental review will be required as part '\\, of the submittal of specific development plans . This negative declaration is based on the requirement that any development of the site will be in the form of a Planned Unit Development and will be subject to the requirements of the City ' s P . U . D . Ordinance. M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : • A vicinity map and a site map are attached . N . AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED : 1 . City of Renton Building Department • 2 . City of Renton . Engineering Division 3. City. of Renton ; Traffic Engineering Division 4. City. of Renton Utilities Division 5. City. of Renton : Fire Department H . , A PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE FOUR RE : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE ; R-129-78 0 . PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 .1 The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map element which designates the site and general area west of Maple Avenue S . W. as high density multiple family residential , and the area east of Maple Avenue S .W. as commercial . (4-3014B ) 2 , The subject request is generally compatible with surrounding ' land uses . The Renton _ Shopping Center is located directly to the east of the subject site ; the commercial and multiple ' family uses. are located along Sunset Boulevard; and the Earling- ton Industrial Park is located directly south of the subject ' site . There are some existing single family residences located around the northerly portion of the subject site together with three (3) single family residences within the subject site which have not to date been purchased and included in the pro- posed development. Additional setbacks , screening, landscape buffering , height limitations , and design controls will be necessary to ensure compatibility of these existing single family residential uses with the proposed development. ( Com- prehensive Plan objective #1 , #3, and #4, page 17 ) Although the site is adjacent to existing single family uses , the location , existing charactler , and size of the site provide an indication that the proposed zoning is timely and appro- priate . However, this is not to say that suitable means of protecting adjacent viable single family uses is not appro- priate and necessary. 3. The applicant has indicated that development of the site will ' be by Planned Unit Development ( P. U. D. ) , thereby establishing , further review requirements by the City for specific $ite development. Further environmental review per the State ' Environmental Policy Act will also be required as part of the P . U. D. review process . 4. , The proposal is compatible with existing zoning east and south of the subject site ( B-1 and M-P respectively) and other existing multiple family and business zoning along Sunset 'Boulevard north and northeast of the subject site . However, rezoning the subject site to R-3 and B- 1 will create .an undesirable interface with existing R- 1 zoned areas directly ,north of the subject site along the south side of Sunset Boulevard. These areas should be protected with conditions establishing setbacks , buffer areas , height controls , etc. , and/or the possible creation of a low density multiple (R-2 ) belt between the proposed R-3 zone and these existing R- 1 areas . This will reduce the impacts and create a more reasonable land use transition (4-3010( 6 ) . 1 ) . The ' Compre- hensive Plan designates this existing R- 1 area for high density multiple family residential as well . 5 . The subject site was considered at the last area-wide land use analysis (Comprehensive Plan amendment) and designated as high density multiple family (4-3014(A) ) . 6. The growth experienced by the Renton Shopping Center and Earlington Industrial Park , together with the site ' s prox- imity to these two areas and Sunset Boulevard (a designated state highway) provides further validity to the proposed use and zoning (4-3014 (C) ) . 1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLI,C HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE FIVE RE : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE; R-129-78 7'. The area has experienced little or no new single family residence subdivision or development in recent years . The physical condition of some of the structures in the area indicate a slow transition from owner-occupied single family residences to rental -type units . Much of the subject site is also undeveloped land , which may have previously been utilized for pasture, gardens and orchards (4-3014 (C ) ) . 8. Utilities exist in the area . However , the water and sewer mains closest to the site are of insufficient size and depth for the proposed use . _ The most suitable alternatives for pro- , vision of water and sewer will be to connect to existing mains in S. W. 7th Street approximately 450 feet south of the subject site. The applicant should coordinate the necessary utility requirements with the Public Works Department. 9. Storm drainage retention and oil /water separation facilities will be required as part of the storm drainage plans . , An existing 48 inch storm main (old Black River Channel ) is located along Edwards Avenue S . W. 10. Proper access to the subject site from S . W. Sunset Boulevard and from Edwards Avenue S . W. will be a critical element of site plan and further environmental review. Sufficient street improvements , on-site circulation , and traffic control devices ( including possible traffic signal at S . W. Sunset Boulevard ) will be necessary. It will also be important to assure public access to all existing residences not included in the proposed development. It is assumed that certain vacation of existing streets within the subject site will be necessary in conjunction with the planning of new streets relative to the total master planning for the site. 11 . Proper fire and emergency vehicle access will also be important with several access points from different directions being necessary. The large amount of frontage along S . W. Sunset Boulevard and the opportunity of specific development review via the P . U . D . ordinance will provide the means whereby suit- , • able access can be achieved . 12 . The small isolated parcel of land near the northeast corner of the site is within an area surrounded by R-1 zoning and uses , which are not part of the subject site . Rezoning this isolated parcel would constitute a spot zone that would be inconsistent with the existing zoning and uses surrounding it. Therefore, this parcel should retain its R-1 zoning (Compre- hensive Plan Objectives , page 17 ) . 13. Proposed development is in the form of two (2 ) and three (3 ) story apartment clusters scattered throughout the site as a Planned Unit Development with -a proposed density of approxi - mately 16. to 20 dwelling units per acre. The easterly ten (10) acres adjacent to Edwards Avenue S. W. , proposed for B-1 , will consist of a combination commercial /office center . The applicant intends to submit a master plan for site development per the P . U . D . Ordinance subsequent to completion of rezoning . 14. The existing trees on the site should be preserved and included • as part of site development as much as possible. 15. The soils and geology of the westerly portion of the site may require additional tests and special construction methods for such intense development . • PLANNING DEPARTME�'; _ _ •' PRELIM'INARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC, HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE SIX RE : C,. H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE; R-129-78 16.1 Provision of ample open space for active and passive recreation will be an extremely important aspect of develop- ment of this site. It will also be very important to provide sufficient screening/buffer areas adjacent to existing single family residences . P . PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : Recommend approval of the subject rezone with R-2 transition/ buffer zone (as described in #3 below) . based on the above analysis excluding the portion of Parcel B within Block 9 of Earlington near the northeast corner of the subject site, subject to the following conditions to be- established as restrictive covenants : 1 . All site development shall be approved as a Planned Unit Development and shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 27 of the Planned Unit Development ( P . U . D . ) Ordinance . 2 . Density - Density shall be within the range of sixteen to twenty ( 16-20) dwelling units per acre . Specific maximum site density shall be established as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . 3. The first 150 feet adjacent to the existing R-1 zoned property along the northerly portion of the subject 1 ' site. The first 150 feet along S . W. Sunset Boulevard shall be zoned R-2 . This will provide a suitable land use transition ! from the existing single family residences to the proposed R-3 1 zone, and will provide density controls , setbacks , height limits , etc . more compatible with the single family residence uses and zoning . 4. Setbacks - No structure shall be constructed within fifty ( 50) feet of an existing single residence zone , and withirk fifty (50) feet of S . W. Sunset Boulevard . Additional setbacks shall be required as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . 5. Landscape Screening Buffer - The first thirty (30) feet adjacent to an existing single family residence zone shall be land- scaped and earth-bermed to provide a dense screening buffer. Additional landscaping and possible fencing shall be required as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . 6. Height Limit - No structure within 100 feet of an existing single family residence use shall exceed a maximum height of twenty five (25 ) feet . 7;. Additional specific_ developmental standards may be required as conditions of Planned Unit Development approval . 8,. No clearing or grading shall occur on the subject site until after preliminary Planned Unit Development approval . All trees shall be preserved as much as possible and incorporated into site development plans . 9. Specific geological and soils studies , together with a detailed access and traffic study shall be submitted at the time of Preliminary Planned Unit Development application . 10. Utility plans shall be coordinated with and approved by the Public Works Department, prior to submittal of the Pre- liminary Planned Unit Development application . 11 . Those portions of lots 3 , 4, and 5 , Block 9 of Earlington described as part of Parcel B in the legal description are not at this time suitable for R-3 zoning . This area should remain as R-1 . Any rezone to multiple family would create an incompatible infiltration among the existing single family residential uses surrounding the parcel . (Compre- hensive Plan Land Use Report , Objective #1 , page 17 . ) I_ 1 , .I I I 1 1 .,;' ,]�U11_I l 'ICI I I I I I I Nil •` ` ` • -•11." - ,,. . +� 6_ ��:j T,�_ ' : -.45' itanilli s'`C‘ 11-.-1 .0lit \ �` %' iiii. Eq TTLE P/PE ,2K1,�., \p� �� s \ —__ t.N'v� * , , , , . iwl d �I �- A . .t.1 , _„::- -7. , . ..L. ' ".- °- ' AV iis •-•••• . . ‘-.......'-c --- --::-- -_1 ', , $14* ftr."lig �.ti ?I:1,f., r �jts1,114 ���� ��I (/ Qihtial- .4t. Ara O r r. ---- _- ATV , ------------../- ,,."-\'''' A ,,. fr.:..r** tio,..,7471whir, . ::11:4,,,iii6-: - - .____-_/ 3 :. m I li ',-4,Ars •fti. r. 01,,.L%._""%ft g 47160.hi,. ."..W.Iffilro 1`- ,.Si...1,10 :::7. _ __ ova.��/�/����if,4/if 1111f1p11!���,i`` �►,�;� .�;ii4;)d '_-41-41‘4M gelite'r.4 .i.f!p muitli. \ \\ ---z- \\ ._.....1..„_,. ._..__ _. „..„...„ , ,. ____.. _, 0;4,.r/f!firi si p ig lifirt.-1.:_- • 1.14t• ""r: .• ''. --. _zgs o b:",-.: !fa-L.. ,1-- A \ \ ..., \ \ \ 0 \ .c, 3.44445ET BLVD ^` \ 0 r ' V IL'i liWriark "e0„., 4, -7Q' \ \ /At .elect ��a;`' fr \\ \\ , `\ , , I I , " 7 p- 1.1.11941.4% ' ''"F'l tzfrViit, ---_,..,-. \ ) '.,.-F3V It)f3Je-er . Air* • .... c ‘s. I i S. W— 7TN— '' - 3 _ 3 g-I a r W I id S LI 1 • ,. i ,,,.-- ..a 7\ %V.:!‘ ::E!.1...Ct'"6"\*.:::....!..!::Icz..;1•L;;;;;Zj . I I o ' II I I —— —— — ' a: III gnplr IIM I 1 IIIIIqiii IIIIIII- \ SRN 100111I_ A illllllll- ,�I/pllllii �PI REZONE ::C. H. G. INTERNATIONAL , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM GS- 1 TO R-3, R- 1 TO R-3 , 'AND S- 1 TO B-1 , File No. R-129-78; property located on Hardie Avenue S. W. ( Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S. W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way. APPLICANT C. H. G. INTERNATIONAL TOTAL AREA ±46 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via S .W. Sunset Blvd. and Edwards Ave. S . W. EXISTING ZONING GS-1 , R- 1 , and S- 1 EXISTING USE — PROPOSED USE Multi-family and Commercial COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN High Density Multi-family and Commercial COMMENTS • • ; 1 • -:I„HL B LL' I V •' /ji Li./ r! ,! I r '.r/ 'm,19+/ 7•/' I _ V!r • - f !, [�„�� --41 .'+ 1�'• ^'(L's �,1 r.�� °t4 rr DIAL I L \ `:, ,' / .1,,:I. Q 3• 4 r)1 is---- Sind iii �I -4 t � /e+s S' • '�'r•• • / ' s, / '.Y J / ,! .-4•. CO �•.^ 21 2�{ 1 4 r, ,�II- l l !Z3'' , n0 r° •,"' • 1 t I' 'V '<: - 1 ,'•t00 \ (/ , _ • irV. r• •^ f! Z</r /@ Q _,� .y 'fe l l I I / .r '�" �335 ,;4 -I: /. 4.. i \ j \ \ x SCT` -.S `'..`• r O 1 .!. • I. i r_f•Tt' '2 iIv `1 /' _- / -4 „.•2s©: r,.. 4', ° { \ \\\ \ C7 , :✓ ; / •� r,•i+i�r r, �' i ://6 M .8/ / `.1 'klil•. 7Q 0�JO• '393 I•�if a � \ . y / l / l - it l 0.4 ACI' Iw \ R:AD `}II` 3 \`4 ! 11 , fir _ 3. l J20. `4 - Q I O ii,b' \\ \11.::.ly,.11 / 2? Y i „ L. 1 HE//RY N. OBI A1IHC HCA -.` 1,I1LWAUK=l B P • ''` i n:® / a� of`. `- 4 4 2,1, 1 tF ,.l.l ST: PAUC 8 PACIIC R. R. �`Q �' ' �'=� � � v'� �T" `Te Ae7.1! %t, 5 `\ O -\,- SU 51 n _4:oaf. .' V 7 C is N. - ,/d -L_.. -� ^.: -fv ��' �+' 27', r 7!6 r +,,,�'a"o. co. Q oti i I w —, Or 1 IJ -- -... - --' \ __ rrn Sw :ST y.k zJ,2Q,.-1S, 27 .- lQ /3• /2 II to S?�/ /- • ? ~al�A �. /. �,• Tu65 4. s,x /s. • ��2.1. A\ iS�oQ ' vSail' 'CS Govt Lot3 /y - ° - /8 -iiii, - 21.26 Acres • GS ® sr o "•;;� ,�' _�� s,i,g3 i® Y. �\\ 1. \ \\ e -- \ \, __/, � rM1 , J (Q S r 2/+ /° 6 r �14 /� -6 •s J SEARS & ROEBUCK&CO `� • `+• \�S \ sin j.r /�, � `20 Hc. 4 l ,sin - �J27/28s 4: u1 a: 3.2 1...0411 , �E 4 nor; - \ F y? T"�c&1 \ 40::" 1 `'2 • CHICAG�2\MIL'JYAUKE ST. �'AUL ��' 2 � � • • � \ „ � • I `\_ n,e N. 8. _I ILRO•0 ••,l 26 27 Q '' w �.E~..S - l co B LHICAGO MILWAUKEE 8 \\\�•' \ • \`\ s���,� C RAILROAD , s. ., , 2:, ! • �. • C, -__--4..- 1 �L 0 \ - � -.\ •SW 1w;- u 46 Q. Y • ST. PAUL R.R. __' 1' � . 'Oi17\ \\ �\ -\ : l7 / J es/ y `" 4.64Ac. \ Cyr q�, - -` �G/S J^Ty r 8 .9 m ,4 3 � j c.^- _ T.c.S7 \ O��•� _ \ \• \ \ - '' c y4�'�eEe Aor S l ?1!n '?sZ_IR1 �[� .y CjOV• LOt .° � 41 \\- - J., .• n,,`[ e • i I �• dj! o EN ; �� �� ����� cre s rp \-4-- MILW!-.UK_E ST. P:UL n4 , ` "- •ra e •! ` .� .�: _9 /•� 8, PAC'�IC RAILROAD Fq"w'+c 112 // /0/9 %/a `s� OPi �e _• h TL-1,7- %_ - 5 �, --- ------- ---- --'-- -- -- - -- -- - - -- - - -- -- -<x --- - ,;x 'S14 '3 r-, + •a• C M.5T P � CO #0/ griu / .r \� - Pai er✓r1 tom' • -u o 9� 63 5. _ _ 6 , �S �� , ' I F- . 16 ,' .3 tj•\ ---_- /t- PAUIS L:<O q r3 tNLt 0 (1 G ov t LO r / Q. UKEE t. nt „x. „...IL- u.ru a N 30.I0 r' �HICA`O 0 w¢r T, I% i 7 'IC COAST RAILROAD CO. r > . 0 \ a a 055 Ac. ,� .o V / .. ,, 6E0. A HORMEL & - o /. 7 e 9�r / .... Tx3.9 / Y EUGE E H0RBAGK /- RENTO SHOE • *` .. . . q i ga -..._ to P r h::___ T rNA R K PAC,nC C RACT �`:,CENTRAL BEu rAC�� 7 PU6E7 INL rs�n - r © :odeiROBERT L EDWARDS 6 f asp er i� O ! -�--- cxrz _ ' .. 8 r ROBERT L EDWARDS I r.<3d 33SAc 477 A° L64 Ac 1.j6Ac T.<.253 • rt.ix TL36 TL254 4, i = TL251 -.1_ "LT3T I 1 r 0 .• -_.q W —- 7T ---•CZ---------3 IIs. 181 - ----- - -------—CW—.—•-7TH -4----• -----•—•---•—•—•------ O. I 0, , ROUTE SCHEDULE • PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE ROUTED j 3/7? PLEASE EVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR: --, 9- -1 z i -76 REZON C 14_(1- 5 A-poejj MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL SHORT PLAT ' SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE 2 /6/471 1 SIGNATURE OR . INITA DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDING .Y-- )-• 3D 78 '7 RAFFI C ENG . X 02- 3 Jo ENGINEERING HEALTH traLITLS 1- 3(. 7 5". REVIEWER ' S COMML.„. APPROVAL CONDITIONS : , SOirl_ Kk5 h . • i PLEASE SIGN THE E . I .W . : , • • • ii ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS TC.! ( Finance Department c, Fire Department ;,) l.cj Library Department 0 Park Department 8 Police Department • Public Works Department , Building Div. Traffic Engineering Div. Engineering Div. Utilities Engineering Div. FROM : . Planning Department , (signed by responsible official or his ' designee) ' J/Ulc-11Aet, SM1T4U-, Assoc. - pL4..�A.) a SUBJECT : Review of ECF- 3c8• 7S ; Application No . : Ira -124 -' 74 Action Name : C}.1(T 1 hI i SeiLw-i wAL. ; (1-6Z6r0 c i& �S--/ to r- . /1"/ & -3 J S--/ 6--/ Please review the attached . Review requested by ( date) : �Z�L�/7�) REVIEW BY: OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : 13L-TD66 Comments : ..)Iil� G ti �'ec' 7� yC` d._. _� -ZV-76 ,., .4r 1, i a?Vg-sc/ /� /-7e Signature erector or Authorized Representative pate • REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : LE : , 'f . . . ,! Comments : 7' / • Signa`tur'e of Director or Authorized Representative Date 6-76 (OVER) ftl. VIE�-I 13V O ( IIEk CI1r DEPARTMENTS : Depart.ment Tic Tit S C 0 m i i en t : -r14 Ct_ u rt L.cc kr,.. .s P rn.I s S Jf J-' T L-/ 11--t T-1-t rt- A121iiF'. w►t_,,_ k0 c S._)»vn(',.-T I7_-3 d, �: «-�.- IZIiQui.n.rf 5j3S-r16<rir►i4` •(JP6.rl.i),ow,6 ... ---- _____�r !-31-7 y- Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date kE: VIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : E Department : 77-)"21�-/ e . /h e—e 7- I L-11 Comments : � c c}j �C LlQ_c-D L--. ..--,..,: _.,____ _ ,-,-__ ---.) ..,..,, . ci Wiz .,? 2�--.7,/ 7 Si gnature of Director or Authorized Representative D to REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : -fii,te/c, ,� �'/'_ Commen is : �d��SC2(_,i 4ii2•�C2 .SGI/4-717-Gc/ icP'a '/2�S (.//''/_)4 i-/Tip' oz-vz-6,(7 4c�Z� j /"1 e_/,)--T f"7e"r /-C �G eizc. ()//7a- K,----';'-.->. ./' . ._,-- ---0/ /7 y Signature of Director or Authorized ' epresentative Date i,E. V I E.W BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department :_ Comments : Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 1978 • TO: Mike Smith, Planning Department FROM: Clint Morgan, Traffic Engineering Division SUBJECT: Rezone - C.H.G. International Implementation of the proposed planned development will have a significant impact on the surrounding roadways. Particular problems to be considered in detail in regard to traffic are as follows: 1. The effect of the left turning movements generated into and from the entrances at Thomas Ave. SW $ Sunset Blvd. West and at Stevens Ave. SW F Sunset Blvd. West. 2. The effect of the left turning movement produced at Hardie Ave. SW and shopping center entry and exit roadway going to Sunset Blvd. West. 3. The effect of traffic at SW 7th Street and Hardie Ave. SW. It is our understanding Hardie Ave. $W from the railroad track south to SW 7th Street is a private section of roadway which makes it questionable as to the extent of future roadway improvements we may want to provide or can provide. 4. Details of the proposed internal circulation are needed to consider the questions above. It is our request that the developer address the traffic circulation problems as listed above and propose a solution for proper traffic control. A :1;) CEM:ad PROPOSED/FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R-129-78 ® PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF-308-78 0 FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Rezone from GS-1, G, and R-2 to R-3 and B-1. Proponent C.H.G. INTERNATIONAL Approx. 46 acres west of Hardie Ave. S.W. (Edwards Ave. S.W. ), Location', of Proposal east of So. 140th St. , between S.W. Sunset Blvd. and Burlington - -way. Lead Agency • CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal has been determined to ❑ have Q not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS ❑ is pis not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . non Reasons for declaration of environmental /significance : This negative declaration is for rezone only and is further predicated on development of the site via the City's P.U.D. Ordinance wit}i additional environmental ,review at the time' of .specific P.U.D. site plan application per City ordinance requirements. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate tiie environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would. • withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Responsible Official Gordon Y. Ericksen : : :ture l . in/Director Date Fruary21, 1978• A, City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 . • • 1 Y-c PROPOSED/FINAL vtCLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE, ,.JN-SIGNIFICANCE • Application No . R-129-78 ❑ PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF-308-78 FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Rezone from GS-1, G, and R-2 to R-3 and B-1. Proponent C.H.G. INTERNATIONAL Approx. 46 acres, west of tidrdie Ave. S.W. (Edwards Ave. S.W. ), Location of Proposal east of So. 140th. St. , between S.W. Sunset Blvd. and Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way. Lead Agency CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal has been determined to ❑ have Q not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS 0 is ❑ x is not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) (c ) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . non Reasons for declaration of environmental /significance : This negative declaration is for rezone only and is further predicated on development of the site via the City's P.U.D. Ordinance with additional environmental review at the time of .specific P.U.D. site plan application per City ordinance requirements. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : Responsible Official Gordon Y. Ericksen Title P1 . nine/DirectorAe Date February 21, 1978 Signature j. ,AirAllrir 1411P;alliir/r. City of Renton '40"7„ . / Planning Department 5-76 1 f' . 1 (pF R4-4, , . (7, ,` RECEIVED of . .... Affidavit of Publication FEB 22 1978 STATE OF WASHINGTON SS. 9 S COUNTY OF KING - ,A. 6 • 8 Y��81�'e t Ha rb a u h being first duly sworn on 'NOTICE oCP • PUBLIC HEARING ::;•. oath,deposes and says that she is the Chief Clerk of RENTON NOD USE,'''-' , HEARING EXAMINER,,':, THE RENTON RECORD-CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four(4) RENTON,WASHINGTON times a week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and A PUBLIC HEARING WILL, has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred 'BE HELD BY THE RENTON to, printed and published in the English language continually as a news- LAND USE HEARING-EX'A paper published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington, MINER AT HIS•REGULARS; and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained MEETING IN THE".COON,. at the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Renton CIL; CHAMBERS;: .CITY', Record-Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the H A L L , R E'N.T OWN„:; Superior Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, ' WASHINGTON,' ON 'FEB RUARY 28, 1978, AT_ k, Washington.That the annexed is a Tu O t i C e of' Public A.M. TO CONSIDER;THE I FOLLOWING PETITIONS?`^• �i'G'1 r L 1.C.H.G. INTERNA"; r TIONAL, •APPLICA "- TION: FOR';REZONE''w, ' FROM GS-1' TO R 3"r`: as it was published in regular issues(and • R-1,TO R=3,'AND DSr1's+"; not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for•a period 'TO B-1, File'.:No. 17117,:',. 129-78; approximately'-.' 46 acres of property _ I of consecutive issues commencingon the AvendweStof.Hardie' I Avenue S.W. (Ed',: wards Avenue),east of. ' 17 �'e b r Li 8 = day of y ,19 7' ,and ending the . South 140th Street bet ;ween S.W; Sunset,,. Boulevard and the Bur; " - lington Northern.Rail; day of ,19 both dates road right-Of-Way. ,;:,w".: inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- ALL INTERESTED PER s scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee SONS TO SAID PETITIONS' ARE INVITED TO BE,PREi.' SENT AT THE PUBLIC 78 charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $2--. . , which HEARING ON,,pBPRUARY has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the ' , 28, 1978 AT.9:O0.A?M::TO first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent EXPRESS THEIR. OPrL insertion. NIONS. ' ' GORDON Y.ERICKSEN' J� a .t �/ RENTON. PLANN;TNG;- G'rGl�t // l�G�.G-- DIRECTOR'_ Vim/ Published in,,TheT Renton Chief Clerk Record-Chronicle;Februa.fy.- • 17, 1978,..R4788 • Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17 day of • Peb.r.0 . y , 19 78 .7—g -' • Notary Public i nd for the State of Washin , _ residing at Kent, King C, y. . —Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. —Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. • V.P.C.Form No.87 ' PROPOSED/FINAL Lf CLAR•ATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No . R-129-78 ❑ PROPOSED Declaration Environmental Checklist No . ECF-308-78 0 FINAL Declaration Description of proposal Rezone from GS-1, G, and R-2 to .R-3 and B-1. Proponent C.H.G. INTERNATIONAL Approx. 46 acres west of liardte Ave. S.W. (Edwards Ave. S.W. ), Location ' of Proposal east of So. 140th St. , between S.W. Sunset Blvd. and Burlington Northern railroad right-of-way. Lead Agency CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal has been determined to ❑ have Q not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS 0 is ' [pis not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 ( 2 ) (c ) . This decision was ma a after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . , non Reasons for declaration of environmental /significance : This negative declaration is for rezone only and is further predicated on development of the site via. the City's P.U.D. Ordinance with additional environmental , review at the time. of •specific P.U.D. site plan application per City ordinance requirements. Measures , , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/final ) declaration of non-significance : • Responsible Official Gordon Y. Ericksen Title P1 . in./iirector .e Date February 21, 1978 Signature �'�`'� City of Renton , / Planning Department de 5-76 • • • • it • CITY OF RENTON' � } �" • ✓ REZONE APPLI CATI N FOR OFFICE USE ONLY LAND USE" ARINC APPLICATION WO. -�� �' 7g EXAMINER 'tlS4 117A0 - • APPLICATION FEE $ : 710. 4� APPEAL FILED RECEI=T ::0. 3?I,(o • CITY COUNCIL ACTION FILING DATE i -;;'3 `71 ORDINANCE NO_ AND DATE HEARING DATE . 0-/d • APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : • 1 . Name CHG INTERNATIONAL Phone 3R3-34R4 Address 1906 One Washington Plaza, Tacoma, Washington 98402 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located on Hardie Avenue • S.E. b e t�:een Sunset Boulevard West and The Burlington Northern Railroad R.O.W. 4. . Scivare footage or acreage of property 46.3 Acres + S. Legal description of property (if more space is required,. attach a • separate sheet) • See Attached • • • • • GS-1-13.1 Ac.+ • R-3-13.1. Ac._" • R-1-23.3 Ac.+ R-3-23.3 Ac.+ 6 . Existing Zoning S-1979 Ac.+ Zoning Requested B-1-9.9 Ac.+- :,TOTE TO APPLICANT : The following factors are considered in reclassifying • property. Evidence or additional information to substantia your request may be attached- to this sheet. (See Applicati Procedure Sheet for specific requirements .) Submit this fc in duplicate . 7. P=c_ Dsed use of site Multi-family residential and business commercial development. • • S . _ the measures to he taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. Multi-Discipline team to develop comprehensive master lan, inrludling site design environmental studies, engineering design, etc. -soon after the r.e::C)ne is granted do you intend to • develop the site? Development will not occur until after approval of the P.U.D. then development will pro- ceed in phases over an approximate 2-3 year period. . -.(spies _)].at plan and affidavit of ownership are required_ Planning Dept. 1-77 :. ,Third Report ' , 'O F R -- ``necember 19, 1977. .� . . �° R_ECEIII�D�/,x- . �, SHII3IT - • i JAN 23 478 I Order No. 637008 DESCRIPTION: \`9 alei� PARCEL "A" ' /Iij/1/ 'C+ That portion of Government Lots 13 and 14 in Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington, AND of Tract 3, Supplemental Map of Renton Shore Lands on file in the office of the Commissioner of Public Lands at Olympia, Washington, AND of vacated Maple Street (formerly Rainier Boulevard) as shown on the Plat of Earlin ton' as , ` Earlington', per plat recorded in Volume 14 of Plats on page 7, records of King County, Washington, described as follows: . Beginning at the intersection of the East margin of said Maple Street, as now established, with the North boundary of the Pacific Coast Railraod Company's right-of-way; thence North 17°19 ' 44" East along said East margin 231.10 feet to the true point of beginning; thence North 77°18 ' 45" East 820.14 feet to the East line of said Tract 3; thence Southeasterly along said East line 293. 54 feet to the North boundary of said railway right-of-way; e thence Westerly along said right-of-way line 917. 22 feet to the production Southerly of the Easterly line of Lot 1 in Block 16, in 4 said Plat of Earlington; thence North 24°14 ' 48" West along said production and along said East line and along the Northerly production of said East line 153 .26 feet to said East line of Maple Street, as now established; :hence North 17°19 ' 44" East 90. 31 feet to the true point of beginning; ALSO that portion of said Government Lot 14 AND of said Tract 3, 'ying Northerly of the above-described parcel, lying Easterly of said Last margin of Maple Street and lying Southerly of a line extending c.ue East from the. Southeast corner of Lot 28 in Block 10, said Plat of E.arlington; . TOTE: The bearings hereon refer to the meridian of the Lambert Plane i Projection for the State of Washington, North Zone and are equatd °26 ' 15" clockwise to the bearings used in the description of th(: • Ic.,roperty conveyed to Robert L. Edwards by .deed recorded under Fuditor's File No. 5726111. PARCEL "B" ' Tie following lots in Earlington, as per plat recorded in Volume 14 of Plats on page 7, records of King County, Washington: •, That portion of Lots 22, 23, 24, 26, 27 and 28 lying South of the South line of Primary State Highway No. 2 as conveyed to the State of Washington by deeds recorded under Auditor's File No's. 2538823, 2537568. and42534519; . . ". . ALL •in Block 7; ALSO that portion of Lots 9 and 10 lying South of the South line of .Primary State Highway No. 2; AND Lots 11, 12 and 13, ALL in Block 8; - :.- -continued- LGV GW Gi 17, 17 / / . " - nnder No. 637008 Description - continuea ALSO that portion of Lots 3, 4 and 5 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the Southerly line of said Block 9, 158 . 00 feet Northeasterly of the Southwest corner of Lot 7 in said Block 9; j.- thence at right angles to said Southerly line 88.36 feet more-or-less 7i to the Northerly line of said Block 9; f: thence Northeasterly along said Northerly line of said Block 9, 66.00 feet more or less to a point 92. 00 feet Southwesterly of the North- easterly corner of Lot 2 in said Block 9; thence Southeasterly 88. 36 feet to a point on the Southerly line of said Block 9, 1. 73 feet Southwesterly of the Southeasterly corner of Lot 3 in said Block 9; tI thence Southwesterly along the Southerly line of said Block 9, 66.62 • feet to the point of beginning; ALL in Block 9; ALSO, Lots 3 through 27, inclusive, AND the Southwesterly 10 feet of Lot 2 adjoining, . EXCEPT that portion thereof conveyed to King County for street purposes by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 766800; ALL in Block 10; . . ALSO Lots 1 through 24, inclusive; ALL in Block 11; ALSO Lots 1, through 7, inclusive, and Lots 15 through 28, inclusive; ALL in Elock 12; • ALSO Lots 15 through 24, inclusive, EXCEPT t.hat portion of Lots 19 and 20 conveyed to the State of Washington for State Road No. 2 (Sunset Boulevard West) by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 2545569; AND EXCE' 2 that portion of Lots 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 24 conveyed to the State of Washington for State Road No. 2 (Sunset Boulevarc West) by deed recorded under King County: Recording No. 2594162; AND Lots 25 through 28, inclusive; ALL in Block 13; ALSO Lot: 1 through 7, inclusive, and Lots 24 through 28, inclusive; ALL in E 1 ock. 14; ALSO, Lots 1 through 24, inclusive, AND Lots 27 and 28; ALL .in Block 15; ALSO, Lct3 1 and 3, EXCEPT pc =tions conveyed to King County for street purposes by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 766800; Lots 4 through 10, inclusive, AND Lot 12; ALL in Block 16; . ALSO, Lots 1 through 14, inclusive, ALL in Block 17; •, . ALSO, Lots .1 through 4, inclusive; ALL in Block 18. PARCEL "C ' . . . • Those por :ions of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; AND of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4; AND of the Southeast 1/4 of the • Southeast 1/4 of Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M. , in King County,; Washington', bounded on the Southwesterly side by the -continued- • December 19,. 1977 • w rder No. 637008 Description r continued Northerly boundary line of the 100 foot wide right-of-way of the Pacific Coast Railroad Company, on the Easterly side by the Westerly boundary of the plat of Earlington;,, as per plat recorded in Volume 14 of Plats on page 7, records of King County, Washington, and on the Northerly side by a line drawn from the Northwesterly corner of Lot 15, in Block 13, of said plat of Earlington and running thence Westerly a distance of 1250 feet to a point on the Northerly line of said Pacific Coast Railroad Company right-of-way, said point being at right angles to the centerline of the main tracks of the Pacific Coast Railroad Company at a point therein distant about 2050 feet Westerly measured along the centerline of the main track of the Pacific Coast Railroad Company as now located along said right-of-way from the intersection of said centerline with the East line of said Section 13; ' EXCEPT right-of-way for Primary State Highway No. 2 (Sunset Boulevard West) conveyed to the State. of Washington by deed recorded under King County Recording No. 2594162. .. ALL Situate in the County of King, State of Washington. 0 gjid ILO • • • a • • , AFFIDAVIT • I, • PIERCE W. DAVIS , being duly swo , dec a e that. I - am the owner of the property involved in this a licationan s€Rterdtine Exhibit A, P P Y PP attache foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects . true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. . Subscribed and sworn before me n/ . this iqf� day of ,�� AJU/-}/�y , 1971S , • Notary Public in and for the State of • • Washington, residing at ,S- m,-/-f/e . • ( i4/eZ 0 illi 70 . SN4 ,0^4.Z.4.4 /4") :) ' (Name of Notary Public) (Signature of Owner) 'MANAGER-REAL ESTATE, ECONOMIC & RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT ( a..._ /Q � 9���/ MILWAUKEE -LAND COMPANY //'lD�V /Abti(Z 8L D( Sect de 808 Skinner Building • (Address) (Address) V\ i-•.(;yf,�, Seattle Washington .'r,;l°" .f;;,% (City) (State) ^`IOTARY , . u'.a '�� AUBLI� ; _= -v ,.r 41. 'i (206) 628-3910 ' ,?'•� " \�� (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that—.the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been foun ofbeR~~ �ugh and complete in every particular and to conform to the yes ations of the Renton Planning Department Date Received00 23 �9'� 19 By: . -d I. Renton Planning Dept. • 2-73 y " ...1 i.0 . .. .i .,.., .. - .., ... ., .v. .' _.._- .<:. - • • _ f: ••�l":k rt':'_l ,`'< • - _ _;:,y''.,- "'� _ -fir. a`l _ _ 1 CITY. OF WA SHINGTON•NT RE NTON,0 ASH NG • i,,` I TON �: ' ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM •Af,v.1i1,.�' ".� '" `-- - • R fi` - , d JU.0 .... - .. ..� '•t:�.F p', 11 i FOR OFF.CE USE UN4Y:- .'�:. `£i � ¢: '"i°`,. i.c'.r. - APPltca�in--,Jo ;.-. ."" ,�i� _ , �°:'� ,r. _ tads - .. r•� Environmental` Checklist• No C'/ 4 • I : r is Q•'' - PROPOSED, date. FINAL ,-date- , !_ 5•:s Declaration o'-f, S gnificance''.. Decl a ra ti on of 'Significance _ - `r'` _ D D . _ DDeclaration of.Non-Significance :, El Declaration of N.on-Significance _- �t'_' ;:•. COMMENTS'' . . u�-'- - '..,- ..__.,..::................."..... ...:... .... .-.._ L.F. , Introduction The ' State: Emvironmental�„Pol:icy Act.. of 1971, Chapter 43:21C;. RGW";: requires •' • ' : all state and local governmental ,agencies to consider, environmental values both for their ;;_' ,--_`_ • '° -=`' " own actions -and:when. licensing"•pri•vate• proposals' The- A.ct also •r.equir :es .that an EIS be - prepared for all major.act"ions significantly affecting the quality of the -environment. T`'• The purpose of this checklist is to help- the agencies involved determine whether or not a • proposal is such a major action. - Please answer-the 'following cuestions" as completely as you can with the 'information • • _' presently- available .to you. Where- explanations of your''answers are requi red,':or-where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. -You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all • agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental .review with- .. .. out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. . Your answers .^ ` '. should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, - : even though completion may" not occur- until sometime 'in the future. This- wiill -allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. ` NOTE: This is a standard form being used- by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington .for various types of proposals . Many of the questions may not "apply to. your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it 'Thou and continue on to the next question. . • • • , ' ' • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND i. Name of Proponent C.H.G. -INTERNATIONAL �_._ ' €.• 'Address and phone number of Proponent: 1906 One Washington Plaza -- ' Tacoma, Washington 98402 = 383-3484 - 3. Date Checklist submitted January 23, 1978 4. Agency requiring Checklist Renton Planning Department 5. Name of proposal ,• if applicable: Earlington Woods 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to. its • size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : - Approximately 550+ units of 2 to 3 story planned apartments on 36 acres at :a density of 16 to 20 units per acre in proposed R-3 zone. Retail and ' office uses on 10 acres at east end of site adjacent to Renton Shopping Center in proposed B-1 zone: The -two portions of the site are respectively designated "high density residential" and "commercial" on the Comprehensive plan. The total development will be within a landscaped setting. f••-•-•••-•, .,....2.,-,':-.7'.';•V-:-.::.,,,,.F.,-,c:e.,..,,o4r•-t A1 ;.:-,,c,- •,:!,_1:-;•iF.t••:,,':;21;,*‘,--,-,4,,:•0-i-,••44:7•'•,,yr-.4'...*.7RF,,,,:?..;"-V.i::`';';•*VAc '• •:..t.:,',:',;‘:',?-1,:."'.''.•, :-'-' • .i !z_•,`..--.';',.*n•Z •*,---=.f•:.'•!...fi'Mf,..',E,i,-W.:-.,Y.,:::'•:',..='-',"2:i, '-'?';:[ ;,;r::;..j;-' '''''il:A:335A-J- -:,0.‘ig,ij :',.;::' ••,•: ee- .pli,. ,,,,1414,4-,`1,,.,..t'PV,:.,„,,c, ry?,S.,-4,•',%.,,,,•,...;,•;•••rryi ,44 -"'•'''''''-';','''"*.l.. ...:"•r•-• ''''S'q;'' '•:4Y..•':'::•-',.s'''Q••''''''.:•'''''''C' .2-5,'..1:4';.7.-;, =;,:,:::,:;""ZZ: ,, ,n;i.i4:'n:,'.:::::t II.91,?',,,Ati,,,W3,1,V4,..,,,,`A,,,,..pn_,,':4,:r4.,k;:,,,!,:,..,,;',g',; "-,.'''...,'. -: . . ":.. . -',,',:",;,,;«.T.I : :. _ ::- -,,,:.';,,,,7,-T;',:,:::.•„,':I' ' :''.. ',.'?,:,:,',..;`,.'I, ; : :'`.,.::',:. :,‘4:1:',,i.?.F.:::::.;:..,.':, .s:':!: ;,,,-,r:,f;,.:,:4:Ff,. t.i.'....c.,-.'t';;F:;17f0',;2:2.-.;;;:."4 "t,.4`-''..7::•4...,',:k,M.:k-'1,-,'-3"?4‘4;;,.., 2:'?;-'1:ti::,fg .. '-,.,:- ''',::.: .: '''.,.,.,-:7..,., ;,:.'-: ,,:r3',,,:,,'•-•'.;":'::':,'', ':':'..,'',-,.',"1' ',..‘r'''.e:''',:r-iW•*'5".L ri:-,'-'''-':',:1",,',:,....tr 'r,l'Y'V'),"'-'-'-kit,4 A ,,.i'''',Y.if:: '4 . -: ...' " ' '.:':.."'-'''''..-:. ; : !':' ''.:(7',.:::'2. ; :' . ' -:. "''''',"::': ',' --l','?.,i.. ...V.:.1:::,[,:',''':',:`,.4! '::, f--• •••,.-,-,,;(''.:' -E"'',:g4,...';:'.' '',?:..?..'f nr.t•F,:...t.,:,,7-fEr.f.-,r'fAt,--.1i,:::!-•,-K`tf.-4-"1/2•1,:,:-,:-•'''',1,.. ....'.,'::Y?.•'! '',•1-:-'-'' ' ' 4 . - -='.: ' .; •:'..•'''•-• :'''•'/:- ':•• : ':' •:'''',•:‘:-=''• = - :'-'...';''-',,t 4';"•'•...,-1,,--rj'•'•' :,..'!,''...,."-'',. '."-,---: .. 2;c-::-.'''......:'''''''44'?'6.i'[.:;:"'-'1,t-it:''4•%.''f.:=';'•VS:::`•.,1•{,15, 15..•;:kt•-;-;:'-,,,f-': :`-';',.'r, • .: •,:-: . .Y.C,.'=,•:,-, :', .', , ', ;;-.r...': :'s ''.""''.,=.'' ',"-•',,=•.',.t.•,',;,:,•::--,-- ,: :'''.. ':-:',.:--..a',7:,--.17.,:'..,'',.".'"" -':.•'Is.i,:,',.- :,--:-!... ..-•::-' 7::;.fq:iakiT.,..7a;'-34 ,,-.' t;5 ;,-, , ,•, ,,„ ... , ., , ,.,,,, .• •.., ,,,..1„,,,..„,,,..,,... ,-,....7ci.,.?„-L,:,:g,--,....-,.:,;;.•-•-•:i ;,--,,,.--; ,.--,,r,,:4. -'', •-•-/...'_ r.',',•-i•: ,'.•,.i..'-'..z3;,,, :iPi.c.:2.;q,-.;F,','• ,,,,-./,';':.44,itil.f...4i.).iekv.,,,!5-,==. - • ' . •,•,'•'•,.--',.,; • '•-•:'-'-,..;.-,,..4: -•'-.--;:-.....y... -,_°--;.,q...,..zt12,;:.,•;',, ...:!,:'..-,.-•`•' --,-.,•-'-'-'-',.'4,•.--,' --•••,•,--,---„t'.4,:,n?,...„,:.,,,.„.....ic..,,:,.„1„,,,,,:„,-,.,,,4204,.‘„F„,;,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-.,.. - .•: ;-:.! . .• . f.:.•-••:=rs-ri,.a--,.•-,x,-, •r.,-,,••,- -.,.•. • :..• - ,:- •--,.---,,, ,..' ' '-r• '-----,-,v*,-,:;:izic,:`:(5 ,k'.,',2, .-,-4. 7. Location of propOsal (describe the physical Setting .of the proposal , as well • as th0 extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including ,:;,.- -•::•--".-':-, any other information needed to give an .accurate understanding of the environ- •-.4,.:,V,-,-.,,...?,:,,„:6r-,:-.. mental setting of the proposal): : :7 '•,',--..:',.-•.',,• . .• :::• .'",;,.-:','•'..:-:.'.., •:. -:, •, ...... .,•...1.,.':-,,::::•-• °:._',.: r.- •:-. :-...,.:g" .fia:-. .j.P!',..''::,••V:t , ,..... ,.,,r,,,..,,;...• , . ,, „,...:,,,,,, ,:..,,,-..... , . , .-',:,--. :: ••:. . .. ,--.•,:-.,;.,-, 4,,-,,„,,,:e.:',-7,--:'!•.•,-,-,---.,- . - , -- , - ";.,i?--.;,„::..:,', .,..:;':••.-:',. - ..• .•.1- ,'Site slopes down from Sunset Boulevard to Burlington Northern Railroad and : -• :....- .•:,..-,---,- . . _ . ,.... extends westerly .approximately 3,500'' from Hardie Avenue S.W. --- Single-family ,.,•-.:- .-.,-.-,..,,,,, . . . • ••• -,...residential to the north across Sunset; industrial park to the :south across...::::: :-,, :,:,:-.,... railroad tracks, retail to the east and apartments and woods to the west. -'":;.---:.-:,,•• ... : ' -4 : •.' . :' ',,.7.: -.,,,....:., - - :•-"::: ..,1-....:-.•:-: ,•:•-••:-.....-;•,--::,,-..:•:,''':::::j.',-'.2'-'1...`...-::',- ---:-i. 8. -;.,Estimated date for completion of the proposal : ...: .._ ,....'s.. .!....••-,„, ,.....'..=. , -,-,,,-.....,-,.:. -,••••••,,,...,-,-.,,,,,,,....... ,-,;,,,,..;•:,,•,,,-,, ., . . Two to three years after_ approval , according to phasing plan. - •-.. ---. „- :•_,,,,-;•;,--,,-,::i.-:,-,:-:.-..q...".2-..::-...-.Y.; -.',:'' ' , .. -: •,:i;,-.,::::: :::,-:7„,,,-„,•-:. ,..-,,,-,us-•• ---- : 9. List of all . permits, licenses or government approval's:required for the proposal.•.:•••7.;.k•- ,-;,i.-.,,, L,7-,..;,--, (federal , state and local--including rezones) : : ,,. : .:_.,,-;:•...-_,, - : ,.,: ...„:•:„?•:-., „ ....,.- . ,-,„,..•:,, ,P..,,-.:'g.I,::.:;,'_,_,••:,:.:,,,,,.k-.-„,.,,.1 • ' ',-• . -- • • ., s• , , ,-.,. q...`' •--‘. :--.. --..':- --,•'- -,-. -• •-•-•-,-5F,:f,- -,,,,,,-.-.; -..;:..,-...,,-'•fz..',...,:•1,-,:,., .,-.-•,,-,.„•,-.:--,,„•-:;/,•%.,..., Rezone only: for -this application-.-...'13-. 1-.D.1-application will follow approval_:,,,:?1..„-:::,::...-,•,,,I, .„ ._. ....._...., „ . - • .-,-.:-.,....,..::::;.,-„zzt;.:...,:o.--...:•&--..----.F.,..._ of rezone and:would 1 ist- additional approvals:':• -required. • - ,- : -'-'.-.. -. , ,-t-,-•.-- ---.,,r,'",:-)•-i',- .:: ',,',J . '-',i,i-.. ;:'''A;::':,. ,„ -," • . . ..:.....:.:;•::•,,..; ,. , . :,i:"4:::-;":',,,O.:•-•,,,i:=7...,:,,,;..:;..:'.:1. ,:i."':iq-,,:!...,;,Z;:i:..:::',:..••:. :'.' •=,:',„', .'•. ;:, , ..,...„;‘";,•:.1 if•7::`,.,- ,•!,-, ';',•=2,;,:fq...;,,r.:^74: ' : '7.1.••-":tc-'‘::='' ' -'!;' ''-'-'' .: ' r • 'I ' -.1::':''''.',',.2:''',',!':',.'' • •"."'' '. : ,' •=. '-• •'": ' ''''':---',rifn-.4!••?,-..". •:V. -.."••'',:srS'<';'• •':,':'?';'‘'.1',:.'l'-,17:-,'.:-A%.1,4:2 1 0 Do,:you have,any plans for future additions,- expansion,.:, or further•'activity: -.•,.:„:, -i,,,H,,.:.-f,T-i.:,:,7,'..=§,:'..a;-:;7•,3 . , ' .' • '-'-Zrelated to, or.. connected with this, proposal? If yes-,.:explain: ,,•.....-:•, ; ., .:,-.,.!::. ;,..7.,,-. ..:.:i...;:;.',.•;,;•4',4, .,..t,,,:.-1-..-,,-. . ..•,, ' - - . ;:--•-,-.::: ., •-• - .--- ,-..•:,-,--•• - - • .,-.• - -e -.- - - -• -:-.,1":,=,•:,:•'...2. -.. ::-.,2:4:,.,,,I..!;..•:! '-iNo,. ..':,., Master Plan for Development of entire site:will be submitted to . •,-.•.-,..•,..• .,'„, -„:•,. :;:,fzi-, . _ - • ---- . .._;- „,--.....-- : -,-,;':-:::,',:ift.' Citysubsequent to. approval of rezones: •. •,.• ..,...„--? i ..„ -.: ..., ,.:•-,. ,• ,- -....• ..,...,...,,,:,J,A.7.p..:,„;----:,..4-]::::Q • ., • . .-.. , .: 11. i Oo-:you•know-of.: any plans by, others which.,may. affect,rthe property-covered by --': ':- + 0,-,-,-.,..-_. •,.... ,.; •.•:" .. T,your-;proposal?. . If yes', explain: •.,: .',:::,-,2 '...••„..----.:•;. ' ,...-,' y.,,,,,,.::..::.::.-.:•,.......,„ •...... „,,,,.,,,...,.:„:.:,..,,,, i. ,. ,,.. ,,.....,,;:;:xf..;,.,,: •,:..,•-•:,-,-,-,,,,i. . .:: i':-`•:•,.,: . - : •:' - - -. . . ,.- '::::::'V h`..=.''''.t.:.'1.;:'-'-'-'''-',.-I": ' .,",:. ''','".7.:•;t:!:;', :-'.:';..;•:-'7.‘'..:,12;'--.-;;`,:r::,.:,!...'T rf:'-'5:''•'...-=''' ''' ,....??•;':,•-- ='••''..-.':'_,'`•::.t.',..t-g •. . - No.-.-.q-, , , • - -.E.:.-..;„,,,•:.. :.....-4,-,,,---it,...--,, :-.-.., -.,:::',71, 'k-r!--•:,;.::::::4;:•,• . . 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- . •... ..-.. ...,5 • posal ; if none- has been completed, but' is expected to be- filed at .some future date, describe the nature of such application form '-i, ...1:'--...f:'• i -., ,.• ,:•:-:_::".':. .:,;.; . ' '::: :.',- , , ..L- •-• - . PU.D. Application for entire' rezone area will be-submitted subsequent to • . . : . - rezone approval . - " " . - . • • - ,'.....4: :-.,..,,,; • . --, ...-::•-. •---.,...-... : -- ..-..-. .-- - - -- •„:,--,---:1:":-:-,:‘ - .----;,:,,',.:.-,..,,-;,: . - -_,_,--•F:•-, . . ..._., .. , ,.., . -: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS : (Explanations of-all "yes"., and "maybe" answers: are required)• ,,, ••- .--.:.•,,,,.• . - -.. .!..:,,, i -:::::.%„,,,-,.. „,;•;•,..•,:.,- s' '--, '-. ,,',?••;;;-.:::z-•:,.'f,‘.•,: , •• - -• ..•..‘..---,:•.-'..;.!,-•::•::• .-.--• -:--- ..7' ..'7'..1'.-,..%'..,',...':5..t,.., .:- ..-.L'.. ' (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: •-•.-::-,•,%,,:',.•:.,.•;'.f.,....'.',:', , : . ' ',... :„-••-.--'1 :,,,-,...; ,,',-..,..iit.7.f.,,,,,.:..,-;. -,?:,„,,:•-..,,•..:,::,,,, i,,,.,•,::_•,•, ,: -......,„,..„4 . - .. , • (a) . Unstable earth conditions or i n: ckanges,:iincgeol ogic ,:,:',,. -..f. "--. 77. • -,,....:.,,: . '.•„:;:.,-,-..,,,:•-•..,.;',:...:,,,..-:,•-,..,,r.:,,-„,,.; -77.7 [substructures? •- .-, . ':',:-.'„-,-:,L .- 'T' ',.._V1T7.. - MAY BE- •R-r- '•:'`.'"-`';-::`,1 "'•' --'-"-:-.7:-.;_,' • . , ..., -.':••s;,•`.-'V --. ..j.,: (b) ' Disruptions, displacements, compaction::or.over- -;::..i:2 •:"-t' .,-.,,.,.:..r..,. . - covering of the soil? ..,•• ' •• 7.'"'';:''''- '''':".1r.i 'r.i:'::: C:'-;:.:';,.....:',[':-.c:r•::::. .YES MAYBE•:..-: NO '-_:.•-••::,••.:..,-.;-,,-f‘,.• ...., •:,..••-• __ . ..... .. . . . -.--:,.....-, .... . .. . _ (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief • - • . .. ,, , • - :.-• features? : . . . . . • X • .. . y5T • . • . MAYBE ., . . .. . (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any .: - „: • • ., _ • ; unique geologic or physical features? • , • —• MAYBE- — . . , • - TES MAYBE NO 1.. . • . .. (e) . Any increase. in wind or water erosion of soils, ,2,,,•_, ,.::•,-...-t-i•-,-;•7!.., . ,.. , • . • , either on or off the site? , . . ....__ _„ X . , . . .., • ' ' YES ..',MAYBE NO .• r.' _"•', ,.., . • , :-.. . (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which . may modify the channel of a river or stream or the •,;*:',-1:.: , ,...4.• •. -. . x ..• bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? . _ ......_ . .. .. ..„. , : . •YES MAYBE W ..,„ . •,-. Y'', . . • . . . •, ,... . Explanation:' See Attacked „, •:,... • • • , ., . , - , .. : .... . . ..,, . ,- . • ' -- , - •,•':....„=.,:: .. .,...,::.-:•-•:-:•',...„:,',,, :., -ct• , -, ..„,:••••:-,if.i• , ,,•:,....:,..:,,,;-:,..g,„. . ; r: ' --; -.. '• , ' ,t E::,' :-.•.,''- ': .,--i.-.,,•-•.-..:i'..•,.;..,,,..-- -: :••., le- -;:`'.:,-,,%;., ' -"-Z-.-'''! --::•-"•,`•:'It'''''\': , - ; .; ,. :':•••..:•" ':':, 'i-;'•::'.,:.'.. .,:::,-,:- ,:,-5..--,-,-..':, '--..."• . `-' :--- '' • :','.';'..-'''',..' :2.k...- -': ''.;•:;•:' '. . . ':::.:'-' „: ••,j.::,,'-,,•!;',Y.,:`,tf,''',...4=';:,-.,!';:4 . " ' '" '' . 'r.' .- ' ' ' - - '"s.:•:'%'' s-",-,'''*=1•:'•`•'•'-•':•••e',:-;•-:''-;"=•\•:7''•:•'•'',':"-::•': ':::',.. , , ..vt-:.,1•;:'.6i:'':'40•:,,,,,.,4%,:i...4 • 1,-.- .'',..;:., : ,:,.....::.:.'-:;;-: .-. • :-,•i..-',."••._:,,-.,:,;1:::•:';,--',"j',4•-:-::',-•- %,-..:-..- ' •;:-2-:3,-..','Ti-Ll'n-.Fif'0?; •14,7.A.V.,,,,..I. ., — ' -, - - :',. •• :-.:::•:-",:,..,''•,,,",.7.'S..,-, „,,g,1'..:;-•2?,I.,::::,:--,;_,...'•::.:::::;".... ...-.:"'.„"*."i',C„-j"..'"-;:!--'.'!;',;',,' -':,, z":;,,..,-F - '2,:..C.Y;t;:.',,` :'-'1: ',.! 1-i'-_',-..:;;;;;'.:Y;,..!:;:.. -',';';',:.;',;.:.i,,;:q14,',..:::,;'',:''.'.":`'':,:.:::::;:.: i'ec'4;;A:47:iri,".:1.. f.`2Y:::::::,",:',-; !:',,T--T4V;_--- -,",..i:-.::•A''..4,g,',-,;:43;:,,.?..:43..i;:.-:-.ni;g:',.::;-',;::';,.F.;',':e-F,F,';;:',;;:a'',:::.'•ii;N:`,4t;t4:V.P'-'fr:4',4:','"ki3NOI:VifIA.tz'tir'W-0 : :..;:g...:.4-'.;". . - . :.".-..rr;C5,-rt':::=--'.•.,S.T.,-.-,-:,:,---',,,..."-, '..--:••-'_'.. ,1-i,iWi--,,',"',':---'•':-':: •'.'',',---";',"-• '...,,,:•": ,,',`:,',.i".•.' ••••:.,',.'...;I.:*--,-c:?--".-:...-:•...,,,,,,,.,V?-irs.---2•4:::, ..•?,,,,f_y„,,,-,,,:s...2,,,..F.,,:.%,i-.;..t.:y3-.,..r.., ;‘,1,p.:t.9.-,:,: ', -• 1'7 : .'.:.,.'':..!-1.":i:' ' .::'.'-;•'; '''''::,,-'" '':.:' '';.'•':.;;;'"..i.::.:‘?:' •:,- "...'-: ' 3 7 ' :: ''., •'''''':.5'.:'••• ••••'•,":'' :•:. .1•'7'•'-'',.•‘;';','•;-•;:',J,'•'-e-,'•:•::'':',,.''.':,.':.•-•,,,.;,':••,•'T•,7,,P."•4:•:4:•,'ei5P,'' :14•;1;4,,,d•4, (2) Air': ' Will :,the proposal . result in: '.... - • : :'..,'.'•.- -..„,...'.....::, '....,, •--- ., - •••.••••::,'•:"11!-..,?•:•:-. 1-'-_-' •••••'•-,1•',.'•-•'• -•,..,-4!?•(5 --•';',,•••Pi•-• , • , • •: ; .; ;• . . .. ,:,.•;,:,,,•- ., , . - - . : • ••: --,-.' - • •.'• -"- -:-..•.•-•,- -• , -:,.. -•'.'„.-: -,'..•,.:?"'.•"•••..Jy•::,.•:',...:.7f,:g'.;:-'1;-:.*.-;,;.$4-:" (a)...Ai r emissions or deterioration of ambient air•:' .• -•:: :- ''''' ;quality' A s, - ••'-' • • •*: -'-'•••,•:•-• "'-•-',;-•••• , -,:%•, •:••:„.:ie:::-:.:-:..,,,,-I,..:11-...•••Ty., ', •''i. • .. . '• • - -: •• : :.= .•:,,•;•'..,--•••-:i;-:::-'•" --• .'„ -'..• •• • " -- - •.: ••-:..;•.•-•.•-•'•l'•,•:....--,--•••••••:'•':'•:'.-::•f;:!''t-'4..- ••••-.:!"..,`'. '•'.. .1.,-,:f.'',..,:.-,•-,•:-;','.•:••“A. •••:,••,•‘,•.c.t.q -•• - ..:-•:-....-.•••••,,,,:-.,,,v,!--,,,4--,-:::.-z,4 , •••••-•.- •• . : ...,_ . . - ..•;. 1-.': '..••••.,•').-.,-..,• :: ,;•_!.,•:,-'• ...,,•••, • • -•-i 1.,:-..--•••••.• •.r.:-.'_-.;- •,:• YES '•.' MAYBE NO •••:.-•-•...-;-:::. ..•.••z,:•••,-,1.,7•4':,•':•'M • 1-H: „ -• .,'(b):: T h e cre it i 0 n o f objectionable odors' . ••••;"•-•' '-:::,••: •'••: •'• - '•". :r. : •• ' :-'• ' 'X :":','-...:•::::-:,: .4;f:-.:0.!,•`-S't"TI3s, "'":'-''''.1.i,:'•••`. -,•-•,,,....,,•••-•,[,•1--i-Le. .,:ris:; • , s . • •:.: (c): Alteration of .a i r:':inovement, moisture or temperature, .*:,‘,.''.... ..,:',"-''•,:':•:•:'i.:: ":. ' :::•:%:::--.....,•',7:••.--;;-..- 4--,•.„;..:, :.K.,-i-,7•,:i,•,,,;,5:•: • . ' •-•••i': -•:- ••or any change in •climate, either locally or ... '.••'!" -...-.: 7 .',' ' '''r--';:*',:..:''':1;.: :.%`',..,;::6W;14:''il [regional ly? •-•;'-'•;. • •• .-,-- .. . , . •• • .'.:.: -.-.:_ •- •••••:•;•.::::-"y, '..:4--- -.',.. ,..-,:•:,;-';:-..::q-,.-, ,';•.''_. ', ' 7--.-' --'-.':-r.•-:i.;'---. .,- •-:'. '-'--i YES :,-,'MAY BE . NO i' ..,;,...'::•..1:-.;••,,....-:-•;:::..:.,'":::. •.. ._,•.;•:••••••' : -•,--', ,,-•••,....:;:.‘....,,:: , • : ,,,-,,7:_if,. ..;''... ...:Y xplanationi '(a) Minimal increase from human activity: ..:Vehicle emissions--. .:,-,-,:-.„ .w , -.:-.-,,, ,.•-.:.,-; .,:- . . . .„ . . :moUld increase carbon monoxide levels slightly. . This will be offset by : ....,.. .. . .. decreases mandated by regulations over the development period. :. •••:'.''.'',!.;.' ' ,''..';': :•;:',",..V'R•:, ',:::',.4 r,,,iv.1‘...... )„.060,0s:,2f..;..:.. :.!..i.,-.1,',':-., . , 1.,..;::*:.',,...`,:'.3 *C.•;,..,'...::i'2'.• li:''''•`i.':;!':.:.:*•••:::•;',.!•••:..,'i•, ; • ' * '.:.•?'•‘;'14'•,':!.V.•;1:),.*44t.k4I (3) ''Water; Will''' the p r o p O's a•V:re i u l't in: ;•'. '•-'."'•-•..';.-„,...:;,:',:::':',:'-:::::::::,'••• •_'•:-...,-..-:.....Z:'.7.•'...;. ......7.-:_•.•:,••".'22-...-..• :_•:',,*,,..,:!::--,-;:-.'2-.1 4-,--,.. :7:4:ti-f:1-1, ;;;9.7:i.' .., . . ..,,,:.,,;,,L; ,, . .,:,.,`,,.:y1,,,:y-'';-7,.'.?"..'-„ ., , ,, : .. . . '-'.,.;•.:,'-',:,... ,..r ..'.--,,•-;',.... ..;.:,,,.;'..--;,--1- - ; :.',, ' is.:' ':.-'-'4';7.1%'':;*'..;:i3.'7A'4•V'Z %.7.1,".r :,,.:;. :.. IV;':1711';'-.': '-'- '•-,(a) -`:-ChangesTin cUrrent -'or'' the course of direction of •-,- r.,. .: ','•••.', ' - ••- ,•••-• ••• •• •‘•-••;,',--4-:•;',,v,-;-.',.-..,„:1 .. ,, ,..._.:,,,..y., :',....,..-,..,,:,;-•,•-•:•=,•"•,;- 2 '-,-..(•'•'.- ; ••.:-..;.'..::-:`.water.movements, •,,1 ri•'either marine or fresh w a t e rs? -•••.•::.•• •'-• •. : X ...,:-.._-„,,-,-.:•„-.ip!'7,,,,,g-,A4:,N,.., :';'''''.:... '''.-'''' ' ' '•''-''''.2-- -' '•''-':.:' ''''...:''''''-4''.:.`'''' '. ':•- ''''-''' ' •' ' ' ''`• '•• '-:":'': YES .-' MAYBE."'NO :-•'•;':'-'i••:1-.':',-`;.'.'-.:!•-:Y,.:-&'7'_;;:':`,!::Y...'P: -•''.•:•i••••;,:',:: .z:::-...,-,,=;;•• •••;(b)"•':(_Changes..,i n abso-rptiiin'•rates, drainage patterns ,' or, --2-•"•.•:%:'', ',3.W.••••••1:„ '-• '''',-,:'-',",''''':::;`,;:: ;,@',',':::f• -'w,1••.V.,::•, .:;•:,i-,•-, -_-, :.,-,..i.-,,..-; .,.•,::-.-. .„...•,., the .rate and amount i-of surface water runoff'-• :r,-..-„ : ,..;•,.< '....:.:: . ' X '''.' ''-''''•'-'•';'••'"•-•-,7;;:•••"2-;;:g.•-$-''; ''!';': , ": -.-:!•.-.-•.:'''Z.S;;;-t'''-' • _ .i.:,: ,-;,...-.':• •,,. .;'''.".-,-...,';'•-••. : - 2 .•j""-•.2,..Z:2-.4.•1:, .., ...:., ,'? ,,,,,, .',,';::: .: . „.,"':-•::',•,:'••••:-LI'r :.'...•••••.'''. Y ES•.•-..MAYBE ' NO ' ' ••••,: ,.-',-,,.,E,T•:• ••-•'.'.'•:1•::.-• ''..1';', ' -:,`,-,`,,,,,:,•-'1„. i•;.i.;.1:::'.,-V•zki.--,•:c':1-• i.-..!':`,..i:AIJI:,,i,MP:';:-_,.-.•..',:: ;.:;:. (:,_ !-,.,,,: ,,,,,,..f,;",-;t.:,...-,1.:N co::.,i;-;.;,•r...,.::::,.4 i;.,z,;t. ,..,,:;,::;,::::,„ . : • ',.-.,r,,,;,-,,-;: :,.:::,:.,;.,:-?:_:,:,;:-...,::; ,(c) , Alterations to,•;:the:•courte or flow of flood wa•ters?..:,:',.•••;•,-'•:. •': ' • X ..- • •-'.."••.•••';',7,•;•,•••„..,''.--,. -• (d) ,Change •.in the amount of surface water ,i.h:any water.•••-• ',•••:•• • •••-': • , , „ •....- ,::,•:.-.:',.'.*•.,-:','- ',.-;•.•• •:?...•:';'c' rs.., • • .-, .: ,--,',,, 1,;,.., • • , • ;'-i''f'.iS..-'7''''C''''''''::''"..' ;';.';!.'''.A -;;;:,:.- - ---,•')•-•'•:-.,<, , .•,•-•- .";•.,•':'!:k,,'.,;;.,::::.;,• . : •• : -f.•••• .•‘••••`•::.:':•:;:.:'.:',•;,.,:f:'- '3',.:,..;:r.-:::,..YES ,-... MAYBE NO .....''•••••i;:::;',.:•:.,":: -•_..!'i,';:, _,. „ '-.'' ..1•:',,.. .:''','!2:•_'“,,•- • - . •. •• . . • r: •';'::::•-',:,••.". ••••' ?.'•••• ••;-!•';`i-•':'i::••,•,,,....7,'•:., ..-• ' ' -. , : :- :‘: :-•.:...:',. ..,:'.•,'^..'-i: . . (e) .Discharge into slit-face waters, or in any alteration • :: '•••'. ••••-• ••: ••• - • • - , - ,---'•• •-,-_- . • , --:_ - surface water quality,, including but not limited to . : . ' •-. -- . , • . '•-•'•'., temperature, ..dissolved._oxygen or•turbidity?. .„ .. • , „,,,„ - • •• X :...i.•.. , . :,...:; 1,i 1.. .•,• .. .,. ?,;ii:1•:i•••,7..,i,..,‘:,.. „ , ., •,,,, • :;, ,,, 0-..;„..;m:.,....:.•,yr-j:,r_.:;•.:.:,..yE s• ,::;Rill- :5-6- . . . ,-•. .:•••••.. • . . - . . ... . ., .. .- .. •,. . ,:ii:i.:.,..;.:„:'-.:;,- .:. , • - . . . - ... . . . -• • (f) Alteration of the' - dfrecti on or rate of flow of ',•'-'-'';-":" !•'••:'-•.:'•••-•-•'',4-'-••• •••-• '.•- • ' • -. --.-- ,-1.„-: • ' ground waters? •• •, •:.... . . _. . YES MAYBE NO . . . . .....,•,. • : '-.... •: -.• ,: . • •••: •.•••:::::.'. ". (.:•::-.:-:•-,..i7.'. • ' .(g) Change in the quantity of ground waters ,• either •• - • ' 'r , --:•-• ''', " • ''-'• - ' - ::: „•••:: . , • through direct additions or withdrawals , or through. •-•:.:. •••_•1.-:- ' -?'-'-'',•-• :•• ' • • ' . • interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ..-• •- • X -= . : r•-•.':•,-,:::.„• .,.. , .,.. - • •• • • YES • :. MAYBE NO .;-:::•4•- . . • .. (h) • Deterioration in ground water quality,- ei ther through . • .•••, : .: -:...: •: . . : .. •' •:' ••i• -:•-•, 7-.7..-: . -. •' '• :.•'• t•direct• injection i.•or:!through •the seepage..o-f• leachate, .'-'.:•::'i.' .-.-: "."---,X,.:.-',.',... !. ',.., .:. : . • --,. . • •::-.,‘,•,• :. , . I phosphates, detergents, waterborne v i rus or bacteria, :.,•'2.', ....,..:,.-• ' ..: • : • ...-• ..--,:',,,,:-.., • • ....,,,,••,, ,.. . . . ' or other substances _into the ground waters•?"-•.•. •'---: •-•'......: '•• '-'".r.•••• -- -°„'' .••:"•••.•-••'•,..--•:-.ii.'•._ . .. • • '--•:;--'‘'• :•- • ' • •••:"':' . -••-' ' •-• ' ..-:•••.YES • ',MAYBE. NO : rs.,--:: . .: ..‘.... -•,,f... : . ,.. (i ) , Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available : .-Y.-•,:. ''',..f.:-.;•,- : ---x - ,- . -,•-•::• ,:•,,,-.:-. .. ' for public water ... • .. -. . - . supplies ,- . -.•-•''...' '-: •.•,::-•. - ..:7::.: , 71'-•TTE E_ A • TICT .:.'•t,- -.,_•:•„. ,.,-•,..T., . , ••. - -, .-.w,..-...... .. . . .. . . . . Explanation:.; See Attached • . . , , • -, . .,. ., . .,..,....:-,...., • • ,....., .. _ ., . . . . . ,. . ... . - . .. . . • . . . . . ... . . . . • . . .., • - . , . .. .,-•'--,--::,--.,.:-.--_,!,•. .1',..:.,..,•,,, • , , . _ .. ., ,• • • :,,,,:;,:.:.,,..5.,,,,,.., (4) - Flora. Will the proposal result in: , , .. ••: " ••• . • , • - :• _ ,-,17,,;,-'4---•.• , . . . .... _ (a) ' Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of an, ... . ........ species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, • : ' ,. .• .• -..:•••."•.•.:.'•-•• • . microflora and aquatic -plants)? X ' •. . ,. ' . - •• YES graft NO ' ..' •-;• •••••••-••••,'.'.i. • ' ••• • . .. -.. '" . .• • . .. , • . (b) , Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or . . •-• . . i endangered species of flora? . - X TES-. ....MAYBE NO . . ,... - . _,• • (c) . Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or ...:.. _. ...• . .. • • ...' ..- ., --,r.• ' in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing : . . --...,.. species? . . . . X .: ... FAMT ......,,,.... YES - W - • •:: '.. ': • •.• • : -• .....• • ' • ' ' •_ . (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? - . 1 . - • • :,' .- . . -ITS--; MAYBE NO .- ...• "- • .:': . . . • .. ,.., '• Explanation: (a & c) Areas of grass, blackberry, scotch broom,,alder and . -•...-....-• maple trees would' be reduced. as the site is developed. These would be re- .. • • , . .-• „ . , . . .. • , -placed with ornamentals and lawns, while utilizing the remaining natural •-: -- 2 -.:.,:-...: flora to its best advantage within the planned development. . ... •. . . . . . . .. . . . . ... ... . . . . , , .. .... . . . - . . . . . . • :', ' --,:.' ,-.• •• -,.. ,,,,.•••••i•:•.,:,, ,..,.• ...., : ., -. • • ..4.:-:: :-....., ,...,:-,,,•••.,:,....---.',,I?: . -..-- - -..., , .. ...- .,,., :----.,'. -...-, -.,-..,-:-.,,..---:-. :.,,...':•. e-!... .:.,....-• :,..• ,...-.,-...,,,,,,,-.?,,,....7.$...,,,z&r.;k4. --- - , • —••= • -, :-..-.:::-.- •-•-,,-;:.'.‘• -.•,,, ''- • 0-••:.:••••:4`•••:-;-•-••;',0'.'cs•?..•-•.T•••'•,'••" q"../q•i:SV,V-,-r;t?;--',.',"A;1.-',.-1.Z .::' ••:••:..",...:*-•,•':',-•-•.::::':i.:.,- ,..f:;-?:-.::....:4; -12':.. .,•:;V:',..:"....:•••'•...•-• ,:,..7••::•"•-..•", •••:,.•-?:•••••:, ',::••••-'. •:.;':i•••,"‘:• ',•!:"..•:; •,'..:',:,;••:',':•.;':',,',•. .'-'-,.:'''',.-..-.,-'•f„:',;--,,:,,';',"',;,•,.--•••..,•,,•,:-..•;,•"-:;'; ',-.:: ••:::.:,.:::,:-..1'21,`1.:i,-1:-:-;,".',,'!'A'2.:1:.:,,,::.f-, ,,f,:f:'.4.;;;':..!=,;,',.z..,,,':,.-7.41,k,,,14.,,,:,,,,,,g;,:sp-p-sA:...,... :;:i,-••-.,Z.t,,,,,-.-,-,:,.1,:,*:,....'.'?d4.-.': .- ,,,-.;.:,.-,,,.t,',:cr ; •::, :.", . :':- •!•••17;:.';':'•,'•4.'•- - • '.r....7%;.:,;`;;;'?,;,tr.'.::,•.4',"•'-'-•'"=";;;;',>-.4-%:2.-.,,,;:';_:;...,,:',,"',,. :,..,".: :.:..:,,,,.r.l. ...,- ,,,:s':.,,....,-;,:-:.:,:-..1,,;,,:,.. ‘'...,...,r,r r,..r,!.;;;::.'4',:.::....,i,;,,,U:: ,.:".2,7,;:ir,Z,Ierg.f.r.:tr.:0...);7,;-:-1.:,...:,?7,. 7r:.-,f-,..,,,r:,!::::.2. '1: r.'-':',......:r.T'.::: : :2, :,:..':C.-:-:;:l'.. . .: -::.: ,;','"':: 4::.;:'r3 ::1:I'::'.:..r:i ;‘3.:•.-,:::.:,:r: •;": '''s '7: :' •-•:•.'. ?::,'','::'::':'.11', ':',...!::, ::Z".,-.'V'*,,-;;'.1'.'.$:,i'iVC,;',$.:40,-`.?:'1,42:j,T,q..: 1;:,".!7 ''''..c.':'''-".';'.., ' :; , , . ',,'','''-"‘ 1.1' • - . ...''.".:'. ':' ' • '. :-,- ...... '-':,",,'. , ''''.:-:',''.',,i.,i::::•'....1.;'...,. .`,,.'!.;01f...;;;;:',A'?;.,.*:ii:f..v::'.;';"'„,';,,4-: .• • . .,,......, ;: ,.. .. ... ,.. ..::,..:. , . : 1 ". ,:_ , : .:-...•:..-9;1:,,,' ..:,',:;•.-..,r.,:,,f,'„;‘::•:,.i•:,-5•4'3 4-':•;:r2.4.?„:;,..',';;;'(-,•:.`;i'';;P''‘',';'Dk'z, ' ''‘ •::•;'•-;'.' ; ' f' : ••;::•:•:::'''•'''''.• '':''''; • ' ': ' ' .. :.'z:• •'•''.•:•'''....4.:'''' *.'`''•''''';''•••••':.-:•:'''..'•••••-;-•1r, t':4''4,I.I'il'n'*•ir.,•:..t.,% ,f,,e•O-''•;:; ::•:; . :, ''''''''''• •(5) ' Fauna. - Will the proposal''•result in: , • -; : -: , •..•, '..,,.,.- -. ":,-,....-?,,,..;.,--;:,:„''''..',-;••1,,1-• -•'.-":F,.r.A'.i,...„:,.-.1!•;--:...4,./.:c?,:,•0:y.:11-,,.)::,,;;;.,,,::,44-::::!:.- 7,:;,:"',-,71.•., . • •, -_ - ,•-• • • - •••• : ''• ,,:• • (a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of ..--„ :...r.:::,::•:. ?-,.,.t. : :„..,,,,, ,-,‘, :-..:-; ',,, '-,-••.,:,-.Y r•.',‘.-I,2",i'.-:' .7',,Z,F.-':.','.:..:,.." any species of fauna (birds , land animals including. ,.:, .-::;.!--•.- !g..z.s.4:.7:- ..:,:•;Y--4,-s--:z•,‘...;:-..-::'-:',C-.--:,... .•,,,,,,---,,i; :..-; •r ••: • -1•,;;,,,:;•-,!:,•_,..::::, reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms ,: ' : , . ,„,-.... ..,,.,-.,•,-..„:• ,.. ..,-, ..,,,:.,....,;,:.-4,..,.., —, -• insects or microfauna)? • - '. - . . .....• r• • A • • :::,.....:,••.;.• ',A,..:•••,;•,,,11-......;,..5_...•;.-;:'...-';,.:-.,..;:..--,.."::!..4x•-.'•-- • .7 '1,)., ,:. '..' " 4:.':‘'::" ' • '..; • . ..-,,, ' .:..,. , • ^-.;,"%-: .'. . :'•.%i '',,-;,'",:.i". ''i j'1'•'''','‘..,.,...: .S.Y ES -;., MAYBE ; NO.--,- ,••.:'• ::::-.27--,1,..':',',.:?•- , :;-:,..:?;i'.....:,-7--...;',-' - "5•77,-: -.; : --:. r • ::: '.:-",'--.,' .. ,: " - " : - . . !,...":";' .;;;-::::.7' .•:„', .- -;;,' -,:: •_.--i•;:.ri..`"-...•'. .'`. ..'''r'.:?:::-;,-.::',1::::-7-.:.S",,,;'-:,,';',;•.7.!-.•.,•' ..... (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or • -:::, : : . .: . :-.......:-,-,v ,--•-•.., : •'- --..,:-•-•-•,--, : , r'. . - -. 1,;.:• endangered species of fauna? , - .. - :,::;',:•:•f2.7.,-..., ; 4,-- ,. :- ---,',, 'T : -. • ,- ..! -^ '-'-':,'•.:.,..:..• . , ..',..-',":',1:::i..'','''''. e.• ;.':-:'y . .7: :::-:!••:- ' ''.':::-'-", ''•: : r; ::.-:.'-',--:-j-':'.,!,:.,-;::ii-...-1-:-4-::.•=i,j.'-' Y ES•;•• MAYBE. .*NO-- :' '-Cc) • , ,. , ,:, `-;•,.. (c) '. Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, .. -. 7 — •r±..',.•:..-:::•,',-; ,'.' '''..:r::';.c.,-‘4.•-•;":.;;"7::,IT. - •:•.,::'•"•• " ; '::.. • • or resul t 'in. a .barrier to the migration or movementof fauna? X ; '-, "----• ":.-..---'.:' - ' ``'- '-.'''`.':-..: •::•i'f::',''. YES MAYBE 0 .., , „-, ..... .• --''','• . ::-..-,•';'.i:::-. '.' '• r ',::i''i' 1'I 'C '•f.• •' ::r'I `';';; : , •,.;'.•••: •.i'':'7 '"ef''Zi.' ri ''ttC"` . .*:"' ' ." )''.' •' "r%''' - ' ,. .....-" '•:-:a'::';'''' (d)-2:" Deterioration• to existing fish. or wildlife habitat? . : ..X - --2,:." ::.,,--;:• '-''H '---.-": :::,'.,:• ;::.',. '--''•:-,-.-‘:.• ' , . , •... ',.':':-.'.--•'::'.;-:: ", Explanation (a & d) Habitat of scotch broom; blackberries, grasses, :.-:-,,: . • .--• ' maple and alder would be partially replaced" by residential landscaping. . ..-;,,,,;.,.-:.• .. ,. ., ...: . Slight reduction in species diversity and in numbers of some resident s -.,,:•„ pecies. --.7. , ,.. ,,, , .• .• . . . ..• . . '..,:-.;.'....''.:' (6) .:',Jioi se. Will the proposal increase existing. noise-. levels? .--,:- .-. ,::•:: -;-)(--- ---.7."-,:-.. :'• ' -,, , -- ,• r,:i.,,,,,•,-, . .,, . : , , ... „ ; :,,-..r.•:y,%:,;-.•.•:,,,,:., ---',,I.- YES' , MAYBE„'',.;NO • "':: --'''-';'''-':','fi:.'•'-','-':- ,• • - ','''.z ----':i•-!2,-,..:••:',-....'-,7,-,,:• " Explanation: ' Slight increase due to human activity, mainly from vehicular -...7.-:-.;• , ... — . ... ._ . . . , . • . .,•-- , .:.. traffic. Should not increase by more than:'2.dBA, 'barely perceivable above, _ ..-.e.k..:.:,..,, . ,:,-..;,. ..: • . . . . . .'....- existing arterial and commercial 'sources.. 4, .., .. ... -"' ' ''';';1,-6,f.:,' • .. , , - -..-- . - 4-., -. . -- • ,_ ...:,•• -: , (7) ••Light and Glare-. " Will the proposal produce new light or : '. ....,. :-.....„,,,,,, - glare? . -. :„ ::,,,„ ;-,‘'• ., -,'.:::,,•-•-••••,, •..-..-:.: X ---.:: ---=, , - 1-:-F.P.1! . . -.,:- ' ., :...,:4 , - , , ':,:.---:...":.'::'.....'......: ..- YES -:MAYBE ',.V.110 : : :, • , ... • ,-. . •--. . . , -..- - ----i:Expi anati on.--r—,Residential and street lighting and lighting at east-end of . -.., .. . . site on commercial-uses will comply to City ordinances. .. . -...- . •• . . — - ' - - • . , . . . -. ." , .... .. • . , .. "• -- - . (8) Land Use. Will the -proposal result in the alteration of the ' .,.-',..-•• '" • ''•••::-.:.:-• -.. , - .; present or planned land use of an area? • : „ : ,:. - ., - .. . . • • ,. . ., „ - • - . , --''''-- ',-- YES -,...; MAYBE :NO :. ' ' ,- - s• - Ex lanation: This vacant and unkempt site would be converted to a planned . ••• -: "landscaped residential and commercial development.. The proposal is on . .. , .. -- ::.sistent with the comprehensive plan. • . ., . -, ,, 2ri,,,,.'...:,-,,,,..::;-,.„,. ....- '::, .L.:':., ', ...:: _Z''. -,;'; ;9) Natural Resources. : Will the proposal result in:.- • -'::,r. -, . •.:-..,,,,,,-. :,.,,,.,,,..:.•••.,: ..,:-,•,,: _ ‘,..... ., ,..,,.„-•:„ ..... • :.„ .: ' . ; : - • ''•'- '" " ' •."''"' : :' - ,''f'-'. .- „ ". -..-•,:,./,-;k .:': :-, • - ,;-.:. . (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?. -- • • - - ,. .2- X . . . : ,..: : . . '.. • - " -- - • -:. (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?" .',. ,-;--, ...., •-•-.;-• : ., - ..,,,, .._.. _ . -, .. :•• ": YES -, FI-A771TE:::NO . ......_ - ExPlanatiori: (a) Typical use of construction materials and energy resources for heating, lighting, cooking, etc. . ..,,. ,. . . _ (10) Risk of Upset. ' Does the proposal involve a risk of an , - •.- -„ explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, ' - . - - : : . -. . .. but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemical's or radiation) s X ' : in the event of 'an accident or upset conditions? , :- •YES 7. ITUTTE' Fir- . . .. - Explanation: • . • . . . . _ , ... _ • , . . . , ,. . . ,„. • _ : . . (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population _ ' ' ' •:- •'...- -' : • • :of an area? , :,,•' * .. - ' • ' .: . • ... .. . _ , , . -. A ..'.:- - , . ' . . MAYBE_ ... _ . Explanation: ' 'Consistent with Comprehensive Plan. Development rate would .... _ . ., • . ,. , . . . ,_ ... ... ._ respond to market demand. . _ . . ._ . . _ . . . . - . .. • . . .. • •, •.. .. . '.... : i ' ;-'::••........:,:-•;,,:-• :,:i--:',:-.-..„ ..,-„ :-.... •.,,,.,..,,..,I'-,,,,,;;,,,,,;•:,-..,1,•:, , .- ,. , r-•--',..:! '.' 1"-.•r. .::-.-Y,;.7-:-.:',:-. .:-..,:;;-,::./::-..,"-, ,, .,..:-.-,..-%;,-i- -;-:,/,'W,.:',,,47.1 :,.,.•:-.'•;',.,'.:,.,-.;!•;."-::",.i!•'::,••',::::,,r:'&.:•:',::,,,,;.. .,.=,...,.,:;::ii.',-..?:;?;','.-....., '..,.•••:,':'..';:',,,,;.:•,440:14.1f:Ii, . , •,,,,,9,-,,e,,i4,11,F;.,•,..„.. ..-:1'.?,:',,:-:',':-..t•2, -,..7...„..r.,,-;;•- •,;,1:,-.,,,f,.7,,-.., ;1:. • '.--v.,,,i-iwtyiv.,: .' '.... n.-t,•,":i i iN';'.T.:1; ',. ';;;;:iTI.,:g0!:',,,..'4',S.:iS : 1:!_."_'•.:-:f.:::.'-',J,?%.'1,:i;:4% .1 ..;•''',',;';'-'0,1;:a.e.V,..ilf....i.rg.'e.::'.'''''-;s5C:';','.','-'. .1:E,.•;:;',..ii"...W5:F;A:i:?- -i:;.Y7s:6.1W;',.;'F..tt.;;i1:•':-TA-1-4'...);.-.:-,-;,-1•Y;i.',..2.-51. .. '`.:`:1''',:i'7".!!' ' • -- -''',..r:-' .-.',''' '"-:“ '''•' -1.-....;t0.1171-:';‘';'':'''-;. •''''.'''.-:,',';',,,,-.-(''•--:.i-.':;•..',,,l,,,,,';:..;',::.:,.,ft'';.:.f.i.,„...:..:„F.firt,,,-',-:,'_1,../1::-":,.....',',..14.',,i, ;;;,-,,,.r;,-5..,•,,,!,.,.;.;,-,r7Tt.t.,:, :c,,,.'',,;I,'Ie,„,14,W,I,',',.:,;,%:F,JF,1,;;,,:!Ftt,,,:,,1:,.',% :;;SW,g,Fa'4•,:... ', ' ''ikt5-.,1,Til: ,...:" ' . '''';‘?"...,''i'''''.::•'..:,:','' :. -'-'-,:'?:',:"?'''.-:1'2. ::,'''''„,'"'..•:"..;:......:,:'1.'.;'.,:,'-.N:•'g2,;::;??,,*.:::-., ..4•''''. 1-:'"',.:".'..;:.::--.: :'i-'''..,',;":.C'T.;,.'..'7?;'"•:',. '':,.';''.4.'':1. '.;',,.(:!..,,,","..:.:.:::tV.A7:: :.'Si41:1 ,,Ik'47,-C..4 .t ;:''',.Z.:''' P"':''.''''.'^'' ''P.t.:.J.,";:37:!-1,:',.::-• '.: '-.. -,-,',..,...,,:.::. , - ,....4.,.i.1,,,,,T.,,,,it.,;,;;,„z„..,.,,,. ...‘,',;,,.,',',,z::.';:'.,,W.',,,-2 1:,,':..f:f'-::)a;,.':':','' :..;';:i.:: ':',.••.".".''',.U.',1:',i4-..?•;74--;`..',--'-',-;?f,''':,," :'''''.':'',. )!':."".-',.!4;':',V:75.:,, ,,;•:':• i'!'".''''-',4!;,,,,, •4,49:,4::,,,V,' - ' '.-, '', :'. .' . ' ,:,:y:if'..i.,;,:c,i:I.,'.,..i,',1 ;' ....- ':;1::.:.,,,-...,.,;; ',.i, . ..;2.e.,;:t.,::,:',;:,-.:1'::::::: , ..----.........ti-,,,:;j5,,.:,,,,i,;•;„.:.-,':,.,';•-•,„;-..,•i;:•••••:..•:-..;.;.:;-::-..:':;:qi;,.':,',,-.;7,,- -17.5...:iSf?::!.`,;,.31 -....t.....„,.:„.; , -,.,,. • •.,,:t:.,,,w,.. , • . ;.:,..r..,;. •. .. ,.;,;•.;/,•,..,,,;;:•,-?;..-; ,..,.,,,.•,.. ..::,.,••-5-;!--,....::-!--..::::..--f,---..',.-.'„,-;.:.-1.':•;,,;-E'.,•',-;'..: '-:,,.--z.,.,,--:-'.; .;---:',..•.:;i:',`. .::Y.:'::,,,---, ''..:••,-.-:-:-:..•-,v-.;'.-,,,,-.4....:.•,‘;.5:;•.3•::.:./..•:.--,,...::-..,--5..-•,:-,:i•,,,,;; -..'.:,....,•,..-..;„-q,;:4,.,,y....,::::::. ..'..,: ' - -•..,,.:...",-:-';...;',"-:•,..-.•••," :-•:,.?.. . '-: --,--.. .-..--.s,.-,,-;;;',,,,,.;i:...--:::::,...;.-.:.--,:. :,.,,.;::,,,....-...:i-,...:.;:',.:,f.54- 4.;;' ,..4b.,,, -.• ..- ---:-. .-!';' -','-'. • • . (12 Housing.);.;,- -, . ,. Will the proposal ' affect existing housing, or --.....::,•'.&.:•;.--_ST:,•;,,i ,:.••X •,-.1.•:'i.,-,,':-.., !./,,,I.:'_ ,,i;,',,..-•: -, ,,,:.:...-...:..,:,.:!I!,:fi$ -:::::',7,,,4.,-.!,':;:',.•,,:- • ''1'-''' '. create a demand for-additional housing?....,...: .,.,„.. -..,. . , . :1-......._......____ .....,.1-,-,,,-.4..., ,•,.,f.,, , -.•:•-. . , - . •„,:-.,...v....- *::',-,.‘. . - .. •:,•-•:.,,;,,----.-.:•-,•.•-:••••••••-:'••,"•.'-..-`,'-•'--_,'-'----‘'..-:'-•-•-•,',•.•••:,..':',. ..'2,-'• :,- "--,-,,,',-, .,•;,•.:';'•.i,•••:. .'-'-':,'•••-:•':''.•,1---;'-',-. YES MAYBE NO ,:.'P.-:1''`i,.'-‘;.', .- 7;';'..4t4::'-='''; • ' ....f- • '— ''''" ,''''!•:-..:'''.':'::;'2,••'',-=',',',..'. -,5^.::',,,L'--:i.''..' .„.•".-,,':-...:,'-,i.,1 j..,2,,',; -:,.. .:..,:-:;•v,...,-„,,::,??,,,.:..-:..:,i1.; --,,.%r-F.:,,7',,,,".:',.-,,, ,t-3....5.; -,:2;',,:r;',T.?::-. '-/..'".:'.•''''.Explanation: See Attached --,--.:-. -- ---: . . • • - -- , .- • , -,,,,,,,...--:----.....-.. --,--;,z - .;-,,,-.:. ,-.1.... -- • ,-.:-..,..• •,....:..w.,,;.:-, - . ,-•,--,-•-, •:,;•-•, , . ..... - --.::?...'.-,...----i,,,,, :,..,:: _- - - ,.--,-;,.:,..,,--,,,,--,-• - . -,--,...,:!2,., ,,..--,, ,- •----,-:,.:••-..,. ':',--I-: " - '- ...::-...-..,.......„,•,,.:y„,:,:„....,,;;.,-..,,,.., ''';;;;-?-1- ' . • . ,;,:,,-:1::;::",'7,:;:f.,.-.'' . - - , . , .. . . ., „ .• , •,..".';`::,:.-.-''..,.L;'....',..,:.'... '"F:i'l':":.'1'. ' , .' . • • :"....,':;..:',,-•,. - • .''' - '. .. . ' . •• ' . • • ,.,'•.•::::;2-. „.....,...•.„..--. ... . - • :!:..,.....,,,,;:,-,,...-...--;..:;•.:,...:-..-, :$,,-;:,,,:,,i,:.; •-::',6'....: . (13)!::.:.::TraAsportatIon/Circulation. Will the 'proposal result• in:-_-.....-: ......... ..,:. ..,,,.:,.,,--.•:,.:,,,,,,•-„,„•.,-,•'..:.;:"',2.-..,:i..".;i•,',...,,jq, ".,:!•::- ....„ ,..:-f.%....,....:- (a) : - Generation of-additional vehicular, movement. ::,-,-,--.-. ---;-•: „. -----. -. ___., .....,.....,,,,.. .....:‘,..,,,,..r.,,p . ••.,.. .-:;,::.,...f.;,..-.- '"----., .;,-; -:: --,: . - :. --- --.'-..,...::::.-..,;YES ---..': MAYBE . NO ,,,-. •-:••--:•---,',--„, -.---.-.-fi,-..;i:•:: •.•.,=:,`::..--,'-:.,. ' ..a•-•-,--(b).-.Effects on existing...parking.---facilities,.'•or demand --:....-•- ..-,-..-71.7,..,....,:,-,ff,..... .7.7,..----•--;•-..::,.'2 .` --.....•,;,',..,:. •..;-••• .-:-,....:--..,, ..,•,,, ..-::,:,...•-. for new -parking?••i:f....!::: :,- .•, ,,..,.. -','!•1-.;.••... -,:,-. •- -,- - - ...."-- -:: , • •• ••._•.-- •-)L .,-.,•,,,:-=:.• . ,. ,.„:::,,,,,,,,,. : • . —.. ....,„.,,-,..:,,,,....,,,,,,-, . . -.:, ,. --..: •,,,„--:4Es-.77,-:-.MAY BE -- NO -..--.•:.•-;- r....; ;•...7,'„ '-:..:.-...---, • --•-• ' • .'• • ' ••.;.;.!..--,',,: 13.,-,••:•'•?:',. ',-.:' .-:•,.,•:','-',,'..•„:',,, V:::-'...'-:-..-.'; ',','? ;:',-,:.',/.-: ;•:- .• • • :.:.,.--,:..,..--••••-..;.,-;,,,.--:•-•..,:,:l...•:.-:.-. - ,•:•.•,.--', -..:1--'.. :2-1-:::-',-".:.•.-'''':f:'•-'.''.V. :',-;:::•:',-_,. . . •':',-..:,'..',••.'•-5,•-' •f- ''''•''''',- 1' , ' •- - '' '' '•s'.••••'".7'. ..:•,.:,WX:,,,. X :'::..";.•:;-1,(.....-Ii:'.'''':;. •,/•:::: ::::':7 -',"...f1,-,7:="1, . ,•• • ;.•-..(C) •Impact upon existing transportation systems? .--r• ?••••.,-,:::-'•••••-•-• _:••-- • - - ..,- .....;,,I,,,,,..:..,.:,....,:y.„.4,,::•.7,.., . ,,,.- _;•••:,:',...''...-__. , :-•:.-•-•'•-•:'., ••••••-i--,.. . .. . - '- - ., -. ,••••••-,.'.:...,YES :,•,.•MAYBE.: is10--:.,:........--,,.-:•-- -.-.....,. :.,-!, • '--,--;-1,..7.1-, -'ai,i61-, . -'-....e,s.-..-'-•,-•••-••,---••(d) • Alterations t:.,o, present.• •.,pa.t.t:er• n•:;-s..y. o.,....•f,. c i.,:.-r.cu...-..•7l--..a,,..,t:,-,,•,T,,,•o.,n, o r•... -.::..•..:...-::;•,-;,•;-•-g„,.r;•,..5:.„.,...,....._.:,,,,,,,.,•,:••:,."„...,J) movement of people and/or goods _____ .'•.;-,,-,::-,,,„••••:•"-.-.-2,:f.,•;„:-.„,,,-.„.,.::•;.,-,-:.::',,,,,..•',:,4..1-•;:?.,„•:•;....;;„4:•••,1?;,••• . _,•';_.•:,.•••.,..-1,:::--,- :•.•-:!2•,,-c,.'4'-‘,:, -...11:1"--,r:'.--. .:•.1i•.,,•:,•.... .-,- '- .,_ . ... • , .„-.,-.--:,,,••,'-: • --• • •-•-•-••-•,'-'/,'•'-`•.•': --'.''''''.','-- •r'-'.- • '-••••'-'•••-••':'•YES:.:: ',MAYBE NO ,..;'•;;....•':' ,•:,..-:;-•. -,'-'-•::':,'.:, --.':':f'j:•--:;:: ,': -•-'' -• ' . --: •;.;.„. • . -.....,:••".-.,...:,:::''ZY•:•-•'.;',...c,-..".",-r.-••• . ••••••,, ,",c,:!,,,,••'.•,;,,-.,,,..':: .--'..,•:,..,-`,/,..'.---.',.:'-:.,•.-. -.••,•,;.-,...i....,.;,:.••„;',-,:,:-,--k:..- •;-•-!',..„...-:;.-.;,...''.,..:,:•.:• ,--..---„,....-,:•,,,•3-2:,'-,..-..•."-:?.:..,•ii,,,, ;....-.;•..,;,„-....:-,;21-,T-c-,,-„.- :- : -•--•:, f,-,•,,-,,....•?,-„;,..-.:;,-,,-.:-,.;:: -•,,....•,- • ..„:„.-,::•.,:-..,..?...,.• ,,,,,,,,,•---.;--.-..--.',,,,,,‘-',":,',;•• •.•e•••••••21::,:f 7.- , 4,-,-;•-,•-•.'1,i ' ":";-...:*i'in-.'•-',:'- 4.i(e) A1 terati ons:•to,:.'Waterborne, rail or air---...traffic?„-.,-----,- ,_„.-------,- •- .- .. ., . ..,:,.,,,, , „,„..,,,,:.,..,, --••;;Jn.-.-?J'.••::.• '.;.:,.;t4",,! :. '-',•--'')':.-1. • •: ::. -,•..,•'-,••-•:.•'.4,:,..- -',,•'•%• :• • :,-.,,•,,'-•'-,•:ft'-2-',', -.,.--- . :"- -•:::. •- ; 7:':.: :•:*:". '.-:-..-'''..: .. MAYBE':.-- .-•:. ,;,,(:.'....:-%,:..;.;.,'---:. .T.,,;',..,7.':.7 (f) Increase in ,traffic-.Yhazards to motor•vehicles,••''',...7--'1":.',-, - •••;„,,',,- - -• bicyclists or:pedestrians' - ' . . , m , ,:--..•.; .,-_,-;•:,T.•••,.:;--,.-:•,:::: ,;-:•.„.--,..:;•,;-:••': X — -: -,,•,,,,,:;:;„-:•:,•:•:.*:.••!.;.::•,,::(.-4',-;,, ..,...j,,..g.,-;;',L.",- •'':4•••:.,;::':• • • • ••. .,•,••,.,,...4., •)::,••••••. " .-- ...,-.-,-,,,,,,,...:,;:-.•,•,;---"-',.••••_.;-..• ••••,--',.•-•:--.,••':•;...:'-':•':,;'15..'..'i';';-'.•:'-'• YES-.-.,::, MAYBE .NO•-,,,-::--,.:,--:•,.:,;:...•,,,•:-..•-,--,,-..-",".:t-. '.,.v,.74',...".. . ,-,.-,.,...,•f!:-.. ,-.',,,,-,'-',:l. '-'...4,,'•,;7:d, '.• •' ''--•:fl•-.;...,'!.',',:F.if'''',.'?:‘,1".',':''',-,;;;';''.;Y:,::..-'Srl.';f:':::'":::!",-;Y''.'::.....1-7-:;: :',','::::..-. .,10'7.:-!'"itt....'.f:... '`.::::::,f:'.'`.:.:',•?.;:11:'..r.-',:::',..:'..--:.'-''''..t.'1''-.'2;.;‘,..i:I.-:,',',--%:' , •,,-;.4,,,,:.,,.... •-•,...,',..i•*.,'..,',.:-- •• . " ' Explanation See :Attached. • . ;-.; -,..:::-..r.i.. -'-';',•••=-,1--:;.;.--'•-.--;:z.:.,4-,i'',, .;' •--. :',•,-,.--•-:;..?:.::;.-:-4..kl,._`,..-;i:,..-.;; := --?:'a.•.: • • -., .:...,-...,%?. ...,,,,-, ...,--,...i:-../..:: ...: -....-,!. .--s. : - : .,..... ,.. ....• -• . . .• . . . .. • . .... ... .. _ . ... ..- .., , •-...",'; ',....'• A..:::-,'(:.- .... •• .. . .„.. . ._ ...... • -=-•;•-•.,;,.:-- , • ••'': •-•• • . - •---- .. ,. . ..• .. . .•.- .,-,,. . ./...:,.. . ..... . ,, . • -.-- . . „ , Lkfr,...-,..,, . • • • • - - - - •• •.••:.'.. .! ...-.• , .-,.•'--..•.:'.• ''''•:---'-2.V.1.•-:•••:,...' •' _, ,- - . - ' ' " ' ,. , , . .. ,.. -•-••-•?..:?,:". (14);•f-.Public Services. Will • the proposal have- an effect upon, or_....,.:.,•;:tt ..iA,,,,,•••••;:...,. .,:•:',,:,-,;•,•--, •"''K'i...'."-;:'• • - -•-2•-•result in a• need for altered governmental service ---.,-..-..--;,7•-•-:-•-•- •,--- ,--•;-••••_,••:',.- ,:,•:.,!,......,•-:.,•:.---., ;.:._. - .....----:,,,. . . ,. , ','•. in, any of the following -areas : .-. . . . . . .,. . ,-,,_.:. .„.-..-,,-.-.,..-• .,.... . •.4:,,,-;-:.,...,, ,,--,.•:,- ;:,.. .,_ .,,;,,,•..„. . . -,-.. (a) Fire protection?.::,;:: . YES---.1 MAYBE ; NO • -- ' -• '• . ',• . '':_*•....:."• . . . ..- . „ . .,:-.--::'••,:- .' •''• (h) Police protection?-, . , ,.. ..-.. .,. - _ .--.. .- • -,-, .. .. ., -•-......- .- ,;:•,•,.?,,,,.. ,.. • . • ...-.,°.."•:;',......, . (c) Schools? „ .,-,..:- :',.,- --- ,: . ..•• . :,-: • ... . • 2 . ., - YES MAYBE " ,•',.:'•: ::- ,,.. ....., • .-..-,3•.•.:-... •:,-• ..-.4.'':'7;•:. . . . -...-(d) Parks or other recreational -facilities - . . • •• , ____, '-',•::,7::• '•:. • • • - . '., .-.. YES .-.,, MAYBE -.NO .---:,..•. . -: , '.•,',:.!•,:,L$:••.. . . . • ' ..: •:...:::';'2,f-4.;-: ' (e) Maintenance of public- facilities,• including '.roads? -,-.;.,.:.•:,••X. •.'•:•-__ __-•-:' ...'•-''.-;___YES MAYBE NO . . • . . • - •,..'. •••.• _' , .'.i.:•...--.,..',.i.,'',-:• .•,,1:1" .•:. : : • -'..'`.7.. ••.- •..". ..-;'.,•-r,---,.;"_,.',: .•,..:',••- •_ft.- -,-,•'• , • (f) • Other governmental services? ..',._-„-.. ..,;,.•......,.;..-.:“.- iy„-;,-: ,,,f•!;•..,.-,-?,. •,...___;....., - - :,-,._...-.. . . _.;,• .•:3•'','-:',';•...,..- . ,:::..., . . . :.:. . . . --. •••,.--,••,,,,v,., 1.-. • ••i'• •••'--/,:q-,:-'•••••-••)-i---•, `'.''---... .-,•--•:',' YES:-.117:.-.:MAYBE ••NO • . •'. ,'..,.....,..: -.-..'.. , •,• . ., I.:i 2. .:•• -. •••••::-,*-',..7.-"X•'.,-.,:,r,-1.i'.-;:r.-i'':;"i'1'5.7:r-'1',V.;:::P.•!:•.c;:' ,'''-ft 3::"'t,.f'•','":'-i.T.'c';7•-,::''...,:::.,''. '.:."• '' .-.• . •,,:::•,,,'":.. •::';',..'••::.:-..,. ‘-'. Explanation-: ..'. See Attached. :::;.-,f.:•,.„,-.".-.; . . , . .... ,...- ... . . , • - ,,-,.• .:• , ,- - -. . - , ,:.k...-. -.-.: ::,;•- .•' .-.::•-•:-.-:-.--,_ - --...-... . -- • .. . . . ..,_.. . . .. . . . .„ , . ... • . •. . • '::::!.,:. . . . , . - • - • . .,- : .._. .:, .. . . ,. . '-'-,:z-,.:'•-- • , . • • .-,-,:,,-., • . .. . . .. -.., (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in:. . . . . . . ., .. _ ._ . .. . . • . . .. . . ••-:-• -. (a) Use •of substantial-amounts• of fuel -or energy' •-_,. ,..._,.. , . : .•'. . , • •• • .. - -.••• •••• -. :• - .. ''- - : TTTYES AI N+. •.. .'-- , ... . • - •. (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of•new sources of energy? , , • YES .. MAYBE Er •••• .• - - - -. ,. . . . . . . • • . . . Explanation: (b) Normallong-term energy commitment for heating, • . . . .. cooking, etc. .. • • . . . • • • . .. . .., .- • • . . 2 • ... . . , • • • . . . • .. (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new , • .:', ..,-: •. : . , . : ' .... systems, or alterations' to the following utilities: -.. ...--. .- . .. ., . „.„ -,-., • , . . ' . • • . • • . '• •-•, . ;',. .• (a) Power or natural gas? • • - ,,- • • • YES -• -MAYBE••• NO ‘..;',.: ••. , ,.,:: . • .... • . . -.::,..-,' . • • --- . ., . . . •. . . • - • - ,• . , . -;::',--,,•;,'• .,:";•.,••.: •. .-..,:i .. .: • -. (b) Communications systems? X- • • - . .• - • • . • YES• . MAYBE' NO •- •:.. - . ''•' • , . , .• - . • • • . . ..• . - . (c) Water?• . - . . % ' '' .X ' •.; ' ' •••••• . ---•• • YES . MAYBE NO •••: • - . . .. . ,. • . - ., . . . . . . . • . . . . , ,- •,., •. • .: •• ••••-•..;,..":••,:',.•.-,...s. _. - .• • :--• ',-,-'•,'- '•-•'••• •,-.':::,:, ,• . - . . . . • „ . . -' • • .-. • , . , .. . . . .- . . . „ . , •. ..•,, , . ., . • • • , -- ;••-:,-' • ..... -•••.:.- --•: . .„ -•..,..•• - -•,:, :-_,• ,,,,,-.....•, -.•,.,,;;.,,,...,,,,.. .-:,,:.•....,•:•.,:-,-•••• -.-:,,,i;-•,-.1.-:-.-'4;f:;!,1:a.,..,,;.„:.%,4,--4..,,..;1-• • : . .• •.- '• -4-:;'.-',-.• ,.., t .ter ...< - • ?C '1Y 4s rr° .,v.:;� fi �:'�9 'f:=." <-y': ` ' 'A,.!' a}<> U - aAS :," y s .tl •�' i,. • . om W -iZ";^, } sy -. ?t+' ": Kfr . i ▪� " ; ^PH : a t ' k ✓ l- u f6 '-. r. .J�, --,..,.i '.w"cv,:` : . twy ' :1' ' •� .." V . r-5`'>.E - ,BK..r•a .... - ., . •-, 5 ,... •,. s`-g�,"--�., _.e� • ..5'.-: :!r:+„i' ii'r< : . _ 3•.1 • yS,,F� - Y .aJv-r • " ,: :, , - .. :, . ''. �� - . r rxa.?,:n•ei��,: l'ITG,yr .' : .. . :�Y- - /rye - �••if':, ••_ '4' Y•t ✓ �i^ L nr x 1..' i t'N+ L' • K:r - � .``' -'• Sewer or -se tic• tanks? • l � - •....>a . x, ., - •r B NO;,: „ �, i- ;,J rl ,rc _ram.,, 7 r•Z,i,,,'-::1"z--.:: •`:v.;,, :,t_..,.Tgv §` e . Storm water drat na e. -'X" . .-t,:.-�,�:• �`:K 1(:,;• - • ,r▪?. F 4`Y :x . . ""•--'- 'f ,_'Sol id .a .-...;.:-_:_ .: _ ...._. _ .___._ _ ;,�). ,. . . ( ) nd disposal? ^ ==-�� ' - ��: • ', • rr, ,. :YES. ,MAYBE' ;NO .t :tf1` " • ,r Explanation. See Attached .-, e3a! • - • (17)` 'Human Health. ' Will the proposal ' result in the creation of _ c -<• -,• ,,;, ;;', any ,health hazard ,orpotential' health hazard_ <` " -'r "`'" d (.excluding <,:_:;�a���_,.•'.•::;-:: �:t�4_ mental health ?` - - " - <, f,. H ▪ '�ne'n rr w TL' _ - :MAY ')s ' r�ry. p io , v:... .. • '-.-,cam i 't;t i l, e :d'd:. 1-E":'•Yp .f: •• 'A=;.-,•,^. A sthe W l' h proposals •: _,;, ':`,';,,= ,-:, _,4 (18)„ a tics`-� it ' t e - result in the obstruction of _ .,.r.,- - ' .• any, scenic vista or view open to the public,. or., wi11, the., - . • • ; t4„<,-,,,,;; ;,�,- ,,�:'. '; proposal--•'result-"in-•the- creation•-'of-an aesthetically-offensive -' w:- =c•'`%-•''- : , ""y site open to. public. _• : view?.�•:..,, - . - _ _ ;''X- .,.�.`.: ,,. =ter - .. - :YES•- '.MAYBE'.'..;�NO..:,:�;:_q•:�•:,`' -: - -'----- - Explanation:' The= roposal' will improve the visual character of the area = ' •- -"-- and 'remove- uncontrolled dumping -and. the unkempt•nature of the site in its .:: a ,'1: • present state. t. • (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the . -- quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?. - YES ,MAYB NO - Explanation: . (20) Arc'heoldgical/Historical . _ Will the proposal 'result in an. - . _ '-''▪ ` - ' -alteration of a significant,archeologicalor historical ,:.1 'Q-.!. :'' s,i'te,: structure, object. or building? ' "` ' y= N0 ;x. ;:=.; Explanation: No significant archaeological or°historical sites suspected. ': ': =_ - Waiting for confirmation from Office of' Archaeology and Historical Pre— �. '4; servati on. : r,- t III. SIGNATURE I , 'the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information `.;�<•_•• is.. true and complete. It is -understood that the' lead agency may withdraw .any decla- '-''"s . • ration of non-significance that it might issue in liance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation _or willfu la k of full disclosure on my part.. • ::;r=- - : Proponent. �jt�`Yt/° (si ed} -, Alit- S- jQGC�( , (name ,r 9fle& u . aP TiZid7/4CptS Alit t . .. . • City of Renton - ` ' ' - _ Planning Department'. • . . 5-76 • exCc • :c 1i1r a• 4:�,,."70.'' _ ".:; im: '' :,-ac 7'Wr , (/"Cs na\i Eb C.H.G. INTERNATIONAL ATTACHMENT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST u II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS #15 ------°-----"'°' Av (1 ) Earth �* — (a) Potentially unstable earth conditions exist on the site in the form of previous slumping along the steep slopes and from abandoned underground mine shafts which underly the western portion of the site. Further on-site investigations prior to construction would be necessary. The potential hazards could be minimized or eliminated with careful planning and design. (b & c) Any project would require at least minor recontouring of the site. This would result in the displacement and overcovering of soils. (e) There would be a temporary increase in the potential for soil erosion during construction. The potential will be mitigated with proper construction techniques. The project will be plan- ned and engineered to decrease present erosion conditions. (3) Water (b & e) There would be an increase in impervious surfaces for buildings,. • • parking lots and roads which would replace soil and vegetation. This will decrease the absorption of water on the site proper and increase the quantity of runoff. Increased human and vehicular activity will add small , quantities of pollutants to runoff water, having a slight effect on water quality. Detention ponds will be provided to mitigate surface impurities through settlement and detain runoff such that it does not exceed that which presently occurs. (12) Housing Removal of a few older marginal single-family houses owned by the sponsor. Other existing residences on and adjacent to the site will be given careful consideration with respect to their setting within the development. The residents of the houses within the proposed development have been personally contacted and are in favor of this proposed development. The rezone will allow for needed additional planned residential and commercial uses. (13) Transportation/Circulation (a) The planned residential uses will generate approximately 3,000 trips per day (based on 6 trips/unit)*. The planned commercial development will operated approximately 2,000 trips per day (based on 18 trips/1 ,000 G.F.A. )* per Institute of Traffic Engineers and Chris Brown (traffic consultant) guides (c) Efforts will be made in the P.U.D. to minimize the impact of additional traffic on existing roads and facilities by tying in and responding to existing conditions. (f) Increase in traffic would require attention to safety design. (14) Public Services • (a - f) There would be an incremental increase in demand for public services in the local area. The agencies have been contacted and no unusual problems are anticipated. (c) Public schools for the area are Earlington Elementary, Dimmit Junior High and Renton High School . The local elementary schools have experienced decreasing enrollments in recent years and do not foresee any problems in handling additional students and expressed interest in the proposed project. If approximately 500 multi-family housing units were constructed, there would be an additional approximately 150 students in local schools, grades 1-12. Taxes from these additional units, as well as the commercial use (will not generate students) , will generate taxes to help offset the costs of these additional services. (16) Utilities - (a - e) The site is adjacent to power, gas, telephone, water, sewer and storm drainage systems. Local extensions and or modifications to service will be required to serve the proposed development as follows. The utility companies have been contacted, and are aware of plans and foresee no problems. (b) Possible need for larger telephone trunk lines. (c) Will require some 3,600' of waterline to the perimeter of the site, but no new supply. (d) Will require some 950' of sewer off-site to an existing METRO trunk. (e) The storm water will be directed through- detention ponds, therefore there will be no increase in the 'rate of discharge, only in the quantity. The nearest line is adjacent to the site on Hardie Avenue. "" r'�1` f���CI11ED/V _RSEDES LETTER OF FEBRUAR' , 1978 �-- 4 pF RSA o • THE CITY OF RENTON U `� ,1111)-p Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 op c. CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 'gyp 5§41. 233-2550 ED SEPST-- February 14 , 1978 C. H . G . International 190,6 One Washington Plaza Tacoma , Washington 98402 RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR APPLICATION FOR REZONE from GS-1 to R-3, R-1 to R-3, and S-1 to B-1, File No. R-129-78; approximately 46 acres of property located west of Hardie Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue) east of So. 140th Street between S.W. Sunset Boule- vard and the Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way (see attached map. ) Dear Sirs : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mgn;tioned application on January 30 , 1978 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for February 28 , 1978 at 9 : 00 a .m. . . (Council Chambers) Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director - • /`� By : y I��1�. �� - L Michael L . Smith Associate Planner MLS :wr • Attachment Randy Blair, Wilsey and Ham 631 Strander Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Pierce W. Davis, Mgr. Robert L. Edwards Real Estate, Economic & Resource Development Renton Shopping Center Milwaukee Land Company Renton, WA 98055 808 Skinner Building Seattle, WA 98101 • __ � \) :2 a 1� I. 2 • Y� �°c_ b r 25 2rA_ '4 e„,_.. --.�� 4' _ ,�: 9Lv' SAP f 4. sit• c•` hrr' V ,r '�r�;'�` A?_7f17 ! �1 y 1'. at .' ' \ \ ' I 11 C+etCa - tiI.LW��IK_ ry P I ii; � -, f "' ''! �'' •4sa f,,. */ affear N ,X.. �,, ST PAUL 8 PACIcIC R R • �(�� _ ... .',j ((�J it • _ r ( `y an� � ,4' , �' C1(\\• SW Sufis5. '1 �' . y .:-.-- -7 ,' z, E b '3e, �® wiz, h iii ` T '6�; ,ry• ,3 0~ 1/` $i s •� u ` • -- 7 I s Ct�v�: Leg 3 s 7..H ,1 ( € s.k. ul� . . -�`,� �Z gN, '' ,� 1 -t 7� �i 1 1' a • Y • ' S - 2�26' Ages ® o s l $�'. , •,• Q \ I ttY,S4c 9.Ts t r C9 S� f. i3+j,Q,It -2 •Cl. ,.1 ir r .% • 1N . ' SEARS l ROE BULK 6lA" :\ S f. �'4 t T.a 1 - - .•1--1 41 2 poi • i'�`''27 `V 7 1 1 , '•,/._ \� . - `S • .• -� H•CAG:e MiLWAUKEE ST eAUL `' 1 SJ'y - 18 V _ S` r` P 1 !f 2 at 8 PACIFIC RAILRJ-0 dr: r 17 ....� Q n s' e ems, .. . � HIL GO M LW NEF S "' - - \�� • i'Si ! CST APAUL IR RAO - - \`'S _ - I. •`, :j1.� �. g ./?j -- Go����� cres �p ` ,;. CHICaC_ MILW:--L'K-E ST P:UL % 4iJ•` • • `I .' :-\. & PAC•cIC RAILROAD w.•� ?///;roi9 .7 't , `ry Y S �-- _-sl_ �c--s. O GM ST P $.„... P v } `� 7 • 130Golvot to % -are " .. i' .Se. orN -IC COAST RAILROAD CO s sINC rua e`'L# • . 055k- '� , "6E0 A H6RA7EL L • u ". 7 i }i FUG E H.•BAGS . :3_,,ENTo +. p►r \� f ..R. . ,� �' r . • Og R: r yRA — 152 / //, �r.f` Z¢ ROBERT L EDWARDSP ING QQ�• - ' ., N I 375Ac I 471 Aa � INAL %Ac / ROBERT WARDS a Al _ - - r,, -- LL]6 LAZS( , :.�'•- il•131 I r c.7b2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON, ON FEBRUARY 28 , 19 78 , AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . C . H . G. INTERNATIONAL , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM GS-1 TO R-3, R-1 TO R-3 , AND S- 1 TO B- 1 , File No . R- 129-78; approximately 46 acres of property located west of Hardie Avenue S . W . ( Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S . W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 28, 1978 AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS . GORDON Y . ERICKSEN PUBLISHED February 17 , 1978 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR . CERTIFICATION STEVE MUNSON , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public , on the 15th day of February , 1978 SIGNED j2k-...q114.4.4.44.4401m.1 �,. ,,, THE CITY OF RENTON f— n , ,„ o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 O� ® y ' , CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT O Q- 235-2550 4)4ti. SEPSclIP . cO - February 7, 1978 -. C. H. G. International 1906 One Washington Plaza Tacoma , Washington 98402 - RE : NOTICE OF APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM GS- 1 TO R-3, R-1 TO R-3, AND S- 1 TO B- 1 , File No. R- 129-78 ; property located on Hardie Avenue S. E. between Sunset Boulevard West and the Burling- ton Northern Railroad Right-of-way Dear Sirs : The Renton Planning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on January 30 , 1978 . A public hearing before the City of Renton Hearing Examiner has been set for February 21 , 1978 at 9 : 00 a .m. . (Council Chambers) Representatives of the applicant are asked to be present . All interested persons are invited to attend the hearing . If you have any further questions , please call the Renton Planning Department , 235-2550 . .� Very truly yours , Gordon Y . Ericksen Planning Director , .- ':' By s -� ,. Mic a-el S . &mith Associate Planner wr cc : Randy Blair -41. Wilsey and Ham 631 Strander Blvd . -,97 . `,, Tukwila , WA 98188 .. Pierce W . Davis , Mgr . Real Estate , Economic & Resource Dev . Milwaukee Land Company cr JG, . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON) . WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL , RENTON , WASHINGTON , ON FEBRUARY 21 19 78 , AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS : 1 . C. H. G. INTERNATIONAL , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM GS- 1 TO R-3, R- 1 TO R-3 , AND S-1 TO B- 1 , File No . R- 129-78 ; property located on Hardie Avenue S . E. between Sunset Boulevard West and the Burlington Northern Railroad Right-of-way . 2. PAUL AND ANNE SMITH , APPLICATION FOR FOUR-LOT SHORT PLAT APPROVAL AND WAIVER OF OFF-SITE • IMPROVEMENTS , Files No . 130-78 and W- 131-78; property located on the southeast corner of Jones Avenue N . E. and N. E . 20th in the vicinity • of 1916 Jones Avenue N. E . • Legal descriptions of files noted above on file in the Renton Planning1Department. • • • • • • ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 21 , 1978, AT 9 : 00 A. M. TO EXPRESS THEIR ;OPINIONS .' • GORDON Y . ERICKSEN PUBLISHED February 10 ,11978 RENTON PLANNING DIRECTOR . ' . iCERTIFICATION • I , STEVE! MUNSON ' (a:; 'i , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE ;COPIES • OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERFPOSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ' ATTEST: Subscribed and !sw'orn to before me, a Notary Public , ' , on the 8th day of February ; ? 1978 S I G N S D.J - p PLANNING , DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER III PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 28, 1978 APPLICIANT: C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL FILE NO. : R-129.78 , REZONE A. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Applicant requests approval, of rezone from GS-1 , General Classi - fication Suburban Residence District and R-1 Single Family Residence District , and S-1 Suburban Residence District to B-1 Business District. This is to allow the development of the site for multi-family residential and business/commercial purposes in the form of a Planned Unit Development . B . GENERAL INFORMATION : 1 . Owner of Record : MILWAUKEE LAND COMPANY 2 . Applicant : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL 3 . Location : Located west of Hardie Avenue S.W. (Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S.W. Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. 4. legal Description : A detailed legal description is on file in the Renton Planning Department. 5. Size of Property : Approximately 46 acres. 6. Access : Via S .W . Sunset Boulevard and. Edwards Avenue S . W. 7 . Existing Zoning : GS-1 , General Classification Suburban Residence District ; R-1 , Single Family Residence District; S-1 , Suburban Residence District 8. Existing Zoning in G , General Classification District; the Area : R-1 , Single Family Residence District ; M-P Manufacturing Park District ; 1 B-1 , Business District 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan : High Density Multi -family Residential and Commercial east of Maple Avenue S . W. 10. Notification : The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Record Chronicle and posted in at least three (3 ) places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance. C . PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The purpose of the request is to provide zoning consistent with a proposed multi -family and commercial use . ' I PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE ' TWO RE : C. H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE ; R-129-78 D . H'ISTORY/BACKGROUND : The westerly 13 acres of the site was annexed into the City by ammended Ordinance No . 1928 on December 22 , 1961 . The remainder of the site was annexed to the City in July 8 , 1948 through 0rdinance No . 1320. E . PHYSICAL BACKGROUND : 1 .1 Topography : The interior of the site is fairly level with the eastern two-thirds (2/3 ) of the site experiencing a slight (3 percent ) slope to the south . The western one-third ( 1/3 ) of the subject site slopes steeply to the south at approximately 18 to 23 percent . 2 . ; Soils : The subject site is composed of two (2 ) primary soil types : Beausite Gravelly Sandy Loam (BeC ) and Beausite Gravelly ' Sandy Loam (Bed . ) Beausite (BeC) , permeability is moderately I rapid , available water capacity is low. Runoff is medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate . This soil is used for timber and pasture and for urban development . Beausite (Bed ) , runoff I is rapid and the hazard of erosion is severe . This soil is used for timber and pasture. 3. Vegetation : The site primarily consists of dense ground cover in the form of scrub bushes and grass . Stands of deciduous trees are also scattered throughout the site. 4. , Wildlife : The 'thick vegetation is a suitable environment for ; native mammals and birds . 9 5 . ' Water : ' No surface water is evidenced on the site. 6. Land Use : The surrounding area is primarily a mixture of commercial , single-family residences and undeveloped uses . Directly east of the site is Renton Shopping Center , while to the north a small mixture of commercial and single-family uses exist . The site itself contains large portions of 'undeveloped land with a scattering of single-family residences . The existing railroad track line and Earlington Industrial Park are located directly south of the subject site . F. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS : The subject site is located in an area of mixed uses . Abutting the site', on the east is the Renton Shopping Center while to the north a small mixture of commercial and single-family uses exist along S . W. , Sunset Boulevard . The site itself consists of primarily undevel - opedlland with a few single-family residences scattered throughout the site. G . PUBLIC SERVICES : 1 . Water and Sewer : An existing four (4) inch water main runs along Sunset Blvd . S . W. , a six (6 ) inch main runs along Stevens Avenue S. W. onto the site itself, and twelve ( 12 ) inch water main is located along S . W. 7th Street approximately 450 feet south of the subject site. An eight (8 ) inch sanitary sewer is available along Sunset Blvd . S . W. and along Lind Avenue S . W. A forty-eight (48 ) inch storm sewer is located along Edward Avenue S . W . . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28, 1978 PAGE THREE RE : C1. H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE ; R-129-78 2L Fire Protection : Provided by the Renton Fire Department as per ordinance requirements . Any future development of the site will be subject to City of Renton standards . 3 . Transit : Metro Transit Route 107 operates along Sunset Blvd . S . W. to the north of the subject site . 4. Schools : The site is located approximately one-half (z) mile to the south of Earlington Elementary School and one-half (2) • 1 mile to the west of Renton High School . 5 . ', . Parks : The site is located approximately one and one-half ( 12) miles to the west of Cedar River Park and Liberty Park and within three-quarters (3/4 ) mile to the south of I Skyway Park. H . APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE : 1 . Section 4-725 ; Amendments 2 . Section 4-706 ; R- 1 Residence Single Family 3 . Section 4-707 ; S-1 Suburban Residence District 4. 1 Section 4-709A; R-3 Residence District 5. Section 4-711 ; B-1 Business District I . APPILICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENTS : 1 . Land Use Report , 1965 , Residential , page 11 , and objectives ; pages 17 and 18 . J . IMPACTS ON THE NATURAL SYSTEM : The rezoning of the site itself will not cause any impacts upon existing natural systems . However , the proposed future development of the site will cause an increase in storm water runoff , traffic movement , noise levels , and disturb soil and vegetation . K. SOCIAL IMPACTS : Once the site is developed into commercial and multi -family resi - dential uses , the potential increase in social interaction is great. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT/THRESHOLD DETERMINATION : Pursuant to the City of Renton ' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , as amended , RCW 43 . 21C , a Declaration of non-significance has been issued for the subject rezone ;further environmental review will be required as part of the submittal of specific development plans . This negative declaration is based on the requirement that any development of the site will be in the form of a Planned Unit Development and will be subject to the requirements of the City ' s P . U . D . Ordinance . M. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION : • A vicinity map and a site map are attached . N . AGENCIES/DEPARTMENTS CONTACTED : 1 . City of Renton Building Department 2 . City of Renton Engineering Division 3 . City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division 4. City of Renton Utilities Division 5. City of Renton Fire Department II PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE FOUR RE : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE ; R-129.-78 0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS : 1 .!; The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan map element which designates the site and general area west of Maple Avenue S . W. as high density multiple family residential , and the area east of Maple Avenue S . W. as commercial . (4-3014B ) 2 . ' The subject request is generally compatible with surrounding land uses . The Renton _Shopping Center is located directly , to the east of the subject site ; the commercial and multiple family uses are located along Sunset Boulevard ; and the Earling- ton Industrial Park is located directly south of the subject site . There are some existing single family residences located around the northerly portion of the subject site together with three (3 ) single family residences within the subject site which have not to date been purchased and included in the pro- posed development. Additional setbacks , screening, landscape buffering , height limitations , and design controls will be necessary to ensure compatibility of these existing single ' family residential uses with the proposed development. (Com- . prehensive Plan objective #1 , #3 , and #4, page 17) Although ; the site is adjacent to existing single family uses , the ! location , existing charactr , and size of the site provide an indication that the proposed zoning is timely and appro- priate. However, this is not to say that suitable means of ' protecting adjacent viable single family uses is not appro- priate and necessary. 3. 'The applicant has indicated that development of the site will be by Planned Unit Development ( P . U. D. ) , thereby establishing further review requirements by the City for specific jite development. Further environmental review per the State 'Environmental Policy Act will also be required as part of the P. U. D. review process . 4. The proposal is compatible with existing zoning east and south of the subject site ( B- 1 and M-P respectively) and other existing multiple family and business zoning along Sunset Boulevard north and northeast of the subject site. However, rezoning the subject site to R-3 and B- 1 will create •an undesirable interface with existing R- 1 zoned areas directly north of the subject site along the south side of Sunset Boulevard. These areas should be protected with conditions establishing setbacks , buffer areas , height controls , etc. , and/or the possible creation of a low density multiple (R-2 ) belt between the proposed R-3 zone and these existing R- 1 areas . This will reduce the impacts and create a more. reasonable land use transition (4-3010( 6) . 1 ) . The Compre- h!ensive Plan designates this existing R- 1 area for high density multiple family residential as well . 5 . The subject site was considered at the last area-wide land use analysis (Comprehensive Plan amendment) and designated as high density multiple family (4-3014(A) ) . 6 . The growth experienced by the Renton Shopping Center and Earlington Industrial Park , together with the site ' s prox- imity to these two areas and Sunset Boulevard (a designated state highway) provides further validity to the proposed use and zoning (4-3014 (C) ) . PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE 1FIVE RE : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE; R-129-78 7,. The area has experienced little or no new single family residence subdivision or development in recent years . The physical condition of some of the structures in the area indicate a slow transition from owner-occupied single family residences to rental -type units . Much of the subject site • is also undeveloped land , which may have previously been utilized for pasture, gardens and orchards (4-3014(C ) ) . 8. Utilities exist in the area . However , the water and sewer mains closest to the site are of insufficient size and depth for the proposed use. _ The most suitable alternatives for pro- vision of water and sewer will be to connect to existing mains in S. W. 7th Street approximately 450 feet south of the subject site . The applicant should coordinate the necessary utility requirements with the Public Works Department . 9. Storm drainage retention and oil /water separation facilities will be required as part of the storm drainage plans . An existing 48 inch storm main (old Black River Channel ) is located along Edwards Avenue S . W. . 10. Proper access to the subject site from S . W. Sunset Boulevard and from Edwards Avenue S . W. will be a critical element of site plan and further envjronmental review. Sufficient street improvements , on-site circulation , and traffic control devices 1 ( including possible traffic signal at S . W. Sunset Boulevard ) will be necessary. It will also be important to assure public access to all existing residences not included in the proposed , development . It is assumed that certain vacation of existing streets within the subject site will be necessary in conjunction with the planning of new streets relative to the total master planning for the site. 11 . ; Proper fire and emergency vehicle access will also be important , with several access points from different directions being necessary. The large amount of frontage along S . W. Sunset ; Boulevard and the opportunity of specific development review , via the P . U . D . ordinance will provide the means whereby suit- able access can be achieved . 12 . ,The small isolated parcel of land near the northeast corner 'of the site is within an area surrounded by R-1 zoning and uses , which are not part of the subject site . Rezoning this ,isolated parcel would constitute a spot zone that would be inconsistent with the existing zoning and uses surrounding it. ' Therefore , this parcel should retain its R-1 zoning (Compre- hensive Plan Objectives , page 17 ) . 13 . proposed development is in the form of two (2 ) and three (3 ) story apartment clusters scattered throughout the site as a Planned Unit Development with a proposed density of approxi - mately 16 to 20 dwelling units per acre . The easterly ten (1.0) acres adjacent to Edwards Avenue S . W. , proposed for B-1 , will consist of a combination commercial /office center . The applicant intends to submit a master plan for site development per the P . U . D . Ordinance subsequent to completion of rezoning . 14. The existing trees on the site should be preserved and included as part of site development as much as possible . 15 . The soils and geology of the westerly portion of the site may require additional tests and special construction methods for such intense development . . PLANNING DEPARTMENT- PRELIMINARY REPORT ) HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING OF FEBRUARY 28 , 1978 PAGE .SIX RE : C . H . G . INTERNATIONAL REZONE ; R-129-78 16,. Provision of ample open space for active and passive recreation will be an extremely important aspect of develop- ment of this site. It will also be very important to provide 1 sufficient screening/buffer areas adjacent to existing single family residences . P . PL'ANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION : Recommend approval of the subject rezone with R-2 transition/ buffer zone (as described in #3 below) . based on the above analysis excluding the portion of Parcel B within Block 9 of Earlington near the northeast corner of the subject site , subject to the following conditions to be established as restrictive covenants : 1 . All site development shall be approved as a Planned Unit Development and shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 27 of the Planned Unit Development ( P . U . D . ) Ordinance . 2. Density - Density shall be within the range of sixteen to twenty ( 16-20) dwelling units per acre. Specific maximum site density shall be established as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . 3 . The first 150 feet adjacent to the existing R-1 , zoned property along the northerly portion of the subject site. The first 150 feet along S . W. Sunset Boulevard shall , be zoned R-2 . This will pirovide a suitable land use transition from the existing single family residences to the proposed R-3 zone, and will provide density controls , setbacks , height limits , etc . more compatible with the single family residence uses and zoning . 4 . Setbacks - No structure shall be constructed within fifty ( 50) ' feet of an existing single residence zone , and within fifty ( 50) feet of S . W. Sunset Boulevard . Additional setbacks shall be required as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . +' I 5. Landscape Screening Buffer - The first thirty (30) feet adjacent to an existing single family residence zone shall be land- scaped and earth-bermed to provide a dense screening buffer . Additional landscaping and possible fencing shall be required as a condition of Planned Unit Development approval . 6. Height Limit - No structure within 100 feet of an existing single family residence use shall exceed a maximum height of twenty five (25 ) feet. 7 . Additional specific developmental standards may be required as conditions of Planned Unit Development approval . 8. No clearing or grading shall occur on the subject site until al,fter preliminary Planned Unit Development approval . All trees shall be preserved as much as possible and incorporated into site development plans . 9. Specific geological and soils studies , together with a detailed access and traffic study shall be submitted at the time of Preliminary Planned Unit Development application . 10. Utility plans shall be coordinated with and approved by the Public Works Department, prior to submittal of the Pre- liminary Planned Unit Development application . 11 . Those portions of lots 3 , 4, and 5 , Block 9 of Earlington described as part of Parcel B in the legal description are not at this time suitable for R-3 zoning . This area should remain as R-1 . Any rezone to multiple family would create an' incompatible infiltration among the existing single family residential uses surrounding the parcel . (Compre- he'nsive Plan Land Use Report , Objective #1 , page 17 . ) 1 I I I 1 .k 1 \\' I1 I I I 1 I III 1 I N4I I \ ` ; �. -T',�� ' 6e) I t___' 1.\•N` -F\ 4'. ' ' 'Ql,- . IN dill- '!' O�_sE.ATTG a • Z 2polo t a • af. , • . --- \.0C,.a • 6• 6 14'EN �,i11 1 aR�l. LE PrP , \ s N,�+ \ 1 ELiNE a \\P.s\\ 'Q ► _A B- i,:7.7'-'-' L-'-' `,_- , ' I I/OM iiii 2 p." 1" \ -a R•... - - _ L `vit 44141167401411110 N tag"tip tint: . : G� a ',no -.Mil my.,f.7.1,,,,,ri .z......,,,....1 awl lefites. .v4 i„ado - ____ _._t._ ft 4710 . Nlikillv ..,,%.K.k. i;r74.40b-ii.,* • ,, _ _ __________4__._, ; a .mitif :47 ii Ater., eel 447: ,.- \ _.--\\EIMOUP .,..p.„, ha i iifinkt4• 19 kpili ili.1..kririr isi 1111 ropigiti ... \- 1 , _- l'`! ; fr ���1`/�iyl�'���i�,;u��a����!°4 .t:I04z0;l• '� \\\\\ tea. \ .-l„i c\‘l'\,\ .UN-SET BLVD •-elm t pP \ i``� .;`er.r(,t!ii ,��'V.` EC�ir� ��.tu;���' 15\\ ____ N iltt ,,„:..T:,--4;;;;;:, ielf 1.7...P P. \ "2_ •\ • . 1 ! . : . .....4, .0Arissizr,,,.. ht,,,4 :174, A. ' \ \ " - \ ) \-1'3\ It.l.Je-cl- . . , , , _ r • • _C S� < I n -9ti.,, m l-_ - I •.ti 1 W ` Q 1 • ' U .�q `.;..;�..\ Z • • •• '-i- t ;kim1L • REZONE : C. H. G. INTERNATIONAL , APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM GS- 1 TO R-3, R- 1 UIIIIIII/I11• TO R-3 , AND S- 1 TO B- 1 , File No. R- 129-78 ; property located on Hardie • Avenue S. W. (Edwards Avenue) east of South 140th Street between S . W . Sunset Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Railroad' Right-of-way. • APPLICANT C. H. G. INTERNATIONAL TOTAL AREA ±46 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via S . W. Sunset Blvd. and Edwards Ave. S . W. • EXISTING ZONING GS- 1 , R- 1 , and S- 1 . EXISTING USE _ PROPOSED USE Multi-family and Commercial COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN ' High Density Multi-family and Commercial 1 COMMENTS — • • a 6 ,�.' = r ,r ;'. ? 1 ""j• _ `'= - '--�C. .:� - - -�.Sa� // ' - -� .i ' j T 1 yam' \ltUlAl It \V\ L l7 7 r co jGe 77• l`'1Q^�l� a •Jb�Js �% ti ��.•NJ' -� sae Glr %-` r,'� ttAi ',T.,3 J \ 777---i .)1 r J ,.a; �• .r �1 37 ti- S , - y / ' 7 �9�• ` � � ?e ' 7 g- ♦ • I' _������✓✓✓ (,� RN \ SG 4'2,-.., •... 7" 0 J. _ . 22 , : /8 Cj Y / / / • ,r '� 333 + ,, .I: 4. '�°°ac. BLS T O i I 247 zs z7k f.•; nrr! l �,s l r_ = � ' :4, 40 u I: . I,\ \ ;S. {• - Jr %7 •�. r r ' `� 1 7 I 1t -• 17 l S.aI.r 1 9', ,ei : \\ C9I(! U r� f 1� 116 7 �8 �fy �I ys. 7a JO 1s� 1 1�J j ! l; �� /�7/:R1 � >)j 6 'f �� ; 04 Ac!: 4p' h \ �\ ROAD \ 4rH ;�.1r' /r? 6�fi :7�j •4eQ � ' :ADO � \ a. an / 7 ,Z 7B/N 11CA=` b11LWAUKz E. ---- 6 PL \l j ®�' r�. ® j F�; r ��• 4�/9/'/� ' `� ' �.l\I HENRY'"enar H. �\ , �/ c• .4 Sr Ta V-0�- w ' ST. PAUL 8 PACIFIC R. R. - - - D --•_ - .-- -- ---� ---- ----r - ----- -s-- - - -- _ - __suNS,E- a.._,, ; -.¢ >' ,r Sr`\ s�paz \\_ $ S.W. �3 8 ibilk. CI s�= s.e OE \y,,r' 65 • rA Itcg� C is /6, - I • �• sAT +Y - I It -- ` — \\ wiz 4. .,.,,.,, I R T 7 gitir# 27/ 7 r'6 f •-0,.. , Q oti I I H \i'4-7 , ov' /�-,`Tr2S .s "7l'. .. i. ,4 /3. ,S • , /-! :I1�j7J . 14:4. s;.. tfiRa" y I`/ ��\ t ' 8 f,� ,\,-- : - - - -- ---- -- \------ W. .. Sy Y'•..U;7a ZS • 277 rev`+- Y �z a /�J:9 S r'. ' , ba•� .l. , •} TL-165 .. on -V tP' Z�� oQ5 odi ``5 - Gov't Lot3 TH • �2 �6 n . 81 ;s {gy m '\G•p ci\\ 5" e - 4,A , \\�� 21.26 Acres �+ . • ST. . /l.e ;;2O 2/�-= •3/2®0 ' - •gf ,�3/12'i' • \\ c ,, \\ e o , G 0 i 5 r - CD s ' 22 _ E. iA'' ,6•S 4 SEARS & ROEBUCK&(A. i\y 207S Ac t 'S,r4 �Y• N r '4/ZS ` �1 �,•' {J / � �s7—,�y/ \ ._ `\ ?` LD 1 ' 3 • = er . ® ; 26/27/'n 312/ , `-�-may 40 . ` F lit a 'm•d �`__ 17'-2 �HICAGQ MILWAUKE ST. rAUL �' Z0. le; - / LAI �_- Q'G I _ il CY AC'FICRLROAD • Nt I • Mir ICAGO MILWA.UK_E SL PWL n-">c 4 illIV .1-1'. mitcgi._ �_- ± ' r4 ;3 /� "•v' i -_-- 8 PAC. IC RAILROA7 rc g a z I HAy l I �Es ;y-ns ac. � - - -t.2d 'S/4 /3 V .. i ell .... „. ..‘ . sz.y: C M.ST P slot- 9 ‘40, \ '''' a. AI/ �/ 11 pA1 �a v.7�. , Govt Lo gr" m1111 - _ , a UKEE " 1 4-0 :42 '3O.IO -(T �NILAGOIL u.ua d^ ` ,� wa.nz,l VA ' pr 8.N INC. 1 = P` ,; ,. Ih IC COAST RAILROAD CO. 7,, rtza ii I6E0. A e // I W O I. 335Ac - 477 Ac 1.64 46 "Lj6 Ac T.t153 I r,c.,J 0_36 TL254. T� TL251 I T.L-251 I 0 s / 1 r _ •-�--•Sw —- 7 r -.—.ct.—•—•----Y'1J-.I8�. ' --- --- L4 c —.—.-7TH �'—•—.ST — -- s ! •—•—•—•—•—•—•—•—•—• v • / • ROUTE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE ROUTED j 3/72 PLEASE EVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR: REZON C:.0(1r wt[ 7A,mcw44,L. MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE L SIGNATURE OR j DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDING ) .3D RAFFI C ENG . X 02- /6 ENGINEERING ly / I ,/ /Y/76- HEALTH REVIEWER 'S COMM APPROVAL CONDITIONS : SIRE_ K(3 PLEASE SIGN THE E . I .W . : ROUTING FOR REVIEW OF ENIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORMS lc, : ( Finance Department r Fire Department ! Library Department 0 Park Department Police Department ' Public Works Department Building ' Div. a Traffic Engineering Div . 0 Engineering Div. 0 Utilities Engineering Div. FROM : Planning Department , (signed by responsible official or his designee) ' sUBJECT : Review of ECF- 3o8. 7S ; Application No . : r -IZ-7-- 74 Action Name : C HST 1 t moi ri C4 ; (1-1 7e 'J Y2ezrt. S --/ iv r 3. / Please review the attached . Review .requested by (date) : .46/74) . REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ZSLTDC� Comments : .d- c e �w C��ed Tv 0- i /�Pi /� % i ___-< 2 A-674/4 ie .7,:c.)...e-x... ch (2.0.7da,i, deete-ii a-7e-- dam- � a lQ (i dv' r/ /� /7�' Signature irector or Authorized Representative Date REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : ,: , • / rf Comments : Al.) . r / '7/ r .-( l I, '�r r !�� / I Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 6-76 (OVER) 1F. VIEW BY 011-1ER JF:PARIMENTS : De p a rt.me n t -r- TiKS Comments : -r74ct_ rt I"C 11, P rus S /1--t tfl Lo %---L %-)Prook-r 12- 1/4-A-; • Ii.c.ku 1.3%1 ¶ t Pc r L._ d.ruAold-t-c, , • Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date . „ . REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : 1 Department : 7T4/1/ 6 >- Comments : c2/7/ c--17Q_Q( Signature of Director or Authorized Represekative Dge"---/ • REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : • Department : . Comments : Titf-L.S-exi--; /E640,r,fisi • acr20.VAL a ()7/7C/- • • Signature of Director or Authorized ' epresentative Date • • ,_ VIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : Department : Comments : • • • • . • Signature of Director or Authorized • Representative Date . . • • • • • • MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 1978 TO: Mike Smith, Planning Department FROM: Clint Morgan, Traffic Engineering Division SUBJECT: Rezone - C.H.G. International Implementation of the proposed planned development will have a significant impact on the surrounding roadways. Particular problems to be considered in detail. in regard to traffic are as follows: 1. The effect of the left turning movements generated into and from the entrances at Thomas Ave. SW F Sunset Blvd. West and at Stevens Ave. SW & Sunset Blvd. West. 2. The effect of the left turning movement produced at Hardie Ave. SW and shopping center entry and exit roadway going to Sunset Blvd. West. 3. The effect of traffic at SW 7t61 Street and Hardie Ave. SW. It is our understanding Hardie Ave. 8W from the railroad track south to SW 7th Street is a private section of roadway which makes it questionable as to the extent of future roadway improvements we may want to provide or can provide. 4. Details of the proposed internal circulation are needed to consider the questions above. It is our request that the developer address the traffic circulation proihems as listed above and propose a solution for proper traffic control. • G //1^ CEM:ad ' ROUTE SCHEDULE PLANNING DEPARTMENT C2` DATE ROUTED j 30/77 PLEASE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION FOR: 12 -1z�i -7g R E Z O N COLT-. t orf 2 JA--p e),.u4L- MAJOR PLAT SITE APPROVAL SHORT PLAT SPECIAL PERMIT WAIVER , SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PERMIT OR EXEMPTION AND RETURN TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH ANY COMMENTS YOU MIGHT HAVE , BEFORE ?/ /7? SIGNATURE . OR INITA DEPARTMENT APPROVAL DENIAL DATE BUILDING 1 30 - 78 _ _ RAFFI C ENG . X 02- Ag ENGINEERING /- /- 7, HEALTH • .„ REVIEWER 'S COMM APPROVAL CONDITIONS : Slim a • / PLEASE SIGN THE E . I .W . : .,,,,'!w,r.z„....,1?„.;:..;;;,.-i,,..0:.,i,,,,,,..,:„.!,;.;:::-.=,:.:1,;,./. .,:f.,.: .;:i.:.,...,,•:,:.:.:`,.,-.!;,.•:",J•..,..4,,';'.„":.;.::::i'::.;'::',,;4 r)-.!-,1!.''?:.'Ai;'':::::1,,':4';,..:.:.,:is'.::',:' ,..."-,'.'",:-. --,•''';'::...'-';',',?:.';'::::::','..:::::::';',7i1.:':..':fr:,;:.i,r:•..,I'::: -?:":::;:.'if•-i,::::1:','..x7'," ,:;;:',;',:z:.c.;',7:'Z,':,'',!!A.::*5.,A'ZA:6111 .4%-:',,''7) 'A-il.,":','''');-:::i1;:`:,';:r:::',:;:441;:;,,::,'zf."'',.. .:',''-'1 i',..,:','.../Z•J'; .':!',7-r.,.:':.,".:,;:';',.;•Y,; '-':-''''','.i::.,:-.r.":: ::"-,',,":j.::.,:!2',':,::.5.',(7.''''.',... .-'-','1.''.'..:.:;:-'•,::-,: .,'.-::1,:.:'.'',:,;1,.,-',-,::-.1 t:-.,';',:'..";.:':'`.::,'.-:.:i. ,t*..f;s:,::::„'i-''','":,::;:',. .,:.;.i.,..,.5:4,•,;..5s.,,i'.,s,..•:,;-'10,i,P;.YA,0:,,,tk,ki ';',',:,'',: .:-.-.-:i.,:i,.:..';'.',,,-,.,•,. ..-.-..z...,:-,;f1,,..:' ,';‘,.••,•,',.,,,:•,. ,.,•.''-•,,',:,.....,,iY••.:,,.,'.;s.•-,,..',..,,.',.,,,,,,:,••,; ';. -,:,-;,,,,,,-t!..-:.:,,,,.;.,,:-..-,.', -:,.• ','.....1,-,..,..,•,,:',.. :;•;•:',:,....:,,;.,,,,,,,,,,,.-..,7,..,;,,,..,.,„ .,,,,•.;. ,.„ .•,...,,.,....,•,' , . ,.;-,..,-,- --z--;--,,, , , . ..',,,•::, ..,it•,,,„,,,;•.2.q• '''";••;?•iLli4 ..,'/,'.'•c..,:'...' ..... .;(,'.:,:•';'•:'$'',..?.';'1•,,-.',::-:•'''.,',•;'..,!--•;,?',',- .,''''.;'•1;,.....',::''.'.,:'''''.'",'•:.'•'[..1':,',,,',;if••...''':',.'''.,'••:,'.•;„-.. ..;'';',::::,:.'", ••',,, - _. '',:,,',.., ;(..-,,,,,'-••::":','V:.-•,,, L,',.;''..,...,:.-,. ."'-'''•:','PJ .V:".:•.•,•k?...',1'.4,,•1;j..Y4,',..-:',',:.1'...';'.'-,...z.:'•,'• r.!..,..di;, •4.1`,01,1-7',.',•'-',.:' .?/'': ''''.i;:i..,.;.-?:.'?'g:,;R,,i;.f-4,-,;";',•-f,.:''.':,?;'',‘-'',i-,A_''''''','..,..,..r[(;:i".i:::!'''.i',' x',,,[:!:.•..'•:`,,,'.:,'-''.,.,:',..,',.. ,,,•,..,,.';::-..''.,.',,,...I....,':•;.!.:;,,:,.','',,•::.,':,'.:::.,..H.;,:,...,'....•,,. ,.-.!„..,.,?..,;-ii..,'7.2:... :•,.•,:.,',,.',•',:',..••,.;-.,:..''s:. ,,'.:-.'',..•,, •,:,'-..;.'-:-..::..,.7..,-;.,.:,,;,..,•'„...;..'::,:'p f,:i.:.:...,j...,'.,,..'..,.,. .,',';..,..:.;,i,i-,:'.,...'. ' : . ; . o1 - , , ,,;.'„,.,':,,,,',„:.;.'.',...,....'•',:•;,.:3;V.,,,,::y`,,,',,'1,.:,.;..,'.,:.'.i;'.;•,1;`•--.,.1,,,,. V ,':";•• .' : 11 1tIlittNAFOR,'REV1EW0P. ENilRONMENTA .'itlEaKiiii .?iiti ,!4-i3O.'ll:,,'i,. t',,-,-;'-.,:1c,'.4.':.,:,''./:•.!;,-i.:-4.):ii,'',.';,.' -ir --‘,.'.47.,'..,'',"•'..qi,,','''.1.','.'...., ,:i"''‘F,,,•.:...,',..-;',..,!::e.,'..,1A.,F•:;1•‘;.F.•.L:'.1.!;:':'1'''.''..P''T-.:1'.',':•• ':,,i'.'.'',.1.!:'',:'...;'''',. ,'.-...'..7.',-..-.' :':'':-•.::"'',.;:''j'-.1i'.';'' :'-::':.."';'-':."-!'..:',;;'''',,'41-,':'',.,;1'5•:!,',.'",:;.„(,,,,":,!,.,4T.';'' '';,;)'4',.-.-j.!.,'i.'fi'.:..';',4-.•:..V.,.17 .ns;',:,,:!‘;,,d1;:.*''.7:1";,,;!ii"'..i ,-;. g,.,.•..,,;..,,,41.-'.;,,„, 7.,,-r'..,.. ,,,.,,'•. , ,,, ,', 5.:A,.;,. ,.ii,i,, ;,•; , .., .d, ,: 0;,.:,, ,..% , ,, ,•' ,..'.: - ::,•.,'''. ...:,;,,;;::::::‹,].',.':',..''!J ,..,:,':::'".i"1-,:'`:-- ' ',.'.,:;•,'::'.',.1:1 '',::.i,' ''''.3*1';'Ir''.":.".,rf,',''',:e:!:'''''','•'1S'''}; F4nanc Department 't'4.•;''..:',':-••'.4'i•T,,,, ._:,..,'.,..... ...... , .,s,.., . , . '... ,. . •. : •. , . • .. ..., .. ,,,:-,•...,,,,-;,-?....,...,...,.......•,,.:,,, ,,...,.,;,,,i.....„..:.:,,..,,;.,, ,...,.,,,..,,,•,.f.,„:,,,,,r,......;,,,,,,,.,.„.„ ,,,, k.,..i.,•,,,,,•,,,,,,',.,;,,.. .,...,,,r-,-:1,....`,7,' ',...';'•,',..,..-:.,...,'1 •,--„., Fi.:rc-:',.',-,14,e.p.a,r.t mell:t- '.'..'., ,...'..'(1 .':.--: - .; : ..,':':..','.,..: ...,..'.., ...''::'•'-...i,:::'.1-c.}.1;;'',.,'.!.:.';'.'.':;'.,.. „.,'.-,. ;.e;;,_„',.r.,..:..,... 40.1..1 bIt'ary,..,',D e pa rt Men t...;-"•-•.-. ',v'....,-,.•.',,-, ',',.••.:•.,••••:•.•..••:'...,.;.,„;'...,,,•,....,...,:-.'‘... ....:, ''.-,,,•,,'i.,•......,:,,...'.,,,,, •,...-:,,,,!:...,,...,.„..,-;',•;,,,,,. .,,,,,,,„F,..-:•.?,,:,.,;-..i,:,:-.i, •-:'' !'.e.,.''.;:)".....„;••••.•'..`- ,''.•.•,',.[.• : .•••,..,..t. - .. _••,• • '',..',•;,:.•,,.,:.,.,,,,, , ;',', , . : . - .: : ' , - . , . " ,.,,t,.;.,•,.',..:',. , ,, . •, •••-..,;. • . ••..,..,•'.,';,..:,..,,•;,‘,.:,'„-i...,•'.:,.,'''.-'', •.,.'•'.1-,-''' .,.,..F0,6iek.u'Dep`6rtm.ent• . . . . . . ' . '...,...• -.' I. . ...'. ' • .'• -1•..... -..., •-• : ..:. .',,; l''sJV,',...:':','..•'':•...."'.'" sy".•,..-....d..c....:•... 0 Poll ce.....Department - . • .. . •' ..:• ... .......J.-:.',..,-.....;;•,:t"...' ..... .•. -.-,.......'..:, '•... ',' ,. :.. '.,.‘...,..,. .H..-.'•,-';',,..,,J!!!'..': •,,. ,. :, ..."•••-.:.,,,,,.....-..!: •••... .... :',.....'.....,,.,t•-•,•••.$1..'Publi c...`Workt .. Department ..,.41,:,',;.. ..' ...' '....... ''.',.P...,.. ::‘,...',.. • ' " :."':.i.:'.,:;...".;.'...;.',,;.' ,..., ....'''..'•'... •..... - . .. . - • ' •••••''.' ...•. - '.• •.. ' . • ......, ' '•••:-..- .:':.•'. • .."...-. 4.1 ,-,...-'-::••-' . .... ....'.. . ..' '. - ...r..... :.,.-44, .• Buil ding Div. .• . Cit Traffic Engineering Div.. ..-_-.4 ,....,`,....... ...,... .7 . ..' . HI .•. .: :...,..,...... ; .-:_:. : .-...•, •.. - : .. . , .,!....-' -• ' ' • .-.. . ..-.,...44-64,..Engineering Div. . . '..+1,:i -Utilitie'S Engineering •Div........-"..' .''. . • .„ . , .• ..: " • . . • • , • - , . . . . . • . . . , . . ... . 9••.- -.' ' '. -; . . -FROM:', Planning Department , (signed by responsible Official ::or his .. ., • designee) .1.,..... • . .. .:.., : .. ........s• .. .i .'. .'„. .. • , .. ..: . . . . ...:f..' .• ' • . . . .. . . . • . . . . „ :kifil OittAl.:• •-.c t-4)T14- As (:;.e. —piet4..-,JA_)14-L._, • , , • — • . • ,,,•,••• . . . ..- • . . . . ,. , . . . . . . • . . . „ , • . . „ ,•• .. . . . . . . . . •,,,,• . . " ••• • . . .. • • ' , . , • . . . • .. „. -1. a.. •• . SUBJECT :1 Review• .of .'ECF-; 3og- 7: . . ; Application No. : g -17,7.,? /0.• . • .._: . . . _.... _ .. • . ActAction N a me : ' .Ci4C liktren.upinu.AL.; • ,(i-tszf),Jks r-goit c-sj-th2, iz'7,3'• • f • . . • . .„ . . . . . r. .. „ . ' . , • '. :,•". " . "•' • .A.'1 4b &-3.- 6 .-C) S--/ 11-ty'6.-•-/•-• • ... •. '', ' . . . .. , .• • '. , . • . . .. . ,.: •. . Please review :the attached . Review requested by bjf (date.) t 2 6 7 •• • . • • •.''. -' .,..,. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. • , • . • . . • i • , . . .. .i • ' REVI,EW. BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : , . . . . ,.. .• . : . .,• • . . . . . . .,., • . . . . . . .. . .•, . . . . .. . . •-r, • • . • . , . . • ' . • , Department . • . . • • . • • . . /---, ,,' . C.Z.ed ..- ., • . COmmentt • ...-„, -.-'7-7."1,;er-e-A. • ,, ,j. . 1 ,,71).0 '• '. e;r-'. 'e.4-l'''7'4.e'e"'-'e-•'f"1*--":"C--''-7t- •E 44 -(-<"• - . "c'' oef,ete,71. ez,,,;p2_, ,,, d'•-e (...GOCI 4 ard'ead, . . . . , . • ••, . . . . . . , . ,,• , -1 * . •,. . . ,• , . . . . . • . . . ' • . .. . . it- ., • . • . . . , 1 . • * '•••• ,4007,:' iela * (:!./ /d.,,44:e51-2,f../ . . ' A:...r. -'-' ' • , - Signature . . ireCtOr• or Authorized' 'Representative ' • •• . • Date . . ,.... . ,',1. . • . . ... .. . . , .. .. . .. , .. _. . • • 1 • . , . • ' ' . . ._ _ . ,.. . , . ... , . , . . .. . , . • . . . . . .. . . . . . .. • . .. . . , .. . • .REVIEW BY OTHER •.CITY ..DEPARTMENTS . . , ,. . •. . , • , .....: . • . •• ,. - ••• .. • . '.Department :. .1-.),, ,,-.7.d.er.,/d•-•••/- . .: „._.. .. ...• .. ...-..'...... .', '.-...... •••• ... ...•••• ,..- • - . -', • .'..• • .1 . 5 • • , ,.. . . , , .,.... , ,, . . . • • • .** . . . • • ''...., ' :* • '''• :". 'f: * ' • -f.tomthtnts :.. a- . ' ' . • . . • . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .• .. . . . .. . . . ' . . . . . . . „ . .. .. . . . . . •. ., . . . ,. . . . • . ' • . . . , . . . . . . . .. • • .. . .. . . . • . . . , .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. -., -: ,.: • . . . • • . . . . . . -. .,• •: Signature of Di rector or Authorized Representative . -. ,: ' • Date . ' . '''.....• „..,-„,-,• .. . , . , . ,. . . .. . .,. . . . . , . , , . . . , . • . .• ,_ • ..., ..‘..,-.• . , • . . . .. .. . . . . ,. ,,..,,, .,. r • . • r A . . .. .• .. . . •I . ,.l. .•., • r . . • • ,,. , . • • , • . . . . r " '':"••- •r•.. ' 6-76 . . . . (OVER) ..":. ,,i -,.. • • . . . . . ,• .. .„ ... . . .. . , .. . P-'..r.,',......,........ .,. . . ', . •• • . . . . - • .• . . . •. . • ,. . • .. ..„. .• . ... I,'` .'. .. • ,f,.. ,, . . . . II • f r • • . . ,. . , 1 .A . . f', . ., ..• '. , . . •• .., ... H. .. . . .-•''..'•':;•11 I•2:f'',•2 : ' •' , . ' , . • . . „ ,,I . . ... , , i. . , • ..• . . , . . •,. ,r, , •.. 1.:i-')..,•''''''.;;......:•."'''''•"'" • . . ' ". . i . , • . i'. . . . r ' . • ".:." . :, ' " " ' . '. .• . - . , • .. ., . . .... .. ..., ... ••,... ... -... .. „.....-.. ,..,.. .z, ,... r. . -, .. __ _ ' '', +' (REVIE'W ;:BY'' OTHER CITY :LJC.PARTMENTS : ' Department : _px-rc.'TI1cS • Comments -rri .urtk,tTrr,s 1Pnr�s, �-�.r�y �,� it „. Atzi4A w►4-4- )i— So»ravH'T CL-3 1 w���- • r';E Itii.Gu1.n-.4 Su13srJ�'f•Lriis` ( CJ pe.r+,A1+-5-(a .., • • . 1-al,,ate• ., MSignature; of Di rector or Authorized Representative . ' -.Da-te: i'4 .r k REVIEW BY •,OTHER:: .C:IT:Y' DEPARTMENTS : . ' '.1 • 4. fa ,D'e' ar"tmen't t� �7�; c ,h'�e ,r.,, • Comments . - • .„ ' - ' cY.7ei .'--4, C2( ./.11•/. 42)— • . ' I" ..;.". . . ' . • T 4 .._ 3 7� ' Signature of Director or Authorized Repres. tative D te '. ' Tn I , r REVIEW BY 'OTHER CITY . DEPARTMENT'S : : • Department s/e� �tI�' ': '" J (Comments . crams" ��'2 ,_s-N ii / � ,• 6 ct�.2e • � Chi lii`l. �. S. Gf/ ,o' i7'lid'. .- &,-a f,4 7- /-1"a" /1(' • '''',ice )cJ4,.. . .,, • / . _ . • Si gnatu!re of Di rector or Authori zed • epresent'ati ve ' Date . . • • REVIEW BY OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS : f`• Department . . • _ • „ .• Comments :. • • tl i 1 • ) 1. ' '. I . 1+ 'S , 'I� 'r' I. i l .r,. ,�f 1; • • tt. ii'! +t 'l. - rf, i p _ s;ii .'a' io i •,'ti^� �•1^';lit*: �,t`, 1 f 4'f 6 I k� " 't T :f' �`r 5r r•>' $$�� F� 1� 1: e; ,' n to •f- it. $; g a e o Dt e:cto"r °'or':-Authorized Rep,re;sentat;i::ve'.. �Dat� << :uz :i' y{ rld'.. '! �f- lc i 1' . " 'i.:'' ' �S l' tj. ( I' f I 6'. �t - •4' tR, 'J. ,ti� t:. +.y i F.�.y% '.4 .A^ :.l•. ',ti • ,r6 la • I '1. 1„4!„ t'M' , r' FYi' �'4'}:e ;Y 1:1'r •t -'t sl - - y�q ;,E ,. I- • I�r^•. .�s� r,: ,1 'k ^�i •y7', S' ,1 vt.. , <7 t • MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 1978 TO: Mike Smith, Planning Department FROM: Clint Morgan, Traffic Engineering Division SUBJECT: Rezone - C.H.G. International Implementation of the proposed planned development will have a significant impact on the surrounding roadways. Particular problems to be considered in detail in regard to traffic are as follows: 1. The effect of the left turning movements generated into and from the entrances at Thomas Ave. SW & Sunset Blvd. West and at Stevens Ave. SW $ Sunset Blvd. West. 2. The effect of the left turning movement produced at Hardie Ave. SW and shopping center entry and exit roadway going to Sunset Blvd. West. 3. The effect of traffic at SW 7th Street and Hardie Ave. SW. It is our understanding Hardie Ave. SW from the railroad track south to SW 7th Street is a private section of roadway which makes it questionable as to the extent of future roadway improvements we may want to provide or can provide. 4. Details of the proposed internal circulation are needed to consider the questions above. It is our request that the developer address the traffic circulation problems as listed above and propose a solution for proper traffic control. CEM:ad