Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutECF_Environmental_Checklist_220406_v2SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 24 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background [HELP] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Kennydale Gateway SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 24 2. Name of applicant: Kennydale Gateway LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Kennydale Gateway LLC c/o Vulcan Inc. Attn: Alicia Stedman 505 Fifth Avenue S, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98104 4. Date checklist prepared: November 12, 2021 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Community and Economic Development 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The project that is analyzed in this Environmental Checklist involves site preparation work, construction, and operation of the project referred to as the Kennydale Gateway project. Site preparation and construction could begin in approximately 4Q 2022 with project occupancy occurring by approximately 4Q 2024 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No future plans for further development of the project site are proposed. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. -Geotechnical Engineering Design Study (Hart Crowser, 2021); -Greenhouse Gas Emission Worksheet (EA, 2021); -Existing Conditions Report (Talasaea Consultants, Inc. 2021); -Arborist Report (Greenforest Incorporated, 2021); -Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (Hart Crowser, 2019); and, -Transportation Report (Heffron Transportation, 2021). 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. There are no other known applications that are pending approval for the Kennydale Gateway site. - Updated December 8, 2021, - Update #2 April 6, 2022 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 24 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. State and Regional Agencies Puget Sound Clean Air Agency -Demolition Notice Renton-King County Department of Health -Plumbing Permits Washington State Department of Ecology -Construction Stormwater Permit Local Agencies City of Renton -Master Site Plan Application -Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review -Street Modification Request -Building and other minor site development permits -Shoreline Substantial Development Permit 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Existing Site Conditions The Kennydale Gateway site is located in the City of Renton, south of the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard N and Interstate 405 (see Figure 1 for a vicinity map). The 7.76-acre project site currently consists of paved areas, several building foundations, trees and vegetation, and two buildings, including: • 1-story, 31,200 sq. ft. storage warehouse building that was constructed in 1975; and, • 1-story, 18,720 sq. ft. garage/storage building that was constructed in 1974. See Figure 2 for an existing conditions map. Proposed Buildings and Uses The proposed Kennydale Gateway Development would consist of three, 4- level residential buildings with approximately 385 residential units, 1,500 sq. ft. of retail space and 404 parking spaces (roughly 218 spaces in parking structures and 186 surface parking spaces). A 15' permanent easement is being provided along the Northwest side of the site for WSDOT improvements. An extra 5' temporary construction easement will also be provided. The project is planned to be phased during construction with Building 2 as Phase 1, Building 1 as Phase 2 and Building 3 as Phase 3. Refer to Table 1, below, for development details associated with each building, and Figure 3 for a site plan. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 24 Table 1 Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Residential Units 105 128 152 Retail Space 1,500 sq. ft. 0 0 Parking Structure 73 spaces 65 spaces 80 spaces Surface Parking 62 spaces 67 spaces 57 spaces 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The project site is located in the City of Renton south of the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard N and I-405 (see Figure 1). The project address is 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard N. The legal description for the project site is attached to the plans that are on-file with the City of Renton. B.Environmental Elements [HELP] 1.Earth [help] a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________ b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The steepest slope on the site is approximately eight percent. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The near-surface soil conditions within the central portion of the site are generally composed of one to two feet of historical fill over about 15 feet of interlayered, soft to medium stiff silt and loose to medium dense sand/silty sand with variable amounts of gravel and trace organics. These soft/loose upper soils appear to extend slightly deeper into the northern portion of the site (20 to 25 feet bgs). Below these soft/loose to medium stiff/medium dense upper soils, very dense, interlayered sand, silty sand with gravel, and silty/sandy gravel with cobbles is present. These dense underlying soils are interpreted as glacially overconsolidated. See Appendix A for further details (Geotechnical Engineering Design Study; Hart Crowser, 2021). SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 24 d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Yes. Based on City of Renton GIS data, portions of the site are designated as a potential seismic hazard Environmentally Critical Area (see Appendix A for further details). e.Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 2,880 cubic yards of cut and 4,335 cubic yards of fill would be required for the project. The maximum depth of site excavation would be approximately 5 ft. in the northwest corner of the site. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion is possible in conjunction with any construction activity. Implementation of a Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control (TESC) plan would mitigate potential impacts from excavation activity. Once the buildings are operational, no erosion is anticipated. g.About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 73.9 percent of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction. h.Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Temporary Erosion Control Plan approvals (including Construction Best Management Practices, Erosion and Sediment Control Approvals) would be submitted as components of the building permit. Best Management Practices will be instituted to reduce soil being tracked onto the roadway and water quality will be maintained during excavation per City of Renton and King County standards. 2.Air [help] a.What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The proposed project could result in localized increases in air emissions due to construction vehicles, equipment and activities. Dust could also result during construction activities. Emissions would not be expected to result in exceedance of ambient air quality standards. The proposed project has been designed to conform to the applicable regulations and standards of agencies regulating air quality in Renton. These include the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA). In order to evaluate the climate change impacts of the proposed project, a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Worksheet has been prepared to estimate the emissions footprint for the SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 24 lifecycle of the project on a gross-level basis. The emissions estimate is based on the combined emissions from the following sources: • Embodied Emissions – extraction, processing, transportation, construction and disposal of materials and landscape disturbance; • Energy-related Emissions – energy demands created by the development after it is completed; and, • Transportation-related Emissions – transportation demands created by the development after it is completed. The Worksheet estimate is based on building use and size. In total, the estimated lifespan emissions estimate for the project is approximately 446,236 MTCO2e. The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Worksheet used to estimate the project emissions is contained in Appendix B of this Checklist. Emissions estimates do not take into account any sustainability measures that could be incorporated into the project, such as LEED Gold certification and Salmon Safe certification. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no offsite sources of air emissions or odors that are expected to affect the proposed project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The following measures could be implemented to further control emissions and/or dust during construction: • Best Management Practices would be instituted to minimize dust created during excavation activities. • Demolition dust would be handled in accordance with PSCAA regulations and sprinkling during demolition. • The existing buildings onsite would be evaluated for asbestos-containing materials prior to demolition. If asbestos is found, EPA and Puget Sound Clean Air Agency regulations would be adhered to relative to removal and disposal. 3. Water [help] a. Surface Water: [help] 1)Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. There are no surface water bodies on the site. May Creek, which is a Shoreline of the State, and one Category III wetland were identified and delineated on the May Creek Trail Park property directly to the south of the site. May Creek is a tributary to Lake Washington and has a Shoreline Management Zone extending 200-ft landward from the stream’s delineated ordinary high water mark. A portion of this Shoreline Management Zone extends onto the southwestern corner of the site. The Shoreline SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 24 overlay for that portion of the site within the Shoreline Management Zone is Shoreline High Intensity. A 100-ft vegetation conservation buffer is required for May Creek, measured landward from the stream’s ordinary high water mark. This vegetation conservation buffer extends onto the site in two locations of the southwestern corner. See Figure 4 for the location of the Shoreline overlay and the vegetation conservation buffer extending onto the site. The Category III wetland to the south of the site has a 75-foot standard buffer that does not extend onto the site. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. A portion of the project will occur within the 200-foot shoreline zone for May Creek. The approximate area of impact to the shoreline zone would be approximately 55,854 sq. ft.,and would encompass all of the shoreline zone that extends onto the site. This work would include demolition of paved areas, grading, and construction of an internal access road. The proposed development plan meets the general requirements for development within the High Intensity Overlay. See Figure 4 for the location of the shoreline overlay that extends onto the site and Appendix C for additional information (Critical Areas Report, Talasaea Consultants, Inc.; 2021). Approximately 6,592 sq. ft. of vegetation conservation buffer extends onto the site at the southwestern corner. It will be necessary to reduce the vegetation conservation buffer as it extends onto the site in order to accommodate the proposed development plan, which includes a required emergency access road along the south side of the development. Refer to Appendix C for additional information and details regarding how the project complies with buffer reduction standards. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No fill or dredge material is anticipated be placed in or removed from any surface water body as a result of the proposed project. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. The proposed project is not anticipated to require any surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. The project site does not lie within a 100-year floodplain. The City of Renton GIS data identifies a Special Flood Hazard Area (100-yr flood) associated with May Creek, located in the south-central portion of the site, extending roughly 120 feet north of the south property line. However, a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) was issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency on 22 May 2012 determining that the site is SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 24 not located in the SFHA.1 The map panel itself has not been revised, and the LOMA serves the interim purpose of revision without having to update an entire map panel. See Appendix C for additional details. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. There would be no discharge of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: [help] 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Groundwater would not be withdrawn for drinking water or other purposes. The groundwater table is some areas is at 2’-0” below the soil, but mostly ranges from 4 to 9 feet below. Minor dewatering will be required for aggregated piers and elevator pits. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Waste material would not be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources. The proposed building would connect to the City’s sewer system and would discharge directly to that sewer system. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Existing and new impervious surfaces constructed on the site are and would continue to be the source of runoff from the proposed project. The site is located within the Lower May Creek Drainage Basin. Under existing conditions, stormwater onsite flows from the north and east of the property to the southwest to a ditch. All stormwater runoff reaching the ditch eventually drains to an existing type 2 manhole and pipes that convey flows to the May Creek stream to the south. The stream flows southwest and discharges to Lake Washington. The project will be adding more than 7,000 sq. ft. of pollution generating impervious surfaces that is not fully dispersed, and therefore is required to provide enhanced water quality per the City of Renton. Due to the close proximity to Lake Washington, the project qualifies for the Direct Discharge Flow Control Exemption. Two Biopod Water Quality filters are proposed to provide enhanced water quality treatment. The project will implement flow control BMPs to mitigate the impact of storm and surface water runoff from development. 1 FEMA Letter of Map Amendment Determination Document (Removal). 22 May 2012. Case No.: 12-10-1006X. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 24 2)Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. The proposed stormwater collection system and associated mitigation measures are expected to prevent waste materials from entering the ground water or surface waters. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. The proposal would not be expected to alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the site vicinity. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: The proposal will comply with the applicable City requirements relating to surface water runoff control and water quality, including the City's Surface Water Design Manual (2017). 4. Plants [help] a.Check the types of vegetation found on the site: _X__deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _X _evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _X__shrubs _X__grass ____pasture ____crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. ____ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other ____water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ____other types of vegetation There are 62 trees on the site including 55 significant trees, one landmark tree and six dangerous trees. Tree species include black cottonwood, red alder, bigleaf maple, Douglas-fir, and black pine. See Appendix D for further details (Arborist Report; Greenforest Inc.; 2021). b.What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? All existing vegetation within the site interior and along the western and northern perimeters would be removed. In total, 56 existing trees would be removed and six significant trees at the southeast corner of the site would be retained (five red alder and one bigleaf maple). The project would comply with the City of Renton tree retention and land clearing regulations (RMC 4-4-130). c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. No known threatened or endangered species are located on or proximate to the project site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 24 d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Six of the existing significant trees on the project site would be retained. A ten-foot landscaped buffer would be provided along public streets surrounding the site (Lake Washington Blvd. N and I-405). Per code requirements, approximately 33 new interior parking lot trees and 10 new perimeter parking lot trees would be provided as part of the project. All pervious surfaces would be landscaped and irrigated as required, including street frontage, perimeter/interior parking lots, freeway frontage, and bio-retention areas, in accordance with Section 4-4- 070 and the Surface Water Design Manual. Proposed vegetation will be a mixture of trees, shrubs, and groundcovers in a primarily native palette with adapted or specifically chosen species to appropriately correspond with unique conditions on site as necessary. All proposed trees shall be a minimum of two inches (2”) caliper and from the Approved Tree List; all proposed shrubs shall be planted with a minimum of two (2) gallon container size, provided at the minimum rate of one per twenty (20) square feet of landscaped area (up to fifty percent (50%) of them may be deciduous); all proposed ground covers shall be planted with a minimum of four-inch (4”) pot size, provided in sufficient quantities to provide at least ninety percent (90%) coverage of the landscaped area within three (3) years of installation. Native hardwood mulch to be provided for all landscaped areas, two inches (2”) minimum depth at shrub planting and three inches (3”) minimum depth/three feet (3’) minimum radius at trees. e.List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. A dense growth of Himalayan blackberry (non-native and invasive) exists along the fence line along the site’s southern boundary. This growth of blackberry is on City-owned property. See Appendix C for additional information. 5. Animals [help] a.List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: seagulls, pigeons mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: squirrels, rats fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________ b.List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. According to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation mapping, the following endangered species and/or migratory birds could potentially be in the project location area: gray wolf, marbled murrelet, streaked horned lark, yellow-billed cuckoo, bull trout, bald eagle, great blue heron, rufous hummingbird and western screech- owl. However, the project site is currently used for light industrial purposes, approximately 82 percent of the site is composed of impervious surfaces and it is assumed that there is limited animal habitat on the site for any such animals. It is assumed that if any animals or migratory birds were present in the vicinity, they would be associated with May Creek, south of the site. However, according to the Critical Areas Report (Appendix C), the wetland south of the site has not been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 24 Threatened or Endangered animal species, state listed Threatened or endangered animal species, or priority species. The site is currently segregated from the May Creek Trail Park by a chainlink fence. c.Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes. The entire Puget Sound area is within the Pacific Flyway, which is a major north- south flyway for migratory birds in America, extending from Alaska to Patagonia. Every year, migratory birds travel some or all of this distance both in spring and in fall, following food sources, heading to breeding grounds, or travelling to overwintering sites. d.Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: No specific measures are proposed. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. The site is located in an urban, developed area and no known invasive species are known to be on or near the site. Invasive species known to be located in King County include European starling, house sparrow and eastern gray squirrel. 6.Energy and Natural Resources [help] a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas are the primary sources of energy that would serve the proposed development. During operation, these energy sources would be used for project heating, cooling, hot water, cooking, and lighting. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. The project would not be expected to affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Energy conservation features required by the City’s Building Code would be incorporated into the building design. In addition, a high- performance mechanical system and energy recovery devices will be incorporated into the ventilation system. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 24 7.Environmental Health [help] a.Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. The completed project would have no known environmental health hazards that could occur as a result of this proposal. 1)Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed for the site identified two Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), which indicate the presence or likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property. The first REC is the known and potential underground storage tanks associated with the current and former industrial structures. The second is the historic use of residential USTs and/or oil burners on the adjoining properties north, east and west of the site. See Appendix E for the complete report. 2)Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None are known. 3)Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. During construction, paint products, diesel fuel for construction and generators, sealants and other typical construction materials may be stored on site. No toxic or hazardous chemicals are anticipated to be stored, used or produced during the project’s operation. 4)Describe special emergency services that might be required. No special emergency services are anticipated to be required as a result of the project. As is typical of urban development, it is possible that normal fire, medical, and other emergency services may, on occasion, be needed from the City of Renton. 5)Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Best practices would be utilized during construction to reduce or control environmental health hazards. As well, a Construction Contingency Plan (CCP) would be prepared to manage and to address potential environmental issues that may be encountered during subsurface excavation, including any USTs. Pursuant to recommendations made by the WA State Dept. of Ecology, pre-characterization of soil and groundwater following demolition of the existing site buildings will be conducted in preparation for redevelopment activities. As well, a Hazardous Building Materials Survey would be conducted prior to demolition to identify any hazardous materials associated with existing buildings (i.e. asbestos, lead based paint, etc.). See Appendix E for further details. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 24 b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise associated with I-405 may be relatively high at certain times of day. Traffic noise is not expected to adversely affect the proposed Kennydale Gateway project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Construction-related noise would occur as a result of on-site construction activities associated with the project, primarily related to demolition and site grading. Construction noise would be short-term and would be the most noticeable noise generated by the proposed project. It is expected that primary construction hours would occur from 7 AM to 6 PM Monday through Friday. Some excavation work could occur during evenings or weekends to reduce truck trips during peak traffic. The proposed project would comply with provisions of Renton’s Noise Level Regulations (RMC, Chapter 7, Section 8-7-2). Once the project is operational, no significant long- term noise impacts are anticipated. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: As noted, the project would comply with provisions of the City’s Noise Level Regulations (RMC, Chapter 7, Section 8-7-2); specifically: construction hours would be limited to standard construction hours (non-holiday) from 7 AM to 6 PM and Saturdays and Sundays from 9 AM to 7 PM. If extended construction hours are necessary, the applicant would apply for a noise variance. 8. Land and Shoreline Use [help] a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The site is currently used for light industrial purposes and storage. Surrounding land uses include: • North – the N 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard and I-405 intersection, and beyond the intersection is the Quendall Terminals development site. To the north of Quendall Terminals is the Seattle Seahawks practice facility (Virginia Mason Athletic Center); • East – I-405; • South – the May Creek Greenway and May Creek Trail. • West – The Barbee Mill residential development is located to the west, on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard N. The proposed Kennydale Gateway project will result in an intensification of on-site development, and the introduction of a residential population associated with the proposed SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 24 project uses. This would result in increased activity levels on-site and within the surrounding neighborhood. The project would not be expected to adversely affect land uses on nearby or adjacent properties. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? No, the site has not recently been used as working farmland or forest land. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. The site is located in an urban area and would not affect or be affected by working farm or forest land; no working farm or forest land is located in the vicinity of this site. c. Describe any structures on the site. The site currently contains two one-story buildings as detailed below: • a 31,200 sq. ft. storage warehouse building that was constructed in 1975; and, • a 18,720 sq. ft. garage/storage building that was constructed in 1974. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes. Both existing buildings on the site would be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is currently zoned COR (Commercial Office Residential) f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The Comprehensive Planning Land Use Map in the Renton Comprehensive Plan identifies the site as COR (Commercial Office Residential). g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? May Creek, located directly south of the site, is a regulated shoreline of the state. Southern portions of the project site are located in May Creek Reach B (MC-B) and in the Shoreline High Intensity Overlay District. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. The Site is located within an area mapped as a high seismic hazard area and a special flood hazard area (100-yr flood, SFHA). However, a Letter of Map Amendment was issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency on 22 May 2012, determining that the SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 24 site is not located in the SFHA. See the Critical Areas Report (Appendix C) for additional details. King County GIS does not map any critical areas on the site. It does map one stream on the parcel south of the site. The stream is identified as May Creek; a Shoreline of the State. In addition to May Creek, the City of Renton’s critical areas GIS database maps one wetland south of the site’s southeast corner and north of May Creek. No other critical areas (outside of Lake Washington) are mapped by the City of Renton in the vicinity of the Site. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 525 people could reside in the development’s approximately 385 residential units and approximately four to six employees could work in the 1,500 sq. ft. of retail space associated with the project.2 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No housing is located on the project site, and no people would be displaced by the project. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: No displacement impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. L.Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: No significant adverse land use impacts are anticipated. The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan (2015) designates the project site as Commercial/Office/Residential (COR). Per the COR Purpose Statement, these are “areas that are located near a significant amenity, such as a waterfront, are near major transportation or transit routes, and are comprised of one or more large tracts of vacant or underutilized land in the Commercial Office Residential land use designation and zone. This land banking designation is intended to transform properties into compact, mixed-use developments that act as City gateways, through master planning and coordinated design.” Consistent with the COR land use designation, the Kennydale Gateway project would convert an underutilized light industrial site into a compact, mixed-use gateway development with multifamily residential, parking and retail uses. Consistent with the COR Purpose Statement, the project will be located in close proximity to transit when the bus rapid transit (BRT) corridor along I-405 is anticipated to be put into service in 2024. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: The project site is not located near agricultural or forest lands of commercial significance and no mitigation measures are necessary. 2 Retail employment assumes 250 to 400 sq. ft. per employee based on the 2014 King County Buildable Lands Report. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 24 9.Housing [help] a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. Approximately 385 units of housing would be provided as part of the Kennydale Gateway Development. Housing would be market-rate. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing units would be eliminated by the Kennydale Gateway project. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: No significant adverse housing impacts are anticipated and no measures are proposed. 10. Aesthetics [help] a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest height of the proposed residential buildings would be approximately 50 feet. Principal exterior building materials would include brick, cementitious lap siding, metal panel, and cementitious panel system. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views of the two existing one-story warehouse buildings, building foundations from previously demolished structures, and paved areas on the site would be replaced by views of a new multifamily residential development consisting of three, four-story buildings (three residential stories over 1 ground-level of parking) integrated with courtyards and surface parking. Therefore, redevelopment of the site would change the aesthetic character from a relatively open, partially vegetated property to a new multi-family development with roadways and open/space and landscaping. It is City policy to “protect public scenic views and public view corridors, including Renton’s physical, visual and perceptual linkages to Lake Washington…”4 The proposed project will alter street-level views along Lake Washington Boulevard N and I-405. To address these considerations, four photosimulations were prepared depicting the existing view and the view following full development along segments of each of these two rights-of-way. See Figure 5 for a viewpoint location map. The existing and proposed views from these locations are described below. •Viewpoint 1 – Figure 6 shows the existing and potential views from Lake Washington Blvd N, looking north towards the west border of the project site. As depicted, the existing view includes vegetation, trees and glimpses of the one-story warehouse building present on the west border of the project site, along the east (right) side of the road. Under the proposed view, portions of the new four-story residential building on the southwest portion of the site would be visible in the mid-field view. The overall SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 24 visual effect would be an increase in the existing urban density and further vertical definition of the site; no significant impacts would be anticipated. • Viewpoint 2 – Figure 7 shows the existing and potential views from Lake Washington Blvd N, looking south towards the west border of the project site. As depicted, the existing view includes trees and vegetation surrounding the site, and a glimpse of one of the site’s existing one-story warehouse buildings. Under the proposed view, portions north and southwest residential buildings would be visible. Similar to Viewpoint 1, the overall visual effect would be an increase in the existing urban density and further vertical definition of the site; no significant impacts would be anticipated. • Viewpoint 3 – Figure 8 shows the existing and potential views from the NE 44th Street overpass, looking south towards the north portion of the project site. As shown, the existing view includes a relatively open view of the site including paved areas, gravel stockpiles, and the existing warehouse building present on the south portion site. Under the proposed view, the new four-story residential building on the north portion of the site would be visible. Similar to Viewpoint 1, the overall visual effect would be an increase in the existing urban density and further vertical definition of the site; no significant impacts would be anticipated. • Viewpoint 4 – Figure 9 shows the existing and potential views from I-405, looking north towards the east border of the project site. As depicted, the existing site is primarily screened from view by existing trees and vegetation. Under the proposed view, portions of the new four-story southeast and north residential buildings would be visible. Similar to Viewpoint 1, the overall visual effect would be an increase in the existing urban density and further vertical definition of the site; no significant impacts would be anticipated. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: No significant adverse aesthetic impacts are anticipated, and no measures are proposed. The project will comply with the Urban Design Regulations in RMC 4-3-100 and is intended to have a visually pleasing design. 11. Light and Glare [help] a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The proposed project is not expected to result in light- or glare-related impacts from stationary sources or mobile sources (vehicles). At times during the construction process, area lighting of the job site (to meet safety requirements) may be necessary, which would be noticeable proximate to the project site. In general, however, light and glare from construction of the proposed project are not anticipated to adversely affect adjacent land uses. Once operational, interior and exterior building lighting and lighting from vehicles maneuvering on-site could at times be visible from adjacent properties and streets/roadways. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 24 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. Light and glare associated with the proposed project is not expected to cause a safety hazard nor interfere with views. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No off-site sources of light or glare are anticipated to affect the proposed Kennydale Gateway project. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: No significant adverse light or glare impacts are anticipated, and no measures are proposed. 12. Recreation [help] a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The May Creek Greenway and 3.5-mile long May Creek Trail are located directly to the south of the site. Lake Washington Trail is located to the west. As well, the site is located within approximately 1,000 feet of Lake Washington. The nearest public access point to Lake Washington is Kennydale Beach Park, located approximately 0.5 mile to the south of the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. The proposed project would not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: No significant adverse recreation impacts would occur, and no measures are proposed. 13. Historic and cultural preservation [help] a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. There are no buildings, structures, or sites located on or near the site that are listed in or eligible for listing in national, state or local preservation registers. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. There are no known or visible landmarks, features, or other evidence of Native American or historic use or occupation on the site. The site is located in the vicinity of the shoreline SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 19 of 24 of Lake Washington. Numerous named geographic features are located near the project area and these include descriptive names for geographic features, resource procurement sites, villages, and names associated with mystical events.3 c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Potential impacts to historic resources on or near the site were evaluated by consulting the Washington Information System for Architectural & Archaeological Records Data. The Cultural Resources Assessment for the Quendall Terminals Redevelopment Project and the Cultural Resources Survey for the I-405, Tukwila to I-90 Vicinity Express Toll Lanes Project were also reviewed. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. No significant adverse impacts to resources are anticipated, and no measures are proposed. 14. Transportation [help] a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The project site is bounded by Lake Washington Boulevard N on the west and north and I-405 and the southbound on-ramp to the east. The south edge of the site is a wooded public access corridor along the May Creek Trail. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Voters approved funding for a bus rapid transit corridor (BRT) along I-405 and a station is planned at the NE 44th Street interchange directly north of the site. In conjunction with WSDOT’s project to rebuild the NE 44th Street interchange, the BRT would have direct access ramps to the center lanes of I-405. Pedestrians would access the station via the rebuilt NE 44th Street. The BRT project is planned to be put in service in 2024. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? The Kennydale Gateway project would include parking for approximately 400 vehicles –about half in surface lots and about half in structure on the first levels of the three buildings. 3 Cultural Resources Consultants, Inc. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Quendall Terminals Redevelopment Project. June 28, 2012. And: Archaeological and Historical Services, Eastern Washington University. Cultural Resources Survey for the Washington State Dept. of Transportation’s I-405 Renton to Bellevue Improvement Project. July 2018. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 20 of 24 d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). The project would construct a new roundabout at the Lake Washington Boulevard / NE 43rd Street / Site Access intersection that would fit with the Washington State Department of Transportation’s (WSDOT) planned improvements for the I-405/NE 44th Street interchange (a project that includes four other roundabout intersections). The project would also make sidewalk upgrades along Lake Washington Boulevard N that would be incorporated into WSDOT’s project to meet current City of Renton sidewalk standards. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The proposed project would not use or occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail or air transportation. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? The proposed Kennydale Gateway project is expected to generate an estimated 1,640 vehicle trips per day. Approximately 1,540 of the total vehicle trips would be attributed to the apartment uses, and 100 trips would be attributed to the retail / food service uses. Out of the 1,640 total trips, 82 would occur during the AM peak hour and 133 would occur during the PM peak hour. Details about the methodology used to estimate these trips are provided in the Transportation Analysis in Appendix F. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. The project would not interfere with or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on the roadway network near the site area. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: The project would construct a single-lane roundabout at the Lake Washington Boulevard N / N 43rd Street / Site Access intersection. This roundabout is expected to operate at LOS B during the AM peak hour and LOS A during the PM peak hour. No further mitigation would be needed to accommodate the project. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 21 of 24 15.Public Services [help] a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. It is anticipated that the proposed project would generate an incremental need for increased public services due to the addition of residences, as well as visitors to the site. To the extent that emergency service providers have planned for gradual increases in service demands, no significant impacts are anticipated. Applicable City impact fees for schools, parks, fire and transportation would be paid to cover a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve the new development. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. While the increase in residents and visitors associated with the proposed project may result in incrementally greater demand for emergency services, it is anticipated that adequate service capacity is available within the City of Renton to preclude the need for additional public facilities/services. As well, applicable impact fees would be paid to cover a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve the new development. 16. Utilities [help] a.Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other ___________ b.Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utilities and providers (in parentheses) that currently serve the site will be reconnected to the proposed as follows: •Water – (Renton Public Utilities) • Sewer – (Renton Public Utilities) • Natural Gas – (Puget Sound Energy) • Electrical – (Puget Sound Energy) • Garbage – (Republic Services) SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 22 of 24 C.Signature [HELP] The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: ___________________________________________________ Name of signee__________________________________________________ Position and Agency/Organization ___________________________ Date Submitted: November 12, 2021_ ___________ Brandon L. Morgan Director, Development, Vulcan LLC, for: Kennydale Gateway LLC Updated December 8, 2021 Update #2, April 6, 2022 FIGURES Source: EA, Google Maps, 2019 Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Figure 1 Vicinity Map Project Site North Source: EA, GoogleEarth, 2021 Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Figure 2 Kennydale Gateway Project Site — Existing Conditions North *Not to Scale Project Site Demolished Buildings Source: HLR Architects, 2021 Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Figure 3 Site Plan Source: Talasaea Consultants, 2021 Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Figure 4 May Creek—Shoreline Buffer and Vegetation Conservation Buffer 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 Source: EA and Google Earth, 2021 Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Figure 5 Viewpoint Location Map Viewpoint Location 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 Source: HLR Architects, 2021 Figure 6 Viewpoint 1—Lake Washington Blvd N, Looking North Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Existing View Proposed View Source: HLR Architects, 2021 Figure 7 Viewpoint 2—Lake Washington Blvd N, Looking South Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Existing View Proposed View Source: HLR Architects, 2021 Figure 8 Viewpoint 3—NE 44th Street, Looking South Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Existing View Proposed View Source: HLR Architects, 2021 Figure 9 Viewpoint 4—I-405, Looking North Kennydale Gateway Environmental Checklist Existing View Proposed View