No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA82-045 Harding Lawson Associates A Report Prepared for MI Professional Building Associates .. ROpj1 ..c/o Metro lex Ltd. � P Fund, 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RENTON MEDICAL BUILDING RENTON, WASHINGTON HLA o- cfi.,,,IfiTTED TE By Meda04417...._ oomoo®oo°o® Mark Adams o E. aea Geologist Q .� ••°� •°f• a � o a f +"Sy • 0 O d 844 �Q%•• 0. . G .C1 jorr A ,p J E. Newby � erg.. •.....� y� C - f Engineer eeeca,S,!g�PPib� � ® °soo®®mom® Harding Lawson Associates 300 120th Avenue N.E. , Bldg. 4, Suite 219 P. O. Box 3885 Bellevue, Washington 98009 206/453-8383 May 11, 1982 Harding Lawson Associates TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . iii I INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . 1 A. General . . . . . . . . 1 B. Project Description . . . . . . 1 C. Scope of Services . . . . . . 2 II SITE CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . 3 A. Surface . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Subsurface . . . . . . . . . 4 C. Groundwater . . . . . . . 6 III CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . 8 A. General Considerations . . . . . 8 B. Erosion Control 9 C. Site Preparation and Grading . . . 11 D. Cut and Fill Slopes . . . . . . 14 E. Drainage Provisions . . . . . . 14 F. Foundation Support . . . 16 G. Floor Slab Support . . . . . 17 H. Retaining Walls . . . . . . . 18 IV USE OF THIS REPORT AND WARRANTY . . . 20 APPENDIX . 23 DISTRIBUTION . . . . . . . . . . 38 ii • Harding Lawson Associates LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 Site Plan . . . . . . . . Plate 2 Unified Soil Classification . and Key to Test Data . Appendix Plate 3 Physical Properties Criteria for Rock Descriptions . . . Appendix Plate. 4 Log of Boring 1 . . . . . Appendix Plates 5 Logs of Test Pits 1 through 11 through 7 . . . . . . . Appendix Plates 12 through 14 Logs of Test Probes. . . . Appendix iii Harding Lawson Associates I INTRODUCTION A. General This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for a proposed Medical Building in Renton, Washington. The building will be located north of Valley General Hospital on a 5.4-acre parcel bordered on the east by Talbot Road and on the north by South .37th Street, as shown on the Site Plan, Plate 1. The scope of our service was developed based on a visit to the site and on discussions with your architect, Peter Schroeder of William Graham Consultants. B. Project Description The proposed medical building is a four-story concrete and steel frame structure. It will be located on Lot 4 of the East Valley Medical Park short plat. The proposed building is sited on the top portion of the slope of the ravine with parking areas constructed to the north and west. A bridge over. Panther Creek is also being considered to provide access to Valley General Hospital. Construction of the office building will require vertical cuts on the order of approximately 18 feet and fills of less than 10 feet. Structural loads are not known at this time; however, we anticipate they will be typical for this type of 1 r Harding Lawson Associates structure, that is approximately 5 kips per linear "foot for wall loads, and 400 kips- for column loads. C. Scope of Services The purpose of our geotechnical investigation is to explore subsurface conditions and provide recommendations for design and construction. Specifically, this report provides conclusions and recommendations regarding the following: 1. Site preparation, grading, and drainage during construction. - 2 . Temporary excavation stability. 3. Foundation support including type, design criteria, and estimated total and differential settlement. 4 . Support of slab-on-grade floors.. 5. Retaining walls, including lateral pressures and subsurface drainage. 6. Mitigation of potential construction difficulties . We explored subsurface conditions by drilling, one test boring at the location shown on the Plot Plan, Plate 1. In addition, seven test pits were excavated by backhoe to depths of between 7 and 12 feet and six test probes were made with a Davis Peat Probe. The locations of the test probes and test pits are also shown on Plate 1. Soil samples obtained during our explorations were returned to our laboratory for testing. A complete description of the drilling and laboratory testing is presented in the Appendix to this report and the exploration logs are presented on Plates 4 through 13. - 2 4i ' 1 Harding Lawson Associates II SITE CONDITIONS A. Surface The site is located on the sloping eastern side of the P 9 Green River Valley; a plan of the site is shown on Plate 1. Panther Creek crosses the property parallel to and about 100 feet north of the south property line. The creek lies in a ravine which is approximately 25 to 35 feet deep and has moder- ately steep but stable slopes partially covered with mature trees . The northernmost portion of the site slopes gently downwards to the west. According to a preliminary site plan by William Graham Consultants , site grades range from Elevation 35 at the western property line to Elevation 95 at Talbot Road. We understand that site elevations are on City of Renton datum. Although the ravine slopes are fairly steep, we did not observe any indication of past or current slope instability.. There are several large fir, maple, and alder trees on the slope with straight trunks indicating little or no downslope movement. Also, there are no irregular or hummocky topographic features suggesting past movement. However, there is almost certain shallow soil creep taking place as a result of the slope steepness. This is common to almost all natural slopes and does not constitute a threat to slope stability. Water was running in Panther Creek at the time of our 3 i • Harding Lawson Associates reconnaissance. However, no other seepage or running water was noted anywhere on site. Panther Creek extends into the upland area and collects a considerable volume of surface runoff. This volume should fluctuate with the seasons, being largest during the winter time and decreasing during the summer. However, the ravine does not appear to have been subject to any flooding. There are a number of small trees growing in the ravine and there are no erosional features in the stream bed suggesting active downcutting. The site is undeveloped. There does appear to have been some past clearing or grading as the gently sloped northern portion of the site is clear of trees and is vegetated primarily with blackberry bushes and grass. B. Subsurface Our test explorations indicate that the site is underlain primarily by sedimentary rock of the Renton Formation. The upper portion of this formation is deeply weathered to residual soils which are generally medium dense. The residual soil is mantled in some areas with recent alluvial soils or glacially derived soils. On upland parts of the site, we generally found 6 to 12 inches of dark brown organic topsoil overlying one to three feet of soft to medium stiff sandy silt (residual soil) . The silt 4 ' 4 Harding Lawson Associates typically grades downward into silty sand and below 5 feet into moderately weathered sandstone (Renton Formation) . Silt- stone was encountered below the sandstone in Boring 1 at a depth of 30 feet. In all test pits, the sandstone was moderately fractured, moderately hard, and moderately weathered (See Plate 3 for an explanation of these terms). Bedding was not apparent, but geologic maps of the area show nearby beds dipping downwards to the northeast at 40° to 60°. More recent glacial or glacially derived soils were encountered on the north part of the site in. Test Pits 2 , 3, and 4. In Test Pit 2, located at the northeast corner of the property, dark brown topsoil is underlain by. a 1.5 foot thick layer of medium dense sand which in turn overlies 11 inches of stiff clay with some sand partings. Below the clay, we encountered a unit of irregularly mixed silty sand and silty clay. The density of this unit varies and it' s mixed appearance suggests it formed through some type of mass wasting or sliding activity. . This conclusion is reinforced by the presence of an underlying unit of soft sheared clayey silt extending from 9.5 .feet to the base of our test pit at 12.5 feet. The sheared texture indicates considerable remolding and movement. This sliding appears to be restricted exclusively to the area immediately around Test Pit 2 as no slide debris was 5 1 . 4 I ' ♦ • Harding Lawson Associates observed in Test Pits 3 and 4 located downslope from Test. Pit 2. We consider the chances of slide reccurrance slim due to its restricted size and gentle slopes on this area of the site. In Test Pits 3 and 4 , we encountered glacial till beneath surficial layers of topsoil (in both test pits) and stiff clay (in Test Pit 3) . The till is hard and consists of silt with a trace to some gravel and with sand seams. The till extended to the base of Test Pit 3 (9.5 feet) but was underlain at 9 feet in Test Pit 4 by weathered siltstone. In contrast to upland parts of the site, our test probes in the lower portion of the site indicate that alluvial soils occur in the ravine. The soils consist of sandy silt or silty sand with some gravel to a depth of 1.5 to 3 feet. Our probe was not able to penetrate below this depth. However, we anticipate that sandy and gravelly alluvial soils extend downward to rock of the Renton Formation and that little or no soft organic soils are present. Along the base of the slope., we found a layer of soft soil derived from erosion and shallow soil creep down the slope. This layer is only a few feet thick; however, it does limit vehicle access to the ravine. C. Groundwater No groundwater or seepage was noted except in Test Pits 2, 3, and 4 . In these test pits, seepage was observed in sand 6 • Harding Lawson Associates seams in both the till unit and the sheared silt unit. This seepage should not impose unusual constraints on development. Based on our information and experience on adjacent sites, we believe that the permanent groundwater table is at or below the level of Panther Creek. 7 Harding Lawson Associates III CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. General Considerations Based on the results of our investigation, we conclude that the structure can be satisfactorily supported on conven- tional spread footings founded in the moderately weathered. sandstones and siltstones of the Renton Formation. The surficial weathered soils are significantly weaker and will compress under foundation loads. Since footings spanning from rock to soil may experience differential settlement, we recommend that the building be supported solely on firm sandstone or siltstone, typically found four to five feet below the surface. Because the Renton Formation is hard, excavation for the building may be difficult and will require heavy ripping equipment. Once excavated, the building cut should stand near vertical except near the top where there will be loose weathered soils. The upper portion of the cut should be sloped flatter. We do not anticipate any major groundwater problems during construction. However, there may be localized pockets of water and minor seepage may develop at the transition from residual soil to weathered sandstone. 8 Harding Lawson Associates Because the construction site is close to Panther Creek and the site soils are susceptible to erosion, care will need to be exercised in grading to prevent excessive erosion and siltation of the creek. This can be accomplished through an appropriate grading plan and through effective erosion controls normal to King County erosion protection procedures. B. Erosion Control Surficial soils at the site are silty and could erode if proper grading and soil protection methods are not used. The single most important factor influencing erosion is the total land area uncovered (unvegetated) at any one time. Any bare ground, regardless of slope, will be subject to erosion during periods of rain. Consequently, we recommend that site grading be phased so as to expose bare ground the minimum length of time necessary for construction and that, to the extent possible, grading be accomplished during drier months of the year. Soil erosion can also be minimized by retaining as much of the natural vegetation as possible for landscaping purposes. This is particularly important on the ravine banks, where the steeper slopes constitute a greater erosion hazard than elsewhere on site. When working on slopes, grading equipment should be operated on the contour whenever possible, particularly in the 9 r , Harding Lawson Associates final pass. After grading is complete, landscape areas and other areas which will not be covered with pavement or buildings should be revegetated as soon as possible. Revegetation is typically accomplished through seeding with grasses and planting shrubs and trees. Proper landscaping practices will minimize erosion potential. If the site becomes ready for seeding during the rainy season, it may be necessary to delay reseeding until drier weather. In this case, bare slopes should be protected by some temporary cover. Possible covers include plastic sheeting held down by sand bags or other weights, straw, or jute mesh. We recommend straw as it tends to stay in place once applied and does an effective job of, absorbing rain drop energy. Straw also transmits water readily. We recommend a minimum straw cover of at least 4 inches. In addition to these methods, we also recommend that a temporary silt retention facility be installed in conjunction with a storm water retention basin if construction is not confined to the drier summer months. The typical silt trap consisting of straw bales is usually not. effective during prolonged periods of rain. Consequently, we recommend that either a filter fabric silt fence or gravel filter be used. The retention basin should be sized to handle storm water in accordance with City of Renton standards and the silt filter 10 • • Harding Lawson Associates should be of sufficient height and strength that it will not be overtopped or washed out during periods of high water inflow. The retention basin will probably need to be cleaned out periodically to maintain its effectiveness. Site grading should be done so that runoff is carried to the retention basin.. -Proper engineering design should result in an adequate stormwater retention basin. C. Site Preparation and Grading To minimize disturbance to Panther Creek, we recommend that construction access be from South 38th Court, down the gentle north slope and then back above the base of the slope to the building cut. Site preparation should begin by stripping brush and small trees and the layer of dark brown topsoil from both building and paving areas. The topsoil layer is approximately 12 inches thick and should be wasted off site or stock piled for later use in landscaping areas. After stripping is com- pleted, the subgrade in areas where fill is planned should be proof rolled with a heavily loaded vehicle under the observa- tion of an experienced soils engineer.. Any areas exhibiting excessive weaving, rutting, or other signs of softness, should be repaired. Repair may consist of in place compaction of the soft soil, if practicable, or of excavation and replacement with compacted fill. Specifications for compacted fill are discussed below. 11 • Harding Lawson Associates Prior to placing fill on the existing slopes, we recommend that horizontal benches be cut to provide a key for fill in order to lessen the potential for downslope movement of fill. The width and depth of benches may be determined by the con- tractor, as long as competent soil is exposed. The surface of the benches should be proof rolled as described above. The soils exposed after stripping and benching should be soft to medium stiff, silt or sandy silt. Because these soils are very fine grained, they are highly susceptible to softening and disturbance when exposed to water and construction traffic. We therefore recommend that site grading and filling be performed during the normally drier months between May and September. During dry weather, native fill soils should be spread in layers approximately 6 inches in loose thickness, allowed to dry or sprinkled to obtain a moisture content suitable for compaction, then compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density in building areas and 90% of the maximum dry density in pavement areas. Maximum dry density as referenced in this report is defined by the ASTM Test Procedure D-1557. Considering the high silt content of the on-site soils, we expect that proper compaction will be most easily achieved with either. sheeps foot or rubber tired roller compaction equipment. • 12 Harding Lawson Associates If because of wet weather conditions, on-site soil is no longer suitable for use as fill as determined by a professional soils consultant, then we recommend that only imported pit run sand and gravel be used as fill. The imported material should consist of clean well graded sand and gravel containing less than 5% fines (material passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve by -__ weight) . Fines limitation may be relaxed somewhat for dry weather conditions and up to 10% fines would be acceptable. For material meeting these requirements, fill may be placed in loose lifts up to 12 inches thick, depending on the effec- tiveness of the compaction equipment, and compacted as described previously for building and pavement areas. We expect the most efficient means of compaction will be a vibratory smooth drum roller. - . Fills extending over the colluvium at the base of slope and into the ravine should be constructed by advancing an initial two to three foot lift of imported pit run over these soils to avoid their disturbance. Once this base is placed, filling may continue as described for the remainder of the site. Soils encountered in cut areas should predominantly be hard to very hard sandstones and siltstones of the Renton Formation. Exposed subgrade soils in cut areas where structures or pavements are planned should be proof rolled and repaired as described previously. 13 • Harding Lawson Associates D. Cut and Fill Slopes In general, we recommend that existing natural slopes be modified as little as possible. We believe that temporary cut slopes in firm sandstone or siltstone will stand at incli- nations near vertical. However, the sandstones and siltstones may be somewhat fractured and blocks may spall from the cut face. Consequently, particular care should be taken when working below the cut to be alert for such spalls. We strongly recommend that our firm be retained to observe excavation of the cut slope for any evidence of instability. The top of cut slopes should be flattened to about -a 2 : 1 slope at the transition to the loose weathered soil. Permanent cut and fill slopes should be planned at inclinations of 2 : 1 (horizontal:vertical) . It is important that all fill slopes have compacted surfaces. The contractor should accompany this by constructing the fill wide and then trimming to expose a firm dense surface. All slopes, whether cut or fill, should be grassed or planted to help control surface erosion. E. Drainage Provisions We expect that little or no groundwater will be encountered in excavations for the medical building. . However, because the site is sloped, there will be some runoff. The severity of runoff problems and associated construction problems should decrease in the summer and be greater in the winter season. 14 I Harding Lawson Associates For general site drainage, we recommend that the site be graded to prevent ponding and to slope away from building walls for a distance of at least 5 feet. Standard grading procedures should be taken so that water does not drain over cut or fill slopes or over the brow of the slope into Panther Creek. For permanent control of subsurface water, we recommend that standard foundation or footing drains be provided as described below. In addition, all below grade portions of the building should be provided with a backdrain to reduce the potential for moisture on interior walls and to intercept groundwater. The backdrain and footing drain can be incor- porated as part of the same system. All backfill placed behind subsurface walls for drainage purposes should be imported sand and gravel and should extend to within 2 feet of the top of the wall. The imported sand and gravel should be well graded from a 3/4 inch size to the U.S. No. 20 sieve containing no more than 3% fines (material passing the, No. 200 sieve) . The top 2 feet of backfill should be impervious material compacted to prevent surface water from entering the sand and gravel backfill. At the base of the sand and gravel backdrain and all exterior footings, we recommend that a foundation drain be provided per accepted construction practice. The drain should 15 Harding Lawson Associates consist of a four inch diameter smooth wall perforated pipe, laid perforations down: The corregated plastic pipe commonly sold for drain lines is not suitable. Footing drains should be surrounded by six inches of concrete sand. If the drains are placed on or adjacent to concrete foundations, the sand may be omitted between the drain pipe and the concrete. The invert of an exterior subdrain pipe should be at least 12 inches below the adjacent interior floor slab. Water collected in the footing drains should be carried to daylight or to a storm drain. Roof drains and storm drains for paved areas should also be provided. The water collected should be carried in tight lines and discharged away from the buildings or into a storm drain system. Under no circumstances should roof or other drains be allowed to empty into footing drains. In addition, runoff from the pavement area should not be allowed to drain over into the ravine as the ravine slope may be eroded. F. Foundation Support Isolated or continuous footings should bear on moderately weathered sandstone or siltstone and have a minimum width of 2 feet. A qualified soils engineer should inspect footing subgrades to evaluate whether suitable bearing soil has been reached. We recommend that all interior and exterior footings be embedded below the adjacent grade at least as much as 16 • • Harding Lawson Associates the footing thickness. For interior footings the lowest adjacent grade may be taken as the floor slab elevation plus one foot. For footings designed and constructed as outlined above, we recommend an allowable bearing pressure of 10,000 pounds per square foot. This pressure is for dead loads and may be increased by 25% for dead and live loads and by 50%. for the total of all loads, including seismic or wind. The weight of the footings and backfill over it may be neglected. Lateral forces can be resisted by passive soil resistance against the buried portions of the footing and by friction on the base of the footings. For conventional shallow footings a uniform pressure of 1,000 psf beginning 12 inches below the surface may be used to calculate the passive soil resistance, provided the footing backfill is compacted as required for fill. We recommend that a coefficient of . 35 be used to cal- culate the friction force between the base of footings and - foundation soils. These values do not include a load factor; an appropriate load factor should be selected by the structural engineer. G. Floor Slab Support Slab-on-grade floors may be supported on firm sandstone or siltstone or on fill compacted as described previously. We recommend that the slab be underlain with a minimum of 6 inches of free draining crushed rock or clean coarse sand 17 Harding Lawson Associates and gravel containing less. than 3 percent fines to provide underslab drainage and to act as' a capillary break. A vapor barrier should be placed between the floor slab and capillary break. H. Retaining Walls Lateral earth pressures acting on the retaining walls will depend primarily on the height and flexibility of the wall. The type of backfill and how it is placed and compacted, and the geometry of the backfill and drainage pro- visions. We have assumed for our analysis that the building wall will be 18 feet at the tallest point and will be drained. The wall should have a backdrain as described previously. Wall backfills should be compacted with light equipment and moderate effort to avoid developing excessive pressures behind the walls. We recommend that only hand operated equip- ment be allowed within 5 feet of subsurface and retaining walls. The backfill should be placed in approximately 12 inch lifts conditioned to a moisture content suitable for compaction, and compacted to about 90% of the maximum dry density. For a rigidly supported subsurface wall, we recommend that it be designed for a uniform pressure of 20 times the total height of the wall in pounds per square foot. This assumes a nearly horizontal backfill surface that is placed and 18 Harding Lawson Associates drained as described earlier. If there are any plans to slope the backfill at steeper than 3 :1, we should be consulted to evaluate the higher pressures which will result. • 19 Harding Lawson Associates IV USE OF THIS REPORT AND WARRANTY We have prepared this report for use by Professional Building Associates or by their design representatives for this project. The data and report should be provided to the contractors for their bidding or estimating but not as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. If there are signi- ficant changes in the nature, design, or location of the . facilities, you should request that we reconsider our conclu- sions and recommendations, and provide a written modification or verification. When you have finalized the design, we recommend that the final design and specifications be reviewed by our firm to see that our recommendations have been properly interpreted. Within the limitations of the schedule and budget for our work, we warrant. that our work has been done in accordance with generally accepted practice in this area. .No other warranty, express or implied, is made. The scope of our work did not include services related to. construction safety precautions and is not intended to recommend or direct construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, except as specifically described and then only for consideration in design, not for construction guidance. There are possible variations in subsurface conditions 20 _ f r Harding Lawson Associates between the explorations and also with time. A contingency for unanticipated conditions should be included in the budget and. schedule. Inspection and testing by a qualified soils engineer should be included during construction to confirm the conditions indicated by the explorations, or to provide corrective recommendations adapted to the conditions revealed during the work. The conclusions and recommendations in this report should be applied in their entirety. 21 . I 60 70 40 so $o � N _._.__\________(_L_. i • South 37th Street 90 ,(411 ,i i 1:1 i �'r SCALE $ . 0 40 100 • 200 . 4k.4 r._` Proposed li. i , A . S' 38ty 1 Bf-Pil ' uilding Court i • LEGEND •Pa Existing South 38th Courtto e • 4 ..... .............. ..., \ �° B1 - Boring number and location \P3 Proposed • Bridge T 1 »- TP Test pit number and location •P If 4 • f 6 • Test probe number and location • I _ Existing ~ Building • Proposed building location _ 1111111 Proposed parking area �_ _ _ PANr" % CREEK _ �` ---------Property line • 5. ,..-so-- Existing contours • • 70 %� ' 8• ....... ) . REFERENCE: Site plan prepared by I William Graham Consultants dated April 1, 1982. • 9. Navas.tIIwe.w Aasooiaters SITE PLAN PLATE • Engineers, GeologistsHLA &Geophysicists Renton Medical Building. l d i n 9, Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE • BJT 14,782,001 .07 r, 'l(✓ 5/ii(h_ 22 Harding Lawson Associates APPENDIX Field Exploration We explored subsurface conditions by drilling one boring to a depth of 37. 3 feet with a B61 Mobile drill, excavating seven test pits with a rubber tired Case 580-C backhoe, and . probing in 6 locations with a Davis Peat probe. The boring, test pit, and test probe locations are shown on Plate 1. The field explorations were continuously observed by our geologist and field engineer, who examined and classified subsurface soils, selected sampling intervals, and maintained a detailed log of the explorations . Relatively undisturbed soil samples were taken during drilling with a 2. 4 inch I .D. heavy duty sampler equipped with brass liner rings. The sampler was driven with a 300-pound hammer falling 30 inches , and the number of blows required to advance the sampler 1 foot was recorded. The materials encountered were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System described on Plate 2, and the Rock Classifications described on Plate 3. All samples were sealed in plastic containers to limit moisture loss, labeled, and returned to our laboratory for further examination and testing. The boring logs presented on Plates 4 through 13 are modified from the field logs to reflect the additional information from laboratory examination and testing samples. 23 Harding Lawson Associates The number of blows required to drive the sampler is also shown on the logs along with the sample condition and length of sample recovered. Laboratory Testing The samples were examined in our laboratory and represen- tative samples were selected for moisture/density determination, and direct shear testing. Strain controlled direct shear tests were performed on two fully submerged and consolidated sample. Direct shear test results and the moisture, density data, are presented next to the sample notations on the boring logs. 24 . MAJOR DMSONS TYPICAL NAMES OW 1K WELL GRADED GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND MIXTUES CLEAN GRAVELS . WITH LITTLE OR 5 i GRAVELS NO FINES ®P _•a mow/ouzo GRAVELS,GRAVEL-SAND MIxTT/ns CO MON DIAN HALF 02 i� COARSE IRAGTTON OM I silt',GRAVELS,POORLY GRADED GRAVEL-SANDwon MAN GRAVELS WITH ' SILT maxims 0 n IAR NO.4 SIEVE size aVIS LER FINES • W ®C f, curveGRAVELS.POORLY GRADED GRAVEL-SAND- ' CLAY MIXTURES SW .� GRADE D SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS • CLEAN SANDS • • WITH LITTLE OR SANDS NO Hass SP .'. POORLY GRADED SANDS,GRAVELLY SANDS MORE • THAN HALF ' . . i i. COARSE FtAcnoN RL SM .M SILTY SANDS.POORLY GRADED SAND-SILT IS 4MAU.0 THAN SANDS WITH MixMES • NO.4 SIEVE SIZE OVEe II%flN is SC CLAYEY SANDS,POORLY GRADED SAND-CLAY . • MIXTURES 1 INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINE SANDS,ROCK I n i ML FLOUR,SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS,CM CLAYEY SILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY O. SILTS AND CLAYS INORGANIC curs or Low TO MEDIUM rLMTICITY, GRAVELLY CLAYS,SANDY CLAYS. SILTY CLAYS. O LIQUID LIMIT LESS THAN SO CL LEAN CLAYS CS OL ORGANIC CLAYS AND ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS Of W Law PLASTICITY i= INORGANIC SILTS,MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACIOUS is MH FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS,ELASTIC SILTS 1 SILTS AND CLAYS THAN s LIMIT ORM INORGANIC curs Of HIGH PtAsncm, IdCH / FAT CLAYS slam O a OH ri ORGANIC CLAYS Of MEDIUM TO HIGH MASTICIT/, ORGANIC SILTS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt eon FEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM SAMPLE DESIGNATION • 'Ue/LADY►ed• Simple ® Rwle or Cl.uillsetl.. Sample STRENGTH TESTS ® VANE SHEAR TEST ® UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TEST F • /1.1/ L • l•S»r•rorF I000 (30.9)I ( DIRECT SHEAR TEST 1000 (30.0) —311 TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST CD • Cew.•114aq/ - Drelw.l .I• ♦ 1 UU • Uns•wr.11/.r./ - Uw/r.lw•/ cu Melst•r• C•wt.wt otter Tett (%) CD • C.w..11bre/ - Dr.I..• Stress Hemel to Sheer Floss (psi) I/2 Deviator S.r•s. (psi) M.ishun C♦wtent .lar T••t (u) ---- Coollwlry Strata -Os (Ps() e KEY TO TEST DATA Harding Lawson Associates PLATE a_.i.• � Engineers,Geologists LEGEND &Geophysicists Renton Medical Building2 Renton, Washington DRAWN ,4'7�J„2 N4MMBERo� APP OVED DATE REVISED DATE j3 UU ,`�l4Pr S—II—r-z- 25 I CONSOLIDATION OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS;usually determined from unweathered samples.Largely dependent on cementation. • U = unconsolidated P = poorly consolidated • M = moderately consolidated W =well consolidated • II BEDDING OF SEDIMENTARY ROCKS • Splitting Property Thickness Stratification Massive Greater than 4.0 ft. very thick bedded Blocky 2.0 to 4.0 ft. thick-bedded Slabby 0.2 to 2.0 ft. thin-bedded Flaggy 0.05 to 0.2 ft. very thin-bedded, Shaly or platy 0.01 to 0.05 ft. laminated Papery. less than 0.01 ft. thinly laminated - • III FRACTURING • Intensity Size of Pieces in Feet • Very little fractured Greater than 4.0 Occasionally fractured 1.0 to 4.0 Moderately fractured 0.5 to 1.0 Closely fractured 0.1 to 0.5 • Intensely fractured 0.05 to 0.1 -Crushed Less than 0.05 IV HARDNESS • 1. Soft—Reserved for plastic material alone - 2 Low hardness—can be gouged deeply or carved easily with a knife blade • • 3. Moderately hard—can be readily scratched by a knife blade:scratch leaves a heavy trace of dust and is readily visible after the powder has been blown away. 4. Hard—can be scratched with difficulty:scratch produces little powder and is often faintly visible. 5. Very hard—cannot be scratched with knife blade.leaves a metallic streak. • V STRENGTH 1. Plastic or very low strength • 2 Friable—crumbles easily by rubbing with fingers 3. Weak.—An unfractured specimen of such material will crumble under light hammer blows. 4. Moderately strong—.Specimen will withstand a few heavy hammer blows before breaking. 5. Strong—Specimen will withstand a few heavy ringing hammer blows and will yield with difficulty only dust and small flying fragments. 0. Very strong—Specimen will resist heavy ringing hammer blows and will yield with difficulty only dust and • • small flying fragments. • VI WEATHERING—The physical and chemical disintigration and decomposition of rocks and minerals by natural processes such as oxidation,reduction,hydration,solution,carbonation,and freezing and thawing. D. Deep—Moderate to complete mineral decomposition;extensive disintegration;deep and thorough dis- coloration;many fractures,all extensively coated or filled with oxides,carbonates and/or clay or silt. M. Moderate—Slight change or partial decomposition of minerals;little disintegration:cementation little to unaffected.Moderate to occasionally intense discoloration.Moderately coated fractures. • • L Little—No megascopic decomposition of minerals;little or no effect on normal cementation.Slight and intermittent,or localized discoloration.Few stains on fracture surfaces. F. Fresh—Unaffected by weathering agents.No disintegration or discoloration.Fractures usually less • • numerous than joints. • Harding Lawson Associates Physical Properties Criteria PLATE Engineers.Geologists for Rock Descriptions 8 Geophysicists• Renton Medical Building 3 Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE 14,782,001 .07 (lA-A S-i/- 8z- 26 . • . • • . Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o15 Y • ;, a Equipment B61 Mobile 0 0 0 0 3 cQ • �,c aai cca 80 Feet * 4-9-82 M N o m m V o o D Elevation Date 0 GRASS 761 (' 13 21 .4 104.4 II DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) 3012 ( 30 19.3 103.5 medium stiff, moist with occasional sandstone : . •.;..:;::; fragments, roots to 11 feet 83/.9 5- "" : (FILL) •: ORANGE-BROWN SILTY SANDSTONE(SM) 50/.5" ',K :;::: moderately fractured, moderately hard, moderately ;::.:.c strong, moderately weathered 10- ".... 105/..75" C;:", 15- `,:'•�'• GRAY SILTY SANDSTONE • 9 2/.7 5" '...•;:°• moderately hard, strong, ' .;.- little weathered . 20 70/.65" 21 .3 106.0 �• 25- • 64/.5" sandstone becomes well graded with angular fragments to .25 inches in length 30- GRAY SILTSTONE . moderately hard, strong 74/.3" 21 .9 108.4 little weathered with fragments of hard clay- . stone embedded in matrix,and . . with fine sand 35- . Boring completed to 32.3 feet on 4-9-82 . No groundwater encountered. 40- . . *City of Renton Datum. • Harding Limon Asaocistos # -. LOG OF BORING ' PLATE H LAMedical Engineers,Geologists Renton Building l d i ng 4 &Geophysicists Renton, Washington • DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,782,001 .07 NIAA 5-I1-$? 27 Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o ° Case 580C Backhoe o L a . Equipment Q E 0 5 8 a-w o cn Elevation 85 Feet Date 4-9-82 in 2 a o 0 >a MOTTLED BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) soft, moist • ` with roots and some clay (FILL) • • � DARK BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) A: •:- loose, moist 5 LIGHT BROWN SANDSTONE moderately fractured, moder- ately hard, moderately strong, moderately weathered • becomes hard, slightly weath- ered at 7 feet Test Pit terminated at 7.5 feet on 4-9-82 No water observed. 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT 1 PLATE I-I LA Engineers,Geologists Renton Medical Building Geophysicists Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,782,001 .07 MirN S�//-gz 28 • Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o o Q m L 0- Equipment cCase 580C Backhoe 0 0 3 >a o io Elevation 81 Feet Date 4-9-82 Fa mc°� o0 0 _ II DARK BROWN SANDY ORGANIC SILT(OL) • • soft, moist • • with roots n GRAY SAND (SP) medium dense, damp 5- with orange mottling MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY CLAY (CL) / stiff, moist S/ BROWN IRREGULARLY MIXED SILTY SAND (SM) AND SILTY CLAY (CL) 10-$ density or stiffness varies, moist R GRAY CLAYEY SILT (ML) soft, moist 15- . Test Pit terminated at 12.5 feet on 4-9-82 Water noted in sand pockets in sheared clay. 20- 25- 30- 35- 40— Harding Lawson Associates LOG • OF TEST PST 2 PLATE Engineers,Geologists Renton Medical Building - 8 Geophysicists6 Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,782.001 .07 - MP- 5--11 -ts z 29 Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o a Equipment Case 580C Backhoe 0 0 o c` o o0 o Elevation 71 Feet Date 4-9-82 m � 0 iiii DARK BROWN ORGANIC SILTY CLAY (OL) Isoft, moist BROWN AND GRAY CLAY (CL) stiff, moist 5- BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) hard, wet with a trace of gravel cobbles present below 7 feet • R seepage noted at 8 feet and 10- .below in sand seams Test Pit terminated at 9.5 feet on 4-9-82 15- • 20- 25- • 30- • 35- • • 40- Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT 3 PLATE Engineers,Geologists Renton Medical Building 7 &Geophysicists Renton, Washington DRAWN J NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,732,001 .07 Ors c-1/-g 30 • Shear Strength (Ibstsq ft) o o n - °' Equipment cCase 580C Backhoe . J= a 0 0 a) 15)' ' `E° 9- '� o m Elevation 71 Feet Date 4- 82 m 2c� o0 I ' ll DARK BROWN ORGANIC CLAYEY SILT (OL) soft, moist with roots and fine gravel MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY SILT (ML) 5- hard, wet with sand seams containing water • g'' BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) dense, wet 10 weathered sandstone BROWN SILTSTONE moderately fractured, moderately hard, moderately strong, moderately weathered 15- Test Pit terminated at 10 feet on 4-9-82 20- 25- 30- 35- • 40— Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT 4 PLATE Engineers,Geologists &Geophysicists Renton Medical Building 1111 Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,782,001 .07 _ 5": 31 . • Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) °o >, L n Equipment Case 580C •Backhoe 0 0 E. `. °' 6 Feet 4-9-82 m 2 0 a 0 o u, Elevation 3 Date 0 •. 1 I ! r - . •• DARK BROWN ORGANIC SILT (OL) BROWN SILT (ML) _ ''s ...medium stiff, moist • ,•;§,c:.; BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) 5- dense, moist ;4 r weathered sandstone DARK BROWN S I LTSTONE moderately fractured, moderately hard, moderately 10- strong, moderately weathered, weathered seams Test Pit terminated at 7 feet on 4-9-82 15- • No water observed. • 20- • • 25- • • 30 • - • • 35- 40- Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT 5 PLATE Engineers,Geologists • • &Geophysicists Renton Medical Building Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,782,001 .07 .S 11 z • 32 y r Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o o a Case 580C Backhoe ,, s a Equipment - ` ` o cDn Elevation 43 Feet Date 4-9-82 • m 2� 00 0 DARK BROWN ORGANIC SILT (OL) 24.8 95.2 "' soft, moist 'III BROWN SILT (ML) soft to medium stiff, moist g. ;?w`.' BROWN SANDY CLAYEY SILT medium stiff, moist weathered sandstone/siltstone BROWN SILTSTONE AND SANDSTONE moderately fractured., • moderately hard, moderately 10— strong, moderately weathered Test Pit terminated at 10 feet' on 4-9-82 • No seepage observed. • 15- 20- 25 • - • • • • • 30- • • • 35- • 40- Halrdieg Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT .6 PLATE Engineers,Geologists Renton Medical Building �O &Geophysicists Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE • BJT 14,782,001 .07 r1RPr 5-/1 ��Z • - 33 Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o o a o 2 c >, s o Equipment Case 580C Backhoe 0 5 8 -; o u) Elevation 86 Feet Date 4-9-82 in Q a 0 II II DARK BROWN ORGANIC SILT (OL) 1'w' soft, moist 21 .4 80.6 r — BROWN SILT (ML) soft, moist 5- ORANGE BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) stiff, moist weathered sandstone/siltstone '''; BROWN WEATHERED SANDSTONE • moderately fractured, moderately hard, moderately 10r strong, moderately weathered Test Pit terminated at 8 feet on 4-9-82 . 15- No water observed. 20- 25- 30- 35- 40— Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PIT 7 PLATE Engineers.Geologists&Geophysicists Renton Medical Building Renton, Washington DRAWN JOB Ny�MBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,7t32,001 .07 r1P f1 5-// -rZ 34 Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) 0 0 o LOG OF TEST PROBE 1 L a Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel 7 mo o 0 Elevation 39 Feet Date 4-14-82 1111 0 DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) soft, wet trace of organics with occasional gravel BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) 5 • Probe refused at 3 foot depth on 4-14-82 10 15 LOG OF TEST PROBE 2 Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel Elevation. 39 Feet Date 4-14-82 0 Ili! DARK BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) loose, moist with some gravel and with some roots and wood fragments 5 Probe refused at .5 foot depth. Test Pit extended by hand to 1 .5 feet and terminated on 4-14-82. • 10 15 Zi Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PROBES PLATE Engineers,Geologists Renton Medical Building • &Geophysicists Renton, Washington 12 DRAWN JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14.782,001 .07 I IPTP • 35 • Shear Strength (Ibslsq ft) 0 o o LOG OF TEST PROBE 3 m n 71 Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel 0 co —0 , o w Elevation 35 Feet Date 4-14-82 m 2 U 0 0 DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) 411 soft, moist with occasional root fragments silty sand? Probe refused at 2.6 feet on 5 4-14-82 10 15 LOG OF TEST PROBE 4 Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel Elevation 34 Feet Date 4-14-82 0 DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) R- soft, moist with occasional gravel Probe refused at 1 .5 feet on 5- gravel (?) on 4-14-82 10- 15— Harding Lawson Associates LOG OF TEST PROBES PLATE _ Engineers.Geologists Renton Medical Building &Geophysicists Renton, Washington 13 DRAWN NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE BJT 14,7JOB 82,001 .07 /`'fptr\- j-11 -cz- 36 Shear Strength (lbs/sq ft) o a LOG OF TEST PRObE 5 m a Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel 0 0 o co Elevation 37 Feet Date 4-1.4-82 m � o oo 0 .soma i"1111114 DARK BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) LIGHT BROWN WELL GRADED GRAVELLY SAND (SW) 5 Probe refused at surface. Test Pit hand dug to refusal at .8 foot depth on 4-14-82. • 10 • 15 LOG OF TEST PROBE 6 Equipment Peat Probe, Shovel Elevation 36 Feet Date 4-14-82 11111 DARK BROWN SANDY SILT (ML) .400011 soft, moist with organics BROWN SILTY SAND (SM) loose, moist 5 Probe refused at 1 .5 feet on ✓ 4-14-82 10 15 - ��� , Harding Lawson Assoelats LOG OF TEST PROBES PLATE Engineers.Geologists. &Geophysicists Renton Medical Building Renton, Washington JR W - JOB NUMBER APPROVED DATE REVISED DATE �D 14,782,001 .07 NA 37 - i Harding Lawson Associates DISTRIBUTION 1 copy Mr. Richard M. Shute Metroplex Fund Ltd. • 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 2 copies Mr. Peter Schroeder William Graham Consultants 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 MAA/JEN/cag QUALITY CONTROL REVIEWER „Tames T. Cameron Engineer 38 E3EGINNIN OF FILE MAO . , FILE TITLE L5A / ie , • gab 04.6 •••• ••iie . • OF R4, A 4$ THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 oasIL BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER . FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 042, 94TF0 SEPZE��t August 2, 1982 Mr. Pete Schroder Wm. Graham Consultants, Architects Securities Building, Suite 1017 Seattle, WA 98101 RE: File No. SA-045-82; Professional Building Associates. Dear Mr. Schroder: The Examiner's Report regarding the referenced application which was published on July 13, 1982 has not been appealed within the 14-day period established by ordinance. Therefore, this matter is considered final and is being transitted to the City Clerk this date for filing. Please feel free to contact this office if further assistance or information is required. Sincerely, 171::134441.16"mni."' Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner cc: Building & Zoning Department City Clerk \ • AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING • State of Washington) County of King ) • Marilyn J . Petersen , being First duly sworn, upon oath disposes and states: That on the 13th day of July 19 82 , affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. • • Subscribed and sworn this V.) day of 1 9 • Lva5., crn \a-eke • Notary Public in and for r-e State of Washington, residing at Q�kon - • Application, Petition or Case: Professional Building Associates; SA-045-82 (The n2.c;r!Wte.6 contain. a .P_,i :t of the pahtti,e6 n i -r.e.cond, ) Fr V. July 13, 1982 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION. APPLICANT: Professional Building Associates FILE NO. SA-045-82 LOCATION: West side of Talbot Road South immediately south of S. 37th Street. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks site plan approval for construction of a four-story medical office building with associated parking. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Building & Zoning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with conditions BUILDING & ZONING The Building & Zoning Department report was received by the DEPARTMENT REPORT: Examiner on June 29, 1982. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Building & Zoning 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 July 6, 1982 at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, presented the Building & Zoning Department report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #l : Application File containing Building & Zoning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Site Plan as submitted Exhibit #3: Site Plan Submission, June 9, 1982 Exhibit #4: Cross Sectional Diagram Responding to the Examiner's inquiries , Mr. Blaylock advised that a distance of 130 to 150 feet exists between the northern edge of the building and the northern property line in conformance with a condition of restrictive covenants imposed in 1975; and a distance of 50 feet exists to the east property line. • The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Pete Schroeder Wm. Graham Consultants , Architects Securities Building, Suite 1017 Seattle, WA 98101 Mr. Schroeder advised that the 50-foot setback from the eastern property line established relative to building height and bulk was required as a condition of the original short plat of the subject site. Additionally, the ultimate square footage of the structure has been reduced from 42,200 to 42,038 square feet which requires 211 parking spaces. Responding to discussions regarding LID 324, Mr. Schroeder noted concern regarding limitations of the LID, its current progress , and the applicant's responsibility in redesigning access to the project in conformance to the LID. He noted that site grade and location of existing trees at the western end of the property pose limitations in providing a well-designed access to the building; and restrictive covenants imposed during site plan review in 1979 have been officially extinguished based upon the fact that the site plan was technically weak and did not consider a complete environmental analysis at the time. The applicant's final concern relates to a trip generation charge of $15.00 per vehicle trip since the ultimate subsidy of traffic improvements is unknown; as well as a concern related to utilities hookup charges to which the applicant would prefer not being bound at this time. The Examiner clarified that the trip generation fee is a condition imposed by the Environmental Review Committee and is a matter not subject to the Examiner's review. There was no response to the Examiner's request for further testimony in support of the application. Responding to his request for comments in opposition was: SA-045-82 Page Two S. Christensen 17412 Springbrook Road Renton, WA 98055 Queries by Mr. Christensen, resident directly across from the proposed project, pertained to the distance from Talbot Road west to the proposed structure; access to the project; number of traffic trips generated by the proposal ; architectural design and color of the building; and possible widening of Talbot Road and potential removal of trees to accommodate that widening. Responding to Mr. Christensen's concerns , Mr. Blaylock advised that a distance of 250 to 300 feet exists from Talbot Road to the proposed building; access would, be provided via 38th Court with emergency access only via 37th Street; 2100 daily vehicle trips will be generated from the proposal ; the building, which is designed to serve the hospital facility, will contain medical-dental offices , and will consist of four stories on the south side and three stories on the north side in a staggered design with a central entryway; and the proposed color and material will be earth-tone stucco. The Examiner advised that other inquiries related to roadway widening, removal of trees, signalization of the access road in the future were related to LID 324 which is under the purview of the City Council upon formation. Responding for the applicant was: Richard Shute Metroplex Fund LTD 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Responding to Mr. Christensen's concerns, Mr. Shueindicated edmthat an andexistingiotree ee in the narrow 38th Court accessway will require removalupon 324 has commenced with a preliminary assessment of all adjoining property owners accomplished. Responding to concerns regarding generation of 2100 additional traffic trips from the proposal , he advised that a traffic study has revealed that 80% of those trips will be directed to the south along Talbot Road and will not impact the roadway to the north. Responding to discussion regarding proposed architectural style and proposed use of the building, Mr. Shute stated that the subject site is located within a public- quasi-public zone which is designated to provide services to the hospital . The architecture will be similar to that illustrated in the rendering displayed in Exhibit #3, and as a result of the staggered design, visual impacts will be minimized, particularly from the northern boundary line. He noted that the site design will take maximum advantage of the heavily wooded terrain and Panther Creek, and the color of the building will be in natural earth tones. He submitted a photograph of the proposal as envisioned into the record as follows: Exhibit #5: Photograph of proposal Mr. Shute also noted that preservation of the natural greenbelt has been required by both the LID and restrictive covenants previously imposed; however, the applicant's own personal goal would be to preserve these natural amenities on site. Responding to discussion of plans for construction of a pedestrian-bicycle link along the western site boundary across Panther Creek, he advised that preliminary discussions have been held with hospital authorities, and although these plans have now been delayed, reinstitution of the proposal is possible in the future to provide a pedestrian-automobile link to the hospital , thereby diverting traffic which would normally utilize Talbot Road as a direct route to the hospital . Responding for the applicant was: Bert Barton Multiplex Fund LTD 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Mr. Barton requested clarification of earlier comments related to the imposition of a trip generation fee. The Examiner clarified that the $15.00 per trip fee had been imposed by the Environmental Review Committee under authority of the SEPA Ordinance, and that condition was subject to appeal, to the Hearing Examiner during the 14-day period following imposition of the condition. However, he was uncertain whether the appeal period had since expired. The Examiner requested final comments. Since none were offered, the hearing regarding File No. SA-045-82 was closed by the Examiner at 9:43 a.m. • SA-045-82 Page Three FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS 6 DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The applicant, Professional Building Associates , filed a request for site plan approval for a professional medical/dental clinic in a P-1 (Public/Quasi-Public) zone. 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Building and Zoning Department report , and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton' s Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , RCW 43.21C, as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) , responsible official . 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. • 5. There was no opposition to the proposal expressed. 6. The subject site is located on the west side of Talbot Road S. immediately south of S. 37th Street. 7. The approximately 5.4 acre site straddles Panther Creek which flows through a ravine on the subject site. The site additionally slopes downward to the west at about a 10% grade. 8. The site is heavily wooded with significant trees on the level portions of the site in the ravine. 9. LID 324 will reconstruct the Talbot Road/S. 38th Place intersection in the vicinity of the subject site. Water and sewer lines run along Talbot Road S. and are available to service the subject site. 10. The applicant proposes constructing a 42,038 square foot building on the subject site which will be served by 211 parking spaces. The building will step down the hillside and will be two and four stories depending on the perspective. 11 . Approximately 64% of the site will be left as open space and the building will cover about 5% of the site area. 12. Restrictive covenants imposed by the City Council when the property was reclassified to P-1 required preservation of the creek and ravine, and required setbacks from property lines and the ravine for structures, and imposed building height restrictions. The applicant's proposal complies with these restrictions. 13. A detailed geotechnical report on the soil and slope stability was submitted by the applicant detailing construction techniques to maintain the integrity of the slopes and the quality of the water of Panther Creek. 14. The subject site was annexed into the city in April of 1959 by Ordinance No. 1743. The site was reclassified to P-1 in July of 1975 by Ordinance No. 2944. The property was short platted in 1977 and a previous site plan, since withdrawn, had been approved for the subject site in 1979. 15. The proposal is expected to generate approximately 2, 120 vehicle trips per day. About 80% of these trips are expected to utilize the Talbot Road S./S. 43rd Street intersection. 16. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of public and quasi-public uses while the area surrounding the ravine is designated for greenbelt uses. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The subject proposal appears to serve the public use and interest. The plan takes into detailed consideration the Panther Creek system and the topography and geology of the subject site. 2. The geotechnical report indicates that the site can be ,developed while maintaining the integrity of the various slopes of the subject property and the water quality and quantity of Panther Creek. In order to assure that the site is developed in a feasible manner, the development of the site must be accomplished under the direct SA-045-82 Page Four supervision of a geotechnical engineer. Reports of that engineer must be made to the Public Works Department in such time and manner as that department may require. 3. All covenants imposed at the time of the reclassification of the subject site shall be adhered to by the applicant. 4. The building shall have an exterior treatment which will enable it to blend with the wooded site and not interfere with the greenbelt characteristics of the southern portion of the site including Panther Creek. 5. Because the slopes may be susceptible to slippage or erosion, especially during the wet seasons , all grading should be completed prior to November 1 , 1982, and hydroseeding of all slopes not otherwise landscaped or built upon prior to December 1 , 1982. DECISION: The site plan is approved subject to the following conditions: • 1 . All prior covenants imposed by the City Council concurrent with the reclassification of the suite must be adhered to by the applicant. 2. There shall be no grading of the subject site subsequent to November 1 , 1982 and all graded areas shall be hydroseeded if no landscaping or construction occurs prior to December 1 , 1982. 3. All development of the subject site shall occur under the direct supervision of a geotechnical engineer and reports prepared for review by the Department of Public Works. Such reports shall be in a form, frequency and manner as approved by the Department of Public Works. 4. The exterior treatment of the building shall be in earth tones to harmonize with the wooded site. The treatment shall be subject to the approval of the city's landscape architect. ORDERED THIS 13th day of July, 1982. TWA Fred J. Kaufn n Land Use Hea 'ng Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 13th day of July, 1982 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: Pete Schroeder, Wm. Graham Consultants , Securities Building , Suite 1017, Seattle, WA 98101 S. Christensen, 17412 Springbrook Road , Renton, WA 98055 Richard Shute, Metroplex Fund LTD, 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98101 Bert Barton, Multiplex Fund LTD, 1117 Minor Avenue, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98101 TRANSMITTED THIS 13th day of July, 1982 to the following: • Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. •Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director David Clemens , Policy Development Director Members , Renton Planning Commission Ron Nelson, Building & Zoning Director Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before July 27, 1982. 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 evidencewhich 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. SA-045-82 Page Five 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 or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall . II PRELIMINARY REPO""' TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PROFESSIONAL BUI NG ASSOCIATES JULY 6, 1982 PAGE THREE 4 . Schools : The subject site is not in close proximity to any existing schools, and the proposed project will not have an effect on existing school population except possible indirectly through increased employment opportunities in the area. 5. Recreation: The subject site is approximately one mile south of Talbot Hill Park. G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1 . Section 4-710, P-1 , Public District. 2. Chapter 22 , Parking and Loading. H. APPLI �\h: E SECTIONS OF 'i COMP:.,tvii:J ii is)SIY/E PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CIS DOCUMENT: NT: 1 . Policy Element, Comprehensive Plan, 9.G-2, p. 22, Health Care Facilities. I. IMPACT ON THE NATURAL OR ui+a M!\iv ENlI I':4 : 1 . Natural Systems: Development of the site will disturb soil and vegetation, increase storm water runoff, and has an effect on noise levels in the area. However, these can be mitigated by proper development controls and procedures and adherence to the existing restrictive covenants and sound. • planning principals and practices. 2. Population/Employment: The nature of the use is such that there isn't likely to be any significant effect on population. 3. Schools: Not applicable. 4. Social: Construction of the proposed facility wil provide opportunities for social interaction • between the building' s employees. 5. Traffic: Estimated traffic generation will be . approximately 2, 120 daily vehicle trip ends. Eight (80) percent of these trips will impact the intersection of S.W. 43rd Street and Talbot Road South. J. EVIROl;'II"oN iAL 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 was issued for the subject proposal by the ERC on June 14 , 1982. K. AG i ii JCIES/IID t-. .'i,; ; i++itl4!lI\i i S CONTACTED: 1 . City of Renton Building & Zoning Department. 2. City of Renton Design Engineering Division. • 3. City of Renton Traffic Engineering Division. 4. City of Renton Utilities Engineering Division. • 5. City of Renton Fire Prevention Bureau. 6. City of Renton Parks & Recreation Department. 7. City of Renton Policy Development Department. PRELIMINARY REP( TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PROFESSIONAL BUJ :NG ASSOCIATES . JULY 6, 1982 PAGE FOUR L. DEPARTMEHT ANALYSIS: 1 . The proposal is to construct a four-story medical office building with associated parking. ' The building will contain 41 , 514 square feet on a 5. 4 acre site. This is a reduction from the original request of 42,400 square feet as a result of necessary mitigating measures recommended by the Environmental Review Committee. The site will provide 206 parking spaces to meet the needs of the facility. 2. The proposed medical office building is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Public/Quasi-Public. 3. The subject site is presently zoned P-1 , Public Use. Any private project within the P-1 zone requires site plan approval. 4. The site was originally reviewed for development under File No. SA-325-79 . At that time, the unique characteristics of the site were not totally evaluated to consider the potential development.. The original site plan envisioned straighting out Panther Creek and basically covering the entire site with an office structure. The Hearing Examiner' s decision required the placement of restrictive covenants • on the development to control the impacts upon the natural amenities. The applicant, in 1979, has since forfeited the property and it is questionable whether he had total legal control of the property. The present applicant is anticipating eliminating the restrictive covenants imposed on the property. 5. The applicant has provided a detailed soils engineering study for the site to assure compatibility and minimization of construction on the ravine along Panther Creek. The building is designed to focus upon this natural area and utilize the natural amenities by stepping into the upper limits of the ravine. The building was originally proposed slightly farther to the east. The building was moved to the west approximately 30 feet to eliminate the need for filling the lower parking area beyond 1 to 2 feet and removing a stand of established trees at the end of 38th Court. The applicant is attempting to obtain additional easement over an adjacent lot so that the trees will not have to be removed. Approximately 64% of the subject site will be left in natural vegetation with a majority of it surrounding the location of Panther Creek. On the subject site plans dated June 9, the specific location of Panther Creek has been shown. The building is intended to remain 45 feet at the nearest point to Panther Creek with construction not occuring within 30 feet of the Creek. Only one utility connection is envisioned at this time to have to cross Panther Creek to create a looped water system for fire protection within the development. At some time in the future, there is the possibility of linking hiking and pedestrian pathways into this complex. This is the northernmost extent of the medical complexes surrounding the Valley General Hospital. PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER • PROFESSIONAL BU: ENG ASSOCIATES JULY 6, 1982 PAGE FIVE 6. The original short platting and primary development of the subject area was severely limited and confused by non-completion of required offsite improvements on Talbot Road South and 38th Court. The Public Works Department advises that the previous applicants had bound themselves to participate in an L. I. D. This fact is complicated by the inability of the Public Works Department to engineer the L. I.D. The L. I.D. must be formed by the individuals and the engineering will have to be completed by them. At this point, some engineering has been done but there is a concern over the treatment of 38th Court in that trying to keep it as natural as possible. The applicant would hope that the large trees and divided pavement could be maintained. However, this is not typical of any L. I.D. projects presently pending within the City or accepted street designs. • 7. Comments received by City departments were submitted prior to the most immediate revisions accepted by the Environmental Review Committee on June 9 , 1982. The majority of the comments have been included in the revised site plan. Specifically, relocating the building minimizing potential grading, avoiding at all costs interference with the Panther Creek ravine, and saving as much natural vegetation at the entrance of the subject site as possible. In addition, the Environmental Review Committee - required payment of assessment costs for improvement of the intersection at Talbot Road and S.W. 43rd Street in proportionate amounts to those imposed upon One Valley Place, One Talbot Place, and the Doctor Lloyd Medical Building. 8. In general, the applicant has taken all concerns of the staff into consideration and revised the plan to reflect a sensitive and professional approach to the subject site. The only point apparently overlooked at this time would be the inclusion of pedestrian and bicycle traffic from the subject site toward the south to link with the facilities at Valley General Hospital. These could possibly be designed in conjunction with the required crossing for the water main extension to limit any disturbance within the Panther Creek ravine area. 9. The applicant in presenting this new site plan approval, is attempting to eliminate the uncertain requirements of the restrictive covenants imposed on the site plan in 1979 . Based upon the information presented and the supporting analysis for geology and traffic, it would appear that the City should agree to modify those original covenants and not object to the applicant formally withdrawing those covenants and imposing new ones to conform. to this site plan approval. M. DEP! f"T TAL RECOMMENDATION: : Based upon the above analysis, it is recommended that the Hearing Examiner approve the request by Professional Building Associates, File SA-045-82, subject to the following conditions : 1 . Construction of necessary offsite improvements by either a formation of an L. I.D. or direct improve- ment ' _cv the applicant. The L. I.D. will be formed and engineered by the apolicant. PRELIMINARY REF - TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PROFESSIONAL B1 )ING ASSOCIATES DULY 6, 1982 PAGE SIX 2. Inclusion of a bicycle/pedestrian pathway system linking the development to the southern property line. Pathway is to be 8 feet paved surface. 3. Provision that no associated building construction may be within 30 feet of Panther Creek except for the extension of the water main and trail system. 4. Approval of detailed temporary erosion control plans prior to construction. 5. Grading of the subject site shall be completed prior to November 1 , 1982, and all cut slopes not able to be landscaped prior to December 1 , 1982, shall be hydroseeded for stability. All work in the ravine shall be completed between May 1st and November 1st, EXCEPT for hydroseeding and emergency erosion control. • \ V 1..' 7 ` iL. i1'' - i ' 4 ,: ' '• 4tarmi.. WI,IJ Imo t. r - - • - • k. to bur" 1\ fig 4 �`? 5 36 LN sT. <. / •�� in he illiallY..2 c L a 13 1� Z °i j• ., � � 174"' ' ST . i 46 ,. '' < :113 In • ` • f ��j ..' '4 i 0 1 114,A%♦ 9T : :: AVM"' �• "' 4,, 9 30 31 32 33 • ., ni.y •E. 77 TN ST 34 k 1 VALLEY ' ® 9 10 • • VA GENERA' 'HOSPI1TAL 6 1 G• • 37 I ® �! 39 I X- 6 A41024044 t ,, . „:i.: 1 is 19 241, 22..:, :4,•,' 1‘, , ' . ' ' .1. 1 SITE APPROVAL: PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES SA-045-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES APPLICANT TOTAL AREA ±5. 4 acres PRINCIPAL ACCESS Via Talbot Road South EXISTING ZONING P-1 , Public Use Zone EXISTING USE Vacant PROPOSED USE Four-story medical office building COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN Public/Quasi-Public COMMENTS I _ `a • pq.p t� v� Q 0r� ®i 4 8-rP ` - 73 Nco fig . . -.--441-:77.-r.-.' 44 ' _n 1 a; . ma o ZO1dI14& r- I ° QQ __...„4.1iiiii • �� � g grRoroor� use rvEpluu.� las� • 7 .. . KING t Tauc& -meFa,opar CS a E. ID. vm..S 4' 'SIDS. • t a • ESIT''- /k/WA. 5.4• SECT TITLE • Ilikal, i 2- P. akri+r� S• C 2�� O4JILD11 Wes �fiJa .iZ,1yv -: . 4 T! (s Lc) 4s '1:a 2 I ----- /".."...".............--..".*********.---' .- 177"fclnYs.y� eS. c � r .i- V' DEFT TITLE 101 - Z12 . .4 wt 6 CI ell V _ FROND n CD VICINITY MAP PROJECT DATA . I =LI Thar DUE ED WI DIM IP I Or 0 t..►'T M �-RrsNTHvf cramsn..w.s. ..'owsf..i rD+ww f r..mak+aM� � �SKrs IPPOII I I f 1 • VIILLIAM *RAH 6 . I CONSULTANTS 1 s 0 411* • Itgjilli S arwln.,sale a Company me Seattle oldbl 4 lbgton \1111 LEESWEIMI min- - ,. ID % 4, 4- t. ;• s , -1.- 1-- - .. - s - ? i.".•'r}its'1,"'� -.i �'`:.'y .•.'-''''- J 5.` ++-aG`:�•1.rlli- J�A_. . _• ;R SITE SECTION icnu I-.ao-o- • . ' • 1 . . �-' ,� .„`ter-^'�• :•�:If, .;'d 1. � ,I• • -- it riri hi.�ice..,## �_^=�� ,. lt, , •� . a rt "T�' P • 0• 91.7 ...ir 5 , • + , 0� s- �. skiri -,:44,01 C . :�_. _ _ fit—,,. P� s '` \ , .: kw , _ A ,S.' \fiz p ,,,... N mk .:„„„ .ilisio.i,c, r, • , J1 s �� 4 Aal wee \ti'J' r lf. : i q ., / •- `�., IN% 11 a %,',.:. . 411 4 WA, \ A ,r,,,CW , „, ......, ...ill\ . ,� ,ti Inl mar ► •4-4 1 �� n..n...•r .fir "qN „ kela ��_.," • ,;'.i7.. �` ``•�� m ill I I1110 (ri!- 1 `•� ,+ ' Ilq,,, r Ai •"%'•- 'Iraq. ii!vrailit91); 1 • att .......k 4,47$ . $, :, dt%4111A„„A 41\ . Ittig stAajoire,. _r .N 1 111/11 0100:1Ff lifh. ; i : % �( III/// v � '''� � ' ,,.. y e . • 01 ��M `�\` ` ii 'WC rr� `� \ ,� 's 'fin • :-............A. .- •, .•.: • , . 4' is,„ e" ‘‘, II W'i. ,1 , . ...... ..„,„, , , ..... .. ..... ..,.* A,. c.....„„„. ,i0,,„„..,.., .., 4.. , .,,,,,,,..,,,,,. ,....:„. A N.:, . — \liiiiiiri • •` ;.,ICI' ° ,. ,4ii • �i�♦ j tii ..... .644,iirviii, 1 , J\,vp,4- i 1/1-,..fir 4,4, , 41 ' VMUUll ' ail . kr, ; . .k,, rikt.,:4%.......t ire, rogi) ,-y. i 7\f..44•P.,, * \‘‘tro,:,s,, a 4„/„.....,_‘ ,v,res,:‘, 3 .4 'N\\,,,, .v. 4,4k t. :-:1, /4,-\ ..,%‘,,,, . . • ,It lizio . 14/1 AV* "S'\\s a i /�N,l IIIUir 1111. IQN m ..I;; 44444. :ill I)i . iii 4:47..-CI '''4„. .1.16.„.4.4/417iikeilft.ifigu,,,, i • • 7.111.....!•.../ . -di., • r--A we k .. II, ,.. ,,...7„:„),,,:,..,,:„..:,..,,,,......„.„7.,,,,,,,,,,,..,.... .,r _.,...,..v.v.,,,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,.. iiiii -iv i61 .019 ..„4/:, •••,:,4,,,in F...,..aoliii_ .' = .ill' - _ -: -I N. ,4 i u„. ll:VC. A .„,„*.:„.....,,,4011 • • .■i !ftl a - - - Ilion a_ rili ti w '.'ii rT1i1 • 4 IS` -045-82 li � r � P M o L�CM�I C�C��1C�G�aL H o •glOQ4a ,��1 P Rio FIEgOoaQd BUOLEoa® P 4 ` Kw TM PSOFISSIOMAL WILOMS ASSOCIATES 0, J • • ;•i . )7...-'..\\\\HI • • ft" • • ... r • • r •• 1„.............:„....." • - X f ' l''1,1.. klitlf wpm m • z ,jt ' r— • b °k =. • • . • F • 'SwsS • f ;Z j •I a 1.' 1 • • r, r ,I. ..__,_........__ a4 , , „, / gyp, , , �i XL • . ! f 'A --! i . , • D _ 1 . • { ,.:1>,1; I. 14 i:' ,.,4-'1 ! . i t i 1 d111 1 F rIi Z I i • y 4 ' 4 .Yt.1i., 1 • Iv 11 8. �1 .�3% �YaJ.', y 1 I 1 / f1,1) • SA-045-82 • 0', , , , . „ , %g �; _•iJ� a ���� r SQL L aG, HORVE Q ' PQO CMD© LL oUOLOMfal k $ c ClC • Fon rise P1OFEBSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES • • • • • it, - , S i I • • Ha X . / ..�� 'a r v-y S v �. rr� ;N • • . Ii •-i ? ! '' 0 in 111.01 i 1 as' .i._ r • • •.) . -~' yy�,rf , ..: .;It r y ";1 t+ If A • T f'� o-Ab,4 � d,fif,,r 1. .�i,v�� f 1• " \\\ • JJ • • i '1 • 1 ' SA-045-82 :;----71, s i). 2 .. li 10111 • a � ',' Q PGICIFC00O0aAL o MOdDOa® 1 f ,d'�1[, roe tut PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES • • • ii ., 1 ,...(6:,,,, 1 1 -...t..li . , 4 'it g 5 ,., . • • re a �� ,1 ;,,,,' 4:, • Z° . u 1 rl • i P s I A ' I { . : O ' i i g � n 4 u l • 4 ' • • ti, I , . . . ' I ) ':•0 ,%•.,'';?1''' ' . I • . • • • • • III' i Z SA-045-82 , , • ] li ° / = 0 a MaL�C�C� CC [� QQL m al m 1(-) FOR THE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES • a a..• p • . ) . . : . : ii .: , • • „.„ , : . . ,: • . . . I f a ,n *..,,-X' •,m � ^ Q'. . ;it • G �" i • d • 5a9 , '' : ,- ',.,1 - '" i • • z.F ;; IC t g11 , ii p . . . . ? - .. . 'J "il 1rii, r < i 2d 1 . _ , .../ 7 Z h. ,,, •, i 1 ., , .?„ ii P tritNi fi \ SA-045-82 • • Iggqi 9r0. = . e '" 7m. WAn n M M nD n 5.1?, r< '.it: roe re* PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES \ / g R-.�M \ ., • It b . 7 1 1 72 1 \ ,1--' ' - .'4b • ' '1.4........ ' . / * II ; . .._ • / 1 _ rt—SII , 0 1 ; air _____;„ rip _____ fivoid , : 33 . ). . \ ic2 / 0 ' ' Aii"--- __________... ____-eir / /----.. .- ! , .., ' 'Pill . . . : .--le --- .1--- - t i / I ,________________ . 1 . , r ` -- L / -Ikt , i i -- . I i . : IN:. 116:.‘ ' X/ 4 ///// ....'.....- '"---. Vilikimih...111 . : LII44\14f/ik- aii. :1 1 I/I/. i lifi / ,,. ..., I \ - . I 0 .• . '. r/ i' .. Wa / ir/ / ,7.--N4 ' 1 , . /1/ • . ' 4/ / ' f • '''. •• NO '& • --1 ---T 7 7. . i 0 iv -%-k__. --'.-. .----`..1\ el I/// I ii- ' ' • ,1 1 . 4, ‹ O -1-------- 0,, ) ) P II------.'/-4 /,,: " ':I./...I . .. ---- 111116 " . ' 77---- —/ -4/; / ,' 1 // // / i ' ' '1 ,. / .1 . . , , , , gig 2 • // / . 5 / ''8 �,� _ i- . / / //// / t ././ ///////,/, // , — . ,„ w , 1A_ __., '�a.,71. ///////// // ' l <-0 .'--._. / / // // //// 1 ro0/ //// 4, %ta __., 0 . � ., /_ a / // / / I t Ir a SA-045-82 1gg .; � � ! g 0 . • . :. :. -_, c 0 0 CC[�CLaL TX n ry PROD FEg2OOaaL o UOLDaa® 4 FON THE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES 1 §3 0 , , BE'MN BUILDING & ZONING DE' RTMENT I DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE ; Valley General North Professional. Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. -. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 II ENGINEERING DIVISION • • OTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ❑ UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION • UFIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OPARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT EIBUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT i[--? POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PRCVIDED IN WRITING, PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT h BY 5:00 P.M. ON . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; Ly 40/e54/;,- illi .IOW/ El APPROVED El APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS INbT APPROVED 67 444 44 at . '& * Auky eeeJ 4611-/ ® Air & e fo i ateg4- ceia' / d . c hr co 6 4f L adI4t' ei `S/ 0 A e ctfae A 2:_f_x9 � /ewe Ads 6; '&0 fi- e;1e-m da /le y A_ 4firet S � �� e 4,biz �4•4/ 57 !rz . 4 * Z K1 k deice DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE CPPUICtA61 c/1®A9 3 fr Lficeup . w fit, fr rf: a r,,4MAf__• A. ./ + / I I eta• PING PUtL -MID'JGAaaN D,OeM :P.T• ' .4 a • r a a t� ! i RNO •A1t1 A.T.DC UI ArAtG (IV N.2) Mr0 rJ �•'-. _ _ ... IriN a '^� �'. •: I _ 3 Kw"ANLAN Cattev (Deat,E PrNK) e'Aeay 1,1 �, s q ��l fl _ b yZ t V ALLLLL [iauev Nrsatos -3o[IN•a £A ' CaC r,7 t) 4 ��1 " r / "'•`� •�•!'•• �S a u• "1 ,• S. 4No.- �7 LS = JFwN nAe1E /aD./7a6 uC [RtD) EAeI✓ t= y 1(4 �( ��j CI.,Nrrsi) CA4y tl(•� D Z • ^ ,�� .a • ' / �s n./.` ' 4 u au„` . rKAjtl wT j • iljpilint■ i. A2ALEA -MT,EYCtEST CJTi �x1 •• �� 3i f. ,TJ i0 a'� 'd'♦'��C Iy"� 1 CNAMA¢CY MMUS oonaA -N•Non CrAQe63 f1 E `` y /• • . r $ •-,S!: r c + . �, ,.— Z��• L -OR 'mum, AfDe a:Trr•e DvRa110A4s N i/ ,� `I•,� v !'� �� •+ - a• ! p3euDe77 u•A-TA•rFOuw - Deu v J. .a ' it— rr •an cre t CO Kif' r ■'L•F 'c .. Ie�O,�r�,,�'�+..� >�ir —"' j -'4 Ail[3 wwefws -CAa aw Des writ u 1 H,i. L _+A� •*; •r s VA/ D—rey��—,:. �r—w rs 9. Rao-LrNf711a C0..rrl) uQA[ Gao1+eQ `t3 a. t H �4. • ' /r a D31�.--�__ •t •r_ C-. p ,a 4Ne •uNrouC(DwaG veLLdW Tit,Pry<)nrD. Oi • c:g i. .,l T . a •raJ�,ya,. v " _s IJ I%Akint4 a. AM& CI[GrNATU al -NATYS VI we MAft,C Qr GS J (01 ►r KA s r • '• A�•1 ,r ' -- ~51 R Ts46A -XATriC a1E3TieN CfDae O �' D •T it �/ a• Ij,D�jh I - ��n'• Ce[NY3 (CA=Ah M)MT) Pai'.I PIG OWa v - null C117" �j .• �'� .T �. y rw;`,�`J,•�,Sswrid,�4'11�1�'-.�.- ?�/.-z. ' ' d Lao AeerlNus v�ueru.a 're Nus(emu"uNr) lY I1yl� �R ►) ..• / l •r,J'G,�y anljr a • .. '' +40 '•� s A_ r K 'Jun 1Aa:R Go LD CeAMCl9 •LOW 31If IDIN• r--'I�/p��� • u Q .f u • -'� .1 A. RNO -6,u.,DRN CSC PINK lll�� Li (Ault) a ) •t mrN6 el 1 s •= T• `- rO�`l.�ri ,• •-� [� r= „ . �) watArA Gm sac DrN r) aria, as r.. a t>• a ,�/: u au Q.-,f _ n Lath C u- r)■7:LAUREL a O/� r .. " rR AZALEA-Tac waaaG(tAasc WNr1t) �L�J r"r P. a v I v, „ ►, Z. 1y.. • •• 1 �" �' "knee !~_ rl wzA�1 -PrNauat Preacr �SNrsL PrNc .6'' a• — • r` .. •a ��'a. / �'" C?. Cl QMO-CLfLw @rIM C4NC LO r ,�4i. —• • 1 �? t y 4 .. ) ) W I�Aa 1 T R70.�CT TITLE {' .K � _ �� .4 y �� s ,- .t.r.,.( .. tr'. \'.•�•` �'�Y .r al. [ K) fetal E�Ilcv 1 ^! RNo •sc.B �sr,c Prn r) ar '� /� ,` fib/ \ '� .. Yj ZZ MU Ge PME -IOLN SA*rAD,N6 .j • ;}+ •• Da ! -a - / 23 Low- ett Tbe al ' CourOS^•-CNarC( r-j ....- yrf N •..1j. �`� _.. i`•^• •V �� ��`, - EXISTING 2K 7L NIPC'! 7LIlu,OaA- NoLLVW000 TSJ ISTrD 1• ,n v {i Q�� ! \ �jl CLINIC Cr A2ALEA -6wMeKQ (rtOx_arN.t) Low r•1 I ��fii* � / ' S�®® �t/.{� ��V 71 COTTDMCA�T[R Otu For a• Ca •y - Alq"iI IOW mu -. / " T f`i,l • F' ,� r _ �� 'C. NO�M1CC-Mass RNrC M Il V ) ID -CvoeD tAbuGR • � ,:all of •• '� \.� afl. 'RU NU 9. WN,TTAOMatI CNEDLA✓CDYELv'Pram) r, • ee. I:Anima uplebo +HUMVStRRv-TREE • ( " • 3 .�� ^ � ;} � . thhhib... 34 ANOROMCDA FLsreauA -PrCar3 7'AWNIUs - j �� ,• `' aQa�D,9arx �� a.„• (� ` 3L LAu•Oea:eAa43 -DoWUdal- LAa ArI.„ I[SIS. RNo -rota DONA.D A. 4RaNAa, Reo) a. +trl Ntr ' ��! a•we-''lam fr* * 37. RNo- eCr+sN uNoY (uaae a,..a) MAY air t� c � • Y as • a •3 u .. t.!O A.= N. iwNhrA TA/bN,U -trP cwu®rtaY o® can t1. FLwrn as Dt...ara aw. r '• r e• C•OM A /,a "'errs -Y-b• 1Wtera -....•e'34e li r ~' a !�• • Suar•ra• I muse ...es - cAu-0r.aru • Diu al .1 1 • y� �. r • a. - -'-- '• s' �-Lwu arm -eau.ca •• duC.a>•p -r•-a• a,� �11r— '"/� --� I F,.aWUIw t D[a ow ea& lerlf3 - l:1• \ l /.{�L� 'a( "u y "a 3 '`� \. Tar{. hut Is•t 6 s"a. Daatra• CCO Arab � ; �t,� t� , y �./ j //e \ /. I •►'+• Dena ma roe u,uN nsaNF-eN r �� dARrG Ot -EEQ'-AfPai"'7'=v CONSULTANTS CFI�a<'�(�'ISH�I(,f�l i,.� '` r' 1 lL©YC76111V1 L��L�y IfV Il Owl r 7/ a( •Y A' • j ' man., �. .; I - ML► Sit 8 cannily tac. `J� � �� • A fLf� PRCDweea Foa saittli Washington I I p' - _ R6NTON DIQDIGAI Burt.p lN$ .1111N.N.:NN .LANDSCAPE- -� UWDJQAPEBN C1,Nr� III CONCEPT PLAN -•} "" "�r,N"" •Po. BOA ria 'DV BALL,1.11144. Ill,0 sp m b s ' O �� xwaR 1 Ia a aO ar A1aW 1182 VIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVIS e-;n APPROVED Eg APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ❑ NOT APPROVED sY1c9 u G /276 O7 L) 71b 74 cJ 0 i o Z L,D 6 ___ DATE: 5' 4 •. �IG RE OF DIRECTOR R AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 r<tvttwttv� DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; OAPPROVED 'PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO e'4/32 LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • WATER ^/p LATE COMERS AGREEMENT • SEWER y,Gs O//•02,57 pev 0.41- A. 40 a,7 O -//=16, 0l/,�� SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • WATER ce9prim, fib SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • SEWER u,ti,,v CAS- SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CI!ARGE • WATER y s f'/a,L o, 71 GJ-1"q J/r'0 -GOD SPEC��L ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE :SEWER No A"PR01'LD 67ATER PLAN yE$• APPROVED �E1YER PLAN y,e APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS BY FIRE DEPT. Yig S' FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS ��S PAC4t et (9./e4e'"4- `' 9� DATE: S//(. /8"sz... SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : -IRL: OAPPROVED ETAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED •emu /Ge ' n,ZsT/e /c it .c) /WA! //t/G a ss s DATE: c554/ l C9?' SIGNATURE F DIRECTOR OR UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Iry euJ !/101:19 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION; (..__e_c-. 751 . DAPPROVED ZAPPROVED WITH CONDITI' ONOT APPROVED 6) ?Y,0 ✓l try e_ ,2,E , ,C�-�..a`� �-e ea �3 - /�, ( - S7 f - ,✓"- �„� 0� ya✓e e...,s Ge✓„ r cam( 4,.....,... J L.,.., 11, O) 17it�, c c� ,�-,{e i v, 4" ( �� �u is r s // �P ��"/ (,�~�'� Y o 4-e ,-.1e..:.(s ✓f� i .� ,,,,,,4, vKS ft S // Y-e 1 l- & Sa4,iedi- -ft dew sue ,-4y .c....A. .JFa a4sy J�- _ 62�3r• "farm ( c t d, (�-t,,'p S 11 L #Grusc^ (mil Peg doci V ��' ''r'"' w5 • rv.a+► r- gee'''. Au Sid. uud°C V a.. ` g+I,,i,�j eel(.1 .Cd • R�a s' �.., ass ct�cca•w� ��C�'' 4 DATE : .�7ZS/��— SIGNATURE OF DIREC OR OR AUTi�O j ED REPRESENTATIVE • REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; ri►:11�h/ L 1VG/Ate-6,e//(16 OAPPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED . gp/o/e,G mil' �ce L./ d' �!L 71-c e//-s, 7 _ii /7 710 4/-44.w --c,14.1 0, vz.CCP1(lcie g6 Q• -•5 42-5-5 c.TV P' 7-721‘c)/- le9/1/ c.r . ./,3 3 , % �,.-� c- �. „el, c. -�. .r-� ____6-3 ,,,/.%„., >---. -7,,,,,,,,r, _/2%,,........) DATE: ��7 9 SIGNATURE OF DI RECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 6/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION; POLICE • APPROVED a APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED 1) All off site improvements be installed prior to occupancy. 2) Workhours be 0700AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday to avoid noise complaints from the residental area and the hospital . 3) Building be equipped with alarms due to its remote location from police dept. & it attractiveness to burglars looking for drugs. (Even if drugs are not stored drug users will break in looking for drugs because it is a medical building.) 4) Security doors & locks be installed Lt. �0. .=�e DTFR1 SIGNATURE OF ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVEATE: 6/2/82 FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : SA-045-82 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-046-82 Description of Proposal: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. Proponent: Professional Building Associates Location of Proposal: The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Lead Agency: Building & Zoning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on June 2 , 1982 and June 9, 1982, following a presentation by Jerry Lind of the Building & Zoning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Gary Norris, Jerry Lind, David Clemens, Ronald Nelson, Roger Blaylock and Richard Houghton. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-046-82 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Peter :W. Schroeder DATED: May 12 , 1982 2) Applications : Site Approval (SA-045-82) 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Police Department, Fire Prevention Bureau, Building & Zoning Department, Traffic Engineering Division, Utility Engineering Division, Design Engineering Division. More information: Policy Development Department. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development has a non-significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: Will not adversely impact the environment or adjacent land uses and that the following requirements shall be complied with: 1 ) Approval subject to revised site plan dated and submitted on June 9, 1982. 2) Subject to trip generation payment of $15/vehicle trip for traffic impact at intersection of Talbot Road South and South 43rd Street. Final disposition of vehicles to be determined by Public Works Department. FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES PAGE TWO Signatures: IdagrA- 1,44/21 Rona . Ne on D R. Clemens Building & Zoning Director Policy Development Director R c lar C. Houg t Public Works Director PATE OF PUBLICATION: June 14 , 1982 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: June 28, 1982 ' , FUZING AND ZONING D. PARTA t PRELININARY REPORT TO THE W. �*D G EX I PUBLIC HEARING JULY 6 , 1982 APPLICANT: PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES FILE NUMBER: SA-045-82 A. Sai"iii"i!\m\ PD' r'rI)SE OF The applicant seeks Site Plan Approval for construction of a four-story medical office building with associated parking. B. GENERAL INFOi;+ TION: 1 . Owner of Record: Eugene R. Ekblad 2. Applicant: Professional Building Associates 3. Location: (Vicinity Map Attached) West side of .Talbot Road South immediately south of S. 37th Street. 4. Legal Description: A detailed legal description is available on file in the Renton Building & Zoning Department. • 5. Size of Property: +5.4 acres. • 6. Access : Via Talbot Road South. 7. Existing Zoning: P-1 , Public Use Zone. 8. Existing Zoning in the Area: P-1 ; R-1 , Residence Single Family. 9. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Public/Quasi-Public 10. Notification: The applicant was notified in writing of the hearing date. Notice was properly published in the Daily Record Chronicle on June 25, 1982, and posted in three places on or near the site as required by City Ordinance on June 25, 1982. C. HISTORY/BACKG,*A' D: The subject site was annexed into the City on April 15, 1959, by Ordinance No. 1743 . The Comprehensive Plan in the area was studied and amended on October 22, 1974 . The subject site was rezoned to P-1 on July 11 , 1975, by Ordinance No: 2944 . Certain restrictive covenants dealing with retention of the natural character of the site and ravine area, together with certain developmental requirements, were filed on July 23, 1975, and run with the land. The subject parcel was part of Short Plat 113-77 approved by the Hearing Examiner on January 31 , 1978 . The Examiner also approved a site plan for a 50, 000 sq. ft. medical office building on the property in SA-325-79 of June 1 1 , 1979. PRELIMINARY REP^Dm TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PROFESSIONAL BU ING ASSOCIATES JULY 6 , 1982 PAGE TWO D. Plr';'SICAL mACKCROUND: 1 . Topography: The site slopes downward to the west at approximately a 10% grade. 2. Soils : A majority of the site consists of Indianola Loamy Fine Sand (InC) . This soil has rapid permeability; available water capacity is moderate; runoff is slow to medium; and erosion hazard is slight to moderate. This soil is used for timber and for urban development. The ravine -area consists of Alderwood Gravelly Sandy Loam (AgC) . Runoff is medium, and erosion hazard is severe. The slippage potential is moderate. This Alderwood Soil is used mostly for timber. This soil does not appear to be appropriate for urban-type development. • 3. Vegetation: The site is heavily wooded with an abundant cover of evergreen and deciduous trees. Groundcover' consists principally of brambles. Restrictive covenants designate the existing significant trees and the ravine area for preservation and incorporation into the development of the site. The ravine area is to be preserved in its natural woodland-type state or enhanced with suitable native-type vegetation. 4. Wildlife: Existing vegetation on the site may provide suitable habitat for birds and small mammals . 5. Water: A small stream runs along the southerly boundary of the subject property. 6. Land Use: There is an existing single family residence located to the east of the subject site. There are existing clinics located south and southeast of the subject site. Valley General Hospital is located approximately 1/8 mile south of the subject site. There are existing single family residences located directly north of the subject site on the north side of South 37th Street and east of the subject site on the east side of Talbot Road South. E. r„;gtr.+,cni:,• r OOD CHARACTERISTICS: The area is characterized by a mixture of single family residences and public/quasi-public uses in the form of the hospital and supportive medical clinics. F. PUI LIC SERVICES: 1 . Water and Sewer: There is an existing 20-inch water main located along Talbot Road South and an existing METRO sewer gravity line located along South 37th Street and Talbot Road South. Storm sewers are not available in the area. There are drainage ditches, however, and any development on the site will be subject to suitable storm water retention and oil/water separation facilities prior to out-flow from the site. 2. Fire Protection: Profided by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: METRO Transit Route #145 operates along SW 43rd Street approximately 1/4 mile south of the subject site. CITY -OF R I:. } JL O N LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JULY 6 , 1982 AGE D COMMENCING AT 9 : 00 a.m. : COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SECOND FLOOR, RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING AAD-053-82 JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER • Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days . SA-045-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. • 5#0•45- 6z • OF RA,A �y ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0,9�rFD SEPZG1,0 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MEMORANDUM MAYOR DATE: June 16, 1982 TO: Gary Norris FROM: Roger J. Blaylock, Zoning Administrator RE: TRAFFIC ESTIMATE/VALLEY GENERAL NORTH PROFESSIONAL BUILDING Please find attached the estimated traffic information from TDA for the above proposed project. The Environmental Review Committee conditioned the applicant to participate in improvements on Talbot Road S. and SW 43rd Streets equal to the traffic volume times the rate of $15.00 per trip. Please evaluate the estimated trips for the proposed project and determine the necessary fees. 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 JULY 6 , 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer, File AAD-053-82, of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) , File SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 6, 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: June 25 , 1982 RONALD G. NELSON BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I, STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS 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, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 23rd day of June, 1982. � ti SIGNED: Sto..e7/16,14pgiern sP. OW- tg. MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Schroeder DATE: June 14, 1982 FROM: Jim Jacobson JOB NO. : 3000 SUBJECT: Valley General North Professional Building Traffic The purpose of this memorandum is to describe the findings of our traffic study for the proposed Valley General North Professional Building in Renton. There were two primary purposes of the study: o Identify the total amount of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. o Identify the amount of the project-related traffic that would use each of the streets in the vicinity of the site. The following sections identify our methodology and the results of these investigations. TRIP GENERATION Trip Generation Intensity Factors , a publication of the Arizona Department of Transportation identifies a daily traffic generation rate for medical office buildings of 50 vehicle trip ends (VIE) per 1,000 GFA. This figure is based on surveys of 13 medical office buildings in four different states. According to these surveys, approximately 14.5 percent of the daily traffic occurs during a medical office building's peak hour. (This is not necessarily the corres- ponding peak hour of traffic on adjacent streets. ) When applied to the proposed Valley General North Professional Building (42,400 GFA) , the resulting daily traffic generation would be approximately 2,120 daily vehicle trip ends (50 VTE/1 ,000 GFA x 42,400 GFA). Approximately 307 of these vehicle trip ends could be expected to occur during the hour that the office building would generate the most traffic (2120 x . 145) . The Institute of Transportation Engineers in their publication Trip Generation identifies a daily traffic generation rate of 75 vehicle trip ends per 1 ,000 GFA. However, this number is based on only 5 medical office buildings, all in California. Examination of the data in Trip Generation Intensity Factors indicated that these five studies are part of the 13 studies included in its generation rate of 50/1 ,000 CFA. Although the generation rate developed by the Arizona Department of Transportation in Trip Generation Intensity Factors is smaller, it is based on a much larger sample and assumed to be a more repre- sentative generation rate of all medical office buildings. TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION TDA conducted traffic counts of the number and directional distribution of vehicles entering and exiting medical office buildings located immediately y7 V L To: Pete Schroeder - 2 - June 11, 1982 east of Valley General Hospital and north of SW 43rd Street along Talbot Road. It is reasonable to assume that the distribution of trips to and from the pro- posed Valley General North Professional Building would be very similar to the distribution of trips to the existing nearby medical offices. A sample of 240 cars over a two-hour period during the afternoon of Thursday, June 10, 1982, indicated the following distribution: 20 Percent north on Talbot Road 25 Percent east on SW 43rd Street 50 Percent west on SW 43rd Street (toward SR 167) 5 Percent south on Talbot Road (south of SW 43rd Street) The resulting amount of traffic that could be expected to be added on each street due to the development and occupancy of the proposed project is shown in the attached Figure 1. Observations of traffic operations along Talbot Road and at the intersection of SW 43rd Street indicate that many people are not sure of the location of their doctor's office. Many of the people enter and exit a number of drive- ways before they find the right building where their physician is located. Better signing or. clearer directions from physicians to patients could help improve the traffic situation in the area. ..„ ,. u , c / -- --- , . L t:,:j di , . . . fl o tczQ d d tares d •9 TTT ' 7 0 r - 0 • �312O f 9 1P '} Proposed Building Site ` 4 7 rei ...---7--..._ .. Li ' ffji it/ te V..7.1 0 ' 1_,,Iii ': ° Q cr o � ; & q/4j, ,,,_____,---- ,----.. El SW 43rd St. • ills el 51 °A iIIK! o, / oo c # 46)6 0 r Valley General North Professional Building Figure 1. Traffic Added To Surrounding Streets 999 - Additional Daily Volume (9%) - % Of Daily Traffic Source: TDA _ ` •4 r' ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JUNE 9 , 1982 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS ECF-022-82 DEAN W. BITNEY R-023-82 SP-028-82 PMH-029-82 ECF-040-82 C . A . PARKER SP-036-82 OLD BUSINESS ECF-043-82 G . M. ASSOCIATES R-019-82 Dick Gilroy will speak on behalf of G. M . Associates ' application to rezone property from G-1 to B-1 for a community shopping center ; property located on the east side of Duvall Avenue N . E. between N . E . 4th Street and S . E . 121st Street . ECF-046-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES S'1-045-82 Pete Schroeder of William Graham , Consultants, will speak on behalf of Professional Building Associates ' application for site approval to build a four-story medical office building (Valley General North Pro- fessional Building) ; property located immediately south of S . 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S . _ • zavvinvivriniviHt, KWJEW COMMITTEE ' AGENDA • c� JUNE 9, 1982 ''�, 9'1 PAGE TWO ei V ., im.mil• tagi F___I 1 k.k 1 . --1 ) -.. r le 1 //444 . et. ,,,,,L, , • 4.______...„, \\ 40(iiiii. , . i___________\ . ....,____„ .._________, T2. '"',. 111 - \ _Il , fir . i', ��� . . LAKE �` . .� e \ - "; �� WASHINGTON liii /�,_.; I'roan 5._'.141 rilt ;- \ In tl = — *-- • ....2:6-E q\ K VFW>lir r \ - 1111 lb r� -re \I 1 "Pk �-,,, _. ._ •"=mi 1 El AemijOlpillrf '-::: 1 'oi �I ;III cc. ;. "Pi it , ! Ail G. M. ASSOCIATES ( - ,thi *-".'llfoisit Li> ---, , . / /:A/1/...� . •`,, . ..a�' �/ M;�` % s li DEAN W. BITNEY I — _.� fi ..;p/1' �kb 1.‘7 11111 Ir?" linammilinillginerr"illa , I: ...,...re 6 „,,,,it.1 ''' " 1 \-4.-Appeaiiiial , • .. --- i.....„....- ! ..ttyp...,____/.4.1---- / .• • VI9 : .---- -4n ; lomp. ill i , _s '1 Iv .....datke,, ,_,.:.:i. • ____ Aga 1 -. - ---- _____ . ( , wirarjr-iate. If Aw._4. . .. . ' -..... --I III . Iill w. mil - o �;,ll (e — ® PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES I__�_� �� .a.,.. I u 1 I ... ,_, � . 11,i ci. _ pr aN ..,... Fr i 1___„ . , ,v .. .. LAKE , / ' - - L I \,.. rir,v2, [ YOUNGS 1 I ,. --1}---1 U 1 1 e,i I , William Graham 1_ -.nsultants Planning • Urban Design Willis, Cunliffe, Tait lull Suite 248cSecurities Building, 313 Columbia Street West, 1904 3rd Avenue, New Westminster, B.C. V3L 1A7 Seattle, Washington 98101 Telephone (604) 525-4646 Telephone (206) 223-0393 . June 7, 1982 Mr. Bob Aldrige D.O.A.Q. Architects 3224 Wetmore Avenue Everett, WA 98201 RE: Valley General North Professional Building - ^ Access Easement on Lot #2 . :. Dear Mr. Aldrige: • r.. This letter summarizes the phone conversation we had this morning covering design implications of an access easement to Lot #4 of the East Valley Medical Park across your client, Dr. Dan O'Brien's, property. • • It is my understanding that the basic parameters of any such easement agree— ment will be established through our mutual aesthetic interests and an - ongoing dialogue. --You indicated several items -which should be incorporated . in an agreement which are summarized below: ,... (1.) All construction work on the access drive and related landscaping shall be coordinated with the L.I.D. construction time table. (2.) . All trees to remain will be so designated. • (3.) A revocation of the easement will take place if the designated trees ' are cut down. (4.) A landscaped screen will be installed by the Lot #4 ownership -adjacent to Dr. O'Brien's clinic. Specific size and location to be worked out between the respective design teams. (5.) Lot #4 site layout will be adjusted to enhance. pedestrian/vehicular access with Lot #2 -(Dr. O'Brien's clinic) . • I will be in touch with you in the near future as events evolve on our project. Sincerely, Peter Schroeder William Graham Consultants • jl cc: Dr. O'Brien Rick Shute S —Dr( )—it. 1DM 316 Second Avenue South Seattle.Washington 98104 (206)682-4750 June 8, 1982 Mr. Richard Shute Professional Building Association c/o Pete Schroeder William Graham Consultants 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Shute: This is in regard to the limited traffic study you need for the Valley General North Professional Building in Renton. We understand the objec- tive is not to provide the transportation element of an EIS, but rather is limited to estimation of traffic generated by the project, and its distribution to the local streets, with particular attention to Talbot and its intersection with 43rd. We have not been able to discuss this with Gary Norris yet, for any special requirements. With that caution , we estimate a maximum budget of $1500 to provide necessary field counts, our travel estimates and a brief technical memorandum. We will finish the study prior to the end of June, if given a go-ahead by the 14th. Sincerely, TDA Inc. William R. ager President • NELSON McCARTHY. P. S. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 7 RICHARD C. NELSON OF COUNSEL MICHAEL J. MCCARTHY 710 ONB PLAZA JAMES S. TURNER WILLIAM G. MCGILLIN 10800 NE B'� STREET ALAN N. TONNON HUGH W. HAWKINS.JR. B. DAVID THOMAS BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 JANICE ANN POTTER ROBERT P. WILLIAMSON AREA CODE 206 PAUL L. HAMMANN TELEPHONE 454-2344 THOMAS K. WINDUS JARED C. CURTIS MARCY L. HIKIDA June 9, 1982 KATHRYN C. NEILSEN Mr. Peter Schroeder • William Graham Consulting Planners & Urban Designers 1904 - 3rd Avenue Seattle, Washington Re: Elimination of Restricted Covenant for Renton East Valley Medical Park Dear Mr. Schroeder: This office represents Professional Building Associates who have obtained contract rights to purchase certain property generally captioned above from Vallis Investors, a joint venture. • • The subject property was conveyed to the Gliege Corporation by Vallis Investors in June of 1979. This conveyance was in contemplation of a partnership which was never formed. It is our understanding that Gliege Corporation executed the restricted covenant in question. We have obtained Gliege Corporation's affidavit indicating that at no time did they intend to possess any right, title or interest in the subject property. In acknowledgement thereof, they have executed a Quit Claim Deed to Vallis Investors dated March 31, 1982. In addition, they have agreed to execute the necessary documents which may be- necessary to remove the restrictive covenants • previously exeuted in error by Gliege Corporation. It is anticipated that such acquired documentation may be obtained and recorded no later than June 30, 1982. If you should have any questions regarding this matter please don't hesitate to contact this office. • Very truly yours, NELSON & McCARTHY, P.S. r . I Michael J. McCart y MJM:lj OF R O11111 OD ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Z NA o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR O� 43� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09gTF SEPSE���P J'. ne 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, " Roger J. lay lock Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp OF A%44 �, e ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z a RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR ..LL 0 MUNICIPAL BUILDNG 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 O,Qgr SEPT �OP June 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, ' Roger J. lay lock Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp 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 JULY 6 , 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer, File AAD-053-82, of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) , File SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 6, 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: June 25 , 1982 RONALD G. NELSON BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I, STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS 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, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 23rd day of June, 1982. • CPc11-11-1-' SIGNED: sig .#40..e7Xeigaeryi OF R4, A, �y © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Z o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AEA. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09ITF0 SEPj �O�P June 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, . --Wen?4,0t, .- 8L,Licte_ Roger J. laylcck Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JUNE 2, 1982 AGE c DA COMMENCING AT 10 :00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS ECF-040-82 C. A. PARKER SP-036-82 Special permit application to remove 359 ,309 cubic yards of gravel ; property located at the 2700 block of Royal Hills Drive S.E. NEW BUSINESS ECF-046-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES SA-045-82 Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) ; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road c . ECF-047-82 THE AUSTIN COMPANY SP-046-82 Special permit application for the construction of an earthen mound for purpose of surcharging underlying compressible soil ; property located at the southwest corner of Lind Avenue S.W. and S.W. 16th Street. ' "'ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW r—IITTEE.- AGENDA ill ii JUNE 2, 1982 . I lib. . 1 I PAGE TWO . •- mi / 1 1 • . 1' 111111Filt I . . . .4 • nr9 rt P ---1 i 1 !, i ). ..:. -fillif. ' /Alas / ii • Al) :445 . h N. 1 1 ine : 1 i \It. f. ------A . • ____Viar\--. • -- . - ------1 ,SI 440\• WASHINGToN '‘i „ Elni IMP.-7- 1 nem. 1 \ .1t`:#ii. 1111111'AMR11 st\N .1 a i . .... \*** ma • - - -- --- ...a.:.t ._... ivpisT; 1124 .„ I Iv ] 1 . • raillE =Val' , _ , . Ir. 6- -., % -..tihq E. -meg ex% Itifter-'„ Plig N. ' .%=-119 't jig Arimiemai s VIM" lilLoug I) IgrAtorillimmlagri , 111111 - kid-' _ L?) r.111idoisEr MIMI /04.41111kani.1 mu 1 i ggssm I I V111111.10/4 ,••:... i- -I -1111 ,_._r_14901 Flibilt.4 ll L i'. 1. 1 I• k • c - '441111614*EMirlittIlli*. --- d11.;•-•q i,.7-----1 LW il I - • \ ? %NO/al"1 PC I II q ----- C.,, i •: a...0 k . I ilbx. .... ....01•um Ai illip‘ mai . 1 Ail_ .. ...- wok .. i.... • . 01 \\_1•••._.. -,-.•41p0-71 .;:::' • tale •:' 1,',", •--);•...4:i I - k 1" l'9 ' 1111111111,Mr 1111 -;i5o c. A. PARKER 11111c A N rI.A2 a 0 0 0 _NW. 1....,.... ill_ .i. .., A _. . ...4 ...„ /..... .4 . 1.4...- __.___. .. ...w .„.. .. P . _ Ai dir*, ....,i; mmiffi111111\., i -4 • THE AUS TIN COMPANY .._..\.. ... -__ 111 .....,,,I&I__....• , 111 ' -s, . a r --.4..,...„::. • 1' ..:. . NIT 114111N ' . MI114141 '!.'.'''.'.'. - 14 1 e 111 1vopi k• --7'-t( — Fr 0 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES , 1.044 c t .2 11 I. . -r i ) --. ....,.. .. . .. ".. .. •. ••• .1 .,• • , L 111°11141 • ---, ,. '. .. . 1 ____ .. i 1 I,2‘... •,,-1,- 111 , T ‘ Lifl 14 11: ...\ q "C-- . • ylolluKNEas 1 I ) if .. ••. ...4 7, ..j... Li 1- 1_ ] ....„.. -3-/- Jo 11,-,I. I .10T " I - 1 RE 3N BUILDING & ZONING DE. ',RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET, ECF o 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) ; SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT; Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION ; The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: ® PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE ; 6-1-82 • Ej ENGINEERING DIVISION • El TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE ; lj UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT fl .BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS ; COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED. IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; POLICE 1-11 APPROVED © APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1) All off site improvements be installed prior to occupancy. 2) Workhours be 0700AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday to avoid noise complaints from the residental area and the hospital . 3) Building be equipped with alarms due to its remote location from police dept. & it attractiveness to burglars looking for drugs. (Even if drugs are not stored drug users will break in looking for drugs because it is a medical building.) 4) Security doors & locks be installed Lt. . Pe ss DATE ;; 6/2/82 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/PTvISION ; _ DAPPROVED vLJ APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED P ✓t C�� �Q.d S CJ n L"�t%f /? e�� d� Y6.)e_ .iS Ce✓`G'�c i\ Ate^-�-�✓ E.-� l�. .c, e i ram. L l s // Y o e€ • L4-S p✓ � � --/� Ye ✓� n�✓�S Sd4 - Kelm S'ca r.4�y r sd Sk a�C U a o� C va...I •� �,,,d . P e w c-e- s � s p DATE: ,�/ z SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUT�IORI ED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; E NGIRL6-6-,2 I OAPPROVED 1PROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED rcr,4fici/ e ( -53 Tit°6‘,/- kV,/ - 3 . %T „Li/ DATE:• 7/9/? SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; POLICE ' ❑ APPROVED © APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1) All off site improvements be installed prior to occupancy. 2) Workhours be 0700AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday to avoid noise complaints from the residental area and the hospital . 3) Building be equipped with alarms due to its remote location from police dept. & it attractiveness to burglars looking for drugs. (Even if drugs are not stored drug users will break in looking fori drugs because it is a medical building.) 4) Security doors & locks be installed Lt. �Pessn SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVEATE; 6/2/82 RVON BUILDING & ZONING DEORTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: 6-1-82 . 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION 0 TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: 0 UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT liltPOLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 0 OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' BY 5:00 P .M. ON 7 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : /Gr!l I ,,yLE%iC El APPROVED 0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS II NOT APPROVED C2 6'4//iff ,4X f4 & * "diety ieeJ 4,-/ v AilitiP ele ez# etai�' to Ghx. seii1 i be Q/ . 4 /0( -4 e/adI/ eixe-twit © a i A e /a a as J J7 /dwiike4, ,e /as 6pg ' Anft , to. sec, /1/4" - d-fr:‘, oceire/dow etty *44/ 06,14 '//�I/ ,e 4//� S,yioiie. 4 * Z Kei k 7c ee- =(' DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance with conditions for the following projects : G. M. ASSOCIATES (ECF-043-82) Application to rezone 17. 3 acres of property from G-1 to B-1 for a community shopping center, file R-019-82; property located on the east side of Duvall A venue N.E. between N.E. 4th Street and S.E. 121st Street. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES (ECF-046-82) Application for site approval to build a four-story medical office building (Valley General North Professional Building) , file SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Further information regarding this action is available in the Building and Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by June 28, 1982. Published: June 14 , 1982 RE -1N BUILDING & ZONING DE RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • El PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION IZTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : El UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION . 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION .DEPARTMENT El BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT • POLICE DEPARTMENT • POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : %e/is. 1✓GCNEE.�/n�� El APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED :3 DATE: -1-i 7//2 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RE"'"ZiN BUILDING & ZONING Di RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF 046 — $2 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : oi UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Ell POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT LI OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : OAPPROVED EKPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED I UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO i ¢`8z LATE COMERS ACREEMEaT - WATER No LATE COMERS AGREEMENT - SEWER ,g-S //•�� 'iey- i-- ,�j� 4/4 a -1/� �a oil,��O SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - WATER cOi i,-,, r/fG SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - SEWER 1 co4)A) 60- • SPECIAE. ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - WATER yes */2,z/ 0 71 A)-.rq 9/W-6 a® SPECigt ASSESSIAE 9T AREA CRUDE - SEWER No APPROVED tVATER PLAN Ygs. APPROVER SEWER PLAN &F5 APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS BY FIRE DEPT. 1/ FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS Y�� P�/441-LPL 01411 - alGA DATE: 6-/ & cr: , SIGNAT URE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REN1 BUILDING k ZONING DEP/ 'MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 .— 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building . BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S . 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: 111 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 111 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT n POLICE DEPARTMENT , n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 0 OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : (B L� n APPROVED E. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED • �r�‘�� C--- ,/ 1 .6 _ DATE: CJ" ...S-=� SI yliRE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REI )N BUILDING k ZONING DE RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 c1 ENGINEERING DIVISION El TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU El PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT •BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : � El APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED ; saji/e_A-0-e-41:5-- f 1.17, l7 /`k SPe�(�C (!�'� ! r y ✓ dry:4nv'f�5 0 ; v-e P�✓�`S l J Sakie - -(i' Aidet, Sa...4*y 'SA-1 ' r� ac�Q "$e 54rfrl (A a. d- p S I I�a7�ia.. d-Grusc ev1•e�! P e-2 v..Cd d Re ; , remeass AJ i- "Ah41 Situ—Huck U y .� ospdaJ e d,;cdf . 24Jc 44cQN ass - PelAidtgc ,evt . 80 - A DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUT ORI ED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RE- -)N BUILDING & ZONING DI RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 • El ENGINEERING DIVISION 1=1 TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG . DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU Ei PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ri BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT OPOLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : --, €E El APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED 't�7 6- afiuL577e _j d.c> fttie) /tiG G ss .S / L- DATE: c5"/-2/ /- SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 FINAL IDECLARATI®t"' OF A ON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No (s) : SA-045-82 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-046-82 Description of Proposal: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. Proponent: Professional Building Associates Location of Proposal:Po The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Lead Agency: Building & Zoning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on June 2 , 1982 and June 9, 1982, following a presentation by Jerry Lind of the Building & Zoning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Gary Norris, Jerry Lind, David Clemens, Ronald Nelson, Roger Blaylock and Richard Houghton. Incorporated by reference' in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-046-82 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Peter Schroeder Schroeder DATED: May 12, 1982 2) Applications: Site Approval (SA-045-82) 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Police Department, Fire Prevention Bureau, Building & Zoning Department, Traffic Engineering Division, Utility Engineering Division, Design Engineering Division. More information: Policy Development Department. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development has a non-significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: Will not adversely impact the environment or adjacent land uses and that the following requirements shall be complied with: 1 ) Approval subject to revised site plan dated and submitted on June 9, 1982. 2) Subject to trip generation payment of $15/vehicle trip for traffic impact at intersection of Talbot Road South and South 43rd Street, Final disposition of vehicles to be determined by Public Works Department. FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES PAGE TWO Signatures: Rona FA. Ne• on RBuilding & Zoning Director D66"53 R. Clemens Policy Development Director • ' '.. R'c ar• C. Houg Public Works Director DATE OF PUBLICATION: June 14 , 1982 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: June 28, 1982 • ti • Date circulated : May 21 , 1982 Comments due : June 1 , 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No(s) . Site Approval (SA-045-82). PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE:Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval. application to build . a four story medical office building with associated parking. The property is located immediately south of S. 3 /th LOCATION: Street and west of Talbot •Road S. • SITE AREA: •5.4 avres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. . DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1) Topographic changes : I X 2) Direct/Indirect air quality : X 3) Water & water courses : X 4 ) Plant life : X 5 ) Animal life : • X 6) Noise : X 7) Light & glare :_ X 8) Land Use ; north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : possible with single family to north. View obstruction :, Salve 9) Natural resources : Panther Creek 10) Risk of upset: • 11 ) Population/Employment : X 12 ) Number of Dwellings : x 13) Trip ends (ITE) : 717 traffic impacts : S. 38th &, Talbot, S. 43.rd & Talbot 14) Public services : X 7 15) Energy : x 16) Utilities: X , • 17) Human health: X ,. 18) Aesthetics: X 19) Recreation: X 20) Archeology/history: X COMMENTS: Signatures: //W/ /C4 Ronald G. Nelson D d R. Clemens Building Official Policy Development Director c and C. Hou ton, Public Works Director '7 FNAFFlL Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONIMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : v / 7) Light & glare : 8) Land Use ; north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : , „ %/ / L �c G -G Imo,i l G c7W.,74- /4-7 c re 3-$�'= I+..t its V M 1��/ ��g�. (.- vw.�+a� 9Z! 6%�Y. �l'G traffic impacts : "° 7a .doffs c�,�11,iitbm;7'�o • 1-kta,fc+Y- cb'>'Db/a.,,7 14 ) Public services : [/ 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : -'` 18) Aesthetics : • 19 ) Recreation : C/ 20) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : / - Si��e /�� �Ve ddi ADP-re, G' L vJJe V9 Gnu ji.alp G�- „,44 T / q 3 46 Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information_ ; Reviewed by : ) = i ' title : /� � -SiD��: /2Sl/- Date : � 02 7dam 2— Re' FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONIME6NTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET E C F - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (96) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO. 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : ✓ 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; ,north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : T 9) Natural resources : vv 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : ✓ 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : IV 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : ✓ 17 ) Human health : '/ 18 ) Aesthetics : 19) Recreation : ✓ 20) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : pip rer_,..c.,c Otpizpr4 /?b, 3 2 (, A 1 Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information_ Reviewed by : /P Title : L;,./, -y� � L. Date : .5/23/8 FORM: ERC-06 UTILITIES Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 • ENVIR0NMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site ap royal application to build a four story medical office buildi.ag with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA: 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : ✓ 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : ✓ 3 ) Water & water courses : ✓ 4 ) Plant life : ✓ 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : ✓ 7 ) Light & glare : ✓ 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : V 9 ) Natural resources : ✓ 10 ) Risk of upset : ✓ 11 ) Population/Employment : • 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15) Energy : ✓ 16 ) Utilities : 1/ 17 ) Human health : 18) Aesthetics : • 19 ) Recreation : t/ 20) Archeology/history : ✓ COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : AIA11 (0.6 4 /y it1e : 0774./T Date : b-40 FORM: ERC-06 1:21:bLeVIC:( Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA: 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 1 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : Ag�,,„,J� (5 7' ,96 '75 ' View obstruction : r+e/ff6 9 ) Natural resources : ArlW 'tC_ 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : �/ 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : ` Gf�/ es440.4 A ge traffic impacts : /� 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : -COMMENTS T, Apo1 ® 6,tvewe /l Gt'/ ewl6 ' a f J yQ74 eAs aiyt Acta6 46 44 Qe I iko/ 4 /J!0A4 /44 Oat ® T e' Ned eGctic�AA4/ Recommendation : ►ANSI OS More Information /; Reviewed by : 1 �. C�I��Q�Oiitle : ��D� A hp. Date : 6 2/ 6%2 FORM: ERC-06 UILO. 4 ?.PIING% Date circulated : riay 21, 1982 Comments Cue : June 1, 1982 ENVIROtNENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medica1 office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE _ INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : , 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3) Water & water courses : - X 4) Plant life : d 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : Y 7.) Light & glare : 8) Land Use ; north : east : south : w e•s t : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : T 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services : k 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : x 20 ) Archeology/history : x COMMENTS : ' l 3ca)063- 06e . woe 41 v Ai s 7-. ,_S zOG, .�e-p.oJJ 6 O Ac', t) . (sth gRs aLL OP . t/c1a ©,,us-r-lacrroA) (0�v r- -- .r,7v /1erui-rD fge-: _ias i. T&. t.1-D 624I Lc) 4 r A. s -Fagg 6i� Recommendation : DNSI_ DOS More Information Reviewed by : • .4e4 ,C Title : / Date : -12 FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 ENIVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 Renton Fare Dees Fire P::;e APPLICATION No (s) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) [E[Q7C\�J PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building - MAY, 2 i 1982 Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office i 1 caag with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA: 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : .77 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : ,/ 4 ) Plant life : ✓ 5 ) Animal life : ✓ 6) Noise : ✓ 7 ) Light & glare : ✓ 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : • south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : ,/ 10 ) Risk of upset : V 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : ✓ 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : /:18 ) Aesthetics : • 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : ✓ COMMENTS : Recommendation : ✓ D S More Information Reviewed by : Title : i _g5e, Date : • FORM: ERC-06 I44 Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office huilding with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street aqi west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : _ 3 ) Water & water courses : • 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : I 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : xxx 14 ) Public services : xxx 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18) Aesthetics : • 19) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : DNSI if improvements are made to Talbot Road and all lighting in the parking lot be placed so it shines inward on the building rather than on building shining outward. The building should also be equiped with burglar alarms. Recommendation : DNSI XXX DOS More Information Reviewed by : L � 'P sson Title : Date : 6/2/82 FORM: ERC-06 761 oft A) 1141 / : -haiale?044,3a 5. l c 2 mear- SIN =au Jbr4aWN DWI a-R --Jrdvsfti • cN n fN -cr3 7bY41 MieNI 'cro A City ?4S-19-ai Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 • ENVIIRONMEINITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office buildiu.g with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : , 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : • 19) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : Title : Date : FORM: ERC-06 CITY OF RENTON CITY OF RENTON OF RENTON _ M O APPLICATION Ili-i/ NMII1d1 0 ('f1AY 1 d 19B2 SITE APPROVAL MAY( ! ~ i982 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY .U, , r , G/ZONING DEPT. Ems':' !' NGir?t.;(!I ,`!-. File No . SA- ,7 - _ Filing Date d5/3 402) Application Fee $ 4g✓` Receipt No . 77.1/7 Environmental Review Fee $ /e1 APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : 4orgi„, ►•- • 1 . Name Valley General North Professional Building °IlPhorie 3- . 93 Address &1 1 GVF(11 )61' ��it -( "% ` ` 1A5 I 2 . Property location _The property is located immediately South of South 37th Street and West of 96th Avenue South (Sprinkbrook - Talbot Road) 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) (Sep attached sheet) c:rr OF TINTON la ''C FA T ! Int c;. n! GILONtP'!C DS!T. 4 . Number of acres or square feet 5.4 acres Present zoning P-1 5 . What do you propose to develop on this property? A medical office building with associated parking_ 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application : A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other factors limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20 ' B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan . . . . 1" = 10 ' C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels) 1" = 200 ' to 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) 7. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER ACTION : Date Approved Date Denied Date Appealed Appeal Action Remarks / ,/ c /lr Planning p,e. t. Rev, l-7 f • rY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ' Application No. -O#' `P Environmental Checklist No. A. /7'd4.`cf,,Zi PROPOSED, date: FINAL, date: 0 Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should 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 will 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 "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name-of— Proponent Professional Building Associates 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: - - - V - 3. Date--Checklist submitted May 12. 1982 - - 4. Agency requiring Checklist City of Renton/Planning Dept. 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Valley General North Professional Ruildiig 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) : The proposal is a four story. 42.100 square foot medical office building with associated parking. Primary construction materials would include light colored stucco or similar material and tinted windows with metal frames. -2- • 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The proposal is located North of Valley General Hospital with residential to the North, professional buildings and residences to the East, and wetland and freeway to the West. The site consists of a sloping plateau above Panther Creek, which runs the length of the south property. No structures are on the site. The plateau area is covered by brambles and grasses and a few trees at the easterly property line of the termination of 38th Court. Panther Creek's adjoining ravine has small caliper trees and brush cover. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Spring 1983 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal (federal , state and local--including rezones) : 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: The medical offices and clinics within the building would be executed under separate permit. 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal ? If yes , explain: A bridge connecting this property and Valley General Hospital across Panther Creek trom the West parking lot had been considered as an improve- _ _, mpht' in the fl,ti,r.P 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- • posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? YES MAYBE NO (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over- covering of the soil? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ES MAYBE NO (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? �. YES MAYBE NO (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X YES MBE NO __ Explanation: _ In the areas of parking, drives , landscaping and building, soils would __ _ ___ be affected. Some displacement, compaction and overlaying of the soil is required within these locations which represent only about 50% of -- •-- the 1 nt " `u _3_ (2) Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? YES MAYBE NO (b) The creation of objectionable odors? YES M YBE NO (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, • or any change in climate , either locally or regionally? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Some dust will be created during grading and excavating and also associated with standard construction proceedures. It will he limited to the construction period only. (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES MAYBE NO (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MAYBE NO (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? -�— YES MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of X ground waters? YES MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X • YES MAYBE NO (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO (i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X YES MAYBE NO _ __ _ Explanation: Proposed building and parking area would have more rapided runoff and reduced obsorption. Plans, however, call for on site_ retainage, oil filtered and restricted return to natural drainage. (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees , shrubs , grass , crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora? YES MATTE NO (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X - YES MAYBE ;IO (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Building, parking and landscaping areas would reduce the existing vegatation, but landscaping will use indigenous plants and up to 50% of the site would be untouched including a number of large trees screening the Eastern side of the building. - -4- -- -- �- . (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species. of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? YES. MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? YES MAYBE NO (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? YES MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Building and parking area will reduce existing crrub brush arid. associated fauna, but up to half the site and the productive and sensitive areas along the creek and ravine are being preserved. (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The increased traffic will create limited associated noise (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or X glare? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Parking lot and general building lighting will he designed however to eliminate all offsite glare. (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES MAYBE NO t Explanation: /Wig A/i/1/dAA/g//i4//a/VOW*/f/aidi/Vi/it'y'/Mr//ith'e'/a/dyth/►ii/n'y /Varh'gi/ng'M%'s ✓tlaN/a'r/d'/a's/Is/u'dh'/Wi //h'aiVegs't'a' 1lddd/ddthddddYI tY-i WAY/t✓,W.I/ /s/i/tle'/d'e s/i/t!y'Ai/oitl/ tia'u's'/i/ra'ddda's'd t ldd l0v`avbi!b(/oaf id/dY/Ybf d /s/u'r/r/o/uWA/g"/a/rle/a/461142600i /r4t1i/62aliui//d11dr Ud l (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population ' X of an area? YES MMAYBE NO .Explanation: This building is a support facility for the adjoining, enlarging hospital and as such will have .staff and personnel associated with use. On site density would thus increase, but growth rate of the surrounding area wouldn't be noticeably effected. -5- ( 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X _ YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Some additional housing for the building users may be created as part of the economic growth in the Valley General Hospital zone. (13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? YES MAYBE NO (b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? YES MAYBE NO (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YES MAYBE NO (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X YES MAYBE NO \\\ (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The development of this building would increase traffic in the immediate vicinity of the building but this will be greatly-mitigated by the L.I.D. improvement of 38th Court and because of staggered patient scheduling. (14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? YES MAYBE NO (b) Police protection? X • YES MAYBE NO (c) Schools? - X YES MAYBE NO (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? YES MAYBE NO (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: This proposal would increasz local population and- thus need for all government services but would not individually require new government facilities. (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require X the development of new sources of energy? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Energy needs of a building this size would not si,hstantially impact present energy sources or require new sources, but it would require normal energy loads to operate. (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities : (a) Power or natural gas? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO (c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO -6- •.= (d) Sewer or septic tanks? YES MAYBE NO r (e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE NO (f) Solid waste and disposal? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: All service hook-ups normal to servicing this type of project. (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result 'in the obstruction of 1 any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? X YES Mom- NO Explanation: 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- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful ack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: P %//4�J1,19 (signed) - (namento"d) AFC City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 { LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel No. 4 of East Valley Medical Park Short Plat recorded under Recording No. 780815-1009 , and being a short plat of : That portion of the Southeast 1/4 corner of said Section 30 ; thence North along the North and South center line of said Section 30 , a distance, of 250 feet; thence North 89°06 ' 03 " East 950 feet to the true point of beginning; thence North parallel to the North and South center line of said Section 30 , a distance of 421.49 feet to the Westerly production of the Southerly line of a tract of land sold on contract to Joseph Mance and Betty Mance, his wife b recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 4687718 ; thence South 84 17 ' 00" East along the Southerly boundary of said Mance Tract and along the Southerly boundary, of a tract of land conveyed to Joseph Mance and Betty Mance, his wife, by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 4643926 , 813 . 77 feet, more or less, to the Westerly line of the Springbrook or Talbot County Road ( 96th) Avenue Southeast; thence South 6°00 ' 20" West along the Westerly line of said road 520 feet, more or less, to the North line of a tract of land, conveyed to Ivan G. Unbedacht and Phyllis Unbedacht, his wife, by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 4696849 ; thence along the Northerly line of said Unbedacht Tract North 74°39 ' 53" West 674 . 52 feet, more or less, to an angle point in said Northerly line; thence continuing along said Northerly line South 89°06 ' 03" West 105 feet to the true point of beginning; Situate in the County of King, State of Washington. AFFIDAVIT • I , C `'� 77 e -ti , P' 4i. ia41 , being duly sworn, declare that I am the oViner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this / O - day of (let , 19 g21 , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at (Name Notary Public) (Si ture f 0 n (Address) (Address) _L la 6)-(4 . (City) (State) Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received , 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 . L7NDIN _J ..: OF FILE FILE TITLE ... • . •• • 10. . aro' • 410.,1 *IN .. ceipt # ,'' CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT NAME DATE PROJECT & LOCATION { Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee TOTAL FEES Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor. Thank vou. CITY ,OF IRE i" T O N LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JULY 6, 1982 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9 : 00 a.m. : COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SECOND FLOOR, RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING AAD-053-82 JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days . SA-045-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. S o'45- 8 2 OF R4,11/ A, ;y © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09 co� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 C,9��FD SEPT . BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MEMORANDUM MAYOR DATE: June 16, 1982 TO: Gary Norris FROM: Roger J. Blaylock, Zoning Administrator RE: TRAFFIC ESTIMATE/VALLEY GENERAL NORTH PROFESSIONAL BUILDING Please find attached the estimated traffic information from TDA for the above proposed project. The Environmental Review Committee conditioned the applicant to participate in improvements on Talbot Road S. and SW 43rd Streets equal to the traffic volume times the rate of $15.00 per trip. Please evaluate the estimated trips for the proposed project and determine the necessary fees. • 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 JULY 6 , 1982; AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer, File AAD-053-82, of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) , File SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 6 , 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: June 25 , 1982 RONALD G. NELSON BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I, STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS 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, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 23rd day of June, 1982. SIGNED: ✓- !E741424070/ _ opt,>- ESL MEMORANDUM TO: Pete Schroeder DATE: June 14, 1982 FROM: Jim Jacobson JOB NO. : 3000 SUBJECT: Valley General North Professional Building Traffic The purpose of this memorandum is to describe the findings of our traffic study for the proposed Valley General North Professional Building in Renton. There were two primary purposes of the study: o Identify the total amount of traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. o Identify the amount of the project-related traffic that would use each of the streets in the vicinity of the site. The following sections identify our methodology and the results of these investigations. TRIP GENERATION Trip Generation Intensity Factors , a publication of the Arizona Department of Transportation identifies a daily traffic generation rate for medical office buildings of 50 vehicle trip ends (VTE) per 1,000 GFA. This figure is based on surveys of 13 medical office buildings in four different states. According to these surveys, approximately 14.5 percent of the daily traffic occurs during a medical office building's peak hour. (This is not necessarily the corres- ponding peak hour of traffic on adjacent streets. ) When applied to the proposed Valley General North Professional Building (42,400 GFA) , the resulting daily traffic generation would be approximately 2,120 daily vehicle trip ends (50 VTE/1 ,000 GFA x 42,400 GFA). Approximately 307 of these vehicle trip ends could be expected to occur during the hour that the office building would generate the most traffic (2120 x . 145). The Institute of Transportation Engineers in their publication Trip Generation identifies a daily traffic generation rate of 75 vehicle trip ends per 1 ,000 GFA. However, this number is based on only 5 medical office buildings, all in California. Examination of the data in Trip Generation Intensity Factors indicated that these five studies are part of the 13 studies included in its generation rate of 50/1 ,000 CFA. Although the generation rate developed by the Arizona Department of Transportation in Trip Generation Intensity Factors is smaller, it is based on a much larger sample and assumed to be a more repre- sentative generation rate of all medical office buildings. TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION TDA conducted traffic counts of the number and directional distribution of vehicles entering and exiting medical office buildings located immediately 4 f . To: Pete Schroeder - 2 - June 11 , 1982 east of Valley General Hospital and north of SW 43rd Street along Talbot Road. It is reasonable to assume that the distribution of trips to and from the pro- posed Valley General North Professional Building would be very similar to the distribution of trips to the existing nearby medical offices. A sample of 240 cars over a two-hour period during the afternoon of Thursday, June 10, 1982, indicated the following distribution: 20 Percent north on Talbot Road 25 Percent east on SW 43rd Street 50 Percent west on SW 43rd Street (toward SR 167) 5 Percent south on Talbot Road (south of SW 43rd Street) The resulting amount of traffic that could be expected to be added on each street due to the development and occupancy of the proposed project is shown in the attached Figure 1. Observations of traffic operations along Talbot Road and at the intersection of SW 43rd Street indicate that many people are not sure of the location of their doctor's office. Many of the people enter and exit a number of drive- ways before they find the right building where their physician is located. Better signing or. clearer directions from physicians to patients could help improve the traffic situation in the area. u f ,e i ---, , _ _ E„ii di . . L, 7 oa d d =9 a icdJ JJi .w..reff t A• 6 / • `l Proposed Building Site N.. o , cj A ' - . • --\.....____, _, I . \ g /ii ' ffJi . co n C 0 Q,,,,„7/4, Cilili LI 4° pli7 ______#, ......„7-77 SW 43rd St. • ,Ms SI I ','7- iSI Is Dr / / o {} 2 Q .L P. 4:1h. T Valley General North Professional Building Figure 1. Traffic Added To Surrounding Streets 999 - Additional Daily Volume (9%) - % Of Daily Traffic Source: TDA ,' 1, __ �.r/ ,4 r' ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE JUNE 9, 1982 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10 : 00 A.M . : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS ECF-022-82 DEAN W. BITNEY R-023-82 SP-028-82 PMH-029-82 ECF-040-82 C . A. PARKER SP-036-82 OLD BUSINESS ECF-043-82 G . M. ASSOCIATES R-019-82 Dick Gilroy will speak on behalf of G . M . Associates ' application to rezone property from G-1 to B-1 for a community shopping center ; property located on the east side of Duvall Avenue N . E. between N . E . 4th Street and S . E . 121st Street . ECF-046-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES SK-045-82 Pete Schroeder of William Graham , Consultants, will speak on behalf of Professional Building Associates ' application for site approval to build a four-story medical office building (Valley General North Pro- fessional Building) ; property located immediately south of S . 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S . _ , tiNVIKONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE • ' AGENDA • i . ,JUNE 9, 1982 i‘ 1 — /4 PAGE TWO II \WU I I 1 • • 1 WillithI:, I , I . Mat --I ) .. I film% . 1114v1 ... e( — , . 1 1 AI ,Liii . i \ ,......0. '.......___ )-------, ' \\ \um ----L - / --- . __ __ . _ 1 - :„.. ._, II LAKE - , JO= : "1"-dgina LAKE '‘• 711I - : . 11711: 1 \ \ WASHINGTON ', MI ille......7 1 illiiirr=• ; I 5_.•./4.1 %lb,21;; & II - \ F 41112rmaipa , ..-: -1 .i'"\• ,..,_ ir, Ad =I, ! -'----,---min - 74- I. . 14.- 711111EEF, \ • 1 ri*/41 ima ril_ ____„._ . wi minn....... 1 K im ,,op ILT ___,-" • 1 . lirwertimdk,r----- Y L • I , #p gimp= i 1 . _..... dik.•\w • ii \ A /1/111111,.A.i.. LAMM ! a G. M. ASSOCIATES it 1 ( iffISMOLVI 01 1 7411111r 11Pr7/ .. • gillivon. I 4 Itir41,132'. , J I Ell --- -1-1.11-4S1140111111tilP444 ...., > ,' 11111111111%fraftrizi EN esuik_.----44..... —'H i (CAlitiorfir nil'il ---.), \ ! 4 DEAN W. BITN Y 1 = , ,, _; i 16,\•„.„_________, ..._ lipitu k L.--- -- r 1 l'alv., L I e• r' • imiram im— N.. •----- ----- . f..- e c. A. PARKER - .....N \ 9-- . . ... ..,...„ , relekiriato;:iiiiti ..i.i." ..4,1...„ 14,46iszt,N real is , if, -Ivo I gi a i - I .„N_A 1 'ft-'.-..1-. ..-- . - - — 1 it ii, wriarinv — , •.. i • -. ---- ,.. Ind.,40, .f.es A( 4 .---1 i II w' 11 Mei 1 L . ' 01 I.NNIIIIIE 7.7 A we: ' - Li 7 . I .. ..1 .... ...mii , 1p i %. .... , N. • i 'i PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES , 0 1 li 1 c...,N. roil. — ' , ) 11. , LI 1 - •.\71 .,. __/. ' II -- -;-.- T. 1 I E ..,,,.. \• : '', _ H • — I ( imi ' (-1 Li IL ik •f f:r L. , 1 LAKE YOUFWA 1 " I ( I i I 11 1 -11 --1 U I I 1 I " I .' I .,. - .PT7 1 William Graham 1_. .nsultants 0.` Planning • Urban Design • Willis, Cunliire, Tait 1u17 Suite (Securities Building, 313 Columbia Street West, 1904 3rd Avenue, • New Westminster, B.C. V3L 1A7 Seattle, Washington 98101 - Telephone (604) 525-4646 Telephone (206) 223-0393 June 7, 1982 • Mr. Bob Aldrige D.O.A.Q. Architects • 3224 Wetmore Avenue Everett, WA 98201 : RE: Valley General North Professional Building Access Easement on Lot #2 • • fY r a- >. • ' Dear.Mr. Aldrige: This letter summarizes the phone conversation we had this morning covering design implications of an access easement to Lot #4 of the East Valley Medical Park across your client, Dr. Dan O'Brien's, property. • It is my understanding that the basic parameters of any such .easement agree— ment will be established through our mutual aesthetic interests and an --ongoing dialogue. ---You -indicated several items -which should be incorporated ;F;...'.: in an agreement which are summarized below: • (1.) All construction work on the access drive and related landscaping ' shall be coordinated with the L.I.D. construction time table. (2.) All -trees to remain will be so designated. ,(3.) A- revocation of the easement will take place if the designated trees • are cut down. (4.) A landscaped screen will be installed by the Lot #4 ownership adjacent to Dr. O'Brien's clinic. Specific size and location to be worked out between the respective design teams. (5.) Lot #4 site layout will be adjusted to enhance pedestrian/vehicular access with Lot #2 -(Dr. O'Brien's clinic) . I will be in touch with -you in the near future as events evolve on our project. • Sincerely, • • Peter Schroeder William Graham Consultants jl _ cc: Dr. O'Brien Rick Shute 1DM 316 Second Avenue South Seattle Washington 98104 (206)682-4750 June 8, 1982 Mr. Richard Shute Professional Building Association c/o Pete Schroeder William Graham Consultants 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Shute: This is in regard to the limited traffic study you need for the Valley General North Professional Building in Renton. We understand the objec- tive is not to provide the transportation element of an EIS, but rather is limited to estimation of traffic generated by the project, and its distribution to the local streets, with particular attention to Talbot and its intersection with 43rd. We have not been able to discuss this with Gary Norris yet, for any special requirements. With that caution, we estimate a maximum budget of $1500 to provide necessary field counts, our travel estimates and a brief technical memorandum. We will finish the study prior to the end of June, if given a go-ahead by the 14th. Sincerely, TDA Inc. t:4 6 William R. ager President d .5 t - NELSON McCARTHY, P. S. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 7 RICHARD C. NELSON OF COUNSEL MICHAEL J. McCARTHY 710 ONB PLAZA JAMES S. TURNER WILLIAM G. MCGILLIN 10600 NE 8T" STREET ALAN N. TONNON HUGH W. HAWKINS, JR. B. DAVID THOMAS BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 JANICE ANN POTTER ROBERT P WILLIAMSON AREA CODE 206 PAUL L. HAMMANN TELEPHONE 454-2344 THOMAS K. WINDUS JARED C. CURTIS MARCY L. HIKIDA June 9, 1982 KATHRYN C. NEILSEN Mr. Peter Schroeder William Graham Consulting Planners & Urban Designers 1904 - 3rd Avenue Seattle, Washington Re: Elimination of Restricted Covenant for Renton East Valley Medical Park Dear Mr. Schroeder: This office represents Professional Building Associates who have obtained contract rights to purchase certain property generally captioned above from Vallis Investors, a joint venture. • The subject property was conveyed to the Gliege Corporation by Vallis Investors in June of 1979. This conveyance was in contemplation of a partnership which was never formed. It is our understanding that Gliege Corporation executed the restricted covenant in question. We have obtained Gliege Corporation's affidavit indicating that at no time did they intend to possess any right, title or interest in the subject property. In acknowledgement thereof, they have executed a Quit Claim Deed to Vallis Investors dated March 31, 1982. In addition, they have agreed to execute the necessary documents which may be necessary to remove the restrictive covenants previously exeuted in error by Gliege Corporation. It is anticipated that such acquired documentation may be obtained and recorded no later than June 30, 1982. If you should have any questions regarding this matter please don't hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, NELSON & McCARTHY, P.S. Michael J. McCart y MJM:lj OF R OA. • © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z NA o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09 0 co� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0gTF J SEPTEMO�P J.:ne 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, ' Roger J. laylock Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp OF R4,4 A. v a © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Z G. RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR SIAM 09 �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09gTED SEPT �O`�P June 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, ----Vene, ,t. o L& Roger J. ?laylock Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp 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 JULY 6 , 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: JOSEPHINE WEYMEYER Appeal by Josephine Weymeyer, File AAD-053-82, of a decision by the Board of Public Works regarding the application of Chapter 21 , Dangerous Building Code, to repair or remove the structure located at 225 Sunset Boulevard North within 60 days. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) , File SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 6, 1982, AT 9 : 00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED: June 25 , 1982 RONALD G. NELSON BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR CERTIFICATION I, STEVE MUNSON, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS 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, in and for the State of Washington residing in King County, on the 23rd day of June, 1982. � � SIGNED: mik:4e771(040044f)1 OF i © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR Z rn OA co� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL A% . SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 o,9gTFo SEPT " P June 7, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Pete Schroeder c/o William Graham Associates Professional Building Associates 1017 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 Subject: Valley General North Professional Building File SA-045-82 Dear Mr. Schroeder: On June 2, 1982 the Environmental Review Committee evaluated the subject project. It was determined that the following revisions and additional information will be required in order for the Committee to render an environmental determination: 1. The southern and western-most parking lots (3) will require revisions in their design. The lots are to be graded so that the final grades are close to the existing contours of the site. 2. It is suggested that the building be moved somewhat west to lessen the impact on the ravine and Panther Creek. Please further detail the area that will need to be excavated to site this building. 3. A detailed traffic impact analysis of the site will need to be submitted for the Committee's review. 4. Fire lane access is not adequate for the southwestern portion of the building. Fire lanes are to be 20 feet in width and within 150 feet of any portion of the building. Please contact the Fire Marshal for design standards regarding this. Please submit the above information at your earliest convenience so that an environmental determination by the Committee can be made. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this department. Sincerely, Roger J. laylcck Zoning Administrator RJB/JFL/mp ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CO NITTEE JUNE 2, 1982 AGE ' DA COMMENCING AT 10 :00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM PENDING BUSINESS ECF-040-82 C. A. PARKER SP-036-82 Special permit application to remove 359 , 309 cubic yards of gravel ; property located at the 2700 block of Royal Hills Drive S.E. NEW BUSINESS ECF-046-82 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES SA-045-82 Site approval application to build a four-story medical office building with associated parking (Valley General North Professional Building) ; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road c . ECF-047-82 THE AUSTIN COMPANY SP-046-82 Special permit application for the construction of an earthen mound for purpose of surcharging underlying compressible soil; property located at the southwest corner of Lind Avenue S.W. and S.W. 16th Street. 'ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW r--1ITTEE • . AGENDA c----- -, I, I% - -7•- JUNE 2, 1982 . \ I 1 PAGE TWO , ,,,-,,, / I • ' • \ ,....g-6. A...- I i •ft.k . • c AL:17 . -1 • i! 1 -I- ( I.-----.- q 1 / •.• ),_ .' ' • 1 , 1 •t. g• 1 --.„ r \ i .\ liki.. m LAKE #11 ...\ WAS \ 't.P- /.! \ NH 4.). Alk ‘V\- HINGTON r stiit1/4N '.\ ifintrt ---. -, trial 1 tlitf*Pr- ' \ ' J. .. 3 [111 n a, 111111EIM :WM \ . 1 \ nirimmm, r • 1. . = 4154 •' -.Ea ( a rarinialinir -2- I k Ail= 4114 \ DOENG 11.41111letrEINIT M ' VAMOLIKO tilikla \ 1,11 I II MA tl fill 1751 I i I .i i TI _ rithirdAINE Al 2111MTRAilligi . ' 1 I 'itiliminvion-, illy 1 voimuummilp. ...:... 7 , .11 In 62....diamo . ..,... c., • - -.47, „alppl . L._ 111140aI ,...• -•"111B211111 WAHL/ I. '.14•1___)---.. 7vrb. .•; ;,.. illimilabolvim sa. \,',...7..-::: •-)i..11'1-4-7.1.--41 1 li. I =-J - II 1 ri " iii If - it, , ,...„ ...... • c. A. PARKER 'llIl , •-.:••• • ,... ..- • NroplagiailegiN.._11 .. T.-I..'. 11/4 •,5.: , ,,,,- .-.._- • ........ ,,•., 4,...-••04.'1.... ;Nilo. .4150111"*.%, itfoci i \--\ I • THE AUS TIN COMPANY - \ , „:. .. ,... . -•\ -• 111 _.... . . ) lir- .0, ,_, .__. i ii ....&... • . •,.. . .. • .0. 1 4--;,,-:. . . • .. 1 -- --- . viaw --. - ---- - ---- I i, MEI FA:,n, ., A‘---- - -------, - --- .1-- ---- I l 41 d . ii , ... 14541161,ge444e—Ve 1 .......- IIL ImINA11111= 1 ...„.. .... . rev - Nit 11"Ne 1,1 Ali 0 PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES r • ... _____L______J , . t .. . .. .. . -1 ) ---7 1 I E '1.1:1:\ ''' - i . - I ' -, .._ . ...-[-- _ , ••.. .. .. •, - _,; 4 -0 I _______ ) 1 1_, '-`-\ v - -L/ I 1 4 ... .. — : ....•..., - '....• LAKE YOUNGS Li I ] — 1 I7- I L .. , I RE. )N BUILDING & ZONING DF -;RTMAENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET, ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: ' Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE: Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • [=1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION E] TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ri UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT g2 POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : POLICE APPROVED © APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1) All off site improvements be installed prior to occupancy. 2) Workhours be 0700AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday to avoid noise complaints from the residentalarea and the hospital . 3) Building be equipped with alarms due to its remote location from police dept. & it attractiveness to burglars looking for drugs. (Even if drugs are not stored drug REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/PTvISION • El APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED ?\"o ✓ �e Q d S c .. c of S , �P.d e:, r-� ,�-ff e L / P S?x// e (w/L o �€wr-e44)1"5 ✓ i S 04/7 K ��� ^ �o �D✓� e� /�5 S' s Sf gal d' T��'p S i 1 ►ate• o-G�<rsc�. C'w�el '. � � r�b3 N.� r- �soJ-ti �''�a Sly�.�lu�'C � U �'+'� �v.�..1 Vul th td . 2 c.d c -, G.r a tss �� d✓ DATE —51 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUT ORI ED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED /4p/2re,r/ £ 4 j e'j��_5 / 77� '- D ` y_ D ve �L 9( O P G?55 et t/ Y ! J?1 v7L /ec , /3 3 - 4%7 a-7- 7 -/27(') -1/;-7/9/2__ DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; POLICE APPROVED © APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1) All off site improvements be installed prior to occupancy. 2) Workhours be 0700AM to 5:00 PM Monday thru Friday to avoid noise complaints from the residental area and the hospital . 3) Building be equipped with alarms due to its remote location from police dept. & it attractiveness to burglars looking for drugs. (Even if drugs are not stored drug users will break in looking for drugs because it is a medical building.) 4) Security doors & locks be installed Lt. e ss n 6/2/82 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ATE; RE1ON BUILDING & ZONING DIORTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: OPUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 • ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OPARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT LI BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DOTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' BY 5:00 P.M. ON . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Al' 44 i�tS LI APPROVED El APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS I/I NOT APPROVED , 7' 6'd4fie ,44 fit & v‘e idiez,ii ,i,,e atei / , V At fee, al/ eta/maw/4 SalaiXie d . 4/01,(//4 ,,w ereadi e-tlgf © aid 44dc/ e�/atsae 0 ditat pp:if ekdpe-/,,,1 ,..eM5 . 0 Am , f' e-/ee 9 imytk. 7" �G7/4J/,e4(9 , ,, , ,,,,,d4,,, ?e%/h/r , s; oire.. ,c7 ,,, /4 0/5/ gi-0_- S k ie,,e‘ezz-/ DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance with conditions for the following projects: G. M. ASSOCIATES (ECF-043-82) Application to rezone 17. 3 acres of property from G-1 to B-1 for a community shopping center, file R-019-82; property located on the east side of Duvall A venue N.E. between N.E. 4th Street and S.E. 121st Street. PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES (ECF-046-82) Application for site approval to build a four-story medical office building (Valley General North Professional Building) , file SA-045-82; property located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. Further information regarding this action is available in the Building and Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by June 28, 1982. Published: June 14 , 1982 RE ON BUILDING & ZONING DFRTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE: Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 ® ENGINEERING DIVISION & TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION 0 FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; %�Prf�=,��c IVG'tNEE.e/141� OAPPROVED [ElIPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ONOT APPROVED /Gh/y�a�GLzz� 3 , r `a,�z fi-`c/L�'"I 7`" - �• vim✓ DATE: ��7/7/2 _ SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RE"')N BUILDING & ZONING DE- RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET •ECF 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 E] ENGINEERING DIVISION El TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : r UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION • FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT El BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT • POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : • APPROVED D4PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS JJ NOT APPROVED UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO J724/8z LATE COPIERS 'AOREEME4T • WATER No LATE COatF.RS AGREEMENT - SEWER • y s sfr//,R ' Pep- - rar,f_4 40 4/4 Q /1-/l- � O//,'��D SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • WATER c-pn4/04, FAIG SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - SEWER COAJA) Ceitz- • 5P,CIA;. ASSESSMEHT AREA CHARGE • WATER yes / ,z/j o 71 AJ 9Au d© ASSESSMEI'JT AREA CHARGESEWER i fQ APPROVED tATER PLAN .S APPROVED SEWER PLAN J`/ APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS I BY FIRE DEPT. q' FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS Pik-A-LPL (9.1 as / DATE: s/a& SI GNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REN1 BUILDING k ZONING DEPI 'MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 04-6: - 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S . 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 ENGINEERING DIVISION r1TRAFFIC ENG . DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU 0 PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT a POLICE DEPARTMENT Ell POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : �, c APPROVED C APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED S-�©u c CB 1276 u r>> , /J-v o z2. 6 o,0 DATE: SIG( URE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REI )N BUILDING k ZONING DE RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: [I] PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 • /�/ ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : UTILITIES ENG . DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION . BUREAU PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT El BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT El POLICE DEPARTMENT II POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ' BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : APPROVED 0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED 0 ?Yv ✓t c% �6t_s 2 n-r�� !� j wt e YU�/� CC 4,17i ` ` svT e i v` L l l� k s !�C (w� �^'r Y 0 B 4-4.�iYti7'S rt �Gc�0 i dam// -// ;v-eg.._ ^'� ►-�v e e�✓�`S S4ket - j Kelm Sa,�.-1�y S.s �%�wJ4 i ac�Q Gef� � � 5farill a.. d'ti•rp S 11 Var o-1 c 3C abdi ' v.•c� aRc4 ,;y ri,L62.13 N. r sow 1v SAa$k dt # V a/ Ctwavef FlvvA, d t'utv,;cd . 0ed d4A5 f'a `iat' req,,eictir4e 8,J6 - DATE: 5/2- SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUT ORI ED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RE—3N BUILDING & ZONING DI RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION NO(S) : SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. TO: • 0 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6-1-82 ENGINEERING DIVISION OTRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : OUTILITIES ENG . DIVISION k; FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OPARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT .BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT OPOLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5:00 P.M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : - --J€( APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS LI NOT APPROVED G 6i ST1GrC j�.c) rivo /,v Ss .S L DATE: 6"/.e/ 4- SIGNATURE F DIRECTOR OR UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 t'sk FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Application No (s) : SA-045-82 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-046-82 Descrieation of Proposal: Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. Proponent: Professional Building Associates Location of Proposal: The property is located immediately south of S. 37th Street and west of Talbot Road S. • Lead Agency: Building & Zoning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on June 2 , 1982 and June 9, 1982, following a presentation by Jerry Lind of the Building & Zoning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Gary Norris, Jerry Lind, David Clemens, Ronald Nelson, Roger Blaylock and Richard Houghton. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-046-82 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Peter ;W. Schroeder DATED: May 12, 1982 2) Applications: Site Approval (SA-045-82) 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Police Department, Fire Prevention Bureau, Building & Zoning Department, Traffic Engineering Division, Utility Engineering Division, Design Engineering Division. More information: Policy Development Department. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development has a non-significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental non-significance: Will not adversely impact the environment or adjacent land uses and that the following requirements shall be complied with: 1 ) Approval subject to revised site plan dated and submitted on June 9, 1982. 2) Subject to trip generation payment of $15/vehicle trip for traffic impact at intersection of Talbot Road South and South 43rd Street, Final disposition of vehicles to be determined by Public Works Department. FINAL DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE PROFESSIONAL BUILDING ASSOCIATES PAGE TWO Signatures: 453 Rona G. Ne on D 0R. Clemens Building & Zoning Director Policys Development Director R c ar C. Houg t Public Works Director PATE OF PUBLICATION: June 14 , 1982 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: June 28, 1982 • • • • J • Date circulated : May 21 , 1982 Comments due : June 1 , 1982 ENVIROINMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 _ 82 APPLICATION No(s) . Site Approval (SA-045-82). • - PROPONENT: Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE :Valley 'General North Professional Building Brief Description of .Project : Site approval. application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. The property is located immediately south of S. 37th LOCATION: Street and west of TalbotoRoad S. SITE AREA: .5.4 avres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42, 200 sq. ft. . DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : - IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : X 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : . 1 . X 3) Water A water courses : X 4 ) Plant life : X 5) Animal life : - X 6) Noise : X 7) Light & glare : X 8) Land Use ; north: east : south : west : Land use conflicts : possible with single family to north. View obstruction : Same 9) Natural resources : Panther Creek 10) Risk of upset: 11 ) Population/Employment : X n 12 ) Number of Dwellings : x 13) Trip ends (ITE) : ' 7.17 traffic impacts : S. 38th &, Talbot• S. 43.rd & Talbot 14) Public services : I X 15) Energy : X 16) Utilities: X 17) Human health: X ‘, 18) Aesthetics: X 19) Recreation: x 20) Archeology/history: X COMMENTS: • Signatures: ////'W/Y Ronald G. Nelson D d R. Clemens Building Official Policy Development Director 2 (g 4:44(/' and C. Hou ton, Public Works Director • "T PtAFPI[. Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 • ENVIIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (96) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north: east : south: west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : !� 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : , 777 A 4-, cYCa-S - I+-r 7r!/lm traffic impacts : j!° 7"a/Lol s '0G_L4-4 Ebb, `Yio /tea pv- e �� - 14) Public services : (/ 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities : 17 ) Human health: 18) Aesthetics : • 19 ) Recreation : G/ 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : o - S;/- 2 G�- T A ti 3-9 -"� Recommendation : DNSI_ DOS More Information Reviewed by : i itle : Date : a- o? / 72 FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 ' ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION No (s) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : _ ►� 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : ✓ 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; .north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : vv 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : _ 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : ✓ 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : ✓� COMMENTS : 4 �j_�.,z:� ,,� �r �'e � 4,te�;.; 7 ) /�6 :; ,%72/a,,. , 0(/r.:ppi) "�:(7s 1, 3 2 c< 5 ^ :`tom �' 3 /h. Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : 42/2 Title : L:. Date : .5/240-`2 ;� FORM: ERC-06 UTILITIES Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical. office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE • INFO 1 )- Topographic changes : ✓ 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : , ✓ 3) Water & water courses : v/ 4) Plant life : \ ✓ 5 ) Animal life : v' 6) Noise : t/ 7) Light & glare : ✓ 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : V 9) Natural resources : ✓ 10 ) Risk of upset : ✓ 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services : I 15 ) Energy : ✓ 16 ) Utilities : a/ 17 ) Human health: 18) Aesthetics : • 19) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : ✓ COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : � / 0,7,4itle : /)77 -✓T Date : C440 / /sr✓ FORM: ERC-06 I buc' • DEW. Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SWEET ECF - 046 - 82 . APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical_ office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : _ 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north: east : south : West : Land use conflicts : ,'41 e * GltS 4 oQ7d( View obstruction : 9) Natural resources : "lea aetL 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : Jl' C - 7 / ( e4 traffic impacts : /�4' 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : �- 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS g To 'C,�7`t!// ® e el/e4tJ e16:S iP cart -e! �e I$€d 4 / iee?e - /44 &at e TAetaaeGd1eA0/ Recommendation : ►)NSI OS More Information by : Reviewed fRrdep/s,Title : 7e4// l/. Date : 6 2/ g FORM: ERC-06 eauit.a. 4 =NI 1 Date circulated : may 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office huildinp with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : , 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7,) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction :_ 9) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : K 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : X/ 19 ) Recreation : X 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : 342)65" Olt 1--oe4-7z a? et,4-1s 7i o,v D' s 09I224J Lc) 1i1th rJ. /s �I�J9 loilo� Recommendation : DNSI_ )( DOS More Information Reviewed by : Y4 Title : Date : D FORM: ERC-06 FIKE Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 • ENIVIRC(IIENITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 Renton Pre Dcv; Fire erafor i LlaLj APPLICATION No (s) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) Krk PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building MAY, 2 1 1982 Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office bnildijag with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : •� 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : , ✓ 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : ✓ 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : ✓ 7) Light & glare : v✓ 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : • south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : ✓ 9) Natural resources : ✓ 10 ) Risk of upset : V 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE) : traffic impacts : 14) Public services : I ✓ 15 ) Energy : ✓ 16) Utilities : a( 17) Human health : 18) Aesthetics : • - V/./: 19) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : ✓ D S More Information Reviewed by : Title : /&-- 1 � Date : • FORM: ERC-06 r1 Date circulated : may 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1. 1982 ENIVIRONIMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 046 - 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office b1,ildinv, with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Strept and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (o) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : xxx 14 ) Public services : xxx 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : DNSI if improvements are made to Talbot Road and all lighting in the parking lot be placed so it shines inward on the building rather than on building shining outward. The building should also be equiped with burglar alarms. Recommendation : DNSI xxx DOS More Information_ Reviewed by : Lon Title : Date : 6/2/82 FORM: ERC-06 zit ?aril ag ill .ir r--c4Q; iv HAvrni 2C braluz5N Ca-dN • (WEN/ NI aht j24N 4t4 z 3Nn[\ Alki frl, 017,_ „ 1 .7,cicis9c) Howl op- oe-y,Ng (ANW Ncaratl N144 Date circulated : May 21, 1982 Comments due : June 1, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF — 046 — 82 APPLICATION No (s ) . SITE APPROVAL (SA-045-82) PROPONENT : Professional Building Associates PROJECT TITLE : Valley General North Professional Building Brief Description of Project : Site approval application to build a four story medical office building with associated parking. LOCATION : The property is located immediately south of South 37th Street and west of Talbot Road South. SITE AREA : 5.4 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) 42,200 sq. ft. DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6) Noise : 7) Light & glare : 8) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13) Trip ends ( ITE) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : Title : Date : FORM: ERC-06 C{T� OF RENTON OF RENTON OF RENTON --% APPLICATION fl M [i n ���A`l 1982 SITE APPROVAL 1,1 4Y 1 " i9a2 J FOR OFFICE USE ONLY � Di„NG/ZONiNc. D EPT. cU' D NIC:/7t t.:E'!' . ,- pT File No . SA- :11;4- " cam Filing Date 73 Application Fee $ ARC Receipt No . 77-V Environmental Review Fee $ APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 6 : Lo l�4 1► alCAl��^"'` 1 . Name, Valley General North Professional Buildinghone 3- 93 AddressJo1? (iLit)G-t• 1A5 (Ot 2 . Property location The property is located immediately South of South 37th Street and West of 96th Avenue South (Sprinkbrook - Talbot Road) 3. Legal description (attach additional sheet if necessary) (See attached sheet) o f1 n car .6- !&6.? r., -, N!NO • 4. Number of acres or square feet 5.4 acres Present zoning P-1 5 . What do you propose to develop on this property? A medical office building with associated parking. 6 . The following information shall be submitted with this application : A. Site and access plan (include setbacks , Scale existing structures , easements , and other factors limiting development) 1" = 10 ' or 20 ' B. Parking, landscaping and screening plan 1" = 10 ' C. Vicinity map (include land use and zoning on adjacent parcels) 1" = 200 ° to 800 ' D. Building height and area (existing and proposed) 7. LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER ACTION : Date Approved Date Denied Date Appealed Appeal Action Remarks it/ Planning D+ t. Rev° l-7 / FY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ' Application No. -0154 Environmental Checklist No. -Z'eA-4-161--eY.2) PROPOSED, date: FINAL , date: 0 Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the, following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should 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 will 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 "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND -1. - Name--of- Proponent Professional Building Associates 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: 3•. Date-Checklist submitted May 12. 1982 - - 4. Agency requiring Checklist City of Renton/Planning Dept. 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Valley General North Professional Ruildi. g 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) : The proposal is a four story. 42.200 square foot medical office building with associated parking. Primary construction materials would include light colored stucco or similar material and tinted windows with metal frames. -2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : The proposal is located North of Valley General Hospital with residential ' to the North, professional buildings and residences to the East, and wetland and freeway to the West. The 'site consists of a sloping plateau above Panther Creek= which runs the length of the south property. No structures are on the site. The plateau area is covered by brambles and grasses and a few trees at the easterly property line of the termination of 38th Court. Panther Creek's adjoining ravine has small caliper trees and brush cover. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Spring 1983 9. List of all permits, licenses or government approvals required for the proposal (federal , state and local--including rezones) : 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: The medical offices and clinics within the building would be executed under separate permit. 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: A bridge connecting this property and Valley General Hospital across Panther Creek trom the West parking lot had been considered as an improve- _ mPhf in the futiir.p_ 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- • posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? TES MAYBE NO (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over- covering of the soil? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? ES MAYBE NO (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? _X_ YES MAYBE NO (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X YES MAYBE NO _. _. __ Explanation: • In the areas of parking, drives, landscaping and building, coils would be affected. Some displacement, compaction and overlaying of the soil is required within these locations which represent only about 50% of the lnt: -3- (2) Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? YES MAYBE, NO (b) The creation of objectionable odors? YES MAYBE NO (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature , or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Some dust will be created during grading and excavating and also associated with standard construction proceedures. It will he limited to the construction period only. (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements , in either marine or fresh waters? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES MAYBE NO (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MAYBE NO (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? YES MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to • temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of X ground waters? YES MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either , through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X • YES MAYBE NO • (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection , or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates , detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO (i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X YES MAYBE NO ._ Explanation: Proposed building and parking area would have !Dore rapided runoff and reduced obsorption. Plans, however, call for on site. retainage, oil filtered and restricted return to natural drainage. (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees , shrubs , grass , crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora? YES MAYBE NO (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X YES MAYBE .10 (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Building, parking and landscaping areas would reduce the existing vegatation, but landscaping will use indigenous plants and up to 50% of the site would be untouched including a number of large trees screening the Eastern side of the building. .a: -4- (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? _X YES. MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? YES MAYBE NO (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? YES MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Building and parking area will reduce existing scruh brush and. associated fauna, but up to half the site and the productive and sensitive areas along the creek and ravine are being preserved. (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO , Explanation: The increased traffic will create limited associated noise_ (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or X glare? YES MATTE NO Explanation: Parking lot and general building lighting will be designed however to eliminate all offsite glare. (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including , but not limited to , oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES MAYBE NO 4 , Explanation: AMk/ l/1/di/r✓gi Ns/fa/ y(Mt//f/a/di/Vi/ily'/Void Mid/a/d'Yc>'i/difrfcl i DWI/ah/gfii/g'h/o"s/p/iNaN/amid'/a's//s/uW AVVVV/h'aW/sta'f' '/irtt/iiia'cla del/ a'a thf 1/6 d Wait/Ws/e'.// /s/i/t!e'/d'e'niVi/t/j M o'uW MAN/i/richida's'd/ / vW b(l V d f d/cif/f bf AVIA/r/o/u'r►/d'>/rr"g'/a/r✓da"/v"du'l/d'r/'/i /ddIddfi/ddall'W/d11dth'd/ (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population X of an area? YES MAYBE NO .Explanation: This building is a support facility for the adjoining, enlarging hospital and as such will have staff and personnel associated with use. On site density would thus increase, but growth rate of the surrounding area wouldn't be noticeably effected. -5- ( 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Some additional housing for the building users may be created . as part of the economic growth in the Valley General Hospital zone. (13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? YES MAYBE NO (b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? YES MAYBE NO (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YES MAYBE NO (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , \\\ bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The development of this building would increase traffic in the immediate vicinity of the building but this will be greatly/mitigated by the L.I.D. improvement of 38th Court and because of staggered patient scheduling. (14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in 'a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : (a) Fire protection? YES MAYBE N▪O (b) Police protection? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Schools? X YES MAYBE NO (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? YES MAYBE N▪O (e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: This proposal would increase local population and thus need for all government services but would not individually require new government facilities. (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require X the development of new sources of energy? YES. MAYBE NO Explanation: Energy needs of a building this si7P would not suhstantially impact present energy sources or require new sources, but it would require normal energy loads to operate. (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities : (a) Power or natural gas? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Communications systems? YES MAYBE NO (c) Water? X' YES MAYBE NO -6- (d) Sewer or septic tanks? YES MAYBE NO (e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE NO (f) Solid waste and disposal? YES MAYBE NO _ Explanation: All service hook-ups normal to servicing this type of project. (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? X M Y YES BE NO _ Explanation: 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- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful ack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: ./r (signed (name printed) City of Renton Planning Department 5-76 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel No. 4 of East Valley Medical Park Short Plat recorded under Recording No. 780815-1009 , and being a short plat of: That portion of the Southeast 1/4 corner of said Section 30 ; thence North along the North and South center line° of said Section 30 , a distance of 250 feet; thence North 8906 ' 03" East 950 'feet to the true point of beginning; thence North parallel to the North and South center line of said Section 30 , a distance of 421.49 feet to the Westerly production of the Southerly line of a tract of land sold on contract to Joseph Mance and Betty Mance, his wife6 recorded under Auditor' s File No. 4687718 ; thence South 84 17 ' 00" East along the Southerly boundary of said Mance Tract and along the Southerly boundary, of a tract of land conveyed to Joseph Mance and Betty Mance, his wife, by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 4643926 , 813 . 77 feet, more or less, to the Westerly line of the Springbrook or Talbot County Road ( 96th) Avenue Southeast; thence South 6°00 ' 20" West along the Westerly line of said road 520 feet, more or less, to the North line of a tract of land, conveyed to Ivan G. Unbedacht and Phyllis Unbedacht, his wife, by deed recorded under Auditor ' s File No. 4696849 ; thence along the Northerly line of said Unbedacht Tract North 74°39 ' 53" West 674 . 52 feet, more or less, to an angle point in said Northerly line; thence continuing along said Northerly line South 8906 ' 03" West 105 feet to the true point of beginning; Situate in the County of King, State of Washington. • AFFIDAVIT • I , C` PC 43 is , being duly sworn, declare that I am the oiner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and 'sworn before me this / Q1 day of 0_K , 19 S71.., Notary Public in and f r the State of Washington, residing at . qata_a_e__AL, (Name Notary Public) (Si ture f 0 n ��- ��� 0 227_ - r/ ( 'c (Address) (Address) 1 p a-re e I ( -LI . (City) (State) 3 0 � c-, Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received , 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 ;r kepi', r N ! NG OF FILE FILE TITLE • /' �+! 4' • r � • F • � r' .r 1 ceipt # ; ,`..: CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT NAME DATE PROJECT & LOCATION Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee TOTAL FEES Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor. Thank vou.