Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA02-040 (1 of 5) Print Map Page Page 1 of 1
King linty Rome . News Servi es Comments Send')
Parcel Map and Data
;::3224 59034 '
Lake Washfn to
_N40THST :
7 . 41.11Vij 0.,-
{C)2002 Kng C' fir.. 0415. '0420 ..
Parcel Number 3224059034
Address i" 4300 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N
Zipcode
Taxpayer BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC
The information included on this map has been compiled by King County staff from a
variety of sources and is subject to change without notice:King County makes no
representations or warranties,express or implied,as to accuracy,completeness,
timeliness,or rights to the use of such information.King County shall not be liable for any
general,special,indirect,incidental,or consequential damages including,but not limited
to,lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuse of the information
contained on this map.Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited -
except by written permission of King County."
King County I GIS Center I News I Services I Comments I Search
By visiting this and other King County web pages,
you expressly agree to be bound by terms and conditions of the site.
The details.
http://www5.metrokc.gov/parcelviewer/Print_Process.asp 3/11/2005
•
• 1/, .5)-ta,v6 crYt. nka-A-a-11 0-1"4-1"-
. WitCH°93—MED
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
,Robert Cugini ✓Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Barbee Mill Company Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100 Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98057 Kirkland, WA 98033 (party of record)
(owner) (contact)
Nancy Denney Greg & Sabra Fawcett, DDS i/Campbell Mathewson
3818 Lk Washington Blvd N Family Dental Clinic Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98055 PO Box 1029 2140 Century Square
(party of record) Fall City, WA 98024 1501 Fourth Avenue ste: #2140
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98101
(applicant)
Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mgr. Greg Fawcett Tom & Linda Baker
Department of Ecology PO Box 402 1202 N, 35th
Northwest Regional Office Fall City, WA 98024 Renton, WA 98056
3190 160th Avenue SE (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue; WA 98008-5452
(party of record)
Attn: Rich Johnson Attn: Stewart Reinbold Dan Frey
Department of Fish &Wildlife Department of Fish & Wildlife WSDOT
PO Box 1100 PO Box 1100 • 6431 Corson Avenue
LaConner, WA 98257 LaConner, WA 98257 Seattle, WA 98018
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Wendy Giroux ark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes
South County Journal • 3711 Lk Washington Blvd N 8606 118th Avenue SE
PO Box 130, Renton, WA 98056 -"'Renton, WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
(from Goeltz Gloria Brown Gregg Dohn
1501 4th Avenue ste: #2600 1328 N 40th Street Jones & Stokes
Seattle, WA 98101 Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way ste: #E300
(party of record) (party of record) Bellevue, WA 98005
(party of record)
Bruno &Anne Good Kim Browne Bill Dunlap
605 S 194th Street 1003 N 28th Place Triad Associates
Des Moines, WA 98148-2159 Renton, WA 98056 11814-115th Avenue NE
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98034
(party of record)
G. Goodman Dave Enger, TD&E Joyce Kendrich Goodman
3715 Lk Washington Blvd N 2223-112th Avenue NE ste: 3715 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 #101 Renton,'WA 98056
(party of record) Bellevue, WA 98004 (party of record)
(party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 1 of 5)
'
�
�
'
�
'
LJ cc
�
Ml(,CROFILM
_~D
'
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter Bob Fawcett
3815 Lk Washington Blvd N Jones & Stokes 305 Second Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way Issquah, WA 98027
(party of record) Bellevue, WA 98005 (party of record)
(party of record)
Edith Hamilton Mark Hancock eslie Kodish
3714 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Susan Martin James Hanken Marlen Mandt
1101 N 38th Street 999 Third Avenue ste: #3210 1408 N 26th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
atricia Helina Dennis Law S. & Nel Hiemstra
4004 Lk Washington Blvd N 3625 Lk Washington Blvd N 3720 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Allen Lebowitz vtynn ManoloPoulos (Rbert Lange
212 Pelly Avenue N Davis Wright Tremaine 4017 Park Avenue N
Renton, WA 98055 777 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) #2300 (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004-5149
(party of record)
Vi<arsha Hertel Marcie Maxwell L'latt Hough
3836 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 2048 Ortak, Inc.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98033
(party of record)
Al & Cynthia Leovout Kay McCord Ande Jorgensen
PO Box 1965 2802 Park Avenue N 2411 Garden Court N
Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Torsten Lienau Tim McGrath Mary Kammer
HDR 900 N 34th Street 51 Burnett Avenue S ste: #307
500 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
#1200 (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004
(party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 2 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Terry McMichael Kim ;rowne, - eent Kevin Lindahl
4005 Park Avenue N Kenn •al eighborhood 3719 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Associ 'on Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 1211 '1. 8th Place (party of record)
Re on, A 98056
•arty of record)
Keith Menges Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Cedar Homes 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N ste: #A203
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party'of record)
John &Greta Moulijn Barbara Questad R Lynch
3726 Lake Washington Blvd N King County Wastewater/ 1420 NW Gilman Blvd ste:
Renton, WA 98056 Treatment Division #2258
(party of record) King Street Center Issaquah, WA 98027
201 South Jackson Street ste: (party of record)
#500
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Linda Knowle Dorothy Muller
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Kennydale Realty 51 Burnett Ave S ste: #410
Fisheries Department 1302 N 30th Street Renton, WA 98055
39015 172nd Ave SE Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
Auburn, WA 98092 (party of record)
(party of record)
Misty Kodish Mary Maier, David Nestvold
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106 May Creek Steward 6608 117th Avenue SE
Renton, WA 98056 King County DNRP Bellevue, WA 98006
(party of record) 201 S. Jackson Street ste: #600 (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Douglas R. Marsh Michael E. Nicholson Sara Nico� MO1-4 "
1328 N 40th Street City of Newcastle 304 B Pnett Ave N ste: #A
Renton, WA 98056 Community Development Director Re n, WA 98056
(party of record) 13020 SE 72nd Place arty of record)
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
(party of record)
Don Robertson Neil Thomson D. Sabey
1900 NE 48th Street ste: #R101 PO Box 76 21410 132nd SE
Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Kent, WA 98042
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 3 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Scott Thomson Amy Norris Ramin Pazooki
PO Box 76 1900 NE /18th Street ste: #I-202 WSDOT
Mercer Island, WA 98040 Ret r,-WA-989.56- 15700 Dayton Ave N
(party of record) (party of record) PO Box 330310
C�o25 Co LJJ SL Seattle, WA 98133
Wet ?FrUU(I (party of record)
Rich Schipanski Fritz Timm, PE '- Virginia Piazza
Blumen Consulting Group City of Newcastle 1119 N,35th Street
600 108th NE ste: #1002 13020 SE 72nd Place Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue, WA 98004 Newcastle, WA 98059 (party of record)
(party of record) (party of record)
Josef Schwabl verly Wagner 1. a.ry C. &Yvonne Pipkin
3921 Meadow Ave N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1120 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #D104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
(party of record)
Jennifer Scott Rich Wagner Herbert & Diana Postlewait
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: Apt #1 2411 Garden Court N 3805 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Richard Weinman Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham
270 Third Avenue Raedeke Associates 3907 Park Ave N
Kirkland, WA 98033 5711 NE 63rd Street Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98115 (party of record)
(party of record)
Robert West Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Kevin Sloan
3904 Park Ave N 3830 Lake Washington Blvd N Pan Abode Homes
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N
(party of record) (party of record) Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
Doug Williams Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith
201 South Jackson Street 3724 Lake Washington Blvd N 1004 North 36th Street
MS KSC-NR 0503 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98104-3855 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
John Wilson Dustin Rayarles Wolfe
1403 3rd Ave ste: #300 8936 132nd Place SE 1111 3rd Ave ste: 3400
Seattle, WA 98105 Newcastle, WA 98057 Seattle, WA 98101
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 4 of 5)
•
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Linda Reutimann Bud Worley Wendy & Lois Wywrot
1106 N 38th Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N. 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #B202 ste: #A104
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 ; Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record)
Mike Cowles Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling
BNSF Railroad 2108 Camas Ave NE 527 Renton Ave S
Engineering Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055
2454 Occidental Ave S (party of record) (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98135
(party of record)
•
Gary Young Monica Durkin Cyrus M. McNeely
3115 Mountain View Ave N Washington Dept. of Natural 3810 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Resources Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Aquatics Division (party of record)
950 Farman Ave N
Enumclaw, WA 98022
(party of record)
Cynthia Youngblood Ahmer Nizam Jim Johnson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N Washington Utilities & 3921 115th Ave SE
ste: #A103 Transportation Commission Snohomish, WA 98290
Renton, WA 98056 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive (party of record)
(party of record) SW
Olympia, WA 98504
(party of record)
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko (Amy & Cira Reymann
3837 Lake Washington Blvd N 2125 NE 24th Street 1313 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Eileen Halverson vAlex Cugini Steven Wood
16226 Crystal Drive E PO Box 359 Century Pacific, LP
Enumclaw, WA 98022 Renton, WA 98057 2140 Century Square
(party of record) (party of record) 1501 Fourth Ave ste: #2140
Seattle, WA 98101
AKte_
(party of record)
Cutl c Grr\
�ti N h PL.
I�-et2 wok VOsto
Update: 01/18/05
(Page 5 of 5)
•
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Robert Cugini Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Barbee Mill Company Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100 Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98057 Kirkland, WA 98033 (party of record)
(owner) (contact)
Nancy Denney Greg & Sabra Fawcett, DDS Campbell Mathewson
3818 Lk Washington Blvd N Family Dental Clinic Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98055 PO Box 1029 2140 Century Square
(party of record) Fall City, WA 98024 1501 Fourth Avenue ste: #2140
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98101
(applicant)
Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mgr. Greg Fawcett Tom & Linda Baker
Department of Ecology PO Box 402 1202 N 35th
Northwest Regional Office Fall City, WA 98024 Renton, WA 98056
3190 160th Avenue SE (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue; WA 98008-5452
(party of record)
Attn: Rich Johnson Attn: Stewart Reinbold Dan Frey
Department of Fish &Wildlife Department of Fish & Wildlife WSDOT
PO Box 1100 PO Box 1100 6431 Corson Avenue
LaConner, WA. 98257 LaConner, WA 98257 Seattle, WA 98018
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Wendy Giroux Clark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes
South County Journal 3711 Lk Washington Blvd N 8606 118th Avenue SE
PO Box 130 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
Tom Goeltz Gloria Brown Gregg Dohn
1501 4th Avenue ste: #2600 1328 N 40th Street Jones & Stokes
Seattle, WA 98101 Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way ste: #E300
(party of record) (party of record) Bellevue, WA 98005
(party of record)
Bruno &Anne Good Kim Browne Bill Dunlap
605 S 194th Street 1003 N 28th Place Triad Associates
Des Moines, WA 98148-2159 Renton, WA 98056 11814-115th Avenue NE
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98034
(party of record)
G. Goodman Dave Enger, TD&E Joyce Kendrich Goodman
3715 Lk Washington Blvd N 2223-112th Avenue NE ste: 3715 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 #101 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Bellevue, WA 98004 (party of record)
(party of record)
i
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 1 of 5)
•
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter Bob Fawcett _
3815 Lk Washington Blvd N Jones & Stokes 305 Second Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way Issquah, WA 98027
(party of record) Bellevue, WA 98005 (party of record)
(party of record)
Edith Hamilton Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish
3714 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Susan Martin James Hanken Marlen Mandt
1101 N 38th Street 999 Third Avenue ste: #3210 1408 N 26th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Patricia Helina Dennis Law S. & Nel Hiemstra
4004 Lk Washington Blvd N 3625 Lk Washington Blvd N 3720 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Allen Lebowitz Lynn ManoloPoulos Robert Lange
212 Pelly Avenue N Davis Wright Tremaine 4017 Park Avenue N
Renton, WA 98055 777 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) #2300 (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004-5149
(party of record)
Marsha Hertel Marcie Maxwell Matt Hough
3836 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 2048 Ortak, Inc.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98033
(party of record)
Al & Cynthia Leovout Kay McCord Ande Jorgensen
PO Box 1965 2802 Park Avenue N 2411 Garden Court N
Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Torsten Lienau Tim McGrath Mary Kammer
HDR 900 N 34th Street 51 Burnett Avenue S ste: #307
500 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
#1200 - (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004
(party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 2 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Terry McMichael Kim Browne, President Kevin Lindahl
4005 Park Avenue N Kennydale Neighborhood 3719 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Association Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 1211 N. 28th Place (party of record)
Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
Keith Menges Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Cedar Homes 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N ste: #A203
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record)
John & Greta Moulijn Barbara Questad R Lynch
3726 Lake Washington Blvd N King County Wastewater/ 1420 NW Gilman Blvd ste:
Renton, WA 98056 Treatment Division #2268
(party of record) King Street Center Issaquah, WA 98027
201 South Jackson Street ste: (party of record)
#500
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Linda Knowle Dorothy. Muller
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Kennydale Realty 51 Burnett Ave S ste: #410
Fisheries Department 1302 N 30th Street Renton, WA 98055
39015 172nd Ave SE Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
Auburn, WA 98092 (party of record)
(party of record)
Misty Kodish Mary Maier, David Nestvold
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106 May Creek Steward 6608 117th Avenue SE
Renton, WA 98056 King County DNRP Bellevue, WA 98006
(party of record) 201 S. Jackson Street ste: #600 (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Douglas R. Marsh Michael E. Nicholson Sara Nicoli
1328 N 40th Street City of Newcastle 304 Burnett Ave N ste: #A
Renton, WA 98056 Community Development Director Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 13020 SE 72nd Place (party of record)
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
(party of record)
Don Robertson Neil Thomson D. Sabey
1900 NE 48th Street ste: #R101 PO Box 76 21410 132nd SE
Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Kent, WA 98042
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 3 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Scott Thomson Amy Norris Ramin Pazooki
PO Box 76 1900 NE 48th Street ste: #F202 WSDOT
Mercer Island, WA 98040 Renton, WA 98056 15700 Dayton Ave N
(party of record) (party of record) PO Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133
(party of record)
Rich Schipanski Fritz Timm, PE Virginia Piazza
Blumen Consulting Group City of Newcastle 1119 N 35th Street
600 108th NE ste: #1002 13020 SE 72nd Place Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue, WA 98004 Newcastle, WA 98059 (party of record)
(party of record) (party of record)
Josef Schwab) Beverly Wagner Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin
3921 Meadow Ave N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1120 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #D104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
(party of record)
Jennifer Scott Rich Wagner Herbert & Diana Postlewait
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: Apt #1 2411 Garden Court N 3805 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Richard Weinman Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham
270 Third Avenue Raedeke Associates 3907 Park Ave N
Kirkland, WA 98033 5711 NE 63rd Street Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98115 (party of record)
(party of record)
Robert West Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Kevin Sloan
3904 Park Ave N 3830 Lake Washington Blvd N Pan Abode Homes
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N
(party of record) (party of record) Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
•
Doug Williams Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith
201 South Jackson Street 3724 Lake Washington Blvd N 1004 North 36th Street
MS KSC-NR 0503 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98104-3855 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
John Wilson Dustin Ray Charles Wolfe
1403 3rd Ave ste: #300 8936 132nd Place SE 1111 3rd Ave ste: 3400
Seattle, WA 98105 Newcastle, WA 98057 Seattle, WA 98101
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 4 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Linda Reutimann Bud Worley Wendy & Lois Wywrot
1106 N 38th Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #B202 ste: #A104
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record)
Mike Cowles Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling
BNSF Railroad 2108 Camas Ave NE 527 Renton Ave S
Engineering Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055
2454 Occidental Ave S (party of record) (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98135
(party of record)
Gary Young Monica Durkin Cyrus M. McNeely
3115 Mountain View Ave N Washington Dept. of Natural 3810 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Resources Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Aquatics Division (party of record)
950 Farman Ave N
Enumclaw, WA 98022
(party of record)
Cynthia Youngblood Ahmer Nizam Jim Johnson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N Washington Utilities & 3921 115th Ave SE
ste: #A103 Transportation Commission Snohomish, WA 98290
Renton, WA 98056 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive (party of record)
(party of record) SW
Olympia, WA 98504
(party of record)
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko Larry & Cira Reymann
3837 Lake Washington Blvd N 2125 NE 24th Street 1313 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Eileen Halverson Alex Cugini Steven Wood
16226 Crystal Drive E PO Box 359 Century Pacific, LP
Enumclaw, WA 98022 Renton, WA 98057 2140 Century Square
(party of record) (party of record) 1501 Fourth Ave ste: #2140
Seattle, WA 98101
(party of record)
Update: 01/18/05 (Page 5 of 5)
®099S Jam Snapp slags, ssaippd ®AURAY V
Steven Ruegge J H Baxter&Co Barbee Forest Products Inc
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#204 1700 S El Canino Real 4101 Lake Washington Blvd
Renton, WA 98056 San Mateo, CA 94402 Renton,WA 98056
Gardner Hicks Robert&Elizabeth Lange Port Quendall Company& Fka Jag Develor
4008 Lake Washington Blvd N#4 4017 Park Ave N 505 5th Ave S#900
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104
Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develo , Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develol
505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104
Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develol Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Neil Thomson
505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900 PO Box 76
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104 Mercer Island, WA 98040
Patricia M Helina Gardner Hicks Clarissa Fawcett
4004 Lake Washington Blvd N 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N#4 4008 Meadow Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Barbee Forest Products Inc Timothy Hunt Thomas&Caryl Hunt
4101 Lake Washington Blvd N 3908 Lake Washington Blvd N 3916 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
1
Bruno&Sarah Nicoli
3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton,WA 98056
1
®099S Jo}aWidwa;as vuslaays peed vIlooLuS
®0995 aaste1 ae813 swirl sseappy ®AU3AY
Mclaughlin Properties Lk Jon Youngblood • Lois Wywrot
PO Box 60106 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10
Renton,WA 98058 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Darrell&Linda Igelmund Ronald Hutton Therese Luger
900 87th Ave NE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20
Medina, WA 98039 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Darrell&Linda Igelmund Gurel Mehmet Lance&Caren Gibson
900 87th Ave NE PO Box 1921 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B 10
Medina, WA 98039 Lancaster, CA 93539 Renton,WA 98056
Maria Flores Kimberly Ann Kelly Rande&Celia Cruze
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B 10 Alan Robert Konn
Renton,WA 98056 • Renton,WA 98056 - 5105 Highland Dr
Bellevue, WA 98006
Mehmet Gurel Kenneth Carl Roy&Cheryl Lynch Jr.
PO Box 1921 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20
Lancaster, CA 93539 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
•
James&Jane Harrison Lee Ernst Rich Foster Inc
2259 74th Ave SE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 4150 Old Springfield Rd
Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton,WA 98056 Springfield, OH 45502
Juan Francisco Anguiano Castillo Bruno&Ann Good Charles&Sharon Lynn Harwood
Linda Stonich 605 S 194th St 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Des Moines,WA 98148 Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Dane Egenes James&Jane Muscat Gary Gibson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#203 1308 Queen Ave NE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Andrew Newing Colleen Allen Beverly Wagner
8815 116th Ave SE 4100 Lake Wash Blvd SE#D103 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Jason King Paul&Amy Houser Jr. Nagamine Pt
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D 2230 Squak Mountain Loop SW 2783 Freedom Blvd
Renton,WA 98056 Issaquah,WA 98027 Watsonville,CA 95076
•
®099S aoj,awidwa;esn wistam4S Peed qwowS
i
Mclaughlin Properties Llc Jon Youngblood 1 Lois Wywrot i
PO Box 60106 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10
Renton,WA 98058 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
<
Darrell&Linda Igelmund Ronald Hutton Therese Luger
900 87th Ave NE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20
Medina,WA 98039 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Darrell&Linda Igelmund Gurel Mehmet Lance&Caren Gibson
900 87th Ave NE PO Box 1921 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B 10
Medina,WA 98039 Lancaster,CA 93539 Renton,WA 98056
1
Maria Flores Kimberly Ann Kelly Rande&Celia Cruze
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B 10 Alan Robert Konn
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 5105 Highland Dr
Bellevue,WA 98006
= 1 —
Mehmet Gurel Kenneth Carl Roy&Cheryl Lynch Jr.
PO Box 1921 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20
Lancaster, CA 93539 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
— -1 r ,
James&Jane Harrison Lee Ernst Rich Foster Inc
2259 74th Ave SE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 4150 Old Springfield Rd
Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton,WA 98056 Springfield, OH 45502
Juan Francisco Anguiano Castillo Bruno&Ann Good Charles&Sharon Lynn Harwood
Linda Stonich 605 S 194th St 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Des Moines,WA 98148 Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Dane Egenes James&Jane Muscat Gary Gibson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#203 1308 Queen Ave NE 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Andrew Newing Colleen Allen Beverly Wagner
8815 116th Ave SE 4100 Lake Wash Blvd SE#D103 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
r7asonKing - l-Paul&Amy Houser Jr. -< Nagamine Pt
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D 2230 Squak Mountain Loop SW 2783 Freedom Blvd
Renton,WA 98056 Issaquah,WA 98027 Watsonville, CA 95076
_J
Steven Ruegge J H Baxter&Co Barbee Forest Products Inc
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#204 1700 S El Camino Real 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 San Mateo,CA 94402 Renton,WA 98056
l <
Gardner Hicks Robert&Elizabeth Lange Port Quendall Company& Fka Jag Develol
4008 Lake Washington Blvd N#4 4017 Park Ave N 505 5th Ave S#900
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98104
> — —
Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develol
505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104 • Seattle,WA 98104
i - r----
Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Port Quendall Company&Fka Jag Develop Neil Thomson
505 5th Ave S#900 505 5th Ave S#900 PO Box 76
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104 Mercer Island,WA 98040
Patricia M Helina Gardner Hicks Clarissa Fawcett
4004 Lake Washington Blvd N 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N#4 4008 Meadow Ave N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Barbee Forest Products Inc Timothy Hunt Thomas&Caryl Hunt
4101 Lake Washington Blvd N 3908 Lake Washington Blvd N 3916 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Bruno&Sarah Nicoli
3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton,WA 98056 •
j — r 5
1
•
P.Lsr
xI BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
KING COUNTY
. WASHINGTON
FILE NO. LUA-02-040
PERMIT APPROVAL
PLAN UPDATE PACKAGE ,:.•
JANUARY 3, 2005 . °08`- , ••.�A4s
w _N �- ,/ ' 'o
SHEEP INDEX --,4c �1= � 1
PROJECT INFORMATION t%`
V.
m 1 EMIR SITE PUN AND,LDPOGRAPHY UAP OWNER �,' \
'Cod R040100.00 BARBEE MILL CO. Q �. d is, r
of owlti+u CONTROL ux 4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD.N. ` >.
OETARED GRADING P.AND GRADING EIEVAr0NG P.O.BO%359 • .i F:i'a}f F=;. °�i
01 2 DEwEEn G Km AND GRADING REVATIONG RENTON.WA 98057 __
y o
CONCEPTUAL.. NG PHONE(425)226-3900 / S"'° '-" µ i= �,y
E? CONCH...LANDSCAPING RAN u ��F'c-q T' I•
_
E 3 MI.PUNTING DETAILS
r1 I TREE CURING AND.0 CLEARING Pl. �
r1-2 TREE CURING AND UN0 CLEarox4 RUN
PI 0 CORPSHEET AND SLIE DATA 1
P2I ORP SHEET
pAN PROJECT ENGINEER .tf..". p� �E4_'- '
FREEDMAN AN PUT __ - `•~ '+Y�E H'�- -
P3 2 PREDMIWAY GRADING AHD DRRN0GE PUN 10230 INC.' sop. moo. 4110
O
P, PRELIMINARY UTILITY AND DRaHAGE PUN KIRKL NE WAPOINTS98 3 #400
PRELIMINARY.OR UTILITY PLAN TELEPHONE:
O,WA 98033 scarf
P1 x oREuulNvry unurY PLAN TELEPHONE:(425)822-4446 IN FEET
-002 RAILROAD CROSSING-NORTH AND
D PRONE FAX:(425)827-9577
NH-003 RAILROAD CROSSING-SOUTH PUN AND PROFILE PROJECT MANAGER:MATT HOUGH.PE
PROJECT SURVEYOR:BILL LAWERENCE,PLO VICINITY MAP
9
6
3
4
9
8
R
C
1 I
I4„E.• C a
III Incorporated
8 'se a'a Loan NE Pofou D<IADO
.A.IRO_EOV'L.ID' 014Pho 60(.0m480
-4448
Iu«o zH tAY: (l(CS
lannet OWNM
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
r....-, BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
...,_
/ %oA tot• , 0
......-.-
A'BrY APSA'OOLrI_CSP
EEAA:
PT TLCEO.MPPUABNYU SHED
I X
.c. . ......
F.e.
''.4''' ilt$:143119,i.ttC•-•.' 7''&'1'9'',1;:'„. '4''-. '9 LAKE WAS H I N GTO N fli
' A—,-.' Erg -7-0-.1 '--i--..,'.9",i.''• ."
",..._
g-- k.i...-.00.0.o..i.sq.• ,tr;'•'"tt...... ...,..
k,
a
:41t-.-PIQINI.45'41gir.,"EklAkErZI ,?,....1111•••.; • ' I 1}- -•
•- giall-alP"Lot.' .6p. LPL?.4tat --",--•m .1'5144,..9.tii,
a 0.14.EL.`:, t ---...ialn... ., . A*:A... 0,,v , ,
<ig
:- *R-'7137 imiz
.r..=n 41 .: a P•al 07 , 7. , ,,,,,„.0,,..,„.. _.,.., WASHINGTON
.- :..-' ''l '.-•-i;
eft\
*- 7*' ---i„. .1 " ''``•4. N,Zto Illt ‘----- c-
.:' ,.2.4(- ,,,,,,,ta .:isimliCs-RM AM' '.. .;',1 ,• • •,,f1.4.- , ii., .„..
6',. ' 7. - = -2.I.% ::-.-E, 4,-.7:-6. 4:: a ..:72 i.--:,-1.'1, ill
'..-g '.7 ' ::. L.A.Waszt--- .,,ikirl .../•%4v,r,,41, --,:g'-:.—iiv-- „ :,,,..7, - 1 •°\:.:,.., 111.- " tIP..I.E9"
I
I, 4 .....C.1 .. ..."- • ', - .....--9 1 .......' ' ' '''.n --m- ' •"1. I jV '', I- 4"Er' ,ti!. S. i,7. 49 P-i. .. ki iir ,-ttir_,--.3.,
„.„.4, .. E4', "2 m p,I%Id•':' "'"'A ' .413'5-9 ' ''' ' 1 I• I' I
°
: -,I.T.: ';i ' ..TM 9,7 .• -,-, : 3 -.'.' .50';,;. : ..e, 101•L' '" 6. ,6) ,.. .!'4 7 . .
1
VACANT 0 i , (
8.1
141„r-y.-a.,.., . •IN , mt !i4. ,.. uino lig . • .k. t A Lk .14 •-.1'r4-3- 7. grI. ..w,gr-„.:P 0°2: ; '''' lk
A vi ... wir vok v k .m—........
i..t., .1jeTtlitri --121."`P''''Fa'l *';' ,s:15‘1`6404. t , '' 1 ' / - '
..11 F-•N.,ri.. -.1.. Tic' AAA_ - ,a ,Th...,A_ R, . . a., . . .0.. _ir:j... r q q -.4 %,,,,,,..49,;:,,,,- ,:e44,44 ....
AN I§
...,,
.. , _wt._ ,.._. ,,, ... ,_, ..: ..7. li,.. . ,, , . . x .1,1 ,... e
" > J r7-, . < ,,,, 1 4 • ., Rog
1.--,...:..., w--. P. ''714. TAill, ;;Er 1€_. 1.4' ..• it, o"..E1,..4-.-1•-- -: ti' -4-- ._.,ci 7:-, 15-", -.E.,.1..": i. ! -', - . 1 -; • , ,..1 CI • , '44 '-', 4. .'0 ..‘1 ' 0, a. 2„,13&
-Et"--1! Efl ' --1 -... zi- 1„,0, .„, - ,:-• ;:-. --2'ILLI,i,-;,, f42 2 hgvp '.r- '.. e ,t•
4/ tr.,k, /-/lit':0 :
P-''''''s*-pi,Eue.1 ' u4/ TLria;."- i'-' 1.11,1it. :-.: 1,a1 CO.L---- s'' '''W,".' '',,,: •• •• ' 0 7 ' . .4.4 :21,... .t.,,,°?...!i .4":".':..."N“..."?.44:'0'.;"--,,,,,,,..„.4
/ __ .1:- e.--,,..r__..--i.: --::,i;j::: 0111....,, %4.".:-; .:::..it, '. Iiii.,1 ,..._„.•' :".,,I.:._ ,1:_isi°:.. ;': :21111
---=-.-P•i An -----.0 -----------....
if*N1 ,.//•'%41 ' .
, • °'- 71-- 4-'
g.F.. . ,....:
S , IP iiiril:-1 , LI ':c2TEF": ''. 41 lang 11111-11 7
ill
I, T i VI ,21i' -1-----"'•-......,...1.:Ht 2,,,,,,,,s,. 'o* / 4,; Will 1'I.11 :' N
•,,,,
,, ., .,.,-„, • • .„,,,,--' ,,,. • /..9,,,
. A. 4.! '-'''- A-.• ---.AjAr' 2
-•.F
a d'I lf: I= c
-
: . f.- -;.;\
..--:".--"--- .....,•''A
C.,,. '<c,„. 11!„ 1, :_. ' ., i, gs,_,!_rn' re,,w,v4. 1 , .? j .,,,. 1, al i .j ,
., ,--wizo ,,'"---r ... , •_-- . _
• -.... xi =
-.... -4:.... — - 6 <,1 ,,5"„..0-4411 ---,-- 9 ' ; . .•• ._. _ 0 (24 0
-,1, 1-7---- ,...,.111-' -
. 1 . ? W i--'''' •••' --'-'-':'-'-' --Z• - -. - ai".•••'- r.--1!)1 Ti 5,1 - I:1 Z
_, I.• 1-...• ,ER.
i %.. ' iglorigor—r-i-, ....---; . .: . `7! ,.."31).„----•:.-- ---. - -. =2,3_ 5S ---- Q r. t,..1,V1J1* -, -N,
...-
v:,
;411,,,,, A r• : .\-,' = '..... k 1 W 7._,---0V--, 5n,i4
=
not wa_ i ----1. . # 0 z _,--. :...,.
.- ,r- r t. r'',14A . -1,-,. r . i(931..::#:_t_ .-- 1 9f.RE-NTOB . ' -,41:g"4:f71111111111411E*.- ill .•, -44'A - • o a
.•s ___-. - IS = • .
Wriffl....S NENFASTLT7._ 7o ,_.. U_ •,••
/0=
.0.-- i 'A' ' '' IF!• = i ! °
1 "P•i . '
k UtifMtlE,UL4 11061 $7...14111W011.2 C TY1.0.FR NTIPN'?, it--.....dermr. I 1 il'AIW,...„j ' ,p incor-P.,..d
•••• IMO NE PM.Od9e!'••' : "OVIAratt,S All 1111,"? 111111 '' •'..••:••-••--- - --lItTN AYE. 9 A WIP- - .4 SIAA 400
,..Erten,10.1319mtoo 08011.2. 1.---.e.\ ". ‘.\ 'I &Li 9`....''..34 ir• -NA ,11EPB9 B.,* ''• CITY•F NEWCASTLE
1.1.,10.11Y7'0 , 11", 4..kg,...lik: 10 ...,"'. -'--. '. ' . =IMO • 1 1 I ,...., PEP.MOM 822-1.18
...s
• '''''' \''' r• r ''..,. ' 'Sy itilliet • s
‘.., all 1-''''' %, '','E . 4.: • : •::,: -..-1-A- : 2..1. ..; I ' F
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
%PET UST
Uncle BARBEE MILL:;-PRELIMINARY PLAT -��'
02095190 OVERALL.- PLAT PLAN / '
a:osala., / /4":.: !
n nZ1:-: / y: •• 1
L•
'9.,,, r ,,.,
. • e ,/,.:,::.....
,..,?,,, WASHINGTON ° 0 ;ell' •'".'Ir;
• ,/%2y, ,'/ /. /..,' 7-------, 7--
3
1 COR-2 ZONE iJ ,`C ' ''lc If.'
io
•
'''''' /
- n-� �i_1-JL: -J L_ J L•�i �L 'J ` /•/ ( C . , e
-tet,i,if__MIL'°a, ,
LAKE" ; .. ✓4 -s= a' s/' i %v,� _ n
WASHINGTON y,._ =�Y�'' � — A � _ ""1 ... -,--- 3 -; dal r IF
I �n /q �p
f /,j o1000'
11 i C__�'1. r�— RA J / ,:�/ so., IN
wFEEr V1 '1e
w 4 % ' < C_=' {/' / VICINITY MAP E• m
' ' .( LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
-==J _ / ,1\ ''J
e //�\J�^ e 1 ALL, , COED CLASS
' . / FEWAY.IXCEPT THAS PORTION,M ANY,OF 9AID SHOREWNDS LYING NORTN OP
�;,=v v I , '� " � , P'v =_-+`^' WESTERLY PRODUCTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT HAT 1. W
__�J°, 1�1 .•. ' `\y '^+I -1 (, T' YY// SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF MG.STATE OF WASHINGTON. g Z
` /'` ,/'*'!,•/ FLOOD HAZARD d
., ' _/// • / THE 100 YEAR roam HAZARD Is colovano WHNN TEE NAY CREEK SANIts I-
r tl ; AJ /i'Tu
i { a
:', 1kr7,_1 �, ,' �- �__ LEGEND 0 W
9 zi
i•. ++ :/ } Ai M. ! " ' ,, LAKE SHORELINE BUFFER AREA- •♦J
9 Y" �r "� !•e /�J; / '" WJTS AND GRASSE5MRED TO NATNE () ;
6 , •/ ® t`:`T Y�`" i. !` % '// !!\ 7> -- 7 MAY CREEK BUFFER AREA- {.r O. ;', , >�P 'u i-{' /'; BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMITED TO NATIVE r'
�i:'� "l{,iY�..i 1 /!' /\// PLANTS,AND GRASSES fr/+I
�\�'_ � . !'!.-.:/ / ,[./ 115'MANAGED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA- it
Y ''' A_�' m\d , // -�/ /, \ ��`^h!AND OTHERMANAGED LANDSCAPEMATERIALS ro O a
9 ,�� ✓`_1 •%y�% I /i/7/ `\ ® °yC� Y v0 Incorporates
.... ..... � /, • . ' I �:Y 4. 10290 A8 Pokute'.Drive
,:e. ,
0 1Z.ZIV,Ir
•
t ,. - S` % _ __ -- __ -- -- _- __ . O'�I _ P 30 1
_ / / / �i Zj 209.00100
f . CO_1
N 40TH ST. 2�E IN�T�
-- Shoot I of 3
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
f N
L T t5
EXISTING' SITE PLAN
wmat Y.
.g�8193
SCALE I
AND 'TOPOGRAPHY MAP / °
/ / • / N FEET $
° 3
1.
ms
• // /14:Y7 I.=
/i , f e,t7 ( ( !8
w ! .12
___ //- /2//rI ,,NEW t.y0
lk
1 oR.-zsD ___ �--�_-.amp_-,r, - -ter _-'=-1' /7. l',7. �� .i i i,,p(�',^ �: "
- _ o +�, to
1.HORIZONTAL DATUM GTON STATE PLANE
// °I,:.....•./.
L / —'ICOORDINATE SYSIFAI(SPC).NAD 93/91.NORTH ZONEiii,
I ' I 8.Pll OISTPNCES SHOWN ARE GRID DRTINLES.TO CONVERT
LAKE -- %��;'::'; � 1 Tp crspuNODIsrM+cEs MULnPLr m1.DOo9nm.WASHINGTON T I - - n/<��.:' '., � 3.vmnul wTUN:ruw 6e
OOT'G COUNTY) /< Il '�y/` ♦.PRIMARY VERTICAL BENCHMARK:MOS'GAOINGSTA'.BRASS
y'�/- STAMPED VSGS'SET W A DRILL HOLE W THE SW- _ j CORNER OF A URGE SLOPING CONCRETE STRUCTURE ON gTHE NORTHEAST SIDE OF A 36'CORRUGATED PIPE PIPE
I AR Imo -Y/S'I f !�j/ THAT HOUSES A STREAM GAUGE ON THE WEST SIDE OF •FR
y,'-- L� �� / THE EVA D.CREEK BRIDGE 8.LAKE WASHINCTON C•.
�II1I� 4 (y�, BOULEVARD.EIEVATON:R8.91 FEET V9
lV 8.TOPOGRAPHY IS FRONDED BY DECROSS AERWML MAPPING � a$
Y� // WITH AM.CONTROL BY OTAN,INC.W IW3.
hog
® /7-,
��/ / f A' `r/' ��%( 6 BOUNDARY LINES SHOWN ARE FROM ALTA AGSJI. Rm$n
d
- 3 / /-! /�. IMO TITLE SURVEY OF SOUTH PARCEL FOR JAC
/ DEVELOPMENT 8f BUSH.ROED.&HTICHINS,INC.DATED ,wrz ,a,,j'
Tk_��T'$$ 11 ri// Bf1S/98 AND A HEIL SURVEY BY OTAK,WC.W MARCH, F�;�
____„/'.','r::;i,; \ ,'� � +-BENCHMARK � ....
�S
' 17y"' / ' a
'.,"/"/ ;tz:/
55a w„,- ▪ y
1 'I 1 '' r / .r
ali
0li y" , - / S-&n/,,N.1 ...,. � PAa\
„„,„,,,,or I ' ' //, y
/ QI Z
z 1-
9 2----
.t T V Eos _ °_ t4// /` / ,• LC wisjR y,.,y, /i%
4-1
_ `, ,: y,;j'6 ,,. !. rot• o a
// DELTA I`\ �, , /•I/,/ /% / N$ S� ` Incorporated
_R -_/ TH6 ENP WAS CREATED BY ME OR UNDER MY
/R' r r ��''m'"' DIRECTION.
„ _/ J�'Y1 / .' ..,' [iL/"!' :7'O5 fy 30209.001 001
Pro,ect No
Av+ %� ` /`.(.'If/ �..: WIl1LVI C.UWAFNCE.PLS DATE SM1eeCO_Z
R _ azD 3 ..,,?' :/ Y N 40TH ST. I s eel 2 of
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
LtateN i
iteethee BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
mete
T.6E. 1
TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTIONS
-47'iv g
T . 60 ma
c ao• ''. • 1 a PUE I
5, 39 R/11
E 18 Huutoo _ k,
Z s
5 le 16 16 16 5
0 5 TRAFTIC UNE sou / SIDEWALK 0 5 TRAFTIC 1ANE
I TRAFFIC UWE o 5
'7:1 TR'F'C \>‹,,,, 2 1
-9-N EL ,,>'
',
!/ ';'';‹ %•<''''WgW/• ,` ''''N'wm,,•-7.7,' 79F,9,; : :•,;;‘;,, ,, ,-,Y.>„' :-,,, ,, ,„)
o or
1 i. ,,,,,,. i
OFFSITE ACCESS COLLECTOR STREET STREET"C°
NOT TO SCALE STREET A(STA.19+50 TO END) NOT TO SCALE
I Z
- 81
1 1
BRIE AT:'
BRIE i 12 Pia I1 i 26 1,/,,
21. 1 I 8 PUE i
AN. T3 E
1 13
1 SIDEWALK o 5 LAMM LANE 16 S'
TRAFFIC o 5 STOMATA 1 1 5
10
WPC LANE 10
0 5. 1 TRATPC LANE0 5 1 1 d. Mg 11
'''''': --- '''',:,, '',• ;->‘,,,, z,;',/,'.',4& y, -Z.2 M
,—, (./)
0 z
iS)
ONSITE RESIDENTIAL ACCESS STREET PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT w o
w W
NOT TO SCALE STREET A(STA.2+00 10 STA 19+50) NOT TO SCALE a, u)
STREET B
STREET D i
STREET F
0
g I g rs.i IY
gI P‘I _1
ROADWAY SECTION NOTES
B
0 3'ASMET CONCRETE PAYMENT.CUSS a Z al
1 iaa
0 2'ASPIOJT coNcarrs PAVEMENT cuss a 4-,
F cS;
®::trrvTREATGE°Or E):E =
OVER S.CRUSHED SURFACDC BASE coussy C o a
It c,CDIENT CONCRETE CURB.OATS / (e) ---..,
1.-. .. 1
0 Incorporated
7-: C#.
,.., 0
Z30209 001 001
1 Project No
CO 3
'1 Sheet 3 of 3
, ..
PORTION?:OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
• 4./
p,-7 /, -
.---_-"_-
v
= F--8—', --' —,
--—n.17--- .L.._.'_."--X_T.,.\..._-'•,-.•-—__-‘,'3
,,';_-:/"-=Z•-_--•--,--_-;1-,,,,_C',s-,.,)„-Z:-_‘,-..,' , - 7/.a g'4'r,AZ'ih',.vlF
ksi/'l• „S
1 C20911630
v .,
22 ' ' -C.. 4 / i !0
21••'• 20 19 18 17 16 15,,; 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 . 6 5 4 3 2 j---7.,;0P/, //,'
1 ./.... 24
:,1:99Asks ,., ,
, \ AY c •", /1/
.2/!.;111* ,1 0 0
11
I ) ,/, ;f/
---•
25 "-- -
, -.9 ,-,,,i,4;ne, AVIiijA.fflif-r..''.11:M 1:E.,.9 -.9,..i .-9:9./;,• ;9-1 •9,';',:9".ii::'::.•''79:71'4 -,r1",r4,110ES,' '","MaelL,11.,1,,10=arr.. 11 ittaltir..•:'" / / •
,
J , ..-• -- ' ''', 4 &I''g43644/*i ; kilLAIIMINittfirEe-slii - ,:g_liE ligt smEerl -!;:''.:,;:lf,gdtkiallmi:,liatiz„, 140,411e liar :- ;,,, .* ...5
26 , . ,. -1iiv„--- =- -- ., • -=-,-->-. ';///-
.L1 4 ittP0. '
...,_- ' \ j-7T.---- '•!':':3'! , I ,
.
-- rir
//1.•::,40.-'''' 6,''Y' , 14,,,/ _'._,•
/ • ';‘,te
.1 11,'• ,,
I,' 0
-I'
/•
'.; , I:*,,-- 28 • ./ „
66
84 •• ,,,-:' ,5
A , #
/
.9 i,r.
10i/ ,,,,, 55'''. 4 '
/I/ /,/• 8,
"„---, ,,„., ,„,:c0 mit• ,0.0- , , §
..,. N,•,, " ."',-,,_____ !
F_, a ill
88N•'.., 14;9•3+;... ./ / ls _ . 1
....
..„,.., „ ,'''‘ . T.,L.: :i: ';,•,,e',P- ',• 1 a Ht..,
.‘,,,,,,,,,..... 2 .'eak,. i%i - .4, 40•000P
90 63/
.i.'2',I 31 IL\ti•;,:•',. ..'•••'•••.; de -, ' 1....... .-- i,----;.-'.E'ltfilllia / #i• . --- -- '-,-_-',$. y.., 0 oara.
- .),,,,rir- • 4%,-2/ f 4 <4
t - 4. ow ''';:;:i;?\>-. .„'::;:'-'-'.-.4.7 .':',1t7- ; 61 / ,414--,4 .„,,-.1‘••••-''...9'.''I Z
,i,,, -.•;.1,:,..52,, ,ht::gf! , 594\ A /C„ ,
// ,'•43/ '/4' r.1 0-
•F *r.,.4,.:1/4„:‘,. _.,.1!7.
3° . \ /.01:=1:Z-1_4_Z-i---- ,:•.-_-•,':/"2 4,;—.7.,->s%'777,v,41 \. / ,4., ,,,,,r , 1 ki
:2 1 /atV 4.•4.41%. -- I'S. '4*''"--------:----------; ")147-;'''''''''' /7 1.1<Cti _,._T :II.' I c..___1
..6,
.,ts...,.....„..
'.;,), 00; .1,'tb--;\./,)<I_____/01-;0.--',;.6,-'r- 66
M _,"'' Ai.•• '''11; ,s•- .4A,' :;"--',,,---5--f-7-0'7 ''' 00' y //I
.•e. ' --- ,','/f 7 ,' #
. :----,:-...; ,,,,,--...iiirir.= /,,, / /,i
•WI l'f'4?-1. .!!ff-4 -. ,....=// -0' / '''.\.1•2\.*.--- Att,--------- '' •'./•'.,,e 4 ______ _ .1" 4,\\.7.t.,F.LZ.R1IW- ,,., -;.,---3-432- ,• .",(4, .,,V444'0' hi
,,, ‘,...s,.._ ,,,,I I' r - , X "It, ALS,'" -'- ->„--•"' ,),:t, '.1.'
? L_____t . ,,,, , ,,,„y,.) 'it' -— \ .%/;A:=-:
A , 4— s, •1::54 , , -,/,:--,!,:' •• ,4,,, /;,/,.. • : ,,,_ _ --__ •• • .1„, .,,:4 I " —A,. 35,,,,,„,1! i ic, ,_. ;:.4„, A#
,, I ,/, I
.... /,'I";I,'1 filie _.-_-',2 i.',;' 52 „
g SEE SHEET D1_2
LEGEND: '7\‘' I 1 C9 0 a
MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 I ,' i: i g,
23
PROPOSED CONTOUR ! ()(1 I : 1
-24- EXISTING CONTOUR-.-PROPOSED STORM DRAIN ,.,
i
PROPOSED CULVERT
o
RUTTIER ZONE
E
• STOMA CATON en.
30209 001.001
• STORM DRAIN MAMOLE
RETAINING WALL "'"'[71_1
C.Ca RoccE9V
i
DU,1 270 I F1165.9 Row
Sheet 1 of 2
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
"*;,Twev.ii,
Ltacoler 1
• II7,44A'r''• SEE SHEET D1_1
, • . g
,35).' ::.:.7,-,-,;,.5._,..,,it-zg.1,-,137 -,,/2:, <"
C2094270 I 1 14. ,/ I,',I,:cik?):41 ;'...,;I: L.I-, k,,‘.,,,--:::,./.,-,..;:,-;' , -:;',-.; e\--4,_,4. ...",..,,- ..•I '- „,. , ,, er „ ///j ij/ /
02091130
02098190
. ‘,1z.zi. '----7: ,,,t,,,•,:i; ::-.-4.;.---H------ , 4'4',-'5'1"
g=1
kt.IHSE.41. :,,,t e Il, 35„O II 7.4.,4'., <-77 ,":44?",./,\9, '' / `4•• , ' 03,,Ple,7 ,' 'I''...7 „.•"-":-52 ,. .K.V../ / /,•../1/-
02098193
I.2094701
g=, . ,:',,t'' __7_----- 17,-',A1,/i' ly'iiij. N','.•,-.-_--ii, --',‘ \,‘,,‘94"-V,.Z 9.? ..'••,4- "1..44\ .. •,•,•. . •' <,4 „,„', ,,,,,,,;,/,/ ,/,/,22,/.-.../4/_, ,,.
C2094500 I . ,I,. r/--------TIIII'; %24'Ilk 4•Ii.-at,--': , 1 1
I.\•1... ‘ ' //It/ 4: ///
3 ri
,ii.„.2„._ ,,;.-•A,,', -.. i 5° `,,,,:',/,.0 Its,,. •,> )",,*" ,,,/Av.\-t,"„q.,,term,-,.,,,,.ST!\41.1,1itE 1144//W,2,44// // ,,4//I i 4 y,
: .1t1. -----_,,,, . ,.5,• , 1 ,,,, ,i,<:‘, ...„.. /^ .- -)__•-- ,, / ,,/ ,'
11,
8---t-, \I.:-A\ \ /'' ''fr* •I / / #.1100..„•._—.•%,--4-:,-.•::,,:_;• \////,/,/,/// /
E S
'I ..,_!.1•.•:I—------,,,'OM\ 'q 19---,/' ,',', xi,,./ „;,^ / ..,mffie j-----V:.-_,. ..y.,,.::-.-7-±-';, --,),),y i',ef,-4.?7,,/, /1
;:l.WIN " ,1, \;:[!t", ••.! , , ,/,/,`--- • ,(/7-- , *T0-, • • ', pl.,„-44 ..;4, e,',/,,'',// '
.E•49.9, N _, / ', \A9*.4I, 9.'',\ / x.V,. i/:9,, . ttp.WW,/,' 115 1,9.,1/41 4-,-4,,t4 ...,',//;'4, / /
,.
Nwi
I
../ , ) #7/ ,,,:_ ,, __-_-_-.-.-;,,,:, . ,...y.f.1:.:14,,,, , ,,/,,,,.„
1.1.WONIINENON
' ". -."--''''1 " ,1 7,' '4, I , / •
.,..;.;•• „- __,, I ' 14 r a i X-4:----'-'--1.--!CI'.''r------i' i.,'91`.(-,N; // / ;XI/ i ,,' ' ,, ,.4t
, i)
,. ;, /,, /, ,. , -_-.--;/- - ,,,:i-mq----,,,YN,•,,/.-, /7,N., ,, /,,'
1\‘‘`'t,''''.' r--_ - -1-1 '. / /1/011<4. NOR.; //,
i .':/,‘:.• ' \ \ \ o, -4, i ,'"; 4 ^:',, .
4
41 i ..„', // I' ,r. , 41,; ,
c,,,,,,,,,,, . /• ,, • /,—, „4,.,4,,,,(,,,,,,, ,,
I
5 .f: --, -,/,/ l,104N ,, .41‘;;t4g-',-,' / / /i, ,/ '''%//' f•Ak( ---- ------
,S ; 4, 1 li , , ,,r,''' ' /ai"-, ..„;;',2;r/',.././.;//,'/,'?" '''' ,4://
,i. ‘ . ,1 t,.- / - ,4 ; it. , ,,,,,,,47,,,, ,,, •,/„//,/ ,/ ,., ,,,,,,,,oz,_ .
A, ,........„.„.2NN --_,_-- / •., )..) 1 , , „„,„ 0
43, ; ,,,C...-.. ,,,,,.; --", ,.• .4 / ,w9 l';',',1.1'4FH•l,',Pi ,/,',/,,-0.4.s.-,/ <,// ,/i 'A' 81' <<V-"''-':'‘Y. '/ ///ii'llit.''.'•J "fe-',''' '°1 `-s 10; i
,:(, ,., :;::\4+•'‘`.‘ ,,,,,/ ,/ ;rya: ,,,-; /,' /, ,^, s. „,i)"-, / ///;I, i /7 ,
‘. ‘,44.' , `.\\ ,i /,/,..,H:4,`,..gr ../ ,,,, ,/ io' '___•,‘,-,-7 ',-,g/0 /- ,,,,,,, • ", //,',.&,‘ //, _ ....4
DAZ Rs?
V--/; '; '%'.-;4.\\\`---- s' 7,•';.-.':'‘'''41:" / r.' /,..."';'----- 1-",_,,,//ti,:://7,,,,/;',//‘4,-,.// f",;,,('',"4,,,/
/ to
,i,,,,,,,::,:,z•z: ,,,,K :::, ,;,‘,,s,,,s 46/.„.. .,, 4,., ,,,,,,;, ,,/ ,,,it ,..,K .,,1...„,,,,, ,4,71/ ,_/,_/ ,.:,/,/,„"A,...-/,/,!,/ !,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,
2 z
': (72':''' s\4j's) ' ,.er.VY:' ..e• //,` /44--y-, ,0'3:‘,,,/ ,/z."/ /- //,../e,/,' d/;',////'-V„0,'
i ': 4; -----1.- ,.'w..-' ..-"*.Y 4' ' &Apr - •, ,-:. ,‘, 7—'4- //' //,'Sr'"'-•!"0 ,,,,,," , g 0-
a. 0
ce
d '2
, - ,•., • • . .... ....._:_,..„. -___:------ , .,. ,,,,,,,,, ( / ./ 45714..F // / 1*%<:-/-c,f-'="'" . ....//' / 1-• 0
0
LEGEND:
;-0.% . s\. ,,;01/,'N'.'•1,1° .' _Z„it/// , ic*: ./i/ ,)/ ./..,/,';/:'; 23 PI N
'/ PROPOSED CONTOUR
i ". / ZS-,e't: 4•441.,"4):' ''' '"/ 4,6,t /1", '11" , ///"%3 9 9 ?,//p-1_,/ - ',/ '.', / ' Orr" '' '•'; ,-,- EXISTING CONTOUR
—sc---PROPOSE°STORM DRAIN C r°4 <
•,4 xi z U Et
i
/ =Mr •,::‘ .:',.:`,,- otAf.d,_ -`;',`,",‘)5.__ ,„.„'„,;"'„gtY ,',Y,,,,' ;71 c-',c,/,...f ,/,;;;,/ PROPOSED CULVERT
BUFFER ZONE g M °
a
,,-;< :: i ::)•''''''R'' \ ' b ,\--/-' 0:,,,,,,--,4 ,/,/,/,'• 4',, - /,---/. /.;-,, • STORM CATCH BASIN
'5
• STORM DR.MANHOLE X
; 4,,,•9A ,3''s,',/. 3 ' ' / .. ,—, ,,).,,„",, ,,,, ‘,‘ ,. ,t
-:,-' ‘..•, ,s,i.;%;r.... , 's ,96,__,,,_" .•%7 • /,
COM ROCKERY Z
0 0 a
/
/.....---Z. -./.. ..i.Aints.j.e.;',''',:;„:;:h", -_'-_-:,* 'NA'../:'•Vi cP,',', ,27 0 I F•1•IED FLOOR ELEV.
U „ .
/ 3 4/s,".f;..e,•r?. '-':. ----- "--9 \',OT.'n, 3/2';''', // , ,/ ./ '.',/1'
0 IFIC.FPDra'ed
‘t,/ /.V. 4''V tAl
,, „3 ,
'Z- .' -"-- 9i\ \ 'k, /,,,,/ . ,., ., / ,/ ,.,
! , - r_, ,- \,,s,,/, , ,4/ ,,, , r /
30209 001.001
''.
Km' °.' 3 / „/"' $ ,A,'
D1_2
S88.1.15.5 439 36' 1_--'11 I ' '' — --
,D.. IN RET Sheet 2. 2
Z
PORTION:FOF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
.REF N=
Nseve 5s w oas:sr/ Clyz
7NF ST 4
cx::u¢w i I24r __ - •n+bi'r✓! t ...JY Nz �' •'lrr 3
"'� %
1 22 IIII`�2T \ 20 19 18 17 .
I
ARID II zea I. 8 ® ®i I2ToI �M1,` 12201 Ivol I27o1 IR901 1280I 7 6 5 4 2 I, i';' /�• !'g
I _ .
I ,- +Dtd I I :L,
25 y_y _ / /
1 •K r •,;-off', as -a 2:oo';', _F. a%1i>m-+ z ,,,„ , ;,.-. �--,,3 _ /
5�
-- - / `i ,, _-'-- . ,,.4,--e—,,kr_ _ mow.,,:. - ' - _h --6M"'- a5f$A;; / %•,
T
,,��:.' i 'Ha ,:;,,., ....: ,- e y Mt; {� _ t_RBTREET A - '' ' _..._. _ �,�. €s a
a // •
1113� '- � / a• 1:0001 ems'i'sOi '�� // €
j 2] .l c d:3 75 ]6 77 78 79 ��` .. / /z- ,/,, Hya z.N,
f 2D0 , ��'77!'M� z/DI/Iz/.0 n0 I 74,, 73 x72 eo 71 /z0 r69 / rr Nr �.
h e+ l eo ® • .:•• L nn l a-ao o it
dre,"'SilillIliit,, , it(--,-; ,',
;/ , �
I \ 24 7r. 1 \ i. J;
\ 29 '/'t' I -__-1=250I C1_yM vo."0.00,0,0),n 0O I� r :2% �I
m I 1 :Ez -- TO=Ott Bz �he 66 fi7 : / /
, ,I \ i. ®:1 ,\ ;,\
xaa �II/- . • __ _ zs
/
.
%
/ /i I/: �SOuOtt-t9L F. li�tln18
M1 � 1,...2 /`,
� � - ✓ -.,
rS§
ra
J �E ►
z�,NP T E: 8 I51 4 /ro
_
W W1�N,
ry
i"L \8 \
\ arr
I' �9L_ r B '
/-...Idilk.14**
:
_ -- / - ' 1 g� WSv _, w_ :3- r- - T ,4 r. / ,7;II o � 61 ,
/5 I� �� 94_ 1II i1285'I -
=, � ," \iyi: 59\,...-6. - --_ " ,-/ A , / / 1
-'� 4/ '//•• Z
o i r 4-
-'
_ _ __I }} �=� R °r � ��"/ 'rV � /' � Q8} j I �_ Ii_I�� PhiZ_ / \
I° ' '� '=- ♦ il \ /r r Ib "rl v I 1 �, z0/•
I 11 -- -- `i/:tt g4l/ a y '
Y I1 3a pj __ '''5 . / fi ' # • 1 . _-, 1� " F: iJ /
, 1 \i_gTf g
W0�/ 4' / , ,,e / / 0; ., a: .' ,-- � t, � 1, I /0 '' i � mi,"/ r, OWwi I1,1r rlyya � rr = Jz .' / /�I / d� 3ii Aph K j, / •i a W Cp,g s I-- I� / ® ' S � �' �` �. . / / �, r zeo I / i ✓ltii/, \3j 61• y� `" '� V4®@a" ^ Fy � 3 t
1I N. 261 ' i' 10 , �,. Sa r"` 'f ' 1 / / 1 a, ,r — ..jl i I ilnnr,: , r ,� , , , 7 I
gidl I, j
I =SEE SHEET G12 LEGEND: MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 ; v 10, O o a
PROPOSED 001T0R /
EARTHWORK DATA (APPROX.) U I. ;-.
--- 3 EXISTING CONTOUR--- XI r I Q Incorporated
EXCAVATION: J2.000 CY(90.000 TONS) -1
—SD—PROPOSED STORM DRAIN
6 nu, 38.000 CY(80.000 TONS) PROPOSED CULVERT ✓✓
N01E: UNSUITABLE IXCAVARON SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SIZE - - DIRER ZONE O
TO AN APPROVED OFF-SITE LOGRON IN ACCORDANCE H • STORY CATCH BASIN
CIT THE Y OF RENION STANDARDS.AMMO L FILL 1 BIIN E z,
TO BE PROVIDED FROM A LOCAL SOURCE AND SMALL BE IN • STORM GRAIN MANHOLE 30209.001 001
WITH
ACCORDANCE WITH CRY OF RENTON STANDARDS. RETAINING WALL AOl NI.Cl Ci RROCKERY0MEM
R FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. 4S 0' a0'
Nw
SCALE IN FEET Sheet I of 2
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
SEE SHEET G1_1
t
cxavewo ,1/ 1i4ry4 ��" 57,` ,:%-- ilk '"b"'- 'r
JH
1 t _ _ ,. �• F,`N e r' m'1 38`-- ' \ TSRn£ N` R/
@ a, _- • 1st 1 __ I 1' �r ; T
39 ,-9 I.- � „`
NT � �I ';. '
.0,_ N .I;, , .4.' / WW,k
�•� y I rLANE WAWema
rvii
, , ,iii 1 �l l 1 aP4'' `� *�I ��`t'I��'i jly I �
Y 41 , ry5a �i ..9x/ //�` F �/ `•v2i77�17c1v�"
1 I :I 1 %/,.' ICI
rl MP.1 �eel`' / '' / . o // i,, �#', S
, Iza42 ir'�:::._ �I; �.I xs\b/`�:R�",./' i'i'�//' // I'',:�
' i ._N ( 11)(;;;;
' .I.vzs I� i�,''" ,�/'„"/'/'' / / ��%,/,p"i''�, , Ils / ,//.'('��/! / /7?: / Na,;/ .51
ti' T % . III. N`,1� / I Pea6SN' / / ''�' c�i
\-- i ,,. .,/
/f/ / %,/' ""� 106 "- /'/ ,',:, V /%,' .�-/`� v Wig®
`di 1 `fl19 r /, , f LEGEND o
/ 48 3 /"' .,,,,,./.; ,,
/ . PROPOSED CONTOUR ¢
/ - EXISTING CONTOUR [i] Z
.dry _`1 I/�/ Y/''/ —SD— PROPOSED STORY DRAIN
\\ `y/ -—
-- __� / , 0 m#}..�,.', / , /- / II, PROPOSED CULVERT d N
r'3• Il l l /•ti Pj %' ,..1. '. j, �I I/ W BUFFER ZONE Z
` _ -^ "' , / /-,� STORY CAT.BASIN
I\ / //,� • STORY DRAIN YANHdE H
>_ . /
, too . : ;� = 41 CC
/ -' h`•, 1 // xeO /:// / RETAININ7
,� / i ®' LIIIISNm RCM EIF/. OW WnCINARr / / '/..//'�/'/ TER YARI( �RAI I - \.98. .< % .'/
s -/: i ; , ;, �. /,!,.:./.'„,',”,'
/ EARTHWORK DATA (APPROX.) ¢
/, -*, til./' '' / 1 / ExuvnnoN: azaao a(m.000 roNs) a�.v
$ /'.,.' /'" E1LL: xAoo a A o � T�.'' ` THE CRY"REM/ / ...+. �./ r __- TO AN APPpCVFD-� ''.•�:" • // /' 'Yi' % CN STANDARDS. I.
INTERPRETIVE PANEL //1cti 'Si t;(if �` f IncorPoreled
s / ,'il / (_....________,„-..f-, i /_ /, .` ,, :% n x4' , ,/,''' ' - 30209 oot col
saera'u-E usss' —r s— %,,{--. •,/ � asis 4r E:^',' -, J r ao' o'�<u. G1 2
E F',E'll-_� I.I „ is//, ./ 'rSN 9a' ..,% r' S;G — E-1� — o
Y SC4f IN FEET Sheel x of ]
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
u.n.,
•
��F
oze�vo ...y .. __ __ __ NB�aB� 10
e9N o0209 BM —� r -, ,,_ 3
...T. ...�J 23 i __ ' - r ___ ___ 1- '---1 r- - i 7i•� �S 3
♦�� f__J .+•A.: III 1 % '_�:°.
11`r....4 1 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 ^�,- ��, d'S:
♦ 24 a •15 14 13 12 11 10 9 6 �,�p$,ryLaaavuI` . J 1 ' ,Fayar�l. 7 � 6 5 4 3 20II 1 �% :.> 1
, ;:'14 25 ; I�� tlt -- 4a,e�� e_��_+�..�� �_�i �� -J1 i' p`• /
,1..�a _ �J /'_� n_ xa+0o-c�.a x -�_ lY Ov`- _ __ Y(P/'J•l m
,�♦��_- - ` �aX.. - N,._-`_-•-S'� c5 6_.yy. - t _ ��w_ MO j-. /, 6
. Ci't ;4y, o )' �..-- s -� - /
26d. _
, I. A0 Ai.,
• O _
v.
1 1.;* ' 75 / 75;r / / ' ,Y• of I IIIr /
�♦ / 78 /79 T60 \61 y/\ 82 4r1 72 71 70 69 i '/ / yVMY,;
4 28 I hA1 g • iD( :•o r.i.'`��- \,./'a4OA 41• •o O is*% g --_- �3
//
♦♦♦♦ } /'{ '' i DcDO ;74 lT is L - - J L. L----_ l' / III d'
,
eAECT
'�♦�♦-�_`__��� a`:• syl zFp „I \.�✓OBpp SvOD (f�a[I YtRT47
•• • •'at.c''''''..\:L_''''',,00;,...0 --tiCO='_`. ��Fa� 130 1
1 .
.
^� yea.� �' J __
s / Y' ``> % 63 /•• /.
•Q.. 6 m,�14
3Ok 2 mil/:�ee ; •• aC+
aLL
------- Y, Nam'..
I 94 s i 1 \ \ \
�1.
' '-- I: �% 58 1 1 ♦♦♦4;;•;.:'.:, `...J N /� I j 1 pW
(:`1n+• • I 1 �e ��, 1 57 1 1 � 0• 1/, , 41 s j
1 �� i '� /
Y C.yl: !♦♦ 34 1 �;m/9 11 1 Tl l ♦♦♦♦♦ ; / , LLl • 1 ,,,,[„; ,/
til
2 R:�: ♦♦ 35 .: ;I• 11 "\ 0♦�..+•♦' ... ,� .: � 4/i
- •p♦ 36 1 '/•"7k' la \' /:...*- _ �i6F• �'" .{iA'- ", ' I
L` -�-r - .}ctil 1, ! p
+ i , Nv � `zp' ' , .a::-'- -_c__`_ _ r-�;
SEE SHEET L1_2 ▪ a.I ),1
s Plant List NNA� MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 1? I,I . U a
F 1 0 STNBOL B 0 NAW COL6809 NA./ 6VA0w0• ...0L, B...... S,xtBOL ADD SxxBOL 9 ��
Y 7RAa IIIIS u fDW E55 MW.12'O.C. r� LS �""� Pie �N 5E5 LANE SHORELINE IIFD N IUTNE I •
O -
• o--iy{gFNFCIPRIS ORNBA 3-a•6t' WETTANO GRASS SEED YIX a(BG,000 SF
°- 0' 20 d0 60 � Incorporated
0-- ppTtARp5[ ]a'HI Am EIX BUFFER AREA-- 4•+ 102z0 NE PaivM Dmv
•
MARSW41's SEEDLESS A. 2•CAL gg59, 0 BIOSWAtE GRASS SEED YUI a1B5 PT000 SG ,..© fFAS SHORN
EA PµUNRNGS DNIIED TO IUTNE Salta 610
fR4gHUs PFNNMVPNICA SPS OCAS N N.5'O C is LV1T5 egg i-1 LOLA,11811NL®08,13
7%77 '18.69U CS SEFDI FSS' R © 9 CfOSPPPIM DS INA IIP51 a.POOTS 5 MAN FD SCAPE BUfTER AREA- O PEonc1R5)
8.-1118
E e,,F91Nial� Ipnav ereA I2-?I6� FARBERRY I-6• C. ® AND OTHER.N CED WNSCAPE WiERP. PAR.I�)PTP-BSP
lU1JP reEE 2•CAU, za O.0 EROSION CONTROL CRABS SEED MIX Z 30209 001.001
r a''' SP AS `,•„2, 0.113C TREE TO REMAIN ® CCAOSEFCOMRI HEDGES IBJ?o.C1R. I' "1 1'EllrM ALL DISTRUBED ARFAS AT '""No
IEIER OF PROPERTY-4 I65(10005F P. L1_1
APPROXIMATE TOTAL AREA OF LANDSCAPE Snttt NP
s sO.Ff.-233,5a2
A[R6 a B.T] I ,
eat o J
,.
PORTION OF GOVEI3 NT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, RSE, W.M.
SEE SHEET L1 1 At
"
"'•*____ :,�: v-//�:-//..?aN'\ \ 55 !•♦ \ `••' •�♦♦pew♦J'..>2.
:.
IIS
C1BRR5OD .... Iy'
.cgog
• J8 �' �... �) f �...� — •`•��6'SOFT SURFA RAI�.." 5�p
g11 ` 1 1 J l 14 ••.,/ ••. 115 ♦ b %J i i
♦ 1 ;/ 1; i
LAaB wAa♦Anw ao ` ;\! / o l / /, =.,/.:v°
' 4 41 I .',"I frV,A,r..,.N,..-.
! - A4• !\ ..11�. / /,: 7/ / // ./, '• w ,"rt a;
_ (s,� n / 171 / : % 11 rFmunmWno m
♦ - az f I - la\...-- P 2 \�1� 'dew ' / /. 'Po/ I . /'
/„.
,`- 43 / )� 1.♦• �. i /y/ •mOB`as'S9• /; i Plant AM1 Q
\�/`'/, � /♦♦•.. l % %//y , / / ., R�/159690/%• / / / IrlanLL Ll.T'6 VQ
.'"'':.,•• ' / k,.\ ,� j , 108 / //„.-/ ,O - 1,..35', /; ii- / 00 s"a ,�G
/
11 "`♦♦�� - ! /.f/ ♦♦♦''' .. I,./ / / * y� / /: SYMBOL' A 4"4 AM. �� eS
• • / . • a /: / EGON l5 IIFOLu �SPPLINO Cr
\ //./ip
•
•♦ /
`!i0 ' �/ toz _ / ;i ��' (94-KA ORIF"Ar"Po5EZA -9437 p, E
�`; i!i.- 4�iS� \ ` • i..; 10, i/ e i /i: i )/ !f'.;;?, IX,0 TREE TO REMAIN a QZ
iT s l : :• Y" V '; „" 4 / // d / ,,„/
/ O wFruND mss SEED MIX 4u3s/pp1Ls sF �t
\\ ,,, :::;: .14." too • / G\���' ;',�+/ k..., rns,SEED MM t11,;,S) /!
°ry /, ✓ zip"- \ ....y�♦�♦ \ ` , e!4• /'/ / / / L"� BURBERRY U� 1-6.O.C. 1.I w Q
`•.♦ -,, \ /��, �'/'S%'4 •I/ / ® 000s nm L,EL D r S a1B3?o cHT Q w Z
s 'z'• sh�zz''�i♦••. �� 99 .�5.,' /�� // � ' \�I/ C�;;;1 LAI`FFEa"n"w°1i,"ixcsU�'irED io ruTrvE i'' p�,+b 7
EORDINPAY r <, .: T••s, ,/ , / ,•; / PIAMSEfK BUFFEP�MFA- (' d -
/ AIER NMK T� 98 / S•, I / /' / `"� PSY.VI4GA"FD LANDSCAPE
ro N4,NE (� CL
f.
/ DGRPASS
R - .. .. //;; !� 97 / +� 5 CAPE BUFFER PAU-
` ` \ "e'r.s. //�/ '/,,/ / 15 MANAGED
LANS MAY DUFFS IAWN
8 "���"""• ��\� / •4• 1 6 /�/ // :' / ® T"ER TAMED IPNDSGPE MAhANts�0
R "\ .:::',,,::',/
•••I!,j:>'� G;//' ss i pY//�///� T`• O / / / EEROSI CONTROL cR Ss SEED MIX =
C // tV' -:‘.;/:.;',;aY Lj/j.�9 y �' / GMf Pll DISrttUBED ARCS AT ��']]
o .! ./4''',,,,1?
.. // /i."/ ,jam /// t I PER METER OF PROPERr!-4 tB5/10005F 0 O U
♦ /
9 / ��.,/ ,_''lam / / PP.-1 I ATE TOT. 15R of LWDSGPE:
/ /,•yy _T :� / �� / /,• i/</ ASO Ft.CRES.. .13 s4z LN -_. -
- %' +•X`�- ,,y./f' �\iV'© / e / Q mcorPoretetl
INTERPRETIVE PANEL ` ,:r.F'j� y/ x o 1 \ 1: / / 4"� 10290 �o Nm
0
••/, // ,/ /J. / Zj 30209.001 001
^ / /. lj/ 0' 20 40 80
E / n t.
I; 58B'49'S5•E 439 SB' '"' a 5a I ' SM1ee1 a.
_,y 9' 3e' A5
Sheol 2 of 3
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
; ii Y• : Landscape Notes
..•W-' ..H: General Execution of Work
°fO• 1 E CONTRACTOR SHALL.
TTIA.wHSU "tl 7• , „mil TEAMS.LABOR,EQUIPMENT AND RELATED YENS 31 FlE1D ADNST LOCATIONS G PLANT MATERML aS NECESGRY ro P.NDE g
NIEAGE55AR!i0 ACOONPLSH PLL WORN IN ACCORDANCE WNH THE PUNS -F T SEPAF A BETWEEN'TREES AND TIRE IAlfa S AND UDNT y
•
R ' CI.P.ONS FOP TIE ,,L16,. Ti1Ltt U A 2RMF`N µFPT,ARATION BEIwEEN SHRUBS AND FIRE xvDRaTS AND
PROVIDE OWNER OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WITH A SCOPE Of ER aN xI5 wDH UNOSGPE ARCxI1ER
b L 2. WORN OF INTML PROJER BID TOR COxSwUR10L AND OWN OWNER s REPPESEMA'V IN THE FIE:PRIOR TO CLETA N,
tl TCLU�iNT THE P.`AO OF LANpSCAPE wvNRNALCE 22. SEA:ARRANGE TREES ON SIZE IN PFOPOS:mrA Ox5 PER f1RAWIxGs.
tl ' mr rn-c fOB"JO"Mv5 follAwlNG COMPIETON OF ixE PRNECi. q5W i AiCHRECT OR OwxFR AND/OR OwxERS FFPPESEMATNE i0
/2"DM.CLEAR ROOST TIG TUBING \i • OF TREES RPRIOR ro PU IEG. GVPTE PR.PUNT
• t' J IOGTE PPoIECT,A.AVOID DISRUPDON OF ALL ABOVE ONO BELOW D SIANE OR GN'AS OEFVIID E PRSEXW'ITH PR SPOHIS WD
�_ •
Z4, 110 OR as 00010 U OTLSIS CI1 SITE FGNRES(0001 0 W NEW? 0.a r0 4N 00OU1Rm SML O OUTIOW IS THEN SGE0RE&C"TILL UTO S WATER WWOA j
�F ) LOCK IREEVTES,OR RESULT NNALACE5 O.COCTOR SHALL BE RESPoNSIBRIE FOR zv! ARRANGE SHRUBS TOFFS ORO SUPPoRIS r0 STAVD VFAT BE
EJl J1i""Eu/ 6 \I rzUBBER DOSE CIX4RwG A. EMIT DSHEGES REPO CANSTNCTON z SHRUBS *:1 R OGiWM SNOIE W PUN g
_ iET STAI¢5 OUTM aWl&LL �� REVIEW ME SIZE ORS REPORT ANT DSGtFPONGfS BETWEEN �nPW AND w NLGxuEM AS wplG�RAMS
(REMOVE AMR YEAR DOUBLE ST OM 2 G GE+GALV W µD VRAVI AND FETE TONS w"'ro T.' PIX'"TG,..,1 11%/.vr 5"Ruf �OwN IN c.F s L.AT
� OxTL /ox THE N ALL
S REPPESEMAIIYE x�iI0 OU OUPm11L1. OGTOTS OF 5 URH ADS SUE'E wpV�EC m
'6' 1/I II Er RLWGr 71.41".NO PEMRn K �_ (TWIST 5.HD$ZO OUNO'EOCH_OTHER) S. CONFIRM Locno s OF ALL VEGETATION TO BE RETAINED AND ALL YbJUSNENIs sIYLL 8E.DE BY THECONTRACTOR WHEN SHRUBS i<
....lira n R TNN LRaDE • E • 0o
y $qp 2A COVERS DIG PRS i0 A NWWUM �^y FEP. ) — vGErATDI+wNwEn uRiN ucN GRO ° cHA` LRCH[ F 6 NOT INSrOLL PUNT uorERWS UNTIL OTHER'CONSTRUCTION OPERATORS U 5 G PER DETUI PNO Ai SPACING SPECIFlm IN m 6
—may of fuM2 E up ;:=- LFPR 0 BASE) w UCH COxNLT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED CONTRACTOR SHALL INNDL£ I M ITTA UME35 OT�iIERW6E NOTED IN PUry
1 lip,
i, fsn, RAND s[5,..s y, n +-�� FINISH GRADE µ>N ) AND BAR...ONES 25 UwN AND R>ER gARGs TO BE INNER s00 OR HmROsem As sPECUFlm
!3 „ J� ,+If U OVE PLL WINE BASKETS -- i//�\\ A�,'A' R TSMnlplWS D2a oNA Wx51RUCPory OwR1 rvoi B�ACCEPT:. PIAM E FOR SPECIFlm 470SE FD WXEs k W
`/ bli CIO 01 REµMpOvE TWINE O"ONBURUP µglNrrux THE SIZE Ix CIGN A'A StA ALIMAX0x Oi AUK Ms AS BINDER. ENr i0 a S
t =i o E"PPARLTS NA"'NGX O SOIL ro `c�,�l��\II Es of R euL G '"x"".wI"GP"i,L mGlx"'c°LE uIPdELM Lr.No sM�T"HL:oEsiTNUTED BY
-Alit, Two PARTS NAT.TOPSOIL •� \\SIP (REuo.E Pnu wlrzE GSNFrsg° n SHALL Bh KEPT o
�y},4 �/�• �.I i'L2Ma Pge, .' y µo sr'iTpf DIVT ICES BN�FIFRs G z Au AR 2
laggirg-L TILLED mom.AND MOUNDED - •A s• R 15 bF OTTER BPOFi1r4Lw5TALLPAUPD 05�V"RWGO[OI6 FU�CTpN INCHES.hUNI SO Em wGRI W PLAN CLUgNG LAWN a
gl- L TN[AMENDED. �t h. An_ P µpWVRE E E x n.s GR Dm sYDO H'B A GR DE
u Y c"aA7RISA"""c.L¢NoumNs ro B. REFER TO UxµDSGPE PUN FOR PLANTING DETAILS EFER ro CPAL DRAWINGS 6 PIOSX1 SYOOIH oVtLdp"IL HOD"GRME SNHOOxN WUI.CS"EXS Rr
R- TNO PMIS GIVE roF50I1 UTOUT T SHOW CONSTRUCTION PETALS PLANS
FOR UTILITIES.GM.ANp NNROSESMCG A OLWIATLA F PUP." LUw+G xo
•-.•. illSIPo"IE ELEMENTS",FOi SHOWN IN THESE PU. LY s42.s SEED YUEsSTAr SPECHFlED MWGTpx
_ 'ArvarvE rat,AND YOUNTFO TOPSOIL IU.SOIL P REQUIREMENT, SAa'"G TiORWGxLr HHiuFDMTE"C0 IFTEF.ULCH:GN"e<"u+D ...0 )
ALL w'CWDINO SOIL PREPARATION AND AMENDMENTS
wi"Mux N TMSRNr u05NRE[ONIINT OF 9 PERCENT FOR A i0 6 N%
2) TREES SN CALIPER AND LARGER UT BE GUYED AS PER CONIFER DETAIL WE£ E TOE Of HNRSEmING .r:rp GNS1 HµM FRO.
3) W LAWN/HYDROSEEOED AREAS CUT TREE CIRCLE AT 2'RADIUS FROM TRUNK I.TIE BPIG.COLOR:PMC RIBBON ON WIRE GUYS IYIN I PER GUT) 9 ALL NEW PUNTING AREAS G.,BE WGEMENIED W.2"LATER OF ORGANIC NAIU FOR YAN-NADE Fl£MENR OR wIRIS10. RONOE PROPER �I�O,
MATER.CULTIVATED A MINIMUM OF 6"DEEP. S ANq Eteo NS TO sEmm ORFlS TO ENSURE MU ,
/� 'A"OSSTURE R.SST"A'L BE AS NECESSARY GTERUIxATON ESEED ARFAPS TE O W HOT SiOw PROMPT GEPMINATON
E I 1 M.FI Humi NA, Nr AND N - L0•FES FOR THE 5 GT IMF Ns BDAPEU:FROM i0E
TREE PLANTING DETAIL �1 TREE GUYING DETAIL ID E pRGxE CONTENT D SOILS IN PmIDO s;TL°o�Gx a`TDw 55 O1xEIrnISE
NOT TO SGm STATUE EVERGREEN TREES UNDER 6. NOT TO SCOPE HALL.BBE µMORRED"BV ONE Owxm OR OwxERs REPPESEMFTNE. STA OP'''�
�� `� I UUNTING ARFPRESHALL BE COVERED WITH AT ROUGH
RA Of ALL PLACH. 2 PUNT pUmpp gu NNrtUCTOR SHALLG urr,E NL PUNT YArEPML INST1AMID REGISTERED
12 PUNTING Bm PREPARATION. EXCAVATE AND ROUGH GRADE5D PUNDrvG KO - NE OF FlxV.A I.TIrvCE OF JOB 'y?
p�ApPp DISGSED�w.rERSL anD PUNT IA1rEPW.1Hai SHOWS A
M7FORAP OTHUAWU IOPI TA µD GA VING"PL "ODDER TO CONDUCTOR.PERCENT OR LOPE OF CANOPY SwP1 BE PEPLAC:B<THE
MISR GRADaar E
ISHE iTRO�IFRAVCE wwllx A rmlH OF A FOOT
ES ATIO1EDIXICAVATE AN PLANS
0'K I'BELOW 13 LAWN/TURF AREAS PREPARATION ATE ANO FWGx GRADE ALL ARVS TO fIN91 WORK.ACCEPTANCE Afro MAINTENANCE PAvwG SURFACES RECEIVE COD OROxttfROSEED TO A GRAPE SUFFTLTINUY mw EIM ro.C•r 26 ALL RANG BETS SHALL BE StrOnni AND RM.FREE OF DEBRIS OR OTHER
u AUELEgrarogra8PSOTfD sliS. Tra SLARR' D.-e SURE ram.MATTER PRIORR TO APPUGTION OF BAR...NaSH LATTER
a�'�e"'=- y;' 7; SPECIFIED DU.
N O sLLA V APPM1VXIw10EFLYDOf INCHES BELOW FA"IN6LI GRADES UM0 oR A uwJNI T Tung 41ARF Ozs�As ARF°LAN'&w'i"oXTSV IL"'wst A"ifi"eEmG°auvE"z n°DO'm.US Q
IUPoR2D TOPSOIL OR SURABLE ' OP YZE BARN PIECES)S'LYUUN WY BE MRIFD 0
NATIVE TWSOR PUNT MATERIALS-SELECTOR AND PLANTING OR i0 INSTAUA.N OFLCRELMINFA S SMALLER THAN ONE
GALLON COMALIA SIZE LCH SHALL BE,%1E EYENLT AND su00' 82
1 MOM"SW I iFAULS SHALL BE GRADE NO I.SIZED W ACCORDANCE WITH CONSRANC DEPTH THROUGHOUT All PUNTING BED CJp n
B�-IE=11=11=11�II-1IRII�WIIm SHRUB ROOT CROWN i0 BF ((ppuu,,EPEGN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY SroLK-ANSI 2601.1966 b GRADE TOLERANCES S GRADES Of Ill PU LLN BE ON µ0 LAWN TURF
G
If=11III=II=11r11-11=11r-.. EXISTING SUBG600 qET NO LESS TARN I" OP MORE TNµ 2" Gl"IPER 0 TEES 5!HLL�BEB MVSURM ATOT 6 INCHES OVgMP00r BNL to ER CRASS IFlUS BEM'TTABU5H:s E TENTH OF ONE FOOT
2 n�ifdllAMnrIILyn=1i T:= ` Ba'E suRRouxDlxc GRn"DE ((AVSTT ) "" _
R=IL=I[11-IE=1=11=11R-IC Er BELOW NMACmi PAVED N UPKES. R
.I./'• WS•"Li.IMErIGLLT TRI"WINKEO.M' CORN NLLT BPA'D"NNClH ISWPEO ONO SI, WMDASURR SURFACES
A GLEAN UP SITE
LEAN ONO DEBRIS,COMPLETION
SPRAY-WASH SOU FROM
lV LUItS GROwW CIL LItl srss WOUS ROOT
GLARY'PRUN FAcfs AND LGVE sNE GLEAN UPON coYPLErION of corvSIIOUCIION E. e.^
Me�xcs R�Ex�E�Ixc Aw siArvD.RDs wR coxDlxtiox AND srzE
p� ULCH µ SPECIFlm Ou L NURSERY
O TIBPo RWO Iu ONS. PONE 32. I7wD S AMMIECr Axp OWNER ANDEN NR LLSi ORFSE SW Rl%
_ uP.ULCH CLFM OF SHRUB BY THE CO INSPECT UNDSGPwT AND PPmAG REPS i0 BE g
-1-n e �o'u' � LLnsGaE Ae REC..
uovTRWM"HE�xw�sFAw oRRouuim PGxLs ouPLETm PwoR ro FINAL Aeer.PraNCEAoi woRx. p„ m•zgx�
v " .! IIFLL �. I ") PUNT LIST WILL BOi JECTEG Sx CE OF WLDSCMWG AVD LaPoGnON WRING ME Jll'STAND I)rOPmUL i10L ff FREE OF ALL ROCK,DEBRS IwD OTHER FOROW uATm e� _ E�0.LLvrP50"'U'AUEiIOUENi3 r0 p Sim BR CONTRACTOR
W E REJECTED FALOwTNG COUPLETIOI Of WORK 'SI MCIDA THOSE ACRA'SS AND41-
OVER t DuuEIFR NLD WEEDS. OF ALLP .0 ro EMURE THIASANR GRMttx AND SURVNAL y.l m7S �
2)Ta<Torsos AND suBGwDE TO A MN 6-DEPTH �-j.�- .: � NU.PARTS NATIVE A.
M U Is ROOT Gus G ALL PLUM THE D ANT TWULT LEND TOGETHER. G WEEDING PLANTS
TO P.P.3)SUBIHT POW ACCEPTANCE p&RRMULCH kTOP50a lIL3m.AUENDm..IUD MOUNDED DESpYAnox MF�ESMxOµproR�RREpPu9IxWE pOFCOr'REE GVS.ESE RESET.G�ppNpESMS TO P
k-IF y B-I-I' ' ROVE SUBSOIL PEA"T"iW JunE ISf MRBUCx SETEUBEv bTONiI ISAPTPOLx C‘Li FUPIx`ME W PMTOR SWLL"v MERRi4 DOUR"w�OLIWTO SPECIM
S UST)« UYNrt a6 NWRS PRIOR r0 SHIPMENT t� .U4HLT W PANTY ANT R ONEFFS HERBICNE AUNDSGPM ME.i 7-,
wTEPP�UWOE N"OEPTi fill
DEIhERY. TEPPIAL DEINEPm LO RECONYErvOm FOR ONE TAR rOLLOwWG LWDSGPE I.TAWTON
ONTINWPLY YOIST THRgWx IxSTAWTON � � i co
MENANCE SITWMILLN INGWDO RAPLACEUEM OF OFAD OSUSm PUNTS r4
6. WFT.ATERUL SHALL BE FROM A SWGI£MISSES SOURCE FOR ULN O EM OR MORE OF GxOPT
131 PLANTING BED PREP DETAIL n SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL ' iPTGmI�FlTm SPECIEBE T"'TH IUD. RSERT BE HOSE Pu aAEN s"DUR`Fc SURE LFUR°LIEwNP"'cE PERIOD AND THRDMGHour THE
E A2NB UTIroOE WIBORNHwe/LLOREC-0tp BORODO) xE-TFAA CUNUNRE PEPoOD SINLL BE NAOE et THE CONFRACrOR I-
0 SGIF NOT i0 SCALL Of t0 PERCFNL OF EACH PL ECUEs D6NER i0 THE SOE 0 DA15 OF 00 NOONTON AND At NO PWRIONAL EXPENSE TO THE a4\/ NOT r `� i APPLE SDLErFlED Bf TAGS GTI G GENUS SPWL 11 VORIETY Ov""rtIE0. OSF:m El WHICH 00 NOT GF ElEco µT PPONDE CO0
lE OF TOE PUNT TOR I BWR IF PISS THAN 0 AGE DEl}y'mm) IWRuq Arvp OL GP/Ss ni(UST 3'TPIL OR SOUOm OFFAS WHHCH a
M SHVL BE AUTO ALLm ANT N0 T. AT OR AN
I). COx011116 IS LAWN 50IBIE FOR GICUUi 5 OF Ill WFf wTmW3 DOOITO a13 PGRYS TRAM DATE L ITUCEIA-T. E m0 OF ME (2
QUANTITIES AND LAWN SQUARE FWTAGE rEOR BUD SUBNNLAL). P fFMIUZE LAWNS wHM t6-t6-B AT A RAZE
u:wul"IF SIZE w RAM UST.OR As OTIERWTSE NOTED IN PUN.M.THE RECOuuENDm fJt OF(MNZER uµ 10000 TIER ,N.-]� Z_
C OF PUMw`WOOL ES FACE 16 ACCFPTABIE J5. AT E END 0<THE JO-GT MUN I C TOOL THE 200IL L--1 I-
H OwLFAD/Ort�aO A NOTICE
PEPRESEMOINE SHALL INSPER 11S
RETAIwNG WALL 19. COOINDICATES
.INDICATES L "µPoES CALORERAT 6 ABM ROOT�BAL LL: SRE DSGNW OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE �y
2.OF CROWN M Gn Fl k B OF INMATES.MATES:MIT 36 THE]0-GT wJCISOSS E PERIOD.TIE COxrPACrOR SwLL Fi
utHPOx-TYPE AND YIN.DEPTH CONTAINER CORDrtO.. PpI7,4 TIE OWNER WmI vFSWUCTgMs FOIO THE GENEROL COMwUm EL
S PER UNUL FL OF DISTANCE TO L µ ssmmm M NpOUNSUBSTIWNgN OF PUxr.wiFAUL 4SPE US,vARHEtt 4ZE OR ®AND uA1,FTRLANtE OF SITE UNDNAPwG w
S E OBED OR FACE CAPE AGCHITEC Po+O 0 NEUR"�AxD/OP Ow""�MR'S PEP"R"FSEx�A1rvF O co U S� Of WALL I R IGGTEECMFl LIUpTT BE EOPP OL FRO.FWR OWLFLN PUNT BROKERS
9 U SP0Un 01 oR iEEDe00 PRciENs 0O TM?NO0Al NiAN •V ,4 CU
rCR PWAL( B ECIFlm.OR µ APPROVED TR UWOSE ARCHIIECi. FE 6
a' `F...... .7Ce);.:.)`i../sAs(w�,7,$ . AHxc �Cj 0.l
S-SPACINGµ S0OWL ON PLANS �r•'�1 - =!F
F ITNSGU.SPACING LAYOUT .ILA- -U L= MNNTAw MULCH O. O
G TO COLCUUTE TOTAL PLANTS-IF SPACING(5) PLWTINGs -i0FS0U-ME ANO uW NPB WW PPW.F
EWMS YUL RT S.F.AREA BY TO EQUAL TOTAL DEPTH µ SPEUFlm
PUNTS EXISTING SUB..
) ...IS TYPIGL FOR FLAT OR NEARLY MT PUNT.BEDS 1M
T/3 2) uIN DEPTHS:R TOPSdL AND.ULCH wRt Incorporated
„• S. D.
BE uFASUREI AT rNE OUT9PE EDGES ANO CEMm OF PUmNG BEDS 1� � ors
a. RI UPB
�� PLANT SPACING pa STOODLA"a W L /1 PLANT BED GRADING . roos
5 �� NOT TO SCALE `� NOT TO SCALE F. 30209.001.001
1 W 2D ProNRt rvP.
iTs0 _3
SCALE w FEET Sxeet xa
Sheet 3 of 3
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
Z _ J
-- — =__ „ �ledrl sEc uouxE"—c "s _ IT�_�F
$ I'I I 4
1O,s.T , --� -� 22`1`21'r 2, 19 18 1] 16 15 4R 113 1 �P i/J%O� \ I
,/ 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 ry \y1' ''\ � '-.,v �,� c
ii,l'
I•�_. II ppfip
I --
_- y 2._, � _ tS Elm _ I R _-_�-_ 0 / i'I '�,
26 pl.// - ., ''
, I
r - 2] / ]5 / 7fi li I ,,,,,,4, ___..
]9��80 81 --_� 82 �. i '( ]4i' 73 72 ]t /]0 /69 d
" ' 0 ��E
11 � I
.2r1W4,/ ,z ,/,
,_ ////2-/..ve'',:,/, #
8
,,, _!jr,,_,,:i.: 1 ty (,, : zz,,,,,;, .,//,.//
I 1 ' eOT=,BoA. winc......„,
84 _ '
` ► sue; a1> y�� sEA. / '� z'"p /'I :/� oz
.,:. .., ,t,
. .....„
A ', # 64/ E. '11 0,27
e�i 3111� ' I��% II �j• 5FA / t, .! yy Rivii
E
J ""7," pin ;: „��ppp///III 1� 2.� ,ilu. ;/.,�� :°/\� �' �_ fit . ,�;I o ,I .III iy..� Al \ - - ` ,9 /' '�3 I 4' "___mod` �` :'7 ��l II�7�.`/..._;'� va i' ��I -_:. ?2CC IIclrih( � /7:' /1 1 I = 7 / I'-.j i 1 / \ ,�,\ / �';< ; %I1 -_ '!%Ie 4`illl, , ,. /,I3a I I f�it �, � 'i \ � / ' •- 1 11) I +�� :I. /'i G3 _,y°/ i, /- ;- Nr ,,/ 7 I,ti ,,,`) —'I s E zB /'Y fit. ,�w' i,,s;Illil F' L/- ''W c, / /)c I I y Itii I I S ;; "sz i I®- \,. .-1-.. 1�;--:'lli I E. °a i.; 1 i .. x
SEE SHEET T1_2 _-. I , 14
LEGEND: MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 ; U, i l 0 0 a
z3 NOTE
6I CLEARING sNw.Rc umlEo TD THE EXTENT
I
PROPOSED CONTOUR N TO COMPLETE PROPOSED 0EN0.0N. ! I
FASTING CONTOUR 1 GRADING AND BLIF./STREAM RESTORATON
[ 3 T5.AND
RYAS ED ON BN IDcorporateE
" 1/�'/\I nxas TO 6E CUT APPROXIMATE GIND WY VARY EO ON TiNAI
NPPROVEN ENGINEERING Df4GN FOR SITE
8 —.—.— �NO E MIT(APPROX.) O
9 Z 30209.001.001
z
T1 1
Sheet
' SCALE IN FEET Sheet 1 of 2
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, RSE, W.M.
xpEr usT
SEE SHEET T1_1
....,
• mcl„wO^2igg,0.ar._1s,nEeA'rtL7a
0,3
--...-.--!11.i 1•1-r,-...,,-'-,-A I---'-,‘'.,—,,,,„.,‘,,-1,1)-\;\---, 35 _
/1yr.5',\„),,,L I-'..,,/-,..„.'.-'-„0.4;.i,,':'13.4i'!•,,,,‘,,•,"_- .. r.--i-_t/--,\-=\1,.,-=.A9.,!_.-k--_-.__,/./.,„"-,e,---,-w_-/-;_'-:,./-,."--,-.7•._-_‘.4_t,-,0„-_.,,,//.f,./-_/.,:,'.-,_7,r•4-.,-,-,-1,/-":..-,"/7-,/,,,/.-•-'•o-.;,•;•7-,:,--","-„•~//-„/,"":/-7,...:2..*.,‘:s..-4".:.,o.,-1.,,--,4_/f-4,.4;,.t-.\,/,,..•..o.4...,.„1-:/.‘t.„"rt1.,,.''?.,.,/",.c,-,.tqP,.,/_,/..._.".r;..'--i,'7-,;.::,',c,-1,.,."4-„,,s;/-1r"0.•-i•4,•,'-/4-4•r,(.,/',,.\:.,,,,,7,,„-),,;.'
' ._ 4 / . I,//,"".",14/,/r,/,.',,/''././,,4•,A;'7,/.',-',1/'(,,;,A,,,/‘v.‘,,,;'/,y,-,
/•'/',1:-,./,_,:-
,
,V'/1,:--'/*-,,,/,'•%.'/,,'
1 '
1 I / : ) 1 ' 71i
40 -"5k , , // /, /
4, 1:I ) / /
/' I, V , f / ;',% ..
'2 1 , // , (109 /' /
.,.:/...'
.1
,.,,,.,„(,0,,,,,*„,..,..•:.:',(4..1;,;*,*<.,a
i'g2H,
.1A
' '''' / / •:,./ '/ ' '':' ' " 1 //'' / / ,;,'W
ST
' ./ / 4 jj , / _ 1_E•lt.... -' *41' . ////,' //$ //,...,..---,-.-
'94 • r...1.ro.
i /'. ', • "".- \ .4,-/i, 7 ,,,••;,9''', ,,/,',& ,/,7 ' i'PO
,v ti,/ ,,,,,,:- ,=,,,___,\‘‘ 96 , . • 4:/ ,/ , 105 ---- / / ,,,,, // ,/ / i
\ s`., •--,1 ri,1,21,/, , / /'i' r1.1 .., @
›., 1.99:12ft
,F,,/AN--
, , 8
.3
--: ' ' / //'6,- , ,,,. 104 ' •I'C' // '''/IP / ,/'r'r,' //'
'-''''\'' ./.4; Z( ,' '' \ l'• t 7-7/--:// ' ,,/,%/2W,41 i Z
f:441
PA z
,4 CI
,q Z CL
.... <
4 • / \-"\ -----,- -%"- 4-
,,,. 100 /, ;.• / der'1:7-..g/L-,1/-1"-- ..,'//,/,,/i.,---7-- c,., Q.(.R9
, 0 w r n
•"' XI D--1
1 ,
ORDINARY MGR r,ZW/ , ',V, \ . " :/‘A \\, ,/ ) /-1' ,/ .."' .... //4*/ LEGEND:
(.)
1 WATER MARX
\''SI''---1;V( /'''Y' i'V--I/I:'''..////// / ' PROPOSED CONTOUR Z LI.1 0
\\,9: e,',;'------1:- ii-1;".„•,;,r f ,,__ EXISTING CONTOUR 4., CC
g ...„,
0 TREES TO BE CUT CA
,
/;.7,/,',/, z
/ ,- ,..,,,,,,-:3,1 ,, ,,,,, _-0,7,___ :::,,,_ ,•,•,•4, • ,/,,••.,/,' ,... ry —•—•— min L'rr''''''") 0 o a
.....-
i..
i • ,/ , .'''.'.,1,,,_._.„ ,-... , W 7/ , / /, iN/yi ,
/ / /i • ,>.• / ,i,,',/
(" ,r,'''' f;:'. -- '''' ;•.' 1', ':-/7-2//, / 4.1 /,./ ; . ,/' >.//,'//
7.19E CUM.SW/L BE UNflE0 TO TNE EXTENT
NECESSARY TO CONFUTE PROPOSED DEMOUTION.
GRADING.AND BUFFER/STRUM RESTORATION to
i , '....."`"'''''''''"" • . '..- \•S,..,4., /, /,-,,-,/ ,,,..- 2 • ,,,, IMPROVEMENTS CLEARING LIMITS SNOWN ARE
''.1 o 4 , ' / APPROXIMATE MP NAT V.WED ON FINAL
Z 30209.001.001
1 / SBEF49,51 ---
40. 0..90' ao. T1 2
Z SC.N.E IN FEET Sheet 2 al 2
•
• PORTION OF'GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
=- - BARBEE ;MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
fTETS:c,..
it
, SITE INFORMATION: ., /
.......
e t STONING ZONING: CDR-3 �/
Js'y,/yC 5
..C,T'• ORO.SITE EPEE UST ACwAsHirSoN )0 O y��I '•//'); Ny
NEI DEVELOPED.AREA (/// G✓+'A ��.f ' m 8
�;, (GRO - AREAS 8 RATER): 1i21 AC ♦ $q. t
MG/STRUCTURE FOOTPRINTS / .•.;:.3 1 k R W
a
(BunDlrc Alroxows rnvsuce): eax IMPERVIOUS / R ; i_�i z o C' ,�/° a
PROPOSED DENSITY: MIN.088 DU/AC NET(US➢U) 71 E = [ kJ 0 f/ <Y
L . I'
PERMUTED DENSITY: 5 DU/AC NET MIN.(88➢u) /A 1 �.
/� •' BUDDING SrTPAru,Ins-P ZONE}
aen108Eo PB9PO.SE➢NmT) 1) � $ 'Yi� 34tlEIK`.;\�
TOTINROIINs 0' 0' .n;.,, '.,,A. II
(colwox LOT LINE) . Q• ,� fl • `i I fir•;:.
�/ FRONT YARD D r �___ f ''
/ / OTHER SIDE YARD 0' 1 , .3) Y,/ U.
a/. a ^TU G_ \ €' a
Atrili
/:_ rum,.IRPA form Apo. '4Z-71 1 '73 _'R.:.,Y.ov1 )'
, ASHINGTON. ACMES .,-)-yPA�gry R(1� �
• AREA 0 TN�AY CREEK h BUFFER 41A ACRES
^/ WI C'..^,',, gym- n b I
J 0 AREA OF WETTED k BUFFER S 0.33 ACRES 09 W 1009
T •
1I/ p / B.W ACRES 0 E,
}E- NE ROAD RIGHT-OF-IAY(ON-SITE): 62 ACRES SCALE r OPEN SPACE I.T/ACRES V Q
-r- VICINITY MAP �F�
I-IIr'i i I-i'IT I I //. $
il-f--,7 �Ii 1!nl-I.[Ji"1vl-i•1.1. •I,.I° ,I.
A-� STREET♦ ' lll_J g
i - ftr_ / FLOOD HAZARD �.'�,
i�,-a� ' ' ' ' �llre i', YEAR IN CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION: 0., M�gp4
THE MAY CREEK
11.
,_, J CONSTRUCTION I3 PROPOSED TO BEGIN IN SPRING OF 200S AND IS g
�y ANT'IC@ATID M BE COMPI}.TID IN TAE FALL OF 2008.FOID(OSG HOURS
hr
• � a // / NOTES: HD�IL aToo°APOH m e oo"NeHETu'NOxI�ALL.os Tw cmcwscwz
DICTATE UTIINR.IN THE EVENT EDMONAL NODES ARE REQUIRED,
\I a: ySD T B ` r / %/ i NOTIFICATION WILL BE GIVEN TO EMT CITY OF RENTON.
\ 1. All FASTING MEGRIMS TO BE DROVE'ONSTE.
k. \ -�. 4::' ALL WERT TEL BE HAULED TO THE SITE FROM THE soma VIA TAEe
I �, Y \ \ R, EL ELIDING ONO.NAUROE TRACKS TO BE REMOVED, WA9@TGTON BLVD.,NE PARE DRIVE AND 1-400.PIAUI.ELL BE
.1 - �\ °.A\` ,,.%�� 9. THE PROJECT f3 CURRENTLY PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED W TWO PHASES. DEPLOUNABLEETTOTOPERRAATE WITHIN TRAFFIC INIC IANEN'I URGER TRUCES ARE
a
-)- O\ ,�/ PNEE 1-BOIIa/e.La'OF HAY GREET!
�/ /(�� PHASE E-NORTH/WEDI OF MAY CREEK FOR WORK TO BE DONE WM.THE LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD RIGHT OF a O
\u �'4. r/ NAY INCLUDEROVED IHE CLOSURE OF ONE LANE AND UM. YEN TO CONMOL MAN WILL BE UTILISED.EMS Z
TAKE '' T ' ''� LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DIRECT TRAFFIC,AND TEMPORARY BIGNAGE AND...MEMOS IN ,� 4
',DUNGEON 1 _I_-1 \' �P.��'e411%, m_ //eV IMPACTS FROM RDANCE DVSf SHALL CITY OF RONFLtN D BY WATERING CONSTRUCTION
1 \ • / T !AND REIMS.TO TRs COMMENT Is SITUATED IN THE STATE OF IMPAC S NOM DUST EL BEION AND ADD BY WATL SHALL C HE RUCTION
__ I .COUNTY OF I@! AND IS DESCRIBED A9 FOLLOWS: USING AN IMPROVED EROSION CONTROL PLUS,INCLUDING'TIRE WASHES, W
/ vB""��/ —__T AIL THAT PORTION OF COVERNI@IT LOT 1.SECTION u.YUF11310P u NORtB ELEAS AND SMELT STEEPING IN ACCOA➢ECE IfeH STANDARD PRACTICES 0 w N Q
°[ / RAN. A WY.IN SING WESTER, OF NGTONORTH AND PACIFIC SECOND OAD eu RFdvY EMUINl6NI oPE1NnoN9 AND oaER xo]SE PRODUCMe
�/ /' T,RN.D LYING C MITY. AS NORTIOINOFSE RETSECOND
MA RIGHT
/I OF WAY,EXCEPT THAT PORTION,IF ANY.OF SAM SHORELAND9 LYING NORTH OF ALIIVIfOx SHALL BE LG..TO NOM.WORKING HOURS 1THAN WETS .a„I W CC
a /// TEE WL4TEILLY PRODIICDON OF THE NORTH IA'D OP SAm GOVERNMENT LOT 1 FROM UT �CNPITY AEEA AT A HINWIN.NO SPECW.NOISE �y W
9 /X %/ STIVATEINT86COUNTYOPSING,suTEOPW1SIIN'tCNN. MEASTINSAI¢PIANITED ATYI®T116. Oz6 >OHF.
sA.\,-.2"-'-':.1ili =v Q I / \ SHEET INDEX: xj,
, /� P o `OVER SHEET o O a
� ; ( A� / PBJ PRSI.D@TAAY PLAT ,`
Y / __ MO / // __�_ / J_ V__�__ P22 PREWDNARI'PLT yLVIA - V
/ 0 P91 PRBIffiNARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN rin
! R-8 ZON6 %/ ___ __ P9J: PHEILDITARY GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN „ ..a.
,y /�P (O Iucorporafed
n / PU PRELDMIARY URINE PLAN yJ
C.e OVERALL PLAT PLAN NOT TO SCALE PA2 PRE➢D AR IITIEn PAN A"t ZO
2 ' HJ TREE COMING AND LAND CLEARED PLAN
30209 001.001
C TI_3 TREE CUTTING AND fESD CLEARING PLAN I...•-45
- P1 0
3
Sheol NO.
N Sheet I °f 7
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
.PE,6.
M
...,N I rC
,94
�w o �vF
°''°°�`'°° -- -- s' o -- -' xee•4B•se•w saes 4r _ `ST,9 v
0 M' j
r _ _ _, r___ _, r___ , r___ , r1r' , r 36-1T--6- 36' J6' 36' Sfi' 36 36' ]6' M' %- / �9 d
:'1b. ",. -IL I I I -36'I 6 I 1 I ; .-- i t--- a i r--- -i r--- 1 r -, 7 ry s t/ x> >
/o2i5Ac 23 IDos]ss 13924 ss'0Ac1 2°y'009 YI p9�4 Y'39245F1 309°AC 009°A 194.5 I I I / /
009 at ACI IN ac. .I Ac 1 ° Z F'39z4 9F 009 AC 0° 0,09 aC:009 at I 009°nC:009°AC 1 390 AL peg]SF / ''. 4
rJ IB3'SF r -J 009 AC 009 at C.I 0:9z3 AC.009 AC.I 9 at /'
y a 1 I �.c/a I I 0.044C'0.09 AC ,, / j
Ezo9no' 'f6s m' ¢ o $ $ to o tr 3 $o' b, to to 3 i/ 8/"z W 33
l0 22- 21 I 1 20' 19 P 18 ." 17 1 16 ' 15 B 14- 13 B 1 P- - R p - R _ b / / �`r 4 \ /
g
y •
{ 06 AC 24 I' I w I 1 1 j T72 y ;11 I 10 9 8 7 i 6 w 5 4 3 2 1 /i ,
i 1 w I I I I
g —_J�' L___ ___J L }I J L
J L J L_„�•___J L } J L _�_ _J L___ _J L_ J L__ // ,, E ep
1 , 3 �- 2' 24' I ]6_ 36' - 36' 36'-+ J6' 6 36' 36't". 11 �'
.:C. 1 0715A. 25 I� , i\�I ° - -- - -_ -_ 36 - --- - _- PR /
1A tt.0o 36 'e•,p .`� / %/ m 6
5490q F ^/ .'P 9 s'��— 3TAEET A 368 - - =z39,6 -�—- :% I' a a b�. 26 __ _ _ nr
. , ; 013 C /'�7 —' J/ St' -1 s' St' , I} _ i ,I
5 6� -I I- r75 / 76 i/°�/77/ 78 i /�/79 80d!/ /� 81 82 / 1 i /// 0 / 70
c./"!So a oIz Ac i ;°So92CF <'E : / al 2 lkP P SF /tm - o1i2Ac P'3 e°Ac1 Oo e4 Ao SSe4A41 SSe4 "5A / �:rf•• aiia5C 28 I`I 1 '��f`\ J / i ���✓"� s °° I1 , T/T�
• JI gr I // a`, I IT I L____ ___J L___ 0.__J L___ ___/7'// 1 r o"
0\01 ^M1 �.°oasaC`` I GSEYENTRI SWAT 614 6 ACCESS Tu�u/n(w
1 ulv lo- .�j _ 44. __"' UTILITY ESNT. �\/ Cil/
�` oiins zs i�1 I 1 .a91s\B3 In �o°is SF
,31 233 SF: °IS sF AC �.\rz:=" ,
__�•d `1 __ __—H 1 . Iry I I 66 1'I0.14 AC 66 /
V•• 1 OPEN SPACE //\� `84 ( .I 67 _ 68 BS / ,
�• 30 1'a� m\ e° �u�_- /) �/> I 1 �•� I.!, wry%/, ,, e x
L ot3JA __—� 1 WATER T auum ,42 AC a s fis i Yi /�I r I`�` a l 14 SF
B
\ IS \ /n / \, oii7 cF ,+�\ 86\ Ja rJ \\ 65 k i a' //// ,I -1---- 4Q�
OPEN SPACErc 5.
1 A \\`. .O115e,\87 \,%, //54 . a/ 859 OF, 0'�2 AC. .. -36'- tS Ja �, ON
gi^ TRACT° � \ }b 761q` �` 88 \\ .` i�0 `/ `s°//\ `�%�T�.�k X� §.
\" .y. 0.11 C. Y.J\b; `. \ 1 64 : ��,•�❖.•. F ./ ,, 5•_�o —6• [Qy �w.
0az NG 1 1 ^ '�`.�C�o5°nc o.69 Zi eve // ' \Qsae Ac •.z �• �' 1-a' w ►d
H w -- -------------�\. 90 . \ r 15 ;1/ /^\\ 63 ti/`•�f / .� L� __J Q1 . ^mz`�
\ 1 Y %s 3B1s sF>� / / . —T-1 0 eeII
b 014 AC 31 11 'e .SS/. 0.09 aG •$ �i. Rl�a Lu
._�1 1'* I (nss sF 91 /AA,F 4w/V� / \ SA� / /, 5'1
33011251-583831385
159' 1j 1 8 1 `.0.09 AC 9\ ' >v-4/ j J4-, \°tO AC 62 \ /. ••
OW ]T
0.,5 A 32 Ito 19 •�x \ "�/`O 9 \ -'°AG\\\\\\ 61 \> z
__ --te6--- ----J f r/ \`93 `. ` �.y9'� , C.-\\..,
SF\\\\o ioac. 60 \ /�gn�-----------'------�1'14 5.,, 11 \a°o act\ .16. 9Ac.\ \ \ \ ^�•,j___7// . wnaNum-- 6)]B SFlot 11 94 A \ SF`, \ \ 59 \ \ /- //p' FR WOt6 AC 33 1 al 1 1 '/ 3� �j0. AG \ \ \, \ \ wf a: , I
o pA
IP I I A ' s\ • \\ 57 \ \ ,-'3:
) KOP / / '� Q1 8} / 4 0-
.5,;Ua: 6974 ASF 34 Ig1 j M15. 0 AC.\\ \ \\ \ \ \ "'111111 I j1''
Y ial:::::;: \: --- �8 \ \ __a��� \\• \\ J\��zJ� �•" / /I \,r 1: IS 1 tY
) 0
•
SL
S>7 _
::::: 7107 SF 35 'o. •. /\g// • �p \ / � ..• Al /
...• 016 AC I L=60_ S 54 \+u, 6'___M1 may. V. / / , IOo I I W
y .50'\` 0.m / \\\]00]S.. -' 22' • TRACT B J// L-I]t' I / '� Qa J
.mA. 1�9' --�4 f B °e. °6 AS•` \ �~" I oPEN vacE /0 �, - y,T°°/ F I' '� I L+.I
\• 53 _ �•� TRACT , 1 L.21. L.100' w I I 1 U
36 --i \3736 S.1..\'Hid T CT'A'\ LFE�� ,��j I GQ
A 0 is A ° 0.09 AC ♦ /:�/ EN SPACE Q\ \ NP 2 B • I 1 1.1 8 I$ . _______� 8 • 9 ._ 52 \ \ 2°rRAcr \ \ a , n� I' `\ :n 1
SEE SHEET P2_2 I _f�9 ', ,
x MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 ii i 0 0 a
;• •
� U$ LEGEND I I' • I LAKE SHOREUNE BUFFER AREA- 4..
lncorparated
Y . .: BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMITED TO NATIVE
PLANTS AND GRASSES
9 MAY CREEK BUFFER AREA-
,..1 BUFFER PLANTINGS IJMITED TO NATIVE
PLANTS,AND GRASSES 3020930 001.001
15'MANAGED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA- P
4F BUFFER ER MANAGED
MAY INCLUDE LAWN o r 2_U
AND OTHER MAAG LANDSCAPE MATERIALS
No.
so,. IN FEET Sheet 2 of 9
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
... _ SEE SHEET P2_1
I __ / Tpcs Ac\ 55 'o \ \ `_ y% .j A�
• Si oto]sF 35 SI d. \\ NON \ \ 3 ,!%x%k:'..: „.../
" 8
.�I 6 AL. I L.60'- h 54;O`'S3�A \ M1 y... 5
�5'. V/ )S F \��,1 22' t]'M1� OAElOLTSF LE ',0 k
r- i }1 �;o oe5\ M1� J g
;h,'Ck� ni]pr •36 ti<-9__so - ` • ''''-.--4 \ \ci :?aby
_I1— —II �! I c. 'I m \s��.°j 'tih ��v7sccEi\Q\oW' /// 3
uasxmi 5 I =o —' :T'*..1 ----_ _� 8 I 00952 j�.99.4r si //• C' � /
I 80- 41 Ial\ o3i2 nc hi� /,'.'; • .� I$'' 94
T 0 721 F .�37 i.J$.I f7 I ;,, 51 <\— .ti/�l $ t' �xXI;.>y! '� 1. '
-- a x1 nc. III mla \� \\ <./1/ J X" ' , '1 / .4 l x
a—I5 . :<��F6y]i�j .II o. 1 1 50 ,� . /. ':;✓:, f/, i' 6'SOFT sURFAyE TRAI l a5 C
RtY1AC. '`38 la. cl /M1",I,''. "�'✓).<` �// ffA h-
`ler -- _____71 1 ow 1 _ z /` // ,5• 3 "� I I+/S >lH ?B
{�`` 49 `, \'
6]35F 39 11%� \ 39]65F./ 1 ''��j 110<�_'^ 5,'0�3\�\ �W/ ',' ' '
\.55 \ 016 ACh� 8 \ �0.09 AC/ F / F.Vryy< OSO6AC\ / '�'1%' 'tC /i ai
LAKE WAH NOTON ^. .,>V \I�\ OPENTSPNLE J / L \� \\ /ycY1/ {;� �' //, t\fZx].W
alis AC. 40 \ / hy' 6 / 'Ar y / °
� / cA ,/,,,,,,
\'` / tbi
. / • �
9
laj '/ "— m1 m / boa na ry" aj
` —'i _-f— o I Y ) .'' 4o nT N/ / w
12 1 SF a 'n ; m 4 ,
" /- s • s
.•
43 / , /,nl \\/ / /'''
/ ^'mil ! / SS,By., ',/ G-066917 /,' I, _
h.'.. F 1_.: a1 ! 12521 /. / R-/206500' /' / V 24..... ]I86]5 /Y, /�/ffJ / e e06A. / /;/, i431N35. / G'� �\.`v//� Ac � /44 / �,.' //••. l \�\09 /ry �//�" ,!/ / ` 31a3i/ Q.' � `.�
9�,; , 3 nc� J doh t ,/ r�h o.os aio7\ i / / / i ^� / /��"� / / v,ti.E�l
'', FLY° 45 s' y"y ' / ,V'. 'os ) ,8 o' / J a am��
4./v'\ ;:s11,y
°e A2\\ \ >'�o :N �,'19]9 6 O6 is/ e;8^ l e / 7s,/\Q // VCP // �M.E 4.
: I 16567 c 4\�f�.pe Y � Q05 oa 'G ' 2, / //•. � / o-Z.
•
48 \ av z. y ofi c. •`./>4'/Cli
'4 l Q /,'�P,/ /
i 'T- ../ y,J` i9ao103`�/ Y / \ ; �/ / w
`'1 / O c '� / /// Q'I
.Y \ / c 02 \/ Y LLI
° : ;� ..: :::: :::: i56]5 ID1 / //:`/��/ \ LEGEND 0-
N.
`^` U'eo n ` 100 y ,l /; J I—T LAKE BHORELINE BUFFER AREA- D_'
``� /<VV�gJ( / BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMBED TO NATIVE
ry /' ✓ �. ."'.;', .: Y' <ooc s\e`\ /'�'% / �'�. ��,'' /, /;, // / �I.\ PLANTS AND GRASSES [s] Z
/ M1 / !v' / / �// / -<=I MAY CREEK BUFFER ARFA- C W
8 /:::..:�� , <h 5 99 1,;' �' 1 : ','1 BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMBED TO NATIVE '� (Y� LA
Y WATER 1wRKLN ;:re P,Ary 2 SFatr 9B ' /'�/ ryi /, // /, j'/ "111 PLANTS.AND GRASSES ^�0
/ \`\ 31/ t SS FF�� /// jz, %l / /, /i `/ I AND OTHER MANAGED Y INCL DE MATERIALS �.y W d
8 �ENTSP�CE . L 9fi° \ hh 8 � b a 1� / /- ' / N / L'�
/ /� WATER r /^� \^-/^0 x,v/ X- / / / _=1
Y INTERPRETIVE PANEL \ ' ` 8912 5 c�<' -II ry / '%
0 20 AC AL (� S O Incorporated
8 / m.r 's % O
/r I 12 AC J:, <'^/' i. (' ,''/''',/,/ 4 30209 001 001
--�. // , /:// � �40' Prolecl xo
\ TCS 4'`so f�, P2_2
SBBY953E° 439.36' - r-—1 / /l i : �I� e
0' No
SCALE IN FEET Sheet 3 of 9
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
mNx -- r--= ----__---------------. NBee•ssw', _ - . ST 1 s�eslr L �-
23 _Ct
i
r-- / p -• ".f. /0y,, - 3g3
j1 1 22 r21 16 15 114 13 4
aasmx J. 1 1 24 r, t'z,,� 19 18 1712 11 10 II 9 6 5 4 } `v1•a ,."j/ '1�
II I �; j i . III /; ,;.,' =1-
yyy
•
It I 25 - - �mr� Illii e • . .Y ' 'I/
• :I , I-_ / sD I LL w -. ,-A-. 81' ^ix �,q-?5`�i2, 2.M _ �1-4::.,:^:: +...'a'Y`- .�_a :` ''ea..1' - 7 - i E (;�`° //•' '� m
eC 6W
I .x,.,4 .. C.,r, d, r t!rF^i4 �" I t.STREEf.'kWh!9a 3G'�2 j. .'-'.t..oo / ,L
27 j77 ;71z/78 79 '80 _11,.$::
'_ ..� '� I I� IFTT1uu*
OQi'� L/nl(,I.fres:.'!
1411'1:\
A� J
to iI "[a,N I
1` ' t.li I1 / f7ri
I - 29 '� 83 - W i=/I
It_ .::: BoiER touAtm-le.z --_I 8{ h�y,,� fi76:/ r ' ,"
1
wni=zt B .Ee�� i A.. ‘ /. 1 / I /� Ca]I Qsf
BOi 0=19 'i- 1 N -`fir. .�/ / ry�/ -- ' ' I '' XJ $S
E.
?.I ,.. 31 li, 11"
aT. �ri ., v R _ s ,. ' ow:8
_ -\ lig* 62'
of 1 ttri:
93 I'�Ill, ,//� ,Ll. g:..i/_/=�/ ' 61-i i.�,I / /' <
• \ / • 41/• II I .-1_ 1z z.-_-- ------ -"'�3lr `��;. i� / a° d
aT 1 P, / I ! ¢S,, , 7a r_ ' , ',-__.��;,,,:16 ! ;k,. „ ./??7 /.' i j -I%' ,--`'I�� - II ;ItO�; ,`" w
` i N Ohl \ + .'% ,, OA / / /%�, • /el 1 i lv;,';SI-kIl IF I ��; t,i r7 i
I 4, 5 ' - \4\N � / r / I fn ' ,% 'hm 1 i O W,,, / 1np7/' ' a76i '%,,:/„=,ss""�\ / �(�AR a " - i.p,8", i,' I , pa o
, ii,";,/ %^�sz ,. .i i. . — /, �/ /�9i'i�, / _ ,.tf�' (_ _i P- : i I{I a(.l d¢
SEE SHEET P3_2 {I j I;1: UI
LEGEND: MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 I , 9 I 11i it O 0 a
33 PROPOSED C0ITWR / 1 !-1
- EXISTING CONTOUR r ! I I I• I• -.
x -SD-PROPEE.SICRM URABI Incorporated
- PROPOSED CULVERT
lG BMW ZONE
• STORM CATCH BASIN �J0
• STORM DRAM MANHOLE F 30209.001.001
g RETAINING WALL Pre,KtP 3 1
C ROROCNERT .0' 00'
MIN FINISHED FLOOR ELEV. SAeel No.
SCALE W LED Steel 4 of 7
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
_ SEE SHEET P3_1
bl
II M1� 36l llll'1 �!l �fl` �/,i�',/ �.�.. Q�fJ`/%0.�JEf/µ//J� �.' F �,1
0209310
Ir „
,,,„,„ , ,, 5.37, 5 „,/...- ,/,7, _...._,--00--- ' '::•"- -•, — 1.•••••'----•••>.* \\\ . \'',''• ' , . .k.;.1_
.'pta h..'�, 1 /, /1/4,itt,,,,_
Z;p\:f;r��\ /},aT/,'/ I E r
I -_ aoa t j/�'e `` '`==`=1 L�y11 ///,�:/�.T''�;;,r%.''j;; mb
1 39 "-fli ` / �/ yv,�_ --�II'4' '4"/////f w
''--j t / )4,7k,-,.,
:4,,V \// 4° I A\. ,.,7 ' J/7/// ,,'2/ '4 I A,:il,:2- -
I.'
III__ ff �,,4�, _' �-+ / /% A' `"
1 44 A,
0.,., , ,. ,.„, „._, ,,11,,,,
.4 ' ,:"./,'///1 ,/,/.4),/•/•"/"1 /-f/
A, -----•---...; ) / ' ,4 ', ,',/-(/4 I t.,,,,!,:i ,i," io'49 ,,;,,i if,'/ ,,/,, /,,./.?(,,,,,,, , 11,,,.,,/,,,,;,- /I_J.,. :,,,,/,,/,,,;-
.91
81
°B -4',/;I:7'''r:/i,/,,',.'/;;', '1-24/,';',.'.../.-4'7°, '1'__-_<'
- 4 ' // '106 <'�{1'=�= /,� ��I� % i:i%"00 i;'/.a,� C a w ;g'sH
It-N"- -- '
\ �_/ ,' 03 ^ '/! ;'. am,'47'/ , y,, O a,:. I
..j14:6/:::/:::::
%�I %//V:;;;"•;c9:1111;%?'
Yeti ,` �--- V - _ ,// 102 _, '-./,yNr,' ,/' / \\ :7,/ 4.1iinlY ::',V ,,;;',;:"...7,_.'''7''‘to,\°4' ‘,. � /S - i,r'/•' `r.�(/fP7 W
s / \\\`, �'f r ♦ r cow
99 / \� ♦.' i• %' LEGEND:
OROINSW HIGH ,�''a' '' - ' `'\ \U ♦ : PROPOSED CONTOUR o [i] Q
/il , WATER NPAK \\TRA1 / ,1 \\ ♦9tl.___ 'arL % 1 ,/ Il'�, /' : /// '/ -1}___ Er1STM0 CONTOUR pl z Q
�' ' S\ `-__ %YT^' r. / // 1(/,'� `//// -so-PROPOSED STORY DRAM Ury
$ T!q. .N /'♦/' C;!:` Y/ PROPOSED CULVERT C+ (],' w p
96 ;8 %•i .a'?�i/ i/ tO
A� i JWEIMER ZONE ii--IlA _yy_ \ •T / /•� STORM STORM DCATONR.BASIN �/Jaa
/ / ' / ,,`I , " /H"" // • RETAINING WALL o
Cnal• MIRY
INTERPRETIVE PANES / r � /'' :% MIMED rEan ELEV. U _
4 /
�'`< may. ,�♦� ,, ,, : / •
/ sE.asa'E 6 /..•''p ✓ �=• of w P.okP3 2
0' 40' SO.
lniz
SCI,L W MET Sheet S of 7
„.
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
i '
,
44 i,
ely
.
YFEF MY -'L.....
• / Si. 1-17---C2091,500 1
r ----
- ' I
0209B190 -
101SEN. 23 ,
CAST130 1 r----
I
„ . 4
0209810
C.202,1130 . .
-- .-
.
22 21 2?,'t.'11.,9 ,1)/3 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
I 6 5 4 3 • , .: b 1
0
C2C.90.30 i 1 I
8 7 2 1 ,. 1-1, ,..,,.
24
I'd ...TA '• I I i
\1 1 ' • .•I , #
,T e•..'” I _------ L-... #25 ,--. .,=' 77--;T-,44ti16 1,....--1-1 ..1.''. -----,...,-- ',.',.. '----7. ---'-'7.--'"-' •
- - --- .' ,5--"--'. •
. w.E..., :-:w ITJA-00 --n11. "..11:-17 ft,oL_: W "• '1',7-,-,z, ,L,„. •._._ :.__,,,,„,, - ,, : -.,:Ate. ..r,... / i
I : ,-.1 II ,II — -"-7:-t, 7 —•'7ST-R--E'--:-7-.--_ -'', ,,,ii,•i1;.,1.' .f-iI'• .. fI-.----'-.-'-'------`-. -. IIIII >IIII'•"/ / i/
- . . -- - - i f26 / ' t _ , e - 1 /d •
1 1 27 /I'',11.12 75 /76' 77/ 78 79/80 "-By'82 4/"..----;:-------.) \ : 1'J, 74 73 1
72 71 70 : 60
--,i''
'/,‘N
• 1 ,11C:), •
‘.i /
.
/ , i' -c CONNCT FORCE
LIMN )EXIST.
SEWER MANHOLE
/ 1 28 :-2-1.,- ,,,, „, / , J / / r. --: ,. ,.., i w11 1 p.
',2.:--.)1.. .:P,II:i -t/
'.
INA. ' W--I i• •.,11,/... ')..' i
•I- N--s.t.''''.* _ss --- ^WO t—, / ' 44 1
T---------_______ It: 4,0 1 r \/ .,,, ,:. ,___-_, ,r__ ----)z..--,,_----„_ ----.____=_,_._-_:_.':K•'' 'N„ . :'i :"' --It.f. _T__—_____ __:,, _ ,5
OsT-PI,§ J a)D
e---
8,6 85-,
z/-. ,-s,I / 4 l-----6///
i Qe-,,..-----",,,,,,,, 211 •ii,',11 t\ ,,,,,,,,,,, ,..,,,e',"
3, 63
„ i a. ,s1g14
!!!...9!..NN\D 9.... '• /1/
nr co;Ea 91
.---,--
______---
• /___Ai, ,
\ •, .. ,..,,/ORDINARY.
60
L.3,
58
, .
--2f1- -
57 . / • ,
,! :11 f' , 56 ,,4\.„,9„,,,, • .--. ' z
col)I:,!.!!•! . , --__-1___ ,..ra
_. 75\:•-----n-----------,-,----- ..- /' ,/ iii :
36 Ilitiir- . \L;1L1f:.\ Te1ES4'./'''', i kA6 • .,1,5,,,,,,,,,.GfE,2.-.1,•1,1 ,;•-1,n : 11(j I 0 1 S',''I
v , _r_____,K __ 5 ,..ii' / ' . tti'.1.1'''.1'10-7".)'-'-' •:,...-: 'i-5 i i#i Z, al 0-v,
9
Z--...- -i. f• •
• ..-'' '''''"7 ....--,-_ —,,------------)-- : 1 --
SEE SHEET P4_2 • I.!I:II •,! - I i :i: g
MATCHLINE STA. 19+75
LEGEND: I I: : 0 ‘-' .. ". •
SS— MENG SAMMY SEWER NAM I I: • I, ;•• - -
0 IncorRorated
11 —SS— PROPOSED SANITARY SEM.RAIN
• PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LIANROLE 4.1
-I-1
§ ———— PROPOSED SANITARY SEVER FORCE MAIN 0
—-A - EXISTING WATER MAIN
JO z_30209 001.001
_w— PROPOSED WATER RAIN 11oolPNo4_1
A PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
t SGLE IN FEET Sheet 6 of 7
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
SEE SHEET P4_1
1
, ____-- --,751IY1/ 53\
MD,
• Y.
C209P500 1 36 I 71,Mf, ,, ..,•\...-.3112\ z,-,------
1 „ 7
- , • !i .,"!1 , ,-- 1/ •
\ 'Ili---- 7 'AI\ ,, 50 -zz. „./ - t-:\lkyr.,,, .____,-------f---
;
\ \ - -'4A, ' ' „,--'// / „ .A,Aik„ n,,,w
• I / ,,,, J.-f
. ,
1, '''\*ii i I.,/,p; • / /
, ,!•;\•.;-,, /49 • \' ..0::
\ /,,/ 4, , It-- • , ,/‘ 39 0\':', / '11 /,77 / .1144'r4k4T ,,,,-,-,,N _ r/v/ • /
1 , k,
I ..\_____--- .'' :\ / „. ' / de its .•‘'4, .,'-: 44:i / // ///./i g s
'------- \ 40 1, l' '11MT.cAcE ' / • // / 1' l/ // ' //,/ <'
7 ...'' ,,,..
', • , 1 I '.,,,,113 ,7/1P, ," ''''
-'-----.:i//' /
. . 1 - , ,i, i / 1 /// ' ii2N. 4;71,,5'/ /' •
1 - -- -------- 1:', 1), / / ,i/I ' y4,7,/ 7 1 / i // 111 4/iff '714' i tii // ‘1?/,''' : ,/,
i' ‘, /i'i / /,./ .., ,,, / i t." ./ ,' , ..
t 42 • // 1 1 // Ito • ,,tilltt;Vi //"..../. I j ',/
/
/ ) ,! ,, .41 / , ,',./ ..• , /
„ 109 ''411.-14'9. 6 /\"' e // ' '•• .1 ,' /--
' / '2c, .‘ : /. ' / / ' li /1/..,/ , /
,,, 1013 ,-,.i.,,4 ,7// / / //z_
4 / 9 ,..12' IVI/,, 71-- s' / /,..". /-
,,' 46 ''7 / / "1// '94Q7NV il /'''..it. / / 1 e4 mgg'....•
,..•• ,
,,',,,,,,.-..:•; , ,o5 ,. ..' i 4.4.,, // ,,, ••••• ,
x \ N. ,..--- %. - .., •. ",/,/ . /,./ / ,,, \,;/,7,4„,„ ,
0-am
r4
,
‘,102 4,:r4•, , / 4, 4,1/ /4/,, :X 4/ / N,N,
—ss— POSTING SANITARY SUER MAIN Pe
/ \____2.-- ----------. ----------------- 100 ,/a774/ .,e -___;„Z__/ ...,••,,, ,7
—ss—PROPCGED SANITARY SET.LIMN =I
I 7 / . „/ • PROPOSED SANFTARY SEP.MANHOLE 15
/ il,:7;W ' / ,7 S// / ————PRCPOSED SANITARY SET.FORCE LIAM •-• ,
I i
i /
,"*„,..,
•Z P:1
7!,17 \1 d'. i ,/
...7/4/1'1'., S,)N. AO' // /. ///
/ ...„., ...... ..;-.,x, , , ,..' ..--,/
... .7.,, 3r,i // 2 ---7.- It ''s• /../ "-/,,,,,WATER.,••.1.1. „..,9-1,1$‘i :,,e/,.7 O., ...• , /
z
6 , / .,.„.,--",, ,,:,,..-'"7--.. ' ' 1,'",p.4.1A,:y4,4, ,,,,!:",..."/ ,/ o a
/ , ,e , U _
/ -\\ , i.
tV, • i, / '..," /
A , •.' 4,•A.'il,,/ / ' " ' / `' 0 Incorporated
4.
38,73-33 c 439 36. --
_c_ •.--__,_--,;.','- -')11(,,i_•',, 7 ,
. //
/ N. . t 1\— 10. te ii tre 441300-'1 3012=094-0 01.00 1
, / N4,h5WEI 2
V SCALE IN FFFT Sheet 7 of 7
\
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
/
00/ SIGN LEGEND
EIE
�. / / Q
/y/ `.y✓ ..' y,� _ .� ,.rl , ov°ws`oor6 uunm nccrss,'_-%,. y,•a, i g
__---_ ________- / ,� - �)�' � z'§ I;r `/ 7' _� ACME RCA=CROSSING
{�i i i / ,ss / _ j Oy MASHING LIGHT SENA AND E °
{ '" �'\ +cal�S^ Amman GCE POST YWNIED
„ /.. .,:::'-'/`•''''' ,-=:::::, 14414, SI____ / ,'''''''.* ' '' ....". AN
, , „ :._ .,,,,...,,,2;:,.•,.. 7 ,•-... 4, .. . .- . • „.........,.. .,.• ..,•:....„, , ,./..:, ,,,, .. ev.-;,./
, , . .„/ 0 „:„:„,,,..„:_1:•,,,,.• • .. ...,.,,,, ,,,,, , ,:",.:• v ,,,,.„ ,.., ../.....4, <12.,,,,,,, ,
\ 7_/ • ':i•.+'=! ,: I. // \ "-
, a ': / y
L P ' i / am\/
A'-y = V1 ^ (0u\>.I. / / I s .7 ,,,/ /2
W l siE I+AS5 6L O O w �INe,ztl
�ii a{ / / % / 14 IAO� C6
• .s - - '/ ' Y. it, R -_I Ea
mho +'°
�J n^nn r d'
0
E I .. 3 7
•
yr
a'-ir / CENIEIZUxE - AWNW/
' ' i / i/' Ac " /,i z= z "M. ` �. -
.0.
OCCENIEPoME.. e ' / / , ' / /°/' .//,iz -) P POSED G 0 1-4 246-,: // / - 0 / / ' ,,/•,` ',,,; ;7 ' II -
iV I ($ ---- s %/ / v /eHi � A // R''' ;if ,,, v c� cy /i /i „..,/ ii � > �
�P , • / ''/ i �� '
/��r'/
s ' i i / ?r' /2 zae — o
s " 1
a
Z ' /`n ' 4 / i, i /� %•��' /' 9+6o Ho+oo ,o+ao +G+eo H>+20 n+so Hz+oG '~
/ %' ii 44Incor ted
3 / , /
:/7,./- ._ ,; %/ i /' / % 5s // 2G INrwm ore
/ i' r // / / ,%/ 5 (42
5 10•r2.. 5�e�Zl-4N9
1.A / / %�'/// ,de ,%// '� scur O INE¢C 3020900100
- / ' / ' / M1 / / HOR 4o sn
20' 0' 20' N.
P,xtH—one
GNE INE a
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
° fSIGN LEGEND
: 11
-_ / i mil^ .. ,/.",' "/' J�'/ Y' , y ,, \
\ ii
STOP
mm501 !_;‘, 5b1, ,e''/. ,_„--_,‘‘ ,, \\ ,-__/ / / / ,
G . \- tiE` • 6 \\ /' /x' ' // "/ /// i Q ,��
_,: `, _ - •IOPEhLSPACE;\\ \ \\• /TE / ' / ' i - , �''/ '
,'•��� / ACME Pw6nDvD CROW.
\'.{.".�\S\fit. --h -- _ \i\ \.} /' r // // / i / :•,:/Oj// /' C. PDOW110 G1EPOsE YrdMPD �'
1,':-.'.. )<?v.).:,:-;:\s.')1 ---.__.---:=-____ ,1 \ / ! L.'',',41////// , /,_, / ,/ / / .. ,Y/// ///- ® e
,':-4- °-Q- 7'-y��:-,'. a._. \`, \, . 1 I //f;, 3 Q, '" / ';j--X=: ' '', tyy„aOG
i,,:_. V yr
,,,,,,„,/,.„ ,/ ,,,,,,,
\i 1 •i :'..• ' 71 /'/ /,;,'
/ ;.:' ,-,, ,/ I VI STR e 1.+9683 ,
it /..,'Jl ./.-39), V �l.,,,.--,,,Nipl ' +.Y'/ /. .,� / '/ .• :/ PNT��IN>9.91 P.
E3FV�41.10 �4' �
AM.
/-'--G "-`\ ._.-- °;E�/J - ;: yam. '',,,,,,,,,/,
/ �; /,Q. ';' 'I,.'6 me
5
„y
..
/ /, O -,i,/ ' / ,i/ ,, ,,
Sso ram • G�4. a 81
wg
EI
itill
, ,,/ , i/`vitti' / 7m6
b :// E. xO
/,
� , PPOPOEED OWE '� '/ ' / !4., i „ , ;/i''' AT \\ O d
/ r' !�/' ' 'i' , zr /,/ \ / : AMWNE Q� J/ voraAND / /AP/ I , / j // )'\ \.\\.�
/
g "/ //26, / //////// //'
/ / //,'' ,:'" ,',/ '/r,/,',/
,/; / „/,/I as o 0
9 / //' ,'/ //ill( a
• x3l 1\ 0 o a
30 / / ' lir
,//; , —__ , '\\ 13.00 13.50 H.00 1.50 15.00 {-I _ :
/t�3 —1
( / /i'/'/, /'// i/i .;u 3 ` 0 Inc°PDreLed
g 369i / . / ' / / / .-- \ 11°' go alt4
ma Vey Poo
A / / 5 0 6 0 mom .001
VRT. 30209.001.001 Y
sU,E 0!MET 0,0,1 Po
r0P AD• 00• 4 �XH-nn3
sc.inz a rrrn
t Sheet of
, "11*(444/ P
October 11, 2006
Elizabeth Higgins
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98055
Re: Request for Revision to Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project Number: LUA-02-040
Dear Elizabeth:
The following permits have been obtained from the City of Renton for the Barbee
Mill development:
• Final EIS Issued May 3, 2004 (LUA-02-040)
• Preliminary Plat Approval March 21, 2005 (LUA-02-040)
• Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit April 1,
2005 (LUA-020-040;SM,EIS,PP,SA-H)
• Demolition and Grading Permit (TED-40-3330) 9/20/06
The purpose of this request is to revise the Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit to reflect an increase in the amount of imported fill and to reflect the
revised proposed final grades of the site plan as compared to the original
application.
The revised permit application information supporting our request is attached.
We understand that no fee is required.
Sincerely,
Con omts Company
Gary Upp'r DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Project Manager CITY OF RENTON
OCT 1 2 2006
RECEIVED
f
Attachments:
Attachment A— Revisions/Addenda to Shoreline Development Permit Application
Materials
Attachment B — Project Narrative
Attachment C- Construction Mitigation
Attachment D-Original Preliminary Plat Map
Attachment E- Revised Grading and TESCP Plan
Attachment F-Proposed Cross Sections
Attachment G- Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
ATTACHMENT A
REQUEST FOR REVISION TO CITY OF RENTON SHRELINE SUBSTANTIAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Project Name: Barbee Mill (LUA-020-040)
Project Address: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056
Revisions/Addenda to Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Application Materials
1. Pre-Application Meeting Summary— Not applicable
2. Waiver Form — No changes.
3. Title Report - change in ownership to Conner Homes Company
4. Land Use Permit Master Application Form — Contact Person information is
revised as follows:
Name: Gary Upper
Company: Conner Homes Company
Address: 846 108th Ave NE
City: Bellevue
Zip: 98004
Phone No. 425 646 4437
There are no other changes to the Land Use Permit Master Application Form
5. Rezone, Variance, Modification, or Conditional Use Justification — No
Changes
6. Environmental Checklist— Checklist responses are revised as follows::
A.2. Name of Applicant: Conner Homes Company
A.3. Proposed Timing or Schedule:
Complete site development work September 2006 through May
2007. Construct homes May 2007 through 2011.
A.11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal ...
Refer to Project Narrative (Attachment B).
B.1.e.Desribe the purposes, type, and approximate quantities of any
filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
The quantity of imported fill has been increased from 37,000 cy. As
noted in the original application to approximately 80,000 cy. An
additional 20,000 cy. of sandy silt previously dredged from the
mouth of May Creek and currently stock piled on the site will be
recycled as top soil as the site is developed. The placement of the
fill is shown on the attached site plan (Attachment E). The
description of the reasons for the plan are contained in the attached
Project Narrative (Attachment B).
7. Project Narrative — Seef Attachment B.
8. Construction Mitigation Description — See Attachment C.
9. Fees — No fee is required.
10. Neighborhood Detail Map — No changes.
11. Landscape Plan, conceptual- No Changes
12. Site Plan - See Attachment E.
13. Tree Cutting/Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan — No changes.
14. Architectural Elevations — Not applicable.
15. Floor Plans — Not applicable.
16. Wetland Assessment— Not applicable.
17. Standard Stream or Lake Study— Not applicable.
18. Flood Hazard Data — Not applicable.
19. Habitat Data Report— Not applicable.
20. Grading Plan — See Attachment E.
21. Utilities Plan — Not applicable.
22. Drainage Control Plan. Shown on Attachment D.
23. Drainage Report— Not applicable.
24. Geotechnical Report— Not applicable.
25. Traffic study— Not applicable.
26. Engineering Report Not applicable.
27. Plan Reductions —Attachment D.
28. Colored Maps for display— Not applicable.
Environmental Review Materials
All materials required for environmental review of the requested revision are
provided in the Revisions/Addenda to Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Application Materials detailed above.
ATTACHMENT B
REQUEST FOR REVISION TO CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE
SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Project Name: Barbee Mill (LUA-020-040)
Project Address: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056
Project Narrative Addendum for Revision to Grading Plan
During the phase of the project where the conditions of preliminary plat approval
were engineered into detailed site development plans, it became evident that
raising the elevation of the southerly half of the site by up to six feet thorough the
importation and placement of structural fill provided positive benefits.
In meeting Mitigation Measure B3 as recommended by the Hearing Examiner
and adopted by the City Council, The new May Creek bridge needed to be
constructed to provide a design clearance above the 100 year flood elevation of
May Creek. In order to accommodate this elevation, the driving surface must be
at elevation 31 feet above sea level at each end. The revised grading plan
accomplishes this.
Mitigation Measures B4 through B6 place requirements on how the site is to
accommodate projected May Creek flood waters and, at the same time, provide
and enhanced, 100 foot wide buffered corridor for the stream. At the time
preliminary approval was granted, the preferred EIS alternative for meeting these
requirements involved benching the west side of the May Creek beginning at the
ordinary high water mark and extending 50 feet to the west. This activity would
create additional flood capacity and then the area would be replanted in
accordance with an approved stream buffer landscape plan.
During the design phase it was determined that benching the stream channel in
that manner would destroy a significant amount of existing ,mature habitat that
was regarded as high quality by the State Department of Fisheries. By raising
the bridge and the lots adjacent to the channel, we have managed to provide
more than adequate flood way capacity and avoid any disturbance of the existing
buffer foliage. We will simply be adding to the buffer to bring it to a full 50 feet in
width in areas which were previously asphalt. This alternate approach was listed
as an EIS alternative.
The grade changes have also benefited our utilities. First, we are now able to
gravity our sanitary sewer to an existing sewer location at the northeasterly
corner of the site rather than construct a new sewer lift station on site near Lake
Washington. Second, by raising the grade, all of our underground pipe work, as
well as the excavation of our large water quality pond will be above the existing
ground water table. This is seen as a benefit because it keeps our work separate
for residual contaminated groundwater that is being managed by the previous
owner's ongoing remediation program.
The manner in which the lot fills are transitioned to the shore of Lake Washington
is illustrated with the attached plan sections. As required by the conditions of
approval, D16, the first 35 feet of buffer beginning at the ordinary high water
level of the lake will be planted in native species according to a buffer plan which
will be formally approved at the time of the final site plan approval process. The
new grading plan shows that the elevation change between the lake and the lot
grade will take place in this 35 foot of buffer area. 'This will result in a slopes that
will vary in slope from 3.5:1 at the south end to about 5:1 at the north end of the
site's lake frontage. As the cross sections show these slopes take into account
meeting Mitigation Measure D12 which states: Reduce the elevation above
OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline plantings.
ATTACHMENT C
REQUEST FOR REVISION TO CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE
SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Project Name: Barbee Mill (LUA-020-040)
Project Address: 4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056
Construction Mitigation Description Addendum for Construction of Passive
Attenuation Zone
Proposed Construction Dates: The site development work will occur between
September 2006 and May 2007. The majority of the grading work will be
accomplished during the fourth quarter of 2006.
Hours and Days of Operation: Construction will take place during normal, City
of Renton working hours Monday through Friday and occasionally on Saturday.
Proposed Hauling/Transportation Routes: Construction equipment and
trucks will enter and leave the site through the main gate on Lake Washington
Blvd. North near the south end of the Property. Interstate Highway 405 has an
interchange onto Lake Washington Blvd. North located less than one half mile
northeast of the main gate.
Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sedimentation Control:
The area of disturbed area needing erosion control measures is basically the
same as previously addressed by the existing, approved erosion control plan.
The attached grading plan (Attachment E) includes plan revisions to the erosion
control plan as well. These revisions are fairly minor. In addition, the site has
an NPDES permit from the state and is maintaining a SWPP on site. The SWPP
includes the TESCP as a starting point but is an evolving document designed to
meet the NPDES requirement that the turbidity of any water leaving the site be
less than 25 N.T.U.
I „;.
•
,z '-- • .,.. ---Nz"---
--� -- / -- -- - % -- __,___ _ ----- -__- -' -'__ -- /- N88'48'S6'W ._/ 0854�' -- -- -- -- \� _� / � r 1• , a, / :__---_-_---Z.:- __....__ ::__ ._.___,__,.._r_________,______ , ...., ,,
_ • �1` i'. ;`fi - 9
..._
23
_- - ��i0�f� 24 ~ ' �� / \ - :_ n Xis
...... .
`�\ 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 I �\ �: � '„' ' //i/ t g
22 21 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
:!,.../7,:s....f./4,,,,,./. .
r 24 •
jI zs.o I I 26.0 I 12s.a V I 27.0 I I 27.0 I 1 zzo I 1 2zG I I. I I zzo I ► zzo I I zzo I 1 27.0 1 �� 1 z7.o I �� I zzo I I 27.0 I 1 zzo I I 27.0 I 1 28.0 I Ii;, /
/ // /
I I I 1 ../ I I I \ I I 1128.0 I �119.0 I i 129.0 I i?'Y'.,',-� .��/ /////,// a
1 ,;/ I 1 1 \ I 1 I \ I 1 I r :•' / /i/,A/ 7 7JIE
1 \ I }"' /
., ..
:•2:
r/ /
t .._Y,.., -.c ... , ,- - ,. - .. :.. /iIIIii '
.... .. , - n "` 'fi.t 61 41
-
2 _ .. ., ..1+U ^,.. _-._. . . .,. _. t ��15 � 17+D0=>�:.:_�s'.`:
t 2 _ - /
i'
:
/
,e.
•-"ir
Iis•• I:r:: _•.. - .. �Z
:gt
Mit
1 26.0 1 _ ,
1( • Ilt : 26
'
:
. .:',1!;%;4:I.,„r' -- . V ,' , ___ ____
I
/ % 74 / 73 / / /. / / /
4. 75 76 77 78 79 / 80 81 82 -_ _ / 72 71 /70 69 / / � ' {
' : /////l'.7 if
I 27 :/;�.-`,: _ s ;I I / I ,!!( .lr/
' �''- JI I 1 / I I ® l J • %r 1: 2s,o 27"o I L 1 I III I /I 'I'.:;; Izzo i/1 27.0 I �� Izzo 28.0/ 4:,4 ,/ 28.0 27.5 OF= __, I I I I 28.0 29.0 / 29.0 30,0 ///// ,, I;j(' /J{
13�i.� r 1 ' /, �1;�1//r
N-./ / . ,-.ci' . i//
\ 26.0 A1111, / c: / ,g 28 ..4*.fi',4 iii,-..:j.. . , s/ /, t,:I...1-z..:-..e.i• / /j uns.S.. 1
, cx::cs t5lvloc1 I :i \ .!.i,,,,r1.,.:?i,'::'211:\ .ep.,, .,....:::i0e.' -.4i;:tft,4::,:..„.._..,....„0,;:021:4;reo.,t,zzz..)z.,.. . , - ...
Ns'N
1 - _ 29 \'S.r-14.±-.,:3.
' ;y'y '.; 1:1X.6.1:" +Ea 126,0 I '':`�:j_c.. • I I , ,/
/1 -. .: C:;- ":a /TEQALITY192 F„
\ la; ,: 1%+�' ._ BOT=15-0 0: 26.0 • ~.1 r 30.0
--- \\-- 30 '7.r:_-;=\ �`,": �K: ed'i''; qy� • , •�•i.`• 85 `/;: ':_�%-r. r I. , �� ,/ / I 0
�4 Jy,. ® J,•;, ligir j')51.1''''. •J•, �e v.o o '.I 651 ' / / / •
[;:"sus'nj:,s_tili Z'r zr;,,n,a,� -a -`0` ' eNI' 4 `- I � } / \ /,/, U F
• ?K: :•:e Kt:• �? ' . I. I if , ca
o
.: TOP=21.0 F» --=1 t�.•':•'4s,.;a.. "'•' KYF $'J / / 00
k WATER QUALITY-19.s :,'; 'xd$K:o.•°a• :•:"�• 1 /�,'--•. m / / /• / •
CO 1
tr; BOT=15.0 ""ivy 1 - -: ;;:;•:K.'" %j 13:2 64• / ,, / /�/ a,...4
flr -'' '` Y- "'�s...�\ 9.�J .f2=''' I 27.5 . 'I. •• ,'<� 27.0 O / / , • 0I c
v`iwarwa^.rtq't�uw''�'aY.i1E?+�`3�'sv�.>�,•:• \ 2. ,`>:�_g;.(Cs_ ^qr!o. ' - V89 _ . / •
/ /1 I a1 pZ0�1 O N
t ,:".. __\ _ •A::.!''.
'u, ,. ,mow;?:�' 2 -\ a/'# ;;:,,/,-.�.=,jn.},''- / _ / 1/ , 1"'•q .••I Fi
`..•..�r�J, 28.0 I :<tc•,. ;:'' I O r �, a),i'ta.
• 1IK
31 ,'� s` J �� I / /c / /� Q'i11
a• I - 125,0 ` _9 a app:.: _" \ _ / /�v --- `�1
a . :.2.!.....011\
_::___ i . WItiai V'7 2'
-71
l /25.0 Iri:3:s 1 I // f' .3 ,\}?' / 1 1_ / Q r r / / // Q
� / '• >'r rA is 6:' , a„�.-,.s. 59 / - j r� .. �q
/
'I1 33- i.M1;i'f:' /�-_ / /r 'o`r?'` 1091 44 "?<' 58 1 / /:i �,,,r / ,......./:-
////../�at \ - \ I /e i
--/--J 1 z5A 1 I'o •. �� \j / / o r ti i / 1 _`'r •I$�/i: `'�._ / 6= / \l/ /(1 \� 57 129.0 •1 / r,�/ �r / // ` \ / 1
vI _ -1'-- _ I,�'1,,,V.: i//v ' ��. "' Q•� � 1111 I 1 \ - 29.0 //� I 1-4
/ / ''';:: ;/
`` / /I / / NI I --. 1---/ I ' l a Z F-
1_ - - ,_, '_ i�d /i /s ;` 1 \11 III �\ �I I // '/ // // 111 \ 11 •' ~ Q
•
- J34 "Zmril °: 1( 1I / illicit::._ /i / // /i/ / / / , r.:. -� I I .k /
edL: I c "" I\\ 186vx. 1 / / r/ r r ✓ / /, 1 `: "_.^; \ // Q i1 25.0 1 / ..'i^ _ / ter\ �" rr / :tilQ���1 <• 1:_v'. Y -"S%>� - /18.0 • `_St -/ .i 'ri //� / / f%: \ ....�.�.a.t'5 "t�'�" ✓ .VOINIEr / • a d�- OAte/ •\.` ' /I _k • • I• �•y� Q/ 10 / 1vf / N d
Q
pJ Ir'1
I
/ J
_F:,:
•
l! /
a /1 , / ' l 11
i I!/ I; : mil / /. 0.. i -; //' / / /, , =�V; =:" 1 I___ !I } � �;�! !1
N \' 1 26.01//// '+:'' _ -� J/ /i//`// 52 ,:\'k@• - /..- ' • // / / Y. •N'.,' I % _� Ir 1 I .
I .l I 49,=` //_ r�� ! / ~� ' / '`-� � r` •^:p7�• I i ' I 7/ I (1 s I
SEE SHEET G1_2 i ' ', I / / I 141 ® O a
• LEGEND: MATCHLINE STA. 19+75 ►1
II /% `I I
• 23 PROPOSED CONTOUR I I A I; o Y ® tia
�
EARTHWORK DATA (APPROX.) DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ---23--- EXISTING CONTOUR
CITY OF RENTON Incorporated
EXCAVATION: 32.000 CY.(50.000 TONS) SD- PROPOSED STORM DRA[N
FILL 38.000 CY (60.000 TONS) OCT 1 2 - PROPOSED CULVERT
STOFER ZONE f�Ac ms ' ii
NOTE: UNSUITABLE EXCAVATION SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE • STORM CATCH BASIN
TO AN APPROVED OFF-SITE LOCATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ��^� �� 30209.001.001
THE CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS.ADDITIONAL FILL MATERIAL • STORM DRAIN MANHOLE ProjectNo-
TO BE PROVIDED FROM A LOCAL SOURCE AND SHALL'BE I1'1 ,, `A. a ' RETAINING WALL G 1 . 1
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDS. 40' 0' 40' 80' ^
CSC* ROCKERY
:-N • ,:ci
• .
/ . g
SEE SHEET G1_1
• •-•..4'-.:TAN.,-.::• -••:.--..
, . /\ _. ti ------ • 5
s-
, I ..•••••••••• •••'.''''''.''''•'''-...' f,f.••,..-,,',,y,-.1,',', '.‹,:,,,5A r-e'•.• ' I.7 /-K i i'/),',03:2 K 6.x...„-x...,,,\:• , ..• 26 .
1 35 / ;•;',,..%?•-•::];',i0"..:.‘crc.,!„-...77..H,••:::;.3:,:t;',...,_>,;‘•q.:.:". -t:'. • • -• . 1111111111." -.-/:\-,N3---•-'i ,..,e,,, ,,, ,..,,,
-..-.,,E, „ ,, .
_ ____
.
\N , . ,,r I '''-r?''-'''-.,"'f-'''.'-'.' •:-i.,''-4?-.j.. ,,iV-::•'-',--':-••.t . ,-5,--/,';--___.-.(28.0 1 ; 4•00.
r/r/ 1,44-•:-."--,,,,,,,:?,. .......,,,,,,!...,-,:::::,...,,.: • ,--__':=--- ,;(3) r-As. 1 i.,,,/ ,
r ;.Ir''.; ?:''..;•'',,-,.'f.-'116.•:,'•?.?,,c!,'''.FA'-'''s,'-,,'' /-:--:'1g'S 1.!..‘ ..--
' . \,
' • - .. -- q"' 361/1/11A416Y-
L____--\
1-4. i/ •.-.•;;„,•.-..y.,•••::! \ ,././//,;,..,...;?,,,.......:•„.
..- -• ,,
- --•-_,----,
_-- --r /.2.-- ••• I 28 0 I..--.--, . . , , •
„ i• its...',4.;-!:,!;:1•7.t-,!. :".-„:.".-_-,-,'///,.'
/
/y ,
...- .„...-
\ 17_
...." .4„!-:-::41.±* __--' , ..•' „„--•"- --0: *..,
''-- a,a,t--e,FAI ---- ,- .
., - ,-
/
, r/ / / ' t .
5 .Q
5 E
Cl LC
/ -.. , i ..,-
,,,, ., .... ------------ ---o 0
. . .. I '1 01/1 I 1,j,,i'Z';:::.',. . /;"...';;: '-'.--'-;:':/// i ,
/ HI ii// ..4.1, ';,..::`'j I., ."/.''':," ..--------- '.''. 51 /---;•--r , ---- ;'..;.'41,.. -;•,..•'',\ ---------- //,//
,-A'J-1
/
1 1 H i lit,/// ''.,...'!03 ,71".•7. 1._'Y ri--' ------,- ,..--
• •V./// II;§:;91'}';`,:i- 1. j--- 'y'5,",--,.-.- Sill
I i ../ /// ''';-------> \,'?"-%'-r*'\ - ,
.." _.‘ / //,' ..-000 s t:W.4':.:,%.i-2-4..;,, . 1.- „,--.:---„,----. .,.\\\ -V // //
ir/ii wyme,,__, 04.:0-;1 //)'7/'
, , , ,..,__ ,,, \ \ -- // /%,/, .* >_
03 .
--,
'--. l',.%,1\. /
1 I ---------- iN \ - r----'-'-' / 50 , , , , „•.,
/...../ z.,- / "./...„//sr.; \....i.:.7.--;.-...:___. . ....i. „,..„...., ,..,\, \ \
,,A,;..::,,,,:2..7.y,
., . .,-- ''•.''''•-•- '67 SOF-rSIS4E TRAIi. 1 \i//,-y
/ ,-- 8
1- i ,__1 ,'-- V kfr • '.7,..77:?fIX', -;•.i-- ....0 // sa.oF /
s ‘
\ il g
• ._-------1- / 1 --- ;1.,.•.'.-4'57.,.\ I ;:;.-- // //,‘ -..AL • \\---- \ ---2 1 1 / 1
k•.\'' ...-- 1..:.:!:-ei. '-..,,t. -' 1 28.0 I
l.," IV
A g
,. / ,c, / • .,-, ,, ;-..0,i.,14. -., __-___-,-\ 1, \if p,/,,,/,,.. / /
,
., 4:pf,:,.1-:-.:,!:;,:,:i _ .. --. -s. \\ f. ,IN/,...._.::://// / V ' /
1 rx,-, •4.,\
h,/ ,Ap.
l/ 0., 4b, / -'',:'f.4 1...:::'.:F",e•.:-i 1 g:,,,',.". gi. '\ • / l -/.,• /If / /•
/ 1--"' ' /1/1 / • '41:K.f.t f'''-%';'. ., c! 3., 10,,,, 6,,//,/,a / , • ,ssw
/ ,,,, 11-1A:1.1,-,,,....,,/,,,,-,i7.,,,-.,„, -4,-•,,„ Nat.k.' //// ir / / 4 r%
,iii'-;;.':3.4.'• t„..,/ ( //. ,/ // I .%)",I,a TAalit r •
115 ,• 'III,.-- • •,-A4-',1',-,-il,/z-4:P.,-,, •• * / / /IF / / • /
K \ / \ 1 I• / N • i / .7=41,,-;:).--. ..":1,;i",*;-!.-4..,1. .-iii,%;:. 1,..*. // d / / /// .. .:.. -
`, ...--'.-----...----_,IP •'.;::.--rs-•,:?.,‘,::.,:.-Z-„:,-i4--,i-.:ii.1 ..... --i.,-4,...0 41r / / /// Ilk.ii.
t i',..4:?‘
\ r .,-.;rii.if,,,,,,.:*,-_,,,\ • ( 'I/ ' . '
,v..,:s..-,,,.,9.-i,•:,,, , \ r, / i
h . ., .•Ir --- -----70'-. --A,.,v...:,.:,-, ,•,"/,..:•: 41;,e: e / / / / 4
.--- :..'".-•-:-.- _ /.,•',-•i'l .,,.-s.<0..::---,:'."....4). .4:3Prioi-,43.›.a.,:- .... , ' 4,1 l'illifij77
----7---- / 40 / /1 / I 11.4-> -----,--- ,,,,,,m„,-,.9,91p.. ., .;,.;.,,,f5,,,..mtv.,;••if`<triA,„ / / / //.
LAKE WASHINGTON \ ,•.,„,,,,:i,..
,-.4'N \ ii I. / I ,'OM. / 4.' /// i4h.46'1' •''. 4)
I / . /....'-'),'-'/. 1 .,:ide• -'1.-'9,4t;f2"'?4iii>
\ -'• Mill \%_• ,i-Z te\ . I I // ' I f•%-_. / ,--- :03?;,i;:..;"i',..7.IIW •/••, -:'i!,V,4P-,...t.''',,.;. ,4411H'.\4,,,....___1142.05e;//' 'ion
li/ '3--- -- /1:::4-,t-i:g•-,/ ••,;.-••- 4'..P'• --RiPA.-s,'•/?.-°/!):.7-..----/ta:Tif.-„,, --:::,/,r ..)-)
1\ .1- .....,,,..,,,-,.,/ • / , ...4,0%s --isio..:-.-1, :pe-.,),,,4, .1/ •
1/ /11 (,. • i I IP"- - : -- /..,,11.1,,:-.;:f:'.::E.!.A.i6:4::::'ii,///////, ""sse.''...,.'„'-eleh'4,,ii-e4i:c.,:,:7:1:4,,,,-';.,-;..•,..,/7///,,/ ... Dwasi______Ep2,a_______-16
/ / i 1 III if /...,,,,/..,..,.,...... /.1///„, /1 // -,..,47.:,.:.--,,,-.:.„.7....„0 ..
\ , I / / • ' 112 ily,-, /4 -,'..1...c-r.:.1:,•.i-7: //2.0, /
(Ty.„,) '/ 1/ i „) /--• IEMMET111; •',6 "...F.A4:•:. 'a.°/r/' / /,/ ' --•';7;3••,;-•---•
/ / y ' *-1.,-Yi t .*
1 \ -"••7a'.sy-(`- i/ / ' / I 14,•-10 • ,4,...„ 1 .,....-,-,.,o,z,./ 4
r „„: , / x'A', %1 .,-4..:,,,:•--,:- /,)) /
's‘
I % I 1 I r i 111/ \ 11 f,:z70,-YA-3P/•///// / "9" / ' / // /CO' /if /, /
1 i fii ' i .// \N il 1.1 T , .:;.:. ., // / //r///.4 ; // : , ,--,1*
1 k:.i•111..;.:5t.i.. 1.
1 \I /-44)-;91/if 4/7 ^
1 k awn ;,..-5.4*1,7.14.1i4K, \_'..11.41 hi / / -/
"., ' • / /,' •i
1 if;ii...,,•:,. .,.,-,,.4-,.,•:.-.7.,..„ : ,/ :/11/// /./I /1 1,1., , a , .4..,;.:,, .-,2)/ / / / /,/ •• / Z
• 42 ,fr,:.•••!;'`,-••:•"-";40-, :, ,-, , 1 1 ' r i• . .7 /7 7,7 .7 . , ,A
. 0
1 \ ''''''': '4'''.461..i,t7.-.„-, / 110 lill i •-•''... . ,,,,Y.// / / 6/4. I
---------.___,..,... ‘) / ,k,;.-1,v.i3.,t,Nvii-Aw,..-1 -- // 1 ii .•,-i,... .I:I3277....:,///// 1 1 /ii)e i / / // fr• r. :/
• •
/ .,...?,,,f„,.,:-.....:',:.;.,g, - / '. Ingli , 4,\J;.‘,..„,, /// / / / / I • /1
- ;;;.5flq:.,iTliVe.,.' / i // s!/ I I r.';'0c,.,3:71F7, // 7,/,,/
/ I, /
i / //// .. • fly • 0 Z
Y / b/ C.)0
-, j-,:i..--..r.--"4:::',-.-4.,,f,:-f•Sz;-
Aii-cf:-.Vjw:.?-0' 109 0 117„),. -Ai,-,q,/,y, // / ./ //' • / //it/
/ / MN , ,-,,-.. .,....,,,,••// i /- /ill. tlaggio'
, • i•--0Z-Z-ii.,-t -- 1 i 10 /-gkg.ii:;:•".:-1-• , 7 ., , ,
... , ,.....„,•,,_,,•,.., ,
. / /, , //// • i ,/ ////,//,/ ....
, 4 ,;.V.V.-faliTi:T /1 : --•'''% 1 1 k 0 0
0 0
/ /
,
' „••••1.1. / . -,•'----.-->o;'7----...j.;/, / / /r / II II. .-1.4,..V. ./////// // // / /4" ///1-TZ:,3115/89/.5"://///,,/•itY
1 /P'-'•,1YP.iik.--• . / / /// ar / / , .., /, /,
• / // (- rz,r ff_YQ / -.N.„-: // // ,if / / ,/ //,' / __,
,z -, ct; ,--.=-Ey .. , -'' ii.'1.1‘;'. ...11 / -///41 / P' / • -//,',-, / ----- -- 1 . • Cr:112u*I.A7 •, z EMI -i.;;-.7* / ./.. ',.-.- / .
• /1 / --- i'\C- -'==.1"/// /4-,------..C.:F PA el
, •4 , i ) ,- ••••.-•.F.,-;:., z/ , //ill' 44 / // ////',.. P-1 -,gi
,...../
,,,,-.,,:,-„,,-,, ., /• /././../ „
-,
, //, , • / , 3,=.5 1 1...!--8.4i:;:7.11 , -4 / I • if ii i/1//,'.ri° /,;//,;t, ..,, XI ir P. -
/ . ,>\'' NEI _.-...., . :,.0e/41',7:.;,--.' "/ ///4' • /// ,' ////,'' iqi ////';',/
1 A , .,e:/;;:gic.:F-2:;.e.'- , /,// 4.//1///' . --.•
n 106 N ,:/.7,....4t1r1.5.-!1:;: //// ///////'41,1?-• ti ////,//ki: ////i//'//// /
_...
,y-
--N
7---
Zo
iiIICE s' 4
.,..:.•,,,,-ifa:. ;?-1c:2;1.':eili ///// . ili // // I
.-.- • /
..--
1.. 1 10
• / \ ,--- -- i \ LEGEND: z
Cti 2* er....?.3,,i,,24V'// /4, / / / 53"\ i ::-764-vii.-- / ,•,/,:e/rry / //// Y ‘<'. //;/7
•-.
•40•1 ..1. ..„?:*,",' //, ,,z,k• i / 104 ,ij:?:.*,VA.',i't,..., /// //' ////
/ / / 23 -- PROPOSED CONTOUR • I-4
- / I f \ \47 .:-]•)s••••••:..,.. -- • . ////i A.c, / , / /- -'\.\\,..„ KEEN ...,-..,i ;.,i-vy _ __,:Z---,/,/s//,/. (.7<////// ,,,, ti ii ,./ -
',"--,. /..;;.... •• , , / ,• , / v--; /, /,' ,.-.7,k- ,,//, /0/
.
•\„ .DT,•,•
.IE.
.I,ff,
-.,,.k--n.-.-••.-...•...l
-."-_.-.2-,.._.-...--......•/-•••_41//_,,_r_,v.w...-4_•;•_%•-„.•/,7„_:„_3.,_.i.•..._,'..,_,,.,._
._/,
/, ,/,/,/ ,
/,1/
1/-,1/,•:,,/t 2
-f':&E1,'1/•0M/1:14•/
P•-I.,-../,I.-/,;:21i!.'•::',811,.,.02..,_14..(021/3/\s1..1.'-,:.:;Y:;v/.://::/1/'.':'/':.'-.71:,-,/',-.I,;/.:.•/1••/,•:":',,;:,./,.;/;,,;/.,//,i,:...'.r.Tr i.„1.i,-,,',/....::.,:.,-:\/:..t6-,../-,.,J.v„//•. /:,:'‘.r/.''../„/_//'-/•'•:-//,--,//./-
, ./.„/ /,/
,7/I/7
'/1;/;,/i L./•r;i// ,1•%
-14'.•-•',
1‘/i,•
.TE,0I0FTS 0F.IRPATaK.S.0E MiImHE NlRSRET.GEECDDy.O.Z Nc TFASONCL.CH)N.PEI
4L..TUOvR.R.E..UA.
A.RR
OV 100290 - S - PR°P° DST: O NES.T.
DLH1.EN Ro.VA.L.
..E
N
/ I :: / 17 : / ININ:WA
/, 2 : / / / 1 OO .....•.... • •-u4g40T0C..10.rA.-r..r4.)4,r g i
•fP-lgrr'eIrp.P--
I<•
TX14Me-.c-314.-I
o.az-0<0CL..:Ln•a.4L..c1-..)J I(z0l;<W.!I-0z_ 1
•
/ / TO BE PROvIDED F1R01.4 A LOCAL
/ • t.015''.. ,.-Or' / ."•:,), ..\, \__, //.:fg.S2j0....:!., `."- ^--- /// ...".' / '''', // ///// ,' .. /// //
.,,,, ,,,' ''' ..ii;i:' .%•V' 7 ,;•:X 416N.....,..2y /.,-,.,;,.,.,,...zi._ , 7 // // /c/./ ///(,' .* •/ / /
/Ask.- ::"/" :!,.*•/,'• /,e // y • // / / / -
/ A, _.., .,.... . '\ ,,,,x ,*I-• •----T--,-....-/p-•I N i \ / / / ' ' //// / . •
• ACCORDANCE W0H CITY OF RENT
U:80NS.°AtilrITABCLEY :E. AR:MDmOVE0NALD FRFIODAN:mATcEHTEREwSlazTE
APPR(OEX6VED°CA.°13:AOTIFFT:-NNSSSITE LOCATION IN ACCOR
CITY OF RENTON STANHADLLARD
0SNOUsRTANCEDANARDDISHALL BE IN
64 :15,1'. .59.frnl
0 Incorporated
4-)
, 0 .
' 4(1„ . ''''' ,,,,,00' r `., ,',)i.•••:;,,,,7.-'ift,-;,,./ii. ; I / ,' /*,/ -1 . / , J./,, ,,,...„, /././ / /
/ INTERPRETIVE PANEL
• .7/ / / //,. .. i.,../ i //
/ Ur,•:Ir: .,,,,i0II*. ' ' N 0,:.n,:::,;:e.47f/ //,111/// ‘ / / /,5. . / , i
" III;g1•70'.. .,-\ \ "7,..j....'140:,;;CV:'/' // jy, /1 /. / // / // ,/.',.. .: / 7N1/
\
---_-_,----
I/
, -- / -.1, ., / / / /../ / / • .- /44' , / • '
•
40' 0'44 40' Z 30209.001.001
G1 2
0,10 -...- ,‘
.
rSTS-li! I
...• '--- 14' ',ell' .9 / / // // / a' otz 46 ?As' EAS) • . 80. Psrhoeleect tNNo.o.
---......" ‘ _- /I I// ,0 6E41'9/ A./3"/N,9' / '--,---=.-(i. ..._.... .- i\r-------
-- B A R -..'•LJ L N� i Y Y , !MU tierP>320 /a' ',0:�:- 1 ,N,'',':
snit Grad g and TESC Exhibit CAE 39A�2 n
Shoreline Development`. _ in �A : gip /�' �-
1 ---,.' : '--,;. ,' ,;-• tillt# i) 7; / .6,'
1
, ,
:
:
'
',....F-,,z-A(„ A.,..,•,'-',.‘,1 ; f ' , i' 1 : 11' --- ' '' ''--'/Cm'.. .)El ,' /'/ ,,,,,. '..414/li.,;/\ ir /,,,, i:. ,,,,,, „,, ,,,,,
\ . . M y -✓wry _ _.._ __...__.._.. I/
:.✓:. `. '. / -.__.._ 20..TEMPORARY ��_.._.:+.. ..-
(2a
%'\-_.4_. TOE y9
c� 1.
... CONSTRU
•i•'z i'
217 (12 : '' 10R �.
1W x2T .._...D .. ..--...---- --� 1CP 29.0 ., v ..-•—_.. � Tz' ',}, ��;i..;twey�i`:�?i
•
( l0E ; _-_____ ___. .�..._.._.t»,x�., --MONO
__ _ __ ___ ___ ___ __ _ �'�, �,�/ �'-;
•
•
,- ` .. t' r:—""L' ----:—t--- , ,,,—';'--i , , i ,/; i �-- Y 1) J� /f0E O( '/j 1//'6.�f.'.Q..
• ^,.. ..r. lFF
20 19 16 17 16 15 14 13 12 11• 0 ' 9 8 6 .',//' :r-lwi-.. m' !'
22 21•. / lOP
4 I / i .—.0)I , , i\. , , , ')/' ' ` �( ,/ ~ // ^/.
/ r
_dd i 4 _ _.. I y�.
Imo. 7 pYPJ 1 1 ,.{�'-' ]--' — -\� �•} _ 1. -•—•-I +_---•' •4--±- ., .- -a-.±-_ 'aa -/ / , if/ t//,Jy
,/'
tlf
Q I s ; Ip:. '
O MP.) ,/// / % 7, 79 'ii; 283
,• pYPJm. 76/ 7574 73CAL 77 • •
1:1
iT. -- ' 1/' / //� MA Millo--I - - •
• 11�:ir' -_ -•
• / 1 (J*�. //�1i
I SEGMENT ,��� � ( , -,. —/rvp i �J '
L ;m PONO 2 � 4 8ttlwl� 'f, • 7 y,,.) /' ,/
/' ,fr / %,.,
(tYP. Y./ i// �..^ A .0) OT�(C mAO) 1 \ (TYP) t ill 68 _ __./ 69 ,/ v!_' r' /, ,/! //. yy,,I J ,,
' 0' 0 LL...xa xeA / �. 1 / / / ! /,�llf
fff"` ••\.. • :: ,,, i 1cE mA ;T°E m.o �,••" ��a m.c 87 6(T7rP• ' ji I j /�j m /
•_
'/ r
I O /-mom / /- .' 64 a• as -ea / / .,- /L. f - ''f / �// ' ;
'lE ''...A.....,::-- ,,,,,..
/-7-7.' .-'14r1 191 ‘, \ - 1 411 66 /:i / if if / ' I r I
Il ../l'‘.11/ / —
�".Q 93 � -/ tom/':_'' 4--(/ ( '/' w'f
... -"-: • • in r.ri _
, 64 ;;S' /.': 7 '..,''' '- /A/ ' '
•
93.. "IIIIII _ 2 \\- 96 P,+ft; '=.':;, - 63 j 1 1/ 'd. ,'I•,.," / '/�.
1I,IIII� ''Al" 1'�:';`'._) / / ' / / 7. it
,..,,.I 31I{�Id��I. 11��I I,. \\\ ,t),} 'I '�.~ �.\/ �2 �i'1 ,.,/•/%( �/ /,.'/Y,' !/. '\,\�
\\\\��IItI I1II` I -,�,.;•,-9�....,,\ ?+, /t �,,'{t"{i,,- k) •i11�11�" \ ! - ,_\ I)i' %, ;illy' I 0\ Ask61/\ J,,,••i /'i / w!
t � � �!�• /%-c.'�:.:. �.;-_�\ `"-'1 .-�. 11 �L.\
e \ i,.` •/ T°E 2z° t'=-_t', /A/,. J /J/t/i is p /�. tl t Pwmuxr straw wwN rrmm TO Is um m
\ \�S�" ,y/ys...._ _ .yi •.°'._. 7';• �1 ii 58 ,., / / //1' ./,- i. f / /. !j,�'' HEWN WITH FINAL S cMTH TESL 6
-.�. c/L.' .__ ^:. •,,� -' -- ! /'1'�/ Imo' r //s: meta
01-C4.12 FOR 11. �,
_ y
,,-_:.z..� 115E
* u
i1 ma oSZE.AND
• .. , .,:,... .r^ 57 / / /' J' Q 121� sE TIRCA aF NM
uuris
I / M , d I ' '•)/ • ,/ / / /' 'P /,,, SHEET
� ,/ !' j' %'' a •.7, /fo: //y oEnuL oN sEET
I il' /�•'� ,O`��•�. _ .._..�... •-. ., ,.. .)� F / /• +/ / ''t ,'� DOpNSTRUCnpI iFNCE PER
All
1135 ✓( ;;/ •'%"9E- . l °"`; i "X 1/i i .� //!! ''! � Pm oEwL oN s+EET c191 I 'r)'ll,,` - .://. .„_,6( '(s) , , �•<. 'MA ) ',/•f r !/1/e/221/!;/,-/v1 •M/ I.:J�FENCE F]c.::ER@7Aa,,Ts.T
' / aoNs«cRa+
'�' `) 1, ;�t't1' ,,,:;/.' 2 x _ __. / '//+ '1 / `rlllf/17' -i ) / c19c.
36 {{1)i _�-/\/r.� •i•.- ! ••••' �,-▪ ')'',"'-4 ,/
' r • ) V ' r•, oETAL ON 91FEf ct9t
fC1t s,! t'i{ L.^ �e+n l✓ /, �,/ r� i/ ._....:.y9. J ?�.( ! •;• //;' .� ! EITROCX 1M03.w/Sl PER(` t�l��ll ,I I Cl /,,"i0....���r,-,,,\5.1 PONowa ea . _. :¢CAECA •:'0 i'/,' ' / / :L,J !. /bi .%,\ 1.90. •urtmcEPtors mn1_ PEA 07 ON
v
�-4•a�-.:: rr(iv'per , !/' 'r' I'p a---..-3......... /' Top MA r - o.�)n 1/ /'t /;`.1\ c,.91
tq� I• ."':':,F. fiit r dial•I9ID 35 _- tis.__.-.. .'t- ',1'a- �`0• / !+ !-,:1 !`�
ID, Eli i; ,. Ill\ "2&0 4.0 .._.-... - • q::^. :�;+�/ ' / /• /,'!i• .''�X C1.90.
. �t •,:: 11\\1.1� t 'l_.� f' ''/) 1�,\\• I 11iOCI(WE«DAM PER OET/0.ON 511EEr
11 .�7 3f; '/ •.:11\tl �►1\11�,� TCE x4.o Y �. •rt,•- '''��'•riPEr d_ .� ' 4:1
L>=ii111Cr,,) __ ' ` f• . f ,�,. x' �.~,S ` -. hi�g°'.V,„. // s¢E
.tC, ,;`•-' ii,`\„^ •. \;%psi` j\` "\�\"m TOP a ''l••' �t m, � `w�^t1: ' ;�,f/' ,'y\\ TExPoRARrcuLVEm.MPROXw cm MD1.. \ ` _\1`,,\,`'..`.=.,,. v / FCY:ii;.63, n i, (A9 m• .L / 4,; J :\,\ i °�Im (s-aEON.}` I .t 1 j i '' l0E NA/ / V[ w't ���1� ,/ ' l ,'\., 1°15 Cf YVI.I�-P/PATPIPE wlfT,OUIFALL.OR%',4 11 1 `�\•- ' ,1 �1",\\� POND O l it 1• O"�7.e 11 J , . / l= � 7// J ra+OUREr w+OETUL oN s1EET
I.3 2 \ 11gI,WiF� 17.8 E1)4 14" . y�:o:•,1 1O TESL saNYR PEEI DETNL oN 41EEf c192
\�e]' 1At
�I I—11----Ii \`�" •:� j / 'zmr �'^ !; J•fr' ®• J/�, l t f smwwr»tAP wE°Eru oN sNEE]c19o.
;T \ ,!/ +,� 113 s. \, 7 0'' �w 4 O• k ' -j`_._-.__•• aSfpWE oRUNP,,L4RY` 1 \ 134 •• / _ 'D L 2l1 lk /': •/ // /'/. .. Q••••�r•rp I • `•.••" f] FOR IAE wlfN TESL EtEISURES olaY.
'! 1 (( f .r { • +112 / . / /� P•(p ON% 'T C 91 GVl61RVCibIL SEE OETNI
`/\ Ti _ -7.-7 '6, i 11 /t) ,'�a .4i \. / 4 /lj,I� J. '��" /,/ yy //"�'� k..ti }:Q \`,,._✓'1/ C1AZ
r( / \ 0•) V TOE •9 6,C 1 /' %i I//It II / •'/ ` /• '/�'/' / ��;•
i,.7 �A.„0.3i./' 1078181.ra's..0,...„:1438T1
PFH DEFAIL CNSFEET C792// '`,Y \ \ 1• /', J y�t r / '�\4j�/ J,/'' ,I // r/ / 'fi;j ,• f dl1- - ,off,% RUCIpN FENCE M/ATTAACIaaO1 �'• ,l�"�� \ \ \ , // •) ,V'. 1 1 j • 'r%lI..'4'I ip:�' S • J'i/� ~\ •\'`C"J OE7AL CAE 91EET C1.91�� RCPSay'•8' •/ E •10 Iii`t . �//J/ �".I / / '' '/ .N LLC11ON .. SEE DETAL ON SNEEr OI.B7.. I:'. VI� at 1 1 ;r, f ; pas„'9°4 f• Tj /' �VV :£'/ IE n6../�'.J� /i ' /// cwBBmR ` ulT vaax wAA 10 vROIEcr RRE'r', 1111111 ` SS ' m.1 / / 4t $ECO LLA55 aL\OatL N,OR,VRSNA1L11\ � 4 ),\, i"I f) (.) 09 It / J'' '/:.: '�'� ,/%: r'^,��,�,.,s��Eq� TED wmE umRY wax sFE sIEEr
,,,N,, 1111,11``' \. -- I ; !d (// r'1`.'i' _ 0,...)1 l/ ID z,Y�, c. ,, .. : a.tNeSi cp a a.94
\_\\ ,111 \\'•az } l�"'"1/ a I ',—_• ////"' / ,/ l'll)'; sr ,'.fl%'_20: '- m Fml SCREEN BUM PER OETAI ON SHEET
\\`'•`';1�1`` - i : ' 08 1 ! / /�/:d I 7).//
/P / / I,',
\lt `111I } /5�. E =�, F3 '. /i, ; 'i ///; �-' I EGEN___Dox
1;i ':i ) r, , • , • / / CATCH HAM IN ET PROMERIAK,',HICH'/�£:�����j�/�/43� T (.•'� .i�',/.,:I/ \I 107 ••,/��� /fj• ..` t •._/� �� [/ w ROLx a1Ea(mWIa on, • / / �`i k.A. , ,-.' 1.,... / //'�,,,/, p.,. ,,, / / / — — — Tsii SCREEN aFuac,mr
%i'�! / ay ! • 2°.• 4I 06 ;,(� //y /' /' i�Jd J �j ' 4, .; —x_x— sLTE e19m
,.. -e / r•Ai '` // / / / //: // ,N ''jyf, •1 —//—X— CONSTROslim W 9LT FEt)CE
`,y '.' �.-, ` �i I, •L' • r:,/,' //ji I/ '/ . --,e4:ti`:>. 1- �'-/-. TCOEu NPOwM'6EfERCEPfoRgf61 FENCE
E:-'' %/� V1'• r . %' /t/ //, s /%.:__=7`_ ttt�"'"' Ira ruNeEn Txw wuL nnaR
1 ��� /,f' /'• // •/; //a'i1'/, 1„L ?ZAP imlE 3)
/. /•� / --,-14* �ID. %" "'? _ �._// /// %/// .✓/ //�t'J/-,.,,.., ,,_. me.sss 3
/4, / r � - l� , • ../ • / /�/ eh,. [ /!� '// •
..CTa saa YOWWt MOCK WAIL
g!� •' mow.�. t l/•�103 1, / ,[/ f /. /,.' �mE o'.NE IaTRABIDOt
-� / ` �'%,Iq,� ti� �i1s>j / Y.__ •
J- �/ /%/!'� /{,J jf,-/y�,',��//�(�J•/f'J ---_ GRADE BREAK
/47 ,•, •t> Il d�',, � .. 111 ':/'",, /4;,//,/r.'( :t/a/// 111 caEwN ETty.
I/ - •�,(//� weu (I C :�`_...f:' L. r !( 1//•�, ,;' i/ FAS�fP�COMa1N ELEV.
•
) a` , u.P 4 al
;4.44„ a . `„ '� r To -.. /• :P%r' „,-...113- ,.i./'/,.. ,,,:,,,/,?;,/, t4l• /
, ,ii, ..,....,-.. .,,,, ,,*
- ' .Tp.,.. 11:1:7?-1-`'E'ILL . VI IP\--:-1. 2, i,, „//t, ::'fi,';ik) i / -,1. #'''' ' ' •///' ,!/;,itv:•-'-).f.''.
i ura. z m, 1.,.-.- �i/i. 4-/%,'%9'/ r ,'t:1t/�/ 1 //4%/
•
Hisli h. r anx•
.....,..7„:e.017.40.147,47....:2'41'.'"//1/ /°,7. • "77//
\, ID +� --' iil i, d i // o PO sS //)•Y // / 1 / LTg .,e,a
fiarrficli 140 i07 E
,,,,,,,i4
.( e �\� /` ,11,.-;,-,./.• ,• ,y:7� t /•/ ,. Inlemet:wURsetak0ON
�; � r I r'� ' r r $ )•4,./.- ,/,/ .//' T• y�nes ww s caNCErnut E ram cs tm
x f 4e" -;r Ili-: C a• r`6 i t/°' //- .//; ,y t /,i J +'44t,, ' c., •3 y'3 tATwrs A wP OEWARENf TI4tr
—..Aair .r tll/r�/s�' /t�!/ ; /e r'/ °! + E' tawre`nY•,y,-. R°°�PEaam�aRwwr tfcm• is F vNOfwE
fiYP) -: '• 2, • id .x , /,%'!,% /�%/ '.*��/�// r . l s s _. wv aPERnlaarNe � s
�"...m ,- r• ;Lit
f,�i7/�./. / / /' O_�.,/% f AS 1NE PVN L4 F1W3®
i_r ~ `m 3� -- r.,V 1 j/,, %j//'i ,1//!'/ �_-/•/.' Exhibit:C788
*; P°N° 9 !; :;1 <) ' l //'t� / �j October 11,
_ Q_ Icy •, /, ai: _n C 0 N N E 5 1" ment Permit Grading
(_..,. S "' • J�.�!�t/ l �j//' H 0 1H E Shoreline Develop
1—
f)1111i1I� 111 !-, 93\ BA.RBEE MILL •
=f `E:` ; 's ilo 6 ,` 'li��l�� I 31 _ \ II i V1 % •• LAKEFRONT SECTION
• '' r' r t'`' llifill
- ' \ \1l ` /` , , , •%i ; ;-
�� t .\ `,i ', 32 �- _ ` I I r'� `\ 1 �:T'% • Z
', -- �� I 97 `\ \ Conner Homes z
�/ I'YIIl IlI r
�' _ i 1 I `-__- y-__ \_v,,�✓; ,/i`'-,. Sheet 1 of 7 tL ><u
--- 1 ' `,� \\` C\ , `{.`I II 1 A '\`\ 4 L.:\\ `� -... d ,:'At rt�. /, ,` '”f• o_' 7.1'A--J,(,' 60
•
�� `, 11111 '� �r i�:' .`ems,: a� c.�
•- \ ; r'ri __ , I , % _- �. ;�7}y 1,\ �r „
yi, -
s'slilllll ` G �. \ \ t�.
' `, . l\S 4'TI4N 5 ', \r r, ' =_ , 3 r' I. --:: s\�'' \ \�\\ •,
^` , `\\ 'I r \1% I'IIIIIII� �r i?�+ I 1t `j'%'' r ` •2 • i QI THIS PLAN IS CONCEPTUAL BUILDINGS, LOT
1 • _--- ,) I' ` ♦'•` 1 , 1 1 137 1,d' r \ LAYOUTS AND IMPROVEMENTS
,\ 1 r---�.� � / , J , , -�� ,I , J >'�1,`i1_�/��l11 t�r�' � ,� �-`'%''' � SHOWN ARE
-,. , ' , \ \1 f , ' -- 1 •'SE t^-r��os w » \\ " REPRESENiATiVE OF THE"TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT
. 1 ; `�_ `.;, , , :�r,��` 1 .e,' •- \ 4:ii, IS PROPOSED. BIJ� IN MOST CdISES, THEY FUVE NOT
\ `, ``' \ `" `` ;`.. ' �I'll�ll' 138 • `-art ' \ so ''i• .-',' BEEN DESIGNED OR CONSTRUCTED. THE FINAL PLAN
\ 1 ,` ,5\ -- �,, '- / ' ,, ,r MAY DIFFER FROM THIS CONCEPTUAL PLAN. THE
•', I I ,I -,• '\ _ t I , 1 1'S \ I DEVELOPER RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE CHANGES
u \ , I.I. 1.-.S- i i—2.',' ``( r , `:'''Ai\\\\\ }9 ` ,.`,49(r' ;: , r r
�� ; , s r'."%'fry
AS THE PLAN IS FINALIZED AND IMPLEMENTED.
•
I 'I% i r _..--- -,, ;,),,,,,,AI \ 40 i' t\. tclitt .7-'; ,,',.,..../.•': y 11 .../ .
/ , /1 _.\l 1�`.r�SECT `t%`., 11�1"11�'''1 111 '�N`� V•%. �,•,fir . �r�
\ ..
r / / , — T11 t A! � 4' 1 'it ,! 4 -J, r•i ,, -'� ,rl _ ' ,I i , S'41111�\\� __ 1 l yi II i !r}'r,i
. .
„ ,
\ 42 11 1 .. /./";/11 ri/X1/1/ ;
, ,-) .\ \\Ai r, r'.: sEc-ntA,3\ (-) ),,
\ ✓ 1 `` r'J f',• lj • i +r,r w OCTOBER 6. 2008
\, 1 ,---/ \,,,,,, ,,--- , ,_„..,,,,,,,-- z.( .-:„„,- , ...-„---„,,/,,•,_ (",\...---' ). / I r L'....,.....` ..... ),_.,..-.;:..../,,, iii /I h''''`; '/' / i,i,,''',.1 19. 0 a
,/,,,,/,4. ... ,<„,...-- .:,,x,05/ ;_. / e
,_........ ...., , , , , ,
._...........__
...•.„1".1......„.. ,.,
• ii :•'-tilrh.-.7,9,e,.,..,-er,.,ei..i
r'' '/----;:::::::'--2/,'T---5-,-- ---1.! I,'i ;;'::, ' / '-1? s-':"sr \k"-,/,'-'- ':**i*t ,-----4;',,,.- \
\ � /1 .N4441 N ., Incorporated
,__;.-. 1a� / ,,/ ,/ • • Lj`, ) .� � , 0 40 80 160 10230 NE Points Drive #400
,r ,, ' { ,'-- _- ,r \•.\\ \\: \,. /' ,,i r �1�y'-a � f - Kirkland, Washington 98033
,, ,',-',,.. „. ,SECTIO11 1 ,',.%. ,N _.., `'•1„r , .J',,,. .e.=" , Phone: 25 822-4448
;'�. i i J'•`', i�\l `r-', \ : %4. ' ♦ �n FAX: �425; 827-9577
t ( ,i r ,' , '. \r , r--' "`'-` .`�,. a �'="`- / ` `) Internet: WWTY.Otak.COM
ire rAs4 C'vAg
4-11
:41
U11 s+w
Vlits.14w•
4"" eyrs4.
whir—
v1/4hs(Akio- /i
74' ►`'9 11.-4 RaQ
BARBEE MILL SECTION 1 0' 2' 4' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS 71=7.7
Sheet 2 Of 7
I'roposcg( Gradc
(Lip- (dap e 6.
12,4r1 bf4d
4 ertiti*u. Oyili n
H-1i1t vVzizw 18.(0
1,..alLG 0.0r2Va-+1M
..1--jur
!lo.a1 .4 ,
, v.,es4-41 C•r..it
\,/
1_*4. 1N da$k iti'l-oH All0L-
40116
LXic-iiLt1 F-ip_ga f
B ARB EE MILL SECTION 2 0' 2' 4' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS 7.10:7
Sheet 3 Of 7
Pro pose.4 Graff
131.04 ik top
6 ilk - csd
?roro 'CI of
Sl�er�tiNL OrLiN I f alCiS'f'"t•'zo� lira
it
441'14 tAkt".mkt et i 8�
t v.q
L atcz tiv14:4 4moo
BARBEE MILL SECTION 3 0' z' 4' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS 71m7.7
Sheet 4 Of 7
yD eo$e ei raek
54Cis4-ikq irvitte
DTA-twat. Dtrcj;harReal !
,` �
B A R B E E MILL SECTION 4 0' 2' 4' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS 7%77
Sheet 5 Of 7
rsor:41:4-fr
aercp 4
8 t/lit-- 1.esd
6(4er4,11KL OrdihW,
ki i C ' Wi ter 184 l(iK 4y1 dGraj
L..a a Sled-44i.vi
Igo % -. .--- .--�
I
1..... 4 W 1514iS4Si a%
611.111111111.11.111...11111.11114.114.14
B A R B E E MILL SECTION 5 0' z' a' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS rrMIE:Mill
Sheet 6 Of 7
•
f rgos,td Grille
L of.t.liwt.. 614ih .
tliotl vy+,w k - 18.1,
— ---
. • Exis4;�c y C�ad,
lei5rii'ri' pr_g-2P
B A R B E E MILL SECTION 6 0' 2' 4' 8'
LAKEFRONT SECTIONS 7-1.-7-1
Sheet 7 Of 7
wn-Acgt4fpar" 6
ME"tc P o14 Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
Lam"" . Earth, Soils and Geology.
QC� ' Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
`' site construction.
•,Jg:,C �v A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed;OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading; OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B., Surface Water Resources
81. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
• flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway to avoid restriction of flows during
. regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel; removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design. •
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume(i.e.a flood terrace excavated on either side of the stream).
• B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
C1. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
•
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance
adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of Renton
and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety. •
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
f,' p
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
i
D6. . The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular
and pedestrian traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals
and/or mammals including,but not limited to deer, ducks and geese, muskrats,squirrels, mice and
frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
--D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for'loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing •
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thena) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established
(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR bY
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands
or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
} shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide.long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such-as
the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
E1. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
• E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
• roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording.of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
F. Hazardous Materials
F1. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
(
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Rat
11
1
•
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color, including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height,relative building bulk may be reduced
by.screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a change in
proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height, buildings shall be designed and sited
to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
I. Noise
11. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and vibration resulting
from any necessary pile driving operations: Such measures shall include pre-drilling of the upper
portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for
smaller,residential supports.
12. Vibration,auger casting,or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to
limit noise related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of crossing
construction. •
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer. The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
g of fial plat.
K2. The
recordin applicantthe shalln pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
rl
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
iii
o CITY )F RENTON
♦ © ♦ PlanningBuilding/PublicWorks Department
— Kathy Keolker,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
April 28, 2006
William E. Stevens, PE
OTAK
10230 NE Points Drive, Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill (LUA 02-040)
OTAK Project No. 30788
Design Code Modification Request
Dear Mr. Stevens:
The Barbee Mill preliminary plat is proposing construction of two (2) railroad crossings to serve
as the required access for the proposed plat. The modification request is to allow less than the
minimum vertical curve as required by RMC 4-6-060.F.8.B, due to the proximity of Lake
Washington Boulevard and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) right-of-way and track.
The City can modify street improvements for new plats if there are practical difficulties in
carrying out the provisions of the Street Improvement Ordinance. The Modification Procedures
as defined in Section 4-9-250D clearly states the criteria for approval by the department
Administrator. In order for a modification to be approved, the department Administrator must,
"...find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this Ordinance impractical, that
the modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance, and that such
modification:
(a) Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection, and
maintainability intended by this Ordinance, based upon sound engineering judgment; and
(b) Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and
(c) Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and
(d) Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and
(e) Will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity."
The proposed plat appears ripe for modification as all improvements and agreements are between
the plat, the railroad, and the City. No other properties are involved. As both rights-of-way exist
and the proposed crossings will be developed comparable to other crossings in the city and the
request meets the standards for modification, the request is approved with conditions.
Modification Approved with Conditions:
1. Provide an agreement and any easements for the crossings to be used as public
access with BNSF for approval by Renton City Council prior to recording of the
plat.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
•
William E.Stevens,PE
April 28,2006 •
Page 2 of 2
2. Final design shall be subject to review and conditions by the Fire Marshal.
3. Final channelization plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Development Services Division and Transportation Operations Section prior to
recording of the plat.
This decision to approve the proposed Street Modification is subject to a fourteen- (14)day
appeal period from the date of this letter. Any appeals of the administrative decision must be
filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:00 p.m.,May 12, 2006.
Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required$75.00 application fee with: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. City of Renton
Municipal Code Section 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Examiner. Additional information
regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)430-
6510.
If you have any questions,please contact Juliana Fries, project manager, at (425) 430-7278.
Sincerely,
6 X-1,il(N*04,
A n Kittrick
Development Engineering Supervisor
Public.Works Inspections &Permits
cc: Neil Watts,Development Services Director
Stan Engler,Fire Marshal
Juliana Fries,Engineering Specialist
LUA 02-040 File
• ECE ;.0
Wrq. 2,. APR 1 l tnrnv
v�J
Gr CITY OF
-J. ►'UBLIC woR SNTON
- ADMIN
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
PO Box 47600 • Olympia, WA 98504-7600 • 360-407-6000
TTY 711 or 800-833-6388(For the Speech or Hearing Impaired)
April 7, 2005
I certify that I mailed a copy of this document
to the persons and addresses listed herein,
postage prepaid,in a receptacle for United
Greggimmerman States mail in Lacey,Washington on
gg � f'R/L 200.57
Planning Department � ���
1055 South Grady Way
Renton WA 98055
Steven Wood
Century Pacific LP
1501 Fourth Ave Ste 2140
Seattle WA 98101
Dear Mr. Wood:
Re: City of Renton Permit# LUA-02-040
CENTURY PACIFIC LP - Applicant
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit# 2005-NW-50011-1
Purpose of this letter:
This letter is to inform you that on 4/4/2005, the Department of Ecology received notice that the
City of Renton approved your application for a substantial development permit. The permit is to
subdivide 23 acres into 115 lots for townhouse units and install utilities and roads within
shoreline jurisdiction of Lake Washington and May Creek. (Chapter 90.58 , Revised Code of
Washington).
What happens next?
The law requires that you must wait at least twenty-one (21) days from the date that we received
this decision from City before you begin the specific activities authorized by this permit.
Therefore, you cannot lawfully begin those activities until after 5:00 p.m. 4/25/2005. This
waiting period is to allow anyone disagreeing with any aspect of your permit to appeal to the
state Shorelines Hearings Board.
If anyone does appeal your permit, you must wait until the appeal is over before you start work.
The Shorelines Hearings Board will notify you by letter if they receive an appeal. To be sure
that the Shorelines Hearings Board has not received an appeal, we advise you to call them at
(360) 459-6327 before you begin work.
{f,
�+4
Gregg Zimmerman
April 7, 2005
Page 2
Other federal, state and local permits may be required in addition to this shoreline permit.
If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Donald J. Bales at (360) 407-6528.
Sincerely,
/ 077a-a
Donald J. Bales, Shorelands Specialist
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program
DJB:djb
SDP2.DOC
CC:
►, CITY )F RENTON
444.
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
April 1, 2005
State Department of Ecology
Northwest Regional Office
3190 160th Ave. SE
Bellevue, WA 98008-5452
SUBJECT: Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit for
File No. LUA-02-040;SM, EIS, PP, SA-H
To Whom It May Concern:
Enclosed is the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the above referenced project. The permit was
issued by the City of Renton on April 1, 2005.
We are filing this action with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General per WAC 173-14-090.
Please review this permit and attachments and call me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
Attachments:
A. Legal Description
B. Shoreline Permit
C. Site Plan—OHWM highlighted
D. Master Application
E. Environmental Publication
F. ERC Determination of DS
G. Environmental Checklist
H. Project Description
I. Hearing Examiner's Decision
cc: Office of Attorney General
City of Renton, Parks
City of Renton, Utility Systems
Applicant/Owner/Contact
SMlh.ddc RENTON
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
CO This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
CITA/-IF RENTON
City Clerk
Bonnie I.Walton
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor
March 22, 2005
•
Steven Wood&Campbell Mathewson
Century Pacific, LP
1501 Fourth Ave., Ste. 2140
Seattle, WA 98101
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat; LUA-02-040, PP
Dear Mr. Wood and Mr. Mathewson:
At the regular Council meeting of March 21, 2005, the Renton City Council adopted the
recommendation of the hearing examiner to approve the referenced preliminary plat,
subject to conditions to be met at later stages of the platting process.
Pursuant to RCW, a final plat meeting all requirements of State law and Renton
Municipal Code shall be submitted to the City for approval within five years of the date
of preliminary plat approval.
If I can provide additional information or assistance,please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
&I'Una d•
Bonnie I. Walton
City Clerk
cc: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Council President Tern Briere
Susan Fiala,Senior Planner
Fred Kaufman,Hearing Examiner
Matt Hough,Otak,Inc. 10230 NE Points Dr.,Ste.400,Kirkland,WA 98033
Alex Cugini,Barbee Mill Company,PO Box 359,Renton,WA 98057
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6510/FAX(425)430-6516 R E N T O N
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
0This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
t 1
March 21,2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 97
Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of March 14, 2005. Council concur.
March 14, 2005
Appeal: Ridgeview Court City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the
Preliminary Plat, Cliff Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat(PP-04-131); appeal filed by Sean K. Howe,
Williams,PP-04-131 524 2nd Ave., Suite 500,Seattle, 98104,representing Cliff Williams of
Ridgeview Court,LLC on 3/7/2005, accompanied by required fee. Refer to
Planning and Development Committee.
Vacation: Walkway,NW 6th City Clerk submitted petition for vacation of portion of unimproved road
St&Rainier Ave N,VAC-05- (walkway)between NW 6th St. and Rainier Ave. N.;petitioner Jack D.
002 Alhadeff, 95 S. Tobin St.,#201,Renton, 98055 (VAC-05-002). Refer to
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; set public hearing on
4/18/2005 to consider the petition. (See page 99 for resolution setting public
hearing.)
Community Services: Henry Community Services Department recommended approval of an ordinance
Moses Aquatic Center Fees setting new fees and increasing fees at the Henry Moses Aquatic Center.
Council concur. (See page 100 for ordinance.)
Community Services: Heather Community Services Department recommended approval of a contract in the
Downs Park Development amount of$167,148 with J.A. Brennan Associates, PLLC for Heather Downs
Architectural Services,JA Park development architectural design services. Council concur.
Brennan Associates
Lease: Eoscene,200 Mill Community Services Department recommended approval of an amendment to
Building(4th&6th Floors), the lease with Eoscene Corporation (LAG-02-003)for space of the 4th and 6th
LAG-02-003 floor of the 200 Mill Building for additional space and a lease term extension
through 6/30/2010. Refer to Finance Committee.
Plat: Laurelhurst Phase 1, Development Services Division recommended approval,with conditions, of the
Duvall Ave NE,FP-04-160 Laurelhurst Phase 1 Final Plat; 69 single-family lots on 15.7 acres located on
the west side of Duvall Ave. NE at NE 2nd St. (FP-04-160). Council concur.
(See page 99 for resolution.)
Planning: 2004 Countywide Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department
Planning Policies Amendments recommended adoption of a resolution ratifying the 2004 amendments to the
Growth Management Planning Council's Countywide Planning Policies.
Council concur. (See page 99 for resolution.)
Annexation: Maplewood Economic Development,Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department
Addition, Maple Valley Hwy submitted 60%Notice of Intent to annex petition for the proposed Maplewood
Addition Annexation, and recommended a public hearing be set on 4/4/2005 to
consider the petition and R-8 zoning; 60.5 acres bounded by Maple Valley
Hwy. and the Cedar River. Council concur.
Plat: Barbee Mill,Lake Hearing Examiner recommended approval, with conditions, of the Barbee Mill
Washington Blvd N,PP-02- Preliminary Plat; 115-lot subdivision on 23 acres intended for townhouse units
040 — located at 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N. (PP-02-040). Council concur.
Solid Waste: Garbage Legal Division recommended approval of revisions to the garbage ordinance to
Ordinance Revisions clarify and add definitions, to make garbage collection mandatory with certain
limited exceptions, to add and clarify violations, and to criminalize violations.
Refer to Utilities Committee.
MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL APPROVE
THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA DILL
AI#:
Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 3/21/2005
Dept/Div/Board.. Hearing Examiner
Staff Contact Fred J. Kaufman, ext. 6515 Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Correspondence..
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Ordinance
File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation Study Sessions
Legal Description and Vicinity Map Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Legal Dept
Council Concur Finance Dept
Other
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Hearing Examiner's Report and Recommendation on the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat was
published on February 22, 2005. The appeal period ended on March 8, 2005. The Examiner
recommends approval of the proposed preliminary plat subject to the conditions outlined on pages
15 and 16 of the Examiner's Report and Recommendation. Conditions placed on this project are
to be met at later stages of the platting process.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat with conditions as outlined in the
Examiner's Report and Recommendation.
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
February 22, 2005
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
Minutes
APPLICANT/CONTACT: Century Pacific LP
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson
1501 Fourth Ave., Ste 2140
Seattle, WA 98101
OWNER: Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company
PO Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
CONTACT: Otak Inc
Matt Hough
10230 NE Points Dr., Ste. 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North
(Between North 40th and 44th Streets)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 115-lot subdivision of a 23-acre site intended
for the development of townhouse units. A shoreline
Substantial Development Permit is also required.
SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the
Examiner on January 18, 2005.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining
available information on file with the application, field
checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The following minutes are a summary of the January 25, 2005 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing opened on Tuesday,January 25, 2005, at 9:57 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of
the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
,
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 2
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No.2: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan
application, proof of posting, proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No.3: Preliminary Plat Plan,North Exhibit No. 4: Preliminary Plat Plan, South
Exhibit No. 5: Preliminary Landscape Plan,North Exhibit No. 6: Preliminary Landscape Plan, South
Exhibit No. 7: May Creek Buffer Restoration Sect. B Exhibit No. 8: Lake Shoreline Conceptual Landscape
Plan
•
Exhibit No. 9: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile, Exhibit No. 10: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile,
North South
Exhibit No. 11: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading Exhibit No. 12: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading
Elevations,North Elevations, South
Exhibit No. 13: Existing Site and Topography Map Exhibit No. 14: Neighborhood Detail Map
Exhibit No. 15: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 16: Summary Table of Mitigation
Measures
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development
Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The subject site is located along the
Lake Washington shoreline. There is an existing single-family development to the southeast designated R-8 and
some small multi-family developments designated R-10. The property is situated within the Center Office
Residential (COR-2)zoning designation, which provides for a mix of intensive commercial, office and
residential activity. Stand-alone residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required
density of a minimum 5 dwelling units per net acre is satisfied. The existing site has limited operations of a
lumber mill with several structures that will be removed with the exception of a boathouse located on proposed
new Lot 95.
The historical background was discussed by Ms. Fiala.
Site-Plan Review: •
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines and is subject to the City's
shoreline Master Program. The applicant is requesting to subdivide this site into 115 lots for the development of
townhouse units. May Creek bisects the southern portion of the site from the east, under Lake Washington
Boulevard North and into Lake Washington. The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase 1
would include Lots 96-115 located to the south and east of May Creek and Phase 2 would include Lots 1 - 94 to
the north and west of May Creek. Lot 95 currently contains a boathouse and dock which would remain on the
lot and within the plat. Two entry access points are proposed along Lake Washington Boulevard North, one to
the north, Street F, that would be an at grade railroad crossing and a second one approximately 950-feet to the
south along Lake Washington Boulevard North, Street D, also an at grade crossing.
The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance. An Environmental Impact
Statement(EIS) was prepared. No appeals of the adequacy of the Draft or Final EIS were filed. A mitigation
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
' February 22, 2005
Page 3
document was issued on August 16,2004 and an appeal of the Mitigation document was filed by the applicant
and later withdrawn by the applicant.
This project is to be reviewed as a Level II Site Plan, it is a conceptual site plan. The applicant is not required to
provide any floor plans or elevations.
At the request of the Examiner,Ms. Fiala explained the differences between a Level II Site Plan and a Level I
Site Plan and what will happen at the public hearings, or if it is an administrative decision for the benefit of any
property owners that were present at this hearing.
The COR zone allows a building height of 10 stories and/or 125 feet, however the applicant is proposing that the
buildings could be up to 50 feet in height within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of
the shoreline requirements. Building height would be verified at the time of individual building permit review.
The COR zone does not have specific requirement for on-site landscaping. Landscaping is reviewed through the
site plan review process. The applicant is proposing to install street trees along all residential public streets
within the site, the open space/water quality tracts would be landscaped as well. Several of the plant materials
proposed include Oregon Ash,tulip tree, Hinoki Cypress and Snowberry. The approximate total area of
landscape would be over 5 acres of the site. All landscaping is required to be fully irrigated.
The Examiner inquired as to the extensive grading and excavation throughout the site. Preliminary earthwork
quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of fill
material and how many traffic trips all that might generate? Ms. Fiala stated that she would have to calculate
the number of trips.
The May Creek and Lake Washington buffers are proposed to include 15-feet of managed landscape with 35-
feet of native vegetation. The applicant is required to construct public sidewalks along both sides of all public
roads. Access to the shoreline would be provided via new trial/walkway through Tract E to the DNR land. A
six-foot wide soft surface pedestrian walkway would be provided along the south side of May Creek and include
an interpretative display at the southwest end of the trail. All public streets would have sidewalks on both sides
except for Street C, modification requested that a sidewalk be provided on only one side of the street.
Potential impacts from the development of the site to May Creek and Lake Washington will be mitigated by
existing code provisions, as well as the mitigation measures placed on the project.
Fire,Traffic and Park Mitigation Fees are proposed for the plat. -
Adequate sanitary sewer, water service and other utilities would be extended as necessary for the development
of the site.
Preliminary Plat Review:
The subject site is designated Center Office Residential—2 (COR-2), which provides for large scale office,retail
and/or multi family projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporating significant site
amenities and gateway features.
The proposed plat is in compliance with all the appropriate Comprehensive Plan policies.
The proposed plat complies with the density requirements for the COR-2 zoning designation with a net density
of 6.8 dwelling units per acre.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 4
The proposed lot sizes are appropriate for the attached units proposed for this plat. The applicant has shown
setbacks on the plat plan to indicate potential building envelopes that do meet the COR zone requirements.
The COR zone does not require any front, rear or side yard setbacks. However, the applicant is proposing the
following setbacks: interior side years of 5 feet; front yards of 10 feet and rear yards of 10 feet. The proposal's
compliance with building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits.
All proposed lots comply with the arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations with the
requested modifications. Due to the length of the private access to Lots 43 through 48, a Fire access turnaround
is required.
All proposed radii at intersections of public rights-of-way would exceed the minimum radius required and
would meet code. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement from
the Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of
the site. The roadway would be dedicated as a public right-of-way.
Staff recommends the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for all common
improvements.
The project is along two shorelines, Lake Washington and May Creek. It is subject to the City's Shoreline
Master Program. Current impervious areas would be restored to native vegetation within the buffer area. All
mature trees located within the May Creek buffer are proposed to be retained. Within the 50-foot buffer from
Lake Washington,the first 35 feet would be planted with native vegetation,the remaining 15 feet would be
managed landscape.
The Examiner inquired about the 100-year floodplain and which part of the property was subject to that
designation. Ms. Fiala stated that there is a portion in that designation,there has been mitigation measures
placed on the subject site stating that all structures must be built one foot above the required floodplain level.
The applicant has provided a shoreline landscaping plan (Exhibit 8)which proposes one pedestrian walkway
trail per lot to the shoreline. There are numerous lots along the shoreline(Lots 23-48) staff recommends that
there would be only one trail walkway to the shoreline per two units. This would eliminate additional intrusions
into this required shoreline buffer. Trails will be provided throughout the site, along May Creek is proposed to
be a soft-surface trail.
The site is located within the Renton School District and they are able to handle the additional students.
Staff recommends approval of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat subject to eight conditions.
The Examiner questioned if the boathouse on Lot 95 would be a legal conforming use when the property is
platted.
Mr. Fiala stated that she did not have an answer but she would do some research and let the Examiner know.
Alex Cugini, 611 Renton Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 stated that he is the president of Barbee Mill
Company which is owned by the,Cugini family. They have been working on this project for almost three years,
prior to that they worked with the Paul Allen group for four years. All of their experts were present and would
be able to answer most of the questions.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 5
Tom Goeltz, Davis Wright Tremaine, 1501 4'1' Avenue, Suite 2600, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that they are
present today to request approval of the Preliminary Plat and the Site Level II and would support staff with the
exception of a couple of issues.
There was an appeal of the mitigation document which was withdrawn last Friday. The clarifications that were
needed have been obtained and a major concession on their behalf to use 50 foot buffers on Lake Washington.
A letter was submitted by them yesterday and contains some exhibits labeled A-K. Eight conditions were
proposed by staff, they are happy with four,two they would like clarifications and 2 conditions they would like
removed.
In discussing the mitigation document, they are referring to the revised document dated January 10, 2005 and
approved by the ERC on January 25.
Item 2 has been clarified, Street F has been changed to Street A which will be dedicated, there is an.easement
that allows the Barbee Mill Company to absolutely dedicate that to the City. The Quendall Company has
submitted a letter that states that the property is going to be dedicated to the City and they are in agreement.
Staff's condition#7 requiring additional open space due to the lack of a full 50-feet on some of the lots. From
their perspective, they started out at 25-feet and compromised and conceded to 50-feet where they could, for
those lots that don't have a full 50,they all have a full 35 with native vegetation and that there may be some
with less than 50, it is well in excess of the legal requirement of 25 feet. There are 8 lots total that are affected
by this condition. They would like this condition removed.
They are also requesting that Condition#8 be removed. Each lot, that will be independently owned, should
have a path to the water without having to share. It seems that it would be a problem in the making to require
joint paths. It does not appear to be a SEPA condition and he was not aware of any code provision that would
allow this type of limitation on an individually owned lot.
Condition#6 regarding the private access tracts,the staff report requires cul-de-sacs,turnarounds, or an
additional access road. All of those are fine, but there may be other engineering solutions. He would like to add
the words"or other satisfactory access alignment"to the menu of choices for the final plat.
There is a summary of the additional criteria for site plan approval, staff covered in its report well the section for
200E and he added 200F which are some additional criteria showing that they have been met as well.
As to the docks, they are still at a conceptual level,they have not decided on docks. There is a condition D-17
that expressly deals with docks.
Matt Hough, Otak, Inc., 10230 NE Points Drive, Ste.400, Kirkland, WA 98033 stated that in regards to the
flooding question, there was extensive analysis done for May Creek, one that included modeling. Condition B4
recognizes that the 100-year floodplain must be contained within the 50-foot buffers around May Creek. The
means of doing that would be developed, reviewed and approved during engineering design. It can be done
either with the fills that would occur on the lots or there is a concept for flood terracing with modification of
May Creek which would allow additional conveyance within that corridor that would contain the 100-year
floodplain within that area. The delta of May Creek has historically been dredged,he did not know if that was
going to continue. The modeling did assume that the dredging ceased, it is a conservative analysis.
The second question was on truck trips based on the earthwork volumes, most of the excavation is coming from
removal of existing stockpiles or excavation for the storm water ponds. If that material is suitable for on site fill,.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 6
that would be used. It could be anywhere from 300 to 1,900 trips, it would be expected that they would
roundtrip to minimize the number of trucks on the road.
Lynn Manolopoulos, Davis Wright Tremaine, 777 108°i Avenue NE, Ste. 2300, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that
they do have all necessary permits to complete remediation, however, it would be most appropriate to do that
work in conjunction with the development. They will evaluate if it would be appropriate to do some portion of
the clean up within the next year. The Shoreline Permit would be in effect for five years as long as the work
begins within the next year. It would be completed prior to any structures being built.
There is no indication that any of the contamination on the Quendall Terminal site has impacted the Barbee Mill
site in any way. The Quendall Terminal property is under a formal agreement with the agency and all work
done with the oversight of the Department of Ecology.
Rich Wagner, 2411 Garden Court North (Kennydale neighborhood) Renton, WA 98056 stated that he supports
the application, he is very familiar with the Level I and Level II processes and the idea of pinning down the site
parameters of the site development long before one is asked to develop architectural character. The two often
do not relate and not a lot of architectural value is presented at the early stages.
The current site plan has a unique feature that has not shown up for the last thirty years, and that is the access
point shown off of Lake Washington Blvd, south of the bridge over May Creek. It helps connect this residential
project to the City of Renton and Kennydale as well.
Lastly, it is noted in the findings of staff that the coverage is based on a 65% or 75% of the attached garages.
That is an old carryover from the COR zoning that will come to play in the development of the interior lots of a
tri-or four-plex.
Larry Reymann, 1313 N 38th Street, Renton, WA 98056 stated that he is a volunteer naturalist on the Cedar
River and involved with the Park Ambassador Program with a focus on May Creek. He was concerned about
the access to the shoreline of Lake Washington between Lot 23 and the neighboring property to the north, if that
north property should be developed into a park or something. He suggested that a 50-foot walkway would
preserve the access to the shoreline.
Exhibit 7 shows a cutaway for May Creek, it is very important for salmon to have shade over the water in order
to prevent the water from heating up in the summer. It appears that there is approximately 70-feet of open space
with no provision for shade for the water. Larger trees in that 70-foot area would be a good thing to protect the
salmon and other fish that spawn in the creek.
Dredging at the mouth of the creek is essential to prevent flooding of the area. The Homeowners Association
should be governed as to how the habitat in May Creek is preserved. He would be willing to work with the
owners in a proactive way to protect the habitat and wildlife.
Mark Hancock, PO Box 88811, Seattle, WA 98138 stated that he lives in the lower Kennydale neighborhood
just south of the project and he has no problem with the project. They do have a problem with traffic cutting off
405 and passing through their neighborhood and up to the 44th Street interchange. It was requested that to the
extent that the haul routes of the gravel trucks, if they could be required to go on to NE 44th Street and use that
interchange that would be most helpful.
Fritz Timm, Sr. Engineer, City of Newcastle, 13020 Newcastle Way,Newcastle, WA 98059 stated that the EIS
process contained a couple of opportunities for the City of Newcastle to make comments on the project. This
particular project does not have any serious qualms in respect to the City of Newcastle, however, there were
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 7
comments that were in respect to light, glare, transportation, and dust. The mitigation measures did not seem to
cover these issues to their satisfaction. Comments have been submitted in respect to the am/pm peak hour
traffic issues, there will be an increase at specific intersections from this particular project. If there is anything
that the City of Renton staff can do to assist with their efforts to improve those conditions it would be
appreciated. He stated they did submit a letter to Susan Fiala in which various concerns were documented by
the City of Newcastle's traffic engineer, Mike Nicholson, Community Development Director and himself.
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services covered some of the questions that were brought up during the hearing.
Starting with haul routes,she noted that they would be monitored closely. They are very aware of the
neighborhoods having trucks getting through on streets that are not large enough. The worker taking those exits
they have no control over, but the gravel trucks are controlled internally.
The 1-405, 40th Street,44'h Street is a regional concern they do welcome Newcastle's input into what might be
needed. 1-405 has a significant amount of money that they will bring to the table.
The light/glare issue is very interesting,the level of lighting is mandated by City Code. Hoods on the lights may
be a possibility, but the basic lighting levels must be accommodated. There is a new residential light standard
that may possibly be used within this area. Dust is a normal routine, the site will be watered down and erosion
control is required and that includes both mud and dust.
The turnaround between Lots 42 and 48 and between Lots 95 and 98 were discussed. Street A and Street C both
were in for modifications for narrower widths, which there was no objection to due to their proximities to May
Creek,the Lake and the railroad. The Fire Department was very adamant that they wanted cul-de-sacs at the
end of both Street C and Street A because they exceed 500-feet in length. On Street C, there is an existing
roadway that comes from the south, up and into Street C. One of her conditions was that they needed to create a
road cut and pave that transition point at that location. The Examiner commented that this would not be a
general access, it would be a gated or emergency access only. Ms. Kittrick continued that it was a question at
this point. She did not know what the actual road serves,who has rights to it, if it's public or private. It is very
obvious that it has been there for a lot of years. That opened it up, if it is a public road or a public emergency
access, it could be paved per City Code to 500 feet long,20 feet wide and could be a second access and teen a
cul-de-sac would no longer be required.
Mr. Hough stated that they could put larger trees in the 35-foot buffer to protect the salmon and wildlife. Some
of the existing trees will remain. The Department of Fisheries will be involved because of the creek and it is
presumed that they will have some criteria for trees and shading and other design elements.
Mr. Reymann asked again about the homeowner's association or what entity would be responsible for the
shorelines and for the environment specifically along May Creek and Lake Washington and maintaining as
much as possible the natural habitat for wildlife.
Mr. Goeltz stated that regarding the homeowner's association,the City has enforcement authority for the
association. if the City thinks there is not adequate maintenance or care or the conditions are not being
maintained then that is an enforcement right on the part of the City.
Ms. Kittrick stated that the Department of Fisheries and DOE are on top of these sorts of issues. There also are
plenty of volunteers that are out there and more than happy to call City Hall if there's a plumage out of place or
something is not being properly cared for.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:51 a.m.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 8
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
I. The applicant, Century Pacific LP, Steven Wood, filed a request for a Level 2 Site Plan and 115-lot
Preliminary Plat for the Barbee Mill property along Lake Washington Boulevard.
2. The yellow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation
and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1.
3. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC), the City's responsible official, determined that an EIS
was required for the proposal and one was prepared.
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard. The subject site is the location of the
former Barbee Mill site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington and west of the boulevard. The
subject site straddles May Creek as it approaches and enters Lake Washington. The site is located
somewhat southwest of the NE 44th Street Exit from 1-405 (Exit 7)and north of NE 40th Street.
• 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of center office or residential uses;but does not mandate such development
without consideration of other policies of the Plan.
7. The subject site is currently zoned COR(Center Office Residential). The COR districts were created
for certain large or uniquely located properties including the subject site.
8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1804 enacted in December
1959.
9. The subject site is approximately 22.9 acres of 997,960 square feet. The parcel is irregularly shaped
with its eastern margin defined by a slight curve in the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and
its western margin defined by the shoreline of Lake Washington.
10. The majority of the subject site is relatively level with grades ranging between 0.5%to 4.0%to the west
and north of May Creek, 1.0%to 7.0% on the south portion of the creek and towards Lake Washington.
There are some grades up to 35%to 40% along May Creek.
11. The subject site contains a variety of sensitive areas in addition to the slopes noted above along May
Creek. May Creek runs through approximately 800 linear feet of the site with banks on both sides. A
fifty-foot buffer would be provided along each side of the creek from the ordinary high water mark.
Any mature trees within the buffer area would be retained. The site sits along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington and has approximately 1,900 lineal feet of shoreline. A fifty-foot buffer would be provided
along the lake. The applicant proposes that 35 feet be native vegetation and the remaining 15 feet
would be manicured vegettion adjacent to the future dwellings. Category III wetlands are located in two
areas on the subject site. One is located adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of Street
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
• February 22, 2005
Page 9
C (northerly wetland) and the other is located at the southern edge of the site near the south end of Street
C (southerly wetland). Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed.
12. The applicant proposes dividing the acreage into 115 lots. The lots would be arranged generally along
the perimeter of the site and in an interior block in an almost triangular arrangement. A tier of lots
would be located along the north boundary of the site and another would be located along the Lake
Washington shoreline. There would be a tier of lots located along both sides of May Creek. In addition,
in the north central area of the site would be a triangular block with lots along its north and south edges.
13. The main access to the subject site would be from the northeast corner of the site via a 60-foot wide
roadway from Lake Washington Boulevard and across the railroad tracks. Currently, that segment of
roadway is a private easement. An agreement with the underlying holder would allow it to be used by
the applicant and allow it to be dedicated to the City if the project is approved. Where the roadway
enters the site a public right-of-way, 42 feet wide would provide access to the majority of the subject
site. Street A would run east to west and then turn south and end with a hammerhead turnaround. It
would then continue as a narrow private roadway. Street B would run at somewhat of a diagonal
intersecting Street A's east to west leg and then its north to south leg. Street D would provide a second
point of access out to Lake Washington Boulevard. It would form a T-intersection with Street B. Street
D would have a bridge across May Creek. Branching off Street D to the south would be Street C.
Street C would be 39 feet wide and run along the south side of May Creek. Street C would end in
another hammerhead turnaround.
l4. The Fire Department has indicated that due to the deadend roadway length of both Streets A and C,that
hammerhead turnarounds are insufficient and that both roads would require a full cul-de-sac
termination. Staff did note that there is another roadway at the end of proposed Street C but that staff
does not know its ownership or if it is a public or private roadway and whether it could be used for
access to this site and across the railroad tracks.
15. The 115 lots would contain a combination of townhome structures in 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit buildings.
The attached units would be located on their individual lots with common walls between units. Side
yards would be provided between structures. A Level II Site Plan does not require very specific details
such as structural design or facade detail. Building heights are also not covered in this level of analysis
although the applicant has proposed buildings up to 50 feet along the lakeshore and up to 75 feet outside
of the shoreline jurisdiction. Mitigation measures that would screen the bulk or increase setbacks for
any building over 3-stories or 35 feet in height have been imposed. There was no indication of whether
or not docks would be proposed for the shoreline lots.
16. The density for the plat would be established after subtracting sensitive areas and roadways. The May
Creek sensitive area is approximately 30,350 square feet; the Lake Washington sensitive area
approximately 66,850 square feet; and the roadways are 153,331 square feet. Subtracting this total of
255,429 square feet from the full acreage and dividing by 115 units yields a density of 6.8 dwelling
units per acre. Although, Proposed Lot 95 is not currently proposed for development(see below)which
could affect the density calculation slightly. Also affecting the calculation could be the cul-de-sac
requirements of the Fire Department at roadway ends and turnarounds.
17. The applicant proposes phasing the project. Phase 1 would include Proposed Lots 96 to 115, the lots
south and east of May Creek, located along Proposed Street C. Phase 2 would include all of the rest of
the proposed lots, Proposed Lots 1 to 94, except Proposed Lot 95. Proposed Lot 95 contains an existing
boathouse and dock which the applicant intends to retain. A further review would be necessary to
determine if such a standalone use would be permitted in the COR-2 District.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 10
18. The COR zone does not provide a minimum lot size for single-family housing. The lots will range in
size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867 square feet. The plat submitted demonstrated lots that vary from
25 feet wide to 55 feet wide and from 66 feet to 211 feet deep. Lot depth along the lake includes the 50
feet shoreline setback as well as submerged portions of lots. As noted,there would be attached units in
which case side yards would be located between the multiple family, townhome units. The applicant
has proposed 5-foot side yards,and 10-foot front and rear yards.
19. Access to some of the lots, Proposed Lots 23,24, 67 and 68 as well as Lots 43 to 48 would be via
private easements. These would meet code requirements other than the Fire Department's requirement
for a cul-de-sac in some instances.
20. The applicant proposes a number of features that include open space, street trees, access to a DNR
parcel and a 10 foot pathway between Proposed Lots 20 and 21 to the property north of the site,the
Quendall properties. Wetland preservation and shoreline preservation would be accomplished with
setbacks of 50 feet where 35 feet would be native landscaping along with 15 feet of manicured areas
adjacent to homes. Staff calculated that approximately 5 acres of the site would be landscaped.
Irrigation would be required for landscaping areas. The applicant proposes a 6-foot soft surface trail
along the south side of May Creek and interpretive area at end of the trail. A landscaped series of tracks
near the north central and northwest corner of the site will deal with storm water and connect to the
Department of Natural Resources property located along the lake front. This would provide general
access to the lake. Light and glare issues as well as a host of other issues have been addressed by an
extensive list of mitigation measures attached to the issuance of the final EIS.
21. Staff has suggested that the attached units have a common pathway or not more than two for 3-unit and
4-unit buildings to the lake rather than separate paths to limit intrusions into the shoreline buffer areas.
The applicant would prefer that each unit have its own path.
22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate
approximately 45 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be
assigned on a space available basis.
23. The development will increase traffic by approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 1,150 trips
• for the 115 homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips will be generated in the morning and
evening.
24. Stormwater would be handled and conveyed by Tracts D, E and F. These would provide water quality
before water is released into the receiving waters of May Creek or Lake Washington. Mitigation
measures were imposed as a result of the EIS reviews. Portions of the subject site are located within the
100-year flood plain.
25. Sewer and water services will be provided by the City.
26. The applicant was concerned about some of the conditions recommended by staff. Condition#6
required certain standards for turnarounds and the applicant wanted the ability to propose alternatives.
Condition #7 required compensation for areas where the 50-foot buffer along Lake Washington's
shoreline was reduced, suggesting that it be provided elsewhere as common open space. Condition #8
was noted above where staff recommended that the paths from units to Lake Washington be limited to
not more than two for three or more units.
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 11
27. It was suggested that additional shading be required along May Creek to provide better salmon habitat.
There was also concern regarding protection of the various buffers.
28. Contaminent remediation would continue as development of the site proceeds.
CONCLUSIONS:
Preliminary Plat
I. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. Although the COR zoning would have
accommodated a mix of high quality office and residential uses, it does permit solely residential uses of
the kind proposed by the plat. The development will provide mainly small but high quality lots due to
the plat's very desirable location adjacent to May Creek and Lake Washington.
2. Reusing what has been a recently underused industrial parcel will increase the tax base of the City. It
also provides in-city, urban-scale housing in an area where urban services such as water arid sewer are
readily available.
3. The lots are generally rectangular with reasonable access to the City's street system. There is an issue
with access to the proposed lots located at the end of extended deadend Streets A and C. The lots will
have to meet Fire Department access standards. That might mean that full cul-de-sac turnarounds will
have to be carved out of lots near the dead ends of proposed Streets A and C. This determination will be
solely at the discretion of the Fire Department.
4. Access to the plat will be provided via two routes into and out of the subject site. That should provide
reasonable circulation.although both would have at-grade crossings of railroad tracks. Crossings of
those tracks are governed by State law and mitigation measures imposed under the EIS. Transportation
mitigation fees have also been required to help offset the plat's impacts on City roadways.
5. The applicant will be paying Parks Mitigation fees to help counter the impacts created by new residents
on the City's parks and recreational programs. Similarly, the applicant will pay a fee to offset its
impacts on fire services.
6. In the main, the proposed plat appears to be a reasonable way of dividing the subject site allowing
ownership of individual lots while increasing the density of the site by providing an arrangement of
attached townhomes.
Site Plan
7. The following criteria are used in reviewing general site plans as well as those requiring Level II Site
Plan analysis. It should be noted that Level II analysis is based on more conceptual submissions and
does not require the level of detail otherwise required under Site Plan Review.
Section 4-9-200E: DECISION CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN AND MASTER PLANS:
The Reviewing Official shall review and act upon plans based upon a finding that the proposal
meets comprehensive planning considerations and the criteria in this subsection and in
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat -
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 12
subsection F of this Section, as applicable. These criteria also provide a frame of reference for
the applicant in developing a site, but are not intended to discourage creativity and innovation.
Review criteria include the following:
1. General Review Criteria for Both Master Plans and Site Plan Review:
a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies. In
determining compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, conformance to the
objectives and policies of the specific land use designation shall be given
consideration over citywide objectives and policies;'
b. Conformance with existing land use regulations;
c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses;
d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site;
e. Conservation of area wide property values;
f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
g. Provision of adequate light and air;
h. Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions;
i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed
use;
j. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight;
k. Additional Special Review Criteria for COR, UC-NI, and UC-N2 Zones
Only:
i. The plan is consistent with a Planned Action Ordinance, if applicable;
and
ii. The plan creates a compact, urban development that includes a
compatible mix of uses that meets the Comprehensive Plan vision and
policy statements for the Center Office Residential or Urban Center
North Comprehensive Plan designations; and
iii. The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally
consistent, and provides quality development; and
iv. The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide
adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site, and/or to protect existing natural systems; and
v. The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area and Mt.
Rainier where applicable;and
vi. Public access is provided to water and/or shoreline areas; and
• vii. The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area
plazas, prominent architectural features, or other items; and
viii. Public and/or private streets are arranged in a layout that provides
reasonable access to property and supports the land use envisioned; and
ix. The plan accommodates and promotes transit, pedestrian, and other
alternative modes of transportation.
8. The proposal is compatible with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. The plan suggests
that this site is suitable for Center Office Residential uses,that is any of a combination of office or
residential uses or one of those uses exclusively. While a better use of the property might have been a
mixed-use development with high quality office and residential uses, both the Zoning Code and
comprehensive plan allow an exclusive residential use of the subject site.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat •
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
• February 22, 2005
Page 13
9. It appears that the proposed use complies with the Zoning Code. The proposed residential use does
comply. The bulk standards that the applicant has proposed meet or exceed the standards for residential
uses found in the COR regulations. The zone permits buildings of 10 stories or 125 feet in height while
buildings between 50 and 75 feet have been proposed. The front and rear yards proposed also meet or
exceed those required in this zone. Compliance with the Fire and Building Codes will be determined
when building permit applications are reviewed. All access, roadway width and length and turnarounds
will have to meet Fire Department requirements.
10. The site is pretty well separated from adjoining properties and other than traffic, a generalized impact
that any development would affect, the development should not affect neighboring properties. One
impact discussed is that redevelopment will affect some of the view properties upslope of the site. The
redevelopment of the subject site will add to the ambient light during evenings. Residential
developiiient will increase night lighting from the site. This impact has been absent from this recently
under-utilized site. Street lighting standards are dictated by code. The proposed buildings will also be.
somewhat taller than what has generally been located on the site but they fall within the permissible
height limits of the COR Zone.
11. The site plan contains about five acres of open space and access to the shoreline of Lake Washington via
a path to DNS property. There will be limited visual access to the lake from the street system since side
yards between buildings are narrow and 50-foot tall buildings will create somewhat of a wall. There
will be access to May Creek via a walking path which will also lead to the lakeshore. Sidewalks are
required along the public streets that will serve the site and street trees are proposed along the roads.
12. Redevelopment of this large, lakefront site will increase the tax base of the City and should enhance
property values for this site and surrounding sites.
13. It appears that the roads will provide reasonable access to the subject site, clearly affected at some times
by rail traffic that could block access into or out of the site not only for residents and visitors but also for
emergency personnel. Roadways will still have to be designed to meet all Fire Department
requirements. Sidewalks along the streets will provide reasonable pedestrian access.
14. The buildings appear to be reasonably spaced and meet Zoning limitations although side yards between
these potentially taller buildings will create somewhat of a block for light and air.
15. Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed. There should not be any
untoward noise or odors once construction is completed and all contamination has been or will be
removed from the site.
16. Public services including water and sewer service will be available to the site. Stormwater will receive
water quality treatment and be discharged to the lake.
17. In addition to the projects compliance with the standard Site Plan criteria noted above, the project must
also generally satisfy the Level II Site Plan criteria. There is no Planned Action Ordinance in this case.
The townhome project is not as dense as might be anticipated for the COR Zone but the site is quite
constrained by its sensitive location more or less sandwiched between Lake Washington on the west and
May Creek on the east. It achieves a reasonable density of 6.8 dwelling units when it has to provide
water quality treatment and open space beyond that found in its sensitive shorelines.
18. The conceptual plans submitted do not answer questions about the internal cohesion of the project other
than it would be united by a townhome theme and street trees. There are no building footprints nor
,
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat s
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 14 •
façade features nor definitive building heights that provide a clue to internal consistency. These issues
will have to be addressed when actual plans are submitted.
19. There are both private spaces, yards and shoreline setbacks, and public open spaces and the natural
systems are preserved by the buffers required by Code and conditions imposed on the project. At the
same time, the applicant may not sidestep around the required mitigation buffer of 50 feet along the
lake. Since the applicant did not appeal those buffer setbacks it cannot then design lots that do not meet
that standard. Staff has suggested a compromise that allows the buffers to be reduced but calling for
compensation for the lost square footage. That seems appropriate. So either the applicant shall redesign
the plat to meet the setback buffer required by mitigation or they shall provide the compensation
suggested by staff.
20. The intrusions into the shoreline setbacks along Lake Washington should be limited as this area is
supposed to be natural. Therefore, staffs recommendation that the number of paths from units to the
lakeshore shall be limited to one path for each two attached units or two for 3 or more attached units is
reasonable. While the applicant indicated this might create ownership issues, if these various dwellings
can share common walls and common roof systems, they can accommodate shared paths to the lake.
21. The plan does not appear to provide any view corridors to the shoreline of Lake Washington but does •
provide a walking path along May Creek. The code is not clear what it means by"where applicable"
and there is the path to the DNS land which might provide access if not an outright view corridor.
Similarly, there is the interpretive area at the end of May Creek which will be accessible from the
proposed trail.
22. The open space tracts provide a form of focal point, as do the pathways to the DNR property and the
end of May Creek. These features also provide access to the water features on the subject site.
23. The roads and paths provide reasonable access to the site and its features subject to the issues noted
above.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should approve the proposed plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans, dated
January 3, 2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services
Project Manager
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 15
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the Development Services Project Manager. The Fire Department shall
have sole discretion in these matters.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
10. The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards.
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
DECISION:
The Level 11 Site Plan is approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans, dated
January 3, 2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 16
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services
Project Manager
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the.Development Services Project Manager.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
10: The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards. .
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
ORDERED THIS 22"`� day of February 2005.
-
FRED J. KAUFAN
HEARING EXAMINER
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 17
TRANSMITTED THIS 22"d day of February 2005 to the parties of record:
Susan Fiala Steven Wood Kayren Kittrick
1055 S Grady Way Century Pacific LP 1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140 Renton, WA 98055
Seattle, WA 98101
Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company Matt Hough Campbell Mathewson
PO Box 359 Otak, Inc. Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98057 10230 NE Points Dr. Ste. 400 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140
Kirkland, WA 98033 • Seattle, WA 98101
•
Torn Goeltz Lynn Manolopoulos Rich Wagner
Davis Wright Tremaine Davis Wright Tremaine 2411 Garden Court
1504 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2600 777 108th Avenue NE, Ste.2300 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98101 Bellevue, WA 98104
Larry Reymann Mark Hancock Fritz Timm
1313 N 38°i Street PO Box 88811 Sr. Engineer, City of Newcastle
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 13020 Newcastle Way
Newcastle, WA 98059
TRANSMITTED THIS 22" day of February 2005 to the following:
Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Stan Engler, Fire
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling, Building Official
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission
Larry Warren, City Attorney Transportation Division
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Utilities Division
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Neil Watts,Development Services
Jennifer Henning, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services
Stacy Tucker, Development Services King County Journal
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may,
after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 18
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both
the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. •
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
To: All Parties of Record
If you would like to remain on the party of record list, please contact the Hearing
Examiner's office at 425-430-6515. (If no one answers, please leave a message stating
your name and address and that you would like to remain on the Barbee Mill Party of
Record list.) Otherwise, your name will be removed from the list.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
•
••
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
Vg..1V...
...,..... BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT — NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
.41.1.4.
i• 0,.a
4.
Cart.:Zr'e
AMOV:511'ill:iii Niliitbr,;, 1
11.1.7440.- ,:74i.44.'ij 1.•: 4../V,,°i 4..
eT Pi
,,i.e•' :".i.SC;FIgle/AI Pr::.t1.41,0.:1.4144%.1L4'.4'.i:';!..i!.. k". LAKE WASHINGTON
Ti t
/N'AIP1'"?..0314C1731g:*L-114.11, `4.m.,,,Z•••. , l!OF.:.,_.
• OirPi -2-1 _1.1 Elo mr-fr ,,p7r4-E-01heil . • — ,r7,1te .,
4 %
t \
____,
.'''Mlir.F FA IV 818`,ignig'.1MIIV V:n-Alir•iii:2PIZA6t.. '. .i \ _ ._.
. ici*•,.*...„.t,'i.imiP'-'..;-"t,e..gViE1.-i
'-0•,..•Zr'o'i reaizrf-1. i•fei•Eo4:l1-1'F4M,
; P . A& 7R ,1..,i0A7i .,egig_oi4MiF.,rm,,l,i, gg:.e•.„o,G..l..i. qtry-.l1.,l.,..a i...;s.7.,it.4tai:1.e'iwi,ii.L4 xi,,,ir,..,.p,4,i:.,1,.,,-•—,,-...-'„-,z*•,„;;.•.$'^z„zF.Ro.:,,IL±.V,i•;c•.-•..
IN"G'Nro.t..•,,.\,f:-t'a;s.g„ "I'.s."..''N
I•:, ,,_0, ,••
•
I
g.rt " VVTilagl . ,. , . 4 i, . -; ..
•,_•,•s,,,t,,,,
.,-
ir,4-tg -,/i, . , g ,v„&r..,,,,Ii.N.. ,,,,,N, ipr,..! f:,trirci.,ici..!,.;...... . : • .t5s..t- ../
I.: ',,t is.$$ rs . cli'$ .-'E•2111111.ili t!+'Pt ''''''..!: 71., ii 6) -^:0• ra * , er44,44 - -- + ' . . '
••• 1E:. ,, ^ "2 1.-4,,,i- si .11:,,,,i2.- ...I.% ,..9, ?.. il•e?c...,.)-414. VACANT()0 ' / <
i g
1.•..Y.Ina...:s. .: '':i.i.r. ..,at ir A,t1`11^0!..11.V.. 3W.1 .*:-.:16, on.sk ,.., I'ti i ...n.m.. ....7 V. Ilb.:4, • ,,... .. ,...,:...\, , , 0 0 I . • 4,4,
'L",4kIi I.....AI... • • °9 s!
j:A, . •? 01 .01. ,,,21 - oiti...,•,^ . t.s txtfa Iri.,..• .,,,v•it:. ,m, .•(b., .,:, .•N.,,,..`14.‘....,.%..:.‘.4, ... ..... i .., .,.
. • il
m..??....41_,:jaj.,•54. 1 -; r= •,,,,.• ,,,,. ,,,,,,,,,-„,.....,•,,, ...„,..k,,,,,,-...„..r,..... 7, ,2,,,..,....„.„.„....:-.... ,,. ...,.,,,4,
\ :: ' / '. t''144./ I jS' 9 E-. • .4,1h
:lea ---,..,...'. -,7.::-..:,-- - IP; " ...A,: kg.,',,- '1. '" '... '-`•4, 41 crom "'I....." •-- .?' ''t'f's!) - '4 .1 ;.. •• ' . 4-0,.
Et! ?F•ti-* 't "8. cta -- wog ,!-: ..i'-id, itt \, A'":11 ! •-• di ai--•-=, os, lti.•44-• '••• r•• •••i• .•."4 04, 5nigi
, ,.",41 \,- 4 lir - 1.•,•••,•••,c, :
>-• =*"
-,-1,eilE. ti5 , e, ,: 0 1J i • -0?Et, r.42,f,-;•4 5111,-dzittif gli:W LT".11,/ VIIWINIIIMPM711.1..tea •,,..; * 0%-7-'''C 'D• /\ .."sii.S* _'''."'''..'7: %},.• A '
-,t
,5•7Ife 4•-• , _ - ";' '."...'"." ' 5, ....wn PIRIPIEIHMI -1.4.3 .,sm;..if '' "r c :' " -. .- " -- - ''''-'D ,,„. , , z
. „„„„,. ..,:.:5".Aiaiij.im,„i- , -1 •--. ..\,,,,,_,..„ '-' it'''...s l• '''''' 11 is ''' ''
.....4 • .. Nip). •;,1,1.-..., -.
. •,,.•.:.9(-4 \ - O.
..,..... .--rx.:•k,s...z1=-:,...;,•:,:..1:2:.:::::;,.....1.77ER.,-.::. ' .:1-1- c..4.-----:-'.... ' =
j_411111AF:t q,'...-''ii...'''''''' --- 1 \ .'''''4.14•,7,. ..t I ''''',.. ,..P4e4 ........' '14.,.., n 2
1 Nigiii,P**.
‘ sa, ai ors. so$1.
I It.
' .1_2-R-i'' _--- • t -
. Its ctssfilt s 14:444:' II :L____1111. r''
,7511111itmo.14-ilia r '
KM"
•' 17.i .:ig y :••'''::::::. 'Qt..'';, 16 ... 4:41,111',.-%,,.N,ws4h'''' ././ • '....4#01".... k.,....:, ,,,.,0 ii 1, g
.. . i ' .. ,.......;,. .; ,:, .4 :, ...„ :,,,•,... ,... ,_, .
.s''''k'Z'T.-,;......,. . ,4,., ,i,...h1:1;!:411181Virc't.','•"'' .--. 0
4'10 ti / i, .„..•., '' • ' --,--- .. ' ----•• P". """ • = 2 ' .
,5 ,,.. -...-..- ,• •. i, ,,1.: 0 1, ,ic, , i 1 , „
8 ,, ' :'•''1.0.'"'' Z. 7':'.' 11111111 jai, .., .. . .
x . '''t 1''''t • ' 1 If n
)! . ts i $ •fl_ - 4„,..... ,$ .l'....,, 1 .-1,-1,------. •.. ••••.: ..,-,:„....2„._ -----r-r"- 0 c=1 Fo'
1171"4,,
Sg. ,
..• i S rip ..... -Ho . ' . g '-'•'1 .. LI. ' 'I .1 g . . = i"
.' . 4101100 9 P 4 ' s. ... ,,,i 3....,. g.1.••••"' "' ,3,.."‘t' V ' • '
31 1.. iti...12 . )'A 'k-o:--I ". 2*A,"1.-g I „ , -,.4,64. .„„,1
.,4,4, . =, ,•, :01.. r ,.,,,....,,,,g,.., gE RUITOB pip•
_........._.
,r4r .. 7 ''• :: ''',,, 1 '' :1:144:11ristittimi ::: 1';2:41.r•---.--...-.. !AV.; I.- 44n- -":.ill-,:-.. 1.---" :1"r:":7.: .:1 '*INIalniii.,...1".1111UNLLENTrAS 76:4-.11 : ,.91115111i,: ' \
le
0 ....Ait, .p.
i illa i , '.• '''* L• $.1 111,4411 ?* i 3 g g -•-: 7
I ! . .11121gP;11:1114Vol ''',(44%. Ii .. •cryo .--NT•N';
SlirIng .
/
Aeila . ..$ -s I-•... 7.„7.4.„......_,
11 a-1r•F NEWPASTLki'' alill.1 . 711142aIrrei6.._ • is i ..°;';
; 1-• . ‘ 1 "L. riorittkial, ar*. -et,oror-1.-
11! i . .--,.. - . - . --,-J-e 9 ILI MI 0,-10,
' \\ t I• IML,... rallai %%1.-4ir 14,,,th000ir
11,1 % ! t<, r .""'" t‘'14'' trie41101 4 , • . ,_ ..., ;.i.f. i. . . . 4a z 30209.001 0.1
i (Y•fi.,At : / I „ 1 ith. va,.6-e, lii,..,,;,......3 .......
I ' V.• : 5 --*.;---47,: iltiMillitt 6 . • ••.'l f
i',.. IX:RINI 8.1 ' ..?,-
i lir-,
>.< 'p•-•,—••••••••• ''•' .,' ...•••••• ".1.., .g g ' a.• •1• •... :.:.:9'.4. •': Pl.! 1.1 •.($
.. ••••.:F c t .,• . .. . ..,. ‹,, ?'•••••reiN•I
,
'`''
Co
. ..
--i
•
Jp•••
._
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
BARBEE _v1ILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
OVERALL PLAT PLAN '/4i
EIP:W;a j w��� f
L'\-
pi/f ,/.....).,J.c....___, i
WI ..4',..0(:•.? • //A.. .1
,// Y!I' �'� 1.:' •t:: /4r� off....." �9
_r.-• •. -
m«-r xaxr ._____..__..._.._..... •• .i� �••\ F
I .1r- ir 1r -ir-= --ir=-ir--ir_-ir =ir- " I.''a`` /,q:r'mxr .F s ,a
Iil 11 11 II II 'I II II II ;, , J•.r / _a I 4 , L ,:',.,..',+ mm.,,< I�
IIF " ^ I II •II II• II '•��• •11 �I:I II :1� ': 11 1 /.a
.:r_ 1 1.". :Lr._JLr Lc-iLJLr-�L_IL,JL�.JLr- /49 ,,lfr F,.r,..u,�
LAKE
WASHINGTON — - - -'7.•- -�. r /" �I y?.i .,: .�«
-. IA 7— ^ /s. / ,f,aSy.11 I o s0 !Oa IOW'_'zX -'"1 'J" 1, �/ / ®^ Q
,1 i CAA 1 I i . I' I SCALE IN RV
•
8 11
I 1 ,A�%a� •
VICINITY MAP �A;1
I ` '4 1 < ,r V l•('h' •�• / k flit
I :_ r " 1i 0i r / / / ` I
BD , r/. h , / / ` LEGAL DESCRIPTION: d
1` %, .tea-../�'«%. L /7 ,_ \� TO LAM)(Oi K. LD M Tq9 CONIDMM la DINATO IN MC STATE Cr
1.,�. • , t N;} 44 ! / NAnDNOT)N,COUNTY Or MO AND Is DE9DRIRDD AS rOUARl: Z
y.Dy >: _ ( ALL THAT PORTON Or 00nNIMENT LOT 1,5ECTON sr,T1.11a10,E.NORM. �•
W'1• _ _. V ,/•�t•� � /.1r.Y ^..-` `\\\ RANar O CS O R.M.a Km0 COVNi,..ARX➢1OTON AOD or SECOND Cusa,� ��• !-.•`y''/ Or TAT.IDS lDIODIOT LTIND KESRRT.Or NOITTHCRN r1Q/tC YO'CRAILROAD RIONT ,,,,1
' It `�•"f. a -mil_;!s, l,,A, Or RAY.OOP?TUT PORTON.p ANY.or SAID 9NORSI ND9 LYpG NORTH Or
,,,{��jffu�, "R •.i� >' / / ME rr GLY PRODVITON Or MC NORTH LINO Or S..0 00nNNIORT LOT 1W'�/� ..� 1 % Rrrt.� � / ;�!",/ MATE 1x THE eav11TY or KaD,STAY.or RARwNaaox. 1x Z
y / FLOOD HAZARD
!' '• Yid`� * / i, ,,,. ! ( T16 100 WA I1.000 HAZARD Ir COMTApCD WITHIN THE MAY CREEK WOO. '••. P-
` £' 61 o y 6141417'f'r�� 1 LEGEND C W a�/ �� •, UKC SNONCLINE BUrrER ARA- •Z. M�
sDEr !I .O� !1 LLL//////��� 71 PLANTS AND GRASSESUTEO r0 NArNE rI
�, �' °) ^� ✓ , I ! \ MAY CREEK BVrrCR ARFA- co
O
y3.1i • 1/ ' ' PLANTS.D GRASSES ITEO f0 NAME
���77:i J" /!I, N
1� r / /, �� BUrrEMN FUNTNG$SC4PEINCLUDCRAL
M
�.- i �. / •
\ , AND orNEN MANADEOAIANOSUPE 4ALERN.LS (�� O,
2nt OM Mon,
I �j
n a, / __ !/ 1_. __ __ __ I� IVI !/lI L-, r]olo9ao1.001
rra ..�:c___�,.amvs----- N 40TH ST. _� - 'Vs,3_ >w.., ..
X
co
--I5e l
Iv
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
t
�
r 4
4.• x
pf--J r;
• �I '� a I I 22 21 20 i9 fe 17 16 IS la I] It 11 10 9 e 7 0 5 4 3 2 1 •�.; � I g;e: I , : �,, � Ti' , 1 \Ii J I
7 . --- --i111i--- -- ilk-- -- ilk-- -- ilk-- -- w-- --_ddH-- ---Ai-- -- -- ?;I% �;' s
• t0 i �`� •
'• �_ ♦°., " ..0 a w '�� '� __ ....
....•. , ..,• .—._ ... 'r,-T^.tw Mi_ =�°res[C. i. li.4:i-.. �14'9111C ��' ,ij..:
'�:•: ++'A [.±'x .. .,.. :., .4 - • t W C. 'r,:'..7.•+i i.' •[i'.wr- ;.'. "t.`.'_- •�,r: Jig
-?
-
a A,ai •-/0 .711517---,.,tir"...--- ,,,,r0..-; ,,,re.--'7. ., riainS --- ..--iii--- --iiir: (4101.'-1.'... ,..C. ..4 i
. ` / eo , ai/ e x ? s° 7a n f 72 J
nLi
70 e9
!
�ri
•
27
•
i.
•
'' ee.anne.nn�? i \ ; , , ,,,a �1c; i' .2 * ▪a '4+4 * [� // �, I I .: , �L �i. 2Ei l :v., )4NY ' rt \�• ' i `' �' zfr ,'��.r'''4��i a aJ _-- ___J L___ __ L-_ —_J' . : Sr•n co
•
01
1 J' Y S ry I�v ✓ 4 Jh ?nw i: �.�..- ,, I• ? .y } a! J P 6 : g �� ----- a 'iY O.- ' -�>_._ •— --=—J,, ;y;. 29 1 ! 1 ""N-•� *$-.Z,,, A JJaiVN, i, " \ , / "' "y •�i - •
•
•
•
•
•
1 Q 1fi ;i f " '' ' ` iI e%` i % l7 s..: ; l ••• ,''•' •• ,1r. rf} W ! ` e 'i 1 e7',( l 41
2Y•c ` , ).j, i /:%i4 h r„ 0- " . .. .. ..
li•
� tl I�A441- I e9 ` / 94
.!,' .fir��.-ai'•.
63
.1 t 1.:`
��1 Ju-1 • `r.iA `91` �' � %• `'Y i .' ! :'/ '� j� �,n. 0m:a
t x
e x
1 --
'fl
zi1 4�,,'.��.2� 9s �h kF i?2 t 91 / �••, .jl�
*-------- --- 1 ( , {{;� -�'�JJ ��m•'( " 90 '`` •..t:..,. .�•
'------------ - T 1 \ ��/'^'/i1�„Id t ' •:,: ♦< , /,.CIS/(_/••//• J a W
t '.'a^,j 0,11 \ 5�+�`.� „Id,'S'y'_:Y�f,' C ```` ' VL"J11"
t..�••OJ••♦♦•• /„ 1i�,:1f :�'�CI�� ,1ir' �� '4 `I'1'S7 58``1 \ `�I`'� '��i�.':.'::��', ''...;'�� _ • G p
T A ,�f��R t \ ,[ QI ^I
C �_1 ,�._• ---------
-------- alti.IIlle•r 1i.4."s___ os„ - 1`�',i•v.6.,�1` 1` /�.0V.•.•�••0-:•
..,':: r �1 , r- `0. _ - ..I� } o
z . ss It0:14,
' uu�y- i ss Y t,,;E`'`tY .:44♦..•''- i:.� :, n 1[-;I;;. ; •is I I . ;,,,,h{fit;` 00: a `.S� = > % =li; ,. , ax O W
�:i - °,> .� 4s`f-4.n' •iije. e,� V it;b'[p.i'' 7aj',"'at. !!;iyA g I ;. C4 L
1 ,. I 1 '• S2 J �,' • •••• r. w,P'�':. 1i FJS f: r U w
v :A. ,•i ,g I --• ��•�. ._•...:: � ;/` 1, f WI''�''oSFI 5`:• (Y
:i.~:�� I ,.r� `Y : J:' ''!,'♦' ` J'I!•�pca�'• :*le' . 'r7: ,J .�.. • u ¢1 a
` SEE SHEET Lt_2 JJJ y .7,_1} 1 '
Z Plant List
•. �..., .. .A.
•+ s U O .
", ;yy;;a :o=,....v, ,u• o n1. oNNONN.WN - [ ow N AN rIA JF ) [wBo4 W[.IrVF 1uA03 �[ACNO >7NBOW OGORI:0.Nu4 ODACN0. SiNB04' •G1NIVIC NAND. 1AiCN0. JNBOI' BWbIMONAW I 'Si
<�+1•�'� WNONI CYNICS!
Jn*",.�%t��•ii
oPCCON ASN OSOA00•Jo' �'-IN.4A[rrten oBNS ��'Nr. N[MND MSS MD um ALDS,1"0 E[ pWC 5SN/Op0PpPW0CC emu,MG- I { L. :�.,
rn..rN,,.,Anm,y A3 iNOnN (y.Jy�$�+pCWi 1 3'O.0 lU.'CNC[N BV� to WOK
N•••7
-2. 0' 20' J0' e0' WN.[NLLL'1 SUMACS MN i•W- `• _________ Nam"•0•W Q ei38w c owf„,„,W. 4,.0$4,`40o Si g. ep{9M0SP lApMr.Ix�cA S`(y Rle r0 NI790 loaa N reY�,°,n,
}9 \\�J\��\.. Jll • E e'LS Srrn k, :V /S to�.OM f�ewaun �IOYaS Aalf0,1NMOt WA Yav a•.on IS R peCg UNOSUrCo9VRle aso- NN,oC..:YUN..I(30
®'�nM6PIGN>eC Al gy 1-)M. ® BWBEIUIi 1-1.O.C. '® B,DS[P I,wrw05 N EN UNN O .1.5f1 In•we
(/�'�� ANO O01CP WNAOCD 4ND5GD[N,11CAVIS .'7. IN.INe115f•.In
m 1 r n' SPb•.0 AS .�a� ••'0'S• J•Ornx[A<It11 V IB-3A'Ni. ,©.. iNROYGM ILL D,SIPVCD MUS I.i K. 00209.001 001
\\J/ on.r,na0x R.�e.TN SNONN 1.1„�4J C.SPNO 111U l0 Rd. ® OOOSC COMROI n Oo[i J'OC. ""'Cl
,Na,Na
= DuN[EP 6r1Dv[rt-.esn000srKJ L1-1
Mv1103LLY1C MAL ADC,OF Ux0/NDG
tl so.rt..113.541 3'...I•�—
CO
u[3.e.0
01
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT I, SEC, 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
SEE SHEET L1 1
tea• Si I v 'k', roc. ,...''i:• `•• i
clean,
30
fig,' �- - sx - .: y1~
Ile- 7 I I I 50` .f etiJti�',e•,'_`.::•,i../� .",•.:; A ,�,,,��► A =�ti
36 I ('? i , \ ', : •:•! t.• .•30R SV9Ly[TI.14;;'qd
1 ..116:1 u '6'l'\ ''',.;fr`f:S'..r.:V.':;. 7/ 1" sss., ' l'..': :'...''J' .%: '41 I/ '
1.4.1 magma
.. 1 :aa•: •• ," "i ' \ / / / /:'� d �N c ;'. d
uinmO _. V;• i : _ .' ram/ :y `. Y / PI.JJ .,:z-.. /IN -------..,, p ---...:::-:::::::;),:,, ,;:: ,.;:::-;::::::':;::::1 ii.:,•;:.,.,::i.,:i ;,,, ,,,,,,,. ,,,,-,,,,, ,,i ‘ ,,,,,,,;',',/'-,,e//,' /,f::..•.;c.:,' :/.
41
81
,::::• \\ ,e/14 `,r'' n`,toe •:.. ,":/ y'Zmi ,�'`"...4/, <NO p
., J•• \ w �•` • rr 3'ir/.
''� / ,/ .� �imer+lme u9 8•
..4) „ .. ... .. ,.•�• ' 'r r; /�f�•J� ^� 107`+ i:'�.,';!'I J`/' I�1�" /', / it+,/ ilis..1,.
o.roo"a ansyntnue �so:n,<w �I �:
... ..v `�,. 45
\\ •,1,�•. � ,::' •/, / eye,/ / /. ,// , n 3^0 0. 4:,_ y
\\ '.:.1,�..'•:• iv,/
��GG,//.. , to6 f .. u-, /:' ,/ / / r }, m:8 k
",!° \\\\ 16 m' ii•'• ' •Jfoy i ,*. �' -`'� ; /i. ��i .wr na :oo G''197 / vowHs��i \ ,41 :•�.'. i ;*49•. , \;.;04 , 4. I // , . .:�,, G -1� G,tJ // / E w roc=mu . zdraj. '� :M• � // </ Yr , ,'M•}4ti
�\xa ..........:.... .•' •' r#:J, .lox r ,/I'' • 'ir�` / 'lAIF",F:aITee Iv0..g y rit
x �.. o. c \ too ✓� � ���HillYi`�iil � }
} / .-.�`' , ?.:'. J/'^`\\`\ / 4.-3 , N•f.\.` .. ' / jjj
ca
1 / wnK9B \ "/• ./ . mu, h 0.' w
97, ._ :, • a' I / ,wm"os uwrt9 TO w,m2 i Ca a
•
tZa
CC �C: /
•• ` ••• •tg..r` +k/ :V / / [Rpsm"CONTROL CRASS MD m
yy ' -�rri4�.�___.e' ,/kA
,:` .., /,/' 0 11ta0uCM•LL DsiTMlle[D•Aue•T
/ .d Pr]'i � ^-_•/' •. / ••/r .rMu •I.Iro,un_. e,IDoo,r c I• o a
,�` ' y Mr�.uuir TOTAL,n4 DI LwD 'C
e><_ , ., p / .,‹ _\ \ >' » e r\, 'z�•''/'• , 1' I,..I love i.ma° ..
m "`:1'.. ... i` �,,`�� ti! ..,,,„°:cam»
..
s,eve'ee e .acas i T= I.. /,.,�- /f .i, p• xo .0 BO Lt
co ;Is•r at..r,•'' /.u.Aa iurasi L I^u l mr.,L
•
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed;OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading;OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway to avoid restriction of flows during
regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume(i.e.a flood terrace excavated on either side of the stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
C1. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping.mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance
adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of Renton
and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
EXHIBIT 16
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
D6. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals
and/or mammals including,but not limited to deer, ducks and geese, muskrats,squirrels,mice and
frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thena) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established
(where the lake is shallow,on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR b)
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands
or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such as
the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
El. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation.Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
• standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
F. Hazardous Materials
Fl. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
11
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color,including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height,relative building bulk may be reduced
by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a change in
proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height, buildings shall be designed and sited
to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
I. Noise
11. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and vibration resulting
from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures shall include pre-drilling of the upper
portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for
smaller,residential supports.
12. Vibration, auger casting,or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to
limit noise related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of crossing
construction.
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. • An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
]l2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
All that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24
North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington and of
second class shorelands adjoining lying westerly of Northern Pacific
Railroad right of way;
Except that portion, if any, of said shorelands lying north of the
westerly production of the north line of said Government Lot 1.
' B4 - 29 T24N R5E W 1/2
_ft--_ j— // E I17 _8_A
- - - - ® `
;� lmr/ /�::�:� CDR i lin
C
- - - �z, '1 C0R l • 1
%� 1
1....jvv.o. ) ,,,,, :. . „1/4....„.. _
— ap. r , 4 1' St
ei„iii
. ir MN iiimill in _ • _.
— — 1 � IiL..!?c-n1: Et
- = /IV *IILlI1;ii■ In In 1 R
-. — quo
. N - - ,era■■.IIIiui 0■■■v •
-
• ;1 — — MI IIEFAISE11111 11111111M es
yid •ini .� T
N..
_ �■�E ■im= EMI ■�.�'� -8
aig + b w�'� ■ m� NE 36t� _.
H ; — •Ii i.! 1� Wi4II■I■
.r4 AllEri / ..4 0 P-11*-141-,-*I*InemIL in • ?` a --1 - •
°ar-
m , 6
, • 1
Inirfinilf
I 11*' d i '11R f I I SRC / I
1 .
la L, IIl I I 1I N . r (-7
,� 1 1 -
° 113C1 I . -1zL81111 '1 .1 u I 1 11111
• 'ssiECCLL - .n f,. 1 R C
ifiE1311 . R-8
l 811II1lI ( J
I11.I � 1 �rN I0-01 I I III I l�--hl 1 Plltl I El III 1 III V �.
- 1 +$ IJ
IIII - • R I 0 Creek
. 1 .I— Il I 1 1
0 . CN T• T --INIl a0 R— I1 I IIII!!II1 j cN -II/4.
�.d I P I I I IIIII�IL 1(�`L�l���,�CRI I I I C N , i7.�,'L. L-8 ■f�1�l11111■I11 Ii � 1"...1,1._
13'01 ■iii i m'11i11 mmEn i q —
. N 2at_� I ,
-11
_ R
1 C� 8_ : ir 4 i R'
D4 - 5 T23N R5E W 1/2
tiZY 0 7�IN zoo 400 C .
Oa `'{' ZONING • ----Rentoa City Ilmttg O 1®
. + PBW/P TECHNICAL SERVICES Ohl
32 T24N R5E W 1/2 EXHIBIT 15
�'�1Nr-c0 Iz/223/04
54321
)01/21/05 FRI 13:47 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE ZI001
L ERS
Q � Davis Wright Tremaine LLP �1
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE BOISE CHARLOTTE HONOLULU LOS ANGELES NEW YORK
PORTLAND RICHLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE WASHINGTON. D.C. SHANGHAI
2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
Date: January 21, 2005
FROM: Tom Goeltz Telephone: (206) 628-7662 Fax: (206) 628-7699
NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover page):
SEND TO:
Name Firm/Company/Confirmation No. Fax Number
City of Renton Hearing Examiner 425-430-6523
City of Renton Clerk 425-430-6516
Susan Fialia Dept. of Planning & Dev. Services 425-430-7300
COMMENTS:
Attached is Barbee Mill's Withdrawal of Appeal.
THE WRITTEN MESSAGE TRANSMITTED HEREBY IS FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE AND CONTAINS
CONFIDENTIAL, PRIVILEGED AND NONDISCLOSABLE INFORMATION. IF THE RECIPIENT OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE
ADDRESSEE, OR A PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE ADDRESSEE, SUCH RECIPIENT IS
PROHIBITED FROM READING OR USING THIS MESSAGE IN ANY WAY. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE BY
MISTAKE, PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AND DESTROY THE FACSIMILE MESSAGE.
Floor Sent From: Time Sent: AM PM Operator:
RETURN TO VIA INTRAOFFICE MAIL X WILL PICK UP ❑ EXTENSION:
SENDER:
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION
Client Billing Number: [Click Here and Type] Client Name: Client Name
Posting Date: COSTS: Total Pages Sent x$.50 = $
Plus Long Distance Charges +
Entered by: _ TOTAL FAX CHARGES =
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OF THIS TRANSMISSION,
PLEASE CALL (206) 622-3150 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
01/21/05 FRI 13:47 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE 2002
LAWYERS
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 150.1 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
January 21, 2005
Mr. Fred Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Withdrawal of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document;
Barbee Mill Company LUA 02-040,EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
Since filing its appeal on August 30, 2004, Barbee Mill Company and City staff have
worked to resolve differences and clarify the various conditions in the Mitigation Document. I
am pleased to withdrawal the above appeal since we have reached agreement with staff and the
ERC on a revised Mitigation Document. Enclosed is a formal withdrawal of the appeal.
Although the conditions in the Mitigation Document are now resolved,the staff report
issued last week contained 8 new plat conditions. We will likely request some clarification or
modification of a few of those conditions. However,these proposed plat conditions related to
the staff report and not the EIS, and hence are separate from the conditions set forth in the
revised Mitigation Document. I just wanted to clarify that withdrawal of the Mitigation
Document appeal is not a waiver of our right to request changes in the staff's proposed plat
report conditions.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Thomas A. Goelt
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
Q1/21/05 FRI 13:48 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE Ca 003
January 21, 2005
Page 2
cc: Susan Fiala
Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 15999750 26266-4
Seattle
01/21/05 FRI 13:48 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE 4004
1
2
3
4
5 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
6 FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
7 BARBEE MILL COMPANY,
) WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY
8 Appellant, ) BARBEE MILL COMPANY
9 V. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
10 CITY OF RENTON, )
)
11 Respondent. )
)
12 )
13 Barbee Mill Company ("Barbee")hereby withdrawals its Notice of Appeal of final EIS
14
and Mitigation Document filed August 30, 2004 in the above-referenced matter. The City's
15
Environmental Review Committee has approved a revised Mitigation Document dated January
16
17 10, 2005, clarifying or modifying certain conditions which had formed the basis of Barbee's
18 appeal. Based on the revised Mitigation Document,Barbee hereby withdrawals the appeal.
•
19 Barbee may request clarification or modification of some of the 8 staff conditions
20 contained in the Preliminary Plat staff report issued last week. Since these conditions are new
21 and not part of the Mitigation Document, Barbee is withdrawing the above appeal,but reserves
22
the right to request clarifications or modifications of these plat conditions as part of the regular
23
24 plat hearing to be held on Tuesday, January 25, 2005.
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL— 1
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
0.1/21/05 FRI 13:48 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE Z 005
1 tt
DATED this dt tt day of January, 2005.
2
Davis Wright Trelnaine LLP
3 Attorneys for Appellant Barbee Mill Company
4
5 By
6 Thomas A. Goeltz, WSBA 7
7
8 Attachment: ERC Approval of Revised Mitigation Document
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL—2
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
01/21/05 FRI 13:49 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE 0 006
J Iti1V-G1-GUKIJ 11•YJJ Lill Uf" NCN I UIY NGJ YJG r JGG 1-.GG
Planning/Buuing/PublicWorks Department
Kathy KeDl�r-Wtkelor, Mayor GreggZim�mermin P.E4Administralor
• January 20, 2005 . .
•
•
• •
. ' Mr. Campbell Mathewson . •'
' •2140•Century'Square ' •
• Seattle,WA 98101 . ' •
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary.Plat ,
File No: LUA-02-Q40, EIS, P:P.;.SA-H,'SM .
• • Dear Campbell:. '•
• •
. This. letter is to inform you that the •Environmental'Review Committee's (ERC) has,concurred
with-the ERRATA (en-ors and omissions) of January. 2005, for the Mitigation Document as
approved in August, 2004, for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Enclosed please find a copy of
the ERC signatures. ' , ' • • , •
•If you have questions, please contact me at(425).430.7382.
• • For the Environmental Review Committee.. .• . •
•• •
'. : '... .. . .. .....- ' ,. . . .. ... .. . . •
Susah A. Fiala,AICP. •
Senior Planner- • ' ' ' '
• Enclosure , • • ' • ' •
•
cc: Alex Cugini,Owner-, •
Steven Wood/Applicant' • • • •
•
•
e ��TRcjeioc �' hnTAI. Grady Way••Renton;•Washington.98055 • ' ' ' R'E lti 1 0 lr
• - '01:Thi.poparoont+ks o%rxcydadwiahwW„0%podoa,aumer AHEAD Or.THE CURVE •
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 (TX/RX NO 78181 II002
01/21/05`-FRI 13:49 FAX 206 628_7699_ _ „_ DWT SEATTLE ,�� ,�� •w� LQ.j007
CITY OF RENTON
REVISED - MITIGATION DOCUMENT
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mitigation Document has been revised to address errors and
omissions.
Please sign below if ERC concurs that the corrections, dated January, 2005, are consistent with the
approved Mitigation Document, dated August, 2004.
SIGNATURES:
d / I+� DATE
Gre �e , A , AO 5
Dep rtment of I nin uilding/Public Works
ly i
Dennis Culp,-Administra r DA2ia 5-
Community Services
/ip 'Di/
er, re e
D
Re Fire Department
•
•
•
MR Rsvd SitmaWr&doc
TOTAL P.03
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 [TX/RX NO 76181 @1003
C 1 `- ` OF RENTON
..0
Mayor
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
crtlItgi
October 22,2004 RECEIVED
Alex and Norma Cugini O C T 2 2 2004
Barbee Mill Co.,Inc.
P.O. Box 359 RE ON OMUNCIL CITY OF RENTON
Renton, WA 98055
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT NOV E 2004
RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Dear Alex and Norma:
Thank you for your letter of October 5th requesting help and guidance regarding the City's processing
of the Barbee Mill townhome application. I appreciate the timeline attached to your letter,as it is
clearly indicative of your view of the events to date. Understandably,you are troubled by the length
of time this application has been with the City,and the costs accompanying the entitlement process.
Let me provide the City's perspective.
I believe that we need to begin the timeline in December 2001,when application was made for a
substantial mixed-use development on the Barbee Mill site. In fact,two identical applications were
made,one filed December 21St, and the other filed December 26t. Your representative requested that
the application filed on December 21st(LUA-01-173)be placed on hold; while the application filed
December 26th(LUA-01-174)proceed immediately. Processing did commence, including the
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)Scoping. Public information and comment meetings were
conducted in late March 2002. The City expended staff time,placed legal notice in the local
newspaper, and proceeded in good faith with the necessary steps to begin the preparation of an EIS.
Then on April 5th,a third application was filed for development of the site,the current 112-lot
townhome development(LUA-02-040). Needless to say,given the effort expended toward the EIS
scoping process, staff was surprised and confused. You are correct, staff initially refused to accept
the application,as the proposal was considered to be"incomplete". The application had not been
reviewed through the pre-application meeting process as required by City Code. At the direction of
the City Attorney, staff accepted the application across the counter. However,per the code, staff
could not process the application until a pre-application meeting was conducted. Staff scheduled that
meeting for April 25th. The application was deemed complete on May 3rd,with the caveat that
additional information might be requested if needed to process the application. After conducting a
thorough review,staff requested additional information(biological assessment,traffic study
addendum, and revised drawings or street modification requests).
As you know,the requested information was provided to the City,and the"on-hold"status was
removed in early September 2002. A SEPA threshold determination requiring an EIS was issued in
late September,and the City held scoping meetings,hired a consultant mutually agreed upon by the
applicant and City, and commenced EIS preparation.
The timeline you provided indicates that at 120 days from the initial application, a decision should
have been made. City Code(RMC4-8-050:B)specifically exempts EIS actions from normal permit
processing deadlines, recognizing that certain review processes require more time. The amount of
time that the application was"active"amounted to 83 days from submittal on April 5th to issuance of
the Determination of Significance(DS)on November 5th.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary Pla,.
October 2 l,2004
Page 2
The Draft EIS was issued in September 2003 and the Final EIS was issued in May 2004. The EIS
suggests a broad range of mitigation measures that would reduce or eliminate probable impacts of the
development. Draft and Final EIS documents were provided to you and your consultants, and the
range of mitigation was clearly disclosed. No appeals as to the adequacy of the EIS were received.
Staff prepared a Mitigation Document, identifying selected EIS mitigation measures that would apply
to the project. The application was placed"on hold"as the Mitigation Document was prepared,and
because the drawings submitted with the application did not comply with the range of mitigation
measures required in the EIS.
A revised site plan drawing was submitted to staff in early August. While this drawing addressed
some mitigation identified in the EIS,other mitigation was not adequate, including required setbacks
from May Creek at the delta, and setbacks from Lake Washington. The Mitigation Document was
issued on August 16th and the appeal period ended on September 7`h. I understand that you have filed
an appeal of this document.
Staff did receive requests from your consultant and counsel to meet and discuss the Mitigation
Document as it was being prepared. It appeared that the meetings were being requested to negotiate
the mitigation being considered for inclusion in the document. Because mitigation measures are
determined by the EIS,they are not subject to negotiation. Your consultant was sent a letter on
October 12th detailing the changes that need to be made before proceeding.
You have requested that both the project as currently submitted and the Mitigation Document proceed
to the Hearing Examiner. Our decision to keep the project on hold was made with the hope that a
revised plan in compliance with the Mitigation Document would be submitted for review. If,
however,you insist that the appeal and project advance to the Hearing Examiner simultaneously,we
are willing to do so,but City staff will recommend denial of the plat and site plan as currently
depicted in the August drawings.
Your letter made very clear your frustration with the length of time that the process is taking. I do
understand that. If you want to proceed to a hearing with the Examiner, let us know at your earliest
convenience and we will work to schedule it as soon as possible. If you or anyone else on your
development team have further questions regarding the processing of your application,please feel free
to contact Susan Fiala, Senior Planner in the Development Services Division,at 425-430-7382.
Sincerely,
If,
-
Jay Covin
-
Chief Administrative Officer
cc: Mayor Keolker-Wheeler Susan Fiala
Renton City Council Larry Warren
Alex Pietsch Tom Goeltz,Davis Wright Tremaine
Gregg Zimmerman Steve Wood,CenturyPacific
Neil Watts Cambell Mathewson,CenturyPacific
Jennifer Henning
YEAS
}
JAN 2 4 oc
1 -
CITY OF RENTON
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP HEARING
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com o
January 24, 2005
Fred J. Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, LUA-02-040, EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
Applicant comments submitted for the record
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
On behalf of the Cugini family, this letter is for the purpose of clarifying or objecting to several
conditions set out in the staff report for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. In addition, I enclose
various exhibits that we would like entered into the Hearing Examiner record.
1. Page 5, #2 Revised "Mitigation Document"
We would like to confirm that the "Mitigation Document" referred to in the staff report is the
Revised Mitigation Document as approved by the Environmental Review Committee on January
20, 2005. Likewise, "Exhibit 16" should refer to the "Revised Mitigation Document," which I
believe is dated January 10, 2005.
2. Page 13, (d) and Page 15, Condition #5 Street F Dedication
We want to clarify staffs reference to dedicating "the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F." We will dedicate the access street that runs north from the Barbee Mill site, which
actually is that part of "Street A" located west of the railroad right-of-way on the Quendall
Terminals property. This right-of-way will be dedicated to the City of Renton pursuant to the
Easement and Covenant between the property owners (Exhibit H attached).
SEA 1600453v1 26266-4
Seattle
Fred J. Kaufman
January 24, 2005
Page 2
However, Barbee technically cannot dedicate "Street F" since Street F crosses the BNSF railroad
right-of-way. The crossing will become a public crossing once established by the WUTC
consistent with the Renton City Council's decision on July 19, 2004 to make the 2 railroad
crossings public crossings (a copy of the Council's minutes are attached as Exhibit F). As part of
that process, Barbee also will assign its rights associated with the deed reservation for one
railroad crossing as identified in the deed recorded under number 266025 in King County dated
June 9, 1903 (attached as Exhibit G).
3. Page 14, under Shoreline and Page 16, Condition #7 Buffer Compensation
Staffs new Condition #7 would require compensation for the several lots where a full 50'buffer
is not able to be provided. The legal, vested requirement is only 25' under the Renton code
(RMC 4-3-090(L)(14). So the applicant has already volunteered to double the buffer to 50'.
However, there are a few lots where there is somewhat less than 50' due physical constraints and
the road system, but these few lots have well in excess of the code-required 25'. In fact, all the
lots, including those few without the full 50' setback, will have the waterward 35'in native plant
or grass species. So for those few lots without a full 50' setback, the lawns will be somewhat
less than 15' deep.
4. Page 14, last paragraph under Shoreline and Page 16, #8 Limitation on number
of paths to Lake Washington.
Staffs new Condition #8 seeks to force neighboring homeowners to have joint paths in their
front yards to the shoreline. The applicant objects on both legal and pragmatic grounds. First,
this is a new condition without any legal basis. It is not based on SEPA since it is not in the
revised Mitigation Document approved by the Responsible Official (ERC). And there is no code
provision allowing staff to impose access limitations in a homeowners' front yards.
Second, any joint paths would force legal relationships and potential disputes. Condition #8
would mean that one neighbor has to use part of another neighbor's land to reach the shoreline
by having reciprocal easements (or else a trespass). These multiple easements invite not only
legal costs and issues, but also practical issues such as disputes over property damage and
unfunded maintenance, excessive use, hours of use, unwanted intrusions and similar problems.
We believe each waterfront lot owner should have the right to access the waterfront within their
own property boundaries.
5. Page 15, #6 Vehicle Turnarounds.
We request a clarification of Staffs condition#6 to read as follows:
The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire
emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-sacs or additional access
SEA 1600453v1 26266-4
Seattle
Fred J. Kaufman
ida
January 24, 2005
Page 3
road or other satisfactory access alignment for at the end of the
private access easement serving lots 43-48 and at the south end of
Street C prior to recording the final plat. The satisfaction of this
requirement is subject to review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager.
There may be a number of engineering solutions satisfactory to the fire department and
Development Services Manager. This additional language confirms the discretion in the
Development Services Manager to find an appropriate engineering solution. In other words,
there may be additional methods to achieve the fire access beyond a formal turnaround, cul-de-
sac or additional access.
6. Summary of Compliance with Additional Site Plan Criteria.
I have attached a summary of how the Barbee Mill plat complies with the "Additional Site Plan
Review Criteria" in RMC 4-9-200E. This summary is attached to this letter as Exhibit K.
7. Exhibits
We would like to submit the following exhibits into the record:
A Plat plan
B Pedestrian plan
C Aerial photo
D Photo of the existing industrial site
E Photo of the current osprey location
F City Council resolution dated July 19, 2004 regarding its support of public railroad
crossings
G Copy of deed reservation dated June 9, 1903 under King County recording number
266025 regarding rights to cross the railroad tracks
H Letter from property owners to the north and deed reservation for the road right-of-way
on the property to the north
I Permit No. 73972 regarding the current Barbee railroad crossing
J Waiver of Submittal Requirements for Land Use Applications dated July 10, 2003
K Barbee Mill Plat Compliance with Additional Review Criteria for Site Plan Review
Thank you in advance for your consideration.
SEA 1600453v1 26266-4
Seattle
Fred J. Kaufman
January 24, 2005
Page 4
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
X:001
Thomas A. Goe
Attachments
cc: Susan Fiala, Renton Development Services
Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steven Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1600453v1 26266-4
Seattle
X
I A
, ---..BARBEE MILL
PRELIMINARY PLAT
SITE DATA
/ . / / //
/ //
rerw.SAL T22.NOON
/ •11
/
/ /'
wog sm.mu&0..Acnal
. 1
sumt moan mos:li r, )
11..TOM 113
' ./•(/1(
,Erl,a1.30„..9FAUF,63.3g..nv,
/ ,
/'.
•
Li"ea.P.3/4.31TIn 1,,,,11.11VEV TO NAME
/ / '''''.. / .: '
.....mo OTHER 341.1331TED IANDSCAPC WENN. /
1
/ 4./ft'S‘P,T? / /...... /...
;
/ z".T,, '''&pi / .....,(......
i COR-2 ZONE
I fi .1:z ''''''''' -7 • ,-•
_
i',,,!ii'N'2.1,'„., .EF-1,-;7,-,--Li i.,-;.,-'2,]i,„1:-.,,,-''..1 F:-,I,,,:::r-,.-1i- -'.'1- ---:'--- -„-i r21-771`i.:1--1 71'''. - :7/•"/:, 's,'i. ' / .,"
",——, ...razI mst ri...71 Er-Ariz;Igrz ay.; w.•-nr.z:mut stg,".1 c.'„1 n'z/ ,./'I, jp ,'
,,, . --- -,.----.--,- L.• ' it lt : t ' ,t t t It t t t t ,/,' j.,
.. ... . _:s• . I21. 1 II*I 'll" L'il'Il ., ' "1 .1" 1 .j . 11 . ' $ . 1. 1 4,,,II 1 I ` ./, 71:
/
• s - 4/ -4----- —FirEeit7Th
.,
47•:" , j i i /, ( (tr, /1„;; 44,,tv:2,.?.11,z>t,..;:4','iNz7i°,7z , /
), I ', i' /
/ r
„,;------,,,,,,,,,,,__ ,../... , /
.,-•,Nz:F-.N,c ,.," ."-il-.-,,.7-/... • ‘___, tgyz. ',,,, ,&.-;/:-•:', -,,1 ,17.,z,,,,':-.,,,I,, 71 .',, ' 1 i r ;;.,'' / ,,
- "
ra..„--:.. .-
......, ,-A ' ',i ,:',7 ,/,::;,...•!:"...:':::::T.,:, ''' •••:::.c.,''' ,l, 6.,ral- ,,,„, 2.f.''.-7..•,';',;',,,' , 4 ,' '.,
, vol
..."4" --_.2--=1',--,"=---,\ \ \ ''''',-,Z .:,;,,,::'--"-"+`•-, ::.:::;‘--""•-• --". ty'l,,,\5;;-;,,,,,r ,./...::•:,. .2,X,....: ,' ,7 ,/ ...,' ":, T.T..E.....- -1. ''•., - ti'31 . '‘N,1.,, ,./..T.13,-,T,tz:i‹:,:,•''',::.,..,,,,,,.... ...--,' ..•''''''.. ..0„1,.,,, .\,,,,,,/ ....,‘::,::,,,,...i.... .•,--s.,,,. .,/ / .:, ,
*., -----''--... '.TyNNC-:::',,,,"N,5-,:-...4.- ..\...---c- 7.1.,,,,'Z''`.,•,,„ ', .4;.;:::.‘,...!.://' • .,, ,,,,/ / .. ..
aw.T.....; ... ,' ,..„--...;.....„„,„ - .,"- :.:,-;.\\IIE.'":0 s,\ ,./.0"-;•.:'1;r /i -•:-.::::::'=::::::-- -c",,4.1-?. ,r,, ,,,‘' er-,-;;,' -,44--__ \ k,y,,Ii:":.\\,- .. \‘‘, ,4,4":T-77::).' •. ,'. --•'-'7
, /4.0.",.. ..•-•-' ,...:-/ " ‘2,,,'
--iiv ____11.41 \,.1 •,°,vr ;3.,';',,,.4.f4;fA\ ,`,,,,\ \,", ,..).\.',">;-?:.•:.',,i,....,,0' ,, e.,/ r
39.RAT 1
. ,. •,./ ;1'04,,.33'''' \\.t1,\ \___ A 4:3'9.::".......'...'i...:.N,S•!.. •..‘.j ' 4."'• :, Ito 11'z::___1 ,--,...---:t ,,„.,..,7'.. -!,%`A'4, ,,, ..o.,...‘.. $0,*',....•:!..,'• ." // t'
$ ,07;,,-_6 ,,,,, ,,,.! ,.;#1.44')\' •..-,':•-••!:V4-' "i*"? '',...•::" ./ '.e' / ONSITE RESIDENTIAL ACCESS STREET
t;,v1._:_7_:;', ...,,,, \:4: -,, ',*. A .•, •v •,..,;,,, • .- • .. 7 STREET C .
E, ---.1-, :--, t::::::::,Ti,' A:44: .,. ,v—k..--: .......... .;,0 .0- / ,.• ,, '
,, • 7. 4, 1 '' ,, '.'...W., .'
1._
NOT TO SCALE
a4
'.
man TIM , :
0 ...‘ST 35 j: 1 .,j •'3•1Z,"4,30...1-...3....• ,.:,::-!':4'/- i,.. \ sOl' ..,...,,, i .;A: \ , // : ,,
V ...i''::::::::: \ 3: '1''''',..':..'•:7)..':.: : ;;•t,-..-, .,t•\- I i fi/ i ••./'' S/ . 3
. ,... . .
LAKE
WASHINGTON '', -- 'M •.••„ .. A \.,..,....-0.::::::- .: e, -- .. 7- / —y --,,' // ,' 4, /
E, :,..w'''.! _ _:' v4—..c:,f. :,-i A. :ii, 7.,,,::- • , L.,, ,:,7,z,,,, ,7 ,
uNC 1TNOIC UK TWA
11:::::::::: 'I;( '11;V.-1,eIn.-:.-; '. 1^,1'.''''K / / •'' '''''''. 7 / 1 71 7,... 1---I 1
„.2.”--,../ / ‘,.,/. /
.NOTE.:NO 310ENNA AT 30.
DX TY SOWS C
,.... ik. :;..c,7-,!.:,_,),' -,' .4'i-:•,,i,4 .•,' n.; •' 'V-% / • / TYPICAL ONSITE RESIDENTIAL ACCESS
'
,.., Tr:?/---7_ )01.:•, ::::://;I,''',4,;\<, // ,..
NOT TO SCALE it•liair
, ' ''''''*. T..':3,‘".M1' /' "Z•e"I','-V-. ..' ''''....ik.,..7° ''Y if r :. ' ...I.."'7 '' STREETS A, B and D
r.°,72or •z,q;.„`,' 2„k;....- / ,,',...'..,:'.?,;;•:/ -;,.','..:-.43';',v1-:,./.,, A Ii—' ,' .''' '' / '--,,
2 ‘.t, , ss;,,,'Y,-.::-.7;r7 ..,, .,•sy 4r,,,,4"s) /t ,/ i ,- / ,,
'iiq'''•-•••.'7,°I. ''''" ,' /f7 f?..745-.:''..i'‘,T414 •r <','-29,'".,' ," / • --.,
''''''31/311."'IP'iLS INSIPTU.Or .)..1'•j. 10"-.
/,‘,,.:,;)i,,...>„, .-- ss,,.. ,--, ,.,. ..;,•.,,,a-.:-,-,lt +0,..1.-- .9/ ,,' ,' ,' i' / ....,—
........OMER 1INNNID
.,Jiiqy.-- -\\.„--... \.' , -.-7:-:tli< ,..:..,-*•,:,;,.•:- • , • , •• / ,' 1T-NNACT TYCO en., , , , •
,':‘,:''', .. '''.,:.?, .,(..•t.'4....5.".•. . I''.II ,/,,.",,,70‘,s.\/II /
' / '•.,/• / ,,,,,,,a,„,.,,,,,,,,,
causEs ., , . ..•
, :.`iujs.,ie I.`• I.--"-----. .„,,.o,,,,c..:.',.;',;?„41$'11:',t , / ,/ , i/ .\-
/ ''''.7 s• .
;.'-:?.6:14.,:Ilt:/;'''.f.f. /
MAY CREEK , :I.•‘,.. / .,.; / / '4 BMW
DEM '''''' ':". :;'";:*-1.;' ',,/.4" .:
,3.,,•••••.c. 3,.33,3333,33 sITELY/CTN.. 33'NM.WREN ,3....TN
,,,,,,,,,,,••3,33.3 1.66,..333 T.,3T3
SW STPLAN NUTT.
.'.':' 54'‘. •„:N'''T ' ''') .
/ ........."' ' ;Z:':'-' 1.44-•,,,,• ''t .' e , /
MAY CREEK BUFFER RESTORATION
REZONE ' NOT P3 VALE
SECTION-B
.,! .,-,;;;T:"..;„,,D';'s-.§:: ,..,,
0.
0......,
...rpm..
=
IMO IT PONT3 3,103
11,1*.3.3.3.3NNN
JANUARY 3, 2005
EXHIBIT A
BARBEE MILL
PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION/OPEN SPACE PLAN
___T . .
_._ ._ ..
, ,
23
_--__—"_` a a w » ,an ,e » u' a ,, ,
a
n #R !R --�'� Y. I P� 'fit 41 it_ f� !l' i / / / //
- rm.ov.m STREET A _ •" 1100 ,�
�� --.. yam— g. - . T— .it+—'aaaca — �;. -- ,. . —0 j/11
•
27 10 A )) m / A i !0 !� p1 a '
_ >. 11 n; n ID. so /
A
ie I / � '-\. / 1 I 1
a *► It �/"`� .R ` y 14 }p !' ---
. % i\ .'' ' ' . cl' , ,:elffir''-'1:-.' r./.., ti,!\... .... ,, i, ,, a /
` 1\ /
ir..mi..
J
u 1 I
i ,4 er
\\bp!‘
\ i 1 ,,
0
Cal ( - - --------- '' 111:3."74:: lb a- '
LAKE 32 A'./: 41
n • " ' 1� �!!� i ... :,..
WASHINGTON so i, :w
r f' w. 1;.� ONSITE RESIDENTIAL
ACCESS STREET
E1671
30 l A' \ 4.< / SECTION-A °
_ _--- c s'i,.., ' 113 / / ..10 /0
' ' .___,L4 1
�_•,— ; , Y ,''2. V P uz oit
r-' ' ':,i
•
4
/ TYPICAL ONSITE RESIDENTIAL ACCESS M
�� .° SQL
" ,a' SECTION-B
a / iw i ,f� / om..:o x,o+.
b r
'�/ c •
MAY CREEK <s .' O r ,,,,,, „„.,�
DELTA �... maw. �.,<..4.,.•
tiro'0
w�p.cn.c r.xn , K rY•.M.0 O nCr M.w
001''*JIV
/ /
., MAY CREEK BUFFER RESTORATION
SECTION-C NOT';)SCA F
Si
JANLARY 3, 2005
EXHIBIT B
E
ICH
s:c..\- -•,.. 1111t* 'ff.., ....1.),.,;I;.41'.- • - . „
, - \, . . . . . 1' 7o/1k.. • 'Ci - . . • y'
W1
•,' ' •• '' r e y,• • •;P>, ', . —
r----_-_.--- . - -- ..._ *.._. . I _i .•:,P''.."
._ .
. . _ — -- _ ,
, . 1. . . -
' .. . i .,,0,
_ ..— . .
.._ ._.....,
fitahr ,, '"•,..o. i ' ' , . . . . . . ,' li : cl. .
•.,
,.. 7 '4:
oilikliii411144614401i 'It. . • .v.:_:-.' .. , q•--, . '-.; s.- • :k
./ ,. ..
' •v, - ° 1 111°.1 Mir,--60. '' • r ,
Ir. ,
.'..:' ,:: 4 4,.., ., '‘1.411:4• . ,,'3, 4 ' • :is •;11-1,itt, irii." 4 •,,,' '', 41.
..• .*- ' , ,..,.;,4 -.; •1 • " :.?/4 Y.. . '' * , ;,..
..• re%;
eir, '. r, • v.• --
. . r
.,,• ' * " -, .
..,...,4'‘4„ .. •-—=•-. ** r''' "'• • ''''
, ,.. ....;4 .
1111111,4000444\1141
'''.• ...' ?..%
' 1.;* ' *.:I A- • . 1. •
••4, • ' . , - . 1
• i__I-:, Lio4r-
-
‘ 4.4,. 31.4r, T ! ,,r •
• • ,,t. inti i._ ;,, -•,.. iir g • .,
77.- F s. ,„,.,,•,,,,i.
'',.;=". ma " - - - 'i • 44,' . t.. . 7.
. ,
-it,. ..,,, Pli• •• r- - i •
) fl•-•
ilte
• - .11" ' .
•... ' 6 ' PIP
. .
A s , . ': I . • 4 Ahs! . r •ft . 1
- '..
. - .
, 1 .;. . 1rit , . • • .4 ,
, - • \ E—i
,_ . lk.i... ..... r, - .1 kii , ,, t -,. ,.4r. • . .
'' ' 41N, * :. .4 .'- . • •
'; ' • '' • M
1..4
.....imlimes.' te Of: C."leg"';I. _ '. 0,... 1"......, ,,,.! ..i..... Ilkit. , i, • 4 . 1.,
44
. ,
_, . '4.!ialit'srstoti..„:, ,. 1,... .. .4-• it' ' -
, r 6 s\10# i,,,
•i,. -!-Illt:
. s ,
IP. Jo 4 -s•i, . ..
- / , :._:_„...,, .. ..
,, \ ,, N k . .
stirr,: .*,,, ' 6
i. . .
- ...; 4N,N. ' 11; . 1
I.— el
'1 . ,
..,
•
..
\\ .
. . . . .. .
'• . • •
. '
k ', , -. '.' •,.'.....':4'?':,,:,,,e,.71;,...k.i. , 4 ,.'
liP/' .•1',...'''"' .. ":..,;•-,'','' :;:r:';.:.''"-.,,-.;' A,,,p,i4?,v.,
\ ,,,,,l,f-0,'...;:_,;. .•"• -,'.(,.•;',..,.,4,4P.'1,_,,4.t.'„641''!'',1
,,;.--',,,,,,:'•,:!'....ov''-z',',',:71'';.,;'IM.41;.411.'-f-,,;;;
, ,,; :,•;,,4,...,,...-17,:,•*-.I...,:',.:•-:,'.14-'14 liz4r,':,,-..1:ir..-4--,:.:4
- - - . -;. •"--. '...-'.:::,:!.;4%i.17„.. '''',„1.1;1'‘:, -;:,--;•'I-,..•-
'.:...,. . •.-.'. -.-.0":',:4,,*i ,,•-”:71,_'-„_- ..•
. :.....1,.-..,--,i,..-..t't ',14z...,q, •- ,
. , . -,•
. ' -. ....-"..:-4,,,,ir 4.;•.,,,.7•;',:f.';' •
.";',-•-•,..:1?..-,•'?,ti.-
•. • ':•••'-.-' -1,11,041,:r.• ,:',,',,i`''
. . 1,..w.,y ‘.,. ,, .
r
E 1
X
H D
B
1
•
( .
1
•
. ,
•,/
• .,
iff
I it'r
4
'e 1- 1
-4-ii,
. , ,.
. .
— .""\-4'-':—.......1 •
-0-1 -,
• : , -. - .. i• -' MO rIP‘ -•
1.• 14 .
. -. _r
. .
1 . • ' •
. 1
.. . ....... : •' . ,
• .
,l' • .- V.,.......
...4.; • t . , ' • , .
.re`• • - , .
iiii09*. Iiiiiiesitill -...-• uk I . . .
6
'.7 •
i.t,..• '
- loll
47,' •‘ ' '
P•.,
• ' — • .„
. , ..
_. --A- - •
k.
. * \
• .,.
1
- ,\I .. WESCO ' ... .. , -• ..• ‘ . 'IC" * ... 4 '
, • ' I 1.47MBE II — • .....,,,
. .
• .. 1111111.1"": -
• PC
ME ,, .. .
. . . . vi.. . ..,.....,..b...,,,,„,,, . . iroX
• .
* ' ' . •1:--. - .
1 ".." " •
.. ft. - 'nip, •••• ...et •_ ,•''', ,v6,0.S.07.., ..t. ...t.
.e.
. .
, I. okivatog* .... -$1/961.; ..k..--•s .;., ' • - '.,,,.. . .4"`7,41,.. ,. - •.-• ;.,/ ••• . . •
1. .... .
.! .-' :*..Pr• . ..41 *, ' ., -' ..94N./ , )• .t-...itk,z..%,, •1•'N. • n ./..asktIv.
. r - . ' !!‘' et'... . .- ., ,,,-:- , . .-•.:.„ . . • , . ... .
, - • •
."-'--a 4" :'41 • . - *. ' —•,- -1 .— •.11111/4-; ' 'k''' *441‘.1.1.44*:. ': • .'v w-rT.:Aps,14- ' 14L„ft.:ft % 1,
'.: ' ' .1 • V * '* '.'
*P
t ,. ' ''r • i.g , ' . . % , . i. - . •
-..
1. 4 , , itil ,_ ,- A.-,, '`. ' 1 •k' . • ' '
, ,..s „,,k ,...,.... - -• %4 y.• ,•• ..°4
..,t, ,, ,l, ••••. '..-•,,,..t -.447. ......t..6
. i
---• - is. . ti • ' ,,•
. , .
EXHIBIT D \*..t t., , , • ,
'•- • ,4 4%• * •`'''`"1 . ...-,c. -; - • ., ,• . .
..., ''.:- •4' • '
2.• -,—.214ii ' , — 4 .. *4, ' % ‘
•
E
IEH
•
• T
_ 4
x : _�
3t �`V&
f .
.• q._ V-., ‘.. 4/"..'..: "•"
...
..
.411041br1 .
--- -
r
is
•
" 1.. . i......
ioo°°°°°°°°°°°°r t
141
0
4 \k"--"""fil.. 1 id I ri I I II I I II 1114 4 I I 4 SI hill I I I I II II I I."•I I I
L±
t -
AP F
Iet
r -
�4 4 s +
e ,Ar . 4 . .
. .
• if 11k, :it ii,.. •ar-
awl s +�.. F
•
i II joil WO
i 1
IIII . 4.6 - ttit
. -.,:-._....-.." 0.. iiiiiii . . ..... 41
410' Al
4
y . t 1
• i .
'- { ,R •-
1 S li .,0
. 1111111111ii i saimilaimpow...1. ,
EXHIBIT E
U-
LUX2-01-1-
� . u'
. uwwx-m-�-
'
�
'
�
'
�
`
_
�
�
`
'
Transportation (Aviation) Transportation(Aviation) Committee Chair] ,ier presented a report w �
Committee garding access roads for Barbee Mill Prelin ,y Plat(LUA-02-040). The
Public Works: Access Roads property owner for the proposed plat has requested approval from City
with RR Crossings for Barbee Council, designating the two proposed railroad crossings providing access to
Mill Plat,Public or Private the site as public crossings. These two at-grade crossings of the Burlington
July 19,2004 Renton City Council Minutes
Page 240
Northern Railroadwill provide access to a proposed residential subdivision
between the railroad tracks and Lake Washington. At the suggestion of City
staff, the applicant has requested that Council decide if these crossings should
be publicly owned and maintained, or be developed as private crossings under
the ownership and maintenance of the property owner or future homeowners'
association. Following this decision and submittal of appropriate revised plans
for the preliminary plat,a public hearing will be scheduled with the Hearing
Examiner to continue with the approval process for the project.
The Committee recommended approval of the request to designate the two
railroad crossings to the Barbee Mill development site as public railroad
crossings. The Committee recommended required that the public railroad
crossings be improved with active traffic control,including signals and gates.
These crossing improvements are to be fully funded by the project developer,
and without City financial participation. The Committee further recommended
• that City staff work with the property owner to petition the Washington Utility
and Transportation Conunittee for approval of the two public railroad
crossings.
The Committee supported the request to designate these railroad crossings as
public crossings to ensure appropriate access to the public street system and
public shoreline access points for the future development of the site. MOVED
BY PALMER,SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMITTEE REPORT.*
Councilman Clawson expressed concerns about the liability associated with
owning railroad crossings, and indicated his intent to vote no on the committee
report.
•
Councilwoman Briere stated that the Committee felt it was important to have
public railroad crossings since the crossings would be connecting public
properties - the public access to the lake and the public streets. She pointed out
that active signals and gates would be installed at the crossings.
Councilman Connan reported that Committee members discussed the liability
issues, and decided that public ownership is a way to ensure the installation of
active crossing gates. If the crossings were privately owned, active traffic
control may not be installed. Additionally,he noted the importance of
preserving public access to the lake.
Councilman Law agreed that the installation of active traffic controls at the
railroad crossings will make them much safer than many of the crossings the
City already owns.
Committee members discussed that it was the intent of the Committee to
require active traffic control improvements at the railroad crossings.
Councilman Clawson said since the Committee is requiring active traffic
control,not just recommending it,he would concur in the Committee report.
*MOTION CARRIED.
RESOLUTIONS AND The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and
ORDINANCES adoption:
EXHIBIT F
E
X
H ;
IGI
B
T
s►oros s . d preps (• z�•tg 0.76 too a. or 1 outs i c'e ' the *resent right
of way of i.he S i L Line p R. •
•
No wits ',' V R Parke'!" --- •
-
C L Parker ---
S o ' In co of i.)ss .
_ June 3 by V E P :•tndCLP herhust, I :.fHR Ili se *iP •
in .t, d r . the ; Y' resat 3. Attwithseal.
.
Deed Filed ,Tune 3,19 3,1O:55 a:, . Vo, -S P iiov'z 286024 •
rated :p 3 ,19,13 Con.$200
r
George G Witter,tyer utd :essie Wit.t :rkyer •
his sf of I;ir;WV d, Y. Co," To N• - thern Pac if i:: r'ai Tway company •
a Wi soon An Corp '
P p c,prw 'sid era' uit to s p e; ;•J. 5 real prop in •F_ lo,w, t.o- i
wit:
. A strip of la ad , • •ft_ii. widtV• er and at . the F, 10 awes of
the ti 30 acres of L = NE or the SW * o sec 28 tp 26 ?iR
5 R WM sd strip of s.z.d hrrr g ;.or its bound- les 2 lines that are
u / parallel with tun equidist from the centline ..t:' the Seattle Belt T,ie . 7.'
J- Rd lroad of t ri = Nor PICA Fy Co i-s t-re sr i s lot, : takedout an d to' be
7poo oonstruot,ed • ' r.,.ud bu ad p- ergs r:antg 1.33 a, ri or . 1
1 wit Geo (i Wittenmyer --- .;
• Bessie Wittenkyer -- -
8 of w Jo o t' ;•.)ss . ..k
..urie 5,1903ty 0 G W and B W bef Jo J Beard N P in rind fo he
' f B' resat k : rkltid . Attwithseal •
sssaasua
•
?Deed Filed June 13,19v3,10:56 Fan. Vol >�r1-'/ 1) Li-e 3 256025 .:
pated June 9,1903 ;on.$4295 .
Clarissa D ;olmtn a widow of r,
R :o,W To or th er:; a;i.f i c PO lway Company a
Wis Corp
P p oon v lc (3 wttr i.,,to s p the :ie. rea prop in it lo, W, t o- t:
ij A strip of l(uid 10011 1 n width i n o v and ac lots 4tane 1
' 5 sec 29 tp 24 :, H 5 R Wti tir; d lot 1 of 3R. 32 ti) 24 N R
• 5 it: Ali hay.� i or tt t,o atidttries 21i.ies :.hat are par with are egvi dt,
- dist r'rorn the cent lire. or tnt: Seattle belt Tine rr of the !Tor Pao
Ry Co u.. t :.,e :::' i3 .Lc: Rtatk`d Girt rl!Id to t,e rnF.*•d ov ar.r' Fe
sd or es:::, .x l.t;; 6.59 :lc m or 1? ::'^e f p reserves one ut;cter
cattle t�..:.s rt : ta;,:.ori 953 R:.r) o::e private road c !'C): -ir.(" .
2 :d t3 `lr:riHsu T :olr.'ar: --
S of W Jo or r.ino) .,s .
., :;,: 9, t,y ; T C t.of I T T11 viler N P in : ':AA :'r r F. le, !n
rc;i :t :>. t . .il i thse<<1.
•
EXHIBIT G
./ • ,_ z- ,
„.
. '...c, •;:f.cit iet.•;!?1,./.1 . ...V7t4 -CZe_.e.ee /fi - ..... ../4../‘i p, <>.;•f(I;1,-. iz, 7,7
. -
• v,t •
i
. _ ..-
, ,I•/,.
:II .
', '• V ;!.•f C-0 I/7 7.. •1 ..;. i...: 1 f.l'i .•/,7 ../,..„.,:, .,..,,/,. /V,:„../.4, ...,,...,,,,,„.
r:"?
,--- ,1,-
, x „. / / • ;- ,- -
1, • •. .• - , • -- ,•--/ , ,-/.7/0'-i,../e./;:,7V .-vitifre,, ei, •iel/-/fre -4,•4-4,44,2.
-4
i / / --
- . ,,-• r
-.. --
--. ..
' NI iii . .
.-4 ... • .•,
,. .. .
/
• (.1 , . •.,....,•,.-• •. . ,.,.,./....,„ ;' ,/,-,/,•.- .Z.e/iitG.tii-,-ii'd;-lig. .11G74'4tZeie(..(e:4-___.
• ,
. i / / ...(6:: • ------:-4-.
1_
:• .-• :•.f.:-.-v-
i 1,1 1r. ' /..'11/-.ft« .',('-Hee-, ebtfi--. - ' )te,1:1/7/FJ.v10-e_kg;-/ 1_,,,..4........_,_-:.;•';'Ltrac'..,_____;,;;•'-'• -e--- 414
•
---:-. .-... . 7.A41:4;"'' .:. ' '''.*.:•:
! 3 ...--r.....
,c•i!i', t /
'
____................,r_:.....r .......::...rz:- .--7• * -K-.''',..-sg".....71,-1.,fr.. -1 --, --
1 i
•?... %if .
\•4:14ft 7•.,' ;•_I-- '1 //;• •
.-_Li . -Arlet•tyLi../tficv....nzie.iri.. .1kreelit, i k444,4c7.-2,44,4
i.....:,ilayeij,Iteeta zr/irre e. z-6...1
.... ._1(27
11-41a2. :.
/ ,... • ti
.
". ....."\:•...t ',A.
I
- -.......-. . .. gl‘al ...:.:1•..•
..' ••• e
•
. ...."
.. .
• . .
.... .- ..v......'.... . "”. • ••••• •.'",•• ••••.,... e............ .ft .
•
64 o.• .•••••. • ."
-. . ::'....-4.... • •-.10-.. ...' :
I r - • .. . •-•.•.-, -• . ••, .....„:„.-,
/7 • li , ......:!r.-• 4-:;,,,.;
- I-
1.7/vi /f-0, 4e.r /_ ._-__ ......:---4 :- :-•' ; 7 • • •.----
11.
. .
. .
.,1:: .,..- ,.., .
/(e , 4 • -Ant fi "....7:.-.11'....7r1
,..., e fi,,,,...• ' •;/pf 41,,e .__... ..... 4....
. '• , , 1
-,.-...,“!---.: ........ . - - .1.:•••, 01111017t
or.....)../ Wil..-•••• . 1.•
•
li '• •
_ ....:.......„.• ,...,.. .771, -1/4i't"',."4"-.., 44 • .1",......''''''Ciro ra.,.....)
' • 'f, ., /. 7 ,(c
• .• ir ,
0 I/ ...4e., a- •-•• 4.1 -- .;%.••,-J-01)44`• 7.4Vria" •
?;t4e,t' • e 4-e ‘ e..ree4._ - ,e •4!I..1.•,n.6".0_&I'•01.°. 4.••••..
/ 4.: • //
-:=1/;;;;;;/ --"4.t•-•,4 4.--'.•.,-104k.4,17p-r • • Or-,„irk's',
• . „.,-- ,„,-.,. • -, ..,,,,,t.,,,,,,,,„/..,A-5,•-• - ••• - ' • ..e,rt:41: __,,r4 ,!,____•wd.t.:iii
...: -......4,1. ,hteiff•X.:•. •-•„s, , :r..146':.•.:;:tt,•5.517,74,41-7,.rwr....'ex.
•,,,:
3 , • • • ' ' • •"/,•.',7./ k- ,0.--.. -;.... el 7‘•• ''4": ..47gillii''71149%;:•9.4.4""-:4';''' •44-4,.... f.e..... .....42614n.,.......,.,;.•.:.
. ,.
. . , i -•.,--.-..-: -:+kt'illttg-TV•- th7,.4•544%",...;ietirwaviiri . .. li;Y:t.::••:---ii
7.7(4t --ge.:Azzi . - ''..-- --Y ...4;•'.;MVaitr..~OP/47);t Ing g A e ki i i
•/ / ,
i E,./ .. ,..:: .., .12,..4=t .. ;' a •
' '•*''' •//• •", re`i/re(a tlet/ ga . .;••••-•. --i "4,6,..4. ,.,. ...._._. .. • . . • •:.•4,‘„,,...,42.41 --•
_......,..........a...4,Ute.4,.. . : ,..i. • 11. 4,.....*,, ••••• 4: • •O . o .....,
•
, .- .z .,4.?-1•,, riAtive,..... .7fiv.irv.ior... • .4 %, •••:r.......z,
11 . ' • • 'I ' ' • ..' ../•.,ttate.i (Ascf- •"41:- / i i/a ....,......,..- .-- -/- - . v.. -.. -D.
_ ...,,.....*.c -• ....,..
. i ,• z .
..,, -.0":•: .-- . ..,,j4.....,-...ect. r,47 jou > -,..---
• e. . !• _.ec9eg•o.i-21-tile"01/ Iteleaed' . .471•••••• • 4•144.'•
i . . - - :... - •-•::- •-=.-...6 t Iii . J. VEWL_•"1
1 • • • • .
r•
•
r . r,,,,, V;) ill.:"1 ,)tlie/aiii......Z/Ober. : ..;g:::.e••• l• ‘4;:erf..,jnta:•.,70.4. Pc" iii•ial...i.... :,...
efe.iii.,7 __, 6ex .../,,,feil 124 .....iiehic.c,i7p ,‘..,..,... .0,..... ..7., _044.,...,... -1,. .... Isicinfrrili.4.:-.:10.4;„%. ,•-••7.:-•
t"/ :' .
, 's '••••••• 4.'(if.'-i.,•44#„,•eiNeel24e'''.
. i .: /i. r , '''•134YieeA110,3' '.." ••...........i.... ...4,..4;• • a ,.. r.v. -
. N . .s i!bW441.: I-4 p
fi
g ...-: . ;.` tr. ‘. W.........:*. ...L..." I.....,az_:::•14:4L.---.• -
i.. CG 4.!ire e ea d<./141 .Z:tf ce../Azdt;.!./.17 .-v-
,
ml ,/ ,
.,_ • ., 1,- ,,,,::: ....-, ' er 4••:,_Piny.-•iit..,. .. Xa:fieAtits.
•V• •-• elf:tn. 4•11:"...•471i,•''
" • tilrX 0t ,e4oliec4/.4'12.4e,W,44•714411ird .• - . ::14"1P... .%.,4.:,.•`.
.i( ,•,G•I •:' !1 I
. /.. 7Y - - • -- •- .- 'an t‘44... .23‘10:•,v.ft :2.I!":Ileils..;;4•V.rolrc."...W
. l `11. ttlieC-tee"; iit't •*-7•e?-44244/ -,iy .4sIrfatft x ITW‘m''%... Avr.644,..41"Wi..j..3..,%f.t..••4*P:11141 "s.:'.
. f •/ • , . 1. 1 4• 474 zet,/ 7
... / 0, ea..
„....• -lit-.. •
- ...4;-...:... ;, -2,:i. .. ..1.0.)s,.. tZi•...:. •_t•..
••••f•e, - •</1•'1"?.ON litairet 4 4:-.141.4-4f er!......(64‘144.-•!.. roll . : •. .•...,-;,../,-.-Vr ',rli.:I..."11.:.:., .I.%s'....‘'. .
. fr
• ./ ••..,
.?(Z1.1. t• r:. /...4,
r I• "I.• • . . .?
i i 1 /I . // _.i
) '7 -c._.-.. - -.7......-. ,, . ••••4414•r-4.•.1.1‘..
--.1". • ,.7...4... •.‘',t •:,.. .• .•••2 •••••.•4-%
---• : ..-:::(,,IL.-1•. ..0 • • . 0 .. • • .
.. Vol ir.a.- • •
: •••'et'• 'i... 9 "flit, 1 id i tre dVey„(1..froyei "6: s.•1!-1...0-.' "ki, •1V4151;.'41.'41,*; ...:
. , .
,
" // // ,_
01..it in^$.1.14 .1.4•1,,°..s,, i
..e 00?Otte_.41:•14....„,..e." • ••• %.*is..,,,wvit.P.N t j•4.6.„.11.„••a. •-...•• .•••••L:.....-'Ai...4W"'le...4 .• • '••111446!4:4X*1:4
-.7.*it ,,• , ,t,,
•
:!..laei"•! //..'4•,,e A 1 ig4,ft; „4, 44014,4e...... - ....;) - •-: .. . --.:. .!".".•• -c_kiz,v..
........,....„t„,-.,4";•.„. - • . ....., . v • ...... . • .., . • •.. .
, .
.- .... •-....1 ..... '. t tIP .I.,-..1. -v...1...1`, ... .;''4' i It ;,.••1;144.04141":10..619.0fir...,4Mt,
• • ••%• t: •.• , .
.t.:•,*1.A:N•.:.'''..'s
-.....;;;,„.....' •.' • • -- • • •.
•• - • • .. - -•
•••
, .
•
..4.! : ••41. ..6. '• ...,..... • . .1.. .
• ..• ... . -
*6.•••,. %. . .... .• • •.
••• • 11.11•:.• .•-••••• • • •••••;;... ?"7:"...... SZA•••• ..el..% .• ; , .- •• 4!, ..• .
1..,r,Or.::..i.g.•••••••?••• ..,.•- ••_11 ......Ilt .0.• • • :41,.. .. • .... • • •• • .
• "
t
.. •,..1.4,,ITI.:• ...MM.,•••.:g.•1.41m00.• %1••P•••••••••„.••••' .... ....•••••• ,
2.• ,•'le. . •••••r•••:•••••••• ••'••• .• ..‘-. .
. .._•
.•••••••• 1
- .
f4(.14 • - . ..,...,••••-•.1. .; • ....,vt
. .. .
_ .
.; . .- :• . ,
i ." • , ...,- • i. 4-•r -• ,
-• -••rl St.t. t fr%
I U./ • /... . • . .. -1•,•..•:• ..."....."/''''•.-•-•.. V 4'..
•..1 ; 1. ;., -A 1:777x/........ ....... ......,.. ._ _.
. i ,.., ../.. , ,.-7.•,....... ..7. .-:-./..,. :4 ..,
i . !! , ••• - • .-
. • .- - ... ..,..)4,.., .;-,.......6:4-7.
t •• 1 . ( - r
III ill.. 'tit5t .- -•••••---7"- ."':7-'....-------"-a; i i i '. . I i . .„
..,-• -..
- '1' ./1 • lk • ,
' !! 11 i 69412:efit / 47 V tja ..: * /1.2K.Itli//), Ati.,,bi .fe1.4idelL1,fe..14.1- '"W.,...: ,.s,Le(/'
- '., ' "•"V- i • t
'.1-2.e..40t , •N"Kr
. . .. .` - .. • ..' .•I IrIV ... Is
- ..ezisfr--4.-Afilir
.. . . ...
I: '_ ii. .•, ' .'HI:....-. ...,:i ..,7;.,.........::://..-- 41/:,...f,.,,.:0: ..:`/"..t...1,,,:-41frrldr• --.. ,,,f•.....‘,.•-1 ,.....::,,..-:f -.....-‘,......•..i'..-.„Ailll'!",':.7,,:.. .;;;7••:Ir--A-1: ::14'.::::.:::::',;•:".;%-.
•
i• •' ------ . -
i,• • •:•.•;,";•....."'''• • . Mt-Art.4F -.vier
• -,.....4......---.----- • ' - .-•. -- 1r-
/-•'.. ! • 5:4 ,:"..,401. .. , „iff •-:'." lvtiMp. ...N.., ... _..••• _ ne. •./ : „ •ri;,!:
••-;•.› .:-..--,,,. ,1,,,, • . 7 r, *-..,- .7.,s,,,,,+41•.•-•?e...zi .
.;; ....,... . fe'll, iv/61tittii.7.. l:./...:/iir... --:4.°r.,....!:••,:,0- .1 .'" - "a(....-41'. IN .41.•-m...-4... 13,'i"'S.:... ;477115:4';:rtt;e:” 41:4*7•r:,34''..a.'1%;• :•
I • . '--.%"•r••
1
- .• • . .••4-, .....,.'s f.'. ..k.,.
• .." .- - tvl ai
.... _ .
,'f•6.*.1.;14:-... ---,..,t,.... ,‘. / • 2,6, P.•,...,..47-Y.I. "ii••• •4- "IA * mfr.'"?•
.,,;,‘-z, . •-r., ,,,,,4,4,,,,c6.4,7 re .
.. . ••• -hi, •..1..1.:s.tv--s.,<•-- . ""T"," • -,..tb•t"st
••••••tir : yi .4....0, . - ,,; •Actir.'...I ..4.0 .. .o.AMP.0%.. .
VI . . . It•4..' • .4• • ••••• .0. .....
.. " . UeGG)alelit'. Ilid;42 .' .14€11-eiellire-i-tei : .''..-,-.7*----.•. -.. .F... --;:- .
. .,
-.• . - ...... elif
r •.'Z' •."...... .---
• • ."4.10::1::.- •i - ,.t, f4.-/:*/ - ‘.4,...4 ...), ,,.. .•,,o ti:T...1
•__,'4; "fi.-...-'. . '11.- ....:4•11....neezir=,_< .14.-; ,,,,,,.••- . . . --....-...... ..,...7'..---:.j.....; -
1 _..
-' • -.:- 1.• .., --::--_--..-:.:.-„•:-.!-.- rr--1-7-,•-4-.444,,-..---„,- Jr -. . Air;.44.4 .... :4.....i. . .tiff r'pei ii ..-ii.:••.;.L..... ......ft ...c.44„. ...
- -'-"•••-•*"."••..:.•••• '-;.;:. .• -.. if=I/ / • •••-, 'rfir.'.7/_/.,..,,,t.,. .•., ..,• .0-et,;3•, 4..4. , v
• . .1 4 ttOni;m..................n i ;4.4 ... 1 _ ••-' -4: .44...Zfr • ••••
.., . , %.4..4....
• .,7 ,7, :,',... . ..0 4 ,.. .. v• .46. ve.....1.,:.e. ...jj •;..
• 0., .•g
; ' 1 . . . ,....;,Arilr....• e c.... . _,,A.,•• . - -- .... -' • •'••^...,47--...-ri. • t',..V.,P=1•44rfaV94-vir
'',5:""r•i:tt".fif,..----)g, ..-:..,„:,,A lit . /A .!..)4. .--'t'l• - .,'• :4;•,ti,e,,v-• -.Or:.:,,r•
. ••••,glf•...t I .. .;•,•• . - .. ..1•I" 41.44•V•• •11,• ' • 1. :4102 .
i, • . t - ......... • 10 • . . .... .44.4.4 - :e.t..i... ,44....... 7/••••••h• • • t t • • •• • .. . . t .., fe ; -:--- •lo _
' . --- Ortsr ------------ . ..• ; .34.,,,. Vs•z.vTritor ,z,.. .Ii.7 ....t ..•
:i. t• II . :• .'. ..*•........
1
ili h .../.. .. 4/i.,i,e . 7 4 • • .t, opt .. :.:/, . ,•406.4 f ::'('..;_..,:.., .3.i,..1...i.;1.:•.:..,‘
• • ----.7-1.. AV' ,10.4 '''t ••Ayr/ .f"Z d• •;-.e• 1.
-- 4_01 - 4/ . .a27_ • '• 4,4•4v0.....,...!• f./ - , ;.;.... --.!,... .„
/.4, ---• •,-,....., - •,..• .• • ,.,„ . at ./4.1%.
..::--.7. :. ., - ,.,1- ' ''' r" t" . • : -- --
/1 A •7 ..I..4•4•••
.1 I 7T7:-.- 7.-.r.• ._ .. . / , , ,i., ., ..,: . gomf..,,..,,.-
11
i . r •-•-• ''''its'"' ••
t
.....,,,,,‘ . •
4. #:'••• • • . •••*•''''--ig:L.-. •".7.1:..r;* ,A.t.t.- a*tirdrittiie•* 0 e . .01•r• ..it
11 ,1-• •:*4'.7,31„i;.•4...1:-.‘ -0,.•• - 434'- '4 ii•obirt.4 ' #st•- - 14...
4tririi.-•.147 . . . :
-------- •
sr.* ••g .40 41••••:.t;No:. v•erjaidliOr44.:•1 4„
a^ .........,..........., . ...... .... .... ...-........-.......... "-,-:,...-7,77-1„,.......5.%. ..-,,r .....yromryjundriab•••••=4 , . •••p•CV• .1.•:. •• ..r. •,,..4.3.4.1,... •
NiT4,11r0 .. 4„, '"
3- '.. i •1-7.••T-r,:'.::7,:** •.• -.......u...„_•,..I.....,. ....t......,4-i;e . pitiweert•i-v, gr • • - A;09A, 0..-,....-- • • ic. IN'.
•. . , rip,...', , • .1...-0•=t5.. •.:• ..r• .- • .....•'. ...TV.•...***'* __• • 4 Mt:4••• * • .
. _. . . . i. ...v..?•?-.Norq174i.----,-.. •• •....-" .....7 ' . 40l.., atild
; - •‘: ,,. •-• ••••.ertiiii- • --•:',1••••••• .. ' -.-...."7.-114 , 1•.24.114 ... vtoAw.,0., - ) , ......, ... •• . 4,......,,,• ..
..,•• ... - • . . •,.. •
.. .. , . ....• •.4-.1k4sLioic ...,.'-' ' • .. .eft. , I. • ..747e0c.,:z. • ...fr.,--
, . "• ,L,.....,_.. .. • . . - . . .. ...-.,:-A_ .-: . .,•-:.- .....-„,.,„ . .. -4*• • . . -.
•1. I... I .zt-::•••;41..! ,. / .. •!...' •,- •',.._Ni. • .d.,-. • :.;f:. - # ;,i,t'f;•;:;ai'Xsftt..• e: 41•!rr,l•-.3_,.....•.:•
•,_ / _..:-.4.::.• i• *pr..-.,. .. , q,,v:( ., A. i.4:,. ii..e..'.0.; •-•i•••••••• TZ-1'..:.•
f , i I. 'Fig .6 ri i ir ,...,,4y/z:i Iii• .*./. . aceitx.w.. - • ---;• -•. . . Low- .. • '- ,`--..-y.,. -,.t... - -7:1" -". ..-,.."....- ,
' d. • , . ---,„---. •-,.• -. . ,,,,0,--77-:;-,.• -' --•••• .1.p ro•• -'.., . , .....A.:p.--#:-....„••••
•......›..,.....t.t,.. r, ,40; fii._.` . .j....., ,-.T-•-xt.0141 . ;• .--#3,..:•=" ..
• .... i Igw. • - - . / ..._...„.. . ,. - "....,..
A.e __._...........-. 5.122.22:i' . •:-. ,-- 'IT 4 l•••"!,/, • 1, 0/ ..• 'g.;.t.: 'fqe..4...,......
, . .1 42. I-......:21:x...,. . .. 1. •-u••lr... /... u a •..t.; 7,471-.1 i..44 •••,:N ...:....• ' -2126..-1 ••''.... ;4•41..... ....o.Y:k414.15...
.. ..00
4 1 - '. II 47147,7:Zi fr2ii462„,,i ...- . ...:%•-‘/ A e,,L,,441, 46°403.:i."::.1C-::..,::....glir,r '--.--.'..443Y•
Gesi
it 4;=,..--,-„„j-l• ,;- •,. ---„..,.' • - ••,.." • • • -1-.:. '•WV,1„...44: • - -iI.: ••L'a*T22.*4-4%;:ter~....-.....-le"114Welin0511"WVNirttirill;'s .•- .
1 4. 0 ,...,-.7•••°I.,:--Z., -••••. 1- ..:„77!..7.•.-' .,-.. ••"....4. u.••• • . ......wL..4,.......... . ,..,...4.,......,,........ ..rj&;;;.• ae •...reseeec,......,./.• a dit..elegja.,..„&•.,,,.,•..
• d- t. ' .45-10-..• :"-' f••.•-... - - . • :-.#•,...- i•Alo,- .'--•,-. e•-_,_,-0;,,r),e,a.S0'AVat..grtitrragrret..314' ...1..e-- ","0"1---T.:
. . . , ••••• • .....7,-......., •• ..,,,,,-,4....,..,•....•:,•.4.. •',.....,qr. ...LW,!I•et%,14;IF•‘.,...„,„-fgr_.., .2.41.1... 40 . .. ...AI 440 •..r .1. .. uge084.8.4.auth 2•
- . 't2.27•C.2
....'I It' -. • •- .."'" eg-- .-7. • .. ...„0, . .--FA,,,,-- -,..c.,..--.,..v.b.4;. . b....vv-rev- . -,,,,„, .
• i , t -.„ ;-...- ..-0.1.-.-.76 ,.. • ", •••‘'#-1- •-,I, - _yr. Z' to:ii 11 -• ..4e••••••••'LOX?tam...1'to lyoj, ATTe..__* . ,..,, AI Y • .• •11U •
* • ' VI .4"Valtialt A
V
• .• •-•'' • i...-" • #6.1'/A-A*11"--**el.;:f*,"',' -'lAr'el.:''''Ai-14035' i'lir- •r7;%,,, -•• .'"diarar•LL.4ii•••
-..r, ... 'I,4- / .L.,_.1waig..0.,.... t. ,i...1.11,...ff.e..f..... ., • . 4. .1" ... . . AC ..4...
. e ...a.
- - fen.TIV 10,0/1... eidi_L•7 er•X" • • 4.:' Y ••• • r 4,1,-.....-
.-i.. i .4 4, -.....J4 t4:x:.4.,:.4..4*%*.*.4.-i•:i41i-1.,l••,..f•...1.".v;••.•.:`-4'.'k.1-,.i.r'.,./,vi,"•:'r./•.•'•rsci'Z.t.A.y-p.rr 1t A•'t A..1•••&-•4'-.•1•.:• -• -__--4_A.:y7•7-.1"-7*yr`,w ri4,i+e0j-T.:4•O%i•:.t4ks r.4i 7ra.1i,.:A.4..W.L,4,-11.*2''1;-r.:•#.0.t••S•0.!1,:,r;i6g ed'p.t..t.r...4iAt TY4,4O6,-*.r,..'_t izt.,Axtj.j•.. 4o-r.a.,4 i1 4A,-.-s,M-1 i. 'i *494I n ?i' iSj : 4 : -" 4 er *%" Me " •4-.4:*.I', 1A/'A1.4f..1/p•..4..•1•_1
.
• t -# -. b-00#47'1A..2-*J..-.til"i114*:••• `•• •'0...7/ )•! • --. -ere• *
0 ' •'' 4 244i .4• .4*2•4,444.4...-'21 0-, 0""jita.elorg-.0"41%/14):../,i...11:YOrr „___•Pla.:.1.11e4rakfl.7$0f#:1;;VAPA:.....ii-o-.7.7.k.....u.: • 4474t.
• . ... i'. !:-Vre.AN.riroci"Irr .J....... rIell i• n't.rorr. •••••/#E1•44.7:lit:1v••••;•..)%74,4111,-.1.7-0---•*.zo.""VI'••• Iw'w'.,•FIY:tX•itv' ,', illtr;:;;;;,:ilkirl,.;**Ir-.0 '..!.
. *.rit • .;1 .eartv#7,'.4'40Mb...iai.. ••'4'. -4.--,r..4.0,:hd 'N 2.2.4fiAt'iiir 4011.W...§.4-1,7*.ftt-vi-rrit' At.it..$ ',..-Zfrai;•• /7•- ._3,
1..4# , 71,...itfoisgv:vointimfdiw 0,, (..,F4P•ilafl- _ote:7Tit,::•74./:40:P4/17.,*•1i'' i•••*:•••••:4ZTA .!..!;(•'"V."'%• -illi.'1.4.% ...-•....iN ..,
'..= I , :',...-,V.Prirrir,747,09i'Ap.0443F77iiiv4 • vr.7x.e •Iric`zi:x.... 1',... fi:* `Att',(fii-iiiiiiitti . ''•
. . L. virtli , •
•i • • ••1 i 0 aft' ..4. • 4'tat ps . lir l'. • •• A. ' V :0• TA•4t ''..••••4- ''' '4--"v‘i. ...na:..,72.404 . ....,tml, ,
a*a '104.16°''Ag '1'2'4 ri/A. se de, ii hi e*, • .1: fir 4,74:7 - -....- refrtiol,.: •., cm. . ... 4. ..--., 4•••••• --,,
• • 1 * . '.,,....z•-/.. - -- , .#1:1-.'Vii•••• •••••••L' *•' ' - - ' s'.Mr *1"fit.-•••••'1"%`.7.#.7717.;:r:$1• 0...7-:.
I i:; 714:!;.,•;: ,.,•...tri••'' ' - ..4)Mirrk .siti-j/ko
. , ; 1,.... :r ,.....
. . . AV" •''. ie Ain'oflp Aeoszt-41' 4. . .4s mt. -
• ;•:-.• ..."*.i::. at.,s,-fr 4 .__. •s - FTT/tiltrii46,7..., /•"/.. / 4 .4- . ,, 40.•Y. • e ... . . ...- .-..... • • ...S.4- • , kk•;-;•
- •:. . ' sillg.;. ....•rev:w • 4:1'••- • 9 ..:
• •''• • ••• or74 ..r.f.r,:e•P - -, -- --..,7row , ••• ;- .,4.;-", 7-• •-.. . t1 .1.= • -• ----me; ja_. •• • *,
• • 1. ' '• -v't ,.. .izu rt".tr x - Awl• • ....•... 1•', 0, :- • -.. r " . •41': •- 70117".#0.zot '. ....••'!" :
1%01 *.• --,.. -. . ... .., .,,...•2
-. s • .• 3,, ' • . '
r ''',4-61T i. ;4,:i1F. , "-"• -261111 "4 . ' • 3/..t1...,.• • •• . , t'''4":„11.•'!....i.'..-..:1..; Au:- -1,"i '4# • , )•1.*.
;; ° .•ki).::•e•it:•N eft"' ...1 ii,;,,-.f.4114.',Jr.1. -- : ,N #17,..7' " "' ,c-./ i 'h•:.•. . ...... .. • - ,.44.1,4- d:./ .>, :#,:. .„,..s...
. ..t.. .:i ,ti".,szo:::....prrtr.f,ipiptivitirty4 - is:=3;., svir „ ...co --- . 7dtetli •:,
.... # M1410. A,',Varirll.":11:-.‘" AIN • '''T*0.;:w• Wit IV / *AL. •'' .e....40"'; II i'.iP.R.-°'.. , •: .: .-4.5i:. ..rajoii.t".4.6:4'1,16*4.4'0.4.tr. "V:4•6.,..7.7.M.7./111.1t,''
..'• ''.1•/P•V4. /11 trArZ".."•frseP
. 4:•' :;/"`"Irl.!,,..- "0444.., 4.4, '..0.9 „,e,...,:wl• td.a.liefill :`• 20,,v • bro. i. • • , . , ‘•••• •fr.:---•• oi
. r ,,.. • •?•• .....ut,Amat,e -
.....,,,,. v, ...!..,,,404;:..sa„,,i•i..,iipt,. 1 616. •-• „,..,...i%14-iiitysraL, .N.,.., . • . , • . .•„„..,.• ••I, •".i.:44i• ttitily.
1
, . , s i .-'7 7.,r_e•-i•„i,6••• 4..
, . ,..,••
•i 1 i ' i 1 tilit'Aigt•.00::.• fel 70'1AT' .1,-W... ' -.,1, .,,,lir.. •, :. . .. . ., .Ar.r....-.,., ..1„; , -t.-
•1- ... ..• ,i.,' clo A.Azi,..Ir.. .11.•01,•ev. -.. . - . ielot.p, ... ,•: .rt.-...i. '.lt,44.',I . -4-t.7.• ' ,t1 4,',4*,1,,,‘"""%lewt.. .' -..:" '. ` !-.
•.:. 1 .... . ;cl:::_crtt..;i .1....ill !,‘,1 Itt4 . •A Sialr -f 4.. --,..r. '"A.' ..'.!'• .2r;j ITA• -:-?'•• or/yip'‘
.„ 40,;#4.4: . iik.0.1.4:A I4 • "hn •-tW '
•.. ,i 2„"t• q •.lir, •11,140641,eim 4,411011401.'qiirci ... iti ''.••• a.......... •" tr I .• ••/I 6' Ael . g Crali$ ( .4 . - • • .'" • • • . •
., • ' I i 1.,01t...i • •,•.1..i.440.4•Vs.••••••-.••. i Jr • ' -rrf of....,:c_thy,"%V' •tl. rt. 1.. ."..k 'A .t.' „..., .•.A.. .'•;;;;.':7,-ii.1•;..1ff..0.m.h.4......-.:. .....-__.. . . _ „„„
.. •* • i•• &W.V.'s' ..f•.1.'1..0**ell. 4
-. -' A '.! Oiltgi ifq,•”•*# Fold", .,'"4.21*Zietitei •.iv' '1-.13 ' 'r*"..... .'.. - .....,,,--mv,..3turriA.x.,/,...,•....
...
......, - .•
-'',, r. ' .i.Arr.,VAI•r,'"4,'"..4'Z'....tl.'.1' 7.,.*':-.V....ik.•. .1;i't*; ta".•'71. • ' ‘:i.•4-1•2:.".''' 1.7:7'. --.-..-..-7.....4.414717.;i: j':;,-•/',. - -. ,7,,,,' . ":„.',•-•-••:.`. •-•••----"er.,.• A ; NI
''. it.). '•• I..JW11,1•`''..-" • . .
ir • ' •- -. 0%14.)i'Jt' • ' '.76.0a,. .„.;.. ,,,,,ze4;00„ kiird,e... , . - •:•,.,
,
. .... . .: ..,..1,00.4.44171-4..)s;A, . •irielft• ..iu ••• ' li, c , . • .
i i..4.; r 4 t;#1,111,.1.••;fit;;,1.••••*';g1t.0044441.!,•*,.4% .. . :.'-'. )1 '. I.; •...-41•4*-'.4 10' '' ' 1.!:*."..• ...Y.; '!'lle'•.-'11 -"..4•.;•'-, . ''' - ''•l'•• .•
i
' /... ...1 : ;4•Ittle:!•;i4:.•;."'.11..1),?•• • 41-4,z, o ..,1. •. ..1.41'0'....:.v. 0. .4, r . ' 1 , • .•
-• i a.; ••• -0•••(•••---•-••;,t.'.'N•-• ...wiS ' • •r• '''P rx'117"4"Arsalke !II'- N.,• -0, -- .- .--::,_. • •
•-•••• II.. 71 Z...°''" '7'....Vv.'.A*.rjr. f:3 ". 1/#4;011:4"Nti.;zy. ,„ 4,j; ‘ - ,. ••• - „4.. -iN141441:',_ ... ':: A.:,.. -114*#•/ !
0-:*.‘",i.t. •,: .:t ••..4:. .-letti 41. •,L4 . A!4'; -efear e t•K,la ii .-..i. eil,... • .' 4reAgeolfuzgaillii?..i-deon
„.„, •ip a ,.1 ,, ..,,,,,.,. , ,• ..
. . .• ..• •li ...• r_... •rip
1 ..‘,..•°A 1 fas.f... '.:?...."-- .1... 1 ' ..... -_-* ,T...//. ... . ,....1‘21.:7--.#•- "i•1st? .. ...ezii . ../
- ...----- If t 1 A....--• -:? '7./.....64'..P .3P479... ;14::44-11Y,1.74";fel,.r.‘ . tattr...11.20-.141 . • V••41#4"-
-- . .,.. , •
•
X
IH
Dec 18 04 12: 09p B -'5ee Mill (425) 271 -8844 p. 2
12/1//2004 16:2B 20661 99 PAGE 02/02
Dec 1s Dl 02:32p Barbee Mill • (425) 271-8844
p
December 14,2004
Susan Fiala
Senior Planner
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 •
•
Re: Barbee Mill(LUA 02-040)
Dear Ms. Fiala:
On behalf of Quendall Terminals, this letter shall confirm that, at the city's request, a 60-fFoot
right-of-way located along the west side of the railroad tracks on the Qucndall Terminals
property,as shown on the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, shall be dedicated to the City of Kenton.
In fact on February 13, 1996 an Easement and Covenant document was recorded in King County
. under #9602150689 which states that Quendall Terminals, a joint venture comprised of Altino
Properties, Inc. and 7.H Baxter& Co., as Grantors, shall provide a 60-foot wide easement for
"roadway and utilities" across the Quendall Terminals property and shall "dedicate the easement_
to the City as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is required by the City as a condition for
•
approval for any platting processes involving either Parcel B .ir Parcel C." For reference, Parcel
A is the Quendall. Terminals property, Parcel B is the Bat,ee Mill site and Parcel C is the
BaxterlVulcan property located to the north of Quendall Terminals.
•
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, •
Quendall Terminals
4/L. 111P ' •
Alex Cug i •
Presiders on ,ehalf of es t
Ahino • ..ernes, Inc, Attorney on behalf of
I.H. Baxter& Co,
•
EXHIBIT H
in 4•1(Qt• - --ti. .�.,.�„��,.a:,, •.c am ...r rtltirr•
1 f
Y
1 ' BASEMENT AND COVENANT
R
R
•r Agreement made, effective as of 1
• �..,. 1996,
_ between Quendall Terminals, a joint venture comprised of Altino
Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter & Co.,
a California limited partnership (hereinafter3"Grantors") , and
Barbee Mill Co., Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter —
•
& Co., a California limited partnership (hereinafter "Grantees") _
8
WHEREAS, Grantors are the owners of certain real property
•
cW whose location is commonly known as 4503 Lake Washington Blvd. N., .
CRenton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached
In
w hereto as EXHIBIT A and by this reference incorporated herein
: t .
i CD ("Parcel A") . . .
QD
• CI +
rWHEREAS, Grantee (Barbee Mill Co_ , Inc.) is the owner of
certain real property commonly known as 4101 Lake Washington
Blvd. N., Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is
Irv' attached hereto as EXHIBIT B and by this reference incorporated
ik
herein ("Parcel B") .
i
•
WHEREAS, Grantee (J. H. Baxter & Co.) is the owner of certain
real property commonly known as 5015 Ake Washington Blvd. N. ,
Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached .
hereto as EXHIBIT C and by this reference incorporated herein
(Parcel "C") . 1'•
} _.,.._... __......• _W___ ,l M_ Qp,..
trsin=ccsnx zi/ccti/t»so3.it .
sr
` .. _ • •i
..._..,....._ -
ta.
•
. ... .
-.
• •
. ... - -_,.,,,,,,,•-- ..
WHEREAS, Grantees desire to acquire certain rights in Parcel
A.
I
I
WHEREAS. the parties hereto wish to establish a legal
description as to the location of an easement for access and right
.re••.
of way, . 0.--
the terms and conditions for the maintenance of the
; roadwa
Y, and future relocation of the roadway. - '
FOR TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual
promises and covenants contained herein, the sufficiency of which
is unconditionally acknowledged by Grantors and Grantees, the
parties hereby agree as follows:
t
en
I. GRANT OF EASEMENT
CD Grantors hereby agree to grant and conveyin
CI
perpetuity from
0 the effective date.-of this conveyance to Grantees an easement for
.-1
(v roadway uses and utilities over, across and under Parcel A. The
C
Ca easement granted in this instrument is appurtenant to Parcel B and
Parcel C.
II. EASEMENT PURPOSES
The easement shall be for the purpose of providing access for
ingress and egress and for underground utilities between Parcel A
•
and Parcel B, between Parcel A and Parcel C, and between Parcel B
and Parcel C. The roadway shall provide access sufficient and
adequate for the purposes of Grantees' uses to the highest use e•
permitted by the then current zoning, including two access points .
.
to the public highway from Parcel A. The easement may be used by
(SMI/7susi4uci/m1n»>a.i) 2
.
•
- :. . _ - •_
•
r.
--
•
I
the owners of Parcel B and Parcel C, as well as their officers,
employees, agents, tenants and invitees.
III. EASEMENT LOCATION
The easement granted in this instrument is located on the east
60 feet of that portion of Parcel A lying immediately west of
railroad right-of-way.
IV. ROADWAY RELOCATION
The Grantors or Grantors' successors or assigns may relocate .
the easement across Parcel A at their sole discretion and expense
provided passage between Parcel B and Parcel C remains
uninterrupted, and at least two access points remain from Parcel A
to the public highway. Grantor or Grantor's successors or assigns
further agree to record a restated legal description for this
easement upon relocation. They shall also dedicate the easement
cn to the City as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is
i 00
required by the City as a condition for approval for any platting
CD
•
1 In processes involving either Parcel B o Parcel C.
C1 V. TERMINATION •
O
LID The easement granted herein shall exist in perpetuity, and
shall run with the land and the title to such property, and shall
inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement, their
- respective heirs, successors or assigns.
VI. MAINTENANCE OF EASEMENT
Grantees, their respective successors, heirs and assigns,
covenant with Grantors, their respective successors, heirs and
assigns that Grantees, from time to time, and at all times afterIII
csrn1n244s/42261/CCM/173903.11 3
tit'l
the effective date of this instrument, at Grantees' own cost and
expense, will repair and maintain, in a proper, substantial, and
workerlike manner, the above-described roadway. As between the
Grantees, the costs of repair and maintenance shall be 'equitably
apportioned based upon each party's use of the easement.
VII:' CO277121IIING RIGHTS OF GRANTOR �•
Grantors and their successors, heirs and assigns may continue
to use the easement for heir own purposes so long as their use is
not inconsistent with the purpose of this grant.
VIII. INDEMNIFICATION
CI Each party hereto ereto will be responsible for claims or damages
0 resulting from or arising out of the use of the easement by such
party and shall indemnify and hold all other parties hereto
CDCD harmless from any claims or damages arising therefrom.
CI IX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between
the parties and any prior understanding or representation
P ion of any
kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon
either party except to the extent incorporated in this Agreement.
X. MMODIPICATION OF AGREEMENT
Any modification of this Agreement or additional obligation
assumed by either party in connection with this Agreement shall be
• binding only if evidenced in writing by each party or an authorized
representative of each party.
111
tsv111/724 422ciimy17»o3.0 4
x:
, ; _•,, •' �.. • ..• •v._ i ••'%r.rZ'`.7hn .. 7•�•• .�Y •
•f �� •j'YiJiy
•
•
. ,_w"tC'' • :•Cif:':_=.•.....1-.£ 4,
•
XI. ATTORNEY'S FEES
f In the event of any controversy, claim, or dispute relating to
•
I this instrument or its breach,reach, the prevailing party shall be
j entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorney's fees and costs.
XII. BINDING EFFECT
. 1
This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the •
respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns
of the parties. 1
• XIII. GOVERNING LAN
• It is agreed that this Agreement shall be governed by,
construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of
en
• CEO Washington, and venue shall be in King County.
O
U] XIV. NOTICES
w4
OAny notice provided for or concerning this Agreement shall be
VD in writing and shall be deemed sufficiently given when sent by
CI
certified or registered mail if sent to the respective address of _
each party as set forth at the beginning of this Agreeme t.
XV. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS
The titles to the paragraphs of this Agreement are solely for
the convenience of the parties and shall not be used to explain, •.•
modify, simplify, or aid in the interpretation of the provisions of
this Agreement.
•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, e party to this Agreement has caused it
to be executed at‘,�t%e. ,
Washington, on thetdate
indicated below.
��
tm m
91/726csiazzsiir/i»,a3.i1 5
•
•
IS ::'3,1.-• *.. '
•
^ •
�•• •. . _• cam^.\+ • -c S'�vs^r•.•..: �{��;:
•. • 3•�''� •:Y• ` i - •.Wit.:.:.•
f' .� :!TPA.}.• '.'_
•
• t-�rwr�..
".. . .
•
•
J . '.,14d,E;PFgr____,
DATED this _j_,Igday of 1996. 1
GRANTORS
QUENDALL TERMINALS, a joint venture
comprised of Altino Properties, Inc.,
a Washington corporation, and '
J. H. Baxter & Co., a California
limited partnership
. - - ALTINO PROPERTIES,,INC.
,By:
Its: .*b:4116),a
r
•
J. H. BAXTER &
../
By:
i -
s:
GRANTEES •.
BARBEE MILL CO. , INC.,
a Washington corporation
- .‘k . ..
. .
•
By: Wit....f . ,,_.- A '
Its: ' /Lot!i!' Or
410
• J. H. BAXTER & CO.,
• a California limi d partnership . '
• ��'
By:
•
Its:.—
.
STATE OF WASHINGTON )•
•
COUNTY OF KING ) ea.
)
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document.
•
ts11111i/72css/4z2cs/mr/i1»o3.ii 6
•
t .
.•
•
�. •
•
pqo
�w ... 'a � i- {{_''
...,. --.
•
I . . .
1
•
On this dayof
�� personally appeared— Feb 1996, before me
be the p L p_ L)cppeare�, �I P � �uQ rn i fir. , to me known to
�' of Altince Properties, Inc., the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
Cn AlP,(
Nota Public in nd f the State
of Washington, residin t: Rer`-bn
My commission expires:
Z N nck
1
Type or Print Notary Name
WASHINGTON
STATE OF F14b�rgR2i�A )
COUNTY OF ) ss.
KING I
•
•
I certify that know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document. are
•
On this day of f�6,,o=.� , 1996, before me
personally appeared h�„� 8
� be the � . to me known to
�'`=ryd oI J. H. Baxter & Co., the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and pu oses therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
•
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written. _
3R11�S C. FW ?I c-�rn. 4 ( "
STATE OF WI�SF�YC,TON `! P b •c in and for the Sxate
NOTARY-•••P( � of residing at: 17� (�,
My commission expires:
yr comrstioo a lo. /O—t t-tG T1'4%4 s C`.R.i iu
(Type or Print Notary Namej t
-•v
ISrre1/7144S/41161/Cti/133333.11 7
011
•
;.:. S:: .:;fir'.:::_' : • .
.. ': "' "
M: Y! i i. `
' L.7L..
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF KING ) ss
)
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear.on this document. -
On this
personally appearedl d day of P e h 1996, before me
be the Q x ('_u9 t ; r to me known to
�•RPSrrin p of •Sa±bee Mill Co., Inc., the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
-- . f and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
OrtAl
Nota Public/ �in an• for ``he State •
of shington, residing .0 :`Renn
My commmi,ssion expired: (, -q•q
U Z Qn rri ti o ri c
(Type or Print Notary Name
c� I -
2
8
L
No
i V •
CD
......i•rxcs.......73,...ii 8
•
- ,`` 7 .
•
s - •
•
•
EXHIBIT A
t
That portion of Government Lot 5 in section 29, Township 24 North,
i Range 5 East, W.M. and shoreland adjoining lying westerly of the
Northern Pacific Railroad right of way and southerly of a line
described as follows:
f
Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line of said Section
29; thence north 89°58'36' west along the south line of said Lot 5,
1,113.01 feet to the westerly line of said Northern Pacific
Railroad right of way; thence north 29°44'54" east 849.62 feet
•
along said right of way line to a point hereinafter referred to as
:ems — point•A; thence continuing Norith 29°44'54• east 200.01 feet to the
true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence south
56°28'SO" west 222.32 feet to a point which bears north 59°24.56"
west 100.01 feet from said Point A; thence north 59°24156" west to
the inner harbor line and the end of said line description.
•
t u,u,s/uui/mr/i»fa3_u
•
ta-
• •••
�1, •• f •
':.•.. •' • % �♦ =ice:•. S.
•
•
•
EZBIBIT B
IAll that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24
I North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, and of Second Class
Shore Lands adjoining, lying westerly of Northern Pacific Railroad
i right-of-way; EXCEPT that portion, if any, of said Shore Lands
I lying north of the westerly production of the north line of said
Government Lot.
b ..
•
•
up
fl --
61
t 0
I
, ,n«S,.z2«,071,1»,a,.1.
MMIIIIMM
.
• , .
T
l EXHIBIT C
-haw
' That portion of Government lot 5, section 29, township 24 north,
range 5 east, W.M,, and adjacent shore lands of the second class in
front thereof lying westerly of the Northern Pacific Railway
Company's right of way and lying northeasterly-of the following
described line: Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line
of said section 29; thence north 89°58'36• west along the south
line of said lot 5,. a distance of 1113.01 feet to the westerly line
of said Northern Pacific Railway Company's right of way; thence
'-� - north.29044.54•. east, along said right of way line, 949.63 feet to
an iron pipe which point is the true point of beginning of the line
:m
described herein; thence north 59°24.36• west 525.00 -feet to'an
iron pipe; thence continuing north 59°24'36• west 488.23 feet, more
or less, to the Inner Harbor Line of Lake Washington, EXCEPT
portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true point
of beginning of the line described herein; thence north 59°24'36•
west 50 feet; thence northeasterly to a point on said westerly line
0I of said Northern Pacific Railway Company's right of way distant
North 29°44.54• east 100 feet from said true point of beginning;
C.p thence south 29°44'54• west to said true point of beginning, and
O EXCEPT that portion of said shorelands lying northerly of the
41,4 1I northerly line of said lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the
County of King, State of Washington.
C That portion of-government lot 4, section 29, township 24 north,
CD range 5 east, W.M., TOGETHER with shore lands of the second class
CI fronting thereon lying West of the Northern Pacific Railway right
• of way and south of the following described line: Beginning at the
northeast corner of said government,lot 4, which point is marked by
an i on pipe and is 920 feet, more or less, north of the southeast
cor r of said government lot; thence south along the east line
the eof, 156 feet; thence east 62 feet to the westerly line of said
right of way; thence southwesterly along said right of way line 156
feet to the beginning point of the line to be described; thence
north 58°20' west 460 feet; thence north 67°40' west 210 feet to
the inner harbor line of Lake Washington as now established, and
the terminus of the line; SUBJECT TO right of way granted to Puget
• Sound Power and Light Company by instrument dated April 7, 1939,
between Julius B. Falk, a bachelor, and Puget Sound Power and Light
Company; situate in the County of King, State of Washington.
That portion of Government Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 N, Range .
5 E, W.M., and adjacent shore lands of the second class in front
thereof lying Wly of the Northern Pacific Railway Company's right-
of-way, described as follows: Beginning at the quarter corner of
the S line of said Section 29; thence N 89°58'36" W along the S
line of said Lot 5, a distance of 1113.01' to the Wly line of said
Northern Pacific Railway Company's right-of-way; thence N 29°44.54"
E along said right-of-way line, 949.63' to an iron pipe which point
is the true point of beginning; thence S 29°44'54" W, along said
(sr►si/7266s/42261/CCW/t»so3.11 1
lir
.. ' - , .jam44 .—_ .2_ .
y.NY. I "` _.. • .vim• " _
• . .+,'•".,'i�'l:Ifg'/T•.I•ia:•-'s'/•.�u-r.AI.1« •
.. --w�'•,..^• i•. .
F{I/i./IL —...-.�.�. - ••. r t+\..a'lii.1L•r.{,�\^.•w.�Y..�. �, .....
.e'�'"ns""'-•:•-�. ... ..,.�•e Mom,. 'rw��... •_
. i
right-of-way line, 100.01'; thence N 59°24'36• W 1039.16', more or
less, to the Inner Harbc,r Line of Lake Washington; thence N
44°20.006 E along said Inner Harbor Line 102.95' to a point from
which the true point of beginning.bears S 59°24'36• E; thence S
aar•-- �a�,e,.r.+
' 5599°°24'36• E 1013.23', more or leas, to the true point of beginning,
PT• portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true
point of beginning of the above described property; thence S
29°44'54• •it along the Wly line of the Northern Pacific Railway _
Company's right-of-way 100.01'; thence N 59°24'366 W 100.01';
thence N 56.28.50• E 111.16' to a point from which the true point
of beginning bears S 59°24'36• E a distance of 50'; thence S
•-~- 59°24'36•.8.50' to the true point of beginning,- .and EXCEPT that
portion of said shore lands lying northerly of the northerly line
of said Government Lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the County
of King, State of Washington. -
If
.
1 •
I .
•
•
•
•
(stinin2css,.22si,as,i,39p3.,1 2
•
• __ ...I..• •e^ . i .. a
+ter. •tit`..T�. .i-\'ti .. .,.'.i• --.�
•
N '1 (,�ll�j.\tl'1.•s,��.`•�'�,��` �•yi ��r1 t J11••1i`[ , ,f�l`� 71\;� �,l 1' /���� sj�,�+�1/ '�lli il� �;/�� ��`�
I `1 • �' + i,' f
N.
4/• \ 7/ ,,..7e ,,,,,,,;;I-k:',/i,litil ,111-4.,\k}iii- ,,.,!..;.,;_,5,5";,,,..---•
//A./i.t.,-7,tri,,,,,,, .. A.4..,. 1::".,1,, ..!_,,,,„:i.:;.;.
IN
L k ��.�im IV. � =te r
ji ie'a:1
174
,-. Z-%4\ er:71,K,F fa, .1.-4 ' :Ifs ,I 1I•/' / G 7l
'mR�,�s • , Il. ') &./fi� /1 ��// l J T 1 i / Jr t�iG 'off f,t al( f�•+?'V, 1 `''� iW
I..,,ii0i--4 i11t‘'/.l4
ai fl ` .1 I.
I. `I�i�+t �� %��� 1 . 1��3�I�.1 lkf % •` ;, /,1�u/ �1/.�1�'' 41
a n d c •,fir �C y 4 i 1 if 1> ld ., " + e. i /
. �1 Y i'1l • /f'p/ . 1 v ' }//y .// / T,0111y, •1 'ITO.I"f A �•'�1FJ�f�j 6 /z'lVj 1\ 'V_
`� _Ns-1`.111� )*`j/ 11 I' 1. 111111" l,•,f111'/MI •� ►I``'l// '`/1 ,l1 ct I+7r•N 1 • +y i/l t•f/1\i•l�•
,..-- • ` , :•4 i��,yl `° l 'II�•11 [ t,�l fj'j�jl� '�1,1t':� ;• '‘�;al ;ry�.�1��. �'(' /'f I f1 j
1 �. � I , fit- l�,
�= ` . ~'IJ + %11\ J �' it���(1 ' I /I i 'l11'7 ''q 1 )jl\\) l •i�N -rlit 'llt, ' 1� �`
al
ril.,'
•
n •itt
N . C
\,,41
1 In
bo
It-ai d, , N,„,
: q ...I . N .r.......,....-
N' tin "
141
p 14
Tim� �� ��� 0o;0 (1) \k.,
, •
M H ON
lrI
PI
q
i,,
•
, ....
.
•
• •
',....' .
. PEgkirlballY10 :% ' ' '':-%".. • ..
,,,.....
:KERN PACIFIC RAMAT ocaphii-i doptintiiihihider the itee of
,-0'.7. wisconsin; hereinafter called hBailway,Gdmpiner in cembideritiem of one dollar
in hand paid the receipt of which Ali hereby acknowledged, And the Agreements
herein contained; hereby grant e to *BEM kill coittima, INCA, .a WaShingtdri
corporation, hereinafter eal_led "grantee", Perisiesien tciffackiiittiin a ixriirlite read
crossing aver the Railway Company'S lotwleot right fifilily'Warlto Belt tine ifi
front of Government LOt 1 of SeCtibn.32* TtierishiP.0.1. tiOrttts•lialiel 5 Itiat Of the •Willmuette Meridian, at QUENDALL siding biking cminty) week4gterti the center
line of said road intersecting the center line of the RailWay Cdrapanyis main
track as now cicinetrusited at a point therein distant 211 feet southwiiiiterU, testi.,sured'along said track center Li.rievironi Milii Post 6 (which fade post is Vitiated
.approximately 1162 feet southwesterly,.measUred along said itiialc.ceeiter line,
from the north line of said isectipn), the point of intersection being otherwise
described as Rile•I'oat 6'tdshts.21.7;:pitb4.•:••..•••:..-•:,-t-•••••07••-•—••.0.7-7. tfoo..nm-t•mt,----.••••
. ...
.• .
• This grant is made upon the iolideing terme.i • .. . . • •
• . .
. • 1. The crossing and incidental drainage fEtcilitiee shall be denetirii cited
and maintained by the grantee with.,thsigrantee!s.own labor and laaterielii,and at••the grantee's bole eicperige in a gae.arid Wkinitilike strinier.to.thit Satiefacitied of the Divieiiiki Superintendent Of the itai1wai.Oolipan,4 • .• • •• : ".• .. .. .
•. - . '
• . 2. The grantee agrees to retiaie and keep removed at the grtintitil.t.b;it,ponkit
any vegetation that will Interfere viih"aPproaChiiig trains being seen for a Idis-
ta
nce of not lees that'five hundred fecit-in each diretition irinkfilit paint in the
road creasing from ic dietarice et riot labs than.fiftYlest..trat the r4.1: oh both sides of the -treiak. • . - .• • ' •- • ' • •-,:i.m.'-'t.- 1!.'' - :
• •-.•... .-
3. 00 boconnt.dt thin ptiTiti:. kiiii-44 been given without any aUittantiai
consideration moving to the RailwaY iiiiii)a*, the grantee egre0 to iriciiiiiifY and
hold-harmless the RsilWay Cdtpany,froik.any and all,loSei coati.tatiage:f or injury-
to persona, including death resulting-0artifromi or,to..prep a-.teciiii.44..:Si •growing Out of the use Of said Priiite ii6aa by- the grantee, itd etipibi,'•`iiiiik iffenti,
. servants or invitees or any other person uaiog Isaias with the graqet At,'iiintioisloti
- Ai"tlialtirtiriireatittivilrettittixtiltt. ;,..— . ..• ., ; .,.. .• • - . 4,,-;:.;.... '
damage or injury may arise, and niitiff,t'Ail- 'it• • ft•00"--..'ilti lint-6:: i.20 lif .
part from the negligence of the Railway COripanY4 ellployeecial?igente.'..Or:igiOrinti s
- :1 ......... . 4:-.••ok..;-. ::-....4.:, •
; . ,...: .
LI. It is agreed that the provisioi6,. f.piirdOilph..:A tare fo thi *Rd/iiita.
tection of any.other railroad company or C011ipanieri heretofore or hereafter•• 'granted the joint Ilia of the Railway Company's property of which the prefianee
npcin-Which Said private road crossing in located are A parts .
•
5. Should'the Railway Company.at any t.liiie deem Said tre,tising a Mena de to
• the safety of its operation, or should said crossing iiiterferiti with the nee Of
its right'of way for railway purposes, the Railway Company may terisitiata this
grant upon written notice of thirty days, and Said notice shall be good if . •
served personally upon the grantee, or posted upon the premises* or depoilted in
a United States post office addressed to tho.grantee at rennydale, ifathingtOn.. -
6. The graittee:.shall.,not:qms.ign7or-transfertthis petidt withoilt the
• , -written approval of the Railway CerapaSyi.
.. ..
7. • This'perifit:.etiPerSedes.:.iiiiedfiff64 ' ,' iftr'e*.tglit4erliatfOirliiittilfifeedvMhiL.,.:..--. : ,
and dated October 6,. 1935 from the Railway Company to Pacific Fir Company,
.predecessor in interest to the grantee herein with respect to certain property
near said right of way.. . .
. . . .
,
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed thee. preeents in
duplicate this 2Otfi day of Octoberi,..4.4i.k,....4,,,,,„*„....:,.„,..„4.,„...,..„..4,654..„..,4--
.•• - . ...„. ...
. .
•
. NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY,
. ..
• By CI
•
Industrial Agent
HftilVIS'itittVi4a'iNart."''''!. .
/ • .. .
- . .
BY g--7.... . c...
,.,..,... ,. ...
' Attest ,, • / .Wesident . . .Secretary • %.....___,
. ...
. .
•
- -
•
...
EXHIBIT I
•
• .
X
H
I
s i
1
EVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS 1-OR LAND USE
APPLICATIONS
calculations, Sulrvey 1
Drainage Control Plans
:.:.i::n::':.::'.ii:;:v,:.•:;v';}.�i':•i:::::i`i�•::._:'i::•::`ii::l:4::;:_:n;^;• ii[iiii:;.. ::..... ......,. ;., '
Elevations,Architectural 3 ANo 4 tiA/J
Existing Covenants(Recorded Copy)4
Existing:::Easefnant;s #kec6`rd.:..:.:..:....:.:A.,.. ..:::..... .. ..
Flood Plain Map, if applicable 4
��'<i`-:+jC:```:���::.'•.::: i(:j:}!:C�:'•v�:::'X::�.: ':�:�:.:�ki'::i<:j:: :iJ•: ':•.Y'+'+:::Y4::i::?:.''i:.::vriC:��i:`::v^:v`:: `i!?i;iC'' :iv':•`i!`>:���!':�i��ii!�4'�:":�;:�`'�:�:`�;}�'v'+:jLii�:::'::�:'::'�i:i:��:'?'�. %.:...i
F1pQr P1aris'a'rwo. .......
Geotechnical Report2 AND 3
��once
G.t
Grading Plan, Detailed 2
��SS GAt 1
Kin: .o:ui�. `....... .e. ........ ....... ..> .................................. . . .......
Landscaping Plan, Conceptual4
Le ID .1�
List of Surrounding Property Owners 4
Olin :l:abets forPro ::.:`: 01Ntiers.:.:;::::..:..:::::...,:...::.::.. ...::.:.:.:.;:;:.....
Map of Existing Site Conditions
Master�A'Monument Cards (one per monument) 1
i. (icier 'e'8:4:01 '1.f. ;Aria..s...
Pak �tjt; a S.'
Plan Reductions (PMTs) 4
F?�o.
Preapplication Meeting Summary 4
Rehabilitation Plan 4
This requirement may be waived by: •
p
1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: B 1 • P.
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section DATE: —7/l 0 D-003
4. Development Planning Section
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV AFORM\aformwaiver.xls06/25/02 EXHIBIT J
•EVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
i/ WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE
APPLICATIONS
Screening Detail 4 • tiffifj)
Title Report or Plat Certificate 4
Traffic Study 2
............:
Tree:: .:u#i'r N `efationC
Urban Center Design Overlay District Report 4
9z`
•
it .I r
Wetlands Delineation Map 4
::lands Iantln'
.........:.
Wetlands Study 4 •
Ulf.
e
g:
D
Lease.A re`risen ra
e t`.
`tVl EX t e
........................
.:...:.::...:
Vi w e��Ivla e r
.05� at10 S'o Friul n:P- t •
This requirement may be waived by: L
1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 3 g P- F.
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section DATE: 1 (7fl9
4. Development Planning Section
Q:\WEBIPIMD EVS E RVIAF O R Mlafo rmwa iver.xls06/25/02
Ii
E
X
•
H
IK
B
T
/ f
{
1
BARBEE MILL PLAT
COMPLIANCE WITH ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
In addition to the staff report's discussion of compliance with the Site Plan review criteria
under RMC 4-9-200E, Barbee submits this summary of compliance with the Additional Review
Criteria for Site Plans under RMC 4-9-200F.
1. Review of Impact to Surrounding Properties and Uses:
a. Mitigation of Undesirable Impacts on Surrounding Lands. The project
complies with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning, which itself has reviewed general use
impacts on surrounding properties. The applicant also has limited building height substantially
below heights otherwise authorized by the code. The applicant will comply with the
construction conditions relating to noise. [See Conditions I1-4 of the Mitigation Document].
b. Overscale Structure Impact. There will be no overscaled structures in this
tonwhouse project. However, the applicant has voluntarily agreed to reduce building heights to
50 feet within the shoreline zone and 75 feet outside the shoreline zone. This is a substantial
reduction from the 10-story or 125 foot height limit otherwise allowed. Also, if any buildings
exceed 3 stories or 35 feet in height,then the Mitigation Document requires design consideration
for screening or reduction of glass surfaces that would produce glare. (Conditions G2 and H2.)
c. Transition and Linkage Between Uses and Streets, Etc. The applicant has
submitted a pedestrian circulation plan with trails and sidewalks. The plat provides a connection
to property to the north. The public trail is provided along May Creek will not impact other
properties. •
d. Placement and Scale of Structures. The lots as laid out will avoid over-
concentration of structures on any particular portion of the site. The site has appropriate open
space with otherwise evenly dispersed lots.
e. Efficient Functions of Parking and Service Areas. The plat has an
efficient circulation system, and parking will be handled within each lot.
f. Impacts of New Construction on Views. The current site comprises several
older, industrial buildings and towers that currently block certain views. As mentioned above,
the applicant has voluntarily limited building heights to substantially below the authorized height
in the COR zone. Further, the open space areas on Lake Washington and throughout the project
will provide visual accessibility to Lake Washington. Also, the applicant has voluntarily
provided a minimum of ten foot set backs between buildings (5' on each side of the lot line),
which also will maintain visual accessibility.
g. Outdoor Storage Screening. As a residential plat, there will not be major
outdoor storage areas. Each home's storage area will be screened and regulated to the extent
provided by the homeowner association through the Declaration of CC&Rs.
EXHIBIT K
f
SEA 1599890v1 26266-4
1.24.05
h. Exterior Lighting. Condition H of the Mitigation Document expressly
deals with light and glare mitigation.
2. Review of Impacts of Site Plan to the Site:
a. Privacy and Noise Reduction by Building Placement and Spacing. The
lots are aligned to take advantage of the amenities of the Lake Washington shoreline and May
Creek. Setbacks between structures have been volunteered by the applicant at ten feet. There
also is a pedestrian trail and open space areas.
b. Placement and Scale of Structures in Relation to Natural Characteristics.
The houses fronting on Lake Washington have a 50-foot buffer. The waterward 35 feet of the
buffer is to be planted with natural grass and plantings and otherwise is subject to the numerous
conditions of the Mitigation Document, (Conditions D 14-D 16). Also, a 50 foot buffer on each
side of May Creek is provided to protect the natural resources of the creek.
c. Natural Landscape Preservation. The native vegetation along May Creek
and Lake Washington will be retained to the extent provided in the Mitigation Document. (See
Conditions D2, D3, D5 and D7.)
d. Use of Existing Topography. The site is generally flat, except in the areas
that will remain in buffers along May Creek. The site will be modified to the extent required
under the Mitigation Documents for protection against the 100- year flood. (See Conditions B4,
B5, and B6.)
e. Limitation of Impervious Surfaces. The site will substantially increase
pervious surfaces. 19.5 acres of the current site are covered with paving, which will be reduced
to 13.1 acres with the residential development and installation of lawns, landscaping and the
50 foot buffers.
f. Protection of Planting Areas. All of the landscaping and the buffers are
protected from damage by vehicles and pedestrian movements.
g. Building Form and Placement for Sun and Shade. The building heights
have been voluntarily limited, which will enhance sun and shade conditions both onsite and
offsite. Open space areas and buffers also will enhance access to sun and open space.
3. Review of Circulation and Access:
a. Adequate and Safe Vehicle Access. The street and sidewalk circulation
plan has been approved by staff and meets all code requirements. The railroad crossings will be
public crossings, with the final design and control facilities approved by the Washington Utilities
and Transportation Commission. The applicant has committed to provide control arms and
signals at the two railroad crossings accessing the property.
b. Circulation Patterns to Minimize Access Points. The plat has two access
points to Lake Washington Boulevard, which is an appropriate mitigation for traffic and railroad
2
SEA 1599890v1 26266-4
1.24.05
crossing. The access points were revised pursuant to the EIS process and with staff's
participation.
c. Consolidation of Adjacent Property Access Points. The northern access
runs over the adjoining property to the north. That access will allow use by other properties.
d. Orientation of Access Points to Side Streets. The internal streets collect
traffic and the access to Lake Washington Boulevard is limited to the two points of railroad
crossing.
e. Safety and Efficiency of Internal Circulation System. The internal street
system has been designed consistent with staff requirements and Renton code. Pedestrian access
is on trails or sidewalks with adequate widths.
f. Separation of Loading and Delivery Areas. As a solely residential project,
there are no loading or delivery areas.
g. Appropriate Transit and Carpool Facilities. This is a residential project
where carpool facilities are not applicable. As stated in the EIS, no transit service currently
exists in the project vicinity on Lake Washington Boulevard, although a park and ride area is
located at Park Avenue North and North 30th, and a flyer stop is located at I-405 and North 30th
Street.
h. Safe and Attractive Pedestrian Connections. As mentioned,the pedestrian
circulation system includes separated trails and separate sidewalks adjacent to internal streets.
The plat approval requires landscaping and buffer improvements for pedestrian locations.
4. Review of Signage: Not applicable, except to the extent the applicant may place a
monument sign with the name of the project. No commercial uses will occur within the
residential plat.
5. Special Review for Hazardous Waste Treatment and Storage Facilities. Not
applicable.
6. Review of Street Frontage Landscape. Not applicable in this residential project.
The plat does require plantings for landscaping and landscape plans, with irrigation, for the lots.
7. Review of Compliance for Certain Zones. Not applicable to COR zone.
3
SEA 1599890v1 26266-4
1.24.05
LAWYERS
Ij
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ. 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
January 21, 2005
Mr. Fred Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Withdrawal of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document;
Barbee Mill Company LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
Since filing its appeal on August 30, 2004, Barbee Mill Company and City staff have
worked to resolve differences and clarify the various conditions in the Mitigation Document. I
am pleased to withdrawal the above appeal since we have reached agreement with staff and the
ERC on a revised Mitigation Document. Enclosed is a formal withdrawal of the appeal.
Although the conditions in the Mitigation Document are now resolved, the staff report
issued last week contained 8 new plat conditions. We will likely request some clarification or
modification of a few of those conditions. However, these proposed plat conditions related to
the staff report and not the EIS, and hence are separate from the conditions set forth in the
revised Mitigation Document. I just wanted to clarify that withdrawal of the Mitigation
Document appeal is not a waiver of our right to request changes in the staff s proposed plat
report conditions.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Thomas A. Goelt
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
January 21, 2005
f1:L'
Page 2
cc: Susan Fiala
Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
;.,
1
2
3
4
5 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
6 FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
7 BARBEE MILL COMPANY, )
) WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY
8 Appellant, ) BARBEE MILL COMPANY
)
9 v' LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
10 CITY OF RENTON, )
)
11 Respondent. )
)
12 )
13 Barbee Mill Company ("Barbee") hereby withdrawals its Notice of Appeal of final EIS
14
and Mitigation Document filed August 30, 2004 in the above-referenced matter. The City's
15
Environmental Review Committee has approved a revised Mitigation Document dated January
16
17 10, 2005, clarifying or modifying certain conditions which had formed the basis of Barbee's
18 appeal. Based on the revised Mitigation Document, Barbee hereby withdrawals the appeal.
19 Barbee may request clarification or modification of some of the 8 staff conditions
20 contained in the Preliminary Plat staff report issued last week. Since these conditions are new
21 and not part of the Mitigation Document, Barbee is withdrawing the above appeal, but reserves
22
the right to request clarifications or modifications of these plat conditions as part of the regular
23
plat hearing to be held on Tuesday, January 25, 2005.
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL— 1
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
1 DATED this a t day of January, 2005.
2
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
3 Attorneys for Appellant Barbee Mill Company
4
5 BY ilgeolo,
6 Thomas A. Goeltz, WSBA 7
7
8 Attachment: ERC Approval of Revised Mitigation Document
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL—2
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
JAN-21-2005 11:05 CITY OF RENTON 425 430 7300 P.02
Ill.-,-IL t 1 J i' J1:116.21-:4 i i. v i .
� Planning/Bunaing/PublicWorks Department
Kathy tCeOIkcr-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator
•
•
•
• January 20, 2005 • •
. ' . Mr. Campbell Mathewson . .
• • 2140 Century'Square •
' Seattle,WA 98101 . • • • .
•
Subject: • Barbee Mill Preliminary. Plat . •' . . . . • •
• File No: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP.;.SA hi,'SM .
• Dear Campbell:. • .
. .This letter is to inform you that the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) has.concurred
with-the ERRATA (errors and omissions) of January, 2005, for.the Mitigation Document as
. approved in August, 2004, for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Enclosed please find a copy of
the ERC signatures. . ' • .
If you have questions, please contact me at (425)•430-7.382. .
' . For the Environmental Review Committee,. . . •• •
•
Susan A. Fiala,AICP. • '
Senior Planner• • • • '
•
• Enclosure . • • ' • ' '
cc: Alex Cuginf, Owner.
Steven Wood/Applicant .
•
•
. _-- I'
'YB :ou Grady Way-Renton,'Washington.98055 . ••. ' • .RE N0 N
• • :.. .' poparmr,...60'1G;neydadsrmfeda1..80%poa..,.. e• AHEAD OF.THE CURVE .
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 [T%/RI NO 7618] V.1002
J HN-LI-GUUJ 11•UJ LIIT ur KCI`I I UIY 4GJ 43U (3UU r.✓JJ
CITY OF RENTON
REVISED - MITIGATION DOCUMENT
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-Fi, SM
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mitigation Document has been revised to address errors and
omissions.
Please sign below if ERC concurs that the corrections, dated January, 2005, are consistent with the
approved Mitigation Document, dated August, 2004.
SIGNATURES:
�°�.�, , , 4dI'1
Gree , Ad i DAT/ d/0 5
Dep rtment of 'I- nin Building/Public Works
iteit Li
t24/°5
Dennis Culp,Administratk DAT
Community Services
/�— D1DJ/
et', re
to ISAI
Re Fire Department
Mit Rsvd Sicmature_doc
TOTAL P.03
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 [TX/RI NO 76181 01003
itr
M.T. Miller
Tire Wholesalers
19613 81st Ave. S. �i
Kent, WA 98032 ;' t✓
O'' 'yrpi,
Fred J. Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
1055 South Grady
Renton, WA 98055
LAWYERS
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF FIENTON
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP JAN 2 4 2005
RECEIVE/
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
January 21, 2005
Mr. Fred Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Withdrawal of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document;
Barbee Mill Company LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
Since filing its appeal on August 30, 2004, Barbee Mill Company and City staff have
worked to resolve differences and clarify the various conditions in the Mitigation Document. I
am pleased to withdrawal the above appeal since we have reached agreement with staff and the
ERC on a revised Mitigation Document. Enclosed is a formal withdrawal of the appeal.
Although the conditions in the Mitigation Document are now resolved,the staff report
issued last week contained 8 new plat conditions. We will likely request some clarification or
modification of a few of those conditions. However,these proposed plat conditions related to
the staff report and not the EIS, and hence are separate from the conditions set forth in the
revised Mitigation Document. I just wanted to clarify that withdrawal of the Mitigation
Document appeal is not a waiver of our right to request changes in the staffs proposed plat
report conditions.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Thomas A. Goelt
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
January 21, 2005
Page 2
cc: vSusan Fiala
Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
1
2
3
4
5 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
6 FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
7 BARBEE MILL COMPANY, )
) WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY
8 Appellant, ) BARBEE MILL COMPANY
)
9 V. ) LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
10 CITY OF RENTON, )
)
11 Respondent. )
)
12 )
13 Barbee Mill Company ("Barbee") hereby withdrawals its Notice of Appeal of final EIS
14
and Mitigation Document filed August 30, 2004 in the above-referenced matter. The City's
15
Environmental Review Committee has approved a revised Mitigation Document dated January
16
17 10, 2005, clarifying or modifying certain conditions which had formed the basis of Barbee's
18 appeal. Based on the revised Mitigation Document, Barbee hereby withdrawals the appeal.
19 Barbee may request clarification or modification of some of the 8 staff conditions
20 contained in the Preliminary Plat staff report issued last week. Since these conditions are new
21
and not part of the Mitigation Document, Barbee is withdrawing the above appeal,but reserves
22
the right to request clarifications or modifications of these plat conditions as part of the regular
23
plat hearing to be held on Tuesday, January 25, 2005.
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL— 1
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
st'
1 DATED this a L day of January, 2005.
2
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
3 Attorneys for Appellant Barbee Mill Company
4
5 By Zottosa
6 Thomas A. Goeltz, WSBA 7
7
8 Attachment: ERC Approval of Revised Mitigation Document
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL—2
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
J1-111—Li—GUUJ .L.L.U...? Lill ur MCNIUN 4LJ 4310 Y.5160 1-".UZ
• ili r-te4. • .-• 1 _l_ 11..../_a_' Jt..1%..a:J'_s_ :11 JR. *.b.....P"J• —
. • • Planning/B4 g/PublicWorks Department
. • 'MB it, N. '
. , Gregg Zimmermin P.E.,;Admiiiistnitor
Kathy Koolkur-yibcticr, Mayor ' . •
.
.. .
•
. . -
• . .
. . . •
- . •• - •
• • - •
. .
. . . .
• . : . • • . .
. . •. . ••
. .
. • • . .
• •
. . . • • •
•• ' ' - .
• January 20, 2005 . .. . . • ..
•
. . . . .
• • .
- . • •
. • • • . . . • . .
. .
- -
. . ' Mr. Canipbell Mathewson . .
. • • . • .
• •2140.Century'Square . .
• Seattle,WA 98101 . • • • • •
• . . • •. -
•. • •. . • •
•. .. . . . -
• • • . . .
. . . • . • •
Subject: • Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat • . . . .. • •• • .
.
. File No; LUA-02-040, EIS, Pf.?.;.SA-1-1,'SM .
•
. . • •
• . • . , .
- • .
- • .
•• • • Dear Campbell:. . . ; ' • . . .
- • •• •This letter is to inform you that the .Environmental'Review Committee's (ERC) has.concurred
with the ERRATA (errors and omissiOns) of January, 2005, for the Mitigation Document as
• approved in August, 2004,. for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Enclosed please find a copy of
the ERG signatures. . .. • ••. " .
.
• . . . . -. . • • • . . .
. . .
If you have questions, please contact me at (425)430-7.382.
. . •
. . . .
•
• • For the Environmental Review Committee,. " ••• •• ,
' . •-•
. .. . . • • .
. • • . ••• - . . . . • • • ..- • • . .
• • . • • 0-ii •-• . ..-------. ..e--. .. • . • -
. •. • .
Susan A. Fiala,AICP •. ••. • . . •
Senior Planner• • . ' • • ' •• • • • •
•
•. . .
. • . . .
. • •
• • . • .. • .
. . • . .
. •
•
. • • . • .. •
• EnCloSure ' - . . • . ' . - • . • •
. . .
. . . ..
. . .
. . . •
. • • . . - . . . •
. . .
• : cc: •Alex •Cugini, Owner. • . .
. . • • • •Steven Wood/Applicant. •
• • . •
. •
. . . .
. .
• . . . • •
. • - • •
. . ..• • • . .
. .
. . . •
. . • - .
. .
. . .
. . . .
. .
• . . . • - • . • • .
. . .
• . • . " .
.• • - . . . . . . .
• . . .
. .
•
. . . .
. . . ----...-----.7...............
. - • • -
. .
- . c`m-•-141..- 'Litj`"---.1 .1-0tYVOYA Grady Way.-Renton,Washington.98055 . .. . .. •. . .RENTON
. •• . . -• . ..•'•' .. .
.. :Thr.paparcontAmEd"incyclenfmareripl..30%1,34 copal mow AHEAD OF.T1-1.1i (.:1114V.R
• •
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 [TX/RI NO 7618] 1711002
CITY OF RENTON
REVISED - MITIGATION DOCUMENT
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mitigation Document has been revised to address errors and
omissions.
Please sign below if ERC concurs that the corrections, dated January, 2005, are consistent with the
approved Mitigation Document, dated August, 2004.
SIGNATURES:
9,i / gem / Zd 0 5
Gree - , Ad r dY DAT
Dep rtment of •I. nin Building/Public Works
J44Y 6144/MAI
2b/b5
Dennis Culp,Administratfv -DA
Community Services
/v D 'DJ/
er, re to OAT
Re Fire Department
•
Mil Rsvd Sianature_doc
TOTAL P.03
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 [TX/RX NO 7618] 11003
01/21/05 FRI 13:44 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE cuut
L{% ERS
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP1
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE BOISE CHARLOTTE HONOLULU LOS ANGELES NEW YORK
PORTLAND RICHLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE WASHINGTON. U.C. SHANGHAI
2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL
Date: January 21, 2005
FROM: Tom Goeltz Telephone: (206) 628-7662 Fax: (206) 628-7699
NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover page):
SEND TO:
Name Firm/Company/Confirmation No. Fax Number
City of Renton Hearing Examiner 425-430-6523
City of Renton Clerk 425-430-6516
Susan Fialia Dept. of Planning & Dev. Services 425-430-7300
COMMENTS:
Attached is Barbee Mill's Withdrawal of Appeal.
THE WRITTEN MESSAGE TRANSMITTED HEREBY IS FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE AND CONTAINS
CONFIDENTIAL, PRIVILEGED AND NONDISCLOSABLE INFORMATION. IF THE RECIPIENT OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE
ADDRESSEE, OR A PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE ADDRESSEE, SUCH RECIPIENT IS
PROHIBITED FROM READING OR USING THIS MESSAGE IN ANY WAY. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS MESSAGE BY
MISTAKE, PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY AND DESTROY THE FACSIMILE MESSAGE,
Floor Sent From: Time Sent: AM PM Operator:
RETURN TO VIA INTRAOFFICE MAIL X WILL PICK UP (] EXTENSION:
SENDER:
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION
Client Billing Number: [Click Here and Type] Client Name: Client Name
Posting Date: COSTS: Total Pages Sent x$.50 =$
Plus Long Distance Charges+
Entered by: TOTAL FAX CHARGES=
IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES OF THIS TRANSMISSION,
PLEASE CALL (206)622-3150 AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
01/21/05 FRI 13:45 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE fl002
LAWYERS
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELT7. 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 150.1 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
January 21, 2005
Mr. Fred Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Withdrawal of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document;
Barbee Mill Company LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
Since filing its appeal on August 30,2004, Barbee Mill Company and City staff have
worked to resolve differences and clarify the various conditions in the Mitigation Document. I
am pleased to withdrawal the above appeal since we have reached agreement with staff and the
ERC on a revised Mitigation Document. Enclosed is a formal withdrawal of the appeal.
Although the conditions in the Mitigation Document are now resolved,the staff report
issued last week contained 8 new plat conditions. We will likely request some clarification or
modification of a few of those conditions. However,these proposed plat conditions related to
the staff report and not the EIS, and hence are separate from the conditions set forth in the
revised Mitigation Document. I just wanted to clarify that withdrawal of the Mitigation
Document appeal is not a waiver of our right to request changes in the staffs proposed plat
report conditions.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Thomas A. Goelt
SEA 1599975v126266-4
Seattle
01/21/05 FRI 13:45 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE uu:s
January 21, 2005
t1
Page 2
cc: Susan Fiala
Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1599975v1 26266-4
Seattle
01/21/05 FRI 13:45 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE iJUU4
1
2
3
4
5 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
6 FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
BARBEE MILL COMPANY,
) WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL BY
8 Appellant, ) BARBEE MILL COMPANY
9 V. ) LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
10 CITY OF RENTON, )
)
11 Respondent. )
)
12 )
13 Barbee Mill Company("Barbee")hereby withdrawals its Notice of Appeal of final EIS
14
and Mitigation Document filed August 30, 2004 in the above-referenced matter. The City's
15
Environmental Review Committee has approved a revised Mitigation Document dated January
16
17 10, 2005, clarifying or modifying certain conditions which had formed the basis of Barbee's
18 appeal. Based on the revised Mitigation Document, Barbee hereby withdrawals the appeal.
19 Barbee may request clarification or modification of some of the 8 staff conditions
20 contained in the Preliminary Plat staff report issued last week. Since these conditions are new
21
and not part of the Mitigation Document, Barbee is withdrawing the above appeal, but reserves
22
the right to request clarifications or modifications of these plat conditions as part of the regular
23
24 plat hearing to be held on Tuesday, January 25, 2005.
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL— 1
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
01/21/05 FRI 13:45 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE ig1uuo
1 DATED this o—L day of January, 2005.
2
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
3 Attorneys for Appellant Barbee Mill Company
4
5 By ito°40,2 Ul 6 Thomas A. Goeltz, WSBA 7
7
8 Attachment: ERC Approval of Revised Mitigation Document
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL—2
SEA 1599925v1 26266-4
01/21/05 FRI 13:46 FAX 206 628 7699 llYV'1' ,�A'1'1LL
.,r..1 La LVv..i ...i- . . ,. i.�.,i_.. -rc✓ -,JO 1..IVV r.UG
tit'1 A -!i' y16�v- 70 -IL 4•y i .
,. planning/Buu ung/PublicWorks Department
-� Gregg Zimmerman RE.;Admlaistrator
Kathy Kaolkcr•Whceier,Mayor
.
• January 20, 2005 .
•
• .• Mr. Campbell Mathewson . -
• •21.40•Century•Square .
' Seattle,WA 98101 . • .
Subject ' Barbee Mill Preliminary.Plat . . • • • •
File No: LUA-02-a40, EIS, P:P.;.SA-H,'SM .
• • Dear Campbell:. ' • •. .
• . 'This. letter is to Inform you that the Environmental*Review Committee's (ERC) has.concurred
with•the ERRATA (errors and omissions) of January, 2005, for the. Mitigation Document as
• approved in August, 2004, for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Enclosed please find a copy of
the ERC signatures. • . • - . .
.If you have questions,• please contact me at(425)•4,30-7.382. .
• . . For the Environmental Review Committee,. •• •
Susan A. Fiala,AICP '• - • -
Senior Planner• • • •
• Enclosure • . . ' • • • • •
cc: Alex Cu. gini, Owner-. .
. • • • •Steven Wood/Applicant :
Et3c Mrrt 03 Grady Way'-Renton,•Was•hington.98055 ,• .• •. •R•E N T 0 t V
• •�?Na 4=56X�ra.d !a3..anx� ma. AHEAD OF.THE C%JXV .
01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 (TX/RX NO 76181 @1002
01/21/05"FRI 13:46 FAX 206 628 7699�, „"„_ DWT SEATTLE _ _. EJ 007
CITY OF RENTON
REVISED - MITIGATION DOCUMENT
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPOSAL The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mitigation Document has been revised to address errors and
omissions.
Please sign below if ERC concurs that the corrections, dated January, 2005, are consistent with the
approved Mitigation Document, dated August, 2004.
SIGNATURES:
Gre �e ,Ad t
ao DAT
I/
U/0 5
Dep rtment of l nin Building/Public Works
jigae 1 t2-0/6 5-
Dennis Culp, Administrat r . DA
Community Services
er, re e
DAT
Re Fire Department
•
•
Mit R9vd SiafaWr®.doc
TOTAL P.03
• 01/21/2005 FRI 10:01 (TX/RI NO 70181 lT 003
ir Cf IIC Rl[AJY im EAR CARE
January 21,2005 IL _ o.
A I
t
- CITY OF ENTo ,,,,,,r!;- •Tire Wholesalers
. HEARING&M ERt-tt.••.- 19613 81stAve. S.
Kent, WA 98032
Fred J. Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
1055 South Grady .
Renton, WA 98055 ,.
Dear Mr. Kaufman,
This letter is to express our support for the Barbee Mill Preliminary plat. Prior
to 1999 we lived in Kennydale, overlooking the east channel and the Barbie Mill
property, so we are well acquainted with the area. It is of our opinion this project would
be a real enhancement to the City of Renton. We have missed the convenience of the
location with the easy access to I-405, reducing travel time in any direction one may
head. With the approval of this plat, the Miller's plan to be one of.firsts to be on the
waiting to buy list.
Thank you for your consideration,
1-e//c;.4 fe A#7,( '
Mike and Mary Miller
663 Bremerton Pl. N.E.
Renton, Wash. 98059
ye►►zw
4sk { CITY IF RENTON
Il Planning/Building/PublicWorksDepartment
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 20, 2005
Mr. Campbell Mathewson
2140 Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Campbell:
This letter is to inform you that the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) has concurred
with the ERRATA (errors and omissions) of January, 2005, for the Mitigation Document as
approved in August, 2004, for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Enclosed please find a copy of
the ERC signatures.
If you have questions, please contact me at (425)430-7382.
For the Environmental Review Committee
\ K
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
Enclosure
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood/Applicant
ERC MITDOC_RSV4'0»south Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 DOC R E N T O N
5� �� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
_..} This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
I
j-_
CITY OF RENTON
REVISED - MITIGATION DOCUMENT
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mitigation Document has been revised to address errors and
omissions.
Please sign below if ERC concurs that the corrections, dated January, 2005, are consistent with the
approved Mitigation Document, dated August, 2004.
SIGNATURES:
&)/0 5
Gre ierWAsecl0/101 DATEDep rtment on Building/Public Works
W ig/HAV-f
Zc� bS
Dennis Culp, Administrat r DAT
Community Services
i' /'" ✓`L/ al
ee er, re ie DATE
Re or Fire Department
M i t_Rs vd_S i g n at u re.d o c
.,,,,) 41_N 0 W N 11 ,
d• 1
_ _ JJ 2 2
. CITY OF RENTOPJ
rY, � : __ : HEARING EXAMINER'
ivsx'_a ii=}3:4sts:41i2fsi2a -
nn
•
C r p� f 4s
U SS S__ criskfty+ sty
P'di14h1i c "i. .
PIE Barbee.Min Pre'h ..a.{'[l.Plat-
N:41,11-ir_.22-scip.tar,,- 4 , , ,,,0 -
jr
I-am-w ii g-yo to-expres.s.-ny support for the propose development by the Cu ni
.Lemi y far_th _ n-rb e.Mil1 Property.
As-you are aware; this:nroperty isin a-transitional-phase;from industrial to what--hope
will f1ec me.`nother�;"�nhanc ti nt'L slake front propexty.
Their nroDosed-project.with its town homes and-important-public open-space will
_deflantiv.add ehargct 'ti-a Tie jjma I few-that it erwlifl-very wei_ .he The r iatelyst.that il4-
€ar-nirinte.fi_[r-therinterest:in the reil ainina lake front property, that untimelywould-hest
At inno-Mast here ie n-nrraieet that.ie doable_ that will-add th-Rentoif s-wonrder, i_il lad efront-
.a d-nrow de.amenities to.€onr citiyrnft_
Once again T h artily.sunrinrt this-deveinnment an` }hair vntu.for your consideration_
Re.onr,r1,
i tier City Counr_.il.i_"�/,_snnaher
- . A niPiiii-
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss.
County of King )
Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states:
That on the 22nd day of February 2005, affiant deposited via the United States Mail a
sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid,
addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition.
Signature: .00A-(A^,
V.. � -
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 8dndday of (=�br�ovw1 , 2005.
NEV41\‘am
. SS\ONF ;�G1� a;
o NOTARY%_ e
•:U • mil 1 `^�
°e =. PUBLIC s° `
11 Notary Public ' and or the State of Washington
e'��.• 9'4g Dy'4�°® Residing at I""'v ,therein.
'a" O0 WAS'
Application, Petition or Case No.: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record.
X•
,74?=54
•
HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT
February 22, 2005
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
Minutes
APPLICANT/CONTACT: Century Pacific LP
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson
1501 Fourth Ave., Ste 2140
Seattle, WA 98101
OWNER: Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company
PO Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
CONTACT: Otak Inc
Matt Hough
10230 NE Points Dr., Ste. 400
Kirkland, WA 98033
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North
(Between North 40th and 44th Streets)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 115-lot subdivision of a 23-acre site intended
for the development of townhouse units. A shoreline
Substantial Development Permit is also required.
SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the
Examiner on January 18,2005.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining
available information on file with the application, field
checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The following minutes are a summary of the January 25, 2005 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing opened on Tuesday, January 25, 2005, at 9:57 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of
the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat -
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 2
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No.2: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan
application, proof of posting,proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Plan,North Exhibit No. 4: Preliminary Plat Plan, South
Exhibit No. 5: Preliminary Landscape Plan,North Exhibit No. 6: Preliminary Landscape Plan, South
Exhibit No. 7: May Creek Buffer Restoration Sect. B Exhibit No. 8: Lake Shoreline Conceptual Landscape
Plan
Exhibit No. 9: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile, Exhibit No. 10: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile,
North South
Exhibit No. 11: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading Exhibit No. 12: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading
Elevations,North Elevations, South
Exhibit No. 13: Existing Site and Topography Map Exhibit No. 14: Neighborhood Detail Map
Exhibit No. 15: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 16: Summary Table of Mitigation
Measures
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development
Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The subject site is located along the
Lake Washington shoreline. There is an existing single-family development to the southeast designated R-8 and
some small multi-family developments designated R-10. The property is situated within the Center Office
Residential (COR-2) zoning designation, which provides for a mix of intensive commercial, office and
residential activity. Stand-alone residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required
density of a minimum 5 dwelling units per net acre is satisfied. The existing site has limited operations of a
lumber mill with several structures that will be removed with the exception of a boathouse located on proposed
new Lot 95.
The historical background was discussed by Ms. Fiala.
Site-Plan Review: -
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines and is subject to the City's
shoreline Master Program. The applicant is requesting to subdivide this site into 115 lots for the development of
townhouse units. May Creek bisects the southern portion of the site from the east, under Lake Washington
Boulevard North and into Lake Washington. The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase 1
would include Lots 96-115 located to the south and east of May Creek and Phase 2 would include Lots 1 -94 to
the north and west of May Creek. Lot 95 currently contains a boathouse and dock which would remain on the
lot and within the plat. Two entry access points are proposed along Lake Washington Boulevard North, one to
the north, Street F,that would be an at grade railroad crossing and a second one approximately 950-feet to the
south along Lake Washington Boulevard North, Street D, also an at grade crossing.
The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance. An Environmental Impact
Statement(EIS) was prepared. No appeals of the adequacy of the Draft or Final EIS were filed. A mitigation
•
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 3
document was issued on August 16, 2004 and an appeal of the Mitigation document was filed by the applicant
and later withdrawn by the applicant.
This project is to be reviewed as a Level II Site Plan, it is a conceptual site plan. The applicant is not required to
provide any floor plans or elevations.
At the request of the Examiner,Ms. Fiala explained the differences between a Level II Site Plan and a Level I
Site Plan and what will happen at the public hearings, or if it is an administrative decision for the benefit of any
property owners that were present at this hearing.
The COR zone allows a building height of 10 stories and/or 125 feet,however the applicant is proposing that the
buildings could be up to 50 feet in height within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of
the shoreline requirements. Building height would be verified at the time of individual building permit review.
The COR zone does not have specific requirement for on-site landscaping. Landscaping is reviewed through the
site plan review process. The applicant is proposing to install street trees along all residential public streets
within the site, the open space/water quality tracts would be landscaped as well. Several of the plant materials
proposed include Oregon Ash,tulip tree, Hinoki Cypress and Snowberry. The approximate total area of
landscape would be over 5 acres of the site. All landscaping is required to be fully irrigated.
The Examiner inquired as to the extensive grading and excavation throughout the site. Preliminary earthwork
quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of fill
material and how many traffic trips all that might generate? Ms. Fiala stated that she would have to calculate
the number of trips.
The May Creek and Lake Washington buffers are proposed to include 15-feet of managed landscape with 35-
feet of native vegetation. The applicant is required to construct public sidewalks along both sides of all public
roads. Access to the shoreline would be provided via new trial/walkway through Tract E to the DNR land. A
six-foot wide soft surface pedestrian walkway would be provided along the south side of May Creek and include
an interpretative display at the southwest end of the trail. All public streets would have sidewalks on both sides
except for Street C, modification requested that a sidewalk be provided on only one side of the street.
Potential impacts from the development of the site to May Creek and Lake Washington will be mitigated by
existing code provisions, as well as the mitigation measures placed on the project.
Fire, Traffic and Park Mitigation Fees are proposed for the plat.
Adequate sanitary sewer, water service and other utilities would be extended as necessary for the development
of the site.
Preliminary Plat Review:
The subject site is designated Center Office Residential—2 (COR-2), which provides for large scale office,retail
and/or multi family projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporating significant site
amenities and gateway features.
The proposed plat is in compliance with all the appropriate Comprehensive Plan policies.
The proposed plat complies with the density requirements for the COR-2 zoning designation with a net density
of 6.8 dwelling units per acre.
_Barbee mill Preliminary Plat ' - -
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 4
The proposed lot sizes are appropriate for the attached units proposed for this plat. The applicant has shown
setbacks on the plat plan to indicate potential building envelopes that do meet the COR zone requirements.
The COR zone does not require any front,rear or side yard setbacks. However,the applicant is proposing the
following setbacks: interior side years of 5 feet; front yards of 10 feet and rear yards of 10 feet. The proposal's
compliance with building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits.
All proposed lots comply with the arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations with the
requested modifications. Due to the length of the private access to Lots 43 through 48, a Fire access turnaround
is required.
All proposed radii at intersections of public rights-of-way would exceed the minimum radius required and
would meet code. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement from
the Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of
the site. The roadway would be dedicated as a public right-of-way.
Staff recommends the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for all common
improvements.
The project is along two shorelines, Lake Washington and May Creek. It is subject to the City's Shoreline
Master Program. Current impervious areas would be restored to native vegetation within the buffer area. All
mature trees located within the May Creek buffer are proposed to be retained. Within the 50-foot buffer from
Lake Washington,the first 35 feet would be planted with native vegetation,the remaining 15 feet would be
managed landscape.
The Examiner inquired about the 100-year floodplain and which part of the property was subject to that•
designation. Ms. Fiala stated that there is a portion in that designation,there has been mitigation measures
placed on the subject site stating that all structures must be built one foot above the required floodplain level.
The applicant has provided a shoreline landscaping plan (Exhibit 8)which proposes one pedestrian walkway
trail per lot to the shoreline. There are numerous lots along the shoreline(Lots 23-48) staff recommends that
there would be only one trail walkway to the shoreline per two units. This would eliminate additional intrusions
into this required shoreline buffer. Trails will be provided throughout the site, along May Creek is proposed to
be a soft-surface trail.
The site is located within the Renton School District and they are able to handle the additional students.
Staff recommends approval of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat subject to eight conditions.
The Examiner questioned if the boathouse on Lot 95 would be a legal conforming use when the property is
platted.
Mr. Fiala stated that she did not have an answer but she would do some research and let the Examiner know.
Alex Cugini, 611 Renton Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 stated that he is the president of Barbee Mill
Company which is owned by the Cugini family. They have been working on this project for almost three years,
prior to that they worked with the Paul Allen group for four years. All of their experts were present and would
be able to answer most of the questions.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM •
February 22, 2005
Page 5
Torn Goeltz, Davis Wright Tremaine, 1501 4''Avenue, Suite 2600, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that they are
present today to request approval of the Preliminary Plat and the Site Level II and would support staff with the
exception of a couple of issues.
There was an appeal of the mitigation document which was withdrawn last Friday. The clarifications that were
needed have been obtained and a major concession on their behalf to use 50 foot buffers on Lake Washington.
A letter was submitted by them yesterday and contains some exhibits labeled A-K. Eight conditions were
proposed by staff, they are happy with four,two they would like clarifications and 2 conditions they would like
removed.
In discussing the mitigation document,they are referring to the revised document dated January 10,2005 and
approved by the ERC on January 25.
Item 2 has been clarified, Street F has been changed to Street A which will be dedicated, there is an easement
that allows the Barbee Mill Company to absolutely dedicate that to the City. The Quendall Company has
submitted a letter that states that the property is going to be dedicated to the City and they are in agreement.
Staff's condition #7 requiring additional open space due to the lack of a full 50-feet on some of the lots. From
their perspective, they started out at 25-feet and compromised and conceded to 50-feet where they could, for
those lots that don't have a full 50, they all have a full 35 with native vegetation and that there may be some
with less than 50, it is well in excess of the legal requirement of 25 feet. There are 8 lots total that are affected
by this condition. They would like this condition removed.
They are also requesting that Condition #8 be removed. Each lot,that will be independently owned, should
have a path to the water without having to share. It seems that it would be a problem in the making to require
joint paths. It does not appear to be a SEPA condition and he was not aware of any code provision that would
allow this type of limitation on an individually owned lot.
Condition#6 regarding the private access tracts,the staff report requires cul-de-sacs, turnarounds, or an
additional access road. All of those are fine, but there may be other engineering solutions. He would like to add
the words"or other satisfactory access alignment"to the menu of choices for the final plat.
There is a summary of the additional criteria for site plan approval, staff covered in its report well the section for
200E and he added 200F which are some additional criteria showing that they have been met as well.
As to the docks, they are still at a conceptual level,they have not decided on docks. There is a condition D-17
that expressly deals with docks.
Matt Hough, Otak, Inc., 10230 NE Points Drive, Ste.400, Kirkland, WA 98033 stated that in regards to the
flooding question, there was extensive analysis done for May Creek, one that included modeling. Condition B4
recognizes that the 100-year floodplain must be contained within the 50-foot buffers around May Creek. The
means of doing that would be developed, reviewed and approved during engineering design. It can be done
either with the fills that would occur on the lots or there is a concept for flood terracing with modification of
May Creek which would allow additional conveyance within that corridor that would contain the 100-year
floodplain within that area. The delta of May Creek has historically been dredged,he did not know if that was
going to continue. The modeling did assume that the dredging ceased, it is a conservative analysis.
The second question was on truck trips based on the earthwork volumes, most of the excavation is coming from
removal of existing stockpiles or excavation for the storm water ponds. If that material is suitable for on site fill,
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat -
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 6
that would be used. It could be anywhere from 300 to 1,900 trips, it would be expected that they would
roundtrip to minimize the number of trucks on the road.
Lynn Manolopoulos, Davis Wright Tremaine, 777 108th Avenue NE, Ste. 2300, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that
they do have all necessary permits to complete remediation, however, it would be most appropriate to do that
work in conjunction with the development. They will evaluate if it would be appropriate to do some portion of
the clean up within the next year. The Shoreline Permit would be in effect for five years as long as the work
begins within the next year. It would be completed prior to any structures being built.
There is no indication that any of the contamination on the Quendall Terminal site has impacted the Barbee Mill
site in any way. The Quendall Terminal property is under a formal agreement with the agency and all work
done with the oversight of the Department of Ecology.
Rich Wagner, 2411 Garden Court North (Kennydale neighborhood) Renton, WA 98056 stated that he supports
the application, he is very familiar with the Level I and Level II processes and the idea of pinning down the site
parameters of the site development long before one is asked to develop architectural character. The two often
do not relate and not a lot of architectural value is presented at the early stages.
The current site plan has a unique feature that has not shown up for the last thirty years, and that is the access
point shown off of Lake Washington Blvd, south of the bridge over May Creek. It helps connect this residential
project to the City of Renton and Kennydale as well.
Lastly, it is noted in the findings of staff that the coverage is based on a 65% or 75% of the attached garages.
That is an old carryover from the COR zoning that will come to play in the development of the interior lots of a
tri-or four-plex.
Larry Reymann, 1313 N 38th Street, Renton, WA 98056 stated that he is a volunteer naturalist on the Cedar
River and involved with the'Park Ambassador Program with a focus on May Creek. He was concerned about
the access to the shoreline of Lake Washington between Lot 23 and the neighboring property to the north, if that
north property should be developed into a park or something. He suggested that a 50-foot walkway would
preserve the access to the shoreline.
Exhibit 7 shows a cutaway for May Creek, it is very important for salmon to have shade over the water in order
to prevent the water from heating up in the summer. It appears that there is approximately 70-feet of open space
with no provision for shade for the water. Larger trees in that 70-foot area would be a good thing to protect the
salmon and other fish that spawn in the creek.
Dredging at the mouth of the creek is essential to prevent flooding of the area. The Homeowners Association
should be governed as to how the habitat in May Creek is preserved. He would be willing to work with the
owners in a proactive way to protect the habitat and wildlife.
Mark Hancock, PO Box 8881 1, Seattle, WA 98138 stated that he lives in the lower Kennydale neighborhood
just south of the project and he has no problem with the project. They do have a problem with traffic cutting off
405 and passing through their neighborhood and up to the 44`'' Street interchange. It was requested that to the
extent that the haul routes of the gravel trucks, if they could be required to go on to NE 44`1' Street and use that
interchange that would be most helpful.
Fritz Timm, Sr. Engineer, City of Newcastle, 13020 Newcastle Way,Newcastle, WA 98059 stated that the EIS
process contained a couple of opportunities for the City of Newcastle to make comments on the project. This
particular project does not have any serious qualms in respect to the City of Newcastle, however,there were
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 7
comments that were in respect to light, glare, transportation, and dust. The mitigation measures did not seem to
cover these issues to their satisfaction. Comments have been submitted in respect to the am/pm peak hour
traffic issues,there will be an increase at specific intersections from this particular project. If there is anything
that the City of Renton staff can do to assist with their efforts to improve those conditions it would be
appreciated. He stated they did submit a letter to Susan Fiala in which various concerns were documented by
the City of Newcastle's traffic engineer, Mike Nicholson, Community Development Director and himself.
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services covered some of the questions that were brought up during the hearing.
Starting with haul routes, she noted that they would be monitored closely. They are very aware of the
neighborhoods having trucks getting through on streets that are not large enough. The worker taking those exits
they have no control over, but the gravel trucks are controlled internally.
The 1-405, 40`1' Street, 441h Street is a regional concern they do welcome Newcastle's input into what might be
needed. 1-405 has a significant amount of money that they will bring to the table.
The light/glare issue is very interesting, the level of lighting is mandated by City Code. Hoods on the lights may
be a possibility, but the basic lighting levels must be accommodated. There is a new residential light standard
that may possibly be used within this area. Dust is a normal routine,the site will be watered down and erosion
control is required and that includes both mud and dust.
The turnaround between Lots 42 and 48 and between Lots 95 and 98 were discussed. Street A and Street C both
were in for modifications for narrower widths, which there was no objection to due to their proximities to May
Creek, the Lake and the railroad. The Fire Department was very adamant that they wanted cul-de-sacs at the
end of both Street C and Street A because they exceed 500-feet in length. On Street C, there is an existing
roadway that comes from the south, up and into Street C. One of her conditions was that they needed to create a
road cut and pave that transition point at that location. The Examiner commented that this would not be a
general access, it would be a gated or emergency access only. Ms. Kittrick continued that it was a question at
this point. She did not know what the actual road serves, who has rights to it, if it's public or private. It is very
obvious that it has been there for a lot of years. That opened it up, if it is a public road or a public emergency
access, it could be paved per City Code to 500 feet long, 20 feet wide and could be a second access and then a
cul-de-sac would no longer be required.
Mr. Hough stated that they could put larger trees in the 35-foot buffer to protect the salmon and wildlife. Some
of the existing trees will remain. The Department of Fisheries will be involved because of the creek and it is
presumed that they will have some criteria for trees and shading and other design elements.
Mr. Reymann asked again about the homeowner's association or what entity would be responsible for the
shorelines and for the environment specifically along May Creek and Lake Washington and maintaining as
much as possible the natural habitat for wildlife.
Mr. Goeltz stated that regarding the homeowner's association,the City has enforcement authority for the
association. If the City thinks there is not adequate maintenance or care or the conditions are not being
maintained then that is an enforcement right on the part of the City.
Ms. Kittrick stated that the Department of Fisheries and DOE are on top of these sorts of issues. There also are
plenty of volunteers that are out there and more than happy to call City Hall if there's a plumage out of place or
something is not being properly cared for.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no further comments from staff.-The hearing closed at 10:51 a.m.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 8
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS &RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
l. The applicant, Century Pacific LP, Steven Wood, filed a request for a Level 2 Site Plan and 115-lot
Preliminary Plat for the Barbee Mill property along Lake Washington Boulevard.
2. The yellow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) documentation
and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1.
3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, determined that an EIS
was required for the proposal and one was prepared.
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard. The subject site is the location of the
former Barbee Mill site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington and west of the boulevard. The
subject site straddles May Creek as it approaches and enters Lake Washington. The site is located
somewhat southwest of the NE 44th Street Exit from I-405 (Exit 7) and north of NE 40th Street.
6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of center office or residential uses, but does not mandate such development
without consideration of other policies of the Plan.
7. The subject site is currently zoned COR(Center Office Residential). The COR districts were created
for certain large or uniquely located properties including the subject site.
8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1804 enacted in December
1959.
9. The subject site is approximately 22.9 acres of 997,960 square feet. The parcel is irregularly shaped
with its eastern margin defined by a slight curve in the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and
its western margin defined by the shoreline of Lake Washington.
10. The majority of the subject site is relatively level with grades ranging between 0.5% to 4.0%to the west
and north of May Creek, 1.0%to 7.0% on the south portion of the creek and towards Lake Washington.
There are some grades up to 35%to 40% along May Creek.
11. The subject site contains a variety of sensitive areas in addition to the slopes noted above along May
Creek. May Creek runs through approximately 800 linear feet of the site with banks on both sides. A
fifty-foot buffer would be provided along each side of the creek from the ordinary high water mark.
Any mature trees within the buffer area would be retained. The site sits along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington and has approximately 1,900 lineal feet of shoreline. A fifty-foot buffer would be provided
along the lake. The applicant proposes that 35 feet be native vegetation and the remaining 15 feet
would be manicured vegettion adjacent to the future dwellings. Category III wetlands are located in two
areas on the subject site. One is located adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of Street
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 9 •
C (northerly wetland) and the other is located at the southern edge of the site near the south end of Street
C (southerly wetland). Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed.
12. The applicant proposes dividing the acreage into 115 lots. The lots would be arranged generally along
the perimeter of the site and in an interior block in an almost triangular arrangement. A tier of lots
would be located along the north boundary of the site and another would be located along the Lake
Washington shoreline. There would be a tier of lots located along both sides of May Creek. In addition,
in the north central area of the site would be a triangular block with lots along its north and south edges.
13. The main access to the subject site would be from the northeast corner of the site via a 60-foot wide
roadway from Lake Washington Boulevard and across the railroad tracks. Currently, that segment of
roadway is a private easement. An agreement with the underlying holder would allow it to be used by
the applicant and allow it to be dedicated to the City if the project is approved. Where the roadway
enters the site a public right-of-way, 42 feet wide would provide access to the majority of the subject
site. Street A would run east to west and then turn south and end with a hammerhead turnaround. It
would then continue as a narrow private roadway. Street B would run at somewhat of a diagonal
intersecting Street A's east to west leg and then its north to south leg. Street D would provide a second
point of access out to Lake Washington Boulevard. It would form a T-intersection with Street B. Street
D would have a bridge across May Creek. Branching off Street D to the south would be Street C.
Street C would be 39 feet wide and run along the south side of May Creek. Street C would end in
another hammerhead turnaround. '
The Fire Department has indicated that due to the deadend roadway length of both Streets A and C,that
hammerhead turnarounds are insufficient and that both roads would require a full cul-de-sac
termination. Staff did note that there is another roadway at the end of proposed Street C but that staff
does not know its ownership or if it is a public or private roadway and whether it could be used for
access to this site and across the railroad tracks.
15. The 115 lots would contain a combination oftownhome structures in 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit buildings.
The attached units would be located on their individual lots with common walls between units. Side
yards would be provided between structures. A Level II Site Plan does not require very specific details
such as structural design or facade detail. Building heights are also not covered in this level of analysis
although the applicant has proposed buildings up to 50 feet along the lakeshore and up to 75 feet outside
of the shoreline jurisdiction. Mitigation measures that would screen the bulk or increase setbacks for
any building over 3-stories or 35 feet in height have been imposed. There was no indication of whether
or not docks would be proposed for the shoreline lots.
16. The density for the plat would be established after subtracting sensitive areas and roadways. The May
Creek sensitive area is approximately 30,350 square feet;the Lake Washington sensitive area
approximately 66,850 square feet; and the roadways are 153,331 square feet. Subtracting this total of
255,429 square feet from the full acreage and dividing by 115 units yields a density of 6.8 dwelling
units per acre. Although, Proposed Lot 95 is not currently proposed for development(see below)which
could affect the density calculation slightly. Also affecting the calculation could be the cul-de-sac
requirements of the Fire Department at roadway ends and turnarounds.
17. The applicant proposes phasing the project. Phase 1 would include Proposed Lots 96 to 115, the lots
south and east of May Creek, located along Proposed Street C. Phase 2 would include all of the rest of
the proposed lots, Proposed Lots 1 to 94, except Proposed Lot 95. Proposed Lot 95 contains an existing
boathouse and dock which the applicant intends to retain. A further review would be necessary to
determine if such a standalone use would be permitted in the COR-2 District.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 10
18. The COR zone does not provide a minimum lot size for single-family housing. The lots will range in
size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867 square feet. The plat submitted demonstrated lots that vary from
25 feet wide to 55 feet wide and from 66 feet to 211 feet deep. Lot depth along the lake includes the 50
feet shoreline setback as well as submerged portions of lots. As noted,there would be attached units in
which case side yards would be located between the multiple family,townhome units. The applicant
has proposed 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards.
19. Access to some of the lots, Proposed Lots 23,24, 67 and 68 as well as Lots 43 to 48 would be via
private easements. These would meet code requirements other than the Fire Department's requirement
for a cul-de-sac in some instances.
20. The applicant proposes a number of features that include open space, street trees, access to a DNR
parcel and a 10 foot pathway between Proposed Lots 20 and 21 to the property north of the site,the
Quendall properties. Wetland preservation and shoreline preservation would be accomplished with
setbacks of 50 feet where 35 feet would be native landscaping along with 15 feet of manicured areas
adjacent to homes. Staff calculated that approximately 5 acres of the site would be landscaped.
Irrigation would be required for landscaping areas. The applicant proposes a 6-foot soft surface trail
along the south side of May Creek and interpretive area at end of the trail. A landscaped series of tracks
near the north central and northwest corner of the site will deal with storm water and connect to the
Department of Natural Resources property located along the lake front. This would provide general
access to the lake. Light and glare issues as well as a host of other issues have been addressed by an
extensive list of mitigation measures attached to the issuance of the final EIS.
21. Staff has suggested that the attached units have a common pathway or not more than two for 3-unit and
4-unit buildings to the lake rather than separate paths to limit intrusions into the shoreline buffer areas.
The applicant would prefer that each unit have its own path.
22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate
approximately 45 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be
assigned on a space available basis.
23. The development will increase traffic by approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 1,150 trips
for the 115 homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips will be generated in the morning and
evening.
24. Stormwater would be handled and conveyed by Tracts D, E and F. These would provide water quality
before water is released into the receiving waters of May Creek or Lake Washington. Mitigation
measures were imposed as a result of the EIS reviews. Portions of the subject site are located within the
100-year flood plain.
25. Sewer and water services will be provided by the City.
26. The applicant was concerned about some of the conditions recommended by staff. Condition #6
required certain standards for turnarounds and the applicant wanted the ability to propose alternatives.
Condition #7 required compensation for areas where the 50-foot buffer along Lake Washington's
shoreline was reduced, suggesting that it be provided elsewhere as common open space. Condition#8
was noted above where staff recommended that the paths from units to Lake Washington be limited to
not more than two for three or more units.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 11
27. It was suggested that additional shading be required along May Creek to provide better salmon habitat.
There was also concern regarding protection of the various buffers.
28. Contaminent remediation would continue as development of the site proceeds.
CONCLUSIONS:
Preliminary Plat
1. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. Although the COR zoning would have
accommodated a mix of high quality office and residential uses,it does permit solely residential uses of
the kind;proposed by the plat. The development will provide mainly small but high quality lots due to
the plat's-very desirable location adjacent to May Creek and Lake Washington.
2. Reusing what has been a recently underused industrial parcel will increase the tax base of the City. It
also provides in-city, urban-scale housing in an area where urban services such as water arid sewer are
readily available.
3. The lots are generally rectangular with reasonable access to the City's street system. There is an issue
with access to the proposed lots located at the end of extended deadend Streets A and C. The lots will
have to meet Fire Department access standards. That might mean that full cul-de-sac turnarounds will
have to be carved out of lots near the dead ends of proposed Streets A and C. This determination will be
solely at the discretion of the Fire Department.
4. Access to the plat will be provided via two routes into and'out of the subject site. That should provide
reasonable circulation although both would have at-grade crossings of railroad tracks. Crossings of
those tracks are governed by State law and mitigation measures imposed under the EIS. Transportation
mitigation fees have also been required to help offset the plat's impacts on City roadways.
5. The applicant will be paying Parks Mitigation fees to help counter the impacts created by new residents
on the City's parks and recreational programs. Similarly,the applicant will pay a fee to offset its
impacts on fire services.
6. In the main, the proposed plat appears to be a reasonable way of dividing the subject site allowing
ownership of individual lots while increasing the density of the site by providing an arrangement of
,attached townhomes.
Site Plan
7. The following criteria are used in reviewing general site plans as well as those requiring Level II Site
Plan analysis. It should be noted that Level II analysis is based on more conceptual submissions and
does not require the level of detail otherwise required under Site Plan Review.
Section 4-9-200E: DECISION CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN AND MASTER PLANS:
The Reviewing Official shall review and act upon plans based upon a finding that the proposal
meets comprehensive planning considerations and the criteria in this subsection and in
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
. File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 12
•
subsection F of this Section, as applicable. These criteria also provide a frame of reference for
the applicant in developing a site, but are not intended to discourage creativity and innovation.
Review criteria include the following:
1. General Review Criteria for Both Master Plans and Site Plan Review:
a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies. In
determining compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, conformance to the
objectives and policies of the specific land use designation shall be given
consideration over citywide objectives and policies;
b. Conformance with existing land use regulations;
c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses;
d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site;
e. Conservation of area wide property values;
f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
g. Provision of adequate light and air;
h. Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions;
i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed
use;
j. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight;
k. Additional Special Review Criteria for COR, UC-NI, and UC-N2 Zones
Only:
i. The plan is consistent with a Planned Action Ordinance, if applicable;
and
ii. The plan creates a compact, urban development that includes a
compatible mix of uses that meets the Comprehensive Plan vision and
policy statements for the Center Office Residential or Urban Center
North Comprehensive Plan designations; and
iii. The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally
consistent, and provides quality development; and
iv. The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide
adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site, and/or to protect existing natural systems; and
v. The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area and Mt.
Rainier where applicable; and
vi. Public access is provided to water and/or shoreline areas; and
vii. The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area
plazas, prominent architectural features, or other items; and
viii. Public and/or private streets are arranged in a layout that provides
reasonable access to property and supports the land use envisioned; and
ix. The plan accommodates and promotes transit, pedestrian, and other
alternative modes of transportation.
8. The proposal is compatible with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. The plan suggests
that this site is suitable for Center Office Residential uses,that is any of a combination of office or
residential uses or one of those uses exclusively. While a better use of the property might have been a
mixed-use development with high quality office and residential uses, both the Zoning Code and
comprehensive plan allow an exclusive residential use of the subject site.
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat -
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 13
9. It appears that the proposed use complies with the Zoning Code. The proposed residential use does
comply. The bulk standards that the applicant has proposed meet or exceed the,standards for residential
uses found in the COR regulations. The zone permits buildings of 10 stories or 125 feet in height while
buildings between 50 and 75 feet have been proposed. The front and rear yards proposed also meet or
exceed those required in this zone. Compliance with the Fire and Building Codes will be determined
when building permit applications are reviewed. All access, roadway width and length and turnarounds
will have to meet Fire Department requirements.
10. The site is pretty well separated from adjoining properties and other than traffic, a generalized impact
that any development would affect,the development should not affect neighboring properties. One
impact discussed is that redevelopment will affect some of the view properties upslope of the site. The
redevelopment of the subject site will add to the ambient light during evenings. Residential
development will increase night lighting from the site. This impact has been absent from this recently
under-utilized site. Street lighting standards are dictated by code. The proposed buildings will also be
somewhat taller than what has generally been located on the site but they fall within the permissible
height limits of the COR Zone.
I I. The site plan contains about five acres of open space and access to the shoreline of Lake Washington via
a path to DNS property. There will be limited visual access to the lake from the street system since side
yards between buildings are narrow and 50-foot tall buildings will create somewhat of a wall. There
will be access to May Creek via a walking path which will also lead to the lakeshore. Sidewalks are
required along the public streets that will serve the site and street trees are proposed along the roads.
I2. Redevelopment of this large, lakefront site will increase the tax base of the City and should enhance
property values for this site and surrounding sites.
13. It appears that the roads will provide reasonable access to the subject site, clearly affected at some times
by rail traffic that could block access into or out of the site not only for residents and visitors but also for
emergency personnel. Roadways will still have to be designed to meet all Fire Department
requirements. Sidewalks along the streets will provide reasonable pedestrian access.
I4. The buildings appear to be reasonably spaced and meet Zoning limitations although side yards between
these potentially taller buildings will create somewhat of a block for light and air.
15. Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed. There should not be any
untoward noise or odors once construction is completed and all contamination has been or will be
removed from the site.
16. Public services including water and sewer service will be available to the site. Stormwater will receive
water quality treatment and be discharged to the lake.
17. In addition to the projects compliance with the standard Site Plan criteria noted above, the project must
also generally satisfy the Level II Site Plan criteria. There is no Planned Action Ordinance in this case.
The townhome project is not as dense as might be anticipated for the COR Zone but the site is quite
constrained by its sensitive location more or less sandwiched between Lake Washington on the west and
May Creek on the east. It achieves a reasonable density of 6.8 dwelling units when it has to provide
water quality treatment and open space beyond that found in its sensitive shorelines. •
1 8. The conceptual plans submitted do not answer questions about the internal cohesion of the project other
than it would be united by a townhome theme and street trees. There are no building footprints nor
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 14
façade features nor definitive building heights that provide a clue to internal consistency. These issues
will have to be addressed when actual plans are submitted.
19. There are both private spaces, yards and shoreline setbacks, and public open spaces and the natural
systems are preserved by the buffers required by Code and conditions imposed on the project. At the
same time, the applicant may not sidestep around the required mitigation buffer of 50 feet along the
lake. Since the applicant did not appeal those buffer setbacks it cannot then design lots that do not meet
that standard. Staff has suggested a compromise that allows the buffers to be reduced but calling for
compensation for the lost square footage. That seems appropriate. So either the applicant shall redesign
the plat to meet the setback buffer required by mitigation or they shall provide the compensation
suggested by staff.
20. The intrusions into the shoreline setbacks along Lake Washington should be limited as this area is
supposed to be natural. Therefore, staffs recommendation that the number of paths from units to the
lakeshore shall be limited to one path for each two attached units or two for 3 or more attached units is
reasonable. While the applicant indicated this might create ownership issues, if these various dwellings
can share common walls and common roof systems, they can accommodate shared paths to the lake.
21. The plan does not appear to provide any view corridors to the shoreline of Lake Washington but does
provide a walking path along May Creek. The code is not clear what it means by"where applicable"
and there is the path to the DNS land which might provide access if not an outright view corridor.
Similarly, there is the interpretive area at the end of May Creek which will be accessible from the
proposed trail.
22. The open space tracts provide a form of focal point, as do the pathways to the DNR property and the
end of May Creek. These features also provide access to the water features on the subject site.
23. The roads and paths provide reasonable access to the site and its features subject to the issues noted
above.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should approve the proposed plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans, dated
January 3, 2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services.
Project Manager -
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 15
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the Development Services Project Manager. The Fire Department shall
have sole discretion ill these matters.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
10. The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards.
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
DECISION:
The Level II Site Plan is approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result Of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans, dated
January 3, 2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat •
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-11, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 16
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services
Project Manager
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements,etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled,as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the Development Services Project Manager.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
10. The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards.
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
ORDERED THIS 22"d day of February 2005.
FRED J. KAUFIAN
HEARING EXAMINER
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 17
TRANSMITTED THIS 22"`� day of February 2005 to the parties of record:
Susan Fiala Steven Wood Kayren Kittrick
1055 S Grady Way Century Pacific LP 1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140 Renton, WA 98055
Seattle, WA 98101
Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company Matt Hough Campbell Mathewson
PO Box 359 Otak, Inc. Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98057 10230 NE Points Dr. Ste. 400 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140
Kirkland, WA 98033 Seattle, WA 98101
•
Tom Goeltz Lynn Manolopoulos Rich Wagner
Davis Wright Tremaine Davis Wright Tremaine 2411 Garden Court
1504 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2600 777 108'"Avenue NE, Ste. 2300 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98101' Bellevue, WA 98104
Larry Reymann Mark Hancock Fritz Timm
1313 N 38th Street PO Box 88811 Sr. Engineer, City of Newcastle
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 13020 Newcastle Way
Newcastle, WA•98059
TRANSMITTED THIS 22"d day of February 2005 to the following:
•
Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Stan Engler, Fire
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling, Building Official
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission
Larry Warren, City Attorney Transportation Division
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Utilities Division
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Neil Watts, Development Services
Jennifer Henning, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services
Stacy Tucker, Development Services King County Journal
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may,
after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 18
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one) communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both
the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
To: All Parties of Record
If you would like to remain on the party of record list, please contact the Hearing
Examiner's office at 425-430-6515. (If no one answers,please leave a message stating
your name and address and that you would like to remain on the Barbee Mill Party of
Record list.) Otherwise, your name will be removed from the list.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
=Lir_
,.,...., BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
....,..,
may
u....s“
/,`
• "1•76
:. t\ \dt\kL-,,,, -S( kr . • .•,,,,A,
114,,
1000:614i6:14571110111:,'Ft44, 1 i-
1.40#45-..., ...0.4!er,Tr el“. *teZ,:jj:iLi•,.f.,!,4.. 0
i...:' .:-.,ja,,'4,.:.5.FSZAI.1?.1..-,t' . 111\4411...f::•Ii': 4. LAKE WASH IN GTO N
Foi....---, -0.9 are--.,,,. •. ....,_'''',;3
lois itf al i lii 1:AN 1 Nal i t g P1.1,5..t/L"til;:'N'44..t., . ' 1 /,,b,-
, ._,:-Itill!:.V.t IOW MO .ZM•-&-U,M.Pli . t7/1*
14
.f..., .
- Er '74:1A; Pl"! .apiAlite:Om,i.,111/fi---• *,.,/,.....,. ; .
<t
.. •k,..g....,-,,oag., ..Ti :. . ...., •,.....-• ir.,-. ,ca.. '' ' 4. .•• • \
'-.-••••••••W.---.-.::.-.- '.414fi 4-1;171•••7•ATI .17174:61•171iii;77:4710.,• • ' 4 4.,,':.• • \ k ,
... 1-•` 1r n•zzr..go vt, El* No v, . ..
, t;7 : ,171,r ,L ,., ;Al& NV N.54, A - •• ;,,e,4 r %:,;,..,:i.sFR gt •••• ,,,.. L';' °3
Ili
. islr, -,:." :'7' ' . ' '.-- I'l - PA .9E1 iitii:z 021 ilr," ,-.. 4-'•.1, .'••,.. ,.... ;:c...... ,k, :2. - . pc,r: .. irti .E%-ups N.I. z.40, ..,..e, .„.• .,. ,, ,..., ,, ''''.:A.."
Z u•ALf 171. i 1 ' ' 'EU..' IV! :=4,0,.....14 :ior .,_.n,,,,,,. -o, ,..,',6 , ..- _ ,,," ,Nt.
i r
i'. •trp,-; ..- . . - '" ''','cr.if :.•a7ii va.-im ,Wti . ":(..' •-.- '4.".•' 16-'=11111L_
1", .--.'61 gli(7.1 z.41.., er,,,,,,.4-, .vyi • L.,4 , ••, ‘...4%.%" ..-/ .OM '
!.,4*_1z I •Tp; 4. ,%F.-p E.7,14.,,rv, t....,A igrie.-... i 4 4.graftzilv r.3i •_.-•ql),.... ' 1,,0;,,,,••• t5, sz, ,Ill :,..0 4___,....,,„-1:ii 2:. •; 4 N '''Ili if .N1 ol,F. 14'mig,g '4.1: PI irliaLit• , .t'-. • "."."'-'SIF •','
t.,_.`'"'„,,r••• ,' ,.it 'i;,•': • .1-tiqvievtirk...= a r ii.%-* •P ":12 g 1'1 '1,-. r ;*, ,
1..., ,..,9.--.I :4 .-.4 t.'918;PKI3 AL:4,'..1•''t isill rik i----4 -^, .--446 SFR• - ' ,'''''' .. .....1
- g.i, . ,a -,N -7 ,.-jiz,Art ••-•-V,k_ ttil v,.. 5, ;II•`-: VAIII , EIN 4.'t14••,. - ,..,.,\+,
k• ...2.• • ''''''‘ '•••• V 4'•••••4.1 IP ?:%1.!--,S, al•CS:•Yike r 2. 0: v. ...%,..7 nom 7 9. 6.19t":. • • ".•,,,..
. • .••••1 3 5• wa ‘2 IL A.••,T).4 1 I 7..••11 OW a TR V • i
VACANT 0 C/A
4,.
o
J;-• •
'.'..
.4,
. e
. . c•
, I
-7,-
,-,, 1
I
1
...,
=
P,
•=
8i
"Pri.mi- - ...i ; ilg .%1 .iel .,- !...'.., ' t' • 9..0.'1;4.4'r it:' •Ei. ..A-: •'.'-. :. .
' A... 1 m ...E'.1. '•-•--- IL......•••
'0'.., F° '''• 1 -11 ' r•g"91 *-ed-.prri ggl .01.g4i;-.1 Ig-.. 7 4.1,' "''''.1 k-
' f tt•
. .146,,4,0 I . IP E_, il
-•----t-- •r A 1 ...1:Aci .c..--•-, ./.7 , '''•"-.i. ,.
,• 6•t 4 .4 5irgi
''' Et ' 446.1 •"! At ..i.,t---4
,ftet, vr...1-t.- • :..-.J. 8 ,g - . - • - ,.,, .5 nu * ' ".• I 4J---, ,,c., . >.
,,-I.,' 9.7 ' -,CL,...... - . •-- ; - ••••=' 8'-' '-'. >a .•,,:' - • ' ,-. P
M•f01111 ... r __.H1.,,c2, . .i. ,. • . ..... .•.:, .; X- 'IS„.., \:,'.:',„''...,j, - cd
R.,e3 0 siTi i • 9 04....,,•.1:,,. a XII,„2”,„,,X• ili I..1 11.11.1MINELLML...I p •
,..,•:. • 4'--;',''', . '1,7 4 •• ,- - I s,,,,,,.••••,. -4
-+4.1.4 h•-- K„.........,,,........u.. VLICNI1741••• • ..- ii
''''' ' ' •-, ----- • ININNiManalliali 0
40),, ••• 'M z
..-. a_
=.,-mmayffi=___1_,_,.-es-,71-, • •-•--,,,,--,:-.F,F7,.-..-",. -- . -, \ -•, 4. , .1 yee, '..s1,... : ... / 4,
- /allli:-l"r:r•'2'. -."'••----- \ ',. 44.- til't" --r... .r, *ii ..• ..••• 4,,,,
.-.....r. . - • _4-,--.r eis,-....-ite-1 1.4:' §T.i-- , . --...rrs.4 I Z,E !!'••• '!eiie ; •'. .%. 4. E ,
I I /gal!!E.callihik.14111.71 °I,., _ ...;.,71- :1:', -:::i_'.'.:::.*'''''' ',,r,,_ •-i i 2-•'.::s7z. P..._\::4.'.1';''''t.7'441:41•41/.I.:t6;i:1::..111.::::IY:4°.1.5.'S''''Ll .-:4 8°'--
.44 ke
\.1.1 :,,t4:, 1 E ' 44,..f• .4* •/ '''.'24, : ;., ;lir:. *.• cl• L'-'
. ligstmi. • ;
' lillgre` ..,„, ' -"Rd'' .---• . : ' _ : 0. -.-..„ ..,
.
, ,I i .,. ,
x g ,,-. - ..vc,•.- 7-,7-,.. :Nil.,- .. ..„ , . . . ., . , ,.;,..r,.;. k ,.// 'n A ),
„> ' ' , ^ - '-'....-. ,I, ;-,..-4 i 77"-. r , . N. - --,...2,•,,7..:.....,. -,_v.- co ai
' '\11,*,;,.•:' . , . .< I . .....
,
4 Fr, ;47"11,_,,c1 -..INT* 7.,7"-111-", •;-:_.• f ..:.,j,"I al 1. i . . ,, .
, I a
-
1 ;.--it "" .. .L iL / •)'1'iif," ,.al , . /--..,.......5,-,!1, ...„,,..‘,.. ,,,... ! : . ;.".t.E___a _ji:f.,r,'1:--- 'J--.---z.,- -e. LT,
OZ Z
, 't_.„,, ,gEt, ..' ,,Til A. ; i .,1, . i 2 .,ea .. ., ., , m ,-7,-......goos0.0 . •z....,_.,Alb, ,0 .
t-P_.': .•1' , ' igiiii--i-rikawif
cn
v- :, Po 1 ef3 ,,• ' C
li_is x ) ... i .„.e-i. ''' : 111.- z ,,,.'" 0 c'n'''.: 'i ' i' 1.;dilre.0..:4.4,11.4 QE R-RNTO.LI . .- *" C,;,i.. ---it... • ,____0 o a,
I .".. : 1,011Iti,M.:. -..,7
- : . ,.. :t; •7.e• ..1. - . 1 R,,f ,.. .044 . ni . 1.-1-,- . - i:...___.....- . ....D. - --,.- •--:,.. t, , -..__,... -
' :-"-, `•' inlet':1111 1 15,24-r----. iipi-ai '• • : .11.------‘1-:
.OAT:
1 4 i . ',...
..1,Illt 0%4 ' 1 5 t , 1 1 F 7
i „A a-T, 0 Incorperal.
..Ord ! n f '•'• is.:9i,j00,0,4zli,•301,0.,%; v• -IA _ . .c Tyb !--NT•N'',i il*ANN ' 4-, OM 14 Peol•D..
' -.11107 1 . , ' F...6(1410V'trq ...,,..= '116'•,...-'oh..na.....-a. vm,..r..... ........... , ......,2,„ „„., , . .40,111 . ..ttr. re.- -11.•••: . .
3311„,. 1101. 4,- 4 .4104V1,1 VI I.1 .""''Cr?"iF NEWpASTLL'. • . iniumis , 1,,144-4 4...*Lie F, 4•9.11; ! ! sCi .,.,...-.7.,,,
.,...„:„ ....,,
'• 'e Q ,..7 r
' CZa. '', $11 t'I. A itirOligi', am. '0.1011 - I ''' ? i . •
kil . ill 1 g 7.3ukiti,444t.= . ; 41-2V3' 71.11 • . • •
i . .-,1_,. coy.•on,..1 ar. •• •-•,....:-- - _-E. \••• • s' :•.....,--- ---s-,,-, Awe: • ' . ,,,, • .PI 1 I ; t•3 inf. . • .• . ...f- 0 ,00 200 0,04_,.,93,.0cr.....9 001_001
' 4,,,d3; 111114:411. Eh I i. I. ro„(.!.?- • (..11.7 3,,vol .XrTi 'FL*, . \\; '!''''. ''''.., 4; , . 4 • •I• •... ...:.,1::.•i• •.: iP.i..1 1.1 , ....y.,F ;',I•-•,„ It ,. . . , ..,, <,,,, . ....m...1
= '
co
----t
- ... ...
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
E:C.4Lr--
+'~-' BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT / r,
(;owgim;Te OVERALL PLAT PLAN '
.010,93
/' // !
/i. 2:fil', .'.... 1 (
,..,;.. i,(_,-- /X\,) "--. .7;(i'' J ii
A/ /.'..1(1.... ,,,..;;;;;-.-- ....,'....:JC•2 •• /i 4., C ',i'
/; J
___— 77tt
Tom,' r-- ,r--lr r -lr--lr--N---lr--lr--i w JIli• i II 'IF 11 I•[ III /; 9/////
'� i • : :AI 'ref':::.!'••�•, rriNm up ''0,
��EE I I y�j{ /.
xv PPP IL _ Lr L --L-- L� ,.'L:_�L.. J -J..++..SJ; (- §y_.. ..•y. 't
LAKE - s .r—"- -tea—- _ / -' •
WASHINGTON I '1•° - , I •f ;T .1.:)- Mee
.E-- `l1 IA ,4.0. ' ''4 .%,,'Nj 3631,7
- ,'y// •/ ,,.._ U8 iF�1•ute�'°IO . • 3' 4
I + 1 % ,'/ / I V' suu SOW wI[a� 61 L�
4141‘tiv
11146,
+C ✓ \ s•r.: / / 'r// VICINITY MAP E• +6
gg ' • IEQAL DESCRIPTION: > c m:$6�
• '� \ ,„,,. • /,' / \� T10 0AN0 T. CAACO ro TICS CONIO[12NT V 900ATLD IN n:nail Or
�:.. ` ' 74 / / i, AlNdOroN.COVNTY Or K010 AI1D U DE9CNIBED AJ IOUA•!: y
�ti•' i
_-yy � .• `', �" ALL TKAT PORTION 0?00KRNLM LOT I.9ECIION R.TOT!!NP as NOR..
^ - -- 1 , .•
:'�•`• • ', .I-/,!` `\\\ RANDS MAR.EY_IX MO COUNTY.R0!00 ON AND OF SECOND CUSS a
+ • 7�1 4 9NORKLVID,ADJOINING LIMO WESTERLY Or NORTNCRN PIMC 001041 D RIGHT
L �I , a f!�J --r ,./..., OT TAT. 0' THAT non or,V AN'!•n tom
r no,cov MO NORTH.GI��',,. • :/`iI' /, , THI R91777 PPH T[TION ON nit ft o MID Or REEL OCYCPH1 O N LOT,. W
/ +JN I , ���`• Y7 ate I Ye' 91T0ATC IN TM COUNTY 0/KIXO,RATE OF 4771.9 7011. rci
al
L l BUJ , /,'//•' :.%/ I FLOOD HAZARD d a-
�•",5- •'}'\ +vr '.yl
A - j /'• '/ THC 100 T//.R R000 NAAARD 19 cowman IITNIN The NAY CREEK 000000. M 1- '
�1 ' ' �y Lsn d,°
- 1 LEGEND C as a
J/ / UKE SNOREUNE BUFFER MG- L
, ' j I t SN / ` /. , e!'- /T , . : BUFFER PUNRNGS UNITED TO RUNT C)
9 m-r,� r t / vwrts AND crussts
.-: . ✓ / \ IAAY CREEK BGRASS ARfA- E.
5 �' - 4;,� �� / / BVIFER PTpNTINDS UUIT[D TO NATNE
g ,• ;l: .,_. / f:'`:l PUMS,AND GRASSES /
> .;,•�• \ -,., 15'NAWGEO UN 1.11V ctUDEBurFE AREA- C
/ `,� \ wn
-. - Arlo OTNER uiNAGED UNOSCIVE ttATERuls 0 O a
it \ 'ewer-pare.
AA.100
J - �.' �j r .lifi[n-osrr
I/'7j j z r'.4 011
0100,
'/�t / / ,gib
�cc___a•zDBc-, _ 3.t ;'T' •xC' N OTH S uE wr .-.'�._ t... 9 C0_1
? °
X
=
- 11125 el
N
•
• PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
•ifit
C9(
1 .
r r
1
twat.__
CTO1N30 'APAISb5‘1.4. /
. ... .01110110
..T
•,N....TI-:'',.::4 ' .-. N f- - 1-f-- f -... ..... • • •— -- ---- -------77----i----
/ •1::4::"./4.
.. . ..
nurut ...I
(
: ::,..•• r- :. v, , '' ..:.A ,,
C101.1000 gitiz ...
. 1.2 22 21 20 19 16 17 16 I
i5 14 13 ig II ig g 5 g I. 5 5 4 , 2 ., , j.. At •.. ,
Y ;
Cirtle 4 i
t4,44u 1
,• '. ,' 7 4:'ir r r /7• f i e , 7,„--- — 1W-- -- iih -- -- ilh-- -- ilk-- am-- ---ilh-- ---iih- .11k--- ---illi --4 -.1..-.. ....
* " 1 .weip.',/- 1,,t r7-4117, 7.7."..71:777..,-;-=7;-,,,.... .,.-77-77..=,..::-___,4: •-""" ,,,• .-.,!.i 4.7777,:•••••=7.7777.1' '
_ ;•:'" §`
e a
, •."' Ani.o/.....ranam/roasmagmamposps...m........ moons,,,,C; '• ,.., -4 2
•,.. 2° __ 1,7=.1 --,y.'
.-4,,,,,,,... . • ,.,,
qv K.,4. ,-- ., N„,-,- .• ,•,, ,-,. ., ....,•,... , , ,
,..,, .. .•.
, ,.ti::. 27 i I i?yiti( 75, 76 , 77 76 , 79 60 ' / 6i ' '''• 1I'r4.,Z,.a• 7. 73 ', 72 71 • 70 69
r'A I ff / ,-/:,' N/ ' " -/ X.. /,
a• .<5'11,•, • ,,,,p,..'. •\ ..,„,... ,... i ,v,:,. s, .' ,./ i„. '0.1• .;,.
, I/ ... ,-,
. . ‘-.,,,- • • ,..1.1e• • ,,,*.r.•4.4„,.:.,. .,..,..., ,•... , ,,. ,• 'II"
26 1 I"l4fi 41.9.' r 4?4.7.1-4., • / ',V',:," ''''`,..Y74*,.s ,,..,,.. , , ,,,-,., . .. ,____ ___J L--- -...4.L--—_4 / 1'
, ,,,,, • ,..K,,,i,5,44.•;a479 s , .,". .....,'.. ' ''.' T, . / .p."....1A '' IPT.2 ' .'
rt• RIM 00 (2
10,241110 TON N
-3 ;se -mi J.i,,,iii i„:...4.2,,,,., ,,i,v.,:..._•••••„'.•:•n.,_, •-•04s-,...,-..--inzf.p..---.•,,•••;;,•••gg,,/,:o.w.i)- ••••,•;-••44‹," "sc.Vic .•••... --- - - -..-; . • ,...:,------•••,-,..7_7.:..-.4 -t.g•,,,. ••••3••,,.;--- ..•• ••;-,----,,,..i".„.•:_•::•,-....-.,..,••44.71.$00494.;,";:r•A;ii.•',, •. '4111 ::::-,,-,; ,___,,,..__Ijs ,.' ,,,,,/,,•• miir.:.510,,,,.-
2. :g• „ . 0 Is; •4•• •••,,,-.,.._, --'" ---,:..--:-••••-•-?:••••••'••• •:.•,,,,to..,,,0.1,450,,,,,,,044.9„ N.63 qii i 17 ,44.4 :.76• 1 ,t„,,il,,,::., .... ,................................................'. .7,e,"4. 0./,' ‘•‘'`• ' I ," f MATT NO 1
1 FS '' .3 0 \ Y...,Atitt.'......Q..:,,:yve..:::..•.:.:.:.:::..:,;..:.I.:.:.:.•..:.:.:.:.:.:.':. ...;,..,'".'",r,m1,!:,' , '' '' 84 I '..41 ' ev ; /87 ev.." l' r• .4"
.....0.4 . •., '‘,.''N , ::1.! ; .. ...--,Z.'._ I I :.3Z *-- --1:-...,__, ' I I;•?.,‘,4;,:•;:y;.. .:`,A.A.:9::,:::Y.:..'. ..............;..e!-,i.,: ;} 1::r.. ‘'N:4 ' ..N a3 '••',' ,.' ':}..„It / --- i: ,( X7 .
54...4,.'"?;".ritt4 INI'''':4.1'..f. I • •..•"" o*'."—AT i ,. ' 4:i.
• •. oe \ *7#,'''..,•'...•;.. lb' '•4'." //: i i'/ / ,./7 8z
U\ fl•:, Itz-...11%1P.j,' . ..:. .-:-: ..:• fii?...0k4lic.- ', -, , ,;',.....,., .:: • !.; ' ,' . ,'•-/---. /
;‘ 4r4'4';14'A 4.kr: ***.:..' .•.' 1•dl''.41' 'S, .‘ ' ''',.• :'' ' ' " ') .A4V....,,,t't '
3V*', _*122.:"•',:•'''-;'-‘,:-;•%-°--'-'e 3-.'*I.'!I'1.:\*'‘V\k,t 1: ,i!IP‘L..,''5'0'..?....-*:..;7.:3......•7.•.;;.•;..i•..N..:.•?4..t.:r,;,;-,.5,Ir
,, , -,.,..‘..,,..'•9 N0
, -,•`•4911._..--,4-4,-00/410#6050 7/'4...•• 3 4 ,•••••••,••.'••••...•.....• /
n F:q21:1 2'a gi a
• 1 ,.•
-'•.- .4.4-1Z.9410 '-.- ;44.1 /' / .- \\• ' 7;'' '.; y,•;- '1. E 25%
›. -g
11. ..------- •,'-',,..;:.:::•.97:.w / # -., z
z s
*3, \, ,,t ,V,', . Ns, '. -,..sofetiff;-:F:h•"'" - —RI\ \\\set ' //:.:4:::::".'' ',. ,/ '5
\ ---------- attV4 , (' NN3 s-ss '0,. .tiirtioilb,.i, l ,-- \\ ' 80 \\ /.
Ca7
1 ...'------ ----- - 43y4 .11 ‘;ezt-",t!sa'''4" ' \ , \\ '9 \\ ,.• 5it/
a c-)
------- " .' •'0,-.0.V.;,00-79V.:-'1' \ ' m,\
0.2./::::.;;:.:-`
:.. • /
-- 0.w.•••••••• _r______' ,,..offt."•-" ‘.'la \
57 I.e•'..e.t"..V.P...,-- , 3 1)
4.4.„.., • .4 %
/are;,1r,''14r9•;i r• , . . • s ,
x 34 1 '15. • t
\,,\!,..' -,•:.
*‘'S , \‘‘', ... ,/%.40:.;'....':..•,:.-:?.,':.?• .,.....:.. /
44 . •
-i -, . •.i• , -zz
0 r'•1--; --.z. .'t, '. 1.\,__ w q',,.:'„,... ,
X , ----,„,• .4.. --------- fa:Ai c.:::::2;11/•r:''.. • ' " '4 .... • \ ) "‹....••••••.,.,..,.'.... , , I
• , . \, .,,,.§::. IE.,'..,,., ea. . - F"/ . ..ig, a _ ,.....
.-., ram •.,,, ,....4 --------- c„., . -....- \. t,sg ',, /-:44:;:::::::,r :'::,:y .....-', :V.,-iti,;11".i,,, 't',,,.---•7 i-.•••-.". ._;,-;,J:I 1: o gi I e....
1 t : : " 1 irlegylitr„''',14' \54\ ..,\, .., . -- .. • .. ,'.1',7r-t st 04.,,,-,'ip, —.:. renii rA.!..:,.:1:f f: ' %::' Cci 21':::'r:Z;Or: . ! '''''',E,r ti 7:1-44... . , -...„„1„.,.........,,,,,:,........- .:.:.,... .., ,, ..,,, :,,ileh'. .4.14t....,••..p,.,.... • ,)--' o P4 Lo
' .r s—.A— " I ;...!10;,.....•-•'"" s . : 1,°:$34,2 N*31, .14_IV.;'%.0.01.' i' : z 01 E
1 ;$:: :;:.. •,•• 36 , ,3...0,rim-----•• •..ss•,, • ,,4.4:7,:r:..rt,',.`i.•!,a:.4,,,, :,,..",,,:.,•,,::*.:,:../..---0 .--;• , .... 7'''' 4W
\ ' 53 \, ,'Ai:t:::4"‘• 7':,.,1*:::*•:.:•';(-:.:%:••:''''..,.i:. „//4.- .,.'....;:" A,7 2,
•'-' _,-,,;f4.."•••••••r"-I-7:74`.'..""'.. : ;
;'' 1 .';::.1 ::: V__------ '!Iiit!T!ir,•?, / . " `ss, / .9".9---,:':.:'......'....,:i•,-.,.....-•,..1.::... _-•-;.:".;•:•••• ....- / .: 4-,,-..- -, I- • z-,
:., 0.41411111 \ •1': ' ; <4
I ,1N:, :.... c SEE SHEET L'i_2
1 ':! li; 0 o a
e 1 Plant List 7' L .• •+ '.; 3( L) -----
, ,., .I,2:31.91',Z... IIA,.... z,...L IIIlli',=. 10.... sz.,zz. :=0",t1:.
,,_1404(40 OPROs$ 4....,.. 1.4444 sHORELINE 111.117Ut
1.• .,,,S4n,
- 0 incarp-----a
,, .{.,111,1,1115[Mug 44,i.,4,0.5. ED riETIANO MST SEED ma .1.9°4e,°,,.., Ng. fairner,_TO NAM
Al SNOWN
m° 0
7 20
1 40 80
' 04t4"n1tros.!!" i.0r9,0z9,,,...-,zz
03C1
iaagl,FaaL mira g
EM mBora3Es'098A15 ILM-NOR ....As.jo.c".. =5554i21 lVin:a2ly't1rt it':'M.:,,,,,IsOtiSl lrt:..;O1U5
f1rt.4ri.IA.
R1E,. n-IDM-a-.o-,O.-..(.T14O.a214 3Ww0)P_.,0..2o a2ll-
..0,
0 0.
94I,,4 . . OE : " 11 "s 9Th`% , , o1 a 44 0 C EROSION CONTROL CUSS MO NM 4 30209.00.000
X ,,,,,, ram.MET /0uo ZZT0,ratZA f:. 1Zg,„ = , ., '09091: 101
14
Ofigoosage TOTAL MD.Or 1..0.4.44E1
=
_1 SO.It-123.042
ALM.4 OA 004489 ,9
CO
—I
..
C71
...
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC, 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
- SEE SHEET Lt_1
* - ..:.v,1 5p
N. I d .,L. wyr ,."W9` 54 L .;, ....,1. 0:,
Ua„ar
9fe,,,ra
I''__ ufl"1� R: �••" • .v:..::...:�:., .. -'�:.::. yam �i3
ffa,en,
•
i.„„...,,
,forrue r .'
u9„ro
u0arfw
u,rw,r I �'4
rnA„ JB I ----'
__________41111,1 .I*0... -• -- \\,./'
won"3 f J7 , t 5, 1'. .,:V.'''''. '' ..•` `'• S
ri.:.
:-/y..
[--- •*•':---- , ', .
JB 1 /`� KI..• '' •' e•sort sua..'TR.1I� .- �',
1lSi'we%-------7- s''9a•,..,14g 1 49 r/ ;,.. // /',...w.42:•�/ ...f, 1 kji r 2 a
)tc ' ‘•./ /./4:.:'..`:::./ •:''' .//'' I" ‘‘,
L/JJIwA••CRM eji� 40 5 •'�' ��.� •—:, M' 4V Y�;
i. --------- fa\il:• .•.•>4:'1'.....1/:.. z.:e. ' .' „3 ' :.',. / N..'5111 :/.m4t; i• ..• • 11r-
1- I '' ,Nei. ' '.':.;!•7 .....; .1.-:',' ' '' 'to''Aii;',' /.7",-' ,/ '''''," i.,...:::.... .
/ N �6' ••••: /.., O ; te9 i "+aye,�'/ a-oa'.3'Sa• /
i i .. . :`' 1.2 .," / b p/ / yr i e:�a°; 7.. :'.•✓ Ple�4 1s4000/9 � e�c "yf'� g
• - `� J . . �'�. /`�•/' � � oRc9on wan
�•.. '',./- ..•�of t08 i
� / / . / four TRa :c:oL C
Q` �••' 1i%fi�� ';:�".`w,♦i�'•` .�i•., +''♦.�`�toa '::e•'/:., /... ./.:� ::„.. .../:::',..'''''
/ / O nn�oor,mnnn m��nm.. 3°So.,w'... ------47
/ ire /,•' uw. •o.<. �J:, 4B �' :17'10._..• " ;,' a ••:A,.••••// toi 1" 'iir l•! r/,' �, /• , ' qcr _ aw ci.
...
•�•��•�- . `.. �••. '•.. .. •' :'aE•4'if"n....e:P +/ / '�. i / uw e•o:c. W Q
.�, ` ..--... �Pt . —�" ...........� :'�,�.�•��'// ,,az ,: .. ', 05�v1��h���8rof:7 ee -onort°s 0. 0
NM/+` •`�� '�'� tot '' /'i... 11 COSTING [E TO MAIN
4 .; 1.0. < too � ;; i / / r1
.J"` 3.'.,A O'• `.; / Njf.\ % / ® :rr rnr:.3.L•.'•rtz+ NNW r4 IC �°
/ F W
r4i w^TrA�"�"'"'•°" "yao� '(A.• ee • ./,/%• /•.I s.'%:','i/ '144 ..I, ;.`4' fZ w
B ' 97 '/' �:., , /.` Y ' W7r8 :u R vwnwu uurt[0 TO nATNE A a
y ••,•:%.l>:r• , _ j' 0 `r /�: .// / EROSION CONTROL CRABS MD m'.
e // ae' • //� / o"r', 'r' .6' / ,10'l ,MROVCNI µL O:STBUBEO AREAS.T
S 1'' 4 -,, -: �� • /�•••%♦ / °[B nf:RT Or>ROCOffY-,L05 f0003I n- O
�.4T / AP°n03UlT[TOLL AREA 0E LWOSCVE •/ 4,% M' • 'i''1 . /:%' •/ 50.rt.-31J.a.3 tI i°
1x /// .. /.;` f.% ./ ,' cad-a.,a
M1 /r INTERPRETIVE PANEL ;;C`'1'n SF y'' ` /'• " •
,4 n.rC
1 ( 'I 1L�• i I'<' /�D/`•'/. / �0+ I^ P
,/ i / 0 �II1 Nilu`IOU 4-1 ha.
vre e1015
/ V TJ
_ 30209.001.001
266',963 E .J9.36 1 -.Jr�jk / ,N.SI+r.dFa,rl...i:/ /,.'�•(.1 IULAJI A .. `1_.2
Fr 1 :/ ,l a Yam' 'j dn'/L''81-
Snrrl
C)
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed;OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading;OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
•
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway to avoid restriction of flows during
regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume(i.e.a flood terrace excavated on either side of the stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
C1. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance •
adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of Renton
and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
EXHIBIT 16
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
1
D6. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals
and/or mammals including,but not limited to deer, ducks and geese,muskrats,squirrels,mice and
frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thena) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established
(where the lake is shallow,on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR b)
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands
or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17_ Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such as
the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
El. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
F. Hazardous Materials
Fl. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
it
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall bp provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color, including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height,relative building bulk may be reduced
by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a change in
proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height, buildings shall be designed and sited
to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
I. Noise
11. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and vibration resulting
from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures shall include pre-drilling of the upper
portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for
smaller,residential supports.
12. Vibration, auger casting,or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to
limit noise related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of crossing
construction.
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
lii
;;' �; CIT`� OF RENTON
„IL Planning/Btrilding/PublicWorksDepartment
Ka 6y Keolker=Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 24, 20n5
•
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT.(LUA 02-040)
REQUESTS FOR MODIFICATION
STREET &SIDEWALK WIDTH REDUCTION
The proposed street modification requests associated with the proposed single-family residential
plat located generally off Lake Washington Boulevard, south of N. 44th Avenue and I-405
interchange have been reviewed. This is an Milli development on an undeveloped property with
two accesses proposed from Lake Washington Boulevard NE and a possible emergency access
from the south if it can be constructed to meet code. The existing street to the south has narrow
pavement:•width and no pedestrian improvements. The proposed modification requests to allow
the interior residential streets to be reduced to 42-feet in width, and for the sidewalks to be
reduced to five feet in width throughout the plat.
The Street Modification request is hereby approved.
City Code 4-6-050(Street Standards)requires full street improvements for all adjacent rights-of-
way for, within and dedicated by a plat. There are also certain standards for width of dedication
for proposed streets to be added to, the city grid;;.:One of these is the 42-foot wide street
improvement to provide..32 feet of.pavement, 5-foot sidewalk and curb on both sides, and
streetlights. Private utilities would be installed:in:a,ten-foot easement"immediately adjacent to
the edge of the dedicated right=of-way. This allows'full use of the Street in normal manner while
allowing the development to maximize the number of lots in a constrained space. § 22&1, c
The City can modify .street:improvements for new plats if there :are practical :difficulties.in
carrying out the provisions of.the Street Improvement Ordinance..The Modification Procedures
as defined in Section 4-9-250D:clearly states the criteria for approval by the Department
,Administrator. In order for a modification to be approved,.the Department Administrator,must
"find that a special_individual reason makes the strict letter of this Ordinance impractical,that the
modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance, and that such _
modification:
(a) Will.meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and. .
maintainability intended by this Ordinance, based upon sound engineering judgment;and
(b) Will not be injurious to other property(s)in the vicinity; and .
•
• (c) Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code;and
•
(d) Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and .
(e) Will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity." .
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington.98055 R E N T O N
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
C. This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Meets objectives and safety, function: Due to the constraints of the Lake Washington, May
Creek and the railroad right-of-way in the near vicinity, staff supports the modification request.
The intent of public and emergency access and pedestrian amenities is met with the proposal, as
there is no reduction in the pavement width, travel lanes,:or sidewalks: The proposed road cross.:
section meets the minimum standards for the typical 42-foot wide street improvement providing
two lanes of traffic, parking on both sides, and five-foot sidewalks. Easements are provided for. .
private utility installations.
Not injurious or adversely impact adjacent properties: Adjacent properties are not injured nor
adversely impacted as all dedications are from the proposed plat and allow future extensions and
circulation as the development occurs. The development enhances fire/emergency access to the
lots immediately south of the property.
Conforms to the intent of the coder The intent of providing for-the city street network is met.
Justified and required for use and situation intended: The zoning of this parcel is COR2,
however the developer is seeking approval with:a minimum.of 5 du/acre. The modifications as
requested allow this density and number:"of,lots,that stillmeet the various setbacks and access
criteria. The plat provides the:rminimum necessary for full;use for access, emergency and
- domestic,as well as parking and pedestrian amenities.
The'Street Modification isapprovedc' •
'This decision to approve"the=.,proposed; Street Modification:;is'`subject to a fourteen-(14) day
appeal period from the date of this letter. Any:appealsof the administrative decision must be
filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by:5,00;p m.,February 7, 2005.
Appeals must be filed in',writing together witl the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton,.1055.South Grady'.Way,Renton,.WA"98055:'.
Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton:Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. . .
Additional information regarding.:the appeal process may be from the Renton City.
Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510: ;`.
Kayr T(ittrick
• Y •
Development Engineering Supervisor
Public Works Inspections &Permits
•
•
cc: Land Use File
Neil Watts.
Stan Eaglet
Susan Fiala •
CIT` OF RENTON
r.
.,u . Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 24, 2005 : •
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT(LUA 02-040)
REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION STREET``C"
STREET WIDTH REDUCTION AND CROSS-SECTION DESIGN
- The proposed street modification requests:ass.ociated with the proposed single-family residential
plat located generally off Lake Washington Boulevard, south of N. .44`hh Avenue and I-405
interchange have been reviewed. This is an infill development on an undeveloped property with
two accesses proposed from Lake Washington Boulevard NE and,a,possible emergency access
from the south if it can be constructed to meet code. The existing street to the south has narrow
pavement width and no pedestrian improvements: The proposed modification requests to allow
the width of the proposed new road labeled as."Street C" to be reduced to 39 feet with sidewalk
on the development side only. The sidewalk would be five-feet in width in conformance with a
• previous modification request. Sidewalk would be omitted on the side adjacent to the railroad •
right-of-way.
The Street Modification'request and the.proposed cross-section as illustrated on Sheet CO-3 are
hereby approved subject to conditions listed below.
City Code 4-6-050 (Street Standards)requires full street improvements for all adjacent rights-of-
way for, within and dedicated by.a plat, There•are.,also certain.standards for width of dedication
for proposed streets to be added to the city` grid. One of these is the 35-foot half-street
improvement to provide 28 feet of pavement with.:.parking only on,the development side, 5-foot
sidewalk and curb, and streetlights: This allows full use of the street in normal manner until such
time as the remaining right-of-way is dedicated and improved by future.development. •
• The City can modify street improvements for new plats if there are practical difficulties in
carrying out the provisions of-the Street Improvement Ordinance. The Modification Procedures
as defined in Section 4-9-250D. clearly states the;criteria for approval by the Department
Administrator. In order for a modification to'be approved,.the Department Administrator must
• "find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter of this Ordinance impractical,that the
modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance, and that such
modification:
(a) Will meet the objectives and safety, function; appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by'this Ordinance,based upon sound engineering judgment; and
• • . (b) Will not be injurious to other property(s)in the vicinity; and • .
(c) Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and
(d) Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and 0
(e) Will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity."
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
::*. This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
R 1
•
Meets objectives and safety, function: Due to the physical limitations of the parcel at this
location, and the constraints of the railroad right-of-way and May, Creek with its .attendant •
buffers in the near vicinity, staff supports the modification request: . The intent of public and
emergency access and pedestrian amenities is met with the proposal as there is no reduction in
• the pavement width nor travel lanes, and sidewalk is provided on the side Most likely to be.used..
The proposed road cross-section meets the minimum standards for•the typical 42-foot wide.street •
improvement providing two lanes of traffic,parking on-both sides, and pedestrian amenities.
Not injurious or adversely impact adjacent properties: Adjacent properties are not injured nor
• adversely impacted as all dedications are from the proposed plat and allow future extensions and
circulation as the development occurs. The development enhances fire/emergency access to the
lots:immediately south of the property.
Conforms to the intent of the code: The intent of providing for the city street network is met •
with the dedication as proposed. •
• Justified and required for use and situation intended: The zoning of this.parcel is COR2,
however the developer is seeking'approval:with,a Minh**of 5:du/acre. The modifications as
' • requested allow this density andnumber`of lots that still meet,'the various'setbacks and access " , •
criteria. The plat provides the minimum necessary for fu11.`tise.for access, emergency and •
domestic, as well as parkingand pedestrian amenities: ,; •
The Street Modification is,4proved"subject to the,following<conditions:
• •
1: An access point and;'curb cute shall;be provided•for:>.the existing access road to the south. A
paved transition shall be,provided;betweeri'the!.old•road and�the>new„road..
•2. Plantings or other landscaping shall be provided next to the curb.line on the east to the edge
of the property line.•
This decision to approve';the'proposed Street Modificationris"subject to a fourteen-(14)• day
appeal period from the date-,of this,letter:, Any appeals:'of:the-administrative decision:must be
filed with the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5:,00.p:m:,February.7, 2005.. • :
Appeals must be filed in writing together.;with`the required fi$75.00application fee with:Hearing. • •
Examiner, City of Renton,:1055 South Grady Way,:lenton,WA 98055. . : •
Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section-4-8-110.
. Additional information regarding the,appeal process may be obtained from the.Renton City
:Clerk's Office, (425)430-6510.
•
K n Kittrick
Development Engineering Supervisor ; •
'Public Works Inspections &Permits
•
cc: • Land Use File •
Neil Watts. •
Stan Engler • •• •
Susan Fiala
;; CITI OF RENTON
#"3 i Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Greggimmerman P.E. Administrator •
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor gg
January 24, 2005
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT(LUA 02-040)
REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION STREETS "A" & "C"
STREET ACCESS LENGTH AND PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT
The proposed street modification requests associated with the proposed single-family residential
plat located generally off Lake Washington Boulevard, south of N. 44th Avenue and I-405
interchange have been reviewed. This is an infill development on an undeveloped property with
two accesses proposed from Lake Washington Boulevard NE and a possible emergency access
from the south if it can be constructed to meet code. The existing street to the south has narrow
pavement width and no pedestrian improvements.The proposed modification requests to,allow
the length of the proposed new road labeled as "Street C" to be allowed to exceed 700' without
construction of a cul-de-sac. The submitted modifications also include a request to.allow six lots
to access from a private.road easement with no frontage on a public street.
Both Street Modification requests are denied.
City Code 4-6-060 (Street Standards) requires full street improvements for all adjacent rights-of-
way for, within and dedicated by a plat. There are also certain standards for emergency access
and egress. Among these is.cul-de-sac construction for any development in excess.of.300' from
the nearest intersection. In addition, all homes in excess of 500' are`required to have sprinkler
;systems. Both Street "A" and "C" are well in:excess of this length and therefore require.cul-de-
• . sacs rather than hammerhead.turnarounds: Any road in excess of 700' requires a secondary
access:
•
The City can modify street improvements for new,plats if there are practical difficulties in
. carrying out the provisions of the Street Improvement Ordinance. The Modification Procedures
as defined-in Section 4-9-250D. clearly' states the criteria .for approval by the Department.
Administrator. In order for modification.to be approved; the Department Administrator must
"find that a special individual reason makes the strict letter:of this Ordinance impractical, that the
modification is in conformity with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance, and that such
modification:
(a) Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and
maintainability intended by this Ordinance,based upon sound engineering judgment; and
•
(b) Will not be injurious to other property(s)in the vicinity; and
(c) Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code;and
(d) Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation`intended; and.
(e) Will not create adverse impacts to other_properties in the vicinity."
As the plat as proposed cannot meet the intent of emergency access and egress, the Street
Modification request for exceeding the 700' length is denied. Please note, if code standards for
secondary access via the existing road to the south can be met, no modification is required.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
L: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
The Modification regarding number of lots accessed and served by private road may be
considered in the light of the constraints of the site, but the request.is rendered moot by the issue
of cul-de-sac turnaround requirements due to the overall length of the roads.
This decision to deny the proposed Street Modification is subject to a fourteen-(14) day appeal
period from the date of this letter. Any appeals of the administrative decision must be filed with
- the City of Renton Hearing Examiner by 5 00 p.m.,February 7, 2005.. '
Appeals must be filed in writing•together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing •
Examiner, City of Renton; 1055 South Grady Way,Renton WA 98055.
Appeals to:the Examiner are.governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.
Additional information, regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City
Clerk's Office, (425):430-6510.
Ka r Kittrick
Development Engineering Supervisor
Public W
orks Inspections Bc:'Permits;:" . •-�`'"
cc: Land Use File s's
Neil Watts Al .:
Stan Engler
Susan Fiala _
•
•
•
•
•
STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING }
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
PUBLIC NOTICE
Lily Nguyen,being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising
Representative of the
King County Journal
a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general
circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date �+
of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King RENTON HEARING EXAMINER
RENTON,WASHINGTON
County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the A Public Hearing will be held by the
Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. Renton Hearing Examiner in the
The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the founofl Chambers Hon the seSall,1055 South
King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly Grady Way,Renton, Washington, on
distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed January 25,2005 at 9:00 AM to con-
notive,a con-
sider the following:
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA02-040,PP,EIS,SA-H,SM
Location: 4201 Lake Washington
Public Notice Blvd N.The applicant is requesting
to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into
115 lots intended for the devel-
was published on Friday, 1/14/05 opment of townhouse units.The site
is by Lake Washington and May
Creek runs through the site.Access
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum is provided from Lake Washington
of $58.00 at the rate of$16.00 per inch for the first publication and N/A per Blvd.
All interested persons are invited to
inch for ea bseque section. be present at the Public Hearing.
Questions should be directed to the
Hearing Examiner at(425)430-6510.
Published in the King County Journal
Lily Nguyen January 14,2005.#858050
Legal Adve sing Representative,King County Journal
Subscri d sworn to me this 14th day of January,2005.
Tom A.Meagher '`°n.ekp;••9
Notary Public for the State of Washington,Residing in Redmond,Washingt$AR Y o"•':
Ad Number: 858050 P.O.Number: _-•— Z
Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge. " pUBk.\G O
•. 1
9j,•'•:�AY 2.20�'
\-\���
��Y o CITY OF RENTON Receipts i 159
U „ City Clerk Division
+ + 1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 P/q©400
N ITO 425-430-6510 Date _
❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee _❑ Notary Service
❑-"Check No. S(7/c / ❑ Appeal Fee ❑
Description: IL !7 4,f),„ — ti e fQ _r ' _ £Ast ',if tom,,
ir
404- 02- oS-io
Funds Received From: Amount $ �—
Name 4 / )
Address a .
/� / 4/-4 Ave .
City/Zip 14- 9//o/-/4 y
City Staff Signature'
' LAWYERS
•
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
September 7, 2004
Fred Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Renton Municipal Building
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Memorandum in Support of Appeal
LUA 02-040
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
Attached is our legal memorandum in support of the Barbee Mill plat Notice of Appeal of
the Mitigation Document, which was filed on August 30, 2004. We understand from your letter
that there will be a single consolidated hearing with the preliminary plat itself. We are
submitting the legal memorandum now so it is within the original appeal period of September 7,
2004.
We have requested staff to set the consolidated appeal - plat hearing as soon as possible.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Thomas A. Goeltz
TAG/sew
Enc.
SEA 1545078v1 26266-4
Seattle
Fred Kaufman
September 7, 2004
Page 2
cc: Alex and Norma Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Crissa Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Jennifer Henning, City of Renton
Neil Watts, City of Renton
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Steven Wood, Century Pacific
Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific
Gregg Zimmerman, City of Renton
Matt Hough, Otak
SEA 1545078v1 26266-4
Seattle
1
2
3
4
5 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
6 FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
7 BARBEE MILL COMPANY, )
) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
8 Appellant, ) OF APPEAL OF BARBEE PLAT
MITIGATION DOCUMENT AND
9 V. ) FINAL EIS—LUA 02-040, EIS, PP,
CITY OF RENTON, ) SA-H, SM
10 )
11 Respondent. )
)
12 )
13 I. DECISION AND CONDITIONS APPEALED
14
In May, 2002, Barbee Mill Company ("Barbee") filed a Preliminary Plat application for
15
the property located on the eastern shores of Lake Washington at 4101 Lake Washington
16
17 Boulevard North, in Renton ("Plat"). The Plat proposes 112 lots for attached residential units
18 as authorized under the existing COR-2 zoning for the site.
19 On August 16, 2004, the City of Renton ("City") issued the Barbee Mill Preliminary
20 Plat Mitigation Document ("Decision") based on the Final EIS that sets forth mitigation
21 measures that the City deemed necessary to address impacts of the Plat. Barbee, pursuant to
22
WAC 197-11-660 and RMC 4-8-110.e.4(a)(iii), appealed the Decision on August 30, 2004 with
23
respect to the following conditions as discussed below: B3; B5, B6, D4; D6; D11; D12; D14-
24
25 16; E3, E5, G2; H2; 11-4; and K3. This Memorandum sets forth Barbee's legal and factual
26 arguments in support of the proposed revisions to those conditions. For convenience, we attach
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 1
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 again Barbee's proposed changes to the Summary Table of Mitigation Measures, which were
2 also attached to the Notice of Appeal.
3 II. CONSOLIDATED HEARING
4 Barbee requests that the conditions appealed herein be considered by the Hearing
5 Examiner in a consolidated open-record hearing on the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. Pursuant
6 to RCW 36.70B.050, RCW 36.70B.060, WAC 197-11-680(3), RMC 4-8-110(C)(8), and RMC
7
4-9-070(0), Barbee's appeal of the Decision must be conducted as a single, consolidated open-
8
record hearing with the underlying governmental action.
9
10 III. PARTIES TO APPEAL
11 1. Identification of Appellant.
12 Barbee Mill Company
Attn: Thomas A. Goeltz
13 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2600
14 Seattle, WA 98101-1688
Telephone: 206-622-3150
15 Facsimile: 206-628-7699
16 2. Identification of Respondent:
17 City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works—Development Planning
18 1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
19
20 IV. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
21 1. Revise Condition B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the
22 floodway or-flood-plain to avoid restriction of flows during regulatory flood
events.
23 The project offers mitigation by replacing 2 bridges over May Creek with a new single
24
bridge. In addition, Barbee agrees that the new bridge should span the floodway since that by
25
definition will have moving water at times of flooding. However, the requirement to locate the
26
27 entire bridge outside the "floodplain" is unauthorized and unreasonable.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—2
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 By definition, the "floodway" is the channel of moving water that carries the base flood.
2 RMC 4-11-060. In contrast, the "floodplain,"which lies outside of the boundaries of the
3 floodway, has only standing water during a flood event so that the bridge pilings would not
4 impede water flow. The City states that such measure, in combination with the construction of
5 levees, fill and other measures, is necessary to protect the development from flooding.
6
Decision, pp. 7-8. Condition B3, however, is invalid for at least three reasons.
7
1.1 The City Fails to Identify Any Specific, Adopted SEPA Policy.
8
The Decision fails to refer to a specific, adopted policy that justifies the "floodplain"
9
10 portion of Condition B3, and Barbee is unable to find support for Condition B3 within the
11 lengthy portions of the Renton Municipal Code ("RMC" or"Code") cited in the Decision.
12 Consequently, the "floodplain"portion of Condition B3 is not authorized under SEPA.
13 WAC 197-11-660(1)(a)-(b) mandates:
14
Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies,plans,
15 vallv rules or regulations formally designated by the agency ...as a
basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when
16 the DNS or DEIS is issued.....The decision maker shall cite the
17 agency SEPA policy that is the basis of any condition or denial
under this chapter. (emphasis added).
18
"These requirements prevent after-the-fact rationalization for conditions based merely on
19
ttighborhood opposition." Western Homes v. Issaquah, 90 Wn.App. 1029, 1998 WL184900,
20
at *8 (unpublished 1998).
21
22 The Decision's stated bases for imposing Condition B3 are: "City of Renton
23 Environmental Review(RMC 4-9-070); 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual;
24 ` 01 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual." See Decision, p. 11. This is far too general
25 to meet the SEPA requirement. While neither the courts nor the legislature have clearly
26
defined the specificity required in citing policies to support substantive mitigation conditions
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 3
A 1542616v1 26266-4
1 under SEPA, it is evident that the City must specifically direct the applicant and the public to a
2 specific policy or goal within such documents which provides authority for the condition. The
3 policy must be specific enough to provide guidance to staff, rather than ad hoc or unfettered
4 conditioning. See, e.g., Cougar Mountain Assoc. v. King County, 111 Wn.2d 742, 752-53, 765
5 P.2d 264 (1988) (invalidating City denial because, among other things, "the Council failed to
6
describe the specific SEPA policies with which Cougar Mountain's application conflicted.");
7
Levine v. Jefferson County, 116 Wn.2d 575, 578, 806 P.2d 363 (1991) (Court of Appeals
8
properly ordered permit issued without mitigative restrictions where County failed to identify
10 policies supporting the conditions); Victoria Tower Partnership v. Seattle, 49 Wn.App. 755,
11 758-62, 745 P.2d 1328 (1987) (reference to Seattle Comprehensive Plan, Seattle Zoning Code,
12 and Seattle 2000 Goals and Subgoals was insufficient identification of policies supporting 8-
13 story height limitation); Western Homes, 1998 WL 184900, at *8 (city's attempt to impose
14
,conditions to address view impacts was invalid where City failed to point to a specific subarea
15
goal or policy with regard to views).1
16
17 In Western Homes, for example, the City stated in a"conclusory manner" that view
18 impacts must be mitigated. 1998 WL 184900, at *8. Nothing in the record, however, indicated
19 4Jiat there was any specific subarea goal or underlying policy with regard to views other than an
20 attempt to use "aesthetics" as stated in one section of the DEIS. The Court of Appeals
21
invalidated the City's attempt to condition the project based upon aesthetics where "view
22
mitigation" was not indicated as part of the adopted city policies. Id.
23
24
25 1 The Renton Municipal Code adopts by reference the policies in a number of City codes and
ordinances that may serve as bases for the City's exercise of substantive SEPA authority. See
26 RMC 4-9-070(0)(1)-(2). Barbee does not object to the City's incorporation of such documents
and policies by reference as authority for imposing SEPA mitigation. What Barbee objects to
27 is the failure to cite a specific policy justifying the specific SEPA condition.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—4
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
`,"t Similarly, in Levine, the Court invalidated the imposition of SEPA conditions where the
1
2 City failed to identify policies supporting its mitigative conditions and that the policies
3 referenced were not sufficiently specific to support the mitigative conditions. 116 Wn.2d at
4 578. The Court reasoned:
5
[T]here is no evidence in the record that the county considered
6 any identifiable policies in attaching the mitigative
conditions There is no citation in the record to any identifiable
7 agency policy upon which the restrictions were based, and there
is no indication that the county actually considered any such
8 policies.
9 bb at 581-82.
10 The Court reached a similar conclusion in Victoria Tower Partnership, holding that the
11
City's explanation of the policy basis for conditioning its approval of a building permit on a
12
height limit of 8-stories was insufficient where the zoning code authorized the proposed height
13
14 16-stories. The City did not identify in its written decision the specific policies it relied
15 upon, but chose instead to "vaguely refer to a discussion of a handful of these policies." 49
16 Wn.App. at 762. The City has an obligation, under the provisions of SEPA and as a matter of
17 due process, to identify with sufficient particularity the specific policies that provide the basis
18 £or Condition B3, and the City has failed to do so.
19
1.2 Bridges Need Not Span the Floodplain In Order to Mitigate Impacts
20 of the Plat on Surface Water.
21 By law, the City can only impose conditions on Barbee which are necessary to mitigate
22 significant adverse environmental impacts of the Plat, which impacts have been clearly
23
identified in the EIS. RCW 43.21C.060; WAC 197-11-660. The EIS fails to indicate that
24
bridges spanning the entire floodplain are necessary to mitigate any likely, significant adverse
25
26 impacts of the Plat. In fact, the EIS does not discuss at all the impacts of bridge pilings of a
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 5
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 new bridge in the floodplain. Consequently, there is no clear impact upon which to justify
2 Condition B3.
3 Condition B3 suggests that it is necessary that the bridges span the floodway in order to
4 avoid restriction of flows during regulatory flood events. However, it is the floodway and not
5 the floodplain that carries flows. RMC 4-11-060. The"flood plain" is that"land area
6
susceptible to being inundated by stream derived waters with a one percent chance of being
7
equaled or exceeded in any given year." See, e.g., WAC 173-22-030(4) (defining flood plain).
8
9 Bridge pilings will not impede water flow in the floodplain, even in 100-year floods, because
10 the water in the floodplain (as distinguished from the floodway) is not moving. The City has
11 failed to show a legitimate basis for requiring Barbee to construct bridges that span the entire
12 floodplain, rather than just the floodway, and hence the "floodplain"portion of Condition B3 is
13 invalid.
14
1.3 Requiring Bridges That Span the Floodplain Is Unreasonable.
15
Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.060 and WAC 197-11-660(1)(c):
16
Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being
17 accomplished.
18 'Barbee has no objection to designing and constructing bridges that span the floodway; however,
19
requiring the bridges to span the floodplain is unreasonable. It is not clear whether a bridge
20
spanning the floodplain could even be built without"mid-span" supports that would be in the
21
22 floodplain. And the cost to build such a long bridge would be unreasonable and not capable of
23 1%ing accomplished with a 112 unit residential project. The City has provided no reasonable
24 basis for requiring bridges to span the entire floodplain, as opposed to just the floodway.
25
26
27 ,
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 6
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 2. Clarify Condition B5 [Flood terrace]. Compensate for flood storage area lost
by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and providing additional
2 storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace excavated on the west either side of the
stream).
3 Barbee previously submitted an illustrative flood terrace proposal which happened to show the
4
terracing occurring on the west side of the stream, but it was illustrative of the technique that can be
5
used on either side of the stream. This preliminary model was completed on the west side to merely
6
show one possible solution. Barbee requests this text change to allow the flexibility at final engineering
7
to utilize the flood terracing on the west, east and/or both sides of May Creek.
8
9 4.11 3. Clarify Condition B6 [100' Corridor]. On the May Creek side,provide a wider
100 foot wide corridor(i.e.,the proposed 50 feet on each side) to provide
10 additional conveyance and flood storage to reduce channel scour and compensate
11 for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment deposited in the stream
channel.
12 Barbee believes this merely a clarification. Namely,this condition should be clarified to refer
13 to the proposed 50 foot wide corridor on each side, and that this condition is not intended to require
14
buffers greater than 50 feet on May Creek, nor is it intended to relate to buffers on Lake Washington.
15
16 4. Delete Condition D4 [Bridge height-width for sunlight and precipitation].
L
^.{.slgll IJIidg .ffic nt h., ght and . idth to allo etratio o f
17
18 42> Condition D4 requires Barbee to design bridges "with sufficient height and width to
19 allow penetration of sunlight and precipitation to maintain vegetation." Such condition is
20
invalid for at least three reasons.
21
4.1 The City Has Failed to Adequately Identify Specific Policies
22 Underlying the Mitigation Condition.
RAO
23 The Decision fails to indicate any specific City policy which allows staff to impose
24
Condition D4. For the same reasons discussed in Section 1.1 above, Condition D4 is unlawful.
25
See discussion,supra, Section 1.1; RCW 43.21C.060; WAC 197-11-660.
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 7
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
o
1 4.2 The Condition Is Not Necessary to Alleviate Significant Adverse
Impacts of the Plat on Plants and Animals.
2 The Decision fails to show that the Plat will significantly and adversely impact
3
vegetation if bridges are not constructed in a manner that allows penetration of sunlight and
4
precipitation. Hence, the City lacks authority to impose the condition under SEPA.
5
6 RCW 43.21C.060; WAC 197-11-660.
7 4.3 The Condition Is Vague and Not Capable of Being Reasonably
Accomplished.
8
Condition D4's requirement of"sufficient height and width" is vague and ambiguous,
9
10 making compliance with, and enforcement of, the condition unreasonable. See RCW
11 43.21C.060 and WAC 197-11-660(1)(c); see also Burien Bark Supply v. King County, 106
12 Wn.2d 868, 871, 725 P.2d 994 (1986) (a regulation that requires the doing of an act in terms so
13 ague that individuals of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ
14 as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law).
15
Property owners are entitled to receive fair notice as to what conduct is proscribed, and
16
to be confident that the law will not be arbitrarily enforced. Haley v. Med. Disciplinary Bd.,
17
18 117 Wn.2d 720, 739-40, 818 P.2d 1062 (1991). Hence, courts have held that such vague
19 standards as "appropriate proportions," "harmonious" colors, avoiding "monotony" in design,
20 and use of"suitable methods and materials" are unduly vague and allow for arbitrary
21 enforcement that violates dueprocess. See, e . Anderson v. CityofIssaquah, 70 Wn.App. 64,
g•. 9 �
22 42'
74-75, 851 P.2d 744 (1993). Condition D4's standard of"sufficient height and width" is
23
precisely the sort of standard invalidated under Anderson.
24
25
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 8
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
• 410
1 5. Delete Condition D6 [Bridge height-width for animals]
2 Condition D6 is invalid for the same reasons as Condition D4. See discussion, supra,
3
Part 4. The City: (1) has failed to cite any specific policy supporting Condition D6, (2) has
4
failed to show that any proposed bridges will significantly and adversely impact wildlife
5
6 movement, and (3)the standards required for construction and design of the bridge are unduly
7 vague and subject to arbitrary enforcement.
8 6. Delete Condition D11 [Removal of Bulkheads or Provide Plantings in Rip-
Rap]. Eithr: a) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditio„s c
910
be .. es�abl;sl....l l..,l ere the lake; sh llow ., ublic lands o
ctio with, . ter bu ldi .,+backs\. O b) Re a bulkheads and
11
gip.
12
The project will provide inherent mitigation by significantly reducing impervious
13
14 surface and significantly increasing vegetation by converting from the existing industrial use to
15 a residential use. Despite these benefits, the Decision improperly attempts to achieve a public
16 benefit, rather than mitigating a project impact, by require Barbee to: (a) remove bulkheads
17 where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established (where the lake is shallow, on public
18 lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks; (b) remove bulkheads and rely on
19
vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with
20
greater building setbacks); or (c) provide plantings in rip-rap. The bulkheads and rip-rap are
21
22 re-existing conditions. The plat does not propose to add to, modify, or do anything else to
23 these existing conditions. Condition D l i is invalid for at least five independent reasons.
24 6.1 The City Has Failed to Adequately Identify Specific Policies
25 Underlying the Mitigation Condition.
26 a, Again, the Decision has failed to adequately identify any specific policies providing a
27 basis for Condition D11. Hence, for the reasons discussed,supra, in Section 1.1, Condition
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 9
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
I •
1 Dl i is unlawful. The Decision's stated bases for imposing Condition Dl 1 are: "City of Renton
2 Environmental Review(RMC 4-9-070); Environmental Regulations (RMC 4-3); and City of
3 Renton Shoreline Master Program Regulations (RMC 4-3-090)." See Decision, p. 28. The
4 Decision does not so much as refer to even a specific section of its Comprehensive Plan,
5 Shoreline Master Program, or Environmental Review provisions when citing a"policy nexus,"
6
much less actually cite a specific policy.
7
fav
6.2 The Decision Has Unlawfully Required "Mitigation" For Pre-
8 Existing Impacts That Are Not Directly Attributable to the Plat.
9 WAC 197-11-660(1)(d) provides:
10 Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be
i 1 imposed upon an applicant only to the extent attributable to the
identified adverse impacts of its proposal. (emphasis added).
12
The City has concluded that the existing bulkheads do not present the City's desired
13
14 environmental condition, but the City has not concluded, and cannot show, that the Plat is the
15 cause of the less than ideal environmental condition that the City attempts to make Barbee
16 mitigate. The plat does not propose to make any changes to the edge of the shoreline. The
17 Decision instead is trying to obtain what it sees as a public benefit at a property owner's
18 expense. The Decision seeks to have Barbee remove or modify bulkheads without any
19
showing of a causal connection between the plat and the removal of bulkheads. Because such
20
ulkheads legally preexist the Plat and their presence and condition are not attributable to any
21
22 extent to the Plat, Condition Dl 1 violates the mandate of WAC 197-11-660(1)(d).
23 6.3 Condition D11 Violates RCW 82.02.020 Because It Is Not
"Reasonably Necessary As A Direct Result"of the Plat.
24
Condition D 11 is not reasonably necessary as a direct result of the Plat and hence such
25
26 condition is unlawful. RCW 82.02.020 prohibits local governments from imposing"any tax,
27 fee, or charge, either direct or indirect" on development unless such tax, fee, or charge is
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 10
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 "reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development or plat." A condition
2 need not involve monetary charges or the dedication of land in order to be subject to RCW
3 82.02.020's prohibition. See, e.g., Isla Verde Intern. Holdings v. Camas, 146 Wn.2d 740, 757-
4 58, 49 P.3d 867 (2002) (plat condition requiring 30% of land be set aside as open space was an
5 in kind indirect tax, fee, or charge for purposes of RCW 82.02.020). Similarly, the fact that a
6
condition is imposed under SEPA does not free the City from complying with the provisions of
7
RCW 82.02.020. See, e.g., Honesty in Environmental Analysis and Legislation (HEAL) v.
8
9 CPSGMHB, 96 Wn.App. 522, 533-34, 979 P.2d 864 (1999).
10 Under RCW 82.02.020, the City bears the burden to show that the conditions are
11 "reasonably necessary" to mitigate the direct impact of the Plat. RCW 82.02.020; Isla Verde,
12 146 Wn.2d at 758; Cobb v. Snohomish County, 64 Wn.App. 451, 459, 829 P.2d 169 (1992).
13 The City must demonstrate that the need for the mitigation arose directly from the Plat. Castle
14
Homes & Dev. v. Brier, 76 Wn.App. 95, 107-08, 882 P.2d 1172 (1994).
15
Here, the Decision provides no evidence that the Plat itself will cause any impacts that
16
17 necessitate removal or modification of the bulkheads. Washington courts have repeatedly held:
18 [D]evelopment conditions must be tied to a specific, identified
impact of a development on a community....RCW 82.02.020
19 does not permit conditions that satisfy a"reasonably necessary"
standard for all new development collectively; it specifically
20 requires that a condition be "reasonably necessary as a direct
21 result of the proposed development or plat.
22 Isla Verde, 146 Wn.2d at 761 (emphasis in original) (citing cases). Hence, in Isla Verde, the
23 court rejected the city's argument that it satisfied its burden under RCW 82.02.020 merely
24 through a legislative determination that there was a need for subdivisions to provide open space
25 as a measure that will mitigate a consequence of subdivision development. Id. In order for a
26
condition to be lawful under RCW 82.02.020, the city must be able to identify a"direct impact"
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 11
SEA 1542616v 1 26266-4
Oa>
1 of the Plat—not a generalized impact of development. Id.; see also, e.g., Vintage Const. Co. v.
2 Bothell, 83 Wn.App. 605, 610-12, 922 P.2d 828, aff'd 135 Wn.2d 833, 959 P.2d 1090 (1996)
3 (fee imposed on basis of city-wide property values and characteristics did not establish site-
4 specific relationship required); United Development Corp. v. Mill Creek, 106 Wn.App. 681,
5 698-99, 26 P.3d 943 (2001) (city could not require developer to make frontage improvements
6
for drainage where development would not effect drainage at adjacent boulevard). The City
7
has failed to identify any impact of the Plat that necessitates the imposition of Condition D 11.
8
9 6.4 The Condition Violates the Constitutional Prohibition on Regulatory
Takings.
10
In addition to being subject to the parameters of RCW 82.02.020, the City's authority to
11
impose substantive conditions under SEPA is bounded by the Takings Clause of the Fifth
12
13 Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment)
14 and the Takings Clause of Article 1, Section 16 of the Washington State Constitution.2
15 Honesty in Environmental Analysis and Legislation ("HEAL") v. CPSGMHB, 96 Wn.App.
16 522, 533, 979 P.2d 864 (1999). While the City may think it a good idea to remove the
17 bulkheads, the City cannot compel Barbee to bear the costs of realizing that goal, no matter
18
how desirable, unless the City can show, at a minimum: (1) a legitimate "public problem or
19
problems that the condition is designed to address;" (2) "that the development for which a
20
21 permit is sought will create or exacerbate the identified public problem;" (3) that the condition
22 "tends to solve, or at least to alleviate, the identified public problem;" and (4) the condition "is
23
2 To determine whether the Washington State Constitution extends broader rights to its citizens than
24 does the United States Constitution, the court considers six criteria. See State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at
V1, 720 P.2d 808 (1986). Based upon a Gunwall analysis, Article 1, Section 16 of the Washington State
25 Constitution extends broader rights to citizens than does the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
See Manufactured Housing Communities of Washington v. State, 142 Wn.2d 347, 356-61, 13 P.3d 183
26 (2000). The State Constitution's eminent domain provision is more restrictive than the Fifth
Amendment's clause and thus State courts may forbid the taking of private property for private use even
27 in cases where the Fifth Amendment may permit such takings. Id. at 360-61.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 12
FA 1542616v1 26266-4
•
1 `roughly proportional' to that part of the problem that is created or exacerbated by the
2 landowner's development." Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505, 523-24, 958 P.2d 343
3 (1998). Failure to satisfy even one of the requirements is fatal. See Dolan v. City of Tigard,
4 512 U.S. 374, 384, 114 S. Ct. 2309, 129 L.Ed.2d 304 (1994); Burton, 91 Wn.App. at 521-24.
5 Here, it is not evident that the existing bulkheads represent a public problem, much less
6
that any such public problem has been caused by the proposed development, i.e the Plat.
7
Absent such showing, Condition Dl i is invalid. Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, 114 S.
8
9 Ct. 2309, 129 L.Ed.2d 304 (1994); see also Luxembourg Group, Inc. v Snohomish County, 76
10 Wn.App. 502, 505-08, 887 P.2d 446 (1995) ("Since the dedication requirement would not
11 remedy any problem caused by the Luxembourg subdivision, the County does not satisfy
12 Nollan's `essential nexus' requirement..."); Benchmark Land Dev. v. Battle Ground, 94
13 Wn.App. 537, 546-47, 972 P.2d 944 (1999), aff'd 146 Wn.2d 685, 695, 49 P.3d 860 (2002)
14
(city cannot require developer to expend money to remediate a preexisting deficiency).
15
The nexus requirement"is consistent with the fundamental purpose of the Takings
16
17 Clause, which is 'to bar [g]overnment from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens
18 which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole,...not to bar
19 government from requiring a developer to deal with problems of the developer's own
20 making,"' Burton, 91 Wn.App. at 522 (citation omitted) (emphasis in original); see also, e.g.,
21
Benchmark Land Company v. City of Battle Ground, 103 Wn.App. 721, 14 P.2d 172 (2000),
22
aff'd 146 Wn.2d 685, 49 P.3d 860 (2002); Luxembourg Group, Inc. v. Snohomish County, 76
23
24 Wn.App. 502, 887 P.2d 446 (1995).
25 For example, in Luxembourg Group Inc. v. Snohomish County, the county conditioned
26 subdivision approval on a developer's dedication of an internal stub street to the southern
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 13
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 property line. Luxembourg, 76 Wn.App. at 505-06. The court held that the dedication would
2 not remedy any problem caused by the Luxembourg subdivision since the need for access was
3 not a result of the proposed subdivision. Id. Consequently, the condition failed the "nexus
4 test." Id.
5 Similarly, in Benchmark, the Court held that a city ordinance requiring developers to
6
make half-street improvements as a condition of plat approval was invalid for failure to satisfy
7
the nexus and rough proportionality tests. 94 Wn.App. at 545-549. The Court reasoned that
8
9 there was no necessary correlation between the extent a development borders a street and the
10 extent to which residents of the development will actually use the street. Id. at 545-46.
11 Furthermore, the Court held that the City had no evidence that the half-street improvements
12 would actually alleviate any traffic problem caused by the Plat. Id. at 549.
13 Here, the City has failed to show a nexus between any impact of the Plat and Condition
14
D 11. The Plat has not created impacts that necessitate removal of the bulkhead.
15
Even if the City could show nexus exists between Condition D 11 and the impacts of the
16
17 Plat, the City"must make some sort of individualized determination that the required
18 dedication is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development."
19 Dolan, 512 U.S. at 391. No evidence indicates that the removal of the bulkheads is roughly
20 proportional to the impacts of the Plat which are sought to be mitigated by such removal. See
21
Isla Verde Holdings, Inc. v. City of Camas, 99 Wn.App. 127, 141, 990 P.2d 429 (1999).
22
6.5 Removal of Bulkheads will change the Ordinary High Water Line.
23
Condition D l i is invalid for the additional reason that it will change the line of
24
25 Ordinary High Water, the impacts of which have never been analyzed in the EIS.
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 14
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
7. Delete Condition D12 [Reduce Sheet Pile Walls and Rip-Rap.] R ,e
1 elevation above OIIWM „f sheet pile. n a t n
v�v♦H.aV as MI✓v.V V11♦1111 Vl J1lVVi 1J 11V ♦I{il1J Rl
2
3 The Decision seeks to condition Plat approval upon Barbee reducing the height of the
4 existing sheet pile wall and rip height. See Condition D12. This condition is invalid for the
5 same four reasons that Condition D l i is invalid: (1) the City has failed to adequately identify
6
specific policies supporting the imposition of Condition D12; (2) the City has unlawfully
7
required mitigation for pre-existing impacts that are not directly attributable to the Plat; (3)
8
Condition D12 violates RCW 82.02.020 because it is not"reasonably necessary as a direct
9
10 result" of the Plat; and (4) Condition D12 amounts to a regulatory taking because the City has
11 shown no nexus between the impacts of the Plat and Condition D12. See discussion above in
12 Section 6.
13 8. Revise Condition D14—Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream-and
14 lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and complex
communities of indigenous vegetation.
15
Revise Condition D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creekd
16 lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from indigenous
vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
17
Condition D16—Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream and lake
18 shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive communities of
19 indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further
from the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high
20 water mark shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as
appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be landscaped as
21 appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
22 Conditions D14- D16 all seek to unlawfully condition Plat approval upon increasing the
23
25-foot Code-required buffers to 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shorelines. Barbee has
24
volunteered to increase the buffers to 50 feet on May Creek. However, Barbee does not agree
25
26 to increased buffers along Lake Washington due to the negative impacts on the waterfront lots.
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 15
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 The City has no authority to increase the buffers beyond the Code without the applicant's
2 voluntary agreement.
3 8.1 The Code Requires a 25-Foot Setbacks.
4 The doctrine of vested rights applies to SEPA ordinances. Victoria Tower Partnership
5 v. Seattle, 49 Wn.App. 755, 760, 745 P.2d 1328 (1987); WAC 197-11-660(1)(a). Here, the Plat
6 meets the Code requirement of a 25-foot setback from Lake Washington. RMC 4-3-090L(14)
7
requires minimum 25 foot setbacks for residential structures. Although the Code speaks of a
8
9 "minimum" of 25 feet, there are no provisions in the Shoreline Master Program, and no City
10 SEPA policies, that authorize the City to increase the buffers beyond that stated in the Code.
11 Since the Plat is vested, the City cannot rely upon ad hoc staff determinations. Neither can the
12 City rely on policies that are pending or have yet to be adopted at the time the Plat application
13 was complete. Id. at 761-62. Although the City has proposed adoption of critical area
14
regulations that would increase minimum buffers, no such regulations have been adopted. The
15
City therefore cannot rely upon such regulations as a basis for requiring greater setbacks. Id. at
16
17 762.
18 8.2 The City Fails to Identify Policies Justifying the Greater Setbacks.
19 The Decision fails to indicate the specific criteria or standards upon which the City
20 relied in requiring the 50 foot buffers instead of the 25 foot setbacks authorized by the Code.
21 As support for the 50 foot buffers, the City cites only general codes:
22
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-080);
23 Environmental Regulations (RMC 4-3); City of Renton Shoreline
Master Program Regulations (RMC 4-3-090).
24
For the reasons described in Section 1.1 above, such general and cursory recitation of entire
25
26 chapters of the Code is insufficient to satisfy the requirements of RCW 43.21 C.060 and WAC
27 197-11-660.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 16
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 8.3 RMC 4-3-090(L)(14) Contains No Ascertainable Standards for
Imposing Higher Buffers.
2 Barbee is not unable to find any policy within the general Code sections cited by the
3
City that established any ascertainable standards for determining when buffers greater than 25
4
feet are required. As a matter of due process, the City must provide clear standards to prevent
5
6 arbitrary enforcement by those charged with administering the City ordinances. See In re
7 LaBelle, 107 Wn.2d 196, 201, 728 P.2d 138 (1986); Burien Bark Supply v. King County, 106
8 Wn.2d 868, 871, 725 P.2d 994 (1986).
9 8.4 The City Has Failed to Show that 50 Foot Buffers Are Reasonably
10 Necessary to Mitigate Impacts of the Plat.
11 For the reasons described in Section 6.3 above, the City's imposition of Condition D14
12 violates RCW 82.02.020. The record does not indicate that 50 foot buffers are reasonably
13 necessary to mitigate impacts directly resulting from the Plat. The City may choose in the
14 future as a legislative matter to increase buffer widths, but staff cannot do that ad hoc without
15
evidence of specific impacts and adopted policies.
16
8.5 Based on the Record, the City has Failed to Establish Requisite
17 Constitutional Nexus and Rough Proportionality Between the Plat
18 Impacts and Condition D14.
19 For the reasons described in Section 6.4 above, the City's imposition of Condition D14
20 violates RCW 82.02.020. The City has failed to show the requisite constitutional nexus
21 between the impacts of the Plat and the need for 50 foot buffers. Furthermore, the City has
22 failed to show that buffers of 50 feet are roughly proportional to the impacts of the Plat. See
23
Honest in Environmental Analysis and Legislation ("HEAL") v. CPSGMHB, 96 Wn.App. 522,
24
533-34, 979 P.2d 864 (1999)(best available science must support need for 50 foot buffers in
25
26 order for rough proportionality standard to be satisfied); see also Isla Verde Holdings, Inc. v.
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 17
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 City of Camas, 99 Wn.App. 127, 141, 990 P.2d 429 (1999) (flat set-aside of 30% is not based
2 on individualized determination of impacts of proposed development).
3 9. Clarify Condition E3 [Traffic Circulation]. A traffic circulation system for
this project that does not preclude access to serve properties west of the railroad to
4 reduce crossings shall be provided.
5 Barbee cannot be required to provide the access for future property development, but rather the
• 6 road system must be directly related to the impacts of the Plat. See discussion in Section 6.3 above.
7 Also,this condition is not based on adopted SEPA policies. See discussion in Section 1.1 above.
8
9 10. Clarify Condition E5 [Roadway Classification and Section Requirements].
The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications
10 provided by the approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system
designed to current public road section standards for residential access streets as
11 described in Chapter 4 of the City of Renton Development Standards..
12 Barbee seeks to correct an improperly vague condition by clarify the meaning of this
13 condition with the proposed text changes. See discussion in Section 4.3.
14
15 11. Delete Condition G2 [Large Vegetation and Additional Setbacks for
Planting Areas.] tiv' e b ild' bulk b^ ed, ea b.
1��rlsrci
16 thro„ h : r dditi^ ^l setbacks f plantin „a
aaaa vu�aa aua Via.i'a.�a.iu cis
change a
ea plantings m be r red
.
17
The language of Condition G2 is ambiguous and confusing, but it appears to require
18
19 Barbee to plant"large vegetation" as "screening," and to provide "[additional setbacks for
20 planting areas." Condition G2 is improper for several reasons.
21 11.1 The City Fails to Identify Policies Justifying Condition G2.
22 For the reasons described in Section 1.1 above, Condition G2 cannot be imposed
23 against Barbee because the City has failed to cite any specific policies justifying the imposition
24
of the condition. RCW 43.21C.060; WAC 197-11-660; discussion in Section 1.1 above.
25
Furthermore, Barbee has been unable to locate any specific policy within the chapters cited by
26
27 the City which policy would justify Condition G2.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 18
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 11.2 The Condition Is Vague and Discretionary.
2 For the reasons discussed in Section 4.3 above, attempted enforcement of Condition G2
3 against Barbee would run afoul of due process.
4 12. Delete Condition H2 Buildi gs shall be d„signed and sit„d to reduce
5 [Eliminate Glass Surfaces on Buildings.]
6 The Decision improperly seeks to condition Plat approval upon Barbee's reduction or
7
elimination of glass surfaces from the homes that will be constructed on the site.
8
12.1 The City Cites No Specific Policy Authority for the Condition.
9
The City cannot impose Condition H2 on the Plat unless the City has adopted and cited
10
11 a specific policy that necessitates or justifies the condition. To our knowledge,the City has no
12 such policy, and hence Condition H2 is invalid for reasons further described in Section 1.1
13 above.
14 12.2 The Condition Is Vague and Contains No Ascertainable Standards.
15 Condition H2 requires Barbee to "eliminate" or"reduce" glass surfaces on the
16
residences that will be constructed in the Plat. Such terms are vague and provide no
17
ascertainable standards with which Barbee can comply. For reasons further described in
18
19 Section 4.3 above, Condition H2 violates due process and the requirement that conditions be
20 reasonable and capable of being accomplished.
21 13. Delete Condition I1 [Noise--Pre-drill piling holes].
22
23 Delete Condition 12 [Noise—Piling installation methods]. 11-fettsible-given
24 >
25
Condition I3 [Noise—Barriers around equipment].
26 ,
27 .
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL— 19
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 13.1 Renton Has Sufficient Existing Regulations for Construction and
Noise.
2 For the purported purpose of mitigating noise impacts that will result from construction,
3
Conditions I1, I2 and 13 require specific pile-driving and other construction techniques. Barbee
4
will comply with the City's construction standards and noise code. RMC 4-4-030C and 8-7.
5
6 There is no indication that Barbee's proposed construction methods will fail to comply with
7 Renton's existing noise regulations, and furthermore there is no evidence that compliance with
8 Renton's noise regulations is insufficient to mitigate potential noise impacts. Hence, the City
9 has no legal justification for imposing Conditions I1 —13.
10
11 WAC 197-11-600(1)(e) states:
12 Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider
whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcement
13 would mitigate an identified significant impact.
14 The same WAC continues:
15 If...the requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and
16 mitigation measures in the GMA county/city's development
regulations or comprehensive plan adopted under chapter
17 36.70A, or in other applicable local, state or federal laws or rules,
provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific
18 adverse environmental impacts of the project action...the GMA
19 county/city shall not impose additional mitigation under [SEPA].
20 WAC 197-11-660(g) (emphasis added). Similarly, pursuant to WAC 365-197-030:
21 SEPA substantive authority should not be used to condition or
deny a permit for those impacts adequately addressed by the
22 applicable development regulations....SEPA substantive
authority should only be used when the impacts cannot be
23 adequately addressed by existing laws.
24 The City has failed to recognize that existing regulations already adequately mitigate
25 construction noise.
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—20
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 13.2 The Decision Fails to Identify Adopted SEPA Policies to
Support Noise and Construction Conditions.
2 Again, the Decision has failed to adequately identifyany specific policies providing a
3
basis for Conditions II through 13. Hence, for the reasons discussed in Section 1.1, these 3
4
conditions are unlawful.
5
6 14. Condition I4 [Rail Crossings]. "
7
a"qu o " for locomotive horns shall-b �e d wi c ra. a
8 eressings.
9 The City in Conditions El and E2, which Barbee is not appealing, already sets out the
10 appropriate conditions for the at-grade crossing of the BNSF railroad tracks. Under those
11 conditions, Barbee will install railroad crossing improvements as required by the WUTC and
12 I
by BNSF. See Conditions El and E2. However,the Decision proposes another condition that
13
would require Barbee to install at-grade rail crossings that might help meet a future federal
14
15 regulation which would then lead to a"sealed" status to qualify for possible Federal Railway
16 Administration (FRA) designation of a"quiet zone" for locomotive horns. The City is
17 improperly seeking to have Barbee do more than meet the WUTC and BNSF requirements.
18 14.1 Regulation of Rail Activity Is Preempted By Federal Law.
19 The City cannot regulate the operation of horns at crossing by public railroads. Hence,
20
the City cannot require Barbee to undertake certain (unknown) improvements at the railroad
21
crossings so that a federal railroad will operate differently. See City of Auburn v. United State,
22
154 F.3d 1025, 1030 (9th Cir. 1998) (federal law preempts city's local environmental review
23
24 laws pertaining to railroad crossings); City of Seattle v. Burlington Northern Railroad Co.. 145
25 Wn.2d 661, 41 P.3d 1169 (2002) (Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995
26 and Federal Rail Safety Act of 1970 unambiguously express clear intent to regulate railroad
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—21
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 operations as a matter of federal law and hence such acts preempt city railroad switching and
2 blocking ordinances). The City has no authority to impose Condition I4, and any authority
3 granted to the City under local ordinances is preempted by federal law. The City Cannot Show
4 that Condition 14 Is Reasonable Necessary as A Result of the Plat.
5 14.2 Condition I4 Is Not "Reasonably Necessary As A Direct Result"of the
6 Plat.
7 For the reasons further described in Section 6.3 above, the City cannot legally condition
8 Plat approval upon conditions that are not reasonably necessary to mitigate direct impacts of
9 the Plat. The City, in violation of RCW 82.02.020, is requiring Barbee to mitigate impacts that
10
the Plat has not created.
11
14.3 The City Is Forcing Barbee to Confer a Public Benefit Rather Than
12 Mitigate a Direct Impact of the Plat.
13 Barbee's Plat will not create any change in the manner in which locomotive horns are
14 sounded. The City has cited absolutely no evidence that impacts of the Plat are directly
15
responsible for the noise impacts that the City is requiring Barbee to mitigate through
16
Condition I4. Through Condition 14, the City is forcing Barbee to confer a public benefit
17
18 which in all fairness must be borne by the public as a whole. For the reasons set forth in
19 Section 6.4 above, Condition I4 constitutes an unconstitutional condition on development.
20 14.4 The City Cites No Policies Authorizing the Condition.
21 The City has not pointed to any specific SEPA policy that justifies or authorizes
22 Condition I4, and hence the City cannot impose the condition upon Barbee. See discussion in
23
Section 1.1 above.
24
25
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—22
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 14.5 The Condition Is Not Reasonable or Capable of Being
Accomplished.
2 The City has authority to impose only mitigation measures that are "reasonable and
3
capable of being accomplished." RCW 43.21C.060; WAC 197-11-660(1)(c). Barbee has no
4
control over the rail operations or decisions of the Federal Railway Administration regarding
5
6 horn operations. The City even acknowledges that Condition I4 is contingent upon a future
7 federal decision. Since there are no existing federal regulations, it would be impossible for
8 Barbee to know what improvements would be required.
9 Any such adoption by the FRA of new"sealed crossing" regulations, and the FRA
10
decision of horn operations, is beyond the reasonable control of Barbee and hence the City
11
cannot impose Condition I4 upon Barbee. The Decision notes that the improvements required
12
13 by a future FRA decision could range from $200,000 to $1 million. That is an unreasonable
14 burden on a 112 unit plat. The City also fails to show that the physical improvements of a four-
15 quadrant gates, median-divided barrier are capable of being installed at this location even by
16 the railroad itself.
17 15. Revise Condition K3 [Public Access Through Private Development]. Public
18 visual and p ysical access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May
Creek shall be provided and incorporated into the preliminary plat.The-applieaM
19
publie-aeeessT As shown on the applicant's "Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space
20 Plan"dated August 3,2004,the system will may include a soft surface trail along
May Creek,sidewalks,and two(2)public an open space tracts adjacent to Lake
21 Washington with one at the May Creek delta and one at the northern part of the
plat,
22
As a condition of Plat approval, the City has required Barbee to provide public access to
23
24 the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek. Condition K3 further states: "The
25 applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to determine the location and design of the
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—23
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
•
1 public access. The system may include a soft surface trail along May Creek, sidewalk, and an
2 open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington."
3 Barbee has submitted voluntarily a public access plan which includes a soft surface trail
4 along May Creek, sidewalks, and two (2) public open space tracts adjacent to Lake
5 Washington, with one at the May Creek delta and one at the northern part of the plat. See
6
Barbee's "Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space Plan" dated August 3, 2004. Barbee requests that
7
Condition K3 be revised to state that this Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space Plan satisfies this
8
9 condition for public access. Barbee objects to the portion of the condition that leaves a public
10 access decision to staff for future determination without guidance or adopted policies.
11 Barbee has volunteered to provide public access as set out in the Pedestrian
12 Circulation/Open Space Plan, even though Barbee believes a public access requirement for this
13 Plat is unauthorized without such a voluntary agreement. Any attempt to require public access
14
would be an improper attempt to obtain a public easement over private property, and to obtain a
15
public benefit rather than mitigating any impacts.
16
17 The Decision and the EIS discussed, among a range of options, the possibility of
18 requiring a public trail through the front yards of the Plat along Lake Washington (Decision at
19 pg 19), although this public trail requirement is not expressly included in Condition K3. But
20 Condition K3 is vague about what staff might seek in the future. Any City effort to mandate a public
21
trail along Lake Washington, in the front yard setbacks from Lake Washington, is patently illegal for the
22
reasons set forth below.
23
15.1 The City Has Not Shown that Public Access Is Necessary to Mitigate
24 Direct Impacts of the Plat.
25 Pursuant to RCW 82.02.020, the City cannot condition approval of the Plat upon the
26 dedication of land or an easement within the proposed development or plat unless the City can
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—24
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 demonstrate that such condition is "reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed
2 development or plat to which the dedication or easement is to apply." This statutory
3 prohibition extends more broadly to development conditions in general. Hence local
4 governments cannot impose conditions upon development unless such conditions are
5 reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development. See Isla Verde, 146
6
Wn.2d at 756-57; discussion, supra, Part 6.3.
7
Any City requirement to grant a public access way through Barbee's private property
8
9 (beyond that volunteered by Barbee) is improper since no such public access exists prior to the
10 Plat and none will be impeded by the proposed Plat. The city can provide absolutely no
11 evidence that Barbee's Plat is creating impacts that necessitate provision of public access
12 through and along Barbee's private property. For reasons further described in Section 6.3
13 above, Condition K3 violates RCW 82.02.020 to the extent it would go beyond Barbee's
14
volunteered access plan. See also, e.g., Nollan, 483 U.S. at 837-38; Dolan, 512 U.S. at 384;
15
Isla Verde, 146 Wn.2d at 757-58.
16
17 15.2 The Public Access Requirement Constitutes a Regulatory Taking.
18 For reasons further described in Sections 6.4 above, a mandatory public trail or other
19 public access under Condition K3 (other than volunteered by Barbee) amounts to a regulatory
20 taking in violation of constitutional limits on development conditions. The City cannot impose
21 a condition upon a plat unless it shows that such condition is necessary to alleviate an impact
22
directly caused by the plat. Specifically,there must be some nexus between the impacts of the
23
proposed development and the condition imposed. See Section 6.4 above. Furthermore, the
24
25 City "must make some sort of individualized determination that the required dedication is
26 related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development." Dolan, 512 U.S.
27 at 391; Section 6.4 above.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—25
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 In the landmark case dealing with unconstitutional development conditions, the U.S.
2 Supreme Court rejected a development condition that required the property owner to dedicate
3 an easement that would have improved public access to the beach. Nollan, 483 U.S. at 837-38.
4 Applying the "nexus"test, the Court rejected the condition even though the locality's staff
5 report said improved public access to the beach was necessary. Id. at 841-42. The Court
6
concluded that Nollan's project(replacing a bungalow with a new house) would not make the
7
identified public problem—lack of public beach access—any worse than it was prior to
8
9 Nollan's development. Id.
10 The Court reached a similar holding in Dolan v. City of Tigard. In Dolan,the Court
11 rejected Tigard's exaction of a floodplain easement that would have enhanced the public's
12 recreational opportunities. Although recreational opportunities were needed, Dolan's project
13 (expansion of a retail outlet) did not cause the problem (lack of public recreational
14
opportunities) and would not have made the identified public problem any worse than it was
15
prior to Dolan's development. 512 U.S. at 386-96. Succinctly stated: the government may not
16
17 use the permitting process as a vehicle for solving public problems that the proposed project
18 does not create. See Nollan, 483 U.S. at 841-42; Dolan, 512 U.S. at 386-96.
19 The City has not and cannot show that the Plat will exacerbate any existing'deficiency
20 in public access to the shoreline. The Barbee property is already private and nothing about the
21
Plat makes public access more difficult or necessary. All residents of the Plat will have access,
22
and there is no basis for the City to require Barbee to open up its private property to the public.
23
24 The government cannot force some people alone to bear public burdens that should be borne by
25 the public as a whole. Burton, 91 Wn.App at 523-34. While providing public access through a
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—26
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 walkway, greenbelt or otherwise is a laudable goal, Barbee is not responsible for bearing the
2 cost of meeting such goal:
3 A strong public desire to improve the public condition [will not]
warrant achieving the desire by a shorter cut than the
4 constitutional way of paying for the change.
5 Id(citation omitted). Condition K3 is unconstitutional to the extent it would
6 require public access beyond that volunteered by Barbee.
7
8 15.3 The Public Access Requirement Is Unduly Vague.
9 Condition K3 requires Barbee to provide "public access"to the shoreline, but it
10 provides no indication of the standards for such public access. It is unclear whether the City is
11
requiring a public trail along the entire Plat waterfront, a narrow strip of access to a portion of
12
the shoreline or something else. For the reasons described in Section 4.3 above, such condition
13
14 therefore is unduly vague and incapable of being accomplished.
15 15.4 The Public Access Requirement Is Unnecessary.
16 Barbee has voluntarily agreed to provide public access along the shoreline of Lake
17 Washington and May Creek as shown in Barbee's "Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space Plan"
18 dated August 3, 2004. Such voluntary mitigation makes the Plat consistent with the policies
19
and goals of the Shoreline Master Program and makes any further access measures
20
unnecessary. See WAC 365-197-030 (SEPA substantive authority should not be used for
21
impacts adequately addressed by applicable development regulations); WAC 197-11-660(1)(b)
22
23 (mitigation shall be related only to specific adverse environmental impacts of the
24 development).
25
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—27
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
1 V. REQUESTED RELIEF
2 Appellant requests that the Examiner, in a consolidated hearing with that for the Plat,
3 invalidate or modify as necessary the following conditions as set forth in the attached"markup"
4 of the Summary Table of Mitigation Measures.
5 DATED this 7 'day of September, 2004
6
7 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Attorneys for Appellant Barbee Mill Company
8
9
10 By
Thomas A. Goeltz, WSBA#5157
11 Traci Shallbetter, WSBA #29712
12 Attachment: Proposed Revisions to
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF APPEAL—28
SEA 1542616v1 26266-4
ATTACHMENT A
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing,
grading and site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized; OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed; OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading; OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B 1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality
facilities designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot
above base flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway er— leedplain to avoid
restriction of flows during regulatory flood events. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Spanning
the floodway is a reasonable mitigation measure, but the requirement to locate the entire
bridge outside the `floodway" is unreasonable. By definition, the `floodway" is the
channel of moving water that carries the base flood. In contrast, the `floodplain" has
only standing water so that the bridge pilings would not impede water flow. Spanning
the floodplain is a costly and unnecessary mitigation measure in light of the other
mitigation measures to which the Cugini family is agreeing.]
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4, or
B5, or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing
stream channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill
outside of the established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any
necessary stream / buffer improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time
of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space
corridor and providing additional storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace excavated on the
west either side of the stream). [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The flood terrace proposal
previously submitted to the city did show the terracing occurring on the west side of the
stream which was illustrative of the technique on either side of the stream. This
preliminary model was completed on the west side to merely show one possible solution.
It seems that both the city and the Cuginis would like the flexibility at final engineering to
utilize the flood terracing on the west, east and/or both sides of May Creek.]
B6. On the May Creek side provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor(i.e.,the proposed 50 feet
on each side)to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to reduce channel scour
and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment deposited in
the stream channel. [BASIS OF OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE: We
expect that this is merely a clarification. Namely, that this condition refers to th e
proposed 50 foot wide corridor on each side and that this is not intended to require
buffers greater than 50 feet on May Creek, nor is it intended to relate to buffers on Lake
Washington.]
C. Groundwater
Cl. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as
outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000
and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act
cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and
perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics
Control Act cleanup standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D l. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance
during construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas
away from buffer areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with
native species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part
of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. Design bridges with sufficient height and width to allow penetration of sunlight and
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary
and hence unreasonable mitigation condition. Further, the condition is unclear and
unfair since the city has not defined "sufficient height and width" and is leaving this
open to future interpretation.]
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary
landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
D6. Design bridges with sufficient height and width to provide for animal movement.
[BASIS,OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary and hence unreasonable mitigation
condition. Further, the condition is unclear and unfair since the city has not defined
"sufficient height and width"and is leaving this open to future interpretation.]
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides,
or herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal
to place development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the
existing buffer vegetation.
DI 1. Either: a) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re established
(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building
is oaau hallo• ov'r' bl tan ction with gr uter building setbacks); OR c)
vv'w�-
Provide plantings in rip rap. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessarily and
hence unreasonable mitigation measure. This requirement provides no direct mitigation
to the impacts of the proposed development.]
D12.
shoreline planting [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-
shore habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive and complex communities of indigenous vegetation. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION: The Cugini family is vested to the city's code in effect at the date of
application, which states a 25-foot buffer. The Cuginis have provided twice the buffer
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 2
Seattle
requirement on May Creek and in light of the additional significant mitigation measures
to which the family has agreed, the Cuginis do not believe the city has a factual or legal
justification for taking an additional 25 feet from the lakeshore.]
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment
of mature canopy from indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept
light and glare. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow
public access further from the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary
high water mark shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The
remaining fifteen (15)feet may be landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior]
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance
from near-shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage,
AND THEN; c) Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light
penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents
such as the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
E1. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing
locations with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with warning devices
automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC. Further,
the city and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system for this project that does not preclude access to serve
properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be provided. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY: The Cuginis cannot be required to provide access for
future property development, but rather the road system must be directly related to the
impacts of the Cuginis'plat]
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each
new average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications
provided by the approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed
to current public road section standards for residential access streets as described in
Chapter 4 of the City of Renton Development Standards. [BASIS OF OBJECTION—TO
CLARIFY: We are trying to further define what is intended.]
F. Hazardous Materials
F1. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial
Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan
that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F2. The applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil
remediation is complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to
achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall
Terminals through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with
requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act.
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 3
Seattle
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
GI. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color,
including sloping roofs, roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building
offsets.
G2. Ael.,ti. e buildingbulk�„ bo edu ed b- g th gh 1, a ..tti Addit' t
n
setbacks for planting areas and a change in proposed plantings may be required. [BASIS
OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply with the existing bulk standards applicable to
the COR zone. We are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies which just or
authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-11-660(1) (a). This condition is vague
and unclear as to when and how such design review would be implemented.
H. Light and Glare
HI. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. Buildings shall be designed and sited to reduce or el-im-i+iate glass surfaces that might
prefluee-glure-frern-SUri-refleetien. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply
with the existing standards applicable to the COR zone. We are not aware of any
adopted SEPA policies which just or authorize this condition, as required by WAC
197-11-660(1) (a). This condition is vague and unclear as to when and how such design
review would be implemented.
I. Noise
I1. The pile holes shall be pre drilled to the maximum feasible depth (depth may be limited
by the character of deposits). [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply with
the existing noise code To the extent this condition seeks to go beyond the adopted noise
code standards, we are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies which just or
authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-11-660(1) (a).
12. If f asible en soil c dition ilell.,t• ib t•
piles into place, cassion type piles, auger cast piles or other methods shall be used.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
I3. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines,
steadytackground--neise-levels-shalll bbe provided--BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as
prior].
14. At grade rail crossings that meet a"sealed" status to qualify for possible Federal Railway
Ad is tion (FRA) desi o. r " f t 1, ll 1.
on—vr-cr— e��6i�v—roi�vE6mvti'b�-Iiern�-�rxcn-,—ve
provided with public railroad crossings. BASIS OF OBJECTION: This condition seeks
to cause a future federal decision that is beyond the reasonable control of the Cuginis.
Mitigation measures must be reasonable and capable of being accomplished, as required
by WAC 197-11-660(1)(c). Further, we are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies
which just or authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-11-660(1)(a).]
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the
lumber economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.
The design and location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior
to recording of the final plat.
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 4
Seattle
. j
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and
the Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to
the recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior
to the recording of the final plat.
K3. Public yisual and physical access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May
Creek shall be provided and incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall
work with City of Renton staff to determine the location and design of the public access.
As shown on the applicant's "Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space Plan" dated August 3,
2004, the system will may include a soft surface trail along May Creek, sidewalks, and
two (2) public an open space tracts adjacent to Lake Washington with one at the May
Creek delta and one at the northern part of the plat [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The first
proposed insert is language expressly from the city's code. RMC 4-3-090(J)(5)(b). The
second insert is to confirm the applicant's submitted Circulation and Open Space Plan
complies with the Shoreline Master Program regulations and this condition.
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 5
Seattle
CIT' . OF RENTON
.aLL Hearing Examiner
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Fled J.Kaufman
August 31,2004
Thomas A. Goeltz •
Davis, Wright,Tremaine,LLP
2600 Century Square
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101-1688
Re: Notice of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document
Barbee Mill Co.—LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Goeltz:
This office is in receipt of your letter dated August 30, and hereby notifies you that the appeal will
be heard at the same time as the open record hearing on the preliminary plat and site plan at a
time and date to be determined.
If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing.
Sincerely,
---r--.÷..j''''''' f)(._
()---
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner •
City of Renton
FK/nt
cc: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman,Plan/Bldg/Public Works
Neil Watts, Development Services
Jennifer Henning, Development Services
Susan Fiala, Development Services
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6515 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
J,.
+� LAWYERS
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
CITY OF RENTON
ON
August 30, 2004
AUG 302004
RECEIVED
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
2 : 29p►l rUN
Mr. Fred J. Kaufman
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Renton Municipal Building
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Notice of Appeal of Final EIS and Mitigation Document
Barbee Mill Co. - LUA 02-040; EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Mr. Kaufman:
The applicant Barbee Mill Company respectfully appeals the issuance of the Mitigation
Document, and the related final EIS, in the above matter. The City of Renton issued the
Mitigation Document on August 16, 2004, with a notice of the right to appeal. Barbee is
appealing now to protect its rights, but expects that this appeal will be heard by the Hearing
Examiner at the same time as the open record hearing on the preliminary plat and site plan. State
law and Renton's code require that there be a single, consolidated open-record hearing with the
underlying governmental action. RCW 36.70B.050,RCW 36.70B.060, WAC 197-11-680(3),
RMC 4-8-110(C)(8), and RMC 4-9-070(0).
Barbee Mill's specific objections of fact and law are set forth in the attached"Summary
Table of Mitigation Measures." This attachment takes the ERC's Summary Table and shows
Barbee Mill's objections and the proposed changes to the specific conditions being appealed.
Barbee Mill's proposed inserts are shown with underlined text and proposed deletions are shown
with strut. The basis of the objection is set forth in italics at the end of each proposed
change. Barbee Mill will submit a memorandum with further arguments and discussions prior to
the stated appeal deadline of September 7, 2004. Consequently, we are providing this Notice of
Appeal within 14 days of the decision, and our full arguments will be submitted within the 20
days specified in the August 16, 2004 Notice submitted by the City.
SEA 1542494v1 26266-4
Seattle
• I
August 30, 2004
Page 2
A filing fee of$75 is enclosed.
Respectfully submitted,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
diX--"cfn
Thomas A. Go:.
TAG/sew
Attachment
cc: Alex and Norma Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Crissa Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Jennifer Henning, City of Renton
Neil Watts, City of Renton
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Steven Wood, Century Pacific
Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific
Gregg Zimmerman, City of Renton
Matt Hough, Otak
SEA 1542494v1 26266-4
Seattle
-
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing,
grading and site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized; OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed; OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading; OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B 1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality
facilities designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot
above base flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway er—€leedplain to avoid
restriction of flows during regulatory flood events. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Spanning
the floodway is a reasonable mitigation measure, but the requirement to locate the entire
bridge outside the `floodway" is unreasonable. By definition, the `floodway" is the
channel of moving water that carries the base flood In contrast, the `floodplain" has
only standing water so that the bridge pilings would not impede water flow. Spanning
the floodplain is a costly and unnecessary mitigation measure in light of the other
mitigation measures to which the Cugini family is agreeing.]
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4, or
B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing
stream channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill
outside of the established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any
necessary stream/buffer improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time
of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space
corridor and providing additional storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace excavated on the
west either side of the stream). [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The flood terrace proposal
previously submitted to the city did show the terracing occurring on the west side of the
stream which was illustrative of the technique on either side of the stream. This
preliminary model was completed on the west side to merely show one possible solution.
It seems that both the city and the Cuginis would like the flexibility at final engineering to
utilize the flood terracing on the west, east and/or both sides of May Creek.]
B6. On the May Creek side provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor(i.e.,the proposed 50 feet
on each side)to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to reduce channel scour
and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment deposited in
the stream channel. [BASIS OF OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE: We
expect that this is merely a clarification. Namely, that this condition refers to th e
proposed 50 foot wide corridor on each side and that this is not intended to require
buffers greater than 50 feet on May Creek, nor is it intended to relate to buffers on Lake
Washington.]
' s
C. Groundwater
Cl. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as
outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000
and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act
cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and
perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics
Control Act cleanup standards.
D. Plants and Animals
Dl. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance
during construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas
away from buffer areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with
native species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part
of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. De brid s v:itl' sufci.t he ht and width to allow tration f ligh+ d
'b'.' •• "b`' ••• •�• vita• vvau[ri-cv-mzvvv-T�cire crurrozz-vr3iiirrr�crr-ui�
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary
and hence unreasonable mitigation condition. Further, the condition is unclear and
unfair since the city has not defined "sufficient height and width" and is leaving this
open to future interpretation.]
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary
landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
D6. Des bridges--with--suffcient-heig'and width to pro ide-fe al exent.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary and hence unreasonable mitigation
condition. Further, the condition is unclear and unfair since the city has not defined
"sufficient height and width"and is leaving this open to future interpretation.]
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides,
or herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal
to place development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the
existing buffer vegetation.
D11.
('i ere- he-lake is s la�-low,o blis ction-with greater v 'lmlding
is shall ow, ;, public lands o nctio„ , ith eater bull.ing . tb L l; O )
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessarily and
hence unreasonable mitigation measure. This requirement provides no direct mitigation
to the impacts of the proposed development.]
D12. Reduce the el v atio n above OI-IW r „f sheet pile .,lls nd + ll t l
�u . uvvvv vir�
shoreline plantings. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-
shore habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creekstream-and-lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive and complex communities of indigenous vegetation. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION: The Cugini family is vested to the city's code in effect at the date of
application, which states a 25-foot buffer. The Cuginis have provided twice the buffer
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 2
Seattle
r /J
requirement on May Creek and in light of the additional significant mitigation measures
to which the family has agreed, the Cuginis do not believe the city has a factual or legal
justification for taking an additional 25 feet from the lakeshore.]
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stfeara-and-flake shoreline to allow establishment
of mature canopy from indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept
light and glare. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream-and-lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow
public access further from the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary
high water mark shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The
remaining fifteen(15)feet may be landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior]
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance
from near-shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage,
AND THEN; c) Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light
penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents
such as the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
E1. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing
locations with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with warning devices
automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC. Further,
the city and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system for this project that does not preclude access to serve
properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be provided. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY: The Cuginis cannot be required to provide access for
future property development, but rather the road system must be directly related to the
impacts of the Cuginis'plat.]
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each
new average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications
provided by the approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed
to current public road section standards for residential access streets as described in
Chapter 4 of the City of Renton Development Standards. [BASIS OF OBJECTION—TO
CLARIFY: We are trying to further define what is intended.]
F. Hazardous Materials
Fl. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial
Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan
that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F2. The applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil
remediation is complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to
achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall
Terminals through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with
requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act.
SEA 1542583v1 26266-4 3
Seattle
f + ' I
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 19th day of January, 2005, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
Parties of Record See Attached
(Signature of Sender): 1CHAR ES ,OKKO
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) NOTARY PUBLIC
SS STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING ) 1 COMMISSION EXPIRES
MARCH 19, 2006
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: /MA
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print): CAA r (212
My appointment expires: . /1.1/pe
Project,Name:  Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project Number:. LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Robert Cugini Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Barbee Mill Company Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100 Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98057 Kirkland, WA 98033 (party of record)
(owner) (contact)
Nancy Denney Greg & Sabra Fawcett, DDS Campbell Mathewson
3818 Lk Washington Blvd N Family Dental Clinic Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98055 PO Box 1029 2140 Century Square
(party of record) Fall City, WA 98024 1501 Fourth Avenue ste: #2140
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98101
(applicant)
Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mgr. Greg Fawcett Tom & Linda Baker
Department of Ecology PO Box 402 1202 N 35th
Northwest Regional Office Fall City, WA 98024 Renton, WA 98056
3190 160th Avenue SE (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98008-5452
(party of record)
Attn: Rich Johnson Attn: Stewart Reinbold Dan Frey
Department of Fish & Wildlife Department of Fish & Wildlife WSDOT
PO Box 1100 PO Box 1100 6431 Corson Avenue
LaConner, WA 98257 LaConner, WA 98257 Seattle, WA 98018
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Wendy Giroux- Clark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes
South County Journal 3711 Lk Washington Blvd N 8606 118th Avenue SE
PO Box 130 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
Tom Goeltz Gloria Brown Gregg Dohn
1501 4th Avenue ste: #2600 1328 N 40th Street Jones & Stokes
Seattle, WA 98101 Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way ste: #E300
(party of record) (party of record) Bellevue, WA 98005
(party of record)
Bruno &Anne Good Kim Browne Bill Dunlap
605 S 194th Street 1003 N 28th Place Triad Associates
Des Moines, WA 98148-2159 Renton, WA 98056 11814-115th Avenue NE
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98034
(party of record)
G. Goodman Dave Enger, TD&E Joyce Kendrich Goodman
3715 Lk Washington Blvd N 2223-112th Avenue NE ste: 3715 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 #101 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Bellevue, WA 98004 (party of record)
(party of record)
Update: 01/19/05 (Page 1 of 5)
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter Bob Fawcett
3815 Lk Washington Blvd N Jones & Stokes 305 Second Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northrup Way Issquah, WA 98027
(party of record) Bellevue,. WA 98005 (party of record)
(party of record)
Edith Hamilton Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish
3714 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Susan Martin James Hanken Marlen Mandt
1101 N 38th Street 999 Third Avenue ste: #3210 1408 N 26th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Patricia Helina Dennis Law S. & Nel Hiemstra
4004 Lk Washington Blvd N 3625 Lk Washington Blvd N 3720 Lk Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Allen Lebowitz Lynn ManoloPoulos Robert Lange
212 Peily Avenue N Davis Wright Tremaine 4017 Park Avenue N
Renton, WA 98055 777 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) #2300 (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004-5149
(party of record)
Marsha Hertel Marcie Maxwell Matt Hough
3836 Lk Washington Blvd N PO Box 2048 Ortak, Inc.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 620 Kirkland Way ste: #100
(party of record) (party of record) Kirkland, WA 98033
(party of record)
Al &Cynthia Leovout Kay McCord Ande Jorgensen
PO Box 1965 2802 Park Avenue N 2411 Garden Court N
Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Torsten Lienau Tim McGrath Mary Kammer
HDR 900 N 34th Street 51 Burnett Avenue S ste: #307
500 108th Avenue NE ste: Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
#1200 (party of record) (party of record)
Bellevue, WA 98004
(party of record)
Update: 01/19/05 (Page 2 of 5)
•
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Terry McMichael Kim Browne, President Kevin Lindahl
4005 Park Avenue N Kennydale Neighborhood 3719 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 Association Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 1211 N. 28th Place (party of record)
Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
Keith Menges Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Cedar Homes 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N ste: #A203
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record)
John & Greta Moulijn Barbara Questad R Lynch
3726 Lake Washington Blvd N King County Wastewater/ 1420 NW Gilman Blvd ste:
Renton, WA 98056 Treatment Division #2268
(party of record) King Street Center Issaquah, WA 98027
201 South Jackson Street ste: (party of record)
#500
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Linda Knowle Dorothy Muller
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Kennydale Realty 51 Burnett Ave S ste: #410
Fisheries Department 1302 N 30th Street Renton, WA 98055
39015 172nd Ave SE Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
Auburn, WA 98092 (party of record)
(party of record)
Misty Kodish Mary Maier, David Nestvold
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: #106 May Creek Steward 6608 117th Avenue SE
Renton, WA 98056 King County DNRP Bellevue, WA 98006
(party of record) 201 S. Jackson Street ste: #600 (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98104
(party of record)
Douglas R. Marsh Michael E. Nicholson Sara Nicoli
1328 N 40th Street City of Newcastle 304 Burnett Ave N ste: #A
Renton, WA 98056 Community Development Director Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 13020 SE 72nd Place (party of record)
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
(party of record)
Don Robertson Neil Thomson D. Sabey
1900 NE 48th Street ste: #R101 PO Box 76 21410 132nd SE
Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Kent, WA 98042
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/19/05 (Page 3 of 5)
•
I r
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Scott Thomson Amy Norris Ramin Pazooki
PO Box 76 1900 NE 48th Street ste: #F202 WSDOT
Mercer Island, WA 98040 Renton, WA 98056 15700 Dayton Ave N
(party of record) (party of record) PO Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133
(party of record)
Rich Schipanski Fritz Timm, PE Virginia Piazza
Blumen Consulting Group City of Newcastle 1119 N 35th Street
600 108th NE ste: #1002 13020 SE 72nd Place Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue, WA 98004 Newcastle, WA 98059 (party of record)
(party of record) (party of record)
Josef Schwab) Beverly Wagner Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin
3921 Meadow Ave N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1120 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #D104 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 (party of record)
(party of record)
Jennifer Scott Rich Wagner Herbert & Diana Postlewait
5021 Ripley Lane N ste: Apt #1 2411 Garden Court N 3805 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Richard Weinman Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham
270 Third Avenue Raedeke Associates 3907 Park Ave N
Kirkland, WA 98033 5711 NE 63rd Street Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) Seattle, WA 98115 (party of record)
(party of record)
Robert West Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Kevin Sloan
3904 Park Ave N 3830 Lake Washington Blvd N Pan Abode Homes
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N
(party of record) (party of record) Renton, WA 98056
(party of record)
Doug Williams Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith
201 South Jackson Street 3724 Lake Washington Blvd N 1004 North 36th Street
MS KSC-NR 0503 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98104-3855 (party of record) (party of record)
(party of record)
John Wilson Dustin Ray Charles Wolfe
1403 3rd Ave ste: #300 8936 132nd Place SE 1111 3rd Ave ste: 3400
Seattle, WA 98105 Newcastle, WA 98057 Seattle, WA 98101
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Update: 01/19/05 (Page 4 of 5)
• -
PARTIES OF RECORD
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA02-040, PP, ECF, EIS, SA-H, SM
Linda Reutimann Bud Worley Wendy & Lois Wywrot
1106 N 38th Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton, WA 98056 ste: #B202 ste: #A104
(party of record) Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record)
Mike Cowles Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling
BNSF Railroad 2108 Camas Ave NE 527 Renton Ave S
Engineering Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055
2454 Occidental Ave S (party of record) (party of record)
Seattle, WA 98135
(party of record)
Gary Young Monica Durkin Cyrus M. McNeely
3115 Mountain View Ave N WA Dept. of Natural Resources 3810 Park Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Aquatics Division Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) 950 Farman Ave N (party of record)
Enumclaw, WA 98022
(party of record)
Cynthia Youngblood Ahmer Nizam Jim Johnson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N Washington Utilities & 3921 115th Ave SE
ste: #A103 Transportation Commission Snohomish, WA 98290
Renton, WA 98056 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive (party of record)
(party of record) SW
Olympia, WA 98504
(party of record)
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko Larry & Cira Reymann
3837 Lake Washington Blvd N 2125 NE 24th Street 1313 N 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
(party of record) (party of record) (party of record)
Eileen Halverson Alex Cugini Steven Wood
16226 Crystal Drive E PO Box 359 Century Pacific, LP
Enumclaw, WA 98022 Renton, WA 98057 2140 Century Square
(party of record) (party of record) 1501 Fourth Ave ste: #2140
Seattle, WA 98101
(party of record)
Dan & Laurie Brewis
2719 Williams Avenue N
Renton, WA 98056-1469
(party of record)
Update: 01/19/05 (Page 5 of 5)
CITY OF RENTON
HEARING EXAMINER
PUBLIC HEARING
• January 25, 2005
AGENDA
•
COMMENCING.AT-9 00 AM, .
COUNCIL.CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL
The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be
heard. Items.will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner.
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-02-040, PP, EIS, SA-H, SM
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Level 2 Site Plan and
Preliminary Plat approvals. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is also required. The
proposal is to subdivide a 23-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867
square feet. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most of which would be
• constructed as 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit structures.
PROJECT NAME: Parklane Court Preliminary Plat
PROJECT NUMBER: . _ _.LUA-04-142, PP, ECF _
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval for a 10-lot
subdivision of a 4.3 acre site vested under the development regulations of Residential Five (R-5)
dwelling units per acre (currently zoned R-4) and designated as Residential Low Density (RLD) on
the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. Access to the site is proposed via a new 42-ft. wide public
road extending east from Lyons Avenue SE that becomes a private access easement. The lots are
proposed to range in size from 7,996 sq. ft. to 9,627 sq. ft. Three non-regulated wetlands and two
regulated wetlands are located within the site. Wetland creation and enhancement and buffer
averaging are proposed for the Category 2 and 3 wetlands.
HEX Agenda 01-25-05.doc
City of Renton
PUBLIC Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
HEARING PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER
A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST:
Public Hearing Date: January 25, 2005
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Owner: Alex Cugini, Barbee Mill Company, PO Box 359, Renton, WA 98057
Applicant/Contact: Century Pacific LP, Steven Wood, 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140, Seattle, WA 98101
Contacts: Otak Inc., Matt Hough, 10230 NE Points Dr. Ste.400, Kirkland,WA 98033
Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific LP, 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140, Seattle, WA 98101
File Number: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM Project Manager: Susan Fiala,AICP
Project Description: The applicant is requesting Hearing Examiner Level 2 Site Plan and Preliminary Plat
approvals. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is also required. The proposal is
to subdivide a 23-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867
square feet. The project would be developed in two phases. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units - most of which would be constructed as 2-unit, 3-unit
and 4-unit structures.
Project Location: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North (between North 40th&44th Streets)
'f • ' J ;' - t
w
m
411171-j-- (74
c. a_ ti. ,' `` CITY Wirak .
` 1 Ko/
r%0 t', / la 1 a
. Fi
8:p art• ,
t
1ItHLI
Ky C D. NI , N'S E V J
rra.
3 &_9Kta A-HING7.N
r i _i
q•� l !IBME ,.LAKE WAS - .1 it 8 -• f" I I* �'g
y �' c 1' te.4 ,6r .s ' , i . .y,-
A7
' '7-4(- ±-' le r tseir E .TS "lAPg 4 i NIM I! I:"'"'•'lir r, Pik '
r w tie anEti ■ 34 � v
I' --.�1• 'A:75 11'■ntil■Psi l•-i'"---,m1,,,ir.4 �i�f 1I /A ' ,7c- 4.iI r FFp,'a i •
•
I
City of Renton P/B/PW Department ' Pr Nary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAY LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 2 of 16
B. EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1. Project file("yellow file")containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other
material pertinent to the review of the project.
Exhibit 2. Overall Preliminary Plat Plan (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 3. Preliminary Plat Plan—North (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 4. Preliminary Plat Plan—South (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 5. Preliminary Landscape Plan—North (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 6. Preliminary Landscape Plan—South (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 7. May Creek Buffer Restoration Section- B (date Jan. 3, 2005)
Exhibit 8. Lake Shoreline Conceptual Landscape Plan.(dated Nov. 23, 2004)
Exhibit 9. Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile- North (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 10. Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile—South (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 11: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading Elevations—North (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 12: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading Elevations—South (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 13: Existing Site and Topography(dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 14: Neighborhood Detail Map (dated Jan. 7, 2005)
Exhibit 15: Zoning Map: Sheet C 4 West(dated 12/28/2004)
Exhibit 16: Summary Table of Mitigation Measures from Mitigation Document
C. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1. Owner of Record: Alex Cugini, Barbee Mill Company, PO Box 359, Renton,WA 98057
2.Zoning Designation: Center Office Residential (COR)
3.Comprehensive Plan Center Office Residential (COR)
Land Use Designation:
4.Existing Site Use: Lumber Mill
5.Neighborhood
Characteristics:
North: Port Quendall site: COR zoning
East: Undeveloped, single family and commercial (Pan Abode); COR, R-8 and R-10
zoning
South: Single Family Residential; R-8 zoning
West: Lake Washington and Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) land
6.Access: Via Lake Washington Blvd. North to two at-grade railroad crossings to a new
internal public street system
7.Site Area: 22.9 acres (997,960 sq. ft.)
8.Project Data: Area Comments
Existing Building Area: N/A All structures to be removed/demolished, except boathouse on new
Lot 95.
New Building Area: N/A No data.
Total Building Area: N/A No data.
HEXrpt_BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pr iPary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 3 of 16
D. HISTORICAUBACKGROUND:
Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date
Annexation N/A 1804 12/08/1959
Comprehensive Plan N/A 4498 02/20/1995
Zoning N/A 4820 12/15/1999
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development LUA 01-173 NA On-hold
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development LUA 01-174 NA On-hold
Barbee Mill Soil Remediation LUA 02-069 NA 09/12/2002
E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE:
1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts
Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts
Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table
Section 4-2-110: Residential Development Standards
2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts
Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations
3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards
Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations
Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations
Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations
Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations
4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards
Section 4-6-060: Street Standards
5. Chapter 7 Subdivision Regulations
Section 4-7-050: General Outline of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment
Procedures
Section 4-7-080: Detailed Procedures for Subdivision
Section 4-7-120: Compatibility with Existing Land Use and Plan-General Requirements and
Minimum Standards
Section 4-7-150: Streets—General Requirements and Minimum Standards
Section 4-7-160: Residential Blocks—General Requirements and Minimum Standards
Section 4-7-170: Residential Lots—General Requirements and Minimum Standards
6. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria
Section 4-9-200: Site Plan Review
7. Chapter 11 Definitions
F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
1. Land Use Element: Center Office Residential objectives and policies; Residential Streets
objectives and policies; Subdivision of Land objectives and policies.
2. Housing Element
3. Environmental Element
H EXrpt_BARB EEm iI l.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pr Pary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP, SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 4 of 16
G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS:
1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND
Project Site — The 23-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard
North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa
Fe Railroad right-of-way along its eastern boundary. The property contains 16 buildings,
some of which are currently utilized for limited lumber operations with the remaining buildings
unused and in disrepair.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning designation,
which is intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and residential activity
in a high quality, master planned development that is integrated with the natural environment.
Stand alone residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required
density of a minimum 5 dwellings units per net acre (du/ac) is satisfied.
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines and is,
therefore, subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. The property is relatively flat with
grades ranging from 0.5% to 4.0% to the west for areas north of May Creek, from 1.0% to
7.0% towards May Creek and Lake Washington on the south side of the creek, and from
7.0%to 35.0-40.0% along the banks of May Creek. The City's Critical Areas Maps designate
the property as containing potential high seismic hazards, steep slopes (15% to 25%) and
flood hazards.
Project Description — The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115
residential lots ranging in size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867 square feet. The project is
proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would include Lots 96-115 located to the
south and east of May Creek and Phase 2 would include Lots 1 through 94 to the north and
west of May Creek. Lot 95 currently contains a boathouse and dock which would remain on
the lot and within the plat. Site infrastructure would be constructed during Phase 1.
The proposed net density would be 6.8 dwelling units per acre after the required deductions
of public rights-of-way, private access easements serving three or more lots and critical
areas.
The shoreline fronting lot lines would extend to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended
for the development of townhouse units - most of which would be constructed as 2-unit, 3-
unit and 4-unit structures. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate units
on each lot.
Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and water quality/open space tracts would be
established with the plat. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline
(within Department of Natural Resources lease land), all buildings would be demolished as
part of the project and lumber operations would be discontinued.
Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement,
which would be dedicated as public right-of-way, from the Lake Washington
Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of the site.
The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the majority of
the project with a 39-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek. Private
streets and shared driveways are also proposed within the plat. A secondary access point is
also provided at the southeast corner of the property as well as a bridge crossing over May
Creek to provide connection to Lake Washington Blvd.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake
Washington shoreline—for which a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would
be maintained with 35 feet of native vegetation and 15 feet of lawn for the majority of the
lakefront lots. In addition, May Creek bisects the property extending southeast through the
site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake Washington. The
HEXrpt BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pn- ,lary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 5 of 16
project would provide a 50 foot buffer on each side of the May Creek ordinary high water
mark and would restore currently impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer
area. All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer area are proposed to be retained.
The project applicant has also identified two category Ill wetlands with associated buffers
within property boundaries — one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of
Street C (aka"northerly wetland")and another at the southern edge of the site near the south
end of Street C (aka"southerly wetland").
Project construction would require extensive grading and excavation activities throughout the
site for the removal of existing asphalt areas and the creation of new building pads,
roadways, and utilities. Preliminary earthwork quantities are estimated at approximately
32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of fill material to be
imported to the site.
The previous mixed use land use proposal on the property, specifically the Barbee Mill Mixed
Use Development Project (file nos. LUA-01-173 and LUA 01-174), has been placed on hold
per the applicant's request.
2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971
as amended) on , 200 the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued a Determination
of Significance (DNS) for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. An Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) was prepared. A 20-day appeal period commenced on May 3, 2004 and
ended on May 24, 2004. No appeals of the adequacy of the Draft or Final EIS were filed. A
mitigation document was issued on August 16, 2004. A 20-day appeal ended on September
7, 2004.An appeal of the Mitigation Document was filed by the applicant on August 30, 2004.
3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES
A summary table of the Mitigation Measures is attached as Exhibit 16.
4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS
Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to
identify and address site plan issues from the proposed development. These comments are
contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into
the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of
the report.
5. CONSISTENCY WITH SITE PLAN CRITERIA
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-200E lists the criteria that the Reviewing Official is asked
to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on a Level II Site
Plan Review application. RMC 4-9-200E.1.k includes, "Special Review Criteria for Center
Office Residential (COR)Zones Only." In reviewing the proposal with respect to the Site Plan
approval criteria set forth in RMC section 4-9-200.E of the Site Plan Regulations, the
following issues have been identified by City Departmental reviewers and Divisional
reviewers:
Pursuant to the Site Plan Regulations, Site Plan review is required for any proposed
development located within the COR zoning designation. The subject site is within the COR-
2 designation applicable to the Port Quendall area.
(a) Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements&policies.
As further discussed under the Preliminary Plat portion of this report, the proposal is in
compliance with the elements and policies established by the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan for the Center Office Residential — 2 (COR-2) designation. Those
policies applicable to the site plan are discussed below.
HEXrpt_BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pr ary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 6 of 16
Land Use Element
Policy LU-124. Primary uses should include complexes of offices or residential
development. The proposal would include all residential development with 115 attached
dwelling units.
Policy LU-126. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the
scale and intensity envisioned for the designation. The proposal would be located on one
parcel and include a single use, that being residential at a density above the minimum of the
underlying zone, COR-2, with a proposed density of 6.8 du/ac.
(b) Conformance with Land Use Regulations.
The project's compliance with the development standards of the COR 2 zone are discussed
in detail under the analysis of the preliminary plat's compliance with the underlying zoning
designation. Further analysis of the pertinent standards related specifically to the proposed
site plan is discussed below.
Landscaping —The COR zone does not have specific requirements for on-site landscaping.
Through the site plan review process, landscaping is a site element that is reviewed. The
applicant is proposing to install street trees along all residential public streets within the site.
The open space/water quality tracts would be landscaped.
The May Creek and Lake Washington buffers are proposed to include 15 feet of managed
landscape are with 35 feet of native vegetation. Several of the plant materials proposed
include: Oregon Ash, Tulip Tree, Hinoki Cypress, and snowberry. The approximate total area
of landscape would be over 5 acres of the site. To ensure that the proposed landscaping is
installed, staff recommends as a condition of approval, landscaping be installed similar to
that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans, dated Jan. 3, 2005, subject to the
approval of the Development Services Project Manager. The landscaping is to be installed
prior to issuance of the certificate of building occupancy or final inspection, as applicable.
All landscaping is required to be fully irrigated. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans are
required to be submitted with the submittal of building permits.
Building Height—The maximum building height permitted in 10 stories and/or 125 feet in the
COR zone. The applicant is proposing that the buildings could be up to 50 feet in height
within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of the shoreline
jurisdiction. These heights are below the maximum allowed and thus in compliance. No
specific building heights were provided during this conceptual site plan review. However the
Draft EIS evaluated heights up to 75 feet.
Building height would be verified at the time of individual building permit review.
Pedestrian Access—The applicant is required to construct public sidewalks along both sides
of all public roads. The five foot wide pedestrian sidewalks 'within the development would
connect to Lake Washington Blvd. Pedestrian access would also be provided to the north
property via the creation of a ten foot wide easement located between new Lots 20 and 21.
Access to the shoreline would be provided via a new trail/walkway through Tract E to the
DNR land. A six foot wide soft surface pedestrian walkway would be provided along the
south side of May Creek and include an interpretative display at the south west end of the
trail.
(c) Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. -
The proposed development of the site is not anticipated to impact adjacent properties and
uses. Potential short-term noise and traffic impacts would result from the initial construction
of the project to adjacent properties. The applicant would be required to comply with existing
code provisions that establish allowed hours of construction activities for projects within 300
feet of residential uses to weekdays between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 p.m.
HEXrpt BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pro. at)/Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25, 2005 Page 7 of 16
Construction activities are not permitted prior to 9:00 am on Saturdays and no work is
permitted on Sundays.
The surrounding properties include: Quendall Terminals to the north; Pan Abode business,
undeveloped land, multi family and single family residences to the east, Lake Washington to
the west and single family residences to the south. The east property line is bounded by the
Burlington Northern railroad.
Once completed, the multi family development would likely result in increased traffic and
noise as typically associated with residential activities. These impacts would not exceed
those contemplated in the adopted of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning
designations for the site.
The EIS evaluated building height, bulk and scale for the proposal development. The EIS
stated that the development would affect the visual environment. Mitigation measures were
imposed on the project requiring that building bulk must be reduced through design
elements, building offsets and planting screens for structures over 35 feet or three stories in
height.
(d) Mitigation'of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site.
The proposal is not expected to adversely impact the site. The site currently contains several
structures related to the lumber mill, which would be removed, and is mostly impervious
surfaces. The additional site landscaping, removal of soil contaminants per DOE approved
cleanup being accomplished under MTCA, and infrastructure improvements would enhance
the site.
The applicant was not required to submit building elevations or floor plans for the Level 2 site
plan review. However, the attached units are proposed to be less in height, ranging from 50
to 70 feet, than the permitted 125 feet of the COR zone. It is anticipated that the heights of
the structures would remain closer to 50 feet or less as the proposed units would be
townhouse style, typically with three levels, maybe four levels with a potential height of 12
feet per level.
Potential impacts from the development of the site to May Creek and Lake Washington will
be mitigated by existing code provisions, as well as the mitigation measures placed on the
project, including but not limited to the buffers/setback, landscaping, erosion control
methods.
Construction activities related to the initial development of the project would be required to
utilize best management practices through code requirements for an approved temporary
erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP).
(e) Conservation of area-wide property values.
The project would re-develop and improve an industrial site along the Lake Washington
shoreline. The proposal is anticipated to increase property ownership in the area and is,
therefore, anticipated to conserve or enhance area-wide property values.
(I) Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation.
As further discussed under the Preliminary Plat criteria, access to the subject site would be
provided by two new at-grade railroad crossings to an internal public street system. The new
streets would have either 39 or 42 foot rights-of-way with 32 feet of pavement with 5-foot
sidewalks.
Construction truck hauling hours are limited to between 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. under the
Development Guidelines Ordinance in order to avoid conflicts with peak hour traffic. The
Traffic Planning Section will review construction-related impacts prior to issuing final
construction permits.
HEXrpt BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Prr ary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25, 2005 Page 8 of 16
(g) Provision of adequate light and air.
The proposed residential buildings are not required to be set back from the property lines.
However, the applicant is proposing a minimum of 5 feet from property lines for a total of ten
feet between structures.
The proposed buildings would be set back from the Lake Washington 50 feet and 50 feet
from May Creek. This distance would lessen any shadows created by the structures and
case on these critical areas.
At the time of the site specific Level 1 site plan review, building elevations would be required
and illustrate the window fenestration.
(h) Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions.
It is anticipated that noise and odor impacts would result from the initial construction of the
site. These short-term impacts would be mitigated by the applicant's construction mitigation
plan. The proposed development would not generate any harmful or unhealthy conditions.
Noise impacts associated with increased traffic and activities resulting from the completed
project would not increase significantly above existing conditions.
The applicant is required as stipulated in the mitigation measures that the contaminated soils
must be removed as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas, sated
June 12, 2000. It is also required that a contamination and hazardous materials contingency
plan be provided.
(i) Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use.
Fire Department and Police staff has indicated existing facilities are adequate to
accommodate the subject proposal, subject to the applicant's payment of the necessary
impact fees. The applicant will be required to pay Fire and Traffic mitigation fees prior to the
recording of the final plat. Please see discussion under preliminary plat on Access.
Adequate sanitary sewer, water service and other utilities would be extended as necessary
for the development of the site.
(I) Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight.
The proposal would redevelop an industrial property that contains several buildings in
disrepair. The development of the site is anticipated to prevent neighborhood deterioration
and blight.
(k) Special Review Criteria for COR Zones.
The plan is consistent with the Planned Action Ordinance:
There is no Planned Action Ordinance applicable to this site.
ii. The plan creates a compact, urban development that includes a compatible
mix of uses where appropriate:
No mix of uses are planned. The entire site would be residential containing
attached dwellings.
iii. The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally
consistent, and harmonious with development on adjacent sites:
There are no building elevations or floor plans at this time. Staff anticipates that the
buildings proposed would be architecturally compatible. This is a Level 2 Site Plan
review. Additional site plan review, Level 1 Site Plan, will be required at the time of a
site specific proposal for the buildings.
iv. The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide adequate
areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site, and/or
to protect existing natural systems:
H E Xrpt_BAR B E E m i l l.d o c
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pr ,,ary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 9 of 16
A passive pedestrian trail is proposed along May Creek. Several open space tracts,
some combined with water quality, are proposed.
v. The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area where applicable:
No view corridors are proposed by the applicant to the shoreline. However, the open
space tract, Tract E, would potentially provide a visual/view corridor to the lake
provided all buildings from the DNR lands are removed.
vi. Public access is provided to water and/or shoreline areas:
The applicant is proposing to provide a pedestrian trail/walkway along May Creek
and a walkway through Tract E, the water quality/open space tract, to the
Department of Natural Resources land. As well, an easement for future connection
to the north property would be provided to allow public access from the public
sidewalk within this site to the north property.
vii. The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area plazas,
prominent architectural features, or other items:
An interpretative panel would be provided within the open space tract at the
southwest end of the May Creek Trail.
viii. The plan assures adequate access to public streets:
The proposed streets internal to the plat/site would be public streets with sidewalks
throughout the site.
ix. The plan accommodates and promotes transit, pedestrian, and other
alternative modes of transportation:
Pedestrian sidewalks would be provided for within the site. The site provides public
roads for vehicular traffic. No other modes of transportation are proposed.
6. CONSISTENCY WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT CRITERIA
Approval of a preliminary plat is based upon several factors. The following preliminary plat
criteria have been established to assist decision-makers in the review of the subdivision:
(a) Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Designation. The subject site is designated
Center Office Residential—2 (COR-2). COR provides for large-scale office, retail and/or multi
family projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporating
significant site amenities and/or gateway features.
The proposed plat is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies:
Land Use Element
Policy LU-124. Primary uses should include complexes of offices or residential
development. The proposal would include all residential development with 115 attached
dwelling units.
Policy LU-126. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the
scale and intensity envisioned for the designation. The proposal would be located on one
parcel and include a single use, that being residential at a density above the minimum of the
underlying zone, COR-2,with a proposed density of 6.8 du/ac.
Housing Element
Policy H-4. Encourage infill development as a means to increase capacity. The addition of
115 dwelling units would increase the City's housing supply, thereby furthering an objective
of the City of Renton.
HEXrpt BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre, iry Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 10 of 16
Environmental Element
Policy EN-6, "Develop land use regulations which establish and enhance setbacks along all
waterways and intermittent stream courses. The purpose of the setbacks would be to retain
an enhancement of the natural vegetation for infiltration, maintenance of wildlife and normal
water temperatures, filtration, and the retardation of run-off and erosion."The site is located
within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of May Creek and Lake Washington. Several
mitigation measures were placed on the project to mitigate impacts including establishment
of a 50 ft creek buffers on each side of the OHWM of May Creek, a 50 ft. wide buffer along
Lake Washington shoreline and erosion controls measures.
(b) Compliance with the Underlying Zoning Designation. The 22.9 - acre site (gross area)
consists of one parcel designated Center Office Residential - 2 (COR-2) on the City of
Renton Zoning Map. The proposed development allows for the future construction of up to
115 lots.Attached dwelling units are proposed within 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit structures.
The site currently contains several structures on the site that are proposed to be demolished
to make way for the development. As a condition of plat approval, staff recommends that
demolition permits be obtained and inspections conducted for the removal of these buildings
prior to recording of the final plat.
Density—When a development does not involve a mix of uses, the minimum allowed density
is 5 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) to a maximum of 25 du/ac. Net density is calculated after
public rights-of-way, private streets serving more than three lots, and critical areas are
deducted from the gross acreage of the site: Public rights-of-way equal 153,331 sq. ft.;
private access easements total 4,898 sq. ft.; May Creek of 30,350 sq. ft.; Lake Washington
equals 66,850 sq.ft.for a total deduction of 255,429 sq.ft.
After the total deduction of 255,429 sq. ft. from the 997,960 gross sq. ft. site (997,960 gross
sq. ft. — 255,429 sq. ft. total deducted area = 742,551 net sq. ft. / 17.1 net acres), the
proposal would arrive at a net density of 6.8 dwelling units per acre (115 units/ 17.1 acres =
6.75 du/ac). The proposed plat complies with density requirements for the COR-2 zoning
designation.
Lot Dimensions — There are no minimum lot sizes or dimensions in the Center Office
Residential zone. The preliminary plat provides the following lot widths which range from
approximately 25 feet to 55 feet and lot depths ranging from 66 to 211 feet. The lot depths of
the lots along Lake Washington include that portion within the 50 foot buffer area and the
lake itself.
The smallest lot would be 1,779 square feet and the largest lot would be 16,867 square feet.
The plat would create 115 residential lots and seven (7)tracts with the following sizes:
Lot/Tract Area (sq.ft.) Proposed Access
1 5,897 Road A
2 3,907 Road A
3 3,924 Road A
4 3,924 Road A
5 3,924 Road A
6 3,924 Road A
7 3,924 Road A
8 3,924 Road A
9 3,924 Road A
10 3,924 Road A
11 3,924 Road A
12 3,924 Road A
13 3,924 Road A
14 3,924 Road A
HEXrpt_BARB E Emill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pn. ,ary Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 11 of 16
Lot/Tract Area (sq.ft.) Proposed Access
15 3,924 Road A
16 3,924 Road A
17 3,924 Road A
18 3,924 Road A
19 3,924 Road A
20 3,924 Road A
21 3,927 Road A
22 4,097 Road A
23 10,153 20 ft. shared drive
24 6,510 20 ft. shared drive
25 6,700 Road A
26 5,480 Road A
27 4,935 Road A
28 4,740 Road A
29 4,796 Road A
30 5,087 Road A
31 6,197 Road A
32 6,519 Road A
33 6,778 Road A
34 6,974 Road A
35 7,107 Road A
36 7,177 Road A
37 7,213 Road A
38 7,363 Road A
39 7,673 Road A
40 8,148 Road A
41 7,639 Road A
42 7,095 Road A
43 7,094 Road A
44 7,187 Private access
45 7,103 Private access
46 6,873 Private access
47 6,349 Private access
48 16,867 Private access
49 3,976 Road A
50 5,274 Road B
51 5,371 Road B
52 3,736 Road B
53 3,697 Road B
54 2,607 Road B
55 2,539 Road B
56 4,319 Road B
57 5,713 Road B
58 4,691 Road B
59 4,449 Road B
60 4724 Road B
61 4,541 Road B
62 3,815 Road B
63 3,681 Road B
64 3,859 Road B
65 5,112 Road B
66 5,072 Road B
67 6,233 20 ft. shared drive
68 6,655 20 ft. shared drive
HEXrpt_BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre 3ry Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 12 of 16
Lot/Tract Area (sq.ft.) Proposed Access
69 6,663 Road A
70 3,384 Road A
71 3,384 Road A
72 3,384 Road A
73 3,384 Road A
74 5,082 Road A
75 5,188 Road A
76 5,205 Road A
77 3,732 Road A
78 5,028 Road A
79 3,732 Road A
80 5,028 Road A
81 3,732 Road A
82 5,028 Road A
83 3,529 Road B
84 3,915 Road B
85 4,427 Road B
86 4,081 Road B
87 5,487 Road B
88 4,333 Road B
89 4,761 Road B
90 3,924 Road B
91 4,315 Road B
92 3,755 Road B
93 4,392 Road B
94 8,076 Road B
95 9,533 Road C
96 3,116 Road C
97 1,993 Road C
98 1,779 Road C
99 2,667 Road C
100 2,587 Road C
101 1,957 Road C
102 1,994 Road C
103 2,397 Road C
104 2,384 Road C
105 1,979 Road C
106 1,986 Road C
107 2,374 Road C
108 2,521 Road C
109 2,241 Road C
110 2,435 Road C
111 3,142 Road C
112 3,296 Road C
113 2,728 Road C
114 2,600 Road C
115 4,457 Road C
HEXrpt_BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre my Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 13 of 16
Tracts Area (sq.ft.) Type
A 139,184 Water Quality
B 49,764 Open Space
C 4,271 Water Quality
D 54,424 Open Space
E 9,687 Open Space
F 8,912 Open Space/Water Quality
G 6,116 Open Space
Setbacks—The COR zone does not require any front, rear or side yard setbacks. However,
the applicant is proposing the following setbacks: Interior side yards (between structures) of
5 feet; front yards of 10 feet and rear yards of 10 feet. The applicant has shown setbacks on
the plat plan to indicate potential building envelopes.
Lot Coverage-The maximum lot coverage for buildings is 65% or 75% if parking is provided
within the building. No building footprints were required for the Level 2 Site Plan Review. The
proposal's compliance with these building standards would be verified prior to the issuance
of individual building permits.
(c) Compliance with Subdivision Regulations.
Lot Arrangement: Side lot lines are to be at right angles to street lines, and each lot must
have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement per the
requirements of the Street Improvement Ordinance.
The side lot lines of the proposed lots are at right angles to street lines. All lots would gain
access to public roadways either directly or via private access easements. Lots 23, 24, 67
and 68 and Lots 43 through 48 are proposed to be accessed with private access easements.
As proposed, lots comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision
Regulations provided the requested modifications are approved.
Lots: The size, shape and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width
requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of
development and use contemplated.
There is no minimum lot size required for the COR — 2 zone. The majority of the lots are
rectangular in shape and oriented to public streets. The proposed lots appear to have
sufficient building area for the development of attached units within 2, 3 or 4 unit structures.
Property Corners at Intersections: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-
of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of 15 feet.
The proposed subdivision would create Lots 50, 51, 56, 57, 74, and 115 to be located at the
intersection of public rights-of-way. All proposed radii would exceed the minimum radius
required and thus would meet code.
(d) Reasonableness of Proposed Boundaries
Access and Street Improvements: Access to the project would be provided via an existing
60-foot wide access easement from the Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane
intersection through the abutting property on the north side of the site. The roadway would
be dedicated as public right-of-way. To ensure this road is dedicated public right-of-way,
staff recommends this dedication as a condition of plat approval. The applicant has
indicated this would be the primary access to the site. This access is labeled as"Street F".A
second access road would be located 950 feet to the south of Street F, along Lake
Washington Blvd. This road is labeled as "Street D". Both of these access roads would
require crossing the BNSF railroad tracks at-grade. Both crossings must comply with the
Washington Transportation and Utilities Commission (WUTC) and BNSF design
requirements.A mitigation measure was placed on the project requiring such approval.
The applicant has requested several modifications from the street standards which have
been reviewed administratively and approved with conditions. The modifications requested
H EXrp t_BAR B E E m i I I.d o c
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre. 3ry Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 14 of 16
included: reduction of the width of Street C's right-of-way to 39 feet with 32 feet of pavement
and sidewalk on one side; reduction of rights-of-way for remaining streets to 42 feet of right-
of-way with five foot wide sidewalks; and to permit one additional lot to utilize the private
access easement serving lots 44 through 48.
Additionally, staff recommends the establishment of a homeowner's association or
maintenance agreement for all common improvements, including but not limited to: utility and
access easements, stormwater facilities and tracts, as a condition of approval.
Topography: The property is relatively flat with grades ranging from 0.5% to 4.0% to the west
for areas north of May Creek, from 1.0% to 7.0% towards May Creek and Lake Washington
on the south side of the creek, and from 7.0%to 35.0-40.0% along the banks of May Creek.
Shoreline: The subject site is bordered by Lake Washington on the west and is bisected by
the lowest reach of May Creek where it flows into the lake. Both are considered shorelines
of the State subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. The project proposes to
generally maintain a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark of the lake shoreline
and would also provide a 50 foot buffer on each side of the May Creek ordinary high water
mark. Current impervious areas would be restored to native vegetation within the buffer
area. All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer are proposed to be retained.
Portions of the site are also located within the 100-year floodplain and the property is
designated on the City's Critical Areas Flood Hazard map.
Within the 50 foot buffer from Lake Washington, the first 35 feet (closest to the shoreline)
would be planted with native vegetation, the remaining 15 feet would be yard. For Lots 42
through 48; the 50 foot buffer is reduced in width, ranging from setbacks of 36 ft. to 47 ft.
The 35 ft. of native plantings is maintained within this area, however the managed
landscaped yard is where the reduction in width occurs. No compensation for this reduction
of width appears to be accounted for along the lake shoreline. To provide for compensation
of the reduction of the width of the setback area, staff recommends as a condition of plat
approval that the applicant provide compensation along the shoreline of Lake Washington by
provision of either common open space or native plantings or other agreed upon
compensation prior to recording of the final plat.
Furthermore, within the required shoreline setback from Lake Washington, the applicant has
provided a conceptual landscape plan illustrating a walkway to the shoreline and
bench/seating area for each lot. It is conceptual, however, to reduce the number of intrusions
into the buffer area, staff recommends as a condition of approval, that one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or per two units, in the event that the structures would contain more
than two units, be allowed along the shoreline. This would potentially reduce the number of
walkways to the shoreline by one-half under the current proposal.
Relationship to Existing Uses:The surrounding developments include:to the south are single
family residences; to the west is Lake Washington and Department of Natural Resources
land (DNR); to the east-across Lake Washington Blvd. is commercial (the Pan Abode
business), single family and multi-family and vacant lands; and to the north is
underdeveloped land within the Port Quendall area (Quendall Terminals and Vulcan Sites).
The proposed attached dwelling units are an outright permitted use in the COR-2 zone and it
is anticipated to be compatible with these existing uses and with the future development of
surrounding properties provided code and mitigation measures are complied with.
(e) Availability and Impact on Public Services(Timeliness)
Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to
furnish services to the proposed development, subject to the applicant's provision of Code
required improvements and fees. (Please see section on Access for further discussion
concerning Fire Prevention). The Environmental Review Committee imposed a Fire
Mitigation Fee in order to mitigate the project's potential impacts to emergency services.
HEXrpt_BARBEEmill.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre ry Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT _., LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25,2005 Page 15 of 16
Recreation: The proposal does not provide on-site recreation areas for future residents of
the proposed plat. However, the applicant is proposing a pedestrian pathway through
proposed Tract E to access the DNR land and Lake Washington Shoreline. Also, to address
an imposed mitigation measure, a soft-surface trail along May Creek is proposed to be
constructed. To the south of the site, approximately one mile, is the northern portion of Gene
Coulon Park. It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate additional users
of existing City park and recreational facilities and programs. As required by the
Environmental Review Committee, a Parks Mitigation Fee will be required prior to the
recording of the final plat.
Schools: The site is located within the boundaries of the Renton School District No. 403.
Based on the student generation factor, the proposed plat would potentially result in 51
additional students (0.44 x 115 = 50.6 rounded to 51). The schools would include:
Kennydale Elementary, McKnight Middle School and Renton High School.
Storm Drainage/Surface Water: The. proposal includes three water quality ponds within
Tracts D, E, and F. The Environmental Impact Statement included an extensive review of
surface water resources whereupon several mitigation measures were placed on the project
to address these impacts.
Water and Sanitary Sewer Utilities: The proposed development is within the City of Renton
water service area. New watermain extensions are required within a "looped" system to
serve the site and provide for fire flow. The City may require the provision of a new
connection to the King County East Side Interceptor. The final design of the sanitary sewer
system will be reviewed during the utility/construction permit review.
H. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, Project File No. LUA-02-040, EIS,
PP,SA-H,SM subject to the following conditions:
1. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans,
dated Jan. 3, 2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to issuance of the certificate of
building occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is
subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
2. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for
each phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
3. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the
final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
4. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the
recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared
improvements, including landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the
document(s), if necessary, shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services
Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to
recording of the final plat.
5. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled
as Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
6. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or
cul-de-sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43
to 48 and at the south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this
requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
HEXrpt_BARB E Emi ll.doc
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Pre iry Report to the Hearing Examiner
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040 EIS,PP,SA-H, SM
PUBLIC HEARING DATE:JANUARY 25, 2005 Page 16 of 16
7. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that
portion of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open
space or native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager.
8. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would
contain more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and
approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
EXPIRATION PERIODS:
Preliminary Plats (PP): Five(5)years from final approval (signature) date.
Site Plan Approvals (SA): Two (2) years from the final approval (signature) date.
HEXrpt BARBEEmill.doc
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
`°a BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT ,/ ; /
TAAATAL
T=�TA� OVERALL PLAT PLAN // . ).';'/:,,,/ i
�/:
/74 ,/..51.,',,f .,e, Ivan.... 7)- ,:-... (.,...,; .. ,,
.,!" /i —L G JEUI ate
a.
mN' `-''l f —lf•jj[
$1(1,„Fir";--,,r.„,,
i , ,• FP
IL
L 1 i / 3• ✓,..cry A,
4 _ a— - ,' `'/ r�, is J ,�, 1.� i,YNS,,,.4:, +`
WASHINGTON II , _=- �7,- -� 'r •-_ -- 7//i �f a�
,,77 ` 1 .. Ti/1
O Dw• o• zoo' woo' 4 e
,, ,— C_ti'J: .,.- 4R /.• 1, rEZMZI
Tcuc of FEET cl
-•• F die_: . /
G- % j vzczNZTr zznP F • mi •4�,1
H; ^ C. .�,- ) ,a), /,// • LEGAL AESCRIPTION; >
. &_.--.,,i '� \`q\ \ `//�..;�,`��� // /� // \ THEW00 LAND N.CHARIT SO THIS O AND
IS DESCRIBED
19 SITUATED0IN THEFOLLOWS:
STATE OF
PO / / ', RA97wVOTON.COUNTY OF I@10 AND f9 Dh9QtID®AS FOi1098:
d ,J ALL THAT PORTION OF OOYERNI6NT 0.T 1,SECTION SS,TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH.
_ I1�-��—i'� ...fff RANOC A GAST,WY.,111 Iw1G COUNTY,1IA9 NORTHERN
AND OF SECOND CUSS
-,-_.� I� `` �� {/, "/� / -\ SHORAANDS AD102ONG LYING NISOERLT OF NORTHERN PACIFIC 0040rtmulon010 RIGHT
_� , "gip ..o�� /• OF WAY.EWER THAT PORTION"A ANY,OP SAID EHOREIAND9 LYING NORTH OF
THE'ROE
2 V I • • / /'C/ SITUATE LINE CODUNT!OF STOIC STATE OF WASHINGNORTH UNE OP TON.GOVERNMENT LOT I.• a
�i 'I' ;' ..,__;, II,, JI/p y A�/�44 , /,' / FLOOD HAZARD a
-�::. ,1 ,p..,, e ,,..-/, THE 100 YPAR FLOOD HAZARD IS CONTAINED HIM THE NAY CR0011 DAMS. 1-
! �� a'r < I
;. ', / a
," LEGEND O w O w
411110' �,••+� ' LAKE SXOREUNE BUFFER AREA- •�
y�" I / - ',' n•1 BUFFER PLANTINGS UNITED TO NATIVE V aJ W
'y��_111 :�I'/:: PUNTS AND GRASSES GG
� /y ;' 1AAY CREEK BUFFER AREA-
�./ / 4 f, BUFFER AND GRASSES
UNITED TO NATIVE
�" •,� 15'MA AND GRASSES CID
,. i/f�� /1 >�. .y/ �.. `\ 7I``��,y� BU MANAGED PLAN LANDSCAPE MAY
A INCLUDE BUFFER AREA- C `�
1 146.,yY E11' >/ t / / `�� , f;�1'AAND OTHER MANAGED LANE MATERIALS O O `-^
. Ara Ls6 ::? VI 4V-Zr
��,, " I • s Im»m eaoN DMA
�., 1 y,A Awl,soo
•.L'w 30209.001 00
itir` FoMI
/ / W ►`� Ioo _ _ ) C0_1
p -7-__.__.aazonE---- wx3 •'_„ d — N 40TH ST. ITZSS sru wlai I/" °S
Sheet I of 3
x —
CO `f 25c I
N
•
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
---toco=___
1. i ON
sr
mace / _� -- 0.03 AC. NBYIB'SB'W
b ���Ct-'9.L"-- 10 10' --]6' 36 36' - S6' ]n >6' -
cz99Rx0 1.,• j r-- l r-__ ___, r__ rT', f___ __]- ]6' -J6 IO6J to -ifi .w: -_ae. ]6-_ ]6. _Ss• ]6. - /I < FSr'9.r l r � i`�,N/ lg �s
1� J/ I n I ; ' r E i r r / �y�i x
101'35 Si 27 09]51]92]SM1'I 13931 AIJ9�IA II ]9N SFi39N SF1 JB�1 713911 SFI 19314i]921 5(I Da21 Sf13921 SFI 09084 SF,J9N 41 ]ox1 SiJ9x ssl I ISr: /
.ram 0.3]AC. _� 0.09 AG QO9 AlO9 AC GI 409 AG 609 AGI 009 AC I 009 AC.0.09 AGI 0.9 AG 0.09 AC.I ' I /�
�'A .9 AC ow AC.I G 009 AGI OW ;0.01 Y y1 n89)S /.
b yypp,, d I I I I 0.09 AC.I0.09 AC. 0.09 AC.0.09 4C.1 0.09 AG 0.11 AC. /� /
___ ___ i63'1p3' it
. 22- 21 4 20'n 19 18 17 I $ 1 $ a- �f I I / 8/- W
esl¢Sf 24 I I}3 I I 1 ¢78 iS I 14 13 12 c 11 10 I 9 $ aI $ pK, $ / / qqq
I 1 ' 3 c. 1g. I I I I I 4 3 I 2 1 /
]6Y J __J I I 1 1 1 i I a 7 I 6 I]96 Sri
i/ `��,//
_ L___1y-__J L___ __ J L___7I __J L___ J L___I} _J L___11 __J L___1.___J L__- ___J L___'_ _J L__ 1'Y. MAY. I n�< ' a.�1' 10 ]6� e' + fig'_I 3' ]6' � ]6' 6' n' 36' SB' S6'� b' Sn' ]B� M' }
IJO J • y ]e' 4�x0' 4J /
V\10. _ _ 3- - _ -L-690' _-- ----- m S
r• 11 00 o 2 3 ,{
I 5100 F 26 �1 0'� 90 i 199' 19TRE r A .2J9' 17400
- // I
.� 0.1J AC. / \ . /'6 k
//y' �0;J�SIr� SI -/ 51•� 51' STD SP- --51.; I ___ ♦ _ _-_ - \1 a
.' _ .ny / /o--- 7 %%____/yam �____ __ T__ ]5 15400
]6' ]n' )• / Q
�. I r IIr
°$' 4939 u Y7 I R'/ i' 75 76 / '77.� 78 ,%i°/79 , e0 }t/91 •� 'ez 1 I 1° / A
2'Ai . Q AL !rvF ,,.5r Sx05 SP /]3 4 3020 SF / / ,/ i
71 I 70!�' Y� '0)09 3020 C /J)]x S 5030 l p /
o1z Ac., <0:99 AC o,x Aa/ ; <ao9 A $I a.ua
' ,�„. , \ / ]]81 Y JJB°SFI 301 S �/- ` • �\\�l/ �I I 412 AC. a06 ACI O.OB AC.OM AG1 0.00 AC. / , 4 i({
��� - a.ln�c_ 3 j1 8TI 1 /'" �`. '+ , �.\ 1• ' ... `` // a` e} L____ _ J L___ _J L___ ___1'/ tf/gip d+
.I 1;86 4 1 HI ✓ V v \/ /..3329
AG\` 1 In ��aDRIVEWAY 1N M1 CCE55 tr 9t' lunw 11nr a
3 . 29 IS mn ~ W _ UT UTT F9 T. /' �Tg(�
1 11 1 J9I,\87`1 L_ p1 444-- -1 I /, `q r•A _ ¢123' ' 1 TRACT b' ^ /^`�. 099 AC. 1 �� o72 Ac' 1 ro 14 Act am Ac ' 'A.
Dom♦ U012)Ac 30 11X1 `\\\ \ OPEN SVOWIMFo.1a s` �84 `,/I^ �N / / 66 1 , 67 _ 68 r�' ._.c_; /^
L __ ,-----"I'
1.4 i�is2 ec. k \o'•. 4`4091 Arc\5 ` '`..// 8 7�,` �L'L i i / /,1 :A, _ I __
TRACT¢' .. ,8 11\1.
i/'��' / oii)Ac\`�,�.�as 74 r j /^\•` 65 sM2 sp. 1§', _ j I i 1- i o
WAT°fiN OIWIfY �� ��, �`��`ot30 Ac`\e7 /11 4• /SBSO iC'` 0.,3 AG J 36• --. //, '� I i3
1.1'
TRACT _ \`A191 Sp` 89 \. 6 ;' �0 I qy�1..�"\}"\\ ` '6. .y c. ~4 `br. \` ..!P .,/ �/' 64` `. 5°1�• ' 11- �71 9
0.21 AC. `x' ]' 1 ]92 69 ���� 31. : i��4•• , e,_I I-s• F ii
--- _ 1�-------- 11 f�i^`�`.`o.ae c\ -=- -'seQ6 �/ /,.\voe 2c`' .`�' .0�4s4�. ,� I ' I I �I 1�4'
6011.]g 31 151 \ 1 . 010 C, � y Z5'•i 3015 s.r \63 ".�♦ ♦ -[
ti 179' 1' i C o039°s'�ii„ 1 \_ 1 (0..w/ '/ \`�\ i�'���A • / -'_••' ��P^ n Y.s.s.�man 4 8
--"-{-11 iz 1 1 �'�i •``.``,,c92� `,;. -�$R��- 5{- 3'-, \oto 9., 82 \e i�.\� . /,* d
!Mpg 32 .' . in.
n,s \ ) „.. �/,
gg a1s AG _1 \ `� �(q\8\/ - ^ 1t A4\ \ 61 1 /, i�1 q
00- -- --__----J °tl� I '"' '"97 `` `� j9/'i6 - t-�i691 Sr1\\ato�c:'. \\`� /♦4 ✓{ �/[�,[X�' ' �y�
•
1 1 T OBO,, \` ♦1 i O.,t„•\\\\ 60 \\!\ �Ay...v.. � /7y/-ROWRY.p.,
^ It... oi]6°A j51 94 \ w\s)t]Sl` \ \ 59 \ \ ,, //, WATER,it fix]
1 1 b \O.IJ AF' \ \ \ \ j♦'
�' ♦♦ ♦ten 1 00]n if. �, / �'i \\ \ ¢M \ \'3 tl I /,il::
•
•
, � . 0.,6 34 1 1 8 1 1 /., /' � .�/`• .� C 4;"
Z.
• ;-9E' r
• gq• •SEE SHEET P2_2 v
LEGEND MA CHLINE tA. 5 � ;I!illllyi U 0 a
1 II ,
1 :I { ✓.
BUFFER R PLANTINGS BUFFER AREA- 0 Incorporated
BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMITED TO NATIVE4.
PLANTS AND GRASSES y.l
k .. MAY CREEK BUFFER AREA- 0
_p :'::..BUFFER PLANTINGS LIMITED 70 NATIVE
PLANTS,AND GRASSES }0209.001.001
fT7 15'MA AGED AND9CAPE BUF ER AREA- p.9p
,Aiiy BUFFER PIAMINGS MAY INCLUDE LAWNI
X �'.%'d PND OTHEP MANAGED ANDSGPE MATERL LS w' C �'S ul �-I
SCNE W FEE, Swot 2 91 9
C13
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT I, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
1.....I
-------
SEE SHEET P2_1
Re... _. ..17181.1c
C10911500
020981110 r-F---1 -L'''s ss•—ti '''.. `4,9,.; ,,>?.:, %. ,:...."..:':::'.,,:?1,,T47,' -5,,- i...:,..;,?,',;4?
.....
......,
0.1.030 I s K gyl.g 39 1,41 ' ,P-67•:---\\,IgS 2•-siN • ,,,,, ;StiT;t.,,X O.\,,,02)...1:,",;'.:...';.:*: -<:. ; ..::•'..',:l.A.,/f
leCLSM
.1101 ,.._
%IX
1 : ‘:.i.`,0--------- 37 141 il Q '''',1.4.,,51 ,,.''‘..)•:::::,;. 6,1::::',.,.../A..:::.,::, ' (...:,'..'' . , :...cr',......2.;;;'1' . — X e
[---:.-"Lt''''---------tll .\ I ' 50‘‘‘,‘,‘•„'. '. ..f,',:';:.''..-::::*:,;': -1,., \ ''.,::;.' ;5....: ' --/ 4' ;fl
38 '41..._..\_As1 N'b• Ti'e, :..,:..,,.,,,- .... ,:-..-.:''...2;. , f...2,--- ..----Ai.-4/,,,;,,,„..:-,A h'.., 'i,
1, , .?,e_________ , ; -N, 4,....-,..... .,...., .." ,.-•:;,..........' . ‘,. 't ,
I Or----------, ‘ d " 1..,`,.. 49 ' ' , .:::,.., ;i: ...• ..•:.••• •-------‘ ''. liX4. I A.."1 1" k 2
:. ,,,, °II 7.1: 39 __\ s V....S.N.1,,f,''/.,,,i• .:::.::'':',, 1..:`; ',..::/..V, ''''": l'\ ''... ., .., / ///iq''''./ C.' /.
— ... 1:' ,,l'i,''IL---------\ \ • ' .:;::*::::..:`
LAXPVIAARAVON r attcrTv5-
„,SF 40 'S.A. ..
" `''. /'../ -.4'?•:,,,, ,;"?.."/ ,,•''.* 1
: ...'!:::"4:\"*C. ---'''' ,,.. i•'‘.!....t:::::.2• YO--------
' • , ----------I \IS,'S 9 tr.' :.J.,,:::-,... :. ';'::' cm Ic..r. N, , ,,,,P,/ sei ,,,,• ,, ,.:',, <_:=1,/ , $4,,,./teiii;e4,9
,:,1 : ,. . „sss, \. R .... :.ii.,,,.::... : .::.,..:::,,,,,,,,„ ,4. • ',,, / , , , z,,. 2-.,c. ' :: , -,,old'
--f"'•''h--------_ H .8 I , ....::.;;):::: .........6e!::: li It...,,,,a., ''%' / /A/ # , ,'',Ift .
• V;:i
4' ?e• %\„.34 PT Sr. I i Ell ...;.,.." ;`,,,...4': : y: :i.:::.:4'05,.10:it s,‘\,,,A, 4, it. i'..„,,.. :.
F52 A, ,.,......,../c- -, „:;......,., 4•,;:- s:
A : • , .::•75; • .• '
,0•1:yo. ---, r ,,,,,,•;•...,::::, ,• j ,...,::., , //' // ' / 1// • •'/ g
i'•,x,,'•'; ...::''.:,•• 43 /4 .:1,A' ;I:!.:,,:;,-' :'. :.;;4/ /
q. • ' :','-' ••.,. , ,-- ., --',:.:-,......y . , ::./% i-gis.-- / s/
• -`',.• :-...c, '-'M gl• NN<:"'1 ,-: l'i•:::::::::,, 4 ..:.•,•• •-•:::•.:. R / ..,.", fr
--"* ,.... .;:••••:::,.. .x,,o,:;,‘,,, .., ,,,,A, ,;•,'•,-T:..*:::-.:;. ':' ' ..... ,r..,'..:::::.,:112,1g‘i,e?8',`: Ci I'//..•:.._ / .41 4' i',:s./f.-..1‘7111.‘ '.
....N. .,/I/'...'s '.. : %<::;??r•'"''.4.5‘s::'''''.Y147/‘.::':':.':::::'.'7?..-:!: •••••. ::::);,,..,:.:;'(°8!ic.';''7';,j'i,i-is, .,. ,....,.././4),./ ,/,;:i„...,7 ,, ., Igil:1,1
:. . :ec.,..,, , \I\ .4','Y 9,?:?.:::'.......y ,,e- •••,..' :::::'1.1';:p,,<13,'",`„:4:4Y ,0 . ,4-:' ,'" ,./ ,/,,C•:•:. ,''
., •
1 'g \,...47\\;\--' •t•• ,14.•'.7:::;.•-••/.....f,:'.' ,:.••;rf,. , 421‘a.',',",, ,/; 4 ' .,..,./ - ,/ /7 ,: /
4 ,
\--• -- .e.,,:5s45,x-4-..:-:. ' , -./.,,72•11tfe ; •9-'e- • :::•• ,' \s-'1 ;".0:.,: , 1
41
si
4' : ' •----- '• ' ' • • :',••••.,' :, ,k,, ",;;OI • ,/';,, , , :
LEGEND
/ l'\ ••\,.....' ..' al_li;•- ":-.• , ::" '------ ,•....''....,•/-> 120562 11.'• .,. /
/ . .
\---'—•,-,..-,.......,----- :...,,,..,„.. ,„,,,,....,.0 ,,,. ,
7.„,„,.. ....,.. .\. _
/ WAY 9.1
VA S 9 A l A 11 I A , . ...... / ,•'•••-' 99 ,) 4/
,T.,,,,Aso,* ,e•- '7.1 7,,..'f'
: :: v.--; 6.5 98 r
:, .....',:,' / .°."-.. ."..`',. N>.>/ / / : ' 1 ' :.
' ,.':.. <:,.,T01 it: -...F \\,..;'7 , ,- "`"\ _, ... -
/// ,.' „
/ '
. 1;••••.:1 FFF22.PALIATUAGALLPAECT TO NATIVE
FT., i LT' t
15'MANAGED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA-
BUFFER PLANTINGS MAY INCLUDE LAWN
•.AND OTHER MANAGED LANDSCAPE MATERIALS 14 CL
/ TRACT'A r•
OPEN 5PAcE .,.„ ......,,,,,, ::, es ,,,, .4,/,,, 1 ,,,,,
,7•• „ :42?: ,,,,,, ----, -.___'/".:_4 _.*t S, ,•.>
,,. : , •,..--- WATER CUALITY „,,,‘",•:,‘,^70,/' , / ,,, : . 1
0 o a
'"
ss,ss, .„4. -.:-- .;:b 4,0 ,.,.„,. : . . .
_ •, • / , / , / o Incoryorated
c*
1 .4,
/
AC
--...;.;. ...:';-336‘• 1' e ,/,' • • . - /
••___,_„. ......,---....r •,..„s,. A .., ,,, 1 0
--...2 22.,5..., ' ,C / .' . ,. r
,Mr: / ,/ 1 .P . .•,, -:).-- ''' 1 co g z
P2 2
•
W SCALE I.FEET 9..3 a, 9
'
-P.
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
E^RRC__4
naI 1
M� _ / Tch<
PtR,elm lF
MOM„o A
NEsae'6ew
1.20.703
47
24 i22 21 20 19 16 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 1
w'j' %'A,:f:W� @$Lamm
frot
!' J I' 8 5 4 3 2 1 ' d
1 r,;
PI
���.-- -- i -,„ „ _. .. I, -" r .'_fix':, <� '_ t-..':._:,._',:'.. !�i' ./ [ t
•
1;i
�� ^`.' d. ' - - ----�'� -- ----.,� v�� y#';�y,,^'�51•il/--- -- '- ...w�,�..�.m!"tee/'(' ,�. ¢
by:�; 27 75 76 '70 ' 79 ,80 �, ' 81 ,82 p 1
2 � / \\e/ / 74 73 ;'J T
iA� / F rc. ' ry.t !'7 ,' 72 71 70 89 / p ,.'`�' (4'U%
0
pye
• a1JI; F� . $�'' �0 tM • x 5 '// A ip° ye x 'I c J L L — 'i:�' ��lan
f
7. _ /•••• 67 : le
>7r''srt".x .%%%7? •,r,�.`a a,... <,,.fier/ .\ \�\ . /i / i 7j '
87
Srb: ,�y a`7�t �.'.4rit • ,68\` / v' , r`64 o i' 'ra-'Nr• ,/ AJ $
�1� ♦ •Ak
wg r
4
s-1 31 ti i1`l f �� '''5�`� `►� 1� s3 ::.•,4.;.,.4.....4...::!....t.."..:....,;..t.,:::.!:.11,e/./
. • a. �?1 i
_ '$ . / 91` %♦` / �3 / ell 0 RI:
92
-__- 32 - 7.'At �.g. / ``'``♦` _ ' _ie' .- ;..d�Y-''-.1,3 -- - \ \ ♦♦) i10�.:'."' J# C, Z
a.
Is\
Lce
59
��♦Ji•♦•.•..�•: __ ' Fla 1 s� ''. • \\\ 58\\\\\\ •\ \\\\\'' ..:::- � � J' I µ i:�l:: i. a vUi
V 34 ,1\ ��I '• jly
0.
,o\ ,, \\ _....
2 ..I::: ♦ '� .. .. ,dl" 55`, \ \ .♦Mir%�•' • I "E` is. _ F :j Q
3g .v.\.]1• 35 ''�fGtS+'" t:, ? \ \ ♦� .� �♦♦�. ..t•' / I -fir, — r..' <�
Y 1.a...♦• I_'`" .i,r?'..::..,S S4 - k C__r Cana♦ - _ J 1."11f,;, .�,�-..,- ..r� :�
�: , ..d. ' ^ Irk. w
O♦ 36 1 'If' E•' - ♦♦ •:♦' .. .o '' �cf� .b; I �; _"'_. .1.6 }1 XI d
ii iv'v ` 92 '44.. ' '.; Y1• r•°.....' / ,I 1. ;Ja -`'7w_ a.`ay� +
SEE SHEET L1.2 / .i "I I I ,,,
' T P:f
Plant List
•n c _N s •. 9+ 5 a :: it U 0 a
n 0-0 W SruBl Ct List 812E SY11WE MM.WAND/ 317w�E COMMON NAI®/ HAUPJ I 11 40�NI610 NAAS. BPACIN6 8GE]IIFA tU1� 4PACIN0 GCD]lTPIC xAMa G�A@IO• SYu60l: BCQ SNO ELINE
I .,Da0N ASN 0'M. 0—MOM S 10l�'M. E SNOREl1NE BUPFFR AREA- I ••I I � I•. Incorporated
FRA.NUS LATNUA �PAC .13'O.G WETAND GRA55 6Em MIX 'WA?SF iFgegriABNeE
w /pee
9.
0• 20' 40' 80' MAASIMLL's SEEDLESS AS4 3•GL o--u:Jy,„4j�:. }a'M. mOSRAIE DBMS SEED Yu ALBS/f 000 Sr FFmI v1IlAINO tMIIED To NAtYE DOD 10 P.t.Drh.
fBAINOS PNNMYANICA ]PACING A6 YPL]'O.G PIS ® ��Op,\RR
IAA..VS SFEM DK .0. W GIIOOPS A STOSTAP10109 IAA let A.POTS E euFrER AREA- x-'Sr1Lo1 r•^—1WA
♦�iva�dhlP:'� $B,If`eA 2i o' rIE 6E.WBERRr t-G•o.c. ® BUFFER RAN..Ma INCLUDE LAWN 0 roc(us)]a-Ma
6 ,.., C.
AND 0111EA MAtUGEp LANDSCAPE MATERIALS
F2(W)[lI-05Tf
RI E IMP TRITE
Io SYMxG/5 - )�pxf.mn Aem,n.rA 1e-N•M. EROSION CONTROL GRASS SEED YM z 30209.001.001
X 9 srawNf°� E snNG REc ro Rouw ® GOOSE GON noL nEDG s sac. 0 p ,ARgs ivaosF P s PphvvL`1_1
F� OPiT ]1TZ AREA OF LANDSCAPE Sn,et Ne.
W
J .eel I el 3
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
Mir LT
SEE SHEET L1_1
1112.13
" I
'. : ', , ;IA
: ` )•
•• 39 t44 i' `.) f:' ' ..0,0a . V.-. esort"rt mu/,/f 5
• _ • t
I / r i7 a N _
t/sxinwrtoN _ 40 , A
�'.':� • • 11• 4 / u:�c-'!i 1:N'-'0 .40,.r /`: % y mi VL•ii - ----��\ '.!1 '.`� i�,,.♦�i 1t\ // a / Z A ,,°�, <`' III
O`i ': •i>ta.::+ /`/ <�! °�/ aF'grad i. er♦rz w
-_ 1 1 :. I.,. .,.,,'' :♦♦♦i r i ;ti.{;i; /. t,:{'Y /.7 osslEi�u°v
��.� 42 j . 'S ,�,•'.9 r `V��y�.�.�'y i '�� 1 /W./ 6P1�/�, CERTIFICATE NO.7/1
-• ,,,
VV ...CCC„���\\\ •� 0....:.,::;`:•' ..• a&<D" / �/ �Y�¢E4 ��SS
il if
/��"♦ ///,, /' �e.as /
,..�� • / r pii♦ ,Y7' ` r/ ,,,,
/�'---,..
0/ / /: ,/ DREGDN ASH a-10'M. E'a �Q'rN
` "' 45 ,1,��.:....'.,:':� .. /�` / 107` // /,. .Y// / lwnNlH,nFttln I5 SMCwN p1 N
I / % .:-.: \ \ ;;yy �...:,:.::y;•' •�/ 106 VM9uu1'S SEtDlE95191 2-CJL i
`+I�+�ei/ „A.n9r ams,YAme, -,s7. Asy \ \ 46 � / y / / : / / �'Mnasw E's srEolrsr sx°wry 8 �
•r \ •/a :`:� ,♦•i� 1°5 6 ;7� / /� i/ / nNr TREE zYNG.... / \;\ ,' ii_•:.:'., y .\.400♦ n(. ` /a ''r /< / / /: / / augactaGRrxrmmee SP N � ZQ
�' 47 , {r` 11:'<�.., ,,�,J} .• .jF•�•�� / \``�04 ': '� / / '// '•! / N=CYPRESS Il a_
. fop ��� 6A 0�♦♦♦.�E�!•'. :..�: .�'i0�, `t03` ���,e�,' "- /- Ili / ��Lprrplm�6 q��� a-<'xr. � ``7
f .. ,• /iJdA +` 4• `. /�_ : �" S°5G.t8llltltNwt. a
i0•. ' -.y,.� .#.`i4�,i .t°t i/ ,�s//` / //, • / 4:.IIG..-''-?✓ Ensmm m¢TO Md.
4
� #;, 1 ^ yam.'• • `a+ ,: •":ROi^ f00 '/ "% 1ç>,/. >'
:.�.•
�" 0♦ / ` / 0. 1.• ` ' `4 � .' ," 7 - V,/ •
� ��°vuw w.a G" • `•�:�%ia' 98 / ; / ,! /' ; �// IfR YF€iiCdulNn`1.sus-ro' 0 / w
.::: :` ' ::, / I �./ COFFER MAKINGS OWED TO NRNE
• ♦ i�.':..�:%+/<,, ,1 //^ �'" 1=1 GVRER ERP"PA S NAY IPX7EE 1 WN
>°°T' 95, '.F/,p f A / JN,� '// / ® EROIONC NROLCRASS UND4CME MAZER
WI
`� / 1 '': c C /iI)• p4 / ,f / ." �' / 0 ''Ou of esrrtu _AnroE9 r
5. s �/ '�' fr �-.1e \ // PERwEIEn or vaoPERrc-s tes/Iwosr r>t Cl
Y ,.6 ��,g / •a \ // � / APPRD%IMATE 1RAL APFA Cr UNDSGPE' LI
B r r%'.°" l"'/a -".y'� /'\• / / / n50wEs':sma<:
^ /, INTERPRETIVE PANG ` ' " Y/P'r/'(1'i ^.`\ y». ,7+�.. / .;'%: / i.,
IA
ii 14 ,
��c 1. �y.; ,�"' 1•"j\y��▪ (' / z 30209.001.001
PreNcl No T Se6'a:. aaD '�^• 441 Jam` 'Na515.':'2Ea+'I•:?i�'. ' ,.9.46 N[AS�A
9.w./ :r, T,J ,' 1J<.9 / ::,, -1 "iflb9'< 1.t^ Snaal L1._2
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN a d
• d
. • d c,
d P d
s
•
- MANAGED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AREA V
BUFFER PLANTINGS MAY INCLUDE d
LAWN AND OTHER MANAGED d � . ° a.
LANDSCAPE MATERIALS a
TERRACE FLOOD BENCH :• a•s •`'' d
PLANTED WITH NATIVE a f: _ ` `
GRASSES °
6' SOFT SURFACE PATH s .b. , ,•`
a
•
TRANSITIONAL UPLAND s.t,.
NATIVE BANK PLANTING .
ems. f'
S
MAY CREEK •
15' MANAGED 35' NATIVE BUFFER STREAM CHANNEL 35' NATIVE BUFFER 15' MANAGED _
LANDSCAPE AREA RESTORATION PLANTING RESTORATION PLANTING • LANDSCAPE AREA
50' STREAM BUFFER 50' STREAM BUFFER
MAY CREEK BUFFER RESTORATION
SECTION-B •
NOT TO SCALE
ImI
1 WI
I -41
I
•
- ., `
e_72444 i.:‘,., ,q0,67..1,,,,i7,..ti,‘,:,:tvessayi7,s _ _ _ __v
:.
^_' j.' , f •, I Native Plant Area
r" PVP4E x $0����(� Species May Include:
'� � ....
� ,, -- Vine Maple
"' Salmonberr�
- i
� +� r+ •: i ' Red Flowering Current
LA-KO �` r� r 1 Snowberry
r/4" ' V� % / 1 Red—Osier Dogwood
/WMN/W
�TO� ` Evergreen Huckleberry
r `'. rip �r • {1 Nootka Rose
s'a;
Native Grasses
e _ Yard Area
,•,'-",,,& ()
' Buffer plantings mayinclude lawn and/or
, Sc-'--. s 7 other typical Landscape materials
• •
•
r,.<<_ a I NOTE:
THE PLANTING TYPES AND CONFIGURATION
- SHOWN ON THIS EXHIBIT ARE CONCEPTUAL,
AND OTHER VARIATIONS ARE ALLOWED WHICH
n,4-fl �LI YAii_;7 MAINTAIN A BALANCE OF VEGETATION, LOT
OWNER VIEWS AND LOT OWNER ACCESS TO
ithOr kI 4 Ag( THE SHORELINE.
EXAMPLE PLANTING
O •
: . BARBEE MILL.�r...,.., 0' 10' 20' 40'
Incorporated LAKE SHORELINE CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPE PLAN 77_77
10230 NE Points Dr. Suite 400
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Phone: (425) 822-4446 NOVEMBER 23, 2004
FAX: (425) 827-9577
I W
ICI
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
MM..
/
r ., / / _ ''
... ' i
/
/ a e/ / /, • /• . ..
SIG07 /' -
/ ) / N LEGCE)N D
. 1!/
:,...,.
, „, • .. „. .2.15,
ftmmV ' ... i' ..
LI
4,...,* ."' - „.,
/ -7.t-0,-,•,.;•.../
MIK PAM C80S410
D 91.419110 urxr Mk/10 1.1
...... '''''' 4Y•i:•:'t;i'..,,,, ......,.;,. / • AUTOLLATIO GATE POST YOU=
dr,.. .,14,3,,,..:,„,,''..:.;;;;,F;'' qt. ' A,.., ... ../ .,,A ''' CP<'.,..../ ,,...:,...'"''' X. .
...tt •--..... .--,t--.........
/.. ''.. 8i':- .: :;;ilil.:.., ,...r..9:';::;;I.•. i'''''/C'';•/7:' e / G e E.,
k A
3+. .--- ' '1.. --.s....--,04-k...•....a4,1„,,,
.
it ..., ...." • , .,•• ,•
Alet:74% ,
....,,,
f_.__re. 4,2., e,, t4..i 6 ;91:?. ,. ,,....;,,,,-<;,• ,_.,. _.....i, ...-' •‘-,.._.,>,;.,-.,'',,..,..;_:::.i..,;:::::,„.%•,-:....:;,,...:::.•,:-:,.1.„,•-•::-:-::",-.2.../i,r„/ - it.,Pt. ..,:,,,--of.
'•wA4),-
7 :-.!.,,,,y,,,,z,-,,,,, :, / 1>c / ' ,,, N., • -...* ,./.....>" ...-.;::,-• ,./ r.-_-',--.- ..,,,t•
,, , .„...,: v: i:, -; , , ,
/, 4p z ,,, ://,'::-.,,\ y...:.../..,. .. ./..• ,../:':..• / ,.' .--- ,'' .' d'
'Z:,-', . —' '.. ..'!!;i4-4:.:::!..N, •C ,:..,
''-- .-‘ -.':'''•.... i ..71f:!:::,,'"-.;:i'':7:55. ' 1 d''' /Ck-'4'.• V. . •"/."'.7 .4,.' /../ ..';'-"../.. • ':\..
/
4,r" .:2;:2-7i!'.1# ',.-.. , '--- / •-'• / / 1/ •ki'.....• ,...--- .,- .:. - ,... .
i
a gi
°•—• .-: :-.-::.-:,-:::=17:s::.:-/4 /.-i,,,"- •-•-•i•7. ;
NI STA A 11+09 ; 51 1,1
ti . -:•---::-;.---.:-.,:i•-•-•:-_-,f-,, A.:,.. .• ,;,/,...... / .... ; 1,' ,-.,',71 //../;./ /. /...
.D -,-;- . foo.. :;: •, ,,, s ../ • ,, ,, /) .„,,/,,sy ,,..:, ; ,...,.
PM ELM A 38 13
• 1 %7 /k.!.WittOF'
/
—• / .--r—r---------- —",.14;:'.3.,T,'i
r; ., //I/ ,.," / ,/ ./. ! I 1 • .0.vc : I(IF 1.96 . : E.
? / i /'// i i ; ,i// /7/ i;3 /...1.' ..' ! 1 I I i '.i. ' ,_. 0. ' . I
"---± '"• ! i !
,' / ',, g/ / ,-- :', , , i //:,, ,..• . . . g 1 i ! : a -• 1
•••••... L......... .... .,,,.,7,14•,, TiNig.;,-4-, ..., .IFS ////... / .../ ,Z, j,/it „/./ 7.. / ./. ,..
. . 1 N 1 1 1 0 t'.7:"'''.' • 7;. e - V-4 i ! i . y,
. .. .•-•-....02.' ;'ile.'•:-44.1r:',': i /// 1 / /.... .1' / / ," '''' I I -I-- td I :- -- : -w + • i
4 I / , „ i .'e'-', ...• / . •
k i„Fgfri FT.203;0'.:j1j 4ff •j..i ' /'I / ••• I /' ' / - / /1.. j''' / / '' I I i j j j 9 i :dg; . ... _c AthrAM'O'Zi4. :.'y •"'1.... i; i 4''' / i// „ /‘," ,,..." .7 ,.. ; - ;3 ; . • ' a) -e
_ •,- ; ;--__ _____ , , z. > w all-ifP$iii'.'?—..".../ .: / ,/,','" i/ .3",' ,/,/ , .,.' ,./.." / /i ,'
,,,,i-- —1— -\—,.- : • • --- .' • • a)
,-0"".....,• .-- / / ,- .../,,,,' " / ,, ,y ?•• :,'z ..,••• .,-•' r •-., , ,• 04 la.;
/ , „ ,• ,, .. .4 • --.-...-.-- ',-..., j..4 .. '.='
P8OPOM 084 ' .y
; 0 ,... • trj.6
n-
/ ---- •"' //i ''.'''''' FA./4 '! f lt A' 7/•t()/ 47. I
„ . ,/7 ,/ /,/ • / l; / ; I/,,,, I // C/Y9.... /./
• 1 i• , •• • • -----} . . .c,
, w / r /// I- /,/ • Ii .1.' / .,,,.. Aexyg•av '.4 Cfi 0
R g 1 g g g g -•;:t; g g .i. 3 R; 1
9.60 10+00 10+.0 10+80 11+10 11+60 ,.
.9,18,‘/41//' ."....;;.' ,/' •'',/j ,',// 0?„l-.4,.. "/ / '... ci) 0 a
-.. , , • ,, ,,,,,' /v./ iv.: 4'• • 4
1 ://,-- , , r , ,/„/ i ., 4•e••:.,. ..;,,•• /
1!IIS I .— /• /,0_ / i;•i,'c, .:.:/'•:: 74 SsT.CcA.LE IF ii8. PNi/ /, . FEEITIv XDe9.19•a•018.I-c8,2•.Io 0—r809s8p.ST0o.0ar=0 y.a 1g.10.
.tr10e03802
.1
tic,
' M -
><
i =
CO .
—I
(..C,
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
•
—— SIGN LEGEND qq
aO ✓L': _;� ` ` ° :]. t ;1 0 STOP
9'ew°°° �6 11 �' I .es ';//
\\\\\�\ e _ •'\ i !; /fib /•i '• C• . Abiy g
• ':I•:. �,.. \OPEN-SPACE`'( ,., r ! / , a4.y snric mum ammo s H
:T:. : -~ ____.-I!'-':::::'
• (adE aHIFD rii
k
�� A .. I\ 'i, 1 �1TA. N9e0R 'i
Sid' ,• .:�.:^'�z.. \\ _ \ .�r, • .�• J 1 Isii`��
J .... ,fir• = 'r r 0• , 10
A`.. .2:','r:i; .: _.,, ' i• ,e v uEv se et wo.--veo
r � YY'111��I��I
-+ 1100'—
::••�: � .,\ meta�++/ _ — ��
1 d 11
m Iii=1 •;%ft* ,//♦ �� / i.l i..;r .041:,i;. 4.: // : , ,, E �'I a
/1 -`-��` : t. .�.•.n:� �', I _+____ yam'
•
•
h 1=: -.i i I i I j a.;� ,, E-L. S,I
gn fkilA,i I i 1'J'f'''.. , /1,
, / / � / � ,/'i r / i :.,••'� ! GxN[ r.
/ '' ', ; '/ ' , J// /..-•:`` 'i ' ';' - — ---- " ._ ' "'-- —' W r 1
//,;;/ ,s:' . /./ .//:....';..1 / i 1 I I i i : i ' ; • , 4. ql.
//// A239 / //I e r
/
It,
/%' i/;//VI
1. _ i,/ /;' ,,•'..,r'., -1 —I' I - i j ; 0 0
?9 i,' �` ,`ii '9 a" / /'/!':;'j i I ' 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 ! R7 a
ii
g /' //:ill' ' 1 / ' . 1 o a
/ , ;, , ' /: v 13000 13.50 ..00 NSG 1f.W
1 / / / ,'i' 0' ,/', , ' ,' /, ,fss taco pore ad
Y s _ ,'i' ,/ '// r% am wu.sa Poo
a ,,,,,/
' , . . ._ eaue
/ ' /' ii' i r o• s• ]P: am-nn
f0 hta0 vurr. 30209.001.001
FEET
1zoo 0• zo' VIw•v XHoJeCI N—Onl
KORisssi
X t SCALE01,II] 5°t Kpel
2
CO
I
' 0'
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
44 it,
66•,B 6,a
CIPIT1
e «e I 23 I I 1 -.- \` j
ro 1 amc.x , �r1'EEJJ
...."0 ammo if,
I -- — 22t
21 . 20 19 18 17 18 15 14 13 -' "-'� t T,' k /
I 24 xeo �,/ ® ® ® ® Y3Tsl 12 II 10 '9 8 7 8 5 t :� ,a", / i/
1 xsA 1 I v.o 1 1 11,0 1 i v o I I v o I ® ® I. r--61 3 2 1 _•„rig?"
,� 5 gg
1I I Ivol Iz1Al fe'S57 ,Ill Baal I. G4i•"i In�"H � p
44II
• I i o 1 - � 12 I' `` r_-s.'.Ir.166 4 R11t -la 3 . • •_ _• .. - _ yi
/'/r -- -- + •) ,.F T :t' .,.1 ,. M, ,a 'I I i " „ke;.:1 F, "l I•� I 4P r •�! . / s
/ '° yID 4r°1� I r:,, =T � = ,.. z :1 Pam' j'3t � +� _,. s `_�� ``�>h: Asi11a �sR'�a .7� r')YNI a 4� r ��I 28 a 11 _-' ',:� '�E 1'` (1�9d 1;�`i HS ,�� .; lj ! 11601 ,�'le�l Y)Y --, illir ...� 1'lypyr•Nptat'` r.. . / //' <4 -
'II7 1 27 (' w I vp�/ 5 ft77 8 79 ,' 0 rt.,.
82 oP- 74',I 73 72 7I 70 '60 a // .
' f - •'';e I, _l;Ei � I x°II ;® ®I... /®I® , 9 k/dr i%
fly'.) �' ��1 '.•.. - ('.�/ /\/ / . .l.K�:
f?CO l E [ / d'
2r 1 .•1..,' T '\ rT '
\1sA •l A,6t �e�.*�' �` 68 'P /30 s- y _ •Y/.•1 67 •. /'
'��1. ' Pe' A` A� Ni. es �' F,/,1E% es'.- �'.•` /,I E1
51 eom'nurr ° -ice Flifijjti spy '�' >- 87 _d, / /i�/I yS gd
i i
�yj(id,.:-441 *�,„ a' ilk' . 63 �—: . P.
.1 T`I xsu 11,'�iiIIL' i .a '91 ® i -•anisF ,'c i,,...�fl3 i.`'-rfr- � o '"_. - �„ w^.&
0,1•5
•.us jc071 / �` / Z
1 A2 Vi'ittil11'; �.�'i'F 1 1'� 61 .i/.' o ' ;•/�'
Fgi j 60 , /e
i� � i a' r E I �h"1 L'i� 1e
ss I as ip{'�,�.y� 'G h� �\, LaxL'!_ 0 9' .;' �/ ';i
1 ® ikill+N4�i1: '%t( { s'•. I 1 \eirI 56 \\ • 'I g .�►
_ _ 4'iidlr'!I�i ,r- --= 'Ef"f k~ `1a;I 'Tle ® ! � ' I — 1•,'fri ,�' / W
_ a n
-z=�-- ..a..t .6/ f�•,�.t1 iqs,'��" il� �y' lffj' 67 ��I <jL1ØIj?
Z
''" // '//.7�/ 3_•
V./:-- i iiifLtl 7�i��t_lj�l�`�f�N•�i4iIL�Y�I� / �®>tu•� /�C„� � -,M t et,i/ II ?} )y / j iSEE SHEET G12 � iUa
• LEGEND: Ch.1 SS . : 1
kEARTHWORK DATA (APPROX.) EaBrao°mxram !;` �� ,;� ' ' , 4 Incorporated
au4ATION, 32.000 CT(60.000 TONS) -s0-PROPOSED STOMA DRAM (O
tIRE: 3BA00 CY WAXTONS) PROPOSED CULVERT �,
NOTE MUMBLE FXCAVATION SRAM BE RELINED IRON ME VIE . SUFFER 2CNE O
TO AN APPROVED OFT-SITE LOCATION DI ACCORONEE WWII STORY CATOf BASH
DIE CITY OF MOON STNIOWOS 104.ADpRONAL FILL INTE
F••�� •
1 10 EL PRO,IOED IRON A LOCAL SOURCE AND SM.9E M STORY OPID YANNC E 30209.001.001
e 1 ACCOIIONICE W11N CRY OF REN1ON STANDARD.
dalWALL POMMY ep• 0' AO' 00'RPI«t
X I mai FINISHED FLOOR FIEV. Aeel 8*
Na
J_ 581E PITiEr Sleet 1 of 2
W
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
DEr_V*
SEE SHEET G1_1
_- 35 T"4 T, _. I ., . r!`, s•. \i7351. • •17x �•_•_ • 7..•, 1
MINA MIMIC
Eat r r��i-y`' &u „y�=�-.'\'"'"�'w ss• t ,,..pp� ��.
rr! �' ry 74o I lam`"' — �yaV
020.0120
a B0'Irrrr4 �,:,�'/. ® j,;af� ... ^ % `U.y i ,',
MINOS
fir)r:r„ ti ri
SOMon
/'--•xe.::-----
H
; i i. L,\ � to sot L pi
t QM _.t't'u ® /•. e a SORwlaya TIO4,,
!,1416,.....u.2 , / ..; .• , /41---'•..1
'
• .; // VNr /\ I 1 I'�,■= d!)� / ('
;/ ea w.ao tyir �...,,,,,,,,a.„.,
�5„1 Hdh � j �sd; {ry dll a / � ` • ,
/� . '-') r t lam -I •/ �,,u;�' _r!;�, /r.� `r
r rim wd tn" I
•IIII,i • � rrr /'r ,•',',,A('`,."
i •
I• ,J< x
81
S\, YK
i 4 ,L; } I toed ,i•'r �h { r (--"/....;'/d yp�y/ ,///,• ;r'l 11
Her` ® •1 ' V• 4 /;.''. 7�4,F• 5a
off/ I� ;,� ; -;a; Atiii ;•/' 0,.., ,/_.,/ , .. Ilia'tos pol�E ,• ;.'i ,.,; >, .8 g
�/ '-'' ® :III-
}Thy' T ii
/ a7
i (` 3,.. Vy t® '/'-,::.:y /y l LEGEND: o
® \. �1 y.- ..;/&' 103 iJ�L/r•? ./� '� _._._. PROPOSED=TOUR Z
'I� EasrDw caNTo9R r4
.� , ;'/ .1D� m •,' �,V" _SD--PROPOSED CSTOWULVERT
DRAIN S
.---/ tfi• y�py(• "• PROPOSED L1ILHAT a y�
q \I _ '1.Mill 101 '{i' t',�i /''• '•'••h�'r eun[n zwe Z
/
\✓-� r too �'.tj'.,r .. ..•.... STORY DRAM WNNgE O Q�
--�� L�S7 p.z:�:' i•`• •/ r';' RETAINING eut Q
ROMERY
.'� •
' / 17 1 ,urrAl.,FLOOR EIEV.. Q M H
}@y OPOMMl xwN S' Er.1-. .i... 'r,y MALER YAx( `9& ,'�? ' • r'k / / HWO (APPROX.)oo
rn
I
\ , �:,, /, , � . G'/•,f' ` ROTC URSUIUstx EXCAVATOR SV11 SE REMOVED FROM TIE SRC I, i l ._.s :.' ', • TO AN APPROVED OFT_SEIE LOCATION M ACCORDANCE O M o o a
/, �r�.+ Y' ,,� `.N'd '�y'ji, �+ /' . ,j TIE an OF RENTON STM0NO1 mom..FILL.... l)
/ 9r`k'4.4,,.c' 4j1 .J7.flel,i�'+"'6'' r r/, ,.r r ro DI FRONDEDwmmE rnr a RETIDLOCAL m5UR2E AND 9uu BE w A.6i
F // INTERPRETIVE PAM. / '0-- ' �s�4Iy'. •'' // / EO m<uryo>•.ew
4.
,.. 7/,w. 302N.001.001
X 1 SOT S5-E ' �-, ...,15' r ':—.,,A,A,EA Propel Na.
=i uaw �� i71=`,+.1.. i� r'± ,
's..er.:_.--: ...r-- diF�'��— .o• o•�a. ro. .a G1 2
eTi;
SCE PI FEET shoot 2 of 2
—I
N
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
;r- EXISTING SITE PLAN ii
019111123
AND TOPOGRAPHY MAP / + i �� eE_____ / // . �' , / le..i• MI FEET 9
f
i7
i.
<aR-a:iQxc. ems .; _ .., . '[r
I•'. , % �' /l�'- ,' 1.NOIRO 'n'w(sre).toSTAre -�i •1 -1 •..-: .. coonoDuretI(sPc),xAo a�/al.xoRnl zoxc'T 1 N ORO�UxCRDomAxcaulc ORID ObVRCES ro COMtRT
LAKE I �' '-- /,WASHINGTON il
-.......I /•// i uuEmY BY v0000trol.
DONO COUNTY)
// / ` i Y VIRDCN.DAM MD 88
r / // A.MART YMCA/BEMOAN&LEAS•DAGOWS•.BRASS
•
DISK`_....._, .••' • / / -� IN THE SW
CORNER Of�A UE SLOPI.USGS.SET NG AWEIRILL EbIRUCiURF ON
-- • .: ::`i/� • ! ��•'•-� THE NOR11E T SOE OF A]G•CORRUGATED PIPE PIPE
//! / / TNAT MUMS A STREAM GAUGE ON THE WEST SIDE OF
��— -i. G7 I S'f'�• � /- BOULEVYMU.EIEYAATroc 2IDGE ER LAKE xaroN E.,
�H1e/l'•., /• \'y e.TOPoCRAPNF$PROVIDED BY DEOROSS AMT.WPM ( R
Q}1 d : :P'',,. • . W1M AERtu CONTROL Bf mAk wC.w 200.1. f/9
A.BOUICAT'W6 SNOEM ARC FRO:ALTA Areu gg11
1 `'� I /:"Si-'• �C .'„/ WID TIRE SUFNET OF SOWN PARCEL FOR.VD E.1 'gFN
,{}emu /�^ yG� F I Ofl�/n2E2IDP:pR BF BDSN.ROM.4 xRCHPiS.INC.DATED •l
4 ty / ��4r' ,.-:'' f ,x/"/ :y woo
AND A FIELD SURVEY RV OTAN,INC.IN KAROL a `y
.e, ....'''.1` iy,:,,d', , 1:4
yY � �
I I s ,• % � �,
•
.H , . \\° wee Cy d" le •! iY: I..//ti � m
AGUAD D0oo'. I .. /r� : Z1) \ .'‘' ,/,'"' '' ,....I ;,1••:`'..:- •.- ,,,a!,/,.„.„. , • • IL'-:'g ,
i /..fj Jl' •4, LQ Z
,:Ds / A�� . • x
� �
i ` •/, ' , a o Oas; 7 . ', :r ' �D
/ WY CREEK '' _ ® MS:AP WAS CREATED BY:E OR UNDER NY �I incorporated
OETSA • /•/4 ... / - �: D/IRE�CTIO/N./l N,,,
__ _Q / , �;',/r�+ ,,,�. ^7/� L-. .. n_/o FOB
', Vas ,Cy 30209.001.001
�E�? W'R11AW C.IA1YRDIDE•RS DATE ProptO_2
_ _nsw�---I' f7A; ,FY��• N 40TH ST. I
3
03
CO,
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
MAT-
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT — NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
,....,,,........
k
Mitg
ant..
,/
V •WA,/ ; 5:S • 6'0
IMP SOURCE:
:::-.4 0 \. ‘,),i,t4-7-0 ,3i t •• 4,
BriRK 7...M.Ter"'l Vi*,
%lint`"litlikt 41. pir.,..
14
:-.0"- ,.--,,i.i.,.r,gr,c10,ii-•-•- •,,...'.,'.:, . g-.., LAKE WASHINGTON
„...17,..., .........%>:,...,::::‘ ..,„..,„..%
ri, -...,,..::::, -
•..1kri pi71_,,J. 4,,, -., , , 1 )„,
5
•-.. ,. •:. ,L..... mNiz. Er 'SO'.....-L,li,ie __.. .011 ,Q ..
*4' P%!Pp LqgliE4qin. go,lx..z4.161.4ailit ,i-, . -
‹g
.--. ..,.......R.La cell e=10=...-, l,:. •el 64...:.ea PZ,l g I i
I _.„___ A
,,,, ,
1'VI f:'sr 77.1.•;,1 7;7 it%'ildfil 743;s7i:'1. ,...":1
t 1 t
.., • 'eeerf..1 rta - alt ' 704 ', „"' ,,,... LAKe WASHING .. .
:: FFRX" .M- MI , UM ecz .Nr,?; IL, MN on- ;•:, f...i',;.‘41•••=•••• . , roN ''., .4LA r:,
•bi.`4,,'"-',,,t:°,s-
\ c-
. .--i• ., - .. .mE Mla'r MIX .11P. ..,.Z. ..tlf.„ --.-.- - •-'. q .4
•,.
-se• ' '%"..:0,,,,,
cee.0°.„er
-.,
r1r - ' , • 'q 51! ON 11,4,':.15,11 iti -elit='.. ,',11".:, Eil . ''''N,',. '' .'' .11,t
',...1 - : . .. .,,,:A Riv., Lie, E•tr. rife. p...vi.m7;n,,.1.--...= zr.:-.-.4% "-'. . ‘.....,- - 4,...E.c7" ..,.. I
_ g ila ': it °0.•_.41,;.Z•3'ff,:g..A.-71 aitIrd'.•;:vE forr:efv4 1 ,•. .--,k_ - y- ' stk i, r__1.401;I -0x, .
c•s• I
• 'CAW." Fii ko?, 7,,Lte..70 ELT PETt., 'a-4 00.: E, ta 1 crim---m__ gz 1 ,,, _.......,..-I-r ...,,s.,- ,1 ',I,,.
i .
'?-wim-, t!,' .,, n ,iti"ffiri NVe..?kl-INN-P.Silrit: V. .:-.r:%•n PC .1'5 .3 . '. ' „.......\ .. 0 i tig Li-i-c.• k er:.-1.,:h7.1.0 ,in 5111,4 hg„f ?.4 F-4sits -4- - t2.,. - A t ,
, +
,
, L,..r... „....„, r., .,.. ,,,,,,,,. vt.....i 7.air-. ,,_..„4.4.Am eq. .„..p. ijk '4,4u L.!'.493 0 47.4'0Ah,. '•••-- i'" . VACANT 0 // 4.1 .g
; II re.'"I'llit 17 9 1 ik,• ' ' \ 0
'.9R,17.7319!, i'''' • 7 IR 114,J cc% ,-. 10 S 3.E.4.31,.!i 17d ..' VI I. .__ .. . 11....., F..4.4.v , ; ,.'0 0 I
meg i. '2.1441:?.■1" ' ....At:: r. k
81
-:
*r''' 4'''"• ' 11%'n ra 0 t7•1 -"''''' •-:- ...-•
•
.,
.4'.--''' IR; 07 6.-ti•L'4 IL° - 4r A ' cr,coli •-•..f ',47d, - -.!, i .,' -. . '40, , g`5311gi
Et! T-1-. .• -••"--- '0 .7..„ rill PIN ••••-si ',,° i. ... * . : . .. , „,„ . 11:340 v A\,,,,, ,,,,,,-"',s74.0,.ki,‘,. ..0,,,,, s
0 az=1°Ei
l'.:1' EI:t ' g t-' ''' oitigi4 KT -9•„.#44 "42?;.:1M, s'i*.,iiii. t........s 'N't f D .,•• •7 p }.,
.tlii..t. 1 • - i, cg+A..,14"11,'i4i.o " • •••• "k3 '.. /
.._......W IIMINESINIz416 . 4'
„-,... 8.,g, 1 • c° C=;:i•-•• .' ---. ' % -.4k.• • z c,_
—
,, -- --'''\
------..- __-----E-----:-t-- ..—:-.:.-z-,-....::-- .. _....%. "
-...- ..,..,__. .....61..„, ..w.- - i •---- .". -.2 ,-""1-1; 1 e k.:,, - -.7--.,'V„... . -'„ ''''''''- ,p. , ---;xe, „.,
\It
F t
Int,P:-.— to7Miir. • ,,
. k.....,.,
=10.lrf;.': - '''''''' <-------1'-g- -4-Fr''' — - . , ' i it P:9'1..! .: 7!.-71 ,i..::7---T,‘-1 E. :'' No,^4,^,,L '')-'4,7,1410•4,,im:";.......w.,,,-• ...-:„•
5*- ' .-'27.`„. ‘1111.1"' wilio. , ''''''' 1 ' .`I'l . 0 .C•J •' 1 1/1DI= ° k i 't, N ----... , ..,_„•-•-•••••-•:---,___—,---o_.._.."_..,. ,,,,,,, c., m ,
g •• Ta‘,1•;:•-,..•-' • i -.;•-• IN ... IIMo *.e.
,, i . "! •;-• °- • 1 ' •.,.. i:- ' -- ' — „ --•••''',; •:•-•- __,--.Fr'-'-'-` 0 41 g i . '1: t: ,`!,!4f,';: ' •
44'4, .1 ''''.:.. 6 ,'i'•" ' ,.1,,,,.,-^,welfare
, r -• 'el &,..41,--04= P 49 j's. /e- ',?-,-,•7•,", . -
0, , . - et •,
r10 pa z-• - .•:-.. i...;0',..,' ,,cgt...1,..•,.,..,-- -"r•W '''' '
::114- --.. 1 71 *„ 4 ''''641111510MV4101?.....,,' ....o. ".. ... s' . '•'. --1Z-22> : cg A g4.0•'''' ----1 - 4 ^.' '-.1 ','1", irw'.' ' ,.
Illg 4-..,..0.7',111 ,..,7 k,:.IIIIIIIIIIQS5P, t g
I •••• AtE it .., ..._.4.:..ii,?Itig• i .1 A 11#4
•-e Al 1 ° '• ° i ircolc i =, e b ' 1' • ---t19-7.,
r ,, -. 'rX . ' p • ot 4.3,(c... .4 IN Rg.tiToll Pir-- --1"--• ''''-"' ''' o a
... - • : . - i '''.., amtti...lig „ .1; - - ; _ .. .44 : iu_—/-•,..---.......- t 46Enr"113 ,M NEIKSTri < 12
•...vil ! ..: ( . .,-,.., t zw 1' 1 2 A.g. , or21.1,- ' . . !. . j i.- AllNIA)&1054". • g=i '111,.
1 '!0.41 / •' % IOW'.*L' ......,,i, ..7.5,,- _
• °ii, ' 4 - -. - ) - 1 i 1 5.
1 ,,„ i, ,., 0 L...orporated
‘ ' . it liSOCON 1:,r.74ZIR,... ....,14 WA Alit
'C TY• 1-- • 't
Pe:iiitSX ' •
...
ts i '
v, ' Wrisdill,VICIV.,14 17 '':'..gl-A "'"6 N.'%. ".:"Is'.--. -. ...-• •••- --vs.P. 1 1f4 ,. .• ,- '
$. i
1 tf •
•,.. :. ' 1 .
✓▪ ft.OM jg-.4
1,111 CT!:7.,:,,t..7't4e,•Al . 11,55,°7,1,11X 1. *-- !Tr o•F NEWPASTL ' , , gmo
i ''. s'\ 1 1 ''L. i.1011044P'A..i:P• '....4.41.,1.- n-
IE i Oi VIVA .‘i'40 404,1 g
1
• 1 ''''
a,-.P.i'
7.77 ....
- „. • 3, ...• ____ dAmio • %wf-m . . ,,, , moimutlg -
,, . 4,• • • • .....:.?c•.•• -: .21.4. -11 i x..,J c ..,, t . • . • ‘ ...h C"... '''''.4 She..1 of 1
= 'I.
CO
...A
.I,...
.-7- _ - \ B4 • 29 T24N R5E W 1/2
- - - - ��/ / ,/
CDR ` h3
- ' CDR ����•
\_ .. t ,
1.
r i Q
1-1
%
A ti `v ,1 i-E140-- — — ) AL,
ree. y
A,....• r 4►4r St
_ mil /4' mow mewl
I I is .t 2 ii
. fifiriF I ot " il 0
— — — Mfii'1111'I' U IJj ► , • . i R
- -' — — xi Aillisengt1111111.0 - - //1■■������� E!II !
nit . N
-84
0 - . /111111MI Rigor. MIMI r.
, z:— ammo mummal). MR11111111LO 111 NE 36t1 z,
. ,4Eli01 INbPt ?4' W11 I .IJ. ■ • o • — IP;
U r�I�4I 'PIN 44f( 1s PO I[siaeb ,'
1 I ,ilab - �) N
iRC
ril . . ? . . .
. A111 , -
r C_-
fi0 ■menumusnmar I
o : IG�CI !lI j�111111
. U I I�_ III I I -$I I i J II - �' 11 R I.
RipliI�II ( I� II I
em u■' I I'll 1 ii I I I I I I I 11.11R14 I �rinn■'
rn:ii u 111 Io-4811 I PI�1LI 1�4 1111 III mla■
ilibk-C -
MaY
Cree-� I � 11 I I I I7 I � IR q
,=1111 n I I I �
I I II4401 CNii T.. - 1
I R I'► I ni-IN 4t ? r���� "''n 'may CN ., _ .
11I -Is-1I -8 I I J, 11 I II I I I I I I ,. �� °Ot l
�] I111 1 r I?9'H I 11.111 I RI-8 11 i 8 d?" tor
, '14. .. i j-: - ji 1 imantm.■
.giiiis --
_g `. 1 1 J R-8 .. _
— I I17t'CL �,, II , R-4 \ I I ',
D4 • 5 T23N R5E W 1/Z .
�titY o� --- �z C4
�_ ZONING —Renton City Lim{f� 1:4800 �
_ + P/B/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES TA, 1'l'4 32 T24N R5E W 1/2 ' EXHIBIT 15
54321
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed; OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading;OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway to avoid restriction of flows during
regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume(i.e.a flood terrace excavated on either side of the stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
C1. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
D. Plants and Animals
Dl. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping,mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance
adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of Renton
and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
EXHIBIT 16
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
i
D6. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals
and/or mammals including, but not limited to deer,ducks and geese, muskrats,squirrels, mice and
frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thena) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established
(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR b)
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands
or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from •
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such as
the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
El. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
F. Hazardous Materials
Fl. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
ii
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color, including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height, relative building bulk may be reduced
by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a change in
proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height, buildings shall be designed and sited
to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
Noise
11. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and vibration resulting
from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures shall include pre-drilling of the upper
portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for
smaller,residential supports.
12. Vibration,auger casting,or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to
limit noise related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of crossing
construction.
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
iii
, - CITY )F RENTON
y PlannmglBuildin blicWorks Department
Kathy Keolkei-Wheeler,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 5, 2005
Campbell Mathewson
Century Pacific.
2140 Century Square •
Seattle, WA 98101
•
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary..Plat •
File No.LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-1-I, SM .
Dear Mr: Mathewson •
• We have received the revised information and drawings.for the;subject preliminary plat and site
plan. Therefore, the land:use.application (File No.:LUA-02-040).has been taken"off-hold".
A-Public Hearing will be held by the:Renton:Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the
seventh floor.of City Hall, 1'055 South Grady.,Way,;Renton; Washington, on January 25, 2005
at.9:00 AM to consider the Preliminary:Plat and:Site Plan..The;applicant or representative(s)'.
of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing:'A copy of the staff report will be
:. mailed to you.,one week before the hearing., :;
An appeal of the Mitigation Document was filed. If the appeal of the Mitigation Document.is not
. withdrawn, the appeal will be heard as part of this;,public hearing, :
Please contact me at(425)430-7382, ifyou have questions: V ,
Sincerely; ,
' Susan A. Fiala, AICP
.- Senior Planner
cc: Barbee Mill-Company/Owners .
Century Pacific, LP/Applicant .
Parties of Record.
Project File ,
1�t
1I
' ------ --77n .
OFF_HOLD.duc 1055 South Grady Way.-Renton,Washington 98055 R . N T O N
AHEAD OF
C. Thispapercontains50%recyclectmaterial,30%postconsumer .THE CURVE
DE.: M-N
LOPT PLANNING
Pro WN 1 tive
JAN.0 3 2005
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat is a proposed residential subdivision g J i i C te of
the existing Barbee Mill Company lumber mill adjacent to Lake Washington in north
Renton, Washington. The site is approximately 22.9 acres,located west of Lake
Washington Boulevard and south of the I-405 and NE 44th Street interchange. The project
site includes approximately 1,900 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington including the
delta of May Creek. The property is zoned COR2 (Center Office Residential, Port Quendall
site). The applicant is seeking approval of a Preliminary Plat with a minimum density of
five du/acre per RMC 4-2-120B.Adjacent property to the north is also zoned COR2.
Property to the east is zoned R-8 and R-10 and the property to the south is zoned R-8.
The site is currently used for lumber production. There are approximately 15 buildings on
the project site, which were built for lumber milling and storage including one operational
office building. Many of the buildings are vacant. The existing boathouse located in the
southwest portion of the property is the only existing structure proposed to remain with
this project.
May Creek runs through the easterly and southerly portions of the site with ultimate
discharge at a delta at the shoreline of Lake Washington. Two Category III wetlands also
exist adjacent to the southern property line south of May Creek. The majority of the
delineated boundary of these are located within the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-
way. The required 25-foot buffer for these two wetlands extends onto the Barbee Mill site.
The westerly-most wetland is in proximity to the existing storm drainage outfall that
outfalls onto the property from the established residential areas south and east of Lake
Washington Boulevard. The proposed property access (Street D) and an onsite roadway
(Street C) have been located at the preferred location based on discussions with the City
and the analysis provided with the project's Environmental Impact Study (EIS). These
roadway locations will result in some incidental impact to the two wetlands as evaluated in
the EIS. Efforts will be made during final engineering design to minimize impacts to each
of these low-category wetlands including the use of walls and rockeries to contain the limits
of the roadway fill. However, such features/structures would not likely be allowed within
the railroad right-of-way. As such, portions of these two low-category wetlands
(approximately 2,530 square feet or 0.06 acres) will be eliminated to facilitate the required
access to the site. This fill would be mitigated for in accordance with City of Renton
standards as the project is vested as well as any applicable and reasonable criteria
established by the SEPA determination.
According to a geotechnical report prepared by Golder Associates, dated August 2000 and
re-issued in December 2001, the site soils consist mainly of Norma Sand Loam. Existing
site grades north of May Creek range between 0.5% to 4%with a general slope westerly
across the property. The slopes across the portion of the site south of May Creek vary from
approximately 1% to 7% northwesterly toward May Creek and Lake Washington. Existing ,9 .,
grades within the May Creek buffer area vary from 7% to approximately 35% to 40% at the
banks of the creek. There are no existing stormwater detention or water quality ponds on
the property. Stormwater runoff primarily sheet flows directly to Lake Washington and
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 1
otak
\\Kirae0l\proj\project\30200\30209\Admin\CorrespWarrative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
May Creek through limited strips of vegetation. The proposed subdivisions will improve the
existing conditions by channeling storm water to constructed water quality ponds or
dispersing limited landscape areas through vegetated areas prior to discharge to Lake
Washington and/or May Creek. No on-site detention is proposed for the project due to the
site's proximity to Lake Washington and it's designation as a"major water body" which
provides exemption from detention per the King County Surface Water Manual (KCSWM).
The proposed development includes a mixture of 115 duplex and fourplex townhouse units
on individual single-family lots. Attached units will be located with common walls along a
"zero"lot line. Adjacent, non-attached units will be separated by a minimum five-foot side
yard setback on each individual lot. Front and rear lot setbacks are proposed to be a
minimum of ten feet. Residential lot sizes range from 1,820 square feet to 16,850 square
feet. Parking and other typical lot/parcel development criteria will comply with the COR
zoning defined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of complete application for the
project. Building heights will be limited to the voluntary maximum evaluated during the
SEPA process for the project. Streets within the subdivision will be dedicated to and
publicly maintained by the City of Renton. Water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities
servicing the project will also become part of the public systems maintained by the City of
Renton.
Currently, there are three bridges crossing May Creek. Each of these will be removed with
the project. One new crossing of May Creek is proposed with the project to provide fire
access and circulation for the subdivision. This improved crossing is currently planned near
the location of one of the existing bridges. A 50-foot buffer will be provided along each side
of May Creek. A maximum 50-foot setback with restrictive plantings is also proposed along
most of the shoreline of Lake Washington and the delta of May Creek. This lake shoreline
setback is typically 50-feet with a reduced width to a minimum of 25-feet at specifically
constrained lots as shown on the Preliminary Plat plan.
The City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-2-120B allows development of a COR zoned
parcel with residential uses at a minimum density of five du/net acre when the
development does not involve a mix of uses. The proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
project includes single-family residential use only at a density of approximately 6.76 du/net
acre.
Primary access to the site will be from two points along Lake Washington Boulevard. The
majority of the project site is located north and west of May Creek with a primary access by
means of a 60-foot easement over the eastern edge of the adjacent property to the north.
The owners of the Barbee Mill property have an ownership interest in this adjacent parcel.
The developed site area north of May Creek will include a looped local access road (Streets
A and B) with a connection to the southeastern portion of the site via a new bridge crossing.
These internal local access streets will be a 32-foot wide paved street section with sidewalks
on both sides located within a 42-foot right-of-way. A 26-foot wide private access easement
will service lots 43 through 48 from Street A north of the May Creek delta at Lake
Washington. Roadside sidewalks are proposed throughout the development to provide
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 2
otak
\\Kirae01\prof\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\N arrative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
continuous and convenient pedestrian accessibility. A soft-surface trail within the May
Creek buffer is also proposed as part of the project to provide public access to and from the
easterly property boundary to the Lake Washington shoreline. The terminus of this trail
will include an interpretive panel documenting the historic role(s) of the Barbee Mill.
The townhome units located south and east of May Creek will be accessed from Lake
Washington Boulevard directly via an improved roadway located north of the existing
commercial driveway for the site. The proposed public access road at this location will
maintain a 32-foot wide pavement section with sidewalks on each side within a 42-foot wide
right-of-way. This roadway will connect the southern and northern portions of the property
by means of a new bridge crossing at May Creek(Street D). The smaller fourplex lots in the
portion of the site south of May Creek will front along a public roadway with a 32-foot wide
street in a 39-foot right-of-way (north of Street D). This local access street is a dead-end
with limited access that is proposed with a hammer-head style turnaround at the westerly
terminus. Other infrastructure improvements for the project include two offsite connections
to the existing public water main located within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way.
An estimated construction cost for the subdivision infrastructure is approximately
$3,250,000. Infrastructure construction will include approximately 38,000 cubic yards of
fill for road and lot construction and 32,000 cubic yards of excavation from the water
quality ponds, underground pipes, and existing stockpiles. The site also includes
approximately 72 trees, which are approximately six inches and larger at chest height. The
majority of these trees are located along May Creek and its buffer. The trees within the
existing May Creek buffer will remain undisturbed except for those in conflict with the
proposed bridge crossing and other project-related grading improvements. The trees to be
removed include five ash trees ranging in size from six to ten inches located southeast of
lots 62 through 64, two cottonwood and four ash trees ranging from six to thirty inches
south of May Creek and east of Street D, three six-inch ash trees at Street D, and one six-
inch ash northwest of lot 108. One ten-inch cherry tree located on lot 105, one twelve-inch
cedar tree and one sixteen-inch fir located northwest of lots 96 and 97, and ten ash trees
ranging in size from six to fourteen inches in the vicinity of Street C are also proposed to be
removed.
The onsite roads and water quality pond tracts will be privately maintained in accordance
with City of Renton standards. The Homeowners Association will own and maintain
designated on-site open-space areas. Temporary job trailers will be located on-site during
construction and during the initial home sales period.
Routine Vegetation Management
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat project will likely begin construction in the summer of
2005. It is expected that one of the first construction tasks will be the clearing and removal
of selected onsite trees and vegetation. All vegetation to be protected along the May Creek
corridor will be delineated with construction and erosion control fencing. It is expected that
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 3
otak
\\Kirae01\prof\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Nairative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
excavators, loaders, roller compactors, and other large earth moving equipment will be used
to clear and finish grade the property. Since the property has been previously developed,
there is very little vegetation onsite except for the areas on either side of May Creek. This
project will preserve the majority of this existing vegetation by providing a buffer of 50 feet
along each side of May Creek.
The May Creek buffer area will be protected with continued maintenance of the existing
vegetation and supplemental landscape and native plantings. Much of the vegetation in
this corridor will be allowed to grow naturally to allow a mature re-vegetation of the creek.
During the course of the construction, no tree trimming or tree topping is planned for any of
the vegetation along the May Creek corridor. Areas of grass along the creek that are
currently being mowed will be mowed during the construction period unless the City
prefers that no mowing occur. No chemical applications of insecticide or herbicide are
proposed during the construction period.
Mowing will occur with both standard riding mowers and hand mowers. No other use of
equipment for management of vegetation is expected onsite during construction. Newly
landscaped areas will be maintained by the contractor after installation until final
acceptance by the Owner. Any work on maintenance of vegetation will occur during
standard working hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 4
otak
\\Kirae01\proj\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Narrative010305.doc
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested that the right-of-way width for residential access street be
reduced from 50 feet to 42 feet within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.F.2.b
Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: Right-of-way
width 50 feet
Modification: Allow the residential access street right-of-way to be 42 feet wide for
Streets "A", "B", and"D" at the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—The developable area within the Barbee Mill site is constrained by Lake
Washington along the west side, a railroad right-of-way along the east side, and May Creek
running through the southerly portion of the site. Reducing the residential access street
right-of-way from 50 feet to 42 feet for Streets "A", "B", and"D" will help provide additional
room for housing. The right-of-way width reduction will also provide more room for May
Creek buffers.
1. Safety—Granting this modification will not compromise safety. The street design will
continue to adhere to city design standards for width and geometry. Emergency service
will not be affected by reducing the right-of-way width since two points of access and
turn around provisions are maintained.
2. Function—The residential access streets will function as required by maintaining city
standards for pavement width, horizontal and vertical curvature, and two access points
to the project.
3. Appearance—The proposed reduction of right-of-way width will not change the
roadway appearance.
4. Environmental Protection—Smaller right-of-way widths will help the environment by
accommodating increased buffers along May Creek and the small onsite wetland.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not have an adverse impact on street
maintenance. The street design and construction will comply with city standards.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—The road design and construction conforms with
current City code. City of Renton Development Regulations Section 4-6-060-R-3 states
"The department may approve a reduction in right-of-way for residential access streets
for new streets...within a subdivision to 42'when the extra area from the reduction is
used for the creation of an additional lot(s) which could not be platted...or when the
platting with the required right-of-way width results in the creation of lots with less
than 100'in depth". *N�N�'
7. Impact on Other Properties—Reducing the required right-of-way widthRave
an impact on other properties. The modification is requested for intm4' 3�rb-dw s
only. 0e Gl`
b3 0)
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-sight-of-way width.doc
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested to allow back-to-back reverse curves on residential access
streets within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.F.8.c
Tangents for Reverse Curves: A tangent of at least 100 feet shall be
provided for reverse curves on residential access streets
Modification: Allow the residential access streets within the preliminary plat of Barbee
Mill to have back-to-back reverse curves
Justification
Background—The developable area within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat is
constrained by Lake Washington along the west side, a railroad right-of-way along the east
side, and May Creek running through the southerly portion of the site. In order to fit lots
around the sensitive area buffer edges, the residential access streets need to curve back and
forth. A length of tangent roadway between two reverse curves is typically required only
for superelevation run-out on higher-speed neighborhood collectors or arterial streets.
Residential access streets are intended to be low speed streets with relatively low traffic
volumes. Superelevation is normally not required on low speed streets. Other local
jurisdictions, such as King County, do not require superelevation for residential access
street horizontal curves and do not require a tangent length between reverse curves for low
speed horizontal design.
1. Safety—The Barbee Mill onsite residential access streets conform to low speed design
standards with a minimum centerline radius of 100 feet without super elevation. As
such, safety will not be compromised by the proposed modification. It will not affect
emergency service access.
2. Function—The roadways will continue to function with adequate pavement width and
sight distance provisions as low speed public access for the Barbee Mill site without a
tangent between reverse curves.
3. Appearance—The roadway appearance will not be noticeably affected by this
modification.
4. Environmental Protection—Allowing back-to-back horizontal curves along the
residential access streets for the Barbee Mill site will benefit the environment by
providing greater flexibility to accommodate irregular curves in the onsite sensitive area
buffers.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not affect the maintenance of the onsite
streets.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—This modification conforms to the intent of code for low
speed residential access design including horizontal curvature to optimize sensitive area
buffer lines, open space, and residential lot areas.
7. Impact on Other Properties—This modification will have no adverse impact on other
properties.
DEV CIS,OF RtNTONNING
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-Reverse Curves.doc ,AN W 3 2005
RECEIVED
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested that the sidewalk widths be reduced from six feet to five
feet within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.F.2.b
Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: Six-foot
sidewalks adjacent to curb both sides
Modification: Allow the sidewalk width to be five feet as measured from the face of curb
within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—The developable area of the Barbee Mill site is constrained by Lake
Washington, May Creek, and an existing railroad right-of-way. In order to optimize the
amount of front yard space available to homeowners, sidewalks should be confined to the
public right-of-way. Reducing the sidewalk width from six feet to five feet, measured from
the face of the curb, will allow the sidewalks to be built within public right-of-way in most
cases while maintaining the required 32-foot street width.
1. Safety—Pedestrian safety is maintained with a five-foot sidewalk. AASHTO standards
for local roads and streets include a minimum sidewalk width of four feet. Granting
this modification will provide sidewalks greater than this four-foot minimum.
2. Function—Reducing the sidewalk width from six feet to five feet as measured from the
face of curb will not change their function as pedestrian access ways.
3. Appearance—This modification will not adversely affect the street appearance.
4. Environmental Protection—Reducing the sidewalk width from six feet to five feet along
Street"D"will reduce environmental impacts by making the bridge crossing of May
Creek and the fill of the northerly wetland (Category 3) narrower.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not adversely affect the maintenance of the
street facilities.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—This modification conforms with the code intent by
providing pedestrian access along the front yards of each residential lot.
7. Impact on Other Properties—This modification will have no adverse impact on other
properties.
DEV CITY OF RENTON IPlG
'.1AN032005
RECEIVED
K\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-Reduce sidewalk widths.doc
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested that the private access easement serving lots 43 through
48 be allowed to serve six lots with no frontage on public right-of-way
within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.J.1
Minimum Design Standards for Private Streets: Allows for access to six or
less lots, with no more than four of the lots not abutting a public right-of-
way
Modification: Allow private street to access six lots with no portion fronting on a public
right-of-way within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—The developable area of lots 43 through 48 within the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat are constrained by Lake Washington along the west side and May Creek
on the east. These lots are located on a peninsula formed by the shoreline of Lake
Washington and the May Creek delta. The combination of increased buffers and the
topographic constraints to shoreline and stream buffers limit the buildable area. The
reduced width of the proposed private access easement provides the necessary area for lot
development. The reduced tract width also improves the area available at the May Creek
and shoreline buffers.
1. Safety—This modification will not compromise safety. The street design will continue
to conform to city design standards for pavement width and horizontal curvature.
Emergency service will not be affected with the reduced tract width. Sprinkler systems
may be required for specific homes on this access easement as determined by the City
Fire Chief in accordance with current city codes.
2. Function,—The proposed private access will serve the six residential lots as required by
city standards with adequate street width, horizontal and vertical curvature.
3. Appearance—The reduced tract width will not adversely change the roadway
appearance since the minimum pavement section for the driveway will be maintained.
4. Environmental Protection—The reduced tract width will benefit the environment by
providing additional area for buffers along May Creek and the Lake Washington
shoreline.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not have an adverse impact on maintenance.
• The street design and construction will be in general accordance with city standards.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—The intent of the code to provide access to no more than
six residences via a private drive is maintained with this modification. The road design
and construction will conform to other applicable preliminary plat conditions.
7. Impact on Other Properties—Allowing a private street to access these specific six lots
will not adversely impact other properties, since it occurs on an isolated peninsula
internal to the plat.
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Conesp\Street Standards Modification-Private Access Easement.doc J- ""- 0 2005
RECEWED
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Prolect: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested that the right-of-way width for residential access street be
reduced from 50 feet to 39 feet for Street"C" within the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.F.2.b
Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: Right-of-way
width 50 feet
Modification: Allow right-of-way of Street"C" to be 39 feet wide within the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—The developable area within the Barbee Mill site is constrained by Lake
Washington along the west side, a railroad right-of-way along the east side, and May Creek
running through the southerly portion of the site. Reducing the residential access street
right-of-way from 50 feet to 39 feet as shown in the roadway section of Figure 1 for Street
"C"will provide additional area for housing development. The right-of-way width reduction
will also provide additional area for May Creek buffers.
1. Safety—Granting this modification will not compromise safety. The street design will
continue to adhere to city design standards for width and geometry. Emergency service
will not be affected by reducing the right-of-way width since two points of access and
turn-around provisions are maintained.
2. Function—The residential access streets will function as required by maintaining city
standards for pavement width, horizontal and vertical curvature, and cul-de-sac length.
In addition, low traffic volumes are expected for Street"C" (serving twenty-one sites).
3. Appearance—The proposed reduction of right-of-way width will not change the
roadway appearance.
4. Environmental Protection—Smaller right-of-way widths will help the environment by
accommodating increased buffers along May Creek and the small wetland south of
Street"C".
5. Maintainability—Granting this modification will not have an adverse impact on
maintenance. The street design and construction will comply with city street standards.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—The road design and construction conforms with
current city code. City of Renton Development Regulations Section 4-6-060-R-3 states
"The department may approve a reduction in right-of-way for residential access streets
for new streets...within a subdivision to 42' when the extra area from the reduction is
used for the creation of an additional lot(s)which could not be platted...or when the
platting with the required right-of-way width results in the creation of lots with less
than 100' in depth".
7. Impact on Other Properties—Reducing the required right-of-way width will not have
an impact on other properties. The modification is requested for internal roadways
only. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
JAN 0 3 2005
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-39'right-of-way width.doc RECEIVED
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
Description: It is requested that Street"C" be allowed to exceed the 700-foot standard
for dead-end streets without providing two means of access within the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.G.2
Cul-de-sacs and Turnarounds—Minimum Requirements: Length of
street longer than 700 feet requires two means of access
Modification: Allow Street "C" to have a dead-end length of approximately 710 feet
within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—Street"C" serves 20 townhome lots and one boathouse lot within the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat. The length of the road is 710 feet from the intersection of Street"D"
to the south boundary of the property. Street"C" is constrained by May Creek on the west
and the railroad right-of-way along the east side. Street"D" has been located for optimal
safety at the railroad crossing. All lots within the Barbee Mill plat would be served within
the 700 feet limit.
1. Safety—This modification will not compromise safety. The street design will continue
to conform to city design standards for pavement width and roadway geometry.
Emergency service will not be affected since a turn-around is proposed to be maintained
onsite.
2. Function—Residential access Street"C" will function as required by maintaining
roadway standards for horizontal and vertical curvature, and cul-de-sac length.
3. Appearance—The proposed length of roadway will not change the roadway appearance
since the typical roadway section is maintained.
4. Environmental Protection—No adverse impact to the environment results from the
proposed dead-end condition, and the current configuration of the plat/roadways
minimizes sensitive area intrusions.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not adversely impact roadway maintenance.
The street design and construction will comply with city street standards.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—The length of roadway conforms to the intent of the
code to provide reasonable access to each individual residential lot without restricting
emergency vehicles. Design considerations have been made to reduce the length as
much as practical while limiting impacts to sensitive areas and maintaining the number
of railroad crossings.
7. Impact on Other Properties—The proposed extension of the onsite roadway to the
limited, existing single family lots to the southwest should improve access to those
properties with a widened pavement section and safer railroad crossing.
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
'JAN 0 3 2005
RECEIVED
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-Street C length.doc
CITY OF RENTON
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—LUA 02-040
.Description: It is requested to allow Street "C" to be constructed with sidewalk only on
the north (house-fronting) side
Standard: Street Standards, Section 4-6-060.F.2.b
Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: Six-foot
sidewalks adjacent to curb on both sides
Modification: Allow sidewalks only along the north side of Street"C" within the Barbee•
Mill Preliminary Plat
Justification
Background—The area available for development between the May Creek buffer and an
existing railroad right-of-way is limited. Townhomes front along the northerly side of
Street "C". In order to avoid grading impacts to wetlands and the railroad right-of-way
along the east side of Street "C", sidewalks should be built only along the townhome side of
the street.
1. Safety—Pedestrian safety will be maintained by providing a sidewalk at the frontage
of lots along Street"C". Other local access roadways will include sidewalks on both
sides. These access streets also are expected to have low traffic demand since they are
dead ends with a limited number of residences located only on one side. Omission of a
sidewalk on one side of the roadway will not affect the level of emergency service to the
homes along Street"C".
2. Function—Providing sidewalks at only one side of Street"C"will function as intended
by city standards since houses are located only on one side of the street.
3. Appearance—This modification will not negatively affect appearance since houses are
located only along one side of the street.
4. Environmental Protection—Having sidewalks on both sides of Street"C" would create
additional grading into wetlands and buffers along the easterly side of the streets.
Therefore, the proposed reduction of sidewalks to only the northerly side of Street "C"
will reduce environmental impacts.
5. Maintainability—This modification will not adversely affect maintenance of the
roadways or sidewalks.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—This modification conforms with the intent of city codes
by continuing to provide continuous pedestrian access and connections to other public
facilities for each house along Street"C".
7. Impact to Other Properties—This modification will have a positive impact to the
adjoining railroad right-of-way by allowing additional area for road grading within the
Barbee Mill site. No adverse impacts are expected to result from this modification.
tot
onoN INO
CAN
® 3 2005
K:\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Street Standards Modification-sidewalks on along northerly side of street C.doc
fee°ED
,
„ CITY. 1 E' RENTON
Plannin uildin . blicWorks D artment
Kathy&eolker-Wheeler,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator.
December 13,2004. . •
" .Mr. Steven Wood
Century Pacific: `
2140.Century Square : '
Seattle,WA 98101 ' '
RE: , Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—File No.LUA-02-040;.EIS,PP, SA-H, SM .
' Submittal.Materials dated November 24,.2004 -
•
Dear Mr:Wood:
. In reply to your letter and submitted:.drawings:dated::Novernber 24, 2004, we offer the following
"response outlining what further action or correction is needed.in order to present the project to the
- . .• . .. Hearing Examiner. - .
As you are aware,:the Hearing Examiner:Public Hearing is tentatively.scheduled for January 25, .
2005. The staff report is due. to the Hearing Examiner on Tuesday, January 1;8 2004:I Will need
time to route'the drawings for'staff comment,Nand.then prepare the;report: It would.be most
'appreciated if.the materials would:be;submitted no later than January'3; 2005 to keep the public '
hearing scheduled for the 254'of January ; ;. •
City of Renton Reply to':Steven.Wood letter"•of'November 24,2004
: •; .Corrections/Revisions to the:Plat/Site,Plan - ,
.•1. A street profile and other:sections-and%or:details as-necessairy of.the,main access entrance
: • that demonstrates-compliance With the WUTC standards for=railroad crossings: :
The.street:profile for the south entry a`s':st'ated'in your letter of.November:24,•2004, has ' .
. substandard vertical curves;the road grade is:15.9 percent; and the length of'landing does'not .
meet minimum.;WSDOT crossings standards. Discussion with the P/B/PW Administrator.and
. Development Services Director"indicates that this element of the plat must be revised prior to .
going to the Hearing Examiner. The mitigation measure:is'discussed in the DEIS starting on .
page 3-76 (copies have been attached) : . -
•
Action Needed The grade level crossing is to be moved to the nortlyas.shown in Figure'.3.5-
8. Revise plat and provide"new street profile.. .
2:. The Public Access.to.north is:to be.shown (i.e.pedestrian trail)on the plat. '
The easement for a trail has been provided. However, as indicated.in the. response a
pedestrian circulation plan was to be provided:It is unclear if the Landscape.Plan represents -
circulation or not.
Action Needed Please provide.narrative on how pedestrian circulation works throughout the .
plat. Provide circulation plan as noted.
I:\Barbee Mill EIM5 A@MthagnadY WaYmb1340004Arashington 98055 1\ E 1. T 0 N
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
• Barbee'Miill Preliminary Plat- nittal Review
•
Page 2 of 4
•
•
• 3. . The grade of the.main entrance is greater than 15 percent. It is approximately 15.9'percent •
. based on Sheet:D1-2.
The applicant states that the main entry to the development is the northerly'entrance which is
located on a separate parcel. The'Cuginis are part owners of this property to the north of the
subJect site. The remaining owner(s) of the property:to the north Must be notified by the
applicant of the requirement for right-of-way dedication this land to.the City of Renton as
public right-of-way: This.dedication is part'of the final plat process..However, it is highly
• likely that-the Hearing Examiner will question this "off site"access: '
The applicant states:the south entry is the secondary entry to the development..The'grade of
• . the south entry exceeds 15.•percent. Please see comments from Item # '1 concerning the
revisions to'thisentry.
•
' Action Needed: Obtain written "agreement from.property owners of the north parcel
• . _ concerning the right-of-way dedication'. Submit this.prior-to public hearing. • • •
• - :4. The-tracts for.access"must be;,-revised to read as private access easements throughout the
preliminary plat. Has been,corr'ected as requested:
Action.Needed:None. x;. ;N• .• ,"
• 5. Provide information/data .on.the length of road for':Fire emergency.of.access easement`
- n labeled.as Tract J• . Has been provided as requested:;.
• Action Needed:None. ; xr <r "`
6. ' Update the Project`Narrative:.Last dated$ept::13; 2002.;4ncluding density, number of lots; : ` .
• etc. based on revisions.. Several'items`eneed"further clarification;:or revised text .and these
include:
•. Page 2-The:50 ft•Isetback along Lake Washington-is reduced.in several places, a request
• for buffer averaging should be:.made by the applicant,?m writing with justification..
• . Furthermore, the first;35'<ft:..of native-P lantings:mustbe maintained at the 35 ft.:width,.
• • • - the remaining 15.`ft. of"the,50 ft:is where the-reduction of buffer may occur. However, •
when buffers are reduced iri'width,''epmperisation by increasing buffers .elsewhere .is •
• • . _ •required.This compensation is not shown within the plat,,Please revise plat.': •
Page 2-;the north:access must be dedicated, not.as a•60-ft easement as stated in the
• narrative.Please revise:See#3 for further'corninent: • .. •
• For the 26.ft:private access easement serving lots-43 through.48, there are too many lots
served by the easement Per code, only four not fronting..a public:right-of-way•may •
• access the easement."A.request for a modification to the street standards.can.be'madeby. .
the applicant with written justification to permit additional lots served by the easement. -
• -For Street E•the right-of-way can not be:less than:39 ft. with 32 ft, of pavement. For . , •
Street C the right-of-way can be reduced from 42 to 39 ft:with 32_ft. of pavement.This
requires a request by the applicant to the City and which staff would support.
• • The storm drainage tracts would be owned' and Maintained by the HOA. The City
requires a utility access easement to the tracts. Please revise 'text/narrative where •
. appropriate: •
Action Needed: Revise plat to address items listed.Provide narrative when appropriate,
•
I:\Barbee Mill EIS\Dec_submittals.doc December 13,'2004
•
• • Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat iittal.Review •
Page3of4 . •
•
•
7. Label the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)for May Creek and Lake Washington. Has
been revised.
•
Action Needed:None. •
.8. Revise other submittal drawings-that would change due, to revised plat (i.e. drainage plan,.
grading plan, etc). Revise drawings based on comments within this,letter. •
•
_ Action.Needed: Submit drawings,narratives,PMT's. •
Revisions to Address Mitigation Measures.
1. Provide a 50 foot setback from Lake Washington. 25 feet.is shown..Revise lots as necessary.. •
As stated in Item# 1 in previous section, a request by the applicant for`buffer averaging of
. the:shoreline setback is needed.Maintaining the 35 ft.native vegetationis'required for all lots: •
along the shoreline and.creek: Only, the 15 ft.,lawn can be modified.and compensated
• elsewhere in the•plat.
•
•
• Action Needed Submit a written requested for shoreline setback/buffer. averaging: Provide .
• compensation with square footage• and.;illustrate on plan.
2. The setback from the delta/llay:';.Creek that affects tots. 91, .92, 94, 95 has'not been
incorporated into the plat.:.;:Rvise,plat`;as necessary.:,Staff notes that lots have been •
•• renumbered and re-configured:: _;,,
Action Needed:None
Submittals Materials: =;_
1. Four (4) full size copies:of the Rev sed Preliminary.Plat, landscape'plan.and other revised • • .
• drawings based on corrections listed : All drawing sheets must be folded to 8:'/2•x•11.
2.. A full size colored drawing'of revisedplatiis required:
. 3. PMTs(8 %2 x11) of all revised drawings:
Mitigation Document Clarification Staff..is revising',the'=text'of.'the Mitigation Document:as .•
discussed at the November.10`°..2004:meeting and-outlined in your letter: A copy of the revised
document will be forwarded to you upon ava lability : : :'; _
•
Additional Comments and Actions:.
1. •Provide information.about Lot 95 and how it is accessed: How does the.boathouse `:
and dock function?-Restrictive covenants may be:required as a,condition of plat approval if in
• ' the future these uses would be'removed and replaced:
•
2. In review of the Shoreline Conceptual Landscape Plan, the land area for the:chair/bench
encompasses too much of the native planting area (nearly 20 ft. wide):•To reduce the impact'
•
• to the native planting'area, it is likely that staff.will recommend as a condition of.approval,
- that;the each building fronting Lake Washington'shoreline would be allowed.one trail/path to
' the.shoreline. This would reduce•the.number of pathways by one-half along .the Lake •
Washington shoreline. .
To reiterate, please provide revised plans and written documentation as outlined.above no later
. than January 3,2005 to my attention at the 6th floor of Renton City Hall. - •
•
Please contact me at(425)430-7382 if you have any questions. •
•
•
•
I:\Barbee Mill EIS\Dec_submittals.doc December 13,2004
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat iittal-Review
Page4of4
Sincerely,
Susan Fiala,AICP
Senior Planner
"Enclosures-DEIS pages on Site Access and Figure 3.5-8
• cc:'_:' Campbell Mathewson
Gregg Zimmerman
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Larry" Warren '.
.. .;Y
•
•
•
I:\Barbee Mill EIS\Dec_submittals.doc December 13,2004
3.5.3.3 Channelization Warrant Analysis 1
Channelization warrants were conducted for the south site access/Lake Washington Boulevard
intersection under horizon-year 2007 conditions per WSDOT standards. The intersection channelization
is planned for a northbound-shared through-left turn lane,southbound-shared through-right turn lane,and
eastbound-shared left-right turn lane.
A channelization warrant analysis was conducted for the northbound left-turn movement site access per
the WSDOT design manual,Figure 910-9a(see attached). The northbound left-turn movement totals 15
vehicles during the PM peak hour. The location experiences a total peak hour volume (north and
southbound approaches)of 540 vehicles. Northbound left-turn movement storage is not needed based on
channelization warrant guidelines. Due to the low volume of traffic maneuvering the northbound left-
turn, additional background growth on Lake Washington Boulevard would likely not warrant a left-turn
lane beyond the horizon year based on vehicular volume criteria alone.
An additional check of site access channelization was conducted for the AM peak hour(where inbound
and outbound traffic patterns are reversed). The heavier traffic flow is outbound from the site;therefore,
a channelization warrant analysis was conducted for the eastbound right-turn movement per the WSDOT
design manual, Figure 910-12 (see attached). The eastbound right-turn movement totals 12 vehicles
during the AM peak hour. A storage lane for the eastbound right-turn movement is not needed based on
channelization warrant guidelines.
Cumulative impacts of developments accessing the south site access may include the need for turn lanes.
The total volume of traffic needed to warrant the installation of a northbound left-turn lane (given no
change in background traffic)is 60 vph (an additional 45 vph). The total volume of traffic accessing the
eastbound approach needed to warrant the installation of an eastbound right-turn pocket is 250 vph(or 45
vph turning right),which is an additional 200 vph on the approach(or 30 to 35 vph turning right).
3.5.3.4 Mitigation for Site Access and Rail Impacts
Impacts of the proposed site access on safety, as well as other impacts, can include a range of potential
measures,including:
• Grade-separated rail crossings, if found to be practicable as directed by the legislative policy in
RCW 81.53.020. This option also could be implemented in the future when properties to the
north develop to mitigate cumulative impacts of development.
• Relocated grade level crossings to meet guidelines for level rail crossings and intersection
approach grades as indicated on Figure 3.5-8. This may place crossings closer together and
increase the potential for blockage of both by a stopped train. This could be mitigated by
connecting the existing access point at the north end of the Vulcan property with this site through
a continuous frontage roadway on the west side of the BNSF right-of way. That would provide a
separation between access points of about 3,600 feet. This access option could be combined with
consolidation of existing rail crossings to reduce the number of vehicle train conflict points.
• A variety of crossing controls for grade level crossings,ranging from:
> passive signing and stop bars,
> warning lights and bells,
> gated control of approaches,and
> quad-gate control of all vehicular and pedestrian approaches.
City of Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat 554-1779-017
Draft-Environmental Impact Statement 3-86 September 2003
c t -
{
,APPAt '
I-. /• ,
i
(
. / , !
11111 COR-2 ZONE / & .91 / 'A
/ ' ".',---
4 '
)
own IforiE i-iiii• 11- 1 /4 i//' /
/s '
, i \
_
OHW
Call,
:4 Affrrarr Mt L. .1 /7
A. ..
, -64
I /.7..„,.....„.,
PUBLIC LAND
gi:*'' .-r4 Space r Qua„tY % •.:/-, .';/ /
relwit-
or.`` '.' -- -- -0 I, ,n\<* , i‘8.# .•./. i' i
r ,..; A •
I r ' WA LAKE • -IAltk- - • AV
SHINGTON imiNV ow • / • ,/ ,-4:•-
.
I mown ...ia• / •
als--- 1 miri /
.14
11 I I, •••11111INIR . PT . :4/ , r7 ,
, ,
i __ PUBLIC LAND
1
Ili," 011‘000-,> 4./Vi ifr
•W011 . II ; 41
,, 4 4
\,.. ......
Y CREEK
DELTA N\14f / ir FLILMOODI:LAIN-idteVc/ i.
/ f/
MilL4R-1- Vir ,t '''' r 40TH ST
-:41K4 (pm-
WI,
1 ,t,ri,V
11111111
far.,:,k- '•• 1//"'s•- •.,
•vb.:
1
I _
_
IParametrix DATE: 07/24/03 FILE: K1779017P01714F-3-5-08
Ariik'N Figure 3.5-8
I SCALE IN FEET
or-1_1 I up Alternative Access
150 300 Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
♦ 8,
3.5.2.6 Site Access
r•
The site is adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad right-of-way. The proposal
includes public street crossings at the location of the existing Barbee Mill site private driveway access
and at the existing private driveway crossing at Ripley Lane approximately 350 feet north of the
intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane. (Continuation of a private crossing is
precluded by BNSF Railroad practices that limit a new or modified private crossing to a maximum of six
properties(Cowles 2003b personal communication))
Theprocedure for establishingapublic street crossingover a railroad right-of-way m the State of
Washington is governed by RCW 81.53.020 and WAC 480-62-150, and requires approval of a grade
= crossing petition by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. Legislative policy of the
State of Washington to requires new highway crossings of railroads to be grade separated, where
practicable (RCW 81.53.020). This policy applies to local streets, and feasibility generally includes
consideration of topographic, operational, safety, and economic factors as well as public need for the
crossing, and reference to guidelines adopted by the Federal Railroad Administration (Nizam 2003
personal communication). The vehicular traffic volumes from this development and the current level of
use of this rail line do not meet FHWA criteria for grade separated crossings, which generally are
implemented for very high vehicular or train volumes(FHWA 2002).
The decision to provide public roadway crossings of railways may include elimination or consolidation of
existing public or private crossings to minimize the total number of crossings. This type of consolidation
may require property owners in the vicinity to work together to provide a circulation system to serve all
properties on the west side of the BNSF railroad tracks. The proposed northerly access to the site on to
Ripley Lane would require dedication of a public street over the property to the north.
It may be desirable, however, to ensure that the feasibility of future implementation of a grade separated
rail crossing is not precluded. The location where existing roadway grades provide the greatest potential
for overcrossing is near the Ripley Lane intersection with Lake Washington Boulevard, where the
roadway is currently above the railroad. An overcrossing at this location, however, would require
substantial reconfiguration of the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection with substantial
changes in elevation and grade for both roadways.
k 'L
At the proposed at-grade crossing location(at the existing site access),the elevation difference with Lake
Washington Boulevard is approximately 10 feet. Given the 60-foot separation between the road and
railroad at that location, a 16 percent grade could theoretically be established. The combination of
standards for roadway approaches and rail crossings may preclude any substantial change in grade
between the roadway and the railroad. The guidelines of the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials provide that the roadway surface should not be more than 3 inches higher or
lower than the top of the nearest rail at a point 30 feet from the rail (AASHTO 2001). The similar
WSDOT Design Manual standard is 3 inches above or 6 inches below(WSDOT 1998, Section 930.03).
The normal standard for a road approach to assure a safe area for cars to wait for entry and for sight
distance is an area 20 to 30 feet in length with a grade not to exceed 6 percent(WSDOT 1998 Fig 930-3).
The buildout of Lake Washington Boulevard, with a center left-turn lane, bike lanes, and sidewalks,
would require most of the right-of-way. This combination of requirements would leave little area for a
change in grade between the road and the railroad.
EiThe difference in elevation between the railroad and Lake Washington Boulevard decreases to the north,
with both at nearly the same elevation approximately 400 feet north of the existing site access
(approximately 400 feet south of the May Creek bridge). Relocating roadway access to this point
presents few limitations for meeting geometric or sight distance standards on Lake Washington
;v.
City of Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat 554-1779-017
i, j Draft-Environmental Impact Statement 3-76 September 2003
J '
Boulevard. It presents several design challenges for the project because the elevation of the railroad is
approximately 20 feet above the elevation of the majority of the site. Specific design issues include:
• The grade of the access roads serving the lots on the east side of May Creek would have to be
raised at its northern end to meet the grade of the new access road near the grade of the railroad.
That would involve substantial fill and would likely completely displace the northerly wetland if
the BNSF allowed fill on their right-of-way. If the railroad did not allow fill, retaining walls of
substantial height would be required. The design of buildings also would be affected. Buildings
near the northerly end of the roadway would likely step down from street access at a mid-level
— with lower floors at grade. The roadway providing access to the east side of May Creek would be
a dead-end approximately 700 feet long.
• The height of bridge crossings of May Creek would be higher(or fill,where allowed outside the
— floodplain,would be substantially higher).
'i" • The access road would intersect the loop roadway system on the west side of May Creek at about
Lot 55. This would present few design issues, but would result in a dead-end street about 580
feet long at the southerly point.
• Relocation of access is likely to impact the northerly wetland and would require development of
additional wetland mitigation area.
The proposed crossing at Ripley Lane, which provides access to the site by a roadway constructed over
r the property to the north, has similar, although less severe, grade limitations. The change in grade is
approximately 4 feet on the east side of the railroad and approximately 6 feet on the west side. This grade
change would not allow a 3- to 6-inch change in g grade to be maintained 30 feet on either side of the
railroad, nor would the change allow a 30-foot landing at 6 percent grade to be provided at each
connecting street given the 65 foot separation between the rails and the existing pavement of Ripley Lane
and the 70 foot separation between the rails and the roadway on the east side. In addition, widening
Ripley Lane to a three-lane section with a center left-turn lane,bike lanes,and sidewalks to accommodate
the ultimate buildout of property in the vicinity"would move the roadway closer to the rails.
An alternate location that is nearly at-grade occurs at an existing private railroad crossing approximately
200 feet south of the existing Lake Washington Boulevard intersection with Ripley Lane. This location
would be approximately 200 feet north of the Barbee Mill property line and would be accessed from the
site by a roadway, which would be constructed over the property to the north. The existing site access
proceeds at an angle across the railroad right-of-way, which would likely be unacceptable for a public
street. Construction of a roadway at this location could involve potential conflicts with the Ripley Lane
intersection. In particular, the left-turn storage lane,which serves that intersection, might overlap with a
center acceleration lane for left turns out of the site. Potential conflict would increase with greater traffic
I
volumes as the sites to the north developed and generated additional trips.
Traffic control at railroad crossings involves two basic approaches:
I • Passive control. This involves signs and pavement markers and relies on drivers and pedestrians
to recognize that a train is approaching by listening for the locomotive horn, seeing the
I locomotive, and stopping with adequate clearance from the rails. Passive control includes
signage and pavement markings that would include,at the minimum,a circular Railroad Advance
Warning sign and pavement markings consisting of a stop bar. Supplemental markings can
include reflecting cross-buck signs,lighting,or stop signs.
1 • Active control. This consists of signals and gates that are designed to provide warning devices automatically activated by an approaching train and may include gates that physically exclude
vehicles and pedestrians. Active controls include a range of devices activated by a train's
City of Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Draft-Environmental Impact Statement 3-77 ptemb 79-003
September 20
ti
approach and range from track-side or overhead flashing lights to gates, which are normally
installed on the approach for both vehicular lanes and pedestrian walkways. Because gates can be
circumvented by cars that drive in the lane for opposing traffic to weave around both gates, quad
gates can be installed to close both the lanes and prevent drive-arounds and to provide greater
security. Employment of quad gates also may qualify for consideration of a"quiet zone"where
sounding of locomotive horns is not mandatory,as discussed in Section 3.9,Noise.
There is no specific standard for choice of traffic control, but many considerations must be balanced,
including vehicular and pedestrian safety. In addition,the cumulative impacts of additional growth and,
therefore,additional exposure to accidents,are relevant.
The WSDOT uses general guidelines for screening appropriate control based on many factors. One
criterion is related to the type of roadway and an exposure factor based on the average daily traffic on the
roadway and the number of trains per day. Based on that general criteria, a two-lane site access roadway
serving the entire traffic demand of the site would have an exposure factor of 4,400(1,100 ADT x 4 trains
per day) and would warrant flashing lights (WSDOT 1998 Figure 930-2). A slight increase in traffic or
number of trains would warrant gates according to this criterion; additional traffic would be likely if •
additional sites were development to the north. This guideline does not specifically consider pedestrians.
For the proposed project, the degree of pedestrian exposure also may be a substantial factor if public
access to the shoreline is provided and integration of a pedestrian circulation system in the area results in
large numbers of pedestrians. Other criteria recommended for consideration include sight distance,
school bus use, a history of accidents, and interactions between traffic control devices at nearby
intersections.
Specific to this project, the possibility of higher future use of the train line may justify more stringent
control measures. A potential safety concern is short queuing distance between the rails and traffic
control at Lake Washington Boulevard. Cars on the tracks may be blocked by cars queuing at the
intersection. The 50-to 60-foot separation between tracks and the intersection provide queuing space for
two to three vehicles. It is possible that a vehicle could fmd itself on the tracks with cars stopped at the
intersection and a train approaching. Additional lane width to provide a means to escape this situation is
a very desirable feature. In the case of a quad-gate crossing,a system also may involve sensors to ensure
that outbound gates do not shut with vehicles present. In a case where signalization is present at Lake
Washington Boulevard, preemption of signal phasing likely would be required to allow traffic•on the
111
cross street to clear the intersection whenever a train approaches.
3.5.2.7 Traffic Accidents and Safety Analysis
The accident history was reviewed for intersections in the project vicinity to identify potential safety
concerns. The City provided accident data for a 3-year period from 2000 to 2003. The average accident
rate in urban areas for a roadway with a collector arterial classification is 4.27 accidents per million
vehicle miles (1996 Washington State Highway Accident Report). The section of Lake Washington
Boulevard from N 30th Street to the I-405 interchange ramps experiences a collision rate of
approximately 3.5 accidents per million vehicle miles.
EJI
In addition to accident histories, another means often employed to locate intersections with safety
concerns is to calculate the accidents per million entering vehicles. Locations experiencing greater than
1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles indicates a high rate of occurrence. Table 3.5-6 summarizes
the collision and injury rates and accident types for the study intersections where accident data were
provided. The listed intersections experience less than 1.0 accidents per million entering vehicles. The
predominant type of accident that occurs is a right-angle collision at unsignalized two-way stop control pig
intersections.
City of Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat 554-1779-017
Draft-Environmental Impact Statement 3-78 September 2003
•• CITY . .JF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
October 12, 2004
Campbell Mathewson
•
Century Pacific
2140 Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat— File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Submittal Materials
Dear Campbell:
In order to take the project off-hold and continue to process the application, a review of
the submittals dated August 27.and August 30 of-2002 and August 9, 2004:. has been
- done to determine .completeness and compliance with mitigation measures. The :
following outlines what action and or correction is.needed:
Corrections/Revisions to the Plat/Site Plan
1. A street profile and other sections and/dr:-:details as necessary of the main access
• entrance that demonstrates compliance with,.:;the WUTC standards for railroad
crossings. .
• 2. The Public Access to north is to be shown'(i.e. pedestrian trail) on the plat.
3. The grade of the main entrance is greater'than 15 percent: lt is approximately. 15:9 '
percent, based on Sheet D:1-2..
4. :The tracts for access- must 'be revised to read as .private access easements
throughout the preliminary-plat:
5.: Provide information/data on'.the length Of' road for ''Fire emergency of access :.
-easement labeled as Tract J..
6. Update the Project Narrative. Last dated Sept, 13, 2002: Including density, number ' .
of lots, eta based on revisions.
7: Label the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)for May Creek and Lake Washington..
8. .Revise other.submittal drawings that would change due to revised plat (i.e. drainage".
plan;grading plan,etc.).
Revisions to Address Mitigation Measures
1. Provide a 50 foot setback from Lake Washington.125 feet is shown: Revise lots as
necessary.
2: The setback from the delta/May-Creek that affects Lots 91,:"92,.94, 95 has not been
incorporated into the plat. Revise plat as necessary. .
Submittals Materials:
1. Submit four (4) full size copies of the Revised Preliminary Plat, landscape plan and
any other revised drawings based on corrections listed. Drawing sheet size of
2. A colored drawing of revised plat. . . .
3. PMTs (8 1/2 x 11)of all revised drawings.
ADAEDALUS`STMSOIMMayaksApitgafirAminsesiittgt6§5 October it,2u04 RE .N TON ,
AHEAD OF THE.C U R V E
COThis paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Page 2 of 2
Barbee Mill—Submittal Items
When the above information and revised drawings have been received, staff will review
for completeness. If complete, the project will be taken off-hold and the Hearing
Examiner public hearing would be,scheduled.
Please contact me at (425)430-7382 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Susan Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Neil Watts }
Jennifer Henning.
Larry Warren
•
•
„F •
\\DAEDALUS\SYS2\USERS\SFIALA\Barbee Mill EIS\SeptReview_submittals.doc October 12,2004
STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING }
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
PUBLIC NOTICE
Lily Nguyen,being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising
Representative of the CITY'OF RENTON 1055 South Grady Way
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND Renton,WA 98055
• AVAILABILITY DOCUMENT PURCHASE
King County Journal MITIGATION DOCUMENT INFORMATION: Available for
Notice is hereby given that the City purchase from the Finance
of Renton has issued the Mitigation Department on the 1st Floor of
a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general Document for the Barbee Mill Renton City Hall. The Cost is $5.00
circulation and is now and has been for more than six monthsprior to the date Preliminary Plat on August 16,2004 plus tax and postage (when
pursuant to WAC 197-11-660 and applicable).
of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language RMC 4-9-070, and is available for PUBLIC REVIEW: The impacts
continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King public review. Copies are available described in the Barbee Mill Final
for review at the Renton Municipal EIS and Draft EIS are the basis for
County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Library (the Main Branch and the mitigating measures established
Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. Highland Branch)and at the Renton in the Mitigation Document. This
The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the City Hall, Development Services, Mitigation Document is designated
1055 South Grady Way,Renton. by the City of Renton as the first
King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill decision document for the proposal.
distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed Preliminary Plat EIS considers APPEAL INFORMATION: Upon
potential residential development issuance of this Mitigation
notice,a alternatives for the redevelopment of Document,a twenty(20)day appeal
the 22.9-acre site located along the period commences.Pursuant to WAC
Lake Washington and May Creek 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E.,the
Public Notice shorelines.The EIS reviews potential adequacy of the Final EIS and the
impacts on the property from the Mitigation Document may be
proposed 115-townhouse lots as well appealed. Appeals must: 1) state
was published on Monday, 8/16/04 as from the continuation of the specific objections of fact and/or law;
existing industrial use. 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00
LAND USE NUMBER: p.m. September 7, 2004; and 3) be
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum LUA-02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM accompanied by a filing fee of$75.00.
of $149.38 at the,Fate of$15.50 per inch for the first publication and N/A per PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Appeals must be addressed to Fred J.
inch for eac subsequent insertion. Preliminary Plat Kaufman,Hearing Examiner,City of
4 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: West Renton, Renton Municipal Building,
side of LK WA BLVD N between N 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA
40th and 44th and abuts BNSF RR 98055.
Lily Nguyen right-of-way. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
YLEAD AGENCY: Contact Susan Fiala,City of Renton
Legal Adve :sing Representative,King County Journal s����111 I I i lll City of Renton at(425)430-7382.
Subs ribed and sworn to me this 16th day of August,2004. Development Services Division— Published in the King County Journal
•
k'L--.----- �
/i� P/B/PW August 16,2004.#846716
\\\
4eAG H /
P.. .\on Exp,� . /.i
Tom A.Meagher 4-; 5 e ;
Notary Public for the State of Washington,Residing in Rec mor�rd tiingtori.
Ad Number: 846716 P.O.Number: QC., �O
Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surchage.•°. p 3 v C7
.P/ MAY 2,:... ..r\\�.
����/Jq i 1OF
F`t�P\\\���
►, ? x CITY L___E RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
August 18, 2004
Campbell Mathewson
Century Pacific
2140 Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Campbell:
We are in receipt of your letter dated August 17, 2004. The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat land
use application was placed "on hold" on May 25, 2004 and has not been taken off-hold per
your assumption.
As stated in the correspondence dated May 25, 2004, the language was as follows: "As
applicant, you will be required to submit revised plat drawings to address the Mitigation
Measures and to enable the City to continue_ processing the land use .application for the
proposed plat. Once the applicant has revised the preliminary plat, submitted revised site plans
that are found to be acceptable, the project would be scheduled with the Hearing Examiner for
a public hearing."
The preliminary plat plan submitted on Monday, August 9, 2004 does not address the Mitigation
Measures as required by the adopted Mitigation Document of August 16, 2004. The most
notable is the lack of inclusion of the required 50 foot buffer from Lake Washington, and
associated reconfiguration of the parcels adjacent to the lake. Therefore, the submittal is not
found to be acceptable and the application will continue to be on=hold.
Please contact me at (425) 430-7382 if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood/Applicant
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
C. This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
1
•
Co),cilgivrp
ON ,vo
A(6../ .
•
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P. "?ECE/,/
4.0
CAMPBELL MATHEWSON
VICE PRESIDENT •
CAMPBEL�:�c'AmIIWSON 2140 Century Square '
Vice PresW-nt = 1501 Fourth Avenue •
(206)689-7203 Seattle,Washington 98101
FAX(206)689-7210
E-mail:emathewson@dwt.com www.centurypacificlp.com
August 17, 2004
Susan Fiala CENTURYPACIFIC,L.P.
City of Renton Real Estate Investment Bankers',Advisors•Developers •
1055 S. Grady Way --
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Susan:
This letter is in response to your email dated August 10, 2004 regarding the status of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat that was submitted to the City of Renton on April 5, 2002. For your
convenience, attached to this letter is a copy of the city's latest Mitigation Document "Summary
Table of Mitigation Measures" with changes shown that the Cugini family continues to request
that the City of Renton consider. A "Basis of Objection" has been added after each item in an
attempt to explain the Cuginis' position. As :you will see from our comments, a number of these
notes identify measures that are suggested by the city, but which appear to provide no direct
mitigation related to impacts of the proposed development.
It had been the Cuginis hope to meet with the city in advance of issuance of the Mitigation
Document to talk through several of the outstanding issues and see if a meeting of the minds was
possible. We had hoped to narrow the areas of disagreement or uncertainty in the language of
the conditions in the Mitigation Document:. Unfortunately, staff cancelled our scheduled meeting
on August 4 and, thereafter, proceeded to unilaterally send a Mitigation Document to the
Environmental Review Committee that does not reflect an agreement between the parties. We
are therefore left in the position of respectfully "agreeing to disagree" with staff on a number of
the items in the Mitigation Document and we will have to let the hearing examiner and city
council decide.
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacificlp.com
On August 9, 2004 OTAK provided the city with an updated Preliminary Plat and a Pedestrian
Circulation/ Open Space Plan that show the agreed-upon revisions in response to the Mitigation
Document including:
• Additional detail of the May Creek buffer to describe the native versus managed
landscape area and the potential for flood terraces;
• 6' soft surface trail at the May Creek buffer;
• Delineation of the open space tract at the shorelines of May Creek and Lake Washington;
and
• Location of the proposed interpretive panel.
The updated plat does not show the 50'-wide buffer on Lake Washington for which there is no
current agreement. Our revised plat conforms to the city code of 25'-wide buffers and we are
entitled to present to the hearing examiner and the city council a plat that meets the Code as to
buffer widths on Lake Washington.
The Pedestrian Circulation / Open Space Plan shows a sidewalk connection to the Quendall
Terminals property in the northeast corner of the Barbee Mill site. In addition, we revised the
plans to show a public trail along May Creek and two large open space areas on Lake
Washington (one at the May Creek delta and one at the northern part of the plat) connected via a
sidewalk system. We believe these revisions satisfy any public access requirements in the Code
and disagree with the city's email comment that we have not shown "public access along the
lake." If the city is implying that it wants the Cuginis to show a trail through the front yards of
all the lots along the lake, which is directly contrary to what Neil Watts told us previously, then
we vigorously disagree with such a condition. An attempt to require a trail in a residential
development also conflicts with Renton's Shoreline Master Program [RMC 4-3-090(J)(5)] as
well as a number of court decisions.
We have received the city's "Notice of Issuance and Availability of the Mitigation Document,"
which indicates that an appeal is required to be filed by September 7, 2004. In order to preserve
the Cuginis' rights to object to a number of the conditions in the Mitigation Document, we likely
will be forced to appeal. By the city's code and state law, the hearing on the Mitigation
Document appeal is to be heard at the same time as the hearing on the plat and site plan. SEPA
appeals must be consolidated with the hearing on the underlying governmental action. (See
WAC 197-11-680(3)(v), RMC 4-9-070(0), and RCW 36.70B.060.) Holding a single hearing is
appropriate for the Cuginis' applications to allow the hearing examiner to review the Mitigation
Document in the context of the overall plat and site plan application.
Therefore, we hereby request that the staff: (a) send the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat and
Site Plan to the hearing examiner as soon as possible and (b) issue the Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit. In addition, we believe that the plat was taken "off hold" upon the
submittal of our revised plat plan on Monday, August 9, 2004. If this is not consistent with the
city's position, please let us know immediately.
CRE 2030%1 0-3 2
Seattle
•
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your assistance
with this project.
Sincerely,
Camp ell Mathewson
Enclosure
Cc: Alex and Norma Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Crissa Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Tom Goeltz, Davis Wright Tremaine
Jennifer Henning, City of Renton
Matt Hough, Otak
Cathy O'Neill, Barbee Mill Company
Neil Watts, City of Renton
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Steven Wood, CenturyPacific
Gregg Zimmerman, City of Renton
CRE 2030v1 0-3 3
Seattle
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing,
grading and site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized; OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed; OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading; OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality
facilities designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot
above base flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway or floodplain to avoid
restriction of flows during regulatory flood events. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Spanning
the floodway is a reasonable mitigation measure, but the requirement to locate the entire
bridge outside the 'floodway" is unreasonable. By definition, the "floodway" is the
channel of moving water that carries the base flood. In contrast, the 'floodplain" has
only standing water so that the bridge pilings would not impede water flow. Spanning
the floodplain is a costly and unnecessary mitigation measure in light of the other
mitigation measures to which the Cugini family is agreeing.]
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4, or
B5, or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing
stream channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill
outside of the established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any
necessary stream/buffer improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time
of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space
corridor and providing additional storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace excavated on the
west either side of the stream). [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The flood terrace proposal
previously submitted to the city did show the terracing occurring on the west side of the
stream which was illustrative of the technique on either side of the stream. This
preliminary model was completed on the west side to merely show one possible solution.
It seems that both the city and the Cuginis would like the flexibility at final engineering to
utilize the flood terracing on the west, east and/or both sides of May Creek.]
B6. On the May Creek side,provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor(i.e., the proposed 50 feet
on each side)to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to reduce channel scour
and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment deposited in
the stream channel. [BASIS OF OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY LANGUAGE: We
expect that this is merely a clarification. Namely, that this condition refers to the
proposed 50 foot wide corridor on each side and that this is not intended to require
buffers greater than 50 feet on May Creek, nor is it intended to relate to buffers on Lake
Washington.]
C. Groundwater
Cl. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as
outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000
and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act
cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and
perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics
Control Act cleanup standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance
during construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas
away from buffer areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with
native species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part
of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. Design bridges with sufficient height and width to allow penetration of sunlight and
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary
and hence unreasonable mitigation condition. Further, the condition is unclear and
unfair since the city has not defined "sufficient height and width" and is leaving this
open to future interpretation.]
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary
landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
D6. Design bridges with sufficient height and width to provide for animal movement.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessary and hence unreasonable mitigation
condition. Further, the condition is unclear and unfair since the city has not defined
"sufficient height and width"and is leaving this open to future interpretation.]
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides,
or herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal
to place development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D 10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the
existing buffer vegetation.
D11.
(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building
setbacks); OR b) Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake
is shallow, on public lands-or : ti it e to ,.uild
Provide plantings in rip rap. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: This is an unnecessarily and
hence unreasonable mitigation measure. This requirement provides no direct mitigation
to the impacts of the proposed development.]
D 12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip rap to allow more natural
shoreline plantings. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-
shore habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on May.Creek stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive and complex communities of indigenous vegetation. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION: The Cugini family is vested to the city's code in effect at the date of
application, which states a 25-foot buffer. The Cuginis have provided twice the buffer
CRE 2031 v l 0-3 2
Seattle
requirement on May Creek and in light of the additional significant mitigation measures
to which the family has agreed, the Cuginis do not believe the city has a factual or legal
justification for taking an additional 25 feet from the lakeshore.]
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on May Creek stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment
of mature canopy from indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept
light and glare. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
D 16. Provide 50 foot buffers on May r e stream-and-lake shoreline to allow establishment
of more extensive communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow
public access further from the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary
high water mark shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The
remaining fifteen (15) feet may be landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior]
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance
from near-shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage,
AND THEN; c) Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light
penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents
such as the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
E1. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing
locations with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with warning devices
automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC. Further,
the city and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system for this project that does not preclude access to serve
properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be provided. [BASIS OF
OBJECTION—TO CLARIFY: The Cuginis cannot be required to provide access for
future property development, but rather the road system must be directly related to the
impacts of the Cuginis'plat.]
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each
new average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications
provided by the approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed
to current public road section standards for residential access streets as describedin
Chapter 4 of the City of Renton Development Standards. [BASIS OF OBJECTION-TO
CLARIFY: We are trying to further define what is intended.]
F. Hazardous Materials
Fl. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial
Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan
that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F2. The applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil
remediation is complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to
achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall
Terminals through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with
requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act.
CRE 2031 v l 0-3 3
Seattle
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color,
including sloping roofs, roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building
offsets.
G2. Relative building bulk may-belueed-hy-serccning through large vegetation. Additional
sethaeks-fer-planting-afeas-and-a-ehange-in-preposed-plantings may be required. [BASIS
OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply with the existing bulk standards applicable to
the COR zone. We are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies which justify or
authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-11-660(1) (a). This condition is vague
and unclear as to when and how such design review would be implemented.
H. Light and Glare
H 1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. Buildings shall be designed and sited to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might
produce glare from sun reflection. [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply
with the existing standards applicable to the COR zone. We are not aware of any
adopted SEPA policies which justify or authorize this condition, as required by WAC
197-11-660(1) (a). This condition is vague and unclear as to when and how such design
review would be implemented.
I. Noise •
I1. The pile holes shall be pre drilled to the maximum feasible depth (depth may be limited
by the character of deposits). [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The Cuginis will comply with
the existing noise code To the extent this condition seeks to go beyond the adopted noise
code standards, we are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies which just or
authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-1 l-660(1) (a).
I2. If feasible given soil conditions, less noisy pile-nstallatien methods, such as vibrating
piles into place, cassion type-1 'less-auger cast piles or other methods shall be used.
[BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as prior].
I3. Noise barriers around stationary equipment-sum—as-compressors, welding machines,
pumps, and similar equipment that w oula ^ rate c tin sly a+ could contribute to
steady background noise levels shall be provided. BASIS OF OBJECTION: Same as
prior].
I4. At grade rail crossings that meet a"sealed" statu
" one" for locomotive horns shall be
provided with public railroad crossings. BASIS OF OBJECTION: This condition seeks
to cause a future federal decision that is beyond the reasonable control of the Cuginis.
Mitigation measures must be reasonable and capable of being accomplished, as required
by WAC 197-11-660(1)(c). Further, we are not aware of any adopted SEPA policies
which justify or authorize this condition, as required by WAC 197-11-660(1)(a).]
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the
lumber economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.
The design and location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior
to recording of the final plat.
CRE 2031 vl 0-3 4
Seattle
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and
the Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to
the recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior
to the recording of the final plat.
K3. Public visual and physical access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May
Creek shall be provided and incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall
work with City of Renton staff to determine the location and design efthe public aces^
As shown on the applicant's "Pedestrian Circulation/Open Space Plan" dated August 3,
2004, the system will may include a soft surface trail along May Creek, sidewalks, and
two (2) public an open space tracts adjacent to Lake Washington with one at the May
Creek delta and one at the northern part of the Nat [BASIS OF OBJECTION: The first
proposed insert is language expressly from the city's code. RMC 4-3-090(J)(5)(b). The
second insert is to confirm the applicant's submitted Circulation and Open Space Plan
complies with the Shoreline Master Program regulations and this condition.
CRE 2031 v l 0-3 5
Seattle
" . CITY OF RENTON,
• CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE. BY MAILING
On the 12th day of August, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Notice of Issuance & Availability- Mitigation Document documents. This information
was sent to:
Narile ',,RePrOsptitingi
Agencies See Attached
Parties of Record See Attached
(Signature of Sender): ,t1.1' 4,diejr-
KA4
STATE OF WASHINGTONCI
......... CNA,
) SS \
COUNTY OF KING f 8 voT AA? ••
, a) : PuBuo
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker •
•• 0
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fdrie AP...a-ethcf•c;c
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
........
Dated: Cti,
Notary blic in and--I for the-Vate ashington
Notary (Print):
witARILYNP3151CriEFF
My appointment expires:
MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Ptoject,Ntirtili6e! LUA02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
template-affidavit of service by mailing
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept.of Ecology* WDFW-Stewart Reinbold* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section do Department of Ecology *
PO Box 47703 3190 160`h Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Bellevue,WA 98008 39015—172nd Avenue SE
Auburn,WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region* Duwamish Tribal Office* Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW *
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Seattle,WA 98106-1514 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
PO Box 330310 39015 172nd Avenue SE
Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Auburn,WA 98092-9763
US Army Corp.of Engineers* KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology&Historic
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation*
Attn:SEPA Reviewer Ms.Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer
PO Box C-3755 201 S.Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343
Seattle,WA 98124 Seattle,WA 98104-3855 Olympia,WA 98504-8343
Jamey Taylor*
Depart.of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia,WA 98504-7015
KC Dev.&Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave.SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72"d Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS:XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
Seattle,WA 98104-3856 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Title Examiner
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle,WA 98104-5004
Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an"Optional DNS",the marked agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's,and the notice of application. *
Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send
her the ERC Determination paperwork.
template-affidavit of service by mailing
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Attn: Robert Cugini Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave. N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Renton,WA 98056
Renton, WA 98057 Kirkland,WA 98033
Barbee Forest Products Nancy Denney Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS
Attn: Robert • 3818 Lake Washington Blvd N Family Dental Clinic
4101 ashington Blvd Renton,WA 98055 PO Box 1029
Fall City, WA 98024
R on,WA 98057
Campbell Mathewson Dept. of Ecology
Century Pacific, LP Northwest Regional Office Greg Fawcett
2140 Century Square Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mgr. PO Box 402
1501 Fourth Avenue#2140 3190 160th Avenue SE Fall City, WA 98024
Seattle,WA 98101 Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Tom &Linda Baker Department of Fish &Wildlife Carmen Flores
1202 N 35th Attn: Rich Johnson 16707 SE 14th Street
Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Bellevue,WA 98008
LaConner,WA 98257
Flora Baldwin Department of Fish &Wildlife Dan Frey,WSDOT
4017 Pa enue N Attn: Stewart Reinhold 6431 Corson Avenue
Re n,WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Seattle,WA 98018
LaConner,WA 98257
Department of Fish &Wildlife Wendy Giroux
Lisa Bartel Attn: Larry Fisher
201 P Avenue N PO Box 1100 South County Journal
K Box
0
Re on, WA 98055 LaConner,WA 98257 Kent,WA 98035
Tom Goeltz
Clark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes to
to 1501 4 Avenue#2600
3711 Lake Washington Blvd N 8606 118 Avenue SE Seattle,WA 98101
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Gregg Dohrn
Gloria Brown Jones &Stokes Bruno &Anne Good
1328 N 40th Street 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 605 S 194th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005 Des Moines,WA 98148-2159
Mr. Bill Dunlap G. Goodman
Kim Browne Triad Associates 3715 Lake Washington Blvd N
1003 N 28th Place 11814—115th Avenue NE Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland,WA 98034
Tony Boydston Dave Enger, TD&E Joyce Kendrich Goodwin
3901 Lake ington Blvd N 2223 112 n Avenue NE, Suite 101 3715 Lake Washington Blvd N
Ren , A 98055 Bellevue,WA 98004 Renton,WA 98056
0;AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160®
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
Dan &Laurie Br ' Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter
to Jones&Stokes
11026 100 venue NE 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N 11820 Northup Way
Kirk! ,WA 98033 Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005
Bob Fawcett Edith Hamilton
305 2nd Avenue NE 3714 Lake Washington Blvd N
Issaquah,WA 98027 Renton,WA 98056
Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish Susan Martin
PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Lane N #106 1101 North 38th Street
Seattle,WA 98138 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
James Hanken Lakeside Community rch Marlen Mandt
999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 6947 Coal Cree arkway SE 1408 N. 26th Street
Seattle,WA 98104 Box 270 Renton,WA 98056
Newc e,WA 98059
Patricia Helina Lynn ManoloPoulos
Robert Lange Davis Wright
4004 Lake Washington Blvd N 4017 Park Avenue N 10500 NE 8th Street, Suite 1800
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005
Marsha Hertel Dennis Law Debbie Martin
3836 Lake Washington Blvd N 3625 Lake Washington Blvd N 1412 N 30th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
S. & Nel Hiemstra Allen Lebowitz Marcie Maxwell
3720 Lake Washington Blvd N 212 Pelly Avenue N PO Box 2048
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Matt Hough Kay McCord
Otak Inc. Al &Cynthia Leovout 2802 Park Avenue North
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 PO Box 1965 Renton,WA 98056
Kirkland,WA 98033 Gig Harbor,WA 98335
Torsten Lienau
Ande Jorgensen HDR Tim McGrath
2411 Garden Court N 500 108tn Avenue NE, Suite 1200 900 N 34th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98004 Renton,WA 98056
Mary Kammer David Lierm Terry McMichael
51 Burnett Avenue S#307 620 E ion Street 4005 Park Avenue N
Renton, WA 98056 K911 ,WA 98031 Renton,WA 9805
b AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160®
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
Kennydale Neighborhood Association Kevin Lindahl Keith Menges
Attn: Kim Browne, President 3719 Lake Washington Blvd N1 Renton, to
1211 North 28th Place Renton,WA 98056 28 Street
Renton,WA 98056 WA 98056
Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
Pan Abode Cedar Homes John &Greta Moulijn
4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A203 3726 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
King County Wastewater Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Barbara Questad;Treatment Division Mr. & Mrs. R. Lynch Fisheries Department
King Street Center 1420 NW Gilman Blvd#2268 39015 172"n Avenue SE
201 South Jackson Street#500 Issaquah,WA 98027 Auburn,WA 98092
Seattle,WA 98104
Linda Knowle Roy&Cheryl Dorothy Muller
Kennydale Reality 4100 La ashington Blvd N#B204 51 Burnett Avenue S#410
2902 Kennewick PI. NE Ren ,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055
Renton,WA 98056
Mary Maier
Misty Kodish May Creek Steward David Nestvold
5021 Ripley Lane N #106 King County DNRP 6608 117th Avenue SE
Renton,WA 98056 201 S.Jackson, Suite 600 Bellevue,WA 98006
Seattle,WA 98104
Micheal E. Nicholson
City of Newcastle
Douglas R. Marsh Community Development Director Sara Nicoli
1328 N. 40 Street 13020 SE 72nd PI. 3404 Burnett Avenue N
Renton,WA 98056 Newcastle,WA 98059-3030 Renton,WA 98056
Don Robertson
Sara Nicoli 1900 NE 48th Street#R101 Neil Thomson
310 Hibriten Avenue SW PO Box 76
Lenoir, NC 28645 Renton,WA 98056 Mercer Island,WA 98040
D. Sabey Scott Thomson Amy Norris m
132nd21410 SE PO Box 76 1900 NE 48 Street#F-202
Kent,WA 98042 Renton,WA 98056
Mercer Island,WA 98040
Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT Rich Schipanski Fritz Timm, P.E.
15700 Dayton Avenue N City of Newcastle
Blumen Consulting Group
P.O. Box 330310 to 13020 SE 72nd
Seattle,WA 98133 600108 NE, Suite 1002 Newcastle,WA 98059
Bellevue,WA 98004
Virginia Piazza Beverly Wagner
Josef Schwabl
1119 N 35th Street 3921 Meadow Ave N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D104
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160®
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin - Jennifer Scott
1120 N 38th Street 5021 Ripley Lane N, Apt#1 Rich Wagner
2411Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Rent n,G WA 98056C0t N
Renton,WA
Herbert&Diana Postlewait David Sherrard Richard Weinman
3805 Park Ave N 5808 Lake ashington Blvd NE 270 Third Avenue
Renton,WA 98056 Kirkla ,WA 98033 Kirkland,WA 98033
Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham Robert West
Raedeke Associates 3907 Park Avenue N 3904 Park Avenue N
5711 NE 63rd Street Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Seattle,WA 98115
Kevin Sloan Doug Williams
Hamid&Tasleem Qaasim Pan Abode Homes 201 South Jackson Street
3830 Lake Washington Blvd N 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N MS KSC-NR-0503
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98104-3855
Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith John Wilson
3724 Lake Washington Blvd N 1004 North 36th Street 1403 3`d Avenue, Suite 300
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98105
Rod Stevens Charles Wolfe
Dustin Rays 505 5th Avenue S, 10th Floor 1111 3rd Avenue, Suite 3400
8936 132 Place SE Seattle,WA 98134 Seattle,WA 98101
Newcastle,WA 98057
Linda Reutimann David &Joyce ev n Bud Worley
1106 North 38th Street 1208 Nod28m Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B202
Renton, WA 98056 Rent , A 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Wendy&Lois Wywrot Mike Cowles
Larry Reymann 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A104 BNSF Railway
1313 North 38thStreet Renton,WA 98056 Engineering
Renton,WA 98056 2454 Occidental Ave S
Seattle,WA 98135
Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling Gary Young
2108 Camas Avenue NE 527 Renton Avenue S 3115 Mountain View Avenue N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Monica Durkin
WA Dept. of Natural Resources Cyrus M. McNeely Cynthia Youngblood
Aquatics Division 3810 Park Avenue N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A103
950 Farman Avenue N Renton,WA 98056. Renton,WA 98056
Enumclaw,WA 98022
µ AVERY® Address Labels Laser 51600
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160®
Ahmer Nizam
WA Utilities and Trans. Commission Jim Johnson Don West
1300 South Evergreen Park Dr SW 3921 115th Avenue SE 22464 NE 60th Street
Olympia,WA 98504 Snohomish,WA 98290 Redmond,WA 98053
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko Larry and Ci ha Reymann
3837 Lake Washington Blvd N 2125 NE 24th Street 1313 No. 38 Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Steven Wood
Eileen Halverson Alex Cugini Century Pacific, LP
16226 Crystal Drive E PO Box 359 2140 Century Square
Enumclaw,WA 98022 Renton,WA 98057 1501 Fourth Avenue#2140
Seattle,WA 98101
6 AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160®
,,
__ _ __ _,
. ,
NOTICE , - ./. ,
, iL
yfr • -r_.,,°
CITY OF RENTON ('0I„nJ . .r r '✓- „/' ',/ �I^ '+ \
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY 'Ammar“. ' ✓
='i ..>� ' is
MITIGATION DOCUMENT , a
a'%i' T
y_ _;'- /
Notice is hereby given that the City of Renton has issued the Mitigation Document for the Barbee Mill ya ••i' _
Preliminary Plat on August 16,2004 pursuant to WAC 197-11-660 and RMC 4-9-070,and is available ` L J/ � �./ :�'
for public review.Copies are available for review at the Renton Municipal Library(the Main Branch i-''� /A. l I
and Highland Branch)and at the Renton CityHall, Development Services, 6�floor, 1055 South ■ ��' rf / \' 1
9 P gtvO.' .g-''—gib' /^ 1
Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development �� �i / ;
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May / %� -
Creek shorelines. The EIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 •townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use. /r d,ems'`;,/��,:�.,�1' ,
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM / .. ''*-,f '
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat L.. /35°' 1, MEV I •
II.mn ST.
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O.Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson
Renton,WA 98057 206-689-7203 ` �1 �, �4 r @
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington 4 ,�'i„�r 1i''�l ' i '
Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44'^Street and a ka% l�,fn-
tl'
abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the � //, �Ua�.�l�
eastern boundary. 5 ti/� § e
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton o � ��,� �„�,ry;
Development Services Division-P/B/PW S \�///ii�' §^.i;a
1055 South Grady Way s Z co- /i /4►��n�`'i°'
Renton,WA 98055 $ ° OlO c,, �f�y a
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Environmental Review Committee 5 z ' 1� �iy.E__'
City of Renton z 1 �Z i t g�r I FI
1055 South Grady Way 1 3 Q;Cj r '/ 1k��^
Renton,WA 98055 �� • • \ 1. i-Appw
a i 45 \'5� IF
�a �''
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from a j�//r' ' , °w-'-'; q
the Finance Department on the 1st Floor of Renton City Hall.The Cost is$5.00 plus tax and postage 1 . c a,Ia�o �}. ,(when applicable), r.:17,1tAiiiiL
"'I 1P -�N r .ra r 7 �' 1it -SrPUBLIC REVIEW: The impacts described in the Barbee Mill Final EIS and Draft EIS are the basis for ;4. Tlnri�9 u�-1� h Map4 r ;,
the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is u 't''7' Vir° `` `�drvi1�
designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for the proposal �, A nn�i 5, � r/10 ��� '
w D it CAI 10,410J7411,..
APPEAL INFORMATION: Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty(20)day appeal ',,;'„ �'`1't i.4t t e'y I y T
period commences.Pursuant to WAC 197-11-630 and RMC 4-8-110.E.,the adequacy of the Final , ,E_ :I {'Ill ;`efi rini:�/,`
' EIS and the Mitigation Document may be appealed.Appeals must: 1)state specific objections of fact -i/i. ` :'N r I I ��' I r,0,R-r4�'
and/or law;2)be submitted In writing by 5:00 p.m.September 7,2004;and 3)be accompanied by a ,SLr a� 1p,,, t 1�i 11. I c i
filing fee of$75.00.Appeals must be addressed to Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner,City of ' f , "ll1E I FNh
Renton,1055 So.Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. tf117. F: ° c-'�� r -_ :;.-
r_J "cs,I•,.rc..j.m..a,c�I4411 L}.., r I -'-
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:If you require additional information,please contact Susan Fiala,City
of Renton,Development Services Division at(425)430-7382. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200.
``%%%%%%%%%%%�. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
z. xvl N I4/y(�11 Please,Include the pf•ojeot NUMBER,`w_heri:ballIng for..pro_per flip identification. I
_ ••.r ei,- vi,.''I.
•
CERTIFICATION
',a PUBLIC S
ri
Il'Ilii WASO".-I, pfek -ore , hereby certify that 3 copies of the
above document were posted by me in 3 conspicuous places on or nearby
the described property on At4.6_,k si- 16 r Sao 9 .
SigneM k-0,4,a?fr
ATTEST: Subscribe worn b fore me,a Notary Public,in and for Stat of
Washington residing• . ,on the ,32�°'s-day of
MARILYN MCHEFF
MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07
NoTic:1 ;11E
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
Notice is hereby given that the City of Renton has issued the Mitigation Document for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat on August 16,2004 pursuant to WAC 197-11-660 and RMC 4-9-070, and is available
for public review. Copies are available for review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch
and Highland Branch) and at the Renton City Hall, Development Services, 6th floor, 1055 South
Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May
Creek shorelines. The EIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson
Renton,WA 98057 206-689-7203
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington
Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and
abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the
eastern boundary.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Development Services Division—P/B/PW
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from
the Finance Department on the 1st Floor of Renton City Hall. The Cost is $5.00 plus tax and postage
(when applicable).
PUBLIC REVIEW: The impacts described in the Barbee Mill Final EIS and Draft EIS are the basis for
the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is
designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for the proposal.
APPEAL INFORMATION: Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty (20) day appeal
period commences. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E., the adequacy of the Final
EIS and the Mitigation Document may be appealed. Appeals must: 1) state specific objections of fact
and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. September 7, 2004; and 3) be accompanied by a
filing fee of $75.00. Appeals must be addressed to Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of
Renton, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you require additional information, please contact Susan Fiala, City
of Renton, Development Services Division at(425)430-7382.
'j .
r :7 •
I/1 / / '
..e r'/
amT \, .L LJJ_ LJLJ__I_JL_�4:I.�'J-I--J - _ ..- � • ! fh
707
_ 1 0
, - , • 4,-,_ _ iloy.„,,,,,- , =
, .... ,, ,,
, .....„.„ . ..„2 . ,, „...,
4 , /
/QV
gy '+ --, i ' rir
..,„ /: /
--,,,, ,
,,,
I L �
. —
�r• /
/ i / . i
...ma • ,:.� N 40TH STa.
1 47 ,44 , it Tg
.'
o r
, i i .!le,r.a
rz
Z 00e- -EtW i
.m i_. op- ,,,;./ Ifo. :A" Lj - J;j. '\ V 4 WM ill";
,ACA tJWiC:i C7QS.2 n / J!1f (ItMi'3.;411,it ciPox
-I Silyt:talf24W=4 irws,s r c: a �J r
w //Ianr ac,, 3— n.+z Pr,
Mis aesU`�5�'
��t Al-if!dr ntvrn►r T-al mil= °fll�!=o �ur ti
W ]r R!ay.Iv IUy tl116 gr l 2 �w EOSl , a`
7 i 771 i 7R afi �i n � s*•
IbJeln o e� i r • ova�Flis
� �� d i i il7R i l!R �;5i1��>w'7� � �i��i;�d�g�� d
�fi illtl J s Rt tl! 1 �"��ri :FCo�s��1'�'
,�1.y� 9?,z i7 3 f'!li R]7 f xir ' i i �a s`6 Lat,.;u
ll f tltlbRb3tll tl'tl.tl tla Is�.'yl , I n'�eM R"f5d�"e-R:
R f v 71 i3�_1,:ioAli R/` E ,Err I
6 7/! d E ltlsbdu ..Ala`_IL AU
4 I I iiilif" ii7,13 R7R* ; R]i I i _ W
Al!` i7Ri37E I.P Jilliir R3Fi cr.i-1-,y� t I1 . J �.� ..
_
l , ITlt 4ip i ti 1. 14 rizirrI.:Giclivi 3r. L� 1 >P 9 _ W
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
' Pleaselnclude the;;pro project NUMBER whe c g� n. allln ,for;proper-file identification.
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 10, 2004
TO: Environmental Review Committee
FROM: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, x7382 9.
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Mitigation Document
The attached is the signature sheet for today's discussion and approval of the Mitigation
Document which was not available at the meeting.
Thank you for your patience !
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
Notice is hereby given that the City of Renton has issued the Mitigation Document for the Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat on August 16, 2004 pursuant to WAC 197-11-660 and RMC 4-9-070, and is available for public review. Copies
are available for review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and Highland Branch) and at the Renton
City Hall, Development Services, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development concepts for the
redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines. The EIS
reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of
the existing industrial use.
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson
Renton,WA 98057 206-689-7203
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard North
between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Development Services Division—P/B/PW
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from the Finance
Department on the 1st Floor of Renton City Hall. The Cost is $5.00 plus tax and postage (when applicable).
PUBLIC REVIEW: The impacts described in the Barbee Mill Final EIS and Draft EIS are the basis for the mitigating
measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as
the first decision document for the proposal.
APPEAL INFORMATION: Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty (20) day appeal period
commences. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E., the adequacy of the Final EIS and the Mitigation
Document may be appealed.Appeals must: 1)state specific objections of fact and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing
by 5:00 p.m. September 7, 2004; and 3) be accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals must be addressed to
Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA
98055.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you would like additional information, please contact Susan Fiala, City of Renton
at(425)430-7382.
Mitigation signature.doc
PUBLICATION DATE: August 16, 2004
DATE OF DECISION: August 10, 2004
SIGNATURES:
opt!"wtert .6//e/o
Gres• im DATE
Departmeilding/P lic Works
Dennis Cul ,Adm nistrator DATE
Community Services
/7-0V
/Le h I , Fire Chief U DATE
Renton Fire Department
Mitigation signature.doc
s
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 28th day of May, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Final Notification documents. This information was sent to:
._._ .. ..Name_ , Representing"
Campbell Mathewson Contact
Alex Cugini Owner
Steven Wood Applicant
See Attached Parties of Record
(Signature of Sender): a 2
' %%%%%%%%%%%,,, i
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ='-Q0-�'yN Mo't„
) SS 4 �ssioN�+A•0,1%°,
COUNTY OF KING ) i : NOTAgk mt�s
�.... o
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker 5►��, "Ve L►C
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary acferet4sm §rr _
purposes mentioned in the ihstrument. ''a OA il INAgN\N�=
Dated: 6 ((yl®y � ) ,t
Notary ublic in and for the Sta a ashington
Notary (Print):
MARILYN KAMGHEFF
My appointment expires: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRESP-9P-f►7
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Pirajecfi Numbrr. LUA02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
I
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Attn: Robert Cugini Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave. N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Renton, WA 98056
Renton,WA 98057 Kirkland,WA 98033
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Nancy Denney Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS
Attn: Robert Cugini 3818 Lake Washington Blvd N Family Dental Clinic
4101 Lake Washington Blvd Renton,WA 98055 PO Box 1029
Renton,WA 98057 Fall City, WA 98024
Campbell Mathewson Dept. of Ecology
Century Pacific, LP Northwest Regional Office Greg Fawcett
2140 Century Square Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mgr. PO Box 402
1501 Fourth Avenue#2140 3190 160th Avenue SE Fall City,WA 98024
Seattle,WA 98101 Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Department of Fish &Wildlife
Tom &Linda Baker Carmen Flores
1202 N 35th Attn: Rich Johnson 16707 SE 14th Street
Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Bellevue,WA 98008
LaConner,WA 98257
Flora Baldwin Department of Fish &Wildlife Dan Frey,WSDOT
4017 Park Avenue N Attn: Stewart Reinhold 6431 Corson Avenue
Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Seattle,WA 98018
LaConner,WA 98257
Department of Fish &Wildlife Wendy Giroux
Lisa Bartel Attn: Larry Fisher South County Journal
201 Pelly Avenue N PO Box 1100 PO Box 130
Renton,WA 98055 LaConner,WA 98257 Kent,WA 98035
Tom Goeltz
Clark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes 1501 4th Avenue#2600
3711 Lake Washington Blvd N 8606 118th Avenue SE Seattle,WA 98101
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Gregg Dohrn
Gloria Brown Jones &Stokes Bruno &Anne Good
1328 N 40th Street 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 605 S 194th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005 Des Moines, WA 98148-2159
Mr. Bill Dunlap G. Goodman
Kim Browne Triad Associates
1003 N 28th Place 11814— 115th Avenue NE 3715 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland,WA 98034 Renton,WA 98056
Tony Boydston Dave Enger,TD&E Joyce Kendrich Goodwin
3901 Lake Washington Blvd N 2223 112 h Avenue NE, Suite 101 3715 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98055 Bellevue,WA 98004 Renton,WA 98056
' f
Dan &Laurie Brewis Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter
Jones &Stokes
11026 100th Avenue NE 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N 11820 Northup Way
Kirkland,WA 98033 Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005
Walt&Bessie Cook Bob Fawcett Edith Hamilton
903 N. 36th Street 305 2nd Avenue NE 3714 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 Issaquah,WA 98027 Renton,WA 98056
Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish Susan Martin
PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Lane N#106 1101 North 38th Street
Seattle,WA 98138 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
James Hanken Lakeside Community Church Marlen Mandt
999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 6947 Coal Creek Parkway SE 1408 N. 26th Street
Seattle,WA 98104 Box 270 Renton,WA 98056
Newcastle,WA 98059
Patricia Helina Lynn ManoloPoulos
Robert Lange Davis Wright
4004 Lake Washington Blvd N 4017 Park Avenue N 10500 NE 8th Street, Suite 1800
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98005
Marsha Hertel Dennis Law Debbie Martin
3836 Lake Washington Blvd N 3625 Lake Washington Blvd N 1412 N 30th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
S. & Nel Hiemstra Allen Lebowitz Marcie Maxwell
3720 Lake Washington Blvd N 212 Pelly Avenue N PO Box 2048
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Matt Hough Kay McCord
Otak Inc. Al &Cynthia Leovout 2802 Park Avenue North
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 PO Box 1965 Renton,WA 98056
Kirkland,WA 98033 Gig Harbor,WA 98335
Torsten Lienau
Ande Jorgensen HDR Tim McGrath
2411 Garden Court N 500 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1200 900 N 34th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Bellevue,WA 98004 Renton,WA 98056
Mary Kammer David Lierman Terry McMichael
51 Burnett Avenue S#307 620 E Marion Street 4005 Park Avenue N
Renton,WA 98056 Kent,WA 98031 Renton, WA 9805
Kennydale Neighborhood Association Kevin Lindahl Keith Menges
Attn: Kim Browne, President 3719 Lake Washington Blvd N1615 28th
1211 North 28th Place Renton,WA 98056 NE Street
Rent
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
Pan Abode Cedar Homes Therese
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A203 John &Greta Moulijn
4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton,WA 98056 3726 Lake Washington Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
King County Wastewater Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Barbara Questad;Treatment Division Mr. & Mrs. R. Lynch Fisheries Department
King Street Center 1420 NW Gilman Blvd#2268 39015 172nd Avenue SE
201 South Jackson Street#500 Issaquah,WA 98027 Auburn, WA 98092
Seattle,WA 98104
Linda Knowle Roy&Cheryl Lynch Dorothy Muller
Kennydale Reality 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B204 51 Burnett Avenue S#410
2902 Kennewick PI. NE Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055
Renton,WA 98056
Mary Maier
Misty Kodish May Creek Steward David Nestvold
5021 Ripley Lane N #106 King County DNRP 6608 117tn Avenue SE
Renton,WA 98056 201 S.Jackson, Suite 600 Bellevue,WA 98006
Seattle,WA 98104
Micheal E. Nicholson
City of Newcastle
Douglas R. Marsh Community Development Director Sara Nicoli
1328 N.40th Street 13020 SE 72nd PI. 3404 Burnett Avenue N
Renton,WA 98056 Newcastle,WA 98059-3030 Renton,WA 98056
Don Robertson
Sara Nicoli 1900 NE 48th Street#R101 Neil Thomson
310 Hibriten Avenue SW Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 76
Lenoir, NC 28645 Mercer Island,WA 98040
D. Sabey nd Scott Thomson Amy Norris to
21410 132 SE PO Box 76 1900 NE 48 Street#F-202
Kent,WA 98042 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton,WA 98056
Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT Rich Schipanski Fritz Timm, P.E.
15700 Dayton Avenue N City of Newcastle
Blumen Consulting Group
P.O. Box 330310 600 108tn NE, Suite 1002 13020 SE 72 Place
Seattle,WA 98133 Bellevue,WA 98004 Newcastle,WA 98059
Virginia Piazza Beverly Wagner
Josef Schwab)
1119 N 35th Street 3921 Meadow Ave N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D104
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
i
J
Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin Jennifer Scott
1120 N 38th Street 5021 Ripley Lane N, Apt#1 Rich Wagner
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 2411 Garden Court N
Renton,WA 98056
Herbert&Diana Postlewait David Sherrard Richard Weinman
3805 Park Ave N 5808 Lake Washington Blvd NE 270 Third Avenue
Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland,WA 98033 Kirkland,WA 98033
Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham Robert West
Raedeke Associates 3904 Park Avenue N
3907 Park Avenue N
5711 NE 63rd Street Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Seattle,WA 98115
Kevin Sloan Doug Williams
Hamid&Tasleem Qaasim Pan Abode Homes 201 South Jackson Street
3830 Lake Washington Blvd N 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N MS KSC-NR-0503
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98104-3855
Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith John Wilson
3724 Lake Washington Blvd N 1004 North 36th Street 1403 3rd Avenue, Suite 300
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98105
Rod Stevens Charles Wolfe
Dustin Ray 505 5th Avenue S, 10th Floor 1111 3rd Avenue, Suite 3400
8936 132 Place SE Seattle,WA 98134 Seattle,WA 98101
Newcastle,WA 98057
Linda Reutimann David &Joyce Stevenson Bud Worley
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B202
1106 North 38th Street 1208 North 28th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Wendy&Lois Wywrot Mike Cowles
Larry Reymann BNSF Railway
1313 North 38th Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A104 Engineering
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 2454 Occidental Ave S
Seattle,WA 98135
Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling Gary Young
3115 2108 Camas Avenue NE 527 Renton Avenue S Mountain View Avenue N
Rent
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Monica Durkin
WA Dept. of Natural Resources Cyrus M. McNeely Cynthia Youngblood
Aquatics Division 3810 Park Avenue N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A103
950 Farman Avenue N Renton,WA 98056. Renton,WA 98056
Enumclaw,WA 98022
Ahmer Nizam
WA Utilities and Trans. Commission Jim Johnson Don West
1300 South Evergreen Park Dr SW 3921 115th Avenue SE 22464 NE 60th Street
Olympia,WA 98504 Snohomish,WA 98290 Redmond,WA 98053
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko Larry and Ci a Reymann
1313
3837 Lake Washington Blvd N 2125 NE 24th Street Rent No. 38th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Steven Wood
Eileen Hlaverson Alex Cugini Century Pacific, LP
5021 Ripley Lane N #302 PO Box 359 2140 Century Square
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98057 1501 Fourth Avenue#2140
Seattle,WA 98101
/1.4e 73 d 7
// off— s 2. 1,-S- '_ �
CITY L, F: RENTON
u1154N,
<; Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
_ iA
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
May 26, 2004
Campbell Mathewson _
2140 Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101 •
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat ,
File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H,SM.
Dear Campbell:
This letter is to inform you that.the appeal period has ended..for the Environmental Review
Committee's (ERC) issuance of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
No appeals were filed on the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIS.
As discussed in detail under separate.correspondence dated May 25, 2004, the subject plat,
site plan and shoreline application has been placed "on-hold" pending preparation of the
Mitigation Document and submittal of revised plat drawings.
If you have any questions, please contact me at (425)430-7382.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
ijz., ----------
./Z. 4 ,
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner. •
Steven Wood/Applicant
Matthew Hough/Otak
Parties of Record
FINAL_EIS_LTR.DOC RENTON
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
614 This Daoermntains 50%rarvdarl matarial 3n%.,.,mot r.,.,ci i..,e. AHEAD OF THE CURVE
STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING }
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ------CITY of RENTON— between North 40th Street-arid
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND North 44th Street and abuts
AVAILABILITY Burlington Northern Santa Fe .
PUBLIC NOTICE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL Railroad right-of-way along the
LilyNguyen, first dulysworn on oath that she is a Legal AdvertisingIMPACT STATEMENT eastern boundary.
being Notice is given under SFPA RCW LEAD AGENCY:
Representative of the 43.216.080, that the Final' , City of Renton '
Environmental Impact Statement Development Services Division!
(FEIS) for the' proposal described —P/B/PW Department i
King County Journal !'below was issued by the City 'of'i , 1055 South Grady Way I
I:Renton Environmental Review, , Renton,WA 98055
I.Committee on May 3, 2004 and is' RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general :available for public review. ,The' Environmental Review
to the date ;,document is available for review at, . Committee
circulation and is now and has been for more than six months
prior ;the Renton Main Library located ate City of Renton'
of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language ,100 Mill Avenue South and the' : 1055 South Grady Way '
„Highlands Branch Library located at;
continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King Renton,WA 98055 j
2902 NE 12th Street and from 8 am , DOCUMENT •PURCHASE' IN
County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the to 5 pm, Monday through Friday at 'FORMATION:$10.00 plus tax and
Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. the Development Services Division, postage (if applicable), will be,
The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the 'Renton -City Hall, 6th floor, 1055 charged for the Final Environmental
South Grady Way, Renton, WA Impact Statement. The document:
King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly '98055. may be purchased at the Finance;
distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed ' PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Department located on the first floor;
Preliminary Plat EIS considers Renton City Hall.
notice,a potential residential -development APPEAL PROCESS: On May 3;
:concepts for the redevelopment of the 2004, the Environmental Review
22.9-acre site located along the Lake Committee, issued .the Final
Notice of Issuance and Availability Washington and May Creek, Environmental. Impact Statement
shorelines.the EIS reviews potential) ,(FEIS) for the proposed Barbee Mill'
impacts on-the property from they ;Preliminary Plat. This action:
was published on Monday,5/3/04' ) proposed 115 townhouse lots as well° 'initiated a twenty (20) day appeall
as from the continuation of .thef ,period, during which the FEIS may
existing industrial use. R, 'be appealed. Any appeal must be'i
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing-publication is the sum ' LAND USE NUMBER: based on the adequacy'of the Draft,
of $180.38 at the rate of$15.50 per inch for the first publication and-N/A per LUA-02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM and Final EIS.Under City of Renton,
', PROJECT NAME: Barbee Milli Code, RMC 4-8-110.E.4.a.iii, an'1
inch for eac ubseque sertion. Preliminary Plat I appeal of the FEIS must be made toe
PROPONENT:• i the Hearing Examiner. The appeal;
The Barbee Mill Company . I period will end on May 24, 2004, at1 '
LilyNguyen P.O.Box 359 , 5:00 p.m. - '
' Renton,WA 98057 . ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If,
Legal Advertise g Representative,King County Journal Contact:Campbell Mathewson 1 ,you require additional information,
!, 206-689-7203 f 'please contact Susan Fiala, City of.
Subsc ' ed and sworn to me this 3rd day of May,2004. , LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Renton, Development Services:
kVL----------
\\\111111111!!// The 22.9-acre'site is located one Division at(425)430-7382.•
� ��\\\ �G H c /��� the west side of Lake 'Published in the' King County f
� ,�tG,, ,...., /�/i - _W.ashington_Boulevard_North� Jo�al May`3,2004_#841355 _
Tom A.Meagher ` ••y o�SEX p I res•.,• i • -
Notary Public for the State of Washington,Resioingia Zed oii,Wa$l gon .
Ad Number: 841355 P.O.Number: = O a s O / :r
• o ® V C7`
Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit s u�cAarg 4�0)� : `
z•:'cam:
•/, ksl%•••.......M AI'\t x �
///// '1/f lEl I Oi f\\\\\
// \\\
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 21st day of May, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Final Environmental Impact Statement Decision documents. This information was sent
to:
Name:
Eileen Halverson Party of Record
(Signature of Sender): .Jr, /i'/ %%%%%%%%% >
1111
1
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) �; � wF+; r%�,
) SS f rv� N'rAgy.om.�',,�
COUNTY OF KING ) '
AUSL%C .
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker L,9 '•. s da
•'2
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntdr, •'t•r41ie•i4esand
purposes mentioned in the instrument. ''�� ASH�N.
Dated: 6124/09 �,� /' 4/ -n_4�
Not4 -ublic in and for the St of Washington
Notary (Print): MARILYN KAMCHEFF
My appointment expires: IVIYAPPUINI MEN I EXPIRES 6-29-07
>"oi : am : Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
4p ojeat "•5 LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 6th day of May, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing FEIS documents. This information was sent to:
Name: Representing..
Agencies See attached
(Signature of Sender): 40 ; .4,11t6,,/ _ c ''
STATE OF WASHINGTON )' i;or�pTAgy 9N
) SS
COUNTY OF KING ) I, A,'•• pUBOC' z
E 29-g1••,• CI
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker '',FOp yyAsNx�_'
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fo�`tine.►i€ 'and
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: _3 `2S�0 V
Nota Public in and for the S)elf Washington
Notary (Print): MARILYN KANCHUF
My appointment expires: MYAPPOINTMENTEXPIRES6-29.07
,Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project Number: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
template-affidavit of service by mailing
King County Department of Transportation Tulalip Tribes Natural Resources
201 S Jackson Street; KSC-TR-0815 7515 Totem Beach Road
Seattle,WA 98104-3856 Tulalip, WA 98271
City of Bellevue Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
11511 Main Street 110 Union Street, Suite 500
Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle,WA 98101 ,
Puget Sound Regional Council King County Surface &Water Management
1101 Western Avenue, Suite 500 201 S Jackson Street, Suite 600
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle,WA 98104
(206) 296-6519
US Environmental Protection Agency US Department of Fish &Wildlife
1200 Sixth Avenue 9317 NE Hwy 99, Suite I
Seattle, WA 98101 Vancouver,WA 98665-8900
(800) 424-4372 (360) 696-7605
NOAA Fisheries Renton Chamber of Commerce
14th Street & Constitution Avenue NW, Suite 6217 300 Rainier Avenue N
Washington, DC 20230 Renton, WA 98055
(202) 482-6090
Renton Historic Society Washington Environmental Council
235 Mill Avenue S 615 Second Avenue, Suite 300
Renton, WA 98055-2133 Seattle, WA 98104
(206) 622-8103
King County Audubon Society King County Library
PO Box 778 960 Newport Way
Auburn, WA 98071 Issaquah,WA 98027
(360) 786-8020
Bellevue Regional Library Seattle Public Library
1111 110th Avenue NE 1000 Fourth Avenue
Bellevue, WA 98004 Seattle, WA 981 04-1 1 09
Seattle Times Seattle Post Intelligencer
PO Box 70 PO Box 1909
Seattle, WA 98111 Seattle, WA 98111-1909
King County Journal Renton Reporter
1705 132nd Avenue NE 600 Washington Avenue S
Bellevue, WA 98009 Kent, WA 98032
(253) 872-6600
_ _
. , _
,_____
N.oncE .
,.. . ,....„ .
. , A
CITY OF RENTON �
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY i e gaaI �
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT i44r .0-C47/ -
Notice is given under SEPA,RCW 43.216.080,that the Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS) ~' -
for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee ' 0140. •
on May 3,2004 and is available for public review. The document is available for review al the Renton 1l'�,�S�y,
Main Library located at 100 Mill Avenue South and the Highlands Branch Library located al 2902 NE �L �,'
12'"Street and from 8 am to 5 pm,Monday through Friday at the Development Services Division, - Itt 6
Renton City Hall,6t'floor,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. .�, r �, •
PROPOSAL:The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development �� �,• - , '� d '
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May i /
Creek shorelines. The EIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 0a4 tri t� ilk
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing Industrial use. ,- % "r��,A � v .I . �
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM '.6
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O.Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson Inl �_� _
Renton,WA 98057 206-689-7203p `�'''' i �0 1
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington O"f i �,
Boulevard North between North 40 Street and North 44 Street and • 7 7f 4,?�1 r,,
abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the q /'e " _c
eastern boundary. o -;0,1iiii 1�slc'-,
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton m z ',: ;-` �M11Kv��17,
Development Services Division—P/B/PW Department ,
1055 South Grady Way 19 op. . . r� 1. i
Renton,WA 98055 = t,_•./ 1 r a
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Environmental Review Committee 'j
City of Renton a �'���:,,� G�ti�11 � 5a��i
1055 South Grady Way k f,:;"v` f,,..1 -twit. IttrA
Renton,WA 98055 1 t� �is� '''
aw 1r I ilt �4��
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: $10.00 plus tax and postage (if applicable), will be ° Wn 11 �I I ICI ��r`�i^r
charged for the Final Environmental Impact Statement. The document maybe purchased at the rt - I !�l Ic
Finance Department located on the first floor,Renton City Hall. m E?_ t :1 53 5.VAri ,tom)
APPEAL PROCESS: On May 3, 2004, the Environmental Review Committee issued the Final 2 7I , , 1 ii I ++it�111'I^ t
Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)for the proposed Barbee Mill PreliminaryPlat.This action M rs j k I;st•
z.�/ f tl I iai�I r:v,,.
initiated a twenty(20)day appeal period,during which the FEIS may be appealed.Any appeal must i + _ '
be based on the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIS. Under City of Renton Code, RMC 4-8• �f 1a�r° t'zl �tQ'- -^.�
110.E.4.a.iii,an appeal of the FEIS must be made to the Hearing Examiner.The appeal period will I ' q U i t ccex'-,
end on May 24,2004,at 5:00 p.m. .,PIAr•.�i' S:Ii . i-, '
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:If you require additional Information,please contact Susan Fiala,City
of Renton,Development Services Division at(425)430-7382.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)430-7200.
• DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION I
Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification.
CERTIFICATION _ r 4 "F�A.t.O.
0 NOTARY 9m;
/ % N �DUBLIG :�_
• I, _f/v� 727 ? ,hereby ertify that copied,8 tie p:
•• above document were posted by me in conspicuous places on on, Ej-k•ASHA4C,-
the described property on 3/?Qd .,'4.,.",,...
Signe 7 �,
ATTEST: Subscribed a d swo before me,a Notary P blic,in and for State of a
Washington residing ,on the—Ey ,/� _day o
MARILYN KAMCHEFF
MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07 ,
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 3rd day of May, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Final Environmental Impact Statement documents. This information was sent to:
Name . °..Representing
Agencies See Attached
.‘
(Signature of Sender): ,W \1& ��'�y - 'y
to NOTAgy 9;: i
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) `.�
SS N '°UBOO _
COUNTY OF KING ) 7,�y .,� • 2s0 .�sI ;�'�O-'
f I414 OF WAsvP-
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker �� "...,,,-.
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: 5i7 Q/D1
Notar ublic in and for the&ate of Washington
Notary (Print): itilARLYNKAMCHEFF
My appointment expires: MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project Number: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
.
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology* WDFW- Stewart Reinbold * Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section c/o Department of Ecology
PO Box 47703 3190 160`h Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Bellevue,WA 98008 39015—172nd Avenue SE
Auburn,WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office* Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A *
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
PO Box 330310 39015 172"d Avenue SE
Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Auburn,WA 98092-9763
US Army Corp. of Engineers* KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Office of Archaeology& Historic
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation*
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer
PO Box C-3755 201 S.Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343
Seattle,WA 98124 Seattle,WA 98104-3855 Olympia,WA 98504-8343
Jamey Taylor*
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia,WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72"d Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
Seattle,WA 98104-3856 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services•
Eric Swennson
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle,WA 98104-5004
Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an"Optional DNS",the marked agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. *
Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send
her the ERC Determination paperwork.
•
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 3rd day of May, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Final Environmental Impact Statement documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
Barbee Mill Company Owner
Century Pacific, LP Applicant
Parties of Record See Attached List
(Signature of Sender): ,,a Raaryzew-- �`.��'�Nio 4/0y'4,
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) /8 14OTAAY m:
) SS
COUNTY OF KING ) : •
��CJ UBLIG :2
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker bpF W %%%%%%=
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for'�fa,0,1esaTid
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: 61 Z-f D y -z c 7 ,� /
otar A ublic in and for the he Sa go Washin ton
Y 4a 9
Notary (Print): MAItll1'NKAMGHtfr
My appointment expires: M1'APPOINTMENTEXPIRES 6-29-07
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project Number: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
template-affidavit of service by mailing
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Attn: Robert Cugini Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave. N
Box 359 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98057 Kirkland, WA 98033
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Nancy Denney Greg & Sabra Fawcett, DDS
Attn: Robert Cugini 3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. Family Dental Clinic
4101 Lk. WA Blvd. Renton, WA 98055 P.O. Box 1029
Renton, WA 98057 Fall City, WA 98024
Campbell Mathewson Dept. of Ecology
Century Pacific, LP Northwest Regional Office Greg Fawcett
2140 Century Square Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. P.O. Box 402
1501 Fourth Ave. #2140 3190 160t"Ave. SE Fall City,WA 98024
Seattle,WA 98101 Bellevue, WA 98008-5452
Tom & Linda Baker Department of Fish &Wildlife Carmen Flores
1202 N. 35th Attn: Rich Johnson 16707 SE 14th St.
Renton, WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Bellevue, WA 98008
LaConner, WA 98257
Flora Baldwin Department of Fish &Wildlife Dan Frey, WSDOT
4017 Park Ave. N. Attn: Stewart Reinhold 6431 Corson Avenue
Renton, WA 98056 PO Box 1100 Seattle, WA 98018
LaConner, WA 98257
Department of Fish &Wildlife Wendy Giroux
Lisa Bartel Attn: Larry Fisher
201 Pelly Ave. N PO Box 1100 South County Journal
Renton, WA 98055 LaConner, WA 98257 P.O. Box 130
Kent,WA 98035
Tom Goeltz
Clark Van Bogart Charles F. Dobes
to 1501 4th Ave, #2600
3711 Lake Washington BIN 8606 118 Ave. SE Seattle,WA 98101
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Gregg Dohrn
Gloria Brown Jones & Stokes Bruno & Anne Good
1328 N. 40th Street 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 605 S. 194th St.
Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Des Moines, WA 98148-2159
Mr. Bill Dunlap G. Goodman
Kim Browne Triad Associates 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
1003 North 28th Place 11814— 115th Avenue NE Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056 Kirkland, WA 98034
Dave Enger, TD&E
Tony Boydston 2223 112t"Avenue NE Joyce Kendrich Goodwin
3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. Suite 101 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056
Kennydale Neighborhood Association Kevin Lindahl Keith Menges
Attn: Kim Browne, President 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N. 1615 28th
1211 North 28th Place Renton,WA 98056 Street
Renton,
Renton, WA 98056 WA 98056
Jerry Kierig Therese Luger
Pan Abode Cedar Homes 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., A203 John & Greta Moulijn
4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 3726 Lake WA Blvd..N.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
King County Wastewater Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Barbara Questad; Treatment Division Mr. & Mrs. R. Lynch Fisheries Department
King Street Center 1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2268 39015 172nd Ave SE
201 South Jackson Street, #500 Issaquah, WA 98027 Auburn, WA 98092
Seattle,WA 98104
Linda Knowle Roy & Cheryl Lynch
•
Kennydale Reality 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204 Dorothy Muller
2902 Kennewick Pl. NE Renton, WA 98056 51 Burnett Ave South #410
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055
Mary Maier
Misty Kodish May Creek Steward David Nestvold
King County DNRP
5021 Ripley Lane N. #106 6608 117th Ave SE
Renton, WA 98056 201 S. Jackson, Suite 600 Bellevue,WA 98006
Seattle,WA 98104
Micheal E. Nicholson
City of Newcastle
Douglas R. Marsh Community Development Director Sara Nicoli
1328 N. 40th Street 13020 SE 72nd PI. 3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Newcastle, WA 98059-3030 Renton, WA 98056
Don Robertson
Sara Nicoli 1900 NE 48th St., #R101 Neil Thomson
310 Hibriten Ave SW PO Box 76
Lenoir, NC 28645 Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040
D. Sabey Scott Thomson Amy Norris to
21410 132nd SE PO Box 76 1900 NE 48 Street#F-202
Kent, WA 98042 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton, WA 98056
Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT Fritz Timm, P.E.
Rich Schipanski
15700 Dayton Avenue North tle
Blumen Consulting Group City of Newcastle
P.O. Box 330310 600 108tn NE, Suite 1002 13020 SE 72nd Place
Seattle,WA 98133 Bellevue, WA 98004 Newcastle,WA 98059
Virginia Piazza Beverly Wagner
Josef Schwab]
1119 North 35th Street 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104
Renton, WA 98056 3921 Meadow Ave. N. Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056
Dan & Laurie Brewis Bruce Erikson Lisa Grueter
Jones & Stokes
11026 100th Ave. NE 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N.
Kirkland, WA 98033 Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northup Way
Bellevue, WA 98005
Walt& Bessie Cook Bob Fawcett Edith Hamilton
903 N. 36th St. 305 2nd Ave. NE 3714 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056 Issaquah,WA 98027 Renton, WA 98056
Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish Susan Martin
PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Land North #106 1101 North 38th Street
Seattle,WA 98138 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
James Hanken Lakeside Community Church Marlen Mandt
999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 6947 Coal Creek Parkway SE 1408 N. 26th St.
Seattle, WA 98104 Box 270 Renton, WA 98056
Newcastle, WA 98059
Patricia Helina Lynn ManoloPoulos
4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. Robert Lange Davis Wright
Renton, WA 98056 4017 Park Ave N. 10500 NE 8th Suite 1800
Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98005
Marsha Hertel Dennis Law Debbie Martin
3836 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3625 Lake WA Blvd. N. 1412 North 30th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
S. & Nel Hiemstra Allen Lebowitz Marcie Maxwell
3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. 212 Pelly Ave. N. PO Box 2048
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Matt Hough
Otak Inc. Al & Cynthia Leovout Kay McCord
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 P.O. Box 1965 2802 Park Avenue North
Kirkland, WA 98033 Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Renton, WA 98056
Torsten Lienau
Ande Jorgensen HDR Tim McGrath
2411 Garden Ct. N. 500 108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 900 North 34th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton, WA 98056
Mary Kammer David Lierman Terry McMichael
51 Burnett Ave. S., #307 620 E. Marion Street 4005 Park Ave. N.
Renton, WA 98056 Kent,WA 98031 Renton, WA 9805
Gary C. & Yvonne Pipkin Jennifer Scott
1120 N. 38th St. 5021 Ripley Lane N, Apt #1 Rich Wagner
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Renton, WA 98056
Herbert & Diana Postlewait David Sherrard Richard Weinman
3805 Park Ave. N. 3rd
Renton, WA 98056 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE 270 3 Ave.
Kirkland, WA 98033 Kirkland, WA 98033
Emmett Pritchard Chris Sidebotham Robert West
Raedeke Associates 3907 Park Ave. N. 3904 Park Avenue North
5711 NE 63rd Street Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle,WA 98115
Kevin Sloan Doug Williams
Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Pan Abode Homes 201 South Jackson Street
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N. Renton: MS KSC-NR-0503
Renton, WA 98056 WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Dewey Rancourt Jeff Smith John Wilson
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. 1004 North 36th Street 1403 3rd Ave, Suite 300
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98105
Rod Stevens Charles Wolfe
Dustin Ray to
nd 505 5th Ave. S., 10 Floor 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
8936 132 PI. SE Seattle, WA 98134 Seattle, WA 98101
Newcastle, WA 98057
Linda Reutimann David &Joyce Stevenson Bud Worley
1106 North 38th Street 1208 North 28th Street 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N. #B202
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Wendy& Lois Wywrot Mike Cowles
Larry Reymann BNSF Railway
1313 North 38th Street 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., A 104 Engineering
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 2454 Occidental Av So
Seattle, WA 98135
Bill Yeckel Jan Hickling Gary Young
2108 Camas Ave NE 527 Renton Ave. S. 3115 Mountain View Ave. N.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Monica Durkin
WA Dept. of Natural Resources Cyrus M. McNeely Cynthia Youngblood
Aquatics Division 3810 Park Ave. N. 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A103
950 Farman Av N Renton, WA 98056. Renton, WA 98056
Enumclaw, WA 98022
Ahmer Nizam
Washington Utilities and Transportation Jim Johnson Don West
Commission +n 60th
1300 South Evergreen Park Dr SW 3921 115 Ave. SE 22464 NE St.
Olympia, WA 98504 Snohomish,WA 98290 Redmond, WA 98053
Mark Zilmer Kaui Ewaliko Larry and Ci a Reymann
1313 No. 38th St.
3837 Lk.WA Blvd. N. 2125 NE 24th St Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
May 26, 2004
Campbell Mathewson
2140 Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H,SM
•
Dear Campbell:
This letter is to inform you that the appeal period has ended for the Environmental Review
Committee's (ERC) issuance of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
No appeals were filed on the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIS.
As discussed in detail under separate correspondence dated May 25, 2004, the subject plat,
site plan and shoreline application has been placed "on-hold" pending preparation of the
Mitigation Document and submittal of revised plat drawings.
If you have any questions, please contact me at(425)430-7382.
For the Environmental.Review.Committee,
•
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner • •
Steven Wood/Applicant
Matthew Hough/Otak
Parties of Record
FINAL_EIS_LTR.DOC RENTON
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
::This paper contains50°/recycled material,30%post consumer
CITY F RENTON
Plannin uildin blicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
May 25, 2004
Campbell Mathewson
2140.Century Square
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: Barbee.Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA=02-040,EIS,PP, SA-H,SM
•
Dear Campbell:
With the completion of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS);"it has been determined that a
mitigation document is required to be prepared'by the City of Renton.
As evident from the EIS, numerous..mitigation measures have been proposed to address
environmental impacts of the proposed preliminary plat, as well as the direct and indirect impacts
from the proposal (i.e. site plan, shoreline substantial development permit). Therefore, the City
will prepare a Mitigation Document to establish specific mitigation measures to diminish or
eliminate significant adverse impacts identified in the EIS..
As applicant, you will be required to submit revised plat drawings to address the Mitigation
Measures and to enable the City to continue processing the land use application for the proposed
plat.
At this time, the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat land use application (file no. LUA-02-040, EIS,.
PP, SA-H, SM)has been placed"on hold."
When the Mitigation Document is complete and its appeal period has ended and once the
applicant has revised the preliminary plat, submitted revised site plans that are found to be
acceptable, the project would be scheduled with the Hearing Examiner for a public hearing.
Please contact me at(425)430-7382 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N-AHEAD O F THE CURVE
:: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
June 3,2002
Page 2 of 2
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood/Applicant
Matthew Hough/Otak
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman,P/B/PW Administrator
Alex Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Ben Wolters, Economic Development Director
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner
��'
- V ,`'
1
�. �'CIT. F ::R,
.• ENT'ON`�
Pl li.: r
annin N uildiri� b cWo lcs De artinent
•.JL '1. 1: • P
• Gregg• • ' - - -
Ma �3
2004
Y • -
'1 1;•::.:*:-2-*'::'''''-'1::.:':
-H SM :;'
SUBJECT:• Barf;ee.Mil:.,, -.elimina -Plat;.•LUA=b2=040 EIS,:PP-,,',$A, ,
.Final.Environmental.Im' act Statement; FEIS
r'lnterested' art'D'ea -
• .Y.,
•
' `':'This fetter eis notification''that the`Env'ironmental• ,fReview:-_.Committee%, ERC 'desi '•nated,'as'.the._
SEPA:` responsible"official:.for:theC'`City;.of:.`Renton :'.issued the,Final, Environmental 'Impact'
p, _
Statement FEIS 'for•:tl e Barbee.Mill::Prelimi•nary Plat•on,May3,=;20p4.,'"
I• ` .r' earth, • ublisf in and :
The>,Final ,EI 1),..i gments,,:the.:r;D.-- 'EIS ;by.-providing:,:additions ,:,_es. p, g: ,
' =::answering comment letters received on;=th`e Draft'and••.making.corrections;,The D.raft.EIS.should,'` ;
Fiinal:E'lS�.-' "
'-'4::::--..':::--....:1:-:1'::'
.:b"e�referred to:for text hot`rev•ised i`n'�thin i
:The docuriient'is=availo r .for•=review a.,.the-Renton. .-..., Libra , locafed-,:at 100`M ill-•'Avenue
rY .
South and'-.the,Hi hlands'Branch .Lib,rar "'located:at,2902';NE 'f2t" Street�and'-from am`to;5,. m; ;:,,
g. !Y. ''b' I?
:•Monda 'throu g h`Friday,at the Development'Services.Division; Renton Cit ;Hall, :6 floor;:1,055
Y 9, y.. p;, Y
:R `nton `WA:98055...:
_ 'South Grady 1Nay,, a ,.. -
The•-FinaI.E1-, 'may"be, purchased•et-•the,City:of',-RentonrH.Finance o ffice located on the`first. .1
floor floor of'Renton;'Cit Hall':,T.hedocument costs`,$'10.00;;plus;;tax:;'
'.This:`action:initiated a'twent '2•0 day`:a. eal"period;_`durin�.:which'the'FEIS.ma y':.be?a• 'ea led,:`
An .•a- eal'"musfi'fbe,ba`sed=:on the�adequacy-of,-the,.-Draft-and'Fin•al EIS:•Under.,City:of Renton,' ;,r,',
Y I?P :
Code, RMC. 4-8-1.10:E:4 a:iii;:an>appeal;,of.the: F'EIS`:must,be"rude;to the;,Hearing,Examiner;`
' .The a eat eriod.will'end on`M• ay.24,•2004,�`at:'5:00 .,.. • ;
,..,,,,.,:.,,,.:..,,,,,,,„:_:-.:,..,,.....: .....,,: .,....i.,,._,,:,,..,,.,,... .:.....:,:
r,.-a• rdi this rri tter, 'lease contact:me:b.'' hone, 4•25).430-7.382:or -:
If•you h"ave.q�uesfions. eg, ng a , p., y.p (. _), Y .
tt n ioii` •the a dress:abo e mail�directed.to`m :a e t at f d ., •Y,.
,,:
.•Sincerer' •
-
__., t - .
,
Susan .f1
-
, ,
Pro'ect.Mana'Fla er•,
,;l „
n wriers=:B rbeeMill.Coma %O
Ce ntu �Pacrfic" LP/
. rY pP,
Parties:of:Record'
:R E` tir
N_ O�•N�
''1'.n5S,South`Grady;Way.=R'enton,-Washngfori`98O55' -
FEIS,'Issuance Letter- .0c.C -• • •.
_ - V: - :AHEAD�'OF;THE,�CURVE'r
.- This papercontains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer;:
J
40
• CITY L- ' RENTON
•
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator.
May 3, 2004
Washington State
Department of Ecology,
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703 •
Olympia,WA 98504-7703
Subject: Issuance and Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the following project•issued by
the Environmental Review Committee (ERC)on May 3, 2004:
ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT •
PROJECT NAME: Barbee MiII'Preliminary Plat
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA 02-040, PP, EIS, SA-H, SM,
LOCATION: . The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard
North between North. 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington .
Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
DESCRIPTION: ' The Barbee Mill: Preliminary Plat EIS . considers . potential residential •
development concepts for the -redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located
along the Lake Washington:and May Creek shorelines. The EIS reviews
potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 townhouse lots as well
as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
•
This action initiated a twenty (20) day appeal period, during which the FEIS may be appealed. Any appeal must
be based on the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIS. Under City of Renton Code, RMC 4-8-110.E.4.a.iii, an
appeal of the FEIS must be made'to the Hearing Examiner. The appeal.period will end on:May.24, 2004, at
5:00'p.m.
•
If you have questions;please call me at(425)430-7382. •
'
For the Env' onmental Review ittee, . •
Susan Fiala, AICP
Senior Planner •
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division
WDFW, Stewart Reinbold '
David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources
WSDOT, Northwest Region .
Duwamish Tribal Office
Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance)
Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
US Army Corp. of Engineers
' Stephanie Kramer, Office of Archaeology& Historic Preservation
Enclosure
FEI3r\geiiLyLTR.doL\ 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
•This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
CITY OF RENTON
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080, that the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on May 3, 2004 and
is available for public review. Copies are available for review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and
Highland Branch) and at the Development Services Division, Renton City Hall, 6 floor, 1055 South Grady Way,
Renton, WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development concepts for the
redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines. The EIS
reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of
the existing industrial use.
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary hat
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson
Renton, WA 98057 206-689-7203
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard North
between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Development Services Division—P/B/PW
1.055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
The FEIS provides responses to comments on the Draft EIS (DEIS)and makes corrections to the DEIS.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: $10.00 plus tax and postage (if applicable), will be charged for the
Final Environmental Impact Statement. The document may be purchased at the Finance Department located on
the first floor, Renton City Hall.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you require additional information, please contact Susan Fiala, City of Renton,
Development Services Division at(425)430-7382.
PUBLICATION DATE: May 3,2004
FEIS_ERC_signature.doc
DATE OF DECISION: April 20, 2004
SIGNATURES:
Ar 2 ', el 0
Gre g Zimm n, ministrator DATE
Department of la in /Building/Public Works
0
Dennis Culp, Administrator DA
Community Services
/-",X0'‘ °V
Lee a er, Fi Chief DATE
Red/ 1/9-_..--
on Fire Department
FEIS_ERC_signature.doc
r
11(1111r1C1-1-4611111-1-
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080, that the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee
on May 3, 2004 and is available for public review. The document is available for review at the Renton
Main Library located at 100 Mill Avenue South and the Highlands Branch Library located at 2902 NE
12th Street and from 8 am to 5 pm, Monday through Friday at the Development Services Division,
Renton City Hall, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL:The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May
Creek shorelines. The EIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359 Contact: Campbell Mathewson
Renton,WA 98057 206-689-7203
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington
Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and
abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the
eastern boundary.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Development Services Division-P/B/PW Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: $10.00 plus tax and postage (if applicable), will be
charged for the Final Environmental Impact Statement. The document may be purchased at the
Finance Department located on the first floor, Renton City Hall.
APPEAL PROCESS: On May 3, 2004, the Environmental Review Committee issued the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. This action
initiated a twenty (20) day'appeal period, during which the FEIS may be appealed. Any appeal must
be based on the adequacy of the Draft and Final EIS. Under City of Renton Code, RMC 4-8-
110.E.4.a.iii, an appeal of the FEIS must be made to the Hearing Examiner. The appeal period will
end on May 24, 2004,at 5:00 p.m.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you require additional information, please contact Susan Fiala, City
of Renton, Development Services Division at(425)430-7382.
. •
i
pir
/ /� �\
,H • . #44 •.4,,,,. • 0 ,
-; - L is
1, ._....__ ct,,,, -7".,,,,,,&))
WASHLNGTONmat i �' '� /
ik.Wk, 0 4••1,1
y
/ Ne." r'0474f , /7 jr
L_ r ';.'.err IS
...wa .Sn �a" ,, •.--
N 40TH ST.
i
, em l I�- . % ,yj ; _
•
jii6iP Agmll, ' '
a !!//, El Sf 1t
O o 4,14't, K,l v le,
x •
CH•I O 5a" h� ..,„,,,"_Nit Iituc !iyu�
fc Z `\ ,9,*, II �ac`1r_/ �X
a z 2 gI�L r i
w Wirt ,r*\Eit ci FAO fligig
c.
1 L__,/, -/:%-i'..,(1,,:i4,...74,0411-I 24/1-31D,Et'At ""*D" =
ail WANFall
w r9_Wuu 1 Z71Tl11'iri '�""M.I i'
w r�fi�c nn r���v�.�r iru����`i'
+i.R;tl3JL 'L.J.� I.JL` S of " Vim.
c,
.] �J aaae£�f[..T�Z114+.].1 . pi Pam,
ma 7
w 31.0 rimanza _' r+ i[a�ir�li a Cawi,ni i
w [.a f i9.PF a i a f"I.
E� J �' in GtlCtlt
W e eeL I.Je G aEee lae• rlpp �s 6;1
C S 7 J,.Ja Q74'V]V]P f11Y,.., 5 , of 1„,...,,,,
ass 1 1 nia II yiiys QJ
. e sa Ltia ari- Tee u h 1 ■■ I ��.�� O 1a r av
'fg`•� /, m in i i�ii i 'I�i SIt1�r^7� 4V �rIl �C* ",�a,
`-. {, C ell! J e! e!I. , Q,V� �..
,-,i /� 9 iii VMii i9uii WV^5i{i' [7 J� [rti. ...
ANIly eL 1 eeceeae J e e e Ve_. !• t ( r�IL�F ai iSFnree.
1m`P%, =oVi CQ CS Yii9iiQ`'� 1 yf q
All
fray t VV I V iir 5 V G� 'YiVR 7ILt C557 avertex)
I '$� �biii5 7P iiYVGFri P7rVV M"1G IN.1� `, y 9 k. MI
I J J're L e ,LlA11e eni nti,3 01 7_=
a/ f9^i Ll L12iQ^.iJ^U7 iiC7Y[R9 i��';t� y_ e _
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DIVISION AT(425) 430-7200.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
JANUARY 20, 2004
To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief
From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning
Meeting Date: January 20, 2004
Time: . 9:00 AM
Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
Agenda listed below.
Barbee Mill EIS Discussion (Fiala)
LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development concepts for
the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek
shorelines. The FEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use. Discussion to
focus on the potential mitigation measures, including floodplain and dredging.
cc: K.Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor
J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator
B.Wolters, EDNSP Director
J.Gray,Fire Prevention
N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ®
F.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner
L. Rude, Fire Prevention ®
J.Medzegian,Council
S.Meyer,P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R.Lind, Economic Development
L.Warren,City Attorney ®
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
JANUARY 13, 2004
To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief
From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning
Meeting Date: January 13, 2004
Time: 9:00 AM
Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
Agenda listed below.
Barbee Mill EIS Discussion (Fiala)
LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development concepts for
the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek
shorelines. The FEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use. Discussion to
focus on the potential mitigation measures, including floodplain and dredging.
•
cc: K.Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor
J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
A.Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator®
B.Wolters, EDNSP Director
J.Gray, Fire Prevention
N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ®
F.Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
L. Rude, Fire Prevention ®
J.Medzegian,Council
S.Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R. Lind, Economic Development
L.Warren,City Attorney ®
•
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
JANUARY 6, 2004
To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief
From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning
Meeting Date: January 6, 2004
Time: 9:00 AM
Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 -
Agenda listed below.
Barbee Mill EIS Discussion (Fiala)
LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development concepts for
the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek
shorelines. The FEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115
townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use. Discussion to
focus on the potential mitigation measures, including floodplain and dredging.
Cherie Lane Preliminary Plat (Fiala)
LUA-03-110, ECF, PP
The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and Preliminary Plat approval for a
16 lot subdivision of a 4.98 acre (gross area) site. The site is located within the Residential - 8
(R-8) zoning designation. The proposed lots are intended for the eventual development of
detached single family homes — lots ranging in size from 4,500 square feet to 6,271 square feet.
Access is proposed via a new half-street, S. 35th St., that extends west from the proposed
south extension of Wells Ave. South. Two wetlands and an abandoned coal mine are located
within the site.
cc: K.Keolker-Wheeler,Mayor
J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator®
B.Wolters, EDNSP Director
J.Gray, Fire Prevention
N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ®
F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
L. Rude, Fire Prevention ®
J.Medzegian,Council
S.Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R. Lind, Economic Development
L.Warren,City Attorney ®
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 31, 2003
TO: Environmental Review Committee
FROM: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, x7382
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill EIS, LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Mitigation Measures proposed by Applicant & Flood Plain
Analysis Interdepartmental Memo
The attached documents are for ERC discussion to be held on January 6th at 9:00 am.
A) Letter dated November 26, 2003 from applicant/Century Pacific with proposed
mitigation measures. Please carefully note language of their measures.
B) Internal Memo dated December 10, 2003 concerning Flood Plain Analysis. Staff has
forwarded this memo to consultant to conduct further review of Otak's work.
Thank you!
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
STEVEN L.WOOD ,4C?
MANAGING DIRECTOR � � �
November 26, 2003 °RCP
Neil Watts C,
Renton City Hall- 6th floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98055
Re; Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Neil:
Thank you again for taking the time to meet with the Cugini family and us on Monday,
November 3 to discuss the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. As we agreed, this letter will outline
our approach on a few key issues prior to our discussions of a more comprehensive draft
mitigation agreement with the city in the coming weeks. We have attached a revised preliminary
plat to reflect mitigation suggested to date.
As we discussed, the Cuginis are willing to agree to mitigation conditions similar to the
following:
Road System
• The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat shall. consist of a private road system designed to
current public road section standards for residential access streets as described in Chapter
4 of the City of Renton Development Standards. This would include minimum pavement
widths of 32 feet (curb-to-curb) and right-of-way widths of 42 feet. The City and the
future developer(s) shall work together during the design of roadway improvements to
determine the most appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
Buffers from May Creek and Lake Washington
• The developer(s) shall maintain a buffer of fifty (50) feet from the ordinary high water
mark of May Creek. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark
shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining
fifteen (15) feet may be landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area. The final
hydrologic and hydraulic design for any necessary stream/buffer improvements at May
Creek shall consider the actual vegetation proposed within the 100-year flood plain area.
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7201 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL stevenwood@dwt.com
www.centurypacifidp.com
Neil Watts letter
November 26, 2003
Building setbacks from the Lake Washington shoreline shall be in accordance with
current City of Renton development regulations.
Floodplain and Dredging
• The developer(s) shall contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed fifty (50) foot
setbacks from May Creek. Containment shall be provided by enhancements to the
existing stream channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement
of fill outside of the established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any
necessary stream/buffer improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time
of final engineering design. (This condition is based on updated parameters in the
Parametrix model found in the EIS and discussed in the attached memorandum from Dr.
Bob Schottman and Mr. Russ Gaston of Otak.)
Thank you again for your time and assistance. Please proceed with the issuance of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat Final Environmental Impact Statement as soon as possible. We look
forward to receipt of a draft mitigation document in the next few weeks. Please do not hesitate
to contact me with any questions at 206-689-7201.
Sincerely
•
Steven L. Wood
Managing Director
Cc: Alex Cugini,Barbee Mill Company
Norma Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
/Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, City of Renton
Tom Goeltz,Davis Wright Tremaine
Campbell Mathewson, CenturyPacific
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director, City of Renton
David Sherrard, Parametrix
Larry Warren, City Attorney, City of Renton
2
oa Memorandum
To: Campbell Mathewson
From: Russ Gaston, PE; Bob Schottman, PE
620 Kirkland Way,#100
Kirkland, WA 98033 Copies: Matt Hough, PE
Phone(425)822-4446 •
Fax(425)827-9577 Date: November 20, 2003
Subject: Flood Plain Analysis at May Creek
Project#: 30209
It is expected that the proposed Barbee Mill project will include changes to the existing
bridges and channel cross sections for May Creek as it flows through the site. Parametrix
evaluated several alternatives in its August 2003 report titled Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Appendix B Floodplain Analysis Technical Report.
Otak has updated some of the parameters in the Parametrix model to evaluate the flooding
conditions for May Creek and to include an alternative concept. The updated parameters
are based on recent field observations and current topographic information, and the
adjustments are consistent for both the existing and proposed conditions.
Existing Channel
The existing model has been updated to include the following:
• Block the flow from entering the left channel in Section 1 as May Creek outlets to
Lake Washington. The Parametrix existing model now shows flow in two channels.
Survey information and a site visit do not show a hydraulic connection between the
left channel and upstream cross sections.
• Allow overflowing water to escape directly to Lake Washington rather than
reentering May Creek. The site slopes generally towards the lake and should convey
water away from May Creek if overflow occurs.
• Increase Manning's roughness from n=0.026 to n=0.035 for sections downstream
of Section 3.
Proposed Channel
Otak's planning-level HEC-RAS model makes the following adjustments to the Parametrix
model:
• Increase Manning's roughness from n=0.026 to n=0.035 for sections downstream
of Section 3;
• Remove the downstream and middle bridges and modify the associated channel
cross sections accordingly;
• Replace the upstream bridge with a larger bridge;
• Modify the proposed channel cross sections to include a bankful section for a 1.5-
year flow and a terrace flood bench for high flow conditions;
• Allow the channel sections downstream of Section 3 to aggrade to Lake
Washington's winter water surface elevation(16.9 ft NAVD 88);
• Limit the lateral extent of the channel and flood plain to a 50-foot buffer on each
H:\PROJECT\30200\30209 ADMIN\CORRESP\MATHEWSON112003M.D0C
side of the channel.
Modeling Results
The updated, Otak models have been run with the adjustments specified above and with
the same flow rates provided in the Parametrix report. The updated modeling shows the
following results:
• For existing conditions, the water surface elevation at the upstream project
boundary(Section 11) is approximately the same for the Parametrix and Otak
models. This section is located downstream of the Burlington Northern railroad
bridge.
• The Otak model shows that the proposed water surface elevation is as least 0.5 foot
lower than the existing water surface level at Section 11.
• The Otak model shows that most of the 100-year proposed water surface elevations
are below the existing right overbank elevations used in the Parametrix model.
Only the water surface elevation at Section 7 is higher than the right overbank.
That section, located upstream of the new proposed bridge, has a water surface
elevation approximately 0.6 foot above the bank.
We believe that these changes provide a reasonable channel and bridge design alternative
for inclusion in the Environmental Impact Statement. Our design goal would be restore the
natural geomorphic properties of the stream. We anticipate that the final design analysis
will be based on additional on-site stream flow observations and consideration of
alternative maintenance programs for the project.
H:\PROJECT\30200\30209\ADMIN\CORRESP\MATH E WSON 112003M.D OC
•
•
•
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
ii .
rnn.a
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
�� ,
91 OVERALL PLAT PLAN 4/1 •111E111 /020021.2 J/,' 6/
•
ru-7 Ip
i/
' ' /,' •
I I ' ,tee , I "3 q
4/> M
/ 4O ///2
i ki E
l- COIF-2 ZONE '! •// f/ 1ë \
�. 1•
MI /1 Au1i
- --\=1 1 jmem ir'. I LL 1 I T / // / I f I TIREEt A,_ J ;'/ p I!/ ! {/ _.�� ir ' I �z
gliI
Miii �Ji I I p SOO• 0' we 1000 ii7 O 00.0►
I my,. W
liRli
�W rt ,1 mL., /‘‘, . *z--:29H2O / l�/ff/ I� I MILE IN HIT
�ge
1 .,. 1 ;-' $Oj /•
I VICINITY MAP
I --, w,`•; �- ,� . Q,,' �/re%f/ ` // w .
I • ` , \mar,, -�✓,''/ ; %4' \' I' li LEGAL DESCRIPTION: >+
• i ' �> "4,'.<? ,,/r/', // / \�� 1 .
\ I ASAZI000Two TTONP,REFERRED TOof IWID THIS EAND10E�PESrnSITUATED uOTTR,STATE or
• L. •• `/ ' ♦.b •'" / r i I ALL THAT PORTION OF OOYERNYENT LOT 1,SECTION SO,TORNSUP P.NORTH.
y I —J {� .;'.^`.e, / // \^\ Ij RANGE 6 EAST,WY,IN MO COUNTY,WASHINOTON AND OF SECOND MSS
pq f�•n 1. /._'.j.� J I SHOREIAND6 ADIOINSTO LYING WESTERLY OF NORTHERN PACIFIC RADAOAD RIGHT
^2 I %-:J `t✓...i.. (' // •f ,••-• ^\� 5 I OP WAY,EJICEPI THAT PORTION,H•ANY,OF SAID RE-I/N S LYIND NORTH OF
''. 'v ' . // I THE WESTERLY PRODUCTION OF THE NORTH TINE OF SAID OOYEANIC NT LOT I. W
" j Le-:_J 11A �ry ^ '%l�'d''L�S9L. -^ I / .' / I SITUATE DI THE COUNTY OF KING,STATE OF WASNDt61ON. Qy
1 1 w�=..�.4•Y' T .// / Z
1_[�: :'city? /�, . /f/f I FLOOD HAZARD • a 5
•:e.'/' ',.n',t- ^ _ �a` / % / I THE 100 TSAR SLOOD HAZARD IS CONTAINED WITHIN THE MAT CRUX DAM. F-
311110$114 .Ni.
T.
.a9 r ••"/ �— LEGEND •, w
y3 -"s-,-••, �,•'f� t�� -•/ mn••• •
' NATIVE IANDSGPE AREA- .�(J N
Y < ��/ :�;" v`c9 j ;j/ / \` 77--->' El ins PLANTINGS
GRASSES
m °NAME >
.� / ,p J' ' ,/ / °�r BUFFER PWM"SEAT.T.1- �'1I
L-'ri• l: / , / / "-�• 5::3 AHD O1NFR TUWLED IASaTRCAPE YAIFRIAiS p�+f
v �' /11 I �? 4 Posted
§ '..., / / .74° o a
4 ,/^. C. ����! lncar
f f_____/ .'-N • AS
I �UEJlRIA�•/ T, �'�,� �'I f f __-- 1 P I Q p�wii:wmilw
1 ..'"is; Pe ((Aa ea LS a
WITEOLECON
.' e.E `.0 ezr-
p YY yAT, 09. 1.001
N1 �, j' - /' ' "VL YWO I Project No.
--�� ...,� /�' N 40TH ST.
1 . :7:- w., p���p�yfpf SM1..t Na
-.. �,�,_ - -- - C'Yt_-L0 ,,�.� of 1
•
•
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
/ /
..w... M/A, HIL S�E ��,2/ /
','-
suitor .�. .....y ....� .MekA @E,lKM Pv4A1 limos _A,V! Min wso>m IR40td Me. Wr,�sA IiWA1C RYJiW UARf�9 ram._ fWl'IAG tmam IAWPF.1 aaom Ar® b®'9 R{f:A eiCYO 8'33 �V ElF4tG IITIKA S T -Os° on.
cl,.v,ry i _- - -_ -_ -- _ 1 _ N8!'b b.'W _ IQ! waQ / �7-�'
e.F , n wo, C 1 /
02091.130 ::<e - -'TRACT'A' OPEN SPACE /
°KAME ✓r --• '--- r_c._- �_onr .nx _ :n .a ao �. - .na:,- I .,av - m. -- "r I J r •- J r l 1v -7 /
ne'v i° lt.,i .slAoav 23 I J ooI - i .n ur .a iw'i I� i I ? wN.,' // 8/ /• -- F w
__-____ ; I __ c2,.xw . 2;v I,_ 1800 ,.aoo ve" ,noe v nw 1 ,eo. nw nmav v I . ne,vI Bien 1 we I.i.aa,v :v„-_ -e'', /}ueaw 0. ao ieaoo v ao sr neam v ' .'I I,eunv 9 4 I 1 , v �/ ..I .nr I;��v 22, "w.e�, 7 '$ '18 fI 17 I '8: E " a$I in,.°'v. n'I I S 20 'b I , -14 v� �: f: N� k. g A. ao v$.'i, k m sr
oo ` .....GO $ %Y / � /�(7+� a
L J 1 L^- � I i 18 15 13 '12 1 A. 1 u 10 x 9 j 7 i 6 :7 5 isF 4. 3 3 pa2 v ,, r J7/i/ ,:�( Y
r___;.: � a,,° v 1 s'l�J�''.___ -;,_,„;__J_ L.nw 1_.vo° J L.;;;-
_=_�__ _J L I J L___ J L___ J L 1 I 1 ICE /// Sa
Ij 26,,a s•< ,o<a_ .,00 J- 'x ._ :_ .v ro' '__- __ I _ J L____}'___J L I J °4a--�'ii� ''
/ .ava .nov w < /. I-F--,�.,v , „ ,,w,a---'--.�'4- ,4 -"°-STRCCF-A "t°--—__--- -- 't°^ .oon __.� ;_w'_T_ WmI $1 A. 28 1ans ems, —� t- STRCC a ♦ c c// v .7. iyy``ff va,� '' I7 woo r / / / S?
r----"r •
f•:e j/: �':,m.v .•/ 72 r�'Ynnn T' ex..s, .',is'/.un v e ' u.nv-�I�c. 1 r--- w-1 - A. /j• // `I ,/ �
I '1.'_i .i.,,so2,r + i .a .sse n v r 74 9 y 77 m I IT oo sl ,enw i I -..-.'1
I /• / / EY!.
- ,rf 8 + 71• /,/' '73\ 73M n3" 76M ''t(4.` IA. I nn a v�ii.om v§ i . / ,, % 3,,,,...z
5 I :u.w I� / I 11 69 I 67 1 1 66 / / f, r I if; 1,
$I w,v,v 28 .I ,.1a,`` / ."9„ j i , . $1 .eenm v $ 70 I 86 I I '• 65,/ / / r S i I ::i�Y� / �. // 4I 78 w r 8 1 I I / ' / / •Ao,ew,..
L r.
J� i;P`,/ / .
\ ,"'' 'C ` I �� ,a____—___J L_______J _____.� o i / 8y oru+•t�
•gl R r
' 6 S I„ i e I Zoos sr /a ,.''inwe v e eu.a, ,%',A r:<_�.„ // /
OPEN SPADE•
R 8 F�/"``+` {�4. / aea..'v /i ' I jab% •,e,% 62 ;/ / 63 43"' 64/,,e.- / /,�' / 4f / // U X
H.°, TRACT''A' in.,.v •\< r r r' ' I / / / // / / e" / j
SANITAREZ T T, o os WATER QUALITY s$r .` ` 80 /` C v 61 / / /;0r / / / ► NR
(EounuArg $; Ta i'A \ sees.sr /...
/ ,;/^``` i %/ '. °••+A,>, / �� // '/ y�F
VARY) - 1W • ,a8i�,• a„ nv , ' 82 ma's. \`\• v/'�qf 'wr.r.ogr/'.- ' s• .7`:(- 4.44:494:.a/ r/%/el/ �/ / W:$ �
•
•
0.4
n' \y— 4/ ..w �`; ea 'Ii„ `';.>aa 6' �" °+`j< "'>a....t % :•� / rf•/ // / /
0 AY'R o.w <',-r..n, S R E a '/ \\.\\. 39 / O . 'as'AN / W' /
' ate :.v`\'s s _ \ /.' /':, / / 'e'
:4 N+o si ^\\\\,.sxv\ a'SBv\\ 37 )�)•• ss' •% /: / /, 4-
3.
io.r 1 'J°' <. ru v\\\\ SS \\\ i � .': /'. /;: ' J / (N, /
'' __ '- 1" g ./ „•" ',/ .`a n\\\: \ \ s'A. \\\ •?. -,`'J F.' / • ./ / /Jam/ / (3<
1�. n/ ` \` /\\' \ \i>nn v Sa \ \ \'''''
iti Oi/! ';i' ``,;;..: /
/ / O H
'R --` 30 e....n v---_' 1 I svnx v rv'.f, .`nun v \ 3 s\ \ \ ' ,1 /•�' / / / / s- a.
:R .a a ,'b / \`'\ \ \ •/. / / O= /
I- 7 I TP.' 9' ` St --__ \ b's •••,..: .v['e, i / r / z^ I
�: 0
I 31 R�r o '�'..• .; ,z:: / r LEGEND , w
•
I 32 I[ �,h 'Y '1 .Mr NATNE tANOSCME MFA- •r,(�
9 25'I svasov I -8 </▪ v ri0 \ s. y•�::....'...,.... :._ �; !:", :•. / / (I,, 1 I TREES.PLANTS,AND GRASSES
NAME > 0-V)
_ ` .' . ,.,;.' .� �v'p- `"- //}/ ,/ / �. rwucEo wroscAPE 6urrtR ARrA- ,��/
• / / �+<J µo O7NER1N4`IAOt wLV1D5fPE AUTATEAu15 FLI
8 2%ORCINARv N,. "„ - I e /+,µv.\``▪\.` 49 '' p•::•••. +,,.,./,`.'�._,ASE jti it �:`:..(9_.. c?-- 4 / .v
WATER SE16A+• I 33 I`e "�+'. '•�• (A'H12 /
`� I - ��-' T. '• « \"% 46 ` \ `,/' 'r•. i..:: N.I.1 '• 2 / / J .n_as_ia.T3T
I v` \ •••� .:.,.% _ .W SIEfF.l1H'E? ':..,'.;:• 5 • 1/ / / / / .. ...._. 41 "y :!
�__ i Vass 1 se '� ` \ Pi0 ":.' / / / / afap pr0��i•.1 ••-
I. 1 `a7 /:0 •:>, 0,..::' \• '� 1//,� / / / / ..,,,,IN, QQ P+1 Incorporated
! M ,'s• .. 'El
11 E;• ene,s.‘o` '\;p•.• rA /,:,•.J..'!...;2 I //\ �.i 4/ / !/ ,fin 1 w ao wu.m r. ao
OUCH W.4,n C4S f� 6 O Pi9ew VYaIC faLfm rnCic AefT� TJTeI E® o@T.S 6[e101,v.>Rtti aa0 vmat 7� t9�1 tfHe ® �L19'6W!® e.�1 .�Ce C@ZI rC2t .f6'� iJ INtl+°11A YE4,7'
MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET P2� ` o' 20— 4o�eO �- :�? n°
I�u^I mt.-: m.o 0t
30209.001.001
Projec
NOVEMBER 26, 2003•
2-1
Mi..9EFCIO 011142f ss!S°..t 1 of to
•
•
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M. •
w,.1'9 MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET P2_1 ••
�ovn,�o xcsa .sTrr. ar..:m rssusi occru wm�o exvs av�m ra+m �f` ] er -gv.Si'O° COMA ••n¢a su Igaaa ea9at veasx.ass>c{, area W mmu .,.., ..,,. uv� irmmms„1.'mw n�.a eksry
pooaln,r. I 31 I` i 1 iR ,'.� \. \ - ---�y7 yJ♦.♦ ,.•: i i:'•>: ',.1 'Q .." ice'/
e:vrto n'I Q 4te.e.w \\`D\ • /� ''7/44., x.n's •ii /�'1+,,.•. / /
w�ava - I 32 I k Y ,'9x •• / \\\ 7 ♦ '•♦ • ,• /:.: t.. �, / / /
si°wt°e�i i .e.uP. I x 8 </"a.v,\�\ i� .♦ti x'.,,`.',.: r;.' ,. dj..... / 8
SMACK
\ . ' +.IN : . � ' //" - . \ \. oR'CBARYNC:•.'•`: • I \ i 1
42S'o,m,,,,,OON " _ ----�— •' \ ow �, \,• ♦♦ °:•';:+' • • ,.
O ♦♦4♦•♦ - /e • / / ,WA1FA SETBACK I i .,.]4 1 t \ 7 ... ✓y• " , .: ;. Y. iOit♦i♦:♦`Y i f �' i
R g" • s"t „>.,. \° c
If .,i �,.,•L_ ------ 8t y ; j> � ' ` / t Ea
t AS' 'q1 46\4\\\ \ / // ry". ..5- �♦ .y, \. 'A' / , / /
St w.>,. 5 t. \ .,: /. �':,•:.,:... ♦•,. d./ e,A,�9a. /V it / / / ia � QdQ LAKE WASHNOTON 1 ivaw. 1 •\ I •\.',••.'.T �A ...s'11 114 -0 / / /: / . ' / .�^`.r.W�2. .
1 n3 L G / /
I I us __ t'P v c, ?:•. :.��/ F' :O ;/ \ Y12 ,• /.„�.84. �2 ypApp. /s i %/ / k FY' a
II . t1 t ei 71.4.1,srt :•.f tao, ✓•/1.,:.:.'�'♦4/ wIII :R •A // , ,/ 4,i / / wocv°
��__--j c $77 \ vt1 �p wAx,--- _rya 8 .'` '.,.. .•/I l':.eur,4,", ia.11a ' =. `°fi // ../ ' �' /' sc
•
°—" _` \ r- ,;'• ' .f / %.::�:1• :♦fib l`.a..vv"tog / R ' /, r-�''% , u°
+ ., , 39wo.n _ .. ,•CE /:i.!.:`.:'• , \ . k . �/•' / / ao'
•
/ -\ 40 v+lam !- •♦♦ •'p;...... 1 -/4 °" . / e-/ut'so. O Ip..•N
\ `� ♦A ...� f. 4 4:,toi1 a• /./ �'i n. oesoa/ ` �y2`+4. 2r' ..?AZZ NION _ ¢•� \\ \ w / •G': .♦ 6 A , ~// / ,/ T 168A9• ...\‘-' / �Rar
wA1EA SETBACK <a, / \ \ e. / - ,:r •':,% ,/;`•.. ...j��/ At... / • ,n/ �, N6]S' V
u. \\ ,d ' y. r/ ' �.;•..c ''•♦i♦, V / / Ii / ' /
Fl�yiJp ♦ ' ▪ /� 4 O •
'r f 3'^\\''42 m41 `\\\ /:� , `'�i� / 7� 'a...1 •♦�a s/e e`+103 / • / , % E.
tea.,,.• / �/P•♦♦•.: /'' S F' i.to4 a ' ��' • / ,' /�� / 124
a / •' 4�N``\\ gt /V�' •:i,:.:.. :,,/�/ //-{ , 'PAC, ‹�ims9 r` i� a / '.'•/? / / C9
.raj/ C ,,� . \\\ /\., �'�Q- •♦:. i.-/ /, '.: , ,�c7' 33 /;'0 . i ////e / / �9 / 1
/" ///'� .>.v \\\\ ` 't� '}3. _ ♦,4..i.:. ♦...: ... • ��' ss,a,.v• 4 - / /A/ / \,fin N- // b'TO IIE LOCAT 0 AT/MS,INO W
\ 92 �. \\\.. . �P ,h ,.eta•'•,. r::y 3% :.1,:;;';/ry A I i. / ,A/ / / V nnoAo aosslNa ` M.I
`e a uae.v , - . .ems' /•:'.',: ♦•• / /, Q/ //' /
`' \ "'\\.. �PaoOVER aosm TNAa > '• ♦♦♦4•• o�\• 101 '„ 7 . / /
\.\ ___— -// '� .:S•;�•� , ' ,.... ,) �•4Q♦ / /,„ \\< 2 LEGEND �,0 i N
�' /. L• 'ra.♦,•!`, 99 `d'r /s'. 8i /Y '-/ / \ ••S N~., Q1 7 ri •
/' \ ti \ „uv / �`• 1'V� ,• /
j ' 4 . NATtIE UNOSCAPE U000 .P0y(� •/may LJ=
/ Q/w,4 'TA. 1� ,+ ,. / / / , / `(�tI BI1.FE8 PUNIWGS u0003 TO NATNE C, 0'_
•
SF-� / \ '/ \ ,+`+ //.0"•\ ,�/ , /S /\ I I TRt15,FIJMS,ANO ONASSFS '.y Q� a N •
QNP S�\ / /•.a P ;: 0,.�, / / '' / \ A BurTEa`OPwirWc PSEAATCm iUOE UwN ,,�A�//b '�P` / • " 8 w•Ae �;\ �/ / / / ANO OTHER M,NAOm LANDSCAPE M 0040LS W
•
8.
;\ /`� r, .;sZT
i / /'' // 4 \,n�' 97a '�' •'a6, ° ° - 9/ �A\ // / A.J O•ua
� �' // w TRACT
wwn # f� • �,p. / c
/ / y o
.r 7E 1
// / I' '�a/ 95>,� / �� / �\ / i /Y 0 lnco,•porMO Brklard lep
/' '•�k ���J'"" y/ , ° �/9/ : `� •\\\'/ ,C9. - � o' 20' 40' Bo' r0� �wwwe.t��r, en°um
r ' ' / of y. .. I I I� I / mt.o. .a,tav .
' O�Y - .. -I 30209.001.001
'--`-N ' \ ° �// • / Project No.
/ ser/4ea5_ ap _��` �r-1u,. • _. v9 J-- l — — j -----'----- NOVEMBER 26,.2003 sA...P2_2
u
N.BFfOt 1T4,DIc 1-DOP-424-55554 sn..t 3 o/ 10
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
•
77
•ova oo ,/= /, / .
A e,A---, ''''(/.1/
' s
•
f
IS R
IS R
///,/
/////1/.
/ ;(//
/ m cif'm
/
// ///ri
i
! dell �g;'
•
/ / a
v / 1svui�
/' A.
•
////1 //‘Z.- i 84 i
e,,..ti..., .
min 4
* /., /1 / 7,-7:...,,.-''.<3
• Ol/ // //) . r,I \\, 4
i /A / . \ N -
/ .., 0,, 1 ,:4
, //t„.....t......_... P. 1— •
A • , jr// ;../..1/0 / --- /9Z Z... ..'"'N•
/, P
Z t7J
O� ''' w
•P0T /
Y / / /
�� i F /' ///GAO ( •I \� P4(A
u , r��ti ___P l fro , kr--u��v` oA '% / / ` ,� ��1 , I
„'p o a
CO
....___.........,
iiaw v8 :.ieow•,J iiedw v u.w.w v R _- ;a .''� / i �/ �A -._ __._—__.._._.__.._ ,�m„ F Incorporated ,
•
e 8 1. 5 4 g 3 eiwx ve f Y / A/i / /� �/ l ( anted.r i ITee flw
2 / / / / JJ f 0' 20' d0' 80' �°0e1 �� �'
E_ I �{ /8/ //// / j/ �/ i :c WO 4-1 EEL �.001.0-i�.co'vit
K J L _I ow.J L_ _ L..___J ...... .� / / // /�/ I O ,<-t 30209.001.001
onn r)nJ tams ;roan Imam �a essmo T'sOm• /won maw Iola B idi+a cameo =ma �ID Emma wee maw seams nYSSfle: icITRA hft!A esaa Project No.
MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET P2_1
NOVEMBER 26, 2-003 „eeIP2_3 •
. h.AU BEFORE,NU MO t-¢aq-4E}7 55j SO.•t 4 ev to
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 10,2003
TO: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner ✓�`' � Y �"`�� �
Ron Straka,Utility Engineering Supervisor 4 2
DEC
FROM: Chris Munter,x7205 O "
coo ED
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Flood Plain Analysis Comparison
I've reviewed the Draft EIS prepared by Parametrix dated September 2003,and the Flood Plain
Analysis at May Creek Memorandum prepared by Otak dated November 20,2003, and have the
following comments.
For existing conditions,both reports assume overtopping at the river mouth for the 1003/ear event,
with floodwaters escaping overland to Lake Washington. Parametrix used Manning's coefficients
of 0.06 and 0.07 for the channel and floodplain respectively, although 0.026 was used for the
sections downstream of section 3 in May Creek due to its sandy substrate. Otak used a value of
0.035 for these sections that would tend to reduce velocities. No justification was given for this
change of value. Both reports assumed a Lake Washington water surface elevation of 16.9 feet
NAVD 88 and a future 100-year flow of 1,059 cfs based on 1995 King County modeled flows.
For future conditions,the Draft EIS prepared by Parametrix analyzed three scenarios; existing site
topography, 50-foot May Creek setbacks with levees and/or fill, and 100-foot setbacks with levees
and/or fill. The memo prepared by Otak proposes a 50-foot buffer width with modifications to the
proposed channel cross sections to include terracing a"flood bench"for high flow conditions. The
Parametrix report assumed no modifications to the upper and lower reach bridges and that the
middle bridge would be modified to not hydraulically confine the creek. The Otak report assumed
the removal of the downstream and middle bridges and replacement of the upper stream bridge
with a larger bridge.
In comparing both reports for the 50-foot setback scenario,Parametrix proposes levees and/or fill
that would raise the flood stages by 1.6 feet yet contain the floodwaters from all building areas on-
site. Otak's memo proposes terracing at the 50-foot setback mark for high flow conditions. Under
this scenario,most of the 100-yr flows are contained within the banks except for flows at section 7
upstream of the new proposed bridge. Elevations at this section are 0.6 feet above the bank. No
discussion on what happens to this water and what building sites this will affect is detailed.
Except for the unexplained change of Manning's coefficient in the lower reaches,the lack of
discussion of resultant overtopping,and the difficulties associated with obtaining permits and
approvals for modifying creek cross-sections from WDFW,USACE,USFW and NMFS,Otak's
analysis seems to be an adequate effort. More information regarding the terraced flood bench
should be required. Does the terrace extend the entire length of the reach within the site boundaries
and what Manning's coefficient was used to analyze this part of the cross-sections? Does the
analysis take into account specific plantings,poolings,or LWD permitting agencies might require?
Depending on the types of plantings required on the benches,the Manning's coefficient would
change depending on the age of the vegetation. The overtopping should be discussed in more
detail. Where does the overtopping go,what building sites are affected,do they propose an
amendment to the FEMA flood plain maps,etc.?
There are enough environmental concerns warranted to have Parametrix review Otak's work and
make modifications to the EIS.
H:\File Sys\SWP-Surface Water Projects\SWP 27-Surface Water Projects(Plan Review)Barbie
Mill\OtakFloodComparisonMemo 12102003.doc\CMtp
CITY OF RENTON-
„u Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 26, 2004
Mr. David Sherrard
Parametrix
5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE
Kirkland, WA 98033
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat (LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM):
Final EIS and Floodplain:Model Review
Approval and Notice to Proceed •
.
Dear David:
Per discussions :regarding Parametrix's review of the floodplain model completed by
Otak, the City of Renton has agreed to the scope of work as outlined in the document
titled "Barbee Mill Final EIS. & Floodplain Model Review"; dated January 9, 2004. It is
understood that all remaining work (floodplain analysis and revisions to.FEIS) would be
within the total not to exceed EIS budget for the above referenced project.
•
The provided estimate for the floodplain model review is in the approximate range of
$8,000 to $10,000. The timeframe. would'. be: two 'to three (2 to 3) weeks to complete
review of the floodplain model and prepare text:
This letter gives the notice to proceed with the floodplain model review. Should you have •
questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 430-7382 or by
email at sfiala@ci.renton.wa.us. •
•
Sincerely,
•
Susan A. Fiala, AICP
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson.
Neil Watts ' • 5
•
Jennifer Henning
File
I TR_flnndplain analycic nor R E N T O N
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer
m
Barbee Mill Final EIS & Floodplain Model Review
January 9, 2004
SCOPE OF WORK
1. Complete Final EIS response to comments
2. Review Applicant (OTEK)proposal for modified stream channel for flood
capacity
a. Meet with Applicant (OTEK)
b. Review model inputs and results, with focus on Manning Coefficients
c. Prepare preliminary email report of results of review to Renton Staff
d. If directed by Renton Staff- Re-run HEC-RAS model if analysis of
sensitivity of alternative Manning Coefficient inputs are desired
e Address mitigation options for flood overtopping of stream corridor
3. Revise Final EIS to include applicant revisions to the May Creek corridor as
alternative mitigation measures
a. Revised floodplain mitigation to include Applicant(OTAK) modified
stream channel and other modeled options. For publication in FEIS,
revised mitigation section for floodplains and flooding, current DEIS
pages 3-19
b. Revised stream corridor option on May Creek with 35'+15' setback
• Describe as Option C in Section 3.4, Plants and Animals,
Mitigation section, current DEIS pages 3-48 through 3-61.
• Address potential impacts on terrestrial and aquatic vegetation and
animal communities
Assumptions:
1. Final EIS.will be prepared in compliance with WAC 197-11-560(a)(c) and will
include supplemental analysis to address options raised by the applicant. FEIS
will consist of:
a. Updated Fact Sheet
b. Revisions to text consisting of:
i. Summary, revisions to:
• Surface Water Mitigation Subsection 1.3.3, floodplains
• Plants and Animals Mitigation Subsection 1.5.3
ii. Section 3, Affected Environment, Impacts and Mitigating Measures,
revisions to:
• Surface Water Mitigation Subsection 3.2.3.1, Floodplains, current
DEIS page 3-19
• Plants and Animals,Mitigation Subsection, 3.4.2.3 current DEIS
pages 3-48 through 3-61, Describe as Option C
Renton,Barbee Mill Final EIS page 1 of 2 Scope of Work and Assumptions
c. Comments and Responses to DEIS comments as submitted for Renton
Staff review on November 14, 2003 with response to Transportation
comments in December 2, 2003 comments by Bob Mahn
d. Revised Appendix B, Floodplain Analysis Technical Report
2. Description of proposed floodplain mitigation and May Creek setbacks will be
provided by the Applicant, in CADD format similar to existing including:
a. Text description of 1 to five paragraphs
b. Plans of lot layout with May Creek buffer area in CADD format in same
scale and format as Figures 3.4-4
c. Plans of stream channel modification including:
i. Plan view of stream corridor alternations
ii. Cross sections of the final stream alternations at a minimum four(4)
locations
3. A single meeting will be held with the Applicant (OTEK) at Parametrix office.
Parametrix will prepare meeting notes. OTEK and the City will review and
comment on the notes within three (3) days of transmittal. Parametrix will
finalize notes.
4. The Applicant (OTEK) will provide a CD with electronic documentation as well
as hard copy documentation of their model results a week prior to the meeting for
Parametrix review.
5. Initial review of model inputs used by OTEK will be emailed to Renton staff. No
additional documentation of this review will be produced.
6. Additional model runs are HEC-RAS model (if required)will consist of
a. A single model run
b. Changes made to inputs, such as an alternative Manning"n"value, and the
width of the stream corridor will be approved by Renton staff prior to the
model run. The results will be compared to the OTAK values.
c. No cut or fill volumes will be estimated.
d. If flooding overtop the specified setback, options to reduce flooding will
be conceptually addressed in the text. Additional levees or fill to prevent
overtopping will not be evaluated using the HEC-RAS model.
7. Results of review and modeling will be provided in a modified Appendix B,
Floodplain Analysis Technical Report
8. Analysis of impacts of the revised proposal for the May Creek buffer option will
follow the same format as the existing analysis of Options A and B and also
review the proposed terraced flood bench from the perspective of restoring natural
stream morphology and function in this reach.
Renton,Barbee Mill Final EIS page 2 of 2 Scope of Work and Assumptions
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 10,2003
- ` r iJpl',l4 1`1, Qh1�1P1C�
TO: Susan FiaTa, Senior Planner 2.;cd,- c pc hc'aT
CIcY
Ron Straka, tility Engineering Supervisor A ® 2 3
DEC
FROM: Chris Munter,x7205 W nal ED
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Flood Plain Analysis Comparison
I've reviewed the Draft EIS prepared by Parametrix dated September 2003,and the Flood Plain
Analysis at May Creek Memorandum prepared by Otak dated November 20,2003,and have the
following comments.
For existing conditions,both reports assume overtopping at the river mouth for the 100.year event,
with floodwaters escaping overland to Lake Washington. Parametrix used Manning's coefficients
of 0.06 and 0.07 for the channel and floodplain respectively, although 0.026 was used for the
sections downstream of section 3 in May Creek due to its sandy substrate. Otak used a value of
0.035 for these sections that would tend to reduce velocities. No justification was given for this
change of value. Both reports assumed a Lake Washington water surface elevation of 16.9 feet
NAVD 88 and a future 100-year flow of 1,059 cfs based on 1995 King County modeled flows.
For future conditions,the Draft EIS prepared by Parametrix analyzed three scenarios; existing site
topography, 50-foot May Creek setbacks with levees and/or fill, and 100-foot setbacks with levees
and/or fill. The memo prepared by Otak proposes a 50-foot buffer width with modifications to the
proposed channel cross sections to include terracing a"flood bench"for high flow conditions. The
Parametrix report assumed no modifications to the upper and lower reach bridges and that the
middle bridge would be modified to not hydraulically confine the creek. The Otak report assumed
the removal of the downstream and middle bridges and replacement of the upper stream bridge
with a larger bridge.
In comparing both reports for the 50-foot setback scenario,Parametrix proposes levees and/or fill
that would raise the flood stages by 1.6 feet yet contain the floodwaters from all building areas on
site. Otak's memo proposes terracing at the 50-foot setback mark for high flow conditions. Under
this scenario,most of the 100-yr flows are contained within the banks except for flows at section 7
upstream of the new proposed bridge. Elevations at this section are 0.6 feet above the bank. No.
discussion on what happens to this water and what building sites this will affect is detailed.
Except for the unexplained change of Manning's coefficient in the lower reaches,the lack of
discussion of resultant overtopping, and the difficulties associated with obtaining permits and
approvals for modifying creek cross-sections from WDFW,USACE,USFW and NMFS, Otak's
analysis seems to be an adequate effort. More information regarding the terraced flood bench
should be required. Does the terrace extend the entire length of the reach within the site boundaries
and what Manning's coefficient was used to analyze this part of the cross-sections? Does the
analysis take into account specific plantings,poolings,or LWD permitting agencies might require?
Depending on the types of plantings required on the benches,the Manning's coefficient would
change depending on the age of the vegetation. The overtopping should be discussed in more
detail. Where does the overtopping go,what building sites are affected, do they propose an
amendment to the FEMA flood plain maps,etc.?
There are enough environmental concerns warranted to have Parametrix review Otak's work and
make modifications to the EIS.
H:\File Sys\SWP-Surface Water Projects\SWP 27-Surface Water Projects(Plan Review)Barbie
Mill\OtakFlo odComparisonMemo 12102003.doc\CMtp
•, t fff
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
STEVEN L.MANAGIN MANAGING ��TOR 1�
November 26, 2003 1"6 �� rl..%)�®®�
cSA
Neil Watts
Renton City Hall- 6th floor V
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, Washington 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Nat
Dear Neil:
Thank you again for taking the time to meet with the Cugini family and us on Monday,
November 3 to discuss the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. As we agreed, this letter will outline
our approach on a few key issues prior to our discussions of a more comprehensive draft
mitigation agreement with the city in the coming weeks. We have attached a revised preliminary
plat to reflect mitigation suggested to date.
As we discussed, the Cuginis are willing to agree to mitigation conditions similar to the
following:
Road System
• The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat shall. consist of a private road system designed to
current public road section standards for residential access streets as described in Chapter
4 of the City of Renton Development Standards. This would include minimum pavement
widths of 32 feet (curb-to-curb) and right-of-way widths of 42 feet. The City and the
future developer(s) shall work together during the design of roadway improvements to
determine the most appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
Buffers from May Creek and Lake Washington
• The developer(s) shall maintain a buffer of fifty (50) feet from the ordinary high water
mark of May Creek. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark
shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining
fifteen (15) feet may be landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area. The final
hydrologic and hydraulic design for any necessary stream/buffer improvements at May
Creek shall consider the actual vegetation proposed within the 100-year flood plain area.
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7201 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL stevenwood@dwt.com
www.centurypacifidp.com
Neil Watts letter
November 26, 2003
Building setbacks from the Lake Washington shoreline shall be in accordance with
current City of Renton development regulations.
Floodplain and Dredging
• The developer(s) shall contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed fifty (50) foot
setbacks from May Creek. Containment shall be provided by enhancements to the
existing stream channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement
of fill outside of the established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any
necessary stream/buffer improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time
of final engineering design. (This condition is based on updated parameters in the
Parametrix model found in the EIS and discussed in the attached memorandum from Dr.
Bob Schottman and Mr. Russ Gaston of Otak.)
Thank you again for your time and assistance. Please proceed with the issuance of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat Final Environmental Impact Statement as soon as possible. We look
forward to receipt of a draft mitigation document in the next few weeks. Please do not hesitate
to contact me with any questions at 206-689-7201.
Sincerely
Steven L. Wood
Managing Director
Cc: Alex Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Norma Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
Robert Cugini, Barbee Mill Company
/Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, City of Renton
Tom Goeltz, Davis Wright Tremaine
Campbell Mathewson, CenturyPacific
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director, City of Renton
David Sherrard, Parametrix
Larry Warren, City Attorney, City of Renton
2
oa Memorandum .
To: Campbell Mathewson
From: Russ Gaston, PE; Bob Schottman, PE
620 Kirkland Way,#100
Kirkland, WA 98033 Copies: Matt Hough, PE
Phone(425)822-4446
Fax(425)827-9577 Date: November 20, 2003
Subject: Flood Plain Analysis at May Creek
Project#: 30209
It is expected that the proposed Barbee Mill project will include changes to the existing
bridges and channel cross sections for May Creek as it flows through the site. Parametrix
evaluated several alternatives in its August 2003 report titled Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Appendix B Floodplain Analysis Technical Report.
Otak has updated some of the parameters in the Parametrix model to evaluate the flooding
conditions for May Creek and to include an alternative concept. The updated parameters
are based on recent field observations and current topographic information, and the
adjustments are consistent for both the existing and proposed conditions.
Existing Channel
The existing model has been updated to include the following:
• Block the flow from entering the left channel in Section 1 as May Creek outlets to
Lake Washington. The Parametrix existing model now shows flow in two channels.
Survey information and a site visit do not show a hydraulic connection between the
left channel and upstream cross sections.
• Allow overflowing water to escape directly to Lake Washington rather than
reentering May Creek. The site slopes generally towards the lake and should convey
water away from May Creek if overflow occurs.
• Increase Manning's roughness from n=0.026 to n=0.035 for sections downstream
of Section 3.
Proposed Channel
Otak's planning-level HEC-RAS model makes the following adjustments to the Parametrix
model:
• Increase Manning's roughness from n=0.026 to n=0.035 for sections downstream
of Section 3;
• Remove the downstream and middle bridges and modify the associated channel
_cross sections accordingly;
• Replace the upstream bridge with a larger bridge;
• Modify the proposed channel cross sections to include a bankful section for a 1.5-
year flow and a terrace flood bench for high flow conditions;
• Allow the channel sections downstream of Section 3 to aggrade to Lake
Washington's winter water surface elevation (16.9 ft NAVD 88);
• Limit the lateral extent of the channel and flood plain to a 50-foot buffer on each
H:\PROJECT\30200\30209\ADMIN\CORRESP\MATHS WS0N112003M.DOC
' S
side of the channel.
Modeling Results
The updated, Otak models have been run with the adjustments specified above and with
the same flow rates provided in the Parametrix report. The updated modeling shows the
following results:
• For existing conditions, the water surface elevation at the upstream project
boundary(Section 11) is approximately the same for the Parametrix and Otak
models. This section is located downstream of the Burlington Northern railroad
bridge.
• The Otak model shows that the proposed water surface elevation is as least 0.5 foot
lower than the existing water surface level at Section 11.
• The Otak model shows that most of the 100-year proposed water surface elevations
are below the existing right overbank elevations used in the Parametrix model.
Only the water surface elevation at Section 7 is higher than the right overbank.
That section, located upstream of the new proposed bridge, has a water surface
elevation approximately 0.6 foot above the bank.
We believe that these changes provide a reasonable channel and bridge design alternative
for inclusion in the Environmental Impact Statement. Our design goal would be restore the
natural geomorphic properties of the stream. We anticipate that the final design analysis
will be based on additional on-site stream flow observations and consideration of
alternative maintenance programs for the project.
H:\PROJECT\30200\30209\ADMIN\CORRESP\MATHEWSON112003M.DOC
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
L.'.
' BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
C]xu;70 //\ il
OVERALL PLAT PLAN y �/ / •
Wh9IX ,//1// ,/J.4)/, 0' 50' 100' 200' 2 -
` age/
!/J'a j I '''-..',;',5,`',/ii 1
. ..
3,1
/ / /� \\ WA41MfON o - `
n ` j1 \C , rp 0 G . g ca:,.-
jii,,,,G it. \\ 0 4;
I
/:k..:,,/ ///,''',../.";',":/-2r, \ \\
COR-2 CONE ,\! • t J �/ ' • / ,."`t1 \ I I! J � I,
__ 1 __ Mv��mil_ / , ! o }v 8
%'I '•.„ olirrit-_-.-iiLly:-:::. Imo.. II. /.MOW r �i !/ Y/l � � '�Iz'' Lij rmm.t -
Ji a,li*,?:,
dIp _. / / / `i. ,rF"a� Lu _srReet� `-- 1J L-_J _JL_�POr / i/a/ �/ J 111 T 1 / • pTC i g
WASHINGTON I .• f . /'' -- '< 1 -•i/ '' / • i
I WA. ; I `. .7 /! o DOD D 500 1000. sq
i e.- F LBL1, �.< .� /!•_J,� /�! //// I SANE IN FEET isil
0 .Mg0
,.. 0 ( , '>✓ *» % ,/ '/ VICINITY MAP ... • F �& 6
•
,..: �1 ::;', ./' '//:$o// ,
j ,'sL, ,�,.. `•,,• �.\. `?•4, . / • �- LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 5+
\ •-L.-�- 'i .�.,• `\S\ ,r�' +2✓y r,/ ', //lSv I THE!AND REFERRED TO TNIS COMOTHENT IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF
' .. ,' _ ✓• '// l' WASHINGTON.COUNTY OF KENO AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
ALL THAT FORME OF 001MRNUENT SOT 1.SECTION 32.TOWNSHIP Et NORTH.
�;•--J n / �,: j��< - /�� C I RANGE 6 EAST,H.K.IN KING COUNTY.WAS INGTON AND OF SECOND CUSS
�,•1_ .- }+r: �Y. l4f'% P/ /'I// / \ 1 Dorn?
F WADY,IX�C,,:THAT 4.1m,NH, EY OP..., ,PACDSCLYDIO NORTR OmP
! -I- /�'•�%1 1 .0.0 '/ ` /' / "'- �� ` I SATE IN�TIIT0 COUNTY OF CNW ATE OP WA9IM0TON,OOVERNIIBNT IM 1. PA
I
D 1 ;�- ,,"s / /J i/a ifi / i- i 1 FLOOD HAZARD • •
': �_---'� 'i'1:t �� ��y! /!/` // / I THE 100 YEAR FLOOD HAZARD IS CONTAINED■ITHDI THE HAY CREEK BANNS. I_'
116'
sA.114111101 <j 11. //'r/ _ LEGEND •n w
> _} NATIVE LANDSCAPE PAPA— .W U
\\---, •it ? • /�.i • / r ;,,I BUFFER FIANNA'S LURED TO NATIVE
tu
. ('o \ �;T .�':' .NA /_ , / , i,
\ TREES.PLANTS.IJiD OFASSES try W O
A, T\ , .. 1•' ,•
I. /; ///7 , MANAGED UNDSGPE BUFTEN AREA- ,.�/LNj
v 1:;, e,q-.. '/ •S ANo INEgruMN REV AIWE LUTNERAS F�"i A.� '
•
/ /I '
zlu
Y= 1 ..,z. / Li
^ . /o`. l • •
�,yc��,`y n Incorporated
1TAY CRCEIC / �✓IY- '/%/: ♦a0° �, en DTHm6 W.1 iICO
��,,''� ++ 10nkDnA Ira W33
DELTA/ , .^y>::/, u�ov. -- I f�' ° Pt' LIT]I Bt2 I
. 8 T PAD I2. Ilr...
i'e /' / \ _� non f nF.oMEmK
C ' I !, / @�0 30209.001.001
Project No.
e ,. �':¢-=Y 1 __. -- -- - N 40TH ST. -- -•- --� Sheet I
'+ AIL EFFORE MU 81C 1-EOo-424-RiS�sne.L 1 .I 1
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M. _
u.t:..
e., al z C2055500i =Wm, � ,v _ aAD. o .� E: e N F M ICIjEar:�S, E9 S T / )%/,,
1 NBBSB•W m�r.o.Srdx _ tasty 1085AY aeu as
C9m1 -:sP __ __ _ _ TRACT'A' OPEN SPACE -r l f " l r _ r____.y.. 7 .s/y //
.'o`e1 j<.r --1 •
w aw raw A aw-J ram- _ 'o 1 r And- ow'J r'cm -: f --- aco --- 1 8 eo vlar '/ / /• / o
cµn / LHr
23 _, i s i r 1 r i _ �8/ ,29 anN 21 e iie:.n v 19 w u iiiaeaw s :zam v :W. An .aawvi� / / /�) 22'Ws $ rS a1 • 0i ws /1 r $ 2010 9
a»
J w 1 , I
i25=,_1i.L \ L.ow .a Laer oar J L 1 7 */ // /' eR 8 A. G) s,r '.�a_J, __ _ __ ero = J L____ nw J L I J L____ _J L J I -� °� / / i
ie 1 wn.0 s ' n Leas am _ _ "0° ._ moy _J mw __ .ow dam /
I-�-oa' •'• _mo,,p0 3 -=;c°-- - "1°STRCCT'-A--'11'—owi------°° -—a--_ '-2 _---- .m ao I$TRCC' °°A •-' / // m
i $1 .. I - w.: n xa ---son; - xa 8�8 ' // %/ c 3
IBf--- // ,�` e.9amv Ae/ 72 / 'ssan a �./�/' - ' 7- 7,A, .m On :. I '• ---
-- --, row_ , il-- --V23. /�/ // / '/% �$
It,i ua m2v, r / 71• '/73 vi• 74 v/S' b'imn '/�<. ♦ 77 ISI ! ''om 191 ieawvt iiw vi p,wws1w vi/r// // // / •
'cif'.
♦s
$ __ - a I 8 (. / '(�' / /C�' �78 �/. ♦= roi- I '_$ 8 8r 0 1. r3 / 4 / $ fe:! '
�, I iu.u • • ♦ 1 I I I I ;� / C tx, •
; r_
i 8 28 w 1 Hs emm s I 69 I 68 T. 67 I i 66 65// // '>o,mn
,0.I / '•'4. / /°4, / 'q' , $_I 78 m $ 70 / / / , Wt•M.�'.1°I ••e'vv ""'". _ / J' 8I L____.L-- J L-__—___J L___1_ / , / // i.
4 or
I 64. ♦"' s bh♦♦"'/, r icazu v , ' w1 i>n oa ACCESS t d —'v/// / /
, ,
4+. I I o UTNTY ESM (�/V/ / /
''• •1 78 I9 9 I % /,vaa ass./>. 73 s/'dam / u
_ 11 -` I ai.em v / / gg
TRACT"C' ig Ad/'\♦17. S �oi7a I- , � I 62 /`, ,83 64 r/// / �Gi/ /1 / U G
CPEN SPACE \♦ did/ / ._..v /v j I •'°;0a• / / �s / / iy,8
),.ea TRACT•B. \ ate v ♦C /P p' g / / / / // / / • R. � 3p
SANITARY 5t1VR .0 h ,/,,,,,..
\,n \ ^80 / P C m / I d / / /
EASE18 ea WATER QUALITY �,A/ P�A. ,s ♦ / d ♦i, s 81 / / / / / .i/ / i '
(LOCATION
r VARY)T�• '4 L w, n=,r♦ • am A 61♦ ♦\ �P 4'/••♦ `.�� i i „,,,,es,."„ / xff�'� / / f'��`
Y`-- ,W ,s°i/� °• y ♦♦♦♦♦ 82\ ♦♦♦♦`, ' .*.,•i. i a,.xev♦ `•.i"'�us.i / �8'i /� / Fi7& �
,� �/ .a9av ♦♦♦ 84 l QA a�� fi •``�r� time,v 3 . � . J^A /I/B/ �/ / / a
p 'm'„, ♦ SIR ash \ / v` r: ':;l'f'd� •/�'• / /
• a • A7'R.o.W;, o/', ♦♦♦)♦. - aa.N > ' :\� 59 '.'.:••••:•. f. / /
/ 1
q.
-1 87♦♦♦ ♦ rrr \ 58 \♦ ♦ / w,C,..., /I /" e /
_ 1. 1 v s `` ) .4 sr\\ 57 ♦ y / �.. /
/ i 42- 9
- a.as i" y,P4• 88 .j" ,/ `� r.sr\ \ r \ /. ../ %.. / // �JT / Pg'�
r..ci ' . 9.0 s
•
�- �-�__ 1j s S ,�,(. w ♦ .,♦ �� \\\Yvan v 54 \;) •
\ \��»i` v>.�_,r....'i'.: ' f:;.' i / / / O / PI r
r` 89♦\ mil a; ♦ \ ,\ \ \ :'9 %�/ / / / r� / a.
•
_ />. ,1, enm v \ 53 \ \ > t.:y. /^ / r/ /
ossest
/.— —'I i------
I a I •90 ! `r. ♦ �a •3. \ •\ \ \ '`',1i ✓' i'; .' ;•
/ / / / W Z
- I- '' , / "51\ ). -- \ �1)�r,�� r.:;'.n:':e'' lafQP.,...;:..'' / /� LEGEND ® W
"• w ar31 i qD -_ �y •"4••!`..: y / i y° �,2' �'a"'1+. W
C 1 I ar I r ,a.0 s\♦"e • /i B-iC rirr, f f'
�_- I o ♦-// '`` \♦ •,•�_ •dam • Ei619.6'•'.:' :cf•:. a / NATIVE LANDSCAPE AREA- •,..1 U w I
SSS I 32 r ;"c_= .`." •\♦ ,y • J•�••••� .wa[E �l .d'.� / / / ///sue I--'1 o-
'' '' • I I BUFFER PLANTINGS IINRm TO NATIVE
/i_ ♦ •�i:'•.,.••" '- i• • f��' • / / / / TREES.PLANTS'AND GRASSES t �.U)
9 25'I-ueaaeY -_-1�" 8 < .us`\� ♦ / /f' ,'..,�•' / /
_J ',"' / F:.. / �, MWYCED LANDSCAPE BUFna ora.
^ ":�, �,�„'_;.":.�::: :�..•:`;��::..':•�:;'�',.iY / 1I,� _I
_ .. 0 \�P♦v O .. .{ l' /•.:' I •/ / Q '(`I BUFFER PLWTWGS lNY INCLUDE FAWN ry,Cn
Y _ / ••�' ' F'•�P11 •,i .. / / / .V / I`r zAA AND OTHER MANAGED LANDSCAPE MATERIALS Imo=
26'ORDINARY Hlr. I L y //� \♦ " / . �.:•` / / I yd^^
WATER SE10A, I sm.w s ]3 1- .P'4 n/ ` `♦ ♦ / O � '/ / / �' V .
I I ♦ / 00 ,f PHKSp^j:�9.'::...:;;:;" / / /%/ •N
i I �'r d,s 45 ♦ ♦ /� � S // J o a
\ \J !L�,,:,.':.e f.•...... dtdlNApYN{GH _ l / -M,"`�
1,____
__ _ ♦ ♦ `,\ ♦). • � 1/ % / -------\ ii N• i I I iinu v34 11 k`„ ♦ 47 'P`� .•'%/ ( 4 r f % / // ! E•4'e"``'G`; A.o Incorporated
E '" 1 L----------J 8^ S \\'gym♦♦ .,• �\ • , •rY/� ..•, �__ I L/ )./ /p / / I i.A eir.a.020.T 900S3
ss» .. ,d..sa Rffi! == m e-. RcaeW ..... ...r. ..... Q� •asaa . ..... •a4.. meeo rne. err,v e�A �esra Y..... .0m. ... c�a .. eca r 0' 20• 40• 80r Poue (2e) ea-dHe
MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET P2_2 4: rz w ez 9sn
4-4 mem„el 3oz:o9.001.001 r.`ct
i NOVEMBER 26, 2003 SAW .2-1
J
' �BEESIftUOU qCJ 171W_42y-s535I,Shoot 2 al 10'
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M. ,
_w---_ MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET P2_1
m :x>:m Mar= =V. ra.� esaam rma, ass °✓5° rmsn CINRVO �: csm -ge,¢SS'vSO eacwz i�ea� a ,srara,®rt4 ra;R Ss Sasv ,��ass_ \ .�yr�an - pa„.,�?si �''�e.>, /"`�-c' / .
e
GIOBRVIO
wNsue ��- I 32 I" '" 'Ru / .,. ...•. „ ••- l//:•. L.`.;.�i �r / /
•
:ciao" I I , � < «,e. ,.'?,,,. ,.:•_"..'\:'a:'.': ...:6;0." %;<, .i1�`R::" 3'• / / // •
..
a''�' is / P i / a
2S.ORDINARY x1Ox __ — i••. r¢ ``\48 \`` " •'••' WATERLINE ;♦�N ` e / / / jy3
WATER SETBACKs3a i Ka 47 �:�!� .. `i( ; ♦.O�♦O :.�.� ;/ / / s"
I ;,.e¢ a S>e i' %2:..a.:,..:. O,.4L+.A.ri!i.JY• I d ../,' / / ^
___�__35 -,ltY. d'ow.,�1 `�\ y/,�`° s;..::f:.-ikj `Y,,.,=i�♦♦ ,f• .,.p Inr,/ i ,i' % / tE 8
•
2s• e,,,»p \ + .., .•.. P.,..'...."..:...r♦ \v.,t,; ii//' j / i/ ' i 44g
? ?/ v . .♦w�♦M1 'fig" �\ / 5 /
.or 11-- 136 1 y + u.n v /.!( f ;, ..':'• iv;., .115 , / ,,,./
i' / `
LANE WASNMOTON \ \ ;,aeo v 1 -\ 1 ' '', /4o .¢: I''''„114 //.". `�. ,../;" / / / ,\sWyW'.&
1 ..� f ....•..::•�♦/ /� may\¢ /• / ! dye,
_ -� ¢\+ 45 ,-,� ,p4.,,:1,/ '.O '�i.`. tt3 ,„ar y /.4, ,' .' / / dr 9
l,: i /
I I se C— • ,bp, �'
I I 1-----..,
\ 37 \:.1 58 �••,..'U''",f l '�Cy♦'"1 • • .;./ •" ..:z�'e.. rY'f' pT/, i/ / / •�+' 'aie°e
I \ \ mw v t..- . I:. s3.....•! a " 44 // / / / / ""aroxuvdy
—�' a o +: 4' yo I":'':. a:�1ry \fli!••el 8 i/ / 4� '
t_� ---J \ \ ,; ..4+ .�..1/l`,lWr1 4, ^''G 110 /5 A'^ 4. 4// / /' // / -._ t
er:•. 3B -�-�" k8 e" .:.'':.'V f 6.: ' .,ryl nu¢ ,,, r ,,,,,-,,, ,,,, ,,,/ / 0
_ �- _-'�q�" I '�'y •• •.'.,.;:,./ Y':"'`:•O l 109 Roy.'=.` ,
Tw,erl.rm.nr� __ . /� - :•1 QM1 . .. �^ ','/^.,' ,, coin
¢ x.., st,i/ h:.:r:•.. ` tog .,r /
/ /^: 40 Wig. i' ♦��.:..o..•../ .i„.•.:•::.♦..47-�a ,,, s. i g i'/ I-a/-A. 0.5e9• �O o ....oh
25' ORDINARY NIGH z<; \ \ �/,/ t♦.;...d..:...,/ / ...• 4 °og •'.t07) e.• / / /i R. aes.eD' Q•
A, / / A / TJs9.49•/ , / o�
WATER sETBAGH z/ \ \ , �' e,. ;.% ,./...,.........::...:‘ T./ • , ,a/ / LF ale.ss'/ <V /
.¢,.� \ ;° i,,/
fA��,� %.:•-- , ♦ / :,w / at/ y/ / �.�" w^.8
,s �¢ ems. �/ \\\ `4i� .he7 ":°' s°rlosv f /X/,/ t/ j / 'CO
/ \ .
�^ \//42 va 4t \ \ /.9 /: ♦♦♦� i <.,.:' ♦ o-' it / '
/ ,vg�i" v a �i`+ti♦ ' A,j ..j 5�../r2' '°",u toa y �� ' /' �I/�' / /' A,� ' C4
/ // 91 N. \ //r:'_`r% :O4i,4,/ 'U` j /'�' Q' / �� / NOTE:
/' /'.- 9.¢,eT \\\\ ., 4�¢r.0 Wit; .1::..:'j//.. ....,..,'♦ ,/ ,A,.>., $¢ • I. % \='®it vP // RAILROAD�TOSSNOOCATED ATasnno W
l . 92 e,„ ,,. fi ::*'•i / /:: ,/'•,' 3,,.10z 9 e /� Ak ''. / \ \ fY
s 99 f'>.' :. .da ry ENT /'" / W
\4 \ A eer `— /: # .O .,ram � ' I
-;47
\ 2.
\� '''e oVER MST.BRiDCE- ;.,�1•♦!A' • 101 Str /ram 6. :L\
. ✓ i' ....•.47. too .&. 0 W
7 \`_—— / :�0.! " Rv / �/ i� LEGEND �•0 f�1
y
/ / / b \ 99y s / , 6 0� -�' / 1 / 4 IUTrvE uNDSGPE FA- •1-4 V �-
/ / N. h b / 4fj / BUFFER PIANFINDS CR25 i5 xATNE
/ E 2 / e/94/`�';. „; , . / `,, #, / 1...:I mEEs,wwls.,wD eBAsses 0_V7
gs P`' '°" ,,, 4 ' //''' ,p `5."S° 'I/ % ., NANACEo wmw�PE BUFFEw AaPA- ,.�/
7 'e Q PSG /// / 5 3:4e ,; . . �ry9 .n�' , Ti 9O /
', // // �:ro on+mDSEa ueixosirE wRws W Cii
9� / / . 96g v--- ,.o / -e/9 'N�/ / /
/ / ii ' I O.• 7 A.
/- / 1RAOT'ET ` 97 .�s�, o/ o 07 / • // // ®.,deter a)F4 .-er il .-,-,0 0 a
/ WATER OUALLTY 11, .3,°^ /j
1/
> ye 98 . \ / / ,4g="�'N, /P_O Incorporated
[ — - �,, ark 9�\\
'` \ 9 0• 20• 40• so' FFeec m) BP2-I.N
2 �, �.� •F'E •_, -' ./ %yO' ' �_., \/ We ux Zp f f zsT)R cot .
.' /,' **/' P 2 2.
' Project He.
�`� `• / �,/ 8/, / 30209.001.001
T= +� — NOVEMBER 26,.2003 s",el Ne
PO.B60(EE YOU lMC t-80D-424-SSS5P Sleet 3 0l 10
• .
. . . .
. .
• • • .
• .
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
rsr...w...
P`.... 4.
=
. • .
/7/ .
CIDSP.,40 . • ,
FWD/ •
010901:0 k§
111.11. ',' / // • .
W-SCAL . i i
/ , /-',... •
• ,.... _ .
. '
. .
•
• • . • • '',9 4'i
yt /t•
/ I...•3
1
/ / -
, a / 0
, / / 7
/ 1 • . •
• • . C.E.rlNl.-4ai,r
's.tl,lri0l yl.o041EO.„Nl
rk0Eo11 il i liI,
g.l
•'•_i4,4.
• ,
/
/
' ,/,(1/ / ,
, - ,`
/ ,>
1
/ ,.//7 ...." • a
// ,------- ..-I.. /4/ )c2
j.,../V
g ../_.._/0 /
0 41 • '
.;.••• /".•,...../ • ‹C./
,-,.),. ,
/ / ; / --/ ' `-' //
p4 , CL•-rr
1 r i ''A. • .,F,5; /S`4
/ I • . cn
// ' - ,./ q' / / I I +.J g
1 I- -1
, ', 74 / /
. / 4 e .--,.....„, 1 \
\ • ,.., 0 a
i ,. , , 7 0, / .J____ I e .;•-c,,,,-•N il Eu
, oof moo Sr r ,,1 .0. './....' ,06.;-,-/ /c,;,/ / / IV e - .._ 0;.., ,,..'7=1 .
7 • r A.A. 0,4.sr
. ' li /..4. i 7 /OP / // / -1 ar„.2 Incorporated
.; I 6 5
1 4 ..g 3 8 ,
.6=42 ST ,.1, / /// +7\' I C ,...., Barg loid101 .
li,. * 1 //' I 1
f • // // 0 rc7, faittv
Z. i 2 / z/
* / cc157
J L___ _....0.J LT___IJ ---10 ' // • ' i 1/4-- - = z 6 30209.001.091
Project No.,,,,,,.... . / 1 t..../cam MAO 10130‘ 0011021 Coietol 10010a1 MOM .01010 Imo. E.= 10115136i 030801 O.= C.. .-M+.12. 111/41 1.111111% MIS •
. 1 NOVEM,6ER 26, 2003. s„.„,P 2_.3
MATCHLINE — SEE SHEET P2_1
ic.mi BEFORE 70U DIG 1-800-421-5513t Shed•of 10
. ._
. .
. .
. . . .
.. .
r1
CITY OF RENTON ,/4(22
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 20, 2003
TO: Departmental Reviewers
FROM: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services Division
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—
Preliminary FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FEIS)
Attached is a review draft of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS). The document contains the responses to public comment received on
the DEIS. The document is fairly short in length as the responses take up the first 25 pages
followed by copies of the comments .
If you have comments, concerns, please forward them to me in memo form via email so that
I can compile them in a single letter to the consultant.
I would appreciate receiving your comments no later than
Noon on Tuesday, December 2nd
Additionally, please pass on the document to other staff in your respective
Department/Division. Also, for those who attend and/or are on the Environmental Review
Committee, we will be scheduling a meeting to discuss the document and then proceed to
issuance.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at x7382 or via
email.
Thank you in advance for your prompt review!
cc: Gregg Zimmerman
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Larry Warren
Alex Pietsch
Dennis Culp/Leslie Betlach
Larry Rude/Jim Gray/Corey Thomas
Chris Munter
Keith Wooley
faWashington State Northwest Region
Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North
Douglas B. MacDonald P.O.Box 330310
Secretary of Transportation Seattle,WA 98133-9710
00
October 15, 2003 TTY 1-800-8
TTY: 1-800-833-6388
www.wsdot.wa.gov
Susan Fiala
Development Services Division
6th Floor,Renton City Hall
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Barbee Mill Plat, 115 SFR
City File. #LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
Dear Ms Fiala:
Thank you for giving WSDOT this opportunity to comment through SEPA on the above
development. WSDOT has reviewed the Draft EIS for the above-proposed action and
offer the following comment.
•
This project will send an additional 79 trips through the Northbound I-405 ramp terminal
at NE 44th Street. This location is currently a two-way stop controlled intersection that
operates at a LOS F during the PM peak. However, there is not a WSDOT programmed
project to build a signal at this location, in addition this location barely meets warrants for
a signal. Therefore, WSDOT does not believe that the impacts from this development
warrant requesting mitigation measures (new signal)that are not commensurate or
reasonable with respect to the impacts. This location has not been identified by WSDOT
as a High Accident Location(HAL) or a High Accident Corridor(HAC).
If you have any questions, or require additional information please contact John Lefotu of
our Developer Services section at 206-440-4713, or by email via lefotuj@a,wsdot.wa.gov.
Sinc ly,
•
P o
King Area Planning Manager
JL:'jl NINO
VELOWE"Et,pN
cc: Don Sims P.E.,SnoKing Area Traffic Engineer, MS120 0 GIN 0 R
17 2113
RECEIVED
. ' `'_' CITY OF RENTON
'ok
PlanrungB uilding/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
November 3, 2003
•
Ms. Wendy Clement
Foster Pepper& Shefelman PLLC
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Public Records/Information Request
File No. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Ms. Clement: •
Enclosed is the receipt for payment of copies and postage totaling $16.32.
Please contact me if there are questions (425) 430-7382.
Thank yo for you t_.payment. •
Susan A. i a,`
Senior Planner
cc: File •
•
rubuciNfo_receipt.doc fi�tt,,�1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E 1\I T O N
AHEAD OF THE CL7Rv1
4,: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
• CITY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Printed: 11-03-2003
Misc. Fees-Build/Plan
RECEIPT
Permit#: MISC03646
Payment Made: 11/03/2003 08:28 AM Receipt.Number: R0307378
Total Payment: 16.32 Payee: FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN
Current Payment Made to the Following Items: I
Trans Account Code Description Amount
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 16.32
Payments made for this receipt
Trans Method Description Amount
Payment Check 1526 16.32
Account Balances
•
Trans Account Code Description Balance Due
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies .00
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) .00
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage .00
5997 0 .00
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax .00
5999 999.999.99.99.9999 Unknown Fee Item .00
Remaining Balance Due: $0.00
FOSTER PEPPER&SHEFELMAN,PLLC SEATTLE,WA 98101
1526
10/30/2003 1526
115352 City of Renton
Invoice# Invoice Date
102903RENTONCITY 10/29/2003 16.32
Client/Matter Code
336.57 10/29/2003 of DEIS comment 16.32
•
;; . a CITY F RENTON
BOILl Plannin1�uildin blicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
- October 28, 2003
• Attn: Wendy Clement
Foster Pepper& Shefelman PLLC
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
•
RE: Public Records/Information Request
File No. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
•
Dear Ms. Clement:
Per your Request for Public Record, please find enclosed copies of the public comment
and public record for the DEIS comment period for the subject project.
• Cost per page Number of Copies Cost
$0.15 single sided 15 $2.25
$0.30 double sided 38 $11.40 •
Total $13.65 4 _
Postage Please add
Please mail the check for $13.65 plus the postage as stamped on the envelope no thx)
to my attention with the check made out to the "City of Renton".
Once the check is received, a receipt will be mailed to you.
Please contact me if there are questions. (425) 430-7382.
Sincer ,
usan A. Fiala, AIC
Senior Planner
•
cc: Bonnie Walton;,City Clerk - -
File
PubliclNfo.doc 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
AHEAD O F THE CURVE
:: This paper contains 50 re% cycled material,30%post consumer
•
CITY OF:RENTON
• .:::: CURRENT . ..ING:it `I51[ # :<;::::: :. : • ::::.:
:::: #: FFIDA. .T;O.::<SERV10E.BY
•
•
•
On the Z day of Oc2rb be. sr , 2003, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope containing
Yl ptj c2. of £4-6/►S i ov1 d Covwnwuzik \0 A.
documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
{q'4ct. Li 5 't
•
1%�'
(Signature of Sender) --r`< =A�� KAtijC4
STATE OF WASHINGTON F.) ' \SST N +A9�'n��,
•
) SS :0 •
N° ARY
COUNTY OF KING ) Qvet '�'� N PUB1.lG ;'_I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that l Jet �r yJ 4 '•.�o q.iav d.kttio
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses andfNerr?Nyeb�t ti �
in the instrument. 441 R WAS
Dated: (`/��Q- 06
Notary ub is' and for t a State of Wash' n
Notary(Print) MARII VN KAMCHEFF
My appointment exphasAppoiNTRAFNT FXPIRl:S 6 29-07
Project Name:
f34ih Mill PreI• PI
Project Number:
02-0 ti 01 Pi''f CI5 5')-H , 911
NOTARY_DOC
AGENCY(DOE)LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology* WDFW-Stewart Reinbold* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. *
Environmental Review Section c/o Department of Ecology Attn. SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703 3190 160th Ave SE 39015—172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Bellevue,WA 98008 Auburn,WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region* Duwamish Tribal Office* Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program *
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv.,MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 39015172nd Avenue SE
PO Box 330310 Auburn,WA 98092-9763
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers* KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Office of Archaeology&Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Stephanie Kramer
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343
PO Box C-3755 201 S.Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia,WA 98504-8343
Seattle,WA 98124 Seattle,WA 98104-3855
Jamey Taylor
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia,WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72"d Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
. Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street PO Box 90868, MS:XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle,WA 98104-3856
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Eric Swennson
700 Fifth Avenue;.Suite 4900
Seattle,WA"98104-5004 `':.;.':..
Note: If.the.Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS",the marked agencies and
cities will need to be.sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. *
Also.note;..do'not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send her
the.ERG Determination paperwork.
Last printed 07/22/03 9:40 AM
di re., 110 t$T4ut.,,,
CITY (OF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
October 28, 2003
Attn: Wendy Clement
Foster Pepper& Shefelman PLLC
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98101
RE: Public Records/Information Request
File No. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Dear Ms. Clement:
Per your Request for Public Record, please find enclosed copies of the public comment
and public record for the DEIS comment period for the subject project.
Cost per page Number of Copies Cost
$0.15 single sided 15 $ 2.25
$0.30 double sided 38 $11.40
Total $13.65
Postage Please add_
Please mail the check for $13.65 plus the postage as stamped on the envelope (no tax)
to my attention with the check made out to the "City of Renton".
Once the check is received, a receipt will be mailed to you.
Please contact me if there are questions. (425) 430-7382.
Sincer ,
usan A. Fiala AIC�
Senior Planner
cc: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
File
PubliclNfo.doc 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
. This paper contains 50%rec cledmaterial,30% AHEAD OF THE CURVE
y post consumer
CITY OF RENTON from the proposed 115 townhouse
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE& lots as well as from the continuation
AVAILABILITY of the existing industrial use.
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL LAND USE FILE NUMBER:
STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING I IMPACT STATEMENT(DEIS' LUA 02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Notice is given under SEPA,ROW PROPONENT:
43.216.080, that the Draft The Barbee Mill Company •
Environmental Impact Statement P.O.Box 359
PUBLIC NOTICE below( for the DEIS)
issued proposal
sthe City bof Renton,ON: WA 98057
by LOCATION: The 22.9-acre site is
Allison Prohn,being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising Renton Environmental Review located on the west side of Lake
Representative of the Committee on Tuesday,September 2, Washington Boulevard North
p 2003, and is available for public between North 40th Street and
review and comment. Copies are North 44th Street and abuts
King County Journal available for review at the Renton Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Main Library, located at 100 Mill Railroad right-of-way along the
Ave. S. (425-277-5560) and the eastern boundary.
Highlands Branch Library,located at DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFOR-
a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general 2902 NE 12th St.(425-277-5556)and MATION: The DEIS documents
circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date from 8am to 5pm, Monday through (Volume I - Draft Environmental
Friday at the Development Services Impact Statement and Volume II -
of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language Division,Renton City Hall,6th floor, Technical Appendices) are available
continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA for purchase at the Finance
County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the 98055. Department on the 1st floor of
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Renton City Hall. Each volume may
Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. Preliminary Plat EIS considers be purchased independently for
The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the potential residential development $15.00, plus tax and postage, when
concepts for the redevelopment of the applicable.A CD version, containing
King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly 22.9-acre site located along the Lake both volumes,is available for $5.00,
distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed Washington and May Creek plus tax and postage when
notice,a: shorelines. The DEIS reviews applicable.
��// potential impacts on the property COMMENT PERIOD: Written
N(37-7C F. 0� Z5s -44)NC /iNO comments on the DEIS will be
accepted for a 30-day comment
41/4/4-46i UTY
p / period,ending 5:00 p.m.,Wednesday,
October 1,
was published on: refe. //o /01_3 addressed to:2003, and should be
/ V City of Renton
DEVELOPMENT Development Services Division
CITY F." PLAN,RENTON ATTN: Susan Fiala
N 1055 South Grady Way,Sixth Floor
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum Renton,WA 98055
of $ /5-- , 00 at the rate of /S. 00 per inch for the first OCT (425)430-7382
A public 0 Z
6 ^ ' hearing has also been
publication and NA per inch for each subsequent insertion. �J scheduled to accept written and oral
10
4461277
comments on the DEIS and will be
ESEli
{VF held on Tuesday,September 23,2003,
` "' 6:00 p.m.,in the Renton City Council
Allison Prohn Chambers(7th floor)located at 1055
Legal Advertising Representative,King County Journal South Grady Way,Renton,WA.
Subscribed and sworn to me this 2/x/ dayof .5:/ ,20 O3 . Date of Decision: August 26,2003
\\\11111 1111////
�� \\\\ P.................
M E i ///���/ Published in the King County
�, Journal September 2,2003.#844032
Tom A.Meagher /0 NOT AR y N•: :
Notary Public for the State of Washington,Residing in Redmond,WashingTon i —•—
Ad Number: 0 yy 03 0 P.O.Number = cf2A%:, i li B L\`' /0
Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surcharge. ��9j••.,.tq 20SI •��\�
z: ,
//,//////OI Iw1ASN�\\\\\�
r & 2. -O4v `f
October 8, 2003 •
City of Renton t%Zt\''t .
Development Services Division , CITY O.F NEWCASTLE
ATTN: Susan Fiala
1055 South Grad Way Fritz Timm,P.E.
y y Senior Development Engineer
Sixth Floor 13020 S.E.72nd Place,Newcastle,Washington 98059-3030
Renton, WA 98055 (425)649-4444,Ext.116 Fax:(425)649-4363
fritzt@ci.newcastle.wa.us
Re.: Barbee Mill Preliminary. Plat DEIS
Dear Ms. Fiala;
On behalf of the City of Newcastle, I am submitting the following comments
including attachments that address our continuing concerns for significant
environmental impacts. City of Newcastle staff has reviewed the applicable
portions of the DEIS prepared by Parametrix and issued by the City of Renton on
or about September 2, 2003. Items of concern include Transportation, Air Water
Animal Environmental Health and Light and Glare.
The City of Newcastle's traffic engineer, Dave Enger of TPE, had requested that
both the AM and PM peaks be addressed on specific routes and at certain
locations. PM peaks were addressed, however, AM peaks were not even
mentioned. I would request that the City of Renton make the appropriate
amendments to the DEIS to adequately address the concerns of the City of
Newcastle as identified in the copy of the attached letter from Mr. Enger to Mike
Nicholson on September 30, 2003.
Mr. Fritz Timm, Senior Engineer, for the City of Newcastle has also responded on
the issues and his comments are also attached. I am also requesting, herewith,
that the EIS address those concerns that he has raised. The address to these
items should be more than a cursory review. Examples of concerns that have
not been adequately addressed by the DEIS include haul routes for materials
being exported to and from the development site. In the sections on Air and
:Environmental Health I would note that dust from the site and along haul routes
could be contaminated with a variety of materials, i.e. the fallout plume from the
Asarco Smelter stack covers this area and recent information from the DOE
indicates the presence of arsenic. When the site is disturbed to what extent will
the applicant mitigate for the arsenic and other industrial pollutants that will
become airborne? Should the export of materials from this site be hauled on
routes through the City of Newcastle, what precautions are . going to be
implemented to protect these routes from "blow off' that may. contribute to
degradation of air quality and environmental health? I did not find an appropriate
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
13020 S.E. 72nd Place, Newcastle, Washington 98059-3030
Telephone: (425) 649-4444 Fax: (425) 649-4363
.
response to our early questions with regard to haul route and dust issues. Dust
and contamination are addressed only as development site issues and the offsite
impacts are I'm sure inadvertently left out of the analysis. I note with some
interest that is ancillary to the above issues that there is arsenic contamination of
the ground water on site.
When the issue of light and glare or view shed is addressed in the DEIS it is as if
• there is not a view of the site from residential properties in Newcastle. It is
almost incomprehensible that the only impacted views are from Mercer Island. I
have attached copies of photos taken from only two locations in the near vicinity
in Newcastle, there could be many more but I think the point is well expressed by
these photos. I am requesting on behalf of the impacted residents and the City
of Newcastle that the DEIS recognize the impact to views not only of Lake
Washington but of the territorial views that in some cases include the Olympic
Mountains. The impact of ambient lighting on the evening and night views
should be considered. Careful attention to conditions with regard to the type of
glazing, non-glare, and placement of structures and reflective materials that may
or may not be used for construction of the project must be a part of the approval
of this project. Please, do not disregard the value added component that view
has for the impacted properties.
The City of Newcastle is not opposed to the development of this site and is on
record with this position. We are, however, advocating for careful, thoughtful and
adequate consideration of the impacts to the neighbors in Newcastle.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment and thank you for your time and
thoughtful consideration of this and the many other comments that you may have
received.
Respectfully Y ur,,
Micheal . Nicholson, AICP
Community Development Director
Enc.
•
•
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2223-112"AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101 -BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 98004-2952
TELEPHONE (425)455-5320
VICTOR H.BISHOP,P.E.President FACSIMILE(425)453-5759
DAVID H.ENDER,P.E.Vice President
September 30, 2003
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
13020 S.E. 72nd PI.
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS
City of Renton File No. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Traffic Impacts to the City of Newcastle
Dear Mr. Nicholson:
As we discussed, I have reviewed the Transportation section of the Draft EIS for
the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat in the City of Renton.
A general correction that should be made in several places in the Transportation
section is that S.E. 64th St. and all the streets to the north (including S.E. 60th St. and
the northern segments of Lake Washington Blvd.) are in Bellevue, not Newcastle. The
Bellevue/Newcastle city limits runs along the south side of the S.E. 64th St. right-of-way
(west of the east right-of-way line of 112th Ave. S.E.). The S.E. 64th St./112th Ave. S.E.
intersection is in Bellevue. However, the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. S.E.
intersection is in Newcastle. These two intersections are Very close together, and
should be analyzed together, as has been done in the DEIS for the PM peak hour.
I have three concerns about the project trip distribution shown on Figure 3.5-5,
the first two of which are related. The first concern is that no site-generated trips are
distributed to S.E. 76th Street. Secondly, the 9% of the trips distributed to 112th Ave.
S.E. south of Lake Washington Blvd. appears to be too high.
Traffic passing through the S.E. 68th St./116th Ave. S.E. intersection on the way
to or from Barbee Mill is more likely to use the S.E. 76th St./116th Ave. S.E. route than
the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. S.E./S.E. 68th St. route. The S.E. 76th St./116th
Ave. S.E. route is about 1,4 mile shorter, and would require less travel time for most
users. It appears that most of the 9% should be redistributed to the S.E. 76th St./116th
Ave. S.E. route (perhaps 7% or 8%). A much smaller amount may use the 112th Ave.
S.E./S.E. 68th St. route (perhaps 1% or 2%).
N300572DEISItr
•
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
September 30, 2003
Page -2 -
My third concern about the project trip distribution shown on Figure 3.5-5 is
regarding the 25% of the trips distributed to N.E. 44th St. east of Lake Washington
Boulevard. This is the largest percentage on the edge of the distribution on Figure 3.5-
5. I expect that some site-generated trips would distribute to the businesses in this
area (i.e. McDonalds, etc.). However, it appears that most of the 25% would distribute
to the Lincoln Ave. N.E./Monterey PI. N.E./112th PI. S.E./114th Ave. S.E./S.E. 88th
St./S.E. 88th PI./124th Ave. S.E./S.E. 89th PI. arterial route to Coal Creek Parkway
Southeast. The trip distribution and assignment shown on Figures 3.5-5 and 3.5-6
should be extended to show the site-generated trips expected along this route.
As you well know, the City of Newcastle is in the process of updating its
Comprehensive Plan. The draft Transportation Element has been approved, and
formal adoption by the City Council is expected within the next few months. As part of
their work to update the Transportation Element, Mirai Associates conducted AM and
PM peak hour analyses of street intersections citywide. The results are summarized in
the draft Transportation Appendix in Table TR-3: Intersection Level of Service (LOS), a
copy of which is attached.
Table TR-3 lists LOS E for the 2002 AM peak hour and LOS F for the 2002 PM
peak hour for the eastbound approach to the Coal Creek Parkway/S.E. 89th PI
intersection. Phase II of the City's Coal Creek Parkway improvement project, which is
currently in the preliminary design stage, would widen and signalize the S.E. 89th Pl.
intersection. This project is described in the draft Transportation Appendix in Table
TR-5: Transportation Facility Plan (2002 —2022), a copy of which is attached. Besides
extending the trip distribution and assignment to this intersection, the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat DEIS should identify any potential impact (perhaps in terms of site-
generated trips as a percentage of total trips) and mitigation.
Table TR-3 also lists LOS F for both the eastbound and westbound approaches
to the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. S.E./S.E. 64th St. intersection during the 2002
AM peak hour. We believe that this LOS F on Lake Washington Blvd. is largely due to
increased traffic volumes due to drivers using the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave.
S.E. route to avoid traffic congestion on 1-405 during the AM peak period. In order to
improve the LOS at the intersection, Table TR-5 also includes a project to install a
traffic signal at the intersection.
My April 1, 2002 letter to you on the Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
transportation analysis scoping requested analysis of the AM and PM peak hours. This
letter was transmitted to the City of Renton as an attachment to your December 11,
2002 letter to the City of Renton. However, this Barbee Mill DEIS includes project trip
generation during the AM peak hour, but does not include intersection traffic volumes
or analysis for the AM peak hour. Due to the existing LOS F during the AM peak hour
N300572DEISItr
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of CommunityDevelopment
ment P
City of Newcastle
September 30, 2003
Page - 3 -
at the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. S.E./S.E. 64th St. intersection, it is particularly
important that the Barbee Mill EIS address impacts and potential mitigation during the
AM peak hour at this intersection. The analysis should include the project-generated
trips as a percentage of total trips at the intersection.
My April 1, 2002 letter on the Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development transportation
analysis scoping also requested that the EIS address impacts and mitigation of
construction traffic. This Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS apparently does not
address construction traffic. The EIS should identify and discuss truck haul routes for
construction materials and wastes. Measures to mitigate construction traffic impacts,
such as potential truck haul route restrictions, restrictions on haul hours of operation,
weight limits, and oversize load routing should be addressed. Other potential
mitigation measures related to construction truck traffic include pavement condition
monitoring and restoration, plans for the transportation of hazardous materials, truck
washing, load covering, and spill prevention and clean-up.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
& ENGINEERING, INC.
06'4,4 29€.
David H. Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Vice President
DHE:
N300572DEISItr
I ,
•
•
) Table TR-3: Intersection Level of Service(2002)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak
Signalized Intersections Hour Note
LOS Delay LOS Delay
(sec,) (sec.)
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 72nd • B 13 B 16
Place
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 79th Place B 15 B 12
, Coal Creek Parkway SE &SE 84th Way A. 9 C 25
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 91st Street B 11 A 7
,its r)altzed.fnte'rspctiars'ay :.f2=:<: "'; �,; �,'.: :•{ :, .x
r. ,.:,•�����,,.�.,�,.,... ,. . .�:�. ,n,.• ,.(,.,IP�•:�4�Y;stop;co �I;o'��edj,a;:,,�.,,,...,_ ._ ,_, i.;,... i=< <:,:»`,,,,s•.:;.i.�`
116th Avenue SE& SE 76th Street A 9 A 8
116th Avenue SE& SE 68th Street D 32 B 14
116th Avenue SE& SE 88th Street A 8 A 8
133rd Ave SE (Newcastle Coal Creek) & A 9 B 11
SE 72nd Place
134th Avenue SE& SE 79th Place A 8 A 8
:. �.� a•. G.rl ....L':`,iJ., r .�• r• '.:�''Y+_:.Q:: .....�,..::71;.:�' .-,eq'(q;,p;.;e;:.,.'..,:{.•:::
;.Ui ra{nalize, ::Iptersectibns•'�Sto :=c�rttkolled�:;o SIR ., `'rose- 6 ;:::;t
�:,.,��,..YM'.,.:N �1n:N•�,Y4M,.,... .,,.�.,,-.�.,ii .�.,�.:�.�.:,�,_.,,�..,n.s..,..F...�.::,,,<!?�.w...,,pp.,,.,..,...,��Q�,�l•��.,,:�,...,......,,_ ..,._.�.
112th Avenue SE &Lake Washington F >50 C 23 EB approach
Blvd F >50 B 12 WB approach
123rd Avenue SE (North of SE 69th B 15 B 16 NB approach
Way)& SE 69th Way B 14 C 25 SB approach
129th Avenue SE & SE 69th Way C - 16 B 15 NB approach
C 19 F >50 SB approach
WB approach
Coal Creek Parkway& SE May Valley (SE May Valley
Road F >50 C 15 Road is outside
City of
Newcastle)
-----� Coal Creek Parkway& SE 89th Place E 43 F >50 EB approach
Bolded cells indicate the areas where LOS standard is not being met.
1The LOS shown is the LOS for minor approach movement(s)only.
Transit
King County Metro(KCM)provides public transportation services in the City. Three
routes 114, 219 and 240, serve the residential areas. Route 240 provides local service
on Coal Creek Parkway connecting Bellevue with Renton. Route 219 is a
community circulator connecting the communities of Factoria, Somerset,Newport
Hills, and Newcastle. Figure TR-4 shows the transit routes and frequencies.
Approximately half of the City is within the Route 925 Dial-A-Ride-Transit(DART)
service area. To use this service, a passenger must make a reservation at least two
hours before the trip time.
The Newport Hills Park-and-Ride lot is located adjacent to the City along I-405 at the
Lake Washington Boulevard interchange area. KCM Routes 111, 167, 219,247,
280, 342, 925, 952, and 560 serves this lot.
TRANSPORTATION—Appendix-DRAFT TR-5
•
12-4-02 I:�T{�1ytin
L1 v
•
IP
•
Transportation Facility Plan (2002—2022) •
•
Based on the 2022 traffic forecasts and the level of service analysis and standards,the
• Transportation Facility Plan for 2002—2022 was developed. The transportation
improvements in the Facility Plan are described in Table TR-5.
. Table TR-5: Transportation Facility Plan(2002-2022)
Project Description Street Priority Estimated
Classification Cost
Widen Coat Creek Parkway from SE 72nd Place to
May Creek Bridge to 4/5-lanes with pedestrian and
bike facilities, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Signals
are included at commercial driveway in the vicinity of Principal Arterial High Priority $14,800,000
NE 70th St., 133rd Avenue NE, SE 84th Way, SE •
----� 89th Place and SE May Valley Road. Replace May
Creek Bridge. (Phase II and Phase Ill)
Install a signal in the CCP commercial area for Principal Arterial High Priority $250,000
pedestrians
Reconstruct 136th Avenue SE from SE 79th Place
SE to 135th Avenue SE with a curb, gutter, and Neighborhood High Priority $3,900,000
Collector
sidewalk on one side and shared bicycle facilities. •
Maintain the Pavement Management System (PMS) City-wide High Priority $4,900,000
•
and provide street overlays.
Implement Neighborhood Traffic Control Plan. City-wide High Priority $400,000
Construct a new Transit Center in the vicinity of Coal City-wide High Priority $6,750,000
Creek Parkway/SE 72nd Place.
.i.�i' -j.j `•;.q,•rxY`tr<; C}-'t .F.. ..t:w 4. ij.l, � : -:1,, i]:.,, ..t:r
-.. .-.. ... r.4.......ni.r.x...r...,.i,e.r e.i ...... .e. ,] t:,ZdA..wN`.:i�:.��".'..Ar.:r.,.i.i.]i•i,:..:..'................
Install a signal at the intersection of Lake Minor Arterial Medium Priority $150,000
Washington Blvd. and 112th Avenue SE.
Install a signal and add turn lanes at the SE 69th Minor Arterial Medium Priority $125,000
Way/116th Avenue SE intersection •
Install a signal at the SE 69th Way/129th Avenue SE Minor Arterial Medium Priority $125,000
intersection.
•
Widen the east side shoulder on Lake Washington •
Boulevard from SE 64th Street to City limit for • Minor Arterial Medium Priority $500,000
pedestrians and bicycles.
Upgrade and widen 112th Avenue SE from SE 64th
Street to SE 68th Street to three lanes and add •
Minor Arterial Medium Priority $1,600,000
curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes on both
sides of the•road. .
Upgrade and vi.den SE 68th Street/SE 69th Way,
from 112th Avenue SE to 129th Avenue SE to three Minor Arterial Medium Priority $6,700,000
lanes and add curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and bike
lanes on both sides of the roadway.
Upgrade 116th Avenue SE from SE 84th Street to •
SE 88th Street and 112th Place SE from the west
city limit to 116th Avenue SE with bike lanes, curbs, Minor Arterial Medium Priority $1,800,000
gutters, and sidewalks. Add left turn lanes at key
intersections. Signalize the.intersection of 116th •
TRANSPORTATION—Appendix-DRAFT' TR-9
12-4-02
r.:Rn
VA:*
11,cAg<v
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Nicholson, Director of Community Development
FROM: Fritz Timm, Senior Development Engineer
DATE: October 10, 2003
RE: Barbee Mill Draft Environmental Impact Statement
❑ Urgent ❑ Action Needed ® For Your Information ❑ Comment
After reviewing the Draft EIS document for the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat, there are several remaining issues that should be addressed. Some of
these issues were addressed in prior comments from Newcastle, but I would
appreciate efforts to more completely address these impacts.
Under the Environmental Elements, Air Section, we would like to have the
construction impacts analyzed to include discussion of construction dust and
construction haul routes on the environment and on the citizens of Newcastle.
In general wind directions in this area are northeasterly. This brings dust
generated on the site in the direction of Newcastle. Standard dust control best
management practices tend to be less than sufficient to control dust on larger
sites such as this project. Will standard dust control practices provide sufficient
protection for Newcastle residents and property? Will existing pollutants in the
soils on the site be disturbed in sufficient quantities so as to cause concern for
Newcastle residents? How will monitoring be performed to quantify the
adequate mitigation of the potential impacts from a project as large as this on
Newcastle citizens?
Many of the haul routes that may be in use during construction pass through or
are directly adjacent to Newcastle. Please address these haul routes and the
potential hazards that may impact Newcastle citizens. Potential mitigations
could include dust and contaminant stabilization on site, identification of haul
routes that avoid undue impacts to population centers, and requirements to
cover construction material and debris hauling vehicles.
Again, within the Environmental Elements, Environmental Health Section, we are
concerned about the potential to remobilize existing onsite soils that contain
hazardous materials in the form of dust. In the same fashion, we are concerned
about spill protection on materials hauled through or past Newcastle. As we
have expressed I the past, we are concerned about the potential for construction
noise impacts on Newcastle citizens. The noise analysis in the Draft EIS does
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development Project - EIS Scoping, Page 2
deal with the onsite impacts from noise per the state statutes. However, we are
still concerned about the noise of truck traffic in and around Newcastle
generated by the Barbee Mill site. Potential mitigations for this issue could
include limits on construction-haul hours.
Under the'Environmental Elements, Transportation Section, a very good analysis
of the Draft EIS is included in the letter written by Dave Enger, on our behalf,
dated September 30th, 2003. However, there are a few additional concerns that
we would be pleased to have addressed. Dave mentioned our concern
regarding AM peak hour traffic. Please address this concern. We would like to
express additional concern regarding the potential for 1-405 bypass traffic in
several directions through Newcastle. Given the current AM peak hour
congestion on 1-405, we feel that most of not all construction and long term site
generated traffic will bypass 1-405. This creates significant additional stress on a
transportation system that is already in failure. This bypass is not reflected in the
site generated trip distributions included in the Draft EIS. Bypass routes that
should be addressed include traffic proceeding north on Lake Washington
Blvd./112th Ave SE, to enter 1-405 at 112th, and also proceeding further north
through the Newport Hills area of Bellevue, to the Coal Creek Parkway
interchange. As drivers become familiar with the congestion and potential
bypass routes available, they will make use of them, adding to the already
significant 'problems addressed in Dave Enger's letter.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 4:51PM;JetFax #203;Page 1
• 4b Ciri OF NEWCASTLE
13020 SE 72"d PI
Newcastle, WA 98059
FAX Date: October 8, 2003
Number of pages including cover sheet: 14
TO: Jennifer Henning, Susan Fiala FROM: Fritz Timm
City of Renton Development Services
E-Mail: fritzt@ci.newcastle.wa.us •
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Phone: (425) 649-4444 ext 116
Draft EIS Comments
Fax Phone: (425) 649-4363
Phone: (425) 430-7382
Fax Phone: (425)430-7300
CC:
REMARKS: ® Ur•ent ® For our review ❑ Red ASAP ❑ Please Comment
Attached please find our concerns and comments for your information. Please include them in the
documentation for further study for,the proposal. We would be happy to discuss mitigation options
regarding these and other issues at your convenience.
Fritz
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
• OCT 0 0 2003
RECEWED
acii ur. uci an iviaiUe YUUI U, IU/UO/UJ 4: rei(J.e
111110 lb
October 8, 2003 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
OCT 0 0 2003
City of Renton
Development Services Division
ATTN: Susan Fiala
1055 South Grady Way
Sixth Floor
Renton, WA 98055
Re.: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS
Dear Ms. Fiala;
On behalf, of the City of Newcastle, I am submitting the following comments
including attachments that address our continuing concerns for' significant
environmental impacts. City of Newcastle staff has reviewed the applicable
portions of the DEIS prepared by Parametrix and issued by the City of Renton on
or about September 2, 2003. Items of concern include Transportation, Air Water
Animal Environmental Health and Light and Glare.
The City of Newcastle's traffic engineer, Dave Enger of TPE, had requested that
both the AM and PM peaks be addressed on specific routes and at certain
locations. PM peaks were addressed, however, AM peaks were not even
mentioned. I would request that the City of Renton make the appropriate
amendments to the DEIS to adequately address the concerns of the City of •
Newcastle as identified in the copy of the attached letter from Mr. Enger to Mike
Nicholson on September 30, 2003.
Mr. Fritz Timm, Senior Engineer, for the City of Newcastle has also responded on
the issues and his comments are also attached. I am also requesting, herewith,
that the EIS address those concerns that he has raised. The address to these
items should be more than a cursory review. Examples of concerns that have
not been adequately addressed by the DEIS include haul routes for materials
being exported to and from the development site. In the sections on Air and
Environmental Health I would note that dust from the site and along haul routes
could be contaminated with a variety of materials, i.e. the fallout plume from the
Asarco Smelter stack covert this area and recent information from the DOE
indicates the presence of arsenic. When the site is disturbed to what extent will
the applicant mitigate for the arsenic and other industrial pollutants that will
become airborne? Should the export of materials from this site be hauled on
routes through the City of Newcastle, what precautions are going to be
implemented to protect these routes from "blow off" that may contribute to
degradation of air quality and environmental health? I did not find an appropriate
CITY OF NEWCASTLE •
13020 S.I .:' 72nd Place, Newcastle, Washington. 98059-303()
Telephone: (425) 649-4444 Fax: (425) 649-4363
Sent oy: Myiue 4bb1U; 10/08/03 4:52PM;JetFar #203;Page 3/14
411,
response to our early questions with regard to haul route and dust issues. Dust
and contamination are addressed only as development site issues and the offsite
impacts are I'm sure inadvertently left out of the analysis. I note with some
interest that is ancillary to the above issues that there is arsenic contamination of
the ground water on site.
When the issue of light and glare or view shed is addressed in the DEIS it is as if
there is not a view of the site from residential properties in Newcastle. It is
almost incomprehensible that the only impacted views are from Mercer Island. I
have attached copies of photos taken from only two locations in the near vicinity
in Newcastle, there could be many more but I think the point is well expressed by
these photos. I am requesting on behalf of the impacted residents and the City
of Newcastle that the DEIS recognize the impact to views not only of Lake
Washington but of the territorial views that in some cases include the Olympic
Mountains. The impact of ambient lighting on the evening and night views
should be considered. Careful attention to conditions with regard to the type of
glazing, non-glare, and placement of structures and reflective materials that may
or may not be used for construction of the project must be a part of the approval
of this project. Please, do not disregard the value added component that view
has for the impacted properties.
The City of Newcastle is not opposed to the development of this site and is on
record with this position. We are, however, advocating for careful, thoughtful and
adequate consideration of the impacts to the neighbors in Newcastle.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment and thank you for your time and
thoughtful consideration of this and the many other comments that you may have
received.
Respectfully Y r
Micheal . Nicholson, AICP
Community Development Director
Enc.
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 4:52PM;JetFax #203;Page 4/14
l.: :St r a;:
• ... TaS':, 1 '71'C ''�ar:i•.:a:1J:l1t `:`-i_itf'r'.. �; ,
••
y� •
••.
,bl ti i', I:r'c.:.pl.
:II • p,r" , ,
:_ ... Jr.;
•
- . . . .. ._.. .l:a: rp.,..• t74 ' 'Y',,.- --ii.g:;Ji ... '', ,.r',. .,I
• - . .. .. . . ,....,- . • ..--'-... .• :• ::• '..'''',.7 ....Stt.'',;" .,;,.., .'..,:. ..f!..li:2,1•1-:.'i::::.'...'1,•"1•.1•',.•.•(::::tn 'P. . .1 ...f, .1. , .
. . . ....... ."" . ...."..."•.-7--":-".'"--.....71..•••••6•174'14.r..t.::: '1• • l'...,.; —• %.,1—1'"..!.'
w::, ..
;r rl )
•
1;1: rf
•
i.
..
•
r. ,Rye 1
_. .1 _ Ai • •
t. . .. . . .._._._. .. . 'r _ - - i •"1' -!�KL: - ,. .d. • t •
-• ' _ 1E " t',;;: I . C' 1.,.•[fi n•t' .1. t "
•
•
•
. . . ... `i: :.R' .,.,.. .',' :1. •id. ..• i.f%,'9,7:•ti 1•'�T'•'�1'•n1aS
.. .. . .. ^i;, j,�. • ;:'r'• ,'„,1:7{I' �. 1'4+•.ao. .0 '{�I�'by+`` •*J..'T,G'11
•
.}"L" iil - - ~"i:-.•,." _ e.- 'L•.i,,. , 0. '.t„l r:.::.Y. ,P..�:f.1.3 It
. .. 7 ',. mil'':.411 N 4„
•
.. .. .. ... ... _. . •:,.'_ ,. it's''•'JI: i:•. ',j-;.` ±V .I'''
I1 :}'r°'''�` 'r:
,'ice:1. 74. 4 I �(�' .n
1 .i3' 1 • r
i'.. r
`•• ''•.�C..l "YM I', 1, :hl. ig Vi,ti
.. .. ., ,, !-1. ,.; 1 ,. II,J.Ii�. { J. ,,.' _ sit!,.•
• r..�P� . :i_t i
. >^ .J'' l yi :Ij`;I:.' iI�'„� j❑° ,� 'ry' �I;rl'''li J' .+,�,.
. .• '•,�►A' P• i 'tj5+ •P: it•' ,1 '9 •( "'I', .,. • �
•
11
•
,.. ,. , �/ I.
I • �`�.J. R i
. .. ... .. ..... 1 ,.•.: .ei�•. i:i: +:e;• C; 'ai•
, t•
sent Dy: Jeti-ax MNJ•iUe 4DDIUi iu/uo/uo 4.Dorlpli)ecraJc ffcuo,raye of 14
r' sv.;t'.1 4 It C e
I�'.t� 'tE�i aI!ft., ,
i
•
•
i. :: :.. _ ' el 1•'3. d..M L't J4.y 1! t1 /ea V? /.1 I r :i;
• .S ..1 y.▪!1� k J. i,.i[,R
.. _ _ .. .. • _ •I�t)j".,,tt, I�•:t`I.eM .'"'n N y 47f Mi" ,• '� ,
r er of tl j •' • ; 4(Ii, •• •
� r Iif I,laf�f�'w y ni' ,.v, '
ii• :1 .•J it • .�!IM.t:Tit M. I-r t' l:•JI 1'
A.::•' t• • 1 :u ?1L4- _1!,•}r.ia.l°. •il t[.: ,I
1 ',t 1 frl't .11Nh.L ,Ja,S{_�q.I�r,•l. ] Wit:, ,Fh` f 1.5.
-ll 4'• f{r..il.. • i s Y ' .3. • •r1 , ' •
. .. ... r r..s i r,s • t ‘!ilti..
. 1:7•L.
•
� • IIii.,L. ,Irmo'. Y } ..t S+:
• r • p N
• i Iif" ,• ~ 1 • 1 >• ItCl' ��... I. T • N .- i,f" 4 ,M..4 '7 tr !, i1 , i
.. .. A ".: � l
. •
lc
. ..•. .. to '. 4r t"4.17 Y°4i I 1 I ,'9.i', I'• 17 1• .l 'I
. k I •,F0t.. 1 i ,Y.I1 Lmu.l• .i'. 1 1.I it.
.
• •
' ' . .•. Wit•.s ,k.; 1 " 157I , t i.d `J 1t N f
•
•
•
• !t. _ . • It.• _ . . " :: i _:"• , S, •'J• 'r .i !i ;77 14 j;::rta, rY j .+I. It .
.. . .. .. • )... ..
•
•
•
•
....• P :1 ' �i (, . :• .. i :;• ',:. �;:^...1. p
• t. .N71,
l� �t .::. •
N Y
x
•
r,: •. •
'•i
#I .7
( `iy
•
,k pja.•,
•. '�f�
1uA Yk
,�� i M I :1114 �1 1 b
4 �1 : i I !. A'
C'LJ. 9{. 4
: f •
A 'r'
1 k • "y'..•i f'tl I i
.. .. .. ... ... ...... .. .. ,
. .•• .,' '•''''. -::^)i.r_ , ,t : f:::P .I..▪ .:
A
•
•
•
•
f.. .. 'n a4t•. v• �'[ s ..�? a...
t Y ly• t• fr ry Akio,• J
r•t S
• • ,c".1 •. •••- , ' ' .,•:....„.,..:',...^,74P:'!..i`..t....0,1,,hi' • I• ., i.•
I :I `
•
.. r ..t " • • WIa • /• r. 1( r F l k y� •
•
i.
• •
•
i▪+'+-•••:
y 4, Y }/ 1' i '
_ —fit.•- t.
.. . 41
.. . •.. '.".•7 1t j_rh 11 r•,•!� e.... ri ,yisi':: Lb:: l,;;.:r� • 'it f'S
•4 • r'r• .:j n' . •" ,.ri.^f a,.".... ` pC..
�i_ .. •L .t.k`raja.:;,•;,f';,L9�„; ;.w A
y,jLi x i".1k; 'ry
_ .N i, 110, x YS i'4i•ur4 li gNt`"k- ,.. 1
M ti .i • ::r3 r—"/,''..';;;F�:1:;;' 'SLI li�ayr�.
... _ ^. W�, s •r' {a ; 71If* :irr�,y,Yfr: ,
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45b1U; 1u/ufy/u:] 4:norm;Jerrax F ua;rage r a
/)'1'. ,, ' ••• . I
•
..:. Ir : . "J" ��
1• lr.it r .7. / r'r„ W' s';4
. .41a • ; .I'I •
,',., ..; .,.,:i44.::::;1::::.-7.4..:;:l:SOr ' i p.Z.!. .,:: ik .i. 1::
•
•-• ••- - . .:,..k,..:, . I: •'1-...:;';;;;.:..71:T.:,1%/::1;t41...1. • ....' i• '
t,, ",l. i;, 1 t';� , •i. a! •.,
rr
11
• .; /: 7... r` r'r I t' 1.a .1?:1, .i
:,, ,
Ig 4 •fin 4: :'t s l a. I,,, I i!
_ • 1 cr..A 41 jj j i: .
•
•
A1i'..� .. . - ;r;,•1rr:n;lhrrf::: • y
iii
- ,... . . . — 'y�r.'1' L'V,•11 . .. if .,:?,:$."..,.r.' ' 1^
.. .. . .... . t . •• Iy L+11
..4.'� } i 1 fe .
�d,�lsl1
+ ,n
1;
'•• .• ...•..''.. .•. 3..,,
• r 1t.
i 1:.L..e.....•AV.• .":_.'.'A....'..,...:•:'''..-.4....:...:.:."t...:'';.',',,..,..,,l,,,'6,"i.•°:'.,•;•,:•l.''.','.,t..
'•f'r'
.. " ,.,../._
ii'.. 11.may '" I.w
. 1
...-•••.....:-•. •'••.• ...,....
•
•
....:..:..:'..... .. .. ... .. 1 ,. • ' '
y� r .I��'�,r13PW14p • A,
d •J� .. 1ii 11' ,.
, ,
I 1
:. R rJ
,..1.:T1I 7 Ve......-.Z..-
0. •♦ . '• :JA 0
,.:... .. j'�1:111', f t.� .1t • '; a 1
.r, �1. r. 14�i
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 4:56PM;JetFax #203;Page 7/14
,. ' ti-s( 4g:;.'7:::•::;.f.F.s.Nii:.:7,'.•'.'.;;•'•:.,41 ;'21 ,
• l•s ' ie:4221r,'sr.747...*•":7_;:v.,11,":s'.1•••::2,:r.r....7.1:".1, A, ;,, •
. • .
• . -. , ' it_ I. P ....-1 Ls .:,...:‘•::.•!'slrlir:Ft.•.'.'''::.:1"•.1..,.. . $., ..' '
.0?3•'.
.:.;;14,...•..;i4:.,:;•-,!:;4,. .. •
.1...-1.0 r4Lk.••;.1. ii'..•.!)1.0,.t'
.4•01,,.."'••1'•.• • '........
. .... ........-..•
-
. • • •..• • f•...f. ,.7•.•;stl:.lizi'i.1:•:.i.;.:4•
• • • • •
. . . . .• • •
.. •
t • •-• '2,••••sp->•.!,•?;•:••••••:.4,.:.!,.
• .• •. •• • • .• .•
• ,I „,•".;••.•.•41,..•:.e.:,.•1,1,... •
..$ • •••••st-.-..4.,%r;-..;::::i...1.,
1 ; ''",..-.•:t••.-:•71".7.e:'. -
• ., . ..":•"t•:••.:".:7:" l'.:•••,.,..4.,'"11.'ir.:•ir...,7,;,T.I.. ..
- • 1, •,:".•,:•••.zr-Tr.....,:41, . ,
•. •• . .•..• a. ', : ••::;•:4,••••..:.1.,,•'.••:''.• '' •••, .4'. '., ••- •••:, .
. ......,.....:.r.:!.......,:: 1.
• " " • • • '
.. -• " " ' ' ,: '* .b• 1 '::::•;••7.-....irii'•:::•:•.., 1• ,
0 .
' .i., . .....:.:7.7......7.7;.17,-.!;;., •;,,,, : 16 • .
. ... . ,...,.':!;,1...4!.;.t1..,.`., ,.''. •'. :r;i
• •. • ...., " 1.'• ....i',...,i7i,:•,*"1.'.)1
• -4,,;•,..1.o..•••••- ...-].2;!-' i •......?;:.;;• it. • e••• .4 ..; •
.. .-..,•••.,..-.1...14.147:.,;,1,..1.:„-..,.. . „.., i•...t..k' .,. •
• • • ..• . !is tly••,:...„..,...,....-..i•;..(.4..i:.•,..,,..iy...i••••., • i
- .. ., •• ....";••••,rir.1 ,i,..e.•.1V,- • o.. v.
...: .. . .. . .. ..•
.;:;'.i........r..:.-;;I '.1 '°?•• . • .••'''
:• ., • 1 I.:.i.,..,_•--;,..:-:‘..,;-.4•'.-,..r:;::.,,,-:5.• L.•.,;c...,•,; . •sii,6. '11%, 1111,. ' . •
•
• . . ,
. .) .4.!'...7:..i'ilii...4,••••'• •' •':'
• •
` , ••....•-,.4.4r,r1;k•-,•:•-•:••••••::::'•'' .. , 1;1: 4 * .ft):
'.• 41.: .•:.7:::.7..:7'. ....::::::•:77:rl.::-T ;:.. . .. ... .. . . . .
. • •••••••• •••••
. ..:
. : : • •i3i, :•i•-••:::',••:•-•••!.-...41..7 •••.••i't, 1 g •
•. •. '. • •
. .. . . , • ,
I. I it, 0
. , h .•: ' .1 .. ••• •• • • ',1.4!..,. ...:Yr111..47'.45:::.;'.::'. 1.•• • ••i„
•...:. ,. ,
•• •• • • •• .•••
• ., "Cir ';•••.-r.'.?;::';:'-;t1.,1'..1.1-iii-.'''''',•'1''I.. Ai'
.. . . "I' 0.:.....i2:• ^-';i::::•c;."4,Li.'"7. ''1 Si.. .0 .
.-1.,....r,1/4.•••1,7••••••••!!.•:....,•:, • ' • /
i...
. •• : • • • l'..1 i. •••••..'''''.1:r-f....".-.4.1.01%*.0•, ' .•
• ' ,..,...,.'. 1.,,:.:"...!..*•!0 ;"...':.
'•• ' s :,.",.......',,....
1 l' 4..!'!•.S''''''...?•'''0-1.7.•'',:;-,.7.1i •
• : . -4.r. ' ' ;4 • sr: '. ''''::;'•••;:.;`.;'..7;0-,,.. .
. . ; ... ........ ••-a.!•-1.‘..-l'il•••'• .
..v.. -::•,....:,c,...t..4........:.,..0.
• • . : • .-• .. ..,4,.. .*•• • 'i.:.."'.....•::::..•-•.*•;.•.i .:;.:,:••••!) . .i
. ,• .1 •
.g,
'i,•;;.'.'•;. "
•
. • . :IL, •,, . '.. i.i
• • * • • • • • .' tl•,-.-1•'• ' • '.al ': i••::...-.• ; . ''. .4. ••11'..; ,., :, .:11), •
i • t,--- • _if_•••;. . . •
• . .•
• - .-.11*.• ••.'•'.. i•'' /..t
• • • • • •' .i..•'::.. . .. • ... •• '1'•••,ii.....,• 1 .,' ro, :,,:- ..-F..: ' ,: . . •
•
.f.::;‘,,,,,;.•:. %,..
•-- ..•••• .. • ,.,.• -.. •:. ........• :...-...-. ..:.•.-...... ..-.......: ... ".. .. .. :.,..it .
..f•,•141, :.• 1..A- -- - ...!1:7}2•::..1 ..,/ i ri;
.
• " ' ",.::.". *.%:. I.: '.. If • ' "'IP? Pf/ j
et
... •-• . .. • • •.•.
- - •-• • . ,4,,,o.,
• ••• - •••• • ••• •• . .
....o.I.,
- ••'•liblICI • .''''''''''.
. '''..1:;4r,;4.1, .i.!.',*.. 1,4- :::•4.111.._
. • " : '••••• .' .•.:...7)4f•l•.i.I•3iF,: -I,. • • ...•-• ..: - - - - - . • . .
•,. . . . . . . I-q.t.
- • •- •• ... • ,n,;••• U.'„
.,,.„41' 4-'4 , .' ...•
. . ,...• ,
• P. i'. ' ••i-I':''':
.. . • .. ••..: :: i.;..•,.- • •.,,•;ii..,. — .: .. .....D : . .t4: p-,.....„11,'1',•..-• :'.:4'''..i4i!
. ...‘„, .,..... •....•••• .,,i1---. '' '•••••••••'-..--......:....:'..:,....., ....0.-..„• ..w....00 '.
:.11S74::4
. . . . • .• . : ••••.•• •s: ..;?;,..;.-.ITIP:Tkr.e. :' ',-- S ..;i'. :-.....t.7.•-..-;•:::.".•-;., ., . ..1 ''L,..1.% --Ir.+ . .
• . .1 ,„,...:,15:1,,s;1'.. ....,te. • .. li."rt'. :...••• ;..............,.. :,,...iii6';i:,•........4:, : '.:.... ''...:I'l:s.-'7.1:117...'-115 . ''' :. .tir...!•....,. !•-.4.trl:...... .It. •
'.....''•':•,$V,..4'..‘ • •: '..1,P!,,i,,
. .. .• ,. . t'•..
1 '. .
• . .
. .
. • ... :,.... .1.1., • ..." ...i. _ ... .
• . , ;•1 ••••i;•'''';.•l'....,A 4'4'.• •
...:..... . .. ••-. ..•.... .......... ...- :.•• •• -....•,•,..: .:::'5:•,e• '. ' • ' -.'. •;,.•:-Sr • •' - X i.I:•a
• ' • '''• 141;11,1' ; ..77.,... ..: . I; .,.. .:. •,-. • • "A.'
. ... .. • .' ' ... ' ....',..1:-;.i',• ' ".: "•• ...,'••••••••-••••• . r'-' • ''.. ' P.
• • • t• ' 1.
•• • ••. .. .• • ••• . ' ... ,..1.,...' • ''' '•••.......... '•,•••••'...''....'::!j•:•'‘':.••••••16 ,. •
. . . . .. ' • .' '1.'•' i .! i ..• •• ••••••• •• .. : .1••••,•:•47 ..
• • . • 1 • ... •'
• • * • 1 ••• • • • • • . ••i 4..-
.
• . • , k. ...w.,.1-:...-!............. ......-....-7,:':i7:7;, -.7 ,•`:•,,„; ' . .., ..4 •
. ....-. .. . . . .
s* "1,4".';••• 1.:' / ••:•••••1 ...••:'; • ••••••.:••• ..s•••'i•"r •• *' ***1 . 1 • •, .. • r
.' : '''.'. . .' .':.-i-.."•: .. ". ':'.'.. ..'....7.':.......:'•%.:-...kj..7..,•;4! .•':•.:•••:.-.--.•-•;-;•••.•-..-...- .:• ,-., i - .•. . t
.. . . !ill'?*..' . " . '.:7 ' • . : '
.. ....
. . ' ., ••
• . .' .•.• . '. . ••••••.•' .'“i".•• •1 • •:'•••••. ,',f.••••••:-;••••.'•••44..`.* 0..,... ,,, .43,4"Fpil '.'• * ; * ' ' *1 * '
•• * . 4117'';t: t. ' ' • •• ' ;
. ii• .: •*.1..:!...e i% :::•,.. .,•,. . . ..
. •. •• . -..•V.." •• '...,..4.: . '''• •":•••••• • * ••• .,,,1,:;. ,.' . 2 C ' 1....:i. , :,.., .J., ,... ,. .. ...... .
..... . . ..,. ..„• , , ,.. „ ....... :IL'',4" ,,;•....k.:...; . . . . -. ' ''',y1'. •i . ;. 0 ',I ti""I•.' . • 1.i y• AI,
"741:: f' a rI4 • •; .:11 '....::.':: .
•. •: t 4, 4i,e11.::‘F,'' " . ,.. 2.::',Y," '.,IML• ' I: .iti..: ' - !1:4 ....;,•-• - ..
: . . . . :. .,,,. ,.... 11-!......„, • . 2',...• •- •AL-Ai''''...*':".:• •:.' A . •.•:.• of;;R.?1'Stri•:. .'.
' • '' ' tr,-7.1:ii• - • - -:•- - .. •''''.'. ,'' „14„. , ilkli; .. . , ."'. , ; 1. .
\
0 - X 4: ,I,. st .:, ' •OP. : 141..''t . a v.
- •
. . t•VA 1.'4% , P:ta, %.I r .:
- 2-' • ' . •' • . ' • 1. :: .,'5• : ' '-ii t ; •,• '-. °°°:... la 71'•klr.i" *04,,.,,,'.. 3 : • .
„...... .. ,... ,4•• .-4... , .
• - ,.... i • ' .•' •
• •.1,
.. ,. • : .
.s... :. •. . .. . .... ••-:•• •,•••• s..• • •,. : ,',Afg4 ••• " • ••••
...14...‘i
. • •:. • ...,,0.,,i'. .111...f....-. - • • •• ..
. ;.4. ..,•• . .
. ..
• .. . . • • . , , .. . •
. ..,,, •
, ..
iPz
" . ..
• • . .
• .
.." . " -• . ' . .N.•,,,/...,.:'...... •,..-..,.,• ,..-......,,.: 44 i..• 'k
-...t•:•!,44"•:1,11'9.,; ''. :.:.._:..;...f..':'•••••:::Z:.• ,..,, .. .. ..: . l''.. •r . '
Sent by: Jet Fax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 4:57PM;JetFax #203;Page 8/14
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2223-112^AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101 •BELLEVUE,
WASHINGTON
98004 295
2
NE (42 2
VICTOR N.WOER.P.EISKOE.PTe.la, FACSIMILE (425)453-5759
DAVID M.EN[tER RE,Vuo PreoIEICoM
September 30, 2003
Mr. Mike Nicholson l� V€l� Pst�T PLANNING
Director of Community Development cI rY OF FIE ION
City of Newcastle OCT 0 2003
13020 S.E. 72nd PI.
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030 RECEIVED
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS
City of Renton File No. LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
Traffic Impacts to the City of Newcastle
Dear Mr. Nicholson:
As we discussed, I have reviewed the Transportation section of the Draft EIS for
the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat in the City of Renton.
A general correction that should be made in several places in the Transportation
section is that S.E. 64th St. and all the streets to the north (including S.E. 60th St. and
the northern segments of Lake Washington Blvd.) are in Bellevue, not Newcastle. The
Bellevue/Newcastle city limits runs alonptthe south side of the S.E. 64th St. right-of-way
(west of the east right-of-way line of 1th Lake Washington Blv64th
%12�'/Ave�S.E.• S.E.
intersection is in Bellevue. However,
intersection is in Newcastle. These two intersections are very close together, and
should be analyzed together, as has been done in the DEIS for the PM peak hour.
I have three concerns about the project trip distribution shown on Figure 3.5-5,
the first two of which are related. The first concern is that no site-generated trips are
distributed to S.E. 76th Street. Secondly, the 9% of the trips distributed to 1121h Ave.
S.E. south of Lake Washington Blvd. appears to be too high.
Traffic passing through the S.E. 68th St./116`h Ave. S.E. intersection on the way
to or from Barbee Mill is more,likely to use the S.E. 76th St./116th Ave. S.E. route than
the Lake Washington Blvd./112t Ave. S.E./S.E. 68th St. route. The S.E. 76th St./116t
Ave. S.E. route is about mile shorter, and would require less travel time for most
users. It appears that most of the 9% should be redistributed to the S.E. 76"° St./1161h
Ave. S.E. route (perhaps 7% or 8%). A much smaller amount may use the 112th Ave.
S.E./S.E. 68th St. route (perhaps 1% or 2%).
N3oa572DEISrtr
Sent by: JetFax M91Oe 45610; 1U/U6/U3 4:5/rM;Je[F$X #2U3;rage 9/14
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
September 30, 2003
Page-2 -
My third concern about the project trip distribution shown on Figure 3.5-5 is
regarding the 25% of the trips distributed to N.E. 44th St. east of Lake Washington
Boulevard. This is the largest percentage on the edge of the distribution on Figure 3.5-
5. I expect that some site-generated trips would distribute to the businesses in this
area (i.e. McDonalds, etc.). However, it appears that most of the 25% would distribute
to the Lincoln Ave. N.E./Monterey PI. N.E./112th PI. S.E./114t Ave. S.E./S.E. 88'h
St/S.E. 88th Pl.1124th Ave. S.E./S.E. 89th PI. arterial route to Coal Creek Parkway
Southeast. The trip distribution and assignment shown on Figures 3.5-5 and 3.5-6
should be extended to show the site-generated trips expected along this route.
As you well know, the City of Newcastle is in the process of updating its
Comprehensive Plan. The draft Transportation Element has been approved, and
formal adoption by the City Council is expected within the next few months. As part of
their work to update the Transportation Element, Mirai Associates conducted AM and
PM peak hour analyses of street intersections citywide. The results are summarized in
the draft Transportation Appendix in Table TR-3: Intersection Level of Service (LOS), a
copy of which is attached. .
Table TR-3 lists LOS E for the 2002 AM peak hour and LOS F for the 2002 PM
peak hour for the eastbound approach to the Coal Creek Parkway/S.E. 89th PI.
intersection. Phase II of the City s Coal Creek Parkway improvement project, which is
currently in the preliminary design stage, would widen and signalize the S.E. 69th PI.
intersection. This project is described in the draft Transportation Appendix in Table
TR-5: Transportation Facility Plan (2002—2022), a copy of which is attached. Besides
extending the trip distribution and assignment to this intersection, the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat DEIS should identify any potential impact (perhaps in terms of site-
generated trips as a percentage of total trips) and mitigation.
Table TR-3 also lists LOS F for both the eastbound and westbound approaches
to the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. S.E./S.E. 64th St. intersection during the 2002
AM peak hour. We believe that this LOS F on Lake Washington Blvd. is largely due to
increased traffic volumes due to drivers using the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave.
S.E. route to avoid traffic congestion on 1-405 during the AM peak period. In order to
improve the LOS at the intersection, Table TR-5 also includes a project to install a
traffic signal at the intersection.
My April 1, 2002 letter to you on the Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
transportation analysis scoping requested analysis of the AM and PM peak hours. This
letter was transmitted to the City of Renton as an attachment to your December 11,
2002 letter to the City of Renton. However, this Barbee Mill DEIS includes project trip
generation during the AM peak hour, but does not include intersection traffic volumes
or analysis for the AM peak hour. Due to the existing LOS F during the AM peak hour
• N300572DEISIIr
sent Dy: Jetrax 4001u; lu/utl/u. 4:DtlrI;Je1rax peu..;rage IU/ 14
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
ment
City of Newcastle
September 30, 2003
Page-3 - '
at the Lake Washington Blvd./112t Ave. S.E./S.E. 64th St. intersection, it is particularly
important that the Barbee Mill EIS address impacts and potential mitigation during the
AM peak hour at this intersection. The analysis should include the project-generated
trips as a percentage of total trips at the intersection.
My April 1, 2002 letter on the Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development transportation
•
analysis scoping also requested that the EIS address impacts and mitigation of
construction traffic. This Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS apparently does not
address construction traffic. The EIS should identify and discuss truck haul routes for
construction materials and wastes. Measures to mitigate construction traffic impacts,
such as potential truck haul route restrictions, restrictions on haul hours of operation,
weight limits, and oversize load routing should be addressed. Other potential
mitigation measures related to construction truck traffic include pavement condition
monitoring and restoration, plans for the transportation of hazardous materials, truck
washing, load covering, and spill prevention and clean-up.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
& ENGINEERING, INC.
p&xv-4 24e. &.-). .
David H. Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Vice President
DHE:
•
N300572DEISItr
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 4:58PM;JetFax #203;Page 11 /14
•
•
•
•
Table TR-3: Intersection Level of Service (2002)
•
AM Peak Hour PM Peak
Signalized Intersections flour Note
LOS Delay LOS Delay
(sec.) (sec.)
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 72nd B 13 B 16 •
Place
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 79th Place B 15 B 12
, Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 84th Way A. 9 C 25
Coal Creek Parkway SE&SE 91st Street B 11 A 7
t.x• .yy,^y. .. •v�i'0 :�. ... .,n 'Y q:�'ti••,:�::^IT,.`1-;.df�/r::7r•.�;�...a¢re'4.t`i�l;��'';'f"' "
.41 ,►red.nfe jsec l0I1,s.(a 'v ay:� 9P coB4j' .eta ' I•.:..._,;,r.,;�.:y;;`c ;sa�__}:L ' �I t�".��..._,x.. .�.. t �' i �+. i., ..�.�..�.i:S:..�.r�...�.r..._,� a ;t�'v._��t:i_.......
116th Avenue SE&SE 76th Street A 9 A 6
116th Avenue SE&SE 68th Street D 32 B 14
116th Avenue SE& SE 88th Street A 8 A 8
133rd Ave SE (Newcastle Coal Creek)& A 9 B •
11
SE 72nd Place
134th Avenue SE & SE 79th Place A 8 A 8
V ,:n; Y.� ..„ t,,..' ,F'J" �Bi�p; :r rr.+.. ;;Y•,., ,r.:r�:'u,ra:.a'+:•c+'t;+•+;• 3�i,'t :�•� ,,.
r, 1 . J ria�01.0.F"s•'. ct bnC (s QF!a L�f� I `�.E� f r } �P..o. dii, . ,Iy�' �t; � ;'.
112th Avenue SE & Lake Washington F >50 C 23 EB approach
Blvd F >50 B 12 WB approach
123rd Avenue SE(North of SE 69th B 15 B 16 NB approach
Way)& SE 69th Way B 14 C 25 SB approach
129th Avenue SE &SE 69th Way C 16 B 15 NB approach
C 19 F >50 SB approach
•
WB approach
•
Coal Creek Parkway& SE May Valley (SE May valley
Road F >50 C 15 Road Is outside
City of
• Newcastle)
--� Coal Creek Parkway& SE 89th Place E 43 F >50 EB approach •
Bolded cells indicate the areas where LOS standard is not being met.
The LOS shown is the LOS far minor approach movement(s)only.
Transit
King County Metro(KCM)provides public transportation services in the City. Three
routes 114,219 and 240, serve the residential areas. Route 240 provides local service
on Coal Creek Parkway connecting Bellevue with Renton. Route 219 is a
community circulator connecting the communities of Factoria, Somerset,Newport
Hills, and Newcastle. Figure TR-4 shows the transit routes and frequencies.
Approximately half of the City is within the Route 925 Dial-A-Ride-Transit(DART)
service area. To use this service, a passenger must make a reservation at least two
• hours before the trip time.
The Newport Hills Park-and-Ride lot is located adjacent to the City along I-405 at the
Lake Washington Boulevard interchange area. KCM Routes 111, 167, 219,247,
•
• 280, 342, 925, 952,and 560 serves this lot.
TRANSPORTATION—Appendix-DRAFT . TR-5
12.4.02 rr,flyer,
rr pr
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 1 u/U8/ua 4:5srr;JetFax #zud;rage 1 /14
•
• Transportation Facility Plan (2002--2022)
• •
Based on the 2022 traffic forecasts and the level of service analysis and standards,the
Transportation Facility Plan for 2002—2022 was developed. The transportation
improvements in the Facility Plan are described in Table TR-5.
Table TR-5: Transportation Facility flan (2002-2022)
Project Description Street Priority Estimated
Classification Cost
Widen Coat Creek Parkway from SE 72nd Place to
May Creek Bridge to 4/5-lanes with pedestrian and
bike facilities, curbs, gutters,and sidewalks. Signals
are included at commercial driveway in the vicinity of Principal Arterial High Priority $14,800,000
NE 70th St., 133rd Avenue NE, SE 84th Way, SE
-- > 89th Place and SE May Valley Road. Replace May
Creek Bridge. (Phase II and Phase Ill)
Install a signal in the CCP commercial area for Principal Arterial High Priority $250,000
pedestrians
Reconstruct 136th Avenue SE from SE 79th Place Neighborhood
SE to 135th Avenue SE with a curb,gutter, and Collector High Priority $3,900,000
sidewalk on one side and shared bicycle facilities. •
Maintain the Pavement Management System (PMS)
and provide street overlays. City-wide High Priority S4,900,000 •
Implement Neighborhood Traffic Control Plan. citywide High Priority $400,000
Construct a new Transit Center in the vicinity of Coal Citywide High Priority $6,750,000
Creek Parkway/SE 72nd Place.
—5':3s:.je••v,;:T•"�;�� .�'S i"r., - ..�r.:�;, z- :q:� ..�� ':�}�' Gi:., „�.� ...q;,:. :r,..�„ �.�i�: ,.,....
iis..la.i:1.�??w, :i•� uS• 1'',I•f ifi i' 'i; :1 -�,.il'. :F,1' ;,5::;d ja'.j Ir;: {I
.d:::.:Lq;Yip#:A:L�u,.t•:}5.1�!c �'.''ry,mci•].i':'_. -. .. :'.1';.'i 1 0 ;��'j.! at..N J:..'n',.' . :..t i t„'>-' i7. ....... ....
Install a signal at the intersection of Lake Minor Arterial Medium Priority S150,000
Washington Blvd. and 112th Avenue SE.
Install a signal and add turn lanes at the SE 69th Minor Arterial Medium-Priority $125,000
Way/116th Avenue SE intersection
Install a signal at the SE 69th Way/129th Avenue SE
intersection. Minor Arterial Medium Priority $125,000
•
Widen the east side shoulder on Lake Washington
Boulevard from SE 64th Street to City limit for Minor Arterial Medium Priority $500,000
pedestrians and bicycles.
Upgrade and widen 112th Avenue SE from SE 64th
Street to SE 68th Street to three lanes and add Minor Arterial Medium Priority $1,600,000
curbs, gutters,sidewalks,and bicycle lanes on both •
•
sides ofthe.road•
Upgrade and widen SE 68th Street/SE 69th Way,
from 112th Avenue SE to 129th Avenue SE to three
lanes and add curbs, gutters,sidewalks, and bike Minor Arterial Medium Priority $6,700,000
lanes on both sides of the roadway..
Upgrade 116th Avenue SE from SE 84th Street to
SE 88th Street and 112th Place SE from the west
city limit to 116th Avenue SE with bike lanes, curbs, Minor Arterial Medium Priority $1,800.000
gutters, and sidewalks. Add left turn lanes at key
•
• intersections. Signalize the intersection of 116th
TRANSPORTATION—Appendix-DRAFT' TR-9
12.4-02 m"�.S?lr'.!
sent Dy: jetrax m iue 43o1ui iu/uo/ua
CM,
-
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Nicholson, Director of Community Development
FROM: Fritz Timm, Senior Development Engineer
DATE: October 10, 2003 .
•
RE: Barbee Mill Draft Environmental Impact Statement
❑ Urgent ❑ Action Needed ® For Your information ❑ Comment
After reviewing the Draft EIS document for the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat, there are several remaining issues that should be addressed. Some of
these issues were addressed in prior comments from Newcastle, but I would
appreciate efforts to more completely address these impacts.
Under the Environmental Elements, Air Section, we would like to have the
construction impacts analyzed to include discussion of construction dust and
construction haul routes on the environment and on the citizens of Newcastle.
In general wind directions in this area are northeasterly. This brings dust
generated on the site in the direction of Newcastle. Standard dust control best
management practices tend to be less than sufficient to control dust on larger
sites such as this project. Will standard dust control practices provide sufficient
protection for Newcastle residents and property? Will existing pollutants in the
soils on the site be disturbed in sufficient quantities so as to cause concern for
Newcastle residents? How will monitoring be performed to quantify the
adequate mitigation of the potential impacts from a project as large as this on
Newcastle citizens?
Many of the haul routes that may be in use during construction pass through or
are directly adjacent to Newcastle. Please address these haul routes and the
potential hazards that may impact Newcastle citizens. Potential mitigations
could include dust and contaminant stabilization on site, identification of haul
routes that avoid undue impacts to population centers, and requirements to
cover construction material and debris hauling vehicles.
Again, within the Environmental Elements, Environmental Health Section, we are
concerned about the potential to remobilize existing onsite soils that contain
hazardous materials in the form of dust. In the same fashion, we are concerned
about spill protection on materials hauled through or past Newcastle. As we
have expressed I the past, we are concerned about the potential for construction
noise impacts on Newcastle citizens. The noise analysis in the Draft EIS does
Sent by: JetFax M910e 45610; 10/08/03 5:00PM;JetFax #203;Page 14/14
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development Project - EIS Scoping, Page 2
deal with the onsite impacts from noise per the state statutes. However, we are
still concerned about the noise of truck traffic in and around Newcastle
generated by the Barbee Mill site. Potential mitigations for this issue could
include limits on construction-haul hours.
Under the Environmental Elements, Transportation Section, a very good analysis
of the Draft EIS is included in the letter written by Dave Enger, on our behalf,
dated September 30th, 2003. However, there are a few additional concerns that
we would be pleased to have addressed. Dave mentioned our concern
regarding AM peak hour traffic. Please address this concern. We would like to
express additional concern regarding the potential for 1-405 bypass traffic in
several directions through Newcastle. Given the current AM peak hour
congestion on 1-405, we feel that most of not all construction and long term site
generated traffic will bypass 1-405. This creates significant additional stress on a
transportation system that is already in failure. This bypass is not reflected in the
site generated trip distributions included in the Draft EIS. Bypass routes that
should be addressed include traffic proceeding north on Lake Washington
Blvd./112th Ave SE, to enter 1-405 at 112t, and also proceeding further north
through the Newport Hills area of Bellevue, to the Coal Creek Parkway
interchange. As drivers become familiar with the congestion and potential
bypass routes available, they will make use of them, adding to the already
significant problems addressed in Dave Enger's letter.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us.
10/07/2003 18:40 FAX 253 931 0752 MUCKLESHOOT FISHERIES fI001/005
•
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE
FISHERIES DIVISION
1 •
TRIBE 1, 39015 - 172• nd Avenue SE•Auburn,Washington 98092-9763 TRIBE
Phone: (253) 876-3122 • Fax: (253) 931-0752tt
f $
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL COVER
TO_ FROM:
Susan Fiala Karen Walter
COMPANY: DATE:
Renton Development Services 10/7/2003
Division
PAX NUMBER: TOTAL NO.OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER:
425 430 7231 • 5
PHONE NUMBER:
425 430 7382
RE:
Barbee Mill Plat DEIS LUA-02-040
NOTES/COMMENTS:
Susan,
I am faxing our comments to the DEIS. I will be out of the office tomorrow,however,I will
be in on Thursday and Friday,if you have any questions. We appreciate the deadline extension
and the additional copy of the DEIS from the City.
Thank you.
chvotatia
CRE�pN
Statement of Confidentiality
This transmittal is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information that is
privileged,confidential,and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this notice is not the intended recipient,you are
hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this transmittal is prohibited. If you have received this transmittal in
error,please notify us immediately by telephone and return the documents via first calls mail to the address below.
mart,STATF. .n
O
9i do
4110
lene a°
State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311
September 29, 2003
Susan Fiala
Senior Planner
Development Services Division •
6th Floor Renton City Hall
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Dear Mrs. Susan Fiala:
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement. City
of Renton,WRIA's 08.0282 and 08.6007. Project location: Barbee Mill,4101
Lake Washington Boulevard North East,Renton,Washington 98056.
As previously mentioned at the December 2002 meeting,the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife requests the City of Renton to please include and evaluate the following
possibilities for the Barbee Mill project site. ,
• Include the pedestrian walkway over May Creek to be attached to the Street D bridge.
This will allow the removal of the current proposed walkway bridge. Bridges have a
negative impact on fish life and habitat by constricting the channel, shading, exotic
• species using these structures for habitat and cover for predation on salmon and trout.
• All walkways in the proposed buffer areas along May Creek and Lake Washington should
be placed as far•landward as possible. Dead end paths can be constructed to May Creek
for viewing. Split rail fencing should be installed along the walkways and trails to help
promote the survival and growth of surrounding vegetation. Moving the walkways back
will allow the replacement of existing concrete and riprap bulkheads with natural sloped
bioengineered bulkheads (vegetation, large woody debris, and a few large rounded
boulders). The Lake Washington/Cedar/Sammamish Watershed Near-Term Action
Agenda For Salmon Habitat Conversation Paper, dated August 2002, cited the loss of
channel complexity, degradation of riparian conditions, and altered hydrology and flow in
May Creek as a significant factor for the decline of the salmon populations.
Page 3-42, the current proposal assumes the construction of one individual dock on the 16
shoreline lots not fronting public land. Under the City of Renton Shoreline codes, docks up to 80
-feet long and 12 feet wide could be constructed. I believe it is important for the applicant and/or
future home owners to realize they will be required to receive permits for the State and Federal
agencies as well. ,
-
Susan Fiala
September 29, 2003
Page 2_
As the Area Habitat Biologist for this area I believe we have the opportunity to enhance fish life
and habitat while creating a environment that the public and prospective home owners will enjoy.
If you have any questions,please contact me at(425) 649-4423.
Sincerely,
-711"d•X
Stewart Reinboid
Area Habitat Biologist
SB: Susan Fiala 092903
cc: Rich Costello
David Brock
Rich Johnson
•
•
szers
4 I
e
yD' t oyQ
��eea
STATE OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
1300 S. Evergreen Park Dr. S.W., P.O. Box 47250 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7250
(360) 664-1160 • TTY (360) 5861.
September 9, 2003 Sap 'ON /NG
/
IAA
Ms.Ms. Susan Fiala �'G+E'v
City of Renton Ito
Development Services Division
1055 S. Grady Way
Sixth floor
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Barbee Mill Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Ms. Fiala
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) Staff have reviewed the
draft environmental impact statement for the city of Renton's Barbie Mill development
proposal, and would like to submit the following comments.
•
As is pointed out in Section 1.6 of the document, the construction of public railroad
crossings in Washington requires prior approval from WUTC per RCW 81.35.020. In
general, the Commission seeks to limit the number of railroad crossings in Washington to
those that are essential to a community and are not redundant with respect to reasonable
alternative access across the tracks. Since the transportation options listed in the
document consist of multiple railroad crossing scenarios, it may be in the project's best
interest to discuss the options on site with Commission Staff and representatives of the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company. Consultation with all parties prior to
any one option being proposed would give the city the opportunity to hear all sides and
concerns before it files any petitions with the Commission. Prior agreement by all parties
would also eliminate any possibility of a formal hearing on the matter.
Please contact Ahmer Nizam at(360) 664-1345 to coordinate any such meeting or to
discuss WUTC's role in railroad crossing safety. Thank you for the opportunity of
comment on the proposal.
Sincerely,
Carole J. Washburn
Secretary
m 4230 ie
��ipWASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF DOUGSUTHERLAND
Natural Resources Commissioner of Public Lands
v
DEVELOPMENT P
CITY OF gE",ONNING
OCT082003
October 6, 2003 RECEIVE®
Susan Fiala, Senior Planner
Development Services Division
Renton City Hall 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Comments for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS
Dear Ms. Fiala:
Thank you for providing the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) with a copy
of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. I am pleased
to be able to offer comments on this document from the perspective of the DNR. As the
proprietary manager of state-owned aquatic lands; the DNR is charged with four main tasks
related to those lands—encouraging public use and access;fostering water-dependent uses;
ensuring environmental protection; and utilizing renewable resources (Revised Code of
Washington RCW 79.90.455). The DNR has the obligation to develop and determine uses of
State Owned Aquatic Land (SOAL)that will provide the best benefit for the citizens of
Washington.
With this in mind, I have compiled a few comments regarding the proposal:
• One of DNR's interests related to this project is the filled SOAL that is located within the
Harbor Area, adjacent to the Barbee Mill site. DNR retains its right to collect fair
compensation for the use of this land. Any proposed use of SOAL needs to be authorized
by the Department of Natural Resources. This includes but is not limited to,mitigation,
restoration,recreational development, development setbacks/buffers,bulkheads, docks,
dredging, outfalls, and easements. For example, if any portion of the 25-foot buffer or
setback includes SOAL,the DNR needs to be notified and compensated for this use.
Moreover, if the developer would:like to'utilize SOAL for mitigation.purposes,they must
first apply and receive.approval from the DNR. Mitigation that takes place on SOAL has
a fee associated with it. •
SOUTH PUGET SOUND REGION 1950 FARMAN AVE N I ENUMCLAW,WA 98022-9282
TEL:(360)825-1631 I FAX:(360)825-1672 I TTY:(360)825-6381
Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer RECYCLED PAPER 0
Susan Fiala, Senior Planner
October 6, 2003
Page 2
• Another suggestion to consider is increasing the proposed 25-foot buffer. Two of
DNR goals are to support and encourage public access to the waterfront and
ensure environmental protection. By creating a larger buffer, both of these
objectives can be accomplished. A larger buffer will provide an area for the
public to access and enjoy the shoreline and will also enhance protection of Lake
Washington and May Creek from runoff and erosion.
• The DNR property may become landlocked by the development proposal.. The proposal
should clearly delineate the area to be offered as a roadway easement between the DNR
property and a public roadway. The design of this easement should be consistent with
current zoned uses. The proponent may contact me to work on the specific design of the
easement area.
Thank you for giving the DNR the opportunity to comment on this project. If you have any
questions,please don't hesitate to call me at(360) 825-1631. -
Sincerely,
Monica Durkin, Aquatic Land Manager
Shoreline District Aquatics Region
c: Region File
gjB arbeeMillComments
STATES dO DEVELOPMENT
CITyOFREM�1�91NG
oy° OCT n
3 2003
�'�1889,
STATE OF WASHINGTON RECEIVED
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1063 S. Capitol Way,Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501
(Mailing Address)PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343
Phone(360)586-3065 FAX(360)586-3067 Web Site: www.oahp.wa.gov
October 1, 2003
Ms. Susan Fiala
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way
Sixth Floor
Renton, WA 98055
In future correspondence please refer to:
Log: 100103-04-KI
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Barbee Mill Site
Dear Ms. Fiala,
Thank you for contacting the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (OAHP). The above referenced project has been reviewed on behalf of the
State Historic Preservation Officer My review is based upon documentation contained in
your communication.
The Draft EIS for the Barbee Mill site,Preliminary Plat makes references to a
Determination of Eligibility for listing upon the National Register of Historic Places that
was apparently made on the structures found at the mill site. This office has been unable
to find where that determination has been made. If the previous determination is more
than five years old, a new determination of eligibility should be sought. We would
suggest that both the water tower and the black warehouse be surveyed as individual
cultural resources, and that Determinations of Eligibility be sought from this office on
those two structures. We strongly suggest, that in any case, the water tower be preserved
on-site as an icon to Renton's sawmilling past. -
Regarding possible subsurface archaeological deposits, we concur that ground disturbing
actions should be monitored by a professional archaeologist. A monitoring plan should
be prepared prior to the activities to outline the monitoring and discovery protocols. If
archaeological deposits are observed, work should cease in the vicinity of the.find, and
the OAHP, City of Renton and the affected Indian Tribes notified immediately._ If the
deposits cannot be avoided, they would need to be assessed for significance. This would
require a permit from OAHP per RCW 27.53 and WAC 25-48. DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
OCT 0 3 2003
RECEIVED
C)
•
Ms. Fiala I
October 1, 2003
Page 2
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Please contact me if you have
any questions.
Since ly,,
Russell Holter
Preservation Design Reviewer
Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
360-586-3083
cc: Donna Hogerhuis
Cecile Hansen
Charlie Sigo
„Ilt,INDIA,. .: I g
A
„,,t1k ._
_-.,........,..-
B MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN s
b CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM 'B'�
a l &
39015 172nd Avenue S.E.• Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 \ 5
Phone: (360) 802-2202 • FAX: (360) 802-2242
September 4, 2003
City of Renton DEV ct�
AttnDevelSusan F opment alearnces Division CnYpli EONNl
•
1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor SE
P 1
Renton, WA 98055
:Rk:.Berbee Mi11..Company, LUA 02-040,-EIS .
Dear Ms. Fiala,
On behalf of the Cultural Resources Committee, I have reviewed the following
information sent regarding placement of the Barbee Mill Company and have the
following comments. We are unable to consult on this project as required by Section 106
of the National Histt ric:Preservation Act. The DEIS documents sent to this department
does not provide Appendix R:' Please sen'us°Append'ix R•for our review. Without a '
complete cultural survey report we are unable to review impacts.
The Cultural Resources Program does not represent the Wildlife Program and the
Fisheries Program which are separate departments under the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. If
needed, please contact these departments for their input on this project.
We appreciate the effort to coordinate with the Muckleshoot Tribe prior to site
preparation. The destructive nature of construction excavation can often destroy a site •
and cause delays and unnecessary expense for the contractor. If you have any questions,
please contact me at 360-802-2202, extension 103.
•
Sin erely,
Donna Hogerhuis, Cu tural.Specialist
• • ' Cc: Melissa Calvert;Wildlife and Culture Director• . • •
. .. , , Rob Wliitlarir;'SHPO ' . . • - .• .. ,s. , ,
)""
4.0Esy MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE L yq,
•
Fisheries Division
TRIBE 39015- 172nd Avenue SE •Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 INDIAN
• $ TRIBE
Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752
October 7,2003
Ms. Susan Fiala
Senior Planner
City of Renton
Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor
Renton, WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Company Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement,LUA 02-040
Dear Ms. Fiala:
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) for
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat(LUA 02-040). This project is within the Usual and Accustomed Fishing Grounds
and Stations of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. Therefore,we are forwarding the following comments in the interest of
protecting and restoring the Tribe'.s treaty-protected fisheries resources. The Tribe's Wildlife and Cultural Resources
Divisions may also send separate:comments to this project.
Based on our technical review of the DEIS, our general comments are as follows:" '
1. The DEIS does not fully analyze all potential alternatives that could be developed at the site. For example,
the DEIS analyzes the no-action and the 115 lot proposal only;however,there are three flood controls
scenarios that were discussed in chapter 3. These flood control proposals would affect the eventual
development at the site;therefore,they should be treated as separate plat development alternatives that are
fully analyzed in the DEIS. Similarly,there are two"mitigation alternatives"discussed in Chapter 3 (i.e. a
50 foot buffer and a 100 foot buffer)both of which modify the number of lots and configuration of the plat.
These alternatives should also be discussed as separate alternatives. We recommend that the Final EIS
(FEIS)include all of the options identified above as full alternatives analyzed completely.
2. The DEIS contains limited discussion and analysis about the potential for individual docks,joint docks or a
marina to be constructed at the site. The DEIS references potential future development of these structures,
but provides limited analysis. As a result, cumulative impacts associated with shoreline and dock
construction and use is not fully analyzed in the DEIS. We recommend that the FEIS analyze all of the
reasonable foreseeable dock alternatives at this site and analyze their site specific and cumulative impacts,
which include the potential to interfere with the Tribe's fishing in the area.
3. There are discrepancies within the DEIS as to how many lots actually front Lake Washington. There are
sections in the DEIS that suggest the number of lakefront lots are 16, 23 or 24. The beginning section
(1.1.1)that describes the action alternative should clarify the number of lakefront lots and be consistent
within the rest of the FEIS, p�NNING
pEYEL
CITYOpMENT OE RE1`(TON
OCT 17 2003
RECEIVED
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division October 7,2003
Comments to the Proposed Plat for Barbee Mill DEIS LUA 02-040 Page 2
4. The DEIS has limited discussion about the two areas north of the Barbee Mill(Baxter and Quendall sites),
which were previously proposed for one large development. and the FEIS should discuss the potential
development that may occur at these sites and any potential cumulative impacts to Lake Washington and
other waterbodies in the vicinity.
We are also submitting page specific comments for your review. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this
proposal.If you have any questions about these comments,please contact me at(253) 876-3116.
Sincerely,
914W/V3A06 ----
Karen Walter
Watershed and Land Use Team Leader
Cc: Tom Sibley,NOAAF,Washington Habitat Branch
Eric Pentico,WDFW,Region 4
Alice Kelly,DOE,NW Region
,
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division October 7,2003
Comments to the Proposed Plat for Barbee Mill DEIS LUA 02-040 Page 3
Page Specific Comments to the DEIS
•
Page 1-8-The new bridge on May Creek will permanently preclude vegetation growth within its footprint and
associated shoulders. This is an adverse impact to the creek that will require mitigation.
Page 1-9 The DEIS should discuss how the proposed setback and future vegetation along Lake Washington compares
with the requirements of the 401(c)permit issued for the Mill site. Also in this section the statements regarding
existing bulkhead removal conflict with others made on page 1-1.
Page 1-9 The DEIS fails to acknowledge that chemical runoff from the properties may also adversely affect fish and
other aquatic life,not just water quality. See Table 3.4-1 for additional information to support this comment.
Page 1-9 The existing docks and boathouse more than likely provide habitat for predators,not refuge habitat for
juvenile salmonids. See statements on page 3-42 regarding the potential for predator habitat.
Page 1-9 It is not clear why the 25' setback buffer is used as the distance to analyze the lots' potential impacts to Lake
Washington. This value is arbitrary and has no apparent ecological basis. The FEIS analysis should be based on what
the ecosystem functions are possible at this site,what functions are present currently, and how impacts(from trails,
bulkheads, and docks)to these functions will be avoided per mitigation sequencing.
Page 1-10 In addition to planting native plants,the Barbee Mill site should include mitigation/restoration measures
such as adding wood or creating refugia/shallow water habitat to provide more immediate benefits than small plants
and trees.
Page 1-14 If one is needed;the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division requests a copy of the remediation plan
for the proposed roadway across the Quendall site as soon as it is available.
Figure 2.1-1 Overall Plat Plan- The number of lakefront lots are shown is 23,however,the DEIS identifies 24 on
page 3-14 and 16 on E-13.
Page 2-3 The FEIS should include an alternative that evaluates the effect of implementing"Office"zoning with no
setbacks(the existing zoning) along with the urban environmental shoreline designation. This alternative should be
compared with the other alternatives.
Page 2-4-In section 2.2,the FEIS should discuss why the 1994 401(c)permit(94-2-00196)was never enforced and
discuss how this permit affects analysis assumptions.
Page 3-13 The FEIS should analyze the potential for the ditch that flows from the affected wetland to May Creek to
have salmonids in it and potential adverse impacts to these salmonids and their habitat.
Page 3-14 The FEIS should discuss how riparian buffers on May Creek will improve water quality if the stormwater is
routed to Lake Washington only.
Page 3-15 As noted previously,the three floodplain options should be presented and analyzed as full development
proposals.
Page 3-16 Section 3.2.2.3 Cumulative Impacts. The DEIS fails to discuss the potential for developments upstream of
v
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division October 7, 2003
Comments to the Proposed Plat for Barbee Mill DEIS LUA 02=040 Page 4
the site to adversely affect water quantity and quality.
Page 3-40 The proposed levee alternatives would affect channel processes and effectively eliminate any channel
migration zone more than the proposed buffer widths.
Page 3-41 The citation for Knutsen and Naef may not be appropriate for this discussion because their work did not
focus on urban streams. Also,it is not clear what constitutes a"small stream"and if May Creek would meet the
definition. The statement regarding a 35 foot buffer as being adequate for water quality parameters such as
temperature is unsubstantiated. Finally the last sentence on this page regarding wood and bank stabilization is
unclear.
Page 3-42 The lot that is identified as"open space"appears to actually have a stormwater pond on it,which will
reduce its ability to provide ecosystem functions.
•
Page 3-42 It is not clear from the section as to the setback that is proposed for the lots with direct frontage to Lake
Washington and how many of these lots exist. See also page 3-44.
Page 3-50 As noted previously,the mitigation options discussed on this page should be full alternatives analyzed in
the FEIS.
0 111011
DEyCmPOF AE LA'ti�N'rvc,
City of Renton September 10, 2(�a o�v
Development Services Div. 122003
Susan Fiala REC I JED
Dear Ms. Fiala:
Thank you;and the City of Renton for the opportunity to continue the input
from the Kennydale Community regarding the Barbee Mill Development. As
we have said in previous meetings, we share the concerns about the
increased traffic this development will generate from the 44th St Exit on
1405 into Kennydale, and believe that, in addition to other measures,
locating both entrances into the development North of May Creek will
appreciably mitigate this impact. Our main concern however, is for the
natural habitat along May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline that will
be forever changed by this development.
We have hiked along May Creek and monitored the wildlife there, especially
the Sockeye, Coho, and Chinook salmon runs, for decades now, and done
what we can to assist them in their struggle to survive and reproduce. We
have witnessed deer and the Osprey that live at the mill raise their offspring
and thrive. We believe strongly that these creatures' survival depends on
public involvement and awareness of their well being, and that to realize this
it is essential that citizens have access to May Creek and the Lake
Washington shoreline that could be walled off by this development. The
changes this development will bring to the unique natural environment this
site represents should not just maintain wild habitat, but enhance it. If what
is left of wildlife habitat here is managed prudently, these considerations will
not impede the Barbee Mill Development, but tangibly increase its value.
In the six years I was Packmaster for St. Anthony's Cub Scouts, and, in the
years since as an active member of the Kennydale Neigborhood Association,
and Block Watch Captain for our neighborhood, I have discussed the
ongoing development in Kennydale with a great many residents here. The
overwhelming majority of our neighbors agree, as we do, that the greatest •
legacy we could leave our children's children would be a Park on the last
undeveloped shoreline in our area. A third jewel in the crown that Newcastle
and Coulon Parks represent would benefit countless citizens for generations
to come. As we work toward that goal, it is of paramount importance not to
let the Barbee Mill Development block the public's access to May Creek and
the Lake,Washington shoreline.
Thank ou for your consideration,
'... At
Larry an Cir eymann 1313 No. 38th St enton, WA 98056
U
O�V Cl'"IE
RFNTONNNNG
October 7, 2003 OCT u 8 ��^
RECE
Ms. Susan Fiala
Senior Planner
Development Services
Renton City Hall-6th floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton WA 98055
Re: Bar-Bee Preliminary Plat
Dear Susan,
I , and my family have a concern regarding the Bar-Bee proposal and the apparent failure for
future dredging of the Mouth of May Creek. Our concern is that without future dredging of the
Creek our property directly up-stream will be negatively impacted due to increasing hydrological
impacts from ever increasing back pressure due to silt and debris accumulation. I would like to
propose that the historical dredging continue with the new Bar-Bee development perhaps through
a homeowners association pact.
While I favor providing housing for the future, I feel that the Fawcett Family's property should not
have to bear the negative consequences and inhibit our family's ability for future development of
single family homes adjacent to May Creek. Continued occasional dredging may have a positive
impact on the Bar-Bee site by allowing smaller stream buffers, and without the need for
installation of levies.
I am also aware that property owners upstream in the May Creek Basin have raised the issue
with King County with regards to the positive benefits of dredging the Creek from a Fish, and
drainage benefit. Perhaps it would be of benefit to query Mr. David Irons (King County
Councilman) and get his opinion on dredging the Creek and how both people, and fish would
benefit. I do know that continued siltation is an impediment to spawning of Salmon.As I am sure
you are aware careful and timely dredging would be a benefit to providing improving habitat for
the Salmon.
In summery, I would appreciate some balance, and how our family will not have to bear the brunt
of water backing up onto our property as a result of the current proposed Bar-Bee development. I
would also like you to address the increasing negative hydrological impacts onto our property
and what possible redress that is available to our family.
Sincerely,
Dr. Greg Fawcett
P.O. Box 402
Fall City, WA 98024
425-222-7011
e-mail....fawcett@nwlink.com
FOSTER i' EPPER & SHEFELMAN "LC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Direct Phone
(206) 447-2901
October 7, 2003 Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
E-Mail
WolfC@foster.com
VIA FACSIMILE AND p�
HAND DELIVERY nit
M
F
Ms. Susan Fiala, Senior Planner °�+�. AH/NG
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor j?Q03
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 ccfrt
Re: Draft EIS Comments, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Application
IIII THIRD
AVENUE
Dear Ms. Fiala: Suite 3400
SEATTLE
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall Washington
» 981°I-3299
"PQC").(collectively, PQC ). As you are aware, PQC owns three properties
within the COR-2 Zone in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the Telephone
"South J.H. Baxter property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). (2 0 6)4 4 7-4 4 0 0
These properties are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Facsimile
(206)447-970o
Products, Inc. ("Barbee")property. PQC representatives were present in Renton City Website
Hall at the draft environmental impact statement ("DEIS") public comment hearing W W W.FOSTER.C O M
on the evening of September 23.
PQC has reviewed the DEIS for the Barbee Mill preliminary plat application
(the "Application" or "Project") and provides the following comments on the DEIS.
The major thrust of these comments follows directly from our December 16, 2002
scoping comment letter. The goals and potential development of all areas zoned
COR-2 ("COR-2 Area") should have been analyzed in the DEIS to account for the
larger environmental and development context in which the Project is situated. ANCHORAGE
Alaska
PORTLAND
A. Incorporation of Previous Comments Oregon
We provide this letter in addition to our May 30, 2002, September 26, 2002 SEATTLE
Washington
and December 16, 2002 comment letters, which we attach and request be
incorporated herein. As noted in these previous letters, the City has the legal SPOKANE
authority, if not mandate, to insure that the Project's direct and cumulative impacts Washington
do not constrain the development potential of the PQC Properties or have.negative
50400398.02
October 7, 2003
Page 2
impacts on the surrounding environment in the COR-2 Zone.
B. SEPA Requires A Thorough Consideration of Project Impacts and Mitigation
Measures.
SEPA requires the City to provide a detailed statement on major actions that significantly
affect the quality of the human environment. The detailed statement must include 1) the
environmental impact of the proposed action; 2) any unavoidable adverse environmental impacts
of the proposed action; 3) alternatives to the proposed action; and 4) any irreversible and
irretrievable commitments of resources which would occur if the proposed action were
implemented. RCW 43.21C.031(1)(c).
As explained below, the DEIS falls short of SEPA's requirements because it does not
adequately identify Project impacts or how those impacts might be mitigated below the level of
significance. Additionally, without a.cogent discussion of the Project, cumulative impacts, and
proposed mitigation measures, it is impossible to determine whether the Project would result in
an irreversible commitment of resources toward mitigation measures that would not integrate
with (or even preclude) future development of adjacent properties.
C. Overview of Unanalyzed Impacts and PQC Property Development
In our comment letter dated May 30, 2002 (attached hereto), we listed certain potential
impacts within the scope of the Project's environmental review. In our December 16, 2002
comment letter (also attached), we specifically requested that the EIS analyze all of these
potential impacts in addition to the transportation issues discussed in Section D, below.
Notwithstanding this request, these issues remain largely unanalyzed in the DEIS, particularly
from a cumulative impact perspective:
1. Cumulative and other Project impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and
fisheries from combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and
Baxter properties. (Our previous letters have described the development-enabling
activities undertaken and in process on the POC properties, including cleanup of
environmental contamination. In addition, given the Project's proposed
treatment of nearshore areas (i.e. "hardscape"rather than revegetation or
substantial habitat improvement), the DEIS should have examined the likely
future shift of mitigation responsibilities along the Lake Washington shoreline to
other COR-2 area properties, and the resulting development constraints).
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
50400398.02
October 7, 2003
Page 3
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard? From a COR-2 areawide perspective,
May Creek impacts will be reduced if Pan Abode development peak flows do not
need to drain through May Creek The DEIS fails to explain whether the pipe
redesign/bypass discussed at pages C-9 and C-10 of Appendix C will
accommodate: 1)future Pan Abode peak flows as a mitigation feature for May
Creek, or 2)future drainage needs of COR-2 area transportation improvements).
3. Cumulative and other Project impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from
development of the Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties. (See discussion under
Section C 2 above and Andrew C. Kindig's attached analysis at Paragraphs 19
and 20).
4. Cumulative and other Project impacts to Lake Washington water quality from
Barbee Mill property development in conjunction with development of adjoining
properties and construction and post-construction activities associated with any
road system improvements. (The DEIS does not appear to contain any such
quantified analysis).
5. Cumulative and other Project impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the
COR-2 Zone from any access and roadway improvements, which could constrain
access options and natural resources on adjoining properties. (The DEIS fails to
acknowledge offsite road improvements and wetland impact).
As noted, our previous letters have described the development-enabling activities
undertaken and in process on the PQC properties, including cleanup of environmental
contamination. The first portion of the South Baxter cleanup was completed in a timely fashion
in late October 2002. The remainder of the South Baxter cleanup will be completed in the spring
and summer of 2004. As evidenced by the Ecology Consent Decree, the cleanup was initiated
with redevelopment of the properties in mind. The DEIS ignores the redevelopment attributes of
the South Baxter cleanup and the requirement to fully consider the associated "of record"
documents.
D. Specific Issues that Require Further Analysis
1. Transportation
As described more fully in the attached analysis by David Markley of Transportation
Solutions, Inc., the transportation section of the DEIS should include an analysis of all of the
roads in the area (particularly the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd. intersection (the
"Intersection")), under reasonable development assumptions for the remainder of the entire
COR-2 Area.
50400398.02
October 7, 2003
Page 4
It is recognized by all parties involved that the Intersection and the I-405 interchange will
inhibit future development in the COR-2 Area. It is crucial that the final EIS analyze the effect
of full build-out of the COR-2 Area, so that proper mitigation can be identified and implemented.
The DEIS's vague reference to an undefined future "overall mitigation program" to cure the
Project's traffic impacts reflects an inadequate analysis of environmental impacts.'
1. Site Access: There are two proposed site access points. The DEIS fails to explain the
viability of the proposed northerly access point. If the northerly access is not viable,
it will change traffic patterns and project impacts. Moreover, the DEIS traffic
analysis (Fig. 3.5-6) shows no vehicular traffic utilizing the northerly access. The
DEIS fails to adequately address Project traffic (or traffic that would be generated
from other properties) that would utilize the northerly access.
2. Scope of Analysis: The analysis does not include the ramps at I-405 Exit 9, which
had nearly twice as much projected traffic volume than the North 30th/I-405 ramps,
which were analyzed in the DEIS. AM peak period traffic conditions should also be
included for all I-405 interchanges and the road network between the site and I-405
along Lake Washington Boulevard.
3. Traffic Operation Impacts: The DEIS does not address queuing along Lake
Washington Boulevard/NE 44th Street in the vicinity of the I-405 interchange.
4. Transportation Concurrency: The DEIS does not address whether the project will
meet transportation concurrency compliance as required by the Growth Management
Act.
5. Rail Crossing: The railroad crossings that will provide access to the Project are a
second transportation issue, and the DEIS clearly suggests that mitigation of railroad
crossing issues may require use of PQC property2. The City has indicated that its
code requires the crossings to be accessible to pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic.3
The DEIS should more fully examine the impacts to railroad traffic of the new
crossings as well as the safety issues inherent in mixing pedestrians, vehicles, and
trains in the same location. Furthermore, as noted in our December 16, 2002 letter,
there is some question as to whether the southern railroad crossing will be acceptable
to the City.4 The DEIS should examine, as an alternative, the impact of having only
one access point to the Project.
I DEIS,page 3-88-89.
2 DEIS,page 3-86.
3 Memorandum from Juliana Sitthidet to Lesley Nishihara, October 7,2002,page 2.
4 This is because Barbee's easement over the railroad at that point is revocable upon 30-days notice. See City of
Renton Environmental Review Committee Staff Report/Determination of Significance,November 5,2002,page 10.
50400398.02
•
October 7, 2003
Page 5
6. Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Analysis: The DEIS traffic discussion fails to
consider the cumulative impacts of other potential development in the COR-2 Zone.
Given the unique topography, rail crossings, current condition of I-405 and other
constraints, the lack of a proper cumulative impacts analysis limits the utility of the
DEIS in shaping mitigation that will adequately address the Project's impacts and the
Project's relationship to other potential development in the area. For example,
Section 3.5.3.4 Mitigation for Site Access and Rail Impacts states that the proximity
of the relocated grade crossings, which could both be blocked by a stopped train,
"could be mitigated by connecting the existing access point at the north end of the
Vulcan property with this site through a continuous frontage roadway on the west
side of the BNSF right-of-way." Thus, although the DEIS acknowledges the PQC
Properties when it is convenient to do so to minimize the Project's impacts, the DEIS
fails to address future development of the PQC Properties, which will play a
significant role in shaping the major improvements that will be required for area-wide
solution to the traffic issues raised in the DEIS.
2. Shoreline, Water Quality, Flooding and Other Natural Resource Issues
As set forth in the attached letter from Andrew C. Kindig, the EIS fails to present a
complete analysis of the impacts of the development, including cumulative impacts, on the Lake
Washington shoreline and May Creek, and to clearly associate those impacts with the mitigation
necessary to minimize or avoid them. As Mr. Kindig indicates, reference to past studies of the
project area is incomplete. We concur with Mr. Kindig that the DEIS structure results in
difficulty interpreting the specifics of the current proposal and the various mitigation options.
We also concur with his general statement that where mitigation options are listed in the DEIS,
evaluation of levels of impacts and mitigation adequacy are by and large absent.
3. Soil Contamination
Soil contamination is another issue that did not receive adequate scrutiny in the DEIS.
As indicated in the Determination of Significance, the site is known to contain soils
contaminated with arsenic and zinc.5 The Quendall Terminals property to the immediate north is
also known to contain contaminated soils and groundwater, and cleanup negotiations are
underway with the Department of Ecology. The DEIS fails to adequately account for the
Project's placement of residential dwellings in close proximity to this contamination and the
associated proposal to site a road across the contaminated Quendall Terminals property.
Moreover, there is no acknowledgement regarding the partial unity of ownership between the
Quendall Terminals property and the Barbee Mill property or the fact that no Cleanup Action
Plan has been finalized or approved for the Quendall Terminals property. Given that no cleanup
plan has been finalized, let alone approved or implemented, it is premature for the DEIS to
5 Id.at 4.
50400398.02
•
October 7, 2003
Page 6
assume that the Quendall Terminals property will be available for road construction or that it will
not impact the proposed neighboring residential development.
Finally, there is a substantial amount of COR-2 Area information contained in the
Department of Ecology record for the ongoing Baxter property site remediation and in previous
comprehensive studies of potential development alternatives and transportation improvements of
the COR-2 zone. This information is readily available from the Department of Ecology and
other sources, including the City. It does not appear that this information was fully reviewed and
incorporated, as appropriate, within the shoreline, critical area, and Native American sections of
the DEIS.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DEIS. Please keep us informed of your
further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
(6;47J
ie.
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M. Healey, Vulcan Inc.
Steve VanTil, Vulcan, Inc.
Clint Chase, Vulcan Inc.
50400398.02
FOSTE __ PEPPER & SHEFELMA vLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Direct Phone
(206) 447-2901
Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
September 26,2002
E-Mail
WoliC®loster.com
VIA FACSIMILE AND DEVELOPMENTCITY OF EHM
PLANNING
HAND DELIVERY
SEP 3 0•2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager, Development Services Division RECEIVED
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton WA 98055 L I L I THIRD
AVENUE
Suite 3400
Re: Comments,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,Revised Notice SEATTLE
Washington
Dear Ms.Nishihira: 91iIDI-3�99
Telephone
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall (2.o6)447-44o0
Company(collectively, "PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Facsimile
0.06)447-97o.
in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the "South J.H. Baxter Website
property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). These properties WWW.FOSTER.COM
are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
("Barbee")property.
Background
We provide this letter in addition to earlier comments on file, and in specific
response to the September 12, 2002 Revised Notice of Complete Application for the
Barbee Mill preliminary plat application (the "Application" or "Project"). When ANCHORAGE
Alaska
considered.on a cumulative and concurrent basis, the Project's potential impacts may
constrain the development potential of the PQC Properties and have negative impacts PORTLAND
on the surrounding environment in the COR-2 Zone. As we stated'in our comment Oregon
letter dated May 30, 2002, (attached hereto), the potential cumulative impacts subject
SEATTLE
to environmental review are as follows: Washington
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and SPOKANE
fisheries from combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Washington
Terminals,and Baxter properties.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 2
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the
Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and
construction and post-construction activities associated with any road system
improvements.
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any
access and roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and
natural resources on adjoining properties.
PQC Property Development-Enabling Activities
Since 1996, PQC has actively pursued development-enabling activities for the Baxter
properties with the Department of Ecology, other state and federal agencies, and the. City. In
May of 2000, the King County Superior Court entered Consent Decrees for the North and South
Baxter properties as negotiated by PQC and the Department of Ecology. In 2002, PQC
completed the associated permitting process for the South Baxter property with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. The clean-up required under the South Baxter Consent Decree has begun
(please see the attached Daily Journal of Commerce article and photographs of work in progress)
and will enable eventual development of the property by PQC or its successor. Our May 30,
2002 letter and previous correspondence have consistently described the potential for area-wide
development in the COR-2 Zone and the multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process
which stand behind the North and South Baxter Consent Decrees. As you are aware,the Consent
Decrees describe with some particularity a potential development of the Baxter properties—two
68-foot tall office buildings of approximately 200,000 square feet each (please see the attached
South Baxter Consent Decree excerpt).
Permits Required for the Project
The Revised Notice of Application indicates that several public approvals are needed for
the Barbee Project, including: SEPA review, Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval, Shoreline Substantial Development Approval, and
Administrative Street Modification Approval. The Project will also require a Level 1 Site Planl
and a Level 2 Site Plan,2 and will likely require related approvals from state and federal agencies.
RMC § 4-9-200B(1).
2 RMC § 4-9-200B(2).
50346525.01
September 26,2002
Page 3
Because decisions on all of these permits must be made in light of SEPA's broad requirements,3
the City should request information now, through SEPA, that will be needed for all future
Project-related decision-making. For instance, the review criteria for a Level 1 Site Plan include
conformance with the comprehensive plan; mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses; safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; and (for COR properties only)
harmonious-development with adjacent sites.4
In addition, access to the Barbee property must necessarily cross a Burlington Northern
Railroad line, and Barbee proposes to have two such crossings. One of the crossings is a new
crossing. The second crossing appears to be the railroad crossing that currently connects the
Quendall Terminals property (directly north of the Barbee property) to Lake Washington
Boulevard. It is not clear from our review whether the Project's use of these railroad crossings
has been formally negotiated, and the railroad crossing issue is not addressed in Barbee's traffic
impact analysis. In addition, it is not clear whether Barbee has considered the implications of
road construction over the contaminated Quendall Terminals property, and whether the
Department of Ecology has been consulted in this regard. Finally, a new vehicle bridge is
proposed as part of the subdivision's road structure. This bridge will cross May Creek, a
salmon-bearing waterbody, and will require construction activities below May Creek's ordinary
high water mark.
Legal Authority to Require Further Environmental Study
Under SEPA and the Subdivision Statute, the City may allow Barbee to only use an
equitable portion of the area's traffic capacity, and to limit the prospective development's
contribution to cumulative impacts on natural resources within the COR-2 Zone. In this regard,
SEPA provides the City the ability to require a land use permit applicant to supply information
that is reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision.5 In
addition, the Washington State subdivision statute6 asks the City to determine if the proposed
subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety, and general welfare and serves
the public interest.? As we noted in our May 30, 2002 letter, because of these laws, the City
needs to diligently address a wide range of cumulative, concurrent, and onsite environmental
impacts raised by the Barbee Application. City attention is necessary because the Project will
potentially constrain probable future development elsewhere in the COR-2 Zone and will
3 RCW § 43.21 C.030 requires that the"policies,regulations, and laws of the state of
Washington shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in [the
State Environmental Policy Act]."
4 RMC § 4-9-200E(1).
5 WAC 197-11-335.
6 RCW §§ 58.17.010 et seq.
' RCW § 58.17.110.
•
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 4
potentially result in a 115-lot subdivision that is located on the shore of Lake Washington,
alongside May Creek, and that has limited and shared vehicle access.
•
Allowing the Barbee Project to capture the remaining development capacity in the COR-
2 Zone is not supportive of Renton's general welfare or in the public interest since it would
severely stunt the development of the PQC Properties, properties for which the Renton
Comprehensive Plan targets specific and high-profile development.
The Subdivision Statute has at least two applicable provisions. First, the Statute requires
the City to "assure conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the
comprehensive plan . . . ."8 The Renton Comprehensive Plan (the"Plan") calls for a coordinated
development of an office/residential "center" on the properties west of the railroad tracks
(including the Barbee and PQC Properties). "The intention is to create a compact, urban
development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the city."9 Plan Policy LU-130 states
that the proposed development plans of the properties should be'coordinated. The properties are
all zoned Commercial Office Retail (COR-2) and are the only properties in the City zoned COR-
2. Taken together, the Center Office Residential section of the Plan's Land Use Element,and the
Gateway section of the Plan's Community Design Element show that the City desires
coordinated development over and full development of all of the COR-2, properties. In other
words, the Plan, coupled with the added authority of the Subdivision Statute, gives the City the
ability to insure that each of the COR-2 properties is developed in such a way that none of the
properties have environmental impacts that constrain the development of the other properties.
The second applicable Subdivision Statute provision requires the City to inquire into and
formally find that the proposed subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety,
and general welfare and serves the public interest.)0 In this case, Renton has implicitly decided
that the public interest and the general welfare of Renton's citizens is best served by coordinated
. development of all of the COR-2 properties. Without a full analysis of the indirect, direct, and
cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, it might be difficult for the City to determine if
the Barbee subdivision will hinder this public interest goal.
Under SEPA, the City may require a land use permit applicant to provide information
reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision)' The
City's SEPA decision must include an analysis of indirect, direct, and cumulative impacts of the
Project.
8 RCW § 58.17.100.
9 Renton Comprehensive Plan Objective LU-U.
10 RCW § 58.17.110.
11 WAC 197-11-335.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 5
One of the indirect impacts of the Barbee Project will be the impact on future
transportation patterns at the Intersection. As explained in our May 30, 2002, letter and above,
the City has reason to believe that the PQC properties could be developed in the foreseeable
future.12 The City, because it cannot deny PQC or a successor reasonable development of its
properties, will have little choice but to permit future developments that will effect the Ripley
Lane and Lake Washington Boulevard intersection (the "Intersection"). If the City allows a
Barbee development that uses a disproportionate share of the remaining Intersection traffic
capacity, then the City might be forced to either deny PQC or a successor reasonable use of its
property or be forced to spend significant sums of money improving the Intersection. Either of
these is a potential indirect impact of the Barbee proposal, and the City may currently have
insufficient information to evaluate their likelihood.
A seminal Washington Supreme Court case that provides a basis for this impacts analysis
is SAVE v. Bothe11.13 In SAVE, the Court found that the City of Bothell had undertaken
inadequate SEPA review in its decision to permit a large shopping center. The flaw in Bothell's
environmental review was that it had not looked at the impacts of the development on areas
outside of Bothell's city limits, that is, the surrounding communities. The court found that "the
zoning body must serve .the welfare of the entire affected community."14 Under this decision,
Renton is compelled to examine the effects of the Barbee proposal on neighboring properties,
including those properties' development potential.
In this situation, the potential cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project are also
extensive. "Cumulative impacts" include impacts that arise because a development sets a
precedent for future actions.15 The Barbee development will set a precedent for future actions.
The Barbee and PQC properties are very similar in location and potential use and are zoned the
same. If the City allows Barbee to realize 90% of the development potential of its property, the
City will have difficulty justifying a decision to allow PQC or a successor, because of lack of
traffic capacity or other environmental capacity, to only realize 30% of its properties'
development potential. In other words, the amount of traffic generation and environmental
impact that the City allows Barbee sets a precedent for the amount of traffic generation and
environmental impact that the City should allow the PQC properties. These cumulative impacts
include cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries; accommodation
of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake Washington Boulevard, and Interstate
12 PQC has kept the City well informed of potential development. See letter from Chuck Wolfe
to Lawrence J. Warren,February 12,2002; letter from Chuck Wolfe to City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee,April 2, 2002; and letter from Chuck Wolfe to Leslie
Nishihara, City of Renton Development Services Division Project Manager,May 30, 2002.
13 SAVE v.Bothell, 89 Wn.2d 862 (Wash. 1.978).
14 Id. at 869.
15 WAC 197-11-060(4)(d).
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 6
405; cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife; and cumulative impacts to Lake
Washington water quality and wetlands within the COR-2 Zone.
This cumulative impacts analysis is supported by Hayes v. Yount, in which the Supreme
Court upheld a decision of the Shoreline Hearings Board to overturn a shoreline substantial
development permit.16 The Court held that the Hearings Board had properly ruled that the
County had not adequately considered the cumulative impacts of the development. In particular,
the Hearings Board found that, although the development in question, which involved the fill of
wetlands, would not have a significant adverse environmental impact, it would set the precedent
for future similar developments that, taken together, would have significant environmental
impacts.17 This cumulative impacts analysis was recently re-affirmed by the Supreme Court in
Buechel v. Department of Ecology.18 Under these decisions, Renton has the clear ability to
require sufficient information and studies and to consider the precedential value of the Barbee
Mill proposal.
The cumulative impacts that an applicant may be required to study also include impacts
that are more extensive than the impacts that the applicant could be required to mitigate. In other
words, the applicant may be required to study the cumulative impacts of properties that are not
owned by the applicant.19
Barbee's Supplemental Preliminary Plat Documentation
As discussed above, one of the major cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project will be on
the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. Barbee's Final Traffic Impact
Analysis does not contain an analysis of the cumulative impacts on the Intersection under the
assumption that the PQC Properties will be developed, as was requested by the City on June 3,
2002. As indicated above, development of the PQC Properties has been firmly enabled and
should be included in Barbee's traffic analysis.
Barbee has also submitted a biological assessment (the "Barbee BA"), prepared by
Raedeke Associates, Inc. The Barbee BA may not provide the City with the full amount of
information that it will need to assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Project.
For instance, the Barbee BA does not reference the PQC Biological Evaluation ("BE")
completed for the neighboring Baxter Properties as part of the Baxter Property Consent Decree
process. The PQC BE is a public document and was readily available for Raedeke Associates to
review. In particular, the shoreline analysis in the PQC BE is extensive and references area
shoreline conditions. A further area that is lightly analyzed in the Barbee BA is short-term
16 Hayes v. Yount, 87 Wn.2d 280 (Wash. 1976).
17 Id. at 287-288.
18 Buechel v. Department of Ecology, 125 Wn.2d 196, 189 (Wash. 1994).
19 WAC 197-11-060(4)(e).
50346525.01
September 26,2002
Page 7
construction impacts, especially in light of the fact that Barbee proposes construction of a bridge
for Street D that will require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Barbee's Application, and please keep us
informed of your further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M. Healey,Vulcan Inc.
Robert L. Collier,Vulcan Inc.
Clint Chase, Vulcan Inc.
Lawrence J. Warren, Esq.
•
•
•
50346525.01
•
•
•
• .f T Y a }f �' �f Uit; 3 i=!�h.; l h'� +^' j •r. p t" 1 91 K r
� t �'4 91 i'd
{ � f M}} v, �fl;� � p
ti ill 41`4 I, pF 66 S f4Y.r •
is ` 4 '4" rif `>S yiC
1 !'aa lVt4l`l�rfft��T'4� #j� �y '.r • r ' .} 70,,A r ettY,,v4 ;'
1Pf 11%V1 , `�vYi�,S Ue•• ,y � took 6,p 4t f
i {a{tiri( JJ_ ° 7x ' at ! '�;••70•" .> iY >' sr,}'�4l
t S 1•1 )Y it i i r I.�r�r yt • • � 3'' n,� 1 s� ,407,+p� ,y,,4•00
tr' ' Ft}} i} t l.�: iY �Sr' �( rs4Ns G.r'Yfii�r
4 C r s
f
} iA? `i '� •�?�� �� { +' �3' ryket-�"rxyr�y+x fiS hLX,E�4 ME,y
it qjf J! 4 s 4�! X•y�. }.H e t*rw• '�• a� �"�C+^a�jd"�k..,,C�' YIkS},E.
isY _if (�(Y� ...t•.y�I��j j y t, #4;4{�y'sft�l
• r F I(}'FF��tf..15t' K 1_N� � "f 1 ' � A F `♦�'��`Y ',�JJd'I
1. v C .1 A [A k r t�„Y x. .,� C , kv• .f.�e`,p� PAyf e•4- �i 4 -S 1 yi&WI"{y
L^J t 4'5'rikti„,t'v t F7 iYy7�`J'1,
t {{ Jul•' R,, y S"�C({�, Ky. •y,,t�Y�
,`)f f •
t l.' • 1 /�✓<yy 14' rl•4: •S k•T= ;•iz, 1�`F� '( 4r.• A
¢ `�" 3 U�kS l s Si 044
• iL.� • y3,tri iI
• �� • t �t,-1 • -. r • • 4t liTok/r pixy, f'x^ W'9 tom•°'
l.. �t,,, • 2 4 9 i r 4r<xv�✓1F r
' t;� G�/' l+Fs i`S
' lGt a�
1'1 •�fti 1 • n;uy�';, '43 ., 5�4?'1.�x C
�y+� •
y •�.1V . �fFz
ti C •!�l r k "i..-' „b,,,f l'3kL}
;u;t;•
Firv• °.. 'Y'.�•5 a„`�'S�t'1.t ,2l wi,?a\. I{„..r ttei.
yea a
Z •�� y !
a y vi
t
..3•v ,f•''f�z,.�Vt .
k w •
�f(' I ^ ...7�r:•!.R ' !�aY�.}`fie.
)f ( ��11 �ri i
�ti����'•��r ���"f43�,y �i�t y',(v.S'����� �t yt 1\����S�s e
E>rf s � •S f � A F A��� '�y�`�YaJ•a x:-�r,�R��k.
i air 1 .sya�
r 1 •
�'x �.-t + r l t i '
{3t�I V A _ ;ri+71 •ts,
•
y 4 S
ply! y
•
•
. .--.
. „
, .
. .
. .
. • _.-1 • . 1
. •
. - .
• ,
. .
-
•
. . .
.
77)
-an‘,..Rut,mt.,. t(p. Cayr)tonxtfce_ . .
• __. 1 . .
y tz_9 12__G • . .
. . .
. .
• . .
. .
• . .... .
. . . ....„ • .
• •
• • ••.•• . :•. •,.. . .,. . •.• . _ . •_•• . . .. ....... . .t,......:.„.,...fk.,. .;.,-....1.:„.74,,....i,..„...,...;•.::• ,;,.;i114....f„:E,,,14::-,••:
• .,1..
_...,...- .....-..:1-.....--..........
..•... :-...:::•-.P.. ...00.-.: •:i.. .t.. . u•.:.,-."...e-.•...n._.•..-•.......,.. a:•_. ,...: .
.- .......
...:..,.....,_.:,:..7.,.......•,;..i,::,;
...-;:-•,-
..•. . . !11„..:.,...-i szo•.•t.k. O,..t-h..ee:l..s:.o.:..u.:Q:th.••e..r U.n.t....o..:„n..•.i::.r....d.i.•:-..cd_,;. a..e......,.d.,.-1,t..-h.i
Continued from page 1
cleI -u to• in ...-......:'..._•.•-..-,.-'...-:-.,•...
..'.•-..
•.:'.-..:'...
1 ...Barbee-Mill:site,- v.vliich:needS.,-1::.:. •
• • .. • - •-
.: very-little.clean-up.The'•Cugiiiis-:- !.-.••
By.1007A-BBEIFEtti:- .1:-. -Site'.fdi_the State Department of --:.. .- "- i,•are seeking permitS to build towri• ,
. . . •
• - - •
- ..-- Journal ie4 Estate Editor ....•I:: .Ecology Pather,-Allen'S Company. -. •••.,- :.:•hoines on•the Barbee Mill Site. :.- • : -
. . -
.- - Port Quendall Co.'s :Cleaii-up. •
. •
' • -- ".-• -••• f,'-:---• •• • •-• • - -•: • is Starting proinptly after-reZeiv,'--": .-•.• . • - •NI,..
' .: • Paul Aliens f$:Poft..QiigniJailZ9i. •irlditheicl,§tteciilireft perplits,ft,-Ptcy start also doesn't appe4f...16 signal-..:•••:...•
plans :-Iireparatlen..to -sell•the....site:-:.F,.:-. '..
,• . to start more-than-t,6.:init.• .•the U.S.Ariny Corps of Engineers':/-• . • •
. . . though Allen spokesman Michael.
lion...c.leaiiijP.Pe4..Wee.k0f_.Politik. .;:this summer • . - -. . • ' , ...
iFi--Nank basSed on.sayirig:Wlietliei,-:•.•:::--:
:-.•..edsoil.atthe 29--..aet,e13:iitos*op- Sue Orison:,tienton'seConoinie. -- •-:•• . .: • . -. • .- - • . . • - -•••. .--
r•.... Bentoiii.S.LakeWaShinitbliliVater-;- development adniinistratot...Said" . i,.•inariteting•••0 the.•.•property-ha -.:-
:•:.• -occurred; *- - - .,. • .•---•- ----•
.
•:,...trait.thecompany taidestetil4• ,Port: Qiiendall.Co..promised a- • -, •-
[-•.:-• Word;circulated earlier., -:•., - .
.0:Sik will tiegiii--•Se4L'I.,:ini -.Cleati-ub,i,Then it thiiglit the prop-• - • - -•
V•••;iunimei':.that"Allen"S-i-epteSenti-i .."'-• .
..,-
:*i;4fe.ltigitillt.: titif.a ritIVIOC.Uffelpt:;;;.: 'ern.ill:2,063-dixt'I think they re:- . . .- . •
i•-!:_,tives.hail.put oUlteelets fOr'a buy.7--!: ....
ili.00-2.#editielittroilitialWeoei... keeping that commitment ' :--.- ..- .
- l'.: Nank responded. •y,sesterday......-:•
:::,:rattttielit161.i Oit.'ikilltilikik.:::.'',--•.-Thii.:B. xtei'4.0.-Olietty "tifV6rs•- ••.. •
'11400.4'*.-i:441i-r;liiiliteiisiiialle:.$4*:ilIkt•Vgilie6ith.ird;4.Wiat6i'igif.& - .f -' : L.:;:t-only that Port..QUendall Clii...1...ttilk-.i-,..:-
r:•-;.ing--actiOn to "realize thefrril,:•::::'..:-
. :41:•;hifigi.liiitiedig,,'•et4liiiiiii.'••-•:kik*--ti as- Nit •Qiielidalr•that..• -..:.::..•
i.-1,,-.4.115;!'liiii4.t'i•.61V...thkiitAiiiiat':::.....'Agieg.-4 out to redevelop into•41:.:-...:-...-1.: r.!:-.,p9telitial!'.of tilklitoiieAr.,::::..;-:-..-.-:•:...-,..!''-'.
L'.,.'•."Certiiiity arir,ttiii*POrt 61ti *--.•''•-•
-.--Wa$41-1WW-.5•41iirgiiilliP;;'j.:;:iiiiie:',iiiiie4 151.05015.51';'51*04;.'i.. ••••-•:''•-.•...- . r:::-.daa can do to realize':the full
1-MW,4,11:SINIIIreAt,_.,kr0, 00.4440:100si.:00010.it7Otait--:....,:.°;.t.'
:n•PI---cDriCi eilaaitt6---'5,-11.,:461V-':.-••••-':ait'aiite".:`i&itifielifi••-thetifid-•;-:•-•_.,-.-:.. • 1.-:-=',4---'ten-Yal-,•-i4...'!"'will- .a..-6,-...!- e.:'Sai--..cl-
I.- --:,..-Kovin paruels,President of-the:
•-4 '''crilpYreeii-;•-tot.,ele ...,b.tirot)oz.-• 1990$,:•ttfOW.i iv.6-,:4134atto':'aftet:.•..:;•:,••:,-
4„Fii"..4.--,..A&;•:::-.6 .4;1:::..g.ou.-14:,,It.ritzt;Alk.:.....,.A.ii ,s,.;,:g.if.f.witt,ts.:::griti., ::::.:;•-1....:._ .. c.5......„....: . ''.!Seattle • develepnlient• .fitiiir til-,--:...-,
54,7?-.t ,•- P- 4,Wi:fitiMirtiga.; airolyirin-Oteequiadir. . ...:::.- ,--,--:Nitze-Sitageii&del;..gaid-his.liiiii.A.---- --
. ,._ ._ _ _ ..
,„,•,.,..1 - .,..,..004404., , .,....• • 4.,2„,,,,.......„„,„..„*.:..„,...r......‘„,,:,‘,,,,z,„yin,-.. .• , ,..,.:,..a-approached'.-POO:•00g1.14A1-••• ."-:? -
,-;:i•.••J,. , te- • - ,..• ..• • ,;•••...A.,:sitelor -• ,inin-ion:•-.4.1.lumo.• , '-• -.
a-•-'-'-!ral'-''-'131iTAgaitilital.;1 Ce05'- •--': '-• 06:abbuittY.ingle'buttlkii.top;;:;1.‘...-
•:...-.:'. i.I.y..bilt.Por.t goe-iidaefiliasia..•:: ••
4'--- - - •' • - -- - • -7.'....: - ;1'-••4540tditrt i.":'''.;••••?:'
.II (0....4.ardliiii.Ae ViIr4e31.' 7.....•.".''.7..-.;itad1'.4t.W.giirell 6 krf4tiii1W.'s::* .' , • ::• XP•4;c1:4101...'•-::' •-`'• -. -:K•-'• •••'‘'....;,•
1::.:'•firalr•ThIV.bliattigi471:-!r"-P•qi•.1"%•••-:CO''iiteM"'Aft•&trAW."pialtittlyttr#:?1,.••i.-5,_-- •;•;.V.-5...atli0)fay..4:110fiATO-0a41-1jAiLT-';:i:::
-;--- — - •:- • • -••••• ,.'-'-' ,4'. -Ic•'''•---K••- • •• :-.' . ..-.-:iiiarket;'''-i/afilel.4''Saidli6•'],',.-:
Starting the -6.1eatii•*;'-dWi'tiicta4Vty'PAUfeIete0irdSair(5-- ..Y.$26 1 • .-: .- . . .. . .... ..- .
• i• meet"a-regulatory•fieldtilig.sga:'.Ili-Ali:OW ..eloaii,fie-tfigtiigiiii ' • . - 1.-..-,:lial,ren:t Offered.It:•-•to• us We
Wov,-......
L.•• ta-11-•:'043". lburn;sifia'fikie.?..-.1517:,::ti.4-: ••••..-..-.,,...::,... -c•-lE,r.i.,.iki. ,=4.6?-.:ii.i. ilo.:.ic,...1.1:iiiii:0'. .. • . r.--...o.pprOadht.ii-theiti to:ti3r1o.iiiitiatO.:-•,,,-;.,
r,-:-..-,ifistossiOn'iiiit.thqs-lid-Verf-t iixi.--. .,..',-..
f-:-.t/Wrrevillintor...rieW:
- . !•:;..'.•••• Port-.Queodaf C.47&-lead•Con .:--.:..
. .
trktor'•6n.the clean up IS•Tfferniiif.....-
• -.,---.16.te6.•The involves mainly
.. .
,,r.--r::.riehioiiog• eftoote:-...4ints.titii.,;.--:: .-. -
- . . • • • 1;:..tiegorooeifolfpoiii-*her.lipli.,--..:.
. .• .
• !;-..„tr:.opeA.-4tion ,-0Olburki iaiq:.--..,- .-..
• .. :.•-..... .loe-Nabboje1d can be reached •
1206j. 219-6518 or by.e-inail....111
. .. . -
.-..-. joe@dic.com. • .... ••• ... _.•
... . . .•.
. . .
. .
• -
. . •
: - •
�@{1 - .ry is
- - FE C:EIV �' - -
- - In King:County:Supeibo!Govrt oier!1's'oltli5 •.
1 MAY 1000.
- Cashier SostiOri Kg _ -
2 :Superior Court Clerk -
3
4 i -
51 .
• IN THE SUPERIOR.COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON -
7 1 IN AND FOR KING COUNTY
8 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF - -
9 ECOLOGY, N4)02 :. 1. 177 9 = SENT
•
. Plaintiff, -
10 - PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT
- v'. DECREE
11 - •
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a Washington RE:- SOUTH J.H.BAXTER -
12 i corporation, - PROPERTY/RENTON
13 • - Defendant.
- -. 14 :
15. .
16 ' - ' ..
171 .
i
18 � 0 - -
19 - ' • •
-
20
;
21
22 ! •
- • -
1
23 - - -- -
24 •
251
-, - . 261 -
- � i
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER . ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASIIINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology
ox 40117n
j South Baxter . Olympia.WA 98504-0117
FAX.(360)438-7743
1 7 Property would act as security for certain South Baxter Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of .
..= 2 ' this Consent Decree,Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded.and:of no further force ..
3 and effect,and the May 6, 1992 Renton-Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of
• 4' no further force and effect: Comprehensive summaries of project area.historical information,records
5 and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report(Woodward
6 Clyde,.1990)conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree;and in multiple documents prepared
• - . .7 by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present.
8 • .
IV. DESCRIPTION.OF PROPOSED PROJECT
9 .
• . . . 1 41. Defendant proposes to acquire the South Baxter Property(along with the North
10
Baxter Property)to facilitate eventual commercial,urban residential,and/or retail development,
• 11
either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development
12 ; -
Project("Project"),including adjacent properties,which could Ultimately result in between
13 .
approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development at the north end of Renton. The
14 .
South Baxter Property, along with the North Baxter Property is anticipated to include approximately
15
400,000 sq. ft. of development.
- 16
1 42. In 1989,the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan
17 '
affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993,extensive public
- 18
hearings and meetings were held,and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the
• 19r .
general public concerning•Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning
20 '
• ': Code amendments.
21 '
43. In addition, in 1996 and 1997,an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS")scoping
22 ! .
• j process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping -
23 `
process involved significant public participation,including mailings,formal comment,and public
24
meetings.
25
) 26
- 1
GENERAL OF WASHINGTON ATTORNEY
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 9 Ecology Division
CONSENT DECREE PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-011.7
FAX(360)438-7743
i
i .
. .
. )
• I •44: Anypropertydevelopment will be com leted-in accordance with the Renton
y P P .
• • 2. Comprehensive Plan and area-wide zoning Center Office Residential designation: Subject to the
3 requirements of the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, such development.will include
4 •permanent public access to shoreline at the Baxter Property. - • •
•
45. Any residential townhomes or condominiums on the South-Baxter. Property will be •
6 j built structural concrete.parking or other structures,placing the first occupied floor at least
.
7 ' level above the soil. -
' '8 46. Two office buildings(approximately 200,000 square feet each)and associated - •
• -.9 ! parking maybe located on.the South Baxter Property. The proposed buildings are anticipated to be
.
10 L five stories,or approximately 68 feet tall. Parking may be located as the first floor of the office •
• • 11 building or as separate structures. . .
- 12 47. The_development would be designed to take advantage of the desirable location of
13 ' the South Baxter Property and will minimize adverse environmental.impacts. Redevelopment will
- J 14 facilitate permanent public access to the shoreline(through a gravel walking trail on the inland edge
15 of shoreline enhancements and observation stations);create a connection to existing recreational use
-16 ' trails, and create transportation and parking-improvements.
17 . 48. Development of the South Baxter Property is-expected to create a significant number
18 ' of well-paying jobs and spur.development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues . -
I
19 ; would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington.
20' ' 49. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act("SEPA") -
- 21 environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has
22 ! • been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of .
23 Nonsignificance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H.
24 1 •
25
. i .
• • ) 26
. t
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 10 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
Ecology Division
CONSENT DECREE PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 I7
FAX(360)438-7743
.
.
•
:= • 1 V. VVORIx TO BE.PERFORMED
2 ' 50. Upon the Effective Date-of this Decree;Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action
3 Plan described in Attachment B,including all attachments thereto,according.to the schedule
. • 4 provided therein. Defendant shall submit as-built documentation to Ecology to verify construction of
�
5 the cleanup and mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan: Cleanup activities include '
6 source-remediation,site grading to facilitate site redevelopment,soil.capping,wetland mitigation,
7 '- and confirmational groundwater monitoring: Source remediation includes removal of NAPL from
g ' wells(BAX-14), sediment and soil excavation and off-site treatment or disposal, and in situ soil
9 mixing(stabilization).•Source remediation activities will occur at prescribed locations according to
10 the Cleanup Action Plan. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize
11 disruption to the surrounding community. As such,the actual schedule for site cleanup may vary to
12 facilitate this coordination.
51. Defendant a ees not to perform anyremedial actions for the release of Hazardous
13 gr
_�. 14 Substances covered by this Decree, other than those required by this Decree,unless the parties agree
15 ' to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in
16 ' accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted
17 � pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Cleanup Action
18 ' PIan(Attachment B). •
19 ,
52. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant(Attachment C)with the Office
20 of the King County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Cleanup Action Plan and
21 ' shall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty(30)days of recording.
22 VI. ECOLOGY COSTS.
23
53. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this
24 Decree: This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the
25 .Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996.
26 1 The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology
ATTORNEY PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 11 GENERAL OF WASHINGTONEcology Division
CONSENT.DECREE PO Box 40117
ISouth Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
r
•
1 ; 1.07. " If the Couit withdraws its consent,this Decree shall be null and.void at.the option of
2 j any party, and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs and without prejudice.
3 In such an event,no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree.
4 XXXI. SEVERABILITY
5 ' 108. If any section,subsection,sentence,or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal,
6 invalid,or unenforceable,such illegality,invalidity,or unenforceability will not affect the legality,
7 ; validity,or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any othei section,subsection,sentence,
8 or clause.
9 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE
10 109. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been
11 k entered by the Court and the closing of the property purchase is completed as defined in the Property
12 Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J.H.Baxter St Co.
13 SO ORDERED this /6 r'day of / ,2000.
14
15
16Judge,King County Superior Court
�o T�-
The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date
17
specified below. •
18
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY,a ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
19 . Washington corporation .
20. /��`on.
By: fr ` -By:
21 Pri Name. Amy r_ M.A,R/7/ Printed Name: •TA 00-,4 t G f1 r,,,j/
22 Date: j i oco Date: /Y/7 is; aSI v
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
23
24 By: 1 •
Printed Name:
25 Date: .
26
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 27 Ecology Division
CONSENT DECREE PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
o`�a
e,�,o
A
0C 8 '�io4310
ikk 491
Ato
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS, INC.
DEIS REVIEW LETTER
T SI
Transpor utions,Inc.
8250.165th Avenue NE September 29, 2003
Suite 100
Redmond,WA 98052-6628
T 425-883-4134
F 425.867.0898
www.tsinw.com
Charles R. Wolfe
Foster Pepper and Shefelman, PLLC
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle,Washington 98101-3299
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Mr. Wolfe,
Thank you for asking Transportation Solutions, Inc. (TSI) to review the transportation
element of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement. This
review is intended to examine impacts and mitigation related to the proposed preliminary
•
plat,both alone and in context of the other COR-2 zoned properties in the area. We
understand these properties include the Baxter properties and the Pan Abode property
which are collectively owned and managed by your client, Port Quendall Company.
These properties are intended to be redeveloped with some combination of a mixed-use
development that could have the potential for as much as 400,000 square foot of office
space on the Baxter properties alone.
Background and Qualifications
As you know, TSI is a transportation consulting firm that specializes in short-range
transportation planning and traffic operations engineering. A majority of our practice
involves analyzing the environmental impacts associated with private and public
development proposals. Our staff combines over sixty years of experience and 600 such
analyses. Traffic impact analyses have been performed on projects that range from small
single-family developments to complex,phased public and institutional projects
including universities,planned recreational developments and stadia. This experience
has provided us with a comprehensive understanding of the State Environmental Policy
Act(SEPA) and the application of these policies to analysis of transportation conditions
associated with new development. We have not been involved with the analysis or
review of traffic issues for your client's property or other COR-2 zoned property in this
area prior to this review.
Approach
Our review of this analysis included a review of the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement and other EIS scoping correspondence. The transportation element and the
project description were our focus in the DEIS. We assume this document contained all
T SI
Transpor t lutions,Inc.
of the technical analysis since a separate technical report was not included in the
appendices as were technical reports for the floodplain, water resources, terrestrial plants
and animals and aquatic species. We first examined the overall approach to the
transportation analysis and then addressed individual assumptions, analysis,
documentation, and findings in this analysis.
Overview
We found the general approach used in evaluating the transportation impacts to follow
generally acceptable analysis methodology for evaluation of the impacts of an individual
development project.
Despite an adequate general approach, we found several assumptions, and internally
inconsistent comments that leave the ultimate impacts and, more importantly, their
mitigation uncertain and unresolved. Many of these issues related to the cumulative
impacts of off-site road improvements and most particularly, effective and equitable
resolution of the rail crossing. We believe these items should be addressed with more
detail so that the applicant, the City, other affected public agencies like the Washington
State Department of Transportation, and Port Quendall Company understand the extent of
the impacts of this project. More importantly, these issues need to be understood to
ensure sufficient certainty that mitigation measures will be implemented in order to be in
place to sufficiently off-set the identified impacts.
Specific Concerns
As noted above, the analysis left a number of questions that seemed to be unresolved.
Some issues may be simply explained while others may require additional analysis.
Site Access —There are several aspects of the site access that raise questions that warrant
clarification or analysis. The site plan shows two access points over the Burlington
Northern Railroad. The southerly access connects directly with the project via a bridge
over May Creek. The northerly access appears to extend north across an adjacent private
property. The only reference as to how this might occur was found in Paragraph 3 of
section 3.5.2.6 which indicates "The proposed northerly access to the site on Ripley Lane
would require dedication of a public street over the property to the north." Some
explanation of how this northerly access is viable should be provided if the proposal
actually calls for two access points. I could not find any reference to an agreement for
the use of the property to the north for the purpose of a public road. If there is such an
agreement it should be documented. If such access is not available, an analysis
describing how a single access to the proposed plat is compliant with city emergency
vehicle access requirements for a plat of this size and configuration, and should include
review by the City Fire Marshall.
Charles R. Wolfe Page 2 September 29, 2003
TSI /
Transpor ti utions,Inc.
If the northerly access is to be used by.the Barbee Mill plat, then it seems logical that
some of the traffic generated by the project should use the access. The traffic assignment
shown on Figure 3.5-6 shows that no vehicular traffic is using the northerly access. The
travel time for some of the northerly residences will be shorter that use of the southerly
access. There does not appear to be any use restriction to this northerly access
considering the applicant proposes these streets to be public roads.
Since all the roads are proposed to be public roads, we assume the northerly access will
be shared with properties to the north It therefore seems logical that some reciprocal
access between the northerly properties and the Barbee Mill southerly access will be
involved. A cumulative impact of the shared and cumulative use of these access points
by the northerly properties should therefore be examined, particularly in relation to the
operation of the site access at Lake Washington Boulevard.
Scope of Analysis - The traffic operations analysis included the intersections shown on
Figure 3.5-1. If the intersections at the N 30th Street/I-405 ramps were examined with 4%
of the project traffic (see Figure 3.5-5), then it seems logical that the ramps at Exit 9
(Lake Washington Boulevard)should also be examined since that location serves almost
twice the volume (7%). The criteria for identifying study area intersections should be
described and uniformly applied.
We assume the city's traffic impact analysis guidelines focus on the afternoon peak
traffic period since that was the only time period analyzed. Since congestion in the
vicinity of I-405 interchanges during morning commute periods is well documented, it
seems appropriate that AM peak period traffic conditions also be analyzed, at least for the
intersections at I-405 interchanges and the road network between the site and I-405 along
Lake Washington Boulevard.
Although specific plans for the development of the other COR-2 zoned properties have
not been established, some general assessment of the development potential on the Baxter
sites was identified by the Department of Ecology as being up to 400,000 square feet of
office space. Because traffic volumes for such development could be substantial and are
likely to have patterns that are different from those of the Barbee Mill development,the
cumulative impacts of this potential development should be analyzed even though it is •
not an official pipeline project. This analysis is significant because the mitigation
necessary to offset the cumulative impacts could be substantial. If mitigation is not
shared equitably, it could reduce or foreclose development of the remaining COR-2
properties.
Traffic Operations Impacts —As part of the level-of-service impacts, it seems
appropriate that the project and cumulative analysis show a queuing analysis along Lake
Washington Boulevard/NE 44th Street in the vicinity of the I-405 interchange. Since
several of the intersections are very closely spaced in this area, a queue from one
Charles R. Wolfe Page 3 September 29, 2003
TI ®
Transpor a i olutions,Inc.
intersection could preclude ingress or egress in the vicinity of Ripley Lane/Lake
Washington Boulevard.
We assume the City's level-of-service standard is to have intersections operate at LOS D
or better. This should be confirmed and included in the report.
Transportation Concurrency—We could not find any reference to Transportation
Concurrency compliance. Under the Growth Management Act, such compliance is
necessary. We suggest such a quantitative analysis be included in the transportation
analysis.
Rail Crossing —The discussion of the rail crossing was very confusing. The project
proposes two public rail crossings; one potentially located at one of two alternate
southerly access points and the other to the north across a private parcel for which the
applicant apparently does not have any access agreement or public road. The rail
crossing discussion goes on to suggest that the Burlington Northern Railroad will likely
consolidate the private crossings that exist today and that the State Legislature desires
crossings to be grade-separated. These BNRR and WSDOT practices are consistent with
our experience on other projects. The discussion suggests that grade separation could
result in consolidation of the private access points, which presumably could involve
elimination of the southerly Barbee Mill access. Such access consolidation could
substantially change travel patterns for the Barbee Mill property and other properties in
'the immediate area.
Alone, the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat does not apparently warrant a grade-separated
crossing. Yet the discussion implies that a grade-separated crossing is likely at some
future date and the most feasible location is "near Ripley Lane." The discussion indicates
that such a grade crossing would require a substantial reconfiguration of the Lake
Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection. We presume some similarly substantial
modification would need to occur on the west side of the Burlington Northern Railroad
tracks. This would seem to adversely impact your client's property and severely reduce
their development potential due to acquisition of right of way for the grade separated
portion of the crossing on the west side of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks. The
proposed mitigation that rail crossing issue can be resolved with a crossing "at the north
end of the Vulcan property"assumes your client agrees with this plan. Like the northerly
site access issue addressed above, we believe some agreement with your client for such a
crossing should be in place before the applicant proposes such mitigation. Since the
Barbee Mill Plat is intending to access Ripley Lane as part of their proposal, it seems
appropriate that a much more definitive plan for consolidated rail crossings be explored
and formal application with the WUTC be made before environmental review is
completed. More importantly, we believe a more definitive mitigation plan be developed
particularly if a grade-separated crossing is even remotely likely.
Charles R. Wolfe Page 4 September 29, 2003
Is' ,,
Transpor utions,Inc.
Accidents and Safety—The discussion indicates that vehicle crashes were reported at
only four intersections in the study area over the past three years. This seems like a very
limited number of accidents. Was there some arbitrary cut-off point? We would be
interested in the basis for the intersection accident standard of 1.0 accidents per million
entering vehicles.
Rail Safety—This discussion refers to types of accidents and to a web site but never
indicates if there has been an accident in the immediate vicinity of the site or at other
locations along this rail line that have similar vehicle volumes. Additional quantitative
information about crash history and the typical length of the trains now using this line
instead of providing hypothetical examples is recommended.
Cumulative Impacts —This qualitative discussion does not provide the level of analysis
that seems consistent with the COR 2 zoning and only refers to the minimum potential
when suggesting the vehicular impact. As disclosed, "Additional development would
generate a need for additional access points, or geometric and signal improvements at
existing intersections." Given that cleanup activities are underway on your client's
property, it seems reasonably likely that development to the level reported in the
Department of Ecology decree will occur in the foreseeable future. This would seem to
justify such cumulative analysis. Without such a cumulative analysis, it is likely that
available capacity is usurped by the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat which limits the
amount of additional development that can occur without major improvements.
Mitigation—The mitigation analysis does a very good job of illustrating how the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat alone is in compliance with design standards and warrants. The
approach states and implies that other major improvements are necessary. As indicated
above, considering that the effect of this mitigation could be to substantially change
access serving this entire area,particularly the property west of the Burlington Northern
railroad, a comprehensive and more definitive cumulative analysis seems warranted.
-Possibly more significant is the potential for the cost of the more major improvements
(e.g. traffic signals, intersection widening, freeway ramp modification, and reconstruction
of interchanges)to render redevelopment of your client's property financially
impractical. Such major improvements can be contrasted with the types of mitigation
proposed by the applicant(e.g., stop signs and lane extensions).
There are general references to a sharing of costs through some future agreement. Our
experience suggests that post development cost sharing agreements never work as
intended. An approach that does work and which could be considered is for the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat to prepare a comprehensive analysis of traffic impacts and
mitigation. This could include a phased mitigation and implementation plan with a
latecomer's agreement so Barbee developers are reimbursed for any disproportionate
mitigation costs. Such a corresponding commitment or predictable mechanism for
sharing the cost of the necessary mitigation is absent. Considering the significance of the
Charles R. Wolfe Page 5 September 29, 2003
Ts!
Transpor utions,Inc.
potential mitigation, it seems appropriate that these issues be addressed concurrent with
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
I trust this provides you and your client with a better understanding of the implications of
the transportation analysis presented in the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft
Environmental Impact Statement. If you have other questions, I welcome your call.
Sincerely,
Transportation Solutions, Inc.
David D. Markley
Principal
Copy: Clint Chase, Vulcan
Charles R. Wolfe Page 6 September 29, 2003
L. IERS
� 1
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
tomgoeltz@dwt.com
OCT n n
September 26,2003
WED
Susan Fiala VIA HAND DELIVERY
Senior Planner
City of Renton
Development Services Division
Renton City Hall, 6th floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Draft EIS—Applicant's Comments
Dear Ms Fiala:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft
Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS"). For your convenience, this letter serves as a
compilation of the comments provided by the Applicant's development team including:
• Steve Wood CenturyPacific Developer
• Campbell Mathewson CenturyPacific Developer
• Matt Hough,PE Otak, Inc. Project Engineer
• Russ Gaston,PE Otak, Inc. Flood Analysis
• Bob Schottman, PE, PHD Otak, Inc. Flood Analysis
• Torsten Lienau, PE HDR Traffic Consultant
• Tom Goeltz Davis Wright Tremaine Legal - Land Use
• Lynn Manolopolous Davis Wright Tremaine Legal—Environmental
• Jim Johnson Golder Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Engineer
• Robert Plum,PE Golder Associates, Inc. Geotechnical Engineer
• Emmett Pritchard Raedeke Associates, Inc. Wildlife, Wetlands,Plants
Page 2
October 7,2003
After some general comments, comments follow the same numbering system as in the DEIS.
GENERAL COMMENTS
§ 1 SUMMARY
§2 ALTERNATIVES
§3.1 EARTH, SOILS,AND GEOLOGY
§3.2 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
§3.3 GROUNDWATER
§3.4 PLANTS AND ANIMALS
§3.5 TRANSPORTATION
§3.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
§3.7 AESTHETICS
§3.8 LIGHT AND GLARE
§3.9 NOISE
§3.10 CULTURAL RESOURCES
GENERAL COMMENTS
The Barbee Mill plat application vested with a complete application on May 3, 2002.
Further, any mitigation measures must have been formally designated by the City Council and
in effect on or before the issuance of the DEIS on September 2, 2003. With this background,
we make the following general comments to the EIS.
1. "Net"Analysis. The EIS analysis should keep in mind that there are existing
impacts from the mill use which will be eliminated or reduced as new impacts are
incurred with the new project. In other words, it should be a"net"impact analysis. For
example, impervious surface is already at 85%, and will drop to 57%. The current site
is 85%, or 19.5 acres, impervious surface. The proposed project would include 57%, or
13.1 acres, of impervious surface. The net benefit is 6.4 acres. This significant
increase in non-impervious surface should be acknowledged in each section that
evaluates the potential impacts to wildlife, plants, wetlands, etc. This will produce
substantial net benefits for wildlife, surface water runoff, ground water and other
impacts. Likewise,the removal of two bridges, and the replacement of one,yields a net
benefit of reducing bridges over May Creek. Again, this will reduce impervious
surface and runoff, increase wildlife habitat and similar net benefits. The EIS currently
does not properly account for this net benefit analysis. Appropriate Level of Detail.
There should be some acknowledgement that the application is a preliminary plat and
that much of the detail (e.g. exact building elevations)is not required by the city's code
at this stage in the development process. There could be some discussion that upon
preliminary plat approval,the Applicant must provide final engineering before
receiving final plat approval.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 2
Page 3
October 7, 2003
2. Appropriate Level of Detail. There should be some acknowledgement that the
application is a preliminary plat and that much of the detail(e.g. exact building
elevations)is not required by the city's code at this stage in the development process.
There could be some discussion that following preliminary plat approval,the Applicant
must provide further engineering before receiving final plat approval. Further, the City
requires additional permits before actual development occurs.
3. Comply with Zoning. There should be some acknowledgement somewhere in
the document that the project as proposed complies with the underlying zoning. This is
a very low density project relative to that allowed under the COR2 zone thereby
creating minimal impacts on infrastructure including roads, utilities, views, etc.
4. Continued Dredging. It is incorrect to assume cessation of dredging at the
mouth of May Creek. It is our expectation that either the property owner/homeowners
association will continue to dredge the mouth every few years as has happened for the
last 50 years and/or King County/City of Renton will dredge the mouth as they
currently do for the mouth of the Cedar River. The EIS should at least acknowledge
continued dredging as one alternative.
5. Increased Buffers. In regards to buffers, it should be emphasized that the City
of Renton code requires a 25 foot buffer. The project is vested at these 25-foot buffers.
We are not aware of any adopted and designated policy for SEPA purposes that would
allow any mandatory increase to 50-feet or 100-feet, even though those are analyzed in
the EIS. Despite vesting however,the Applicant offers an approximate 50 foot buffer
with the subject development proposal. There is no legal basis for any discussion of
any buffer greater than that offered by the Applicant which is a 100% increase over the
city code requirement.
6. Bulkheads. The most likely scenario surrounding bulkheads is that the existing
bulkheads remain in place. This should be acknowledged and analyzed as such.
§ 1. SUMMARY
The DEIS summary contains a chart with a long listing of various mitigation measures.
The list appears to be a vast range of ideas for opportunities,but these do not
necessarily comply with the requirements for SEPA mitigation measures. Specifically,
mitigation measures must be specifically based upon identified plans,policies and
regulations, and all mitigation measures must be reasonable and capable of being
accomplished. Many of the mitigation measures in the summary chart are not lawful or
appropriate mitigation under the substantive SEPA standards:
(a) Mitigation measures of denials shall be based upon policies,plans, rules
or regulations formulated designated by. . . a legislative body. . . as a basis
for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when the DNS or
DEIS is issued.
SEA 1412494v1 262664 3
Page 4 Ij
October 7,2003
(c) Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being
accomplished. WAC 197-11-660(1).
§2. ALTERNATIVES
1. Bulkheads. The EIS should presume all bulkheads will be retained and
maintained, and the construction of new bulkheads should not be assumed. [See page
1-1; 2-1].
2. Additional Alternatives The "alternatives" section should be revised to state
that the EIS actually analyzed several additional alternatives, including modification of
the proposal with 50-foot buffers and 100-foot buffers, and a proposal with different
railroad crossing and circulation. For example, the extensive discussion and figures
appearing at DEIS pages 3-48 through 3-61 deal with different proposed buffers and an
analysis of the impacts of those additional buffers. This should be recognized as a
distinct alternative to the "Proposal." Likewise, the extensive DEIS discussion of
railroad crossings and modified access and circulation, appearing at DEIS pages 3-76
through 3-88, is yet another distinct alternative variant of the "Proposal."
Consequently, the "action" proposals really consist of three alternatives: the
"Proposal,"the"high buffer alternative" and the"revised access" alternative.
3. No Action; No Build. In addition to there being several "action" alternatives,
the final EIS should recognize that there are two analyzed"no action" alternatives. The
first is a continuation of activities at the current level. This would be the literal "no
action" alternative, and there would not be any new impacts to be studied or analyzed.
Second, the EIS also analyzes the continuation of industrial uses, but with a change of
uses and some new structures. This could be considered the "No New Build"
alternative.
4. Applicant's Objective. The EIS should contain an express statement of the
proposal's objectives as required under WAC 197-11-440(4). Specifically, the
applicant's proposal is as follows:
The Applicant's objective is to construct a low-density
townhouse project that complies with applicable city codes.
The only EIS alternatives to be studied are those which "achieve the proposal's
objective." WAC 197-11-440(5)(d). Consequently, several "alternatives"referred to in
the DEIS are not appropriate DEIS alternatives since they do not meet Barbee's
objectives. For example, the DEIS discusses "construction of apartment buildings 70
feet high resulting in five to seven story buildings that could accommodate well over
100 units on the 43 lots outside the SMA jurisdiction." Page 3-50 (and also on page 3-
52). This DEIS discussion of apartments or more dense, taller structures is not
warranted since it does not meet the Barbee's objective.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 4
Page 5 Ij
October 7, 2003
§3.1 EARTH, SOILS,AND GEOLOGY [Comments primarily from Golder Associates]
1. General Comment — The subject application is for preliminary plat approval
and, therefore, the exact building structures are unknown at this time. The EIS should
acknowledge, for example, that single-story wood-frame townhomes would require
much different(i.e. less) support than a 4-story concrete structure.
2. General Comment - The parcel of land shown on the maps, for example, on
Figure 2.1-1 that shows Public Land on the north side of the May Creek delta, was
dredged approximately 5 years ago and does not exist as upland property today. This
area should be removed from all maps.
3. General Comment - The EIS includes a comprehensive discussion of a wide
range of potential impacts and possible mitigation measures . Page 3-3 of Volume 1 of
the EIS states: ". . . The character of the facility and the population exposed to risk are
important factors in determining appropriate mitigation strategies . . ". Golder's
conceptual geotechnical recommendations presented in its 5/31/03 letter reflect this
concept. This includes pile foundations and offset distances from the shoreline to
minimize potential damage from lateral spreading. These recommendations represent a
level of risk consistent with the standard of practice for this type of development. This
corresponds to a low probability that under extreme seismic conditions some local
deformation could occur that might impact some of the structures. Due in part to the
inherent flexibility of wood frame structures, the impacts would not be life threatening.
We feel strongly that complete mitigation of all potential risks would be inappropriate
for this development because it is well beyond the current standard of practice.
4. Foundations — Golder concurs with the EIS that most structures can be
supported on lightly loaded piles bearing in the compact zone encountered below a
depth of about 15 to 25 feet. The piles should be designed for the downdrag forces
induced either by post earthquake liquefaction settlements and/or settlements due to
grade changes in areas of compressible organic layers. With a proper offset from the
shoreline, we feel that the risk of lateral spreading deformations would be minimal and
would not require designing the piles for high lateral loads. In areas where new fills are
required, it may be feasible to use spread footings provided a minimum of 2 to 4 feet of
structural fill underlies the footings. If spread footings are used, the risk of post
liquefaction settlements on the order of several inches must be acceptable.
5. Liquefaction Mitigation - Golder feels that suitable foundations and required
offsets from the shoreline will adequately mitigate liquefaction risks. The development
would still be susceptible to localized road and utility damage during major seismic
events. Mitigation of these problems for all roads and utilities is considered
inappropriate and not done for these types of developments. As an example, these
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 5
Page 6 i iT■
October 7, 2003 �!
types of risks are routinely accepted by WSDOT, Sound Transit and other agencies in
the Puget Sound area.
6. Lateral Spreading Mitigation - Golder feels that a practical offset distance on
the order of the setbacks required by the city code from the shoreline to structures will
minimize the risk of lateral spreading damage. This is based in part on the fact that the
May Creek has built up a substantial delta into Lake Washington resulting in gentle off-
shore slopes with steep submarine slopes located over 1,000 feet off shore. Obviously,
additional explorations and analysis are required to evaluate the appropriate offset for
final design. However, we are confident that the lateral spreading issues can be
mitigated with an appropriate offset without the expense of ground modification.
7. Low Probability Risks - The EIS makes reference to the impacts of movement
on the Seattle fault, seismic induced landslides, slide induced waves, and others.
Although these are technically valid risks, their occurrence probabilities are so low that
they are not considered in the design of residential, wood frame projects. Thus Golder
feels that it would be inappropriate and outside the standard of practice to mitigate
these risks.
8. Liquefaction. The DEIS is not able to identify what magnitude of seismic event
would be required to liquefy the on-site soils to the extent that utilities, residences, or
other such facilities would be at risk of significant damage. It makes a general
statement that "...depending on the area subject to liquefaction, the depth, and the
extent of lateral movement, damage could range from minor to severe." This is an
extremely broad ranging statement. In fact, this same section of the report goes on to
say, "...is difficult to estimate the extent of risk of damage to buildings, roads, and
utilities due to the complexity of the factors affecting liquefaction..." As such, the
extent to which such potential damage is described/implied does not seem to be
reasonable.
9. Lateral Support. The DEIS recognizes that geotechnical recommendations have
been made and engineering alternatives are available for providing containment and/or
lateral support to on-site soils to protect against lateral soil movement. Although the
long- and short-term effectiveness of these is suggested, it seems to be doubted in the
text of this chapter—again without basis.
10. Soil Stabilization. The report cites a single source, The Oregon Dept. of
Transportation, (ODOT 2002) for the statement that"There is uncertainty in evaluating
the relative effectiveness of ground treatment strategies for limiting lateral
deformations..." The full context of this statement is not known, but Golder would not
expect ODOT to be an authority on soil stabilization for seismic impacts. It could
likely be argued with other sources (such as local geotechnical specialists) that current
engineering practice and construction methods are available to provide lateral support
for the existing and proposed conditions for this project.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 6
Page 7
October 7,2003
11. Seattle Fault. Discussions of the Seattle Fault are provided in detail in Section
3.1.1.1. However, that same section also explains that "...topographic expression of
this fault are not indicated at the project site...and there is no known recent
displacement of sediments shown by borings across the area..." We recommend
deletion of this text since it does not seem to have any relevance to project affects,
impacts, or mitigation measures.
12. Mitigation. Redundant, emergency backup facilities as suggested by the DEIS
are not warranted given the lack of specific evidence for risk. This determination
should be made at the time of engineering design of the facilities under consideration,
given additional geotechnical information.
§3.2 SURFACE WATER RESOURCES [Comments primarily from OTAK
Engineering]
1. Dredging. The DEIS suggests that adverse impacts and/or significant changes
in the May Creek shoreline condition would result from permanent discontinuation of
dredging operations. First, the sediment is an impact from upstream development, and
not a result of this proposal. This sediment loading is not a consequence of this project.
Second, this statement assumes that there are no future (long-term or short-term)
reductions in sediment loading due to improved stormwater management and/or
streambank stabilization at upstream sources. In addition, it makes this claim with only
the benefit of historical dredging records and not an actual sediment transport analysis
to project future conditions based a number of variables. Third, this applicant and
proposal cannot be required to undertake affirmative dredging activities for the benefit
of upstream owners. Fourth, the applicant likely would continue dredging operations
subject to obtaining appropriate permits.
2. Flooding. It seems speculative and there does not appear to be any quantitative
analysis completed to justify the statement "...if the stream is prevented from
migrating, potentially aggradation would continue, with deposits that would reduce the
capacity of the stream bed over time." Similarly, there does not appear to be any basis
to say that "An additional option is utilizing the wider 100 foot setback from the
stream, which would provide additional flood storage to compensate for the reduction
in conveyance capacity." The Applicant does not think this is a valid SEPA mitigation.
And in any event, additional analysis would be necessary to justify this claim, but it
would also need to be verified that the elevations within the stream buffer zone would
provide "conveyance" capacity. Currently, the model shows these overbank areas as
draining northwesterly over the project site.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 7
Page 8
October 8,2003 �!
3. BMP. The suggested Gradient Terraces BMP does not seem applicable to this
project given the site conditions and proximity to the Lake Washington shoreline.
4. Flooding. Table 1 (attached at end of letter) shows a comparison of water
surface elevations for the four options which were evaluated by Parametrix. For future
flowrates of 1,059 cfs, they predict that the water surface elevation will be 29.1 feet at
Section 11 for all aggraded conditions. That location represents the upstream extent of
the Barbee Mill project and is located downstream of the Burlington Northern Railroad
and Lake Washington Boulevard (See Figure B-2 from the HEC-RAS report). The
documents show that the existing condition without aggradation has a water surface
elevation only 0.1 foot lower than the other options. In addition, there is no change
between the 50 feet and 100 feet setbacks at this upstream location. As such, on-site
flood storage compensation to protect upstream properties from the slight increases in
floodplain depth on the Barbee Mill site due fill outside of any buffer width seems
unnecessary and has no obvious mitigating benefit. Clarifications in the HEC-RAS
model could in-fact result in less variance between existing and developed site
conditions (see discussion of issues below).
5. Flow Conditions. It is unlikely that small increases in the water surface
elevation for locations adjacent to the Barbee Mill project will affect flow conditions
under the railroad or for upstream property owners. FEMA Flood Profiles (Sheet
109P) show that the energy grade line for the HEC-RAS model rises very rapidly for
cross-sections beyond the upstream end of the Parametrix model. The effective slope
of the water surface profile from Section C to Section D under the Burlington
Northern/Santa Fe Railroad on Sheet 109P is approximately 3.7 percent. Section C
corresponds approximately to Section 11 in the Parametrix model.
6. Compensatory Storage. There should be no need for compensatory storage at
this site. The temporary storage of flood waters occurring under existing conditions
generally provides protection for downstream property owners. There is no potential
for flood damages for downstream property owners for this project since May Creek
discharges directly to Lake Washington after leaving the Barbee Mill site and there are
no downstream property owners. In addition, Lake Washington is recognized as a
major receiving water body with adequate capacity to attenuate additional flood
volumes that may result from changes in topographic conditions at the project site.
7. Model. OTAK's review is based on the report's Appendix B and does not
include a review of the electronic HEC-RAS files. Review of these electronic files
would confirm some of the assumptions/parameters of the model and the validity of its
•
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 8
Page 9 Ij
October 7,2003
overall conclusions. Access to the electronic model for review could clarify some of
the following issues:
The report's Figure B-2 seems to indicate that flood waters have the
opportunity to sheet flow in a westerly direction and discharge to Lake
Washington without flowing along the May Creek alignment. The
HEC-RAS model is one-dimensional and assumes that water flows
perpendicular to the channel cross-sections. The cross-sections should
be adjusted to account for the flows towards the west and the model
should recognize that the flows split before entering Lake Washington.
The report does not discuss the implications of sheet flows towards the
west but does show that flood waters are approximately 2 to 3 feet deep
in the right floodplain for sections 6.7, 6.75, 6.9, and 7. Note that the
1995 FEMA Flood Insurance Study avoids this issue by placing their
first station downstream of the upper bridge.
8. Flooding. If short circuiting of flood flows directly to Lake Washington does
not occur, then the existing and "proposed aggraded" models should be changed to
define ineffective flow areas for the right overbank at Sections 4.4, 5, and 6.9. The
model, as now configured, seems to show all water moving parallel to the May Creek
channel. The flow seems to occur along the entire cross-section, an unlikely situation
when much of the water in the floodplain away from the channel is likely to be
relatively stagnant. To be effective, flows need to have measurable flow velocities.
HEC-RAS manuals provide guidelines for estimating effective flow areas for cross-
sections upstream and downstream of the bridges. Table 2 below shows the top widths
used in the Parametrix models where the effective flow areas are allowed to expand to
more than 500 feet.
Table 2—Flow Widths for Various Models
Top Width for Future Flows [ft]
Section Existing Existing Proposed Proposed
Aggraded 50' Setback 100' Setback
4.4 560.6 561.1 71.0 121.0
5 1471.1 1470.9 98.2 148.0
6.9 557.9 558.1 126.9 176.9
Note: The assumption of wider flow areas causes reduced water surface elevations
for the existing and"proposed aggraded"models.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 9
Page 10
October 7,2003
9. Setbacks. The DEIS does not show cross-sections for the setback conditions
and OTAK is unable to determine whether the setbacks were modeled as levees.
10. Bridges. The information provided in Appendix B does not allow OTAK to
evaluate whether bridges are modeled properly. Bridge cross-sections should be
provided. The report does not indicate whether bridges overtop during flood events.
11. NAVD Datum. The DEIS does not clearly show the conversion between
NGVD 1929 datum and the project NAVD 1988 datum. This conversion is necessary
to allow a comparison of 1995 FEMA elevations using the NGVD 1929 datum and the
current project elevations using the NAVD88 datum. A Tide Datum sheet provided by
the Corps of Engineers for Hiram M. Chittenden Locks states that 0.00 feet NGVD is
equivalent to 3.58 feet NAVD88 and 6.80 feet COE. As an example conversion, the
thalweg elevation estimated from FIS Sheet 109P at section C is 20.2 NGVD 1929
(23.8 ft NAVD88) while the thalweg elevation at Section 11 in the HEC-RAS model is
22.0 ft NAVD88. The thalweg elevation and the shape of the channel may have
changed since the time of the FEMA survey. The Corps of Engineers web site is:
http://www.nwd-wc.usace.army.mil/nws/hh/tides/np/np94a.htm.
§ 3.3 GROUNDWATER [Comments primarily from Otak]
1. Aquifers. Aquifers at the site are described as being local and downgradient of
regional groundwater recharge areas. The nearest potential well site (i.e., valid water
right certificate) is a for a property more than 2,000 feet east of the project site and on
the opposite site of I-405. City of Renton Well 5A is nearly a mile southeast of the
project. Both of these off-site domestic water sources are upgradient and outside of any
influence of the project site. As such, no impact to local or regional groundwater
sources should be expected as a result of this project.
§3.4 PLANTS AND ANIMALS [Comments primarily from Raedeke Associates]
1. Page 1-8, 1.52, 2nd paragraph. It should be noted that the project is removing
two bridges which will provide more improved habitat than may be disturbed by the
one new bridge crossing.
2. Page 1-9, 1.5.2, 1st paragraph, last sentence. The "limited proposed 25-foot
setbacks" are pursuant to the Renton Code (and again page 1-9, 6th paragraph). This
language suggests that the Applicant is somehow deviating from something established
and allowed. This in not correct. The Renton City Code calls for a 25 foot buffer —
exactly as is being proposed by the Applicant.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 10
Page 11
October 7,2003
3. 5 3.4.3.2, Mitigation through Alternative Buffer Areas. General Comment: The
DEIS discusses various buffer width alternatives that are evaluated on their ability to
provide the full level of buffer function as described in the cited literature is
inappropriate to the scope of a SEPA EIS. The proposed enhanced buffer would
provide a substantial improvement over current site conditions, and while not providing
100 percent of all buffer functions, would represent a significant improvement over
existing conditions. We recommend that the DEIS evaluate the effectiveness of the
proposed enhanced buffer for May Creek based on its effectiveness in mitigating
negative impacts that would result from development of the site under the current
proposal. .
4. Page 1-9, 1.5.2, 7th paragraph. It should be noted that the proposal conforms to
and, in fact, surpasses in many instances, the city code for setbacks from any
waterways.
5. Public Access, Page 1-9, 1.5.2, 8th paragraph, Page 3-39, 3-48 - 56. The DEIS
proposes a range of public access facilities over the site, including uses of publicly
owned shorelines, public walkways over the private lots fronting on Lake Washington
and public walkways or trails along the privately owned May Creek buffers. The
project proposal has access and recreation for residents on site. Public access on public
lands is not within the applicant's control or purview. Public access also is provided
through views and view corridors. However, the DEIS discussion of a public walkway
over private lots is unlawful and not a reasonable mitigation measure for consideration.
We believe the access that is provided as part of the proposal meets the Renton
Shoreline Master program.
Further a public walkway over private property in this context violates both federal and
state laws regarding takings and mitigation measures. There have been a number of
cases declaring that local government efforts to compel general public easements, trails
or open space are invalid unless the need for the public access is directly caused by the
impacts of the proposed project itself. This project obviously has not created any need
for general public access. Nollen v. Calif. Coastal Comm'n., 483 U.S. 825 (1987)
(pedestrian beach easement invalid since no nexus or cause from the particular
development); Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994) (bike/pedestrian pathway
held invalid since dedication is not related to impacts of the proposal); and Isla Verde
Int'1. Holdings, Inc. v. City of Kamas, 146 Wn.2d 740 (2002). Thirty percent open
space requirement illegal under state statute requiring dedications to be "a direct result
of the proposed development". Barbee Mill's project has not created any public access
problem or lack of a trail connection. The City cannot require Barbee Mill or any other
private property owner to dedicate property for a public trail or other use as a condition
of obtaining development permits with a need for that public access is not "occasioned
by the construction sought to be permitted". Dolan, 512 U.S. at 390.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 11
Page 12
October 7, 2003
6. § 3.4.1, Wildlife, Paragraph 1: Recommend referencing documented source of
information regarding usage of project site by deer.
7. $ 3.4.1, Wildlife, Paragraph 3: Small mammals such as voles and mice may use
the project site; however, usage is likely limited by small area of mixed vegetation
communities present due to majority of project site being used as lumber mill.
Recommend including a discussion of limits to usage of small mammals under existing
conditions.
8. § 3.4.1, Wildlife, Paragraph 3: See comment under `Wildlife, Paragraph
1'above.
9. § 3.4.2.1, Wildlife, Paragraph 3: Recommend referencing documented source
information regarding waterfowl nesting activities along Lake Washington shoreline
within the project site or in the vicinity.
10. § 3.4.2.1, Wildlife, Paragraph 3: Ospreys that currently nest on the sawdust
tower experience regular disturbance from lumber mill noise and sawdust which is
blown onto the nest and appear to be acclimated to substantial human disturbance.
Recommend including a discussion of acclimation by osprey using the sawdust tower
nest to human disturbance.
11. § 3.4.2.1, Wetlands, Paragraph 2: It is unclear how modification of the drainage
system in the area of the southernmost wetland would likely result in reduction in the
source of water for the wetland and thus the potential loss of the total wetland area of
1,712 square feet.
12. § 3.4.2.2 Impacts of Development and Use of the Site, Wildlife, Paragraph 2:
Planting a mix of shrubs and dwarf ornamental trees around the proposed stormwater
detention pond would be an improvement over existing site conditions which is mostly
impervious surfaces. Recommend discussing these plantings in the context of their
adequacy as mitigation measures for specific impacts rather than as potential impacts
themselves.
13. § 3.4.2.2 Aquatic Species — General Comment: Proposed enhanced buffers for
May Creek are discussed as though they are a project impact. The proposed buffers are
intended as mitigation measures for project impacts such as potential increased levels
of noise and light intrusion and potential water quality degradation and would provide
higher levels of buffer function than exist under current conditions. Recommend
discussing these proposed buffers for May Creek in the context of their adequacy as
mitigation measures for specific impacts rather than as potential impacts themselves.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 12
Page 13 Ij
October 7,2003
14. § 3.4.2.2, Aquatic Species, Paragraph 6: Proposed enhanced buffer for May
Creek would average approximately 60 feet in width. Recommend changing the
second line to read, "...approximately 60 feet, as proposed..."
15. § 3.4.3.2,Wildlife, Paragraph 5: See Comment 5.
16. Bulkheads. The buffer mitigation "options" presume that existing bulkheads
would be removed —which is not the proposal.
17. Bulkheads The report "assumes" the need for shoreline protection for
"...residential use on Lake Washington..." based on the "...southeast facing aspect and
the prevailing direction of winds and storms from the south." The purpose and
accuracy of this statement is unclear. The text subsequent to these statements goes on to
suggest that the existing bulkhead provide more-than-adequate shoreline protection for
residential use. Then, it goes on to state that the bulkheads should be removed. These
are not only conflicting statements, they also seem to have no relevance since bulkhead
removal is not proposed.
18. Bulkheads The Bulkhead subsection(and related discussion in previous portions
of the report) does not appear to describe mitigation for unavoidable impacts of the
proposed project, but rather it suggests "opportunity" for the project to provide a more
natural shoreline habitat. Unfortunately, that "opportunity" is not consistent with the
proposed residential use of the project site as allowed by the current zoning of the
property. The shoreline restoration appears to have no relevance on that basis.
19. Pocket Beaches. The report suggests/describes a provision for pocket beaches
and "other" shoreline features at the Lake Washington frontages. However, these
features do not appear to mitigate any specific project impact. Rather, they are
suggested as an improvement by way of"opportunity". This seems like a subjective
discussion unrelated to the SEPA evaluation intended by this report.
20. Buffers. The report perceives the effective stream buffer to be reduced near the
Lake Washington shoreline. However, this interpretation is not a reduction in stream
buffer, but rather a regulatory reduction at the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) of
Lake Washington.
21. Buffers. The current project proposal provides for a minimum 50-feet buffer
from the ordinary high water line (OHWL) of May Creek. It could be argued that the
"averaged" buffer proposed at May Creek provides mitigating benefits equivalent to
those described for Option A in the DEIS subsections titled Stream Morphology,
Pollutant Removal and Sediment Filtration, Water Temperature Regulation and
Regulation of Microclimate, Large Woody Debris Recruitment, and Residential Noise
and Lighting.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 13
Page 14
October 7, 2003
22. Buffers The suggestion provided with this section that equivalent density could
be achieved with an apartment-style product instead of the proposed townhouse plan is
true when considering only individual dwelling units. However, it is inaccurate in
terms of property valuations and meeting the goals of the Applicant. The results of
mitigation Options A and B are therefore not appropriate considerations as required
under current SEPA rules. There is significant infrastructure costs necessary to
facilitate the improvement of this property, and adequate real property valuation is
necessary to offset those costs. The proposed Options do not allow for that.
23. Buffers The DEIS suggests mitigation Option B, 100-feet buffer widths, in
response primarily to potential channel migration and the premise that increased buffers
provided improved water quality, habitat, and public access opportunities adjacent to
May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline. There appears to be no scientific or
technically measured basis specific to project impacts to warrant Option B. We would
suggest that the recent publication King County Draft CAO: A Review of Wetland
Categories and Buffers and Case Study (Raedeke, et al, February 2003) provides
additional and detailed response appropriate for this type of buffer application.
§3.5 TRANSPORTATION [Comments primarily by HDR]
1. Access. An alternate and direct roadway connection to Lake Washington
Boulevard in the proximity of the northeast property corner and existing at-grade
railroad crossing was previously discussed with the City for the project in-lieu of the
Ripley Lane connection. Preliminary review of this alternate access/crossing showed
adequate intersection separation to Ripley Lane at Lake Washington Boulevard. The
DEIS suggests that this alternate access would have potential conflicts with the existing
channelization at Lake Washington Boulevard. However,revisions to the roadway
channelization would be proposed to mitigate any such conflicts with the new
access/intersection design. Adequate intersection separation is provided between the
proposed alternate access and the existing Ripley Lane.
2. Railroad Crossing. The project proposes two roadway access points to the site
at or in the proximity of existing private, at-grade crossings of the BNSF railroad from
Lake Washington Boulevard. These crossings have safely and satisfactorily served the
commercial/industrial uses at the Barbee Mill and Port Quendall sites under historically
higher train volumes than what is currently in occurrence and that should be anticipated
in the reasonable future. The two at-grade crossings proposed for the site are to be
improved to maintain public safety for single-family use of the site based on current
City of Renton road standards, including site distance criteria and safe refuge. The
ultimate design of the at-grade crossings to the site will result from the approval of the
City's review of a specific, detailed design and subsequent petition to the Washington
Utilities and Transportation Commission(WUTC) in accordance with RCW 81.53.020
and WAC 480-62-150.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 14
Page 15
October 7,2003
Barbee Mill currently has two existing rights to cross the railroad tracks. First, it has
permanent crossing right reserved in a 1908 deed when property was granted to the
railroad. Second, it has a permit from the Northern Pacific Railroad. While both
crossings are currently private, state law provides a procedure to make these crossings
permanent public crossings by filing a petition with the WUTC. See RCW 81.53. The
applicant anticipates that the City would file such a petition since the Proposal is fully
consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning for the site. Under GMA,
the City is required to provide concurrency to implement its land use designations,
which for the lands located west of the railroad tracks,would mean establishing public
crossings as allowed under state law. Under the City's code, no more than 6 houses can
be served with a private road. RMC 4-6-060J. Consequently, if the City did not
petition the WUTC for public crosssings, then the City would have conducted a major
de facto downzone and forced numerous multiple crossings, i.e. 1 private crossing for
every 6 houses. For the Barbee site, and Quendall and Vulcan, the COR zone would be
meaningless if the City did not petition for a public crossing to allow the development
that is granted by the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. The City has a precedent with
other property owners of cooperating and implementing zoning by filing WUTC
petitions.
The DEIS is not accurate in its description of existing grade and elevation conditions at
the southerly rail crossing. Recent survey data of the site confirms that there is only
about 8 feet of elevation difference and actually 65 feet of separation between the
BNSF tracks and traveled way of Lake Washington Boulevard at this location. This
results in a comparable theoretical grade of 12.5%for this approach. Preliminary
roadway designs indicate that current City of Renton road standards can be achieved
with the at-grade crossings.
The DEIS is correct that the easterly approach grade between Lake Washington
Boulevard and the BNSF at the southern crossing does not allow for the 30' "level"
staging area suggested by AASHTO and WSDOT for at-grade highway crossings. The
30' "level"landing guideline does appear to be achievable on the west side of this
crossing and at both approaches at the northerly access based on preliminary design.
This criteria,however, is only a guideline and there appears(based on preliminary
design and current site conditions)to be adequate separation from the traveled way of
Lake Washington Boulevard and the BNSF tracks to provide safe refuge for staged
vehicles. The WSDOT standard(Fig. 930-3) cited by the DEIS "... to assure a safe
area for cars to wait for entry and for sight distance"likely does not apply to the access
intersections with Lake Washington Boulevard as they are proposed. Lake Washington
Boulevard has a posted speed of 25 mph in the vicinity of the project, representing a
35 mph design speed for entering and stopping sight distance. The current condition of
these access locations does not suggest any sight distance deficiencies or
vehicle/pedestrian safety hazards. Final roadway design will maintain adequate sight
distance,refuge area, and signage for safe use by the proposed residential community.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 15
Page 16 a�j
October 7, 2003 �%%
3. Cumulative Impacts. The DEIS speculates on cumulative impacts from future
development of Quendall Terminals and the Vulcan sites to the north. The DEIS goes
on to say that "additional development would generate a need for additional access
points or geometric and signal improvements at existing intersections." First, without
knowing the specifics of any future development on those sites, it is not possible to
state that additional access points or geometrics would need to change.
Second, the DEIS mistakenly assumes that "cumulative impacts" under SEPA simply
means things that may happen in the vicinity or in a similar time frame. However,
analysis of cumulative impacts from potential development is not warranted unless the
City can demonstrate that the future development by other owners is "dependent on
subsequent proposed development." Boehm v. City of Vancouver, 11 Wn.App. 711
(2002). Examination of an future development's potential impacts is speculative when
"there are no specific plans to review and the impacts therefore are unknown." Tugwell
v. Kittitas County, 90 Wn.App. 1 (1997). There the Court explained that "the
cumulative impact argument must fail unless the [local government] can demonstrate
that the [proposed] project is dependent on subsequent proposed development."
Cumulative impacts include those effects "resulting from growth caused by a proposal,
as well as the likelihood that the present proposal will serve as a precedent for future
actions. WAC 197-11-060(4)(d) (emphasis added). The DEIS should acknowledge
that the Barbee Mill plat will not set a precedent nor cause development of the Quendall
or Vulcan sites.
4. Roadway Network, Page 3-62, Section 3.5.1.1: A summary description of
Ripley Lane is missing from the bulleted list.
5. Level of Service Summary, Page 3-67, Table 3.5-2: Did the LOS results at the
I-405 northbound ramps at N 30th Street change during the DEIS process?
6. Trip Generation, Page 3-65,, Table 3.5-3: How was the 545,000 square feet of
industrial development derived?
7. Project Trip Generation, Page 3-69, Section 3.5.2.2: HDR previously
commented on the use of LUC 210 single-family detached housing. Without
documented data on trip generation from this actual site, HDR continues to recommend
that land use code 230, Townhome, be used.
8. Project Trip Distribution, Page 3-71, Section 3.5.2.3: Why would 47% of this
development traffic (residential traffic) in the p.m. peak hour be coming from primarily
residential neighborhoods east of I-405? An explanation of cut-through traffic avoiding
1-405 was given later in the document, but that would only be a portion of the 47%.
Should not these trips be primarily coming from commercial land uses? Could this be a
limitation of the model used?
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 16
Page 17
October 7,2003
9. Figure 3.5-5: Recommend adding intersection numbers to this figure for easier
reference to the subsequent two figures.
10. Future Level of Service, Page 3-75, Section 3.5.2.4: The intersection of N 30th
Street/1-405 NB ramps is also LOS D in the future according to table 3.5-2.
11. Bulleted list at the top of the page, Page 3-77: Recommend either quantifying
the use of the word"substantial", or delete it. "Substantial" is too subjective. Also, in
the second bullet item,please state what the bridge and/or fill is higher than.
12. Site Access, second paragraph, Page 3-78, Section 3.5.2.6: The calculation that
uses 1,100 ADT to justify flashing lights is based on a disputed trip generation
estimate. Would this still be justified if LUC 230 were used?
13. Traffic Accidents and Safety Analysis, third paragraph Page 3-80,
Section 3.5.2.7: How many times in the last 10 years or other reasonable time period
has a train had to stop in this section of the railroad and blocked the crossings in this
vicinity?
14. Traffic Accidents and Safety Analysis, last paragraph Page 3-80,
Section 3.5.2.7: The frontage road concept is not reasonable or feasible since Barbee
Mills cannot obtain ROW or easements for a frontage road. It should be stated that a
concept like this would require participation of the properties to the north as they are
redeveloped, and would not be the responsibility of the Barbee Mill development at this
time.
15. Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions, Page 3-82, Section 3.5.2.8: HDR believes
that the discussion about diverted I-405 trips is a regional problem, not a problem
caused by this one development. HDR believes that trips from this development may
divert from 405 and use local roadways, but that would not happen if I-405 were not
congested. HDR suggests that this be acknowledged as a regional freeway issue, and
that the State is planning improvements to I-405, whether they are in the 2007 time
frame or not, and therefore this is a short-term problem.
16. Signal Warrant Analysis, Page 3-85, Section 3.5.3.2: No discussion of how
2007 8-hour volumes were obtained was included in this section. Does Renton's model
provide 24-hour data?
17. Mitigation for Site Access and Rail Impacts, first bullet Page 3-86, Section
3.5.3.4: How would Barbee Mill participate at this time? Is the intent of the second
sentence to place responsibility on the future developments, without Barbee Mill
participation?
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 17
Page 18
October 7, 2003
18. Mitigation for Site Access and Rail Impacts, second bullet Page 3-86, Section
3.5.3.4: same comment as above.
19. Mitigation of Non-Motorized Facility Impacts and Transit Impacts, last bullet
Page 3-88, Section 3.5.3.5: Barbee Mill development cannot provide transit service on
I-405 or Lake Washington Boulevard with connections to local park and ride lots, since
that is an agency decision.
20. Roadway Network, Page 3-62, Section 3.5.1.1: Burnett Avenue should be
bulleted and indented.
21. Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Network, Page 3-67, Section 3.5.1.3: In the
first sentence, add an"s"to "vehicle"
22. Future Baseline Street Network, Page 3-68, Section 3.5.2.1: Make EMME/2 or
EMME2 consistent throughout document.
23. No Action; No Build: The DEIS throughout should refer to the No Action
alternative and No Build alternative. The No Action is the industrial development
scenario, whereas the No Build alternative is doing nothing at the project site. At times
this distinction is unclear.
24. Site Access, Page 3-76, Section 3.5.2.6: In the second paragraph, second
sentence, delete the "s"in"requires".
25. Bulleted list at the top of the page, Page 3-77: Recommend replacing "dead
end"with"cul-de-sac".
26. Page 3-80,First paragraph: delete the"s"from"projects" in the first sentence.
27. Page S-85,Fifth paragraph, second sentence: add a"d"to the end of"describe".
§3.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS [Comments primarily by Davis Wright Tremaine]
1. Sections 1.4.1, 1.4.3, 1.7.1, 1.7.2, Summary of Impacts and Mitigating
Measures for Groundwater (p. 1-20), 3.3.1 (Groundwater Quality), 3.3.3 --- The Draft
EIS does not accurately describe the groundwater removal and treatment to be
completed as part of the Independent Remedial Action Plan (IRAP). Groundwater will
be extracted during the soil removal action to facilitate excavation of contaminated soil.
This groundwater will be treated and most likely discharged to the sanitary sewer.
After the soil removal action is complete, groundwater will be monitored to evaluate
the residual groundwater concentrations. Based on the results of the groundwater
monitoring program, remedial actions to address residual groundwater concentrations
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 18
Page 19
October 7,2003
will be evaluated and implemented, if necessary. If groundwater extraction is required,
a variety of groundwater treatment methods will be evaluated. The EIS should clearly
distinguish between: 1) the removal and treatment of groundwater during soil removal;
and 2) the evaluation of groundwater remedies that will only occur if required based on
post-soil remediation groundwater monitoring.
2. Sections 1.7.1, 3.6.1.6 (Sediment) —These sections indicate that the sediments
adjacent to the site contain total organic carbon (TOC) in excess of sediment cleanup
levels. The sediment removal action is complete and the sediments no longer contain
elevated TOC. Ecology has issued a no further action (NFA) determination for the
sediment. These sections also indicate that a portion of the sediments are currently
being transferred to a disposal facility, but disposition of these sediments is complete.
These sections of the EIS should be revised to reflect the current status of the sediment
cleanup work and the issuance of the NFA.
3. Sections 1.7.3, 3.6 3-- The site will be cleaned up to residential cleanup levels.
As a result, no restrictive covenants are required. Any reference to restrictive
covenants should be deleted.
4. Sections 1.7.1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigating Measures for Hazardous
Substances (p. 1-22), 3.6.2.2,'3.6.3 -- To the extent a cleanup plan must be developed
before a public right-of-way may be placed on Quendall Terminals, the cleanup plan
will be developed in conjunction with the Washington Department of Ecology and the
owners of Quendall Terminals. At this time, it is not known if such a plan will be
required. One likely scenario is that the roadway will be considered a cap for any
contamination. The Draft EIS should not suggest that any remedial action is required,
and it should not discuss any specific remedial action.
5. Sections 1.4.1, 3.3.1 (Groundwater Quality) -- The second sentence in the
second paragraph in each Section should be revised to read: "There is one localized
area of elevated total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) in groundwater at the site."
6. Section 3.6.1.3 (Stormwater Outfalls) -- The word "separators" should be added
after the words "oil/water" in the second sentence.
7. Section 3.6.1.4 -- Since petroleum hydrocarbons are not present in site soil in
excess of cleanup levels, the phrase "soil and groundwater" at the end of the first
paragraph in this Section should be changed to "soil and/or groundwater".
8. Section 3.6.1.6 (Soil and Groundwater) -- The fourth bullet should be amended
to read "Extracted groundwater will be treated." The last word in the tenth bullet
should be changed to "necessary".
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 19
Page 20
October 7, 2003
9. Section 3.6.1.7 (Quendall Terminals), 3.6.3 -- The owners of Quendall
Terminals have not completed a feasibility study. As a result, Ecology has not selected
a remedy for that site. Any reference to "recommended strategy" or specific remedial
measures for the Quendall Terminals site should be deleted.
§3.7 AESTHETICS [Comments primarily by CenturyPacific]
1. General — Since the application before the city is a preliminary plat which,
pursuant to the city's code, does not require detailed architectural drawings, the
discussion of the aesthetics as tall square boxes is not accurate. In fact, the use of blank
square boxes exaggerates and misleads the reader of how the townhouses will appear.
2. General — The zoning on the site allows 125 foot tall buildings. The DEIS
should acknowledge that the heights, voluntarily agreed to by the Applicant, are
between 40% and 60% less than what could be built on the site pursuant to the zoning.
This is an extremely low density project on 24 acres.
§3.8 LIGHT AND GLARE
1. The light and glare impacts seem similar to normal residential development.
§ 3.9 NOISE [Comments primarily by OTAK Engineering]
1. Pile Driving. The DEIS states that "...pile driving is potentially the greatest
source of noise and vibration generated from construction activities." However, the
pin-pile type of supports suggested by the project geotechnical engineer for proposed
residential construction do not generate significant noise or ground vibration—certainly
not the 101 dBA level considered by the report.
2. Train horns. Provisions for private road crossings of the BNSF would mitigate
the need for mandatory horn sounding suggested by the DEIS for public crossings at
the project site. The discussion of train frequency and the associated "annoyance" of
increased soundings seems irrelevant since it would only be a result of increased train
traffic and not a resultant of the project proposal.
§3.10 CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. Impacts, Page 1-19, 1.11.2. We agree with your statement that "The lack of
national, state or local listing of the buildings results in limited authority to require
preservation of privately owned structures." A statement similar to this should be
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 20
Page 21 �7,.'
October 7,2003 �1!
included in almost every "Impacts" section of the DEIS since much of what is
suggested in the Draft EIS is not required or authorized by local, state or national laws.
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft
Environmental Impact Statement. If you or Parametrix have any questions regarding the
Applicant's comments,please feel free to contact us.
Sincerely,
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
Thomas A. Go
Attachment : Comments on Mitigation Measure chart
cc: Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 21
Table 1 ---Water Surface Elevations for Parametrix HEC-RAS Modeling
1990 Flood Conditions: Flowrate=598 g.01 g.09 g.10 g.06
Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed
No Aggradatior Aggradation Aggradation Aggradation
Middle Br. No Middle Br No Middle Br No Middle Bridge
Station Location 50'Setback 100'Setback
11 D/s of Washington Blvd. 27.6 27.6 27.6 27.6
10 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7
6.9 24.8 24.8 24.8 24.8
6.75 D/s of Upper Bridge 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0
6 23.3 23.3 23.3 23.3
4.35 21.7 21.8 21.8 21.8
4.25 U/s of Middle Bridge 21.6 21.8 21.8 21.8
2.25 U/s of Lower Bridge 19.9 20.7 20.7 20.7
2 18.7 18.9 18.9 18.9
1 Mouth of May Creek 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9
FEMA Study: FEMA Flowrate 1996=870 cfs
g.01 g.09 g.10 g.06
Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed
No Aggradation Aggradation Aggradation Aggradation
Middle Br. No Middle Br No Middle Br No Middle Bridge
Station 50'Setback 100'Setback
11 28.5 28.5 28.6 28.6
10 27.7 27.8 28 27.9
6.9 27.3 27.3 27.1 27.1
6.75 24.9 24.9 24.9 24.9
6 24.2. 24.4 24.3 24.3
4.35 22.5 23.8 22.9 22.9
4.25 23 23.7 22.9 22.9
2.25 22.9 22.9 21.8 21.8
2 19.3 19.4 • 19.4 19.4
1 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9
Future Condition: 100 Year Future Flow=1059 cfs •
g.01 g.09 . g.10 g.06
Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed
No Aggradation Aggradation Aggradation Aggradation
Middle Br. No Middle Br No Middle Br No Middle Bridge
Station 50'Setback 100'Setback
11 29.0 29.1 ' 29.1 29.1
10 28.0 28.2 28.4 28.2
6.9 26.4 26.4 27.4 27.3
6.75 25.3 25.3 25.5 25.4
6 24.3 24.4 25.0 . 24.9
4.35 23.1 23.9 24.1 24.0
4.25 23.0 23.9 24.1 23.9 .
2.25 22.4 22.4 23.1 22.9
2 19.6 19.7 19.7 19.7
1 16.9 16.9 16.9 16.9
Barbee Mill 1
klproject\30200\30209Veports\deis_heuas1review.xls otak
i
'� ,
I . /!• /
r4 ; /i,
1 II/1
1
.i i / i 1 1 - �rJ /�
I / `1 I r' r! i
1 J
1 ,�i �� 1 j •
i
/-/
U ITS OF FLOODPLAIN / A/4 / /
, \ // dc,,, i.•:--. - ,„/ .:/ 1/
\ \ \\ I ___----- -<lei/ A ,/ / .
= / / i // . i, ,
r
.4 ok-/ 7 co,/
/ fi- I 1 13,;;),„ _______:„.7 i.10// ,,„ ..kz.,,.
F L,..- geedlifi -i j,• //f [f r it /,
I.
RSi6. 11 ' iri. ,
•
LAKE r I ,%! / �'o%, i i ! { I,,��'yyx�'` /' i/' LIMITS OF
WASHINGTON ` � / /, RS'k.k..I.;1i ' ' 1/7.){,: , . , FLOODPLAIN
_i` / / F lb
-�ti l 11010 I .�///f/i MAY CREEK
1`i` 1 ' RS 4.35 i,,,,.: `f' Ei\a,�y., /, / // /r
\•, •'QS9" RS 4.25 •"'r ;''i =�•i//,f// /�
/ 'AI
' ' RS 4.2 i k- �f/! ! k - ----- �____
„„ f ...-- 1:'7
` 0 \� Yr R�4 /;t,, .4,i., ,
/� / ' 'Nr `' i / ffi,/ \�_ _ _ // r JPPER BRIDG / /G1 „ / /v
' ' FiS•2.
`\ r/ �< • j 'o , . 1 M /
tDG � i /-________
/ 44 .' f
•
• , ./ ce ` j \y„ `Rs/2.1, _i • ? !
....... .
(- P'Y/ E--- i - 11 --, if
j' /
% �'r �/ / f rf /
t ! 1 /
- _ Lr F.. ' __:! • _ / / -
`'aj /ram N 40TH ST
f/'//% L •
OWER BRIDGE
•
i :r+` .::.�. / J
•
Parametrix DATE: 07/01/03 FILE: K1779017P01714F-B-02 •
Figure B-2
100-YR FLOODPLAIN Barbee Mill Reach
WNO SCALE —---—---— MAY CREEK CENTERLINE �QQ-yr Floodplain
RS RIVER STATION IN HEC-RAS MODEL with Future Flowrates
DOW,
••
ELEVATION(FEET NGVD)
...
•al ••J CO to 0
0
o
to 4 al 0 0
0
Co 0 0 0
0 0
7-_-1-7 --1-1-1-471-I ! 1 jdit-ff ,-,1-L-11 !! • H ' 1-' L."'•
9 ______---------•-,--4-;-!--71-7-1._471:11-71-777 :- 1 i 1, ;--r-r-;•1 T,.. :4..i_i 1-4_ --LI.' ;--f-'-t,; --;-4--L-•-• !--------!: ..__;.:14_
frthtL
i
, I i ' trMIT1OF OtrAlt S Y. _.• 1.-!-, I-I. „„.. . 0)•4 -Ea; : i Lt.
; • :: ',---,-:', '...'1.'7..... '. . * , i . . I- .. 1 ' !...i-. '-'.-"1-'-•,-Y• ' 1 I •
•
- • • ' • • !!I' ! 1 ' . ilk: ' : : : ( I I ;-L- ;•' :•;-(-1-4-1' ;i 1• i___: !"::1-:-.,--;;--L4-(--1-,--I--I-;--1-1--1*H-i 9-134.'4";EiR'°..........4.. ri-r..,...rm ,,_..
1. ;• i t•.•,-; ;- ,yi., :.,_,.:.__Iiir__) . . ; ,.,-; . -, : i-1-1-1-1-t. ,AL-,=1.-_,..., ..I_R 11-f.k 1-1-{-+, --rrt__111-_--1..-1-4-Es•-1-1-L.144.---H-k-';-1-4-1-..4-
o 1„.
1 ; •-,--:-:-:-.-;-;-,-,-..i: T ._ :
"-H.' -1--; 'H r•- 1-1...-[-.-1-1:1-44-4 ; "-.1 I-h---' ; ' ' I i LJ----L--=-1-1--;--I---1-i-(1-1----,-!-!";-i-(-:- ;-
1 1 • • ;---;--:-;-1-111 ,1 ; ; . ;-1.-i-i-, !--±- •;-; -4-, '-; ; i_;,_ [4.4_3-,-1-1------,- 1 • 1_ _L_4.1_4___. . , ,H...;..,...: , ;-, , ,-. --tH
• ; i : -1 p.-; i-, ••-• ,-'I • 1 • .,.•_;___ :. ;-- 1----,-, ;-F-t-4 • t 1 ij i 1 4_,4.._!.._[- "---I-1- 1.---r-1 - I- •" : 1"-r- I!.1 • r, , , . ._,......-,...L._:__
-:-i---: --!-,. , 1 -r, :--.1-11-ai__r_l_i__F-4-1.-1-1--H-i-1-i-r-q--F-t-.1-1- :.i-L T I.; ;-;.; .._1-. ' 1 I f J.; ; 1 ; J.-37_,..-L-_t__: ;_i_LL.I...1.1.-_;__L.L..L.• 1...1-;-,-••
:,1 iLIL.i...L;_i_ .-.',. -, " :-.1.-L-,--;--,-,----; 1 1, , , :;.;_ti_7_ -L-r-s-• _47.-1.-"_;_. ; ; : ; ' 1-1-1--1-er L . •.,,..i.„._0_,_,-,--..„....,.,....,,_ •,..,..,._-4-,-44--;
-.' -- E:::P---- 44-1-1--i--4---'111:11, -tviciciFirktqFeo-Aci.
L., : . • : : :. .i 4-•-1-1-,--!-:- -i•-,-, 1 . -,-;• ; ; • '4_1_4_, -...-I- 1-1! :I • .--- -. •"
1 ; . :.:_.... ;...t....,_:•,...'-4-,,--,--;--,--,--r-, t 1-,-,., L; ;:; ;_i_LI-__ -' ' ; ' I ,--I---,-1-. i_,• 1_4_
; . 0„,-, • ; -.144 ; .-;-4-4,-,, rta--Tif-#4; ;_/--,TT, 11-4_;_i...1_14---•!-H-4!f- -;•-t-!--LA L.--1 ; --I i..,;,14 ,,,p4s-HtNwrowiatOk..LEVARD-
II;1 :•-II : : I : '.:21 \:L' '4;tiL1.1-4-i-(-1-4.1-4-1-1 ;414 ,••,,,,,L,-,-;-[-- t-L.:1-, :, aii ,....4..., ._. ,,• -;-;i•;-,----s-- ;.;1;-,:::.„1_-•_, :
1-; : --•,-:., .itil:.1.1Ni. 1,--iti± - 11._14.1_1--i-HTII:f.-1,--1-, , 1.--t-l•i-i-i---,_F-I--_t-4-_4-.4 1_1_1 : IT
i-i
.H. rq- --F-1- , , ., ,
' ' ; • . , , I ' ' '-l--t-'"1-.i-T•I-I !-•-i-t-r4.1-rt- ;
-i: I ': I 11-I-1-7 II.-' 1/-1.77 1.I:I•I I 1-1-1 4-L'': I I 1 / I I: k-I-I-r-1-14±1 --1--1 1,-1-1--C-I1 I : : • I'-; "
i,.--!-61) ; • ;" . '": I:I :-('I 1::V :-'-;i L..I.J.._;._• I I L_L(--1( ( il I--r:--F1, I i I-r I a(...1__(._+-1--L I I • I 1 1-14.1 --(--1,-(--.4i--_-(--1:1_,---1,:-.1_,L__(,:41:-
•1-.L.1 • :-I' i---i_r i......,171:1:-L 1-1 I,"1-1-.t 4.1 i-I .-•-•--I-1-; +17_1_4' 1 __,"_l_ "..4:4_,_•_,_-_fli-L.Th!__:„..Lii__I-1--1•-1--L_L-L.1,--(-
1, I.I...._1 1_:.I...-1-1-r\-. -,(--( ; 1-11-1 r-1*I ; ' 1 L.4.44--4-;---1,4-1-1 i-4-r i-r-l-t- r -__;____14-i-1-4-;--1-'-lt±÷-hf-i-
L.'1- : !---; I 1-1- t"1TH-1 1_1:::....1;_aT2,-1 ! 1 1-'41-I-Ill".t I 1 t".-1-1-1--_-_,2 1 1 ' ' 1-.-1---1.-rj ,1-j-rjer 1:,_•-1
: .. . : . . : ••: I " 1-,-;-H ,•;•:\\-.,-;--,_•_,._. ;4, ; 1.-;•;--,-4 ' !--4-•-1-1-11", •,--;_j:-4-7.4-4-1.-1_1_1_1_ ; ! , ;I ! ; I-I-, 4-4-;,!_, 4....:_i__:_; ! ! 1:4
; : ; • ;•.4-; • •!-;1 71,••!-)1,•;•1___0 iii-__;_i__1_-; ! 1-1-!_i-, 1---!-r I--..+1:1;_;_;.:4..1_41___;_;_:...[_i_i ! -I--1----;-t-. 1--1---4- p ; • ; : ' • • -
ilk- , - • 1 ; , --•; ; , , ....,\.. t2..4-i .1.-: --i--1.-1-• t rt-s--•; -; . , s ;._•_;__..-.-1 1 i i 1 .• ' ;•--,•,-,--,-..-1:i-r-l_._‘\ , . 4-1- -!--4-4-4-.J i • ._;_• • L.:_;_4_.;4.1.4_.1.4--;--; I I 111;_II [I 1 --ri'
'•••:', r; W.- _.._._.i.'TIT:1:EL! '- -Hs-\4-i i LI, .1•r±.i.-11[-1-1:11--:1-`-j:1-1-1-10-t-"ti 1 i : 1 _i- I I T IT"1 1 I ! I I 1 ,71
i_.4.1._•r_L Liri_LX",-.4-t-_:::!...,C.! i...bi,_.1 _LL...__1_0L. ..,"--..I..1.7:-.„-4_,_=1_ 1-L-1-4, ----1--t-I-j,--: ,7. RsirAt -ttilGIHWANI-4051 H-I • 1
-; : : •.__;_.:.
1 i••-;-•--1--;-1-r-!------;••st:- • •:-1"1--1--t:....; ; __.-••-1•-,-L-r-t4ti--t--:---1;:;t-; L___,:_L__..1_4_± ;._;-1- ; : ; ; :,;,-;-!--1--4-i-ii:•„---1:;L:1_:
Irl-stillt• ,.,..t., ; • I.;- ;-•:-.1: t- ,-•-; • ; • :-.--' •--1-1, ,.1-••,--r-- ,.--r•-;•::_i_L_ iss LL• 1._; (..1.-1 -.L.-.-(--;; !, ; (--; . , . ,1 i ;_;,_•2,_
-I-I-;-1:1-1"-(1 i 1-.1"._ .1 _I '.1-(1.4 !_:_le-- ! ,-t- -ri-1-1-!..i-J-E.1_,42,7_,1_-4- E4-1-1-!--t-r•-'4-1-t--;-1-1-I-T-71-4-_:--;-c-111_11'
[ • : ' : -' I: :.!.1.!'•'_...1__•. 14-;•4-LI-N-i.-.. -i-;-1.-1-i Ht.;..-t-.1-.-.:1Thrili-1-L-L-1-----L-41-1-4--1•'. , ___-~1-4-;-I-. ; 1--11--- Il. : 1, I ' ! '• !--H--
s„- .:4_,L...1.].. .1.71444... _:i.4..71!,::._ 1.7.,„...t.r._[_.L.1.1..if.: L1.1 ..hi...„0_77:.„...r..21..±t.IT:::T..:::.t.....
0 I ; Ala- • • a•71.:: : (:•:::;..:.;.1.I.;,--;-,-;(-(4\I ' ;-(--1-(-1:'I i i_l_.L.L.1,_; . ; 1. (--I II,4 ic I 4, -_4;•••!--;!!1 Ft-!fi-..;-1...r .11;1_4 4
1 , To, , . . i .; ; . , ; ; I-,-1-I 4! •-;-'. - i4.;_i 4 -L-1-!--41--- -;-!1'!- i!,:!"i.-17.--11-1-:I ' ' ' ' H.t:4'-H-1-.1"-H1-:--H-r.t
I' • • . : . •....'. t".•-::,__.;_i_; ,.I.., 1-1.,-:-- -7.L.:- -1,_7!::__:: i 4..i. i.LI 1.4-1.:.-1-I- 1---1.-1-1-•"+-`1-11-, .1-1--
.
-' ';.•-- 4.4•4-; --4-;-4--4-÷;•,-I-",_•, •_;•.,_,..i...i.J__. '4_;tl+-I •-;--,•1-1 ;,-;-,---t--;, 1_;__;__t_;_:_ti 4..i-1,--i-j-4---H-1-1-1-ri-!"-;•-.7.
1 .•,-(7-: L.--.2j .!---"."'-'•!'--1 f'I!t-44 t!'-L-1-•!". - 4".-;-,..!-1-!----(--!--(--4--:-H-'4-4-rt.-TT-M.T-'_; a4...1-. 4--'4.-4±1-4--1 i i--1-4; !-I ;ii-r-.•t,
\-,, •:-i •. , ,---I.,--12-t-r•-•.-,-r- 1 _IN_ .'.1...1_.I-L.-.!--1--,-I-1--i-.,H-I'F'`•-.- H : ' • , 4 "" 1
' • • 1 • ,-' ,.--/..-1--.,--"--I,-1---;- t ' . I i • -,-.-"-.--1-,-,..-,--, . , , , , , , t .....,1 _,_,..• .-.1_,..4.1-,.--1-,--,---I
e !"-• -* • . ,. .'-..rir. •_L. L--.F.' 1--L-1-!--,--. -4--r\ (-- - • : ; ; ' : ; ' L- ; :-1--1-;-,--1-- 1-11-1,--1-1.,..., :_, ,..,;_-1.._,_L.,,,_.,_.:.,........,...,....-
1-.;-,, ; 4+-;--1-•-•7;1-r7-1,-;---1 ..L.L.(L-1.-1,
co IcI -IF :•' I''•---''•I t-r--.---;1.71., t i•I tt.:4-,-1-1 '.-J-1-L:4 ! 1-!!!!'t 1._i I-41! !--'-1-!-.-1.-!.1.:1; -i.I!!:-.1-1-1-,--1J-„---1, ,-1-4-1,--4-+-41 .1-11-.1-::.t..itti 4.7.17.1:117,-.L-1.!•,-•
• -1 Mk, • ' ; ":4-,......4.4.- -1-4-i•I-1--4.4-4.-"-!-•-4; ',-;\• i-1._;-_I:j...1....L_ L.L..i. -1.L-!--!.--(--;--(--(-(.1__-__L-1-1-1-_11.-1-_(-1-..7_(_:(;-;---;-ii--;-
iiir . • L.t..1.4_ 1-..--!- -1---L 1---+•••••--, -I•,---I- -, '-"- L:, ...,_! ...-• --1•,••4•-,L! L+••••• .-", , -• _L., !..L.-4.-L-- --L- '---•+-‘---'!
> ! : •-!--7• • ' ' I.-,!i--2,ri .i_j....,--1 -+1. .+4 J. i-:•-;-1-4- ;•';--N --;:, . ...., ,. ,_...,_ .,--,•••;---;-L-H--;-, -1-1-r-'----1- . _.. .:_i_i.:..4.4.-_;—t--1-•• !••••- 1- I
-'•4-.. .. _.•..1-,--1-••••!--1-1-!--; •,---:---; .-;•r'., L;\ -_ IT.T,..;_,,.J.;-; i.....-:-l' .4''.--F-r- , ,-7-4.---1• ;__t_..1.1..L-1 1-1-1-..4."/-1-t 1-,-!'t'''-'••1
; ! ' . ' ; ".1--1-1--."-!.....4"--"--•--!-1-1-t.4--'•-:-- •-• • :..,_;,_.:•••• •••••-; ••;-••-t-r. -;-, Li•-•L., ;_;_i_L4_,_,____;__;._;----,- ------r-,
(7) ! '. i-i--•1 ,1,' '1''','-r7,111.;_i_t..!_j..i_4_14.:,--.;----, F--; -;-! ,_---14___;._(_;..____J-+--,--;--" — - ---- ,:.-,_ ...,
--I o j•I : __LILL:2-4-4-!--1-,-H--,.-1-H--!--;.-7-!--,-4-4-!-;, .."...1 1.• ; • :.1 :•• ' ; ! r•ri-j_.:i j_,..iitr,:i.1 i.,.;._.._._-......it 7.•,.. -- 1
, , .:.i..,,,•,--..-1,-r 1.-;,-1-,•1-7-.L.;.! .]1...4 i.:.i_ ., ••-••,-i----, : • 1-: •• ..---r.-E-4'. -. .;..!-.. •!. I. • • 71:24 ,-.
j., : . ......, , -• ' t•-11 1,-r-1-11j , , t. I.. .-A.... :-f\1 1 : .
0 • • -. • :. . : •- ' .-: I t 1' -1-;-' •• ! ; • ; ,...-' '1 I--\ -""'"- •-1" t-7-`...... 1.•-1-1-. 1.-1-1 : "1 1,-: ; 1, • " 1 . • •.1.-- _t .... I.: ' l'.'• i
2 I-:--i-••',..-:---:•.. '-•• '-1 ?-1-1-1-1-:,_ ._i_.„, . 4_,-,..--,,-,....-4..t1-N • ::+-,....1.,..,.i.,-._._,..,..-4_,_,•4••,---,-._,-; ;-,-; i. ,-.1-ar..., L.,.:.,1_,_.t..;..,..I
,71.5 "".• '!..e! !: :', ' --:-i--.1-;:l.4- 'I-1-',""t'!fir.1-L-I•t-"-t•-!--, - ._-.711:l.ct_- ;-,.4.4_ 4.4-; !-•4-1-;--4-H-1-t-t- '- ,- 14.i_t_1- .-:-:-'.1--:;---1
Fli et''' 1-: 0' -' !.." 1--'!---1--- --1.1-1.-.1-... It----..,.1, .- : " 11 H,41--H-F 1-1-F-1t•-r:11 I I t . :. :. : : t Th : • ..1
-1' ! ; .'. . . • ,_ . 1",-1-1,-•'.1----1,--,--1-1••'t''-'1:I . i-,r"-l _Li• ; \.; , • 1 1 ftL1 LL,4.,_.:_i_;.4-1-.L-L-•-'-•.-1-4---L,-11-r-:-:""-hl.-:FiLar....1
---:-.--:-..:-,:r---,-..-7-t-i-.14-i-rr : I.i ;--',-.i, '-1--•ki•i•L- ,' - -I i4\11 i\-'-1-"--"•1.-4.11-r! I-4-4- 4-+-1-4'--!-!,-I--4 4 -1-i.-t21__,••••-f 7 I---h't_ITI__•,---;•-;
0 v•N. - -; ;. "•-•4- ; r•• ;41.-T-1-;;"rj-4.:17..i-I.H-i--4-•.1-,-,--I ;••••••1-;-r--"; ••• ';V,-_ ..;-.,...;-1-1--i-;-'-.4--'-±f•-;-t --; 1-1_,_4_1.4-1-,--; 4. {-1--LF•4-1--;
oC.
• < ; ! ; l•-• 4-: i•••"• ' ;•!--L-I-4T--2t-4--!-11-T-11_11: _4-4-i- ._4_,_,--L -4-,--j-,-,•-,-:,•-,.-,•-',--
1-. .,.: ,-•-•;---4--,-I-i--.----t-• ,..i.,.1....2..A.J.._..,...,.4 i.,4,--1 I---.-1-1-1' 4--•-1.- --hi; 41 • 4..!...; :_-1-L.-1-4-1-1-1--14-4-`---,-Li-1.-1:'.;-.•_!..-t-17
4,--f•4.; i i 1- 1-:--1- .-4-.-,:-, TC-J11..L._;.. .I.-i- 4--1.4--1-1-1,---14,"1-,t'':',.•_,) t..I 4.14!..L. --L-j-L11,--F,--;--(- -; H, Lt(I"rrl i •.!_L_:.1-; i-i-
0 - '7'1'''.- ' •..; ,1._, ',L.!..1-i-L-,1-1-1.-i-(4- •F-e-;--1-',-!-L-t-_-Fut.11-..-.1....,_4...K ..,..,.....±.,-- - J • 1._!...1.-4.1-i•-;-,- - , --• :•s :-;
1-! ;•• •1 71-;1,1-. _.-L,;,,4_4.i.14._;.L.1,j.1-4-(;;;(..j..(-!!,;--.4.:1 t1-1"r•,..f, :(2.1-1.I..L.I.' I-;\\ 'f 1-,--_u _r---i-, J--1-;L-1.-1-11- I ; , • :-.(-1-1-:;---1-4---,--I-4--H-,-.:
-i
11-1:'::::: I: -; ! :--- : !.: '(-(--F(-1-V I--`I --!-1"('I ; 71,-; I ( ; ! ' ' ( •-(-H--,-. ' . . ;-,--"-IIIIIL L_LI-1.'_!_i_2,-.1..i_4_-;-Li-L-----!--;1-•.-, ('I--i--;_
T o I !',I ::IL:::..L...._,_.__(-;-(-;-.-4-1.-+-1-,-, !--!-'7-r, -1-77 , ..1.7[7,__;,... ;_;,,;_i i.1,:,i.,..:., ,\$ .. -I 1 LL, i...._11_1_.;
.c.° F.—, •-;•: ,- • • 1 •-•!••••----,-• ..--•"1 4ifl--!-!-1".4-:.CL',4 .: ,.....:_l-4•!•••!4-1-4-4 •---:•-r•4-4-?;:;;_i__ • ;_4_-.4-'-I-1-4--(4-4---I--1-1:1,--1.--'-'-;1-(-7r_Cta
• : •••• '-• • '•''''; : ' :-. : !:':'-1:-.:Is!4...17;i:.1! 1•I-••"--i•1-+4-4.1--1-4-1-1-".:-.-1-• 111_ti 1 ; 1--,2-1-•i-1-i----, --,.•-7-;)-4-.... _L._._4_ _.
;t-t-;:r 1 • •, IA...., : .;I i ,A 1 1.4-H.- : r l•(-1(i•-; :....: ;_(__ .;! -;---F4-1-j,-;•H--',-- -I-J-t 1---T1._..;.-L-i-L4•4••:11-4
• , :•;--4-•;•,•[;••••. ; ;_i .,...1._:.,.,.,.., .; 7;-'f t.1-4,-;; ; ; ._%. 1_..1-+.4--!-!--!-"-1 • ':r!TI 1- 1-1-1.-1-,41--''-•
1 I Ca• • . • - '••- "-I 1-1!!!-!'"- --7'• it ..1-.1..j."-1.,-I-1,-- LI' t.4 1•T -:-.... ..Li -i_•,-L-1-:•-:•-!••4 --1-:-71-E11,1-. -1 1_1
. . . : ..• : : '.-.--: • I "i-i !'j•iT.i.!..1! ......;•1-4-;•-j-i--1--i----1- •--;'!--i-i•;,"-; •:1.1-.I •\N' ' 4-'--1--!-+-4--'--------;-T_1 i-i--•-•-•U1- -!-!•••!-I-
1
• . • '•I ; 1 - i I '• , 1,1;: ;-47-1.i 4 :4-;2. 4 I;4-"I-I-t II:11::::::;:•1•11.11:_i 7-i--1__: .4...4. ‘L -F1-}-H--Hi- -I-1-h-. 1 TI1 r , "
[
• - '• F• ''..•.•: ' ' •• ' ',..,-.1.-+H.. --''•-1'1 L11- -1-." -!--:-"1__. t.• '-1_ • 1 ' . i , . 1_:_:--L.1--1-1. -1---1-1---4-4-1-.!-+-
. • ...__.• . --,-. ;-•,-; • : I ,, L...1_. H ,.--;-1 , , 4-1-._,„J.;J.,4; .11 1-.,-1-
..:_l--.-1-1.-I-;--"--L-1--1-1-1• , :..,_ _1 1 ' ..; :- - .- •
,....• 1-.----.-------!"1 •-•"-T., ••••;,... .L.......,..4..: :.1 ! :1 r I, Lid, 1..!,•.1. -1_.+..i..-, 1 -1, ti111-_[__H-TLL:_r!.L..!-",--;--- 1:1-1----: ..'l•,--1
'-' i•:. • - • : ' 7 1 : !- : ! • r.,....,...,..1 ,.. ,.,...„... !----,...--, , . . . • •.,. , _._....1._
....... , .•, . . , -,. •, ! • : : , ,i_ ,._,..,....,...•:••,•-:-_,•,---,„-.:-•,-i- •Ili .i_, L.,_-_. r ; i -:-;1-.1 fi-l-r-1:-.1.7i-1--•-.11---.1
1 • : :.-' . : - •I I -!.'"1 :"1.!-..._1:1.2,..!.......-.7: .i- •,.;-I.:j''l'''i- : I-.,"'.1 71!..,..11;i-.!I..1.-t._
- -1-1-Lii "-tt(7:1_-!;*74_ i-•.-t-
J...
I ' ' '. !.' ! ' ' !I••• •-•4; '.'i'-'4....!..!•-; • I ;44! ",-!•-1 ' i;',-!I 1 LI'"!-I.-..L.',4.‘-4. .1.i-;•4:-I,-Lim -• ri-t--
,
:•: • :• ••;; ;.;.1s 1.1 :...., iti.i.;•1 ; 1•;-; ; ;: :-T. I-...:_:-.!....1:4-;. ..4.:,..i..,.„ :.1 ;•1-!--t-I-;--1,--ht - ,__!, , • 1 1 4.4_1_1_4_4_4i--1,--;H••••-:-T-L;i:..
. /--,7\ . • : ; ' • i : :-.-.1-I.;... L 1-.1-1)....:.=:.:.;..";... •.;-s..,.4-•-:•-4.: :--i ,-;•:-.-1--•:.-:-:fit-tti._;._... -a.,\_., ; --i--;-H-1-1--1-r-;- ••.--;-;•--,-;_-_,_;,_,...,_
s •.-• :••-•-,- ,-1-••s-, .....; ::Lt.'s- '..,."-;•;••:-.-••;1•11.---' !--;• -1-,--: -1.4 ; ' ; ; ' '-; ' : ; : • : ; ; ; • : . ; ; ;....: 4.•
I I, \.Y-T---.--L•-;, : • 4; - 4; :-• 1.;.-_"......‘_;.-4.; •_H-. " ! --4--;--!--. r - . i 1 .._i..4....L. LA-. '-,-N, 1-,--•:--r' ; ';!-:',-7; LI J:i L.L_L.;..f.
• ! • . L' : i. !;''. , : . ••:. ' I •,:_i.'.;_.,_;_--4-L--!.- i:k.-•t-1-4-,"77":":---i (.; : '.i-'-,L.-
'_.
:(1:I:I;:(I::-: : I - '•:j I-:" '.- •-• I ...:1 .-':.. .( -- -(--1-;(41-.t I- IT--i-fl-;1-:'„-11:.•!2(1-:::.IL_....(-1 LI-
.
- •I•j . . I ( .(L.F;:.(. .: r, 1;•:,.:::(....I;I•;I..L. __' _l_ii:;-41 IL ,_1(A-1--4--I--Li-i-.-(-1-1-;(•i
0-
I • 1,-:i. t----4., :...I.., ., . ,.,_.i.,..,.....,._,...,.....,..r.„,
t -"---1--` '-'4-r r' ' 4 ,....L...,....-
I • ::.:1:1';' ' .4-1..!::f I: 1.1...."...:1.1.•it 1...'',...1.1:-:.-•;...::.1] !•.:;--: :
1 -;12•2:--112-•:;.11:;,_:.. :"!."•__E. -... :____, -1--,--- -•-t-7--;--,-1--;--:-471.—_,....i__I. _ ..,...; t_t_i_ r- -1 ,(-_--!_-1--4-,
-1 1. : • ..:--.• :- -:. :-!'1-1't•:"•- ! .,_• ,1.,_. 1,
2 -: Apt'''1"1L1-•:-i'''..1.I--". "•1•-••-11-"•••!•i;•-!..._-..il i :I..i•;.;.••.;...1:',._ . •
1 1-•r•"-I'''', 1- I - , : . • • ,.._..,.1„.i,4 ; !--".4---; ---4-"11-‘.7"-- -"lj-1+-1.-1-...:-.1 -.;_1:..-1.t:
i••
' .
:11 "%gr;...,.., ,-,.;-1- -1----i---1,--t ; :I-4--; .....;__,.1_1 ; I j 1-!-I-H--1----1-1-4 \\'-'-1,4--t±-i-4:1-1--2,--TT
--•--. ,.r, , • CH-1-:.f.'"'"!"-Ei"--:,.+-........-! .T,--4:--4-4••4-4-44 1 -f•T • HT!..-7-1--r-1.;'' 4-7-,_;_ls_-; . .,...!_;___i._,...1 .,.._
0 ...,...,..i.......t.;.I•i •-•;--0--- 1-1-t-iji-! ril--.1-..r4 , ,
,
-, :*I- !I -. i-k- 4-4-.4-4-!--4--1. '. -÷!----,-1----..--1-17:7-17.1..--1:1; . . ,•4--h,- I.-4-1\\
, .<
m 7--,- ,....i....;.1 L.-,,.;.-,•••,-4.-,- •,--, 1-1--rs•-••••1 r.i...,..1 ;ii---1--H-ki-i-1---:--,-,:r-rt- ,N.,:•_..i.-1,1--4-1-
.
m M > >
-.,--,-1-i-L-L-1,..,..,.,_: 1..,.,4,•••,•••,--,- ,..1-, i-i-LE.1 : ,:i...., r,..,-_,,..,_ .;_4-i,--:-1-1-1-1--1-,-1-11--tit-•; •-•Th_-_,-,1....1_1_1_4_1._
.44.....1.1..,..,....,-',..1.-..:.-1.1.--,..1-.-... -.1-_....;LI.1...i ! 1 , n--IH-I t 4: 1 i :4".7.1._i_i_i_.__LN.,,, H--H-F--
. : ., , ,: e . I . ; _t_;.L.+, ,..,......- L. . .
Z 0... 0 0 r r- Alt. , • ! . . i. .1--1-f--,-r-e:'.- T-I-!--4_-t24.1`-!II: 4-4-1--14 -r-I 1-a_L• 1:4-•_1-1--,-H-1,-\\I- --1--H--
z coo °
o c g 8 .
-, vw.. : "' i ri:-,--..:' ur...--:_-11:1:11:'-1---:-11---1-1-frIS-11-;4'• • -1-11-1:14_02-1.7.2.[-L-t-r,:1-11-1-1-•1--1--It•-)-1' rl-
"!!! liii).-7.."." ..-•-''-;t 1 '"..-;-L71-14-1•144-"L!--r--•-i----i- - --i-r-, , ..,•-1 ,--, , ,_L . -
-,- , i--• • ..T- •-. .,_,_, , ,... .. .—, i, . • . -...._,
. -
...
o
. 0 0
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD PROFILES
•
._,
KING.COUNTY, WA
,•
GO
.
• '13 D INCORPORATED AREAS MAY CREEK
Tides:North Puget Sound-94A-Hiram M.Chit n 1.:ocks http://www.nw&wc " :e1rmy.rniVnws/hh7tidesfitiiinp94a.1i1m
.;,:„.., 44*,,,,,,. , , :, ,,,,
'4;'1-- ,it 4:-.' -. ZA,: I ix.xxi* r
::!...',:.Z..'"....:.....)!!
Tidal Detium Regions, North Puget 'Sound:Region
94A - Hiram M. Chittenden Locks
Relation Between Various Datum Planes
Datum Plane IVII.,LAV NGVD NAVD88 , COE i! CITY !:
Highest Estimated Tide
Mean Higher High Water 11.35 5.25 8.83 : 12.05 ; -.88
Mean High Water 10.49 4.39 7.97 * 11.19 -1.74
IMean(Halt)Tide Level 6.66 : 0.56 4.14 !i 7.36 ! -5.57 '..
I.N6VD 6.10 ' Q..09 ::3.58 ; 6.80 , -6.13
, . ..,
1Mean Low Water 2.83 -1.21 03 I is 3,53 ;9.40 Mean Lower Low Water 0.00 ! -6.10 -2.52 ; 0.70 -12.23
1 Lowest Estimated Tide
, ...
1 Record Levels(IVILLW) •
. Local Area Map
,
I Highest Observed Tide ;
Ai lINET
Date .12/15/77 ii ...,0: 477/1 ''.6:7=.%kl: . 4 lan11 AM
'.."' ' .,:...,' '
BAINPR1;1004: '''4'it-'I' " •,•
'•-•-. - :;24-:::...,=. • N . .
'Lowest Observed Tide 3-4.60 , IlLAND :„ ' '''.•''''.•q:".,„,if,14-;:' .PKI.. 1,"417.1"LE : lei i
;Date 6120/51 i 11 ' tg.fiti.
t:
Period of Record
. . . ..„... .. ,
Epoch 1960-. 1978 ! .6 OI
fill: 2 RTON
. •
;
:Index Gage VIC1140±.1qAe
. .
. ..,... . •• ,• , . .
An Data Provided-Is:Provisional
.......___ _ „ .._ •.____ _
1.:
P
tfOme//Mail/1 Search • .
•Last Updaies on Thursday.January 06;2000
loll
•
. . • .
. . .. •- ,'
. _
•
* . • ' 9/1$/2003!'1.1::51.A41;;
BARBEE MILL'S COMMENTS TO DEIS MITIGATION CHART APPEARING IN DEIS SUMMARY
Barbee Mill has copied the mitigation chart that appears in the DEIS summary at pages 1-20 to 1-23, and added a new right-
hand column with Barbee's comments on each mitigation measure. These comments supplement the comments in the letter
itself. As a preliminary matter,many of the mitigation measures listed in the DEIS Summary are not lawful or appropriate
mitigation measures under the substantive standards of SEPA- WAC 197-11-660(1):
(a) Mitigation measures or denial shall be based upon policies, plans, rules or regulations formally designated by . .
. the legislative body . . . as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority and in effect when the DNS or DEIS
is issued.
(b) Mitigation measures shall be related to specific, adverse environmental impacts clearly identified . . . The
decision makers shall cite the agency's SEPA policy that is the basis of any condition . . .
(c) Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being accomplished.
For example, mitigation measures relating to deep foundation systems or ground densification for liquefaction, dikes for
flooding, a ban on docks, public access over private property, and additional buffers exceeding adopted codes do not'appear to
be based upon adopted plans or policies or are not reasonable and capable of being accomplished.
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Earth, Soils, and
Geology
Erosion and sedimentation Implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Applicant will comply with applicable code
erosion control prior to construction requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 23
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARGEE COMMENT
Liquefaction Construct buildings on a deep foundation system, such as Based on site-specific analysis, Golder
pilings,that would transfer the building loads to the Associates proposes lightly loaded piles
dense soils beneath the potentially liquefiable alluvial bearing in the compact zone at a depth of 15-
deposits 25'. Disagree on need or appropriateness of
piles for high lateral loads[See Applicant's
DEIS comment letter at§3.1]. Request City
to identify any other comparable residential
project with a deep foundation system.
Further, DEIS's discussion of a deep
foundation system is not based on adopted
code and would not be a valid SEPA
condition.
Install ground improvement measures, such as stone Foundations (as described above) and offsets
columns or deep dynamic compaction to reduce the from the shoreline are adequate and
liquefaction potential underlying roads and utilities appropriate mitigation. Disagree on need or
appropriateness of ground improvement
measures. [See Applicant's DEIS comment
letter at§3.1 j. Request City to identify any
other comparable residential project with
stone columns or deep dynamic compaction.
Further, DEIS's discussion of ground
modifications is not based on adopted code
and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 24
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Provide containment consisting of ground densification 15-30 feet of offset distance of structures
treatment to reduced the hazard of lateral spreading, from the shoreline minimizes risk of lateral
particularly near the shoreline spreading damage. Disagree on need or
appropriateness of ground improvement
measures. [See Applicant's DEIS comment
letter at 03.11 Request City to identify any
other comparable residential project with
ground densification. Further, DEIS's
discussion of ground densification is not
based on adopted code and would not be a
valid SEPA condition.
Erosion and Implement an appropriate Temporary Erosion and Applicant will comply with applicable code
Sedimentation Sediment Control (TESC)Plan requirements.
Pollutants in Surface Construct, operate and maintain the proposed water Applicant will comply with applicable code
Water quality treatment facilities requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 25
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Flooding Contain the 100-year floodplain within either the The project currently proposes a voluntary
proposed May Creek open space corridor, or in increase in the May Creek stream buffer to
alternative 50 foot or 100 foot wide corridors contained 50 feet. The HEC-RAS model shows no
by fill or levies at least one foot above base flood levels significant benefit of a 100 feet buffer versus
the already increased 50 feet buffer in terms
of flood plain depth and conveyance. In
fact, there is no change in flood plain
depth/water surface elevation at the most
upstream, on-site section between a 50 feet
and 100 feet buffer. This further suggests
that increased buffer width (and any
associated floodway storage) is unnecessary
and provides no mitigation benefit to off-site,
upstream properties. The applicant will
comply with applicable code requirements
with respect to the design and construction of
infrastructure features, fill placement, and
building construction in designated flood
plain areas.
Construct residences with the lowest floor one foot above Applicant will comply with applicable code
base flood elevation requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 26
IMPACTS - MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing Request City to identify any other
existing fill within the open space corridor and providing comparable residential project where this
additional storage volume mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of fill removal is not based on
adopted code and would not be a valid SEPA
condition.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 27
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Provide the wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide - Request City to identify any other
additional conveyance and flood storage to compensate comparable residential project where this
for future increases in flood elevations because of mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
sediment deposited in the stream channel discussion of 100 foot buffer system
contradicts adopted code of 25 foot buffers
• and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
The project currently proposes a voluntary
increase in the May Creek stream buffer to
50 feet. The HEC-RAS model shows no
significant benefit of a 100 feet buffer versus
the already increased 50 feet buffer in terms
of flood plain depth and conveyance. In
fact, there is no change in flood plain
depth/water surface elevation at the most
upstream, on-site section between a 50 feet
and 100 feet buffer. This further suggests
that increased buffer width (and any
associated floodway storage) is unnecessary
and provides no mitigation benefit to off-site,
upstream properties. The DEIS states
(section 2.4.1.4) that "the HEC-RAS model
did not simulate sediment transport and the
potential influence this would have on flood
levels. "As such, a complete analysis has not __
been provided to justify the claim that
additional flood storage would be necessary
to "...compensate for future increase in flood
elevations because of sediment deposited in
the stream channel. "
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 28
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Remove and/or reconstruct existing bridges to reduce the The proposal calls for the removal of
restriction to floodwater flow 2bridges, and installation of 1 new bridge,
for a net reduction of 1 bridge.
Groundwater
Groundwater Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at 03.3
Contamination Act cleanup of the site and 3.6. Cleanups are governed and
regulated by DOE and not City.
Provide ongoing treatment of contaminated groundwater, See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at§3.3
if monitoring after soil removal indicates,pursuant to and 3.6. Cleanups are governed and
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site regulated by DOE and not City.
Plants & Animals
Removal of Osprey nest Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected Applicant will comply with applicable code
in the project site vicinity requirements.
Removal of existing Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along Applicant will comply with applicable code
vegetation May Creek from disturbance during construction by requirements.
erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access
areas away from buffer areas
Existing invasive plant Clear to completely remove invasive species and re-plant Applicant will comply with applicable code
species in buffer areas with native species requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 29
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Loss of vegetation at Design bridges with sufficient height and width to allow Request City to identify any other
bridges penetration of sunlight and precipitation to maintain comparable residential project where this
vegetation mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of modified bridge standards is
not based on adopted code and would not be
a valid SEPA condition.
Restriction of animal Design bridges with sufficient height and width to Request City to identify any other
movement at bridges provide for animal movement comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of modified bridge standards is
not based on adopted code and would not be
a valid SEPA condition.
Lack of habitat value of Use native plants in residential landscaping Applicant will comply with applicable code
residential landscaping requirements. See Applicant's DEIS
comment letter at§3.4.
Surface water pollution Use of native plants in residential landscaping can Applicant will comply with applicable code
from fertilizers, pesticides, minimize the use of fertilizers,pesticides, or herbicides requirements. See Applicant's DEIS
or herbicides with comment letter at§3.4.
resulting impacts on Provide greater setbacks from surface water to reduce
wildlife and fish overspray, spillage and runoff that carries pollutants into
water
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 30
•
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Wetland and buffer Avoid wetland displacement by designing changes in the Based on evaluation of alternatives and
displacement proposal to place development outside the wetland and wetland functions, the Applicant proposes a
buffer small displacement of the southern wetland
and will compensate consistent with
applicable code requirements, and with any
applicable Corps of Engineers permitting
process.
Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement Applicant will comply with applicable code
elsewhere on site requirements, and with any applicable Corps
of Engineers permitting process.
Compensate for loss of buffer through averaging and Applicant will comply with applicable code
enhancement of the existing and buffer vegetation requirements, and with any applicable Corps
of Engineers permitting process.
Bulkhead impact on Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at 03.4
aquatic species can be re-established(where the lake is shallow, on (17—20). Request City to identify any other
public lands or in conjunction with greater building comparable residential project where this
setbacks) mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of bulkhead removal is not based
on adopted code and would not be a valid
SEPA condition.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 31
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at§3.4
(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in (17—20). Request City to identify any other
conjunction with greater building setbacks) comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of bulkhead removal is not based
on adopted code and would not be a valid
SEPA condition.
Providing plantings in rip-rap Request City to identify any other
comparable residential project where this --
mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of rip-rap planting is not based on
adopted code and would not be a valid SEPA
condition.
Reduce the elevation above OHW of sheet pile walls and Request City to identify any other
rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline plantings comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of wall or rip-rap removal is not
based on adopted code and would not be a
valid SEPA condition.
Loss of waterfowl habitat Preserve pilings and other in-water structures that are at a See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at 03.4
through removal of pilings distance from near shore habitat important for juvenile (21-24). Applicant will comply with
and other in-water salmonids applicable code requirements and/or
perching sites directive of Department of Natural
Resources.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 32
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Lack of large woody Provide 50 to 100 foot buffers on stream and lake See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at 03.4
debris (LWD)recruitment shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and (21-24). Request City to identify any other
complex communities of indigenous vegetation comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of 50 or 100 foot buffers
contradicts adopted code of 25 foot buffers
and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
Elevated shoreline water Provide 50 to 100 foot buffers on stream and lake Request City to identify any other
temperature shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from comparable residential project where this
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of 50 or 100 foot buffers
contradicts adopted code of 25 foot buffers
and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
Light and glare impacts on Provide 50 to 100 foot buffers on stream and lake Request City to identify any other
wildlife and aquatic shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive comparable residential project where this
species communities of indigenous vegetation to intercept light mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
and glare discussion of 50 or 100 foot buffers
contradicts adopted code of 25 foot buffers
and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 33
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Direct disturbance of Provide 50 to 100 foot buffers on stream and lake See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at 03.4
wildlife and aquatic shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive (21-24). Request City to identify any other
species from residents or communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer comparable residential project where this
public using public access disturbance and allow public access further from the mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
facilities shoreline - discussion of 50 or 100 foot buffers
contradicts adopted code of 25 foot buffers
and would not be a valid SEPA condition.
Impacts of docks on Prohibit docks,require use of mooring buoys or floats at Request City to identify any other -
juvenile salmonids a distance from near shore habitat comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of prohibiting docks contradicts
adopted SMP and would not be a valid SEPA
condition.
Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage Request City to identifii any other
comparable residential project where this
mitigation was'imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of reduced or shared docks is not
based on adopted SMP and would not be a
valid SEPA condition.
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials Request City to identify any other
that allow light penetration comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed Further, DEIS's
discussion of narrow docks or special dock
materials is not based on adopted SMP and
would not be a valid SEPA condition.
•
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 34
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Difficulty of ensuring Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation Applicant will comply with applicable code
maintenance of shoreline by-an entity other than residents requirements.
vegetation
Transportation
Increase transportation Provide demand management programs including Applicant will-comply with applicable code
demand from trip improved transit and carpool facilities and service and requirements. Request City to identify any
generation on-site and off-site facilities and programs that would other comparable residential project where
provide safe pedestrian circulation to these facilities this mitigation was imposed. �-
Intersections not meeting Mitigate LOS impacts at the 1-405 southbound ramp/NE Requires area wide system for fair share
City of Renton level of 44th Street(Lake Washington Boulevard) intersection contributions. At most, Barbee Mill would
service (LOS) standards through an all-way stop control or a signal. A signal is be obligated to pay for only its fair share,
not warranted based on the vehicular volumes Mitigate which based on peak hour trips is minimal.
LOS impacts at the 1-405 northbound ramp (Lake Request City to identify any other
Washington Boulevard)/NE 44th Street intersection with comparable residential project where this
an all-way stop control and the addition of a northbound mitigation was imposed
right-turn lane or a signal. The intersection meets volume
criteria for Signal Warrants -
Geometric limitations of Move the site access to locations where Lake Applicant will comply with applicable code
propose railroad crossings Washington Boulevard and the rails are at about the same requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
elevation. This would have some impacts on grading for regulations control required public crossing
on-site roadways on the east side of May Creek features.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 35
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Potential safety impacts at Provide grade separation,which removes potential Applicant will comply with applicable code
railroad crossings vehicle/train conflicts, but is quite expensive. This may requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
be implemented in the future to mitigate cumulative regulations control required public crossing
impacts of development of adjacent properties features. This condition is not warranted by
project traffic contributions and anticipated
train volumes.
Provide active control designed to provide warning Applicant will comply with applicable code
devices automatically activated by train approach and requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
may include gates that physically exclude vehicles and regulations control required public crossing
pedestrians - features. This condition is not warranted by
project traffic contributions and anticipated
train volumes..
Provide passive control involving signs and pavement Applicant will comply with applicable code
markers and rely on drivers and pedestrians to recognize requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
that a train s approaching and stopping with adequate regulations control required public crossing
clearance from the rails features.
Provide for consolidation of existing rail crossing to Applicant will comply with applicable code
reduce the number of conflict points requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
regulations control required public crossing
features.
Provide for a traffic circulation system to serve Applicant will comply with applicable code
properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings requirements. If-public crossing(s), WUTC
regulations control required public crossing
features.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 36
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Increased Include a mix of on-site and off-site facilities and Applicant will comply with applicable code
pedestrian/vehicle programs that would provide safe pedestrian circulation requirements. If public crossing(s), WUTC
conflicts regulations control required public crossing
features.
Diffuse impacts of new Contribute to the City of Renton Transportation Applicant will comply with applicable code
trips on the circulation Mitigation Fee - - requirements.
system
Hazardous Materials
Soil and groundwater Remove contaminates from the Barbee Mill site through See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at§3.3
contamination Model Toxics Control Act cleanup and 3.6. Cleanups are governed and
regulated by DOE and not City.
Address contaminants from the proposed roadway See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at§3.3
through Quendall Terminals through appropriate and 3.6. Cleanups are governed and
removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with regulated by DOE and not City.
requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act
Encountering Provide a contamination and hazardous materials See Applicant's DEIS comment letter at§3.3
contaminated soil during contingency plan and 3.6. Cleanups are governed and
construction regulated by DOE. Applicant will comply
with applicable code requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 37
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Visual Impacts
Reduce building bulk by reducing building height Request City to identify any other
comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of reduced building height
contradicts adopted code and would not be a
valid SEPA condition.
Reduce building bulk by increasing setbacks between Request City to identify any other
buildings comparable residential project where this
mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
discussion of increased setbacks contradicts
adopted code and would not be a valid SEPA
condition.
Reduce building bulk by varying building height, bulk, Applicant will comply with applicable code
and setbacks requirements.
Reduce apparent building bulk by design features, Applicant will comply with applicable code
materials and color, including sloping roofs, roof detail requirements.
such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets
Reduce relative building bulk by screening through large Applicant will comply with applicable code
vegetation. This mitigation would not take place for a - requirements.
number of years until vegetation matures. Additional
setbacks for planting areas and a change in proposed
plantings would be required
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 38
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Light and Glare Impacts Incorporate shielding for exterior lights in fixture Applicant will comply with applicable code
selection requirements.
Design buildings to avoid glass surfaces that might Applicant will comply with applicable code
produce glare from sun reflection requirements.
Provide additional buffers with dense vegetation to block Applicant-will comply with applicable code
light and glare requirements.
Noise
Construction noise Restrict hours of construction to reduce noise impacts Applicant will comply with applicable code
impacts during hours when nearby residences would be most requirements.
sensitive
Noise from pile driving Restrict construction hours of pile driving Applicant will comply with applicable code
requirements.
Pre-drill pile holes to the maximum feasible depth(depth Applicant will comply with applicable code
may be limited by the character of deposits) requirements.
Require less noisy pile installation methods, if feasible Applicant will comply with applicable code
given soil conditions, such as vibrating piles into place, requirements.
cassion-type piles, auger cast piles or other methods
Construction noise from Provide noise barriers around stationary equipment such Applicant will comply with applicable code
stationary equipment as compressors,welding machines, pumps, and similar requirements.
equipment that would operate continuously and could
contribute to steady background noise levels
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 39
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN DEIS BARBEE COMMENT
Noise from locomotive Provide at-grade rail crossings that meet a "sealed" to Applicant will comply with applicable code
horns qualify for possible Federal Railway Administration requirements.
(FRA) designation of a "quiet zone" for locomotive horns
Historic and Cultural
Resources
Loss of existing buildings Provide an interpretive display with images of the Request City to identify any other
historic industrial use of the site, as well as indicating comparable residential project where this
how it reflects the lumber economy and shipbuilding mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
heritage of the area discussion of interpretive dispay is not based
on adopted code and would not be a valid
SEPA condition.
Potential disturbance of An archaeologist should monitor the demolition and Request City to identify any other
archaeological resources construction work near the northeast corner of the site, comparable residential project where this
and if deposits are found, consult with the, Washington mitigation was imposed. Further, DEIS's
State Archaeologist in determining whether the discussion of monitoring system is not based
archaeological deposits contained information important on adopted code and would not be a valid
to understanding the history of the area and should be SEPA condition.
conserved
Public Services
Cumulative impacts on Provide parks and fire mitigation fee for cumulative - Applicant will comply with applicable code
parks and public services impacts (see Appendix A) requirements.
SEA 1412494v1 26266-4 40
JM1.
V
es‘�Yp'yF
®C ��MO�Niti_
l0 H o
LETTER OF DECEMBER 16, 2002
FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMhN PLLC
ATTORNEYS .A T LAW .
Direct Phone
December 16, 2002 (206)447-2901
Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
VIA FACSIMILE AND E-Mail
HAND DELIVERY WolfC@foster.com
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
Re: EIS Scoping Comments,
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Application
iDear Lesley: THIRD
AVE THIRD
Suite 3400
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall SEATTLE
• Company(collectively,."PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Washington
in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the "South J.H. Baxter 9 8= _ s 2 9 9
property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). These properties Telephone
are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Products, Inc. r=0 6)4 4 7-4 4 0 0
("Barbee") property. A PQC representative was present in Renton City Hall at the Facsimile
EISpublic scoping meetingon the eveningof December 10. =0 6)4 4 7 9 7 0 0
p g Website
WWW.FOSTER.COM
PQC supports the City's decision to require an environmental impact
statement("EIS") for the Barbee Mill preliminary plat application (the "Application"
or "Project") and provides comments below on the scope of the EIS. The major
thrust of the these comments is that the goals and potential development of all areas
zoned COR-2 ("COR-2 Area") will have a prominent role in land use decision-
making for the Project; therefore, to enable the City to engage in cogent decision-
making, the EIS should be carefully designed to account for the larger environmental
and development context in which the Project is situated. ANCHORAGE
Alaska
Incorporation of Previous Comments PORTLAND
Oregon
• We provide this letter in addition to our earlier comment letters, which we
SEATT
request be incorporated herein. Our letter dated September 26, 2002 (attached •
ahi E
Ws
Washington
hereto), provides a thorough analysis of the City's legal authority to consider COR-2
Area goals and development when undertaking land use decision-making for the SPOKANE
Project. As noted, the City has the legal authority, if not mandate, to insure that the Washington
Project's direct and cumulative impacts do not constrain the development potential of
50358618.02
December 16, 2002
Page 2
the PQC Properties or have negative impacts on the surrounding environment in the COR-2
Zone. In short, the letter explains the City's legal authority to require the EIS to be scoped
broadly to include a thorough analysis of potential cumulative impacts.
In our comment letter dated May 30, 2002 (attached hereto), we listed certain potential
cumulative impacts within the scope of the Project's environmental review. We request that the
Barbee Mill EIS include analysis of all of the potential cumulative impacts raised in that letter, as
summarized below:
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from
combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter
properties.
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property,Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the
Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and
construction and post-construction activities associated with any road system
improvements.
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any
access and roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and
natural resources on adjoining properties.
To the degree possible based on the general nature of the pending applcation, the Barbee
EIS should also contain analysis of the potential specific onsite impacts that were listed in our
May 30, 2002, letter.1
1 Specific onsite impacts listed in May 30,2002,letter:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup,as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues,including reconstruction of the bulkhead,debris removal,shoreline
enhancement or restoration,and related water quality,habitat,and fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction(if proposed),including related fisheries and habitat issues.
4. Issues related to impacts.of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife,including salmon,trout,long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues,including water quality impacts to Lake Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;assurance of
adequate buffers pursuant to federal,state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management,impacts and mitigation if fill takes place.
50358618.02
•
December 16,2002
Page 3
Our previous letters also described the development-enabling activities undertaken and in
process on the PQC properties, including clean-up of environmental contamination. The first
portion of the South Baxter cleanup was completed in a timely fashion in late October. The
remainder of the South Baxter cleanup will be completed in the spring and summer of 2003.
PQC is particularly sensitive to the possibility that the Project will be developed in a manner that
limits the development potential of PQC's properties.
Scope of the EIS
PQC generally concurs with the Committee's EIS "areas of discussion" as listed in the
Notice of Determination of Significance issued for the Project, as well as recommendations
within the Environmental Review Committee Staff Report ("Staff Report") of November 5,
2002. All EIS Sections should include a thorough and detailed analysis of the COR-2 Area
environment. This analysis should figure most prominently in the following EIS Sections:
transportation; water resources; land use; shoreline and critical areas; socioeconomics; and
public services and utilities. It is within the legal authority of the City to require analysis of
_ these COR-2 Area issues, and the City will find this analysis to be of utmost importance for
future decisionmaking on the land use permits required by the Project.
In particular, the transportation section of the EIS should contain an analysis of all of the
roads in the area, but particularly the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd. intersection (the
"Intersection"), under reasonable development assumptions for the remainder of the entire
COR-2 Area. It is recognized by all parties involved that the Intersection and the I-405
interchange will inhibit future development in the COR-2 Area. As the Staff Report implies, it is
crucial that the City fully understand the effect of full build-out of the COR-2 Area, so that it can
properly and equitably apportion the Project its share of the COR-2 Area's development
potential. At the December 10 EIS scoping meeting, this point was also made by Project
neighbors from the Kennydale neighborhood.
The railroad crossings that will provide access to the Project are a second transportation
issue. The City has indicated that its code requires the crossings to be accessible to pedestrian as
well as vehicular traffic.2 The EIS should examine the impacts to railroad traffic of the new
crossings as well as the safety issues inherent in mixing pedestrians, vehicles, and trains in the
same location. Furthermore, there is some question as to whether the southern railroad crossing
will be acceptable to the City.3 The EIS should examine, as an alternative, the impact of having
only one access point to the Project.
2 Memorandum from Juliana Sitthidet to Lesley Nishihara,October 7,2002,page 2.
3 This is because Barbee's easement over the railroad at that point is revocable upon 30-days notice. See City of
Renton Environmental Review Committee Staff Report/Determination of Significance,November 5,2002,page 10.
50358618 02
•
December 16, 2002
Page 4
As various Kennydale neighbors carefully noted on December 10, the shoreline and
critical areas section of the EIS will play a particularly important role in further permit
decisionmaking. We concur with the conclusions reached by Andrew C. Kindig in his letter
detailing his review of the Biological Assessment submitted by Barbee. The EIS should contain
a complete analysis of the impacts of the development, including cumulative impacts, on the
Lake Washington shoreline and May Creek. This analysis should be based on the assumption
that the PQC properties will be developed. In particular, the development of the Pan Abode
property will potentially impact May Creek. Thus, as stated in our May 30 letter, the Project
impacts on May Creek should be analyzed in tandem with potential future Pan Abode impacts on
May Creek. The same analysis holds true for the shoreline section: the future build-out of the
Baxter properties should be included in the analysis of the Project's impacts on the Lake
Washington shoreline.
Soil contamination is another issue that should receive particular scrutiny in the EIS. As
indicated in the Determination of Significance, the site is known to contain soils contaminated
with arsenic and zinc.4 The Quendall Terminals property to the immediate north is also known
to contain contaminated soils and groundwater, and cleanup negotiations are underway with the
Department of Ecology. As noted in the Staff Report, further analysis and consideration of the
proximity and levels of adjacent contamination should be set forth in the EIS.
Finally, as Mr. Kindig noted in his letter, there is a substantial amount of C.OR-2 Area
information contained in the Department of Ecology record for the ongoing Baxter property site
remediation. This information is readily available from the Department of Ecology. The Barbee
EIS drafters should review and incorporate portions of this record, as appropriate, within the
shoreline, critical area, and Native American sections.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the Project EIS. Please keep
us informed of your further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M.Healey,Vulcan Inc.
Clint Chase,Vulcan Inc.
4 Id.at 4.
50358618.02
oAM
gc��{?A
°O. '�o Ni,�,Q
A.C. KINDIG & CO.
DEIS REVIEW LETTER
A.C. & Co.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
.12501 Bellevue-Redmond Road,Suite 210
Bellevue,Washington 98005-2509
Tel 425 638-0358 Fax 425 455-8365
September 25,2003 ;
Project No.199
Mr. Clint Chase
Vulcan Northwest
505 5th Avenue S., Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
RE: Barbee Mill DEIS Review
Dear Clint,
This letter is my review of the DEIS for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat by
Parametrix, dated September, 2003. Previously, I had reviewed the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat Biological Assessment prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. on
August 26, 2002, which included review of the Environmental (SEPA) Checklist
received by Renton on April 5, 2002 and Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Permit
Review Plans prepared by Otak Incorporated, dated August 27, 2002. That prior
review was prepared for the City of Renton (dated October 21, 2002). Some
elements of this review draw from or copy text from my prior review, where still
relevant to the current proposal as described in the DEIS. For convenience, this
letter contains my complete review of the DEIS, and there is no need to reference
back to the October 21,2002 review.
This is an independent review of the DEIS as requested by Vulcan Northwest.
My review perspective assumes the SEPA documentation needs to be technically
sufficient to support permitting decisions and environmental review obligations
of the City of Renton for this project. This review includes consideration of
biologically-based cumulative impact issues that I perceived to be interrelated
with or dependent upon the proposed project.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 2
Project Summary-Key Features for the Review
Based on the DEIS, the action alternative, named Proposal ("current proposal of the
applicant") includes the following actions that were important to my
consideration(see page 2-1 of the DEIS):
1. Termination of mill operations and associated activities, including
dredging of May Creek.
2. Demolition and removal of "the existing Barbee Mill facilities, including all
buildings, asphalt surfaces, and other associated structures" (DEIS Appendix C,
page C-9). This excludes one of two existing bridges over Mill Creek, to
be improved as a pedestrian crossing, and existing docks and a boathouse
at the southern-most portion of the property (DEIS,Figure 2.1-1). Note: the
DEIS indicates two existing bridges would be retained for pedestrian use on page
3-39; I assumed the latter to be an error since a second pedestrian bridge is not
shown in Figure 2.1-1 reflecting the current proposal, and demolition of a second
bridge is described on page C-10 in Appendix C and on page 3-14 of the DEIS).
3. Grading of the site as needed for plat improvements and the construction
of 115 residential homes.
4. Creation of 24 residential lots, bulkheads or armoring along 16 to 17
residential lots fronting Lake Washington (DEIS. page I-9) and up to 16
private docks along Lake Washington with 25-foot building setbacks in
the following three categories:
a. 16 residential lots extending out into Lake Washington to the inner
harbor line, which is the Washington State Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) ownership boundary (lots 31 through 44, 91, and
92; DEIS Figure 2.1-1), including one individual dock per
developed lot for up to 16 additional docks (DEIS page 1-9 and
page 2-3);all 16 lots are expected to require bulkheads for shoreline
protection due to the 25-foot proposed building setback (DEIS page
1-9 and page 2-3); and no restrictions to lot landscaping to the
water's edge are proposed;
b. 8 lots extending toward the Lake Washington shoreline but
terminating at the inner harbor line which traverses uplands at this
location, leaving DNR-owned uplands between the shoreline and
the residential lots (lots 23 through 30); and
c. Lot 23, which includes one corner extending into Lake Washington
but is excluded from the lots that could support private docks by
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 3
the DEIS (which specifies up to 16 docks only); however the
lakeshore portion of this lot is assumed to also require bulkheads
for shoreline protection per the DEIS (page 1-9).
5. Creation of a public walkway "directly at, the water's edge" of the Lake
Washington Shoreline for 700 feet between Lot 29 and the mouth of May
Creek, requiring bulkheading or armoring(DEIS page 3-39);
6. Creation of Tract C "open space", also extending towards the Lake
Washington shoreline but terminating at the DNR ownership boundary,
leaving DNR-owned uplands between the shoreline and Tract C. The
applicant has not defined a public access program or description of use for
Tract C, but the DEIS presumes public access is developed through this
area to the Lake Washington shoreline through Tract C.
7. Presumed "Use of the public [Lake Washington] shoreline waterward of the
inner harbor line for general public use" (DEIS page 3-39).
8. Creation of "public walkways or trails...presumed...through the buffer area
along May Creek" (DEIS pages 3-39; same use described on page 2-3); Note:
this is counter to the last bullet on page 2-1 of the DEIS which says no trails,
walkways or public access are currently proposed along the May Creek corridor or
the shoreline -it is assumed the analysis on page 3-39 is a correct reflection of the
proposal.
9. Creation of a May Creek buffer averaging about 50 feet and ranging from
20 to 100 feet planted with native species to provide forest cover (DEIS
Appendix C page C-9);
10. Construction of two new stormwater outfalls from stormwater quality
treatment ponds, discharging to Lake Washington at an invert 0.5 feet
below the MLLW of the lake (DEIS Appendix C page C-13). The water
quality pond serving the area north of May Creek would discharge to
Lake Washington through the Tract C open space and (presumably)
through the public lands to the lakeshore by easement(WQ1 outlet shown
in Figure 3.2-4). The second new outfall would discharge to Lake
Washington at the southern end of the mouth of May Creek (WQ2 outlet
shown in Figure 3.2-4).
A number of possible mitigation actions are described throughout the DEIS,
however it appeared that none of the mitigation actions beyond the averaged 50-
foot buffer of May Creek and stormwater treatment per the King County Design
Manual requirements were part of the current proposal.
AC Kindig cat Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 4
It is evident that Parametrix found it necessary to make some assumptions about
land uses where they were not otherwise provided for their analysis. This
included for example, presumptions about use of public lands along Lake
Washington, activity in Tract C, activity in the May Creek corridor, and planting
of the May Creek buffer with native vegetation (see page 3-13 of the DEIS). I
assumed the DEIS presumptions reflect best understanding of the current
proposal.
DEIS Review Comments
1. The structure of the DEIS made it very difficult to understand what
comprised the current proposal. A full description of the proposal was
scattered through the various chapters and appendices. A summary of
affected environment, impacts, and mitigation (Chapter 1) preceded
summary description of the two alternatives (Chapter 2). The proposal, as
described in Section 2.1, was elaborated in many separate sections of the
DEIS, and in some cases the elaboration was contradictory (as for
example, trails in the May Creek buffer). This made it difficult to know
what the applicant was specifically proposing, and what Parametrix had
presumed the applicant was proposing. With no distinction, it was
necessary for this reader to assume the proposal included all
presumptions that may have been added by Parametrix to be parts of the
current proposal.
2. The structure of the DEIS made it impossible to evaluate whether many of
the mitigation options were proposed by the applicant to minimize or
avoid impacts, or were suggestions by Parametrix how to mitigate that
were not proposed by the applicant.
3. Where mitigation options were listed, for example various means .to
minimize Lake Washington shore impacts by limitations to private docks,
homeowner access to the water, and alternative means to avoid the need
for bulkhead construction, they usually included no evaluation of
mitigation adequacy. No evaluations of impacts and the level of
mitigation to compensate for those impacts were provided for most of the
natural resource elements. Exceptions were means to avoid on-site (but
not off-site) flooding once dredging ceased, and proper functioning of the
planted May Creek corridor.
4. With regard to affected environment descriptions, the DEIS would benefit.
from reference and use of several documents pertaining to assessment of
A.C. Kindig et Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 5
federally listed species on or adjacent to the subject property, but within
the Action Area defined in the BA. These included documents pertaining
to various remediation and redevelopment proposals for the Quendall
Terminals and Baxter properties to the north of the subject site, and to
environmental assessments prepared for reconstruction of the I-405 and
NE 44th Street interchange to the east of the subject site. Review of these
documents could strengthen the EIS, particularly with regard to
assessment of the Lake Washington shoreline context, habitat, and use by
listed species.These documents are the following:
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. May 11, 2001. Environmental
Assessment Discipline Reports [on] Water Quality, Fisheries, and
Plants and Animals [for thel I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange Project,
Renton,WA.
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. February 17, 2000. Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum [for the] Quendall and Baxter Properties, Renton, WA.
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. January 3, 2001. Biological Evaluation
[for] Remediation of the South Baxter Property,Renton,WA.
• Beak Consultants Incorporated. June 19, 1997. Port Quendall Project
Mitigation Analysis Memorandum.
• Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. 1997. Draft Summary of Lake Washington
studies completed by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in the vicinity of
the Port Quendall Project(referenced and summarized in Beak 1997).
Two of these documents summarize information on May Creek from
agency contacts and field work between 1996 and 2000, and all. are
relevant to the subject property vicinity and the Lake Washington
shoreline. For example, habitat in the May Creek channel from the Lake
Washington confluence is described in detail in the I-405/NE 44th Street
report, including interaction between the rip-rap along the channel banks
and scour. This same report also more thoroughly describes the Lake
Washington shoreline than the DEIS. The Barbee Mill shoreline is
'described from field reconnaissance in the Beak 1997 report. The
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (1997) described lake shoreline composition in
the project vicinity, which Beak (1997) used to put, the project area in
perspective in terms of lakeshore habitat value. Both of these reports give
the results of juvenile chinook rearing use surveys of the Lake Washington
shoreline at the project site. Lower May Creek is considered a locally
significant resource area by King County because of the relative high
A.C Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 6
habitat value of the reach from RM 0.1 to RM 23.9 to the Lake Washington
system to spawning salmonids.
5. The DNR-owned lands adjacent to Lake Washington currently have mill
structures upland and over water, a wooden dock, wood and other debris
at the shoreline, pilings and dolphins extending to the outer harbor line,
and bulkheads. Some demolition is assumed, because of the presumption
of public access to the water on the DNR-owned lands, however the extent
of that upland and/or in-water demolition is not described or postulated,
except to note that a Washington Department of Natural Resources
aquatics lease termination assessment and restoration order would be
required (DEIS page ii). It is not clear that a DNR restoration order would
be compatible with a trail immediately along the lake shore as Parametrix
presumed. If, for example the DNR restoration order seeks a return of the
shoreline to natural and useable aquatic habitat, there is no analysis of
how the adjacent residences or Tract C may affect the objectives of the
restoration order.
6. There is no firm description of the proposal for Tract C "open space"
function or its future use as part of the project, except that it would
contain a stormwater pond (Figure 3.2-4). The DEIS does assume a public
access/recreation area would be provided at the Lake Washington
shoreline, and Tract C is the only open area that could support such a
purpose. Does,for example, Tract C provide for public access through the
DNR property to include the present mill dock extending into Lake
Washington? If this is the intent of the project, it would be reasonable for
the DEIS to evaluate associated impacts and uses to cumulatively assess
related impacts to the Lake Washington shoreline. Lots 71 through 90 are
all oriented to views of Lake Washington through open space Tract C,
which suggests that disposition of the adjacent DNR uplands at the Lake
Washington shoreline is an important component of the project.
7. The BA (Raedeke 2002) described the need for construction of bridge
abutments within the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of May Creek.
The DEIS indicates construction of the new traffic bridge is "presumed to
include no work within the OHWM of May Creek." I must assume the latter'is
true due to an update in plans. At this stage of planning it is not unusual
to lack detailed conceptual plans for construction of the bridge and the
two new stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington. However, more of a
conceptual plan for these structures (beyond disclosure of their need)
needs to be provided to Parametrix and described in the EIS for
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 7
evaluation. Without it, there was no means for the DEIS to reasonably
address the scale of impacts or feasibility of construction to avoid impacts
from installation or maintenance of these structures.
8. The Construction Water Quality Impacts section of Appendix C, Water
Resources (page C-11), does not address the construction of the new
bridge over May Creek, the demolition of two bridges over May Creek,
construction of up to 16 residential docks, or construction of the
bulkheads presumed necessary along the property's Lake Washington
shoreline.
9. The southern stormwater pond is located in a sandy delta area at the
mouth of May Creek, where the lake is very shallow and subject to
deposition with May Creek sediments. Presumably, this outfall could be
subject to obstruction by deposits after dredging of May Creek is
terminated. The DEIS did not evaluate how far into the lake the outfall
from WQ2 outfall might need to extend to avoid burial from sediment
delivered by May Creek to the delta area (and how constructed), or other
maintenance such as dredging at this outfall that may be required if the
outfall terminates at the lakeshore at minus 0.5 feet MLLW. It may be that
discharge velocity from the pond is expected to keep the outfall clear and
cut a channel through any deposits that may accumulate at the current
shoreline,but that is not evaluated.
10. The Aquatic Species Report (Appendix E) does not evaluate construction
impacts beyond control of upland erosion on fisheries. Assessment of the
construction activities described in(8) above are not included.
11. A federal permit may be necessary for bulkhead construction and other
in-water work, depending on the nature and location of the proposed
designs for structures, including stormwater utilities if they extend
beyond the OWHM. If so, it is not included under Approval and Licenses
in the Fact Sheet.
12. An HPA would be required for the Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife's (WDFW) review and include WDFW conditions as that
agency deemed warranted. It is worth noting that WDFW in the past
cited an in-work window of June 16 through January 31st for south Lake
Washington to protect juvenile salmonids. However, the combined
windows for work in south Lake Washington recommended by the
National Marine Fisheries Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service are
more restrictive. Where the Services' approval under Section 7
consultation under the Endangered Species Act was sought for a U.S.
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 8
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Nationwide 38 permit at the nearby
South Baxter property,in-water restoration work is restricted to August 1st
through December 31st. The Corps's current guidance for the project site
area is a work window from July 16th through December 31st.1 It would be
reasonable for the DEIS to evaluate whether the more restrictive window
requested by USFWS and NMFS for a nearby project is prudent or
reasonable for the proposed action, or if the Corp's recommendation is
reasonable for the proposed project's bridge, bulkhead and outfall
construction.
13. The reductions in impervious surface contributions to non-point drainage
reaching May Creek would have some calculable reduction in May Creek
velocities, however the realized reduction relative to total flow in the
creek and total contributing basin is unlikely to be measurable, or
meaningful in the sense that it offsets other impacts, especially in the
lowest portion of May Creek where water level and hydraulics are
influenced by Lake Washington. There are no flowing streams through
which site drainage flows between Lake Washington and Puget Sound, so
the reduction in impervious surface from the existing mill to future
• residential land uses makes no difference except to the portion of the site
presently contributing flow to May Creek, where it is not likely to be
measurable. It is certainly true that there would be no adverse effects
from a reduction in impervious surface.
14. The DEIS (and Appendix C) assumes that water quality would be
improved as a result of the provision of water quality treatment ponds
where no water quality treatment was previously offered. Basic Menu
water quality treatment from the King County Surface Water Design
Manual is inferred without supporting analysis to avoid adverse impacts.
This may be true for some or all contaminants in stormwater. However
absent an analysis this conclusion applied to all contaminants is
conjecture. It does seem common sense that residential land use with
treatment should have less of a water quality impact than industrial land
use with no treatment. However, the DEIS only examined the issue as a
change in impervious surface, land use, and treatment, and did not
'U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. May 30,2001. Programmatic Biological Evaluation for the State of
Washington for Salmonid Species Listed or Proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Under the Endangered Species Act. Regulatory Branch, Seattle District.
Appendix D-2(updated May 19,2002)Approved Work Windows for Waters within National Park
Boundaries,Columbia River,Snake River,and Lakes.
A.C. Kindig&Co.
i
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 9
consider the nature of the change in land use and contaminant sources.
The SEPA Checklist submitted for the project indicated the mill supports
approximately 12 employees. This is a very low level of industrial
activity. Mill activities include use of vehicles and consequently some
contaminant sources. However, the proposal is estimated to create 1,188
average weekday daily trips (DEIS Table 3.5-3), so the traffic volumes and
motor vehicle access to the site is greatly increased over current mill
operations. Vehicles are a major contaminant source to stormwater
runoff. Landscaping and pets will also contribute contaminants to
stormwater that are not likely prevalent in current mill runoff. The net
result of a changed set of contaminant sources offset by treatment in a
pond, versus the existing condition, is difficult to judge in this situation
without more work than the EIS provided. I do not disagree with the
contention that residential development can be adequately treated to
prevent water quality impacts, but found no basis to agree or disagree
with the DEIS contention that it would necessarily be an improvement
over current conditions or that the treatment proposed would be sufficient
to avoid impacts at the two discharge locations. A quantified water
quality analysis would benefit the EIS analysis.
15. The state water quality standards used in the DEIS are outdated. The
water quality classifications of waters have changed under WAC 173-
201A adopted July 1, 2003 and effective August 1, 2003. This should be
corrected in the FEIS.
16. The DEIS concludes that the approximately 50-foot averaged buffer width
for May Creek restored to a forested condition would "fall significantly
short of providing full riparian functionality" (DEIS Appendix E, page E-14)
and provides analysis that concludes the proposed buffer "would not
provide the full range of habitat functions and protections that streams require"
though it would be an improvement, over the existing condition (DEIS
Appendix E, page E-16). However, there is no assessment as to what a
proper functioning upland corridor width ought to be for May Creek.
Consequently, it cannot be evaluated whether Options A or B
(modifications to May Creek and Lake Washington shoreline proposals
described on pages 3-48 to 3-52) are sufficient. Under Option B a possible
100-foot corridor width for May Creek would occur, which may be
sufficient for riparian function and fish habitat purposes. Option A,
proposed for the same purpose, makes no consequential improvement to
the May Creek corridor beyond the Proposal, and thus remains
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 10
inadequate to provide meaningful riparian function according to the DEIS
analysis. Tables E-1 through E-3 on page E-15 (DEIS Appendix E) give the
appearance of indicating that even a 100-foot width is insufficient. (See also
comment 19 below; a 100-foot alternative is suggested along May Creek as one
possible way to lessen flooding impacts).
17. One part of the DEIS consideration for accepting a 50-foot averaged width
is that it would be reforested and be an improvement over the existing
buffer width and vegetation(page E-20). However, this does not take into
account whether the improvement is sufficient to offset fisheries impacts
from increased human activity and disturbance near May Creek, and
alterations to Lake Washington, including docks and bulkheads and new
stormwater outf ails. If it does not function well, the long term
improvement may not realize any practical offset to impacts the project is
determined to require.
18. There are 25-foot minimum residential building setbacks proposed for the
Lake Washington shoreline consistent with the currently adopted Renton
Shoreline Master Program, but no buffers along Lake Washington are
proposed. Residential lots that abut the lake and not DNR-owned
uplands extend out into the lake waterward of the OHWM. The DEIS
concludes the proposal is "likely to continue the trends [along Lake
Washington] that have resulted in degradation to terrestrial and aquatic habitat
that is illustrated by the decline of salmon species" [DEIS Appendix E, page E-
19. If this is true and unmitigated, it represents a fatal flaw with the
current proposal that should require reconsideration. No specific set of
mitigation actions are proposed to prevent or minimize this adverse
impact from occurring, although many suggestions are offered. A clearer
linkage of impacts to mitigation necessary to address them would greatly
assist the reader to understand the proposal and warranted mitigation.
19. If dredging is discontinued in May Creek (it is not an element of the
Proposal), analysis in Appendix B concludes sediment deposition and
buildup of bed elevations and bars would extend the 100-year floodplain
onto about half of the proposed residential development to the north of
May Creek (DEIS Figure 3.2-3). If this is true and unmitigated, it is a fatal
flaw of the proposal. The DEIS evaluated mitigation measures' and
derived two alternatives. The first is a 50-foot setback to May Creek with
levees and no alterations to the one existing bridge that would remain, but
a full span of the new bridge (Alternative 1). The second is a 100-foot
setback to May Creek with levees and the same assumption for the
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Mr. Clint Chase
September 25, 2003
Page 11
bridges (Alternative 2) (Appendix B, page B-14 to B-16; and described as
Scenarios 1 and 2 on page 3-15 of the DEIS). Alternative 1 would raise the
flood stage up to 1.6 feet; Alternative 2 would raise the flood stage to a
slightly lower degree (DEIS pages 3-15 to 3-16). There was no analysis on
how this may affect upstream properties affected by the existing
floodplain (for example, the Pan Abode property), except to say that
impacts of levee construction would in turn need to be mitigated by
compensatory storage, best placed at the upstream end of the May Creek
corridor through the site (page B-16). Without levee construction and
compensatory storage provision, significant and unavoidable flooding
and floodplain impacts would occur. The plan as it exists would need to
be modified to prevent these adverse impacts.
20. Given the nature of the adverse impacts to flooding, adverse impacts to
the Lake Washington shoreline, and minimal function expected from a 50-
foot averaged restored corridor around May Creek that the DEIS
described, the Proposal as is would have significant adverse impacts.
Option B as described on page 3-50 is the only means suggested by the
DEIS to offset the most serious impacts, and would appear to require
project re-design or development of another alternative. Other mitigation
suggestions throughout the document should be evaluated and either
made part of a proposed package of mitigation, or identified as other
possible mitigation. The need for each mitigation element and its ability
to minimize or avoid impacts should be presented for clarity.
Sincerely,
/I. :/?/tk
Andrew C. Kindig, Ph.D.
Principal
A.C. &Co.
A.C. Kinc/iq&Co.
.:
•
1!! i1I •$4
-di, • a
I.
u -�. t 4.
-
r
r a•--.
Y.
- . �'4'•� 'f 4yY,• ri,, y 'X'' ,. '!'4Y :wa ' .•cam - : .. . gri.- r•. •
L P 1 4!
. I
IIP Pe. I I , P
2
' 4
1;..le."1 .•
. , . . • •
1
_.._
1 r .
. . • • e t
; . .- (I,
1 :'1 r ,
' e .
. 4
lk . ty•
1 t. • ' ,
i _,- lig
t .
$ .
.01
i
t. i I
-` 4
I :
IC
1
?
r's , • ,
ti
•
t
1 .
. i. I •
.. • '
r ., ,I
414. 1 . 1 .
. 1114.
'
ill ( it, .., -, - • ,-• -Is.-
•if '111" " . - .'1 s .'11?"
' • ' -r-. "*,;',..;;;;;,
i I,
, I•
pa .....- .
,,
q 41' i 1
, ,f% 1 I .4 ' •f44 ' :AK' . "
1- .2_,..:_ -_ ___,,
11.., .
i ...._.... . ,... .
. . ,.„ ..
IIPP'-- .
,, .,... _
, 1
i . »
, .,.
..._
iiiiillipi
Piliri 1 . 1
i .
rig ,
a,
01.111.
t-4111 IP ii
.,..,
.- •
,. • . ...
..Li .,.,...
, -.......i . .
•11. ,,,P,r •t
...9• 4, . A, I
•
h1 - ••a •
4, •;• .i
. ..'.7 ‘ . . '!:: L. A ?1'1- : ' '' - 1:114.1.1.1...' ' :
.,, IP ', , *# „ $
'1 IRO f•r . /1114 t!
•
.'. y
' ;j f, ',
t' %,.1 " ir - ' . ,
fk ' .
ti�, l r I y
PI
. 'I' ii
kkil 6 ., , t ,
t it
t I
al �P'^.( r
'art
,1., f f
tif:5:.
kf
. a 1 * *" i IIII
r .
r ,
'''''.,.. .1',..,:.:.tittil .
a
\
fi
la-4 N 1',+. a� j i
4 . ,
, -0- r
E•.., - ,., - - . - -, , - / 4 4 .
I.
IA A' lot - ' t } f`'
R, 1117
t • i r-; ii
.. 6
'1
, 4
', ,,,.
'`,tfiy 5 1
.11f
i ttt 11
- 3
r i. ,
'
.„y. ;i t.
} ` YT fi J V . r .�f
Barbee Mill DEIS
September 22, 2003 Public Hearing
Jennifer: Thanks,well, good evening and thank you for coming to the public hearing for
comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat. My name is Jennifer Henning,I'm the Principal Planner with
the Development Services Division here at the City of Renton. And I'm pinch
hitting tonight for the project manager on our team, Susan Fiala who's out of the
office. I'd like to introduce another member of my staff,Andree DeBauw,who
is our Recording Secretary tonight. Andree is also the sergeant at arms and as
you get up to speak tonight,because there are quite a few signed up,you'll have
about five minutes to speak. And Andree's got great little timer here that will
start blinking. When you have two minutes left it will blink yellow and then it
will go red when your time is up. So we'd like to have you try and contain your
comments within about five minute period if at all possible.
We also have Campbell Mathewson here tonight. He is the applicant for the
Cugini family and he is considered the applicant for this project proposal. Robert
Cugini is also here representing as the owner property, and David Sherrard,is the
project manager for Parametrix which is our consultant team that prepared the
EIS for the City of Renton.
Okay so lets go through a few logistics. We have exhibits on the boards mounted
over on the side of the room. It shows the proposal which is to subdivide the
twenty-three acre piece of property along Lake Washington into individual lots
where there would be built townhomes and also four and five-plex structures.
We have a vicinity map and that's mounted on the side. And then there are two
other exhibits which show some alternative or modified proposals that are
suggested in the Draft Environmental Impact Study. So please feel free to review
these. At any time you can get up and wander around and look at those.
Next,we have a sign-up sheet in the back of the room,near the door as you came
in. This is for anyone who would wish to speak tonight or testify. Don't worry if
you are not signed up right now. If you choose to speak later on in the evening
we can take you after we have taken everyone else in order.
For those who plan to speak tonight could you please come to the podium when
it's your turn, say your name, spell your last name, and give your mailing address
so that our records are complete. Anyone who testifies will be made a party of
record on the development application and you'll receive notification of
decisions that are made along the way.
For those of you that haven't attended an EIS hearing before,this is not really
intended to be interactive. This is not where you get your comments responded
to unless they are procedural in nature. We merely are here to collect your
comments and to catalogue those and they will be addressed in the Final EIS
document. So the Draft EIS document which is this two volume set,hard copy
or a CD-Rom,together with responses to your comments and to the comments
received via letter from agencies and other interested parties, that together
constitutes the entire EIS.
So what I'm going to do right now is to recap the proposal and process to date.
Then we'll open the hearing for public testimony.
The EIS or the Environmental Impact Statement was required by the City of
Renton because the City determined that the proposal was likely to have a
significant impact on the environment. We needed the study in order to assess
the impacts and to propose ways in which those impacts could either be
eliminated or diminished,below a level of significance.
So the City issued a Determination of Significance in November of last year.
This was after evaluating the application. And we'd had the application for about
six months at that point and we were doing quite a few studies. The
Determination of Significance was issued by the Environmental Review
Committee,that's the environmental, ah,the responsible official for the City of
Renton. And then we started taking comments on what the scope of this
document should be. We had a public scoping meeting in December of last year.
After we had the public scoping meeting we started looking for a consultant to
prepare the document. And we ultimately selected Parametrix from Kirkland,
Washington to be the City's consultant of the preparation of the document. And
David Sherrard is here tonight as the project manager. And he may be filling in a
few gaps as I need along the way tonight.
So Parametrix commenced their work on the EIS in February. They were all
over the site. They were evaluating the habitat. They were evaluating the
shoreline. They were evaluating the land use and the aesthetics,the utilities
systems,the flood plain, all the natural and built environment systems and many
of the transportation issues. The Draft EIS was then prepared and issued on
September 2,2003. We are in the midst of a 30 day comment period which
began with the issuance of that EIS. This comment period will end next
Wednesday, October 15t,. That is unless we receive requests from agencies or
others for an additional 15 day extension to that comment period. As I
mentioned, anybody who comments tonight will be made a party of record and
you'll be receiving receiving notice on any decisions associated with this
application.
I've shown you the printed version of the EIS. If you don't have a copy,they are
available for purchase in our Finance Department for$15.00 each volume or you
can get the entire thing on a CD-Rom for$5.00. If we need to mail it to you,we
also charge postage and there is tax applicable to both. Also the EIS is available
at the public libraries here in Renton,the main branch and also the Highlands
branch.
Okay, so let's get down to the nuts and bolts. The project site is about 23 acres.
It's in the Kenneydale neighborhood. Roughly, it is bounded by Lake
Washington on the west,NE 40`h Street on the south,exit 7 or NE 44th on the
north, and the Burlington Northern Sante Fe railroad tracks and Lake Washington
Blvd. on the east. It part of...It's currently the Barbee Mill. It's been used as a
sawmill for many many years,probably since the 1930's,Robert,is that about
right?
Robert Cugini: No, it was moved to that site in 1945.
Jennifer: 1945, so it's been used as a sawmill for a very long time. There are vacant
properties to the north in different ownership and those are not part of this
application. May Creek does flow through the site. It's roughly in the center of
the site at the eastern boundary then flows to the, if you look at this boundary,
excuse me this map up on the overhead projector,you can see in blue, from the
center of the site on the eastern border, down to the southwest,that's May Creek
flowing through the site. The zoning designation for this property, even though
it's an industrial use the zoning designation is what we call COR which is
Commercial, Office,Residential. It's intended for mixed-use residential
development combined with office buildings and commercial. However,it does
allow for stand-alone residential development at lower densities and that's what
this proposal is. This proposal is subdivide the property into 115 lots. These
would be developed with 115 residential structures,primarily duplexes,but also
some town homes that have four and five units. The lots would range in size
from 1,847 square feet up to 7,336 square feet. The project also consists of the
construction of public streets and a couple of at-grade railroad crossings to get
onto the site. In the EIS we made a number of assumptions, and those
assumptions were to allow us to analyze the project because we had to look at
what we considered to be the worst case scenario and have full disclosure of the
environmental impacts. So for example, we knew the property was being
subdivided and we knew there would be some residential structures on it,but we
couldn't tell you exactly what the height of those was. The zoning allows heights
up to 75 feet and the Shoreline Program of the City allows heights of up to 50
feet in the shoreline area. So we looked at the potential for some very tall
structures, even though it's likely that would never occur,but we had to look at
that. We also had to assume that there would be individual residential docks for
each home along the waterfront, along the Lake Washington waterfront and that
would be for 16 homes. Even though that's not necessarily part of the proposal
because it wasn't disclosed,we had to make that assumption. In addition,the
EIS analyzed a 25 foot setback from Lake Washington; that is a setback to the
residential structure, and that's what the Shoreline Master Program currently
allows. However,there are a couple alternatives with greater setbacks that the
EIS looked at that are kind of the current thinking in terms of protecting the
salmon and habitat; and that would be for a 50 foot and 100 foot setback, and
those are some drawings that are shown on white posterboards over on the side of
the room. The 50 foot setback would result in fewer units, a total of 101. A 100
foot setback would result in only 50 building sites(50)building sites. So the EIS
assumed that the level of development of the site of the 115 units,but it also had
to look at alternatives. So the alternative we chose to look at was what we call
the"no project" alternative,which is continuation of existing industrial use of the
site. So it assumed there might be some reuse of the existing buildings and that
some sort of industrial development would continue.
Okay,having said all that,we're just about 6:15 P.M. I'm going to grab the sign
up sheet and we'll open the public comment portion of this public hearing.
Andree is going to serve as a recorder and we're going to call the speakers to the
podium in the order you are signed up. And should you wish to testify and are
not signed up,then we'll have an opportunity for you to do that.
And our first speaker is Mr. Greg Fawcett.
Greg Fawcett: oh, okay...which way does this face,this way over here? Are you okay here?
Jennifer: Um,yeah you can speak to us.
Greg Fawcett: Oh.
Jennifer: You don't need to speak to the audience. Okay? Thank you.
Greg Fawcett: My name is Greg Fawcett and my mailing address is PO Box 402,Fall City,WA
98024. Forgive me for speaking quickly but I wanted to go through some of the
issues that I had. I'm 51 years old. I grew up in Kennydale,went to school in
Renton, graduated from Hazen in 1971. I completed my B.A. degree at the
University of Washington, and then went on to get my doctorate at the University
of Washington in 1981. My family currently owns property in Kennydale, and
my brother and my mother and my son currently just live a few blocks away
from the proposed Barbee site. Our family has owned property in Kennydale
since 1875,prior to the incorporation of the City of Renton and when
Washington was a territory.
I wanted to use the limited time available to try to help educate people in the
room regarding the growth and population and its impact on land usage and how
that affects everybody in this room and in this country. In the United States we
have a net increase of 2%of the population every year on average. It's a matter
of record with the most recent United States Census, and also the Washington
State Growth Management Act. Most people consider a 2% growth rate increase
to be modest,yet in 50 years that means the population will double.
This growth in population is nothing new. In fact, it has been stable for nearly
300 years in this country since 1700. Many in this room will witness the
doubling of the population in their lifetimes. To those that say how can this
happen or what kind of world will this be if that occurs, all you need to do is look
back 50 years. And in fact this area and in this region has more than doubled in
the last 50 years.
Those that sit on the Council are very well aware of The Growth Management
Act, or the term"management growth", or the new buzz phrase "Smart Growth".
I speak tonight in favor of the proposed Barbee Mill development. Not because
it degrades the environment,but because it provides housing for a rising
population in an urban area and whose net effect will be to decrease the damage
to the environment for future generations.
And let me begin to explain why that is a benefit to the environment. If we do
not more fully develop urban areas that already have existing infrastructure
including roads,utilities,density of population,then economic pressure for a
growing population to sprawl increases to outlying regions. This ensuing sprawl
will on balance create greater environmental damage. Every acre that we set
aside in urban areas as open space,or as protected,puts increasing pressure for
sprawl in areas further away from the existing urban areas.
If we limit the areas to support housing this acts to drive up the cost of housing
for those who live in the urban areas. In a recent article in the Seattle Times "the
cost per square foot for housing in Seattle is four times the cost in outlying
areas". My question is what is that family going to have to do without to pay for
this increase in housing? Are they going to have to do without health insurance,
prescription medication. Are they going to have to do without the ability to pay
for their children's higher education,or retirement, or quality of life? What are
people going to have to do without to pay for this increased cost of housing?
As we restrict development in urban areas this acts to drive up the cost of all real
estate in those areas. The rise in cost for real estate drives up the cost for all
goods and services that each of us in this room depend on. I would ask again,
what are we going to have to do without to pay for this increase in cost?
If you do not want to support growth in the City of Renton and use the
environment as your mantra then just embrace the inevitable sprawl that will
result and explain to your children how you protected the environment by
promoting sprawl.
I would be remiss if I did not offer at least some possible solutions. I think one
idea would be to evaluate properties for development on a case-by-case basis. In
other words,just as you would consider an individual for a job based not on their
class, or race,but rather on his or her individual characteristics; so must we
consider individual properties. Where is can be demonstrated that considering all
the factors a specific parcel can offer on balance greater good to the area then the
summation of those factors should precedence and override a single existing
restriction,or regulation. This concept would be truly a"Smart Growth"
concept.
Another concept would be a transfer of development credits: where by
neighboring property owners like myself that have similar zoning or whatever,
would sell their credits to a developer to more intensely develop properties to a
greater density above existing zoning allowances. Many other cities,the City of
Seattle,the City of Redmond, and King County already have such ordinances in
place.
I would be happy to discuss in more detail how to transfer development credits so
it would be a win for the environment, a win for the City, and a win for future
development. Thank you very much.
Jennifer: Thank you Mr.Fawcett. Our next speaker is Torsten Lienau. Leen-ow? You're
not,you're going to forego speaking? Okay,thank you. Our next speaker is Mr.
Robert Cugini.
Robert Cugini: Robert Cugini,PO Box 359,Renton,WA 98057. I am Robert Cugini. I'm one
of the owners of the Barbee Mill property. My family has been in Renton since
1904 and we are excited about the chance to finally redevelop our industrial site
into something that is much more compatible with the existing neighborhoods.
Our project represents about the least dense,least impact project that could be
proposed for the site. As many of you know,there has been proposals in recent
years that would have taken full advantage of the 125 foot height limit and
increased traffic by thousands of cars per day. We're excited about the fact that
our project generates minimal traffic,protects views, and is a significant
environmental improvement over the existing industrial use. We look forward to
working with the City and our neighbors to bring this project to completion.
Thank you for your time in the recent months with all the work on this project
and for the opportunity to comment this evening. Thank you.
Jennifer: Thank you Mr. Cugini. Our next speaker is Mr. Campbell Mathewson.
Mr. Campbell: No thanks. I thought you were supposed to sign in.
Jennifer: Okay. Alright. Mr. Emmett Pritchard.
Mr. Pritchard: Same for me.
Jennifer: Okay. Mr.Don West. •
Mr.West: It's the same for me.
Jennifer: Okay. Mr. Jim Johnson.
Mr. Johnson: Same here.
Jennifer: Okay. How about Matt Hougu. Is Matt interested in speaking? Okay. Fritz
Timm.
Fritz Timm: My name is Fritz Timm. I'm the Senior Development Engineer with the City of
Newcastle. Mailing address is 13020 S. 72nd Pl.,Newcastle,WA 98059. I want
to express the City of Newcastle's appreciation for allowing us a period of
comment. We have in the record a series of comments regarding the project. We
went through the EIS and identified a number of locations where we felt that the
impacts may not have adequately addressed our comments; possibly through
misinterpretation of what our comments indicated. With me is our City Traffic
Engineer,Mr.Dave Engar and he also will be expressing some more specific
issues related to traffic. With respect to other comments that we had put on the
record;noise, dust,light and glare,these issues were primarily concerned with
respect to the height of residences of Newcastle along Lake Washington Blvd.
and further to the south because they're directly impacted by the project. Our
feeling is that the issues as they're impacting the City of Newcastle should be
more specifically addressed. Again that relates specifically to noise, dust,light
and glare. And if there's specific questions that the team has with respect to
those,we plan on submitting formal comments a little later in the month.
Jennifer: Thank you Mr.Timm. So as I understand it, a letter is forthcoming from the City
of Newcastle.
Mr.Timm: Yes ma'am
Jennifer: Thank you. The next party signed up is Gary and Yvonne Pipkin.
Mr.Pipkin: Yeah we had no comment because we thought that was just a sign-up sheet.
Jennifer: Okay. Thank you. How about John Houtz?
John Houtz: No.
Jennifer: No?Alright,Mr. Chuck Wolfe
Chuck Wolfe: My name is Chuck Wolfe. I'm with the law firm of Foster,Pepper, and
Shefelman in Seattle. We represented the Port Quendall Company for many
years. The Port Quendall Company; as some of you know, owns the Baxter
Properties,the former Baxter Properties to the north and the Pan Abode
Properties to the east of the subject property. And we will be submitting
substansive comments at a later time. Quite frankly,we've got the EIS under
review right now and we'd like to take this opportunity if possible,to request
induction of the 15 day statutory exception or extension,rather,I'm sorry.
Because of the precedential nature of this development on the Port Quendall
Company property,the complexity of the issues, and the fact that our clients in
the past have studied many of these issues,we'd like to see some prior studies
better integrated in the current document and have specific identification of those
opportunities underway. And that's all for tonight.Thank you.
Jennifer: Okay,thank you Mr. Wolfe. So as I understand,you're requesting an extension
of the comment period. If that does occur, all parties would be notified that the
comment period has been extended. But we have not made that decision as of
tonight.
Mr.Wolfe: I understand that if you're unable to make that determination prior to October 1
then we would prefer October 16th or so.
Jennifer: Okay,Thank you. And for the record,I understand Miss DeBauw says that we
don't have your address but we do have it on the sign up sheet. Could you verify
1111 Third Ave.,#3400, Seattle,WA 98101. Is that correct Mr.Wolfe. (he
verified). Okay,thank you. Our next speaker is Dave Engar.
Dave Engar: Good evening. My name is Dave Engar. I'm employed by Transportation
Planning Inc. Our address is 2223 112th Ave.NE, Suite 101,Bellevue,WA
98004. As Mr.Timm mentioned I'm the Traffic Engineering Consultant for the
City of Newcastle. And I will be submitting a letter with our comments on the
review of the transportation section that will attached to the City of Newcastle's
letter to be submitted a little later before the deadline. I have reviewed the
Transportation Section of the Draft EIS and appreciate that it does address some
of the comments that were mentioned in our, in my April 1,2002 letter which
was attached to the City of Newcastle letter that was submitted in December
regarding scoping for this project. However,there are a few additional issues
and some additional analysis and discussion that we think should be included in
the EIS.
The first of those is that a general correction should be made that several of the
streets that are mentioned in the Transportation Section toward the north end of
the study area are actually in the City of Bellevue and not the City of Newcastle.
In particular, southeast 64th Street and all of the streets to the north are in
Bellevue because the city limits between Newcastle and Bellevue runs along the
south edge of 64th Street,west of 112th Ave. SE. There are several references
and tables that refer to those streets in Bellevue.
Regarding the project trip distribution shown on Figure 3.5-5 in the
Transportation Section I have three concerns regarding that figure. The first is
that the figure shows no site generated traffic on SE 76th Street, which runs up the
hill into Newcastle. Secondly, the figure shows about 9% of the site generated
trips using 112th SE, south of Lake Washington Blvd.,which appears to be to
high. Trips that would travel between that area in Newcastle,kind of northeast of
the Barbee Mill site up in the vicinity of SE 68th Street and 112th Ave. SE,trips
between that area and the Barbee Mill site would probably use SE 76th Street
rather than the 112th Ave./Lake Washington Blvd.route just because the SE 76"'
Street route is probably about a half-mile shorter and a more direct route. And
that needs to be taken into consideration in the EIS. So that 9%of the trips that's
shown on 112th probably most of that really should be shown on 76th Street
instead.
My third concern about the trip generation or trip distribution rather, for the
project shown on Figure 3.5-5 is regarding the 25% of the site generated trips
that are shown NE 44th Street, east of Lake Washington Blvd. We think that the
trip distribution needs to be extended to show where that 25% is expected to go.
Now I would expect that some of those trips would be distributed to the
McDonald's and the other commercial developments right in that area of NE 44th
Street but I would expect that most of those trips would probably continue on up
the hill into Newcastle, along the Lincoln Ave./112th Pl. SE route. And probably
many of those would continue on on SE 88th Street and 89th Pl.; all the way to
Coal Creek Parkway. So we think the trip distribution needs to be extended at
least to Coal Creek Parkway to that intersection, at that 89th Pl.
The City of Newcastle is in the process of updating its Comprehensive Plan and
as part of that effort they've done an extensive analysis of the intersections city-
wide during the a.m. and p.m.peak hour and looked at levels of service. And
one of the levels of service concerns is a Level of Service F that's been identified
at that SE 89th Pl/Coal Creek Parkway intersection. So we think that this Draft
EIS for Barbee Mill needs to include a trip distribution to that intersection and
possible identification of any impacts and any potential mitigation.
The City of Newcastle's Comprehensive Plan process has also identified a Level
of Service F condition at the Lake Washington Blvd./112th Ave. SE intersection
during the a.m.peak hour. We think that's largely because of traffic using Lake
Washington Blvd. and 112th Ave. SE as an alternate route to 1-405,particularly
northbound during the morning peak hour. There's some long back-ups at the
stop sign at Lake Washington Blvd. as you try to turn left on 112th Ave. SE. We
had mentioned in our scoping request letter last year that we wanted,that we
would like to see an analysis of the a.m.peak hour at that intersection. That was
not included in this Draft EIS and we think that is still needed,particularly in
light of this Level of Service F condition.
Finally,we would like to see the EIS include an analysis of construction traffic
impacts. Apparently there is no discussion in the Transportation Section
currently. EIS should identify and discuss truck haul routes for construction
materials and wastes. Measures to mitigate construction traffic impacts such as
potential haul route restrictions,restrictions on haul hours of operations,weight
limits, oversized load routing, etc. Other potential mitigation measures are
related to construction truck traffic; include,pavement condition,monitoring, and
restoration,plans for transportation of hazardous materials,truck washing, load
covering, spill prevention and clean-up, and related issues. Again,we will be
submitting written comments in the near future. Thank you.
Jennifer: Thank you Mr. Engar. The last person I have on my sign-up list tonight is Ms.
Marcie Marxwell.
Ms.Maxwell: (She was inaudible,but declined).
Jennifer: Okay. Is there anyone else in the audience who would care to provide oral
comments tonight on the Draft EIS for the Barbee Mill proposal? If so,now is
your chance. Okay,well with that I will close the public hearing. I'd like to
thank you all for your interest and for your attention tonight. Anyone who signed
up as you came in, or if you'd like to give us your name and address as you leave
will be made a party of record. If the comment period is extended,you'll be
notified. The Final EIS typically takes about 60 days to prepare once the
comment period for the Draft EIS is complete. So you can expect to see the
Response to Comment document issued in about two months from the end of the
comment period. So thank you very much. Staff will be here and the EIS
consultant will be here,the applicant and owner for several minutes if you'd like
to catch us and discuss anything. Thank you.
BARBEE MILL DEIS A,NTOX PUBLIC HEARING
SEPTEMBER 23, 2003
NAME (please print clearly) ADDRESS/PHONE/ E-MAIL CHECK HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK 9>
1. V
✓vGrcoFawe, V1- f). 0. iSoxy0a Fail t rWr} 9g". /
2.
-1-11en4K @ holsrietc. co",
V;ToesrEl.) Lc a p.N Sco - lo8123Avc 'tie) ;4'.e.12oo) Fe1/cvuct wq Tool-- 4zs.4so.433c
3.
4 ,
✓rM k (7 t )PT/ s 12) 1 `I ; Sin / LA,A_ 5\4/0
5.
ll/il 1414tt 1964-C/A,P4 5.-9-I 1 i\r &-- GO s'eattL ? Tug
6.
/ 0 tA \-Afe6±- 2.2 4,1,0,`1 N\E c�u Si-. 2 Iaw„,,,,dl q, s 3
)
7.
J;�/ Jokfrns or) 3 92/ //-s-7/4 /9v, . sc , ).,,a),,,,, s4 , c 1, 9 r,zi
8.
/ /"►'47/ bliii44, �` 20 Ae141,0(0 �y -f�4o� 44664%), �.(iy�- Sit 33
9. — y13020 / A, cask. t /
t-t ` I / 1Z J C�, 72. �L.J-c-e ��� e.f t./��f� 7 rO S 7
V 10.
.,,/J�r1s \-4 A- yv D tv Nt--- P I Pj'(r J c 1 a 0 , . -F'‘ S-T. K E tii-o,\l okc vs
11.
ti ,Wck 1 \Os z 68°9 g.Wi.ei Lkt,tE, f2_60row1 9bo ssC.
12. raqei peer v�
scel ti (' D ✓
✓vC f uk Gu��� i —+ �� d We_ 3 o ,Se., g001 "&°t- 1 o ±kpc &( Co,
)3: { 112Aw5I�o( I-A7 icJ Pam,, Iit,) � harur;1Lf.l,sc, /N c, 1/
oU .e_. �= � `�-23 ((1N ' N ' ' 101 ,_, ggat,Lt
nr
Ian (, 'l , / �,
15.
Those who sign-in will automatically be made a Party-of-Record for the project. Page of
ri
LETTER OF MAY 30, 2002
•
•
FOSTEIc PEPPER & SH EFELMI, -d LC
•
ATTORNEYS AT L A W
Direct Phone
• (206) 447-2901
May 30,2002 - Direct Facsimile
(206)749-2035
E-Mail
Ms.Lesley Nishihara wotrc®roster.com
Project Manager,Development Services Division
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Comments,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms.Nishihara:
IIII THIRD
We are writing on behalf of our clients,Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall AVENUE
Company("PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone in Renton, Suite ;goo
known as the"North J.H.Baxterproperty,"the"South J.H.Baxterproperty,"and the SEATTLE
Washington
"Pan Abode property." These properties are located north and east,respectively, of 9 8101 3=99
the above-referenced development proposal..
Telephone
(206)447-440o
We have provided similar comments to those set out below under prior Facsimile
Barbee Mill development proposals. We provide this letter in response to the May (Z o 6)4 4 7-9 7 0 o
16,2002 Notice of Application, given the wide range of issues subject to analysis Website
under RCW 58.17.110,associated SEPA review and the ongoing potential for W W W.P O STE R.C O M
significant environmental impacts in the areas of transportation and natural
resources,including potential impacts to May Creek and Lake Washington. When
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis,these potential impacts may ..
constrain the development potential of adjacent COR-2 Zone properties.
Background .
ANCHORAGE
As noted in the attached February 12,2002 letter to City Attorney • . Alaska
Lawrence J.Warren,PQC acquired the Baxter and Pan Abode properties to develop .
medium-and high-density commercial,residential and retail uses. The Baxter PORTLAND
properties are currently contaminated, and cleanup work(pursuant to Consent Oregon
Decrees with the Department of Ecology)is expected to commence later this year. SEATTLE
In the future,the Pan Abode property will likely be used for hotels,restaurants or Washington
highway-oriented retail.
SPDXANE
Washington
The Consent Decrees are of record in King County Superior Court and reflect
• a multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process to facilitate development.
50327523.02 - .
Ms.Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30,2002
Page 2
The attached letter to Mr. Warren describes the anticipated redevelopment of the Baxter
properties as described in the Consent Decrees, as well as Renton's long history of
comprehensive planning for the COR-2 Zone. The letter also requests that development
agreement negotiations commence with regard to the development activities to follow the
imminent cleanup work.
Cumulative and Concurrent Impact Analysis
Given the development-enabling activities under the Consent Decrees and the anticipated_ .
development to follow,it is clear that the SEPA and Preliminary Plat review(as well as any
pending site plan and/or shoreline application review)for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat(the
"pending Barbee Mill reviews")must also examine the cumulative and concurrent impacts of
. development on the Baxter and Pan Abode properties.
Any environmental or land use review of area properties should assure that sufficient
transportation capacity will be available to serve all properties within the COR-2 Zone on a fair
and consistent basis. Accordingly,the pending Barbee Mill reviews should examine how the
cumulative impact of combined build-out on the Barbee,Baxter,Pan Abode and Quendall •
Terminals will affect ingress and egress from I-405, and how the circulation between these
properties may affect circulation on local streets. Potential trip generation must be addressed on
an areawide basis in order to fairly allocate development capacity between properties.
In addition,the following additional cumulative and concurrent impact issues must be
examined and analyzed within the pending Barbee Mill reviews:
•
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from combined
build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter properties.
•
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property,Lake Washington
Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible through the Barbee
Mill property,or must discharges occur on May Creek adjacent to Lake Washington
Boulevard? •
•
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the Pan Abode
and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and construction and
post-construction activities associated with any road system improvements.
50327523.02 -
• . ••
S
Ms.Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 3 .
•
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR 2 Zone from any access and
roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and natural resources on
adjoining properties.
Specific Onsite Impacts •
We also believe that reviewing agencies should consider a range of specific onsite
impacts arising from the development of the Barbee Mill property. We are aware of the
following issues and impacts from studies commissioned for Vulcan Inc. and PQC regarding
development of the Baxter and Pan Abode properties:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup, as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species
listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues,including reconstruction of the bulkhead,debris removal,
shoreline enhancement or restoration, and related water quality,habitat, and.fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction (if proposed),including related fisheries and habitat
issues.
4. Issues related to impacts of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife, including salmon,trout, long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues,including water quality impacts to Lake
Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;
assurance of adequate buffers pursuant to federal, state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management,impacts and mitigation if fill takes place.
50327523.02
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30,2002
Page 4 •
•
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please include us on the
circulation list for all further communications relative to the pending Barbee Mill reviews.
Very truly yours,
-
06464_ ir.)
Charles R.Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Rod Stevens,Vulcan Inc. •
50327523.02
10/07/2003 10:43 4252229574 FAWCETT DENTAL rHut CJl
I IMO
October 7,2003
DEVE-OPtIAENT S��IC�
Ms. Susan Fiala CIS®F REINT��
Senior Planner ®c� ®`� 2003
Development Services
Renton City Hall-t3th floor ce', , D
1055 South Grady Way
Renton WA 98055
Re: Bar-Bee Preliminary Plat •
Dear Susan,
I , and my family have a concern regarding the Bar-Bee proposal and the apparent failure for
future dredging of the Mouth of May Creek. Our concern is that without future dredging of the
Creek our property directly up-stream will be negatively impacted due to increasing hydrological
impacts from ever increasing back pressure due to silt and debris accumulation. I would like to
propose that the historical dredging continue with the new Bar-Bee development perhaps through
a homeowners association pact.
While I favor providing housing for the future, I feel that the Fawcett Family's property should not
have to bear the negative consequences and inhibit our family's ability for future development of
single family homes adjacent to May Creek. Continued occasional dredging may have a positive
impact on the Bar-Bee site by allowing smaller stream buffers, and without the need for
installation of levies.
I am also aware that property owners upstream in the May Creek Basin have raised the issue
with King County with regards to the positive benefits of dredging the Creek from a Fish, and
drainage benefit. Perhaps it would be of benefit to query Mr. David Irons (King County
Councilman) and get his opinion on dredging the Creek and how both people, and fish would
benefit. I do know that continued siltation Is an impediment to spawning of Salmon.As I am sure
you are aware careful and timely dredging would be a benefit to providing improving habitat for
the Salmon.
In summery, I would appreciate some balance, and how our family will not have to bear the brunt
of water backing up onto our property as a result of the current proposed Bar-Bee development. I
would also like you to address the increasing negative hydrological impacts onto our property
and what possible redress that is available to our family.
Sincerely,
Dr. Greg Fawcett ME'V oN1Na
P.O. Box 402 oeve rr of AEA
Fall City, WA 98024 ^ `sQ3
425-222-7011 Vol t
e-mail....fawcett@nwllnk.com Sg51
N M IL qFce'��',
� �p &. aCrO? FO
a,.,.[x- :eta- u�r �3 0 %a,
51/d0T ---: 0-4-2fr .-z-a_i - 51----
_i_4 ---- i-e-a._, i
� _ q30 fr
� � 5 /CLIA&
,,250 „., /, -, ______ ,7
/
CUDu , ---w,., __41-.4,,, ,,,,a,..:,,,
; a_ze..
Igf2, , /z) .,0_.KL6- --7t
&I'LL St-e-4/C-, 4 ' 2Y-e-1
U � ., i ctca . �� a,$
-P�a a,w- � i — Gum— `�S
CFI/ OF RENTON
• Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
October 1,2003
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
EXTENSION OF COMMENT PERIOD
Dear Party of Record:
City of Renton has received several,requests to extend the comment period for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS). Washington Administrative
Code(WAC) 197-11-455(7)states: "Upon request, the lead agency may grant an extension of
up to fifteen days to the comment period. Agencies and the public must request any extension
before the end of the comment period."
Based on the requests received,the City of Renton will extend the DEIS comment period one
additional week. The extended comment period will end on Wednesday,October 8,2003 at 5:00
p.m. Written comments should be addressed to :
Susan Fiala, Senior Planner
Development Services Division
6th Floor,Renton City Hall
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
Following the completion of the public comment period,the City will prepare and issue a Final
Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)that will include responses to the comments received.
The City will then issue a Mitigation Document which will set forth the necessary conditions to
diminish or eliminate environmental impacts.
If you have any questions or require clarification of the above,please contact Susan Fiala, Senior
Planner, at 425-430-7382.
The City of Renton appreciates your interest and participation in the State Environmental Policy
Act(SEPA)process.
Sincerely,
ja )67:4-
Neil Watts,Director
Development Services Division
Uocumentl\cor 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer
pME�A poN1NG
oE�sG�(`l OF E
MARK HANCOCK OC1 ® 2003
PO BOX 88811 ��,j O
SEATTLE, WA 98138 -E
October 1, 2003
hand delivered
Ms. Susan Fiala
Senior Planner
Development Services Division
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055.
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat DEIS, LUA 02-040
Dear Ms. Fiala:
I have one area of concern regarding the proposed Barbee Mill project DEIS. While the
impacts during construction were discussed in a number of the study areas, I did not find
a discussion about construction traffic impacts or mitigation. This is a concern for those
of us who live in the adjacent "lower Kennydale" neighborhood because of the extent and
duration of the proposed project, combined with the extra traffic we already suffer
through from the I-405 commuters who cut through our neighborhood to avoid the
freeway congestion. I would like to see the FEIS address these issues, and propose,
mitigation measures that would be added to the final project approval conditions to
protect our neighborhood. This can be done without burdening the project.
There is a very real possibility of significant and long-term construction traffic through
the adjacent neighborhood streets:
1) It has already happened. A couple months ago the Barbee remediation project used
our streets as a gravel truck"turnaround." They ran tandem gravel trucks one
morning off Lake Washington Boulevard, up 40th, south on Park, down 38th Street,
and back north on Lake Washington Boulevard (apparently an easier approach to the
site, or a way to line up the trucks going in). I personally witnessed this.
2) The Barbee submittal states that they will cut through the neighborhood. In their
"Construction Mitigation Description" (stamped in by the City 04/05/02), they state:
"All materials will be hauled to or from the site from the south via Lake Washington
Boulevard, NE Park Drive and I-405. Flagmen will be employed to direct traffic in
the event larger trucks are unable to operate within existing traffic lanes." (underlines
are mine) Note that the north is not even mentioned, and to use Park it will be
necessary to also pass through at least two numbered east/west residential streets.
There are 14 public and private streets that connect to Park between 30th and 40th
(I doubt the developer would put out that many flaggers). Also note that Park-to-40th
is a shorter route to the site from 30th than Burnett or Lake Washington Boulevard.
3) The biggest concern is the gravel trucks. The SEPA checklist states that 38,000 cubic
yards of fill material will be brought in, and there will be 32,000 cubic yards of
excavation. Since truck/trailer rigs will carry from 20 to 30 c.y. per trip, that would
represent 1300 to 1900 truck trips for the fill alone (add to that another 1100 to 1600
trips if the excavation material is hauled off site).
4) Add to that the trucks hauling off the demolition material. And then all the new
building construction supplies, and their employees. Most of this will come from the
south, where the contractor material warehouses and offices are, and the affordable
housing is for the employees.
5) There is incentive to cut through the neighborhood in the morning coming to the job.
The I-405 northbound lanes are nearly at a standstill most mornings, and it is quicker
to get off at 30th(instead of going on to 44th), and cut through the neighborhood to the
Barbee site.
Why is this important?
1) This is a residential neighborhood. It already has significant extra traffic from drivers
who cut through to avoid I-405 congestion. Peace and quiet is difficult enough now.
2) There is no need for any Barbee-related construction traffic to pass through the
neighborhood. All of it should use the 44th Street interchange (not 30th), which is
directly adjacent to the Barbee site.
3) Safety is an issue. There are plenty of school kids out in the mornings and
afternoons. The neighborhood is a popular area for pedestrians and bicyclists.
You also have to be careful just backing out of a driveway because of the I-405
cut-through drivers speeding up and down our streets (why add to that?).
4) These are residential roads, not designed to take the loads of the gravel trucks (both in
terms of weight on the asphalt, and turning radius at corners). This also raises the
economic issue of extra wear-and-tear on the roads(and safety again).
5) With extra traffic, especially trucks, there are also the issues of noise, air quality and
vibrations as they rattle by our homes.
What should mitigation measures be?
1) As noted above there is no need for any construction traffic to pass through our
neighborhood, and it will not inconvenience the proposed project to direct all traffic
to the 44th Street interchange.
2) The City should require a haul route map from the developer, that requires all trucks
(esp. for demolition and fill/excavation material) to use the 44th interchange only.
3) There should be "No Trucks" signs on Park. If the traffic still increases on Park, then
additional stop signs and/or speed bumps should be considered to discourage its use.
4) If 30th or Burnett have similar problems, then similar measures should be considered.
5) When the project jobsite information/rules handout is done for workers/contractors, it
should include language telling workers not to cut through the neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration of the above.
Sincerely,
Mark Hancock
10/01/-20 WED 14:43 FAX 3605863067 AKGHY 6 HI S'1' YKh,SV E[JJuut 9®
aH STAT,Q _
•
eNr.
STATE OF WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION
1063 S. Capitol Way,Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501
(Mailing Address)PO 80x 48343 o Olympia, Washington 98504-8343
Phone(360)586-3065 FAX(360)586-3067 Web Site: www.oahp.wa.gov
October 1, 2003
Ms. Susan Fiala
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way o 1/F<o
•Sixth Floor c/�y�FF,yI
Renton, WA 98055 °C1 9FMONN/N
&1 ,��4703 c
In future correspondence please refer to:
Log: 100103-04-KI ,Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Barbee Mill Site 0
Dear Ms. Fiala,
Thank you for contacting the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (OAHP). The above referenced project has been reviewed on behalf of the
State Historic Preservation Officer My review is based upon documentation contained in
your communication.
The Draft EIS for the Barbee Mill site Preliminary Plat makes references to a
Determination of Eligibility for listing upon the National Register of Historic Places that
was apparently made on the structures found at the mill site. This office has been unable
to find where that determination has been made. If the previous determination is more
than five years old, a new determination of eligibility should be sought. We would
suggest that both the water tower and the black warehouse be surveyed as individual
cultural resources, and that Determinations of Eligibility be sought from this office on
those two structures. We strongly suggest,that in any case, the water tower be preserved
on-site as an icon to Renton's.sawmilling past.
Regarding possible subsurface archaeological deposits, we concur that ground disturbing
actions should be monitored by a professional archaeologist. A monitoring plan should
be prepared prior to the activities to outline the monitoring and discovery protocols. If
archaeological deposits are observed, work should cease in the vicinity of the find, and
the OAHP, City of Renton and the affected Indian Tribes notified immediately. If the
deposits cannot be avoided, they wound need to be assessed for significance. This would
require a permit from OAHP per RCW 27.53 and WAC 25-48.
10/01/20 3 WED 14:44 FAX 3605863067 ARCHY & HIST PRESV uu'
Ms.Fiala
October 1,2003
Page 2
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Please contact me if you have
any questions.
Sine y,
•
/Russell Holter
Preservation Design Reviewer •
Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation
360-586-3083
cc: Donna Hogerhuis
Cecile Hansen
Charlie Sigo
•
CITY I F RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Gregg• immerman P.E. Administrator
Jesse'Tanner,Mayor gg
•
October 1,2003
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
EXTENSION OF COMMENT PERIOD
•
Dear Party of Record:
City of Renton has received several requests to extend the comment period for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS). Washington Administrative
Code(WAC) 197-11-455(7) states: "Upon request, the lead agency may grant an extension of
• up to fifteen days to the comment period. Agencies and the public must request any extension
before the end of the comment period."
•
- Based on the requests received,the City of Renton will extend the DEIS comment period one
additional week. The extended comment period will end on Wednesday, October 8, 2003 at 5:00
p.m. Written comments should be addressed to :
•
Susan Fiala,.Senior Planner
Development Services Division ,
6th Floor, Renton City Hall
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
Following the completion of the public comment period,the City will prepare and issue a Final
Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS)that will include responses to the comments received.
The City will then issue a Mitigation'Document which will set forth the necessary conditions to
diminish or eliminate environmental impacts.
If you have any questions or require clarification of the above,please contact Susan Fiala, Senior,
Planner, at 425-430-7382.
The City of Renton appreciates your interest and participation in the State Environmental Policy
Act(SEPA)process.
Sincerely,Aid Ito •
Neil Watts,Director • '
Development Services Division ,•
llocumentt\cor REi N T O N
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 1 v 1 i v
CO
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
C This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
King County
Wastewater Treatment Division
Department of Natural Resources
King Street Center
201 SouthJackson Street
Seattle,WA 98104-3855
September 26,2003
Susan Fiala
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact Statement
The King County Wastewater Treatment Division has reviewed the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Draft Environmental Impact Statement. King County's Eastside Interceptor,Section 4,is
located within the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat site(please see the attached figures). In order
to protect this wastewater facility,King County is requesting that the Agency do the following:
• Submit construction drawings for the project to Eric Davison in the Design, Construction and
Asset Management Program, Civil/Architectural Section. Eric can be contacted at(206) 684-
1707. Drawings should be submitted for review during design development so that King
County staff can assess the project's impacts. Drawings should be sent to:
Eric Davison,DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
King County Wastewater Treatment Division
201 South Jackson Street,KSC-NR-0508
Seattle,WA 98104-3855
• Please contact Eric Davison at(206) 684-1707 a minimum of 72 hours prior to commencing
any construction in order to allow staff time to arrange for a King County inspector to be on
the site during construction.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have questions,I
can be reached at(206) 684-1227.
Sincerely,
Barbara Questad
Environmental Planner
Enclosures
cc: Eric Davison,DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
Pam Elardo, Supervisor,Right-of-Way Unit, Planning and System Development
CLEAN WATER —A SOUND INVESTMENT
•
,r .TFt_ -•1r,a+.M: ., • m+rP;Xc•r "'e2,•g�...:�,4r.'�?i .. - - -..\.:•�:----_._n^J RY,Gi -:d '..R mt. 'r'gw7-7.77^- ' !�,.
L
1-
•
..F
H
.' 0Z=
• Q
" IL
F' W
J
g
r
w-1
J
•.:.,,..;.,,ter-_ .7.
tr 'D.
:
•
f
.lj Wa
_
r� Q
- • W
_
•
• E. • - '
a�
•
i -
11.._
OI: .� ��,. Ili:.":.mETII[sPOiITO
1OVQ
•
;. .:'_..
, p�''
•
.. gr rygg (g Q
-dC�D B�6 '�43�d...
1 Tp¢! p J U '
p r X$
•
, • .. :• - - _ NEREO ,," - WOW.
•
- - - >1' = Q UIL''
�=ar^ '.'•Iv:.eL'xl l' Y(�✓' 1 'i'3: _ _ -� „ . +.x. _.. -- fr.,:,:.-.cr;,::. 5.2.
\--.NY' CREEK CROSS/NG._ NOTE: g
_STA. 26,'92 EXISTING CONTOUR /1VATER SER✓/CE SEE 5/PEC/AL CONST NOre a•STRUCTURE-SEE p�t'� /O FOR CONSTRUCTION.LIMITS •4
jam\ N. /96 404.93 .i/AINTA/N • \ SEE DWG 5 DWG 3 \
y F/Sl/LADDEQ� f E./661,367,DO / ACCESS. \� / 1'
\ \
EE,OWG'IOTf ��\� \ NERYR/DYL/NE.
1 _• \�� .AE'�'/AL-TELEPCJNE ' ;PERM. ESMT \ i
.
• \''
ram`' CABLE.SEE SPEC.
-Y. =%c.__, - :-.L i-- f CONS._NQTE S,OVYG-3\ - � ��
W :xRT_AvAi T;� �, "_ -._ � _2- ----_ , 4 ,;a } i y� t� \ \ \. fUT/RE MERCER
c-
,
i
,
` v - - -- _ D_CONNECTION
F.'. -- - :J --_ �� '°_ _ I SCAN
�`
� 1
r _ _
.
- ------ •
�{1 ��- 1�_�__� ' _ T .-1-' aiiia__..<. ---._. i—. s`,• 1 I _._1-_'-- T _._—_ _ _.3�F -'_. _ - = 30 _._.-- --_
--— ��tn = __ _ L _ —r�'_•� r—r • — _ _ - — -- Y
• L � I
t W. — �� .-.\. .�.�" • _ -s —ry6=_�.,._ �� _ J r a� i �— -- - r - - ,.
:za I yY45H B iYA Q �6 t•:--'-= '
_3C.. � •zzl _ L._ - Be /I •
,NOTE S C0 3r`_` .xsc,TE ETER �. "-LAKE W'$H. �zr r BL,YD
\ STiL.26f�O L'/NE:" _ h I'i cn. 1 \ \;
t: �_ ...NM R//y le �\ _ '\ �N•,r `c, —, —7GIF['knZ=ZS.
�^ ;L- _� 11 ^� _' _NH�ROZ-Z4 i' .zTs �. \ _• z.a :_—• .x.a • R W'' -.
• _ o :STA:39f97.'O
.. •
E.662, y01 / - ; .. ��- - -' _ .-.-. EX/5T. 60 '. u— -r- 9751.-
� - 1, ^-. --zs 7iVTRACTO HALL Y� c` ._STA..',93T<BG:d0 , . �' A /
/rCP CULY. :\]N �?rSEE S tEiAG / L/c/E' \zb
6 ca r-2' �'_,� - _APPQOX.70C.F.OF24 RCP \:,,b �a '' '-'•- ---N-%96,9 _ �•,. P/!?E-PLzi ,:,; \ �'ON>T,YOTE ..��,� -' '
° __.E'7662,- BOTH ENDS�\ `\\ �i . '' �'�a
! / 'CULVERT UNDER S.E.BOTH=ST\• �.. {\ ` \ \ \\ } \4."Y',.. N, t
MAY CdG \ \ ORA/NAGS J�dIJTE r CL EAN t\', ` I' \! \o ' / �` A •
%NTe' SCALE, HORIZONTAL. I'=_50',VERTICAL I .■10• AND SLOQETO NEWC'ULVERj
- -
•
- - '{ -- .__ --. -. fie -
•
1 - --
•
•
PL E.J.P-t.,NG__BETSW f,E _t r
- ..... .. .,. L- __I,,_
1---, ..�.....,._ }.,._ �-. - -� . ...._......._(._ _ �U/+Y
�
•
.._:.%..... s---- -.._..- .-.._ _-_.._..._ ... : ...t-.
t'
_._ .-.
.� ` t. - i
STA261 Y3.77STA'77/y3` -` _ tQ0E F L E f!fl N1C�1Wd --TOWARD —
SHALL SE DONE I r 1 T RR QYE4 PfG�-. P D�/DE O Afk! E. -TOCO/J 1UCI1lAG� 1ioT t ICH TWEEU PIPE 4VD A O . - . -. _- A:._ d{.OIE:, !P:/.'E L0YF
lDEV`i4•A-/RdAGEC_-_.:: _� _ _
;X/S /A/G' PA�ED. CC SS ROA,:-.._J_..._.... �R J ... Q_CF 7E ,— ._. .A1dY...CREEf BQSSJ G •
n L ," ' , ! ---..__,.-__I : -
... _"57iWCTUQE..:,+__.. iNAY.'. lL.PQD /NGa._..._..__ _._.._�._ _ ._ _ —....,""_.'..-_._..._-._ -..--F_...___._.... {--_ .. _- _......_...I_._._ ._..__...!._ .- .. .FEPL�CE.1/./:_ _b..Td._IIA.TCN' ..........._ . ...... — , - P O /OE::D/TL .Es I/:8/dE OFPOPE.:._ cr_� _— . E2 EV275: . = :..$fJI1 : S1J3 tCE!lL $70f4.�YATV _JIt7X .. 7 7.A.4.2+ A_.S :RyG -::Q: _ -- { .:___::__:_i.. i..._-
.�..... :;�--
...
. -
I' 30 -- . _. . t _ _ I:- SEEDWG TO. dR4- , .� . a _ • t .
,._. .{_•
. .., I. BE� 1.. :. r i i _....
• ' _ 1 "fie/' sS291:/ee-MrreASCl/ �i5IMICIAIWAVAFAFiP�fi f
__ l�Ti/iA/ig@61�2�?,�'EZT.1 //OiV • _ -. - , - . ' '
+ T ".t... 77717, Via.. . : .. T
9 P 6.PC
P.RC
i { , L.. .y. ...'...�...... 1iTha'T
;q... _.1:11t ...-_ l.__ _ .._._�....__+-. '... .._. f�'f r '1 y• . . ;... :.. - - --- - -- -> tI1 .. ; . .. ........ _ - --— _ �"/0 :. t ._ ,,
1
,
i0
1
•
CD
o , - ....�-._. tJP._ BLS.. - p.1-!_.?. DACE . _. , ..., . I. _s' t.- U/L :tPa t4ot.t - ll."to =_.
x tC t..
r✓1 LA < i { 1 , Il ). . '.:, . ....1 _.�,:. f :t-
. , L. .:: •
�� -'/#5�..GO�d TR T!";" .
i . - - - -- -;.:_ 1... ::F..L_._ E...- f O'aTLE,op _ --1
$
•
•
r '. .. 26/00 .27/00 .26400 ,29fOO 30f00. .3/,'O0 . . 8�'-.4J . .93/00 . 3✓/00 . . 35f0O.... ... 354.02 . . • . :37/0 ' 38T'Lv r�i00•
4OfO0
E - a _ . - - - _ .OR aw,NG''RL,rlo ER^.'• :,',
OES,GNEO iVYY_ METROPOLITAN •• ENGINEERS MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLIT4. AN S-E A T T L E „DER 202'c'- REN.TON E-ASTSIDE. INTERCEPTOR.-S'ECTIONN.,'4 ' ' :8..,'..,.;- -
7Riwly—QCI��L_ BROWN AND CALDW ELL CAgEY AND KRAMER /// - i �/ //� 1�/ 11 /J��,,y,�' Y' / �:7 scat_
'AF '�HI S I - 4 SURMIT]ED_. -,),7:G! //_J__ RECMMENDED._ f1,,,, rtVPROVED_..E,,,,,,,-.IVY,rr.,.,,,,.OVED ".:-.�� �APPROVE0 ."---,�.�-/err• SY ST E.M STATION 27 TO. '.-STATIO(V '4 �EE_T i1GRE9 J
,�...,,, 1_L, AND NGM N R.W BECK AND ASSOCIATES Ofe7an Cnu -Merrnyouten Eip:.,ren t•,oieer Cevneer-mePown•nn[Ma Ch.enamnr-w"rteenwnn Eng,neera F,1.10.ppe,n,n En;,ne<n rww v,ca:,.,Mol+rnoop, ,,,1 r:e _ '., . NOTED .'OAT E JUI�.��963_'_ - _ - - _- _ O .,_8.—•Oe. '-f l'— -
. . _ _ ... . - . .. .. .. _ , . . • -- Igl
. . . _ _ .
. • - • .
. .
_ ...
• . .. • .. .
- •
' . . . . • -
111111WIW.„4rem-WH.H.• 1110,,_. . . • . . . • . .
•
.
.
.3.-
Fg.g.:',..._.. : 3.'_Wr7L-..'.. ,,,:-.-'.4'7,'!"..PAIM" '_.4,-.5...!!..1117n.,!. ..!.''.7..7'7.--....17..)!Zr....13-`4.537 :1,4F-3'"12r273Z.."'7 7171. 3.7.7.7.47:t'rig. ... L--,.:7W:4 ...;:,, 77-717.7.7773 ...' ,......7.:..;.._ „ . - 7.''''---. -"r--..- - -
.
•
-.. - . ''••-.'''''"'''''" ,:7..r.4.,;.&-,.*,'-1.'''''.-6• '•;.'-..:-1-:'•2..,: ''..':-',-.:'...- ' -,' •f-.•-'1i....71'.,=:::::, •ziE-7: -......',''..:;a°-'''...... f.-9-c-•.-;:.::'"--;i:.f-,:::-'-:''':- 3-,."-.'':'-':' '.'-' -'....t.::'.7.:'7:.:2.. '!'..:4'-4'''7."-rig'..,,,:-' •-• • •':r‘ "'.'-'-• - ' , . - •;
3.:.•,••- ,.
. . • . • . . ,
- .." . . 3. •-r. ' :. s .:VII • • -•--t--- -'... . ... •'1". ''. -:'• ri •''''' .• • . . .'f,'5•.•:. . ,' ..• .f.. .3-..•Lr'.'•--... 7,.1 . . :.:_,-..- ,-:.q,1•.'". :'• •:'i : . .. .
i,'" .
. . . . .
•,. . . .
• • • r.;-
. .. - 4' '-- :.- -''',".2'-':,'.."1-3,....:.--.•,..-',. •'.- - ,' .,---.-•'"._-•'..:.,,-;'•'..i'.z-t-.`,...-:.....,..;. ..,..-.:,c..,-... -• .,,s; ,-.; •'...•:-.-:-..7. _:.-'..•.• , .--,..f:..,..,..,::.'.,'".'•.:'e±:•:,,-•.'.!•..,. '.::.,1--7:,-',,,.-II : .. L.,-...r'..3,r-\.'• •,....:'- ::---.4.'•:.... ...-:,:. •::"/ - '. • ..:• -! - .. .
. - . Z Z< •
:t'• - ..
, ..,• • . , ...• • :
. ..
: -
. .. 1-.'.. ' ."-' -:.: '--...-.?-7-.t')...;.Z.:''',:-:-..:.;i:f.I...'-1.7..:i.-. .:•"_:-.- -•r''..-''i.:.':...;:-.1..:..r,:;ei.:1.,."-::::,..:•'.-:'.....--.--..'. . .-..':'...,:-:.;•:.."1:".i::.:-...:.7:`.,..3...:'-i•-r .--L.'..:•;'•1...-:Pt -..r.'.-.--.±„. z: -..-727"•-. ..‘'f:.7.&-.77-,. ,-,.',-:': ; .: -•':'.':-_,:-'--_-.:f-y.,' •'. .. ' ----.i 7•.•-•-•-••.' •'.' .. . . -.• .
' -. • ' ' - ••t Z 0. 1.-::. •."-- .
' ..• .. • • ' i -0 lk
. .
. . . 0
•
' • :', Z -,' . • . - • • ' . ,
, . • :...- CI cr --
' • - .. . •, •,• - -•,--,-1;.---f:'•-•,--•• L-. ---...,, -;--• .---?••••:',-'----..:--•',':-.',A---.'s--z-'•-•.:a a;;•,--•-,:.'-.:.-•,..i..:---*.. •-.--.-- .q::-..,•--,::.:AZ•t;:-:-!':-.:..ft i-7,6.7.----a.--,-- ?,-:•.-.:a.,--a--,--,:,--:-.,-,-,--•-,,:;..; ,:''-• '• ...- , • ...... ... . . -. - • • -,:-I ta ca-
.
. . .... .
-. . • . - • • •. ; '-. m>- u_ •, .
. ; , ---- --- --- - -•
____.. . . -. • -
•• -- .1 cc z °
-• .•.. . - . . .
. . .. .. .... ..
. . • •.- • .
..•::.:- D-.0
'' -.•• -' .. .•'2 -''•:7-...'l'''-- 5:: ...-7*'',. :'''''X'" ''''''`"'••-"":'•:••......':':'''''.,•• : L'..:1,;.- .'"_.--. 7 T. •-r- .. ' -' - -' i.'• ' ''' • . " "
. -.. ". ..._ .
. ... . )... ,_ ,.. ,•-•, --;.'dr >-,•,.z 0• '
• • .. .. _
. .. ..., . . . _ ..„. . _
. .
- -
- • .• .6 ..
,.• • • . . . ..
•n.• .. .i . • • .•• , •.. •• • . • . .
/ ,• .'7 CL.X 6 .
. . . . . .• .
:' •'. 'n•'". ' . . .•t:••••'•'•:,'::.'..,1'•,.;•,'••''...5..•5.::•'-i..7.'•','' ''S.:','•::--'7'.-^,-:-'•'''''.:':--"'"::::,i'.;.: '•';':: -,:-:.:::::::-,--.'''''''"''''''':"-',-1.,,...:•-..;; ;:':::•7::,.:".,:',4,1•:!iitl:L.,. .,.••:-,:"...'' '.../,/,':......:T•7'...,.... .::.''.'..'"':-,::' ..'.-..', ' ,:'•''''''''' '',..: '-'----'.e....1"-:i. -7'• -. r- - • '.• Cr
' • ' . • i . . -..., .
. ..'
. . ,.• . ,... .. • ..-..- . '. • °4-
-• • - 'ME intliehrILITY- OF -ME ROP 1T 1
1 : • -
1 . .
.:. ,.. _......,...
- . • - -- - , ---,!.rifl=,-'-. . - '•.'..:..,..':. •- ,'-',... .'.: ; .• -
clis,UtiispRLENTIEENE ..1111FE;:in 7.gurVITAICI;littaL
" SEATTLE. DOEV--.NOT-S:Illihil
AEt3 1:
. - !.:1`;: • --.-: x•,c 5
. .
• .
..-. . .. -,.. . .. ..• • • "" -.IM 0.• '
, . •., .........,. .. .:.7z.:.::. ., - . ,
' • .-••. •,.. . . ,.-- .,• • .• . . - • .3.
. . ,.3.....•-, .. ...
, . . - • .
•
• .
. .., -.-' • '.:!:'1.-,::--,::,',-.q..-.-...';--'r'...'.,. '.';;;•:-.',.-• -. . ' • NEREDif."- - . ,
.. , ---•<,c,
.. . . .. .
,- - • •---• ., .. . . .. .
• • •
•
SEE SPEC/.4Z..CON57-NOTE-3 • . •• :••• '• . ' . ' .. - . I. .. .- •..
v--,MAY GREEN'CROSSING_ .
-STA. 2 /92 7-. EX/57-ING CON TOUR NOTE:
34 WATER sERwcE
FoR CoN5rRucriON 1,1M/T5
•
\ SI-WV-LIRE-SEE R...,.‹.6...::_,If _ DWG 3 •.:N• /96,40493 \
SEE DWG'5 ' .
• • • . • •.- • •. . •. . . .
•
A49/NTAiN \ . .. ..
. . : .... . • . . . .
' . --'\• -,:•• F/57-/ZADD3IElliiDDEJ.- .__-E/662,36Z00
' .
• .
......eiV ACCE55. • . . . • _____..._,„„.---------- - . •. . • • • . •
. •
.
•
-------,•:, 5E..DWG:10.8-- ., -----..._-----,,--_ • •\ N,R."Fr Vic tiii.)E. ,
, • . • - • • .. . .
. .
. . • .. .. . •
_ r.--cAAEE1.•.57/.6.EppEhrE \• N.,\_:.pERA.f. E5mr ....„„ _..;,..,5,....\ ..... .-
_ , .•
_
• •
. _ -.CONS\IVOTE 5 _ R... \:-
./ .
: • - •••.
• • .•••.. . . •
--
1 .
, ...,'„-- • -\I
N.,,,,,,.p.,•• • •.. ki., . . ..\------_______•.----,-..-..,--`,'.:-.--;'.:--,.• ------:::::---
.• ,
,) •
, .
., •:,:-.-: -•,:-.--7!
\ 11771 \ --•-..\ . 1 • -_-,47/7'41REMERDER ',
• /2".._441111r\ . •:4/.4lle r:::-':',--.-.:',,Q.Z.Z.--..„... •-• 21----.--- -.-..26 4._ .- •"&<:- J".. / L.--
1:•.":: , .Y\::•------•-. ' X '.''.,. ift,-.1”... ,..., w,•(E__'5H.7: !0=-.±7.:_-.=-___--i-'1•12;4---, ---1--C,.7---,,---• .__..: ,:,,,-- .. -.----___,---....Y.'.\ ,...., , -___ _,_ -i _______________ _ _-___ .\,. . , {,-___,--'..-fj.4_ \-..... ,..\ •• .15L A_NDIcONNECTON
-_-.-1-5--C---31--..---77--,,,-_ .‘-:-- -- ... _ )N_ I ' • \ •:•• ' 1•••-___ ,-.,____,,....
a " .-,._..,___-_ - -_ \-•. .„__._ = r,••Il',\ ,.--i 14 I
-r-L-'-''-:-=T_1--1 -'•. -==1:--=----_-''._ "'-2,1:i;35;"::- .,-,--,\ I 1=1-.1.-----2,---:---L-L-±::::'- \\ ' ' ' :-.T.----=T---'=2-3-7-- " ' ''c--," - ' - ''' .„.....-245.:- .:j '--1-,117.,„_-,1--'--f---'
-- JO ---
. . -.=:-,_,_=,7:_.=:-----j: '. 1 11 A.111. 7..-.----: ---7.---.--L ----,---._'----77--- 17-:_---:-'-',-,_- • i ,-------,---r_-_,-.-‹- -• ,_ , 41-3 '---I-- , 1' : ____ __;/' 4,F-1-) ' ' • -• -•-•--\--..% - -,4.-___..,._ ---GYPEe4 -,
• -,:•-:_______-„:=,-_------___--_-_---,-_-;-7,72_, .........._ _. ---.--..,-_-_-____ _,,.. -, .., __ , _. . . , . .
-- \.-\ -
.," , ._-_. ...... L..i__. L_:_,.:_ _..,;.._-_ .. _i____ • :thyfii'LI .
. - - ". DUI -MII: . - .,----..--F,..-_---.. ....m,..=...=•-L=-1.---_----2& ,. `'''-..._ - --,,------I--_-_-__2_7:-:-_--z......__ __ _ _•••• ••• - - __L-, .,,--,.,..\,• _!... ---...----_----
-- •- ' ' ' -• - ' '- -''' -- - - --''• --: - -----:---%-.--.;,---,--,':- ,y-..iF*5375.4.5.-7-"_.-.\.71: .. "-C"-:---2:'..
--:'• ' --,...".; --'.... ' 1 :SAW--...-: I.." '' . 57/...„_ . „. ...,...
. .= -.''• ..'. . __._...2.5-- ---77.,
' •
:..-' • L .1 • ' .k1 • IV
•317 e"
\L,.61A-A--, •. ?.. -11/A5(4...•. •n' _aLi;6'-
L .• 5pec.--co,v5r - - \ •-i',:ITFR-iNETER. .. -- "•._LA If-E •frt/.,,,A-S?"1-. •..='•• -51.1. -.:..\••...-.- • •
- - - NoTE-q, DWG:.3. •. . .„..,.. . ..........,. \..._ . . . _____L-__ L '7.______27_?7__._ __ , ---''------.---- ----7'.
. 1
I .
. ' . . - mr., m-- • • -;-F.- ------ --t=.- ,-
....
''.: . . .- . ' '. 1-1PRY.alw .d!" . : • 1 __
. . t . I.) " ' ' - \ . - 'Th.,. 1-.%- -- •• ' -_..., ' (,,\N-,.,.\-- -c.' -- \ : i •' '• -. IIWY.\,' - '`MW---• '
ir:l.'-. ' \ -51-4,4Pg11°- 'S• . ,_. - . . '. LINE': • ffigr- • : .RAY. `,{;
) • , .',7\ \'''.-\'' ___, .... ..__ ---.......
..,• --' .7,N347:g40,9-24e.--LM---..1-1\- 4-.1./.5'2F60 ....,\'‘..,'.\\ .:\ l'''9 '-\:`•1'- 1 ' - 2,33, 2s..AA3 ...• •, .
\',. :/V/96.35-0.64 • ••• .., .- - . ;2.1. , . ,•I-\.::...'..-:. •. ,k/ki,..\--' -25TA:3949.7.q. - -i
. . . . st,.E1662,.:7402 : ., • _____._____- \..„.,
I ' ....57:4:'_53,1SC•da ! 'EC'; j -. •.
.•
_ -----e6.--_-EONTRA-CirtR--.5- 34.11.41/"------10 - '',,.---.--...\''' --k - ''' \, -/PCP CLIZV •\•\,;„•\\„'5EE S_P /AL .
. .i• • ?,.! . . . '' 'e 4. .. -' . 2, _..,....L---1,-,'.-,..V.,
V - ‘s, . ''' - --;-,,M:Vg.9- / \'.., P/Pe-,PL.Ik't,t -Vvi'vStiv'grE ‘ \ . . 1..m./E• \26241-97.5/ --••
f=1111 .- •1. • • . • ; ' . •. ' 2' '
1 - . ' • , . - . . ,..;,.,:,'" -/7 ---,• ' 2 ..., ••\.„--------- ., .,...... . 1,41.PROX.,70 L.'F'OF 24-RCP- _ "...., \,,,,:.„•;\ T's "A ___E:766T, ..,..
,. ,,._ ,''01_11E,-47- UNDER .5.E 5,277-1_57: \,•....,),--Se \..\ ,
. .. .;•Agorie END,5.‘\\• \ •4 4,41,v04,\,..A . . ,.. ,,,,,?.. 0-..-,
...-- - . MAI 9'Citk• ) .\ . .,.3- ORA/NAGE,;Pot/TE-. CL FAA/A,_.L..\ (IA \I -, \ ‘-''' 1 - .- 1\k''. '. 'r.-*--I \'9. .. ... . I
- . \• .1 f • .••••
- • SCALE, HO.RIZONTAL I •50' Vtli. IdAL r•ioi.,. . _ AND„SLOPE 70'NEW-CULVERT . . •• - . . . ,. ,. . . '..- .• . • - . . /A/ -.. • . . . . . .
• _ :: :-----!-• -__ lingigEMENIMMI
' •
L:
. •
--1.7.--_,-.7.;
. --
' ._. ..___ __........_L._
•__ _._
sem- t. - - .1-1- .
. I-L.__ .___,..t ,__ __ I._ . 4::: ;. •I • .1:_-__ • ..;•}7.- - '.I::2.'.ft_t-....2-_ ', . . .:
INLEA_OR/11/NE_BE7-WEE11 -t -riiiii-Ra
--7,,t.:teErt'lS:70157.4:17193!._.... _-_....3____... -.TT_r.._...: .
PP:: -el-4.014''-.:P----6P14e-:--D•';.71;coaE•_:_:--:-'1 :-.:. .,-......--1.-77-::--7---r---.7.-.. 7--- ..:-. -t•-•-----• :----• •• .-----------'sof.ii--- iit--•;Ro •rwovw•i.e-I:pr./AR. -------- -,-•_•_ •--1 .--•-..... ---.71,7._. . ....1-T .......: i _7...„:„..._I..= _ .. •
5/1344L BE DORE PRIOR_1 '7.7;_-_14._-----..:...-_-_1th- _ __ _.
...........
40 '
l• ' 40' -777'eril-txu_cnall^ LI ---• . - I--r.t, •ITCP:.3; TWEEX1 -IPE.14/.10- "/41.--TO- ' ---1.
..• . --.4 •- 1-- :.
',E A 1.1_41. •• _I. r-
. I
I. •' ..m4rcgh-6-x-:.ckas_ci 54:.:_. -7.•=:::__ ___-...-. • i vi ,
._r_
t .
-. X/5 wa"PAVEDACC5-i'6,0A.Ot.17___...---Dg-Amt:,a_cREE-K=_-.--__-__. - _ __-_- ___7.4______ ._. i . . .; ;
. .
• STRUCTZ/,'RE..:.1.._...--- '.-A,IAr D-• le.4-1205. __ ' • I --. AlEPLADE'31W---44-0DTTZT-.33;0474/.17- -_•:.•_•• --•••------i-..•-•_•... -:-•_•••-,-- . _I_._ , •---••_--_•-••--• ,-- •-•--v-r---1 ROVIOE iO/767/:E.4.0AITSWEIDF-P-IPE1 •.:__::-•-•! , T---4--L ,
__-7r7... ___-1_____ - .1-47.5 X761.....----MRFACE- - . \ , D 170-R4T.TrAirki,/1//./Lt_i-S__ITE-47I.• _-_-...- -.-1-----i.---.--- .. ,
. .
• • IL-7E,EEZZ.5:--
---- ah H.: - ---,,,, ....JP,I - 1 -f•
- ' 711!glIRMIIMMIMMUNIMMIII - 1111,1111 .
•:==/..- '._...'..,,,, I Afrop.M. _.__117A.. OEM:--.:Eissiessi ________ _Bmiloommi _..„_. ..____17:._._
FIL ' ••9• , _
-.44974107431 -
•
10 .0"' -'''42Cdrar./e ,• ,--Ardirter-,•' •I//•-er
' dmimi..._`47,Z.ArAFIZird=fideagaraftEdgfreediregitrA447-4.44,166.9KAffaffr..........Aerar._-41)-107492102.7_".........4:17:•1:4_•56. 1...___,___ ih'''-__________. .............„.______ ' ____....,______- :.-...i....=...1.7...:_i_____,....... _.,. .-..... . _177, _...„..i.:._r.._ .___.:..... .. : ..........,.._,... . . 1.._... _.
I • =__'....:.':...,.hiPiiiisi'21 .
__.. .........._....._. _. ........_. . ._..-1_.._..
• ' -•- --I J 1 • -J. -- -- -- -. -I- _..17. -•-•---F• I-- ' • +- -t--- -I- -i. • ' . • .
• 3_
•1- ---1- ,i.0":PCP !. , • .
-- r .
, - - 6.5:r2-0.•.)-;296„ _
'' •
• .
•- i i • 1 t
- ... ' .__I-5 .11...1-.C.---- ---- - '-- ' .•21-60.• ' 3D ..:..tAt N'._-_;-..2._g..2-__:_:. •,.' I ] 1 _I 4, 1 .-;- -3----.i-- --1--• f --1-' r ---17-7:71... r -_-_--1 :,,t1r.- a\ ,
.-.-- 4PRROVED.P0311a.•!•-%4 ..!._._. .
1 . . . 1 . 1 , , -I-..- ;
, --,-
4 , . .., •
4.- 4.- , -, _Liz. -, t\--••',,; .---47,-- - • r- ---, ;------..T.-:- j_ . ----. - _ -
,-
; -:.:-.- , .. •-.„-i -- - . --; - -; -;.---- -.- 7._ -.1-.=.,-- ; -;`,,.'i*k--"----.I... - .,..--:.' r...7.7.1"."--r--..-r..-- •r T...._._-..._..,....;_7_._. • . i. .. ... 1..........1 ••.._1_..._--:•__.._„_•:.....r_..:: ..,, ....•,• .. . • • •.,,
pyr/6.48--`. ..1? _ ---'+.. Rffil 4 . ; FILE:7-/P,EZE•71,4770N- • t .---,--• : •- tii -- • . •• : i- - 1 - ,L .--.1-...7.-....."---.
1 • , . .•i • FoR•DETER44/4v.m./..0. --•. ._..._ , ••••••••17---i • ; • :I- -•• •3-•-•• •. *q•I)' •
•
-,-- • •42.:_::.:._::-_-=3.5Z.E_:..C.O.AZ,T.ze• toom...EtZ55.,.EC,R. ,......___,_ _ __. __._..........__..
, __ ... ._
." • • _-E.tpitYATE:•.:,.:_i.c..._ --_-._ty• 1-----. 1- ' •-i, • 'i - ---- • •• .. 1
-.4zia.,frEtt4c4-: •5!- --.-..L..!-01,..= .1:-.-_.--- ,. . :--.:-:.-47.--_.... .•...•:.•--7--.••-.;•._.. 1 -.. i - .... • i •
, .... . • (5E47.51?c74"..1)'- ..71... ' j ... 1 -- - ;45-BuiL71.:.-??../1'_•.-.7eA-&Ey..e.04157:2:J ._:_)----7----i---- --L.---!---- , .- 7.---' . - -1)ke •-'
I • --i- 1
_.. .
co_ .W1__CLAE.3___. ; II . "--t.e,01
-3 ' _____i___-_ _1',-___.„4----J-4,--- - :.,-:-- 7a.t.".i7 ---,, • , A. .-',I
e I• .• -•'•---_ _-_.`14•ree-lir,-N ._.1.. _____•___ ..____._ ...____. . 1....._....,... . . . .I,_ ..-7-1 . 77". - . .i. ' 1
• 7:j.1.1____. , .. ..,______..3 ._:::.0.....,.:rt,_''.' ':•-.,.....AS...CON T-P.UCTFP
. ----L--_-4 i__•.-__i.__4 ___.I___4_•__:,._:_. r__. __i..
I. . ..__.. i. 7.
._, ----4_----.--A--• •- -' ---- - _. 4.2....i._._ . r ,• • . - -•-•--- _ __
. , .1:.__..... _ - .--- ---•- ..._ __.
• . •L.-..1-!-.7.11 ---.-4--.1".- - ___ 1-_-.7-•--7-7-1.::-. -- _..,
! .3 .
'- .1.. • ‘: : • -
• -
- • 0.5,,c0 27,400 ::29000 29i-00 .30RX7 , 57-100 . 3„..,r../..) , .. .337,00. . . ...34i/00 35--,!0,9.
• • . .
H" ' OES*4ED HrVY- ' METROPOLITAN• ENGINEERS • . MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN . S.EATTLE • ,...,-Ft-202‘C- _ R EN TON • EASTSIDE INTERCEPTOR-•SECTION., 4-.• :1?...-:;• 8..-, ..;:•;- . ..,
.,.
._, - - •,:..... ...p.ita._ BPOWN AND CALDWELL CAREY AND KRAMER -,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,fr...;.,. SCALE •,,, SYSTEM . . ....••, . .. _ •
..11OPPO,TO Prt.- A'PROVED .±0:',,...t.• .1.:;,,,,,-..c.....• .... STATION -27 TO• STATION-. .-:-40 :.::•-...•• - •:8-- - -,:ii-- • ::--;i
SUBMIT TED_A---7.42i-Z.:9Z.... IT CCOMMEMBE 0---Ze. .eerr . Apr' AS NOTED - . - ' 4_UKE,19e13- . •
.BaTE • ; ,1
''. . -.EC•CC AL-14,_ -HILL AND INGMAN R W BECK AND ASSOCIATES. 0...,.r n9ini.e,-melmorohtanE 0,e'urs .Proiecr rftp:mac.-too:N.10a,,rnq ee,f. C...e,i..);;,••,•,..o.r°,+".f^',""" -
•
•
•
u..
, :fit. �:-_.:,,.,._..
•
'
0
Q
�ti.
Z
p
•
�_ 94' • • •
• i
-. ... _ ... n .._. :. .:.�.-� ,..,.:is-.c-� - -
J O
m • . • a Q •
Y
X
U. •
2
•
•
n-
cc f!1
:=.
, "THETAN ,Q 4J
-
...�: ,.':._-.�_. 1'.`-`..r':.f-::.... ::'. _ • ��17 LW� �-YC3di83�119iE0 �� OR ��'� O�2
THE � R�P RI
F
_. ,,:. . . .. • • TEE
_._, _ aN
•
LI
•
:
- �G P1ETERES� i F T.
E��Q ��•� a o
•
•
,
HEREON" W O W
- _ ._ ...._ ,.. .Me>C -a* +'rti' •t++_. ,•• . . .K�........ , - ='f 'v-`s:'l:__.i,I...- _ _ -_ • _m — c
..� , w....- _...._ ..,...s-, _[-•-_.n -, .--_•v_ r-_.-.....�-_...-.-___ ..s,c, in .. v�.�'-SFr�i . _t , ��-.�-,. _ _
•
J _ EX/,STING CONTOURr SLOPE TO DRAIN TO •
1.. . 5LOPE TO F.'I// TO NEW h'� ON L/M/ �M CREEK SEE DWG /O MAY.CREEK CR0551N :. ,
NOTF
STORM WATER INLET fOR CD STRUCT/ T.6 AV_
�� • po /%/(/ //f �o •
1 � �=1�... — „...„ �brjs d[SGO;R�AD/>E/✓�, \4Ty E��_ /9
- .`P� / �•• �J" '_ � _��,_,/� /III' , '/"-- --_-�-- --t ---_ -' r\ , �}
/ / /fn/ .zl: ✓' �`— \ ETA.26 .92
t i''--� j E% SLOPE/TO Z oRA/N -----"---"I"-_ \ \/ \ r� N:.196j404�3
1`•- . _/ \' 20 �\ '-- ,� -� _ 8"R - 17 RY .\ TD.,zX/ST CULhERT _ -- (-I; � \J '\ ��:,,_ /- - 1661 Z-O�' .
` ,./4/z./.;\ie.\__________ \/7 -
_ • - G'
WECISSWA
) 7"-- t._ .'. --__. ---..... ,. --a-171,45"07 -=
...-I: .., . • 7:---"-----=------ ------,--- -r--------__,i, . . -.....-.. ------..s.:-..___±.11."-'_:'' '-_-_---7.-.17•-r---7,H2-irl-T-,T-72:7---.".--- '77....•-='• E•-"- -"7"."--------7---c._.,.. '--;i0..i1/,' 1:1)4--'•;;::.\\:---7-1.-..-_,:::::--- ------1..--W--a•-'.."'-'-1.1"".1 •n------L__•-•--•__L..--1.1._'7•-=-J---,..,=.. -1--1-----=.--L----------'7-::--'--7,7:- 41'-'-r ir.,-- ----'---'.''----77-•.'.....-1-------.7.--•":...-•;-•-:::-'7---'2-'-` -C--‘-,,,,, ::--71:2,:,-.."-.:.,..'L...-----",_„•-•.--14."•--,--r-:.------ - .-5-r--6.6;7.-::: -......r.... .. _..,.. , 4_6.6. 11•1".--j11_____11•141jr•liei-____,111W''
:B
I. _ \:.'. ,sue_ -- -- L- --� -
•
41
•
" :. _k-_= -1- [AE; _ �_ - ..
- - - - -- - - - --_-_ _- - - - =--r-�_= ,vim--�- ', - -
h
.CAKE e. .-- It �='- -- - - _ �_ ; 1 �- - � — •E 2 DING I.
If�ASN } �— N I =,
SEE • �.
, - •
V f GMh!'PO 2L 1 `oEgM — T::(TYO) `,- STA.26t90
� ,o /662
J �, o O / ORM --\ _ • iv 5T.A.?MOS
T . -LILT \ - R -QF �, CURIYE -.DATA -. /I ...,1/E
F� ST PUCT. W C/✓E °C r i'r A_/%747.30 6 ze'
'so 5/DE/NLET. /N✓.,TO F/T ;, TA. /8tL4.85. _ ,.,. • •', i
�•, - 4e'9°:o4a25.' F L:/6622/2.43' ' ';.: 7yi4
—` _ �. EX(5T. E.-W, CULdERT. Pa 3G4/.SO • �• • • `"", {
a•/ v HWY. P GV.LINE u
�'1�a — :SFE- DI1/6:4 °% .E/66/,_B7Z.69. \ L�.576.7/" j' a \' I".,r._. �_'' _� i i{-=
\ SCALE HORIZONTAL- I =50.VERTICAL' I b=/ 34'24__.
_..__.I.."__•.__ .. .l-. _.__ _.._.._ .. .._.._._:_............... ...... .. _._.._CIA Q _ � ''Tlfl.J.�_i2 . ._a.
__.._i ., __--- ---CG1t ,5.��1C.F/L� T _7OP_.i�?,<i'EiYCH_.EF2zP�fQ�h'ICL�..a �--_ -- — _
1 +
t r i_ , }
•
-- _,....__._t. . ......................:..... FEGzgCE bV.i1.�1 I -;�..:, _._.f_,_ :__._ : .:.:-
r
t __
,
_ .._.._ t . AREA
i .........,._ .............. . ......_.__............,______. __.._.._.._.._..___.._. _..__..�.._ - �- -- - - - _ . ..
•
_.. -.._._.... ..•_.. .__,.._._._.� GRADE.-._.._,.-..._.. __ _
,- � ..j-__..._._.,.. _i _._. .__... "? __.._� ,.... }:.:.... T— �1.CJCT^?E''F' E��z �rO,:_
... 5 QC{lQ99B
.. .. ..:..mow ' .. ._.....:1,. 'V
• 1 5,O.00�99 ` T«.-i _r..__. -__ -_`_ 44/::Li :r _/,/ 7G'Y{820::_:�.::
tt t !
I
�r
• -.1.. r• t L
;..._.._.... N.Y._ 5� ::. } ,... i_
•� t
,
•
f i'• ... '' --- --. _._} _ F'Y y'..
•
-ri
_ t�{ _- . -� ,Art' •N -,S
17
s
_
r - ......_. . . _.� Y _ OLIO 2/000 . . 22/00 ... t 23/00 - 6NtU0, - 25/00 . . :: 26/00 rQ7' •:,-
BOO /3/A� /6{OO /7f010 /BfGk9 /9fD0 20f . .. :.
• • ,. AWING.NUMBER.''-,
]ESILwE]T^VY METROPOLITAN ENGINEERS M U N 101 PA L I T Y OF METROPOLITAN_ ' S:E AT T L E. _ FILER zo_a C RENTON EASTSIDE INTERCEPTO• R =!SE- CTION .4 1 fL 7..�'`.:;,.
•
SOLE -SYSTEM • SHEET NUMBEA
gnaw, 'DWG BROWN.AND CALDWELL - _ CAREY AND KRAMER . ,// Of e ApPfloVEEct/ ,,-- ",/,{0��� _ . STATION 13 TO- STATION 27 - - 7 oP II
MA RAY K AN A$$OC18TE$ SUBMITTED - RECOMMENDED APPROVED •!l47., /�/PE.eKPPOVED^,-(/`,+f�/`''_' a
eI1CLN[D RFW HILL AND iNG N BECK D oe::gn E%In•er-Malraoonton engg;“• P,eig&IEneir+•r-- eepoMan Ene not .. CNaIEntnear-Met ae Erpm••,•:,-_ "_For ul,:M,^'�on E!,pn••r. Fa.Y-•16".nn o="."'"x:on 5e,": - J 7.- -AS'NOTED DATE JUKE 1963
O
September 19, 2003
Cyrus M. McNeely
3810 park Ave. No.
Renton, WA 98056
Dear Ms. Fiala:
I have read portions of the Draft EIS for the Barbee Mill proposal and have comments regarding traffic and
impacts in the area. Specifically, note that on page A-7, Transportation, of the Scoping document there is
indication that Park Ave. No. is to be included in the analysis. It seems that this wasn't done because both
Park Ave. No. and 40th No. are virtually ignored in the document.
North 30th to Park Ave. No., to No. 40th, to Lake WA Blvd to the No. 44th interchange is now, and will
certainly increasingly become a popular northbound 1-405 by-pass route. Park Ave. No. is wider,
straighter and smoother than Burnett, with no stops between No. 30th and No.40th. It is a quicker way than
Burnett to get from 1-405 Exit 6 to the project site. Certainly some drivers going to and coming from the
site will use this "go-around" routinely, some when they know there is congestion on 1-405 and still others
legitimately enroute to the Renton Hilands and points between. Park Ave. No. and No. 40th should both
absolutely be included in the "Project Trip Distribution" and analyzed for
impacts and needed mitigation.
Minor point on Pg 3-62: Project site is bounded by"...I-405/Lake Washington Blvd to the 'west'..."?
Should be "east"?
Thankt;•for opportunity to comment. Reach me at (425) 255-5937; cmikeathom@aol.com.
CyrusM. ("Mike") McNeely
nfro
DEV%%ipF so-Too INQ
GIN
SEP 2 2 2003
Thursday,September 18,2003 America Online:Cmikeathom Page: 1
• i(c)to�
OrF?EONNINc;
.• r2 2�03
RECEIVED
F� 1VED
11 - _ _s_SS con a reo
cc- to\'loc)►.a., \ 3
c7�
P � .
; .I1 0� .LaKe
cer\ t/
-These_ ax-e, 0, ov-e( b\Nacur\C�
. \. Da ad s.
020-ackr->i -for c)a,A)\,-c_
ce,AL,)
. - „ .
-�Q = Noce.,
*CCus ct aY Co it)
o C- cc� _ cJ. . ,v
ccer \aL ne�i 1n,100f
CC
Pr.) 1 bAX,C
Qa s \coL. a. c
1—Caa i rn01- or �� f e l vu -E-
`-ems Cyr Cocs
! , �CQ- ref f eRW.
‘.(\&vsa--iucdJ2-ta occsiCo( .
0
_____At6
ec .\ S a_ s dlma,nd 1 .
:- -
I 62•..: - ,--,-- c\Asx ___ -41 - . a . ' .S V CCJASS 0
5, :., : ---- ‘___-, ‘ • i i r\ .e(A.t II
uri- -246E- -.k- -ILDs -a,\. R-4=k) a_Na II
- :' :-', Sirlk.A)Y‘ 100as?_,D 0 - -e po ,-i\--- , ,i,
; . iRsi,(\- -cf\r‘. ., :, , . , : .. . , 1
Lo:A.)•cf. . - `‘ s (xJ e . II
c �cGi h\obr o6) ' , r. II
( k \ 1\ S ! 1 II
- ' ' -` :. \R. ' ' : % ce_ac.z____ (c\- H ii
--TYA A' '• fi- I.
i C s w ,
; - , . , .-,. - .i.: ' , II
tea:. -k-\ A,c - 11
�� - . s , II
?-1-(\tri\-' \st__:)0L,__ '
415 7 z-,-?)C)C- , •II
- : . - , , -
II
II.
II
II
II
OL-oto
DEVELONE
CITY iv PL./A%
RENTO1v NG
City of Renton September 10, 2Q4pA
Development Services Div. ucry ? 2003
Susan Fiala FIECE , D
Dear Ms. Fiala:
Thank you and the City of Renton for the opportunity to continue the input
from the Kennydale Community regarding the Barbee Mill Development. As
we have said in previous meetings, we share the concerns about the
increased traffic this development will generate from the 44th St Exit on
1405 into Kennydale, and believe that, in addition to other measures,
locating both entrances into the development North of May Creek will
appreciably mitigate this impact. Our main concern however, is for the
natural habitat along May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline that will
be forever changed by this development.
We have hiked along May Creek and monitored the wildlife there, especially
the Sockeye, Coho, and Chinook salmon runs, for decades now, and done
what we can to assist them in their struggle to survive and reproduce. We
have witnessed deer and the Osprey that live at the mill raise their offspring
and thrive. We believe strongly that these creatures' survival depends on
public involvement and awareness of their well being, and that to realize this
it is essential that citizens have access to May Creek and the Lake
Washington shoreline that could be walled off by this development. The
changes this development will bring to the unique natural environment this
site represents should not just maintain wild habitat, but enhance it. If what
is left of wildlife habitat here is managed prudently, these considerations will
not impede the Barbee Mill Development, but tangibly increase its value.
In the six years I was Packmaster for St. Anthony's Cub Scouts, and, in the
years since as an active member of the Kennydale Neigborhood Association,
and Block. Watch Captain for our neighborhood, I have discussed the
ongoing development in Kennydale with a great many residents here. The
overwhelming majority of our neighbors agree, as we do, that the greatest
legacy we could leave our children's children would be a Park on the last
undeveloped shoreline in our area. A third jewel in the crown that Newcastle
and Coulon Parks represent would benefit countless citizens for generations
to come. As we work toward that goal, it is of paramount importance not to
let the Barbee Mill Development block the public's access to May Creek and
the Lake Washington shoreline.
Thank ou for your consideration,
. Jae/Adn'tivr .----
Larry an Cir eymann 1313 No. 38th St enton, WA 98056
U —090 Cy)
STATg
mr!!!!.
in.... 2
'y4 leas'1
STATE OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
1300 S. Evergreen Park Dr. S.W., P.O. Box 47250 • Olympia, Washington 98504-7250
(360) 664-1160 • TTY(360) 58
AEN. NING
September 9, 2003 Sep OA/
Ms. Susan Fiala it cue
City of Renton ��OvcD
Development Services Division C
1055 S. Grady Way
Sixth floor
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Barbee Mill Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Dear Ms. Fiala
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission(WUTC) Staff have reviewed the
draft environmental impact statement for the city of Renton's Barbie Mill development
proposal, and would like to submit the following comments.
As is pointed out in Section 1.6 of the document, the construction of public railroad
crossings in Washington requires prior approval from WUTC per RCW 81.35.020. In
general, the Commission seeks to limit the number of railroad crossings in Washington to
those that are essential to a community and are not redundant with respect to reasonable
alternative access across the tracks. Since the transportation options listed in the
document consist of multiple railroad crossing scenarios, it may be in the project's best
interest to discuss the options on site with Commission Staff and representatives of the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company. Consultation with all parties prior to
any one option being proposed would give the city the opportunity to hear all sides and
concerns before it files any petitions with the Commission. Prior agreement by all parties
would also eliminate any possibility of a formal hearing on the matter.
Please contact Ahmer Nizam at(360) 664-1345 to coordinate any such meeting or to
discuss WUTC's role in railroad crossing safety. Thank you for the opportunity of
comment on the proposal.
Sincerely,
ea,a_
Carole J. Washburn
Secretary
day..
• rn N MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN
TRIBE CULTURAL RESOURCES PROGRAM TRIBE
39015 172nd Avenue S.E. • Auburn, Washington 98092-9763
Phone: (360) 802-2202 • FAX: (360) 802-2242
September:'4, 2003
City of Renton OEVELOp
Development Services Division C/n,0�E N1NG
Attn: Susan Fiala
1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor SEp.a a 2003
Renton, WA 98055 4 ECEIVE
Re: Barbee Mill Company, LUA 02-040,EIS
Dear Ms. Fiala,
On behalf of the Cultural Resources Committee, I have reviewed the following
information sent regarding placement of the Barbee Mill Company and have the
following comments. We are unable to consult on this project as required by Section 106
of the National`Historic'Preservation Act. The DEIS documents sent to this department
does notprovide°Appendix R:Please send us Apperid'ix R for our review. Without a
complete cultural survey report we are unable to review impacts.
The Cultural Resources Program does not represent the Wildlife Program and the
Fisheries Program which are separate departments under the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. If
needed, please contact these departments for their input on this project.
We appreciate the effort to coordinate with the Muckleshoot Tribe prior to site
preparation. The destructive nature of construction excavation can often destroy a site
and cause delays and unnecessary expense for the contractor. If you have any questions,
please contact me at 360-802-2202, extension 103.
Sincerely,
•
Donna Hogerhuis, Cu tural Specialist
Cc 'Meffssa Calvert,'Wildlife and Culture Director '
= ' 'Rob Whitlam `SHP0 ) ' :, .-;; . ... c -i; ....•. t=
NOTE TO FILE
DATE: September 11, 2003
FROM: Susan Fiala
RE: Barbee Mill DEIS document
Volume 1 of the Barbee Mill DEIS document has an error in the date provided on the
FACT SHEET, page ii, for the month of the public hearing. It stated October 23rd and the
correct month is September 23rd
This was brought to our attention by the applicant/owner's representative.
Staff corrected copies in their possession by placing a label over incorrect information or
if a CD version a label indicating the correct date was placed on the CD plastic cover.
To correct documents sent out to agencies and departmental reviewers, staff prepared a
letter/memo stating the error and providing a labels as needed.
At the time this was brought to our attention, only 1 set of hard copies and one CD was
purchased. However, the cover letter in the document did state the correct public
hearing month and day.
�-
e� .
CITY OF:RENTON
On the 2 day of Se , 2003, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope cunt nin9
i'no# u of !SSka.1te li9+/ar fa Jai litz4 Copy of DE/S
documents. This information was sent to:
Name Rearesentinq
VGel Ind{i
Set o44eicilei j i1S`E. f. (7. (2 . ( Issai c i ova; (46; (i'ft.( .
het I,'s k ah back A c r(oj Il PE 15 vai l_1
�r,vl/leS a- ?y � J
.
' trs
Pk% so
v NpTAgy 9R;
(Signature of Sender) � ��/ �,.
PuBLt�' .
STATE OF WASHINGTON A _
SS hid
COUNTY OF KING ) rCt ',II Op WA Op
44
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ,��sijtierthis
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instru ent.
Dated: 00, -2(762.:
' � c •Notary PiL1 i i and;for he.Stata of•Wash gton tat -
t.
• ` 'Notar“Print) .',i 'M ILYQtKNACHEFF •
•My appointment exp, poINTMFNT EXPIRES fr29-07
Project Name: 2
1JGt r h&el^i 11 Prei. P D _I S
Project Number: Lu� OZ"oYq EIS PP Sig-II Skil
i
NOTARY.DOC
„ti
A
AGENCY(DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology* WDFW-Stewart Reinbold* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. *
Environmental Review Section c/o Department of Ecology Attn. SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703 3190 160th Ave SE 39015—172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Bellevue,WA 98008 Auburn,WA.98092
WSDOT Northwest Region* Duwamish Tribal Office* Muckle`shoot Cultural Resources•Program *
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Attn: Ma,Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Burien =WA 98166 '� : :� t :3.J(i;5-.1741d Averjue
PO Box 330310 ' ' Auburn,,WA 98092-9763
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers* KC Wastewater Treatment Division* Office of Archaeology&Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office , Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Stephanie Kramer
Attn: SEPA'Reviewei' =L=_191s. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343
PO Box•C-q7 51 '§_,• b ;,201 S.Jacksoq SST,MS KSC-NR-050 Olyrrip�ia,WA 98504-a3431;,, •
Seattle`,WA 981,24 • _ ., ,,Seattle,WA 98104-3855 -
JameyTaylor • , :t<� `�.� ..�, • ' .',t;, `) '�.,.r.
Depart. of Natural"Resources . v
PO Box 47015
Olympia,WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle .. City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72"d Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle,WA 9810.4-3856
Seattle Public; Jtilities,;'
Real Estate'e.rvices.-",”" :,.
Eric Swe_iinson' `' .:._ •
700 Fifth Avenue,Suite000
Seattle,WA 98104-5004"
9 =
=INotet''.It`ttie.'Noticeof(Application tatePs\that it is an "Optional DNS",the marked agencies and
cities':will need'to be sent a copy'of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application. *
Also note, do not mail Jamey'Taylor any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send her
the ERC Determination paperwork.
' -Dust Aa.uu'L I LS ✓e ce it/0J C1 AY J Cop ti 04- DE rS. All 4Tt vS
f�l c e l✓t el .~ Can't (�a c t • (7t S J.
'` I iti :ter'. •: "_;; 'i3"'r`
Last printed 07/22/03 9:40 AM
Page 1 of 4
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PARTIES OF RECORD
PLAT/LUA02-040,ECF,PP
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Dept. of Ecology —1 CA) Todd Fennell
Attn: Robert Cugini Northwest Regional Office 18152 145th Avenue SE
Box 359 Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. Renton,WA 98058
Renton, WA 98057 3190 160th Ave. SE
(owner) ' Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 Carmen Flores
' 16707 SE 14th St.
Campbell Mathewson ( Department of Fish &Wildlife Bellevue,WA 98008
Century Pacific, LP Attn: Rich Johnson ((TT
2140 Century Square PO Box 1100 GD Dan Frey,WSDOT GD
1501 Fourth Ave.#2140 LaConner,WA 98257 6431 Corson Avenue
Seattle,WA 98101 Seattle, WA 98018
(applicant) Department of Fish &Wildlife
Attn: Stewart Reinbold Wendy Giroux
Tom & Linda Baker PO Box 1100 South County Journal
1202 N. 35th LaConner, WA 98257 P.O. Box 130
Renton, WA 98056 Kent, WA 98035
Department of Fish &Wildlife
Flora Baldwin Attn: Larry Fisher Tom Goeltz
4017 Park Ave. N. PO Box 1100 1501 4th Ave, #2600
Renton,WA 98056 LaConner, WA 98257 Seattle, WA 98101
Lisa Bartel Charles F. Dobes Bruno &Anne Good
201 Pelly Ave. N 8606 118th Ave. SE 605 S. 194th St.
Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056 Des Moines,WA 98148-2159
Clark Van Bogart Gregg Dohrn G. Goodman
3711 Lake Washington BI N Jones &Stokes 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056 11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue,Washington 98005
Gloria Brown Joyce Kendrich Goodwin
1328 N.40th Street Mr. Bill Dunlap 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Triad Associates Renton, WA 98056
11814—115th Avenue NE
Kim Browne Kirkland,WA 98034 Lisa Grueter
1003 North 28th Place Jones&Stokes
Renton,WA 98056 Dave Enyer, TD&E 11820 Northup Way
2223 112 h Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98005
Tony Boydston Suite 101 •
3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. Bellevue, WA 98004 Edith Hamilton •
Renton, WA 98055 3714 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Bruce Erikson Renton, WA 98056
Dan &Laurie Brewis 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N.
11026 100th Ave. NE Renton,WA 98056 Mark Hancock
Kirkland, WA 98033 PO Box 88811
Bob Fawcett Seattle, WA 98138
Walt& Bessie Cook 305 2nd Ave. NE
903 N. 36th St. Issaquah,WA 98027 James Hanken
Renton, WA 98056 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210
George Fawcett Seattle, WA 98104
Dan Dawson 4008 Meadow Ave. N
Otak, Inc. Renton,WA 98056 Patricia Helina
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.
Kirkland,WA 98033 Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS Renton, WA 98056
Family Dental Clinic
Nancy Denney PO Box 1029 Marsha Hertel
3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. Fall City,WA 98024 3836 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 09/02/2003 2:50 PM
Page 2 of 4
S. & NeI Hiemstra Allen Lebowitz Marcie Maxwell
3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. 212 Pelly Ave. N. PO Box 2048
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Matt Hough
Otak Inc. Al & Cynthia Leovout Kay McCord
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 P.O. Box 1965 2802 Park Avenue North
Kirkland, WA 98033 . Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Renton,WA 98056
Ande Jorgensen Torsten Lienau Tim McGrath
2411 Garden Ct. N. HDR 900 North 34th Street
Renton,WA 98056 500 108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue, WA 98004
Mary Kammer Terry McMichael
51 Burnett Ave. S.,#307 David Lierman 4005 Park Ave. N.
Renton, WA 98056 620 E. Marion Street Renton,WA 98056
Kent,WA 98031
Kennydale Neighborhood Association Keith Menges
Attn: Kim Browne, President Kevin Lindahl 1615 NE 28th Street
1211 North 28th Place 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N. Renton,WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
John &Greta Moulijn
Jerry Kierig Therese Luger 3726 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Pan Abode Cedar Homes 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.,A203 Renton,WA 98056
4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N Renton, WA 98056 �L
Renton, WA 98056 r Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Mr. & Mrs. R. Lynch Fisheries Department
King County Wastewater 1420 NW Gilman Blvd.,#2268 39015 172"d Ave SE
Barbara Questad; Treatment Issaquah, WA 98027 Auburn, WA 98092
Division 4..
King Street Center Roy&Cheryl Lynch Dorothy Muller
201 South Jackson Street, #500 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204 51 Burnett Ave South#410
Seattle,WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98055
r
Linda Knowle Mary Maier CD David Nestvold
Kennydale Reality May Creek Steward 6608 117th Ave SE
2902 Kennewick PI. NE King County DNRP Bellevue, WA 98006
Renton, WA 98056 201 S. Jackson, Suite 600 —1 CD
Seattle, WA 98104 '� Micheal E. Nicholson
Misty Kodish " City of Newcastle
5021 Ripley Lane N.#106 Douglas R. Marsh Community Development Director
Renton, WA 98056 1328 N.40th Street 13020 SE 72nd Pi
Renton,WA 98056 Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
Leslie Kodish -�
5021 Ripley Land North#106 Susan Martin Sara Nicoli
Renton, WA 98056 1101 North 38th Street 3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Lakeside Community Church
6947 Coal Creek Parkway SE Marlen Mandt Sara Nicoli
Box 270 1408 N. 26th St. 310 Hibriten Ave SW
Newcastle, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98056 Lenoir, NC 28645
Robert Lange Lynn ManoloPoulos Amy Norris
4017 Park Ave N. Davis Wright 1900 NE 48th Street#F-202
Renton, WA 98056 10500 NE 8th St, Suite 1800 Renton, WA 98056
Bellevue, WA 98005 i-1(,a'
Dennis Law Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT
3625 Lake WA Blvd. N. Debbie Martin 15700 Dayton Avenue North CD
Renton, WA 98056 1412 North 30th Street P.O. Box 330310
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98133
Last printed 09/02/2003 2:50 PM
Page 3 of 4
Virginia Piazza Josef Schwabl Rich Wagner
1119 North 35th Street 3921 Meadow Ave. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin Richard Weinman
1120 N. 38th St. Jennifer Scott 270 3`d Ave.
Renton,WA 98056 5021 Ripley Lane N,Apt#1 Kirkland, WA 98033
Renton,WA 98056
Herbert& Diana Postlewait Robert West
3805 Park Ave. N. David Sherrard 3904 Park Avenue North
Renton, WA 98056 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE Renton,WA 98056
Kirkland, WA 98033
Emmett Pritchard Doug Williams
Raedeke Associates Chris Sidebotham 201 South Jackson Street
5711 NE 63rd Street 3907 Park Ave. N. MS KSC-NR-0503
Seattle,WA 98115 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Kevin Sloan John Wilson
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. Pan Abode Homes 1403 3rd Ave, Suite 300
Renton,WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N. Seattle, WA 98105
Renton,WA 98056
Dewey Rancourt Charles Wolfe
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. Jeff Smith 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Renton,WA 98056 1004 North 36th Street Seattle, WA 98101
Renton,WA 98056
Dustin Ray Bud Worley
8936 132nd Pl. SE Rod Stevens 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N.
Newcastle,WA 98057 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor #B202
Seattle, WA 98134 Renton,WA 98056
Linda Reutimann
1106 North 38th Street David &Joyce Stevenson Wendy& Lois Wywrot
Renton,WA 98056 1208 North 28th Street 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N.,A 104
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Larry Reymann
1313 North 38th Street John Studman Bill Yeckel
Renton,WA 98056 1036 North 31st Street 2108 Camas Ave NE
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Mark Rigos
1309 N. 39th PI. Robert&Alison Taylor Gary Young
Renton, WA 98056 3811 Lake Washington BL N 3115 Mountain View Ave. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Jane&Bill Riordan
1501 Dayton Ct. NE Neil Thomson Cynthia Youngblood
Renton, WA 98056 PO Box 76 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N
Mercer Island,WA 98040 #A103
Don Robertson Renton, WA 98056
1900 NE 48th St.,#R101 Scott Thomson
Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 76 Mark Zilmer
Mercer Island,WA 98040 3837 Lk. WA Blvd. N.
D. Sabey Renton, WA 98056
21410 132nd SE Fritz Timm, P.E.
G)
Kent, WA 98042 City of Newcastle Mike Cowles G�
13020 SE 72nd Place BNSF Railway
Newcastle, WA 98059 Engineering
Rich Schipanski 2454 Occidental Av So
Blumen Consulting Group Seattle,WA 98135
600 108th NE, Suite 1002
Bellevue,WA 98004
Beverly Wagner
4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104
Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 09/02/2003 2:50 PM
Page 4 of 4
Monica Durkin
WA Dept. of Natural Resources V
Aquatics Division
950 Farman Av N
Enumclaw, WA 98022
Ahmer Nizam 0
Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission
1300 South Evergreen Park Dr SW
Olympia,WA 98504
L
C 1) = Co►i pc�� visk ° 0415
14 C : YarJ copy of 95(5
Last printed 09/02/2003 2:50 PM
•
1J1-1.164.3L'L' 11 - i 161',1 v K,101.11ilt 1 1,111
OVE1111i1,L FIAT PLAN f"�/
NOIIICE 0
i-u—r, .,/, . :/) it—
CITY OF RENTON ��/�\
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE&AVAILABILITY _"_ f•i;,, (-
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT(DEIS) + 4
Notice is given under SEPA,RCW 43.216.080,that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) i "l `
for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee
on Tuesday,September 2,2003,and Is available for public review and comment. Copies are I ''"4 01004111k# ///�;available for review at the Renton Main Library,located at 100 Mill Ave.S.(425-277-5560)and the `" ^"Highlands Branch Library,located at 2902 NE 12'"St(425-277-5556)and from Sam to 5pm,Monday ! /r through Friday at the Development Services Division,Renton City Hall,6a floor,1055 South Grady 1 '-
,..itev;,..,`d�/Way,Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential _
development concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake )_ , v' .1'Washington and May Creek shorelines. The DEIS reviews potential Impacts on the property from the fi` Y "�
proposed 115 townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing Industrial use. � d �_4A51p IECTON
LAND USE FILE NUMBER: LUA 02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM � . S,
ram i -� )
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company Y �� �'
P.O.Box 359 - _
Renton,WA 98057 /
`
LOCATION: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard Na- +',•roc North between North 40'"Street and North 44t Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe L. -•• ""' •Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary. " ',; x.am Sr.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The DEIS documents(Volume I-Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and Volume II-Technical Appendices)are available for purchase at the Finance °s;:;„';,,Department on the 1stfloor of Renton City Hall. Each volume may be purchased Independently for 0
$15.00,plus tax and postage,when applicable. A CD version,containing both volumes,is available
, u�q r
for$5.00,plus tax and postage when applicable.
•.��¢. �, R�.•.,rl(
COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day comment
'-'
period,ending 5:00 p.m.,on Wednesday,October 1,2003,and should be addressed to: 4,45,:/"...JtAllii:
o ;/4. A Ifli
CITY OF RENTON c `°/dA'1 qaa
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION $ ter s,
ATTN: SUSAN FIALA m z �avr`•�l / t7�,
1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY,SIXTH FLOOR c o o 0 -- .O5 ''•• y
RENTON,WA 98055 a _ \ ;,'ram=. i =ltg- at��/1 1„.
A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS °w = lti����I/ ! "'iii and will be held on Tuesday,September 23,2003,6:00 p.m., In the Renton City Council 22,
¢ �+� 6�Yc 111111-a m�t ' a 1 ,i,'� �7 MR
Chambers,T"floor,City Hall,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA. c / ,, a 11 y� T
If you have further questions,please contact Susan Fiala 1°• A o� ''' ,(N at(425)430-7382. I r .�r/�Q � „y,-y�-
1 z e tli. n
rr ..-tyacn{o :�rs t?i 1 r'S
f
.ca-m r —fir Irg/.,Y'i51 1 ,(m
7t,F aruw-1F.,- ...n.i.,i-nli ii p linpn4IIAr1` 4,F
m CS( •rn i^rcty err- � 1f g �n x'r'e�,',
a i "r t.Ifif�i rye + � �(,�lil rtnsrp4
w II lIAYlg i I 4-•• r o� if
et. mr rn ,r x�.c At�.v'� �II r.�.Ig�`.R'E
7/ 5 m,r, h .�'ri4 I ]l(Jul I �tf
„Eri[� '^I 1 ae czki::
i i,cr 1 „tol'_n ,r %
!t I 's--n ^"'t}r
Mi4i
it
•
�Q` •SSIOAjFA•A�4i-,
CERTIFICATION �'�� o A �'•
•
I � � �•
g.j
� , hereby ce ify that copies of t�i���c'.s 29-Q;�.•`aC?'�_
1 OF WASH
above document were posted me in 7 conspicuous places on or nears j'j•+,11 r1/4„...,
the described property on ? .2-�>
Signed: 1...4_6� zilf........
-- ATTEST:Subscribed and worn efore me,a Notary Public,in and for th Sta of
Washington residing'`n A, ,on the_ ` ` day of
MARILYN KAMCHEFF
MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07
•
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE &AVAILABILITY
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080,that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS)
for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee
on Tuesday, September 2, 2003, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are
available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Ave. S. (425-277-5560) and the
Highlands Branch Library, located at 2902 NE 12th St(425-277-5556)and from 8am to 5pm, Monday
through Friday at the Development Services Division, Renton City Hall, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady
Way, Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential
development concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake
Washington and May Creek shorelines. The DEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the
proposed 115 townhouse lots as well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
LAND USE FILE NUMBER: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359
Renton,WA 98057
LOCATION: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard
North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The DEIS documents (Volume I — Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and Volume II —Technical Appendices) are available for purchase at the Finance
Department on the 1st floor of Renton City Hall. Each volume may be purchased independently for
$15.00, plus tax and postage, when applicable. A CD version, containing both volumes, is available
for$5.00, plus tax and postage when applicable.
COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day comment
period, ending 5:00 p.m., on Wednesday, October 1,2003, and should be addressed to:
CITY OF RENTON
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
ATTN: SUSAN FIALA
1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, SIXTH FLOOR
RENTON,WA 98055
A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS
and will be held on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 6:00 p.m., in the Renton City Council
Chambers,7th floor, City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA.
If you have further questions, please contact Susan Fiala at(425)430-7382.
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT I,SEC.32.MN.RSE.II Ie l:C
I
— — .-— -- j �.
��lik �(�1J i , I 1 RumoR Glue
��� - t' BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP \ \V % X .k - ---"=,I.sr 1!• Irt I.-, ,rl
��\ ,. A� r,,,{ ,r,rr,r,�rl r'„r,r„r,.. �-YJ LEI I- bJ;� �. I--�
}\irazik,k, r .. R— £ 1I; :.R• \tbt1' • "f '11',i,r i J�i:- i'�'I-, -Tim C<
tio
Ao,
r a 1 � 1 �� ' LAKE WASHINGTON 1, ,> �.\ S"';;r;, �� �;;P;r>p ```r;� rr� 1`
r� �r�,e ' 1� - {' a ��f t- ,_ c f;>r ` % •r�' :•yt' ; '_.I P •li
' _na trilf�4 sFRE" -: ... .. .,yw I .�:. \ •.1+a '�ia,'fofj,y;f' � '�� r�� ` f; •(' Sri'Ity-[�'I � r++� }r �• �'� "r �� "ter , :r> - . rJr r,� 1 �M1s'.1�QInl ��� I `' ,-T jlll ��', l ± I 'Y•�
�y} �or t `�� %."�� �� "II.�i > ; \ (\�hf i\,..c ��5� �, _ ``I.:1 I` L;r�-� r_ FZ
'-1 •
1r.7-aP �`CP hi!_ .�d..� .�I�i f�. .r; `lp .*.a :) — �D/ '\',h .r =e F r. �'.F
EJ
iirjr- -
•: 1 1r_,A,iM • .0 grit,.i r 4. .. ``' ��� \1 iii....,,,,,..,4 \;\ L`\\\ s.-P, L. rJ 4 _, I Fj[ 7GC{¢ �rr{� liT � � / ♦t \� r r, F1-
6��gg� i ".ix. ��� AST , ti TZo' z `� ".. i1- ri .risti
4161
�� l �� 99l�Elb�i4A iM\'.��A �; ;t € `� _ ,, F 1 y `�`ti:i ,
K
17
/ F.�� ���a `�� +� iconi. `:.: 7 ,moo _ -
AAAi:Ac1ACAA miB fig 1 E,� W �Il'l: s;
1 a' r` . "e-41,Qft`f �•`►�y~`-ie I NEW.AS r ' ;y :r_.3 �i 1.1e 6 'at z / ; ��� i'
-----------------— ——--------- — )7
v—
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE & AVAILABILITY
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080, that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for
the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on
Tuesday, September 2, 2003, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are available for
review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Ave. S. (425-277-5560) and the Highlands Branch
Library, located at 2902 NE 12th St. (425-277-5556) and from 8am to 5pm, Monday through Friday at the
Development Services Division, Renton City Hall, 6 h floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek
shorelines. The DEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 townhouse lots as
well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
LAND USE FILE NUMBER: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359
Renton,WA 98057
LOCATION: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard
North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The DEIS documents (Volume I — Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and Volume II — Technical Appendices) are available for purchase at the Finance
Department on the 1st floor of Renton City Hall. Each volume may be purchased independently for
$15.00, plus tax and postage, when applicable. A CD version, containing both volumes, is available for
$5.00, plus tax and postage when applicable.
COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day comment
period, ending 5:00 p.m.,Wednesday, October 1,2003, and should be addressed to:
City of Renton
Development Services Division
ATTN: Susan Fiala
1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor
Renton,WA 98055
A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS and
will be held on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 6:00 p.m., in the Renton City Council Chambers (7th
floor) located at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA.
If you have further questions, please contact Susan Fiala at(425)430-7382.
deis issuance sig sheet.doc
Publication Date: September 2,'2003
Date of Decision: August 26, 2003
SIGNATURES:
(931tV /1. /et.•—) 6/0 3
Gregg Zimmpr an, mi istrator DATE
Department of Ian ing/Building/Public Works
111b 03
Dennis Culp, dministrator DATE
Community Services Depart ent
/17 "
Lee V1)re er, Fire Chief DATE
Renton Fire Department
deis issuance sig sheet.doc
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 21, 2003
TO: Environmental Review Committee
FROM: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, x7382 Aid
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill EIS, LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM ''
Revised Text of DEIS document
The attached text provides the revisions which reference the issues outlined in your
email/memos which are included at the end of the packet provided. The revisions are
shown as underlined text. The referenced section of the DEIS document is noted on
each page. Please note that Parametrix indicated that the numbering to use is that with
the strike-through as their word processing system incorrectly renumbered the revised
pages.
If there are any questions prior to our ERC meeting please email me to address your
concern early on.
It is anticipated to have the signatures completed at the August 26th meeting.
Please feel free to contact me at x7382 or email.
08.19.03
Excerpt from Summary, 1.3 Surface Water Resources,page 1-6
stormwater run-off volumes from the site to May Creek and Lake Washington. In addition, reduction in
impervious surface area could increase the amount of stormwater infiltrating to groundwater.
Water quality treatment for the proposed alternative is required under City of Renton codes. Preliminary plans
include treatment of stormwater that would be an improvement over current conditions for the site.
Flooding impacts for the site were assessed based on the presumption of cessation of dredging at the mouth of
May Creek because deeper water conditions would no longer be needed for log handling and storage. Another
reason for stopping dredging is the benefits of the shallow water and emergent habitat provided by normal delta
processes. With the formation of a natural delta, the 100-year floodplain would cover a substantial part of the
site.
4,&31.3.3 Mitigation
Construction impacts would be minimized through implementation of an appropriate Temporary Erosion and
Sediment Control (TESC)Plan.
Operation and maintenance of the proposed water quality treatment facilities to conform to City of Renton
requirements would reduce adverse water quality impacts from pollutants in runoff.
Containment of the 100-year floodplain within either the proposed May Creek open space corridor, or in
alternative 50 foot or 100 foot wide corridors could be accomplished with fill outside the flood corridor to bring
the lowest floor of residences a minimum of one foot above base flood elevation or levees approximately 2 feet
above existing ground level. Compensation for flood storage area lost could be provided.
Provision of the wider 100 foot wide corridor would provide additional flood conveyance and storage to
compensate for the future increase in floodplain depths that will occur because of aggregation of sediments in
the stream over time.
Existing bridges should be removed and/or reconstructed to reduce the restriction to floodwater flow.
41.4 GROUNDWATER
Affected Environment
The project site is primarily a groundwater discharge area. General groundwater flow on the site is west toward
the lake with a northerly component in the northern portion of the site.
Elevated concentrations of arsenic have been detected in the groundwater over the northern half of the site,with
minor concentrations of zinc. Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were also detected in specific areas.
Groundwater impacts from metals are believed to come from an in-place soil
Excerpt from Summary—1.6 Transportation,page 1-12
1,&31.6.3 Mitigation
At the I-405 southbound ramp/—(Lake Washington Boulevard) NE 44th Street intersection, an all-way stop
control or a signal would mitigate operation at LOS F. The installation of a signal is not warranted based on the
2007 projected vehicular volumes.
The I-405 northbound ramp_(Lake Washington Boulevard)/—NE 44th Street intersection operations can be
mitigated with an all-way stop control and the addition of a northbound right-turn lane. The intersection also
meets volume criteria for signal warrants.
The development is also expected to contribute to the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee of$75 per
net daily trip generated by the project. This will mitigate general system impacts of diffuse new trips from the
development on the general circulation system.
Geometric limitations of the proposed rail crossings can be mitigated by moving the crossings to locations
where Lake Washington Boulevard and the rails are at about the same elevation. This would have some
impacts on grading for on-site roadways on the east side of May Creek. Relocation also would reduce
separation between crossings and increase the potential for both to be blocked by a stopped train. This could be
mitigated by connecting this site with the at-grade crossing at the north end of the Vulcan property.
Safety at railroad crossings involves three basic approaches:
• Grade separation,which removes potential vehicle train conflicts,but is more expensive;
• Passive control for at-grade crossings, involving signs and pavement markers and relying on drivers
and pedestrians to recognize that a train is approaching and stopping with adequate clearance from the
rails;
• Active control of at-grade crossings, which consists of signals and gates designed to provide warning
devices automatically activated by train approach and may include gates that physically exclude
vehicles and pedestrians.
•
The City of Renton and the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission will evaluate crossing options
based on topographic, operational, safety, and economic factors and the public need for the crossing.
Consolidation of existing private crossings may be required.
Mitigation of non-motorized impacts and transit impacts include a mix of on-site and off-site facilities and
programs that would provide safe pedestrian circulation.
41.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
1 7.11.6.4 Affected Environment
As part of lumber processing, various substances were used on the site to treat wood including arsenic trioxide,
copper sulfate, zinc sulfate, and iron sulfate and pentachlorophenol. Underground storage tanks (USTs) with
petrochemical fuels were located on the site. A variety of solvents and industrial chemicals, fuels and
lubricants have been utilized in sawmill operations.
IMPACTS MITIGATING MEASURES
Earth,Soils,and Geology
Erosion and sedimentation Implement Best Management Practices(BMPs)for erosion control prior to
construction.
Liquefaction Construct buildings on a deep foundation system,such as pilings,that would transfer
the building loads to the dense soils beneath the potentially liquefiable alluvial
deposits.
Install ground improvement measures,such as stone columns or deep dynamic
compaction to reduce the liquefaction potential underlying roads and utilities
Provide containment consisting of ground densification treatment to reduced the
hazard of lateral spreading,particularly near the shoreline.
Surface Water
Erosion and Sedimentation I Implement an appropriate Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control(TESC)Plan.
Pollutants in Surface Water i Construct,operate and maintain the proposed water quality treatment facilities
Flooding Contain the 100-year floodplain within either the proposed May Creek open space
corridor,or in alternative 50 foot or 100 foot wide corridors contained by fill or levies
1 at least one foot above base flood levels
Construct residences with the lowest floor one foot above base flood elevation
Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space
corridor and providing additional storage volume.
Provide the wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood
storage to compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
Remove and/or reconstruct existing bridges to reduce the restriction to floodwater
flow
Groundwater
Groundwater Contamination Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site
Provide ongoing treatment of contaminated groundwater,if monitoring after soil
removal indicates,pursuant to Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site
Plants&Animals
Removal of Osprey nest Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity
Removal of existing vegetation Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance
during construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas
t away from buffer areas
Existing invasive plant species in buffer i Clear to completely remove invasive species and re-plant with native species.
areas
Lack of habitat value of residential Use native plants in residential landscaping
landscaping
Difficulty of ensuring maintenance of Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than
shoreline vegetation residents.
Transportation
Increase transportation demand from trip Provide demand management programs including improved transit and carpool
generation facilities and service and on-site and off-site facilities and programs that would
{ provide safe pedestrian circulation to these facilities
-------- - ----- -- -- -___.._.._ _..._.-----------1--------- ---------------
Intersections not meeting City of Renton ! Mitigate LOS impacts at the I-405 southbound ramp/NE 44th Street(Lake
level of service(LOS)standards j Washington Boulevard)intersection through an all-way stop control or a signal. A
signal is not warranted based on the vehicular volumes.
Mitigate LOS impacts at the I-405 northbound ramp(Lake Washington
Boulevard)/NE 44th Street intersection with an all-way stop control and the addition
of a northbound right-turn lane or a signal. The intersection meets volume criteria for
Signal Warrants.
Transportation (continued)
Geometric limitations of propose railroad E Move the site access to locations where Lake Washington Boulevard and the rails are
crossings at about the same elevation. This would have some impacts on grading for on-site
roadways on the east side of May Creek.
Potential safety impacts at railroad crossings j Provide grade separation,which removes potential vehicle train conflicts,but is quite
expensive. This may be implemented in the future to mitigate cumulative impacts of
development of adjacent properties.
Provide active control designed to provide warning devices automatically activated by train approach and may include gates that physically exclude vehicles and
pedestrians.
Provide passive control involving signs and pavement markers and rely on drivers
and pedestrians to recognize that a train is approaching and stopping with adequate
clearance from the rails.
Provide for consolidation of existing rail crossings to reduce the number of conflict
points.
Provide for a traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to
reduce crossings.
Increased pedestrian/vehicle conflicts i Include a mix of on-site and off-site facilities and programs that would provide safe
pedestrian circulation.
Diffuse impacts ofn new trips on the Contribute to the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee.
circulation system
Hazardous Materials
Soil and groundwater contamination j Remove contaminates through Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site.
Encountering contaminated soil during Provide a contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan.
construction
Visual Impacts
Reduce building bulk by reducing building height.
Reduce building bulk by increasing setbacks between buildings.
Reduce building bulk by varying building height,bulk,and setbacks.
Reduce apparent building bulk by design features,materials and color,including
—_ — _ — --- sloping roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
Excerpt from Section 3.2 Surface Water Resources 3.2.3 Mitigation page 3-23 FORMER PAGE
3-19
Discharge to Lake Washington
Following water quality treatment, water quality treatment ponds would be discharged directly to Lake
Washington through separate 18-inch diameter pipes (indicated as WQ1 Outlet in Figure 3.2-4).
Discharge rates for the large pond would range from 2.5 cfs during the 6-month, 24-hour storm to 8.0 cfs
during the 100-year, 24-hour storm; for the small pond,these figures would be 1.6 cfs to 5.0 cfs (Raedeke
Associates, Inc. 2002).
Adjacent Upstream Drainage
An existing bypass storm drain line would be replaced with another line with a capacity adequate to serve
the developed offsite N 40th Street basin.
Mitigation for Floodplains and Flooding
Potential flooding and floodplain mitigation measures could include the constructing of levees or
constructing the proposal on fill at an elevation above the estimated 100-year flood level as presented
above under Scenarios 2 and 3. The model predicts an average maximum floodplain depth of 1.0 foot
above the ground surface during the 100-year flood. Therefore, the levee or fill should be at least 2 feet
above the existing ground elevation, to provide 1 foot of freeboard for the top of the levee or the lowest
occupied floor of residences as required by RMC 4-3-050.I.3.a. These mitigation measures could protect
the development from flooding and reduce the chance of the stream migrating to a new location.
Dredging at the mouth of May Creek could be combined with one (or both) of these potential mitigation
measures.
As an additional mitigation measure, all existing bridges could be replaced with bridges that would not
restrict the 100-year floodplain.
Reduction in floodplain storage capacity resulting from fill placement or levee construction would have to
be mitigated. In general, these impacts could be mitigated by providing compensatory storage at the
project site or a location immediately upstream. This could be provided at the Barbee Mill site by
removing an equivalent volume of historic fill adjacent to the stream at an elevation greater than the bank
and less than the 100-year floodplain elevation.
The estimates of stream aggradation are based on the method discussed in Section 2.3. However,because
the site is located on a delta, if the stream is prevented from migrating, potentially aggradation would
continue, with deposits that would reduce the capacity of the stream bed over time. This would result in
greater and floodplain depths that would eventually exceed the above estimates_made in this report. This
could be compensated for to some extent by increasing the height of the levee or the elevation of the
bottom floor of residences, or utilizing the wider 100 foot setback from the stream, which would provide
additional flood storage to compensate for the reduction in conveyance capacity.
Mitigation for Water Quality
City of Renton standards require that runoff from pollution generating surfaces be treated. The proposed
design includes two water quality ponds to treat runoff before it is discharged (see Figure 3.2-4). The
facilities' operation and maintenance would conform to City of Renton and 1998 KCSWDM (King
County 1998)requirements. If mitigation measures are properly implemented, adverse water quality
Excerpts from Section 3.5,Transportation,page 3-77
3 .51.6.4.1 Impacts on Interstate 405
The impacts on I-405 ramp operations at NE 44th Street (Lake Washington Boulevard) and N 30th Street
were analyzed using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS 2000) ramp merge and diverge analysis tool.
Under both the No-Action Alternative and Proposed Action (in 2007), the I-405 northbound off-ramps to
NE 44th Street and N 30th Street and the northbound on-ramp from N 30th Street operate at LOS F.
Under both the No-Action Alternative and Proposed Action (in 2007), the I-405 southbound off-ramps to
NE 44th Street and N 30th Street and the northbound on ramp from NE 44th Street operate at LOS E.
The analysis indicates that the project traffic volumes would have no further impact on ramp operations,
and there is no measurable increase in delay between the No-Action Alternative and under Project
conditions. Table 3.5-5 summarizes the ramp merge and diverge analysis results in terms of LOS and
density(passenger cars per mile per lane).
Table 3.5-5. Ramp Merge/Diverge Level of Service Summary
Level of Service(Density pc/mi/lane)
Year 2002 Year 2007 No Year 2007 with
Interchange Existing Build Project
Lake Washington Boulevard(NE 44th Street)
1-405 southbound off ramp diverge D(33) E(35) E(35)
1-405 southbound on ramp merge D(32) D(33) D(33)
1-405 northbound off ramp diverge D(35) F(40) F(40)
1-405 northbound on ramp merge D(32) E(37) E(37)
N 30th Street
1-405 southbound off ramp diverge D(33) E(36) E(36)
1-405 southbound on ramp merge D(30) D(33) D(33)
1-405 northbound off ramp diverge D(34) F(39) F(39)
1-405 northbound on ramp merge D(34) F(39) F(39)
3 2.61.6.4.2 Site Access
The site is adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad right-of-way. The proposal
includes public street crossings at the location of the existing Barbee Mill site private driveway access and
at the existing private driveway crossing at Ripley Lane approximately 350 feet north of the intersection
of Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane. (Continuation of a private crossing is precluded by
BNSF Railroad practices that limit a new or modified private crossing to a maximum of six properties
(Cowles 2003b personal communication).)
The procedure for establishing a public street crossing over a railroad right-of-way in the State of
Washington is governed by RCW 81.53.020 and WAC 480-62-150, and requires approval of a grade
crossing petition by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. Legislative policy of the
State of Washington to requires new highway crossings of railroads to be grade separated, where
practicable (RCW 81.53.020). This policy applies to local streets, and feasibility generally includes
consideration of topographic, operational, safety, and economic factors as well as public need for the
crossing, and reference to guidelines adopted by the Federal Railroad Administration (Nizam 2003
personal communication). The vehicular traffic volumes from this development and the current level of
use of this rail line do not meet FHWA criteria for grade separated crossings,which generally are
Barbee Mill DEIS, Excerpt 08.25.03 Revision to page 3-69
3.5.2.6 Site Access
The site is adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad right-of-way. The proposal
includes public street crossings at the location of the existing Barbee Mill site private driveway access and
at the existing private driveway crossing at Ripley Lane approximately 350 feet north of the intersection
of Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane. (Continuation of a private crossing is precluded by
BNSR Railroad practices that limit a new or modified private crossing to a maximum of six properties
(Cowles 2003b personal communication)
The procedure for establishing a public street crossing over a railroad right-of-way in the State of
Washington is governed by RCW 81.53.020 and WAC 480-62-150, and requires approval of a grade
crossing petition by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. Legislative policy of the
State of Washington to requires new highway crossings of railroads to be grade separated, where
practicable (RCW 81.53.020). This policy applies to local streets, and feasibility generally includes
consideration of topographic, operational, safety, and economic factors as well as public need for the
crossing, and reference to guidelines adopted by the Federal Railroad Administration (Nizam 2003
personal communication). The vehicular traffic volumes from this development and the current level of
use of this rail line do not meet FHWA criteria for grade separated crossings, which generally are
implemented for very high vehicular or train volumes (FHWA 2002).
The decision to provide public roadway crossings of railways may include elimination or consolidation of
existing public or private crossings to minimize the total number of crossings. This type of consolidation
may require property owners in the vicinity to work together to provide a circulation system to serve all
properties on the west side of the BNSF railroad tracks. The proposed northerly access to the site on to
Ripley Lane would require dedication of a public street over the property to the north.
It may be desirable, however, to ensure that the feasibility of future implementation of a grade separated
rail crossing is not precluded. The location where existing roadway grades provide the greatest potential
for overcrossing is near the Ripley Lane intersection with Lake Washington Boulevard, where the
roadway is currently above the railroad. An overcrossing at this location, however, would require
substantial reconfiguration of the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection with substantial
changes in elevation and grade for both roadways.
At the proposed at-grade crossing location (at the existing site access), the elevation difference with Lake
Washington Boulevard is approximately 10 feet. Given the 60-foot separation between the road and
railroad at that location, a 16 percent grade could theoretically be established. The combination of
standards for roadway approaches and rail crossings may preclude any substantial change in grade
between the roadway and the railroad. The guidelines of the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials provide that the roadway surface should not be more than 3 inches higher or
lower than the top of the nearest rail at a point 30 feet from the rail (AASHTO 2001). The similar
WSDOT Design Manual standard is 3 inches above or 6 inches below (WSDOT 1998, Section 930.03).
The normal standard for a road approach to assure a safe area for cars to wait for entry and for sight
distance is an area 20 to 30 feet in length with a grade not to exceed 6 percent(WSDOT 1998 Fig 930-3).
The buildout of Lake Washington Boulevard, with a center left-turn lane, bike lanes, and sidewalks,
would require most of the right-of-way. This combination of requirements would leave little area for a
change in grade between the road and the railroad.
Excerpt from Section 3.5 Transportation 3.5.2.7 Safety,Rail Safety,page 3-85 FORMER P. 81
Active controls at crossings are the most effective physical strategy to reduce collisions. For the proposed
new crossings, the City of Renton, the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, and the
railway must decide the appropriate balance between risk and cost. The risk of collisions with pedestrians
because of trespass on the right-of-way can be addressed by fencing the line adjacent to the site and by
installing warning signage, as well as education programs.
Accidents on the rail line adjacent to the site also have the potential to affect the life-safety of residents by
blocking access to the site when trains come to a stop after a collision. Train stopping distance is affected
by the momentum of the train, which is a function of speed and weight, and the reaction time of the
engineer from the time a visual cue is received to the time brakes are applied. For freight trains operating
on the line presently with up to 10 cars and a locomotive, stopping distance is likely to be in the range of
several hundred feet, depending on the weight of the train.
The distance between the proposed road access points is approximately 2,000 feet and would require a
train length of approximately 25 to 30 cars to block both entrances. If the entrances were moved as
outlined above,the distance between the two would be approximately 1,000 feet and could be blocked by
a train 15 to 18 cars long. If the rail line were reopened to long-haul freight trains of between 100 and
150 cars, a train length of 1 to 1.5 miles long could, under a variety of operating conditions ranging from
accidents to operational stops, block both entrances. The potential for operational stops to block the
entrances is low given the lack of switches between south Lake Washington and Bellevue. Under
existing use of the line for local freight service, it is unlikely that freight trains would block both
entrances to the site.
An additional access option that would provide greater separation between access points and reduce the
potential for blockage would be to develop a continuous frontage roadway on the west side of the BNSF
railroad to provide access to the existing crossing at the north end of the Vulcan site. That would provide
a separation between access points of about 3,600 feet. This access option could be combined with
consolidation of existing rail crossings to reduce the number of vehicle train conflict points.
3.5.2.83.5.2.8 Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions
The City of Newcastle lies to the northeast of the site and is expected to experience a portion of the
project-generated traffic. Based on the trip distribution analysis, up to 22 percent of project traffic (27
PM peak hour and 262 daily trips) are destined to, from, or through the City of Newcastle. Table 3.5-7
describes the arterial sections affected by project trips, traffic volumes, and the percentage increase in
traffic due to the project development.
Table 3.5-7. Project Impacts to the City of Newcastle
PM Peak Hour Volumes
%off Growth
Year 2007 Total Attributed to
Arterial Section Year 2002 (with Project) Project Traffic
112th Avenue SE-SE 68th Street(south of Lake Washington Boulevard) 449 506 19
Lake Washington Boulevard(Between SE 60th Street and SE 64th Street) 285 333 15
Lake Washington Boulevard(north of SE 60th Street) 331 381 10
SE 60th Street(east of Lake Washington Boulevard) 231 294 5
Excerpt from Section 3.5 Transportation 3.5.3 Mitigation page 3-91 FORMER PAGE 3-87& 88
3.5.3.33.5.3.3 Channelization Warrant Analysis
Channelization warrants were conducted for the south site access/Lake Washington Boulevard
intersection under horizon-year 2007 conditions per WSDOT standards. The intersection channelization
is planned for a northbound-shared through-left turn lane, southbound-shared through-right turn lane, and
eastbound-shared left-right turn lane.
A channelization warrant analysis was conducted for the northbound left-turn movement site access per
the WSDOT design manual, Figure 910-9a (see attached). The northbound left-turn movement totals 15
vehicles during the PM peak hour. The location experiences a total peak hour volume (north and
southbound approaches) of 540 vehicles. Northbound left-turn movement storage is not needed based on
channelization warrant guidelines. Due to the low volume of traffic maneuvering the northbound left-
turn, additional background growth on Lake Washington Boulevard would likely not warrant a left-turn
lane beyond the horizon year based on vehicular volume criteria alone.
An additional check of site access channelization was conducted for the AM peak hour (where inbound
and outbound traffic patterns are reversed). The heavier traffic flow is outbound from the site; therefore,
a channelization warrant analysis was conducted for the eastbound right-turn movement per the WSDOT
design manual, Figure 910-12 (see attached). The eastbound right-turn movement totals 12 vehicles
during the AM peak hour. A storage lane for the eastbound right-turn movement is not needed based on
channelization warrant guidelines.
Cumulative impacts of developments accessing the south site access may include the need for turn lanes.
The total volume of traffic needed to warrant the installation of a northbound left-turn lane (given no
change in background traffic) is 60 vph (an additional 45 vph). The total volume of traffic accessing the
eastbound approach needed to warrant the installation of an eastbound right-turn pocket is 250 vph(or 45
vph turning right), which is an additional 200 vph on the approach(or 30 to 35 vph turning right).
3.5.3.13.5.3.4 Mitigation for Site Access and Rail Impacts
Impacts of the proposed site access on safety, as well as other impacts, can include a range of potential
measures, including:
• Grade-separated rail crossings, if found to be practicable as directed by the legislative policy in
RCW 81.53.020. This option also could be implemented in the future when properties to the
north develop to mitigate cumulative impacts of development.
• Relocated grade level crossings to meet guidelines for level rail crossings and intersection
approach grades as indicated on Figure 3.5-8. This may place crossings closer together and
increase the potential for blockage of both by a stopped train. This could be mitigated by
connecting the existing access point at the north end of the Vulcan property with this site through
a continuous frontage roadway on the west side of the BNSF right-of way. That would provide a
separation between access points of about 3,600 feet. This access option could be combined with
consolidation of existing rail crossings to reduce the number of vehicle train conflict points.
• A variety of crossing controls for grade level crossings,ranging from:
> passive signing and stop bars,
> warning lights and bells,
> gated control of approaches, and
Excerpt from Section 3.5 Transportation 3.5.3 Mitigation page 3-94 FORMER PAGE 90
Mitigation of Non-Motorized Facility Impacts and Transit Impacts
Mitigation of non-motorized impacts and transit impacts include a mix of on-site and off-site facilities
and programs that might be implemented in coordination with a variety of parties. Measures include:
• Provision of pedestrian facilities within the site with a design that provides greater pedestrian
comfort through setback from the curb with an intervening planting strip, and/or provision of a
buffer between travel lanes. An on-street buffer might consist of curbside automobile parking or
a marked, dedicated bicycle lane.
• Provision of pedestrian connections to the properties to the north within the northwest portion of
the site to provide convenient access to anticipated future mixed-use development in the area and
avoiding the necessity for out-of-direction movement back to the east to access the site. This
pedestrian connection might be combined with a vehicular connection.
• Provision of public access to public lands along the shoreline and other shoreline public access
that connects to the general pedestrian circulation in the site and to Lake Washington Boulevard.
• Provision of off-street trails within open space along May Creek connecting to the site circulation
system at the northeast corner to provide continuity with the access roadway to the north and
connecting to shoreline public access.
• Provision of pedestrian and bicycle connections to Lake Washington Boulevard and a railroad
crossing providing pedestrian crossing control, such as gates.
• Pedestrian and bicycle improvements to Lake Washington Boulevard consisting of sidewalks, in
addition to bicycle lanes.
• Transit service impacts of the proposal can be mitigated by integrating additional service on the I-
405 corridor to local Park and Ride Lots with adequate capacity for local demand, or by
providing service on Lake Washington Boulevard with other transit enhancements.
All of these measures are likely to contribute to an environment in which choice of alternative modes of
transportation is supported by site design. The multiple issues faced in choosing something other than
single occupant vehicles for trips will also be supported by employer incentives and system
improvements, such as HOV lanes and expanded transit routes, as well as rideshare matching services,
that are included in a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management program.
3.6.3.61.6.4.3 Mitigation of Cumulative Impacts
Mitigation of cumulative impacts of this proposal together with expected impacts of redevelopment of
other industrial sites in the vicinity can be mitigated by developing an overall mitigation program. The
mitigation program could ensure that intersections and other improvements are designed to accommodate
future channelization and signal improvements. The circulation system could include provision for a
grade separated crossing of the railroad and other elements such as a street serving all properties west of
the BNSF railroad served by a minimum number of railroad crossings. Such a circulation system could
include abandonment of Ripley Lane between the railroad and I-405 right-of-ways.
I I
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 11,2003
TO: Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
A.Lee Wheeler,Fire Chief
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman 6 z
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Draft Environmental Impact
Statement(DEIS)
I have read portions of the draft Environmental Impact Statement including the sections on
transportation, hazardous materials, 'and surface water resources, and skimmed the remaining
sections. I have also read Appendix B,Floodplain Analysis Technical Report. My main concern
was to review and evaluate the identified impacts and recommended mitigation measures in those
areas involving health and safety of potential future residents and motorists.
In reviewing the transportation section my greatest area of interest was the site access. Site
access must cross the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks which the EIS states carries
four trains per day at the current time. It appears to me that the EIS does properly identify the
potential safety impacts of at-grade railroad crossings, and also a number of possible mitigation
measures including grade separated crossings, at-grade crossings with active or passive controls
for motorists, and other approaches. Section 3.5.2.6 of the EIS states that "the vehicular traffic
volumes from this development and the current level of use of this rail line do not meet FHWA
criteria for grade separated crossings,which generally are implemented for very high vehicular or
train volumes (FHWA 2002)". It is likely that the high cost of installing•grade-separated
crossings would render this project financially infeasible. In my opinion it is appropriate for the
DEIS to list all of the potential mitigation measures as it does. Based upon the statement that
these crossings do not meet the FHWA criteria for grade separate crossings (which I have not
independently verified), I don't think it would be appropriate to either insist on grade separated
crossings or to remove the other potential mitigation measures from the document. I am,
however,very concerned about added liability and costs that the City would take on by accepting ,
public at-grade crossings and the crossing equipment. My recommendation, therefore, is to
modify the DEIS to include an alternative that these railroad crossings would be private rather
than public. This alternative would reduce the city's liability. Although not a consideration for
the DEIS, the City could also require on the face of the plat a provision that would hold the City
harmless in the event of injury at the at-grade crossings, and a provision requiring the
homeowners association to maintain the crossing.
I am equally concerned about the site floodplain provisions. I think that the City will have to `
insist that either levees will have to be installed to protect future homes from flooding due to the `r On-
termination of the periodic dredging, or by raising the building floor areas above the 100-year ......- tdr
floodplain level per the Renton Municipal Code, or both. I think that raising the building floor ',_ ' n
areas above,the 100-year floodplain should be added to the mitigating measures on page 1-20. 4
ry
The DEIS appears to properly identify the other potential mitigating measures. Although I prefer
the 100-foot wide corridors to the smaller options because it would allow more space for the
Document2\cor
Page 2.
creek to meander over time, I can't technically rule out the feasibility of the other options listed.
Therefore I don't have a problem with.listing all of the potential mitigating measures. Regarding
the potential for future flooding once homes are built and the dredging stops, a fallacy of
establishing a 100-year floodplain is that it will change over time as aggradation and delta
formation occur at the mouth of the creek. This unique set of circumstances could result in a
huge liability for the City in coming years. Although not a matter for the DEIS, we will need to
put some thought into means of legally protecting the City from such liability, such as recorded
hold harmless provisions on the face of the plat, and/or requirements that a homeowners
association be set up that is responsible for maintenance of the levees and flood protection.
Regarding mitigation for,the hazardous materials contamination on portions of the site,page 1-21
establishes the removal of contaminates through Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site. I
am satisfied with the inclusion of that provision.
Overall, the DEIS appeared to me to be fairly complete. Although this project is problematic in
several ways, the DEIS does identify these issues and provides a variety of potential mitigation
measures to address the problems. While I am not recommending large changes in the DEIS,that
doesn't mean that the City can be incautious about this project. Should this project move
forward, we would need to carefully evaluate means to protecting the City from liability
associated mainly with at-grade railroad crossings and floodplain concerns.
cc: [Click here and type name]
Document2\cor
•
O��Y •ft
•
♦ CITY OF RENTON
4'�NTO
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 8, 2003
TO: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner
FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat ( DPEIS )
General items that are mentioned in addition to the previously submitted
ERC comments are listed below.
Page 9, Scoping Determination, Appendix A
Public Services and Utilities
1. The water main system for this project shall be served by a looped
system through this project with two points of supply. The Fire
flow shall be provided to address the largest proposed buildings in
the Development.
Site Access, Rail Safety Pages 3-80 & 3-81
1. The Rail crossings for site access need to be separated by the
minimum of the 2000 feet as proposed. This is needed to eliminate
or reduce the possibility of both access roads being blocked by one
rail accident. This is of great concern for public safety. The Fire
Department would support a greater distance if possible between
the access crossings.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.
Susan Fiala-May Creek f'a 1
From: Dennis Culp
To: Fiala, Susan
Date: 8/8/03 3:55PM
Subject: May Creek
Hi Susan,
From the Community Services point of view, we very much want a trail along May Creek all the way to
the lake. We also want a small area on the lake shore at the mouth May Creek for a small picnic area.
We would be willing to purchase an easement for such a trail if required.
As I read the Shoreline master program, May Creek falls within its purview. If so, the master program
talks about physical as well as visual access, so we should be able to place physical access as a
condition of development...hopefully.
Regards
Dennis
CC: Betlach, Leslie; Wheeler, Lee; Zimmerman, Gregg
% CITY (iF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
July 18, 2003
•
David Sherrard
Parametrix, Inc.
5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200
Kirkland, WA 98033-7350
Subject: SECOND REVIEW COMMENTS
Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement (PDEIS)—
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/File No. LUA-02-040
Dear David:
The following comments are organized by section as presented in the Preliminary Draft
EIS. Please note that there are numerous typos and grammatical errors throughout the
document that need to be corrected. I've listed below the specific errors that have been
brought to my attention under the relevant section; however, we request that a final edit
of the document be performed prior to transmitting the final version to the City.
TABLE OF CONTENTS •
• The word "groundwater" should be removed for sections 1.4.2 and 3.3.2 in order to
be consistent with what is listed under the other sections.
FACT SHEET .
• Under"Approval and Licenses"the "Variance" bullet should be modified to read
"Variance and/or Modification from the Critical Areas provisions..." since a variance
may not necessarily be required to propose buffer averaging, for example.
• An additional bullet should.also be added under this section to disclose the need for
"Approval of a public crossing over railroad and/or Street Modification for access to
the development."
• Please confirm the date and location of the public hearing, as well as the final cost
for purchasing the EIS, with the project manager during the week of July 21st
SUMMARY
• Please include the general boundaries for the City of Renton on figure 1.1-1.
• The "may" in May Creek should be capitalized on page 1-6.
• In the last measure listed under the Transportation portion of the mitigation table
(page 1-21), "on" should be "of".
• In the third measure listed on page 1-22, "eve"should be "eave".
• Please add payment of the Parks and Fire mitigation fees to the table (and reference
the Scoping Document/Appendix A, if necessary).
lec\\e\05
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
:.� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Second Review Comments
Page 2 of 4
ALTERNATIVES
• The bullet/arrow in front of the two paragraphs listed under the "Height" bullet/arrow
should be removed, as they are subordinate to the code provision being discussed.
EARTH, SOILS, AND GEOLOGY
• In the last paragraph under section 3.1, "preformed" should be "performed".
• The word "to" should be inserted between "due" and "a" in the third line on page 3-3.
•. In the sixth paragraph on page 3-3, "steams" should be "streams" and "for" should be
deleted after"fire flow".
• There is an unnecessary "of in, the third sentence of the second paragraph under
section 3.1.2.2.
SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
• Appendix C should be referenced;;somewhere in';section 3.2.1.1.
• The word "qualities" should be "quality" in,,A1-16-4efirst bullet under Identified
Management Strategies
• There is an extra period 'after the second sentence: n,the second paragraph of
section 3.2.1:2 on page,3-12:
3t
• "Barbie" should be "Barbee'
,.ir the:third-:paragraph Aon page 3-13 and in the first
paragraph on page 3-14. Please 'cofduct:a';word search,toverify this error is not
3g
repeated elsewhere in the`documnent'
• On page 3-15, there is An unnecessary space between?:;:`modifications" and the
period in paragraph`threert
• In the paragraph under-"Scenario-1,,, Existing site topography" on page 3-15,
"extend" should be "extent".and,;.an unnecessaripe.riod.',should be deleted.
• The word "the" before North'44th Street shouldx:be deleted in paragraphs two and
three of page 3-19. +
• "1988" should be corrected to "1998" in the last two paragraphs of page 3-19 and in
the fourth paragraph of page 3-20.
GROUNDWATER
• • "Groundwater" should be deleted from the heading of section 3.3.2 on page 3-24 for
consistency purposes.
PLANTS AND ANIMALS
• The headings "Upland Habitat" and "Wildlife" on pages 3-28.and 3-35, respectively,
should be made consistent.
• In figure 3.4-6, 3.4-7 & 3.4-8, the.word "Proposed" for the 50-foot and 100-foot
setback options should be "Alternative" in order to distinguish these as possible
mitigation options from the applicant's proposal:
• In figure 3.4-7, the "36-foot" lawn section depicted for the 100-foot setback option
should be "25-foot" in order to total the overall setback of 100 feet.
• . /
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Second Review Comments
Page 3 of 4
TRANSPORTATION
• On pages 3-63 and 3-67, the "N" after"27th Street" should be at the front of the street
name.
• On page 3-67, the figure listed in the second paragraph should be "3.5-1".
• Please number the intersections listed in figure 3.5-2 on page 68.
• On page 3-69, "NE 30th Street" should be "N 30th Street".
• Under section 3.5.1.4, the "Fay" in the second line should be "Fe".
• Under section 3.5.1.4, the first two sentences of the second paragraph are repeated
at the end of that paragraph.
• Under section 3.5.2.1, is the "horizon-year" the same as the impact year (2007)? If
so, the figure referenced should be 3.5-4.
• The second sentence under_3:5 2:3 should reference Figure "3.5-5" rather than "3.5-
4.
• The first sentence of,paragraph two"on page,3- 3�should be corrected to reference
figures "3.5-5, 3.5-6,,and-3.,5-7' _ r
• •
• Reference to "SR 901"'within section n3 82;8..should'be corrected to "SR 900".
• The streets listed in the second line„tti the first'airow on page 3-82 contain typos and
should be corrected. N°`;`.::;, .
• With regard to section 3.5,3,zin both paragraphs 1 and 2, the City does not have
established "City operational standards , but rather addresses on a case-by-case
basis intersections operat ng,,,at LOS E or F.,:,Ahe`'text� should read "locations
operating at LOS E or-below.,
• The second sentence of the•.thir'd paragraph under:35:3.1 and its use of the word
"diffuse" do not make sense`.-:--, rg
• Within sections 3.5.2.6 and 3.5.3.4, discussion should be added to disclose the
potential adverse impacts from the revised crossing locations (per. suggested
mitigation). For example, being closer together has implications for trains blocking
the entrances, etc.'
APPENDIX A/SCOPING DETERMINATION
• Should we add "Revised" to the title page, as well as on page 9, for the parks and
fire mitigation fee discussions that were recently added? In this case, we will defer to
whatever you suggest.
•
• "PARKS:" should be deleted after the subheading on page 9.
APPENDIX B/ FLOOD PLAIN ANALYSIS TECHNICAL REPORT
• The appendices to this appendix should be renamed from "A" and "B" in order to
avoid confusion with the primary appendices.
r -
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plait
PDEIS Second.Review Comments
Page 4 of 4
IMPORTANT: When the final version of the document is ready, please provide it on a
CD as a PDF file with a postscript of 3 (pursuant to specifications given by the City's
print shop).
Per your instructions, I have faxed this letter to the attention of Julie Highton in your
Kirkland office. Please contact me as soon as you return to the office to set up a
meeting time to discuss these revisions. Thank you!
Sincerely,
Susan Fi a, AICP
• Project Manager
ky'.�.
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Neil Watts ,. p::, /:< _ j,
Jennifer Henning
Y l ' J t?,,v '3k
C 13RE Off
DATECITY OF RENTON NAME
M INIT , 3 50
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 197 ive,w, . i 3 ono
PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT t,3.i.J4N1r5 ,e1 ,-. Nwl v 05
SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT P ' Y
,Z1 tr.- .►� 0411A-
APPLICATION NO.: LUA-02-040, EIS, SM, PP, SA-H
DATE RECEIVED: July 15, 2003
DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: May 3, 2004 (Final Environmental Impact Statement)
DATE APPROVED: April 1, 2005
TYPE OF ACTION(S): [X] Substantial Development Permit
[ ] Conditional Use Permit
[ ] Variance Permit
Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW,the City of Renton has granted a Shoreline Substantial Development permit.
This action was taken on the following application:
APPLICANT: Century Pacific LP (Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson)
1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140, Seattle, WA 98101
PROJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit (SM)for the proposal to subdivide a 23-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,779
square feet to 16,867 square feet and associated utility and road improvements. The project would be
developed in two phases. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most of which would
be constructed as 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit structures.The applicant is proposing that the buildings could be up
to 50 feet in height within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of the shoreline
jurisdiction.
Both shorelines, Lake Washington and May Creek are designated as "urban" environments under the City's
Shoreline Master Program.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline-for
which a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained with 35 feet of native
vegetation and 15 feet of lawn for the majority of the lakefront lots. In addition, May Creek bisects the
property extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within
Lake Washington. The project would provide a 50 foot buffer on each side of the May Creek ordinary high
water mark and would restore currently impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer area. At this
time no docks are proposed, but could be as part of the future building construction. A conceptual site plan
review was processed and approved with conditions by the City of Renton Hearing Examiner. Detailed site
plan review is required to be conducted prior to the construction of any structure on the property.
Residential development is permitted within this urban environment designation provided the development
provides reasonable public access to and along the water's edge. For public access to Lake Washington, an
access easement would be provided through an Open Space/Water Quality tract to a parcel under the
ownership of the Department of Natural Resources, which is leased by the current owner. For public access
along May Creek, a public trail is proposed to be provided along the entire south side of the creek within the
property boundaries and terminate in an interpretative display of the history of the mill site at the delta.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attachment'A'.
SEC-TWNP-R: 32-24 N-5 E
WITHIN SHORELINES OF:' Lake Washington and May Creek
ShorelinePermit.doc
•
�• SCHEDULE C
ORDER NO. 325436-5
IN
THE LAND REFERRED
COUNTYIOF KINGI COMMITMENT
D DESCRIBED ABEFOLLOWSE STATE
OF WASHINGTON,
24
ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TOWNSHIPN _
OF
ON, CLASSE 5 S SHORELANDSM. , IN ADJOININGGLYING WESTERLYNOF NORTHERN
SECOND
PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY;
EXCEPT THATPORTION,
P SAID ROF LYING NORTH
THE WESTERLY DUCTION OF THE NORTH LINE SAID GOVERNMENT LOT
1.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OP WASHINGTON_
THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOW IF
FIFL TEXT OF
NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS,
THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENTS? TO BE INSURED.
SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 24N RANGE SE NW QUARTER NW QUARTER.
•
PAGE 8 OP 8
CITY OF RENTON
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971
PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
APPLICATION NO.: LUA-02-040, EIS, SM, PP, SA-H
DATE RECEIVED: July 15, 2003
DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: May 3, 2004 (Final Environmental Impact Statement)
DATE APPROVED: April 1, 2005
TYPE OF ACTION(S): [X] Substantial Development Permit
[ ] Conditional Use Permit
[ ] Variance Permit
Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW,the City of Renton has granted a Shoreline Substantial Development permit.
This action was taken on the following application:
APPLICANT: Century Pacific LP (Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson)
1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140, Seattle, WA 98101
PROJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested a Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit (SM)for the proposal to subdivide a 23-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,779
square feet to 16,867 square feet and associated utility and road improvements. The project would be
developed in two phases.The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most of which would
be constructed as 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit structures.The applicant is proposing that the buildings could be up
to 50 feet in height within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of the shoreline
jurisdiction.
Both shorelines, Lake Washington and May Creek are designated as "urban" environments under the City's
Shoreline Master Program.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for
which a 50-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained with 35 feet of native
vegetation and 15 feet of lawn for the majority of the lakefront lots. In addition, May Creek bisects the
property extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within
Lake Washington. The project would provide a 50 foot buffer on each side of the May Creek ordinary high
water mark and would restore currently impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer area. At this
time no docks are proposed, but could be as part of the future building construction. A conceptual site plan
review was processed and approved with conditions by the City of Renton Hearing Examiner. Detailed site
plan review is required to be conducted prior to the construction of any structure on the property.
Residential development is permitted within this urban environment designation provided the development
provides reasonable public access to and along the water's edge. For public access to Lake Washington, an
access easement would be provided through an Open Space/Water Quality tract to a parcel under the
ownership of the Department of Natural Resources, which is leased by the current owner. For public access
along May Creek, a public trail is proposed to be provided along the entire south side of the creek within the
property boundaries and terminate in an interpretative display of the history of the mill site at the delta.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attachment'A'.
SEC-TWNP-R: 32-24 N-5 E
WITHIN SHORELINES OF: Lake Washington and May Creek ���j ,,L.
ShorelinePermit.doc ./17,8 i 00177 .13
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Page 2 of 2
APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: City of Renton
The following sections/pages of the Master Program are applicable to the development:
Section Description Page
4-3-090.J Urban Environment page 3-25
4-3-090.K, 3,4, 6,7 General Use Regulations for All Shoreline Uses page 3-26
4-3-090.L Specific Use Regulations page 3-27
4-3-090.L.14 Residential Development page 3-36
4-3-090.L.17 Trails page 3-37
Staff recommends that development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and
condition:
1. The applicant shall comply will all SEPA mitigation measures established by the Environmental Impact
Statement(EIS) issued on May 3, 2004 and set forth in the Mitigation Document, dated January 10, 2005.
2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval required by the Hearing Examiner as part of the
decision for the Preliminary Plat and Level II Site Plan issued on February 22, 2005.
3. The applicant shall comply with all construction conditions by the State agencies.
That the permit be granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the
following:
1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant
from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements.
2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the
event the permittee fails to comply with any condition herein.
3. A construction permit shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the Washington State
Department of Ecology or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review
period have been completed.
Gr gg im man 1�s raior Apnl 1, 2005
Planning/B ildm /Public Works
cc: Attorney General's Office
City of Renton, Plan Review(Kayren Kittrick)
City of Renton,Surface Water Utility(Ron Straka)
City of Renton, Parks(Leslie Betlach)
Applicant
Project File
•
ShorelinePermit.doc
•
. .
' . .
' • .. . .
• .. . .
. . .....„
•
. .
:. . „ • . .
..•
' .
•
. . . . . ....r;.. •••• •
/ •
/
. .. . • •
• • . • :• . riiii/ /
\ / i / // .......... / .
• 0 A4.1 ti 1,
•• •
. __________ „.._..„, 1_,,,.., -- , ... ,
/• -- -'''-------------------_..... i ---
--------- ------ ..23.ossoar" ----'-- s i--• --'46'A:it. , 1
i ----- ---.--.---- ,----
COR-2 ZONE --------------- •
. ' / ^,....."
' •
-...
•.••' •• .••.••'•'..-.•....•,.•:•••••'..-..',
i.'..•
. ='•.I,I..:I1:"_,._,:.,...,II.:-,.'',—.'.,.,-,.. igIV4.k1iltolil§-i.MR!i
i—.E-g t .O r.
..4.--1 r•'I V'_/
, _i•.r•''.,A,,/.....,,-1-,•„
.4.,s-,--.• /'7_ .3...•'',.
_e.J
. —
%,,-,-;—.•-/-/i'/,
LAKE l" A
SHINGTON M, , J
m
2
,.
7h
,•0
.'
/'•
.•'1: '''''''''.. • / < . ' ' • / / /I l' ,
. •/
• -• • / ,/ ,, i.
, • < •-•.,... )' t'•r, ) / / //// /I • i
. • . . . mt"
OW —
' / .• -, K.
1' 1 I •/ is 4 ,,,,..as .s.,....,....../
"......-," .• ,. ...v.:::,:ifti::: / i Ajir •
'...e.. :/. 's /•;:;:'1''W / th,:r//
•-v-- - \ •:;:•::, t...-1 -
..... . A 1 /.... n ••„,........ :-..-----'''''• .
• / N ..... . .:0:',;.fr, .•. AIL...1.,/ . i /11‘7
1140461‘41rd it l''. 11 1—--: ' —-! k .( ' ,-; \..,\ . :.:Avi-. . ,.
- , ,k,— . i " , • s‘,01
• ••.:, \ .,S • .;:::!..‘. .•-.•••••• / •4??/
•
• •
• :•;M:•:•;:':;:3: • -P i . ....-),
• ,„ kAtsiii: ,,,, 1 z, ,-' • ".•• 21\h• . \\'''/fl. \.\\... ...... :t.A.,0 /*9/Al
/. • .,, \ -..,. \. -:)„.•:::: ::-",,: v- /i/,;/ • .
• . i.'=izi* _ .._ ,,„ .. y N-- ,.:::.••,,„,g,,,,•• •yroicitY ....\\''''''''N`•••••••..„.:,
• , .. •/..\ " ..:.::::-::.* ••:4->;•E.W.1.7...,-4.-.:.:,,i6t;f.? 0 1 qi• prit;'
:.... -44 -,r - 0•7
•
• . :.111Mr.Sait 1..„ •-'''\••, ,,„;:i..::•:-..,, .,.' '4.: vel" -0,..,i,,o.,•**--*47 .541:,:•205'.. / /(/:",.. .
• a :::: '..-.•:•:,, •4 . •:.- ' ,,Tre4C41&„.:•<••••:•:•••'
.• 1 •••,„ ,,...::;::• •.7 :••••,,,,- ,-.,..- • ...h4.--..4-.7.:•x-:•:•:,• • /. ///%,, /
•
. :. atilligle
,*- At,,g!',.. •,,:.,-ilf•x••: .••:;•-•••••• - ' ' ,/
. .
. .
11112kMAIlla t - ..i: ,'" • •/,. .i;•7:%-"' • `,, • • I / . /4'siy„ . .
.:.
,;:: ..1 -I,4-Sii::' '?0,, , . . / . / • ,jit,..
. !'4:11friiiime 1 ;: :b :-.N1 :7 /:1
. .
, • AlpsiTgiii.V -*Mi. pri-i'&" ,, ,,,_________
„ts•37 • vy -at / ,,,, • .
4,6„NlikrItY---444
x•r/ j .
. 09*DiNA12,1
1it6 A ..... 4,14111110,-,F.,,,.. . .4:::,_;•rs.,- ...•A,.;:i: '.- - -1' / " ,
INCHYPS '''ir/
• ••_
V)MetZ,' .*: ...../. ' if::,:•:.,.,:'4.r. „04:,:44 hire / /////
• 114 ate— •_,,a1./.'
e '..:::f vr 60- :‘0,4.e:;i:•"
••• . .. ..... • .
•-'*"' 1, ,,..„4„...::‘ ,..* , , / //,,/,':/// /,
,:t1:::i: .„..7...ititis•4 ti:::,*;. ' r' '
. , "t::::,,„ ...:,.:::::?::.:•Yr4 - ,,:i.,7 no\ ....
/
/
,
• ,„ ,•/ 222.a. , /
' •••,,,,.',..1.R..1:'/„i..:1::./
/ ,
. . ' ...,,txv‘ ,• /
., „
,• , ,
••, .
/ ,
„<-..,:.„0411.-. -4% ,4.,,•• ...- ,/,, ,,, , ---- , ,
•
/ . ,
— - zi •ir- ., . •• „,,,,•
, . ,
,... — .. / • •— — ___:,__./,./.. _, /...... ,;•"4_ / / _ —
- R-11 7.ONV. .11Wlaillref Alir -rt 11:-•
•• /
. , ... / N 40TH QT.
.•.-
WO,----.Z-2,Ad-(....i. Atift-N) •
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
1111.51V..
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT — NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
1
1/Lox
wow.
--
$ ,.1 , i il • ,e,,,
IMP SOW=
ATLAS OP SCRITLI..OVOLIZIKED
IT KROLL.1.COMPReft
il\q,4KI,V$Vt,-,Al'Iti$CIIRi I„
tikik'\:°•411i* 474.-itgr,41111;:iii4) .4
1 1-
%V•Pi44' --:---. :ea. -''''''''4 •7:,21% .1•.1''5
075,ral1,0'.,,......,k„...,„.I...L..'4',
LAKE WASHINGTON
-1
_kg
.44144S . ,3-.V13_4t' ittE.• Er .Turr.1.1 Er A1.1171 --.."'••-,Niarl7ti 1
:tite'lliMr.V..q?•_`fi fiNrig: .1,-,154' i:51'.:,,Iring,,;(.,_. .'4 31,....:', .,
41,g
------:-.-1---• .,- ,, i•
,--------=—'7,3. r,.. ,:171 .i.1 ;3537;'lay% is.' ',•4=4 '
Iii-E. 211‘" 141[!!! m... ,.,---,,, ...,---:-,, Film NE.4.. 1 5,,,,......., ,., GTO N 5 .
0 . 19 ....11,
. gj F E..: , r ;---li,,,, r11. -iv.. 15V., 'AR ;- A4.,141,7 "'•%,;,, 7 1.
,-• -s ..) =,, .5., '-'.1 •• :,,,,,A i,.
-- --, , • sit Z. 1 trou= r4-.1• NI-_-.' :PM 41.,..'5 ..:4 ., • ..:. ''D. ,
.3. iii. 2:_i• '4•4•;F-4 kig•titer --1 1 41,17ibt ,4, 1, , I
i• '0, '.., __,, ' ,__,,,.,1-'‘ ..-.„u .,,-4-.E.-; qh,,-; .Z3'i21: ',2Ni-3..:,-•, lvt04-„ca.,,i,,..-114“., N . . a or
0 q
3o,s_p-it i7v1f171N1'.',1' '.._.•f. liifiES,jcitl .1:1,L-9= '1_. .,6"•-.‘ 4101 16
pl IKL 1• T.T.RIK,/ ...5.r7
., F,..,:ou2. i;.,&exL-.12p,lr'!`7: .1 •FJP1:11 -i 4 i Pi . , en,„‘....-' 4, ..A._,.• 'I,..
'
.
: ?.F17e%''' =firNE,V:Mrlfr",4 '''•S' '' 6,sPo'ar4, rij.L5 44.--, i., :ri 144 s 1.,1r7. '.:•,. 1 1 0 - c
' ,1,,St IA "I 2,1:, Epfr.; ',,-k-'14-., ...'tn.! ;':'-' 61-ii..t 0,14 ti. l''.01` •5 511111.• lir 'tit,. ' 'vacAnrr 0
•A.t it, r ./ /^,71 t.".. W S.i'-‘3:1 7.1'''''::.In;;{.r.1 0,5:, nil V:.E. "tilla- . 1 ' 1
ti
4 PL t 1.1r, .• 4,,
• '3'..5'.j U _5, '='..r.,A;s1--..m low li we• — IL ,..._ smr,./.....r..miem...
1
/ , < c
, I
1.- I
c- I
..%%,..........„:„.„,‘4,...- ..Q..7:2.; I „,...": • ...„
15'
5
.1-isi '' kV 'I•JP"a4 Tr! x;x: ivra. , s ri 1
2 I M
. .,_, Is, I. iliiilAiiifor,' MI- LF 4P. gliki U ' ; 447.' b 1
. ...,
-9 1 • ti §55
1.A.i..- - iltag-c ',71.-Ii'111.314 4Wilre'PLIL li.. ,,,ir: 4 A rt?dt, ...."
• i'EN3 •..,s ..,-,,apu ,...,v.--.4.11:ii tiohti&—li g RIF .41 1 . 1'' ''' ,..,, 44, .,z. ..,, •h• ;:. -.
•4....-4,' 1", ‘ /./.
of- _ N--;...."'..4..'k..„... ic,..!c, : 20
>.
• P•71vir, 14',"" ...-.1 .•.I.,r.H v. 0> 2 1.411 tj - •••• '','
.•' .." t` ' itiai ompligqii1111421firizi,"°. "
- .,1- - s-- .1 .........,. e ..... -?.. ', 1,.. • to.
..• olf' --"S"..... 5'.le s g3-.... : A • ... ••< z
kil-3111 Iiii,P,M,, - I 0 aiiiklar
,
\
pd
0.., - 11111111 .
1 - --,- -,--4! - .444 C. ,•ktiltiNligti r 15 j .
. zusiti9.167 it I, pi,p f I , sin_l. 1 - i il `'.,- • .....:.,.= „ .'' ...' .,. N 2
9, . 0 '-ID.. 1 ' el • -• 1 , ,
ib .w.6,7_ : ......, is." 0 A, 1.... .2.or ,_ .
1 '''." ',Y-0\ ) G:9•7•4. 7.1111111111111,N14.ar
il , ...k!--'-.iril.5:4..tHiiii,f '„,,,..4 ...C:::.t... wit libto.„.411CP4ii .a. 1.1.4.1: Ult.a7Ziroir v .• ! .. . , 3 . . . ,..
**'°'W%41"140022141411 ,
pkih, ----------------,,,..$-_
Go .1:•_44.9-
_, .
-- ,::-,41:-.1` , •
R t1• 0 sm
ir.4„,-.
- '''--.--, • Oe ' '''' /71111111114
v:
t c ED
- z
I- iiiiie . . . (<.,.. ..t.F "It'iltg.c.''1 --1 - .• RipP.,_ . , . .... ... . .. ,, . c, , re ,:....... .., ..„..b.., ,• ....___..-0 o a
k i :golf; .. t. „.„, . mumnfif.11iamw as am,! t"....MIN : : • - ill' :14NEIP AST : •,.< 5 AN qg I- C.)
• i i % gi. %
.. ,. ,p0:1 • 41 "Mnr,.......GX14, In PO*5.1.‘A-, ...,„''' AV C TY• •-- • 1 fir..,,dvip is i i
-
... MN IR real•IRK.
( I .,aea 7• Le i '
••• I . III
! k : 1 ••• z!!!..... Ka 4:17.;4. Iii - ..... .. .
: , IliP I 1Eil.!$Ark41:r1.2 Kittf 1Z ! f SOU KOO
rairr"-• 1$,T* V kr 41.1111 •••"7;111 10 t •F NEW ASTL goon. .ntiket14 ot1 1 •,-,.t.n:trer_a
1 r. 11 .00,4a ic.. ... ...),,, 4.
1 i LI°x2,6014•T .,st-4.1 4,),,,,...,-.7
1 .a..... ..,,, . ' 4.,. . 'ti, ,V4' -•••• '1,t‘ ,:..A. ,k„,,..,,,,,,p,,,,,„.
. . . \. t / _,.____-,, itp.m,.
- , -...,. -g, . d • • • • ..:.: .1•4• • -
L*14 i 1,.• .,.
th dA.
I \IF ,..,
4 1' 110 IIV
• - •6a frakii I e C.,
1 ' .n. -
1 n-- I-.125••••
IThr. ,00.2... tooz:„,....o.i.:::!.00,-.”0-,
s3(. 3
• .
•
CITY OF RENTON
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
LAND USE PERMIT
MASTER APPLICATION
PROPERTY OWNER(S) I PROJECT INFO
II RMATION
II
NAME: Alex C u g i n i PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
Barbee Mill Company
Cugini/Barbee Mill Property
ADDRESS:
PO Box 359 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE:
CITY: Renton ZIP: NW 1/4 Sec. 32, Twn. 24N, Range 5E
98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
(425) 226-3900
•
322405-9034
APPLICANT (if other than owner)
•
EXISTING LAND USE(S):
NAME: Dew, • Lumber Mill
Steven Wood.l�M �P/! ME
/ �' l(fIm'OF RF -AONNfA► ROPOSED LAND USE(S):
COMPANY(if applicable): Attached Residential
Century Pacific, LP APR 5.1d01
DESI
ADDRESS,. RECEIVED EXISTING
C Center Office Resid ntialAP(COR)GNATION:
2140 Century Square
1501 Foltrth Avenue PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION
CITY: ZIP: (if applicable): N/A
Seattle 98101
TELEPHONE NUMBER EXISTING ZONING: Center Office Residential(OOR2)
(206) 689-7201 Port Quendall Site
PROPOSED ZONING(if applicable): N/A
CONTACT PERSON
SITE AREA (in square feet): 997,960:SF
NAME: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED
Dan Dawson
FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING
COMPANY(if applicable): THREE LOTS OR MORE(if applicable): •
Otak, Inc. 169,210 SF
ADDRESS: , . • PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 ACRE(if applicable): 6.58 du/acre
•
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS(if applicable):
CITY: Kirkland . • ZIP:
98033 Lots
NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS(if applicable):
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: Units J!,S
(425) 739-4202 / dandawsongotak.com
/D5 eDi - `-157•1 "enrife-)
maslerap.doc Revised January 2002
•
P' 7JECT INFORMATION (con _ u•d) • • •
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: $2.75 Million
None
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
BUILDINGS(if applicable): N/A ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE ,
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
BUILDINGS(if applicable): N/A ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq.ft.
❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq.ft.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-F .,I•ENTIAL ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq.ft.
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A W SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 87,150 sq.ft.
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTI• : ILDINGS(if Ill WETLANDS 425' sq.ft.
applicable): N/A ...
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT(if applicable): N/A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE NW 1/4 QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24N, RANGE 5E , IN THE CITY
OF RENTON, KING COUNTY,WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
Check all application types that apply --City staff will determine fees.
_ANNEXATION(A) $ SHORELINE REVIEWS , ,, '
_COMP PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA) $ • CONDITIONAL USE(S01=C) $
_CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CU-A,CU-H) $ _EXEIMMP 4DN(SME) $ NO CHARGE
X ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW(ECF) $ .+=:SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT(SM) $
_GRADE&FILL PERMIT(GF) $ _VARIANCE(SM-V) $
(No.Cu.Yds: ) $
_REZONE(R) $ SUBDIVISION
_ROUTINE VEGETATION $ _BINDING SITE PLAN(BSP) $
MANAGEMENT PERMIT(RVMP) _FINAL PLAT(FP) $
SITE PLAN APPROVAL(SA-A,SA-H) $ _LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT(LLA) $ -
_SPECIAL PERMIT(SF') $ PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP) $
_TEMPORARY PERMIT(TP) $ _SHORT PLAT(SHPL-A,SHPL-H) $
_VARIANCE(V-A,V-H,V-B) $
(from Section: ) $
Postage: $
_WAIVER(W) $ TOTAL FEE $
_OTHER: $
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
I, (Print Name) le �nST' ' "•r Tr I^'C• , declare that I am (please check one) ✓the current owner of the property
involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation(please attach proof of authorization)`arLI that the foregoing
statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my*P �eiotttielief.
I certify tha I•know.or have satisfactory evidence that - PPS_ , FFFF1111 �%r i
,ti-?k ,-. ,5r. signed this instruriae rLd �����+�++Iige®Zrii
' ' it to be his/hertheir free and voluntary act for the uses 1Jpos ,5 ,
411° • 1111, mentioned in the instrument. i 5 �j en; i
_ _
(Signature of Owe- 8resentati op Qc `� ,O�p� c.)
Notary = - .
/ry Public in and for the State of Washington i t+s�'i,� „.2o�A �2 .
• i �'
(Signature of Owner/Representative) Notary(Print) SC on G1��"`�S�'^' it,
t t 1OF W ASH��O`
My appointment expires: I I-Z LI- 0 3 t t 1`\`\".,
masterap.doc Revised January 2002•.
Y,
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE&
AVAILABILITY
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL •
IMPACT STATEMENT(DEIS)
Notice is given under SEPA,RCW
43.216.080, that the Draft;'
Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) for the proposal described •
below was issued by the• City of
Renton Environmental Review
Committee on Tuesday,September 2;
2003, and is available for publi ,•
review and comment. Copies are
available for review at the Renton-
Main.Library, located at 100 Mill•
Ave. S: (425-277-5560) and.the
Highlands Branch Library,located at
2902 NE 12th St.(425-277-5556)and.
from.8am to 5pm, Monday through
Friday at the Development Services
Division,Renton City Hall,6th floor'-;.
_ 1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA
98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat EIS• considers.
potential. residential development:
concepts for the redevelopment of the:
22.9-acre site located along the Lake
Washington and May Creek4
shorelines. The DEIS reviews
potential impacts on the 'property
From the proposed 115 townhouse-1
lots as.well as from the continuation
of the existing industrial use.
t LAND USE FILE NUMBER:
LUA 02-040,EIS,PP,SA-H,SM�—
'-PROPONENT:
The Barbee Mill Company
P.O.Box 359
Renton,WA.98057
LOCATION: The.22.9-acre site is
located on the west side of Lake
Washington Boulevard North
between North 40thi Street and
North 44th Street and abuts •
Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way along, the
eastern boundary.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFOR-
.MATION: The DEIS documents
'(Volume I - Draft Environmental' '
Impact Statement and Volume II -
f Technical Appendices) are available
for purchase at the Finance
Department on the 1st floor. of
Renton City Hall. Each volume may
be purchased independently for.
•$15.00,plus tax and postage, when
applicable.A.CD version,containing
both volumes,is available for$5.00,
plus tax and postage when
applicable.
COMMENT PERIOD: Written
comments on the DEIS will be
accepted for 'a 30-day comment
;.period,ending 5:00 p.m.,Wednesday,
October 1, 2003, and should be
addressed to:
City of Renton
Development Services Division
' ATTN: Susan Fiala .
1055 South Grady Way,Sixth Floor
Renton,WA 98055
(425)430-7382
A public hearing has also been
scheduled to accept written and oral
"comments on the DEIS and will be
held on Tuesday,September 23,2003,
.6:00 p.m.,in the Renton City Council
Chambers(7th floor)located at 1055
Soueh cy Way,Renton,WA26, / �,
Date of Decision: August 26,2003 �I
ublished in the King County
Journal September 2,2003.#844032
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE & AVAILABILITY
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS)
Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080, that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)for
the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on
Tuesday, September 2, 2003, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are available for
review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Ave. S. (425-277-5560) and the Highlands Branch
Library, located at 2902 NE 12th St. (425-277-55561and from 8am to 5pm, Monday through Friday at the
Development Services Division, Renton City Hall, 61n floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055.
PROPOSAL: The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS considers potential residential development
concepts for the redevelopment of the 22.9-acre site located along the Lake Washington and May Creek
shorelines. The DEIS reviews potential impacts on the property from the proposed 115 townhouse lots as
well as from the continuation of the existing industrial use.
LAND USE FILE NUMBER: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
PROPONENT: The Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359
Renton,WA 98057
LOCATION: The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard
North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
right-of-way along the eastern boundary.
DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The DEIS documents (Volume I — Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and Volume II — Technical Appendices) are available for purchase at the Finance
Department on the 1st floor of Renton City Hall. Each volume may be purchased independently for
$15.00, plus tax and postage, when applicable. A CD version, containing both volumes, is available for
$5.00, plus tax and postage when applicable.
COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day comment
period, ending 5:00 p.m.,Wednesday, October 1,2003,and should be addressed to:
City of Renton
Development Services Division
ATTN: Susan Fiala
1055 South Grady Way, Sixth Floor
Renton,WA 98055
(425)430-7382
A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS and
will be held on Tuesday, September 23, 2003, 6:00 p.m., in the Renton City Council Chambers (7th
floor) located at 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA.
Publication Date: September 2,2003 //``
Date of Decision: August 26, 2003 Jy.-:r-� 0-2) r 8T 7o3 2_
Z-1
publicalion.doc
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (DS)
AND EXPANDED SCOPING OF EIS
APPLICATION NUMBER(S): BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115
lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with the shoreline fronting lot lines
extending to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units-most of
which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be
located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included
with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat. The site is
presently utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the
shoreline, all buildings would be demolished as part of the project.
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north
side of the site. A secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property. The
project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge
crossing over May Creek in order to provide connection to the secondary access point. Installation of
new foundations for the proposed bridge would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of
May Creek; therefore approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations
is necessary unless demonstrated otherwise.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—
for which a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. May Creek bisects
the property extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek
Delta within Lake Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high
water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore currently impervious areas to
native vegetation within this buffer.
In addition to Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat and Variance approval, the project requires
the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat
improvements. The applicant has also requested an administrative street modification in order to allow
for reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet throughout the plat. The proposal also requires
Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit review for the development of
the residential structures — both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as separate land use
applications in the future.
PROPONENT: Century Pacific on behalf of Barbee Mill Company
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North
(West side of Lake Washington Blvd between North 40th Street &
NE 44thStreets)
EIS REQUIRED:The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on
the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) is required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c) and
will be prepared. An environmental checklist,or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts,
can be reviewed at the Development Services offices.
LEAD AGENCY: Environmental Review Committee •
City of Renton
The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS:
Transportation; Earth (Soils Contamination); Air Quality; Water Resources (Storm
Drainage/Runoff; Groundwater; Water Quality); Land Use; Shoreline and Critical Areas (Critical
Fish Species and Habitat Areas); Aesthetics; Socioeconomics (Population, Housing,
Ane-j,„0,o° F
ds&scoping signature
Employment); Recreation; Public Services and Utilities (Fire and Emergency Medial Services,
Police Services, Schools, Parks,Water,Wastewater, Solid Waste);Archaeology.
SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes and members of the public will be given an opportunity to comment
on the scope of the EIS. Specifically. further notification will be given regarding the time, date and
location of scopinq meetings to be held in the near future. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation
measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses of-other approvals that may be required.
Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on December 16,2002.
Responsible Official: City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Development Planning Section
Planning/Building/Public Works Dept.
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton,WA 98055
APPEAL: You may appeal this determination of significance, in writing, pursuant to RMC 4-3016,
accompanied by a non-refundable$75.00 appeal fee, no later than 5:00 PM on November 26,2002.
Renton Hearing Examiner
City Clerk's Office
Renton City Hall-7th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
To appeal this Declaration, you must file your appeal document with the hearing examiner within fourteen
(14) days of the date the Declaration of Significance (DS) has been published in the official city
newspaper. See City Code Section 4-8-110, RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details.
There shall be only one appeal of a Declaration of Significance (DS), and if an appeal has already been
filed, your appeal may be joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal
has already been heard. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above
office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals.
PUBLICATION DATE: November 12,2002
DATE OF DECISION: November 5,2002
SIGNATURES:
4 i '����q�ti '�+ 114510 �.
Greggim r an, minis rf ator 99
Department o Pla ing/Building/Public Works
/i /( O�
l
,dames Shepherd, /�ninistrator DA E
/ Community Service Department
(Y-
Lee eeler, Fire Chief DATE
Renton Fire Department •
ds&scoping signature
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
qm IVOS
A. BACKGROUND 13y 6 OFi- "
,
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: ,: littiV/q- q ',0- -
, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
2. Name of applicant:
Century Pacific, LP
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Campbell Mathewson ,:
Century Pacific, LP
2140 Century Square
i
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101 r
v
(206) 689-7203
4. Date checklist prepared: ,K
April 3, 2002 it
ii
5. Agency requesting checklist: 4-) t��op
City of Renton 7YOp ./
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 1. 4/3?it o Ni�,0
Construction of the proposed plat roads and utility e s?®0?
infrastructure could begin in 2003 following final plat and site ,y q
plan approval. Construction of dwelling units could begin with �kb
the infrastructure improvements and occur over a several year ;
period. i
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further
activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. oj f e-exiAid-i ?Ji- -AP
The proponent does not have any plans for future additions, PrE e Cf�ftill.°D DG I,is
expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this , 0Y1 yy�
proposal. f_.
i
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been
r.
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. II
The following environmental information has been prepared
for and is included with this proposal:
a) Wetland Delineation Confirmation Radaeke and Associates, ' 4- e/14 -i- V;
April 2002. if Cu- ) da-1
3/(v�ep 0---
2 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST /11/c9dhit 6
I ,
F
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
b) Traffic Impact Analysis HDR Associates, April 2002. 4- Pefort dQ
c) Geotechnical Feasibility, Golder Associates, April 2002. "71a3�a�3-
il
Environmental information prepared for a previous proposal
S4
on the subject property includes:
(f .DYAr?uCN
a) Preliminary Storm Drainage Report, Triad Associates, July 4- Dom„ �.k( u
10, 2000.
b) Initial Transportation Analysis, The Transpo Group, August cv
8, 2000. ' D
Environmental Information prepared for a previous proposal 1 i3 t0/n ji`GGZ-I
that included the subject property: , ,s�C-TYLekt,t-
it
a) Wetland Determination Report, David Evans and :1 d 4, e//(ol -e..
Associates, Inc., May 1997.
b) Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, Beak Consultants Inc., '
June 19, 1997. t
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental 4
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered
by your proposal? If yes, explain.
A remediation plan for environmental contamination at the site
is under review by the Department of Ecology. An application
for site plan approval for a mixed use development is under •
review by the City of Renton.
10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for it
your proposal, if known. ; W.1--M Plain
Apprrv4
SEPA Process, Preliminary and Final Plat approval, Shoreline af_444'nri (-
Substantial Development Permit, and Clearing and Grading }
Permit. r. Tre6LLW11't Vt'1
11.Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the 10.9'r2 MOGt 7u h ii
proposed uses and the size of the project. There are several ;a.
questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain t
aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those
answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to i.
include additional specific information on project description.) ItOa-,/ .
Subdivide 22.9 acres into 112 townhome building lots and . _�i 5 /0
construction of new public streets, utilities, water quality '`• ~
ponds, and landscaping. Project includes removal of all i —bi'7de-G
existing buildings, equipment and pavement. i GvoSsT 9
r
ovor. Aux/
.. ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
12.Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including
a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known.
If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While
you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
The subject property is located in the City of Renton in the NW
1/4 of Section 32 Township 24 North, Range 5 East WM. The
site is bounded on the west by Lake Washington and the east
by a portion of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-
way
and Lake Washington Boulevard near NE 44th Street. The ;-
property address is 4101 Lake Washington Boulevard North.
A complete legal description, vicinity map and site plans are
provided with this application.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS I
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one):
Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other:
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent
slope)?
The site is very flat at about 0 to 3 percent slope except for
the stream banks of May Creek that are about 30 to 40
percent slope.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example,
clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of
agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland.
The site is primarily fill underlain with interbedded organic i
silts, silty clays and fine to medium sands according to the
Golder report listed previously.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the j`' rc-05IV71G(
immediate vicinity? If so, describe. A.� !-1,e !-f
There are no apparent surface indications or history of /jA=�/P-� on
unstable soils in the immediate vicinity.
S r5- v/tea c
4 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST /145.
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any
filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Earthwork for the project would include removal of existing
asphalt pavement, excavation and backfill for utilities and
water quality ponds, and grading for road construction. All
waste paving material would be exported to an approved
recycling facility. Import would include stone, gravel and ;r
crushed rock for utility backfill and road subgrade obtained
from approved materials providers. The quantity of fill
material on site is 38,000 cubic yards and the quantity of
excavation is 32,000 cubic yards based on very preliminary
estimates. The source of fill has yet to be identified. Fill `y
material will come from an approved off-site source.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or
use? If so, generally describe. it
Some soil erosion will occur from on site grading. During
prolonged or heavy rainfall, fine soil particles could
become suspended and transported by stormwater runoff.
An approved temporary erosion control and sedimentation
control plan will be prepared and implemented as part of
the site construction to control erosion on-site.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious
surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or
buildings)?
The combination of road surface, driveways, sidewalks and
roof surface would cover about 60 percent of the site at full
build out. The percentage of impervious area existing on
the site at this time is about 85 percent.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other
impacts to the earth, if any:
Those site areas disturbed by grading and excavation `4 -
would be limited to the flat portion of the site. Any ;a
sediment-laden runoff may be readily controlled at the
perimeter of the disturbed areas to prevent sediment
transport to May Creek or Lake Washington. City of Renton
regulations require an approved temporary erosion and
sedimentation plan to be followed during construction.
2. Air '
a. What type of emissions to the air would result from the proposal
(i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during
5 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
construction and when the project is completed? If any, It
generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Normal levels of fugitive dust and equipment exhaust
emissions are expected to occur during construction. {
Vehicle exhaust emissions will occur when the completed
project is occupied. No other emissions that would be
atypical of a residential development are expected.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may
affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
There were no apparent sources of off-site emissions or
odor that may affect this proposal present during recent
site visits.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts to air, if any: t'
During prolonged dry periods, measures may be taken to
reduce the amount of dust caused by heavy equipment and
truck traffic on the site. Soil wetting is a method commonly
employed to control dust on construction sites. The
sitework will include hydroseeding of disturbed areas with
an erosion control seed mix to reduce wind-borne dust. The
applicant will meet all applicable city codes and
requirements regarding reduction of emissions.
3. Water
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate
vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal
streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream .3
or river it flows into.
The subject site contains roughly 400 feet of Lake a•
r . MOO I"
Washington shoreline. The site is bisected by the of shol,c-f inc
lowest reach of May Creek where it flows into Lake .
Washington. A small, class 3 wetland is located a fela5 L
adjacent to the railroad track embankment in the
railroad right-of-way just east of the site.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to �b �� �
t.
(within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please (4,0 fZ/M ' /0ea lz4
describe and attach available plans.
atto:9 t?,aV-6
6 ENVIRONMENTAL(SERA)CHECKLIST
Drop 0 5'64 .�
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
Yes, the project would include road and utility 'e Va4/1WINI,C-e,
improvements construction within 200 feet of Lake f ,124 f
Washington and May Creek. No construction activities r ��
are proposed below the ordinary high water mark of 3 JaYf}r-v
Lake Washington or May Creek. � )
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be 01/0/ ettetk
s
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and /� �� /tS
indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate (,
the source of fill material. ate,
No fill or dredge material would be placed or removed ��"" �
from any surface water or wetlands. Ck- .
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
The proposal will not require surface water withdrawals
or diversions.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, i
note location on the site plan.
Portions of the project within the stream banks of May
Creek are within the 100-year floodplain. None of the g<
area proposed for development is within the 100-year ;f
floodplain. •
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials
to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and
anticipated volume of discharge.
The proposal does not involve any discharge of waste
materials to surface waters.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be dischargedf.
to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
No ground water will be withdrawn nor will water be
discharged to ground water on a long-term basis.
During construction, dewatering of utility trenches may g.
be required. Water removed from trenches would be
treated prior to release in accordance with water quality
standards.
7 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the
ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for
example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the f
general size of the system, the number of such systems, the
number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number
of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
No waste material would be discharged into the ground
from septic tanks or other sources.
1,
c. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and
method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities,
if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow '3
into other waters? If so, describe.
The source of runoff would be surfaces such as roads,
sidewalks, driveways and roofs. The collection method
will be via a subsurface drainage system with disposal
into ponds as shown on the site drainage plan }`
submitted with the application. The eventual discharge Y
point will be Lake Washington.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If
so, generally describe.
No significant amounts of waste materials are expected
to enter ground or surface waters. ;t
Iv
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and
runoff water impacts, if any:
" Il
All non-paved areas around buildings would be landscaped
with trees, shrubs and groundcovers including lawn
grasses to control runoff.
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Cottonwood
_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs Willowstk
grass Turf type grasses A
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage,
other
8 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other I.3
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
Some areas of lawn grass would be removed for road and
utility construction. Several trees in future building lots
may have to be removed. No native vegetation removal i5
would occur in the May Creek stream buffer of 50 feet.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near
the site.
No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be
on or near the site however no specific field investigation
or data search were performed to confirm this. Because
the site is mostly paved it is unlikely that any threatened or
endangered species exist at the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures ��
to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
The project includes extensive landscaping of stormwater
detention areas and open spaces. The May Creek stream
buffer will be enhanced with native plants in all areas where '�
shrub and upper canopy vegetation are lacking within the
buffer. All disturbed areas will be seeded with an erosion
control grass seed mix.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or
near the site or are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, Potentially Osprey ,.
other: ; Cfrier '
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, iriervsJ
other: rodents jf av46 lr9C
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, =f Or) - e5 h0't9
other: ;i f �
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or
near the site.
The Puget Sound Chinook salmon is a listed species ' Coro as
known to occur in Lake Washington and May Creek at
some part of its life cycle. Some bald eagle and osprey use , CG
may occur on or near the site. The bald eagle is on the jI
out j ris-v1,--i' a s
9 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST 1( % 1/5FlfvS•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
federal and state threatened species lists; osprey is on the
state monitor list.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The Lake Washington shoreline may be used by some c d01�
migratory waterfowl species as part of a migration route. (Oho
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: '}The May Creek stream buffer habitat will be restored j
wherever existing pavement is to be removed. The
detention pond areas will be landscaped primarily with
native vegetation including future potential perch sites. '3
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove,
solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy i>
needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
The completed project will use primarily electricity and
natural gas for heating, lighting and appliances.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by
adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
The project would not likely have a negative affect the 1
potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the
plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to '
reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Washington State energy code compliance will be required
for all residential structures.
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure
to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous
waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,
describe. i PAP
There are no unusual environmental health hazards that r Doe,
would occur as a result of this project. Any environmental 13rri o,g S� G
contamination of the site would be remediated prior to
jC 1dek
dr4
beginning any site improvements or building in accordance CAS
with State and Federal laws and an approved clean up
program. Building demolition practices are regulated to
0 ENVIRONMENTAL(SERA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
reduce environmental health hazards by containing and
removing or hazardous materials.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
No special emergency services are anticipated.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any:
No measures to reduce or control environmental health ;a
hazards are assumed necessary or proposed.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your
project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)?
Low levels of ambient traffic noise from Interstate 405 ;L
are present but not expected to affect use of the site for
residential development. Noise from train traffic on the
adjacent BNSF line would be clearly audible but
infrequent. ;g
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or
associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term
basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from site.
On a short-term basis, construction equipment would
create noise levels typically ranging from 60 to 80
decibels at a distance of 200 feet from the source during
normal construction hours.
On a long-term basis, ambient noise levels would be
typical for residential neighborhoods.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if
any:
Typical measures to reduce short-term noise impacts iz
include limiting the hours of construction as defined by
the City of Renton codes. No unusual measures to
IP
reduce or control noise impacts are assumed necessary
or proposed because residences in the vicinity are not
close to where most of the construction activity will
occur.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
I i ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA) CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
The site presently is used for the Barbee Mill, a specialty n
cedar products producer.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
It is not likely that the site has been used for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The site contains a building for the mill offices and about
14 other structures that are used for log handling, sawing
and milling operations and storage of wood products.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
All of the structures will be demolished and removed for
recycling or disposal at approved facilities.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
The current zoning classification of the site is Center Office I
Residential 2. (COR2)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
The current comprehensive plan designation for the site is
Center Office Residential.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program
designation of the site?
The current shoreline master program designation for the
site is Urban Environment.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally
critical" area? If so, specify.
Yes, May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline are
considered environmentally critical.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the ;`
completed project?
The project would provide units for 112 households or
roughly 200 people.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project
•
displace?
The completed project would displace the present
tf'
workforce of approximately 12 people at the Barbee Mill
)2 ENVIRONMENTAL(SERA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if
any:
The project would provide construction jobs for road, utility
and building construction. jY
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: 'v
The proposed project would be developed in accordance
/VllisI- frall
with all applicable Cityof Renton zoning requirements,
a
development requirements, and comprehensive plan ! 7Vb`%L&CQSS.
elements.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
A total of 112 middle to high-income residential units would
l-r?i/1 dv
be provided. ;t 1 L 5_ iJv) i
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
No housing units would be eliminated with this proposal.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if
any:
No measures to reduce or control housing impacts are
assumed needed or proposed.
10.Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not
including antennas; what is the principal exterior building ,H
material(s) proposed? Ap-p (I`rawt f-
proposed project. hc.s Ita/Un �7'1
No structures are ro osed with this ro ect. The tallest
height of any future residential structures would be limited fI'M - � b-v1-Wr7'
by the zoning requirements in effect at the time of building '
permit application. iqA911.IS to
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or )�/;7� c)-bO- YC I
obstructed?
sicorr,f0AZ
The removal of the Barbee Mill buildings and subsequent F' kp indie/frj
construction of residential buildings would change the
views east from Mercer Island and the views north and
south along Lake Washington. The mill is a visual anomaly
13 ENVIRONMENTAL(SERA) CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
within a viewshed dominated by residential properties. The
physical appearance of the existing buildings, massing and
harsh openness of the site, create an aesthetic more suited
f3
to a large industrial area. At the south end of the lake, the
closest, and only remaining industrial area on the
shoreline, has undergone a recent redevelopment to non-
industrial use.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if
any:
No particular measures to reduce or control aesthetic
impacts are assumed needed or proposed because the
proposed land use is visually compatible with the
surrounding residential land uses and any existing view
obstructions would likely decrease.
11.Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time
of day would it mainly occur?
The completed project would include light sources
normally associated with a residential community: vehicle
headlights, street lighting and outdoor lighting of homes
and landscaping. Most of the light would occur in the
morning and evening hours during the fall, winter and
spring months.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard
or interfere with views?
No safety hazards or interference with views related to light ;r
. or glare are expected with this type of residential use.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your
proposal?
There are no known off-site sources of light or glare that
may affect this proposal.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts,
if any: 'r
No measures to control vehicle headlights are assumed
needed because the internal road system is relatively flat
and would not cause headlights to be directed in "a manner 4
that caused impacts. Likewise, no measures to control ;
home and landscape lighting are needed other than
G
covenant conditions that restrict excessive lighting. Street
14 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
lighting standards limit the amount of uplighting from
fixtures to reduce potential impacts to views.
i
12.Recreation
s,
f`
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in ;5
the immediate vicinity?
Gene Coulon Park is located near the project to the south.
The park includes boat launching and beach facilities.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational
uses? If so, describe. j
The project would not displace any known recreational
uses.
;i
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation,
including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project i;
or applicant, if any: ; F®+- SOU 1�-
The project proposal includes an active recreation area at t V1- !- ( L' •
the Lake Washington shoreline that will benefit the
residents and guests of the subdivision.
13.Historic and Cultural Preservation 1
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, t
national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or ,
next to the site? If so, generally describe. ;i
;t
There are no apparent places or objects listed on, or
proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers
either on or next to the project site although no formal data
search was performed to confirm this.
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,
eue
archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on 1 n ������c
or next to the site. ; t�yl dtY16,S heo-c..
There are no apparent landmarks or evidence of historic, been/1 tat.4111— tzv
archaeological, scientific or cultural importance known to e}m-N-10107 ti2t
be on or next to the site. it n 1 U e.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: .
No measures are assumed needed or proposed. If I.
archaeological resources are encountered during project
construction, then appropriate actions would be taken 1
consistent with regulatory requirements. I
15 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
14.Transportation a
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and
describe the proposed access to the existing street system.
Show on site plans, if any.
Interstate 405 serves this area via the NE 44th Street
interchange. The site is accessed via Lake Washington
Boulevard as shown on the preliminary plat map submitted ;£
with this application. ,is
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the ,_
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
14
The site is not currently served by public transit. A bus
r
park and ride lot is located within 1 mile of the site at the
405/ NE 30th Street exit.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have?
How many would the project eliminate?
The completed project would provide the minimum off- x
street parking for each dwelling unit required by City ofif
Renton land use codes. On-street parking is expected
throughout the project's internal roads as well.
The number of parking spaces available for the present use
is not readily quantifiable because extensive areas of the
site are paved and available for parking. Some of the areas
now used for employee parking are not striped. All existing
parking spaces would effectively be eliminated.
i
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or .,-
improvements to existing roads or streets, not including '`
driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private). SCCIAII6t6/40 project will require the construction of new interior (,t 6�SS
public streets. An off-site access road improvement is f� ,� cr '
proposed to be constructed to the north and connecting to l ��
Lake Washington Boulevard North/Ripley Lane. W�L
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, all
rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. is CUYVl.i- d-r
si
The project would not directly use rail, water or air
transportation. The project would occur in the vicinity of a f
BNSF rail line, within 2.5 miles of the Renton Airport and
adjacent to Lake Washington which could be used for water
transportation. 1
16 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
j +
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the (I
completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes
would occur.
According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by HDR
Associates, (March, 2002) about 717 average weekday daily
trips would be expected after project build out based on
112 residential units. Peak volumes are anticipated during
the weekday PM peak hour when about 67 trips would
occur.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts,
if any. '
f: Ourr v I Gi fi1�C.
No particular measures to reduce or control transportation (nyAds
impacts are proposed. Further discussion of traffic
impacts is discussed in the report submitted with this no-t- b- t'
application.
15.Public Services sK
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services
(for example: fire protection, police protection, health care,
schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
The project will result in an increased need for some public
services including school enrollment and health care. Fire
and police protection needs are not expected increase
significantly above that required for the current land use.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on !:
public services, if any.
A higher level of property tax revenue will be generated to
support public services.
16.Utilities • j&
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural . !
gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic
system, other.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility
providing the service, and the general construction activities on
the site or in immediate vicinity which might be needed.
The City of Renton would provide sanitary sewer, water and r_
refuse service. Electricity and natural gas would be
provided by Puget Sound Energy. Qwest is the telephone
provider and ATT Broadband would provide cable service.
17 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA) CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
General construction activities that would be required on
and adjacent to the site would include utility extensions to .
the site where required and on-site installation of utilities. !
1
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my
knowledge. I understand the lead agency is relying on them to
make its decision. f
o.
mati f
Signature:
..i)/yi
i
Date submitted: 41k/m
iri
A
This checklist was reviewed by:
8 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
Project Narrative
06.1,
EtOp
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat is a proposed residential subdivision locatI4 tnthe�sit Ro�NG
the existing Barbee Mill Company lumber mill adjacent to Lake Washington in &rises
Renton, Washington. The site is approximately 22.9 acres, located west •'
Washington Boulevard and south of the I-405 and NE 44th Street interchange. £ ect
site includes approximately 1,900 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington includin�e
delta of May Creek. The property is zoned COR2 (Center Office Residential, Port Quendall
site). The applicant is seeking approval of a Preliminary Plat with a minimum density of
five du/acre per RMC 4-2-120B. Adjacent property to the north is also zoned COR2.
Property to the east is zoned R-8 and R-10 and the property to the south is zoned R-8.
The site is currently used for lumber production. There are approximately 15 buildings on
the project site, which were built for lumber milling and storage including one operational
office building. Many of the buildings are vacant. The existing boathouse located in the
southwest portion of the property is the only existing structure proposed to remain with
this project.
May Creek runs through the easterly and southerly portions of the site with ultimate
discharge at a delta at the shoreline of Lake Washington. Two Category III wetlands also
exist adjacent to the southern property line south of May Creek. The majority of the
delineated boundary of these are located within the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-
way. The required 25-foot buffer for these two wetlands extends onto the Barbee Mill site.
The westerly-most wetland is in proximity to the existing storm drainage outfall that
outfalls onto the property from the established residential areas south and east of Lake
Washington Boulevard. The proposed property access (Street D) and an onsite roadway
(Street C) have been located at the preferred location based on discussions with the City
and the analysis provided with the project's Environmental Impact Study (EIS). These
roadway locations will result in some incidental impact to the two wetlands as evaluated in
the EIS. Efforts will be made during final engineering design to minimize impacts to each
of these low-category wetlands including the use of walls and rockeries to contain the limits
of the roadway fill. However, such features/structures would not likely be allowed within
the railroad right-of-way. As such, portions of these two low-category wetlands
(approximately 2,530 square feet or 0.06 acres)will be eliminated to facilitate the required
access to the site. This fill would be mitigated for in accordance with City of Renton
standards as the project is vested as well as any applicable and reasonable criteria
established by the SEPA determination.
According to a geotechnical report prepared by Golder Associates, dated August 2000 and
re-issued in December 2001, the site soils consist mainly of Norma Sand Loam. Existing
site grades north of May Creek range between 0.5% to 4% with a general slope westerly
across the property. The slopes across the portion of the site south of May Creek vary from
approximately 1% to 7% northwesterly toward May Creek and Lake Washington. Existing
grades within the May Creek buffer area vary from 7% to approximately 35% to 40% at the
banks of the creek. There are no existing stormwater detention or water quality ponds on
the property. Stormwater runoff primarily sheet flows directly to Lake Washington and
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal ,,,/ 1
ilAdnfOn/� /7/ otak
\\Kirae0l\prof\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Narrative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
May Creek through limited strips of vegetation. The proposed subdivisions will improve the
existing conditions by channeling storm water to constructed water quality ponds or
dispersing limited landscape areas through vegetated areas prior to discharge to Lake
Washington and/or May Creek. No on-site detention is proposed for the project due to the
site's proximity to Lake Washington and it's designation as a"major water body"which
provides exemption from detention per the King County Surface Water Manual (KCSWM).
The proposed development includes a mixture of 115 duplex and fourplex townhouse units
on individual single-family lots. Attached units will be located with common walls along a
"zero"lot line. Adjacent, non-attached units will be separated by a minimum five-foot side
yard setback on each individual lot. Front and rear lot setbacks are proposed to be a
minimum of ten feet. Residential lot sizes range from 1,820 square feet to 16,850 square
feet. Parking and other typical lot/parcel development criteria will comply with the COR
zoning defined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of complete application for the
project. Building heights will be limited to the voluntary maximum evaluated during the
SEPA process for the project. Streets within the subdivision will be dedicated to and
publicly maintained by the City of Renton. Water, sewer, and storm drainage facilities
servicing the project will also become part of the public systems maintained by the City of
Renton.
Currently, there are three bridges crossing May Creek. Each of these will be removed with
the project. One new crossing of May Creek is proposed with the project to provide fire
access and circulation for the subdivision. This improved crossing is currently planned near
the location of one of the existing bridges. A 50-foot buffer will be provided along each side
of May Creek.A maximum 50-foot setback with restrictive plantings is also proposed along
most of the shoreline of Lake Washington and the delta of May Creek. This lake shoreline
setback is typically 50-feet with a reduced width to a minimum of 25-feet at specifically
constrained lots as shown on the Preliminary Plat plan.
The City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-2-120B allows development of a COR zoned
parcel with residential uses at a minimum density of five du/net acre when the
development does not involve a mix of uses. The proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
project includes single-family residential use only at a density of approximately 6.76 du/net
acre.
Primary access to the site will be from two points along Lake Washington Boulevard. The
majority of the project site is located north and west of May Creek with a primary access by
means of a 60-foot easement over the eastern edge of the adjacent property to the north.
The owners of the Barbee Mill property have an ownership interest in this adjacent parcel.
The developed site area north of May Creek will include a looped local access road (Streets
A and B) with a connection to the southeastern portion of the site via a new bridge crossing.
These internal local access streets will be a 32-foot wide paved street section with sidewalks
on both sides located within a 42-foot right-of-way. A 26-foot wide private access easement
will service lots 43 through 48 from Street A north of the May Creek delta at Lake
Washington. Roadside sidewalks are proposed throughout the development to provide
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 2
otak
\\Kirae0l\prof\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\Narrative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
continuous and convenient pedestrian accessibility. A soft-surface trail within the May
Creek buffer is also proposed as part of the project to provide public access to and from the
easterly property boundary to the Lake Washington shoreline. The terminus of this trail
will include an interpretive panel documenting the historic role(s) of the Barbee Mill.
The townhome units located south and east of May Creek will be accessed from Lake
Washington Boulevard directly via an improved roadway located north of the existing
commercial driveway for the site. The proposed public access road at this location will
maintain a 32-foot wide pavement section with sidewalks on each side within a 42-foot wide
right-of-way. This roadway will connect the southern and northern portions of the property
by means of a new bridge crossing at May Creek (Street D). The smaller fourplex lots in the
portion of the site south of May Creek will front along a public roadway with a 32-foot wide
street in a 39-foot right-of-way (north of Street D). This local access street is a dead-end
with limited access that is proposed with a hammer-head style turnaround at the westerly
terminus. Other infrastructure improvements for the project include two offsite connections
to the existing public water main located within the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way.
An estimated construction cost for the subdivision infrastructure is approximately
$3,250,000. Infrastructure construction will include approximately 38,000 cubic yards of
fill for road and lot construction and 32,000 cubic yards of excavation from the water
quality ponds, underground pipes, and existing stockpiles. The site also includes
approximately 72 trees, which are approximately six inches and larger at chest height. The
majority of these trees are located along May Creek and its buffer. The trees within the
existing May Creek buffer will remain undisturbed except for those in conflict with the
proposed bridge crossing and other project-related grading improvements. The trees to be
removed include five ash trees ranging in size from six to ten inches located southeast of
lots 62 through 64, two cottonwood and four ash trees ranging from six to thirty inches
south of May Creek and east of Street D, three six-inch ash trees at Street D, and one six-
inch ash northwest of lot 108. One ten-inch cherry tree located on lot 105, one twelve-inch
cedar tree and one sixteen-inch fir located northwest of lots 96 and 97, and ten ash trees
ranging in size from six to fourteen inches in the vicinity of Street C are also proposed to be
removed.
The onsite roads and water quality pond tracts will be privately maintained in accordance
with City of Renton standards. The Homeowners Association will own and maintain
designated on-site open-space areas. Temporary job trailers will be located on-site during
construction and during the initial home sales period.
Routine Vegetation Management
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat project will likely begin construction in the summer of
2005. It is expected that one of the first construction tasks will be the clearing and removal
of selected onsite trees and vegetation. All vegetation to be protected along the May Creek
corridor will be delineated with construction and erosion control fencing. It is expected that
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 3
otak
\\Kira e01\proj\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\N arrative010305.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
excavators, loaders, roller compactors, and other large earth moving equipment will be used
to clear and finish grade the property. Since the property has been previously developed,
there is very little vegetation onsite except for the areas on either side of May Creek. This
project will preserve the majority of this existing vegetation by providing a buffer of 50 feet
along each side of May Creek.
The May Creek buffer area will be protected with continued maintenance of the existing
vegetation and supplemental landscape and native plantings. Much of the vegetation in
this corridor will be allowed to grow naturally to allow a mature re-vegetation of the creek.
During the course of the construction, no tree trimming or tree topping is planned for any of
the vegetation along the May Creek corridor. Areas of grass along the creek that are
currently being mowed will be mowed during the construction period unless the City
prefers that no mowing occur. No chemical applications of insecticide or herbicide are
proposed during the construction period.
Mowing will occur with both standard riding mowers and hand mowers. No other use of
equipment for management of vegetation is expected onsite during construction. Newly
landscaped areas will be maintained by the contractor after installation until final
acceptance by the Owner. Any work on maintenance of vegetation will occur during
standard working hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 4
otak
\\Kirae0l\proj\project\30200\30209\Admin\Corresp\N arrative010305.doc
•
•
February 22,2005
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
Minutes DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
CITY OF RENTON
APPLICANT/CONTACT: Century Pacific LP FEB 22 2005
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson
1501 Fourth Ave., Ste 2140 RECEIVED
Seattle,WA 98101
OWNER: Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company
PO Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
CONTACT:. Otak Inc
Matt Hough
10230 NE Points Dr., Ste. 400
Kirkland,WA 98033
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA 02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North
(Between North 40'h and 44th Streets)
SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 115-lot subdivision of a 23-acre site intended
for the development of townhouse units. A shoreline
Substantial Development Permit is also required.
SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the
Examiner on January 18,2005.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report,examining
available information on file with the application,field
checking the property and surrounding area;the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The following minutes are a summary of the January 25,2005 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing opened on Tuesday,January 25,2005,at 9:57 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of
the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040,EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 2
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No.2: Overall Preliminary Plat Plan
application, proof of posting, proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No.3: Preliminary Plat Plan,North Exhibit No.4: Preliminary Plat Plan, South
Exhibit No. 5: Preliminary Landscape Plan,North Exhibit No.6: Preliminary Landscape Plan, South
Exhibit No.7: May Creek Buffer Restoration Sect. B Exhibit No. 8: Lake Shoreline Conceptual Landscape
Plan
Exhibit No. 9: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile, Exhibit No. 10: Railroad Crossing Plan and Profile,
North South
Exhibit No. 11: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading Exhibit No. 12: Detailed Grading Plan and Grading
Elevations,North Elevations, South
Exhibit No. 13: Existing Site and Topography Map Exhibit No. 14: Neighborhood Detail Map
Exhibit No. 15: Zoning Map Exhibit No. 16: Summary Table of Mitigation
Measures
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development
Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The subject site is located along the
Lake Washington shoreline. There is an existing single-family development to the southeast designated R-8 and
some small multi-family developments designated R-10. The property is situated within the Center Office
Residential (COR-2)zoning designation,which provides for a mix of intensive commercial, office and
residential activity. Stand-alone residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required
density of a minimum 5 dwelling units per net acre is satisfied. The existing site has limited operations of a
lumber mill with several structures that will be removed with the exception of a boathouse located on proposed
new Lot 95.
The historical background was discussed by Ms.•Fiala.
Site-Plan Review:
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines and is subject to the City's
shoreline Master Program. The applicant is requesting to subdivide this site into 115 lots for the development of
townhouse units. May Creek bisects the southern portion of the site from the east, under Lake Washington
Boulevard North and into Lake Washington. The project is proposed to be developed in two phases. Phase 1
would include Lots 96-115 located to the south and east of May Creek and Phase 2 would include Lots 1 -94 to
the north and west of May Creek. Lot 95 currently contains a boathouse and dock which would remain on the
lot and within the plat. Two entry access points are proposed along Lake Washington Boulevard North,one to
the north, Street F,that would be an at grade railroad crossing and a second one approximately 950-feet to the
south along Lake Washington Boulevard North, Street D, also an at grade crossing.
The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance. An Environmental Impact
Statement(EIS)was prepared. No appeals of the adequacy of the Draft or Final EIS were filed. A mitigation
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 3
document was issued on August 16,2004 and an appeal of the Mitigation document was filed by the applicant
and later withdrawn by the applicant.
This project is to be reviewed as a Level II Site Plan, it is a conceptual site plan. The applicant is not required to
provide any floor plans or elevations.
At the request of the Examiner,Ms. Fiala explained the differences between a Level II Site Plan and a Level I
Site Plan and what will happen at the public hearings, or if it is an administrative decision for the benefit of any
property owners that were present at this hearing.
The COR zone allows a building height of 10 stories and/or 125 feet, however the applicant is proposing that the
buildings could be up to 50 feet in height within the shoreline jurisdiction and potentially up to 75 feet outside of
the shoreline requirements. Building height would be verified at the time of individual building permit review.
The COR zone does not have specific requirement for on-site landscaping. Landscaping is reviewed through the
site plan review process. The applicant is proposing to install street trees along all residential public streets
within the site, the open space/water quality tracts would be landscaped as well. Several of the plant materials
proposed include Oregon Ash,tulip tree, Hinoki Cypress and Snowberry. The approximate total area of
landscape would be over 5 acres of the site. All landscaping is required to be fully irrigated.
The Examiner inquired as to the extensive grading and excavation throughout the site. Preliminary earthwork
quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of fill
material and how many traffic trips all that might generate? Ms. Fiala stated that she would have to calculate
the number of trips.
The May Creek and Lake Washington buffers are proposed to include 15-feet of managed landscape with 35-
feet of native vegetation. The applicant is required to construct public sidewalks along both sides of all public
roads. Access to the shoreline would be provided via new trial/walkway through Tract E to the DNR land. A
six-foot wide soft surface pedestrian walkway would be provided along the south side of May Creek and include
an interpretative display at the southwest end of the trail. All public streets would have sidewalks on both sides
except for Street C,modification requested that a sidewalk be provided on only one side of the street.
Potential impacts from the development of the site to May Creek and Lake Washington will be mitigated by
existing code provisions,as well as the mitigation measures placed on the project.
Fire,Traffic and Park Mitigation Fees are proposed for the plat.
Adequate sanitary sewer,water service and other utilities would be extended as necessary for the development
of the site.
Preliminary Plat Review:
The subject site is designated Center Office Residential—2 (COR-2),which provides for large scale office,retail
and/or multi family projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporating significant site
amenities and gateway features.
The proposed plat is in compliance with all the appropriate Comprehensive Plan policies.
The proposed plat complies with the density requirements for the COR-2 zoning designation with a net density
of 6.8 dwelling units per acre.
• 3
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 4
The proposed lot sizes are appropriate for the attached units proposed for this plat. The applicant has shown
setbacks on the plat plan to indicate potential building envelopes that do meet the COR zone requirements.
The COR zone does not require any front,rear or side yard setbacks. However,the applicant is proposing the
following setbacks: interior side years of 5 feet; front yards of 10 feet and rear yards of 10 feet. The proposal's
compliance with building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits.
All proposed lots comply with the arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations with the
requested modifications. Due to the length of the private access to Lots 43 through 48, a Fire access turnaround
is required.
All proposed radii at intersections of public rights-of-way would exceed the minimum radius required and
would meet code. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement from
the Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of
the site. The roadway would be dedicated as a public right-of-way.
Staff recommends the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for all common
improvements.
The project is along two shorelines, Lake Washington and May Creek. It is subject to the City's Shoreline
Master Program. Current impervious areas would be restored to native vegetation within the buffer area. All
mature trees located within the May Creek buffer are proposed to be retained. Within the 50-foot buffer from
Lake Washington, the first 35 feet would be planted with native vegetation,the remaining 15 feet would be
managed landscape.
The Examiner inquired about the 100-year floodplain and which part of the property was subject to that
designation. Ms. Fiala stated that there is a portion in that designation,there has been mitigation measures
placed on the subject site stating that all structures must be built one foot above the required floodplain level.
The applicant has provided a shoreline landscaping plan (Exhibit 8)which proposes one pedestrian walkway
trail per lot to the shoreline. There are numerous lots along the shoreline(Lots 23-48)staff recommends that
there would be only one trail walkway to the shoreline per two units. This would eliminate additional intrusions
into this.required shoreline buffer. Trails will be.provided throughout the site,along May Creek is proposed to
be a soft-surface trail.
The site is located within the Renton School District and they are able to handle the additional students.
Staff recommends approval of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat subject to eight conditions.
The Examiner questioned if the boathouse on Lot 95 would be a legal conforming use when the property is
platted.
Mr. Fiala stated that she did not have an answer but she would do some research and let the Examiner know.
Alex Cugini, 611 Renton Avenue South,Renton, WA 98055 stated that he is the president of Barbee Mill
Company which is owned by the Cugini family. They have been working on this project for almost three years,
prior to that they worked with the Paul Allen group for four years. All of their experts were present and would
be able to answer most of the questions.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040,EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 5
Tom Goeltz,Davis Wright Tremaine, 1501 4th Avenue, Suite 2600, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that they are
present today to request approval of the Preliminary Plat and the Site Level II and would support staff with the
exception of a couple of issues.
There was an appeal of the mitigation document which was withdrawn last Friday. The clarifications that were
needed have been obtained and a major concession on their behalf to use 50 foot buffers on Lake Washington.
A letter was submitted by them yesterday and contains some exhibits labeled A-K. Eight conditions were
proposed by staff,they are happy with four,two they would like clarifications and 2 conditions they would like
removed.
In discussing the mitigation document,they are referring to the revised document dated January 10, 2005 and
approved by the ERC on January 25.
Item 2 has been clarified, Street F has been changed to Street A which will be dedicated,there is an easement
that allows the Barbee Mill Company to absolutely dedicate that to the City. The Quendall Company has
submitted a letter that states that the property is going to be dedicated to the City and they are in agreement.
Staff's condition#7 requiring additional open space due to the lack of a full 50-feet on some of the lots. From
their perspective, they started out at 25-feet and compromised and conceded to 50-feet where they could, for
those lots that don't have a full 50,they all have a full 35 with native vegetation and that there may be some
with less than 50, it is well in excess of the legal requirement of 25 feet. There are 8 lots total that are affected
by this condition. They would like this condition removed.
They are also requesting that Condition #8 be removed. Each lot,that will be independently owned, should
have a path to the water without having to share. It seems that it would be a problem in the making to require
joint paths. It does not appear to be a SEPA condition and he was not aware of any code provision that would
allow this type of limitation on an individually owned lot.
Condition#6 regarding the private access tracts,the staff report requires cul-de-sacs,turnarounds, or an
additional access road. All of those are fine,but there may be other engineering solutions. He would like to add
the words"or other satisfactory access alignment"to the menu of choices for the final plat.
There is a summary of the additional criteria for site plan approval,staff covered in its report well the section for
200E and he added 200F which are some additional criteria showing that they have been met as well.
As to the docks,they are still at a conceptual level,they have not decided on docks. There is a condition D-17
that expressly deals with docks.
Matt Hough, Otak, Inc., 10230 NE Points Drive, Ste.400, Kirkland,WA 98033 stated that in regards to the
flooding question,there was extensive analysis done for May Creek, one that included modeling. Condition B4
recognizes that the 100-year floodplain must be contained within the 50-foot buffers around May Creek. The
means of doing that would be developed, reviewed and approved during engineering design. It can be done
either with the fills that would occur on the lots or there is a concept for flood terracing with modification of
May Creek which would allow additional conveyance within that corridor that would contain the 100-year
floodplain within that area. The delta of May Creek has historically been dredged,he did not know if that was
going to continue. The modeling did assume that the dredging ceased, it is a conservative analysis.
The second question was on truck trips based on the earthwork volumes, most of the excavation is coming from
removal of existing stockpiles or excavation for the storm water ponds. If that material is suitable for on site fill,
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 6
that would be used. It could be anywhere from 300 to 1,900 trips,it would be expected that they would
roundtrip to minimize the number of trucks on the road.
Lynn Manolopoulos, Davis Wright Tremaine,777 108`h Avenue NE, Ste.2300,Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that
they do have all necessary permits to complete remediation,however, it would be most appropriate to do that
work in conjunction with the development. They will evaluate if it would be appropriate to do some portion of
the clean up within the next year. The Shoreline Permit would be in effect for five years as long as the work
begins within the next year. It would be completed prior to any structures being built.
There is no indication that any of the contamination on the Quendall Terminal site has impacted the Barbee Mill
site in any way. The Quendal I Terminal property is under a formal agreement with the agency and all work
done with the oversight of the Department of Ecology.
Rich Wagner, 2411 Garden Court North (Kennydale neighborhood) Renton, WA 98056 stated that he supports
the application, he is very familiar with the Level I and Level II processes and the idea of pinning down the site
parameters of the site development long before one is asked to develop architectural character. The two often
do not relate and not a lot of architectural value is presented at the early stages.
The current site plan has a unique feature that has not shown up for the last thirty years, and that is the access
point shown off of Lake Washington Blvd,south of the bridge over May Creek. It helps connect this residential
project to the City of Renton and Kennydale as well.
Lastly, it is noted in the findings of staff that the coverage is based on a 65% or 75% of the attached garages.
That is an old carryover from the COR zoning that will come to play in the development of the interior lots of a
tri- or four-plex.
Larry Reymann, 1313 N 38'h Street, Renton, WA 98056 stated that he is a volunteer naturalist on the Cedar
River and involved with the Park Ambassador Program with a focus on May Creek. He was concerned about
the access to the shoreline of Lake Washington between Lot 23 and the neighboring property to the north, if that
north property should be developed into a park or something. He suggested that a 50-foot walkway would
preserve the access to the shoreline.
Exhibit 7 shows a cutaway for May Creek, it is very important for salmon to have shade over the water in order
to prevent the water from heating up in the summer. It appears that there is approximately 70-feet of open space
with no provision for shade for the water. Larger trees in that 70-foot area would be a good thing to protect the
salmon and other fish that spawn in the creek.
Dredging at the mouth of the creek is essential to prevent flooding of the area. The Homeowners Association
should be governed as to how the habitat in May Creek is preserved. He would be willing to work with the
owners in a proactive way to protect the habitat and wildlife.
Mark Hancock, PO Box 88811, Seattle, WA 98138 stated that he lives in the lower Kennydale neighborhood
just south of the project and he has no problem with the project. They do have a problem with traffic cutting off
405 and passing through their neighborhood and up to the 44th Street interchange. It was requested that to the
extent that the haul routes of the gravel trucks, if they could be required to go on to NE 44th Street and use that
interchange that would be most helpful.
Fritz Timm, Sr. Engineer,City of Newcastle, 13020 Newcastle Way,Newcastle, WA 98059 stated that the EIS
process contained a couple of opportunities for the City of Newcastle to make comments on the project. This
particular project does not have any serious qualms in respect to the City of Newcastle,however,there were
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.:LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM •
February 22,2005
• Page 7
comments that were in respect to light, glare,transportation, and dust. The mitigation measures did not seem to
cover these issues to their satisfaction. Comments have been submitted in respect to the am/pm peak hour
traffic issues,there will be an increase at specific intersections from this particular project. If there is anything
that the City of Renton staff can do to assist with their efforts to improve those conditions it would be
appreciated. He stated they did submit a letter to Susan Fiala in which various concerns were documented by
the City of Newcastle's traffic engineer, Mike Nicholson, Community Development Director and himself.
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services covered some of the questions that were brought up during the hearing.
Starting with haul routes,she noted that they would be monitored closely. They are very aware of the
neighborhoods having trucks getting through on streets that are not large enough. The worker taking those exits
they have no control over, but the gravel trucks are controlled internally.
The 1-405, 40th Street, 44th Street is a regional concern they do welcome Newcastle's input into what might be
needed. 1-405 has a significant amount of money that they will bring to the table.
The light/glare issue is very interesting, the level of lighting is mandated by City Code. Hoods on the lights may
be a possibility, but the basic lighting levels must be accommodated. There is a new residential light standard
that may possibly be used within this area. Dust is a normal routine,the site will be watered down and erosion
control is required and that includes both mud and dust.
•
The turnaround between Lots 42 and 48 and between Lots 95 and 98 were discussed. Street A and Street C both
were in for modifications for narrower widths, which there was no objection to due to their proximities to May
Creek,the Lake and the railroad. The Fire Department was very adamant that they wanted cul-de-sacs at the
end of both Street C and Street A because they exceed 500-feet in length. On Street C, there is an existing
roadway that comes from the south, up and into Street C. One of her conditions was that they needed to create a
road cut and pave that transition point at that location. The Examiner commented that this would not be a
general access, it would be a gated or emergency access only. Ms. Kittrick continued that it was a question at
this point. She did not know what the actual road serves, who has rights to it, if it's public or private. It is very
obvious that it has been there for a lot of years. That opened it up, if it is a public road or a public emergency
access, it could be paved per City Code to 500 feet long,20 feet wide and could be a second access and then a
cul-de-sac would.no longer be required.
Mr. Hough stated that they could put larger trees in the 35-foot buffer to protect the salmon and wildlife. Some
of the existing trees will remain. The Department of Fisheries will be involved because of the creek and it is
presumed that they will have some criteria for trees and shading and other design elements.
Mr. Reymann asked again about the homeowner's association or what entity would be responsible for the
shorelines and for the environment specifically along May Creek and Lake Washington and maintaining as
much as possible the natural habitat for wildlife.
Mr. Goeltz stated that regarding the homeowner's association,the City has enforcement authority for the
association. If the City thinks there is not adequate maintenance or care or the conditions are not being
maintained then that is an enforcement right on the part of the City.
•
Ms. Kittrick stated that the Department of Fisheries and DOE are on top of these sorts of issues. There also are
plenty of volunteers that are out there and more than happy to call City Hall if there's a plumage out of place or
something is not being properly cared for.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:51 a.m.
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 8
FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS&RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
l. The applicant, Century Pacific LP, Steven Wood,filed a request for a Level 2 Site Plan and 115-lot
Preliminary Plat for the Barbee Mill property along Lake Washington Boulevard.
2. The yellow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation
and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit 1#1.
3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC),the City's responsible official, determined that an EIS
was required for the proposal and one was prepared.
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard. The subject site is the location of the
former Barbee Mill site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington and west of the boulevard. The
subject site straddles May Creek as it approaches and enters Lake Washington. The site is located
somewhat southwest of the NE 44th Street Exit from I-405 (Exit 7)and north of NE 40th Street.
6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of center office or residential uses, but does not mandate such development
without consideration of other policies of the Plan.
7. The subject site is currently zoned COR(Center Office Residential). The COR districts were created
for certain large or uniquely located properties including the subject site.
8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1804 enacted in December
1959.
9. The subject site is approximately 22.9 acres of 997,960 square feet. The parcel is irregularly shaped
with its eastern margin defined by a slight curve in the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and
its western margin defined by the shoreline of Lake Washington.
10. The majority of the subject site is relatively level with grades ranging between 0.5%to 4'.0%to the west
and north of May Creek, 1.0%to 7.0% on the south portion of the creek and towards Lake Washington.
There are some grades up to 35%to 40% along May Creek.
11. The subject site contains a variety of sensitive areas in addition to the slopes noted above along May
Creek. May Creek runs through approximately 800 linear feet of the site with banks on both sides. A
fifty-foot buffer would be provided along each side of the creek from the ordinary high water mark.
Any mature trees within the buffer area would be retained. The site sits along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington and has approximately 1,900 lineal feet of shoreline. A fifty-foot buffer would be provided
along the lake. The applicant proposes that 35 feet be native vegetation and the remaining 15 feet
would be manicured vegettion adjacent to the future dwellings. Category III wetlands are located in two
areas on the subject site. One is located adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of Street
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat - .
•
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 9
C (northerly wetland) and the other is located at the southern edge of the site near the south end of Street
C (southerly wetland). Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed.
12. The applicant proposes dividing the acreage into 115 lots. The lots would be arranged generally along
the perimeter of the site and in an interior block in an almost triangular arrangement. A tier of lots
would be located along the north boundary of the site and another would be located along the Lake
Washington shoreline. There would be a tier of lots located along both sides of May Creek. In addition,
in the north central area of the site would be a triangular block with lots along its north and south edges.
13. The main access to the subject site would be from the northeast corner of the site via a 60-foot wide
roadway from Lake Washington Boulevard and across the railroad tracks. Currently,that segment of
roadway is a private easement. An agreement with the underlying holder would allow it to be used by
the applicant and allow it to be dedicated to the City if the project is approved. Where the roadway
enters the site a public right-of-way,42 feet wide would provide access to the majority of the subject
site. Street A would run east to west and then turn south and end with a hammerhead turnaround. It
would then continue as a narrow private roadway. Street B would run at somewhat of a diagonal
intersecting Street A's east to west leg and then its north to south leg. Street D would provide a second
point of access out to Lake Washington Boulevard. It would form a T-intersection with Street B. Street
D would have a bridge across May Creek. Branching off Street D to the south would be Street C.
Street C would be 39 feet wide and run along the south side of May Creek. Street C would end in
another hammerhead turnaround.
•
14. The Fire Department has indicated that due to the deadend roadway length of both Streets A and C,that
hammerhead turnarounds are insufficient and that both roads would require a full cul-de-sac
termination. Staff did note that there is another roadway at the end of proposed Street C but that staff
does not know its ownership or if it is a public or private roadway and whether it could be used for
access to this site and across the railroad tracks.
15. The 115 lots would contain a combination of townhome structures in 2-unit, 3-unit and 4-unit buildings.
The attached units would be located on their individual lots with common walls between units. Side
yards would be provided between structures. A Level II Site Plan does not require very specific details
such as structural design or facade detail. Building heights are also not covered in this level of analysis
although the applicant has proposed buildings up to 50 feet along the lakeshore and up to 75 feet outside
of the shoreline jurisdiction. Mitigation measures that would screen the bulk or increase setbacks for
any building over 3-stories or 35 feet in height have been imposed. There was no indication of whether
or not docks would be proposed for the shoreline lots.
16. The density for the plat would be established after subtracting sensitive areas and roadways. The May
Creek sensitive area is approximately 30,350 square feet;the Lake Washington sensitive area
approximately 66,850 square feet; and the roadways are 153,331 square feet. Subtracting this total of
255,429 square feet from the full acreage and dividing by 115 units yields a density of 6.8 dwelling •
units per acre. Although, Proposed Lot 95 is not currently proposed for development(see below)which
could affect the density calculation slightly. Also affecting the calculation could be the cul-de-sac
requirements of the Fire Department at roadway ends and turnarounds.
17. The applicant proposes phasing the project. Phase 1 would include Proposed Lots 96 to 115,the lots
south and east of May Creek, located along Proposed Street C. Phase 2 would include all of the rest of
the proposed lots, Proposed Lots 1 to 94, except Proposed Lot 95. Proposed Lot 95 contains an existing
boathouse and dock which the applicant intends to retain. A further review would be necessary to
determine if such a standalone use would be permitted in the COR-2 District.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 10
18. The COR zone does not provide a minimum lot size for single-family housing. The lots will range in
size from 1,779 square feet to 16,867 square feet. The plat submitted demonstrated lots that vary from
25 feet wide to 55 feet wide and from 66 feet to 211 feet deep. Lot depth along the lake includes the 50
feet shoreline setback as well as submerged portions of lots. As noted,there would be attached units in
which case side yards would be located between the multiple family,townhome units. The applicant
has proposed 5-foot side yards,and 10-foot front and rear yards.
19. Access to some of the lots,Proposed Lots 23,24, 67 and 68 as well as Lots 43 to 48 would be via
private easements. These would meet code requirements other than the Fire Department's requirement
for a cul-de-sac in some instances.
20. The applicant proposes a number of features that include open space, street trees, access to a DNR
parcel and a 10 foot pathway between Proposed Lots 20 and 21 to the property north of the site,the
Quendall properties. Wetland preservation and shoreline preservation would be accomplished with
setbacks of 50 feet where 35 feet would be native landscaping along with 15 feet of manicured areas
adjacent to homes. Staff calculated that approximately 5 acres of the site would be landscaped.
Irrigation would be required for landscaping areas. The applicant proposes a 6-foot soft surface trail
along the south side of May Creek and interpretive area at end of the trail. A landscaped series of tracks
near the north central and northwest corner of the site will deal with storm water and connect to the
Department of Natural Resources property located along the lake front. This would provide general
access to the lake. Light and glare issues as well as a host of other issues have been addressed by an
extensive list of mitigation measures attached to the issuance of the final EIS.
21. Staff has suggested that the attached units have a common pathway or not more than two for 3-unit and
4-unit buildings to the lake rather than separate paths to limit intrusions into the shoreline buffer areas.
The applicant would prefer that each unit have its own path.
22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate
approximately 45 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be
assigned on a space available basis.
23. The development will increase traffic by approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 1,150 trips
for the 115 homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips will be generated in the morning and
evening.
24. Stormwater would be handled and conveyed by Tracts D,E and F. These would provide water quality
before water is released into the receiving waters of May Creek or Lake Washington. Mitigation
measures were imposed as a result of the EIS reviews. Portions of the subject site are located within the
100-year flood plain.
25. Sewer and water services will be provided by the City.
26. The applicant was concerned about some of the conditions recommended by staff. Condition#6
required certain standards for turnarounds and the applicant wanted the ability to propose alternatives.
Condition#7 required compensation for areas where the 50-foot buffer along Lake Washington's
shoreline was reduced, suggesting that it be provided elsewhere as common open space. Condition#8
was noted above where staff recommended that the paths from units to Lake Washington be limited to
not more than two for three or more units.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 11
27. It was suggested that additional shading be required along May Creek to provide better salmon habitat.
There was also concern regarding protection of the various buffers.
28. Contaminent remediation would continue as development of the site proceeds.
CONCLUSIONS:
Preliminary Plat
]. The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. Although the COR zoning would have
accommodated a mix of high quality office and residential uses, it does permit solely residential uses of
the kind proposed by the plat. The development will provide mainly small but high quality lots due to
the plat's very desirable location adjacent to May Creek and Lake Washington.
2. Reusing what has been a recently underused industrial parcel will increase the tax base of the City. It
also provides in-city, urban-scale housing in an area where urban services such as water arid sewer are
readily available.
3. The lots are generally rectangular with reasonable access to the City's street system. There is an issue
with access to the proposed lots located at the end of extended deadend Streets A and C. The lots will
have to meet Fire Department access standards. That might mean that full cul-de-sac turnarounds will
have to be carved out of lots near the dead ends of proposed Streets A and C. This determination will be
solely at the discretion of the Fire Department.
4. Access to the plat will be provided via two routes into and out of the subject site. That should provide
reasonable circulation although both would have at-grade crossings of railroad tracks. Crossings of
those tracks are governed by State law and mitigation measures imposed under the EIS. Transportation
mitigation fees have also been required to help offset the plat's impacts on City roadways.
5. The applicant will be paying Parks Mitigation fees to help counter the impacts created by new residents
on the City's parks and recreational programs. Similarly,the applicant will pay a fee to offset its
impacts on fire services.
6. In the main,the proposed plat appears to be a reasonable way of dividing the subject site allowing
ownership of individual lots while increasing the density of the site by providing an arrangement of
attached townhomes.
Site Plan
7. The following criteria are used in reviewing general site plans as well as those requiring Level II Site
Plan analysis. It should be noted that Level II analysis is based on more conceptual submissions and
does not require the level of detail otherwise required under Site Plan Review.
Section 4-9-200E: DECISION CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN AND MASTER PLANS:
The Reviewing Official shall review and act upon plans based upon a finding that the proposal
meets comprehensive planning considerations and the criteria in this subsection and in
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-I-I, SM
February 22,2005
Page 12
subsection F of this Section, as applicable. These criteria also provide a frame of reference for
the applicant in developing a site, but are not intended to discourage creativity and innovation.
Review criteria include the following:
1. General Review Criteria for Both Master Plans and Site Plan Review:
a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies.In
•
determining compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,conformance to the
objectives and policies of the specific land use designation shall be given
consideration over citywide objectives and policies;
b. Conformance with existing land use regulations;
c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses;
d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site;
e. Conservation of area wide property values;
f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation;
g. Provision of adequate light and air;
h. Mitigation of noise,odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions;
i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed
use;
j. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight;
k. Additional Special Review Criteria for COR, UC-Nl, and UC-N2 Zones
Only:
i. The plan is consistent with a Planned Action Ordinance, if applicable;
and
ii. The plan creates a compact, urban development that includes a
compatible mix of uses that meets the Comprehensive Plan vision and
policy statements for the Center Office Residential or Urban Center
North Comprehensive Plan designations; and
iii. The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally
consistent,and provides quality development;and
iv. The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide
adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users
of the site,and/or to protect existing natural systems; and
v. The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area and Mt.
Rainier where applicable;and
vi. Public access is provided to water and/or shoreline areas; and
vii.The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area
plazas,prominent architectural features,or other items; and
viii. Public and/or private streets are arranged in a layout that provides
reasonable access to property and supports the land use envisioned; and
ix. The plan accommodates and promotes transit,pedestrian, and other
alternative modes of transportation.
8. The proposal is compatible with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. The plan suggests
that this site is suitable for Center Office Residential uses,that is any of a combination of office or
residential uses or one of those uses exclusively. While a better use of the property might have been a
mixed-use development with high quality office and residential uses, both the Zoning Code and
comprehensive plan allow an exclusive residential use of the subject site.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM •
February 22, 2005
Page 13
9. It appears that the proposed use complies with the Zoning Code. The proposed residential use does
comply. The bulk standards that the applicant has proposed meet or exceed the standards for residential
uses found in the COR regulations. The zone permits buildings of 10 stories or 125 feet in height while
buildings between 50 and 75 feet have been proposed. The front and rear yards proposed also meet or
exceed those required in this zone. Compliance with the Fire and Building Codes will be determined
when building permit applications are reviewed. All access, roadway width and length and turnarounds
will have to meet Fire Department requirements.
10. The site is pretty well separated from adjoining properties and other than traffic, a generalized impact
that any development would affect, the development should not affect neighboring properties. One
impact discussed is that redevelopment will affect some of the view properties upslope of the site. The
redevelopment of the subject site will add to the ambient light during evenings. Residential
- development will increase night lighting from the site. This impact has been absent from this recently
under-utilized site. Street lighting standards are dictated by code. The proposed buildings will also be
somewhat taller than what has generally been located on the site but they fall within the permissible
height limits of the COR Zone.
11. The site plan contains about five acres of open space and access to the shoreline of Lake Washington via
a path to DNS property. There will be limited visual access to the lake from the street system since side
yards between buildings are narrow and 50-foot tall buildings will create somewhat of a wall. There
will be access to May Creek via a walking path which will also lead to the lakeshore. Sidewalks are
required along the public streets that will serve the site and street trees are proposed along the roads.
12. Redevelopment of this large, lakefront site will increase the tax base of the City and should enhance
property values for this site and surrounding sites.
13. It appears that the roads will provide reasonable access to the subject site, clearly affected at some times
by rail traffic that could block access into or out of the site not only for residents and visitors but also for
emergency personnel. Roadways will still have to be designed to meet all Fire Department
requirements. Sidewalks along the streets will provide reasonable pedestrian access.
14. The buildings appear to be reasonably spaced and meet Zoning limitations although side yards between
these potentially taller buildings will create somewhat of a block for light and air.
15. Impermeable surfaces from the former operations would be removed. There should not be any
untoward noise or odors once construction is completed and all contamination has been or will be
removed from the site.
16. . Public services including water and sewer service will be available to the site. Stormwater will receive
water quality treatment and be discharged to the lake.
17. In addition to the projects compliance with the standard Site Plan criteria noted above,the project must
•
also generally satisfy the Level II Site Plan criteria. There is no Planned Action Ordinance in this case.
The townhome project is not as dense as might be anticipated for the COR Zone but the site is quite
constrained by its sensitive location more or less sandwiched between Lake Washington on the west and
May Creek on the east. It achieves a reasonable density of 6.8 dwelling units when it has to provide
water quality treatment and open space beyond that found in its sensitive shorelines.
18. The conceptual plans submitted do not answer questions about the internal cohesion of the project other
than it would be united by a townhome theme and street trees. There are no building footprints nor .
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 14
façade features nor definitive building heights that provide a clue to internal consistency. These issues
will have to be addressed when actual plans are submitted.
19. There are both private spaces,yards and shoreline setbacks, and public open spaces and the natural
systems are preserved by the buffers required by Code and conditions imposed on the project. At the
same time, the applicant may not sidestep around the required mitigation buffer of 50 feet along the
lake. Since the applicant did not appeal those buffer setbacks it cannot then design lots that do not meet
that standard. Staff has suggested a compromise that allows the buffers to be reduced but calling for
compensation for the lost square footage. That seems appropriate. So either the applicant shall redesign
the plat to meet the setback buffer required by mitigation or they shall provide the compensation
suggested by staff.
20. The intrusions into the shoreline setbacks along Lake Washington should be limited as this area is
supposed to be natural. Therefore, staffs recommendation that the number of paths from units to the
lakeshore shall be limited to one path for each two attached units or two for 3 or more attached units is
reasonable. While the applicant indicated this might create ownership issues, if these various dwellings
can share common walls and common roof systems,they can accommodate shared paths to the lake.
2l. The plan does not appear to provide any view corridors to the shoreline of Lake Washington but does
provide a walking path along May Creek. The code is not clear what it means by"where applicable"
and there is the path to the DNS land which might provide access if not an outright view corridor.
Similarly, there is the interpretive area at the end of May Creek which will be accessible from the
proposed trail.
22. The open space tracts provide a form of focal point, as do the pathways to the DNR property and the
end of May Creek. These features also provide access to the water features on the subject site.
23. The roads and paths provide reasonable access to the site and its features subject to the issues noted
above.
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council should approve the proposed plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans,dated
January 3,2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection,as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services
Project Manager
•
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat .
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 15
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary,shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the Development Services Project Manager. The Fire Department shall
have sole discretion in these matters.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
•
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
10. The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards, and 10-foot front and rear yards.
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
DECISION:
•
•
The Level II Site Plan is approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with the mitigations measures formulated as a result of the EIS process.
2. Landscaping shall be installed, similar to that illustrated on the preliminary landscape plans,dated
January 3,2005. The landscaping is to be installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of building
occupancy or final inspection, as applicable. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
3. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat for each
phase. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development
Services Project Manager
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040,EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22, 2005
Page 16
4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all
buildings, except those located on Lot 95, located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat.
The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services
Project Manager
5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording
of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including
landscaping, utilities, private access easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be
submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat.
6. The applicant shall dedicate the public right-of-way for the north entrance to the project, labeled as
Street F, prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the
review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
7. The applicant shall revise the plat to provide for the required Fire emergency turnarounds and/or cul-de-
sacs or additional access road at the end of the private access easement serving Lots 43 to 48 and at the
south end of Street C prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject
to the review and approval o the Development Services Project Manager.
8. The applicant shall provide compensation for the reduction of managed landscaped yard of that portion
of the 50 foot buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington by providing: common open space or
native plantings or other agreed upon compensation prior to recording of the final plat. The satisfaction
of this requirement is subject to the review an approval of the Development Services Project Manager.
9. The lots fronting the Lake Washington shoreline shall be limited to one walkway/trail per
building/structure and/or one walkway per each two units, in the event that the structures would contain
more than two units. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Project Manager.
l0. The Fire Department shall approve all road widths, lengths and turnaround provisions.
11. The applicant's proposed yard setbacks shall be used when the buildings are constructed. Those yards
shall be a minimum of 5-foot side yards,°and 10-foot front and rear yards.
12. Staff shall determine the legal status of Proposed Lot 95.
ORDERED THIS 22"d day of February 2005.
•
FRED J.KAU AN
HEARING EXAMINER
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040, EIS, PP, SA-H, SM •
February 22, 2005
Page 17
TRANSMITTED THIS 22"day of February 2005 to the parties of record:
Susan Fiala Steven Wood Kayren Kittrick
1055 S Grady Way Century Pacific LP 1055 S Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste.2140 Renton,WA 98055
Seattle, WA 98101
Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company Matt Hough Campbell Mathewson
PO Box 359 Otak,Inc. Century Pacific LP
Renton, WA 98057 10230 NE Points Dr. Ste.400 1501 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2140
Kirkland, WA 98033 Seattle, WA 98101
Torn Goeltz Lynn Manolopoulos Rich Wagner
Davis Wright Tremaine Davis Wright Tremaine 2411 Garden Court
1504 Fourth Ave. Ste. 2600 777 108'h Avenue NE, Ste.2300 Renton, WA 98056
Seattle, WA 98101 Bellevue, WA 98104
Larry Reymann Mark Hancock Fritz Timm
1313 N 38th Street PO Box 88811 Sr. Engineer, City of Newcastle
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle, WA 98138 13020 Newcastle Way
Newcastle, WA 98059
TRANSMITTED THIS 22"d day of February 2005 to the following:
Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Stan Engler, Fire
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Meckling,Building Official
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Planning Commission
Larry Warren, City Attorney Transportation Division
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Utilities Division
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Neil Watts,Development Services
Jennifer Henning, Development Services Janet Conklin,Development Services
Stacy Tucker,Development Services King County Journal
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact, error in judgment,or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant,and the Examiner may,
after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department,first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,March 8,2005.
Barbee mill Preliminary Plat
File No.: LUA-02-040,EIS, PP, SA-H, SM
February 22,2005
Page 18
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both
the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040, EIS,PP, SA-H, SM
To: All Parties of Record
If you would like to remain on the party of record list,please contact the Hearing
Examiner's office at 425-430-6515. (If no one answers,please leave a message stating
your name and address and that you would like to remain on the Barbee Mill Party of
Record list.) Otherwise, your name will be removed from the list.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
•
•
•
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT — NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
f.V1.1.4..
MI.
war.
•••••••••• • e,,.o,
1
rt.-rut.mel.mi.D 1
ittiSVAVAOSI in7i•Sirtr„..7 ik BY KROLL WI COMM
..V '''''rrIteig;.%•Pal'4",t 114ttin.. .
Alp 4,4:•d::'._'__'5-'--1--.e' --•--'"---.4-,ra•.-1•1§4,1,11#1410:44
V,C,'..e. ••1 ....:7" .kr'. .V...4S•lt ' "i'!°,4 1 F
.„•..."•' %,1,7;2,@,.....5;,,,E1F.7 ;;•...„, •,,, !,,:;:.. g!
LAKE WASHINGTON J Ji
1303'.' ?,,fi,,• i-:,gl.....,, .1..:11.1,1r. -.7\,....4 74 I.•
.'. Ai r"-I:FE,t r .-.-Tir., ,...,. ....,r_ t r.., •.,.....,z. 1141, .
. .1-.f,-: IMIWTOM4tg:411:0, I .. •
: iggl fIa'r;3.L.•11‘ IA',T-1 itc91:!, -J411'.:' -,Se.';),11`.11/ . ' „ '0e:7-. .---..\ 1 ,
-
:11:111`,..'nTeTtlIT"q!r5E1,!EVL.:!iiii7tilF71--t. ,i:°,,:;:s.r.'..2 :1,...i,‘,.._._,.._,7„_1:0_._:rt.::4,4-FAI„.....,z,,,.'iii*•:41'..44::,-...,.,,,,.. .... ,,,,,,,,,G rou \ ..,..}.,..
\
''''''''''''''-'7-"`',N, ..4-icirc..7.70::.:72 .17.4";-.I'"iii-ii.7"-7.1...-•la Tif.^.1. ...,....4,,P.15,C.... ' •
,
‘'.
. "v"•'...:%
1 ;LI i A - • - ag•-•; sr PIE: L'.,Z.-1 'Alt.1 .-ip.5 tl, :,PD-I. „ ,..„ co,,.u. - am..,,,i___ ,
< I
\
ii- rj - 'n".:, -:.-Aug.:: ',_1',. ',110,'"r Ez.t.';; ; .r,•`. ,...:. ., -7,.,"'" "' lk. . .., N.:.
Sil?"21 'Et - ., 1`,11.t •_:,,g.: PE-I'';,Z.g NI'Vt,..,t 'a'.,.... .1.,lilatiii ..- 4 •'44
0 i
,••'
•-., ,..” ,,. :-,•-••,„ •H ...LI a ir: ..o.trf. :,.Yrn. rv.1, .4,1 rl.....A.1.. ....- ;.\ . /;),j.. • 1
Eglgjet‘k 0_ ,,,,,,,-zi-eggl-4,5riori.,_mr-,_ gliall-.1.11,•:...iprl .-4 i •s.• -. - ‘.....," -1,14 0, -,.. 1
.. - g•111.13. ••-.1 irr,.. 6.-*...;•' " 1,,,R.:: I-- ,r.i-r•alp ".:. '-; '. ....1 ,.._ MI'•
.... ......
. ,..: N, :lii.,-.:1,; 4,g, ,ta.hiPaiti-ene .02,1,A:47$1.,,, -rerlfi a'-.0.,.` r ;-, 1 .0'f.-- , - o
;F.. 4 .,. i 0 pi. c.:,4411:Ecc: st.pr. :,:rt • ;. . rnel: .4 ,...14.iii, S R4-''. .... ,2.:, -- ,.... 0
=
1
1 Ciii :,. 4' iioN ;141.2:4! 'f.fitftgQ41.i 6,% 2; 41,07,;u `..V:Itie1 . Irt4,4k., -.„ \ . VACANT 0
M0.7 b., ""'" '." ;'-''A- 1 '.II 1 IV • "1. ',. .tin ...g.- -.ma o. I .- . -, o .
i. . -' ` •?•-•17.•::''-,10....'-'-'4:ii•:-.V.'A'V.'4 31-'• '•li °"3 •••••;_.• •'•'15- -4./.../c=c.4ft' ........r. - • -•• -•'..., . .. 0° i .-/„.
. .. ., e • ..
? lia 11.,m,.:- kEggit IS :4"7 • vtD V:4:' EL
,,,,,.; A,..leg .: , . E lil. ••• ' d• 17.75;r: :-% 41- i 2 IIAMY1'
40
+ '•,..: 1 J, If:4 *4,5, it' I r ",r la A; " • 7 cfP l',./ .... I
'• . tl,44 • ifo• i il
. .0.. ..' 'At:04 -.- ' -9i 14 ,,. a.. .. i A I -L'41" •,-6. -; ,7 -414,0 Atin, -9 1 r!...4.
.,,. ....... .. .....a. .r._-gua.3 . . iii -..,,ii ,1 , A * 1 •-• 1Q.—:" c., ,.. . 0,1,1
a. R,gp •
.. rro,.., rfftRir,..h,N. , .,.r..,..pl. ,:.F.J ...-td; ol. 0'4 2..1"ir r 4: .I',.. • 4'
as_-I .111.Pr .Vi...111.m1XX.T.e; •,,,; ..
lig11144-21 ''' ' . II • A , / , j•
047411p.r.t, lior Cr... . --.c. -;;;• ,,,I,.../ .:161ii14:11---.
\
rr,•••1.0.'' ,,, ,rt. • \,i. •g! 1 . ',,,4. .°'4,,...../ .0*,-- sugiiii,ii ;:i ....
• _________ .. . . ,,,,, - .-...b <% •,.6 . mil : ,. .1. i 's'.-.-.... .. .. -.4.!•4).‹. 4Li;,..iikia,,,!0-evreAS
4f2r4.. Nil' ,A. „NI „pi, . .,..- 119'7.1°1741177----7...:: P, 41/4'. ,ga. .1; 'Al••''' .7":;::. \ 1 I ir''' .':.::::'-':.....•. .... ..? . .-4 ,,t,... P... . "'-'.::.1.....' .4".L.. 1 , ,
. ,..,......r. .„II.'•:4.:-...,:i:Z.7..:: :"'.-----''''..F.7--. C ed:58.1
i ,1"• t li.•:-• . • I 47- 1.., "" ', '1••• '',.1...,....,?. ...__•••.:.',.._.!;_.:. .^_....,-....1......i..-
. \-;'!.tte: 1 •4, • ``4.,,,
1,•••rei.1-• •
•• Arg .v .,.. , .,,,,,.444,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„*eg..N.L..P. 4 iii.gt:41.1.-11•-a' "71.01d: ' I . .--.1 --Li' ' 5 ! ' . ' "". : . ,'“ •••--iii r17-1.:'.1 -
, '*,-,-....._ • „axat-11• 1 A ; • • i z .,ti. •
,, 4. ,••,0 ir,L• var ,.‘,.:,.. .g 1 , it. z .,,,,„. ,„ ._, ,„,,.. 1 ? , , _.,....- . .14 SI,,,e: ....4A:•1 Aga . • ../. ac4 ".'4 cll
0 •-•''" -• I 4 i...(0,14 n I . I.;'-- ‘•. • . i:C41cdeA-"C7P-•• Q.E Rqtriroil SP..._ ''''' 1 i.•.••••'40 . / 0 51,
't gal;fcifiltitirtwill A ° - I 4,..s. 1. '444 —4....---4--..:-
WItItar:n• NI bAbTE: m.4..._, i( i•-\,...."--6 .s57. -XEL
g .10-g .I. Rafe Wilf.1111iNAlilli 13 •9./.4 f . i 010
11%4 - , 1
• zt • . • 1 F. ---.. ?-- '
IALIMPP: I A•et` 1. 7
n t t '''''. , A.11 . ' va• es mks ,t,---- 0,- -
610CP.PAtz,vo iex, ....‘14k • t I •i
. CTYOF.--NTAN',I lwraput . - i
4. 10110 Mr NAY Oro
: • POP' 4t4;;r* a rNir''''. ...,'.....rit,,,=. w..,,,......,. .. . 1.,41 . sc.. ,f....•••• , , .
''' It .ix 1..„...1.%..0.ml.. .1,4 . -0 ...,s la 1.4 - '" I rit•F NEWPASTLL'' • '. immElle
‘ 1 `71. 121 Vilit:XdO"‘ elth .1'`10..<c*"'4”-
r-, kr,larg;rn"
I
I h , I•. 4'4(a.,4M1-"dio "zih,co':itig .
. 1.....-1,1_., , i e i , . gEG.X.• :ma.6: t 11' -,,'••••••L'4 l'o '00* 00' 00 ,,.,..,„,.
...19.6; • ...%., 4 f 1 *. • -,, r • i,v.s•..iiall • AttlIt.tigNiq 1
;,. t
• -, ---
, -•!.,;"— .. ikt.1710; . I. 7 ",r-Co.A ,,... , UR,Igilltkitt. 0-i 1. 1. 0., rlomi".1".12
IL*1.1 'I i i \li '' ...,k t . • . • . .., ro ?,,=.72,11,4
a
-1
. ,
_,.
.4..
. .
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT I, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
teem..
"; BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT . �.
zur OVERALL PLAT PLAN /
// •• ,
GIVITIiii
1/101.1114 A7.
•
, ....,.--• 1- A,/ --- //Pc J 1:I
il I 1.• ,•,'OP • / 4 ri'
tA, /:' 41(...'S.,___,.. 1 WklaCti 2 0 e., /til—
/' f414
/•Y.N_
co
.00
•
ir
F li �- L• e�,ILy.11•lle 'lL ' L.1i-II /'' /V i1 T 1,\... � A .L::,\'A I�
a:•. TO-•
YCS1L J L � I r L.I.!':.L; r
LAKE tars,t - - - - /. .; j s
WASHINGTON I ! J'I/� -r -; +�- T..
r ,Gi / r�< I / - � ;.. J.41%�',."'
!yy�����J i .1 / .' 1 TT'i �i wa..'Y. a
,. twist.
, 3. g
_I Atiti 1I ! I o sao' O. sov eoy +
W ...IGC,f
tal11
,-.-1 I % • •, /^ � /%;j, 4; fy
VICINITY MAP a `iin
' .\,,�, /, / �♦ I LEGAL DESCRIPTION:iin 1 ,/.4 o midi
T10t LUN RtR1R.t0 To T,0 C240 IS 020 1 BTNATtt IN TND man OF
s r Ja ,� / rAfmanx,GODNTY or XDa LND n Desc uam u T0U or1: Z
�'+L y • • R ^' . '`' 11L TNAT wpTON Of 000TOI NLtR LOT I.aarnON sa 10014aI a.00400.
-' k
{ ` L �" ,I-%/,•i• `\\ Mlar" O42•,M I b'� ��. I ;• ` ��� • f -- ;� I ,. /pl,f`Y rC ' ' ri. ' // ,�tl�/' aITUAR 1/1 TNEPCOVO�O�l00�A m0fUiACSIIOINpTA00N.00,'LRM¢1R LOT I. ....—
TN/
' Rp}ttaida\ ,4* IF A %•/ !: •., / I FLOOD HAZARD d a
a / 4 k. ,44 ., ;/ MD 100 TCU FLOOD FARM II COM1N!C MIDI PHD HAT CRUX BWq. a
g i� u ;fir' si, f , •`'.`. �---��_ I I LEGEND a
A .$r'' l .. - Ow
•„ ' Y ,� k, lAl([SNOREUNE BUYER AR V CA
mia• �,. rt ��pp� , BUK(R R�/JIPROS UHRCO TO NATNC
�� �M1" +1;•. �v /•I^ PLANTS AND GRASS ,O
777CCC � 7799 IAA?CREEK BUFFER MCA. I„ O
,f. �j ... •
BUFFER PLANTINGS UwTEO TO NAM u
- t,'�J��A' /•�/ PLANTS.AND GRASSES y
_ ��lO r/• IS'IAANACED LANOSGAPC BUFFER ARFA-
y i i �k /4Y� .•'I�' / r / %.�� BUFFER PLWTNGS YAY WCWOC UWN Q �j
SSSS i • AND OTNER 44NAGE0 UNOSGPC LUiCRILLS O U'
me 01 Two Dmi
jl yy- ,' /! n� ' YL �� .NH„L ,tb Na IMF]
�� �jj �M/y'{y� 1I/� , Ilt 1411 IN•,L„
I 1*
m, -7F_�_�a. T =fr . ,/ .:. N 40TH ST. ESZSZZsu D N RV \✓' 3 a..,n..
IV
i •
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
„..1vam.' , Mgt
- —
�Jrs_. ! _ /F�
namD -- «
Matta
ONm IV
24 i u xl 20 19 e n to is . u 2 I to 9 1 /?/s l J„� yp
u_i+o°0L ':: T I , , , e [ 6 s 4 17 2 1 /, ..._ '�! 9
N ,,,„,,,,Aft �„ rh» :•__ —man-..°•.---_.; `:.;r.y... .., ;•v,.• '.�` p;'I
C7%: 27 i9/ / 75 7e i n ve 79 k• .i .,►} •i 7x 71
"Z + y r uf"t't�� / :'e' \`gib/ •'<'' / eD C e? / e: ao A!J r Ag •,crv$ tj a.. /, / ;'�+KtJW 1 'iiiii'J l---, _-d L_-_, //.' / II
rii:
�..,••___-�I � .4 v 1 •,,, b ya 9 aG y/ ".f,•41y�,1'4j 4t '°?+`!v i :' --'--n.___— • ar.uv 7 E �,'. '4: ai. xpt7 >r x YJ� , 4¢I�4i... 7 /♦ /.rRik'.Z. � • - 20•`1 1 •.'•..".•"+y-.-`•;"' .'Vc+..�,c( J✓l .f,: �` : eo 1�: -�•I / 4.
�.yv �� .. ' 1<1 tr t"'� .f'i ` \ , r / i i / �.1`'.`t.C•..vx: ,4 a(
W $�•: 1 `.. •• • .•e.4� ri"Y i?$,.4j , es ' y . ee 1 ,( r h:
11 !' l e� eN / i
7.
l`` O 'Ili ei+i.16,\�RI0U�it :0� c ,, r�� \e2```;` ' i .) ---•-..' / ,{ il
�M i ',rL 'r`,y�ll ` i r. i • ee . \0 �••:• •: • • /,(f 11
r:1'%/�•i� ` r•ti u tiltitti
1'Il,:t' F . C �'N," `' / i'2•S.•',',;i.�:.:. // / ��NilS5= _-_- 711 sjY ..� `s ` >.� q ' ,' ' 67 '�i%.!1; .; • al 'Jy �� b i r 1 ,•+a w� /%V</ BI• ` �\+' . � m" a /`\\` '::"•••r:•r`., '�,• I
1 c M 8Pg
32 lri '5" / ', '',‘'s ':,-,1R.11.14 • , , N
,.!•.A,•.•.::_- d pi 'J'%,`-11.JN. '" `t, 1 ` s7 ,i•:! `•' ,�i Q eTl 4TT •'It I
LI
]t` 13„,
:: s. .i' lly' \, ] .ve- ,.. };;,/ / /� Ni Ir aorta \ 1 -" :[ Za: Qy.�4
t :. as ��I '� J,. ae t` ] ,` - :.*• % , ...••� Y ' •;L -d- F�/ ::I G -Crr
i22 �' _ +��M � P s4 � .�r=-- c•.• .;J � ,0 ;:;':,gr'+'ai`.'•.oy..�.�.�e•.a . •, o w
;'i:_ 1nit s'1 �fitit #Q,Q` s., � �r° / / ° 1;`.'i t .. 1?><.•,,,�. 9± •• �• ,�
co
irgop
st � t• -------- J - ,4; r/ . `s2`.`` / ••;.• ., `'7t• •. ... _,-..•.. 2 / I ° tl�j�!4' • �� :1
e SEE SHEET L1_2 / (0.t. �` , %0 '
p Plant List v' + ' g O c1
tn,eM+ a 1MNp11 VJ. I�Cu. �' eanl i N.1N eWINO 3n00u ecmrirtmC Nu. eiACXa °,wa: 9<,om l0 MA F p 1.i U ••• •:•,.
Talsn"le'll,mity •_1W M. Q••'10XOXIfi rnn eeyT]a 11[TUND CIWS][W.rs 4a]/1 00 4r 1M[5Xap0y,0.p[11y1jXgEp��B]UE1F�y/fF M!A- I ,•]-.'Mt. uy 7?iIi IAYC[K BYitUI MWroWIf•,
M1fr, 1 ,111,DGuWi ,at 1]•O.C. rt] In11 AhDl,D,m
{eloult0u 1MldROam YM f AL910. Wa e'0.G SIGMA MOS MD w .00/d0 0t �yry .. ,,01 �j�M}��II�[D 10 NOM[ y .Al t%
ui�l1,L°NULLi'Sf[O,Lif EXOWN C(OMV] A�aV 1•r0,4 py�jt�p�•`^'•BWr u U_ r2��i..1421)122-4.1�
,..,��1 1 ]•� ®' 6'SdfnF!,'9CdE"d'Tu �:,O.a' ® an,BeEutr ,_°•o.<. f® uoawX co,as ew cu iw ,4 74411)r-o
1 11 0/ TMx•'�'�`196 i0.1M"" iyi..O,3 DIMINO ton To AM. ® C0�0]LCOMaOI nC00[] 10]2OC1 ,r[BNC'EV C. pa4,979.0 r+•Ia1 "I
LI e42 -1
Mr110]OY1E TOLL AM OF M,IDK*PO
]D.M_[2]•e°D „tn
COAp[f-a.O U•
2%..,, ]
-i
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
YJ1�T..
'D...' SEE SHEET LI_i
e,.»• _
.:..::i17 ]a I IIIRYItl9 •',�•,t.•.1:"�� \ 55 1..` I `6::.�.i:•:. P
»eum
ae
140.410.
itkeii;uuc ... tt.. - -ell:. •L' 52 .;!•/ -V.1
1 tl. _ �� �;( .>T. S..... t...,,N,\ r sort mnv.t•t r",I� x s+ ,f'� „
iffi
_-mow{— 111��� w - .4' S -• / /B
��iill��.tb \• '' �jl':::.// ( ' " 1) I% L '
:.:,.r:�;,.I •'.!' j.,•I.
III
•
'•\ 1, 41 , ,�' 1,4 4:::: . ' W aelwun,b,»f
..-:::..:•.:‘../ j3q. ...r.4, .. : ;..':..f ,4 ,t. / ' ,..,.."1:: .. / ' .
:::.. \'\/ • wrzTIrI��Q �I$Q 3// 9 : )
r <_;/' / ' '' �' 'J4? J / 'Jf%, -y//j( "
's. • /� // 4:' J ' / ': I CL
4 40 � r. `� / ': ,'x„,, \ e„A, ♦. a10J`a�`sQ,' {�:,yr+t'•'I'I : Y�, , �,••• ,•♦�/ / �ippnr�,�p�� Wl If'C.C. .G a
,...,.., \\` ::. .' V✓ / ,102 ,�f,. ...:y:iTa• _ a'K. / ' ., 4 // 0-12IL IZS, y•M w Q
•
••��'�• " /!r /.J ;'!• / C$ 48t4d1nRf Ty �_°r°I.'
.., 101 ''. r}' a o
y � y+ .:.s+�--"• �.;V,��'•�.♦f.4• r '• 7 /7
•y� , ' / Uf,;. :.w ,..-.a' \„9N'B�ti♦••••tj' Be, :�9 .' , • py>i e"osu uM wmt +'. A.
V.
/
} •'%>:.` B� .' J/'% .�•' !I{[�"°L'Idsi7, m Iwnt t� W a
!1 `�/�`\.\ 9e` / ` ,�• .. •r"Y• • .• ® f 0 COMMM4,.01n Ytapai el.
.nl
1 ,, •: :N.,,,, C•�_'-•b / d/ f.` ' 'V �/'• '/'' ' GOSroM OMiS MO IMMARSl4!
r MATE tout•II o WO
•I IMfM"""MMl / •`:: 1€ 1£,n .•fi ,''`. J Mg:am I.IS I.6 g ..., .•� . Sr
/
.a•' \ / J� ✓ 7 •\ J. /•'j/:a / lei»e[Mau e,n•
x 40, _ J 4 �" o ,1,.1,1,1 e»»1
(j 00200.001,001
=/
CO
o as' l i.. :T=, _„ nsis.••at,• y ' l..,:in c.q.s) o' 20 so eo
=l•
rn
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed;OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading;OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway to avoid restriction of flows during
regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume(i.e.a flood terrace excavated on either side of the stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
Cl. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation. buffer.vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during -
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping,mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance
adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of Renton
and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
EXHIBIT 16
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
1
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features,materials and color,including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height,relative building bulk may be reduced
by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a change in
• proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height,buildings shall be designed and sited
to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
I. Noise
11. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and vibration resulting
from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures shall include pre-drilling of the upper
portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for
smaller,residential supports.
12. Vibration,auger casting,or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to
limit noise related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of crossing
construction.
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. • An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological'deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
K. Public Services
Kt. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
• determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
•
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
D6. The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and
pedestrian traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals
and/or mammals including,but not limited to deer,ducks and geese,muskrats,squirrels,mice and
frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thena) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-established
(where the lake is shallow,on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR b)
Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow,on public lands
or in conjunction with greater building setbacks);OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such as
the homeowners association or a similar entity.
E. Transportation
El. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
F. Hazardous Materials
F1. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
ii
ota _
117 s main street,suite 400 • seattle,washington 98104-2540
(206)224-7221 . fax(206)224-9230 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
www.otak.com CITY OF RENTON
July 15,2003
JUL 1 J 2003
RECEIVED
City of Renton
Development Services Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
attn: Ms.Lesley Nishihira
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat— Otak Project No. 30209
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Site Plan Approval-Level 2
Dear Lesley:
This correspondence along with the enclosed information are provided to complete applications for
a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Site Plan Approval Level 2 Review for the •
-
Barbee Mill property. These applications are provided as requested in our meeting last
Wednesday,July 9tn and your subsequent e-mail dated July 10,2003. The applications are being
made in conjunction with and with reference to the complete Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat �l
application(City of Renton Reference LUA-02-040,ECF,PP) currently under environmental
review. As previously discussed,many of the application requirements for each of these permits
were satisfied with the referenced Preliminary Plat.
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
The following submittal requirements have been fulfilled with the Preliminary Plat Application
provided previously for the Barbee Mill project on April 5,2002 and later supplemented on August
27,2002:
• Pre-Application meeting Summary(not applicable)
• Land Use Permit Master Application Form
• Environmental Checklist
• Project Narrative
• Rezone,Variance or Conditional Use Justification
• Construction Mitigation Description
• Neighborhood Detail Map
• Site Plan
• Landscape Plan Conceptual
• Tree Cutting/Land Clearing(Tree Inventory)Plan
• Habitat Data Report(see Biological Assessment dated August 16,2002 and Wetland Review
dated March 28,2002 as prepared for the project by Raedeke Associates,Inc.)
• Wetlands Report/Delineation(see Biological Assessment dated August 16,2002 and Wetland
Review dated March 28,2002 as prepared for the project by Raedeke Associates,Inc.)
• Utilities Plan, Generalized(sewer,water,stormwater,transportation improvements)
creativity, integrity,and skill • strengthening our communities • performing exciting work • serving our clients
Ms.Lesley Nishihira Page 2
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, Supplemental Permits July 15, 2003
• Drainage Control Plan
• Drainage Report
• Geotechnical Report
• Traffic Study
• Plan Reductions
• Colored Maps for Display
This submittal includes the following information to complete the requested permit and amend the
current land use application:
• Application Fee in the amount of$500.00 and$18.13 for mailing labels
• Current list of surrounding property owners within 300 feet of the project site on standard City
of Renton form with notary signature(2 Copies)
• Mailing Labels of current list of surrounding property owners(2 copies)
• Flood Hazard Data is provided in the form of the current Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)
related to the project site(12 copies)
Since the following items will be submitted with the future Site Plan Level 1,the following
submittal requirements are to be waived for this shoreline permit application by the City(and
deferred to Site Plan Level 1)as discussed in our meeting and your subsequence correspondence:
• Architectural Elevations(see attached written waiver)
• Floor Plans (see attached written waiver)
Site Plan Approval-Level 2 Submittal
The following submittal requirements have been fulfilled with the Preliminary Plat Application
provided previously for the Barbee Mill project on April 5,2002 and later supplemented on August
27,2002:
• Land Use Permit Master Application
• Environmental Checklist
• Title Report and Referenced Documents
• Mailing Labels
• Legal Documents
• Pre-application Meeting Summary(not applicable)
• Project Narrative
• Neighborhood Detail Map
• Site Plan
• Utilities Plan, Generalized(sewer,water,stormwater,transportation improvements)
• Grading Plan, Conceptual
• Drainage Control Plan
• Drainage Report
• Geotechnical Report
• Wetlands Delineation Map and Wetlands Classifications Study(see Biological Assessment
dated August 16,2002 and Wetland Review dated March 28,2002 as prepared for the project
by Raedeke Associates, Inc.)
S:\PROJECT'HOZOQ30201MDMIMCORRESPNISRI RI RAO715O34DOC
Ms.Lesley Nishihira Page 3
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, Supplemental Permits July 15, 2003
• Landscaping Plan, Conceptual
• Tree Cutting/Land Clearing(Tree Inventory Plan)
• Traffic Study
• Plan Reductions
• Colored Display Maps
This submittal includes the following information to complete the requested permit and amend the
current land use application:
• Application Fee in the amount of$1,000.00
• current list of surrounding property owners within 300 feet of the project site on standard City
of Renton form with notary signature(2 Copies)
• mailing labels of current list of surrounding property owners (2 copies)
• copies of the current Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)related to the project site(12 copies)
are provided in response to permit Item 17,Flood Plain Map.
Your e-mail correspondence confirmed that the following items were not required to complete the
Site Level 2 review:
• Architectural Elevations
•
• Floor Plans
In addition,the following items were confirmed to not be necessary and/or applicable for a
complete application:
• Item 22,Screening Detail, Refuse/Recycling (Elevation)
• Item 23, Urban Center Design Overlay District Report
A detailed project narrative was provided with the initial Preliminary Plat application. In addition,
subsequent information has also been provided by the project team in response to
questions/comments that have occurred during preparation of the PDEIS. Details of the housing
product for this site will depend in part on market conditions at the time of development,but more
so on who the builder of the housing ultimately becomes. As such,this project can only identify the
general type and approximate size of the individual residential buildings for the project at this
time,which can be summarized as:
• Approximately 112 townhouse-style residential dwelling units;
• common wall dwelling units along shared property lines(i.e.,zero lot lines);
• standard building setbacks of 5 feet side yard and 10 feet front and back yard at lot locations
without shared walls;
• individual lots range from 1,800 to 6,000 square feet;
• voluntary height limit of 50 feet for buildings within 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline
and 75 feet for on-site buildings outside of this shoreline area;
• building footprints are not yet known,however the current environmental review of the project
is evaluating a building coverage of 5,625 feet at typical lots (i.e.,75 feet square).
SAPROJECIV021"30208NDMIMCORRESPVJISHI HI RA071503LDOC
Ms.Lesley Nishihira Page 4
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, Supplemental Permits July 15, 2003
In general,and specifically to your request for a response to Item 1.(k)of the General Review
Criteria for Level I and II Site Plan review for COR zoned property(section 4-9-200.E.1),we
summarize compliance below. We note that these criteria are"objectives"and that"strict
compliance with any one or more particular criterion may not be necessary or reasonable." Section
4-9-200.E.1: Since this is a townhouse project allowed under the COR,and not a mixed use project
that is also allowed by the COR zone,a number of criteria are either not applicable or need to be
tailored to a townhouse project.
i. the Planned Action Ordinance is not applicable to this project;
ii. the plan creates a compact urban-type development consistent with the allowable uses
within the COR Zone;-the townhouse use us expressly allowed by the COR zone.;
iii. the plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally consistent and
harmonious with existing development on adjacent properties;
iv. public and private open spaces have been incorporated into the current plan to provide
passive and active recreation-view corridors from public areas and open space buffers
along May Creek are provided.;
v. adequate view corridors have been maintained with the current plan;
vi. public access to the shoreline(consistent with current comprehensive plan policy) is.
provided with the plan-no public access on the site is proposed since this is a townhouse
development,and not a mixed use development which has public access due to retail and
commercial uses that are part of a mixed use project. ;
vii. the plan provides distinctive focal points with public open space and trail head connections
to the shoreline and existing pedestrian facilities;-private open space is provided with a
focal point on the water,but no public open space is provided since this is not a mixed use
project.;
viii. the plan assures adequate access to public streets;
ix. the plan accommodates transit,pedestrian,and other alternative modes of transportation.
This amendment to the current land use application for the Barbee Mill site is submitted on behalf
of the owners of the property,Barbee Forest Products,Inc. and Barbee Mill Co.,Inc.by their
agent Century Pacific LP. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this application
package,please call Campbell Mathewson at 206-689-7203. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Otak,Incorporated
/ 9dek Stull t7 -r-iv
Matthew J. Hough,PE
Senior Project Manager
Enclosure
MH:ms
MPROJECI%30200\30209ADMINWORRESIANISIIIIIIRAP71503LDOC
07/14/03 MON 08:28 FAX 206 224 9230 OTAK-SEATTLE 1Z0U2
it '
4-
'/`` `''in1/V/NA
LIST OF SURROUNDING i. V ,. ' °!/
PROPERTY OWNER _/ .
WITHIN 300-FEET OF THE SUBJECT SITE
t.
City of Renton Development Services Division -
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, s a 8.;5t
Phone:425-430-7200 Fax:425-430- 'k yOl'FEN ONNINQ
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill li 11 i iOa'1
APPLICATION NO: CIVED .
The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services
Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development.
NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER
Johnson Stewart W 4100 Lake Washington Mclaughlin Properties Llc 4100 Lake Washington BlvdoN 221200 0020
Youngblood Jon C 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N ! 221200 0030
Wywrot Lois R 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N I 221200 0040
Igelmund Darrell & Linda' 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N ! 221200 0050
Hutton Ronald E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0060
. Luger Therese M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0070
Igelmund Darrell & Linda 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0080
Gurel Mehmet Trust 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0090
Gibson Lance M/Caren M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0100
Flores Maria 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0110
Kelly Kimberly Ann 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N i 221200 0120
Cruze Rande R/Celia E;Konn 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0130
Gurel Mehmet 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1 221200 0140
Carl Kenneth J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0150
Lynch Roy E Jr/Cheryl L ' 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0160
Harrison James P & Jane M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0170
Ernst Lee E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0180
Rich Foster Inc 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0190
Castillo Juan Francisco An 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0200
Good Bruno & Ann E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0210
Harwood Charles H/Sharon LI 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0220
Egenes Dane A 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0230
Muscat James P & Jane M g
Gibson Gary J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0240
Newing Andrew H . 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0250
Allen Colleen 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0260
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0270
Wagner Beverly J
King Jason S i4100 Lake Washington Blvd N221200 0280
Houser Paul W Jr & Amy S I4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0290
Huserne FamilyWTrustPt 4100 Lake Washing ton Blvd N j 221200 0300
Ruegge Steven A 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0310
' 4
J H Baxter/Co 100 Lake Washington Blvd N 221200 0320 '
4500 Lake Washington Blvd S , 292405 9005-
Barbee Forest Products IncLake Wash Blvd N Renton • 322405 9005
Hicks Gardner W
? *no Site Address* Renton 322405 9036
Lange Robert H/Elizabeth L
4017 Park Ave N Renton 9805 322405 9039
• WBB\P WIDEVSERV\AFORlvnaformlislospo,doc07/01/02
U'f/14/U3 MUIN U5:ZU 1'AA ZUti ZZ4 11Z3U U'1•AJS-SEA'1••1'LE 1.0003
t
u - .
•
(Attach additional sheets, if necessary)
•
NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
4350 Lake Washington Blvd N NUMBER
Port Quendall Company;Fka g 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka 14350 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka 14350 Lake Washington Blvd N j 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9049
Thomson Neil 1 4016 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9050
Helina Patricia S M ! 4004 N 40th St Renton 98055 322405 9058
Hicks Gardner 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N 322405 9059
Fawcett Clarissa *no Site Address* Renton 322405 9081
' Barbee Forest Products Inc 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N 334270 0005
Hunt Timothy A 3908 Lake Washington Blvd N 334270 0415
Hunt Thomas R/Caryl J 3916 Lake Washington Blvd N 334270 0425
Nicoli Bruno I & Sarah C *n? Site Address*. Renton 334270 0427
Applicant Certification
• I, ./.i I.S a ( 7 , ' , hereby certify that the above list(s)of adjacent property
(Print Name)
•
owners and their addresses were obtained from:
CTitie Company Records
. King County Assessors Records ,,,.....\\,
•
g �� Date A . el o
Signed- " - �� �9��
(Applicant) 0-1 . Ql`! 'N: +ll
P I
NOTARY , :,�O�ii i
ATTESTED: Subscribe before me, a Notary Plic,in ang r41*St V 9s'f gion,
residing at l o /� ay of PI %2o3
1
Signe liG! h 19 OF`N__
• (Notary Pub-c \‘�‘.���`
y,r,r:r.r,r„un,;,,•Ip.r : r ar•1;,t�,r„sr r!!,,'9n,,11;1„I,N, ,�„I�ae•Ih1�'e.n�•!;'., ,;.5;., w,..k.,'' ;>I"�{�,J,I* � ieii:i:l;i ITN•i 1dL'l+t l d i"in;;i'',P�;;�'1'r"JJIi'G; ',;i l{11(f li;6
{1 br„ul..r r,nrfq,! I,I dlr`!I y llr l•�I„I:,L'a dd"'iLl•1 tlJ(,If�i,,IC:r�l ,,,,,;q::•..r ,rr•r,•,V, 5.,. i 'ift 4M r r 1f,,,r r,I p,•r lI ;r,I, 1 :I i l,.rl jr FR!'� r(ii yi•i i ,,i:nrr
iP„ra r,I?(li il�,n,r,1,111,;11,�,,{.�:JV,r,IIU;I yr J-'r,rr,��qr r 1 .,tp�I{l,1 1� ,I,A".��cnJ i1'Y'.'1!.� 1.14 t�{�..�. ,.,,I;If!11,1 :,,r.,,l�nl,{l,,Ar�1�•�,I �. r�A,r,l,�{f,i„I;I��,l�rd�ll,iri,� 1{� 1�r1,��!,r„
,,,,1„lraa'L;,t:lr,la!u:�!,�!I,,,,,I11b rt l i��r�.�Yr l lld r;,l r,nt I : + 1 Ir ! ?,il ,,,ranw r•„•:,•lo,.�:n y,r,o,�,r,,,:,.,,,r 1 rl�) ((,Ii�I ,I :h r alr,�i� rr�i,6r,i,r, ,. ,npprr„�,,, ��.JIf n9r;l, ,!,
n., .r,r!If;r.p,,.pr.,0t n1?'IrnlC,lri,lrl,�,:lal.,u]h,lliiiliil III{iiaInnnl4lb,rll;r.,, ;�;lr.I,rrrr,l.,I+I'iVlI },I.Jf+,!11i11,11;v1„Ir,r)lr,1f�r,pl4l,I-r,I,rl-It1i!0Ir;,I,I,! ' 1 t 01;
I,:,crJi;rin,tl,l-„ll�,nr.,•„lhnlfl,4e :,I,y,ryllr�IIlh •di�ir�,i,r lr, i�r:r„r.„,1 :I�It, 1IJ;'ilr,,,,,i!„ rr.l.r, ,li,t ,11rri. ,ir,l,rr„•1,:16 Indi.,,r:rq,r„rrl,r, ` r 14,r r„} I, ,4r�' ,p,r
' :r,;r�Ip 1,,r,iaLlE;,a4 ,l n.b l,;,r 11,lli�if6„ r�,nJr:,?I:L::Ii,I,a ,�SI i;{h��lr rr�.!r�Jr.:efl;ll 1.,r.,r.rr -„r,rr,ll,a a�i di r lilrl,llt!fi;,66.,:q i,rNo:,.I1r,:n:i.,•4,,:r,jl,+d:•q'I,Ili, •r!°1; ,11,r,rlL.r.l !,�il,tr a�l,,;,Jt
41!i: `il l�llla„I„ dr:'li li I °"V'11,1'i,�' lg!�;!'I'C'i i'lil;:n ll I:I ! I n ea!::,.,tgn ,r, r p ! r,I,,l}d 1 I
(,,;,;A1',, ;iril+l�l!'3lil.!r,.}tl;s!t rri;,,i,r' J r;•1 I,, I, ,I:I, i' qP Ff�,`r .T1P.N,1' 11a914 '1.. Oji p".i'I'i'i I lif l 1I dl l r++J`lhPI i t lk lliilliill!!-i i 1 l ril�i ill
Ir':"!!' I 41r,IiJl !.rhyl+tr yr!t 1 ?..;pr.df! (_L, ! ,i,: �.. .,,(.h 41.,.,rn�S. f.�•,11,, S-,F,:.., ,.�,.rn
.,,,,:r;(, : �,;'•I r��J li? lri, !r! I J r, ,li ,,�I i '' ll i�r r,`nv:',1.1•..inmp,i:;1..dt,,,,rl,h,^rth 1 I, .,I,,I r ..,i, I,}. ,i,irl, r,,tri�r,a.n 4 ri ',S
r'rlt f111,,rr( J,rtn:�l,P+,r,,i,ll11lrMy�ttr}rel:;f,lhf•!'l,natt9r!I:I I:„! .I'. 1:: ,rfhl•.err,�Irr1,r,„•,.r,,.,.':,„rr�;,,r�.,.,rr.qf4' ;,111,t�a.,,fil6n,r�,r•'t;�,.{.:Ill;'I,r.� �;I:rrl;,;Jl1'4J;1,,.!r,{,I! r111`'1;{!S.
,ilr,lflirsr!,Itr( �If 1.,�Il,,. i,f:d' .Sr i'r,.1,r1 IfPfll$igliqiiM
,,r l fi�l ah r�,r!r(S r J ill pI:lr.r 5!, I r;rlrr, !,i3,1.,.lr„I ::1,lyd 1:10: ,1} ,!gl,l,i?.,::{�., ;ill6 n1IWI,h
,..,,r •;r)rr.r,.d.I;Nnn,•eJ•'i�rt,!r:a a i,.I,r,���ri,� L I ,�,}ir�I,r r.,gMrl�tr I,In��rr:r,u,!dl i,�,� ,Irr,,!)rYr;I'I i'4�f1; ,, rIr d,pq•blF !•i(r !E,I.,,Lul,�:;d��. �ICII Il.r lr�rl f' of .,1�,l,rrvlyirOTipal!Il,r�!!:,�,,,hl,if;";'fJ�!,: Il rilHIlillPiiii Ifti,�a :i!'rgeri,rh, r.nar.rr:l:rir�rl lfit;l11J,401:4ri,$, Ot6rita,ia,r 1l}it.,lllili,,lll,ddr..r.1,illrl�l,1,,. ,Ltn}I�;11i,iiyq,R,u,rll f I'i�i'.Ir,l�'L,iilly!�f��;f;;,�;1!�'.�E I ,I,iII 1 ; I,: �a !1 4hl�r. q0�l e . 4I, •p �Q, '�,�.�'�,I 1d. O r,,,,lr( ter ( ' '(, i . E114 ski' I ii s'°ill,}! 1i.,�':! � t,n n• iT t l I (,!U �,!r11!vp„.;rr r,l„ut+•Nil+',:''+.II' r�•'�u rIr,: ,ll, II Il,4n fr 1)IlU lnlf'Pl,l it illl;l {a��,�rr.rr„u rl:Iyp,pr �rtlrrtil•,rud,o,e nUN'': rd n o •l:rf'1, hi �)i it ,r:,l,(III Id�I r::I;r�rr ,,,I,r� ;1:S,¢.,,h l,{{fr!I if�I r rl„1.:?•I'I�IIL{r,!„ �I,„u o-„f{r:$�r.t J.,,,lrv��,!,,,-,�ir:�r,.ar,,! f ��r.iRr,.rlrhl,r, ,,t rr.gr,-!!I�lSII. .rl.ft i:,, i,.Il'aih,•ei,!,�,llplc•r„1,h1,*I�,r-,ridro,Jr,�p�i�;{'p:,.hf•1 „bnr,ri�t'1�l•i?r�id,,aJr„�°i,•d j�.i�!rtiis•I,iIroI:,�,,, ',r;�l ei Y .Rlq',{ hr,IlilFi! ,1!jht ll,i{Iry{o�, !p(1d.io,ilJ•,iird!rrrrnurrrr„g ku.,V.�r��i,�f'.rL,Iq.{rlr(,r.1,l:rtll"li:,t:{r+}i li; ,rllrll,,,irin„I,r,l,III,r•J;i, r}�,,1•irl„i1dIli,4r�de
?�,l�s,,I,r.rr ri;qdV�-�••T+rf i r r r,�,r,t,r yy;IIIJi�i f9,,,�:,,ryril ll�,�r IIPrNrr f�,?,Irr�r�n)�lyr,rr�`,,I,.r.r��.r:r�lr.,�•,Ir,.4lr!r11,,ilt''rth,r,:,gy.�,d�,.;ir,�rlif,tn rr.Lilr,l q ar„r,,i9r,S�hl•,irl,n r ?I I ,�,,r,�.,i; i�..,}rl•I
L.r,..,, r�,rd �td r.7 (!,. r ,Li,r.1 ,rrr el,�, l�`�„;,„r.:r i;r:!te(,d+l:,:;!>,r:.l:t"^^I r In;�;rr.,,l!�I , ,Il,le 1'!;1 r,,b�I.I,E1�'m1 I'i';•' Si''!If:!{`Isi�(}illld!I'ill�'f``,t.iifl�!�f 1 tr 111��l
8; 1:,?4,& 0 �a 4 iori,ol',I iirnrluliilaiNllit4ii mr,I, itilr'1.t,1,1!_„;;ripii rJ1 ,!I,(I ti°?i11; ill til,;(�I,I i;ll it I i 1,0 1, ,•(IILt y l:,�ll;j??,!:i;
ie'I+Ii!'•,�I�I�`'',!rl)r�ail.,' (':1,•,,•,r J'I.i?l�} ,. 'i .I.r.�J,.,.!li,'i!j,},,lug Irle�,ll!r,�liln Pnn �f:iltl i f i��iir•f I! `t:P.!�i' ''' �`Ji r S,
1r, nh,rl. ,ri,,,.!,r„i�t,r.l I,.rr,If.I,IdrLrn,.,r,,,r v„n� .,rrar;„r.�l•,;,,1•aIPSr„rr.,r,irr,irrn' ti"..�.,•:rrr Iii I .'q)•. I ,�:1!r1yI', .Iu„111�f�rr�1L.,,:I•rrhlii�-r+:r f,;f ! r
1 dlll•t ,d Syr,r,6r,tr,a, 14�,41:: ,I.ri!to. n it.,,,,, Ir 1,,,.1 fh„n„r .,I ,01[,,,,., N s .•rr n•,„-,r nl,,,,I„itt llh4 6�t$14 li �l l 1,r ot:,;1,rI r,rlAf,rr r,(p,r,i11„r,V,,,,t,r,r ;i„�rq'1iRlE,4S1,i1'I
,„dr1E,flprfgpov,ipobiviinl:iiifiRtitcmiiorrriolorokyki!:imiiJ
} 1,�.,,ry rt1:I.,I: y11i;�:r4,,•r r,i 11�d?„,,(ail il}r I Ir4�i.,+�I �'If•a?l6 rrr,++,,? ;,'.!!I:!i!d i:iJ,.n,1A91+,(�'ll rL,ll}•rrc, , i,.f iL.I,i`,I,r„r�p14 S�(I lr!it f,.4,.,^,,Sol;:, ,r rl�rai,J.f,q:1=±ai-1 Iro„Ii,,oG}r bi :r„1•,r,,ihr rrr,{ rr„r.r.r!{r,1!J,rl,•,i:. J'if?�„'rrL,•�4:irdrr'.r•rl�r.r:.iiJ;i,.� r,ro irr,I,r.,.'nily�m' l,Ir;,,,r,r i �tr1A!'r•,,i1 J�iLa:r.r•1�•Jrl:.r,.hr:l:;h,r„LI : trl r }:1,,6rrlr,rvrl'L'r?,t111'•,Ir rrCflollar,!,u1,r I rrl,r .111111i,1,In,ll''r;r:Viralrrp,•,h1r:.4;,r/71,Ip:,;l'', •rlPtt4,in,L ,nill3„d,,.,,,,,,,rY,llrlrl!r I f.rG-I,.,.r,r,d,,,l;rlrn:,r.1,N,III,;Illtrlil,6r, if}; r furl ,l,Jh nrl11{ 1,i!r,,1}:y„llilt111t,,1,!f}If1+ff�,it,R'rII'r.n,r�!UlI•r,'ri!ii;i ,•iIrr., .I'S'yl!{!riiit:q'7,,10, ,19,llliA0.rlgiliriFrtl„Ilitutq,rnralnrlJ!ll,Iryr.I�,l1r:,i1�'��j',I� .,. 41r;1.� r.!Ilflr r:rhr!a�r.I. h '.l:'( V i� l i l,i�. j f ri t;i S�;,.,or. �,n• 1 i r ti,r r.�S 1. 1,;„tr.r ,�,r,n.r I,^1r•l,II i.`(1'�i
Ij;;n,� il,r,,� .r,!"ri n y nri, „).r:l:fr !,lyr,i!„.r,!qr,.1.1 ,i it r,•a q.Il rgi,'q:• ;}rl�,q Ire ry r Ir,i r,I r it+q r,.n,.r riII rIrr�rn,;yl,l�,,�;,!„:�. iaL-I:r,,,II rIr„l'llr rl�.i�,11%I,I �y,'f':tl,;,.err:rrt;,-rr'f?r�rrr>PTOIr.nil+ ;Ilil-ii141 rl aUil`r% ,r.,,r,.,,llrr „1II'i ililL'r„••{rl� �{cJ�hJ,:,IJI�,II,i;,.�IrnrhJ��ti;lt;'lirllJ'II ;1 !,rrrlrr:r +•� 4-1.1h0ii!rlili.: 1i 4,r1
rr,i n ;r 1�h,;:r,rr,ii,l.,1f,h,rr,rlri!�,,,t.rr' r``17!II I;r,r.r r II,rr,t,?rir ll,iif rJJ li;,,ri,�{rrlr,�+�'S,r ,rr'rrr„rr r.1:,J,rr,�,r,:r r ap•r II„n ti,n.l�i r,�w rl�t1!r�4'r hr,Y r f�f•ri,,r ``'' :Ihr,l r„,It •I,I l l. rl rfr Irlr;,l�,lr
IIIT r,iAli'm•;^.,'^r1• '!Iiii !al•„1rlili,fl:;r,1,r:,r!r:rl:II,i'lllrlf u„. I„r ,i,19•,.Iii lll'I'llG'allhrl,.,rrr i,l•,,iril},„rI„!,,IIM•ilr'••it.111111 ,l.l1:1 ',v# nI4i'rr111,r4,llr,c ,,I„•,•,
r,14+�+,d,l;,�.,,,Ia:r,a,1�.,.,.,I,Iin;,111d,Irar•o,!„I:ri.,un,r„7r, ,I, .�„r Iq ,Fr,„Il�l,rr, r , ., J 1r4�;,lI!r,!rr)J„�{,,.+I{„!'r.,d;r r,r o,!:r•r.{; !,i,,Ilp,I�,,r,l;'Irr.,F L' r I r 6 rr-r,ir�r.r I„♦,';I r
.Y I: 1, d:,l,.ui:,l;,:Ir 11 rll,Ir,rf••Ilr,a,rl,r,rll rlrlrrglll 11GIF .I,}}I„ l i i I,,y.r„n,uJJ,4';n p,r.i V ,r N ,n!rrl,r J',I, . ,il} 4. )l i
I { .r J 1 l! it ?! i i I �vOrrdR "' JI" l i tr,r 11 r II,,It, '1 + i I 1 t�, ,!,Ir;i
r �? ,'!Illu;d"tU'Gi'1411'i;"i'!I.'3V'itl J"rl:'•' I�'.rIJ'�ifrL,!{1,li�s,1 ! Ir.,r{r;r4,tr rrl l,. n,lphrl,I,gp,ll�{r,r`{ i�t'!Ii ili++il��:'?",�r,,,l r;,or S.l„r!!:i�' IpI�I°I!'.Ii'.li:�i er lli'
iJ!dpr ,rl .;.r,PyorllS,!;r11. 1,rIl.1l'1r.t,. I,;.all?.fl y,if �rr,d l nILl,l�rnp,l„.,,!r:...,.rrieF1,ll,Ir.rr Ir:,l;l•r:. I' '.It,1r :J1J1, If1lf!,I0 Lf1r ,di ,f,�P 1IIIll�l,:
(,rr.rl, ,,., r'IM1,,r,•r;;,Ird,I•.I.r�:hhp:,:1?rn'a911ur,r'„Ir'Idd„rr,(ltI!l,rrl,1 lS�l tJ r"il l�i,.yn,n,l,r dln:44{n,Ili,ua1rlliulrril.,�li�{II ir71,'{+iL' :�irl!�i,I:I+Igf,hrr 4l r,!,,,IrIII(IIr, •„i:,,1, ,'rr,ltrr,l�d;tl .IIlr r.l ;�1�
,r p rl n11iu!,ili.I,r,:r,, r,a r,ilr,N:r. .rh,r Irr r llii,; ,Ilri,r',,,•„4}..!b r(, ,l�.�1 d ',r,,,n r rl.,rr��,r, .�N�.�rr:,I,�,�r Il•rll;r�or r!r�tt+t,,1,�I,i g4?r t,',t .,rir31 „lr r r?,ll!,„�aJ�.,�lrli Ih1.,u 4'.t 11 a 11!I 1 .,i,
n r :„•a r;,1:,I'Iirl 4„}. ,.r;:•i'I ha,,r I n ,i.l I I ,r,,+r,U L:.{f 1• J,r,tlr n r.nHl tr,'wr,41n1".gr!4�•r.n,!r,!r l(„r r.hn n Irlrigrllrl..p LEr�L11 4:1 �1{„r ff,1,.:,r i r 4,r:n„I I,I Irr,,id J,
1;1't!!' rq,l.,tl I I ,11, ar,it(i f ii,lfid l I Ili I'a,hair I 7,,
,J Jii,Or,.,!1,J r ,! r.,l,} ,1� I1.o,i 1, rI yn.,i-,rlr r..,'i I r-,,.,1 yt 1(tr trii !, ..A141 V.,I. ii;m t. (on,f 1 11,,
. }r'S�'� S,.I .I; h,dr s�dfm, „pes,aili„dta l�r:rl .I) ,,,„�i at�.�4g1t11 :qii r�` ip s; ' Q,,r( 1,' 11
1g,,1!,,r ,•,,.n;r1r„(rir.1„r,.. rrrr„I„,r ,r,r; it,I14,4t,I,r.rf:1101Iprr"M', IfPyr ,r d.;,!!.:I, r,tr, Ir.V{I,1 ,r.1,6 r 1„ II .,-rk,r„! rr�I,r,J J.rl rt„�;rr.,• ',•:4„I(I?I,�,t,4r r.r l,r!.��„;�rlil,r 1r,j�r t Ik„r:I,t+,t,..,e4ri:.rr• r. ,r�;,¢r{nf!rr,-r:rJ,rif i'!�:::Il{,;,r ,1 i,I r,11,:',i�,1 r eu r!.r I I!':Jr{r,r,r,n�?l!{l;l�,Y'jill;';i;j„I.,1,rro-¢1;:,.,ha llJ1hW ,,ifrn ,Iln;vl W. i N•ait:"tp.h.;1;;;I `/I!'.' on„6 :0.11b ;I fi,l.Il.rNl9tll3!Ji�;$':lult'i'r,Jk II I,.;nri,Jgr„^,nl,Jill:Nrt14,14,0Jtrl'
{!'ri!'!.4hr.rr-rlrrr rrl,,.,r,Rl> Irrr,,T ; r ,.I ,I .i..1.tr.r I +� yt f 1„) { .'71 r! ..r ,J 1�� Lfi(� n f Ilr:rfl I Ilr:,,, I .r ,n r„ , ff�wt:,.,.,1,{}4,:itl;l,l;r�f .r +n,r 6r'.}�.t}'r.r,;;, •r, ;:C'Z i' ,1 u:rr,4r:5 r(';,y� rr1 :•,�rrl,li;,r.Yr,-,ai ll;!rlitl,!,r�i},1!S;;SI'f i'��1 rr,:'r',;'�:i'I t •1! I ) �nJ,.r,�{I.,rr'Y.;.,,it I r1VII!,rl.ulrr' i.l lr.rr11..,'.r11ri,!'i!','i�if'ir.i it r,'�,�,!1,'r 1,I•,,r„+,!•,+,,�I1 i'i!,10•:lal l�In,it rir!i,I'n!rr?hri,1l .,4 r 1 t�..,I..,. ihil1,I:51Djir11,.r1ra.d•'I;l'i•`.I•r rr.(,t III! ,r .,t,lr .,114�.iT r:1 , .rf,.,, r rt1,11 , , ql I r, r !1Pi1,niliirr„I1 'I„u:,aiUl,{I;,;rrrl.,l,ar ;rI r;11 Irr 1L, .r,rrr a,14i,n,i, 4 NIII,•r {„r{L,,r rr.r 1,Ii r r+,r,:L,i n ,r,r,,,b,'•md4lAu•r;,Il„n,l l,';;III;J,i•Ihr., l lIr r„ 1.{'rlala nl!lrr,.l.,rl,a,
il,„i ,tlr.rftii:'•:,, rrl,rr r,r r ! ,.r1r r,J;,,l„Iq{I^!(21 41f1;:i drip iiii;;Jr,l l 11„ir.,rr:r'r r• !r,r,1.r r,1t1,I ,!-r rrr Irl,fJ,bi i.::1;1 Ir I,Il,fi., 14:i,.r�r,JrI(r i{';,,;11 Jili11•iq iii'i 1�,1'CJI:I(111'ilu r ' .8:
t iI i,r r'f,w:r},br1•Ir•,?,(,r1IrI'ti.,l„IG,rnlir:•,,,r:, q irn,aerl%a lf,r,f,r-,1,Irrl::rl I,+I'L:i{;}!f;li',',,�r!r:�r,•Ilb;m!'r;r rd,,i 1,1��„�r rr.rl.,r,l,r ll�„•,;r1{rr,,,:L,hr.y„1.1.,111 II1,rh J r r r,err r r ,rl,r,f,��i r,:,lr,,,
,n I r I,UV rr-N,,L I.I:r.;J.,•,.I,r„•,L,,n',r,,,,f::r:,rI r L" ,l,�r 11-,Il,L ;, ,an,�r•'•I'-,i�i,,,!I CA r�„rnllo,i,„ri yr,N,,,i.,rr r,r it•;r, rr,r t:,f ma,AI,,!„:l!Iflf? I„^rrJrl r¢Ir+l J•i,,,rl:,r,rr'-,
!�I G�I{1�C1I�:J,iI rf.Ir,I:,.,dln.,,iLq,1,Lr.,pf,,.:,r,l�r,r�,ud:,.,?:r„r rr,�„1 r(rrl;rin r�a��ll,rf,,:ti,.�y�N`,5,..,!t1;'rrt:^.:1:,p,.r,!!;ritlyd:a�"gr.'a,•glllri5r:)l;'f;I,II:'on,nacl}11:,i:,hlarr���4al�lr,�r!a',,144,I,!rI„r,r,,,:,.r„Nrr,,.�irl-•hrlydb,r•rt!.,Irr,n,
•
•
•
WEB\PW\DEV SERV\AFORM\aformlistospo.doc 2
/
atroScan / King (WA)
Parcel # Owner Name Site Address YB Owner Phone
221200 0010 Johnson Stewart W 4100 Lake Washington ( No 1980
221200 0020 Mclaughlin Properties Llc 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0030 Youngblood Jon C 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-271-3286
221200 0040 Wywrot Lois R 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0050 Igelmund Darrell & Linda 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-462-1036
221200 0060 Hutton Ronald E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-255-2592
221200 0070 Luger Therese M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-235-8097
221200 0080 Igelmund Darrell & Linda 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-462-1036
221200 0090 Gurel Mehmet Trust 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0100 Gibson Lance M/Caren M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0110 Flores Maria 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0120 Kelly Kimberly Ann 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0130 Cruze Rande R/Celia E;Konn 4140 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-957-1535
221200 0140 Gurel Mehmet 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0150 Carl Kenneth J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-277-0392
221200 0160 Lynch Roy E Jr/Cheryl L 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0170 Harrison James P & Jane M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0180 Ernst Lee E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0190 Rich Foster Inc 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0200 Castillo Juan Francisco An 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0210 Good Bruno & Ann E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 206-824-0768
221200 0220 Harwood 'Charles H/Sharon L 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0230 Egenes Dane A 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-277-6044
221200 0240 Muscat James P & Jane M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0250 Gibson Gary J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0260 Newing Andrew H 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-228-0431
221200 0270 Allen Colleen 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0280 Wagner Beverly J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 425-226-4460
221200 0290 King Jason S 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0300 Houser Paul W Jr & Amy S 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
221200 0310 Nagamine Family Trust Pt 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980 831-724-3583
221200 0320 Ruegge Steven A 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1980
292405 9005 J H Baxter/Co 4500 Lake Washington Blvd S
322405 9005 Barbee Forest Products Inc Lake Wash Blvd N Renton
322405 9036 Hicks Gardner W *no Site Address* Renton 425-226-6267
322405 9039 Lange Robert H/Elizabeth L 4017 Park Ave N Renton 9805 1905
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 1976
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 1975
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 43t0 Lake Washington Blvd N 1957
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 1958
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 1974
322405 9049 Port Quendall Company;Fka 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N 1963
322405 9050 Thomson Neil 4016 Lake Washington Blvd N 1962
322405 9058 - Helina Patricia S M 4004 N 40th St Renton 98055 1945 425-226-6348
322405 9059 Hicks Gardner 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N 1955 425-226-6267
322405 9081 Fawcett Clarissa *no Site Address* Renton 425-228-7747
334270 0005 Barbee Forest Products Inc 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N 1930
334270 0415 Hunt Timothy A 3908 Lake Washington Blvd N 1964 425-981-0799
334270 0425 Hunt Thomas R/Caryl J 3916 Lake Washington Blvd N 1964 206-281-7948
334270 0427 Nicoli Bruno I & Sarah C *no Site Address* Renton
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
* troScan / King (WA) - *
Owner :Johnson Stewart W - Parcel :221200 0010
Site :4100 Lake Washington ( No Mail ) Renton 98056 Xfered : 10/03/2000
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington ( No Mail ) Renton Wa 98056 Price : $155, 000 Full
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Mclaughlin Properties Llc Parcel :221200 0020
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 12/31/1996
Mail :PO Box 60106 Renton Wa 98058 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone :
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1A8d Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Youngblood Jon C Parcel :221200 0030
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 11/10/1986
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$54, 000
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-271-3286
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Wywrot Lois R Parcel :221200 0040
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 05/16/1994
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$107, 000 Full
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No B1dgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Igelmund Darrell & Linda Parcel :221200 0050
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 11/24/1993
Mail : 900 87th Ave NE Medina Wa 98039 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-462-1036
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Hutton Ronald E Parcel :221200 0060
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-255-2592
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No B1dgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Luger Therese M Parcel : 221200 0070
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 11/27/1996
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$106, 000 Full
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-235-8097
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner : Igelmund Darrell & Linda Parcel :221200 0080
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #A20 Renton 98056 Xfered :08/27/1985
Mail : 900 87th Ave NE Medina Wa 98039 Price .
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-462-1036
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Gurel Mehmet Trust Parcel :221200 0090
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 06/05/2002
Mail :PO Box 1921 Lancaster Ca 93539 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone •
.
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Gibson Lance M/Caren M Parcel :221200 0100
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 08/25/1997
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$116, 000 Full
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Flores Maria . ) Parcel :221200 0110
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 06/02/2000
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price :$168, 000 Full
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
* troScan *
King (WA)
Owner :Kelly Kimberly Ann Parcel - :221200 0120
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 07/13/1995
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$106, 000 Full
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan *
/ King (WA)
Owner :Cruze Rande R/Celia E;Konn Alan Robert Parcel- :221200 0130
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 05/06/1998
Mail :5105 Highland Dr Bellevue Wa 98006 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-957-1535
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan
King (WA) : *
Owner :Gurel Mehmet Parcel :221200 0140
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton 98056 Xfered :07/11/2002
Mail :PO Box 1921 Lancaster Ca 93539 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan
King (WA) : *
Owner :Carl Kenneth J Parcel :221200 0150
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-277-0392
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / 1(ir g (WA) *
Owner :Lynch Roy E Jr/Cheryl L Parcel :221200 0160
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 12/10/2002
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #B20 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .•
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Harrison James P & Jane M Parcel :221200 0170
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 04/20/1990
Mail :2259 74th Ave SE Mercer Island Wa 98040 Price : $84,503
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Ernst Lee E Parcel :221200 0180
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 08/30/1991
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$86, 500 Full
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan King (WA)
Owner :Rich Foster Inc Parcel :221200 0190
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton 98056 Xfered :05/17/2002
Mail : 4150 Old Springfield Rd Springfield Oh 45502 Price :$172, 000
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No B1dgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Castillo Juan Francisco Anguiano ' ) Parcel :221200 0200
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 11/29/2000
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C10 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$137, 500 Full
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Good Bruno & Ann E Parcel :221200 0210
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 07/18/1986
Mail : 605 S 194th St Des Moines Wa 98148 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone :206-824-0768
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA)
*
Owner :Harwood Charles H/Sharon Lynn Parcel :221200 0220
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 06/01/1994
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C20 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$108, 000 Full
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
* troScan / King (WA) - *
Owner :Egenes Dane A Parcel :221200 0230
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 10/25/2002
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #203 Renton Wa 98056 Price :$170, 000
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone :425-277-6044
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Muscat James P & Jane M Parcel :221200 0240
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #C20 Renton 98056 Xfered :06/27/1986
Mail : 1308 Queen Ave NE Renton Wa 98056 Price :$50, 000
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / I{ii g (WA) *
Owner :Gibson Gary J Parcel :221200 0250
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton 98056 Xfered : 01/08/1988
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .•
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Newing Andrew H Parcel :221200 0260
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail :8815 116th Ave SE Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-228-0431
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan
King (WA) : *
Owner :Allen Colleen Parcel :221200 0270
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail : 4100 Lake Wash Blvd SE #D103 Renton Wa 98055 Price .
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .•
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Wagner Beverly J Parcel :221200 0280
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D10 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone : 425-226-4460
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 132 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :King Jason S ' 1 Parcel :221200 0290
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D20 Renton 98056 Xfered :02/28/2002
Mail : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D Renton Wa 98056 Price : $187, 500
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan *
/ King (WA)
Owner :Houser Paul W Jr & Amy S Parcel :221200 0300
Site : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/04/1983
Mail :2230 Squak Mountain Loop SW Issaquah Wa 98027 Price .
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone .•
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan
King (WA) : *
Owner :Nagamine Family Trust Pt Parcel :221200 0310
Site ' : 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/27/2001
Mail :2783 Freedom Blvd Watsonville Ca 95076 Price .
Use : 020 Res,Condominium Phone : 831-724-3583
Bedrm:2 Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1980 Pool:No B1dgSF: 1, 107 Ac:1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Ruegge Steven A Parcel :221200 0320
Site :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #D20 Renton 98056 Xfered : 05/14/1990
Mail :4100 Lake Washington Blvd N #204 Renton Wa 98056 Price : $122, 503
Use :020 Res,Condominium Phone .
Bedrm:2 Bath:2. 00 TotRm: YB: 1980 Pool:No BldgSF: 1, 107 Ac: 1.37
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :J H Baxter/Co Parcel :292405 9005
Site :4500 Lake Washington Blvd S Seattle 98118 Xfered : 01/21/1993
Mail :1700 S El Camino Real San Mateo Ca 94402 ' Price .
Use :309 Vacant,Commercial Phone .•
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF: Ac: 12.78
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
* troScan / Kirig (WA) *
Owner :Barbee Forest Products ...- Parcel ':322405 9005
Site :Lake Wash Blvd N Renton Xfered :09/26/2001
Mail :4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price :$165, 000
Use :332 Misc,Right-of-way,Utility Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF: Ac:7. 11
* : MetroScan
King (WA) : *
Owner :Hicks Gardner W Parcel :322405 9036
Site :*no Site Address* Renton Xfered .
Mail :4008 Lake Washington Blvd N #4 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone :425-226-6267
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF: Ac: .57
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Lange Robert H/Elizabeth L Parcel :322405. 9039
Site : 4017 Park Ave N Renton 98056 Xfered :09/10/2002
Mail : 4017 Park Ave N Renton Wa 98056 Price :$400, 000
Use : 002 Res, Single Family Residence Phone .
Bedrm:3 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB: 1905 Pool: BldgSF:2, 140 Ac: .52
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel :322405 9049
Site : 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/26/1998
Mail :505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$3, 489, 894 Full
Use . :106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1976 Pool: BldgSF:3, 814 Ac:7.24
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel :322405 9049
Site : 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/26/1998
Mail :505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$3, 489, 894 Full
Use : 106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1975 Pool: BldgSF:31, 200 Ac:7.24
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel : 322405 9049
Site :4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/26/1998
Mail :505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price : $3, 489, 894 Full
Use : 106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB:1957 Pool: BldgSF: 11, 080 Ac:7 .24
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel :322405 9049
Site : 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered :03/26/1998
Mail : 505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$3, 489, 894 Full
Use : 106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1958 Pool: B1dgSF: 6, 400 Ac:7.24
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel :322405 9049
Site : 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 03/26/1998
Mail :505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$3, 489, 894 Full
Use : 106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1974 Pool: BldgSF: 18, 720 Ac:7.24
* : MetroScan / King (WA)
Owner :Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Developmen Parcel :322405 9049
Site : 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 980. 6 Xfered :03/26/1998
Mail :505 5th Ave S #900 Seattle Wa 98104 Price :$3, 489, 894 Full
Use : 106 Off,Office Building Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1963 Pool: BldgSF: 4, 000 Ac:7.24
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Thomson Neil Parcel :322405 9050
Site :4016 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail :PO Box 76 Mercer Island Wa 98040 Price .
Use :005 Res, Fourplex Phone .•
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1962 Pool:No BldgSF:2, 730 Ac: .75
* : MetroScan / King (WA)
Owner :Helina Patricia S M Parcel :322405 9058
Site : 4004 N 40th St Renton 98055 Xfered :02/14/1994
Mail : 4004 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :002 Res, Single Family Residence Phone :425-226-6348
Bedrm:2 Bath: 1.00 TotRm: YB:1945 Pool: BldgSF:2, 300 Ac: .16
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
* troScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Hicks Gardner Parcel - :322405 9059
Site :4008 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered .
Mail : 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N #4 Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use : 005 Res, Fourplex Phone : 425-226-6267
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB:1955 Pool:No BldgSF:3, 100 Ac: .18
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Fawcett Clarissa Parcel :322405 9081
Site : *no Site Address* Renton Xfered .
Mail : 4008 Meadow Ave N Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone : 425-228-7747
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF: Ac:7.75
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Barbee Forest Products Inc ' ) Parcel :334270 0005
Site : 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 12/27/1984
Mail : 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use : 002 Res,Single Family Residence Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: 1930 Pool: BldgSF: 620 Ac: .50
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Hunt Timothy A Parcel :334270 0415
Site :3908 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered :03/25/2003
Mail :3908 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price :$270, 000
Use :002 Res, Single Family Residence Phone :425-981-0799
Bedrm: 3 Bath: 1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool: B1dgSF:3,240 Ac: .76
* : MetroScan / King (WA) *
Owner :Hunt Thomas R/Caryl J Parcel : 334270 0425
Site :3916 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 98056 Xfered : 12/02/1994
Mail :3916 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :002 Res, Single Family Residence Phone :206-281-7948
Bedrm: 6 Bath:3. 00 TotRm: YB: 1964 Pool: BldgSF:5, 800 Ac: . 66
* : MetroScan / King (WA)
*
Owner :Nicoli Bruno I & Sarah C Parcel :334270 0427
Site :*no Site Address* Renton Xfered .
Mail :3404 Burnett Ave N Renton Wa 98056 Price .
Use :300 Vacant,Residential Phone .
Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF: Ac: 1. 46
' I
' I
Information compiled from various sources.Real Estate Solutions malces no representations
or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report.
L u CY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Printed: 07-15-2003
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUA02-040
Payment Made: 07/15/2003 02:43 PM Receipt Number: R0304877
Total Payment: 1,500.00 Payee: BARBEE MILL CO., INC
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description Amount
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 1,000.00
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 500.00
Payments made for this receipt
Trans Method Description Amount
Payment Check 102035 1,500.00
Account Balances
Trans Account Code Description Balance Due
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee .00
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees .00
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers .00
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat .00
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees .00
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review .00
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat .00
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat .00
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD .00
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees .00
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment .00
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks .00
5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone .00
5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt .00
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev .00
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval .00
5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Special Fence Review .00
5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees .00
5023 0 .00
5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee .00
5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend .00
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies .00
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) .00
5954 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits .00
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 18.13
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax .00
Remaining Balance Due: $18.13
,1Y OF RENTON
• 1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Printed: 07-15-2003
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUA02-040
Payment Made: 07/15/2003 02:44 PM Receipt Number: R0304878
Total Payment: 18.13 Payee: SEAN CAMPBELL MATHEWSON
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description Amount
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 18.13
Payments made for this receipt
Trans Method Description Amount
Payment Check 2166 18.13
Account Balances
Trans Account Code Description Balance Due
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee .00
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees .00
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers .00
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat .00
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees .00
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review .00
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat .00
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat .00
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD .00
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees .00
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment .00
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks .00
5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone .00
5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt .00
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev .00
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval .00
5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Special Fence Review .00
5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees .00
5023 0 .00
5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee .00 ,
5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend .00
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies .00
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) .00
5954 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits .00
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage .00
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax .00
Remaining Balance Due: $0.00
C; -:LOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE
APPLICATIONS
. ........... . .
R MEN .S
Calculations, Survey, �r�F
Dertsrt <::Wo►`ksheet .
Drainage Control Plan 2
a .. }fie .a.rt.a................................................................... .:..:.. ... ...........:. ...:..:.:.:::::::::::..::: : :.;;.:.;;:.;>:.;::.;;:.:_;:.:.;:.;:.:;;:<.;:.::;::.>:.: ;:.;:.;;; ::.::::.;;.:�..:..:.::.>::.:.«.;:.;;.;:.
Elevations, Architectural3AND4 JP J
Elevations':.Cradrn : ::.: :.::::::. ...::..:::.::,-- :: ::.::.. .::: :::::..::::.:. ..:.::::::... .:::.:.;..::. ..::::: . : ::.:.: ::...::::::.:::::.:::.:::::::::::::::.:::.::.::::::.:::::
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy)4•
�F
Flood Plain Map, if applicable4 ., ` C/` ���
•
•
Geotechnical Report2ANDs "
.radin
Grading Plan, Detailed 2
9;;;.:.:.:<.tY.. ..s ....sa s Map}nd►ca�rng Sa#e4 ::.;;;;;;..;.:.::..:..: :..:.:. >:»:>::»::::>::>;;::;.:; ....:.:..:: ::,,>;:,;;:,;::,:. .. . .
Landscaping Plan, Conceptual4
List of Surrounding Property Owners 4
<::Lab. ls:for>Pr ' '`""`"
o e Own <::`a' � > < ;::> > ;> :>
Map of Existing Site Conditions 4
ppbcat on Form 4
... .......... ... ... . . . ........ ...
Monument Cards (one per monument) ,
o Parkin` : ' era e& L nd :::•
:<.<:
c m Anal ssq> •
Plan Reductions (PMTs)4
Preapplication Meeting Summary 4
Rehabilitation Plan 4
This requirement may be waived by:
1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: B_ P' P
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section DATE: —7/1 O/2r1,O'
4. Development Planning Section
Q:1WEBIPW\DEVSERVIAFORM\aformwaiver.xls06/25/02
APPLICATION TYPE: FEE AMOUNT:
Planned Unit Development:
Tentative $500.00
Preliminary $2,000.00
Final $1,000.00
Rezones:
Less than 10 acres $2,000.00
10 to 20 acres $3,000.00
More than 20 acres $4,000.00
Routine Vegetation Management Permit $75.00
Shoreline Filing:
Site Plan Approval:
Hearing Examiner Review $2,000.00
Administrative Review $1,000.00
Special Permit $2,000.00
Temporary Permit $100.00
Temporary Permit Sign Deposit (refundable) $25.00
Variance $500.00
Waiver $100.00
JOINT LAND USE APPLICATIONS: For joint land use applications, applicant shall
pay full for the most expensive (major) application and one half for related applications.
EXTRA FEES: Whenever any application is to be handled under the terms of any
portion of the City's land use codes, adopted codes, or the Uniform Building Code, and
that application is so large, complicated or technically complex that it cannot be handled
with existing city staff, then an additional fee can be charged which is equivalent to the
extra costs incurred by the City of Renton to pay:
a. overtime costs,
b. the pro-rata costs of additional employees necessary to handle the
application,
c. The costs expended to retain the qualified consultants to handle the project,
and
d. Any general administrative costs when directly attributable to the project.
Such fees shall be charged only to the extent incurred beyond that normally incurred for
processing an application.
When the application or development plans are modified so as to require additional
review by the City beyond the review normally required for like projects, at the discretion
of the Development Services Director, an additional fee may be charged at $75.00 per
hour.
Any questions regarding land use fees should be directed to the Development Services
Division, 6th floor customer service counter, at (425) 430-7294.
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\AFORM\aformlandfee.doc06/25/02
IF ,., ' _,
E . .'_:LOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE
APPLICATIONS
::>::::::::LAND.USE''PERMI.T:>S.UBM:; >:; >::;::<:::>::::::::::::» ::;:>:::::
...........
ITTAt...
:;:.:;:.:.::.;:.;:.;:::..;;::.;:. M .
;;;:.;:.;.: :.::;:.::.:: REMIENTSi<:< > > ::.:: » >::: :<::. ...�::.;:.;:.::.;:.;: : : : :. ;:.;;;:.:.;:.;:.>;:.;:. :.;:;::.;
Screening Detail 4
J.-t.1' 141 f leS.><' '' '>'. : -:: " r >. `:''.> '< i > : :' <:> '< > > < > i'> >: > : :.;;:. :.; ;:.::.;:.»»:: >::>:::::::::>:::::<:»;::>:::«:>:>:.:::;::;:.;;:.:;.;:.:.;:
Title Report or Plat Certificate 4
P•O•g: rs Tv'a
:...p .y......p. .::.....n.:.:ur....::a..::.:::: :: :...:::.::::::::.::.... ...............::::::.::::::..:. : ::.::::::..::::::::.::.::::::.:.:::.:.:. :.......:............ .....::::.::::.::
Traffic Study 2
.. E i iiiE2 :i ::;kN >•e ;itr::?> ;l::: : Plan `• :TrgeCuuttiniegteo� Cearin „ ( : ,: i i? '':..;::i ii: 22:::::.i2i.i.:.::>;::;:• .• ,... ` y i,,: ..„. i2i....;: i. :: : ,;:
Urban Center Design Overlay District Report 4
Utilities, a an, Generalized. >: :.::.;:,..:.:...:. :. : .
Wetlands Delineation Map 4
lAtet nds Planting Plan 4::,.::.:.::;.::....::.:::1111:: ..: ;..:. ;::.;::.;:.:: : :::.::.::.--. .
... ........... . ... ........................ ............................................
Wetlands Study 4
Wr1 s► e e
1.;.; ,pp icapt Agr..eemept.Statement
•
Invento > >::
n of EXIStIn
ase.A re;0.00.1::
e ent .Dra ft
.:. :<: :.:;':� :.'.:�;...;:..-:,.;2 A. Di'3:isi"i`23'isi` 'ii';"`2 ::;:: l: ii' :;i`ii:i'i'isi;i;:;;j'::i':i'? ::i: ;': `is ` :"isiii>:�E:iE:i"'i':'i`!:'i'ii' :;Si.�i::.:.'S:
i tin Sit:;::t✓o ";.:_ ; : < :::. »: : :> .>:> ::: :>::;€'':::`: <: : : : > >
: >'.:N►...P.....Ex.... .. . ..e...:. edition§. 2 ::::: :: ':'''''''. ''':: ............. ''.:-, ... ,,,,.:....: :.:.::..:::.::.:::::::::.: : :: . ..�:.�::::::::::::.::::
> , f.. ::. c . i s is::: : % 5:: : :':-.' - > >[$»>� < < : ' .--` : :. > < : ...........................................................
.... .. :::
:;:Map o View Area :.;:::.;::.:..:.::: .. :. .:.::::..
Photos:>::;:::::
�mulat ores:>>::> '> >> : < >>s> `` •; > ::>< ><'.' :''>
..........................................:....:..:. ..:::
This requirement may be waived by:
1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: 0 13° P. P
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section DATE: /9/ 9
4. Development Planning Section
Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERVIAFORM\aformwaiver.xls06/25/02
' ., CITY (__� RE TON
Mu. Y Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
June 19, 2003
David Sherrard
Parametrix, Inc.
5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200
Kirkland,WA 9803377350
Subject: Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement(PDEIS) —
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/File No. LUA-02-040
Dear David:
The following comments are organized by section as presented in the Preliminary Draft
EIS. Additional comments regarding sections 3.6 through 3.10 will follow under separate
cover.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
• General: Is there a section"1"or should the"Alternatives"section be revised from "2"
to"1"?
• - 3.2/Plants and Animals: The addition of.subheadings for "Affected Environment,"
"Impacts" and "Mitigation". under both."Vegetation Cbmniunities and Terrestrial
Habitat" and "Aquatic Species" would be helpful and consistent with how other
sections are listed in-the table.
FACT SHEET
•
• No comments regarding this section. •
SECTION 2.1 PROPOSAL •
• General: The margins for"1. Features of the proposal..." should be corrected.
• • Under"2. Features to be developed...": The fifth dash (-) line "Height:..." should be
labeled as the second arrow (➢)—stating the standard of the COR-2 zone—with the
proposed height sentence (which is presently labeled as the second arrow) placed
below as a sub-paragraph.
SECTION 3.1 EARTH, SOILS,AND GEOLOGY •
• Subsection 3.1.3.1: Some bulleted measures, or portions of the measures, are
underlined while others are not. The use of underlined text in this section should be
consistent in order to avoid confusion.
• Subsection 3.1.3.2: The last sentence of this section, "Land use restrictions...", •
should be deleted. Instead, a statement should be made that generally explains that
additional, and possibly extensive, geotechnical investigation based on specific
building type, size and location will be necessary at the time of site plan review and
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
� AHEAD OF'THE CURVE
:: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Comments
Page2of5
that, depending-on•the.:.resulting conclusions, additional.Environmental/SEPA review
may be required.
SECTION 3.2 PLANTS AND ANIMALS .
• Fourth paragraph under "Upland Habitat" (page 3-1.0): The fifth sentence of this
paragraph, "House cats and...", references "the park." Is this meant to say "site"?
Please clarify.
• Subsection- 3.2.1.3: The "Wildlife" heading should be unbolded, italicized and
underlined to be consistent with the other headings of this section for wildlife.
Additionally, the "Osprey" heading should not be underlined.
• Buffer options: The City's preference would be to include both options in the
document as possible mitigation alternatives. In addition, and if possible, the figures
representing each of these options should. be revised to depict the described
vegetation and residential portionhebutter� .
SECTION 3.3 SURFACE WATER- rO4 jCES a m
• Note to City Reviewers: Ye . pre entm .th vat ' re urces section before the
plants and animals s ction:wouldd provide for better, p . a document.
•
• • Subsection 3.3.1.1'Thy$eon o egraro :re in be p ra x raph under the "on-site
wetlands" discus on sh uld ref := t&� "nor erly/s therly" or "northern
• most/southern mo t" ` tl d a alka nd 1. IL)Is uld be consistent with ;
the discussion ofwetlandsundo ct ` .2, and woI Id : void confusion about
where the referenced desigiattOnst e tak rom.. .
' y •
• Subsection. 3.3.2: ‘hV,041,1,0ng
should be `revi • ,e`. °Facts" onl and delete
• Y „ - bM1X yEnvironmental in order c :c; gsistent with tie�1 t-44adjng for other sections.
• Subsection 3.3.3: Simi(afl ftre�Shheadir}g-s:oikk iPPsed to "Mitigation" and not
K y �P
•� • include the word "Measures:�'N Y :tip.,
• Subsection 3.3.2.1: The last senleffeevoniatetraph no.. 2 incorrectly states that site •
development would not impact the on-site wetlands. This should be corrected to be
consistent with the project description, which discusses displacement and buffer
averaging. .
•: Last paragraph subsection 3.3.2.1: When the "description of alternatives" was
• . reviewed, the applicant-confirrndd that only one (1-) of the existing'bridges-would-be
retained for foot-traffic use.. The last sentence in the paragraph references two (2)
foot bridges. .
• Second paragraph subsection 3.3.2.3: Clarification should be made as to which
KCSWDM is being referenced (i.e., 1990 v. 1998). My assumption is that the
• document intends to reference only the 1998 manual; however, the City has
presently adopted only the 1990 version and it may be some time before we adopt
• the 1998 manual. Typically, and particularly for this project, we would require
compliance with the 1998 KCSWDM as a SEPA mitigation measure. The discussion
of impacts and mitigation measures should be refined to make this distinction (i.e.,
specify each reference to the KCSWDM as either 1990 or 1998). .
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Comments "0.
Page 3 of 5
• Other: The City's Surface Water Utilities section has requested that additional
discussion be included to address the necessary/required elevations of levees and
construction fills that will in turn determine finished floor elevations, quantity of import
material, and impacts to the creek. Finished floor elevations for structures in or
adjacent to the floodplain are required to be a minimum of 1-foot above the 100-year
floodplain elevation pursuant to RMC 4-3-050.I.3.a, Residential Construction for
Flood Hazards. In addition, compensatory storage for filling of the floodplain is
required and should also be addressed in greater detail. -
SECTION 3.4 GROUNDWATER .
• No comments regarding this section.
SECTION 3.5 TRANSPORTATION (incorrectly numbered as 3.4 in document)
• Subsection 3.4.1.2: Numbering the intersections listed (rather than bullets) would
yam•° ��.
provide clarity by correspondinwihe.lgures4vm
• Fiqures 2, 3, 5, & 6: When fig es are,revised,, rsection 2 should be drawn to
more accurately reflect�=t e4actual=geometry.of ther;intersection,intersection
which is a modified 57
point intersection. The,streets°;should also be rallied:
In addition, Section . .3.5"Site yAccess ,describes:a second site access on Ripley
Lane. However, MIS intersection's notdown iin these figures nor accounted for in
• the traffic analysis/trip distribution. :"h .. r
a'bh1`q.5 "���..3'?ke § <;,�
dKss:4 u;;,s.xz R•:•„ 'n y»'
These figures also do not include Rippe :ane at nortth access drivewa which is,
however, included on Table C. 6t4-~ $ p .
Z.q\ 'LS
• Fiqures 2, 3, & 6: Intersection 10 shows 510/561/562.( es ectively) vehicles exiting
the intersection eastbound, ;"",but intersection.,1h1 oily shows 230/280/281
(respectively) vehicles entering,,eastb✓�cound:, °'':: .
• Figure 3: Intersection 7 shows 0 vehicles on LaF Washington Blvd left turn, but
figure 2 (existing volumes) shows=7Axe icles,Jorrthiis movement.
• Subsection 3.4.1.3: Please list the transportation projects assumed as part of the
baseline network.
• Subsection 3.4.2.3: Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals, and Vulcan properties are
actually comprised of four parcels. The first complete sentence on page 3-4 should
be revised to state, "There are currently four private rail crossings that serve these
properties."
• Subsection 3.4.3.1: The second sentence in the third paragraph, "The No-Action
Alternative...", should be relocated to the first paragraph of this section. In addition,
"for the proposed action and No-Action Alternative" should be added after"results"..
A mode-split analysis was not included or discussed as indicated in the scope of •
work for the DEIS.
• Subsection 3.4.3.2: The percentage numbers referenced are not consistent between
the text summary, text detail and numbers shown on figure 4., Please re-check the
numbers, their totals and how they correlate to the figures.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Comments
Page 4 of 5
•
In addition, the trip distribution percentages are based,on the City's 2020 model but
are notably different from the I-405/NE 44th interchange :analysis which used the
PSRC regional model. While these are different models, the PSRC forecasts were
adjusted for local conditions. What are the reasons::for the difference in trip
distribution? :.
• Fiqure 5: Intersection number 7 traffic volumes are not"project trips".
• Fiqure 6: Intersection number 7 incorrectly indicates northbound Lake Washington
Blvd left and through turns shown as zero.
• Subsection 3.4.3.3: A brief discussion of cumulative traffic impacts of the proposal in
conjunction with future development of adjacent properties should be included similar
to what has been done for"non-motorized impacts" in Section 3.4.3.8.
• Subsection 3.4.3.4: The first sentence in the second paragraph of this section
appears to be internally inconsistent.. P ease clarify how the ramps could both be
• operating at LDS E and F, but At: ra icivolfte-.having no measurable impacts.
• . Subsection 3.4.3.5: In ofd r to ftlp wiJen reading &tt xt, suggestion was made to
include a site plan in , is" ctio `,that how both cc. s points, existing railroad
tracks, May Creek, a? ``"
�� other``,�ea ures. "
In addition, the acc ' s aQ• irijr de rib o,min. ar raph 1 (ihes 6-7) and in paragraph 6
(lines 2-3) is not included iri they p p a n�t o ischssion, a in Figures 2,3,5, & 6,
and should be added.A f .1
cO • te '
Paragraph.1 on page 3-1 Q discusse$ Exposure facto- = D x number of trains per
day". With the reference tdwedge d§ traffik a fig re with ADT •may be
appropriate.
f1
Lastly, the text is uno arG�u ng„the "...existing ssing,at Ripley Lane about 350
feet north of the inters ct1on df L`alie,"Washir.toii B Qd Ripley Lane..." accesses
other properties and if it in`b�d therefore;requir the'creation of access easements.
• Table E: Title of the table shoi.h iqd d e4,ea'Estethe history summary, (2000-2003).
• Subsection 3.4.3.7: A figure depicting the routes described in bullets 1-5 on page 3-
10 would be helpful.
•
• Subsection 3.4.4: Although it would require renumbering of the rest of 3.4.4,
recommendation has been made to add a new section sub-heading 3,4.4.1
"Mitigation of Vehicular Traffic Impacts".
• The mitigation discussion needs to address Renton's Transportation Mitigation Fee
of $75 per net daily trip generated by the project; and, that with payment of the fee
• and certain site-specific mitigation the development would meet Renton's
concurrency requirements.
At the end of the 1-405 northbound ramp discussion (on page 3-16)., it should be .
noted whether this signal is warranted as was done for the I4105 southbound ramp
discussion in the previous paragraph.
• Subsection 3.4.4.2: Of the 15 northbound left-turn vehicles discussed, wouldn't
some of these use the northerly access? Please clarify.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat4
PDEIS Comments
Page5of5
• Subsection 3:4.4.4: Mitigation discussion should also include potential
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to reduce vehicle trips and
encourage transit usage.
MISCELLANEOUS
• All references to the City of Renton code should be"RMC", not"RCC".
• Subheadings throughout document should be made consistent (i.e., font type_style
and size, etc. for affected environments, impacts, mitigation measures and
subordinate subsections).
•
Comments regarding the remain `'sec i'.o is will be forwarded shortly. Please let me
know if you have any questiofis cent rnin4,these co f cents. Thank you!
o-,•
Sincerely, .," a, z y
CalignX
� #
_£."',•53=R},,y ..APT ¢
� ,f. ,,,���---3666y... ;b•` �jiA
vf-
Lesley Nish, ira; s: E, 44
Project Manager` ` . . 7
er
4 . .,vim;
rik
.PI.F"r .'.CLti'�C,;%x
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Susan Fiala
410 f CITY ReNTON
r.
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
June 19, 2003
David Sherrard
Parametrix, inc. • -
5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE, Suite 200
Kirkland,WA 98033-7350 •
Subject: Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement (PDEIS)—
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/File No. LUA-02-040
Dear David:
•
The following comments regarding 3.6 through 3.10 are organized by section as •
presented inthe Preliminary Draft EIS..
SECTION 3.6 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS . .
• Subsection 3.6.1.3: A figure, specifically depicting the location of the buildings
discussed,to accompany the discussion of the location of hazardous materials would
be helpful. .
SECTION 3.7 AESTHETICS
• Subsection 3.7.2: In line four-of the first:Paragraph, the word"alternative" should be
replaced with "proposal". • • .
• • Subsection 3.7.2: The addition of a visual simulation, along with the accompanying
discussion text, that depicts a westward view of the site (i.e., from Park Avenue & N
38th)would address concerns raised by.residents in this particular area.
• Subsection 3.7.3: Landscaping seems to be the only mitigation_ discussed for bulk
and scale impacts. Although landscaping could be used to shield the impacts,
additional discussion should be included as.to how the buildings themselves can be
designed to mitigate these impacts.
• General: Although not significant, additional discussion regarding impacts to public
view corridors (i.e., from 1-405), or if one should be allocated for when determining
building placements, should be included in this section.
SECTION 3.8 LIGHT AND GLARE
• No comments regarding this section.
SECTION 3.9 NOISE
• Subsection 3.9.2.3: The analysis refers to the "noise impacts previously studied for
the 1-405 interchange and 44th Street". That study indicates that the noise levels are
1 to 5 dBA, which is slightly more that the dBA indicated in the PDEIS. Please clarify
if the text is saying that the transportation noise impacts for the project were studied
separately and identified as 1 to 4 dBA, and not derived directly from the identified.I-
405/44th Street interchange study.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
:: This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
PDEIS Comments#2
Page2of2
Additionally, this section indicates that increased noise levels on Meadow Avenue
are related to 1-405 traffic. Was this independently determined or derived from the I-
405/44t Street interchange study? That study states that "(t)he greatest noise
impacts are away from 1-405 in locations where arterial traffic is the dominant noise
source". Consequently, there seems to be a conflict over which is the greatest
source of noise. Why is there a difference; which is the greatest source of noise and
• why?
SECTION 3.10 CULTURAL RESOURCES -
• No comments regarding this section.
FIGURES
• Figure 1.1-1: The project site almost appears to be located in Newcastle on this
map. The inclusion of jurisdictional boundaries and enlarging the type font of
"Renton"would help to avoid any confusion.
• Fiqure 3.2-1 &2: :Can a key t nat,, Jines be ridded which shows what portions of
the overall site these area�_ view f? Tso, pleaskk or use a heavier dashed line
type to distinguish the iL'undarie�gf.ea6haoLthe vetl s
• Fiqure 3.3-1: The prdjectsite should be indicated'on tis p.
•
• Figure 3.7-2: Please al ma eg r grArpivs t indicat�which areas are inside
and which areas ate outside of 'd s F9li ages cent bo andary.
MISCELLANEOUS ` -� g
� �
• In order to be consistent throe) 1 II se i s of the docu rent, the addition of a .
concluding statem ,it rega ing si tficantvimpact �- si ilar to those made in
subsections 3.3.3.3 o Su Ea: e�, ater Resources 4 o ` oise-would be helpful.
.Zi'
.r$rid$, * I a i � .�^•x '..,.'h.•.yr ;
Please let me know if you have i fquest1pns cccer'nigg�these comments. Thank you!
Sincerely,
rA5z...)
Lesley Nishi
Project Manager '
•
cc: Campbell Mathewson .
Neil Watts .
Jennifer Henning
Susan Fiala ,
—.c v I v
Holly Gruber-03-24-03.doc _ Page 5
March 24,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 5
ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Admjnistrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative
REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work
programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2003 and beyond. Items noted
included:
0 The new downtown parking garage is anticipated to open to the public in Ma:
The primary structure is now complete,and the contractor will continue to
install metal panels and glass windows to the buildings exterior,as well as
installing the elevators,security system,and parking pay stations inside the
building.
4w The Recreation Division's Renton Teen Council sponsored a middle school
dance on March 17th,which was a great success with 171 young people in
attendance. This is the first of four dances to be offered this year.
AUDIENCE COMMENT Sandel Del'Iastus, 1137 Harrington Ave.NE,Renton,98056,introduced herself
Citizen Comment: DeMastus— as the president of the Highlands Community Association(HCA). She
Highlands Community , announced that Police Officer John Schuldt with the K9 Unit,Animal Control
Association Officer Mary Ann Pratt,and Elynn Clayton(South Sound off-leash dog park)
will speak at the HCA meeting on March 27th.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing. At the request of Councilmembers Persson and Keolker-Wheeler,items
7.a. and 7.b.were removed for separate consideration. --1,
Appeal:Nicholson Short Plat, City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal of ti
Brad Nicholson,SHP 02 111 Administrative and Environmental Determination for the Nicholson Short
Plat,2300 NE 28th St. (SHP-02-111);appeal filed on 3/6/2003 by Brad
Nicholson, accompanied by required fee. The appeal packet included one
additional letter from David Parisi as allowed by City Code. Refer to
Planning&Development Committee. .,---NI
Community Services: Golf Community Services Department recommended approval to replace 40 golf '
Cart Lease-Purchase carts through a three-year lease-purchase agreement with CitiCapital '
Agreement,CitiCapital Comm;rcial Corporation and to retain 10 golf carts from the existing fleet
Commercial Corporation of 50. Annual expenditure is$26,064. Refer to Community Services
Committee.
r✓ �T
Development Services:Barbee Development Services Division recommended approval of the amended
Mill Preliminary Plat EIS agreement with Parametrix to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement
Preparation,Parametrix (EIS)for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal(LUA-02-040). Barbee
LwA • Ch-- Ho Mill Company will pay for the EIS preparation. (The agreement was amended
to expand the scope of the EIS report to include adequate review of historical
1,-- and cultural resources as directed by Council on 3/17/2003.) Council concur. --
Human Services: 2003 CDBG Human Services Division recommended approval to continue participating in
Housing Stability Program the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Consortium Housing
Participation "Stability Program in 2003,which assists low-to-moderate income families with
rent or mortgage payments due to a temporary crisis in their lives. Refer to
Community Services Committee.
i oll Graber-minutes 03-17-03.doc Page 7
March 17,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 7
Transportation:NE Sunset Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with
Blvd&Duvall Ave NE the Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)for the design
Intersection Improvements, and construction of intersection and traffic signal improvements at NE Sunset
WSDOT Grant Blvd.and Duvall Ave.NE. City project share is$44,000. Refer to
Transportation Committee.
Utility: Annual Consultant Utility Systems Division requested approval of the annual consultant roster
Roster for Appraisal&Right- listing eleven firms to provide appraisal and right-of-way services for 2003,
of-Way Services with the option of extending the roster annually in 2004 and 2005 upon Public
Works Administrator approval. Council concur.
CAG:02-120,Springbrook Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-02-120,Springbrook Springs
Springs Watershed Property Watershed Property Fencing Installation;and requested approval of the project,
Fencing Installation,F&H authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$13,798.02,
Fence Co. commencement of 60-day lien period,and release of retained amount of
$3,440.13 to F&H Fence Co.,Inc.,contractor,if all required releases are
obtained. Council concur.*
Public Works:City Shops Referring to items 8.e. and 8.f.,Councilman Persson inquired whether there is
Fiber Optic Connection an existing fiber optic connection for the City Shops site. Gregg Zimmerman,
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator,responded that he would
investigate the matter.
*MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY NELSON,
COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO
REMOVE ITEM 8.b.FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED.
Separate Consideration Development Services Division recommended approval of an agreement with
Item 8.b. Parametrix to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)for the
Development Services:Barbee Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal(LUA-02-040). Barbee Mill - 1
Mill Preliminary Plat EIS Company will pay for the EIS preparation.
Preparation,Parametrix
Councilwoman Briere requested that the scope of the EIS report be expanded
1r1A '02'b 1 b include adequate review of historical and cultural resources.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL
HOLD ITEM 8.b.FOR ONE WEEK FOR REVISION TO THE
AGREEMENT. CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Glenn R.Davis&Jeffrey M.Silesky of Davi;
Citizen Comment:Davis& &Silesky Real Estate Investment Services, 15600 NE 8th St.,Suite B 1-
Silesky—Olympia Ave NE 173,Bellevue,98008,stating that Urban Crafts is proposing to construct a
Utilities Installation mixed-use facility at the corner of NE 4th St.and Olympia Ave.NE in the
Renton Highlands. Due to the substandard utilities in that area,they
requested that a sanitary sewer and water main be constructed in Olympia
Ave.NE as a joint project with the City.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO UTILITIES
COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
„ CITY 1F RENTON
loll `y Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner;Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,.Administrator
March 26, 2003
Alex Cugini
Barbee Mill Company
P.O. Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
' Subject f REVISED SCOPE OF WORK
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)for , •
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/LUA-02-040, PP, EIS
Dear Mr. Cugini:
- ' : Thank you for your prompt response to my:previous correspondence (dated March 11, •
2003) which requested your agreement to the payment of-costs,associated with the
• : , preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) for the.Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat proposal'. The initial payment was received and deposited to. the appropriate
account far paymentto the Consultant. In addition, the,consultant'was given notice to ,
• proceed with the project,.based.on a:start date of March 17, 2003,
Subsequently, staff requested approval of the consultant agreement•by the City Council.
However, upon review concerns were raised regarding the "scope of work's lack of
analysis for historic and cultural resources on the project.site. As a result, modifications
to the•scope were made ,(revised:;scope: of work attached).. The Council ultimately
approved_the final consultant agreement and revised scope of:work on March 24, 2003. .
This addition to,the scope of work, .however, resulted in an increase to the;total:cost
estimated for, the preparation of the, EIS':. Therefore, the timeframe for necessary,
contributions to compensate the consuitant has .been revised accordingly and is,iisted
below:
1 $20,000,00 tb be,received no later than March 17, 2003.
2.' .$50,000.00 to be received no later than April14, 2003.
•.3. - $50,000.00 to be received no later than May 12, 2003. '
4. $15,919.42 (revised)to be received ho later than June 1, 2003.
5. $10,000.00 to.be received no later than July 1, 2003. . 0 ,,fir
6. $10,000.00 to be received no later than August" 1, 2003: 02 �
7. $10,00.0.00 to be received no later than September 1, 2003. ,
($165,919.42 revised total) =✓ c- �,�
In order to demonstrate your acceptance of the revised'payment plan, please 'sign and
date below and return this letter to me at your earliest convenience. Please note that if -t� C11N
• this,agreement is not returned Or if any scheduled payment is not received b ,c#lrr `5.cpg:
specified date, work on;theEIS may be suspended. ' ® 0” 0 6^Z�'y
bP `: 8 6.
1055 South Grady Way=-Renton;Washington 98055. 1 E lr •It°d
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill EIS
March 26, 2003
Page 2 of 2
•
Please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 430-7270 if you have any questions or
concerns regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
ip
• Lesley Nis ' ' a
Project Manager
•
64-j2Afrii ‘IP
`f//O D •
Alex Cugini, Jr., P o•-rty Owner Date
•
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Larry Warren
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Alex Pietsch
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL'
AI#:
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:
Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division March 24, 2003
Staff Contact Lesley Nishihira (x7270) Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Amended Consultant Agreement for preparation of Correspondence..
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Ordinance
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal (LUA-02-040). Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Amended Consultant Agreement Study Sessions
Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council Concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
Other (Human Resources) X
Fiscal Impact: None
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
City staff requests approval of an amended Consultant Agreement authorizing work at the
applicant's expense for the production of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal.
At its March 17th meeting, the City Council directed staff to ensure that the consultant's
scope of work included adequate review of historical and cultural resources. Additional
detail has been added and incorporated into the attached scope of work (please refer to the
attached edited page, as well as page 20, section 4.5 of the amended scope of work).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends the approval and execution of an
amended Consultant Agreement authorizing work associated with the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) required for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The applicant will be
responsible for the cost of preparing the EIS and will be billed via a pass-through account
established between the City, the consultant (Parametrix) and the applicant (Barbee Mill
Company).
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
•
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
Deliverables
• Noise section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.5 Historic and Cultural Resources
Affected Environment
Cultural resources consisting of archaeological resources as defined in RCW 27.53.040 will be assessed based
on existing information at the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,the King County Cultural
Resources Division,the University of Washington Library,the Renton Museum,and the Puget Sound Regional
Repository of the Washington State Archives. Consultation with tribes will include solicitation of comments
and review of any information provided. The site will be analyzed with respect to its historic, cultural and
architectural merit.
Impacts
Impact assessment will depend on the identification of cultural resources. The lowering of Lake Washington
elevation in 1910 and the subsequent fill of the site for development renders the probability of pre-settlement
resources extremely low. The potential loss of structures on the site with cultural, architectural or engineering
value will be assessed in regard to the presence of similar structures in the region.
Mitigation
Mitigation,if cultural resources are found,may include avoidance,but is most likely to include excavation and
conservation. A variety of strategies may be appropriate,including information and educational displays which
commemorate the site's place in the history and cultural development of the area.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing documents will be utilized to assess cultural resources and historical merits of the site.
• The State Historical Preservation office will be contacted by letter with phone follow-up to solicit existing
information on historic and cultural resources on-site.
• Tribal cultural information will be solicited by letter.
• One (1) field visit will be made to the site. Photos of structures will be taken,but a full inventory will not
be performed.
Deliverables
• Cultural and Historic Resource section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 20 op 231- 03-18-03
0
COUNCIL REFERRAL TO ADMINISTRATION
TO: Gregg Zimmerman,PBPW DATE: 3/18/03
FROM: Michele Neumann LOG#: N/A
On 3/17/03, Council referred the following:
Revise language on consultant agreement for Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS
preparation on page 20, section 4.5, to include historical preservation reference;present
Consent Agenda item to Council again on 3/24/2003.
Please respond by:
Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor. (After Mayor's approval,Mayor's
secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return copy to you.)
Prepare memo to Councilmembers via Mayor and include attached letter with memo.
(After Mayor's approval, Mayor's secretary will copy for Council and Clerk and return
copy to you.)
Prepare letter(s)to citizen/agency with department head's signature and submit to
Mayor for approval. (After Mayor approves the letter, the Mayor's secretary will mail it
out after making a copy for Council and Clerk and returning a copy to you.)
Schedule matter on Council committee agenda. Arrange with Council Liaison ASAP.
(Copy of response to City Clerk not required.)
XX Other: (Lesley Nishihira is working on amending the agreement as requested, and the
agenda bill will be resubmitted for the Council meeting of 3/24/03)
PLEASE REFERENCE LOG NUMBER ON ALL LETTERS.
cc: -s ey ,Nishiihira
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
MAR 19 2003
RECEIVED
SCOPE OF WORK (03-18-03)
RENTON, BARBEE MILL EIS
WORK PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Environmental documentation for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat will include preparation of an
environmental impact statement (EIS) and related supporting documents and materials as described in the
following items. The EIS will be prepared to meet the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA)and Renton City Code 18-97. Primary guidance for the EIS will be SEPA Guidelines WAC 197-11. It
is assumed that one(1)build alternative and the no-action alternative will be analyzed in the EIS.
1.0 SCOPING AND EARLY COORDINATION
Goal
The City of Renton Development Services Division has met all procedural and substantive requirements for
scoping pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), WAC 197-11-500, and Renton City Code;
provided for comments from the public, cooperating agencies, and other agencies with expertise regarding
elements of the environment or permit jurisdiction. The January 10, 2003 Scoping Document is the basis of
this scope of work.
Tasks
Parametrix will notify the city if,at any time during preparation of the EIS,new information indicates a need to
change the Scoping Determination to respond to unanticipated issues.
2.0 ALTERNATIVES
Goal
The integration of environmental considerations in the public decision-making process is one of the primary
goals of SEPA. The development of alternatives is one of the key steps in both the project development and
environmental process. The city has specified in the January 10,2003 Scoping Document,the consideration of
a No Action Alternative,consists of continuation of some form of industrial use of the property.
Approach
During the course of analysis of impacts and identification of mitigating measures,a combination of mitigating
measures may be developed which constitutes a reasonable alternative which meets the criteria in WAC 197-11-
440(5)(d) for a private proposal of achieving the proposals objectives on the-same site. Parametrix shall advise
the City and applicant of any alternatives it recommends based on environmental issues identified in the
analysis process.
Assumptions
This scope of work is based on analysis of two alternatives:
The current proposal of the applicant. Future use or alternations for DNR owned uplands,will be based
on consultation with the DNR aquatics leasing department land use policies for shoreline property, and
confirmation of assumptions with the city.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 1 OF 24 03-18-03
• A No-Action Alternative, which presumes the continuation of industrial use on the property with a
configuration of buildings and impervious areas similar to what currently exists. In consultation with City
staff, a pro-forma description of other uses,which could occur on the site under existing zoning will be
developed. Description of the No Action Alternative will be limited to the following:
• A use or mix of uses allowed by current zoning and identified as reasonable in consultation with City
staff.
• Future use or alternations for DNR owned uplands, will be based on consultation with the DNR
aquatics leasing department land use policies for shoreline property,and confirmation of assumptions
with the city.
• Total floor area,by use.
• Total required parking.
• Building bulk and dimensional limits as allowed by zoning codes, or as allowed by use of existing
buildings as allowed uses or non-conforming structures pursuant to Renton City Code 4-1 -050.
• Setbacks,landscape,and other requirements as specified by zoning codes.
• Projected impervious surface based on building and parking requirements,less landscaping, sensitive
area buffers,and other requirements.
• Site plans,building plans,and similar graphic depictions of the alternative will not be prepared.
If Parametix identifies a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures,as provided
in WAC 197-11-440 (5) (b) (iii)and(6),this will occur at the time of submittal of the Preliminary Draft EIS for
City staff review. The scope assumes:
• City staff review of the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
impacts and mitigating measures.
• Any meetings to discuss the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
the Preliminary Draft EIS.
• Description of impacts of the potential project alternative will take place in the mitigating measures
section of each element of the environment,and will not require separate analysis as an alternative in
the impact section of each element.
Deliverables
• Draft and Final Description of No-Action Alternative.
• Description of potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures may be
identified at the time of submittal of a Preliminary Draft EIS for City staff review.
3.0 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Soils, Geology,Seismic Hazards,Earthwork,Erosion/Sedimentation
Goal
Provide analyses of soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and erosion/sedimentation for
affected environment,potential impacts, and mitigation development. These analyses are important both for
disclosure of impacts of the project and in providing a context for assessment of impacts on other elements
such as water quality.
Approach
RENTON B ARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 2 OF 24 03-18-03
This task will be based on review of existing studies on soils, geology, surface topography,and sensitive areas.
Parametrix will prepare this section based on review of existing data and a peer evaluation of exiting studies
and qualitative evaluation of likely impacts.
Affected Environment
Parametrix will review readily available geotechnical and geological data for the project including, but not
limited to,geologic maps from the U.S. Geologic Survey,National Resource Conservation Service County Soil
Survey,King County Geologic Hazard and Sensitive Areas maps,and site reconnaissance reports,including the
Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment by Golder Associates,and the Independent Remedial Action Plan,by Hart
Crowser.
The affected environment relative to the soil and geology conditions on the site will be evaluated and
described,including controlling factors such as terrain, soil types, character of fill, seismic risk of liquifaction
and slope failure, erosion susceptibility,and other limits on development. Background description of past and
potential seismic events will including magnitude of earthquakes recorded and potential magnitude of pre-
settlement earthquakes,as well as potential magnitude of techtonic plate subduction earthquakes.
In addition to the soils and geology of the project,Parametrix will also characterize the groundwater resources,
including aquifer characteristics related to potential contaminant plumes,utilizing existing data. Results of this
analysis will form one of the inputs to analysis of Toxic and Hazardous Materials.
Impact Analysis
Impacts of the project will be evaluated based on review and evaluation of existing soil and
geology/geotechnical information and project plans.
Specific impacts considered will include:
• Cut,fill,and other earthwork parameters.
• Risk of failure of slopes,or retaining structures due to landslides,including seismic induced events.
• Risks to structures, including seismic risks of liquefaction based on soil characteristics and fill character,
appropriate design of foundations and supporting structures.
• Character of groundwater resources, including contamination, and impacts as a result of project
construction, including groundwater infiltration from pervious surfaces and runoff control or treatment
facilities will be assessed.
• Sedimentation within the May Creek basin will be assessed, with results presented in the Plants and
Animals and Water Resources sections.
Temporary construction activity impacts will be evaluated,including:
• Erosion and sedimentation impacts.
• Stability of temporary cut,fill,and utility excavation.
• Stockpile and other temporary soil displacement.
Mitigation Development
Proposed mitigation measures will be reviewed based on potential adverse impacts identified. Mitigation
measures incorporated as commitments in the project design,together with mitigating measures resulting from
analysis of seismic and other risks will be identified. Standard Best Management Practices (BMPs)incorporated
in clearing and grading permit conditions, will be identified and evaluated. Potential applicable mitigation
measures available but not included in project design or standard BMPs will be identified.
RENTON BARBEE MILT.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 3 OF 24 03-18-03
•
Additional FEIS Analysis
Comments by agencies and the public will require additional analysis for the FEIS. For budgeting this is
assumed to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing site information and soil,geologic,and seismic studies. Analysis will be
qualitative in nature, except where existing literature provides quantitative assessment of risk of failure or
other parameters which can be reasonably applied to the site.
• No more than one(1)reconnaissance-level field visit will be performed.
Deliverables
• Draft Soils and Erosion section for DEIS.
• Response to comments for the FEIS.
3.2 Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat for Terrestrial and Aquatic Species
Goal
The proposed location of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat will displace existing developed area on the west side
of May Creek and may displace existing vegetation,wetlands,and associated wildlife habitat on the east side of
May Creek. The site also has the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat. This section will assess
impacts on these elements.
Approach
Parametrix shall prepare this section utilizing existing information,including technical studies provided by the
applicant. A reconnaissance level site visit will also be conducted to confirm present conditions.
Wetlands and Upland Habitat for Terrestrial Species
Affected Environment
Existing vegetation in the project vicinity will be characterized based on a reconnaissance-level field visit,recent
aerial photos, and existing literature. The characterization will include identification of the vegetation classes,
dominant species, successional stage, human disturbance, and current use. Assessment of wetland size,
classification, and functions will be based on existing studies and delineation and confirmed by a
reconnaissance-level field visit. Based on existing information and the field reconnaissance, Parametrix will
evaluate habitat relationships between the existing wetlands and May Creek and/or Lake Washington as well as
the function of May Creek as a wildlife corridor connecting the site and Lake Washington to upstream habitat.
This task includes the following:
• Review existing information, including previous studies in the project area, soil surveys, wetland
inventories,and topographic map and basin studies.
• Assess proposed wetland and shoreline buffer areas on Lake Washington and May Creek for potential
upland habitat value and identify critical habitat areas.
• Identify use of the site as a migration route for upland species.
Impacts Analysis
Impacts on existing vegetation and wetlands will be assessed based on preliminary plans for the one (1) build
alternative and will include:
RENTON B ARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 4 OF 24 03-I8-03
• Displacement and augmentation/restoration of vegetation and wetlands.
• Evaluate effects on plant communities related to any changes in groundwater or stormwater volumes or
water quality.
• Interference to critical life functions such as wintering,foraging,migration,breeding and/or rearing.
• Effects related to collisions between vehicles and animals.
• Effects on migration or dispersal of organisms,where the project could create or exacerbate barriers to
movement.
• Impacts of residential docks on lake-fronting lots on lake shore vegetation/habitat.
• Impacts of potential public access along the shoreline.
• Impacts of future use or alterations of DNR owned uplands,based on DNR land use policies for shoreline
property and coordination with DNR shoreline division.
• Fragmentation or consolidation of habitat due to provision of buffer areas and construction of new
roadways or other features of the proposal.
• Indirect impacts, including reasonably expected residential landscaping under current Renton codes,
human presence impacts such as noise and lighting that could reduce habitat suitability for wildlife.
Mitigation
Mitigation measures will identify potential opportunities to avoid,minimize,and compensate for impacts of the
project,including restoration and enhancement of wetland and buffer areas and other measures. This does not
include providing detailed mitigation design specifications;however,overall mitigation goals and objectives will
be defined in sufficient detail to meet EIS disclosure standards.
Aquatic and Endangered Species
Goal
To assess impacts upon these elements and investigate opportunities to enhance resources.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare this section,in accordance with best available science,as indicated by existing scientific
literature.
Affected Environment
For this task, we will collect existing information that establishes the baseline of existing environmental
conditions for the area potentially affected by the build alternative. Aquatic species potentially affected by the
project will be identified,with a special focus on endangered species,along with any potential suitable habitat,
critical habitat,or essential fish habitat(EFH)within or adjacent to the project area. A plan view and side view
map of shoreline fisheries habitat will be prepared. All descriptions will be based on existing information,
including aerial photographs,information provided by the City of Renton, the applicant,Basin Plans for May
Creek,and any relevant studies of aquatic species by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,Tribal
Fisheries studies and NOAA Fisheries.
The EIS team will conduct a reconnaissance-level survey of habitat conditions.
Impact Analysis
The objective of this item will be to identify potential impacts to fish in the project vicinity. The analysis will
include evaluation of potential impacts likely to occur during construction and operation of the project,such as:
• Displacement or enhancement of habitat.
RENTON BARBEE Mill.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 5 of 24 03-18-03
• Impacts on habitat for spawning,rearing,and other lifecycle stages,including:
• Displacement or enhancement of habitat.
• Direct effects on wildlife from construction such as erosion/sedimentation
• Water quality impacts,including increased potential for sedimentation during construction.
• Changes in stream hydrology,including seasonal flows.
• Stream substrate alternation
• Impacts of residential docks and bulkheads on lake-fronting lots on aquatic species, including
salmonid/predator interactions.
• Impacts of future use or alternations of DNR owned uplands, based on DNR land use policies for
shoreline property.
• Fragmentation or consolidation of habitat.
• Effectiveness of proposed setbacks and buffers on aquatic species, including indirect impacts, such as
reasonably expected residential landscaping under current Renton codes, and human presence impacts
such as noise and lighting that could reduce habitat suitability.
Mitigation
This task will involve identification of mitigation concepts that would address the specific impacts to natural
resources at the site including:
• Potential measures identified in existing basin plans for enhancement of currently altered or channelized
portions of May Creek.
• Potential benefits of enhancement of the May Creek and Lake Washington shorelines
within or adjacent to the project boundaries, including alteration of bulkheads and
substrate.
• Measures which can be incorporated into stormwater management and water quality facilities.
• Buffer area alternatives, including those recommendations in the Tri-County Salmon Conservation
Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule Response Proposal, and King County
Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office-April 19,2002.
• Potential measures to mitigate indirect impacts, such as residential docks and landscaping of buffer areas
and human presence impacts such as noise and lighting.
Additional FEIS Analysis
Review of the DEIS by resource agencies and other entities will produce comments requiring additional
analysis and preparation of elements for the FEIS. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 25 percent of
the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing studies.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include order of magnitude comparisons of impact based on
quantifiable differences resulting from additional impervious surfaces.
• The City of Renton will secure all rights-of-entry.
• No off-site wetland mitigation will be proposed.
RENTON BARIBEE l\'itu.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 6 OF 24 03-18-03
•
•
•
• Assessment of threatened chinook salmon present in May Creek and Lake Washington will be based on
existing studies applicable to the site.
• Assessment of threatened bull trout will be limited to potential impacts of site actions on habitat within the
site. Upstream sections May Creek will be assessed to the extent such resources have been identified in
existing studies.
• The City of Renton will provide copies of all studies relating to aquatic use of the shoreline.
• Future use or alternations of DNR owned uplands,will be based on consultation with the DNR aquatics
leasing department land use policies for shoreline property.
• A Biological Assessment and coordination with state and federal agencies on permit applications is not
included in this scope.
• One (1) reconnaissance level field visit will be made to the site by one (1) wetland specialist (1) wildlife
specialist and(1)aquatic species specialist.
• The impacts of stormwater management,water quality, and stream buffer areas on aquatic resources will
be based on a comparative analysis of features of the proposal with evaluation standards contained in the
Tri-County Salmon Conservation Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule
Response Proposal, and King County Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office - April 19,
2002.
Deliverables
• Draft EIS Wildlife and Fish section.
• Response to comments for FEIS.
3.3 Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains, Groundwater and Water Quality
Goal
Provide analyses of affected environment,potential impacts,and mitigation development for May Creek,Lake
Washington, and other water bodies identified on and near the site. These analyses will provide a basis for
analysis of impacts on fish and wildlife, aquatic resources, and endangered species and provide a qualitative
evaluation of proposed options for enhancing the existing May Creek on and adjacent to the project site. The
build alternative will need to conform to criteria specified in the City of Renton Addendum to the King County
Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and meet all requirements of the RMC and other applicable
regulations.
Waterways,Runoff/Drainage,Floodplains
This section of the DEIS will include a discussion of existing drainage patterns and runoff rates for the site and
May Creek hydrology and floodplains. Parametrix will prepare this section based on review of existing data,
field investigation,and review of existing technical studies. Impacts from the project build alternative will focus
on stormwater impacts of development, water quality impacts of runoff and potential sedimentation impacts
on May Creek and Lake Washington. The May Creek floodplain will be mapped using hydraulic and slope
models. The model will be used to evaluate channel and delta stability, sediment transport, and floodplain
limits that may result from changes or cessession of dredging operations.
Affected Environment
Parametrix will summarize relevant existing stream locations and physical characteristics, past channel
alterations,existing flood conditions,existing storm drainage facilities,and water quality information based on
RENTON B ARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 7 OF 24 03-18-03
existing information provided in N'hMA , Department of Ecology, King County, City of Renton, and other
relevant studies.
Analysis will address:
• Surface water characteristics.
• Surface water locations and typing, water quality classifications, Clean Water Act listing status, WRIA
plans,or other identified management strategies.
• Floodplain boundaries,floodway capacity,existing obstructions and past channel dredging.
• Existing stormwater outfall and impervious surface area.
• Relationship of surface water to wetlands identified in Task 1.2.4.
• Relationship of surface water to geologic setting,soils class,and characteristics identified in Task 1.2.1.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will describe potential long-term impacts on surface water resources, including the stormwater
conveyance system,potential impacts on streams and Lake Washington, and potential flooding from the one
(1)build alternative. The EIS impacts section will summarize the results to compare the build alternative with
No Action. Specific impacts considered will include:
• Hydrologic and water quality impacts from stormwater runoff,including typical runoff pollutants.
• Flooding impacts of May Creek, assuming a "conservative case" discontinuation of dredging and
formation of a natural delta. The May Creek floodplain of will be mapped using hydraulic and slope
models,which will be used to evaluate channel and delta stability,sediment transport,and floodplain limits
that may result from discontinuation of dredging operations. Peak discharges and flood hydrographs at a
single location will be generated utilizing floodplain volumes from the May Creek floodplain study for the
1%frequency event.
• Increase in frequency or severity of flooding from project runoff.
• Displacement of floodplain storage.
• Potential impacts on wetlands.
Groundwater
Affected Environment
Groundwater conditions on site, and in the vicinity will be assessed, based on existing studies. Groundwater
contaminant sources and levels will be identified based on the IRAP for the site,and existing information for
adjacent sites. Groundwater levels, flow, estimated volumes, and water quality will be assessed based on
existing studies. Potential recharge to on-site wetlands will be assessed.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will provide a qualitative description of potential term impacts on ground water resources,
including:
• Interception of runoff by the stormwater conveyance system.
• Potential infiltration by stormwater facilities.
• Potential changes in the amount,direction or quality of groundwater flows.
• Potential impacts of interflow on Lake Washington,May Creek and wetland recharge.
Water Quality
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 8 OF 24 03-18-03
Affected Environment
Parametrix will identify existing water quality conditions in lower May Creek, from the Lake Washington Blvd.
crossing, and Lake Washington adjacent to the site, based on existing studies and surveys. Existing surface
water sources of contamination will include existing storm water discharges, as documented in City of Renton
records, existing contribution of contaminants from the site, and adjacent sites as documented in MTCA
related studies for the site and adjacent properties,spill data (historical record of major spills,locations,extent,
etc.),and stream erosion/sedimentation as documented in existing studies.
Analysis will address:
• Surface water quality conditions.
• Water quality classifications.
• Surface water sources of contamination.
• Clean Water Act listing status.
• WRIA plans,and other identified management strategies.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will describe potential long-term impacts on surface water resources, including the stormwater
conveyance system, potential impacts on streams, and potential water quality impacts from the one (1) build
alternative, as well as temporary construction-related water quality impacts. The EIS impacts section will
summarize the results to compare the build alternative with No Action. Specific impacts considered will
include:
• Typical runoff pollutants.
• Impacts to water quality.
• Effectiveness of proposed runoff treatment, based on parameters in existing literature, which can be
reasonably applied to the site and the proposal,or standards of the jurisdiction.
• Maintenance activity impacts.
• Water quality components that will be used to evaluate potential impacts on wetlands, terrestrial, and
aquatic species(these will be assessed in the Plants and Animals sections).
Construction impacts will include assessment of:
• Erosion and sedimentation potential associated with clearing and grading.
• Potential impacts to surface water associated with project staging areas (non-sediment pollutants,
hazardous materials storage,etc.).
Mitigation for Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains, Groundwater and Water Quality
The mitigation section of the DEIS will summarize BMPs incorporated in the build alternative,BMPs required
as part of engineering and other standards of the jurisdictions surface water management standards, and
Construction impact mitigation will include:
• Qualitative summary of construction BMPs for erosion and sediment control based on the Ecology 2001
Manual.
• Evaluation of mitigation and BMPs will be limited to the areas within the project limits.
Operational impact mitigation will include:
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORE PROGRAM PAGE 9 OF 24 03-18-03
• Floodplain mitigation,including removal of obstructions,increase in flood conveyance(both floodway and
floodplanin)and other measures which can be incorporated on-site.
• Floodplain mitigation for the May Creek basin which may be referenced in existing plans, which would
impact the need for conveyance and other measures on-site.
• Water quality/quantity BMPs proposed for runoff control and stormwater management requirements (i.e.,
Puget Sound Stormwater Management Manual, City of Renton and King County Surface Water Design
Manuals and RMC).
• Spill-control BMPs.
• BMPs and other measures to protect or enhance groundwater,including measures which may be included
in the IRAP.
• Means of committing to the mitigation measures.
Additional FIZIS Analysis
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed
to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
The scope and budget for the Affected Environment section of the DEIS assumes the following:
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• No subbasins or drainage areas will be modified from existing delineations.
• The site is not within the Aquifer Recharge Zone as shown on City of Renton Critical Areas maps.
• New areas of impervious surface and pollutant generating impervious surface within the project limits for
the one (1) build alternative will be provided by existing plans and technical reports. Recalculation of
impervious area will not be performed.
• The City of Renton will provide maps of drainage basins, storm and storm drainage facilities, and known
hydrologic and groundwater information for the site and upstream tributaries.
•The City of Renton will provide all existing water quality and other studies for May Creek and the existing
drainage systems within the project area and identify all deficiencies.
• The applicant will provide all existing plans, studies and descriptions of surface water conveyance,
treatment and other facilities within the project area and identify known deficiencies.
• Existing literature will be used to characterize pollutants in runoff.
• No sampling will be conducted.
• The City of Renton will identify the existing typical water quality treatment BMPs required of development
projects within the city.
• Existing stormwater conveyances are presumed to generally be adequate for the amount of new
impervious surface added by the proposal.
• Stream hydrology and capacity, as documented in existing technical reports, will not be exceeded with
stormwater facilities incorporated in the project plans proposing direct discharge to Lake Washington.
• Existing technical studies and plans provided by the applicant are complete and accurate (no inaccuracies,
misinterpretations of regulations, or errors are present), correct detention volumes proposed, and water
quality treatment meet all applicable standards.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 10 OF 24 03-18-03
• Water quality impacts will be evaluated based on analysis of potential pollutants in runoff generated within
the project boundaries.
• The impacts of stormwater management,water quality, and stream buffer areas on aquatic resources will
be based on a comparative analysis of features of the proposal with evaluation standards contained in the
Tri-County Salmon Conservation Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule
Response Proposal, and King County Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office - April 19,
2002.
• FhMA studies and maps will be utilized for flood hydrology and existing floodplain limits.
• Flooding impacts of May Creek, assuming a "conservative case" discontinuation of dredging and
formation of a natural delta. The assessment of flooding will include FEMA approved HEC-RAS one
dimensional model for peak discharges and flood hydrographs at a single location utilizing r'hMA
floodplain volumes in the May Creek floodplain study for 1%frequency event. Assumptions will include a
uniform delta elevation equivalent to the level upstream gradient. Modeling will assume the proposed
bridge spans the floodway and includes no structures or fill within the flood plain, except piers. A
reasonable assumption for the area of piers will be made. Assumptions for modeling will include one
review with Renton Surface Water Utility Engineering staff to establish agreement on parameters.
• One(1)reconnaissance-level site visit will be made.
If existing information is not adequate,additional studies outside the present scope may be required which may
include:
• Field analysis of stream carrying capacity,barriers,constriction,bank erosion,and other characteristics.
• Hydraulic analysis of the capacity of existing open and closed stormwater conveyance systems.
• Analysis of the alternatives or modifications for stormwater detention and water quality treatment facilities.
Deliverables
• Draft EIS sections for Water Resources.
• Response to comments for FEIS.
4.0 HUMAN ES V(RONIVIENT
4.1 Transportation Analysis
Goal
The transportation analysis will address impacts of the proposal to the local traffic circulation system.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare this analysis in accordance with City of Renton Municipal Code(RMC) Section 4-6-070
and 4-9-070 authorizing the identification of transportation impacts and identification of appropriate mitigating
measures and requirements for disclosure of environmental impacts by the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA).
Traffic Forecasting Methodology
Traffic forecasts for this study will be developed using the City of Renton EMME/2-based travel demand
model for the impact year specified by the city(presumed to be 2005-07)with adjustmentsto add specific local
projects as based on existing traffic studies supplied by the city,which may include . the Labrador Subdivision,
The Bluffs,Tamaron Point,and Southport.
Study Area
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE.11 OF 24 03-18-03
The study area for developing traffic forecasts is generally defined as the area where trip generation from the
proposal adds trips to the street system such that an impact to operation, safety, or non-vehicular circulation
may occur. The trip distribution through the City of Newcastle, is included, specifically the use of Lake
Washington Blvd. and other routes for trips bypassing freeway congestion. For the purpose of this scope and
budget, this area is defined as the area bounded by Lake Washington Blvd SE/SE 6Oth Street to the north, I-
405/Lake Washington Blvd to the west, and the approximate alignment of 27th Street N to the to the south
with additional area of qualitative description of potential bypass routes through the City of Newcastle..
This scope is based on analysis of the following intersections, in accordance with the December 10, 2002
memo fron Nick Afzali,Renton Transportation Systems,and the scoping determination:
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 6Oth Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 64th Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 44th P1
• Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Lane
• Ripley Lane/project north driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/project south driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 36th Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 30th Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/Burnett Ave N(at approx the extended alignment of 27th Street N)
• I 405 ramps at Lake Washington Blvd./SE 44th P1
• I-405 ramps at 30th Street
Future Baseline Street Network
Future year traffic forecasts will be completed for full occupancy of the proposed development (to be
determined in consultation with Renton Staff,presumed to be 2005-07). Specific projects in the vicinity such
as the Labrador Subdivision, The Bluffs, Tamaron Point, and Southport may be added to the EMME2
baselines. The network for the opening year would include all funded transportation improvements projected
identified in the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). The analysis will assume no traffic
signals will exist by the baseline year 2005-07 at 44d' Street/I-405 ramps. Signalization will be analyzed as a
mitigating measure.
Affected Environment
The most complete data year available(presumed to be 2002)will be utilized to characterize existing conditions
in traffic level of service and delay, traffic accidents and safety, access management,pedestrian facility design,
and transit. A complete inventory of transportation facility characteristics within the study area will be
summarized in this section.
Impact Analysis
The traffic impact analysis will address level of service for the PM peak hour as the most congested period for
study area.
Project Trip Generation
The impact analysis will include development of trip generation estimates using appropriate Institute of Traffic
Engineers (I1'h) surveys and local information. A mode split analysis will be utilized to determine whether
transit use or other modes may reduce trip generation as compared to ITE rates.
RENTON B ARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 12 OF 24 03-18-03
Trip generation for the No-Action Alternative consisting of development of the site under existing zoning will
be derived using Institute of Traffic Engineers trip generation tables for the appropriate use. The No-Action
Alternative development trip generation shall be compared to the trip generation of the project for informative
purposes,but would not be included in level of service analysis for the No-Action Alternative.
Level of Service
Level of service (LOS) analysis will be performed for intersections and representative road segments using the
Synchro traffic operations analysis software based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000
methodologies. Three LOS cases will be run:
• Current traffic=base year=2002 volumes(PM peak hour)
• Opening year(2005-07))No Build forecast(PM peak hour)
• Opening year impacts with the trip generation from the proposal
I-405 Impacts
The impacts on 405 operations at the ramps at 44th Place/Lake Washington Blvd. and at N 30th Street will be
analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual analysis of ramp merges and other relevant methodologies specified
by WSDOT. Mitigation will include the extent to which planned I-405 improvements may mitigate impacts in
the future.
Site Access
Site access involves two proposed public street crossings of the BNSF railroad line. Access issues include
appropriate design criteria of the access to meet BNSF and WUTC standards, safety issues related to vehicle
train conflicts, and emergency vehicle access. Emergency vehicle access is especially a concern if a
train/vehicle accident leads to blockage of both project access points,which is possible, given train stopping
distances and the distance between access points. Evaluation must also consider the potential for higher
future rail use on the line if BNSF finds that market and rail traffic justify us of this route as a second mainline
between Snohomish and Auburn/Tacoma. Hazards associated with at-grade railroad crossings will be
evaluated based on specific site conditions and existing literature including FHWA Report, Highway/Rail
Crossing Technical Working Group Report, November 2002, "Guidance on Traffic Control Devices at
Highway-Rail Grade Crossings", WUTC accident reports compiled under WAC 480-62-080 as well as
coordination with Ahmer Nizam of WUTC and Mike Cowles of BNSF. In addition to the rail crossing, safety
and capacity concerns at the intersections with Lake Washington Blvd.and Hazelwood Lane will be addressed.
Traffic Accidents and Safety Analysis
Accident characteristics and patterns will be analyzed for the roadways in the analysis area. Accident rate
comparisons will be made with region-wide and/or statewide accident rates for routes in the same functional
class and for any available "comparable route" case study data. High-Accident Locations (HAL), High-
Accident Corridors(HAC),and Pedestrian Accident Locations(PAL)will be addressed.
Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions
Impacts on the City of Newcastle,to the northeast of the site will be assessed through:
a) An assessment of trip origins and destinations within Newcastle based on an EMME2 select link
distribution query;
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS Wore:PROGRAM PAGE 13 OF 24 03-18-03
b) Trips routed through Newcastle will be assessed quantitatively through description of the project
traffic volumes on specific road network links,and assessed qualitatively in terms of the proportion of
project trips as related to the total trips.
c) Trips bypassing I-405 through Bellevue and Newcastle will be assessed qualitatively in terms of
project trips which may be diverted to local streets:
• Expected congestion levels on I-405, as compared to projected congestion on alternate
routes and potential factors affecting the decision to divert to local streets;
• Relative travel time comparisons between elements of the freeway network and local streets
based on the length of the route and number of stop or signalized intersections (LOS and
formal trip length analysis will not be performed);
• Alternate routes considered include:
1. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/66th P1 SE/Lake Washington Blvd.
2. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/SE 89a' P1/Monterey P1 NE/ NE 44th Street/Lake
Washington Blvd.
3. I-405 to 52nd Street/Lake Washington Blvd
4. I-90 to Lakemont Blvd/Coal Creek Newcastle Road/SE 66th Place to Lake Washinton
Blvd (to be considered only if total trips with destinations in the Issaquah area exceed
20 trips);
Non Motorized Facility Impacts and Relationship to Transit
The character of existing non-motorized facilities (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) in the study area will be
described. Alternatives to improve pedestrian access and safety will be developed. Improvements to enhance
pedestrian facility connections to transit facilities will also be explored as mitigating measures.
Mitigating Measures
Mitigating measures will be identified for impacts.The proportional contribution of the proposal to total traffic
and growth in traffic on specific roadway links will be identified. Specific intersection and roadway
improvements needed to mitigate impacts of traffic generation will be identified based on a specific LOS
threshold standard specified by city staff. Warrants for traffic signals will be analyzed, where LOS analysis
indicates a need may exist.
Mitigation for trip generation will include Transportion Demand Management options for mode split, peak
spreading and other mechanisms. Discussion of this element will include regional factors such as development
of HOV and transit facilities,and future land use patterns likely to affect mode choice at the residential origin.
The potential for incorporating features in the proposal which may encourage use of alternate modes will be
identified,including safe and convenient pedestrian circulation and access to transit stops,widened shoulders,
or other facilities for bicycles, and connections with existing and planned recreation trails, commercial and
other destinations.
Mitigating measures to address potential impacts on safety, pedestrians and other impact will be assessed,
including mitigation for crossings of the railroad.
Final EIS
RENTON BARBEE MILL ETS Woiu:PROGRAM PAGE 14 OF 24 03-18-03
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• For baseline 2005-07 traffic growth, the City of Renton EMME/2 model will be used with possible
additions to include specific recently approved projects in the vicinity, such as the Labrador Subdivision,
The Bluffs,Tamaron Point,and Southport. The City will provide traffic reports for projects as well as the
I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange Project Transportation Discipline Report(June 2001) and other existing
transportation reports in the vicinity.
• Existing 2002 base-year traffic counts on all roadways modeled will be available from the HDR project
traffic impact analysis and local jurisdictions, including intersection turn movements. No traffic counts
will be conducted.
• The 2005-07 baseline future year transportation network will consist of all fully funded transportation
capacity improvements as provided by the City of Renton.
• The No-Action alternative development analysis shall include only trip generation that will be compared to
the trip generation of the project for comparative purposes,but not subject to operational analysis.
• One (1) meeting with Renton transportation staff, and one (1) meeting with WSDOT staff will be
required.
Deliverables
• Transportation section for the DEIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.2 Hazardous Materials
Goal
The site is known to contain contaminated soils,primarily arsenic and zinc. An Independent Remedial Action
Plan (TRAP) has been prepared for the site pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) and approved
by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the City of Renton, involving removal of an
estimated 21,500 cubic yards of soil from the site.
Approach
The analysis will rely on the September 2000 remedial action plan,including the cleanup levels established to
protect human health and the environment.. This plan is designed to bring soil conditions to residential
standards. Potential impacts from contamination on the adjacent Quendall Terminals site will also be
evaluated.
Affected Environment
The EIS text will summarize the existing standards for remediation to residential standards,based on Ecology's
existing literature, specifically the scientific basis for exposure standards and scientific uncertainty inherent in
the standards and Ecology's method for assessment of long-term risk to residents on sites. Specific reference
will be made to provisions of the Ecology-approved cleanup plan, including the locations and depths of soil
removal, methods for confirmation sampling, and protection of human health and the environment with
respect to the proposed development scenario. Site investigation reports will also be reviewed regarding the
current status of confirmed groundwater contamination and suspected surface water contamination, as
indicated in the current Ecology database for the site.
RENTON BARBEE MILL.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 15 of 24 03-18-03
Impacts
Assessment of impacts will include a qualitative assessment of any confounding factors which may affect the
ability to meet the goals of the IRAP. Residual risk to future residents on-site from on-site materials proposed
to not be removed,or isolated will be assessed based in existing literature. The existence of contaminants from
other sites, and potential exposure to residents on site will be assessed based on existing studies under two
scenarios 1) the scenario of implementation of cleanup of those sites,and 2) delay of cleanup of adjacent sites
until after this site is developed and occupied with resulting continued presence of contaminants.
Timing and extent of disturbance off the site required for cleanup will be discussed as it relates to other
infrastructure required for project development,in relation to future use of the DNR owned shoreline,as well
as the relationship to rehabilitation of the stream corridor and shoreline bulkheads, or other options for
shoreline enhancement.
Mitigation
Mitigating measures will include an assessment of alternative cleanup levels not contained in existing standards,
based on USEPA criteria for selection of alternative cleanup methodologies.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis and some individual responses. For
budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 15 percent of the DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing scientific studies applicable to development of standards and applicable to this site,including the
IRAP for this site,and available studies for adjacent sites will be used as the primary basis for analysis.
• One(1)reconnaissance level field visit will be made to the site by one(1)hazardous materials specialist.
• No sampling will be performed,on or off-site.
Deliverable
• Hazardous Materials section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments and revised section for Final EIS.
4.3 Aesthetics,Light and Glare
Goal
The objective of the Aesthetics,Light and Glare task is to identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and
evaluate visual and aesthetic impacts of the proposal and potential mitigation,as appropriate.
Aesthetics/Visual Quality
Affected Environment
Parametrix will collect and review pertinent documents that define the visual quality and aesthetic issues related
to the proposed build alternatives. These reports include Land Use Regulations and Policies; local
comprehensive plans and policies; and open space,pedestrian/bicycle routes, and recreation plans. Collected
information will be confirmed by site reconnaissance and information gathered at the scoping meeting.
Viewpoint Identification
Viewpoints from different landscape units will be defined by topography and differences in the land use and
urban design context as defined by comprehensive plan policies or zoning regulations, as well as identifiable
RENTON BARIIEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 16 OF 24 03-18-03
design characteristics of existing development. Significant visual features and landmarks within each landscape
unit will be located and the intrinsic qualities that characterize each landscape unit will be described in text
form.
Specific resources to be defined include:
•Character of existing development,including topography,vegetation,land-use patterns,community identity
(aesthetics and image), neighborhood boundaries and edges, building scale and massing, building/open-
space texture.
• Street grid,development texture,and open-space patterns.
• Parks,pedestrian/bicycle routes,and other recreation areas.
Typical viewpoints will be identified and mapped within each landscape unit from existing plans and policies,
site reconnaissance, and through the public scoping process. The selected key viewpoints will become the
views to be used to describe existing conditions in the comparison of impacts between the existing conditions,
the build alternative,and the No-Action Alternative.
Potential resident and transient viewer groups will be identified. Viewer groups could include:
• Residents within the area to the north and east of the site. Where possible, views will be selected from
public rights-of-way or other public sites that approximate the views from residences.
• Residents to the south of the site, along Lake Washington. These views will be selected from near-shore
Lake Washington views that approximate the views from residences.
• More distant views from the east,including I-405,the West Hill in unincorporated King County,.
• Viewers traversing Lake Washington Blvd. adjacent to the site, including views from the curve traveling
west from the I-405 interchange and views northbound from south of the site.
• Views from parks and public open space,including Clarke Beach Park in Mercer Island.
Impacts
Evaluation of impacts will include a qualitative description of the appearance of the existing site and proposed
facilities as viewed from representative key viewpoints. Visual simulations will be prepared using photos of the
site. Simulations are proposed for a"conservative case"which would include removal of existing buildings and
depiction of the gross bulk of structures allowed on proposed lots,based on City of Renton zoning standards,
and any specific commitments to height and bulk contained in the preliminary plat application.
The analysis will include an objective descriptors of attributes (such as form, line, color and texture) and
provide a qualitative evaluation in terms of relationships between elements of the visual environment in terms
of dominance, scale, diversity and continuity. Viewer response to the visual environment will be described in
terms of viewing populations and visual quality descriptors such as vividness/interest and
intactness/coherence/unity.
Evaluation of the change from the existing industrial development of the site to the proposed residential plat
will focus on intensity, scale and building bulk. Evaluation of compatibility with existing development in the
vicinity will be evaluated in terms of bulk,height, scale, design,landscape and vegetation character as it relates
to the character of existing development.
Mitigation
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORT:PROGRAM PAGE 17 OF 24 03-18-03
To develop mitigation, Parametrix will identify mitigation concepts that reduce the impacts to the visual and
aesthetic resources of each landscape unit and enhance the visual characteristics of the build alternatives.
Potential mitigation measures to be considered could include concepts that alter the building mass; screen
views of the project(topographic and vegetation screening);or integration of the project into the surrounding
landscape through use of materials and color,structure,design scale and massing,or slope gradient alteration.
Light and Glare
Affected Environment
The existing lighting and glare from the site, and its visibility, intensity, and dominance will be assessed for
existing viewers,which generally will be coordinated with the viewpoints selected for visual simulations.
Impacts
Impacts will describe likely light and glare sources on the site, including standard street lighting, and assess
impacts on potential viewers. This analysis will be integrated with the Aesthetics/Visual Quality analysis to
provide a perspective of nighttime visual impacts. Visual simulations will not be prepared for this component
of the analysis.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include qualitative comparison of probable visual and
light/glare impacts based on the character of existing industrial buildings and the building bulk allowed by
existing zoning standards and landscaping and other features required by codes.
• Photo simulations will be prepared based on black and white photos of existing views, are anticipated to
include a single view on an 81/2 x 11 sheet and will not exceed five(5)views.
• A preliminary screening of potential viewpoints will be developed, reviewed and approved by City staff
prior to preparation of visual simulations.
• Depictions of gross bulk of structures will be based on height,building coverage,and setbacks required by
City of Renton zoning standards and specific commitments to height and bulk contained in the
preliminary plat application. Building depiction will consist of boxes rendered in a neutral gray. A list of
criteria and a single view depiction will be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to completion of
additional other simulations.
• Analysis of visual quality will be qualitative and will generally follow criteria in Blair, 1982, Substation
Visual Simulation Techniques,and FHWA,1981,Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects.
Deliverables
• Visual Quality/Light and Glare section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.4 Noise
Goal
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 18 OF 24 03-18-03
This element of the scope will assess noise impacts associated with construction, impacts of noise from the
adjacent railroad on the residential use of the site, noise from use of the site, and noise associated with
increased traffic volumes related to regional growth,and the proposal.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare an EIS noise section analysis using typical noise levels generated by construction, and
rail use.
Affected Environment
The EIS text will summarize noise level in the project area and identify sensitive receptorswith a particular
focus on the rail line adjacent to the site. Description of existing noise levels will include characterization of
human response to noise levels based on context and normal activities.
Construction Impacts
Construction noise impacts shall be described based on:
• Types and locations of equipment likely to be used on the project.
• Typical construction equipment noise levels and duration.
• Typical means of reducing construction noise.
• Local ordinances relating to construction noise.
• Land uses or activities,which may be affected by construction noise.
Construction timing and phasing shall be discussed and the potential need for variances assessed.
Rail Impacts
Potential noise impacts from the rail line will be assessed based on typcical railroad carriage-to-rail noise,
whistle noise, engine noise and other typical rail related noise based on existing studies and accepted industry
standard tables. Carriage noise will be based on operating speeds as determined in coordination with BNSFRR
personnel. The frequency of rail use will be based on current experience,and also the potential for higher use
of the line in the future.
Transportation Impacts
Noise impacts from traffic related to the project will be derived from the magnitude of traffic increases from
the baseline,and the project based on the traffic/volume noise increase relationship of 3dbA noise increase for
a doubling of traffic volumes. The increase attributed to both the background increase and increases in traffic
from the proposal will be assessed. Impacts will be compared with projected noise levels from existing sources
in the area,including noise from I-405.
Mitigation:Construction and Operation
Mitigating measures for potential construction impacts will include limits on hours of construction, staging,
equipment used,barriers,and other feasible measures.
Traffic noise abatement measures will be evaluated, in accordance with the standards established by FHWA
and WSDOT,as reference points for establishing levels where traffic noise impacts are predicted to "approach
or exceed standards" or be a "substantial increase." The proposal does not include roadway improvements
utilising federal funding; therefore, these FHWA and WSDOT standards provide a reference rather than
indicating mitigation requirements.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 19 OF 24 03-18-03
Unavoidable adverse impacts shall include impacts identified for which mitigating measures are not identified,
or which cannot be assured to be fully mitigated to meet applicable standards.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
Deliverables
• Noise section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.5 Historic and Cultural Resources
Affected Environment
Cultural resources consisting of archaeological resources as defined in RCW 27.53.040 will be assessed based
on existing information at the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,the King County Cultural
Resources Division,the University of Washington Library,the Renton Museum,and the Puget Sound Regional
Repository of the Washington State Archives. Consultation with tribes will include solicitation of comments
and review of any information provided. The site will be analyzed with respect to its historic, cultural and
architectural merit.
Impacts
Impact assessment will depend on the identification of cultural resources. The lowering of Lake Washington
elevation in 1910 and the subsequent fill of the site for development renders the probability of pre-settlement
resources extremely low. The potential loss of structures on the site with cultural,architectural or engineering
value will be assessed in regard to the presence of similar structures in the region.
Mitigation
Mitigation,if cultural resources are found,may include avoidance,but is most likely to include excavation and
conservation.A variety of strategies may be appropriate,including information and educational displays which
commemorate the site's place in the history and cultural development of the area.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing documents will be utilized to assess cultural resources and historical merits of the site.
• The State Historical Preservation office will be contacted by letter with phone follow-up to solicit existing
information on historic and cultural resources on-site.
• Tribal cultural information will be solicited by letter.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORN PROGRAM PAGE 20 OF 24 03-18-03
• One(1) field visit will be made to the site. Photos of structures will be taken,but a full inventory will not
be performed.
Deliverables
• Cultural and Historic Resource section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
5.0 DEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare an adequate and complete Draft Environmental Impacts Statement addressing the effects of the
proposal and No-Action Alternative.
Approach
PDEIS Preparation
Parametrix will prepare a Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS) following SEPA Guidelines,WAC 197-11, and City
of Renton procedures for review by the City of Renton and respond to comments to prepare a Draft EIS
(DEIS) for publication.
The PDEIS is expected to include the following chapters or sections(subject to revision):
• Cover and Fact Sheets.
• Summary,including tables comparing alternatives.
• Alternatives,Including the Proposed Action.
• Affected Environment,Impacts,and Mitigation Measures.
• Appendices, including list of preparers, distribution list, glossary, index, and other technical backup.
Technical studies will be prepared for
• Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat for Terrestrial and Aquatic Species
• Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains,Groundwater and Water Quality
• Transportation
• Hazardous Materials
• Aesthetics,Light and Glare
• Professional editing will be conducted on the PDEIS. Ten(10) copies of the PDEIS will be provided for
review by project lead and cooperating agencies.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include order of magnitude comparisons of impact based on
quantifiable differences resulting from one example of other allowed uses,which could be developed on
the site.
• The applicant will provide Parametrix with two paper copies and one electronic copy of all technical
reports and plans prepared for the proposal within one week after the Notice to Proceed. All graphics in
reports shall be provided in electronic format, as specified below. The applicant will arrange the
availability of consultants who provided technical reports to answer questions about the technical
assumptions underlying their reports and shall respond to questions within five(5)working days.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 21 OF 24 03-18-03
• The City of Renton will provide one copy of all existing information in their possession concerning the site
and proposal including, but not limited to, correspondence and analysis of the proposal; existing Renton
EMME/2 model parameters;existing and future planned road lane and intersection configurations within
the transportation analysis area; and all utility location, sizing, and capacity information for facilities
affected by the proposal,including plans and specifications,Critical Area Designations,Maps and Studies,
existing Watershed and Wildlife Studies of May Creek, Capital Improvement Programs, and
Transportation Improvement Programs within one week after the Notice to Proceed.
• All site and building utility plans,and other related maps will be provided in original size and format either
AutoCAD Map Release 2000 drawing files along with CTB file (pen assignment file) or GIS Arch Info by
the applicant or City of Renton. Graphics shall be provided in original size, 81/2 x 11 format(PDF,JPG.
TIF,PageMaker,Freehand) by the applicant or City of Renton. The applicant will generate LDD (Land
Development)/CAD cross sections of the site existing and proposed topography at locations specified by
Parametrix to be used in developing shoreline/aquatic lands cross sections. Except where specific graphic
products are specified to be provided in the scope above, all other graphics will be as provided by the
applicant and city and will be published without further graphic manipulation beyond formatting to fit the
page style of the document. Additional graphics,if required,shall be a separate billable task.
• Parametrix staff will perform one (1) reconnaissance level site visit, not to exceed four (4) hours. The
applicant will make project management personnel and consultants who prepared technical reports for the
applicant available for the reconnaissance field visit to provide orientation to the site and answer questions
about the technical assumptions underlying their reports. City of Renton staff will be notified of the date
and time of site visits and may attend.
• Communication with City staff on assumptions for various studies, including, but not limited to No-
Action Alternative, floodplain modeling parameters, traffic generation, transportation network, will
generally be electronically transmitted with email transmittal of city comments.
• The schedule presumes that all City reviews for coordination on assumptions require no more than two (2)
working days,except as provided for the PDEIS.
• Parametrix will deliver ten (10) review copies of the Preliminary Draft EIS to the City for distribution to
City staff and cooperating agencies.
• The City will provide a single contact person for review of the Preliminary Draft EIS. The City shall
reconcile and compile all review comments into a single hard copy or electronic copy. The second review
by the City will address only whether previous comments are responded to adequately. No new issues will
be raised at the second review.
• Two (2) rounds of review and revision of the Preliminary Draft EIS are assumed with initial City
comments transmitted within 5 working days, Parametrix response/revision submitted within 5 working
days, second round of City staff comments transmitted within 5 working days, and final revisions by
Parametrix within 5 working days.
• If Parametix identifies,a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures, and
the City directs incorporation into the Draft EIS,an additional 15 working days will be incorporated into
the schedule for revision and reformatting of the mitigation section of the document. A site plan to,
illustrate the alternative shall be based on CADD drawings for the existing site plan.
• All final documents will be provided in an electronic MS Word document and camera-ready hard copy
format.
• Printing will be billed directly as a separate item by the City of Renton to the private applicant.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK.PROGRAM PAGE 22 OF 24 03-18-03
• Distribution and legal notice of the DEIS will be provided by the City of Renton.
• A PDF format version of the DEIS for CD-ROM or web posting will not be prepared.
• Up to two (2)Parametrix staff persons will attend one(1)public hearing on the Draft EIS.
Deliverables
• Preliminary Draft EIS (15 Copies).
• Draft EIS camera ready for printing.
6.0 FEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare adequate and complete Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Approach
Response to Comments
All comments received on the DEIS must have a response in the FEIS. General responses will be developed
to address commonly raised issues. Detailed or unique comments will require individual responses. Comments
will be cataloged according to commentor, element of the environment, and status of response. This item
assumes up to fifty (50) substantive comments will be received and some additional technical analysis may be
required.
PFEIS Preparation
Parametrix will prepare a Preliminary Final EIS (PFEIS). The PFEIS will include response to comments
received on the DEIS. The PFEIS will include the elements specified in WAC 197-11-560 (5) for a case where
changes in response to comments are minor.
Professional editing of the PFEIS will be conducted.
FEIS Production
Based on comments by City of Renton staff and coordinating agencies,a camera-ready Final EIS (FEIS)will be
prepared.
Assumptions
• All DEIS assumptions also apply to the FEIS.
• Up to 50 substantive comments(not just letters)will be received.
• Limited technical analysis will be required to address comments. For budgeting purposes, approximately
10 percent of the DEIS preparation effort is assumed for response to comments, but does not include
additional substantive analysis. This assumption and the effort required to complete the FEIS will be
reviewed at the close of the comment period and may require amendment to the scope and budget.
• Parametrix will deliver ten (10) review copies to the City for distribution to City staff and cooperating
agencies.
• The City will reconcile and compile all review comments into a single copy.
• The.FEIS will be revised based on one(1)round of comments received on the PFEIS.
• A camera-ready copy will be prepared for final review and approval signatures.
• Printing will be billed directly as a separate item by the City of Renton to the private applicant.
Distribution and legal notice of the FEIS will be provided by the City of Renton.
Deliverables
RENTON BAREEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 23 OF 24 03-18-03
• Summary of all comments received on the Draft EIS.
• Preliminary Final EIS (15 Copies).
• Final EIS,camera-ready for printing.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 24 OF 24 03-18-03
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT B
I
• City of Renton
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS Schedule
February March April May June July August September
ID Task Name Start Finish 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mon 3/17/03 Tue 92/03 1.1.111MIMINIMMIIIIMININIIIIIIMIIIMY .
2 Task 1-Program Management(PMX) Mon 3/17/03 Tue 3/18/03 ,
3 1.1 Project Start-Up(PMX) Mon 3/17/03 Mon 3/17/03 3/17
4 1.1 Notice to Proceed Mon 3/17/03 Mon 3/17/03 3/17 17
5 1.2 Project Kick-Off Meeting(PMX) Tue 3/18/03 Tue 3/18/03 3/18 18
6 Task 2-Preliminary Draft EIS Analysis Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 •
- I
7 2.1 Description of Alternatives Tue 3/18/03 Mon 4/14/03
8 Description of Alternatives Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/31/03 3/18 3/31
9 City Review Tue 4/1/03 Mon 4/7/03 4/1 4/7
10 Finalize Tue 4/8/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/8 4114
1i 2.2 Natural Environment Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03
12 2.2.1 All elements except Floodplain Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03
13 Receive information from appiciant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18 13/24
14 Review existing information Tue 3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 - 4/7 '
15 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/8 '14/8
16 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 419 4/14
17 Description of affected environment Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4/15 .4/28
18 Analyze impacts Tue 4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 4/2g .5112
19 Determine Mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 ! 5/13 5/19
20 Prepare section of PDEIS Tue 5/20/03 Mon 5/26/03 j 5/20 5/26
21 2.2.2 Floodplain Tue3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 ,
22 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18 3/24
23 Review existing information Tue 3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 4/7
24 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/8 4/8
25 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 - 4/9 4/14
26 Floodplain Model Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4 15 4/28
27 Description of affected environment Wed 4/9/03 Tue 4/22/03 4/9 4/22
28 Assess impacts Tue 4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 4/29 5/12
29 Identify mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 5/13 5/19
30 Prepare draft section for PDEIS Tue 5/20/03 Mon 5/26/03 • 520 5/26
•
31 2.3 Built Environment(PMX) Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 ' I
32 2.3.1 Transportation Analysis(PMX) Tue3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 ' • 0
33 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18 3/24
34 Review existing information Tue3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 325 417
35 Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/8 4/8
36 Confirm Assumptons Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/9 4/14
37 Future Non-Project Baseline Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/21/03 4/15 4/21 •
- I
This schedule assumes authorization to proceed by March 17,2003. Page 1 Mon 2/24/03
The schedule Is subject to roll-back based on later receipt of Notice to Proceed,of materials to
be provided by applicant or city,or later dates of completion of city review
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT B
City of Renton
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS Schedule
February March April May June July August September
ID Task Name Start Finish 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
38 SYNCHRO Setup Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/21/03 4/1 4/21 1 I _
39 SYNCHRO Baseline Tue 4/15/03 Wed 4/23/03 4/1 4/23j
40— Trip Generation and Assignment Thu 4/24/03 Fri 4/25/03 4/24
41 Analyze intersection LOS Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 4/28 /2
42 Analyze accident characteristics and patter Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 4/28 /2
43 Analyze pedestrian facilities - Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 _ 4/28 /2
44 Mitigation Strategy Coordinate with City Mon 5/5/03 Wed 5/7/03 s/5 5/7
45 Mitigation Analysis Thu 5/8/03 Wed 5/14/03 i 5 5/14
46 Prepare Draft Transportation EIS Section Mon 5/5/03 Mon 5/26/03 6/5 5/26
47 2.3.2 Other Elements Human Environment Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 ,
48 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18 24
49 Review existing information Tue 3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 4/7
50 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/8 4/8
51 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 4(9 4/14 1 ''
52 Description of affected environment Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4/15 4/28 i,
53 Assess impacts Tue 4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 4/29 5/12 •
54 Identify mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 I 5/13 6/19
55 Prepare draft section for PDEIS Tue 5/20/03 Mon 5/26/03 ' 6/20 5/26
56 Task 3 DEIS Preparation and City Review Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/30/03 I i
57 Assemble PDEIS Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/2/03 5/27 r6/2 •.
58 Renton Stafff First Review Tue 6/3/03 Mon 6/9/03 613 16/9
59 PMX Response to Renton Review Tue 6/10/03 Mon 6/16/03 1 6/10 6/16
601
Final Review Renton Staff Tue 6/17/03 Mon 6/23/03 I 6/17 .6/23
1
61 DEIS Final Text Tue 6/24/03 Fri 6/27/03
6/24
62 Printing (not included in budget) Mon 6/30/03 Mon 6/30/03 6/30 6/30
63 City of Renton Issued DEIS Tue 7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03
64 DEIS Comment Period Tue 7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03 7/ 7/31
ss Preparation for Public Meeting Tue 7/1/03 Mon 7/21/03 7/1 r7/21
66 Conduct Public Meeting(Assume 1 Meeting) Tue 7/22/03 Tue 7/22/03 7/22 7/22
67 Task 4 Final EIS(FEIS) Fri 8/1/03 Tue 9/2/03 !
68 Summarize Public Comments&Respond Fri 8/1/03 Thu 8/7/03 I 811 gn
69 Renton Stafff First Review Fri 8/8/03 Thu 8/14/03 i I ,
8/8 . .Sena
70 PMX revision Fri 8/15/03 Thu 8/21/03 ( i
8/15 r8/21
71 Final Review Renton Staff Fri 8/22/03 Tue 8/26/03
8/22 :_ .8/26
72 FEIS Final Text Wed 8/27/03 Fri 8/29/03 8/27�, /29 Jr-
73 Printing(not included in budget) Mon 9/1/03 Mon 9/1/03 ( 9/1 9/1
74 FEIS Issuance by City of Renton Tue 9/2/03 Tue 9/2/03
� snl sn
This schedule assumes authorization to proceed by March 17,2003. Page 2 Mon 2/24/03
The schedule is subject to roll-back based on later receipt of Notice to Proceed,of materials to
be provided by applicant or city,or later dates of completion of city review
•• a: CITY RENTON
to
owl Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
March 14, 2003
David Sherrard
Parametrix,
5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Notice to Proceed
Dear David:
The consultant agreement for the above referenced project has been approved to form
and has been placed on next week's consent agenda (March 17, 2003) for final approval
by the City Council. Shortly thereafter, the agreement will be executed by the City
Clerk's office and a signed original will be returned to you.
In addition, the initial deposit required of the applicant for the costs associated with your
preparation of the EIS has been received by the City and deposited to the appropriate.
account. Please forward future billings to my attention for prompt review and
processing.
It is now appropriate to proceed as scheduled (start date of March 17, 2003) with the
scope of work established by the agreement Please be aware that any work performed
prior to the final execution of the agreement will be at your own risk. I do expect,
however, to forward your copyof the executed agreement by the end of next week.
Should you have questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425)
430-7270 or by email at Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us.
Sincerely, .
0 ?)
Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts •
Jennifer Henning
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
:.� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
•
.. CITY F 'RENTON
-. PlanrungfBuilding/PublicWorks Department
J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.;Administrator
March-11; 200,3. r
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON' "
MAR u 3 2003
Alex Cugini. • ECsEI E®,'
Barbee Mill Company
:P.O. Box 359
Renton, WA '98057
,Subject: ;. Environmental Impact'Statement(EIS) for
Barbee-Mill Preliminary Plat/ LUA-02-040, PP,,Elt
•
Dear me. Cugini:
This letter is sent to confirm the City ofRenton's acceptance of the terms proposed by
' Mr. David E. Sherrard, Senior Project Manager of Parametrix and to establish an
• agreement for payment of costs associated with:the preparation of`the Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to be completed for the Barbee Mill,Preliminary Plat proposal.
Pursuant to the Environmental:Review Committee's SEPA Threshold;Determination of
Significance (DS) issued.on November 5, 2002 for the above referenced .project, the
proposal;to subdivide the property into 115-lots intended for townhouse development
requires the completion of an EIS'. Based on RMC section 4-1-170; Land Use Review
Fees, 100% of=the cost associated with the preparation of the EIS shall be paid at the
direct expense of the applicant •
Specifically, the attached. consultant .agreement ' establishes a cost amount of
• $162,927.03.for all work associated with the preparation of the EIS, which is'to be ;
completed by September 2, 2003. As we have previously:.discussed,: a deposit of
_approximately 12% of the estimated cost, or $20,000:00, will be necessary prior to the
City giving notice to proceed (tentatively scheduled for March, 17, 2003): Accordingly;
' ; an invoice for the initial deposit is attached. ,Please include the top portion of the invoice_;
with your payment and forward it either to my attention or to the Finance Department as
soon as possible. : - '
In addition,'75°io of the work to be performed is,estimated to be completed by the end'of.
• May;'therefore,, 75% of the total cost Of the EIS, or approximately'$120,000.00, must -
also be received prior to the end of May. The remaining balance,will be divided among
the ,later months of the work schedule with payments scheduled for;the first of those
Months. This will ensure that the account balance is appropriately replenished for timely
payments to the consultant. . 'The following outlines the timeframes for .necessary .
contributions that must be:deposited to the City's'account for payment to:the consultant: '.
1 $20,000:00 to be received no later than March 17, 2003
2. $50,000.0.0 to be received no'later than April 14, 2003,
3.: $50,000.00 to be received'no later than May,12;'2003. -
4. $12,927:03'to be received no later,than June 1, 2003.
5. $10;000:00 to.be received no later than.July 1, 2003:
6. $10,000.00to be received no later than August 1;2003.
7. . . $10,000:00 to be received no:later than September` 1, 2003.
($162;927.03.total)
- • 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E,N T 0 N
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
, '' This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer,
Barbee Mill EIS
March 11, 2003
Page 2 of 2
Should you find the terms of the consultant agreement and the payment plan outlined
above to be acceptable, please sign and date below and return this letter to me at your
earliest convenience. In the event this agreement is not returned and/or the initial
deposit is not received by the scheduled start date of March 17, 2003, notice to proceed
on the EIS will not be given to the consultant. Additionally, if any scheduled payment is
not received by the specified date, work on the EIS may be suspended.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 430-7270 if you have any questions or
concerns regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishibi. a •
Project Manager •
•
•
3 /3/Cr
i.✓Alex Cugini, Prop Owner�' r)- Date
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Larry Warren
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Alex Pietsch
CITI vr' RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA B.—,
AI#:
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:
Dept/Div/Board Development Services Division March 17, 2003
Staff Contact Lesley Nishihira (x7270) Agenda Status
_ Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Consultant Agreement for preparation of Correspondence.. a RRENCE
Environmental Impact.Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Ordinance 3.5. 73
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal (LUA-02-040). Resolution jE
Old Business k, /M'� 3'
Exhibits: New Business �` � v
Consultant Agreement Study Sessions .; 1., 3 ' O3
Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council Concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
Other (Human Resources) X
Fiscal Impact: None
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated •
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
City staff requests approval of a Consultant Agreement authorizing work at the applicant's
expense for the production of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat proposal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends the approval and execution of a
Consultant Agreement authorizing work associated with the Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) required for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The applicant will be responsible
for the cost of preparing the EIS and will be billed via a pass-through account established between
the City, the consultant (Parametrix) and the applicant(Barbee Mill Company).
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
MAR 0 7 2003
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh RECEIVED
CITY or RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BL
AI#:
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:
Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division March 17, 2003
Staff Contact Lesley Nishihira (x7270) Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Consultant Agreement for preparation of Correspondence..
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Ordinance
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal (LUA-02-040). Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business .
Consultant Agreement Study Sessions
Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council Concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
Other (Human Resources) X
Fiscal Impact: None
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
City staff requests approval of a Consultant Agreement authorizing work at the applicant's
expense for the production of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat proposal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends the approval and execution of a
Consultant Agreement authorizing work associated with the Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) required for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The applicant will be responsible
for the cost of preparing the EIS and will be billed via a pass-through account established between
the City, the consultant (Parametrix) and the applicant (Barbee Mill Company).
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
&INCURRENCE.
DATE la'
NAME INR ATE
(,,Nf Id! GA'N 3.
,H M4II& 3 11/
CITY OF RENTON -w "rs 3
Planning/Building/Public Works aIM
MEMORANDUM -
DATE: March 12, 2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Jesse Tanner, Mayor
FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works
Department
STAFF CONTACT: Lesley Nishihira, x7270
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat E.I.S.—
Consultant Agreement
ISSUE:
The Development Services Division requests approval of a consultant agreement authorizing
work associated with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The cost of the EIS, which was determined to be necessary by the
City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC), will be at the direct expense of the project
applicant.
BACKGROUND:
Location —The Barbee Mill consists of a 22.9-acre site and is located on the west side of Lake
Washington Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street abutting the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary. The property
has historically been utilized for lumber operations, which over past years have been decreased
to a limited level and are presently in cessation. Many of the existing structures are in disrepair
and all would be demolished as part of site development.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning designation, which is
intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and residential activity in a high
quality, master planned development that is integrated with the natural environment. Stand-alone
residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum
5 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac) is satisfied. The site includes a number of sensitive features,
including Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines, critical wildlife habitat areas, wetlands,
contaminated soils, high seismic hazards, steep slopes (15% to 25%) and flood hazards, as well
as Department of Natural Resources lease lands along a portion.of the site's lake frontage.
Development Proposals (Past and Present) — At one time the property was included in a large-
scale development proposal that involved adjoining properties to the north (a.k.a., Port Quendall);
however, the property has since been proposed for development as individual site. Initially, the
applicant filed a land use application for a development proposal that would include a mix of
residential, office, retail, hotel and restaurant uses (file no. LUA-01-174). The City began
processing this application and upon review determined that an EIS would be necessary in order
to consider potential adverse environmental impacts from the proposal. However, after the
completion of the EIS scoping process, the applicant requested that the review of the application
be suspended and proceeded to submit an entirely separate land use application involving a
completely different development concept on the site. It is this proposal that the City is presently
reviewing (file no. LUA-02-040).
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM.
DATE: March 12,2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Jesse Tanner, Ma orr
FROM: Gregg Zimmerma Kdministrator, Planning/Building/Public Works
Department
STAFF CONTACT: Lesley Nishihira,x7270
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat E.I.S.—
Consultant Agreement
ISSUE:
The Development Services Division requests approval of a consultant agreement authorizing
work associated with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The cost of the EIS, which was determined to be necessary by the
City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC), will be at the direct .expense of the project
applicant.
BACKGROUND:
Location —The Barbee Mill consists of a 22.9-acre site and is located on the west side of Lake
Washington Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street abutting the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary. The property
has historically been utilized for lumber operations, which over past years have been decreased
to a limited level and are presently in cessation. Many of the existing structures are in disrepair
and all would be demolished as part of site development.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning designation, which is
intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and residential activity in a high
quality, master planned development that is integrated with the natural environment. Stand-alone
residential development is also permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum
5 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac) is satisfied. The site includes a number of sensitive features,
including Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines, critical wildlife habitat areas, wetlands,.
contaminated soils, high seismic hazards, steep slopes (15% to 25%) and flood hazards, as well
as Department of Natural Resources lease lands along a portion of the site's lake frontage.
Development Proposals (Past and Present) — At one time the property was included in a large-
scale development proposal that involved adjoining properties to the north (a.k.a., Port Quendall);
however, the property has since been proposed for development as individual site. Initially, the
applicant filed a land use application for a development proposal that would include a mix of
residential, office, retail, hotel and restaurant uses (file no. LUA-01-174). The City began
processing this application and upon review determined that an EIS would be necessary in order
to consider potential adverse environmental impacts from the proposal. However, after the
completion of the EIS scoping process, the applicant requested that the review of the application
be suspended and proceeded to submit an entirely separate land use application involving a
completely different development concept on the site. It is this proposal that the City is presently.
reviewing (file no. LUA-02-040).
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 2 of 3
The current proposal is for the review of a Preliminary Plat that would subdivide the site into 115
residential lots intended for townhouse development (reduced map attached). Most of the units
would be constructed within duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures
to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. The attached units would be constructed with
zero setbacks from common lot lines and would place each unit on an individual lot. The
proposal would result in a net density of approximately 8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross
acre site — 9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public roadways = 13.77 net acre -> 115
units/13.77 net acre=8.35 du/ac).
Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and four utility/open space tracts would be established
with the plat. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access
easement, which would be dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake Washington
Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of the site.
The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the majority of the
project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek. Both primary and
secondary access to the site would require railroad crossings that must be approved by both the
City and the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.
In addition, an Independent Remedial Action Plan has been approved by the Department of
Ecology and the City for the clean-up of on-site soils containing elevated concentrations of
arsenic and zinc (file no. LUA-02-069). However, this approved remediation is not anticipated to
occur until site preparation activities for an approved development project begin.
Licenses, Permits and Necessary Approvals — The following permits and approvals will be
required for the proposed redevelopment of the site:
• City of Renton: Environmental (SEPA) Review; Preliminary Plat Approval; Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit Approval; Level II Site Plan Approval; Level I Site Plan
Approval; Shoreline Variance Approval, if applicable; Wetland Buffer Averaging and
Compensation Approval; Street Modification Approval; Railroad Crossing Access Approval;
Site Preparation, Demolition, Building and Construction Permits; and Final Plat Approval.
• King County: Shoreline Permit for DNR lease lands.
• Washington Department of Ecology: Hazardous Waste — No Further Action Letter;
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination; System (NPDES) Permit; Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit Approval; Shoreline Variance Approval, if applicable; and Water Quality
Certification.
• Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA).
• Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission: Approval of Railroad crossing(s).
• US Army Corp of Engineers: Section 401 and 404 Permits, if necessary.
• US Environmental Protection Agency: CERCLA/MTCA Clearance.
Environmental (SEPA) Review — Prior to proceeding with the review and formulation of staff
recommendations for all of the City's necessary land use permits, the project must undergo
review pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Upon consideration of adverse
environmental impacts that would potentially result from the project, the City's Environmental
Review Committee issued a SEPA Threshold Determination of Significance (DS) on November 5,
2002. Under SEPA regulations, the DS requires that an EIS be prepared to thoroughly analyze
specific areas of concern surrounding the project.
Specifically,the scope of the EIS for this project will generally focus on the following areas:
➢ EARTH
• Soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and erosion/sedimentation
impacts.
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 3 of 3
> PLANTS AND ANIMALS
• Displacement of existing vegetation, wetlands and associated shoreline and wetland
habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species.
• Examination of the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat as part of the
project.
• Incorporation of shoreline access and regional trails through the site.
> WATER RESOURCES
• Waterways, hydrology, floodplains, groundwater and water quality impacts (including
possible impacts from cessation of May Creek dredging operations).
• Potential impacts and mitigation for impacts to May Creek and Lake Washington.
> TRANSPORTATION
• Impacts to the local traffic circulation system, including traffic forecasts, specified
intersections, trip generation, level of service, as well as accidents and safety.
• Design and safety impacts of railroad crossings.
• Impacts to 1-405 and adjacent jurisdictions (i.e., City of Newcastle).
> TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• Review of clean-up levels appropriate for residential uses.
• Impacts from abutting contaminated properties.
> AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE
• Identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and evaluate view impacts.
> NOISE
• Review of noise impacts associated with construction impacts and railroad usage.
> CULTURAL RESOURCES
• Assessment of cultural and archeological resources on the site.
> ALTERNATIVES
• In addition to the proposal, the EIS will examine a "no action" alternative that will
assume the continuation of the industrial use of the property. During the course of
analyzing impacts and identifying mitigation measures, however, a combination of
mitigating measures may be developed which would constitute an additional
alternative. This may involve a reduction in the number of units and/or a
reconfiguration of the plat layout.
CONCLUSION:
After study of the areas discussed above is completed, a Preliminary Draft EIS will be assembled
for the City's review and approval. The City will then issue the Draft EIS for public review and will
accept comments given at public hearing or submitted in writing. When comments on the Draft
EIS have been considered, the City will issue the Final EIS with responses to the draft comments.
By this time the City will have likely identified a preferred alternative. The EIS will then be used
as the basis for staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner upon consideration of the
Preliminary Plat and other land use permits.
The attached consultant agreement establishes the scope of work, timeframes and budget for the
EIS work. Based on RMC section 4-1-170, Land Use Review Fees, 100% of the cost associated
with the preparation of the EIS shall be paid at the direct expense of the applicant. A deposit
from the applicant must be received by the City prior to giving the consultant notice to proceed on
the work outlined in the agreement.
cc: Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Alex Pietsch
. .
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
a ,
• 400 ; r
— ‘Ie„',/,'?„.,,- likkri,A-A /,' •
•'•..tji;i11:0919..ii•;01gpi.i.lk ' • • arlarmila
i I
1 1;
41.;,..44.) ::+r441,,_",:,th/10' . • A
III].
-'--- .."-.--'' --.7 .4arkZ: :.111110tiiii:-4c..°4 . • •
' 14
' .0„, • • • .
I'srif,,14-..1.-t.'``'D'-: -'4. .l' t ZIP' . If •nigg4741.11:12.c N.101,/ir,...2- ,N,„, . '',‘,.,„4.11111.. ei - ., . . •
. LAKE WASHINGTON Q a
-10717.4: .- TI.,Y.;.. '. ,,,:....,-*..-1.3,!.' :••,..., •" 4 li . .. •
• ! g
::-.01Crl ala, ,. IVY.- jo,.a;„ N••••106...i...t. :WIIN,;IMF,::Wil... •,,--,-/j, ' -=.7"......„._ 'Ili- .
' • alg
.1.11 ,??..,/ • •
• . I _4,,-, . . . .
•
•em Ape •••• . ..-. . ; --,
_.•167J11&;,..MV4,,,,,ts.,r . ..,,,,,s..,„5:4.iilor4.:gt?„,i,...:-... .... -c,,tyliff . , .
riAtittio •
. .
• • • .
a/ 1 * Irk!!. .",)/- - .3.--.3[11Gti-•lair..-1 2'N-.' '••,... .,!......._`_zz' . )..
/7„."`,.•
rr,v,La•-.s.3,1;lc":10:-.L,-4.1 7.-1_..liFf:', WM, L.4,•••-•• 3.41..i.*, 1,1,t1,,,,,,,,,, ..4...,..,,,,,,
•-.4.-,.1[21 711111.1.1 ....,.`•942,... L.-tigan ....... ....-....- ..,_ .,,,6,••.,I.. W.: LAnt .
:..1.1.1M aa r-- a21:111 rill IR ..212-2. 37.174 h, .k.,, mg• ,,.•,...,I, ..... AsitINGToN - . . • A
55-v-a Kir REIr..-„-7, E3 titi a z i,pq 3.7s7.: 4.41:•1.7.. mr : •
I,it„wari •. -.: .
sH.4 • . . •
lersra wirri MI.1:;,..4 TEL1 CNC ..= ,r.i.i....:-.. 4.14, r pg,...1 ..... ••• ,.,FR - LA os .. • '''1%0•.' '
••,..iii.ms =1 U.7., IIICVM.I. •:LIES 011 c7a.L.-.1: ...1.1. . ,;....,',...!;74 71..:Imort! ,.,rgiatt w 41/4.- 4irt....1.1/4. 1, ., . . . ..
itc.17... TT•',:i.3 .-:-•_.1.. M.I M Xi..'.,!: 01.1_,sk. „.i:fs.-.: .t11.M.11:: i. It* (4 i.vi E ...,
12Z WI_ •.NIL: r._;.1 LIE MI-, V,gimt woppil \ I. . .
I..... I WP,VC iti C:-..•..! 713,13:1 7.1,1 CR .7.-2N1:;1 ...Ara.: .=•:-.1'r-1. ''-'$40/'11.. ii.‘ ma--,,,Hir' kkitjte „„
..a.. '7',:k-.13-'•`- 1, .:3 '--- :z 'g'Ir/g.'4'"'r . \ , I, 04.1..A.
! • ,___ r .
.. .. . ..
I
...1.=. -.-Rei 1.34.: :1:Li MI ...n CZ ....144-1 Kg Fg5 MP! 714 ri 1....., mii _ ,, ,2-7-11;..,* ... • . ! . • ,.
..-':7 -4"-
+-1:Dt, .„.„41.4 ' • - . ,. • iih. . . ,. i
6
0fi.Oniiiiti.; .1/21r7 _.,,,,- L-1, 1•Iiiik." - •••.'s. 711,14i..,\1..&110; ' 1 " As
•='21:, '' ''4. :'. .,.,. iata: [4•4 . -. ,
....--k- - I • . '%, . •
MISAaL ari izigf; rj_ltii ice..„. .„. . ... t , . it . . . . ....,
•
iii,
clAP!,..cia7...4'Llmc-• 1k.Er:: rixE: :,-;.-cr•-,T ,-42-•••--:•., -175.11 .i..7•1' ir,-•:r: N ti,r. -1,..:,,, ... • 1 . C = II .
1 1
... 0
. .
ran= FQ7n,: !_r_,z,r,,.. .7.20:4! a:irs p.m:- Ii0,M. 'Z.,',-.1i5.R.E- '11,: idr,.:,,,,ix.- ,-=7";,.. ..--,. 4-gi,,, a • 4, I
W.Eli 1 17.1 Na fi.p11113 1 C;, WI.VI .:I LI!S •42 13L .. ,j:- .,..;:t. ..,..-.--, .Au, . .,. i. ...4 I. : •
mits 3...m u,• F3.-3,r1: ctuf. ILt. rmg ;•'.•'II.1 ::ai:.:-.,:i 7..zirli ... I., pc I.1)i,. 1111,inni lits,. ,-, `bv.k . VACANT 0
acrom ..71]p.•2 moi''zn LI' Y.7,1,i..,r•rf'0--V,C... 11`,:',; -' n, 1/41, ;‘,11 Ita......Q--.4 _ lqiii 0 /4„,, `,-,:s -Nigro.
IL =pi a iiipic,.. ;,........,.-4r.,......x•-.: z.i.,E.fi ...7a,, .1.. ,. •
. ,... • -4- 41.4
II&ES••',,..1 t.,:r airlx',1 A Ez. .14ut_eqrryria• 7i!....1r4 P3 - .•- .01 ociLi" "IR Lr, •. 6...._ 7 fr.f.iti ., 0.t..,44\
V#0,4,4 •••., • . .,-c 0 i . e., .
*la MI a .:INEZogil " ji " .," n I, -111.•
lig i
7LIF A 1_7...417. 410,A y. ,, •,..1.1-4*,,.,, f.;:_i,._:...: lim ...p..”0 •-..4 ..• , i,.. . , , . ..
- , ..4.„„,,, , . ... I:L, 5 *•••.4 .IX rit-JMI ..4.11/SO 44, -:' ., ,,..
111,m'et r'• "" -1 ' ".4"--TX,Lr t 2R4,12-4nitja -gitt...,- ---14 ,,i
....:
Pi Ir.i.". •-rm.-- hr., - , r .. - ;Am t•....• • -, 4.SA,_ .
•,;4//2!'<-1.7.-.22-.. I.. ,:, ;:-..-;12:,.. _.---_,. . _ , . ..
.1. kJ •,!,• .171 g M'A g it°ND; 7 •t, PZ111;:t." [11 li 11LE 4 17 phSIAllir 3/ el. , 4.
, , ... .
• /4e
-••--1'... . .•=• 11111111.1-11 1 I
'al, n. i 4,- ' 41It:".-'•" ‘••••• . ' .. . ?••
-.. c• _ .. 7- 114.71.4* i----• AI . Lig- „,...$ 1311,4:4,Pr_r- . saHniir.,.., pulw-_w //,,,,. 4, . .....
Ilt,,,. , .4 -- i• . .
‘.>"--i.1,4„.s..tss,,-`'4,„„ 4- • 0 ,
4.-"bXliZr .;•' .,, • -:.--,.....: %.,..:/-4'.'-`,,- 1, '. •
. .. • 64 PI III Fi pi piv 1 in ..
. ...
,":...efi.;
• z
'op.. s . /. gir h.. i -' . 11 ' '414:14. ' ,.,:...'_7,."••74;:tiii.:471...p,I.:-,:;- "111,14?Lp..7_/t
.'..•::',..7t,&.:,=,K::.-"A. --- - %'lit .t r..
i- • •.--.".•....,...-,-,..„..=:--, •,-'....-7:. ..,i.,--...'.. ...• - /AIM 1I1Mir w • -.. , ..:....4114- --.. , - ,,,,. s •:.,,,u.., :-.'"'*--—win. — -----4 ''',,,,i;• <15 7'4..A!- ,.,
.7!:
• -
r- - ill • - ,jaggiajr..t„r".... . . .... ...,...
. - .
hiv, ,„.:•0 ; E. _
r443 lc
k . . ,... . g ,-,, •,,:,,,...-4,.. ,--4.4k,.. .... , "4. : -
141 . 7.-IM. 1141111144Pirl
c,.1. ,
,,,,.... . lomi..._____itcRE .. ..... .,. / •
. Thirialr . 1111111,tiCrailll 7 11 INN V. ..• - .t'' . ,, ..
- - •
' Avr.7' ta-' . • -„ III
•. ,6f7:c: , bokrisgtisii,. , la , 1 I/". -N '
•
' NEI —- '.- ''.1 IREmili1141 0_11 M J
• Ibb.,4 . t.,- . ......„
. . ; .... • ; . -.,.. ._. .
I 1 .
• ,t - -1, ,9
4. to• .1 , _ ' ' ' .... - - -,4,'.1:...t.4 F4
a ',7
II;, 4.4 -III 11111rTillinif - .
, .
. • • 1,
). .4 °it, .1 Q)*°44111,14N1411.1EVIri. 110- •••, . '.
• .11 rito,t4;
6.4,..,.....,,J i _• ' _ .. • . ,
_•-•••• UPEOLA A/C Pe,
•,,..r.-..C.. -.' ''''•- •.'''0 '
4. 2010111472.1."-?,d.e• 'It• . lireiN116.' V -1.C.!''..-..,4".-4:.'
V4ui •.1:-i...,
,,.a.4.,t,.c„,-#,°.(..,.. •inf3rRN,-*,t.4tp144ei1 12k 1.11,.W 31t1-71 oiSgr v'iPiT,Npct5aIicf1eer1PKg1-.,i t"lri7,g•,4•t'AiN41a-.^A1..,.A..K....7•a..Vb•.3Wa;:..-i1D1.
iE..i..,Ps"I1IIC1X,ft4lK r
g!.NIPNi•,7-.I':.,.g,-i v.,*4-A.1l.-' k,.I
IJ 11In.1111,11
PIIIM NIi!
r•
id••'..
p1'i5n
'.7•+-7'r'',-'"•'••.••14115•D;i1,ie,,„v.R P4L,-t....
TrO.•,. ._
}r.4*....•"1-'2-'2 f-*A .1 11'.
1.<M Pisot li**4716'..,. .•
• .20>;s°g
1gco
I(83
„ AYE.1.- .11.2.•••• -'••'/ . IX M
jimck
FR'15 i.L
_
"
0)1-
Moorporated
; • -! 1 I." , Pt..37. ...• •••01„..„"tek-r• /11 ilk'M)
. pi. ,,._44;,„,-.44.r. ,..,• • •-- ,,,,'rfolliX ''' "' —1 - 'IIF NEWCASTL • _t.,.. -.%1•14•rill
' 11 *a. . g[ 414
=map.
le• • -:1---9,:_za 1.• I a 0 -
I 1 -1.° . ix iittAr4.4.v. ott• lotAlk - " - . . • •ig.• t -at - - - 3Ukseie ..:-_;:.. egit. '',. t5 fir rip... 2 a •
,. ' . E • -121r!V 'AT ••I• 40 , '..:soik 1. .
.....)^mt i , -
P7. Ida oak=
k•
ir-, 30209.001.001
/ • \ .
. . .
66 2
1 • , .
gm.no.
i . . .
MESIOZEUE A•lit at t
. .. • --
' . .
•
• .
. •-....6.1..B,-11 6-./.2 ‘..1,._/V11/1\41lY:- -I Lvi 1, 6.EU. :_z, 1'24N, R51
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT :.; \
OVERALL PLAT PLAN y jam°F
//'/ / eA
iW
sv
,'‘'. „... ,
, ,
A,,. .
•
,/ Y/
0,
111%.-/
.. /4
, , , / -.--
I
_,,,, ././
,_ . , _ ....
., „...---,,,4 /
JCOR-2 ZONE 's
% I—_. b,�I ,I I,. l 7 .1"';•d';" 1:.i-,r-i 1 r-i_1 1:: i_71- I .I 1_ I ,I I_—/---,
:I�.. / , /r
,I :... ,I " h�••13 .,I' I I ' yqI f:.. I=..J_..`1-4--4i.r.1— 1"•-r' .1—.� i'''"' 1 ..It-=- / / /
/ _
I ,,;-�� I, <I I�.LJL_L 41 I._J�-y_°JLi 11,._I-iL I J1' i' 1 1a -/. ': jJ(
-• �.i .... a .,:•vSTREEf A' J L -zl— L---1 L.—:J.-� ///, • ;•�/ / )
LAKE 1 / 1
WASHINGTON • ,_ �.. 7 —, —
f= .c /� /---/:/r. %/,eii>_ / _-yam\ „ "� rI_- ..I f I r:/ r,�i �'
Irf—_-- (\ ,'/y /'K /' /'< ,t,. / --_—I 1 1Y i~ I�'d`'IF-•6 rr/ ///
• IIL= __ / , `/ / `/ / I ,°T I I ,9 f1 L.
I` / '% //
•
r — :I I. -➢ .// '//
FT.
/ •
I -- \y r\yr •'^(- \ \\ a\ \ /' // / / [�•
.
•
• :., I I,:—:-_i_ ro, <L••\''Z's' )\---**.•f 7 , ,
i,____...,___:- ‘---•-•'--\ ; //" ..' \''''••••k..'\sk.\''› 4' yi.",/ „..i'-' /
•
\ /
/ a! • /
MAY CREEK y fix(L/.
\�-•, -A.- s:. ,,r'/ /.
DELTA / /
/'b�� ,'f.rss..,F•- -i::tic• - /
' / .
N 40TH ST.
•• 4* CITY JF RENTON
sal. 4Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
February 13, 2003
David Sherrard
Parametrix
5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Consultant Selection
Dear David:
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to prepare the EIS for the
above referenced project.
Attached is a revised scope that the City has prepared in order to streamline the EIS as
much as possible. At your earliest convenience, please submit an amended budget and
schedule, if necessary, that addresses this reduced scope. Upon the review of this
information, I will arrange a meeting between you, the project applicant, and myself to
discuss the scope of work and budget in greater detail. Subsequently, I will prepare a.
contract to execute this agreement.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425).430-7270 or
by email at Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us.
•
Sincerely,
Lesley Nish' ' a
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
•
•
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
CO
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
C This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 13, 2003
TO: File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP c,
FROM: Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
SUBJECT: Revised Scope—Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Environmental Impact Statement(E.I.S.)
In an effort to eliminate insignificant impacts from detailed study, the scope for the EIS will
generally be limited to the areas listed below. This revised scope will serve as a basis for a
revised work program and budget upon the final selection of the consultant.
ALTERNATIVES
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
> EARTH
• i.e., soils, geology, seismic hazards, earthwork, erosion/sedimentation
> WATER RESOURCES
• i.e., waterways, hydrology,floodplains, groundwater and water quality
> PLANTS AND ANIMALS
• i.e., shoreline and wetland habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species
• include analysis of shoreline access and regional trail
BUILT ENVIRONMENT
> TRANSPORTATION
• include analysis of design and impacts of rail road crossings
> TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• include analysis of impacts from abutting contaminated properties
> AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE
> NOISE
• limited analysis; only as it relates to construction impacts and future residents/railroad
usage
> CULTURAL RESOURCES
• limited analysis; only as it relates to archaeological impacts
cc: Jennifer Henning
Neil Watts
c% ,. CITX OF RENTON
" . Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
February 13, 2003
Lisa Grueter
Jones & Stokes
11820 Northup Way, Suite E300
Bellevue, WA 98005-1946
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Consultant Selection
Dear Lisa:
Thank you for submitting your firm's proposal for the above referenced project. We were
impressed by the high quality of the materials presented. While each firm satisfied the
minimum qualifications for the requested proposal, staff found the task of comparing the •
proposals to be very difficult as each was excellently prepared and appropriately
addressed the issues surrounding the project.
After consultation with staff members and the project applicant, the evaluation of the
proposals did not warrant the selection of your firm. However, in the event the selected
firm is not able to fulfill their duties for this project, your firm will be asked to consider
accepting this project.
If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 430-7270 or
by email at Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nis ' ra
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THR
5 This paper contains 50%recycled material_snu„nef , (ITI1
;y CITYF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 10, 2003
Lisa Grueter
Jones &Stokes
11820 Northup Way, Suite E300
Bellevue, WA 98005-1946
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Request for Proposals
Dear Lisa: •
Thank you for your interest in attending the public scoping meeting for the above
referenced project. The City of Renton is now requesting a written proposal from your
firm regarding the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement, (EIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal.
Attached is information regarding our request for proposal as well as a copy of the
Scoping Comments Summary and the Scoping Document issued by the City. Additional
project specific information as contained within the official land use file is available for
review with the Development Services Division located on the sixth floor of City Hall.
Please provide three copies of the proposal to my attention at Renton City Hall — 6th
Floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 no later than 5:00 p.m. Monday,
January 27, 2003.
We will be reviewing the proposals in terms of project management approach, technical
approach, schedule and reasonableness of the budget. Our estimated timeline for the
completion of the DEIS work would be late May with the FEIS to be issued mid-July.
If you have further questions or would like additional information, please contact me at
(425) 430-7270 or by email at Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us. Please note, I will be out of
the office January 13th through January 17th and will be happy to provide any additional
information requested immediately upon my return on Monday, January 20th
Sincerely,
/ \)s
Lesley Nishih a
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
C"�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
, This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
..r4 CITY i RENTON
PlanningBuilding/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 10, 2003
•
Rich Schipanski
Blumen Consulting Groupm, Inc.
600 108th Street NE, Suite 1002
Bellevue, WA 98004
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Request for Proposals
Dear Rich:
Thank you for your interest in attending the public scoping meeting for the above
referenced project. The City of Renton is now requesting a written proposal from your
firm regarding the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal.
Attached is information regarding our request for proposal as well as a copy of the
Scoping Comments Summary and the Scoping Document issued by the City. Additional
project specific information as contained within the official land use file is available for
review with the Development Services Division located on the sixth floor of City Hall.
Please provide three copies of the proposal to my attention at Renton City Hall — 6th
Floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 no later than 5:00 p.m. Monday,
January 27, 2003.
We will be reviewing the proposals in terms of project management approach, technical
approach, schedule and reasonableness of the budget. Our estimated timeline for the
completion of the DEIS work would be late May with the FEIS to be issued mid-July.
If you have further questions or would like additional information, please contact me at
(425) 430-7270 or by email at Iishihira@ci.renton.wa.us. Please note, I will be out of
the office January 13th through January 17th and will be happy to provide any additional
information requested immediately upon my return on Monday, January 20th
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
..�� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
;y } _ CITY F RENTON
.u. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
J e Tanner MayorGregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
January 10, 2003
David Sherrard •
Parametrix
5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS—
Request for Proposals
Dear David:
Thank you for your interest in attending the public scoping meeting for the above
referenced project. The City of Renton is now requesting a written proposal from your
firm regarding the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal.
Attached is information regarding our request for proposal as well as a copy of the
Scoping Comments Summary and the Scoping Document issued by the City. Additional
project specific information as contained within the official land use file is available for
review with-the Development Services Division located on the sixth floor of City Hall.
•
Please provide three copies of the proposal to my attention at Renton City Hall — 6th
Floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 no later than 5:00 p.m. Monday,
January 27, 2003.
We will be reviewing the proposals in terms of project management approach, technical
approach, schedule and reasonableness of the budget. Our estimated timeline for the
completion of the DEIS work would be late May with the FEIS to be issued mid-July.
If you have further questions or would like additional information, please contact me at
(425) 430-7270 or by email at Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us. Please note, I will be out of
the office January 13th through January 17th and will be happy to provide any additional
information requested immediately upon my return on Monday, January 20th.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nish, ra
Project Manager
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Alex Pietsch
Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
:�� This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS
REQUEST FOR SCOPE, SCHEDULE AND BUDGET
January 10, 2003
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposal is for a 115-lot residential preliminary plat located on the Lake Washington
shoreline. A detailed project description is contained within the City of Renton Scoping
Document dated January 10, 2003.
PROPOSAL CONTENTS
• Identify project team, including project manager.
• Identify key personneVsubconsultants for issue areas:
• Natural Environment (earth, plants and animals, water, air)
• Transportation
• Toxic and Hazardous Materials
• Aesthetics, Lights and Glare
• Noise
• Land and Shoreline Use
• Public Services and Utilities
• Historic and Cultural Resources
• Population/Housing/ Employment
• Provide a brief scope of services indicating approach to project management, technical
issues and public involvement.
• Include a budget, billing rates and schedule.
DUE DATE
Please submit three (3) copies of the proposal no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, January
20, 2003. The submittal should be directed to: Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner,
Development Services Division, Renton City Hall — 6th Floor, 1055 South Grady Way,
Renton, WA 98055.
rfp.doc\
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SCOPING DOCUMENT
January 10, 2003
cJ
��'N )
City of Renton
Development Services Division
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
•
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
SCOPING DOCUMENT
Introduction 1
Description of the Proposal 1
Project Site 1
Proposed Action 1
Relationship to Remediation Process 2
Licenses, Permits and Necessary Approvals 3
Alternatives Chosen for Analysis 4
EIS Approach 4
Elements of the Environment 4
Natural Environment 5
Built Environment 7
Final EIS 12
Project Name/Number: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Lead Agency: City of Renton
Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee (ERC)
c/o Jennifer Henning
Renton City Hall
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Proponent: Barbee Mill Company
Alex Cugini
P.O. Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
Project Manager: Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
Development Services Division, P/B/PW
Renton City Hall —6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
(425) 430-7270/ (425) 430-7300 fax
INTRODUCTION
The City of Renton has requested comments on the scope of the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. Both public and agency
scoping meetings regarding the project have been held. Comments submitted in writing
or given through testimony have been considered and incorporated into this document
where appropriate. All comments received during the scoping period are contained
within the official land use file and are available for review.
This scoping document provides a description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
as well as those elements of the environment identified for consideration and analysis in
the EIS.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
Protect Site — The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington
Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington
Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along the eastern boundary. The property
contains 16 buildings, some of which are currently utilized for limited lumber operations
with the remaining buildings unused and in disrepair. Existing development within the
vicinity of the site includes predominantly detached single family housing located within
the Residential — 8 (R-8) dwelling units per acre zone.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning
designation, which is intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and
residential activity in a high quality, master planned development that is integrated with
the natural environment. Stand-alone residential development is also permitted in the
zone provided the required density of a minimum 5 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac) is
satisfied.
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines
and is, therefore, subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. The property is
relatively flat with approximate grades ranging from 0.5% to 4% to the west for areas
north of May Creek, from 1% to 7% towards May Creek and Lake Washington on the
south side of the creek, and from 7% to 35-40% along the banks of May Creek. The
City's Critical Areas Maps designate the property as containing potential high seismic
hazards, steep slopes (15%to 25%) and flood hazards.
Proposed Action — The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115
residential lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The
proposal would result in a net density of approximately 8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9
gross acre site — 9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public roadways = 13.77 net
acre ---> 115 units/ 13.77 net acre = 8.35 du/ac).
The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units — most of which would be
constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to
be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common
walls with separate units on each lot. The shoreline fronting lot lines would extend to the
inner harbor line.
Scoping Document 1
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and four utility/open space tracts would be
established with the plat. With the exception of the existing building located on the
shoreline (within Department of Natural Resources lease land), all buildings would be
demolished as part of the project and lumber operations would be discontinued.
Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement,
which would be dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake Washington
Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of the
site. The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the
majority of the project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May
Creek. Private streets and driveways are also proposed in specific locations within the
plat.
In order to provide connection to the secondary access point at the southeast corner of
the property, a bridge crossing over May Creek (at the location of one of the three
existing bridges) would be necessary. Installation of new foundations for the proposed
bridge may require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek and if so,
would require approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
Regulations prior to the installation of required plat improvements. An additional
existing bridge is proposed to be utilized as a pedestrian crossing.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake
Washington shoreline — for which a.25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark
would be maintained. No other alterations or improvements to the lake shoreline are
included with the proposal. In addition, May Creek bisects the property extending
southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta
within Lake Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek
ordinary high water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore
currently impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer area. All mature trees
located within the May Creek buffer area are proposed to be retained.
The project applicant has also identified two category III wetlands with associated
buffers within property boundaries—one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near
the end of street C (aka"northerly wetland") and another at the southern edge of the site
near the south end of street C (aka "southerly wetland"). The applicant is requesting to
buffer average the minimum required 25-foot buffer for the northerly wetland. In
addition, approximately 400 square feet of the southerly wetland is proposed to be filled,
with enhancements to the northerly wetland and buffer area proposed in order to
mitigate for loss of wetland area.
Project construction would require extensive grading and excavation activities
throughout the site for the removal of existing asphalt areas and the creation of new
building pads, roadways, and utilities. Preliminary earthwork quantities are estimated at
approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of fill
material to be imported to the site. In addition, approximately 18 trees would be
removed as part of on-site grading activities.
Relationship to Remediation Process — The Barbee Mill Company has proposed an
independent remedial action plan (IRAP) pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act
(MTCA) to the Department of Ecology in order to perform excavation and removal of
approximately 21,500 cubic yards of arsenic contaminated and elevated zinc level soils
(those exceeding MTCA method A levels) that are contained within the uplands portion
Scoping Document 2
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
•
of the property. The environmental investigations and proposed remedies for the
Barbee Mill site are documented in the following report:
• Independent Remedial Action Plan, Upland Areas, Barbee Mill Company, Renton,
Washington prepared for the Barbee Mill Company dated September 6, 2000 by
Hart Crowser, Inc.
The IRAP was reviewed and determined to be acceptable by the Department of Ecology
on September 12, 2000. Subsequently, the City of Renton conducted Environmental
(SEPA) Review and issued a Special Fill and Grade Permit for the remediation project
on September 9, 2002. The permit will remain valid for a period of 4 years with the
requirement for either an extension or new permit upon expiration.
Although the approved remediation is anticipated to occur concurrently with site
preparation activities for an approved development project, some analysis regarding the
intended clean-up levels and the appropriateness of those levels for the proposed
residential development will be necessary in this EIS.
Licenses, Permits and Necessary Approvals — The following permits and approvals
will likely be required for the redevelopment of the site:
• City of Renton: Preliminary Plat Approval
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval
Level II Site Plan Approval
Level I Site Plan Approval
Shoreline Variance Approval, if applicable
Wetland Buffer Averaging and Compensation Approval
Street Modification Approval
Railroad Crossing Access Approval
Site Preparation, Demolition, and Construction Permits
Final Plat Approval
• King County: Shoreline Permit for DNR lease lands
• Washington
Department of Ecology: Hazardous Waste— No Further Action Letter
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval
Shoreline Variance Approval, if applicable
Water Quality Certification
• Washington
Department of Fish &Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
• Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission: Approval of Railroad Crossing(s)
• US Army Corp of Engineers: Section 401 and 404 Permits, if necessary
• US Environmental
Protection Agency: CERCLA/MTCA Clearance
• All other applicable licenses and permits necessary to allow the redevelopment of
the site under the proposed action.
Scoping Document 3
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
ALTERNATIVES CHOSEN FOR ANALYSIS
In addition to the proposed action described above, the following alternative will be
considered in the EIS:
No-Action — Continuation of some form of industrial use of the property (the specific
industrial activity on the site may change over time, but on an overall basis would remain
consistent with its character). Some form of clean-up would likely occur per the
approved TRAP, but the specific cleanup plan and the timing of remediation would likely
be different and extended.
EIS APPROACH
EIS Required — The lead agency has determined that this proposal could have
significant adverse impacts on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared.
The EIS is intended to address all probable significant impacts that would occur as a
result of redevelopment to the site. The EIS is intended to provide a sufficient level of
detail and analysis such that further environmental review under SEPA will not be
necessary.
The EIS will build upon previous environmental documents prepared for the site and
comprehensive planning efforts conducted by the City of Renton. Some of the
documents that will be consulted and incorporated, as appropriate, into the analysis of
the EIS include:
• Proposed Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Draft and
Final EIS(January 1992 and February 1993).
• City of Renton Draft and Final Comprehensive Plan Supplemental DEIS and FEIS
(December 1994 and February 1995).
• Port Quendall Preliminary Plan Draft and Final EIS (September 1981 and February
1982).
• May Creek Basin Current and Future Conditions Report(August 1995).
• Barbee Mill Dredging, Determination of Non-Significance — Mitigated, LUA-02-067,
ECF, SP, SM (August 2002).
• Barbee Mill Soils Remediation, Determination of Non-Significance — Mitigated, LUA-
02-069, ECF, SP, SM (September 2002).
ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT
The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS. Direct,
indirect and cumulative impacts as a result of construction and operation of the proposal
and alternative will be identified and evaluated for each of the following elements of the
environment. Mitigation measures will also be identified, as appropriate and warranted.
The items discussed within both the natural and built environment categories have been
preliminarily listed in order beginning with those that should be studied most extensively,
followed by items requiring lesser levels of analysis. Although the analysis of the less
significant items will likely be minimal, it is necessary due to the inability to fully ascertain
the breadth of such impacts based on the information provided. Therefore, the
Scoping Document 4
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
identification and disclosure of those potential impacts as they specifically relate to the
proposal, along with associated mitigation measures as warranted, will be contained
within the EIS.
Natural Environment
Earth —A site specific analysis of soil, geologic and hazard conditions will be prepared.
This analysis will build upon the data provided in previous documents. The discussion
of existing conditions will address the soil and geologic characteristics of the site and
the sequencing of the geologic strata that underlie the ground surface and the offshore
area. Any limitations of the site's soils for grading and for support of structures and
roads will be described. Applicable maps and cross sections will be provided.
In addition, a discussion of applicable geologic hazards as established by the City's
Critical Areas Maps with emphasis on the site's potential as a seismic hazard area.
Seismicity of the region will be discussed and will include a description of some of the
larger historic earthquakes that have affected the area, as well as the potential for the
site being affected by larger earthquakes that have occurred at times that pre-date
settlement of the area.
The potential for earthquake-induced landslides or liquefaction will be addressed. The
susceptibility of the site's soils to erosion and sedimentation, and existing sediment
discharge problems at the mouth of May Creek will also be described.
Appropriate design of the foundations and other supporting structures, as well as
anticipated building construction methods for development of the site will be described.
The general nature of these types of building foundations will be discussed in order to
provide a baseline for evaluating potential impacts of construction.
An evaluation of the anticipated impacts of proposed construction at the site will be
conducted. Impacts associated with cuts and fills that would be constructed in
association with access roads leading to the site and general site grading will be
addressed. The quantities and depths of cuts and fills will be estimated, and any need
for import/export of material identified. The potential for erosion and sedimentation
impacts will be evaluated; specific emphasis will be placed on any potential impacts to
May Creek. Any potential slope stability impacts will be defined for steeply sloped
areas along May Creek. Finally, any risks of construction and building placement
associated with potential seismic events (liquefaction) will be addressed. Mitigation
measures which may be relevant to minimize impacts on the site will be identified.
Soil and sediment contaminant sources and levels that exist on site will be identified
based on information generated as part of the Independent Remedial Action Plan
(IRAP) prepared in accordance with the MTCA and as approved by the Department of
Ecology (refer to the Toxic and Hazardous Materials section of this scope for further
discussion).
Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat — Existing upland habitat
conditions and values on-site will be described. An analysis of existing on-site wetlands
will be performed with functions and values of the wetlands and their habitat
relationships to May Creek and/or Lake Washington to be described. This analysis will
build upon data provided in previous documents and field confirmation of present
conditions.
Scoping Document 5
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
An assessment of the proposed shoreline buffer areas of Lake Washington and May
Creek will be provided relative to any upland habitat value and identified critical habitat
areas. Potential impacts to upland habitats and any identified wetlands from project
construction and post-development will be addressed, including potential impacts from
increased erosion, water quality changes and increased human activity. In addition,
analysis of cumulative impacts from reasonably expected unrestricted landscaping and
future applications for residential use docks from the lake fronting lots. Cumulative
impacts from future use or alterations of the DNR-owned uplands will also be
addressed. Opportunities for enhancement of resources will be examined, particularly in
light of existing conditions.
Plants and Animals: Fisheries — Aquatic and riparian habitat along the Lake
Washington shoreline on, and adjacent to, the site will be characterized in terms of
fisheries habitat and functions. A plan view and side view maps of shoreline fisheries
habitat will be prepared. The examination of existing biological activity, as well as the
condition of the near shore lake bottom sediments, will build upon existing studies. This
data, together with the assumption of fish use, will be used to characterize existing
conditions.
Potential impacts on fisheries resources from both construction and operation of the
proposal will be assessed. Such impacts could include effects on critical habitat areas
due to potential increases in erosion/sedimentation during construction, changes in
water quality conditions, the influence of in-water structures (docks, bulkheads) on
salmon/predator interactions, dredging-related impacts and increases in lighting on
salmon migration. Mitigation plans and/or opportunities for habitat enhancement and
the adequacy of the proposed shoreline buffers will be examined.
Water Resources: Stormwater Drainage / Runoff / Flooding — Existing drainage
patterns, runoff rates and volumes will be described, with particular attention to peak
flows to May Creek. Drainage sub-basins within the site will be located. Specific
flooding and sediment discharge problems at the mouth of May Creek will be
addressed.
Post-development runoff patterns, volumes and flows would be estimated. Potential
impacts to May Creek and each surface water discharge location will be evaluated,
including possible increases in erosion and sedimentation due to construction.
Additional analysis of the upstream drainage basin for existing and future developed
conditions will be conducted to address the potential need for upsizing existing culverts.
Analysis of detention, water quality and compensatory storage for filling within the
floodplain will be included. In addition, options for alleviating sedimentation problems at
the mouth of the creek will be examined, specifically addressing the continued dredging
of the creek relative to potential flooding impacts and expansion of the 100-year
floodplain into developed areas. The appropriate design of bridge foundations located
within the floodplain will be discussed. The relationship of the proposed drainage
system to the adopted surface water drainage standards will be assessed, and the need
for any mitigation identified.
Water Resources: Groundwater — Groundwater levels on-site and immediately
adjacent to the site (Lake Washington) will be described based on past and current
investigations. The direction of groundwater flow will be documented. The contribution
of infiltration on-site to groundwater and surface water resources will be described. Any
Scoping Document 6
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
potential impacts to groundwater quality conditions will be assessed. Measures to
mitigate any identified groundwater impacts will be addressed.
Groundwater contaminant sources and levels that exist on-site will be identified based
on information generated as part of the Independent Remedial Action Plan (IRAP)
prepared in accordance with the MICA and as approved by the Department of Ecology
(refer to the Toxic and Hazardous Materials section of this scope for further discussion).
Water Resources: Water Quality — Existing water quality conditions in lower May
Creek and Lake Washington will be described based on available data and previously
conducted studies. An assessment of the current conditions of any wetlands, seeps or
swales will be performed. Surface water contaminant sources and levels that exist on-
site, if any, will be described based on information generated as part of the TRAP. City
of Renton plans, policies and regulations relevant to shoreline areas, wetlands, surface
water quality management and use of Best Management Practices will be identified.
Water quality impacts during construction and post-development will be assessed,
including potential impacts resulting from erosion and stormwater pollutants typical of
urban runoff. Potential impacts to May Creek, Lake Washington and any wetlands will
be addressed. Post-development water quality composition will be estimated using
existing literature, with consideration of the effect of proposed water quality treatment
facilities. Predicted changes in water quality for May Creek and Lake Washington will
be compared to relevant standards. Opportunities for mitigating any identified impacts
will be described and examined.
Air Quality — The analysis of air quality impacts will be minimal. Construction-related
air quality impacts during demolition and construction, such as the potential for
generation of dust during site grading activities, will be discussed. Measures to mitigate
air quality emissions during construction will also be addressed.
Built Environment
Transportation — An overview of existing conditions within the study area will be
provided. A description of the local arterial network, including Lake Washington
Boulevard, Ripley Lane, Park Avenue North, Burnett Avenue North and WSDOT 1-405
facilities at the NE 44th Street and NE 30th Street interchanges will be included.
Existing trips associated with current on-site uses will be discussed with levels of service
at nearby intersections to be analyzed.
There are several transportation issues regarding the proposed development that will be
addressed, including impacts to the existing roadway network, impacts to the Burlington
Northern Railroad and availability of public railroad crossings, access to the 1-405
freeway, impacts from increased trips through and on Newcastle streets, and cumulative
traffic impacts of the proposed development and existing, as well as future, land uses.
In addition, safety, pedestrian and non-motorized facilities, emergency vehicle access,
transit impacts and the design of the railroad crossing(s) will be addressed.
Trip generation and distribution will be determined for the Proposed Action and
alternative and will build upon previously conducted studies. The City's transportation
model would be used to determine trip distribution. The City's transportation model will
also be used to determine future year (year of opening for the proposed development)
traffic forecasts for the roadway network surrounding the project site. Future year
Scoping Document 7
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
forecasts will include traffic generated by pipeline and approved development identified
by the City. The future year forecasts will be used as baseline traffic for the
determination of traffic impacts related to the proposed development. The roadway
network will be analyzed for the project during the p.m. peak hour based on a level of
service (delay) analysis. The level of service analysis will include project-impacted
intersections, including site access locations.
Appropriate mitigation will be identified for vehicular traffic impacts, and will include
options for trip reduction through Transportation Demand Management (this could
include options for mode split, peak trip spreading, etc.). Potential increases in mode
split to transit; HOV and non-motorized travel will be explored. Mitigation would also
address, where appropriate, design of railroad crossings pursuant to WUTC and BNRR
requirements, as well as safety and emergency vehicle access. The proposal's
participation in planned off-site improvements, and additional improvements not
currently planned, will be evaluated relative to mitigation.
Toxic and Hazardous Materials — The site is known to contain contaminated soils —
primarily contaminated with arsenic and zinc. An Independent Remedial Action Plan
pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act (MICA) has been approved by the
Department of Ecology and the City of Renton (file no. LUA-02-069) that would bring soil
conditions up to residential standards. The IRAP has not yet been implemented on the
site. Discussion of timing of the intended clean-up as it relates to site development
preparation will be included in the EIS.
In addition, analysis of contamination levels on adjacent properties and compatibility
with the proposed residential development will be completed. This analysis may build
upon the on-site analysis conducted for the site but must specifically address the
compatibility and appropriate proximity of the proposal with heavily contaminated
properties abutting the site.
Aesthetics, Light and Glare — Existing aesthetic qualities and scenic resources of the
site and the surrounding area, including Lake Washington, will be identified. The
industrial character of both the upland and marine portions of the site will be described.
A description of the general view shed to the site, which includes surrounding residential
(to the north and east), 1-405 and Lake Washington Boulevard, and portions of the West
Hill (unincorporated King County), Mercer Island, Newcastle and Lake Washington itself,
will be included. Photos from these representative viewpoints will be provided to visually
document existing conditions.
The potential impacts to views from these areas from redevelopment of the site will be
evaluated. The proposed uses, heights, design, and shoreline features will be
considered relative to existing uses. Visual impacts of the proposal during the different
phases of redevelopment, as seen from selected viewpoints, potentially including from
Lake Washington and Mercer Island, area parks and roadways, and representative
existing residential areas, will be evaluated. Visual representations such as view
corridor maps, conceptual drawings, photo simulations, computer simulations, or other
illustrations will be used in this analysis.
The change in aesthetic character of the site from industrial to residential will be
evaluated, particularly relating to design, scale, intensity and compatibility with the
surrounding aesthetic character. Any additional mitigating measures to reduce any
Scoping Document 8
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
visual impacts of the proposal that are not included in the proposed design and are
warranted will be evaluated.
Existing sources of light and glare emanating from the industrial use of the site will be
identified. The potential impacts of light and glare from redevelopment on surrounding
land uses (especially residential uses to the north and east); residences across the lake
on Mercer Island, and from Lake Washington itself will be addressed. An assessment
of the impacts of night lighting on fish habitat will also be discussed (integrated with
Fisheries analysis). Measures to mitigate impacts from light and glare will be identified,
as appropriate.
Noise — The analysis of noise related impacts will be minimal. Relevant federal, state,
and local sound level criteria will be identified and discussed for impacts of the project
on surrounding uses. Construction noise will be evaluated by specific construction
activity and phase (i.e., pile driving, excavation, etc.), using published sound levels of
construction noise. These sound levels will be adjusted to represent the actual
distances to potential receptor locations in the neighborhoods surrounding the project
site.
Potential means for mitigating any identified traffic and other noise impacts will be
discussed. Pertinent regulations covering construction noise, and potential constraints
on the timing and duration of construction noise events, will be identified, as warranted.
Land and Shoreline Use — The Land Use analysis will describe the type and mix of
uses, zoning, density, scale and shoreline uses both on site and in the surrounding
community. A discussion of the site's historical activities will also be included based on
available information.
The proposal's degree of compatibility with the existing character of the Kennydale area,
especially the residential areas directly to the north, east and south will be analyzed. A
site-specific analysis of the compatibility of the design, scale, and features of the
Proposed Action and alternatives with immediately surrounding uses will be provided.
Based on the designation of the site as an Office/Residential Center, the City's
Comprehensive Plan targeted this site as one of several sites within the city to
accommodate some amount of office employment and multi-family housing. The Land
Use analysis will include a discussion of potential land use trade-offs relating to
provision of substantial residential housing versus employment on the site.
The Relationship to Plans and Policies analysis will summarize relevant policies and
provisions from City land use, transportation and related plans, ordinances or
regulations and will discuss the general consistency or inconsistency of the proposal.
The EIS will contain a specific evaluation of the relationship of the proposal to the
adopted Comprehensive Plan. This analysis will address relevant policies on the Land
Use, Transportation, Housing, Capital Facilities, Utilities, Economic Development and
Environmental Elements.
The proposal's consistency with the City's Zoning Code, and Office/Residential zone
provisions will also be evaluated. In addition, the proposal's relationship to other
applicable standards/regulations (i.e., Critical Areas Regulations) will be addressed.
The relationship of the proposal to the City's Shoreline Master Program will be assessed
relative to policies and standards related to encouragement of water-enjoyment uses,
Scoping Document 9
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
intensity of use and public access. Measures to mitigate any adverse land use impacts
to the surrounding community and uses will be identified, as warranted.
Public Services and Utilities: Fire and Emergency Medical Services — Existing fire
and emergency medical services will be discussed at a minimal level. The current
staffing levels, equipment and facilities of the City of Renton Fire Department will be
described and any service deficiencies identified. Specific stations that respond to the
site will be identified. Current demand for services (number of calls) will be assessed
based on available information. Response times to the site, and any existing mutual aid
agreements between service providers, will be described. Any information on estimated
future increases in fire and emergency medical service calls without the proposal will be
provided. Available water resources for fire flow purposes will be documented
(interrelated with the Utilities section below).
An estimate of the added demand on fire and emergency services from the proposal will
be made based on information provided by the Renton Fire Department or on data
available from other jurisdictions. Impacts on response times to the site will be
addressed. The need for additional fire and emergency medical services from
redevelopment will be determined. The potential need to hire additional personnel,
purchase more equipment, or build additional facilities will be assessed. Emergency
access routes and on-site exits including the ability of emergency vehicles to gain
access to the site during times of traffic congestion or railroad usage will be evaluated.
Potential impacts will be assessed relative to planned improvements identified in the
Capital Facilities Element. Additional improvements to mitigate any significant impacts
will be determined, as warranted.
Public Services and Utilities: Police Services — Existing police services will be
described at a minimal level. The current staffing levels, equipment and facilities of the
Renton Police Department will be described and any service deficiencies identified.
Specific stations that respond to the site will be identified. Current demand for services
(number of calls) will be assessed based on available information. Response times to
the site, and any existing mutual aid agreements between service providers, will be
described. Any information on estimated future increases in police service calls without
the proposal will be provided. Current crime rates in the site vicinity will be described.
An estimate of the added demand on police services, both during construction and
operation of the proposal, will be made. Potential impacts on response times, the need
for additional personnel, police vehicles, or facilities will be discussed. Potential impacts
will be assessed relative to planned improvements identified in the Capital Facilities
Element. Additional improvements to mitigate any significant impacts will be
determined, as warranted.
Public Services and Utilities: Parks — Minimal analysis of recreational impacts will be
completed. Existing parks, recreational facilities and trails in the site vicinity will be
identified, and their adequacy to serve the existing population will be analyzed using City
of Renton standards for parks and recreational facilities contained in the Comprehensive
Plan. Planned improvements in the area, identified in the Capital Facilities Element, will
be described along with establishment of identified regional recreation trail easements.
Proposed on-site recreational facilities and opportunities will be described. The impacts
of the proposal on existing parks (especially the Kennydale Beach Park and Gene
Coulon Park both located south of the site), recreational facilities and trails will be
Scoping Document 10
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
assessed, given the proposed on-site facilities with emphasis given to code
requirements for substantial public access to the Lake Washington shoreline. The
availability of these facilities to residents and employees of the development, as well as
the general public will be discussed. Additional improvements to mitigate any significant
impacts will be determined, as warranted.
Public Services and Utilities: Water — At a minimal level, the existing City of Renton
water storage and distribution system in the site vicinity will be described and its' current
capacities identified. Existing fire flow capability to the site will be determined. Any
existing problems or deficiencies in the system will be assessed. The planned
improvements identified in the City's Capital Facilities Plan will be reviewed. The
project's water demand in terms of peak flow for both domestic use and fire protection
will be quantified. Demand related to all proposed uses and project phases will be
calculated. The capacity of the existing system to accommodate the project's demand,
and the project's relationship to planned improvements in the area will be evaluated.
Additional improvements to mitigate project impacts will be determined, including
possible upgrades in water main sizing and additional storage capacity. The
relationship of the proposed system to the adopted water system level of service
standards will be discussed.
Public Services and Utilities: Wastewater — There will be minimal discussion
regarding wastewater utilities. The existing City of Renton/Metro wastewater collection,
discharge and treatment system will described and current capacities identified. Any
existing problems or deficiencies in the system will be described. The planned
improvements identified in the City's Capital Facilities Plan will be reviewed. The
project's increased sewage flow generation will be quantified, based on demand from all
proposed uses and phases. The capacity of the existing system to accommodate the
project's increased flows will be determined, and the project's relationship to any
planned improvements evaluated. The capacity of the Metro treatment plant to
accommodate added flows from the project will be addressed. Additional improvements
to mitigate project impacts will be determined, potentially including new sewer lines,
pump station and connection(s) to the Metro interceptor. The relationship of the
proposed system to the adopted wastewater system level of service standards will be
assessed.
Public Services and Utilities: Solid Waste — Existing solid waste collection, transfer
and disposal services and facilities will be described at a minimal level. Recycling
programs available to the project site will be identified. Current capabilities of Waste
Management-Rainier to collect and transport waste and the Renton Transfer Station to
receive waste will be assessed; additionally, the capacity of the Cedar Hills landfill to
accommodate all solid waste from the City of Renton will be evaluated. Planned
improvements, identified in the King County Solid Waste Management Plan, will be
reviewed. The project's increased waste generation will be quantified. The ability of the
collection, transfer and disposal facilities to adequately handle the project's waste will be
assessed. Any additional upgrades in service or facilities, as a result of the proposal,
will be determined. Opportunities for recycling and other waste management programs
will be examined.
Public Services and Utilities: Stormwater — At a minimal level, existing stormwater
facilities, any planned improvements, project impacts to stormwater runoff volumes;
Scoping Document 11
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
rates and facilities and relevant mitigation measures will be discussed and evaluated in
the Water Resources section of the EIS.
Public Services and Utilities: Schools — There will be minimal discussion regarding
school impacts. Existing student enrollment, capacity and projected enrollment will be
described for the schools that serve the site vicinity. Student enrollment forecasts for
future years will be identified as available. Current plans by the Renton School District
to construct new facilities, or make facility improvements, will be discussed, and existing
transportation services available to/from the schools servicing this site will be identified.
Any existing capacity problems will be identified.
The number of students expected to be generated by the proposal will be estimated
using the appropriate school district formula. The capacity of the schools in the site
vicinity to accommodate the projected student population will be evaluated. Any need
for additional improvements will be identified. Potential impacts to school bus
transportation operations will be assessed. Additional improvements to mitigate any
significant impacts will be determined, as appropriate.
Historic and Cultural Resources — The analysis of historic and cultural resources will
be conducted to a minimum extent. Cultural resource records and reports on file at the
State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation will be researched, along with
reports, maps, photographs, etc. available at the University of Washington and State
libraries. Consultation with appropriate tribal sources will be conducted. Based on
these sources, and with consideration of the recent industrial use of the site, any areas
of potential cultural or historic sensitivity will be highlighted. If the potential does exist,
potential impacts from construction and operation of the proposal will be assessed.
Measures to mitigate any potential impacts will be identified, as appropriate.
Socioeconomics (Population, Housing, Employment) — At a minimal level, there will
be a description of the existing jobs currently on site will be provided, as well as a
description of the existing and future forecasted population, housing, and employment
levels and characteristics in the area. Trends related to the mix, type, cost and
affordability of housing would be discussed, particularly in the Kennydale neighborhood.
Future employment needs identified by the City will be discussed.
The on-site population that will be generated by the specific type of housing units will be
estimated as well. These projections will be compared to the assumptions used by the
City to gauge any important differences. Furthermore, the number of estimated jobs
and population will be compared to overall, adopted forecasts and targets for City
growth, to determine the proposal's percentage of such overall growth.
Measures to mitigate any adverse impacts to population, employment and housing
conditions will be identified.
FINAL EIS
When the Draft EIS is completed, it will be issued and made available for public and
agency review and comment. Comments received within the designated comment
period (usually thirty days) will be incorporated into a Final EIS, together with
appropriate responses to those comments. Final action on the proposal will not be
taken prior to the issuance of the Final EIS.
Scoping Document 12
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
fl w
l .
CITY OF RENTON
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS
SCOPING COMMENTS SUMMARY
AGENCY
An agency scoping meeting was held on December 9, 2002. The meeting was attended by two
outside agencies (City of Newcastle and Department of Fish and Wildlife) as well as by five City
staff members. The verbal comments from that meeting are summarized below:
• Discussion of the regional trail easement necessary to complete linkages along May Creek
and Lake Washington.
• Establishing controlled public access points so as not to disturb habitat areas.
•
• Condition and use of nearshore environment critical to habitat functions and adequacy of
proposed buffers. Restoration of shoreline areas on the site is necessary, especially when
considering present conditions.
• Traffic congestion impacts for the 1-405 interchanges are likely to result from the project.
• Concern regarding impacts from increased trips to and through the City of Newcastle to/from
the project site.
• A looped watermain system will be necessary to achieve the required fire flow for the
project.
• Discussion of the May Creek floodplain and the need for bridge structures to span the
floodway to provide a minimum clearance of 3 feet above the 100-year water surface
elevation. Compensatory storage for fill within the floodplain may also be necessary.
• Project may be required to follow the DOE stormwater manual.
• Potential impacts from residential docks and light/glare from new use.
• Required buffers from the category 3 wetlands on the site must be provided and any
impacts mitigated.
• Consideration should be given to potential view impacts from the surrounding hillsides,
Mercer Island and Lake Washington.
In addition, written comments were received from three outside agencies: City of Newcastle,
Department of Transportation, and Department of Fish and Wildlife. The written comments are
summarized below:
AGENCY COMMENT SUMMARY EIS SCOPE
City of Three major areas of concern were Comments will be generally
Newcastle identified — all with regard to addressed within the analysis of
(12/16/02) transportation impacts. Specifically, Transportation impacts.
issues requested to be addressed
include trips with an origin or destination
in Newcastle, trips passing through
Newcastle to/from the north, south or
east, and trips using Newcastle streets to
avoid traffic congestion on 1-405.
Barbee Mill Preliminary F
Scoping Comments Summary
Page2of3
Department of The concern identified was the potential Impacts to the NE 44th Street I-
Transportation for significant impacts to the 1-405 ramp 405 interchange will be included
(12/09/02) terminals. Analysis of the need for in the Transportation discussion
signals and channelization was of the EIS.
requested. •
Department of The habitat at this site has been severely Impacts to wetlands and habitat
Fish &Wildlife degraded for many years by the areas from project construction
(12/12/02) industrial use of the site. The conversion and cumulative uses will be
of the site to residential use will present discussed in the Plants and
opportunities for rehabilitation of critical Animals section of the EIS.
habitat. Analysis of specific areas Assessment of the proposed
including nearshore habitat of the lake, buffers from Lake Washington
the instream habitat of the creek, and the and May Creek will be conducted
riparian zone of the creek and lake has along with the determination of
been requested. any appropriate rehabilitation or
habitat mitigation that may be
warranted.
Standard comment forms from Building, Fire, Police, Parks, Water, Sewer, Stormwater and
Transportation reviewers were received after the initial routing.of the project (green folder
review) and are attached. In addition, two internal memos were received during the scoping
process identifying specific areas of concern. These memos are also attached.
PUBLIC
Twenty-two members of the public attended the public scoping meeting held on December 10,
2002, and three spoke. A transcription of the recorded testimony taken at the meeting is
attached. In addition, nine individuals submitted written comments regarding the scope of the
EIS. These comments are summarized as follows:
NAME COMMENT SUMMARY EIS SCOPE
Mary Maier Buffer sizes for May Creek and Lake Comments will be generally
(12/16/02) Washington shorelines, as well as addressed within the analysis of
wetland buffers, need to be addressed. Plants and Animals impacts.
Examination of ecological resources
that the site provides must occur.
Inez Peterson Issues surrounding railroad traffic and Comments will be generally
(12/10/02) safety should be addressed. addressed within the analysis of
Transportation impacts.
Mark Hancock Concerned with increased traffic Comments will be generally
(12/10/02) through Kennydale neighborhood, addressed within the analysis of
consistency of proposal with the Transportation, Land and
Comprehensive Plan, and clean-up Shoreline Use, and Toxic and
issues on the adjacent properties. Hazardous Materials portions of
the EIS.
Lois Wywrot Concerned with excess volumes of Comments will be generally
(12/10/02) traffic, height of new buildings, and addressed within the analysis of
protection of May Creek. Transportation, Aesthetics, and
Plants and Animals portions of
the EIS.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS
•
Scoping Comments Summary
Page3of3
William Yeckel May Creek should be restored to its Comments will be generally
(12/10/02) natural state and the buffer seems to be addressed within the analysis of
too little. Plants and Animals impacts in
the EIS.
Nancy Denney EIS should address: May Creek habitat, Comments will generally be
(12/16/02) public access, air quality, noise and addressed throughout the EIS.
light, traffic congestion in neighborhood
and 1-405, railroad, neighborhood
issues, views, utilities and construction
and possible alternatives.
Thomas Goeltz Necessity for earth, water and animal Comments will generally be
(12/16/02) analysis within EIS; but detailed addressed throughout the EIS.
analysis of other elements not
necessary.
James Hanken Four main areas of concern: traffic Comments will be generally
(12/16/02) impacts, shoreline concerns, wetland addressed within the
mitigation issues and setbacks from Transportation
contaminated areas on abutting
properties.
Chuck Wolfe Scope should include: cumulative Comments will generally be
(12/16/02) impacts to shoreline habitat, off-site addressed throughout the EIS.
drainage, wetlands, cumulative traffic
impacts and railroad crossing.
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 6,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
FROM: Ron Straka(x-7248),Surface Water Utility Supervisor
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill EIS Scoping Comments
The following are my EIS Scoping comments regarding the Barbee Mill project:
Stormwater:
Impacts due to stormwater runoff(quantity and quality) needs to be included in the EIS analysis.
This includes the construction impacts and completed project impacts along with any off-site
improvements. On-site contamination clean up and protection of surface water and groundwater from
contamination from hazardous material that exists on-site during clean-up and long term if.
contaminates are capped and left in place needs to be addressed as part of this EIS or the site clean up
Plan.
Recommended Mitigation: Project should comply with the standards specified in the Washington
State Department of Ecology's August 2001 Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington. Storm system conveyance sizing shall be done in accordance with the King County
Surface Water Design Manual.
Floodplain:
Impacts to the floodplain storage and hydraulic capacity need to be analyzed in the EIS and
mitigation provided. Applicant should review existing FEMA mapping and determine if it is still
accurate by comparing the flows used by FEMA to produce the FIRM map and the hydrologic
analysis developed as part of the May Creek Basin Plan. If the May Creek Basin Plan hydrologic
information is higher than the flows used by FEMA, all planning project design shall be done using
the higher flows. Filling of the floodplain needs to be identified and quantified. The hydraulic
capacity of new stream crossings needs to be provided and their impacts the floodplain quantified
(change in water surface elevation).
Recommended Mitigation: Elevate Finished floors for structures in or adjacent to the floodplain to
be a minimum of 1-foot above the 100-year floodplain elevation (City Code) for current condition
hydrology. It is recommended, however that 100-year floodplain elevation based upon future
condition hydrology be used to establish finished floor elevations. Compensatory storage for filling
of the floodplain is required. No filling or obstruction of the FEMA Floodway is allowed. All New
and existing stream crossings need to be designed and analyzed to show that there is a "zero rise" in
the future condition 100-yr floodplain elevation. New stream crossing need to be designed to allow
sediment transport and fish passage. A FEMA Map revision may be required as part of this project if
the hydrology used by FEMA is substantially different than the current condition hydrology
developed as part of the May Creek Basin Plan. The transport and deposition of sediment in May
Creek, on in the lake, should be considered with respect to establishing the 100-year floodplain
elevation.
C:\WINDOWS\TEMPFGWViewer\PP EIS Scoping Comments Ver.2.doc\RS\cor
-
•
Shoreline and Streams:
Impacts to the shoreline of Lake Washington and May Creek need to be quantified and mitigated for
as part of the EIS. Lake Washington and May Creek are classified as shorelines of the State. Bank
hardening and lack of buffer or encroachment into buffer area needs be mitigated. The impacts of
and required mitigation for any dock construction would also need to be analyzed in detail. Impacts
of Replacing existing bulkheads and/or bank armoring over the life of the project, if they are not
modified as part of the project, should be considered and mitigated for as part of the EIS.
Recommended Mitigation:
Comply State Shoreline Regulations and the Cities Shoreline Master Program requirements. Use bio-
engineered bank stabilization methods to restore and enhance shorelines to increase riparian
functional values. When modifying existing shoreline provide shallow water habitat along the
shoreline for out-migrating juvenile salmonids. Provide shoreline and stream riparian buffer's widths
that are needed to adequate protect salmonids (with no trails), which are planted with native
vegetation.
Light and Glare:
The project's impacts to fish and wildlife due to increase light and glare needs to be considered as
part of the EIS and mitigation measures provided. The increase light and glare from the project
along the shorelines of May Creek and Lake Washington could adversely impact juvenile salmonids,
which use the shoreline for rearing or out-migration,by increasing feeding upon them by predators at
night. The increased perdition to out-migrating juvenile Chinook salmon may be required to comply
with the Endangered Species Act. If Federal funds are used on the project or Federal permits are
required for the project(wetland filling,in-water work),Section 7 Consultation under the Endangered
Species Act will be required.
Recommended Mitigation:
Minimize lighting that is directed towards or along the shoreline areas. Provide larger buffers and
plant buffers with larger vegetation (trees) that will help to block out light and glare. Provide a
shallow water habitat along the shoreline that provides habitat for juvenile salmonids,but not suitable
for most predators.
Wetlands:
Impacts to wetlands on the site or in areas where offsite improvements are required need to be
identified in the EIS and appropriate mitigation provided. Adequate wetland buffers should be
considered and encroachments into wetland buffer identified. Changes to wetland hydrology and
vegetation due to the project should be considered.
Recommended Mitigation:
Provide wetland mitigation in accordance with state and city wetland replacement ratios and
mitigation standards. Provide adequate buffer widths and protection of buffers from intrusion.
Please include these comments in the scope of the EIS for the Barbee Mill Mixed-Use Development
Proposal. If you have any questions regarding these comments,please contact me.
cc: Lys Hornsby
Jennifer Henning
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GWViewerWP EIS Scoping Comments Ver.2.doc\RS\cor
j I
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
• MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 10,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira,Development Services
FROM: Nick Afzali,Transportation Systems l 4__for M c-k
STAFF CONTACT: Bob Mahn,x7322
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Proposal
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) Scoping
Transportation impacts need to be addressed. We would expect such analysis to include, but not
be limited to:
• A study area similar to that depicted in Figure 3 of the July 23,2002 Preliminary Traffic
Impact Analysis prepared by HDR Engineers,Inc.
• Study area existing traffic volumes and traffic operations.
• Site-generated traffic and study area distribution.
• Future traffic volumes both with and without the Barbee Mill site development
• A mode-split analysis
• Impacts on traffic operations at the: Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd. intersection
(major access point to and from the Barbee Mill site);N.E.44th Street/I-405 on and off-
tramp intersections; and,Burnett Avenue N./Lake Washington Blvd. intersection.
• Traffic analysis assuming that all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the railroad
• tracks would be developed at the density of the proposed Barbee Mill development,and
any other significant development proposals in the study area.
• Discussion of planned transportation improvement projects in the study area and any
potential impacts the Barbee Mill site development may have on them.
• Discussion of existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities and potential impacts
to them.
• Potential Transportation Demand Management Plan.
• Discussion of existing and planned transit service and other high occupancy facilities and
potential impacts to them.
Barbee Mill •
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)Agency Scoping
December 10,2002
Page 2
• Discussion of transportation safety(i.e.traffic accidents)both existing and as a result of
the Barbee Mill site development.
• Discussion of existing and planned railroad track operations/usage and potential impacts
to them.
The transportation impact analysis should also address the following comments:
• The text in the EIS Scoping Notice indicates the proposed subdivision of the Barbee Mill
site into 115 residential lots. The previous(July 23,2002)Traffic Impact Analysis
assumed 112 residential lots.
• The text in the EIS Scoping Notice indicates that access to the site would be provided via
a roadway through the abutting property on the north side of site to the Lake Washington
Blvd./Ripley Lane intersection. However, Overall Site Plan accompanying the EIS
Scoping Notice indicates that all residential lots could be accessed via south end roadway
as well as via Ripley Lane.
• The traffic analysis should assume that the intersections of N.E.44th Street and I-405 on
and off-ramps are unsignalized and should note whether traffic signals will be needed and
what warrants would be met to justify the signals.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments for this project.
cc: Bob Mahn
File
H:\TRANSIPLNGIRLM\RaVEIWS72002 BARBEE MILL 2t
•
CITY OF RENTON
PUBLIC HEARING
TRANSCRIPTION OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY
DECEMBER 10, 2002
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
FILE NO. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Lesley Nishihira: You can face the crowd at the podium if you want to stand, or at the table if you'd like
to sit,which ever is most comfortable for you.
Allen Lebovitz:O.K. Nothing like going first. My name is Allen Lebovitz, do you need me to spell that?
(He spells his name for the record.) I'm a Renton, North Renton community resident along with my wife
Lisa Bartell and I guess I'm here because I was somewhat concerned when I first heard about this
project. I'm worried about a number of aspects of the project. I don't know a whole lot about it, which It
sounds like I'm not alone on that.
I guess what first and probably foremost makes me concerned is that it's a really unique piece of land
and it's extremely valuable in about every way as a land can be valuable. It's valuable to the people that
own it,to the folks that;you know, have rights to it. It's economically valuable. It's valuable to the
community too because it's extremely unique. And then I guess also, it's very valuable from an ecological
standpoint. On this lake there's not much land like that available. And so that really covers all of my
opinions about this land.
It needs to be treated with respect to that value, all of those values because once it's been managed,
especially with the current proposal you can't undo any of that. So it's a big decision and I guess I should
point out who I am in addition to being a community member. I'm a watershed ecologist. I have a master
degree in Environmental Studies from Yale University. I've been practicing in this region in Washington
for about eight or nine years. I worked with issues like this a lot. I do a lot of salmon biology and salmon
ecology so I see habitats like this all the time. And I know from my experience you don't find habitat like
this that often in this area. Granted,the site has been greatly impacted by past land use practices but it's
still exceptionally unique.
And I guess specifically the concerns that I have are, starting with the impacts to the community: how
does the community benefit from that project? I live on Pelly Ave. N. I'm not right up against it so I don't
know how the folks that live right beside it would feel but I know from my perspective I'm concerned about
my access to that type of area. There's not many options like that left. You have Coulon Park,which is
fantastic but it's a fully developed park. So this is unique in that way. I also wonder how it will change the
character of that community up there and how you would undo that change if you ever wanted too? I
don't think you could. So you're committing to heading down in that direction.
The other concern that I have on that note too is why does this type of development on a piece of
property like that...,there's no water dependency to that use? The Barbee Mill had a reason for being
there. They needed access to the shore I think,to pursue its business and from my understanding of
shoreline rules and at least the intent of shoreline rules, it's to guide development around areas where
you have access to water to make sure that you're using that land for that value. I like waterfront
property. I own some waterfront property. I own fifteen acres out on the coast. I would love to live on the
water but at the same point I would never in a million years develop that fifteen acres into that type of
development because that does not make full use of that property. I have one little cottage on it and
that's the way it's going to stay if I can help it.
r
I.
r
I guess from an ecological perspective I have some pretty significant concerns of about filling wetlands
even if it's a small amount of fill in that area because those types of wetlands are exceptionally valuable,
even if they are category three. The reason that they are category three is that they've been degraded by
past land use practices. And somebody mentioned that there's some historic information about that site.
I would guess that there's some pretty good aerial photography that would document what that site looked
like. And my guess is that there would have been more, significantly more wetlands there and a
tremendous amount of habitat there. Similarly,the buffering around the stream really doesn't even begin
to get at protecting the ecological values of that stream. I work quite often in undeveloped areas in forest
lands,that's what I do a lot of and the buffer requirements in those areas are far greater. I hear
constantly from the folks that I work with there in forest lands that they think it's exceedingly unfair that in
urban areas the same types of rules that their forest's abide by aren't being abided by in the urban area.
Interestingly enough that these are people that log and they're using lumber mills and that was an old
lumber mill site so there's some irony there. So I have grave concerns about how the current ecological
values there are being protected.
I guess probably the last thing I should say is that I almost didn't come tonight because I do
understand that this is an urban area and you know people have to live some place. Private property
owners have a right to derive value out of their property. I work with some really strong private property
advocates in my profession and I own my own business. Actually I'm an independent contractor so I
have to earn a living. However, I guess that what concerns me most is that all of the values aren't fully
being considered in the development of this project.We do need to have places to live, it does make
sense to develop in urban areas to cluster development but at the same time does this area actually need
that much more in the way of housing units? A lot of housing units have been put up out in that area. I
don't know if we actually even need that.
And like I said, I almost didn't come to this meeting. The thing that changed my mind was that actually
my wife,who's a veterinarian, pointed out to me that driving into work,she drives by there every single
day, she actually saw an eagle closer than she's seen an eagle in a number of years. She's worked with
eagle in the past, but an eagle that was hunting in that area. I've heard about an osprey, I know there's
salmonid usage,there's all kinds of salmon in that area. Plus, I mean a list of wildlife that's about that
long that can deal with that type of habitat as it is. So even though I was thinking.l should spend my time
focusing on wild areas which is where I do most of my work,there still are important habitat values for
land like that. And I wouldn't want to say that I don't want to see anything done to that property. First of
all,that wouldn't be fair to the landowner.
It may not make any sense but I think the type of development that should be done there should be
much more aware of the values of that property and recognize those. I think there are alternatives and I
really hope that they can develop different alternatives. And I would be more than happy to elaborate on
what I think some of those alternatives could be but I don't want to monopolize the entire time here.
Thanks.
Applause
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Allen. We actually do not have any other people who checked boxes, but
by a show of hands I see others who are interested. Mr. Pipkin why don't you come up...
Gary Pipkin: My name is Gary Pipkin,,I live at 1120 N. 38th St. in lower Kennydale area about a quarter
mile south of the sawmill. (Spells last name). And I basically want to sit here and reiterate things that
have been said in about 3 prior meetings that were specifically related to this project and I want to re-
enter them into the record to accommodate the process.
The access to the property in the past meetings was discussed. The existing entry into the sawmill
plus the other existing crossing that is north of that near the 44th St. exit are two sites for entry into the
property that would be acceptable. About twice as many people are in this room were in that discussion
and anything south of the May Creek Bridge that was proposed as a private entry into the new Cugini
homes that are being built on the waterfront was greatly objected to. So the consensus of that meeting
was that the existing two entries into the property should not be varied from.
Also,that in the May Creek treatment, deer use that May Creek corridor to swim across Lake
Washington to Mercer Island and back. They do it every day of the year. You can see them if you sit out
there and watch as well as the salmon and other wildlife. They use that area to get to the lake and back.
-2-
•
The height of the structures was looked at in great length by both the folks that are applying right now.
They also delved into what was done by the Paul Allen group earlier so they have looked at a whole
bunch of testimony and a whole bunch of data that was gathered for both projects to apply the learning
from both of those to this project. So the information available isn't just what is coming from you and me,
it's come over the last four years actually. This fifty foot maximum height was developed from the
consensus that four story flat roof buildings were as tall as could be accepted without destroying
everyone's view. It does impact views but it doesn't destroy them.
Also the roadway, Lake Washington Blvd.,the consensus was that twelve foot maximum lane width,
one in each direction, would be the maximum ever applied to Lake Washington Blvd. There would never
be widening. There would always be twelve foot traffic lanes and the speed limit on those traffic lanes
would never exceed 25 (twenty-five) miles an hour no matter what. So those were two points to keep the
traffic under control and discourage them from traveling south to exit the property and get on to 1-405.
There was also in the last meeting about this property, concern that the open area that was published
as public access to the lake gave the public the ability to walk over there and go to the lake but there was
no parking available. So you have to walk three-quarters of a mile to get to the property to walk across
the lawn to get to the lake because there was no non-resident parking allowed for that area. And by no, I
don't mean absolutely none I mean there's like ten cars. When you have the intent of this property, more
than that needs to be applied and so that was the concern that was raised at the last meeting and it
wasn't decided upon. It was raised and was going to be looked at. At this point is where that probably is
going to start to be looked at more closely. That's the extent of what I wanted to re-enter into the record
to make sure that it was tied directly to this project.
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Mr. Pipkin
Larry Raymond: Hi, my name is Larry Raymond my wife and I and family live at 1313 N. 38th St., up the
hill from Mr. Pipkin. So I basically am very much in agreement with the two people who have spoken
already, Mr. Allen and Mr. Pipkin. I would like to see that May Creek streambed and the watershed as
much as possible, not just with habitat preserved, but with wherever possible habitat enhanced. And I
think a basic component of that same process would be a very encouragement of as much public access
as possible to the stream. I would hope that the entire shoreline would be available for public access. It
may be a little more difficult but I think the bottom line in terms of raising awareness of just how unique
this resource is... This land and this mouth of this creek;obviously, it's going to be developed but as
much as possible I would like to see enhanced habitat for salmon and all of the wildlife that is already
there. And if anything, if we could restore and increase that habitat in ways that were compatible with
people;to give kids and the public a chance to see what it's like when a King salmon comes up May
Creek. I've hiked May Creek for about twenty years and when you see one of those Chinook with its back
sticking out of the water you just have a responsibility to make sure that they are there for your children.
So that would be, along with traffic and overall development, enhancing habitat on that stream and the
lake along there, and allowing access to the entire shoreline would be a very important aspect to this
development as far as we are concerned. Thanks.
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Mr. Raymond. Do we have anyone else interested? Please raise your
hands. I see none. We will now close the public scoping meeting for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS. You do have an opportunity to mail in your written comments or leave the comment form here
before you depart tonight. And do stay tuned, we'll mail out notices and keep all of you informed as best
we can. Thank you.
-3-
y March 24,2003 - Renton City Council Minutes - Page 112
AUDIENCE COMMENT Sandel DeMastus, 1137 Harrington Ave. NE,Renton, 98056,introduced herself
Citizen Comment: DeMastus- as the president of the Highlands Community Association (HCA). She
Highlands Community announced that Police Officer John Schuldt with the K9 Unit,Animal Control
Association Officer Mary Ann Pratt, and Elynn Clayton (South Sound off-leash dog park)
will speak at the HCA meeting on March 27th.
CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing. At the request of Councilmembers Persson and Keolker-Wheeler,items
7.a. and 7.b. were removed for separate consideration.
Appeal: Nicholson Short Plat, City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision on the appeal of the
Brad Nicholson, SHP-02-111 Administrative and Environmental Determination for the Nicholson Short Plat,
2300 NE 28th St. (SHP-02-111);appeal filed on 3/6/2003 by Brad Nicholson,
accompanied by required fee. The appeal packet included one additional letter
from David Parisi as allowed by City Code. Refer to Planning&Development
Committee.
Community Services: Golf Community Services Department recommended approval to replace 40 golf
Cart Lease-Purchase carts through a three-year lease-purchase agreement with CitiCapital
Agreement, CitiCapital Commercial Corporation and to retain 10 golf carts from the existing fleet of
Commercial Corporation 50. Annual expenditure is $26,064. Refer to Community Services Committee.
Development Services:Barbee Development Services Division recommended approval of the amended
Mill Preliminary Plat EIS agreement with Parametrix to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement
Preparation,Parametrix- (EIS)for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal(LUA-02-040). Barbee
,,ILA- - 02 -0(40 Mill Company will pay for the EIS preparation. (The agreement was amended
to expand the scope of the EIS report to include adequate review of historical
and cultural resources as directed by Council on 3/17/2003.) Council concur.
Human Services: 2003 CDBG Human Services Division recommended approval to continue participating in
Housing Stability Program the Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Consortium Housing
Participation Stability Program in 2003, which assists low-to-moderate income families with
rent or mortgage payments due to a temporary crisis in their lives. Refer to
Community Services Committee.
Airport: Boeing Lease Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of Addendum#20 to
Addendum#20,Fund Transfer LAG-65-877,Municipal Airport lease with The Boeing Company,and
to Purchase Boeing Restrooms requested authorization to transfer$80,000 from the Airport Reserve Fund to
the Airport Capital Improvement Program(CIP)account for the purchase of the
Boeing restroom facilities. Refer.to Transportation(Aviation)Committee.
Utility:Water System Plan Utility Systems Division recommended approval of a contract with R.W. Beck,
Update&Highlands Water Inc. in the amount of$218,051 to update the City's 1998 Water System Plan
Distribution Improvements Analysis,and to pre-design the water distribution improvements for the 565
Pre-design,RW Beck pressure zone in the Highlands area. Council concur.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO
REMOVE ITEMS 8.a.AND 8.b.FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION.
CARRIED.
Separate Consideration Approval of Council meeting minutes of March 17,2003.
Item 7.a. Councilman Persson questioned the way Executive Session was notated in the
Council Meeting Minutes of Council meeting minutes. Mayor Tanner asked Assistant City Attorney Zanetta
March 17, 2003 Fontes to research options for the documentation of Executive Session in the
minutes.
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI#: s P--.
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:
Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division March 24, 2003
Staff Contact Lesley Nishihira (x7270) Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing..
Amended Consultant Agreement for preparation of Correspondence..
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Ordinance
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal (LUA-02-040). Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
Amended Consultant Agreement Study Sessions
Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council Concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
Other (Human Resources) X
Fiscal Impact: None
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
City staff requests approval of an amended Consultant Agreement authorizing work at the
applicant's expense for the production of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal.
At its March 17th meeting, the City Council directed staff to ensure that the consultant's
scope of work included adequate review of historical and cultural resources. Additional
detail has been added and incorporated into the attached scope of work (please refer to the
attached edited page, as well as page 20, section 4.5 of the amended scope of work).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends the approval and execution of an
amended Consultant Agreement authorizing work associated with the Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) required for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The applicant will be
responsible for the cost of preparing the EIS and will be billed via a pass-through account
established between the City, the consultant (Parametrix) and the applicant (Barbee Mill
Company).
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
Deliverables
• Noise section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.5 Historic and Cultural Resources
Affected Environment
Cultural resources consisting of archaeological resources as defined in RCW 27.53.040 will be assessed based
on existing information at the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,the King County Cultural
Resources Division,the University of Washington Library,the Renton Museum,and the Puget Sound Regional
Repository of the Washington State Archives. Consultation with tribes will include solicitation of comments
and review of any information provided. The site will be analyzed with respect to its historic, cultural and
architectural merit.
Impacts
Impact assessment will depend on the identification of cultural resources. The lowering of Lake Washington
elevation in 1910 and the subsequent fill of the site for development renders the probability of pre-settlement
resources extremely low. The potential loss of structures on the site with cultural, architectural or engineering
value will be assessed in regard to the presence of similar structures in the region.
Mitigation
Mitigation,if cultural resources are found,may include avoidance,but is most likely to include excavation and
conservation. A variety of strategies may be appropriate,including information and educational displays which
commemorate the site's place in the history and cultural development of the area.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing documents will be utilized to assess cultural resources and historical merits of the site.
• The State Historical Preservation office will be contacted by letter with phone follow-up to solicit existing
information on historic and cultural resources on-site.
• Tribal cultural information will be solicited by letter.
• One(1) field visit will be made to the site. Photos of structures will be taken,but a full inventory will not
be perfortned.
Deliverables
• Cultural and Historic Resource section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 20 OF 224- 03-18-03 I
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 12, 2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: Jesse Tanner, Mayor
FROM: Gregg-col Zimmermala? 4ministrator, Planning/Building/Public
Works Department
STAFF CONTACT: Lesley Nishihira, x7270
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat E.I.S. —
Consultant Agreement
ISSUE:
The Development Services Division requests approval of a consultant agreement
authorizing work associated with the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The cost of the
EIS, which was determined to be necessary by the City's Environmental Review
Committee (ERC), will be at the direct expense of the project applicant.
BACKGROUND:
Location —The Barbee Mill consists of a 22.9-acre site and is located on the west
side of Lake Washington Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North
44th Street abutting the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along
the eastern boundary. The property has historically been utilized for lumber
operations, which over past years have been decreased to a limited level and are
presently in cessation. Many of the existing structures are in disrepair and all
would be demolished as part of site development.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning
designation, which is intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office
and residential activity in a high quality, master planned development that is
integrated with the natural environment. Stand-alone residential development is
also permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum 5 dwelling
units per net acre (du/ac) is satisfied. The site includes a number of sensitive
features, including Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines, critical wildlife
habitat areas, wetlands, contaminated soils, high seismic hazards, steep slopes
(15% to 25%) and flood hazards, as well as Department of Natural Resources
lease lands along a portion of the site's lake frontage.
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 2 of 4
Development Proposals (Past and Present) — At one time the property was
included in a large-scale development proposal that involved adjoining properties
to the north (a.k.a., Port Quendall); however, the property has since been
proposed for development as individual site. Initially, the applicant filed a land
use application for a development proposal that would include a mix of
residential, office, retail, hotel and restaurant uses (file no. LUA-01-174). The
City began processing this application and upon review determined that an EIS
would be necessary in order to consider potential adverse environmental impacts
from the proposal. However, after the completion of the EIS scoping process,
the applicant requested that the review of the application be suspended and
proceeded to submit an entirely separate land use application involving a
completely different development concept on the site. It is this proposal that the
City is presently reviewing (file no. LUA-02-040).
The current proposal is for the review of a Preliminary Plat that would subdivide
the site into 115 residential lots intended for townhouse development (reduced
map attached). Most of the units would be constructed within duplex structures
along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek. The attached units would be constructed with zero
setbacks from common lot lines and would place each unit on an individual lot.
The proposal would result in a net density of approximately 8.35 dwelling units
per acre (22.9 gross acre site — 9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public
roadways = 13.77 net acre -3 115 units / 13.77 net acre = 8.35 du/ac).
Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and four utility/open space tracts
would be established with the plat. Access to the project would be provided via
an existing 60-foot wide access easement, which would be dedicated to public
right-of-way, from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection
through the abutting property on the north side of the site. The project would
provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the majority of the
project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek.
Both primary and secondary access to the site would require railroad crossings
that must be approved by both the City and the Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission.
In addition, an Independent Remedial Action Plan has been approved by the
Department of Ecology and the City for the clean-up of on-site soils containing
elevated concentrations of arsenic and zinc (file no. LUA-02-069). However, this
approved remediation is not anticipated to occur until site preparation activities
for an approved development project begin.
Licenses, Permits and Necessary Approvals — The following permits and
approvals will be required for the proposed redevelopment of the site:
• City of Renton: Environmental (SEPA) Review; Preliminary Plat Approval;
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval; Level II Site Plan
Approval; Level I Site Plan Approval; Shoreline Variance Approval, if
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 3 of 4
applicable; Wetland Buffer Averaging and Compensation Approval; Street
Modification Approval; Railroad Crossing Access Approval; Site Preparation,
Demolition, Building and Construction Permits; and Final Plat Approval.
• King County: Shoreline Permit for DNR lease lands.
• Washington Department of Ecology: Hazardous Waste — No Further
Action Letter; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination; System (NPDES)
Permit; Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval; Shoreline
Variance Approval, if applicable; and Water Quality Certification.
• Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA).
• Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission: Approval of
Railroad crossing(s).
• US Army Corp of Engineers: Section 401 and 404 Permits, if necessary.
• US Environmental Protection Agency: CERCLA/MTCA Clearance.
Environmental (SEPA) Review — Prior to proceeding with the review and
formulation of staff recommendations for all of the City's necessary land use
permits, the project must undergo review pursuant to the State Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA). Upon consideration of adverse environmental impacts that
would potentially result from the project, the City's Environmental Review
Committee issued a SEPA Threshold Determination of Significance (DS) on
November 5, 2002. Under SEPA regulations, the DS requires that an EIS be
prepared to thoroughly analyze specific areas of concern surrounding the project.
Specifically, the scope of the EIS for this project will generally focus on the
following areas:
> EARTH
• Soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and
erosion/sedimentation impacts.
> PLANTS AND ANIMALS
• Displacement of existing vegetation, wetlands and associated
shoreline and wetland habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species.
• Examination of the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat as
part of the project.
• Incorporation of shoreline access and regional trails through the site.
> WATER RESOURCES
• Waterways, hydrology, floodplains, groundwater and water quality
impacts (including possible impacts from cessation of May Creek
dredging operations).
• Potential impacts and mitigation for impacts to May Creek and Lake
Washington.
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 4 of 4
> TRANSPORTATION
• Impacts to the local traffic circulation system, including traffic forecasts,
specified intersections, trip generation, level of service, as well as
accidents and safety.
• Design and safety impacts of railroad crossings.
• Impacts to 1-405 and adjacent jurisdictions (i.e., City of Newcastle).
> TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• Review of clean-up levels appropriate for residential uses.
• Impacts from abutting contaminated properties.
> AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE
• Identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and evaluate view
impacts.
> NOISE
• Review of noise impacts associated with construction impacts and
railroad usage.
> CULTURAL RESOURCES
• Assessment of cultural and archeological resources on the site.
> ALTERNATIVES
• In addition to the proposal, the EIS will examine a "no action"
alternative that will assume the continuation of the industrial use of the
property. During the course of analyzing impacts and identifying
mitigation measures, however, a combination of mitigating measures
may be developed which would constitute an additional alternative.
This may involve a reduction in the number of units and/or a
reconfiguration of the plat layout.
CONCLUSION:
After study of the areas discussed above is completed, a Preliminary Draft EIS
will be assembled for the City's review and approval. The City will then issue the
Draft EIS for public review and will accept comments given at public hearing or
submitted in writing. When comments on the Draft EIS have been considered,
the City will issue the Final EIS with responses to the draft comments. By this
time the City will have likely identified a preferred alternative. The EIS will then
be used as the basis for staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner upon
consideration of the Preliminary Plat and other land use permits.
The attached consultant agreement establishes the scope of work, timeframes
and budget for the EIS work. Based on RMC section 4-1-170, Land Use Review
Fees, 100% of the cost associated with the preparation of the EIS shall be paid
at the direct expense of the applicant. A deposit from the applicant must be
received by the City prior to giving the consultant notice to proceed on the work
outlined in the agreement.
cc: Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
•
Alex Pietsch
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into on this , day of , 2003,by and between the CITY
OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HEREINAFTER CALLED THE "CITY," and
the consulting firm Parametrix whose address is 5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE, Suite 200, Kirkland, WA,
98033, at which work will be available for inspection,hereinafter called the"CONSULTANT."
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS
WHEREAS,the City has not sufficient qualified employees to provide the services within a reasonable time and the
City deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified
professional consulting firm to do the necessary planning work for the project, and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that it is in full
compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington, has a current valid corporate certificate from the State of
Washington or has a valid assumed name filing with the Secretary of State and that all personnel to be assigned to
the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a
competent and professional manner, and that sufficient qualified personnel are on staff or readily available to staff
this Agreement.
WHEREAS, the Consultant has indicated that it desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms
and conditions set forth below.
NOW THEREFORE,in consideration of the terms,conditions, covenants and performances contained herein below,
the parties hereto agree as follows:
I
OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF WORK
The Consultant shall furnish, and hereby warrants that it has,the necessary equipment, materials, and professionally
trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work,
which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant
hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to
complete the work detailed in Exhibit A.
The Consultant shall perform all work described in this Agreement in accordance with the latest edition and
amendments to local and state regulations,guidelines and policies:
II
TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION
The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services are to
be completed and all products shall be delivered by the Consultant by , notwithstanding delays due to
factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant.
The established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the Consultant,but may
be extended by the City in the event of a delay attributable to the City or because of a delay caused by an act of God
or governmental actions or other conditions beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to
Proceed, the Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, the
Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of the time and cost needed to
complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual
agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein.
{
Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 30 days or more affecting the completion
of the work may be considered a cause for re-negotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party.
III
ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED TO THE CONSULTANT
BY THE CITY
The Consultant shall provide the City with a list of data requests. The City will furnish the Consultant with copies
of documents which are available to the City that will facilitate the preparation of the plans, studies, specifications,
and estimates within the limits of the assigned work.
All other records needed for the study must be obtained by the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with
other available sources to obtain data or records available to those agencies. The Consultant shall be responsible for
this and any other data collection to the extent provided for in the Scope of Work. The Consultant shall be
responsible for the verification of existing records to insure they represent the accurate and current field conditions.
Should field studies be needed, the Consultant will perform such work, consistent with the attached Scope of Work,
or as modified through mutual agreement. The City will not be obligated to perform any such field studies.
IV
OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTS AND
DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CONSULTANT
Documents, exhibits or other presentations for the work covered by this Agreement shall be furnished by the
Consultant to the City upon completion of the various phases of the work. All such material, including working
documents,notes, maps, drawings, photo, photographic negatives, etc. used in the project, shall become and remain
the property of the City and may be used by it without restriction. Any use of such documents by the City not
directly related to the project pursuant to which the documents were prepared by the Consultant shall be without any
liability whatsoever to the Consultant.
Where possible and feasible all written documents and products shall be printed on recycled paper. Final
documents, and interim drafts as feasible,will be printed on both sides of the recycled paper.
V
PAYMENT
The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for services rendered under this Agreement as provided
hereinafter as specified in Exhibit C, Cost Estimate. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed
or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the
work. All billings for compensation for work performed under this Agreement will list specific project titles, actual
time (days and/or hours) and dates during which the work was performed and the compensation shall be figured
using the rates in Exhibit C.
Payment shall be on a time and materials basis, approximating the amounts associated with each task listed in
Exhibit A. The amounts under each task may vary; however, the total amount of the contract shall not exceed
$165,919.42 without a written amendment to this contract,agreed to and signed by both parties.
Payment for extra work performed under this Agreement shall be paid as agreed to by the parties hereto in writing at
the time extra work is authorized. (Section VII"EXTRA WORK").
A short narrative progress report shall accompany each voucher for progress payment. The report shall include
discussion of any problems and potential causes for delay.
To provide a means of verifying the invoiced time for consultant employees and material expenses, the City may
conduct employee interviews.
•
Acceptance of such final payment by the Consultant shall constitute a release of all claims of any nature, related to
this Agreement, which the Consultant may have against the City unless such claims are specifically reserved in
writing and transmitted to the City by the Consultant prior to its acceptance. Said final payment shall not, however,
be a bar to any claims that the City may have against the Consultant or to any remedies the City may pursue with
respect to such claims.
The Consultant and its subconsultants shall keep available for inspection, by the City, for a period of three years
after final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement and all items related to, or bearing
upon, these records. If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year retention
period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit fmdings involving the records have been
resolved. The three-year retention period starts when the Consultant receives final payment.
VI
CHANGES IN WORK
The Consultant shall make all such revisions and changes in the completed work(published Draft and/or Final EIS)
of this Agreement as are necessary to correct errors appearing therein, when required to do so by the City, without
additional compensation.
Should the City find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed work or parts
thereof revised, the Consultant shall make such revisions, if requested and as directed by the City in writing. This
work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as provided in Section VII.
VII
EXTRA WORK
The City may desire to have the Consultant perform work or render services in connection with the Project in
addition to or other than work provided for by the expressed intent of the Scope of Work. Such work will be
considered as Extra Work and will be specified in a written supplement which will set forth the nature and scope
thereof. Work under a supplement shall not proceed until authorized in writing by the City. Any dispute as to
whether work is Extra Work or already covered under this Agreement shall be resolved before the work is
undertaken. Performance of the work by the Consultant prior to resolution of any such dispute shall waive any claim
by the Consultant for compensation as Extra Work.
VIII
EMPLOYMENT
The Consultant warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide
employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract and that he has not paid or agreed to
pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee,
commission,percentage,brokerage fee,gifts or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award
or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this
Agreement without liability, or in its discretion to deduct from the Agreement price or consideration or otherwise
recover,the full amount of such fee,commission,percentage,brokerage fee,gift or contingent fee.
Any and all employees of the Consultant, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the
Consultant under this Agreement, shall be considered employees of the Consultant only and not of the City and any
and all claims that may or might arise under the Workman's Compensation Act on behalf of said employees, while so
engaged and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any negligent act or omission on the part
of the Consultant's employees, while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall
be the sole obligation and responsibility of the Consultant.
The Consultant shall not engage, on a full or part-time basis, or other basis, during the period of the contract, any
professional or technical personnel who are, or have been at any time during the period of this contract, in the
employ of the City except regularly retired employees,without written consent of the City.
3
If during the time period of this Agreement, the Consultant finds it necessary to increase its professional, technical,
or clerical staff as a result of this work, the Consultant will actively solicit minorities through their advertisement
and interview process.
IX
NONDISCRIMINATION
The Consultant agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for services
because of race,creed,color,national origin,marital status, sex,age or handicap except for a bona fide occupational
qualification with regard to, but not limited to the following: employment upgrading; demotion or transfer;
recruitment or any recruitment advertising; layoff or termination's; rates of pay or other forms of compensation;
selection for training; rendition of services. The Consultant understands and agrees that if it violates this Non-
Discrimination provision, this Agreement may be terminated by the City and further that the Consultant shall be
barred from performing any services for the City now or in the future, unless a showing is made satisfactory to the
City that discriminatory practices have terminated and that recurrence of such action is unlikely.
X
TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT
A. The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon not less than ten (10) days
written notice to the Consultant, subject to the City's obligation to pay Consultant in accordance with
subparagraphs C and D below.
B. In the event of the death of a member, partner or officer of the Consultant, or any of its supervisory
personnel assigned to the project, the surviving members of the Consultant hereby agree to complete the
work under the terms of this Agreement,if requested to do so by the City. This section shall not be a bar
to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the Consultant and the City, if the
City so chooses.
In the event of the death of any of the parties listed in the previous paragraph, should the surviving
members of the Consultant, with the City's concurrence, desire to terminate this Agreement, payment
shall be made as set forth in Subsection C of this section.
C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by the City other than for fault on the part of the Consultant, a
final payment shall be made to the Consultant for actual time and material expenses for the work
complete at the time of termination of the Agreement. In addition, the Consultant shall be paid on the
same basis as above for any authorized extra work completed. No payment shall be made for any work
completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the Consultant of the Notice to Terminate. If the
accumulated payment made to the Consultant prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount
that would be due as set forth herein above, then no final payment shall be due and the Consultant shall
immediately reimburse the City for any excess paid.
D. In the event the services of the Consultant are terminated by the City for fault on the part of the
Consultant,the above stated formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event the amount to be paid
shall be determined by the City with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the Consultant in
performing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work originally required which was
satisfactorily completed to date of termination, whether that work is in a form or of a type which is
usable to the City at the time of termination, the cost to the City of employing another firm to complete
the work required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value
to the City of the work performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment
made under this subsection exceed the amount which would have been made if the formula set forth in
subsection C above had been applied.
4
E. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the work, the original copies of all
Engineering plans, reports and documents prepared by the Consultant prior to termination shall become
the property of the City for its use without restriction. Such unrestricted use not occurring as a part of
this project, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant.
F. Payment for any part of the work by the City shall not constitute a waiver by the City of any remedies of
any type it may have against the Consultant for any breach of this Agreement by the Consultant, or for
failure of the Consultant to perform work required of it by the City. Forbearance of any rights under the
Agreement will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act
or omission by the Consultant.
XI
DISPUTES
Any dispute concerning questions of facts in connection with work not disposed of by agreement between the
Consultant and the City shall be referred for determination to the Administrator of Planning/Building/Public Works
or his/her successors and delegees, whose decision in the matter shall be final and conclusive on the parties to this
Agreement.
In the event that either party is required to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any of its rights in this
Agreement, both parties agree that any such action shall be brought in the Superior Court of the State of
Washington, situated in King County.
XII
LEGAL RELATIONS
The Consultant shall comply with all Federal Government, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the
work to be done under this Agreement. This contract shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws
of Washington.
The Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from and
shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part
from the Consultant's errors, omissions, or negligent acts under this Agreement provided that nothing herein shall
require the Consultant to indemnify the City against and hold harmless the City from claims, demands or suits based
upon the conduct of the City, its officers or employees and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by
or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the Consultant's agents or employees and (b) the City, its agents,
officers and employees,this provision with respect to claims or suits based upon such concurrent negligence shall be
valid and enforceable only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence or the negligence of the Consultant's agents
or employees except as limited below. It is specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided
herein constitutes the consultant's waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the
purposes of this indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this
section shall survive the expiration or termination of this agreement.
The Consultant shall secure general liability, property damage, auto liability, and professional liability coverage in
the amount of$1.0 million, with a General Aggregate in the amount of$2 million, unless waived or reduced by the
City. The Consultant shall submit a completed City of Renton Insurance Information Form, and the Standard Acord
Certification Form prior to the execution of the contract. The City of Renton shall be named as an "additional
insured" on all contracts/projects. The Consultant shall also submit copies of the declarations pages of relevant
insurance policies to the City within 30 days of contract acceptance if requested. The Certification and Declaration
page(s) shall be in a form as approved by the City. If the City's Risk Manager has the Declaration page(s) on file
from a previous contract and no changes in insurance coverage has occurred, only the Certification Form will be
required.
The limits of said insurance shall not,however,limit the liability of Consultant hereunder.
5
•
All coverages provided by the Consultant shall be in a form, and underwritten by a company acceptable to the City.
The City will normally require carriers to have minimum A.M. Best rating of A XII. The Consultant shall keep all
required coverages in full force and effect during the life of this project, and a minimum of forty five days' notice
shall be given to the City prior to the cancellation of any policy.
The Consultant shall verify, when submitting first payment invoice and annually thereafter, possession of a current
City of Renton business license while conducting work for the City. The Consultant shall require, and provide
verification upon request, that all subconsultants participating in a City project possess a current City of Renton
business license. The Consultant shall provide, and obtain City approval of, a traffic control plan prior to
conducting work in City right-of-way.
The Consultant's relation to the City shall be at all times as an independent contractor.
• XIII
SUBLETTING OR ASSIGNING OF CONTRACTS
The Consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the work covered by this Agreement without the express consent of
the City.
XIV
COMPLETE AGREEMENT
This document and referenced attachments contain all covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the
parties. Any supplements to this Agreement will be in writing and executed and will become part of this Agreement.
No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable
for, any statement, representation, promise, or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or
modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as an amendment
to this Agreement.
The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof,
and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted.
XV
EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE
This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original having identical legal effect. The Consultant does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations,
warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the Request for Qualifications, and the supporting materials
submitted by the Consultant, and does hereby accept the Agreement and agrees to all of the terms and conditions
thereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above
written.
CONSULTANT CITY OF RENTON
Signature Date Jesse Tanner,Mayor Date
type or print name ATTEST:
Title Bonnie I.Walton, City Clerk
•
RESOLUTION NO. 3229
CITY OF RENTON
SUMMARY OF FAIR PRACTICES POLICY
ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 3 2 2 9
It is the policy of the City of Renton to promote and provide equal treatment and service to all citizens and to
ensure equal employment opportunity to all persons without regard to race, color, national origin, ethnic
background, gender, marital status, religion, age or disability, when the City of Renton can reasonably
accommodate the disability, of employees and applicants for employment and fair, non-discriminatory
treatment to all citizens. All departments of the City of Renton shall adhere to the following guidelines:
(1) EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES - The City of Renton will ensure all employment related
activities included recruitment, selection, promotion, demotion, training, retention and
separation are conducted in a manner which is based on job-related criteria which does not
discriminate against women, minorities and other protected classes. Human resources
decisions will be in accordance with individual performance, staffmg requirements, governing
civil service rules,and labor contract agreements.
(2) COOPERATION WITH HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS - The City of Renton will
cooperate fully with all organizations and commissions organized to promote fair practices
and equal opportunity in employment.
(3) AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN - The City of Renton Affirmative Action Plan and Equal
Employment Program will be maintained and administered to facilitate equitable
representation with the City work force and to assure equal employment opportunity to all. It
shall be the responsibility of elected officials, the Mayor, the Affirmative Action Officer,
department administrators, managers, supervisors, Contract Compliance Officers and all
employees to carry out the policies, guidelines and corrective measures set forth in the
Affirmative Action Plan and Equal Employment Program.
(4) CONTRACTORS' OBLIGATIONS - Contractors, sub-contractors, consultants and
suppliers conducting business with the City of Renton shall affirm and subscribe to the Fair
Practices and Non-discrimination policies set forth by the law and in the City's Affirmative
Action Plan and Equal Employment Program.
Copies of this policy shall be distributed to all City employees, shall appear in all operational documentation
of the City,including bid calls, and shall be prominently displayed in appropriate city facilities.
CONCURRED IN by the City Council of the City of RENTON,Washington,this 7thday of October, 1996.
CITY OF RENTON: RENTON CITY COUNCIL:
•
Mayor Council President
Attest:
City Clerl
110
Lc Y O'et>
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE
ARAMETRtX I iNc. hereby confirms and declares that
(Name of contractor/subcontractor/consultant/supplier)su
I. It is 1'ARAME'rRtX,L.g .�S policy to offer equal
(Name of contractor/subcontractor/consultant/supplier)
opportunity to all qualified employees and applicants for employment without regard to
the race,creed,color,sex,national origin,age,disability or veteran status.
II. '`AN\E'TRIX., INC. complies with all applicable federal,
(Name of contractor/subcontractor/consultant/supplier)
state and local laws governing non-discrimination in employment.
II. When applicable, 12ARAMETRI Tkic, will seek out and
(Name of contractor/subcontractor/consultant/supplier)
negotiate with minority and women contractors for the award of
subcontracts.
P i c.w7 E. MILLER,1?E. RttmCIPAL—
Print Agent/Representative's Name and Title
7/(A/Z---
V /
Agent/Rep se tative's Signature
Instructions: This document MUST be completed by each contractor,subcontractor,consultant and/or supplier.
Include or attach this document(s)with the contract.
9
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK (03-18-03)
RENTON, BARBEE MILL EIS
WORK PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Environmental documentation for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat will include preparation of an
environmental impact statement (EIS) and related supporting documents and materials as described in the
following items. The EIS will be prepared to meet the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA)and Renton City Code 18-97. Primary guidance for the EIS will be SEPA Guidelines WAC 197-11. It
is assumed that one(1)build alternative and the no-action alternative will be analyzed in the EIS.
1.0 SCOPING AND EARLY COORDINATION
Goal
The City of Renton Development Services Division has met all procedural and substantive requirements for
scoping pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), WAC 197-11-500, and Renton City Code;
provided for comments from the public, cooperating agencies, and other agencies with expertise regarding
elements of the environment or permit jurisdiction. The January 10,2003 Scoping Document is the basis of
this scope of work.
Tasks
Parametrix will notify the city if,at any time during preparation of the EIS,new information indicates a need to
change the Scoping Determination to respond to unanticipated issues.
2.0 ALTERNATIVES
Goal
The integration of environmental considerations in the public decision-making process is one of the primary
goals of SEPA. The development of alternatives is one of the key steps in both the project development and
environmental process. The city has specified in the January 10,2003 Scoping Document,the consideration of
a No Action Alternative,consists of continuation of some form of industrial use of the property.
Approach
During the course of analysis of impacts and identification of mitigating measures,a combination of mitigating
measures maybe developed which constitutes a reasonable alternative which meets the criteria in WAC 197-11-
440(5)(d) for a private proposal of achieving the proposals objectives on the same site. Parametrix shall advise
the City and applicant of any alternatives it recommends based on environmental issues identified in the
analysis process.
Assumptions
This scope of work is based on analysis of two alternatives:
• The current proposal of the applicant. Future use or alternations for DNR owned uplands,will be based
on consultation with the DNR aquatics leasing department land use policies for shoreline property, and
confirmation of assumptions with the city.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 1 OF 24 03-18-03
•
•
• A No-Action Alternative, which presumes the continuation of industrial use on the property with a
•
configuration of buildings and impervious areas similar to what currently exists. In consultation with City
staff, a pro-forma description of other uses,which could occur on the site under existing zoning will be
developed. Description of the No Action Alternative will be limited to the following:
• A use or mix of uses allowed by current zoning and identified as reasonable in consultation with City
staff.
• Future use or alternations for DNR owned uplands, will be based on consultation with the DNR
aquatics leasing department land use policies for shoreline property,and confirmation of assumptions
with the city.
• Total floor area,by use.
• Total required parking.
• Building bulk and dimensional limits as allowed by zoning codes, or as allowed by use of existing
buildings as allowed uses or non-conforming structures pursuant to Renton City Code 4-1 -050.
• Setbacks,landscape,and other requirements as specified by zoning codes.
• Projected impervious surface based on building and parking requirements,less landscaping, sensitive
area buffers,and other requirements.
• Site plans,building plans,and similar graphic depictions of the alternative will not be prepared.
If Parametix identifies a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures,as provided
in WAC 197-11-440(5) (b) (iii)and(6),this will occur at the time of submittal of the Preliminary Draft EIS for
City staff review. The scope assumes:
• City staff review of the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
impacts and mitigating measures.
• Any meetings to discuss the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
the Preliminary Draft EIS.
• Description of impacts of the potential project alternative will take place in the mitigating measures
section of each element of the environment,and will not require separate analysis as an alternative in
the impact section of each element.
Deliverables
• Draft and Final Description of No-Action Alternative.
• Description of potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures may be
identified at the time of submittal of a Preliminary Draft EIS for City staff review.
3.0 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Soils, Geology,Seismic Hazards,Earthwork,Erosion/Sedimentation
Goal
Provide analyses of soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and erosion/sedimentation for
affected environment,potential impacts,and mitigation development. These analyses are important both for
disclosure of impacts of the project and in providing a context for assessment of impacts on other elements
such as water quality.
Approach
ItENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK'PROGRAM PAGE 2 OF 24 03-18-03
This task will be based on review of existing studies on soils,geology, surface topography,and sensitive areas.
Parametrix will prepare this section based on review of existing data and a peer evaluation of exiting studies
and qualitative evaluation of likely impacts.
Affected Environment
Parametrix will review readily available geotechnical and geological data for the project including, but not
limited to,geologic maps from the U.S. Geologic Survey,National Resource Conservation Service County Soil
Survey,King County Geologic Hazard and Sensitive Areas maps,and site reconnaissance reports,including the
Geotechnical Feasibility Assessment by Golder Associates,and the Independent Remedial Action Plan,by Hart
Crowser.
The affected environment relative to the soil and geology conditions on the site will be evaluated and
described,including controlling factors such as terrain, soil types, character of fill, seismic risk of liquifaction
and slope failure,erosion susceptibility,and other limits on development. Background description of past and
potential seismic events will including magnitude of earthquakes recorded and potential magnitude of pre-
settlement earthquakes,as well as potential magnitude of techtonic plate subduction earthquakes.
In addition to the soils and geology of the project,Parametrix will also characterize the groundwater resources,
including aquifer characteristics related to potential contaminant plumes,utilizing existing data. Results of this
analysis will form one of the inputs to analysis of Toxic and Hazardous Materials.
Impact Analysis
Impacts of the project will be evaluated based on review and evaluation of existing soil and
geology/geotechnical information and project plans.
Specific impacts considered will include:
• Cut,fill,and other earthwork parameters.
• Risk of failure of slopes,or retaining structures due to landslides,including seismic induced events.
• Risks to structures,including seismic risks of liquefaction based on soil characteristics and fill character,
appropriate design of foundations and supporting structures.
• Character of groundwater resources, including contamination, and impacts as a result of project
construction, including groundwater infiltration from pervious surfaces and runoff control or treatment
facilities will be assessed.
• Sedimentation within the May Creek basin will be assessed, with results presented in the Plants and
Animals and Water Resources sections.
Temporary construction activity impacts will be evaluated,including.
• Erosion and sedimentation impacts.
• Stability of temporary cut,fill,and utility excavation.
• Stockpile and other temporary soil displacement.
Mitigation Development
Proposed mitigation measures will be reviewed based on potential adverse impacts identified. Mitigation
measures incorporated as commitments in the project design,together with mitigating measures resulting from
analysis of seismic and other risks will be identified. Standard Best Management Practices(BMPs)incorporated
in clearing and grading permit conditions, will be identified and evaluated. Potential applicable mitigation
measures available but not included in project design or standard BMPs will be identified.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 3 OF 24 03-18-03
•
Additional FEIS Analysis
Comments by agencies and the public will require additional analysis for the FEIS.IS. For budgeting this is
assumed to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing site information and soil,geologic,and seismic studies. Analysis will be
qualitative in nature, except where existing literature provides quantitative assessment of risk of failure or
other parameters which can be reasonably applied to the site.
• No more than one(1)reconnaissance-level field visit will be performed.
Deliverables
• Draft Soils and Erosion section for DEIS.
• Response to comments for the FEIS.
3.2 Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat for Terrestrial and Aquatic Species
Goal
The proposed location of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat will displace existing developed area on the west side
of May Creek and may displace existing vegetation,wetlands,and associated'wildlife habitat on the east side of
May Creek. The site also has the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat. This section will assess
• impacts on these elements.
Approach
Parametrix shall prepare this section utilizing existing information,including technical studies provided by the
applicant. A reconnaissance level site visit will also be conducted to confirm present conditions.
Wetlands and Upland Habitat for Terrestrial Species
Affected Environment
Existing vegetation in the project vicinity will be characterized based on a reconnaissance-level field visit,recent
aerial photos,and existing literature. The characterization will include identification of the vegetation classes,
dominant species, successional stage, human disturbance, and current use. Assessment of wetland size,
classification, and functions will be based on existing studies and delineation and confirmed by a
reconnaissance-level field visit. Based on existing information and the field reconnaissance, Parametrix will
evaluate habitat relationships between the existing wetlands and May Creek and/or Lake Washington as well as
the function of May Creek as a wildlife corridor connecting the site and Lake Washington to upstream habitat.
This task includes the following:
• Review existing information, including previous studies in the project area, soil surveys, wetland
inventories,and topographic map and basin studies.
• Assess proposed wetland and shoreline buffer areas on Lake Washington and May Creek for potential
upland habitat value and identify critical habitat areas.
• Identify use of the site as a migration route for upland species.
Impacts Analysis
Impacts on existing vegetation and wetlands will be assessed based on preliminary plans for the one (1) build
alternative and will include:
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 4 oa 24 03-18-03
• Displacement and augmentation/restoration of vegetation and wetlands.
• Evaluate effects on plant communities related to any changes in groundwater or stormwater volumes or
water quality.
• Interference to critical life functions such as wintering,foraging,migration,breeding and/or rearing.
• Effects related to collisions between vehicles and animals.
• Effects on migration or dispersal of organisms,where the project could create or exacerbate barriers to
movement.
• Impacts of residential docks on lake-fronting lots on lake shore vegetation/habitat.
• Impacts of potential public access along the shoreline.
• Impacts of future use or alterations of DNR owned uplands,based on DNR land use policies for shoreline
property and coordination with DNR shoreline division.
• Fragmentation or consolidation of habitat due to provision of buffer areas and construction of new
roadways or other features of the proposal.
• Indirect impacts, including reasonably expected residential landscaping under current Renton codes,
human presence impacts such as noise and lighting that could reduce habitat suitability for wildlife.
Mitigation
Mitigation measures will identify potential opportunities to avoid,minimize,and compensate for impacts of the
project,including restoration and enhancement of wetland and buffer areas and other measures. This does not
include providing detailed mitigation design specifications;however,overall mitigation goals and objectives will
be defined in sufficient detail to meet EIS disclosure standards.
Aquatic and Endangered Species
Goal
To assess impacts upon these elements and investigate opportunities to enhance resources.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare this section,in accordance with best available science,as indicated by existing scientific
literature.
Affected Environment
For this task, we will collect existing information that establishes the baseline of existing environmental
conditions for the area potentially affected by the build alternative. Aquatic species potentially affected by the
project will be identified,with a special focus on endangered species,along with any potential suitable habitat,
critical habitat,or essential fish habitat(EFH)within or adjacent to the project area. A plan view and side view
map of shoreline fisheries habitat will be prepared. All descriptions will be based on existing information,
including aerial photographs,information provided by the City of Renton, the applicant,Basin Plans for May
Creek,and any relevant studies of aquatic species by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,Tribal
Fisheries studies and NOAA Fisheries.
The EIS team will conduct a reconnaissance-level survey of habitat conditions.
Impact Analysis
The objective of this item will be to identify potential impacts to fish in the project vicinity. The analysis will
include evaluation of potential impacts likely to occur during construction and operation of the project,such as:
• Displacement or enhancement of habitat.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 5 OF 24 03-18-03
•
•
• Impacts on habitat for spawning,rearing,and other lifecycle stages,including:
• Displacement or enhancement of habitat.
• Direct effects on wildlife from construction such as erosion/sedimentation
• Water quality impacts,including increased potential for sedimentation during construction.
• Changes in stream hydrology,including seasonal flows.
• Stream substrate alternation
• Impacts of residential docks and bulkheads on lake-fronting lots on aquatic species, including
salmonid/predator interactions.
• Impacts of future use or alternations of DNR owned uplands, based on DNR land use policies for
shoreline property.
• Fragmentation or consolidation of habitat.
• Effectiveness of proposed setbacks and buffers on aquatic species, including indirect impacts, such as
reasonably expected residential landscaping under current Renton codes, and human presence impacts
such as noise and lighting that could reduce habitat suitability.
Mitigation
This task will involve identification of mitigation concepts that would address the specific impacts to natural
resources at the site including•.
• Potential measures identified in existing basin plans for enhancement of currently altered or channelized
portions of May Creek.
• Potential benefits of enhancement of the May Creek and Lake Washington shorelines
within or adjacent to the project boundaries, including alteration of bulkheads and
substrate.
• Measures which can be incorporated into stormwater management and water quality facilities.
• Buffer area alternatives, including those recommendations in the Tri-County Salmon Conservation
Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule Response Proposal, and King County
Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office-April 19,2002.
• Potential measures to mitigate indirect impacts, such as residential docks and landscaping of buffer areas
and human presence impacts such as noise and lighting.
Additional FEIS Analysis
Review of the DEIS by resource agencies and other entities will produce comments requiring additional
analysis and preparation of elements for the FEIS. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 25 percent of
the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing studies.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include order of magnitude comparisons of impact based on
quantifiable differences resulting from additional impervious surfaces.
• The City of Renton will secure all rights-of-entry.
• No off-site wetland mitigation will be proposed.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 6 OF 24 03-18-03
• Assessment of threatened chinook salmon present in May Creek and Lake Washington will be based on
existing studies applicable to the site.
• Assessment of threatened bull trout will be limited to potential impacts of site actions on habitat within the
site. Upstream sections May Creek will be assessed to the extent such resources have been identified in
existing studies.
• The City of Renton will provide copies of all studies relating to aquatic use of the shoreline.
• Future use or alternations of DNR owned uplands,will be based on consultation with the DNR aquatics
leasing department land use policies for shoreline property.
• A Biological Assessment and coordination with state and federal agencies on permit applications is not
included in this scope.
• One (1) reconnaissance level field visit will be made to the site by one (1) wetland specialist (1) wildlife
specialist and(1)aquatic species specialist.
• The impacts of stormwater management,water quality,and stream buffer areas on aquatic resources will
be based on a comparative analysis of features of the proposal with evaluation standards contained in the
Tri-County Salmon Conservation Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule
Response Proposal, and King County Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office - April 19,
2002.
Deliverables
• Draft EIS Wildlife and Fish section.
• Response to comments for FEIS.
3.3 Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains, Groundwater and Water Quality
Goal
Provide analyses of affected environment,potential impacts,and mitigation development for May Creek,Lake
Washington, and other water bodies identified on and near the site. These analyses will provide a basis for
analysis of impacts on fish and wildlife, aquatic resources, and endangered species and provide a qualitative
evaluation of proposed options for enhancing the existing May Creek on and adjacent to the project site. The
build alternative will need to conform to criteria specified in the City of Renton Addendum to the King County
Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and meet all requirements of the RMC and other applicable
regulations.
Waterways,Runoff/Drainage,Floodplains
This section of the DEIS will include a discussion of existing drainage patterns and runoff rates for the site and
May Creek hydrology and floodplains. Parametrix will prepare this section based on review of existing data,
field investigation,and review of existing technical studies.Impacts from the project build alternative will focus
on stormwater impacts of development,water quality impacts of runoff and potential sedimentation impacts
on May Creek and Lake Washington. The May Creek floodplain will be mapped using hydraulic and slope
models. The model will be used to evaluate channel and delta stability, sediment transport, and floodplain
limits that may result from changes or cessession of dredging operations.
Affected Environment
Parametrix will summarize relevant existing stream locations and physical characteristics, past channel
alterations,existing flood conditions,existing storm drainage facilities,and water quality information based on
RENTON BARBEE Miu.EIS Wore:PROGRAM PAGE 7 OF 24 03-18-03
•
existing information provided in FEMA ,Department of Ecology,King County, City of Renton, and other
relevant studies.
Analysis will address:
• Surface water characteristics.
• Surface water locations and typing, water quality classifications, Clean Water Act listing status, WRIA
plans,or other identified management strategies.
• Floodplain boundaries,floodway capacity,existing obstructions and past channel dredging.
• Existing stormwater outfall and impervious surface area.
• Relationship of surface water to wetlands identified in Task 1.2.4.
• Relationship of surface water to geologic setting,soils class,and characteristics identified in Task 1.2.1.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will describe potential long-term impacts on surface water resources, including the stormwater
conveyance system,potential impacts on streams and Lake Washington, and potential flooding from the one
(1)build alternative. The EIS impacts section will summarize the results to compare the build alternative with
No Action. Specific impacts considered will include:
• Hydrologic and water quality impacts from stormwater runoff,including typical runoff pollutants.
• Flooding impacts of May Creek, assuming a "conservative case" discontinuation of dredging and
formation of a natural delta. The May Creek floodplain of will be mapped using hydraulic and slope
models,which will be used to evaluate channel and delta stability,sediment transport,and floodplain limits
that may result from discontinuation of dredging operations. Peak discharges and flood hydrographs at a
single location will be generated utilizing floodplain volumes from the May Creek floodplain study for the
1%frequency event.
• Increase in frequency or severity of flooding from project runoff.
• Displacement of floodplain storage.
• Potential impacts on wetlands.
Groundwater
Affected Environment
Groundwater conditions on site, and in the vicinity will be assessed,based on existing studies. Groundwater
contaminant sources and levels will be identified based on the IRAP for the site,and existing information for
adjacent sites. Groundwater levels, flow, estimated volumes, and water quality will be assessed based on
existing studies. Potential recharge to on-site wetlands will be assessed.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will provide a qualitative description of potential term impacts on ground water resources,
including.
• Interception of runoff by the stormwater conveyance system.
• Potential infiltration by stormwater facilities.
• Potential changes in the amount,direction or quality of groundwater flows.
• Potential impacts of interflow on Lake Washington,May Creek and wetland recharge.
Water Quality
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 8 OF 24 03-18-03
Affected Environment
Parametrix will identify existing water quality conditions in lower May Creek,from the Lake Washington Blvd.
crossing, and Lake Washington adjacent to the site, based on existing studies and surveys. Existing surface
water sources of contamination will include existing storm water discharges,as documented in City of Renton
records, existing contribution of contaminants from the site, and adjacent sites as documented in MTCA
related studies for the site and adjacent properties,spill data(historical record of major spills,locations,extent,
etc.),and stream erosion/sedimentation as documented in existing studies.
Analysis will address:
• Surface water quality conditions.
• Water quality classifications.
• Surface water sources of contamination.
• Clean Water Act listing status.
• WRIA plans,and other identified management strategies.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will describe potential long-term impacts on surface water resources, including the stormwater
conveyance system, potential impacts on streams, and potential water quality impacts from the one (1) build
alternative, as well as temporary construction-related water quality impacts. The EIS impacts section will
summarize the results to compare the build alternative with No Action. Specific impacts considered will
include:
• Typical runoff pollutants.
• Impacts to water quality.
• Effectiveness of proposed runoff treatment, based on parameters in existing literature, which can be
reasonably applied to the site and the proposal,or standards of the jurisdiction.
• Maintenance activity impacts.
• Water quality components that will be used to evaluate potential impacts on wetlands, terrestrial, and
aquatic species(these will be assessed in the Plants and Animals sections).
Construction impacts will include assessment of
• Erosion and sedimentation potential associated with clearing and grading.
• Potential impacts to surface water associated with project staging areas (non-sediment pollutants,
hazardous materials storage,etc.).
Mitigation for Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains, Groundwater and Water Quality
The mitigation section of the DEIS will summarize BMPs incorporated in the build alternative,BMPs required
as part of engineering and other standards of the jurisdictions surface water management standards, and
Construction impact mitigation will include:
• Qualitative summary of construction BMPs for erosion and sediment control based on the Ecology 2001
Manual.
• Evaluation of mitigation and BMPs will be limited to the areas within the project limits.
Operational impact mitigation will include:
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 9 of 24 03-1 8-03
• ' I
• Floodplain mitigation,including removal of obstructions,increase in flood conveyance(both floodway and
floodplanin)and other measures which can be incorporated on-site.
• Floodplain mitigation for the May Creek basin which may be referenced in existing plans, which would
impact the need for conveyance and other measures on-site.
• Water quality/quantity BMPs proposed for runoff control and stormwater management requirements (i.e.,
Puget Sound Stormwater Management Manual, City of Renton and King County Surface Water Design
Manuals and RMC).
• Spill control BMPs.
• BMPs and other measures to protect or enhance groundwater,including measures which may be included
in the IRAP.
• Means of committing to the mitigation measures.
Additional FEIS Analysis
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed
to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
The scope and budget for the Affected Environment section of the DEIS assumes the following
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• No subbasins or drainage areas will be modified from existing delineations.
• The site is not within the Aquifer Recharge Zone as shown on City of Renton Critical Areas maps.
• New areas of impervious surface and pollutant generating impervious surface within the project limits for
the one (1) build alternative will be provided by existing plans and technical reports. Recalculation of
impervious area will not be performed.
• The City of Renton will provide maps of drainage basins,storm and storm drainage facilities,and known
hydrologic and groundwater information for the site and upstream tributaries.
•The City of Renton will provide all existing water quality and other studies for May Creek and the existing
drainage systems within the project area and identify all deficiencies.
• The applicant will provide all existing plans, studies and descriptions of surface water conveyance,
treatment and other facilities within the project area and identify known deficiencies.
• Existing literature will be used to characterize pollutants in runoff.
• No sampling will be conducted.
• The City of Renton will identify the existing typical water quality treatment BMPs required of development
projects within the city.
• Existing stormwater conveyances are presumed to generally be adequate for the amount of new
impervious surface added by the proposal.
• Stream hydrology and capacity, as documented in existing technical reports, will not be exceeded with
stormwater facilities incorporated in the project plans proposing direct discharge to Lake Washington.
• Existing technical studies and plans provided by the applicant are complete and accurate (no inaccuracies,
misinterpretations of regulations, or errors are present), correct detention volumes proposed, and water
quality treatment meet all applicable standards.
RENTON BARBEE IVIIIZ EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 10 OF 24 03-18-03
• Water quality impacts will be evaluated based on analysis of potential pollutants in runoff generated within
the project boundaries.
• The impacts of stormwater management,water quality,and stream buffer areas on aquatic resources will
be based on a comparative analysis of features of the proposal with evaluation standards contained in the
Tri-County Salmon Conservation Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule
Response Proposal, and King County Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office - April 19,
2002.
• FEMA studies and maps will be utilized for flood hydrology and existing floodplain limits.
• Flooding impacts of May Creek, assuming a "conservative case" discontinuation of dredging and
formation of a natural delta. The assessment of flooding will include FEMA approved HEC-RAS one
dimensional model for peak discharges and flood hydrographs at a single location utilizing FEMA
floodplain volumes in the May Creek floodplain study for 1%frequency event. Assumptions will include a
uniform delta elevation equivalent to the level upstream gradient. Modeling will assume the proposed
bridge spans the floodway and includes no structures or fill within the flood plain, except piers. A
reasonable assumption for the area of piers will be made. Assumptions for modeling will include one
review with Renton Surface Water Utility Engineering staff to establish agreement on parameters.
• One(1) reconnaissance-level site visit will be made.
If existing information is not adequate,additional studies outside the present scope may be required which may
include:
• Field analysis of stream carrying capacity,barriers,constriction,bank erosion,and other characteristics.
• Hydraulic analysis of the capacity of existing open and closed stormwater conveyance systems.
• Analysis of the alternatives or modifications for stormwater detention and water quality treatment facilities.
Deliverables
• Draft EIS sections for Water Resources.
• Response to comments for FEIS.
4.0 HUMAN ENVIRONMENT -
4.1 Transportation Analysis
Goal
The transportation analysis will address impacts of the proposal to the local traffic circulation system.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare this analysis in accordance with City of Renton Municipal Code(RMC)Section 4-6-070
and 4-9-070 authorizing the identification of transportation impacts and identification of appropriate mitigating
measures and requirements for disclosure of environmental impacts by the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA).
Traffic Forecasting Methodology
Traffic forecasts for this study will be developed using the City of Renton EMME/2-based travel demand
model for the impact year specified by the city(presumed to be 2005-07)with adjustmentsto add specific local
projects as based on existing traffic studies supplied by the city,which may include. the Labrador Subdivision,
The Bluffs,Tamaron Point,and Southport.
Study Area
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 11 OF 24 03-18-03
The study area for developing traffic forecasts is generally defined as the area where trip generation from the
proposal adds trips to the street system such that an impact to operation, safety, or non-vehicular circulation
may occur. The trip distribution through the City of Newcastle, is included, specifically the use of Lake
Washington Blvd. and other routes for trips bypassing freeway congestion. For the purpose of this scope and
budget, this area is defined as the area bounded by Lake Washington Blvd SE/SE 60th Street to the north, I-
405/Lake Washington Blvd to the west, and the approximate alignment of 27th Street N to the to the south
with additional area of qualitative description of potential bypass routes through the City of Newcastle..
This scope is based on analysis of the following intersections, in accordance with the December 10, 2002
memo fron Nick Afzali,Renton Transportation Systems,and the scoping determination:
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 60th Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 64th Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 44d'P1
• Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Lane
• Ripley Lane/project north driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/project south driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 36th Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 30th Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/Burnett Ave N(at approx the extended alignment of 27th Street N)
• I 405 ramps at Lake Washington Blvd./SE 44d'P1
• I-405 ramps at 30th Street
Future Baseline Street Network
Future year traffic forecasts will be completed for full occupancy of the proposed development (to be
determined in consultation with Renton Staff,presumed to be 2005-07). Specific projects in the vicinity such
as the Labrador Subdivision, The Bluffs, Tamaron Point, and Southport may be added to the EMME2
baselines. The network for the opening year would include all funded transportation improvements projected
identified in the City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Program(TIP). The analysis will assume no traffic
signals will exist by the baseline year 2005-07 at 44th Street/I-405 ramps. Signalization will be analyzed as a
mitigating measure.
Affected Environment
The most complete data year available(presumed to be 2002)will be utilized to characterize existing conditions
in traffic level of service and delay, traffic accidents and safety, access management,pedestrian facility design,
and transit. A complete inventory of transportation facility characteristics within the study area will be
summarized in this section.
Impact Analysis
The traffic impact analysis will address level of service for the PM peak hour as the most congested period for
study area.
Project Trip Generation
The impact analysis will include development of trip generation estimates using appropriate Institute of Traffic
Engineers (ITE) surveys and local information. A mode split analysis will be utilized to determine whether
transit use or other modes may reduce trip generation as compared to ITE rates.
RENTON B ARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 12 OF 24 03-18-03
Trip generation for the No-Action Alternative consisting of development of the site under existing zoning will
be derived using Institute of Traffic Engineers trip generation tables for the appropriate use. The No-Action
Alternative development trip generation shall be compared to the trip generation of the project for informative
purposes,but would not be included in level of service analysis for the No-Action Alternative.
Level of Service
Level of service (LOS) analysis will be performed for intersections and representative road segments using the
Synchro traffic operations analysis software based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000
methodologies. Three LOS cases will be run:
• Current traffic=base year=2002 volumes(PM peak hour)
• Opening year(2005-07))No Build forecast(PM peak hour)
• Opening year impacts with the trip generation from the proposal
1-405 Impacts
The impacts on 405 operations at the ramps at 44"'Place/Lake Washington Blvd. and at N 30th Street will be
analyzed using Highway Capacity Manual analysis of ramp merges and other relevant methodologies specified
by WSDOT. Mitigation will include the extent to which planned I-405 improvements may mitigate impacts in
the future.
Site Access
Site access involves two proposed public street crossings of the BNSF railroad line. Access issues include
appropriate design criteria of the access to meet BNSF and WUTC standards, safety issues related to vehicle
train conflicts, and emergency vehicle access. Emergency vehicle access is especially a concern if a
train/vehicle accident leads to blockage of both project access points,which is possible, given train stopping
distances and the distance between access points. Evaluation must also consider the potential for higher
future rail use on the line if BNSF finds that market and rail traffic justify us of this route as a second mainline
between Snohomish and Auburn/Tacoma. Hazards associated with at-grade railroad crossings will be
evaluated based on specific site conditions and existing literature including FHWA Report, Highway/Rail
Crossing Technical Working Group Report, November 2002, "Guidance on Traffic Control Devices at
Highway-Rail Grade Crossings", WUTC accident reports compiled under WAC 480-62-080 as well as
coordination with Ahmer Nizam of WUTC and Mike Cowles of BNSF. In addition to the rail crossing, safety
and capacity concerns at the intersections with Lake Washington Blvd.and Hazelwood Lane will be addressed.
Traffic Accidents and Safety Analysis
Accident characteristics and patterns will be analyzed for the roadways in the analysis area. Accident rate
comparisons will be made with region-wide and/or statewide accident rates for routes in the same functional
class and for any available "comparable route" case study data. High-Accident Locations (HAL), High-
Accident Corridors(HAC),and Pedestrian Accident Locations(PAL)will be addressed.
Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions
Impacts on the City of Newcastle,to the northeast of the site will be assessed through:
a) An assessment of trip origins and destinations within Newcastle based on an EMME2 select link
distribution query;
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 13 OF 24 03-18-03
b) Trips routed through Newcastle will be assessed quantitatively through description of the project
traffic volumes on specific road network links,and assessed qualitatively in terms of the proportion of
project trips as related to the total trips.
c) Trips bypassing I-405 through Bellevue and Newcastle will be assessed qualitatively in terms of
project trips which may be diverted to local streets:
• Expected congestion levels on I-405, as compared to projected congestion on alternate
routes and potential factors affecting the decision to divert to local streets;
• Relative travel time comparisons between elements of the freeway network and local streets
based on the length of the route and number of stop or signalized intersections (LOS and
formal trip length analysis will not be performed);
• Alternate routes considered include:
1. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/66th P1 SE/Lake Washington Blvd.
2. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/SE 89th PI/Monterey PI NE/ NE 44th Street/Lake
Washington Blvd.
3. I-405 to 52nd Street/Lake Washington Blvd
4. I-90 to Lakemont Blvd/Coal Creek Newcastle Road/SE 66th Place to Lake Washinton
Blvd (to be considered only if total trips with destinations in the Issaquah area exceed
20 trips);
Non Motorized Facility Impacts and Relationship to Transit
The character of existing non-motorized facilities (pedestrian, bicycle and transit) in the study area will be
described. Alternatives to improve pedestrian access and safety will be developed. Improvements to enhance
pedestrian facility connections to transit facilities will also be explored as mitigating measures.
Mitigating Measures
Mitigating measures will be identified for impacts.The proportional contribution of the proposal to total traffic
and growth in traffic on specific roadway links will be identified. Specific intersection and roadway
improvements needed to mitigate impacts of traffic generation will be identified based on a specific LOS
threshold standard specified by city staff. Warrants for traffic signals will be analyzed, where LOS analysis
indicates a need may exist.
Mitigation for trip generation will include Transportion Demand Management options for mode split, peak
spreading and other mechanisms. Discussion of this element will include regional factors such as development
of HOV and transit facilities,and future land use patterns likely to affect mode choice at the residential origin.
The potential for incorporating features in the proposal which may encourage use of alternate modes will be
identified,including safe and convenient pedestrian circulation and access to transit stops,widened shoulders,
or other facilities for bicycles, and connections with existing and planned recreation trails, commercial and
other destinations.
Mitigating measures to address potential impacts on safety, pedestrians and other impact will be assessed,
including mitigation for crossings of the railroad.
Final EIS
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORN PROGRAM PAGE 14 Or 24 03-18-03
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• For baseline 2005-07 traffic growth, the City of Renton EMME/2 model will be used with possible
additions to include specific recently approved projects in the vicinity, such as the Labrador Subdivision,
The Bluffs,Tamaron Point,and Southport. The City will provide traffic reports for projects as well as the
I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange Project Transportation Discipline Report(June 2001) and other existing
transportation reports in the vicinity.
• Existing 2002 base-year traffic counts on all roadways modeled will be available from the HDR project
traffic impact analysis and local jurisdictions, including intersection turn movements. No traffic counts
will be conducted.
• The 2005-07 baseline future year transportation network will consist of all fully funded transportation
capacity improvements as provided by the City of Renton.
• The No-Action alternative development analysis shall include only trip generation that will be compared to
the trip generation of the project for comparative purposes,but not subject to operational analysis.
• One (1) meeting with Renton transportation staff, and one (1) meeting with WSDOT staff will be
required.
Deliverables
• Transportation section for the DEIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.2 Hazardous Materials
Goal
The site is known to contain contaminated soils,primarily arsenic and zinc. An Independent Remedial Action
Plan (IRAP)has been prepared for the site pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act(MTCA) and approved
by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the City of Renton, involving removal of an
estimated 21,500 cubic yards of soil from the site.
Approach
The analysis will rely on the September 2000 remedial action plan,including the cleanup levels established to
protect human health and the environment.. This plan is designed to bring soil conditions to residential
standards. Potential impacts from contamination on the adjacent Quendall Terminals site will also be
evaluated.
Affected Environment
The EIS text will summarize the existing standards for remediation to residential standards,based on Ecology's
existing literature, specifically the scientific basis for exposure standards and scientific uncertainty inherent in
the standards and Ecology's method for assessment of long-term risk to residents on sites. Specific reference
will be made to provisions of the Ecology-approved cleanup plan, including the locations and depths of soil
removal, methods for confirmation sampling, and protection of human health and the environment with
respect to the proposed development scenario. Site investigation reports will also be reviewed regarding the
current status of confirmed groundwater contamination and suspected surface water contamination, as
indicated in the current Ecology database for the site.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 15 OF 24 03-18-03
Impacts
Assessment of impacts will include a qualitative assessment of any confounding factors which may affect the
ability to meet the goals of the IRAP. Residual risk to future residents on-site from on-site materials proposed
to not be removed,or isolated will be assessed based in existing literature. The existence of contaminants from
other sites, and potential exposure to residents on site will be assessed based on existing studies under two
scenarios 1)the scenario of implementation of cleanup of those sites,and 2) delay of cleanup of adjacent sites
until after this site is developed and occupied with resulting continued presence of contaminants.
Timing and extent of disturbance off the site required for cleanup will be discussed as it relates to other
infrastructure required for project development,in relation to future use of the DNR owned shoreline,as well
as the relationship to rehabilitation of the stream corridor and shoreline bulkheads, or other options for
shoreline enhancement.
Mitigation
Mitigating measures will include an assessment of alternative cleanup levels not contained in existing standards,
based on USEPA criteria for selection of alternative cleanup methodologies.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis and some individual responses. For
budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 15 percent of the DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing scientific studies applicable to development of standards and applicable to this site,including the
IRAP for this site,and available studies for adjacent sites will be used as the primary basis for analysis.
• One(1)reconnaissance level field visit will be made to the site by one(1)hazardous materials specialist.
• No sampling will be performed,on or off-site.
Deliverable
• Hazardous Materials section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments and revised section for Final EIS.
4.3 Aesthetics,Light and Glare
Goal
The objective of the Aesthetics,Light and Glare task is to identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and
evaluate visual and aesthetic impacts of the proposal and potential mitigation,as appropriate.
Aesthetics/Visual Quality
Affected Environment
Parametrix will collect and review pertinent documents that define the visual quality and aesthetic issues related
to the proposed build alternatives. These reports indude Land Use Regulations and Policies; local
comprehensive plans and policies; and open space, pedestrian/bicycle routes,and recreation plans. Collected
information will be confirmed by site reconnaissance and information gathered at the scoping meeting.
Viewpoint Identification
Viewpoints from different landscape units will be defined by topography and differences in the land use and
urban design context as defined by comprehensive plan policies or zoning regulations, as well as identifiable
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 16 OF 24 03-18-03
design characteristics of existing development. Significant visual features and landmarks within each landscape
unit will be located and the intrinsic qualities that characterize each landscape unit will be described in text
form.
Specific resources to be defined include:
•Character of existing development,including topography,vegetation,land-use patterns,community identity
(aesthetics and image), neighborhood boundaries and edges, building scale and massing, building/open-
space texture.
• Street grid,development texture,and open-space patterns.
• Parks,pedestrian/bicycle routes,and other recreation areas.
Typical viewpoints will be identified and mapped within each landscape unit from existing plans and policies,
site reconnaissance, and through the public scoping process. The selected key viewpoints will become the
views to be used to describe existing conditions in the comparison of impacts between the existing conditions,
the build alternative,and the No-Action Alternative.
Potential resident and transient viewer groups will be identified. Viewer groups could include:
• Residents within the area to the north and east of the site. Where possible,views will be selected from
public rights-of-way or other public sites that approximate the views from residences.
• Residents to the south of the site,along Lake Washington. These views will be selected from near-shore
Lake Washington views that approximate the views from residences.
• More distant views from the east,including I-405,the West Hill in unincorporated King County,.
• Viewers traversing Lake Washington Blvd. adjacent to the site,including views from the curve traveling
west from the I-405 interchange and views northbound from south of the site.
• Views from parks and public open space,including Clarke Beach Park in Mercer Island.
Impacts
Evaluation of impacts will include a qualitative description of the appearance of the existing site and proposed
facilities as viewed from representative key viewpoints. Visual simulations will be prepared using photos of the
site. Simulations are proposed for a"conservative case"which would include removal of existing buildings and
depiction of the gross bulk of structures allowed on proposed lots,based on City of Renton zoning standards,
and any specific commitments to height and bulk contained in the preliminary plat application.
The analysis will include an objective descriptors of attributes (such as form, line, color and texture) and
provide a qualitative evaluation in terms of relationships between elements of the visual environment in terms
of dominance, scale,diversity and continuity. Viewer response to the visual environment will be described in
terms of viewing populations and visual quality descriptors such as vividness/interest and
intactness/coherence/unity.
Evaluation of the change from the existing industrial development of the site to the proposed residential plat
will focus on intensity, scale and building bulk. Evaluation of compatibility with existing development in the
vicinity will be evaluated in terms of bulk,height, scale,design,landscape and vegetation character as it relates
to the character of existing development.
Mitigation
RE.NTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 17 OF 24 03-18-03
To develop mitigation, Parametrix will identify mitigation concepts that reduce the impacts to the visual and
aesthetic resources of each landscape unit and enhance the visual characteristics of the build alternatives.
Potential mitigation measures to be considered could include concepts that alter the building mass; screen
views of the project(topographic and vegetation screening);or integration of the project into the surrounding
landscape through use of materials and color,structure,design scale and massing,or slope gradient alteration.
Light and Glare
Affected Environment
The existing lighting and glare from the site, and its visibility, intensity, and dominance will be assessed for
existing viewers,which generally will be coordinated with the viewpoints selected for visual simulations.
Impacts
Impacts will describe likely light and glare sources on the site, including standard street lighting, and assess
impacts on potential viewers. This analysis will be integrated with the Aesthetics/Visual Quality analysis to
provide a perspective of nighttime visual impacts. Visual simulations will not be prepared for this component
of the analysis.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include qualitative comparison of probable visual and
light/glare impacts based on the character of existing industrial buildings and the building bulk allowed by
existing zoning standards and landscaping and other features required by codes.
• Photo simulations will be prepared based on black and white photos of existing views, are anticipated to
include a single view on an 81/2 x 11 sheet and will not exceed five(5)views.
• A preliminary screening of potential viewpoints will be developed, reviewed and approved by City staff
prior to preparation of visual simulations.
• Depictions of gross bulk of structures will be based on height,building coverage,and setbacks required by
City of Renton zoning standards and specific commitments to height and bulk contained in the
preliminary plat application. Building depiction will consist of boxes rendered in a neutral gray. A list of
criteria and a single view depiction will be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to completion of
additional other simulations.
• Analysis of visual quality will be qualitative and will generally follow criteria in Blair, 1982, Substation
Visual Simulation Techniques,and FHWA,1981,Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects.
Deliverables
• Visual Quality/Light and Glare section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.4 Noise
Goal
RENTON BARBER MILL EIS WORE PROGRAM PAGE 18 OF 24 03-18-03
This element of the scope will assess noise impacts associated with construction, impacts of noise from the
adjacent railroad on the residential use of the site, noise from use of the site, and noise associated with
increased traffic volumes related to regional growth,and the proposal.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare an EIS noise section analysis using typical noise levels generated by construction,and
rail use.
Affected Environment
The EIS text will summarize noise level in the project area and identify sensitive receptorswith a particular
focus on the rail line adjacent to the site. Description of existing noise levels will include characterization of
human response to noise levels based on context and normal activities.
Construction Impacts
Construction noise impacts shall be described based on:
• Types and locations of equipment likely to be used on the project.
• Typical construction equipment noise levels and duration.
• Typical means of reducing construction noise.
• Local ordinances relating to construction noise.
• Land uses or activities,which may be affected by construction noise.
Construction timing and phasing shall be discussed and the potential need for variances assessed.
Rail Impacts
Potential noise impacts from the rail line will be assessed based on typcical railroad carriage-to-rail noise,
whistle noise,engine noise and other typical rail related noise based on existing studies and accepted industry
standard tables. Carriage noise will be based on operating speeds as determined in coordination with BNSFRR
personnel. The frequency of rail use will be based on current experience,and also the potential for higher use
of the line in the future.
Transportation Impacts
Noise impacts from traffic related to the project will be derived from the magnitude of traffic increases from
the baseline,and the project based on the traffic/volume noise increase relationship of 3dbA noise increase for
a doubling of traffic volumes. The increase attributed to both the background increase and increases in traffic
from the proposal will be assessed. Impacts will be compared with projected noise levels from existing sources
in the area,including noise from I-405.
Mitigation:Construction and Operation
Mitigating measures for potential construction impacts will include limits on hours of construction, staging,
equipment used,barriers,and other feasible measures.
Traffic noise abatement measures will be evaluated, in accordance with the standards established by FHWA
and WSDOT,as reference points for establishing levels where traffic noise impacts are predicted to"approach
or exceed standards" or be a "substantial increase." The proposal does not include roadway improvements
utilizing federal funding; therefore, these FHWA and WSDOT standards provide a reference rather than
indicating mitigation requirements.
RENTON BARBEE Mtu.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 19 OF 24 03-18-03
Unavoidable adverse impacts shall include impacts identified for which mitigating measures are not identified,
or which cannot be assured to be fully mitigated to meet applicable standards.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
Deliverables
• Noise section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.5 Historic and Cultural Resources
Affected Environment
Cultural resources consisting of archaeological resources as defined in RCW 27.53.040 will be assessed based
on existing information at the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,the King County Cultural
Resources Division,the University of Washington Library,the Renton Museum,and the Puget Sound Regional
Repository of the Washington State Archives. Consultation with tribes will include solicitation of comments
and review of any information provided. The site will be analyzed with respect to its historic, cultural and
architectural merit.
Impacts
Impact assessment will depend on the identification of cultural resources. The lowering of Lake Washington
elevation in 1910 and the subsequent fill of the site for development renders the probability of pre-settlement
resources extremely low. The potential loss of structures on the site with cultural,architectural or engineering
value will be assessed in regard to the presence of similar structures in the region.
Mitigation
Mitigation,if cultural resources are found,may include avoidance,but is most likely to include excavation and
conservation.A variety of strategies may be appropriate,including information and educational displays which
commemorate the site's place in the history and cultural development of the area.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative. •
• Existing documents will be utilized to assess cultural resources and historical merits of the site.
• The State Historical Preservation office will be contacted by letter with phone follow-up to solicit existing
information on historic and cultural resources on-site.
• Tribal cultural information will be solicited by letter.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORD PROGRAM PAGE 20 OF 24 03-18-03
• One(1) field visit will be made to the site. Photos of structures will be taken,but a full inventory will not
be performed.
Deliverables
• Cultural and Historic Resource section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
5.0 DEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare an adequate and complete Draft Environmental Impacts Statement addressing the effects of the
proposal and No-Action Alternative.
Approach
PDEIS Preparation
Parametrix will prepare a Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS) following SEPA Guidelines,WAG 197-11, and City
of Renton procedures for review by the City of Renton and respond to comments to prepare a Draft EIS
(DEIS) for publication.
The PDEIS is expected to include the following chapters or sections(subject to revision):
• Cover and Fact Sheets.
• Summary,including tables comparing alternatives.
• Alternatives,Including the Proposed Action.
• Affected Environment,Impacts,and Mitigation Measures.
• Appendices, including list of preparers, distribution list, glossary, index, and other technical backup.
Technical studies will be prepared for
• Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat for Terrestrial and Aquatic Species
• Waterways,Hydrology,Floodplains,Groundwater and Water Quality
• Transportation
• Hazardous Materials
• Aesthetics,Light and Glare
• Professional editing will be conducted on the PDEIS. Ten(10)copies of the PDEIS will be provided for
review by project lead and cooperating agencies.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include order of magnitude comparisons of impact based on
quantifiable differences resulting from one example of other allowed uses,which could be developed on
the site.
• The applicant will provide Parametrix with two paper copies and one electronic copy of all technical
reports and plans prepared for the proposal within one week after the Notice to Proceed. All graphics in
reports shall be provided in electronic format, as specified below. The applicant will arrange the
availability of consultants who provided technical reports to answer questions about the technical
assumptions underlying their reports and shall respond to questions within five(5)working days.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 21 OF 24 03-18-03
• The City of Renton will provide one copy of all existing information in their possession concerning the site
and proposal including,but not limited to, correspondence and analysis of the proposal; existing Renton
EMME/2 model parameters;existing and future planned road lane and intersection configurations within
the transportation analysis area; and all utility location, sizing, and capacity information for facilities
affected by the proposal,including plans and specifications,Critical Area Designations,Maps and Studies,
existing Watershed and Wildlife Studies of May Creek, Capital Improvement Programs, and
Transportation Improvement Programs within one week after the Notice to Proceed.
• All site and building utility plans,and other related maps will be provided in original size and format either
AutoCAD Map Release 2000 drawing files along with CTB file (pen assignment file) or GIS Arch Info by
the applicant or City of Renton. Graphics shall be provided in original size,81/2 x 11 format(PDF,JPG.
TIF,PageMaker,Freehand)by the applicant or City of Renton. The applicant will generate LDD (Land
Development)/CAD cross sections of the site existing and proposed topography at locations specified by
Parametrix to be used in developing shoreline/aquatic lands cross sections. Except where specific graphic
products are specified to be provided in the scope above, all other graphics will be as provided by the
applicant and city and will be published without further graphic manipulation beyond formatting to fit the
page style of the document. Additional graphics,if required,shall be a separate billable task.
• Parametrix staff will perform one (1) reconnaissance level site visit, not to exceed four (4) hours. The
applicant will make project management personnel and consultants who prepared technical reports for the
applicant available for the reconnaissance field visit to provide orientation to the site and answer questions
about the technical assumptions underlying their reports. City of Renton staff will be notified of the date
and time of site visits and may attend.
• Communication with City staff on assumptions for various studies, including, but not limited to No-
Action Alternative, floodplain modeling parameters, traffic generation, transportation network, will
generally be electronically transmitted with email transmittal of city comments.
• The schedule presumes that all City reviews for coordination on assumptions require no more than two(2)
working days,except as provided for the PDEIS.
• Parametrix will deliver ten(10) review copies of the Preliminary Draft EIS to the City for distribution to
City staff and cooperating agencies.
• The City will provide a single contact person for review of the Preliminary Draft EIS. The City shall
reconcile and compile all review comments into a single hard copy or electronic copy. The second review
by the City will address only whether previous comments are responded to adequately. No new issues will
be raised at the second review.
• Two (2) rounds of review and revision of the Preliminary Draft EIS are assumed with initial City
comments transmitted within 5 working days,Parametrix response/revision submitted within 5 working
days, second round of City staff comments transmitted within 5 working days, and final revisions by
Parametrix within 5 working days.
• If Parametix identifies a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures, and
the City directs incorporation into the Draft EIS,an additional 15 working days will be incorporated into
the schedule for revision and reformatting of the mitigation section of the document. A site plan to
illustrate the alternative shall be based on CADD drawings for the existing site plan.
• All final documents will be provided in an electronic MS Word document and camera-ready hard copy
format.
• Printing will be billed directly as a separate item by the City of Renton to the private applicant.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 22 OF 24 03-18-03
•
• Distribution and legal notice of the DEIS will be provided by the City of Renton.
• A PDF format version of the DEIS for CD-ROM or web posting will not be prepared.
• Up to two(2)Parametrix staff persons will attend one(1)public hearing on the Draft EIS.
Deliverables
• Preliminary Draft EIS(15 Copies).
• Draft EIS camera ready for printing.
6.0 FEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare adequate and complete Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Approach
Response to Comments
All comments received on the DEIS must have a response in the FEIS. General responses will be developed
to address commonly raised issues. Detailed or unique comments will require individual responses. Comments
will be cataloged according to commentor, element of the environment, and status of response. This item
assumes up to fifty (50) substantive comments will be received and some additional technical analysis may be
required.
PFEIS Preparation
Parametrix will prepare a Preliminary Final EIS (PFEIS). The PFEIS will include response to comments
received on the DEIS. The PFEIS will include the elements specified in WAC 197-11-560 (5) for a case where
changes in response to comments are minor.
Professional editing of the PFEIS will be conducted.
FEIS Production
Based on comments by City of Renton staff and coordinating agencies,a camera-ready Final EIS (FEIS)will be
prepared.
Assumptions
• All DEIS assumptions also apply to the FEIS.
• Up to 50 substantive comments(not just letters)will be received.
• Limited technical analysis will be required to address comments. For budgeting purposes, approximately
10 percent of the DEIS preparation effort is assumed. for response to comments, but does not include
additional substantive analysis. This assumption and the effort required to complete the FEIS will be
reviewed at the close of the comment period and may require amendment to the scope and budget.
• Parametrix will deliver ten (10) review copies to the City for distribution to City staff and cooperating
agencies.
• The City will reconcile and compile all review comments into a single copy.
• The FEIS will be revised based on one(1)round of comments received on the PFEIS.
• A camera-ready copy will be prepared for final review and approval signatures.
• Printing will be billed directly as a separate item by the City of Renton to the private applicant.
Distribution and legal notice of the FEIS will be provided by the City of Renton.
Deliverables
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS Woiu:PROGRAM PAGE 23 OF 24 03-18-03
•
• Summary of all comments received on the Draft EIS.
• Preliminary Final EIS(15 Copies).
• Final EIS,camera-ready for printing.
RENTON BARBEE Mtu.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 24 OF 24 03-18-03
EXHIBIT B
TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION
io
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT B
• City of Renton
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS Schedule `
February March April May June July August September
ID Task Name Start Finish 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Renton-Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Mon 3/17/03 Tue 9/2/03 -� .
2 Task 1-Program Management(PMX) Mon 3/17/03 Tue 3/18/03VPI
3 1.1 Protect Start-Up(PMX) Mon 3/17/03 Mon 3/17/D3 3/17
4 1.1 Notice to Proceed Mon 3/17/03 Mon 3/17/03 3/17 1- 7
5 1.2 Protect Kick-Off Meeting(PMX) Tue 3/18/03 Tue 3/18/03 3/18 18
6 Task 2-Preliminary Draft EIS Analysis Tue 3/18/03 Mon 526/03 • -
7 2.1 Description of Alternatives Tue3/18/03 Mon4/14/03
— 8 Description of Alternatives Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/31/03 3/1e 1 1
9 City Review Tue 4/1/03 Mon 4/7/03 4/1 - r4/7
10 Finalize Tue 4/8/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/8 4/14
11 2.2 Natural Environment Tue3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03
12 2.2.1 All elements except Floodplain Tue 3/18/03 Mon 6/26/03
13 Receive information from applciant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 324/03 3/18 r
14 Review existing information Tue 325/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 14/7
15 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue4/8/03 4/8 r4/8
16 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/9 , r•14 •
17 Description of affected environment Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4/15 r4/28
18 Analyze impacts Tue4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 429 r 2
19 Determine Mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 5/13 r 9
20 - Prepare section of PDEIS Tue 520/03 Mon 5/26/03 5/20 - -
21 2.2.2 Floodpiain Tue 3/18/03 Mon 6/26/03 I' .
22 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18
23 Review existing information Tue 325/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 4/7
24 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/e 4/8
25 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 • 4/9 14
26 Floodplain Model Tue4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 16 4/2827 Description of affected environment Wed 4/9/03 Tue 422/03 4/9 4/22
28 Assess impacts Tue 429/03 Mon 5/12/03 4/29 5/12
29 Identify mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 ; 5/13 9
30 Prepare draft section for PDEIS Tue 520/03 Mon 5/26/03 5/20 5/26
31 2.3 Built Environment(PMX) Tue 3/18/03 Mon 526/03 ' V .
32 2.3.1 Transportation Analysis(PMX) Tue3/18/03 Mon 6/26/03 ' ° I� - .
33 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 324/03 3/16 3241
34 Review existing information Tue 325/03 Mon 4/7/03 325 1 4/7
3s Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/8 4/8
36 Confirm Assumptons Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/9 4/14
37 Future Non-Protect Baseline Tue4/15/03 Mon 421/03 4/15 4/21
This schedule assumes authorization to proceed by March 17,2003. Page 1 Mon 2/24/03
The schedule is subject to roll-back based on later receipt of Notice to Proceed,of materials to
be provided by applicant or city,or later dates of completion of city review
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT B
• City of Renton
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS Schedule
February March April ,May June July August September
ID Task Name Start Finish 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
38 SYNCHRO Setup Tue 4/15/03 Mon 421/03 4/1 4/21
39 SYNCHRO Baseline Tue4/15/03 Wed 423/03 4/1 .423I
40 Trip Generation and Assignment Thu 4/24/03 Fri 4/25/03 4/24 •
41 Analyze intersection LOS Mon 428/03 Fri 5/2/03 4/28 •
42 Analyze accident characteristics and patter Mon 4/28/03 Fri 52/03 4/28 /2
43 Analyze pedestrian facilities Mon 4/28/03 Fri 52/03 _ 428 6/2 44 Mitigation Strategy Coordinate with City Mon 5/5/03 Wed 5/7/03 5/5 --
45 Mitigation Analysis Thu 5/8/03 Wed 5114/03 16P8 5/14
46 Prepare Draft Transportation EIS Section Mon 5/5/03 Mon 526/03 • 6/5' -size
47 2.3.2 Other Elements Human Environment Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5226/03 ' l .
48 Receive information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 324/03 3/18 1324
49 Review existing Information Tue 3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/25 1•
50 Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8/03 Tue 4/8/03 4/6 I
51 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 4/9 r4/14
52 Description of affected environment Tue4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4/15 rl 9
53 Assess impacts Tue 4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 4/29 ,• 2
54 Identify mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 5/13 r 9
55 Prepare draft section for PDEIS Tue 520/03 Mon 5/26/03 5/20 I•
56 Task 3 DEIS Preparation and City Review Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/30/03 j .
57 Assemble PDEIS Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/2/03 5/27 16/2
58 Renton Stafff First Review Tue 6/3/03 Mon 6/9/03 1 6✓3 r6/9
59 PMX Response to Renton Review Tue 6/10/03 Mon 6/16/03 i 6/10 r6/16
60 Final Review Renton Staff Tue 6/17/03 Mon 623/03 6/t7 023
61 DEIS Final Text Tue 6/24/03 Fri 6/27/03 6n4 •
62 Printing (not included in budget) Mon 6/30/03 Mon 6/30/03 6/30 ',WO
63 City of Renton Issued DEIS Tue 7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03
64 DEIS Comment Period Tue7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03 7/ 7/31
as Preparation for Public Meeting Tue 7/1/03 Mon 721/03 7/1 721
•
66 Conduct Public Meeting(Assume 1 Meeting) Tue 7/22/03 Tue 7/22/03 7/22 722
67 Task 4 Final EIS(FEIS) Fri eWro3 Tue 9/P/03
66 Summarize Public Comments&Respond Fri 8/1/03 Thu 8/7/03 ; eM 8✓/
69 Renton Stafff First Review Fri 8/8/03 Thu 8/14/03 i ere U14
70 PMX revision Fri 8/15/03 Thu 8/21/03 j efts 821
71 Final Review Renton Staff Fri 8/22/03 Tue 8/26/03 8/22 826
I
72 FEIS Final Text Wed 8/27/03 Fri 8/29/03 8/27 9
73 Printing(not included in budget) Mon 9/1/03 Mon 9/1/03 l 9/1 9/1
74 FEIS Issuance by City of Renton Tue 9/2/03 Tue 92/03
I 9/21 92
This schedule assumes authorization to proceed by March 17,2003. Page 2 Mon 2/24/03
The schedule Is subject to roll-back based on later receipt of Notice to Proceed,of materials to
be provided by applicant or city,or later dates of completion of city review
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT C BUDGET (03.18-03) City of Renton
554-1779-812
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS • Environmental Impact Statement
(Time and Materials,Not to Exceed Total)
•
PROJECT: City of Renton,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
CLIENT:City of Renton
+,.y�.., DaviSMr4N Asunder Baby Nda wed Sara Tony Tan Allbu Jame Andel Ken LAM& Jn Coast Jae MIN Bob%der Bid LaVoie Cuter Corns RIONs John Pore Bob Sums Woe
PMXN .:':'"1`r''.1r°r, Pooled Meee9er Oealyddogy Mtleaae Revd Sogyoxixoy Wet. Water Vegetation Terred4d Aquatic A4ulk Tnde eeee Transportation Franklin Wessman IWFuemrh% Tech Aim Oraptda Praeeahg
,'CJiq.;�i:,",;�j++a�y�hh�•;5q{,^`` STAFF OM1OC eedydd Fac5Aane Resources Resources W.' HmVSMaer Rag Padlsgon
i'%i°j�Q.^t!s'u: lta3 Meledde Wi1Jat Svlode Water Wetlands Wbad Reearma Remora TMk Modeling TMkAmy0e n3lgetkn Crowing lealakddlsd Nob. TOTAL TOTAL
Phase Teak Ong DaalMkn DSC Rezas, 43xm $3e01 $4Be5 $2662 152.93 P49.58 S26.62 $31a1 12A.14 S2553 SD.74 S2a49 S3S33 sues 52M39 $4627 4332 S2433 US CO 126e0 427.03 [DAD HOURS COST _
Prated Management 40 4 4 4 4 4 16 4 79.5385 $2,835.64
DNOC 32 - .
32 S360.00
Allema8ves 8 4 4 18 S516.00
Soils/Geology 4 8 18 16 4 48 $1,769.68
Shsreene Welland Habitat 4 16 38 4 4 s4 $1,945.32
Fisheries 4 32 60 8 4 _ 108 $3,34af1.1..i
Water,Orelnage,Roodda9 4 20 90 4 4 4 11 4 141 $4,288J
Graadwatar 2 12 36 4 8 24 4 4 94 $9,015.bc'
Water Dually 2 8 36 4 50 51,547.12
Transpodatan 8 _ 6D 10 140 18 8 8 4 4 258 $7,905.08
Toxic end Haz.Materials 4 12 40 4 8 4 4 78 $2,349.48
A05110103.WA a,GI.. 4 _ 40 36 4 84 52,20920
Noise 4 18 4 4 28 $788.00
C.Wrm64dodc 4 40 4 4 4 56 $1,44920
DEIS 40 8 18 10 20 8 12 12 32 8 18 8 36 20 50 288 $8,845.40
FES 36 4 11 2 5 16 3 3 5 5 10 8 16 2 9 2 40 4 24 202 $6,220.66
DSC Labor Subtotal&lamsnt Solely Rates 16$ 32 46 119 18 51 174 31 29 53 53 106 78 10 172 15 8 95 18 120 103 126 1624 $49,986.10
Salary EscalationEstimated%of proIect completed before next Increase 60%
.Estimated%of next salary Increase 5.0% Additional Direct Salary Maltreat Salary Eaata8on $1,249.65
DSC Labor Subtotal with Salary Eaaiaton '. $51,235.76
overhead Rate 185.00% OVerhe.d(OH)Coate OH Rata x DSC. . $94,766.15
Rued Foe Rate 35.00% Reed Fee(FF)Cate FF Rel.x DSC a $17,932.81
In House Expense ha Noe. umc. Unit aracoe< Madllp x . �+,:,,+�•v y„;,,;,.y.5 :r„y,r,.'e.,�~:...: ." .,.,e•: ,::tY ?''%' y,.:"''•:y : .sN.— A::"t:.,n": ,
.'Seek,,� �" h� i�
er.;r}: ;:
x
'.'
..;�:i
.
.,. 'a• x'
x","
^
'
Chap 1000 $0.365 mile $365.W "At;�rlT €, p',fM�'d-,5,,✓'::.;se'.tix. a:f.F �.r,t.�T::.� �'>`*t m^ ,l,�?j.'„ .; i. s''.`:' �r' Fi {:•444;b^..." �r ' ;v,U'?'.x�
1365.00
aXr:r,5,e A 3 ,z .rti:".' 'q4.'�.t K§^ . ,.� 5;.e;:<r✓ ,P�n� °*;.fr+""`�aur•;,+-::Y,W. . .`var`'.,1,v s'sn:41.0',F:x:'S?','o.' ._?.`,r,i'J„::. -.
pdaok4000 $0.10 sheet $400.00 J:'\.,aa��,, (::.''11r, ,: n ,�_t ,� y :1:•;.M. ;:k hq. "ia7,,z eq ',"-7i "�,%,u,D&f„ Tv'.:" +y�..�6.r.ry; .5.Io y A ".,a .:."-_n;.`aak i... $400.00
_ CheekR print. 1W $,.00 sheet $100.00 A`m,t,i4-,`; 't'x �'' "Fr',,,� <`` ' rZ2 ..Z:e,/,".✓ ,x� R }� {' ,,ia,:. , .R:a.frvXo;:;,, ;,''ir.rV,x„;> e��4, Y cr""`f»r"' x-
-
�
v.%
u: ..i.:, s,00
" ., ,xy, �,;,, 5hs' :v ,, (?:xK a",.s z,. a;, weI,': r, n+wFy ;ra.rn,h. ",. �, .".'' " r,1>7''°",G�;.;;s. ''''' Y+41'%' ;
Real Rats $20.00 sheet. :"a.:: T°, .4. _" 4` }a;„7 i.;,",,�:. i 1:;k 5s;�;i.�r, ,a\; 7" .,, . .o,v, .1,$i �—,a.r..yrc^ :i4:,
lase,Postage,shbP69 der 25 $1.000.00 10% . �+3+. �:Sa:Y . ma �-,,k ='3-' �zf . e,3.<.» P ._ x�;sLi aa� ;a'. .fta: "'.G;Fi ag 81,100.1:
Direct ,..1"a"�=.0.°So':"'r�.ysv-� ,-ra' `,: 'S,ra',.ggw..:<*:�^;:-- w:S;;; >p<. `+inu,•;xyr "- ,",,xa; "t F:a kp:w",ex 'L:l'.'e'', r" �'1
OutsideExpenses P Mataw :a`s r:a� d,sN:a,=.�"»�-r. _ ,�,.,�a...ak,`'t..•�:=c .Y' `'t=r..:�•:.�:��Ic'z�?�,:c��-..,,S; P..»�.:,.�'i`. , ;C%:-'_z *' "�=:w r vs:� .,.,. .,.1
M<a�.t'..a�°'az,z<. ::x: ,,,..a �,;:A�'' ;.t,.s„
15% ,r. S'i;" ; w�'y".1,, 4g ' ',' �.` k'.4 : "' ? 4;,.;•"".ova<e�''`:3 a"='"".'.;1�a�,.4 ` "10.tom
,sa 5n "'ti'C xy R o�±^�_^i � �r�.,',^� ya ��-'+ '�' M,x�"�.(.a
'' .fl,qs,,,, :.�, d ;> ,':°^'•`$,tic .., P4..:$' J'e. Mai zfi' }?:g,,
4. .., yra",y'"' ," Y., r: ¢ ;,.''�., ?''?.,.a3:". 't'nat:9 ;.,.:�,.,7.dy,h',;.,d.°s'S.'Y.a,xs-r?:'' t;'.' P..
10% a- 3m',a; ,4 �!+�$' '\ 't`sz"�R°.� 1';�., . i;"S,'"C�, .l ';'f,"` � �i � .:'<.' .e°'4'.., ms�"/T s, 'e:;x.�..�,,,sr`,'F,.E�'Y�.3
°+'.•.,e"u�.., 4,,,,, y'i.3 4' kvkA,l:,.f,s,,-41:.5.,r .,�`3•.v.,. .;5.,.,;% ,';p'. S.`tr ,,,,, : n�w,:, -�4l.,4•� Y ° ^,,T rrrr ;�"+.1}.�.s 4, �e
g ':, w q',. ,t� '.Y'..+. 5'9m,>.�.',;P,'"j'>Y" V,� w x,P,'.M hi'S' .�W?yr m''fis:.e'T::Iw� Y:S;"ti....r:
"tYs-;�` r'�..,•a':<''. '""r•' ':,7�i-.:;. M,r?:c+"si.- !', �_,�-;, .-,:".ter. 7 ...
10% '�,�,'�rTa --r-�.�„F y;T,..a,';., �{ aa� o-., �•, .., ,...i.,,r'G�; ,Y,,t±�;;;�ram, �eY"a�.
'� #,. 3',a(,,,,,:.. ®:.. I,C':,^l. u,�^. * 'k :r4v^„K ,:t }t'}.1:�' R,.VA;•ttirj.".;:i-1.o wp,:x.
Subeonsulfents :R ,:,k .. ;crc",�4 ..e a. .a3.. ,x'-, ;'r.;,"':s -..}=� ,".t;r %Y'^.,.�,,`r-. •r.v _ham.,,li`x,'`..' , ..._"„Y+.w" n.
in, -•, 'm,.r4u.k.;.`k '. r;k,1 .kr, _:F's i.-..fir. s;";,,,,=? 1 v.k.;.:4...;' rc� `�.f' �`;1'.:e,',s«"".ti.,..t''.'.:f ;:'1:'```t:°p1f47. Err.5*'lif)7'''''%:e";'°`4✓';7i.^•'2
:T:yKr✓'i_. .Ja' .i�,-:Pw^t�i.) :(.,.-! �t�. sit .:rLr.et, �',,,,..y: .�,f'�: .Y.'+` S it_`�,•'`...
�:�%:• "' '4'.: `'"s4r",'.x.�. '..9'-',-.4, �':'S7*,',w.y ';<._;y i.-a•s":' t.,,1',-, r1yf?p;�a.,:i;A'.,,5'. .i:Fw..,*..a, Sr°" _. °>v"p+; .R,,,V,.-.,.
10% dr_,''..,�����,--.�.'.'>,,..,..s'i"''... ��''�v. .;11''N:.�:;i�'..a_ ,..r6 ..:. ... . . �.r� ;�'c, �::a. W ..r.,"�.-..,..:enr,rreE:v'ket*x^C': ,
$1,965.00
$165,919A2
Prepared By. Reviewed By. Approved By.
(Proles Manager) (Division Manager)
-4
•
Poled Cbvgbyaern memos Fenton Barbee REVISED Budget w3•113-03Jda
March 17,2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 102
Transportation:NE 3rd/4th St Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with
Corridor Signal King County to receive grant funding in the amount of$80,000 for the signal
Synchronization,King County synchronization of 13 traffic signal locations along the NE 3rd and NE 4th St.
Grant corridor. Refer to Transportation Committee.
Transportation:NE Sunset Transportation Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with
Blvd&Duvall Ave NE the Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)for the design
Intersection Improvements, and construction of intersection and traffic signal improvements at NE Sunset
WSDOT Grant Blvd. and Duvall Ave.NE. City project share is$44,000. Refer to
Transportation Committee.
Utility: Annual Consultant Utility Systems Division requested approval of the annual consultant roster
Roster for Appraisal&Right- listing eleven firms to provide appraisal and right-of-way services for 2003,
of-Way Services with the option of extending the roster annually in 2004 and 2005 upon Public
Works Administrator approval. Council concur.
CAG: 02-120,Springbrook Utility Systems Division submitted CAG-02-120, Springbrook Springs
Springs Watershed Property Watershed Property Fencing Installation; and requested approval of the project,
Fencing Installation,F&H authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of$13,798.02,
Fence Co. commencement of 60-day lien period,and release of retained amount of
$3,440.13 to F&H Fence Co.,Inc., contractor,if all required releases are
obtained. Council concur.*
Public Works: City Shops Referring to items 8.e. and 8.f., Councilman Persson inquired whether there is
Fiber Optic Connection an existing fiber optic connection for the City Shops site. Gregg Zimmerman,
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator,responded that he would
investigate the matter.
*MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY NELSON,
COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO
REMOVE ITEM 8.b.FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED.
Separate Consideration Development Services Division recommended approval of an agreement with
Item 8.b. Parametrix to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)for the Barbee
Development Services: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal(LUA-02-040). Barbee Mill Company will pay
Mill Preliminary Plat EIS for the EIS preparation.
Preparation,Parametrix
7' ° Councilwoman Briere requested that the scope of the EIS report be expanded to
include adequate review of historical and cultural resources.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,SECONDED BY BRIERE,COUNCIL
HOLD ITEM 8.b.FOR ONE WEEK FOR REVISION TO THE
AGREEMENT. CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from Glenn R.Davis&Jeffrey M. Silesky of Davis
Citizen Comment: Davis & &Silesky Real Estate Investment Services, 15600 NE 8th St., Suite B 1-173,
Silesky—Olympia Ave NE Bellevue,98008, stating that Urban Crafts is proposing to construct a mixed-
Utilities Installation use facility at the corner of NE 4th St. and Olympia Ave. NE in the Renton
Highlands. Due to the substandard utilities in that area, they requested that a
sanitary sewer and water main be constructed in Olympia Ave.NE as a joint
project with the City.
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO UTILITIES
COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
ao ve-e-piL - j pay 20, seettht,�.s
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
I AIN: 96,
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of:
. Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division March 17, 2003
Staff Contact Lesley Nishihira (x7270) Agenda Status
Consent X
Subject: Public Hearing:.
Consultant Agreement for preparation of Correspondence..
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Ordinance
Mill Preliminary Plat proposal (LUA-02-040). Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: New Business
• Consultant Agreement Study Sessions
Information
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council'Concur Legal Dept X
Finance Dept
- Other (Human Resources) . X-
! Fiscal Impact: None •
Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment
Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated
I Total.Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
City staff requests approval of a Consultant Agreement authorizing work at the applicant's
expense for the production of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat proposal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends the approval and execution of a
Consultant Agreement authorizing work associated with the Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) required for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The applicant will be responsible
for the cost of preparing the EIS and will be billed via a pass-through account established between
the City,the consultant(Parametrix) and the applicant(Barbee Mill Company).
•
•
Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 12, 2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: y Jesse Tanner, Mayor
FROM: -co/di-1Gregg Zimmermakministrator, Planning/Building/Public
Works Department
STAFF CONTACT: Lesley Nishihira, x7270
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat E.I.S. —
Consultant Agreement
ISSUE: -.. -_--
The-Development. erv_ices.Division.re requests approval ofa consultant agreement- _ •
___ q pp
authorizing work associated with the preparation of an Environmental Impabt
Statement (EIS) for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. The cost of the
EIS, which was determined to be necessary by the City's Environmental Review
Committee (ERC), will be at the direct expense of the project applicant.
BACKGROUND:
Location —The Barbee Mill consists of a 22.9-acre site and is located on the west
side of Lake Washington Boulevard North between North 40th Street and North
44th Street abutting the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along
the eastern boundary. The property has historically been utilized for lumber
operations, which over past years have been decreased to a limited level and are
presently in cessation. Many of the existing structures are in disrepair and all
would be demolished as part of site development.
The property is situated within the Center= Office Residential (COR-2) zoning
designation, which is intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office
and residential activity in a high quality, master planned development that is
integrated with the natural environment. Stand-alone residential development is
also permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum 5 dwelling
units per net acre (du/ac) is satisfied. The site includes a number of sensitive
features, including Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines, critical wildlife
habitat areas, wetlands, contaminated soils, high seismic hazards, steep slopes
(15% to 25%) and flood hazards, as well as Department of Natural Resources
lease lands along a portion of the site's lake frontage.
•
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 2 of 4
Development Proposals (Past and Present) - At one time the property was
included in a large-scale development proposal that involved adjoining properties
to the north (a.k.a., Port Quendall); however, the property has since been
proposed for development as individual site. Initially, the applicant filed a land
use application for a development proposal that would include a mix of
residential, office, retail, hotel and restaurant uses (file no. LUA-01-174). The
City began processing this application and upon review determined that an EIS
would be necessary in order to consider potential adverse environmental impacts
from the proposal. However, after the completion of the EIS scoping process,
the applicant requested that the review of the application be suspended and
proceeded to submit an entirely separate land use application involving a
completely different development concept on the site. It is this proposal that the
City is presently reviewing (file no. LUA-02-040).
The current proposal is for the review of a Preliminary Plat that would subdivide
the site into 115 residential lots intended for townhouse development (reduced
map attached). Most of the units would be constructed within duplex structures
along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek.:The attached units would-be constructed With zero
- TM setbacks from common:lot lines-aid.would place each unit on ari_individual lot::
The proposal would result in a net density of approximately}8.35 dwelling units
-_ per acre (22.9 gross acre site - 9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public
roadways = 13.77 net acre-p 115 units/ 13.77 net acre = 8.35 du/ac).
Landsca-pe;-roadway;-=_utility n.iruprovements and_tour,utility/open space-�- rac-s.::_—
---- would-_be-established with the.plat. Access to the-project would be_provided via
an existing 60-foot wide access easement, which would be dedicated to public
right-of-way, from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection
through the abutting property on the north side of the site. The project would
provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the majority of the
project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek.
Both primary and secondary access to the site would require railroad crossings
that must be approved by both the City and the Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission. •
In addition, an Independent Remedial Action Plan has been approved by the
Department of Ecology and the City for the clean-up of on-site soils containing
elevated concentrations of arsenic and zinc (file no. LUA-02-069). However, this
approved remediation is not anticipated to occur until site preparation activities
for an approved development project begin.
Licenses, Permits and Necessary Approvals - The following permits and
approvals will be required for the proposed redevelopment of the site:
• City of Renton: Environmental (SEPA) Review; Preliminary Plat Approval;
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval; Level II Site Plan
Approval; Level I Site Plan Approval; Shoreline Variance Approval, if
Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 3 of 4
applicable; Wetland Buffer Averaging and Compensation Approval; Street
Modification Approval; Railroad Crossing Access Approval; Site Preparation,
Demolition, Building and Construction Permits; and Final Plat Approval.
• King County: Shoreline Permit for DNR lease lands.
• Washington Department of Ecology: Hazardous Waste — No Further
Action Letter; National Pollutant Discharge Elimination; System (NPDES)
Permit; Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval; Shoreline
Variance Approval, if applicable; and Water Quality Certification.
• Washington Department of Fish &Wildlife: Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA).
• Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission: Approval of
Railroad crossing(s).
• US Army Corp of Engineers: Section 401 and 404 Permits, if necessary.
• US Environmental Protection Agency: CERCLA/MTCA Clearance.
Environmental (SEPA) Review — Prior to proceeding with the review and
- - formulation of staff recommendations for all of the City's necessary land use
.,,-permits;-the-project must undergo review pursuant to the State Environmental
-Polity—Act(SEPA). Upon consideration-of adverse environmental impacts that
would potentially result from the project, the City's Environmental Review
Committee issued a SEPA Threshold Determination of Significance (DS) on
November 5, 2002. Under SEPA regulations, the DS requires that an EIS be
prepared to-thoroughly analyze specific areas of concern surrounding the project.
- Specifically, the scope of the EIS for this project will generally focus on the
following areas:
➢ EARTH
• Soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and
erosion/sedimentation impacts.
➢ PLANTS AND ANIMALS
• Displacement of existing vegetation, wetlands and associated
shoreline and wetland habitat for terrestrial and aquatic species.
• Examination of the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat as
part of the project.
• Incorporation of shoreline access and regional trails through the site.
➢ WATER RESOURCES
• Waterways, hydrology, floodplains, groundwater and water quality
impacts (including possible impacts from cessation of May Creek
dredging operations).
• Potential impacts and mitigation for impacts to May Creek and Lake
Washington.
• Consultant Agreement
Barbee Mill EIS
Page 4 of 4
➢ TRANSPORTATION
• Impacts to the local traffic circulation system, including traffic forecasts,
specified intersections, trip generation, level of service, as well as
accidents and safety.
• Design and safety impacts of railroad crossings.
■ Impacts to 1-405 and adjacent jurisdictions (i.e., City of Newcastle).
➢ TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
• Review of clean-up levels appropriate for residential uses.
■ Impacts from abutting contaminated properties.
➢ AESTHETICS, LIGHT AND GLARE
• Identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and evaluate view
impacts.
➢ NOISE
• Review of noise impacts associated with construction impacts and
railroad usage.
➢ CULTURAL RESOURCES
----- Assessment of cultural and archeological re-sources on the`site:
-: ➢ .:ALTERNATIVES .-..... = — :._ ..:_�_._._.:. ....: :
• In addition to the proposal, the EIS will examine a "no action"
alternative that will assume the continuation of the industrial use of the
property. During the course of analyzing impacts and identifying
=measures, however;-_a-_combinati_on.of,mitigating=measures:_.-- __
_ _.may be developed which would constitute_.an additional. alternative..._ _ . ..
This may involve a reduction in the number of units.-and/or -a
reconfiguration of the plat layout.
CONCLUSION:
After study of the areas discussed above is completed, a Preliminary Draft EIS
will be assembled for the City's review and approval. The City will then issue the
Draft EIS for public review and will accept comments given at public hearing or
submitted in writing. When comments on the Draft EIS have been considered,
the City will issue the Final EIS with responses to the draft comments. By this
time the City will have likely identified a preferred alternative. The EIS will then
be used as the basis for staff's recommendation to the Hearing Examiner upon
consideration of the Preliminary Plat and other land use permits.
The attached consultant agreement establishes the scope of work, timeframes
and budget for the EIS work. Based on RMC section 4-1-170, Land Use Review
Fees, 100% of the cost associated with the preparation of the EIS shall be paid
at the direct expense of the applicant. A deposit from the applicant must be
received by the City prior to giving the consultant notice to proceed on the work
outlined in the agreement.
cc: Neil Watts
Jennifer Henning
Alex Pietsch
•
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT,made and entered into on this ,day of , 2003, by and between the CITY
OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HEREINAFTER CALLED THE "CITY," and
the consulting firm Parametrix whose address is 5808 Lake Washington Boulevard NE, Suite 200, Kirkland, WA,
98033,at which work will be available for inspection,hereinafter called the"CONSULTANT."
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat EIS
WHEREAS,the City has not sufficient qualified employees to provide the services within a reasonable time and the •
City deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified
professional consulting firm to do the necessary planning work for the project,and
WHEREAS, the Consultant has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that it is in full
compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington, has a current valid corporate certificate from the State of
Washington or has a valid assumed name filing with the Secretary of State and that all personnel to be assigned to
the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a
competent and professional manner, and that sufficient qualified personnel are on staff or readily available to staff
this Agreement.
WHEREAS, the Consultant has indicated that it desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms
--and-conditions-set forth below— • - _ -- —
NOW THEREFORE inconsideration of-the terms;conditions,covenants atid-p& e W -" -- - , performances contained herein below, -��
the parties hereto agree as follows: -
I
----.--
-'• 'he Consultant shall furnish, and hereby warrants that rt has,[fie necessaryiequipment,materials, and professionallY
trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work,
which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant
hereby warrants that it has the necessary experience, qualified and trained personnel, equipment and materials to
complete the work detailed in Exhibit A.
The Consultant shall perform all work described in this Agreement in accordance with the latest edition and
amendments to local and state regulations,guidelines and policies.
II
TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION
The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion,
attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services are to
be completed and all products shall be delivered by the Consultant by , notwithstanding delays due to
factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant.
The established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the Consultant,but may
be extended by the City in the event of a delay attributable to the City or because of a delay caused by an act of God
or governmental actions or other conditions beyond the control of the Consultant. If, after receiving Notice to
Proceed, the Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, the
Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of the time and cost needed to
complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual
agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein.
•
Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 30 days or more affecting the completion
of the work may be considered a cause for re-negotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party.
III
ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED TO THE CONSULTANT
BY THE CITY
The Consultant shall provide the City with a list of data requests. The City will furnish the Consultant with copies
of documents which are available to the City that will facilitate the preparation of the plans, studies, specifications,
and estimates within the limits of the assigned work.
All other records needed for the study must be obtained by the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with
other available sources to obtain data or records available to those agencies. The Consultant shall be responsible for
this and any other data collection to the extent provided for in the Scope of Work. The Consultant shall be
responsible for the verification of existing records to insure they represent the accurate and current field conditions.
Should field studies be needed, the Consultant will perform such work, consistent with the attached Scope of Work,
or as modified through mutual agreement. The City will not be obligated to perform any such field studies.
IV
OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTS AND
DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CONSULTANT
Documetrtt;,exhibits_ or-other presentations for the work covered by this.Agreement shall be furnished e y the -
T iToiisultant to the City upon completion of the Various phases of the work." 2Vl)1 sicfi maferial, including working -
documents,notes,maps, drawings, photo,photographic negatives,etc. used in the project, shall become and remain
the property of the City and may be used by it without restriction. Any use of such documents by the City not
directly related to the project pursuant to which the documents were prepared by the Consultant shall be without any
=-=z_-w::.:=hability-=whatsoeverto the Consultant:-==___.- -: .:;____: <<�_°__:_.:_—_. ....:____�__ ._._.... —__<==._ :_..::===.a_::
Where possible and feasible all written documents and products shall be printed on recycled paper. Final -- - _._
documents, and interim drafts as feasible,will be printed on both sides of the recycled paper.
V
PAYMENT
The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for services rendered under this Agreement as provided
hereinafter as specified in Exhibit C, Cost Estimate. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed
or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the
work. All billings for compensation for work performed under this Agreement will list specific project titles, actual
time (days and/or hours) and dates during which the work was performed and the compensation shall be figured
using the rates in Exhibit C.
Payment shall be on a time and materials basis, approximating the amounts associated with each task listed in
Exhibit A. The amounts under each task may vary; however, the total amount of the contract shall not exceed
$162,927.03 without a written amendment to this contract,agreed to and signed by both parties.
Payment for extra work performed under this Agreement shall be paid as agreed to by the parties hereto in writing at
the time extra work is authorized. (Section VII"EXTRA WORK").
A short narrative progress report shall accompany each voucher for progress payment. The report shall include
discussion of any problems and potential causes for delay.
To provide a means of verifying the invoiced time for consultant employees and material expenses, the City may
conduct employee interviews.
•
The Consultant shall not engage, on a full or part-time basis, or other basis, during the period of the contract, any
professional or technical personnel who are, or have been at any time during the period of this contract, in the
employ of the City except regularly retired employees,without written consent of the City.
If during the time period of this Agreement, the Consultant finds it necessary to increase its professional, technical,
or clerical staff as a result of this work, the Consultant will actively solicit minorities through their advertisement
and interview process.
IX
NONDISCRIMINATION
The Consultant agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for services
because of race,creed,color,national origin,marital status, sex,age or handicap except for a bona fide occupational
qualification with regard to, but not limited to the following: employment upgrading; demotion or transfer;
recruitment or any recruitment advertising; layoff or termination's; rates of pay or other forms of compensation;
selection for training; rendition of services. The Consultant understands and agrees that if it violates this Non-
Discrimination provision, this Agreement may be terminated by the City and further that the Consultant shall be
barred from performing any services for the City now or in the future, unless a showing is made satisfactory to the
City that discriminatory practices have terminated and that recurrence of such action is unlikely.
X
TERMINA-T-ION OF AGREEMENT -_, —• =. ..
- A. The-Cif "reserves the right to terminate tTiis A-��eemerif at anytime Upon not less=than-tef -10 dais—Y@� Po ( )
written notice to the Consultant, subject to the City's obligation to pay Consultant in accordance with
subparagraphs C and D below.
a —II:..,-,In_ihe_e ent_ofahe death of.a-member,,;partner;;oz_officer-of_the-Consultal any s-supery so_ _v:x- r,:
___ personnel assigned to the project, the_surviving members of.the.Consultant hereby agree to complete the.
- work under the terms of this Agreement,if requested to do so by the City. This-section shall not be a bar
to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the Consultant and the City, if the
City so chooses.
In the event of the death of any of the parties listed in the previous paragraph, should the surviving
members of the Consultant, with the City's concurrence, desire to terminate this Agreement, payment
shall be made as set forth in Subsection C of this section.
C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by the City other than for fault on the part of the Consultant, a
final payment shall be made to the Consultant'for actual time and material expenses for the work
complete at the time of termination of the Agreement. In addition, the Consultant shall be paid on the
same basis as above for any authorized extra work completed. No payment shall be made for any work
completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the Consultant of the Notice to Terminate. If the
accumulated payment made to the Consultant prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount
that would be due as set forth herein above, then no final payment shall be due and the Consultant shall
immediately reimburse the City for any excess paid.
D. In the event the services of the Consultant are terminated by the City for fault on the part of the
Consultant,the above stated formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event the amount to be paid
shall be determined by the City with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the Consultant in
performing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work originally required which was
satisfactorily completed to date of termination, whether that work is in a form or of a type which is
usable to the City at the time of termination, the cost to the City of employing another firm to complete
the work required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value
to the City of the work performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment
A
•
from a previous contract and no changes in insurance coverage has occurred, only the Certification Form will be
required.
The limits of said insurance shall not,however,limit the liability of Consultant hereunder.
All coverages provided by the Consultant shall be in a form,and underwritten by a company acceptable to the City.
The City will normally require carriers to have minimum A.M. Best rating of A XII. The Consultant shall keep all
required coverages in full force and effect during the life of this project, and a minimum of forty five days' notice
shall be given to the City prior to the cancellation of any policy.
The Consultant shall verify, when submitting first payment invoice and annually thereafter, possession of a current
City of Renton business license while conducting work for the City. The Consultant shall require, and provide
verification upon request, that all subconsultants participating in a City project possess a current City of Renton
business license. The Consultant shall provide, and obtain City approval of, a traffic control plan prior to
conducting work in City right-of-way.
The Consultant's relation to the City shall be at all times as an independent contractor.
XIII
SUBLETTING OR ASSIGNING OF CONTRACTS
- —, The Consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the work covered by this Agreement without the express consent of
- — the City.
XIV
COMPLETE AGREEMENT
•
_ This_;document and referenced attachments contain all covenants,atipulations,and.provisions.agreed_upon by_the _
parties. Any supplements to this Agreement will be in writing and executed and will become part of this Agreement.
.: No agent,:or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, representation, promise, or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or
modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as an amendment
to this Agreement.
The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof,
and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted.
XV
EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE
This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an
original having identical legal effect. The Consultant does hereby ratify and adopt all statements,representations,
warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the Request for Qualifications, and the supporting materials
submitted by the Consultant, and does hereby accept the Agreement and agrees to all of the terms and conditions
thereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above
written.
CONSULTANT CITY OF RENTON
•
Signature Date Jesse Tanner,Mayor Date
CONCURRED IN by the City Council of the City of RENTON,Washington,this 7 thday of October, 1996.
CITY OF RENTON: RENTON CITY COUNCIL:
Mayor Council President
Attest:
City Clerl
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
•
•
• A No-Action Alternative, which presumes the continuation of industrial use on the property with a
configuration of buildings and impervious areas similar to what currently exists. In consultation with City
staff, a pro-forma description of other uses,which could occur on the site under existing zoning will be
developed. Description of the No Action Alternative will be limited to the following:
• A use or mix of uses allowed by current zoning and identified as reasonable in consultation with City
staff.
• Future use or alternations for DNR owned uplands, will be based on consultation with the DNR
aquatics leasing department land use policies for shoreline property,and confirmation of assumptions
with the city.
• Total floor area,by use.
• Total required parking.
• Building bulk and dimensional limits as allowed by zoning codes, or as allowed by use of existing
buildings as allowed uses or non-conforming structures pursuant to Renton City Code 4-1 -050.
• Setbacks,landscape,and other requirements as specified by zoning codes.
• Projected impervious surface based on building and parking requirements,less landscaping, sensitive
area buffers,and other requirements.
• Site plans,building plans,and similar.grapbic_depictions of the alternative will not-be prepared. -. - _ ._
If Parametix identifies a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures,as provided
in WAC 197-11-440(5)(b) (in)and(6),this will occur at the time of submittal of the Preliminary Draft EIS for
City staff review. The scope assumes:
• City staff review of the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
impacts and mitigating measures.-
• Any meetings to discuss the potential project alternative will take place in conjunction with review of
the Preliminary Draft EIS.
• Description of impacts of the potential project alternative will take place in the mitigating measures
section of each element of the environment,and will not require separate analysis as an alternative in
the impact section of each element.
Deliverables
• Draft and Final Description of No-Action Alternative.
• Description of potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures may be
identified at the time of submittal of a Preliminary Draft EIS for City staff review.
3.0 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Soils, Geology, Seismic Hazards,Earthwork,Erosion/Sedimentation
Goal
Provide analyses of soils, geology, earthwork, geologic and seismic hazards, and erosion/sedimentation for
affected environment,potential impacts,and mitigation development. These analyses are important both for
disclosure of impacts of the project and in providing a context for assessment of impacts on other elements
such as water quality.
Approach
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 2 OF 23 02-24-03
•
Additional FEIS Analysis
Comments by agencies and the public will require additional analysis for the FEIS. For budgeting this is
assumed to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing site information and soil,geologic,and seismic studies. Analysis will be
qualitative in nature,except where existing literature provides quantitative assessment of risk of failure or
other parameters which can be reasonably applied to the site.
• No more than one(1)reconnaissance-level field visit will be performed.
Deliverables
• Draft Soils and Erosion section for DEIS.
• Response to comments for the FEIS.
3.2 Plants and Animals: Shoreline and Wetland Habitat for Terrestrial and Aquatic Species
Goal
The proposed location of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat will displace existing developed area on the west side
of May Creek and may displace existing vegetation,wetlands,and associated wildlife habitat on the east side of
May Creek. The site also has the potential for rehabilitation of degraded habitat. This section will assess
impacts on these elements.
Approach
Parametrix shall prepare this section utilizing existing information,including technical studies provided by the
applicant. A reconnaissance level site visit will also be conducted to confirm present conditions.
-
•
Wetlands and Upland Habitat for Terrestrial Species
Affected Environment
Existing vegetation in the project vicinity will be characterized based on a reconnaissance-level field visit;recent
aerial photos, and existing literature. The characterization will include identification of the vegetation classes,
dominant species, successional stage, human disturbance, and current use. Assessment of wetland size,
classification, and functions will be based on existing studies and delineation and confirmed by a
reconnaissance-level field visit. Based on existing information and the field reconnaissance, Parametrix will
evaluate habitat relationships between the existing wetlands and May Creek and/or Lake Washington as well as
the function of May Creek as a wildlife corridor connecting the site and Lake Washington to upstream habitat.
•
This task includes the following:
• Review existing information, including previous studies in the project area, soil surveys, wetland
inventories,and topographic map and basin studies.
• Assess proposed wetland and shoreline buffer areas on Lake Washington and May Creek for potential
upland habitat value and identify critical habitat areas.
• Identify use of the site as a migration route for upland species.
Impacts Analysis
Impacts on existing vegetation and wetlands will be assessed based on preliminary plans for the one (1)build
alternative and will include:
• Displacement and augmentation/restoration of vegetation and wetlands.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS Wow:PROGRAM PAGE 4 OF 23 02-24-03
• Displacement or enhancement of habitat.
• Direct effects on wildlife from construction such as erosion/sedimentation
• Water quality impacts,including increased potential for sedimentation during construction.
• Changes in stream hydrology,including seasonal flows.
• Stream substrate alternation
• Impacts of residential docks and bulkheads on lake-fronting lots on aquatic species, including
salmonid/predator interactions.
• Impacts of future use or alternations of DNR owned uplands, based on DNR land use policies for
shoreline property.
• Fragmentation or consolidation of habitat.
• Effectiveness of proposed setbacks and buffers on aquatic species, including indirect impacts, such as'
reasonably expected residential landscaping under current Renton codes, and human presence impacts
such as noise and lighting that could reduce habitat suitability.
Mitigation
This task will involve identification of mitigation concepts that would address the specific impacts to natural
resources at the site including.
• Potential measures identified in existing basin plans for enhancement of currently altered or channelized
portions of May Creek. _ -- -
• Potential benefits of enhancement of the May Creek and Lake Washington shorelines
within or adjacent to the project boundaries, including alteration of bulkheads and
substrate.
—= Measures which can be incorporated=into stormwater management and water quality-facilities: "
• Buffer area alternatives, including those_recommendations in the Tri-County Salmon Conservation
Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule Response Proposal, and King County
Endangered Species Act Policy Coordination Office-April 19,2002.
• Potential measures to mitigate indirect impacts, such as residential docks and landscaping of buffer areas
and human presence impacts such as noise and lighting.
Additional FEIS Analysis
Review of the DEIS by resource agencies and other entities will produce comments requiring additional
analysis and preparation of elements for the FEIS. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 25 percent of
the DEIS effort.
Assumptions '
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis will be based on existing studies.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include order of magnitude comparisons of impact based on
quantifiable differences resulting from additional impervious surfaces.
• The City of Renton will secure all rights-of-entry.
• No off-site wetland mitigation will be proposed.
• Assessment of threatened chinook salmon present in May Creek and Lake Washington will be based on
existing studies applicable to the site.
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS Wow:PROGRAM PAGE 6 OF 23 02-24-03
•
• Surface water characteristics.
• Surface water locations and typing, water quality classifications, Clean Water Act listing status, WRIA
plans,or other identified management strategies.
• Floodplain boundaries,floodway capacity,existing obstructions and past channel dredging.
• Existing stormwater outfall and impervious surface area.
• Relationship of surface water to wetlands identified in Task 1.2.4.
• Relationship of surface water to geologic setting,soils class,and characteristics identified in Task 1.2.1.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will describe potential long-term impacts on surface water resources, including the stormwater
conveyance system,potential impacts on streams and Lake Washington, and potential flooding from the one
(1)build alternative. The EIS impacts section will summarize the results to compare the build alternative with
No Action. Specific impacts considered will include:
• Hydrologic and water quality impacts from stormwater runoff,including typical runoff pollutants.
• Flooding impacts of May Creek, assuming a "conservative case" discontinuation of dredging and
formation of a natural delta. The May Creek floodplain of will be mapped using hydraulic and slope
models,which will be used to evaluate channel and delta stability,sediment transport,and floodplain limits
- that may result from discontinuation of dredging operations. Peak discharges and flood hydrographs at a
-single-location will be generated utilizing floodplain volumes from the May Creek floodplain study for the
1%frequency event.
• Increase in frequency or severity of flooding from project runoff.
•
• Displacement of floodplain storage.
---• Potential impacts on w.edands._._--
_—
Groundwater
Affected Environment
Groundwater conditions on site,and in the vicinity will be assessed,based on existing studies. Groundwater
contaminant sources and levels will be identified based on the IRAP for the site,and existing information for
adjacent sites. Groundwater levels, flow, estimated volumes, and water quality will be assessed based on
existing studies. Potential recharge to on-site wetlands will be assessed.
Impacts Analysis
Parametrix will provide a qualitative description of potential term impacts on ground water resources,
including.
• Interception of runoff by the stormwater conveyance system.
• Potential infiltration by stormwater facilities.
• Potential changes in the amount,direction or quality of groundwater flows.
• Potential impacts of interflow on Lake Washington,May Creek and wetland recharge.
Water Quality
Affected Environment
Parametrix will identify existing water quality conditions in lower May Creek,from the Lake Washington Blvd.
crossing, and Lake Washington adjacent to the site, based on existing studies and surveys. Existing surface
water sources of contamination will include existing storm water discharges,as documented in City of Renton
RENTON BARIIEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 8 OF 23 02-24-03
• Water quality/quantity BMPs proposed for runoff control and stormwater management requirements(i.e.,
Puget Sound Stormwater Management Manual, City of Renton and King County Surface Water Design
Manuals and RMC).
• Spill control BMPs.
• BMPs and other measures to protect or enhance groundwater,including measures which may be included
in the IRAP.
• Means of committing to the mitigation measures.
Additional FEIS Analysis
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis. For budgeting purposes,this is assumed
to be 10 percent of the DEIS effort.
Assumptions
The scope and budget for the Affected Environment section of the DEIS assumes the following:
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• No subbasins or drainage areas will be modified from existing delineations.
• The site is not within the Aquifer Recharge Zone as shown on City of Renton Critical Areas maps.
• New areas of impervious surface and pollutant generating impervious surface within the project limits for
the one (1) build alternative will be provided by existing plans and technical reports. Recalculation of
impervious area will not be performed.
• The City of Renton will provide maps of drainage basins,storm and storm drainage facilities,and known
hydrologic and groundwater information for the site and upstream tributaries.
•The City of Renton will provide all existing water quality and other studies for May Creek and the existing
— — drainage systems within the project area and identify'all deficiencies.
• The applicant will provide all existing plans,—studies and descriptions of surface water conveyance,
treatment and other facilities within the project area and identify known deficiencies.
• Existing literature will be used to characterize pollutants in runoff.
• No sampling will be conducted.
• The City of Renton will identify the existing typical water quality treatment BMPs required of development
projects within the city.
• Existing stormwater conveyances are presumed to generally be adequate for the amount of new
impervious surface added by the proposal.
• Stream hydrology and capacity, as documented in existing technical reports, will not be exceeded with
stormwater facilities incorporated in the project plans proposing direct discharge to Lake Washington.
• Existing technical studies and plans provided by the applicant are complete and accurate(no inaccuracies,
misinterpretations of regulations, or errors are present), correct detention volumes proposed, and water
quality treatment meet all applicable standards.
• Water quality impacts will be evaluated based on analysis of potential pollutants in runoff generated within
the project boundaries.
• The impacts of stormwater management,water quality,and stream buffer areas on aquatic resources will
be based on a comparative analysis of features of the proposal with evaluation standards contained in the
Tri-County Salmon Conservation Coalition - 2002, Biological Review Tri-County Model 4(d) Rule
RENTUN BARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 10 OF 23 02-24-03
405/Lake Washington Blvd to the west, and the approximate alignment of 27'h Street N to the to the south
with additional area of qualitative description of potential bypass routes through the City of Newcastle..
This scope is based on analysis of the following intersections, in accordance with the December 10, 2002
memo fron Nick Afzali,Renton Transportation Systems,and the scoping determination:
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 60'h Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 64'h Street (Impacts on Newcastle)
• Lake Washington Blvd/SE 44th P1
• Lake Washington Blvd/Ripley Lane
• Ripley Lane/project north driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/project south driveway
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 36" Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/N 30th Street
• Lake Washington Blvd/Burnett Ave N (at approx the extended alignment of 27th Street N)
• I 405 ramps at Lake Washington Blvd./SE 441h P1
• 1-405 ramps at 30th Street
Future Baseline Street Network
- -.. _ -• Future_year._traffic..forecasts._.will be completed for full occupancy of the proposed development (to=-.be. ------
determined in consultation with Renton Staff,presumed to be 2005-07). Specific projects in the vicinity such
as the Labrador Subdivision, The Bluffs, Tamaron Point, and Southport may be added to the EMME2
baselines. The network for the opening year would include all funded transportation improvements projected
identified_in:the,City's 6-year Transportation Improvement Program(UP). The analysiswill assume no traffic __
signals_will exist by the baseline year 2005-07 at 44'h Street/I-405 ramps. Signalization will be analyzed as a
mitigating measure. •
Affected Environment
The most complete data year available(presumed to be 2002)will be utilized to characterize existing conditions
in traffic level of service and delay,traffic accidents and safety,access management,pedestrian facility design,
and transit. A complete inventory of transportation facility:characteristics within the study area will be
summarized in this section.
Impact Analysis
The traffic impact analysis will address level of service for the PM peak hour as the most congested period for
study area.
Project Trip Generation
The impact analysis will include development of trip generation estimates using appropriate Institute of Traffic
Engineers (ITE) surveys and local information. A mode split analysis will be utilized to determine whether
transit use or other modes may reduce trip generation as compared to ITE rates.
Trip generation for the No-Action Alternative consisting of development of the site under existing zoning will
be derived using Institute of Traffic Engineers trip generation tables for the appropriate use. The No-Action
Alternative development trip generation shall be compared to the trip generation of the project for informative
purposes,but would not be included in level of service analysis for the No-Action Alternative.
REN TON BARIBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 12 OF 23 02-24-03
• Expected congestion levels on I-405, as compared to projected congestion on alternate
routes and potential factors affecting the decision to divert to local streets;
• Relative travel time comparisons between elements of the freeway network and local streets
based on the length of the route and number of stop or signalized intersections (LOS and
formal trip length analysis will not be performed);
• Alternate routes considered include:
1. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/66th P1 SE/Lake Washington Blvd.
2. I-405 to Coal Creek Parkway/SE 89th PI/Monterey P1 NE/ NE 44th Street/Lake
Washington Blvd.
3. 1-405 to 52nd Street/Lake Washington Blvd
4. I-90 to Lakemont Blvd/Coal Creek Newcastle Road/SE 66th Place to Lake Washinton
Blvd (to be considered only if total trips with destinations in the Issaquah area exceed
20 trips);
moron Motorized Facility Impacts and Relationship to Transit
_ The character_of existing non-motorized-facilities .(pedestrian, bicycle and transit)_ in.the study area will be _._.. ._
' described:-Alternatives to improve pedestrian access and safety will be developed. Improvements to enhance
pedestrian facility connections to transit facilities will also be explored as mitigating measures.
Mitigating Measures
Mitigating measures will be identified.for impacts.The proportional contribution of the proposal to total traffic
and growth in traffic on specific roadway links will be identified. Specific intersection and roadway
improvements needed to mitigate impacts of traffic generation will be identified based on-a specific LOS
threshold standard specified by city staff. Warrants for traffic signals will be analyzed,where LOS analysis
indicates a need may exist.
Mitigation for trip generation will include Transportion Demand Management options for mode split, peak
spreading and other mechanisms. Discussion of this element will include regional factors such as development
of HOV and transit facilities,and future land use patterns likely to affect mode choice at the residential origin.
The potential for incorporating features in the proposal which may encourage use of alternate modes will be
identified,including safe and convenient pedestrian circulation and access to transit stops,widened shoulders,
or other facilities for bicycles, and connections with existing and planned recreation trails, commercial and
other destinations.
Mitigating measures to address potential impacts on safety, pedestrians and other impact will be assessed,
including mitigation for crossings of the railroad.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
RENTON BARBEE MILL EIS WORK.PROGRAM PAGE 14 OF 23 02-24-03
scenarios 1) the scenario of implementation of cleanup of those sites,and 2) delay of cleanup of adjacent sites
until after this site is developed and occupied with resulting continued presence of contaminants.
Timing and extent of disturbance off the site required for cleanup will be discussed as it relates to other
infrastructure required for project development,in relation to future use of the DNR owned shoreline,as well
as the relationship to rehabilitation of the stream corridor and shoreline bulkheads, or other options for
shoreline enhancement.
Mitigation
Mitigating measures will include an assessment of alternative cleanup levels not contained in existing standards,
based on USEPA criteria for selection of alternative cleanup methodologies.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require additional analysis and some individual responses. For
budgeting purposes,this is assumed to be 15 percent of the DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Existing scientific studies applicable to development of standards and applicable to this site,including the
IRAP for this site,and available studies for adjacent sites will be used as the primary basis for analysis.
• One(1)reconnaissance level field visit will-be made to the site by one(1)hazardous materials specialist.
,.... • :_.:- '.::No sampling will be performed,on or_off_site. ---_
Deliverable
• Hazardous Materials section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to-comments and revised section for Final EIS.
4.3 Aesthetics,Light and Glare
Goal
The objective of the Aesthetics,Light and Glare task is to identify existing aesthetic and scenic resources and
evaluate visual and aesthetic impacts of the proposal and potential mitigation,as appropriate.
Aesthetics/Visual Quality
Affected Environtnent
Parametrix will collect and review pertinent documents that define the visual quality and aesthetic issues related
to the proposed build alternatives. These reports include Land Use Regulations and Policies; local
comprehensive plans and policies;and open space,pedestrian/bicycle routes,and recreation plans. Collected
information will be confirmed by site reconnaissance and information gathered at the scoping meeting.
Viewpoint Identification
Viewpoints from different landscape units will be defined by topography and differences in the land use and
urban design context as defined by comprehensive plan policies or zoning regulations, as well as identifiable
design characteristics of existing development. Significant visual features and landmarks within each landscape
unit will be located and the intrinsic qualities that characterize each landscape unit will be described in text
form.
Specific resources to be defined include:
RENTON BARUEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 16 OF 23 02-24-03
Light and Glue
Affected Envirotm7etlt
The existing lighting and glare from the site, and its visibility, intensity, and dominance will be assessed for
existing viewers,which generally will be coordinated with the viewpoints selected for visual simulations.
Impacts
Impacts will describe likely light and glare sources on the site, including standard street lighting, and assess
impacts on potential viewers. This analysis will be integrated with the Aesthetics/Visual Quality analysis to
provide a perspective of nighttime visual impacts. Visual simulations will not be prepared for this component
of the analysis.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text is not anticipated,
except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• Analysis of the No-Action Alternative will include qualitative comparison of probable visual and
light/glare impacts based on the character of existing industrial-buildings and the building bulk allowed by
existing zoning standards and landscaping and other features required by codes. - _
- • •Photo simulations will be piepared-liasecl on bliel andrwhit -photos of existing views,are anticipated to
include a single view on an 81/2 x 11.sheet and will not exceed five(5)views.
• A preliminary screening of potential viewpoints will be developed, reviewed and approved by City staff
• prior to preparation of visual simulations.
• Depictions of gross bulk of structures will be based on height,building coverage,and setbacks required by
City of Renton zoning standards and specific commitments to height and bulk contained in the
preliminary plat application. Building depiction will consist of boxes rendered in a neutral gray. A list of
criteria and a single view depiction will be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to completion of
additional other simulations.
• Analysis of visual quality will be qualitative and will generally follow criteria in Blair, 1982, Substation
Visual Simulation Techniques,and FHWA,1981,Visual Impact Assessment for Highway Projects.
Deliverables
• Visual Quality/Light and Glare section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.4 Noise
Goal
This element of the scope will assess noise impacts associated with construction, impacts of noise from the
adjacent railroad on the residential use of the site, noise from use of the site, and noise associated with
increased traffic volumes related to regional growth,and the proposal.
Approach
Parametrix will prepare an EIS noise section analysis using typical noise levels generated by construction,and
rail use.
Affected Envirotmment
RE\TON BAR BEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 18 OF 23 02-24-03
• Noise section for the Draft EIS.
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
4.5 Historic and Cultural Resources
Affected Environment
Cultural resources consisting of archaeological resources as defined in RCW 27.53.040 will be assessed based
on existing information at the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation,the King County Cultural
Resources Division,the University of Washington Library,the Renton Museum,and the Puget Sound Regional
Repository of the Washington State Archives. Consultation with tribes will include solicitation of comments
and review of any information provided.
Impacts
Impact assessment will depend on the identification of cultural resources. The lowering of Lake Washington
elevation in 1910 and the subsequent fill of the site for development renders the probability of pre-settlement
resources extremely low. The potential loss of structures on the site with cultural,architectural or engineering
value will be assessed in regard to the presence of similar structures in the region.
Mitigation
-. . -. -- Mitigation,if.cultural resources are.found,.may include avoidance,but.is.most likely to include excavation and
conservation.
Final EIS
Comments received on the Draft EIS will require specific responses. Revision to DEIS text-is not anticipated, - -
• except for minor revisions for clarification. For budgeting purposes, this is assumed to be 10 percent of the
- _DEIS budget.
Assumptions
• Analysis will be based on one(1)build alternative.
• The State Historical Preservation office will be contacted by letter with phone follow-up to solicit existing
information on cultural resources on-site.
• Tribal cultural information will be solicited by letter.
• One(1)field visit will be made to the site
Deliverables
• Cultural Resource section for the Draft EIS.
•
• Response to comments for Final EIS.
5.0 DEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare an adequate and complete Draft Environmental Impacts Statement addressing the effects of the
proposal and No-Action Alternative.
Approach
PDEIS Preparation
Parametrix will prepare a Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS) following SEPA Guidelines,WAC 197-11,and City
of Renton procedures for review by the City of Renton and respond to comments to prepare a Draft EIS
(DEIS)for publication.
RENTON ISARBEE MILL EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 20 OF 23 02-24-03'
• Parametrix staff will perform one (1) reconnaissance level site visit, not to exceed four (4) hours. The
applicant will make project management personnel and consultants who prepared technical reports for the
applicant available for the reconnaissance field visit to provide orientation to the site and answer questions
about the technical assumptions underlying their reports. City of Renton staff will be notified of the date
and time of site visits and may attend.
• Communication with City staff on assumptions for various studies, including, but not limited to No-
Action Alternative, floodplain modeling parameters, traffic generation, transportation network, will
generally be electronically transmitted with email transmittal of city comments.
• The schedule presumes that all City reviews for coordination on assumptions require no more than two(2)
working days,except as provided for the PDEIS.
• Parametrix will deliver ten(10) review copies of the Preliminary Draft EIS to the City for distribution to
City staff and cooperating agencies.
• The City will provide a single contact person for review of the Preliminary Draft EIS. The City shall
reconcile and compile all review comments into a single hard copy or electronic copy. The second review
by the City will address only whether previous comments are responded to adequately. No new issues will
be raised at the second review.
• Two (2) rounds of review and revision of the Preliminary Draft EIS are assumed with initial City
- = comments transmitted within 5 working days, Parametrix response/revision submitted within 5 working
• - days, second round of City staff comments transmitted within 5 working days, and final revisions by
Parametrix within 5 working days.
_ -_ • If Parametix identifies a potential development alternative as a combination of mitigating measures, and
the City directs incorporation into the Draft EIS,an additional 15 working days will be incorporated.into
the schedule for revision and reformatting of the mitigation section of the document. A site plan to _
illustrate the alternative shall be based on CADD drawings for the existing site plan.
• All final documents will be provided in an electronic MS Word document and camera-ready hard copy
format.
• Printing will be billed directly as a separate item by the City of Renton to the private applicant.
• Distribution and legal notice of the DEIS will be provided by the City of Renton.
• A PDF format version of the DEIS for CD-ROM or web posting will not be prepared.
• Up to two(2)Parametrix staff persons will attend one(1)public hearing on the Draft EIS.
Deliverables
• Preliminary Draft EIS(15 Copies).
• Draft EIS camera ready for printing.
6.0 FEIS Preparation
Goal
Prepare adequate and complete Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Approach
Response to Comments
All comments received on the DEIS must have a response in the FEIS. General responses will be developed
to address commonly raised issues. Detailed or unique comments will require individual responses. Comments
will be cataloged according to commentor, element of the environment, and status of response. This item
RENTUN BARBEE MILL.EIS WORK PROGRAM PAGE 22 OF 23 02-24-03
EXHIBIT B
TIME SCHEDULE OF COMPLETION
_ _ _ _ •
• •
. 1
PARAMETRIX EXI..._rT B II
City of Renton
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS Schedule
February March April i May June July August September
ID Task Name Start Finish 2 3 :4 5 6 7 8 9 '
38 SYNCHRO Setup _ Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/21/03 4/1 f..,,i..,,,! 4/21
39 SYNCHRO Baseline Tue 4/15/03 Wed 4/23/03 4/1 i,Nd,j;yr4M3
40 Trip Generation and Assignment Thu 4/24/03 Fri4/25/03 • • 4/24 %' •/25
41 Analyze intersection LOS Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 1. 4/28 i,,ylt; /2 '
42 Analyze accident characteristics and patter Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 i' - 4/28 L 5/2 .
43 Analyze pedestrian facilities Mon 4/28/03 Fri 5/2/03 4/28 yy,,. 5/2
44 Mitigation Strategy Coordinate with City Mon 5/5/03 Wed 5/7/03 5/5 5/7
45 Mitigation Analysis Thu 5/8/03 Wed 5/14/03 6A8 5/14
46 Prepare Draft Transportation EIS Section Mon 5/5/03 Mon 5/26/03 I 5/6 5/28
47 2.3.2 Other Elements Human Environment Tue 3/18/03 Mon 5/26/03 I, _ . -
48 Receive Information from applicant and city Tue 3/18/03 Mon 3/24/03 3/18 o....2J13/24; •
49 Review existing information Tue 3/25/03 Mon 4/7/03 3/26 ...„,,,,r ,j 4/7
SO Reconnaissance Level Field Visit Tue 4/8603 Tue 4/8/03 ,4/8/4/8 _'-
51 Confirm Assumptions Wed 4/9/03 Mon 4/14/03 j 4/9 i.a.7"�4/14 •
52 Description of affected environment Tue 4/15/03 Mon 4/28/03 4/15 ,." •
f„;I.; -;j 4/26
53 Assess impacts Tue 4/29/03 Mon 5/12/03 ;i 4/29 t:.if;;k;s'rl'1 5/12
54 Identify mitigation measures Tue 5/13/03 Mon 5/19/03 5113 5:1: ,•e6/19
55 Prepare draft section for PDEIS Tue 5/20/03 Mon 5/26/03 i 5/20 l�t'i''; 5/26
56 Task 3 DEIS Preparation and City Review Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/30/03 - \ I - - /.
57 Assemble PDEIS Tue 5/27/03 Mon 6/2/03
58 Renton Stafff First Review Tue 8/3/03 Mon 8/9/03
59 PMX Response to Renton Review Tue 6/10/03 Mon 8/16/03 i 6/10 r•,Y;,•; 8/16
80 Final Review Renton Staff Tue 6/17/03 Mon 6/23/03 6/17' •.•. 6/23j
61 DEIS Final Text Tue 6/24/03 Fri 6/27/03 '
62 Printing (not included in budget) Mon 6/30/03 Mon 6/30/03 • 6/30 4r6/30
63 City of Renton Issued DEIS Tue 7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03 •
64 DEIS Comment Period Tue 7/1/03 Thu 7/31/03 '7/ ,�e , ,•7/31 '
65 Preparation for Public Meeting Tue 7/1/03 Mon 7/21/03 .1 7/ + , ;, 7/21 •
66 Conduct Public Meeting(Assume 1 Meeting) Tue 7/22/03 Tue 7/22/03 I I 7/22;, 7/22
67 Task 4 Final EIS(FEIS) Fri 8/1/03 Tue 9/2/03 iI 4
68 Summarize Public Comments&Respond Fri 8/1/03 Thu 8/7/03 i j 6/1 ,:'..,•,;:18/7
69 Renton Stafff First Review Fri 8/8/03 Thu 6/14/03
i i 8/8{,;, ens
ie
70 PMX revisionFd 8/15/03 Thu 8/21/03 8/15 Y;; ;1 8/21 'i -
71 Final Review Renton Staff Fd 8/22/03 Tue 8126/03 _ 8/22 i,6/26
72 FEIS Final Text Wed 8/27/03 Fri 8/29/03 •
i 8/27(; :/29
73 Printing(not included in budget) Mon 9/1/03 Mon 9/1/03 _ 9/1 69/1
74 FEIS Issuance by City of Renton Tue 9/2/03 Tue 9/2/03 • j ' 9/2.j 9/2
This schedule assumes authorization to proceed by March 17.2003. Page 2 t . Mon 2/24/03
The schedule is subject to rollback based on later receipt of Notice to Proceed,of materials to
be provided by applicant or city,or later dates of completion of city review 'is
is ,i
i
i
it •
•
i
i
PARAMETRIX EXHIBIT"".BUDGET r City of Renton
554.1228.812
Barbee M:' .m.Hat EIS Env al Impact Statement
(Time and Matenoo 14ot to Exceed Total)
I:.
PROJECT: City of Renton,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
CLIENT: City of Renton `'
f•.C"n N•.1f" Darin Slenard Je,H.&P)ey Mee mew Sandra Toro Tom Ames Jena Frew Ken Lulea Jan Cann Jr9e Seeks Bob Pees e0LaVde:;:Geer Dawn Rohl Rao T,K.Bnf •bM Perk Boo Sawn WesselKeeFrKukk Tech Abe Graplia WON
PMXN ,:,� 'rq•;'M" .. DrW,xdMadpe Gnhyessegy' 64000'n Ratted sa1A0eoegy Woe Weer v.00teen Tenurial Aeuaac 4Oeek, Tnniporulbn F5W5n Drosounp
..0.$^ STAFF o'oc Geohydrot FaudatePu RKomn. Rnourta f Teak NanVeNcdar RK Mslhello
'y; :;a 2: r" . .MneNb Huh41 Sdemk WSIa Weeds Haslet Ramses RKMn Ws Nee MA7eb We TOTAL
+^Y.;�;;_,;yr MpaeMp Mlipalkn „Lt., MnIat4JCulmal TOTAL
i
ase Task Of Oese4n0m 050 Palos $37.00 530.00 519.05 626.62 042M 54155 $2662 13120 S54.14 $26.53 519.71 62519• $3523 151.50 625.36 $15.27 43.32 524.33 526.03 526.00 527.00 529.00 HOURS COST
Project Management 40 4 4 4 - 4 • _4 _ - 16 _ 4 80 52.835.64
_--• ONOC 32 CNC .- __ . • __ 396000
_ Allemalives B _- IIIMM 4 16 5516.00
Eli
l
d 8 16 i6 __ II 4 51.769.68Shoreline Welland Habitat � MM 36 , . -, ® S1.945.32 _
� _ _ 32 60 S3,3a1.08
d SC286.56
_ ® Groundwater 4 = _���. ___ _ MN 94 61.015.66
_ �____ 8 36 _ 4 St,547.t2
_C -. 8 � 259 57,905.0E .';
� 8 �' ��� 52.349.46 ,
52.209.2L
Toric and Has.Materials
Aesthetics.Light 9 Glare
Cultural 4
12
_E
28
$6952E
Noise .
a ., 12 S8.845.40
36,162.27
DSC Labor Subtotal at Current Salary Rates 168 32 46 119 18 51 174 31 29 53 53 106 78 10 172 18 8 68 18 116 99 124 1580 .549.073.79
Estimated%of project completed before next increase 60%
Salary Escalation
Estimated%of next salary Increase 5.0% . 1 Additional Direct Selsry Cost from Salery Escalation 51,226.64
DSC Labor Subtotal with Salary Escalation S50.300.64
Overhead Rale 185.00% 593,056.14
Estimated Prole,Fired Fee Rale 35.00% Hata ' _ S17,40522
In•House Expense item '' -
Mn • ':i'a.. y� - �.t«"ti �i`�` •s ..Tf'�. .$'. 'f..`7 .��''.?�r. a.�a �:-, .w`."•..rr.•:a,r a (..r 3365.00
�! lid:.:"<: �.: '.: ::r't� ' f S '+R' i..� 2 r11 x.- '� A:' 'S 2.
. -grins.: ,.�` .r.... i .;, r , 4N� .4,7; a., r.iWe . ... @') '4,.•^..)•
_ __
;� _ ...,•a 4:i+':� 7:.5;- ~Jr. p¢.:l� ,• ' •;':'•i`:+4+•.•�. _ „rd,.•i:.S Y. ,;.•d..l,.� '..1 a..v..We..�'•fsa. r.biM:`.ca'., ;;ar,•
Photocopies °';Ttn,,. �. 3a.L.1'7,::'E.1 - �; fi-c 'SiA ;ism,,. ;.k... ..',Q 7.,r., •. " ":e'ni"!:' :-^4. i.i"..V::-.., ='T._i;.:L•.u: _ $d00.00
./•:i :', _ ..u. J.:., .y; .e. jury:'. _,,a""' .L7- Tt•'a, $ .d:,;, '' -3•:.- 'y,aay�L�(.. ,:.'Y'.Y,¢:,' 'a.:f. �t{:' n}'.a:[''l.ro .T_; t�3. -a:.�l:r.MFr i..i4 x:(1,4;)•i '.:'3.;;i. -r.Y�:r• ;�Yr,..'u
.:. .�{`a.'�`.e,�l.Pa`�d�'sn�..r(%.�L�'�::Y'''$.nv rL,.'. 't¢. � 1:,� I
Cned Drily ;.f-corn• .;c:-'::,dar .;x.c �!{:• ,�%. .aym ,r .:�•;r, ..ryd.;;',r:.: 'S �.• :};�';la}.A, k'.,,. 500.00`
,hi <Y'':1'.rr'1" (; ",^a,. .d :Dti14:7,J-'., `'4nir"", s2' '.c!y- -.,,�,r .3..�
'z .,.k.' `,X-.q;°` .;.x.Y7 :`a'% t.4'.'r-Y±`: ,f,..�'r.•.c?:�`:=+^t A',..• f,.�«u:�y�'`�:;�"•'•a+Y9; .oy.,:,.r;..
r,1J; 1t ---I1I
6 ,1 ; 5 (
Final Plots •.4i Sf. '`,r '.S� C:'i::.t. 4•!� f _if'f ::5... r•FN-',ri,2 L .-ia:.d*{+1}),):
rY,`.:;ra� Gt tie' .,,rtt a is<`r:.,'+)' ,4 ,,.h',•'-,?:.+':.�i•^,•.^4 4=5C^ ';Pr.r.
'%� '!• `'µ .'�,. ,l. tt r `�t i. .`�i'.,.L:'. atpT T:"'�r..; .k,•:.KF'P-<:.r r.`f :k.5:�: .t.lNr.ei'�$
:•:U'a'l.�i.^4:;.. `i:i:..l.'c,; •,::0,,4 '... :•!r}•!'.�. ':Mol.l 1:i- b`3h,.ae ' r;'i.;:r4;v...,.a. r^i -
MISC.PwIa Pomace. .KC �:f$'1;�'. �):�,. �y.hh�¢+��'u,�K.,LT,s,.''."E':q_ .1� �.. A �.,,.. S.
n•t F'ur. Y:. 3.e. 'Ki'. ".yv, oa• '-M.' ".Y:. - .,,1 �,.7.+;.
.,.y'., -.�... nTv v7.':a• .�.:�"'ii'.: .F' d:iaR`_ '.:J:�:R ' �i..'I1 -
Description a.`ti"^ ;:v �.".Ci roi`r:r' '.'�."c ? t �:'�'�• "+'Si: f'ki:»^�'i:Yi;. �;S'`v�'.T: .'.:j7��'_'
Outside Expensesa�•tuT..,4{"Vf/t-' .. `�c�aa'^ � •a�» ,,; .�`r.. 1• R, ..f ��?a�• :r� - ..,
- ;2.q,J ?}t•'.T,:%'>R"o- ,�e'.e'o- ?.%i':.. .l ..z�.Tl ..ks+T'13, �(oe rT '"a' :,'"yti:•`.;'a.:+9 6 a". x�..�, `Yri
, '.f.>5t:•," s. ki •.,{:r.:`'I.r.0 .."4..at r4:;.�`fi:'"t -) P..,cp.7..4: . .744 `.1; b .:i" ')f`;It+�,.'LgtAf .. ^�,i'PAV5.,,�
r., ...,,.,_},. ri:3. r: ;7Se'^aJ:>;,: d:&•:., ..:":j yg:.: a}LS{. :'e'i Sy.r.•0 rr...d ., - ,•xa y .,,., '': .C,'.j.lst ..�!: �.:3 �2..� '7':•'i�Tr; f7.etc :?`;f. iS= r K-9.'3}i '.7'.6K,•:k:r. .Y4y�. c .3+ e:=3 " H.�'y"J''2 'fi. �2t71,
�, fir';. 'a:yr, .§•dy 4 '•Y.{: 4,.. .:�,: t•I+.y,F��:;'�%�'�s�r;?"�.a�;�r .$• F�+'-. !i, [ .
pC ;,�-: _, ,'++d. �r:j.;,[i±.�;.�: egi:, ��y•..�'�'ynf �;°♦♦'i:.�.?:� ..;a.�7n;F� y.�I zfas ,i� S:.c"'�'<i.�i ��3..�' jy ' c.
1 '4l, y ,.A? •:2E`a' ,a');'7 :.n',';`Arr'.'y�d.4;g: LY'R•-.r•. rl)a :,r'.A:o..<•.),3''1it�L°75 tli.,.r144:7' ,.,".'.: {: 'A W-';)sWitt
tt�s.:{'fi
o% d• 2 ,„ ;a t:. ,'. .%+y N:ir._. ,9,. 2•A:V,,.;.,f eL...':; '.'++.., z: e. z=,...rrr, wy T::Y•.!S i Hktlr4� E4._.:
y; "xK:+�is, s4,a 11y,�i.t ''? a} :ha. .:' ifOil') -p;. ;'i.1; . ' i;.',_xF;';i.A (.1,' :ak•: k`'. :;
Subconaulfants A}' y +.�• .•a ;`.� •td r� --
itli":•4.a. �F7'�i'3.:, �J.7 '1� y'N�x t '&4 1•`V•'rPi a'. 5 r',��t •�j,&'._: t Y-
10% :.nS•• s #•= u.y; ; �,,, •�, ( ry 7�?) fa � e .:�;' ;trfi �+�` ;w�ri' `,
. r�o � + +,��5 .:�xY'4^2��:. ` ..'.��' : t�.ri!.•,�Y,,Xk 4 ,.,Y;�..,,,Y w'.�,.i�:: � � LSr�b�:a;'.'. A;k.A,4,
£{r''1. '�''.c:r1:.F', xn:y,'g'1'1 '7 iY3;wR.6�.1t,: '4J - ,; )1. ---.4 ::� ,:t!i4; .s:'44-fr fi.{ ..)' ...,',..5.:_ r .'i �x
VA axh'z.;Lyy, zy�,• r.;r••-n1d�e• ,.:7i..•.1F�. •?g,•s: `�rli:�::'�.'�>� e.d�'s? 3e..`;,;.'i".r:na. � F.:; ., . ..,' 'L•',�. ',7$: '".��•'�1=5•�'•`_
S 1.965.00
Assures notice in Nam by March v,2o03 . PROJECT TOTAL Not•le.060eed Amount.The Consultant Will bill at its ordinary rates current at thefts servlcee ere performed. 5162,927.03
0 i
Prepared Bsy... C7��� Reviewed By. r Approved By: •
(Project Manager) (Division Manager)
Project Delivery System Renton Barbee REVISED Budget 002.25-02.xle
e
s
• Bill Yeckel
• 2108 Camas Ave NE
•
• Renton WA 98056
•
• Yeckel@attglobal.net
/71
December 17,2002
Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
Development Services Division
Renton City Hall,6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
Dear Lesley:
After the EIS meeting for the Barbee Mill plat proposal on the night of December 10,I came up with some
more concerns. They are listed below. Please let me know how they can be addressed.
1. Why has the city of Renton not pursued buying the property with city money and turning the
it into a public park? This park could be centered around the natural treasures at the site,
like the creek,the wetlands,and the waterfront.
- 2. What does Century Pacific have planned for the open areas on the site plan? Will these
areas be grass lawns that will require a lot of water and chemical fertilizers to maintain or
will they leave the spaces open and natural?
3. If the site does go ahead with the current plan,there should be some realistic public access to
the waterfront and to May Creek. This would mean public parking for the waterfront access
or a public trail that runs through the site. What is the plan for this?
Sincerely,
Wlliam Yeckel
Kennydale Resident
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
DEC d>9 20C2
RECEIVED
,/
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 110 day of DP'e rvv lac,v , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope containing
l luny 0apor4 r D l vttA.+inA
documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing telw r
•
{mac v l V1A q i ✓ K L D 6f AR55o u.e c.e.5 lc
•
(Signature of Sender)
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Adree Dl .,4.) signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
Dated: 12-' ( 9 (02_ • `
Notary Pub' and f✓in or the State of Washington
MARILYN KAMCHEFF ► Notary(Print)
NOTARY PUBLIC MARILYN KAMCNEFF
Myappointment e
STATE OF WASHINGTON r pp
COMMISSION EXPIRES
nea
dv .
ico' r'1 i 11 Pea. 12(s-
Project Number:
10144 bYD 212
NOTARY.DOC
V
bY
�aBARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS �NT°� ,...-,i,;,; P11L12#5'CO,PIIN,G IMEaTiIG
DECEMBER 10, 2002 ="=...r-D "�--` '''''a' •
NAME (please print clearly) ADDRESS/ PHONE/ E-MAIL CHECK HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK
1.--- - k\PR- -�-'1;e;r►o u hd r ir‘c a c.oM
' i�1.fell Liena(A, So— Ic ' Ne. Mg") c,`, -6 i?ooi' tteV��Lo1�t ggoo4- 4Z5,45a,�33S
2.
-Je94( -ce'ci 6 -)cv by,,, (4.11-Gii 5(AtO. iq, Pt1.-c-44 CPAIA AFoolf* COPPre- .4A(‘A‘D)
3.
L l k � - 0 IA/ /-e -e-cvl F 2 -a-7 --/ 1 ke ,la reel, 4 b I`
4. //'' r
/U s-,A, 6 m 'T ii t t s-�( Il' Art f r y 0 r 1;14 gip/ a ( J��r;
5.
,3t2ocC Eer(c a(' 301 S L-1C umni 1iu4 G&= /2 ti -c''✓-
F- J ''1 " �� ' �`� �� - --coLk a_
7
7. a 4-exr��1 �,e! 2I
C�CrlL �� Cre.l (�LLC t.� L e �' S(-Pi mow` e
-.1.--eeob F6- ‘A,6ek-- 3C 5 2 0 d- AL-A).- k-) r_5_5q7A _ 7Z---4‘555
K�� SI( s • iti.)vyt.9AA Cova 6 -r 60.) - i aP Alb-��,,f-c), 10Ci e BQ/1 to/4- 7 v
io.c,e_o �� v4-. 20 11 ,(_ -3 fie, 1 ) • �.� �` a 1-a-ca- '77 4 7
11. 1-/-44/4/- Aae-tiait`ti- xs7d'-- i)ce- k- 4//-e v /c4/- _ 9p5i
g
12.
/14/97- g24 /-1 Optig_._ 6f-e.._. . 42 S-- 8 zZ-4C(cCC-f'
13. c
' t
14. `w �� �� T 1/ erE-C'Uzz
15. DalA EC y Ws Pv i /D,o� - Os-- -5.1�,5/
ilec- e- l_ of 4/ oa Lk Oa.5f d7v,W /U 4z63 -50 P
Those who sign-in will automaticaYly be made a Party-of-Record for the project. Page of
TY
om fit.
f
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS - ' PUBLI_G SLOPING ME'ETIN:G
DECEMBER 10, 2002 ----.. so
NAME (please print clearly) ADDRESS/ PHONE/E-MAIL CHECK HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK %
1Ildil
q4_ \fVoh7r1 r Pl o,ia.) 11ao N. R 14_ ST RC�G�'NJ `7,4_.. --_a7/- . -eq -I3.
/06/17(L
4. x ,/d
Alle-1* t-sipx)-v ;-z 2(-z F-4 . ‘-/a 5-- 2�7/- ,3I� �l_e(a�1--z ,1�4 �ke), � y:
5. ! �1
1/ �` /l � ( 3 E3 !`/G �,n-+ SJ s qZC- a� ��s> • I
i v6. . ILl 7 r O� &je I?�C/ - Wry•50/ (1< '
4/4 .� ??d 7 /-ee k-e G o �� Es?-a 73s� �C?3C
7.
; 5 <I {se <<<f/ V i C71" C° ,c A-0-c_ Are / 2 7- f TOE q. c-+-.-\ 4- �o kc,�,.�k
8. .. /�7,v/Av4 &/�`dL G°
9.
10:::"
WC I' ?(ck_ '' 88ell St-e C.AA 9 3)38
0' t-e--,jtoik.) fac5 v_P ilt) S4A-t- S, ce2el
�n 1
t+A:d
r-- te.EU-
11. c
\/'':' ed;ge--_ 37X/ GC( /)'jl 'C'60 "1"(t - ).0 , iLki ' k.i TT(2..§-& , ,
12. 3-0se r Schwab
13.
14.
15.
Those who sign-in will automatically be made a Party-of-Record for the project. Page 2 of 3
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS P .B±Li;CNICO'PIiNGMiEEaTIIN;G ::
DECEMBER 10, 2002
NAME (please print clearly) ADDRESS/PHONE/E-MAIL CHECK HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK 9>
/ ZW ke2 5,M2 GU j',j/- 7, />i`2 %h 7 f/v
9(
2.
/o Give (t7 1 sv/ y Ave / -` ,2-600°1 S of fie &!o i
3
)-- `set 6a.t ri 9-oil/LLD 5k km, elezit-e-i - 5/2 s--9?,3 -1 d 7 7
4ZC'
/( 1 N. 174 CY4 4L-,ke4 60' /FT
S
5.
fitAq /viA- i F�- 20 r S- uc s vct,) s r Cee o Sb A-rrzL.-
1.7
6 ke
7.
c9-7a pe-(z)(
8.
/ fcMcjre( 4-005- Ps r Ave kJ', -6, WA 423_2Zg--3 a .4
9.
10.
11.
12. -
13.
14.
15.
Those who sign-in will automatically be made a Party-of-Record for the project. Page 3 of 3
t
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Public Scoping
COMMENT FORM
Name (please print): Ai ", 414
Signature: 7)'
Address: c20/ S J 4L,C &do SSE
Phone: czoc, E-mail: g/e
What environmental impact(s) do think the EIS should address?
y GO Oct c.1) 4,11Lf 7/4 r S '7a A Ac SS ;
EF.-6- A-c H-F b J
You may submit your comments NOW or mail to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m., DECEMBER 16, 2002.
41,
•
I would like the EIS to address the buffer sizes of May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline and the
protection and buffers for the two wetlands on site. Specifically,I would advocate retaining and restoring
buffers along May Creek and the shoreline that preserve and restore the natural processes that existed prior
to the development of this site and that would be endorsed by the ecological community.This area at the
mouth of May Creek is unique and provides a high degree of habitat due to its position in the basin.It
provides breeding,foraging and cover habitat for several species including habitat for the ESA-listed
Chinook salmon.This parcel serves as a link in a corridor for fish and wildlife that connects the May Creek
Canyon area,much of which is protected and intact,to Lake Washington.Recent studies by Tabor and
Piaskowski(2001)1 just begin to document the value of rearing habitat along the Lake Washington
shoreline for juvenile Chinook.I would like their findings to be incorporated into the EIS. Overall,I would
strongly encourage a critical examination of the ecological resources that this site provides and to afford it
the highest degree of protection necessary to restore and maintain its ecological value.
1 Nearshore Habitat use by Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Lentic Systems of the Lake Washington Basin,
Annual Report,2001.Tabor,R.A.and Piaskowski,R.M.U. S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Western
Washington Office,Division of Fisheries and Watershed Assessment.Lacey,Washington.November
2001.
V.
et
LAW OFFICES OF
JAMES C HANKEN
999 THIRD AVENUE,SUITE 3210
SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98104
206-689-1205
Fax 206-689-7999
jhanken@hankenIaw.biz
Okik/0*-41
fr. (r' 01( December 16, 2002
�`V I
Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
Development Services Division DEVELOP
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor C►n'" ONNING
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055 DEC ,- 82002
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat RECEDED
Environmental Impact S coping Review
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
This letter is being submitted on behalf of J.H. Baxter and Company, a California Limited
Partnership. It was a joint venture partner in the Quendall Terminals property immediately adjacent
and north of the Barbee Mill site. These comments are expressed on behalf of J.H. Baxter only.
We have provided testimony on this matter at'an earlier occasion and desire to update our
comments by this letter. It is our intent to be supportive of Barbee Mills' efforts in development of
their property;however,we believe that the environmental impact must be carefully and completely
evaluated especially in regards to cumulative impacts throughout the May Creek Delta area.
We focus our comments on four separate areas of concern. These areas are traffic impacts,
shoreline concerns, wetland mitigation issues and set back for contamination concerns. We will
address each of them separately.
We believe that the traffic impacts have two separate aspects. First,there are the impacts off-
site involving those impacts on existing traffic infrastructure and the capacity of that infrastructure to
absorb this development as well as other developments on adjacent parcels. Furthermore,we believe
that there will be on site traffic impacts which will have specific concerns for the Quendall Terminal
development capacity.
In dealing with the off site traffic concerns,we believe that the trip generation evaluations for
existing highway facilities needs to be assimilated with the studies of future development on the
other properties west of 405 that are dependent upon the 44th St. interchange. . Thus, the total
accumulated impacts of this project along with other development must be studied and evaluated
with input from the impacted properties. '
In addition,we have the concerns regarding the on-site traffic impacts. In this respect we are
focused on the impacts that the access through the Quendall property will have on internal traffic
A
Wesley Nishihira
December 16, 2002
Page 2
configurations and requirements for Quendall Terminal property itself. We don't quite understand
the full impact of this. We believe the environmental scoping should have this aspect fully
evaluated.
We note that the shoreline along Lake Washington will be significantly impacted by the
development. As owners of adjacent property with our own significant mitigation requirements
respecting ESA issues as well as habitat issues in general, we have desire to have the shoreline
natural restoration be fully evaluated in conjunction with other properties shoreline issues. Such
shoreline issues include the appropriate set back requirements,the height requirements and density
restrictions necessary. Studies regarding cumulative impacts of the May Creek Delta development
process need to be done.
In speaking of the natural restoration of the shorelines of Lake Washington,we are led to our
concerns about the wetlands. Throughout the May Creek Delta there are wetland issues, many of
which deal with the interface of Lake Washington and the uplands. We believe that the development
of fragmented wetlands throughout the area would be short sighted and inappropriate for habitat and •
environmental concerns. We believe that the full cumulative impacts of all wetlands throughout the
area should be evaluated and studied.
As the final issue,we have concerns over the separation of the residential areas proposed for
the Barbee Mill property as being sufficiently set back from any contamination currently on the
Quendall terminal property as it currently exists as well as any contamination that may exist at the
Barbee site. Specifically we are desirous to have sufficient set backs to establish sufficient
protection for the residential community that will be developed.
These are our comments in regards to the environmental impact statement. While we make
these comments to perhaps expand the EIS scoping requirement,we still wish to support the overall
development of the Barbee site. We believe this approach will make a stronger and better record for
the development of the project.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment and appreciate the information supplied.
Wesley Nishihira
December 16, 2002
Page 3
•
Very truly yours,
Law Offices of James C. Hanken
(lea"
James C. Hanken
Attorneys on behalf of J.H. Baxter and Company
Joint Venture Partner
Quendall Terminals
JCH:db
AWYERS
Ij
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAV$I 0 RIELLSEVAIE G OID113Q7$ILU LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON,D.C.
DIRECT (206) 622-3150
thomasgoeltz@dwt.com 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
December 16, 2002
DEVE OPMENT P
��- VIA FACSIMILE AND STANDARD MAIL CI� FDEc RE NN,NG
0);)) Ms. Lesley Nishihira . 8 2002
City of Renton, 6th Floor ECEIV-
1055 South Grady Way E®.
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Environmental Impact Statement("EIS") Scoping for Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,
Renton File No. 02-040
Dear Ms.Nishihira:
We provide this letter in response to the November 5, 2002 Staff Report and public
comments on the potential environmental impacts of Barbee Mill's preliminary plat of a 22.9
acre site into a 115-lot development("Project"). Barbee Mill submitted a complete application
for a preliminary plat in full compliance with RMC 4-7-080(F) and 4-8-120, and now seeks to
address the proper scope of the EIS that the City will require for the Project.
According to WAC 197-11-408,the City has a duty to "narrow the scope of every EIS to
the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives, including mitigation
measures." In its Staff Report,the City discussed the impacts of the Project on ten different
elements of the environment. We agree with Staff that the Project, as mitigated, will have no
significant adverse impact on the elements of the environment that Staff omitted from its Report.
While the City did not indicate whether it believes that each of the elements it did discuss are
within the scope of the EIS,we expect that, at most,the City will include the following elements,
and no others,within the EIS scope: earth,water, and animals. The Project, as demonstrated by
environmental analysis that has already been performed, will have no probable significant
impacts on any other areas of the environment.
As the City is aware,the property on which the Project will occur is not a vacant, pristine
site,but rather an intensive industrial site. The Project will therefore result in a significant net
benefit to the City and the environment. The Project will convert the use of the property from an
industrial use to a residential use. When complete,the property will have only 57% impervious
surface, as compared with the 85%of the site that is currently covered with impervious surface.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 2
As part of the Project, asphalt in wetland buffers and near the shoreline will be removed and
replaced with natural vegetation. The net increases in traffic will be insignificant. In short, the
Project proposes a drastically less intensive use of the shoreline than the existing use, and its
impacts on nearly all elements of the environment, as further discussed below,will be
insignificant.
We offer the following information for the City's consideration as it begins to narrow the
scope of the EIS to the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives.
1. The Purpose and Scope of the EIS.
The purpose of the EIS is to inform decision makers and the public of reasonable
alternatives or mitigation measures "that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts,"not to
require the applicant to ponder alternative ways of handling a specific aspect of a proposal. See
WAC 197-11-400(2). Hence, an environmental impact statement is required to analyze "only
those probable adverse environmental impacts which are significant. " RCW 43.21C.031(1)
(emphasis added).
The City has a duty to ensure that the EIS "is concise," and thus the City must
"[e]liminate from detailed study those impacts that are not significant." WAC 197-11-408(2)(c).
According to WAC 197-11-408(1):
The lead agency shall narrow the scope of every EIS to the
probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives,
including mitigation measures." For example, if there are only two
or three significant impacts or alternatives, the EIS shall be
focused on those.
(Emphasis added). The EIS "is not required to evaluate and document all of the possible effects
and considerations of a decision or to contain the balancing judgments that must ultimately be
made by the decision makers," and the"EIS need not analyze mitigation measures in detail
unless they involve substantial changes to the proposal causing significant adverse impacts." See
WAC 197-11-440(6)(c)(iv) (emphasis added); WAC 197-11-448(1).
"Significant"as used in SEPA means "a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate
adverse impact on environmental quality." WAC 197-11-794. Significance "involves context
and intensity," and"[i]ntensity depends on the magnitude and duration of an impact." WAC
197-11-794(2). In determining whether an impact is significant, "[t]he severity of an impact
should be weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence." WAC 197-11-794(3).1
1 It is worth noting that the scope of the EIS that Barbee Mill is proposing(earth,water,animals,transportation)is
considerably broader than the scope of analysis that the City ahs required for past projects of significantly greater
magnitude. For example,the City allowed the developers of Southport to rely almost entirely on the two
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 3
2. Elements Within the Scope of the Barbee Mill EIS.
Based on the foregoing principles of law and the environmental analysis that Barbee Mill
has already provided to the City, the only elements of the environment within the proper scope of
an EIS for the proposed plat are: (a) earth; (b) water, and (c) animals. However, we have
provided the City with the information necessary to evaluate the proposal's impact on those three
elements; therefore, any additional analysis required for the EIS should be extremely limited.
(a) Earth.
(i) Seismic Hazards and Steep Slopes.
The City has already determined that the subject property is suitable for a mix of
intensive commercial, office and residential activity, or stand alone residential development with
a minimum density of 5 dwelling units/acre. See RMC 4-2-020;see also WAC 365-195-610
• (requiring SEPA analysis of zoning regulations). The City's Critical Area Maps identify
potentially high seismic hazards and steep slopes on the Project site, which the City was aware of
the presence of such areas when it adopted the COR zoning. The City could not have zoned the
property Center Office Residential ("COR")without having evaluated the likely environmental
impacts that such development would have on the property designated and zoned for that kind of
development. See WAC 365-195-610 (adoption of comprehensive plans and zoning regulations
are "actions" subject to SEPA review). With full knowledge of the critical areas on-site, the City
zoned the property COR, indicating that the City has already determined that likely significant
adverse impacts to the earth resulting from COR-2 development can be mitigated.
A geotechnical study by a qualified professional has already been performed in
accordance with RMC 4-3-050(J)(2), and such a study is the primary requirement of the City's
critical area regulations governing geologic hazards. The applicant hired Golder Associates to
perform a geotechnical analysis of the site. That April 4, 2002 Geotechnical Feasibility Report
identified the potential hazards. Based on site-specific analysis and review of the development
standards set forth in RMC 4-3-050(J), the consultant recommended mitigation that would
ensure that structures and systems on the site would not create a significant adverse impact on
the soils and stability of the earth. Specifically, the report identified the foundation design,
seismic design, site preparation, and erosion control measures that will prevent the Project from
significantly and adversely impacting the earth and satisfy all standards set forth in RMC 4-3-
environmental impact statements that the City has previously prepared in support of its comprehensive planning
efforts,and prepare only a supplemental environmental impact statement. The Southport Planned Action proposed
redevelopment of 17 acres adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline and required comprehensive plan map and
text amendments,a rezone,a zoning code text amendment,and approval of use of the property for a mixed use
development including residential,retail,and office uses. Despite such extensive revisions and intensive
development,the City ultimately issued a Mitigation Document for the Southport proposal. The Barbee Mill
preliminary plat obviously will have fewer significant adverse environmental impacts than the Southport Planned
Action,and hence the scope of the EIS that Barbee Mill is proposing seems reasonable,if not generous.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
' 1r
December 16, 2002
Page 4
050(J). No development will occur on protected slopes, and an erosion control plan will be
submitted to the City upon the City's request. See RMC 4-3-050(J).
(ii) Contaminated Soil.
The Project is not likely to have significant adverse impacts on the environment. Barbee
Mill has voluntarily submitted a clean-up plan under the State's Model Toxics Control Act
("MTCA"). See City of Renton LUA-02-069, ECF, SM, SP. State authorities have already
concluded through detailed analysis that as long as such clean-up standards are satisfied, there is
no likely threat to human health or neighboring properties. See RCW 70.105D; WAC 173-340.
According to WAC 173-340-200:
A clean-up action selected in accordance with WAC 173-340-350
through 173-340-390 that includes remediation levels constitutes a
clean-up action which is protective of human health and the
environment.
Notably, Barbee Mill proposed the highest clean-up standard for the site—that required for
residential use. Ecology has indicated that the clean-up program Barbee Mill proposed is
adequate to meet State standards, and Barbee Mill expects to receive a No Further Action letter
from Ecology. Further analysis of the soils, therefore, can have no effect on what clean-up levels
are appropriate for the site. See, e.g., WAC 173-340-200. The Project cannot be deemed to
present a likely significant adverse impact to the public where the site meets or will meet the
highest clean-up standards under State law.
(b) Water.
(i) Floodplain and Surface Water.
The Project is not likely to have significant adverse impacts on the floodplain and surface
water. Raedeke Associates, Inc. has already performed a Biological Assessment("BA") for the
Project and such BA has been independently evaluated by A.C. Kindig & Company("Kindig")
at the City's request. The BA and the Kindig Report indicate that the Project,with proposed
mitigation, will not have significant adverse impacts on the floodplain or surface water. In fact,
the Project will greatly reduce the impervious surfaces on the site from 85% coverage to 57%
coverage. Asphalt bordering the waterfront will be removed and surface water will no longer
drain directly into Lake Washington without treatment.
The City suggests that additional analysis of the upstream drainage basin and surface
water impacts are necessary because the BA did not provide detailed conceptual plans for
construction of those facilities. As the City's consultant recognized, however, "At this stage of
planning it is not unusual to lack detailed conceptual plans for construction of these facilities."
Kindig went on to state, "Lacking detailed plans at this stage of the process is fine for most
engineering specifics best answered at final design." The applicant can evaluate certain impacts
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 5
at this time, only insofar as the specific details of the Project allow. See Narrowsview
Preservation Assn v. Tacoma, 84 Wn.2d 416, 526 p.2d 897 (1974); see also WAC 197-11-
060(5); Cathcardt-Maltby-Clearview Community Council v. Snohomish County, 96 Wn.2d 201,
210, 634 P.2d 853 (1981). Barbee Mill has submitted all the information required for a
preliminary plat under RMC 4-7-080(F) and 4-8-120, and Barbee Mill cannot be expected to
evaluate impacts that are at this point unascertainable. To avoid potential significant impacts
that are not yet ripe for evaluation, Barbee Mill has agreed to have a qualified fisheries biologist
review and approve the design and installation plans for the stormwater outfalls and the bridge
abutment construction.
Although Kindig notes that several questions relating to the feasibly and adequacy of
"typical"mitigation cannot be answered absent detailed conceptual plans,he in no way
suggested that additional analysis of the impacts of the Project upon surface water or floodplains
was necessary at this time or as part of an EIS. Rather, he emphasized that it is typical for a
Project to lack"detailed plans"until closer to final design(which would occur after all SEPA
analysis for the Project in general). See, e.g., RMC 4-7-080(F) and RMC 4-8-120 (requirements
for preliminary plat applications).
With respect to water quality impacts from the proposed modifications, Kindig has noted
that"there would be no adverse effects from a reduction in impervious surface" and has further
stated that"I do not disagree with the contention that residential development can be adequately
treated to prevent water quality impacts." See Kindig Report, pp. 9-10 (emphasis added).
The City's building, drainage, and development standards,when combined with
mitigation recommended in the BA,will ensure that the final plans for the outfall and bridge
abutments will not significantly and adversely impact the water. See RMC 4-4-030; 4-5-010.
Substantial additional voluntary mitigation also will performed.
To the extent the City has questions that remain unanswered, "[d]iscussion between the
City and the applicant could undoubtedly answer the questions." See Kindig Report,p. 15.
(ii) Wetlands and Critical Habitat.
The Project will not have a significant adverse impact on wetlands and associated habitat.
The site contains two low-quality wetlands that, when combined, cover only 0.02 acres of the
Barbee Mill property. Neither of the wetlands provides habitat to salmonid species. At least one
of the small wetland areas has been artificially created as a result of installation of a culvert
beneath the railroad tract running through the northern part of the property. Additionally,the
Project will greatly reduce the amount of impervious surface on the site (from 85%to 57%)
thereby improving drainage and wetland health. The City's independent consultant, Kindig, who
reviewed the BA, stated that he agreed with the BA conclusion that the improvements planned
for May Creek will improve riparian conditions over the existing condition." See Kindig Report,
p. 11.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 6
In addition, the Project must comply with the standards and mitigation prescribed by
Code, and the City has designed such standards to ensure that the Project has no significant
adverse impact on wetlands and critical habitat. For example, under RMC 4-3-010(M)(6),
Barbee Mill will be required to adhere to the City's stringent standards for wetland buffers. See
RMC 4-3-010(M)(6). Barbee Mill may request to average buffer widths,but to do so, Barbee
will have to obtain the Administrator's approval and comply with the standards set forth in RMC
4-3-010(M)(6)(f).
Finally,the City Code requires a professional wetland study and delineation as the
primary method of ensuring that the proposed activity will avoid adverse impacts to regulated
wetlands and buffers. Barbee Mill has already prepared multiple wetland reports, including
those required by City Code. See RMC 4-3-010(M). The applicant has submitted a Wetland
Determination Report prepared by David Evans and Associates, Inc. which concluded that the
Project will not have significant adverse impacts on the wetlands after the proposed voluntary
mitigation is undertaken. A separate Wetland Delineation Study prepared by Raedeke
Associates, Inc. also indicated that with the proposed mitigation,the Project will have no
significant adverse impact on wetlands. Finally, Barbee Mill prepared a BA that discussed the
Project's potential impacts on wetlands. According to the BA, as long as the proposed
mitigation conditions are followed,no significant adverse impacts to wetlands,buffers or
associated species are likely to occur. See BA,pp. 21-31.
(c) Animals.
For reasons largely discussed immediately above, the Project, as mitigated, will not
significantly harm animals or their habitat. The City's concern about impacts on animals is not
that the proposed Project is likely to have a significant adverse impact on animals, but rather that
"the independent review lists six areas/issues that should be further described and evaluated:"
(1) dredging;2 (2) increased human activity; (3) landscaping; (4) residential docks; (5) alterations
on DNR-owned uplands; and(6) removal of mill docks. Nowhere in the Kindig Report,
however, did it indicate that any of the six issues were appropriate for evaluation in an EIS or
that the activities he listed were likely to involve significant adverse environmental impacts on
animals.
With respect to cumulative impacts on animals, Kindig wrote: "Cumulative impacts of
the proposed plat and future residential docks should be addressed in the BA, j[the plat makes
future applications for such docks reasonably likely. See Kindig Report,pp. 13-24. There is
nothing, however, in the preliminary plat application that makes the installation of docks
reasonably likely. Barbee Mill does not even own the majority of the land upon which docks
would be built.
2 Dredging is an existing activity on the site,and will continue in conformance with RMC 4-3-010(L)(6).
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 7
Given that the presence of residential docks is independent of the preliminary plat
approval, and the nature of the docks (if any)that may be installed cannot be determined at this
time (i.e., will there be docks, single-owner docks,joint-use docks, a single dock for the entire
development), it would be inappropriate to require Barbee Mill to evaluate the impacts of
speculative docks. The future owners of the individual lots will evaluate the potential impacts
that may be caused due to installation of residential docks (which will require separate permits
and approvals) at a later phase, when the details of the specific structures (if any) are more
clearly defined. See WAC 197-11-060(5) (authorizing phased review);Narrowsview
Preservation Ass'n v. Tacoma, 84 Wn.2d 416, 526 P.2d 897 (1974); SEAPC v. Cammack II
Orchards, 49 Wn. App. 609, 615, 744 P.2d 1101 (1987).
As to the other issues,the independent consultant stated that he disagreed or questioned
the basis for some of the conclusions drawn by Raedeke with respect to the appropriateness of
certain voluntary mitigation,but he nowhere stated that the Project, as mitigated, was likely to
have significant adverse environmental impacts on animals. Furthermore, Kindig emphasized
that all of his questions and concerns could"undoubtedly"be resolved through a discussion
between the City and the applicant. Kindig Report, p. 15. The applicant would be glad to
discuss questions that the City may have with respect to the six areas Kindig mentioned.
The purpose of the EIS.is not to require the applicant to ponder alternative ways of
handling a specific aspect of a proposal unless that aspect actually is likely to have significant
adverse environmental impacts. See WAC 197-11-400(2). The City, understandably perhaps,
presumed that anything Kindig recommended needed additional analysis was an impact that
required scrutiny under an EIS. In fact, the City's consultant made no such conclusions; instead,
he indicated that the issues could be resolved through an informal discussion with the City. See
Kindig Report,p. 15.
3. Elements That Are Not Within the Scope of the EIS.
Noise, land use compatibility, aesthetics, recreation,historical, cultural preservation, and
public services are beyond the scope of the EIS. The City"is required to narrow the scope of
every EIS to the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives, including
mitigation measures." WAC 197-11-408(1). If there are only two or three significant impacts or
alternatives, the EIS must focus on those. WAC 197-11-408(1).
Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies must consider whether local, state, or
federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant impact. WAC
197-11-660(1)(e). Fundamental land use planning choices made in adopted comprehensive plans
and development regulations are to serve as the foundation for project review. RCW
36.70B.030(1). Local governments may, pursuant to RCW 43.21C.240, determine that the
requirements for environmental analysis and mitigation measures in development regulations and
other applicable laws provide adequate mitigation for some or all of the Project's specific
adverse environmental impacts to which the requirements apply. RCW 36.70B.030(4).
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 8
The planning choices made in adopted comprehensive plans and development
regulations, and the environmental analysis that served as a basis for such decisions, indicate that
the impacts on noise, land and shoreline compatibility, aesthetics, recreation,historical and
cultural preservation, and public services have already been evaluated and proper mitigation has
already been determined. As explained below, the requirements for environmental analysis and
mitigation measures in development regulations and other applicable laws provide adequate
mitigation for the Project's specific adverse environmental impacts on: (a) noise, (b) land and
shoreline compatibility, (c) aesthetics, (d)recreation, (e) historical and cultural preservation,
(f) public services, and (g)transportation.
(a) Noise.
The Project, if it is performed in compliance with local and State laws governing noise,
simply cannot have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment with respect to
noise, and hence analysis of noise simply has no place in the EIS. See WAC 197-11-400.
Pursuant to the authority of the Noise Control Act of 1974, WAC 173-60 sets forth the maximum
permissible environmental noise levels in various environments, and provides standards relating
to the reception of noise within such environments. See WAC 173-60-010. State regulations list
the "maximum permissible environmental noise levels," and provide that"[n]o person shall
cause or permit noise to intrude into the property of another person which noise exceeds the
maximum permissible noise levels set forth below in this section." WAC 173-60-040. Chapter
7 of the Renton Municipal Code adopts by reference WAC 173-60-020, 040, 050, and 090, and
contains its own additional noise level regulations.
Typical construction activities generate noise, but such activities cannot generate noise in
a manner or intensity more severe than that authorized by State and local law and already
determined in GMA environmental documents to be sufficient to prevent probable significant
adverse impacts on the environment. To the extent the City has specific concerns about noise,
such impacts can easily be mitigated by the imposition of simple conditions, such as a limit on ,
the hours in which construction activity can take place.
The City has no basis to believe that after complying with state and local regulations
governing noise,the Project will have significant adverse impacts with respect to noise. As a
matter of law,then,noise is not within the scope of the EIS. See WAC 197-11-158(5).
(b) Land Use.
(i) Compatibility with COR-2 Zone.
The City errs in suggesting that the Project may be inconsistent with the comprehensive
plan and zoning policies for the COR-2 zone and thus have significant impacts and land use
compatibility. As a matter of law,the City has already decided that the density and use of the
Project is compatible with the COR-2 zone and surrounding property. See RCW 36.70B.030(3);
WAC 365-195-610. This State feels so strongly about the issue of finality and efficiency in land
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 9
use planning that it prohibits the city from revisiting the land use compatibility issue in the
permitting process. RCW 36.70B.030(3); WAC 365-195-610. According to the Legislature, the
"project review process, including the environmental review process under chapter 43.21C RCW
and the consideration of consistency, should start from [the land use determinations set forth in
the comprehensive plan and development regulations] and should not reanalyze these land use
planning decisions in making a permit decision." See Laws 1995, ch. 347 §§ 404 and 405. The
City Mayor demonstrated his understanding of that fundamental principal in a letter,where he
wrote:
The current residential preliminary plat application for 11[5]-
townhouse units complies with the established uses and residential
density requirements of the COR zone....while it is the City's
preference that the property be developed as part of a larger,high
intensity project....the property owner has every legal right to
propose development which falls within the boundaries of the
applicable regulations adopted by the City Council.
See Letter from Mayor Tanner to Cynthia Youngblood, dated August 26, 2002.
Prior to adopting its comprehensive plan land use designations and zoning regulations,
the City evaluated whether such designations are likely to have a significant adverse impact on
the environment. See WAC 365-195-610 (adoption of comprehensive plans and zoning
regulations are "actions" subject to SEPA review). The City conclusively determined that a
townhouse development with a density of 8 dwelling units per acre is an appropriate use for the
COR-2 zone, and for the urban shoreline environment. See RCW 36.70A.040; RCW
36.70A.130; WAC 365-195-610; Sammamish Community.Council v. City of Bellevue, 108 Wn.
App. 46, 56, 29 P.3d 728 (2001).
Having already determined that development such as that proposed by Barbee Mill is
compatible with the COR-2 zone,the City cannot now suggest to Barbee Mill that its proposed
use might not be compatible with the COR-2 zone. The City's determination of proper land use
and compatibility simply cannot be revisited as part of the SEPA process. See RCW
36.70B.030(3);see also Moss v. City of Bellingham, 109 Wn. App. 6, 16-18, 31 P.3d 703 (2001).
State law explicitly provides:
During project review,the local government or any subsequent
reviewing body shall not reexamine alternatives to or hear appeals
on the items identified in [RCW 36.70B.030(2)], except for issues
of code interpretation.
RCW 36.70B.030(3);see also Moss v. City of Bellingham, 109 Wn. App. 6, 16-18„ 31 P.3d 703
(2001) (discussing RCW 36.70B.030 as a way in which the Legislature attempts to avoid
duplicative analysis by assigning SEPA a secondary role to more comprehensive environmental
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 10
analysis in plan and systematic mitigation of adverse environmental impacts through local, state,
and federal environmental law).
(ii) Shorelines.
The City suggests that, even though no development is occurring that necessitates a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (and hence the SEPA analysis related thereto),the
Project is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the shorelines that at present does not
appear to be capable of adequate mitigation. The Project, however, is authorized by the City
code,provided that the Project complies with all applicable land use regulations. State and local
law clearly provide adequate mitigation for some or all of the Project's specific adverse
environmental impacts to which the requirements apply. RCW 36.70B.030(4).
The presence of residential docks (if any)is independent of the preliminary plat approval,
and the nature of the docks (if any)that may be installed cannot be determined at this time (i.e.,
will there by single-owner docks,joint-use docks, a single dock for the entire development).
Hence, Barbee Mill will evaluate the potential impacts that may be caused due to installation of
residential docks (which will require separate permits and approvals) at a later phase, when the
details of the specific structures (if any) are more clearly defined. See WAC 197-11-060(5)
(authorizing phased review);Narrowsview Preservation Ass v. Tacoma, 84 Wn.2d 416, 526
p.2d 897 (1974);SEAPC v. Cammack II Orchards, 49-Wn. App. 609, 615, 744 P.2d 1101
(1987). To the extent impacts on shorelines are likely to be significant as a result of the
construction of docks or otherwise, an evaluation of such impacts in an EIS can be performed as
a separate phase or at the time of application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit.
(c) Aesthetics.
(i) Views.
Additional analysis of the impacts that the Project is likely to have on aesthetics is
unnecessary. The zoning regulations allow 125 foot buildings on the entire project site. See
RMC 4-2-120B. Barbee Mill has voluntarily mitigated potential aesthetic impacts by limiting
the height of its townhomes to 50 feet within 200 feet of the shoreline. The townhomes upland
will be in the range of 2-3 stories. The City's code authorizes Barbee to construct 10 story
buildings on the entire site. The Project is visually compatible with the surrounding residential
land uses and no evidence indicates that the Project will significantly and adversely impact
views,particularly when voluntarily mitigated, in a way different from other permitted
residential structures.
(ii) Light and Glare.
No basis exists for concluding that the Project is likely to create light and glare that will
create a significant adverse impact on the environment in terms of aesthetics, and in fact the City
cites no basis for reaching such a conclusion. It is difficult to imagine a project permitted in the
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 11
COR-2/Urban zone that would have less impact on aesthetics than a single family residential
development, short of no development. A 10-story office building with glass casing is permitted
in the City's COR zone, and hence could conceivably result in significant impacts due to light
and glare; the proposed townhomes will not generate a significant impact in terms of light or
glare.
An environmental impact statement is required to analyze only those probable adverse
environmental impacts which are significant. RCW 43.21C.031(1). The purpose of the EIS is
not to require the applicant to ponder alternative ways of handling a specific aspect of a proposal
unless that aspect actually is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts. See WAC
197-11-400(2). Light and glare impacts are beyond the scope of the EIS.
(d) Recreation.
The City's supposition that the Project will have a significant adverse impact on
recreational opportunities is unfounded, especially when considered in light of the City's
development standards. The Renton Municipal Code sets forth requirements to insure adequate
on-site recreation for new development, and Barbee Mill, as indicated in the Staff Report, has
agreed to pay mitigation fees of approximately$40,768.95. In addition to paying a park
mitigation fee Barbee will voluntarily,per code,provide on-site recreation areas as part of the
proposed plat. In light of that,the adverse impacts of the Project on recreation simply cannot
reasonably be considered significant.
Additionally,the City cannot justify the need for an EIS evaluation of impacts related to
recreation based on the absence of a public recreation trail connecting along the entire length of
May Creek and Lake Washington. Barbee Mill's Project has not created the public access
problem or lack of trail connection, and to require Barbee Mill to dedicate such a trail would be
unconstitutional. Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, 384, 114 S. Ct. 2309, 129 L.Ed.2d 304
(1994);Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825, 837-38, 107 S.Ct. 3141, 97 L.Ed.2d
677 (1987).
The fundamental purpose of the Takings Clause is "to bar [g]overnment from forcing
some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by
the public as a whole."' See id. (citation omitted);Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505,
522, 958 P.2d 343 (1998) (citation omitted). If the lack of access was a problem of Barbee
Mill's own making,then the City might be able to impose the condition—assuming the City
could prove that the other requirements for such a condition were met. Dolan, 512 U.S. at 384
(citation omitted). Such problem(if there is a problem),has always existed. The public was not
able to cross the Barbee Mill property before the proposed subplat and the City cannot require
that Barbee Mill allow the public to cross the private property after the development. The
proposed plat does not create or even exacerbate a public problem. If the City wants a trail
easement across the Barbee Mill property, it must pay for it. See id.;Burton, 91 Wn. App. at
521-24.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
•
December 16, 2002
Page 12
Under the well-settled doctrine of unconstitutional conditions,the government may not
require a person to give up a constitutional right—here the right to exclude others from one's
private property—in exchange for a discretionary benefit conferred by the government where the
benefit sought has little or no relationship to the condition imposed. Dolan, 512 U.S. at 385.
The City cannot require Barbee Mill or any other private property owner to dedicate property for
a public use as a condition of obtaining development permits when the need for the public access
is not"occasioned by the construction sought to be permitted." Dolan, 512 U.S. at 390 (citation
omitted).
While the City is justified in discussing recreation in its Staff Report, the City must
"[e]liminate from detailed study those impacts that are not significant." WAC 197-11-408(2)(c).
The purpose of the EIS is not to require the applicant to ponder alternative ways of handling a
specific aspect of a proposal unless that aspect actually is likely to have significant adverse
environmental impacts. See WAC 197-11-400.
(e) Historic and Cultural Preservation.
EIS analysis of impacts on cultural and historic resources is unnecessary and beyond the
scope of the EIS. See WAC 197-11-408(1). The Washington State Office of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation("Office") is the authority in this State with respect to the nature and
location of cultural and historical resources. See RCW 27.34; WAC 25-42. The Office was
entitled to review and comment on the Barbee Mill proposal and checklist and to apprise the City
if Barbee Mill's plat was reasonably likely to have an adverse environmental impact. See WAC
25-42-060. To date,the Office has given no indication that the Barbee Mill Project will have a
likely significant adverse impact on cultural or historic resources. To the best of Barbee Mill's
knowledge, as disclosed in the checklist, there are no cultural or historic resources on the site and
the City has provided no basis for believing otherwise.
Barbee Mill will agree to contact the Office and to propose and adopt such mitigation as
may be required in the event historic or cultural resources are discovered on the site. To date,
however,there is no basis for concluding there are cultural and historic resources on the site,
much less is there a basis for concluding that the Project is likely to have a significant adverse
impact on historic and cultural resources. If there is no evidence of cultural and historic
resources on site—which is the case—then analysis of a range of alternatives is useless.
(f) Public Services.
The City's Determination of Significance errs in recommending that Barbee Mill study
impacts on public services as part of its EIS, even though the City's Code already provides for
adequate public services and requires mitigation fees to ensure that police, fire and related public
services are adequately funded. See RCW 36.70A.020(12); RCW 36.70A.070(3). The City has
designated the subject property as suitable for intense mixed use development and such
designation could not have occurred absent a determination that adequate public services were or
would be available to support such development. See Renton Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 13
227. The requirements for environmental analysis, protection, and mitigation measures in the
City's development regulations and comprehensive plan and in other applicable local, state, or
federal laws or rules provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse
environmental impacts of the Project on public services and thus no further environmental
analysis is warranted. See WAC 197-11-158(5).
It appears that the City's concern with respect to public services is that Barbee Mill has
not provided confirmation from the Renton School District that it will be able to accommodate
additional students. Again,however,the City's comprehensive plan, subarea plan, or
development regulations have already adequately addressed the of a project's probable specific
adverse environmental impacts on public services. That is a requirement of any GMA-planning
jurisdiction. See RCW 36.70A.030(13), (19); 36.70A.070(3); WAC 365-195-305; WAC 365-
195-315; WAC 365-195-335. If probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs, a local
government must take action to ensure that existing identified needs are met. RCW
36.70A.030(3); see also Renton Comprehensive Plan Policy CFP-3. The City must"[e]nsure
that those public facilities and services necessary to support development [are] adequate to serve
the development at time the development available for occupancy and use without decreasing
current service lands beyond locally established minimum standards. RCW 36.70A.020(12).
(g) Transportation.
Barbee Mill has already thoroughly studied probable significant adverse impacts that he
proposed may have on traffic. Impacts on transportation, and alternatives and mitigation related
thereto, may be within the scope of the EIS. Barbee Mill has, however,provided all or
substantially all of the analysis that would result from an EIS.
The City has suggested that additional analysis of cumulative traffic'impacts is required
because the Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis ("TIA") does not contain traffic forecasts
pertaining to traffic generated from"all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the railroad
tracks." The undeveloped parcels,however, generate no traffic meriting consideration in the
TIA, and development of such parcels is entirely speculative. See Boehm v. City of Vancouver,
111 Wn. App. 711, 720,47 P.3d 137 (2002).
According to Washington courts, analysis of cumulative impacts from potential
development is not warranted unless the city can demonstrate that the development under
consideration"is dependent on subsequent proposed development." Id. (emphasis added).
Examination of an anticipated development's potential impacts is speculative when"there are no
specific plans to review and the impacts therefore are unknown." Tugwell v. Kittitas County, 90
Wn. App. 1, 12, 951 P.2d 272 (1997). WAC 197-11-060(4)(a)requires consideration only of
"impacts that are likely, not merely speculative," and hence there is no basis for finding the
Barbee Mill TIA deficient based on lack of analysis of cumulative impacts from potential
development proposals (no proposals even exist) in the vicinity of the Project.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
December 16, 2002
Page 14
The City has indicated that the TIA incorrectly assumes signalization of the NE 44cn1-
405 intersection by 2005, and incorrectly splits the number of units that will utilize the access
points on the north and south ends of the site. Hence,the City believes EIS analysis is necessary
to determine whether a traffic signal is warranted and the ability of all units to use the south and
north ends of the site. The City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan,however,provides
for signalization at the 44t/I-405 intersection, and hence, Barbee Mill is required to assume
signalization. See TIA,p. 13.
The City has requested detailed analysis of the Project's potential trip generation and
impacts to existing off-site roadways, including confirmation by traffic counts. Barbee Mills
fully complied with the City's Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New
Development, and nothing in those guidelines requires such additional off-site analysis.
Moreover, Torsten K. Lienau of HDR Engineering, the author of the TIA for Barbee Mill who
also authored the traffic section in the Southport Planned Action EIS, can attest that the analysis
contained in the TIA is every-bit as extensive as that contained in the TIA for Southport. If
Barbee Mill were to perform traffic counts at the off-site intersections suggested by the City, it is
clear, according to HDR Engineering, that the counts would be de minimus.
Barbee Mill has prepared a complete traffic analysis in conformance with the City's
standards. The Project will result in no change to the City's level of service standards, and the
impacts caused by the Project on traffic are so minimal as to not even justify mitigation. See
TIA,p. 19. Barbee Mill will, of course,pay transportation impact fees to help fund off-site
transportation improvements. In sum, we agree with the conclusion of the City's transportation
representative, Mr. John Hasty, who indicated that he has no objection to the City's analysis.
Finally,the City has asserted that further analysis of the impacts of railroad traffic to the
increased trips anticipated on local streets is necessary,the ability to secure permanent crossing
rights, and the compatibility of the crossing with emergency access to the site. The Barbee Mill
preliminary plat,however, currently offers two accesses and a potential third access to the south
in an emergency. See Letter from Campbell Mathewson to Lesley Nishihira, Sept. 24, 2002
Barbee Mill has already obtained the consent of all property owners of the abutting parcel
to the north indicating their agreement to allow dedication of public right-of-way through the
property in order to provide primary access to the proposed Project. See Letter from Campbell
Mathewson to Lesley Nishihira, Sept. 24, 2002. Additionally,Barbee Mill has provided the City
with a copy of the easement and covenant providing the Barbee Mill property with a 60-foot
access easement across the Port Quendall property to the immediate north of the subject
property. That easement and covenant also indicate that Quendall Terminals will dedicate the
easement to the City as a public right-of-way, and that Barbee Mill has been granted permission
from Northern Pacific Railway Company to maintain a private road crossing. See Letter from
Campbell Mathewson to Lesley Nishihira, Sept. 24, 2002. In short, Barbee Mill has met RMC
4-6-060.G.2 requiring two means of access and RMC 4-6-060.G.5 requiring secondary access for
emergency equipment.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
•
•
December 16, 2002
Page 15
Barbee Mill has further agreed, as voluntary mitigation,to support any efforts by the City
or BNSF to obtain approval for a second crossing from WUTC. We have commenced
discussions with BNSF and are agreeable to a condition of the preliminary plat similar to that
found in the Southport approval:
The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with
the BNSF railroad during the design of roadway improvements to
determine the most appropriate railroad crossing solution.
Earth, water, and animals may be elements within the proper scope of the EIS, but Barbee
Mill has already thoroughly analyzed the proposal's impacts on those elements of the
environment,reasonable alternatives, and potential mitigation in its BA, TIA, Geotechnical
Report, and wetland analyses. Given such careful study,the proposed 115 unit plat on 22.9 acres
is unlikely to have significant adverse impacts on those three elements of the environment.
4. Cumulative Impacts.
In many instances,the City has indicated that certain elements of the environment must
be addressed in an EIS because it is likely that the cumulative impacts of other possible
development that may occur in the area would result in a significant adverse environmental
impact. Vulcan, Inc., and Port Quendall Company(together"Vulcan")have also suggested that
substantial additional analysis is required for the Barbee Mill project in terms of cumulative
impacts that future development many have on the environment. See, e.g., Letter from Charles
Wolfe to Lesley Nishira, dated September 26, 2002.
SEPA, however, does not allow a City to require an applicant to evaluate cumulative
impacts where such impacts are speculative. See WAC 197-11-060(4)(a); Tugwell v. Kittitas
County, 90 Wn. App. 1, 12, 951 P.2d 272 (1997). WAC 197-11-060(4)(a) requires consideration
only of"impacts that are likely, not merely speculative." "[N]othing ...requires the City to
consider, in connection with [an independent proposal], the unformulated plans and unknown
impacts of possible future development on [the same or adjacent parcels]." Citizens for Sensible
Growth v. City of Leavenworth and Vacation Internationale, SHB No. 98-24 (Findings and
Order, Oct. 15 1998)Here, "future development on either [parcel] remains in the category of
supposition and conjecture....[and [c]ertainly there is no `proposal' [for development] as that
term is defined at WAC 197-22-784." See id.
Requiring Barbee Mill to consider an anticipated development's potential impacts is
speculative since "there are no specific plans to review and the impacts therefore are unknown."
Tugwell, 90 Wn. App. at 12; see also Boehm v. City of Vancouver, 111 Wn. App. 711, 720, 47
P.3d 137 (2002). The court has explained that"the cumulative impact argument must fail unless
the [local government] can demonstrate that the project [proposed] is dependent on subsequent
proposed development." Id. (emphasis added). Even where future development is "not totally
ruled out,"cumulative impact analysis is not required unless there is showing that the project is
"dependent upon subsequent proposed development." Id.
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
•
December 16, 2002
Page 16
The City's request for analysis of the impacts of future development of the entire area of
undeveloped parcels is beyond what they can legally or reasonably require of Barbee Mill for
several reasons. The undeveloped parcels west of the railroad tracks are not owned by Barbee
Mill, and the development of such properties is speculative and remote. No development
applications for any of the properties are pending. Clean-up has not even commenced on some
of the properties. In the recorded Ecology Consent Decree for the Baxter properties, the owner
postulates that"eventual commercial, urban residential, and/or retail development" will occur,
and that this unknown mix of development"could ultimately result in between approximately
4000,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development." That is more than a seven-fold increase
of future potential development.
The City may require analysis of"cumulative impacts" but those impacts must be caused
by the Project or the Project must set a precedent for future actions. See WAC 197-11-060(4)(d).
The Project, which is fully consistent with existing zoning, is neither causing the"entire area"to
develop nor setting a precedent for other areas.
5. Conclusion.
Barbee Mill expects that the City will require further analysis in the EIS of the Project's
probable significant adverse impacts on: earth,water, and animals/critical habitat. We are
prepared to provide the City with such additional analysis as is required; however, we have
already provided the City with the bulk of the information necessary to evaluate the proposal's
impact on those elements. It would be inappropriate for the City to include noise, land use
compatibility, aesthetics, recreation, historical, cultural preservation, public services, or
transportation within the scope of the EIS given that the Project, as mitigated voluntarily and in
accordance with State and local law, is not likely to have significant adverse impacts on any of
those elements of the environment.
We appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to working with the City as
the Project progresses.
Very truly yours,
Davis W • ht Tremaine LLP
//tet
aNtla a�
Thomas A. Goeltz
cc: Alex Cugini
Jennifer Henning
Larry Warren
Campbell Mathewson
SEA 1300204v1 26266-4
w
FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN ' "rLLC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
ATTORNEYS AT LAW CITY OF RENTON
DEC 1 C? 2C32
RECENED
Direct Phone
December 16, 2002 (206) 447-2901
Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
VIA FACSIMILE AND E-Mail
HAND DELIVERY WolfC@foster.com
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: EIS Scoping Comments,
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Application
Dear Lesley: ___= THIRD
AVENUE
Suite 3400
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall SEATTLE
Company(collectively, "PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Washington
in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the "South J.H. Baxter 9 s= _'3 Z 9 9
property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). These properties Telephone
are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Products, Inc. (2 0 6)4 4 7-4 4 0 0
("Barbee") property. A PQC representative was present in Renton City Hall at the Facsimile
EISpublic scoping meeting the n ofecemer . Z 0 6>4 4 7 9 7 0 0
i
P g i g onevening December 10 Website
WWW.FOSTER.COM
PQC supports the City's decision to require an environmental impact
statement ("EIS") for the Barbee Mill preliminary plat application (the "Application"
or "Project") and provides comments below on the scope of the EIS. The major
thrust of the these comments is that the goals and potential development of all areas
zoned COR-2 ("COR-2 Area") will have a prominent role in land use decision-
making for the Project; therefore, to enable the City to engage in cogent decision-
making, the EIS should be carefully designed to account for the larger environmental
and development context in which the Project is situated. ANCHORAGE
Alaska
Incorporation of Previous Comments PORTLAND
Oregon
We provide this letter in addition to our earlier comment letters, which we
request be incorporated herein. Our letter dated September 26, 2002 (attached SEATTLE
Washington
hereto), provides a thorough analysis of the City's legal authority to consider COR-2
Area goals and development when undertaking land use decision-making for the SPOKANE
Project. As noted, the City has the legal authority, if not mandate, to insure that the Washington
Project's direct and cumulative impacts do not constrain the development potential of
50358618.02
•
December 16, 2002
Page 2
the PQC Properties or have negative impacts on the surrounding environment in the COR-2
Zone. In short, the letter explains the City's legal authority to require the EIS to be scoped
broadly to include a thorough analysis of potential cumulative impacts.
In our comment letter dated May 30, 2002 (attached hereto), we listed certain potential
cumulative impacts within the scope of the Project's environmental review. We request that the
Barbee Mill EIS include analysis of all of the potential cumulative impacts raised in that letter, as
summarized below:
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from
combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter
properties.
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the
Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and
construction and post-construction activities associated with any road system
improvements.
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any
access and roadway improvements, which could constrain access options and
natural resources on adjoining properties.
To the degree possible based on the general nature of the pending applcation, the Barbee
EIS should also contain analysis of the potential specific onsite impacts that were listed in our
May 30, 2002, letter.1
1 Specific onsite impacts listed in May 30,2002,letter:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup, as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues,including reconstruction of the bulkhead,debris removal,shoreline
enhancement or restoration, and related water quality,habitat,and fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction(if proposed),including related fisheries and habitat issues.
4. Issues related to impacts of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife,including salmon,trout,long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues,including water quality impacts to Lake Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;assurance of
adequate buffers pursuant to federal,state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management,impacts and mitigation if fill takes place.
50358618.02
December 16, 2002
Page 3
Our previous letters also described the development-enabling activities undertaken and in
process on the PQC properties, including clean-up of environmental contamination. The first
portion of the South Baxter cleanup was completed in a timely fashion in late October. The
remainder of the South Baxter cleanup will be completed in the spring and summer of 2003.
PQC is particularly sensitive to the possibility that the Project will be developed in a manner that
limits the development potential of PQC's properties.
Scope of the EIS
PQC generally concurs with the Committee's EIS "areas of discussion" as listed in the
Notice of Determination of Significance issued for the Project, as well as recommendations
within the Environmental Review Committee Staff Report ("Staff Report") of November 5,
2002. All EIS Sections should include a thorough and detailed analysis of the COR-2 Area
environment. This analysis should figure most prominently in the following EIS Sections:
transportation; water resources; land use; shoreline and critical areas; socioeconomics; and
public services and utilities. It is within the legal authority of the City to require analysis of
these COR-2 Area issues, and the City will find this analysis to be of utmost importance for
future decisionmaking on the land use permits required by the Project.
In particular, the transportation section of the EIS should contain an analysis of all of the
roads in the area, but particularly the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd. intersection (the
"Intersection"), under reasonable development assumptions for the remainder of the entire
COR-2 Area. It is recognized by all parties involved that the Intersection and the I-405
interchange will inhibit future development in the COR-2 Area. As the Staff Report implies, it is
crucial that the City fully understand the effect of full build-out of the COR-2 Area, so that it can
properly and equitably apportion the Project its share of the COR-2 Area's development
potential. At the December 10 EIS scoping meeting, this point was also made by Project
neighbors from the Kennydale neighborhood.
The railroad crossings that will provide access to the Project are a second transportation
issue. The City has indicated that its code requires the crossings to be accessible to pedestrian as
well as vehicular traffic.2 The EIS should examine the impacts to railroad traffic of the new
crossings as well as the safety issues inherent in mixing pedestrians, vehicles, and trains in the
same location. Furthermore, there is some question as to whether the southern railroad crossing
will be acceptable to the City.3 The EIS should examine, as an alternative, the impact of having
only one access point to the Project.
2 Memorandum from Juliana Sitthidet to Lesley Nishihara,October 7,2002,page 2.
3 This is because Barbee's easement over the railroad at that point is revocable upon 30-days notice. See City of
Renton Environmental Review Committee Staff Report/Determination of Significance,November 5,2002,page 10.
50358618 02
December 16, 2002
Page 4 -
As various Kennydale neighbors carefully noted on December 10, the shoreline and
critical areas section of the EIS will play a particularly important role in further permit
decisionmaking. We concur with the conclusions reached by Andrew C. Kindig in his letter
detailing his review of the Biological Assessment submitted by Barbee. The EIS should contain
a complete analysis of the impacts of the development, including cumulative impacts, on the
Lake Washington shoreline and May Creek. This analysis should be based on the assumption
that the PQC properties will be developed. In particular, the development of the Pan Abode
property will potentially impact May Creek. Thus, as stated in our May 30 letter, the Project
impacts on May Creek should be analyzed in tandem with potential future Pan Abode impacts on
May Creek. The same analysis holds true for the shoreline section: the future build-out of the
Baxter properties should be included in the analysis of the Project's impacts on the Lake
Washington shoreline.
Soil contamination is another issue that should receive particular scrutiny in the EIS. As
indicated in the Determination of Significance, the site is known to contain soils contaminated
with arsenic and zinc.4 The Quendall Terminals property to the immediate north is also known
to contain contaminated soils and groundwater, and cleanup negotiations are underway with the
Department of Ecology. As noted in the Staff Report, further analysis and consideration of the
proximity and levels of adjacent contamination should be set forth in the EIS.
Finally, as Mr. Kindig noted in his letter, there is a substantial amount of COR-2 Area
information contained in the Department of Ecology record for the ongoing Baxter property site
remediation. This information is readily available from the Department of Ecology. The Barbee
EIS drafters should review and incorporate portions of this record, as appropriate, within the
shoreline, critical area, and Native American sections.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the Project EIS. Please keep
us informed of your further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
E .
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M. Healey, Vulcan Inc.
Clint Chase, Vulcan Inc.
4 Id.at 4.
50358618.02
A
• FOSTER I— PPER & SHEFELMAN ,.LC
ATTORNEYS .AT LAW
Direct Phone
(206) 447-2901
Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
September 26, 2002
E-Mail
Wol(C@(oster.corn
VIA FACSIMILE AND • DEVELOPMENT PANNING
CITY PLAN
HAND DELIVERY DEV ENT
SEP 3 0'2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager, Development Services Division RECEIVED
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6`h Floor
Renton WA 98055 r x is THIRD
AVENUE
Suite 3400
Re: Comments,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, Revised Notice SEATTLE
Washington
Dear Ms.Nishihira: 98r0r 3299
Telephone
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall (206)447-4400
Company(collectively, "PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Facsimile
(2.06)447-9700
in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the "South J.H. Baxter Website
property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). These properties WWW.FOSTER.COM
are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
("Barbee")property.
Background
We provide this letter in addition to earlier comments on file, and in specific
response to the September 12, 2002 Revised Notice of Complete Application for the
Barbee Mill preliminary plat application (the "Application" or "Project"). When ANCHORAGE
Alaska
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis, the Project's potential impacts may
constrain the development potential of the PQC Properties and have negative impacts PORTLAND
on the surrounding environment in the COR-2 Zone. As we stated in our comment Oregon
letter dated May 30, 2002, (attached hereto), the potential cumulative impacts subject
SEATTLE
to environmental review are as follows: Washington
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and SPOKANE
fisheries from combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Washington
Terminals and Baxter properties.
50346525.01
•
September 26, 2002
Page 2
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the +s
Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and
construction and post-construction activities associated with any road system
improvements.
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any
access and roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and
natural resources on adjoining properties.
PQC Property Development-Enabling Activities
Since 1996, PQC has actively pursued development-enabling activities for the Baxter
properties with the Department of Ecology, other state and federal agencies, and the City. In
May of 2000, the King County Superior Court entered Consent Decrees for the North and South
Baxter properties as negotiated by PQC and the Department of Ecology. In 2002, PQC
completed the associated permitting process for the South Baxter property with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. The clean-up required under the South Baxter Consent Decree has begun
(please see the attached Daily Journal of Commerce article and photographs of work in progress)
and will enable eventual development of the property by PQC or its successor. Our May 30,
2002 letter and previous correspondence have consistently described the potential for area-wide
development in the COR-2 Zone and the multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process
which stand behind the North and South Baxter Consent Decrees. As you are aware, the Consent
Decrees describe with some particularity a potential development of the Baxter properties — two
68-foot tall office buildings of approximately 200,000 square feet each (please see the attached
South Baxter Consent Decree excerpt).
Permits Required for the Project
The Revised Notice of Application indicates that several public approvals are needed for
the Barbee Project, including: SEPA review, Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval, Shoreline Substantial Development Approval, and
Administrative Street Modification Approval. The Project will also require a Level 1 Site Planl
and a Level 2 Site Plan,2 and will likely require related approvals from state and federal agencies.
RMC § 4-9-200B(1).
2 RMC § 4-9-200B(2).
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 3
Because decisions on all of these permits must be made in light of SEPA's broad requirements,3
the City should request information now, through SEPA, that will be needed for all future
Project-related decision-making. For instance, the review criteria for a Level 1 Site Plan include
conformance with the comprehensive plan; mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses; safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; and (for COR properties only)
harmonious development with adjacent sites.4
In addition, access to the Barbee property must necessarily cross a Burlington Northern
Railroad line, and Barbee proposes to have two such crossings. One of the crossings is a new
crossing. The second crossing appears to be the railroad crossing that currently connects the
Quendall Terminals property (directly north of the Barbee property) to Lake Washington
Boulevard. It is not clear from our review whether the Project's use of these railroad crossings
has been formally negotiated, and the railroad crossing issue is not addressed in Barbee's traffic
impact analysis. In addition, it is not clear whether Barbee has considered the implications of
road construction over the contaminated Quendall Terminals property, and whether the
Department of Ecology has been consulted in this regard. Finally, a new vehicle bridge is
proposed as part of the subdivision's road structure. This bridge will cross May Creek, a
salmon-bearing waterbody, and will require construction activities below May Creek's ordinary
high water mark.
Legal Authority to Require Further Environmental Study
Under SEPA and the Subdivision Statute, the City may allow Barbee to only use an
equitable portion of the area's traffic capacity, and to limit the prospective development's
contribution to cumulative impacts on natural resources within the COR-2 Zone. In this regard,
SEPA provides the City the ability to require a land use permit applicant to supply information
that is reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision.5 In
addition, the Washington State subdivision statute6 asks the City to determine if the proposed
subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety, and general welfare and serves
the public interest.? As we noted in our May 30, 2002 letter, because of these laws, the City
needs to diligently address a wide range of cumulative, concurrent, and onsite environmental
impacts raised by the Barbee Application. City attention is necessary because the Project will
potentially constrain probable future development elsewhere in the COR-2 Zone and will
3 RCW § 43.21C.030 requires that the"policies,regulations, and laws of the state of
Washington shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in [the
State Environmental Policy Act]."
4 RMC § 4-9-200E(1).
5 WAC 197-11-335.
6 RCW §§ 58.17.010 et seq.
7 RCW § 58.17.110.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 4
potentially result in a 115-lot subdivision that is located on the shore of Lake Washington,
alongside May Creek, and that has limited and shared vehicle access.
Allowing the Barbee Project to capture the remaining development capacity in the COR-
2 Zone is not supportive of Renton's general welfare or in the public interest since it would
severely stunt the development of the PQC Properties, properties for which the Renton
Comprehensive Plan targets specific and high-profile development.
The Subdivision Statute has at least two applicable provisions. First, the Statute requires
the City to, "assure conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the
comprehensive plan . . . ."8 The Renton Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan") calls for a coordinated
development of an office/residential "center" on the properties west of the railroad tracks
(including the Barbee and PQC Properties). "The intention is to create a compact, urban
development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the city."9 Plan Policy LU-130 states
that the proposed development plans of the properties should be coordinated. The properties are
all zoned Commercial Office Retail (COR-2) and are the only properties in the City zoned COR-
2. Taken together, the Center Office Residential section of the Plan's Land Use Element and the
Gateway section of the Plan's Community Design Element show that the City desires
coordinated development over and full development of all of the COR-2 properties. In other
words, the Plan, coupled with the added authority of the Subdivision Statute, gives the City the
ability to insure that each of the COR-2 properties is developed in such a way that none of the
properties have environmental impacts that constrain the development of the other properties.
The second applicable Subdivision Statute provision requires the City to inquire into and
formally find that the proposed subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety,
and general welfare and serves the public interest.10 In this case, Renton has implicitly decided
that the public interest and the general welfare of Renton's citizens is best served by coordinated
development of all of the COR-2 properties. Without a full analysis of the indirect, direct, and
cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, it might be difficult for the City to determine if
the Barbee subdivision will hinder this public interest goal.
Under SEPA, the City may require a land use permit applicant to provide information
reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision.11 The
City's SEPA decision must include an analysis of indirect, direct, and cumulative impacts of the
Project.
8 RCW § 58.17.100.
9 Renton Comprehensive Plan Objective LU-U.
10 RCW § 58.17.110.
11 WAC 197-11-335.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 5
One of the indirect impacts of the Barbee Project will be the impact on future
transportation patterns at the Intersection. As explained in our May 30, 2002, letter and above,
the City has reason to believe that the PQC properties could be developed in the foreseeable
future.12 The City, because it cannot deny PQC or a successor reasonable development of its
properties, will have little choice but to permit future developments that will effect the Ripley
Lane and Lake Washington Boulevard intersection (the "Intersection"). If the City allows a
Barbee development that uses a disproportionate share of the remaining Intersection traffic
capacity, then the City might be forced to either deny PQC or a successor reasonable use of its
property or be forced to spend significant sums of money.improving the Intersection. Either of
these is a potential indirect impact of the Barbee proposal, and the City may currently have
insufficient information to evaluate their likelihood.
A seminal Washington Supreme Court case that provides a basis for this impacts analysis
is SAVE v. Bothel1.13 In SAVE, the Court found that the City of Bothell had undertaken
inadequate SEPA review in its decision to permit a large shopping center. The flaw in Bothell's
environmental review was that it had not looked at the impacts of the development on areas
outside of Bothell's city limits, that is, the surrounding communities. The court found that "the
zoning body must serve the welfare of the entire affected community."14 Under this decision,
Renton is compelled to examine the effects of the Barbee proposal on neighboring properties,
including those properties' development potential.
In this situation, the potential cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project are also
extensive. "Cumulative impacts" include impacts that arise because a development sets a
precedent for future actions.15 The Barbee development will set a precedent for future actions.
The Barbee and PQC properties are very similar in location and potential use and are zoned the
same. If the City allows Barbee to realize 90% of the development potential of its property, the
City will have difficulty justifying a decision to allow PQC or a successor, because of lack of
traffic capacity or other environmental capacity, to only realize 30% of its properties'
development potential. In other words, the amount of traffic generation and environmental
impact that the City allows Barbee sets a precedent for the amount of traffic generation and
environmental impact that the City should allow the PQC properties. These cumulative impacts
include cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries; accommodation
of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake Washington Boulevard, and Interstate
12 PQC has kept the City well informed of potential development. See letter from Chuck Wolfe
to Lawrence J. Warren, February 12, 2002; letter from Chuck Wolfe to City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee, April 2, 2002; and letter from Chuck Wolfe to Leslie
Nishihara, City of Renton Development Services Division Project Manager,May 30, 2002.
13 SAVE v. Bothell, 89 Wn.2d 862 (Wash. 1978).
14 Id. at 869.
15 WAC 197-11-060(4)(d).
50346525.01
•
September 26,2002
Page 6
405; cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife; and cumulative impacts to Lake
Washington water quality and wetlands within the COR-2 Zone.
This cumulative impacts analysis is supported by Hayes v. Yount, in which the Supreme
• Court upheld a decision of the Shoreline Hearings Board to overturn a shoreline substantial
development permit.16 The Court held that the Hearings Board had properly ruled that the
County had not adequately considered the cumulative impacts of the development. In particular,
the Hearings Board found that, although the development in question, which involved the fill of
wetlands, would not have a significant adverse environmental impact, it would set the precedent
for future similar developments that, taken together, would have significant environmental
impacts.17 This cumulative impacts analysis was recently re-affirmed by the Supreme Court in
Buechel v. Department of Ecology.18 Under these decisions, Renton has the clear ability to
require sufficient information and studies and to consider the precedential value of the Barbee
Mill proposal.
•
The cumulative impacts that an applicant may be required to study also include impacts
that are more extensive than the impacts that the applicant could be required to mitigate. In other
words, the applicant may be required to study the cumulative impacts of properties that are not
owned by the applicant.l9
Barbee's Supplemental Preliminary Plat Documentation
As discussed above, one of the major cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project will be on
the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. Barbee's Final Traffic Impact
Analysis does not contain an analysis of the cumulative impacts on the Intersection under the
assumption that the PQC Properties will be developed, as was requested by the City on June 3,
2002. As indicated above, development of the PQC Properties has been firmly enabled and
should be included in Barbee's traffic analysis.
Barbee has also submitted a biological assessment (the "Barbee BA"), prepared by
Raedeke Associates, Inc. The Barbee BA may not provide the City with the full amount of
information that it will need to assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Project.
For instance, the Barbee BA does not reference the PQC Biological Evaluation ("BE")
completed for the neighboring Baxter Properties as part of the Baxter Property Consent Decree
process. The PQC BE is a public document and was readily available for Raedeke Associates to
review. In particular, the shoreline analysis in the PQC BE is extensive and references area
shoreline conditions. A further area that is lightly analyzed in the Barbee BA is short-term
16 Hayes v. Yount, 87 Wn.2d 280 (Wash. 1976).
17 Id. at 287-288.
18 Buechel v. Department of Ecology, 125 Wn.2d 196, 189 (Wash. 1994).
19 WAC 197-11-060(4)(e).
50346525.0I
•
September 26, 2002
Page 7
construction impacts, especially in light of the fact that Barbee proposes construction of a bridge
for Street D that will require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Barbee's Application, and please keep us
informed of your further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M. Healey, Vulcan Inc.
Robert L. Collier, Vulcan Inc.
Clint Chase, Vulcan Inc.
Lawrence J. Warren, Esq.
50346525.01
•
•
•
FOSTER rEPPER & SHEFELMAN , LLC
ATTORNEYS AT L A W
•
Direct Phone
• (206) 447-2901
May 30,2002 Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
E-Mail
Ms. Lesley Nishihara WollC@foster.com
Project Manager,Development Services Division
City of Renton
• Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton, WA 98055 •
Re: Comments,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms.Nishihara:
IIII THIRD
We are writing on behalf of our clients,Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall AVENUE
Company("PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone in Renton, suite 3400
SEATTLE
known as the"North J.H.Baxter property,"the"South J.H. Baxter property," and the Washington
"Pan Abode property." These properties are located north and east,respectively, of 9 8 I 0 I-3 29 9
the above-referenced'development proposal.
Telephone
provided similar comments to those set out below under Prior ( 4 i 7 4 4 00
We have
P Facsimile
Barbee Mill development proposals. We provide this letter in response to the May (206)447-9.700
16,2002 Notice of Application, given the wide range of issues subject to analysis W e b s i t e
under RCW 58.17.110,associated SEPA review and the ongoing potential for W W W.F O S T E R.C O M
significant environmental impacts in the areas of transportation and natural
resources,including potential impacts to May.Creek and Lake Washington. When
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis,these potential impacts may ..
constrain the development potential of adjacent COR-2 Zone properties. •
Background '
ANCHORAGE
As noted in the attached February 12,2002 letter to City Attorney Alaska
Lawrence J. Warren,PQC acquired the Baxter and Pan Abode properties to develop .
medium-and high-density'commercial,residential and retail uses. The Baxter PORTLAND
properties are currently contaminated, and cleanup work(pursuant to Consent Oregon
Decrees with the Department of Ecology)is expected to commence later this year. SEATTLE
In the future,the Pan Abode property will likely be used for hotels,restaurants or Washington
highway-oriented retail.
• SPOKANE
Washington
The Consent Decrees are of record in King County Superior Court and reflect
a multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process to facilitate development.
50327523.02
Ms.Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30,2002
Page 2
The attached letter to Mr. Warren describes the anticipated redevelopment of the Baxter
properties as described in the Consent Decrees, as well as Renton's long history of
comprehensive planning for the COR-2 Zone. The letter also requests that development
agreement negotiations commence with regard to the development activities to follow the
imminent cleanup work.
Cumulative and Concurrent Impact Analysis
Given the development-enabling activities under the Consent Decrees and the anticipated..
development to follow,it is clear that the SEPA and Preliminary Plat review(as well as any
pending site plan and/or shoreline application review)for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat(the
"pending Barbee Mill reviews")must also examine the cumulative and concurrent impacts of
development on the Baxter and Pan Abode properties.
Any environmental or land use review of area properties should assure that sufficient
transportation capacity will be available to serve all properties within the COR-2 Zone on a fair
and consistent basis. Accordingly,the pending Barbee Mill reviews should examine how the
cumulative impact of combined build-out on the Barbee,Baxter,Pan Abode and Quendall
Terminals will affect ingress and egress from I-405, and how the circulation between these
properties may affect circulation on local streets. Potential trip generation must be addressed on
an areawide basis in order to fairly allocate development capacity between properties.
In addition,the following additional cumulative and concurrent impact issues must be
examined and analyzed within the pending Barbee Mill reviews:
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from combined
build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter properties.
•
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property,Lake Washington
Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible through the Barbee
Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek adjacent to Lake Washington
Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the Pan Abode
and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and construction and
post-construction activities associated with any road system improvements.
50327523.02
Ms.Lesley Nishihara •
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 3
•
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any access and
roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and natural resources on
adjoining properties.
Specific Onsite Impacts
We also believe that reviewing agencies should consider a range of specific onsite
impacts arising from the development of the Barbee Mill property. We are aware of the
following issues and impacts from studies commissioned for Vulcan Inc. and PQC regarding
development of the Baxter and Pan Abode properties:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup, as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species
listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues,including reconstruction of the bulkhead,debris removal,
shoreline enhancement or restoration, and related water quality,habitat, and fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction(if proposed),including related fisheries and habitat
issues.
4. Issues related to impacts of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife,including salmon,trout, long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues,including water quality impacts to Lake
Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;
assurance of adequate buffers pursuant to federal, state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management,impacts and mitigation if fill takes place. •
•
50327523.02
•
_.��' •J '
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 4
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this.proposal. Please include us on the
circulation list for all further communications relative to the pending Barbee Mill reviews.
Very truly yours,
( & . J2J44
Charles R.Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Rod Stevens,Vulcan Inc.
50327523.02
.
''' Or
-
_..., , ...e •. 4 _ -,,„ .,
.-AP,
''''F-1
• ,-,, ''''•' -'' -'t----' ,,if
.. • ,,*-0,,,,p,,,r,„i,,,,•.....r414..--"•:: „-#.`•;•41;4,!..(#t ......• s., ' cl • .- •L •- :.,-;._,. I• •-.4:.„elkw.,,,_ .. • ,,4 - -„4.-4,,,••-:..,,-- -.,„cote-
k---.;-,c,4:.•zZ.v,- -• ...,c0t4„.„...,.4.4.4.,,.-„. ,,,,,, vir,,i,:leP3 k V"4‘"r4 . . ,....4.,4,,-;! •.',... ..?' 47...i ''',, --i-z41,- ,-- (..4-:. r,'.Ax,..
- e•-•••.1 iimic In! '.-4 r:r.A..---,.., .. ..-:,.yr.„4„,.. -4, ,,-„,,,,N.••••-•.%-st,...4 L.'. -: .0. -..,•• ,...04.4,.5,1,7 ' 'i
-f•4„;„.7447.14.,- i,Pi:i„.„- ,4,0•- -4,,•'. ,A'7.4''-- .. • -....,••-1.•,•.,. .:,.,,,•...,JA74.4/*).,,,,...,4-.,s.14F. 4,7" •Ih. •',. ••• i. s. Pq-
. , • • . 104,- .,,ti"'--,.' ' - '. ',.. •i t ..,,, • .. ,p- 3*-',.,,....4,-• • 1. ,..:.,• ar.`" ' .' •
A"'• Pte !' ''''''ir,- f ,'re - '00 - -ft, t . -:Nlat,,iit",',,,S1 ',15,!...%-..,0!4'441'-4.T:i A i • 1 --;`47.1.,?'41,,:**='.aj,,,4.4....$3'; ',tah.''.4,A1 411,t1:4 • .4'
-,.1(.. . ..4.,,-;.., . -- , - -- v......4..,rv.to .e,t, itti.-41-v4 ., . •.
., , ,., , •.•..,,„.', *...t=- .-,•:,-0.,!,,,-,-,v J.11,71 4;•,'s..... 41 ,7 - 4Er.' .'-t
t'''‘4" ' • ... .,, , -' '4 ''! :r .4"kt:,117.11k.tdt'll_A 1.M.:.',1'•..
.4. • 5 * %.......,. ...."'''••••1:NA-037.1,;','''',4,,,.„.‘ ''':' lte.V7:1 ''. .,f:->.',,,4"rf.t•i/'• • 'IV' 4.6.4"-r• .'r ;.'"'.:'&'-':',13V--.f,'`:* . :4‘13 l''. '' 1 IV-.
„,,,,,r,y. .,..,,,,it, +.1,-t..1i, ,. V't 4 .,:ye,,,T,'„ •'i, „ii .1p.,.
'A .• .ii 7,5',...4 4.•' .".'...11':t:,..,'-..-7411.-4,3*.411--,•0....1,4- -.,,,..e )..a 411.4. , .....,..4 f ,, .:•:'Ni'" ilr,•' . •i.-1-,,'',. ...• t J. r.1
• -;-;:.,i..4•AO If-, :4-•,-.;•:- l' '94 '
1 . ,.0 .!4-7 . ...,,,,,,,,c,-,..1:4,-:.-- -,,,,,,,,-,..140.1,z itzt...t.-6.1.2. -,.; - 7i^4 . - ••' ' I ';44..P.,-
. . k.1.2.• T.,---x-•A - .-•-A , • - , ' -•fh, ,,. - -•;,:-:-.--,?.,--,,:,,,,,,v...,- ' ••,,-. , -.1, • •
"• e .4 .,.. 1,...,`„?...;,, 4, , .:ot-•,,,..,,,,,,,6..,„,e.-4....-0....„-• aic..7."..,..A.,41* • . --4, ..A.4-- . if • Iv.,.4.: .• :-../...,.--,,wr.- -1-wi .‘„,,,- -.• fel,. 'ti.4 •
.--. -i4.4..4.%.:-. , 4 d-',•.;;44,-.v.?.4r7-!.•,;;.' '• 16:*--i,V;1`,:-',"..':-...W1ti t;'4/0,1
)..,--.---:-.1,'
i' 4.7.a.. kn..,•, t.t.,0454 -
''l'. ' i' 6'74V:,.'I ..'s '‘ '''',..11:f;4;1.1t45;;.;.41'7"-IZF4-'4‘1r;+044.06e'l* '''',. Y!,-;t- , ..;:- 1?'f'.%,,•,;i:.'''' "',-.',"›.i--'4-.;-X‘',W,C.74-71V- _,...i•'''',N;;,S,,, --,_e.-';.,:,.%,14. ; , I
'•- -,i,A,,,r.':,.,`,..40,1';k)1,--,,,,,,,,,v....---• •P.ilai•. ..fr;
= ••-3. -.,fi 1!,. .--1/4
•-., .tr.,wtAt.,.. -,:c.„,.„,!?,„,;;;,,,,,-.A.,7i:04rio;,......11 ii „.04,,n,11,4 ' • 44, . 4.. •,.4.1:- • - •••••.;,4,..,,.cn,„,....ir.-5,-414,•,?:,..,::544,L••..r.e-p 1,,,i,-,„•.- ;..,,-,
4 . _•
...,,,,,,45.442,4,41':,,.i•,,,95k,4 .,.:-,t-A-1 4,r, - 00 L. ii 4
.5$ ,. , ..--vi,ik. ,,,kA,A ...• „ ':'l'.71%-:',`,1t;r/1.140,N,-;--44V-.tr"4%.'1V70.4:kt't r k ke'l'4-)' - ' ''''V: . V'.., y4I,Vf, 4,ie,d'a.-1,-.---,,i-.•.4.. . ' ' -
,..,..."4-,,,,:01,..t. ,:,-`,,... - - - •' -.1.4,..1,9,0,,,,4--,:4,,,fht,1,,,,..-s ,...:, -4.), ,,,.J.._ ..,--, ....,.t.,.,.., ,
. : '-'•:,'Iril'43,fg--us-',-'2•;‘:'3".•1,kfk:k, -4-`... ,'.fi'i•, i ' ' .i
'''ir". .41-'4' '.N..' '-c•.••iteMit.41:4.4„44.144.„11r•-•ip.t.,•k--.-44;..,0_- - •-44 • t.., *-,„/.1-.. .•
• -'-.',-rk,,,;.;:.:14:-/V4V4,--„AVi,',, 0.,i---fp. -,,
fA.' ••?',/..._.„..,1,4%,..4v,,,,,...• • •-36.,41.....3 r i•:, ' '.. ..-%•'1:i?':44.11-117?-v1114.--4'it'4'.?•,•?‘•if 4-- . •'gill
,
v.: -5.i. • . ir • .
.. - qi,, , , ,..
. f•-;V''*i ta,,,,V,a17,-tA,A4 ,,i4,..t..,„" ,, 'It 4..„„4,-L.•
4. ,,.1:1,-,,„".,,- ',,,a,frog,sv., .. , e,,... ,•••:.,.. .,::;:.;.:::: ,,,;"13.,,f-e;.'F4.1741,e1-4 it'ik...*13,1.
t• ,:ma,11.*',,,,?4,t7,1 .17-‘,,,...-.ip,sa,. ..t ,•.:,,,f;,:, ..,,.,, 4-,,..,, -it.ifIt'.ts,...,,,.,,-,::';14.'Wk.. 44Ziktv....0,,,,, ,ft,,,,,•7.•!.9ia.".1..:,.i,'
-: '-'-'14v4t1i4,Fp.'..i'•ifgt1..ytA,N.f--k!':..,4..a.'4.,, r. . '.--1,4444,040-Cpjiiii ... •,,,‘ .;;',."- ..
-•.._....,,,...., ' ., .--•- ..444.: ,c.,4,4,.. ., t444,,,,,o ... .4 to,-.• ''"•
l ,„%.1,4-4., , ,. -,. ...„. ..,..' , •-1441• :•!..44..,,,,,i, I. .4.,..; ,
,4...,:,4, , 33, ','•,;,--,',,..,..-'''',::,',••••4' :''' ••t„ -.3. i,......44,„. .1,1,. _
, • . •- '.•PRAti,.1,1,,'::V.,,,..4-.4, 14,•. - •,.-%,...,,;•••,„,:, :„, , , • .‘. ,... •. .•....,......27:4,44,...-,,,,,„5-,,,N4 4_,:44,-0,4 -4,,i. .-- .4- . ,
• - ....- . ••
0;T;'„ii.,•-•4"1.4i.4,,,Ikie.4, •,..4,41%,:, }4 •4 '4" * i tif:•:*`:,...-- " •.-.:-:--e•-..,'=;;,,;,];,:;';',':r4-,:1-41,, ,,,,L'?-.2t)c.if,,,,,0?),?k,,,,;,.??:-.'4,1 t.-,, ..,.....1,-....„„-o... ..:
••,. ,,,,•„•.; . -.4...5;.,;,;. •. 0 •,.7 .
,-'1,...1.t." ''- PI-•i.:;',1.0•4., 1-1.:1-4". - i X t-'1.-...4'.;AP
. . y`.-:',.";!--,,.4,,,,,,?,,,,,k,...ft.i.•ip-iii,;,.-n....c,, ,,s,-,,,...,.. -04f...f:. o. .,,,V.
.-'-*•••.-1..- x.44, --.-,',.•,,L,1$41'4 .4•444,-..."-,---• • 'r;*.%--„?.,•„4•'•
‘•4•3-:.--_,•••••,•••e4",.'0.4-144r.....„'-..;.fv:. ...r.,$--..4*.y.). 4A.' -
fllt,
s:.
- -0
Ir.*..,..4..t.,1-- .44,-,4,....&F.0."-• 7,.• - -, o• 34* , . ,. ,...,.......,A$„.zo,-*x. tp,.."..,-i .c., ''''' .'
a.•...:-;-'. -. "lit'''.5'1:.-'47 - ' I".-'• .. f. ...t.'e: .4%.• '-.:'..::...-i::v,ge:Ap,..37 .,,,....,• ...44 .. •,..r',''' ..
,,,r.f.-„:1 '4,-.4ei.-A4'.5:,,k47...,1:;,4t,tt:t'.,,A:?...7 . g '. •
-•'-.-2.-4--f,.e...4S-.,,le,1.e,,,,.,44•.i.,.•f 4.'.-g l4.-4-4-4i1,.4•P4••,••;4t&i.,-k0,i•i-,.,.,4•,.•:,14-..-.f.4.,k,-.•,M,,i4_'1i.7,.._„{-.4...1E..,4-x'.•0.i,.,.e.'„,•.•4:*.;.44*4,.-:4.:..z..‘0..;.',44,T1.0.'.--l-i p,N-c•f..•44,-.--4,44t4,e.,l4.',,'"-,,„.t,g,.•.-'_.,,.'P„1;,.,,V,4A',i ftf
i•••% „-..4,,,,A-,i.,,e.I•,'.`.• r '•,'..,'*..1,..i.t--,'`,,--,"-.,.,.'•.;"....A-','*;.!-•...'''-.!.'''-';•..,',..'';,•''',...'-',f'.,I'>,--1,4,e,.,,:-%00:2.ri?'4.14.'1v..'
ii ' "f.1.4Q',PV1.4CW14,4144:14,1'4,441-;-1,N4-"',.".-''','i4..'%r,'1-.4.4i,,7t.M-,rA,...i..1''-1..,,M,..:.,'A,•i'l4.t.-.t•,4,!,''',-.s's4.'-%.'-4.'Z,.._',.'..,..-.1.-,1)„,...,.i,",.g,.1e1,4,1,t/'t,04.104.-*•1,....'7•,4.•....-
".,.k-..,--,-,,.A,,-,-•''-4,:1,tt•.-.t-,.,s4':.-'.
, •!..-v,,-14.4,4%• l• - - :--,..;•.,t, *;„Atikii- v....,1.A.17.-,,,,:,...1.-if..,... - al%-)P,f r,
.'f.9rett; •..0..-.„.0,..5,,k•i.t, • -,-•-•kI•;;TOZWiti.4.&•!-W.It,,,,,,,.1p;.„-,k..,;;;,. .4, cf.,.-. .._
,,,,ti.II.p. %.,"..i,;•7,.-•41-t; •ys,;., tio.At.9,4Ar-,rifi...:
i
..,,•;,.!4.41,14444-4..„4.:
i 9 6f. ...L'i,:;',',A3'7=%-l'A-"raOr'ff-e544,
,iptirl „„,e-N•.44 "._, ,7*.•'.....v1-:-,:•::-;:--r..:,,,,..:5,'Ap`t,..d,izt
:.-ttv.:, ,...,,..,:•:-,.-,.,..%- .fr,,r,lo.,, .'-. I- „A „•••- ,,,,, .0.'.4:-.,
•
. ‘i, .. e.... s"‘"'" 1-4-^ • •.- 1,41,rict,t._ .,::.•-•,,,,,,.-,,ct?0A.4A,,,,;••,44,,. ••••••s. •,, . -li p:,..,...•,,,,,e•
4, ,,,),A, ,,,,y,,,?.;,,p;-.11,,f-:3.• .;- - .,it; irxr„?',..*,;v:1',',A1'4- i ,,,r-.4i,. .,-,., --d-,,,i,,......,,,,r;-0.4k,v„,-.,,,,,itr. •,,, l't ...- ttr..
,-,,,,,,k tr.41,711.p.,0>,,,,,,t.---... r,i,,-.•-•-..NeR4-• - -•,„,41•-•ite"...•.461.1 ?,,•,::,,-.4:...,,•••?$m4,-4.5.4-k„..-.,,,;.t...44,-4..,,,t -- : , ,e ,4,- r:,,T,
w-,,„ ,-1,11-,';',.4 ' cer-t, .-`. 4 4,-14,.'-',1f.'4' 4•4"ih . ,N,•:.1.-•.i..4,N.113..•.•:.-t•-'.. .;•fy,,k ati› -- iv•• e.,.. '.'4-,;•-., ,•,,,,,,x',4'
4 ,q..7.% -.7:-4qI, , ,
.--1,ttif,4":-IV.Ve-fivezb •/....-ir‘'N':+5r,"•4...''''' -"" -1... . i.':4.-',._,`-- -..41. . -•-•-•:-.;:-., -.:.i'4.4Kstie-40t- ' -.... '-5,-.- ce. Irt-
,• ,-. • . • - "•-''•?•'.Y.`,,,,o,A',',4'•p":_••4-,4t.:. ,- -N.,•'-':-,,';' •4'1''''' '''' .4
.,) ..7.4 ' .* , .4‘.-'..,. ,t-V,-'1 -4- :;t4„..l ''''" ''..:4-4.V.'" ..14",?Att:',46..•'' --:'
V,, .„*.04,.4,..,,_- f '4_„---r„„:•\14.iti.' -,• -;,.- ,. -:. . ':;•„7"3.:.:444'1,'",.'4,r.s4. '---ii._ „grot,10"-.• •',F
,-.- 1w,. 11-,:t.-*-4-. 4 '.i, ':''''','' '.',I,'''''''k,1,*•61, *Y.7-eiVr-7,.,Zfa4-'40R},{i, '4,7,
- .-. lt,,,,,,-:'40-t0'.1- •Igisg,g,"'.,-- .'':./.''"--',4**14,.4,1.."';/4 411,i?'?...-4`1;PI‘ 41.04`-'7-
'-e.;;VV.11.141,:a• : i r.,...?- ,•.. ..,.,',,...•••••..;• . .""•.;',,,*gliltth,t',ls,•-%04-4z,0- •'.. _:''.-,'-{,,,,*•Ati0...4,Lir-0,rf
z.etr;,..:,P;',:,‘rPtfi."'.f,•"-:v,ir•T•;0' k,-,,.4 • t, V it,;413k1, •." ,iS•b53V2i*V.it,••;•44,4- :-.4 -.4..1..
4,147. '';V:,14"1"P-t:':•,-,•',yr ..il, 0 1.!•:-...k;:;:gvg'-.....!:;. :..,-;;-. ., *Avie,',.A:
•
...4%.,--..,s, - ,',-... • ,--4p4...-w......„'V.4..,,. ' ••*••••%.,,,, .- ., A ' -4.A......,r4.,...,4,,,-0,-;'••• -'43.-aty,...1.• .!;,. :441;...T.,.12-Vi-'•4,,..--!*-'i'-_ ..„.*Not,.\,:o4:,- <
,J.•,:"-i-.-::',-.';az,-.tut:•'.,,,Ntt•'-t.•-,-.,.„'-:titg-..91.,--,',xtte,e,,' - ti '' :-."4-i-4'•,.4•;•.14-g*--8,4,•qi,3-,..--eK4R-,V•ft, ,.„-A.W.44,4 .,'' „,t4„...roto•e..01, • :
. • • -r•--‘.?. ..siz, ,4,-,:,,i,i4t. ,,,-f..•!...,. -*: Af•i, ,',..,Vi';', •
,-•.,.-.12,4i4.)-4,po.44.-4-;•.ti.,1,„„_-„,-4,-_,..*4 4 4;,•‘. 4s-.4.w7T-sp,-,. .4_-
; 44L.. Al,---.•• ,t,„; .. A ,,, . , I, ,,_ _,,,, 0., ‘r
.-f,''...•..'•..."...0:---'"is.'07:x,--,''.---Irl'A'Z' - ,'4,"Vs't‘trpivrAp-.'"1 '
''' ,.. sc-e:','''V'''*1',2..1"=".Z 7:7q...67.,°>'44-'..*7' . '- ,'•'''' '''.' S- - ..' P-
I ....q.."'I'Ve,'' '',A401•40.4.?.i+; , •••••,...,-;.." ,All.1„5„,,,,vra,,,,,/.
A;11,74,4•04:'..4-. ....W.• 0..r...r.„'. %V...f.• V);..,qtr..."'„,••••.' •
• ,..,:e'VC1,ii.C.P./...'t-A.:4.P."--;;•'-'40';:t 4'41.''S''' ‘',.$.1- „, ..... ..••'';,.Atirt,t•'+ 1 .tir'
. .....7,--,„....,. ..,.2,1/2.,..,,,..ri...01;,-.,.....7.1 .4.1,-.T...zri -..--.,...4 -.,,,e4,,,,. ••
... -:•,...,,,-...• • ,e.-1,-.,,,,,,y,tp.,-.y..-3- 1,.•1,,,„ •;., •_,,,..4g,,ft-;;:,.., .„Nr, , .
., r._ .,..,,,..,;,-,..,;:k.,,,,,,,-w-0.. gip,..h..i„..:,-,14,,,,,,...4.p., . .. ,:‘,1::./.,x...-4.,:‘,.*,:::2-,:ikm,v 4::-' ;..„-,._-%,..,... ,_ ,r,1,-,:t•--.-..*•-,44.•, '',0t- .
. ..,:e4b:,,,,. .s. ,r4,,,rt;,. ••••••.;.4,11.„;r1:;,-.7,.f:',, 1. .-i.-4-siv,,v0,-..4,..•.."......1., ,',..•i•?,',z,,Aur&•,-:', ••-,4,4•F.,'4,...-.",..s..-.?-;.)• : - ke.N.,..*4-/ :"
g,,,./. ,. ei''414-4. „,...,,,k• , 71.-,:,,,r?..f,ii,i^ . .• . ,.•-.A ,,,; ,. :-i-s-,-1;lar-te,:,/,',tc,,, 0='''''-`;, .**,,:,-,- •.',..:', ,,,,*,.: -..:::, ,, 1. _..
.,0"...'•• .,. ' . .M".i 'T7--,- .,eitY.f.i,t,%r ,. 4.• Sk4 V-a.. ':':''I:'4.;''''
,. . .. ,..,,.,...•,,,r--1.,,, •••,',;'.:,•,n,k-.1,,i,,,,?.., .,' ...,,....., ",-......--1-„,„.---'6.,"
,,,,,t,1,-`1/4_-.1,.j„' Ir,:,,,,,,..3-t,'`.1.• r %. 4, ' iji--:t::.-,4V ;-'' ',-7-' ;114.-'- A•-',.„1:•1",..„ .•' -•• ''.--,•'•- k,Tr' .,,•
. .
-.. 'AFA,-,N.A. It-rl:,_.-,:, ,,,•:' ""st".;.N. ..•i*'''':*-* , ;,.,e.".;It:-3,•"4'2'N'f-A.,•‘;f4::' :' *•*,.'"‘*--;-•-t, "'''-04 ""'74••-' 't
. - _qii mit „, .11,• - ' -..4 ** '42:‘ ''..', '!$•1•'-'*" i " '1-`r.-Vc.,kac••••';', 4,-4-- ","„.414.• .‘.•'• li--'-‘,.---,•„."Alii,.. ',,,,11"0's 4,*.- • . le
i*, -1,1•,•.1 .-..;- ..-1,,,,e •.,.- -..._.-••=-.r.. ..,"....,.....,..,. . ,... 14.' L,t, ''.`,.%.-'.,.. ".',4.'"-;i.::. - 't..i:
''.'.' ' ' . -.. .175.4tr,e4.' '....' l'Xgigi , • .4.' •1,i--1'.. .4*4-,0igf'. ,-1`,e..•,4,;1-,. ':, .'4 l,
Ifeig,1%qi',„' 1....,,,4 ” , ,....,`,4t4,.,' X '• . .).,,....*,,od. , ' , '14,,4*
.'::.* -:411. .k.e.'.,:,,,41trt'::'..z.!i. ', ,.-.. ,..;,:r,...,;,.'„...,-i-:-.0g0,0ig.i.iyi,,,,,,:i..r..1.--4-.,. -1/4.',.0,P4 '",^ '' • ,
•..,, _*%.,..n". ;,,,i'..-.04:;-.1,-;— ..,•,. ift--,it4s,?4.:-.i3-L•kt„,t,.
1
,_ *1?,;P:II'4.4.., .'? ,-/: ,,.,. 4444:- ii;,::,-- -woi--.•--* .,..-e•-:_Yr,:: ,. j.‘:;,„,.:,.,---,-. - •
4t
Is ,
0 ,47i,`,..;,, :,: 4,;Is', .' it::, ,,„ ,r...,, :.,.:,,......4. ,''."-..,, ,!;',"-,..:Ap.A 0,4- I—
.'4.g..,,,,:_...-:,,%..i„m"..:sik.z.,1.-.4.i.,-..-,.‘ve..";;;64te,t4Ity,.• :4 ,,..r. - - .,--.14,-;-,..: ,.......10iiii7WLS2A§;:-,-.' .- .91=7"Nif
,..: „--,4, ,`. .' "
4k,
•,...,,i;-:,,t4 r',....-,„N.,..;•'-‘7S -„Ei;,-41 .''..i'-':N0,...0-"-' " •% ---". , •,• la. ,," -.... -.: -. -• •
,...- - ,,.
-,. ,..*-,,p,..,.•,-4.4,zr.i'v,1,*1•••,-$, ;".0,--4.$4,... ......•- =, ' .
. ..,
...- 4,,0-414-0-4'4.4,*aff,t•I'--ir,s,...:0.t.git',•-•4•• "'• I•,..,0,11111rer''' tt" ifi,„01...,,A04/
.•V...it,f.00 ;,....t.,-„4344:1-...-n,',$,,,,.%4 ,t.4. .4,1441,
'.1,- fr,
1,f
' '' v.-.t4'../
. ,.4..70", , ,?4•,,..,"' ,,4,' V:•41"_ .''''-'4' 14.
• '
;'1,N f,......- .„...,.....„ni'• .. felo ...,-
1.4. .• •. ;-t-,pts , ,
•-•-'..„,,,..,-.,,, ,?., .,f :
,10'I, -
-„-c.f?,
leri..1.`ab'•4,f, ,Lt.1
4-1-4 4
. r '
'I: iiiN-Zr*:**'-''Zi!s.-
'`':-.,• '''''.'".•' #4). • At--..',W•F''' t't .'' '7:j'40,'' 1' .'-4't'iki L::..'„.''-44.
. HiN0.1 . '...5'-' ,.'''' '14'015.sttly,,,,Mtki,:.e^!,,Y,.4- ',4t*:11...t4":?r'b,,'
.,,,. , . .,..„7..,..0,,,,,7:e,4.4„,:ii, .,,iiffsf, ,.:\ a;:,`,;:te •••lt,i',44.-41.;`„z?,;:t..., +.. ,..,,,, - --,:•,,, 74...-. %.,...N,
...- ,ijj ''jf t• „.,,,,."
(-41: ,-..,..,.....,,-14 .$1,A1:Irre-A,N„,z,,,,74,,_ -`4. i'' ,••-1.4.4. --,-• „,,,,,,,,,e1,, , , , . .1 :,..1
..., .4.-,-...,..-...„.‘7.1.1......„K„.1%....„.•-... • .,44.....14.....v.,•,.,i,-, • 1,";',"..v,.t.'W, i'.." ,„ ',,',.,V., .
•••• go,- 1.. , .,„,,,, 4 "#.144,,,,te l'`i",-,;;•••• 0,.. ei,.. .-.
,.
...=-7,,,4,1,:',u'''..'''CIV.;!4•!... ../0,4t T--", ..t,,,, t rt.0'. ..-:-4 .• 4 ...* -44 ••• •••'•, -- ••• - A.r,i 4,'r ' --- uiii—'4. i-** *'
4. \tit
. ..,-,...zpechr.--0,r.,,-,....,--,,,,.!R.,. .: . ..-Av, ...,!.Aer,,:op_:Aao - 1 4/1'.0'.1.••••••;' ''''''' ?:-Pr....3.
. ' 8'i t ;'-''''''''-' •i'` le',.". I'l
;',,..; -1"1`.. .'74....'''So'r tltir 3.17,'.1: • '''''.V'i''' -"'Y-' -etl' .A.4:-,4LN,:,,k t-;..i N','4" *- ',''t ,W,z.-.' • *, - '4.kt•'• '' ‘-'-• -'rt.."'Z---s..,
171 ekt
' !"?' - '..',..4..1 ,r..e)14%...riot..--.,..-... -- ....,14...40440,. 't.g.,4.4-, -,%*-AY,',.v."44-'-'74-, '.!:,.....--,,,, t .,- , ..- .'„, '4,:.* '•-‘':-.'?-i..4.i''''4.7
•
,:. ' k,2, „ •I''- '
"..•••••;:t.:, ,:. .,..fix.-:„ 71-g- ,.',,,,,,%,„.t-1,..t,.-',,•i.-••,4-7,:P.,',4•.,,,Iii,-'. ••-,..;%0!*-,4.- #$ ,,c1V,..t,,,,..FT1/4: 4:A1.-ti *.:'-- k A,1,:it..., .-.....fri. --Itti?::itt.
i.-,::-.-,, --.4.,..,: , .1.,:0- '..24,1A-.b.--',--:-Tv?,i ,. • '1 • ',..v.ii.a.k. •A,4
" ::. 4.•• •-....z '--::-:, -''''. .'l
fl. ., ,•;141, :-..4 4,,,,„ •• .- V 1,40,4'.;•••-, .... Tr'..:. 'N:it.' • '''.IL. --',*•4
.V...-... -•••Lf.'",i,,,.--,1•7,,, ,'"-4%,,,, ,t9".44:':*:••-,.. .ictiVe.3i,„,,.r..,. 1"z•••4( 4 at.,.ii e' '.7; n1;;" 414 i _43 S '0.4-4-^-1,':', ,,,. ,,!)7'.• ',,Va.•;, -• .- 4.
,.,,,,,.,t;,,,^: •44`,,,i4•4X',...-,, ,A,`X..,1.!,t., )1•,--441q....1,iii, ,',4 114X'''';;4:4' li *.4 /t- 444 414 '; . '-''".' --'--.... 4`.'',,,-LV1,-,''' V'.. ‘' ',1,...-.,-'
i .
'.2111--'A 4.-‘..:e1:4:'rn.IN tiloili-' :.i.'• '.- $,A,,,A:.4.-.,,,,,p.. 4 . . - ,tx, i.,,,,i 4. ft.,„,-?.. ibA4,0 . -.,,P-fk. •.'.,- -,-.
. . .
. :::•imr::,,f41R, •. -,. .-.,. . . .Ai,.1.4.411`,-. - -ii....',14',,r.',- -.1' ',, % f •g *: - .,,' ...; ' '•-• !t.:X.T.. .4,-ir,e.-,..'-44.:-. '•4.).‘ -. 4•--;*
, ,. . ....-, .
. .. •, .,. . . -- 44. •_,•14.1.„.....e-4.,,I...4-4 i
• ..4-0,-.4..410,4,4, • ._ - ir.s..A!' •:_- A 0./of. ''''' t i''7t•4.• .4' ' ,,it lak;ki$4,::',. . -f.. .1„. il.,,..-'-o-:'.,&sk.S. . ;i-L..-,. ;Nit,
., -.,...„t„..;41,....,.t.7.4.,..f.44914,...„„,,T„,git•,.--•. 4-4 1'.1-,1;.?„-:., Att,'44., -t•
.grstArk3'.',. af'••• . •' '.. 4• yi,\+ ei""^"e•• * ti"-1,i',Li! lz,4:,•vi,t,„:, ._„,..i, ". ,It: .i.i.
• 4,•,..,--„,75_,4ftykr4L7,4_,, .14...,::..,,scvirolt„,,,,,, _e. .,..i., ,,,,,,•.,:lte1/43,xt..:(„ , 1:4 _, ,..... ,:,., .4„tieot•,..„,, :e.4•,,,,. . :„1,-,-4„,-,
.'.::•',',.••••''''-'-k•I':-.'.*:€61441,411,4*.k,,,..•„:*4:-.:•1.-.,-...- .--.4.1".. ,c,...-,4-. ..el,...iii.,... , . ..k• 11,, ... ,.... ...„ ,..,,........,.......... :4-44,0,___,,...."-
•••L' •• - r• ta".N,- ,r'.4.I ,_
•.".';';',.4f d''''.1'.."Til `4•,.-C".3t"i-,,('''''14-4,•n""Xi'.', :‘,.`-&-zez.47:, 4'.T.0,,?.,1,.0•1„-A.,44b...,•.!7,-, • 4. :il 1,.- '.2:-.,..t.'
,,,N4t,‘,,,,,,t.- .„ Ae.,7..--4v 14-<,,,t.: f•. 4*-k' . • ti ' 1'14 -,2.'
':47 .... ., lit'.1......• !......,..,.,,, .-,A, -+,'4.-- .f..1
'''''''''',"''''''-'''''' ''' ' - .-'4-'..-# 4''','-'''''-',e., '''-' P-4,.-A 4,/,,4 , , • ••,,k-44.,r-41..-c---34,-vt-,-.4,t;t15 ,-..•• - I ;'-F-4k7,,th .-'1: ' '1, p.....4-.91 k...-,1 '.4, _•,-.!:41 14
L -,-,-----x‘I, .tc.,S s,„_;-•044-1,,,•%.„,,rt,"4,,y-T .1.,,,tfy -,,,I. . I, .-41:,
ii'.`;.',-:-.1‘.'.."-..-.; -..‘4.-:-. '•;:-, •- - ' - -'4..-L,'.*-1-,'4,-;,...„:74%;.4,443 4--,,V1.'4',-*-',i*,,- --,.,- -:4,1-4--1,- -I're':-.-..;.e.r, •‘. 'r.c1-::•;.t--4 h.,.-.•6 t.-,- , ‘'',..'s 4,-Az" ' Z c " r•-r..... ,,''. ,k,-.44
V,-1,-,: ...,•<-,'-'-f:--, . - -''•-...-. . • l':::,'''',.•'`'-_,-•t.. - -••11,:iic„4.,li.'_114;?-4,.:,-.,-% '!14t ft.",-,..•-•'. ,,,, -4-,1 L-.;., .,..,..4,‘,A
,.../.. .., t I;,.....-
3.:!-74:1 VV.t':•••-i- ,1,Pj %.,.!ki .!-- •-, . ,. - .
, •',"4,),-;,..`,...-,W0-, ',any,,,,,-?..w.-.:1..;,,,,.., ,...b!,,,c,:.4.,(i,-tp.sitir,...0.:.1.,:...,if:,-- ,y.,„ . ty.....-1).. ..,
:,•,,,.-.-CrL."-''."'•-,J.-"---••• . ''',,?r4..4.4-1,41;. 4,,,v0„,,,-:),-7‘'''-'1'.tf,.-C71!.,,f-4K •,--,,...:•f.j-i 4... i...4. ....?, - - 1
' ;:fv;:r.;,--ti.'ir4 ‘1,4. 4. -,411„„,,v„..,;,..1,-,„„•,,, •44,..•,..k. ..... •
• -.•,--.; 4 ...t...•,...44 -. .; -
4 k: ,, i.e y"} 1 * . S ;';;t
1. e6 t
*�R � fE+; RY,s tit
p ah
•
Nole
., p +
a. �. e-.•,. `�..'a• :' i'`.e kg %1 isf , + r �ii � ,Xa- .: � y� fit ` f� .�. 'r► . ;lyik`,. •1i .
td
,, .. f f.: � � !I•;rY l+d1' .fib�,` �?.� .,r { .yy� i °�r.��f.� Y.''., ' i� S�''��ti ,
a � R a• 1 !b' a t. R! •4i'�.}, '•l 9�5-'. S s.. 1r :.
el
4i'-'‘..'1l‘,,.i,.lt4_fr.,v'-.,:.,;,.-...1'k,i-t,t
t v, ' + •.f'. f(*.�� y, tAl �7 `•, a
x 1 ^ 9 •• r
.4ki
.�{ t3 1 E`
y
f ki i s 4 4 ` .1,,, 1. 4' '' f 1 t e.L,3 4 14~1 t 4.+f'; r 4:" a,.
ILta.. Vi'l 4 4 i.1 0� �' i i 4 ki ^',,,,, t f t 1' r4`I ' ; "a
•
kii A i„ •
,. iF , ,'' ' ;1*,'�`� i' f� "/ i •"' �� '�a ,d�•ri Ate• 't�r. �4� . 1+111 i ,• ``
'1 P:. .', 'AI' l ,•.i y :. i a, q kt' `k e4 3 f f . a e 1 r k .. �.
tl, r • .' l 4 ,4 .l i.4.„-, �1,- q s. v.7, i t t i'f t�4 y` ;at•,4 �, -
} f is i '' 40v. 7 ;1 * 4L t
` t ray + ;_! ii ti ,, .S �, .. 4,1 . I,. t, { tit
...
, 't ,» ff_ 't , o. , f5J! ,r�' f k y S, y - f 1 9 '1 ,.- 11
4.
ei
py rjj.}` - �,:-RM 't*'�/ �4rrL.;`� (J• { fi •4: "el 9 p' ,(1+. 4
At l j+kr� •5 •�: t i��,y S'� f? ii�, ?I I ,i! N 5� i a
iii,
tin,
,_ 11„,.,
, , ict
0
,;till 164.
�.. .c A
+ �6'- y, •r1 it ems �i ' ,''�„'' '�� 11
r h 4
,‘ y a• 1 S *Ji ■ Y�
f'ir''.' ' V')P i- lir 41144 '':i '''' ..1 I
,, +iv
4
I.
•
4$f t
#. ,,
;� Z 1,1 In .ail ...yyy.fI
F
I,. `. . f -` i , a
i '' ,.
4. .
▪ 1 �6ii
n
`•+ of 44._*✓ ,T - p 1 ,. �* T 0,
it ,
..,f
kk
# fey, c�...• X { ' s. 1. {t j I+,, i a(.. ..y:
,,ear Rxt 1 /Y r tl 7 ri Pt��'I f ark
R y, p
e 1:'4" v- '' }. 't •• I Sa_ i 1 '1` Ilk,
�: , :te iN.
r * • � .„ta,..•
j� 4L, k , �if •
I a :y
' %4 t'4k 4 f l‘I•:'
'71"i 147:4( 4 (4. i it , .3.40
i-b 1 i'" 14,1 i' !1� �t� 1 t IN i rxiba 1 s i.
{ „,4 ai
A lt. 'r .- ', p p
1‘
{, 4 IFS 1 �j 4 € y'1
i
•
I,.v'. i• 1 ."1" r _ ..„..-
4•...‘..4..,......p.. r
. i, ; ; ,
..,,,,•.,-,T,7-• •',.., .'-',',..26:1;01-'•'..,4-f";.•,ti.t.,
! -, y
• '}a }yak
.j' ,; J i
I 'ir. . • -.
�- 1„ r't ,.,;:if.";,., 1 i
jrw
,*il'';, :.,,-,,,a,c.e-i--.. ,:i."41.4,',.-,,,s1.:;'',.--.E-r:1:.',i;,, ..•,. .- 11::::,:N7
..,..tii4v,
4 .
.1''',T7''?`:'>/,±',,,,"..*V'Ij'Alk,,, "\'N.,. ; 't..4,,\s."4teli,42..f.''''' kt,:i ' 2",'.
1,4(
.,47.-_,..„ .t.4.,..,. ..,:,i.. ,i7....NANk.... ....Arg-,_‘.,...::14,4 ''- „. ;,.:,,,
.+A)';-'*'!.1C....*LA174,..,:4:1:::;.:i e!'):Xi._ '•fAiSt:,,,;;T:t.%'47:,,.-.?:,'•:•.,7
. 1x�4 }i f�5,a '.t w'ir i7,1.,'+ry'�;' k�",s7.5fk t {j,�!
,t. i,. pw.t �t `e ,.•.;vas '''w.c s, ;, K°k. ��,_,'
• .
. •
• .
•• • • .
. •
•
•
•
•
. . .
. • 'D it4 i L_Li ..a. c:3,L3s.".smo„... t3cr Ce.-yyl Mt P/t.,e_ .
• 1 . •
7 tz_9 12_0 c. --e... •
• .. .
. .
• .
•
•
....
. •
.• . . .
. • .
..„ .:.,
. •• • . .. ,..,:;,y. ..3'.,: :•=.s._:,t,,,-._:ii-:-7::1:7:;.1,'..:,:::.;•%,,T,;.:*;::0?,..-i-bfi.9...:•••..:r
.. . . ...-• ,•. .::. -. -. :.,...•-•.,.. •-•.•..,.::-•'. •.••z;•-•.--•:;: -:..":- • -..- - '. ' -.:. ..' '. .• .:: . ......1.....-". .. ..O
r...t• :, . . l.. • e. n...,
a 1. ..
.. p.?...i.. rfr:-t'...:-..Q: • .-.•. e..:.',n.....:.; i..a.,..il 1 1
..‘:,.i:"......:
- ... ....- :-. ..--
, .Continued from page 1 .. .... , ...
t•.
,
. . . .
• .•
• - •
!. •• .
• • • •
1 , own the southern.thir.d,cAlecl tik6'"' -... :
• , . —
ceanti .. ... .., .
to • e in - -----/-:,_- . , ...Barbee•Mill:site,- N.viiich:•need .. ...,.
• -
.: very-little clean-up.The Cuginis2. :-...•
1••:.--are seeking peiinitS to build town . , s.
' - • By JOENABBEFELfl-:- -• -site for the State Department of . . .
'..•hoines on.the Barbee Mill 8.0. :... •••••. • •• journal Fear Estate Editor •...•.-. . Ecology Rather Allen s company. .
•••• • Port Quendall Co.'s 00..an':Up. •
• - . .- •- ... - ..• • -- - • :. .. ..
,• - • . : „...... . • .... . „ • • is starting promptly'4.teir-reCelv-t.,. ..•.': ..•... ...- •.. •
:..•start also doesn't appe#tO signal.......,...
' •'...- ' •• '''.•' Port- 4iienilalltr,cv •hie the last required perMits,P...,,
• .: . Patil'Aliell S• • . .......• ;;-• the•-ij. •.Army Corps of Engullee0.:.••••• - • * ••:.'Preparation..to .s ell..••th0....site '.:.7.......y.•
:• .plans to start fa thanindre- .-P0114.7. .:Li:L.0 ... . .. .. .
-ut- .this summer
lion:cleaiiiiP*4.:Weqlr'Of-Ff°11. 1:. •..-.-- •-... ......, :.. ithoUghAllen spOke:smanlylicljael-...?....-.•
i • . - .;: . • . .'•••••1\tank p*asse-d on.Sayiri. whether J.
i'•••!:'•niarlietlii..g'•Of the.TioPeliY•lig...i.!....:....:,•
• •"• .soil t the ko-acre Baxter site on. --•i•-Sue C.44.sori, economic •• ... •
RentbiiiLakoWd4iiridtOtilkut.o.r.7 deyelOprdentadnisinistrato5...said .
;:. oCcurred., • ... . ••••• . ..•.
. • .: . .. .
:„..frait‘thoscompany Said;yes. f.04x.; ,Port: Quendall.Co..promised.a- •: '•
'':•: • Word;circulated;earlier,:thlS 3•..,..:,:.:. .• ' Work *tit•hettir-s60-1....on -•eleah-.up:When it bought e prOp-. •: • • -.
r...;gunimer.that•Allen"i iepteSent*1 . ...:.
.•i. . - . .• ,•.. -'.. • •• -:- •'- ...'" ." . . •:2060-grid:f•Tthink-they're, • .
:,,,'Atiifefitit sseiiiit*Ii.*K#OPYT:;•: 'eql.!1' -• ' - • •"tin nt.''-1-- :'.• .- 1:...•.•tives.had.put oiilfeelers lbea'buy.7-:: ,.'...
.-• ''•-• 4:fro-•Pdxtett Cave.•...--.keeping that coninn ...p t.,...,..,W--4tCr:: 01-WIl',:-in,--allite i'-,- ?"' r':::TIA":tnxtei:niticiOtty ..doom- - - .er..Nank responded yeSterdy.-:.-...
li:•,re.ittoto4doi..-,-,0-.-..-- -4:7:-.-:'.4::4111.4-::.:'.. -'r.--...'f. 'thirdiif'1.ark-Wgif6' • ' . • .:•Only that Port..%1Plidall CO...is..,..ta......k-....-:::„.-....
4.0aiO:i'::irhe:gtidetq:,4Pxt*.0::Y-lik0;q.t•hon••.• ,',:. ing••actihn to 'realize the full •1-..,:.
;:y41.t.tififaf.itilMii-she-e- Wittiht.:.••:::Woxiii:.as' :Port QU9rid...q... ..that..:•: ::...„. ...,.putential: of thQ.ProPe0Y.: • . • .-:.,...
....,,H.. it_'-'4:1:11i!,:fpil-/0,•-• 1,:••01.4"-:.,,iii.„§...;:igi,...fij...,64...:.,:-.:-AD. . ...T.4.,-.go..Oult tii.:reilej.:e6lfopiAtinctoet.i.:, .....: ...-... E., rtiiiiyaliktiiing.pprt..Qtiew.--,..
'gtiiiladifor:if-ti.f.;::.:i0fOlgiltf,:igig9';'..:;"iiilg.6..i.**4'-PTi ,:c.:t._.,..,wenif,...,.... :•;;;, r•::-.clallt 'can:do:•.to. rea146-...pie;
''''' tial .iirii witt.(16;".he:Said,-,:::"
:e.. 60,1'.0.1,41-•k,!•-4;:)**0".P0t0.4s.;•*rq .,,,ili!,_,,.. ...a,,, :-; ::: . :,.:.;pcitep,. .,..:. . .....,. .,..._
P - I'AitY6'.Iwitial "I'647'''alq:Ilibte...gfAiting:::itil,t e-:m1 : .:„. ....,.
'sv.' -ortg PP 4,Pi.',-.,•-• ;4,-,,,,,4,ki-::', • -•*.,,is' ---:•••••-••••e•F:iy,. •1"-figiadle,'-'4fiet•-..;--.-.. .?-::.-..XpvinDaruels,presiiieriforth... 6,:',:::•.-.-:: -- - -
'....a.Wastannf, t'ai;atedl.Ifttifoir7b/di-.. i590$::'•.-before.i-„Ile;•C)....--•... -1,:-..,• ;• • •;i-••. '''...!Seattl • deyeldpMent. .firiti:; of
•...'47„.. .„,..:.:......,,,,, :. 7....' .--4-,• ••••••94-i;... ..1.-ni46,1LOSif;^4414i11.4.4,:g14r0:::*.'..S. :'"•,,,,.. ":.1' .;
;,.i:Nitze-Stageh&C.0:;•.Saidlistirth,t,...•
,ialirrat&O.';,Wq.4.001PV-09''''-a't1P• Kr .”ft-VV-1`1Wit6"'"' '.. .- • •
'V.....301F3XE',v:-..••:.,,Ahr61-1K6i•,- 1,•- -- -: .,only,.4 e,..' .-•. r,„... •-:-
F.K.itqaeVF.V.1 ;-„'C-*Igf •:..,,,,,f-dr.p,:iw,,:t...; ..:,:,..--- ,..,.....,nlysirivis. ... •. • ' haS•approacbed..Poil'....0.0end41...:-:.....,' -'s''''' `• '•' ' ''' •••:`'•''''tgfoi4d Inn
:51 ion: •.. .11 •: ,.,..s; ••.. ,•::•:06:0out.trYingftOuyithAOrt0:',..'....:.
1.':611-4. tiKA-Mr1114.... ''- aillhil'Iiii AltatMEARtakitr5-'.... ...-.-.:%•'....
--.-'ity but Port Quendall Coihasta:. .• •
'Ikar• - k4.0):.-4,11,g-410. -:,,---.-a•c:,?-:...--.rti--. ---'..",..-- - .-`*alikill4§i*;.-:'11.J:.-:-,:..
:-._Aallau.2,„1,:::-.'.4--'44..q 74t--_-.:':- ^ --'"---' - ' ,.-4't..-::. ., ._..: --7, _,,,-...-ai,, : -.- --s- 'v,- :. . . '.:: :iisilit!Pfl6ct...I..: ;.: - -.....:........: *:!;::,...-..-:...."‘!•:.'
': ''' ''-''---4fla 11 rm.':7.--' ifie'Vetift6V..,--tuWgkifei-Afid euglniAttifflek, - .. . .'TheSr..liati6::ii0t:aft:ci.60-#.:Pfix14.1 ,;.:::"..
''..-.•:Ititrbitilt-eTiffirrt"peWYse':.- .1r):!:.:fr'" :,..9.P10.,r46,1:0.):5.,__ zirF9.'!.1:7:110,—.,.....,01...,,A.4..W.„.t.r.f.''..... : . ;•'.1'.:..'ni'.....aiket,..".-- fls.atireli- iicf.%:, Ttiey.i......f....:.
•-•,,. Starting the clean- up -tw:--7elxiqc,4TNRI,.74.,E,TI•gig...:tt?, . • 1.:::::haven1 .Offdred...lts-'to'•-its.......VV.. 6...'••••..-:.......
• it• • ..-•••• •-•'• •gilt I ''"••••d'adliiie",safa;'Iiiillioii ..eleatoilk.1.4q...P.1.0.w. . r.....4ppiriia644.theuitu:0-.3etaiu.i.tiaje..,:,.:::;..c.::
fu n. .
tiiVeol.burn,--refaii4g6 .7i5v.:Ih:6-: -,-:-....!,..-:,..e.;005ile.qo,-ipa02,;79c9fy .:, ; .• .:..,ifisatis8i6n-ind•Ahe yhasieh'..t..Sait,-..,,.i..:•:?
....,•.... .: :•
. ,.•:...they're willing: ..deal- • .. • -....... ..,:-
:
i:;..'••-: Port•-..Quendall Co.:7-&..:lead• •......
. .. . . .
•
• con-
tractor"ifinthe:cleafi-up is Thermo
•
•:-.:• 17te-tee.-Thd:Wdiii(bivtily4M4lik‘:---:.•
removing Cfe6Sote:- and treil.t.'-.•••• ...
.:
• • L.•:.tachlOropbenolfroM•eaklier ling.t.,--..
. . .•
!.....ber operations.;Colburn said.. . .. .
. i::-:•: .toe Nabbefeld can 6e,i-eaheilli.t•..:. •
. .. .!••••• (206). 21076518-or 'by.e-inail'...‘ai•
• • • •• •• • •
:•:.'•pe@djc.com.• .- •... — .. :•
. .
. ,.
- ' • ••• • • - • .
:•-., , • ..• - • - •
•
. •
•
, .
•
. •
• .
• ••
,EC I� D
s• - in Kio ..County Suminor Coutt Cier!t's Olio : •
....'''''-') •• .l
• • . MAY: .18 2000-
•
Cashier Section'KNT
2 • :
Superior Court Clerk
3 •
•
4I . .
i
.5 1 . .
61 • EXPO4
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON •
• 7 1 IN AND FOR KING COUNTY •
•
8 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF •
9 ECOLOGY, NO 0 ". 2 - 1. 17 7 9 - 5KN
j Plaintiff,
10 1 PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT
v. • DECREE
111 •
•
PORT.QUENDALL COMPANY,a Washington RE:. SOUTH J.H.BAXTER
12 corporation, PROPERTY/RENTON
1 -
13 ; ' . Defendant.
'•
. • - • .
• 14
15
,
161 • .
1 •
171 .
18 1 ..
1
•
191
20
21
221 • . •
23
•
' . 24I
25
•
-, 26 .
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASIIINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology
oxD4'0117n •
South Baxter - Olympia,WA 98 504-01 1 7 .
• FAX.(360)438-7743
•
•
1 � -Property would act as security for certain South Baxter Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of
2 this Consent Decree, Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded and-of no further force
3 and effect, and the May 6, 1992 Renton-Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of
4 no further force and effect. Comprehensive summaries of project area historical information,records
5 and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report(Woodward
6 Clyde, 1990)conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree, and in multiple documents prepared
• 7 by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present.
8
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT •
9 �
41. Defendant proposes to acquire the South Baxter Property(along with the North
10
Baxter Property)to facilitate eventual commercial,urban residential,and/or retail development,
• 11
either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development
12
Project("Project"),including adjacent properties,which could ultimately result in between
13
approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development at the north end of Renton. The
14
South Baxter Property, along with the North Baxter Property is anticipated to include approximately
15
400,000 sq. ft. of development.
16
42. In 1989,the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan
17 )
affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993,extensive public
• 18 �
hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the
19
i general public concerning Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning
20
• i Code amendments.
21 0
43. In addition,in 1996 and 1997,an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS")scoping
22 !
process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping -
23
process involved significant public participation, including mailings,formal comment, and public
24
meetings.
25
- 26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 9 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-011.7
FAX(360)438-7743
•
1 44. Any property development will be completed.in accordance with the Renton
2-I, Comprehensive Plan and area-wide zoning Center Office Residential designation: Subject to the
3 requirements of the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, such development will include
4 I permanent public access to shoreline at the Baxter Property.
5 i 45. Any residential townhomes or condominiums on the South Baxter. Property will be
6 I built over structural concrete parking or other structures,placing the first occupied floor at least one
7 level above the soil. •
' 8 46. Two office buildings(approximately 200,000 square feet each) and associated
9 parking may be located on the South Baxter Property. The proposed buildings are anticipated to be
10 i five stories, or approximately 68 feet tall. Parking may be located as the first floor of the office
11 building or as separate structures.
12 47. The.development would be designed to take advantage of the desirable location.of
13 the South Baxter Property and will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Redevelopment will
.. 14 facilitate permanent public access to.the shoreline(through a gravel walking trail on the inland edge
15 i of shoreline enhancements and observation stations);create a connection to existing recreational use
.16 trails, and create transportation and parking improvements.
17 I 48. Development of the South Baxter Property is expected to create a significant number
18 of well-paying jobs and spur development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues
19 would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington.
20 ' 49. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act("SEPA")
21 i environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has
22 I been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of
23 Nonsignificance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H.
24 !
25
26 !
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 10 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
u � '
V. WORK TO BE..PERFORM.ED
2
50. Upon the Effective Date of this Decree;Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action
3 Plan described in Attachment B, including all attachments thereto, according to the schedule
i •
4 provided therein. Defendant shall submit as-built documentation to Ecology to verify construction of
5 the cleanup and mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan: Cleanup activities include
_ I
6 ! source remediation, site grading to facilitate site redevelopment,soil,capping,wetland mitigation,
7 . and confirmational groundwater monitoring. Source remediation includes removal of NAPL from
8 ' wells (BAX-14), sediment and soil excavation and off-site treatment or disposal,and in situ soil
• 9 !, mixing(stabilization). Source remediation activities will occur at prescribed locations according to
10 j the Cleanup Action Plan. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize
11 disruption to the surrounding community. As such,the actual schedule for site cleanup may vary to
12 facilitate this coordination.
13 51. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions for the release of Hazardous
14 Substances covered by this Decree,other than those required by this Decree,unless the parties agree
15 to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in
16 accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted
17 I pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Cleanup Action
i .
18 i Plan(Attachment B).
'19 i 52. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant(Attachment C)with the Office
i
20I of the King ng County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Cleanup Action Plan and
• 211
•
ishall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty(30)days of recording.
22 i VI. ECOLOGY COSTS'
231 53. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuantto this
24 j Decree: This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the
25 I .Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996.
26 The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT.DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 9 8504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
I
:= 1 •
,
j 1 ! 1.07. . If the Court withdraws its consent,this Decree shall be null and void at the option of
- 21 - any-party,-and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs and without prejudice.
31 In such an event, no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree.
4 I XXXI. SEVERABILITY
, -
5 i 108. If any section,subsection,sentence, or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal,
1
6 invalid,or unenforceable, such illegality,invalidity;or unenforceability will not affect the legality,
1
71 validity,or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any other section, subsection, sentence,
81 or clause.
9 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE •
10 109. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been
11 i entered b the Court and the closingof the propertypurchase is completed as defined in the Property
i
. Y P PrtY
•
12 Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J.H.Baxter&Co.
13 SO ORDERED this /6 day of /'h-a-a_ ,2000. •
14
15
1 G4e,-Kin County Superior Court
16 w-- .f
P o T 44.-
The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date
17i -
1 specified below.
181
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY,a ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
19 ; . Washington corporation
1
20 . �tBy P / By: 'r*cc� l4
21 ; Pn Name. fA
m C. xi, 1i' Printed Name: T16.+, s /V;r r.l/
22 ! Date: 7.. j J , Date: /r/cr. 's ,;?&e 0
• DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
23
24 ; By: < Gam`A6-400V-----.7
Printed Name: 1
25 I Date:
261 ,
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 27 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
l' CONSENT DECREE Eco
PO Box�i0117n
PO 4117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 9 8 504-01 1 7
1 FAX(360)438-7743
i
DEVELOPMENT
Barbie Mill Preliminary Plat Development Proposal
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Public Scoping
PLANNING
CITY OF I'ENTON
To: Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager 9. �� ;^
� rP' . ,�IVED
From: Nancy Denney
3818 Lake WA Blvd. N
Renton, WA 98055
RE: Public Comments
Environmental Impacts that should be addressed by the EIS:
Environment
1. May Creek is a wildlife estuary to many species of animals and birds. If
anything this parcel of land should be restored to its original state from
abuses and landfills by previous owners. I feel that not all values for this
piece of land are being considered. This is the last tract of land this size on
Lake Washington and restoring it to it's natural form would increase the
chances survival for many wildlife species from the ecological stand point.
This is their corridor between Lake Washington and the May Creek green
belt east of I-405. How will these species (birds, fish, deer, coyotes,
raccoons, turtles and others) be affected by basically paving over the Barbie
Mill site and building 115 townhouse units with four streets slicing through
the property? Do the 50 to 100 feet proposed urban stream setbacks
provide adequate green spaces to support these populations? In non-urban
settings stream setbacks are far greater. Does proposal on the table
represent the best practice for a viable salmon stream? 50' - 100' setbacks
with numerous housing units proposed don't appear to provide adequate
stream protection. The townhouse units with the densest population in the
proposal appear to be closest to May Creek with the smallest stream
setback.
2. The proposed public green space in the middle of the tract doesn't appear
to provide any parking for non-resident users. Will the entire shoreline be
protected for current ecological values and be open to the public?
3.With the proposed number of housing units, will the air quality issues be
addressed? The proposal doesn't offer many green spaces or vegetation to
offset the increased air, pollutants from automobiles and buildings. The
proposal does suggest restoring currently impervious areas to native
vegetation within the buffer area. Will individual townhouse units be
required to landscape with trees and plants to help maintain or increase
current wildlife populations?
4. Currently, May Creek and the Log Boom Area support many species of
birds. Will the 24-hour presence of humans in the proposed townhouses
have a detrimental effect on the birds currently inhabiting the mouth of the
May Creek and Lake Washington log boom area?
4. How much light and noise will be generated at night by the development?
Presently the area at night is very peaceful, quiet and dark. Kenneydale and
Ripley Lane residents currently enjoy the solitude.
Traffic & Transportation Issues
1. Increased traffic on the ramps to I-405 Exit 7 and possibly Exit 6 at
commute times and back ups resulting from on ramp monitoring lights.
2. Increased traffic on Ripley Lane entering and exiting the proposed
development and the new proposed entrance on Lake Washington Blvd.
South of the May Creek Bridge. Congestion increase for current Ripley
Lane and Lake Washington Blvd. residents and current pedestrians and
bicyclists on the dedicated Lake Washington Bike Loop trail / walkway.
3. Increased traffic on Lake Washington Blvd. during commute times will
exacerbate current issues with streets and driveways, which currently do
not have stop signs. The posted 25 MPH speed limit is violated daily with
driving speeds in excess of 40 MPH. In the past 3 years, the City of Renton,
has given its approval to, 5 big developments in this 2 mile lake front stretch
of Lake Washington: Alexian Townhouses, Pinnacle Apartments, Coulon
Estates, Bristol Apartments and Clover Creek Housing sub-division. These 5
high-density urban housing projects have greatly increased the traffic on
Lake Washington Blvd. Lake Washington Blvd and Park Avenue N currently
are freeway escape routes when I-405 has a back up. The increased traffic
will cause safety concerns in the neighborhood with traffic speed and
quantity of vehicles. Increased traffic at Exit 6 will create safety issues
for students walking to and from lower Kenneydale to Kenneydale
Elementary across the freeway.
3. Impact of the proposed development on the current railroad right of
way, and possible future uses of the railroad right of way - rapid transit,
rails to trail conversion, etc.
Neighborhood Issues
1. The views from the dedicated bike/walking path along I-405 to the North
and Lake Washington Blvd to the South need to be addressed. Lost will be
sunsets to the south over Skyway and nighttime views to the North of the
East Channel Bridge, Bellevue and all views over Lake Washington to Mercer
Island.
2. Neighborhood views from streets and walkways in lower Kenneydale and
along Ripley Lane should be evaluated.
3.This proposed development would increase the usage of currently
overcrowded Kenneydale Beach Park to the South and possibly even Gene
Coulon Park. The proposal as it currently stands appears to offer minimal
beach access for the proposed 115 townhouse units. Would a log boom
swimming area be provided? Would this become an additional city park of
Renton?
4. Who would become responsible to maintain the mouth of the May Creek
the Sub-division tenants or the City of Renton?
Utilities / Construction
1. What will be the impacts of all new construction for sewage treatment,
electrical power lines, phone lines, storm water collection treatment and
transfer?
2. What plans are made for a 100-year flood of the May Creek or impacts to
the water supply capability of the Renton water system in a low water year?
3. Issues to address during the construction phase. A) Traffic congestion
caused by vehicular traffic and delivery trucks entering and exiting the
development during peak commute hours. B) Construction traffic and
noise in early morning and evening hours on neighborhood residents and
animals currently inhabiting the May Creek green belt. C) Construction
debris, signs and tools blocking existing roadway and bicycle,pedestrian
pathway. CO Construction materials polluting May Creek and Lake
Washington, E) Contamination from the Port Quendall site to the North
contaminating the property of the proposed development, F) Restoring
habitat for animal species currently inhabiting the Barbie Mill property.
Possible Alternatives:
• Use the two existing entrances over the train tracks as access points to
the sub-division rattier than building an additional entrance South of
May Creek
• Provide money in trust to deal with issues created by the development:
Improvements to I-405 Exit 7, possible bicycle pedestrian overpass at
entrances to development, possible widening of Lake Washington Blvd
(turning lanes or an intersection with a traffic light)
• All underground utilities for the entire site
• Transportation plum-that encourages options other than single occupancy
• vehicles to and from the proposed site (limit townhouse garages to 1 per -
unit)
• Do what's best for May Creek Estuary and Wetlands not the
development. The current land has been permanently scarred by
development uses of previous landowners. Provide adequate setbacks for
fish, birds and other wildlife species.
•
Lesley Nishihira, 06:49 Abi; 2/13/20, Barbee Mill Scop1.4 Comments
To: Lesley Nishihira
From: Kim Browne <kbrowne2@mindspring.com>
Subject: Barbee Mill Scoping Comments ,.l)/k -U oZ. O'-/O) lop
Cc:
Bcc: KNA Board
Attached:
Lesley,
The following are environmental' impacts that should be addressed in the Barbee Mill
Environmental Impact Statement:,
* fisheries
* view corridors
* traffic, particulary through Kennydale streets and the Blvd
* Construction routes should be limited to using NE 44th Street, not the Blvd
* water quality
* wetland
* land use, consistency with adjacent uses & plans and policices, & public access
* plants and animals
* public services -- schools and parks -- a trail system along May Creek is included in
the City's long-term trail plan,. The proposed development should not preclude developement
of a trail head to support the planned trail.
* rail safety -- an analysis of rail safety at crossings into the site and along the
project perimeter should be done. I have spoken with Mike Rowswell of the Washington
Utilities and Transportation Commission. He said his department would be happy to evaluate
rail safety and make recommendations. Call Ahmer Nizam (WUTC) to do this. Mr. Nizam's
phone number is 360-664-1345.
A copy of this email will be submitted in the mail. Thank you for the opportunity to
comment on this proposal.
Kim Browne
KNA President
6 ,
DEVELOP OFF NTON lNG
DEC 6 2112
Printed for Kim Browne <kbrowne2@mindspring.com> 1
December 13, 2002
City of Renton
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Dear Ms. Nishihira,
I am writing this letter to address concerns regarding the preliminary proposal for
development of the Barbee Mill site. I am a neighbor located at 3825 Lake Washington
Blvd. N.. My house is directly South of the Barbie site and is accessed by a single lane
road off of the main arterial. For the last 20 years or more there has been adequate space
at the end of this lane for a turn around for all vehicles.
Recently, this lane and the area for the turn around has been blocked off by the Barbie
folks. I have previously contacted your office regarding the lack of space for service and
emergency vehicles. At this time the blocking of the lane is still in place.
I would like the committee and your office to identify what will be the process for
allowing this area to remain open. As it stands there is no room for a fire engine and/or
Emergency response vehicle to negotiate a turn around to remove anyone who might be
in need of emergent care. The garbage trucks are now backing out of the lane. I do not
feel this makes sense in regards to a fire truck or an Aide unit.
The area where the turn around has been for the last two decades also has a large
collection cistern under the black top that the city replaced about ten years ago to pump
sewage up to the road. This is directly north of the enclosed pump station at the end of
the lane. Is this placed on the Barbie Mill or City property?
My concern is that there be space at the south end of this development for emergency and
service vehicles to either exit through the Barbie development to the north onto Lake
Washington Blvd.N., or to negotiate a normal turn around prior to entering the
property/development at the southern boundary. O\
W\ P�
OP
pEv C`jv O
D C rilta
c
To the best of my ability, I'do not see where this particular area is addressed on the
Project Description. Please enter my concerns and provide me with information
regarding the proposed development and/or plans for the southern border of this project
that abuts the existing laneoff Lake Washington Blvd that has emergency and service
vehicles blocked at this time.
Thank you for your time.
Sin erely,
A4 QL,o_s
Gil Schoos
3825 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056
VgL
®� CY p •
�7 �N.
pep -Nroivivilvo
December 12, 2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Development
Dear Lesley,
I was unable to attend the hearing on December 10, 2002, and I would
respectfully ask that you keep me informed of the next hearing so that I may
attend. I own property at 4008 Meadow Avenue North in Kennydale where I
grew up, just a few blocks from the Barbee Mill. I also own investment property
in the Highlands, as well as property directly east of the Barbee site which is
approximately eight acres zoned R-8.
I would like to say that I fully support the proposed development. Since the
1700's the population in the United States has doubled every 50 years, and we
are on track to double again. I would refer you to any demographic study, or
past issues of the National Geographic on this subject. I would also ask any
wetland biologist where he would propose we put people in the future? If we
shrink them into smaller dwellings the cost/foot will increase. People are already
finding it difficult, if not impossible, to afford housing. I find it difficult to believe
that anyone would expect the Cugini family to let their hard earned property go
fallow. If it is so important to the environmentalists to preserve open space and
wetlands, then let them pay the Cugini family what their property is worth, and
then the environmentalist'can keep it as open space. Of course, it is not that
important,to the environmentalists, especially when they can have someone
else, i.e., the private property owner, bear the brunt of their hysteria.
Wetlands are comprised of three basic elements; water, soil, and vegetation.
You can build directly on top of wetland, still having the water and the soil to
filter and purify the surface contaminants; and, to a large extent you can add
back the vegetation around the buildings. Bellefield Office Park, in Bellevue, is
but one example of this concept. Other alternatives are to build on pilings,
thereby allowing no destruction of wetlands, and also allowing light to reach the
•
vegetation. The myopic view of a separate wetland area that is devoid of any
buildings is simply old and increasingly outdated. We must in the future look
towards building on wetlands in a manner that preserves their function, while at
the same time allows for the increase in population, especially in urban areas.
Government can no longer afford to be all things to all people. We must ease
unnecessary environmental restrictions in urban areas to promote more
'affordable development so we do not harm our most precious resource, our
people.
Lesley, I would suggest that you make a proposal to the City Council that they
enact an ordinance to allow for the transfer of development rights. This would
give planners another tool to shape more than one particular parcel at a time.
Planners could then create open space, preserve wetlands, etc. They could
also decrease the expense to the City of Renton of providing services, by
clustering;or increasing the density of any proposed development while still
maintaining the same net density in a region. King County and Redmond, along
with other cities, already have such ordinances in place.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
AivIgkhArcAfir .
Greg Fawcett, D.D.S.
P.O. Box 402
Fall City WA.98024
(425) 222-7011
e-mail Fawcett@nwlink.com•
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
Jennifer Toth Henning
;Fah
ty'Faii:
- `.. .: :fly Dental
' ':Greg'nL:
Y' .,; - t� Sabra s.. : a 'cett;D:D;s'':
' Fawc .
33609 Red 'j O.:130 l029,
�_ .. :,. . . , ,-`. 1` _ .:pall' City od.:
— ,City"WA 98024'"
MARK HANCOCK
PO BOX 88811
SEATTLE, WA 98138
December 10, 2002
TO: City of Renton
RE: Barbee Mill EIS Scoping(LUA-02-040)
4
As a resident of the lower Kennydale neighborhood,I wish to ask that a few items be
addressed in the EIS for the proposed Barbee Mill preliminary plat: w•�,,
1) TRAFFIC o'P4t•
My primary concern is about traffic through our neighborhood, along Park and 161
Lake Washington Boulevard, and short cuts through the east/west numbered
streets. During construction,there are a significant number of cubic yards of
material that will be hauled to/from the site. In the proponent's applicatio there
�' iv0' is a discussion of traffic on Park. I don't recall the exact number of yards, ut as I
r,,oru o' recall the subsequent truck loads and trips were over a thousand. Hopefully, the
R �y�ot City can/will direct all construction traffic to the 44th interchange on I-405, and
keep contractors, suppliers and personnel out of our neighborhood. After
construction, residents of the new development will probably drive through our
neighborhood to get to/from the 30th interchange when they go to/from.the south.
It would be helpful to quantify those numbers, and see how they can be
minimized on our residential streets. Also, creative design of the access points
to/from the project along Lake Washington Boulevard could minimize the impact
(e.g. if there is no mid-point access point, as was proposed in the prior mixed-use
site plan, but only one at the north end of the project, it would be simpler for most
residents to access I-405 at the 44th interchange,than drive back down through
our streets. A mid-point access point will make it too easy to cut through our
neighborhood.)ALS* A No1SE issue Ai Co -O alma Eo uP(nog. Iu.,N g4lwv A.M.
2) Comprehensive Plan
This project is far from what was envisioned on the property in the City's
Comprehensive Plan. How does this proposal vary from that vision, and how
does it address or miss the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan?
Furthermore,this site was one of four properties that made up the overall future
Port Quendall integrated development. Now that it is being split out, how does
that impact the future of the adjacent sites, both in terms of coordinating plans and
♦
,,
Barbee Mill EIS, 12/10/02,page 2
relationships between developments on the sites, and the ability of the other
properties to do significant projects at all (e.g. will this project use up available
traffic and other thresholds such that major improvements to roads,the I-405
interchange, etc. would be required before other significant projects could be
done. If so, is it appropriate for this project to go ahead and leave the needed
improvements for the remaining parcels to be stuck with?) Lastly, one of the EIS
project alternatives for study should be along the lines of the Comp Plan vision,
and another alternative for study should be along the lines of the most recent Port
Quendall proposal.
3) CLEAN UP ISSUES
This site was originally proposed to be developed along with the adjacent site that
has clean-up issues. Now they are being split apart (is this appropriate since they
have a common owner?). If they are split apart, what will happen to the site next
door? How does going ahead with this project impact the ability to get the clean
up accomplished next door?
Thank you for considering my thoughts.
Sincerely,
Mark Hancock
Nes
City of Renton 'c<Op
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION OF �� ,
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL Dec
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Public Sco i ja�Q��
COMMENT FORM
Name (please print): \dr 11(a eck�"1
l
Signature: 44- S..- -
Address: -i o q otmAzi c) /v p N 6
Phone: °j s ¢� o o �j`3 E-mail: tec ke.t t_110,klC._l • e.
What environmental impact(s) do y y think the EIS should address?
I iN�; / C.r f' - c\A,C A. c,_ s-e 5 - 4- A-4 ct•LcT-&i
�4/I i t/ft e_,.;, ,17 -Re)Wu S\ti o linae_ t�P s ,t`i� � aLv.A I
01 re_oLSe-ck wikert., pc d 1tr ,
4c
1 cI I\ a. / S z vV1 C
,l Yt.1 cv y e,\61..ct.-cto_t Ci Ga 3
You may submit your comments NOW or mail to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m., DECEMBER 16, 2002.
bevel.�lry©t M PL
R '�NN/
City of RentonDECC)Al NG
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLICDEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION DEPARTMENT
� ®2002
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL VC&vE.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Public Scoping
COMMENT FORM
Name (please print):„Lib s ,,;</ \\,2,4 W
Signature: C "' ` ) 41,
Address: 4/ert, O ��J • go- . T_'
Phone.(', ) 79 E-mail:
What environmental impact(s) do you think the El should address?
,e�,}. n ,�- � �c:C'z<,.o/ s(J
6-1)-11 ' e-A'. .4j mac, 1
(1117/1- se, "\--"' )3--)
You may submit y6ifr comments NOW or mail to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m., DECEMBER 16, 2002.
Lesley Nishihira- Citizen comment:BARBEr"fl 13 AELIMINARY PLAT - „_ „..._.. Page 1
VNOFAci#4
From: Ine Petersen <webgirl@seanet.com>
To: <Iishihira@ci.renton.wa.us>
Date: 12/10/02 2:46PM
Subject: Citizen comment: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
>TO:
> Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
> Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
> 1055 South Grady Way
> Renton, WA 98055
> (425) 430-7270
With the planned addition of 115 more residential units along this 2-mile stretch
of Lake Wash Blvd North in Kenndale, I would like to request that the train speed
be reduced to 10 mph at the northern city limits. This requires coordination with
several governmental agencies but should be included as a requirement of EIS due
to the increase in citizen safety which it would provide.
There has been a steady growth in this neighborhood which has already increased
the car and foot traffic in the area, especially along the Lake Wash Bike Path
which follows the railroad through this area of Renton. More people and more cars
means greater chance for a railroad accident. And now there are plans to dd
even more homes . . .
The train reduces its speed to 10 mph at the northern property line of Coulon
Park. To lower train speed to 10 mph two (2) miles sooner at the city limits
adds about 7 minutes to the train times through this neighborhood, but it would
add immensely.to the safety quotient of the area. I think this should have been
done at the time the Lake Wash Bike Path was created, but it wasn't. With the
growth in the neighborhood since that time, it is time now to do the coordination
needed to reduce train speed along this 2-mile stretch of Lake Wash Blvd North.
INEZ P PETERSEN
3306 Lake Wash Blvd North#3
Renton, WA 98056-1978
425-255-5543
webgirl@seanet.com
n�R •
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT EIS �'\"`° AGENCY SCOPING MEETING
DECEMBER 9, 2002
NAME (please print clearly) AGENCY/ADDRESS/ PHONE/ E-MAIL
1.
M1 litz N1c..FlL okb Cy of k M;seE /3azo sE, i a. id ,t uJ,. akos V 1
2.
binlN MAN6whuwc A1NZN&V ,,( -C AYt‘iic V!& 4,( v 1attlucjzoNE"i-,
3. /
"(c. 5k-y T CA,/ c l?p,.._ko_.� 7:- -_S ---k- \ : r..- ^�-
1,��
4.
6 M lx 1( al ti d�t,,a,v✓v 6 k w�P , /4.,q
5. i
6. J,)-14,..t,- 7),-)44Gv i 12--'-e( "_ ` Ac(e %, ,- ,-,/ .
(4-rr kiat-t-br4 O-r .K, k , 42 -may- 42 t4- MA11 - -&� C. O1 - c.a,�
7. 4z5 Q-x3;' /o s
�( 1 ---t eVICc c,c,. f D R.. Soo-t o& Ave 10 z 5,.,1-e- l i oo 1374etteoLke w 11 Rs +I i cv,a.,,' Gzd r i sic,e 1
8.
J g-ffil Orekt/vti.vtaiFtAA LtZs coo / 2.F .,
9.
C79tML- 6V\AT-NiN 42.-S--43 0-7 24 te iS1-1e`C".,t,c-@ 6, 4ce-.4-1,, , t,3-t, . oi
10.
J / a,_),t-et 6 .Cie it - /t/-24 -/130 - 70 d v 3.'1Q(' reef.(o.-t . uJ a, )S -
JrE
6,511C r6hac/ jr/CsjCo,K• 42s-436-6�09 fbe lacGt)c;!reSen.4.M,02
12.
R,cL c ••;(1/4.ccs (-Jo, t, R�s ( 4 P,(ct fr 1°r 3cQ0 ( <(.3 cis- x �5 y .64045 ri e4fi .),L.ck o if
13.
9-<,,4o.-;)g �, WA ter' / -4)
14.
15.
Those who sign-in will automatically be made a Party-of-Record for the project. Page i of
1
/61/46,&N Gy
December 11, 2002
VIA FAX & US MAIL
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager CITY OF RENTON
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South'Grady Way DEC 2602
Renton, WA. 98055 FE `a`�,r D
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat SEPA EIS Scoping
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
On behalf of the City of Newcastle, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to
participate in the recent scoping meeting for the revised Barbee Mill project EIS. This
project will directly and indirectly impact the City of Newcastle. Thus, the City of
Newcastle submits the attached comments with regard to the environmental elements.
The comments attached are from the City's Traffic Engineer and Senior Development
Engineer and were prepared at the direction of the Community Development
Department for your April 2002 scoping meeting. Since the proposal has changed only
in scale, the impacts may have been reduced, however they have not been mitigated,
thus the City of Newcastle continues to have concerns for identified impacts.
We respectfully request that the traffic, transportation and transit issues identified in the
attached material be included in the EIS that you plan to prepare. There are three
major areas of concern that the City of Newcastle requests be addressed. They are:
• Trips with an origin or a destination in Newcastle
• Trips passing through Newcastle to or from origins and destinations to the north,
south or east
• Trips using Newcastle streets to avoid traffic congestion on 1-405
A more complete description of the concerns is included in Mr. Dave Enger's letter of
April 2, 2002 to Mike Nicholson. The City, as does Mr. Enger, emphasizes the need to
do a "worst case" traffic analysis assuming severe traffic congestion on 1-405. Although
the new proposal will not have the same trip generation characteristics, the City of
Newcastle remains concerned that trip generation, especially "trips using Newcastle
streets to avoid traffic congestion on 1-405", will have certain identifiable impacts to the
City. Recent traffic modeling done in conjunction with the 5-year review and update of
the City's Comprehensive Plan indicates that congestion on one or more of the
alternative routes may be approaching an unacceptable level of service.
The three main routes that would appear to be affected that are identified in the second
bullet above have been mapped for clarification and a copy of that map is also attached
to this request.
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
13020 S.E. 72nd Place, Newcastle, Washington 98059-3030
Telephone: (425) 649-4444 Fax: (425) 649-4363
In addition, the City's Senior Development Engineer, Fritz Timm, has identified other
elements that are of significant concern to the City of Newcastle. These items should
be addressed in the EIS as well:
• Under "Air", air quality issues resulting from construction and transport of
materials to and from the site are of concern.
• In the "Water" section, there are a number of concerns identified, including water
quality habitat, water contamination from construction activities, and the
development and acceptance of a spill prevention and cleanup plan for both on-
site and haul route spills.
• Of course, concern for "fish friendly" environments should be addressed in the
"Animal" section of the EIS.
• "Environmental Health" concerns include the need to address on-site
contaminated soils and noise; both in proximity to the site and along haul routes
through or past Newcastle.
• The "Light and Glare"-issues should be addressed as they impact valuable views
of Lake Washington and the Olympic Mountains for both Newcastle and Renton
residents.
The City of Newcastle may choose to supplement or amend this request subject to an
opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS. In the event the need arises, the City will
respond in a timely manner or request additional time to do so. Again, thank you for
this opportunity to comment.
Respectfully yours
Micheal E. is olson, AICP
Community Development Director
Attachments
c: Andy Takata, City Manager
City Council Members
Fritz Timm, P.E.
David Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E.
2
•APR 01 '02 19:13 TO-NEWCASTLE FROM-TPE T-350 P.02/04 F-081
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2223-112^AVENUE N,E.,SUITE 101 •BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 08004-2952
VIC7'OA N,flISHOP,PE.Nos
TELEPHONE OM 455.5320
OAVID M.ENGER,P.E.Vice ProeMnV _ FACSIMILE(425)453.5759
April 1, 2002
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
13020 S.E. 72nd PI.
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
Re: Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
City of Renton File No. LUA-01-174, SA-H, ECF, SM
Potential Traffic Impact Issues
Dear Mr.-Nicholson:
As we discussed, the City of Renton has invited all interested municipalities to
comment on the environmental elements to be evaluated in the Barbee Mill Mixed-Use
Development EIS. The development would include 819 condominium units, 50,000 sq.
ft. of retail space, 112,000 sq. ft. of office space, 30,000 sq. ft. for hotel use, and 8,000
sq. ft. for restaurant use. The Barbee Mill development would be located at the old
lumber mill site at 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N. in Renton.
We have several concerns about the potential project trip generation and
distribution, resulting impacts to Newcastle streets, and necessary mitigation. The
analysis should address the AM and PM peak hours, and construction traffic impacts as
well as the traffic impacts after completion and full occupancy. These issues may affect
the scope of work of the traffic analysis that will be conducted for the EIS. The City of
Newcastle requests that these issues be addressed in the EIS.
A significant amount of the new traffic generated by the Barbee Mill Development
may use Newcastle streets. We expect that this new traffic on Newcastle streets would
mainly consist of three types of vehicle trips, as follows:
1. Trips wi h poripin u _destinati n in Newca- e.' Some of these trips would be
made by Newcastle residents who would work or shop at the Barbee Mlli. Some
may be trips by Barbee Mill residents to shopping, services or other destinations
in Newcastle.
2. Trips passing through Newcastle to or from origins end dastinatlnE1Sj0 the north
smith or past. These would be made by residents of the Renton Highlands,
Issaquah, south Bellevue and other areas to the east. We expect that these trips
N300572issuesltr
.APR 01 '02 19:14 TO-NEWCASTLE FROM-TPE T-350 P.03/04 F-081
Mr. Mike Nicholson �(
Director of Community Development -I
City of Newcastle
April 1, 2002
Page - 2 -
would use three main routes through Newcastle, to or from the 1-405/N.E. 44th St.
Interchange and the Barbee Mill site:
a. The Lincoln Ave. N.E./Monterey Pl. N.E./112t PI. S.E./114thAve. S.E./S.E.
88th St./S.E. 88th Pl./124t Ave. S.E./S.E. 89th PI. arterial route to Coal
Creak Parkway Southeast. From Coal Creek Parkway S.E., these through
trips could split to three routes:
1) South via 138th Ave. S.E./Duvall Ave. to the Renton Highlands and
other areas to the south or east.
2) East via S.E. May Valley Road to Issaquah and other areas to the
east.
3) Northeast via Newcastle-Coal Creek Road S.E. to southeast
Bellevue, I-90, Issaquah and other areas to the north or east.
b. Lake Washington Blvd. S.E./S.E. 76�' St./11®t'Ave. S.E./S.E. 69th
Way/S.E. 72" Pl./Newcastle-Coal Creek Road S.E. to southeast Bellevue,
I-90, Issaquah and other areas to the north or east. This route passes the
Renton School District's Hazelwood Elementary School, in an area with
few sidewalks.
c. Lake Washington Blvd. S.E./112t Ave. S.E. to the Newport Hills area of
Bellevue.
3. Trips using Newcastle streets to avoid traffic congestion on l.4fR. he route we
are most concerned about is Lake Washington Blvd. S.E. and 112thAve. S.E. to
the north of The Barbee Mill. These arterial streets closely parallel 1-405, and
form a direct connection from the N.E. 44 St. Interchange (Exit 7) to the 112th
Ave. S.E. Interchange (Exit 9). Some traffic currently uses these streets to
bypass this section of 1-405. Future Barbee Mill employees leaving the site could
drive eastbound across the N.E. 44th St. overpass, observe traffic congestion on
1-405 northbound, and turn left onto Lake Washington Blvd. to use this bypass
route.
We are concerned about increased traffic volumes, speeds, and pedestrian and
vehicular traffic safety on Newcastle streets, particularly the routes identified above.
These streets pass through residential areas, have numerous residential driveways and
generally do not have sidewalks. All streets in Newcastle are two-lane streets, except
for Coal Creek Parkway S_E. and some of the streets that it intersects (for short
distances from Coal Creek Parkway S.E.). Coal Creek Parkway S.E. is also the only
N300672issuesffr
•
APR 01 '02 19:14 TO-NEWCASTLE FROM-TPE T-350 P.04/04 F-081
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development It
City of Newcastle
April 1, 2002
Page - 3 -
- street in Newcastle that has signalized intersections.
Transportation impact studies usually look at traffic volumes, impacts and
mitigation for typical peak hour conditions. As we all know, at times 1-405 is more
severely congested than is typical, due to high traffic volumes, collisions, traffic incidents
or other factors. We are concerned that when 1-405 is severely congested, significantly
more Barbee Mill traffic may use Newcastle streets to avoid the freeway. Thee to the
conditions On these City sfrsats,.�ha City of Newcastle requests that the Barbee Mill EIS
alsa p c analysisgas amine severe
�-- -�--____.., traffic congestion a1]
Of course, if 1-406 is expected to be severely congested during typical future peak hour
conditions with the Barbee Mill, an additional "worst case" analysis may not be
necessary.
The EIS should address impacts and mitigation of construction traffic on the
above streets and conditions. The EIS should identify and discuss truck haul routes for
construction materials and wastes. Measures to mitigate construction traffic impacts,
such as potential truck haul route restrictions, restrictions on haul hours of operation,
weight limits, and oversize load routing should be addressed. Other potential mitigation
measures related to construction truck traffic include pavement condition monitoring and
restoration, plans for the transportation of hazardous materials, truck washing, load
covering, and spill prevention and clean-up.
The EIS should also address the effects of the project on transit facilities and
service. Sound Transit has budgeted for a Newcastle Transit Center to be located
within the City's Community Business Center. The EIS should address whether bus
service would be appropriate between the Barbee Mill and the Newcastle Transit Center
and/or other locations in Newcastle.
We are available to coordinate with the Barbee Mill EIS traffic consultants, and
can provide copies of relevant City of Newcastle transportation documents and traffic
data to them. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
& ENGINEERING, INC.
et)--C%-..:4
David H. Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Vice President
DHE:
N300572issuesltr
Vi:qh
YZ4W►w
�P'CAS�
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Nicholson, Director of Community Development.
FROM: Fritz Timm, Senior Development Engineer
DATE: April 1, 2002
RE: Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
City of Renton File No. LUA-01-174, SA-H, ECF, SM
EIS Scoping
c:
❑ Urgent ❑ Action Needed ® For Your Information ❑ Comment
We have several issues that have been identified in the course of looking at the
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development proposal that we would like to have
included;in the scope of the EIS.
Under the Environmental Elements, Air Section, we would like to have the
construction impacts analyzed to include discussion of construction dust on the
environment and on the citizens of Newcastle. Newcastle is upwind of the
proposed construction project and could be impacted by dust off of the
construction site. Many of the haul routes that may be in use during construction
pass through or are directly adjacent to Newcastle. Potential mitigations could
include dust and contaminant stabilization, identification of haul routes that avoid
undue impacts to population centers, and requirements to cover construction
material and debris hauling vehicles.
Under the Environmental Elements, Water Section, we would like to have the
impact of water runoff from the site addressed in detail both during construction
and during future use. We would also like to have the stream habitat that would
be protected, as.well as that which would be removed, or enhanced, by the
project identified. Stormwater runoff from construction could impact May Creek,
which is the prime creek system through Newcastle. The potential that
contaminated soils or other hazardous cargos could be carried through or beside
Newcastle is of concern in the event of accidental spills impacting our creeks or
stormwater systems. We would like to see this potential addressed and also
would like to see the development of an effective spill prevention and cleanup
plan for both on-site and haul route spills.
Under the Environmental Elements, Animals Section, we would like to have the
impact of the proposed development on fish upstream migration analyzed.
Impacts to the channel of May Creek through the Barbee Mill site or stormwater
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development Project - EIS Scoping, Page 2
entering the creek within this site could impact the size and health of spawning
returns from Lake Washington into May Creek.
Under the Environmental Elements., Environmental Health Section, we would like
to have the onsite soils contamination analyzed with respect to construction dust
impacts on Newcastle. Potential mitigation could include on-site encapsulation
or special dust control measures if appropriate. We would also like to have the
potential impacts of the construction project on our citizens with respect to noise
analyzed, with the potential for haul routes through or past Newcastle, as well as
the proximity of the site it-self to Newcastle. Potential mitigations to these issues
could include limits on construction hours, or construction-haul hours, as
appropriate based on the results of these analysis.
Under the Environmental Elements, Light and Glare Section, we would like to
have the impact of sky glow and direct glare from the project on Newcastle
residents analyzed. Our residents have a unique view out across Lake
Washington available due to the topography of the area.
Under the Environmental Elements, Transportation Section, we would like to
have the potential for transit connections to Newcastle included in the analysis.
, ' CY
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Agency Scoping
COMMENT FORM
Agency: T--n145 fr" /65ti Sy &0 ` t
Name (please print):
Signature:
Address:
Phone: E-mail:
What environmental impact(s)do mu think the EIS should address?
rr_l (rv9 :t� �1,r1; s� ,'T Fre'. I �I.; �• fn✓Wt- 4
You may submit your comments NOW or mail to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m., DECEMBER 16,.2002.
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 10, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira,Development Services
FROM: Nick Afzali, Transportation Systems 1� frov N<L.k
STAFF CONTACT: Bob Mahn,x7322
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Proposal
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) Scoping
Transportation impacts need to be addressed. We would expect such analysis to include, but not
be limited to:
• A study area similar to that depicted in Figure 3 of the July 23, 2002 Preliminary Traffic
Impact Analysis prepared by HDR Engineers,Inc.
• Study area existing traffic volumes and traffic operations.
• Site-generated traffic and study area distribution.
• Future traffic volumes both with and without the Barbee Mill site development
• A mode-split analysis
• Impacts on traffic operations at the: Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd. intersection
(major access point to and from the Barbee Mill site);N.E. 44th Street/I-405 on and off-
tramp intersections; and,Burnett Avenue N./Lake Washington Blvd. intersection.
• Traffic analysis assuming that all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the railroad
tracks would be developed at the density of the proposed Barbee Mill development, and
any other significant development proposals in the study area.
• Discussion of planned transportation improvement projects in the study area and any
potential impacts the Barbee Mill site development may have on them.
• Discussion of existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities and potential impacts
to them.
• Potential Transportation Demand Management Plan.
• Discussion of existing and planned transit service and other high occupancy facilities and
potential impacts to them.
Barbee Mill
Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)Agency Scoping
December 10,2002
Page 2
• Discussion of transportation safety(i.e.traffic accidents) both existing and as a result of
the Barbee Mill site development.
• Discussion of existing and planned railroad track operations/usage and potential impacts
to them.
•
The transportation impact analysis should also address the following comments:
• The text in the EIS Scoping Notice indicates the proposed subdivision of the Barbee Mill
site into 115 residential lots. The previous (July 23,2002)Traffic Impact Analysis
assumed 112 residential lots.
• The text in the EIS Scoping Notice indicates that access to the site would be provided via
a roadway through the abutting property on the north side of site to the Lake Washington
Blvd./Ripley Lane intersection. However, Overall Site Plan accompanying the EIS
Scoping Notice indicates that all residential lots could be accessed via south end roadway
as well as via Ripley Lane.
• The traffic analysis should assume that the intersections of N.E. 44th Street and 1-405 on
and off-ramps are unsignalized and should note whether traffic signals will be needed and
what warrants would be met to justify the signals.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments for this project.
cc: Bob Maim
File
H:\TRANS\PLNG\RLM\REVEIWS\2002 BARBEE MILL 2\p
Ltf
• 444. ieeeao
State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Mount Baker District Office,Post Office Box 1100,LaConner,Washington 98257
December 10, 2002 DEVOrly OFM�ANNING
N
City of Renton Development Services Division
ATTENTION: Lesley Nishihira DEC ' 2002
1055 South Grady Way ' tCeVED
Renton,Washington 98055
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
SUBJECT: Environmental Impact Statement Scoping; Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Proposal, Convert Barbee Mill from Industrial To 115 Townhouses, Lake
Washington and May Creek, Tributary to Ship Canal, King County,WRIA
08.6007
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) offers the following comments for
•
scoping the above project at this time. Other comments maybe offered as the project progresses.
The 22.9 acre Barbee Mill site is located on Lake Washington and is bisected by May Creek.
Lake Washington and May Creek support many species of fishes. Among these fishes, steelhead
trout and coho salmon populations have declined to very low levels within the past 20 years, and
chinook salmon have been listed as"threatened"under the Endangered Species Act. The habitat
at this site has been severely degraded for many years by filling of the lake and the industrial use
of the site. The conversion of the site to residential use provides the only foreseeable
opportunity to'conduct some habitat restoration beneficial to fish and to wildlife. If
redevelopment of the site is conducted without concern for the needs of fish and wildlife, there
will be long-term adverse impacts to these creatures.
WDFW requests that the scoping include potential impacts to fish and wildlife, and the potential
for mitigating adverse impacts. Specific areas of concern include the nearshore habitat of the
lake, the instream habitat of the creek, and the riparian zone of the creek and lake. These will be
affected by road construction, the placement of houses, stormwater facilities, lighting and glare,
and the installation of piers for boats in the lake. Mitigation for these impacts can be achieved by
limiting the stream crossings, increasing the buffer widths and planting the buffers, the strategic
placement of tails to avoid impacts to the stream and lake, the treatment of stormwater to the
highest standards, and creating community docking facilities and access verses piers constructed
for every waterfront lot. We also encourage the enhancement/restoration of the nearshore area
of the lake and the instream habitat of the creek. _ ,
c .1
Ms. Nishihira
December 10, 2002
Paget
Despite the fact that this site has a lengthy waterfront and a major stream running through it,
residential use of this property can be done in a manner compatible with providing for fish and
wildlife. However, the existing proposal may need to be modified in order,to provide for fish
and wildlife in the critical shore and stream areas.
Thank you for,the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions,please
contact me at (360)466-4345 x254
Sincerely,
Richard E. Johnson
Assistant Regional Habitat Program Manager/Region 4
REJ:rej
cc: SEPA Coordinator, WDFW
Stewart Reinbolt, WDFW
CITY OF RENTON
• PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 6,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
FROM: Ron Straka(x-7248),Surface Water Utility Supervisor
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill EIS Scoping Comments
The following are my EIS Scoping comments regarding the Barbee Mill project:
Stormwater:
Impacts due to stormwater runoff (quantity and quality) needs to be included in the EIS analysis.
This includes the construction impacts and completed project impacts along with any off-site
improvements. On-site contamination clean up and protection of surface water and groundwater from
contamination from hazardous material that exists on-site during clean-up and long term if
contaminates are capped and left in place needs to be addressed as part of this EIS or the site clean up
Plan.
Recommended Mitigation: Project should comply with the standards specified in the Washington
• State Department of Ecology's August 2001 Stormwater Management Manual for Western
Washington. Storm system conveyance sizing shall be done in accordance with the King County
Surface Water Design Manual.
Floodplain:
Impacts to the floodplain storage and hydraulic capacity need to be analyzed in the EIS and
mitigation provided. Applicant should review existing FEMA mapping and determine if it is still
accurate by comparing the flows used by FEMA to produce the FIRM map and the hydrologic
analysis developed as part of the May Creek Basin Plan. If the May Creek Basin Plan hydrologic
information is higher than the flows used by FEMA, all planning project design shall be done using
the higher flows. Filling of the floodplain needs to be identified and quantified. The hydraulic
capacity of new stream crossings needs to be provided and their impacts the floodplain quantified
(change in water surface elevation).
Recommended Mitigation: Elevate Finished floors for structures in or adjacent to the floodplain to
be a minimum of 1-foot above the 100-year floodplain elevation (City Code) for current condition
hydrology. It is recommended, however that 100-year floodplain elevation based upon future
condition hydrology be used to establish finished floor elevations. Compensatory storage for filling
of the floodplain is required. No filling or obstruction of the FEMA Floodway is allowed. All New
and existing stream crossings need to be designed and analyzed to show that there is a "zero rise" in
the future condition 100-yr floodplain elevation. New stream crossing need to be designed to allow
sediment transport and fish passage. A FEMA Map revision may be required as part of this project if
the hydrology used by FEMA is substantially different than the current condition hydrology
developed as part of the May Creek Basin Plan. The transport and deposition of sediment in May
• Creek, on in the lake, should be considered with respect to establishing the 100-year floodplain
elevation.
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GWViewer\PP EIS Scoping Comments Ver.2.doc\RS\cor
Shoreline and Streams:
Impacts to the shoreline of Lake Washington and May Creek need to be quantified and mitigated for
as part of the EIS. Lake Washington and May Creek are classified as shorelines of the State. Bank
hardening and lack of buffer or encroachment into buffer area needs be mitigated. The impacts of
and required mitigation for any dock construction would also need to be analyzed in detail. Impacts
of Replacing existing bulkheads and/or bank armoring over the life of the project, if they are not
modified as part of the project, should be considered and mitigated for as part of the EIS.
Recommended Mitigation:
Comply State Shoreline Regulations and the Cities Shoreline Master Program requirements. Use bio-
engineered bank stabilization methods to restore and enhance shorelines to increase riparian
functional values. When modifying existing shoreline provide shallow water habitat along the
shoreline for out-migrating juvenile salmonids. Provide shoreline and stream riparian buffer's widths
that are needed to adequate protect salmonids (with no trails), which are planted with native
vegetation.
Light and Glare:
The project's impacts to fish and wildlife due to increase light and glare needs to be considered as
part of the EIS and mitigation measures provided. The increase light and glare from the project
along the shorelines of May Creek and Lake Washington could adversely impact juvenile salmonids,
which use the shoreline for rearing or out-migration,by increasing feeding upon them by predators at
night. The increased perdition to out-migrating juvenile Chinook salmon may be required to comply
with the Endangered Species Act. If Federal funds are used on the project or Federal permits are
required for the project(wetland filling,in-water work), Section 7 Consultation under the Endangered
Species Act will be required.
Recommended Mitigation:
Minimize lighting that is directed towards or along the shoreline areas. Provide larger buffers and
plant buffers with larger vegetation (trees) that will help to block out light and glare. Provide a
shallow water habitat along the shoreline that provides habitat for juvenile salmonids, but not suitable
for most predators.
Wetlands:
Impacts to wetlands on the site or in areas where offsite improvements are required need to be
identified in the EIS and appropriate mitigation provided. Adequate wetland buffers should be
considered and encroachments into wetland buffer identified. Changes to wetland hydrology and
vegetation due to the project should be considered.
Recommended Mitigation:
Provide wetland mitigation in accordance with state and city wetland replacement ratios and
mitigation standards. Provide adequate buffer widths and protection of buffers from intrusion.
Please include these comments in the scope of the EIS for the Barbee Mill Mixed-Use Development
Proposal. If you have any questions regarding these comments,please contact me.
cc: Lys Homsby
Jennifer Henning
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GWViewer\PP EIS Scoping Comments Ver.2.doc\RS\cor
. `l
i, Washington State Northwest Region
Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North
Douglas B. MacDonald P.O.Box 330310
Secretary of Transportation Seattle,WA 98133-9710
206-440-4000
TTY: 1-800-833-6388
www.wsdot.wa.gov
December 5, 2002
Lesley Nishihira
Development Services Division
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: Barbee Mill Plat, 115 SFR
City File. #LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Dear Ms Nishihira:
Thank you forgiving WSDOT this opportunity to comment through SEPA on the above
development.
These comments are a follow-up to the original comments in a letter sent by WSDOT to
the City of Renton dated July 17,2002 (attached). The change in Threshold
Determination does not change the original Traffic Impacts that were identified by
WSDOT in the referenced letter. In our view the traffic issues relating to the proposal has
not changed since our last review. Please refer to the attached letter for our comments
Again we thank you for this opportunity to comment on the above project. WSDOT will
continue to encourage a partnering effort to reach a solution that is acceptable to all
parties involved without compromising the public health, safety, and welfare, and the
functional integrity of our state highway system.
If you have any questions, or require additional information please contact John Lefotu of
our Developer Services section at 206-440-4713 or Vicki Wegner at 206-440-4714.
Sincerely,
_ . . -- . . - ' - ' . .(
'' - '-' ' '\_____
, , .
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Ramin Pazo, CITY OF RENTON
King A e Pla ra nning:Manager.
. DEC 1 0 °,
JL:j 1
Attach:TIA Comments 07/17/02 RECpvr-
Adi
WIAWashington State Northwest Region
Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North
• Douglas D. MacDonald P.O.Box 330310
Secretary of Transportation Seattle,WA 98133-9710
206-440-4000
July 17, 2002 TTY: 1-800-833-6388
www.wsdot.wa.gov
Leslie Nishihira
Senior Planner, Development Services Division
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way Ilia COP,
Renton, WA 98055
Subject: SR-405 MP 7.47 vic. CS 17435 DEVE�N Mtr,?�
Barbee Mill OF REN NNN/NG
City File No. LUA-02-067
Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis Comments - DEC l b 4, -9
RECEIVED
Dear Ms.Nishihira:
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review and comment on the Preliminary
Traffic Impact Analysis dated March 28, 2002 for the Barbee Mill Property. This
proposed development will consist of 24 townhomes and 88 residential duplex units. The
development will be located on the Barbee Mill Property on Lake Washington Boulevard,
just west of the NE 44th St./I-405 Interchange. Our comments are as follows:
• We are unaware of any concrete plans by City of Renton to signalize ramp
terminals, nor is there a pending WSDOT project to do so. Our analysis indicates
this development would significantly impact the I-405 ramp terminals if they
remain unsignalized. The project exacerbates the LOS F condition. The TIA
needs to acknowledge this possibility and should fund or significantly contribute to
appropriate signal and channelization needs at these intersections.
• Signalized analysis should include queuing info. SB ramp intersection EB queuing
extremely likely to spill back beyond Ripley Lane intersection, which would
impact operation of that intersection.
• Page 8 of the TIA, the Trip Rates that are shown in the table cannot be found
anywhere in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The totals in the Vehicle Trips
columns are all correct calculations from the equations. We recommend using the
equations and In/Out percentages instead of the Rates as it implies use of
something different from ITE Trip Generation Manual.
Ms. Leslie Nishihir _
July 17, 2002
Page 2
• Provide an accident analysis of the I-405 ramps at their junctions to NE 44th St.
This should include 3 years of accident data, a discussion of the most predominant
types of accidents, and an assessment of the project's traffic safety impacts.
• Recommend a Figure 7 with 2005 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with Project.
• Add the left and right turn arrows to the SB movement of intersection 4 of Figure
6.
Tun Yuri
We look forward to reviewing your next submittal. If you have any questions, please
contact Phil Segami at 206 440-4326.
S' erely DEv
C1Ty OF M pZNHAIG
in azooki
ng Area Planning Manager RECEIVE
1.1
cc: Mark Bandy, Traffic MS 120
DevSvcs1SR405\BarbeeMilITLA1.doc
CITY OF RENTON
PUBLIC HEARING
TRANSCRIPTION OF PUBLIC TESTIMONY
DECEMBER 10, 2002
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING
FILE NO. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Lesley Nishihira: You can face the crowd at the podium if you want to stand, or at the table if you'd like
to sit, which ever is most comfortable for you.
Allen Lebovitz: O.K. Nothing like going first. My name is Allen Lebovitz, do you need me to spell that?
(He spells his name for the record.) I'm a Renton, North Renton community resident along with my wife
Lisa Bartell and I guess I'm here because I was somewhat concerned when I first heard about this
project. I'm worried about a number of aspects of the project. I don't know a whole lot about it, which It
sounds like I'm not alone on that.
I guess what first and probably foremost makes me concerned is that it's a really unique piece of land
and it's extremely valuable in about every way as a land can be valuable. It's valuable to the people that
own it,to the folks that; you know, have rights to it. It's economically valuable. It's valuable to the
community too because it's extremely unique. And then I guess also, it's very valuable from an ecological
standpoint. On this lake there's not much land like that available. And so that really covers all of my
opinions about this land.
It needs to be treated with respect to that value, all of those values because once it's been managed,
especially with the current proposal you can't undo any of that. So it's a big decision and I guess I should
point out who I am in addition to being a community member. I'm a watershed ecologist. I have a master
degree in Environmental Studies from Yale University. I've been practicing in this region in Washington
for about eight or nine years. I worked with issues like this a lot. I do a lot of salmon biology and salmon
ecology so I see habitats like this all the time. And I know from my experience you don't find habitat like
this that often in this area. Granted, the site has been greatly impacted by past land use practices but it's
still exceptionally unique.
And I guess specifically the concerns that I have are, starting with the impacts to the community: how
does the community benefit from that project? I live on Pelly Ave. N. I'm not right up against it so I don't
know how the folks that live right beside it would feel but I know from my perspective I'm concerned about
my access to that type of area. There's not many options like that left. You have Coulon Park, which is
fantastic but it's a fully developed park. So this is unique in that way. I also wonder how it will change the
character of that community up there and how you would undo that change if you ever wanted too? I
don't think you could. So you're committing to heading down in that direction.
The other concern that I have on that note too is why does this type of development on a piece of
property like that...,there's no water dependency to that use? The Barbee Mill had a reason for being
there. They needed access to the shore I think,to pursue its business and from my understanding of
'shoreline rules and at least the intent of shoreline rules, it's to guide development around areas where
you have access to water to make sure that you're using that land for that value. I like waterfront
property. I own some waterfront property. I own fifteen acres out on the coast. I would love to live on the
water but at the same point I would never in a million years develop that fifteen acres into that type of
development because that does not make full use of that property. I have one little cottage on it and
that's the way it's going to stay if I can help it.
I I
I guess from an ecological perspective I have some pretty significant concerns of about filling wetlands
even if it's a small amount of fill in that area because those types of wetlands are exceptionally valuable,
even if they are category three. The reason that they are category three is that they've been degraded by
past land use practices. And somebody mentioned that there's some historic information about that site.
I would guess that there's some pretty good aerial photography that would document what that site looked
like. And my guess is that there would have been more, significantly more wetlands there and a
tremendous amount of habitat there. Similarly, the buffering around the stream really doesn't even begin
to get at protecting the ecological values of that stream. I work quite often in undeveloped areas in forest
lands,that's what I do a lot of and the buffer requirements in those areas are far greater. I hear
constantly from the folks that I work with there in forest lands that they think it's exceedingly unfair that in
urban areas the same types of rules that their forest's abide by aren't being abided by in the urban area.
Interestingly enough that these are people that log and they're using lumber mills and that was an old
lumber mill site so there's some irony there. So I have grave concerns about how the current ecological
values there are being protected.
I guess probably the last thing I should say is that I almost didn't come tonight because I do
understand that this is an urban area and you know people have to live some place. Private property
owners have a right to derive value out of their property. I work with some really strong private property
advocates in my profession and I own my own business. Actually I'm an independent contractor so I
have to earn a living. However, I guess that what concerns me most is that all of the values aren't fully
being considered in the development of this project.We do need to have places to live, it does make
sense to develop in urban areas to cluster development but at the same time does this area actually need
that much more in the way of housing units? A lot of housing units have been put up out in that area. I
don't know if we actually even need that.
And like I said, I almost didn't come to this meeting. The thing that changed my mind was that actually
my wife, who's a veterinarian,pointed out to me that driving into work she drives by there every single
day, she actually saw an eagle closer than she's seen an eagle in a number of years. She's worked with
eagle in the past, but an eagle that was hunting in that area. I've heard about an osprey, I know there's
salmonid usage, there's all kinds of salmon in that area. Plus, I mean a list of wildlife that's about that
long that can deal with that type of habitat as it is. So even though I was thinking I should spend my time
focusing on wild areas which is where I do most of my work,there still are important habitat values for
land like that. And I wouldn't want to say that I don't want to see anything done to that property. First of
all,that wouldn't be fair to the landowner.
It may not make any sense but I think the type of development that should be done there should be
much more aware of the values of that property and recognize those. I think there are alternatives and I
really hope that they can develop different alternatives. And I would be more than happy to elaborate on
what I think some of those alternatives could be but I don't want to monopolize the entire time here.
Thanks.
Applause
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Allen. We actually do not have any other people who checked boxes, but
by a show of hands I see others who are interested. Mr. Pipkin why don't you come up...
Gary Pipkin: My name is Gary Pipkin, I live at 1120 N. 38th St. in lower Kennydale area about a quarter
mile south of the sawmill. (Spells last name). And I basically want to sit here and reiterate things that
have been said in about 3 prior meetings that were specifically related to this project and I want to re-
enter them into the record to accommodate the process.
The access'to the property in the past meetings was discussed. The existing entry into the sawmill
plus the other existing crossing that is north of that near the 44th St. exit are two sites for entry into the
property that would be acceptable. About twice as many people are in this room were in that discussion
and anything south of the May Creek Bridge that was proposed as a private entry into the new Cugini
homes that are being built on the waterfront was greatly objected to. So the consensus of that meeting
was that the existing two entries into the property should not be varied from.
Also,that in the May Creek treatment, deer use that May Creek corridor to swim across Lake
Washington to Mercer Island and back. They do it every day of the year. You can see them if you sit out
there and watch as well as the salmon and other wildlife. They use that area to get to the lake and back.
-2-
r
The height of the structures was looked at in great length by both the folks that are applying right now.
They also delved into what was done by the Paul Allen group earlier so they have looked at a whole
bunch of testimony and a whole bunch of data that was gathered for both projects to apply the learning
from both of those to this project. So the information available isn't just what is coming from you and me,
it's come over the last four years actually. This fifty foot maximum height was developed from the
consensus that four story flat roof buildings were as tall as could be accepted without destroying
everyone's view. It does impact views but it doesn't destroy them.
Also the roadway, Lake Washington Blvd.,the consensus was that twelve foot maximum lane width,
one in each direction, would be the maximum ever applied to Lake Washington Blvd. There would never
be widening. There would always be twelve foot traffic lanes and the speed limit on those traffic lanes
would never exceed 25 (twenty-five) miles an hour no matter what. So those were two points to keep the
traffic under control and discourage them from traveling south to exit the property and get on to 1-405.
There was 4Iso in the last meeting about this property, concern that the open area that was published
as public access to the lake gave the public the ability to walk over there and go to the lake but there was
no parking available. So you have to walk three-quarters of a mile to get to the property to walk across
the lawn to get to the lake because there was no non-resident parking allowed for that area. And by no, I
don't mean absolutely none I mean there's like ten cars. When you have the intent of this property, more
than that needs to be applied and so that was the concern that was raised at the last meeting and it
wasn't decided upon. It was raised and was going to be looked at. At this point is where that probably is
going to start to be looked at more closely. That's the extent of what I wanted to re-enter into the record
to make sure that it was tied directly to this project.
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Mr. Pipkin
Larry Raymond: Hi, my name is Larry Raymond my wife and I and family live at 1313 N. 38th St., up the
hill from Mr. Pipkin. So I basically am very much in agreement with the two people who have spoken
already, Mr. Allen and Mr. Pipkin. I would like to see that May Creek streambed and the watershed as
much as possible, not just with habitat preserved, but with wherever possible habitat enhanced. And I
think a basic component of that same process would be a very encouragement of as much public access
as possible to the stream. I would hope that the entire shoreline would be available for public access. It
may be a little more difficult but I think the bottom line in terms of raising awareness of just how unique
this resource is... This land and this mouth of this creek; obviously, it's going to be developed but as
much as possible I would like to see enhanced habitat for salmon and all of the wildlife that is already
there. And if anything, if we could restore and increase that habitat in ways that were compatible with
people; to give kids and the public a chance to see what it's like when a King salmon comes up May
Creek. I've hiked May Creek for about twenty years and when you see one of those Chinook with its back
sticking out of the water you just have a responsibility to make sure that they are there for your children.
So that would be, along with traffic and overall development, enhancing habitat on that stream and the
lake along there, and allowing access to the entire shoreline would be a very important aspect to this
development as far as we are concerned. Thanks.
Lesley Nishihira: Thank you, Mr. Raymond. Do we have anyone else interested? Please raise your
hands. I see none. We will now close the public scoping meeting for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
EIS. You do have an opportunity to mail in your written comments or leave the comment form here
before you depart tonight. And do stay tuned, we'll mail out notices and keep all of you informed as best
we can. Thank you.
-3-
- CITY (W RENTON
;Lit* PlanningBuild _. -PublicWorks Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
2,12/UL
December 2, 2002 I L % ,"�0.
Dan Dawson
Otak, Inc. .
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland, WA 98033
SUBJECT: Barbee.Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA=02-040, PP, ECF
Dear Mr. Dawson:
This letter is to inform you that the appeal period has ended for the Environmental Review Committee's
(ERC) Determination of Significance-DS. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination.
Scoping for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will conclude on December 16, 2002. A public
scooping meeting has been scheduled for December 10, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. An
agency meeting has also been scheduled for December 9, 2002 at 2:00 p.m. in the 7th Floor Conferencing
Center.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact meat(425)430-7270.
• For the Environmental Review Committee,
Sin erely,
Lesley Nishi it
Senior Planner
cc: Campbell Mathenson/Applicant
Alex Cugini/Owner
FINAL.DOC RENTON
,1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
AHEAD O F THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
I
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
Barbara Alther,first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL
600 S.Washington Avenue,Kent,Washington 98032 ___ _ _
CITY OF RENTON
a daily newspaper published seven(7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of NOTICE OF-PUBLIC MEETING
general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of Members of the public are invited to
publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily commew on the scope of the EIS for
the following proposal:
newspaper in Kent, King County,Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT ,
legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the South County Journal(and ' - December 10, 2002. Open,
not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers during the below 'y house will be held from 6:30 p.m.
stated period. The annexed notice,a to 7:30 p.m.to provide background
information on the proposed
project and the EIS process.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Official public testimony will be
on: 11/29/02 y taken from 7:30 p.m.to 8:30 p.m.
as
publishedThe meeting will take place in the
Renton City Council Chambers,
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$60.00,charged to ' 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 South
Acct. No. 8051067. Grady Way.
You may also submit written
The cost above includes a$6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. comments to Lesley Nishihira, Project
Manager, Renton City Hall, 6th
Legal Number 845017 Floor,1055 South Grady Way, Renton,
WA 98055. All comments must be
e i 41-idtil--— di e r. received before 5:00 p.m., December
L 16,2002. ,
Legal Clerk, South County Journal For further information regarding this
'project, contact Lesley Nishihira, 425-
30-7270.
of c ,2002 :'ublished in the South County
Subscribed and sworn before me on this day
• ,urnal November 29,2002.845017
'raaaasaaaaar. �� �� -
\\°� @ C9. F°B°PPP p
>•`Z°0`��,ss.c'a.:y;�.f'''5",„ Utz otary Public of the State of ashington
o' �'•„, 4-Op residing in Renton
:'c,
N0T4`�r u, � Ci� f'tq,/1/?,A King County,Washington
—Q-- e �r''"'� ,9 -Pi.1/
`o_ pin or.., �..' d h.. e' : ONE//4/
As
oP,,P„9°aaauo ea l aaaaa°�°,���
CITY OF RENTON
NOTICE
OF
PUBLIC MEETING
Members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS for the following proposal:
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
> December 10, 2002. Open house will be held from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. to provide
background information on the proposed project and the EIS process. Official public
testimony will be taken from 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. The meeting will take place in the Renton
City Council Chambers, 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way.
You may also submit written comments to Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager, Renton City Hall, 6th
Floor,1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. All comments must be received before 5:00
p.m., December 16, 2002.
For further information regarding this project, contact Lesley Nishihira,425-430-7270:
PUBLICATION: November 29, 2002
T ��xxor Il, I / •
�q �.� � 4 . 1�.
..d.,.�tl ,! ,��'wn-.�e��� .. t z �irl;►�:�9 r7Llr
Li.
wr
it / �0/11 !,I' .A2"0 . :-ea 7.,d,N7r;�`"
,, �157 iTO.;-1 I H ''_" 3� Iry „�w,
OF •if ����ni+ irl ,p, III�p�`y4fA0
:„..A.
PUBLIC SLOPINGicske-A,
- =b--�
PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant ssting to subdivide the subject site Into 115 residential lots
ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with a resulting net density of approximately 8.35
dwelling units per acre(22.9 gross acre site—9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public roadways=
MEETING 13.77 net acre—,115 units/13.77 net acre=8.35 du/ac). The shoreline fronting tot lines would extend to the
Inner harbor line. The lots are Intended for the development of townhouse units-most of which would be
constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the,
southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate units on each lot.
Landscape,roadway,utility Improvements and four utility/open space tracts would be established with the plat.
INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE INVITED TO With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline(within Department of Natural Resources'
lease land), all buildings would be demolished as part of the project and lumber operations would be
COMMENT ON THE SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT discontinued. ,
STATEMENT (EIS) FOR THE FOLLOWING PROJECT Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement,which would be
dedicated to public right-of-way,from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane Intersection through the
PROPOSAL: abutting property on the north side of the site.The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways
throughout the majority of the project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek.;
Private streets and driveways are also proposed In specific locations within the plat. A secondary access point
BARB EE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT Is also provided at the southeast corner of the property as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek(at the
location of one of the three existing bridges)in order to provide connection to the secondary access point.
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge may require work below the ordinary high water mark
of May Creek;thereby requiring approval of a variance•from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
i; Regulations prior to the installation of required plat Improvements. An additional existing bridge Is proposed to
th
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10 , 2002 be utilized as a pedestrian crossing.
. The western boundary of the site Includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for,
which a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. No other alterations or
>OPEN HOUSE from 6.30 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. : improvements to the lake shoreline are included with the proposal. In addition,May Creek bisects the property',
• , extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake
THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark ranging from'
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT AND THE' EIS 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore currently Impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer
area.All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer area are proposed to be retained.
PROCESS. IThe project applicant has also Identified two category III wetlands with associated buffers within property
• boundaries—one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of street C(eke"northerly wetland")
➢PUBLIC TESTIMONY from 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m, and another at the southern edge of the site near the south end of street C(aka"southerly wetland"). The
OFFICIAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE TAKEN AND RECORDED DURING applicant is requesting to buffer average the minimum required 25-foot buffer for the northerly wetland. In j
addition,approximately 400 square feet of the southerly wetland is proposed to be filled,with enhancements
THE SECOND HALF OF THE MEETING. to the northerly wetland and buffer area proposed in order to mitigate for loss of wetland area. Project
construction would require extensive grading and excavation activities throughout the site for the removal of
existing asphalt areas and the creation of new building pads,roadways,and utilities. Preliminary earthwork
Meeting will take place in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS on quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of
• the 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way. fill material to be imported to the site. In addition,approximately 18 trees would be removed as part of on-site
grading activities.
i
In addition to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)and Preliminary Plat approval,the
, project requires the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated
YOU MAY ALSO SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS TO: plat improvements as well as a possible variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations(RMC
section 4-4-130.D.4.b)for the installation of the proposed bridge crossing. The applicant has also requested
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager I .an administrative street modification in order to allow for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feat
Ren
ton City Hall,6th Floor !throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial
1055 South Grady Way I Development Permit review for the development of the residential structures.
Renton,WA 98055, 'I i FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THE
(425)430-7270 ji BARBEE MiLL PRELIMINARY PLAT
FILE NO.LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE 5:00 p.m.,DECEMBER 16,2002.11 I PLEASE CONTACT LESLEY NISHIHIRA,PROJECT MANAGER AT(425)430-7270
Please Include the'project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification.
- . I
DO-NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION '
•
•
CERTIFICATION
I, i bs um8 N ISk1 him , hereby certify that 3 copies of the
above docnt were posted by vie in 3 co spicuous places on or nearby
the described property on Weanal Sda)I No . .i
� ka Signed: ,Air E ��� ,
ATTEST:�Slgbscribed swornbefore me, Notary e a Public,in and for t S - •
Washington residing ii �� ,on the 'IFS` day of WO.. . /©O - .
MARILYN ECf M.:-.:E.FF
NOTARY a �' t� UC MARLLYN KAMCHEFF am"'
R��® MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6 29-03
STATE OFWASHINGTOFE
COMMISSION EXPIRES r
JUNE 29, 2003 .
CITY OF RENTON
• CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the Z day of U .)0 . , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope containing
Gc5e i � VlO firs c
documents. This information was sent to:
Name I Representing
�. (jk 5"( Pr oR.( o.t.)(lQ,/S u)/I n \aDQi c1
-cL k U 4jv1 r-; eS
CO-tA --t r t. Pc-%c. �i c L P p I t
r IQ p o 'M� a. Lc, .✓
(Signature of Sender)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
) SS
COUNTY OF KING )I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that gd----re-e- �-2,i�J signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
Dated: t 2 I o2. •. fu- ,t� �ih,
MARILYN KAMCHEFF ► Notary Public i nd for the State of Was ,: on .
NOTARY PUBLIC Notary(Print) MARILYN KAMCHEFF
STATE OF WASHINGTON My appointment enlYriVP0INI IV"t txPIRES:6 29-03
COMMISSION EXPIRES
JUNE 29, 2003
Project Name: n a r M j/J Pry P fi
Project Number:
Lt-f.� D Z -Oyd P/; ELF
NOTARY.DOC
AGENCY(DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology Washington Dept. of Fish &Wildlife Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section Habitat Program Attn. SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard 39015— 172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Mill Creek,WA 98012 Auburn,WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Mr. David Dietzman
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Dept. of Natural Resources
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 PO Box 47015
PO Box 330310 Olympia,WA 98504-7015
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers Ms. Shirley Marroquin Eric Swennson
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Real Estate Services
PO Box C-3755 KC Wastewater Treatment Division Seattle Public Utilities
Seattle,WA 98124 201 South Jackson St, MS KSC-NR-050 'Suite 4900, Key Tower
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Seattle,WA 98104-3855 700 Fifth Avenue
Seattle,WA 98104
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager City of Tukwila
Metro Transit PO Box 90868 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street MS: XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle,WA 98104-3856
Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the following agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application.
Also note, do not mail David Dietzman any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send
him the ERC Determination paperwork.
•
Last printed 10/22/02 3:57 PM
P. O . .2
Amy Norris Ande Jorgensen ___lee Forest Products,Inc.
1900 NE 48th Street#F-202 2411 Garden Ct.N. Attn: Robert Cugini
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Box 359
Renton,WA 98057
)(Beverly Wagner )(Bruce Erikson )(Bruno&Anne Good
4100 Lake Wash.Blvd.N.,D-104 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N. 605 S. 194th St.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Des Moines,WA 98148-2159
Bud Worley Campbell Mathewson Carmen Flores
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N.#B202 Century Pacific,LP 2140 Century 16707 SE 14th St.
Renton,WA 98056 Square Bellevue,WA 98008
1501 Fourth Ave. #2140
Seattle,WA 98101
Charles F.Dobes Charles Wolfe ,Chris Sidebotham
8606 118th Ave. SE 1111 Third Avenue,Suite 3400 3907 Park Ave.N.
Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98101 Renton,WA 98056
425-255-2646
*Clark Van Bogart Cynthia Youngblood D. Sabey
3711 Lake Washington Bl N 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A103 21410 132nd SE
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Kent,WA 98042
Dan&Laurie Brewis Dan Dawson Dan Frey,WSDOT
11026 100th Ave.NE Otak,Inc. 6431 Corson Avenue
Kirkland,WA 98033 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Seattle,WA 98018
Kirkland,WA 98033
Dave Enger,TD&E David&Joyce Stevenson X David Lierman
2223 112th Avenue NE 1208 North 28th Street 620 E. Marion Street
Suite 101 Renton,WA 98056 Kent,WA 98031
Bellevue,WA 98004
David Nestvold Debbie Martin Dennis Law
6608 117th Ave SE 1412 North 30th Street 3625 Lake WA Blvd.N.
Bellevue,WA 98006 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Department of Fish&Wildlife Department of Fish&Wildlife Dept. of Ecology Northwest Regional
Attn: Rich Johnson Attn: Larry Fisher Office
PO Box 1100 PO Box 1100 Attn: Ron Devitt,Facility Mngr.
LaConner,WA 98257 LaConner,WA 98257 3190 16th Ave. SE
Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Dewey Rancourt Robertson Don Robertson
19900 treet,#R-101
3724 Lake WA.Blvd.N. 1900 NE 48th St.,#R101
Renton,WA 98056 Re ,WA 56 Renton,WA 98056
425-255-8697
Dorothy Muller ,Doug Williams vouglas R.Marsh '(
51 Burnett Ave South#410 201 South Jackson Street 1328 N.40th Street
Renton,WA 98055 MS KSC-NR-0503 Renton,WA 98056
Seattle,WA 98104-3855
Dustin Ray Edith Hamilton X Eydie Hamilton
8936 132nd Pl. SE 3714 Lake WA Blvd.N. 3714 Lake WA Blvd.N.
Newcastle,WA 98057 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Flora Baldwin Fritz Timm,P.E. G. Goodman
4017 Park Ave.N. City of Newcastle 3715 Lake WA Blvd.N.
Renton,WA 98056 13020 SE 72nd Place Renton,WA 98056
Newcastle,WA 98059
Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin X Gary Young Gloria Brown
1120 N. 38th St. 3115 Mountain View Ave.N. 1328 N.40th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Greg&Sabra Fawcett,DDS Hamid&Tasleem Qaasim y Herbert&Diana Postlewait
Family Dental Clinic 3830 Lake WA Blvd.N. 3805 Park Ave.N.
PO Box 1029 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Fall City,WA 98024
425-222-7011
James Hanken Jeff Smith John&Greta Moulijn K'
999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 1004 North 36th Street 3726 Lake WA Blvd.N.
Seattle,WA 98104 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
John Studman Joyce Kendrich Goodwin JP Moulijn
1036 North 31st Street 3715 Lake WA Blvd.N. 3726 Lk.WA Blvd.N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
425-255-3710
Kay McCord Keith Menges Kennydale Neighborhood Association
2802 Park Avenue North 1615 NE 28th Street Attn: Kim Browne,President
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 1211 North 28th Place
Renton,WA 98056
Kevin Lindahl ,( Kevin Sloan Kim Browne
3719 Lake WA Blvd.N. Pan Abode Homes 1003 North 28th Place
Renton,WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd North Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
King County Wastewater Treatment Larry Reyman Leslie Kodish
Division 4313 North 38th Street 5021 Ripley Land North#106
Barbara Questad Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
King Street Center
201 South Jackson Street,#500
Seattle. WA QR104
Linda Knowle Linda Reutimann iviarcie Maxwell
2902 Kennewick Pl.NE 1106 North 38th Street PO Box 2048
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Mark Hancock A Mark Rigos )( Mark Zilmer X
PO Box 88811 1309 N. 39th Pl. 3837 Lk.WA Blvd.N.
Seattle,WA 98138 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
425-266-9090
Marlen Mandt Marsha Hertel / Mary Kammer
1408 N. 26th St. 3836 Lake WA Blvd.N. 51 Burnett Ave. S.,#307
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Mary Maier May Creek Steward Misty Kodish Mr. &Mrs.R. Lynch
King County DNRP 5021 Ripley Lane N.#106 1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2268
201 S.Jackson, Suite 600 Renton,WA 98056 Issaquah,WA 98027
Seattle,WA 98104
206-296-1914
Mr.Bill Dunlap Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Nancy Denney
Triad Associates Fisheries Department 3818 Lake WA Blvd.N.
11814— 115th Avenue NE 39015 172nd Ave SE Renton,WA 98055
Kirkland,WA 98034 Auburn,WA 98092
Neil Thomson Patricia Helina )( Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT
PO Box 76 4004 Lake Wash.Blvd.N. 15700 Dayton Avenue North
Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton,WA 98056 P.O.Box 330310
Seattle,WA 98133
Rich Wagner Richard Weinman Robert&Alison Taylor
2411 Garden Ct.N. 270 3rd Ave. 3811 Lake Washington BL N
Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland,WA 98033 Renton,WA 98056
Robert West Rod Stevens Roy&Cheryl Lynch
3904 Park Avenue North 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor 4100 Lake WA Blvd.N.,B 204
Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98134 Renton,WA 98056
S. &Nel Hiemstra Sara Nicoli Sara Nicoli
3720 Lake WA Blvd.N. 3404 Burnett Ave N 310 Hibriten Ave SW
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Lenoir,NC 28645
Scott Thomson Susan Martin Terry McMichael
PO Box 76 1101 North 38th Street 4005 Park Ave.N.
Mercer Island,WA 98040 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Therese Luger Tim McGrath i om&Linda Baker
4100 Lake Wash. Blvd.N.,A203 900 North 34th Street 1202 N. 35th
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Tony Boydston i Virginia Piazza Walt&Bessie Cook
3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. 1119 North 35th Street 903 N. 36th St.
Renton, WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Wendy&Lois Wywrot ( Wendy Giroux
4100 Lake WA Blvd.N., A 104 South County Journal
Renton, WA 98056 P.O. Box 130
Kent, WA 98035
• 1 OOO
119050002508 119050004009 302915006005
ANDERSON MARY M ANDERSON MARY M APPLESTONE STEVEN J
1133 N 38TH ST 1133 N 38TH ST 1204 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200023002 322405903905 322405903400
BAGBY STEVEN M+LEE ANGELA R BALDWIN DONALD P BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#C203 4017 PARK AVE N BOX 359
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055
334270000501 334270052809 334270063806
BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC BARTHELME BONITA M BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD
4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3919 MEADOW AVENUE N 25323 42ND PL S
RENTON WA 98057 RENTON WA 98056 KENT WA 98032
334270064002 362915001006 334270051207
BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD BERG JACK+ELEANOR BERGMAN TODD&SHELLY
25323 42ND PL S 3807 PARK AVE N 3813 MEADOW AVE N
KENT WA 98032 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270044509 334270044004 334270007001
BLOOD J D&P L BLOOD JAMES D+PERRI L BOYDSTON TONY
3713 PARK AVE N 3713 PARK AVE N 3901 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053500 334270024006 292405900500
BREWIS DANIEL BURDICK JONATHAN R BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE ATTN:PROP
1317 N 40TH ST 3713 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N PO BOX 96189
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 FORT WORTH TX 76161
334270053302 221200015008 334270053807
CANTU OSCAR LUIS CARL KENNETH J CARLSON RUSSEL I
3927 MEADOW AVE N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#B203 1409 N 40TH
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200001008 221200013003 221200016006
CROSSMAN CHERYL A CRUZE RANDE R+CELIA E DAPELLO CHERYL
4100 LAKE WASH.BLVD A-101 5105 HIGHLAND DR 1420 NW GILMAN BLVD#2268
RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98006 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
362915008001 362916002003 334270041000
DENAXAS BASIL DENISON STEVEN+ELIZABETH DENNEY ROBERT K+NANCY H
1124 N 38TH ST 1100 N 38TH ST 3818 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270020004 334270044202 334270044103
DENNISON DAYTON P DIETSCH CHARLES C DINEEN JENNIFER A
3717 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3737 PARK AVE N 3719 PARK AV N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
119050003001 119050003704 334270012605
DRAGSETH R DRAGSETH ROLF S ERIKSON BRUCE E+MARY R
1113 N 38TH ST 1113 N 38TH 3815 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200018002 334270014908 322405901008
ERNST LEE E EVANS MARTIN E+KIMBERLY A J FAWCETT CLARISSA
4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C102 3811 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4008 MEADOW AVE N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405908102 322405904309 334270038808
FAWCETT CLARISSA FAWCETT CLARISSA M FEROGLIA GARY A+WORTMAN SHA
4008 MEADOW AVE N 4008 MEADOW AVE N 1015 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200011007 221200025007 221200010009
FLORESAN MS GIBSON GARY J GIBSON LANCE M+CAREN M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASH BLVD N D-101 4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#B102
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200021006 221200009001 221200014001
GOOD BRUNO+ANN E GUREL MEHMET GUREL MEHMET
605 S 194TH ST PO BOX 1921 PO BOX 1921
DES MOINES WA 98148 LANCASTER CA 93539 LANCASTER CA 93539
334270038006 334270049102 362915007003
HAMILTON EDITH M HAMILTON JESS R HANCOCK MARK B
3714 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3720 PARK PO BOX 88811
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 TUKWILA WA 98138
221200022004 322405905405 322405905801
HARWOOD CHARLES H+SHARON LY HAUER ALFRED H HELINA PATRICIA S M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#C202 1330 N 40TH ST 4004 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053906 334270041802 322405905900
HENDERSON SARA HERTEL MARSHA JANICE HICKS GARDNER
1325 N 40TH ST 3836 LK WASH BLVD N 4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405903608 334270038709 221200030007
HICKS GARDNER W HIEMSTRA SYBOUT PETRONELLA HOUSER PAUL W JR&AMY S
4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4 3720 LK WASH BLV N 2230 SQUAK MTN LOOP SW
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
334270041505 334270042503 221200006007
HUNT MARGARET E HUNT THOMAS R+CARYL J HUTTON RONALD E
3908 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3916 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#A202
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200005009 221200008003 ..,,50001500
IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA ISHAM MAXINE
900 87TH AVE NE 900 87TH AVE NE 1209 N 38TH ST
MEDINA WA 98039 MEDINA WA 98039 RENTON WA 98056
119050000502 119050001005 221200017004
JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JELINEK JANE M
3741 PARK AVE N 3741 PARK AVE N 2259 74TH SE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040
322405906205 362915003002 221200012005
JONES JOCELYN C JORGENSEN ERIK H KELLY KIMBERLY ANN
.1424 N 40TH ST 1216 N 38TH ST 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#B104
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270021101 362916001005 334270050209
KENDRICK JOYCE KOLESAR LARRY+SUSAN M KOLYTIRIS PETER+CARLA G
3715 LK WN BLVD N 1030 NORTH 38TH ST 1308 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053708 334270038105 334270038204
KULLAMA PAUL J LE SELL SHIRLEY J LESELL SHIRLEY J
1417 N 40TH ST 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200019000 119050002003 334270019006
LEW KEVIN ANTHONY+JENNIFER LIEVERO LAURA A LINDAHL KEVIN L
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#103 1203 N 38TH ST BYUS REBECCA A
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 3719 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
334270053203 334270017604 221200007005
LISSMAN OLGA A LITTLEMAN VIKTORIA LUGER THERESE M
3930 PARK AVE N 3805 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WA BLVD N#A203
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270049607 322405908300 334270038501
MACKAY JOHN D MARSH DOUGLAS R MARTIN FREDERICK L&SUSAN
3734 PARK AVE N BROWN GLORIA JEAN 1101 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 1328 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056
RENTON WA 98056
221200029009 221200002006 322405904507
MCCULLOCH BRIAN D MCLAUGHLIN PROPERTIES L L C MCMICHAEL TERENCE E
12046 67TH AVE S P O BOX 60106 &BARBARA
SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98058 4005 PARK AVENUE NORTH
RENTON WA 98056
334270051009 362915004000 334270038600
MCNEELY CYRUS M MILLS RONALD W MOULUN JOHAN P
3810 PARK AVE N 1212 N 38TH &GEERTRUDE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 3726 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
221200024000 221200031005 Az..i00026005
MUSCAT JAMES P&JANE M NAGAMINE AKIRA+HIDEKO NEWING ANDREW H
1308 QUEEN AVE NE 2783 FREEDOM BL 8815 116TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056 WATSONVILLE CA 95076 RENTON WA 98056
334270042701 334270044301 322405904101
NICOLI BRUNO I&SARAH C OTSU MAKOTO PALKA ADAM&EVA
3404 BURNETT AVE N 3725 PARK AVE N 808 N 33RD ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
334270041208 362916007002 334270052502
PETETT J SCOTT PIPKIN GARY C&YVONNE M POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
21ST 1120 N 38TH PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051900 334270052106 334270052304
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
HIGH POINT LLC HIGH POINT LLC HIGH POINT LLC
PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270052403 292405901508 322405904903
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION ROD STEVENS ROD STEVENS
HIGH POINT LLC PORT QUENDALL CO.,do VULCAN,INC. PORT QUENDALL CO.;do VULCAN,INC.
PO BOX 3023 505 5TH AVE S 505 5TH AVE S
RENTON WA 98056 SEATTLE WA 98104 SEATTLE WA 98104
362915002004 334270026001 334270025003
POSTLEWAIT H L&D M PROVOST ALAN E PROVOST ALAN W+CYNTHIA M
3805 PARK AVE N PO BOX 1965 PO BOX 1965
RENTON WA 98056 GIG HARBOR WA 98335 GIG HARBOR WA 98335
334270041406 292405900203 334270038402
QAASIM TASLEEM T QUENDALL TERMINALS RANCOURT DEWEY A+
3830 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N PO BOX 477 LOIS A TT
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 3724 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
362916003001 334270053609 334270052007
RANZ MARK K RICHARDS MELISSA A RIGOS MARK J
1106 N 38TH ST 1401 N 40TH ST 1309 N 39TH PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051504 221200032003 362916005006
ROBBINS SAMUEL G RUEGGE STEVEN A SANDERSON MICHAEL S+
3900 PARK AVE N 4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#204D CATHLEEN M
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 1112 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
334270011003 334270053005 334270042008
SCHOOS GILBERT A+ALICE G SCHWABL JOSEF SIDEBOTHAM CHRISTOPHER G
3825 LK WASH BLVD N 3921 MEADOW AVE N 16055 SE 135TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98059
334270012506 334270044400 034B70040507
SIVESIND R STANLEY+ SMITH MICHAEL E SMTIH BRIAN
RIGGS JOYCE E 3706 WELLS AVE N 12048 160TH AVE SE
3821 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059
RENTON WA 98056
362915005007 221200020008 322405903806
STEVENSON DAVID A+JOYCE T STONICH LINDA K STUSSER DAVID
1208 N 38TH ST 4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C-104 STUSSER QUALITY CONSTR INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S#290
SEATTLE WA 98168
362916004009 334270053401 334270010005
TANNER MARGARET A TASCA EDWARD L TASCA JAMES G
1108 N 38TH ST 3936 PARK AVE N 14805 SE JONES PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 'RENTON WA 98058
322405905009 362916006004 119050004108
THOMSON NEIL TOUCHSTONE STEVEN C+RENEE A UNDSDERFER ROBERT L
PO BOX 76 1116 38TH ST 1021 N 38TH ST
MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270050308 334270023008 221200028001
UY NATHAN+EMILY FU VAN BOGART G CLARK VAN BOGART WAGNER BEVERLY J
1314 N 38TH ST BARBARA J 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#D104
RENTON WA 98056 3711 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98055
RENTON WA 98056
334270053104 322405904606 334270050100
WATKINS KEN W WEISENBERGER NADINE WHITE&CO ALEX#16618 C/O EXECUTIVE
3924 PARK AVE N 1324 N 40TH ST HOUSE INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N
SEATTLE WA 98103
362915009009 221200004002 221200003004
WHITWORTH SAMUEL WYWROT LOIS R YOUNGBLOOD JON C
1122 N 38TH 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#A-104 4100 LK WASH BLVD N#A-103
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270008009
ZILMER MARK E+ROSEMARY
3837 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
1 \moil rt
OF
PUBLIC SCOPING
MEETING
INTERESTED MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE INVITED TO
COMMENT ON THE SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT (EIS) FOR THE FOLLOWING PROJECT
PROPOSAL:
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10th, 2002
➢OPEN HOUSE from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROJECT AND THE EIS
PROCESS.
➢PUBLIC TESTIMONY from 7:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
OFFICIAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE TAKEN AND RECORDED DURING
THE SECOND HALF OF THE MEETING.
Meeting will take place in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS on
the 7th floor of City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way.
YOU MAY ALSO SUBMIT WRITTEN COMMENTS TO:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager'
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
(425) 430-7270
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BEFORE 5:00 p.m., DECEMBER 16, 2002.
4,14":„44,4,
,. maxie I
o p /
fty
:21;
031119446 AP ILO
i "- �°,41)0(#8/ � irk �, 14t.1 A z s
fifed H Asio p sip ••••i4;.:
I i °tigi.tee tL• S r. aru�rara .ryp
NNW/ M .;?
LU 're.r c tea... 3rl Z J a�yamisas 11 r
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115 residential lots
ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with a resulting net density of approximately 8.35
dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross acre site—9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public roadways =
13.77 net acre-a 115 units/13.77 net acre=8.35 du/ac). The shoreline fronting lot lines would extend to the
inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most of which would be
constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate units on each lot.
Landscape, roadway,utility improvements and four utility/open space tracts would be established with the plat.
With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline (within Department of Natural Resources
lease land), all buildings would be demolished as part of the project and lumber operations would be
discontinued.
Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement, which would be
dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the
abutting property on the north side of the site. The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways
throughout the majority of the project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek.
Private streets and driveways are also proposed in specific locations within the plat. A secondary access point
is also provided at the southeast corner of the property as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek (at the
location of one of the three existing bridges) in order to provide connection to the secondary access point.
Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge may require work below the ordinary high water mark
of May Creek; thereby requiring approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
Regulations prior to the installation of required plat improvements. An additional existing bridge is proposed to
be utilized as a pedestrian crossing.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for
which a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. No other alterations or
improvements to the lake shoreline are included with the proposal. In addition, May Creek bisects the property
extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake
Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark ranging from
50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore currently impervious areas to native vegetation within the buffer
area. All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer area are proposed to be retained.
The project applicant has also identified two category III wetlands with associated buffers within property
boundaries—one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of street C (aka"northerly wetland")
and another at the southern edge of the site near the south end of street C (aka "southerly wetland"). The
applicant is requesting to buffer average the minimum required 25-foot buffer for the northerly wetland. In
addition, approximately 400 square feet of the southerly wetland is proposed to be filled, with enhancements
to the northerly wetland and buffer area proposed in order to mitigate for loss of wetland area. Project
construction would require extensive grading and excavation activities throughout the site for the removal of
existing asphalt areas and the creation of new building pads, roadways, and utilities. Preliminary earthwork
quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000 cubic yards of
fill material to be imported to the site. In addition,approximately 18 trees would be removed as part of on-site
grading activities.
In addition to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) and Preliminary Plat approval, the
project requires the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated
plat improvements as well as a possible variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC
section 4-4-130.D.4.b) for the installation of the proposed bridge crossing. The applicant has also requested
an administrative street modification in order to allow for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet
throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit review for the development of the residential structures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING THE
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
FILE NO. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
PLEASE CONTACT LESLEY NISHIHIRA, PROJECT MANAGER AT (425) 430-7270
Please include the'project:NUMBER.when calling for proper;file identification:.;
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
•
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 26, 2002
TO: Environmental Review Committee Members
Departmental Division Heads/Reviewers
FROM: Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager, x7270
SUBJECT: SCOPING MEETING
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
The City of Renton will be hosting an agency scoping meeting for the Environmental
Impact Study (EIS) to be conducted for the Barbee Mill project. Interested City staff are
encouraged to attend this meeting to learn more about the project, ask questions of the
applicant or staff, and/or make comments on the scope of the EIS.
The meeting will take place Monday, December 9, 2002 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. in
the 7th Floor Conferencinq Center. Please review the attached notice for more
information and please circulate it to others that may be interested.
Please contact me at x7270 if you have any questions.
Thank you.
cc: J.Tanner,Mayor
J.Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
S.Carlson, EDNSP Administrator
A.Pietsch, EDNSP Director
J.Gray, Fire Prevention
N.Watts,P/B/PW Development Services Director
F.Kaufman,Hearing Examiner
L.Rude,Fire Prevention
J.Medzegian,Council
S.Meyer,P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R.Lind,Economic Development
L.Warren,City Attorney
C.) 'et'
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
NOTICE OF AGENCY SCOPING MEETING
The City of Renton invites all interested municipalities, agencies, and Native
American Tribes to comment on the environmental elements to be evaluated in
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An
agency scoping meeting will be held by the Development Services Division
on Monday, December 9, 2002 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. in the
Conferencing Center, 7th Floor, Renton City Hall (1055 South Grady Way).
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115 residential lots ranging in
size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with a resulting net density of
approximately 8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross acre site - 9.13-acres combined
sensitive areas and public roadways = 13.77 net acre-3 115 units/ 13.77 net acre= 8.35
du/ac). The shoreline fronting lot lines would extend to the inner harbor line. The lots are
intended for the development of townhouse units - most of which would be constructed as
duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate
units on each lot. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide
access easement, which would be dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake
Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north
side of the site. Location: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. No.
During the meeting, you will have the opportunity to ask questions of City staff
members and to make verbal and written comments on the scoping process for
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. You may also comment in writing on
the scope of the EIS, including significant adverse impacts, suggestions for
alternatives or mitigation measures, and/or licenses or other approvals that may
be required. Please submit written comments to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Fax (425) 430-7300
All comments must be received before 5:00 p.m., December 16, 2002.
If you have any questions, or would like additional information, please contact
Lesley Nishihira at (425) 430-7270.
1
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - ..
- NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
e ,
..... -.ttkolkii, t. -..
.grr'7'o "
.,.,...y_ iii,114 ..j. , Alt ,
= N -Aylitopk-, • .0020 0 It• •4 0 a
- ,- •lillti9FP11411girmr °=I 9 .
I I
IA:1;____.0.0.,..t....,..S.:1;,,,%,14 a •-4-4
1.11'
• ''''-'1!::,. 4 - Allvo
11TON '`''141 II •••• ‘?A.V• '' ' ma
.71:1.17"trik...1- 141, -.„..6N's.. 4, 4 4411111110 5F= , ,
0 1
. en...1,11 i •ti a,• , .4:11,41,,14 tit p. . .
.... .,.._ LAKE WAS H I N GTO N
• . ,
Laitz.1 WO-,, 3.TEPrgr, -! ,i; ,
41g
igiit,,wiz,.in. :,..,,,iiti:.
t' lb''''' ....-liklik'*"" ' 1111/1' iv--..
•
grAg•-• milk, -47.31r-1 w'.".Al lit --- .4.,-___IIIIAll.r halt . .
,,,.. .... • .' -
211-.11L0 L•317-'' ..:Ellff.R 11ILL,..._•.:.• zal. '... ,.-, „ti , pp, - . •
:131114 ri:A r-:,,g ED sr...: lq.71 1.71-_NISIPE i I I IE1,... jc•'I, • . . .
:-.3c,•:.,:•13srt..53_-.... M3•-ii•-.1i r-,,2 11 v•L'•-•4,"-'• ,- .. --- .., Itr/j r;•[,'It"„•T.• •
•--•--.---,:,-;,.--'7.-'-'1.:' •.1:,‘li'-l'. ''.11P LI"11 se*5...1 ii ,.._,,r,:-11 Car 11 or.. 1.1;371S IN:,Le, , -.• */,
t. 1 • t '
gel.t%,
v.,..1r,21 ma Iga •-14,:_.„7111 MI 't.. 1112= 5=1,tit ..,..E..: 1:-.1 -11P• 411.-..w. p...r•:..i.., , LAKE „.
. A '
..rair..p•-. 11 P., MP= -asp ,matt,...../r4, , 4.,,,, or. ...,,,,.1,,1,, .„. ASH)+, •INGTorr
sH•R? •
LA DS TI'v.fierd
sill.a in•--% Wt.! MICE ala:Z ?:IN'••••:. 1-41113V -- [ tie it •4kt•-•••FR E. .
.., r.
I ,.......... i
11131S7 7-'31E; Lap Eli as tif,A siAN• .:.: . „,,,,, , kr 1!„. ,R
1
lipito,
ailtiii___
WWI MISICL,.! 73 CZ -n3 UM .7.:"A S..; ....,Ka. =.,. '' '' ' VI bi, .'4 ":, ‘11111109...--- r • , •
,
Ildiag 'gr.?,.,25.3..; rr .tiCf3;-:1 ....41:M........g.• ......, 1 il „lb ... ,s,„ ....„..1 k
1 \ I
...CP Cr. -,•••NT/i ai.: 1:13'M •AA CZ .1.n.1.5.-"I WIFEM'-WW.„ '.. .A ' Ir. cit FA ‘44-.11
g
, •
......r.:4 ...-4 IL.-' ..4413. r•,•,3 rri: .x_o__-..:-:.= :5-••ituA imar.m. ,,,,--'l,.,.; •,• _, ,-...,,.,„, 1 . ... •
:.....1.E. "11,C4 W.17.7,. 13.ip, ON -tf.g.;14 ..F."1'.2111•.F4.1.Amr:1- 4 V .,.,Vir........11F1 ., t..... . . 1111111 . a. IV in. • I , °I•k‘
2Z-7:,,,,,,,"-,P23 Ze,5:74 kg'Wilb 1=1-;,,,c.,7 EU 11-4C.•EirEgLECIENIAN A 'IS ND'
1
, •
. •
•
fipx-- ,..r,:g F-4.'ino•T-..--'micE. argo!, , -c.t"T',..f. n2E-H. :-...-1.-/ RI
,..••••AI ...
- - * =1;k-.• MN I,:z. ia1.7_. .:2 VA Lia*li. :.:+2 41._ rt -nn"----E4 J.
r )91 ie),
wr-...311''.4.":4 ..' , ' r,"as in--. =TM VKA-vlir ,I. r-I''''''' -i • '. '''-N. q. I k.
.7. W E,..3 .LEZ.L.-- r.... ....,.. ...,.., . ..„.••••• ..._,-...4 ,...4.4.1„ r..... 5.Imo .. tr:,4',..,,.s'''.., ‘, .......4
/7.\,..
Mr_LT"'Li 0,11=1:67. NM IC.,_,: MI11.-1,'.rt,..''Pll•••.1,1.=, -,•_ iti ,sw .. ...M!
04,
gams I-1,1v., f.-mntle... Igiars ,.9,11 7.-.6,1 iti. .:, =.:_, p_,..4..tx ttl,.,
L....) ,
W131' 11117f1 ::Z11...r., -•• - :-•. , , .--. Tal • r'. 0 ' - ' , , , id
MEM TM Ee.-'1' L-1,--14.72-1E-Ilal WINE ...,:'4.1:/-2. ...'a.,.. .. 1 ck. li 1.,21....4
VACANT 0 1 5[2 st
I
ffli ti
.......,"• i,1:11-Q...TSILI !ID 4 t.3iIF ;IL'''. 7- P'1144 -.ail Lt' A Iiiiig-" M V : 114 .11;42..v•_b '''''''''-----*N‘',.,,...,,4. \ ...„--"C.) 0 I
.g r --, b I C
1 i 2 i
;1.11 Att' :LI .. 4-e...•,p1", IS ,,..s.cirrad 4, . f. :
IP
_, 4.„,.
,, ,iiiii-s, p.
Mee 1..0„.
pa - .. infitw- vil' kl l'. ,,d Weal -4"
c, '...,• •4,'7 44 \I). c ••.,„ ,
.,titzp..60,., ' ::`,,,:: '....' •1"1'''4.,:,..4ii:, 41i.-::,,-4;•-, .. i I
\ -iiiirr.ff k.-,:•••• .'L., , 0., -y
.•-•L-',.., Ezmi mw-•so.. i ---Zogsr b. ___. irz PI 3•16-44.V. Pt 1 . Or
4.:(4":
L_MX MI r4119. 51%11/10 tali: ..,Iirs ,. HAI ,:;7;111 • AI rja.V.•:..,,,,-.44,tt.m4. itrida ....,, -. , 'I 1.01 XLIP•00.111•33113m0m - -
,,, . •••,. .....:,,
iabia pmpiRmimagnerINtirdp-r4 0 P`• ',
qrzwrapm .
° CZ:7
: - ' s I i• ., • J
_,:eltr.,73.1/4• 5•-• - ' .4\\ _ ' : ,N4 es,.a.
i.... .....
i .jarani„affmt, ,,,, .
000C30(thilatmlEzt-S.-"Open Sp. ,,....,...-......-r..- ...... .. ,
/Aorta , liESPAgi s
, r. E ;
• -, ... ‘,Stks „/ I rAtt:4,44c.,
--'-fte',,, .4' ''.4‘.41** 4 b ,,ALig
..• ', r,i• • ,-,----- ','• • •..4- 0-4,.... ,, ,I
....._ la OE K 4. •AVE NE
May Cr•ek rk IW-------'-'• --,,,,;,•1 .,,,, FY Zilar --7"- I 1 .,!! *.‘=L•-• -• '', '''-'1••";'!''.."..4'••'.-''',,„, 4' :, -3'-' E4
.4
Z: FV.7•.,, ••. 11••• iilli,t,k:t 413 p
E
i, i IA dift ,., 0 ,.. ...,, . ..
... I 1
....
.1:
3111 Pgie',410=a-r----`4-q li MK / . a g
44 4.
4.'4' "1"11111M11111:17131112 1111111113k=111 ' .1 •
. „,ztkratiovor.,41-nuilii* n. .i
,... 4s
ito,26,411T4 . ...r.-....... !. / ,--•-
ti 1444,* MM.* AS la• 1'Mb-- l51,ettt ..--'-.0- ":71"
. • .1-'. ...111.J..airi .16, 1 0 pl CI
)
0 w r.7,3
l'izd-':offi I • R TO i ft fillti''''.-ed..: '. 1,04,4' . •p.2.'g cl L:
0 IV In 311
4
p .„.• .
12:01.111.14F," r ‘1713er 11
0 •
I eikil il Ill LIT t 1C1 1191.tit-at-141 . '5
Iiiall' g ' 1
I \, _DWZIII. - -301P$.. , '" mmor-i•
Elk II a pill.,ird .1111111 ---a.v104mtlirr, 0 z
icli, 5 •
.., • 0,, NgnZingROFIRROliti kNiti0\. Ail •Mi MR i g illokt, .x-orm - NEW KSTC: < 0
•.in,„ rl. ,A.f. ,K 4-'
Aolt
. .
•kce We la '-'.- V
II.
N11.114 -.•
agli .. A T AVL i.- •ASE... •
'-bi! din
• at"V-0-q.,102M?.1171/e4 ••'ik‘-1 big rr .
IL.ii i Ditg....oittl,r* V ic, ..=-,.'
71"( P ri- ..4.--0,ash.. ice Ilk MI& •'•- t•ar l'`' .....""----• -".. ..... ... .....•• -....- ---r..... .... ......• ••••.•MTN AVE. A
VIA .44 ,1401135 It XI lrpore ad' " CI •F NEWCASTL
i• or 0.,04.0S... ,,,,,,%0,.•
! - J3117411. 1 c: ‘1.-.0 . •,...., ..c "I,- .
z :
30209 0011)t);'
CO 2
g,.....
I
INIESCEMEMBOd I 0 ‘
i
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT ',
ii
- OVERALL PLAT -PLAN - ir
• ..,�
/ o so roo 2aD w
/ J//
I 8
a
1.
7.!, n fr, , s,
' � !oa • • . w
>,,,,If..., ,i
t
•
,_
10,./..//, A ) ---.1- .........
_o 1 ji !IL-4 2_ n
i ,, ,, ,,, c-----
/ ' � .,y 07.„ t
� •r . E y`
�1\
;
WE /'j
.v..+wJ COR-2 Ron • `\ ' / ' IAI '
•
.;
_ a / � 4
j _ - .GI 'I i t i n .A� I,_ F �z. � _.' r / / J �; d z
_; 1' -I y, .. „ . . II . _I _7_ /H I
' r L.LJL-,..L-'-JL-I-JL-aL_I-JL1-JLy_JL_I _,,L / .% %,/ / I ` 1 JHz.: s —' a +,BIRI I_ __-_c.__ _.1 ..2122ETA. N
r�n ;y : : 11F � ' SNPJ g �R e Di WASHINGTON . - � e ( r � i r r % ;
r—•-- � .'<' /< - It } • � G• P. cA
rL='_J `\, / 1 L JLJ_JL_LJ %/ r klit .". x1H':ii I• y 1 $
I WA. /I _Iu //w.%./ ; Ka0' N0' 000' p01r�.i
"3% ' `\�`,;L•. \ ./ .. , _�,/ ,, I SCALE Ili FEET W7S
I ..xi , ;'•"` +`N /c- ' / VICINITY MAP E.
.L 6�_'# _1�.\ // /
I.\ _Ln (La^`�\ \° .t,`\at \'`%•' !✓� / / LEGAL DESCRIPTION: >-t
/ I I `''. l 1 /\<.•^•`\ I :-• '' /j/. / // i WASHI GTONTHI LAND�MED TO
1@Ta AND 19 DESCRIBED AIAR IN THY 6fA71t OF `
I I —J <%Z )''• -7 i / , ( AIL THAT PORTION OP 00T�IT LOT 1.SECTION OD.SADISM.24 N01CI
--� ^\ \, =`. % ' / RANGE O Lt13T,EY..ID ZING COUNTY,WA�T010N AND OP 96COND CLASS
r .„ - IR `• "^ / % SHORT 4003 ADIOIIDNO LTD7a 1130 T 0r NORIRODI MOW RAILROAD MOW
RiET"-!- \` `"••.' '�—:1 ',/ OT TAT.INCEPT THAT PORTION,I?INY OP SAID f 9 LIMO NORTH 01 i
o' s.-I Z (Ea\ •••C • /. : / roe vranc Q.T PHODOCNOH or TOO NORTH LINO or SAID WVHOD6i1 LOT 1. W
L_•-� 1 \\erg •.=mr,/ ••^..•'' I / i LL SHOATS!001K!COUNTY Or ZINC 3711E Or 1AHH072000 a Z
gn 1fr = -` \ ••.„•.//4 • '•:„%,= >�� // 4. FLOOD HAZARD a
r1 I-- 11'' I ` '•4%. .// THs 100 TEAR FLOOD HAZARD ID CONTAINED 11HHIN TKO HAT CR=RAM N I-
...7.-.17-.., / /,,,-..17,1 //7 >p >
1 I\ 0 Incorporated
MAY CRAM.10101 .17.4.• <r. � %% / _ em�Atem r.T loo
•6le l.d HrHm4 Ie
j•. Er (125 E71-IRO
/ I �4 I_ k mtenet IIR.01ekl=
M1 € F 30209.001.001
/, \F 9 ,,,'.'. Project No
i 8 6T OE. Sheet Na.
MORK N 40TH ST. YOU Inc t-eoo 424 ssN sn..t 1 m 1
rcY
C)) .6711
ru
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
NOTICE OF AGENCY SCOPING MEETING
The City of Renton invites all interested municipalities, agencies, and Native
American Tribes to comment on the environmental elements to be evaluated in
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An
agency scoping meeting will be held by the Development Services Division
on Monday, December 9, 2002 from 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. in the
Conferencing Center, 7th Floor, Renton City Hall (1055 South Grady Way).
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115 residential lots ranging in
size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with a resulting net density of
approximately 8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross acre site — 9.13-acres combined
sensitive areas and public roadways= 13.77 net acre—3 115 units/ 13.77 net acre=8.35
du/ac). The shoreline fronting lot lines would extend to the inner harbor line. The lots are
intended for the development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as
duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate
units on each lot. Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide
access easement, which would be dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake
Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north
side of the site. Location: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. No.
During the meeting, you will have the opportunity to ask questions of City staff
members and to make verbal and written comments on the scoping process for
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat proposal. You may also comment in writing on
the scope of the EIS, including significant adverse impacts, suggestions for
alternatives or mitigation measures, and/or licenses or other approvals that may
be required. Please submit written comments to:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Fax (425) 430-7300
All comments must be received before 5:00 p.m., December 16, 2002.
If you have any questions, or would like additional information, please contact
Lesley Nishihira at (425) 430-7270.
• 1
•
iiAtc.ts_tir.J MILL P.K.ELIMI.N Alt Y PLAT - .N.ElLitIBUKHOU.L) DETAIL MAP
t . ,
4;
,...,:_--0 ,• 1, , , . 7-.
-1 • . • . ,
. •
= t 0.1461414., eh. •
•, .
. a• leo,no. roo. a
- 2i1A4P..3n..11NIfir!ii) • • .
' .
irqii;ri,,-• ...tS !
"" 7.---“••-•--..! '.9,!:I.,irki...4'" ...4:;-.C. .
•
. • II
-4,....,,,i,„,,,,,e - .... -44.0, • , .
•.. . 1.
..... va.,'•
q
.
41re .1,11.50Fits ;. ."444,41111 A• '. • • LAKE WASHINGTON • 0.
• 1
• _44....-11T-5.!.,.:...",„'..!ilt---"'-',....,,,, -- "4 ik. .5 ' :
... • • . ,
Ea., .1m3 ,.•.:t..•.::O....'r.rt:•-•.+7-1".V4-Ihk. , • . . •11,714.7. 11011L. -.7..-.1r.--1• wip.,:.„,,,r,kr. ..,• . -. -?',.I13il;--."aZ:.11..:-4zd...-DAn.131-r4.i ML1!rCEZD3t-7aA-i.l..3cI,:t,.,-A.•X"-s27=,fa1.i-7.c..F..9.aE.C3.103r7iei1 r 1rrCEqt=rie.•,ii%7rt,asi,:.c.:1,=4,,•••.,,:w:1.W.•'.,R 7Er...1-.1DMD%a1-tti1 rI•SOr.Cc.,.'.-f.A.i46!a'..‘1::mi19.3I1G.....1,l91D.-1.,4i13i1 F 11D1rM9a1:2rt.A-,Et-Ci,•l.•.t.1:)131._o.1;4.Ea-.-C.D.42:114r:.1-4:r aE 3AZ3=Zi1iZ-i:41M.KlF..:4:1-Y1:Iu'f 1M1l1f-1:1-7..l3 44,'.-,.--,••..1:37...,$4,1!1,.2;22..1W`..i1 V.gF47:r 2.•r1t i-14..';,:t..g....21•V,I-X.,.4,ai7L.-.r-.s.--,l1•.1-1,e11r-.,.
...i1:.'7,-,'l4-....i li 4 i.„•',i..:'1."1-.WI t I
EKA1 E.= W1 &4
m M3 ammiNR 4...F:..''i 2..r-„,i-,•,.,:r4.,:p,k...:.i1..14 kl•4”-e--.-4 4.•v•.N•..'z.'.N''$s.'1..'
4• W:As k yr•G.•a
N
‘ .•-
••, ••
ta sv ir a.14•1%l L LA•. D_s
..••••-:,••'.••.••
. • ....' • . ••. \'
\.\•,.. •. • I1..:••.
•
•
. •'
1.c..o,(..
,
J • • 'OA,'124.-2: ..,...1. mi.,-R-p......_ mi is scui,: mcir,. r.Tuc.*- MD LI .4.- hir./.11Z 4<t0-;.•..k, '••"IN 1k 1 • .
. .15. . • .
213;%-zz arm: =1:p.-.; sz i.-. .••.• if-147.1.- ,_-.:1-44:• Latlf.: r. N'f'q_ 1 ••• M.. fik-7-ei .. - . * \...... . _L____•‘•,..4.1.
1,
... .
. I.
arr.= Imo Pa :E.01}•••• En I=p111•.1.z*,z =rim K 4/4. .A 1:-..4 r• *714 i., .., ..1 .. : hk. i ..s • ' I % • , d
saxr7621..r-nr"DP*.•1 1?I_V 7:1:51,4 'Ps:1m EN" mi'-'111:1:z Fis''''zw"Inac.skIl.E..: =10.0'h...,.To 8- La,a51,90., . • '. .„..-Ss, I
WIN 197 N'aVf.30111:147:111Kir. ..,F.-N.111,074% -• -,.: k.
1
Iff11111 -41 P.U win 1.,,m Do ,r-_-.-. .•nr.:•'L.11= 114711_.•-; '..‘ "" Ilk NI *us••• IPA ' I CI 1 VACANT 0
C71 if•A..,74 7==Z r•VErt :...72 ., if•, . IVE". a.-11 7. „ ,,, Aik.*, ,..411111k.
.i.gr".M.4.m.1121 241.10:LIAL'.....,i eri. :0-Air*: wiirTz mor,,,1 pa,. sm...1,4 1 1 1 0 • _ j.. -A.,...._ j• ••-•›- N r ....„..--11€111D 0 AIIHIIP •.•z.4 4,t-4. I. 4104
ri "•Ai =..J.riri. `'''''r IL,,,.q1 II,.... .1161..,4 lik, '':451.1.11..:...OR-..... i 'INA MI -,,...ititift, - -.0,4,......„,„,„' ....;" A • 1 Elf Iii:.,117-ir,..,.9,,,..04,11 i: FA.:lik Ell m il..4.eeidlifig-willgia :fel;F.j..... , 4414.
'.....
...
IP
.;a1 - rIN lawn,.r-ititszika Zit-Rit rari
r•-•:,.,: -••... ti, . Li .r . .: imett..._„. , , \ iht
. II__ MB=.•,..._14 lout; .„--,,--4. idwpc= _,.,,..,,, n, .4, iii - -Iqp. 14 %, 7.4.Cr.P, 14.4,/
.1 li I in' .1;i 0 I..,,--.' ''-ia t•I I 11.. irmrff 4 4' 7-47141.. . No!sill :r_t _NINo 4.
.. . ,
•
.1 ii , c., \‘41..: 4..c.:,, ...• . , .... e?
. o4,
.1'7, =99 1, 9!"•99. -- A. ._.__. et 19/91.4. . Al, pi : , Illri.no,.., .„,m,.. /• 4. \ •4 44'. • ' s
,i.t..,.,,,,,,,.4.,,, ......vil.„ - , ,_ .....,_,, ,0•,4: 1.,L....a.,=atenier:41,„„..41
L_girtmo- K.FIrrifi.imwd Ti2M. i•T-,,,,, 44, 17,1-NU, - Nair alp, /. 0 . •,,,.:, -.. e.,,,,,N,„Ei- ,_:_ . i ... .
• . 61-QUIll MIN1161.121011 - .L...dirtasii..air 1 =7 -. % . .4. 4- %*. ."-t,7 °:'-'.k.' ',.
. .......... ...
br' ',-
• -....
. • . ".. Er•
1 I 1"7
i RiPOlAtl.'?".r....=...r. ..4.'"''''' ' . 0.1,11 Jr. . •14'.. .4.,. kc:..._ . '-'. '' ''''''....*%%41.-46;4‘,,,..<.'.- P'-'.t),. .lb'-.4. . .I. A5P
r- - •001rEtt-ii.--
• .,1, -, -.._ ,:.,„.../A...et.
1 t PArg racy off, . 141119 . ret.-.41' 11111iraiU".----- 11111111110P.
hi• '79 ti glarglai UOIR . lt,41. _ 1 . ,•
.. . ..
, ....• S ,!,
••• "44:t4..„
'''',ii.,...• 41111`4,;-,-111t , • •-'
.4%:;.*... 1 Oi•OA
•1 4 b, ' i4'44, I
• C11-.
_1.1 ____ fa eRE K , 4. •.AVE 1.19, k
,. ., .'• 1 •,•• /;
• 4•W
Kay Creak r
•
. - -°--'91‘• .,,P7‘'..... . iillair . III I ti L11111
• 7/ 7. •Nillr 1"...1': IM 411E9111 111-31111
. ,
-.- .,•., - ., . . . ,
• ....,
• - 9',-,..., %
• 10. . . ;' ,,
. =104_,..„,=16111111pibir Mil imi .q iirik•;
vl-'-7.-7-°_,IL!,••••1-
1 1
------'-----"',•-r'',+7'......!,• 0
;14 4 •
"440 ......E• - • .111-1E114 1111111C illika --6L0:61,..,. "--jti
f..., • ,,,..iiiivititwwwoon.x..x.-: , ..,, ..„).. ._..„..,_.......,,, _. 1 : .,.-
• -, to * ••••, .. meow rk.E. 11.E.f. 0110111911°-.4 OX51 1"rit • Ill -• ...- id • r"7.1 .... '4.1.- '''''0 .w lesI.,....rs.--;" -"14 m
0 ri . IdIrlie "Aeign IX- FM
'-',1161LV, Ed -10.z.•r .•
i' __,L,, - . ".-Vti?;-!•_4;÷" •' !.' ' - . 0 M c•T3
.4- r•rVilck,-1 Oa Ilia sti flit -Kr?. to I q Ng" -'''' 4,--'r,---• • R 0
.., 1 , Estrr
0, ,..r .. , •*II.P. 0.0 a z
0.4. nc- ilUSrelpw,_.' Let .11X •. -....Ag e a .
4: Pilot C).7.04•14.MIUM 1,Xt:gal 2 111 •••kf 1 - -I
44 . •iNg;g. fiRliRRUU113' :1111ii'' • •
i .
ct Zrt.1140:73T4,1112Aer4, vo
+ Lia.M. 'ler Qat fr ,aur.:Agi
3-,atf, . . t . .._ . .., . .• >
..., , .:.!:31111,11UPP"., I. ".1
t•-.1k.W..1111 ; _
• i
T•N 6
AIN .,. - •
til-w'a2IX. 1
......_ ._......_...... ._ .. ..,„..., :.
AVE I-
iiat•
4.-• :
amar, .5. C4 z
4.4
0 v., -.:•,,„,.,
...,_
rs-git-,100 A,,2 VP .,, ,IIX 10P. CI . F NEW ASTL . ''.."4"1111111111 vii-.-.• A*• It VI • 'Ile ij gr gto2 -orporsled
•11,. 0..,r, * .
AtkiiNE„ ! 4k a
‘: . x. ---4 0.
pi letiA,-.4. * otp• *. lir.l•-e - .., mr.:-...re
• • k -4' ^-• ili, r g. :1;12
w -. ix!), 44-6...1.-:0 .**,4•, we . r. ,..9 gr.
'....)"II • 7k1 • • 9 a
1 :1. ,. -a. ... •
' . .
' • .
.1 ait. n_r* ...A . 1411
. • A 30909.991901
Aoki kr.
CO 2
t •
• •
P9.19,6419/09 14:0-61-kgq kk.,,r, '.
: •
•- • - ' " •
• • .' '• • •
. k .• .
•
• ' •• .
• -•
•
. , .
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT % /A,
ii
OVERALL PLAT PLAN /r9,,,T./.'-'
o So ,00 zoo W/ • I 11.1r7t' 1
rw Y
1.1
,,, D
MASOCION
. , -' !,'°Ir.'.'/ /- "..- - 'if oo S .r . .. W c WE
1) c\--.1..
_ iGcJ� i i '. a , 1 ill
COR-R zoNR .u-.m " j . �, �\ e ifi
•iLa.. r-1 ' 1`-•A1`-i`-JJ`1r--m'-�' r-• ,�1-7r p1-1rr1 1i-i 11j-:. 7 ,/Jr / / � j)J� II{
1 1_JLSE -LJL_`JL I _n_i,JL_I_JL I_ _ I II' ;_ I. I 1 7 %� / 0 �� w I l�v+,m I
r�:73 y' JL 1_JL_1_J _
LAKE ! ,�" g � __� a „ - t F to r �t ; s
WASHINGTON 1 L�•_3 .. / _Y,'_ _� - e_1 % i'rt- : 4 Ur T. td
rf 't ( 9 (� aw G
qL°i_':.i •' !� ✓� • . '' Fes_"a_.1. i.'LJLJ_J L1� [_ .f afCit1.wA i � �' E
� '�•�' --A_.i / ;'i ... .L::M!�.il'Iilh�.•1.^:,* ?.rir • fl -' Q!
r /I_ I
I ars n o sro a sea oar mil.
LR
...CANT .\\<`�':;`` . �••''....Lr /:�/ SCALE N FEET'Tr InTiiiiiil p i
�i .. .---/- ;/ VICINITY MAP E.
A.
,,--` ---1 `li.1,."'y'.% .. ;'\\\,:„.�\ ,.\\.w 'j�)./ ' / o«
`...> �,`t-\"\ >` i/ . /�. I 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
\i s y -� I`•• .."L�" ,,may•.•' // ,I/ �y I ffi ram m®m E�COlooEmTr m�twe>m n eua CO
/ i /
-1-4` - lam'" ` ••••••..•11s i�/• ,,/ I i 1•AxmxOlox.COMET 07 mTa AND m Dlb: i O A!)oIIo■R: Z
I 1�__J .,i r>� �� / / I 1 AIL LSAT PORTION 07 OOV WT WY 1.=NON NO.TOIB 94 NORTH,
rw...1 //an,.• !} � -• •/ ."��/ I07%LYNG MENUM OP N mows P RtASECDR303 AM Or AII%�RIOR! 1�•
'• 1 !y v /'•• i -.-! ,, / 0r TAT, T THAT PORTION.O£NT.Or BALD BBOmOANOB LYBm NORTH o7
5'-a+•l- - f`. "A, ,' ' / ..... Y>Q 1TeaEaaa PmnRcnox ar s�BOOTH rHa oP BAm aaviatao AT LOT 1. w
La--' y .•. '••.••• F �aAn u ffi COUNTY 07 m,a Bus os�ABiLDOTrON. u'
IL I
:1 '_T`--;- \1 -, /, •" - ;"F,�> .S/ FLOOD HAZARD1. ga,
,-�„" ' `-' I : < 'v.>•' •
',`I/. / THx Loo�R now NAMAt0 m CONTOUR NlSEN Tffi MAY eRox BONIO. 5• 3
I T-v • I� • T7
3 •� n,\ 911 ter-: / .."-.. ! D U PO
4.4
(.•\Lk.‘ 2\-ii::.OP•.•/ ,.. /..,,V::•. i•k‘.:le iv/. / .."0 o a
•
/' ,% 4' t•, % V. per- A Q lncorporeted
•
( MAY CR�N / (%���\ ' b, %, T a
�SA ->'-'^T / F . NoRcl N9.001I.001
/• Ca_1
-_..___.R-RzotaE__ 1 te71 k •..••.^v I 9 L7 e'L sheet No.
- JIY.' i N 40TH ST. _
- sn.ee I m I
,
4 %; ; CITY t i RENTON
••LL 4 . Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
/ 165 —
November 25, 2002
Pficv u 7 19-u/eg--
Wendy Clement
Foster Pepper & Shefelman, PLLC
1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, WA 98021
Subject: Request for Records
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Dear Ms. Clement:
Pursuant to your Request for Public Records filed November 18, 2002, enclosed are
copies of documents contained within the above referenced file dated September of
2002 to the present.
As established by RMC section 5-1-2.C.1 (attached), payment is necessary for the
copies provided. This fee is estimated at $30.15 (201 pages x $0.15 = $30.15). At your
earliest convenience, please submit to my attention a check for the referenced amount
made out to the City of Renton.
Please do not hesitate to contact me at (425) 430-7270 should you have any questions
regarding this project.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishi ra
Project Manager
enclosures
cc: Bonnie Walton
Gregg Zimmerman
Jennifer Henning
Clarice Martin
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
A
VC n•FF P
R�/VTp11/N/11/
11 •z`br .
CITY OF RENTON 49E0 I.
CITY CLERK
SEA
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 20, 2002
TO: Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator
FROM: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk/Cable Manager, x6502
SUBJECT: Request for Records by Foster Pepper&Shefelman, PLLC
Attached please find a Request for Public Records to be responded to in accordance with
RCW 42.17 and City Policy and Procedure 100-05. This request, from Wendy Clement
of Foster Pepper&Shefelman,regards the documents from September 2002, to the
present, for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,LUA-02-040, ECF,PP. Since these records
are currently the responsibility of your department, I am referring the request to you for
response. Please be mindful that certain records are exempt from Public Disclosure. See
Policy&Procedure#100-05 regarding exemptions, and contact our City Attorney if you
have questions on these.
Please respond to this request within five days as follows:
• Provide the records to the requestor; or
• Acknowledge the request in writing and provide a reasonable estimate of how
long it will take to respond; or
• Deny the request in writing, with reasons for the denial stated as specifically
exempted by law; or
• If you feel the request is unclear, ask the requestor for further clarification.
While the City is not obligated by law to compile information from various records into a
specific form, we are required to produce existing records for inspection.
Please let me know within the five days how you plan to respond to the request, or how
you would like me to respond to the request, if you prefer I do it. Also, please "cc"me
with any related correspondence for my file.
Thank you.'
Enclosure (1)
1-: Lesley Nishihira
41/18/02 15:54 FAX.206 447 9700 F P & S _ 10001/002
FOSTER PEEPER & SHEFELMAN PSLLC
ArrO rEYs AT LAW CITY OFREtsITON
Sco'i 18 2042
1111 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3400 RECEIart CL RKKS ED OFFICE
SEATTLE, WA 93101
FAX: (206)447-9700
PHONE: (206)447-4400
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
November 18, 2002
TO: FAX NUMBER: VOICE CONTACT: VOICE CONFIRM:
City Clerk of Renton 425-430-6516 425-430-6510 ❑Yes ® No
From: Wendy Clement
Direct Dial: (206)447-2814
Attachments: Request for Public Records
Number of Pages (Including this cover page): 2
User &Client/Matter Number: 5403 336.57
Return to/Location: 3403
Message:
•
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.REGARDING THE TRANSMISSION OF THIS FAX,
PLEASE CONTACT THE FAX DEPARTMENT AT(206)447-2903
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN Tills FACSIMILE COMMUNICATION IS PRIVILEGED AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF EACH INDIVID UA I.OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER
OF THIS COVER PAGE IS NOT AN INTENDED RECIPIENT YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION OR THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,PLEASE
IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THIS FACSIMILE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE
U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU.
,11/1O/VG J. '. '* rites CVO 49/ i1UV/ r r o: J iv,'uVL/VUL
.— --
•
®/ •
^At. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORD
Wendy Clement
NAME OF REQUESTOR
Poster Pepper&Shefelman,PLLC . 1
ADDRESS1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400 I •
Seattle,WA 98021 (Business) i 206-447-2814 (Fax) 1 206-749-.1974 .
PHONE: ,_---,
PUBLIC RECORDS/INFORMATION BEING REQUESTED_
(Please be specific—give name,location,file number, etc.) .
l Attention Lesley Nishihira__ ` .-• ' "
• Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat-LUA-02-040,ECF,PP -
Any and all documents submitted from September, 2002 to the present, this includes comment
letters, memorandums, appeals, staff reports, notes, DS's, plans, maps, up dated reports on
J traffic, critical areas, water, earth or any other report with in the expanded scoping area.
REQUESTER TO READ AND SIGN UPON SUBMITTING REQUEST
I understand that Washington State law,prohibits the use of lists of individuals for commercial purposes(RCW
42.17.260(9)),and prohibits the use of lists for promotion of an elected official or to promote or oppose a ballot
proposition(RCW 42.17.130). I also understand that I may be charged a copy tee based on rates set by RCW
42.17.260(8),in conjunction with the Fee Schedule set in the Renton Municipal Code.
///e1 4) •e ms
Signature of :41 estor Date of Request
Per RCW 42.17.320,within five business days of receipt of the records request,the City must 1)
provide the record; 2) estimate when the request can be completed; or 3)deny the request. ,
r'.;i,:; .;Ira7,Gn ywf,.:.r,y$I";,rv�""a-;�:9: P �.Y:3'�•,%�.'n�fY.','. ,711io%o iM1 l L' . ,.;;;;;,'„lr
Mlxi ll,
,
r�17s
,'e• .7 M
Y'v .� _
^� ,,ll.
.on ':.M:„ .11.0
-.TI
",7n•,~.�
.,Iri f!� P{~;r•„iyrlv:V;:u Y•.I d..:,;"'y°+�i• l i,::::;:!4.N;'
° .( `a
. I., . � ;r..!: ,4a �„... •,y,.1_„,r. r„, ..„ -
-1W.n i.:5W , ., 'rw'�'. „.. ",7.�" w I, «m1
ul„ .. n .
—
11/18/02C:1Documents and Satings\clemw\Loeai Sertingi\Tempoiary Intcmcl Flcs\OLK9lREQUBST FOR PUBLIC RECORD.doe
• 5-1-1 1-`
•
CHAPTER 1
�. FEE SCHEDULE
SECTION:
5-1-1: Fee Schedule Adopted(Rep. by Ord. 4723)
5-1-2: Charges For Instruments,Reports, Codes And Services
5-1-3: Refunding Land Use Fees(Rep.by Ord. 4723)
5-1-4: Fines For False Alarms
5-1-5: Golf Course Greens Fees
5-1-1: FEE SCHEDULE ADOPTED:
(Rep.by Ord. 4723, 5-11-98)
5-1-2: CHARGES FOR INSTRUMENTS,REPORTS, CODES AND SERVICES:
The following charges are hereby established by the City which shall be collected for the follow-
ing instruments, reports, codes and services: (Ord.3774, 12-19-83)
A. Maps:
Zoning maps—standard size $5.00 each
Precinct maps—large size 2.50 each
Comprehensive Plan map 2.00 each
(Ord. 3887,2-4-85; amd. Ord.4789,8-16-99)
�., B. Plat:
First page 1.00
Each additional page 0.50
(Ord. 3774, 12-19-83)
C. Photostatic Copies:
Up to ten (10)pages free. After first ten (10)pages all pages, including
the first ten(10),will be charged as follows:
1. Per single page 0.15
Per double sided page 0.30
(Ord.4267, 4-23-90; amd. Ord.4639, 10-28-96)
2. Photostatic copies as furnished by Library coin operated reproduction
machine,per page, 0.10
(Ord. 3774, 12-19-83)
D. Audio or Video Tape Copies:
1. Audio tape, each copy 10.00
2. Video tape, each copy 10.00
(Ord. 4953, 2-4-02)
502
City of Renton
I
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
'DETERMINATION i,
ENVIRONMENTAL-REVIEW
Barbara Alther,first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the COMMITTEE - -
RENTON,WASHINGTON '
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL The Environmental Review
Committee has issued a Determination i'
600 S.Washington Avenue,Kent,Washington 98032 i of'Significance for the following project
' under the authority of the Renton ,.
a daily newspaper published seven(7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of Municipal Code. '
general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of PROJECT NAME: BARBEE MILL
PRELIMINARY PLAT
publication,referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-02-040,
newspaper in Kent, King County,Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a ECF,PP •
legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. • DESCRIPTION: The applicant is t - -
lir
The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the South County Journal(and . requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre
not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers during the below site into 115 lots ranging in size
from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 SF. ..--.`.-- - 1
stated period. The annexed notice,a ' The lots are intended for'the near future. You may comment on '
development of townhouse units - ` alternatives, mitigation measures,
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat most of which would be constructed
'probable significant adverse impacts,`
as duplex structures along with and licenses or other approvals that
as published on: 11/12/02 f some 3-unit, 4-unit -and 5-unit r i may be required.Your comments must
structures to be located on the be submitted in writing and received;
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$114.00,charged to southeast side of May Creek. .. ;, .before 5:00 p.m. on December 16,
Acct. No.8051067. Landscape,' roadway and utility .2002.
improvements are included with the Appeals of the environmental
The cost above includes a$6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. proposal.'4 utility/open space tracts f determination must be filed in writing
would also be established with the 'on or before 5:00 p.m. November 26, '
Legal Number 848566 'plat. Location: 4201 Lake ,2002.Appeals must be filed in writing E
Washington Blvd.N _ •together with the required $75.00 l
/ !G d"0"
, Scoping: Agencies, affected tribes
will be application fee with:Hearing Examiner,
`/ i and members of the public !, ,City of Renton,1055 South Grady Way,
Legal Clerk, South County Journal given an opportunity to comment on ,
of the EIS. Specifically, ; �Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the
.the scope
Examiner are governed by C' of
further notification will be given „ ; Renton Municipal Code Sectio.
Subscribed and sworn before me on this ` day ofA4) ,2002 : regarding the time,date and location of 110.B.Additional information rega3ng
` Leisi
scoping meetings to be held in the the appeal process may be obtained i.
from the Renton City Clerk's Office at`'
`��`��litti rri �fi/, Notary Public of the State of Washington ,' ,(425)430 6 in
`\NN ,. /// t Published in the .South. _County
// residing in Renton , Journal-November 12,2002.848566
• io /� °EVELOp4 King County,Washington i -
` F9 • 0 C/TyOE pL41y 1
\ i d RFAOAiNpV0 Y . k�„may ' '2
s AUBt.\ ' o. r -' F_��,:,
s . a� .
NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Significance for the following project
under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code.
PROJECT NAME: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115
lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 SF. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units - most of which would be constructed as duplex
structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the
southeast side of May Creek. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included
with the proposal. 4 utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat.
Location: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N
Scoping:Agencies, affected tribes and members of the public will be given an opportunity to comment
on the scope of the EIS. Specifically, further notification will be given regarding the time, date and
location of scoping meetings to be held in the near future. You may comment on alternatives,
mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may
be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on
December 16, 2002.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. November
26, 2002. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with:
Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way,' Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the
Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information
regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office at(425)430-6510.
Publication Date: November 12,2002
Account No. 51067
dnspub
_ „
. __ _ ____
NOTICE .
.:
APPEAL:You may appeal this determination of significance,In writing,pursuant to RMC 4-3016,accompanied by a non-
refundable$75.00 appeal fee,no later than 5:00 PM on November 26,2002 to:
• Renton Hearing Exemtner •
ENVD2ONMENTAL DETERMINATION City Clerk'■Office .
Renton City Hell-7'Floor
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE(DS) 1055 South Grady Way
AND EXPANDED SCOPING OF EIS Renton,WA 98055
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION• To appeal this Drxiaratlon,you must file your appeal daeuement with the hearing examiner within fourteen(14)
tlays of ma dote fits Decleretion of Slgniflceoce(OS)has boon published In the official city nowepaper.See City
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT Code Section 4-8.110,RCW 4321C.075 and WAC 197-11.680 for further details.There shall be only one appeal of
LUA-02.040,ECF,PP . e Declaration of Significance(DS),and If en appeal has already been flied,your appeal may be joined with the
Descriprior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed It the other appeal has already been heard.You should be prepared
square
feet:The 7,338 square
H requesting to subdividefronting a ng.let lines
exite Into 115 lots Irnner harborg sire from The1 lots to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA
square feet to rthe square feet with the ouselie units-most lot Iwhic extending be to the Inner line.ex lots P 1
are Intended for the development of townhouse - of which would constructed as duplex structures appeals.
along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek.
Landscape,roadway and utility Improvements are Included with the proposal.Four utility/open space tracts would BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT d�
also be established with the plat.The site is presently utilized for limited lumber operations.With the exception of OVERALL PLAT PLAN it •
the existing building located on the shoreline,all ll buildings would be demolished as part of the project. •
`F/ x`
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north side of
the site.A secondary access point Is also provided at the southeast comer of the property.The project would R ,�
provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek /. -G
In order to provide connection to the secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed , ` A_
bridge would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek;therefore approval of a /j, /"y(—I
variance from the Clty's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations Is necessary unless demonstrated s:a�i�i87Yaaa7awf
otherwise. In addition to Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat and Variance approval,the project
•
requires the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat ,,,m„W ,L. _,,,/ .�Improvements. The applicant has also requested an adminislretive sheet modificallon In order to allow for a 00004,4V.-41 d� _reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet Throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing - f yExaminer Slte Plan end Shoreline Substantial Development Permtt review for the development of the reeldentlel +���� I Ir
structures-both of which the applicant Me chosen to submit as separate land use applications In the fture.THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE(ERC)HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED •
r
ACTION DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. ��a`d '"s �, ~
• -�� �� � N
PROPONENT: Barbee Mill Company r o./4G/j WW1 �,� .
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North(west side of Lake Washington __ °4. 13 6 a +, 'Q, `T NW ,
Blvd.between North 40a'Street&North 44 Street) Gr _ . .
EIS REQUIRED:The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. 0�. r/ / __ J,
An Environmental impact Statement(EIS)Is required under RCW 4321C.030(2)(c)and will be prepared.An
environmental checklist,or other materials Indicating likely environmental Impacts,can be reviewed at our offices. ' \� e4 '
Environmental Review Committee ji s �i
LEAD AGENCY: e1,�� ,1
City of Renton ",yo` a �
The lead agency has Identified the following areas for discussion In the EIS: II � , y�*1, _
-n ' y
Transportation;Earth(Sots Contamination);Air Quality,Water Resources(Storm Drainage/Runoff;Groundwater, e-jF
Water Quality);Land Use;Shoreline and Critical Areas(Critical Fish Species and Habitat Areas);Aesthetics; 1
Socioeconomics (Population, Housing, Employment); Recreation; Public Services and Utilities (Fire and ate-) .''�
Emergency Medial Services,Police Services,Schools,Parks,Water,Wastewater,Solid Waste);Archaeology. I /- ,,1 ,�„
JO :4 r.'
SLOPING:Agencies,affected tribes,and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS.You e�.,'k°. �1.
may comment on allematNes,mNigation measures,probable signKcant adverse Impacts,and licenses of other approvals i �, .;.m�c7 Wn
that may be required.Your comments must be submitted In writing end received before 5:00 p.m.on December 15, �t4IC ,, VA NI
2002.
Responsible Official: City of Renton es.d40[z.F�t.??,M ..1 i• 1��Environmental Review Committee • 1 H? bESSEi9Yd�x it'.Ls I d •
Development Planning Section ... — ,i�y�3"'I /'`r7-9rE'llE -�t•I�
'I,: it xv: ., lC3—R.Z
PlanninglBulldlnyWsy,6°erica Dept ,.,�,dnpty�r„�,;:yz amr.'a t '.
1055 South Grady Way,6 Floor "-
Renton,WA 98055
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ,
AT(425)430-7270.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
• Please Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification.
CERTIFICATION
•
•
I, � I�►In�l h-at _, hereby certify that 0 copies of the
above document were posted by me in .a conspicuous places on or nearby
the described property on Wl r'e_�,C.(41.n-j o NP tA- l :-
vG" i c - Signed: 2
ATTEST:Subscribed and sworn before me,a Notary Public,in and for the of
Washington residing ih ,on the 4• '�'10 C� a40�.
.Ai ii.«s_.,m.row.'iVIC49s.,.Cs,..dr.
4 f ARILYN KAMCHEFF
MARILYN KAMCHEFF d NOTARY PUBLIC
MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 STATE®F INgSHINGT®N
COMMISSION EXPIRES
• JUNE 29, 20�J3 s
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the (8 day of Y a.k 1P v,-,1 6. ' , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope containing
. el C tZ-kv vim.i ✓_g, car ct (1 o"h c_ e
documents. This information was sent to:
•
Name [ Representing
lee /4-/-(4 G.(A c1 (-LS-E. A vA L;e 5
p.0 . IZ _
)r1i (10 YLJ2_r'
54- t).ea„ l.,0001. /q pp(i C_a_471-
p,,,,.,, 0,.,,..05-,,, (O,A_ __,A-- ,
•
(Signature of Sender) �.�.._._ (,j/ -
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 4Jv�4-- Dc8 -.....c cti, signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
Dated: `--/t1 0 0, 1 S , Oa- �J')'1 • 14. t-' -
` R F Notary Public i and for the late of Washimtttt
MARILYNIL A-MaeF ,+,
NOTARY PUBLIC P Notary(Print)
MAR�-YN KAMCHEFF
STATE OF WASHINGTON My appointm i . •
COMMISSION EXPIRES
Project Name:
Da e tl ( Pr-e_. f . P LA:fi
Project Number:
blAfel ©Z - 0'4 0 C F ep
NOTARY.DOC
AGENCY(DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology Washington Dept. of Fish &Wildlife Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section Habitat Program Attn. SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard 39015— 172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Mill Creek,WA 98012 Auburn, WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Mr. David Dietzman
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Dept. of Natural Resources
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 PO Box 47015
PO Box 330310 Olympia, WA 98504-7015
Seattle,WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers Ms. Shirley Marroquin Eric Swennson
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Real Estate Services
PO Box C-3755 KC Wastewater Treatment Division Seattle Public Utilities
Seattle,WA 98124 201 South Jackson St, MS KSC-NR-050 Suite 4900, Key Tower
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Seattle,WA 98104-3855 700 Fifth Avenue
Seattle,WA 98104
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager City of Tukwila
Metro Transit PO Box 90868. 6300 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street MS: XRD-01W Tukwila,WA 98188
KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle,WA 98104-3856
Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the following agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application.
Also note, do not mail David Dietzman any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send
him the ERC Determination paperwork.
Last printed 10/22/02 3:57 PM
w
: Page 1 of 3
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT/LUA02-040,ECF,PP
PARTIES OF RECORD
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Campbell Mathewson Dan Dawson
Attn: Robert Cugini Century Pacific, LP Otak, Inc.
Box 359 2140 Century Square 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Renton,WA 98057 1501 Fourth Ave. #2140 Kirkland,WA 98033
(owner) Seattle,WA 98101
(applicant)
Bruce Erikson Kim Browne Kennydale Neighborhood
3815 Lake Washington Blvd N. 1003 North 28th Place Association
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Attn: Kim Browne, President
1211 North 28th Place
_ Renton, WA 98056
Bruno&Anne Good Tony Boydston Patricia Helina
605 S. 194th St. 3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. 4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.
Des Moines, WA 98148-2159 Renton,WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Bud Worley Dorothy Muller Therese Luger
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N. 51 Burnett Ave South#410 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.,A203
#B202 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Carmen Flores James Hanken Amy Norris
16707 SE 14th St. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 1900 NE 48th Street#F-202
Bellevue, WA 98008 Seattle, WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056
Cynthia Youngblood Mark Rigos Linda Knowle
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1309 N. 39th PI. 2902 Kennewick PI. NE
#A103 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Dan & Laurie Brewis Rod Stevens Kevin Lindahl
11026 100th Ave. NE 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Kirkland,WA 98033 Seattle,WA 98134 _ Renton, WA 98056
Douglas R. Marsh Gloria Brown Jeff Smith
1328 N.40th Street 1328 N.40th Street 1004 North 36th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Edith Hamilton Walt& Bessie Cook David &Joyce Stevenson
3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 903 N. 36th St. 1208 North 28th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Flora Baldwin Eydie Hamilton Richard Weinman
4017 Park Ave. N. 3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 270 3rd Ave.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland, WA 98033
Gary Young Wendy&Lois Wywrot Tom & Linda Baker
3115 Mountain View Ave. N. 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N.,A 104 1202 N. 35th
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Dennis Law Marcie Maxwell
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3625 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 2048
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Herbert&Diana Postlewait Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin G. Goodman
3805 Park Ave. N. 1120 N. 38th St. 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
John &Greta Moulijn S. &Nel Hiemstra David Lierman
3726 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. 620 E. Marion Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 _ Kent,WA 98031
Joyce Kendrich Goodwin Ande Jorgensen Rich Wagner
3715 Lake WA Blvd. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 i Renton,WA 98056
Marlen Mandt Dustin Ray i Tim McGrath
1408 N. 26th St. 8936 132"d Pl. SE 900 North 34th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Newcastle, WA 98057 I Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 11/08/2002 3:52 PM
• Page 2 of 3
Marsha Hertel Neil Thomson David Nestvold
3836 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 76 6608 117th Ave SE
Renton,WA 98056 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Bellevue, WA 98006
Mary Kammer Nancy Denney Mark Hancock
51 Burnett Ave. S.,#307 3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 88811
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Seattle,WA 98138
Mr. &Mrs. R. Lynch Beverly Wagner Scott Thomson
1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2268 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104 PO Box 76
Issaquah,WA 98027 Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island,WA 98040
Robert West Roy&Cheryl Lynch Charles Wolfe
3904 Park Avenue North 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98101
Terry McMichael Chris Sidebotham Don Robertson
4005 Park Ave. N. 3907 Park Ave. N. 1900 NE 48th Street,#R-101
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Robert&Alison Taylor Virginia Piazza Clark Van Bogart
3811 Lake Washington BL N 1119 North 35th Street 3711 Lake Washington BI N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Kay McCord Susan Martin Linda Reutimann
2802 Park Avenue North 1101 North 38th Street 1106 North 38th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
D. Sabey Dept. of Ecology Department of Fish &Wildlife
21410 132nd SE Northwest Regional Office Attn: Rich Johnson
Kent,WA 98042 Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. PO Box 1100
3190 160th Ave. SE LaConner, WA 98257
Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Department of Fish &Wildlife Dave Ener,TD&E Fritz Timm, P.E.
Attn: Larry Fisher 2223 112 h Avenue NE City of Newcastle
PO Box 1100 Suite 101 13020 SE 72nd Place
LaConner, WA 98257 Bellevue, WA 98004 Newcastle, WA 98059
Dan Frey, WSDOT Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT King County Wastewater
6431 Corson Avenue 15700 Dayton Avenue North Treatment Division
Seattle,WA 98018 P.O. Box 330310 Barbara Questad
Seattle,WA 98133 King Street Center
201 South Jackson Street,#500
Seattle,WA 98104
City of Newcastle Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS JP Moulijn
C/o Micheal E. Nicholson Family Dental Clinic 3726 Lk.WA Blvd. N
Community Development Director PO Box 1029 Renton, WA 98056
13020 SE 72nd PI. Fall City,WA 98024 425-255-3710
Newcastle,WA 98059-3030 425-222-7011
Dewey Rancourt Leslie Kodish Mr. Bill Dunlap
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. 5021 Ripley Land North#106 Triad Associates
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 11814—115th Avenue NE
425-255-8697 Kirkland, WA 98034
Don Robertson Charles F. Dobes Mark Zilmer
1900 NE 48th St., #R101 8606 118th Ave. SE 3837 Lk.WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
425-254-0054 425-255-2646 425-266-9090
Wendy Giroux John Studman Debbie Martin
South County Journal 1036 North 31st Street 1412 North 30th Street
P.O. Box 130 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035
Keith Menges Kevin Sloan Sara Nicoll
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Homes 3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton,WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd North Renton,WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056
Last printed 11/08/2002 3:52 PM
.a
- Page3of3
Sara Nicoli Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Misty Kodish
310 Hibriten Ave SW Fisheries Department 5021 Ripley Lane N.#106
Lenoir, NC 28645 39015 172n°Ave SE Renton,WA 98056
Auburn, WA 98092
Larry Reyman Mary Maier May Creek Steward Doug Williams
4313 North 38th Street King County DNRP 201 South Jackson Street
Renton, WA 98056 201 S.Jackson, Suite 600 MS KSC-NR-0503
Seattle,WA 98104 Seattle, WA 98104-3855
206-296-1914
Last printed 11/08/2002 3:52 PM
nCEr
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE(DS)
AND EXPANDED SCOPING OF EIS
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040,ECF,PP •
Description: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847
square feet to 7,336 square feet with the shoreline fronting lot lines extending to the inner harbor line. The lots
are intended for the development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures
along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek.
Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are included with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would
also be established with the plat. The site is presently utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of
the existing building located on the shoreline,all buildings would be demolished as part of the project.
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north side of
the site. A secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property. The project would
provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek
in order to provide connection to the secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed
bridge would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek; therefore approval of a
variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations is necessary unless demonstrated
otherwise. In addition to Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat and Variance approval, the project
requires the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat
improvements. The applicant has also requested an administrative street modification in order to allow for a
reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing
Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit review for the development of the residential
structures—both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as separate land use applications in the future.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE(ERC)HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED
ACTION DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
PROPONENT: Barbee Mill Company
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North(west side of Lake Washington
Blvd.between North 40th Street&North 44th Street)
EIS REQUIRED: The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment.
An Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)is required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c)and will be prepared. An
environmental checklist,or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts,can be reviewed at our offices.
LEAD AGENCY: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS:
Transportation;Earth(Soils Contamination);Air Quality;Water Resources(Storm Drainage/Runoff;Groundwater;
Water Quality); Land Use; Shoreline and Critical Areas (Critical Fish Species and Habitat Areas); Aesthetics;
Socioeconomics (Population, Housing, Employment); Recreation; Public Services and Utilities (Fire and
Emergency Medial Services,Police Services,Schools,Parks,Water,Wastewater,Solid Waste);Archaeology.
SCOPING: Agencies,affected tribes,and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You
may comment on alternatives,mitigation measures,probable significant adverse impacts,and licenses of other approvals
that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m.on December 16,
2002.
Responsible Official: City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Development Planning Section
PlannIng/Building/Public Works Dept.
1055 South Grady Way,6th Floor
Renton,WA 98055
a
k
. 0
APPEAL: You may appeal this determination of significance,in writing,pursuant to RMC 4-3016,accompanied by a non- .
refundable$75.00 appeal fee,no later than 5:00 PM on November 26,2002 to:
Renton Hearing Examiner
City Clerk's Office
Renton City Hall—7th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
To appeal this Declaration,you must file your appeal document with the hearing examiner within fourteen (14)
days of the date the Declaration of Significance(DS)has been published in the official city newspaper. See City
Code Section 4-8-110,RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details. There shall be only one appeal of
a Declaration of Significance(DS),and if an appeal has already been filed,your appeal may be joined with the
prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal has already been heard. You should be prepared "
to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA
appeals.
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT a.
OVERALL PLAT PLAN /'r'
NASI@fGTON ! `✓
.e 444' , :1-* , ig • 40"97/
.,.. ._ ,, . . ...,_ „ .
, ....,,,,,,„„
, .....- ,,w4.yi ,
,„
...,.. ,
,, ,\
r _
v' : .�'� Wit:.
:a a/r . . N 4arN ST
Z _ n "` Al
Y 00 iLELalf 6-' it ,, ' -
5 dy /fill �ioo'°— •�•I
W t.�j� 7 � jln�
< ,, 'i II ' 'fr 8_,
_, 4 4/4ey/
Ail
- .. QT'cer ,� a m r
►.v.4,.r,nwwT
. .!lllil�llll t r'II R i ►,
it-
K t 'd'} N
RM = •• i
•
AR.,1�rl iQ..'i'.�IM >Q.sa 7 . f
--,"• ':ENS I Z►MZ: 2 ...1;
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON,DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
AT(425)430-7270.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
e''thei •� rNUMBER wlien;callin for; ro er flle i„
:Please include project g;; p� p ; identification. •, ,
•• = - ' • CITYF RENTON
,♦r K
;;IL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
November 8,2002
Washington State
Department of Ecology •
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olympia,WA 98504-7703
Subject: Environmental Determinations
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by
the Environmental Review Committee(ERC) on November 5,2002:
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE(DS)
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847
square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units -
most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit
structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. See enclosed notice for complete.
description.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. November 26,
2002. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required$75.00 application fee with: Hearing
Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are
governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the
appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office at(425)430-6510.
Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details.
If you have questions, please call me at(425) 430-7270.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Lesley Nishi /1"
Senior Plann-
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division
Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries
David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources
WSDOT, Northwest Region
Duwamish Tribal Office
Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance)
US Army Corp. of Engineers
Enclosure
dguuty 1aa, RENTON
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
R1 Thie nnnnr,nnfninc cnoi re�,,.asa m�fnriei anoi nncf ,...e. AHEAD OF THE CURVE
�i ` CITY �-Ai RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
November 8, 2002
Dan Dawson
Otak, Inc.
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland Way, Suite 100
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP "
Dear Mr. Dawson:
This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC)and is to
advise you that they have completed their review of the subject project. The ERC issued
a threshold Determination of Significance (DS). Please refer to the enclosed notice for
complete details.
Appeals of-the environmental-determination must be filed in writing:on or before 5:00 p.m.
November_26, 2002. Appeals must_be_filed_in writing together with_the...required_$75.00
application fee with: Hearing Examiner,City.of-Renton, 1055 South.Grady-Way,.Renton,
WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City.of Renton Municipal Code
Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained
from the Renton City Clerk's Office at(425)430-6510.
This information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable
you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any
questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at(425)430-7270.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Lesley Nishi it
•
Senior Planner
cc: Alex Cugini/Owner
Steven Wood/Applicant - -
Parties of Record
Enclosure
gbh tt it RENTON
1055 South Gradyad Way-Renton,Washington 98055
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
{I This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
J . �
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (DS)
AND EXPANDED SCOPING OF EIS
APPLICATION NUMBER(S): BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115
lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with the shoreline fronting lot lines
extending to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most of
which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be
located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included
with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat. The site is
presently utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the
shoreline, all buildings would be demolished as part of the project.
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north
side of the site. A secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property. The
project would provide 42-foot wide internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge
crossing over May Creek in order to provide connection to the secondary access point. Installation of
new foundations for the proposed bridge would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of
May Creek; therefore approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations
is necessary unless demonstrated otherwise.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—
for which a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. May Creek bisects
the property extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek
Delta within Lake Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high
water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore currently impervious areas to
native vegetation within this buffer.
In addition to Environmental (SEPA) Review, Preliminary Plat and Variance approval, the project requires
the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat
improvements. The applicant has also requested an administrative street modification in order to allow
for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet throughout the plat. The proposal also requires
Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit review for the development of
the residential structures — both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as separate land use
applications in the future.
PROPONENT: Century Pacific on behalf of Barbee Mill Company
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North
(West side of Lake Washington Blvd between North 40th Street &
NE 44th Streets)
EIS REQUIRED:The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on
the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c) and
will be prepared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts,
can be reviewed at the Development Services offices.
LEAD AGENCY: Environmental Review Committee
City of Renton
The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS:
Transportation; Earth (Soils Contamination); Air Quality; Water Resources (Storm
Drainage/Runoff; Groundwater; Water Quality); Land Use; Shoreline and Critical Areas (Critical
Fish Species and Habitat Areas); Aesthetics; Socioeconomics (Population, Housing,
ds&scoping signature
/ I
Employment); Recreation; Public Services and Utilities (Fire and Emergency Medial Services,
Police Services, Schools, Parks,Water,Wastewater, Solid Waste); Archaeology.
SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes and members of the public will be given an opportunity to comment
on the scope of the EIS. Specifically, further notification will be given regarding the time, date and
location of scopinq meetings to be held in the near future. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation
measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses of-other approvals that may be required.
Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on December 16, 2002.
Responsible Official: City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Development Planning Section
Planning/Building/Public Works Dept.
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton,WA 98055
APPEAL: You may appeal this determination of significance, in writing, pursuant to RMC 4-3016,
accompanied by a non-refundable $75.00 appeal fee, no later than 5:00 PM on November 26, 2002.
Renton Hearing Examiner
City Clerk's Office
Renton City Hall—7th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
To appeal this Declaration, you must file your appeal document with the hearing examiner within fourteen
(14) days of the date the Declaration of Significance (DS) has been published in the official city
newspaper. See City Code Section 4-8-110, RCW 43.21 C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details.
There shall be only one appeal of a Declaration of Significance (DS), and if an appeal has already been
filed, your appeal may be joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal
has already been heard. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above
office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals.
PUBLICATION DATE: November 12, 2002
DATE OF DECISION: November 5, 2002
SIGNATURES:
R // 4$ l/V6 l! c 0 2-
Gregg Zimrr} r an, minis rator A E
Department(o Pla ing/Building/Public Works
` /e/`; O��
.James Shepherd, �}dfninistrator DA E
rr Community Service Department
i� (Y �Z
Lee a ler, Fire Chief DATE
Renton Fire Department
ds&scoping signature
STAFF City of Renton
REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
A. BACKGROUND
ERC MEETING DATE November 5, 2002
Project Name: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Applicant: Century Pacific
File Number: LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Project Manager: Lesley Nishihira
Project Description: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging
in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for
the development of townhouse units - most of which would be constructed as
duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be
located on the southeast side of May Creek. (Project description continued
on page 2.)
Project Location: 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard North (between North 40th & 44th Streets)
Exist. Bldg. Area gsf: N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area: N/A
Site Area: 997,960 sf (22.9-acres) Total Building Area gsf: N/A
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a
Determination of Significance (DS).
;�i'.eon•�f
•
o� .� ` '�9r.;
• t'C
i ..a
elm
0 t c h a
_ Ore !. �EL . / e' 'li. ',%
/ ).:(1111
LJ.I yr
VV
ikh
emageina
rk' er ei L rEAKE as _re
Project Location Map �,. r�,� � �� ^� ' - 2 ercrpt
A�+M�
��--1 yy iii- T1i 2;
��A� `
NIP
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 2 of 11
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION(CONT.)
Project Site —The 22.9-acre site is located on the west side of Lake Washington Boulevard North between
North 40th Street and North 44th Street and abuts Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way along
the eastern boundary. The property contains 16 buildings, some of which are currently utilized for limited
lumber operations with the remaining buildings unused and in disrepair. Existing development within the
vicinity of the site includes predominantly detached single family housing located within the Residential — 8
(R-8) dwelling units per acre zone.
The property is situated within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning designation, which is intended
to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and residential activity in a high quality, master planned
development that is integrated with the natural environment. Stand alone residential development is also
permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum 5 dwellings units per net acre (du/ac) is
satisfied.
The site is located within 200 feet of the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines and is, therefore,
subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. The property is relatively flat with approximate grades
ranging from 0.5% to 4% to the west for areas north of May Creek, from 1% to 7% towards May Creek and
Lake Washington on the south side of the creek, and from 7% to 35-40% along the banks of May Creek.
The City's Critical Areas Maps designate the property as containing potential high seismic hazards, steep
slopes (15%to 25%) and flood hazards.
Project Description — The applicant is requesting to subdivide the subject site into 115 residential lots
ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet with a resulting net density of approximately
8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross acre site — 9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public
roadways = 13.77 net acre -- 115 units / 13.77 net acre = 8.35 du/ac). The shoreline fronting lot lines
would extend to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units - most
of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to
be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Lot lines will be located along common walls with separate
units on each lot.
Landscape, roadway, utility improvements and four utility/open space tracts would be established with the
plat. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline (within Department of Natural
Resources lease land), all buildings would be demolished as part of the project and lumber operations
would be discontinued.
Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement, which would be
dedicated to public right-of-way, from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane intersection through the
abutting property on the north side of the site. The project would provide 42-foot wide internal public
roadways throughout the majority of the project with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of
May Creek. Private streets and driveways are also proposed in specific locations within the plat. A
secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property as well as a bridge crossing
over May Creek (at the location of one of the three existing bridges) in order to provide connection to the
secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge may require work below
the ordinary high water mark of May Creek; thereby requiring approval of a variance from the City's Tree
Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations prior to the installation of required plat improvements. An additional
existing bridge is proposed to be utilized as a pedestrian crossing.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline —
for which a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. No other alterations or
improvements to the lake shoreline are included with the proposal. In addition, May Creek bisects the
property extending southeast through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta
within Lake Washington. The project would provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark
ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore currently impervious areas to native vegetation
within the buffer area. All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer area are proposed to be
retained.
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Envirot 611 Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 3 of 11
The project applicant has also identified two category III wetlands with associated buffers within property
boundaries — one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of street C (aka "northerly
wetland") and another at the southern edge of the site near the south end of street C (aka "southerly
wetland"). The applicant is requesting to buffer average the minimum required 25-foot buffer for the
northerly wetland. In addition, approximately 400 square feet of the southerly wetland is proposed to be
filled, with enhancements to the northerly wetland and buffer area proposed in order to mitigate for loss of
wetland area.
Project construction would require extensive grading and excavation activities throughout the site for the
removal of existing asphalt areas and the creation of new building pads, roadways, and utilities. Preliminary
earthwork quantities are estimated at approximately 32,000 cubic yards of excavated material and 38,000
cubic yards of fill material to be imported to the site. In addition, approximately 18 trees would be removed
as part of on-site grading activities.
The previous mixed use land use proposal on the property, specifically the Barbee Mill Mixed Use
Development Project (file no. LUA-01-174), has been placed on hold per the applicant's request.
Permits Required — In addition to Environmental (SEPA) Review and Preliminary Plat approval, the project
requires the approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat
improvements as well as a possible variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations (RMC
section 4-4-130.D.4.b) for the installation of the proposed bridge crossing. The applicant has also
requested an administrative street modification in order to allow for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6
feet to 5 feet throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit review for the development of the residential structures.
In summary, the following permits and approvals will likely be required for the proposed development:
• City of Renton: SEPA Threshold Determination
Preliminary & Final Plat Approval
Shoreline Substantial Development Permits
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval
Street Modification Approval
Wetland Buffer Averaging and Compensation Approval
Level II Site Plan Approval with subsequent Level I Site Plan
Approvals
Site Preparation, Building and Construction Permits
• King County: Shoreline Permit for DNR lease lands
• Washington
Department of Ecology(DOE): National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit
Shoreline Permit(s) Approval
• Washington Department
of Fish &Wildlife (WDFW): Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)
• US Army Corp of Engineers: Section 401 and 404 Permits, if necessary
• All other applicable licenses and permits necessary to allow the redevelopment of the site.
With the current project application, the applicant has requested only Environmental (SEPA) Review,
Preliminary Plat Approval and a Street Modification. Prior to the review of a Final Plat application, approval
of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Hearing Examiner Variance and Hearing Examiner Level II
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 4 of 11
Site Plan will be necessary for the project. Additional SEPA review pertinent to those aspects of the
proposal may also be required.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only
those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards
and environmental regulations.
1. Earth/ Environmental Health
The subject site is designated on the City's Critical Areas Maps as containing potentially high seismic
hazards, as well as steeply sloped areas along the May Creek shoreline that qualify as sensitive or
protected slopes.
The applicant's SEPA checklist indicates that earthwork activities are estimated at 38,000 cubic yards of
excavation and 32,000 cubic yards of imported fill material in order to remove existing site improvements
and create the appropriate grades for the installation of roadways and utilities. The site is presently
developed with approximately 85% of impervious surface area and is estimated to result in approximately
60% impervious coverage at the completion of the development.
With the project application, the applicant submitted a Geotechnical Feasibility Report prepared by Golder
Associates dated April 4, 2002. The report states that the site topography slopes generally westward, from
an elevation of approximately 35 feet in the southeast to elevations of approximately 20 to 21 feet along the
lake shoreline. The site is predominantly underlain by soft organic silts and silty clays, which are
interbedded with very loose, silty fine to medium sands overlying granular alluvial deposits. The fills and
alluvial soils that underlie the site to depths of up to about 60 feet were observed to be very loose to
medium dense. The site's soil and groundwater conditions indicate a high likelihood of liquefaction during
a strong seismic event, as well as the potential for settlements and down drag forces, which may
compromise on-site structures and improvements.
Determining the appropriate design of the foundations and other necessary supporting structures will
require consideration to be given to these potential hazards, as well as the structural requirements of the
buildings—which have not yet been disclosed by the applicant. Additional analysis is necessary in order to
fully ascertain hazard potential and appropriate design measures. Specifically, further geotechnical
engineering studies (i.e., liquefaction analysis, evaluation of down drag forces on deep foundations, deep
dynamic compaction, etc.) should be required before establishing the level and appropriateness of
mitigating measures for potential earth impacts (i.e., liquefaction, erosion)from the project.
In addition, the site is known to,contain contaminated soils — primarily contaminated with arsenic and zinc.
An Independent Remedial Action Plan pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) has been
approved by the Department of Ecology and the City of Renton (file no. LUA-02-069) but has not yet been
implemented on the site. Further analysis to confirm that clean-up levels on the property are appropriate
for residential development is necessary, as well as consideration of the proximity and levels of
contamination on the properties immediately north of the site.
Therefore, additional geotechnical and soils analysis via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and
evaluation of a range of alternatives is recommended prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures.
2. Water
The subject site is bordered by Lake Washington on the west and is bisected by the lowest reach of May
Creek where it flows into the lake. Both are considered shorelines of the State subject to the City's
Shoreline Master Program. The project proposes to maintain a 25-foot setback from the ordinary high water
mark of the lake shoreline and would also provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark
ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width. Current impervious areas would be restored to native vegetation
within the buffer area. All mature trees located within the May Creek buffer are proposed to be retained.
Portions of the site are also located within the 100-year floodplain and the property is designated on the
City's Critical Areas Flood Hazard map.
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror II Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - LUA-02-040,ECF, PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 5 of 11
The applicant has submitted a Technical Information Report prepared by Otak, Inc. dated August 27, 2002.
According to the report, upstream drainage water is conveyed in a southerly direction along the east side of
the railway until the water can flow through a 24-inch diameter concrete pipe that crosses to the west side of
the railway embankment. Surface water then daylights into a surface ditch and enters a 15-inch diameter
drain line that carries the water across the site and discharges to Lake Washington.
With the development of the site, the bypass drainage line will be removed and replaced with a line with
adequate capacity to serve the developed offsite basin in the North 40th Street neighborhood between 1-405
and the railroad tracks. The on-site drainage system will be sized to convey the 100-year/24-hour storm
event with three storm drain lines collecting flow from the area north of May Creek, which will discharge into
a water quality pond in the central portion of the site (tract B). An 18-inch trunk line will serve the area south
of May Creek and will discharge to a second water quality pond at the southern most end of the site (tract
E). Following treatment, storm water will discharge directly to Lake Washington.
Additional analysis of the upstream drainage basin for existing and future developed conditions will be
necessary in order to appropriately size the replacement bypass conveyance system that crosses the
south portion of the property. In addition, due to runoff discharge of portions of the project into May Creek,
which in known for flooding and erosion problems, detailed analysis of detention, water quality and
compensatory storage for filling within the floodplain will be necessary. In order to mitigate for potential
surface water impacts, staff recommends as a SEPA condition that the project comply with the 1998 King
Country Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and water quality be provided to this site. However, if
other permits are required (HPA, NPDES, etc) and these jurisdictions impose a stricter standard (2001
Storm water Management Manual for Western Washington, from Department of Ecology), staff will
recommend that, in the interest of a singular drainage report, the same standard be applied throughout the
project.
The project applicant has also identified two category III wetlands with associated buffers that extend into
the property's boundaries — one adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the end of street C (aka
"northerly wetland") and another at the southern edge of the site near the south end of street C (aka
"southerly wetland"). The applicant is requesting to buffer average the minimum required 25-foot buffer for
the northerly wetland. In addition, approximately 400 square feet of the southerly wetland is proposed to be
filled,for the installation of roadway and utility improvements. Enhancements to the northerly wetland and
buffer area are proposed in order to mitigate for the loss of wetland area.
The applicant has submitted a Wetland Determination Report on the JAG Development Property prepared
by David Evans and Associates, Inc. dated May 1997 for the northerly wetland. According to this report, the
wetland is approximately 6,151 square feet in area and would qualify as a category 3 wetland. The
applicant has also submitted a Wetland Delineation Study prepared by Raedeke Associates, Inc. dated
August 6, 2002 for the southerly wetland, as well as to confirm that the conclusions drawn in the 1997 report
for the northerly wetland remain consistent with present conditions. Based on the recent study, the
southern wetland, which is approximately 1,712 square feet in area, would be classified as a category 3
wetland under the City's Wetland Regulations. The study also concludes the wetland conditions described
in the 1997 report are still applicable to the northern wetland.
As proposed, grading activities associated with the construction of street C as well as the installation of
utilities located in the southeastern portion of the site would require the placement of or the loss of
approximately 400 square feet of the southern wetland. In addition, buffer averaging is proposed for the
southern wetland. Although the project narrative indicates that the required 1.5:1 replacement ratio would
be satisfied through enhancements to the northerly wetland, no indication of wetland mitigation methods
demonstrating compliance with City code were included with the application. Furthermore, the buffer
averaging proposed would not be permitted under current regulations as the averaging criteria requires a
minimum buffer width of 25 feet.
Staff recommends that additional surface water and wetland analysis be conducted via an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range of alternatives prior to determining additional appropriate
mitigation measures.
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 6 of 11
3. Animals
The subject site is known to be located within habitat, or the range of habitat areas for a number of species.
Lake Washington shorelines abutting the site are considered migration routes for many fish species,
including sockeye salmon, coho salmon, steelhead and cutthroat trout, and most notably Puget Sound
chinook salmon. Other fish populations known to exist on or near the site include largemouth bass,
smallmouth bass, black crappie, pumpkinseed sunfish, yellow perch, northern pike minnow, three-spine
stickleback, brown bullhead, speckled dace, peamouth, and prickly sculpin.
In addition to Chinook salmon, which are currently listed as a threatened species under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has designated coho salmon as a
candidate eligible for listing under ESA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have also designated
bull trout as threatened. The project area is located upland of the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW) indexed sockeye salmon spawning area. Furthermore, the Department of Fish and
Wildlife has identified near-shore, shallow water areas as important fish habitat because of the abundance
of aquatic plants that provide important cover and hiding places for juvenile fish.
The applicant's checklist indicates that heron, bald eagles, songbirds, osprey, rodents, bass, salmon, trout
and shellfish have been observed on or near the subject site. In fact, there is a documented osprey nest
situated atop the existing water tower in the central portion of the mill property. The project application
does not address measures necessary to relocate and preserve the nest. Although an increased setback
to 50 feet from May Creek is proposed, buffers from the Lake Washington shoreline are proposed at widths
of 25 feet with no enhancement of lake shoreline areas included with the project.
Upon the City's request, the applicant submitted a Biological Assessment (B.A.) prepared by Raedeke
Associates, Inc. dated August 26, 2002 for the project. The B.A. notes that building heights would be
voluntarily limited to 50 feet within 200 feet of the shoreline. In conclusion, the B.A. states that the
proposed development would likely result in an overall improvement in on-site habitat and is, therefore, not
expected to have any adverse effects on listed and candidate species.
In order to thoroughly analyze the adequacy of the submitted B.A., the City retained a consultant to perform
an independent review of the study. The findings of that review are presented within correspondence
dated October 21, 2002 from Andrew C. Kindig, Ph.D., Principal of A.C. Kindig and Company
Environmental Consulting. The independent review concludes that although there is no reason to disagree
with most of the substantive conclusions that were drawn in the B.A. for the narrowly defined project, the
conclusions regarding the adequacy of buffer widths and composition along May Creek and Lake
Washington were not justified. Furthermore, impacts from some elements of the proposal, and particularly
from reasonably expected project-associated actions, were not disclosed or assessed. Therefore, the
conditions listed in the B.A.'s Determination of Effect Summary may not anticipate the full range of impacts
that could occur and be offset or eliminated through mitigation.
Continuing, the independent review notes that the B.A. does not reference nor include several documents
pertaining to the assessment of federally listed species on or adjacent to the subject property, which would
have been particularly relevant to the assessment of the Lake Washington shoreline's context, habitat, and
use by listed species. In the opinion of the reviewer, the B.A. was not successful in describing cumulative
impacts to the Lake Washington shoreline and adjacent habitat from a combination of residential
development and undescribed but reasonably related actions to the proposal. The B.A. substantively
considers only actions within the immediate property boundaries and does not describe reasonably
expected actions at the boundaries of the project site. In addition to specific comments on the B.A., the
independent review lists six areas/issues that should be further described and evaluated as summarized
below:
• Analysis of continued dredging at the mouth of May Creek, if needed, that has previously been
permitted for ongoing mill operations. For example, such dredging could be needed to protect bridge
structures and prevent expansion of the 100-year floodplain into developed areas;
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ iI Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 7 of 11
• Impacts from increased human activity within new lots adjacent to the lake and May Creek, within the
active recreation areas (if proposed), and at the pedestrian and roadway crossings of May Creek;
• Impacts from unrestricted landscaping extending to the shoreline within lake-adjacent lots, including
reasonably anticipated alterations homeowners may make to shoreline or to narrow strips of DNR lands
between their lots and the shoreline;
• Cumulative impacts from reasonably expected future applications for residential use docks extending
into Lake Washington from the lake fronting lots;
• Cumulative impacts from reasonably expected alterations on the DNR-owned uplands in the narrow
space between the proposed project and Lake Washington (i.e., removal of existing view-obstructing
structures and disposition of debris at the shoreline and extending into the lake); and,
• Use of, removal of, or improvements to the existing mill dock extending from the DNR uplands into
Lake Washington into proposed tract C.
The independent review concludes that isolating the proposed project from reasonably expected
associated actions would likely result in less comprehensive mitigation for shoreline wildlife and habitat
than may be warranted by the suite of actions reasonably expected to occur as a result of the proposed
project.
In light of the critical habitat and species that may be adversely impacted by the proposed development,
including associated actions not included with the current application, and the conclusions drawn by the
independent review of the Biological Assessment submitted by the applicant, staff recommends that
additional analysis consistent with those areas previously identified be required prior to determining
appropriate mitigation measures for the project.
Therefore, further analysis via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range of
alternatives is recommended prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures for biological impacts.
4. Noise
Impacts to surrounding residential communities is anticipated from typical construction and hauling
activities, as well as from substantial foundation work (i.e., pile driving, deep dynamic compaction, etc.). In
order to fully assess and appropriately mitigate for potential adverse noise impacts, staff recommends
additional analysis via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range of alternatives
prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures.
5. Land and Shoreline Use
The property is located within the Center Office Residential (COR-2) zoning designation. The COR zone is
intended to provide for a mix of intensive commercial, office and residential activity in a high quality, master
planned development that is integrated with the natural environment. Stand alone residential development
is also permitted in the zone provided the required density of a minimum of 5 dwellings units per net acre
(du/ac) is satisfied.
The proposal would result in 115 townhouse units — most of which would be situated within duplex
structures, with some 3-unit, 4-unit and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek.
The project would result in a net density of approximately 8.35 dwelling units per acre (22.9 gross acre site
—9.13-acres combined sensitive areas and public roadways = 13.77 net acre-+ 115 units/ 13.77 net acre =
8.35 du/ac).
Existing policies established by the City's Comprehensive Plan Transportation and Environmental
Elements emphasize the importance of sub-area planning, public private cooperation, and coordination
between abutting properties, even if under different ownership. The proposal appears to be inconsistent
with existing policies that speak of coordinating within the COR for mix and compatibility of uses, densities,
conceptual building design, site and landscape design, and transit opportunities. The proposal also
appears to be inconsistent with policies that speak of forming private/public partnerships in order to plan for
infrastructure development, public uses, and amenities. Development strategies to reduce adverse traffic
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 8 of 11
impacts to local areas and to manage water resources for multiple uses including recreation, fish and
wildlife, flood protection, and open space should be explored.
The site is located along the Lake Washington shoreline, which is designated as an "Urban" environment
under the City's Shoreline Master Program. The objective of the Urban environment is to ensure optimum
utilization of shoreline within urbanized areas by providing for public use, especially access to and along
the water's edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shoreline for a
multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses.
Although residential uses are permitted within the Urban designation, new subdivision developments along
Lake Washington shall specifically provide substantial public access along the water's edge unless it is
deemed inappropriate due to health, safety or environmental concerns. As proposed, the project would not
provide any public access to the water's edge with the exception of a limited lake fronting open space tract
(tract C) of an unspecified size and interior open space tracts that would be predominantly dedicated to
surface water treatment areas (i.e., bioswales).
The project application does not include a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit at this time; however,
impacts associated with the proposed plat warrant further analysis of the project's effect on shoreline
habitat and uses. Furthermore, components of the proposal, specifically the design of the site (i.e., building
placement, size and height), are not sufficiently defined in order to allow adequate environmental analysis
of potential adverse impacts to shoreline areas. Consideration must also be given to the potential for future
construction of in-water structures, such as individual docks and/or large-scale marinas. Therefore,
additional analysis of shoreline uses via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a
range of alternatives is recommended prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures.
6. Aesthetics
The placement of the project and the proposed building heights would likely result in adverse impacts to
existing view corridors within the Kennydale and Mercer Island neighborhoods, as well as 1-405, Lake
Washington, the West Hill (unincorporated King County) and Coulon Park. However, the application does
not include site specific details that are necessary for the analysis of potential impacts associated with the
project. Additional analysis is necessary in order to adequately assess and mitigate, if necessary, potential
aesthetic impacts.
Prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures, further analysis of light and glare as well as view
corridor impacts is recommended via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range
of alternatives.
7. Recreation
The proposal does not indicate the provision of on-site recreation areas for future residents of the proposed
plat. Inadequate local and regional recreational facilities exist, such as Gene Coulon Memorial Park which
is often at or over capacity on holidays and during the summer. Therefore, in order to offset the additional
use of these facilities, a Park Mitigation Fee based on $350.76 per multi-family unit or an alternative
recreational plan acceptable to the City would be required. The fee, if assessed, is estimated at
$40,768.65 ($354.51 x 115 new units =$40,768.65) and is payable prior to the recording of the plat.
In addition, a public recreation trail easement must be dedicated to the City in order to establish
connections along the entire length of May Creek and Lake Washington. The City of Renton, City of
Newcastle and King County Parks have been acquiring property along this corridor for over 15 years to
create a trail connection from Lake Washington to Cougar Mountain Park. This is identified within each
jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. In addition, substantial public access should be emphasized along the
property's Lake Washington shoreline. As proposed, the project does not address these recreation issues.
Additional analysis via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range of alternatives
is recommended prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures.
ercrpt
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Enviror Al Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 9 of 11
8. Historic and Cultural Preservation
The applicant's checklist does not identify the potential for encountering or damaging archaeological or
cultural evidence by moving soil during site preparation and construction of the project, nor does it propose
possible mitigation measures if any are encountered.
Areas of potential cultural or historic sensitivity should be investigated using the available data bases at the
State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, the Renton Historical Museum, University of
Washington and State libraries. Consultation with pertinent tribes should also be conducted.
Staff recommends additional analysis via an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a
range of alternatives prior to determining appropriate mitigation measures.
9. Transportation
Access to the project would be provided via an existing 60-foot wide access easement from the Lake
Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane intersection through the abutting property on the north side of the
site. The roadway would be dedicated to public right-of-way.
Internal to the project boundaries, 42-foot wide public roadways would be provided throughout the majority
of the development with a 32-foot wide roadway proposed on the south side of May Creek, for which the
applicant has requested approval of a street modification. Private streets and driveways are also proposed
in specific locations within the plat. One of the three existing on-site bridges is proposed to be utilized as a
pedestrian crossing.
A secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property as well as a bridge
crossing over May Creek (the second of the three existing bridges) in order to provide connection to the
secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge may require work below
the ordinary high water mark of May Creek; thereby requiring approval of a variance from the City's Tree
Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations prior to the installation of required plat improvements. In addition,
City Street Standards limit public roadways and/or driveways to a maximum grade of 15%, which the
southern access road appears to exceed.
The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis (T.I.A.) prepared by HDR Engineers, Inc.
dated July 23, 2002. Based on the City's preliminary review of the report, the analysis does not contain
necessary traffic forecasts — including traffic from all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the railroad
tracks — in order to appropriately address potential cumulative impacts to nearby roadways. The T.I.A.
incorrectly assumes that the NE 44th Street and 1-405 intersection will be signalized by 2005 and also splits
the number of units that will utilize the access points on the north and south ends of the site. Therefore,
additional analysis is necessary in order to address the lack of a signal at the NE 44th and 1-405 intersection
— specifically whether or not a traffic signal is warranted — and the ability for all units to use the south end
roadway as well as Ripley Lane roadway on the north end of the site.
Detailed analysis of the project's potential trip generation and impacts to existing off-site roadways is
necessary. Specifically, the amount of daily and peak trip reductions to reflect captured trips and trips
generated within the site, as well as the amount of trips credited for the existing use of the site, should be
re-examined and confirmed by traffic counts.
Although the applicant's Traffic Analysis acknowledges that the project would degrade intersection
operations at Lake Washington Boulevard and Hazelwood Lane, as well as at the NE 44th Street and 1-405
interchange, additional analysis with regard to cumulative impacts from potential development proposals in
the immediate vicinity of the project site is especially necessary. Consideration must be given to possible
mitigation through roadway improvements and/or proportional shares of the maximum trip capacity to be
divided up between neighboring properties. In addition, the Washington State Department of
Transportation has suggested the calculation of the pro-rate share contribution towards the State's planned
"SR 405, NE 44th Street Interchange, Reconstruct Interchange," which has been estimated at $50 to $80
million.
ercrpt
IF
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ -il Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 10 of 11
In addition, each of the proposed access points requires roadway crossings over the Burlington Northern
Railroad right-of-way. Although the applicant has submitted information contending the ability to create a
public crossing for the northern roadway, confirmation from the Washington Utility and Transportation
Committee (WUTC) that the public crossing would be acceptable, as well as identifying the necessary
crossing improvement standards for vehicular and pedestrian traffic, has not been addressed. Furthermore,
the southern roadway crossing, which is essential for secondary emergency access to the site, is located
within a 30-day revocable easement. Due to the uncertain status of this crossing, the application fails in
providing adequate secondary access from which the City has not issued a waiver. Further analysis is
warranted to determine the impacts of railroad traffic to the increased trips anticipated on the local street
system (i.e., resulting congestion from vehicles waiting at the crossings), to access the uncertainty of
securing permanent crossing rights, and review the compatibility of the crossings with emergency access to
the site (i.e., reduced response times due to simultaneous closure of both railroad crossings).
The application as presented presumes that the City of Renton will make the railroad crossing a public
crossing. The City has not been approached nor has the City Council made a decision with regard to
creating a public crossing, so that assumption would be premature. If there are no public crossings, the
applicant must provide the City with adequate assurances that private crossings in perpetuity, or for the life
of the residential development, would be provided. At this point,
Therefore, it is recommended that additional analysis of traffic impacts via an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) and evaluation of a range of alternatives occur prior to determining appropriate mitigation
measures.
10. Public Services
The proposal will add new residential units to the City that will potentially impact the City's Police and Fire
Emergency Services. A Fire Mitigation Fee, based on $488.00 per new single family and duplex structure
and $388.00 per unit for all buildings containing three or more units applies to all development within the
City. The applicant will receive credit for the existing buildings on the site that will be demolished as part of
the project. The required mitigation fee is payable prior to the recording of the final plat.
The residential project will also result in an increased student enrollment for the Renton School District.
According to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan
(January 16, 1992), the City of Renton has a student generation factor of 0.44 students per residential
dwelling unit. Based on the student generation factor, it is anticipated that the proposed plat would result in
approximately 50.6 new students (0.44 X 115 = 50.6) to the local schools. The Renton School District has
indicated that the majority of the site (north of May Creek) would attend Hazelwood Elementary School and
those residing south of May Creek would attend Kennydale Elementary School. All residents of the site
would attend McKnight Middle and Hazen High Schools. Confirmation from the Renton School District that
they are able to accommodate additional students generated by this proposal will be necessary.
C. RECOMMENDATION
Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials
make the following Environmental Determination:
DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE/ DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE—MITIGATED XX SIGNIFICANCE
Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. XX Issue DS with 14 day Appeal Period.
Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period.
ercrpt
Ilr
City of Renton P/B/PW Department Environ •��l Review Committee Staff Report
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT - - LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
REPORT OF NOVEMBER 5,2002 Page 11 of 11
D. MITIGATION MEASURES
Additional analysis performed under the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will
establish alternatives to the proposed action as well as identify significant impacts, appropriate mitigation
measures, and significant unavoidable adverse impacts that may result from the final proposal.
E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS
The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental / Divisional Reviewers for their review.
Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation
Measures and/or Advisory Notes to Applicant.
X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File.
Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report.
Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be
filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. November 26, 2002. Appeals must be filed in writing together with
the required $75.00 application fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way,
Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by the City of Renton Municipal Code
Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the
Renton City Clerk's Office at (425) 430-6510.
ercrpt
•
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT : ��,,
OVERALL PLAT PLAN r;```�j , o• so• 1Do• zoo' w
,,,., , / \� __ i m.
e / t
, w,�sN.wEDN O
e O/. / / ) �� • '
i/ 04
1.
4• i� v II
, Tff:yA�V-�,
COR-2 ZONE ��//r / � �`/--%t�. \, 1'� C``Sig•/'�,/
L• "' - I I J 1=1�-jz,Ir-�;I_ I;--1._I I i / / I I ao:/ �'• C.., 7•.\.
/ L'__�lc
�.I„ I„•}-•`I..5�,•QI"•1L•(I"•}�.�jc.•1 .`j.•�• 11-I •17 4 f • �,•
I ._�LJL`_JL i I`` I. II'2 I4 �_^f I �I 'a h vw
f—.,�i' -JL_I,J L.I_A L_IJ L�l-J L_I_J L_I_J.L..- 9 / s '1-�0 �x!��, g
ATE I I-
-l_s c _ - '_ SlAE6T A --� .3_+.iRELT A '/ Ii// f ] .. _"•.' -.`IM '` _ d.y
WASHINGTON I rrYr , _ - -=;�.,?r_.•. A.. 7/- _7 If'i ,� r�r7- . '/ . "UUII I111Y i , ( ,.f/-•<i„r .. a. _ __I 1-.1 r-"J°- F•y" 1, 1 `l, .t. .p.. i.._ Ili
yr. Upx
'L=_'--I \' �'�. ‘,y, 1[_. _I �'I JL�.JLJ.� „/� 1 I ' a ' . 1 . .a.'' • III- +i
r..— i-�.i Y / ;i ,...,... i i o .Lfi'8.ti3vl,IiC7i•-a. -..... 1e
1 ss ," --`*-- .. ;/ /``// %/ o so0• • sax low �„ DIN�g
SCALE IN FEET ,
I �:_.". ; ^• •,`/• O VICINITY MAP 1
L -
(. _ -- 0-y�c•t1 \ ,�-. '' ' // / /- ' 1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: >-I
14
" ' -�- I , •<=.` .0 Jam. / •!/ / '�y
I•I /. /..\ I LANDRT REFERREDro TINS wNIHT1DNT IS SITUATED IN r�STATE OF z
?` //. T' / •ARRINGTON.COUNTY OF KING AND IS D�tIDli AS rO LOWS:
1-4
I 1 '"_--1 <•"t ,.' i /i, / ;' / I ALL]HAS PORTION OF IN MG
LOUT LOT I.SECTION 32.TOWNSHIP24 NORTIL
pEf rc..-,-1 �.�, ;'.•''(.—— �'�- .. ../ , /foe
I �ORCIAONDSRAD ADJOINING LYING COUNTY.
OF NO TRD E FA IAND CC'CRAIRND�WGNT a
•+. - �` �•-�•�•—.-'� '• / i OP TAY.NSCEPT THIS PORGDN.IP ANY.OF SAID SHORNLANDS LYING NORTH OP
H•_a---1- (� • \. .• /�. . / / -.,.. THE 113TN®.Y PRODUCTION OP THE NORTH LDDE OP SAID GOV�G@!7 LOT 1. wN
1 L •--, 1 . ,I..r.t•Fi' '. ....--• I { STRIATE DI THE COUNTY OP TONG.STATE OF•ARRINGTON. 1•'•1
-, /o• . .. ✓ / HAZARD a, z
, ram.. - �: • •- / g
g.I__�L �1 1(``'-1/•�1 ,• ` ' ' '„, / / TEE YEAR moo HAZARD H coxuot®EMI ate NAT cT✓=HANES. a .
\t r __i Ij l'iI ^,i f ,,,.. i • f�7 a
e '�-L `"/� :ors%� �� / r� I p .i W J
``�� * //✓r 41•,> /% / ''- •
.*0 114
7
R (, _ . „;1 IL
oa
. ,r-„\ //'' ,� / \ 1 5�-J�44�.�.'/ ^ 0 Incorporated
R �DELT/ ` .,,, _ 1. `'`, / ..,.;.. I 1 •.. ,., Al L D�hWE.T./ iNt
r�� _ 30209.001.001
' I ` Project No.
✓ I CN.
` ', ": .:`ncIT I �.. .-....m.,,....;
8 L7 at. sheet No.
N 40TH ST.
put BEFORE YOU DI0 1-BO-4 2/-5 5551(Sheet I of I
PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SEC. 32, T24N, R5E, W.M.
..1\
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT — NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
, ,
'42
0.0 .200. 400 t3
,., a t'w,..••114,11h.Pii•li.114.51110 .,
.iiiiialiAN+4,41A;t4b II,Roll. • •0 71-J-1 1 . ,-
.,, .
''1,,,e44.1 • ,.', - 4-4 - ; -.,,,
A
mc
,5iiirr.OrroN -1- 1 :lit,11
,..
4. w•N l li: .2.?: ; LAKE WASHINGTON L .,.
•3!!Ei --icm;F,' -3:At- -..:,-rity,-- .r. ilzRgi E- , 1
MEI 131C 3M3 1:5,,n M311,, `.!-.4,1kifil '`•....._ 1
N-......: ., 7,1
Katz. L. ..-.13 Clz --..31111'..- 141,1,pp, ,...,... !",41 1.1 9, Ay, 11•IRA ,..,V001 a Of a...I
kil3 1 IV r.;g am(.5.,. .1213 cm%3.01014C h.C. Rip. Ail. ',..y.•;c• •
7.-13 C.:.IrEl FM.-,,3...2.' 313 C.AL a niu.rolvi 0 L.:.Agars. -,04-47 'l'
dl . •Ma Pit"iiil -1'. 31A1 re,'.111'AC-7.a.*a:-ZS!Vie.rpt. .41144, '%,..!•',1, . , 41
E3 =Oa W.k..L.1-, in Mt sat= 1.ayozae Aulic. 1,] 4•1%. di,..,k;i).
-zziCE 7Z3 C3 :*..7.7c..- sal 17-1-: MUM rIV1:=C ..3.12=3 1,..r.:1 hi .1,,,„
%tedr".., :.
t_ WASHINGTO
2131V-: ica, siali-p:' nu =Di j. .2.,. Tim a. . ti 4 Vi/ ...,•.. ',. N sH.RA
1
5.11a a2111--S Mitt_4 ieti az •-- ,...- _im../. .... •
-..1MIN E73 UZI =MC% LEI CE MSELt: Zaa,12-,.. . ..r..1,17.'5 MCI t, 1 i K . '42 Att.'...1S,FR g )1,„„ "Ai Os .
1/133 , Lai ....1' SO C71 113 IiIiSA -‘101,... ...5 ., .
.... WI EN., Mar: r1.3 cm mx= rat:IR .44,A.1. l'ai.t1,, . [1,i I ,., Cc, 44' •:..-.- &wail.' I.....v• I
Ezt.-PM al C•-• .7.3,=11 n'a or :72.s.:4; =ITN Is-gr,. .... ,.1 116,.e. „,: .
imq 311G x 47.3 E',7.z:-.7r,a.XL: 454 I .x ICECI.,,,,I '' LW :..J.n.ltr, ) 2 44: iiingi446, k 'im.........'"- I
A. • •
1
.e. .; I
31-tI*,' in r.,•,,:c'at-- WI KZ'Irl'iL: WK.,/ t.:1:10iNu,_ MO Cr-3 Kra'9 1 .. me 4., '‘,: fl". A PR 1 7°-A'.Ai I
IrEta• wri el '',, i'.W.! II3 C:I Karl/. . ..,..7:31f,T€ C:i.teli: .7ria F...1 ir.; r-.n ,7„---ii: -, . --,. v • 1 z •%,
,147,tli•L..,.1L1,1 *_S17.: aati L..I =4:.-:.azIATI ..Tairr..: .1=.A, -..I"ig -,.- },112 •1 7. , • 0 mos btu& klairl., ,77.J.WF,.-P:*1 4t1r_..2.1.= • ., s ,..e...,,, I 0
mum ca Er.li U.-3,raiiIMEI 0;1:7, 10-,4. ,-7:, 2311,13a d.C13:11I
Init• 171E4,1 5‘7.73rr...' WI MI .1aA91104C NfArEt,7, realg:T. la Fro
acme nia ea naw.,1'fa 13_, ..tr..1,ef 1311 WY= -41114e5 i:_. !A .4-0;•,,T.isi.,, -.IA('
ait 0 I' I
VACANT 0 1 a 0
Iti. OS 1•30...-, IIG ki-Z -4We....,..,.r.,arzi 2,7,13/1, 57.3 ,r6,=, ' ,,,_.4,., Fr. <Pr/WY ng Er‘ :Mb'LA1L.: 'tura 7.:i'lltrt,t P:1 ...0-1 I.'VLF ..i. Li Iry.. 'A'41, _
IV A UR! 11I4 b..•.A....41k..Nor ----. _..../, a° . -, IA-4, ilii'1.1
. , . :5 .,, AM!* I-, •''0 0
- V. I tj••.•1• vi.L i 64,g ay,-li II .,11, RH._ ' ' ,c, , . 1 i 5:
•-E . I., 1 • ..i. iinlim itiA IL
1
`1),,4,
re _
lig tin 4- , , i a, ..• '
---T-J-- ...2-4Ra.'----- --R. -
L ' el lip., .1 7 Co .\\ •,_,,,*.' s, 1, . , cs?o
•,, 4,
ilgig VI IX r
ILA= I 1 31 'Z.
" ;..7 -1,*; -I/t 0 t
:".',..;•e_ !
EZA !!!?95iri illi ii v,----' , Tg -Uai,
I-- ii,iiiiir •
r eltaVi
Di* MAW 7P13.Wamil' :lir-
i! , rialliliiirlEltION4_ -`?---:1 -1' -
pi .. iii :
.,......, i_ow g
..t's••• /
,,,
le , ......,.."47,,, „.......-46*.--- ,........„
• -,, &•*-4%--, '''''----f,... el*,
• - ,,,E
._ ,
0.107 Try ,22• ,ii-3.,...• , f5i,A. '`,.., ''7,\'.: ', ..,e iv' 44' 4 Y/ - •.:1‘,,_ i.,n gi N
May CM1.11 Open Spa
g A., - Iiiriati..,
.....-- -__ la cR E PC 4. JONES . •AVE NE • \ 1 ›.
May Creek rk --------''' 0-4 AIIIME : El 1 - — • —- ----- ...„,...,....„._ s, . ,--Ar44,... 4,....1. i,ii,II i
,47 v411 .8%. ..,'` .' H. •, ..,,,,,,
c:
,_....,..r.11.21 61 , „ ...,..,• ,.._ •, , .;:, ,,,4
. .... ? . --.. ------- '"-..!,-- -
., i I
I .1
.VII .rtf,,,,...c.
,._ / 1 2 1
+0,0 ,. lAygiiiumw .i.,0-i• 'AIX X11101 . 13111111IN L- *4-11--k- Illin -1110 z.r..,__r..,4.,,„,rc:, ..yfr„,,,0*..4,,„,c ,• ,--4,4,..L.,„._ .......!.
y„,.... ......,, a. L
d o
0
, 4 . 440011140,- ,1*.ii ' -'T .12. -..- . -• — -0
=
).! i •
;lora IX-IIIII "" •
, .
04001: '.-t' •;(5z aowa
. BSI
Pw:
•muuMIESIOV2114.- t
, 1 • ...,,., 46 ,..112V4VRARRIIRRUtilizlnYiiT‘VP'illird- -. 441 _ 6 )11,3411"Lt-Ilxv," : ..< ,
_.. ..,„, ill
i : • ,
NI r0 ••111T5 R. a Alf. ta F ,c
1 J". Z =,•
k rt'4107_,?:1.111,nit wus ,f'& k
x ijI . 'R NT•N II - ip...
, - , • • •.
' 33-Lgir' -nt.r" ,..- .ar .arr.,. VI
7W.,gik 4 &1- %IR''r •Ipl .... ......,.......,..—
Ilg 1 --- . ,
--U2711 AVE 5 ." AIE I
. *.
-314 CI ,/F NEW ASTLE• '. grigiga • I. •st g k g 0.4_. Incorporated
liall1111. 1 1 14.1.
I ta0 LaMar 1401100
i .11 tr-C . .1.4••01103
t 3:ar' V •-I 1 ' •t.40 °*" t - A: t I I I I 0. r:r ttti tng
1 4., ._ . t 4 • ---.2%oeL 9 2 A
XWeisel 111.10.1
30209 001 001
1 Ea 2
a..u.DEMI 19U DC 1403-424-5536 meet 1 et 1
W ,
. . _
- ---- -- ---,_, - ---- --- --- -- ;—. 1. -- ...• .
1 .
, l .,
-- - - - - \
C 0 R 7 * CUR
111_
Cte'6‘C
___
- 1V3,3 ..„..... . \--....
— -
)- --- ---
R'-10 ,
IV 40tti St
/ -. ... ,, . .
///.6. ---! . !....1. 1._.:_._:•:-_.:.:_7-.....// .., ,- 'V)--.- 71— -- - .-- :• . •-,' ..-• --I:
/
-, -. ...1 III6- Q • 'R__.8-,_.,:. _Ey.
::-:,.-.../ 4_zr r,..d__ p_c_)_..
. :
..<4.
F• 7'• • gt.--i
/---- p--7/. ; ;11 •\11.I . ... i 1 I I • . , • •
.:-. 7::7 , c..kl)-1- T r ..-.-----:-.--: '>.-i --! : .--- c0 -14.•
• .?-.... I..._L._... i 1 .-' ,__ :--. _:7...... .._-0., c..)
• _.-...t::17-,' i T 1-- - ;•-i
---- '/ - --.I •..)--. . i---- I ; -I . - -0.-- ! - :-.:• o- 1-3
- — — — 1-- - -/ i ; i --J, L_ I._ __..., p_i 1 ; ' • t N
./._ t ,/ I.. 11 N ,,a6th st i 1 '1-1 --.r r 1 ; i
1- -I If ." f ;; ! 4.•
Z
--- 1,--- 1.--!.-!. i PI
Li ET .._pp. t.iiii_._..(,$,At.__Nn...ri ll 8 .s....!
q-NI, I lit
trl- — — — —/-- .. .-- '..! -R---8/ -
i n f , ,1 1
' L8 N ' 'fi 1 R' ' 8' • • . 'I' • '
1-s i-- ; 17' „' -N--34thl St- - r,i—1 -: 1-3-4t
- — — •----7-. . riLI _t_H. L! H I ! LI i i ,.., ., , . i :. i! •R
' bjil 19 i I II. PIN Ill RI—P
. ,-...- ..., HI.. •
._ .. 8 ....; . ..! .. ;• -•,• - i .
_ _ _ ,_--• IMIONINIMMII
EZ , • 1
...:.. ...1.-....1"..- .! 1 1R-18 1 I r-i I 1 i_l livi 1 Al ; 1 1 I 1 1 I ; ; R'-8. I - - ' ' ' '6-1-: I
N r 32nd i IN- '
1
..:,..... 4. 8 f 1Rf$ 1 I -RI 0-.8.-j- ,.1 i PICI-1.Sti:1* ';1 11-
_ co'
. _—/7.--_:-. ..••.,:. , cot 1R-;8; II 111 1 11 111 ; i : 111 ; Rk131 . ; ! : •:
' ce I ;R P 1 1 I I 1 IR'-ig. 1 NI Pt sit! iti 1 ; ; li 1
. .
/. --D---J-..-.-0,-.. _c_ _sod 1 !12r8; 11H111111 1 HI 1R4ii
," -----.:....-- -.-..-..°..._ \- ... . • .... :x R,R4,44-8. I II
0; l;-1, dt -- ' il
cc . 1
-- \----- .
LI IR-18- 1 -8 I ij i,-)I! I 1 i.2 I I i i ! I
R+8 Hi 1 1 I ill i ''!! . ! I ! ; RI-8 ; • ' ' -FR.4 a•
. !. -
R48 ! ; ; I ; ; I N 28th! St .!
-8 - ';' 'f•'• ir ' . '•• •
0 , t , H111 , t ! i ! :,./
,• . i i... !, 7 • . ,
. .
7 ‘....n .i. ".f i ----N ' ' i 7• '•
? ...20 A??
C3
,,vy 0
.c",... ZONING ----Renton dity Limit0 i 4800
P/B/PW TEClitTICAL SERVICES
4%1117 31 T24N R5E E 1/2
.4.N.vo 03/L5/02
5431
ZONING MAP BOOK
:.____......,._..,. ....,....,.
Fwaggeivis, .4„, ,..t_ml.."---, 1 tims„,::,,,,p,::::1 a I wri7L-Ttril 459 1,_._.:Ifft 1,1••-• ,S ,, riliES Tirri;...,,--414*--.1011111•10 ]g sg:iao. VII,, '--pir.:fie ri, i- -;--, -- ' . . I
- It.L: mii;i mi 0 Jar- •In 20. 7
'1}-14 WM gm a up ,e- ti No .41,fAig st Af A,' _ _.,ri,L.m 7 lyj Ili
..,
.,.'4, M W4-rvill! t -74 0 7 0 s, _
a, sr:::::*,....,:*::ggi•-::::Ki-::::w--. \. .! thii, ..friggiEr ''''•--:* ./..am,.._,,e, wi,.:. R-,
•L-4., .-",-,:-:. ! • it . gifk. kit- , hag ‘: ; 26 T24N 5E-
p .:::::::::::::::::x....a:rim:-06:„:‘ -- ,,,r;-.mEm.5, ' 1
i, K:iiK:i:E:K:i:K:ii:r.::i,K K - ..... rr • •••••--!rill inliti ' "
.r2 . ' WREE -.E; ETIVAii;iE::::s. ''°''''..:'..:EAMEM .J. k- i- 'J---'' .• ' "'.
r!::::"AllgrA41711iP
\..„,,....\\I\IN\
relielliValiiii ilinFaa=' -- iligr _4...1 01.i44;4 •Int ; ti Pe, ._.n 7
t imittemom-_----Amm ._,_t1/4/
E.,,:Le,•!IL.t:v1n;atitfintenga strzuotws,atiultiii, ....14„
'---,,e AimillItAilL_ . 35 TR4N R5E
11,111.11VM:E:--'''-:4---iE :::E::•:,.:': :- :-ct,:::,§ri:::::::::::::::::,..:kr•v771r,.1 Ct_W--=. - --ilwv,t7m74 .xrt- . :. i-bt-- ._
hi.1111k:*iri-lvitiMM.IF,..EE-Wi:•NV:VAEMMR.i '-tcliwww:__.,,,..‘01;,5imlicir.:470, ,_,,, . .411,
t
,g=goting •x:qii-zigiMPVIN NOMPOM iiii., El I, .,I,,wi 1 rtNter-r-7, ,1 i I,A Il_t
?16k .
mt.,
tiggibilir..--,a.t..,,i xlivkz.vIt-a•2023NasEe------.i. 1.1111,',. • 4,4,,..11,. . - 1 -ANA
ivripm ix_11142,1Ef.-44Aw, i .0 0,,,411=iaitrig,i1 = -7"
ill 1 L
Lfiifli hi...t0.1"1-PMPEA, 1 , a \'' 4-*W- -61#Ireil - 1(1'sl[W.°Ir=11-3-•IA 6vrooling.-=! s il 1 p---\, t-,111tavr-4 .Prisitri i i
.,.., .
N -fil IMMO . _. I A \ 3:kii,, v,,, ki*tti a -.A
k will ow ,,•Ivititioa,ak 1 Jo s.%., rii ._ 1 11 .7 Illili
-,---1,--i•=4,1%., , ipir'"• To I '-'1I...I I-
Vu 41tii 'S'AAIrlitillT1 \ib '11111! R5 1,4h0I-.Er • Lei R5E
\
1
-,-_-.) AMIN-4 ill i' i :11111
FVE---' ita P_PMIPAMII747,11114 14101t4' -_' ---7 0 - adA 4 i i it.
...14414
kit 111410 k s.--...-''''*414 la_ONAIII 114 k,,,, ,A .16, iii.. •
liWo___ , p ititsrous voip•yf --,\....,,, __
"4"11:11:4111:0-010'114/4* Ili_:--- ,7•,.t. ,-_willot'•iltsp
IrliktaW .0,- "•'•'-' kaa,liadril JI,g,..: . ifigtat- • --,liti. iir_itds!,6 -r--. -
Tirol ,,—.T , 1,0, ,,,, ,,,
,.' &-'-\ — 0.k ._.....- -- . ''----' • N
,, ti,,,,,, ,, , 1111kip.'7"..e.: _II '
'11111-1 . r-.110 . i
.A. i it Olt.). c:.,,,..,,,,,=...•r,.. ,,- ,
'- i‘ II —All 1 gilt' ' " P' -‘_.';•'
7m1., ..., 'Ill ' ..' ,_vii--.,.T-r„--„L4-.
iht.
•• agani... 11_ • 3N R4E iii 1.9 Efallittirrin, I TP'1111:41. 2411?Ellii ; 1;' . 2 T23N1-
ir
LI
dm naafi/. ft,,P0 71----.T. 71 . Ze.01 1"-- 821 --
m,,ik q • Ng 1,„„vicr7 .1. }_77 __ '.1-w-.71 LAIL
.,,,,„, „cis r_-_sr- 1711) -; ;..
Ein. , , ,, ... 9 , I 11 ,
li 444,c2ibta -'•jill 41 l:
.1 !
11 ki• -.I, ,•
It‘,.1 :: t,„41rA.I •in:;k_zi,, , -04; ,,, . i a
I 17df iffwga-t-. .
, • 23 R4E 23
Ataill -.. II 0J
;
..... 1
1.15PArl1511
.1 4 JO ----- r a--on i , • __7 . , ,,-, _. .J... : ,fi''NO\h„....., ‘
lia I to)*1_ (C','II •0
t 1.- • P 11-, g 1
: it r • 33 ,3N R;' ' ',,.;:'T23N" 35 723N
,:..
I .
7---,j11111 611 -In : E •I II _ _ KB IiiiitIr 0' 833 11N
/ . , • i Al • . mu- 0 i t.,..,: , „:,.:- ...............
.........._...
........... ....
...:„.
,,__ rtiAA,
, ,,,, . ,..„. • j „„„„„
: . , , ,.„ •
.:,...„,
22N R4E . all* ' l'71Ik k' Afirt Ilidtt !
2 722N R5E :igig IC‘ 1. . -Al
RFRTIWNTIAT, •
' • May include Overlay Districts. See Appendix
D' 1-1 Center Ne,Vorhood• maps. For additional regulations in Overlay
I—I Resource Conservation
'I :91 Center Subur R-1 I Residential 1 du/ac hit:iota, please see RMC 4-3.
.I Residential 5 du/ac I I Center Downtown.% (R) Publicly owned
I I R I Center Office ResidLid e Renton City Limits R-8 I Reeidential 8 du/ac
COMMFRCATI ' -.--.-Adjacent City Limit.Ell Residential Manufactured Homes
IR-10 Residential 10 du/ac CA Commercial Arterial. ' I.Book Pages Boundary I
I
El3 Commercial Office*R-141 Residential 14 du/ac
'i.i. KROLL
I RM-I I Residential Multi-Family infill EXII cocemarpe yprit-cito ..
PAGE
I RM-N I Residential Multi-Family Neighborhood Center INDOlin.810_,,...... PAGE#
IRM-C I Residential Multi-Family Suburban Center
. ....,,,I lli„ IndustrialtiTHea7lastn-memasiii6owN,RANGE
KA
IRM-U1 Residential Multi-Family Urban Center* Industrial - Medium INDEX
I IL I Industrial - Light
. .,, •
, Alk
r
0
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
October31, 2002 CITY-OF RENTON .-
NOV 0 7 2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
Development Services Division RECEIVE
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Project Number/Name: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF,V-H, SM/Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms.Nichihira:
I would like to submit comments on the above application.
I live in Kennydale and within '/4 mile of the proposed project. I am very disappointed in the III
proposal for May Creek. It is crucial that during construction May Creek be protected and
erosion,pollution, and run off doesn't occur which would pollute Lake Washington or May
Creek. When the trucks cross over the May Creek Bridge, all materials need to be secure and
covered. All dirt mounds and construction in surrounding areas need to be covered so if it rains
the dirt and materials won't run off. When grass is put in, fertilizers need to be banned.
I oppose the lame buffer of 50 to 100 feet. The buffer needs to be 250 feet. Please investigate
what is needed to protect the watershed, the Chinook Salmon, and clean water. It is crucial that
May Creek be fully protected. This is our environment. This is our land. Please take steps now
as the City of Renton to protect our ecological system. Let's protect valuable salmon and other
animal habitat. The Chinook Salmon are the endangered list—we can bring them back if all
communities take steps to restore and protect salmon habitat. May Creek is a valuable ecological
river—protecting our rivers is important.
I oppose the work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek and do not think the city
should approve the variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations.
Already, compared to other communities,Renton has a poor track record with protecting the
environment. Let's make the public proud of Renton and not approve variances which hurt the
trees, and our waters, under pressure from over-growth and short-visioned money hungry
developers. What will Renton look like in the future if the environment isn't protected?
Thank you for your consideration.
Please list me as a party of record, on all public approval lists, and notification lists in regards to
this project.
Sincerely,
Leslie Kodii‘ fj...,
'
5021 Ripley Lane N. #106
Renton, WA 98056-1559
SEA 1281212v1 0-0 1 /
,
. . .
3-7;
1
E
October 31, 2002
Lesley Nishihira ��v���°v�pF�Et TOH 1N�
Senior Planner
Development Services Division — Development Planning 3'.1 2002
Renton City Hall RECEIVED
1055 South Grady Way RECi
Renton, WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat; Project LUA-02-040
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
I am writing to comment on the Master Application filed with the City of Renton for the
Barbee Mill site located at the mouth of May Creek. I have several concerns about how
this development could impact the habitat of May Creek and the Lake Washington
shoreline. Both water bodies are used by Puget Sound chinook salmon; listed as a
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
At this time, I am particularly concerned with the proposed buffer areas for the shoreline
and the Creek. The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires counties and cities to
include the "best available science" when developing policies and development
regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas and must give "special
consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance
anadromous fisheries (RCW 36.70A.172(1); WAC 365-195-900-925). While Renton may
only require a 25-ft setback for these two water bodies, and the proposal is calling for a
50-ft buffer, the scientific literature clearly indicates the need for larger buffers to
reasonably provide for a full range of riparian functions, and therefore, not contribute
significantly to the loss of salmonid habitat.
I am recommending the adoption and implementation of the Biological Review Tri-County
Model 4(d) Rule Response Proposal prepared for the Tri-County Salmon Conservation
Coalition by Parametrix (April 2002). This document recommends Management Zone
standards broken into three categories: the channel migration zone (CMZ), the inner
management zone (IMZ) and the outer management zone (OMZ). May Creek and the
Lake Washington shoreline are categorized as Water Type S. The Tri-County urban
standard for Water Type S is 115-ft IMZ and an 85-ft OMZ.
There is abundant literature in support of large riparian buffer widths for microclimate
control, large woody debris, sediment filtering, streambank stabilization, wildlife habitat
and the removal of pollutants. This literature is summarized in the Biological Review
which can be viewed at http:uwww.saimoninfo.org/tricounty/bioreview.htm. The Tri-County standards
were developed to protect aquatic habitat and provide for critical stream processes.
Additionally, larger buffers provide protection to residents from storm events and open
space is seen as a valuable community resource.
I urge you to implement these standards at the proposed Barbee Mill Plat site to protect
the valuable resources of May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline. Thank you for
your consideration.
Sincerely,
Mary Maier
May Creek Basin Steward
King County, Water and Land Resources Division
nsley .shihira- LUA-02-040 Page 1
From: "Mike Nicholson" <MikeN@ci.newcastle.wa.us>
To: <Inishihira©ci.renton.wa.us>
Date: 10/31/02 12:18PM
Subject: LUA-02-040
Lesley,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the project LUA-02-040, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. The
City of Newcastle had previously submitted comments on the application for mixed use development,
LUA-01-174, please accept those same comments and concerns for the application LUA-02-040.
Recent comprehensive plan update traffic modeling would only add further credence to the information
that was previously submitted. in April of 2002.
If you have questions or needed any clarification please do not hesitate to contact me or Fritz Timm at
425.649.4444
Thank s Again!
Mike Nicholson,AICP
City of Newcastle
Community Development Director
CC: "Fritz Timm" <FritzT©ci.newcastle.wa.us>
•
April 2, 2002 ��CI°yofi , rfr:,,,.:
viNG
APR " ;..
� Ft -
'F:
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager RECEIVED
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA. 98055
Re: Barbee Mill.Mixed UseDevelopment.SEPA EIS'Scoping
Dear Ms. Nishihira: • t
On behalf.of::the.City of Newcastle I Would like to thank you for the opportunity to •
•
participate.in the scoping process;for:t , Barbee Mill project: City-staff attending the .
meeting plans to present in more defai1 the City's conC ns. 'This project will directly
and indirectly impact the City.of Newcastle:,.Thus,'the Cityof Newcastle submits the
attached comments with regard to .the envir'onrpenta(- elements : 'The comments,
'attached are from the City's Traffic Engineer 4.p.O.enior;Q.evelopment Engineer and
have been prepared at the direction of the Community D°evdlo ' ient'Department.
•
We respectfully request that the:traffic, transportatip aid transit issues identified in
the attached ,material be included in the EIS that you;'plan'to prepare There are
three major areas of concern:that the City of Newcastle requests';:be addressed.
• They are:
.
• Trips with an:origin or'.a destination in Newcastle
• Trips passing-through Newcastle to or from origins and destinations to the
north, south or east
• Trips using Newcastle streets to avoid traffic congestion on 1-405
A more complete description of the concernsis included in Mr. Dave Enger's letter of
April 2, 2002 to Mike Nicholson. The City, as does Mr. Enger, emphasizes the need
to do a "worst case" traffic analysis assuming severe traffic congestion on 1-405.
The three main routes that would appear to be affected that are identified in the
second bullet above have been mapped for clarification and a copy of that map is
also attached to this request.
In addition, the City's Senior Development Engineer, Fritz Timm, has identified other
elements that are of significant concern to the City of Newcastle. These items should
be addressed in the EIS as well. Under "Air", air quality issues resulting from
construction and transport of materials to and from the site are of concern. In the
"Water" section, there are a number of concerns identified including water quality
habitat, water contamination from construction activities and the development and
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
13020 S.E. 72nd Place, Newcastle, Washington 98059-3030
Telephone: (425) 649-4444 Fax: (425)649-4363
acceptance of a spill prevention and cleanup plan for both on-site and haul route
spills. Of course, concern for"fish friendly" environments should be addressed in the
"Animal" section of the EIS. "Environmental Health" concerns include the need to
address on-site contaminated soils and noise; both in proximity to the site and along
haul routes through or past Newcastle. The "Light and Glare" issues should .be
• addressed as they impact valuable,..views .of.._Lake Washington and the Olympic
Mountains for both Newcastle and Renton residents. - ,.
The City of Newcastle'may choose :to supplement or amend this request subject to
the Scoping Meeting at which this letter-is presented:: In the event the need arises to
do so the City will respQnd:in:a timely manner or request additional time. to do so.
Again thank you for,this.opportunity:
Respectfullyyo f:
/if
.: 'icheal tcholso'n, i.MCP
Comm ity Development Director . --
Attachments
c:. Andy Takata, City Manager
City Council Members
Fritz Timm;-P:E.
David Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E, '
•
•
•
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
13020 S.E. 72nd Place, Newcastle, Washington 98059-3030
Telephone: (425) 649-4441 Fax: (425)649-4363
. S APR 01 '02 19:13 TO-NEWCASTLE FROM-TPE T-350 P.02/04 F-081
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC.
2223-1120 AVENUE N.E.,SUITE 101-BELLEVUE,WASHINGTON 90001-2952
v,CIon H.1113Ho3 RE.rowdiesTELEPHONE(42S)455.5320
onvlo H.PNUER.RE.Vice Pmldsol FACSIMILE(42S)459.5759
April 1, 2002
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
13020 S.E. 72nd PI.
•
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030
Re: Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
City of Renton File No. LUA-01-174, SA-H, ECF, SM
Potential Traffic Impact Issues
Dear Mr.-Nicholson:
As we discussed, the City of Renton has invited all interested municipalities to
comment on the environmental elements to be evaluated in the Barbee Mill Mixed-Use
Development EIS. The development would include 619 condominium units. 50.000 sq.
ft. of retail space, 112,000 sq. ft. of office space, 30,000 sq. ft. for hotel use, and 8,000
sq. ft. for restaurant use. The Barbee Mill development would be located at the old
lumber mill site at 4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N. in Renton.
We have several concerns about the potential project trip generation and
distribution, resulting impacts to Newcastle streets, and necessary mitigation. The
analysis should address the AM and PM peak hours, and construction t1 affic impacts as
well as the traffic impacts after completion and full occupancy. These issues may affect
the scope of work of the traffic analysis that will be conducted for the EIS. The City of
Newcastle requests that these issues be addressed in the EIS.
A significant amount of the new traffic generated by the Barbee Mill Development
may use Newcastle streets. We expect that this new traffic on Newcastle streets would
mainly consist of three types of vehicle trips, as follows:
1. Trips with an origin or n desfinatinn in NPwca9tlEt.• Some of these trips would be
made by Newcastle residents who would work or shop at the Barbee MITI. Some
may be trips by Barbee Mill residents to shopping, services or other destinations
in Newcastle.
2. T ps asging through Newcastle to nr from origins nd dA tinatlnns to the not hT
Fni,th or east. These would be made by residents of the Renton Highlands,
Issaquah, south Bellevue and other areas to the east. We expect that these trips
N300572issuoaMr
APR 01 '02 19:14 TO-NEWCASTLE FROH-TPE T-350 P.03/04 F-081
Mr. Mike Nicholson flit
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
April 1, 2002
Page- 2 -
would use three main routes through Newcastle, to or from the 1-405/N.E. 44th St.
Interchange and the Barbee Mill site:
a. The Lincoln Ave. N.E./Monterey Pl. N.E./112th PI. S.E./114t Ave. S.E./S.E.
88t St./S.E. 88th Pl./124t Ave. S.E./S.E. 89th Pl. arterial route to Coal
Creek Parkway Southeast. From Coal Creek Parkway S.E.. these through
trips could split to three routes:
1) South via 138th Ave. S.E./Duvall Ave. to the Renton Highlands and
other areas to the south or east.
•
2) East via S.E. May Valley Road to Issaquah and other areas to the
east.
3) Northeast via Newcastle-Coal Creek Road S.E. to southeast
Bellevue, 1-90, Issaquah and other areas to the north or east.
b. Lake Washington Blvd. S.E./S.E. 78th St./118th Ave. S.E./S.E. 89th
Way/S.E. 72na Pl./Newcastle-Coal Creek Road S.E. to southeast Bellevue,
1-90, Issaquah and other areas to the north or east. This route passes the
Renton School District's Hazelwood Elementary School, in an area with
few sidewalks.
c. Lake Washington Blvd. S.E./112th Ave. S.E. to the Newport Hills area of
Bellevue.
3. Trips using Newcastle streets to avoid traffic congestion on I-405. The route we
are most concerned about is Lake Washington Blvd. S.E. and 112th Ave. S.E. to
the north of The Barbee Mill. These arterial streets closely parallel 1-405, and
form a direct connection from the N.E. 44 St. Interchange (Exit 7) to the 112w
Ave. S.E. Interchange (Exit 9). Some traffic currently uses these streets to
bypass this section of 1-405. Future Barbee Mill employees leaving the site could
drive eastbound across the N.E. 44th St. overpass, observe traffic congestion on
1-405 northbound, and turn left onto Lake Washington Blvd. to use this bypass
route.
We are concerned about increased traffic volumes, speeds, and pedestrian and
vehicular traffic safety on Newcastle streets, particularly the routes identified above.
These streets pass through residential areas, have numerous residential driveways and
generally do not have sidewalks. All streets in Newcastle are two-lane streets, except
for Coal Creek Parkway S.E. and some of the streets that it intersects (for short
distances from Coal Creek Parkway S.E.). Coal Creek Parkway S.E. is also the only
N3005721ssueslfr
APR'01 '02 19:14 TO-NEWCASTLE FROH-TPE T-350 P.04/04 F-081
Mr. Mike Nicholson
Director of Community Development
City of Newcastle
April 1, 2002
Page- 3 -
street in Newcastle that has signalized intersections.
Transportation impact studies usually look at traffic volumes, impacts and
mitigation for typical peak hour conditions. As we all know, at times 1-405 is more
severely congested than is typical, due to high traffic volumes, collisions, traffic incidents
or other factors. We are concerned that when I-405 is severely congested, significantly
more Barbee Mill traffic may use Newcastle streets to avoid the freeway. nyle to the
• A mint!AMA that the Harbaa Mill FIR
M
Of course, if I-405 is expected to be severely congested during typical future peak hour
conditions with the Barbee Mill, an additional "worst case" analysis may not be
necessary.
The EIS should address impacts and mitigation of construction traffic on the
above streets and conditions. The EIS should identify and discuss truck haul routes for
construction materials and wastes. Measures to mitigate construction traffic impacts,
such as potential truck haul route restrictions, restrictions on haul hours of operation,
weight limits, and oversize load routing should be addressed. Other potential mitigation
measures related to construction truck traffic include pavement condition monitoring and
restoration, plans for the transportation of hazardous materials, truck washing, load
covering, and spill prevention and clean-up.
The EIS should also address the effects of the project on transit facilities and
service. Sound Transit has budgeted for a Newcastle Transit Center to be located
within the City's Community Business Center. The EIS should address whether bus
service would be appropriate between the Barbee Mill and the Newcastle Transit Center
and/or other locations in Newcastle.
We are available to coordinate with the Barbee Mill EIS traffic consultants, and
can provide copies of relevant City of Newcastle transportation documents and traffic
data to them. Please contact me if you have any questions.
Vary truly yours,
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
& ENGINEERING, INC.
G-„-.11 ?j
David H. Enger, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Vice President
DHE:
N.300572issuesltr
•
fre.451N--:
1�►
CITY OF NEWCASTLE
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Nicholson, Director of Community Development
FROM: Fritz Timm, Senior Development Engineer
DATE: April 1, 2002
RE: Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development
City of Renton File No. LUA-01-174, SA-H, ECF, SM
EIS Scoping
c:
❑ Urgent ❑ Action Needed ® For Your Information ❑ Comment
We have several issues that have been identified in the course of looking at the
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development proposal that we would like to have
included in the.scope of the EIS.
Under the Environmental Elements, Air Section, we would like to have the
construction impacts analyzed to include discussion of construction dust on the
environment and on the citizens of Newcastle. Newcastle is upwind of the
proposed construction project and could be impacted by dust off of the
• . construction site. Many of the haul routes that may be in use during construction
pass through or are directly adjacent to Newcastle. Potential mitigations could
include dust and contaminant stabilization, identification of haul routes that avoid
. undue impacts to population centers, and requirements to cover construction
material and debris hauling vehicles.
Under the Environmental Elements, Water Section, we would like to have the
impact of water runoff from the site addressed in detail both during construction
and during future use. We would also like to have the stream habitat that would
be protected, as well as that which would be removed, or enhanced, by the
project identified. Stormwater runoff from construction could impact May Creek,
which is the prime creek system through Newcastle. The potential that
contaminated soils or other hazardous cargos could be carried through or beside
Newcastle is of concern in the event of accidental spills impacting our creeks or
stormwater systems. We would like to see this potential addressed and also
would like to see the development of an effective spill prevention and cleanup
plan for both on-site and haul route spills.
Under the Environmental Elements, Animals Section;we would like to have the
impact of the proposed development on fish upstream migration analyzed.
Impacts to the channel of May Creek through the Barbee Mill site or stormwater
Barbee Mill Mixed Use Development Project - EIS Scoping, Page 2
entering the creek within this site could impact the size and health of spawning
returns from Lake Washington into May Creek.
Under the Environmental Elements, Environmental Health Section, we would like
to have the onsite soils contamination analyzed with respect to construction dust
impacts on Newcastle. Potential mitigation could include on-site encapsulation
or special dust control measures if appropriate. We would also like to have the
potential impacts of the construction project on our citizens with respect to noise
analyzed, with the potential for haul routes through or past Newcastle, as well as
the proximity of the site it-self to Newcastle. Potential mitigations to these issues
could include limits on construction hours, or construction-haul hours, as
appropriate based on the results of these analysis.
Under the Environmental Elements, Light and Glare Section, we would like to
have the impact of sky glow and direct glare from the project on Newcastle
residents analyzed. Our residents have a unique view out across Lake
Washington available due to the topography of the area.
Under the Environmental Elements, Transportation Section, we would like to
have the potential for transit connections to Newcastle included in the analysis.
I
City of Renton
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
BARBEE MILL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) As ency Scoping
COMMENT FORM •4
Name/Agency (print): 1, ittr 0 ` C E-mail:
Signature:
Address: 43020 '7Z ‘E p Phone:
What TM mental i pa (s)do ou ink the S should address? •
.1 Oieu
•
•
•
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
rAWFMTRI
You may submit your comments NOW or mail to: �G
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager APR :.,;
Renton City Hall, 6h Floor
1055 South Grady Way B.
Renton,WA 98055 R
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m.,APRIL 3, 2002.
•
rleyyNishiiiira Barbee Mill site 4 _ rim, R. m Page 1
From: "Rich Johnson" <JOHNSRJ@dfw.wa.gov>
To: <Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us>
Date: 10/29/02 3:51PM
Subject: Barbee Mill site
Hi Leslie,
Please use the previous comments submitted by WDFW on the previous proposed use of the Barbee Mill
site. The impacts, and thus our concerns, are similar under the new proposal.
Rich Johnson/ Assistant Regional Habitat Program Manager-WDFW
(360) 466-4345 x 254
7 y -
•
6 5TATe
84 o
! fir s
•
State of Washington
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311
February 11,2002
City of Renton Development Services Division DEVECITY OF LOMENT PLANNING
ATTENTION: Leslie Nishihira, Project Manager •
1055 Grady Way South FEB 1 2002
Renton, Washington 9 055
Rgab ;- —Y - •ECEIVED ^L
•
SUBJECT: Notice of Application,Barbee Mill Proposed Mixed Use Development,File
No.LUA-01-174,ECF, SA-H, SM,Lake Washington,Tributary to Ship
Canal and May Creek,Tributary to Lake Washington,King County, WRIAs
08.LKWA and 08.0282
The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)has reviewed the above-referenced
Notice of Application received on February 4, 2002, and offers the following comments at this
time. Other comments may be offered if the project progresses.
Please include myself and Rich Johnson, WDFW,Post Office Box 1100, LaConner, Washington
98257, as parties of record for this proposed project.
This proposed project would have significant adverse impacts on fish,wildlife, and their habitats.
These impacts need to be thoroughly evaluated in an environmental impact statement(EIS).
Through the EIS scoping and reviewing and commenting processes, WDFW intends to provide
further input related to this proposed project.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions, please
contact me at.(425) 649-7042.
Sincerely,
•Larry Fisher; . •
Area Habitat Biologist
LF:lficorbarbee.s.wpd•.,
• cc: WDFW,Johnson,Pratt
• v .
65\
C
of Renton
PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
BARBEE MILL MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Agency Scoping
COMMENT FORM
Name/Agency (print): R . L To toi 3 0 i,. E-mail: oL
Signature: it...-La_4-7
Address:p0 Boy
1100
et5,tLtev 02,
3'z.5.
7 Phone:360
What environmental impact(s) do ygm think the EIS should address? • .
•
e)der ci L4.Q(r 1-7 ,
• l h S 7!r e 4 :L eJ 6 7t 4 v.- ' s (t cat 1. W; i s a:-re •
la,k aL, d. S Lc/e kLe.. E•t ; 7V — coy ('-s cod w;11(:&
1 -i j 0-' v. 4 & d e , - /
V...vs ; o LL5 --f i S Le.5 �-ai c...5 c. a r C o-LA.td WA-. f 1
• 0, / t Le.:v (e, 6:t are A-v v-k . r cal 1-(cAtd
/,^-0-e 5 L7 4z s -- Poi-eti ( per,q1. - - cc.-5 .
C,o,..q ^ ievw_ ;i-,,p 3 to cr.-i.e,k! 4-5) c4 t-W (6-P4t
•
Co u-%vet L_÷ : S: fie. i i' V a: .e e air f/e r�.6.(1. iLe v w,5 614c
s 4 to, 6; tc4. . DPI,
to - .c., 1 4 S1..P
l. t ��el does le� 4derv1/7
°dItu.S s it-Qs , /-1 6 i'J Ire3 74o v d: J Lte-c.�/d l k 4-6
.re v- z u, bl,t.,k IIevaeLtc-L.1 - ttioil. CCveco(' aK.d 6,*tte4�s
4. L4.lr,.�, Wes ��, / s t-rrr.ct�.�-�.s
7 &L. .t4S�✓e4,o , Latit�:6JAar-/t-1.y elf
-tc.1 S v-eel
4)o,&, tt0.tir-�c.1 -a I- 1-Lk f 4Kc , akL ,-�.pv.3ue /d I e�o.. o�.� s
You may submit your comments NOW or mail to: i v�F j !�ir��ufj.i NC
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager DEVELOPMENT r'rro KING
Renton City Hall, 6th Floor c�"n!„90BEt�rtoN
to a�
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055 RECEIVE
ALL COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 5:00 p.m.,APRIL 3, 2002.RECEIV
LLesley,Nishihira-Bafbee Mill Proposal LUA ^' 74 Page 1
. - c
From: "Sato, Brian" <BSAT461 C ECY.WA.GOV>
To: "Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us"' <Inishihira@ci.renton.wa.us>
Date: 10/31/02 9:04AM
Subject: Barbee Mill Proposal - LUA-01-174
Ron Devitt's letter dated Feb. 21,2002 remains applicable to the
development proposed for the Barbee Mill site. Please incorporate into the
current land use file.
Regards,
Brian Sato
STATE
411et
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
Northwest Regional Office •3190 160th Avenue SE•Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452 • (425)649-7000
February 21, 2002
DEyELOp
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager CI v of ENTTOMNING
Development Services Divison FEB ?5 2002
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055 RECEIvEb
S - r. 1'ep '3Gavly( .- t$Wf}may •
�.-,,g'•
• • • • ft of retail space,'�12,000 sq'fft'df off er space;'30,000•sq ft of hotel use and'8,000
sq ft for restaurant use;total of 8 buildings; more
•
Location 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard N
Applicant Century Pacific, LP,Katherine Laird/William W Dunlap
Dear Lesley Nishihira:
In reference to the proposed development, I have the following comments related to
water quality about the demolition/construction process:
1. Re section 1,page 3., A NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit is necessary
because more that 5 acres of dirt will be disturbed. A Notice of Intent is the
appropriate application for the permit and is available on line @
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/sw prmts.html#application . Hard copies of
the application are also available upon request, from Linda Matlock @ 360-407-
6d17 _
?''a:aA ��.,+XtFaxii,.S�L'•`::•a
2. The measures cited to control erosion are not adequate to produce stormwater
from becoming turbid. With the presence of silty clays,physical sedimentation
may not produce a stormwater with low turbidity. Local expertise of emerging
technology would produce clear water and control the other parameters of
concern if the project were to engineer for active treatment of stormwater.
Several processes using either electricity or chemical treatment or enhanced
filtration would be logical options for compliance with water quality standards.
1 The SWPPP needs to include disposal options for turbid water that would not
meet water quality standards if stormwater treatment is not designed for the site.
•
®attiz3 is �i,
Lesley Nishihira
February 21,2002
Page 2
4. Similarly, options for disposal of stormwater that has an elevated pH from
concrete work should be considered if treatment of stormwater is not planned.
5. If there is historical site contamination, monitoring for parameters of concern will
be necessary. Discharges to Lake Washington may have to include whole
effluent toxicity.
6. A wheel wash is necessary to prevent trackout of sediment and other
contaminates of concern. The water from the wheel wash may not be discharged
to the stormwater system,May Creek,or to Lake Washington.
7. Lake Washington is AA water quality and_if any fill is authorized, appropriate in- _-
=Ci:�:1�_.1• :if. .trc ��.—_T — . ��. •
'��nJ' 'if .y/e�f .'�%�:Y. .'i�b �f:::
• . . 'wat" ¶o n ttfi =!riiiist tte;: nloo �i ed o.i-ea•E t � i IV itig �i�bkr• 'g= e5s' 1;
.. ear .i, •.!.l.k :,l,,: :: . .; ,:,,.' ,:•� • g ..f •• Y R.
• • •for:filhng. . •
8. Concerning the construction dewatering wells,if stormwater treatment is planned
for the site, the complications of discharging to Lake Washington would be
simplified. The"appropriate treatment"of dewatering water may require regular
testing to verify that contaminates of concern are not present. Infiltration back to
groundwater may not be appropriate until the contamination on the site is
completely removed.
9. Per section c. water runoff 2)d, The"approved water filtration system"could be
incorporated into the stormwater treatment system. Enhanced filtration could be a
good option for controlling turbidity and other parameters of concern.
• Neutralization may also be necessary to meet water quality standards.
10. If engineered soils involve the use of cement or cement kiln dust, special
provisions must be included in the Stormwater pollution prevention plan
(SWPPP).
Tf ther f4Are quectiops garnet,these c;omments,_please.-eall mega 425,,6.44 7028.
Sincerely,
Ron Devitt, Facility manager,NWRO
RD j c
Cc: Linda Matlock, HQ Stormwater, 47600
Ecology File 200200653
Brian Sato,NWRO
A.C. Kincfig & Co.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING
12501 Bellevue-Redmond Road,Suite 210
Bellevue,Washington 98005-2509
Tel 425 638-0358 Fax 425 455-8365
October 21, 2002
Project No.184
DEVCoyoETP
PVT
Ms. Lesley Nishihira OCT 9
City of Renton, 6th Floor , �?
1055 South Grady Way C /VD
Renton,WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Biological Assessment Review
Renton File Number 02-040
Dear Lesley,
This letter is my review of the Biological Assessment (BA) for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat by Raedeke Associates,Inc., dated August 26, 2002 and received
the next day by Renton. I also had available the Environmental (SEPA) Checklist
received by Renton on April 5, 2002 and Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Permit
Review Plans prepared by Otak Incorporated, dated August 27, 2002 and
received the same day by Renton.
This is an independent review of the Biological Assessment requested by the City
from the applicant for the project. Since there is no proposed federal nexus for
this project of which I am aware, or authority for the City of Renton to
administer the Endangered Species Act beyond its SEPA authority and
responsibilities, this document is interpreted by me to have a SEPA intention
with no fixed format. My review assumes the BA document and related SEPA
documentation need to be technically sufficient to support permitting decisions
and environmental review obligations of the City for this project. This review
includes consideration of biologically-based cumulative impact issues that I
perceived to be interrelated with or dependent upon the proposed project.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 2
Project Summary-Key Features for the Review
Based on information from all three of the resources provided, the proposal
includes the following actions that were important to my consideration of the
BA:
1. Termination of mill operations and associated activities.
2. Demolition and removal of "all existing buildings located on the property
[and] removal of asphalt..." associated with the mill (BA, page 17). This
excludes two existing bridges over Mill Creek, to be improved as
pedestrian crossings, and existing docks and a boathouse within or near
lot 93.
3. Construction of a new third bridge over Mill Creek, with abutment work
within the ordinary high water mark(OHWM) of the creek.
4. Grading of the site as needed for plat improvements and the construction
of 115 residential homes.
5. Creation of an "active recreation area at the Lake Washington shoreline" (page
15 of the SEPA Checklist,but not shown on the plans).
6. Creation of 24 residential lots along Lake Washington in the following
four categories:
a. 16 residential lots extending out into Lake Washington to the inner
harbor line, which is the Washington State Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) ownership boundary (lots 31 through 44, 91, and
92);
b. 7 lots extending toward the Lake Washington shoreline but
terminating at the inner harbor line which traverses uplands at this
location, leaving DNR-owned uplands between the shoreline and
the residential lots (lots 23 through 30; note that lot 23 includes one
corner extending into Lake Washington); and
c. One lot extending into Lake Washington that retains existing dock
and boathouse structures unrelated to mill operations (lot 93).
7. Creation of Tract C "open space", also extending towards the Lake
Washington shoreline but terminating at the DNR ownership boundary,
leaving DNR-owned uplands between the shoreline and Tract C.
8. Construction of two new stormwater outfalls from stormwater quality
treatment ponds, discharging to Lake Washington at an invert below the
MLLW of the lake.
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21, 2002
Page 3
9. Restoration of the Mill Creek buffer to a forested condition (where
lacking) within a 50-foot to 100-foot wide buffer, averaging"over 60 feet."
10. Limitation of residential construction to a 25-foot setback from the Lake
Washington shoreline and a maximum height of 50 feet within 200 feet of
the Lake Washington and May Creek shorelines.
BA Review
Overview Summary
The BA was successful in describing federally listed species that may be present
or use habitat associated with the project site and in making general conclusions
within the limitations of the project as it was described in the BA. I found no
reason to disagree with most of the substantive conclusions that were drawn in
the BA for the narrowly defined project that it presented. Within the constraints
of the project as the BA defined it, some minor corrections could be made and are
discussed briefly below, but these would not change the general conclusions
drawn. However, conclusions regarding adequacy of buffer widths and
composition along May Creek and Lake Washington were not, in my opinion,
justified. Further, impacts from some elements of the proposal, and particularly
from reasonably expected project-associated actions, were not disclosed or
assessed. For that reason, the conditions listed in Section 7.0 of the BA may not
anticipate the full suite of impacts that could occur and be offset or eliminated
through mitigation.
The BA did not reference or include several documents pertaining to assessment
of federally listed species on or adjacent to the subject property, but within the
Action Area defined in the BA. These included documents pertaining to.various
remediation and redevelopment proposals for the Quendall Terminals and
Baxter properties to the north of the subject site, and to environmental
assessments prepared for reconstruction of the I-405 and NE 44th Street
interchange to the east of the subject site. Review of these documents could have
strengthened the BA, particularly with regard to assessment of the Lake
Washington shoreline context, habitat, and use by listed species.
The BA and the project design is mainly focused on Mill Creek. The proposed
setbacks from Mill Creek are greater than those proposed from Lake
Washington. This is assumed not entirely a result of the 100-year floodplain
A.C. Kindfig Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21, 2002
Page 4
boundary for Mill Creek that is located within the buffer (the floodplain is not
indicated in any of the document figures I was provided). Restoration of the
Mill Creek riparian area is proposed; no restoration of the Lake Washington
shoreline is proposed.
The BA was unsuccessful, in my opinion, in describing impacts to the Lake
Washington shoreline and adjacent habitat from a combination of residential
development and undescribed but reasonably related actions to the proposal.
The BA substantively considers only actions within the immediate property
boundaries. Some actions at the boundaries and reasonably expected actions at
the margins of the project (and related to it) were not described or evaluated. In
my opinion,these include the following:
1. Analysis of continued dredging at the mouth of May Creek, if needed,
that had previously been permitted for ongoing mill operations. With the
cessation of mill operations, will all dredging cease, or would it be needed
by the proposed project? For example, it could be needed to protect
bridge structures, prevent expansion of the 100-year floodplain into
developed areas, prevent filling of sediment around existing over-water
structures in lot 93, or prevent sediment filling around docks that could be
constructed as later actions for residential lots extending into the lake.
2. Impacts from increased human activity within new lots adjacent to the
lake and May Creek, within the active recreation area (presumably in
Tract C), and at the pedestrian and roadway crossings of May Creek;
3. Impacts from unrestricted landscaping extending to the shoreline within
lake-adjacent lots, including reasonably anticipated alterations
homeowners may make to shorelines or to narrow strips of DNR lands
between their lots and the shoreline;
4. Cumulative impacts from reasonably expected future applications for
residential-use docks extending into Lake Washington within lots
extending into Lake Washington;
5. Cumulative impacts from reasonably expected alterations on the DNR-
owned uplands in the narrow space between the proposed project and
Lake Washington (i.e., removal of view-obstructing mill structures and
disposition of debris at the shoreline and extending into the lake);and
6. Use of, removal of, or improvements to the existing mill dock extending
from the DNR uplands into Lake Washington adjacent to Tract C.
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 5
It could be considered that items 1, 4, 5, and 6 above are actions with
independent environmental review and not part of the proposed project. To my
knowledge, the DNR ownership boundary is also the city limit boundary for
Renton in this area. However, isolating the proposed project from reasonably
expected associated actions would likely result in less comprehensive mitigation
for shoreline wildlife and habitat than may be warranted by the suite of actions
reasonably expected to occur as a result of the proposed project.
Specific BA Comments
1. Baseline Conditions (Additional Useful References): Relevant documents
on existing conditions, habitat and shoreline conditions, and listed species
that were not included but may have aided the BA assessment are the
following:
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. May 11, 2001. Environmental
Assessment Discipline Reports [on] Water Quality, Fisheries, and
Plants and Animals [for the] 'I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange Project,
Renton,WA.
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. February 17, 2000. Mitigation Analysis
Memorandum [for the] Quendall and Baxter Properties, Renton,WA.
• Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. January 3, 2001. Biological Evaluation
Lorj Remediation of the South Baxter Property, Renton, WA.
• Beak Consultants Incorporated. June 19, 1997. Port Quendall Project
Mitigation Analysis Memorandum.
• Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. 1997. Draft Summary of Lake Washington
studies completed by the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe in the vicinity of
the Port Quendall Project (referenced and summarized in Beak 1997).
Two of these documents summarize information on May Creek from
agency contacts and field work between 1996 and 2000, and all are
relevant to the subject property vicinity and the Lake Washington
shoreline. For example, habitat in the May.Creek channel from the Lake
Washington confluence is described- in detail in the I-405/NE 44th Street
report, including interaction between the rip-rap along the channel banks
and scour. This same report also more thoroughly describes the Lake
Washington shoreline than the BA. The Barbee Mill shoreline is described
from field reconnaissance in the Beak 1997 report. The Muckleshoot
Indian Tribe (1997) described lake shoreline composition in the project
vicinity, which Beak (1997) used to put the project area in perspective in
A.C. Kindig&-Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 6
terms of lakeshore habitat value. Both of these reports give the results of
juvenile chinook rearing use surveys of the Lake Washington shoreline at
the project site.
Other relevant facts which might have aided the reader's perspective were
not included from references that were used. For example, lower May
Creek is considered a locally significant resource area by King County
because of the relative high habitat value of the reach from RM 0.1 to RM
23.9 to the Lake Washington system to spawning salmonids.
2. Project Description (DNR-owned uplands): The BA indicates that 24
shoreline lots are adjacent to Lake Washington(page 16). In fact, seven of
the 24 lots and all of Tract C abut DNR-owned uplands between the
project and the lake shoreline. The DNR-owned lands currently have mill
structures upland and over water, a wooden dock, wood and other debris
at the shoreline, and pilings and dolphins extending to the outer harbor
line. These features are described on page 6 of the BA under existing
conditions. However there is no recognition or description of the future
conditions or changes on these DNR lands in relation to the project. The
BA should consider reasonably expected homeowner actions within the
DNR lands (or measures to prevent them as warranted), where these
lands are a narrow strip between the back of the lot and the lake, and
disposition of the DNR uplands that are the visual focal point for much of
the proposed project.
3. Project Description (Tract C Open Space): The BA does not describe
Tract C "open space" function or its future use as part of the project. The
SEPA Checklist does indicate that an active recreation area would be
provided at the Lake Washington shoreline, and Tract C is the only open
area that could support such a purpose. However, Tract C does not
extend to the Lake Washington shoreline because of DNR ownership of
the adjacent shoreline. It is logical to infer that some recreational use of
the DNR shore lands is intended from or near Tract C, which could
possibly include use of the mill dock into Lake Washington. If this is the
intent of the project, it would be reasonable for the BA to evaluate it. If
disposition of the DNR lease held lands has some other purpose (for
example, restoration), then the BA should describe the impact of the
proposed action on such purpose as it affects habitat. Lots 71 through 90
A.C. Kiadig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 7
are all oriented to views of Lake Washington through open space Tract C,
which makes it unlikely that the intention for the DNR lands is either to
restore it to a forested condition (blocking views) or to leave it with the
existing mill structures and over-water/shoreline debris (blocking and
compromising views). This orientation also suggests that disposition of
the adjacent DNR uplands at the Lake Washington shoreline is an
important component of the project.
4. Project Description (Bridge and Outfall Construction Conceptual Plans):
The BA discusses the need for construction of bridge abutments within the
ordinary high water mark of May Creek, and two new stormwater outfalls
below the MLLW of Lake Washington. At this stage of planning it is not
unusual to lack detailed conceptual plans for construction of these
facilities. However, more of a conceptual plan for these structures
(beyond disclosure of their need) needs to be described for evaluation in
the BA. Without it, there was no means for the BA to reasonably address
the scale of impacts or feasibility of construction to avoid impacts from
installation of these structures.
5. Determination of Effect (Bridge and Outfall Construction Impacts): The
BA was unable to address the potential for direct impacts from
construction of the stormwater outfalls to Lake Washington and a new
bridge over May Creek, because no plans to allow such analysis were
available to the authors. Thus, the extent of mitigation measures or
impacts could not be determined in the BA. Lacking detailed plans at this
stage of the process is fine for most engineering specifics best answered at
final design. However,lacking more detail on conceptual plans specific to
this site, broader questions relating to feasibility and adequacy of
"typical" mitigation are unanswered. Several questions come to my mind
that could be relevant to BA analysis. For example, the southern
stormwater pond is located in a sandy delta area at the mouth of May
Creek, where the lake is very shallow and subject to deposition with May
Creek sediments. How far into the lake would the outfall need to extend
to avoid burial from sediment delivered by May Creek to the delta area?
If the outfall terminated at the lakeshore at minus 0.5 feet MLLW as
indicated in the BA, would dredging be needed to keep it from sediment
obstruction? Or, is discharge velocity from the pond expected to keep the
outfall clear? How would an outfall be constructed in this sandy area? Is
A.C. Kindig&r Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 8
there spawning habitat at the location where the bridge abutments would
be constructed in May Creek? How would such construction occur?
6. Determination of Effect: The BA recommends that the project be
conditioned to have a qualified fisheries biologist participate in
installation plans for the stormwater outfalls and the bridge abutment
construction, and that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
(WDFW) be consulted on timing to avoid impacts when fish are present.
These are both good measures, and certainly a Hydraulics Permit
Approval (HPA) would be necessary for this work. A federal permit may
or may not be necessary for this construction, depending on the nature
and location of the proposed design. An HPA would require WDFW's
review and include WDFW conditions as that agency deemed warranted.
It is worth noting for the City's information that WDFW in the past cited
an in-work window of June 16 through January 318t for south Lake
Washington to protect juvenile salmonids. However, the combined
windows for work in south Lake Washington recommended by the
National Marine Fisheries Service and the US Fish and Wildlife Service are
more restrictive. Where the Services' approval under Section 7
consultation under the Endangered Species Act was sought for a U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Nationwide 38 permit at the nearby
South Baxter property,in-water restoration work is restricted to August 1st
through December 31st. The Corps's current guidance for the project site
area is a work window from July 16th through December 318t.1 It would be
reasonable for the BA to evaluate whether the more restrictive window
requested by USFWS and NMFS for a nearby project is prudent or
reasonable for the proposed action, or if the Corp's recommendation is
reasonable for the proposed project's bridge and outfall construction.
7. Water Quality Impacts (Impervious Surface Reductions): The reductions
in impervious surface contributions to drainage reaching May Creek
would have some calculable reduction in May Creek velocities and thus
benefit to lower May Creek, however the realized reduction relative to
`U.S.Army Corps of Engineers. May 30,2001. Programmatic Biological Evaluation for the State of
Washington for Salmonid Species Listed or Proposed by the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service Under the Endangered Species Act. Regulatory Branch, Seattle District.
Appendix D-2(updated May 19,2002)Approved Work Windows for Waters within National Park
Boundaries,Columbia River,Snake River,and Lakes.
A.C. Kinc/ig 6r Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 9
total flow in the creek and total contributing basin is unlikely to be
measurable or meaningful in the sense that it offsets other impacts,
especially in the lowest portion of May Creek where water level and
hydraulics are influenced by Lake Washington. There are no flowing
streams to which the site contributes between Lake Washington and Puget
Sound, so the reduction in impervious surface from the existing mill to
future residential land uses makes no difference except to the portion of
the site presently contributing flow to May Creek, where it is not likely to
be measurable. It is very unlikely that the proposal would stabilize flow
regimes or decrease peak flows measurably during storm events, as the
BA claimed. No hydrologic data were provided to support the claim. For
these reasons, I disagree with the BA conclusion that the reduction in
impervious surface would "likely result in an overall beneficial effect for
federally listed and candidate fish species within the action area." It is
certainly true that there would be no adverse effects from a reduction in
impervious surface.
8. Water Quality Impacts (Stormwater Treatment): The BA assumes that
water quality would be improved as a result of the provision of water
quality treatment ponds where no water quality treatment was previously
offered. This may be true for some or all contaminants in stormwater.
However absent an analysis this conclusion applied to all contaminants is
conjecture. It does seem common sense that residential land use with
treatment should have less of a water quality impact than industrial land
use with no treatment. However, the BA only examined the issue as a
change in impervious surface, and did not consider the nature of the
change in land use and contaminant sources. The SEPA Checklist
indicates the mill supports approximately 12 employees. This is a very
low level of industrial activity. Mill activities include use of vehicles and
consequently some contaminant sources. However, the proposal is to
construct 115 residences supporting "roughly 200 people" making 717
average weekday daily trips, so the traffic volumes and motor vehicle
access to the site is likely increased over current mill operations. Vehicles
are a major contaminant source to stormwater runoff. Landscaping and
pets will also contribute contaminants to stormwater that are not likely
prevalent in current mill runoff' The net result of a changed set of
contaminant sources offset by treatment in a pond; versus the existing
condition, is difficult to judge in this situation withoufmore work than the
A.C. Kindig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 10
BA provided. I do not disagree with the contention that residential
development can be adequately treated to prevent water quality impacts,
but found no basis to agree or disagree with the BA contention that it
would necessarily be an improvement over current conditions.
9. Critical Habitat Impacts (May Creek Buffers): The BA contains a
rationale that an approximately 60-foot averaged buffer width for May
Creek restored to a forested condition is suitable for the reach of May .
Creek extending through the project to Lake Washington. Areas
widening to greater than about 65 feet occur in two pockets. About 280
feet of the south shoreline at the mouth of the stream, nearest Lake
Washington, would contain the minimum 50-foot buffer. The BA
acknowledges the Tri-County recommendation of a 115 foot buffer for
urban streams such as May Creek, and the Pollack and Kennard (1998)
recommendation for on-site potential tree height (listed as 50 to 250 for
this site). One part of the BA consideration for accepting a 60-foot
averaged width is that it would be reforested and be an improvement
over the existing buffer width and vegetation.
The most recent project that I am aware of to consider an appropriate
riparian width for lower May Creek was the I-405/NE 44th Street
Interchange Project, which defined the functional riparian buffer along
May Creek upstream of the subject property as 150 feet, based on an
average site-potential tree height of 150 feet(mid-way between 50 and 250
feet). This width was used in the NMFS 4(d) rules adopted in 2000 and is
consistent with the Ecology Shorelines Master Program adopted in 2000.
This width was determined necessary, in conjunction with placement of
large woody debris (LWD) in May Creek, to mitigate impacts that would
have occurred from riparian encroachment by freeway alterations. This
functional riparian width was, in part, necessary to create a buffer capable
of eventually delivering LWD to the stream.
Lower May Creek habitat, from it's confluence with Lake Washington to
about RM 0.15, is dominated by riffles, with some pools formed by scour
from bankside rip rap. LWD, and the cover and rearing habitat it creates,
is limiting in lower May Creek and in May Creek for some distance
upstream of the subject property, due to lack of conifers. Given the
significance of the stream for spawning by coho, chinook, and sockeye
A.C. Kiadig Bz Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 11
salmon, and steelhead and cutthroat trout, and improvements planned
through the May Creek Action Plan, in my opinion the BA analysis did
not justify a 60-foot averaged riparian buffer as being functionally capable
of supplying riparian functions now lacking to this portion of May Creek.
It is sensible that the May Creek riparian area be improved to mitigate for
increased human presence on three bridges, construction of a third new
roadway bridge over May Creek, increased human presence and
landscaping to water's edge along much of the Lake Washington
shoreline, and construction of two outfalls to Lake Washington. A 60-foot
averaged buffer, with extensive sections as narrow as 50 feet, is not, in my
opinion, adequate mitigation for the impacts even if replanted. It is also
too narrow, in my opinion, to ultimately provide the LWD and habitat
complexity lacking in lower May Creek, as well as provide for buffering of
this feature from human disturbance, even absent a need for mitigation
from other aspects of the project. Finally, absent information on the future
of dredging at the May Creek mouth, an assumption that dredging would
not continue would lead. to the need for a wider buffer in lower May
Creek to be able to accommodate the aggradation (filling in with
sediment) that would occur. While dredging has only historically
occurred up to the lowest bridge, that dredging has controlled sediment
accumulation upstream of the bridge by leading to downcutting of
sediment load above the upstream extent of dredging. If dredging ceases,
this downcutting would no longer occur, and the stream would tend to
migrate laterally as its bed fills with sediment. A 50-foot buffer in the
lowest portion of the stream is unlikely to accommodate this meanderof
the stream and at the same time allow it to produce LWD and visual
buffer functions. Meander could also lead to the future need to armor the
banks of the stream, if meander within a narrow buffer caused new
structures or plat improvements to be at risk of damage.
I do not disagree with the BA conclusion that the improvements planned
for May Creek will improve riparian conditions over the existing
condition, and in that sense would cause no adverse impact, but disagree
with the conclusion that a 60-foot averaged buffer width(with a minimum
of 50 feet) supplies all functions necessary for maintenance of,suitable
salmonid habitat in this location. A 50'to 60-foot width could supply
some functions adequately at this location, for example shade. However,
A.C. Kincfig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 12
the LWD supply and human screening functions necessary for this buffer
would not likely be met by a 50-foot minimum or 60-foot averaged buffer,
nor would future meander of the stream have sufficient room if dredging
stops. It may be reasonable to consider a buffer approximating 100 to 115
feet, if enhancements and provisions to address the LWD deficit and
subsequent supply, provisions to control human disturbance, and a means
to accommodate sediment aggradation and stream meander are
reasonably proposed and justified within that width.
10. Critical Habitat Impacts (Lake Washington Shoreline Buffers): There are
25-foot minimum residential building setbacks proposed for the Lake
Washington shoreline consistent with the currently adopted Renton
Shoreline Master Program, but no buffers along Lake Washington are
proposed. Residential lots that abut the lake and not DNR-owned
uplands extend out into the lake waterward of the OHWM.
The BA justifies the lack of a vegetative buffer of shrubs and trees along
the Lake Washington shoreline as reasonable because it is an eastern
shoreline that could not block afternoon sun. It is unreasonable to expect
that shoreline vegetation along a lake the size of Lake Washington would
play any role in regulating water temperature through shade. Trees and
vegetation at the shore are not useful because of shade. Among other
functions, shoreline vegetation screens juvenile fish from human
disturbance, provides LWD and small woody debris to the lakeshore,
enhances the introduction of insects as prey for fish, drops leaf litter
providing food and substrate for other fish prey, improves water quality
as a native shoreline buffer (hyporheic zone function), and lends
complexity at the shallow shoreline for rearing of salmonids and aid
juvenile salmonid escape from predators. Few of these functions beyond
leaf litter and wood debris could be contributed where bulkhead wall is
constructed along portions of the existing shoreline, however these
functions could be provided along the lakeshore at the mouth of May
Creek and south of May Creek, and presumably,could occur in concert
with the project as restoration on DNR-owned lands along the Lake
Washington shoreline.
The 25-foot minimum residential setback, with no provision for shoreline
enhancements or native vegetation, would bring homeowner landscaping
AC Kinc/ig&Co.
•
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 13
and activity to the water's edge. The BA justifies the lack of a shoreline
buffer and use of the minimum building setback on the facts that the
project is only a fraction of the total shoreline and that the existing
condition is poor. While true, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (1997) survey
points out that most of the Lake Washington shoreline habitat in the
vicinity is already compromised by bulkhead or other artificial shoreline
treatments, residential docks, and landscaping to the water's edge.
Juvenile salmonid use of this built shoreline in the vicinity may be
unclear,but the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe work did also demonstrate that
the lake shoreline in the vicinity of the May Creek mouth is used by
juvenile salmonids.
Complicating reasonable assessment of Lake Washington impacts is lack
of acknowledgement of the DNR owned uplands and shoreline by the BA.
This area is central to the design and layout of the proposed project. This
same area is presumably the focus of the community recreation area to be
provided at the shoreline,but there is no disclosure of the nature or extent
of the public recreation opportunity to be provided, or analysis in the BA
of any impacts that could result. Finally, creation of lots extending
water-ward of the MLLW of Lake Washington implies that individual lot
owners could propose docks, or combine to propose common dock
structures. Such docks are not an immediate part of this application.
However, the proposal makes such actions possible if permits could be
obtained to implement them. If docks are built after development is
constructed to the lakeshore without buffers, there would be little future
opportunity for mitigating impacts. The BA should have considered, in a
cumulative impact sense, impacts from the proposed plat plus future
residential docks,if such future applications are reasonably expected.
My conclusion is that more information is needed, particularly with
regard to disposition of the DNR lands along the lakeshore and
recreational opportunities presumably associated with Tract C.
Residential structures 25 feet from the lakeshore are too close to prevent
adverse impacts from human and pet disturbance, particularly when
combined with landscaping and its maintenance extending to the water's
edge. Some amount of lakeshore restoration and greater setbacks of
structures should be considered necessary to mitigate impacts of the
proposed land use on lakeshore rearing and migration pathway for
A.C. Kinc/ig&Co.
•
•
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21, 2002
Page 14
salmonids. Cumulative impacts of the proposed plat and future
residential docks should be addressed in the BA, if the plat makes future
applications for such docks reasonably likely.
11. Critical Habitat Impacts (Construction): Because of the flat nature of the
site, it is reasonable to expect that usual and prudent temporary erosion
and sediment control measures and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) that would be required for the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by Ecology would prevent
adverse impacts to Lake Washington and May Creek. Construction of the
outfalls and bridge abutments within the MLLW of Lake Washington and
OHWM of May Creek, respectively, were discussed under items 4 and 5
above (including appropriate construction windows).
The SWPPP elements listed by the BA are basic components of SWPPPs
required by Ecology through its newly adopted Stormwater Management
Manual for Western Washington (2002). The generic requirement to
detain flows would not be necessary for this site. The best management
practices (BMPs) that were listed as examples of some sediment control
measures to be employed are likely to be successful at preventing adverse
impacts from grading and construction on the site.
12. Critical Habitat Impacts (Cumulative Effects): The cumulative impacts
section is weak from a habitat perspective. This section may have been
more useful if it had evaluated the May Creek and Lake Washington
shoreline habitat use from a regional perspective, including plans for May
Creek and existing development and habitat limitations along the Lake
Washington shoreline.
The BA acknowledges that stormwater contaminant sources are likely to
increase. The reduction in impervious surface contributing to Lake
Washington or to May Creek at its mouth could not provide a hydrologic
benefit to the watershed as a whole, as the BA indicates, because there are
no free flowing streams from this point to Puget Sound. The stormwater
treatment facilities could not "...mitigate for water quality impacts of
increased impervious surface within the Lake Washington basin..." The
proposed stormwater facilities would likely prevent adverse impact from
A.C. Kinclig&Co.
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
October 21,2002
Page 15
increased traffic contaminant sources and residential stormwater runoff
contaminants resulting from the proposal.
Discussion between the City and the applicant could undoubtedly answer the
questions raised in this review. Please let me know if any further information or
discussion from me would assist your review.
Sincerely,
Andrew C. Kindig, PhD.
Principal
A.C. Kindig &Co.
A.C. Kindig&Co.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION _ ____
NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
Barbara Alther,first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the APPEAL HEARING
RENTON HEARING EXAMINER
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL RENTON,WASHINGTON i
The Public Hearing for the following
600 S.Washington Avenue,Kent,Washington 98032 land use action,scheduled for October
1, 2002 at 9:00 AM has been
cancelled.
a daily newspaper published seven(7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of APPEAL
general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of BARBEE MILL ADMINISTRATIVE
ublication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily I DECISIONS
p LUA-02-040,PP,ECF ,
newspaper in Kent, King County,Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a Appeal of administrative decisions
legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. by the City of Renton on, the ,ia
The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the South County Journal(and i pending Barbee Mill Preliminary
not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers during the below Plat.Site Location:4201 Lk.Wash.
stated period. The annexed notice,a Blvd.
Legal descriptions of the files noted
above are on file in the Development
Cancellation of Appeal:Barbee Mill Services Division, Sixth Floor, City .�
Hall, Renton, WA. All interested I
as published on: 9/27/02 . persons are invited to be present at the
Public Hearing to express their
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$53.25,charged to I opinions. For further information,
contact the Hearing Examiner at 425-
Acct. No.8051067. '430-6515.
I Published in the South County
The cost above includes a$6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. I Journal September 27,2002.10836-L-
Legal Number 10836
ci#4.1.4.4..-- -
Legal Clerk, South County Journal
II
Subscribed and sworn before me on this ( day of Ca ,2002
_own aeeecpoo ��<(-� � te of�
a```�.�.�,���g3�0 ff fXpl���yoo otary Public of the Staesid residing in Renton
ton
ac; t‘OI ?y ;TA a King County,Washington
—o—
','''1,1 4119J,i3dlJ1��a
D*Vecp AA \I{
C/Ty OF E pt44..
OCT
To the Baxter and Cugmi Families: U October 9,2002 ^�"/ iromiG L.2002
Please receive just one more letter on the Barbee Mill property. Thank you for the modifications toCd EI VED
plans. There are many improvements,yet even so,I would like to offer a few more ideas to you.
You had mentioned selective tree cutting and getting approval for this. I urge you to leave all the trees
as they are. They shade the creek and help to keep the wildlife that drink there hidden from the
encroaching of human activities. After all,the creek belongs to the animals. This piece of land,if it must
be developed,will be best served if it is kept in a wild state. Allowing the landscaping to co-exist with the
existing trees and native plants will make your tract of townhouses,which are foreign to nature,more
harmonious to the integrity oldie land. There is no need to create a manicured setting in order to attract
future homeowners. The right people will appreciate the care you have taken in bringing in a rustic quality.
Most people do not want to live in the same overdone housing development anyway.
Plant deciduous maples and oaks for fall color and summer shade. The great majority of your units will
have no view of the water,so view will not be an issue.
Consult with a real artist on the color combinations chosen for the exterior walls and trim. I have seen
many buildings that could have been truly attractive if care had been taken in color choices. Instead,they
have a vague sort of disharmony that leaves people wondering why they do not like a particular living
place. People will be drawn to a color scheme that is balanced and rich,and they will not even know why.
The idea is to make this a spectacular place to live in. You want to be able to sleep at night knowing
that you truly did put something worth while on this precious piece of land. Make it an experience that
refreshes people even if they are only driving by and do not live there. Make it a place you would choose
to raise your own children in,a place where your friends would come to share a meal. We only get one
chance to raise our children. Most of us cannot afford to own our own single unit home. Be a pioneer in
making a community that will pave the way for kid friendly,affordable dwellings.
A note on the design of the units:place the laundry rooms so that the dryers vent directly to an outer
wall,not running under another room. My own unit has had problems with this. We have also had
washing machines above us overflow more than once and now have to repair the underlying beam
structure.Maybe you could add a floor drain in upper units,or all units,to accommodate accidental
overflows,like they use in Europe. Doing this would save future headaches for the homeowners'
association.
Here is the suggestion that will be hardest to swallow,but would enhance the property in a way that is
beyond monetary value:Make a compromise with this nature oriented piece of land and do not build any
units on the area between the railroad tracks and the creek. It feels tome like crowding if there are units
squeezed in there. I envision a greenbelt there,enhanced creatively,perhaps a botanical garden. Please
give this serious consideration. Take a trip to the Good Shepherd Center in Wallingford,just off of 50th
Street,near Meridian(?) Then take a walk through the Seattle Tilth Garden,a delightful experience in any
season,beautifully put together with flowering plants,herbs,stone walkways rockeries,and colored pieces
of glass.There is a pea patch there as well,and the area gardeners have done wonderful things with each
tiny piece of land available to them.
The old Herbfarm in Fall City had a wooden gazebo. A gathering place out in the open,easily in sight
from the road,would invite potential homeowners to come in and be serious about buying in your
development. Drive up and down Lake Washington Boulevard. There is nothing there at all with a family
friendly,outdoors appeal,nothing that addresses the issues of quality of life for all generations of people.
The young and the old have time to enjoy their surroundings. Not everyone dashes off to the freeway every
workday morning,living a mere fraction of their lives at home. Some are building the foundations of their
budding lives,others are living out their last golden moments on earth. Life is fleeting. Daily living should
be a delicious experience.
Along the idea of the Herbfarm restaurant,maybe you could interest someone in creating a
restaurant/botanical garden type experience there,in returning to a mixed»serge type of plan. Easing into
,� the development with a low profile at the entry would be more appealing than an in-your-face residential
A-eQ r building,several stories high,completely hiding the beauty of the creek from the views at the road.
Utz' Making a small piece of it for public enjoyment returns some oldie land to the surrounding community. It
is important to integrate into the Kennydale scene,and a small classy restaurant would allow all who wish
x�Pr to benefit from this piece of land's beauty.
Thank you,
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 7, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Juliana Sitthidet
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT- LUA 02-040
4201 Lake Washington Blvd
I have reviewed the application for the preliminary plat at 4201 Lake Washington Blvd and have
the following comments:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WATER The site is outside the Aquifer Protection Area. There is a 12-inch water main in
Lake Washington Blvd N. (as-built drawing W-400). The available fire flow from the
existing 12-inch is 5,200 gpm at a residual pressure of 20 psi. The static water
pressure is 125 psi. Pressure Zone is 320 feet.
SEWER There is 8-inch sewer main along the North East Side of the site. The sewer is in an
easement (approx. 210-feet in Barbee's Mill property). This sewer main goes to a lift
station.
STORM This project drains to Lake Washington and May Creek. There are drainage
facilities crossing the south portion of the site and discharge runoff from N 40th
Street to Lake Washington.
STREETS There are no curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting the property in Lake Washington Blvd
N.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
WATER
1. The Water System Development Charge at a rate of $1,105.00 per new building lot will apply.
A redevelopment credit may apply.
2. New water main extensions will be required to provide fire protection to the proposed
development. The new waterlines shall be connected to the existing 12-inch water main in
Lake Washington Blvd. N., at the north and south ends of the development. A "looped" water
line will be required to provide the fire flow reliability and redundancy. This "looped" system will
include a waterline crossing of May Creek near the south end of the project.
3. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double
detector check valve assembly (DDCVA) for fire sprinkler systems.
—
SANITARY SEWER
1. The Sewer System Development Charge at a rate of $760.00 will apply. A credit for the partial
payment already made will apply.
2. Plats shall provide separate side sewers stubs to each building lot. No dual side sewers are
allowed. Side sewers shall be minimum 6" at 2% slope.
3. The City may require that the proposed new lift station also serve the area to the north of the
site. The proposed lift station will have to be designed per City of Renton standards and will
be own and operated by the City.
4. The City would determine the proposed use of the existing 8" force main, and the developer
may be required to provide a new connection to the King County East Side Interceptor.
SURFACE WATER
1. Surface Water System Development Charge at a rate of $525.00 per new building lot will
apply. This fee is payable with the utility construction permit.
2. The plans shall show the 100-year floodplain. Compensatory storage for filling of the
floodplain will be required.
3. An analysis will be required for the upstream drainage basin for existing and future developed
conditions to size the existing conveyance system that crosses the south portion of the
property (drainage facility that discharges runoff from N 40th Street to Lake Washington).
4. Staff will recommend as a SEPA that this condition that the project comply with the 1998
KCSWDM and water quality be provided to this site. However, if other permits are required
(HPA, NPDES, etc) and these jurisdictions impose a stricter standard (2001 Stormwater
Management Manual for Western Washington, from Department of Ecology), staff
recommends that, in the interest of a singular drainage report, the same standard be applied
throughout the project.
•
TRANSPORTATION
1. Grades on Public Street and/or driveways shall not exceed 15%. The proposed south access
appears to have grades higher than the maximum allowed.
2. The traffic mitigation fee of $75 per additional generated trip shall be assessed. This fee is
payable at time of recording the plat.
3. Traffic study for the intersection of Ripley Lane and Lake Washington Blvd will be required as
if the area (all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the tracks) is fully developed at this
density.
4. The traffic study assumes traffic signals at the intersections of NE 44th Street and the 1-405
ramps. This is not the case and the traffic study should note whether traffic signals are
needed for the Barbee Mill project.
5. The railroad crossings must meet public crossing standards. Both accesses must be
developed to accommodate pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic.
6. Dedication to the City of Renton of the proposed access easement to the north of the site will
be required.
7. Sidewalk, curb and gutter, paving, channelization, signals and street lighting will be required in
the streets interior to the plat, along the new accesses to the plat, along Lake Washington
Blvd and Ripley Lane (up to the main access to the site).
8. All new electrical, phone and cable services must be underground. Construction of these
franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector
prior to recording of the short plat.
•
PLAN REVIEW - GENERAL
1. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards
2. All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals
prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer.
4. Separate permits for side sewers, water meters and backflow device are required.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
1. The Barbee Mill site is listed in the Department of Ecology's confirmed and suspected
contaminants sites report, dated July 25, 1996. Due to the historical industrial use of the site,
a soil evaluation report is required confirming the cleanliness of the existing materials. From a
utility standpoint, we are concerned that workers can be exposed to potential contaminants
from the installation and maintenance of the utilities within the site. Backfill materials for utility
trenches shall be clean materials, free of contaminants. A trench liner will be required to
separate the clean materials for the native soils if contaminants are found.
2. The applicant shall install construction fence and silt fence along the down slope perimeter
and out from the buffer area on both sides of May Creek. The silt fence shall be in place
before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the
specifications presented in of the King County Surface Water Design Manual. This will be
required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building
construction.
3. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any
recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be
submitted by the project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the
installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required
prior to final inspection approval.
cc: Kayren Kittrick
CITY OF RENTON
• PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 3, 2002
TO: Juliana Sitthi�et, Plan Review
FROM: Bob Mahn, Transportation Systems
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PROPERTY
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Review of the Preliminary Traffic Impact analysis (TIA) dated July 23, 2002 for the proposed
residential development on the Barbee Mill property has resulted in the following comments:
1. The TIA assumes that 88 duplex units will have access via Ripley Lane to the north of
the development property and 24 townhouses will have access from Lake Washington
Boulevard via a roadway near the south end of the development property. This
assumption disagrees with the preliminary Plat Plan, which shows that all 112 units
can be accessed via the south end roadway (street) as well as via Ripley Lane.
2. The TIA assumes traffic signals will exist by 2005 at the intersections of NE 44th
Street and the I-405 ramps. Development on the Port Quendall site was anticipated to
have resulted in the need for these traffic signals by 2005. However, it now appears
that any development on the Port Quendall site will not occur until after 2005.
3. The 2005 traffic forecasts in the TIA does not include traffic from all undeveloped
parcels on the west side of the tracks assuming they would be fully developed at the
density of the proposed Barbee Mill development.
4. We understand that a revised traffic study will be required to address full development
of all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the tracks (item 3 above). We concur
with this requirement and request that the revised traffic study should also assume that
all Barbee Mill site proposed units can be accessed as proposed on the Preliminary
Plat Plan, and that the intersections of NE 44th Street and the I-405 ramps are
unsignalized and should note whether traffic signals are needed and what warrants
would be met to justify the signals.
5. The TIA includes traffic counts at the entrance to the existing Barbee Mill site for a
one-week duration (Table 4 on page 17 and Appendix B). The use of this information
• and calculation of the traffic mitigation fee is left to the discretion of Development
Services staff.
<c.. ka i ( l-{a w►i &I-e
-
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 26, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Sonja J.Fesser
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Plat,LUA-02-040,PP
Format and Legal Description Review
Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the
following comments:
Comments for the Applicant:
The"Overall Plat Plan", shown on the Cover Sheet, notes the lot number"91"twice. It is noted
once alone, and a second time with"93"(lower left-hand corner of said sheet).
We have no further comments regarding the preliminary plat drawing.
The final plat approval comments, as noted in our memo dated May 31, 2002, still apply for the
final plat submittal. See the attachment.
\H:\File Sys\LND-Land Subdivision&Surveying Records\LND-10-Plats\0397\RV020923.doc
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 31,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Sonja J.Fesser
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Plat,LUA-02-040,PP
Format and Legal Description Review
Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat submittal and have the
following comments:
Comments for the Applicant:
The legal description(on the"Cover Sheet")makes no exception for an irregularly shaped parcel
noted along the south line of the proposed plat,but the drawings/map on the "Cover Sheet"and
Sheet P2_2 all appear to exclude said parcel from the plat boundary line.Reconcile and revise the
drawings as needed.
Street name"Lake Washington Boulevard"needs the suffix North added to each preliminary plat
sheet where it is omitted(including the"Cover Sheet").
The Deed of Dedication document, included in the preliminary plat submittal,is not needed. The
dedication of public streets occurs with the recording of the final plat per the Dedication
statement on the face of the plat document.
Are there any shorelands westerly of the Inner Harbor Line that could be considered a portion of
the subject property?
Information needed for final plat approval includes the following:
Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number,LUA-OX-XXX-FP and
LND-10-0397,respectively,on the drawing,preferably in the upper right-hand corner. The type
size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action
number. Please note that the land use action number for the final plat will be different from the
preliminary plat number and is unknown as of this date.
\H:\FILE.SYS\LND-Land Subdivision&Surveying Records\LND-10-Plats\0397\RV020528.doc
'I .-
May 31,2002
Page 2 ,
Show two ties to the City of Renton Survey Control Network. The geometry will be checked
when the ties are provided.
Provide plat and lot closure calculations.
Complete City of Renton Monument Cards,with reference points of all new right-of-way
monuments set as part of the plat.
Include a statement of equipment and procedures used,per WAC 332-130-100.
Indicate what has been, or is to be,set at the corners of the proposed lots.
Note the date the existing monuments were visited,per WAC 332-130-150,and what was found.
Note all easements,agreements and covenants of record on the drawing. Include the recording
numbers thereof and to whom the documents are granted.
Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if
any.
Note whether the adjoining properties are platted(give plat name and lot number)or unplatted.
The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after approval of the preliminary plat. The
addresses will need to be noted on the drawing.
Do not show the building setback lines of the proposed lots. Setbacks are determined at the time
that building permits are issued.
Required City of Renton signatures(for approval of the plat)include the Administrator of
Planning/Building/Public Works,the Mayor and the City Clerk. An approval block for the city's
Finance Director is also required. The appropriate King County approvals need to be noted on
the drawing also.
The vested owners of the subject plat need to sign the final plat document. Include notary blocks
as needed.
Include a dedication/certification block on the drawing.
An updated Plat certificate will be required, dated within 45 days of Council action on approval
of the plat.
Note that if there are restrictive covenants,easements or agreements to others as part of this
subdivision,they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated
document(s)are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The plat shall have the first
recording number. The recording number(s)for the associated document(s)need to be referenced
on the plat in the appropriate locations.
H:\FILE.SYS\LND-Land Subdivision&Surveying Records\LND-10-Plats\0397\RV020528.doc\sjf
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 25,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Rebecca Lind
STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lake Washington Blvd.;
LUA-02-040 ECF,PP,V-H,SM
Staff previously reviewed this proposal as a preapplication on April 25, 2002 and as a regula
preliminary plat application on May 23, 2002. Copies of these two memoranda are attached.
Since our review of the preliminary application for the project the applicant has not significantly
altered their original proposal for this site. The number of proposed multi-family dwellings for
the 22.9-acre site is still 112, however, the applicant is proposing 24 townhomes and 88
residential duplex units.
What this application includes is an environmental checklist along with supporting
documentation in the form of a biological assessment and wetlands analysis, as well as a
preliminary traffic impact analysis. The wetland assessment identified two emergent wetlands on
the site, Wetland H. Wetland I is approximately 1,712 square feet in area and is considered a
disturbed wetland. Wetland H, somewhat larger than Wetland 1, is mostly outside of the site
laying between it and the BNSF Railroad right-of-way. The traffic analysis indicated that the
proposed residential development would generate approximately 56 AM peak hour vehicle trips
and 67 PM peak hour vehicle trips. On weekdays the development is anticipated to generate
approximately 717 weekday vehicle trips.
No significant adverse impacts were identified on the applicant's environmental checklist. Some
construction impacts might, however, impact species such as Osprey and Bald Eagles if they are
breeding in the area. (Nesting Osprey, apparently do exist on the site.) The applicant does not
see the need for any unusual measures to reduce or control noise impacts other than those in City
codes.
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Policies:
Objective LU-U: Encourage projects throughout the designation which create cohesive, quality
and landmark developments integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to create a
compact, urban development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the City.
Objective EN-C: Protect and enhance the City's rivers, major and minor creeks and intermittent
stream courses.
Barbie Mill Preliminary Plat - 2
09/25/02
Policy EN-7. If crossings and/or access points are required across fishbearing river and stream
channels, improvements should be made in the following order of priority:
1. Crossings and bridges which access several properties.
2. If crossings and bridges are not feasible, culverts could be used which are oversized
and have gravel bottoms which maintain the channel's width and grade.
Objective EN-K: Protect and enhance wildlife habitat throughout the City.
Policy EN-53. Re-establish self-sustaining fisheries resources in appropriate rivers and creeks
through encouragement of hatcheries and salmonid use.
Policy EN-54. Retain and enhance aquatic and riparian habitats by requiring vegetated buffers
for all new development along waterway corridors.
Relevant Provisions of the Shoreline Management Act:
K. General Use Regulations for All Shoreline Uses:
4. Public Access:
a. Where possible, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate
shoreline so that trails, nonmotorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may
be developed providing greater shoreline utilization.
( b. Any trial system shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property
rights.
Analysis:
The subject proposal does appear to enhance aquatic and riparian habitats by providing vegetated
buffers along waterways. However, in terms of improving access to shorelines for "greater
shoreline utilization" this project fails. Only limited access to Lake Washington for residents or
the public is provided. This is in the form of a 220' wide open space tract along Lake
Washington. This tract, however, lacks pedestrian amenities and contains what appears to be a
small wetland and buffer area. A larger open space to the east appears to be developed as a water
quality facility with bio swales planted with wetland grasses. Open spaces along May Creek are
shown as stream buffer as well. As a result this development provides little public or shared
access to the May Creek or Lake Washington shoreline.
Conclusion:
Also, as noted in our memorandum of April 25, 2002 (attached) this development does not meet
the intent of the Center Office/Residential designation in that it does not meet the intensity of
development envisioned. Whereas the current proposal is fairly well integrated with the site's
natural amenities, it does not result in a "compact, urban development with high amenity values
that is a gateway to the City".
Attachments
cc: Don Erickson
H:\EDNSP\Interdepartmental\Development Review\Green File\Comments\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat2.doc\d
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 23, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Rebecca Lind
STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lk. Wash. Blvd.;LUA-02-
040,PP,ECF
Staff reviewed and commented on this application at the pre-application stage on April 25th, 2002.
A copy of this memorandum is attached. Staff noted at that time that the 22.9 acre site was located
in the Center Office Residential land use designation and was zoned Center Office Residential—2.
A number of relevant Comprehensive Plan policies were sited in the memorandum and staff
concluded that the application did not appear to support the stated purpose of the COR land use
designation or that of the Center Office/Residential Zone as set forth in Section 4-2-020M:
"The purpose of the Center Office Residential Zone is to provide for a mix of intensive office
and residential activity in a high quality, master planned development which is integrated with
the natural environment."
We noted that there was no mix of uses with the proposed development nor were the uses proposed
master planned with other uses in the this COR-2 land use designation. We also noted that the
proposed plat did not achieve the densities of 30 to 50 units per acre envisioned for this zone and
required for single-use development. And, rather than the type of gateway development
anticipated, we saw this development becoming little more than another exclusive residential
enclave on Lake Washington.
From a land use standpoint we have not identified any major adverse environmental impacts.
However, because of the exclusive residential character of this development it is unlikely that the
public will feel comfortable accessing shorelines. Policy LU-270 states:
Policy LU-270. The site design of developments should maximize public access to and use of
public areas as well as shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a river, lake, stream or
wetland where such access would not jeopardize the environmental attributes of the
waterbody.
Recommendation:
Measures should be taken, if this plat is approved, to ensure that there is sufficient parking and
access for non-residents to use and enjoy the shorelines of Lake Washington that abut this site.
Attachment
cc: Don Erickson
H:\EDNSPUnterdepartmental\Development Review\Green File\Comments\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.doc\d
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 25, 2002
TO: Leslie Nishihira
FROM: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lake Washington Blvd. N.,
PRE 02-035 (PID 322405 9034)
The applicants are proposing to plat the 22.9 acre Barbee Mill site on Lake Washington into 112
townhouse lots ranging in size between 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet. Front and rear
setbacks are proposed to be a minimum of 10 feet with minimum 5 foot side yards where units
are not attached. The proposed project is to be separated by the May Creek corridor. Townhouse
lots for two-unit attached buildings are to be located on the north and west side of May Creek and
buildings for up to five townhouses will be located east and south of May Creek. Currently
stormwater runoff flows directly into Lake Washington and May Creek.
The subject site is designated Center Office Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map and zoned Center Office Residential-2.
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies:
Objective LU-U: Encourage projects throughout the designation which create cohesive,
quality and landmark developments integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to
create a compact, urban development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the City.
Policy LU-124. Primary uses should include complexes of offices or residential
development, hotels and convention centers, research and development facilities, and
corporate headquarters.
Policy LU-126. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the
scale and intensity envisioned for the designation, or if proposed as part of a phased
development and multi-parcel proposal which includes a mix of uses.
Policy LU-131. Maximum residential density on the various COR sites should range between
30 to 50 dwelling units per acre. The same area used for commercial and office development
can also be used to calculate residential density. When proposed development does not
involve a mix of uses, then minimum residential density should be 5 dwelling units per net
acre.
Policy LU-132. Site plans and proposed structures should be designed so as to fully
integrate signage, building height, bulk, setbacks, landscaping, and parking considerations
across the various components of each proposed development.
•
' Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat 2
09/20/02
Policy LU-133. Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian oriented.
Policy LU-134. Vehicular access to each proposed development should be from a major
street with the number of access points reasonably minimized.
Policy LU-135. A combination of internal and external site design features should be
encouraged such as:
a. public area plazas,
b. prominent architectural features,
c. significant natural features,
d. distinctive focal features,
e. gateways,
f structured parking, and
g. other features meeting the spirit and intent of these policies.
Analysis:
The subject proposal for the construction of 112 townhouses on 112 lots on the 22.9-acre site
appears to be consistent with Policies LU-124 and LU-134. However, a number of the other
policies have not been met at this point. These include Objective LU-U, which speaks about
creating landmark developments; Policy LU-126, allowing a single use when achieving the scale
and intensity of development envisioned for the COR Zone; Policy LU-131, achieving a
minimum density for single uses; Policy LU-132, coordinating with other proposed development;
and Policy LU-135. The latter policy is in regards to providing a combination of internal and
external site design features such as prominent architectural features, gateways, and distinctive
focal features. For example, projects meeting the intent of the COR —2 land use designation
could be anticipated to have public access to common walkways along the shores of Lake
Washington and May Creek. Instead all frontages on these public waterways appear to have been
retained for the exclusive use of abutting residents.
Although the applicants have not provided a separate calculation for deleting streets and streams
in order to calculate net densities, they state that their proposal achieves a minimum density of
6.58 du/net acre. This density however is not in the range of 30 to 50 units per acre envisioned in
Policies LU-126 and LU-131. The minimum density is intended to apply only to the residential
component of a phased development. Regarding Policy LU-134 vehicular access is limited to
two access points off Lake Washington Blvd N., one for the development along the south side of
May Creek and the other for the majority of the new housing development which is located on the
north side of May Creek.
The project, in the department's estimation, does not meet the intent of the Center
Office/Residential designation in that it does not meet the intensity of development envisioned.
Whereas the new development is fairly well integrated with the site's natural amenities, there is
little indication that it will result in a"compact, urban development with high amenity values that
is a gateway to the City"(Objective LU-U).
Since this is a stand alone project there is no indication that an effort has been made to establish
development criteria for signage, building height, bulk and character, landscaping, etc., that
H:\EDNSP\Interdepartmental\Development Review\Preapps\Comments\PREAPP\COR\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.doc\d
City of Rt;::.:, . Department of Planning/Building/Public i_ s
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: c, r kc_S COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2002
)''PLCATION NO: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 12,2002
APPLICANT: Century Pacific, LP PROJECT MANAGER: LESLEY NISHIHIRA
PROJECT TITLE: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT WORK ORDER NO: 78975
LOCATION: 4201 Lk.Wash. Blvd. (between N.40th&44TH)
SITE AREA: 22.9 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: *REVISED* The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA)and Preliminary Plat review to
subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit
structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included with the
proposal, including a secondary access point and bridge crossing at the southeast corner of the site. Four utility/open space tracts
would also be established with the plat. A street modification to reduce sidewalks from 6 feet to 5 feet in width has been requested.
In addition, a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing regulations is necessary for the proposed bridge over May Creek.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor • Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing -
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants _ Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health _ Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources _ Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
ji
. t:�,�rug t: icC7f
C. CODE-RELATED C N� a4 C� i i0/'n l/ `
Cam/ 17,0 IJv�/`lam/
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas w ere additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
.1.1 7 /277
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
A Public Recreation Trail Easement needs to be dedicated to the City for a future
trail connection along the entire length of May Creek and Lake Washington. The
City of Renton, Newcastle and King County Parks has been acquiring property
along this corridor for over 15 years for a trail connection from Lake Washington
to Cougar Mountain Park. This is identified in King County's, Newcastle's and
Renton's Comprehensive Trails Plans. Over 1000 acres have been acquired to
date and this trail easement connection is one of the last "Missing Links".
"It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents
that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. The
City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of $354.51 per each new multi family
unit to address these potential impacts."
CITY OF RENTON
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
MITIGATION ITEMS;
1. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family
and duplex structures and $388.00 per unit for all buildings with three
or more units. Fee is paid prior to recording of the plat.
FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS;
1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of
all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds
3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM
and requires a minimum of two hydrants, one within 150-feet and all
secondary hydrants within 300 feet of the structures. Preliminary
hydrant layout will need revisions.
2. All buildings over two stories or over four units require installation of
approved, monitored fire sprinkler systems.
3. Dead-end access roadways over 150-feet in length require an
approved turnaround. South access street off of Lake Washington
Boulevard should be widened to 32-feet width.
4. All building addressed shall be visible from the public street.
5. Attached buildings will be considered as one building for fire flow, fire
alarm and sprinkler requirements. Separate plans and permits are
required for sprinkler and fire alarm systems.
City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public kvorks
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: LPL/N.3+rltC It cx\SQfl/, COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2002 �®
APPLICATION NO: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 19' OPMENT SERVICES
nTy OF RCNTON
APPLICANT: Century Pacific, LP PROJECT MANAGER: LESLEY NISHIHIRA
PROJECT TITLE: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT WORK ORDER NO: 78975 SEF 1 3 2002
LOCATION: 4201 Lk. Wash. Blvd. (between N.40th&44TH) RECEIVED
SITE AREA: 22.9 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A ''RECEIVED
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: *REVISED* The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA)and Preliminary Plat review to
subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit
structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included with the
proposal,including a secondary access point and bridge crossing at the southeast corner of the site. Four utility/open space tracts
would also be established with the plat. A street modification to reduce sidewalks from 6 feet to 5 feet in width has been requested.
In addition, a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing regulations is necessary for the proposed bridge over May Creek.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing _
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
MA/e
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
6ep-j ec// Rear uli2e.D
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
17/2/0.2-
S' ature f Direc or Autho' ed Represen ive Date
Routing Rev.10/93
I . FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Direct Phone
(206) 447-2901
Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
September 26, 2002
E-Mail
Wo1fC@faster.com
VIA FACSIMILE AND REV CjT(OF RE1V�0 N1NG
HAND DELIVERY
SEP 3 0.2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager, Development Services Division RECEIVED.
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
IIII THIRD
Renton, WA 98055 AVENUE
Suite 3400
Re: Comments, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,Revised Notice SEATTLE
Washington
981o1-3z99
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
Telephone
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall (2 0 6)4 4 7-4 4 0 0
Company(collectively, "PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Facsimile
(.06)447-97o.
in Renton, known as the "North J.H. Baxter property," the "South J.H. Baxter W e b s i t e
property," and the "Pan Abode property" (the "PQC Properties"). These properties W W W.F O S T E R.C O M
are located north and east, respectively, of the Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
("Barbee")property.
Background
We provide this letter in addition to earlier comments on file, and in specific
response to the September 12, 2002 Revised Notice of Complete Application for the
Barbee Mill preliminary plat application (the "Application" or "Project"). When ANCHORAGE
Alaska
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis, the Project's potential impacts may
constrain the development potential of the PQC Properties and have negative impacts PORTLAND
on the surrounding environment in the COR-2 Zone. As we stated in our comment Oregon
letter dated May 30, 2002, (attached hereto), the potential cumulative impacts subject
SEATTLE
to environmental review are as follows: Washington
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and SPOKANE
fisheries from combined build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Washington
Terminals and Baxter properties.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 2
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake
Washington Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible
through the Barbee Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek
adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the
Pan Abode and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and
construction and post-construction activities associated with any road system 1
improvements.
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any
access and roadway improvements, which could constrain access options and
natural resources on adjoining properties.
PQC Property Development-Enabling Activities
Since 1996, PQC has actively pursued development-enabling activities for the Baxter
properties with the Department of Ecology, other state and federal agencies, and the City. In
May of 2000, the King County Superior Court entered Consent Decrees for the North and South
Baxter properties as negotiated by PQC and the Department of Ecology. In 2002, PQC
completed the associated permitting process for the South Baxter property with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. The clean-up required under the South Baxter Consent Decree has begun
(please see the attached Daily Journal of Commerce article and photographs of work in progress)
and will enable eventual development of the property by PQC or its successor. Our May 30,
2002 letter and previous correspondence have consistently described the potential for area-wide
development in the COR-2 Zone and the multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process
which stand behind the North and South Baxter Consent Decrees. As you are aware, the Consent
Decrees describe with some particularity a potential development of the Baxter properties —two
68-foot tall office buildings of approximately 200,000 square feet each (please see the attached
South Baxter Consent Decree excerpt).
Permits Required for the Project
The Revised Notice of Application indicates that several public approvals are needed for
the Barbee Project, including: SEPA review, Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval, Shoreline Substantial Development Approval, and
Administrative Street Modification Approval. The Project will also require a Level 1 Site Plan'
and a Level 2 Site Plan,2 and will likely require related approvals from state and federal agencies.
•
' RMC § 4-9-200B(1).
2 RMC § 4-9-200B(2).
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 3
Because decisions on all of these permits must be made in light of SEPA's broad requirements,3
the City should request information now, through SEPA, that will be needed for all future
Project-related decision-making. For instance, the review criteria for a Level 1 Site Plan include
conformance with the comprehensive plan; mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and
uses; safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; and (for COR properties only)
harmonious development with adjacent sites.4
In addition, access to the Barbee property must necessarily cross a Burlington Northern
Railroad line, and Barbee proposes to have two such crossings. One of the crossings is a new
crossing. The second crossing appears to be the railroad crossing that currently connects the
Quendall Terminals property (directly north of the Barbee property) to Lake Washington
Boulevard. It is not clear from our review whether the Project's use of these railroad crossings
has been formally negotiated, and the railroad crossing issue is not addressed in Barbee's traffic
impact analysis. In addition, it is not clear whether Barbee has considered the implications of
road construction over the contaminated Quendall Terminals property, and whether the
Department of Ecology has been consulted in this regard. Finally, a new vehicle bridge is
proposed as part of the subdivision's road structure. This bridge will cross May Creek, a
salmon-bearing waterbody, and will require construction activities below May Creek's ordinary
high water mark.
Legal Authority to Require Further Environmental Study
Under SEPA and the Subdivision Statute, the City may allow Barbee to only use an
equitable portion of the area's traffic capacity, and to limit the prospective development's
contribution to cumulative impacts on natural resources within the COR-2 Zone. In this regard,
SEPA provides the City the ability to require a land use permit applicant to supply information
that is reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision.5 In
addition, the Washington State subdivision statute6 asks the City to determine if the proposed
subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety, and general welfare and serves
the public interest.? As we noted in our May 30, 2002 letter, because of these laws, the City
needs to diligently address a wide range of cumulative, concurrent, and onsite environmental
impacts raised by the Barbee Application. City attention is necessary because,the Project will
potentially constrain probable future development elsewhere in the COR-2 Zone and will
3 RCW § 43.21 C.030 requires that the "policies, regulations, and laws of the state of
Washington shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth in [the
State Environmental Policy Act]."
4 RMC § 4-9-200E(1).
5 WAC 197-11-335.
6 RCW §§ 58.17.010 et seq.
7 RCW § 58.17.110.
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 4
potentially result in a 115-lot subdivision that is located on the shore of Lake Washington,
alongside May Creek, and that has limited and shared vehicle access.
Allowing the Barbee Project to capture the remaining development capacity in the COR-
2 Zone is not supportive of Renton's general welfare or in the public interest since it would
severely stunt the development of the PQC Properties, properties for which the Renton
Comprehensive Plan targets specific and high-profile development.
The Subdivision Statute has at least two applicable provisions. First, the Statute requires
the City to "assure conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the
comprehensive plan . . . ."8 The Renton Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan") calls for a coordinated
development of an office/residential "center" on the properties west of the railroad tracks
(including the Barbee and PQC Properties). "The intention is to create a compact, urban
development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the city."9 Plan Policy LU-130 states
that the proposed development plans of the properties should be coordinated. The properties are
all zoned Commercial Office Retail (COR-2) and are the only properties in the City zoned COR-
2. Taken together, the Center Office Residential section of the Plan's Land Use Element and the
Gateway section of the Plan's Community Design Element show that the City desires
coordinated development over and full development of all of the COR-2 properties. In other
words, the Plan, coupled with the added authority of the Subdivision Statute, gives the City the
ability to insure that each of the COR-2 properties is developed in such a way that none of the
properties have environmental impacts that constrain the development of the other properties.
The second applicable Subdivision Statute provision requires the City to inquire into and
formally find that the proposed subdivision provides appropriately for the public health, safety,
and general welfare and serves the public interest.10 In this case, Renton has implicitly decided
that the public interest and the general welfare of Renton's citizens is best served by coordinated
development of all of the COR-2 properties. Without a full analysis of the indirect, direct, and
cumulative environmental impacts of the Project, it might be difficult for the City to determine if
the Barbee subdivision will hinder this public interest goal.
Under SEPA, the City may require a land use permit applicant to provide information
reasonably sufficient to allow the City to make an informed environmental decision." The
City's SEPA decision must include an analysis of indirect, direct, and cumulative impacts of the
Project.
8 RCW § 58.17.100.
9 Renton Comprehensive Plan Objective LU-U.
10 RCW § 58.17.110.
11 WAC 197-11-335.
50346525 01
September 26, 2002
Page 5
One of the indirect impacts of the Barbee Project will be the impact on future
transportation patterns at the Intersection. As explained in our May 30, 2002, letter and above,
the City has reason to believe that the PQC properties could be developed in the foreseeable
future.12 The City, because it cannot deny PQC or a successor reasonable development of its
properties, will have little choice but to permit future developments that will effect the Ripley
Lane and Lake Washington Boulevard intersection (the "Intersection"). If the City allows a
Barbee development that uses a disproportionate share of the remaining Intersection traffic
capacity, then the City might be forced to either deny PQC or a successor reasonable use of its
property or be forced to spend significant sums of money improving the Intersection. Either of
these is a potential indirect impact of the Barbee proposal, and the City may currently have
insufficient information to evaluate their likelihood.
A seminal Washington Supreme Court case that provides a basis for this impacts analysis
is SAVE v. Bothell.13 In SAVE, the Court found that the City of Bothell had undertaken
inadequate SEPA review in its decision to permit a large shopping center. The flaw in Bothell's
environmental review was that it had not looked at the impacts of the development on areas
outside of Bothell's city limits, that is, the surrounding communities. The court found that "the
zoning body must serve the welfare of the entire affected community."14 Under this decision,
Renton is compelled to examine the effects of the Barbee proposal on neighboring properties,
including those properties' development potential.
In this situation, the potential cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project are also
extensive. "Cumulative impacts" include impacts that arise because a development sets a
precedent for future actions.15 The Barbee development will set a precedent for future actions.
The Barbee and PQC properties are very similar in location and potential use and are zoned the
same. If the City allows Barbee to realize 90% of the development potential of its property, the
City will have difficulty justifying a decision to allow PQC or a successor, because of lack of
traffic capacity or other environmental capacity, to only realize 30% of its properties'
development potential. In other words, the amount of traffic generation and environmental
impact that the City allows Barbee sets a precedent for the amount of traffic generation and
environmental impact that the City should allow the PQC properties. These cumulative impacts
include cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries; accommodation
of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake Washington Boulevard, and Interstate
12 PQC has kept the City well informed of potential development. See letter from Chuck Wolfe
to Lawrence J. Warren, February 12, 2002; letter from Chuck Wolfe to City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee, April 2, 2002; and letter from Chuck Wolfe to Leslie
Nishihara, City of Renton Development Services Division Project Manager, May 30, 2002.
13 SAVE v. Bothell, 89 Wn.2d 862 (Wash. 1978).
14 Id. at 869.
15 WAC 197-11-060(4)(d).
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 6
405; cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife; and cumulative impacts to Lake
Washington water quality and wetlands within the COR-2 Zone.
This cumulative impacts analysis is supported by Hayes v. Yount, in which the Supreme
Court upheld a decision of the Shoreline Hearings Board to overturn a shoreline substantial
development permit.16 The Court held that the Hearings Board had properly ruled that the
County had not adequately considered the cumulative impacts of the development. In particular,
the Hearings Board found that, although the development in question, which involved the fill of
wetlands, would not have a significant adverse environmental impact, it would set the precedent
for future similar developments that, taken together, would have significant environmental
impacts.l7 This cumulative impacts analysis was recently re-affirmed by the Supreme Court in
Buechel v. Department of Ecology.'$ Under these decisions, Renton has the clear ability to
require sufficient information and studies and to consider the precedential value of the Barbee
Mill proposal.
The cumulative impacts that an applicant may be required to study also include impacts
that are more extensive than the impacts that the applicant could be required to mitigate. In other
words, the applicant may be required to study the cumulative impacts of properties that are not
owned by the applicant.'
Barbee's Supplemental Preliminary Plat Documentation
As discussed above, one of the major cumulative impacts of the Barbee Project will be on
the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. Barbee's Final Traffic Impact
Analysis does not contain an analysis of the cumulative impacts on the Intersection under the
assumption that the PQC Properties will be developed, as was requested by the City on June 3,
2002. As indicated above, development of the PQC Properties has been firmly enabled and
should be included in Barbee's traffic analysis.
Barbee has also submitted a biological assessment (the "Barbee BA"), prepared by
Raedeke Associates, Inc. The Barbee BA may not provide the City with the full amount of
information that it will need to assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the Project.
For instance, the Barbee BA does not reference the PQC Biological Evaluation ("BE")
completed for the neighboring Baxter Properties as part of the Baxter Property Consent Decree
process. The PQC BE is a public document and was readily available for Raedeke Associates to
review. In particular, the shoreline analysis in the PQC BE is extensive and references area
shoreline conditions. A further area that is lightly analyzed in the Barbee BA is short-term
16 Hayes v. Yount, 87 Wn.2d 280 (Wash. 1976).
17 Id. at 287-288.
18 Buechel v. Department of Ecology, 125 Wn.2d 196, 189 (Wash. 1994).
19 WAC 197-11-060(4)(e).
50346525.01
September 26, 2002
Page 7
construction impacts, especially in light of the fact that Barbee proposes construction of a bridge
for Street D that will require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Barbee's Application, and please keep us
informed of your further review activities and determinations.
Sincerely yours,
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Ada M. Healey, Vulcan Inc.
Robert L. Collier, Vulcan Inc.
Clint Chase, Vulcan Inc.
Lawrence J. Warren, Esq.
•
50346525.01
FOSTER PEPPER c SHEFELMAN PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Direct Phone
(206) 447-2901
May 30,2002 Direct Facsimile
(206) 749-2035
E-Mai l
Ms. Lesley Nishihara WolfC@foster.com
Project Manager,Development Services Division
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6t'Floor
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Comments,Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms.Nishihara:
I III THIRD
We are writing on behalf of our clients,Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall AVENUE
Company("PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone in Renton, Suite 34
00
SEATTLE
known as the"North J.H.Baxter property,"the"South J.H. Baxter property," and the . Washington
"Pan Abode property." These properties are located north and east,respectively, of 9 8 I 0 I-3 29 9
the above-referenced development proposal.
Telephone
We have provided similar comments to those set out below under prior (Z o 6)4 4 7 4 4 0 0
Facsimile
Barbee Mill development proposals. We provide this letter in response to the May (=06)447-9700
16,2002 Notice of Application, given the wide range of issues subject to analysis Website
under RCW 58.17.110,associated SEPA review and the ongoing potential for WWW.POSTER.COM
significant environmental impacts in the areas of transportation and natural
resources,including potential impacts to May Creek and Lake Washington. When
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis,these potential impacts may
constrain the development potential of adjacent COR-2 Zone properties.
Background
ANCHORAGE
As noted in the attached February 12,2002 letter to City Attorney Alaska
Lawrence J.Warren,PQC acquired the Baxter and Pan Abode properties to develop
medium-and high-density commercial,residential and retail uses. The Baxter PORTLAND
properties are currently contaminated, and cleanup work(pursuant to Consent Oregon
Decrees with the Department of Ecology)is expected to commence later this year. SEATTLE
In the future,the Pan Abode property will likely be used for hotels,restaurants or Washington
highway-oriented retail.
SPOKANE
Washington
The Consent Decrees are of record in King County Superior Court and reflect
a multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process to facilitate development.
50327523.02
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30,2002
Page 2
The attached letter to Mr. Warren describes the anticipated redevelopment of the Baxter
properties as described in the Consent Decrees, as well as Renton's long history of
comprehensive planning for the COR-2 Zone. The letter'also requests that development
agreement negotiations commence with regard to the development activities to follow the
imminent cleanup work.
Cumulative and Concurrent Impact Analysis
Given the development-enabling activities under the Consent Decrees and the anticipated,
development to follow, it is clear that the SEPA and Preliminary Plat review(as well as any
pending site plan and/or shoreline application review)for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat(the
"pending Barbee Mill reviews")must also examine the cumulative and concurrent impacts of
development on the Baxter and Pan Abode properties.
Any environmental or land use review of area properties should assure that sufficient
transportation capacity will be available to serve all properties within the COR-2 Zone on a fair
and consistent basis. Accordingly,the pending Barbee Mill reviews should examine how the
cumulative impact of combined build-out on the Barbee,Baxter, Pan Abode and Quendall
Terminals will affect ingress and egress from I-405, and how the circulation between these
properties may affect circulation on local streets. Potential trip generation must be addressed on
an areawide basis in order to fairly allocate development capacity between properties.
In addition,the following additional cumulative and concurrent impact issues must be
examined and analyzed within the pending Barbee Mill reviews:
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from combined
build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter properties.
•
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property,Lake Washington
Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible through the Barbee
Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek adjacent to Lake Washington
Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the Pan Abode
and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and construction and
post-construction activities associated with any road system improvements.
50327523.02
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 3 .
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any access and
roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and natural resources on
adjoining properties.
Specific Onsite Impacts
We also believe that reviewing agencies should consider a range of specific onsite
impacts arising from the development of the Barbee Mill property. We are aware of the
following issues and impacts from studies commissioned for Vulcan Inc. and PQC regarding
development of the Baxter and Pan Abode properties:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup, as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species
listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues,including reconstruction of the bulkhead, debris removal,
shoreline enhancement or restoration, and related water quality,habitat, and.fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction(if proposed),including related fisheries and habitat
issues.
4. Issues related to impacts of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife,including salmon,trout,long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues,including water quality impacts to Lake
Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;
assurance of adequate buffers pursuant to federal, state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management,impacts and mitigation if fill takes place.
•
50327523.02
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 4
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please include us on the
circulation list for all further communications relative to the pending Barbee Mill reviews.
Very truly yours,
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Rod Stevens,Vulcan Inc.
•
50327523.02
.. % •-
4,-,4%.:--4f. ow low • ••41%-ra-k,. .10.,4.
.. • .
.t..,1„..-• , •. .., • • • if . ..,,o,„ . -i. • 4. --,e Nk.
. , - . ,
'
. . ;•., , ,• , 4
4...'''.'4,,AT'';...!..er,.k. ''N, • . . - '- t) • e`l , • •I't — " s• i• t 1, I' •• i rt
.. . • , i. .. r-.... _
.
r %...• w'0611/4. 1.1-4 or -.. .01k,.. 1 7
. A
ri• J. 'C 1 • .
• ,
l•t 4, . . 4, . .. iii • - • 7 • , ,
a • • t *• . r 4
.. TA -i
g -4. • .,,,,
. 'II ' 1 i• ' '
,.• .4—.4.
I-lc 4 I
-4it .• -... -,, , I.%. . , ' . ;• - 11
6,s
,'.4_ ,.... •••...V 4. . • ' le 4' 4'''.. .$14' ••• .' r• tr. 4
1 • ,0• IA':
...•' • I e cc,- .
- -•
41 . . •':••• -Jr' ''., -• -.7. "
•.. - .. . -,01, 4 • • 4 f. ,4 •
•••4 a%' ...•••,..44 4... 4
V - ,•-ii t„. • ,
.... 4•41. -... .
• ....
.
, ..
- *.t.. .„ ii,.) •
r
. • . 1
$,4, • ...' • „44 , ...
a
.
•* •
' 44 S ,),ir • ni, i
-....•. .
• '. • 1 '. : -,.: .
. '4 , -
. ..,•
' **
•
-..4.. • .
mooms.,.....,,„, .4 .- ,f ' 4 • ,‘
, ,
$1901td 1.....) ., i. •
• . 0 1
A 1 %• •AA' A .•
• r .10„,ir .* ....,-
, . - - bw
• -.
. r p, T-,
iv. i . .• ,1
- . -•-%. . -,,,'14 ' #
*.".,
4" '
.4, ......i•' . .
-
' P AO 4* (I f
, •
a. ,. • .-
414011491:41111
t -f 4-'. i
A
,..- . . ..• . ,s. Jr. " r ti-A7)...,..4- .
. .
.,., 12k
.
,•., • i, .,
‘ . -• %is '
- .1 . se
IP
. 1 ' a'
I • .
...•if;-'0 • - ' •
. "
r.P. ... • ' . ''
•
.: 'L"'
I'ok /44' • . . J • •
• I
4- .„.„1„. aet,
rr
.
1 .
•,.. , . s
. •
17/i
. i . i
•
A
•'. ,
t ••...,. ..'4,
• •
a 1
• •4 'I.4
. / •'4' •
_ .
' .• i
•
• . .
.........„,
•
••
. *
I .
1 .....44
i •
\ 10
... .
0'
.411411114a11111101111.0.11... .........--
..
' 1
N•
' ..
.if f -.•
•,... ..
. .
•• .4.
• *6
,.. .
5 •
• •
...
- rt. 414:milk. -Pr' . , . .
. .....
• gi•• -
.1 A
r
s
,..' • t
•. .
-3.411..., f /
. *e , • •••••; A. ,, : , .
..". • .. 4 .A ,4.
I
'
, .
,:.-.,,, • . .... ‘,.. •.r. - ... ' • 14( 11" ' .• ' •
i: l•
‘•)? 4,. gil,". 4 .1. • .0,-'.ft......
II ' •t•3It ., '•.
4
.,..e. • . . k , sel',•• •••,„, • .. 1
' \
.. . • 0 . „• „ , • ,
.,, ..•.„ %fil!...
. ,
, •• fs., ' • :A it . •I •C 1 . '
• •
11, • • •
• tit.• • 1
4
•1.• •
• • •i• • , • .. 0, .),•
• • ,
Ilk i • •
• 40• . *
1• ,"
•• 0 ,
•
I , -•••••err-
•
, i y
. 4 •.. It 71114 •• ' • 4 40 al I ,
•
• ,, ,•..
il
•
. .-
• , i ) .8. ' p
\ ..,
•
••4 . , .
0
•-•*--
• .
, or
•
AP -
-.4.
. .
, , , • .
, -
....,
- -•/ & .1 - 7t...14 kill* . . -0, ;',/I°••••.
ik., ,% •
'
4r.* Ili:it glii I .
'1 4. „t:*:,,,,
.ili ir.4,
•"I. „N„ A gr; 410# ,„ ,
: i
, ,,
t
lkr: s')141 t .‘: • 1 ' ' - '' : ,
..... .. • .
iso•
'a :Nil ,, •.' '.
. .. . .• .
,....g, . ulli.,' ., 4 • I., • .
...,
•
. .'
if 4,
$0/
!Ii. . I it • . . •,t 4°
. , I p .. ',..
,., ••
. ' , 411' .,,, •
1 1
el,
ir'1
1 .,.: • .0...,..., i
,• '. „. :r,. ... k
. ,0 •
I , j '
1 .) . . • .1 . :. , . ..-.. .
iti'l i.At,
• ‘ 4... . ..,,, .
1:4 . t N.i ' ,41 , , . • . ...,,, .$ .. :
::"/10 t. Ot i.1 1 :.'•''..1 . :i. '%Nr, , 7:
,• .' '
i ll I t a
I ^ • 4 .. , ' •-• * .•:' ;44
.
1 ,7 i
. 3. ' i
1 ve.
I. .'ik,•`'"dikys., 110 1 1 ,
H 1 ? . 1
igtall#441
‘
I 1
. A %, •,.
. I lijk•.litii:.% tr 1$ igi 4 C ., !
A AO
I -11
41, • ' P
I' . ' —- • ..-.v ''si \••
s -•
$ .
,
.!. 0 • . 414 , 7.
i.
,... . . . t-e-y` •' lilt,• I, "
t ,,'•4 4 . •
4'. ?
41, lis.
S L.
)k ' 1,
• . •
1 ' 0
..r •
Ur , 4, lk. . . tr' ' t * k 'e
1 k 1 i' 4' •11. ; . , , 4
[
11,,,' II, • .4. ,.4 . '
II II
. t
‘%st — N' . it •
‘• .
•
e- 4.
1 - I 4
' lit, r.,.1. , , .• 1 .‘. ;_ ,
. t i, . .4.• I $ .%
. , •
A 0
ot ,„ , w.
.
1 . ' .
,. ,..
: 11:, kr. '
. ,
I.
••
.‘.
' 4/1.11, •7 I t 4 • . ,t. ., . ' . . ,,
i
4' •
• .
.dr 't t ;1.; s '. 1 ' .47
. , l''' Iii a k . ) t t
tt 'I' 11*-; l'e6/ % .. ` ' 1, % . I '; -41'i
, .. ! •
, $,.. ...
'.
4 '4" A. • .. IL • , ,, , . t
,,, .. . ,,i: , _,;,. , i -
..
•
4 ' 1., '' 4 , .4 j'; s.;-/ - t ipihi,4„1,1•.‘' .,1 ,. , ''' 1... .' .)?;.•
e1,'
. .. ,) .. - - • • -i • •41,,„ ',..) / r
r4r • „ •, -, 1 .1.-,r d tk ,i• r..,-.
. $ .
%I .- • -
-NI $ • ,. - fe4%.'"'+'-.)4.- ..'' 41 it k 4
., .
4,i1 t 1. 4 i
'
I • •r t .
t' ':. . . )011. %;&" 1 Al • ..''
' -
• • ,el i '- ' . ."4 • ., • .? r v......, • ......•ti i.
$
,„i :: 4,•-r . ,. . .3,, ......, r . ..$ -• 1. ••
- ,I . ,' " , .„.•
••..
it
• "4
if .0"
• •
4 . • , Ilk:It
•• •11%, ' ' '
i r • f." $ -•-; ....cite( , . _..r) 1 t A ,'
'•... --` --'"- .
...
tri • )!:.„.„'i •
.Iglu, ... . 1 ,. . ._ ....i.„• • i p , ,,.:
.• • . .
. IV ' • , , • ,,, . ,, ,, , . .- ..,- •
,,,„ • 4, i 1. •. . „,.......
., • -..
, ,, 1 !II`, II. • , NI iv..“ .. • 1 • S
tot ,.. r" • •% v•-:
I • '' • 11. '. " . li ' -• -#• A'- > 4.,..'SI.' . . -. -1
• . r ..''• II ,_ii ,,,. • "'•i b.-- • •
..,,,.t if. I 111 •,..- , , t t i
411
r ,i/P. ,o,f i•.!, I,- Iis . / IV .•r 0 ril'ills D rP '7, 4 ' it :7
' .." • ". Of lit , ' .-"., ifr 1 . ••,,4 ,1., ,), , ., . .„
AI )• I.
, ..jt 4 .. * •
,0..... ., ..„, $ „, 1 . . •
It. Air '
.. .
1 ' ' ' • • • ,, u. ,
' 4
:lt' '• .4 ... ,-....di ' 'I e ,
,,, `V le
' tt r- 4. .1011 , ,
ei. it ;
`y`y`_ L , a/ MI:
te : j
v�•
*1
'y 4, .
4'
:t.
z.„..- _ .. „,....., ,,..,i.,..,..,...,,..,,....,„:„...,,,,,,..„.........._ �r,d
--;....: .„„ , ,.. .,.. ,,,,, ,,_,,,11;
,,,..._,
001065-4.---_- _ , -- - - ,
, ,
_ \
i
R4 ,, s
; + t n'r
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 7, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Juliana Sitthidet
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT- LUA 02-040
4201 Lake Washington Blvd
I have reviewed the application for the preliminary plat at 4201 Lake Washington Blvd and have
the following comments:
•
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WATER The site is outside the Aquifer Protection Area. There is a 12-inch water main in
Lake Washington Blvd N. (as-built drawing W-400). The available fire flow from the
existing 12-inch is 5,200 gpm at a residual pressure of 20 psi. The static water
pressure is 125 psi. Pressure Zone is 320 feet.
SEWER There is 8-inch sewer main along the North East Side of the site. The sewer is in an
easement (approx. 210-feet in Barbee's Mill property). This sewer main goes to a lift
station.
STORM This project drains to Lake Washington and May Creek. There are drainage
facilities crossing the south portion of the site and discharge runoff from N 40th
Street to Lake Washington.
STREETS There are no curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting the property in Lake Washington Blvd
N.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
WATER
1. The Water System Development Charge at a rate of $1,105.00 per new building lot will apply.
A redevelopment credit may apply.
2. New water main extensions will be required to provide fire protection to the proposed
development. The new waterlines shall be connected to the existing 12-inch water main in
Lake Washington Blvd. N., at the north and south ends of the development. A "looped" water
line will be required to provide the fire flow reliability and redundancy. This "looped"system will
include a waterline crossing of May Creek near the south end of the project.
3. A separate utility permit and separate plans will be required for the installation of the double
detector check valve assembly (DDCVA) for fire sprinkler systems.
A
SANITARY SEWER
1. The Sewer System Development Charge at a rate of $760.00 will apply. A credit for the partial
payment already made will apply.
2. Plats shall provide separate side sewers stubs to each building lot. No dual side sewers are
allowed. Side sewers shall be minimum 6" at 2% slope.
3. The City may require that the proposed new lift station also serve the area to the north of the
site. The proposed lift station will have to be designed per City of Renton standards and will
be own and operated by the City.
4. The City would determine the proposed use of the existing 8" force main, and the developer
may be required to provide a new connection to the King County East Side Interceptor.
SURFAQE WATER
1. Surface Water System Development Charge at a rate of $525.00 per new building lot will
apply. This fee is payable with the utility construction permit.
2. The plans, shall show the 100-year floodplain. Compensatory storage for filling of the
floodplain will be required.
3. An analysis will be required for the upstream drainage basin for existing and future developed
conditions to size the existing conveyance system that crosses the south portion of the
property(drainage facility that discharges runoff from N 40th Street to Lake Washington).
4. Staff will recommend as a SEPA that this condition that the project comply with the 1998
KCSWDM and water quality be provided to this site. However, if other permits are required
(HPA, NPDES, etc) and these jurisdictions impose a stricter standard (2001 Stormwater
Management Manual for Western Washington, from Department of Ecology), staff
recommends that, in the interest of a singular drainage report, the same standard be applied
throughout the project.
TRANSPORTATION
1. Grades on Public Street and/or driveways shall not exceed 15%. The proposed south access
appears to have grades higher than the maximum allowed.
2. The traffic mitigation fee of $75 per additional generated trip shall be assessed. This fee is
payable at time of recording the plat.
3. Traffic study for the intersection of Ripley Lane and Lake Washington Blvd will be required as
if the area (all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the tracks) is fully developed at this
density.
4. The traffic study assumes traffic signals at the intersections of NE 44th Street and the 1-405
ramps. This is not the case and the traffic study should note whether traffic signals are
needed for the Barbee Mill project.
5. The railroad crossings must meet public crossing standards. Both accesses must be
developed to accommodate pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic.
6. Dedication to the City of Renton of the proposed access easement to the north of the site will
be required.
7. Sidewalk, curb and gutter, paving, channelization, signals and street lighting will be required in
the streets interior to the plat, along the new accesses to the plat, along Lake Washington
Blvd and Ripley Lane (up to the main access to the site).
8. All new electrical, phone and cable services must be underground. Construction of these
franchise utilities must be inspected and approved by a City of Renton public works inspector
prior to recording of the short plat.
1.
PLAN REVIEW- GENERAL
1. All plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards
2. All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals
prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer.
4. Separate permits for side sewers, water meters and backflow device are required.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS
1. The Barbee Mill site is listed in the Department of Ecology's confirmed and suspected
contaminants sites report, dated July 25, 1996. Due to the historical industrial use of the site,
a soil evaluation report is required confirming the cleanliness of the existing materials. From a
utility standpoint, we are concerned that workers can be exposed to potential contaminants
from the installation and maintenance of the utilities within the site. Backfill materials for utility
trenches shall be clean materials, free of contaminants. A trench liner will be required to
separate the clean materials for the native soils if contaminants are found.
2. The applicant shall install construction fence and silt fence along the down slope perimeter
and out from the buffer area on both sides of May Creek. The silt fence shall be in place
before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in conformance with the
specifications presented in of the King County Surface Water Design Manual. This will be
required during the construction of both off-site and on-site improvements as well as building
construction.
3. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any
recommendations of change or revision to maintenance schedules or.installation shall be
submitted by the project Engineer of record to the public works inspector. Certification of the
installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required
prior to final inspection approval.
cc:Kayren Kittrick
- r
•
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 3, 2002
TO: Juliana Sitthi et, Plan Review
FROM: Bob Mahn, ransportation Systems
SUBJECT: BARBEE MILL PROPERTY
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Review of the Preliminary Traffic Impact analysis (TIA) dated July 23, 2002 for the proposed
residential development on the Barbee Mill property has resulted in the following comments:
1. The TIA assumes that 88 duplex units will have access via Ripley Lane to the north of
the development property and 24 townhouses will have access from Lake Washington
Boulevard via a roadway near the south end of the development property. This
assumption disagrees with the preliminary Plat Plan, which shows that all 112 units
can be accessed via the south end roadway (street) as well as via Ripley Lane.
2. The TIA assumes traffic signals will exist by 2005 at the intersections of NE 44th
Street and the I-405 ramps. Development on the Port Quendall site was anticipated to
have resulted in the need for these traffic signals by 2005. However, it now appears
that any development on the Port Quendall site will not occur until after 2005.
3. The 2005 traffic forecasts in the TIA does not include traffic from all undeveloped
parcels on the west side of the tracks assuming they would be fully developed at the
density of the proposed Barbee Mill development.
4. We understand that a revised traffic study will be required to address full development
of all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the tracks (item 3 above). We concur
with this requirement and request that the revised traffic study should also assume that
all Barbee Mill site proposed units can be accessed as proposed on the Preliminary
Plat Plan, and that the intersections of NE 44th Street and the I-405 ramps are
unsignalized and should note whether traffic signals are needed and what warrants
would be met to justify the signals.
5. The TIA includes traffic counts at the entrance to the existing Barbee Mill site for a
one-week duration (Table 4 on page 17 and Appendix B). The use of this information
and calculation of the traffic mitigation fee is left to the discretion of Development
Services staff.
<c: kahl 2wu (4-61A
CITY OF RENTON
FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 16, 2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira, Senior Planner
FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
MITIGATION ITEMS;
1. A fire mitigation fee of$488.00 is required for all new single-family
and duplex structures and $388.00 per unit for all buildings with three
or more units. Fee is paid prior to recording of the plat.
FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS;
1. A fire hydrant with 1000 GPM fire flow is required within 300 feet of
all new single-family structures. If the building square footage exceeds
3600 square feet in area, the minimum fire flow increases to 1500 GPM
and requires a minimum of two hydrants, one within 150-feet and all
secondary hydrants within 300 feet of the structures. Preliminary
hydrant layout will need revisions.
2. All buildings over two stories or over four units require installation of
approved, monitored fire sprinkler systems.
3. Dead-end access roadways over 150-feet in length require an
approved turnaround. South access street off of Lake Washington
Boulevard should be widened to 32-feet width.
4. All building addressed shall be visible from the public street.
5. Attached buildings will be considered as one building for fire flow, fire
alarm and sprinkler requirements. Separate plans and permits are
required for sprinkler and fire alarm systems.
City of Ren.on Department of Planning/Building/Public Vr.,KS -
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: '•)ct f (cS COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 26, 2002
:.PPLICATION NO: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER 12,2002
APPLICANT: Century Pacific,LP PROJECT MANAGER: LESLEY NISHIHIRA
PROJECT TITLE: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT WORK ORDER NO: 78975
LOCATION: 4201 Lk.Wash.Blvd.(between N.40th&44TH)
SITE AREA: 22.9 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: *REVISED* The applicant is requesting Environmental(SEPA)and Preliminary Plat review to
subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit
structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are included with the
proposal,including a secondary access point and bridge crossing at the southeast corner of the site. Four utility/open space tracts
would also be established with the plat. A street modification to reduce sidewalks from 6 feet to 5 feet in width has been requested.
In addition,a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing regulations is necessary for the proposed bridge over May Creek.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation ,.><-
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic./Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
`: a" J5i4Q;.. , .,-,,-',;ii iec..Tim :E'. %1,,:,q a •...r - ,,._.
is;_ Y u '_ :` $yam
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
dii,e4z:, a/14_,/-1-61-/Ocr. 746 /4°rVIC
C. CODE-RELATED Cm NTS
124 c241�a/C S 7 N w/4i
,jive yuL.
•
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas w ere additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Li dzi._- 7A/oz. -
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
Routing Rev.10/93
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
A Public Recreation Trail Easement needs to be dedicated to the City for a future
trail connection along the entire length of May Creek and Lake Washington. The
City of Renton, Newcastle and King County Parks has been acquiring property
along this corridor for over 15 years for a trail connection from Lake Washington
to Cougar Mountain Park. This is identified in King County's, Newcastle's and
Renton's Comprehensive Trails Plans. Over 1000 acres have been acquired to
date and this trail easement connection is one of the last "Missing Links".
"It is anticipated that the proposed development would generate future residents
that would utilize existing City park and recreation facilities and programs. The
City has adopted a Parks Mitigation Fee of$354.51 per each new multi family
unit to address these potential impacts."
City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
•EVIEWING DEPARTMENT: C .ji U\ (V, COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBERRn 26, 2002
APPLICATION NO: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM DATE CIRCULATED: SEPTEMBER-1�, tT�r or Oif or R SERVICES
rrENTON
APPLICANT: Century Pacific,LP PROJECT MANAGER: LESLEY NISHIHIRA
PROJECT TITLE: BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT WORK ORDER NO: 78975 SEt 13 2002
LOCATION: 4201 Lk.Wash.Blvd. (between N.40th&44T11) RECEIVED
SITE AREA: 22.9 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: *REVISED* The applicant is requesting Environmental(SEPA)and Preliminary Plat review to
subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 square feet. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit and 5-unit
structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are included with the
proposal,including a secondary access point and bridge crossing at the southeast corner of the site. Four utility/open space tracts
would also be established with the plat. A street modification to reduce sidewalks from 6 feet to 5 feet in width has been requested.
In addition,a variance from the Tree Cutting and Land Clearing regulations is necessary for the proposed bridge over May Creek.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code)COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housing
Air Aesthetics
Water Light/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transportation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet •
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
6eD-%eGy gear legetwigeo
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
S' ature f Direct or Autho' ed Represen 3/tee-zit-I; Date
Routing p Rev.10/93
,
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT .
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 25,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Rebecca Linda(
STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lake Washington Blvd.;
LUA-02-040 ECF,PP,V-H,SM
Staff previously reviewed this proposal as a preapplication on April 25, 2002 and as a regula
preliminary plat application on May 23,2002. Copies of these two memoranda are attached.
Since our review of the preliminary application for the project the applicant has not significantly
altered their original proposal for this site. The number of proposed multi-family dwellings for
the 22.9-acre site is still 112, however, the applicant is proposing 24 townhomes and 88
residential duplex units.
What this application includes is an environmental checklist along with supporting
documentation in the form of a biological assessment and wetlands analysis, as well as a
preliminary traffic impact analysis.The wetland assessment identified two emergent wetlands on
the site, Wetland H. Wetland I is approximately 1,712 square feet in area and is considered a
disturbed wetland. Wetland H, somewhat larger than Wetland 1, is mostly outside of the site
laying between it and the BNSF Railroad right-of-way. The traffic analysis indicated that the
proposed residential development would generate approximately 56 AM peak hour vehicle trips
and 67 PM peak hour vehicle trips. On weekdays the development is anticipated to generate
approximately 717 weekday vehicle trips.
No significant adverse impacts were identified on the applicant's environmental checklist. Some
construction impacts might, however, impact species such as Osprey and Bald Eagles if they are
breeding in the area. (Nesting Osprey, apparently do exist on the site.) The applicant does not
see the need for any unusual measures to reduce or control noise impacts other than those in City
codes.
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Policies:
Objective LU-U: Encourage projects throughout the designation which create cohesive, quality
and landmark developments integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to create a
compact, urban development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the City.
Objective EN-C: Protect and enhance the City's rivers, major and minor creeks and intermittent
stream courses.
Barbie Mill Preliminary riat 2
09/25/02
Policy EN-7. If crossings and/or access points are required across fishbearing river and stream
channels, improvements should be made in the following order of priority:
1. Crossings and bridges which access several properties.
2. If crossings and bridges are not feasible, culverts could be used which are oversized
and have gravel bottoms which maintain the channel's width and grade.
Objective EN-K: Protect and enhance wildlife habitat throughout the City.
Policy EN-53. Re-establish self-sustaining fisheries resources in appropriate rivers and creeks
through encouragement of hatcheries and salmonid use.
Policy EN-54. Retain and enhance aquatic and riparian habitats by requiring vegetated buffers
for all new development along waterway corridors.
Relevant Provisions of the Shoreline Management Act:
K.General Use Regulations for All Shoreline Uses:
4. Public Access:
a. Where possible, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate
shoreline so that trails, nonmotorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may
be developed providing greater shoreline utilization.
b. Any trial system shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property •
rights.
Analysis:
The subject proposal does appear to enhance aquatic and riparian habitats by providing vegetated
buffers along waterways. However, in terms of improving access to shorelines for "greater
shoreline utilization" this project fails. Only limited access to Lake Washington for residents or
the public is provided. This is in the form of a 220' wide open space tract along Lake
Washington. This tract, however, lacks pedestrian amenities and contains what appears to be a
small wetland and buffer area. A larger open space to the east appears to be developed as a water
quality facility with bio swales planted with wetland grasses. Open spaces along May Creek are
shown as stream buffer as well. As a result this development provides little public or shared
access to the May Creek or Lake Washington shoreline.
Conclusion:
Also, as noted in our memorandum of April 25, 2002 (attached) this development does not meet
the intent of the Center Office/Residential designation in that it does not meet the intensity of
development envisioned. Whereas the current proposal is fairly well integrated with the site's
natural amenities, it does not result in a "compact, urban development with high amenity values
that is a gateway to the City".
Attachments
cc: Don Erickson
H:\EDNSP\Interdepartmental\Development Review\Green File\Comments\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat2.doc\d
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 23,2002
TO: Lesley Nishihira
FROM: Rebecca Lind
STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lk.Wash.Blvd.;LUA-02-
040,PP,ECF
Staff reviewed and commented on this application at the pre-application stage on April 25th, 2002.
A copy of this memorandum is attached. Staff noted at that time that the 22.9 acre site was located
in the Center Office Residential land use designation and was zoned Center Office Residential—2.
A number of relevant Comprehensive Plan policies were sited in the memorandum and staff
concluded that the application did not appear to support the stated purpose of the COR land use
designation or that of the Center Office/Residential Zone as set forth in Section 4-2-020M:
"The purpose of the Center Office Residential Zone is to provide for a mix of intensive office
and residential activity in a high quality, master planned development which is integrated with
the natural environment."
We noted that there was no mix of uses with the proposed development nor were the uses proposed
master planned with other uses in the this COR-2 land use designation. We also noted that the
proposed plat did not achieve the densities of 30 to 50 units per acre envisioned for this zone and
required for single-use development. And, rather than the type of gateway development
anticipated, we saw this development becoming little more than another exclusive residential
enclave on Lake Washington.
From a land use standpoint we have not identified any major adverse environmental impacts.
However, because of the exclusive residential character of this development it is unlikely that the
public will feel comfortable accessing shorelines. Policy LU-270 states:
Policy LU-270. The site design of developments should maximize public access to and use of
public areas as well as shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a river, lake, stream or
wetland where such access would not jeopardize the environmental attributes of the
waterbody.
Recommendation:
Measures should be taken, if this plat is approved, to ensure that there is sufficient parking and
access for non-residents to use and enjoy the shorelines of Lake Washington that abut this site.
Attachment
cc: Don Erickson
H:\EDNSPUnterdepartmental\Development Review\Green File\Comments\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.doc\d
CITY OF RENTON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 25,2002
TO: Leslie Nishihira
FROM: Don Erickson
SUBJECT: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat,4201 Lake Washington Blvd.N.,
PRE 02-035 (PlD 322405 9034)
The applicants are proposing to plat the 22.9 acre Barbee Mill site on Lake Washington into 112
townhouse lots ranging in size between 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet. Front and rear
setbacks are proposed to be a minimum of 10 feet with minimum 5 foot side yards where units
are not attached. The proposed project is to be separated by the May Creek corridor. Townhouse
lots for two-unit attached buildings are to be located on the north and west side of May Creek and
buildings for up to five townhouses will be located east and south of May Creek. Currently
stormwater runoff flows directly into Lake Washington and May Creek.
The subject site is designated Center Office Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map and zoned Center Office Residential-2.
Relevant Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies:
Objective LU-U: Encourage projects throughout the designation which create cohesive,
quality and landmark developments integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to
create a compact, urban development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the City.
Policy LU-124. Primary uses should include complexes of offices or residential
development, hotels and convention centers, research and development facilities, and
corporate headquarters.
Policy LU-126. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the
scale and intensity envisioned for the designation, or if proposed as part of a phased
development and multi parcel proposal which includes a mix of uses.
Policy LU-131. Maximum residential density on the various COR sites should range between
30 to 50 dwelling units per acre. The same area used for commercial and office development
can also be used to calculate residential density. When proposed development does not
involve a mix of uses, then minimum residential density should be 5 dwelling units per net
acre.
Policy LU-132. Site plans and proposed structures should be designed so as to fully
integrate signage, building height, bulk, setbacks, landscaping, and parking considerations
across the various components of each proposed development.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat 2
09/20/02
Policy LU-133. Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian oriented.
Policy LU-134. Vehicular access to each proposed development should be from a major
street with the number of access points reasonably minimized.
Policy LU-135. A combination of internal and external site design features should be
encouraged such as:
a. public area plazas,
b. prominent architectural features,
c. significant natural features,
d. distinctive focal features,
e. gateways,
f structured parking, and
g. other features meeting the spirit and intent of these policies.
Analysis:
The subject proposal for the construction of 112 townhouses on 112 lots on the 22.9-acre site
appears to be consistent with Policies LU-124 and LU-134. However, a number of the other
policies have not been met at this point. These include Objective LU-U, which speaks about
creating landmark developments; Policy LU-126, allowing a single use when achieving the scale
and intensity of development envisioned for the COR Zone; Policy LU-131, achieving a
minimum density for single uses;Policy LU-132,coordinating with other proposed development;
and Policy LU-135. The latter policy is in regards to providing a combination of internal and
external site design features such as prominent architectural features, gateways, and distinctive
focal features. For example, projects meeting the intent of the COR —2 land use designation
could be anticipated to have public access to common walkways along the shores of Lake
Washington and May Creek. Instead all frontages on these public waterways appear to have been
retained for the exclusive use of abutting residents.
Although the applicants have not provided a separate calculation for deleting streets and streams
in order to calculate net densities, they state that their proposal achieves a minimum density of
6.58 du/net acre. This density however is not in the range of 30 to 50 units per acre envisioned in
Policies LU-126 and LU-131. The minimum density is intended to apply only to the residential
component of a phased development. Regarding Policy LU-134 vehicular access is limited to
two access points off Lake Washington Blvd N., one for the development along the south side of
May Creek and the other for the majority of the new housing development which is located on the
north side of May Creek.
The project, in the department's estimation, does not meet the intent of the Center
Office/Residential designation in that it does not meet the intensity of development envisioned.
Whereas the new development is fairly well integrated with the site's natural amenities, there is
little indication that it will result in a"compact,urban development with high amenity values that
is a gateway to the City"(Objective LU-U).
Since this is a stand alone project there is no indication that an effort has been made to establish
development criteria for signage, building height, bulk and character, landscaping, etc., that
H:\EDNSPUnterdepartmental\Development Review\Preapps\Comments\PREAPPICOR\Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.doc\d
. .
. ., ._. •• .
• . .
---,D A i 1—L1 •
ttbANCL, LI .
.. .
•
iz_s 120-z_ •
•
•
. .
. ...
. •
....., .
. • •..•. _. • .• . . : _ t.,,:„.t.„.,,,k.s.. ..,.,?...-. .-:...:-,,,_7...1..:.,:•-•..,:.,....,..:• •::,iti,.,-. ..,1•1;;..:..-.;..-.•:•:
.. . . ..
....., . . .
.:.:
. Poet: Quendat .:.......r. ...,
• - I. ' . Port uenda 1 . . - . . . - • . . ••. ,. . • • •• • .
. .
•.,.... .,. . , .Continued•from.page 1 .. • ' •• . -.. .. •• ..... ..•
. . .
. . .
. . : ••.• . •.•. . .
. . . ... . ,• ... .
. . . . .
•
C.. .e .h.-':-...t4...1).......to in own the southern third called the:,
- 1' •Barbee•Mill:site,. which...needs. .
• . • • • •
I.:. very-little clean-up.The Cugin—is." •*-. 7:
;.,-are seeking permits to build town
' .:..: .. • By Jo'..e.NIfi., 13BEVE. 1.11.: .:' •.Sife....for the state Department of..-..• . -
':• homes on the Barbee Mill Site. : • •,.: •jourrnd• Real Estate Editor • ' • .. .Ecology Rather;Allen's Company.- -. .-- ; ..
•- • Port. Quendall Cc.'s cleanrup. •
. ..
• - --. •-. :• •. .- - -. ' :-.. • -;,. • is starting promptly after receiv -- . . ..
. . .. .• . , ....,. . .
.. . ..., ..,... . . .. .. ...
:...start also doesn't appear.to signal,.....:i...
'..•..-fAll n'S'Port QUendalt Co.:: 'blithe last reqUired perinitsfeCO. .- -.-
.:. preparation• to •sell •the::site,
plans to start a nicire-than-S•inil-• .-the US.Army Corps of Engineers :- . . .
ithOugh Allen spokesman Michael.
lion cleanup InP4...wee.ka..04.14k . .:..this sthomr. • • . . . . . ;', .gai*passed on ,iying:whether.„; ••:••,i...c4soil.at-the Gk,ACt-acre -ter site Or -:•,..i.-$0.6 c4rlsor.f,genton's economic - •. —
i; marketing of the property has •.. ,.•
Renton.S.LakelkAbirigtOnWaler-: development administrator said . . .
!::• occurred
•• . ,
• •-.•• •.•.
-. . . . gold yestetdaY. Port*Quendall Co..promised' a- • .
, ...':.•.Word-..circulated...earlier,:thiS -........::. •-;:-.:•••..V.VOrk:.will begin Sept f3-:.:itni -•Clean-hplikhen it bought the prop. - •. • -
!'.•-•;itirnmet.that•Alleds reOeSenta-, -•••...
,,.
removing..- contaminated•: _ i .,•'iiii iabf;.:...• -erty.in:2060-and:f!rt1-40.-ith,erre.' .._ . -. . .:.
i:.•tives.haaput°tit feelers for a buy : ,....
9J.,:ate.eg..6(iiiielitTroi.ii$446f GOYei.:..•1(0ep.iOg.thai cotii.initint.,:...y-,.... ..• . 1::'6r.Nank responded yesterday... ..-....
1:.-.4e:Ciiiiejid-all c•ii:--i4a.WiiiO4:::•:.',',.. The:.B4xtei-;',06pq.tty covers- - . [......only that Port.Qgendall CO..111.14-
.".•.-1.6go';'-t hilUildeiikat4f,',:*otit• •••'1Wftiktlieeti third of klargp`e,si* - .. • ,
t;-• ing action- to "realize the full::•'..:-
'.,:..-•Itt:t14011 .16-0.4totioii,e1-4,?4xthi..2:-10-**4•aS. Port Qiienclal .,that: ,.....: r......,.poteritial°of the property ......':•••:•:•-..,.:. '
-. —'41:410:sitlitikti on the Allen set out tU:1-ectOelOp..lut6:4:.:..- _ ..:, is-':-• 'Certainly anything.Pert Qtien :.•',..'',.
...-i,;;Vgiatitin--0.-ighiusg3tOko -,..iiiige..1*iiked.-iii•OjOt..-F.01.-:.ortiOo.;..s.:. ...-.:-.,-..:;-. t.,-, . •
:.:,:-.:-:4;thit can do:sto..realize'.the:full....r..-1.!!:'
'.:4kagatikiiit.ttii4444Ani:-.'44 ,,S:liCu`Sitig,ilicielsree-..i: tfoic;: et4i:t....i.•:::: ;,.i l's.;;potentiai,:i.,ve ikiii•cto;"..b6:s.aio.-..-::-!::....:
•AtAfilitpliOdial'!Olii#041'00§;':.t:::444.*.otfr.f:01A,rtifig-.:iii:-the...'•*:.:-.:...,:.3 -:.--,i 1c0intlanielg:t3fegidOnt 4-the:*-, ''.,..:..•04f.':$0.:T4-ati forested. .141#01iiff.- 100.kt000)::*.'.9-Y,#.4.01'-ffit::::,-,--,‘::;.• '--.-fSeattl :develOptnent...ruin of .:..
rii..'.4lie.1.tqator0-*qtfasktipftkctfac:.:..::.,:utiotivr§ottttpi,_.1..1.4.4i ...........,-...„:... ,.... ..- ._:.:;.:Nitze-Stagen&CO:;Said lus.firmi- .-
krektfibrk:?•E'ifi.if:ifAivf:'4'..:*-liAZ,',:.r.,:gjAltillTli.601iV'cililY. the Baxter ..-...-:-
,46,„,v,v&4:,:=.---Ta-1,-;.i..--q-.--.-.;'-i-tabti,,,:-iii4:rdetkg 1411110fi:11,1t6autklitA:•-- .•• . !,...lia -approached:,Porti-Otippdall:: .4itli. i ..74,. i '' '.R....t4s,'*-7!a.2Ailie --,:lig,'.," .•: ''''':''C.:0,.about trying tiibilkihq '•:.--,...•-.':.
-, prop-
:: will•-•'--- :- 4, •',relcii-ov -- -- ,-1 ' =;•_•:;•.striaiiiir.--plotf,n_e-nriln.,. .$ .,..:.fluo_,.,•,...-_.•,-. .;......;.k;.ty but Port Quendall.CC:liAsn't.i,.•. .•
4;',1-• • ' : 'C ( ;ontami14W!.4.-Yik.:::'' - - —.'" ':: - .VANIA:ifOP2Ptt,r:2:.::?",' .
-7141fif ..1411.-604010k4.44074,0:13b, r7 - '.P19:.1Y.P.Xt_ ,9t--Pilcg01 ,....:-this ,.... ...tesponded. •...•.:. •-.... • ..• :. -: ••••:• - i,..'•:-,:..
.;:s.."Th6halie.:*.ii..agosi,04,•#.:0.0 .:.,...-.
fibtIfir-tliVisii061,-W- -. .-,:.',--f77.}:77:-••.:olutalmA---g.cpwi.40%.:f•Jp,"pkirf'—:•::-,- • ,.,... market Daniels iict-...:!..Tfiey,,......:•..:-.
..j--.:. Starting the Clea#Aiii-.**tfW1/2.7: 7751,9,1g-c.h:t00#0.404.glq.$20.; • -.•.. ' ... , ..
- 1::-...haven't Offered- it to to-•us...-We,•:.•: 1.
ii. meet .'t-pgiitastistst•o6.6.dithevsufa.-' million clean•Oqailt0.y.:-.1110•:..:cuOtu§, .
i‘:•..UpproachejithenttOtiytainitiat0;:,,.::...:.
' tiil'Oolburn,. manager-'Of:!Ahe..:.. ' --.,;* continued on oipi3ih. . .
r%.1.:disenssioninit,they haven t.Said--.*:.
,.... • . . . .. .
,•'...- they re*Wing.to ..:::..',.. •::::.`.-.:•;-..
• L.:---. Port'Quendalf.Co..:S.;lead•Ci-.4},.....--.:..•
• irctof on the clean up is Thermo• • :.-:••:.-itetcO:The.work involves. .. ...:. .. .
removing • creosote r•:'and...pen.,•--... .
• • • F.,....tichloropliend froni-earlier ltinit
• . , , ., .. . . • ... •• • •• •.--.....„
• :,:-...„ber operations,Colburn said. .:: •-
•• -:••i ..toe Nabbefeld Gait be.-reaheil-Ot .„.. •
•••• (206j. 2.1076518'or by e-mail at
.
.
. . .joe@djc.com. • . .... - ..... :
•
. ,
. •
. .
. •
. ,
•
•
•
. ' RECEIV D
In King.County Sooerior Court Clerk'sotlice •
`' 1 MAY 18 2Q00.
21
. CashtierSectlon KNT • . .
Superior Court Clerk
3 .
4j
5.
EXPO4
61
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR KING COUNTY
8 1 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF
9 ' ECOLOGY, •
NO U — 2 - 1. 17 7 9 = 5KNT
Plaintiff,
10 I PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER CONSENT
v, DECREE
1.11 .
PORT.QUENDALL COMPANY,a Washington RE: SOUTH J.H. BAXTER •
121 corporation, PROPERTY/RENTON
13 { Defendant.
14
15 .
16 •
•
17
18
19
20
21
221
23 -
24
251
_ 26
r PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER . ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WAS'HINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology B Division
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 17
FAX(360)438-7743
_ I Property would act as security for certain South Baxter-Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of
2 ' this Consent Decree,Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded and of no further force
3 and effect, and the May 6, 1992 Renton-Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of
4 no further force and effect.' Comprehensive summaries of project area historical information,records
5 I 'and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report(Woodward
6 Clyde, 1990)conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree, and in multiple documents prepared
71 by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present.
1
8 �
'
9 ! IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
41. ' Defendant proposes to acquire the South Baxter Property(along with the North
10 I
Baxter Property)to facilitate eventual commercial,urban residential, and/or retail development,
11
I
either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development
12
Project("Project"),including adjacent properties,which could ultimately result in between
13
approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development at the north end of Renton. The
14
II South Baxter Property, along with the North Baxter Property is anticipated to include.approximately
15
400,000 sq.ft. of development.
16 ' •
42. In 1989,the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan
17
affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993,extensive public
18.1
j hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the
19
general public concerning.Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning
20
• Code amendments.
21 .
43. In addition, in 1996 and 1997,an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS") scoping
22
process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping
23 1
process involved significant public participation, including mailings,formal comment, and public
24
meetings.
25
_ 26
PROSPECTVE PURCHASER 9 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-011.7
FAX(360)438-7743
1 , 44: Any property development will be completed in accordance with the Renton
2 ; Comprehensive Plan and area-wide zoning Center Office Residential designation: Subject to the
3 , requirements of the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum,such development will include
4 I permanent public access to shoreline at the Baxter Property.
5 45. Any residential townhomes or condominiums on the South Baxter Property will be
6 built over structural concrete parking or other structures,placing the first occupied floor at leastone
7 i level above the soil.
' 8 46. Two office buildings(approximately 200,000 square feet each)and associated
9 parking may be located on the South Baxter Property. The proposed buildings are anticipated to be
10 I five stories,or approximately 68 feet tall. Parking may be located as the first floor of the office
11 building or as separate structures.
12 47. The development would be designed to take advantage of the desirable location of
13 the South Baxter Property and will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Redevelopment will
14 ! facilitate permanent public access to.the shoreline(through a gravel walking trail on the inland edge
15 j of shoreline enhancements and observation stations),create a connection to existing recreational use
.16 trails, and create transportation and parking improvements.
i •
17 I 48. Development of the South Baxter Property is expected to create a significant number
18 II of well-paying jobs and spur development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues
19 would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington.
20 i 49. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act("SEPA")
211 environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has
22 ± been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of
23 Nonsignificance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H.
24
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 10 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE EcolPO sox 4011vision
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 j V. WORK TO BE.PERFORMED
2 ; 50. Upon the Effective Date of this Decree;Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action
3 ; Plan described in Attachment B, including all attachments thereto, according to the schedule
4 provided therein. Defendant shall submit as-built documentation to Ecology to verify construction of
f
5 the cleanup and mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan. Cleanup activities include
6 . source remediation,site grading to facilitate site redevelopment,soil.capping,wetland mitigation,
7 . and confirmational groundwater monitoring. Source remediation includes removal of NAPL from
8 wells(BAX-14), sediment and soil excavation and off-site treatment or disposal, and in situ soil
9 ! mixing(stabilization). Source remediation activities will occur at prescribed locations according to
10 i the Cleanup Action Plan. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize
11 disruption to the surrounding community. As such,the actual schedule for site cleanup may vary to
12 I facilitate this coordination. .
13 51. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions for the release of Hazardous
14 I Substances covered by this Decree,other than those required by this Decree,unless the parties agree
15 ! to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in
16 I accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted
17 I pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Cleanup Action
18 I Plan(Attachment B).
19 52. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant(Attachment C)with the Office
201 of the King County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Cleanup Action Plan and -
i
21 I shall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty(30)days of recording.
22 • VI. ECOLOGY COSTS
23 53. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this
24 Decree. This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the
25 Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996.
26 The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 11 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT.DECREE EPO colBoxD4011ivision
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 107. If the Court withdraws its consent,this Decree shall be null and void at the option of
2 any party,.and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs arid without prejudice.
• 3 i In such an event,no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree.
4 XXXI. SEVERABILITY
5 j 108. If any section, subsection, sentence, or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal,
6 invalid,or unenforceable, such illegality,invalidity,or unenforceability will not affect the legality,
7 validity,or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any other section, subsection, sentence,
8 or clause.
91 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE
10 109. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been
11 entered by the Court and the closing of the property purchase is completed as defined in the Property
12 ; Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J. H.Baxter&Co.
13 SO ORDERED this: /6 day of 71 4-A_ ,2000.
•
14 '
„D
154 .
Image,K n CountySuperior Court
16I f g p Pao T'
The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date
17
specified below.
18I
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY,a ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
19 Washington corporation .
20
Ay:B f%Q/"lAW' v By: �n*w� r' '-,Y.:11
211 P P . Name. /9/ A C_ ./FZ4 R'' O 1 Printed Name: 7 �,� s c /V;r,.1/
22 I Date: /% 000 Date: NV' is; ,ZGeJ
. DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
23
24 By:
w`
Y
Printed Name:
25 Date:
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER , 27 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
DivCONSENT DECREE EP0117n
POO B o Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 9 8 504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF PENTON
King County SEP 3 0 2002
Wastewater Treatment Division
Department of Natural Resources l� ��,q
lt
King Street Center l� f I!�
201 South Jackson Street
Seattle,WA 98104-3855
September 26, 2002
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Development Services Division
City of Renton
1055 Grady Way
Rei lion, WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/LUA-02-040. PP, ECF, V-H, SM.
The King County Wastewater Treatment Division has reviewed the 2002. Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat proposal dated September 12, 2002. King County's Eastside
Interceptor 4 runs under the approach to the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat site (please
see the attached figures). In order to protect this wastewater facility, King County is
requesting that the City of Renton do the following:
• Sewer extension plans and modifications must be submitted to King County for
Review and approval. Drawings should be sent to:
Eric Davison, DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
King County Wastewater Treatment Division
201 South Jackson Street, KSC-NR-0508
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
• Exercise care during construction while transporting heavy vehicles over the pipeline.
For further information please contact Roger Browne at 206-684-1950.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have
questions, please contact Eric Davision at (206) 684-1707.
Sincerely,
•
kvet.. ()molar(
Barbara Questad
Environmental Planner
Enclosures
cc: Eric Davison, DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
Pam Elardo, Supervisor, Right-of-Way Unit, Planning and System Development
Roger Browne, DNRP/WTD/AMS, Supervising Engineer
CLEAN WATER —A SOUND INVESTMENT
s.
44-
.... •v • TT
,. _ L.._•--a..-.-�._�-r•• - - •+_-n,.-'4-- ---..' _- --7 ...,.. ;' - -•arc- ,-7._�-- .. ___ _ ---- ----
_ }z
Q
sz
.a.
w
:
•
1 O Er-
r
w 1
3
. - 2y
IQ1
K 1
/O
I I-1
I O 1
: X I.
a,
} 1
I
J
i Q,S La
SSTOGJPREM WTOA GERR4//+VUL EOT r h N T ._Y/STlNS CONTOURFUR CJti %�U T/UN LIMITS rr C �uA✓ G<^EED Ki•tiSr!E✓E TO
vG
1G / -%, •£:N :J55,
j�� SEE DY✓s S \ / \< FISH LAGOEP AD JE/J / S C�. J.o£ iE OI"
� � �`r, / _-
\ \ t - A r �?-- sovE TO 0R4l/ � a, \ Vitt
r^ EX,Sr ULY T
.— ` . _ is
`�� c':5 t hi � ' - ^_ ..,' •✓7- __c .ter T/ j "!f
_ __ ----_sue _ - _ ., -__ - - - _ _-- .---_ ® � J•�/
I j /
r---t `� Al A/ \ - t,- - - tS3L ''ram'->-r \' o ` -Y f•«s ,�' J,/ y i ,...!1�zr
f, { .LnclE \�` �PGY/G�d/Ety5T04M'. \ -1/o-•PY: RIt'y T Eko?,.a,:.i.S,J ,�
"` rc r r •_p� CUR✓E LEA`: ;% ` ..` 57A?1s9C55 / / `/
�-t < \ g OF.SEW<'R v./�:473p 'g 1.
�\`‘.�\ -"(��E:NLEL >.NY7J T 574 /Bt/4.85
l � s. s,f� 't rs.,.` \ EY!ST E-:1 CVLt/�FT. /J /95 67L9.30 II. 9°Off'?�' �`. \4 E/G6Z?i?.43 V • r' MAY C
+.� 5E>=" ...iVc-./ E:/66/,877.69 .,^. R. 364/.50' PM! ,P/4V Z./A/E $ !I
\ \ SCALE' HORIZONTAL I".50',VERTICAL 1".IO' O= /•3-f 7?•?'
I
j
t r_ ..._'_ `7C?IClf TRENCH-FOR-.S'DEH/LL...2"iEC77QN,-5EE'DJY[i 5 ( 1 I
1 r I t __ I • , +
I 1 } 1
i
----- - • • A42 CH, 1
+ -- 1. 444
I
•
q
• _ j
2t
, t _ I _-.. ._.:E�73T7.VC._.SURGdCE UAOfR.' --- ,f-- ---� - - - - _ .._�.
t i I • , .' _ i 'JN4LLBE CAS3 F1'• 1 ,
—
•
j ' AIoORdX. FIALf - t.. I 9fE:DW6. >O'FORt (
E . �ARE/1 F/t
�.... .,,lei
i t
- f
- - � _
.
�
_
_ 1
.qv
1 '
I � I
I
l' - 1 9o♦Rr/,I ! i ( C--
CC+k0994 i '• , + 'p + 3 R:110 4 6/' ✓` �'.
.. - i • �] _ _
D i I ._.: i : :.._...... : i i •_._' `. ' ,- _. ,-. .. - `ty, him i •.ijt..«:.. - /CL"S92/ZdA:'it-FILL �, .. Ci:.' L.,`
�_ } : • { ttf }y j}[{ j{{ }ii • T }}, I ! 'y y,
14 1 77
r
I � � yY 3. � � j f
,
r
+j( t � � h..
•/5/00 /6/00 /7O k�1+G7 /9I i0U ,P0h5o 2/000 Z2hXJ Z3/t L1 et),-(.....? r P3lLYJ ' :F,00 !7r�T7
y ` tiG ME TROPGLITAN ENGINEERS MUNICIPALITY O F METROPOLITAN SEAT T L E :..r�. 42 c :j R I NTON °"`.� ,
EASTSIOE INTERCEPTOR-SECTION 4 I 7
8P♦:,s•...oho ;JWEII.' --- F.r hN0 1[RAMER 0,,,,..�FjL ti,IC Alit,ay^ �y 3uw..rte.(_`- x�Lt s� "C[6wEr o[D �:6Llf .o•.+°vYa +fj�lryv' !/.f n•.. wC < r/�J/r a:c SYSTEM S T E M
,,L R W BECK.•ND 45SOCIni E., O.a• E -�..->:_ "pvEa 2.:z Oif,e-'r{' t✓
.• „,i,.Y-w,.e,,,n,..,, ••... p,g....,Q••.•-�,• ,•!.., c..0„hp..., ..,,,,,,., +.dial. 4.PNaVi • I I STATION 13 TO STATION 27
... .. •"+• /n.K,•.ne,+.,•c*er•..; f«r.-.w�•,.p,i.,•.xx..�.•m 1 AS NOTED >n*v.1UNEs I 7.
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
CAMPBELL MATHEWSON
VICE PRESIDENT
September 24, 2002
Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager DEy ELANNING
City of Renton ON
Planning/Building/Public Works Dept. SEP'2
1055 South Grady Way 402
Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040,ECF, PP
Dear Lesley:
Thank you for your letter dated September 12, 2002 and for your subsequent voice mail
regarding the above referenced preliminary plat. We are pleased that the project is back on the
time clock and that an Environmental Review Committee review is scheduled for October 8,
2002. This letter is for the purpose of responding to several items raised in your letter and to
clarify a few other issues. We would appreciate a written response at your earliest convenience
to confirm that we are operating under the same assumptions.
1. You request "a letter from ALL property owners (including J.H. Baxter & Co.) of the
abutting parcel to the north (4503 Lake Washington Boulevard North) indicating their
intent to allow the dedication of public right-of-way through the property in order to
provide primary access to the proposed project" (see¶1 in your 9/12/02 letter).
Enclosed is a copy of the Easement and Covenant dated February 13, 1996 and recorded
in King County under number 9602150689, which provides the subject Barbee Mill
property with a 60-foot ingress and egress easement across the "Port Quendall" property
to the immediate north of the subject property. Please note page 3 under IV. Roadway
Relocation which indicates that the Grantor(i.e. Quendall Terminals) "shall also dedicate
the easement to the City as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is required by the
City as a condition for approval for any platting processes involving either Parcel B or
Parcel C." Parcel B is the subject Barbee Mill property. We trust this recorded easement
satisfies your request for a letter.
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacificlp.com
Nishihira letter
9/24/2002
2. You request "a variance justification which addresses the criteria listed under RMC
section 4-9-250.B.5 as applicable to the required Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
variance for the construction of the vehicular bridge crossing within the 25-foot buffer of
May Creek" (see¶2 in your 9/12/02 letter).
Our engineering firm, Otak, Inc., disagrees with the City's comment in the Revised
Notice of Application that "Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge
crossing would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek;
therefore approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
Regulations is necessary." To the contrary, Otak indicates that there is no expected
deviation from Renton Municipal Code 4-4-130(D)(4)(b) since we do not anticipate tree
or land clearing within 25 feet of May Creek. Should future engineering plans differ
from this expectation,we would submit the appropriate variance request prior to final plat
approval. In any case, we would be agreeable to a condition on the preliminary plat that
reads, "The Developer shall obtain a variance from RMC 4-4-130(D)(4)(b) before
conducting any tree or land clearing within 25 feet of May Creek." However, since this
is not expected or intended,we will not submit such a variance request at this time.
3. You request "additional land use application fees in the amount of$750.00 ($250.00 for
the Hearing Examiner Variance and $500.00 for the Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit)" (see¶3 in your 9/12/02 letter).
Pursuant to our discussion in #2 above, we are not submitting an application fee for the
Hearing Examiner Variance since we do not need such a variance at this time. We also
decline to submit a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and/or its associated $500
application fee. We find nothing in the RMC which requires the to submit the Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit at this time. To the contrary, RMC 4-8-080
contemplates the approach we are taking, that is, it provides a mechanism whereby an
Applicant, at the Applicant's discretion, may choose to submit future permits at one time.
However, we decline to take this approach and are merely seeking preliminary plat
approval under the guidelines outlined in the Renton Municipal Code. In any case, we
would be agreeable to language on the preliminary plat approval that states, "Final plat
approval is subject to the Applicant's receipt of a Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit for improvements located within 200 feet of the shorelines regulated by the City's
Shoreline Master Program." In the same vein, we would be agreeable to a condition of
final plat approval that states, "Final plat approval is subject to the Applicant obtaining
Site Level I approval from the City of Renton."
4. Enclosed please find a copy of "an updated project narrative reflecting the revisions to
the proposed plat plan as most recently submitted" pursuant to paragraph 4 in your
9/12/02 letter.
5. Enclosed please find an addendum to the submitted preliminary plat plan which provides
the proposed square footage of each lot as required in the legend information pursuant to
RMC section 4-8-120.D.16--Preliminary Plat Plan, I.iv." (see¶5 in your 9/12/02 letter).
2
Nishihira letter
•
9/24/2002
6. You request "documentation which demonstrates the applicant's ability to perform
improvements to the pertinent railroad crossings as necessary for public use pursuant to
standards established by Burlington Northern Santa Fe and/or Washington State Utility
and Transportation Committee" (see¶6 in your 9/12/02 letter).
Enclosed is a copy of the Right-of-Way Deed dated June 13, 1908 by Grantor Clarissa D.
Coleman (predecessor to the Barbee Mill Co., Inc. for the subject property) to Grantee
Northern Pacific Railway Co. (predecessor to BNSF for the subject railroad crossing) as
recorded under King County Recording No. 266025. The photocopy of the deed is
difficult to read. However, a review of the microfilm at the County indicates the deed
reads as follows:
"The Grantor, Clarissa D. Coleman, a widow of Seattle, Washington, in
consideration of Four Thousand Two Hundred dollars now paid, conveys and
warrants to Northern Pacific Railway Company, a Wisconsin Corporation, the
real property situated in King County, Washington, described as follows:
A strip of land one hundred (100) feet in width in and over Lots 4 and 5,
Section twenty-nine (29), Township twenty-four (24) North, Range five
(5) East and Lot 1 of Section thirty-two (32), Township twenty-four (24)
North, Range five (5)East.
The Grantor reserves one cattle pass at station 953 and reserves one private road
crossing."
Also, I have enclosed a copy of Permit No. 73972 from Northern Pacific Railway
Company to Barbee Mill Co., Inc. which grants permission to maintain a private road
crossing. This crossing has been used for over 50 years as the primary access to the mill
operated on the property and will continue to provide access to the Property.
In addition, the City's recent negotiations with BNSF on behalf of the Southport
developer should prove useful as the City provides the Cugini family the same level of
support (see minutes from July 15, 2002..Renton City Council meeting in which the
Council approved a measure authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into
agreements between the City of Renton and BNSF to replace and improve the railroad
crossing for the Southport project). In fact, we are heartened to see that "The City of
Renton negotiated with BNSF" on behalf of the Southport developer.
Interestingly, as you may know, in order for Southport residents to utilize the northern
Gene Coulon Park crossing of the railroad tracks, one must break through one set of
bollards and four sets of gates that close at 9:00 pm. Southport, a project with
significantly more net daily trips (i.e. 10,000 versus 596) and pm peak trips (i.e. 1,200
versus 67), has only ONE access across the railroad tracks available 24-hours a day. In
contrast, the Barbee Mill preliminary plat currently offers two accesses and a potential
third access to the south in an emergency.
All of this said, we believe we have met RMC 4-6-060.G.2 requiring "Two means of
3
Nishihira letter
9/24/2002
access" and RMC 4-6-060.G.5 requiring "Secondary access for emergency equipment."
Nonetheless, we have commenced discussions with Mike Cowles of BNSF and expect
that the City will afford us the same level of support in future discussions as it has
provided to Southport. Also, consistent with my August 9, 2002 letter, we are agreeable
to a condition of the preliminary plat similar to that found in the Southport approval as
follows, "The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF
railroad during the design of roadway improvements to determine the most appropriate
railroad crossing solution." If the City would like to petition the WUTC for a second
public crossing, we would be willing to commit engineering and financial resources
towards such an endeavor. As you may know, such a petition may be filed only by either
the BNSF or the City of Renton.
For your convenience, I have attached a copy of my August 9, 2002 letter to you
regarding the railroad access issues.
7. We are pleased that the City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) intends to
consider the SEPA threshold determination for the subject plat at its October 8, 2002
meeting. You have indicated that these meetings typically are private. We are not aware
of any code provision or adopted ERC procedures that prevent the Applicant from
attending (if there are such provisions, please let me know). Accordingly, the Applicant
requests the opportunity to be present at the ERC meeting as part of the public SEPA
process.
If you have any further questions about this application, please do not hesitate to contact me
directly at 206-689-7203. I look forward to continuing to work with you on this project.
Si cerely,i(.41
Camp ell Mathewson
Cc: Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
4
.► for - .-4,..gm
:�rw�....yMF,,
QEva.o MEKT p
OF RE�ON
•
SEPNIfVG
2 5 2002 1
CITY
RECEIVED i
g
l a
s
EASE E AND COVENANT C
. T
Agreement made, effective as of e /V , 1996, 1
between Quendall Terminals, a joint venture comprised of Altino
Properties, Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter & Co. ,
2 Alt
a California limited partnership (hereinafter "Grantors") , and 3
Barbee Mill Co., Inc., a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter
• & Co. , a California limited partnership (hereinafter "Grantees") . 8
• WHEREAS, Grantors are the owners of certain real property
OD
whose location is commonly known as 4503 Lake Washington Blvd. N. ,
0 Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT A and by this reference incorporated herein
0 ("Parcel A") . •
fi �f '
WHEREAS, Grantee (Barbee Mill Co. , Inc.) is the owner of
certain real property commonly known as 4101 Lake Washington
Blvd. N. , Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is
R �, attached hereto as EXHIBIT B and by this reference incorporated
herein ("Parcel B") . •
WHEREAS, Grantee (J. H. Baxter & Co. ) is the owner of certain
real property commonly known as 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. N. , t
Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached
hereto as EXHIBIT C and by this reference incorporated herein
(Parcel "C") . 1
I
.Y
..•
•'
tea. , -. 7104a. .. I. .4.1747,..E ...•ram,
.,rk - "Ir!""t"' . - .
.,j
...
.ti rL., , ,,____. .
0
, .
..____._ . .
_ ._ .
•
. .
WHEREAS, Grantees desire to acq
uire certain rights in Parcel
A.
WHEREAS, the parties hereto wish to establish a legal '
I
description as to the location of an easement for access and right
of wa ..-...��-
Y, the terms and conditions for the maintenance of the
, roadway, and future relocation of the roadway. •
A
FOR TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual
promises and covenants contained herein, the sufficiency of which
is unconditionally acknowledged by Grantors and Grantees, the
parties hereby agree as follows:
1
01 I• GRANT OF EASEMENT
Cr Grantors hereby agree to
C grant and convey in perpetuity from
VI the effective date..•of this conveyance to Grantees an easement for
94
04 G roadway uses and utilities over, across and under Parcel A. The
Cd easement granted in this instrument is appurtenant to Parcel B and .
Cl
Parcel C.
II. EASEMENT PURPOSES
The easement shall be for the purpose of providing access for
ingress and egress and for underground utilities between Parcel A
and Parcel B, between Parcel A and Parcel C, and between Parcel B
and Parcel C. The roadway shall provide access sufficient and
1;g adequate for the purposes of Grantees' uses to the highest use
permitted by the then current zoning, including two access points
to the public highway from Parcel A. The easement may be used by
y ,
' fSltf111/7246S/42261/C¢/17370J.11 2
it L
•1
01- • ,
.
t- _
1111
the owners of Parcel B and Parcel C, as well as their officers,
employees, agents, tenants and invitees.
III. EASEMENT LOCATION
The easement granted in this instrument is located on the east
60 feet of that portion of Parcel A lying immediately west of
railroad right-of-way.
IV. ROADWAY RELOCATION
The Grantors or Grantors' successors or assigns may relocate
the easement across Parcel A at their sole discretion and expense
provided passage between Parcel B and Parcel C remains
uninterrupted, and at least two access points remain from Parcel A
to the public highway. Grantor or Grantor's successors or assigns
further agree to record a restated legal description for this
easement upon relocation. They shall also dedicate the easement
01 to the City as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is
Cip
required by the City as a condition fora approval for any CD
pp platting
LI processes involving either Parcel B o Parcel C.
V. TERMINATION •
O
(.0 The easement granted herein shall exist in perpetuity, and
C)
shall run with the land and the title to such property, and shall
inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement, their
respective heirs, successors or assigns.
VI. MAINTENANCE OF EASEMENT
Grantees, their respective successors, heirs and assigns,
covenant with Grantors, their respective successors, heirs and
assigns that Grantees, from time to time, and at all times after
111
(srns/nccs/422 1/cnr/1 n,o).i, 3
—- - . *.,
•
•
•..;.,.�.� .. .v-._arc. •ti — "^'J' � ,.. .. .t ,�...-� .
, ,..., ,.s,; .•
•
•
1'
t
the effective date of this instrument, at Grantees' own cost and
expense, will repair and maintain, in a proper, substantial, and
workerlike manner, the above-described roadway. As between the
. Grantees, the costs of repair and maintenance shall be 'equitably
apportioned based upon each party's use of the easement.
VII.- CONTINUING RIGHTS OF GRANTOR
Grantors and their successors, heirs and assigns may continue
to use the easement for AN
own purposes so long as their use is
not inconsistent with the purpose of this grant.
.M.1WY._..
VIII. INDEMNIFICATION
C) Each party hereto ereto will be responsible for claims or damages
Cd resulting from or arising out of the use of the easement by such
O •
party and shall indemnify and hold all other ar p ties hereto
p harmless from any claims or damages arising therefrom.
CI IX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
'IThis Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between
the parties and any prior understanding or representation
of any
kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon •
either party except to the extent incorporated in this Agreement.
X. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT
Any modification of this Agreement or additional obligation
assumed by either party in connection with this Agreement shall be
binding only if evidenced in writing by each party or an authorized
representative of each party.
li
Isvei/'nccs/422u/mr/s»fo3.l1 4
ill
•
- .. •••-v.,y :I.•.-...•.::-::. 1�� '•.;4 .... .1 I: :.�}.-'131 ice:-y':
�:ice {Y . . �+ •,q�+.
•-..-Ci•�.:.:. • f:'._ .•..,.••Sri;,.
sip+_— -- ituar:.-,�i._--+ v...r.iud.. - ...
XI. ATTORNEY'S FEES
f In the event of any controversy, claim, or dispute relating to
this instrument or its breach, the prevailing g party shall be
entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorneys fees and costs.
XII. BINDING EFFECT
• _ 1 ......., ..—......
This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the
1 respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns
C of the parties. 1
XIII. GOVERNING LAW
• It is agreed that this Agreement shall be governed by,
construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of
an
• m Washington, and venue shall be in King County.
tJD
NXIV. NOTICES 1
14
Cq
Any notice provided for or concerning this Agreement shall be
CDin writing and shall be deemed sufficiently given when sent by
certified or registered mail if sent to the respective address of
each party as set forth at the beginning of this Agreem t.
XV. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS
The titles to the paragraphs of this Agreement are solely for
the convenience of the parties and shall not be used to explain,
modify, simplify, or aid in the interpretation of the provisions of
this Agreement.
•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, e party to this Agreement has caused it
to be executed ate P� Washington, on thetda to
indicated below.
fS7ttf1/72ii5/47243/GG11/17)f07.11 5
•
IA
ii �—
::Nisi
•
. • .
. ..:..,„:„..,.. ... ...4, ,,,,.„..•• . ,,..:
.. .
.:.., . -.
. • . : 1. ..z-.......---:'.•ei.44- e-,1A-. •Ve7,%:,:;.4•::-.;.:*-;".::...,,!;;..:.:.•:.
}µ' +III "...T...".+:" . •.. •.Z , ' • ' • • •' • '
•
., --,A,;:•.• - .�• C_ ;} .tits. .. — .
•
•
DATED this ,day of 41.g'r,;z" 1996.
. GRANTORS
QUENDALL TERMINALS, a joint venture
comprised of Altino Properties, Inc.,
a Washington corporation, and
J. H. Baxter & Co., a California
limited partnership
ALTINO PROPERTIES,„INC.
•
By:
Its: � (:41,0 ,6/
r
1 J. H. BAXTER &
By:
i -
s:
GRANTEES , _
I BARGEE MILL CO. , INC., •
• a Washington corporation
p
By:I it.... .. ...� -- . II .
Its: '! �. ! Or . .
r
J. H. BAXTER & CO. , '
a California limi d partnership '
By:
•
Its:✓ •
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF KING ) ss.
)
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document.
•
Isursimccs/42261/mwi»so,.:: 6
•
y;•„;`
j} t
4}`
•
. -
.
..401'i YasoyNh4-.r V..
. . • 41) -- '
ersonall Oa this i day of Fe-] , 1996, before me
p Y ppeared g)e Y 0 uQQ rn r. , to me known to
��
be the _p p_a r,rier,-� of Altino'' Properties, Inc. , the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
i seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year above written.
•
,� o Qn �
Ce On `lbDU •fn Ai fq�Nota Public in rid f the State
of W hington, residinjt: ken-ton
My commission expires:
11 Type or Print Notary Name
il STATE OF F74bF8WZ�A
COUNTY OF ) ss.
KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
•
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document.
On this /. day of F 6r'U211 , 1996, before me
personally appeared _ «h.� 8�
be the p„«ldt to me known to
corporation that executed the within and�foregoing H. tinstrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
• said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
•
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
JAMIES C. FiNl�?1 _5;cam+-►4.4.4 ���6�4..�4�
STATEOFWAS}I"IGTON in sid for the S
NOTARY_.- PUBLIC o f residing a t: 1�. �.
My commission expires:
YiCaarnuioaFzies l0096 /0—Zr- TL :T114145 C IRAA„ 0
(Type or Print Notary Name) c
II
isW►ain244s/42241/cov173>03.s1 7
•
F.,:.."; .
. . -
-. • . _ems.-• - •-i 4 l it k':
.• "ram• .:iYX•%•_•••••�••�q'a1'•••. . ... ...• � t . ...a.
I
cif- " ..r!17� •. . •• �4 .t.
( rii:" '.iM!,T.11'"�.,i' i.•-.Ai-. ., •erS
.' r��•
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
COUNTY OF KING ) ss.
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document. •
On this t d day of F eh , 1996, before me
personally appeared Ai 1p X r_19 tni
_ - be the to me known to
�41 coS rr� pn of .-Bakbee Mill Co., Inc., the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
-- and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
Odin` (l o�Q 114.P1��
Nota Public in and for,the State
of shington, residing :Rol
My commm�ssion expirgs: (Q.Q•q
11 Qv1 m 1st Qn •c
[Type or Print Notary Name
t I .�
M
g
-
L in
94
i g •
CO
C,
•
Isvrsi/72665/42241/ax/177f07.1> 8
•
•
•
} I
•
•
EXHIBIT A
IThat portion of Government Lot 5 in section 29, Township
- i Range 5 East, W.M. and shoreland adjoining lying westely of 24 North,
i Northern Pacific Railroad right of way and southerly of a line
described as follows:
Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line of said Section
` 29; thence north 89°58'36• west along the south line of said Lot 5, •
1,113.01 feet to the westerly line of said Northern Pacific
• ! , Railroad right of way; thence north 29°44'54• east 849.62 feet
along said right of way line to a point hereinafter referred to as •
rit —..point•A; thence continuing Norfh 29°44'54• east 200.01 feet to the true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence south
56°28'50• west 222.32 feet to a point which bears north 59°24'56•
west 100.01 feet from said Point A; thence north 59°24'56• west to
the inner harbor line and the end of said line description.
, / - .i .
•
f9ut•1/72K5/.2261/c01/173901.1)
:tFf. •Y
.
• _ •
k EXHIBIT B
All that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24
North, Range 5 East, W.M., in Ring County, and of Second Class
Shore Lands adjoining, lying westerly of Northern Pacific Railroad • •
right-of-way; EXCEPT that portion, if any, of said Shore Lands
lying north of the westerly production of the north line of said
Government Lot.
r-.e - ..
ag
In
f! -.
' O
t0
C)
I
ts....,n«5/422,1,co,t7t,03.1t .
7�` 1 , 5J
•
.MIIIMMt
EXHIBIT C
-4%, That portion of Government lot 5, section 29, township 24 north,
range 5 east, W.M., and adjacent shore lands of the second class in
front thereof lying westerly of the Northern Pacific Railway
Company's right of way and lying northeasterly•of the following
described line: Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line
of said section 29; thence north 89°58'36• west along the south
• line of said lot 5,. a distance of 1113.01 feet to the westerly line
•
of said Northern Pacific Railway Company's right of way; thence
• north.29°44.'54•. east, along said right of way line, 949.63.feet to
an iron pipe which point is the true point of beginning of the line
'''described herein; thence north 59°24'36• west 525.00 -feet to'an
iron pipe; thence continuing north 59°24'36• west 488.23 feet, more
or less, to the Inner Harbor Line of Lake Washington, EXCEPT
portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true point
of beginning of the line described herein; thence north 59°24'36•
west 50 feet; thence northeasterly to a point on said westerly line
09 of said Northern Pacific Railway Company's right of way distant
North 29°44'54• east 100 feet from said true point of beginning;
. Ca thence south 29°44'54• west to said true point of beginning, and
O EXCEPT that portion of said shorelands lying northerly of the
plif 0 northerly line of said lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the
County of King, State of Washington.
40
CD That portion of_.government lot 4, section 29, township 24 north,
00 range 5 east, W.M., TOGETHER with shore lands of the second class
fronting thereon lying West of the Northern Pacific Railway right
of way and south of the following described line: Beginning at the
i northeast corner of said government,lot 4, which point is marked by
an i on pipe and is 920 feet, more or less, north of the southeast
cor r of said government lot; thence south along the east line
the eof, 156 feet; thence east 62 feet to the westerly line of said
right of way; thence southwesterly along said right of way line 156
feet to the beginning point of the line to be described; thence
north 58°20' west 460 feet; thence north 67°40' west 210 feet to
the inner harbor line of Lake Washington as now established, and
the terminus of the line; SUBJECT TO right of way granted to Puget
• Sound Power and Light Company by instrument dated April 7, 1939,
between Julius B. Falk, a bachelor, and Puget Sound Power and Light
Company; situate in the County of King, State of Washington.
• That portion of Government Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 N, Range -
5 E, W.M., and adjacent shore lands of the second class in front
thereof lying Wly of the Northern Pacific Railway Company's right-
of-way, described as follows: Beginning at the quarter corner of
the S line of said Section 29; thence N 89°58'36" W along the S
line of said Lot 5, a distance of 1113.01' to the Wly line of said
Northern Pacific Railway Company's right-of-way; thence N 29°44'54•
E along said right-of-way line, 949.63' to an iron pipe which point
is the true point of beginning; thence S 29°44'54" W, along said
)swa1/77c65/u2c1/ccium.03.1) 1
}fir _.. �
. .4- ...,.. ... Xdl�iii ms�'� ....,vfFiA, ,
lar',. ,
•
S.
ArMIL .. �{.-.sir qi.'✓.4a\.......-. . . •�y. .. -..�. ..
•
•/+IQp/.•�rso.•-. .� '^.Aa`w M►•K +r�!vt-.'.,. ...r.-. •rti...aw._`__._.��.c.:....� �r... .wwa. ....... .-_- .��...•_....'t�tr. :rw.-.
r . .
right-of-way line, 100.01' . thence N 59°24'36• W 1039.16', more or •
less, to the Inner Harbc,r Line of Lake Washington; thence N
44°20'00• E along said Inner Harbor Line 102.95' to a point from
which the true point of beginning bears S 59°24'366 E; thence S
59°24'36• E 1013.23', more or less, to the true point of beginning,
egl►~-" .u ;a,,,.,,,,EXCEPT portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true
point of beginning of the above described property; thence S
- 29°44'540 -W along the Wly line of the Northern Pacific Railway
•
Company's right-of-way 100.01'; thence N 59°24'36• W 100.01';
thence N 56°28'50• E 111.16' to a point from which the true point
of beginning bears S 59°24'36• E a distance of 50'; thence S
59°24'366.E.50' to the true point of beginning,.-and EXCEPT that
portion of said shore lands lying northerly of the northerly line
of said Government Lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the County
of King, State of Washington.
IIf
:I
•
1
•
1 in2css/422ci/ca1/i»so3-i, 2
. .
• 111111=Zpiduall
....-.•-•
. , • .
. .
.. ,. • •• . . •
...
. . . .
• • ' " • •"' • , -
...... . • .- - • • . . . •
.. 4•.' 'I ..k 3, . . ...... . .
., !, ••1 . ..... •
' • • • .
,.• •
• - , • • . .,.
• .. • t . . • , ............_,.
• •••••- ••••• . • • ••••,‘•" t 44,4 ''• ••4/•• •4.••ittir•Fey" - • • . •
.... .. ... ., .....ara,,,..,,....?!...40...! : ‘,..• ,,,_ ,.* .. ram, tq.__,.IA.o....rel•• • .4.4 •
N...0:..0:-•••1;•,..1.16d60....TrAiAll•• V...11.
:• 4.......4........i......„.........0.,.• 4.,........•?... .04 :....e• ..%."...4 b• 1,494,....41,10 44%44-.110- 911.0'.• g°1•.•I.-177.-PO'....ti•t7"." ."'4" •1 .' 1 'r. Ue''t.',.. '''' '
, •. -. ..• .. :. .. ,...•!..,.•'..'.•1.,-•:,,,•;••••.-•!.44-.11:........v...tr, ........4.1,44,4140....anci,,,o.i.:444m,•••••.•:•.;:„1 I oft• •• . - . ..... .'..."'- ••• ' •i'•••, .
%1`....1 4.... ..4 i 4:4 Hq../..1%. •:"..7:5(....%•••,,,r *r..' 4,,a,••••TAI*4 ••,•we.) .1:••• 0 "a ••)•i 7r7,---, ,..--.. ...• • „:,,..,.,
. ..... .. i,..... h..;., ...____,..., _i .,:. „c"......a. rM, trAff..'TV41.
i ,.. ..1 ......1.•44 4..• .• .,,4 441404 4•1 4.4. .....,...4 1.441.4.441404+444 AI& 4 4.J.'.e 9.•;,.k•••; .• • ,•
. •• - • ••• . . • •e• ?Sill I':'..!..".''••"'•?'41-*,•04'tl'A...b..wit•••'• ' !,. ... 4::.'.- •-*•-•'•* , • e. ,.!..
- ..•. '-'• '.p.......... ow., 4d*,P.,'••' r4• 210.: 1 % 1• *AL,- • •
, . ...• -•- . .•• i.. . • ••41.• ,......,• • •V•••••1•„4:ir 14.".$14 Mow .gttr lium,••••••• -AN. - ' . ! .' P)'°' ..A.
-.. ‘. . •• • .0••14', ...”1.....o.a."‘•• :ON,...4.4!. 4 •„‘,„4,,,, 4.a, 41...4 ......•,, .,, •, ........ , .• , •• .,, . U.'
I d • •• • •* • •••:•• '‘• •••••41 •••,•• -4.,,,m ip••. • 1644141105 •• ". . . •• • ''' "/".' I, . •.,.
... • , ............,,,, ..b..i 1..• r • ;%.•• •ft••• gibe ,..,• • •,• . ••• ;I, . .. ... .
..er•
-..• -7 . ...• . . i i ,•,-„,4.4,.,••;• . ,"-1•' 10,1) ,••••re:il.t•otees2;14viri• •%", •,;„,
. • -•• •• -• • • . ..•••••,,,.•••• ..„;...-.4',..4.,,t....:4.1....; • ' ' #fr„,liteko,i,,.... „.%.:.4,. • . • ...4 .1• 91,41 • . •
•• ' ...'"- ';` • ' .••-•`'''•• 'I '• • s•''.. V:".4ii•••. . 4.6. -,1-.-1 '•• :: ..:•)4 ,, t •-• ...•••••t,•,.......,
. _ . • . -
... .1 • • ...•• . • • • •.- • '..,••'1 •••••.•7•••':••••.-1. .•-;•.ait CPC:.....1 %.*• r.14,:'.11. •• ,A't I'- 7...fry;4! , . ' .•- •p .;.• ',. X:
xr;
-.: --. • -` 4 •• '••••-.- , • •- : -..,-%••••r•t-rn 4...rs-- ,;k:,==-.r.„-t..-44f ••••. • . • , •* • ' 1'. . ••
• •• • .. - ,' •*' •• ',. .ts:...•''.r•-4'i7 , 4(•• .;W: • ' •
• :44•44.••fa.. • .„aog.,„ 1, .•••.1. tro,••••••••I ..%.,,„ ,.
TAW.-
• - •• .• an...,go....,0tor.,.. , •'• f a•• „az., sr - ..,,,..=--- 7 • 1.
. • ..•
, ..,,,p,•;,.g.1.. :-.p.,,,.i, a a•• .....:•,...t.. A.•..,A,••
.. •• . A. ....... " •l• "•••• Oh' a b f -rt.'''. - •/44 •0.0 • •'• •et V -..1446.• . Mr...4..10 • I ••••••' • -
1111" . . • •• ••• '•''t t: 1u.'4..):,•:,1,•;,h.,;P ..•P,s,ji. ti -i. ••0 '1 w'• • .• • •.• 1''' ' ,1'. ...)1r*:Ill.. ••
ii __ •
. •„,4 ••1" • 111:44 tlIoto- ow....1.4.44 • . ,
..i .f •' * :as'•• ..., ....‘t-•• I. . V;•
.or 1•41.:•• 7 - , on.Flir.F.147 14,' - • ;.:7•..-.. - ••:". ••• •-. .•46 ........ -...r..4..:.ii!,-..,••:• .44•«.****:1.:47..tt,..146-4•41:441;:r4t., 44f.--Aco"-.331- ,z.
.. ...• r-- • •-..-;.-1., -;1- if-9r •••,i'. •P'- ...,.vgt.c-,•,-- 4••• " /- " •,,- • • •1,17., -- .
' .•-•!..--: ••••. ! •;.1 .. 1-Vr•s•':-%,1• •,, •••4(.4. itr• 4.,••!_4_.±.4%•:+e• , -.. 4.0"'•• ''II '' • '7, - . ,
•:': ".! - .i...k.z.0:4.-,••Jf t•• • 1"7"iiTit..4.r.b i •.4 r v.:?..birf.‘'....;•nr--Zi;e:-...;:iC • -- . • .4-1 T At
. :P.:: ..-...-,,o.f.•,, ;•.g2.• ,re„,1,4„..f.10.1 • •it,:e. •• . , . • „:. . .7/„.1fircl.:44 ._.._.: . .
= •...,,r.,s,---_,. _,x,_erv• • ••••...... ••• .....
...•.-.,••t ••• .1..• LA-1.• •4,0...; .4.11.•*4•404•1i 4.-4. •'"'''I''' rJr‘•••ei,;4,f; 4 0', ate41.II* f•f••...• • : *. • r.‘ '.'.il •
%2•4
•a, ,
''•
.
.•-•,•...-r. ,. . ... .S..,;,.... . .... 1 dr• ••• lap,'• .•••„.iktra; 4.famirt '; • ••I , •• ' '4••
b s, .‘ .• ...., ."'LAO.,4'414.4 44, I • 1 4 10)1)7:11)Paqi•V•)/0,1 -- . •*r•
,..,.. -- • - e' 4 "r'.... •'''' - •V•4•••‘ ••••• • •••• . • J
...4....itzt • • 4. ....,.. ' -
i
.....: . .4•••..,• .••••* • e.1••••••••1•.•111...1•ert ..!..4.61,443 /..., $4412$- 4. • ..i. •'• - ! 1.•
4'4.•••• • ,.:... ..e. :•• AediirA4,4!••,14i.• • .:0,1 'Whir • ,r.;- .4, '4 ' •• '...s.,•••
AA .411.0 Ati 1
. 0 .4
A' 1 ..:• -;,?g ...,... Nr7."4//11.4.,07%
-''' - .•".04.117.::•1%-••••'.! •••'1.-4' ••••
1
:•••••4..1 ,•••• • 4.... .
. .:.t I ..tit: ,• -1.,... ,....,... ...1-.;.1.,. vi YI...'•441,',;ti•;..-kv:,4:90-11/4- .• ,... 2. , -.,•:. I. ,-- : rr
• f ir.1- • •,•••••••.4 v,-.1.Prikrfer,w6for‘v., /21-41,7'cli. •'a, ‘7,13---ti, 0-- eiz.1.-
.....•.,.. -4...*.t...;••s'n ,,...e,. „....,.,, ,,,„, . • ;c.7,TXPIP:O• /2 -,....-e---
,
T i
1,,, ,...... ....., 4.....,: ., ,:,1 ,.i....1..., .,.(16,, ..,....„?.,1,41A .,. 4;4, • rr., l . .:Zs„,‘„.......... .. .a„,.••• ..
.•a.‘.,..Zrr ' -• et......-:..,F•4..t......10:7•1.•*PT.9.3 o'•• .. • •••• ,..•...4 .f..
L
...--I
'. ' • t•Yb.7.•' ..•:`..• •••::•,•;40.4•••-..,:,,te:"!...tatraNt 414.4.:'f,fa 41 4;V'alf gli4"f‘. 7••'‘ 1.??.(211 •*' -NA-471-•$V - 1 -
,(4.4
} / .7 1- .1.
•• I i. -.... •;"4.•••";4;4.44% ••••••••ta••••*%.....rry..1....?:‘444444‘.. aff•el..0.1•414•41.‘ "
- vt....._...7.7.....c.-.. . ......a.. -c''•..„,-..,.. 4 :‘,...A.10,„.4..Ji,„*. ...„.. /0,44,441-11.v ' D.',•' • 77:1,7/-pg.r if .ir,,„....,
... ,. _ re I '• .: i
.„ a ,,., ..„ r • •....•4 .- ai.N.g.... ... :r...4 b t
•' -.-.11,'-' •• • ' I 4.1. • ..••••tt* .. . ,
!L.,.:7. ••
; • . •. •- c• • • . • . # . .• ,• • ..:.••=4...............•..1.ti 6.0.4.,••L1 -- - i.•.,..6r..,.4•-.:.1.4...4?...._-;.:•2........4*,!.:.#..•4-.1 4.0.•64 1:0,.-,.•••.••,•t;••..•,„•p,..•..',•.,•...•!„ :,..,.'.''*':„•7.?"','""'.i"ih.....,i...%,.•.•r•...d....••,..•...'''.'.',aN•r",4•i'.n 4..,4 47 ov.r•i.•e•a•.e••4•.•„7-•„.7,4•.••71./..4..-f•,.'.-..:!•:{.:...•
•ro• r•,p1,M..-A•.a..',N../
•
.'
71/271r,i.11,il 1•i(t-.04.4/'1y/,,1)7911:,,1‘/,,/.:,/,•)'•. ,, % •„4 , At. •„ 1/2 4 ;
I.!1 I
b•-
t iI
_mistto,40 4F. . 04t4„'• . 0 0 /9 " t.. 7 -••.4....4...(..4.4..1'..?...,%....:4-•:-..,4,4:1,4r••••••.*'' • • • •
..* .:::::-":"61:- l'• .."41...'-eiS••••••0(44".Vial4(..t. 0.14%4014N(1. ...for4; r•; ••//)77fir 7)02)"•.;, • ,4•
••0. ._:•..21:......•.'„,....lir.....V!:::da.I.4.1.!•{....a.;......i......•:'if•1•01%.4 iiir - ,i, i " • • '• /
••:•'."'•'•••-•• ' ' . •• ;". •••T Ao•AX" :40..144•1:01•1.1,••••••e,44,6•I• ' : _.7_••:-r-. "- .,
1 i .
. _ ....-.f•.1.4.•4;,41:..f.e....1.-;.%':;'6:JC:0;?..zil-Wq%?.',140/. V-40-. ••• --. • -•,...A.iyi,--)/),,,,,,--;,).•4*f 211/)1 i P;«')) -ii: ' i ---
fr.--....•-I , ., , .1:-`••*..•t.-,4'4, -,;•••14,4•••• ,...1.;4.1.41 • •
-7.-;•-.--r-.%. ,.., . .....0.,4...„ , fki•,......,..1. .7 - • . ,,, ,vF -...'N• - ,..4, /'''y ,
1 L----„1
.s:12;.:.•"2-•-• . !••••••rr,sqr:A. r .•''-:.:".14"V 4.414.14.17111!'•••7441.!.S -
•'...-"lila' Or
•••11/4er e••••.a •1.71•44..}.4.4.54••fire#47/ ,, r,..„.. ,;:::6"------62, „..,)„.,,,2;,....) /2.7, , ,,,, „,,.
,.„ ,......,•..... . ,.. *A.S. „ipe.L.,41,0r..,‘,
(// I 1
" :*,.....;.!•-•;•.?.."'"0"4"-••tr!ItSi.:• 4-e Alf':ih-' Al.‘''Alkkre%.
.. .. ..,-. • • • ,- . ,•• -•• .6.- ....11.„fe . ,, / /,
...„ ..... . . .... •r.,. „„..•ip 4) ..• 1 i, ••...• •.•;1--
/'l - . , 1
El .... .. . :-..,. ....."„:-. (....4:-,..,,. „,/ ., ,pfay.;4.,,, ,zi,• 1
jill .4. !dolt..• ••!••• .... I._ . 4 4 .4." .• •••• ••••• •• ' i
• E . '..Z.‘.•4g47:Ain!'1•4%.j.efe‘k • I
' •
i •••.w•-•••••4;,'"": ••• •••t• ..1,6'..•-•, p-ton". i•••,.x.s••• • • --'p.ric v ,1 rP',T!'b; '• 4 ;(•^••• ,d V••••,••• •!••0•., :••••::• -.•d ' Mt7e.)44'PrIe2 1"' .iii ) /'2:1)v1..•iy,
• I
-. - ...-,-----':•4; •.•. •"-;•••-•I'•vr. ip•-ty",..4..1•1,.••- •...4ri.,‘,:.•• 1.,P4 • ••• • ({ .,
,7/ r(
. •'..•::?.......••a • .•t. •4, s•°...Viiiiiii.......4.••••• ••VA, w-.,- nutiarisr, •.• ..••••••,,--.
,/ •••• 1
7
..) .1
I: ‘, i...;;;--?•';...,,k ' .1".• •,1,0%:.,:4;1•:.f I.3,,..i.•'••••••:11.•"t..4"40414,44e. . de 4 . •• .. . . . 7:)
.,... 4 ta.....L.............• • .1. '...;•ii;1:.`.• 1.•••••,;••...:.:4444iid-t ••••/".. -. .x.'' . -..••... sk' I ,
.____,(u4.4
,:.'! ..4._ • ' ,,;„ '..••,.....- .. ...i,•0,t,0.0,••_.i ....I..4 014 4.11 ,11War• . 41!'l A)/ "V 1I-V). ,•, ;...9•.(, a y r: ••
•---,..,. _ . • 1,,,... . . , ..„ ....-1,... . 1,...I. --rt.4-,4„0-[I ..„9.• ., •i- ,, ••
.-:.'. X.:-•- 7:..:::•....,...4....0,.. ...-70;•••::...J.,..40• "...:•'....; 4.4. -'.....9 fee** N 41....,..•. ."t"Iji".4111/.'4`..I ' , 1 U
..w. -a-••. t•*A.. .P.!;:•...., •4t...___,477.1:4-1...7•1C•.:. ?•-•-740•0•1454.ltidi 2to• ... !,'' '1 " • A1 1
: .... .,,.. , •IN._.- .•.••••••...••.- •••• ••4..../•••4 •.1•••.: Z. ;146,4•Itr4•'' 40..•.. 7,.....--- - . • - --..4
-,::::-:--,-;.-vr"e-.::....,z,Nr44-*.j1; ,;w, ..b..:11.-..‘ •...„:..t,..- ..;rc..!:.::.::. : . --- ..---- .•
.;,. . ..... ,.......,,.:..........,,,:;,. 7„,„,,., ,„.,......„4144,-.
.„,....• ..- •,,...,,,i,..:.,.:.. „...,,,,,:i.c.t..,:„.,.-.4,„0,y,e4,04_, i .Pd=144,-Qi,„ •"2;z1 g••77----------------I..-
. td......:, ,1 - ..„: •- • •-; ••
,.. *.- ,5:4.lie.•••••,•, „.••• .: ;•••'rilii:,1 .41464grelykt71 At'ote6..P.tt,rei
•,:::r.. .,___:.•-•".• •*.•.......:.•.4,,.!,...4.,.......v..t.t:*.it. .r..14.... .-Ii...ipftisli‘m.....uritirt•3 ,tit. '...f:Y,ak.11.11.. ..4. .;,..7.46..._71;5:'$':-. y,,,,' 11.:,:•-• -..
• .,.
..........,
., ..
••*;...---. ''.!. .'ea.•''...•'.".1.• .M-tfr-•-*Z.., •••) Tr, . ... ..
• v.._„: . ..%• .. ........•...Y.,•01. 1'4•.•• ge•Pie•. N•-•-,.•--L-4-s‘•-•1:-if•-••.0'.r'- .'•.•.:Z4-1,••-,•..1%,.•:•.••4.;t'.:•:/t1ou.1•;.....-.:.1,1...•-•*...,..•-P..e••.•.;g.y11
6 4..,..0k...•-1%.,1114.7,' • .,,, -44
. . , '. 7.-.) -'•r••4.77
• ,, ,,, • . . / ...,... ........:1.„... ...f.... .. . , ..
..g.ri• 'i"t / T
• AV.44":"..17111, kit" -1 -- ig 1. , . , , d , „ ,• ,
I
,Iperix7---mitv
......
.-- ----tir.....• ,.• ...:11-...-411.tt•-• - . - ••'- ------ -,----_,.. - -"`"-- :*;•-t, -, •r-:=•::,,,.:--A-Z- ' 41, ;;,,I ••1 'tz,„$•::•-'4•17../...i•Ikt.:•;_it•••.' 7F,72.: • •,.'7.5t-- ..., .."•".%4F6-t•'7."„;. .--:- ---- ----- --• . \tv-i4,-
--- - -a:1t :-
, ,... .'irivi i.. .:.. .'.4..- • • ---- 7 1.4 7:'"-../ -. . 74t.1q -Z." -f•7•zfl----;.-•. - '.77
i , ,
• --.
-j.......j!Invt.',2v•rik,A....J.!p- . --," •,.._ . - --- - :
,:- ; 4 V
;4er:;•.-•,,,,cg$:-..:-'•,t.....,-,,-4,9i.4.- •. • ...• , - , , , - . ,. - •.- .() -7727.172771/15./1/1,17; .....
r.., jr.• i •'!...4,:,d4 .....0.4.,O... • 'Seta...4‘.1.71 .1."...60/ ".”... "...a 7 W • : " • .i.'' '-''. i '
.'".'lf:/'.-',',2;t:.."'„"544 -',1'.' ".",. . '''...:„.-/F-1:: ° ,l'. • • .. ., ••• 7... ..•'-*-17'7:-?P' l' '',
ilk
..,.. ... .. ...........: .... , .,„,... • ..., • ,....,_.. ...a.,........ .., • ..24+ , ... .
'"V••••••.442,d.y.a.=.:ZS....I't • J 'WO.r/ N C"' •-...13;.:...„.?ir,„,.,'
, - • - • , . .,
,....„. ., • .-..• , ,,•-. ,.,4:,.. - . ..,,,, ..._,• ,,,,,,...-it,,,,,,..- -.,•
.....T.,...,..r.,:-...,,,,... ... ,
[
, ' if/ r
VL;... i •• ,-' -_______-- r 7.---
..._, • •-
,
:..:s. .- '" .. •• 4f0'•''•41•".:7711 .' riprip- 717-7 -r„ , ..
. d. • tv; . Dy. 7
i
- 4.--- - • ot,,,„15_14.1t-p. - ' i7./ci 'I ''' ''' ..,-772.1.• • - ' '•-•.:-..t-• • /- , 't • 1 /0.-
....1„,rwl ,..„,„,-"7"-I.A.7......., .
1.,....3*....• k..,, . 4 174-Ar•••••,• •4 - •• •, „ :Ir. ,.•-4 •:• .....i. ...
01_4
••••• - 7....•
, . --fo'fi•• '-.7-
11.7 71r.'24' 'II 411141.44/71)11.1
. . .
.t.4%x,:e:.. 7. .--- - -, . ,4•4 .,•.r2;‘„. ",..1., . ...... .7 .•• ) •;,... •
1/21/4-ja• . 1 , ,f7 .)' . .•M A 4ttqe;...4'.:' * • ' -'•..r.C.,.4•••/00;•••."14........,• ''. . -1 • ,.
11:*.•:-...si .4ra'441 . ..1./., . ? •77-,"-/YQ-7-777.A./1. 3797 /7-12 (2-p yy2,iv i:7 -
;* 'f• ' '.- •t. .••'51'.• .....1 ", •'' ' - . li ••4
if3; __.:t•. . .. .-: ........,,,:g;:!-!.'7,•• :i. - v* , i • •,•,' • 'itr i .•
; 7-777.)cf-!7/0<!--zP,-,7r7•777e7or-A _,...i,,,,,,,,,,,:o"*"7-71 A r...--,-.-.4:a- '
_ ''..' . : . 0.:
• - - --
: -• "`"•••••••'•••• .«.3•••••••••.., r„. •••.:...a...Pm•3.•••0:•••..4.••••••. .:421.41.4., •
- •• .!••••• ... •• ' • ••:::.. •• . , . . . . •! • ...; . . 0/. :.•• L---. i! • • ....,.,,... •• 4.4,e
.• •,, •-I-. •;n•N" •......,.:L... 7". • ' '•.'••••.•• 4•....••••,:f.•i'... ""
•
. • • 1
. .. .. . .
• . ... .•' •
• .-. ... , .• ..
• . - • • .• . • . '
••••••••i• s. •''"•-•"!-••••••••-•
•
•
r•...12._..31eragikin!i, • *-VV.b.ri•Ila ‘... • "•
404)...'14._wr.....,. ... .....v.".. „ Jo& ... -
• .; •
‘ , , , , • . e,„ ... ,, ••
• te-71"-•*".% ' '•' '•re.- • - " . ' .1' . .; ---'''' 7 ` - . ' ..
..............
. i.,ii.....6 0,,.:•1 01,It.je.....vi,.t •s:SiVisi••• , . ..i•L'. . ..%•.., . *A-• ' f0P5-'4 - 11•'4,nr,•// ),,,..,.. .1 I. .,,.
•
,, fr A .7 I/ , I„
-•
•A••••-.s-.t••veky.o.,-otT4 • • , -,,,?-ria„,,,p,,, • .
,..,,....
,• 1:,..; ....•..i.rviet. *,.; , ••
"-...1 ,....te .•T;m t..,tr , . . ..,.,. . .
, .... . • _ ,, , i4 .• ,
• '..k t.:t... •rt-0•41,-41•11•il 4 ...bk• ••- 10 i,,o,, ?Dow.; 01•INTAhr 111).!) .• 1),I - W' - / •7 y••• •
) fe ,.../, i t ,„ ,, • ,. ..,,..
.. .".....,. .s....u,r!, 1 '.,is *4...“iir•• ,. / I, i , et. ...r I .11 i i i..
• . . -•- ."ttk“,.• - '7,,;,;:..4,44:-- • A-- .• ••••
. -.-..•--.
.±...../i,,..,; ,-, yu,;•
..,..-:.,..• • •,....- .%•--- • : „ ; -1:ti,.,.,..,.• ••••1 , -
. *1 • •
x14. .4!41i:: . .P14164.1 •. ..." .' .: •
f •
. ..1,
,. . ...... ....r.itt...4 1,,4.4., •
.. ,.4t,1110,7prer-iirimj 7477 ?,..1•-•••`.'" .R.rie279411;MeV eil-i,..•: ..e•,••A•;•••/ 7...
. . .../
. ,,, ...-./1-.F....:!, 4..p. ' .,-••.1.i•• / / ../.
• '• -A"?l''.":". ;::1":"."-*;44.4 . i -." r727 l-zs 4-4-x374e# :.,P70,71U-ny',• Pi 1::!..)•.,7
• . ``-`t:tql44YVV4,147.*:«1 ,-.,• > . ''. f
4%- . '4.(1.4.4t.e.r.-..?.,„A.,,i4,:."'PO.0.•''''relithrli• Qi -.A r• -- f-
7...7.,:,". . ..
•.•ov,
. "-P-r7.7.1P,Oke.e' eHr
to,....„....44,,. . •• rp7p2,:pati*),7tzp-r-fa4' qi•--,tii
e Xii4tlet, , '
• 4...0.,Ab,•Or r7 :: '‘. • ',
t •••%":4**.,,....../.71. 41;r __
to.b_2 _TI , iff
..* Nlifrilnic ...:4•••;e2a.V"...4S"414Virr " .4- .1-e-rvetn"e")P'7 , J9 V nil i' 77t.I",...•74;f.. '. I
7 1..•••• p•
• ---;t.r,.?,6.74/•• •=1111-14X., :174 "-- • :.:. i7'....., . . ..
i .. . •.
••-.:%•4''S•111,:elIM 410 fr,61.4.1.• ,< , • iiie.rfitilq,71. - Fil.,,,74•13547/ 7P4e://747.0)/'..',/,)*P .7 e• * .
. / . ,t. •.
....-1,..;:,.:;14. •*.t,j.g ,IVA:Al.41"rf g- .. 7,1‘.,,,e,A ........:,-. ..... ,
,*,,- ,. ,,
.. 41,.;,:..11 ,_`.JO a ali. • .,, 4101,7
r••• 1
•_ .. .t••• .4.0•740,-Ars'ilifre4.- ,.P.v, !tr. .„ , (v.),4,,t/. 0-:;;,,,1-01-7x),/,,,,- ./4/0//.//.0, •
• -•••••, '4,.:t.,•”....'.t.. ••''..‘u-.%4A,!ilii4 ''• .:r. ..",:-.• t.„-‘,..-'s- •••;) -••-•-•
t4 "'' r;..e;' 1.44C.i..\,ae.p - 7)13.1,7"--., l•IVV elIe/O, Tr) /,/,) ;;; 3
. .. ... ..,,;,..-b,
13 1- ' ; . •)/...:I'' ' . '/.'1.' -
..-. ma...,-4•• . .... . . ,-.., '•'4.• .. •'-• 1 ••.x:''.‘ - •17. • /
.A ••••01.14. •• . 0.
• . . . ,
17.1f"i . 0 .-224-Pre7/0/? /.,-/2/,7,,, /
,, • i...... ,, .,
i --...., 0.„... , ....h.,- .., mp,,..0.1 ....,--•-- ...• . .••- •.,,../ 1
. so.....v,W.e.•
, , 11
. • r• r •sinv, or i:Arr,4,417/•.11./ 7X;774,f- ,p7 /1./„V) plil://i./.• . . I. i • ii
.. 4,
. .'.. ,... 4. ... ,, -.„ . .. , .7...,,..4,,,4ut..,.s4/0, v,:. ,, . 7
. -.:•4...7..41,4%.• . 1•:•••'•.-,!•••••10,. . . •,-.- • • - • ,..- „_......... ' / /% • /
._,_ .„...... .. ..„,„"t ..,.... _ .,..,. ••ccturvhc...u.rwr, -•lyir....:7.,..s,,....., • / oe ,72 loil,....,,, •• •,/• .„.•, , ..
galk.-
•••,a NX:rPaikk:aViat.,912,00 ''tor w.i.• . .
• .".skilatikdatily*' - .. ._ , -.-.7.. .nrIri.:4‘1••"•"• ' :.. •.• 01"f/ i i i.
....:7S,•1..."kArill':;....,17if%AU?" • /•' .-. ,,,. rr 7)777•;;,. .-; 1 11 M I s%.I
, •
11106;„:11/ 'I 11 - r-slit V. ..'--• .'' , ' . - • / •/7 7
' 1
..... .• ...... - . . .. ••414c-IL ..eka....f
• .0.,..--rjsmpricr••••• '1•-4,..-01-0.,"...?, .-_,,,, .„, • • zip...;„:• • •'• // / /'Mtn/4"'' '•
. -1-••..*.1:7'7T-"..-..%•-•1•MS4_ •;?-141,.Yir,effiat ....,..ff •,, ,. (ff. „..•• ..., 0, i'' "-e •7' //:/• . .• ' •
• 1
•:•t; .,".-4-vi,=•r,;-W-i'7:,:.*:•••3•-• -- ir,*;"1:Ms .41.0i/g447-1-0rd - 47.1,-)s,//,'- '1/ '
'•,-- O....1*e it Ca "4-e/4-4V)"--‘---- ••• - • ...0 lx-s, .- -./ • ..../ --• --r/15 /7 't ".-, / '
-!,:•'i.e..:_/) • '40''."Ve•It°112.1 - .. ' ''••• .• - ...---•-• .•• .? .
- .. .4.11101r • 1.40€••••../.." .. 4.-- )0. - Pirrii,2-727.7;011141.3')• v •11 '...);I::
of&
• /.. . ,
/ '.
..._,..b w-•4104-. ••• "" .'''''' "... ' . . ..• •r I/0 .1•• ••
:-..z•Ip... ...44*..,•..7...........-...0. . . .... .„_ .•
7 .
teo •- • ts......;:-..' .-.;.: • -•'•- --:...,...;:e.s.:••••••!,:-.s.:-.:-.7}-,-A-N7-"17.p-7- -,/1/-'
til"
•-•-.. :.1 ,• . :---..• ...-•-••• ••• • • ,••. :*en•• •••••• / / •• /;"• •
..•4t...*Ea.... ,....•4.113A‘d.,,•4'.31,4' al'a'r ....... '-''--....-"--.-------- -. IlipyyM/ • lo...',/.1/i 3 •13/a.',
*/)
; .:C.• fm:{1•13•"•=Nat:- i• ' •
, t.. • .• •. 111
d
7'.
........ . . .: :•........ ••f:Wr..X"'-'"..-7..-- ------- -)47,--y InIVI"1-11.1,
..
re/..6•4.--'1 ••Ir• -',r•••t4r'.••-••;: • , ..)/ / i • Y-1
no-.......
•4.
:,....61;....1,it,71.... .......-.... . ••••,.•-..,.•
I
• •it
../ .
--
• r 4 ....,.. .1 tgl 4,41.-,Vi sr.^•-•11...1.01' ..i/Am....
.. Cr: "4•"3 n... ,-;. .,•• •1•• ••••":':••••1;...••••... *.:.r."• ••
44.,
•
•
-.. ".
I •I
-...- : ...... '••2. " ....::', 4'77-qpie.-•- a•-.-...,:, •4- 4*, •.....c.0 ....... .. .
=.1.
• et .e . %let'' ? d 110•P 41717X.....,. . • - . . .
ull..-.,AN"••• , . IW... - - --....--.--...--....-....-....._.._,-....._2_._.... ,.
....___.
* 1*73•. r.-7••ta 70:'.••• . •i•0.%......• ".
•i.: 11.-• '91.•• • •ift„,1.`• •.' a' •it, •. •
.4.... ... •• •10414.4•• • ' . ..- ''.••• .g •
....••• %-•4114 • - 7- .
- tii.1 .- li.• ' .4,417....._ infr ."74677r(27'"4-1 e 74447f.-;1171/i.11/7121/11/../7.417".Mr.4‘1,17);J:1 • I
. . .... •-•1A.....t.t.....-.....,.?..-) - . ,- . • i ,‘' 1-- / /
. .-•, i , t 1
' 1.4.. .•.. - 910)=4.fLiorp•or.... _rn i'•.• )7e-pf,-, --77,-7- -Afre Aig•-•/771-12/•;/7/42V.,,,/,.; ic--••
14•111"er ..• - 4g2-A ..-7.-fr- . 1 t r ' ;9/ l' 'i ' /4'P.O.
--- -
' • 0: .u..,
,;...... -7.. :`•'-'77r0.0•••"`,"-. - ..• •
• it. 1.4. ..,...„ .--4-.....:..-.,..e.-...,r..b..-r...'.-,.3?•.
;7.r1.".„-•s g-.*.4.*,:-._.
'! &I,
/,•. i. Y
t ,
/-4/4-,2.,,, )2/1.-,•/;,..; , ,,,,., • ,
f 7
I j '
/
• ' • .
141/1"//efri-0;.0 ;iXii W/271-,),P1,31-• -3 ' •• -..• • . • •,,;•• • •
.•
6.,,,...,..... . x•,_ ... • . • , . / ../. ...„ ,. . , , /- ,•.., . . • " • ....„.•
/
.
_,.
,
: _ .....
, ; . 4,...i
_--:-.-- - -,.....,79- &friy,..,-,,,/,)„,7- > ,,- 4,/.. '1,1Zw4rflin , Ali; 924, . 'iv/ • i • • • .•
.i
7-4' • / • / - 1
/ i
.:/ • 1
• r '- ',/70et•zi•' -y7,7p,,,./yr..7.,,•• i.•/;/-..4)4•? • ,,, ,,,vii;•4,-;",i, 4,, • ,,,,, p2...4.,•/.,1/. , -•,
•
.
/ / -, •
4,„, 47..„,„,..,..,- / fi ../....yi. 2,9 7.4.2--. iyz', • iii,/i.;. .7.7 i i.l.,- . •
. . 2 •,. . . K. ,
k4 ‘
'ti ,
I f(.1 i . 4(.14 - . ,I
:t... --• --..";("7:17".-4:F I
••..:-...•
....r.....4..:;•-•-4 ,4 n
..
4.t/ t'e: 61
) ;' ' • /-•• • • . '. .-J7..,,•••-•.:. ,r)...
i 4 cl /1, ,
', 1.7.ttir./..i._ -- 1 Ilk -4 I,..
•6I . '.! ; •••• i - •'••••• ••
,420V '' ' f •s''); vi....•re-.4:7 .. .
I .. -: ( i),,f,I '.
i • . . • :•':11,'/..• tit •- --•- -.- -r"-'----
// •• • ' -•''''. ''' ;;•1 -• r.
' Ili 1
• 11 ,
fp -:,..1. , i . •7 .. 1 e.lc . ..I. •-,.
Vex/ tk....L./.9„ dif •-' ....1 xl_JF..,_<,1*W.. jai 7)1e_ 4...,./th.....lif_:‘ .4/.. 111IL‘,. frfe?-1.14-v- , ,:OW '• .
: ,1:.I • / • 4. ;•••-•••'''' ••• ''''- • ;dine .. '
- .1"...0. 1..... .
T.: A; I,- %) i ?-• -.4.; •.....f..'.:_!:,,;.1- ..-
42...?" . •,
....
. • „.....,sk.- i , . .47:1-1:1!.. *.
,t. .... . ..
;--.•g%v., /,1 mr 1•,,
•, • AZ rhg„:41., • 47.41itl' , '.'117::41,46,"(iti .f X.... ' lard. ." ' . sir re AL...1.40.**•i6r4"...), 4111•6._,It;e. '.
' • '-' Of Vit.-
...211 . ' • "' 74; i'_ki: .'-- - •A9.;;::41. .
ft
..1
W txtr.?....siliati •
/ .• !:/,,-•-•11....;-4..ffik ., ,. A ---/ 1:541.7g7.„\.....„' .„.• ;al".• --s../...Varil ,•J.7".4..r.t.?..:11'.
,1,-•
' )ailif•- t'i•g(-•-alf.fr "p• .• ;e:/ ..P.v2v-i.g..,-4 itiz.9ti..*. -
•
4 ciai._‘uri..yetyilit ..:..e&'• . N't
e. ........1
d ....,;.,, ,. .-•"IsmiPs...---ity 44:-.2e,,--
.",40/4•41,1fit'...:
. 'ILA/aelniezezi: ti.*/,''..----(...i.-.-g..4-k--,
. .........„. .. ......0.. 4„.._.,....... .A.c.4, , .4,41,,,,.._ ... ....,••f'''..f..7...?4`,.
.1 i .4 0.. ... ' ;....et . i.... •-•&7114• (*'"(0• '•• - • •-•' . . ',-„i'.:".:4
..-......:.4i1::.1.-..."..-
7 * .;.:•1 4;r7,...4•".,'....,•....'.-
:I•.-..';: 6•1.i.(=frhi.-..a-' :'ie:"•t....a:4Gl./.
iI a.&(e?.....7.4i1:•%''":.v4-.1•A:.''.:"!.x"..4"e..x,_l..:."!t';.',g...,.,.-..p. ,2„•-,••a.•r_.d..,ij..t-'4m:O;.r:-;.•4.J.".-".4.r-..e,r
-id•l 4-.:t•t 1 e..•4i...0-7.@0..--..4..1.;-:.;7'.,e-•1/".-':1.-4,.-9-r.1L,,-..p....,i-r.•,.r..-:k.'e7-'.'-,4-4-' -..tf,.;•4i11.t,7y,•••',•1.•a...,,'i,,n,frV..ii....
,o t Af'r'.r 7,'.7..-.•V.:i-.41.-141!dt..?.....-.7...k.i.s...,4.,:,-i,'.,;
:3•9ta t174.frt4Y.1.i-k1L-:4.n3:...-,.r..r......44..•r i iI=.t".z1:•'•"•Ai...a•.•tc........;.0z.'-.yJ..i'„•1,•1:
7
• • F.- -: .. 1 -": .1 if. 4 .... . :tar. -Li
.
1 1
ki r : ev/ „ „ eA
'•
i . I ' . -••••••;•••••••••••••••.+......• emir p-......--•••••••,...**••••••••= :. ,..,.....,i4• 13,,,,frp ,, ,..0,_itaa,a_. a.... a
: t` il .• .•,.jt7..• ••••;•:•••
1 is'‘,;I •,,,y. !
1
''-' • • •••••-•••i 1.."....4. ,,A"':re. !. .ti,„ „'""kgr #-.-- cr .'.8 / .,1 ,_ .
,11..._ 4.,/...A :' ili4,,,t4d. Att.' ,,•,ev. . - • .AK, .,• 114."*"if: i • ..• ,if i i • /419' -- .-- aiti ril.;
........,"*..• .
- /ierj.. •-•-e /I_.s.•. . • fralt=r4:.• . . ,;.. , i.. .
.::••••,-.' . -, .. .• .,5'. • '' ,„Yr?11,,, 4t. ....! ,..1 .i,,,„. ,,,,.. i. , ,,,,-•• ..,f „....p___.erz,,,i_Ltv.....4;„ .r
t , 7171:2_,+•-•!... ..... . .1 / i 1./ ...v 0' AI, I . e.. .. .• "Ada," .
i, , ,..,•Intare.f.on. ..
, ,1-1.5ipterft.ri.„f • •
1 ••• ttP , f . r_Apr. • . ••• , * • .. liar t• .• •
. .., ..I. . *.0 •.1. .9 .. 4040,,t..*r t..1. rm.,.' •. . 41.6 .0 9; • .." ..
• . :..
• tP•...ig:•L 1*1 .•‘'.1..r:. X':- :i.. . Ars:A gi •• Vtgb ..r• , fin ar. ...4,;A.,.. ..r,:.1.0 . „........_....... . .. : .
: A• 'V t ' -•".••41.1.1. ..r•• '''' ..?•••••-
4-.-, "• ...0..*:*; Q...s.:. . • •''' - '•110•••• 17"
' 'm• ••• '4• ...P•V• .•;•••• ii• .40.14•••era•fft .. ....•••••••i••••••••4••••• ••••..; •
•STPI it..j,.'k.'•'-fi.... '"••••...,• ......• ....••••••••• •
/4.101..t4.ht•. •111, .... -
A- •.. i 17:7Yr7tv.:.7'..I. 'tt
'Av..-, ,
..--• •• -,1,..,..;.;.s.g.:•,e.,..3..........44 at 74•• . .1:1'..?:1 Ili' cf/1 ''''' 4r19#47171,4141."''''.. a*- - ;tC-1117'.. '
. ,...........p.z.w. . . •;,,.., ...•. .. . „ 1.,:_if....•••••• " „p. . - ': ,,e. , •-.....r.- .. A.114141. 114.
..• •• • "'•:• .• e* 1044,4:m4;• ..1•11 , itt•le.... •.. , . , .. rel
. ; .11.4.0.ra..• - -,',..S. •.. ,. ..5.41! • •; W„?it• •%.7,... J. ). . •• _ • _ ...eh.
i • .4' ' ' ..cir'•7•.X.r.. .• • . ''' ''•• ' "•••• • .PIA. • •••• : S.7.141•44•... ' •. .tr.••••. •'
' •• ' • ,
'•. - ..• 1•I•i_4.' 4: •'''.. . . ...4..44i1 ' .. - '. A' 41'‘ ' • ''°. -0-b" ••• -4* "C'''•••
/ • / .„ / ',„..*ft s.,•.•_, ,,,p....., ,, ... . , , ••,,,,, •• •4 .. .1%,..re•.. iy,41,...,..14........01. .
4 . 6 t: Ir.. „I(J.)/4 (.• nivel • '.. * adettrIv.........•.•-.......,.....,„,.: - .41P ... „ . .. -...v, ;,.....:.,..z."--.4., ....: •:717.7.- . -... :,..17..:.: •
i• ,I •-f •• ••''' 41Vrt;atl.p igir ‘4..)...:,2,:.
.
'gY.".:. •
., 1 L • . . •
i
... . • . -,- • •-•:.te.,:visfe,,, • A .j%,
4:il . .--;.:-.3.essu A' . .--, - a" •1147/..rAf,li. i• 4'/ •• •"4;,•'••4.•-•• .„ ,,,,
. ' -, ..' 1........-r,jrt••••••••••••••• •• ' • • --- ...,,,..x 41, - -....1.4. ..-4-4 jefi. ;;'''..;''' ..- . • ... - -au.AL--.. ;1411.1;Fo .0711r-q. ,
,, ,........1..44..:,,, . ..„,,, . . " • •".....egtflotat•',• 4 ....14, : y. ".....Crarrrrf' ‘. "'VI r•A i. . ••r. ,'.........1,:.. n!.
... 1 : A trigl.!...... fr21_,./1'. i ., • •4.,-; • ,;. -•rA.A..40-Ns.14: ,441.1 • NIP. .•• ." . . . •y ..t,,Tlii..::;44.4, .-7.1:46
s I . .i k 14....ig, ' ..._ fir4#...,.....P/C.'. •. . _ .IL__,„4„,. 4•Ab j• .. ......•,_...• . z. • ,:.....- _____,. .
h.. ' •a•r At • •
1 1 , •*7altr.Z.4? ' : .::01::,'''' ..- 4.•.'.... u."' 1 .42...a•wci..... 411472%•••411e / •• • ..6# ,,ea.'"'.. VZ.•t •.•••-tt • .. 7,t.i .... -
•VArg. 4:t•. • ia••• k *4:0"0,1,••„...,i....
,... , , ..n.,,y _,,,..„,• ,.... . .‘.. .... . , ;••••••... -Ihr ..''.......# ......r• rir,__,,,. ,11, ..0„15 ••'^r,•Irf.11 .. ..i-». ••"••••••:• ..,'!' 'Pi* „ ...
•- • , t '" !"."•1 'IF':n'ill-' '• •••••"7?•,.".04.••••••;,.. . 4•.4.i...•4:u 4•00#‘4•!...'i 4 wirr."44••,:iii-if ••,„,r44,•‘..14.f....,,_.e.. ..... Aketv..w..1 .13.it. •••••••••••••••••••ty./• .
...... .., . pl•%;...r•it
• a• ,i,al* .r..77tif";arfreteil:tliorfiaa••••••r•"7".: • .b.?4114.6'lif•••
• •. r•-. 66171,61'..16''''. .4,r, fr -• 1.4;----"Jo)
• i• ...1 41 .1. -7104;d1.4.4 . . '..i r .t •-:.:4./ , .A.A.... A' •,,a4.....-_,.......4.-.1.•..f...,....,.. ... . . d• Jet. :.44. ;C.:ati. ••••••' .•i;i1.0•ftl..... •••:at, •.
• :.: S •*a -..•; • •'''''''''''''`' '- •7•-• --. : .1., ••• ,....,-..re..-=r,.....-- - ,61"-tr . •
•at - V ow j../A• • - ..„.• ..W4 4.„„er,,4,411••••••04.1 •rte. le . 4;0 - •. • .V.,• •If •••.;11.:,,i. •.
- • - .• •• irio ' ..*.f.ireit..70,Afrl.k41,0' . „if... 1.04„4,,„„..I .0 1.4.7eN A taiNza '..
.• i ' .•••• i ''''.i.a' TM-4V;'''.4 r....ifr:,,,_AO ..-....Au,......•.,..,.• • .)••a id," .1 • •••e: •••••.•••160:•904.,434,44,fl__•ati • JO *Pia.. V.. ••..- .
.-•3 .!••' •••,...i.T.,..•;:. ,1643•••••3 N.i."f;•14 i .'.1.•••:-.‘liiit•F&IS•Ltirli‘::::e.•....i..7:7•177.-YPPe&ile.":4k4gt.,.... •t•F••••••••••r:•••;,.......4•6•36....c..i.:.*:177.067 .IrTia2..e!"64r."...••ra,,..:Ira
1 ' • 1 4.0-..• _ :1,..,f 44,,,..• ...„ „..._. ____,_ ....,..•i,r...: .1 .4t;r.oy.,,&J,s2_,,.. .v .. pf;.I...r.. t-T,04741,
- a •• -.. .. • •• 14...••••-',...N., N.'bri ,4714=-04.ile.?:97:0"if cipt.);47t:Fdr. 111".102 .14,/.71Ir •ffAlivr. .4•P;1''4!tt:. 4•..." C41-„„:!..•.*...•,.
11i . ., ..•11••01 04..1•..0•.1•4 •........,..
. . • :;11.;'teirig...2.1.V77"••. jr.7+77 • . t "I;M:,'"1.1/IN.';'.firile..4:ti!tf;;;Pra-L't.7.ls'ir wie 4`.,..."1"._,..A......1'.'"Altj. .6. sTr;...-?o,i,„%rica-Nrial 1
SI.4. . • il 1, •tiP..}1.2.1..4, b...4.1 ...11r#04y14, 1,"ideatt IV 0 ANiflite IT 4 71.A '4re Ti.-41.--51, 0,0 4,$Xt. .1.11 -4 t•':', air Y. "ii Z'----.. .
fl ' •'•Z.•Ar*th..1;44 1 e 104 4 4 1954,11'.elf tr 41-714 r..ASA'•1!•;-ir.17 7,..re.-A To w PW71.,* .f.' ,...!•:-:•,,.-tr....•....,f. • 4.--'' .1k4.,._s•Ti.,.. ..-*
v.• •,,.•
. t.., . , 1-1.:• 9%,74,:tiVr-'74 .;:lr.4.11.'.3..rtiV.10.7. 1#711,-".1"`;-•• 't"?4•41-Vert17"-# .te .,",..•. Cir,k,-- - ,.u •*„.4trizz....t,t4in . • :
it
-4:, :14.:•:74:.4.••447401.;1 . r:,,,pyit4vr- ,,pyiki'h itJre' cr',..•i•If•l'• ',..„1,,,,,,kwroot." .r.•;`•j'''.yrk".""callq ...z7a.,z,iiirt......._,..,,,....‘,...4....,,":1,..,,,,,,...
7
....
,1 I; 7';FIcF:...41e. ..4'.- •2:z-lr‘ -1. . ... ,,,,,k4y.lit Li,11......,,, :,r,.k. L.7.-,--.,_-,-.,„w, 1......;,.,i444.4-::,: 721s,.. . . .. .
r kla..I A it,
-4 I• .;144074::: '• ....:- .•I i../i i A „,___•'S •‘ 0 s. / 01 , .- T iYarg ...,' . , ...sw:e: ...".04t.ttszt:::-.7.4e,ejf;?..--41.a,• -r•
i• • $i .. 4 ...tt.:...,.NA-. ;4`.. . _...r. -_,r1...,.....,1, Firi„L5-1;•:•%-t-r .,.........„7,, -:.,. /.....,;:r;e4.6!../.0 , ...• ...;;;;•-.Q..--.. . . .jpi .'... A4'4** - ' • •.,;. -
. , NN., e....,... •?op-m.nr. ; ., . 14,. •4,. ....,,..,.00y, /...04 r
•-•'I. •-,*. -.1-4,- . . iiiic,,i. • • ......... f ,,-.... ,.. , , . „,... ,
N., •••1••••4,.• .. .• .. .;r::_.
-. i • •' 3 0- .. •i '4;i1F. '"•531'• - i '''ic.j..frj. -'*. *"4'f4--;7- U,-;6. - - , .1,t.17‘.-,*.i'.-1,1'.17.•
1.1.,•Al.fti -A(PM%! ; . . • .„. ,1..1,,v•,,.,.- , ,,, „ .c.../ .,h ,. .,„ . ....., .. ,
i
Y ' ...t•s.11.f.):I'lltf.o..Atrrtr, .i7.31)•174.1.„1. .. 411.41i,191...:- • A•Cfr , ..r.. - '4. r .:114,. : ,• 0.. • i.i.-;
-.. 1. ,...4trotActmr;r1k- . :i.ve- - .•••••• % vi milker. • :- . v' I 7,4.• , • ..;,,v4,-"1:-.:::::-;-4:- ,-.1.,.."1; '
44.4e
. 1 • ..t ..• .1.•••• -'1 r..,‘S. - /.74. , d ••*/*P44,0/- •-'#•)-104;°-•• '' 4r#-'' • l'4. '' ..at,' •,f% / ". ‘• .(1.44#.-.. t'll 17.4•.'-
"" • • ••.1....-7 0 1.:k4V u„of' •• .1.• . •
..... r . v. i•Irt4•1 , .4... re.viiiVtihre ., • . 4,,;1..1.•i ••...1!' - iiii?„,A111130);P: , .. • :• ..
• ..:6).• 11.:405;•....1.. "41',./,,...: - •IN••-. ..k., v.‘•mpt,, . _1.
11
l'7,7 ..".•I'sAA le' ‘,..• ., ,;
•1 1 . : ilikAYINklia.r.hir$1'.. ,!M. /TT iir .0 dr"' •„ b' ,...„ „if,.. -4,1. .,,r, . .....‘ t• , '',,,
,,t. •• : ;1,4;0 lf:',I.„.01.,• ,,. •.. - .• e• .: relP4141r... ,4 . .r: 're''•••.f ' '..4.6644 t • •••••••042/1,1
• . • /
•••i n•••••••;•tiiVA;°.;; : •.•'.1 ..'
..1 ..i •.; :11: ,....•!..0,1..rfrit.•.,' .1...t,46.4,41 )•',. Asv- .,,,. . t, ,..,,,,...,...,7),. . .1 It ... . . ,i• .07,.. ;..,..!.. 21iii 1.• ., _„. ,.,ot,„0„.44"4 .• . ..: . • .:
• •1 1 „Ar,int• . .,Pfttr.....1_.11!tits1.1r 4 r . .rt-r. dr.. -
..r.rre..,.., .1i..f•4.
I-"'""A'A' ‘.:.''''',.;,;9 MI,03,,, .. • a;:„..*:• •
....i ,r?..• •
;Taw •A,,•4 t^..'" ' A.. •-7.,..4,-•,'••••`. 4:•.•.0.0‘..,....,:. ,.;;... . ... _.......
• -,..': A• ..;:..413.1ii4 i I;I:et#' a 1...i. •sn 4*:2-...4q•irtir-I' .9. . 0, 4 Lir igaSif:'.
''.•re101.441:1111...Ali ."11.. 4, 1.,k7. ...- .:".,- :.:, .4):,''..,7. .07,71, •..........• 4 .7.. : *
11 •• .I•ti...rii6,1,1itts,..,• \•. . q 4 ...• ... .' , , , .• .,. - • • 1:"' -'47".1474':.;:I 1.!.:' '-•• • • .4, ' . •..• ''),. 14(41. ki
. ,.' li.4 ... '.• ?tgliorte____,,...."....'„*..'...'i.,,-4.‘„,,‘. •• -. nt!•IIA. )(X 4,60, .4/,f,"44,0w. • .4 ..ge..
ler4r4A•ort .14, •' '' • ''S. . r' . • .• •
• , .
s' : '. ''' t:tl 14:',.,•1';'77ZT....%ti•;,,ii, E"i1/07.:[1 -illijr•:••,,fr 111210114.4441'.‘' i,...7 • .i';'•'..“1,.. . - 1;•'•: ..1.7 '*': .. ,. .'. . , .. .. .
. ..• 1 $ -,• 1.,!:1.i.,,,:,;;;;.....:'''!....:."47../ii.1%, . et„,?;;.‘,O.,/0.*.q....4,tr.f"Tr.;:,:',v. iito; „ i ' -
i -
i . .` , ..!.. ,; -•44.
1.• ' '. i ..!•.1.(k••••'..1.f.'.r.),',•;l• 10:01411 '47 u "4!Tillin'T 7:17"-fa"Irlitr: ' ' ' - •':: .. --.44; ‘...-- It-
': 7.i.1 .. .;•.•,.,:.•;,..,, ,• ...”!,.....,+1,tiv..kn ,., 'j.-t.ith.,,$41,at,•.4,:tv..-„,! ti• . ,1.,yi Atti. ..,:'•,,7. :. '2::, , 'A,4,1,• ::.., .....,. ,A. f_.,..
4/ 4.
• 'i..ac't • .:‘•••• •.•.."*.I a•1•07.4 MP,4.,n.4%
.. .. , ....., ,..,..... . ,,, , .. .. .. w ,,... .. ,, 6 i•• :'• •1 ••i ,.• - • " . , ...- , „: .- .,..,,,,i • .7.".
.0 m,., ...,...y.,..,, ,...„.„4„.. ,i, .,.•`1.N:. , .• ',..mc,....,?.;,...g.....1..,7",. ......,,,, • .. ....„---2x.,-... •4.. "0^ '.7.1.1.•••1‘.!•7.0, .froy o, *. ..v- '..-
- .---- 171,A -.•'---- ,,A•--filVP 35V1;• 7:.41•:?,f,41-.:•,f! at ifitzo • 4.tei.,.. . - t ,. .. - ' i•.i .
. . ..
- - • , A
• .•. ,
„''"'r Cam. .... ---_•
. T tro,••7.39'`0..: . •
..,r
,.�'” NORTHERN MUM RAILWAY COS[PAi±, a et i ebrptioi! Under the of
, Wisconsin, hereinafter called "Railway. COnOine, iii conbideration of one dollar
in hand paid, the receipt of whioh ie hereby Aoknowledged, iuid the agreements
herein contained, hereby grants te *BEM MULL COMPANY, INC4, .4 Waehingtou
corporation, hereinafter called "grantee", peiMissio4 tof4aintein a private read
crossing over the Railway Company's 100.40ot right of *i 'ft .,i};b'-Belt tine in
front of Government Lot 1 of Section,12, Tr wnehip A. korthf. ing4 5 teat bf the - '
Willamette Meridian, at QUENDALL siding in King county, Washington, the center
line of said road intersecting the (tenter line of the Railway Companyis main
track as now aonstruated At a point therein distant 217 test soittheeeteriy, mea-
cured along said track (tenter line, I rose Mile Poet 6 (which mile post is ;edited •
.approximately 1162 feet southwesterly, measured along said•ttgok eente' l;ine1
from the north line of said section), the point of intereeotion being otherwise
described as Mile Tait 6 , .
tai.rtita 21T�fit9 a.... .. ....,.,s..•......:.,. , ..,r...-.;•�,,,
This grant is made upon the £olloiring terms, . •
1. The crossing and inoideital drainage facilities shall be cbnstruoted
and maintained by the grantee with,the,grantee!s. own..l,a or and hateriale ,and at
the grantee's sole e*penee in a gedd:kad **Manlike nlike maruier to.the eatiefhetioa
. of the Divieibn Superintendent of the ttailway.CompanY, .
' 2. The grantee agrees to reprove and keep. removed at the i.
BYarst®s.e• feigienbe ,
any vegetation that will interfere with'approaching trains being Bean ter. a';dis- .
tance of not lees thah'five hundred feet•.i.n each dtireetiors:from an point in the
road crossing from h diatarice of not lobe than.fIfty.feet.•frda the rafi on both
sides of the .track, •
:.:•..:,
3. On aocount df this permit 1 by hg.been given without'any aubbtantiai.
consideration moving to the Railway- oup'any, the grantee agree to indaMaif)- and
hold harmless the Railoiay Company.from.any and.alb lose, ccntOlamage:.er WWI'to persona, including death resulting' hereframi• or,:to•propty'erariejn •.ar g •
growing out of the use of said private road by the grantee, its etapl2'syreii, ideate,
servants or invitees or any other person using rams witti-tho ee:P;a'`ermineion
• 8a`A'i$ FYg"4f3"'N619192tsx' sihlt ,
damage or in 4'' .' ' '::
g fury may arise, and nistiYf.t_�fati`, 'g : ft ._: ��: "i►�io�=:.o �,.�1, , ,
part from the negligence of the Railway Coienanysa emp1 reesj,agents.;or:eari,ante,
h. It is agreed that the provisions),e.f. rd a j 3 tare for' the equal pro`.
tection of any other railroad c an' or c ni
omp •y oiigranies heretofore or•hea+eAf'beY+'
granted the joint uee•of the Banana, Company's property of which the pre deed
upon'which said private road crossing IS' located are a part, .
•
5. Should the Railway Company At anj- time deem said eroesirsg a irtenaae to
• the safety of its operation, or should Said crossing interfere with •thb.use Of
its right'of way for railway purposes, the Railway Company may terminate this
grant upon written notice of thirty days, and said. notice shall be good 1t
•
served personally upon the grantee, or posted upon the premises* or deposited in. •
a United States post office addressed to the.grantee at Kenripdale, Washingtona' •`
3. The grantec.shallnot-41seignlortreasterAhis permit without the
-written approval of the Railway Compatryi.
7. ' 'this•permit...supere•edes.:.aidrea OetI: isab`ed1.4* i=J�` $'�+++,reel, 6
and dated October 6 1935o '� -;
.predecessor in interest to thegrantee hereinwith reepectito certair n pr perty'
near said right of way..
' In Witness Whereof, the parties'hereto have executed these presents in
duplicate this 20ph day of October,-.lgisl�:.
NORTHERN PACIFIC RAIt,WAY COMPANY,
By J, 171.. -+-,-.L-.
Industrial Agent
i •
Attest: 4,.... .Z:52 (2'1
Msident
•
Secretary - \ --------__ --
•
•
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
•
CAMI'BELL MATHEWSON
•
VICE PRESIDENT
August 9, 2002 •
•
VIA FACSIMILE 425-430-7300
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
•
1055 South Grady Way •
Renton, WA 98055
ATTN: Lesley Nishihira
•
•
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat •
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Access
Dear Lesley:
. Thank you again for taking time to meet with me on Monday morning. At your request,
this letter is for the purpose of providing you with our understanding of the access issues
related to the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
•
When we met earlier this week you inquired about how the Applicant would be able to
provide two public access points to the proposed Barbee Mill plat. After talking with
Neil Watt, you indicated that the City is comfortable that two "public easements" would
satisfy this requirement. On the first point, we cannot concede at this time that two
•
public access points ate required by the Renton Municipal Code in order for the City to
determine that there is adequate access. Having said that, we believe adequate access to
the plat would.be available over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks via: 1)
• the existing reserved crossing in the right-of-way deed to the BNSF's predecessor and 2)
through the City's suppbrt of a public crossing over the tracks for a secondary access. A
— pett�on Tor a pub is crossing would be considered-by the Washington State > r y and
Transportation Commission ("WUTC").
•
•
•
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 Fount' AVENUE • SENILE, WASI IINCH'ON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX (206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacifidp.com
•
August 9, 2002
Page 2 •
Primary Access
There is a road crossing over the BNSF tracks reserved in the .1908 right of way deed
granted to the Great Northern Railroad, the BNSF predecessor. We are happy to provide
the City with a "public easement" across the railroad tracks at the reserved location where
we control fee title. As you know this crossing would provide access to the Barbee Mill
property, the Port Quendall property and could possibly be used as an access for the
Baxter site to the north.
Secondary Access
The City of Renton could seek approval for a second crossing from the WUTC. Under
WUTC regulations, a public crossing may be granted following a petition from the
railroad owning the tracks or from the governmental entity with jurisdiction over the
road to be crossed. In this case, Lake Washington Boulevard would be the road to be •
crossed. In order for the public crossing to be'considered, the City of Renton or BNSF
would need to file a petition with the WUTC to commence the approval process. If the
City were willing to commence the public crossing petition process we would like to
have a meeting to discuss under what conditions that could happen. •
Such action would be consistent with the City's treatment of Southport, a project that
proposed only one access. As you know, Southport is a much more intense development
generating roughly 10,000 net daily trips and roughly 1,200 PM net peak hour trips. By
contrast, the Barbee Preliminary Plat will generate net daily trips of only 596 with total
PM peak hour trips of 67 (i.e. a mere 5% of the Southport traffic).
•
Even though the difference in.impact is dramatically less for the Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat, we would be willing to agree to language similar to that found .in the Southport
approval for purposes of moving this project forward. For example, the City's language
in the Southport process included:
The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF
railroad during the design of roadway improvements to determine the most
appropriate railroad crossing solution.
•
Certainly, agreement to this language should, at a minimum, suffice for purpose of taking
our project to the Environmental Review Committee.
I look forward to.continuing to work with you on the various issues related to this project.
Pleasetontact me at your earliest convenience with your response.
August 9, 2002
Page 3
Sit rely,
Camp ell Mathewson
cc: Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Rich Wagner, Architect
Lr,WYERS
• DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF P=SIT^'I
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP SEP 2 3 2002
RECOVED
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE HONOLULU LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON, D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
September 19, 2002
Fred J. Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Withdrawal of Appeal
Barbee Mill Appeal of Administrative Decisions to Hearing Examiner
File No. LUA-02-040,PP,ECF
Dear Mr. Kaufman: •
On behalf of Appellant Barbee Mill,we are withdrawing the appeal. The City has
removed the application from hold in response to Barbee Mill's submittal of certain additional
information. Consequently,the specific items appealed are now moot. The appeal hearing was
set for Tuesday, October 1 at 9:00 a.m.
If there is anything further you need from the appellant to complete the appeal
withdrawal,please let me know. Otherwise, I assume you will notify the parties of record.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
a+yt
Thomas A. Goeltz
TAG/sew
F:\DOCS\26266\4\HEARING EX LTR.DOC
Seattle
it
tD�
September 19, 2002
Page 2
cc: L Warren
eslie Nishihira
Campbell Mathewson
Alex Cugini
F:\DOCS\26266\4\HEARING EX LTR.DOC
Seattle
ti
gyp_. .. ;�'._•.
MICROFILMED
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
Prepared by:
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works - Development Planning
August 16,,2004
Revised January 10, 2005Dcc^ r1-0r2004
41. p` CITY OF RENTON .
� _ Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
• August 16, 2004 M
Dear Reader: : . • , . "
Attached is a copy of the Mitigation Document for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plata
• In May 2002, the Barbee Mill Company submitted a Land Use Master Application (LUA '
02-040),for a Preliminary Plat. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee -
' issued a Determination'of.Significance on November 5, 2002..The City. of Renton, in
- accordance with the State.Environmental Policy Act;(SEPA) process, issued a Scoping
Notice on November:27, 2002. On December 10, 2002, a public scoping meeting was
' held to receive;written and oral comments on the proposed scope of study: A Scoping
Document was issued on January 10, 2003. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement
' (DEIS) was issued by the City,' of Renton Environmental Review Committee on
September 2, 2003. A public hearing was held on September' 23, 2003., The public '
comment period for the DEIS-closed on October 8, 2003. The Final.EIS was issued on
May 3, 2004. : ,
The impacts described in.the.'Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Environmental Impact . • '
Statement (DEIS and FEIS) and Other information on file with the'City of Renton are the
basis for the 'mitigation measures established in the Mitigation .Document. 'This
-Mitigation Document is designated by the'City of Renton as the first decision document
. -_ . for the proposal..The project is also subject to preliminary plat, site plan; and shoreline
reviews. .
Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document,a twenty (20) day appeal;period commences.
' Pursuant to WAC 197-1'1-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E.4.a.iii, the adequacy of the Final EIS
'and the Mitigation Document may'be 'appealed. Appeals must: 1) state specific .
' objections of fact and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. September 7,
2004; and 3) be accompanied, by a filing fee,of $75.00. Appeals must be addressed to
Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton,Municipal Building, 1055
So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. • ', , "
. If you,have questions or require clarification of the above, please contact Susan Fiala, -
, Project Manager at (425).430-7382. .
. For the Enviroiunental Review Committee,
2 -
er
r _
-Gregg Zimmerman
' Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works.
•
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055- RE "N T O,N
0.This papercontains50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
MICROFILMED
Summary Table of Mitigation Measures
A. Earth, Soils and Geology
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during clearing, grading and
site construction.
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized;OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed; OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading;OR
A5. Comparable,engineering design.
B. Surface Water Resources
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water quality facilities
designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one foot above base
flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway or-floodplain-to avoid restriction of flows
during regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of B4,or B5,or B6:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space corridor of
approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by enhancements to the existing stream
channel, removal and replacement of bridge crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the
established stream buffer edge. The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream / buffer
improvements shall be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open space corridor and
providing additional storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace excavated on the west either side of the
stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and flood storage to
reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in flood elevations because of sediment
deposited in the stream channel.
C. Groundwater
C1. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site as outlined in the
Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is complete and perform
groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
D. Plants and Animals
D1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from disturbance during
construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging and access areas away from buffer
areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant with native
species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee
Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4.
maintain vegetation.The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to
accommodate vehicular and pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light penetration to those areas
immediately adjacent to and under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable
below-deck clearance adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with
current City of Renton and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
1
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with preliminary landscaping
mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
D6. The width of
proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and pedestrian
traffic with minimum below-deck clearance adequate for passage of small animals and/or
mammals including, but not limited to deer,ducks and geese,muskrats,squirrels,mice and frogs.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers, pesticides, or
herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the proposal to place
development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement of the existing
buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, thenEither: a) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline conditions can be re-
established (where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building
setbacks); OR b) Remove bulkheads and rely on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is
shallow, on public lands or in conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR c) Provide plantings
in rip-rap.
D12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more natural shoreline
plantings.
D13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the near-shore
habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive and
complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of mature canopy from
indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of more extensive
communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and allow public access further from
the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated
with native plant or grass species as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be
Lil landscaped as appropriate to be utilized as a yard area.
D17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a distance from near-
shore habitat; OR b): Reduce the number of docks through shared moorage, AND THEN; c)
Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or materials that allow light penetration.
D18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than residents such as
® the homeowners association or a similar entity.
CC E. Transportation
El. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade crossing locations
with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete
crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever and gates and
warning devices automatically activated by train approach as required by BNSF and the WUTC.
Further, the City and future developer(s) shall work together with BNSF during the design of
roadway improvements to determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce crossings shall be
provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new
average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the
final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and specifications provided by the
approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public road system designed to public road section
standards for residential access streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
11
F. Hazardous Materials
F1. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan
Uplands Areas dated June 16,2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable
Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through Quendall Terminals
through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation, consistent with requirements of the Model
Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
G. Aesthetics
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color, including sloping
roofs,roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height, Rrelative building bulk may be
reduced by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks for planting areas and a
change in proposed plantings may be required.
H. Light and Glare
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet In height, buildings shall be designed and
sited to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare from sun reflection.
w
I. Noise
11.
0 character of deposits).Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise
and vibration resulting from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures shall include
pre-drilling of the upper portions of driven piles for large structures or use of alternate technologies
C) such as pin piles for smaller,residential supports.
12.
place cassinn type piles auger cast piles n other methods shall be used, Vibration, auger
casting, or similar alternate construction methods shall be used where practical to limit noise
related to pile support installation.
13. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to steady background
noise levels shall be provided.
14. At-grade rail crossings shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as
needed to facilitate future double-gating of that meet a 'sealed° star s to q „lif„ for possible
provided--with public railroad crossings at the time of crossing construction.
J. Historic and Cultural Resources
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site reflecting the lumber
economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be provided by the developer.The design and
location shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services prior to recording of the final
plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to stop and the
Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the developer/contractor(s).
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
iii
i
K. Public Services
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid prior to the
recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be provided and
incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work with City of Renton staff to
determine the location and design of the public access.The system may include a soft surface trail
along May Creek,sidewalks,and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
iV
Introduction and Purpose
In order to meet SEPA requirements, the Environmental Review Committee for the City of
Renton issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on September 2, 2003 and the Final
Environmental Impact Statement on May 3, 2004. These documents are referenced herein as the
Draft EIS (DEIS) and Final EIS (FEIS).
The purpose of the Mitigation Document is to establish specific mitigation measures, based upon
significant impacts identified in the DEIS and FEIS. The mitigation measures apply to the
proposed preliminary plat.
Use of Terms
The subject site may be referenced as "Barbee Mill" or "site" or "subject site" in this document.
This document includes mitigation measures that are tied to the approval of site plans, termed
Level 1 or Level II site plans. City regulations require a "site development plan" for development
in the Center Office Residential (COR) Zones (RMC 4-2-120.B and 4-2-120.C). Site plan
regulations are found in RMC 4-9-200.
SEPA Requirements
State regulations(Washington Administrative Code 197-11) and local regulations (City of Renton
Title 4, Chapter 9) govern the development of mitigation measures to address identified
environmental impacts.The primary regulatory chapters are cited below.
WAC 197-11-060, titled Content of Environmental Review states in part, that agencies shall
"carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term effects,"
including"those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal" or, in some cases,
continue beyond the life of the proposal.
WAC 197-11-330, titled Threshold Determination Process requires, in part, that the responsible
official take into account the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of a proposal when
determining whether a proposal has significant adverse impacts. In reaching a decision, SEPA
states that the responsible official shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a proposal
outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather shall consider whether a proposal has any probable
significant adverse environmental impacts.
WAC 197-11-768 titled Mitigation.This section defines mitigation as:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid
or reduce impacts;
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment;
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action;
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing or providing substitute resources
or environments; and/or
6. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-1-
•
WAC 197-11-660(1) Substantive Authority and Mitigation. Decision-makers may impose
mitigation measures designed to mitigate the environmental impacts, subject to the following
limitations:
a. Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies,plans, rules or regulations
formally designated by the agency;
b. Mitigation measures shall be related to specific, adverse environmental impacts
clearly identified in an environmental document on the proposal and shall be stated
in writing by the decision maker;
c. Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being accomplished.
d. Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be imposed upon an
applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of its
proposal. Voluntary additional mitigation may occur.
e. Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state
or federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant
impact.
f. If, during project review, a jurisdiction's development regulations or comprehensive
plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or in other applicable local, state or
federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific
adverse environmental impacts of the project action under RCW 43.21C.240, the
jurisdiction shall not impose additional mitigation under this chapter.
Mitigation Document
Based upon the DEIS and FEIS, this Mitigation Document identifies mitigation measures
established under SEPA rules to address specific impacts identified in the DEIS and FEIS.
Numerous state and local regulations will govern development of the subject site and application
of those regulations will also serve to mitigate certain significant adverse environmental impacts.
Additional consistency review under the site plan review, preliminary plat review, shoreline
permit and other permit approvals will be required.
Provided below for each element of the environment analyzed in the DEIS and FEIS are: 1)
References to text for Affected Environment and Impacts sections within the DEIS and/or FEIS;
2)Mitigation Measures; and 3)Discussion of mitigation measures.
A. EARTH, SOILS, AND GEOLOGY
Refer to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, pages 3-1 through 3-7 for a
detailed discussion of the Affected Environment and Impacts. The mitigation
measures established below address identified impacts.
1. Earthwork, Erosion, and Sedimentation
Mitigation Measures:
Al. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) during
clearing, grading and site construction.
Discussion:
Site work should be phased to minimize the amount of exposed soils to the areas
that are under construction. To control erosion during construction, contractors
would use Best Management Practices (BMPs) and standard mitigation measures
approved by Ecology's Stormwater Manual (Ecology 2001) and by the City of
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-2-
Renton surface water management regulations. Soil and Erosion Control Plans
would be in place prior to construction. By effectively using construction BMPs,
erosion, sediment-laden runoff, and dust would be controlled, and adverse
impacts would be reduced.
A variety of best management practices, as listed below, should be included as
part of the overall BMP program for the project to limit erosion and
sedimentation:
a) Prepare comprehensive erosion, sedimentation and spill control plan to outline how the
site would be managed for erosion and other hazards. It would cover appropriate
measures for each phase of site development, training, pre-construction conference,
coordination with utilities and contractors, monitoring, and reporting. It would provide for
stockpiling of erosion control material on site. Monitoring of water quality and notice of
problems may be appropriate. Provisions for contingency planning and revision to the
plan should be provided.
b) Land disturbing or grading activities should be limited or prohibited between October 1
and April 30, because these are the highest rain fall months when the risk of erosion is
greatest.
c) Delineate and mark clearing limits, limit the amount of the site opened for disturbance at
any time.Limiting exposure is especially critical close to water bodies.
d) Buffer zones should be provided around wetland areas, May Creek, and the Lake
Washington shoreline. Where possible, existing vegetation should be maintained as a
buffer. A barrier should be placed along the creek and wetland areas to protect them
from construction activities and prevent construction equipment or stockpiling within
those areas.
e) All exposed and non-worked soil shall be stabilized by use of BMPs. Time periods of
allowed exposure would depend on the season. Both temporary and permanent
groundcover would part of the construction plans,including:
i. Soils should be stabilized at the end of each day based on weather
forecast. Applicable practices include, but are not limited to, temporary
and permanent seeding, sodding, mulching, plastic covering, erosion
control fabrics and matting, and early application of a gravel base on
areas to be paved,and dust control.
ii. Protect cut and fill slopes from erosive flows and concentrated flows and
establish temporary and permanent cove.
fl A stabilized construction entrance or other method should be installed to prevent
sediment transport. If a standard gravel construction entrance is proposed, geo-textile
fabric shall be installed under the rock. A wheel wash would be required if wet season
grading occurs.
g) Temporary stormwater control should be provided,which may include:
i. Detention for runoff from a site under construction.A detention pond may
be designed to contain runoff from the worst-case storm event expected
during construction.
ii. Protect existing drainage inlets from sediment and silt-laden water.
Stabilize channels and outlets of temporary and permanent conveyance
systems to prevent erosion during and after construction.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-3-
iv. The water from dewatering systems for trenches, vaults, and foundations
shall be discharged into a controlled system. Treatment may be required
for sediments or pollutants.
h) Control pollutants from waste materials and demolition debris, construction equipment,
leakage of fuels,fertilizers,application of chemicals,and water treatment systems.
i) In-water work for the installation of the stormwater treatment pond outfalls and
construction of bridge footings should be conducted during Washington Department of
Fish and Wildlife's (WDFW) prescribed in-water work period for Lake Washington and
May Creek,respectively.
j) A monitoring plan, with independent testing, may be appropriate as part of the quality
assurance plan for compliance including a plan for stormwater sampling locations,
background measurements, and a periodic reporting schedule. The reporting schedule
shall, at a minimum, require sampling during every storm event in the wet season that
would generate runoff,as well as site inspection condition reports on the installed BMPs.
2. Seismic Hazards
Mitigation Measures:
Prior to submittal of building permit application(s),the applicant shall provide
supplemental geotechnical analysis to determine the appropriateness of the following:
A2. A deep foundation system for building construction shall be utilized, OR
A3. Ground improvement measures shall be installed, OR
A4. Containment Walls shall be provided to prevent lateral spreading, OR
A5. Comparable engineering design.
Discussion:
Mitigation for seismic hazards can be implemented for varying levels of the
presumed extent of liquefaction, with varying levels of risk. The following three
basic strategies were identified as potential design alternatives (as necessary) by
the applicant's geotechnical engineer:
Using a deep foundation system that would transfer the building loads to the
dense soils beneath the potentially liquefiable alluvial deposits.
-I Ground improvement measures, such as stone columns or deep dynamic
compaction to reduce the liquefaction potential.
Containment walls to mitigate the hazard of lateral spreading (Golder 2002).
The use of foundations would likely involve piles drilled or driven to dense
deposits not subject to liquefaction. The most reliable foundation system would
be founded on the dense glacial till. Shallower pile-supported foundations might
be acceptable with appropriate geotechnical evaluation and design
considerations.
Piles driven through a weak, potentially liquefiable, soil layer to a stronger layer
would not only have to carry vertical loads from the superstructure, but also
would have to be able to resist horizontal loads and bending moments induced
by lateral movements if the weak layer liquefies. Sufficient resistance could be
achieved by piles of larger dimensions and/or more reinforcement. In addition,
it is important that the piles be connected to the cap in a manner that allows
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-4-
some rotation to occur, without failure of the connection. If pile connections fail,
the structure may fail due to overturn forces.
Stone columns are a densification measure with the added advantage of
providing drainage. They are routinely placed by sinking a vibrofloat or probe
into the soil using a water jet to the required depth.
While adding additional stone to backfill the cavity, the probe is raised and
lowered to form a dense column. A system of closely placed stone columns
provides areas of compacted soils not subject to liquefaction. In addition, stone
columns may prevent the build-up of excess pore pressures in a soil, which
would otherwise lead to liquefaction by reducing the effective stress between soil
particles. This effect, however, is not the most important one, since time for a
positive effect of the drainage is limited to the duration of the earthquake,which
means that in this short time, any drainage into the column only affects a rather
limited zone near the column perimeter but never the whole soil volume. This is
especially true for sands with a silt content of above 12 percent since the drainage
effect becomes negligible (Madabhushi 1999).
Jet grouting is an additional means of stabilizing soils in place. Cement grout is
the most common stabilizer used. The soil improvement is installed through a
drilled hole from the existing ground surface down to the desired depth. A rod
containing a jet is inserted into the hole and grout is pumped at high pressure.
The grout penetrates the existing soils, enhancing the strength of the soil matrix.
The jet is rotated while being drawn out of the hole, forming a column of
improved soil. Numerous columns at close intervals can be used to create a block
of improve soil. The columns can also be interspersed with cells of unimproved
soils surrounded by jet-grouted columns, thus creating an area of improved soil
without having to treat the entire area(Berger/Abam 2002).
Deep dynamic compaction involves the use of impact energy on the ground
surface to create dense and compact subsurface soils. Weights typically ranging
from 10 to 30 tons are lifted with standard, modified, or specialty machines and
dropped from about 50- to 120-foot heights. Freefall impact energy is controlled
by selecting the weight, drop height,number of drops per point, and the spacing
of the grid. In general, treatment depths of up to 35 feet may be achievable in
granular soils. The major limitations of the method are vibrations, flying matter,
and noise (Martin 1999).
For small pockets of liquefiable soils, building foundations can be designed and
constructed to tie all elements together to make the foundation move or settle
uniformly. Such a foundation design is useful for bridging over areas of local
settlement to adjacent stronger ground. The strength of such a foundation also
reduces failure from shear forces induced by differential settlement(UW 2002).
The extent to which stone columns,jet grouting or other soil improvements can
resist the load applied from the untreated deposits located behind the treated
area depends on a number of factors. Such factors include the area of liquefiable
soils applying the load, the area and depth of soil improvements and the
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-5-
materials used. In many cases, soil improvements are used in conjunction with
retaining structures to contain lateral movement due to liquefaction.
Containment structures to control lateral spreading present significant structural
challenges due to the depths to consolidated materials in the range of 60 or more
feet and the extremely high forces likely to be bear upon such structures if large
areas of deposits liquefy. In addition, such structures must extend below the
liquefiable deposits to prevent lateral movement of the entire structure. One
retaining structure option is installation of secant pile walls. These are walls
formed from shafts drilled into the earth. The walls consist of reinforced concrete
shafts spaced on a regular interval and spanned by columns of unreinforced
concrete which fill in the gaps. The first step of installation generally involves
drilling shafts to be filled with unreinforced low strength concrete. Primary
shafts to be reinforced with steel and higher strength concrete are drilled
between and cutting into the sides of the unreinforced shafts. The process is
repeated resulting in a wall composed of circular shafts joined together.
(Berger/Abam 2002)
It is likely that an area of considerable width would be required for soil
improvement and retaining structures between building sites and Lake
Washington.
Mitigation of impacts on streets and utilities pose more challenges because they
are extensive linear facilities. Although these facilities could be built on deep
foundations, the cost is generally a limiting factor. Ground improvement
measures along road and utility corridors can provide some reduction in shallow
liquefaction potential that may reduce slumping, but would not address lateral
movement.
Construction of utility pipelines can involve materials of additional strength to
resist breakage from minor displacement together with sections of flexible line to
allow displacement without breakage. In addition, having emergency backup
facilities for fire flow or domestic supply can mitigate the adverse impacts of
system failure during a seismic event by providing temporary facilities for fire
fighting and water supply.
The character of the facility and the population exposed to risk are important
factors in determining appropriate mitigation strategies. Generally, public
facilities such as bridges justify the most reliable seismic mitigation because those
facilities have a high investment cost,high replacement and repair cost, and high
social and economic cost of loss due to lack of access, especially emergency
access. Residential land use also generally receives mitigation with high levels of
reliability because of the potential for loss of life. Commercial and industrial uses
may receive lower levels of seismic protection because the potential loss of life
may be less due to population density, and also the fact that workers are in an
active state and awake so they can exit failing buildings. Extensive, geotechnical
investigation to further document underlying deposits will be needed to assess
risks and develop appropriate mitigation strategies based on a detailed
understanding of the extent of area affected, the population at risk, and specific
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-6-
building type, size and location. Additional environmental review may be
required at that time.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); City of Renton Uniform
Building Code (RMC 4-5); City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining
Regulations (RMC 4-4-060)
B. SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-8 through 3-14 for the Affected Environment
subsection. Refer to the Final EIS for the Impacts subsection, pages 3-14 through
3-22.The mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
1. Pollutants in Surface Water
Mitigation Measures:
B1. The project shall include the construction, operation and maintenance of water
quality facilities designed according to the 1998 King County Surface Water
Design Manual.
B2. The residences and other structures shall be constructed with the lowest floor one
foot above base flood elevation.
B3. New vehicular bridges shall be built to span the floodway orfleedplain-to avoid
restriction of flows during regulatory flood events.
AND provide a final engineering design consistent with one or a combination of the
following:
B4. Contain the 100-year floodplain within the proposed May Creek open space
corridor of approximately 50-foot width on each side of the stream by
enhancements to the existing stream channel,removal and replacement of bridge
crossings, and/or placement of fill outside of the established stream buffer edge.
The floodplain delineation and any necessary stream/buffer improvements shall
be based on hydraulic modeling at the time of final engineering design.
B5. Compensate for flood storage area lost by removing existing fill within the open
space corridor and providing additional storage volume (i.e. a flood terrace
excavated on the west either side of the stream).
B6. Provide a wider 100 foot wide corridor to provide additional conveyance and
flood storage to reduce channel scour and compensate for future increases in
flood elevations because of sediment deposited in the stream channel.
Potential flooding mitigation measures to protect the proposed development
from flooding are presumed to include the constructing of levees or constructing
the proposed development on fill at an elevation above the estimated 100-year
• flood level as presented under Scenario 2. The model predicts an average
maximum floodplain depth of 1.0 foot above the ground surface during the 100-
year flood. Therefore, the levee or fill should be at least 2 feet above the existing
ground elevation, to provide 1 foot of freeboard for the top of the levee or the
lowest occupied floor of residences as required by RMC 4-3-050.I.3.a. These
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-7-
mitigation measures would protect the development from flooding. The analysis
presumes discontinuation of dredging at the mouth of May Creek as a
conservative scenario. Continued dredging could, however, be combined with
one (or both) of these potential mitigation measures to increase stream capacity
and reduce flooding. Dredging of the delta is associated with adverse impacts
on aquatic habitat.
Mitigation of impacts associated with fill placement or levee construction to
reduce associated upstream degradation (bed erosion and downcutting) and
downstream aggradation (sediment deposition and flatter slope) includes three
mitigation scenarios which are described below:
Bridge Removal - This scenario would remove the existing bridges and replace
them with bridges that do not encroach on the floodplain. This would reduce
potential impacts such as backwater and increased flood stages and/or increased
scour and erosion. Under this scenario, floodplain modeling indicates that May
Creek would still overtop the right bank and flood flows would spread out over
the floodplain and flow to Lake Washington. Therefore, this mitigation scenario
alone would not protect the proposed development from flooding, and a levee
and/or fill would still be needed. As stated above,levees and fill that confine the
floodplain have additional impacts to the stream such as increased flood stages,
erosion and scour. Detailed hydraulic information for this scenario is provided in
Appendix E.
Compensatory Storage - This scenario would include a floodplain bench or terrace
(in combination with removal and/or replacement of the existing bridges with
bridges that would not encroach on the floodplain as discussed above). The
proposed bench would be a flat area adjacent to the right bank approximately 16
to 25 feet wide and would be constructed at an elevation approximately
equivalent to the bank full elevation of May Creek, (between 1 and 4 feet below
the existing grade) as shown in Figures 3.2-5 through 3.2-9 illustrated in the Final
EIS. This would provide additional capacity for flood flows and would reduce
shear stress and flood elevations,which would reduce bed and bank erosion and
benefit the stream(see Appendix E).
In addition, the modified channel cross section would contain the 100-yr. future
mitigated flows; therefore, during large flood events floodwaters would not
escape the channel to the west. This would protect the development from
flooding,but could have long-term effects to stream morphology.
A modification of this scenario was analyzed by the applicant with placement of
the main bridge for vehicular access to the site near the stream bank at ordinary
high water. This bridge location would interrupt the floodplain bench and would
result in some backwater effect during high flows. A bridge at this location
would reduce the effectiveness of the floodplain bench and result in some
overtopping of the right bank during the 100-yr. storm event,necessitating levee
construction.
Additional Setback - Levees or fill could be constructed at a distance of 100 feet
from the existing stream instead of the proposed 50 feet. The approximate
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-8-
location of the levee on the west side of the site is indicated in Figure 3.4-5 as
illustrated in the Final EIS. This mitigation scenario would reduce the impacts
associated with construction of a levee or fill at 50 feet. However, this mitigation
would still require construction of a levee or fill to contain the 100-year flows in
the channel and protect the development from flooding, and would have impacts
similar to those discussed under Development Scenario 2, but reduced in scope
because of the greater flood storage. This mitigation scenario could be used in
conjunction with mitigation strategies of bridge removal and compensatory
storage, described above,to provide additional benefits to the stream.
Water Quality - City of Renton standards require that runoff from pollution
generating surfaces be treated. The proposed design includes two water quality
ponds to treat runoff before it is discharged. The facilities' operation and
maintenance would conform to City of Renton and 1998 KCSWDM (King
County 1998) requirements. If mitigation measures are properly implemented,
adverse water quality impacts are not expected. The following description is
based on the TIR for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat(Otak,Inc. 2002).
The possible increased temperatures of stormwater discharged from the water
quality treatment ponds during summer months could be mitigated with dense
bank cover around the edges of the proposed ponds. Several recommendations
include:
a) Use of engineered soil/landscape systems to improve the infiltration and regulation of
stormwater in landscaped areas (See additional discussion of remediation of the
soil/plant community in the Section 3.4.3 in the FEIS).
b) Prevention of discharge of collected vegetation into waterways or storm drainage
systems.
c) The practice of mulch-mowing.
d) Disposal of grass clippings,leaves,sticks,or other collected vegetation by composting,if
feasible.
Best Management Practices for sediment control during construction shall be
implemented using the standards outlined in 1998 KCSWDM, Appendix D.
Impacts resulting from construction activities would be minimized through
implementation of an appropriate Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP), including a risk assessment and an approved Temporary Erosion and
Sediment Control (TESC) Plan. If mitigation measures are properly
implemented, adverse impacts are not expected. Specific elements of the SWPPP
should include the following (Raedeke Associates,Inc. 2002):
e) Delineate and Mark Clearing Limits: Before clearing or disturbing, the limits shall be
marked.
f) Establish Construction Access: All erosion control plans shall install a stabilized
construction entrance(or other method of preventing sediment transport onto the roads).
If a standard gravel construction entrance is proposed,geo-textile fabric shall be installed
under the rock.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-9-
g) Detain Flows: Based on a downstream analysis, it may be necessary to detain runoff
from a site under construction. A detention pond may be used to control flows during
construction.
h) Install Sediment Controls: If runoff from the construction site occurred, sediment shall be
removed from the water. The water quality standards would have to be met prior to
discharge to Lake Washington.
i) Stabilize Soils:All exposed and non-worked soil shall be stabilized by use of BMPs. Both
temporary and permanent groundcover would be part of the construction plans.
j) Protect Slopes: Cut and fill slopes would be protected from erosive flows and
concentrated flows until permanent cover and drainage conveyance systems were in
place.
k) Protect Drain Inlets:All storm drain inlets would require protection from sediment and silt
laden water.
1) Stabilize Channels and Outlets: Temporary and permanent conveyance systems would
be stabilized to prevent erosion during and after construction. Culvert outlets would
require protection.
m) Control Pollutants: The plan would indicate how all pollutants, including waste materials
and demolition debris,would be handled.This would include maintenance of construction
equipment,fertilizers,application of chemicals,and water treatment systems.
n) Control De-Watering: The water from de-watering systems for trenches, vaults, and
foundations would be discharged into a controlled system.
o) Maintain BMPs: The plan would provide for inspection and maintenance of the planned
and installed construction BMPs,as well as their removal at the end of the project.
p) Manage the Project: The plan would outline how the site would be managed for erosion
control. It would cover phasing, training, coordination, monitoring, reporting, and
contingency planning.
Some specific BMPs recommended for this project are as follows (Raedeke
Associates,2002):
q) Limit land disturbing or grading activities between October 1 and April 30, because these
are the highest rain fall months when the risk of erosion is greatest.
r) Limit in-water work for the installation of the stormwater treatment pond outfalls and
construction of bridge footings to the WDFW's prescribed in-water work period for Lake
Washington and May Creek,respectively to minimize impacts on aquatic resources.
s) Route stormwater during construction to a holding pond for sediment control. The first
cell of the proposed stormwater facility is proposed by the project engineer as the
optimum location for a TESC pond. Most stormwater runoff from the site would be routed
to this pond via interceptor trenches and berms,and later via permanent drainage pipes.
t) The area designated by the second cell of the proposed stormwater facility shall remain
in an undisturbed condition until the site has been completely stabilized.
u) Control and monitor stormwater released from the on-site TESC pond during
construction to ensure compliance with established water quality discharge requirements.
v) Stabilize soils at the end of each day based on weather forecast. Applicable practices
include, but are not limited to, temporary/permanent seeding, sodding, mulching, plastic
covering,erosion control matting,a gravel base for areas to be paved,and dust control.
w) Install matting, plastic sheeting, or other approved slope stabilization measures on all
slopes greater than or equal to 3:1.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-10-
•
x) Monitor water quality throughout the construction period.A monitoring plan shall be part
of the quality assurance plan for compliance. The construction SWPPP shall contain a
plan for stormwater sampling locations, background measurements, and a periodic
reporting schedule.The sampling points would be marked on a map and on the ground.
The Ecology Stormwater Manual (Ecology 2001) contains additional erosion and
sediment control BMPs that include the following:
y) Limiting disturbed areas as practicable;
z) Immediate stabilization of construction roads and parking areas;
aa) The use of polyacrylamide as a cover measure;
bb) Erosion prevention techniques such as surface roughening and the use of gradient
terraces;
cc) Construction stormwater chemical treatment or filtration,as needed,to reduce turbidity in
the site discharge;
dd) Specialized concrete handling;
ee) Providing appropriate on-site storage for fuels and chemicals;
fi) Minimizing the risk of soil contamination during construction by restricting fueling and
equipment maintenance to a designated staging area with an impermeable surface, spill
containment features,and a spill clean-up kit;
gg) Providing appropriate disposal facilities for wastes generated during construction;
hh) Designation of a contractor erosion and spill control lead;and
ii) Advanced budgeting and creation of a force-account for TESC measures.
If mitigation measures such as bridge removal or excavation of a floodplain
bench or terrace were implemented, additional Best Management Practices to
control potential discharge into surface water shall be implemented, such as silt
curtains within the stream adjacent to the construction area. More stringent
protection of cleared areas and assurance of establishment of revegetation, or
non-floatable erosion control measures shall be implemented prior to the time of
the seasonal flood hazard.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); 1998 King County Surface
Water Design Manual;2001 Department of Ecology Stormwater Manual
C. GROUNDWATER
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-22 through 3-24 for a detailed discussion of the
Affected Environment and Impacts. The mitigation measures established below
address identified impacts.
1. Groundwater Contamination
Mitigation Measures:
C l. Remove contaminated soil during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site
as outlined in the Independent Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-11 -
16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an alternative plan that achieves applicable Model
Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
C2. Evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil remediation is
complete and perform groundwater remediation as necessary to achieve
applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
Discussion:
Removal of the contaminated soil and dewatering and treatment of the
contaminated groundwater during Model Toxics Control Act cleanup of the site
would improve groundwater quality with respect to arsenic and other
contaminants. No specific mitigation measures are required for shallow or
deeper groundwater impacts. Impacts to the aquifers below the project site
resulting from redevelopment activities are anticipated to be minimal.
Although the shallow aquifer is not a valuable water supply source for the
community, it is important for on-site and adjacent wetland areas. Removal of
the impacted soil and dewatering and treatment of the impacted groundwater
during those activities would probably improve groundwater quality with
respect to arsenic.
Shallow groundwater could potentially be encountered during installation of
subsurface utilities or other intrusive activities. Because the shallow aquifer table
is likely to be low during the portion of the year when precipitation is minimal,
the chance to encounter groundwater could be minimized by conducting
intrusive activities during the dry season (late spring through late summer and
early fall).
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); State of Washington
(WAC 173-340)
D. PLANTS AND ANIMALS
Refer to the Affected Environment section in the Draft EIS,pages 3-24 through 3-
34. For the Impacts section, refer to the Final EIS, pages 3-16 through 3-25. The
mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures
D 1. Relocate the osprey nest to an artificial structure erected in the project site
vicinity.
D2. Protect the existing vegetation buffer vegetation along May Creek from
disturbance during construction by erecting barrier fencing and locating staging
and access areas away from buffer areas.
D3. Clear to completely remove existing invasive species in buffer areas and re-plant
with native species consistent with preliminary landscaping mitigation plans
approved as part of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat approvals.
D4. De bridge ith. ,ffc ent he h,-ana width to al etratie of nl ght
and precipitation to maintain vegetation. The width of proposed bridges shall be
minimized to that necessary to accommodate vehicular and pedestrian traffic in
order to optimize light penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-12-
t ,
under the bridge deck. Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-
deck clearance adequate to pass debris and maximum flood volumes in
accordance with current City of Renton and other applicable regulatory criteria
for life safety.
D5. Plant open space and buffer areas with native vegetation consistent with
preliminary landscaping mitigation plans approved as part of the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat approvals.
D6:
ne bridg it1 .ff, ent ho ght and .idtl ;ae f a'
The width of proposed bridges shall be minimized to that necessary to
accommodate vehicular and pedestrian traffic in order to optimize light
penetration to those areas immediately adjacent to and under the bridge deck.
Bridges shall also be designed with reasonable below-deck clearance adequate to
pass debris and maximum flood volumes in accordance with current City of
Renton and other applicable regulatory criteria for life safety.
D7. Use native plants in residential landscaping to minimize the use of fertilizers,
pesticides, or herbicides.
D8. Limit wetland displacement to the extent practical by designing changes in the
proposal to place development outside the wetland and buffer.
D9. Compensate for loss of wetland by replacement on site.
D 10. Compensate for loss of buffer through buffer-width averaging and enhancement
of the existing buffer vegetation.
D11. If applicable, then Either: a) Remove bulkheads where natural shoreline
conditions can be re-established(where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in
conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR b) Remove bulkheads and rely
on vegetation stabilization (where the lake is shallow, on public lands or in
conjunction with greater building setbacks); OR c)Provide plantings in rip-rap.
D 12. Reduce the elevation above OHWM of sheet pile walls and rip-rap to allow more
natural shoreline plantings.
D 13. Preserve those pilings and other in-water structures that are at a distance from the
near-shore habitat that is important for juvenile salmonids.
D14. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of
more extensive and complex communities of indigenous vegetation.
D15. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of
mature canopy from indigenous vegetation to provide summer shade and to
intercept light and glare.
D16. Provide 50 foot buffers on stream and lake shoreline to allow establishment of
more extensive communities of indigenous vegetation to buffer disturbance and
allow public access further from the shoreline. The first thirty-five (35) feet from
the ordinary high water mark shall be vegetated with native plant or grass species
as appropriate. The remaining fifteen (15) feet may be landscaped as appropriate
to be utilized as a yard area..
D 17. Either: a) Prohibit docks and require the use of mooring buoys or floats at a
distance from near-shore habitat; OR b) Reduce the number of docks through
shared moorage, AND THEN; c) Reduce shading impacts by narrower docks or
materials that allow light penetration.
D 18. Provide long-term management of shoreline vegetation by an entity other than
residents such as the homeowners association or a similar entity.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-13-
Discussion:
Impacts that narrow the range or degree of beneficial use of the stream and
shoreline areas of the site are inherent in the permanent change of use to the
residential development proposed. A major contributor to the beneficial use of
the shorelines are the specific setbacks and presumed uses discussed above. The
mitigation outlined below illustrates opportunities to expand shoreline buffer
areas an implement other specific measures that increase the beneficial use of the
stream and shoreline areas to include more complex plant communities and
associated wildlife populations as well as mitigate specific adverse impacts of the
proposal.
Mitigation has also been viewed from the perspective of local regulations,
specifically Renton Shoreline Regulations, which sets forth several requirements
as follows: "the potential effects on wildlife should be considered in the design
plans for any activity or facility that may have detrimental effects on the
environment" (RMC 4-3-090-K-2-a); "landscaping should be representative of the
native character of specific types of waterways (stream, lake edge, marshland);
the ecological qualities of natural and developed shorelines should be recognized
and preserved as valuable resources" (RMC 4-3-090-K-6); and "wildlife habitat
should be incorporated into the site" (RMC 4-3-090-K-6).
Subdivision Construction Impacts - Mitigation of construction impacts on
existing vegetation shall include protecting the existing native buffer vegetation
along May Creek from disturbance during construction by erecting barrier
fencing. Staging and access areas shall be designed to avoid buffer areas that are
dominated by native vegetation. During construction, any cleared or re-graded
areas on the site shall be kept covered and/or re-seeded with a temporary cover
crop to prevent the establishment or spread of invasive weedy species.
Construction of the proposed bridge presents a substantial potential for impacts
to May Creek. These impacts will depend upon the design of the bridge;
specifically how close abutments and fill structures are to the stream and how
well erosion control measures are implemented. Selective clearing of portions of
the site where Himalayan blackberry or reed canary-grass already occur, could
be combined with vegetation establishment if cleared areas are quickly planted
with native species.
Mitigation of construction impacts on aquatic species can largely be
accomplished by controlling erosion and sedimentation as outlined in the Best
Management Practices (BMP) identified in the Water Quality section of the FEIS.
Perhaps the most important consideration during construction activities is to
conduct in-water work during the time of year when fish are generally not
present. Staging areas, especially the storage of fuels and chemicals, shall be
located as far from water bodies as possible to reduce potential for accidental
spills.
Implementing a revegetation plan for the buffer areas adjacent to the creek and
lake at the plat infrastructure stage avoids piecemeal implementation as each lot
develops, provides for oversight of the removal of impervious surfaces at the
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-14-
time existing buildings are demolished, and allows the establishment of
vegetation cover for interception of runoff from building sites.
Development and Use of the Site
Vegetation Communities -Project conditions could require residential landscaping
to include native vegetation in private lots fronting the Lake Washington
shoreline, although assuring long-term maintenance given residential
preferences for lawn and ornamental vegetation is a long-term education and
enforcement issue. Native vegetation will minimize the need for fertilizers,
pesticides, or herbicides and reduce adverse affects on terrestrial wildlife, native
vegetation, and aquatic organisms in Lake Washington. In addition, importing
high quality soil material and ensuring adequate soil health, prior to installing
residential or ornamental landscaping, can decrease the need for chemical
supplements or controls in landscape maintenance.
The May Creek Final Action Plan (King County 2001) recommends restoration of
conifers adjacent to the creek to improve habitat conditions, stabilize
streambanks, and improve the complexity and diversity of habitat. The plan also
notes that the prospects of proposed land use changes at May Creek Delta could
create the opportunity for initiation of a major habitat restoration project at the
delta (King County 2001).
Establishment of a viable community of native vegetation on an industrial site
presents a number of challenges. These relate to the degradation of the substrate
that supports plants, and to isolation from existing plant communities that
would provide a diversity of species to colonize specific niches and
microenvironments. Plans for restoration of natural vegetation communities on
developed sites can be aided by inclusion of the following concepts:
Structure. Refers to the physical complexity within each plant community. Site
design must reflect the fact that restored plant associations will evolve and
mature over time. A complex vegetation community that contains as many
features of native communities must be created within the restored vegetation
community.
Spacing. Within each target plant community, the patterns of species and their
spatial relationships shall be replicated to the extent possible. It is important to
develop a design to incorporate trees in the overstory canopy, trees in the mid-
story, shrubs in the understory, and herbs forming the ground layer. Other
important components of the ground layer are logs and stumps, which provide
habitat for insects and amphibians, and are a source of nutrients and organic
matter.
Interspersion. Refers to the degree of complexity of patches within a system or the
transitions among various plant communities. In general, the relationships
between patch size, structure, edge, and dispersion/interspersion in the
landscape are the critical factors affecting wildlife value of a system.
Where spatial complexity is high, so is the amount of transitional area between
plant communities. Such transitional areas or "edges" are rich in wildlife, both in
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-15-
numbers of individuals and species, and are considered important components
of functioning ecosystems. Transitional edges offer wildlife proximity to several
habitat areas and structural variety; however, if the amount of edge in a system
is extremely high,the integrity within individual plant communities may be lost.
Establishment and Persistence. The establishment and persistence of vegetation on
this site is likely to include a number of challenges because the existing geology
and soils largely consist of a variety of fill materials, and there is no local
community of mature native vegetation to provide for succession of native
species. Establishment of soils for native vegetation will require extensive soil
amendment. Persistence of the introduced plant communities will require
replacement of specimens that do not thrive and control of invasive "weed"
species.
The provision of a management entity is needed to provide a long term
commitment to monitoring establishment and replanting, to control the impacts
of use by adjacent residents or the public, and possibly to mediate between the
interests of adjacent residents and the general public purpose of the buffer areas.
Substantial resources are likely to be required over an extended period of time.
Potential management agencies can include the City of Renton Parks
Department; DNR, which has management responsibility for the public uplands
and submerged aquatic lands; WDFW, which has primary responsibility for
managing wildlife and fish resources;volunteer participation by the public using
shoreline access; and the adjacent homeowners or a homeowners' association; or
cooperative programs involving all of these agencies. Dedication of buffer areas
to public ownership, or a public easement for management by a public entity,
may be required.
The palette for selection of plants for buffer areas in riparian and shoreline areas
shall be varied and include a variety of plant communities. For the purpose of
this analysis, it is presumed that the Renton Shoreline program requiring
planting of native vegetation will include native trees such as western red cedar,
western hemlock,Douglas fir,black cottonwood,big leaf maple,Oregon ash, and
bitter cherry, and native shrubs and small trees such as red currant, red
elderberry, vine maple, beaked hazelnut, Pacific crabapple, red-osier dogwood,
Pacific willow,Sitka willow,Scouler's willow,twinberry, and salmonberry. Such
plant communities also would enhance the wildlife habitat of the landscaping
around the water quality ponds and reduce the potential need for herbicides and
pesticides near these waters.
Wetland and Buffer Area Displacement
Avoidance- The displacement of buffer area for the northerly wetland could be
avoided by design changes in the proposal to place development outside the
wetland buffer, with an additional area of 10 to 15 feet for temporary
construction disturbance. This would require redesign of the town homes on
Lots 109 through 115 to move the proposed access road 12 to 15 feet to the west.
If the roadway and town homes were shifted enough to provide a permanent
buffer dimension of 25 feet, but allow construction disturbance of the existing
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-16-
degraded buffer with future restoration, about eight town home sites could be
retained.
The displacement of the wetland and buffer area of the southerly wetland could
be avoided by redesign of this portion of the proposal to place all development
outside the 25-foot wide wetland buffer area. This would involve shifting the
access road currently proposed at the property line west about 40 feet in the
immediate vicinity of the wetland. This would displace proposed lots 99 and 100
and require reconfiguration of other lots for a net loss of two building sites. If
retained, existing utilities consisting of water valves and a hydrant shall be re-
located outside the wetland and buffer.
Compensation, Restoration, and Enhancement- Restoration of the buffer area of the
northerly wetland disturbed by construction would require planting of native
vegetation to replace the displaced vegetation. The existing buffer vegetation
west of the wetland is characterized by non-native grasses and forbs, with some
areas of red alder and Himalayan blackberry. Replacement buffer area vegetation
would include a mix of native trees and shrub species such as western red cedar,
western hemlock, Douglas fir, big leaf maple, vine maple, beaked hazelnut,
salmon berry, and red currant. Enhancement of the existing wetland vegetation
community of the northerly wetland, which consists of introduced vegetation,
could be accomplished by planting a mix of native shrubs and emergent
plants.
Compensation for the area of the southern wetland proposed to be displaced,
together with likely changes in hydrology, would necessitate replacement
elsewhere on site. The City of Renton specifies a 1.5:1 minimum replacement
ratio for wetland creation and replacement. The code provides for additional
area in cases where there is uncertainty about the probable success of the
proposed restoration or creation; where there is a significant period of time
between destruction and replication of wetland functions; or projected losses in
functional value (RMC 4-3-050-M-11-e).
The most likely candidate area for wetland creation is north and west of the
northerly wetland, adjacent to the proposed May Creek buffer area. Likely
constraints for wetland creation in this area that should be addressed include the
following:
a) Adequate hydrology through groundwater and surface water supply is critical to sustain a
wetland vegetation community. Surface water runoff from building roofs could provide
recharge for the wetland. (Runoff from streets contains pollutants that can be an
undesirable addition to wetland ecology.) Regrading some of the area north of the
existing wetland to lower the elevation may provide sufficient groundwater hydrology.
b) Both wetlands and buffer areas are largely devoid of native species due to mowing. A
specific wetland planting plan would depend on a detailed evaluation of site hydrology.
The invasive nature of the existing community of reed canary grass poses a high risk of
invasion of the enhanced and created wetland by weed species. This risk can be
addressed by removing the existing reed canary grass by grading and replacement with
dense plantings of native shrubs and trees.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-17-
Monitoring and enforcement is a critical element of successful wetland
compensation. Recent studies have found that failure of wetland mitigation has
been attributed to design, installation, and maintenance flaws. The single most
important cause of failure has been lack of enforcement (Mockler et al. 1998,
Johnson et al. 2000). The location of most of the northerly wetland on BNSF
property will require cooperation to ensure the entire wetland is managed as a
single biological entity.
Wildlife- Mitigation of impact of bridge crossings may include greater height to
allow penetration of light and precipitation to maintain plants, and vertical and
horizontal clearance for wildlife movement.
Establishing and maintaining streamside shoreline vegetation will provide
upland habitat,provide screening from human disturbance, and contribute to the
enhancement of the food chain provided by shallow near-shore habitat that has
been produced by delta formation. Maintaining some or all of the existing log
rafts and pilings in Lake Washington adjacent to the project site, would provide
perch and loafing sites to benefit waterfowl. To avoid conflict with mitigation for
aquatic species, pilings in deep water areas are the best candidates for retention.
Fencing the open space areas to reduce disturbance from domestic animals will
enhance wildlife value.
Osprey-Osprey mitigation measures could include relocation of the osprey nest
to an artificial structure erected in the project site vicinity, as recommended by
WDFW and agreed upon by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). A
WDFW biologist shall be consulted during relocation of the new nest site,which
will occur while the birds are on their wintering grounds. Potential sites for
relocation on site include the riparian corridor proposed to be established along
May Creek. Research has indicated that ospreys will quickly adapt to and use
artificial nesting structures (Saurola 1997; Houghton and Rymon 1997).
Prolonged exposure to noise during an extended buildout of the site may,
however, discourage the existing osprey pair from relocating within open
space on-site. Potential mitigation would prohibit the loudest construction
noise such as pile driving during the nesting and early fledging period of late
April to late July.
Aquatic Species - There are a variety of mitigating measures for natural stream
and shoreline function that are related closely to the amount of land devoted to
mitigation buffers. For this reason, discussion of mitigation is covered below
under "Mitigation Through Alternative Buffer Areas." This mitigation addresses
such functions as LWD recruitment,bank stabilization/erosion control, removal
of sediments and pollutants, regulation of water temperature through stream
shading,bulkheads, artificial light, and public access.
Removal of existing in-water structures such as pilings, the existing dock, and
log booms would improve conditions for juvenile salmonids by reducing the
amount of existing cover for predators, such as smallmouth bass, and by not
interfering with production of aquatic food resources. Mitigation of the adverse
impacts of residential dock construction and use can be addressed by a number
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-18-
of strategies ranging from avoiding construction of docks, reducing the number
of docks,and or through specific design and construction measures.
Avoidance of the impacts of new docks could be addressed by a plat condition
prohibiting private dock construction. This would avoid impacts from use of the
docks and from dock shading. Such a prohibition could include the implication
that property owners would use commercial moorage at off-site marinas or could
provide for alternative moorage facilities such as mooring buoys or floats located
at a distance from near-shore habitat. The latter option could include a dingy
dock for access to buoys and floats. Such a dock could include the existing
sawmill dock at the northern end of the proposed common area (that could be
reduced in area) or a new, smaller dock more centrally located that would avoid
proximity impacts on adjacent residential lots.
An option that would reduce impacts,but not prohibit new docks, could involve
shared moorage by two or more property owners. In such a case docks could be
developed at property lines to serve two adjacent properties, or a single moorage
facility could be developed to serve the entire development. Dock construction
could include narrower width or materials that allow light penetration. As noted
above, long-term use of docks is likely to be hampered by delta formation and
could lead to requests by residents to dredge,which would reduce the benefits of
natural processes that create shallow shoreline habitat.
Alternative Buffer Areas-More extensive buffer areas provide for a wider range of
vegetation communities that would support re-establishment of natural
characteristics of the Lake Washington shoreline. Buffer areas would reduce
long-term and cumulative impacts of residential development of the shoreline,
and expand the beneficial use for wildlife and aquatic species.
One conceptual scenario (Option A) is proposed for expanded buffer areas on the
Lake Washington shoreline and two (Options A and C) are examined for May
Creek:
c) Re-orienting the turn-around for Street A on the west side of May Creek from the riparian
corridor to the interior of the project to maintain the 50-foot setback.
d) Additional setbacks on the east side of May Creek near the mouth of the stream where
the proposed setback narrows to 15 feet from OHWM. A 50-foot setback in this area
reduces four proposed town home units to one or two.
e) The entire 50-foot setback would be revegetated with native plant species.
For the Lake Washington shoreline, this option is presumed to include the
following two components:
fl The outer 25-feet adjacent to the shoreline would provide a vegetation buffer that would
include restoration of the shoreline to a more natural condition through:
v. Elimination of bulkheads,or reduction in height of existing bulkheads.
vi. Limited re-grading to provide a more natural shoreline gradient and
providing substrate for plantings near the water.
vii. Planting of a mix of native vegetation on the shoreline, while preserving
some view corridors for adjacent residential development.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-19-
viii. Providing passive public access through a pedestrian trail located 10 to 15
feet from the water, with fencing between the trail and waterfront, and
viewing areas every 100 to 150 feet on the shoreline with benches or
other passive features.
g) The inner 25-foot area dedicated to the use of adjacent residences, including yard areas
and ornamental landscaping would be oriented to intensive residential use. It would
provide few benefits to the adjacent shoreline except for distance attenuation of noise
and other proximity impacts. This area probably would be used by the subsurface
containment walls that are likely to be needed to prevent lateral spreading of potentially
liquefiable alluvial deposits. It is also likely that this area would be fenced for privacy from
the 25 foot area of indigenous plantings and public access along the shoreline.
This mitigation option would reduce the number of units on the site from 115 to
about 100, given the current layout of townhomes. The existing zoning,however,
allows a variety of residential building types. Within the applicant's proposed
height limits of 50 feet with Shoreline Management Act (SMA) jurisdiction and
70 feet outside, other types of residential units could be constructed. For
example, construction of apartment buildings to the proposed height limits
would result in five to seven story buildings that could accommodate well over
115 units on the 43 lots outside SMA jurisdiction.
Cross-sections that indicate the building setbacks for Option A are provided for
three different portions of the Lake Washington shoreline as illustrated in the
Final EIS.
Option C, Flood Terrace and Reduced Planting in May Creek Buffer - The applicant
has developed a third mitigation strategy (Option C) that is shown in Figures 3.4-
5A (illustrated in the Final EIS) and analyzed below. Option C applies only to the
May Creek corridor. Differences from Option A include:
On the west side of May Creek, the turn-around for Street A retains the original
proposed orientation towards the exterior of the project, resulting in a setback of 25-
feet from Ordinary High Water. The setback narrows to about 20 feet further south
toward the mouth of the creek.
-, On the east side of the May Creek the original proposed configuration of Tract F and
the adjacent townhomes is retained resulting in a setback of 15 feet at the narrowest,
with setbacks varying up to 30 feet further to the south toward the mouth of the
creek.
-1 The 50-foot setback along the May Creek corridor north of the proposed bridge
would consist of 35-feet of native vegetation and 15-feet of lawn and other managed
landscape vegetation. It is unclear from the proposal who would manage this area,
since it is outside of the residential lots.
Buildings on the residential lots are proposed to maintain a 10 foot setback, resulting
in the setback from the stream in this area consisting of 35 feet of native species and
25 feet of lawns and other residential landscaping. The lot layout and number of lots
is the same as the proposal
A flood terrace would be excavated along the west side of the May Creek corridor
from about Street A to the property line to the north. This terrace would extend 30 to
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-20-
i
40 feet from the existing OHWM and would be three to five feet deep. The result of
the flood terrace would be an increase in capacity to convey flood waters as
discussed in Section 3.2.3, above.
Impervious Surfaces - Impervious surface on-site is reduced to about 60 percent
under the proposal. Under Option A, a slight increase in pervious surface would
be provided along May Creek and the pervious area along Lake Washington
would be doubled. Total impervious surface would be reduced by about five
(5%) percent under Option A as compared to the proposal. The decrease in
impervious surface is unlikely to have a substantial direct impact except along
the Lake Washington Shoreline, where the 50 foot setback would allow
infiltration of most precipitation and eliminate runoff entering the lake except
under the most intense storm events. Option. C has the same amount of
impervious surface area as the proposal.
Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat - The buffer area in Option A (50 foot buffer)
would be planted entirely in native vegetation. The larger width of the buffer
areas that would be planted with trees and shrubs under Option A would
provide greater structure, or physical complexity, greater spacing, or complexity
in spatial relationships including overstory, mid-story, shrubs, and understory,
and greater interspersion, or complexity and transitions among various plant
communities. This could be expected to provide not only more wildlife habitat,
but more complex niches for a greater variety of species and a more complex and
productive food web. A greater separation from human disturbance would be
provided that would encourage species with less Ltolerance to humans.
The Renton Shoreline Master Program, which provides general guidance that
landscaping be representative of the native character of specific types of
waterways (e.g. stream, lake edge, marshland) and be compatible with the
Northwest image (RMC 4-3-090-K-6).
Option A provides little difference from the proposal in buffers along May
Creek, except near the mouth of the creek where Option A increases setbacks to
50 feet in areas where the proposal includes setbacks that range from 15 to 30
feet.
Option A doubles the setback from Lake Washington, as compared to the
proposal. This additional area provides limited opportunities for establishing a
viable community of native vegetation along the Lake Washington shoreline. A
25-foot wide buffer of native plantings adjacent to the lake and a 25-foot area
devoted to lawn adjacent to residences provides a planting area that will
accommodate only one or two native trees (at maturity) between the residential
lawn area and the shoreline. A 25-foot buffer of native vegetation would be likely
to allow plant communities to develop that were relatively simple and
homogenous with few upland transitional areas or edges. The presence of public
access trails in the area would also lead to potential impediments to establishing
a stable vegetation community because of trampling and other disturbance,
and would be an additional disturbance to wildlife.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-21 -
There is potential for conflict in values between the interests of residents on lots
adjacent to Lake Washington and the benefits of greater buffers. In many cases,
homeowners on the Lake Washington shoreline are likely to desire views of the
lake and the distant landscape that would not be accommodated by typically
dense communities of native species. Retaining views may limit opportunities to
develop an effective community of native shoreline vegetation and wildlife
habitat because those communities typically create dense screens, especially
native evergreen species. This conflict may be present to a less extent on lots
adjacent to public land on the shoreline where public ownership, as well as the
Shoreline Management Act, supports planting native vegetation as a means of
enhancing environmental values.
With the 25-foot buffer of native planting on Lake Washington under Option A,
some accommodation of both interests could be provided by emphasizing
groundcover and shrubs in the shoreline with the tree species chosen for the
potential to grow with a large leaf canopy above the level of major views. Such
species would potentially allow removal of lower limbs at maturity that would
allow some views between trunks, while providing a leaf canopy that would
overhang the lakeshore and provide shade and other desirable elements. Native
evergreens could be located closer to residences and along lot lines or other
locations where view corridors between individual or groups of trees can be
provided. Building design that placed the main living and entertainment
quarters on the second floor with garages on the first floor would provide the
potential for visual access over shrub plantings and would allow visibility over
privacy fences between the lawn areas and areas of native plantings.
The 25 foot buffer in Option A could be implemented on the entire public land
corridor along the shoreline by DNR,which manages the land as a trustee for the
public. The existing leaseholder has certain responsibilities for removal of
existing facilities and restoration of the landscape that could be integrated into
DNR action. Maintenance of shoreline plantings on public land will require
designation of a management entity which could include some combination of
the City of Renton, DNR, and the WDFW. Maintenance of plantings on private
lots adjacent to the shoreline will likely involve long-term enforcement issues in
view of property-owner interest in making recreational use of the shoreline, and
interest in maintaining views of the water and a general cultural preference for
lawn. Maintaining non-ornamental landscaping on private lots likely will require
extensive public education and enforcement.
Providing for management of the shoreline setback by dedication to the public,
or by an easement providing for management by an entity other than the
individual property owner, would likely contribute to better maintenance of
native vegetation.
Option C proposes a 50-foot buffer on May Creek consisting of 35-feet of native
vegetation, and 15-feet of managed landscaping. This is less than the native
vegetation area in the applicant's original proposal The 30 percent reduction of
the width of native vegetation on May Creek (with respect to the proposal and
Option A) substantially reduces the ecological complexity and potential to
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-22-
r
provide riparian habitat functions. The narrowing of the total buffer width to a
minimum of 25 feet on the west side and 15 feet on the east side near the creek
mouth further reduces the riparian functionality in those areas.
In the short term, construction of the flood terrace on May Creek in Option C
would remove all of the existing riparian vegetation on the west side of the
stream and would degrade riparian habitat.
Construction of the flood terrace would also likely introduce sediment into May
Creek in the short term,unless appropriate BMPs were used.
Upon re-establishment of native vegetation, however, the flood terrace may
provide an environment more suited to riparian vegetation dependent on ample
water supplies because of decreased distance to the groundwater table. This may
result in a plant community composed of more willow, cottonwood, red osier
dogwood, and similar species. The 35-foot width of the area designated for
native plantings, however, provides limited area for establishment of large
trees that provide stream shading or potential large wood recruitment. About
one-quarter of the width of the 35-foot native vegetation buffer area on the
west side would be on the 3:1 slope providing a transition from the flood
terrace to existing grade.
This slope would present few constraints for re-establishing vegetation, but
would only accommodate one or two native trees (at maturity) between the
managed landscape area and the streambank. A 35-foot buffer of native
vegetation would be likely only allow plant communities to develop that were
relatively simple and homogenous with few upland transitional areas or edges.
In comparison, the area of the site that currently has the most heavily vegetated
buffer located on the west side of the stream north of the northerly bridge is
about 60 feet wide. It generally contains a single row of mature cottonwood trees,
smaller trees such as willow,and a dense understory.
Option C is identical to the applicant's proposal on Lake Washington where a 25
foot building setback is proposed with no proposal, and little opportunity to re-
establish native vegetation.
Stream and Lake Morphology - Under Option A, the 50-foot buffer area along May
Creek would be similar to the proposal in providing limited opportunities for
establishment of vegetation communities that support natural stream processes
such as meandering. It is likely that stream bank protections would be
maintained to keep the stream in its existing channel. The major difference
would be near the mouth of the creek where delta formation and a less incised
creek provide additional opportunities for stream meandering under the
additional buffer area provided by Option A.
Option C would provide an area within the flood terrace that would allow the
stream to re-establish some additional instream habitat-forming and floodplain
processes, such as meandering and channel migration, due to the removal of
existing bank protections. However, the 20 to 25-foot width of the terrace would
limit the extent of these processes. If the stream did meander to the west, the 35-
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-23-
,
foot native vegetation buffer would be reduced and provide less buffer between
the stream and proposed residences. The overall potential to re-establish more
natural stream processes would be somewhat better than under Option A. Near
the mouth of the Creek where the Option C buffer is 15 to 30-feet on the east side
and 25 to 35-feet on,,the west side, there would be fewer opportunities to re-
establish a natural stream morphology as compared to the 50 and 100-foot
buffers under Options A and B.
Option A provides limited area for natural lake erosion and beach formation on
Lake Washington. Portions of the shoreline with shallow depth would
accommodate removing bulkheads and allowing erosion to form a more natural
shoreline.
Option C is the same as the proposal for the Lake Washington shoreline and
provides no mitigation of impacts of the proposal.
Pollutant Removal and Sediment Filtration - Under Option A, the 50-foot vegetated
buffer along May Creek would be similar to the proposal in its ability to provide
natural control of pollutants and sediment in runoff except near the mouth of the
stream.
Option A differs from the proposal near the mouth of the stream where, under
the proposal, the buffer width narrows, while under Option A it would provide
additional area to filter sediments or runoff.
The Option C 35-foot buffer of native vegetation provides a moderately effective
width on the west side of the stream of about 25 feet of level native vegetated
area within the stream terrace for removal of pollutants and sediment by
overland filtration. The slope at the edge of the terrace is unlikely to provide any
pollutant removal because of the velocity of surface water moving across the
slope. The slope may contribute to erosion due to surface water movement. This
slope is also likely to speed the velocity of surface water flows across the
remaining 25 feet of flood terrace, reducing its effectiveness. For much of the
proposed 35-foot buffer, there is no native vegetation beyond the excavated
floodplain terrace.
Fertilizers,pesticides and sediment from the managed landscape zone is likely to
be filtered less effectively than either the proposal where the entire buffer would
be vegetated, or under Option A that would have a wider buffer area than
Option C.
On the Lake Washington shoreline, substantial additional pollutant control
would be provided by Option A, which doubles the width of building setbacks
and providing an additional 25-foot buffer area of native plantings. Interception
of sediment and chemicals in runoff would be moderately effective with the 25-
foot planting area. It would be beneficial if the shoreline vegetation buffer was
established prior to building construction.
Option A would result in a decrease in application of herbicides and pesticides
near the Lake Washington shoreline as compared to the proposal where
development of lawn areas would be expected to increase chemical applications.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-24-
Direct application to water through overspray or spill would be avoided.
Infiltration of waters containing pollutants via direct groundwater input would
be reduced by greater setbacks.
-Option C does not change buffer areas along Lake Washington as compared to
the proposal and can be expected to have the same impacts from chemical
fertilizers,herbicides, and pesticides that can be expected to be applied up to the
waters edge and lead to over-spraying, inadvertent spillage, and runoff
containing these chemicals.
Water Temperature Regulation and Regulation of Microclimate-A riparian vegetation
buffer width of 50 feet on May Creek as in the proposal and Option A would not
be sufficient to provide properly functioning water temperature regulation of
May Creek through shading, but would provide some benefits of additional
shading over time as new vegetation matured. This level of shading may serve to
prevent or moderate further increases of water temperature prior to entering
Lake Washington that would otherwise occur if there was no streamside
vegetation. Because of the location of the project site and the short distance of
stream on the site, stream temperatures will, however, largely be affected by
habitat and water uses upstream of the project site.
Option C would provide even less shading potential since a reduced native
vegetation buffer width of 35 feet would not support the same number or density
of mature trees as would a 50-foot buffer.
Option A would increase shading of Lake Washington shallow water areas and
reduce temperatures increases in area that would otherwise receive direct
sunlight as compared to the project's proposed 25-foot building setback
(presuming that few large trees would be planted on private lots and shading
would be negligible).
Native shrubs and trees planted on the lake shoreline would, in time, grow to
provide shoreline overhanging vegetation and provide temperature moderation
of shallow water habitat. The project site faces largely to the west. The sun angle
and height during the summer months will allow shading to occur in the
morning,because the sun rises north of due east after the spring equinox. During
mid-day, the sun ranges from directly overhead to slightly north of overhead,
allowing overhanging vegetation to shade shallow water areas. The sun in the
afternoon is also slightly north of west, allowing crown shading from trees along
the shoreline and inland. In addition, the angle of the sun shining through more
layers of atmosphere in the afternoon reduces heat transmittal. Shading is
dependent on the density of vegetation and the size of the tree crowns.
Option C does not change buffer areas along Lake Washington and would have
the same effects as the proposal.
Large Woody Debris Recruitment - Option A and the proposal would provide for
approximately a 50-foot vegetated buffer along May Creek, which would be
inadequate for providing natural levels of LWD recruitment, but limited
increases in LWD recruitment would be expected as planted vegetation matured.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-25-
1
Short-term mitigation measures could include the addition of LWD to provide
fish habitat, but this should only be considered a short-term solution, and the
subsequent effects on channel migration resulting from the redirection of flows
would have to be carefully considered.
Since Option C has the least amount of native landscape, it can be expected to
provide the lowest LWD recruitment potential on May Creek of all the options.
Option A would provide more potential for LWD recruitment on Lake
Washington than the proposal or Option C. As with May Creek, LWD could also
be placed along the Lake Washington shoreline in the short term. This would
likely provide habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon in early spring (through
April); however, it also would provide additional habitat for non-salmonid
predators such as bass.
Bulkheads - Shoreline protection for residential use on Lake Washington is
assumed to be necessary with the proposed 25-foot building setback due to the
southeast facing aspect and the prevailing direction of winds and storms from
the south. The current sheet-pile bulkheads on the site were installed at high
activity log-handling areas and are not necessary for shoreline protection from
wave action. In addition, shoreline areas are anticipated to fill in over a period of
years with sediment originating from May Creek due to discontinued dredging
operations. This will likely provide more shallow area that will dissipate wave
action prior to reaching the shoreline and in the long-term will provide accretion
of new land waterward of the existing high water line. Delta formation also
will provide shallow water habitat along the shoreline.
The greater setbacks from the shoreline in Option A provide greater potential for
removal of existing bulkheads on the shoreline because residential structures and
associated lawn areas would not be threatened. Areas where the lake is shallow,
or where it becomes shallower through delta formation, removal of bulkheads
would contribute to the formation of a more natural shoreline in conjunction
with bio-engineering shoreline protection options. Bio-engineering options
presume that some area is available for natural processes and may be precluded
in areas where a 25-foot building setback is proposed. Bio-engineering options
could include regrading the upland portion of the shoreline and limiting
armoring to the lower wetted portion at a shallow angle. This would allow for
more natural shoreline processes to occur as shown in Figure 3.4-9 as illustrated
in the FEIS. This may be especially applicable in publicly owned portions of the
shoreline. Opportunities to implement bulkhead removal and shoreline
enhancement in areas of public ownership could be coordinated with
Washington Department of Natural Resources requirements for removal of
existing development on the public lands.
Further options include varying the shoreline from its existing straight
configuration to provide inlets and pocket beaches to more closely replicate
natural conditions, as indicated in the conceptual sketch in Figure 3.4-10 as
illustrated in the Final EIS. After a period of decades, delta formation may result
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-26-
in considerable accretion of new land and may isolate existing bulkheads inland
away from the shoreline.
As an interim measure, short of bioengineering, or for those portions of the site
where dredging has created deep water adjacent to existing bulkheads, the
following could be implemented:
h) Removal of sheet-pile bulkheads,or in the alternative, lowering the concrete cap close to
the OHWM and providing a graded slope on the landward side, will reduce the negative
impact of wave reflection and provide an area of soil to support revegetation. It may also
be desirable to engineer filled areas waterward of the OHWM to place sand and small
gravel substrate that provides suitable habitat for juvenile salmonids in the intervening
period prior to substantial accretion from delta formation.
i) Riprap re-vegetation by filling the voids in the riprap with soil and installing plant cuttings
or rooted plants, provides more favorable habitat features for fish and wildlife, including
shade, leaf litter, browse, and additional roughness to slow overbank flow and capture
nutrient-laden sediments(WDFW 2003).
Residential Noise and Lighting - Noise and lighting impacts on wildlife along May
Creek would be similar under the proposal and Option A as vegetation in the
approximately 50-foot wide riparian buffer matures. Option A provides more
buffer area and mitigation near the mouth of the creek. Option C, with a 30
percent reduction in the width of the buffer area devoted to native vegetation,
can be expected to provide a reduction in effectiveness in blocking light. The
limited effectiveness of vegetation in providing noise buffer would likely result
in little difference in noise attenuation between Option C and Option A.
Along Lake Washington, the proposed 25-foot building setback along Lake
Washington will not serve to reduce residential lighting and noise impacts as
compared to the additional buffer areas under Option A. Conditions could
prohibit outdoor lighting; however, this would be very difficult to enforce over
time and may not be as large a source of light as light from building windows.
The elimination or reduction in the number of docks discussed above would
reduce light from that source. Option C does not change buffer areas along Lake
Washington and would have the same effects as the proposal.
Public Access Disturbance - Under the current proposal, it is presumed that public
access would be provided to meet the provisions of Renton s Shoreline Master
Program. In areas of private lots adjacent to the lake, public access would likely
be at the edge of the shoreline to minimize impacts on residents. Mitigation
could include setting back public access from the shore and reducing residential
lawn area. Additional flexibility for mitigation is provided by larger setbacks, as
discussed below.
Under Options A, access consisting of trails and other facilities could be set back
from the shoreline along the portion of the shoreline where private lots abut the
shoreline. Buffers equivalent to Option A could be implemented on most of the
public shoreline which ranges from 20 to 80 feet wide.
Public access could be provided further from the waters' edge along the entire
waterfront under Option A. It is anticipated that a trail system would meander
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-27-
,
10 to 15 feet from the waters' edge under Option A. Controlled public access for
shoreline viewing from boardwalks or enclosed areas can be provided at the
shoreline with the potential for direct shoreline access at specific locations where
beach environments might be created or re-established through delta deposits.
The larger setbacks provide greater flexibility in accommodating the
requirements of the Renton Shoreline Master Program for "significant" public
access on Lake Washington.
Option C does not change buffer areas along Lake Washington and would have
the same effects as the proposal. If a public access trail were placed in the
managed landscape area, impacts on May Creek would be similar to Option A,
except near the mouth where the buffer width is reduced.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); Environmental
Regulations (RMC 4-3); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program Regulations
(RMC 4-3-090)
E. TRANSPORTATION
Refer to pages 3-61 through 3-89 of the Draft EIS for the Affected Environment
and Impacts. The mitigation measures established below address identified
impacts.
Mitigating Measures:
E1. Site access (railroad crossings) shall occur in the vicinity of existing at-grade
crossing locations with roadway improvements reviewed and approved by the
WUTC and BNSF. Pre-cast concrete crossings shall be utilized.
E2. Provide active control for the two (2) railroad crossings designed with cantilever
and gates and warning devices automatically activated by train approach as
required by BNSF and the WUTC. Further,the City and future developer(s) shall
work together with BNSF during the design of roadway improvements to
determine any other appropriate railroad crossing solution(s).
E3. A traffic circulation system to serve properties west of the railroad to reduce
crossings shall be provided.
E4. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00
per each new average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid
prior to the recording of the final plat.
E5. The on-site roadway system shall be constructed per the details and
specifications provided by the approved Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat as a public
road system designed to public road section standards for residential access
streets per the City of Renton Development Regulations.
Discussion:
Site Access and Rail Impacts-Impacts of the proposed site access on safety, as well
as other impacts,can include a range of potential measures,as follows:
a) Relocated grade level crossings to meet guidelines for level rail crossings and
intersection approach grades as indicated on Figure 3.5-8 as illustrated in the Draft EIS.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
•
-28-
sP
•
This may place crossings closer together and increase the potential for blockage of both
by a stopped train.This could be mitigated by connecting the existing access point at the
north end of the Vulcan property with this site through a continuous frontage roadway on
the west side of the BNSF right-of way.That would provide a separation between access
points of about 3,600 feet. This access option could be combined with consolidation of
existing rail crossings to reduce the number of vehicle train conflict points.
b) A variety of crossing controls for grade level crossings, ranging from: warning lights and
bells, gated control of approaches, and quad-gate control of all vehicular and pedestrian
approaches.
c) Impacts of increased safety hazards from nearby residents trespassing on the railroad
right-of way can be addressed by: Fencing railroad right-of-way, and education
programs.
Potential impacts of blockage of both access points to the site and resulting risks
due to lack of emergency vehicle access can be addressed effectively only by
grade-separated crossings. This impact is unlikely to occur with current local
freight use of the rail line.
Mitigation of cumulative impacts of this proposal together with expected
impacts of redevelopment of other industrial sites in the vicinity can be mitigated
by developing an overall mitigation program. The mitigation program could
ensure that intersections and other improvements are designed to accommodate
future channelization and signal improvements. The circulation system could
include provision for elements such as a street serving all properties west of the
BNSF railroad served by a minimum number of railroad crossings.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); City of Renton
Transportation Mitigation Fee Resolution No. 3100, Ordinance 4527; City of
Renton Street and Utility Standards (RMC 4-6); State of Washington -
Transportation(RCW 81.53) and (WAC 480-62)
F. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Refer to pages 3-89 through 3-97 of the Draft EIS for Affected Environment and
Impacts. The mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures
F1. The applicant shall remove contaminated soil as outlined in the Independent
Remedial Action Plan Uplands Areas dated June 16, 2000 and/or pursuant to an
alternative plan that achieves applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup
standards.
F2. Th applicant shall evaluate the need for groundwater remediation after the soil
remediation is complete and shall perform groundwater remediation as necessary
to achieve applicable Model Toxics Control Act cleanup standards.
F3. The applicant shall address contaminants from the proposed roadway through
Quendall Terminals through appropriate removal, stabilization, or isolation,
consistent with requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act.
F4. A contamination and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be provided.
•
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-29-
• 0 •
Discussion:
Construction bid specifications for future infrastructure and buildings shall
address the potential for encountering impacted soil and groundwater. A
contamination response plan and hazardous materials contingency plan shall be
developed. It is to include specific worker and public health safety precautions,
protocols for handling materials suspected to be hazardous or contaminated with
hazardous material, and treatment and disposal options for these materials.
Restrictive covenants may be required as part of title report to place limits on
property transfer,as well as conditions that will allow intrusive work.
The level of contamination encountered within the roadway across the Quendall
site could be addressed by a variety of remediation strategies ranging from
removal and disposal, to stabilization in order to reduce mobility, to isolation
from direct human contact. The proposed remediation for this portion of the
Quendall site is capping of the soil (Exponent 1999) Construction of the roadway
would provide an impervious surface that would provide a barrier to human
contact with contaminated soil and reduce infiltration and leaching of residual
contaminants from the unsaturated zone into the groundwater. The City of
Renton,may require additional investigation to characterize contaminants within
the proposed right-of-way in more detail and may require preparation of a
remediation program to be implemented prior to roadway construction and
dedication. Additional information will be useful in determining a cleanup
strategy that meets the City's objectives for dedicated right-of-way as well as
meeting the requirements of the Model Toxics Control Act.
Any remedial action implemented for the project, including the roadway to the
north, must comply with the following requirements as stipulated in WAC 173-
340:
a) Protect human health and the environment;
b) Comply with clean up standards WAC 173-340-700;
c) Comply with applicable state and federal laws WAC 173-340-710;
d) Provide for compliance monitoring WAC 173-340-410;
e) Use a permanent solution to maximize extent practicable, and provide reasonable
restoration time WAC 173-340-360;and
fl Consider public concerns WAC 173-340-600.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); State of Washington
(WAC 173-340)
G. AESTHETICS
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-98 through 3-117, for Affected Environment and
Impacts.The mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-30-
a 4.3 i
, Mitigation Measures:
G1. Apparent building bulk shall be reduced by design features, materials and color,
including sloping roofs, roof detail such as gables and eave overhangs and
building offsets.
G2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height, Relative building
bulk shall be reduced by screening through large vegetation. Additional setbacks
for planting areas and a change in proposed plantings would be required.
Discussion:
For the proposed subdivision and residential development, reduced visual
quality and negative aesthetic impacts can be reduced by a number of strategies
ranging from changing building height and bulk to specific building design
features that that provide visual unity and interest to screening and softening.
The use of common design features, materials and color, as well as landscape
design, can provide a number of features which reduce apparent bulk of
buildings including sloping roofs, roof detail such as gables and eve overhangs
and building offsets that would reduce the appearance of blank or extensive wall
surfaces. Window detailing can add considerable visual interest and provide
both visual unity and variety, depending on the use of common elements and the
variety of size,position, or design provided.
Screening of the buildings on the site would require very large vegetation that
would not be expected to mature for a number of years. Mature vegetation can
provide a crown area that is higher than building roofs, or screen a substantial
portion of building walls. The current design, however, does not provide
sufficient area in front, side or rear yard setbacks to support large trees. The
design of landscaping for open space areas could also provide for large species
that would provide crown area that could provide visual relief, as opposed to the
dwarf ornamental trees proposed. The major public views of the project could be
softened by landscaping only if substantial landscape areas were provided
between town homes east of May Creek and the BNSF railroad right-of way.
Such additional landscape area could result in reduction in the number of units
in that area.
Mitigation under industrial use of the site would probably be less effective
because existing structures would remain. Painting existing structures a color
that would blend with the surroundings better than white and aqua could reduce
negative visual impacts. New structures that are taller than the existing buildings
shall be designed to be either as unobtrusive or as interesting as possible. A
formalized entry into the site would improve the visual character of site as seen
from the roadway.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); City of Renton
Development Standards (RMC 4-2);City of Renton Landscaping(RMC 4-4-070)
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-31 -
4 6-
r
H. LIGHT AND GLARE
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-118 through 3-119, for Affected Environment and
Impacts. The mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures:
H1. Shielding for exterior lights in fixture selection shall be incorporated.
H2. If buildings are greater than three stories or 35 feet in height,Bbuildings shall be
designed and sited to reduce or eliminate glass surfaces that might produce glare
from sun reflection.
Discussion:
For both alternatives, source shielding for exterior lights shall be used to reduce
the visibility of light from distance residential areas and limit spillover light. The
City of Renton recommends using downcast, shielded lights for urban areas. In
addition, architectural design of buildings shall consider avoiding glare from
glass surfaces that might temporarily blind motorists or cyclists. This project is
not expected to generate indirect or cumulative impacts that would be significant
after mitigation.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); City of Renton
Development Standards (RMC 4-4-075)
NOISE
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-119 through 3-126 for the Affected Environment
and Impacts and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The mitigation measures
established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures:
Il. Reasonable measures shall be taken during construction to minimize noise and
vibration resulting from any necessary pile driving operations. Such measures
shall include pre-drilling of the upper portions of driven piles for large structures
or use of alternate technologies such as pin piles for smaller, residential
supports.The pile holes shall he p e ,l,-;lled to the fa f.,sible deptl, (depth
may be limited by the character of deposits).
I2.I2. If feasible given soil conditions, less noisy pile installation methods, such as
vibrating pilesinto p � p loss ., ast piles or „tl,er ,, ethods
shall be used. Vibration, auger casting, or similar alternate construction methods
shall be used where practical to limit noise related to pile support installation.
I3. I3. Noise barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding
hine� l ;1 o „t;,�,,,usly era
could contribute to steady backgroundNoise
barriers around stationary equipment such as compressors, welding machines,
pumps, and similar equipment that would operate continuously and could
contribute to steady background noise levels shall be provided.
I4.I4. At grade rail crossings that meet a "sealed" status to qualify for possible Federal
Railway Administration (FRA) designation of a "quiet zone" for locomotive
horns shall be provided with public railroad crossings. At-grade rail crossings
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-32-
4 F i, d
.,.. •
shall have underground conduit installed and other equipment installed as needed
to facilitate future double-gating of public railroad crossings at the time of
crossing construction.
Discussion:
A variety of relatively simple and inexpensive practices can reduce the extent to
which people are affected. For example, construction noise could be reduced
with enforcement standards requiring mufflers on equipment. Practices such as
turning off equipment when idle could also reduce noise.
Stationary equipment could be placed as far away from residential receptors as
possible. Portable noise barriers could be placed around equipment, with any
openings directed away from the residential receiving property. These measures
would generally provide an approximate 10-dBA reduction in sound and would
be especially appropriate for compressors, welding machines, pumps, and
similar equipment that would operate continuously and could contribute to
steady background noise levels. Substituting hydraulic or electric models for
pneumatic impact tools such as jack hammers, rock drills, and pavement
breakers would also reduce construction noise.
The effect of impact pile-driving can be reduced by pre-drilling pile holes to the
maximum feasible depth (depth may be limited on this site the character of
deposits). Vibrating piles into place would result in less noise impacts. Cassion-
type piles that are drilled with a steel jacket with cast-in-place concrete can be
installed with lower noise levels. An additional option would be auger cast pile,
which is installed using an auger with a center pipe through which concrete is
pumped during withdrawal, thus eliminating the need for steel pipe casing. This
option may also be limited by local soil conditions and the need for lateral
strength in an area subject to soil liquefaction.
Rail Noise Impacts - The FRA proposed regulations to allow designation of a
"quiet zone" that would make sounding of locomotive horns at public road
crossings discretionary rather than mandatory. The regulations have not yet been
adopted; however, they provide some indication of the likely range of measures
that might be taken if locomotive horn noise became a problem because of
increased use of the rail line.
The FRA proposed regulations would allow designation of a quiet zone by FRA
upon application by a local community if at-grade rail crossings are improved to
decrease the likelihood of automobile or pedestrian conflicts at rail crossings. To
accomplish this, rail crossings would have to be improved to meet a "sealed"
status to "fully compensate for the absence of the audible warning provided by
the locomotive horn." This would require that all approaches be controlled by
four-quadrant gates, median-divided barriers incorporating gate arms long
enough to block all lanes and prevent driving around the gates. Gates would also
have to block the sidewalks. FRA estimates the cost of a quad-gate installation to
range from $200,000 to $1 million, depending on whether it is associated with
traffic signals and based on the number of lanes of roadway and the number of
rails (FRA 1999).
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-33-
4 ti ' r
9 1 J . •
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070)
J. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
Refer to the Draft EIS, pages 3-126 through 3-132 for Affected Environment and
Impacts. The mitigation measures established below address identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures
J1. An interpretive display with images of the historic industrial use of the site
reflecting the lumber economy and shipbuilding heritage of the area shall be
provided by the developer. The design and location shall be reviewed and
approved by Development Services prior recording of the final plat.
J2. In the event archaeological deposits are found during construction, work is to
stop and the Washington State Archaeologist is to be contacted by the
developer/contractor(s).
Discussion:
Historic Resources - Lake Washington's shoreline sawmill industries were an
important part of Puget Sound's Euro-American settlement history. Although the
original mill from the 1940s no longer exists, the modern Barbee Mill is the last of
the mills on Lake Washington; development of this property would offer an
opportunity to commemorate the industry's history. An interpretive display in a
public place within the proposed
development could present information about and show images of the historic
industrial use of the site,as well as indicating how it reflects the lumber economy
and shipbuilding heritage of the area. The display could build on a brief
description of the geologic history of this portion of Lake Washington and a
history of the Lake Washington Duwamish people who once lived on or near
May Creek and its delta.
Cultural Resources- An archaeologist should monitor the demolition and
construction work near the northeast corner of the site, close to the black
building. If intact archaeological resources were encountered during
construction, the construction foreman must direct work activities that could
further disturb the deposits away from their vicinity. The foreman would need to
contact the Washington State Archaeologist (360-586-3080), who assists in
determining whether the archaeological deposits contained information
important to understanding the history of the area and whether such deposits
should be recorded.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); Archaeological Sites and
Resources (Chapter 27.53 RCW)
K. PUBLIC SERVICES
As stated in the Scoping Document for the Environmental Impact Statement,
Public Services was not an element specifically analyzed. However, the proposal
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-34-
•
would add new residential units that would increase the demand for Fire
Services and residents that would generate additional needs for park and
recreational facilities. The mitigation measures established below address
identified impacts.
Mitigation Measures:
K1. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be paid
prior to the recording of the final plat.
K2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee. The fee shall be
paid prior to the recording of the final plat.
K3. Public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington and along May Creek shall be
provided and incorporated into the preliminary plat. The applicant shall work
with City of Renton staff to determine the location and design of the public
access. The system may include a soft surface trail along May Creek, sidewalks,
and an open space tract adjacent to Lake Washington.
Discussion:
Public access is discussed in section "D. Plants and Animals". To reiterate, the
Shoreline Master Program requires the provision of public access on Lake
Washington. Additionally; May Creek is a part of the continuation of the
Mountain to Sound Greenway of which the public access trail is to be
constructed along in order to connect to the existing trail system.
Policy Nexus:
City of Renton Environmental Review (RMC 4-9-070); Parks Mitigation Fee
Resolution No. 3082, Ordinance 4527; Fire Mitigation Fee Resolution No. 2913,
Ordinance 4527; City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord.
4716)
Mitigation Document Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
-35-
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
January 18, 2005
To: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief
From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning
Meeting Date: Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Time: 9:00 AM
Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
Agenda listed below.
NO MEETING SCHEDULED - CONSENT AGENDA
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat (Fiala)
LUA02-040, PP, EIS, SA-H, SM
Please see attached for the ERRATA Mitigation Document for review.
MICROFILMED
cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor
J. Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator
B.Wolters, EDNSP Director®
J. Gray, Fire Prevention
N.Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ®
F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
S. Engler, Fire Prevention ®
J. Medzegian, Council
S. Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R. Lind, Economic Development
L.Warren,City Attorney ®
Page 1 of 4
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT/LUA02-040,ECF,PP
PARTIES OF RECORD
Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
Attn: Robert Cugini Dan Dawson George Fawcett
Box 359 Otak, Inc. 4008 Meadow Ave. N
Renton,WA 98057 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Renton, WA 98056
(owner) Kirkland,WA 98033
Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Nancy Denney Family Dental Clinic
Attn: Robert Cugini 3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. P.O. Box 1029
4101 Lk.WA Blvd. Renton,WA 98055 Fall City, WA 98024
Renton,WA 98057
Dept. of Ecology Greg Fawcett
Campbell Mathewson Northwest Regional Office P.O. Box 402
Century Pacific, LP Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. Fall City, WA 98024
2140 Century Square 3190 160th Ave. SE
1501 Fourth Ave.#2140 Bellevue,WA 98008-5452 Todd Fennell
Seattle, WA 98101 18152 145th Avenue SE
(applicant) Department of Fish &Wildlife Renton, WA 98058
Attn: Rich Johnson
Tom & Linda Baker PO Box 1100 Carmen Flores
1202 N. 35th LaConner, WA 98257 16707 SE 14th St.
Renton, WA 98056 Bellevue, WA 98008
Department of Fish &Wildlife
Flora Baldwin Attn: Stewart Reinbold Dan Frey,WSDOT
4017 Park Ave. N. PO Box 1100 6431 Corson Avenue
Renton, WA 98056 LaConner,WA 98257 Seattle, WA 98018
Lisa Bartel Department of Fish &Wildlife Wendy Giroux
201 Pelly Ave. N Attn: Larry Fisher South County Journal
Renton, WA 98055 PO Box 1100 P.O. Box 130
LaConner,WA 98257 Kent, WA 98035
Clark Van Bogart
3711 Lake Washington BI N Charles F. Dobes Tom Goeltz
Renton,WA 98056 8606 118th Ave. SE 1501 4th Ave,#2600
Renton, WA 98056 Seattle,.WA 98101
Gloria Brown
1328 N.40th Street Gregg Dohrn Bruno &Anne Good
Renton, WA 98056 Jones &Stokes 605 S. 194th St.
11820 Northup Way, Suite E300 Des Moines, WA 98148-2159
Kim Browne Bellevue, Washington 98005
1003 North 28th Place G. Goodman
Renton,WA 98056 Mr. Bill Dunlap 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Triad Associates Renton,WA 98056
Tony Boydston 11814—115th Avenue NE
3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. Kirkland, WA 98034 Joyce Kendrich Goodwin
Renton, WA 98055 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Dave Enler,TD&E Renton, WA 98056
Dan & Laurie Brewis 2223 112 h Avenue NE
11026 100th Ave. NE Suite 101 Lisa Grueter
Kirkland,WA 98033 Bellevue, WA 98004 Jones &Stokes
11820 Northup Way
Walt&Bessie Cook Bruce Erikson Bellevue, WA 98005
903 N. 36th St. 3815 Lake Washington Blvd N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Edith Hamilton
3714 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Bob Fawcett R o.,,,W 6
305 2nd Ave. NE M 1 ,6t . M E
Issaquah, WA 98027
Last printed 10/02/2003 11:11 AM
Page 2of4
Mark Hancock Leslie Kodish
PO Box 88811 5021 Ripley Land North#106 Susan Martin
Seattle,WA 98138 Renton,WA 98056 1101 North 38th Street
Renton,WA 98056
James Hanken Lakeside Community Church
999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 6947 Coal Creek Parkway SE Marten Mandt
Seattle,WA 98104 Box 270 1408 N. 26th St.
Newcastle,WA 98059 Renton,WA 98056
Patricia Helina
4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. Robert Lange Lynn ManoloPoulos
Renton, WA 98056 4017 Park Ave N. Davis Wright
Renton,WA 98056 10500 NE 8th St, Suite 1800
Marsha Hertel Bellevue, WA 98005
3836 Lake WA Blvd. N. Dennis Law
Renton,WA 98056 3625 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056
Debbie Martin
S. &Nel Hiemstra 1412 North 30th Street
3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. Allen Lebowitz Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056 212 Pelly Ave. N.
Renton,WA 98055 Marcie Maxwell
Matt Hough PO Box 2048
Otak Inc. Renton,WA 98056
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100 Al &Cynthia Leovout
Kirkland, WA 98033 P.O. Box 1965
Gig Harbor, WA 98335 / Kay McCord
Ande Jorgensen 2802 Park Avenue North
2411 Garden Ct. N. Torsten Lienau Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056 HDR
500 108th Ave. NE, Suite 1200 Tim McGrath
Mary Kammer Bellevue, WA 98004 900 North 34th Street
51 Burnett Ave. S.,#307 Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056 David Lierman
620 E. Marion Street Terry McMichael
Kennydale Neighborhood Association Kent,WA 98031 4005 Park Ave. N.
Attn: Kim Browne, President Renton, WA 98056
1211 North 28th Place Kevin Lindahl
Renton, WA 98056 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N. Keith Menges
Renton,WA 98056 1615 NE 28th Street
Jerry Kierig Renton,WA 98056
Pan Abode Cedar Homes Therese Luger
4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.,A203 John &Greta Moulijn
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 3726 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056
King County Wastewater Mr. & Mrs. R. Lynch
Barbara Questad;Treatment Division 1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2268 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
King Street Center Issaquah,WA 98027 Fisheries Department
201 South Jackson Street,#500 39015 172nd Ave SE
Seattle, WA 98104 Roy&Cheryl Lynch Auburn,WA 98092
4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204
Linda Knowle Renton,WA 98056
Kennydale Reality
2902 Kennewick PI. NE Mary Maier Dorothy Muller
Renton,WA 98056 May Creek Steward 51 Burnett Ave South#410
King County DNRP Renton, WA 98055
Misty Kodish 201 S. Jackson, Suite 600
5021 Ripley Lane N.#106 Seattle, WA 98104 David Nestvold
Renton, WA 98056 6608 117th Ave SE
Douglas R. Marsh Bellevue,WA 98006
1328 N.40th Street
Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 10/02/2003 11:11 AM
Page 3 of 4
Micheal E. Nicholson Mark Rigos John Studman
City of Newcastle 1309 N. 39th Pl. 1036 North 31st Street
Community Development Director Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
13020 SE 72nd PI.
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030 Jane& Bill Riordan Robert&Alison Taylor
1501 Dayton Ct. NE 3811 Lake Washington BL N
Sara Nicoli Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
3404 Burnett Ave N
Renton, WA 98056 Don Robertson
1900 NE 48th St.,#R101 Neil Thomson
Sara Nicoli Renton,WA 98056 PO Box 76
310 Hibriten Ave SW Mercer Island, WA 98040
Lenoir, NC 28645 D. Sabey
21410 132nd SE Scott Thomson
Amy Norris Kent,WA 98042 PO Box 76
1900 NE 48th Street#F-202 Mercer Island, WA 98040
Renton, WA 98056
Fritz Timm, P.E.
City of Newcastle
Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT Rich Schipanski 13020 SE 72nd Place
15700 Dayton Avenue North Blumen Consulting Group Newcastle,WA 98059
P.O. Box 330310 600 108th NE, Suite 1002
Seattle,WA 98133 Bellevue, WA 98004
Virginia Piazza
1119 North 35th Street Beverly Wagner
Renton, WA 98056 Josef Schwabl 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104
3921 Meadow Ave. N. Renton,WA 98056
Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin Renton, WA 98056
1120 N. 38th St. Rich Wagner
Renton, WA 98056 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Jennifer Scott Renton, WA 98056
Herbert& Diana Postlewait 5021 Ripley Lane N,Apt#1
3805 Park Ave. N. Renton,WA 98056 Richard Weinman
Renton,WA 98056 270 3`d Ave.
David Sherrard Kirkland, WA 98033
Emmett Pritchard 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE
Raedeke Associates Kirkland, WA 98033 Robert West
5711 NE 63rd Street 3904 Park Avenue North
Seattle,WA 98115 Chris Sidebotham Renton,WA 98056
3907 Park Ave. N.
Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Renton,WA 98056 Doug Williams
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. 201 South Jackson Street
Renton,WA 98056 Kevin Sloan MS KSC-NR-0503
Pan Abode Homes Seattle,WA 98104-3855
Dewey Rancourt 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. N.
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. Renton,WA 98056 John Wilson
Renton, WA 98056 1403 3rd Ave, Suite 300
Jeff Smith Seattle, WA 98105
Dustin Ray 1004 North 36th Street
8936 132nd PI. SE Renton, WA 98056 Charles Wolfe
Newcastle,WA 98057 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Rod Stevens Seattle, WA 98101
Linda Reutimann 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor
1106 North 38th Street Seattle,WA 98134 Bud Worley
Renton, WA 98056 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N.
David &Joyce Stevenson #B202
Larry Reymann 1208 North 28th Street Renton, WA 98056
1313 North 38th Street Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056
Last printed 10/02/2003 11:11 AM
Page 4 of 4
Wendy&Lois Wywrot Larry and Cira Reymann
4100 Lake WA Blvd. N.,A 104 1313 No. 38th St.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Mike Cowles
Bill Yeckel BNSF Railway Jan Hickling
2108 Camas Ave NE Engineering 527 Renton Ave. S.
Renton,WA 98056 2454 Occidental Av So Renton,WA 98055
Seattle, WA 98135
Gary Young Cyrus M. McNeely
3115 Mountain View Ave. N. Monica Durkin 3810 Park Ave. N.
Renton, WA 98056 WA Dept. of Natural Resources Renton,WA 98056.
Aquatics Division
Cynthia Youngblood 950 Farman Av N Jim Johnson
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N Enumclaw,WA 98022 3921 115th Ave. SE
#A103 Snohomish, WA 98290
Renton,WA 98056 Ahmer Nizam
Washington Utilities and Don West
Mark Zilmer Transportation Commission 22464 NE 60th St.
3837 Lk. WA Blvd. N. 1300 South Evergreen Park Dr SW Redmond,WA 98053
Renton,WA 98056 Olympia, WA 98504
Last printed 10/02/2003 11:11 AM
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 12, 2005
TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator
Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief
FROM: Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services Divisior
SUBJECT: ERRATA— Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat— Mitigation Document
Attached is a corrected Summary Table of Mitigation Measures of the Mitigation Document
for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. The corrections are due to typographical errors and
omissions.
This is for your information only. No further SEPA determination, addendum or decision is
required of the ERC Committee.
If you have comments or concerns, please contact me at ext. 7382 or via email. I would
appreciate your comments no later than Tuesday, January 18, 2005, 5:00 pm.
cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor
J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator
B. Wolters, EDNSP Director
J. Gray, Fire Prevention
N. Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ®
F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
S. Engler, Fire Prevention ®
J. Medzegian, Council
S. Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director
R. Lind, Economic Development
L. Warren, City Attorney ®
r ) ,•
/ ..
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
Project Narrative
SEP 13 2002 Revised September 13,2002
RECEIVED
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat is a residential subdivision project located at the existing
Barbee Mill Company site which is approximately 22.9 acres located in North Renton west of
Lake Washington Boulevard and south of the I-4o5 and NE 44th Street interchange.The site
includes approximately 1,90o feet of shoreline along Lake Washington.
The property is zoned COR2 (Center Office Residential, Port Quendall site). The applicant is
seeking approval of a Preliminary Plat with a minimum density of 5 du/acre per RMC 4-2-12oB.
Adjacent property to the north is also zoned COR2. Property to the east is zoned R-8 and R-io
and the property to the south is zoned R-8.
The site is currently used for lumber production.There are approximately 15 buildings on the
site built for lumber milling and storage along with one office building. Many of the buildings
are unused and in bad repair.
The Barbee Mill site is adjacent to Lake Washington. May Creek runs through the easterly and
southerly portions of the site, emptying into Lake Washington. There is a Category III wetland
adjacent to the southeasterly property line near the northerly end of Street"C".The wetland is
located within the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way,but its 25-foot buffer extends into
the Barbee Mill site. Street"C"has been adjusted to traverse the outer edge of a 25-foot wetland
buffer. There is a second Category III wetland located at the southern edge of the site near the
current boat house across Street"C"from lots 99 and 100. The Applicant proposes to stay out of
the northerly wetland and use buffer averaging for a small portion of its associated 25-foot
buffer(125 square feet)located within the Street"C"right-of-way.The second Category III
wetland will have approximately 400 square feet filled for the construction of Street"C". The
northerly Category III wetland and its associated buffer can be expanded to mitigate the
southerly wetland impacts.
According to a geotechnical report prepared by Golder Associates, dated August 2000 and re-
issued in December 2001,the site soils consist mainly of Norma Sand Loam. North of May
Creek the site slopes are between 0.5%to 4%to the west. South of May Creek the site slopes
from 1%to 7%toward May Creek and Lake Washington. Slopes within the May Creek buffer
area vary from 7%to approximately 35%to 4o% at the Creek banks.There are no existing
stormwater detention or water quality ponds on site. Storm runoff follows directly to Lake
Washington and May Creek The proposed subdivisions will improve the existing conditions by
channeling storm water to water quality ponds prior to discharge to Lake Washington. No
detention is proposed due to the site's location along the shores of Lake Washington.
The proposed development includes 115 townhouses located within a subdivision. Lot lines will
be located along common walls allowing each unit to be on a separate lot. Where the units are
not attached,there will be a minimum 5-foot side yard setback. Front and rear lot setbacks are
proposed to be a minimum of 10 feet. The lot sizes range from 1,800 square feet to 7,40o square
feet. Parking,building heights and other standard development data will comply with the COR
zoning criteria in the Renton Municipal Code. Streets within the subdivision will be dedicated to
the public.Water, sewer, and storm drain systems will also be publicly owned. Townhouse lots
for two unit attached buildings will be located to the north and west of May Creek and between
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal - a
otak
F:\CREA\MATHS\2002\Barbee\Revised Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrativei.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
Street"D" and Tract"F"south and east of May Creek. Townhomes in buildings of up to five
units will be located east and south of the creek.
There are no new crossings proposed for the creek. Currently,there are three narrow bridges
crossing May Creek. One of these will be utilized for pedestrian access. One of the bridges will
be improved or replaced to provide secondary access. At the City's request,we have increased
the buffer to 50-along each side of May Creek. There will also be a 25-foot building setback
buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-2-
i2oB allows development of a COR zoned parcel with residential uses at a minimum density of 5
du/net acre when the development does not involve a mix of uses.The proposed project
includes only residential use at a density of approximately 6.57 du/net acre.
Primary access to the site will be from two points along Lake Washington Boulevard.The
primary access will be through the parcel to the north via an existing 6o-foot access easement.
This recorded easement specifically allows dedication"of the easement to the City as a public
right-of-way" (Recording#96o2i5o689). The owners of the subject property have an ownership
interest in the parcel to the north on which the 6o foot easement will be located. The easement
runs along the eastside of the north parcel to an existing access intersection with Lake
Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane approximately 72o feet north of the Barbee Mill site. The
main access road will be 36 feet wide with curb and gutter, a 4.5 foot planter strip and 5 foot
sidewalks on each side. The onsite Residential Access Streets will be 32 feet wide with 5 foot
sidewalks on each side in a 42 foot right-of-way, except for Street"C". Street"C"will be 32 feet
wide,but with a 5 foot sidewalk only along the westerly side. Street"C"will also connect to an
existing 16 foot wide private access road at the south end near the existing boat house. Lots 43-
44&91-92, 94-97 and 113-115 will be served by Private Access Tracts "H","F"and"G". The 26
foot wide Private Access Tracts will include 20 feet of pavement with curbs. In addition,the plat
will have a secondary access near the southern portion of the site from Lake Washington
Boulevard through a 28 foot wide roadway with curb and gutter and 5 foot sidewalks on each
side. Street"C"will include a hammer head turnaround on each end. Beyond the two site access
roads, other offsite improvements will include connections to existing water and sewer lines
located within the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way on the north end of the project
and existing water and sewer lines located within an existing easement at the south end near the
boat house.
An estimated construction cost for the subdivision is approximately $3,500,000. An appraiser
will determine fair market value for the lots once the final plat is recorded. Infrastructure
construction will include approximately 38,00o cubic yards of fill for road and lot construction
and 32,00o cubic yards of excavation from the water quality ponds and underground pipes.The
site also includes 74 trees,which are approximately 6 inches and larger at chest height. The
majority of trees are located along May Creek and its buffer. These trees will remain
undisturbed. In order to grade the lots and streets, 18 of the 74 trees will need to be cut.The
trees to be removed include five(5)fir trees ranging in size from 8 to 12 inches located in lot 81
and lot 82,two (2) 16-inch fir trees in the south water quality pond, one (1) io-inch cherry on lot
104 and ten(io) ash trees ranging in size from 6 to 14 inches along the south end of Street"C" .
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 2
otak
F:\CREA\MATHS\2oo2\Barbee\Revised Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrativei.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
Through the final platting process,the onsite roads and water quality pond tracts will be
dedicated to the City of Renton.The Homeowners Association will own other open-space. There
will be 115 lots created with the final plat ranging in size from approximately i,800 square feet
for the smallest townhome lot to 7,400 square feet for the largesttownhome lot.The net density
will be approximately 6.57 du/acre. During construction,there will be job trailers located
onsite. During the home sales period, it is anticipated that there will be a sales trailer and model
homes on the site.
•
•
•
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 3
otak
F:\CREA\MATHS\2002\Barbee\Revised Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrativei.doc
1
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT-Revised 9/18/02
LOT AREA LOT AREA LOT AREA
1 4096 45 3628 89 3524
2 4577 46 5184 90 5095
3 4360 47 3856 91 6207
4 4360 48 3764 92 4159
5 4360 49 3764 93 6359
6 4360 50 3762 94 2001
7 4360 51 4295 95 2001
8 4360 52 4379 96 2001
9 3760 53 4517 97 2001
10 3760 54 4573 98 1921
11 3760 55 4586 99 3132
12 3760 56 4713 100 3026
13 3760 57 4414 101 3078
14 3760 58 4334 102 3234
15 3760 59 4478 103 2054
16 3760 60 4179 104 1847
17 3760 61 4160 105 1971
18 3760 62 5925 106 1974
19 3760 63 4451 107 1970
20 3824 64 3941 108 2095
21 4056 65 6331 109 2205
22 3511 66 3760 110 2317
23 4513 67 3760 111 2875
24 3712 68 3760 112 2189
25 3767 69 3760 113 2937
26 3453 70 4520 114 2229
27 4357 71 6398 115 2226
28 4473 72 6226
29 6067 73 4226
30 5994 74 5826
31 6578 75 4226
32 6568 76 5826
33 6304 77 6072
34 6324 78 4680
35 6993 79 4673
36 7336 80 6652
37 7294 81 4772
38 6556 82 3860
39 6500 83 4380
40 6096 84 3669
41 6230 85 4343
42 6021 86 3941
43 5962 87 3676
44 5764 88 3536
•
, l
•
U1®.A
BARBEE MILL `ELIMINARY PLAT I.,
��NTU$ OVERALL PLAT PLAN / ,�'
*REVISED*
���
NOTICE OF APPLICATION � �� ;.,
A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. --
" _��d G •'•The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. v '** cap:agado9Mj�MP9.' '" ` I
PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF,V-H,SM!BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT �l�p.pl: 44�ilit�'" I F'
submitted PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pursuant to the Clty's request(dated Juno$2001),the applicant has '�1 air V, - "i •
bmlfted additional Information deemed necessary to adequately review the environmental impacts of the r+`�C�;:��`'�aSl
project application. Due to subsequent revisions of the proposal,the notice of project application and official E�-,�b,S � •
-',1�;
commenting period have been re-fnhlatetl. The modified aspects pf the pro/act have been Italicized within the ')rQ�w�
•
following description. •
�, ,
The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site Into 115 lots rani "�)11:4,/
ranging In size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336 • 4�•EO .
square feet vnth the shore!/ne fronting lot//nes exfendmg fo the Inner harbor line. The lots ae Infertile /"tl s the ��' I
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit f�',Qa� 'and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creak.Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are
included with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would also be established with the lat. The site is . '.+;
P presentlygs - •����� •
utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline,all buildings would be demolished as pad o1 the project. • _ ) ; •
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting properly on the north side of the site.A • ":•.g secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property.The project would provide 42-loot wide 'Internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek fs order to provide connection to the secondary access point.Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge would likely require work below the ordinary high water mark of May Creek;therefore approval of a cadence from the Citys Tree Cutting and Land Clearing " '
Regulations k necessary. �*- ,?; e
. P `y•
The western boundary of the site Includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for which a 25- ••/toot setback front the ordinary high watermark would be maintained.May Creek bisects the property extending southeast I T,,��.p� ��through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake Washington. The project would Il I I••1 I - j • u'01 provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore J 'currently impervious areas to native vegetation within this buffer. +L� ?`
.„...
addition to tia Development
(SEPA)n Permit fthe Preliminary Plat and Variance approval,Im,the ementproject, rea the ant has! o ei.,,„. ./ .Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associatetl plat Improvements. The applicant has also
requested an administrative wheel modification!n order to allow(or a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet -' �. Fr'
throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development �rG 'Permit review for the development of the residential strictures—both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as x,,, 0Z OOot —1,�-./ - , •
separate land use applications in the future. •
PROJECT LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd.(between North 40'8 44'Streets) • • Z y
PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Hearing Examiner PreliminaryPlat '
•
- slog el- s
Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval,Shoreline Substantial Development Q J� 1,61L1� :1
Permit Approval,Administrative Street Modification Approval • '� I� r;.
W j /r,� 1
Comments on me above application must be submitted In wilting to Lesley Nishlhira,Project Manager,Development �f� \ Ily! La
Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on September 26,2002. If you have 7r -- -"questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a parry of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact Ms. f'r ` it
Nishlhira at(425)430-7270.Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will // �✓ �,1}be notified of any decision on this project. r.
: I
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I Atr�j� f�
DATE OF APPLICATION: ML!'_grN(S(���11rp.. ��.
April S,2002 „a,*B.JL r,Al I0 li Harr NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 3,2002 'fy' =If sJU:R.`J��fat:•5
PROJECT PLACED ON-HOLD: June 3,2002 o fyeua'RH[t4�TL•'L11:;1(!>;;lTh(: III
REVISED NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 12,2002 fry-'':•rGf>7ds>C„Tl-�xP YID '
nilpc ;I> �;� NNrrrarr a la p If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project,complete this form ' - '�''�•'t tC".r'"'l�l�`'2 'and returnto:City of Renton,Development Planning,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. ,
File NoJName:LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM/Barbee MITI Preliminary Plat '
NAME: •
ADDRESS: - \
•
TELEPHONE NO.,
NOTICE OF APPLICATION2
LEAsert
it
•MARILYN YAMCHEFF
NOTARY PUBLIC
CERTIFICATION e STATE OF WASHIPIGTON
COMMISSION EXPIRES
JUNE 29,2003
AA �� s _ - v a v _ _ _ _ ..
I, � 1�1 S 1'1�ice. , hereby certify that �D copies of the
above docu ent were posted by me in �,p cons icuous places on or ntarb�y
the described property on (Ml,1, `l'h.� l ` D F P �VL/1�Y�V 21 -
Signed: - /
ATTEST: Subscribed an worn b fore me,a Notary Public,in and for the St f / or
Washington residing i ,on the ) � day of ��D ' .
MARILYN KAMCK HEFF '-
VIY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:82940
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE_BY MAILING
On the l 'ar"...) day of °,/ZitZiY�tb,-[/L , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope contaaintn
documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
C-ML-ANi V0 r09. Cw uS (vu-1 ` f 'p).% .
/Vw 1i ✓
Lex C'() Y'i I ✓LQA.,
5' C Wao- AIL; 2 a-144
f _ C
. 4-gvnat‘cle
OA-4_
(Signature of Sender) ;41A1:1111YN KA11lsCrF
O
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ���� PUBLIC
SS STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING ) COMMISSION EXPIRES
DUNE 29, 2003
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that l/� I S signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their.free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
Dated: () . 1S6d2 (V(- li �i
NotaryPublic and for the State of W ington .
MARILYN KAMCHEFF
Notary(Print) MY APPOINTh -N-T EXPIRES:6 29 03
My appointment expires:
Project Name:
$A'RE5— PR-- .) N fl "—/
Project Number:
NOTARY.DOC
Page 1 of 2
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT/LUA02-040,ECF,PP
PARTIES OF RECORD
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Campbell Mathewson Dan Dawson
Attn: Robert Cugini Century Pacific, LP Otak, Inc.
Box 359 2140 Century Square 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Renton, WA 98057 1501 Fourth Ave. #2140 Kirkland, WA 98033
(owner) Seattle, WA 98101
(applicant)
Bruce Erikson Kim Browne Kennydale Neighborhood
3815 Lake Washington Blvd N. 1003 North 28th Place Association
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Attn: Kim Browne, President
1211 North 28th Place
Renton,WA 98056
Bruno &Anne Good Tony Boydston Patricia Helina
605 S. 194th St. 3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. 4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.
Des Moines, WA 98148-2159 Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 9805.6
Bud Worley Dorothy Muller Therese Luger
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N. 51 Burnett Ave South#410 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., A203
#B202 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056
Carmen Flores James Hanken Amy Norris
16707 SE 14th St. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 1900 NE 48th Street#F-202
Bellevue, WA 98008 Seattle, WA 9810.4 Renton, WA 98056
Cynthia Youngblood -Mark Rigos Linda Knowle
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1309 N. 39th Pl. 2902 Kennewick PI. NE
#A103 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Renton, WA 98056
Dan &Laurie Brewis Rod Stevens Kevin Lindahl
11026 100th Ave. NE 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Kirkland, WA 98033 Seattle, WA 98134 Renton, WA 98056
Douglas R. Marsh Gloria Brown Jeff Smith
1328 N. 40th Street 1328 N.40th Street 1004 North 36th Street
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Edith Hamilton Walt&Bessie Cook David &Joyce Stevenson
3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 903 N. 36th St. 1208 North 28th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Flora Baldwin Eydie Hamilton Richard Weinman
4017 Park Ave. N. 3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 270 3rd Ave.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Kirkland,WA 98033
Gary Young Wendy&Lois Wywrot Tom &Linda Baker
3115 Mountain View Ave. N. 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., A 104 1202 N. 35th
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Hamid &Tasleem Qaasim Dennis Law Marcie Maxwell
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3625 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 2048
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Herbert& Diana Postlewait Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin G. Goodman
3805 Park Ave. N. 1120 N. 38th St. 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
John &Greta Moulijn S. &Nel Hiemstra David Lierman
3726 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. 620 E. Marion Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Kent, WA 98031
Joyce Kendrich Goodwin Ande Jorgensen Rich Wagner
3715 Lake WA Blvd. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Marlen Mandt Dustin Ray Tim McGrath
1408 N. 26th St. 8936 132nd Pl. SE 900 North 34th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Newcastle,WA 98057 Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 09/12/02 5:15 PM
Page 2 of 2
Marsha Hertel Neil Thomson David Nestvold
3836 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 76 6608 117th Ave SE
Renton,WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Bellevue,WA 98006
Mary Kammer Nancy Denney Mark Hancock
51 Burnett Ave. S., #307 3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 88811
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98138
Mr. &Mrs. R. Lynch Beverly Wagner Scott Thomson
1420 NW Gilman Blvd., #2268 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104 PO Box 76
Issaquah, WA 98027 Renton,WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040
Robert West Roy&Cheryl Lynch Charles Wolfe
3904 Park Avenue North 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98101
Terry McMichael Chris Sidebotham Don Robertson
4005 Park Ave. N. 3907 Park Ave. N. 1900 NE 48th Street, #R-101
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Robert&Alison Taylor Virginia Piazza Clark Van Bogart
3811 Lake Washington BL N 1119 North 35th Street 3711 Lake Washington BI N
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Kay McCord Susan Martin Linda Reutimann
2802 Park Avenue North 1101 North 38th Street 1106 North 38th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
D. Sabey Dept. of Ecology Department of Fish &Wildlife
21410 132nd SE Northwest Regional Office Attn: Rich Johnson
Kent, WA 98042 Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. PO Box 1100
3190 160th Ave. SE LaConner, WA 98257
Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Department of Fish &Wildlife Dave Enger,TD&E Fritz Timm, P.E.
Attn: Larry Fisher 2223 112 h Avenue NE City of Newcastle
PO Box 1100 Suite 101 13020 SE 72nd Place
LaConner, WA 98257 Bellevue,WA 98004 Newcastle, WA 98059
Dan Frey, WSDOT Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT King County Wastewater
6431 Corson Avenue 15700 Dayton Avenue North Treatment Division
Seattle, WA 98018 P.O. Box 330310 Barbara Questad
Seattle,WA 98133 King Street Center
201 South Jackson Street, #500
Seattle,WA 98104
City of Newcastle Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS JP Moulijn
C/o Micheal E. Nicholson Family Dental Clinic 3726 Lk. WA Blvd. N
Community Development Director PO Box 1029 Renton, WA 98056
13020 SE 72nd Pl. Fall City,WA 98024 425-255-3710
Newcastle, WA 98059-3030 425-222-7011
Dewey Rancourt Leslie Kodish Mr. Bill Dunlap
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. 5021 Ripley Land North #106 Triad Associates
Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 11814— 115th Avenue NE
425-255-8697 Kirkland,WA 98034
Don Robertson Charles F. Dobes Mark Zilmer
1900 NE 48th St., #R101 8606 118th Ave. SE 3837 Lk. WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
425-254-0054 425-255-2646 425-266-9090
Wendy Giroux John Studman Debbie Martin
South County Journal 1036 North 31st Street 1412 North 30th Street
P.O. Box 130 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035
Keith Menges Kevin Sloan
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Homes
Renton, WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd North
Renton, WA 98056
Last printed 09/12/02 5:15 PM
119050002508 119050004009 362915006005
ANDERSON NIARY M ANDERSON MARY M APPLESTONE STEVEN J
11331N 38TH ST 1133 N 38TH ST 1204 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200023002 322405903905 322405903400
BAGBY STEVEN M+LEE ANGELA R BALDWIN DONALD P BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#C203 4017 PARK AVE N BOX 359
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055
334270000501 334270052809 334270063806
BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC BARTHELME BONITA M BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD
4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3919 MEADOW AVENUE N 25323 42ND PL S
RENTON WA 98057 RENTON WA 98056 KENT WA 98032
334270064002 362915001006 334270051207
BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD BERG JACK+ELEANOR BERGMAN TODD&SHELLY
25323 42ND PL S 3807 PARK AVE N 3813 MEADOW AVE N
KENT WA 98032 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270044509 334270044004 334270007001
BLOOD J D&P L BLOOD JAMES D+PERRI L BOYDSTON TONY
3713 PARK AVE N 3713 PARK AVE N 3901 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053500 334270024006 292405900500
BREWIS DANIEL BURDICK JONATHAN R BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE ATTN:PROP
1317 N 40TH ST 3713 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N PO BOX 96189
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 FORT WORTH TX 76161
334270053302 221200015008 334270053807
CANTU OSCAR LUIS CARL KENNETH J CARLSON RUSSEL I
3927 MEADOW AVE N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#B203 1409 N 40TH
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200001008 221200013003 221200016006
CROSSMAN CHERYL A CRUZE RANDE R+CELIA E DAPELLO CHERYL
4100 LAKE WASH.BLVD A-101 5105 HIGHLAND DR 1420 NW GILMAN BLVD#2268
RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98006 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
362915008001 362916002003 334270041000
DENAXAS BASIL DENISON STEVEN+ELIZABETH DENNEY ROBERT K+NANCY H
1124 N 38TH ST 1100 N 38TH ST 3818 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270020004 334270044202 334270044103
DENNISON DAYTON P DIETSCH CHARLES C DINEEN JENNIFER A
3717 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3737 PARK AVE N 3719 PARK AV N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
•
119050003001 I19050003704 334270012605
DRAGSETH R DRAGSETH ROLF S ERIKSON BRUCE E+MARY R
1113 N 38TH ST 1113 N 38TH 3815 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200018002 334270014908 322405901008
ERNST LEE E EVANS MARTIN E+KIMBERLY A J FAWCETT CLARISSA
4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C102 3811 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4008 MEADOW AVE N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405908102 322405904309 334270038808
FAWCETT CLARISSA FAWCETT CLARISSA M FEROGLIA GARY A+WORTMAN SHA
4008 MEADOW AVE N 4008 MEADOW AVE N 1015 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200011007 221200025007 221200010009
FLORESAN MS GIBSON GARY I GIBSON LANCE M+CAREN M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASH BLVD N D-101 4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#B102
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200021006 221200009001 221200014001
GOOD BRUNO+ANN E GUREL MEHMET GUREL MEHMET
605 S 194TH ST PO BOX 1921 PO BOX 1921
DES MOINES WA 98148 LANCASTER CA 93539 LANCASTER CA 93539
334270038006 334270049102 362915007003
HAMILTON EDITH M HAMILTON JESS R HANCOCK MARK B
3714 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3720 PARK PO BOX 88811
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 TUKWILA WA 98138
221200022004 322405905405 322405905801
HARWOOD CHARLES H+SHARON LY HAUER ALFRED H HELINA PATRICIA S M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#C202 1330 N 40TH ST 4004 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053906 334270041802 322405905900
HENDERSON SARA HERTEL MARSHA JANICE HICKS GARDNER
1325 N 40TH ST 3836 LK WASH BLVD N 4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405903608 334270038709 221200030007
HICKS GARDNER W HIEMSTRA SYBOUT PETRONELLA HOUSER PAUL W JR&AMY S
4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4 3720 LK WASH BLV N 2230 SQUAK MTN LOOP SW
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
334270041505 334270042503 221200006007
HUNT MARGARET E HUNT THOMAS R+CARYL J HUTTON RONALD E
3908 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3916 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#A202
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 •
RENTON WA 98056
.A,
221200005009 221200008003 119050001500
IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA ISHAM MAXINE
9 XY 87TH AVE NE 900 87TH AVE NE 1209 N 38TH ST
MEDINA WA 98039 MEDINA WA 98039 RENTON WA 98056
119050000502 119050001005 221200017004
JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JELINEK JANE M
3741 PARK AVE N 3741 PARK AVE N 2259 74TH SE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040
322405906205 362915003002 221200012005
JONES JOCELYN C JORGENSEN ERIK H KELLY KIMBERLY ANN
1424 N 40TH ST 1216 N 38TH ST 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#B104
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270021101 362916001005 334270050209
KENDRICK JOYCE KOLESAR LARRY+SUSAN M KOLYTIRIS PETER+CARLA G
3715 LK WN BLVD N 1030 NORTH 38TH ST 1308 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053708 334270038105 334270038204
KULLAMA PAUL J LE SELL SHIRLEY J LESELL SHIRLEY J
1417 N 40TH ST 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200019000 119050002003 334270019006
LEW KEVIN ANTHONY+JENNIFER LIEVERO LAURA A LINDAHL KEVIN L
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#103 1203 N 38TH ST BYUS REBECCA A
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 3719 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
334270053203 334270017604 221200007005
LISSMAN OLGA A LITTLEMAN VIKTORIA LUGER THERESE M
3930 PARK AVE N 3805 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WA BLVD N#A203
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270049607 322405908300 334270038501
MACKAY JOHN D MARSH DOUGLAS R MARTIN FREDERICK L&SUSAN
3734 PARK AVE N BROWN GLORIA JEAN 1101 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 1328 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056
RENTON WA 98056
221200029009 221200002006 322405904507
MCCULLOCH BRIAN D MCLAUGHLIN PROPERTIES L L C MCMICHAEL TERENCE E
12046 67TH AVE S P 0 BOX 60106 &BARBARA
SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98058 4005 PARK AVENUE NORTH
RENTON WA 98056
334270051009 362915004000 334270038600
MCNEELY CYRUS M MILLS RONALD W MOULIJN JOHAN P
3810 PARK AVE N 1212 N 38TH &GEERTRUDE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 3726 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
r,
221200024000 221200031005 221200026005
MUSCAT JAMES P&JANE M NAGAMINE AKIRA+HIDEKO NEWING ANDREW H
130'8 QUEEN AVE NE 2783 FREEDOM BL 8815 116TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056 WATSONVILLE CA 95076 RENTON WA 98056
334270042701 334270044301 322405904101
NICOLI BRUNO I&SARAH C OTSU MAKOTO PALKA ADAM&EVA
3404 BURNETT AVE N 3725 PARK AVE N 808 N 33RD ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
334270041208 362916007002 334270052502
PETETT J SCOTT PIPKIN GARY C&YVONNE M POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
21ST 1120 N 38TH PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051900 334270052106 334270052304
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
HIGH POINT LLC HIGH POINT LW HIGH POINT LW
PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270052403 292405901508 322405904903
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION ROD STEVENS ROD STEVENS
HIGH POINT LW PORT QUENDALL CO.,do VUWAN,INC. PORT QUENDALL CO.,do VULCAN,INC.
PO BOX 3023 505 5TH AVE S 505 5TH AVE S
RENTON WA 98056 SEATTLE WA 98104 SEATTLE WA 98104
362915002004 334270026001 334270025003
POSTLEWAIT H L&D M PROVOST ALAN E PROVOST ALAN W+CYNTHIA M
3805 PARK AVE N PO BOX 1965 PO BOX 1965
RENTON WA 98056 GIG HARBOR WA 98335 GIG HARBOR WA 98335
334270041406 292405900203 334270038402
QAASIM TASLEEM T QUENDALL TERMINALS RANCOURT DEWEY A+
3830 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N PO BOX 477 LOIS A TT
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 3724 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
362916003001 334270053609 334270052007
RANZ MARK K RICHARDS MELISSA A RIGOS MARK J
1106 N 38TH ST 1401 N 40TH ST 1309 N 39TH PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051504 221200032003 362916005006
ROBBINS SAMUEL G RUEGGE STEVEN A SANDERSON MICHAEL S+
3900 PARK AVE N 4[00 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#204D CATHLEEN M
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 1112 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
334270011003 334270053005 334270042008
SCHOOS GILBERT A+ALICE G SCHWABL JOSEF SIDEBOTHAM CHRISTOPHER G
3825 LK WASH BLVD N 3921 MEADOW AVE N 16055 SE 135TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98059
334270012506 - 334270044400 334270040507
SIVESIND R'STANLEY+ SMITH MICHAEL E SMTIH BRIAN
RIGGS JOYCE E 3706 WELLS AVE N 12048 160TH AVE SE
3821 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059
RENTON WA 98056
362915005007 221200020008 322405903806
STEVENSON DAVID A+JOYCE T STONICH LINDA K STUSSER DAVID
1208 N 38TH ST 4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C-104 STUSSER QUALITY CONSTR INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S#290
SEATTLE WA 98168
362916004009 334270053401 334270010005
TANNER MARGARET A TASCA EDWARD L TASCA JAMES G
1108 N 38TH ST 3936 PARK AVE N 14805 SE JONES PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98058
322405905009 362916006004 119050004108
THOMSON NEIL TOUCHSTONE STEVEN C+RENEE A UNDSDERFER ROBERT L
POBOX76 111638THST 1021 N38THST
MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270050308 334270023008 221200028001
UY NATHAN+EMILY FU VAN BOGART G CLARK VAN BOGART WAGNER BEVERLY J
1314 N 38TH ST BARBARA J 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#D104
RENTON WA 98056 3711 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98055
RENTON WA 98056
334270053104 322405904606 334270050100
WATKINS KEN W WEISENBERGER NADINE WHITE&CO ALEX#16618 C/O EXECUTIVE
3924 PARK AVE N 1324 N 40TH ST HOUSE INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N
SEATTLE WA 98103
362915009009 221200004002 221200003004
WHITWORTH SAMUEL WYWROT LOIS R YOUNGBLOOD JON C
1122 N 38TH 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#A-104 4100 LK WASH BLVD N#A-103
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270008009
ZILMER MARK E+ROSEMARY
3837 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
7--N AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology Larry Fisher Mr. Rod Malcom, Fisheries
Environmental Review Section WA Dpt. Of Fish&Wildlife Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
PO Box 47703 C/o Dept.of Ecology 39015— 172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 3190--160`h Ave. SE Auburn, WA 98092
Bellevue,WA 98008
WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Mr. David Dietzman
Attn: Ramin Pazooki 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW— Front A Dept. of Natural Resources
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 Burien,WA 98166 PO Box 47015
PO Box 330310 Olympia, WA 98504-7015
Seattle,WA 98133-9710 ite
US Army Corp. of Engineers Ms. Shirley Marroquin Eric Swennson
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Real Estate Services
PO Box C-3755 KC Wastewater Treatment Division Seattle Public Utilities
Seattle,WA 98124 201 South Jackson St, MS KSC-NR-050 Suite 4900, Key Tower
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Seattle, WA 98104-3855 700 Fifth Avenue
Seattle,WA 98104
KG Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga
Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liason Manager
Metro Transit PO Box 90868
4.--N. 201 South Jackson Street MS: XRD-01W
KSC-TR-0431 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Seattle,WA 98104-3856 49 t
Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the following agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application.
Also note, do not mail David Dietzman any of the notices he gets his from the web. Only send •
him the ERC Determination paperwork.
L ,. Last printed 09/12/02 11:27 AM
l ()vs♦ •,
4\4k i' 9'
*REVISED*
NOTICE OF APPLICATION •
A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton.
The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals.
PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF,V-H,SM/BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pursuant to the City's request (dated June 3, 2002), the applicant has
submitted additional information deemed necessary to adequately review the environmental impacts of the
project application. Due to subsequent revisions of the proposal, the notice of project application and official
commenting period have been re-initiated. The modified aspects of the project have been italicized within the
following description. •
The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336
square feet with the shoreline fronting lot lines extending to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit
and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are
included with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat. The site is presently
utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline, all buildings
would be demolished as part of the project.
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north side of the site. A
secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property. The project would provide 42-foot wide
internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek in order to provide connection
to the secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge would likely require work below the
ordinary high water mark of May Creek;therefore approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
Regulations is necessary.
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for which a 25-
foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. May Creek bisects the property extending southeast
through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake Washington. The project would
provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore
currently impervious areas to native vegetation within this buffer.
In addition to Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat and Variance approval,the project requires the approval of a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat improvements. The applicant has also
requested an administrative street modification in order to allow for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet
throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit review for the development of the residential structures— both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as •
separate land use applications in the future.
PROJECT LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd.(between North 40th&44th Streets)
PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval,Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit Approval,Administrative Street Modification Approval
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager, Development
Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 26, 2002. If you have
questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact Ms.
Nishihira at(425)430-7270. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will
be notified of any decision on this project.
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
DATE OF APPLICATION: April 5,2002
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 3,2002
PROJECT PLACED ON-HOLD: June 3,2002
REVISED NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 12,2002
If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form
and return to: City of Renton,Development Planning,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055.
File NoJName: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM/Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat •
NAME:
ADDRESS:
•
TELEPHONE NO.:
NOTICE OF APPLICATION2
•
r -
•
•
BARBEE..•••MILL • '.ELIMINARY •PLAT 1ta : . •
• OVERALL PLAT PLAN •
•
•
•
• . ,,,I47.b.,,,dft:iii,:. ...:.._ri_t_riiikil-itto--ifixo.ir
•' '�y��'�.(o T?th rw
is �iiii �i
/ ..G.
1 ..11::. lit; 1 -'-.i'7.a'At4titi--- •1; • .. • .
•
; gil, 14., t4' , , : -•§' '—' • .
• • ' ': rAlb, ii, it,›-tol,'4,4,./ ..• i . .
•
•
\r-3........ _...- ..,....40, /-.t.7 4p',
-.- - = ! j-•
N 4OTH n. ' . .
•
• • i 1‘...4%i° 4 4%V.."- .. • . ....
•
. ' o ...
. . • . ,„. .. .
•
...„.• •
. .
, ,•••,,,„ •
. . , .
. • • •
. . . •
..., ... ..
•
•
•
•
• 0
-fi
Z 1 iaI .
•
•• .^""'`■{V'j1�J`. 11 •Y Mn-t•
2'�1.0
,"-fl•\
5 ., 1 , . , i ,/,.,,,,,,,sy N,-*,, 1.L\ . c .
I j ,.iff . , ., •
• h . . A: 414. 4, tit--,,,,,.. go . . .... . . . .
•
_ . ! ....,,..,._,._^� ..•.max. .'..,
4, CITY C RENTON
..u. Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
September 12, 2002
Campbell Mathewson
Century Pacific, LP
2140 Century Square
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP, V-H, SM
Dear Campbell:
Thank you for submitting the additional information requested by the City on June 3,
2002. The submitted materials have been accepted for review and the project is
tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on
October 8, 2002.
Although the review of the project has been re-initiated, the following information will be
necessary in order for staff to provide essential information to City reviewers:
1. A letter from ALL property owners (including J.H. Baxter & Co.) of the abutting
parcel to the north (4503 Lake. Washington Boulevard North) indicating their
intent to allow the dedication of public right-of-way through that property in order
to provide primary access to the proposed project.
2. Variance justification which addresses the criteria listed under RMC section 4-9-
250.B.5 as applicable to the required Tree Cutting and Land Clearing variance
for the construction of the vehicular bridge crossing within the 25-foot buffer of
May Creek.
3. Additional land use application fees in the amount of $750.00 ($250.00 for the
Hearing Examiner Variance and $500.00 for the Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit).
Pursuant to RMC section 4-9-190.E.2, no development within the 200-foot
boundary regulated by the City's Shoreline Master Program shall take place
without first obtaining a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. As
previously discussed, the current application does not require the approval of a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of the residential
structures at this time; although the permit will be required at the time of site plan
review. However, the infrastructure improvements (i.e., roadways and utilities)
associated with the approval of the preliminary plat, and which must be
completed prior to final plat approval, necessitate the approval of a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit for those aspects of the project.
4. An updated project narrative reflecting the revisions to the proposed plat plan as
most recently submitted.
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 N E N T O N
��. AHEAD OF THE CURVE
IF This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer •
Barbee Mill Preliminary Piai
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP, V-H, SM
September 12,2002
Page 2 of 2
5. An addendum to the submitted preliminary plat plan which provides the proposed
square footage of each lot as required in the legend information pursuant to
RMC section 4-8-120.D.16— Preliminary Plat Plan, I.iv.
6. Documentation which demonstrates the applicant's ability to perform
improvements to the pertinent railroad crossings as necessary for public use
pursuant to standards established by Burlington Northern Sante Fe and/or
Washington State Utility and Transportation Committee.
At this time, a revised Notice of Application has been forwarded to reviewing agencies,
parties of record and has been posted within the vicinity of the subject site. The
required commenting period has been initiated and will close at 5:00 p.m. on September
26, 2002.
Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please contact me at
(425) 430-7270.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishihira ;:'. °'".'
Project Manager ;
•
•
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood, Applicant
Dan Dawson, Contact
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator
Susan Carlson, EDNSP Administrator
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner
0 �
* tom' +
*REVISED*
NOTICE OF APPLICATION •
A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton.
The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals.
PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF,V-H,SM/BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT --
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pursuant to the City's request (dated June 3, 2002), the applicant has
submitted additional information deemed necessary to adequately review the environmental impacts of the
project application. Due to subsequent revisions of the proposal, the notice of project application and official
commenting period have been re-initiated. The modified aspects of the project have been italicized within the
following description.
The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 115 lots ranging in size from 1,847 square feet to 7,336
square feet with the shoreline fronting lot lines extending to the inner harbor line. The lots are intended for the
development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,4-unit
and 5-unit structures to be located on the southeast side of May Creek. Landscape,roadway and utility improvements are
included with the proposal. Four utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat. The site is presently""
utilized for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline, all buildings
would be demolished as part of the project.
Access to the project would be provided via a public roadway through the abutting property on the north side of the site. A •
secondary access point is also provided at the southeast corner of the property. The project would provide 42-foot wide •
internal public roadways throughout the project as well as a bridge crossing over May Creek in order to provide connection
to the secondary access point. Installation of new foundations for the proposed bridge would likely require work below the
ordinary high water mark of May Creek;therefore approval of a variance from the City's Tree Cutting and Land Clearing
Regulations is necessary. •
The western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 lineal feet of Lake Washington shoreline—for which a 25-
foot setback from the ordinary high water mark would be maintained. May Creek bisects the property extending southeast
through the site from Lake Washington Boulevard to the May Creek Delta within Lake Washington. The project would
provide a buffer from the May Creek ordinary high water mark ranging from 50 feet to 100 feet in width and would restore •
currently impervious areas to native vegetation within this buffer.
In addition to Environmental(SEPA)Review,Preliminary Plat and Variance approval,the project requires the approval of a
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the installation of associated plat improvements. The applicant has also
requested an administrative street modification in order to allow for a reduction of sidewalk widths from 6 feet to 5 feet •
throughout the plat. The proposal also requires Hearing Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit review for the development of the residential structures—both of which the applicant has chosen to submit as
separate land use applications in the future.
PROJECT LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd.(between North 40th&44th Streets)
PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental(SEPA)Review,Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Approval,
Hearing Examiner Variance Approval,Shoreline Substantial Development
Permit Approval,Administrative Street Modification Approval
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager, Development
Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 26, 2002. If you have
questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail,contact Ms.
Nishihira at(425)430-7270. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will
be notified of any decision on this project. •
•
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
DATE OF APPLICATION: April 5,2002
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 3,2002
PROJECT PLACED ON-HOLD: June 3,2002
REVISED NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 12,2002
If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form
and return to: City of Renton,Development Planning,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055. •
File No./Name: LUA-02-040,ECF,PP,V-H,SM/Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat •
NAME: •
ADDRESS: •
TELEPHONE NO.:
NOTICE OF APPLICATION2
.,
..
• •
.. .
. .
. . .., ...•. ... ...
. . ..
. -•
•
. • BARBEE M.ILL `,ELIMINARY PLAT As •
. .
•OVERALL PLAT PLA14 lz.,,,,,i, •
. .
•
.„..
• ..
- .
. : .
/ coma Iwo it ////' .
..
.. . .
....
•
• .
• .. ..
• ,. OW 4 rei 0 1 1 14:40 ill 11 I VY .
on. /„.... .............1•- 0 _, . ,_ i r-. 4 ... .• . •
- .
TACEIGTox 11.TI(01W:401i.i;k•-.... • •• - : :-4 • /
•
al P - 9.;41141$ OM 1 FR4/1/ •—
1 I :..,...... .
. .
,e;•?. • •
• 1•
• , a rk 4:;,,, ,, . .
•
. ... . - al ,f.. 4, .f. .....,,..„ ...
,-- ., . •:,:::
; gi retrik,4, ----- , 47 .- . - • •
• • giViff .44"...„.4,1 41
:•.: :. •- ..
•
. .gou iz,. •Vor • .
. .
I ••.
f•••:ii
• • • •
AVA I rii
41r . : .:y• •--,
•
• • • • . .
. ......_•••".• i (-7 . . . x40msr. •• . ••.• .;• •• • •
• •
. . •
. .. . .. .
. . .
. .. .
• . .
• . • .
. .
•
• ..• . • •. . •
• • • • .
• ';••••; •.:-•
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . .. . . . ..
•• . • • .. .
,• •.; .
. .
. ....
• ‘,-ti: 4.• .• --,-;:-Q,...(pa'N,t,*7:!A•Ti''' • . . ... .
•
ir .1••••,z4t..2.404,It.,4„:7 . • • •
•
: -3;,a`'•‘:.--'..:•,
•••''
. . `••:i.'''Y
•
• .• / '',/.7' .
. ..••
. . •. •
(1. Sr WY ad • 4., 4. 44,
A'. •..•
I.
. •''.1:..
...:5.r .
:... . .
IF ,,p.,
- ...
i••:-.•
. . • .,
. • ....' :.: :•;.•i.•.•.:• • 0 4*. /. ".'•.c•/•
0
64 0.i../f t k/i•f7y.,* •;ij•'i
„.,/'",•
• . - ••.•-•. ...:.
..'
..••
e / .ti• '%
. .. .
' air,'' ' i::;• •
'). .
. ....
................
•.. ' • •••. :;.:••• • •
, ::..f:f •, .:'• . i;.": ;
Z
0 I 0 Q . .,./.• , ;'' 2 r, •' I X . • •g•.•;'••. "
• • •:;•.•?::::
•
l •' I ()IQ"' 4*9 ... .-.:-:---" ' •
.•
• 0 •
>
1.:t,"'A . •616 . •
. . •• 3.•$•:,:ile:';,.•..i::', .•Z •• • •
..... ' • :i•Mi!
. • .•••. •• . I so g • r , EP---ey A 11. , .
. •-....
CO I . i ' •••• • .
o
rs""d r -- '. '4i0oe' 17k
: •4 . •
. :;::.'•:"
or
',it.ii • . '
• . • . ••;.;:
UJ •arP... / \•••••,,, ir
•: • •• • :.:'. : ' ,ff / \ i 11 ' I M .• 1 • •.. 1..L
1 •
4*'..7:/,41,, ..'' , '.:( • • •• .
• •• • • .
•! a X Pr .ir \N„...‘1! .-,,i, . ,.
::•., :. ; i ..4 .41, .. . V ilL it+, Ti . . , ...:
.':::: . •
•. . .• .... .
I I f . g-iiiCiAi:•,41":'.7 -rit \lk „e•
• -
. .
.. • y . ii stir..NaA=AR-11,-mt,17: set-4. • • • :..!:•. •
.. • • ..• - . .„,, .. Ammo! UN:.4&gle.iirj WI2 • :•
. . .
.,,„°' giBIZIMMICI allt-41:1 s WI — •
• • ZainaLVE. COMMICIF 31111 0-1 . - . • ••'.. •
nigea ZIMIM-31 41/3 •
. • ••
7L.Tr.r. tionm-7241 . fp" ---. i' ,i.'•• •.. ,„ _;......,: : ,,,_ __ •111',...:•:11 [Mb.-'CPI •• 7.-..i ••
•
1
4.•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY. MA/vs-rn ©/eS
eovvu0
A. BACKGROUND b3 y Cirq-7or1P-11/4
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: o iiv q. q .c_
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
2. Name of applicant:
Century Pacific, LP
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Campbell Mathewson
Century Pacific, LP
2140 Century Square
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 689-7203
4. Date checklist prepared:
tr
April 3, 2002
5. Agency requesting checklist: AFL
City of Renton 3 R16.iy�A
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): I QpRo 9FpoN�/IvG
Construction of the proposed plat roads and utility 4 4',1..� 405
infrastructure could begin in 2003 following final plat and site it
plan approval. Construction of dwelling units could begin with o
the infrastructure improvements and occur over a several year
period.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further
activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 5�i/ t2p , �jv\.
The proponent does not have any plans for future additions, . �7reGf- A-Da DG�1�
expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this i an g ✓YIQ.
proposal.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been j<
prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
The following environmental information has been prepared
for and is included with this proposal: I
{
a) Wetland Delineation Confirmation Radaeke and Associates, i;
April 2002. 04Jfkt da-kx-
qtpia-0
2 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
Upd arkc L
• l T+� c-
b) Traffic Impact Analysis HDR Associates, April 2002. ¢.4- Of6rt d t
c) Geotechnical Feasibility, Golder Associates, April 2002. 11 -71a3la ooa-
Environmental information prepared for a previous proposal � ee
on the subject property includes: -
a) Preliminary Storm Drainage Report, Triad Associates, July "r
4- 2e-po� {
10, 2000. '" 0/D--71 -
b) Initial Transportation Analysis, The Transpo Group, August
8, 2000. 1 AN D
Environmental Information prepared for a previous proposal 1 0I 081`CA -(
that included the subject property: scg-yyLvL F
a) Wetland Determination Report, David Evans and . d il4 e/d(o13-00-a..
Associates, Inc., May 1997.
b) Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, Beak Consultants Inc., ii
if
June 19, 1997. t
i¢
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental
i
approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered I
by your proposal? If yes, explain. ri
A remediation plan for environmental contamination at the site
is under review by the Department of Ecology. An application •
for site plan approval for a mixed use development is under a
review by the City of Renton. '1
10.List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for
your proposal, if known. 1 d,I46 Nair)
SEPA Process, Preliminary and Final Plat approval, Shoreline 0 G vin
Substantial Development Permit, and Clearing and Grading
Permit. �ieP,G Cv hilq a v nee
it
it ji,k 11.Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the - �I vI C Mod lOcti films
1.
proposed uses and the size of the project. There are several r
questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain 11
1
aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those
answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to 'E
include additional specific information on project description.) vrr4 qa-7
Subdivide 22.9 acres into 112 townhome building lots and 1q • -r i5 lo /
construction of new public streets, utilities, water quality
ponds, and landscaping. Project includes removal of all --bs'id
existing buildings, equipment and pavement. Gro557h
3 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
• LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
• RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
e3
12.Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to is
understand the precise location of your proposed project, including
a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. I
If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or
boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan,
vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While
you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any
permit applications related to this checklist.
The subject property is located in the City of Renton in the NW
1/a of Section 32 Township 24 North, Range 5 East WM. The
site is bounded on the west by Lake Washington and the east •
by a portion of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right-of-
way and Lake Washington Boulevard near NE 44th Street. The
property address is 4101 Lake Washington Boulevard North.
A complete legal description, vicinity map and site plans are
provided with this application.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one):
Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other:
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent
slope)?
The site is very flat at about 0 to 3 percent slope except for
the stream banks of May Creek that are about 30 to 40
percent slope.
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, ft
clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of
agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland.
The site is primarily fill underlain with interbedded organic
silts, silty clays and fine to medium sands according to the
Golder report listed previously.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the /9-&5 �1G(
immediate vicinity? If so, describe. as l-1 ica<--1
There are no apparent surface indications or history of ovl.
unstable soils in the immediate vicinity. 'i
4 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST / S.
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT. ,
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any
filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Earthwork for the project would include removal of existing
asphalt pavement, excavation and backfill for utilities and
water quality ponds, and grading for road construction. All 1,
waste paving material would be exported to an approved
recycling facility. Import would include stone, gravel and
crushed rock for utility backfill and road subgrade obtained
from approved materials providers. The quantity of fill
material on site is 38,000 cubic yards and the quantity of
excavation is 32,000 cubic yards based on very preliminary
estimates. The source of fill has yet to be identified. Fill
material will come from an approved off-site source.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or
use? If so, generally describe.
Some soil erosion will occur from on site grading. During
prolonged or heavy rainfall, fine soil particles could
become suspended and transported by stormwater runoff.
An approved temporary erosion control and sedimentation
control plan will be prepared and implemented as part of
the site construction to control erosion on-site.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious
surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or
buildings)?
The combination of road surface, driveways, sidewalks and 1.
roof surface would cover about 60 percent of the site at full
build out. The percentage of impervious area existing on
the site at this time is about 85 percent.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other
impacts to the earth, if any:
Those site areas disturbed by grading and excavation
would be limited to the flat portion of the site. Any
sediment-laden runoff may be readily controlled at the
perimeter of the disturbed areas to prevent sediment
transport to May Creek or Lake Washington. City of Renton
regulations require an approved temporary erosion and
sedimentation plan to be followed during construction.
2. Air
a. What type of emissions to the air would result from the proposal
(i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during
5 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
construction and when the project is completed? If any,
generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
Normal levels of fugitive dust and equipment exhaust
emissions are expected to occur during construction.
Vehicle exhaust emissions will occur when the completed
project is occupied. No other emissions that would be
atypical of a residential development are expected.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may
affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
There were no apparent sources of off-site emissions or
odor that may affect this proposal present during recent it
site visits.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts to air, if any:
During prolonged dry periods, measures may be taken to P
reduce the amount of dust caused by heavy equipment and
truck traffic on the site. Soil wetting is a method commonly
employed to control dust on construction sites. The
sitework will include hydroseeding of disturbed areas with
an erosion control seed mix to reduce wind-borne dust. The
applicant will meet all applicable city codes and
requirements regarding reduction of emissions.
3. Water P
a. Surface:
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate
vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal
streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream
or river it flows into.
The subject site contains roughly 400 feet of Lake a49-10-te MOO
Washington shoreline. The site is bisected by the 6-F S`'Lf,. - fY,c,
lowest reach of May Creek where it flows into Lake
Washington. A small, class 3 wetland is located afC vvCc. .
adjacent to the railroad track embankment in the
railroad right-of-way just east of the site.
r� ��
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to '� � C�' �
(within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please 1pC0-4
describe and attach available plans.
at( , t1;-14Gov)
& 1LJ 16 rrce/rL
ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST 6-av, 7 t%/f/1-E/
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
Yes, the project would include road and utility ir vaivIANIx_
improvements construction within 200 feet of Lake C p �Ifril
Washington and May Creek. No construction activities I �,
are proposed below the ordinary high water mark ofp-v
e_
Lake Washington or May Creek. S 17)y
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be , 6VCA✓ Ai /
placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and t ' /fr�S
indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate , L
the source of fill material. IE otm.- b
No fill or dredge material would be placed or removed i vfin 3-5"6-01-
from any surface water or wetlands. •: N-u2-- v(*Aa .
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or i'
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
3
The proposal will not require surface water withdrawals 1
or diversions. c
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so,
note location on the site plan.
Portions of the project within the stream banks of May i'
t
Creek are within the 100-year floodplain. None of the i
area proposed for development is within the 100-year
floodplain. `,
it
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials
to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and
anticipated volume of discharge.
The proposal does not involve any discharge of waste
materials to surface waters.
it
b. Ground: ii
i°
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged
to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known. if
No ground water will be withdrawn nor will water be
discharged to ground water on a long-term basis. I
c
During construction, dewatering of utility trenches may {e
be required. Water removed from trenches would be
treated prior to release in accordance with water quality ,
standards. 1
7 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the •
ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for I
example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the
following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the
general size of the system, the number of such systems, the
number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number
of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
No waste material would be discharged into the ground
from septic tanks or other sources.
c. Water Runoff (including storm water): I'
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and
method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, 1.
if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow
into other waters? If so, describe.
The source of runoff would be surfaces such as roads,
sidewalks, driveways and roofs. The collection method
will be via a subsurface drainage system with disposal
into ponds as shown on the site drainage plan {
submitted with the application. The eventual discharge
point will be Lake Washington. !:
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If
so, generally describe.
i
No significant amounts of waste materials are expected
to enter ground or surface waters.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and I:
runoff water impacts, if any: !'
All non-paved areas around buildings would be landscaped
with trees, shrubs and groundcovers including lawn
grasses to control runoff. I
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other Cottonwood
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs Willows
is
grass Turf type grasses
pasture
— crop or;grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage,
other
8 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other Ij
other types of vegetation
1,
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? is
Some areas of lawn grass would be removed for road and
utility construction. Several trees in future building lots
may have to be removed. No native vegetation removal �=
would occur in the May Creek stream buffer of 50 feet. It
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near
the site.
No threatened or endangered plant species are known to be
on or near the site however no specific field investigation
or data search were performed to confirm this. Because !f
the site is mostly paved it is unlikely that any threatened or
endangered species exist at the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures t
to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
The project includes extensive landscaping of stormwater }
detention areas and open spaces. The May Creek stream it
buffer will be enhanced with native plants in all areas where
shrub and upper canopy vegetation are lacking within the
buffer. All disturbed areas will be seeded with an erosion
control grass seed mix.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or
near the site or are known to be on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, Potentially Osprey
other: !£ Cv�r
mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver,
it 6
,i rn si
other: rodents I y4vrt6 //pca..fu4
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, C1 ) -UtS h�y
other: V1/�tG✓ f -
i
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or
near the site.
The Puget Sound Chinook salmon is a listed species
Cokio GLS
known to occur in Lake Washington and May Creek at CG+ ia-FD
some part of its life cycle. Some bald eagle and osprey use
may occur on or near the site. The bald eagle is on the
a)l 11'I ;-t- s
9 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST 1 I c� i,L / V5FW.•
•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
federal and state threatened species lists; osprey is on the
state monitor list.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
The Lake Washington shoreline may be used by some Chi co IL
migratory waterfowl species as part of a migration route. echo
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
The May Creek stream buffer habitat will be restored
wherever existing pavement is to be removed. The
detention pond areas will be landscaped primarily with
native vegetation including future potential perch sites.
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove,
solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy
needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
The completed project will use primarily electricity and
natural gas for heating, lighting and appliances.
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by
adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
The project would not likely have a negative affect the
potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties.
c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the
plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to
reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
Washington State energy code compliance will be required
for all residential structures.
7. Environmental Health
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure
to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous
waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so,
describe. 'PAP
There are no unusual environmental health hazards that
would occur as a result of this project. Any environmental I I"'o Si7G
contamination of the site would be remediated prior to r6sl�Qf it
beginning any site improvements or building in accordance
with State and Federal laws and an approved clean up
program. Building demolition practices are regulated to
•
1 0 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COM'LtTED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
reduce environmental health hazards by containing and
removing or hazardous materials.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
No special emergency services are anticipated.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any:
No measures to reduce or control environmental health
hazards are assumed necessary or proposed.
b. Noise ,:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your
project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? =.
Low levels of ambient traffic noise from Interstate 405
are present but not expected to affect use of the site for
residential development. Noise from train traffic on the
adjacent BNSF line would be clearly audible but
infrequent.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or
associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term
basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from site.
On a short-term basis, construction equipment would
create noise levels typically ranging from 60 to 80
decibels at a distance of 200 feet from the source during
normal construction hours.
On a long-term basis, ambient noise levels would be
typical for residential neighborhoods.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if
any:
Typical measures to reduce short-term noise impacts
include limiting the hours of construction as defined by
the City of Renton codes. No unusual measures to
reduce or control noise impacts are assumed necessary
or proposed because residences in the vicinity are not ,;
close to where most of the construction activity will
occur.
8. Land and Shoreline Use
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
]] ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
•
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
The site presently is used for the Barbee Mill, a specialty
cedar products producer.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
It is not likely that the site has been used for agriculture.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
The site contains a building for the mill offices and about
14 other structures that are used for log handling, sawing
and milling operations and storage of wood products.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
All of the structures will be demolished and removed for
recycling or disposal at approved facilities.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? �.
is
The current zoning classification of the site is Center Office
Residential 2. (COR2)
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
The current comprehensive plan designation for the site is
Center Office Residential.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program
designation of the site?
The current shoreline master program designation for the 1isite is Urban Environment.
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally
critical" area? If so, specify.
Yes, May Creek and the Lake Washington shoreline are
considered environmentally critical.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the
completed project?
The project would provide units for 112 households or
roughly 200 people. I€
is
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project
displace?
The completed project would displace the present E,
workforce of approximately 12 people at the Barbee Mill.
2 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if lY
any:
The project would provide construction jobs for road, utility
and building construction.
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with
existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: !'
The proposed project would be developed in accordance
with all applicable City of Renton zoning requirements, {
development requirements, and comprehensive plan PUbLI C&CeSS.
elements.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? $,
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
A total of 112 middle to high-income residential units would
1 1 ' (fO
be provided.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. 1
No housing units would be eliminated with this proposal. it
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if �.
any:
1E
No measures to reduce or control housing impacts are
assumed needed or proposed.
10.Aesthetics
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not
including antennas; what is the principal exterior building
material(s) proposed? ';' A/9-19L I'CaJt 1-
No structures are proposed with this project. The tallest h CI,S I(OC UV
height of any future residential structures would be limited r- fid. b irWr
by the zoning requirements in effect at the time of building ;' 1�f� l I
permit application. h, f S iv 50194
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or ; tiV;7'1 a-004
19°4-
obstructed? she.r-c,t0\-6
The removal of the Barbee Mill buildings and subsequent klvGie
vvj
construction of residential buildings would change the !1,
views east from Mercer Island and the views north and
south along Lake Washington. The mill is a visual anomaly
13 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
' RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
within a viewshed dominated by residential properties. The
physical appearance of the existing buildings, massing and
harsh openness of the site, create an aesthetic more suited
to a large industrial area. At the south end of the lake, the
closest, and only remaining industrial area on the
shoreline, has undergone a recent redevelopment to non-
industrial use.
it
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if
any:
No particular measures to reduce or control aesthetic it
impacts are assumed needed or proposed because the
proposed land use is visually compatible with the
surrounding residential land uses and any existing view
obstructions would likely decrease.
11.Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time
of day would it mainly occur?
The completed project would include light sources
normally associated with a residential community: vehicle
headlights, street lighting and outdoor lighting of homes
and landscaping. Most of the light would occur in the
morning and evening hours during the fall, winter and
spring months.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard
or interfere with views?
No safety hazards or interference with views related to light
or glare are expected with this type of residential use.
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your ;♦
proposal? t .
There are no known off-site sources of light or glare that
may affect this proposal.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts,
if any:
No measures to control vehicle headlights are assumed
needed because the internal road system is relatively flat
and would not cause headlights to be directed in a manner 3F
that caused impacts. Likewise, no measures to control
home and landscape lighting are needed other than
covenant conditions that restrict excessive lighting. Street
I4 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
' ' RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
lighting standards limit the amount of uplighting from
fixtures to reduce potential impacts to views. }
12.Recreation Ij
I
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in i'
the immediate vicinity? l
Gene Coulon Park is located near the project to the south. 1
I.
The park includes boat launching and beach facilities. •
it
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational
11
uses? If so, describe.
The project would not displace any known recreational 1
uses.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, I'
including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project iL
or applicant, if any: !K OT S�1JV�/�
The project proposal includes an active recreation area at II VI- p ( L
the Lake Washington shoreline that will benefit the I
residents and guests of the subdivision. `"
t
13.Historic and Cultural Preservation !°
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, iP
national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or ii
next to the site? If so, generally describe. !f
There are no apparent places or objects listed on, or i
proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers I'
either on or next to the project site although no formal data
search was performed to confirm this.
i
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, I, /G1iIG(cCos-i-C
eue
archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on i. /1 5
or next to the site. 1140-6
There are no apparent landmarks or evidence of historic, li ew1 (a- /72
archaeological, scientific or cultural importance known to i PJ I (4Z.
be on or next to the site.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: ;11 1 ` —e.
ii
No measures are assumed needed or proposed. If I
archaeological resources are encountered during project
construction, then appropriate actions would be taken
consistent with regulatory requirements.
15 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
• , "4.
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
' ' RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
14.Transportation i
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and
describe the proposed access to the existing street system.
Show on site plans, if any. ;,
i.
Interstate 405 serves this area via the NE 44th Street it
interchange. The site is accessed via Lake Washington
•
Boulevard as shown on the preliminary plat map submitted j
with this application. i
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the It
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
The site is not currently served by public transit. A bus +.3
IS
park and, ride lot is located within 1 mile of the site at the I ;;
405 / NE 30th Street exit.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have?
How many would the project eliminate?
The completed project would provide the minimum off-
;
street parking for each dwelling unit required by City of r,
Renton land use codes. On-street parking is expected
throughout the project's internal roads as well. '•:.t•
it
The number of parking spaces available for the present use
is not readily quantifiable because extensive areas of the
ii
site are paved and available for parking. Some of the areas `t
now used for employee parking are not striped. All existing
parking spaces would effectively be eliminated. E
1.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or
11
improvements to existing roads or streets, not including
driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or t
private). ('�C,G� _UYI GL,/
?�
The project will require the construction of new interior a G&c-SSG '&
public streets. An off-site access road improvement is �� ,� CvpSSj7�
proposed to be constructed to the north and connecting to il tiin'
Lake Washington Boulevard North/Ripley Lane. i INU1 j ��
g P Y
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water,
�— Q4
rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. CorirL/4- Ctr
The project would not directly use rail, water or air
transportation. The project would occur in the vicinity of a S7 '
BNSF rail line, within 2.5 miles of the Renton Airport and ii
adjacent to Lake Washington which could be used for water
transportation. ,
]6 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
•
w ,
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the r
completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes
would occur. I
k
According to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by HDR +
Associates, (March, 2002) about 717 average weekday daily ?t
trips would be expected after project build out based on
112 residential units. Peak volumes are anticipated during {
the weekday PM peak hour when about 67 trips would I'
I
occur. I.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts,
if any.
1, CUrnv I al-u
No particular measures to reduce or control transportation i11 r Ad- h
impacts are proposed. Further discussion of traffic If
impacts is discussed in the report submitted with this it f 01-- i'�
application. 't ddj11- /_Ge--.
15.Public Services If
ir
It
a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services r
(for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, `i
ii
schools, other)? If so, generally describe. }
The project will result in an increased need for some public ,
,z
services including school enrollment and health care. Fire i`
and police protection needs are not expected increase k •
k
significantly above that required for the current land use. 1E
,
it
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on i
public services, if any. ;F
1,
A higher level of property tax revenue will be generated to
support public services. Iz
16.Utilities is
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural ill
qas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic ,
system, other.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility
it
providing the service, and the general construction activities on it.
the site or in immediate vicinity which might be needed.
i
The City of Renton would provide sanitary sewer, water and r-
it
refuse service. Electricity and natural gas would be ;€'
provided by Puget Sound Energy. Qwest is the telephone II
provider and ATT Broadband would provide cable service. ':t
I7 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
41,
LEFT COLUMN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT.
RIGHT COLUMN FOR CITY OF RENTON USE ONLY.
General construction activities that would be required on
and adjacent to the site would include utility extensions to
the site where required and on-site installation of utilities.
C. SIGNATURE
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my
knowledge. I understand the lead agency is relying on them to
make its decision.
Signature: .
/' O fi
Date submitted: ;f
This checklist was reviewed by:
18 ENVIRONMENTAL(SEPA)CHECKLIST
3 CITY F RENTON
..LL Mayor
Jesse Tanner
August 26,2002
Cynthia Youngblood
4100 Lake Washington Boulevard North,#A103
Renton,WA 98056-1584
Subject: Barbee Mill Property
Dear Ms.Youngblood:
I appreciate the concern expressed in your recent letter regarding the well being of the Kennydale
neighborhood and,more specifically,the suitability of the development project proposed on the Barbee Mill
property.
As you may already be aware,the Barbee Mill site is located within the Center Office Residential (COR)
zoning designation. Although the COR zone allows for a variety of high intensity uses,including offices,
hotels, convention centers and residential, stand alone residential development is also outright permitted in
this zone. The current residential preliminary plat application for 112-townhouse units complies with the
established uses and residential density requirements of the COR zone.
While it is the City's preference that the property be developed as part of a larger,high intensity project with
amenities available for the general public to enjoy,the property owner has every legal right to propose
development which falls within the boundaries of the applicable regulations adopted by the City Council.
The City can only encourage the property owner to propose a project that will result in the best available use
of the land and the least amount of adverse impacts—which it has done extensively.
It goes without saying that the residents of Kennydale and the City of Renton would greatly benefit from the
creation of an additional waterfront park. However,just as other municipalities and agencies throughout the
state are struggling with diminishing resources,the City of Renton will likely be facing a similar difficult
financial situation in the future. Therefore, faced with sustaining a budget for a rapidly growing city,the
acquisition of property valued at millions of dollars is not a feasible option at the present time. In addition
to the acquisition costs, considerable expenditures would be necessary for the initial development, as well as
the on-going annual maintenance costs of a public park. The cost of converting this industrially utilized
property to a park would be substantial.
I applaud your efforts to help make Renton a community that will stand the test of time and I encourage you
to continue to make your voice heard. Please do not be discouraged if the property owner's vision for the
Barbee Mill site is not swayed; this is but one piece of a larger puzzle aimed at the betterment of the entire
City. If you have further questions,you may contact Lesley Nishihira,project manager, at 425-430-7270.
erely,
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
Jesse Tanner CITY OF RENTON
Mayor
AUG 2 8 2002
Referral#22-2002
RECEIVED
cc: Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer
Gregg Zimmerman,PB/PW Administrator
Neil Watts,Development Services Director •
Jennifer Henning,Principal Planner
l Le'sley'.:Nishiliira?Project Manager
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6500/FAX(425)430-6523 RENTON
�� AHEAD OF THE CURVE
.J This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
To Mayor Jesse Tanner: August 9, 2002 ;r�i ` ?MO
{c,, t
I have lived ten years at East Port Shores Condominiums overlooking Barbee Mill,
which will soon be a townhouse development. It sickens me to think about this,
especially the way the homes are lined up 24 units wall to wall, five different complexes.
I have attached my letter of comment and sent it to you, in hopes that you will get
involved and help to modify the plans. At present, it is one more high density housing
project crammed into the Lake Washington Boulevard scene. It could be so much more.
Mr. Tanner, you may have the influence to make this project into something that will
bless the whole city of Renton for the next hundred years. There is a bigger picture to
consider here. It is a prime piece of land situated on the Lake. Why waste it on housing
when it should be used for something that is unique and nourishing to all the people who
have no connection to land because of apartment/condo living. If there must be high
density housing to better serve the region,then make provisions for places of rest and
greenness on pieces of land such as this.
Renton has plenty of other sites for the needs of housing that do not take up beautiful
waterfront land. Restoring the shoreline is a good step. Can you sway the owners to do
more of this restoration and save a place for the wildlife that is constantly being
displaced? Bellevue has its marshes and large greenbelts. What does Renton have?
It would be a great thing if you could leave some sort of Legacy to the city of Renton
by saving this land from becoming more urban sprawl. Remember the Lousiana
Purchase and Seward's Folly?(the state of Alaska) These places started out as one man's
vision that was ridiculed by the masses, but their willingness to stand up for an idea
became great blessings to the United States. You could be a man of vision for this piece
of land.
Please take a second look at the plans here. Is it too late to get something great going?
One man can make a difference, or woman, for that matter. Can the city of Renton buy
this land, or part of it? A long-term loan,twenty year settlement? Is there a rich
benefactor out there looking for a worthy cause to support? Maybe you can dream big
dreams and create a heritage that lives on long after you retire from public office.
Thank you for your time. Kennydale is a great place to live. It's a little bit country, a
little bit city. Here, a nightly walk to the beach is the perfect way to keep in touch with
your growing children or your spouse. Pedestrians are on the path 24 hours a day, and
there are the hard core bicyclists that zoom by in the early mornings and evenings. What
a great thing it would be if there were three parks close together on Lake Washington
Boulevard! They would be like an oasis in the middle of row to row housing. All those
kids (like mine) will need somewhere close to play at, since they will never really know
what a back yard is like...
Thank you,
Cynthia Youngblood
Cynthia Youngblood
#A103
K' 4100 Lk Wshngtn Blvd N
Renton,WA 98056-1584
A 411110
To the Cugini and Baxter families: August 9,2002
111
I am a resident of East Port Shores Condominiums,and daily I look out on the rugged beauty of the
Barbee Mill property where you have most recently proposed a sprawling,high density townhouse
suburbia.I know that financial return is the motivator here. Are there so many family members in on this
deal that maximum profit overrides decisions that could have been more meaningful to the community? I
am disappointed that this was your best,most inspired idea for this undeveloped piece of land,because it
has the potential to become something so much more.
As I view this ambitious plan,I see long rows of townhouses,24 units,22 units, 18 units,and more,all
without a break in the shared common walls. Have any of you ever lived in group housing? I have raised
my two children in a condo for 10 years now,with a parking lot to play in,and I wonder why your planners
have not thought to break the townhouses into 8 unit communities? This would enhance the quality of
living,aid the circulation of air,and allow the inclusion of trees,greenbelts,and woodsy landscaping that
suits the native May Creek countryside. Where are the tree lined,woodsy boulevards that are found in
well-planned developments? Where are the shady,centralized gathering places for residents to congregate
in? (There is nothing like the sun-baked pavement of Kennydale to make a lovely,mild day parched and
uninviting. I know because I live here...)
Take a trip eastward on 44'h street and look at the treatment of housing along the way. Just behind
McDonalds there is a complex of housing that has great woodsy landscaping by the road,but when you
drive into the development,there is nothing but pavement. It feels classy but cold,uninviting. Where do
the neighbors gather together to sit and enjoy the evening?
Down the road there are many large box houses with tiny fenced-in yards. It used to be a shady hillside.
Where are the large beautiful trees to keep a neighborhood cool? Where is the feeling of woods to bring
the houses into harmony with the landscape? Someone crammed as many houses onto that piece of land as
they could. For a little less money in the pocket,it could have been so much more.
Drive eastward on the road past the Newcastle Golf Course and you will eventually come to a
development on the left,past the fire station,where there was great care and integrity put into the land
around the housing. There is native vegetation and the feel of woods when you walk down the sidewalk.
Someone planned well in this case,and considered beauty and nature when they drew up their blueprint...
Apart from the housing issue, few seem to care about wildlife or pockets of peacefulness within a busy
city's borders. Why must this lakeside piece of land be developed solely for housing when most of the land
up Kennydale's slopes will one day be an extension of Lake Washington Boulevard's condos and
apartments? A piece of land like this,or at least a large portion of it should be sold to the city of Renton to
be preserved from development. What of the Herons that nest here,or the osprey and eagles,the salmon?
Why must progress and profit take front seat to long term enrichment? Where is Kennydale's historical
tribute to the mining industry that built this little community?
I wonder if it is a lost cause to get anyone to listen. Money-speak is the only voice that is heard.
Personally I was hoping that Barbee Mill could become a recreational area,with a little bit of marina,a
little bit of restaurant,and a large amount of restored native habitat. There could be a protected,off limits
area for nesting birds... Maybe you are trying to do some of this,because I noted that the shoreline is
being rebuilt. Thank you! It is a step in the right direction. Now,how about something really spectacular
for the generations who come after us to enjoy?
You can make a real difference here. We don't need to be"Little Kirkland." We don't need a crammed
townhouse development. We need something that rises above the greed of the greatest financial return.
Please,think again and see what your best imaginations can create. Don't you want to really be proud of
what you have chosen to do here,rather than financially satisfied? The money from the sale of land will be
gone in a few years. The townhouses you build here will live on forever in mediocrity. Choose wisely,
bless this neighborhood, and good will come back to you in ways you had not envisioned...
Jon & Cynthia Youngblood
4100 Lk. Washington Blvd. N.
#A103
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF'HEARING NOTICE OF AP'E,�
RENTON HEARING EXAMINER
Barbara Alther,first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the RENTON,cHearing HINGTON ,
A Public will be held by the
Renton Hearing Examiner in the
SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL Council Chambers on the seventh floor
of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady. "
600 S.Washington Avenue,Kent,Washington 98032 Way, Renton, Washington, on October
1, 2002 at 9:00-AM to consider the
following petition: 1
a daily newspaper published seven(7)times a week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of
general publication and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of APPEAL
publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily f DECISIONS DARBEE ILL ADMINISTRATIVE
newspaper in Kent,King County,Washington. The South County Journal has been approved as a i ' LUA-02-04o,PP,ECF
legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. Appeal,of administrative decisions .~- .
The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the South County Journal(and . by the City of Renton on the •
pending Barbee Mill Preliminary I
not in supplemental form)which was regularly distributed to the subscribers during the below Plat.Site Location:4201 Lk.Wash. ,
stated period. The annexed notice,a Blvd.
Legal descriptions of the files noted •
above are on file in the Development
Barbee Mill Appeal Services Division,Sixth Floor,City Hall,
Renton,WA.All interested persons are'
as published on: 9/16/02 invited to be present at the Public
Hearing to express their opinions. For
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of$47.25,charged to further information,contact the Hearing '
Examiner at 425-430-6515.
Acct. No.8051067. Published in the South County •
Journal September 16,2002..10800" - -
The cost above includes a$6.00 fee for the printing of the affidavits. ,
Legal Number 10800
Legal Clerk, outh County Journal
fl
Subscribed and sworn before me on this (b day of , .,2002
°paa°,I afAe0Bp0Pgpe /�
°° N °' Notary Public of the State of Washingto-
o "•qr o� •::•.' '� residing in Renton
r v,o i r,A y •• u,1 King County,Washington
s�
NOTICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING
RENTON HEARING EXAMINER
RENTON, WASHINGTON
A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh
floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on October 1, 2002 at 9:00 AM to
consider the following petition:
APPEAL
BARBEE MILL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
LUA-02-040,PP,ECF
Appeal of administrative decisions by the City of Renton on the pending Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat. Site Location: 4201 Lk. Wash. Blvd.
Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, Sixth Floor,
City Hall, Renton, WA. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing to express
their opinions. For further information, contact the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515.
Publication Date: September 16, 2001
Account No. 51067
S .c 6--retie,
empinftts r c1ir + 1(,o
hexpublication
STREET STANDARDS MODIFICATION
Project: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat— LUA o2-040
Standard: Street Standards,Section 4-6-o6o.F.2.b
Minimum Design Standards for Residential Access Streets: 6'sidewalks adjacent
to curb on both sides
Revision: Require sidewalks only along the westerly side of street"C"within the"Barbee
Mill"Plat
Justification
Background-There is very little room for development between the May Creek buffer and an
existing railroad right-of-way. Townhomes will front only along the westerly side of street"C".
In order to avoid grading impacts to wetlands and the railroad right-of-way along the east side
of street"C", sidewalks should be built only along the townhome side of the street.
1. Safety—Safety will be maintained by providing a sidewalk in front of the homes along street
"C". Other connecting roadways will include sidewalks on both sides. Also,street"C"is only
about 300'long in one direction and 23o'long in the other direction. Removal of a sidewalk
on one side of the roadway will not effect the level of emergency service to the homes along
street"C".
2. Function— Having sidewalks only on one side of street"C"will function as intended by city
standards because houses are located only on one side of the street.
3. Appearance— Granting this modification will not negatively effect appearance because
houses are located only along one side of the street.
4. Environmental Protection— Having sidewalks on both sides of street"C"would create
additional grading into wetlands and buffers along the easterly side of the street. Therefore,
requiring sidewalks only along the westerly side of street"C"will reduce environmental
impacts.
5. Maintainability—Granting this modification will not effect maintainability of the sidewalk.
6. Conform to the Intent of Code—This modification does conform to the intent of city codes
by continuing to provide pedestrian access to the front of each house along street"C".
7. Impact to Other Properties—Allowing this modification will have a positive impact to the
adjoining railroad right-of-way by allowing enough room to maintain road grading within
the Barbee Mill site.
REV CITY OF RENTON PLANING
DEVELOPMENT I ENTO SING
AUG .2 02 Aua+' 2 7 e 1
IDEVEctiOriPtErNTRevoNNNINo
AUG 2 2002
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P. RECEIVED
CAMPBELL MATHEWSON
VICE PRESIDENT
HAND DELIVERED
August 27, 2002
Lesley Nishihira
Project Manager
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File NO. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Dear Lesley:
The enclosed material is in direct response to your letter of June 3, 2002 to Dan Dawson of Otak,
Inc. in which you requested additional information in regards to the above-referenced plat.
More specifically, enclosed are:
1. Five (5) copies of a Biological Assessment completed by a qualified biologist;
2. Five (5) copies of a revised Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis (previously hand
delivered to you on Monday, August 12, 2002);
3. Plans revised by Otak pursuant to the comments made by City staff at our meeting on
April 25, 2002, including street modification requests; and
4. A copy of the letter I faxed to you on August 9, 2002 regarding the railroad access
issues.
At your convenience,please provide us written confirmation that:
1. The information submitted satisfies the additional information requested by the City
of Renton;
2. The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP is back on the
Review Process clock; and
3. A date has been set for the City's Environmental Review Committee to review the
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacificlp.com
August 27, 2002
Page 2 of 2
subject application.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to continuing to
work with you on this project.
S. erely,
Camp ell Mathewson
Cc: Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Steve Wood
2
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P. DEV CIN BEN p
AUG 1 2 2002
CAMPBELL MATHEWSONf • RECEIVED
VICE PRESIDENT
!J t
August 9, 2002
VIA FACSIMILE 425-430-7300
City of Renton
PlanningBuildirig/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
ATTN: Lesley Nishihira
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF,PP
Access
Dear Lesley:
Thank you again for taking time to meet with me on Monday morning. At your request,
this letter is for the purpose.of providing you with our understanding of the access issues
related to the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
When we met earlier this week you inquired about how the Applicant would be able to
provide two public access points to' the proposed Barbee Mill plat. After talking with
Neil Watt, you indicated that the City is comfortable that two "public easements" would
satisfy this requirement. On the first point; we cannot concede at this time that two
public access points are required by the Renton Municipal Code in order for the City to
determine that there is adequate access. Having said that, we believe adequate access to
the plat would be available over the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks via: 1)
the existing reserved crossing in the right-of-way deed to the BNSF's predecessor and 2)
through the City's support of a public crossing over the tracks for a secondary access. A
petition for a public crossing would be considered by the Washington State Utility and
Transportation Commission("WUTC").
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacificlp.com
r_ _
August 9, 2002
Page 2
Primary Access
There is a road crossing over the BNSF tracks reserved in the 1908 right of way deed
granted to the Great Northern Railroad, the BNSF predecessor. We are happy to provide
the City with a"public easement" across the railroad tracks at the reserved location where
we control fee title. As you know this crossing would provide access to the Barbee Mill
property, the Port Quendall property and could possibly be used as an access for the
Baxter site to the north.
Secondary Access
The City of Renton could seek approval for a second crossing from the WUTC. Under
WUTC regulations, a public crossing may be granted following a petition from the
railroad owning the tracks or from the governmental entity with jurisdiction over the
road to be crossed. In this case, Lake Washington Boulevard would be the road to be
crossed. In order for the public crossing to be considered, the City of Renton or BNSF
would need to file a petition with the WUTC to commence the approval process. If the
City were willing to commence the public crossing petition process we would like to
have a meeting to discuss under what conditions that could happen.
Such action would be consistent with the City's treatment of Southport, a project that
proposed only one access. As you know, Southport is a much more intense development
generating roughly 10,000 net daily trips and roughly 1,200 PM net peak hour trips. By
contrast, the Barbee Preliminary Plat will generate net daily trips of only 596 with total
PM peak hour trips of 67 (i.e. a mere 5% of the Southport traffic).
Even though the difference in impact is dramatically less for the Barbee Mill Preliminary
Plat, we would be willing to agree to language similar to that found in the Southport
approval for purposes of moving this project forward. For example, the City's language
in the Southport process included:
The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF
railroad during the design of roadway improvements to determine the most
appropriate railroad crossing:solution.
Certainly, agreement to this language should, at a minimum, suffice for purpose of taking
our project to the Environmental Review Committee.
I look forward to continuing to work with you on the various issues related to this project.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience with your response.
August 9, 2002
Page 3
Si rely,
Camp ell Mathewson
cc: Alex Cugini
Robert Cugini
Rich Wagner,Architect
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
'aI Real Estate Campbell Mathewson
P°l U ,;') Investment Bankers•Advisors•Developers Vice President
• MEMORANDUM D5VELOPMENrr PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
DATE: August 7, 2002 •
AUG $ 002
TO: Lesley NishihiraRE CI'
ED
RE: Barbee Mill Plat
Per our conversation the other day, enclosed are copies of the 2nd wetland report for the
Barbee Mill site. I have enclosed 5 copies of the report and 12 copies of the maps
pursuant to Renton's requirements. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any '
questions.
•
•
•
•
•
•
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS • ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE ■ SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
(206) 689-7203 F.A.X (206) 689-7210 cmathewson@dwt.com
• www.centurypacificlp.com
•
August 6, 2002
Mr. Alex Cugini OE,VELO^j�iir:q 1;.
The Barbee Mill Company, Inc. CI7'y '��RENTON Jrr���
4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N. AUG
Renton, Washington 98057 ..'
RE: Barbee Mill Site - Wetland Delineation -Fa'
(R.A.I. # 2002-017-001)
Dear Mr. Alex Cugini:
This summary document presents the results of our field investigation of the southern
portion of the Barbee Mill site located along the eastern shore of Lake Washington in
the City of Renton, Washington. The purpose of our investigation was to determine
whether a potential wetland area previously identified by OTAK would be classified as
jurisdictional wetland. The portion of the property north and west of May Creek, as
well as the extreme southern end of the property is developed as part of the existing
saw mill and neighboring lakefront residences, and so was not investigated for sensitive
areas.
We investigated the southern portion of the property on June 3, 2002 for potential
jurisdictional wetlands and were tasked with delineating any areas that meet the criteria
to be considered jurisdictional wetland (WDOE 1997).
Raedeke Associates, Inc. had visited the Barbee Mill site on March 26, 2002 to
document a previously identified wetland delineated by David Evans and Associates
(DEA) in 1997. That wetland, identified as Wetland H in the DEA report, is located
along the eastern side of the site, adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
Railroad tracks. During that site visit, we were tasked with determining if current site
conditions within Wetland H had changed significantly from those described in the
1997 DEA delineation report and subsequent COE confirmation (DEA 1997).
STUDY AREA
The Barbee Mill property is an active sawmill located along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington in the City of Renton, Washington. Specifically the property is located in
a portion of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, W.M. The property is
bounded on the east by railroad tracks, on the south and west by Lake Washington and
RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC
5711 Northeast 63rd St. Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 525-8122
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6,''2002
Page 2
on the north by a log storage yard (Figure 1). May Creek flows through the
southeastern portion of the property from the east and joins Lake Washington near the
southern corner of the property, as depicted in material received from OTAK on March
22, 2002.
DEFINITIONS AND METHODOLOGIES
Wetlands and streams are protected by federal law as well as by state and local
regulations. Federal law (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) generally prohibits the
discharge of dredged or fill material into the nation's waters, including wetlands,
without a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE 2000). The COE
makes the final determination as to whether an area meets the definition of a wetland,
and thus, if it is under their jurisdiction, whether any permits are required for any
proposed alterations.
The COE defines a wetland as an area "inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions" (Federal Register 1986:41251).
Washington state law requires that all local jurisdictions use the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual published by the Washington
Department of Ecology (WDOE 1997) to determine the presence of wetland conditions.
The WDOE wetland manual is a revision of the COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987), is consistent with the 1987 COE wetland delineation
manual with respect to wetland identification and delineation, and incorporates
subsequent amendments and clarifications provided by the COE (1991a, 1991b, 1992,
1994).
Generally, as outlined in the 1987 wetland delineation manual, wetlands are
distinguished by three diagnostic characteristics: hydrophytic vegetation (wetland
plants), hydric soil (wetland soil), and wetland hydrology. In general, hydrophytic
vegetation is present when "more than 50 percent of the dominant species are OBL,
FACW, or FAC on lists of plants species that occur in wetlands" (Environmental
Laboratory 1987:19). Plants are rated, from highest to lowest probability of
occurrence,in wetlands, as obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative
(FAC), facultative upland (FACU), and upland (UPL) (Reed 1988, 1993). Hydric soil
indicators include, but are not limited to, 1) gley conditions, 2) mottling in a low
chroma matrix, 3) histic (organic) soils, and 4) saturated or inundated conditions. In
order for an area to have wetland hydrology according to the 1987 manual, soils must
be saturated within a major portion of the vegetation rooting zone (usually within 12
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6,,2002
Page 3
inches of the surface) for at least 5% of the growing season (U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers 1991b, 1992).
FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES
Raedeke Associates, Inc., personnel investigated the site on June 3, 2002. During our
field investigation of the study area, we inventoried, classified, and described
representative areas of plant communities, soil profiles, and hydrologic conditions in
both uplands and wetlands. We searched specifically for areas with positive indicators
of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology. We used the Braun-
Blanquet cover-abundance scale and a plotless sampling methodology to describe
homogenous plant "cover types" in both wetlands and uplands (Mueller-Dombois and
Ellenburg 1974). Vegetation nomenclature follows Hitchcock and Cronquist (1976), as
updated by Hickman (1993), Pojar and MacKinnon (1994), and Cooke (1997). The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Wetland Indicator Status (WIS) ratings were
used to make this determination (Reed 1988, 1993). In general, hydrophytic vegetation
is present when the majority of the dominant species are rated OBL, FACW, and FAC.
Table 1 presents the common and scientific names of plants discussed herein.
We excavated soil pits to at least 18 inches below the soil surface, wherever possible,
in order to describe the soil profile and hydrologic conditions in both wetland and
upland areas. We sampled soil at locations that corresponded with vegetation sampling
areas. During the course of delineating wetlands, we frequently used soil probes to
sample soil and note hydrologic conditions to a depth of 20 inches or more at points
chosen to help define the wetland boundaries. Soil colors were determined using the
Munsell Soil Color Charts (Color Communications 1997).
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
As described in the DEA report, the Barbee Mill property had been inundated by Lake
Washington prior to the artificial lowering of the Lake by approximately 8 feet in 1916
(DEA 1997). Most of the Barbee Mill property is mapped as Nooksack silt loam by the
Soil Conservation Service (SCS) (Snyder et al. 1973) and is not listed as a hydric soil
by the SCS (1991, Federal Register 1994). The native soils on site have generally been
highly disturbed by past industrial operations on the site. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS 1988) National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Renton quadrangle,
identifies a series of palustrine scrub-shrub and palustrine emergent wetlands along the
Lake Washington shoreline in the vicinity of the property and illustrates May Creek as
a riverine, unconsolidated bottom feature.
Mr. Alex'Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 4
GENERAL STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION
At the time of our site investigation, the majority of the site was developed as a lumber
mill, as it has been since before 1946 (DEA 1997). To the north and west of May
Creek, the site is paved and contains numerous buildings and machinery as part of the
existing saw mill and associated facilities. South and east of May Creek, the site is
primarily maintained lawn, criss-crossed by paved access roads (Figure 1). The banks
of May Creek are vegetated with a mixture of native trees and shrubs, including black
cottonwood, red alder, Pacific willow, and Scouler's willow, as well as dense patches
of non-native vegetation, typically Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed.
Streamside enhancement plantings are being maintained within the property along
portions of the north and south sides of May Creek. The BNSF railroad tracks and
right-of-way form the eastern property boundary (Figure 1). The right-of-way is
generally vegetated by Himalayan blackberry, horsetail, and other disturbance adapted
plants.
WETLAND DESCRIPTION
During our field survey, Raedeke Associates, Inc. located and delineated one wetland
area in the southeastern corner of the property (Figure 1). Wetland 1 is a palustrine,
emergent, persistent (PEM1) wetland (Cowardin et al. 1992). Vegetation within the
wetland appears to be mowed regularly in order to maintain access to three water
valves and a hydrant that are located within the southern and central portions of the
wetland. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these water valves leak and contribute to the
hydrological regime of the wetland. The wetland occurs along a very gradual slope and
extends along either side of a narrow creek. The creek enters the property from the
southeast, flowing beneath the BNSF railroad tracks. The wetland is roughly pentagon-
shaped, and encompasses 1,712 square feet (0.04 acres) (Figure 1).
The creek appears to be formed by surface runoff from adjacent properties to the east
and terminates in a concrete catch-basin approximately 10 feet southwest from the
western end of the wetland (Figure 1). The catch-basin appears to drain directly into
the storm-drain system approximately 150 feet from the shore of Lake Washington.
This creek is located south of May Creek and is not depicted in the Catalog of
Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization (Williams et al. 1975). The creek enters
the southeastern portion of the property from off-site through a 36-inch diameter
concrete culvert. The creek occupies an approximately 1- to 2-foot wide channel with a
fine, muddy and small gravel substrate. The creek flow was estimated at approximately
0.5 cubic feet per second at the time of our site investigation. The creek channel is
vegetated by watercress, with reed canarygrass, giant horsetail, and creeping buttercup
along the banks. The creek continues off-site to the east (by visual observation only).
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 5
Vegetation
The wetland is dominated by herbaceous, emergent vegetation. The southern end of the
wetland is variously dominated by common velvet-grass, creeping buttercup, and
bentgrass (Table 2). A patch of yellow-flag iris surrounded by a mixture of dagger-leaf
rush, giant horsetail, sawbeak sedge, and reed canarygrass is located near the center of
the wetland and is surrounded by the three water valves (Table 2). The center of the
wetland is similarly characterized by a mixture of bentgrass, rush, birds-foot trefoil,
dagger-leaf rush, small-fruited bulrush, and sawbeak sedge (Table 3). All portions of
the wetland are dominated by hydrophytic vegetation.
Soils and Hydrology
Soils within Wetland 1 are generally characterized by a very dark grayish brown (10YR
3/2) to very dark gray (10YR 3/1) gravelly sandy loam to sandy loam surface horizon.
Below the 'A' horizon lies 3 to 8 inches of a very dark grey (10YR 3/1 to N3) gravelly
sandy loam to loamy sand over a gleyed to mottled subsurface (Tables 2 and 3). The
soil profile was saturated to the surface with a free water table evident at 12 to 20
inches below the surface at the time of our June 3, 2002 site investigation (Tables 2 and
3). Low chroma, gleyed, and mottled soils are indicative of hydric soil conditions.
Saturation within the upper 12 inches of the soil profile during the growing season is
indicative of a wetland hydrologic regime.
Adjacent Uplands
The uplands adjacent to the northern and western sides of Wetland 1 are characterized
by a mixture of shepard's purse, chickweed, English plantain, black medic, crane's bill,
and hairy cats-ear, interspersed with undifferentiated grasses (Tables 4 and 5).
Scattered wetter-adapted species such as bentgrass, white clover, common velvet-grass,
and creeping buttercup also characterize the adjacent uplands, but are not dominant
components of the community. The eastern side of Wetland 1 is the slope of the
railroad right-of-way. The adjacent uplands were not characterized by a dominance of
hydrophytic vegetation.
Upland soils were generally characterized by a surface horizon of 6 to 25+ inches of
very dark brown (10YR 3/2) gravelly sandy loam. To the west of the wetland, the
upland soil profile also displayed a subsurface of low chroma and mottled soil, but the
profile was not saturated and no free water table was encountered within 30 inches of
the surface at the time of our June 3, 2002 site investigation (Table 4). Similarly, to
the north of the wetland, the upland soil profile did not display a free water table or soil
saturation within 25 inches of the surface at the time of our June 3, 2002 site
investigation (Table 5).
The uplands south of the creek and Wetland 1 are characterized by a deciduous forested
community dominated by young red alder trees with an understory of Himalayan
-1
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 6
blackberry, creeping buttercup, and herb-robert (Table 6). Soils in this area were dark
brown (10YR 3/2) gravelly sandy loam to greater than 18 inches without saturation or a
water table to 33 inches (Table 6).
REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
Wetlands and streams are protected by Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act and
other state and local policies and ordinances, such as the City of Renton's (1998)
Municipal Code. Regulatory considerations pertinent to this property are briefly
discussed below, but this discussion should not be considered comprehensive.
Additional information may be obtained from agencies with jurisdictional responsibility
for, or interest in, the site.
Federal Clean Water Act (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
Federal law (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) generally discourages the discharge
of dredged or fill material into the nation's waters, including wetlands, without a permit
from the COE. The COE makes the fmal determination as to whether an area meets the
definition of a wetland as defined by the federal government (Federal Register
1986:41251), and thus, if it is under their jurisdiction. These determinations help
dictate type of permit required for any proposed alteration of wetlands or streams,
depending on the proposed land-use and area of fill proposed (i.e., an Individual Permit
or one of a series of Nationwide Permits).
Under the national conditions for Nationwide Permits under Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, no activity that is likely to jeopardize endangered or threatened species or
their critical habitat is permitted (COE 2000). Development proposals that may
potentially impact critical habitat of listed species (such as Puget Sound Chinook
salmon [Oncorhynchus tshawytscha]) require the submittal of a biological evaluation or
biological assessment depending on the magnitude of proposed impacts. In consultation
with the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, the COE
determines whether a specific development proposal is likely to adversely impact
endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat.
We should caution that the placement of fill within wetlands or other "Waters of the
U.S." without authorization from the COE is not advised, as the COE makes the final
determination whether any permits would be required for any proposed alteration. As
the COE makes the final determination regarding permitting under their jurisdiction, we
recommend that a jurisdictional determination from the COE be requested prior to any
construction activities, if any modification of wetlands or streams is proposed.
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 7
City of Renton Wetland Regulations
The City of Renton (1998) regulates wetlands and other sensitive areas under Title 4 of
the Renton Municipal Code. Under this code, wetlands are classified into one of three
categories based on physical characteristics and presumed functional values. Generally,
Category 1 wetlands are very high quality habitats greater than 10 acres in area that
have multiple vegetation classes and provide habitat for listed threatened, endangered,
or sensitive species; Category 2 wetlands are high quality wetlands that do not meet
Category'1 criteria and have minimal alterations or evidence of human disturbance;
Category 3 wetlands are those lower quality areas that have been altered by human
activities.
The City requires that buffers be placed around regulated wetlands to prevent
inadvertent impacts to wetlands from development activities. Category 1 wetlands
receive 100-foot-wide buffers, Category 2 wetlands are afforded 50-foot buffers, and
Category 3 wetlands receive 25-foot buffers.
Wetland 1, as identified and delineated on the Barbee Mill property, is an emergent
habitat approximately 1,712 square feet (0.04 acres) in area that has been disturbed by
human activities for the purpose of maintaining access to existing utilities. This
wetland appears to meet the criteria necessary to be considered a Category 3 wetland in
the City of Renton because of its small size, it is disturbed by mowing in order to
maintain access to existing utilities, and it is dominated by an emergent vegetation class
with low species diversity and is used minimally by wildlife. The City of Renton has
the final authority to determine wetland ratings and required buffers in their
jurisdiction.
CONCLUSIONS
Raedeke Associates, Inc. has observed two City of Renton Category 3 wetlands on the
Barbee Mill property. The wetland conditions observed in Wetland H on March 26,
2002 are very similar to those described by David Evans and Associates, Inc. (1997).
The delineated wetland drains out to the west through a ditch that empties to May
Creek. Wetland 1, as delineated on June 3, 2002, is also an emergent wetland subject
to frequent disturbance by mowing. The City of Renton requires a minimum of 25-
foot-wide buffers around Category 3 wetlands. If unavoidable impact to either of these
wetlands is proposed, the City of Renton requires compensatory mitigation at a ratio of
1.5:1. We caution that the City of Renton has the authority and responsibility to
determine the extent of necessary impact and the required mitigation for those impacts
within their jurisdiction.
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 8
LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of the Barbee Mill Company, Inc.
and their consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information,
analysis, or conclusions contained herein without permission from them.
The determination of ecological system classifications, functions, values, and
boundaries is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach
different conclusions. With regard to wetlands, the final determination of their
boundaries for regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various resource agencies
that regulate development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of
such agency determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be
reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or
construction activities.
We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our
field, and that this work was prepared substantially in accordance with then-current
technical guidelines and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of
our analysis of the information provided by the project proponents and their
consultants, together with information gathered in the course of this study. No other
warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call us at (206) 525-8122.
Respectfully submitted,
RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC.
Victoria Luiting Emmett Pritchard
Wetland and Mitigation Ecologist Wetland Ecologist
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 9
LITERATURE CITED
Color Communications. 1997. EarthColors Soil Color book. Poughkeepsie, NY.
Cowardin, L., F. Golet, V. Carter, and E. LaRoe. 1992. Classification of wetlands
and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service
Publ. FWS/OBS-79/31. 103 pp.
David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1997. Wetland Determination Report on the JAG
Development Property. 14 pp. plus appendices.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp.
Federal Register. 1986. 40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory programs of the
Corps of Engineers; final rule. Vol. 51. No. 219. pp. 41206-41260, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Reed, P.,'Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest
(Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biol. Report 88 (26.9). 89
PR.
Reed, P.,;Jr. 1993. 1993 Supplement to list of plant species that occur in wetlands:
Northwest (Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. Supplement to
Biological Report 88 (26.9) May 1988.
Renton, City of. 1998. Renton Municipal Code Title 4, Sensitive Areas Ordinance -
4835. City of Renton Planning Commission.
Snyder et al. 1973. Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. U.S.D.A. Soil
Conservation Service. 100 pp. plus figures.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991a. Special notice. Subject: Use of the 1987
wetland delineation manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District.
August 30, 1991.
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 10
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991b. Memorandum. Subject: Questions and
answers on the 1987 manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington D.C.
October 7, 1991. 7 pp. including cover letter by John P. Studt, Chief,
Regulatory Branch.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992. Memorandum. Subject: Clarification and
interpretation of the 1987 methodology. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington D.C., March 26, 1992. 4 pp. Arthur E. Williams, Major General,
U.S.A. Directorate of Civil Works.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Public Notice. Subject: Washington regional
guidance on the 1987 wetland delineation manual. May 23, 1994, Seattle
District. 8 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2000. Final regional conditions, 401 water quality
certification conditions, Coastal Zone management consistency responses, for
Nationwide permits for the Seattle District Corps of Engineers for the State of
Washington. June 16, 2000. Special Public Notice. Seattle District. 132 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory. 1988. Renton, 7.5-
minute quadrangle.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington state wetland identification
and delineation manual. March 1997. Publication No. 96-94. 88 pp. plus
appendices.
Williams, R.W., R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames. 1975. A catalog of Washington
streams and salmon utilization, Volume I, Puget Sound region. Washington
Department of Fisheries: Olympia, WA. 704 pp.
r FIGURE 1
ENLARGED PLAN / /
/ ' 0;/�/ •
CENTURY PACIFIC
/♦!�• ' ; BARBEE MILL
/ / - 0 -° / RENTON,WASH INTON
/ / /, -off" .
EXISTING CONDITIONS
•
/ -
/- / °w . // - ' /
/ ` - / O / / • KEY
,% !`=-/ '
SAW / ,,---- -o a— / •
/ / / . i . PROPERTY BOUNDARY
/ i
MILL // / _ _ _ J: // SP-4 SAMPLE PLOT
/ ♦7 /' WETLAND H 4//,'�
/E
E / //� / (PEM1) ��/ /
•
PEM1 PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT,
n �/ ........• `//;' PERSISTENT WETLAND
/ � / / ::•:• :• �� •
i/q. 0 ' / ' lks"--:--
/ 1 / .,.... ,1 7 . !__j • 41'al .," ,
co
-) / i / . 4(4/ i . //, - -1-- -/'`'7 \
/ / ''' /� �/ / ( PROPERTY BOUNDARY ; / �
r • ::::;:r-H:::://
•
/ / / oa / r�i i// ; �� Lake � - ,;-
/ '
/ .�� / ��t�,' v� - . ��` / - / SEE ENLARGED
o / •gyp. / /p / 4 / PLAN
hi — Lake /s�a,.� ��/ / • , t
‹, . ---iik , 4„,4.(--- / ..:. .,
.o-t.E- iI **".'....\ 1‘ ( (42\E \/z ,A /.
WE LAND 1 4
,-/--------,//, 4/.//4,/'/ , i
.... , � .
\A' `,; ,�G �.,s, ,--, — —1— J ,
north
, , ,
�i / ASP-4 / •e -
o 400
•
o � Air, `SP-3 ��/ /
j \�><�- - Nff•-•94',/
K (AP' - , RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES PROJECT: 2002-017-001
es
- {"'. ,�/ DATE: 6-28-02
°,� SP i.\,��r� ' i< north RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES,INC.
E -` ♦ / ` . �`�� DRAWN BY: CJM, GL
ao
Z ////.:////,,.
/ 5711 NORTHEAST 63RD ST. SEATfLE, WA 98115 Base information rovided b OTAK; files
a) 0- � , ,) ' �,Z • 0B0 (206) 525-8122 FAX: (206) 526-2880 S209B192.dwg and 0209B190.dwg received
' 6/20/02
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 12
Table 1. Scientific and common names of plants with assigned Wetland Indicator
Status (WIS) (Reed 1988, 1993). Scientific names from Hitchcock and
Cronquist (1976), Pojar and MacKinnon (1994), Hickman (1993), and Cooke
(1997).
Scientific Name' Common Name WISI,2
TREES
Alnus rubra Red alder FAC
SHRUBS
Alnus rubra Red alder FAC
Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry FACU
HERBS
Agrostis spp. ® Bentgrass FACW/FAC®
Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd's purse FACU
Carex stipata Sawbeak sedge OBL
Convolvulus spp.e Morning-glory UPL®
Digitalis purpurea Foxglove FACU
Epilobium ciliatum Watson's willow-herb FACW-
Equisetum telmatiea Giant horsetail FACW
Equisetum telmatiea Giant horsetail FACW
Geranium robertianum Herb Robert UPL
Geranium spp.® Crane's-bill FACU+®
Gramineae" Undifferentiated grasses --
Holcus lanatus Common velvet-grass FAC
Hypochaeris radicata Hairy cats-ear FACU
Iris pseudacorus Yellow flag OBL
Juncus ensifolius Dagger-leaf rush FACW
Juncus spp.® Rush FACW%
Lotus corniculatus Birdsfoot-trefoil FAC
Medicago lupulina Black medic FAC
Mr. Alex Cugini
August 6, 2002
Page 13
Table 1. Continued.
Scientific Namel Common Name WISE,2
Phalaris arundinacea Reed canarygrass FACW
Plantago lanceolata English plantain FAC
Plantago major Common plantain FACU+
Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup FACW
Rumex crispus Curly dock FACW+
Scirpus microcarpus Small-fruit bulrush OBL
Stellaria media Chickweed FACU
Trifolium repens White clover FAC
Veronica beccabunga American brooklime OBL
Vicia spp." Vetch --
' = The following codes are used:
= Genera with species having a narrow range of WIS ratings that were averaged
and were then included in our vegetation plot calculations.
# = Genera with species having a wide range of WIS ratings, not included in our
vegetation plot calculations.
* = Those species not listed by Reed (1988, 1993) are rated UPL* by default
(Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation 1989). These
species were included in our vegetation plot calculations.
NI = No indicator. Species not reviewed by Reed (1988, 1993) due to lack of
information on which to base an indicator status. These species were not
included in our vegetation plot calculations.
2 = WIS ratings with a minus symbol are considered "drier," while the plus symbol
indicates "wetter" species. Plants not identified to species are shown with the
WIS range for the species common to this region.
Table 2 Barbee Mill - Wetland 1
SP1 -wetland plot in southern portion of Wetland 1, 5 feet north of ditched
stream
VEGETATION Cover Cover WIS Product of
Index Class Index Midpoint and
Scientific Name Value Midpoint Value WIS Value
Trees
Shrubs
Herbs
Holcus lanatus 3 37.5 3.0 112.5
Ranunculus repens 3 37.5 2.0 75.0
Agrostis spp. 2 15.0 2.5 37.5
Juncus ensifolius 2 15.0 2.0 30.0
Iris pseudacorus 2 15.0 1.0 15.0
Phalaris arundinacea 1 2.5 2.0 5.0
Equisetum telmatiea 1 2.5 2.0 5.0 '
Rumex crispus 1 2.5 1.7 4.2
Carex stipata 1 2.5 1.0 2.5
Plantago major + 2.5 3.7 9.2
Juncus spp. + 2.5 2.0 5.0
SUMS 135.0 300.9
Weighted Mean Index: 2,2
% of dominant species with a WIS Hydrophytic vegetation
index of 3.0 or less: 100,0.0 (1987 methodology): Yes
Veg Notes
Habitat Features Bollr.og mg.l S..t4got,..CP.ad.XQ.!N.C;tt,
(snags, logs, etc.)
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 2 Continued.
SOIL
Soil pit number .1 Field observations confirm mapped type? p Yes ® No
Map Unit (Series/Phase) NQQJ . .K..SiIL.LQarn On hydric list? p Yes ®No
Map Symbol Nk Hydric inclusion? ®Yes ❑No
Profile: Matrix Color Mottle Quantity, Mottle Color
Depth Horizon (moist) Size, Contrast (moist) Texture
0-6" A very dark grayish brown common, coarse, dark yellowish Gravelly sandy loam
(10YR 3/2) distinct brown (10YR 4/6)
6-14" B1 very dark gray(N 3) Gravelly Loamy Sand
14-18+" B2 dark greenish gray Gravelly Loamy Sand
(10G 4/1)
Soil Profile
Notes:
Hydric Soil Indicators (check):
❑Histosol ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Concretions
❑Histic Epipedon ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑High Organic Surface (sandy soils)
❑Sulfidic Odor E Gley/Low Chroma ❑Organic Streaking (sandy soils)
Hydric Soil Criteria Met? E Yes ❑No
Rationale Q).ey.Qd.ahrama.aQil.witbin.upp.Qr...a.2:..Qf.. QiLpr.Q.file
HYDROLOGY Field Date: 6/3/02
Field Observations: Recorded Data (gauge or well):
Depth of pit la"
Depth to saturation Surface
Notes (inlet/outlet, etc.):
Depth to free water/water table ZQ" CharingLslang..s.Quthera.weltand.edsQ..drgiri 1p..atarm.
Inundation depth N/A cimirl.aut.IQKe
Other indicators:
Wetland Hydrology? E Yes ❑No
Rationale: 5aturatiQn..wiShin..uppol.12".Qf..s.Qij..praf le
CLASSIFICATION
Wetland Criteria Met? E Yes ❑No
Classification l'..giairit1g,..Qmargant,.Parai5tent.42. M1.).wetland
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
. Table 3 Barbee Mill - Wetland 1
SP2 - Wetland plot in center of Wetland 1, 6 feet south of flag 1-3
VEGETATION Cover Cover WIS Product of
Index Class Index Midpoint and
Scientific Name Value Midpoint Value WIS Value
Trees
Shrubs
Herbs --
Agrostis spp. 4 62.5 2.5 156.3
Juncus spp. 3 37.5 2.0 75.0
Lotus corniculatus 2 15.0 3.0 45.0
Juncus ensifolius 2 15.0 2.0 30.0
Scirpus microcarpus 2 15.0 1.0 15.0
Carex stipata 2 15.0 1.0 15.0
Holcus lanatus 1 2.5 3.0 7.5
Trifolium repens 1 2.5 3.0 7.5
Ranunculus repens 1 2.5 2.0 5.0
Convolvulus spp. + 2.5 5.0 12.5
Phalaris arundinacea + 2.5 2.0 5.0
Rumex crispus + 2.5 1.7 4.2
SUMS 175.0 377.9
Weighted Mean Index: 2.2
% of dominant species with a WIS Hydrophytic vegetation
index of 3.0 or less: 9 QQ,QQ (1987 methodology): Yes
Veg Notes
Habitat Features RaIIr.od.icgai§.12..0 ;z,..macl1.QV!! ;tt
(snags, logs, etc.)
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 3 Continued.
SOIL
Soil pit number 2 Field observations confirm mapped type? ❑Yes RI No
Map Unit(Series/Phase) NooksacK..silt.laaM On hydric list? ❑Yes ® No
Map Symbol Nis, Hydric inclusion? ®Yes ❑ No
Profile: Matrix Color Mottle Quantity, Mottle Color
Depth Horizon (moist) Size, Contrast (moist) Texture
0-2" A very dark gray(2.5Y Sandy loam
3/1)
2-6" B very dark gray(10YR Sandy loam
3/1)
6-18" B very dark gray(10YR many, coarse, dark reddish brown Loamy sand
3/1) prominent (5YR 3/3)
Soil Profile
Notes:
Hydric Soil Indicators (check):
❑Histosol Aquic Moisture Regime o Concretions
❑Histic Epipedon 0 Reducing Conditions 0 High Organic Surface (sandy soils)
❑Sulfidic Odor ®Gley/Low Chroma Organic Streaking (sandy soils)
Hydric Soil Criteria Met? ®Yes 0 No
Rationale . LQw.Ghr.QXna..sail.with..redQ. im.QrphiG.features..within..pper..1.2"..Qf..aoil.prafila
HYDROLOGY Field Date: 6/3/02
Field Observations: Recorded Data (gauge or well):
Depth of pit 1e"
Depth to saturation Surfem
Notes (inlet/outlet, etc.):
Depth to free water/water table 12" Gharival..alanp.amtbo-nyv.eitand.edg.Q..IQ.storm.drain....
Inundation depth WA t0.lak�
Other indicators:
Wetland Hydrology? ®Yes 0 No
Rationale: 5eturatiQo..and. !eter..table.within.1.2".Q.f.aurface
CLASSIFICATION
Wetland Criteria Met? ®Yes ❑No
Classification Pelintrine,,.amargQnt,.per5iatent..(P.EM1).wetland
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 4 Barbee Mill - Wetland 1
SP4 -upland plot, 20 feet north of SP3
VEGETATION Cover Cover WIS Product of
Index Class Index Midpoint and
Scientific Name Value Midpoint Value WIS Value
Trees
Shrubs
Herbs
Capsella bursa-pastoris 3 37.5 4.0 150.0 '
Plantago lanceolata 3 37.5 3.0 112.5
Medicago lupulina 3 37.5 3.0 112.5
Hypochaeris radicata 2 15.0 4.0 60.0
Geranium spp. 2 15.0 3.7 55.1
Agrostis spp. 2 15.0 2.5 37.5
Trifolium repens 1 2.5 3.0 7.5
Holcus lanatus 1 2.5 3.0 7.5 '
Ranunculus repens 1 2.5 2.0 5.0
Plantago major + 2.5 3.7 9.2
Gramineae 5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Vicia spp. + 0.0 0.0 0.0
SUMS 167.5 556.7
Weighted Mean Index: 3,3
% of dominant species with a WIS Hydrophytic vegetation
index of 3.0 or less: 5.Q,,QQ (1987 methodology): No
Veg Notes
Habitat Features
(snags, logs, etc.)
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 4 Continued.
SOIL
Soil pit number 4 Field observations confirm mapped type? ❑Yes ® No
Map Unit (Series/Phase) NQQksa.K.silt.loam On hydric list? ❑Yes ® No
Map Symbol Nk Hydric inclusion? ❑Yes ® No
Profile: Matrix Color Mottle Quantity, Mottle Color
Depth Horizon (moist) Size, Contrast (moist) Texture
0-25" A very dark grayish brown Gravelly sandy loam
(10YR 3/2)
Soil Profile 1.8:25.':..6ampled..witb..QJQer
Notes:
Hydric Soil Indicators (check):
❑ Histosol Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Concretions
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑Reducing Conditions ❑High Organic Surface (sandy soils)
❑Sulfidic Odor o Gley/Low Chroma Organic Streaking (sandy soils)
Hydric Soil Criteria Met? Yes ®No
Rationale .rigl(..soil. hr.Qm�.with.na.r. QximorRtiic.f.Qatur. s.vxitbin..0 p r..12".af..sail.Rrofil.Q
HYDROLOGY Field Date: 6/3/02
Field Observations: Recorded Data(gauge or well):
Depth of pit 25"
Depth to saturation ?.2 "
Notes (inlet/outlet, etc.):
Depth to free water/water table ?25"
Inundation depth N/A
Other indicators:
Wetland Hydrology? Yes ®No
Rationale: Nosaturation..Q.r...fr.Qg.Water..Within.l,1pM..9.2:..Qf.soll.pr.Qflle
CLASSIFICATION
Wetland Criteria Met? Yes ®No
Classification grasslQnd..Qpiarld
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 5 Barbee Mill -Wetland 1
SP5 -upland plot, 15 feet west of SP2, 5 feet east of gravel road
VEGETATION Cover Cover WIS Product of
Index Class Index Midpoint and
Scientific Name Value Midpoint Value WIS Value
Trees
Shrubs
Alnus rubra (s) 1 2.5 3.0 7.5
Rubus discolor + 2.5 4.0 10.0
Herbs
Stel!aria media 3 37.5 4.0 150.0
Medicago lupulina 3 37.5 3.0 112.5
Geranium spp. 2 15.0 3.7 55.1
Hypochaeris radicata 1 2.5 4.0 10.0
Plantago major 1 2.5 3.7 9.2
Plantago lanceolata 1 2.5 3.0 7.5
Epilobium ciliatum + 2.5 2.3 5.8
Gramineae 5 0.0 0.0 0.0
SUMS 105.0 367.6
Weighted Mean Index: $,5
% of dominant species with a WIS Hydrophytic vegetation
index of 3.0 or less: 3.3. 3 (1987 methodology): No
Veg Notes
Habitat Features
(snags, logs, etc.)
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 5 Continued.
SOIL
Soil pit number 5 Field observations confirm mapped type? ❑Yes ®No
Map Unit(Series/Phase) NQQksack..silt.Iaam On hydric list? ❑Yes ® No
Map Symbol Nk Hydric inclusion? ®Yes ❑ No
Profile: Matrix Color Mottle Quantity, Mottle Color
Depth Horizon (moist) Size, Contrast (moist) Texture
0-6" A very dark grayish brown Gravelly sandy loam
(10YR 3/2)
6-25" B1 dark greenish gray(10Y common,coarse, dark yellowish Very gravelly loamy
4/1) distinct brown(10YR 4/4) sand
25-30" B2 very dark gray(N 3) Gravelly sandy loam
Soil Profile San:tell~d..bolim..2Q.'.'..witb..auger
Notes:
Hydric Soil:Indicators (check):
❑Histosol Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Concretions
❑Histic Epipedon ❑Reducing Conditions ❑High Organic Surface (sandy soils)
❑Sulfidic Odor ®Gley/Low Chroma ❑Organic Streaking (sandy soils)
Hydric Soil Criteria Met? ®Yes ❑No
Rationale Law.ahr.Qrrra..sail.kith..r.Qdla simarpbi.Q.fQ.atures..within..u.Rper..12.'..Qf...Qi.i.p.raflle
HYDROLOGY Field Date: 6/3/02
Field Observations: Recorded Data (gauge or well):
Depth of pit Q,Q"
Depth to saturation >3.0"
Notes (inlet/outlet, etc.):
Depth to free water/water table ?,.Q"
Inundation depth u/A
Other indicators:
Wetland Hydrology? Yes ®No
Rationale: Na.saturation..Qr..frea.water !ithin.up.pac.1.2°..Qf.sQil.Rr.Qtiile
CLASSIFICATION
Wetland Criteria Met? ❑Yes ®No
Classification grasalaui.u.J.anci
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 6 Barbee Mill-Wetland 1
SP6 -upland plot, 8 feet south of ditch/stream in SE portion of Wetland 1
VEGETATION Cover Cover WIS Product of
Index Class Index Midpoint and
Scientific Name Value Midpoint Value WIS Value
Trees
Alnus rubra 2 15.0 3.0 45.0
Shrubs
Rubus discolor 3 37.5 4.0 150.0
Herbs
Ranunculus repens 4 62.5 2.0 125.0
Geranium robertianum 2 15.0 5.0 75.0
Convolvulus spp. 2 15.0 5.0 75.0
Digitalis purpurea 2 15.0 4.0 60.0
Equisetum telmatiea 2 15.0 2.0 30.0
Phalaris arundinacea 2 15.0 2.0 30.0
Veronica beccabunga + 2.5 1.0 2.5
Gramineae 2 0.0 0.0 0.0
SUMS 192.5 592.5
Weighted Mean Index: 3,1
% of dominant species with a WIS Hydrophytic vegetation
index of 3.0 or less: Q,QQ (1987 methodology): No
Veg Notes
Habitat Features Blackberrias.olong.oill:Q.ad.tracks
(snags, logs, etc.)
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
Table 6 Continued.
SOIL
Soil pit number 6 Field observations confirm mapped type? ❑Yes ®No
Map Unit (Series/Phase) NQoJ . K..silt.Ioam On hydric list? p Yes ®No
Map Symbol Nis. Hydric inclusion? p Yes ®No
Profile: Matrix Color Mottle Quantity, Mottle Color
Depth Horizon (moist) Size, Contrast (moist) Texture
0-18" A very dark grayish brown Sandy loam
(10YR 3/2)
Soil Profile' 1.&:a3::..samplad..with..auger Notes:
Hydric Soil Indicators (check):
❑ Histosol ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Concretions
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑Reducing Conditions ❑High Organic Surface (sandy soils)
❑Sulfidic Odor ❑Gley/Low Chroma ❑Organic Streaking (sandy soils)
Hydric Soil Criteria Met? ❑Yes ®No
Rationale J.right.chrarna..soil.with..na..r..dmimorpnic.f.utures.within..ugpar..12".of..prafiie
HYDROLOGY Field Date: 6/3/02
Field Observations: Recorded Data (gauge or well):
Depth of pit as"
Depth to saturation >. s"
Notes (inlet/outlet, etc.):
Depth to free water/water table >3.3"
Inundation depth N/A
Other indicators:
Wetland Hydrology? ❑Yes ®No
Rationale: Na..saturatiQo..Qr..fraa !;Ater..within.upgar..1.2"..Qf.soil.prafile
CLASSIFICATION
Wetland Criteria Met? ❑Yes ®No
Classification Uplaticl -Quier..egige..of..deCiduaus..forgat...
Field Date: 6/3/02 Observers: VTL/GEP Project Number: 2002-017-001
' FIGURE 1
ENLARGED PLAN - V v
/ /
/ ' CENTURY PACIFIC
.!�' y BARBEE MILL
/ /-' p`:: / RENTON,WASHINTON
•
/ — _ _ / , ,/ .O" / EXISTING CONDITIONS
/ ,// /
- / , t5r' / /
/ °" / /-
KEY
• /'- -SAW / / /
/ /
r PROPERTY BOUNDARY
/ 1 / / /� ,� •
/ / SP-4
MILL // �� / _ _ _ � � / J �~ �r ;/ SAMPLE PLOT
'� // WETLAND H Ay /
E / /� / PEM1 ,ii/ / \ PEM1 PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT,
�� ) / / PERSISTENT WETLAND
I /
/ ,, '�r
p / - i
�.
/ /
l
} / ; / . ��/ I / .'y t/, I ✓ce 0`..- ..,..--..--...---..--..---. ..&./7/fAi:l' '11
/
,o / f PROPERTY BOUNDARY !
c DEVELOL=4D.4iL':I,..Nii-,1�:
CITY ,c . / I // �I P. ,i7o I `:7., . t4// ,.'1/4. 7./ 41
_l � ' % /aA .Z. t
1 / ,, ,/% • 1 ;%" :,r ,../'`
/ 0-- / ��<°// �° take I ti,� '„- - . ,
rin
/ �_��� / • �- •�'� / v� 1 • •• i• I �dl ,'-� „'/ SEE ENLARGED
o - -��, w �7 /? ///2K/ o/ 1 ,� /7 .
ma. _ iillik...,\....t...„,,. ; ,
ir
�( / � � / G4, e� It,;
.4,// / - „,*:-:'
J
i #� \\ /�PE 1) / 4Y � ', north
rn \ zoo
C *vim \ .,
MilliN
EV
minimio
E / \ \ / SP-4 // 7 o aoo
o �� kiiir, SP-3 •/ ,
•. - � , .P-2 G 9" /
AP' ' RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES PROJECT: 2002-017-001
a s �-r _ ��� / LAN DATE. 6 28 02
' e a �I SP.- W's 14,li \%/. I—
"" / -\:••r ~ r.' north RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES,INC. DRAWN BY: CJM, GL
z / / / ..'
/ 5711 NORTHEAST 63RD ST. SEATTLE, WA 98115 Base information provided by OTAK; files
a) // ' f/2 " ""''�- o eo (206) 525-8122 FAX: (206) 526-2880
S209B192.dwg and 0209B190.dwg received
[� \v �, / �, 6/20/02
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
DEV CIF OF RENTTON ING
CAMPBELL MATHEWSON AUG 0 5 2002
VICE PRESIDENT
RECEIVED
HAND DELIVERED
August 5, 2002
Lesley Nishihira
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040,ECF, PP
Dear Lesley:
Pursuant to your letter to Dan Dawson of Otak dated June 3, 2002, enclosed for your review and
acceptance are five (5) copies of a revised Preliminary Traffic Analysis for the Barbee Mill
Preliminary Plat.
As your letter requests, the revised report includes "real traffic counts at all entrances of the
existing site for a one-week duration, including weekend day." The report also includes relevant
accident data and fully complies with Renton's Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for
New Development.
At your earliest convenience, please provide written confirmation that the enclosed revised
traffic analysis is sufficient. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
206-689-7203.
S. erely,
Camp ell Mathewson
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7203 • FAX(206)689-7210 • E-MAIL cmathewson@dwt.com
www.centurypacificlp.com
i 1
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
Kt; 611ilkoce, ?'tit AUG i 3 2002
To the Cugini and Baxter families: August 9,2002
RECEIVED
I am a resident of East Port Shores Condominiums,and daily I look out on the rugged beauty of the
Barbee Mill property where you have most recently proposed a sprawling,high density townhouse
suburbia.I know that financial return is the motivator here. Are there so many family members in on this
deal that maximum profit'overrides decisions that could have been more meaningful to the community? I
am disappointed that this was your best,most inspired idea for this undeveloped piece of land,because it •
has the potential to become something so much more.
As I view this ambitious plan,I see long rows of townhouses,24 units,22 units, 18 units,and more,all
without a break in the shared common walls. Have any of you ever lived in group housing? I have raised
my two children in a-condo for 10 years now,with a parking lot to play in,and I wonder why your planners
have not thought to break the townhouses into 8 unit communities? This would enhance-the quality of
living,aid the circulation of air,and allow the inclusion of trees,greenbelts,and woodsy landscaping that
suits the native May Creek countryside. -Where are the tree lined,woodsy boulevards that are found in
well-planned developments?-Where are the shady,centralized gathering places for residents to congregate
in? (There is nothing like the sun-baked pavement of Kennydale to make a lovely,mild day parched and
uninviting. I know because I live here...)
Take a trip eastward on 44th street and look at the treatment of housing:along the way. Just behind
McDonalds there is a complex of housing that has great woodsy landscaping by the road,but when you
drive into the development-there is nothing but pavement. It feels classy but cold,uninviting. Where do
the neighbors gather together to sit and enjoy the evening?
Down the road there are many large box houses with tiny fenced-in yards. It used to be a shady hillside.
Where are the large beautiful trees to keep a neighborhood cool? Where is the feeling of woods to bring
the houses into harmony with the landscape? Someone crammed as many houses onto that.piece of land as
they could'.' For a little less money in thejocket;'it could have been so much-more. ' ' "'
Drive eastward on`the roadpast the Newcastle'Golf Course and you wil eventually come to a
development on the left,past tthe'frre'kation;where there was great care and'integrityput into the land
around the housing. There is native vegetation and the feel of woods when you walk down the sidewalk.
Someone planned well in this case,and considered beauty and nature-when they drew up their blueprint...
Apart from the housing issue,few seem to care about wildlife or pockets of peacefulness within a busy
city's borders. Why must this lakeside piece of land be developed solely for housing when most of the land
up Kennydale's slopes will one day be an extension of Lake Washington Boulevard's condos and
apartments? A piece of land like this,or at least a large portion of it should be sold to the city of Renton to
be preserved from development. What of the Herons that nest here,or the osprey and eagles,the salmon?
Why must progress and profit take front seat to long term enrichment? Where is Kennydale's historical
tribute to the mining industry that built this little community?
I wonder if it is a lost cause to get anyone to listen. Money-speak is the only voice that is heard.
Personally I was hoping that Barbee Mill could become a recreational area,with a little bit of marina,a
little bit of restaurant,and a large amount of restored native habitat. There could be a protected,off limits
area for nesting birds... Maybe you are trying to do some of this,because I noted that the shoreline is
being rebuilt. Thank you! It is a step in the right direction. Now,how about something really spectacular
for the generations who come after-us to enjoy?
You can make a real difference here.'We don't need to be"Little Kirkland." We don't need a crammed
townhouse development.1 We'need something that rises above the greed of the greatest'financial return.
Please,think again and see what your best imaginations can create. Don't you want to really be proud of
what you have chosen to do here,rather than financially satisfied'?`The money from the sale of land will be
11
gone ina few years: The townhouses you build here will live on forever ui mediocrity. .Choose wisely,
bless this neighborhood, and good will come back to you in ways you had not envisioned..:
Jon &Cynthia Youngblood
4100 Lk.Washington Blvd. N.
#A103
Renton,WA 98056
„ .
• ' • .•
..a • I.'
Pvt. 'Oa)-
>t ems§ CITx OF RENTON
Hearing Examiner
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman
•
July 25, 2002
•
Thomas A. Goeltz
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
2600 Century Square
1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101-1688
Re: Barbee Mill Appeal of Administrative Decisions to Hearing Examiner
File No. LUA-02-040,PP,ECF
Dear Appellant:
Your letter of appeal in the above matter has been received and a date and time for said hearing has now
been established.
The appeal hearing has been set for Tuesday,September 17,at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on
the seventh floor of City Hall, at 1055 S Grady Way in Renton. Should you be unable to attend,would
you please appoint a representative to act on your behalf.
The original appeal and other materials are available for review in the Hearing Examiner's Office. We
appreciate your cooperation, and if you have any questions,please contact my secretary.
Sincerely, 1111
Fred J.Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
FJK:kw O
cc: Mayor Jesse Tanner C/4gO F 1
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer ✓/ MONN�At
Larry Warren, City Attorney ` 2 6'
Neil Watts,Development Services Director AECP�V
Parties of Record e®
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055-(425)430-6515 R E N T ® lam
AHEAD OF THE CURVE
f* This paper contains 50%recycled material.30%post consumer
, ,-
•
LAWYERS
El
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
ANCHORAGE BELLEVUE HONOLULU LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PORTLAND SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE SHANGHAI WASHINGTON,D.C.
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CENTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-3150
DIRECT (206) 628-7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE FAX (206) 628-7699
tomgoeltz@dwt.com SEATTLE, WA 98101-1688 www.dwt.com
CITY OF RENTON
June 14, 2002 JUN 1 4 2002
RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'S`- fj OFFICE
IoLi�7�/
Office of Hearing Examiner 4:4
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Appeal of Administrative Decisions to Hearing Examiner
Dear Examiner:
1111 On behalf of Barbee Forest Products, I am submitting a protective appeal of three
ministrative decisions by the City on the pending Barbee Mill preliminary plat. We have
nested a response from the City on these items, but have not had a written response prior to
the 14 day appeal deadline. To the extent the City agrees with Barbee's position on any of these,
then those components of the appeal will be withdrawn.
Very truly yours,
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
. "0...----:".
Thomas A. Go
TAG%sew
cc: Campbell Mathewson
Katherine Laird
Larry Warren
Lesley Nishihira
F:\DOCS\36183\2\00057LTR.DOC
Seattle
I
NOTES RECEIPT DATE 6/ 1/ ° .: >,�,*?
RECEIVED FROM .is ��" e,tea\4 e
ADDRESS 2(0ob .0'YZ"SV rd S LL[t..eff 1 S 01 -titr i-i4 M / .
.. .-kAte_ .\Ate- , . (ISO t0 % $ -7 . 0 0
•
FOR OPc t)$ vve (re4'kA L4_ L,-tA.ft —02-0q1
• ] • im:i'j►„1,'.,to log`4:t :- rIN:4HO*S:'PAIi;'•'_,,.,.ra`;i.`...
4PA'sH'M
.ACCOUNT �..::x.;..:.,,li,,,.,
.. :
k,�it4:4N CHECK r 'IA
.eta..,.....,.:. ,.-.:: �..,...:.,
BALA?7CE' ;te/C>NEK'°: • BY• i ° , . -.�i `�_C...`t�;�L_
• : DUE< 1 'ORDER r
j
01998 REDIFORN9®BL802
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
8 CITY OF RENTON
9 In re: )
)
10 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ) No.
DETERMINATIONS ON APPLICATION FOR )
11 BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT [FILE ) NOTICE OF.APPEAL
NO. LUA-02-040] )
12 )
)
13 )
)
14
I.
15
INTRODUCTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF ERRORS
16
Pursuant to Renton Municipal Code ("RMC") § 4-8-110E(1)(a) and other applicable
17
law, Barbee Forest Products, Inc. ("BFP"), as owner of the real property that is the subject of
18
the preliminary plat Application referenced above, respectfully requests the Hearing Examiner
19
review and reverse the administrative decisions described below of the City of Renton
20
Planning/Building/Public Works Department("Department") as reflected in the attached two
21
letters: (1)letter to Parties of Record dated June 3, 2002 from Leslie Nishihira, Project
22
Manager; and(2) letter to Dan Dawson, OTAK, Inc., agent for BFP, from Leslie Nishihira,
23
Project Manager. BFP appeals the following portions of the Department's letters:
24
25 Error No. 1: "The land use application has been placed on hold...." (Letter 1). "At this
time the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Land Use Application(File
26 No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP)has been placed 'on hold."' (Letter 2).
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL- 1 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS\36183\2\00056PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square • 1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington'98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax:(206)628-7699
1 Error No. 2: BFP is required to perform"a study of the Ripley Lane and Lake
Washington Blvd. intersection assuming the entire area (all undeveloped
2 parcels on the west side of the railroad tracks) is fully developed at the
allowed density of the zone.) (emphasis added).
3
Error No. 3: BFP is required to prepare and submit"Five (5) copies of a Biological
4 Assessment completed by a qualified biologist."
5 BFP does not appeal the first bullet in item# 2 nor item#3 in the second letter.
6 II.
7 SPECIFICATION OF SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS
8 The City committed substantial errors in its administrative decisions.
9 Error No. 1 -Placement"on hold".
10 The letters set forth an administrative decision that erroneously stops all processing on
11 the preliminary plat in violation of the maximum time periods provided by state law and under
12 RMC 4-8-080(E) & (F). The minor additional information that BFP has not objected to [1
13 week of traffic counts; street modifications] does not justify any extension of the public hearing
14 date or other time requirements. Staff should keep processing all other aspects of the
15 preliminary plat that is unrelated to and unaffected by this minor information, rather than
16 putting the entire application on hold. And, as described further below,the requested
17 information that BFP objects to is unauthorized and beyond lawful requirements of a plat
18 applicant and is ambiguous and without adopted standards or criteria.
19 Error No.2 -Additional traffic analysis for"entire area of undeveloped parcels".
20 The Department erred in requiring BFP to study the "entire area" of undeveloped
21 parcels west of the railroad tracks based on some unspecified level of uses and densities and
22 timetable. This requirement is unlawful for a number of reasons.
23 First,the request is ambiguous and unfair to the applicant since these are properties not
24 owned by BFP, and the density and proposed developments are speculative and remote. Some
25 of the land is zoned COR-2,which provides for a very broad mix of uses and broad range of
26 density. No development applications for any of these properties are pending. Clean up has
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL -2 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS'36183\Z\00056PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square • 1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington 98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax:(206)628-7699
1 not even begun on some of these properties. In the recorded DOE Consent Decrees on the
2 Baxter properties,the owner speculates future development of various properties might include
3 "eventual commercial,urban residential, and/or retail development." The decree further
4 speculates that this unknown mix of development"could ultimately result in between
5 approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development." This is more than a 7-fold
6 range of future potential development.
7 Second,the City erred since area-wide transportation analysis must be performed by the
8 City as part of its comprehensive plan and development standards. Under the GMA, a City
9 cannot force an individual applicant on an ad hoc basis to undertake studies and determine
10 appropriate infrastructure on an area-wide basis. That is a job for the City in its comprehensive
11 plan.
12 Third,the Department erred in requesting a traffic study that exceeds the direct and
13 indirect impacts related to the plat proposal. BFP recognizes the City under SEPA may require
14 analysis of"cumulative impacts,"but those impacts must be caused by the proposal or the
15 proposal must set a precedent for future actions. The 112-unit Barbee Mill plat application,
16 which is fully consistent with existing zoning, is neither causing the "entire area"to develop
17 nor setting a precedent for other areas.
18 SEPA rules focus on the impacts that flow from or are caused by a specific proposal.
19 WAC 197-11-752 defines "impacts" as "the effects or consequences of actions." (Emphasis
20 supplied). Further, WAC 197-11-060(4)(d) describes the cumulative impacts the Responsible
21 Official must consider:
22 (d) A proposal's effects include direct and indirect impacts
caused by a proposal. Impacts include those effects
23 resulting from growth caused by a proposal, as well as the
likelihood that the present proposal will serve as a precedent
24 for future actions. For example, adoption of a zoning
ordinance will encourage or tend to cause particular types of
25 projects or extension of sewer lines would tend to encourage
development in previously unsewered areas. (emphasis
26 supplied.)
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL- 3 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS\36183\2\OOO56PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square • ISO!Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington 98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax (206)628-7699
1 Under SEPA, cumulative impacts are not simply a collection of separate and independent
2 actions that are unconnected.
3 Fourth,the City's requested study is an error since it violates the standard City practice
4 and adopted traffic guidelines for background or existing traffic. RMC §4-8-120D(20)
5 expressly defines the required Traffic Study as containing the information in Renton's Policy
6 Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis for New Development. Specifically, these Traffic
7 Guidelines state the following regarding background and projected horizon year traffic:
8 Existing and projected horizon year traffic volumes with and
without the proposed development: The report should include
9 graphics which illustrate existing traffic volumes as well as
forecasted volumes for the horizon year of the proposed
10 development. (emphasis added)
11 Renton's consistent practice for"forecasted volumes"is to include pending applications or
12 approved projects not yet built,but not speculative or potential future applications such as the
13 "entire area west of the railroad tracks." The Barbee Mill preliminary plat horizon year is
14 2005, as reflected in the submitted HDR Traffic Analysis with the plat application. The COR-2
15 Zone properties will not be developed in the 2005 horizon year since the extensive clean up has
16 not even begun, and it is pure speculation to assume the other properties west of the tracks will
17 be online by 2005.
18 The HDR Traffic Report fully complied with the City precedent for determining what
19 projects are included in background and horizon traffic. Specifically,the HDR report included
20 a 2% annual growth rate applied to existing traffic counts, and pipeline traffic from recently
21 and previously approved development was added to the existing traffic count. As the HDR
22 report noted, "This methodology is consistent with the methodology previously approved by
23 the City of Renton and the Washington State Department of Transportation for the I-405/NE
24 44th Street Interchange Project Transportation Discipline Report(June 2001)." Further, the
25 methodology is consistent with the background traffic assumptions for the Port Quendell
26 analysis and the South Port EIS.
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL - 4 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS\36183\2\00056PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square - 1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington 98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax:(206)628-7699
1 In sum,the existing HDR Traffic Report fully meets the City's traffic impact analysis
2 guidelines and is consistent with prior practice. The requested traffic study for the "entire area"
3 is not authorized under SEPA since it is not caused by the proposal nor does the proposal serve
4 as a precedent for those actions.
5 Error No.3: Biological Assessment.
6 The City errs by requiring an undefined `Biological Assessment" study that is
7 premature and with unspecified requirements and parameters. The Barbee Mill preliminary
8 plat application proposes no construction or structures in either Lake Washington or May
9 Creek. Consequently,there is no permit or approval request pending which has triggered any
10 requirement for a formal Biological Assessment required under the federal Endangered Species
11 Act. There is no requirement for consultation or approval since no federal permit or approval
12 or funding is present.
13 Although the letter requires a"Biological Assessment" as a capitalized term,the Renton
14 Code does not contain any definition. Consequently,there are no regulations or policies
15 adopted which would define or authorize such an assessment. A "biological assessment" is not
16 one of the listed preliminary plat application items on the RMC's extensive checklist.
17 Further, BFP has requested further refinement or definition from the City of the
18 Biological Assessment. No response has been received in time to avoid including this item in
19 this appeal.
20 III.
21 CONCLUSION AND REQUEST
22 The Examiner should reverse the City's determination to place the Barbee Mill
23 Preliminary Plat on hold. Further,the Examiner should reverse the administrative
24 determinations and direct that no additional background traffic nor further study of the Ripley
25
26
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL- 5 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS\36183\2\00056PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square• 1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington 98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax:(206)628-7699
1 Lane-Lake Washington Blvd. intersection is required. Finally, Examiner should rule that no
2 requirement for a`Biological Assessment" is required based upon the pending application.
3 DATED this <<e/ day of June,2002.
4 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
5 Attorneys for Barbee Forest Products, Inc.
6
7 By r3g-tecThomas A. Goeltz
8 WSBA#5157
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
NOTICE OF APPEAL- 6 Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
F:\DOCS\36183\2\00056PLD.DOC LAW OFFICES
Seattle 2600 Century Square • 1501 Fourth Avenue
Seattle,Washington 98101-1688
(206)622-3150 • Fax:(206)628-7699
; ..- CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorksDepartment
Jesse Tanner,Mayor.. Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
June 3, 2002
•
Parties of Record
•
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat '
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
•
Dear Interested Party: - • -
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the land use application-referenced above
• has been placed 'on hold"pending the, of additional information necessary for
• the City's Environmental (SEPA) Be...e.Wlofthe pi-diktat
Therefore, the public hearind teptativey.scheduled for Julral.6, 2002 will be postponed.
• • Further notice regarding t ,pubIlcJearing for the pripje t ilt a forwarded to all parties
of record when the land 04 application review is re-initiated:: - -
�`.:•;Cam.
Should you have any questions (gar � .,g� iis' �;crresponden4e or if you would like
additional information, t ease =j. S : r .
. r
r- 4�>
Sincerely,
Lesley. Nishi
Project Manager .
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•• LETTER NO. 1 -
cc: Land Use File
•
•
•
1055 South Grad Way-Renton,Washington 98055 E N T O.lr
��� This y�5oxrecycled t consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
. CIT _- OF RENTON
,A ; .`` Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
June 3, 2002
Dan Dawson
Otak, Inc.
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP \' .,•
Dear Mr. Dawson:
After completing the initial review of.the Environmental (SEPA) Checklist submitted with
the above referenced land use application, it has been:.determined that the information
provided is not sufficient for the City'- of Renton to . make a SEPA threshold
determination.
Potential environmental impacts from the infrastructure improvements associated with
the preliminary plat, as well as the direct and indirect impacts from all components of the
proposal (i.e., site plan design), warrant further; analysis of the project's effects on
shoreline habitat and existing transportation systems. Therefore, pursuant to WAC 197-
11-100 and 197-11-335 and as adopted by reference under section 4-9-070.L.1 of the
Renton Municipal Code, the City is requiring that additional information be provided —
specifically with regard to the Land and Shoreline Use and Transportation environmental
elements. The submission of additional information that is reasonably sufficient to fully
evaluate the environmental:impacts .of the proposal will enable the City to make an
appropriate threshold determination for the proposed plat.
Specifically, the following information has been determined to be necessary in order for
the Environmental Review Committee (ERG) to�make a reasoned decision regarding the
project's environmental impacts and the necessary mitigation measures for the
proposed plat:
1. Five (5) copies of a Biological Assessment completed by a qualified biologist.
The study must assess the potential environmental impacts from the associated
infrastructure improvements that have been identified as components of the
proposal in the submitted checklist, as well as the direct and indirect effects from
the proposed plat on adjacent Lake Washington and May Creek shoreline areas
(i.e., site design issues such as building placement, lighting and shading and
their impacts on critical habitat and endangered species).
2. Five (5) copies of an addendum to the Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis,
prepared by HDR Engineering dated March 28, 2002, that includes the following:
LETTER NO. 2
•
1055 South Gray Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
AHEAD OF TilE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
Barbee Mill Preliminary P,__, .
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF,PP
June 3,2002
Page 2 of 2
• Real traffic counts at all entrances of the existing site for a one-week
duration, including weekend days. This will allow the City to determine the
appropriate credit for the site.when assessing the necessary mitigation fees.
• A study of the Ripley Lane and Lake Washington Boulevard intersection
assuming the entire area (all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the
railroad tracks) is fully developed at the allowed density of the zone.
3. In addition, it is the City's preference that the plans be revised to comply with the
code related items identified at the pre-application meeting for the project held
on April 25, 2002. In lieu of revised plans, street modification requests pursuant
to RMC section 4-9-250.D must be submitted for any roadway that does not
comply with the adopted street standards.
At this time, the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat land use application (file no. LUA-02-040,
ECF, PP) has been placed "on ; "�` Jri eIhoJd �thewinformatlon listed above has been
submitted and found to be acceptable; •t`lie' roject willUbe rescheduled on the agendas
for both the Environmental Re iiew Committee and tIJe'Hq arrng Examiner.
S•y • ^'^ 5 '.9•s
-."'
Please contact me at (425)430-7270 if you, have.any questions:,_
I:<; n-
Sincerely _ "�v.ir�t;,�ysJ�. ham.,.;,
., . rSs '11tie_ l
, k,
Lesley Nishihlra j . I.
Project Manager -. °• w F •
�t:,:-
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson, Applicant
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator
Susan Carlson, EDNSP Administrator
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner .
y.
®EV EZOT, E
King County ci °FR�rotvAlp,t-1
Wastewater Treatment Division `!UM '
Environmental Planning l?®®�
and Community Relations C BA
Department of ED
Natural Resources and Parks
KSC-NR-0505
201 South Jackson Street
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
June 13, 2002
Lesley Nishihira,Project Manager
Development Services Division
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat (LUA-02-040,PP, ECF)
The King County Wastewater Treatment Division has reviewed the Notice of Application for
the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, dated May 16, 2002. King County's Eastside
Interceptor-Section 4 is located under the project's proposed street access within the
Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way(please see the attached figure). In order to
protect this wastewater facility,King County is requesting that the City of Renton do the
following:
• Submit construction drawings for the project to Eric Davison in the Design, Construction
and Asset Management Program, Civil/Architectural Section. Eric can be contacted at
(206) 684-1707. Drawings should be submitted for review during design development so
that King County staff can assess the project's impacts. Drawings should be sent to:
Eric Davison,DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
King County Wastewater Treatment Division
201 South Jackson Street, KSC-NR-0508
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
• Please contact Eric Davison at(206) 684-1707 a minimumn of 72 hours prior to
commencing any construction in order to allow staff time to arrange for a King County
inspector to be on the site during construction.
I ••®1202M
Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager June 13, 2002
City of Renton Page 2
• King County must be assured the right to maintain and repair the sewer line located on the
proposed development site. King County has a permanent easement for the sewer line,
and in the event that the line must be relocated, a new permanent easement must be
provided. Please contact Pam Elardo, Supervisor, Right-of-Way Permit Unit, at(206)
263-3699. Her mailing address is:
Pam Elardo, Supervisor, Right-of-Way Permit Unit
Planning and System Development Section
King County Wastewater Treatment Division
201 South Jackson Street, KSC-NR-0600
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
• Provide evidence of liability insurance and enter into a save-harmless agreement with
King County. Please contact Pam Elardo at (206) 263-3699.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this proposal. If you have
questions, I can be reached at (206) 684-1227.
Sincerely,
Barbara Questad
Environmental Planner
Enclosure
cc: Eric Davison, DCAM, Civil/Architectural Section
Pam Elardo, Supervisor, Right-of-Way Unit, Planning and System Development
. .. .. . __„... .
. ..‘i 1..
. . .. . . _ . . . . .- - _ •
-
,..... - . . .
. - .
- .
•
•
• . .
• .•
.. .• ,
•• • .
:-.
• .
' ' - •. .
E .
. '
. .
• , . .
. .
k•-• . ,
. . . . . .
l• .
- . ..
- .. .
. •
i-,
. . ,.
! . :
. . . . ,. - • . .
f .
- • . .
. 1.
- •
- .
g- - • .
. • • .•
- , , ,.. .... .. •. .. . . . •
1.• - • .,...._______....._________________ - .
:_..).....________ . .
--- .___--.-. -.
. ' .
. . .
• .
_. - . • • .
. . . ..... ,
.• . . • . .
.•
• . . . . . .. , .. • . .
. .
i• . . .
. - . . .... . ... . - . .
... .
k- - •
. - •
„„,,,,,,,,..,--7- •
. ..
.-,
c•.
• \ • . .,---
. • . .
..-
. ,
. .
- •
. .
- .
• • • . • .
........„/„."""." - -
F..i;
. •
.. "---""----"
. : . . - . . .: . • . .. . . . . .•
. • .. • .0e".. .\
- -. - • ,
,,,. •
• . .. . .••• • • - . -•
.
• - . .
. . 1.,-4:. Cc".547,-- C.:FOSS/NG • L.
---:. ;;/.4.--..F.? .5ER/CE ..------2--_-'.:_--.±-.5 --,•-...,:44 CaN.5r
-.5,-.1 26+92 -E.W5rING •20,vrOUR ,
,.., CO3•::7.-re. ' .011 L'•".,,,'"-L5
.. N i 9Z,41-C.d.93 , .•
\• SEE 0:4/6 .5 .
....-., / . -
•. 4./.4mir,41N .
_____,... - • E 1662.367.00 / , • -
- --, •,-- i‘7,57-,/L.,40/DER,A,,/,E7)., •-• - / , •
• ..__. .4CEE55 /
--- _ .. •
• •---• ---..\ ...5.:,-5,.E 0,“,-6'/03' . ;
•
/ .
- - • /
.. .
- /--crlf.EL 57;fsLsEpp...t.F.NE ,..
- _ / . / P.:.-7A'/./.
,
,
. - I I CON.4T AIOT,Er'._-_,,-0.0.6 3'. / • -
-.___/
_ --------c -,7.--‘1-_ . •-,.- - / .
. .
. •- - -. . .
-
,. ;•,e.
. ;\ 'N.
_ . ,
. .
. _. . • . .
,. • , •
. ..- Cc/Lk-Ear JY,/hiller ,..- \ •I• .L. • , - • , • , .
, - • \ .t-e",,•, ,------ .....,._-.z,i i..5L'E....5147: /0 % , . / • i, -1 ' • •, \ •
1
.•
--i! ----i--- \----, •
,, .-....,1-- -•-- s v.,k.-1{i '
I • ._ . .
I-.-f•
. . ..,
.- _ .__ . , i_-.--_,
- ..,.
. -..-.. . f: --: . •-
:‘... ... . -
. .._.
, •- -- - .
• - - - .
/ - 7 .
.‘I . - - -- .. ..
- .. -....._.. ... '.' -I• '
. .".'i -.--__:_l:.7 Z.:-.-'-',..-:--"•c-'- '''-''''" . • '- -- - -' :1 - .; (: ; • i, ' - - --• .- - -. -
.!.....T."..... 94 -•, '' '....- 11''•. -.. .-,
., ..„ . . .... ..
. _
'•''•'.,7 6- --•.- - -4-
. -.. 1. ,..;-'f'''-""------..--,_'3SE4-€;1,-- .r"---1',----2-1-'----",- t-.'..-- .;..,\--''':''• - -
,.•_'..-..
•.:
..
._:..---•.-..,....•.,,,.4-_-.-_-
7__7-__61_..-:;-,_4,.i,i•;.
:__,,7-.,-e.l.i_-,v„.,,1,-.,;,.•..-...---.-.-1/410 f.
11.41 P.,„,•1/4-•_••._.-_.,_.-...-...-....._,_.._.
._._.„_4__._./.-:.•c-_24,E.,.../;.....-.0
•.I
._
c1_
._".-__.__.,-__"-•--":N.....X.,__3.._..______-_______7-_--.•w.--..;;•.--------.--.- ,-*.',
,...'. ..c.c.-.-
•.‘.
-s--..--.--._._•i_sAE3f:l4-6.._4_I•g'-7'
.?.
E
,,_•4./LN-4-1G\/-,-E,,5,,R'.:_,..7,,_,,.io.lP_rCo_/EA.P.r...t,.,-t--,C.-••-E\1P,•-•L:,zA::lE1 L...::"/„6..1•._,.,•.,-.62A--/,,,T':‘,E,‘1,,.,
,4-\5yc,E,_2,E 14/-5 4„\-•L2,.v/i I-
_.•.,L,.J,
i1,.•.\.,
.0..,7....4.2•-\1\_0_i'-_i.i*.:..:'1,.--\.....-.-.L-:I,,t-,,.%.././4-P-;...-.:-,-2._s.i i1,,';
-.,..
.„
;.-..-
...
I1ki
_A_iiii t
,
C. CC5/5 /I ?METER/ vcE DW5 . .,. ` _ 4 \/ . APAY Rim /
--
? _ 4YR - o J 11i I"-'
/ . . . ,•-• \I
'. . . . . • • . . . SCALE HORIZOWTAL 16=
'.' -..7-••-,1;..';. ..- 1-. .. ::".• •It -.. ;: .• , ' ., _-!:.. '. ,. - 50',VERTIAL I 10 P•7?4' 0 e ''-W / vfe
Ii : ... - t -
17 / 4,. . : . \. •. .' •
. ..
• - l• f
, . . . . , . ,.... - • . • . .. . --, - - -....1.
i •• 0\ : • '' ''• • ' --.' '• i • • --.' '-' '''' • r-- .' .: . 1- • ' -•• - ' - ':" • . •'•"". •P.I.E• .-.5aeiloerEa..r7r,`'Al_r5E'E.Dikr6-. .• : -t.I. . ,.• . . ..i . .; . . , ..._ . --. • - • t .
. ., ,
..f.<1......._. ..,..---_ _LL-:_..L.._..!•_.....1 1- --- -.t- ,...-_, ..., . _____,
•
4.:._...". 1 . l .
•
1.1:': 7...• - 1:*- ' • i-.'• •i':"...•. .....-''. I' . ' " i-•• i 7 --i
, ,... , I__r.. : ,
. , . _. .1;:• . ,._.••_ 1. ,.: :; ..Ft4.4- itkiifccitiW-43*(-7t0/ ei./00 1_.,ES- --1-. . f. 71- :_ : 1.: . . .. . --;--- -4i . .i72:44',6c1,-Y',.75Ag121,7--• I ... ;, i .• ... ' -- i .. \--...V?"P bvEP;ArOt:. --,iti'2.4 !,:.0..47A/ArAGEI. .1 ..: - ,...._ . - • - • - : . , •-2 .: .., .j:' --;:i .• ., - 4- !.-•'i--,,L. P.E. FILL ip9°N1 A116.41W4Y...rOW'il'af.:7--'1 -1- --7:. ..• t• • : 'L .'
ITL,• ••, ;•.-• I- •-•4_2\ :1,0ircii.B.417-44,...ertefx.1740. E„,,,ii./0,RR_rq .1 :....J...,.:, 1 .„.1 .. .. , I- -.4--•.,.'; PRA-OL:EP.P/ E iri..tiVWDE LY,041/.2.4GE•,-----..;- -- t t ' ' -
..'1____.W.....:-..7.;:.?_'•!.:fT,:-f-12Z.27GIV...Z.F._:.:.._t.4 ....--, i.,-----÷---t....-1-,:- --7--- t•-..-7.-. -..- . . 73,--.4,. • ,,,,..-,-.17-:-7..-.4-7.-..-77,:- .:..,,,.•. . , .. „.. . . .. - - 7---t--- •---1. ,.- -2,' • i . '---,tt:'-g/TC7r0-4FTWEIFiX.:P/P,r-Aiwri,...44.,,_/41-. .. : .... 1 -- .--------'-'-:-•-'---t--
. ht,f) c..7415•6X-:•:',V0.5:51.e16:•;....,• i :-•••:•• ...I. -''i•r k 1•.• i: - 4 _ .... -,, •••• .1...•_, ...I. ..:,...__-__..i•••_• 1••_- i ••--•-,,-.. ex/5 p.,6• PAK-ED 4.4C-Cg-5 5'. RP,419 •.-..,. /. t"...DR,ttlif.: rb.CREEf"----4.- -t••-' '- '''-•-''
. C4YEE-X,t',4,03t/Ate.'' ,....1.,..-.1.' 1..• . .' ..•L" ' ' ,• :-.::.'..;2--•••.i •••;‘----;--- %..„-'-'1;----. ••:- '1"-. - ...:-.- ...':- ,7- ke-Pi...4.' ce-/AI elki.i:), (--t..-0-..m.4 rci-i i'1.1:- .,-• .4_,_._ _-:' ..4.'__,- :".-..--,z".„.... .:_:_:.-..i:.:112_1-....LH--:::-.,_:_--•+--1_._._L-__L-_-.:.' .,t1„---_,,..rE,PRd.jirci/DizE•0,./prr ANTEER.:C1-/c.44.7.40
i ..,,••• -2:-,4 1 ..••-t-• •-F trifve-rthrg;;•:t4F-A-1011,670'--r:`: ... _ . .-'''.::;'!:- -.--- I -' - ' .--P-. - '- -.-7-..---''- '-(X/577A/C;7:57/4,..41 .Z-•'7;Z"...1." -;:Y.:,...7.-1 7:.'„„. . . .. 1. -. ';.... ..., . .. i.:.....s...,,I.....„.1....._.. , ...'...; 0 , Af ••
' 't • '.--'_'. 1 -.,'' -.*- '; 'S SY.27 5 '- , -.... '1 : . .q.A44 z:I.1374":C5.__Tie43.ACKeir.LL.„ .../,..,, .'C-----_1.,._ .'.. ;--.. ..!.': .,.. . -.t--._4..__ ,. _...4 .. ..i; -. --A7.4-ff.:,.7..A-...4o. .$Er- f.1...•.,
........._.;.
'- '- '5ff E 15411, -V9,_:.6.14/?_!6k ii:: ':-:-'-' -: -- I •-- •- -L. -•:-- ., -•.- -- • • -- . . -.1.., 0-YR1,,a77.".ff...44. z• . ..0-1 - . - .,
1-,---,--;.-,-- 1+-'---..---- . ..,,,
r " v..-Ef..„.;,-•- '''f.: l'.'•''..:.-.-4-'-'.•' ''-'' ''fyi r•- 44P7C4:6"9fAiAl.•'-6g'f-..-- ----._...1-.- - ..'-I ,..; -.:- i•:.....;:f '.-.-----i- i• .,. - ., . . :.. -;. _ .. • - • t --t. . _,
" "•-•!--- - .- -,--,..,.,,,,, :,--//.--...",.- -,.. ---........,-,.--,z,„,.-
,,, . 4. . - , . ;.77.77;7'-'7 r:, -,t.,.---.---)----' -'
' .!..:. -,-- - ...-,i..,'...,..- ,- L V .- • .' •-,. ..1,-.7,'..//,',"‘,7,...f.,c,"./ /',2•
,.. .- .. . , • -, .,.... , , .. ,,, „ . .
- •.'•'t-' ''•°C.I''/VCR,'.'':) ..;" ',i ..-'. .j.'.1,;' •''' •'''''.1''. ''.. '' '''''''''• • l' ' ''' , • •- 'i --.,:'1, "- -----1 . -,-.-
1 '' •I' : . •• , ' 1 -q--L, , "-- '..- ':---- , -.'. ' i•.' ..', .- i .. .'' - '1,5,
',,- 'T.---.!' •.::::„.•:.•'', ...f.'i, ..„,-, ,. ' . . L., . .1•_.::1''.._ i.' •4, ,-
. .,
•:-., :.--,-, 5'•.--',1-2..,•?',.4.•:•,•• .7•• ' •
. . .....,: , . . . .
• ,-,'•••• - --,•-.1 i. --/•,,:,.(VI si • - ••. ' 6,•••• ' I - • ,i-..6'r -;-..t...-s1 44,P t -. 7-74.-,:..,,e,4/1- ..-7 i• _I•
. ...
' ---- ."-_ - ..-.---. „. .?...-L'i---..- ' /-4) "'LW%SW • - • '"- i"1' •'' -- 1.. :• '7 _4-. - -- - ' - .... • •-",.!'--..."; t . . t.. .. . : --1--. ...,--...- , .4, . , • ' 1-- .tt. i -z•4..,, .,-_'..:. .t/ ,-. , ••"' c-f'•-a,,•----= i---"---i- '
1--
' -.4.-4,1'S;'.1''''',/,';'-'•'4.'-••r,71:10') 1 -•••i•-••••• : .• i ,•• •- --,- _.L•-•••-1.•- •, . -:, . , ''-• • 1
•--."--,:;--.'''•-••-;571-• ...:74.t;-:-,it-4/..i- ., '.1..-.:. ;•-•.- -1-.71i...•.- •• --':::.....- :I.,: ._.i.,..,-....-.:.:•l•- --.:: . .1 -.. =.•• f...'-.,. .. i• • -
. , .
- i,,,.„./.4.7,.--,:yi7.4 ..;,,--...f..)- -...-17•-••••••••.- .1.1-2-_J :-.---ft,:•.7'!--''::.j...' . ;'''•':'',:::'.-......4...,:.'".I.-..-...'-'• -t . ; ,-'::E nit";e'LEVA Pail:,••- • :.-,-. .......; -.:-..'„tt,..f,"1- • f ..: --• • , -," • •:.•:,.. .•• -.•'-r•-,-. 1,-• •---p...L•i.".• ,.:: .,.,....-•,-'. :,'t:-• .4 • :.. .i'---- •_.'' - .., ; - • . . . .
•-
1 r I',-"-..:-*'4 ''..j--*. •*.i;•;...-:':'::I--;_'-'-',*" . ......; t . .._-ti .... 1.--r*.";....:..:.- .-`,..• .:.['•:•‘::,..', •••::•t' -• •* . ,,. .'• ,: '. •
11
.. . • . • -./• * ffZRAV/iRi7 • '' :•': *`''''.-•" ' '.• '. '- '' *.... i .•---sfe. ''e'ev:;;.-1...1',00.c,_virix.t.,e/i4:5:iO4:-•.::. . •]*:J',.,....___ ___ -.....••_1••••••..--.•_•.;..-:
-, -•., • -• . l• - . • .-4., • . :_,:•3,42•.s.c.*574,- .. ..-2--:--• -c -_‘• -- - -_,,.-...-•• •. :: - . AS.-azilLit.'.;P i 4 Z'TiA..ecerrAfe/ vs,-,:::: '..',:. _....i:---
.r3E.E .5PfC.5),":,-..,;t•-,....., 4. -....-i ,'''. ' !... .' . .;::-..*. -I '.` ' ,,4 f.
. •
. ; •: .. • -:':?-Z-'-'-..t-'-'.3•4ciii7,:i...-.‘i.N-''''-+----''''T t\e; - 1-•• _; ' -' ...1:-.!. • .--x----. . . • ..- , ;/" ' :'-'''""'''---"--- - '.-----1.--.... -'-'7'-''''.7.71,. .'• ' ...
• , ,
•
. . • • • :j• - • - i " t •
..7'T. 1 •.1-.." •••,•.L,.;-•;-2H rO.:,..=,er,• - • AS.•COST
. .
CITY OF RENTON
CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the day of ) , 2002, I deposited in the mails of the United
States, a sealed envelope containing
400 - by l 1-I-fe✓ "
documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
(Signature of Sender) /_���
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that A d-vt D-e- 4.Gc w signed this
instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
Dated`( cDC a • if
Notary Pu y/c in and for the State of W.��1 ngton .
RILYN KAMCHEFF
NOTARY PUBLIC
I Notary(Print)
STATE OF WASHINGTON My appointrtIbXIirSAMCHEFF
COMMISSION EXPIRES MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03
JU IF 9q 9003
P
Project Number:
e c 2 -o'/o E« P/
NOTARY.DOC
• J
AGENCY(DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology Larry Fisher Mr. Rod Malcom, Fisheries
Environmental Review Section WA Dpt. Of Fish &Wildlife Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
PO Box 47703 C/o Dept. of Ecology 39015—172nd Avenue SE
Olympia,WA 98504-7703 3190—160th Ave. SE Auburn,WA 98092
Bellevue,WA 98008
WSDOT Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Mr. David Dietzman
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 14235 Ambaum Blvd. SW—Front A Dept. of Natural Resources
PO Box 330310 Burien,WA 98166 PO Box 47015
Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Olympia,WA 98504-7015
US Army Corp. of Engineers Ms. Shirley Marroquin Eric Swennson
Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Seattle Public Utilities
PO Box C-3755 KC Wastewater Treatment Division 710—2nd Avenue, 10th Floor
Seattle,WA 98124 201 South Jackson St, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle,WA 98104
Attn: SEPA Reviewer Seattle,WA 98104-3855
KC Dev. &Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent -
Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom,AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton,WA 98055-1219 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle,WA 98059 Kent,WA 98032-5895
Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga
Metro Environmental Planning PSE—Municipal Land Planner
KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868
201 South Jackson Street Ms:XRD-01W
Seattle,WA 98104 Bellevue,WA 98009-0868
Last printed 11/19/01 11:34 AM
Page 1 of 2
BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT/LUA02-040,ECF,PP
PARTIES OF RECORD
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Campbell Mathewson Dan Dawson
Attn: Robert Cugini Century Pacific, LP Otak, Inc.
Box 359 2140 Century Square 620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Renton,WA 98057 1501 Fourth Ave. #2140 Kirkland, WA 98033
(owner) Seattle,WA 98101
(applicant)
Bruce Erikson Kim Browne Kennydale Neighborhood
3815 Lake Washington Blvd N. 1003 North 28th Place Association
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Attn: Kim Browne, President
1211 North 28th Place
Renton,WA 98056
Bruno&Anne Good Tony Boydston Patricia Helina
605 S. 194th St. 3901 Lake Wash. Blvd. N. 4004 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.
Des Moines,WA 98148-2159 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Bud Worley Dorothy Muller Therese Luger
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N. 51 Burnett Ave South#410 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N.,A203
#B202 Renton,WA 98055 Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Carmen Flores James Hanken Amy Norris
16707 SE 14th St. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 3210 1900 NE 48th Street#F-202
Bellevue, WA 98008 Seattle,WA 98104 Renton, WA 98056
Cynthia Youngblood Mark Rigos Linda Knowle
4100 Lake Washington Blvd N 1309 N. 39th PI. 2902 Kennewick PI. NE
#A103 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Renton,WA 98056
Dan &Laurie Brewis Rod Stevens Kevin Lindahl
11026 100th Ave. NE 505 5th Ave. S., 10th Floor 3719 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Kirkland,WA 98033 Seattle,WA 98134 Renton, WA 98056
Douglas R. Marsh Gloria Brown Jeff Smith
1328 N.40th Street 1328 N. 40th Street 1004 North 36th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Edith Hamilton Walt&Bessie Cook David&Joyce Stevenson
3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 903 N. 36th St. 1208 North 28th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Flora Baldwin Eydie Hamilton Richard Weinman
4017 Park Ave. N. 3714 Lake WA Blvd. N. 270 3rd Ave.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Kirkland, WA 98033
Gary Young Wendy&Lois Wywrot Tom &Linda Baker
3115 Mountain View Ave. N. 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N.,A 104 1202 N. 35th
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Hamid&Tasleem Qaasim Dennis Law Marcie Maxwell
3830 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3625 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 2048
Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Herbert&Diana Postlewait Gary C. &Yvonne Pipkin G. Goodman
3805 Park Ave. N. 1120 N. 38th St. 3715 Lake WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
John &Greta Moulijn S. &Nel Hiemstra David Lierman
3726 Lake WA Blvd. N. 3720 Lake WA Blvd. N. 620 E. Marion Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Kent, WA 98031
Joyce Kendrich Goodwin Ande Jorgensen Rich Wagner
3715 Lake WA Blvd. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N. 2411 Garden Ct. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Marlen Mandt Dustin Ray Tim McGrath
1408 N. 26th St. 8936 132nd PI. SE 900 North 34th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Newcastle,WA 98057 Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 06/04/02 3:40 PM
Page 2 of 2
Marsha Hertel Neil Thomson David Nestvold
3836 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 76 6608 117th Ave SE
Renton,WA 98056 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Bellevue, WA 98006
Mary Kammer Nancy Denney Mark Hancock
51 Burnett Ave. S., #307 3818 Lake WA Blvd. N. PO Box 88811
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98055 Seattle,WA 98138
Mr. &Mrs. R. Lynch Beverly Wagner Scott Thomson
1420 NW Gilman Blvd.,#2268 4100 Lake Wash. Blvd. N., D-104 PO Box 76
Issaquah, WA 98027 Renton, WA 98056 Mercer Island, WA 98040
Robert West Roy&Cheryl Lynch Charles Wolfe
3904 Park Avenue North 4100 Lake WA Blvd. N., B 204 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Seattle,WA 98101
Terry McMichael Chris Sidebotham Don Robertson
4005 Park Ave. N. 3907 Park Ave, N. 1900 NE 48th Street, #R-101
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Robert&Alison Taylor Virginia Piazza Clark Van Bogart
3811 Lake Washington BL N 1119 North 35th Street 3711 Lake Washington BI N
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Kay McCord Susan Martin Linda Reutimann
2802 Park Avenue North 1101 North 38th Street 1106 North 38th Street
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056
Dept. of Ecology Department of Fish &Wildlife
Northwest Regional Office Attn: Rich Johnson
Attn: Ron Devitt, Facility Mngr. PO Box 1100
3190 160th Ave. SE LaConner,WA 98257
Bellevue,WA 98008-5452
Department of Fish &Wildlife Dave Enger,TD&E Fritz Timm, P.E.
Attn: Larry Fisher 2223 112 h Avenue NE City of Newcastle
PO Box 1100 Suite 101 13020 SE 72nd Place
LaConner,WA 98257 Bellevue,WA 98004 Newcastle,WA 98059
Dan Frey,WSDOT Ramin Pazooki,WSDOT King County Wastewater
6431 Corson Avenue 15700 Dayton Avenue North Treatment Division
Seattle, WA 98018 P.O. Box 330310 Barbara Questad
Seattle,WA 98133 King Street Center
201 South Jackson Street, #500
Seattle,WA 98104
City of Newcastle Greg &Sabra Fawcett, DDS JP Moulijn
C/o Micheal E. Nicholson Family Dental Clinic 3726 Lk.WA Blvd. N
Community Development Director PO Box 1029 Renton, WA 98056
13020 SE 72nd PI. Fall City,WA 98024 425-255-3710
Newcastle,WA 98054-3030 425-222-7011
Dewey Rancourt Leslie Kodish Mr. Bill Dunlap
3724 Lake WA. Blvd. N. 5021 Ripley Land North#106 Triad Associates
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 11814—115th Avenue NE
425-255-8697 Kirkland,WA 98034
Don Robertson Charles F. Dobes Mark Zilmer
1900 NE 48th St.,#R101 8606 118th Ave. SE 3837 Lk.WA Blvd. N.
Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
425-254-0054 425-255-2646 , 425-266-9090
Wendy Giroux John Studman Debbie Martin
South County Journal 1036 North 31st Street 1412 North 30th Street
P.O. Box 130 Renton, WA 98056 Renton,WA 98056
Kent, WA 98035
Keith Menges Kevin Sloan
1615 NE 28th Street Pan Abode Homes
Renton,WA 98056 4350 Lake Washington Blvd North
Renton,WA 98056
Last printed 06/04/02 3:40 PM
► _ CITY F RENTON
c$
..LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
•
June 3, 2002
Parties of Record r,Y1
AM
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat `,i,";`/'
File No. LUA-02-040, ECF, PP
Dear Interested Party:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the land use application referenced above
has been placed "on hold" pending the submittal_of additional information necessary for
the City's Environmental (SEPA) Review of the proposal.
Therefore, the.public hearing tentatively.scheduled for July 16, 2002 will be postponed.
Further notice regarding the.public hearing for the project will be forwarded to all parties
of record when the land use application review is re-initiated.
Should you have any questions regarding- this correspondence or if you would like
additional information, please contact me at (425) 430-7270.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishih'r'
Project Manager
cc: Land Use File
1055 South Grad Wa -Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
Y g AHEAD OF THE CURVE
This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
� I
CITY OF RENTON
..LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
J Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
June 3, 2002
Dan Dawson
Otak, Inc.
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat.
-
. °File.No. LUA-02-040„ECF,.PP_f
Dear Mr. Dawson:
After completing the initial review of they Environmental (SEPA) Checklist submitted with
the above referenced land use.application,.it has been::determined that the information
provided is not sufficient ;for the City- of Renton :fa.,make .a SEPA threshold
determination.
Potential environmental :impacts,from the infrastructure_improvements associated with
the preliminary plat, as well as the direct and i direct impacts from all components of the
proposal (i.e., site plan design), Warm further;:;;'analysis of tt)e project's effects on
� a i y � �.K' .. �;' to
shoreline habitat and existing transportationsystems. Thereforepursuant to WAC 197-
��v
11-100 and 197-11-335 and as adopted y reference under section 4-9-070.L.1 of the
Renton Municipal Code, the City ie.'requiring tat additional information be provided -
specifically with regard to-the,;Land and Shoreline`Use end Transportation environmental
• elements. The submission of additional information.that:'is reasonably sufficient to fully
evaluate the environmental-impacts .of,the proposal will`enable the City to make an
appropriate threshold determination for the proposed`plat.:='
Specifically, the following information-.has been.determined to be necessary in order for
the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to make a reasoned decision regarding the
project's environmental impacts and the necessary mitigation measures for the
proposed plat:
1. Five .(5) copies of a Biological Assessment completed by a qualified biologist.
The study must assess the potential environmental impacts from the associated
infrastructure improvements that have been identified as components of the
proposal in the submitted checklist, as well as the direct and indirect effects from
the proposed plat on adjacent Lake Washington and May Creek shoreline areas
(i.e., site design issues such as building placement, lighting and shading and
their impacts on critical habitat and endangered.species).
2. Five (5) copies of an addendum to the Preliminary Traffic Impact Analysis,
prepared by HDR Engineering dated March 28, 2002, that includes the following:
•
1055 South Grack Way-Renton,Washington 98055 RENTON
C1114This paper contains50%recycledmaterial,30%postconsumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
Barbee Mill Preliminary Piat •
File No.LUA-02-040,ECF,PP
June 3,2002
Page2of2
• Real traffic counts at all entrances of the existing site for a one-week
duration, including weekend days. This will allow the City to determine the
appropriate credit for the site when assessing the necessary mitigation fees.
• A study of the Ripley Lane and Lake Washington Boulevard intersection
assuming the entire area (all undeveloped parcels on the west side of the
railroad tracks) is fully developed at the allowed density of the zone.
3. In addition, it is the City's preference that the plans be revised to comply with.the
code related items identified at the pre-application meeting for the project held
on April 25, 2002. In lieu of revised plans, street modification requests pursuant
to RMC section 4-9-250.D must be submitted for any roadway that does not
comply with the adopted street standards.
At this time, the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat land use application (file no.. LUA-02-040,
ECF, PP) has been placed "on rbgl.VvOnce the it formation listed above has been
submitted and found to be acpej table, t1i'project wlll1bq rescheduled on the agendas
for both the Environmental 116iiew Committee and the'Hearing Examiner.
Please contact me at(425)<430, 270 if you have any qilkestioljsA
Sincerely, ,,j -4` §
91.46„,
h.� p v rA` 4
Lesley Nishihira ,, <., .''. -n , .:,,, .s• " )i/
Project Manager << s s '� " r - ,°
cc: • Alex Cugini,.Owner .
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson, Applicant .
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Gregg Zimmerman, P/B/PW Administrator
Susan Carlson, EDNSP Administrator .
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director •
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner •
404411
r
MUCKLESHOOT SHOOT INDIAN TRIBE INDIA
� s—
j. TRIBE 6 FISHERIES DEPARTMENT TRIBE 6
May 31, 2002 DEV
Cirypi��ir�ffu?ivc,
Lesley Nishihara, Project Manager ON
Development Services Division JUN
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
RE: NOTICE OF APPLICATION LUA-02-040, PP, ECF/BARBEE MILL
PRELIMINARY PLAT
Dear Ms. Nishihara:
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Department(MITFD) has reviewed Notice of
Application for a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 22.9 acres into 112 lots along the eastern shore of
Lake Washington. The preliminary plat, as currently proposed,will have site specific and
cumulative significant adverse impacts Upon iake Washington.and-salmon'habitat. These
impacts could be reduced by implementation'of appropriate mitigation'rneasures. Additionally,
given the nature of this development, it is probable that a future application'Will:be made to
construct piers or a marina to provide moorage at the site. A future pier/marina project is not
considered in this preliminary plat application,but is mentioned in the scoping notice for the •
project dated February 26, 2002. If the project will include a marina in the foreseeable future,
the environmental checklist should be modified on page 1. Also, the marina should be analyzed
in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement since this activity also has the potential to cause
adverse impacts to the affected area.
The proposed Preliminary Plat is located along the eastern shoreline of Lake Washington
approximately 2.6 miles away from the mouth of the Cedar River. Furthermore, May Creek
flows through the property. Both of these systems are a source of juvenile coho and chinook
salmon (Kerwin 2001)that will travel through the nearshore area adjacent to the project. A
salmon habitat limiting factors analysis conducted in the Lake Washington basin concluded that
degradation of the riparian corridor was a key factor restricting salmon habitat in Lake
Washington proper. The project proposes to enhance the May Creek stream buffer in "all areas
where shrub and upper canopy vegetation are lacking within the buffer". The proposed riparian
buffer of 50'feet along May Creek is insufficient to maintain salmon habitat in the adjacent
stream reaches over the long-term. Therefore, we recommend thatthis enhancemeritoccur on
both sides of May Creek at'least 1,00'feet in'distance from the Ordinary High Water Mark
(OHWM) and preferably to the distance equivalent-to the height'of a native mature:conifer tree
that could grow to on the site.' ;;r
39015 172nd Avenue Southeast • Auburn, Washington 98092 • (253)931-0652 • FAX(253)931-0752
r -
We also recommend that the affected area of the Lake Washington shoreline be replanted
with native vegetation. The drawings attached with the Notice of Application suggest that
housing units will be constructed next to the shore of Lake Washington without a vegetated
buffer. This construction could occur in areas that appear to be occupied by trees and other
types of vegetation(see attached photograph). If this vegetation is removed, the only vegetation
that may be located next to the lake will be vegetation planted along the proposed stormwater
ponds. Since the proposal is a change in land use, the current degraded state of riparian buffers
should not be used to as justification to avoid protecting and improving riparian buffers along
Lake Washington. To reduce the potential for site specific and cumulative long-term adverse
impacts to salmon habitat, the project should include a fenced riparian buffer of a minimum of
50 feet, even if no riparian buffer currently exists along the lakeshore.
The Notice for Application states that there will not be any work occurring below the
OHWM of Lake Washington. However, no information is provided in the application as to how
water from the stormwater ponds will be conveyed to Lake Washington and what measures will
be undertaken to prevent erosion impacts at the point of discharge. It is likely that the project
will require some inwater work to construct the stormwater facilities. The application and
environmental checklist should be revised accordingly.
The Notice of Application drawings are missing any references to piers or a marina to
serve the proposed subdivision. However,the February 26, 2002 Scoping Notice did mention a
potential dock and 120 slip marina at the site. Access to nearby boat moorage is regarded as a
necessity by many living along the shoreline of the Lake. It is probable that in the near future, an
application to construct individual residential piers for the properties abutting the lake and/or a
marina will be submitted. Since these probable future applications would only occur as a result
of the subdivision, we request that the City of Renton condition the plat with a restrictive
covenant that no individual residential piers will authorized for the site at this time. An
alternative approach is that the City, as part of its environmental review, assumes that each
waterfront property will eventually have a single-user residential pier or that there will be a 120-
slip marina at the site to provide moorage for the residents. An environmental review without
analyzing the future piers or marina will be incomplete and avoid an analysis of site specific and
cumulative impacts for the site.
If you have any questions concerning this letter,please call me at(253) 939-3319,
extension 116.
Sincerely,
Ken Walter
Senior Watershed Coordinator
cc: Matt Longenbaugh,NMFS
Tim Romanski, USFWS
Jim Green, US ACOE
Tony Opperman,WDFW Region 4
Alice Kelly, WDOE/Permit Review Unit
Citations
Kerwin, J., 2001. Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Report for the Cedar—
Sammamish Basin (Water Resource Inventory Area 8). Washington Conservation Commission.
Olympia,WA
4
A '
•":4171*k.4::Zr,i,',i7...741,0„,‘,-e-,, -T-:,., • .;:c...-44.i :-or ,-* !;:, klf,'!-..-';*"0.1..r,'A' '''''S---- — ,' ''.' er*".0.7 YA'Ae„tt"Ayr '........
, 4 „
'ne .
.e4
n . 4 . 'n Aftiff44. •':*en' ' :,'. . ; NV-Irr, 4Vt4it . ' ''',, ' -... .
• ', •-•,. ,- ---'''...0`1-.. --.-a.. P'.* — • .. . . „ !ie.,......, ...,-* .. ,,,,, .„..,.,---,.~-,. .,,- ,
'a'' , • , -4-, : ....,.4 ."'"In- #'.. ' — ' ' .; " • "' .I., ..-4t*::".. ..''' .r.
• ' '' .t.''.-"1-4. -Aprit 14,'. ,;.tt IlL. 1 It",...,.. -_..,,, ; 7.• ., rr.:aistCititr9..,.' .
, , ' •''''.".7. ', 1 '.,,'41140.,# *,,.. " II ' ' ' U..' , '''''-%.'. r,', , '•
ROJE.c.11 LOCATION j -''.. "'—>el- • Xret.t '"=,•..,..-41F:,,,,-Te ' -'- • .1",...1 o' — , 10,1 :.42e, ' • •• •
7.......,"_,,-..m.-4 zigwr '''' . ...ry.t.'-lr,,....p ,•;,_- . '. •,- . MOUTH OF MAY CREEK .:Z"l'34'.... o.-,c,..'
, ,.9,70 er •., .... 1.,- ,.« ...1 T -v
---7,',--„,,',..i*:- r4,-ta--, _ . • „, - ' e"--r•" -,,V -.... •' "V,t-111§"V.6`......'" r- .1......
,,,.... .... . . , _. ,. ,,,r..-...,
: ,,... VALY`- ,t*Rti„0 -""
. . .
,•
'1401.,V
- '-
, .
. ,
,ig 1.4 ar.c. 1. ,4--, , • , •r'''r .... , 4,,
. .
... . ...f-.4 , ,..
n 9 "'"-*. - • I..."4.
4.4"" ( 't.". " ' -,i-ft,AL'',
. . . . 4 i ri .• - ,..L. •
-' . - •- •-• .-, ,A-r -.. ?L. b-", •.14.4.1:3."- A'N. ._rft-;,.4.
n--
- - ,,,Tvz,,,A.,„• , #, L. ' 'htto,..- ''' 411. . ..,( 1...,
. 04.-i' .--.- .lr''' ."...... .., '' '",..,.s• 10,1... -''1 •-ilt4
'' -''' ,'T.' tC V*11 1..•I•Ail,',. . -,4°.;.• , '4,1*4 ' ' o'''''' ,. "'':,1‘.. :. •:' t."'''. ' ,. "" .'"' ,,, -' .I...,....7
:',...V.:;',--: ":", ",.' ),-..4 ",-,,',""-•..41;",:,,",,',--,,•„ ,-' , -;,i'."",,-- ,;,.-• ; ' ,.' ,s, - -- . -. - - •
,,,. ',/iN 1:16,-,..`Att':,:A-2-kk '1....,,,,‘.0.,;:4,,•-,.,, •!,',,-,,, ,•,..2.-,.•••,'',.`,-,--. , ., ,, ‘, ., ,,, .. -,7,., ',i7„,- „tizttie: - •
.g.'tot!'•'•••••,' -4''"'-.' , .`
' '-•i 1V* •'''A •acC;4•7 tf4‘..)''.:,..3«•-•,4i•,.•••.• • ... .,
- ' . . ....•'', ','"d'i.,, "' ;,;19,1•;;;;4A,,,,,,,.4.-.14...:;;"4,r4f8j.,.;;.•- .,'", ' , ': • '. ,
' ,. •4"`Y•'' ...•,.." :41*,r75 ,t;/%41.1-;.V,t,„',' • , ,
Photograph of B athee M illsite taken on 23 M ay 2002.
WIWashington State Northwest Region
Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North
Douglas B. MacDonald P.O.Box 330310
Secretary of Transportation Seattle,WA 98133-9710
206-440-4000
TTY: 1-800-833-6388
May 28,2002 www.wsdot.wa.gov
Leslie Nishihira,Project Manager DEVELOpCi �jE
1055 of SouthtGrady Development Services Division Cl fY OF►3EN,ON ING
Renton,WA 98055
RE: SR 405 MP 7.47 SUN 0 3 ��02
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat RECEIVE®
File No.LUA-02-040,ECF
Notice of Application
Dear Ms.Nishihira,
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Application
for the proposed Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat. The 22.91-acre site is located on the west side
of Lake Washington Blvd.between N.40th St.and N.44th St.at 4201 Lake Washington
Boulevard NE in Renton. It is our understanding that the applicant is now proposing to
subdivide the site into 112 lots ranging in size from 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet.
The lots are intended for the development of townhouse units. This is a change from the
previous application that included building 50,000 sf of retail space,619 condominium units,
112,000 sf of office space,30,000 sf for hotel use,and 8,000 sf for restaurant use.
The proposed project may have a significant impact on the state facility but without knowing
the exact number of units we are unable to calculate the PM Peak Hour trips generated by the
project. According to the SEPA Checklist,a Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for this
project in April 2002. We would like to request a copy of the TIA for review to determine
potential impacts'to SR 405.
SR 405,between mileposts 7.06 and 7.57 northbound mainline and between mileposts 7.17
and 7.87 southbound mainline is a High Accident Location(HAL). We may need to discuss
mitigating impacts by constructing roadway improvements and/or calculate the pro-rata share
contribution toward WSDOT's planned interchange reconstruct project of SR 405 titled"SR
405,NE 44th St.Interchange,Reconstruct Interchange"located between mileposts 6.50 and
8.46. This project has an estimated construction cost of$50 million with an unknown ad
date at this time.
If you have any further questions,please contact Phil Segami at 206-440-4326 or Vicki
Wegner at 206-440-4323 of my King County Area Developer Services team.
Sincerely,
{IL
Ramin Pazooki
King Area Planning Manager
RP:vw
MARK HANCOCK
P.O.Box 88811
Seattle, WA 98138
May 31, 2002
Ms. Lesley Nishihira OE ! p�CNr
Project Manager OFr,�NTN/N
Development Services Division N o
City of Renton �qr �`
1055 S. Grady Way ftECI.@ �"`!;'
Renton, WA 98055 IVj
RE: LUA-02-040, PP,ECF/Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms. Nishihira:
After reading through the City's file for the proposed townhouse plat at Port Quendall,
I have one primary concern: that the project traffic should be‘directed away, and in fact
discouraged, from using the residential streets of our Kenneydale neighborhood during the
2-3 years the project is under development and construction.
I am concerned about this because of the developer's perspective as stated in their
"Construction Mitigation Description"page that is in the application packet. They state
there that"All materials will be hauled to or from the site from the south via Lake
Washington Boulevard,NE Park Drive and I-405."
I would agree that most project traffic will come to/from the south(that is where the more
affordable housing is for the workers, as well as the offices and warehouses of many
contractors and suppliers). When they state"all materials"I especially worry about the
trucks hauling demolition and excavation material from the site, and the fill material to the
site. They state in the application that there will be 38,000 cy of fill and 32,000 cy of
excavation for the project. Since truck/trailer rigs will carry from 20 to 30 cy per trip,that
would represent 1300 to 1900 truck trips for the fill alone (add to that another 1100 to
1600 trips if the excavation material is hauled off site). Obviously those trucks should use
the I-405 interchange at 44th St. closest to the project, and not go off at 30`h to cut through
our neighborhood to avoid 1/2 mile of I-405 traffic. Maybe that's what they plan to do,but
as stated the application is a cause of concern.
It's bad enough that Lake Washington Boulevard is proposed as a project route(other than
directly adjacent to the project), but the mention of NE Park Drive is particularly
disturbing. There is no reason to ever pass through the heart of the neighborhood on Park,
by workers or trucks.
LUA-02-040, PP,ECF/Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat, 5/31/02,page 2
Park is a residential street, not an arterial, and is not suited for such a use,because:
1) It already carries extra traffic of commuters using it for shortcuts to avoid I-405 traffic.
2) It is the main road where children are present in the mornings and afternoons as school
busses pass through the neighborhood.
3) It is a main walking and bicycle route for local residents.
4) There are 14 public and private streets that connect to Park between 30th and 40th (I
doubt the developer would put out that many flaggers in such a small area).
5) The physical condition of the road is already very poor(trucks would ruin it).
The residents of Park(and nearly the entire neighborhood as a whole) are unaware of the
details of this application, since they are not within the 300' notice radius and the haul
route discussion is only within the application package at City Hall. I'm certain that if
they and the Neighborhood Association were aware of the mention of Park as a haul route
you would receive many more letters like this one.
I am asking the City to please do its best to direct project traffic away from our
neighborhood while the project is under development and construction. The close
proximity of the project to the I-405/44th St. interchange negates any need for anyone to
pass through our neighborhood. Please add whatever conditions can be accomplished
during the review and approval of the project. The applicant's hauling permit should
include a haul route map and condition to stay up on I-405 to 44th(and forbidden to come
off at 30th). If there is any worker/contractor information or rules sheet handout at the
jobsite, it should include language telling workers not to cut through the neighborhood.
Lastly, it is time for the City to post"No Trucks" signs at each end of Park(and perhaps at
the foot of the connecting streets that lead up to it), and they would be greatly appreciated
at this time.
Thank you for your consideration of the above.
Very t ly ours,
Mark Hancock
PS: In the SEPA document,the developer avoids the discussion of heights and parking
spaces by saying "we will meet code." It would be helpful if the staff report could outline
what the applicable code criteria for these items will be.
1120 N. 38th St.
Renton, WA 98056
May 30, 2002
City of Renton
Attn: Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager
Development Services Division
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
RE: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040, PP, ECF
The proposed construction mitigation description states that all materials will be hauled to or from
the site from the south via Lake Washington Blvd, N Park and 1-405. It is not acceptable to have
materials hauled from the south via Lake Washington Blvd., a lake shore scenic drive, and N Park.
through a strictly residential neighborhood. Specifically, N Park is extensively used by small
children walking to and from Kennydale Elementary School during the school term and walking to
and from other residences in the neighborhood as well as to and from the 7-Eleven store. Also,
groups of children gather at several of the intersections on N Park and the east west cross streets to
wait for school buses. Heavy trucks in the numbers and duration along N Park constitutes an
extreme risk to the small children who frequent the neighborhood street and to the groups of
children waiting for their school buses. There is no provision to ensure the safety of these groups
of children and individual children when the trucks pass by. A flagger would have to be stationed
in each block along the route from N 30th to N 40th on N Park, during the entire time period
each day that the trucks would be using the street, to assure adequate safety for the neighborhood
children. That requires nine flaggers to be stationed along N Park during the stated time period.
Routing the trucks on this street effectively changes its status from residential street to commercial
thoroughfare with none of the protections edicted by the more complex category street.
Therefore, safety is an issue of utmost concern.
The acceptable and readily available route is for materials to be hauled via 1-405 to the exit at NE
44th and into the Barbee Mill property via a rail crossing at NE 44th. We realize that this route
adds .7 miles each way to the trip. However, the safety benefit provided by this route resolves all
of the concerns inherent in using N park. We strongly urge that all construction traffic be routed
via 1-405 and that no exception be made. This level of concern comes to bear when we realize the
total quantity of fill being moved to and from the site will be nearly 80,000 cubic yards of
material. This will be moved by trucks that can haul 20 to 30 yards each load. If you do the
math, that's around 4,000 trips each way by heavy trucks.
Sincerely,
4141y
yr
Gary 9,/ ipkin Yvonne Pipkin
FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN PLLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Direct Phone
MAY 31 20 2 (206) 447-2901
May 30, 2002 Direct Facsimile
RECEIVED (206) 749-2035
E-Mail
Ms. Lesley Nishihara WolfC@foster.com
Project Manager, Development Services Division
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Comments, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Dear Ms. Nishihara:
IIII THIRD
We are writing on behalf of our clients, Vulcan Inc. and the Port Quendall Av E N U E
Company("PQC"). PQC owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone in Renton, Suite 3 4 0 0
SEATTLE
known as the "North J.H. Baxter property,"the"South J.H. Baxter property," and the Washington
"Pan Abode property." These properties are located north and east, respectively, of 9 8 I 0 I-3 2 9 9
the above-referenced development proposal.
Telephone
We haveprovided similar comments to those set out below under prior
(z o 6)4 4 7 4 4 0 0
P Facsimile
Barbee Mill development proposals. We provide this letter in response to the May (2 0 6)4 4 7-9 7 0 0
16, 2002 Notice of Application, given the wide range of issues subject to analysis Web s i t e
under RCW 58.17.110, associated SEPA review and the ongoing potential for W W W.F O S T E R.C O M
significant environmental impacts in the areas of transportation and natural
resources, including potential impacts to May Creek and Lake Washington. When
considered on a cumulative and concurrent basis,these potential impacts may
constrain the development potential of adjacent COR-2 Zone properties.
Background
ANCHORAGE
As noted in the attached February 12, 2002 letter to City Attorney Alaska
Lawrence J. Warren, PQC acquired the Baxter and Pan Abode properties to develop
medium- and high-density commercial,residential and retail uses. The Baxter PORTLAND
properties are currently contaminated, and cleanup work(pursuant to Consent Oregon
Decrees with the Department of Ecology) is expected to commence later this year. SEATTLE
In the future, the Pan Abode property will likely be used for hotels, restaurants or Washington
highway-oriented retail.
SPOKANE
Washington
The Consent Decrees are of record in King County Superior Court and reflect
a multi-year regulatory review and negotiation process to facilitate development.
50327523.02
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 2
The attached letter to Mr. Warren describes the anticipated redevelopment of the Baxter
properties as described in the Consent Decrees, as well as Renton's long history of
comprehensive planning for the COR-2 Zone. The letter also requests that development
agreement negotiations commence with regard to the development activities to follow the
imminent cleanup work.
Cumulative and Concurrent Impact Analysis
Given the development-enabling activities under the Consent Decrees and the anticipated
development to follow, it is clear that the SEPA and Preliminary Plat review (as well as any
pending site plan and/or shoreline application review) for the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat (the
"pending Barbee Mill reviews") must also examine the cumulative and concurrent impacts of
development on the Baxter and Pan Abode properties.
Any environmental or land use review of area properties should assure that sufficient
transportation capacity will be available to serve all properties within the COR-2 Zone on a fair
and consistent basis. Accordingly, the pending Barbee Mill reviews should examine how the
cumulative impact of combined build-out on the Barbee, Baxter, Pan Abode and Quendall
Terminals will affect ingress and egress from I-405, and how the circulation between these
properties may affect circulation on local streets. Potential trip generation must be addressed on
an areawide basis in order to fairly allocate development capacity between properties.
In addition, the following additional cumulative and concurrent impact issues must be
examined and analyzed within the pending Barbee Mill reviews:
1. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington shoreline habitat and fisheries from combined
build-outs on the Barbee Mill, Quendall Terminals and Baxter properties.
2. Accommodation of offsite drainage from the Pan Abode property, Lake Washington
Boulevard and Interstate 405. Will drainage conveyances be possible through the Barbee
Mill property, or must discharges occur on May Creek adjacent to Lake Washington
Boulevard?
3. Cumulative impacts to May Creek habitat and wildlife from development of the Pan Abode
and Barbee Mill properties.
4. Cumulative impacts to Lake Washington water quality from Barbee Mill property
development in conjunction with development of adjoining properties and construction and
post-construction activities associated with any road system improvements.
50327523.02
•
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 3
5. Cumulative impacts to wetlands and stormwater within the COR-2 Zone from any access and
roadway improvements,which could constrain access options and natural resources on
adjoining properties.
Specific Onsite Impacts
We also believe that reviewing agencies should consider a range of specific onsite
impacts arising from the development of the Barbee Mill property. We are aware of the
following issues and impacts from studies commissioned for Vulcan Inc. and PQC regarding
development of the Baxter and Pan Abode properties:
1. Offshore wood waste cleanup, as well as related water quality and fisheries issues for species
listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
2. Lake Washington shoreline issues, including reconstruction of the bulkhead, debris removal,
shoreline enhancement or restoration, and related water quality, habitat, and fisheries issues.
3. Impacts of any over-water construction(if proposed), including related fisheries and habitat
issues.
4. Issues related to impacts of light,human disturbance to lakeshore fish habitat.
5. Issues related to wildlife, including salmon, trout, long-fin smelt,bald eagle and osprey nest.
6. Issues related to Muckleshoot Indian Tribe fishing grounds.
7. Stormwater treatment and discharge issues, including water quality impacts to Lake
Washington.
8. Issues related to impacts on May Creek and Lake Washington from on-site construction;
assurance of adequate buffers pursuant to federal, state and local regulatory requirements.
9. Issues related to wetlands management, impacts and mitigation if fill takes place.
50327523.02
•
Ms. Lesley Nishihara
Environmental Review Committee
May 30, 2002
Page 4
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Please include us on the
circulation list for all further communications relative to the pending Barbee Mill reviews.
Very truly yours,
r4
. VP/4
Charles R. Wolfe
Enclosures
cc: Rod Stevens, Vulcan Inc.
•
50327523.02
wsv
r0V ,r,
Fl rrAfci
`• FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN PLLC • *112
ATTORNEYS AT LAW ROCE
��2
•
Direct Phone
(206)447-2901
• Direct Facsimile
(206)749-2035
February 12, 2002
E-Mail
• WolfCQ@ foster.com
Lawrence J. Warren,'Esq.
Warren,Barber, &Fontes,P.S:
100 South Second Street
P.O.Box 626
Renton, Washington. 98057
•
Re: Vulcan Inc.: Request for Commencement of Development
Agreement Negotiations for Vulcan Properties within COR-Zone
IIII THIRD
AVENUE
Dear Mr.Warren: ' • Suite 3400
SEATTLE
As you are aware, Vulcan Inc. owns three properties within the COR-2 Zone Washington
in Renton, known respectively as the "North J.H. Baxter Property," the "South J.H. 9$=0I 3 z 9 9
• Baxter Property" and the "Pan Abode Property." These properties were acquired to Telephone
facilitate eventual commercial, urban residential, and/or retail development in the (z 0 6)4 4 7-4 4 o 0
COR-2 Zone, either independently or as part of a larger area wide development. As Facsimile
described below, the Baxter properties are currentlycontaminated and scheduled for (z o 6)4 4 7 9 7 O 0
P P websi:e
environmental cleanup. Although not subject to any cleanup obligation, Vulcan W W W.F O S TE R.C O M
believes that the Pan Abode property has strong development potential for hotels,
restaurants, or highway-oriented retail.
Vulcan is currently moving forward with the environmental cleanup of the
two Baxter properties according to the terms of two Prospective Purchaser Consent
Decrees negotiated with the Washington Department of Ecology ("Ecology") and
entered in King County Superior Court on May 18, 2000. Both Consent Decrees
describe (see attached South J.H. Baxter Consent Decree at pp. 9-10) how the ANCHORAGE
environmental cleanups anticipate redevelopment of the Vulcan-owned properties, Alaska
with at least 400,000 square feet of prospective development slated for the Baxter PORTLAND
Properties. The Consent Decrees further describe Renton's long history of Oregon
comprehensive planning for the COR-2 Zone as well as area wide environmental
hias
review conducted for:prior development proposals. WSEATTLE
Washington
Vulcan is iri the process of meeting with Ecology staff to finalize S P O K A N E
implementation of environmental cleanup on the Baxter properties. In concert with Washington
that effort, Vulcan lias authorized us to formally request the commencement of
•
50302144.01 •
Lawrence J. Warren
February 25, 2002 '
Page 2
development agreement negotiations to provide additional detail concerning the post cleanup
development on the Baxter properties, as well as the adjacent Pan Abode Property.
Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170 through 210, likely meeting discussion items include
regulatory standards that will govern such future development, including "development
standards" and "build-out or vesting period" as defined in RCW 36.70B.170(3). if We would
• also anticipate discussion of enumerated principles for allocating vehicle trip capacity among
COR-2 properties pursuant to any mitigation measures and development conditions called out by
RCW 36.70B.170(3)(c) and potential infrastructure obligations identified in RCW
36.70B.170(4).
•
Vulcan is expecting further Ecology comments on its proposed Engineering Design
Report for the environmental cleanups during the month of February and has a meeting
scheduled with Ecology on February 15. Vulcan is also working with the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife
to obtain the necessary Army Corps Nationwide 38 permit approval to enable moving forward
with the cleanup during Summer 2002. Given these pending review items, it would be prudent
to schedule a brief meeting to further design the scope of the Development Agreement proposed
above.
Please let me;know your schedule as well as any comments you may have at this time.
Very truly yours,
FOSTER PEPPER&SHEFELMAN PLLC
1
Charles R. Wolfe
•
CRW:ap
cc: Sue Carlson(w/encl.)
Rod Stevens,'Vulcan Inc.
Richard Settle,Esq.
50302144.01
•
•
RECEIVED
in King County Suoenot Coutt Clerk's Office
1 MAY 18 2000
.
2 • Cashier Section KNT
Superior Court Clerk
3
4 •
5 •
6 EXPO4
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
7 IN AND FOR KING COUNTY
8 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF •
ECOLOGY,
9 NO O " 2 - 117 7 9 - 5KNT
Plaintiff,
10 PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER.CONSENT
v. DECREE
11 •
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY,a Washington RE: SOUTH J.H. BAXTER
12 corporation, PROPERTY/RENTON
13 Defendant.
14
15
16 V •
17
18
19 •
20
21
22 .
23 •
.
24
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Po ox gy D4'0117n
South Baxter , V Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
2 Page
3 INTRODUCTION 1
4 I. AUTHORITY, JURISDICTION,AND VENUE . 3
5 II. DEFINITIONS 4
6 III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS 5
7 IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 9
1
8 V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED 11
I
9 VI. ECOLOGY COSTS 11
10 VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS 12
11 VIII. PERFORMANCE 13
12 IX. CERTIFICATIONS 13
13 X. PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY 14
14 XI. AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE; ADDING NEW PARTIES TO DECREE 15
15 XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION - 16
16 XIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION 17
17 XIV. COVENANT NOT TO SUE;REOPENERS 17
18 XV. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 19
19 XVI. DISCLAIMER 19
20 XVII. RETENTION OF RECORDS 19
21 XVIII. PROPERTY ACCESS 19
22 XIX. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS 20
23 XX. SAMPLING,DATA REPORTING,AND AVAILABILITY 21
24 XXI. PROGRESS REPORTS 22
25 XXII. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE 22
26 XXIII. ENDANGERMENT 24
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0 1 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
•
1 XXIV. PERIODIC REVIEW, 25
2 XXV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTING 25 ,
3 XXVI. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS 25
4 XXVII. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE 26
5 XXVIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 26 '
6 XXIX. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION 26
7 XXX. PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT 26
8 XXXI. SEVERABILITY 27
9 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE 27
10 ATTACHMENT A— Description of Property
11 ATTACHMENT B— Cleanup Action Plan
12 ATTACHMENT C— Restrictive Covenant
13 ATTACHMENT D— Site Map of Property to be Acquired by Port Quendall Company
14 ATTACHMENT E— Form Notice of Proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns
15 ATTACHMENT F— Form Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns
16 ATTACHMENT G— Public Participation Plan
17 ATTACHMENT H— SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance and Environmental
Checklist
18
19
20 •
21
22
23
24
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER ii ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Bow40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 17
FAX(360)438-7743
1
INTRODUCTION
2
This Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree ("Decree") is made and entered into by and
31
between the Washington State Department of Ecology("Ecology")and Port Quendall Company, a
4
Washington corporation("PQC"). Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties
5
to this Decree as provided in Section XI.
61
1. WHEREAS,the purpose of this Decree is to: (1)resolve the potential liability of
7
Defendant for the present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility,
8
including the contamination associated with the"South Baxter Property"described in Section III and
91 -
Attachment A herein, and has thereafter been deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise
10
come to be located within the Facility; (2)promote the public interest by expediting cleanup
11 � activities at the Facility; and(3) facilitate the reuse of a currently vacant parcel of land.
12
2. WHEREAS,the South Baxter Property currently is owned by J. H. Baxter& Co., a
13
California limited partnership("J. H. Baxter").
14
3. WHEREAS,the Facility is listed on the Washington Hazardous Sites List with a site
15
hazard ranking of 1.
16
4. WHEREAS, PQC has entered into a Property Purchase Agreement with J. H. Baxter
17 to purchase the South Baxter Property which is comprised of one parcel totaling approximately 7
•
18 acres and is described on Attachment A.
191
5. WHEREAS, fmal entry of this Consent Decree is a condition of the Property
201
Purchase Agreement necessary in order for the purchase to close.
211
6. WHEREAS, Defendant proposes to facilitate construction of mixed commercial,
22
residential,and/or retail development on the South Baxter Property by performing remedial actions
23
as more fully described in Attachment B (Cleanup Action Plan).
24
7. WHEREAS, Defendant is simultaneously entering into a Consent Decree with respect
25
to the purchase of property immediately north of the Facility(the"North Baxter Property"). The
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98 504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
n
1
11 North Baxter Property is also owned by J.H. Baxter and has in the past operated in conjunction with
1'
2 1 the Facility. Ecology has determined that the North Baxter Property is a separate facility and is thus
3 1 addressed in a separate Consent Decree.
4 8. WHEREAS, in the absence of this Decree, at the time it acquires the South Baxter
5 Property, PQC would incur potential liability at the Facility to the state of Washington and/or third
6 parties under the Model Toxics Control Act("MTCA"), Chapter 70.105D RCW, as an
7 I owner/operator due to releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances, Pollutants, or
8 Contaminants at the Facility.
9 I 9. WHEREAS,Ecology does not intend to provide a defense to Defendant to any
10 liability for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous Substances caused or contributed to by
11 Defendant.
12 . 10. WHEREAS,the Washington State Department of Natural Resources ("DNR")owns
13 I11 submerged lands offshore of the South Baxter Property, including lands which were leased to prior
I
14 1 operators of the Property and which were allegedly contaminated by prior activities at the Baxter
15 Property.
16 11. WHEREAS,the DNR has received notice of this Consent Decree.
17 12. WHEREAS, this Decree promotes the public interest by facilitating use of the South
18 i Baxter Property.
19 13. WHEREAS, Defendant has offered to further certain Ecology goals as provided in
20 I this Decree in exchange for a covenant not to sue and protection from contribution for contamination
21 at the Facility.
22 14. WHEREAS,Defendant has certified that its plans for the South Baxter Property are
23 not likely to aggravate or contribute to contamination at the Facility, interfere with remedial actions
24 that may be needed at the Facility,or increase human health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of
251 the Facility.
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER, 2 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 15. WHEREAS,this Decree will provide a substantial public benefit by promoting reuse
2 of a currently vacant parcel of land, providing substantial economic, community, and transportation
3 benefits to the area, and yielding substantial resources for environmental remediation.
4 16. WHEREAS, the Court is fully advised of the reasons for entry of this Decree and
5 good cause having been shown:
6 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS:
7 I. AUTHORITY,JURISDICTION,AND VENUE
8 17. This Court has authority to resolve the liability of the parties to this Decree.
9 18. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the parties pursuant to
10 MTCA. Venue is proper in King County pursuant to RCW 70.105D.050(5)(b).
11 19. Authority for entry of this Decree is conferred by RCW 70.105D.040(4)and
12 70.105D.040(5), which authorize the Washington State Attorney,General to agree to a settlement
13 with a prospective purchaser of a facility if,after public notice and hearing, Ecology finds the
14 proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup of hazardous substances in
15 compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW 70.105D.030(2)(d). RCW 70.105D.040(4)
16 and 70.105D.040(5)require that such a settlement be entered as a Consent Decree issued by a court
17 of competent jurisdiction.
18 20. Ecology finds that the proposed settlement would lead to a more expeditious cleanup
19 of hazardous substances in compliance with cleanup standards adopted under RCW
20 70.105D.030(2)(d)and that there are no "unique circumstances"as that term is defined in RCW
21 70.105D.040(4)(e)(ii).
22 21. Ecology has listed the Facility on the Washington Hazardous Sites List. Ecology has
23 not made a determination that PQC is a Potentially Liable Person("PLP") for the Facility. However,
24 if PQC was to acquire an interest in the Facility without this Decree, it would become a PLP under
25 RCW 70.105D.040(1)(a).This Decree is entered before PQC acquires the South Baxter Property to
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 3 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98 504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
- 1 .
• 1 resolve PQC's potential liability at the Facility to the state,of Washington and/or third parties for the
2 present contamination arising out of past activities associated with the Facility, including the
3 contamination associated with activities at the Facility that has been deposited, stored, disposed of,
4 placed, or otherwise come to be located within the Facility and to facilitate a more comprehensive
5 and expeditious cleanup than otherwise would occur.
6 22. By entering into this Decree,Defendant agrees not to challenge Ecology's jurisdiction
7 in any proceeding to enforce this Decree. Defendant consents to the issuance of this Decree and has
8 agreed to perform the terms of the Decree, including remediation,monitoring, and payment of
9 oversight costs as specified in this Decree.
10 II. DEFINITIONS
11 23. Whenever terms listed below are used in this Decree or in the attachments hereto, the
12 following definitions shall apply:
13 a. "Baxter Cove" shall mean the shallow cove or inlet portion of Lake
14 Washington that received discharges from Baxter Lagoon, as generally depicted on Attachment D.
15 b. "Baxter Lagoon" shall mean the depression on the South Baxter Property that
16 was formerly used for skimming and settling of process and stormwater prior to discharge to Lake
17 Washington,as generally depicted on Attachment D.
18 c. The"South Baxter Property" is described in Attachment A attached hereto.
19 d. "Cleanup Action Plan"shall mean the Cleanup,Action Plan, including the
20 final Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum and other attachments thereto,dated 4/4/0 0 ,
21 attached to this Decree as Attachment B.
22 e. "Decree" shall mean this Decree and all attachments hereto. In the event of a
23 conflict between this Decree and any attachment,this Decree shall control.
24 f. "Defendant" shall mean Port Quendall Company, a Washington corporation,.
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 4 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT'DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 g. "Facility" shall mean the South Baxter Property, as described on Attachment
2 A, including the portion of the DNR-owned submerged lands shown on Attachment D.
3 h. "Hazardous Substance"shall have the meaning defined in MTCA,RCW
4 70.105D.020(6).
5 i. "Paragraph" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by an Arabic
6 numeral. -
7 j. "Section"shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by a Roman numeral
8 and including one or more Paragraphs .
9 k. "Successors in Interest and Assigns"shall mean any person who acquires an
10 interest in the Property through purchase,lease,transfer, assignment, or otherwise, including those
11 who become a party to this Decree pursuant to Section XI.
12 III. DESCRIPTION OF FACILITY CONDITIONS
13 24. The South Baxter Property,known as the South J. H. Baxter Property/Renton ("South
14 Baxter Property"), is located at 5015 Lake Washington Boulevard North on the eastern shore of Lake
15 Washington in the northeastern portion of the City of Renton,in King County, Washington, as set
16 forth in Attachment A. The South Baxter Property occupies approximately 7 acres,three miles south
17 of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The South Baxter Property is relatively flat and is
18 situated within the northern portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain bordering the Lake
19 Washington shoreline. The Quendall Terminals property is located directly to the south of the .
20 Property. Further to the south is property currently occupied by the Barbee Mill. Interstate 405 is
21 approximately 500 feet to the east.
22 25. The South Baxter Property is bordered to the north by the North Baxter Property. The
23 North and South Baxter Properties have been determined to be separate facilities based on historic
24 operations, previous studies and previous Correspondence and agreements between J. H. Baxter and
25 Ecology,which defined a"Line of Demarcation"between the two Properties. The line of
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 5 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1- Demarcation was originally defined in the Renton-Baxter Remediation Security Interest Agreement
2 dated May 6, 1992 and subsequent Ecology correspondence. PQC and J.H. Baxter have submitted a
3 lot line adjustment application to formally segregate the North and South Baxter Properties. This
4 Consent Decree addresses the South Baxter Property. A separate Consent Decree, entered
5 simultaneously with this Consent Decree, addresses the North Baxter Property.
6 26. In 1873,Jeremiah Sullivan obtained all properties on the.May Creek Delta(Baxter,
7 Quendall Terminals, Pan Abode, Barbee Mill)from the U.S. government and sold them in 1875 to
8 James M. Colman. In 1902,the timber on the subject parcels was sold, and in 1903, a right-of-way
9 was deeded to Northern Pacific. The Northern Pacific rail line later became the Burlington Northern
10 Santa Fe rail line which currently abuts the Baxter Property.
11 27. The four properties remained within the Colman family through at least 1908, when
12 ownership of the subject parcels began to diverge. Peter Reilly took title to most of the waterfront
13 parcels in March of 1916. Between July and October of 1916,the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
14 completed the Lake Washington Ship canal,which lowered the level of Lake Washington by
15 approximately 8 feet(U.S. Geological Survey, 1983). This increased the land area of the waterfront
16 parcels, by exposing formerly submerged portions of the May Creek Delta.
17 28. The J. H. Baxter wood treating plant was built in 1955 upon the deltaic deposits of
18 May Creek exposed by the lowering of Lake Washington. Wood treating operations were
19 discontinued in 1981. Prior to 1955 there is no known record of industrial or commercial activity on
20 the site. Currently, all of the former wood treating equipment has been removed.
21 29. During the years of operation,the J. H. Baxter plant primarily used the Boulton
22 process to treat wood. Although butt tanks were used for some preservative applications,the plant
23 principally used single pressure vessels(retorts)to treat wood. Generally, pentachlorophenol was
24 used to treat poles and creosote was used to treat pilings.
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 6 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 30. The North Baxter Property was used principally for storage of untreated poles and
2 pilings. Wood was stored on site as part of inventory and to facilitate drying prior to treatment.
3 Treated wood was routinely produced upon demand and was temporarily stored on the South Baxter
4 Property prior to shipment by truck or rail.
5 31. The majority of the waste produced by J. H. Baxter between 1955 and 1981 was
6 process water sludges contaminated by pentachlorophenol and creosote. This process water was
7 generated from condensates and blowdown,and was evaporated in a cooling tower. Sludges were
8 produced as a result, and these were disposed of by J. H. Baxter in a class-1 landfill in Oregon.
9 32. The Baxter facility maintained a waste discharge permit(1965) and NPDES permit
10 (1971)for surface water discharge to Lake Washington. Surface water was collected in a depression
11 ("Baxter Lagoon"), on the southern portion of the site prior to discharge. A separating tank and a
12 skimming and settling pond were established,to remove potential oil components prior to discharge.
13 A drainage line from the bermed tankage area was occasionally opened to release storm water which
1.4 accumulated in the containment area.
15 33. During the course of plant operation, five to 11 aboveground storage tanks of varying
16 capacities were located near the operations buildings in the tank farm. The tank farm was contained
17 with a concrete slab and berm. Wood preserving chemicals stored in the tank farm included .
18 crystalline PCP, aromatic carrier oils, 5 percent PCP in solution, and creosote.
19 34. Based upon historical usage of chemicals at the site as well as analytical data
20 available from site investigation activities,the compounds of concern at the Facility are
21 pentachlorophenol(PCP)and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAHs). These compounds are
22 known to exist in both soil and groundwater at the site as well as in sediments of Baxter Cove.
23 35. • While dioxin/furan isomers were detected, in general,only more chlorinated, less
24 toxic compounds were encountered at this site(Woodward Clyde, 1990). Removal of source area
25 ' PAH and PCP,capping of residual soil impacts, and implementation of purchaser's development
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 7 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology
DivisionO 7
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 controls(clean soil cover and/or development features).are expected to sufficiently address any
2 concerns related to dioxins.
3 36. The areas of highest soil impacts coincide with the approximate locations of former
4 operations. In sampling locations in the former operation areas, concentrations tend to decrease with
5 depth. However, in locations downgradient of the former operation areas(e.g., BAX-6),soil impacts
6 are generally associated with the water table.
7 37. Past activities at the Facility have also resulted in impacts to groundwater quality.
8 Chemical compounds detected in groundwater include PAHs and PCP,which appear to be
9 associated with former operation areas. Carcinogenic PAHs(CPAHs)were detected in several wells
10 prior to 1990, but were only detected in wells BAX-1 and BAX-14 in 1990. These wells are located
11 j in areas associated with former operations. No carcinogenic PAHs were detected in wells located
12 near the shore(BAX-6,BAX-8A or BAX-8B),the only wells sampled in the most recent sampling
13 events in October 1998 and January 2000.
14 38. Areas of non-aqueous phase liquid(NAPL)are present at the Facility. The NAPL
15 areas are generally located in the vicinity of former operations on the Facility.
16 39. Former activities at the Facility have resulted in impacts to the adjacent sediments
17 predominantly on the fee-owned aquatic lands that are part of the Facility. Sediment samples
18 collected in Lake Washington near the Facility confirm that PAH and PCP contamination is
19 restricted to the interior of Baxter Cove.
20 40. Several investigations of potential contamination have been performed on the Facility
21 beginning in 1983 with an offshore sediment investigation of potential hazardous substances and a
22 subsurface hazardous waste investigation. In November, 1988, a Consent Decree was entered into •
23 by J. H. Baxter and Ecology for the purpose of conducting a preliminary Remedial Investigation(RI)
24 under the Model Toxics Control Act(MTCA) (No. 88-2-21599-5). The Consent Decree led to a
25 Renton-Baxter Security Interest Agreement dated May 6, 1992, which provided that the North Baxter
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 8 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0 1 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
1 ,
1 Property would act as security for certain South Baxter Property cleanup obligations. Upon entry of
_. 2 this Consent Decree, Consent Decree No. 88-2-21599-5 shall be superseded and of no further force
3 and effect,and the May 6, 1992 Renton-Baxter Security Interest Agreement will be released and of
4 no further force and effect. Comprehensive summaries of project area historical information, records
5 and environmental data have been provided in the Draft Remedial Investigation Report(Woodward
6 Clyde, 1990)conducted pursuant to the 1988 Consent Decree,and in multiple documents prepared
7 by ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation from 1997 to present.
8
IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
9
41. Defendant proposes to acquire the South Baxter Property(along with the North
10
Baxter Property)to facilitate eventual commercial,urban residential, and/or retail development,
11
either independently or as the northern portion of the potential Quendall Landing Development
12
Project("Project"), including adjacent properties,which could ultimately result in between
13
approximately 400,000 and 3.0 million square feet of development at the north end of Renton. The
14
South Baxter Property,along with the North Baxter Property is anticipated to include approximately
15
400,000 sq. ft. of development.
16
42. In 1989,the City of Renton began work on development of a Comprehensive Plan
17
affecting the Property and surrounding properties. Between 1990 and 1993, extensive public
18
hearings and meetings were held, and notification was provided to impacted property owners and the
19
general public concerning Comprehensive Plan land use alternatives and proposed Renton Zoning
20
Code amendments.
21
43. In addition,in 1996 and 1997, an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS") scoping
22
process was conducted in association with proposed development of the Facility. This EIS scoping
23
process involved significant public participation, including mailings, formal comment, and public
24
meetings.
25
26 '
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 9 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 44. Any property development will be completed.in accordance with the Renton
2 Comprehensive Plan and area-wide zoning Center Office Residential designation. Subject to the
3 requirements of the Baxter Mitigation Analysis Memorandum, such development will include
4 permanent public access to shoreline at the Baxter Property.
5 45. Any residential townhomes or condominiums on the South Baxter Property will be
6 built over structural concrete parking or other structures, placing the first occupied floor at least one•
7 level above the soil.
8 46. Two office buildings(approximately 200,000 square feet.each) and associated
9 parking may be located on the South Baxter Property. The proposed buildings are anticipated to be
10 five stories, or approximately 68 feet tall. Parking may be located as the first floor of the office
11 building or as separate structures.
12 47. The development would be designed to take advantage of the desirable location of
13 the South Baxter Property and will minimize adverse environmental impacts. Redevelopment will
14 facilitate permanent public access to the shoreline(through a gravel walking trail on the inland edge
15 of shoreline enhancements and observation stations),create a connection to existing recreational use
16 trails, and create transportation and parking improvements.
17 48. Development of the South Baxter Property is expected to create a significant number
18 of well-paying jobs and spur development in the north end of Renton. Substantial tax revenues
19 would be generated to benefit Renton and the state of Washington.
20 49. Defendant has complied with the State Environmental Policy Act("SEPA")
21 environmental review requirements for the proposed remedial actions to be performed. Ecology has
22 been established as the agency lead pursuant to SEPA. The SEPA Mitigated Determination of
23 Nonsignificance and Environmental Checklist are attached as Attachment H.
24
25
• 26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 10 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
Pb Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
•
1 V. WORK TO BE PERFORMED
2 50. Upon the Effective Date of this Decree, Defendant will perform the Cleanup Action
3 Plan described in Attachment B, including all attachments thereto, according to the schedule
4 provided therein. Defendant shall submit as-built documentation to Ecology to verify construction of
5 the cleanup and mitigation actions required by the Cleanup Action Plan. Cleanup activities include
6 source remediation,site grading to facilitate site redevelopment, soil capping,wetland mitigation,
7 . and confirmational groundwater monitoring. Source remediation includes removal of NAPL from
8 wells (BAX-14), sediment and soil excavation and off-site treatment or disposal, and in situ soil
9 mixing(stabilization). Source remediation activities will occur at prescribed locations according to
10 the Cleanup Action Plan. Coordination between site cleanup and redevelopment would minimize
11 disruption to the surrounding community. As such,the actual schedule for site cleanup may vary to
12 facilitate this coordination.
13 51. Defendant agrees not to perform any remedial actions for the release of Hazardous
14 Substances covered by this Decree, other than those required by this Decree,unless the parties agree
15 to amend the Decree to cover those actions. All work conducted under this Decree shall be done in
16 accordance with Chapter 173-340 WAC unless otherwise provided herein. All work conducted
17 pursuant to this Decree shall be done pursuant to the cleanup levels specified in the Cleanup Action
18 Plan(Attachment B).
19 52. Defendant agrees to record the Restrictive Covenant(Attachment C)with the Office
20 of the King County Recorder upon completion of the capital portion of the Cleanup Action Plan and
21 shall provide Ecology with proof of such recording within thirty(30) days of recording.
22 VI. ECOLOGY COSTS
23 53. Defendant agrees to pay all oversight costs incurred by Ecology pursuant to this
24 Decree. This oversight payment obligation shall not include costs already paid pursuant to the
25 Prepayment Agreement entered between Ecology and JAG Development Inc. dated October 2, 1996.
26 The oversight costs required to be paid under this Decree shall include work performed by Ecology
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 11 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT.DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 or its contractors for, or on,the Facility under Chapter 70.105D RCW, both before and after the
2 issuance of this Decree,for Decree preparation,negotiations,and administration. Ecology oversight
3 costs shall be calculated pursuant to WAC 173-340-550(2) and shall include direct staff costs, an
4 agency support cost multiplier, and a program support cost multiplier for all oversight costs.
5 54. Defendant agrees to pay Ecology oversight costs within ninety(90)days of receiving
6 from Ecology an itemized statement of costs that includes a summary of costs incurred, an
7 identification of involved staff, and the amount of time spent by involved staff members on the
8 project. Ecology shall,upon request,provide Defendant with a general statement of work
9 performed. Ecology shall prepare itemized statements of its oversight costs quarterly. Failure to pay
10 Ecology's costs within ninety(90) days of receipt of the itemized statement will result in interest
1.1 charges at the rate of twelve(12)percent per annum.
12 55. In the event Defendant disputes expenditures or the adequacy of documentation for
13 which reimbursement is sought,the parties agree to be bound by the dispute resolution process set
14 forth in Section XII.
15 VII. DESIGNATED PROJECT COORDINATORS
16 56. The project coordinator for Ecology is:
17 Gail Colburn
Toxics Cleanup Program
18 Department of Ecology
Northwest Regional Office
19 3190— 160th Avenue SE
Bellevue, WA 98008-5452
20 (206) 649-7265
21 The project coordinator for Defendant is:
22 Grant Hainsworth
ThermoRetec Consulting Corporation
23 1011 SW Klickitat Way, Suite 207
Seattle, WA 98134
24
"57. Each project coordinator shall be responsible for overseeing the implementation of
25
this Decree. The Ecology project coordinator will be Ecology's designated representative at the
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 12 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
1 Property. To the maximum extent possible, communications between Ecology and Defendant and
2 all documents, including reports, approvals, and other correspondence concerning the activities
3 performed pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Decree, shall be directed through the project
4 coordinators. The project coordinators may designate, in writing,working-level staff contacts for all
5 or portions of the implementation of Section V of this Decree, including the Cleanup Action Plan,
6 incorporated in this Decree as Attachment B. The project coordinators may agree to.minor
7 modifications to the work to be performed without formal amendments to this Decree. Minor
8 modifications will be documented in writing by Defendant and approved by Ecology.
9 58. Any party may change its respective project coordinator. Written notification shall be
10 given to the other party at least ten(10) days prior to the change.
11 VIII. PERFORMANCE
12 59. All work performed pursuant to this Decree shall be under the direction and
13 supervision, as necessary, of a professional engineer or hydrogeologist,or equivalent. Any
14 construction work must be under the supervision of a professional engineer. Defendant shall notify
15 Ecology in writing as to the identity of such engineer(s)or hydrogeologist(s) or others and of any
16 contractor(s) and subcontractor(s), including the contractor responsible for installation of required
17 mitigation actions,to be used in carrying out the terms of this Decree in advance of their
18 involvement at the Facility.
19 IX. CERTIFICATIONS
20 60. Defendant certifies that,to the best of its knowledge and belief, it has fully and
21 accurately disclosed to Ecology the information currently in its possession that relates to the
22 environmental conditions at the Facility, or to Defendant's right and title thereto.
23 61. Defendant represents and certifies that,to the best of its knowledge, it is not aware of
24 any facts that would give rise to liability to it under RCW 70.105D.040 prior to acquisition of the.
25 Baxter Property. •
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 13 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 62. Defendant represents and certifies its belief that redevelopment of the South Baxter
2 Property is not likely to contribute to the existing release or threatened release of Hazardous
3 Substances from the Facility, interfere with future remedial actions that may be needed at the
4 Facility, or increase health risks to persons at or in the vicinity of the Facility.
5 63. If any certification provided by Defendant pursuant to.this Section is not true,the
6 Covenant Not To Sue in Section XIV shall not be effective with respect to Defendant, and Ecology
7 reserves all rights it may have against Defendant.
8 X. PARTIES BOUND; CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY
9 64. The restrictions, obligations,and rights set forth in this Decree shall be binding upon
10 the parties to this Decree. Qualified Successors in Interest and Assigns may become parties to this
11 Decree at the option of Defendant,by following the amendment procedures set forth in Section XI.
12 65. Defendant shall implement contractual provisions that require all Successors in
13 Interest and Assigns to this Decree to comply with the applicable provisions of this Decree.
14 66. If proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns wish to become a party to this Decree,
15 Defendant and the proposed transferee(s) shall notify Ecology and the Attorney General's office of
16 the proposed transfer,the name of the proposed transferee(s),and the proposed transferee(s) intended
17 use of the South Baxter Property. The notification required by this Paragraph shall occur at least 30
18 days before the date of a proposed transfer of interests. Such notification shall be in the form of
19 Attachment E to this Decree.
• 20 67. In the event Defendant assigns all of its fee interest to a Successor in Interest or
21 Assign,and that Successor in Interest or Assign becomes a party to this Decree, at Ecology's sole
22 discretion and with its concurrence, Ecology shall thereafter look first to such successor for
23 performance of the requirements of this Decree, including, but not limited to, performance of the
24 work as described in Section V,and payments of Ecology costs described in Section VI.
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 14 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
•
1 68. Defendant shall further provide 30 days advance written notice to Ecology of
2 Defendant's intent to convey any fee interest in a substantial portion of the South Baxter Property.
3 No conveyance of title in the South Baxter Property shall be consummated by Defendant without
4 adequate provision for continued monitoring, operation and maintenance of the remedial actions
5 called for in this Decree. Failure of the Defendant or the proposed transferee to timely comply with
6 this Section's notification requirements does not in any way alter the rights and obligations of such
7 party as set forth in this Decree.
8 XL AMENDMENT OF CONSENT DECREE;
ADDING NEW PARTIES TO DECREE
9
69. This Decree may only be amended by a written stipulation among the parties to this
10
Decree that is thereafter entered and approved by order of the Court. Such amendment shall become
11
effective upon entry by the Court,or upon a later date if such date is expressly stated in the parties'
12
written stipulation or the Court so orders.
13
70. Amendments may cover any subject or be for any purpose agreed to by the parties to
14
this Decree. If Ecology determines that the subject of an amendment requires public input, Ecology
15
shall provide thirty(30) days' public notice prior to seeking entry of the amendment by the Court.
16
71. Whenever the Defendant contemplates conveying an interest in the Property to a
17
proposed Successor in Interest and Assign,the proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns may
18
request that the Decree be amended as provided for in this paragraph. The amendment to the Decree
19
shall be in the form of Attachment F,"Agreement of Successors in Interest and Assigns." Ecology
20
may withhold consent to an amendment making proposed Successors in Interest and Assigns a party
21
to this Decree only if Defendant or its Successors in Interest and Assigns is in violation or will be in
22
violation of a material term of this Decree.
23
72. The parties contemplate that various interests in the South Baxter Property may be
24
granted to parties who will become"Successors in Interest and Assigns",but who choose not to
25
become parties to this Decree. Examples include tenants leasing space in completed buildings,
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 15 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 lenders taking a security interest in all or a portion of the South Baxter Property and persons
2 obtaining limited possessory rights in the South Baxter Property. Nonetheless,such parties will be
3 entitled to the protections, if any, afforded by RCW 70.105D.040(4)(e)and(f).
4 XII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION
5 73. In the event a dispute arises as to an approval, disapproval,proposed modification, or
6 other decision or action by Ecology's project coordinator pertaining to implementation of the
7 Cleanup Action Plan,the parties shall use the dispute resolution procedure set forth below.
8 a. Upon receipt of the Ecology project coordinator's written decision, Defendant
9 has fourteen(14)days within which to notify Ecology's project coordinator of any objection to the
10 decision.
11 b. The parties' project coordinators shall then confer in an effort to resolve the
12 dispute. If the project coordinators cannot resolve the dispute within fourteen(14)days following
13 the conference,Ecology's project coordinator shall issue a written decision.
14 c. Defendant may then request Ecology management review of the decision.
15 This request shall be submitted in writing to the Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region
16 Manager within seven(7)days of receipt of Ecology's project coordinator's written decision.
17 d. Ecology's Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager shall conduct
18 a review of the dispute and shall issue a written decision regarding the dispute within thirty(30) days
19 of the Defendant's request for review. The Toxics Cleanup Program Northwest Region Manager's
20 decision shall be Ecology's final decision on the disputed matter.
21 74. If Ecology's final written decision is unacceptable to Defendant, Defendant has the
22 right to submit the dispute to the Court for resolution. The parties agree that one judge should retain
23 jurisdiction over this case and shall, as necessary,resolve any dispute arising under this Decree. For
24 disputes concerning Ecology's investigative and remedial decisions that arise under this Decree, the
25 Court shall review the actions or decisions of Ecology under an arbitrary and capricious standard.
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 16 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE ' Ecology Division
PO Box 40117 •
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 75. The parties may mutually agree to substitute an Alternative Dispute Resolution
2 (ADR)process, such as mediation, for the formal dispute resolution process set forth in this Section.
3 76. The parties agree to use the dispute resolution process in good faith and agree to
4 expedite,to the extent possible,the dispute resolution process whenever it is used. When either
5 party uses the dispute resolution process in bad faith or for purposes of delay,the other party may
6 seek sanctions.
7 77. The implementation of these dispute resolution procedures shall not provide a basis
8 for delay of any activities required in this Decree, unless Ecology agrees in writing to a schedule
9 extension or the Court so orders.
10 78. The parties agree that this Decree is not intended to alter any evidentiary burdens of
11 either party in any proceeding by Ecology for costs or claims involving the South Baxter Property.
12 XIII. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION
13 79. With regard to claims for contribution against Defendant,the parties intend that
14 Defendant will obtain the protection against claims for contribution for matters addressed in this
15 Decree pursuant to MTCA,RCW 70.105D.040(4)(d).
16 XIV. COVENANT NOT TO SUE; REOPENERS
17 80. In consideration of Defendant's compliance with the terms and conditions of this
18 Decree,Ecology agrees that compliance with this Decree shall stand in lieu of any and all
19 administrative, legal,and equitable remedies and enforcement actions("Actions") available to the
20 state against Defendant or Successors in Interest for releases or threatened releases of Hazardous
21 Substances at the Facility,provided such Actions pertain to Ha7.ardous Substances which Ecology
22 knows or believes to be located at the Facility as of the date of this Decree. This covenant is strictly
23 limited to the Facility as defined in Section II of this Decree and shown on Attachment D.
24
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 17 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 81. Reopeners: In the following circumstances, Ecology may exercise its full legal
2 authority to address releases of Hazardous Substances at the Facility, notwithstanding the Covenant
3 Not To Sue set forth above:
4 a. In the event Defendant fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this
5 Decree, including all attachments, and after written notice of noncompliance, such failure is not
6 cured by such Defendant within sixty(60)days of receipt of notice of noncompliance.
7 b. i In the event factors not known at the time of entry of this Agreement and not
8 disclosed to Ecology are discovered and such factors present a previously unknown threat to human
9 health or the environment and are.not addressed by the Cleanup Action Plan(Attachment B): If such
10 factors are discovered,Ecology shall give written notice to Defendant. Defendant will have sixty
11 (60)days from receipt of notice to propose a cure to the condition giving rise to the threat. If such
12 cure is acceptable to Ecology,Defendant and Ecology will negotiate an appropriate timetable for
13 implementation.
14 c. Upon Ecology's determination that actions beyond the terms of this Decree
15 are necessary to abate an emergency situation which threatens public health, welfare, or the
16 environment.
17 82. Applicability: The Covenant Not to Sue set forth above shall have no applicability
18 whatsoever to:
19 a. Criminal liability.
20 b. Actions against PLPs not party to this Decree.
21 c. Liability for damages for injury to, destruction of, or loss of natural,resources.
22 83. Ecology retains all of its legal and equitable rights against all persons, except as
23 otherwise provided in this Decree.
24
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 18 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
f 1
I - _
1 XV. RESERVATION OF.RIGHTS
2 84. Defendant reserves all rights and defenses which it may have and which are not
3 otherwise addressed in this Decree, including the right to seek contribution or cost recovery for funds
4 expended pursuant to this Decree,subject to the limitations in Section XXVII.
5 85. Except as provided herein for the parties, this Decree does not grant any rights or
6 affect any liabilities of any person, firm, or corporation or subdivision or division of state, federal, or
7 local government.
8 XVI. DISCLAIMER
9 86. This Decree does not constitute a representation by Ecology that the Property is fit for
10 any particular purpose.
11 XVII. RETENTION OF RECORDS
12 87. Defendant shall preserve, during the pendency of this Decree and for ten(10)years
13 from the date this Decree is no longer in effect as provided in Section XXIX,all records,reports,
14 documents,and underlying data in its possession relevant to the implementation of this Decree and
15 shall insert in contracts with project contractors and subcontractors a similar record retention
16 requirement. Defendant shall retain all monitoring data so long as monitoring is ongoing as provided
17 in the Cleanup Action Plan(Attachment B). In the event the Cleanup Action Plan(Attachment B) is
18 modified to terminate monitoring, Defendant shall retain all monitoring data until ten(10)years after
19 monitoring is completed. Upon request of Ecology, Defendant shall make all nonarchived records
20 available to Ecology and allow access for review: All archived records shall be made available to
21 Ecology within a reasonable period of time.
22 XVIII. PROPERTY ACCESS
23 • 88. Defendant grants'to Ecology,its employees, agents,contractors, and authorized
24 representatives an irrevocable right to enter upon the Property with reasonable notice and at any
25 reasonable time for purposes of allowing Ecology to monitor or enforce compliance with this
26 Decree. The right of entry granted in this Section is in addition to any right Ecology may have to
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 19 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-01 17
FAX(360)438-7743
•
•
1 enter onto the Property pursuant to specific statutory or regulatory authority. Consistent with
2 Ecology's responsibilities under state and federal law, Ecology, and any persons acting for it, shall
3 use reasonable efforts,to minimize any interference and use reasonable effort not to interfere with the
4 operations of Defendant or Successors in Interest by any such entry. In the event Ecology enters the
5 Property for reasons other than emergency response, Ecology agrees that it shall provide reasonable
6 notice to Defendant of any planned entry, as well as schedules and locations of activity on the
7 Property. Ecology further agrees to accommodate reasonable requests that it modify its scheduled
8 entry or activities at the Property. Notwithstanding any provision of the Decree, Ecology retains all
9 of its access authorities and access rights, including enforcement authorities related thereto, under
10 MTCA and any other applicable state statute or regulation.
11 XIX. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER APPLICABLE LAWS
12 89. All actions carried out by Defendant or Successors in Interest pursuant to this Decree
13 shall be done in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including
14 applicable permitting requirements. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(1),the known and applicable
15 substantive requirements of Chapters 70.94, 70.95,70.105, 75.20, 90.48,and 90.58 RCW, and any
16 laws requiring or authorizing local government permits or approvals for remedial action,have been
17 included in the Cleanup Action Plan and the RI and FS and are incorporated by reference here as
18 binding requirements in this Decree.
19 Defendant has a continuing obligation to determine whether additional permits or approvals.
20 addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1)would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this
21 Decree. In the event either Defendant or Ecology determines that additional permits or approvals
22 addressed in RCW 70.105D.090(1)would otherwise be required for the remedial action under this
23 Decree, it shall promptly notify the other party of this determination. Ecology shall determine
24 whether Ecology or Defendant shall be responsible to contact the appropriate state and/or local
25 agencies. If Ecology so requires, Defendant shall promptly consult with the appropriate state and/or
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 20 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 local agencies and provide Ecology with written documentation from those agencies of the
2 substantive requirements those agencies believe are applicable to the remedial action. Ecology shall
3 make the determination on the additional substantive requirements that must be met by Defendant
4 and on how Defendant must meet those requirements. Ecology shall inform Defendant in writing of
5 these requirements. Once established by Ecology, the additional requirements shall be enforceable
6 requirements of this Decree. Defendant shall not begin or continue the remedial action potentially
7 subject to the additional requirements until Ecology makes its final determination.
8 Ecology shall ensure that notice and opportunity for comment are provided to the public and
9 appropriate agencies prior to establishing the substantive requirements under this Section.
10 90. Pursuant to RCW 70.105D.090(2), in the event that Ecology determines that the
11 exemption from complying with the procedural requirements of the laws referenced in RCW
12 70.105D.090(1)would result in the loss of approval from a federal agency necessary for the state to
13 administer any federal law, such exemption shall not apply, and Defendant or Successors in Interest
14 shall comply with both the procedural and substantive requirements of the laws referenced in RCW
15 70.105D.090(1).
16 XX. SAMPLING,DATA REPORTING,AND AVAILABILITY
17 91. With respect to the implementation of this Decree,Defendant shall make the results
18 of all sampling, laboratory reports, and/or test results generated by it,or on its behalf,available to
19 Ecology in hard copy and on electronic disk. Data submitted on disk shall be in a format acceptable
20 to Ecology for importation for use as a relational database into databases and/or spreadsheet software
21 commonly available.
22 92. If requested by Ecology, Defendant shall allow Ecology and/or its authorized
23 representatives to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Defendant pursuant to
24 the implementation of this Decree. Defendant shall notify Ecology seven(7)days in advance of any
25 sample collection or work activity at the Property. Ecology shall,upon request, allow Defendant or
26 -
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 its authorized representatives to take split or duplicate samples of any samples collected by Ecology
2 pursuant to the implementation of this Decree provided Defendant does not interfere with Ecology's
3 sampling. Ecology shall endeavor to notify Defendant prior to any sample collection activity.
4 XXI. PROGRESS REPORTS
5 93. Defendant shall submit to Ecology written monthly progress reports beginning thirty
6 (30)days prior to initiation of the Cleanup Action Plan(Attachment B)and continuing until
7 initiation of performance monitoring. After that time,progress reports shall be submitted quarterly,
8 or at other intervals as approved by Ecology. The progress reports shall describe the actions taken
9 during the reporting period to implement the requirements of this Decree. The progress report shall
10 include the following:
11 a. A list of on-site activities that have taken place during the reporting period.
12 b. A detailed description of any deviations from required tasks not otherwise
13 documented in project plans or amendment requests.
14 c. A description of all deviations from the schedule during the current reporting
15 period and any planned deviations in the upcoming reporting period.
16 d. For any deviations in schedule,a plan for recovering lost time and maintaining
17 compliance with the schedule.
18 e. A list of deliverables for the upcoming reporting period if different from the
19 schedule.
20 94. All progress reports shall be submitted by the tenth day of the month in which they
21 are due after the Effective Date of this Decree.
22 XXII. EXTENSION OF SCHEDULE
23 95. An extension of schedule shall be granted only when a request for an extension is
24 submitted in a timely fashion, generally at least thirty(30)days prior to expiration of the deadline for
25
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 22 ATTORNEY.GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE - Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0 1 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
ems®
•
1 which the extension is requested, and good cause exists for granting the extension. All extensions
2 shall be requested in writing. The request shall specify the reason(s)the extension is needed.
3 96. An extension shall be granted only for such period of time as Ecology determines is
4 reasonable under the circumstances. A requested extension shall not be effective until approved by
5 Ecology or the Court. Ecology shall act upon any written request for extension in a timely fashion.
6 It shall not be necessary to formally amend this Decree pursuant to Section XI when a schedule
7 extension is granted.
8 97. The burden shall fall on Defendant to demonstrate to the satisfaction of Ecology that
9 the request for such an extension has been submitted in a timely fashion and that good cause exists
10 for granting the extension. Good cause includes,but is not limited to,the following:
11 a. Circumstances beyond the reasonable control and despite the due diligence of
12 Defendant, including delays in obtaining necessary permits, delays caused by unrelated third parties
13 or Ecology, such as(but not limited to) delays by Ecology in reviewing, approving,or modifying
14 documents submitted by Defendant.
15 b. Acts of God, including fire, flood, blizzard,extreme temperatures, storm, or
16 other unavoidable casualty.
17 c. Endangerment as described in Section XXIII.
18 Ecology may extend the schedule for a period not to exceed ninety(90)days, except where a
19 longer extension is needed as a result of:
20 a. Delays in the issuance of a necessary permit which was applied for in a timely
21 manner.
22 b. Other circumstances deemed exceptional or extraordinary by Ecology.
23 However, neither increased costs of performance of the terms of the Decree nor changed
24 economic circumstances shall be considered circumstances beyond the reasonable control of
25 Defendant.
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 23 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0 1 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
C..
1 Ecology shall give Defendant written notification in a timely fashion of any extensions.
2 granted pursuant to this Decree.
3 XXIII. ENDANGERMENT
4 98. If, during implementation of this Decree, Ecology determines that there is an actual or
5 imminent danger to human health or to the environment, Ecology may order Defendant to stop
6 further implementation of this Decree for such period of time as needed to abate the danger or may
7 petition the Court for an order as appropriate. During any stoppage of work under this Section, the
8 obligations of Defendant shall be suspended,and the time period for performance of that work, as
9 well as the time period for any other work dependent upon the work which is stopped, shall be
10 extended,pursuant to Section XXII of this Decree, for such period of time as Ecology determines is
11 reasonable under the circumstances.
12 99. In the event Defendant determines that activities undertaken in furtherance of this
13 Decree or any other circumstances or activities are creating an imminent danger to human health or
14 to the environment,Defendant may stop implementation of this Decree for such period of time
15 necessary for Ecology to evaluate the situation and determine whether Defendant should proceed
16 with implementation of the Decree or whether the work stoppage should be continued until the
17 danger is abated. Defendant shall notify Ecology's project coordinator as soon as possible,but no
18 later than twenty-four(24)hours after stoppage of work, and thereafter provide Ecology with
19 documentation of the basis for the work stoppage. If Ecology disagrees with Defendant, Ecology
20 may order Defendant to resume implementation of this Decree. If Ecology concurs with the work
21 stoppage, Defendant's obligations shall be suspended,and the time period for performance of that
22 work,as well as the time period for any other work dependent on the work which was stopped, shall
23 be extended,pursuant to Section XXII of this Decree,for such period of time as Ecology determines
24 is reasonable under the circumstances. Any disagreements pursuant to this Section shall be resolved .
25 through the dispute resolution procedures in Section XII.
26
2
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 24 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98 504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
1
1 XXIV. PERIODIC REVIEW
2 100. As remedial actions, including long term monitoring, continue at the site,the parties
3 agree to review the progress of remedial actions at the site, and to review the data accumulated as a
4 result of site monitoring pursuant to WAC 170-340-420.
5 XXV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLETION AND DELISTING
6 101. Upon completion of the capital portion of remedial actions specified in the Cleanup
7 Action Plan(Attachment B),Ecology shall issue a Partial Certificate of Completion for the capital
8 ; portion of the remedial actions. Upon completion of the remaining remedial actions as described in
9 Attachment B, except any necessary long term monitoring, and,upon confirmation that cleanup
10 standards have been met, Ecology will issue a Certificate of Completion. Unless Ecology becomes
11 aware of circumstances at the Facility that present a previously unknown threat to human health or
12 the environment, Ecology shall,within thirty(30)days of issuance of the Certificate of Completion,
13 propose to remove the Facility from the Hazard Ranking List,pursuant to WAC 173-340-330(4).
14 XXVI. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS
15 102. To the extent allowed by law, Defendant and its Successors in Interest(hereinafter
16 collectively the"Indemnitors")agree to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the state of
17 Washington, its employees,and agents from any and all claims or causes of action for death or
18 injuries to persons or for loss or damage to property arising from or on account of acts or omissions
19 of Indemnitors,their officers,employees,,agents,or contractors in entering into and implementing
20 this Decree. However,Indemnitors shall not indemnify the,state of Washington nor save nor hold its
21 employees and agents harmless from any claims or causes of action arising out of the negligent acts
22 or omissions of the state of Washington,or the employees or agents of the state, in implementing the
23 activities pursuant to this Decree. In any claims against the state by any employee of the
24 Indemnitors,the indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by the limitation on the
25 amount or type of damages, compensation, or benefits payable by or for the Indemnitors under
26 workmen's compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefits acts.
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 25 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 9 8504-01 1 7
FAX(360)438-7743
1 XXVII. CLAIMS AGAINST THE STATE
2 103. Defendant hereby agrees that it will not seek to recover any costs accrued in
3 implementing the remedial action required by this Decree from the state of Washington or any of its
4 agencies other than loans or grants from the State.Toxics Control Account or any Local Toxics
5 Control Account for any costs incurred in implementing this Decree. Except as provided above,
6 however, Defendant expressly reserves its right to seek to recover any costs incurred in
7 implementing this Decree from any other potentially liable person.
8 XXVIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
9 104. Public participation shall be accomplished by implementing the Public Participation
10 Plan attached as Attachment G. Ecology shall maintain the responsibility for public participation in
11 accordance with WAC 173-340-600(8)(g). Defendant shall help coordinate and implement public
12 participation for the Property as required by Ecology.
13 XXIX. DURATION OF DECREE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION
14 105. This Decree shall remain in effect and this Court shall retain jurisdiction over both the
15 subject matter of this Decree and the parties for the duration of the performance of the terms and
16 provision of this Decree for the purpose of enabling any of the parties to apply to the Court, as
17 provided in the dispute resolution process set forth in Section XII, and the amendment process set
18 forth in Section XI, at any time for such further order, direction,and relief as may be necessary or
19 appropriate to ensure that obligations of the parties have been satisfied. The Decree shall remain in
20 effect until the parties agree otherwise or until Defendant has been notified by Ecology in writing
21 that the requirements of this Decree have been satisfactorily completed.
22 XXX. PUBLIC NOTICE AND WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT
23 106. This Decree has been the subject of public notice and comment as required by RCW
24 70.105D.040(4)(a). As a result of this process, Ecology has found that this Decree will lead to a
25 more expeditious cleanup of Hazardous Substances at the Property, in compliance with applicable
26 cleanup standards, and is in the public interest.
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 26 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
1 107. If the Court withdraws its consent, this Decree shall be null and void at the option of
2 any party,and the accompanying Complaint shall be dismissed without costs and without prejudice.
3 In such an event,no party shall be bound by the requirements of this Decree.
4 XXXI. SEVERABILITY
5 108. If any section, subsection,sentence,or clause of this Agreement is found to be illegal,
6 invalid, or unenforceable, such illegality, invalidity, or unenforceability will not affect the legality,
7 validity, or enforceability of the Agreement as a whole or of any other section, subsection, sentence,
8 or clause.
9 XXXII. EFFECTIVE DATE
10 109. The Effective Date of this Decree is the final date when both this Decree has been
11 1 entered by the Court and the closing of the property purchase is completed as defined in the Property
12 Purchase Agreement between Port Quendall Company and J. H.Baxter& Co.
13 SO ORDERED this / d day of 711.4 ____ ,2000.
14
15 ' / (A'44e 'Pe/
16 Judge, King County Superior Court
Cv-t•�f F)"-o T G+•-
The undersigned parties enter into this Prospective Purchaser Consent Decree on the date
17 '
specified below.
18
PORT QUENDALL COMPANY, a ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE
19 1 Washington corporation
20 I
/t(Al0
21 Pri By: -e-1 Name. ,Ply C_ M4 R71 Printed Name: TA,,,�, s �t7C r,�,1/
22 Date: / Date: A7/ 'c
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
23
24 By: ( C
Printed Name: 1
25 Date:
26
PROSPECTIVE PURCHASER 27 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON
CONSENT DECREE Ecology Division
PO Box 40117
South Baxter Olympia,WA 98504-0117
FAX(360)438-7743
May 22,2002 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
Lesley Nishibiva. MAY 2 4 2002
City of Renton
Development Planning . . RECEIVED
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
File no.: LUA-02-040
PP, ECF, Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
4101 &4201 Lake Washington Blvd(between N. 40th &43rd)
Dear Lesley:
I would like the opportunity to comment on the project. It appears very sad that this is
the last piece of semi-developed land on South Lake Washington, and this land is going
to build stupid town homes. It would seem that our neighbors and city would save the
land for the environment and let the land become a forest again. Maybe an animal and
salmon habitat could be considered. Trees can be planted right on the shore to shade the
water vs. cutting them down so people can have a lake view. The spawning sockeye
salmon need help to survive to see their spawning grounds in the Cedar River. Doesn't
the City of Renton have a vision for the future or want to protect our green space?
Maybe we can leave a legacy and the Nature Conservancy can buy the land?
If my first request is not considered,then I am mainly concerned about the pair of Osprey
and their babies. The top of the silo is a nesting ground for a pair of Osprey, which
returns yearly. The Barbee Mill Co. is proud of the Osprey and has a wonderful website
also: ospreynest.org
The planning needs to protect the Osprey from disruption during the construction phase,
clean up phase, and for future years when greedy homeowners move in and want more
land for their own selfish purposes. I hope that serious consideration will be given to
always protecting the Osprey from the new owners and builders.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Leslie Kodish1111
5021 Ripley Lane N. #106
Renton, WA 98056
May 21, 2002 DEVELOPMENT P
CITY OF RENTON ING
Ms. Lesley Nishihira MAY 2 2 `'"-1
Project Manager RECEIVED
Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way •
Renton WA. 98055
re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Please enter me as a party of record and send any correspondence to me as I
own property adjacent to the Barbee site. Mail correspondence to Greg Fawcett
D.D.S. P. O. Box 1029 Fall City WA 98024.
I am in favor of the proposed development. In fact I would like to offer to
increase the scope of the development by selling development rights from my
property and transfer them so the Barbee site could have additional townhomes
above the current proposal level. Please see the enclosed letter dated February
28th 2002. Please send copies of this correspondence to the developer of the
Barbee Site. -
Sincerely,
--)26/V1 2')1.44-1)7°'
Greg Fawcett, D.D.S.
February 28,2002
Ms. Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager
Renton City Hall,6th Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,Washington 98055
Re: Development Credits
Dear Ms. Lind,
The purpose of this letter is to propose to the planning commission the concept of selling development
credits within the City of Renton. The commission would forward their recommendations to the Council
to draft an ordinance to that end.The idea is not new. In fact,it is my understanding that both the city of
Redmond and King County have been utilizing the concept for years,and have such ordinances in
place. The concept is as follows:a property owner such as myself who has eight acres zoned R-8
would in a perfect world have 64 residential units,. I would sell my development credits to a developer
who could increase the density of homes on another piece of property by 64 units above it's current
allowed zoning. This would provide benefits to all three parties. 1)The property owner, 2)'The
developer,and 3)City of Renton. The property owner receives compensation for the sale of
development credits. The developer purchases each development credit at a lower cost than his
ground cost on his site. The developer would increase his units,in this example,on lakefront property,
by 64. The sale of 64 additional townhomes on lakefront would dramatically increase the profitability of
the entire project.
The benefit to the city would be to preserve open space and vistas,protect sensitive areas such as
wetlands and steep slopes,and to provide for increased buffering along salmon bearing streams such
as May Creek.The positive economic impact to the city would be having upper income residences
clustered to a greater density in a smaller footprint. For the neighborhood and surrounding area there
would be no net gain in the number of units,therefore,the impact to the environment would remain
neutral. In essence,you would be clustering more units to a greater density on a smaller footprint. The
concept would not have to be limited to residential property and could include all property such as
commercial or industrial.
The increase in profitability for the developer could possibly allow for some construction by the
developer of low-income housing as a condition of the development. The city and developer could
choose other locations in the city that would benefit from revitalization and construction of new low-
income housing. An area might be selected that is in an older,run down condition that would benefit
those of modest means.
I grew up in Renton and currently own property there. Now, many years later,I see the potential for a
brighter future for the city. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Greg Fawcett, D.D.S.
cc Donald Erickson, Susan Carlson,Toni Nelson, Dan Clawson, Randy Corman, Kathy Keolker-
Wheeler, King Parker, Don Persson,Terri Briere
•
4 1... ...;
. ID VE:LOP;MENT•SERVI•C�ES .DIV ISION:.: .:
. .... . , . ...
• S •
.:... .:... . ... ...: , . s; :s
::....:
. ... .... .
,..:.. ;,; .. ....:w.athi .�3Dfeet of.te; ub�ecite,::...... .: : ...... :.... ..v..I �.
I
PROJECT NAME: Barbee Mill
APPLICATION NO: f.. tip (� l-UL( 0 p p� 1=L"
The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services
Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development,
NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER
Johnson Stewart W 4100 Lake Washington Blvc).N#A10 Rento 221200 0010
Mclaughlin Properties Lie 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10 Rento 1 221200 0020
Youngblood Jon C 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10 Rento 221200 0030
Wywrot Lois R 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A10 Rento 221200 0040
Igelmund Darrell&Linda 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 Rento 221200 0050
Hutton Ronald E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 Rento 221200 0060
Luger Therese M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 Rento 221200 0070
Igelmund Darrell&Linda 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#A20 Rento 221200 0080
Gurel Mehmet 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B10 Rento 221200 0090
Gibson Lance M/Caren M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B10 Rento 221200 0100
Flores Maria 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B10 Rento 221200 0110
Kelly Kimberly Ann 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B10 Rento 221200 0120
Cruze Rande R/Celia E;Konn Alan R 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 Rento 221200 0130
Gurel Mehmet 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 Rento 221200 0140
Carl Kenneth J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 Rento 221200 0150
Dapello Cheryl 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#B20 Rento 221200 0160
Harrison James P&Jane M 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Rento 221200 0170
Ernst Lee E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Rento 221200 0180
Lew Kevin Anthoney/Jennifer K 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Rento 221200 0190
Castillo Juan Francisco Anguiano 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C10 Rento 221200 0200
Good Bruno&Ann E 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20 Rento 221200 0210
' Harwood Charles H/Sharon Lynn 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20 Rento 221200 0220
Bagby Steven M;Lee Angela R 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20 Rento 221200 0230
Muscat James P&Jane M - 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#C20 Rento 221200 0240
Gibson Gary J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10 Rento 221200 0250
Newing Andrew H 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10 Rento 221200 0260
Allen Colleen 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10 Rento 221200 0270
Wagner Beverly J 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D10 Rento 221200 0280
Mcclulloch Brian D 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D20 Rento 221200 0290
Houser Paul W Jr&Amy S 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D20 Rento 221200 0300
Nagamine Family Trust Pt 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D20 Rento 221200 0310
Ruegge Steven A 4100 Lake Washington Blvd N#D20 Rento 221200 0320
J H Baxter/Co 4500 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 292405 9005
Barbee Forest Products Inc Lake Wash Blvd N Renton 322405 9005
Hicks Gardner W *No Site Address*Renton 322405 9036
Baldwin Donald P 4017 Park Ave N Renton 98056 322405 9039
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
(Attach additional sheets, if necessary) APR 0 5 2002
RECEIVED
~ (Continued)
. NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL
NUMBER
Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Dev 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Dev 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Dev 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9049
Port Quendall Company;Fka Jag Dev 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9049
Thomson Neil 4016 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9050
Helina Patricia S M 4004 N 40Th St Renton 98055 322405 9058
Hicks Gardner _ 4008 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 322405 9059
Fawcett Clarissa *No Site Address*Renton 322405 9081
Barbee Forest Products Inc 4101 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 1 334270 0005
Hunt Margaret E 3908 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 334270 0415
Hunt Thomas R/Caryl J 3916 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton 9805 334270 0425
Nicoli Bruno I&Sarah C *No Site Address*Renton 334270 0427
•
• . Applicant Certification
/�vr� ,
1,
711-6,--t
, hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property
(Print Name)
owners and their addresses were obtained from:
ir• Title Company Records
❑ King County Assessors Records
o0..vo
Signed Date 3- a7. Q Q�.1- 7......�• �- fie°►
(Applic $ • �ssio4;�• Gee
NOTARY >° 'b �• �- i �' ei
ATTESTED: Subscrib a sworn before me, a Notary Pu fic, in and for the A ° of NdSti ,
residing at the of Y . r3 0o.�d.�
signed t°ae©�wlA®H1VI_.„--
(Notary Pu 1'c)
. . . :FisrOity of: tehton Use'•. •,,. .<'
:.MARILYN
R Y
A
..:.. ..:::.
•
0,:: , • .-
:i; �. .s . '.h'ereb. ;'certif... ..- .. . .. ..'.. .... otices:of;th :ro bs• STATE t3E:: .'A.•
.. .. Y YJIto::,
`,Ci Em to eo ••.. :,. ..:.•: :•:�
'.e•ach,•listed• �ro pert• '•:owner>o" •. 4: •• .1CINE.....• •2003 :i
Signed --i'y ',: r` '; ...: .:-_ ;•Date'. • 4../7i . —
NOTARY •
: ' '
•
ATT T: Subscribed•arid;sworn'before.me,allotary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing'
at c� -r�- on'tlie I.1 'day. of• •` . 7)(3 :'•' ,200A-
Signed '74/ ' _ T1 L .i.a. ti
�
listprop.d YN '.4 CHEFF '
REV °miff APPOINTMENT EXPIRES:6-29-03 •
2
,I
119050002508 119050004009 362915006005
ANDERSON MARY M ANDERSON MARY M APPLESTONE STEVEN J
1133'N 38TH ST 1133 N 38TH ST 1204 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200023002 322405903905 322405903400
BAGBY STEVEN M+LEE ANGELA R BALDWIN DONALD P BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#C203 4017 PARK AVE N BOX 359
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055
334270000501 334270052809 334270063806
BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS INC BARTHELME BONITA M BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD
4101 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3919 MEADOW AVENUE N 25323 42ND PL S
RENTON WA 98057 RENTON WA 98056 KENT WA 98032
334270064002 362915001006 334270051207
BENCHMARK CONSTRUCTION LTD BERG JACK+ELEANOR BERGMAN TODD&SHELLY
25323 42ND PL S 3807 PARK AVE N 3813 MEADOW AVE N
KENT WA 98032 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270044509 334270044004 334270007001
BLOOD J D&P L BLOOD JAMES D+PERRI L BOYDSTON TONY
3713 PARK AVE N 3713 PARK AVE N 3901 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053500 334270024006 292405900500
BREWIS DANIEL BURDICK JONATHAN R BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE ATTN:PROP
1317 N 40TH ST 3713 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N PO BOX 96189
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 FORT WORTH TX 76161
334270053302 221200015008 334270053807
CANTU OSCAR LUIS CARL KENNETH J CARLSON RUSSEL I
3927 MEADOW AVE N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#B203 1409 N 40TH
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200001008 221200013003 221200016006
CROSSMAN CHERYL A CRUZE RANDE R+CELIA E DAPELLO CHERYL
4100 LAKE WASH.BLVD A-101 5105 HIGHLAND DR 1420 NW GILMAN BLVD#2268
RENTON WA 98056 BELLEVUE WA 98006 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
362915008001 362916002003 334270041000
DENAXAS BASIL DENISON STEVEN+ELIZABETH DENNEY ROBERT K+NANCY H
1124 N 38TH ST 1100 N 38TH ST 3818 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270020004 334270044202 334270044103
DENNISON DAYTON P DIETSCH CHARLES C DINEEN JENNIFER A
3717 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3737 PARK AVE N 3719 PARK AV N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
(
A i , -
119050003001 119050003704 334270012605
DRAGSETH R DRAGSETH ROLF S ERIKSON BRUCE E+MARY R
1113 N 38TH ST 1113 N 38TH 3815 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
221200018002 334270014908 322405901008
ERNST LEE E EVANS MARTIN E+KIMBERLY A J FAWCETT CLARISSA
4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C102 3811 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4008 MEADOW AVE N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405908102 322405904309 334270038808
FAWCETT CLARISSA FAWCETT CLARISSA M FEROGLIA GARY A+WORTMAN SHA
4008 MEADOW AVE N 4008 MEADOW AVE N 1015 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200011007 221200025007 221200010009
FLORESAN MS GIBSON GARY J GIBSON LANCE M+CAREN M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASH BLVD N D-101 4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#B102
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200021006 221200009001 221200014001
GOOD BRUNO+ANN E GUREL MEHMET GUREL MEHMET
605 S 194TH ST PO BOX 1921 PO BOX 1921
DES MOINES WA 98148 LANCASTER CA 93539 LANCASTER CA 93539
334270038006 334270049102 362915007003
HAMILTON EDITH M HAMILTON JESS R HANCOCK MARK B
3714 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3720 PARK PO BOX 88811
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 TUKWILA WA 98138
221200022004 322405905405 322405905801
HARWOOD CHARLES H+SHARON LY HAUER ALFRED H HELINA PATRICIA S M
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#C202 1330 N 40TH ST 4004 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053906 334270041802 322405905900
HENDERSON SARA HERTEL MARSHA JANICE HICKS GARDNER
1325 N 40TH ST 3836 LK WASH BLVD N 4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
322405903608 334270038709 221200030007
HICKS GARDNER W HIEMSTRA SYBOUT PETRONELLA HOUSER PAUL W JR&AMY S
4008 LAKE WASH BLVD N#4 3720 LK WASH BLV N 2230 SQUAK MTN LOOP SW
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 ISSAQUAH WA 98027
334270041505 334270042503 221200006007
HUNT MARGARET E HUNT THOMAS R+CARYL J HUTTON RONALD E
3908 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3916 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#A202
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
P
1. , 1
221200005009 221200008003 119050001500
IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA IGELMUND DARRELL&LINDA ISHAM MAXINE
900'87TH AVE NE 900 87TH AVE NE 1209 N 38TH ST
MEDINA WA 98039 MEDINA WA 98039 RENTON WA 98056
119050000502 119050001005 221200017004
JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JACOBSON DONALD+PEARL JELINEK JANE M
3741 PARK AVE N 3741 PARK AVE N 2259 74TH SE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040
322405906205 362915003002 221200012005
JONES JOCELYN C JORGENSEN ERIK H KELLY KIMBERLY ANN
1424 N 40TH ST 1216 N 38TH ST 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#B104
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270021101 362916001005 334270050209
KENDRICK JOYCE KOLESAR LARRY+SUSAN M KOLYTIRIS PETER+CARLA G
3715 LK WN BLVD N 1030 NORTH 38TH ST 1308 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270053708 334270038105 334270038204
KULLAMA PAUL J LE SELL SHIRLEY J LESELL SHIRLEY J
1417 N 40TH ST 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N 3708 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
221200019000 119050002003 334270019006
LEW KEVIN ANTHONY+JENNIFER LIEVERO LAURA A LINDAHL KEVIN L
4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD#103 1203 N 38TH ST BYUS REBECCA A
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 3719 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
334270053203 334270017604 221200007005
LISSMAN OLGA A LITTLEMAN VIKTORIA LUGER THERESE M
3930 PARK AVE N 3805 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N 4100 LK WA BLVD N#A203
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270049607 322405908300 334270038501
MACKAY JOHN D MARSH DOUGLAS R MARTIN FREDERICK L&SUSAN
3734 PARK AVE N BROWN GLORIA JEAN 1101 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 1328 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056
RENTON WA 98056
221200029009 221200002006 322405904507
MCCULLOCH BRIAN D MCLAUGHLIN PROPERTIES L L C MCMICHAEL TERENCE E
12046 67TH AVE S P O BOX 60106 &BARBARA
SEATTLE WA 98178 RENTON WA 98058 4005 PARK AVENUE NORTH
RENTON WA 98056
334270051009 362915004000 334270038600
MCNEELY CYRUS M MILLS RONALD W MOULIJN JOHAN P
3810 PARK AVE N 1212 N 38TH &GEERTRUDE
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 3726 LAKE WASH BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
r
221200024000 221200031005 221200026005
MUSCAT JAMES P&JANE M NAGAMINE AKIRA+HIDEKO NEWING ANDREW H
1308 QUEEN AVE NE 2783 FREEDOM BL 8815 116TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056 WATSONVILLE CA 95076 RENTON WA 98056
334270042701 334270044301 322405904101
NICOLI BRUNO I&SARAH C OTSU MAKOTO PALKA ADAM&EVA
3404 BURNETT AVE N 3725 PARK AVE N 808 N 33RD ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056
334270041208 362916007002 334270052502
PETETT J SCOTT PIPKIN GARY C&YVONNE M POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
21ST 1120 N 38TH PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051900 334270052106 334270052304
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION
HIGH POINT LLC HIGH POINT LLC HIGH POINT LLC
PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023 PO BOX 3023
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270052403 292405901508 322405904903
POOL BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION ROD STEVENS ROD STEVENS
HIGH POINT LLC PORT QUENDALL CO.,do VULCAN,INC. PORT QUENDALL CO.,do VULCAN,INC.
PO BOX 3023 505 5TH AVE S 505 5TH AVE S
RENTON WA 98056 SEATTLE WA 98104 SEATTLE WA 98104
362915002004 334270026001 334270025003
POSTLEWAIT H L&D M PROVOST ALAN E PROVOST ALAN W+CYNTHIA M
3805 PARK AVE N PO BOX 1965 PO BOX 1965
RENTON WA 98056 GIG HARBOR WA 98335 GIG HARBOR WA 98335
334270041406 292405900203 334270038402
QAASIM TASLEEM T QUENDALL TERMINALS RANCOURT DEWEY A+
3830 LAKE WASHINGTON BL N PO BOX 477 LOIS A TT
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 3724 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
362916003001 334270053609 334270052007
RANZ MARK K RICHARDS MELISSA A RIGOS MARK J
1106 N 38TH ST 1401 N 40TH ST 1309 N 39TH PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270051504 221200032003 362916005006
ROBBINS SAMUEL G RUEGGE STEVEN A SANDERSON MICHAEL S+
3900 PARK AVE N 4100 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N#204D CATHLEEN M
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 1112 N 38TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
334270011003 334270053005 334270042008
SCHOOS GILBERT A+ALICE G SCHWABL JOSEF SIDEBOTHAM CHRISTOPHER G
3825 LK WASH BLVD N 3921 MEADOW AVE N 16055 SE 135TH ST
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98059
334270012506 334270044400 334270040507
SIVESIND R STANLEY+ SMITH MICHAEL E SMTIH BRIAN
RIG'GS JOYCE E 3706 WELLS AVE N 12048 160TH AVE SE
3821 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98059
RENTON WA 98056
362915005007 221200020008 322405903806
STEVENSON DAVID A+JOYCE T STONICH LINDA K STUSSER DAVID
1208 N 38TH ST 4100 LAKE WASH BLVD N#C-104 STUSSER QUALITY CONSTR INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 14900 INTERURBAN AVE S#290
SEATTLE WA 98168
362916004009 334270053401 334270010005
TANNER MARGARET A TASCA EDWARD L TASCA JAMES G
1108 N 38TH ST 3936 PARK AVE N 14805 SE JONES PL
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98058
322405905009 362916006004 119050004108
THOMSON NEIL TOUCHSTONE STEVEN C+RENEE A UNDSDERFER ROBERT L
PO BOX 76 1116 38TH ST 1021 N 38TH ST
MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270050308 334270023008 221200028001
UY NATHAN+EMILY FU VAN BOGART G CLARK VAN BOGART WAGNER BEVERLY J
1314 N 38TH ST BARBARA J 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD#D104
RENTON WA 98056 3711 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N RENTON WA 98055
RENTON WA 98056
334270053104 322405904606 334270050100
WATKINS KEN W WEISENBERGER NADINE WHITE&CO ALEX#16618 C/O EXECUTIVE
3924 PARK AVE N 1324 N 40TH ST HOUSE INC
RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056 7517 GREENWOOD AVE N
SEATTLE WA 98103
362915009009 221200004002 221200003004
WHITWORTH SAMUEL WYWROT LOIS R YOUNGBLOOD JON C
1122 N 38TH 4100 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N#A-104 4100 LK WASH BLVD N#A-103
RENTON WA 98055 RENTON WA 98056 RENTON WA 98056
334270008009
ZILMER MARK E+ROSEMARY
3837 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N
RENTON WA 98056
O�yY �vti
♦ P8
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
A Master Application has been flied and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton.
The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals.
PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF/BARBEE MILL PRELIMINARY PLAT '
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental(SEPA)and Preliminary Plat review to
subdivide a 22.9-acre site into 112 lots ranging in size from 1,800 square feet to 6,000 square feet. The lots are intended
for the development of townhouse units-most of which would be constructed as duplex structures along with some 3-unit,
4-unit and 5-unit structures. Landscape, roadway and utility improvements are included with the proposal. Four
utility/open space tracts would also be established with the plat.
The subject site is located west of Lake Washington Boulevard between North 44th Street and North 40th Street. The •
western boundary of the site includes approximately 1,900 feet of Lake Washington shoreline. The site is presently utilized
for limited lumber operations. With the exception of the existing building located on the shoreline, all buildings would be
demolished as part of the project. In addition to Preliminary Plat and SEPA review, the proposal requires Hearing
Examiner Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit review- both of which the applicant has chosen to
submit as separate land use applications In the near future.
PROJECT LOCATION: 4201 Lake Washington Blvd.(between N.40'h&43rd)
PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental Review,Hearing Examiner Preliminary Plat Review
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Lesley Nishihira, Project Manager, Development
Services Division,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on Mav 31,2002. If you have questions about
this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact Ms. Nishihira at
(425)430-7270. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of
any decision on this project.
A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner In the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of
City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,Washington, on July 16. 2002 at 9:00 AM to consider the proposed
Preliminary Plat. The public Is Invited to attend.
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
DATE OF APPLICATION: April 5,2002 .. •
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 16,2002
DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: May 16,2002 ' ',>•` e;
•
•
t //nul.n o
If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project,complete this form
and return to: City of Renton,Development Planning,1055 South Grady Way,Renton,WA 98055.
File NoJName: LUA-02-040,PP,ECF/Barbee MITI Preliminary Plat
NAME:
ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NO.:
NOTICE OF APPLICATION2
.{/.
BARBEE'' MILL ELIMINARY PLAT �i` ;/t.•(
:.
•
OVERALL SLAT PLAN `i;
•
it°
•
:,yi=- , ice ,
:. • iLe. fir-ii,/ 4; 1 ' •
•
Z.•P41*- ttitit0) iltItti . :.;g:'• •..•
1 •
•
•
•
•
•
'
Itr
a �: , . ,:..:„ ..,
• • . .
�uot. .. .
. ,,,2„,„,,k., .
q
,.. .
• • , -,/f ,, .
0 % , .- , •,„.,,.,. ,,!•, , ... .
0 „ , 4, , ,. :
. . .. . ...., .. ,.< ,), ,.„.
/,/ ,, .,,, ., ,.
.. .
,. ..,.
,...ft ,„,,, / , ,,,,, .. .
• . iii /' 1
• � . a 1✓ ' Ali�f / rn�= y
•;:i.
co ilici!! 6ri
•
a �, tilt'itjLt
.
LU i qt .,_ '
• . . .•
Y 1; 4'jL\ . 1
. .......::.:
. • ..• ,.
. a
-, .. ."./ "P-441:4?-':":11* 8.-'1,1 . , ..
1 - i'''.,-,, ltiii;r4.0161.111 ,&- -___—
i a.Jl ?_�t1, y_t'/
� t� a • -
•
•
,4,• ,,�•Cgnr1cR7'FRP. 11:1r Pik 1fir
•
`- %r,' :11V5 2.M I_ j ;2=;P:2 .
-
. -- •:%/• 1. a:..N. - •o IC .o .. u.
CITY F RENTON
Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
Jesse Tanner,Mayor
May 16,2002
•
Superintendent's Office
Renton School District#403
300 SW 7th Street •
Renton,WA 98055-2307 •
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
LUA-02-040,PP,ECF
The City of Renton Development Services Division has received an application for a proposed subdivison
of a 22.9-acre site into 112 lots intended for development of townhouse units. The subject site is located
at 4201 Lake Washington Boulevard. Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Application(NOA)for
complete details of this project.
In order to process this application, the Development Services Division needs to know which Renton
schools would be attended by children living in residences at the location indicated above. Would you
please fill in the appropriate schools on the list below and return this letter to my attention, Development
Services Division, City.of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,Washington 98055.
Elementary School:
Middle School:
High School:
Will the schools you have indicated be able to handle the impact of the additional students estimated to
come from the proposed development? Yes No
Any Comments:
Thank you for providing this important information. If you have any questions regarding this project,
please contact me at(425)430-7270.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishihira
Senior Planner
Encl. RENTON
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055
school/ /kac .• AHEAD OF THE CURVE
:.. This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
_ •
el;;,,,,,. . CITY 1--F RENTON
1 , '- „ , Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
May 3,2002
Mr. Dan Dawson 5)2 JoZ
620Ota ir klInc amitag•
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland,WA 98033
Subject: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
Project No. LUA-02-040, PP, ECF .
Dear Mr. Dawson: . :' �'' :a..
The Development Planning;�Section Of the:City of Renton tadetermined that the subject
• application is complete according,to,submittal requirements:and,.therefore, is accepted
for review. F 1:
You will be notified if any additional information;is required to continue processing your
f;,
application. ..,'r
Please contact me at(425)430-727.0..If,you,have`any questions. ,1
•
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishihira
Senior Planner
•
cc: Barbee Mill Company/Owners
Century Pacific, LP/Applicant
acceptance 1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 ` E N T 0 N
CoEAD OF THE CURVE
.. This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer
r1 CITY F RENTON
;LL Planning/Building/PublicWorks Depai tment
Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator
April 12, 2002
Dan Dawson
Otak, Inc.
620 Kirkland Way, Suite 100
Kirkland, WA 98033
Subject: PRE-APPLICATION MEETING—
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat/File No. LUA-02-040, PP, ECF
Dear Mr. Dawson:
The City has scheduled the above referenced project for a Preapplication Meeting to be held on
Thursday, April 25, 2002 at 11:00 a.m. in conference room #602. The applicant or applicant's
representative(s) are invited to attend this meeting and will be joined by City staff representing the
Fire Prevention, Transportation, Plan Review and Planning sections of the Development Services
Division.
We have received your attorney's letter, dated April 5, 2002, stating his opinion that a
preapplication meeting is not required for the project. Although section 4-7-050 "General Outline
of Subdivision, Short Plat and Lot Line Adjustment Procedures" references the general
preapplication process as voluntary, section 4-7-080.D "Detailed Procedures for Subdivision"
further defines the review process for plats and establishes a specific requirement for completion
of the preapplication process.
Therefore, the City has scheduled a preapplication meeting for the project. The completion of this
review will establish the proposal's satisfaction of this code provision in the event the project
application's compliance with the City's land use review procedures are challenged. In addition,
the review will help to identify potential issues that may affect the formal review of the project, as
well as establish a dialogue and working context between the applicant and City reviewers.
Should you have any questions prior to the scheduled meeting, please contact me at (425) 430-
7270.
Sincerely,
Lesley Nishihi
Project Manager
cc: Alex Cugini, Owner
Steven Wood/Campbell Mathewson, Applicant
Thomas Goeltz, Davis Wright Tremaine
Larry Warren, City Attorney
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner
1055 South Grady Way-Renton,Washington 98055 R E N T O N
®This paper contains 50%recycled material,30%post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE
vY/vo/VL r1 L ll:LJ. Lads. LW" ULO IQ 1/IT1 JLSALLL.r lei002
LAWYERS
BEI
Davis Wright Tremaine LZP
ANCIIOItAI:F. IHILLItVl1F. I:HAILI.IYrTF. HONl)I.111.0 1.l)5 ANOEL¢r NEW YOKK
1'OR1'I.ANI) SAN PRANM:INC:0 SI+ATTIF. WA]HINCION,D.C. SHANOIIAI
THOMAS A. GOELTZ 2600 CP.NTURY SQUARE TEL (206) 622-31511
DIRECT (206) 626.7662 1501 FOURTH AVENUE 1+AX (206) 62S-7699
tomgoelt%edwz.eom StATTLG, WA 9B101-l6SS www,dw[.com
Apri15,2002
City of Renton
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055
Re: Non-Mandatory Pre-application Meeting; Site Plan
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat application
To The City:
This'letter is written to support the submittal of the Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat
application. I understand the application was initially rejected today at the counter because no
preapplication meeting was held. After a phone call from you to the planning department,the
application was accepted.This letter explains why the initial rejection was incorrect since the
Renton code makes preapplication meetings elective,not mandatory,on the part of the applicant.
Further,the Code expressly allows the separate submittal of a plat and other permits or
approvals,like Site Plan Approval—Level I,that ultimately may be required for a project to
obtain building permits.
PRE-APPLICATION MEETING:
The Renton subdivision code states:
A. Preapplication Meeting: Any person who desires to subdivide land in the
city should request a preapplication meeting with the department at an early
date in order to become familiar with the requirements of this chapter. [RMC
4-7-050]
•
if mandatory,this code section would have said"shall"or"must" or other mandatory
language. Further,the code sets out the general procedures for processing a subdivision
C:IWINDOWS\Temporary Internet FilesAOLK53911City pre-app Itrl.doe
Sc ittle
04/05/02 FRI 17:22 FAX 206 628 7699 DWWT SEATTLE 1003
City of Renton „p
April 5,2002
Page 2
application. Step 1 is listed as submittal of the complete application. There is no requirement
nor statement in this list of a preapplication meeting. [RMC 4-7-050(d)] •
In addition, Chapter 8 of the RMC underscores that no plat pre-application meeting is
required. See the attached section of the code which makes it clear that preapplication meetings
are required only for a waiver of submittal requirements(not applicable here), a modification of
special development standards under certain sections(not applicable here)or if the proposal is in
an RM-U zone(not applicable here). Otherwise,the code explicitly states"a preapplication
meeting is recommended for all other projects." (RMC 4-8-100]
Further,the plat application checklist expressly states "preapplication meeting summary,
if any." [RMC Table 4-8-120C]. Table 4-8-120C sets out the specific listing, and so its
statement of"if any"is particularly significant. The introduction to Section 4-8-120 states"The
following tables list the submittal requirements for each type of permit application or land use
approval which must accompany the required application fees specified at RMC 4-1-140 through
4-1-200.
The elective, optional nature of the preapplication meeting has been confirmed by the
City on this very site. I attach a letter from Jennifer Henning to this law firm dated August 16,
2000,where a prior application was accepted without any preapplication meeting. The letter
includes the following statement:
It is the City of Renton's normal, customary and accepted practice to conduct a pre-
application conference then pre-screen submittal materials at the Customer Service
Counter prior to the formal submission of a planning permit application. The
preapplication conference and pre-screening review are a courtesy offered to our
customers,and provide preliminary information regarding items needed to complete the
submittal package.
While the prior submittal was not a plat application,the letter's reference to"courtesy"is
entirely consistent with the subdivision code language that advises applicants they"should"
utilize a preapplication meeting if they are not familiar with the code requirements. Here,this
applicant is thoroughly familiar with the city's code requirements in light of its previously-
accepted application. I also note that the state subdivision statute,which expressly allows
vesting,does not list a preapplication conference as a requirement for vesting. [RCW 58.17.033]
We recognize that the Renton code does spell out a detailed process for a preapplication
meeting and the submittals that are to be made. However,this simply indicates what happens
and what is submitted if a preapplication conference is elected by the applicant. The fact that
there are detailed procedures for handling submittals does not bootstrap itself into a mandatory
plat submittal requirement.
C:IWINDOWS1TcmporaryInternet Files1OLIt53911City pre-app Itrl.doc
Seatilc
v�y
U$/UJ/UL t'itl 1/:LL PHA LVV VLv .v99 una a�naaa.r,
City of Renton
April 5, 2002
Page 3
SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL:
The applicant recognizes that a number of permits will be required before building
permits can be issued. However,there is no requirement that all permits be submitted
concurrently. In fact,Renton's Code expressly gives the applicant the election to combine
multiple permits or not:
Optional Process Resulting in a Single Open Record Public
Hearin : An applicant may elect to have the review and decision
process for required permits consolidated into a single review
process. [RMC 4-8-080-C]
Here, Barbee Mill is electing not to combine permits. In addition to RMC 4-8-080,RIM
4-8-120C specifically lists the plat submittal requirements. And there is no requirement on this
checklist to simultaneously submit a Site Plan with a plat application. Neither does the
subdivision code require simultaneous submittals. Likewise,the Site Plan chapter does not
require it be combined with a plat application. Section 4-9-200 speaks of flexible timing:
Site plan review should occur at an early stage in the
development of a project,when the scale, intensity and layout of
a project are known,but before final building plans are
completed.
•
Here,the project has not proceeded sufficiently for any meaningful site plan review. The
site plan chapter further states the timing as follows: "No buildingpermit shall be issued for any
use requiring Level I site plan approval"until the ERC has determined whether to require a
hearing or not. This again speaks to the timing as being optional up to the time of seeking
building permits.
•
If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
Davis right Tremaine •
//
Thomas A. v.oel
Enclosures
cc: Alex Cugini
Steve Wood
Campbell Mathewson
CAWINDOWS1Tcmporary Interne.Fi es1OLKS3911City pre-spp ltrl.doe
Seattle
04/05/02 FRI 17:22 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE 1005
(ooIl pxlAnxl 6E-8
.. 1 \
Z V1 N N to 3 to oV a mr V� z -o 0 -o--o m•. b tn
O m w = o c Z ® v o 0 m 5. a 4 a _ m L.m ?: » m m C ,
_ O m
Q 13 " 0 if o n > > y 'ii o m o 0 3 c C� °, C M 13
o > ? � D '� � m o7 o ymm w1q ),' o`• �im a m -+ D
m' m p T,0 N.t7 N e v o o o �, D r •
m a m :? m °� p1 g rn r Z
c o n > > % m 3m m 4. 3 =v o ^ 0. 1' .an F., 0
co a -n Fi a v - 0 B. n 0 3 -o • :D Cn > C
fat ,p i0 a 3 .� ? < ' ; =• ; 7 13 - `n
p V Zll a 7 C m 0 i: O I` .�. O v,
0 a m A m CO w '0 " . C Z
o •a 3 �
--' 1 Inr7
N 3 ro V= • TYPE OF APPLICATION/PERMIT
'a. x Annexation(10%Notice of intent)
mw x Annexation(60°/.Petition)
o. ,
a Appeal
• .. x• Business License for Home Occupation' •
o c„ w co:. x. .+ Comp.Plan Map Amendment/Re>one
3 to N N to Comp.Plan Text Amendment
Conditional Approval Permit for a
iTi a v, "' 1.11 *` + Nonconforming Structure
m -, Conditional Approval Permit fora
m to N N to ex '' Nonconforming Use
m
a iu oti N N vs -. Conditional Use Permit(Administrative)
1? ;3 go. vs) en x .• Conditional Use Permit(Hearing Examiner)
m w , N a x Environmental Review D
o � CU
, �, _ Environmental Review(Non-Project)
3 iu N_ o x -. Grade and Fill Permit(Special) m
3 ii
N Kennel License ,
co Kennel License,Hobby
$ v Lot Line Adjustment o
ID .• . 1 N o. x Master Site Plan(Overall) 0
o 0.) , _ • w v:' x .. Master Site Plan(Individual Phases)
• N p x — Mobile Home Park,Preliminary
—N r., - Mobile Home Park,Final
.r•• co .u, • Modltleation/Alternate Request
'• �, • :• • a .;:. -• Plat,Final
s•,<. , 'r! j, x •,- Plat.Preliminary
— . ;,: .! N tit •• K — PUD.Preliminary
N NI.:1 ii FUO,Final
..• N ur -• Rezone
• ... x •+ Routine Vegetation Management Permit
a A -► Shoreline Exemption
N m• a x — Shoreline Substantial Development Permit
w to x — Shoreline Conditional Use Permit
N a x — Shoreline Variance
IN) m x Short Plat,Preliminary
co N ice Shod Plat,Final
N N to x .. Site Plan
N w m x Special Permit
cn a to x Temporary Use Permit
u. x Variance
w Waiver
7,3 •r x -' Wetland Permit
OOZ1.-8-P
V-a. vV.Vi £ '1. 11 .41.0 rIL LVV VLV 1V0.7 11111 JG11L11aZ MOO
4-7-040A
4-7-040 EXCEPTIONS: 1. Application:The completed application
is filed with the Department.
A. CHAPTER INAPPLICABLE:
The provisions of this Chapter do not apply to: 2. Public Notice: Public comment is re-
quested by the following:(a) a notice board
1. Cemeteries and burial plots while used on the site, (b) a notice in a newspaper of
for that purpose. general local circulation, and (c)written no-
tice is mailed to all property owners within
2. Divisions made by testamentary provi- three hundred feet(300')of the subject prop-
sions,or the laws of descent. erty.A fourteen(14)day comment period is
provided prior to a determination on the appli-
3. Division of land due to condemnation or cation.
sale under threat thereof,by an agency or di-
vision of government vested with the power of 3. Review:The application is reviewed by
condemnation, or by court judgment. the Department and other interested City de-
partments and outside agencies.
4-7-050 GENERAL OUTLINE OF 4. Plats with Four(4)or Less Lots:The
SUBDIVISION,SHORT PLAT AND LOT Administrator may approve, modify, or deny
LINE ADJUSTMENT PROCEDURES: the short subdivision;or require a public hear-
ing and decision by the Hearing Examiner.
A. PRE-APPLICATION MEETING: Appeal of the decision of the Administrator
4Any person who desires to subdivide land in the shall be to the Hearing Examiner.
Ci • should r:•uest a preapplication meeting with 5. Plats with Five(5)to Nine(9) Lots:A
the =•• ent at an early date in order to be- public hearing before the Hearing Examiner
come familiar with the requirements of this Chap- will be conducted for short plats creating five
ter.
(5) or more lots.The short plat decision will
B. APPLICATION FOR LOT LINE then be made by the Hearing Examiner.
ADJUSTMENT—GENERAL OVERVIEW 6. Improvements:The Department will
OF PROCEDURES: confirm that the required improvements have
The general administrative procedures for pro- been installed by the applicant,or deferred by
cessing applications for a lot line adjustment are the Board of Public Works.
as follows:
7. Recording:The final short plat is submit-
1. Application:The completed application ted to the Department for final review,ap-
is filed with the Department; proval and recording.
•
2. Review:The application is reviewed by D. APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION—
the Department staff; GENERAL OVERVIEW OF
3. Decision:The adjustment is either ap- PROCEDURES:
proved, modified,or denied by the Adminis- The general procedures for processing an appli-
trator and/or designee; cation for a subdivision are as follows:
4. Recording:The approved lot line adjust- 1. Application:The completed application 44
ment is recorded by the City Clerk with the is filed with the Department. 'pk-4
�
King County Department of Records and 2. Public Notice:Public comment is re- 4
Elections. quested
by the following:(a)a notice board on
C. APPLICATION FOR SHORT the site,(b)a notice in a newspaper of general
SUBDIVISION—GENERAL OVERVIEW local circulation,and (c) written notice is
mailed to all property owners within three hun-
OF PROCEDURES: dred feet(300')of the subject property.A four-
The general procedures for processing applica-
tions for a short subdivision are as follows:
7-2
04/05/02 FRI 17:23 FAX 206 628 7699 DAT SEATTLE 0007
4-8-100A
b. Mailing at least ten(10)days before government agencies.Notification shall be made
the date of a public meeting,hearing,or by mail and must include:
•
pending action to all parties of record,the
project proponent and affected govern 1. A description of the decision(s),including
ment agencies, and any conditions of approval.
c. Posting of three.(3)notices at least 2. A statement explaining where further in-
ten(10)days before the meeting, hear- formation may be obtained.
ing, or pending action at or near the
project site. 3. Any threshold environmental determina-
2. Content of Notice:The public notice lion issued and its appeal process.
shall include a general description of the pro- 4. The decision dale and a statement that
posed project, the action to be taken,a non- the decision will be final unless the appropri-
legal description of the property or a vicinity ate land use appeal,
map or sketch,the time,date and place of the from the decision of the City Council ris filed appeal
public hearing,where further information may with the Superior Court within fourteen (14)
be obtained,and the following,or equivalent, days of the date of the decision. (Ord.4587,
statement:"If the hearing on a pending action 3-18-1996)
. cannot be completed on the date set in the
public notice,the meeting or hearing may be
continued to a date certain and no further no- 48-100 APPLICATION AND
lice under this Section is required". DECISION—GENERAL:
E. NOTICE OF HEARING EXAMINER A. PREAPPLICATION MEETING:
DECISION: .
Notice of Hearing Examiner decisions subject to i. a. Preapplication Required:A preap-
notice requirements shall be made by the Hearing k. plication meeting prior to formal submittal
Examiner's office to all parties of record. the of a development application is required
project proponent,and Development Services Di- if a waiver of submittal requirements is
vision, and affected government agencies. Notifi- requested,a modification of special de-
cation shall be made by mail and must include: velopment standards is requested in a
1. A description of the decision(s).includingCenters Residential Demonstration Dis-
(s) trict,RMC 4-3-12083,or a proposal is lo-
any conditional approval. cated in the RM-U Zone designation.
2. A statement explaining where further in- b. Preapplication Recommended:A
formation may be obtained. preapplication meeting is recommended
3. Any threshold environmental determina- for all other projects. (Amd. Ord. 4777.
4-19-19
lion issued and its appeal process. �rd.4788, 7-19-1999)
2. Purpose:The meeting is not intended to
4. The decision date and a statement that provide an exhaustive review of all potential
the decision will be final unless an appeal to issues. Preapplication review does not pre-
the City Council is filed with the City Clerk vent or limit the City from applying all relevant
within fourteen(14)days of the date of the laws at the time of application submittal.The
decision. purposes of a preapplication meeting are:
F. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL a. To acquaint an applicant with the re-
DECISION: quirements of the City's development
Notice of City Council decisions subject to notice regulations and other applicable laws.
requirements shall be made by the City Clerk's of-
fice to all parties or record.the project proponent, b. To provide an opportunity for the City
the Development Services Division.and affected to be acquainted with a proposed appli-
cation prior to review of a formal applica-
tion. (Amd. Ord.4794, 9-20-1999)
8-21
IllrrI<vd 12w'))
• 04/05/02 FRI 17:23 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE (1008
CIT St....DF RENTON
Irto
•
Planning/Building/Public Works Department •
Jcsse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman I.E.,Administrator
•
•
August 16,2000
Mr. Ladd B. Leavens RECEIVED
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP •2600 Century Square AUG 7 ZGGG
1501 Fourth Avenue • ?, ,1•}� '
Seattle,WA 98101-1688 • .
•
SUBJECT: .LAND USE APPLICATION FOR BARBEE MiLL PROPERTY •
Dear Mr. Leavens:
•
•
I am in receipt of your letter of August 11, 2000 regarding a Master Permit Application
for Alex Cugini/Barbee Mill Company/Steven Wood. You have asked the City to
determine whether materials brought to the Customer Service Counter by4.111111110
n Thursday, July 20, 2000 constitute a complete planning
•
permit application. • • • •
My understanding is that: attempted to submit an application for a Level II Site
Plan Review and Environmental Review. Staff reviewed the materials and determined
that that the package was not adequate'to accept as a land use review application, it
lacked, at a minimum, a traffic study, gedtechnical study, and complete title report.
RMC 4-8-120D defines terms used in submittal requirements for building, planning and
public works permit applications; '
Traffic Study: A report prepared by a State of Washington licensed engineer •.
containing.the elements and information identified in the City of Renton "Policy
Guidelines for Traffic impact analysis of New Development"in sufficient detail to
define potential problems related to the proposed development and identify the
improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient
•
manner.
•
Ceotechnical Report: A study prepared and stamped by a licensed professional
engineer hicluding soils and slope sfability analysis, boring and test pit logs, and •
recommendations on slope setbacks, foundation design, retaining wall design,
material selections, and other pertinent elements.
•
The materials brought to the counter did not meet the minimum requirements for an
application submittal as defined in RMC 4-8-120D. Furthermore, the package did not
include a complete title report or a signed Land Use Permit Master Application for
property underlying the proposed marina.
Renton Municipal Code (RMC) Section 4-8-060 D states: "Unless waived by the
Development Services Division, the requirements for a full complete land use, building,
• or public works permit application shall consist of the information listed in RMC 4-8-
120A, B and C, and any site-specific information identified in a preapplication meeting
inc nniitli (Irad"µ►n„ Pentnn.Washingtnn,9R055 FXHIBIT P
04/05/02 FRI 17:24 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE ►0009
•
Mr.Ladd 13.Leavens
August 16,2000
•
summary. Application fees pursuant to RMC 4-1-140 through 4-1-200 are also required
for a complete application."
RMC 4-8-100 A:1.a states in part: "A preapplication meeting prior to formal submittal of
a development application is required if a waiver of submittal requirements is
requested". RMC 4-8-100B:4 states: "An applicant may submit a written request for a
waiver from formal application submittal requirement under RMC 4-8-120, Submittal
Requirements, which may be considered during a pre-application meeting."
Since the applicant opted not to request a pre-application meeting, none of the required
submittal items could be waived.
in addition, RMC 4-2-120B requires that: "all adjacent and abutting properties with
COR zoning shall be included in a Level/I Site Plan for the entire Zone to be approved
in accordance with requirements in RMC 4-9-200.` The submittal materials did not
include this information.
RMC 4-8-100 C states: "Within twenty eight (28) days after receipt of an application,
the Development Services Division shall provide a written determination that the
application is deemed complete or incomplete according to the submittal requirements
as listed in RMC 4-8-100A, 8 or C, and any site-specific information identified after a
site visit."
I—
s the City of Renton's normal, customary and accepted practice to conduct a pre-
application conference then pre-screen submittal materials at the Customer Service
Counter prior to the formal submission of a planning permit application. The
preapplication conference and pre-screening review ar courtes ffered to our
customers, and provide preliminary information regarding items needed to complete the
•submittal package. A letter of completeness/letter of incompleteness is mailed to the
applicant following submittal of the application at the counter. In this way we are able
to expedite the permit review process.
With regard to your client's attempted submittal, it was clear that several items were
lacking during the counter review on July 201hand the application was not considered to
be acceptable. Therefore, the materials were turned away at the counter. No formal
determination or letter of completeness/incompleteness was provided tc
Since your letter is a formal request for a letter of completeness/letter of
incompleteness, this letter constitutes that determination. The Development Planning
Section of the City of Renton has determined that the materials reviewed at the
Customer Service Counter on July 20, 2000, and subsequently re-submitted via courier
on August 11, 2000, are INCOMPLETE according to submittal requirements specified
in Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-120C. And, therefore, the application is NOT
ACCEPTED for review.
The outstanding items needed to accept the land use application are detailed in the
body of this letter.
• i I'•1'°I•I, P1."PI '11ltIli rnMi.tb •remnIctInenmpldedne+,r
• 04/05/02 FRI 17:24 FAX 206 628 7699 DWT SEATTLE (j010
•
•
•
• Mr.Ladd B.Leavens
August 16,2000
3
Please feel free to contact me at(425)430-7286 should you have any questions
regarding this correspondence.
Sincerely,
•
• Jennifer Toth Henning
Principal Planner
cc: Gregg Zimmerman,Administrator.Planning/Building/Public Works
Sue Carlson,Administrator,Economic Development/Neighborhoods/Strategic Planning
Larry Warren,City Attorney
• Alex Cugini,Barbee Mill Company
Steven Wood,Century Pacific,LP
111111111111.1111111111.110
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
11:11DMSION.STEYELOP.SERTEv&PLAN.ING1Trt arbcscouncrir►c°rnPlete•doccor
.. °CITY,.OF RENTON
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES_DIVISION': . ,:: ,.;
V.,. ' - - , -
:LAND USE PERMIT " _.
ii MASTER APPLICATION:.
"
PROPERTY.OWNER(S) . I (; •PROJECT INFORMATION. ;'
NAME: Alex Cug i n i PROJECT.OR'DEVELOPMENT'NAME:'
nr;itBarbee Mill Company .
Cugini/Barbee._Mill _Property f .
ADDRESS:
PO Box 359 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION,^AND ZIP CODE:"
a ;:NW 1/4:Sec..:'-32��;_Twri. 24N, Range 5E
CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER: :KING COUNTY`ASSESSO_R'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S) = •
(425) 226-3900
322405-9034 -
APPLICANT(if other than owner)
EXISTING LAND USE(S):
NAME: LumbeJ Mill
Steven Wood ,
PROPOSED LAND USE(S):Subet i V t S[_DYl o9 (and "
COMPANY(if applicable): - ' _ -furl✓Attached Residential
Century Pacific, LP
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION'.:
ADDRESS2140 Century Square DEVC/o�M Center Office Residential' (coR) a
1501 Fourth Avenue r'r•4;•'J*COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION.
'CITY: F. ZIP: . : ' . _ • (if appeS C N/A
Seattle 90,01 APR�.5
TELEPHONE NUMBER pc•A EXISTING ZONING: Center: Office Residential'(O R2)
(206) 689-7201 CE.VE Port Quendall Site ,
PROPOSED ZONING.(if applicable): N/A
CONTACT PERSON
f SITE AREA-(in square feet):",997'i960:SF -
NAME: SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED
Dan Dawson ,:.
FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING'' '
THREE'LOTS OR MORE(if applicable):
COMPANY(if applicable):' .
Otak, Inc. 169,210 SF _ "
..,;; .z-,� ;.'• ,.' .• '• ':
• 'PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITYIN UNITS PER NET
ADDRESS: ,
620`''Kirklarid .Way, Suite 100 °` ACRE(if applicable): 6.5'S du/acre
; :NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS(if applicable):
CITY: Kirkland - ZIP: 98033 112 .Lots - ;
NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS(if applicable):
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND ADDRESS: i 7�2 r �s ��
(425) 7397 4202 /:danidawsonnotak.com .
masterap.doc Revised January 2002
1
P1 __ IJECT INFORMATION (cons ,r.,ied) ` '
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS(if applicable): 'PROJECT-VALUE' • 2•�5 Million "
None
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
BUILDINGS(if applicable): N/A ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE(if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable):: 'N/A ❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL D AQUIFER PROTECTIONAREA TWO:,
BUILDINGS(if applicable):, N/A ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq.ft.
❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD - - sq:t.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION ,. sq.ft.
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N A "
/ '"SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 87;150''"sq.ft.'"
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS(if 12I WETLANDS `'-425 sq.ft.
applicable): N/A '
NUMBER OF.EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT(if applicable): NSA;. ..
LEGAL'DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE NW 1/4 . QUARTER OF SECTION 32 , TOWNSHIP 24N, RANGE 5E , IN THE CITY
OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION& FEESI
Check all application types that apply--'City staff will determine fees. ,
—ANNEXATION(A) $ SHORELINE REVIEWS
—COMP PLAN AMENDMENT(CPA) $ CONDITIONAL USE(SM-C) - $
_CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(CU-A,CU-H) $ _EXEMPTION(SME) ' $ NO CHARGE-
X.ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW(ECF). $ '5V0.00 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT(SM) $ .-
GRADE&FILL PERMIT(GF) $ •,:.VARIANCE(SM-V) $
(No.Cu.Yds: ; ) $
_REZONE(R) $ ;.Er:;':' .
':.,." , '` SUBDIVISION -.
_ROUTINE VEGETATION , $ ?-,.•. BINDING SITE PLAN"(BSP) $
MANAGEMENT PERMIT(RVMP) q.v.:, : ""'' t - FINAL PLAT(FP) $
SITE PLAN APPROVAL(SA-A,SA-H) $ s.> =,L:OT LINE ADJUSTMENT(LLA)
—SPECIAL PERMIT(SP) $ .-._ - . . ' ' ‘PRELIMINARY PLAT(PP) $ O
TEMPORARY PERMIT(TP) $ SHORTPLAT,(SHPL-A,SHPL-H) ., - $'•
—VARIANCE(V-A,V-H,V-B), $ _ ' .
(from Section: ), . $ 1 G�Z Postage: $ '(tP
WAIVER(W)
OTHER: $
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 1 I
I, (Print Name)& t �'te �i"eS-r i'. r0 73. I Aic• declare that I am (please check one) ✓the current owner of the property
involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation.(please attachproof of authorization) r�d"that the foregoing
statements'and.answers herein contained and the information-herewith are in all respects`true and correct to the best of-y Ap �ihalttieIief.
O ���111FFFffRii111 h .*
I,c rtify tha I'know.or have satisfactory evidence that .. s
.. • .�ttttt�� �f
411° i�k q,n� ,J r. signed this instruRie n t�'c�geO ',
IC 0 •4I
itto be:his/her7their free and voluntary act for the usas£ o sAs +�p,, ��-- mentioned in the"instrum nt. 1 - 'p Z 'off e�;
(Signature of O , =•resentati if C •
%u `�60 '
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington it Nf '.,��1�20.09:r p?
ttt ' �,,,,%%t"' e'-
(Signature of Owner/Representative) Notary(Print)• SC . M q71 a s I i t OF wA5'! .
My appointment expires: 1 i-2 d- 0 3 1 t%%\\\\,�-.'
masterap"doc Revised January 2002 1
03/25/02 MON 13:01 FAX 425 827 9577 OTAK INC 444 OTAK SEATTLE 2006
SNIT 5
lib 008/O09
1/2000 13:24 FAX 208 448 6Z48
SCHEDULE C
ORDER NO. 325436-5
THE LAND REFERRED TO
IN THIS
KING AND ISASCRIBED AS IS FD OLLOWS:
IN THE STATE
OF WASHINGTON, CO
ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION332, TON TOWNSSHIPO24
NORTH, RANGE S EAST, W-M. , IN KING COUNTY,
WAISECOND CLASS SHORELANDS ADTOINING LYING WESTERLY OF NORTHERN
PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY;
EXCEPT THAT PORTION, IF ANY, OP SAID SHORELANDS LYING NORTH OF
THE WESTERLY PRODUCTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT
1.
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON_
THE DESCRIPTION CAN BE ABBREVIATED AS SUGGESTED BELOWFIFL TEXT OF
F
NECESSARY TO MEET STANDARDIZATION REQUIREMENTS.
THE DESCRIPTION MUST APPEAR IN THE DOCUMENTS? TO BE INSURED.
SECTION 32 TOWNSHIP 24N RANGE SE NW QUARTER NW QUARTER.
PAGE 8 OF 8
IJ .
CENTURYPACIFIC, L.P.
April 5,2002
City of Renton DEy
Development Services Department Ca?O�E L4NNING
1055 South Grady Way ON
Renton,WA 98055 APR Q 5 2002
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Application RECEIVED
Dear City of Renton:
Enclosed is a Preliminary Plat application for the Barbee Mill Property located at 4101 Lake Washington
Boulevard North in Renton,Washington. The plat is for 112 townhomne lots at a minimum density of at least 5
dwelling units per acre as authorized under the existing COR2 zoning applicable to the property. The following
list of items is contained in this submittal package:
• Application Fee
• Affidavit of Installation of Public Information Sign(2 copies)
• Colored Display Maps(1 copy of each)
— Neighborhood Detail Map
— Overall Plat Plan
— Preliminary Plat Plans(2 copies)
• Construction Mitigation Description(5 copies)
• Draft Deed for Any Proposed Dedication of Land for Public Purposes(4 copies)
• Drainage Control Plan(5 copies)
• Drainage Report(4 copies)
• Environmental Checklist(12 copies)
• Existing Covenants(see"Plat Certificate"below)
• Existing Easements(see"Plat Certificate"below)
• Geotechnical Report(5 copies)
• Grading Elevations(4 copies)
• Grading Plan,Conceptual(12 copies)
• Landscaping Plan,Conceptual(5 copies)
• Legal Description(see"Plat Certificate"below);Legal Documents -Proposed Restrictive Covenants and
Homeowners Association Documents(4 copies)
REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT BANKERS •ADVISORS • DEVELOPERS
2140 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98101
(206)689-7200 • FAX(206)689-7210
www.centurypacificlp.com
Page 2
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal April 5, 2002
• Letter of Understanding,Geologic Risk(5 copies)
• List of Surrounding Property Owners(2 copies)
• Mailing Labels for Property Owners(2 copies)
• Master Application Form,including Legal Description(1 original and 11 copies)
• Neighborhood Detail Map(12 copies)
• Plan Reductions (PMTs)(1 copy of each full size plan)
— Overall Plat Plan(1 copy)
— Preliminary Plat Plan(10 copies)
— Drainage Report—Figure 2—Vicinity Map
— Drainage Report—Figure 3—Basins,Subbasins& Site Characteristics
— Grading Elevations(3 copies)
— Grading,Detailed(3 copies)
— Drainage Control Plan(3 copies)
— Utilities Plan,Generalized(8 copies)
— Landscape Plan,Conceptual(2 copies)
— Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan(3 copies)
— Topography Map (1 copy)
— Neighborhood Detail Map(1 copy)
• Plat Certificate/Title Report,including Existing Covenants and Easements (5 copies)
• Pre-Application Meeting Summary N/A. Applicant waives pre-application meeting.
• Preliminary Plat Plans(12 copies)
• Project Narrative(11 copies)
• Topography Map,Existing(11 copies)
• Traffic Study(5 copies)
• Tree Cutting/Vegetation Clearing Plan(4 copies)
• Utilities Plan, Generalized(5 copies)
• Wetland Mitigation Plan N/A. Applicant is not proposing any actions to wetland areas that would require
mitigation.
• Wetlands Report/Delineation(3 copies)
We request a determination of completeness within 28 days as provided by RMC 4-8-100[C]. This plat provides
for outright permitted attached residential use on the property. The applicant recognizes that other city permits,
such as a shoreline permit,will be needed prior to any construction of the plat. The applicant elects to seek plat
approval first'before seeking other permits even though RMC 4-8-080[C] allows an applicant to elect to
consolidate multiple permits. Also,pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA),the Washington
Administrative Code 197-11-310 and 330, and the RMC 4-9-070[K], the Applicant hereby requests a
Determination of Non-Significance(DNS)for the preliminary plat.
Page 3
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal April 5, 2002
The applicant has a pending application for a master plan on the property and the enclosed plat provides an
alternative use of the property. The applicant has heard public and agency comments responding to the proposed
master plan. The applicant is not withdrawing the master plan,but requests that the staff puts the processing of
the current master plan application on hold. Neither the RMC nor state law precludes alternative pending
application so long as the fees for both are paid as in this case.
The application is submitted on behalf of the owners of the site,Barbee Forest Products,Inc. and Barbee Mill
Co.,Inc.by their agent C-ntury Pacific LP. If you have any questions regarding the contents of this application
package,please call =ve od at 206-689-7201 or Campbell Mathewson at 206-689-7203.
Ar
Sincerely,
4111"le"
'Stev-, + ood
Managing Dir tor
Cc: Alex Cugini,Barbee Forest Products Co.
Daniel L. Dawson,Otak
Campbell Mathewson,CenturyPacific
•
' i e
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
APR.O 5 2002 Project Narrative
RECEIVED
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat is a residential subdivision project located at the existing
Barbee Mill Company site which is approximately 22.9 acres located in North Renton west
of Lake Washington Boulevard and south of the I-405 and NE 44th Street interchange. The
site includes approximately 1,900 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington.
The property is zoned COR2 (Center Office Residential, Port Quendall site). The applicant
is seeking approval of a Preliminary Plat with a minimum density of 5 du/acre per RMC 4-
2-120B. Adjacent property to the north is also zoned COR2. Property to the east is zoned R-
8 and R-10 and the property to the south is zoned R-8.
The site is currently used for lumber production. There are approximately 15 buildings on
the site built for lumber milling and storage along with one office building. Many of the
buildings are unused and in bad repair.
The Barbee Mill site is adjacent to Lake Washington. May Creek runs through the easterly
and southerlyi portions of the site, emptying into Lake Washington. There is a Category III
wetland adjacent to the southeasterly property line. The wetland is located within the
Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way, but its 25-foot buffer extends into the Barbee
Mill site.
According to a geotechnical report prepared by Golder Associates, dated August 2000 and
re-issued in December 2001, the site soils consist mainly of Norma Sand Loam. North of
May Creek th'e site slopes are between 0.5% to 4% to the west. South of May Creek the site
slopes from 1$ to 7% toward May Creek and Lake Washington. Slopes within the May
Creek buffer area, vary from 7% to approximately 35% to 40% at the Creek banks. There
are no existing stormwater detention or water quality ponds on site. Storm runoff follows
directly to Lake Washington and May Creek. The proposed subdivisions will improve the
existing conditions by channeling storm water to water quality ponds prior to discharge to
Lake Washington. No detention is proposed due to the site's location along the shores of
Lake Washington.
The proposedAevelopment includes 112 townhouses located within a subdivision. Lot lines
will be located along common walls allowing each unit to be on a separate lot. Where the
units are not attached, there will be a minimum 5-foot side yard setback. Front and rear lot
setbacks are proposed to be a minimum of 10 feet. The lot sizes range from 1,800 square
feet to 6,000 square feet. Parking, building heights and other standard development data
will comply with the COR zoning criteria in the Renton Municipal Code. Streets within the
subdivision will be dedicated to the public. Water, sewer, and storm drain systems will also
be publicly owned. The proposed project will be,separated by the May Creek corridor.
Townhouse lots for two unit attached buildings will be located to the north and west of May
Creek. Townliomes in buildings of up to five units will be located east and south of the
creek.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 1
otak
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrative.doc
Project Narrative
Continued
There are no new crossings proposed for the creek. Currently, there are three narrow
bridges crossing May Creek. Two of these will be utilized for pedestrian access. There will
be on average a 50-foot buffer along each side of May Creek. There will also be a 25-foot
buffer along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The City of Renton Municipal Code Section
4-2-120B allows development of a COR zoned parcel with residential uses at a minimum
density of 5 du/net acre when the development does not involve a mix of uses. The proposed
project includes only residential use at a density of approximately 6.58 du/net acre.
Primary access to the site will be from two points along Lake Washington Boulevard. The
townhouse area north and west of May Creek will have access through the parcel to the
north via a 60-foot access easement. The owners of the subject property have an ownership
interest in the parcel to the north on which the 60 foot easement will be located. The
easement runs along the eastside of the north parcel to an intersection with Lake
Washington Boulevard/Ripley Lane approximately 650 feet north of the Barbee Mill site.
The development area accessed from the north will include a loop local access road with a
230-foot long.cul-de-sac on the south end. A 30-foot wide private access tract will serve lots
87, 88 and 37,to 42. The townhomes located south and east of May Creek will have access
from Lake Washington Boulevard through a 24-foot rural roadway with 8-foot gravel
shoulders. The lots will front along a 40-foot wide local access street with a hammer head
turnaround on each end. Beyond the two site access roads, other offsite improvements will
include connections to existing water and sewer lines located within the Burlington
Northern Railroad right-of-way.
An estimated construction cost for the subdivision is approximately $2,750,000.00. An
appraiser will determine fair market value for the lots once the final plat is recorded.
Infrastructure construction will include approximately 38,000 cubic yards of fill for road
and lot construction and 32,000 cubic yards of excavation from the water quality ponds and
underground pipes. The site also includes 72 trees, which are approximately 6 inches and
larger at chest height. The majority of streets are located along May Creek, and its buffer.
These trees will remain undisturbed. In order to grade the lots and streets, 18 of the 72
trees will need to be cut. The trees to be removed include five (5) fir trees ranging in size
from 8 to 12 inches located in lot 81, two (2) 16-inch fir trees in the south water quality
pond, one (1) 10-inch cherry on lot 101 and ten (10) ash trees ranging in size from 6 to 14
inches along the south end of the townhome local access road.
Through the final platting process, the onsite roads and water quality pond tracts will be
dedicated to the City of Renton. The Homeowners Association will own other open-space.
There will be 112 lots created with the final plat ranging in size from approximately 1,800
square feet for the smallest townhome lot to 6,000 square feet for the largest townhome lot.
The net density will be approximately 6.58 du/acre. During construction, there will be job
trailers located onsite. During the home sales period, it is anticipated that there will be a
sales trailer and model homes on the site.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 2
otak
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrative.doc
r A
•
Project Narrative
Continued
Routine Vegetation Management
The Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat project will likely begin construction in the spring of
2003. It is expected that one of the first construction tasks will be tree clearing and
removal of trees on-site within the construction zone. The numbers and locations of these
trees were described previously. All vegetation to be protected along the May Creek
corridor will be protected on site with construction fencing and erosion control fencing. It is
expected that large earth moving equipment will be used on-site to clear the property.
Since the property has been previously developed there is very little vegetation on-site
except for the areas on either side of May Creek. This project will preserve the majority of
this vegetation by providing an average buffer of 50 feet along May Creek.
This buffer area will be protected with continued maintenance of the existing vegetation
which is made up of turf grasses, mature trees, and newly planted shrubs and trees. Much
of the vegetation in this corridor will be allowed to grow naturally to allow a mature
revegetation of the creek. During the course of the construction, no tree trimming or tree
topping is planned for any of the vegetation along the May Creek corridor. Areas of grass
along the creek that are currently being mowed will be mowed during the construction
period unless the City prefers that no mowing occur. No chemical applications of
insecticide or herbicide are proposed during the construction period.
Mowing will occur with both standard riding mowers and hand mowers. No other use of
equipment for management of vegetation is expected on-site during construction. Newly
landscaped areas will be maintained by the contractor after installation until final
acceptance. Any work on maintenance of vegetation will occur during standard working
hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal 3
otak
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Barbee Mill Prelim Plat Narrative.doc
5. Responsibility for Installation, Maintenance and Removal:
The applicant shall be solely responsible for the construction, installation, maintenance and
removal of the sign(s) and the associated costs. The applicant must install the sign(s)
within one week of the date of application and provide the Development Services Division
with a notarized "Affidavit of Installation of Public Information Sign(s)" in order for the
application to be considered complete. The applicant is required to maintain the notice
board in good condition until the final City action on the proposal. The sign(s) must be
removed within a week following the end of the appeal period after the final Council or
Examiner decision.
sign..is removed prior to the final action of the Council or Examiner, the applicant is
responsible for immediate replacement of the sign.
6. Res:ponsibility for Update of Sign and Installation of Notices of Environmental
Determination and Public Hearings:
Once the basic sign, laminated site plan, and plastic case have been installed by the
applicant, the Development Services Division will post a laminated notice of the project's
acceptance at the site as well as fill the plastic case-withloose copies of-the same notice.
The Development Services Division will subsequently be responsible for posting any
environmental determination, notice of hearing, and final decision.
Several local companies that provide laminating services are Graphics Laminating (425-
251-3583), Highland Packaging Center (425-226-7573), and Kinko's Copies (206-244-
8884). .
7. Return of the Plastic Flyer Case to the Development Services Division:
The plastic case must be returned to the Development Services Division (6th Floor) prior to
plat recording.
11
�" •
.. .. ..x. .. .i.:.iii:i,i:.:it .:...:.;.;':."": ,.iiai:^: ':i'i i:.•.
CITY OF':RENTON
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION`
.r"
y5
s
_ _ _AFFIDAVLT F NSTAL:LATI N��; : :.v
r,
is+t
S
OF
c:
RMAT
.
'a
^
—.alN _,FO
0E,��'PMFM,
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ORA _pL_4
COUNTY OF KING ) /P052802
Ac
, being first duly swoii@Ib
oath, deposes and sa s:
�H
1. On the s day of APa,/L , 20 0 2 , I installed I _public information
sign(s)and plastic flyer box on the property located at
4/ 0 i CA.4kii4- 4;n3ty. 7�c,vb Al. for the following project:
�b tC ►' 1 I 1 S�'l M i 04(Lys pI a-A-
Projecct name t
rbee r ePfl / J(
Owner Name
-gQ r b e e. 0'1' 11 .,
2. I have attached a copy of the neighborhood detail map marked with an "X"to indicate the location
of the installed sign.
3. This/these public information sign(s)was/were constructed and installed in locations in
conformance with the requirements of Chapter n Municipal Code.
al atur
SUBS' � t, R1 to before me this .� day of ,—i2t' , 20 O 2.
doket.
C. N 'c) Z • 0 ' NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington,
Pti%`*P. o -
».1� � ; residing at kn.� .
StgTE op�P_= My commission expires on �('2.c9 -53 •
PUBSIGNS.DOC `,\�\ \\\�'
REV.05/00
12
. .
;•:•., i•:'
-----
..,
.---
.,
B4 • ' L'24N R5E W 1./2,
- .4\138 !"' - ' •).. ,
• • - . ._, . . .i - ,
,
. ,...•
"P •
; ,-NE-43 -4---- \\ '`':
• ,
.,. ,,,, R02.-24 8'
gi i . ...
. _. .. .. • ,ff ".
•
r-- • -',•=1,1'.
1 A 7. ' .: 1: •N\ •in•
I-
, > . • I
- - -
1 1.:4%,-'•. i. . .c% !
;• L
92
I .
. a
• •" ' : --) 3 2: ,.1;
-• - \J- -22 Si'NES ---, ,
.- fjje%. "- co ' t . 1110re •: • • • o".f*4
' •e
. - 1 18' , ...„
••
. . • • .
:
,•430.,1 I• . L :144i
. • -
- - - --
-4/17 „---"-,,N'I•,/. .. ,11,1.,)i..i-t6:h'..'.,2.80„00..118„.*...•...,,,.A.5f„t.•).,-11.:"'4" •••''N\Il
PI
e
-- - -- --- -- I ,, , , / ;1•;'
•1267__ _ _ _( R02,21 i. / i -_ LAKE SH. /// " _',-,c4,,.
12
C2: fitqi1
19St' 20 :,
___ -_ --
.._, i 4,.
91•.... 1-."°,..I
.'
"1 ,.,.g>..,.'8.-'.'8••i 0.1.'-',•,-.,.91-.:.-1,•.'.'.1,8,.''..16-,i3.4...'•.-•.::...17..8!:,-.'-'.8';9....-1,:...'.--„.-.7.''.-:.--1.;8-.,8.-J106_8t`.1`>5z21;'•4?;411;i ti.0i 0xz,-),,1,zi,i1-.'7.-.-.'•..?-'.-.'.,,.--.;-I:..'.-.;,8....:-..:.._i-•-i.,'4,-i.?3.,!,.-..7,:•
8...:.;.,7.,.:.,..,,.-,'-.2.-,.•-i0.,84.8..•0',.,.,-..'...'.,'..!::'8
1e9 . zs-.'..,_,.l1;•i-,-
!•D::..-',.i
_:.-..
-
_ . e 6
. / 47
__ , " 35 36 37
•
_ '74 -1 . 8 g( 36a.
i;. k.'j';;`1,\1.I 1 i.,•.--i'L-AN/ti*!:„.,;1;.•;i,,:''
:
:•,f„-.,\I i•k.>
.'•`
.:/..'•
•.
,•.. .;:
.....
-
•
. s•N\':'0'•s\'.''\.,.'.'•„"-,..,l,1.'.".I.AL%;.•,,8.'l'-'It•I1a V,''1.4''4-,1,),i--,o.41•,,,.'s04i.,•};,6,,41,1i,'..;,,R...1:p•Vtl,.o tr1,'1T;:.•_ _/ ) 9 4 8 B 39 9 23 1 I4 45 046 •1 w42 24
e so?o e I
45 Private Rd 81.N37th 4 26
- 8 8 8 8
f40 sa :806
. 141 I 27 28 ,88 :3StiS7 18 7 8 7
63 . 64. 1 34th St i !tit4:.S.01iii.i,;Ii.1T,1viki.1 l4:v0:1..5,;;it0Iii.;ii.5'I,;l 1.,;s••::.i'I::..0g.''i;.ii..,8ii:-•,:.i;.:;r,5i::,4;%v,:•:,,:;:4i%••i:!§‘1i,f;:::';
66 -
69
'i,4;)„1k8T,,.;:,i•,•;.!ii::!1%:.',,•.;..
.;,,,.•
,
`41;.:. .1 iii.:ii•
N 34th...St......69 ,
))g; ;1.'t " - . t 3:.•,•::.
\• ..'ottsit!:;
-•. i ,• -• f Lr. 8' , • : • . .16§ , 8.' ' ' i .; -8.;••••-,-•;,8i---7-6.:77i7....-7'-70"1 . .. 7 i • i
---,'',/ •• ••• -2-1 ;E• . ;
.;•_*/ -.•• , ' ! '-' ' : • • •
. „ . ,. ,78. ... .R.33rd P.1 i 90 : , I 197-'. -..:•
-
. ,e.„,....„..
• , ,or..;::::
. ,
• ,
. s .I 77•••,,,-; :- ••-.i.-,,--19- ----7--.1-. i - -- ,-;-1 ' d, : '
.2,-. ,•'• .' .. . i 1 • ' • . ' • . (.1 • : • i . : . te2
' A ••••t.
,t:t•titt.:•,-:
, . '. '•'4''''- .1 ; "7' -. . .- -:' ..1-'1=•-=-•"•-----•-•-,••••••••••:•••:,--r-i ,- - ...: ,: '°9• ::I
w '' 86
' ' " N 33rd•St . . i ' i ' • ' ' 0• ' Cc , ;•,.., \' ,itigfil.':',
•-a. .
,
811 .3,i .•8' . * E•15••.6;-':7:-.-6; :.-1 '11. 3;2 n-c:1;St 1 13 ;' ‘''1124 . .
1 IP
(I % i1.....''..i
• ' i : ' . . ! . '88 •ar---.- ---- -A-• '= • ' I> I, 88: • ,,
-
i.
,\. ,..,,,,%,•:,.;•
:. . ., N .32nd.. 9s4. . .94 :. -1:4•?Erlc1;iS.. :.......L........:092....:_i....!...i -= U • ' 8', . 8. it.. i• , • Z I ' c I
8 8 8 8 125
,
•• •.--• ,-... '`.204.--• ( 11?:,,•
' ''- sl :ii•'''.g
. ' • • ; • '
, ',lilt ,'",'.'1.i.5. Z f•-'•
.. ..' N. 315t....St r '97 92 N:31st St lap I ;101 ' ; . 10 iio 2 • i •
ivi;•;`,--41 1...- C:11
. . I
„ :0551=3
. • :8', , co ; ,• '
• ,•,1 r.." 2 c%I
i• • ; . . .ii.: ,i,:!?7 ,.. 1A
in .....
• .... N..30th..St ! !.93.1. - : 104 N 15i 30sti...St.,.:.,!_. ..106'.,...2....,_.1 1407.....S.N...2.9_th..St..109_,i ..iiE.30t 7't.' 281 . . ::.1,;,- cc`..••
- !=0 4 0- • 4 • 4 • ••03
., • 8' . 8' ; ' ,8,; , 8' ; I 1 .1 :108 1:) ; 9. `,
' ,• \ '02' .' --.....r IC.)?;160 , 1.,.0t$,.:::20 CC 0• • I • i :
.;• iP•a.,_} CL. uj
'::', : • • I ! : • • - . : .. " , - ; -. '."-:"''') • , r rr I ,‘?03zi..-: , .• %...
,
N 29th St,i iit 112)..N.29th St 114... :. ,......g5'ot i .,
,••1 , .; I% 0467. ,, ' ' - s?\ 411 i?';;•19,L.: ICC cc
1:••t•,•:''.Jr‘
.- .- .°1'.7. ..1..r.. •. _. '. .1.- :......-...,-.....•,4...-......:. .. to 1 • 1.? '• t.:',,,LL.1`-• •
•..:.••••••\\,.) _.----) '••t;tti"ti.t
•8' .8' 113: ed ,;. ! : 8'. : i 8' - ' i' ':•,' • 'i
135.!'
6, , p, ii',,
6. 81.4 lc•••?'•,„....-ii,St ,o :.?•C1
• , • , - • .11§, -• ,, -• 915; : -136:, ) ,
r; -• ..E.2.7 '-- •
...; ii9 ....!......... izol I. !tei ..• ;- , • •; ! `,N :;;iii;;,;•:•;;.
.. , , ,. ... j •,,,.-134...... 133 ,
'''. .)‘•• :' I ; -Er• • ' ' ;8.' ' ' i : '8' : 8. ; - N 28st St; ; i
•
\ , ., ‘. v• 'N 28th St ; •EmergenFy AcCess:Ottlyt .., ' . , ..•::'.7.-:::.:':L... L.: -,.:.7.1 t.-,• -•-..NC 28th St--.-• ,,,t:...-!.:,;•
'',,,st:>:•,it,.
.:'• • I i
:i M Vs:13-• "'. ! WO:•;;;!'::
....,,;.
'.• , %Dirt.RIA . : ' ' ' • . Overbrpwh; . • . i ; , : : . .._., \
-. ; , i ! : ••.',,,.. ;A i ! ".,,',k•:-tzit;
\ N.
\. \ .
- \ '
1 NE P7th'Ct I '• -1- -.-•-• - •• , „,):51r:'.,:,.
• le:).,),..i.
D4 ' 5 T23N R5E W 1/2
a 0mmi4: //4
C)
, rt
1:4800 6:,1,"iiQ Cy6 SANITARY SEWERS C 4
P/B/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES .
` 1.-,,:,i,,,,,,•
A, 32 T24N R5E W 1/2
15.6, 0 09/05/01
April 5, 2002
City of Renton
Development Services Department
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Re: Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat—
Letter of Understanding Geologic Risk Pursuant to Renton
Municipal Code 4-8-120D and City of Renton Renton Ordinance 4835,
3-27-2000
Dear City of Renton:
The Barbee Mill Company is the owner of the site located at 4101 Lake Washington
Boulevard North in Renton, Washington. This site is the subject of a preliminary
plat application and is identified as a potential seismic hazard area on the City of
Renton Critical Areas Maps. The owner hereby understands and accepts the risk of
developing in an unstable area and will advise, in writing, any prospective
purchasers of the site, or any prospective purchasers of structures or portions of
structures on the site, of the unstable potential of the area.
Sincerely,
44-
•
Alex C
Presid
;,�,
Barbee Forest Products, Inc. Ci ti OF'R - `cis :
Barbee Mill Co., Inc.
4101 Lake Washington Blvd. N. AP-) 0 Jy)
PO Box 359
r
Renton, WA 98057 ' �s+a,_,�'=vim
r ,
Construction Mitigation Description
Construction is proposed to begin in the spring of 2003 and is anticipated to be complete in
the fall of 2004. Working hours will be in accordance with standard practices, between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., unless unusual circumstances dictate otherwise. In the
event additional hours are required, notification will be given to the City of Renton.
All materials will be hauled to or from the site from the south via Lake Washington
Boulevard, NE Park Drive and I-405. Flagmen will be employed to direct traffic in the
event larger trucks are unable to operate within existing traffic lanes.
For work to be completed within the Lake Washington Boulevard right-of-way, an approved
traffic control plan will be utilized. This plan may include the closure of one lane, utilize
flagmen to direct traffic, temporary signage, and lane markings in accordance with City of
Renton standards.
Impacts from dust shall be minimized by watering construction areas as necessary. Erosion
and mud control shall be handled using an approved erosion control plan, including silt
ponds, tire washes, and street sweeping in accordance with standard practices.
All heavy equipment operation and other noise producing activities shall be limited to
normal working hours to minimize impacts from these activities. No special noise
attenuation measures are planned at this time.
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING,
CITY OF RENTON
APR•0 5 2002
Barbee Mill Preliminary Plat Submittal RECEIVED
otak
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Barbee Mill constr mitigation descrp.doc
_R 4 A
March 28, 2002 •
Mr. Campbell Mathewson
CenturyPacific L.P.
1501 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2140
Seattle Washington 98101 ��c ypFM,
Opp
4pR A4 744414 G
RE: Barbee Mill Site—Wetland Review 49� f4p
(R.A.I. #2002-017-001) Coke
0
Dear Campbell:
At your request, Raedeke Associates, Inc. visited the Barbee Mill site in the City of
Renton, Washington to review the existing conditions of wetlands on the property. A
previous study by David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA 1997)had identified wetland
habitat on the site in 1997. The purpose of our site visit was to determine if current
wetland site conditions had changed significantly since the previous study. Raedeke
Associates, Inc. visited the Barbee Mill site on March 26, 2002.
DEFINITIONS AND METHODOLOGIES
Wetlands and streams are protected by federal law as well as by state and local
regulations. Federal law (Section 404 of the Clean Water Act) generally prohibits the
discharge of dredged or fill material into the nation's waters, including wetlands,without
a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE 2000). The COE makes the final
determination as to whether an area meets the definition of a wetland, and thus, if it is
under their jurisdiction, whether any permits are required for any proposed alterations.
The COE defines a wetland as an area "inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances
does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions" (Federal Register 1986:41251).
Washington state law requires that all local jurisdictions use the Washington State
Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual published by the Washington
Department of Ecology (WDOE 1997) to determine the presence of wetland conditions.
The WDOE wetland manual is a revision of the COE Wetlands Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987), is consistent with the 1987 COE wetland delineation
manual with respect to wetland identification and delineation, and incorporates
RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC
5711 Northeast 63rd St. Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 525-8122
Mr. Campbell Mathewso:.
March 28, 2002
Page 2
subsequent amendments and clarifications provided by the COE (1991a, 1991b, 1992,
1994).
Generally, as outlined in the 1987 wetland delineation manual,wetlands are
distinguished by three diagnostic characteristics: hydrophytic vegetation(wetland
plants),hydric soil (wetland soil), and wetland hydrology. In general,hydrophytic
vegetation is present when "more than 50 percent of the dominant species are OBL,
FACW, or FAC on lists of plants species that occur in wetlands" (Environmental
Laboratory 1987:19). Plants are rated, from highest to lowest probability of occurrence
in wetlands, as obligate (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), facultative (FAC),
facultative upland(FACU), and upland (UPL) (Reed 1988, 1993). Hydric soil indicators
include, but are not limited to, 1) gley conditions, 2)mottling in a low chroma matrix, 3)
histic (organic) soils, and 4) saturated or inundated conditions. In order for an area to
have wetland hydrology according to the 1987 manual, soils must be saturated within a
major portion of the vegetation rooting zone(usually within 12 inches of the surface) for
at least 5% of the growing season (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1991b, 1992).
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The Barbee Mill property is an active sawmill located along the eastern shore of Lake
Washington in the City of Renton Washington. The property is bounded on the east by
railroad tracks, on the south and west by Lake Washington and on the north by a log
storage yard. May Creek flows through the central portion of the property. Specifically
the property is located in a portion of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East,
W.M., as depicted in material received from Otak on March 22, 2002.
Raedeke Associates, Inc. staff visited the Barbee Mill site on March 26, 2002 to review
the existing conditions of a previously identified wetland feature. The wetland, located
in the southeast portion of the site, along the western edge of the railroad tracks, had been
delineated by David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA 1997). The wetland boundary was
subsequently confirmed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (DEA 1997).
The wetland was described in 1997 as a palustrine emergent system managed as a lawn.
At the time, dominant species were bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera, FACW),red fescue
(Festuca rubra, FAC+), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW).
During the March 26, 2002 site visit,Raedeke Associates, Inc. observed the area
previously identified as a wetland to be very similar to that described by David Evans
and Associates, Inc. (1997). The area appears to be maintained as a lawn. Dominant
vegetation observed during our field investigation was red fescue, reed canarygrass, and
tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea, FAC-). An excavated ditch conveys surface water
away from the wetland to the west where it discharges to May Creek.
Mr. Campbell Mathewso
March 28, 2002
Page 3
Soils observed in the wetland area consist of 8 inches of very dark gray(10YR 3/1) sandy
loam overlying dark red gray(2.5Y 3/1) gravelly sandy loam and very dark gray(5Y 3/1)
very gravelly sandy loam at depths of 13 and 18 inches respectively. The soil was
saturated at a depth of 8 inches, and free water was visible in the sample pit at a depth of
15 inches. Low chroma soil and soil saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface
are indicative of hydric soil and wetland hydrology.
Undeveloped portions of the site have a similar vegetation community to that observed in
the wetland (mowed grasses). However, areas outside the delineated wetland boundary
lacked either hydric soil or evidence of wetland hydrology within 12 inches of the ground
surface at the time of our site visit.
CITY OF RENTON WETLAND REGULATIONS
The City of Renton (1998) regulates wetlands and other sensitive areas under Title 4 of
the Renton Municipal Code. Under this code, wetlands are classified into one of three
categories based on physical characteristics and presumed functional values. Generally,
Category 1 wetlands are very high quality habitats greater than 10 acres in area that have
multiple vegetation classes and provide habitat for listed threatened, endangered, or
sensitive species; Category 2 wetlands are high quality wetlands that do not meet
Category 1 criteria and have minimal alterations or evidence of human disturbance;
Category 3 wetlands are those lower quality areas that have been altered by human
activities.
The City requires that buffers be placed around regulated wetlands to prevent inadvertent
impacts to wetlands from development activities. Category 1 wetlands receive 100-foot-
wide buffers, Category 2 wetlands are afforded 50-foot buffers, and Category 3 wetlands
receive 25-foot buffers.
The wetland identified and delineated on the Barbee Mill property is an emergent habitat
approximately 6,000 square feet in area that has been disturbed by human activities. This
wetland appears to meet the criteria necessary to be considered a Category 3 wetland in
the City of Renton. The City of Renton has the final authority to determine wetland
ratings and required buffers in their jurisdiction.
CONCLUSIONS
Raedeke Associates, Inc. observed a City of Renton Category 3 wetland on the Barbee
Mill property. The wetland conditions observed on March 26, 2002 are very similar to
those described by David Evans and Associates, Inc. (1997). The delineated wetland
drains out to the west through a ditch that empties to May Creek. The City of Renton
requires a minimum of 25-foot-wide buffers around Category 3 wetlands. If unavoidable
impact to the wetland is proposed, the City of Renton requires compensatory mitigation
at a ratio of 1.5:1. We caution that the City of Renton has the authority and responsibility
Mr. Campbell Mathewson_
March 28, 2002
Page 4
to determine the extent of necessary impact and the required mitigation for those impacts
within their jurisdiction.
LIMITATIONS
We have prepared this report for the exclusive use of CenturyPacific L.P. and their
consultants. No other person or agency may rely upon the information, analysis, or
conclusions contained herein without permission from them.
The determination of ecological system classifications, functions,values, and boundaries
is an inexact science, and different individuals and agencies may reach different
conclusions. With regard to wetlands, the final determination of their boundaries for
regulatory purposes is the responsibility of the various resource agencies that regulate
development activities in wetlands. We cannot guarantee the outcome of such agency
determinations. Therefore, the conclusions of this report should be reviewed by the
appropriate regulatory agencies prior to any detailed site planning or construction
activities.
We warrant that the work performed conforms to standards generally accepted in our
field, and was prepared substantially in accordance with then-current technical guidelines
and criteria. The conclusions of this report represent the results of our analysis of the
information provided by the project proponents and their consultants, together with
information gathered in the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or
implied, is made.
Thank you for the opportunity to prepare this material for you. If you have any
questions,please do not hesitate to call me at (206) 525-8122.
Respectfully submitted,
RAEDEKE ASSOCIATES, INC.
k /fix'
Christopher W. Wright
Soil and Wetland Scientist
Mr. Campbell Mathewsoi
March 28, 2002
Page 5
LITERATURE CITED
David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1997. Wetland Determination Report on the JAG
•
Development Property. 14 pp. plus appendices.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Technical Report Y-87-1,US Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,
Vicksburg, Mississippi. 100 pp.
Federal Register. 1986. 40 CFR Parts 320 through 330: Regulatory programs of the
Corps of Engineers; final rule. Vol. 51. No. 219. pp. 41206-41260, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington,D.C.
Reed, P., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest
(Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biol. Report 88 (26.9). 89 pp.
Reed, P., Jr. 1993. 1993 Supplement to list of plant species that occur in wetlands:
Northwest (Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. Supplement to
Biological Report 88 (26.9) May 1988.
Renton, City of. 1998. Renton Municipal Code Title 4, Sensitive Areas Ordinance -
4835. City of Renton Planning Commission.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991a. Special notice. Subject: Use of the 1987
wetland delineation manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District.
August 30, 1991.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1991b. Memorandum. Subject: 'Questions and answers
on the 1987 manual. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington D.C. October
7, 1991. 7 pp. including cover letter by John P. Studt, Chief, Regulatory Branch.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1992. Memorandum. Subject: Clarification and
interpretation of the 1987 methodology. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Washington D.C., March 26, 1992. 4 pp. Arthur E. Williams, Major General,
U.S.A. Directorate of Civil Works.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1994. Public Notice. Subject: Washington regional
guidance on the 1987 wetland delineation manual. May 23, 1994, Seattle District.
8 pp.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2000. Final regional conditions, 401 water quality
certification conditions, Coastal Zone management consistency responses, for
Mr. Campbell Mathewso].
March 28, 2002
Page 6
Nationwide permits for the Seattle District Corps of Engineers for the State of
Washington. June 16, 2000. Special Public Notice. Seattle District. 132 pp.
Washington Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington state wetland identification and
delineation manual. March 1997. Publication No. 96-94. 88 pp. plus
appendices.
Declarant or the ACC will handle the cleanup or repair of damage and deduct the cost of such
cleanup or damage restoration from the$ deposit.
5.3.5 Permits. No construction or exterior addition or change or alteration
of any Improvements may be started on any portion of the Property unless the Owner first
obtains a building permit and other necessary permits from the proper local governmental
authority and written approval of such permits from the ACC. The ACC must approve the
plans for all construction or alteration proposals. (See Section 8.6).
5.3.6 Codes. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the State
of Washington,Uniform Codes (building,mechanical,plumbing),the City of Renton or King
County codes, as applicable, and requirements in force at the commencement of the
construction, including the latest revisions thereof.
5.3.7 Entry for Inspection. Declarant or any agent, officer or member of
the Board or ACC may, at any reasonable predetermined hour upon 24 hours' notice during
construction or exterior remodeling, enter and inspect the Improvement to determine if there
has been compliance with the provisions of this Declaration. The above-recited individuals
shall not be deemed guilty of trespass for such entry or inspection. There is created an
easement over,upon and across the Lots for the purpose of making and carrying out such
inspections.
5.3.8 Driveways and Drainage. Damage caused by driveway connections
or other Improvements to the streets or to the adjacent swales shall be repaired so that such
streets or swales are restored to their original condition (and to any applicable governmental
standards) at the expense of the Owner of such driveway or other Improvements.
ARTICLE 6. COMMON AREAS,LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS,AND
EASEMENTS
6.1 Title to Common Areas. During the Development Period,Declarant may
create and convey to the Association from time to time Common Areas designated or
identified in any document recorded by Declarant. Each Owner shall have a nonexclusive
easement for the common use and enjoyment of the Common Areas, consistent with the
purposes of the particular Common Area and any legal restrictions or rules and regulations of
the Association. Easements to use the Common Areas shall be appurtenant to and run with
each Lot and shall not be assigned or conveyed except upon transfer of title to such Lot.
6.2 Title to Limited Common Elements. The Units sharing Limited Common
Elements shall have the exclusive rights to use of such Limited Common Elements adjacent
or allocated to such Units. Conveyance of a Unit includes the exclusive rights to the use of
the Limited Common Elements adjacent or allocated to that Unit. The Unit Owners sharing a
Limited Common Element shall be jointly and severally liable for the operation, maintenance,
repair and replacement of those Limited Common Elements,provided, however, that if it is
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 11
Seattle/3.29.02
After Recording Return To:
City Clerk
City of Renton -
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton,WA 98055 s:
•
DEDICATION DEED TO CITY OF RENTON
Grantor(s): Barbee Forest Products, Inc, and Barbee Mill
Co., Inc., Washington corporations
Grantee(s): City of Renton, a Washington municipal
corporation
Legal Description: '
Additional Legal See Exhibit A of this document
Description:
Assessor's Tax Parcel Nos.:
Reference Nos. of Related N/A
Documents:
BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS,INC., and BARBEE MILL CO., INC., both
Washington corporations (collectively "Grantor"), as owner of the real property and
improvements thereon as legally described and shown on Exhibit A hereto ("Public Lands"),
dedicates, grants and conveys to the CITY OF RENTON ("City"), a Washington municipal
corporation, for public use as part of the Barbee Mill Final Plat, all of the streets, alleys, and
other tracts or areas shown on the final plat for public ownership and use, including but not
limited to open space,utility easements, and drainage facilities, if any.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Dedication is executed effective upon the last signature
below and shall be recorded in the real property records of King County,Washington. ,
GRANTOR: BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., a
Washington corporation
By:
Name:
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Dedication deed.doc 1
Seattle/04/04/02
Its:
BARBEE MILL CO., INC., a Washington
corporation
By: -
Name:
Its:
DEDICATION ACCEPTED:
CITY OF RENTON, a Washington
municipal corporation
By:
Its:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of , 2002, before me, a Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, on
oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged it as the
of BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., a Washington corporation,
to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned
in the instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year
first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
Print Name
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Dedication deed.doc 2
Seattle/04/04/02
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of , 2002,before me, a Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington, personally appeared , personally known to me (or proved
to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, on
oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument, and acknowledged it as the •
of BARBEE MILL CO. INC., a Washington corporation, to be the
free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year
first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
Print Name
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of , 2002, before me, a Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington, personally appeared , personally known to
me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this
instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument, and
acknowledged it as the_ of CITY OF RENTON, a Washington municipal
corporation, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year
first above written.
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin Land Use Permit\Dedication deed.doc 3
Seattle/04/04/02
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
Print Name
•
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\Land Use Permit\Dedication deed.doc 4
Seattle/04/04/02
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
[INSERT LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND TO BE DEDICATED TO THE PUBLIC AS
PART OF THE BARBEE MILL PLAT]
S:\Project\30200\30209\admin\and Use Permit\Dedication deed.doc C_1
Seattle/04/04/02
ti
After Filing Return To:
4P1? '1 4es f/4YG
C�Cjk0
0
DRAFT
SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT BY DECLARANT
DECLARATION OR COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,
RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR
BARBEE MILL PLAT
Grantor(s):
❑ Additional names on page of document
Grantee(s):
❑ Additional names on page of document
Abbreviated Legal Description (lot,block and plat name, or section-township-range):
❑ Additional legal description is on page of document
Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Account Number(s):
Reference Numbers of Documents Assigned or Released (if applicable):
O Additional reference numbers on page of document
•
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE AND SUBMISSION TO DECLARATION 1
1.1 The Property 1
1.2 Submission to Declaration 1
1.3 Homeowner Association 1
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS 1
2.1 "Architectural Control Committee" or"ACC" 1
2.2 "Articles of Incorporation" 1
2.3 "Association" 1
2.4"Board" 1
2.5 "Bylaws" 1
2.6 "Common Areas" 1
2.7 "Design Guidelines" 2
2.8 "Development Period" 2
2.9 "Improvement" 2
2.10 "Landscaping" 2
2.11 "Limited Common Elements" 2
2.12 "Unit" 2
2.13 "Lot" 2
2.14 "Majority of Members" 2
2.15 "Member" 3
2.16 "Mortgagee" 3
2.17 "Owner" 3
2.18 "Plat" 3
2.19 "Property" 3
2.20 "Temporary Board" 3
ARTICLE 3. DECLARATION AND RESTRICTIONS 3
ARTICLE 4. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY 3
ARTICLE 5. USE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS BUILDING
RESTRICTIONS; CONSTRUCTION 4
•
5.1 Use Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions 4
5.2 Building Restrictions. 7
5.3 Construction. 10
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 1
Seattle/3.29.02
ARTICLE 6. COMMON AREAS, LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS,AND
EASEMENTS
6.1 Title to Common Areas 11
6.2 Title to Limited Common Elements 11
6.3 Road Easements 12
6.4 Drainage Easements 12
6.5 Monumentation Tracts and Easements 12
6.6 Reservation of Easement 12
6.7 Dedicated Right of Ways and Tracts 12
6.8 Sales Office Easement 12
6.9 Utility Easements 12
6.10 No Easement Obstructions 13
6.11 Alteration of Common Areas 13
ARTICLE 7. UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE 13
7.1 Utility Systems; Right to Connect 13
7.2 Drainage 13
7.3 Surface Water Drainage System 13
7.4 Maintenance of Sensitive Areas 14
ARTICLE 8. MANAGEMENT; DEVELOPMENT PERIOD;ASSOCIATION 14
8.1 Development Period. 14
8.2 The Association. 14
ARTICLE 9. BUDGET AND ASSESSMENTS 20
9.1 Association Budget 20
9.2 Creation of Liens and Personal Obligations 21
9.3 Annual General Assessment 21
9.4 Special Assessments 21
9.5 Amount of Assessment 22
9.6 Date of Commencement of Assessments; Due Dates 22
9.7 Effect of Nonpayment of Assessment; Remedies of the Association 22
9.8 Exempt Property 23
ARTICLE 10. SUBORDINATION OF LIENS 23
10.1 Intent of Subordination Provisions 23
10.2 Mortgagee's Nonliability 23
10.3 Mortgagee's Rights During Foreclosure 23
10.4 Mortgagee as Owner 23
C:ITEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 11
Seattle/3.29.02
10.5 Mortgagee's Title Free and Clear of Liens 24
10.6 Survival of Assessment Obligation 24
10.7 Subordination of Assessment Liens 24
ARTICLE 11. INDEMNIFICATION 24
ARTICLE 12. INSURANCE; LOSSES; CONDEMNATION 24
12.1 Insurance Coverage 24
12.2 Casualty Losses 25
12.3 Condemnation 25
ARTICLE 13. GENERAL PROVISIONS 25
13.1 Enforcement 25
13.2 Binding on Successors 25
13.3 Amendment 25
13.4 Interpretation 25
13.5 Severability 26
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 111
Seattle/3.29.02
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS
RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR
ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE AND SUBMISSION TO DECLARATION
1.1 The Property. , ("Declarant"), is the owner of
certain real property in King County, Washington,more particularly described in Exhibit A
attached and incorporated herein by this reference(the"Property").
1.2 Submission to Declaration. Declarant hereby declares that the Property shall
be held, used,transferred and conveyed subject to the restrictions, covenants,reservations,
easements and conditions set forth in this Declaration. This Declaration is designed to protect
and enhance the value, desirability and attractiveness of the Property.
1.3 Homeowner Association. This Declaration establishes the
HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION, a Washington nonprofit corporation.
ARTICLE 2. DEFINITIONS
2.1 "Architectural Control Committee" or"ACC"means the committee of the
Association established to review and approve plans for Improvements on Lots.
2.2 "Articles of Incorporation"means the Articles of Incorporation of the
Association.
2.3 "Association"means the Homeowner Association, a
Washington nonprofit corporation, its successors and assigns. The Association is composed
of Owners and is organized and established to preserve and maintain the Property and to
promote the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the Property.
2.4 "Board"means the board of directors of the Association.
2.5 `Bylaws"means the bylaws adopted by the Temporary Board or Board, in
accordance with Section 8.2.5.1.
2.6 "Common Areas"means the portions of the Property designated as "Common
Areas" on Exhibit B attached hereto. The Common Areas include any(a)roads,trails or
other access ways,parks, sensitive area tracts or open spaces designated by Declarant,
(b) general landscaping areas designated by Declarant, (c) streams, storm water control
facilities or improvements maintained for drainage, aesthetic or other purposes designated by
Declarant, (d) entrance areas to the Property or portions thereof containing signs, gates or
other entrance facilities designated by Declarant,(e)drainage easements or facilities, and
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 1
Seattle/3.29.02
(f) easements or other areas of facilities designated by Declarant herein or in other recorded
documents.
2.7 "Design Guidelines"means the aesthetic standards for evaluating
development proposals adopted by the ACC in accordance with Section 8.2.6 and the other
provisions of this Declaration.
2.8 "Development Period" means the period Declarant requires to develop and
market the Property and shall end at the earliest of the following: (a)the sale of
(i) substantially all Lots,with completed residences thereon, for those Lots sold to licensed
builders and (ii)all other Lots,whether or not residences are then constructed thereon, for
those Lots sold to persons who are not licensed builders; (b)the delivery of written notice by
Declarant that it has elected to terminate the Development Period; and (c)the expiration of 10
years from the date of this Declaration.
2.9 "Improvement"means any Unit, gazebo, garage, driveway, fence,wall, gate,
patio, shed,tennis or basketball or sport court, cabana, swimming pool or other recreational
facility, any utility and storm water facilities, and any other building or structure of any type
on any Lot.
2.10 "Landscaping" means any landscaping or vegetation of any type on the
Property.
2.11 "Limited Common Elements"means any portion of walls, floors, or ceilings
that serves adjacent, adjoining Units and is reserved for the exclusive use of the adjacent,
adjoining Units. If any chute, flue, duct,wire, conduit,mechanical element, bearing wall,
bearing column,walkway, or any fixture lies partially within and partially outside the
designated boundaries of a Unit or is shared with another adjacent, adjoining Unit, any
portion thereof serving the Unit is a Limited Common Element allocated solely to the Units
being served. Subject to the provisions of this section, all spaces, interior partitions, and other
fixtures and improvements within the boundaries of a unit are a part of the Unit.
2.12 "Unit"means a townhouse building or structure or any portion thereof situated
on a Lot within the Property which is designed and intended for use and occupancy as a
residence by a single family, and the appurtenant Landscaping, fences, garages, driveways
and parking areas occupying any Lot on which a Unit is situated. Any shutters, awnings,
window boxes, doorsteps, stoops, porches, balconies,patios, and all exterior doors and
windows or other fixtures designed to serve a single unit, are part of the Unit.
2.13 "Lot" means each of the parcels located on the Property, as shown on
Exhibits B and C, and any legally segmented and alienable portions of such parcels.
2.14 "Majority of Members"means at least 51%of the Members present in
person or by proxy at a meeting of the Association at which a quorum is present.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 2
Seattle/3.29.02
2.15 "Member" means any person or entity holding membership in the
Association.
2.16 "Mortgagee"means the holder or beneficiary of any mortgage or deed of trust
encumbering one or more of the Lots.
2.17 "Owner"means the record owner or contract purchaser, whether one or more
persons or entities, of a fee simple interest to any Lot. Contract sellers and mortgagees or
others having an interest in a Lot merely as security for performance of an obligation shall not
be considered"Owners."
2.18 "Plat"means the approved Preliminary Plat of
dated _, 2002, Ordinance , Renton,Washington and any, revisions thereto after
the date hereof, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
2.19 "Property" means all of the real property described in Exhibit A. The
Property includes all the real property shown on the Plat, as shown on Exhibit B attached
hereto.
2.20 "Temporary Board" means the temporary board of directors appointed by
Declarant in accordance with Section 8.1.2.
ARTICLE 3. DECLARATION AND RESTRICTIONS
Declarant may from time to time during the Development Period amend the
restrictions set forth in this Declaration and impose restrictions in addition to the restrictions
contained in this Declaration. Such restrictions shall be set forth in documents recorded in the
real property records of King County. This Declaration and such amended or additional
restrictions shall run with the land and shall be for the benefit of and enforceable by
Declarant, all Owners and the Association.
ARTICLE 4. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
So long as Declarant, any member of the Board or the ACC, or any managing agent of
all or any portion of the Property has acted in good faith,without willful or intentional
misconduct,upon the basis of information possessed by such person,then that person shall
not be personally liable to any Owner,the Association or any other person for any damage,
loss or claim on account of any act, omission, error, or negligence of such person. This
Article shall not apply to the extent such acts, omissions or errors are covered by the
Association's insurance policies.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 3
Seattle/3.29.02
ARTICLE 5. USE COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND
RESTRICTIONS BUILDING RESTRICTIONS; CONSTRUCTION
5.1 Use Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions.
5.1.1 Permitted Uses. The Property shall be used solely for the uses
authorized in this Declaration and as provided in any final plat or other recorded document
affecting all or a portion of the Property or under the zoning and other governmental
regulations affecting the Property. Each Lot shall be used only for construction and
occupancy of one single family Unit and related Improvements,with such Limited Common
Elements as are appropriate and necessary to accomplish Declarant's objective of constructing
townhomes on the Property with a minimum density of 5 dwelling units per acre. No tent,
trailer or modular or mobile home shall be used as an Owner's Unit on any Lot. No one shall
reside on any Lot except in a Unit or permitted accessory structure constructed thereon that
shall have final inspections and approval for occupancy from the City of Renton or any
successor governmental entity having jurisdiction.
5.1.2 Garbage and Debris. No untidy conditions may be maintained on any
Lot. All garbage,rubbish, yard and vegetation debris and other wastes shall be regularly
removed from each Lot and Unit by the Owner at Owner's expense to a licensed public or
other suitable dump site outside the Property. Untidy conditions shall include,but are not
limited to, storage of wood, landscaping or other debris, garbage and equipment of any kind
whatsoever that is visible from any other Lot,the Common Areas or the streets. If not visible
from any Lot,the Common Areas or the streets and if not creating any objectionable odors,
natural compost piles, firewood piles and waste materials are permitted if contained in
suitable covered containers which shall be secured, fastened and protected from animals. The
ACC may specify the type and design of containers and screening for the storage of compost
or firewood or the disposal of trash, garbage or other waste (sheet plastic and tarps are
prohibited). All containers shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition and shall be
screened from view from all other Lots, all Common Areas and all streets.
5.1.3 Animals. An Owner may keep no more than two dog(s) and two
cat(s). Dogs shall not be allowed to run at large. Owners may not keep horses, llamas, cows,
chickens or other livestock on the Property. All animal pens and enclosures must be approved
by the ACC prior to construction and shall be kept clean and odor free at all times. No animal
may be kept if it is a nuisance. The Board shall have the final and conclusive authority to
determine whether a particular animal is a nuisance. When not confined to an Owner's Lot,
animals within the Property must be accompanied by a responsible person and shall be
registered, licensed and inoculated from time to time as required by law. If the investigation
of the Board indicates that animals are kept in violation of this section, the Board will give the
Owner 10 days' written notice of the violation. Such violations must be remedied by the
Owner within 10 days. Failure to comply with the written notice will result in a fine of$25
per day.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 4
Seattle/3.29.02
5.1.4 Commercial Uses. No commercial use or enterprise shall be permitted
on any Lot or in any Unit unless specifically authorized in the plat approval. Home office uses
(not involving on site sales) and hobby farms are allowed,to the extent permitted by
applicable zoning laws, and the Board may permit other specified home occupations to be
conducted if allowed by law and if the occupation will not, in the reasonable judgment of the
Board, cause traffic congestion or other adverse effects on any portion of the Property.
5.1.5 Storage of Vehicles and Equipment.
5.1.5.1 Parking. Owners may not continuously park cars or trucks in
open view on any Lot,the Common Areas or the streets. When vehicles are parked in
violation of the preceding sentence for a period over 24 hours, other than in the circumstances
described below,they shall be adequately screened from the view of all other Lots, all
Common Areas and all streets. The screening of such vehicles must have the approval of the
ACC. Upon 48 hours' notice to the Owner of an improperly parked vehicle,the Board has the
authority to have it towed, at the Owner's expense. This Section does not prevent Owners
from parking automobiles or trucks on driveways when the Owners are out of town. This
Section does not prevent guests from parking automobiles or trucks in driveways for a period
of up to 4 days.
5.1.5.2 Storage. The storage within the Property of the following is
prohibited: mobile homes,house trailers,utility trailers, campers, camp trucks, motor homes,
boats, boat trailers,junk vehicles or equipment or any other similar machinery or equipment
of any kind or character. The Board in its discretion may allow for storage of campers,motor
homes,boats and trailers on a Lot in an enclosed storage facility or structure that has been
approved by the ACC and is screened from view from all other Lots, all Common Areas and
all streets. An Owner may keep on or in a Lot or Unit such equipment and machinery as may
be reasonable, customary, and usual in connection with the use and maintenance of any Lot or
Unit, if such equipment and machinery when not in use is screened from view from all Lots,
Common Areas and streets, in a manner and by a structure approved by the ACC. The
Association may keep such equipment and machinery as it may require in connection with the
maintenance and operation of the Common Areas. Any vehicle or equipment deemed to be in
an inoperable condition and located on any street in excess of 24 hours may be removed by
action of the Board after 24 hours' notice to remove the automobile or vehicle.
5.1.6 Motorcycles and ATV's. Motorcycles,motorbikes, all-terrain
vehicles and other similar vehicles are prohibited from use on any portion of the Property,
except that properly muffled street-legal vehicles may be operated by licensed individuals
upon streets established for general vehicular purposes and upon the Lots owned or occupied
by such individuals.
5.1.7 Weapons. No firearms or weapons of any kind or nature, including
bows, sling-shots, BB guns or any other guns, shall be fired within the Property except by
appropriate govern-mental officials in pursuit of their law enforcement duties.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 5
Seattle/3.29.02
5.1.8 Nuisance. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon
any Lot,in any Unit, or on other portions of the Property, nor shall anything be done thereon
that is or may unreasonably interfere with the rights of others to enjoy their respective Lots,
Units, Common Areas or Limited Common Elements and become an annoyance or a
nuisance. The Board shall determine whether any activity or use on any Lot or in any Unit
unreasonably interferes with the rights of others to enjoy their respective Lots, Units or the
Common Areas and Limited Common Elements, and such Board determination shall be final
and conclusive. Owners shall, at their own expense,keep their Lots free of rodents,vermin
and other pests.
5.1.9 Derogation of Laws. No Owner shall carry on any activity of any
nature whatsoever on any Lot, in any Unit or on the Property that is in derogation or violation
of the laws or statutes of the State of Washington or any other applicable government
authority.
5.1.10 Fire Restriction. All fires shall be subject to all applicable
governmental laws, ordinances, regulations and controls, including,but not limited to permits,
licenses and approvals issued by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency or other
appropriate governmental agencies. No outdoor fires shall be permitted, except in appropriate
barbecue facilities. Outdoor clearing/cleanup fires are prohibited, except as approved by
Declarant or the Board and the applicable local government.
5.1.11 Sales and Construction Facilities. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of this Declaration, during the Development Period, Declarant and any licensed
builders, agents or contractors designated by Declarant may maintain on any portion of the
Property owned by Declarant or any licensed builder such facilities as in the sole discretion of
the Declarant may be reasonably required, convenient or incidental to the construction and
sale of Lots,Units or other Improvements thereon. Such facilities include, without limitation,
business offices, storage areas, construction yards, signs, model homes and sales offices.
Further, Declarant shall have an easement for construction of a sales office on a Lot declared
by Declarant, as provided in Section 6.8.
5.1.12 Mining. No oil drilling, oil development operations, oil refining,
quarrying or mining operation of any kind shall be permitted on or in any Lot,nor shall oil
wells,tanks,tunnels,mineral excavation or shafts be permitted on or in any Lot.No derrick or
other structure designed for use in boring for oil or natural gas shall be erected,maintained or
permitted upon any Lot. Oil and fuel storage for residential equipment and heating purposes
is permissible if the storage tank is buried and in compliance with all applicable governmental
laws, ordinances, regulations and controls.
5.1.13 Signs. Entrance, street, directional, traffic control and safety signs, and
such promotional signs as may be maintained by Declarant or the Association, are permitted.
"For Sale"and "For Lease" signs, other than those approved by Declarant during the
Development Period, are prohibited. After the Development Period, "For Sale" signs are
C:ITEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 6
Seattle/3.29.02
prohibited. Political yard signs not exceeding 2 feet square are permitted during political
campaigns,but shall be removed within 2 days after the election. The Board may cause any
sign placed on Lots in violation of this Section to be removed and destroyed.
5.1.14 Antennae. Exterior antennae, satellite dishes,towers and other similar
devices for radio,television or other reception are prohibited unless screened from view from
all other Lots, all Common Areas and all streets by an ACC-approved structure or enclosure.
5.1.15 Maintenance and Repair of Lots.Each Owner shall maintain his/her
Lot, Improvements, and Landscaping in good order, condition and repair and in a clean,
attractive and sanitary condition at all times. If any Owner fails to maintain his/her Lot,
Improvements, or Landscaping as required by this Declaration,then the Board may perform
or cause to be performed any maintenance on that Lot that it reasonably determines is
necessary in accordance with Section 8.2.5.3(d).
5.1.16 Maintenance of Limited Common Elements. If any Owner fails to
Maintain the Limited Common Elements serving his Unit within 15 days of receiving written
notice from the Owner(s) of an adjacent, adjoining Unit(s)that is served by the same Limited
Common Element,the Owner(s)of the adjacent, adjoining Unit(s)may perform or cause to be
performed any maintenance to the Limited Common Element that it reasonably determines is
necessary. The costs of performing such maintenance shall be allocated proportionately
among the Owners sharing the Limited Common Element,provided, however,that if it is
determined that the maintenance or repair to the Limited Common Element is due to the
negligence of misconduct of one of the Owners,then such Owner shall be liable for the full
cost of repair or maintenance.
5.1.17 Open Houses. Open houses for the sale of Lots or Units are
prohibited,unless approved by Declarant in connection with the sale of Lots or Units during
the Development Period.
5.1.18 Utility Hookup. Each Owner shall be required to hook up such
Owner's Lot to the utility lines provided by the utility companies serving the Property. Wells
for household uses are prohibited, except that wells shall be permitted solely for the purpose
of providing irrigation for Landscaping and livestock on Lots.
5.2 Building Restrictions.
5.2.1 Minimum Density. The Property shall be developed in accordance
with the City of Renton zoning and land use regulations effective on the date that a complete
application for the Plat has been submitted to the City of Renton. The Property shall be
developed with a minimum of 5 Units per acre.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 7
Seattle/3.29.02
no higher than any maximum height established by the Declarant or the ACC for a particular
Lot. A set of approved building plans must be on the job site at all times. If any height limits
are established,then at the time of 100%framing,no further construction shall occur until the
contractor has submitted to the Declarant or the ACC a written verification by a licensed
architect, engineer or surveyor that the ridge heights of the construction meet the height
restrictions established for that Lot.
5.2.6 Underground Utilities. All utility lines or wires shall be underground
or in conduit attached to an Improvement.
5.2.7 No Lot Contour Change. The surface grade and elevation of each Lot
shall not be materially altered in any manner that would affect the relationship of such Lot to
or materially obstruct the view from any other Lot or adversely affect adjoining Lots or create
run-off or erosion problems or produce an effect out of harmony with the general
development of the Lots in the general vicinity. The ACC shall determine whether such
alteration is prohibited based on the standards set forth in this Section 5.2.7.
5.2.8 Lot Clearing Limits. Each Lot shall comply with any lot clearing,
pruning or tree retention restrictions that may be adopted by the ACC or imposed by the
applicable local government. Prior to starting construction of a Unit or other Improvement,
each Owner shall obtain approval of the ACC of a 20 scale final clearing plan showing all
conifer trees to be removed in excess of 6 inches DBH and all deciduous trees to be removed
in excess of 18 inches DBH. Trees not to be removed shall be physically marked in the field
with a circle of pink flagging. The marked trees shall be protected from damage throughout
the construction and landscaping period.
5.2.9 Mailboxes. Mailboxes shall be clustered and shall be located and
designed by Declarant. Each Owner shall use only the mailbox located and designed by
Declarant for such Owner's Unit.
5.2.10 Landscaping and Fences. Landscaping plans for each Lot shall be
approved in advance in writing by the ACC. Fences, walls and shrubs are permitted to
delineate the boundaries of each Lot, subject to the approval of the ACC,which shall
determine, among other things,whether such fences,walls or shrubs would interfere with
utility or other recorded easements. No barbed wire, chain link, steel post or corrugated
fiberglass fences shall be erected on any Lot, except for those approved by the ACC.
5.2.11 Yard Lamps. Yard lamps of an ACC-approved design and
construction shall be provided by each Owner at the driveway entrance or pedestrian walkway
entrance to such Owner's Lot. Such yard lamps shall (a)be constructed of materials approved
by the ACC that correspond to the exterior materials of the Unit on such Lot(b)reduce glare
and (c)provide a maximum of 100 watts of light. All yard lamps shall include a device that
automatically switches the yard lamp on at dusk and off at dawn and shall not be manually
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 9
Seattle/3.29.02
operable from the Unit. The ACC may specify the light fixtures to be utilized. The yard
lamps shall function in lieu of conventional street lights to provide lit entries to Lots.
5.2.12 Subdivision. No Lots may be subdivided.
5.3 Construction.
5.3.1 Contractor and Architect. All Units and other Improvements shall be
designed by a licensed architect and constructed by experienced contractors licensed under
the laws of the State of Washington.
5.3.2 Building Plans. No clearing, grading, or construction or installation of
Units, Landscaping or Improvements shall be commenced upon a Lot or any other portion of
the Property, nor shall any exterior addition to or change or alteration thereto be made, until
after(a)the details thereof, (b)written plans and specifications therefor, showing the nature,
kind, shape, height,materials, colors, and location of the same, (c)a construction erosion
control plan, (d) a Landscaping plan, and (e) any other submittals described in the Design
Guidelines, shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the ACC as provided in
Section 8.2.6,to ensure the harmony of external design and location in relation to surrounding
structures,vegetation, and topography.
5.3.3 Completion of Improvements. Any Unit or other Improvement
constructed or placed on any Lot hereunder shall be completed diligently and continuously,
including all Landscaping and all exterior finish,paint, and trim,within 18 months from the
commencement of construction (unless completion is delayed by acts of God or labor
stoppages not attributable to the fault of the Owner and beyond the Owner's control). During
the construction period,the Lot shall be kept clean and neat, free of tall grass and other
unsightly growth, and refuse shall be disposed of frequently. All construction sites shall be
maintained in accordance with construction site maintenance requirements if adopted by the
ACC from time to time. The street shall also be kept clear during the construction period. If
in the course of the construction of any Improvements or the installation of any Landscaping
or at any other time, an Owner or such Owner's agent, employee or contractor destroys or
damages any Common Area, such Owner shall promptly repair such Common Area in a
manner and at a location approved by the ACC.
5.3.4 Plan Checks/Construction Cleanup Fee. Each Owner constructing a
Unit on a Lot shall be required to pay$ to Declarant or the ACC to be used as
follows:
(a) $ fee for Unit plan check; and
(b) $ as a cleaning and damage deposit to be held
until the Unit construction is complete. The damage deposit will be used if the Owner does
not fulfill its cleanup responsibility or damages facilities within the Property, in which case
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 10
Seattle/3.29.02
determined that the maintenance or repair to the Limited Common Element is due to the
negligence of misconduct of one of the Owners,then such Owner shall be liable for the full
cost of repair or maintenance.
6.3 Road Easements. Declarant hereby declares a nonexclusive easement for the
common use and enjoyment of the roads as shown on the Plat.
6.4 Drainage Easements. Declarant may create, establish, grant and convey to
the Association a nonexclusive drainage easement for the purpose of providing storm water
drainage for portions of the Property. The easement if dedicated shall be for the use and
benefit of the Property,the Association and Owners. No Improvement, fill or obstruction
(including fences,patios or decks)shall be located in drainage easements unless specific
written permission has been obtained from both Declarant or the ACC and the applicable
governmental entity. All maintenance,monitoring,repair and/or rebuilding of the drainage
easement, retention and detention system, flow restrictors and related facilities shall be by the
Association,unless and until said facilities are dedicated and accepted by the City of Renton
or other governmental authority.
6.5 Monumentation Tracts and Easements. Declarant may grant and convey to
the Association one or more monumentation tracts or easements across one or more Lots, and
such monumentation tracts or easements shall constitute a part of the Common Areas. All
maintenance and repair of the monumentation tracts and easements shall be by the
Association. No Improvements shall be constructed and/or located within the monumentation
tracts or easements by any Owner,nor shall the monumentation tracts or easements be used
for any purpose inconsistent herewith. Declarant or the Association may build,replace,
modify and maintain monumentation, including lighted pilasters and Landscaping within the
tracts or easements.
6.6 Reservation of Easement. There is reserved to Declarant and to the
Association and their agents and employees, an easement over each and every Lot for entry
and access in a reasonable manner and at reasonable times and places for the performance
generally of all their rights and duties as provided in this Declaration.
6.7 Dedicated Right of Ways and Tracts. The Declarant may dedicate to the
applicable governmental entity the rights of way for roadway purposes as depicted on the Plat.
6.8 Sales Office Easement. Declarant hereby reserves for itself and those
licensed builders designated by Declarant an easement over one or more Lots declared by
Declarant for purposes of construction, operation and use of a sales or information office
during the Development Period. The easement reserved hereunder shall terminate upon
removal of the sales or information office by Declarant.
6.9 Utility Easements. Various utility easements are designated on the face of the
Plat for the purpose of providing properties within the Plat with electric,telephone, gas, cable
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 12
Seattle/3.29.02
television service and water. These easements give the easement-holders the right to enter
upon these Lots at all times to effectuate the purposes of the easements. Structures may only
be placed on easements with the prior written permission of the ACC and the entity to which
the easement was granted. No planting material, fill, or other substances may be placed on
utility easements if it will interfere with any utility services.
6.10 No Easement Obstructions. No structure,planting or other material that may
damage or interfere with any easement or the installation or maintenance of utilities or that
may unreasonably change, obstruct or retard direction or flow of any drainage channels shall
be placed or permitted to remain on any portion of the Property.
6.11 Alteration of Common Areas. Nothing shall be altered in, constructed in or
removed from the Common Areas without the prior written consent of the ACC.
ARTICLE 7. UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE
7.1 Utility Systems; Right to Connect. Utility systems shall be underground
exclusively. There is reserved to each utility district or utility company the right to connect
Improvements upon all Lots with the utility service lines. The Owner shall pay the then-
prevailing price for connections, trenching, equipment and meters, as charged by such utility.
7.2 Drainage. All Owners shall maintain in proper working order all roof drains
and area storm drains on Improvements constructed on their Lots and shall ensure that the
water from those drains flows into the storm drainage system installed to serve such Lot. All
Owners shall pre-serve and not alter the natural and man-made drainage courses existing on
their Lots at the times such Owners obtain their respective interests in said Lots. All Owners
are prohibited from redirecting,restricting, altering, or otherwise impairing the natural water
flow in any manner without the prior written approval of the City of Renton (or successor
governmental agency) and the ACC. No Lot drainage shall be directed onto the Common
Areas unless such drainage is shown on the approved road and drainage plans for the
7.3 Surface Water Drainage System. Each Lot shall contain a surface water
drainage system, intended to protect the environment. It is incumbent on each Owner to help
protect the water quality of Lake Washington and May Creek. Owners shall dispose of oils,
solvents, cleaners and other polluting substances in a proper manner and in accordance with
all applicable laws. Owners shall not apply excessive amounts of lawn fertilizers or other
chemicals to their Lots. If deemed necessary by the Association or required by the applicable
local authorities,the Association shall have the power to impose a program requiring
reduction of pollutants, including without limitation imposition of a moratorium on
application of fertilizers.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 13
Seattle/3.29.02
7.4 Maintenance of Sensitive Areas. Each Owner shall, at such Owner's
expense,maintain all sensitive areas located on such Owner's Lots. The Association shall, at
its expense,maintain all sensitive area tracts located in the Common Areas.
ARTICLE 8. MANAGEMENT; DEVELOPMENT PERIOD; ASSOCIATION
8.1 Development Period.
8.1.1 Notices to Owners. Declarant shall give 10 days' prior written notice
of the expiration of the Development Period to the Owner of each Lot. Such notice shall
specify the date when the Development Period will expire and shall further notify each Owner
of the date,place and time when the first annual meeting of the Association will be held. The
notice shall specify that the purpose of the meeting is to elect the Board and officers of the
Association. Notwithstanding any provision of this Declaration,the Articles of Incorporation
or the Bylaws to the contrary,for the purpose of this meeting,the presence, either in person or
by proxy, of the Owners of 10 Lots shall constitute a quorum. The Board and officers of the
Association may be elected by the vote of a Majority of Members.
8.1.2 Temporary Board. Declarant may in its sole discretion, and at such
times as Declarant deems appropriate, appoint 4 persons who may be Owners, or are
representatives of corporate entities or other entities that are Owners, as a Temporary Board.
During the Development Period,the Temporary Board shall have full authority and all rights,
responsibilities,privileges and duties to manage the Property under this Declaration and shall
be subject to all provisions of this Declaration,the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws.
After selecting a Temporary Board, Declarant, in the exercise of its sole discretion, may at
any time terminate the Temporary Board and resume management authority under
Section 8.1.3 or select a new Temporary Board under this Section 8.1.2. If a Temporary
Board is appointed during the Development Period,the Temporary Board shall conduct the ,
affairs of the Association in accordance with the Bylaws.
8.1.3 Absence of Temporary Board. So long as no Temporary Board is
managing the Property or until such time as the first permanent Board is elected(if Declarant
chooses not to appoint a Temporary Board), Declarant or a managing agent selected by
Declarant shall have the power and authority to exercise all the rights, duties and functions of
the Board and generally exercise all powers necessary to carry out the provisions of this
Declaration. If Declarant does so, it will not be necessary for Declarant to conduct the affairs
of the Association in accordance with the Bylaws.
8.2 The Association.
8.2.1 Membership. Each Owner shall be a Member of the Association.
Such membership shall be appurtenant to and held and owned in the same manner as the
beneficial fee interest in the Lot to which it relates. Membership shall not be separated from
ownership of the Lot to which it relates. However, any Owner may delegate his/her rights of
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 14
Seattle/3.29.02
membership in the Association and rights of enjoyment in the Common Areas to the members
of his/her family and to any tenants occupying his/her Unit.
8.2.2 Powers. The Association's duties and powers include but are not
limited to (a) owning,maintaining and administering the Common Areas and facilities,
(b) administering and enforcing this Declaration and(c) levying, collecting and disbursing the
assessments and charges provided for in this Declaration. The Association has the right to
promulgate rules and regulations that may further define and limit permissible uses and
activities consistent with the provisions of this Declaration. All Owners shall receive written
notice of any meeting of the Association at least 5 days in advance of the meeting.
8.2.3 Voting Rights. During the Development Period,Declarant shall have
all voting rights. After expiration of the Development Period, every Owner shall be entitled
to cast one vote in the Association for each Lot owned. The right to vote may not be severed
or separated from any Lot, and the sale,transfer or conveyance of a Lot to a new Owner shall
operate to transfer the appurtenant vote without the requirement,of any expressed reference
thereto. The presence at any meeting,in person or by proxy, of at least 34% of the Members
shall constitute a quorum. If a quorum is present, the affirmative vote of a Majority of
Members shall be the act of the Association, unless the vote of a greater number of Members
is required by this Declaration or by the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws.
8.2.4 Number of Votes. From the commencement of the existence of the
Association,there shall be one vote for each of the Lots located on the Property. The total
number of outstanding votes shall be automatically adjusted to equal the total number of Lots
that may be created from time to time on the Property.
8.2.5 Board of Directors.
8.2.5.1 Expiration of the Development Period. Upon the expiration
of Declarant's management authority under Section 8.1, all administrative power and
authority shall vest in a Board of 4 directors who shall be Members of the Association. The
Association,by amendment of the Bylaws, may increase the number of directors. All Board
positions shall be open for election at the first annual meeting after expiration of the
Development Period. At the first meeting of either the Temporary Board or the Board,the
Bylaws shall be adopted. The Temporary Board or Board will make copies of the Bylaws
available to Owners upon request.
8.2.5.2 Terms. The terms of the Board members shall be defined in the
Bylaws.
8.2.5.3 Powers of the Board. All powers of the Board must be
exercised in accordance with the specifications that are set forth in the Bylaws. The Board,
for the benefit of the Property and the Owners, shall enforce the provisions of this
Declaration,the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws. Members of the Board shall not be
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 15
Seattle/3.29.02
entitled to any compensation for services performed. In addition to the duties and powers
imposed by the Bylaws and any resolution of the Association that may be hereafter adopted,
the Board shall have the following powers and be responsible for the following:
(a) Obtain policies of general liability insurance;
(b) Obtain legal and accounting services if necessary to the
administration of Association affairs, administration of the Common Areas, or the
enforcement of this Declaration;
(c) Pay all costs of maintaining the Common Areas;
(d) If necessary,maintain any Lot if such maintenance is
reasonably necessary in the judgment of the Board to (i)protect Common Areas or(ii)to
preserve the appearance and value of the Property or Lot. The Board may authorize such
maintenance activities if the Owner of the Lot has failed or refused to perform maintenance
within a reasonable time after written notice of the necessity of such maintenance has been
delivered by the Board to the Owner of such Lot. All costs incurred by the Board in doing so
shall be a special assessment against the Owner, and shall constitute a lien against the Lot,
which shall have the same effect as and may be enforced in the same manner as other liens of
the Association pursuant to Section 9.2. If the estimated cost of such repair exceeds one-half
of one percent of the assessed value of the Lot and Improvements on that Lot,the Board shall
be required to have the assent of a Majority of the Members before undertaking such repairs;
(e) Pay any amount necessary to discharge any lien or
encumbrance levied against the entire Property or any part thereof that is claimed or may, in
the opinion of the Board, constitute a lien against the Property or against the Common Areas
rather than merely against the interest therein of particular Owners. If one or more Owners
are responsible for the existence of such liens,they shall be jointly and severally liable for the
cost of discharging it and any costs or expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs of title search incurred by the Board by reason of such lien or liens. Such fees and costs
shall be assessed against the Owner or Owners and the Lot responsible to the extent of their
responsibility;
(f) Pay all utility charges attributable to Common Areas;
authorize the installation of utility or service lines that the Board deems to be in the best
interest of the Association;
(g) Pay all costs deemed appropriate by the Board to ensure
adequate security for the Lots and Common Areas;
(h) Have the exclusive right to contract for all goods,
services, maintenance, and capital improvements provided, however, that such right of
contract shall be subject to Association approval;
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 16
Seattle/3.29.02
(i) Improve the Common Areas with capital improvements;
provided that for capital improvements exceeding $5,000, a Majority of Members must
approve the addition of such capital improvements;
(j) Enter any Lot when reasonably necessary, in the event
of emergencies or in connection with any maintenance, landscaping or construction for which
the Board is responsible. Except in cases of emergencies,the Board, its agents or employees
shall attempt to give notice to the Owner or occupant of any Lot 24 hours prior to such entry.
Such entry must be made with as little inconvenience to the Owner as practicable, and any
damage caused thereby shall be repaired by the Board if the entry was due to an emergency
(unless the emergency was caused by the Owner of the Lot entered, in which case the cost
shall be specially assessed to the Lot). If the repairs or maintenance activities were
necessitated by the Owner's neglect of the Lot, the cost of such repair or maintenance activity
shall be specially assessed to that Lot. If the emergency or the need for maintenance or repair
was caused by the Owner of another Lot,the cost thereof shall be specially assessed against
the Owner of the other Lot;
(k) Adopt and publish rules and regulations governing the
Members and their guests and establish penalties for any infraction thereof;
(1) Declare the office of a member of the Board to be vacant
in the event that a member of the Board is absent from three consecutive regular meetings of
the Board;
(m) Employ a manager, an independent contractor, or such
other employees as the Board deems necessary and describe the duties of such employees;
(n) Pay for all goods and services required for the proper
functioning of the Common Areas and the Association.
(o) Impose annual general assessments and special
assessments;
(p) Open a bank account on behalf of the Association and
designate the signatories required;
(q) Commence legal actions for the enforcement of this
Declaration or any other legal action that the Board deems necessary for the protection of the
Property; defend against legal actions initiated against the Association;
(r) Exercise for the Association all powers, duties and
authority vested in or delegated to the Association and not reserved to the membership by
provisions of the Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation or this Declaration. The Board shall have
all powers and authority permitted to it under this Declaration and by the Bylaws. However,
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 17
Seattle/3.29.02
nothing herein contained shall be construed to give the Board authority to conduct a business
for profit on behalf of all the Owners or any of them; and
(s) In the event of death or resignation of any Board
member,the remaining Board members shall have full authority to appoint a successor
member.
8.2.6 Architectural Control Committee.
8.2.6.1 General. Upon termination of the Development Period,the
Board shall appoint an ACC. The ACC shall consist of not less than 3 and not more than 5
Members. An election to fill either a newly created position on the ACC or a vacancy on the
ACC requires the vote of the majority of the entire Board. However,the Board is not obliged
to fill a vacancy on the ACC unless the membership of the ACC numbers less than 3 persons.
During the Development Period,the Declarant may elect to exercise and perform the
functions of the ACC. If Declarant elects not to perform this function, or at any time elects to
no longer perform this function, Declarant shall appoint the ACC to function as herein
provided. After termination of the Development Period,the functions of the ACC shall be
performed by the Board until such time as the Board shall appoint and designate the ACC.
The ACC shall be appointed within one month of the election of the Board following the
termination of the Development Period.
8.2.6.2 Jurisdiction and Purpose. The ACC shall review plans and
specifications for Units, all other exterior Improvements (e.g., garden sheds,tool sheds, doll
houses, tree houses, gazebos,playground equipment, fences, walls, recreational facilities,hot
tubs, spas,basketball courts, basketball hoops,tennis courts, swimming pools,bath houses,
stables, barns, animal pens or enclosures), Landscaping and alterations thereof(including
changes in the exterior colors of any Units)to be placed upon the Property. No exterior
Improvements, Landscaping or alterations may be made until plans and specifications
showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials and location of the proposed Improvement,
Landscaping or alteration have been submitted to and approved in writing by the ACC. The
ACC shall determine whether the exterior design and location of the proposed Improvement,
Landscaping, alteration or color change harmonizes with the (a) surrounding Improvements,
(b) surrounding natural environment and (c) aesthetic character of Units on the Property.
8.2.6.3 Membership. The ACC shall be designated by the Board.
8.2.6.4 Designation of a Representative. The ACC may unanimously
designate one or more of its members or a third party to act on behalf of the ACC or a ACC
member with respect to both ministerial matters and discretionary judgments.
8.2.6.5 Donation of Time. No member of the ACC shall be entitled to
any compensation for services performed on behalf of the ACC. ACC members or
representatives shall have no financial liability resulting from ACC actions.
C:ITEMPIBARBEE CCRS.DOC 18
Seattle/3.29.02
8.2.6.6 Address of the Committee. The address of the ACC shall be
at the registered office address of the Association.
8.2.6.7 Voting. ACC decisions shall be determined by a majority vote
by the members of the ACC.
8.2.6.8 Submission of Plans. An application for approval of all
proposed Improvements, Landscaping and alterations shall be submitted in duplicate by mail
to the ACC. The application shall include plans and specifications for the proposed work, the
name and address of the Owner submitting the application,the identification of the Lot
involved, and the following information about the proposed Improvement, Landscaping or
alteration:
(a) The location of the Improvement, Landscaping or alteration upon
the Lot;
(b) The elevation of the Improvement, Landscaping or alteration with
reference to the existing and finished Lot grade;
(c) The general design of the Improvement, Landscaping or alteration;
(d) The layout of the Improvement, Landscaping or alteration;
(e) The exterior finish materials and color, including roof materials of
the Improvement; and
(f) Other information that may be required in order to determine
whether the Improvement, Landscaping or alteration conforms to the standards articulated in
this Declaration and the Design Guidelines.
8.2.6.9 Plan Check Fee. All individuals submitting surveys and plans
to the ACC shall be obliged to pay a reasonable plan check fee to cover the administrative
costs of reviewing such development proposals. It will be necessary to pay the plan check fee
upon submitting plans and specifications to the ACC. A plan check fee of$100 will be
charged to review plans and specifications for Units. A plan check fee of$25 will be charged
for the review of other Improvements, Landscaping or alterations.
8.2.6.10 Evaluating Development Proposals. The ACC may
establish the Design Guidelines. In addition to the Design Guidelines, in evaluating
development proposals,the ACC shall determine whether the external design, color, building
materials, appearance, height, configuration of the proposed Improvement or alteration, and
the proposed Landscaping harmonize with (a)the various features of the natural and built
environment, (b)the aesthetic character of the other Units on the Property and(c) any other
factors that affect the desirability or suitability of a proposed Improvement, Landscaping or
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 19
Seattle/3.29.02
alteration. The ACC shall decline to approve any design that fails to meet the above-recited
standards and any other aesthetic standards promulgated by the ACC. The ACC will not
approve temporary or non-permanent structures. ACC determinations may be amended by a
majority vote of ACC members.
8.2.6.11 Approval Procedures. Within 30 days after the receipt
of a complete application in accordance with Section 8.2.6.8,the ACC shall approve or
disapprove the proposed Improvement, Landscaping or alteration. The ACC may decline to
approve plans and specifications that, in its opinion, do not conform to restrictions articulated
in this Declaration or to the Design Guidelines. The ACC shall indicate its approval or
disapproval on one of the copies of the plans and specifications pro-vided by the applicant and
shall return the plans and specifications to the address shown on the plans and specifications.
8.2.6.12 Compliance with Codes. In all cases, ultimate
responsibility for satisfying all local building codes and requirements rests with the Owner
and contractor employed by the Owner. The ACC has no responsibility for ensuring that the
plans and specifications that it reviews comply with building and zoning codes and
requirements and shall have no liability if Improvements, Landscaping or alterations that it
authorizes fail to comply with relevant building and zoning codes and requirements. No
person on the ACC acting on behalf of the ACC shall be held responsible for any defect in
any plans or specifications that are approved by the ACC,nor shall any member of the ACC
or any person acting on behalf of the ACC be held responsible for any defect in any
Improvement, Landscaping or alteration that was built pursuant to plans and specifications
approved by the ACC.
8.2.6.13 Variation. The ACC shall have the authority to
approve plans and specifications that do not conform to this Declaration or the Design
Guidelines in order to (a) over-come practical difficulties or(b)prevent undue hardship from
being imposed on an Owner as a result of applying this Declaration or the Design Guidelines.
However, a variation may only be approved if the variation will not (i) impair the attractive
development of the Property or(ii) adversely affect the character of nearby Lots or Common
Areas. Granting a variation shall not constitute a waiver of the restrictions articulated in this
Declaration or the Design Guidelines. Variations shall only be granted if the ACC determines
that the variation would further the purposes and intent of this Declaration and the Design
Guidelines. Variations shall only be granted in extraordinary circumstances.
8.2.6.14 Enforcement. In any judicial action to enforce a
determination of the ACC, the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's attorneys' fees,
expert witness fees, and other costs incurred in connection with such a legal action or appeal.
ARTICLE 9. BUDGET AND ASSESSMENTS
9.1 Association Budget. The Association's fiscal year shall be the calendar year
unless the Board designates another fiscal year. Within 30 days prior to the beginning of each
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 20
Seattle/3.29.02
fiscal year,the Board shall adopt an Association budget for the following fiscal year, setting
forth the amounts reasonably estimated for Common Expenses. "Common Expenses"mean
(a) expenses of administration, maintenance,monitoring, operation, security,repair or
replacement of the Common Areas or any improvements thereof, (b)premiums or deductibles
for all insurance policies required or permitted by this Declaration, (c) all real property and
other taxes and assessments on the Common Areas, (d)utility and service charges, (e)funding
of reserves for anticipated operational shortfalls or for replacement of capital items, (f)legal
fees and costs of the Association, if any, and(g) any other expenses established from time to
time as reasonably necessary by the Board. Within 30 days after the Board adopts a budget,
the Board shall provide each Member with a summary of the budget and set a date for a
meeting of the Association to consider ratification of the budget, which shall be not less than
14 nor more than 60 days after the summary is provided. Unless at that meeting a Majority of
Members reject the budget,the budget shall be ratified, whether or not a quorum is present. If
the proposed budget is rejected or the required notice is not given,the periodic budget last
ratified by the Owners shall be continued until such time as the Owners ratify a subsequent
budget proposed by the Board. Upon adoption of a budget,the Board shall assess all Lots
with general annual and special assessments as pro-vided in this Declaration.
9.2 Creation of Liens and Personal Obligations. Each Owner, by acceptance of
a deed for a Lot,whether or not it shall be expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and
agree to pay to the Association(a) general assessments and (b) special assessments. The
general and special assessments,together with interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees,
shall be a charge and continuing lien upon the Lot or Unit against which such assessment is
made and also shall be the personal obligation of the individual who is the Owner of the Lot
or Unit at the time the assessment comes due.
9.3 Annual General Assessment. Each Owner shall pay an annual general
assessment based upon the Association's budget in equal quarterly installments on the first
day of each quarter beginning with January 1 of each fiscal year. A portion of the general
assessment may include fees or charges payable to third parties, including without limitation,
fees for architectural services provided to the ACC. Beginning upon the date of this
Declaration, the annual general assessment shall be $ per Lot, and each quarterly
installment shall be $ . All increases in the general annual assessment must
directly reflect increases in Common Expenses. The general annual assessment may be
increased by(a)up to 10%per year without a vote of the Members; and (b)more than 10%
per year only if a Majority of the Members consent to the increase.
•
9.4 Special Assessments. In addition to the annual general assessment authorized
in Section 9.3, the Board may levy in any fiscal year one or more special assessments,
applicable to that year only, as follows:
9.4.1 Capital Improvements. The Board may levy special assessments for
the purpose of defraying in whole or in part the cost of any installation, construction,
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 21
Seattle/3.29.02
reconstruction, extraordinary repair or replacement, of any capital improvements upon the
Common Areas,provided that any capital improvements costing $5,000 or more must be
approved by a Majority of Members.
9.4.2 Legal Fees and Damages. In addition to the general and special
assessments authorized in Sections 9.3 and 9.4.1,the Board may levy from time to time a
special assessment payable in a lump sum or installment basis, as the Board directs, for the
purpose of defraying in whole or in part any legal fees, costs and/or damages or awards
incurred in legal actions in which the Association is a party, or in which a member of either
the Board or the ACC is named as a party(including Declarant when exercising the authority
of the Board during the Development Period) as a result of a decision made or action
performed while acting on behalf of the Association. The special assessment under this
Section 9.4 may be made by the Board only if approved by a Majority of Members.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no special assessment necessary to fulfill the indemnification
obligations of Article 11 shall be subject to disapproval.
9.4.3 Notice and Quorum for Any Action Authorized Under this Section.
Written notice of any meeting called for the purpose of taking any action authorized under
Sections 9.4.1 and 9.4.2 shall be sent to all Members not less than 30 days nor more than 60
days in advance of the meeting. Notwithstanding anything in this Declaration to the contrary,
at the first meeting called,the presence of 51 percent of the Members of the Association or of
proxies entitled to cast votes shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present,
another meeting may be called subject to the same notice requirement; the required quorum at
the subsequent meeting shall be 34% of the Members.
9.5 Amount of Assessment. The amount of the general or special assessment
attributable to each Lot shall be equal to the total amount of such assessment divided by the
total number of Lots located on the Property.
9.6 Date of Commencement of Assessments; Due Dates. Upon approval of the
budget,the Board shall fix the general and/or special assessments, and shall notify each
Owner of its respective assessment amount and due dates. The liability of an Owner for any
assessments against its Lot shall commence on the first day of the calendar month following
the date upon which the Owner acquires title to the Lot. The first general assessment payment
shall be prorated according to the number of days remaining in the applicable calendar
quarter. Upon request and for a reasonable charge,the Board shall furnish a signed certificate
setting forth whether all assessments on'a specified Lot have been paid. A properly executed
certificate as to the status of assessments on a Lot shall be binding upon the Association as of
the date of its issuance.
9.7 Effect of Nonpayment of Assessment; Remedies of the Association.
Assessments not paid within 10 days after the due date shall bear interest at the rate of 12%
per annum until paid, but not exceeding the maximum rate permitted by law. Each Owner
hereby expressly vests in the Association,through the Board or its agents, the right and power
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 22
Seattle/3.29.02
•
to bring all actions against such Owner personally for the collection of such assessments as
debts and to enforce lien rights of the Association by all methods available for the
enforcement of such liens, including foreclosure by an action brought in the name of the
Association in like manner as a mortgage of real property. Such Owner hereby expressly
grants to the Association the power of sale in connection with such liens. The liens provided
for herein shall be in favor and for the benefit of the Association. The Association shall have
the power to bid in an interest at foreclosure sale and to acquire,hold, lease,mortgage and
convey the same. The Owner is responsible for payment of all attorneys' fees and costs
incurred in collecting past due assessments or enforcing the terms of assessment liens. No
Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided herein by nonuse
of the Common Areas or abandonment of its Lot. In addition to the foregoing,the
Association shall have the right to suspend the voting rights of an Owner for any period
during which any assessment against the Lot remains unpaid and for'a period not to exceed 60
days for an infraction of the terms of either this Declaration,the Articles or the Bylaws of the
Association.
9.8 Exempt Property. All Lots are subject to the assessments provided for in this
Section 9 except for those owned by Declarant. All property dedicated to and accepted by
local public authority and all Common Areas shall be exempt from the assessments provided
for in this Article.
ARTICLE 10. SUBORDINATION OF LIENS
10.1 Intent of Subordination Provisions. The provisions of this Article 10 apply
for the benefit of each Mortgagee who lends money for purposes of construction or to secure
the payment of the purchase price of a Lot or Unit.
•
10.2 Mortgagee's Nonliability. A Mortgagee shall not, merely by reason of its
security interest,be liable for the payment of any assessment under this Declaration,nor for
the observation or performance of any covenant or restriction, except those enforceable by
equitable relief and not requiring the payment of money or except as hereinafter provided.
10.3 Mortgagee's Rights During Foreclosure. During the pendency of any
proceeding to foreclose a mortgage, including any redemption period, the Mortgagee or
receiver, if any,may exercise any and all rights and privileges of the Owner of the
encumbered Lot or Unit, including without limitation the right to vote in the Association to
the exclusion of the Owner's exercise of such rights.
10.4 Mortgagee as Owner. At such time as a Mortgagee, or any successor or
assign thereof, shall become the record owner of a Lot or Unit, the Mortgagee or successor or
assign shall be subject to all terms and conditions of this Declaration, including the obligation
to pay for all assessments and charges in the same manner as any Owner.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 23
Seattle/329.02
10.5 Mortgagee's Title Free and Clear of Liens. A Mortgagee acquiring title to a
Lot or Unit through foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof shall acquire title to the encumbered
Lot free and clear of any lien arising from this Declaration to secure payment of any
assessment which become due but was unpaid prior to the Mortgagee's acquiring title.
10.6 Survival of Assessment Obligation. After foreclosure, any unpaid
assessment shall continue to exist and remain a personal obligation of the Owner against
whom the same was assessed, and the Association shall use reasonable efforts to collect the
same from such Owner.
10.7 Subordination of Assessment Liens. The liens for assessments provided in
this Declaration shall be subordinate to the lien of any Mortgage placed upon a Lot or Unit by
a Mortgagee as a construction loan, security interest, or a purchase price security interest, and
the Association upon demand will execute a written subordination document to confirm the
Mortgagee's priority. The sale or transfer of any Lot or Unit shall not affect the assessment
liens provided for in this Declaration except as otherwise specifically provided herein, and in
the case of a transfer of a Lot or Unit in foreclosure to a Mortgagee, assessment liens shall
arise against the Lot or Unit for any assessment payments coming due after the date of
completion of the foreclosure or deed in lieu thereof.
ARTICLE 11. INDEMNIFICATION
To the full extent permitted by law, each member of the Board, each member of an
Association committee (including, without limitation, the ACC and the FMC), each officer of
the Association, the Declarant and any managing agent of the Association shall be
indemnified by the Association against all expenses and liabilities, including attorneys' fees,
reasonably incurred by or imposed in connection with any proceeding to which he or she may
be a party or in which he or she may become involved by reason of holding or having held
such position, or any settlement thereof, whether or not he or she holds such position at the
time such expenses or liabilities are incurred, except to the extent such expenses and liabilities
are covered by insurance, and except in such cases wherein such person is adjudged guilty of
willful misfeasance in the performance of his or her duties; provided that, in the event of a
settlement,the indemnification shall apply only when the Board approves such settlement and
reimbursement as being for the best interests of the Association. Nothing herein shall,
however, be deemed to obligate the Association to indemnify any Owner who is or has been a
Board member, committee member or officer of the Association with respect to any duties or
obligations assumed or liabilities incurred by him or her under and by virtue of this
Declaration as an Owner of a Lot or Unit.
ARTICLE 12. INSURANCE; LOSSES; CONDEMNATION
12.1 Insurance Coverage. The Board shall procure for the Association and
continuously maintain as a Common Expense one or more policies of insurance as follows:
(a) insurance against property loss or damage by fire or other hazards to the Common Areas,
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 24
Seattle/3.29.02
(b) general comprehensive liability insurance for the Association,the Owners, Declarant and
any agents, guests, invitees, licensees, or others, incident to the use and ownership of the
Common Areas, (c)fidelity coverage naming the Association to protect against dishonest acts
by the Board or any officers, agents or other persons responsible for handling Association
funds, (d)workers' compensation insurance to the extent required by applicable laws and
(e) any other insurance the Board deems advisable.
12.2 Casualty Losses. In the event of substantial damage or destruction of any
Common Area,the Board shall provide notice to the Owners, and all insurance proceeds
received for the damage or destruction shall be paid to the Association for repair,replacement
or other disbursement as determined by the Board.
12.3 Condemnation. In the event any part of a Common Area is sought to be
acquired by eminent domain or other proceedings,the Association shall give prompt notice
thereof to the Owners. All compensation, damages and other proceeds received shall be paid
to the Association.
ARTICLE 13. GENERAL PROVISIONS
13.1 Enforcement. The Association,the Declarant and each Owner shall have the
right to enforce by any proceedings at law or in equity all rights, duties, obligations,
covenants and easements now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration.
Failure by the Association or Declarant to enforce any right, duty, obligation or covenant
herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. In the
event of legal action to enforce this Declaration,the prevailing party shall be entitled to
recover court costs, reasonable attorneys' fees and any other expenses of litigation.
13.2 Binding on Successors. The provisions of this Declaration shall run with the
Property and apply to and bind the successors and assigns in interest and all parties having or
acquiring any right, title or interest in the Property or any portion thereof.
13.3 Amendment. This Declaration may be amended during the Development
Period by the sole signature of the Declarant. After the Development Period,this Declaration
may be amended by an instrument signed by not less than 67% of the votes entitled to be cast
by Members present or represented by proxy at an annual or special meeting of the Members
at which a quorum is present. Any amendment must be recorded before it is effective.
13.4 Interpretation. Use of the singular herein shall include reference to the
plural, and vice versa, and use of the masculine gender shall include reference to the feminine
gender. The captions in this Declaration are inserted only as a matter of convenience and for
reference, and in no way describe, define, or limit the intent of this Declaration. The captions
are not to be used in interpreting this Declaration.
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 25
Seattle/3.29.02
13.5 Severability. The invalidation of any one of the provisions herein by
judgment or court order shall not in any way affect any other provision which shall remain in
full force and effect.
DATED this day of , 2002.
, a
By:
, a
By:
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A e Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B -Plat of Property and Lots
Exhibit C - Map of the Property
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 26
Seattle/3.29.02
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of , 2002, before me, a Notary Public in and for
the State of Washington,personally appeared ,personally known to me
(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person who signed the
instrument; on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute this instrument as the
of , the corporation that executed the instrument;
acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned; and on oath stated that he/she was duly elected,
qualified, and acting as said officer of the corporation.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and
year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington,residing at
My appointment expires
Print Name
•
C:\TEMP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 27
Seattle/3.29.02
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
On this day of ,2002,before me, a Notary Public in and for
the State of Washington,personally appeared ,personally known to me
(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence)to be the person who signed the
instrument; on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute this instrument as the
of ,the corporation that executed the instrument;
acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned; and on oath stated that he/she was duly elected,
qualified, and acting as said officer of the corporation.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and
year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
Print Name
C:\T MP\BARBEE CCRS.DOC 28
Seattle/3.29.02
y C A M }; !t r.
, .
•
FirstAmerican Title Insurance Company
2101 FOURTH AVENUE, SUITE 712, SEATTLE, WA 98121
NATIONAL/COMMERCIAL DIVISION TITLE UNIT - C3
FAX NO. (206) 615-3000
RICHARD BOOTH
COMMERCIAL TITLE OFFICER
(206) 615-3008
vC`i,o ESP
SECOND AMENDED �RFNTONN'NG
�p
SUBDIVISION GUARANTEE R D 5?o0?
NEcE,f
ORDER NO. 814728-C3 �®
LIABILITY: $1,000.00 FEE: 200.00 TAX: $17.20
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, HEREIN
CALLED THE COMPANY, SUBJECT TO THE LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS SET
FORTH BELOW AND IN SCHEDULE A
GUARANTEES
HEREIN CALLED THE ASSURED, AGAINST ACTUAL LOSS NOT EXCEEDING THE LIABILITY
AMOUNT STATED ABOVE WHICH THE ASSURED SHALL SUSTAIN BY REASON OF ANY
INCORRECTNESS IN THE ASSURANCES SET FORTH IN SCHEDULE A.
LIABILITY EXCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS
1. NO GUARANTEE IS GIVEN NOR LIABILITY ASSUMED WITH RESPECT TO THE
VALIDITY, LEGAL EFFECT OR PRIORITY OF ANY MATTER SHOWN HEREIN.
2. THE COMPANY'S LIABILITY HEREUNDER SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AMOUNT OF
ACTUAL LOSS SUSTAINED BY THE ASSURED BECAUSE OF RELIANCE UPON THE
ASSURANCE HEREIN SET FORTH, BUT IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COMPANY'S
LIABILITY EXCEED THE LIABILITY AMOUNT SET FORTH ABOVE.
3. THIS GUARANTEE IS RESTRICTED TO THE USE OF THE ASSURED FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PROVIDING TITLE EVIDENCE AS MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN SUBDIVIDING LAND
PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 58.17, R.C.W., AND THE LOCAL
REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SAID STATUTE. IT IS NOT TO
BE USED AS A BASIS FOR CLOSING ANY TRANSACTION AFFECTING TITLE TO SAID
PROPERTY.
Page 1
SUBDIVISION GUARAN'L,,L
ORDER NO. 814728-C3
SCHEDULE A
THE ASSURANCES REFERRED TO ON THE FACE PAGE ARE:
A. TITLE IS VESTED IN:
BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, AS TO THE LAND
HEREIN; AND BARBEE MILL CO., INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, AS TO THE
IMPROVEMENTS THEREON
B. THAT ACCORDING TO THE COMPANY'S TITLE PLANT RECORDS RELATIVE TO THE
FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING THOSE RECORDS MAINTAINED
AND INDEXED BY NAME), THERE ARE NO OTHER DOCUMENTS AFFECTING TITLE TO SAID
REAL PROPERTY OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN BELOW
UNDER RECORD MATTERS.
THE FOLLOWING MATTERS ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE COVERAGE OF THIS GUARANTEE:
1. UNPATENTED MINING CLAIMS, RESERVATIONS OR EXCEPTIONS IN PATENTS OR IN ACTS
AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF.
2. WATER RIGHTS, CLAIMS OR TITLE TO WATER.
3. TAX DEEDS TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON.
4. DOCUMENTS PERTAINING TO MINERAL ESTATES.
DESCRIPTION:
ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1, SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST,
W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND OF SECOND CLASS SHORELANDS ADJOINING LYING
WESTERLY OF NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY;
EXCEPT THAT PORTION, IF ANY, OF SAID SHORELANDS LYING NORTH OF THE WESTERLY
PRODUCTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1.
RECORD MATTERS:
1. DELETED
2. FACILITY CHARGES, IF ANY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO HOOK-UP, OR
CONNECTION CHARGES AND LATECOMER CHARGES FOR WATER OR SEWER FACILITIES
OF KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 107 AS DISCLOSED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED
APRIL 1, 1981 UNDER RECORDING NO. 8104010618.
3. THE LACK OF A RIGHT OF ACCESS TO AND FROM THE LAND ACROSS A RAILROAD RIGHT
OF WAY; ALSO RESTRICTIONS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF ANY ISSUED "PRIVATE
ROADWAY AND CROSSING AGREEMENT."
4. SUBJECT TO THE TERMS OF ANY UNRECORDED HARBOUR AREA LEASE FROM THE STATE
OF WASHINGTON OR PORT OF SEATTLE FOR ANY IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS WHARVES,
DOCKS, PIERS, SLIPS OR OTHER MARINE APPURTENANCES WHICH EXTEND INTO LAKE
Page 2
ORDER NO. 814728-C3
WASHINGTON BEYOND THE PRIVATELY OWNED SECOND CLASS SHORELANDS.
5. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS
CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT:
RECORDED: NNE 13, 1908
RECORDING NO.: 266025
AS FOLLOWS:
GRANTOR RESERVES ONE PRIVATE ROAD CROSSING OVER RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-
WAY.
THE EXACT LOCATION OF SAID CROSSING IN GOVERNMENT LOT 1 DOES NOT APPEAR OF
RECORD.
6. EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN:
RECORDED: DECEMBER 19, 1972
RECORDING NO.: 7212190390
IN FAVOR OF: CITY OF RENTON
FOR: PUBLIC UTILITIES (INCLUDING WATER AND SEWER)
AFFECTS: OVER THE EASTERLY 10 FEET, MEASURED
PERPENDICULARLY TO THE EASTERLY LINE THEREOF OF
THE NORTHERLY 230 FEET, MEASURED ALONG THE
EASTERLY LINE OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED
7. TERMS, COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND/OR PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN A ROADWAY AND
UTILITIES EASEMENT SERVING SAID PREMISES, AS CONTAINED IN DOCUMENT:
RECORDED: FEBRUARY 15, 1996
RECORDING NO.(S): 9602150689
8. ANY QUESTION AS TO THE TRUE LOCATION OF THE LATERAL BOUNDARIES OF SAID
SECOND CLASS SHORELANDS.
9. RIGHT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND TO THAT PORTION, IF ANY, OF THE
PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED WHICH MAY LIE BELOW THE LINE OF ORDINARY HIGH
WATER OF LAKE WASHINGTON.
10. RIGHT OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO THE UNRESTRICTED USE OF ALL THE WATERS OF A
NAVIGABLE BODY OF WATER NOT ONLY FOR THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF NAVIGATION,
BUT ALSO FOR COROLLARY PURPOSES, INCLUDING (BUT NOT LIMITED TO) FISHING,
BOATING, BATHING, SWIMMING, WATER SKIING AND OTHER RELATED RECREATIONAL
PURPOSES, AS THOSE WATERS MAY AFFECT THE TIDELANDS, SHORELANDS, OR
ADJOINING UPLANDS AND WHETHER THE LEVEL OF THE WATER HAS BEEN RAISED
NATURALLY OR ARTIFICIALLY TO A MAINTAINED OR FLUCTUATING LEVEL, ALL AS
FURTHER DEFINED BY THE DECISIONAL LAW OF THIS STATE. (AFFECTS ALL OF THE
PREMISES SUBJECT TO SUCH SUBMERGENCE).
11. UNRECORDED LEASEHOLDS AND RIGHTS OF TENANTS, IF ANY.
12. 100 YEAR FLOOD LINE (H.U.D.) ADJACENT TO MAY CREEK AS DELINEATED ON KING
COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAPS.
13. PRIVATE RAILROAD SPURS ACROSS THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED AS DELINEATED
ON KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAPS.
Page 3
ORDER NO. 814728-C3
14. GENERAL TAXES. THE FIRST HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER APRIL 30TH. THE
SECOND HALF BECOMES DELINQUENT AFTER OCTOBER 31ST.
YEAR: 2002
AMOUNT BILLED: $14,319.18
AMOUNT PAID: $0.00
AMOUNT DUE: $14,319.18, PLUS INTEREST AND PENALTY, IF DELINQUENT
TAX ACCOUNT NO.: 322405-9034-00
ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND: $196,200.00
ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT: $1,054,500.00
NOTE #1: GENERAL TAXES FOR THE YEAR 2001 WHICH HAVE BEEN
PAID.
AMOUNT: $115,939.16
TAX ACCOUNT NO.:
322405-9034-00
ASSESSED VALUE OF LAND:
$7,906,700.00
ASSESSED VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT:
$1,775,400.00
ANY SKETCH ATTACHED HERETO IS DONE SO AS A COURTESY ONLY AND IS NOT PART
OF ANY TITLE COMMITMENT OR POLICY. IT IS FURNISHED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ASSISTING IN LOCATING THE PREMISES AND FIRST AMERICAN EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS
ANY LIABILITY WHICH MAY RESULT FROM RELIANCE MADE UPON IT.
DATED:
MARCH 19, 2002 AT 8:00 A.M.
TITLE OFFICER
PS/EJH
Page 4
if.
• KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 1>�}tj•'
1]4:.-fl1 i#i It,,1`E• F-f
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON PECD F 11.uu
•
OD NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL TAP OR CONNECTION CHARGE22
CD Notice is herewith given that King County WateriDistrict
CD No. 107, King County, Washington, has, on March 25, j981,
Nzt
CD under Resolution No. 5 71 , determined that a tap or c'nnection
03 charge, to be determined prior to construction of n w water
• facilities, will be assessed against the real estate described
on Exhibit "A" hereto attached.
DATED this Z j day of March, 1981.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1
KING COU ' Y ATER DISTRCT NO. 107
L..-
•
Henr F. McCullough, IPresident -
1 q:.
STATE OF WASHINGTON) I €
t
:ss I
COUNTY OF KING ) I f.
On this day personally appeared before me, a duly t
commissioned Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, t
HENRY F. McCULLOUGH, to me known to be the President of the t.'
Board of Commissioners of King County Water DistrictlNo.. 107 i
and, being duly authorized, acknowledged to me that he signed •4
the foregoing document as his free and voluntary act land deed
for the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
'f�
GIVEN under my hand and seal this �.) day of 40. , `:
1981. �' a,
.
' -- ,� r 'e f� Off;•.., .A i-•
7uc > ,.io .,
NOTARY PUBLIC in n r the 'State^,,: '.: : "'"
of Washington, residing ;at Seattle": ,. ;3..
. b
----IA/L/7FL_ .
i.
' ..''' te4
•
•
f*CI).9. ,c ILiEr.T �s
KING t,uuNTY WATER DISTRICT NO.107
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
440 GRADIENT SERVICE AREA
CO
4D PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 9, 16, 17, 20, 21 , 27, 28, 29, 32, 33 AND 34, ALL
CD
_5- IN TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. AND PORTIONS OF SECTION 4
CD
TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ALL IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
OD
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY
NO.2 AND THE CENTERLINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO.2A IN THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE
SOUTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO.2A TO THE
INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST I.'
QUARTER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE
i I
EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER; g;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16 TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE CENTERLINEiOF
COAL CREEK PARKWAY; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE
CENTERLINE INTERSECTION WITH S.E. NEWPORT WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE
CENTERLINE OF S.E. NEWPORT WAY TO STATION P.T. 79+66.85 ON THE NEWPORT- 1
ISSAQUAH ROAD NO.941 ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF r '
SAID S.E. NEWPORT WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID MARGIN TO A POINT
WHICH LIES SOUTH 22°29'23" WEST 544.58 FEET FROM THE NORTH LINE OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16; THENCE
NORTH 81°57' WEST 115.59 FEET; THENCE NORTH 22°29'23" EAST, PARALLEL
WITH THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID S.E. NEWPORT WAY TO THE NORTH LINE OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 16;
THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 16;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
SECTIONS 21 AND 28 IN TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE
CENTERLINE OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.F,. ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG
SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION WITH S.E. 60TH STREET;
-1-
King County Water Di No.107
No.107
Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area !
c0 Page Two
.O
0
C�
C�
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH STREET TO THE
CENTERLINE OF THE PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY TRANSMISSION
LINE (BEVERLY-RENTON) EASEMENT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID 1
CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 7, BLOCK 2 OF NEWPORT HIIILS
NO.9 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 69 OF PLATS, PAGE 17, RECORDS OF KING !
COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID 1LOCK
2, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LliNE •
OF SAID BLOCK 2 TO THE EAST LINE OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.5 AS RECORDEq IN
VOLUME 66 OF PLATS, PAGE 90, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTHRLY
ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST 'ALONG
THE NORTH LINE OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS NO.5 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER1OF :
BLOCK 4, NEWPORT HILLS NO.13 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 73 OF PLATS, PAGES
53 AND 54, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
SAID BLOCK 4 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE WEST ALONG THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4, AND ALONG THE WESTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF
TO THE SURVEY LINE OF THE MERCER ISLAND PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY fir, Y
(128TH AVENUE S.E.);
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID SURVEY LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF 127TH
ti;. is•.
PLACE S.E.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY
•
EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 13, BLOCK 3 OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS ` '.
N0.13; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER •
•> :
OF LOT 28 IN SAID BLOCK 3; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTHWESTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT 28 AND ALONG THE NORTHWESTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO
THE CENTERLINE OF 126TH AVENUE S.E. ; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID
CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF LOT 5,
BLOCK 1, OF SAID NEWPORT HILLS NO.13; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID
EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE THEREOF TO THE SOUTHWEST
.s.
-2- .4,
King County Water Dis ;tjNo.107
Legal Description
a) 440 Gradient Service Area
Page Three
O_
CD
Q
ac) CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AND WESTERLY ALONG THE
SOUTHEASTERLY AND SOUTHERLY LINES OF LOTS 22, 23, 24 IN SAID BLOCK; 1,
AND WESTERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SA7
LOT 24 TO THE CENTERLINE OF 125TH AVENUE S.E.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG AID
CENTERLINE TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 14 0t
NEWPORT HILLS NO.19 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 77 OF PLATS, PAGE 68, RECORDS
OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND tLONG
THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 14 TO THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST QUITTER
OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ; THENCE SOUTH
ALONG SAID WEST LINE AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
OF SAID SECTION 21 TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 150 FEETINORTH
OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH STREET;
THENCE WEST ON SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE
i
CENTERLINE OF 123RD AVENUE S.E.;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG SAID CENTERLINE
TO THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTH LINE OF BLOCK 4 OF NEWPORT HILLS
NO.10 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 70 OF PLATS, PAGE 4, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE WEST ALONG SAID EASTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID BLOCK 4 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE
WEST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 4 TO THE NORTH LINE OF BLOCK 1, NEWPORT HILLS
NO.15 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 72 OF PLATS, PAGE 94, RECORDS OF SAID
COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF SAID BLOCK 1 ; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF BLOCK 1 AND
SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF BLOCK 2 OF NEWPORT HILLS NO.17, AS
RECORDED IN VOLUME 77 OF PLATS, PAGE 66, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, AND
ALONG THE SOUTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 60TH
STREET; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE
-3-
= King County Water trict No.107
Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area
cA Page Four
O
0
C WEST 742.13 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARIIER OF
SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. (ALSO KNOWN AS THE
EAST LINE OF TAX LOT 46 OF SAID SUBDIVISION); THENCE SOUTH ALONQ SAID
EAST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 504.02 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 300 FEET
OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE NORTHERLY
EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF LOT 1 , BLOCK 5 OF C.D. HILLMAN'S LAKE
WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, DIVISION NO.8 AS;RECORDED
IN VOLUME 16 OF PLATS, PAGE 67, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE WEST 41NE OF
SAID LOT 1 , AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 4 OF SAID BLOCK 5 TO THE
f
NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOTS 5 OF SAID BLOCK 5; THENCE EAST ALONG THE NORTH ,.
LINE OF SAID LOT 5, AND ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE
CENTERLINE OF 120TH AVENUE S.E.; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO
THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE
OF S.E. 84TH STREET TO THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF THE WEST LINE OF t;
LOT 1, BLOCK 9 OF SAID C.D. HILLMAN'S PLAT; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG
SAID NORTHERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 AND +`
ALONG THE WEST LINES OF LOTS 4, 5 AND 8 IN SAID BLOCK 9 TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 8; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF
ti SAID LOT 8, AND ALONG THE EASTERLY EXTENSION OF SAID SOUTH LINE TO
THE CENTERELINE OF 122ND AVENUE S.E. ; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE
{ TO THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. 84TH STREET; THENCE EAST ALONG THE CENTERLINE
OF S.E. 84TH STREET TO A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 300 FEET EAST OF
(MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF 122ND AVENUE S.E. ;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT g,
-4-
King County Water Distr.' ?No.107
Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area
Page Five
a
O_
O BLOCK 10 OF SAID C.D. HILLMAN'S PLAT; THENCE EAST ALONG THE SOUTH
ap LINE OF SAID LOT 2 AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 6, BLOCK 12 OF
SAID C.D. HILLMAN'S PLOT TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND
300 FEET NORTHEASTERLY OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE
OF S.E. 89TH PLACE; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TOjTHE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTil, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE
NORTH LINE OF PCL 3 IN SHORT PLAT NO.877107 AS RECORDED UNDER KING
COUNTY AUDITOR'S FILE NO.7809110889;
•
THENCE EAST ALONG SAID WESTERLY EXTENSION AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF
SAID PCL 3 TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG
THE NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF PCL 3 AND PCL 2 OF SAID SHORT PLAT TO THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF PCL 1 IN SAID SHORT PLAT; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY
ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PCL 1 AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY
EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE :w
ABANDONED PACIFIC COAST RAILROAD IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 33; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE CENTERLINE
OF S.E. 89TH PLACE; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE
CENTERLINE OF THE MERCER ISLAND PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY IN SAID SECTION
33; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PIPE LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE WEST
LINE OF SECTION 34, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; THENCE
SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE EAST ALONG THE
NORTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 416 FEEL
OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE SOUTH
LINE OF THE NORTH 208 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE EAST ALONG
-5-
a.
King County Water _ strict No.107
Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area
Page Six
CQ
%.O
O SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE WEST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID WEST
LINE TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 300 FEET NORTHEASTERLY
OF (MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO) THE CENTERLINE OF S.E. MAY VALLEY
ROAD; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO THE EAST, LINE
OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 34; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE TO THE SOUTH LINE
OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE EAST
LINE OF SHORT PLAT NO.677007 AS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY AUDITOR'S
FILE NO.7712090795; THENCE NORTH, WEST AND SOUTH ALONG THAT PORTION
OF LOT 1 IN SAID SHORT PLAT LYING WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTEROF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION
34; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 3 TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTH 530 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION;
THENCE WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF 136TH AVENUE
S.E. ; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE CENTERLINE
OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.E.; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE
OF COAL CREEK PARKWAY S.E. TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 3; THENCE
WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE AND ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 4,
TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4; THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE
OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 4 TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
PARADISE ESTATES NO.2 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 102 OF PLATS, PAGE 31 ,
RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
PLAT AND ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF PARADISE ESTATES AS RECORDED IN
VOLUME 95 OF PLATS, PAGE 93, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY TO THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF SAID PARADISE ESTATES; THENCE NORTH ALONG THE WEST LINE OF
OD King County Water DistrictINo.107
Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area
Co— Page Seven
ct-
O
03
SAID PLAT AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF TO THE NORTHERLY
MARGIN OF S.E. 95TH WAY; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN
TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE WESTERLY 122 FEET OF TRACT 387 OF C.D.
HILLMAN'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN DIVISION NO.6 AS RECORDED
IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 84, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE NORTH
ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY EXTENSION THEREOF
TO THE CENTERLINE OF GENSING AVENUE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID
CENTERLINE TO THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 33
TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. ; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST
LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE
WEST LINE OF SHORT PLAT NO.978054 AS RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY
AUDITOR'S FILE NO.8004280744;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE RIGHT-
OF-WAY
OF THE ABANDONED PACIFIC COAST RAILROAD; THENCE WESTERLY
ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 33; THENCE
NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF S.E. 91ST STREET, e.
BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE BOUNDARY OF WATER DISTRICT NO.107
ACCORDING TO RESOLUTION NO.332; THENCE FOLLOWING THE BOUNDARY OF
WATER DISTRICT NO.107 IN A GENERAL NORTHWESTERLY DIRECTION THROUGH
SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. TO THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID
SECTION 32; THENCE WEST ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SUBDIVISION TO
THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 180 FEET OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE
NORTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32;
THENCE WEST ALONG SAID NORTH LINE TO THE INNER HARBOR LINE ON
-7-
King County Water District No.107
c0 Legal Description
440 Gradient Service Area;
Page Eight
O
O
c
THE EAST SHORELINE OF LAKE WASHINGTON; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG
SAID INNER HARBOR LINE TO THE CENTERLINE OF PRIMARY STATE
HIGHWAY NO.2; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID CENTERLINE TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING.
1
{
.B.
'.4 .e :•.?::.f:.5.-•,. k„.,,-..•_,.......•^..---.r..-4w-,.,..3-,Pa.-...71:fe,c,,,,,eArK..,, tc-mF.5.',.:•?•,,,-k-•,;.:-.:.,..:,iz.,....,!... :',-'t.sf.• , ':7,' .
• • -• ..,...,-.,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,w,.vii--4-v-zzy•w4,-,,,z•m:,?:,s7,44.7:w1„._,1-Vta`•;1ZiOn ,..g4,-;•:'..,,:i-, . &.. .-,,:t5t4.. .; :,ts.,, ,,,...,.. s.:. .....4...:, .,, ;:..,f..::,.....:•.,..:y.,. .,:.:...;,:::::..,.,..,.. -
,qgt,g-gr•Ak-trl-z,t;..asw:,,F,,lrk:xg_t*•ogi,kilkA,9:.:'.q?:Aiopp.,akifjW ..-njt,fat-ksc,=**2.0ai3go:sivi;iivt:ymzior---,:vofom..*;,,.g,v,4v_i,:fw,svpa,:o,::,:w::„
l"'-'',•44:,•w:S10744.0----',A1,74111,;4417%ttgf130f4rIt0,.H.-I•' ' .t•.- -6:1.1•MegiliW:'•• ••,,5;-- A.. -',•-lk.,`,•'.:'-::•:: 1**,...,••:.','*‘,•:,',':'.i.-,•••••:.".!'„'...4"-' r.'74.,•••-,th.30.r•ftiff4.740:kAr•-fAC',W • - -.. 7 v:!istatir 41. ,Mitititollt. .....4. _-1-...1.3.:;..f....-- ,1;...:.,..., ,- -:-.: . ,-• :. ,',.-'..:,;...,:?:-‘,..:,.:;-. ..w.f.:'?s;_jf....'::2.1.. ..iic ..,..,;4. .,.1.- .2.e,.,..7,1..;:i... ..
,,,•,,-., 1.,..N„.„.„„1,s.70,,,,„0,i,t,.:.,-,v4y.g.;.,, ,,4,,,,,,,,,y.,.kz,,..,-,,w,y,,,,w47.,:: :,-,,,.,.. .i..,-,:,,,..,,,,,., ,,';.;,.•-4.4..,.,,. .,s,•?.::.;.,::,... ....... .;.,-..,.- .:7• : - -.., -•
„..:,.....,, ..,..
;
,,:.,..--;,,,,•,..;,.,„..: ,,,..,,...:„:.,,,•.,,:.,..,..::_.•..: ,,.......„ „.
''''',,,404....,,i;,-k.:_mtitio.-4.0-4ke,20.1fiio-0.-„,!....,.i,:A.eli:.,.,.A.:.....q-,:.-;-1:.• -•,::',•-..,,,,.:q.•!:,‘.:.i,.:.-*,._,..,,,,..,.,.,.., :,,,,... ..... .. • ••..••.,,,• ,.‘,- : .„, ..3. ,,,,-,,..-,.....-,-,...:.•-_*,.....,.,.. .•,..,.,- -
-••.,.."..,,,-."..-..,•••••,--.,:v:,-4.....,,..,.,......„..,..,.. ...r.'i;..',.'•<'''•,..'OW,- K..,"
-,1.. ,• ••-:.•:,%.:7.-'f*.-.<;*<17.0*`::::•=ii-,It, „"4114#141:0<:tiAP::g4:0;ti€!;:a':i..:..,'••••.;;‘.'''i::•i;•':'•••-.4Li....:'1••::?:.%..1..• ,....":.;. ' •".• .
.,..1'.:...'"•••••;t44 ' 4ift•fi's•Ye:.7,, •....:,,..;.•."...;•';•.:i..i j.•••:.'..;,':••:t :0,,,•14..• -'1"..ii.
,,f,ya<;;:1Stis4• 14:4.,N.k.,.,f,kW. feZ..,*. .4,i... 44k.t..Hi?•,?:C.i:il*Vratr4fr4R:C:i;..ii,'' '. :. .: • ••. ' .,.,,,.......-,.•;::.:::. vikt,",:ifitiliitklaV,,,..440:„;,,,,„.;.,•:•;: s
fk-FtIrrlux.4'W/A1,,.7.ElefA,A.,,• :A...Q.§:11.40.:4',...,5 :• ••.."`•'''•:'''..-'="::., ' . •••'' ..: •:.'•':-:': !•-•tAML.: 'ii4i•W-•:4'5r'NA•tq'-g4'k-'•f- ..fao*,..
fir .f0. .:610F,,•••4•M-S-ttft344•OX,W.6%-gg.:,:C.',..1V1g7.9V;Vt.19.':•:")--..;•::••::: '';'•':'-i"... -• '.- ' ::.••••••:::,.... .1...':'.%113_Willkh' ilir:441„4.M4AV,„:•;:.::-, •:•:5,TA.,',,,, n'
,W,'At4:W.4gi''.V.Pa 4 1/4:-:,-,41*•,,:111Y4 Cf.:3sMV.4.41,•,:,,Af:'..s:-.:?..,,•it:.Y•-.,:..;:,.•-•. • • • . : .. ,... .,..• .p.,:ga.,04,4•17,,,,,,z4:.1.,0-e-i, ...,....:1,:-. -. ..;•4...-st,••••••-:,-;.4.4.1. - ,•• .,,•.t.s
,•-,f,..:4,_.7,:,;_:.-7!. .,-fi..57,404,A-v*.-4.:s0„k:',:,,A,.-i•Vo.:..te.wma•K:::::•:•.sy.0.,,,i.eg;•f'4,ii,.,_ •••ii•• , ,..-•-• -•.-' ... • ••.-..•.-,tyl‘g•zi -:.,,v5u-0niR.-•;.:*yvi g
Wrq-!-10.iy-•• "''‘ri'•'':',•1-'-'c'"'t.s.''.'.'•''.''.• ' " '
';'w -,•'‘4,--,:7.-,- ,---.4:4-F ,--41.4%.4--'474 . -',1, (1......t.:kg.44;,ig:-.44;..,"' 4:4....:,..••5::41a-,.."..;a • :.-...: ," : 3i<.•":- ,,,,"".1.2'..11: -S.,-.,:•,:.‘11';',:i 4, '''.'''.<','''';,,,<' 's:,',.WW:e.:,
°'4'4`1ttR'..:at-M-- o'n4-1'it;i34.4,44%-::.:4-....,:;,;44.:.;•41i::',-,'-a-,e1-14,.41•.--.-.',:,-,... ‘ ,_ :. ., ,,., , ,.. .. IA:w.„.:4.,,,..g„totit,44.0::,,-..1,z....zit:::::,.,:.....,-..,0*0, :4)1•
"• :ii,..;:,;4,4,-541witv.-ft.,...eig•Ato2,-•:,•1.....4 4,.,,,,,::•,,,,,,,-0•.,45,„- ..-.• ::,,,1 s..:,:, •-•4-.-'4;g.:4. 't • ''• , .A-••1,•,rif.,-i-mk...,,,,,,,.4.11:•10....,wr4,,,,z
tc., ...,..4,•=,.„.......,Affittglw4.7,(4 ,A4.,...;.* ,qiil.44,-11,...,.?.•:$:N.h.v„..,.,1,.. ,,:r3§,....x.•,....,,,..... .c.V.i :.,.f< <+• • -••<:••r< -1- .,,-.W,4.444-.41iVIcr. 4714TI;,;,•-..'• ,,, 04- -,,,,•,:
, . .:•:-.". 4..,5,44,,,,-I"•••••$4.‘.4,p,4.'' t,,...-N',41"..4,;,; "...!••;.; .4•4,-e:%-'4: ;::•-•/
' <;..,AtWilfifirPt kit tint 4%..'4itiT.4.4*i.1.:.'.‘0•;,;•i:Z.Z. .:14, r .-•,'.:: -._.._ • • ''•-••:-'1••••,•4-fr,"-..rcil-1'':-.4 if g.,- ..c,',N•,k .',4,•i17;,:..'s?••'....'-,4-t. :,...i'',' .,-...4Y-
;'"t•:;00,••:,r}..et•- t, 1-X,WIt' r,•_,4,Or''''' '''''kftqf#,':i.::MPP:...„.:t4ri-V0V.,••:•:;".',..::•;:;i4L-4,3•111.21.-NTICs....E)FIFX,, . '...:.....!.',.:-..'-'4..-44',„,---.,•,.,..,,, Al...tr,-v:',-Z•fi.--..,;„•...,:,•,..-.,?,? •-..,,,..v,.:,• -•,.i:i,
...-, ....,„•••••kw.^k„.."4-wk-. ..,',c.4.!--Atte,-...." .4--'-, ..i :i'tliri.,,•,f01-,M.4-,„;,-,e.,,•1.:,....!.;.on,z.,,,,,,,*.e ,-•-•,-,;-5,,,7,,,,,,,...,-...,...--,,-.. .:,.,: , ..,....,..11,,,,,,,,,k,-,h•140‘.1 --W, ,.,•!:' -141fiten,,,,FaZA••••dr',.•:' ..--,-.1,-,-v. ...:•:=.f..
. ,.,..mt„,.t sw,;..- metort.p„ki,-,A.,34kk-AW-•:-?r4-•'.' "!:'''':&';•:'.-.?"7.:•`!.,%:-..(M.,"'!..•:-.....::•':',•,:,•• •• ' •••-,....•'.•:',.....::-',:::.,,...).4g,,,,,,-_,A1„,:...,'''.,T,,t.k.40111.N.,,:,...:4.;!,.-!,4 -,-,,,,• -,ta..!
.t.)i- ti-,Tr.,." "-'44%,......g**-..3:W.:OKR1.1:,;•?:- . 1. ..f.:•.!.,•,),.?.,'::.-W-.• :-:••1.;;•- :•...1.:•:.•f!-..;:- ...-..........;:•,:.;.;.,..,. ...:,... •
,„„..-.:0,,,,,,:,.,,,:.4.2„,..,4-„,• kre,•.,zA lis,,,,,,,,.. k.o.m.;k4,.....1.!.:,...4,y;q::........., !:.••.;....,.-f.,-,:.....,...... ,-•::,i.---...,.....:,....,,• .-..•,.,:.•:.. ":...::,. • .
,t.7.1,-,...‘•-'-.‘ -,,-,:tte.,, , .;.f.;:•4.il.. ..,.' -,:.,..,...:-......:-.i,,,t4r;Ay-0.:•4-.'11'-r:V- ttrjrg' V*d 0- tgliA 5:8 P..D.t.,1-3 .d.,.t Ir.,b.t• .zyttu.g.;:„.94 6 ,.. ., ,•...:p.,,,,11-4:- :,,....;:,.
' .i.4.,..m...•„,„-6-,.: ,.1.&`,.-,‘--hen. ,14„.4,110',),..,•:,-.:,:,.......: :::. . f,y..-......-Z,..<,1,1,4<„,•••:.;•4<",,•4•Jf.•44',...,... ....t.'4 - :-. . : • :- •::: ....:....„:.•;:.•:•!::.,•:::.:,4 i...;..... .7. •" :::.....••. .:•••".•r4,1 ..:.:.::::•
x,-....,..,....-.4..-0-vc-Fg.. -,,,..v..1.-41,4,-.g.,e,„,,,,,...,,,,,,•,,.•••••.,...-.....,,,..;-,-, ..?..,• r.,...,,••..% • •..,...., ,..;. ...-. .,:.,:-.-;• .• .. -
1g,..* .2---.4•5vg.„V,,%-,:,.•':::,.. f!i!,,..,..,•::: •• ..,.:::.-...••• :....,;;.....-••i',..•! • .•. ••.,• .,,...,).::,::.•r.s...;..,:. . .-.•:.:'•• ..,'- ' ••'•...;,-:',.•...i,:: .0.r,•;.,:•,.,.....:J-..., : .. !: :;.,'.',,:.s. '.. ••:.1,4•40... -...3
,.#,:.. .i...,.;40,-„:2;,74„.,,,ail....,i.i,,.;.,,„0: ic.,,!..::,,....4,-„•*:.:.•••.,.....4*..:..........,,z4..im.,,%:,,,,,,,,.A..,.q.ss,„ 1..;?;:.,...z.....,...,A,...RD,.,,S..... XL, qq..-, a MA.41:13,118:..V4.•'...F,64it:D.O.,*.titiri •:.•-;.•"-• •. • rif •;•••;):.
4 i4,-;--ii ,s .....i).-.' .•. . •-•..---...,..:...•,.i..i.,,,:,.., • .- .. r....-, . • ,„,,,..• ,.o•0f1'2..'4-'t0'.,.4N.4t7-.).,4,•_,',-.-1„•A4:..:.,.v‘.,'i...4t'..-.1"..v.,"•er-3.4-X-../4'5f,-".--r4,!*.,,,,:,..,z.,,„,;e--•eMf...,N,r..4.*;LTk74.O.3:k,1r.,'1,A'..-,r-•);4b.kiar e-;-A,:-:..-.--'-'-4.':.4-• -
.-.,,-,,L,4.,..•1,44'. --4',,_,••,a,'..,,0e5',,-..,g:,;,:-.•fI-;1-:•w:s4i•,'t,.',,*',;-:•ii:..t•:-i•!,:!„.,;;::,!''1•;:.1••::•.,•:4.;;:,,...1.•',:•.1..-.`..i..0,.-g.:.-.•.'31*.:1..,-q..:7-.-••.--7••:.•-•,i..";:,•.:•..:.-4e?,.•1•:i•;.-..f:'5•,.,i.1•:h•:3,.•':•s0•n o••":,?••.!"•,.•.).'.v.•-..o4:.•'g:....'...,t.•-:..'•3•-'),:.--•:;..-,:.•!..:..,;'4,•T„,.,-..., •,,.i•:.,.,-,1..,,-A.:.,........s'...:x-.,4d::•-,.•4.1.•::,:.,,•:•)':,:..::,,.k•.••,i--.••..•:'2.,,1:4.,,",..•,...,!.••::•A,.••..7.-;;.-:;..?;v-t,1;,At,•-•o=,..,•...
•.-•.... ••,
f,...•Ar ;.
1•3-•4.,i)."..0..,•...,•7 4,7. :1 4•,,r...-,:a•A!:.zi••.-;a..,':ct..0
o 4 1 :.,•••!•,:,0r;•t•.:i:.:.::.,'•,.',,•4-i.;4;'••••.:.•2 t::.,..,,.. 1,,..,•:',.f-...'....••..,:c.:.:.•,•.':'..-,I•.',,.:.;.,•$
t1ooZ h01 )c4 h44w . f Are / t , 4 ,
fr , * p -t-,1',.a2,7-,4..„4,,,,.f4,.;':,',,..,:'.....•,•,.•q.Fi..c,-:e.,.:i,:i.,F...E. .. ' • '' -t ..,-..,.._;•.......,.,2:..':,..--,.....„......-.:-.-. -., ,..7 •,.,k,.,, ...%,
444O•41i *-•" Mk.•:;;?•;..!;:F..i-' • ;;;.•-•k-:-'7.-:::••• •• - ..-.. ...-•. . --: . . . .:. ....
. . . .. .,.....,.:.,::. -.•:•,-..:.•. •;• .....:'.•;''• ',...:.':•••',.;•,:?;;-''••",•*.'ff+4.-4T '"?'ij... .i.:'' '';''':1: '-'''''-i''''''.•:. :... .-.;"':.....- .tikbe.'.(g',0,,n't,Or;:!::..fOr:.:0.;.?•tet. 'It ;t:tOrt..se 4,•-'10r.a. t kg). p..f...Vw.::4 qz....;.0 v:::::7::::',:;..'.;:,':-•-•'.." --.• ;-'.4.::1'
4-4*-74::z,A.Wv:s.,,V;: "',',g;'0•..:: :••:',',2.::-;.-„-;:::•::.•:.• :.. •::•" - 4•.-5.: .- . • ...s.'f• . ' .-. - . .
147. A„,;•'',. Ayvt40':'''''''''_;.1.,4*-i0:f4 ' ; :.•-':...... .... •-••:i •:.:...... • ,.- ' . '• .. •
140:9-L4:14kVi54 ::: ':..•il*•.;"ti b.iti-d/1001115 a:0:X°) DO :.. iW.V.44K g. ;--ds .U10 th
r V i j'$:',t:4014S-'••g0t,,1•.••;'.-2•••;;•i'•,:,.•;,-,..2• * .•-••
!,..4,10.-„,- -„:,=.f. •-‘‘,14-','•,-r--!,., .•:;•,:'•.:•,...,i'v.,4`.. !.:.•..'.-. ••.:..... ••., • ,..•••••,, . . ...:',.. ..
4.',,e41t7-'-:-:.-.R.'0 '4%,4-'0,',' -1P14,..4.• ,.,.':':...••,..: ;' ....i.::,:%. -, .1- ..., ' .. . . ,. .i.. ......'.7••• •••.',ii'4..:*'.::-.•:',.':. ".•••••"_•.'1.•:.1,Z;.:,„:: '-;••';'•;t2_A. "•.':k•
i'Att.„.:'''..'t.'U.,1.,:q... t.74*.'t ft.:::::•••••:• ....'46'4 '4,1,*a tiiiVi 0. Q,01 Si€,*.lit',1 ra ti 0n v, 1a..t,,,,,7 rya it.21.1 P.,,i 0. .r .i;h.e-.:4-0'1 U...:a::::.lf.i.
P,•`4".'..- -`-'T1'..W-VitekS&; - f•,-,i,:...!,...:.,?:.3-U.I....-4.5.... •+ .•,
•ill"?j,J.•:'%,"•••x4.,;k1Viir•+,,' '••r.''....•--,.'•1'•I: '' • - •-••.••- •• - , , ..1.,•••/,‘F,....i•TIE;,...•!''....-- • „•.:.•,.,./.j,„4...,24(,, -,":4,;:f4g- ....:-
1-'7.13-W, 47,--,`.,.,,,,V14.4,413K4-,....:'--• ,,,' .;•• .' , -. . ..::':• i - '
*„lkirro--,440-1.4..:.,•;.',.;:.,i''-.....i...lt''.A.m. .1-..e.0 1.t IA ',...t1. p I,ta bs,, CI r.'..E...11..,ta , ..t.4--, .. ..,v ,,.yJ im.0 3:4 e 0 4. .•.•,,.. .-•.... , ,..
, . .
- "-,-0--.A.,-,N:•,:igl...-A.,3 ,e,,kqc:,4w-::,.• . . .
•
'-Q,'1,1!....0' ,-.4-?ilig-4.450 n'AVii*VI''''-' •' . - - ' . ,- A et,.-1 0.3,4 1.11.-• -t.. .1,E;4; -.fly,rj t-,la,-;t P &rat.,t::::.•..b,i,kr.val.\1 n.:,.:•..,.-•,..:::::• .-•:.-1.. , ,.. ':- .
...:•.1.•••-t'',,:-•...4.!..-•';2•I+.1Q'•,-,„-•,;'f 01N'-.-''-4'47!'Lt''.,I'.4'.4-,.4-:•=-,.-.-;14':1.44 44,?.:'p-S-"-'24!'.''.:..'!.,,:,.'..,.",-''.A.t'..i.z':'•.'..7-;'.:.4.51•3,4'••"-;.,.,.',,.,r,-'.,-.'.'•...s.:.k4..;.';.:'P•,-:1',4:,'J.•",0',V.k•'•.r-'.2,'.".,„':'S4';i1.,i:4e-.:..1‘.::ls.'...,,•:0-,'•,:A•-'/,'.4"•.,:‘...•.'.--....:..•.....•-.:,...,....•-,'•.-...t.'.,.•4.,.;•4....,-...•1.•'.•t
-.•'.
,, , -,•.!
4VqkWa . 0 ,1 o--,, -.v -,•,o-z:. d- . • -.<.fixi.•
milt. 0 t•
• ..
... •
,,,,,• ,,,,..._1 '+, • . ':•••';..••• : - .•2.•..1.sY:-,:::::.`:1. '' ..'..;;.•.••••1•••••-•'.-•.'0.•Wi'' '2.6:
'.- .. ail a OriT2Yed...eet1::.:41112qatte'l ;'- ••••••2•A••••••',it '-,
..i''''•*.7.2-•'•'•.'172$,•tif.',•••:.:2:ftezi.4y,,.:,,44„,,,,,,,,,pist... ::.„.,... , ,_ __.....„„ .....„,0 rit.z.,,...,.4 tro....,3 ••,,,..A.T..,,, ,..•:.,•......,....,...6.0......i'1..I.•i j?.... ' iA. . • • " .,2-21....,...,,....7.:....-•-,1 ''...?.:.::.-,,..:,.;;;., •:;,•••„,,,",,. '..g::::.,,:.'i.
MIT-,.a,%4•-'--",:t...V1:•.':4',.,;::...,k,,a4r44.140-e..,!...r.•i,11,1,...(.4 D.Zi 0110.4.0 t4 4.4.. • •=.••,-
.ic:!.1.0.'Zn.00WktNktiM41.: :. s''. . • . . .
• . ,4.'''';.' . •'... - '-. '',..--;"'.."•::•.........,,-.. ': ..'';';,...".:L - •....,r#0:.. •:',••
.4
''S 1-1-"*"*.'''''''.(''.5‘'44.4.._'44ro..,a44.4.44.f.Lnes..••'.. 4.L-4 4 4-... 1„,,•e - -e bairm .:i.ra .the.,.0-1.t Isf o f s0at.t10.,. P0A -1.., 04, ,_
t,,,,, ,4:3 p J.4.T.1 „. G., t
,';•,•,`',4•.,..!:..,:.1.:.,',•••,,,'..,ttpt•?4"'-4.144. ):-. •'' ..•• . .
' • • •
377ra7: '54; :4Vii:4-targea7kP:- *'4:-:- .‘''..: . . '''.4•.. ••43- 1 4:;,'" 7...,,,,.i,-,,-)t. •,ar,,.(,•:t. I.:Jar t.1.••••..2 1.21 ri...e1,7'•btillit•eW CI:AIA..f...10'r. ...;; .,• . ..•.'..w_,•%' ' .•
..*,4--Wkit:-;:is,',V4,4,-Zfif.S.z..,•%!-',AY...,1-;••: •: r-I.T.1 l..z,.,:.„ 4•!:,a.:t*0 -,,,,,,:. i-,....„,.,„. 1 - ,.., .. . ,
• • • •
. ,- -:rw.,f,rse: •••••••,•:,..:-*, 1w4..Wio..4„:4;.;•• ' • •
- • • • ••-•••
if,":"- s,-':cell,lir,.'f..,.•:.:•,.:••-,:"..-.);::.!-:,:;.:,..? - ,1 , __. •
__...._-,-----.,-.•.litref-----t:
........„....-1„ ....--
'*:.',•1*.4111.. I.*:•••••,;:' ,.-,..t.':Q•;,.......'..-,1,:..:;:;• ..,.. . t.,1•;•''.11.':10'ii. (4-.:a• C;1).t.:-/W r• •:,..tc;-II':;,.1•-•1 • ..--• ..• •• -- .........:..-.1:-: : -77,7--•••••••- ,..-
1<,<. ,*--'!',:-,::. ;•••:,... .... _,••;_-_.....- • • , • • ; , . , ,
: . , . . • 4, . •• -••
i4,..:.•'?..-7 :*4.,4---4,44. ... 4.
-.4.-c34,..-,...,441-1 100,....,..."E. • •4.1,-•• •
" ("-1..r,,-,,-••••••ri,i: 7,..,t..)„ ,i .i';',"4 A t:!v A 1lb A .0•1.2 t . . ... .•• . 16,_.:.. •
,4„ ,. .• .,...:,....:,..,,,.,..4„,... ,,,,:r...., ...11,1 .,,14;k.-4• 1.2 02 t•,••..!....ti,• ...2 a. i...2'.i A „2.a,-.A.,..i ,-...,p , . . . , _ -•
-,.xi-,....-4.e.ig.ti.,.-A,,,,,:,.4,,,, ,.-4.w.,A:: •
•--ttsfrv- re.,„,,'..-901: • T.0I-41.g.lh 1-,:;,....24- N or.'th, ',°..f.i:i,..ngt-, ,-• „.,,,-4•1,t5 t .0,,. 14' .• • k.1 7 A•41,--d• ,..'•:.--afidorc-7. ...'...:: ..1"--,-'1/4-2,40-• *-%1...': • . - ,•1- ,,tVIL -0.1,•-•••.",, ',.''d..•-,:,f--A 1 0 1 r.;4 ract 1.-,...I In:g '77o-r.k.t 011;14 •4-If 1.1 Q. .h:4 4'r• . -,..'•:••."•....••• `:..ip,,,,II.:
',,,--&:."-T,f-.20•?•%,,qi,424,30.R..g&g-.. .... ,.. :'00,.,1.11,4,,:.;-:„yeijaro ad -1..,io..j.t or "-.ay ,-,.•;•;,,r,„,„Thtwj.., t h,4),t '9.o .1,0;3-i a- % If• -. -.„. - Pr-,,
,.
ettitei-i-4,4: 1---, 0v-tfeir'40"'-1 ••••' • ''- - • - * d 1 ' ,-- ''',••••4th or -the VG:f..i:teril Pr°''' .-2.' . • '4'.
..,,,-.,•-ft- Usr.1.4.,.. ,• .' 1-.41: . 4 a I'd te la o.,1.-10.1.e.:1-,, .$3 .,, i".-•,. . • ..•.i, -.' .4,.,_,t ... . • ;•. •,______44,,,,
.4.1174.1'‘itl'ia: :•,,fri'..• •*:. 1,*:".• . e,,A U. (..."0"t.CM .0.r. 1...3..,-....-7- o,-.,.„...-•,._..411...a.a..2-,.f,.,..----f‘.1-d•--fsc.Ite ri.fx7A-Tr..----T.:0 3/4- -----------.7.7-
wew„4.: .,,,:•:goi,,,,,k4-4p...„..„.....,... __ - ----• - •
.. . .. : . .. ,
. .,. . .
• . .
-•.„Hi*',4'0.t.t. 0._•,144'4. -,10- .
. -.
• •g„
,cated '.7141:y n 141:,,, ..-
:, ,qp,,,,,,',A,11-=.1.-wg4 .,..- ,.,,,.,,.!. ,- •I.:-, ti-,,,,,.;:t.• r.0 r t a ir; .14"b al c a t, fb -:.17”,...„,rtgage- ,... - :::.. . • . .. -. ••••:.:,.:•-:•, ..:-.'I),. -
•siab•i',-....tg,',,Y,N-4.W,w,..,„..wa.,..tli..:. ..•..i,-,••>.0--,,,- -- . - - ,
.:14.47.#ztk-!:11sW-1•?.,..-v.•,-,t.',T.'.FP.kvf'• '.•..-t•-•',..•'•:: •"
0.iir.,„.;•k•-••••bR,M;••,'P-:.:(..‘f.f.c.--,..4.e.:';','si.!....:. i, ,•, f:.hA 3744 7.,PV`:.,; 'IA a-ivy, -,y2..„.1,E;:..-z, ..-:.;',c,, 173 Mo.r.ft gago:Tif'..0:•/.14-1. • .-. .., .. . ---ItL,,,,:. •.• ..-•x.,2,....-:•-,401,5...-7-,`-:...!:::.:::.•:...,::.-.:..!......•-•• .',• .....•• . - -.,:i,e..,.•
v.,la•• :
i'4;:!, .vlil,,.;,!.'•• ••••.4::•••.!.•.',,:.-.. . .., ., „..„ „,„ . ,. „,,,„• ,.....,.,,•. -, ,,,, ,,,,, ,-...,. .• -1.,--., r-,',!... .),,a., ,. -,--, •.-• - ,,,,,..Av,,.
AP 4,,,"'.',:ww.'iw.,4',":...•--... •-•.: . •• 1-0 4 -1,„ I,:-,.).,:-. 7.,...1.i..,,, J,*t: -;q:0.: ttt,13....e. .•r....- , •4.,il•,••,, •,.'4,-'2 '''':•.4"--•ey-' - -` r,' '.. ..,,. ,•... ...- . .••4 .-:. - . [V,.. .
• ..,• •
- •,•:-:--f0V,- - v•--,,,-.•••,. , -••▪,,,,.-- :• . - . - . . „ ,• -,. ,,,....., „ ,• , ,..1,-,...,,,•-;,..1,:i..or . ir.1 i...No Um • -i-: • $4v,._vi.,.•
,.4)4•1-:'-v-t- :.'--1.11•-•;:i2‘:•,' ::•11••••:,.,-•:,;•-• -•:.-•-•-,.-•••..t--,te ,S,,,nlitor e:.7::: c..,1 t -,.c;v: 0•... ‘t,i,',4',4g ,,.,i,4,41..,:-.,Y ':';'•44''.....,. 15 . '.! 1 .......•.,.“. .. .. ',-:.: :- ..*N...,
...**-,1p14,7,,,,41,...;•,-.:1:::-.:-....:::::.:,...,.i.. .-.: •.: ! ,. •' - '- --r•. . • ,
. .. : .,,...,...,.:.:. .-..-::.,..;......•-•- •...:.....-:•. .-. • • ..,s ••::. •
,4,•*.,,&,----*:,,,,.q• -•;:,,,,:,,..:,...-:-::,::::.1.,:..•: .-..•.•: • ........ . ,• .
U •:., •.:.,....,.... ,.•:.,-; .. .••••..,:- .•,..:k '.f.,..- .-
----1,4•,-. ,:,•,,,,,,,,,..,...,:•..:::•...:,..::. -.,.. .... . • ., .
0 (1,;o4 0, •-.- . '--•.:.... . - 4?-„*.: .. ,
11-,,,:%. :=,:•.,,......A. ....,•:.,.`...'. , .,n' p.r r'-''';/. `"'"•',v 7•5•'''4", 1 e''''•4 . er.;5.-c.2x.,. :••4.,Ir.,' V3r t t .a
gag ,-• .4.--.•. :, ..,:-.;-- % ..,•-•,.. ....'.•-•.• .. .-I•*4,-.,.
t.4-.•.'V.•#,4:0•,.,;4•.::„..,,, ...".;•-•:,,:•:,.,:....,•!::.,•-,......:. -.•.;•.• •:•,...•-•,...•. - . . .
•
• • .
.. . , .. . .
P.AA,•,),,yie nlicl. Ar.r.oc.z to:Ipay6 .
. ,,,,,,:!..., ,J.I.Z.i;,..;,.,,,{tr:':-:.1.,:f;;•',.•''..• ' .- • • ' _ , ,..,
p,r-oiA.,-.0,!•,,,;•::;.:.Y:::•.. ...:...;.:,;,:.,•,..- ......',.• • . -. • , .. ... . .. ....... ...,.. .. . ..
,
. •.•. .... . . . . . ...-„..-..,.,.. ., .
• 44,,•-..
.........:'','•••••-•••• -ii•-•- - ri-..ti,..1,,tc,..... ,...,..e...,„,.:.,..• ••-..k,,,,,,..„.
-..,X,,,,A,,,, ,,,....„.... ... .. .....::
leitsAr• .zW:fi...•:. •: :-: •
4,1,!,.V;•'!.:1:,•4 ,,,A Nii,:-,e4ip:4".-:0 .. .:- •- • .
. .,,,.. .•••...„ .. „ • • .
..f.4';';'' •••••:')'?''''..1A-74''''''':f•It'▪llt:4''''T';', .....-."'•'•••'.,:.,..., .i. ' .' . • 1- - •,.••••.......i•••••.: .......: :"
lee ---•-1,..•.',...1•••;i•••••,4;z4-211:-..,',"•‘41.-•:.111,, ••:•-•. •4.:4',rf;• • e,n e fa tk Srf.....--rn'tF%:(1;t:titiZT:', 4:0:-ar..'4..x.-/41.••.A VI."-L.:.,...„.,..4f..--..,4...._.i.j,4::., ,,4-.t-•-:'-',',.:.-.:,-;7".i4.--.".-=''.„---77.7, 27:-.47.-.-......-,, , .-;....:!.. ,
*
1f -tt.:.:4? -4,4 - ,...., % -; . .• ' -•••• -.._ ' -.,7'„1,,,,-4,..r*.,„,.--e-,4,.e,,,,r-,:,,,,,,'..,J•-'..-,•;-4„•',.4--;i‘i,;<11,4?.,;•7'
W,Aw,I,;,gr-:•,•1Y:4 4eP":2ti,',--•4f••l1;l7i1.e.:;,w;!',,4„4;.i;$',::tPal;:;4..;•:;:T-.r;1W0:.Wk4-R'I,Fi?tAii,.a4f.,.A:1,:':t2•?:e..t1gi:•.'.!..-.:•.,,''-..-<.,.:••..*-!...-.:.;,•',•-•.4.:.-;.•..:•...,'-;::::,:.;....44.,.•:•••i:0i'.i:"-V.-.4 4...'::.1.•,,:..:•1..4 5:.,;•.'..:•,.•••--,•,.-,..!;'v.:..."..,..•:•-•,.:411,.1'k-•.•b;:.•...•1„....;,••:..70sZ-"-..•'..."..;,.•;•,1-..•"....,1.;".,.;,1. ... 0:. ---•-:4:.:•:"-•.e-,•:..;••:'...,.11..•7',3..;„.:..,'.,4•f.a.%..',.,.;•••...•:•q',:::.-.•.-..•..;'.::•.'.•.-•.,.-t.3--.3..:.1.:...•..•i„2.t::..`,0"•n;I.•.•"•,'..-7.'4:14•.';.,.•..41,'.,3..--.•,:..::•.k.g.:'....r-.',:•.:,
4 .g ‘ 44
•k , t1 twg4p :..%•,,.-,.••..••i.4•.t::.x P!'.•;.•-„:!,,,.••::.;',':.:j•.:.TL'...::i'i::•''•:,:2.9:.•.f•,':`:-...c•,";;i,,•.:•.,,:.4:`..•.•,0.•.„:..:".-4V.1:'..-':.',':•:0:.,.:,-:•:•,f",.:,.•-:-,,:4,::4i`7F'.,.z.;:4.':?...4';:'i.':';i:•ig!i'%:.t.i,l'i'-;-,c:f',i•-,ki,g•Vt,..i.,:."4,'..,'::1
I.4;...!.l,,.,i7W,;.'2.....I.-.I•;.;:,..„'',4•.,..".-.':.'....e,''.':,,..•,-.:„.••,••:..',.-:.,.-:.,.:'7;:':::..'4::!:'-:.:::;':':44:'•:''::.';%42-.•41'Z.;...,,•,•.:•..-',r..,„.,..'i.:.',%:.',:.,7f::.',:.1r.:':-e:;v'''.-,,..,.4...cv......',..1.,;....,,:.-..-'.p::::,.:'.7:.:•.:3::.::...„•.;._';.g',-•''.„.:.f-%".1,:.•..,..,1• -&i " •
r4r , es400- A167fIcrt ,v0iTrVNFa, &aA:%f..-i,-.4VP••(..,'.:
i;'14*t`4i , rif14t :Y3 , 4L'•':: " . ' • < . .' .' • - • 7i .. .. • .' •.'.. . . .•i,N1%i : q ' i - M ,, ,'..,.•,
-;',..•:..'.2..'J""-;..
•--
-*•
,4l,'',0.''.'.''t.4,4,:fc„.-,"fA.,.rr.tt0f*t2%.z%.7;i!%.'..i0i........,:,..V.V...A:*.'.'.?',........t.,.....'t.i.•;.m'?.1.:1gL..;..;.:.g1VP;i..:':•r''.',V....r‘.;;.;:..F.,,..t..'''::.1",,.,,;V',,!...;..•*,..,..,..,...':''•''....•.,.':..:....1.'...4?.•.L.A..'......:...,•...•.3..4'..,:4.:4..•":i..i.'...;'.t.,.•.' .•:.":..1‘..;:,..r ...• 3•t••„.,:.%''•'4**.:,:'......?.'•.'.•-4,<'&,.'.•'':"••1.,‘•.!.t i•:,..-',''''',A.:'''' .•.'....-''.'.,'i'',..,. .4/'.it.e,':a.r..-...t 0. -..:..;a:.1.•g..'..i..,r 144
' ' .... • •. . . . ' . ;* . . . :.„.1;'.. .- , •:..1:.:k.:...'.....;:..'.T:.:.:i1.'''..21. 4:'•;'.':•."*...,••i.'..f:.:5.'...:2;.:!.:':....'...','....;..'......*.:''...•.'••:•
, :..',•....• ,'Ya;4gi,..'".
:...•
....,•
. • .
. „•,..- . „ .-. •
. .
. .. . ..•..,......
-g.`,17.Y.,•••:.`.1: :"Fg',;-••,i':*•.:-...,:•;:i•?::••!:;••`'... "i•%•••,••;!' •-*'::.. .•••••!..". '
zkt‘..,:.r.:,,.;-.,,,,.5,,,,,,.w..p...,s•,:•••,•.:1••••••..1..;::••1,1,•.-',...•!....:••••;.„,;:•!•.:•••••,.I•.••• . . .. . .....".•.•,•4.-......,.,.:.;',.V.. . .
ik:??.lif.liz-464...A.-fik.,.,',...-:•••••:•:„4•••::.:.!:!..5-:•.,,,,,,,,•:•: ..:„'••••• • '.,..',),:..,,.. 1:-.f;;;,:::'':-.. • ,
, • . - :..,.,..,:".;,..Z.zz,' .- :. ....i.g
-.• .,
.4,,P::.,--14, 11't=1-Zzz‘-'z.,1'•:: '.z',„,:'.2,••••:s:2•; , .,. .• •
• -,'-,.q;,:z .5-'j..z--z,,i,,„.eF:4-';A:',"1••,:z.-•,••. 124."".'. :',:',•:',i.... :.-..,... '.•-: • ,.,,,
,,,. •. ..„ •. ••,RiV.4.•"f...:-:%,..„.,":.‘„11,4:.:?!:.'::,••••:••:.::-.,••••••-:-I'•`.--;:e...•,..1..T..'iP••.:.•:i-'• • ' - - . • . :- ,..-....- ....-- ••'. :•-:- •-• • • ;':.1,72;.-:••:?;7'",
. . •
Rf'0. ''';;i:,;1174' --4 .:•,.•,••.• •• ... .-. ••!:.•••:•;.'.i:••?t.T,"`•,..-;...:=' ••-- , .., ..'"i'1•47,rt.0•.: - •t Alf:. A'.',37.-.*:•••
•3•.:sk4.0k,.!..:•: i " • • -,-'.••.: • .- .• • . • , • - •,:,fl :.,,,P Ns.,W•1.4 •tm 1).' • ,P 1
- • - • 1„4,...."-..., •?-4,--.. • '..: - ..47,44.
:-.-. .-••:••A.:.‘•••,,'5F3•'
.
• .tzt::•..;i,,...,•,.
. •,.t•-•••,>.i t, ,
..e.A..,..4.e.t.
Dy,-F4;.••,.q.,.. . . .. . . .
• .: . .. . ... . ,
. .,.. .. . .. . .... ,. ..
,-....- 4•47.M4i
*•'..1.';?:10v.0-,"i.••:;:•.`; • .• •, .• .. - . • ::• -.. •
. , •" " - •
• • '. -':-•- • • .•,...;\ • .. ;,..„ . •,tg,.;..„ •,%
•- "... :•ii•,---•••• 41i•J.:N..1 •:.•:.:•........ :.,..,. .•..-..y..i., . • 4 11;it,,,,,... ,,,,,
ii-:;'• 1fas.-i,.• • '• • - . • •:•:- 1.,..:-...,-• • •
. •
•.. ,.
,U...!.(4'L'ir-4:51P:::.•:•••
EF)..•4,,,7 VA.....N., • . ••. ..".t h-iiiP.:•5::,'`.:0:.::..C..i',1', '4 -'..-:•r;e-)--,..61•.t.i.' .)......-O. l• -E.' z--:•:• -0''fl t'-'1-tO.'-'' ‘.''''il..:.'':-.'..;"*-1:•i•:'-......"..,..- --...a. -`.,.-fi-'. ',..•.,-...'S..1,".".;... • . .',...,....1-1,k'i,lf
.........'!:
. . -• • - •• i• - • -•:-.1-...:',:.;:-...-- .q,:„..v.,,."*.
....Q,-!,•••::,-- •• .,..,',...-_. • •'••••• •• IF,tt-k.1-1,:),1-0 In;*6-7,-, •, •
•:..--...,..:.i:..--• •• ••.--,44,t.4..;:?:.
A',4:.:1,-Pr,k,-,Ay.•••••:.• : . •i-•
/ ...,., . .•• .•, -:.;•,;:;...'. . :• •pitirt
c*.....:.;:yr.'-:: , . ...:t : •••••• "'i••'• :: . - -,,.:-.7....-....... : • • ••••:i.:,:.-:•..:.•„..-? .- - •• "•••!-;':'.f.'•'; •••• • •-0-11-'..•.
ifik-s'4--f-• x5:1,:•,:........•.,.-,,,r-.::;•: •...:,:-..-..•*i..:-•••::. .,. Tt.,iz et- tn.r' •l'o£4''.1 t, art CI r,r.••.Y.' 140 l•f.5 tii.1 014 iY,OP•N . -10P P •' •',.,•...rf.i....•••••;•.• 4j:k..*
v...,.ISIV4 :y.:•.' .-•.••••. • '•••••• •••.-•• • •-.
•
',...-4:1,3: 1';'.= ''''''t'''.1:•si:.1‘.....:'••''''...":;''''li'Y''..*:''.;:. ''' 1.7::":..t,i.-le,.7 47 ,p,T.'••1:11.3 ti cl.'.,•n k,-*...')'',,e a on 0n i :t.10 t....,.: 1 t :L.,?, ^1 litt.,,n111y-•,0 0,1•Z*0•4:,..:!.4b;1,170.0 .•.••• ,......•,:.: ;,...:... .... .:...F4. , -q.,.,.k;,•,!,•0 .:.„,..i:::: :,....,.,.......:......... -•:...,..... .. .
-:,.,...q.,„:,...-..,....;:•••;.„,f,z. „...4.„.
.. ,... ... . . • ,
.. . ..
0t72,74.-,:°1'.':',..,',:::'::---'...:..•-.:• ' '--. 4, - ,-,,,- ,v,,01-'.P C 4 ns;-il 1,-. :Ail(..1."A•11Ii P-z.1 1.,,;:;1 -0.10• gb&ze ...st.i.rir,..4 • - ..: •,i..1,: ,....-...,.f.; .,.......;:K -_A.
,4-,,,,,w,,I..t,of:;••••;•:....t.••• •: - •.
' - ; ••••'50,.::,.:..,,,-..•!„0:rt..: ,.,•,.•„.„.
''?"'tri,.';.:,4 •,...-.;.:•. . • . - .
. :-.••••••••.• ' •••'• "..'•:': :':•,._.,._:3'.''',-',',• %.:.......,,.....i.:::g.i..g.A.41,--,‘ ' . -1.
.•:'-'•:.• ..'"''•:•-••• - .- ' '-3;1 1-f..1.k.. 1)r..iar<1.4-0:0:3...re:T1 d-.-:Ap.r4V.t.:ttO
.
• • ..•• ...,......,,.: ......:ff...•-•.'Cli-.'''....,':•:'..i.f.g -•$44:-
. •
.
"-- --. - .
r . • . -...:1-41 :- •,.• f: .:. •• •"• , ,.:.,.- 4-,-; , - 1. -L. ' -'' -Yid oOPIPi-11.'.-vi-. :-tis,---04 •, tl-lt•+••••`ttle:',.a 0..V-,Av:is••••',47:tib e-•-'r••,••••••,-:' •••••.,:•••-r.3-1,. .-•:0?-!' --• ,
lam,.T.14.-• ii.„,,,.'. .t o 06 a...,.. e„.... . :...A ,••%,,,.•.i.:. At,•.•..,. 55..t. , . •• .•........., ...,,,,...:.......,....,....•. •....,,..:. . .,.. :,...,,,,,,,,,,..„..„,.:„,,..• , ,•
1.1-s.W..4s, ::.;„...s.77...,.........:.....:, ........:,..... . .
tii:Yfit. •••4`X'•'•::4 ''.-.:.:'-••• ''... .. •. ••. • '. . . . • • ,• ; ••• • ,.
•_,
C....-'-w A. A.-: : ' •.* : . ./•tr'''''ff= -7A 1 1 1..1 C r3 a ari d A'5`;r1 CU.14P7.".art QC-,t',3.0'• Et eid... thr,,t:. .t.-1'1,4).G. r Olt'Or,.'h ii A.,6:4y.. ..,... .:::- r...*:::-..:1;:••• •••1•:•••;:i.;:c.'-.:::,"41.
-6.....-.f,.41,40,-.....-. ., •• - •
• . . . • . ,
• - • ' •':i•-•'...-• ••••• ..":-..:::''J:P.:•';`,:.'.:•;'-;-.....;:l'4,,,a -4,0-••-
ri!o•••••,,.,R;•..:p•..4•,: - • - - . Tarrizr:t 1.:_t tilat. l' .5-.,• will a do f or.ld. tbe. •name f'-ii-o-.--, tr.1,31.- .1„Awfv.:11,, t.-1,.t-i:i..r4s-:..• ....,i•!..:: ':',:_ ,•:;'.:':•• .-„....tv,..!::
.'-.41:, • . . , .
kr-Mli .1--. . ' . - , •• •- - .. . , . .;•:•:::,....•-•-•:-.•••••....- ',.ft'.i.
.4-,..-e,,o,•„.,: .wit.:,T.-.4-7.oe%,,,T.Ir, •••••...r..cfq.1-.,ti •_fol.- •a a 1.d 1...a Y'..e....3.1 -;;71);.- gl gc,, -11 r 0 X'l'' • •. •-. •'''....;••;;::,•,,:;.;:..••'.- com,
•-•• •PP•?-?.,,,e•-if• v , .
. , . •• . ...:... - _,.• •.• 44:4..
. • ,-• ••,.:.••••• ,-••••'••Pcfr•-let
i•-••••te-,tiv-,,,z,4 - - . . .f,-, ,•'!...Qi0,4• '• •-" • • . - .../ 4.1. f
I-N• 1.,' `.'g;,,,,: ••••••-;.,•;'` It,•,:l.:71:;,7;%T.X.f'S V, • 4••I,r., r.,::: e' i''''•••• •••• et', l' t'''•, fLyp'l"''a‘4.,- ,„,", .t! •- .:, - • ,_1,-1-,-,4-.vl•
••rtikett • .
1:.:; !'.M,f3te• ' • ... ., • . ••i•• •:).•,:,f,teA . •.-7,-;krric.:•.•••'....:, '',3„)C f•ci i::"..• 0•:":, .1,f 2,?,:,!:.:(2,1..1 t Ct cal 1_,,y.,i 1..,•e.„--, ,,•';-'•••,••••,•••.;.•,„,,,-,f•..'..:'-'•„.'.n.t. e..T1.. cl." .-s."9-0 cr''':,..,•t.i.:A.--,r,7;• • :----•---•••-7•••;••;••.:••.::-:••••.......-ik.,-..--4•'--#••;•,.- .
if .-..'aOlk • -
'.:-i,-41)P--• , • , • x• - ..-,4-•-. '., ' •z,i,--..-:.''::*:.•;.,:.-t--•.•L•".•'..4,1-1•.;gim
• - • -
who l•-;.;-?.vo 0,6(3 ri o'u 1.y• V.I.;,,,.IC,T.4.t.,k1,...- t 0 61.5n ":31-1 1;:: .-.:0•1 P.,tir•ut= 11 v;;.-„.,tillti::••4:1'1' .',.":.-,'::::',,,'...*5-........`:::;?'.#4.''',tt,$•:..''..*1? .4.::;•.: . • . .
5, ' . •
,,•••• " •' •• • ••- , ••
. . ..
, •• • : '"•::.'.•`•t'.:;•.•.'..... • •,5'.-Ak.• „..;
:,‘....:-.TiV ,,i-,..., . - • „ild 1.l',i or 6.t'ar•tc..:- h.&0 c ak.;..s e,,1 L.tle c;.; ,;•..i:z .4.t,,. ,it e a I to' 'be- 'Ai:Tilt',tci• •• • •...:•':••:,.4i,'---.....••••e2 -iP.-,1:K*:,
, ...ag:.-,:i •. •• . .
..; •.....:i;•;,•7:.• • • • •:'..:•- •?..':••••••,-•'-•-..- 1,%-? •Wfir
, •'•-•.:.?•• :;••'1•'...: .
• . . . .,.
' •..:- ';‘.••••'.:,• ..,.../'..:••••• • '•;?.?,...,*•:51.•.•:;••''...a.',. 1.*•:•,;,•:•
;:....4i) iii: ...... . .-......c.:.S. f•g..1,:g..erl.. the, t.V.;•;.• ':•-,.Li(.1 ,yo a r. S.71.r r..i t a:v.;o'v,!-:•‘: .v,•ri t....•cr2.,. . •.:...:.••.: ....,....,.....ii.,,,•,..:2..•.•,....-. .. •;?..;......:.;.:,., :.....2.••.,...::.,:s.„ 4..,r3.,
t.„
. _ .
• .•••••••••; -.i:,-n.....,-...-:::.'•ir••••••.:':-:.' .. •;:...::...;. .i.'•'••••L.L. .•7 5:- l't,
: .:•.:N -.:3.. : . - , .‘:-:.-::::.p.•-."•.:-..v,.: . '.. . •
-. • •..• --•DA 1:• -•:::t.17 •'•?:.0-•..7•1',v-i-:-..- 13.-Li.---.` --,------.-- --..^7'^'::17.-Z*.-----.'4 ••,,l•4z•I'•5, .
'•ilk:0;i. ',.....•' •-. • . •,', 1;4.'''•.;::,.... .-,.......,... ....- - - . ....... .....
.. ,"":.;•.,r. ...„...- :, ...,:...._,.,s_..., -. •--a-,--ii-i,•••••••••,-,:--5 ... 'F•twk,.y:,--
-•-.4-i:'A';'IN.; .. • ..':•'.•••,',.,•,.•.5,:.:,..t...:: ...,, .,.,.:... .• . • .
. .13, -,.....- ..• ....•-. .. :-....:,..,.1.1.:......:..d: ., 4:b.,:
,.*:'...•••:.7.11,,,m_sg,'•-• ...?..r.;:.t...-..;-•'• .. .%.-••• •.:••.1- • .
•, ts-hil..:'..." 3,„ ,,,, .- .. ...:.•,.%- •. .. ‘.., •r.•••• . • -------- „-P--1 a''''' i....•,•ff..-.V,.'0,;jRti1i.'.... .•••-•••---g....:.•.-•-.: ....--.,:;•;.•.:..-:,,.,1,.:,., ..,.: -.-....-•.. . .
•
•
•
....
N ,-•,•:;•„..'...-.•„-• . .- a-6'7•,-•-t
. . • -, f -r.•.t-•. 2-,-.•.,..f.......-;-• . •4; y /Ii e -, / ..-..:..•..•.••.•0O1,".4.,-0.a..6.7.1.11k,4-,A).,i-x,R0',',i.,-,,:...-
..--
•' • • . ... . •.n. ,:-..,,-.
•.•1•0:4i...- • ',..' ' ' 2 C,.: .
-.'.0.1,14..-. .. .•7., '-, /......... '‘.::••• ".• . •
2"............: ....... • --
:, - :..• ..,•, yott'V
• •
.•I',..fi•Af.A.':• ---,Tr.:--..•:::.M.t,.."..•
.„. .:..1 V • . . . ..7. •s.':'•*.* . :..Pittr;'414-•::•. . . • - - •• >"'•LY
......„1:,,.,C:,,,,,,•,,R us.• tcf%.....!••••c..i.•01'%it• i . • . . ,
• ••:,-:::.:;-,'" ';': ye..),‘ As,,.
•.,•,'':14,1•It! : • • ' •
';•14, •;.:‘. •
.,.• t . • , . .
• • • •
--• . ,
•
''''''•.' •:' .'-'4'''' :...goy
,,li,...•,' ••:., . . ,C,c)rfri'l.c.' '0.1'• XI C.1 )
-;. •.,,ii"• • , •
•
• " '•• '• . • --...-'..iiii,-:; . •"•::•,•':. 'w,,,kkeW:r"..>"
..._,R2 5,.; - . • •- • • • ,,,c---'i.ri I..117:1 l'i 2V t;k•,.. eia..,-;.? o..t. J-I.L.n er. • .19 45 ..),z.,.rol,,v. Ite -pe 1.14'3611AI 5-Y- ••••.•••'',•••:.4',"":'•':•••':'•::•§V:4-='%.•
•S .• •
:..?., 4,.,..,..s. ..--, • :.::-...::Asp')e 1..r f&c,-..7. if.-., . .k:‘,.44., ':Z... P.11 6.: 0-,• 3 i, 111,00,1y:, 1tetAz
t oi me , ',to :be•:-. 1,E.,•• .•••••':':.:'.i.:.., :„..• Ikki--,,,,,.:7o.:.
...
A',0.!..•••1'.'..:. • . • . .:- •:••••••-..Prs.:;.v.t.,1.a.,3,-,t s.r.,e... :,,.!. ,c-•.1-q"1-,fil l'•,,.:' .7 .:II n't.":C.1;•.1.11 .!..;.'\'' C.•f .',.1. cor-,O4-1,0,''' •f. • " ' ...; '.'-• ••••• ••••c:•-qA,•
.••':'li'',•••••• , , ,..,,.„ ti ,A co I ,la
-.-.. . • •ex.r.,,t,,..lit..5,34.. t.....c.,.., •-d,::,.tc,•..,..:.?.";...T-A r L. f4-.rr, t::1.M.g •:i.'f;-'..-i t;rl.:2:::','7.'''.if:,...anf.,:t. a c km ow).e c.i.,,, d • •-• ,•-':,•'„:?::::•• .....4i7,- iki„'i.
-•::.:44- -ff":-.-„. • : •"•-•'..,44-111.11.-. LT;ti tr.z 1;m,. -..t 't o b•,:t'.: ; •i es, Clio t., trs.rirl• 7/,-;"' -,1',l',.:•;,r,-; -rlet .e.ral. eleoci.:.:Oi.
..,....: -' .m;--.- • . •• ,--, ,„•'44..4•
' ..' '- '''' ' .. • V. 'tt4r ..4.• • ' .,„..,f..•,..-.,,...,,' .. • F ..,:;:.,YA.;....:-....; ,v-R-,,,,
4,i• ';..:...-:• .. ...;••••'•::2•10 g.-g.3.4. C:arpo:ri,..:1.•..1.0.y3. tv..r t n3 .113i1 VS .' IC,.• 1:5V:Dri 0 Z.r-f,1.'; t 4.4....ro...0 Ategf..t. .,.4:.ori P41,•,:.....,•.'.•:-•,•;.•:• '•••::-..:":"- - It-.14!,:l'•
' '-:.:••••.•-•.•-•,: . &?‘, ig,-..04'.s.:
..,,• , •:,•••:r..„.,,,.. ,.• -•........i•,4t),'I CI.5.•on '.0,T.,.'';',4': n t vi'.se d• f' . i"..t:(6 ti-•'-'iltIl.,0. ..s.IA 1.:.1-,nr A ...,zi • to.' .•:l't.}Th,•••••:f'•...c:';.•.-;••••,.---, ' '•--',,•"L••.:•:,.-.:,'•:45,.A;•.,t..,•q••4,•P.VAI:n t 11-t....,-•-• rd t l'A •- . ,. v,,. ::.-ia- -1...:.ei. ,,,,-..• -,,,,----. .:pt .e..,' . 1dk - t4 l7 , _ •',-...-!-•••• •i.•„........•s•.••.)•.:‘:.:i,-_,,'.,-'•---:-.':7.'-,'Fr'i?..1 ik.,,i-„k7,,51A0•-•0..•bf ....••y.-.„:::;:.!-..;.;!.q,..:.••;••:.;.04.-.,...,:v4i..''-',)_ - •j2•;i7•'..--.•••z••••. •.'••••'•••:•••.-::•<:••::•tiatd,',C437:M0r0,i;'.t)r),, : .‘• • ••
- ' ', ..-;-, '... •::--.-:- -...':•••::•:•;-.....-.••:-::::',:'-•••,•••'•••••.,•'..--:-.:-•:•::::: ::',:::V'•••:-,1A-21 '44.'4 •
;.L.'. '.;:t?',.','---: ..'''''''..i-'1..i.:•, '.'::::,,, ,,,:::: -. . . . .
. . .. . • -,• •,-:,‘.i•.••••••;:•:•-, -.•:‘',Ii••••••..i,:••••.-•i•';'' ••••••:,:.--. i-iici:,,:-,.?•;.:.::. -i••Kftwu, 4,YR -.VP...---• .•.....'.•-•..T,.. ...T...;::::::..:.-......•.!.;,.....,...;.........,,,• ::, .., . .:
.. . • ••:,-,....--. ....!:-.,.......;..,.;....:...... :,
,.i.4i ..'if-5::v::..::1--::.'::*:.'irfn:',......:•'.;:-....'.,.... ..,;.;.....,._....„44S.....Y. i,.,::.S....}. ..:,.:: .42.14- -.1----,.4.:4....,.., .h.„rt:un..,.., :-.7,fpREff.',1.,q,,,T;FrI_A:7„,,,;,,,,,..:,,,,.„.,,,,i,4;4„=„,....,
•!-.'f.w. ,77•'-`7:''''Z'',11'.'e;T:,•17.',,r;I:,•:..i;1a...X.,Tz.i,1:OD.„IF/Z:4;1.1)f.f--..110.i V.:1--l'i:e i•:,-t):1#:•--,.d ay.:•tIt•fIT1."•:-..01 zx. ,'••1 V...FOV:.',I115.6--init03 -•:••..-i;;;;.,A-0-1.?:1,-w;!:b 4-.4' 4.•
:i''''..,',.'•';';.r.'s•-••,t-'..r::„S:ilit;::,•-f-3f.:5 .'.'•:•:-.••.''.:,,.- -• •. • . • .r.v • • :. . .. ... . . .,...:;.4';':ii'..,.•'-....:‘,,,;.'..:.;•.1;I:ffr.;:ii";••'..''.••1•1*.••••-*•!•',..•':•':;,..\.:.0::'...ig'.4.grt•••.',.. ••-• ,1
; ?,"4'!•:;•',.;:-;.• '.7`.f.v.. :,,?,,F;,,z.".:".,',:.z..:.,:. ..,•... . . . . . • • •-- -
• • - -. , . . ......--„,.-1.::•,:<::: -,,.:,.•.,..!--....-',',•;•:':..,,Ifi"p-:::ii;-74....••:...::•,:•`;':',Q.••:.1:'..:'•1%%•,•-•14,;;;;-'..it‘ -•'','
..R' Y14);i•'$t•••.:1s,•%1VO .;••#,34..,41c-t:''.1.f.Z.':in':''•4r•••''., •: '.,. ...•. ' . ,: .••-•''t,•.4.....:.:'.::?;.'4:.:•,,;;,;•••,!••,..,•,;_•:.:,,14::.,,:,-.04„.....r461,2,-;..,...,,,:1:::,,,;.,4413,-44:44`..,,,:i• :,• • ',i • '...f.'...• : •1 • •"5
-:ki€,••,..r .':,':.P.;•••'..::7,:',..et.:'• ,,•••,,,‘".-2...i;Y:44.....;-42.....,.,,,•!•,i'g.,.?•Erp t!.."..-:- 1
...4.',• :::,:.;•..'r••••I')•:,*: '...;;,;a1::::,:‘..-.P.'..r.'.''.'iil•:-.-•".-• •
. ':''''' '..' ' ••k,--''- - , :-...,..:.'..e,--:::.*•'''...1.'-'4•••'-i'•••:.''''''"4';''''<.•':•ft:'..:!.: :...Y.'liErigfigit;:-.•'•S'..?•'N' .
..':' .,......g...'`..•,.?.i.1,;,.1.,'-',1..,;,r.'..•.'•.:,),a....:, -. .-.. • •,,.,.p..• :....:?:•••:•.?!..•-;•,,,:,,;:•,-„,:.... s..A.-".4. ........,,,,;t:toe.k„..0..!...er,„_9:,..pk?:...,...Z0;, ,5--44 .c.,.-et 4.f.e.,../.,,:.4:4....p.,;,,..,,,..,..,
..,,,e• ...., 4r,•:•f±•r.3•:‘i..,''J-1-JI.••A•11:,'",-0'•- - ' : .
.,,
. .
''''''' .- '''.:..t.i'a•-•-,1-,..•i.;1:-A'T.-c:...-2!,-,•,-•::••z•-••••:.... . . ••• -• -- ""z-----'34.f•''r,,,z` ,•• ••-••-76,1P576••tor crj, ••• -0--",- - •:.'ilt.hAf.... M.'.1.';,'.
f*,..31..,.. ',. ..'..a7r,-..1 Z•:...i.lf Pr!,.?it,'C,....;;4'.?-i•:t:: . .... . ' • ." :.... ....." :'.;..1'.7.. .',............:.:.-,,, ..s.,..1.:3. ,i.',..•' ?.. 1,1,.:..,.,,i.,ri,-...,-",;,-.4'.0.-..-c,.;....,.-:‘•5•-•....:.••Acz.,'",,,:,•:.:Ak.. .'::e-,?:',..'..y.,,,,;,.1:iii--0,!•••1';•!•it-:•••:„ -' V ,,,,,'
.q..„-,,I), . ,•,:,...5.,.;•.,,!..i.,_,..,:,,•.•Aift.,•i,,,;.•,...,,,,....:,....,...;.... :.. :.• ••• : '-:• • = ••••• ••:!•,.;'.5.„••::,•:-•,..•'-.-,5*-:::',.',..,..,'e7. teM'sAT)...O.,.:'VI 4,'044.17-8"..PKI:.:0'. .'.g0•14-.4k4.*A-P.: 6:.,•:•-:•4i:N•Z:::;•'.'.•Z:'•fP:1;:,.1% 5--;Y.'s:. -
'3.4.1- ,'.... ..,,,,,....:ns.•:.d.-.*)..,••••.,;4‘,;,.-4•••• •,f'.^,,z-t•-.-:,••;;:•••••••,.'-,• • ......•••••';•••;1.-',•••••:-.:'•-•-....•-•,,•-'.0-- • 4.i*'.•''.-.'i,'-'s it','-,,,...fce.:4ii.:4",'•=',.,,,3,.i.'4,:.',-......7.-:-... .?'-'3':".'''',,--,..,":41.ir ' "-;:*
.::•''''''-;klereft7t4-T.":21-.:•;:i3 .1..1,•••;':f".•••••;%:*-f••:.'* •2: • • • •: . ..."+•.:•;•••:'i....;•'';;.:•.',:.':.....;*:•:::.t"....04.4;t :1„,1 eat;;;;..,'P,E,'„i.•:.•;:•..3,42;,..,,r,o4-4.ctiy,WP,Urk..4.Y44,-.',.,,,..,4•11W,,ii?,i'•••,11 ,'''. ,-- ••-:
!.:i.: :•:•7-,'.W,1."..,:..../74.4....^....N.'. •!'....',''..i•c:•k*::,,;•••••^.-..•.• •
• .'...:, *"..,,_...2.11::::;..;.,.,;,...;.......',. . .......--,,,•i:?,,,.:-...!;...:1:,..:::::.,:,..,‘,...„-,..;•,5.-.,.....;,t1.1,T,-.7.,,FF.:::.fm,•::,•;";.:n::::;.,•:',.-1:ze-L4,'„,,.,, ".4-,
.-.........;--,:z••••••:;:,..."4z.;s::::*.z.::•':!..-•-..-l'il-:2...%i,;.::::::.z.:f.'is..:.-.!,v. z.:4:-3?..fiz;'zzi.;',,'-;i::: ',.-r-?,.-",g-*- ••
ljzt: -4:0-'zzi:-':•'.•••,:z-1.•-•,',.-,-z•Y-1,..-0-':.-z;•••'••••• z :- ,- :.,•• ; • ...• ^ ; • " -••• ....`'.4.;-.•:'-;:i•:?• ,:::.:-..".:*.•::-;: ..,*s'•.:. z.: ...:.•,;:-..'.••••‘:',.'•..z.z,i..,.'".fz.'z.•;1;:z..11••,z-',.••.':,:1,... .e.::,.'4,.V4t;','.,:.-..,;.•':).•:''''''11.4.•%. ,„;f0.
.;-'.1 ,-;;I-W••,,,:•:*- zz•:•:;.;•:`,':-t•'t•?,-:••••••••.• •• ... - .. -.'..rzf.t;:!:-.::'. ,,...._:.`.:-.;•'..•-••, :• ..• -z-.•"..''''',1-.':.',•..*!:.•,;',•..•-•;t:. "..••••;•••:::-•.-:-.,.:---.-:,..:•i:.;•‘•••z:.•f:'.:ri.".'•!-%.te.r.1,.•:!'•:.•:.*:f:.V.- z•w4-..-.,4;
•4z..,."..,..42,4.tzt.- 13.•:t......:...,::,...7.:••: ..i....lis.:.4..:::':,..:,.,,z-_:,:_i:::!,:::....:,.-...:::,.._.:_-.2-1.-...t......i.• 4:-,_.._.-..L.,..,i-.-,.......r......7._;._,..... .._:-•:_:__;_.___,:;7,.•'-.4.•,f.,?...n...:-.,..••....‘.':i... .::t.t....--:.:.---,7.. .._..,-• ._ :,:.:_:,t..-. .;:,,' .t7:5:7;•.;..-„;.=,,:.„;-;,•,,......,..::::......:::;.,,.:.;,,-,,,:-..lez.-.,:::;:.....-::,,-;:,;:::;;i,.;,,,c,.:;,...-::•;;;•..:;',...;..;:fi:,.........,:ii,?;;;:.....7.-i•,7",1701.,z,a1,c,•ki..)-,4.00,.,,
1111,,z-;.7.7n.•':':•''.-z--:':4},.)-•',P-7-::, .7-;79'.'4"/•,) •or!ti.:••••• •c.A•t.. - --•- - • • • .i.,!......?::-:L.f•;'':;A*4?;3';':.-4. ^.'-':••••?'•+.i:-..:',.,!...•••:::-.'",-1-i:• ;r:);g1.-iil.'F:..r,i:.,:..;::•.:: :. :•.....',.. . 1,I,1:•.'ii"?'.i.:1•':•:;••0•.- :•.40..fi•.:••i:.:4geattYr.::. ;
•'.-;"4^,-A.'4••••,.-.-i••%.:;i••••,';''FY?•:-A31:1-liy:•,,,,A,..0.;-•.;*••:.•*%•‘.-1--:•,•,4..;.: •• ....." • .. •. •••• -
. . ,• . . .
• . .. .
. .. . . . . .
. - . . . .
. .. . . • • .
. .
. . .. •
. . • .
. - - ' . • . . - . •.
. . .. .
...W;•••••," .;42147'.'..%;-•?--'' - "1.::„,„,.A.'"-:•\,:.-='-.-',".-:is t ";,:"P-1.,.....ii:10.q,,'', , ... .`.'.. •: A A'''''':,...'''' ..kti;•' *.1•;,...,... ..f •••„.•-•-,,T..; . ,, gr.e.,1 47.471A,,,_.,.. ,,.•. ,.?..,,,,,,:ii.,-).1,.:. .4r,0
1,0-,.-L,.e4 .' ,.. . . ,' sr,F. , p,,---• ...-o.l.k,:!,= =. .. •
1,'..e,'-.titi,„411:-.-4,w ..wat4.-44:,,11...4:to'aivate-,..-. ,r..,:n4..;_t ',,,.. .;- ,...•.&....-0..,..., .,,,. :......,„..z., , •,. /..• s. -.0....404,.4' -„ s_.„ ' ,,,,t-.4,'i„,,,, t.,•,'e•gyk„„':•?,,,_=,....1,.s,','I-:•
4•4',:k...1:...p.,„*.`r.„.1,1,,,3,..„,ii,:,/sii,...t". 4.1041,5e,t,„444.i.-1.1•A'Y ,va,,,,,,,,V; ,,.:--,414.gg• Lif.....i..,-0 0, . „.-!.5.,2t.:•••,, N.., .„,'-::-,..* -:',+. '.. •••tt..4t• 146.: •rt L....,... ').; '41'-. ,r,...‘Are-4.-I.e..,,,,7b;.2.:,..• •
a..„,,.....,,,....",a,tg" v.,- ,,.',"‘77-'''Ltz'Aitlit-, .--•,s4,-.2,..-- '.1... •- '"' '41r,:g'!'i "ki'4,:y4r24.47A. ,''S,'.,.. *.,:-.,. -1.5!"47;,....4,..: 1,*4.1t,..:. ...-' . „ .,,,,-T.T.,,i(-,,-"4"-,-,•'-',44#4,-,,OW- •
:,..-..,-,,,L, • 7*,,,...1,k,. `,..,,t; .6q4-,., ,,,,.‘'€.,.'",',; ,..--: tta• ...;..FeAx.41-57J4,,,,.itopiAligre,„„,„,,-...-..,:` ..-- 4.4.41-1,4-.A.L. ,,,CI,Vai '''ed,,,i44-i?Z^''.., '..'' ...:,' 4'''''i'V'',',tat, o.,:::08-114.?:t.
4
4.1e.,„Afa,..,.• 44VMACARMO.''', '''t:tflP,Z,V '`‘,N;4'4. '::.! :1.,""4:,,,,,Vititi.':y,_A'A4LPC.* ,'''''. 'kg' .4•VH:4, 64.4.C7f4:1.4 Nit!..t,:irrt I,;.!.,kVA,.•14%A__41•41),W.3f:if. . -
-)V•-,.„..i44%,. ''''49,t.,•-•.0'..P1,11_.,W'r•'•_,Ax,,ti.: 'k''''•'‘1,4.1C.;.,,A,,•‘'''*-......•‘. ' "-Rtr.s.044,,,,..,--4,0•14-1j)- 40.,,i,ks:',egirift.z&_,V§: „.w...k.'., ,..„0,44,24.,sr.,,,.;. -..4w1.,. ,,,...,,fx5x0!„.43t.r.olt,
454, i
.,-- i.,..kftl,_...,;.4t.,. -• -'-.,..•,...•-,,,t4Fiativtomit7Atomv!, • -..,...g.z,"•_ .- ;,0,-,i-, 1g4-.;•.*,. ',-...04.,afghy...444.1.-I,4.-.4P,-.,;, ,tfolt-o&z.: -..
:&...giggitVett,,,u,:iik'... .'7,-;e64-;., ->fir-..„.;., - 407-,.-•-•-•-•.--.,./. ..p.t,,.., -,**kr orp. ...y,•pt•-4 ,--44.•.....,..4-`,:,, ic...,4.7.,.....t..-R4.y/..41,114-44.:--70.-felifois•A‘-oA•41.--wi-zr;•:
:zeft2,444.14t..71. 1,7,".1 A',„"tte'ilfilleigrete..,,-='.•p•Ji- .r -„ : rzilez•sr-l'-' :',14%--1. ' -e.'.13.;,.•tiL,-;;%-tt :ty...e4.4„.W.A,:t.V.:
•Ni.,._.,:44:9;0.1,,.„_±,...Ntr...--4-,-,,..,:zi,,,,,•.--4. 4 ..,m...,.. .;,.;.,,•-'4*",. _Iii& .-'-ee.,...rit ,tp,„,7.-J.,•-.0':. .'eV- ,,.* ,,..4,',.i*. . .04 ...474.•:.0.,-u..‘:•.:4" -4+:f::• ;
1-41144'1:*-44.V.'' k''''''-'5-;',"74''''-.'"' '-'. • 4-441W-&=+' •c'• .1.1.; -.itt.‘&;1-11,a4.4.1.40=14":":... ,'''' Pe43--' --11144'' i-. 4*-",--,r'••. t4:a1;%-(4-Z-t,;.'4.e70,0-4,. .eie:
aesmtir a4vt.
'41.,.-1,1%,i4A21;i4,14.ii 4 0.4 1 4. •.:*.; .,;,.` .i..-.„.4....,...,.x„.:;,-t.zaa:x.,-/o,,,,,v.,t...:nzzv.ve6.,:-,...,x- a.,:z.g.0,..0.1.4„ .,....,4: ,0-.4kot.,,-.4.-„.„...,1.4a4.1?-or...-u.tokoti.04
tx,,,,.,-;t4t.,,,,,,1,- ...._*,,,, f...- _ ,4,..„1,i7.40..w.',SOIL:Ivo-0_,..Srof-A. _-.Ptik....itkki_lt-m-- ,, Pfikvertak•A.,... ...0-- , .-•;1„:;..-*:...-=y6;,,,..1.7117-Ai-„:1„.,-*•,-,- rnew.,... •
,trir*,§.0..r,f4.4",...17. ti'.,"*. "10"' .'4' 1` `: .". 14-... "`• . ....----''4'4-4&'.-4". ..4?"`'.-4.4,..A 440.,. ,..*W!,r-',. t..1' -yaw ,1',,,.C.,,,ii.--IW> .15Tv...%.i-. -., .4,141.#4y:
•,,0-0,0.,;.....4.0.k.-.4;v4,4*.tir;11.- - ....,,4.r. .-,r.,fk,,-,,„' .. ......,4,0..,-.7,0- ....?,..er -,-r-avo.,,-.,..,tb,,,._41,f4t.tew,-,7--/V--.,;..-.,' ,....,.--.-,e-.. --' , .60 ,..:;,.,- -
:47t.,:fk-Avits:;...,vz., 4 ("1 --ttli l'••
4,-....itg.VAt41,F. .`"). ''.'$T,',:-.;%.0.4,4•_,..••,-,.•,..,-,..,;:,......./..,.,.. ger.*.w."4:WiT•fx..,.•.4?-* •41140-''... .t4;--''-'-'•'';,:.•-:S'''''',•-"%r...iiikt .03104-v•••••-••••.t•.: ' '''''
1314Zillf4.441/41,741•.;...`''nir- 1.10.,At. --' 'I'Al'•4.4.•'' j'Ap,ti;&41.4t4.';Ziial,W4-1rit',3,W',.."..W1 t t'1.'":-..*e''7'.4-1,*.tf,.-...- ':;.:14•471.02P.-.*V. ;". `"`:-.-t. .1•1 •
;ar,,,,A.w..-‘,...74.,,,,,...wo,,;.,;,,A,;., ,,....,14,..vi.kwa4,.. .. .,:,....Aratdk .--..,.,.,,z,,,,,,wie.--V* ,,,--,.,*4-0S-44.. • -O. ...- .,,:-,pf'''Q'w‘• .-04Zek,',.-4-,t,x,•-."..'ir,r•,k..:4f.! .
,f7g4,.0.74.,;_tA414•14044.4-' •• ''"...-?...v... #4.a:i0-0'„„ ."47$114::•59,,,04elre,48.7-::-.V.,,re",.'''.-' -,4,4::.,,s0E-tAtioAt-..te„,...- .1.,-.-: -I;- z• -"*=„,-ic.-0„„suu,:,..444R.,..-,, . '7,,N,•"'F. .
'tt".•,,,-0-Wr-r.,-.:t.`...,' .":"-S,W0-441e•Ps- firfr4z.filk4te&--,,-• - •••'...c. '- '''t••••1,-.I-4, '-.1...Wir•-_ •,--...I.,....'‘:<,-.. .,,,.. ..:.- ...s..-46.-Wifweg .,40,..:•••*,,4';'.$1.: •
..? .,:..., . .. .. .''''' ', 4,4'•-;.*.4.`s,•}•,!Vkit."-M.1:-•;'''‘,-$4:111..f,•./**••••,- w••4.0.-'4•1-- -;4&'44,,,,,..-%'-'1'r 7,,,,,..W,L.,..47-,0.''''' ''•#•-c.1..1)..!; tt.-'-. ..-='1',3•••-,:(4--;..1....J.'',410,. ,,,..ta.m1.• 1-4..1-`4"..;..:..P..-i....z.',1e9s-1,-N.'24 b'-''''-f•.'45. •N'''.*:'" ''`..---. '1•'•:'-‘....,.. -. :v1-40P"-Ulil....,,,,,ki.-.se`...i.7-•.... ••'.
,A24.tg,„;,,,V.I.1.4ra.;,•ig.',4-,47&,:1,V74,-Tfritrtt,,' -,,i'N.41,4&P•t's'il,"-Xr,f.- 1,,...„,,dr,:s3,-^adviAriak-fire.o.kw,. ... ',,,,.. ,-_,-..,'Iriegay. .7:44*,e.,,:, '''''-'''4"-:#,' 41-,ZP• •-•-Kt-^.1%,•' - -''; • •
.„,...... ...„ ,,..1.,,t...5kj,....4,... ....ay.:Pr- ,•' • ,'4,..-beW .f.',1afx. •- T_ ot.,„;sr ,...z- 0,,,. . .1,4-v--1 ... . — ,...- ... e— 1.,-_„1!-.41 "4.11.1,.,v.,..,„ts, . ,.
Atlizei..,.s:4.A.,4%,..,-A.v....1.;- . '.<44-..:-. w4,-.,--,75,r-,rbt.zi• • ,,,,,, ... -eiw‘,-. . !!.:0,. -.,,-c.,-.4. ."...--,-,... - . -.,..-?;:r.-.4.--.,...61,q,14.-P....,-Nisvi ...wq.1....,,,,",,--. ..41,41;
...„*.... 4 I,.
.,---41g-4,20.40.0.:,,,,,1/2e.,,,t,„...„...,......,..-4 '0.4..44....' I.I; 4%0444AT,Iirt4'' ..s•-•-...4,,!,:n-L.41Y-dok•-•4?;,."21 -',,..„1-A.,.. ,',Q,•-•:44,yr:rxiit4.*.Nik..117.,:.*.7,2;,1,050,.. ,l.
-4;.4:R:-4:,:a4serkfr,-,z;1;;•1;,palkeh3OP' Vii•IP'-thieggilvir#2444-,,,,;t•:-`4,„..41-"--.7.-. .:1- --.`''.,'..1,,-.,4--•'..%.,-- ti__Atf...*•"A• ''.'.`,,e----' -'''t..-04.1{1A-V,Vt,,Ot.„,V,:-.•,,,f6.7"--,41,-*%,5141 „ - 4.4.i.4...t.,- ,.),7 --o••.' - -*or...vs-W.,.,-', ----.-4.:',.-,- „how.g.,... ..4- -,_ ts,,,,,i.s- - 3...h......7-eglett.044.,, ''.&'.ig`P,A.,`,,,4± ,4„14.0,,,k4,..N 1. ,-0.
tliTiY.V.tRiOkts.*1., .4}.i.7,,,ifig- ,14.4.iork.. 4•10,0•10' -:f'-;r4C--7-.--Vo. ....,..,.,.-.• ,.40t, .,,;, .....,.:A...•.i...t,....., ...,.",\F11,,,r7vA...f 0-4;--;4z.Ase...v.N...y,..-I, .,..
"At
.,,,,„___,_,....i..*,,,, ,...„.„..,*„...„....,,„;,,,.,. -, ,,,,- ..,.44,.....„,,,,, ,,,,, .,,,i ,.....'P 3 Wer*A-Mc- ;.-AA6- . f - •WI'f-e•-• ." ',--.-t•c•--- • - -. b.,‘.... '-' '41'''XtelVF'-'1, .
-.*Witftrtlk,P11445,71:% q.''' `4•,Vir, ,t-4.?'67;M:.,0,"' ,Vie.,,t'-r.-r,t''Ali,-'.e. ' ' --`)!-;,'''. .'-''''' '''''....', • ,,,•-'4',t.!A't,;: 4, .,: ,,,t-4,tt4."0-1"...A : -2- J;;,,,i_,Z144"--t,;;.'47„,';' k • .
Ittri:1,'-lirfiX,P40,74Pkg-lecio r 6' •4rells.41fig.r'S' .,,,, ,;*,'44''' 4,,,:''red,, . ..., ,,,i,r.,,-:•1114..v.,..:., ,,..,..,4-.... , ,L40).-'1':' 4 ,‘,.,,,,.....4...,„,,,,tok ...44.-.„..,.• .
siof., .„, _.,.-t,...„7,-...‘? tilre,',..',.,,,-., ;tn. •,,,,„.rv-,T.,,,.(A,'.,-.1.44"-'n',`2%,411`‘4"..''''r'Z.':%46'" '4'. - ",-. .'‘.1 '-2k5'"..",i,„4'`54,1',-,'''''':4,ft-!*-:.),.1'''',41•;;if, ;;.,,,4-1",;t.*:•''-ft:‘,,04,-41r.47tr•Tri_i-W.0`...f' h.-.7.'','W''.40,a*'-',,h1;4.4:1
40t1',4. 14'4.4‘1'slc..{•••••- S,••,.. - IliPt- ,t IV L.,,..,.. -1 4,,Pm: •-?,,' •••:. ' •,"-,-'14`';',.. Ai,12'11- , ,.:-'-•14.7':' - AW. ,-'4104'.-: .:44`-- ..-1:1•,,tgW1*ii:
,•ra':V"4404.. ''''''''e*.14 -CA. 04- -vi., .05 7 w..-Eges*,' g`,',--,,,r '. -4.,' • 44..,,,.:4.6% ";...4:-,‘;'4'.-', ,.;,''''' -,- .7-7--e-ritAA.... ...144'04,5-4:14'4,. -
4
.•. ...4,-.cc.,,,;... .??,,,.,-...,-,.-„,,..., -,....i,4%.,,,..„.s.„4-..,Wv...„...1.x.--:,..„.7s ,.Ir --14;6:fr .1.'-.-:•41:%;:il..-s X.147-.4.„,-;,.,`.,la•;,.‘,r.-.A,'•, P,R.. •;.-,,,,-.‘ :,1,‘4,7•.'11.-,..x.; sr... '.,•k-4,,,....-ki .4._,....z.mv-.:.",. .t....!..,„,
'4,..'.*,.•:."14:0,71}igol...4T";,,'Otg 1,91,a,N.-<'-,*i.4,,:14r-4,1-h• -•'- •""' .4r; ,... .i. -.., -U-1-,,i'.4-.1.W tor, -0.-- 4•-•Y. -,....44.4... : ....1; F 4,...41.wvr...- .. - •
•..t.,...v,,,,,,,.,----ti.........•...,..‘,-"-)4.,41,.......x.v.o..1 ,4...,--',4%,44,,, • - -,,,,,,,,,-,?, -.,.:,1- ,,,.„,A,, ,„ .,., ,,,,tig.lt..,,,,-..-, '€•,,, . , . -...,,,,,,:pa, _ •,,,,4,,, ....4,..,.. ,
'""' --,IS - .,,,,-"A, • ,,... ._. •.. ..., ..
',`: Atrilift•etiV.,,,,,4X,;,‘,re''',•-•;;Vf:,+'94t,14!‘'.-,'AW,Wr' ' '144`'''L.._° 1"i-14 •.,l'z?..,..,i;„- '2‘..,tc...,.,'- '••V.V.':i' ‘,,*•! '' '.,4;• V.pzi_.-'''N,•-:•:-JA1/2,:wrowl.;4410.-V --''. ,..."4,16"=.3
e
::,•."41..Xe2fitIkt,t1P,44"44,4,.--..0.t.4.41$11--4:„..4- , %--„ -01,.W.;,;•••4vW.".:.:A,Tia,s, ,,,;1.,. ----";,'"•• '...V.-,,t,',,,l's::-,,L.Xki;;72V,,, -i'ili',-' •,,,:lpt'',41.1..„--.' ...., ::--.••,4"rati.-+.4-'1"-Cialqi.- -
,t4
r fliVI.:411•FVT:0 /-;-'44,,,e.k‘&30*1-W.,1044i. iT;it'''% -',IFI .'"-;,';:,4' .,v_,_,..,... .4t 7 /t.".i .''''',/*'-`,<,'-'.'',41..,0.,''' -,,, .v ''-‘`;-- -%,.-!•'.4.- ,:1`.••..'7'44'7',"41ent):10:VA'N
'..,1,,,..4,t,'.e.:MI,Vvs'Avirf.1/,';Y'4Pifigftnil.,,, "4;4'4, .,„4' •-.="‘ - -h_1.4Ytteiv,„....i. - .,:z.,.... .;-'4,4' ,,.."-.A.1:41,-4-71,0, . 4- ' 'Aff 1,1V-.4- ';'3,31.41;,* .410)...00:';*'4N,Alk4
, 1,14,.",044",.., ..t-,b,i,4:,,.."4., ,,.•,..,,,..,/4-4,.,,,,,I.:40.4„. „17,- ...;‘,4 ,ALA fi,',11,...'..1.4.; 4+4t''Ai,_..,0,,f,',-z. ,, ,,•,:',.,,,,e' „41.1 .;,....,.. ., ..."0.1.WA.0,,,m ..
-.tifeW*VS\ig.; •"';r0j•Ii•-•V$"•4''•,1.,,- '-i01.',;''`f•-••4:4,4-- " '4'•:(It'h '-' '''''V': ' 4454,'•'*''.-&-,4%., "-"z- ZSs.40,,,-., ,A#1-. 2.','-42:- ,- -. - "• , •%•t.kla.•
,..:A.,,;c1.-1,tai.tOsto ,'•-',,,-:.•.','....._•'r 1-.14,,,'',q .: 4,-- .`./,e4-i-..,. '4,1,,,,,,•',„4:ftl'io.,Z%,:vrek,;,.-.. 'ri•-'<6. /"A-11:1-.4t,-;:ir4 040,WP....,6.y... T.,,,:•. ' .A :, '" *.<1.;,-, 10,1&•,..1
I•L'ANV-4 "...f,t4M!,,k V,'1 Is'.,44 -,&.1--4‘,1*::fli,:1•;. .-t.,."`',5=-•eV,&,,,ra:kcItig:ttsfe43„k44,S;74-,-,4 t.„.„-,,AP,114,„k„ ke-,5,,,,,,,31:f.t„,tri--00,4its.,-,, ..• - ,_ ,'' 4..16-.41.- .-%."L ,
it'AVA,,I.14-44W.A7-:-.4.4.114,., -",'70''':.,•01,..4.'::,4 ‘v,4 lif:'•‘11r'ffylribg,MTAY4;-•2P-4!•Mkla•-•C -, .14'4 er&- :14••-• 411:11":11"'"-v4`4""'4''';'*''' 'et.i,,,•'''' 40.,r1:Z., k I'(-''''''.4.
..11,11.,=?P.,,a-17-tice,4,.,,,,i ., ,,,-te74-t ,s..-fi 4f It47-1,4,04..., 1,,,,- ',1q--,••,f0•,,,,!-:=0,q71:-,-,,,... rt" . ' " . ' .,._,„.„,,,,,r..,'.•-, ,••,-.,--,•_ - ,''..'z•-ti, -• .-'•-..,› -,:... •c-00.7-eg.7.-. ,:-`,..
,#•••kr4.4411„,!;',. •,,,,..y,, , ,-6,' -:,,,,, -,,,,,' 4.,',. 4.4.17ainiii76,. .."4-1T „ .,,,,attriftliv ,,,4, ; •, ...- )141.4,1,taa..`, 3.•...;-, .V.,'•t',.1 1.„‘..,, +,.' , ' „, *, ...4.,‘,.:-.,-.4., -.
i
,i.
.1..• gei.,iik,,,z,„2„,4,,., 0 .g...tv,Tr..,,,„...,,,, , I,' • 4.-f,.._ . . ..,4,krrrit.„,,,e,.,,c.r..,,,,,..,.-.•J.-- /.._,.... _ .1,i,40,1*,:41,t-' r '''',,,'i"..v .;• . t...1.4.: '.:IC,- ...."---.' 4-, 'i
-;4..... .of',, - -=, .,`',y.,.,-.4..', 1.,,,,..i47-44,) ., .*..,'., ,:V,- ' V,-,13.1g4t.q•- -3 * P'-eik7-fif 0,Vii,..V ."? ;' .1%,b . ?Ire: ..i,f.-'.'' ,i,"':. '44'le '
r.
, .,.., .-..,4,,;. .1.4...102:14,•:,,Y.-4.4,,,i3--",z, .i4
«.'-'.-? - .. .i414.7il :4;* ,.. c:4;,*jr)• .*:;.7-4 '.i.w.74,timp 4=-.4.,,it•ttiA-t.zo.,:',...,,,5:4•,.74-11,1k°,-,„ •_. , ..„„,..,,,,..-.- r,"•91 i ; • -.0,- .7,-..,,'.4 . - ',. 1."., k...„...#'•• 1,4%;:r1.1,4,;,.,'4 0,d.., f,...;-‘. 2 1. AI, ..,!.., ' ,. , ..., , i f."-7.-'?,-. '7' -' ., .....- -- -1 'Z'' ' . : 1...4...-7.3t1.-Sat i'._,,,,r A,,,p,.: .:.......,„ .
1,.$44,,t.O.Y.A'4,11•47. .1i4;14f,' ,r...,:,4, .:dig&Pi.. pi..4, --,-, -_ e.%,-;rW',.. , f , - gl: 3,4;,,s;„6, 0 ,r•-, „, -,. ',, 1.,.''. •.:*49 , ,:, ,-...-4.... }7,,Z4
%.,,,,,,o.4,„,mi.....,,--4...2*-ri,,,,,,-•. „i..''- t4... 't %WA' .. '44.-i,,4iitiir' "'"'',. ''''',-,4.. ...,,. ‘...-4'. '. -..-1:7' ' ..0&4412'14i1)e .:Z., ' ''' j.,:IV,V1044 C ' +.- `.r, .- ' -- '.:11 44,1.1.44*4. t$4**01",'i'i' 0.14- • $ 4' '4 4'4'4,4'''',‘,P' -' fr*-'"-- '4,11' '' . -', 4 J74-1,,• :,'*--r• }4 .,',4..• .,-,-• 62`r .....- .',- , '.,,;.-' --s- ..,-; --...,;:‘,44.t,4
if"04,04'',F.lbs',X...•AN:•.,-,„.-._ ,..4.,41,, '' .,,,-, , VI- fP1•4".".4--f_,,',t,- -.; ..',--11,.... ..,,,,-„,,.1t,... '74-,,,,,...,-. , %, -.4,.., .4-, -t , ., ,-„stsrt,,,,,1,,„ ,,..11..,-,,,., ,Fe,,,. .... .1,, 7...._ .., ou,.0
4r.
ri.77'.4.•c".70146',04".•''.4.,e5Fei-'• , 'V' • eft 41.Vos,„1"' '%.,-MOO'',t'-4 41 v-rf-'",.."!..,,,,-1-"Tatie- ' . _ •_,,.57,,I3r;.14%.",•,--''i•i':'•-,',' „-,ii,itt,'4,A.,:. --46'-
40k
t-- "i-fti-, Alq!;:i4tf% -t. 711X-,?,'.4b-k 1:0•444,'"V'_ '''.1.er-_-''''f;'+`')Atiiiiiir, ,,,'.:/.4 .•; ",-;.';':4 . 'AU( " 4: - . 0,'",1 'q '-'4'..1' . 'r.,,:-
r.,•,-,4*nkt.,44e,,eielet.456.it!,- 4,-,k,':
it., -4•Wsk$:4,1:. 4!;ViNfirtep...,* „,*Tko.xt,40-'N:4".::',IA, ,,,,,,,..4., i''.:,•' ,...'.. ..,,,.4,'.?.•=1,-,,,*qo•VIr- .4‘ '`•,• .4.-.;Ail .."-eie., :.'"'.:.A. .
..:•, .,..avverk ,..,..*„.f.t.k....-- ,,,c-4,,v,,• " .,4,14-4.. -- .,,..1-1"..,.. ....A.,. - . ; :II:i.,,... .i, - '- .:'-- NI, ... •-:..•:.' 4,44, -
,,,4'1-' ---. . -•' 4.44,..--,F.,-,... ,. .i•....c.e.e,:rt 4,-.• ......i.7.4.4..1,5.,5.-Lip . •,5...h .40, , --,_....w. , ._, i_ • ..•. ..:.• ‘ = , . -, ' -,.4,----:-.. - . ' ..,..,., ,..
ri ..'''r- ,..4- 4,. .-...4-1,,, , 4-4.07:0:7e,,,o .4...,-. .0.4.:. - :3,:,..**ott , .i,:,141--A'... i
,.ire,,.... ,,--.0.41.414-,-, ,.' -3i.,,V14u,'5.,'.4 U.,,,V.,:4,44''',%..4 7.-42%. - -,-...,-..,.'4 - -' .5g24.4-o;-'' '-*. -'434117:41,1-1°.. ;.„,.,:- .6,4r4V-,-----"irk'.-- -•,..*-11V,:-.
ra
04--ie,.&,.....„&4.044,1( ;`*-4.-...4-7A,;sirtklgrar;.:, .t.,„ . ..!. L. . `.-,‘:"---:`,;;.-_,.• ,. -40i.o. ..%•,,,,,.....r. .! .-4 • ,', .'.*!'; ''--,•- ".. : '...3.- - *--...,-- ‘,..-.4 -1,44`44--z.0.--..
.g.,ItittoiN -,e441,4,0 , ,,,, ,„ N.7,',.4.y..c,04.0t, 44.:-,., ,,-.,.7.-..4,, ,,,..,_ ,..,,•--._ --t1011,--*----,.-..- _ . ,,,,,,..1- -,..,--,-,•-..,..,A, *„.,- ..,:, ...,.,._,J.4,4,-,x,N8
02.-izikl.,:, ,,...., 'ov,", f4A-01.. .,,,,,.4...0.4,1,0...,--4,.4'`...;4_.. ..1-'.- 1,-, ... .,;„--..,:„.:-..;,'"7.W--:4_-,..1/4-,'"I'' .-411/4•t...",,'".tr..'- .';44,;,-;.-- --"Ta-'41 - .;-,k.„'re.-s' ,z;..,_ ..,..KR,Lt7"..
'0,-firii, _t:',.%?1,.,iz'.-:".,..'Iiiityp..}4.-.4-1/X1.',4,-,,.:,..s, ..4.,--.11asatiit„,„ 4,...siti-,.r",-,,a44, .7ii.,,,;-.... 4,1"..._,s,,,,'": ,-_,.....,1-;,‘,7:-...„ ,' ''', 51,_,„kl-- - 4,42-A• •,..44".",-,40,1
Ofg,ii,P..1.,4",,-•,,m,V..,,,i,,C4'-.14, - '444•184', .-::;-911a,-,,s,*7'-$4.1WA- 1,---.- --..,-.'li.4 - ,,AOPZ-- - ..f- .-`. '.•.,.,.,7-7,...,,e-.4.VA-7...-/:','--..-7...,:'AV 1
e:bi,-,-•':.1. v-...alt..7,441''.4i...4:4,it;'.U1 Mk:••=4.1i."'-+-....,'.".01-*.&:-K. , 't?„-;:„...4k ',/,, ..,._,-,, "*-4,,,,, ...t• -,,,,i,,,,-- , ,"'„,•:;:;.g•!,'- . 4.'/' - ' --' ,U*-1,414'. "1-4&Vg,w.,77.,400,Ve.
tA,.'‘il,' iir0,...4.14•.,,k„,0,-,,"Mi 7`... .t..''---V.'-i!.'2;-vollst-,..-...ia.3,--;=,-'''-. ,---,-?7,......„..,,,r--1-........,,,, ..,74,--, --:-.t.r.....,,,i,,,,,,,iii,,,,_ it;,,:-.t, „:,,,,,t„--,--r-,:-.....-....,,
FA, ..;„‘"Neatitki -14,4,''''7.14#44 '- "At?#* ' -i.r--, '---, ;7, -l:OV4--:1'..;'4:'4- Itt..' : '‘Wq-'' '.,:tfl -‘1:-.:r..-, -r*3‘"-.1'.. :1*
r4w''';- • -04-boit mrleiN4116,-.:•,,-",;,. ' , -;----1.-„;;A.T.;,t„gi ', , --',. ,..f.,. ,,... A'.,..-, 1..-q. : :---,':' !..,:!..,;..,*"' 't'-.'. ...',* *-c......t:- <4;44,2fit ---.?„.. ...-1::--,-.,,2* ::-
t1/440.,ksome,..0z,,,,,, 4-1,..,,.,,.. ,,4-, , ,..w.,,,,,,,,,r;1/4,....•:k. 411-,....4,...,--4,,,,...,0,-1.• -',5-..-.. . --...:-;- '1'......-P*.::;.‘:t'`,'".......z",„:,.,....„',..z.W.-;...7.,..-V t"'"4,,'"'-'„'„4-;-AsIte“..,0„:". "..--„,*-..;,,,,v, ...,?,-.-.'`.-„...4m.- '...'..
fi.Z.L,"'01,11W:',i,14.0'...,,ii..,1;04,-k,,,i- , ....--.A.„,,J,4,il,v. ..4tT.f,---;...-;,. %.5.,,,..„,...,,, !-4,,,,,,431.4-;.-,.,.4,-,-r--...irf.. .„,._',..,v.. .......6.1.;1‘.--,,,, .,,-. t.-,4-':.:•
-P1-1;14,1-1'1F-1101M . -,-,f4m4;64.41- ,:z•... -4,..,..-.v.„*-.-w,-,•,,.,- ,1 114#4...eic- n-Y04-.4.1,:. Ty ',i!1:47 :‘,- -.•, tray..., -We- '''''... ',":
pc,,,tdi•tA14?..i4 •''',Z,1-'1:41,,,'.4t .,,,,..t'.4„,.*;...:1 °„,,,,,t-'4,,,.'1....atA,,s,"- '',' !-.',..,,,-...".„ - ....'.:14,t... 1.,_.-t.k...i,L.,lisAtz ..,-, ,, - ..,1,,,% -'.."--.+-..:,1,‘,,.:' c•-•-f.",,56' -„--50.,,,,,A, :-.-tz.L: ..€.,:m -:- ',4.•7."
.'54.-k\..*' ( ' CII`C'''44.1;4,4,;14.‘...,,,,„'0,.„.',,...k_tiF',.,,-,,,,....7-,-...4,-0,A. nte-h,-,,,,,f . ,,,t-,,,,,, --:. --;-41-,-*,...'--,,,,,z..:-4,9,..11.F-,-.--viii,, .!,,,,-..m.A.f,..-,,f,:_ ..-,.. -,,,.;,-A-...-, 4..'!..0::•-‘.,-,.., ,.-;.1 • 4i;.,-,..... ,
,...,.. ' ' 2.,,It,..:‘,-,..t.: -,,'• 4.,..,...,,...,,,,,i.„,..-„,* ....,.,...4 .-4,.. .. ;7,--,4- ., . 4.,,..t,t'...c.- ...as,',-„`-., ...•,.; ,.., ,27,-,...;.$ irii.sw,..,.-,,,,._*.e. „.,...t4.......iLz,.,,,,,,,,.. •__ 414, ,,,„ ,_ ..m.,..,,,,
1-,,„N.c.ifc,,,_ „, 444ff.t+4,. *4 "''.,6:151Vre i. `e.VIti,,,, - , . tiri?._ ....... -..,,e4a.,4,404:40404fre"--,- ,:'',),A•itljtAg. ., ,t7r. .,k''':,, ',-;4.4.0'.7.- ' .t.."'1.' lov..,,...a.,':4,-.0.--,,,'itk,i.
4v...17,-5Vou.neviset",.. -,,e„...', --.ft.tv, - ,,:-•:m,iliti,i,...4.-1,,tf.x,,- --....- ..v..',x4Ki:-',.; ..wit,-- . ,-.-.-z. ,e-, v-,-,--'-'. .- -,.. =.-'1,k-; -. '4-4.14. -.74*-- --rsli•O '',..4'.--,
V
1,4‘...'fr.c7.: i.OV'-''''''.*C146:1t7,i1.14r; . ,--rt.i..4frk4.WW:.-7 ;KP.k.*:- --"V-t„,v101,4,„Wit:4,-..._--..,:b1.41,•-s A ; - --, 7.....-i'i,i,..iix-'-... 4,.•i,yoA i,,F.-.-,.,-,,,,,,„0. ..-4-
..,;-,. '':',1t11—. ,.,,tz.itit i''--,-,,,,,,,v,-40,.--'1-1*2.- - ',..-,ife..zr .--.---,,.A;;,.4.-elvc4 4-*,-,-.1--'141's.1,P. • t4 5'. '4,' fbr4i0,,e.:--:$' '`'.461-tkiti ,,,,"x,- '..c.;•'',17- ,t -
re '04 ''.: • 'A.,,t, T).tRi,-"`4.4,:tre.th.,%400,Ktf„t„„die„,,,,-k544. .',4: -, „. --vItoikda-,.: -,latti, - , ,. ,,,,,,,4 •;*. t I, 'I r Vit,..1,. , 7..;‘•ti r.,,.6".0,- ' 41 ., ... -:,,4,1',1 .-1,,,,;-•1
144, 4,4tgic
%
. .% , ,„.--, ....,t;1....,,,„„,,,t,ie.v.„goacwis.e.,g%%.7f.-^, twtti4. te,' . ..., , ..„.. ..74: • 41,..*:„ rim...e.,..14,11:T.,.,. ...-z,..•--. •,:..0 '......-11„...0.4,0,41.*:4*.v.1..witate.--,. ../..,”:4 •51,..:‘,..N..,
n,--1L ,, . Atc r**.ti.*-t-t14.1-ii.....4.-:4' .I',- ;' •141.!,,hA - 'F'. '4k47. ''.'.4r, s--4..-4,-"...=', ' .4., -,6,. '-,?' '-.,..,--;-''- a-;..--,,,;!4:Wq, -'.''.,-,,70-t.t..4.t. ."
'‘.7......`f')U,':,V. '•s• , '4.1`Yirif-. , '';'.''''.‘. *"'.' 4:-..*K". 4d.V1W"":', .*.i'-'' -'..-- ' r:,., (,:-, ,:' 4i,V:-7.-J,kt't,”4 ‘ ,,'`, .'-ig-A3-'„,,,,, 4tlit,• , - 1,..F.I.r.4'
- t.,-,, ,s,-4-. ,,,.•
:•-t'-1../7.rio,,:;;'• 1441•,,- •i--•• ,S ' -:>,;:`..'e, ' ‘'t•-fl 40'&'''..it%,,,4114-11:4";:-;•,V.,re:!'41.'''k'-..•%?`:**. :',Z•I'l ' elf _:,,ACt.4.;-:•i ••VI -...1,4-;• -1.4C.-.1'2'44 •
• '-• ff50;;''''''V:V 4f4V45•4 1:§:igN VIPW3,10.•ii?'.4w--:--- t47,,,:tlri',,, ,lifi;Vi-&-:-" '-',i,.,-.--s--- -•c-,:".• 7,,Tittl," ,`,.."- -..,3-4::-.4''44-'11-4,.:1/4i1-`''"7 • .',..*:*
''`4,-.:4- lfroZIAIP%.,"-n,..- -11.,."'- '''.- ' "--T4-.-.'''.-.' • --- -',.;‘"-'... .-,'-.'.>.-'-4-:. -::,4-`'4,''' ,, ..'• . 14•-`, 71., • '-'-'-.," '-,.,'' ',.'•,'. '•
lit„,,,,,4",,,V•'''440.;,-'..-..1.. 4,Y;',42.• ',,-;Zie.--'441' ,-,,,x.,- -,14`"Ir,. .tiCf-.---.;', ,:- '‘,,.`'''''''-r--'--t, ',„*_‘0,„„•,,, ,•"" .4",,,•,•:-"kit,;-.,..-- `"..-,'%-,•-.X - „. -
44/4Z.11k-"''',,c,i. -14;40:-...,,,411 . . Wo.'.., ,''.'" _ -,,,,-.•-;'.--.-':-: :.' •-l.r. .Nx,crift,,,-, ...- :;- 'mi.:,3 ::#.- -...- ,A.. .,•:," Y.: •'''':.'s. V `..4,... A.47:7t;:".-`... ._.Z
7PeC'ti.*4 :t/' .11Y44:jr** 4 '-ri1464:14'::.:1•:4- ,,"1'.A. It'''A'''''%.-.':.. '2,11i'fil. ..4..pit.. 4'.1,,'',: II*. :4-''''4:d' ,,,.T::"v•t::"ill 17A••A-- L N.'"NtrzPfla30:':
.,.:",.:,tire...'--,' „•:.szt-„
V•t„..,,i),,, ..t j.i.U...44, .,4.*4'• ',440,1111,-*V1.4!) ,.CSV--,'-'''''%7‘-"'. '','-:; '','4&'''.4,;.e•ii.';'"•-'t--_.L.--'74'4 -.5;',...i'.*.t, i• .,44,„„"ciStyte&A C...,.t.t. 4444.,.i-•
iVtl*dt`WA-. ,‘11-"• 'Art-`,111,11.W.•.inp.,4,447? .4%,;,,, - .-.14`,.4' 7,,A% ;....••-•;,.: _:, ,-,.4.,,,t,-,,,e:‘•i zfej,i-0,4414.4;1., .i.-‘4:, 41.rt-i.17-i,,fik..--pT.4,.3. ..,4,- •,,,..i;_ke,.., ,
. fa,,',,,,,,..-.,.....,,,ii(,,,,i,,c--,'..0,'„-tte.-.-144-xpq. 4 Nita':- '-,‘, sr"AVV-414, .'' -,--etAtV" ."$442",'Alt ikti,t'-f".* "`,!'- 4.:;-"4/4-Atif,i44.•. :7''''':. - g.'- =;;'---*-":*' " ' ..
411..
r- It-;qk ''. -''''...t'-'4V-*V43 2'1'1.1404...i.' '' '. .-. ;•'‘-%!!'' &,,,, ,,..-044:_:,-..'k--,-s...=:'. •Az-,it•-*-4,„ 4#1.-. •.40,4-4.-_,-tiaziftMit '41,44:`,- 4-'k ..'s-..4.-Vv'-----•'.1 •,,'.1 .,•t3,,,k,,:rtiAtip.,-,10.61.7„seolg.li , :,:-:*4-0='il„'..%,.,f,-z:- 4f,,.•:.4.,* ,..;„-x..44.,-,4,N.- ,...,.......14,- ,-.,,:e ,.'.i,'..,. .4. , • -., - •••• a,„...,..p.40-4,-,-‘.49. q.,...-- -.. v: .
..,..., ., „,,V,,,,:A .t,.1,..-.N.,•eNtax..:11..witatelortooPm.li .N,a-,_ il..4...,,,:p-A.A.-4.1.41{.*..,„-‘18---, 434,...e.t.---Irit,'"VM.,..tt"4-..,--iffil,-41,-- . ' --'t: .."4-.1. '
:! ,-,,,•,;;;,.#:T.751;',', ;.:i9lfri.,:ts,:„.-2*it. *54040,141113-Arit,,,b,,fig.i.54;'-iZ4ai:',,,41f-r -,-,t1W'll-St.g.n.'9,Vcf 1 4;0;4' %i'•••••VA- 04.4-ii,-;' ; •' ,1••,:,.--4.4‘..t-4,134,'..-0-$1•„, -. •••': '‘Z")."e'
'•As..,..‘,,..----:..-, • ..,,,
4,-." • ly.-4' •-.s**4421,'s'NeLtirtIMV.AW-4,e''te,f:Me-1'ts_i-',.F.It-,• •4.144* '.'44tr12'..•\-w ••*421"-f Wi,._-,Z,!'..r 4041.,..Vtli4L-2. .. '''', .:',V=r:t1K •
t
1,'?53e,,,....,-. 1;kk‘,• .i.lizr.,`,‘$,,4,,,.1,,,..;,..coN11,447.t,.!.:f•,4'1,F.vy.,W,„kt' .--,..' 0,,:.•7,.w...„1• ,- 's- .4,`,tar.4,.,r4 ?,,,; ---,‘•-.-,-"- , ,.l'ik,,,71.1N .."i4r iitleArr Ylitrer'., ,'• -,r','iairi,r,,t trr.• ..%cr-4"
. 3..,,,,44. ...k... .A.,.;.i, .;.::,.• i. t'Yx../*-AN -41*.i.,..T. 4* •4::'1,A. V*1:)g.4'.''''Vt`4":',. ':''“'VAt 1' ''''‘Wk4fr. ..7.4---..' '<''''''-'''4Vi'''(''''44'1'*Al's'''.
• .:4.' 0, :;),:: •,:i.:1:...:::,-4;-' '".'.. 0.0-:13.444,644.1i*;t:..D..a,--,'-.i.:',.Vi ^'7‘.`,, iet‘ .* ..t>4.1...,..P'.NO 'Ir414.1• .Oa '. .4.e' '''''- .4- '.44'•.• •' .....".•'. '..
•riitt, -• 1. • ''4'-a",?.A.s'.,: -- ..4 7.4,.1,14101,t4,wito -,,tx,•,-,'p'i‘t• • :y. .. .,• ‘., *gc,.:*. • -t-,-,-,
•• • • - .•
.•• • • .
. . . . . -
• • ..
. . .
< - .
•
,
7 —
..„'
err <: } ? '
•t .
' r� �'�'r C'��'�Lf' j ,.•°�``�¢`.f •,���.b'¢ �• �F(,�f 3e.+ � ,{#-
•
t.,x'k2 r t k's'r0+' ie.. .>'- f:• F s • �k ('. o-= . + '•"�
S ..Ri y�'k'�I�3 rl �M1 S v. y 'r
..1`e:' ri `.,1, ,.°w• r JF'.a 'r l ..!'.ty `'/r..a a a d', - - d r`' Z
1 9 k
w f sr i '4 5,. ,•, ` N' r _rPY .f -«f • '� l � 5•. .:.
ytel
,}y'cr�;of{ t'4r :'. E `4 x •
�� - r :. �,.
t w * ` d.'. -> ti Tc� av,a Pr ' rLfr
,fir ,P si r ,.�- � ^�`..�
•
•
•
•
j: •°•.''4,-4-`. , 1•-d .'u.Y„ C. p I.,,.:t-,—t-, P_: t. + _ .o�,� +'_ °re`'f-;t IY�.kdi!�"`'q" "'.."�„� ef.• ,,k_1 G' 's`r, '".a•jr_yy ,r.V '� ,,�s ,y 'te r 9
•
� ,: f ,k x t • fA a a 96:„ a:-..1-.},4 a` `. �y w`, x- ;r ". ,
� .,, szV. 3 q i' l t C • 'f t p y /•/r .F - i"t° *'• ., ",.;'-� N !'S.-, i
k'xl 8Fa'' r xf'V•"'� +4,"� .r tih .( i • f Pve' ..ik
xt fo ' , r - .N - - /- r k ;r} ,7 p, �/ -'"r r!• ', ,, Fr" ., s T _: t,
q'by ql?xr ° e :Y:= ' i �' ',r,;Syr _ rYk��e a. .k-.rr.,,+ ty p uy"�t
•
4 Y•#F.+:"y$yryYdl'i• -tv ry
,,tg° .*�. ;!,�,r p ,+' �f.rir •-,;' -� f t..,.r"•r+y,,., '� r a' r .,'{r'.
t qp m"y;* Y ±F w:6.3'� :,,:' 9 4' `''4• �" i. Yr ,1..:1^ ! :i.1X -r b°(At Ma `.t.....j t5,. ""`;"< ,r -
y.•^3y� + •LN t.: °: : . .r .._ ,. .... .. -�^'� .r r•f r :;k'A' �,,'L a. - .a"k.'}rS
- :>✓'' b d'• k { y''M<q � py. '�4e ,;`' t 3J - `"7 Y+"W Fffd'°��`w ;-w '"d ..t: Y y-:;t {:��
u*P.r ..i t•A„ i.1t- 7.. 4. :: ", .A" is$. ,: 'k: -rn{" t4 �7 �" s
,,,, a 7<'W ., �' �'e Y uyq ;, ,. a.4 s.,:, i ._;1 Y •) 'y".�e,` "`+P:�✓,. ,; .!y 2+,, 4 .' 3 Idp ,v �`•'C rS n? ;`4`�wYm'3'4 N''� r,Y ,11 + ',,k4.>ti;44ar.-
s„,1, 'R, ' i-t,.. .. '...,. 4..iVy sx+ ..i.. .? +hY "i-.V.1.r. g .. C-"L -w .. i..
•.� j*', ,,ray"%Tv.+ . r. r + .4, .'nor i r# '�. ^g'm�`'<.'icA" Y''Cz3 r `'r _ 8`rs''r .
*f. i ,+.' i'."a.r=,. 4'''^*pi -,..w, - .r '-44, t «, .lt`,4 �'�: , s*e� jn r ,'S;i.�:. -'a' .s"S" .
�• aw;r '. J.l ,,.., ,o .. .r .f' . r -:ur. ,•" y ,...1)4., .P :4u;. ,..,,•5.,.;a , r r,; A k t Pr x "r ! �'- ,+7 �" i_v: ,. i'_:;k "w k,...,
:p Y ?cayta 't q; tl:A..F .$ .. + i, u i= �" ' ID?�,'` A.�`fir.. a9' -wry.." f`' ".' ' ✓ fit:,�.'a'v.�'
;2— , .
'h r },"h'q"w`'Y :h i .tn a i' l Y jt ;J} 1'-. �:+•.•, �ffi�f-�7 't'�?} A 1`t P i_ _,v^ t� ,,:3-F
•*'' -2 "` .� F:;nk:A4 7` 1l.r l it _ Y: , erg , +, ids .fi t^Y'ma,��±�yy .,Z s - _ '.t..-
b. r. _ �;� q `:r d T v, ` ;•,0 r, •"r+.,. .•X o `,,,,„,', ' r<a ,' '*r q'.r -1 + ' a• r:
r"5•.;e5, q- -.7`k -: ..10. &.'- .,,5, 7 1 "Ak ,/y�'r5.a` (ems ^p.4^y +P,.gr �. *'
' . . " • :. rj .F'- il'.ty�rov� " . '�W! yK-�` ti+'L ; ry ! r_r�
.,4.. ,•.'• '�.�s� r' .z;w. :'�i R gi ,:r,,,o .Y� u.3'�,y', 's ',-,- `s`a
i.>-'.F .. _r'"y+u. +7 m;- + fN�a- _ ,� 2 t !f +Y" .'v Faa r.i is ',.,'` '.-r
F
L. ' ,N, ,• ., . ,� '•:� .*l "'•"' 2 ?t..•r> • w: .f'? -td':: r.i`a9t''ar- �+F°'. a f '"?'a v ,.-eA
..,r r ;...i.. . s:«".'at j% :_ y ' • \a i .'"'i, ;,a16¢ 'q`� p y A,7,,r.,t Ak
,'g • .. „
B • >k
•
•
r `� sL • d }.an... W,:,., ,., x J" x� '�.{ 7 r� ,F" t0q'^,.'�,- r kA -, y d r e..5„ ,�.�•I��` • i] .r ,t�Y �{yy�
t- N>• �: f' ,g� f �r Ft _ e'.'..r. �{,.."fZ�K:�.
. s' 2 k, Y s.* ..J .vr.., ,F- :wr.m, 1 lt:- AW.A4-.,1 lW, z..4.:.
t.
; trig.� $ .. _ "lr • q ev. '.A—•... _ •L,....;
k ,µ.. !4' •/, f• =iCiN'' . 'k dlr iw1-a..,,rn�',>'A�'-'
p -:.l •R,,:_t,,w+ '' 3 '° 'Z'i8S: ' 1 :.f,, ,(�,y�`o `Y, :4- .-• •j."'�' • .T..:. �.v. • " •
'i -.✓ yC` .M�:,;> .. 4 ..r r r�.r^. 'T ,��' * "¢"' - � �.3' fi a'.�,, :ir>.;
r' r r t r .. ',x° r s.-_,/... ;. .J'"+,va ..'1•tsl. ("., .w. � ..1. • ,�e 6`.;t '• ,�+. tit':
;, x ,..,.,, ,. ,. 4x lyt,�:;?. ,,,,r 'r',r% .�4,.--WS � t 7.'.4:":� fir° „ .-�,+a1� .of ��' .t..: ,.r.
•,r•° 3 *'"w-Y•',,r y r� _:,hc 9x nc¢.,..,c z.. assf_ a .j_ ,_ ':F._,
•
+'d
- s - •� c�.` : Syr ', -
R hew'J Y. L.--r'l[' ,{vl� _ �':�[�:•' _
r ,
•
r:., r ¢zrra3E,B ? a 3 d<. ,i .h:' 'sit ? ,a%i_?zS��o;tk7.4a ikn ro .w — `^ss r .4';;..... .
r - 7:1 '" �vy� .' �,,� ,gyp°t
,.� .•.' :P.a d X' .,w,+w:: ,y , .fir,.:.r1 r•,r,' F f ,w. €5't•! .+Q'' -:' F:
n
•
w>r.. . ;.?.,, �',,•'^ C-1s" fir' -
-
.-•:;':•'T.-•ge/..';-•01t. .:';,:,4(":"•A'i•-/'•t.':4-!*/--"f•/..4;.;• enlig -' --.474' ..--4.-'. "•42‘. .
.;.'. .. - "'_`,.. `9"': " 'r. :lw.s. J.,!; ,,y Gr 1'.5(.x,i.'.:rr,.;.' '.
,
s.;,.,iyy.,�wj r'=- 4+,,. ..a rv.,... . «. >w-... _."'.:"a'.b,,t- F'+n._+ �..: ..� a��,i.. " 's�-._�?'..
,;>'.: +A"rM ''t,:v .i' ,::.:'a, -... t-��y.w. .:.re;'.' _ F a+ y.pay. sa. 4 X-',. :1".. �•+y,,,.....� ..
"x �yypn rR uYu•'� ax'..v i, .1, , •.y .... .r �'- „'M. 'r -.? 0.'f'..:C j: :r-'-.v.,f jgyrf . ?p. ,Y.
'..:r:..--. 1. "-.. ..' ...L:.. : ' � 3 -1':�.:•, r' ,A:. r. .s ...:.°{H6. .«'5....__R'h' Y. ✓. .._.f ea.S,.Y: .. ...,f_t.P', ... .....�.r..,r...... .n.. _... . .. .... ... ...r.,-l .. .-... .... _
r
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
_ ... , ... :...., .'i ..-0.2 a :!eu 4,».. �'.v't.. ..f `in] �=f •
.1"� uiT••.��:w":+Q•`':��b'
.,..:. .<..- rTi. tom. _, .:-:.::...:, .-�.. _ ei::, 3 ...„ wxf,_ <- g;�; 7,.. .....r: . ;A •s: -, !::• _
.... ... ,> r..,,-..,f :_.. ..,,.. .,- ,., . _•;•,;.. �- .,/'�� _ ��- .3,`.!f.r Win'; v.:
.. ��i��z ., fir, _ .�=: _ .
:. .. n ..Se ,.. .;.... _ .... t.s!'s:7r:u:� .. -";N,�.' 4�'hc�: �.-rr���..�.���yy�?al:�.'�l •as':�:L"-,. .Xi. ;�i
•
. . ,., ti. .. -_.. .. . ... _... , .. :M ... . ,Wig:. ... �� iw�'r-" fit?i.." r xa �e� ,,s.:;:.:
. . •. . . .:.:. . ..: _,•,..W..'.. _...,. - _. ,_ :O, `(fie' ��•..'ir..
rI
R.. ,.. R. .... . w, ... ..m].• n.. �.. .v ...."... "r:..:-., 4r.:.s'ii.'.. --c;JiS i.- (.r..,.:
.. . '„F. .,...,
'L^. b. W
V.l
kx,
.. .. .. .., r. ... :.. �s�, r•3°. ..- m.,..,_.x,w.. '.. xY' , ..-;..r. - �:'�t"-'SS'::..-.�: ����:•r N; -+r.aw�'-,�'-,y:»
,. ....,.a.,Ixr:. ,_v. -r-, m. ¢ Sa..,'. i _ ..,t_u ,. .-_,.,„,. ,.&,•:b :..: �.d,,:$0,r_.r ... .t' r ,
•
.._..._ `L y �J, .,r ,i� r• F,'c.A:?S"-,• 1•r n aY",,'"Y.
_ .. ,.,. ...�:•;,._.::t .w..-ry-,: fwa. .xaJ' ✓°'S?e •Lb..*Y^� t fir,-atti*�+Lx'xs�aim.�: =cad.?�'a�.a�'N�..K'+tF ..�+arlr° ..a,'z ar:.� ,* a.:�:,
.r; 1 .� ` .sue , z-,k
..k......-.. *-:.•r+. o*; ^c»' .-ri -. n °, n t:" ". '''' .:r•' ,-"'rt•� * k" �'r,-✓; rfi
't nw .., .� .. ,.. .wir � -.-th1.+.,':c-:•w...w,;,... .,.rab.:i.' &.a*:n.•=g yY�i° 'e"t-?Sna.. !F9 b�u r 5{`f.Fi*i+.aw.>
�2
-;n-,,.r e g;:y'r• k 4."rd iF.,r . - �'" ,f _ -4-_ ti;r.:„ ----" , ... Y " °Y F,,..
'•5��'R.,:..,.,;;..':'-..i`."M��i-Y:Y<�Y:.�' !'_ . _ . - • sy` _ ,, "t t -t�i'1?�'- #1•iia5'"E*'....
4.
.., " a.:: 9g4'�,-.Z=�'i- "f, r ` 1.' tr,-k4. „e 3.•s;r 'S.a ,, ,. '•�"' s >
�':- .>'S%s{,�.,5 r $:•1. .+::�. � �'.- v3 3� ,` 'ye�.E'.,i t - .off -.T - fir-•r :+" "-"f' .T. -{+F�r"�iR`" =0' ,Tr �s
?.j _ ,tis;C.a•.: '�'- ', L r _ - ,Ty,� •. •s _ ., .d'"_. �F, M
y �s.
�. >4 '`F:��. r7' .'`1. '7�"Xr j'i l :::..�., s+a.-,.. _ ._ . ..._ IT Y�.s`*riE'. ?a, :•h::4'nt.''•-',/. ,r'k`' e: '
F
', r R a M,-,,,T i' ->- .•-•- je'
�• r A 9" Y} )M ., a �° - > y. .�r -� , pi'•! ' ..„' 4. 1''S:'''Y •ri V.
:-•..:. � n.r .uw. X r'. ,.. ,_ .Y, •&I''�" 'd i iqe l ✓' f ': y/ r 1
....... .'.nz r,... :^ r.ff _r{.ram `�^
. .,,_,.: �3 ..,. .«. g.. ..,`. � e,y-... • .ii`.-`. - .t4`.».� .i3• t, s:'�£
�� •�
:., � r- .:.Ca f ^,n,. ., ,,..g. .,�y �- nr�� ��• 1�i '�'' .�z }� 9+%-.i�-`r'�
':�1 '�' -.i.7' Y f`r+e t'� Rr.°w, 4b �'tt�F awc .. �tt"`r, aSy " n .h'8 -r°inn �� 3 �
_ : r S.. Y. +.t-.. :" .fur* .,.,. ` .- ..�' & n;.;:.rr+, ;� �:', f•Y+r; ..: ,F „.-.: . .. r ,k ... <'? m ,f r *. oi. ,7l' +; r is
., ;:r ''1 .;• r:.'f'.:etl"'s y.e•:3tlNas :.d ':.' :a+'. ;.,, ..----,t: .rr «1/► 3+w� d',, , ' N': a.,�r4 nd',t 1,,,,,,,`i'.� `r".,�a, •••
- .'•t.,�,y'��,,i g'r.'.�aqq..+rr. 'k �rP',t,�M . 's' .S,tw '.: lk'm."fi'. • >a':i; ,>i. _ tr
-./.:. 4 .rrti... r ;r. .,, ;?';. t ¢rd iYfr::, 'Y';vf T4Y,^• g ,yr
,,,.... � :Z:,. 'y*a P�.�,y�}'.•x �' ',M, ems, ,.-�`" ��3� '�t 'x* "' " ,i era. !d �;�.,n� .5.. .�..Tlr �YB�'
:•C 3 ?i ..:{'i h- `''M.'y A:-itil.+.p : , „ Sp F }} k, 3r', ,>i-'+ 1.1 '.}'A•. • G L
s+ r,.s G •i f ;i '..T.,t.s w -o - R rM SF'-:,.
^;Y' -y Ey4�.,1;0 Ltiq - 9 'x S YY o. 5 Soh ::t` I'
y. - S 'v. s,�"* '•_,r s• .a A' .no.. �., c- .e ...tr�i- .,1 t�,w.
t^����rtrtnn M,t'"`'' ., '�,.-:{_ „r' "e 1 .;:4 ! - y.� .E •1, T' .—'' '� '!F' � 'w' N" a1 >ri' / .+N _ e, , 1 -
.44 v>p Y,� C• `eat 4„.,..4 w I r f. .,y.�,TI... t n r n 1 .>:+ {Y'•r,}' -0',,� 'J K V i
• M
• _>i: .S a w. 4 .. .. : - h:i, s.Ywt-A.; 4 1 ,i�, xJ�l
r - .:�-a a ... - .,2r'4,,, J ' y "�'!'" ^.''{F' �+ j�'i', 7
.
y
.•1t'+'�p� '' j ,a, A, */ ,n;,: +it•, ,:, rt,. .{ -. i. !' IA.
"Yiw.,.4,4, � 4 L.., .. j ., ,f k^
�;¢g rtr #dam_- .,, ?• ._° sd'Z .,v q''rx�°�'"ry7" '.. �*10 z Tq°"- : u" .. ?e Alta
�'}ry44 "S -
,.' S�N,.'gir. -. t .'r „"°"'-; -` .,« •� ^� - re' x r,k., T- � ' r } :i- r y + t. • a.y�?,:,, r :,.i ror .a yr _S ,-, -i r°- :.,.v` ;,„a ,'. ,i.;,'/#`:`..: " r ":a "✓ �? } � , s:,�: ° �7,-:
:F- ,y:
, ,. ,.4"..., , ____
, ,..
, .....7*,.
, +
.� ,� 'fi:, +F�%..p•dwa ,jz. '` Y.' d d r a!" 'fi -a.. *'+. f �. i ,a}' � .va "F u: 7,.
• f lI
P
.t,1.�"" ;�°:. Na_ Y .W�, : ..,.�.ri� ':....'. .. �. L 1.,�,•: -..-�.: `� . � liP� 5� �$ ^. � ( / 5[ ��L�.f��,,.�J:,
i4 `" ' e. 'r � H., ". ._ P ..Jti.,bay: r% . o. +• f_:!f rXe, r: ., _ rs•.. i. % itls +�.ay Sn' .01:5,�
., . uv - ° ` 4' ,y'
•
! m• Rr : +„„ ,, r t. «I^:-�4 w` 5r '"s9 �' •1.141 5lk?aY el,'
" 1
'`'" A 1:�-f 45 r �ri r rk; ,..+5{ h .,Y'. l t n� ''M.,,r• ^"' i r ' aiA.r' ,. � �i,r' r . -�ln�r
r- J 4 .ad Y:e1F�:A ' '-:. --tic
� 1�� _ f
1.
M <
-i' b'k3+ r...: .-+�' t -. _. -9� .. ;.oaf
;"±)r'`� u•? ::. :,,,--,0 ..irc , -fie'A. y, .i.' '6'dd'i34:, j ,F 'ram r t �' �F d�''�+ .rtm` is
r,� - n e r. ,fi J'" w' f' i'A",' i , .�
i', 4'�t .r t 1 t ry ... b, w, i, ,-', fry`
i ' Are:::•-i# "� '`. '.-a' d' ,F, a - 'r,,, ✓^` .ya,..des ,, ,p' E.,�,.,(�, ,ram ^r.7 '-° ", ': .-y i e .•� 'i r 'F
EASEMENT
THIS INSTRUMENT, made this 4— day of (:CC 11‘,.6,L 't 19 '--;
by and between 13..614:4-42.- -1)luwjt; an �
-D and ;
h
and
and ;
C.1
hereinafter called "Grantor(s)" , and the CITY OF RENTON, a Municipal Corporation
of King County, Washington, hereinafter called "Grantee" .
WITNESSETH:
That said Grantor(s) , for and in consideration of the sum of $ 4 0
paid by Grantee, and other valuable consideration,
do by these presents, grant, bargain , sell , convey, and warrant unto the said
Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easement for public utilities (including
water and sewer) with necessary appurtenances over, through, across and upon the •
following described property in King County, Washington, more particularly
described as follows:
A utility easement over the Easterly 10 feet, measured perpendicularly to the
Easterly line thereof, of the Northerly 230 feet, measured along the Easterly
line, of the following described property:
ALL that portion of Government Lot 1 in Section 32, Township 24 North, Range
5 East; W.M. lying Westerly of the Burlington Northern (Northern Pacific)
railroad right-of-way; TOGETHER with the Shorelands adjoining.
Together with a temporary construction easement described as:
30 'feet in width over the Easterly 30 feet of the Northerly 230 feet of
the above described property.
Said temporary construction easement shall remain in force during construction
and until, such tune as the utilities and appurtenances have been accepted for the
operation and maintenance by the Grantee but not later than
cR
tYi
RECORDED
o fg12 DE'. i3 AM I 1 36
0
cD
DIRECTOR
RECORDS & ELECTIONS
KING COUNTY. WASH.
ti
0
0
0
FILED for Record at Request of
czt
r ►4t D for Record at ReQu* t ,z
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
design, EII.lilGad 1Qe►ai.ra.
200 !SILL A.VH. SOUTH
c EA'. NA I 5ff'Nut STAMPS
Thte THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE:
titVCIYtIJ INIZ NAI
1
AMOR COMPANY
Filed for Record at Request of
0 3 its P lit
AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO s r+, I r 0 I V ISIO11F,i1f
'RDS ii V.I.ECI1OWS
�NERS & McATEER, P.S..
:KING COUNTY
•
flLOOR UATfllt TOWED •✓
tits.Ord AVENUE._
gATfN,rvAsttlNOTON aatol ; 84gi'A• 2g 3.00 400900 D
CA SL ; ****3.00
55 ,
•
FORM L57R
on Quit Claim Deed
r. (CORPORATE FORM)
N THE GRANTOR BARBEE MILL CO., INC. KW3CIBSOY
rt NO MIK TAB
i
for and in consideration of DEC 20 1964
conveys and quit claims to BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS, INC. t g°vVi `!r
the following described real estate,situated in the County of King •e! I 1
State of Washington including any interest therein which grantor may hereafter acquire:
Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24 North, Range
5 East, W.M. , King County, Washington lying West of
Burlington Northern Railroad Right of Way. Land only—
no improvements.
t
•
1
•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to ••. `"`" ° t Istcppr officers
and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed this ,040) day of ,A, _ . r 1.15v`•''
BARBEE '4ILL CO., 1 C C. •• •.; .
By 04 , ... . .,. .
�•, s 1/.fi r. ,
By...c2
STATE OF WASHINGTON,
5s.
County of
on thisday QLLQu.QY i9��� of t� be me,the undersigned,
a Pu 'End for the State of Washing , duly w 'sal anrn, appeared
and •
•
me known to be the resid t and to rapecti y,
r.,.,„;' that executed Ins ment, and acknowledtllt Instrumea to be the free and
�atk deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, on oath stated that
'141101o4sed to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the to seal of saki
(*tapes,ns)i.fitltld*and official sal hereto affixed the day and year first above written.
•
. Navy ina(ii �
o,>
�� ...b ill ' - .: ►taf/Asj t<
v��
g
i
' ikM
Et
EASEMENT AND COVENANT n
w
Agreement made, effective as of l�� lT 1996, g
between Quendall Terminals, a joint venture comprised of Altino
Properties, Inc. , a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter & Co. , E
a • California ,; limited partnership (hereinafter "Grantors") , and 3
Barbee Mill Co. , Inc. , a Washington corporation, and J. H. Baxter
ii
& Co. , a California limited partnership (hereinafter "Grantees") .
WHEREAS, Grantors are the owners of certain real property
V) whose location is commonly known as 4503 Lake Washington Blvd. N. ,
U0
CD CDRenton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached
v4 hereto as EXHIBIT A and by this reference incorporated herein
04
O ( "Parcel A" ) . •
(.10 s
0.1 WHEREAS, Grantee (Barbee Mill Co. , Inc. ) is the owner of
certain real property commonly known as 4101 Lake Washington
Blvd. N. , Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is
attached hereto as EXHIBIT B and by this reference incorporated
herein ( "Parcel B" ) .
WHEREAS, Grantee (J. H. Baxter & Co. ) is the owner of certain
real property commonly known as 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. N. ,
Renton, Washington, the legal description of which is attached
hereto as ,EXHIBIT C and by this reference incorporated herein
(Parcel "C" ) .
WHEREAS, Grantees desire to acquire certain rights in Parcel
1
A.
1
WHEREAS, the parties hereto wish to establish a legal
description as to the location of an easement for access and right
.•..0...0~4.s...s-
of way, the terms and conditions for the maintenance of the
roadway, and future relocation of the roadway.
FOR TEN ($10.00) DOLLARS AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual
promises and covenants contained herein, the sufficiency of which
is unconditionally acknowledged by Grantors and Grantees, the
parties hereby agree as follows:
I. GRANT OF EASEMENT
0
an Grantors hereby agree to grant and convey in perpetuity from
CD
CD
In
the effective date of this conveyance to Grantees an easement for
rl
04 roadway uses and utilities over, across and under Parcel A. The
G
CD easement granted in this instrument is appurtenant to Parcel B and
G7
Parcel C.
II. EASEMENT PURPOSES
The easement shall be for the purpose of providing access for
ingress and egress and for underground utilities between Parcel A
and Parcel B, between Parcel A and Parcel C, and between Parcel B
and Parcel C. The roadway shall provide access sufficient and
adequate for the purposes of Grantees' uses to the highest use
permitted by the then current zoning, including two access points
to the public highway from Parcel A. The easement may be used by
(SWFB1/nccs/412c1/CCN/173so1.i/ 2 ,'".'
the owners of Parcel B and Parcel C, as well as their officers,
employees, agents, tenants and invitees.
III. EASEMENT LOCATION
The easement granted in this instrument is located on the east
60 feet of that portion of Parcel A lying immediately west of
railroad right-of-way.
IV. ROADWAY RELOCATION
The Grantors or Grantors' successors or assigns may relocate
the easement across Parcel A at their sole discretion and expense
provided passage between Parcel B and Parcel C remains
uninterrupted, and at least two access points remain from Parcel A
to the public -highway. Grantor or Grantor' s successors or assigns
further agree to record a restated legal description for this
easement upon relocation. They shall also dedicate the easement
al to the City , as a public right-of-way, if such dedication is
to required by the City as a condition for approval for any platting
0 processes involving either Parcel B o Parcel C.
'
V. TERMINATION
U0 The easement granted herein shall exist in perpetuity, and
shall run with the land and the title to such property, and shall
inure to the benefit of the parties to this Agreement, their
respective heirs, successors or assigns.
VI. MAINTENANCE OF EASEMENT
Grantee's, their respective successors, heirs and assigns,
covenant with Grantors, their respective successors, heirs and
assigns that Grantees, from time to time, and at all times after
isrrei/7264s/42261/ccw/273fo)_1) 3
the effective date of this instrument, at Grantees' own cost and
expense, will repair and maintain, in a proper, substantial, and
workerlike manner, the above-described roadway. As between the
Grantees, the costs of repair and maintenance shall be 'equitably
apportioned based upon each party' s use of the easement.
VII:' CONTINUING RIGHTS OF GRANTOR �•
Grantors and their successors, heirs and assigns may continue
to use the easement for their own purposes so long as their use is
not inconsistent with the purpose of this grant .
VIII. INDEMNIFICATION
Q) Each party hereto will be responsible for claims or damages
CO resulting .from or arising out of the use of the easement by such
O
121 party and shall indemnify and hold all other parties hereto
CD harmless from any claims or damages arising therefrom.
CD
G7 IX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between
the parties and any prior understanding or representation of any
kind preceding the date of this Agreement shall not be binding upon
either party except to the extent incorporated in this Agreement .
X. MODIFICATION OF AGREEMENT
Any modification of this Agreement or additional obligation
assumed by either party in connection with this Agreement shall be
binding only if evidenced in writing by each party or an authorized
representative of each party.
ISMTD1/72665/62261/C00/171101.1) 4
XI. ATTORNEY'S FEES
In' the event of any controversy, claim, or dispute relating to
this instrument or its breach, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover reasonable expenses, attorney's fees and costs.
XII. BINDING EFFECT
This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the
respective heirs, personal representatives, successors, and assigns
of the parties.
XIII. GOVERNING LAW
• It is agreed that this Agreement shall be governed by,
construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the state of
an Washington, and venue shall be in King County.
tD
O XIV. NOTICES
fn
ril 04
Any notice provided for or concerning this Agreement shall be
C C0 in writing and shall be deemed sufficiently given when sent by
C,
certified or registered mail if sent to the respective address of
each party as set forth at the beginning of this Agreemel'ht .
XV. PARAGRAPH HEADINGS
The titles to the paragraphs of this Agreement are solely for
the convenience of the parties and shall not be used to explain,
modify, simplify, or aid in the interpretation of the provisions of
this Agreement .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, a party to this Agreement has caused it
to be executed at�c , Washington, on thei date
AMORk
indicated below.
tsxn1/72646/42261/CCr/173s07.1) 5
•
DATED this day of , 1996. '
GRANTORS
QUENDALL TERMINALS, a joint venture
comprised of Altino Properties, Inc. ,
a -Washington corporation, and
J. H. Baxter & Co. , a California
limited partnership
• - ALTINO PROPERTIES,.INC.
c •
111
By:
Its:
J. H. BAXTER &
By:
GRANTEES a •
BARBEE MILL CO. , INC. ,
a Washington corporation
I 11111
-
fBy: r<<.. ,Armft. IIIts: .!61l1//. !
•
J. H. BAXTER & CO. ,
a California limi d partnership
•
• By:
• Its:..
STATE OF WASHINGTON
ss.
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document.
Isxni/72us/42261/Cc1ii»>o3.i 1 6
On this to day of F eb , 1996, before me
personally appeared O l e y e u Q r n i j r. , to me known to
be the p r p,s i,cf en-t- of Altino Properties, Inc. , the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
E n‘111 +to Aicg1
Nota Public in nd f••' the State
of W hington, residin. : t : Rea4r R
My commission expires :
(le - -4 nc4
Type or Print Notary Name
WASHINGTON
STATE OF GAb1F6RNIA
ss.
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document .
On this j,fday of h,.uz„�, , 1996, before me
personally appeared i,L 4 l,1 27,40. , to me known to
be the gews.. dsig.lt of J. H. Baxter & Co. , the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
lAAAES C. NMl�Jr ‘)C-4-^rri.4.4
•
STATE OF WAStiYGT� P b ' c in and f or the S���
of , residing at:
NOTARY-•--PtLJC My commission expires-: ^ 1 t
lI'CaTTIRS n(gess 10 4= -�
96 I P-- Z T4 �1 aHfE S r �7.7 k JCL u •, ' I
(Type or Print Notary Name)
isrr1.1/7266s/42241/ccm/173s0*.i) 7
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
ss.
COUNTY OF KING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
the persons appearing before me and making this acknowledgment are
the persons whose true signatures appear on this document.
On this la day of F eb , 1996, before me
personally appeared 1Q 1 P X ran- ; I r' , to me known to
be the "0-it&S n rrip -}- of Ba bee Mill Co. , Inc. , the
corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act
and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute
said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate
seal of said corporation.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day
and year first above written.
,
nay
Nota Public in an for he State
of shington, residing of
My comet ssion expir s.
Q1, m �a j
[Type or Print Notary Name
ti L
Sg
Ch
isrrairaccs/unlices/173903.1) 8
EXHIBIT A
That portion of Government Lot 5 in section 29, Township 24 North,
Range 5 East, W.M. and shoreland adjoining lying westerly of the
Northern Pacific Railroad right of way and southerly of a line
described as follows:
-yV•M'V-•�.
Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line of said Section
29; thence north 89°58'36" west along the south line of said Lot 5,
1, 113.01 feet to the westerly line of said Northern Pacific
Railroad right of way; thence north 29°44'54" east 849.62 feet
along said right of way line to a point hereinafter referred to as
-,,point A; thence continuing North 29°44'54" east 200.01 feet to the
true point of beginning of the line herein described; thence south
56°28'50" west 222.32 feet to a point which bears north 59°24' 56"
west 100.01 feet from said Point A; thence north 59°24'56" west to
the inner harbor line and the end of said line description.
11
Isxrs1/72665/47241/c01/17790).1)
-- I
EXHIBIT B
All that portion of Government Lot 1, Section 32, Township 24
North, Range 5 East, W.M. , in King County, and of Second Class
Shore Lands adjoining, lying westerly of Northern Pacific .Railroad
right-of-way; EXCEPT that portion, if any, of said Shore Lands
lying north of the westerly production of the north line of said
Government Lot.
N
N
O
•
(su711/724es/42241/CCW/173>03.1
EXHIBIT C
That portion of Government lot 5, section 29, township 24 north,
range 5 east, W.M. , and adjacent shore lands of the second class in
front thereof lying westerly of the Northern Pacific Railway
Company's right of way and lying northeasterly- of the following
described line: Beginning at the quarter corner on the south line
of said section 29; thence north 89°58' 36" west along the south
line of said lot 5,. a distance of 1113 .01 feet to the westerly line
of said Northern Pacific Railway Company' s right of way; thence
north .29°44.'54". east, along said right of way line, 949.63 feet to
an iron pipe which point is the true point of beginning of the line
"described herein; thence north 59°24'36' west 525.00 -feet to • an
iron pipe; thence continuing north 59°24' 36" west 488.23 feet, more
or less, to the Inner Harbor Line of Lake Washington, EXCEPT
portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true point
of beginning of the line described herein; thence north 59°24 ' 36"
west 50 feet; thence northeasterly to a point on said westerly line
0I of said Northern Pacific Railway Company' s right of way distant
an North29°44 ' 54" east 100 feet from said true point of beginning;
CAD thence south 29°44' 54 " west to said true point of beginning, and
C EXCEPTthat portion of said shorelands lying northerly of the
(� northerly line of said lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the
rl County of King, State of Washington.
tD That portion of government lot 4 , section 29, township 24 north,
CI fronting
5 east, W.M. , TOGETHER with shore lands of the second class
fronting thereon lying West of the Northern Pacific Railway right
of way and south of the following described line: Beginning at the
northeast corner of said government, lot 4 , which point is marked by
an i on pipe and is 920 feet, more or less, north of the southeast
cor r of said government lot; thence south along the east line
the eof, 156 feet; thence east 62 feet to the westerly line of said
right of way; thence southwesterly along said right of way line 156
feet to the beginning point of the line to be described; thence
north 58°20' west 460 feet ; thence north 67°40' west 210 feet to
the inner harbor line of Lake Washington as now established, and
the terminus of the line; SUBJECT TO right of way granted to Puget
Sound Power and Light Company by instrument dated April 7, 1939,
between Julius B. Falk, a bachelor, and Puget Sound Power and Light
Company; situate in the County of King, State of Washington.
That portion of Government Lot 5, Section 29, Township 24 N, Range
5 E, W.M. , and adjacent shore lands of the second class in front
thereof lying Wly of the Northern Pacific Railway Company' s right-
of-way, described as follows : Beginning at the quarter corner of
the Sr line of said Section 29; thence N 89°58' 36" W along the S
line of said Lot 5, a distance of 1113 . 01' to the Wly line of said
Northern Pacific Railway Company' s right-of-way; thence N 29°44 ' 54"
E along said right-of-way line, 949.63' to an iron pipe which point
is the true point of beginning; thence S 29°44 ' 54" W, along said
is,wre:n2665/42241/ccw/i73903.1) 1
104117
4•
44
a.f gt•aeso..-.: 7 r .wo-ee y�en :.: C..�.•-r.•.e-w•.... ..:. �...� '.. 7` YY�ir_ ..� .�.r.r •. i c w�}�
.�...._... __...._ --- --- - z._a_ t—. . -.r.-._. _ •�----- - .—
•
right-of-way line, 100.01' ; thence N 59°24'36° W 1039.16' , more or
jt less, , to the Inner Harbor Line of Lake Washington; thence N
1 44°20' 00• E along said Inner Harbor Line 102 .95' to a point from
which the true point of beginning_ bears S 59°24'36° E; thence S
59°24'36• E 1013.23' , more or less, to the true point of beginning,
s ,.,ty" ,,EXCEPT portion thereof described as follows: Beginning at the true
point of beginning of the above described property; thence S
- 29°44'54■ W along the Wly line of the Northern Pacific Railway
Company's right-of-way 100.01' ; thence N 59°24'36° W 100.01' ;
I . thence N 56°28'50• E 111.16' to a point from which the true point
l of beginning bears S 59°24' 36* E a distance of 50' ; thence S
59°24'36• . E. 50' to the true point of beginning,- and EXCEPT that
i portion of said shore lands lying northerly of the northerly line
of said Government Lot 5 produced westerly; situate in the County
1 of King, State of Washington. T
It
11
I
is -11/72665/a2262/cam/i»>o3.i► 2
0 .
.•1
1 1
. .• WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT
I i00
- ': .
, ON THE
JAG DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
Renton, Washington
1111
CksVie 6?
"ea
4%40
Prepared for:
Mr.Jim Spitze
CNA ARCHITECTURE GROUP
777 - 108th Avenue S.E., Suite 400
Bellevue, Washington 98004-5118
CAAX0015
II "
Prepared by:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue S.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98004-6477
III
1 , : - .,
(.,,
II :3
r,_-:,„,-.L---7,--,-----g-
.4
. , \111 . Revised May 1997
cg) (aa
Oc\standing Professionals...
Outstanding Quality DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
ei \
1
INC.
WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT
ON THE
JAG DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
Renton, Washington
Prepared for:
Mr.Jim Spitze
CNA ARCHITECTURE GROUP
777 - 108`h Avenue S.E., Suite 400
Bellevue, Washington 98004-5118
CAAX0015
Prepared by:
DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
415 118th Avenue S.E.
Bellevue, Washington 98004-6477
I -
Revised May 1997
•
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) conducted a wetland reconnaissance of the JAG Devel-
opment Property in the City of Renton, King County, Washington on October 25, 1996 (DEA,
1996). Because evidence of jurisdictional wetland conditions was found, a wetland delineation was
performed in February 1997 and is documented in this report.
The subject property is located at 44th Street on Lake Washington in the City of Renton, King
County, Washington (Section 29, Township 24N, Range 5E W.M.). The property is approximately
65 acres consisting of five parcels: the Barbee Mill parcel (about 20 acres) on the south; the Port
Quendall parcel (about 20 acres) in the middle; the Baxter Mill parcel (about 17 acres) on the north;
the "Pan-abode" parcel (about 6.3 acres) located east of the main site and east of Lake Washington
Boulevard, and a two-acre eastern parcel between I-405 and the southbound off-ramp. At the time
of this investigation, the Barbee Mill site was fully occupied by active sawmill operations and most
of Port Quendall parcel was used as a log storage yard. The Pan-abode property was occupied by
industrial uses. The Baxter Mill parcel was unused except for storage of several large piles of bark
mulch.
•
Eight jurisdictional wetlands were identified on the subject property using 1987 Corps of Engineers
methodology as required by the City of Renton. Each wetland has been mapped and are
summarized in the table below. All on-site wetlands are in previously disturbed areas and have
formed in old fill materials or in excavated areas. All would be classified as Category 3 wetlands
by the City of Renton because they meet the criteria of hydrologic alteration and soils alteration
(Renton, 1992).
Wetland Summary Table
Wetland On-site Area in City of Renton Required Buffer
(Parcel location) Acres(square feet) USFWS'Classification Category (width in feet)
A(Quendall) 0.195 palustrine forested 3 25
• (8,527)
•
B(Quendall) 0.374 palustrine forested 3 25
(16,284)
C(Quendall) 0.171 palustrine scrub-shrub/ 3 25
(7,444) emergent/open water
D(Baxter) 0.080 palustrine 3 25
(3.483) scrub-shrub
E(Baxter) 0.230 palustrine scrub-shrub/ 3 25
(10,027) emergent/open water
F(East) 0.150 palustrine forested 3 25
(6.528)
G (East) 0.015 palustrine emergent 3 25
(661)
H (Barbee) 0.141 palustrine emergent 3 25
(6.151)
Total area: 1.36(59,105)
'United States Fish and Wildlife Service(Cowardin et al., 1979).
h:Idoc-arealnarrest ivpdocslcaaxlcaax0015t toc0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property
i y
t.
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PREFACE 1
1. INTRODUCTION 2
2. METHODS 2
2.1 Purpose 2
2.2 Preliminary Research • 2
2.3 Site Investigation 5
2.4 Wetland Function Assessment 5
3. RESULTS 6
3.1 Site History 6
3.2 Vegetation 7
3.3 Soils 7
3.4 Hydrology 8
3.4.1 Overall Site Hydrology 8
3.4.2 Stream 8
3.5 Wetland Determination 9
3.6 Wetland Functions 10
4. REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS 11
4.1 Wetlands 11
4.2 Streams 12
1 5. REFERENCES 13
•
I '
h:Idoc-areal natresl ivpdocslcaazl caaz001 S I toc00fJ5.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property Il
,
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Corps Certification Documents
Appendix B. Plant Indicator Status Categories
Appendix C. Sample Plot Data Sheets
Appendix D. List of Plant Species
Appendix E. Wetland Function Assessment Rating Forms
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Vicinity Map 3
Figure 2: Existing Wetlands 4
LIST OF TABLES
Table I: Wetland Summary 9
Table 2: Functional Assessment Summary 9
•
•
h:Idoc-arealnatrestwpdocslcaax1caax00151►oc0005.doc
f _
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 111
PREFACE
This report has been prepared for the use of CNA Architecture Group and the project consultants
and proponents. In preparing this report David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) has used the
site information and proposed development plans as referenced herein. Findings reported herein
are based on information gathered in the field at the time of investigation, DEA's understanding
of the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987), and DEA's understanding of
federal, state and local regulations governing wetland and stream areas. Prior to preliminary and
final design or any construction, all appropriate regulatory agencies should be contacted to verify
the findings of this report, and to obtain appropriate approvals and permits.
The wetland boundaries, wetland and stream classifications and recommended buffers are DEA's
best professional opinion based on the circumstances and site conditions at the time of our study.
The final wetland boundary determination, classification of wetlands and streams, and the
required buffers and setbacks are made by the appropriate federal, state and local jurisdiction.
Two of the three wetland delineators for this project are certified by the Corps of Engineers for
wetland delineation. Certification documentation is included in Appendix A.
I . .
h:Idoc-arealnatreslwpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property
1. INTRODUCTION
David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) conducted a wetland reconnaissance of the JAG
Development Property in the City of Renton, King County, Washington on October 25, 1996
(DEA, 1996). Because evidence of jurisdictional wetland conditions was found, a wetland
delineation was performed in February 1997 and is documented in this report. The subject
property is located at 4'4th Street on Lake Washington in the City of Renton, King County,
Washington (Section 29, Township 24N, Range 5E W.M.) (Figure 1). The property is
approximately 65 acres consisting of five parcels: the Barbee Mill parcel (about 20 acres) on the
south; the Port Quendall parcel (about 20 acres) in the middle; the Baxter Mill parcel (about 17
acres) on the north; the Pan-abode parcel (about 6.3 acres) located east of the main site and Lake
Washington Boulevard, and a two-acre eastern parcel between I-405 and the southbound off-
ramp (Figure 2). At the time of this investigation, the Barbee Mill site was fully occupied by
active sawmill operations and most of Port Quendall parcel was used as a log storage yard. The
Baxter Mill parcel was unused except for storage of several large piles of bark mulch.
2. METHODS
2.1 PURPOSE
The purposes of this study were: 1) to identify, delineate, and describe any wetlands on the
subject property and 2) to evaluate the wetland functions of any wetland present. Performance
of these tasks involved three interrelated steps: preliminary research, site investigation, and
wetlands determination.
2.2 PRELIMINARY RESEARCH
Published information about local environmental conditions was reviewed for evidence of
wetlands on the subject land parcel. The main information sources reviewed included:
• Soil Survey of King County Area, USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 1973;
• National Wetland Inventory (NWI), Renton Quadrangle, 1:24,000, USDI Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1988;
• Renton Quadrangle (1:24,000), United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1950;
•
• Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. Seattle,
Washington;
• Reed, Jr., P.B. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: 1988
Northwest (Region 9). Biological Report 88 (26.9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
• Inland Freshwater Ecology Section. St. Petersburg, Florida. [Pp.86];
• Aerial photographs, Walker and Associates, Inc. 1936, 1946, 1956, 1974, 1985, 1990,
1995;
•
h:Idoc-arealnatresl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 2
•
. ..
.
1
tr • .
? •
•z
0
‘ . ig ish _.:. ..... .,...471. I:lji.
- ,: AV ..1 4iiii.. ...I a. i,..;:..
qv ...
O g 2 4 14Th 1 , A ii g al-Ici it• l• 9 le III .
) S
RNIMIA - 13-gbisp, • . 3s zz
... ..., gffig.:Tam..45c-
s.. _ !......
R 1--------_.
. "...:4• ' • '111. e":1-41(7):14;11.7.,
Ai
.•• ••••:4 !l•,): ::•Iin
444.4. -t.'•!11:i:•:•.,':•;:'' ;'),....
rry iligt11111111"Pr 7'c , ,,
44:
"/'...1
It:j.c.::).....,,,•.,4 •,1••••••
• iCti g ;. ....,r-........ .4, 4. l ' . ileTiO -CZ-)
3..,6... e
I 1...'.
• r 7•••.•Algil
•s .l'a"A•••,r•;..i'•• ••qt • A.
A,t' . mu • , iii
gliA:r1S.:,U ' • .111
''- .,..... ,11,,,,-;:, • Nriariaaminp.
.'w Flii I
‘,........
a .
• -414:rP , AV se.
•;t31.:"7r-ett*:!..t;.c!:1 i I.1 .. •
L• 4
,
'' 'Z •l't.'•:. ::S-..,•
'••: Pr ...E..,'N... 4 ..' ":1 . Cr) '
11 vaitui
*zooligiftb... ••.i
hATEth aft2..Ewft '4,, ,
•
0 . ..-• . .1.1,-c,• .. - .,,-1,.-
.....:. •• ...'::'. t ./11 I 11 '
...;
rr w . 11111ESPImuipi— —
< • • ...*; .
1
s. : :. ...,,..4.•‘,,
'‘•:,.'\ Ai \ \
PARk-•••••••••••iiiii ;•1••••••\:tIkii.:‘....11:;!..::'?' t.%.• .'"44...4;.';11:1:&:'2. 14:YI -'t'C'bik:•;)•.'4..• 'ii •• •i.,•.4.• . i•A.;?•I••1•\.° "&lritiki)•'.kl•Iyitti.•. A
l • •,...t..•. •_,. ...„,, -0:0-41,,gr--- ,..0„,..,. -0.,,,,if4,-: .. . • .-,•
14' . - --k."•—• '1.'•:e 3;?• •;;&711.1:4/41' 1531.a. :••:••4 t -1.,bt7 4• ,'1 4 :4.4; .- :i. )4-‘ 11 -,,,.. -.- 1:10u.•• ,,,,.•--: q
- •., •.,• li f.....'.?"•!
r"." • . . ‘i0..c,---n...'73 g .. g ..,•I i , •••..
'.." ;-1..5.!:!:%."1-:". ' Vi 44`.0:`"4. ,••• ..., .. 11.: ,,.• _ ?•::., ;,....,, prgia"... .-' t,... -.• ...ir?.to,F.'e
0 ....4i..-. . .Kis..::.i.. ..ii.?....., ...0 ..,. •4 .,•• ... ., mil mo 4..8-4 11,:.. stk.,,N,,. .,...4:211.,\,
,.• •: pi :'; :• . ..---• i ....!. ....:•1,..:.e. . FRwy• . .4 . v• v ;,ii...;,i ..
..: . .,._...,...:*...„e #
.0•.• ' • ‘• • )''''..':.•'''' -....,.:1 .W..4• %::E:...S.141.i. ,.
"0 - 4. •..,g0"?.."./°H...a%.,a-. v..:,;.;.;i:••...;71.,....?;14,3.,..,, ., -..,, ,- ., . ---- - 40 . al ..... .-, 4103,„ A.,-
-1-••1/4-sat ifflo •• E•'0"414 2 A -/:), ....... .- ... .oril. ......----:...:, , iia... N1.-- •.• .4.04.„
K "
,.•..... 0--„,.......--,-,..,N. ,........ . ...::.:::, ,:..,,..,..,.,;.,, . ,-..c... ....- •,,a_,c...-' 0-71;14-tP'•P
-.•, b..--•.,,.. . "4141: --.---..•.-..
-
'''.i.-?11'9-..."."* '•':'.5..!;,.":4:-,.f,t%i1Mf4."61.1.4. 4t.i..•IkA1:v14''.'A5.'4jii;.':'t 4,'''r-:er..l.i. lv,i%r i',et§0:i'i1 4.,1-.1 1/4,.,I.e"-.,'..;,. 1...v•elAif.gi.t;i.4l's f'-,"r;1.i,i,-'1';tl10tl1.,F.i:,.4.'104:4.r„,1...t..I).,..FfFiEfiV...,l. g\, .
nr BLVD se—
rrl
9, ,Y.p..o,,... M •: .eptiit.4.o.„• ..11,".i, l.A'!iti tC,...'•..4;. .:-i-.
,i.g•,.,,.. . :-....3 . I4
z y
i n— i 3, BLItHE Av : ii uv 4 2 •,„•.
•..,1,.+'e,„o•,,f),4 )t7A
n
i ' •i;F. '-'"ti' •••1';',!•K:.•1:;.,,:', -.V.IIIV C'•IV•'• •,.• .. •••c'.1!..,' :.•.•:•.:. / 11 g ,
.. ..- 1 0 i , I .• ”... g Al ,„ •
crl --,
= -only'
. alai! I, " I'AV NE '.7,...., ,.:,, ,,,,t3Arral .....,..-.. •,,,i0 ri-,.:, .p,.. 4 ,..-SE
• - • '•ECIIONDS' -.' i''i••'.WIT11°—WM'.',..k0: •,,;;' ....I:-: .-.- '..) 1 .
1161II 4 • g IV.
AV I IITN14Ajg
'. ..
' i E° 14,131Filko* PI"' .,. t.114141nIcTi tlin'ti -• ..rrwr•--,...,-py,•-f,----ii, -,irtimw c . ft•Lil., 01 .
"71 (.,) 'Nv ' - -"' •ti.1:.r•4 —' r t.g •' •. Oir. —44' . xv s, y 1 . . §pip-4/101 ‘ All
•
I a E.• • rrl +. • odeirgte. . , ..... - .,..... _ a - • '.•• . lir' • ..
co co •
, .... myrN• -'- IP% •4
C Alf *rill icanill-a•.. . .
• ,. .. .. 44'•'. .1•7?,4 • . 4 v . " r-r-,1 4
, -6. • „X..alp. a, . 1.- -,, . •...: :11 %.......-.1... y '. ". ' ' ...-A
c jinni' i:. I <
CI 4.4, • . JEFFIJZSON A. ' .1 •, a ..• ' .: v.,4 4., . . . - I v I A
....1 . •i' 'MX ••.' V •' t.• ': •- 'l '3.5 a 0 •_tritt.! Tr 4 ,.,.., .s 122M 9 w.....4V.... S 11 " ,,,‘• ••••...IZZIO AV i .
1,,twait.. NA— a\ El - 'tal ... . :—,.. 1. --ortf-I ' & g • ' ‘-,P.-
. AV•ME 1%1 ..;'... Ai ,.. i.7 . , ;.. ;,, . .• t. v: 4,
< %1ffill
•• •••.• .?" ' •••r ,iirfurt-0,,, ....1.,ii ..... ....., :., ...- ::.F:.i..,..-. *:...4
•• 2 'I. •• •e.% El. '.
2..... 1.... +
F3. .
u. '
- EN .q.'. ••:...'.. .i•?!cir.li....-..:•••::.::i: . ,,4a-C)-ffi .. 0 .!.g 41,1
. . . .
P4)
7:3 •
1 1 1 1 ' \
1 1 �1 1 �\
--- - J ` LAKE 1-- _1_ 1 1WASHINGTON \ - -
I 1 1 •
�ti lI \
/WETLAND 'A' \
%� 0.195 AC.* <,T \ _
` i \; N \\
\ \ �' \\
4 .
'BARBEE DITCH' 9syi'Y \\
__ ` Cj ' \
WETLAND 'H' \ t WETLAND 'C' �� �'L \
5.151 S0. FT. ---. 7,0.1 S0. FT. • '\
0.141 AC t y 0.171 AC.t � •
4 \
E �•ti
WETLAND 'B' \
` / •�' 18 y84 S0. FT.
.,,x,,. WETLAND 'E •
_ 10,027 SQ. FT. \
\ ` .� \\�` 0. 30 ACt •\
\� '~' \\ +, •' \'\ .
`� � `� \ / 1
\ \ 9�F e�
\� \ mn
ND 'D'
• \ ,morn WETLAND\ 3,483 SO. FT.
\\ \ \ �` \\•\\ qs�c
I .__ \ 5 \.\ GYP CREEK ! \
it U.
_ \ \\ .�RAINAGE' I \
WETLAND'F' B \
_ 6 528 S0. FT. \ \
0 •
.150 AC.± \ \,\ N.
•
I , '\ \ 1
D 300 600 \ `\ WETLAND C' 1
I E
Z.
SCALE 1'�300' \\ `_ `S. 60\ N. �1
•
ier: nMiPi npMPtiT PQr i r--r
• EIS Framework Plan, JAG Development Planned Action, City of Renton, Huckell/
Weinman Associates, Inc. 1996;
• David Evans and Associates, Inc. 1994. Wetland and Habitat Reconnaissance on. the
Baxter Mill Property, Renton, Washington;
• Terra Associates, Inc. Wetland Delineation Report for The Baxter Mill Property, 1993;
and
• King County 1990. King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio.
2.3 SITE INVESTIGATION
On February 19, 20, 21, and 27, 1997, DEA biologists conducted a field investigation for the
presence and extent of jurisdictional wetlands on the subject property. The vegetation, soils, and
hydrology of the site were examined according to the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland
j .Delineation Manual and subsequent Corps guidance. Twelve 0.01 acre sampling plots were
established in areas of homogenous vegetation. Plant species on the site were identified
(Hitchcock and Cronquist, 1973) and vegetation was considered hydrophytic (adapted to wet
conditions) when over 50% of the dominant plant species had an indicator status of facultative,
facultative wetland, or obligate wetland (Appendix B). In accordance with the methodology, soil
samples were taken at all sampling plots as well as other points on the site, and were examined
for the following indicators of hydric conditions: thick organic layers, gleying, low soil chroma
(matrix chroma 1) or mottling (matrix chroma 1 or 2). Hydrology of the site was evaluated
through observation of surface water, soil saturation, groundwater level, and evidence of
drainage patterns. Areas in active industrial use such as the Quendall parcel log storage yards
and the Barbee Mill operation were not examined because hydrophytic vegetation would not
have had an opportunity to develop under this level of disturbance.
Wetlands were defined as areas where vegetation, soils, and hydrology reflected hydric
conditions. The boundaries of the wetlands on the site were marked with orange flagging, and
were surveyed and mapped by Bush, Roed, and Hitchings, Inc. The area of each wetland was
calculated during survey plotting. All wetland boundaries are subject to verification by agencies
having jurisdiction.
2.4 WETLAND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT
Wetlands are known to perform significant functions in the ecosystem, some of which are of im-
mediate value to human society: Although these functions are complex, interrelated, and difficult
to quantify, several alternative methods have been developed to assess wetland functions for spe-
cific wetlands. A semi-quantitative method was used for this project (Cooke, 1996). Eight cate-
gories of wetland functions are defined in this method: flood/storm water control, base flow and
ground water support, erosion/shoreline protection, water quality improvement, natural biological
support, overall habitat functions, specific habitat functions, and cultural/socioeconomic functions.
The methodology includes a form that is used for rating wetland functions. For each wetland, a
given number of points for each function based on physical characteristics such as size, nearby land
h:ldoc-arealnatresl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 5
I ,
uses, vegetation types and densities, and drainage patterns can be assigned and recorded on the form.
The methodology states that it is not intended to be used to assign an absolute value (i.e., high,
medium, low) to a function present in a wetland or to an individual wetland. Rather, it is designed to
"determine the presence and relative importance of functions within the wetland" or to "rank
individual wetlands by function against other wetlands in the same drainage system"(Cooke, 1996).
3. RESULTS
The NWI Renton Quadrangle indicates palustrine scrub-shrub and palustrine emergent wetlands
along the Lake Washington shoreline in the central part of the property. In addition, May Creek
is shown as a riverine unconsolidated bottom habitat type (USDI, 1988). The King County
Sensitive Areas Map Folio indicates no wetlands on the property, but shows the on-site reach of
May Creek as a Class 1 stream (King County, 1990). A 1993 investigation of the Baxter parcel
found one wetland located along the eastern on-site railroad grade (Terra Associates, 1993). The
1994 DEA site reconnaissance identified several areas of potential wetland, each of which was
examined and documented during the current study. Wetland data plots documented for the
current investigation are included in Appendix C and located in Figure 2. A list of plant species
observed on the site is presented in Appendix D.
3.1 SITE HISTORY
The southern parcel of the property has been occupied by the Barbee Mill since before 1946.
According to aerial photographs, it has been relatively unchanged since 1956. May Creek.was
relocated between 1936 and 1946, and it presently extends along the southeastern side of the
property (Figure 2). Its general channel morphology has been unchanged since at least 1974.
The central Port Quendall parcel is an active log yard immediately north of the Barbee Mill opera-
tion (Figure 2). Almost the entire parcel presently experiences continued disturbance from these
activities. The site was used as a creosote refinery from 1917 through 1969. Thereafter the site was
used primarily as a storage area for operations occurring on the Baxter parcel. A lagoon area, pres-
ently divided into adjoining north and south lagoons, appears to have been created between 1968
and 1974 (Figure 2). The shoreline in this area has been relatively undisturbed since 1985_
The northernmost Baxter Mill parcel was developed in 1955 as wood treating plant and storage yard,
which was in operation until 1981. Aerial photographs confirm that by 1985 the site had been aban-
doned. At the time of the investigation, the site was used only for storage of large piles of bark mulch.
The Pan-abode property was developed for industrial use between 1956 and 1968 according to
available aerial photographs. At the time of this investigation, the entire parcel was occupied by the
Pan-abode prefabricated house-building operation.
The eastern two-acre parcel was modified during the construction of I-405. Ditches and/or
stream channels are clearly evident in the 1956 and in 1968 aerial photographs. The channels
h:Idoc-arealnatresl wpdocslcaaxl caax00l51rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
• JAG Development Property 6
were rerouted to accommodate the southbound off-ramp. These channels now border the parcel
on the east and the north.
3.2 VEGETATION
The Barbee Mill parcel and much of the Port Quendall parcel are continually disturbed by active
mill operations and storage and transport of logs, and include few areas of natural vegetation. Most
of the vegetated on-site area of the Barbee Mill consisted of mown lawns along May Creek and
along the railroad right-of-way at the eastern parcel boundary (Data Plots 10 and 11).
The inactive portions of the Port Quendall parcel, as well as the entire Baxter parcel, contained
significant areas of sparse vegetation. The Baxter parcel was almost devoid of vegetation in 1985
according to aerial photographs from that year. By 1996, vegetated areas were concentrated in the
vicinity of the former tank farm, the Lake Washington shoreline, and eastern margin along the
railroad grade. These areas were dominated by sapling- and seedling-size black cottonwood
(Populus balsam fera), red alder (Alms rubra), and willow (Salix spp.), as well as soft rush and
reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) (Data Plots 3, 12 and 13). The shoreline areas included
more hydrophytic plant species including hardhack (Spiraea douglasii), common cattail (Typha
latifolia), and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) (Data Plots 1 and 2). Limited areas on the eastern
and western margins of the property included more mature trees (Data Plots 1, 7, and 8).
Himalayan blackberry formed patches throughout less recently disturbed portions of the site. Small
depressions supported emergent species, including soft rush (Juncus effusus), reed canarygrass,
sickle-leaved rush(Juncus falcatus), and bentgrass (Agrostis sp.).
The small eastern parcel was occupied by forest and scrub-shrub vegetation, dominated by black
cottonwood and willow ''trees and thick shrub-layer growth of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus
discolor) and Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) (Data Plots 4 and 5). The eastern parcel
also included a small patch of herb-layer reed canarygrass (Data Plot 6).
Most of the Pan-abode parcel was paved. Vegetation had begun to re-colonize the southern end of
the property, and was dominated by Himalayan blackberry, black cottonwood seedlings, and reed
canarygrass.
3.3 SOILS
Most of the Port Quendall and Baxter parcels are mapped by the King County Area Soil Survey
(1973) as Bellingham silt loam, a poorly drained soil that is listed as hydric. The northern portion
of the Baxter parcel is listed as Seattle muck, a very poorly drained organic soil that is listed as
hydric. Most of the Barbee Mill parcel is mapped as Nooksack silt loam, a well-drained soil that is
not listed as hydric. Much of the property had been inundated by Lake Washington prior to the
artificial lowering of the Lake by about 8 feet in 1916.
All of these native soils, however, have been severely disturbed by past industrial operations and
largely buried under three to 13 feet of old fill material (CH2M Hill, 1978). Aerial photos show that
the entire subject property was gradually cleared, graded,and filled between about 1936 and 1974.
h:Idoc-arealnatresiwpdocslcaaxlcaax00t 51rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 7
During the present investigation, soils approximating the SCS descriptions were found in only a
few shoreline areas on the Port Quendall parcel (Data Plots 1 and 2). These areas may have been
beyond the edge of the most recent fill deposits. The remainder of the subject property was
underlain to a depth of at least 18 inches by old fill materials including: compacted gravel (Data
Plots 3, 7, 8, 12, 14, and 15), decayed concrete and asphalt (Data Plot 13), and loamy sand that is
probably from May Creek dredge spoils (Data Plots 4, 7, 8,10, and 11). Silt loam and silty clay
loam were found only in the east parcel (Data Plots 5 and 6).
3.4 HYDROLOGY
3.4.1 Overall Site Hydrology
Surface and shallow subsurface hydrology on the subject property involves several different
processes, including 1)ponding over impervious surfaces and compacted fill, 2) interaction with
the Lake Washington water level, 3) groundwater flowing onto the property from the east, and
4) past excavation of ponds and ditches.
Water was observed inundating much of the Port Quendall and Baxter Mill parcels after storm
events in 1996/1997. In extensive areas of compacted fill, water appeared to pond above these
materials rather than saturating them (Data Plots 3 and 13) or to saturate them from above to a
depth of only a few inches (Data Plot 12). These conditions also prevailed in the unpaved portions
of the Pan-abode parcel.
Several shoreline areas were saturated to the surface because of their relation to the Lake Washing-
ton water level (Data Plots 1 and 2). Significant groundwater flows onto the subject property from
the east in several locations, typically in the vicinity of the adjoining eastern railroad grades (Data
Plots 7, 8, and 11). Hydrology in the eastern parcel also appears to be related to this groundwater
seepage (Data Plots 4 and 6).
Lastly, several on-site areas that had been artificially excavated in the past were ponded several feet
deep. Several of these had been excavated as ponds or lagoons during previous industrial
operations, and others appeared to have been excavated more recently in order to drain the active
log storage yards. The Gypsy Creek Sub-basin Drainage is a short stretch of open channel
conveying stormwater flows westward. It is fed by a culvert that enters the subject property under a
railroad grade, and discharges into a pipe that extends under the Baxter site to discharge into Lake
Washington. The Barbee'Ditch is an excavated drainage ditch that discharges to May Creek on the
Barbee Mill Parcel.
3.4.2 Stream
May Creek flows through the Barbee Mill parcel to its mouth at Lake Washington. The on-site
portion was realigned into its present channel between 1936 and 1946, and is now designated as a
Class 1 stream by King County. The Washington State Catalog of Streams and Salmon Utilization
lists this stream as South Lake Washington Drainage #0282 in Water Resource Inventory Area#08.
May Creek is known to support stocks of coho, chinook, and sockeye salmon as well as resident
fish species (Williams et al., 1975).
h:Idoc-arealnatreslwpdocslcaaxlcaax00I51rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 8
3.5 WETLAND DETERMINATION
Eight jurisdictional wetlands were identified on the subject property. They were delineated
between February 19 and February 27, 1997, and were verified by the Corps during an April 8,
1997 on-site inspection. Wetland locations are shown in Figure 2 and characterized in Tables 1
and 2. All on-site wetlands are in previously disturbed areas and have formed over old fill
materials or in excavated areas. All would be classified as Category 3 wetlands by the City of
Renton because they meet the criteria of hydrologic alteration and soils alteration(Renton, 1992).
Table 1:
Wetland Summary
�•;. '�� - ite`Ar'ea.in•� °�: �;•;-�:�'_> ..,Ci -of-Reifon... ?iRe ,tiirediBu7fer°
°Wetland i O,n's 4. . . ,.. h'... ;. tl.. v., ,., .t,
..t-k" r,�.«,i .:.'.�;'. .k'�. :‘^;:., �s' ^j'' !,.:'tr`` s.}, •;.vv'^:tjc:z...x..,. v i`4'�'.� s`{�.<-
'r�+a�'t... `"x5y,e^1'�>'3. .,4'. .1 v -3•, s�t'•�' ::�<v t y+�;�,,+ iG-• <.:� -
Y
arcel'locatton ' =��Acre"s.. `s'uare feet :USEWS•Classifica'tton.. <<`Cate o 3zr. T: y idth'in`fet ,..
{ A(Quendall) 0.195 palustrine forested 3 25
(8,527)
B(Quendall) 0.374 palustrine forested 3 25
(16,284)
C(Quendall) 0.171 palustrine scrub-shrub/ 3 25 .
(7,444) emergent/open water
D(Baxter) 0.080 palustrine 3 25
(3,483) scrub-shrub
E(Baxter) 0.230 palustrine scrub-shrub/ 3 25
(10,027) emergent/open water
F(East) 0.150 palustrine forested 3 25
(6,528)
G(East) 0.015 palustrine emergent 3 25
(661)
H(Barbee) ' 0.141 palustrine emergent 3 25
(6,151)
Total area: 1.36(59,105)
I United States Fish and Wildlife Service(Cowardin et al., 1979).
Table 2:
•I Functional Assessment Summary
- l etland:_z, .max. ,4= 4`B::==�: >eG====`'. :D �`;�••; gF •i'! u;G` :Fhii'
Flood/storm water control 15 7 7 9 . 9 5 11 9 6
Base flow and ground water support 15 6 6 9 9 7 7 7 8
Erosion/shoreline protection 9 5 5 NA NA 6 NA NA NA
Water quality improvement N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Natural biological support_ 36 19 23 18 15 22 15 13 16
Overall habitat function 9 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 3
Specific habitat functions 15 6 7 8 6 6 6 5 5
CulturaUsocioeconomic function 2I 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7
Overall Function Points 121 52 58 54 49 57 49 44 45
I Maximum possible score for this function.
- h:tdoc-area1natresl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpr0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 9
,
Wetlands A and B are located along the lakeshore. Although they have been altered in the past, as
evidenced by the immature forested vegetation, they appear to occupy gaps between the Lake
Washington shore and the main on-site fill deposits that cover the rest of the property. Wetland A
(Data Plot 1) is entirely forested by immature red alder with an understory of Himalayan
blackberry. Hydrophytic species including yellow-flag iris, reed canarygrass, and creeping
buttercup occupy the herb layer. Wetland B (Data Plot 2) includes areas of red alder forest as well
as scrub-shrub areas dominated by hardhack and Pacific.willow.
Wetland C is a remnant of an old industrial lagoon on the Quendall Parcel. It is primarily open
water, but it also supports emergent vegetation dominated by common cattail and young black
cottonwood saplings overhanging the water.
Wetland D is centered on an old industrial settling pond and Wetland E encompasses "Baxter
Cove" (Figure 2). Both include artificial excavations, but were determined to be wetlands because
vigorous communities of hydrophytic vegetation have developed. Both wetlands contain dense
growth of common cattail. Wetland D also includes a shrub layer of Pacific Willow and red-osier
dogwood (Cornus stolonifera). Wetland E contains an open-water component and a shrub layer of
Himalayan blackberry, red-osier dogwood, and red alder saplings.
Wetlands F and G are located in the small eastern parcel of the property. Wetland F (Data
Plot 4) is forested by red alder, black cottonwood, and Pacific willow, with a dense understory
of Japanese knotweed (Polygonum cuspidatum) and Himalayan blackberry. Wetland G (Data
Plot 6) is largely a monotypic patch of reed canarygrass, with shrub coverage of red-osier
dogwood and Himalayan blackberry around the margins.
Wetland H is located near the Barbee Mill entrance and is represented by Plot 11. Although a
small group of red alder trees overhangs part of the wetland, it is essentially an emergent
wetland that is maintained as a mown lawn. Dominant species include bentgrass (Agrostis
stolonifera), red fescue (Festuca rubra), and reed canarygrass.
3.6 WETLAND FUNCTIONS
The on-site wetlands were evaluated for eight functions: flood/storm water control, base flow and
ground water support, erosion/shoreline protection, water quality improvement, natural biological
support, overall habitat functions, specific habitat functions, and cultural/socioeconomic functions.
Functional assessment for each wetland is summarized in Table 2. The scores indicated are relative
to a maximum potential number of"points" under this method. They can be compared with the
numbers in "max." column to determine functions that have very low point scores and may thus be
potentially lacking. For functions that are present, point scores can be compared to rank on-site
wetland functions. Evaluation forms for each wetland identify the characteristics that influence the
assessment, and are included in Appendix E.
For most functions, on-site wetlands varied only slightly. This is expected, because all on-site
wetlands have been altered and disturbed by industrial activities, and have developed over artificial
fill deposits. Wetland F is of relatively high value for flood/storm water control because it lies in a
closed depression with a constrained outlet. However, this function is lacking in Wetland E
h:Idoc-arealnatresl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00/Slrpl000J.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 10
• I I
•
because it is open to the Lake Washington shoreline. Wetlands C and E are the highest value on-
site wetlands for "base flow and ground water support", because they are permanently flooded
depressions. However, there is relatively low potential for this function on the property because of
its location at the lower end of its drainage basin. Wetlands A, B, and E are the only on-site
wetlands with potential value for "erosion/shoreline protection" due to their locations on the
shoreline of Lake Washington. Based on available information, there is little potential for "water
quality improvement" functions in any on-site wetland due to soil contamination from past uses of
the site. Wetlands B and E are the highest value on-site wetlands for"natural biological support."
Both of these wetlands have low proportions of invasive plant species. In addition, Wetland B has
relatively high levels of"vegetation structure" and potential "organic accumulation," and Wetland
E includes three classes of wetland including open water. All on-site wetlands are lacking in
"overall habitat function" ,because they are small, with low habitat diversity and narrow to non-
existent buffers that leave 'them open to disturbance. Wetland C is the highest value on-site wet-
land for "specific habitat;functions." It includes moderate levels of potential invertebrate and
amphibian habitat due to its shallow inundated emergent area, and observation of nesting Canada
geese was.evidence of bird habitat value. All on-site wetlands have low potential value for cul-
tural and socioeconomic uses according to this assessment method, because they are privately
owned with access limited by pollutant hazards and ongoing industrial activity, lack commercial
resources such as fish populations, are not notable for aesthetic appearance, and lack recreational
and educational opportunities. Overall, all wetlands are of relatively low quality. None attain even
half of the maximum points available.
4. REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS
4.1 WETLANDS
{
Several federal, state and,local regulations apply to development proposals in and near wetlands.
Agencies having jurisdiction overdevelopment activities that affect wetlands may include, but may
not be limited to, the City of Renton, the Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE),
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engi-
neers (Corps). The City of Renton has guidelines for development in and near wetlands and for
{ mitigation for permitted wetland impacts resulting from development. The WDOE has review and
approval authority for many Federal, State, and local permits. In addition, the WDFW administers
the State Hydraulic Code; which is intended to protect fish life and its supporting habitat. The
Corps regulates the discharge of fill material into jurisdictional wetlands. This determination report
conducted by DEA is subject to verification and approval by these agencies. Detailed site design
prior to verification by agencies is not advised.
Pursuant to the Clean Water Act, and through the Section 404 permitting process, the Corps has
been given the responsibility and authority to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill materials
into waters of the United States including wetlands. Currently, Nationwide Permit 26 under Sec-
tion 404 allows filling less than 0.33 acres of wetlands that are not within 100 feet of a stream
having a channel over two feet wide. When filling such wetlands, the Corps must be notified within
�•
h:Idoc-areolnatreslwpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpr0005.doc rp
ve
Wetland Determination Report
11
JAG Development Property
30 days after construction. Under Washington State regional conditions, fills between 0.33 acres
and 2.0 acres, located over 100 feet from any stream channel over two feet wide, may be filled
subject to a"pre-construction notification" involving submission of a site plan and wetland mitiga-
tion plan. Any wetland fills totaling more than two acres, or any filling of wetlands within 100 feet
of a stream channel over two feet wide, requires an individual permit. The individual permit proc-
ess requires a full project alternatives analysis, and the project is typically modified to reduce im-
pact. For all wetland filling totaling one acre or more, a separate water quality certification is
required by the WDOE.
The State Environmental Protection Act.(SEPA) is implemented by local agencies and provides a
process to analyze the environmental impacts of development. During SEPA environmental re-
view, various agencies have the opportunity to review and comment on proposal. The City of Ren-
ton will act as the lead SEPA agency for this project.
City of Renton regulations define development parameters in and around wetlands, streams, steep
slopes, shorelines, and other sensitive areas. The City reviews all development proposals and im-
plements the appropriate restrictions outlined in the regulations. The on-site wetlands fall within
the City classifications and require buffers as shown in Table 2. Renton regulations allow for fill-
ing of some wetlands, but requires mitigation in the form of wetland creation or enhancement.
4.2 STREAMS
May Creek is a Class 1 stream requiring a 100-foot buffer (50 feet along each bank) in the City of
Renton. May Creek is also considered a "shoreline of the state" and falls within the Washington
Shorelines Management Act.
I '
•
•
h:Idoc-arealnatresl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00151 rpt0005.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 12
.
5. REFERENCES
Adamus, Paul R., E.J. Clarian Jr., D.R. Smith, R.E. Young, and ARA Inc., 1987. Washington,
D.C., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Laboratory.
CH2M Hill, 1978. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Port Quendall Development, Renton,
Washington. Project S12212.BO. Memorandum to Mr. Jeff Layton dated December 20,
1978.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, Fish and Wildlife
Service,U.S. Dept. of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31.
David Evans and Associates (DEA), 1996. Wetland Reconnaissance on the JAG Development
Property. Project CAAX0015. Memorandum to Mr. Jim Spitze dated November 4, 1996.
Bellevue, Washington.
Environmental Laboratory, 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical
Report Y-87-I, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Hitchcock, C.L., and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington
Press, Seattle, Washington.
King County, 1990. King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio
Reed, P.B. Jr., 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 Northwest
(Region 9). Biological report 88 (26.9), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Inland Freshwater
Ecology Section, St. Petersburg, Florida. pp. 86.
Reppert, Richard T., Wayne Sigleo, Eugene Stakhiv, Larry Messman, and Caldwell Myers, 1979.
Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetlands Evaluation. Fort Belvoir, Virginia:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Water Resources Institute.
Terra Associates, 1993. Wetland Delineation Report for The Baxter Mill Property. Seattle,
Washington.
Thomas Brothers, 1995. The Thomas Guide - King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties Street Guide
and Directory.
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, 1973. Soil Survey King County Area, Washington, D.C.,U.S.
Government Printing Office.
U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1987.National Wetlands Inventory Renton Quadrangle.
U.S.G.S. 1950. Renton Quadrangle Map.
h:ldoc-arealna1resl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00l S1rpt000S.doc
Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 13
Williams, RW, R.M. Laramie, and J.J. Ames 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon
Utilization - Volume 1, Puget Sound. Washington Department of Fisheries.
•
I •
•
h:ldoc-arealna7resl wpdocslcaaxlcaax00151rpf0005.doc
• Wetland Determination Report
JAG Development Property 14
"gC0
INC.
APPENDICES
I •
•
,
P))
INC.
APPENDIX A
CORPS CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTS
*5517*
£ T�FDEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
0 \ SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
m -:.-:TI c:.. \yi P.O. BOX 3755
C;'. .`,��I;. SEATTLE.WASHINGTON 9 8 1 24-225 5
C1- r
itt0\` J.Sp` 11[►I.V TO
STATCS Of P' ATT[NT1OM Or
U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CERTIFIES' THAT
MR. JEFFREY MEYER
has successfully demonstrated
to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) , Seattle District,
sufficient understanding of, and the capability to perform
satisfactory wetland delineations consistent with, the Corps 1987
Wetland Delineation Manual and supplemental guidance.
This verifies that
wetland delineations performed by the certified wetland
delineator named above will rgceive expedited consideration and
acceptance by the certifying district, for purposes of the Corps'
final determination of wetland jurisdiction pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean; Water Act.
/ ,5.,..
, p-3
THOMAS F. MUELLER - Date !
Chief, Regulatory Branch Expires March 1994
Seattle District
'This is a provisional certification for the purposes of the demonstration phase
of the Corps Wetland Delineator Certification Program and will not be honored
after March 1994.
S�ET3T OpO� DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
�r N% SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS
L ^-1')T c—: y) P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 9 8 1 24-2 25 5
MAR 2 1 1994
r-,
• O •_ aJp wa►Lr TO
in
• ��u► ION OF
Regulatory Branch MAR 18 1994
JEFFREY MEYER
DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES, INC
415 118TH AVENUE S.E.
BELLEVUE, WA 98005-3553
Dear Participant:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that your provisional
certification by the Seattle District. as part of the Corps Wetland
Delineator Certification.Program (WDCP) . has been extended.
The Corps initially anticipated implementing the WDCP nationwide in
March 1994 at which time this provisional certification would have expired.
Since that timeframe will not be met. your provisional certification will
remain valid until a final WDCP is adopted. This provisional certification
may then be renewed. revised, or replaced. depending on the final WDCP. You
will be notified of what action you must take. if any. to remain a certified
wetland delineator in Seattle District once the final WDCP is authorized.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your participation
in the demonstration ;phase of the Corp's WDCP in the Seattle District. Your
willingness to be involved in the development of the program is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Deborah J. Kn b
Environmental Analyst
U. S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
CERTIFIES* THAT
MR. JOHN MACLIN
has successfully demonstrated
to the U.S . Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) , Seattle District,
sufficient understanding of, and the capability to perform
satisfactory wetland delineations consistent with, the Corps 1987
Wetland Delineation Manual and supplemental guidance.
This verifies that
wetland delineations performed by the certified wetland
delineator named above will receive expedited consideration and
acceptance by the certifying district, for purposes of the Corps'
final determination of wetland jurisdiction pursuant to Section
404 of the Clean Water Act.
2/77 //t/ /99y
THOMA F. MUELLER
Date
Chie , Regulatory B ch
Seattle District
*This is a provisional certification for the purposes of the demonstration phase
of the Corps Wetland Delineator Certification Program (WDCP) and will be honored
until the final WDCP is implemented nationally.
i
ace
INC.
APPENDIX B
PLANT INDICATOR STATUS CATEGORIES
I .
i .
VEGETATION CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Indicator Status of Plant Definition
Obligate Wetland (OBL) Occurs almost always (estimated probability>99%) in
wetlands under natural conditions, but may also
occur rarely (estimated probability <1%) in non-
wetlands
Facultative Wetland Usually occur(estimated probability 67% to 99%) in
(FACW) I wetlands, but may also occur(estimated probability
i 1% to 33%) in non-wetlands.
Facultative (FAC) Plants with similar likelihood (estimated probability
33% to 67%) of occurring in wetlands or non-
wetlands.
Facultative Upland (FACU) Usually occur(estimated probability 67% to 99%) in
non-wetlands, but also occur(estimated probability
1% to 33%) in wetlands.
Obligate Upland (UPL)1. Occurs almost always (estimated probability >99%) in
non-wetlands under natural conditions.
Data source: Reed,1988.
I �'
INC.
( APPENDIX C
SAMPLE PLOT DATA SHEETS
{
• Plot 1
•
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number: CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot:
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: 2/20197
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Nooksack Silt Loam Is the.soil on the hydric soils list? No
Soil Profile: 0-1' 10 YR 2/2 loam w/10 YR 4/4 mottles •
1-5• 10 YR 3/2 loamy sand w/10 YR 4/4 mottles
5-18" 5 GY 4/1 loamy sand
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Alnw rubra FAC 7 98.0 • 1 Iris pseudacorur OBL 4 38.0 •
2 2 Ranunculus repens FACW 2 10.5
3 3 Pholarisarundinacea FACW 3 20.5 •
4 4
5 5
6 • 6
Sum: 98.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Rubus discolor FACU 5 63.0 • Sum: 69.0
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 75.0%
5
•
Sum: 63.0
• HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? , No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 10•
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
•
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? Yes
Rationale: (In Wetland A)
oa rAsrrrxiS
14
Plot 2
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot: 2
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: 2/20i97
County: .King State Washington
• SOILS
Series/Phase: Nooksack Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? No
Soil Profile: 0.18+' 10 YR 2/1 muck
Other hydric soil indicators: I
VEGETATION
Tree Layer ;Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name ; Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
.1 1 Typha latijolia OBL 5 63.0 •
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
Sum: 7
Shrub Layer 8
• 1 Spiraea douglarii FACW 3 20.5 • Sum: 63.0
2 SaIls lariandra FACW ' 5 63.0
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 100.0%
5 •
Sum: 83.5
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? ' Yes Surface water depth:. 1-
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 0'
Ills Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION •
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? Yes
Rationale: (In Wetland B)
YIb9T
QATASHMS
v.+.-.•
Rate r
1
1
Plot 3
David Evans and Associates,Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot 3
•
Applicant/Owner. CNA Group Date: 2120i97
County: King State Washington
•
SOILS
•
Series/Phase: Bellingham Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile: Compacted gravelly fill
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Populus balsamifera FAC 6 85.5 ' 1 Juncur efcrur FACW 6 85.5 •
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 _ 5
6 6
Sum: 85.5 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Sum: 85.5
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,andlorFAC: /00.0%
5
Sum:
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? Yes Surface water depth: 6'
Soil saturated? No Depth of free standing water in test pit?
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Assumed
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? no
Rationale: Not jurisdictional wetland as per on-site inspection by Corps 4/897
4111i97 DATASHTJOS
,.
Plot 4
David Evans and Associates, Inc. •
•
•
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
• Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot: • 4
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: 2/20i97 •
County: King State Washington
SOILS
.
Series/Phase: Bellingham Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile:, 0-6' 10 YR 32 silt loam
•
6-18+• 2.5 Y 4/2 loamy sand w/10 YR 4/4 mottles
Other hydric soil indicators:'
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name ' Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Alnus rubra FAC 4 38.0 • 1
2 Populus balsamifera FAC 2
3 Solis lasiandra FACW 4 38.0 ' 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
•
Sum: 76.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Polygonum cuspidarum ; FACU 6 85.5 • Sum: •
2 Rebus discolor FACU 4 38.0 •
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 50.0%
5
. Sum: 123.5
HYDROLOGY
I '
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 10'
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: water-stained leaves
sediment deposits
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? No
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? Yes
Rationale: (In Wetland F)
Non-hydrophytic vegetation is established among indicators of long-duration hydrology.
• V12/97
DATASNTXLS
, ,r;,,�, Rd,1.0
Plot 5
•
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot: 5
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: • 2/20/97
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Bellingham Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
•
Soil Profile: 0-18'. 10 YR 3/2 silt loam
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class' Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Populus bolsomifrra FAC 5 63.0 • 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 •
5
6 6
Sum: 63.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Rubus discolor FACU 7 98.0 • Sum:
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 Thal are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 50.0%
5
•
Sum: 98.0
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? No Depth of free standing water in test pit?
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? No
Is the hydric soil criterion met? No
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? No
Is this plot located in a wetland? No
Rationale: (North of Wetland F)
•
3,1747 DATAS TXLS
I AI
Po r-d
110...
-+rw MI
Plot 6
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): i BCF/JDM Sample Plot: 6
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: 220/97
County: • King State Washington
SOILS •
Series/Phase: Bellingham Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
I '
Soil Profile: 0-8" 10 YR 3/2 silt loam
8-18" 5 Y S/2 silt clay loam W/mottles
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 1 P/wlaris arundinacea FACW 6 85.5 •
2 2
I —
j 3 3
4 • 4
5 5
6 6
Sum: 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Cornursroloni(era FACW 3 20.5 Sum: 85.5
2 Rubus discolor FACU 4 38.0 •
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 66.7%
5
Sum: 58.5
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 14'
• Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? Yes
Rationale: (In Wetland G)
3'12,9T DATASHTMS
Mr r•
110•44.+,.n Mon 1-8
Plot 7
David Evans and Associates,Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot: 7
Applicant/Owner. CNA.Group Date: 2/20/97
County: King State -Washington_
SOILS
Series/Phase: Seattle Muck Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile: 0-8+• 5 GY 4/1 gravelly sand w/10 YR 3/4 mottles
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Alnus rubra FAC 3 20.5 • 1 Juncus efjusus FACW 3 20.5 •
2 Populus balsamifera FAC 4 38.0 • 2
3 3
• 4 4
5 5
6 6
Sum: 58.5 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Salis lasiandro FACW 4 38.0 • Sum: 20.5
2 Rubus discolor FACU 4 38.0 •
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,andlorFAC: 80.0%
5
Sum: 76.0
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? Yes Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit?
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located In a wetland? no
Rationale: Not jurisdictional wetland as per Corps on-site inspection 4/8i97
4/11197-,,
DATA SM.MS
Plots Id
Plot 8
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): BCF/JDM Sample Plot: 8
Applicant/Owner: CNA Group Date: 2/20i97
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Seattle Muck Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile: 0-18' 2.5 Y 4/0 loamy sand .
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Popular bdsamifenr FAC 2 10.5 1 Jana ejficrur FACW 6 85.5
2 Alma rvbra FAC 2 10.5 • 2 Phalaru arundinacea FACW 2 , 10.5
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
Sum: 21.0 7
Shrub Layer
8
1 Rubur discolor FACU 1 3.0 • Sum: 96.0
•
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 75.0%
5
Sum: 3.0
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? Yes Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 0'
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plot located in a wetland? no
Rationale: not jurisdictional wetland as per Corps on-site inspection 4/8/97
1/1/N7 • LU TASMIXQS
Plot.1-1
�o�r+,ter
• Plot 10
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): JDM/JCM Sample Plot: 10
Applicant/Owner. CNA Group Date: 2121/97
County: King State • Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Nooksack Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? No
•
•
Soil Profile: 0-16+" YR 32 gravelly loamy sand WI faint 10 YR mottles below 12"
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Alnus rubra FAC 1 3.0 1 Festuca rubra FAC 3 20.5
2 2 Agrostis slolonifera FAC 4 38.0 •
3 3 Nypochoeris radicato FACU 2 10.5
4 4 Phalaris arundinacea FACW 4 38.0 •
5 5 •
6 6
Sum: 3.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Sum: 107.0
. 2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 100.0%
5
Sum:
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? No Depth of free standing water in test pit?
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? No
Is this plant community a wetland? No
Rationale: (Near Barbee entrance)
No saturation during very wet recent weather.
]nZDr •
DAiASM.XLS
Plot 99
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: , JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): JDWJCM Sample Plot: 11
Applicant/Owner.. 1 CNA Group • Date: 2121/97
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Nooksack Silt Loam Is the soil on the hydric soils list? No
Soil Profile: 0-6" 10 YR 3/2 gravelly loamy sand
6-18" 10 YR 3/1 gravelly loamy sand w/faint 10 YR 4/2 mottles
I I
Other hydric soil indicators:
•
•
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name . Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Alnres rubra FAC 4 38.0 ' 1 Ag%uis srolonifera FAC 4 38.0 •
2 2 Fesruca rubra FAC 4 38.0 •
3 3 Phalaris arundinacea FACW 4 38.0
4 4 •
5 5
6 6
Sum: 38.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Sum: 114.0
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 100.0%
5
Sum:
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 0' •
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plant community a wetland? Yes
Rationale: (Near Plot 10) _
.Yr?N7
DATASHTXLS
w+.rr
-,� aras fart
•
Plot 12
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): JDWJCM Sample Plot: 12
Applicant/Owner.. CNA Group Date: 227/97
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Seattle Muck Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile: 0.1' 10 YR 22 sand loam
2-8• 5/5 BG sand loam w/2.5 Y 5/6 mottles
8-12' Hardpan fill
Other hydric soil indicators:
VEGETATION
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point
1 Populur balsamifera ,FAC 7 98.0 1 Juncur effurur FACW 2 10.5 •
2 2 Holcur(anatus FAC 1 3.0 •
3 • 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
Sum: 98.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Sum: 13.5
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 100.0%
5
Sum:
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? No Surface water depth:
Soil saturated? Yes Depth of free standing water in test pit? 5•
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
• WETLAND DETERMINATION
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? Yes
Is this plant community a wetland? no
Rationale: not jurisdictional wetland es per Corps inspection 4/897
411197
QATASHTJQS
acM..t� Rota 12-1.3
Plot 13
David Evans and Associates, Inc.
INTERMEDIATE-LEVEL ONSITE DETERMINATION DATA SHEET
Project Name: JAG Development Site Job Number. CAAX0015
Field Investigator(s): JDM/JCM Sample Plot 13
Applicant/Owner. CNA Group Date: 2/27/97
County: King State Washington
SOILS
Series/Phase: Seattle Muck Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes
Soil Profile: ; Old decayed concrete
•
Other hydric soil indicators:
•
•
I .
VEGETATION
•
Tree Layer Indicator Cover Mid- Herbaceous Layer Indicator Cover Mid-
I Scientific Name Status Class Point Scientific Name Status Class Point •
1 Papulus balsamifera FAC 1 3.0 • 1 Junto effusus FACW 1 3.0 •
2 2 Nolcus lanarus FAC 1 3.0 '
3 i 3 Agrostis stolonifera FAC 1 3.0 •
4 4 .
5 5
6 6
Sum: 3.0 7
Shrub Layer 8
1 Sum: 9.0 •
2
3 Percentage of Dominant Species
4 That are OBL,FACW,and/orFAC: 100.0%
5
Sum:
HYDROLOGY
Surface inundated? Approx.20%of plot . Surface water depth: 1'
Soil saturated? Depth of free standing water in test pit?
Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
•
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? • Yes
Is the hydric soil criterion met? No
Is the specific hydrology criterion met? No
Is this plant community a wetland? , No
Rationale:
Water perched on impervious surface.
Plants growing in cracks,typical of site.
U11/97
DATASHrxrs
aga ,w Ras 12-t]
g"(ga
INC.
APPENDIX D
LIST OF PLANT SPECIES
List of Plant Species
Species Common Name Indicator Status
Acer macrophyllum big leaf maple FACU
Agropyron repens quackgrass FACU
Agrostis tenuis colonial bentgrass UPL
Alnus rubra red alder FAC
Carex obnupta Slough sedge OBL
Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FACU
Cornus stolonifera red-osier dogwood FACW
Dactylis glomerata orchardgrass FACU
Epilobium ciliatum hairy willow-herb FACW-
Iris pseudacorus yellow flag iris OBL
Juncus effusus soft rush FACW
Phalaris arundinacea reed canarygrass FACW
Polygonum cuspidatum Japanese knotweed FACU
Polystichum munitum sword fern UPL
Populus balsamifera black cottonwood FAC
Pteridium aquilinum bracken fern FACU
Ranunculus repens! creeping buttercup FACW
Rubus discolor Himalayan blackberry FACU
Rubus lacinatus evergreen blackberry FACU
Rubus spectabilis ! salmonberry FAC
Rubus vitifolius Pacific blackberry FACW
Rumex crispus curly dock FACW
Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW+
Sambucus racemosa red elderberry FACU
Spiraea douglasii , hardhack FACW
Tolmeia menziesii pig-a-back plant FAC
Typha latifolia common cattail OBL
c'J�UUU
INC.
APPENDIX E
WETLAND FUNCTION ASSESSMENT RATING FORMS
•
1 •
vveuana arru nurrer,run R:uuIlb di to Jet I n-yuuW nrtauvu r-el w'i f icu,t,tl MSsessment
Wand # A Staff 3.--PM Date • 5// 3 47
•
%cation S. T R -
Criteria •
•
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 ply
Flood/ X size<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres • • — stze>10 acres
Storm Water 2C Norte or lakeshore wetland mid-sloped wetland depressions,headwaters,bogs,
<10%forested cover — 10-30%forested cover X >30%forested cover
Control X. unomstrained outlet semi-constrained outlet — mayor/termed outlet
�C located'n lower 1/3 of the drainage — located in mlddie 1/3 of the drainage _ located in upper 1A of the drainage
points 7
(max 15)
Base Flow/ X size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres ' _ size>10 acres
i ro u n d Water - rtverhe or lo w'wetland — mid-sloped wetland. _ depressions,headwaters, .ems
�[ iodated in lower 1/3 0(the drainage located h middle 1/3 of the drainage _ located In upper 1 A of the drainage
Support • — y flooded or saturated Z_ seasonally or semi-permanently permanently flooded or satuxatfed,or
`/ flooded or saturated htermittentfy exposed
! no flove-sensirive fish populations low flow-sensitive fish populations. high flow-sensitive populations
pow on-site or-downstream . on-site or downstream contiguous wi h site in highly
(max 15) • permeable strata
r o s i o n/ — sparse 9rtis or no veg abng — sparse wood or veg along OHWM X dense wood or veg along OHWM
OHWM _ wetland extends 30-60 m from
shoreline X wetland extends<30mfrom OHWM
wetland extends>200 m from
Protection OHWM • rately— mode developed shoreline OfOHWM
A highly developed shoreline or subcatchmermt _ undeveloped shoreline or
5 sufxatchment subcatctmeru
points
(max 9)—
ry at e r Quality — raPid Sow through site — moderate flow through site .Z slow flow through site
Improvement — <50%veil cover — 50-80%cover .X >80%veg cover
upstream h barn mom wetland is s 50%of basin upstream from _X >50%of basin upstream from
undeveloped wetland is developed wetland is developed
points J X holds<25%overland runoff — holds 25-50%overland runoff _ holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12)
/A=Not Applicable, N/I=No information available .
.ominant Vegetation: Wildlife:
ALRII
"R-1 PR
.._-._.._ ..... . . .............. ....v vca....�au.nunuvc f-Cfrurrlydr l(:G i.1JJCSSment . .
. i.r
Natural size<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres • size>10 acres
ag land,low veg structure 2 level veg high veg structure
Biological ,X seasonal surface water _ permanent surface water _ open water pools through simmer --
Support one habitat type _ two habitat types 2'..;habitat types
PAB POW PEM PSS 0 EST PAD POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PM EST
X. low plant diversity(<6 species) moderate plant diversity(7-15 _- high plant diversity(>15 spas)
species) _ <10%Invasive species =a
>50%invasive species 4. 10 to 50%invasive species _ high primary produaivty
low part pity moderate primary productivity high organic aocurrtttapce
low organic accumulation moderate organic accumulation _ Nigh°quit
low organic export Z low organic export _ many habitat fetes .
.e law habitat features _ some habitat features _ buffers not c sturtj
- butlers very d�5turbed - _ buffers slightly disturbed _ well connected to upland habitats
q
points•I 1 Z Isolated from upland habitats • ! partially connected to upland
hats —
(max 36) \ •
Overall X size<5 acres size 5-10 acres _ size>10 acres
_lelow habitat diversity _ moderate habitat diversity _ high habitat diversity • .Habitat IC low sanctuary or refuge moderate sanctuary or refuge _ high sanctuary or refuge _-
Functiojs
points_
(max 9) • •
r Specific _7 low invertebrate habitat _ moderate invertebrate habitat ._ high invertebrate habitat
Habitat _ low a np h�habitat X moderate amphbtan habtat . _ high amphbian habitat
low fish habitat moderate rash habtat high fish habtat
Functions low mammal habitat moderate mammal habitat — high mammal habitat
points 6 — low bird habitat moderate bird habitat — high bird habitat
(max 15) .
Cultural/ x low educational opportunities _ •moderate educational opportunities high educational opportunities • .
y low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value _ high aesthetic value
S o c i o e C o- Z'lacks commercial fisheries. _ moderate commercial.fisheries, high commercial fisheries,
no m i c agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources .
1 lads historical or archeological _ historical or archeological site _ important historical or archeological
. resources _, some passive and active site
tacks passive and active recreational opportunities . _ many passive and active
recreational opportunities privately owned,some public recreational opportunities
privately owned access unrestricted public access
yn near open •space .
ot _ some connection to open space _ drecly connected to open space
points 6
(max 21)
Notes:
weuana aria buffer runcuons aria emt-yuarnrrauve rerrormance Assessment
•
timid # Staff Date • 37/0 7
2tT 2qN
^ration $ T • R •
•
•
Criteria
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts
Flood/ size<5 acres r - size 5-10 acres - • _ size>10 acres
Storm Water rtvertie orlaitr:shore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland ems,headwaters,�. .
•<10%forested cover _ 10-30%forested cover >30%forested cover
Control 2f unconsf ached outlet _ semi-constrained outlet _ cutverbbermed outlet
•
located in lower 1/3 of the drainage — located h middle 1/3 of the drainage — located In upper 1A of the drainage •,
points Z •
(max 15)
•
Base Flow/ size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres size>10 acres
Nonni,hound WateNonni,orlaleshore wetland — mid-sloped wetland — depressions,headwaters,tom,
r [ located in lower 1/3 of the drainage located in middle 1 r3 of the drainage — located In upper 143 of the drainage
Support _ y flooded or saturated seasonaly or semi-permanently permanently flooded or saturated,or
v flooded or saturated • intermittently exposed
•
• points _.k no low-sensitive fish populations _ low flow-sensitive fish populations. high flow-sensitive populations
on-site ordownstream . on-site or downstream
(max 15) contiguous with site in highly
permeable strata
r o s i o n/ — sparse grassherts or no veg abng _ sparse wood or veg along OHWM ,dense wood cc veg along OHWM
horeline OHWM — wetland extends 30-60mhorn wetland extends<30 m from OHWM — .wetland extends>200 m torn
Protection OHWM — moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
highly developed shoreline or subcatctunent undeveloped shoreline or
points S sutxntchnertt subcatctmentt
(max 9)
Vater Quality — ratA flow tl'rax°h site • — moderate flow through site X' slow flow through site
<50%vegcover 50-80%cover J ' >80%vegcover
Improvement _ upstream in bash from wetland is — S 50%of basin upstream from . ?X >50%of barn upstream from
undeveloped wetland is developed •
wetland is developed
Points 1.0 holds<25%overland wort _ holds 25-50%overland runoff _ holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12) •
4/A=Not Applicable, Nil =No information available
.
)ominant Vegetation: Wildlife:
•
SP • Po •
?A gyp,
•
•
•
•
•
•
Si!NJ �.ul lcl ., .,I r...w,w as lU OCr ni-yudu ruLduve rerrormance Assessment ..
I.h
•
Natural stze<s acres size 5-10 acres size>10 acres
ag land.low veg structure 2 level veg ?—�( high Igtnvegerpoure
- seasonal surface water permanent surface water _
S u p p o r t — one habtat type :two habitat types _ p' Jh sum
PM POW PEM PSS PFO EST PM POW PEM®F EST PAR POW PEM PSS P low plant 6versity(<6 species) .4-moderate plant diversity(7-15 high plant div > EST '
Y( 15
species) Z— <10%imrasive species ) *.
_ >50%invasive species high primary prod
— tow p ary Oman),X-moderatOman),productivityr
high organic uaiv'
low organic accumulation moderate organic accumulation ' — high organb export
low organic export , low organic export _ many heat features
i -' few habitat features _ some habitat features • _ buffers notrbed
buffers very disturbed - — buffers slightly disturbed _ wed connected to upland
points
Z 3 .(Isolated from upland habitats ' _ partially connected to uplan
(max 36) habitats
Overall Ti? siz- low habitat<5tat acres
-7 size
e5-10 acres •
_ size>10 acres -
Habitat versity moderate habitat diversity — high habitat dive
lowrsty
sanctuary or refuge — moderate sanctuary or refuge higha
Function —` sanct �'0f" 'ge
points
(max 9) •
Specific )( low invertebrate habitat moderate invertebrate habitat — high invertebrate habtat
low amphbian habitat . moderate amphbian habitat . Ash high
' Habitat low fish habitat — moderate fish habtat — sh hbian habitat
high f A habtat
Functions I3"mammal habitat _ moderate mammal habitat — high mammal habitat
points z — low turd habitat moderate bird habitat — high bird habitat •
(max 15) .
Cultural/ x low educational opportunities — •moderate educational opportunities high educational opportunities
atow aesthetic value moderate/aesthetic value high aesthetic value S o c I o e c o- lacks commercial fisheries, moderate commercial fisheries, high commercial fisheries,
n o m i c Z, agriaulture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources
lacks historical or arciteobgical — historical or archeological site important historical or archeological
`,- resources — some passive and active
2c lacks passive and active recreational opportunities — many Passive and active .
opportunities _ privately owned,some pubic. recreational opportunities
unrestricted pubic access
X riot near open space • some connection to open space directly connected to open space
points 6
(max 21)
Notes:
vveuarto an o puiiCI rut ia.uvna a��u ..cI I u-yudl iutativc rci KBluau It.0 r1SSCSS1 nCi IL
Fr,. 4 .
/VI ! / /f g
Aland # - Staff /
Date l 1 l '
O s -----
•
ration
Criteria
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts
Flood/ �stze<5 acres . _ size 5-10 acres - size>10 acres
Storm Water perine or lakeshore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland jdepressions,headwaters,togs,Ilats
<10%forested cover 10-30%forested Dover >30%forested cover •
Control _ unconstrained outlet — semi-constrained outlet 4Zculvenlbermed outlet
located in lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located in middle 1/3 of the drainage _ located in upper 1/3 of the drainage
points 1..
(max 15)
Base Flow/ --7snze<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres size>10 acres
— _p or lakeshore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland ressbns,headwaters,bogs,flats
around Waterlocated it lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located in middle 1/3 of the drainage in upper
Support — temporally flooded or saturated _ seasonally or semi-permanently _ anently flooded or saturated,or
flooded or saturated Intermittently exposed
7n �o flow-sensitive fish populations _ low flow-sensitive fish populations — high flow-sensitive populations •
pointsL p on-site or downstream on-site or downstream contiguous with site In highly
(rnax 15) permeable strata
Erosion/ — sparse grassterbs or no veg along — sparse wood or veg along OHWM _ dense wood or veg along OHWM .
OHWM _ wetland extends 30-60 m from
;h o r e l i n e _ wetland extends<30 m from OHWM _ wetland extends>200 m from
r o t e c t l o% OHWM moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
r,/ _ highly developed shoreline or subcatcfvnent _ undevebped shoreline or .
n set atchmer* subcatchmeru
•
(max 9) -
Hater Q u a l i ty rapid lbw through site _ moderate flow through site ✓slow now through site
A <50%veg cover _ 50-80%cover >80%veg cover -
Improvement _ upstream in basin from wetland is _ S 50%of basin upstream from _j>50%of basin upstream from
undeveloped wetland is developed is developed
points O _ holds<25%overland runoff _ holds 25-50%overland runoff • holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12) .
'A=Not Applicable, N/I =No information available
•
ominant Vegetation: Ty M Wildlife: Gp,r7V/ -Dfl C .
xVc f-N ,4 /1/-57-
Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
Natural size<5 acres • size 5-10 acres _ size>10 acres
B I 0 I O i C a l ag land.low veg structure 2 level veg _ high veg structwe
9 seasonal surface water anent surface water _ open water pools through simmer .
Support _ one habitat type _ ... oar s _ 13 habitat types
"AB POW REM PSS PFO EST PAB PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO.EST
Al low plant diversity(<6 species) _ m•• • e • •nit diversity(7-15 _ltlgh plant diversity(>15 species)
species) _Z<10%invasive species
>50%invasive species 0 to 50%invasive species _ high primary productivity
_ low primary productivity ir moderate primary productivity _ high organic accumulation
low organic accumulation AZ moderate organic accumulation _ high organic export
plow organic export _ low organic export• many habitat features
k' w habitat features _ some habitat features _ buffers not disturbed
' buffers very disturbed _ buffers sightly disturbed _ wet connected to upland habitats
points ' .. / isolated from upland habitats _ panlaty connected to upland
(max 36) habitats
•
Overall size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres _ size>10 acres
low habitat diversity _ moderate habitat diversity _ high habitat diversity
Habitat V low sanctuary or refuge _ moderate sanctuary or refuge _ high sanctuary or refuge
Functlopks
• - points
(max 9) /
Spec if i c — low invertebrate habitat _V a invertebrate habitat high hvertetrate habitat
�/�°w amphibian habitat moderate amphbian habitat _ high amphloian habitat
Habitat _low
fish habitat moderate fish habtat high fish habitat
Fun c t i opp S low mammal habitat moderate mammal habitat _ high mammal habitat
points low bird habitat moderate bird habitat _ high bird habitat
• (max 15) •-
Cultural/ low educational opportunities _ moderate educational opportunities _ high educational opportunities
low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value _ high aesthetic value
••- So C I o e C o- lacks commercial fisheries, _ moderate commercial fisheries, _ high commercial fisheries,
no mi c /agriculture,renewable resources agriculture.renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources
lacks historical or archeological historical or archeological site _ important historical or archeological
/ resources some passive and active sae
- V lacks passive and active recreational opportunities . many passive and active
/recreational opportunities _ privately owned,some public recreational opportunities
privately owned access _ unrestricted public access
notnear open space some connection to open space _ directly connected to open space
points
(max 21)
Notes: 01,9 •
V/(f/5Tk.L71 V G �/�
• �/
•
Y e
'/1
1.
wetiana ana uuner rur coons aria ernI-yuanuLauve rerrulmnance Assessment
•
•
Aland # J7 Staff SDrii Date .3 A 3
OS E
ration S T R
•
Criteria
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts
Flood/ size<5 acres _ size 5-10 aces - - size>10 acres
dv
Storm Water erine or lo ore end _ mid-sloped wetland depressbns,headwaters,b
<10%iaested cover • _ 10-30%forested cover >30%forested cover
Control unconstrained outlet _ semi-constrained outlet ' auhrertibermed outlet
located in lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located In middle 1/3 of the drainage — located in upper 1A of the drainage
pests
(max 15)
Base Flow/ stir <5 acres _ size 5-10 acres ' _ size>10 acres
rtverbe or lakeshore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland- depressions,headwaters,togs,nats
;round Water wed h lower 1/3 of the drainage located in middle 1/3 of the drainage • located h upper 1/3 of the
drainage
Support • — dab flooded or saturated — seasonally or semi-permanently permanently flooded or saturated,or
flooded or saturated Intermittently exposed
X no flow-sensitive fish populations _ low lbw-sensitive ash populations. — high flow-sensitive populations
points on-site or.dow9ream . on--site or downstream contiguous with site in highly
(max 15) •
p rmeable strata
.r o s i o n/ — sparse grassherbs or no veg abng _ sparse wood or veg along OHWM — dense wood or veg along OHWM
OHWM _ wetland extends 30-60 m from
h o r e I i n e — wetland extends<30 m from O H W M — wetland extends>200 m from
'r o t e c t i o n O H WM _ moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
highly developed shoreline or subcatchrner* — undeveloped shoreline or
poInts mart subcatdhmenu
(max 9) •
N a t e r Quality — raPki tow through site moderate flow through site )(slow flow through site
<50%veg cover 50-80%cover >80%veg cover
m p r o v e m e n t — upstream h basin from wetland is _ S 50%of basin upstream from 7 >50%of basin upstream from
undeveioped wetland is developed wetland is developed
points I/ _ holds<25%overland runoff _ holds 25-50%overland ninth • X holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12)
A= Not Applicable, Nil =No information available •
)minant Vegetation: Wildlife:
•
A LA
Y LA
O Sr
- r.aa
••
•
Natural Z size<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres size>10 acres
Biological Z ag land,low veg structure 2 level veg _ high veg structure_ seasonal surface water _„,){ permanent surface water _ open water pools through —
>
Support X one habtat type — two habitat types _ 3 habtat types summer
•
PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEN PSS PFO
EsT
X" low plant diversity(<6 species) — moderate plant diversity(7-15 _ high plant diversity(>15 species)
species) , <10%Invasive spy
>50%invasive species — 10 to 50%invasive species — high primary pro -
low organic accumulation. vity
_ pr
moderate imary productivity — high organic accumulaton
organic accumulation — high organic
export
4 low organic export _ low organic export — many habitat features
few habitat features some habitat features — buffers not gybed
5, butters very disturbed _ butters slightly
pars I _A Isolated from upland habitats ' — partially connected touplpland — wet connected to upland Itabta�
•
habitats
(max 36) tats _-
Overall n size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres _ size>10 acres
low habitat diversity — moderate habitat diversity — high habitat diversity
Habitat low sanctuary or refuge moderate sanctuary or refuge h
refuge ,-
Functions
points — ' "�Of
3
(max 9) •
-
Specific low invertetxate habitat moderate invertebrate habitat high invertebrate habitat
Habitat — 1ow amphibian habitat _Lr. moderate ampht�ian habtat . — high amphibian habitat
low Ash habitat - moderate fish habitat high fish habtat
Functions - low mammal habitat — moderate mammal habitat high mammal habitat
pOir1L5 low bird habtat _ moderate bird habitat _ high bind habitat •
(max 15)
IICultural/ tow educational opportunities.. — •moderate educational opportunities _ high educational opportunities '
So C i o e C O- • low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value high aesthetic value
lacks commercial fisheries, moderate commercial fisheries, _ high commercial fisheries,
no m l c agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources ragriculture,
•
lacks historical or archeological historical or archeological renewableresources
site — important historical O or archeological
,/ resources some passive and active site
`\ lacks paSSNe and active recreational opportunities _ many passive and active
recreational opportunities — privately owned,some public. recreational opportunities
A- privately ownedo" access unrestricted public access
Z( not near open space some connection to open space _ directly connected to open space
points T
(max 21) _
Notes:
p VY LId U CU R .UUI iD oUrlel;rug R iS '.al ms J I n- u ya Rutl
i Rav rCi FUi II ia 0.:l C /Assessment
♦ -
etland # -_ StaffPMN Date 3 /3�77
f
2? ;IN QS
%cation $ T R .
• • Criteria •
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pre
• F I o o d/ size<5 acres = size 5-10 acres • - — size>10 acres
Storm Water . &wine orfakeshore wetland v mid-sloped wetland _ depressions,headwaters,bogs,flats
<10%forested cover — 10-30%forested cover _ >30%forested cover •
Control outlet _ semi-constrained outlet _ cutvent ermed outlet
located in lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located In middle 1/3 of the drainage — -located in upper 1/3 of the drainage
(max 15)
Base Flow/ size<5 aces _ size 5-10 acres . — size>10 acres
riverbe or trim-shore wetland _ mid sloped wetland _ dePressiees,headvaters,bogs,fiats
3 r o u n d Water located In foyer 1/3 of the drainage located In middle 1 t3 of the c ainage located in upper in el the drainage
Sup p o rt • — temPeraitY flooded or saturated _ seasonally or seml-pemranendy X permanently flooded or saturated,or •
flooded or saturated intem1Rtenty exposed
7 ..,?1/ no lbw-Sensitive fish populations — low flow-sensitive ash populations- _ high flow-sensitive populations
points on-site or downstream - on-site or downstream
(max 15) •
contiguous watt site In highly .
. permeable strata
Erosion/ — sparse grassberbs or no leg along i .sparse wood or veg along OHWM 7 dense wood or veg along OFiWM
OHWM 2( wetland extends 30-60 m from
Shoreline _ wetlandwetland extends<30 rn from OHWM wetland extends>200mtom •
?rote c t Ion OH W M .. — moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
highly developed shoreline or subcatctment — •undeveloped shoreline or ;
points 6 sutxaOctYrrert subcauctuneru,
(max 9) - r
Water Quality — ralid Sow through site • _ moderate flow through site X slow flow through site
<50%treg cover 50-80%cover >80%veg cover
Improvement •_ upsrrew in basin from wetland is — • s 50%of basin upstream from Z >50%of basin.upstream from
undevebped wetland is developed wetland Is developed
points 4 - holds<25%overland runoff — holds 25-50%overland runoff - — holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12) ,
fA=Not Applicable, WI =No information available
.
orninant Vegetation: Wildlife:
•
CO S.T
R u of
A1--- Rv
•
•,
Natural L size<5es _ size 5-1oareS _ size>10aCt9S
Biological '� ag land,low veg structure _ 2 level veg _ high veg strut e
seasonal surface water pecmar�ent surface water X open water pools through summer
•
Y Support ore habtat type • _.. two habitat types • _ >_3 habtat types
J PM POW PEM PSS PFO EST PA.B POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB aay. ,EST
. — low plant diversity(<6 species) X.t moderate plant diversity(7-15 _ high $ant$. ersity(> species)
s)
species) <10%Invasive species -
>50%invasive species _ 10 to 50%invasive species high primary productivity
low primary productivity •moderate primary productivity — high organic accumutatjon
low organic accumulation 1G- moderate organic accumulation _ high organic export
low organic export _ . low organic export — many habit features -
few hat tat features _ same habitat features _ butters not disturbed .
buffers very drsturbed butters stigtttly disturbed• _•- well connected to upland habitats
pants -K isolated tom upland habitats • _ partially connected to upland
i (max 36) habitats .
•
Overall l� she<ss stze 5-10 acres _ stze>10 acres
low habitat dversity moderate habitat diversity _ high habitat diversity
Habitat X low sanctuary or refuge _ moderate sanctuary or refuge _ high,sanctuary or refuge
•
Functions .
posts 4- •
(max 9) •
Specific X low invertebrate habitat _ moderate invertebrate habtat high invertebrate habitat
Habitat low a"phh habitat 2( moderate amphbiart habitat . _ high amphloian habitat
X low fish habitat _ moderate fish habitat ._ high fish habitat .
Function ---/low mammal habitat _ moderate mammal habitat _ high mammal habitat
points low bird habitat _ moderate bird habitat high bird habitat •
(max 15)
Cultural/ low educational opportunities — •moderate educational opportunities _ high educational opportunities .
. low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value — high aesthetic value ,
S o c i o e C 0- X lacks commercial fisheries. _ moderate commercial fisheries, _ high commercial fisheries,
no m l c agriculture•renewable resources agriculture.renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources ..
, X lacks historical or archeological , historical or archeological site _ important historical or archeological
resources _ some passive and active site
eliclacks passive and active recreational opportunities _ many passive and active
recreational opportunities _ privately owned,some public. recreational opportunities
pdvatetyowned access unrestricted public access
. , net near open space _ some connection to open space _ directly connected to open space
' points 7
(max 21)
Notes:
• l Wetland and Buffer 1-unctions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
etland # • Staff T-17M Date • 3��34'7
os6
cation S T R
•
Criteria •
Function • • Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts
Flood/ X sate<5 acres _ stze 5-10 acres • - size>10 acres
Storm Water — dverhe or lakeshore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland -a' depressions,headwaters,bogs,flats
<10%lomsted cover 10-30%forested cover >30%fisted cover
Control _✓unoautraned outlet _ semi—constrained outlet culvemberrned outlet
_6 located'n lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located In middle 1/3 of the damage — located in upper 1 A or the drainage
•
points
(max 15) •
•
Base Flow/ X size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres .stze>10 acres
round Water rtverie or lai ashore wetland mid-sloped wetland em
s.he es. .dais
located In lower u3 of the drainage _ located In riddle 1/3 of the drainage located h upper 1 A or the drainage
Support • ,r -lernporaly flooded cr saturated _ seasonally or semi-permanently _ permanently flooded or saturated,ated,or
flooded or saturated Intermittently exposed
no flow-sensitive fish populations low flow-sensitive fish populations. high flow-sensitive populations
Po 7
points' out-site or•downream . on-site or downstream
(max 15) contiguous with site In highly
permeable strata
Erosion/ — sparse grassberbs or no veg along _ sparse wood or veg along OHWM — dense wood or veg along OHWM
OHWM _ wetland extends 30-60 m from
Shoreline wetland extends<30 m from OHWM wetland extends>200 m from
Protection OHWM — moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
- highly developed shoreline or subcatctunent — undeveloped shoreline or
points N A subcaiciment sutx.atctmer>t
(max 9) •
•
Water Q u a i l ty — low tluough sae _ moderate flow through site slow flow through site
• <50%veg cover _ • 50-80%cover >80%veg cover
improvement upstream In basin from wetland is s 50%of basin upstream from >50%of basin upstream from
• undeveloped wetland is developed :. wetland is developed
points I 2 _ holds<25%overland runoff _ holds 25-50%overland runoff holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12)
V/A=Not Applicable, N/I =No information available •
dominant Vegetation: .. Wildlife:
�p /3P
Rv
Po Gv
Rv ii
••�.......,. .+1 n. UUIIGI • u.R...V,w cu nj ,ei I II-yu 1I'mauve rerrormance?Assessment ti i„
'Z
•
Natural stze<5 acres -10 acres _ high Est rs
Biological agland,lowvegstructure
seasonal surface water _ permanent surface water _ open water pools through summer 7
S u p p o r t , one habtat type _ two habitat types _ >3 habtat types
PAB POW PEN P < x m�j i,EST O FO EESTAB POW Plat PSS PFO EST
low plant cversity( 6 species) moderateplant diversity _ high< O plant (>1 )
species
>50%invasive species X 1 )%Invasive species _ high primary prodtrcbviy
low primary productivity _ moderate primary productivity — high«Manic accumulaWn -
low organic accumulation _ moderate organic accumulation _ high Organic export
low organic export _ low organic export _ many habtat features . ' 1
low habitat features _ some habitat features _ buffers not drstabed
A butlers very disturbed _ tubers slightly disturbed _ well connected to upland habitats
•
ems_L,5- . x isolated tram upland habitats • _ partially connected to upland
(max 36) habitats
Overall P.• e<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres _ size>10 acres
low habitat diversity _ moderate habitat diversity — high habitat cversity
Habitat • low sanctuary or refuge. . _ moderate sanctuary or refuge _ high sanctuary or refuge --.
Functions .
pests 1
(max 9) - -
'
X low invertebrate habitat _ moderate invertebrate habitat _ high invertebrate habtat
Specific f low amphtian habitat _ moderate amphbian habtat . _ high amphtian habitat
Habitat 5bur fish habitat .. moderate ash habitat high fish habtat ....
Functions low mammal habitat moderate mammal habitat _ high mammal habitat
pests_6 _ low bird habitat ' moderate bred habitat high bird habitat .
(max 15)
'
Cultural/ X low educational opportunities , moderate educational opportunities _• high educational opportunities
low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value high aesthetic value •
S O C i o e c 0- X lacks commercial fisheries. . — moderate commercial fisheries, high commercial fisheries,
no m l c agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources •
X lacks historical or archeological — historical or archeological site _ important historical or archeological
resources , some passive and active site .
_Z lacks passive and active recreational opportunities' _ many passive and active
recreational opportunities , privately owned,some pubic recreational opportunities •
_C privately owned access _ unrestricted public access
A. not near open space _ some connection to open space directly connected to open space
points 7 .
(max 21)
•Notes: .
k, �- P�`'�e-C—•
J
r
Wetland and Buffer Functions and Semi-quantitative Performance Assessment
4
Wand # Staff S 12n/1 Date -3/ 13/97
Zg2itNo5
•cation 5 T R •
Criteria
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 pts
Flood/ —7 size<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres • - size>10 acres
Storm Waterrfverine ortalceshore wetland _ mid-sloped wetland _,X. depressions,headwaters,bogs,Aats
<10%bresied cover • 10-30%forested cover >30%forested cover
Control led outlet • — semi-constrained outlet culvervbermed outlet
X located in lower 1/3 of the drainage _ located in middle 1/3 of the drainage — located in upper 1/3 of the drainage
points 1
(max 15)
Base Flow/ size<5 Kass — size 5-10 acres • size>10 acres 1
riverine or lataeshore wetland — mid-sloped wetland • depressions,headwaters,bogs,flats
;round Water X located lo lower 1/3 of the drainage located in middle 1/3 of the dainage _ located in upper 1 A of the drainage •
Support X teruPoralY flooded or saturated — seasonally or semi-permanerxly _ pennanently flooded or saturated,or
flooded or saturated intermittently exposed '
Xno flow-sensitive fish populations _ low Aow-sensitive fish populations. — high row-sensitive populations
�Z p on-site or downstream . on-site or downstream contiguous with site in highly.
I (max 15) permeable strata
r o s I o n/ — sparse grassfierbs or no veg along — sparse wood or veg along OHWM _ dense wood or veg along OHWM .
OHWM _ wetland extends 30-60 m from -
Shoreline — wetland extends<30 m from OHWM _ wetland extends>200 m from
Protection OHWM — moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
—
highly developed shoreline or sutxatchment _ undeveloped shoreline or
Pow/I///AI arbraBctmerl . . . sutxatchment
_�u
(max 9)
Water Quality — raPld flow tlrtigh site — moderate flow through site ___X--slow flow through site
<50%veg cover _ 50-80%cover A'. >80%veg cover
1 Improvement _ upstream in basin from wetland is — s 50%of basin upstream from >50%of basin upstream trom
undeveloped wetland is developed wetland is developed
points — holds<25%overland runoff — holds 25-50%overland runoff - 2 holds>50%overland runoff •
( (max 12)
NJIA=Not Applicable, N/I =No information available
•
Dominant Vegetation: Wildlife: .
PI-t" Ag. .• , •
s1_ • •
6v p1-
vveudr ru dna tsurrer r.uncuvns ana emu-quantitative Performance Assessment 4:�I..�.
Natural Yrstze<5 acres — size 5-10 acres — size>10 acres I
Biological ag land,low veg structure — 2 level veg _ high veg lure
seasonal surface water permanent surface water
Support - one habtat r: ST
two habitat types _— _ �f° 'per
PAB POW 67PSS PFO EST PAS POW Pat PSS PFO EST PA8 POW PE�1t PSS PFO F
low plant diversity(<6 species) — moderate plant diversity(7-15 — high plant diversity(>15 species)
species) — <10%Invasive des
>50%Invasive species _ 10 to 50%invasive species — high primary produ ty
low primary productivity _( moderate primary productivity — high organic aavmulaDon
•
Xlow organic accumulation — moderate organic accumulation — high organic export
low organic export — low organic export _ many habtat features
few habitat features — some habitat features — buffers not gybed .
X buffers 13 X isolated Iron upland habitats •
disturbed — buffers Sightly disturbed — well connected to upland habtats
po• is - — partially connected to upland
(max 36) habitats •
Overall size<5 acres — size 5-10 aces _ size>10 acres i
t1 low habitat diversity — moderate habitat diversity — high habitat diversity
Habitat Z low sanctuary or refuge — moderate sanctuary or refuge — high sartctuaryor refuge
Functlop,s
points_
(max 9)
Specific 7 low invertebrate habitat — moderate invertebrate habitat high invertebrate habtat
Habitat low amphibian habitat — moderate amptiban habtat . — high amphiian habitat
low fish habitat — moderate fish habtat — high fish habtat
Functions low mammal habitat — moderate mammal habitat _ high mammal habitat
plaits 1 low bird habitat — moderate bird habitat — high bird habitat •
•
•
(max 15)
Cultural/ X low educational opportunities moderate educational opportunities _ high educational opportunities _
low aesthetic value _ moderate/aesthetic value _ high aesthetic value
S O C i o e C o- ?X lacks commercial fisheries, _ moderate commercial fisheries, high commercial fisheries,
' no m I c agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources
lacks historical or archeological — historical or archeological site _ important historical or archeological
resources — some passive and active site
X lacks passive andiactive recreational opportunities' . _ many
passive
•
recreational opportunities • — privately owned,some pubic recreatlonlo and active
opportunities
privately owned access unrestricted public access
net near open space some connection to open space _ directly connected to open space
points 7
(max 21) ,
•
Notes: . •
off - P/A"RcEL
�; wetiana ana Butter t-uncuons aria 5emu-quantitative verrormance Assessment
v.° .
4 •
redo. 1 # 14 Staff /-6 I4'1 Date - 34 j/�`7
z? vs
°cation S T R
Criteria
Function Group 1 1 pt Group 2 2 pts Group 3 3 cats
Flood/ "( size<5 acres - size 5-10 acres - - _ s¢e>10 acres
Storm Water rfvedne or lalceshore wetland mid-sloped wetland _ depressions,headwaters,bogs.
<10%bresied cover 10-30%forested cover >30%forested cover
Control X unconstrained outlet' semi-constrained outlet _ culvecwem,ed owes
located n lower 113 of the drainage — located In middle 1r3 of the dainage _ located in upper 1!3 of the drainage
points 1 .
(max 15) •
Base Flow/ size<5 acres _ size 5-10 acres ' _ size>10 acres ~
rtverine or lakeshore wetland ,Z mid-sloped wetland . _ depressions,headwaters,bogs,Ilats
Ground Water _a braced in lower 1 r3 of the drainage _ located in middle 1/3 of the drainage located in upper 1 A of the drainage
Support : tempora2y flooded or saturated — seasonally or semi-permanently _ permanently flooded or saturated,or
flooded or saturated intermittently exposed
_ no flow-sensitive isti populations _ low flow-sensitive fish populations. highflow-sensitivepants_a on-site or downstream on-site or downstream populations
highly
(max 15) � - contiguous with site In highly
permeable strata
Erosion/ — use grassahert s or no veg abng — sparse wood or veg along oHwM dense wood or veg along OHWM
Shoreline OHWM — wetland extends 30-60mfrom .
_ wetland extends<30 m from OHWM wetland extends>200 m trnm
Protection . OHWM moderately developed shoreline or OHWM
highly developed shoreline or sutx atrvnent _ undeveloped
bc shoreline or
points •
A. subrxK imerit suaichment
(max 9) '
Water Quality — faPid now through site — moderate flow through site Y-slow flow through site
<50%veg cover — 50-80%cover i >80%veg cover
Improvement upstream in basin from wetland is — S 50%of basin upstream from >50%of basin upstream from
v. undeveloped wetland is developed `.• wetland is developed _
points Lp holds<25%overland runoff — holds 25-50%overland runoff holds>50%overland runoff
(max 12) —
I/A=Not Applicable, N/I =No information available
iominant Vegetation: Wildlife:
•
/2v
ii sr
__.- .- •.. ......v. ,.........w a..� vc....-.1ua.iuiauve rurTORT1arou.Ii5SesSmerlt {':, '
4
•
Natural size<5 acres — size 5-10 acres size>10 acres `--11 •
Biological • ag land,low veg structure — 2 level veg — high veg structure
seasonal surface waterpermanent surface
Support —- one habtat i..; — two habitat types weer — open water pools through sumrlter ~
- _3 habtat types
PAB POW�?„ PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST PAB POW PEM PSS PFO EST
4. low plant diversity(<6 species) — moderate species plant diversity(7-15 — highlan�diversity(>15 spas)
especies
>50%Invasive species 10 to 50%invasive species —- high primary productivity low primary productivity moderate primary — higho
rganic a°�m
low organic accumulation moderate organic accumulation hi 0n
X
low organic export _ low — organic eR
organic export _ many habitat features
i few habitat features _ some habitat features — buffers not bed
buffers very disturbed — buffers slightly disturbed disturbed- well connected to u
points i 6 _A isolated from upland habitats — partially connected to upland upland habitats
(max 36) habitats _
•
•
Overall size<5 acres _ size 5-10 saes _ size>10 acres
3 low hatAat diversity — moderate habitat diversity — high habitat dire .•
low sanctuary or refuge _ moderate sanctuary or refuge h � -
Functions — ' u�Yorrefcrge
points
• (max 9)
Specific -4 low invertebrate habitat — moderate invertebrate habitat — high invertebrate habtat
Habitat low amphibian habitat — moderate amphbian habitat . high amphibian habitat
low fish habitat _ moderate fish habitat — high fish habitat
Functions X low mammal habitat —- moderate mammal habitat high mammal habitat
points_1 low bird habitat moderate bird habitat — high gird habitat
•
(max 15)
Cultural/ n• low educational opportunities — •moderate educational opportunities — high educational opportunities
low aesthetic value • _ moderate/aesthetic value _ high aesthetic value So c i 0 e C o- lacks commercial fisheries. moderate commercial fisheries, high commercial fisheries,
n o m i C agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources agriculture,renewable resources -
6, lacks historical or archeological — historical or archeological site — important historical or archeological
X resources some passive and active site
C. lacks passive and active recreational opportunities
recreational — many passive and alive
opportunities privately owned,some public recreational opportunities
41 privately owned access — unrestricted public access
�r not near open space — some connection to open space directly connected to open space
points /
(max 21)
•
Notes:
&A R E Pn, 2 c E2_ .
1 E
C ON vLC Tp TO /"IA ' C K Vl'1 /2cc/
•
•
•
•
1 1 1 1 \
1 1 •
1 1 \
I ` LAKE 1 1_ 1 1WASHINGTON \ \
-
\j'e\ I ..."
wETUND •A•
/6,527
( \
i. 0.195 AC.* 9� \ ,
41114 � N. \• DEVELOPMENT k \\ b\ \\ `NOFEQtlC! g
rr
•
9 D
NiN ��' •BARGEE DITCH' Is,
\\ AP 0 5 200
2
WETLAND •�• \ RECEIVED
6W191ASQ. FT. 7,444 SQ. FT. \��. _ \
0.141 AC. t ® 0.171 AC.* ., \
\� �•••
�.� . \ E •WETLAND 'B• \ \,,
/•�' 16 264 S0. FT, a\ v,.
/ � d.237a AC.f .\\\\\\\., WETLAND 'E \
_ •/ 10,027 SQ. FT. \
\\� ~1 \\ y \ \
\ • 1 f' �\
npOjll WETLAND •D-
•
\ 3,483 S0. FT.
\ �L
'I '� ,,.� 0 • 9sy%c
` •GYPSY CREEK / \
` \ SUB-BASIN
- ---'--- L 1 WETLAND 'F• .DRAINAGE' , \
_ 6,528 S0. T. \ \
0.150 AC.f \ ..
\
rV
. ,
D 300 600 E ,
1 - `\`- 661 SO FT,\ , 11
1 0 015 AC.±
SCALE 1'=300' \\ - \
IAC. DEVELOPMENT PROTECT
TY OF RENTON •
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Printed: 04-05-2002
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUA02-040
Payment Made: 04/05/2002 01:21 PM Receipt Number: R0201828
Total Payment: 2,516.32 Payee: BARBEE FOREST PRODUCTS,
INC
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description Amount
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 500.00
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat 2,000.00
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 16.32
Payments made for this receipt
0 1Nr4147,
Trans Method Description Amount P
Payment Check #247 2,516.32 qp RFC 4/4/
�� RDA40
Account Balances
2
Trans Account Code Description Balance Due Fo
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee .00
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees .00
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers .00
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat .00
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees .00
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review .00
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat .00
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat .00
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD .00
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees .00
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment .00
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks .00
5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone .00
5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt .00
5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev .00
5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval .00
5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Special Permit Fees .00
5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees .00
5023 0 .00
5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee .00
5036 000.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend .00
5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies .00
5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) .00
5954 604.237.00.00.0000 Special Deposits .00
5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage .00
5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax .00
26