Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA88-071 Vol 2 of 3
{ • .� MICROFILMED CRowSM Earth and Environmental Technologies • ) . Site Characterization Study Tracts A and B, Black River Corporate Park • Renton, Washington • Prepared for First City Washington June 21, 1991 J-3276 . • • - ( 1 • Seattle,Tacoma,Richland,Anchorage,Portland,San Francisco,Long Beach Hart Crowser J-3276 CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 SITE HISTORY 3 History of Dredging of Springbrook Creek 3 Past Releases to Springbrook Creek 4 SUMMARY OF HELD INVESTIGATIONS 6 Previous On-Site Field Work 6 Field Work Conducted for This Study 9 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 10 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION 12 Identification of Chemicals of Potential Concern 12 Summary of Analytical Results from Tract A 12 Summary of Analytical Results from Tract B 15 REGULATORY CLEANUP STANDARD COMPARISON 16 Groundwater Occurrence Underlying the Sites 18 Soil Leaching Test Results 20 LIMITATIONS 20 REFERENCES 22 Page i Hart Crowser J-3276 CONTENTS (Continued) Page TABLES k P 1 Summary of Water Quality at Metro Station 0317 5 2 Summary of Tract A and Tract B Soil Results 24 3 Summary of Cadmium Concentration in Tract A and Tract B Soils 28 4 Summary of Cadmium Results for Soil and Plant Tissue Samples, Tract A 30 FIGURES 1 Site Vicinity Map 2 Site and Exploration Plan Tract A and Tract B 3 Cadmium Concentration in Soil - Tract A 4 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section A - A' 5 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section B - B' 6 Trend in Springbrook Creek Zinc Concentration APPENDIX A A 1 FIELD METHODS - SOIL SAMPLING A-1 PLANT SAMPLING A-1 CEDAR RIVER SAMPLING A-2 APPENDIX B B-1 LEACHING TEST PROCEDURE TABLES at` B-1 Summary of Leaching Test Parameters B-3 LEACHATE SAMPLES CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS ANALYTICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Page ii Hart Crowser J-3276 CONTENTS (Continued) • a ; APPENDIX C CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSIS ip ANALYTICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (7 APPENDIX D SUPPLEMENTAL MTCA CLEANUP STANDARD INFORMATION APPENDIX E BORING LOG AND CHEMICAL DATA FROM PREVIOUS REPORTS Page iii i r Hart Crowser J-3276 SITE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY I TRACTS A AND B, BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION ti {. This report presents a characterization of the nature and extent of chemical contaminants present in two properties (Tracts A and B) of the proposed Black River Corporate Park development in Renton, Washington. The regional study area and site vicinity are depicted on Figures 1 and 2, respectively. The report begins with a brief summary of major findings of the site characterization, and how the measured concentrations of identified site contaminants compare with regulatory cleanup criteria recently adopted under the Washington State Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA). The main body of the report then continues with a detailed Site Description, Site History, Summary of Field Investigations, Nature and Extent of Contamination, and Regulatory Cleanup Standard Comparison. fl SUMMARY OF FINDINGS In 1984, the City of Renton and the Soil Conservation Service placed approximately 2,000 to 3,000 cubic yards of hydraulic dredge materials from Springbrook Creek in a 1-acre area of Tract A. These dredge spoils contain cadmium concentrations above the calculated MTCA j cleanup standard (Method B) based on groundwater protection. However, site soils do not pose an identified risk to human health or the environment associated with potential surface exposures (e.g., direct soil contact or plant protection). M r' The origin of the cadmium contamination at Tract A appears to be due at least in part to documented recent (early 1980's) releases from the Western Processing Superfund site. Metals contamination in creek 1 sediments likely occurred throughout lower Springbrook Creek as a result of such releases. Concurrent with completion of major remediation activities at the Western Processing site in 1987, reductions in the concentrations of metals in Springbrook Creek have occurred. Page 1 Hart Crowser J-3276 The hydraulic dredge spoil area may require remediation in order to Li provide groundwater protection under MTCA. However, all other areas of the site (including Tract B) contain chemical concentrations below MTCA cleanup standards and do not require remediation. y~' SITE DESCRIPTION — This study focused on the Tract A and Tract B properties of the proposed Black River Corporate Park development in Renton, Washington. The properties are owned by First City Washington, and are currently undeveloped land. Tracts A and B are also known as Phase VIII and Phase VII, respectively, of the proposed development. These properties are located within the City of Renton (Figure 1). Ground surface elevations on these two tracts range from 14 to 22 feet above mean sea level. Oaksdale Avenue SW forms the southern boundary of Tract A and a portion of the southern boundary of Tract B (Figure 2). The southeastern boundary of Tract B is SW Seventh Avenue, while Naches ti Avenue SW forms its eastern boundary. The Renton Sewage Treatment plant is located to the southwest of both of these properties. ~' Tract B is also bordered on the east and southeast by an industrial park. Springbrook Creek separates Tracts A and B and also forms the northern boundary of Tract A (Figure 2). This creek receives drainage from a 22-square-mile watershed area to the south of the site. The Springbrook Creek watershed is located along the eastern side of the Green River Valley, and supports a variety of land uses ranging from agricultural to industrial (Figure 1). Notable among the industrial facilities in the watershed is Western Processing, a federal Superfund site. Within the site vicinity, flows in Springbrook Creek are controlled by - the P-1 pond surface water detention basin and associated pump station (Figure 2). The P-1 pond and pump station route flood flows in the creek directly to the Green River, following the path of the remnant Black River. The former Black River channel also runs along the northern boundary of Tract A and through the northeastern to east-central portion of Tract B. Page 2 Hart Crowser J-3276 I Prior to construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal and the loweringof the lake's water level byapproximately 9 feet, the Black L;l PP Y River was the outlet for both Lake Washington and the Cedar River. However, this river drainage was abandoned with the construction of 4; the locks in 1916. Currently, only small amounts of local drainage flow through this channel into the P-1 pond. Construction of the locks {T' reduced the watershed drainage area tributary to the Black River '- channel nearly fifty-fold from 1,020 square miles to its current 22 square miles. SITE HISTORY Little information on the historical use of the Tract A and Tract B properties has been reported. Limited agricultural use of the site may { have occurred in the early to mid-1900s, though the site appears to have been largely undeveloped open-space. Site soils contain approximately 4 to 12 feet of fill (see below). These materials were likely deposited during the initial excavation of the P-1 pond during the 1970s, and again later during the 1984 widening and deepening operation discussed below. ° History of Dredging of Springbrook Creek The P-1 pond was enlarged in 1984, through excavation and dredging of the Springbrook Creek channel north of Tract A. The dredging program was conducted by the City of Renton and the Soil _ Conservation Service, and was intended to increase the storm water holding capacity of the P-1 pond. The program consisted of excavation of nearshore soils, and hydraulic dredging of relatively fine sediment materials which had collected behind the P-1 pond forebay. Based on information available from personnel involved with the dredging operation, supplemented with aerial photographs of the site I"- taken immediately after the operation concluded, excavated nearshore �.? soils were placed throughout much of Tracts A and B. However, hydraulic dredge spoil disposal was confined to an approximate 1-acre settling pond in the north-central portion of Tract A (Earth Consultants, 1990). The location of the hydraulic spoils area is depicted on Figure 2. r- Page 3 , _ a `�'' Hart Crowser J-3276 Up to 6 feet of dredged material apparently settled within central areas of the spoil pond. Past Releases to Springbrook Creek As part of the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) of the Western Processing Superfund site, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) collected sediment samples from Springbrook Creek and its tributary Mill Creek in August 1983 (EPA, 1984). The purpose of �. . this effort, which included the chemical analysis of approximately 33 sediment samples collected 1 to 3 miles upstream of the P-1 pond, was to determine the extent of chemical releases associated with the Western Processing facility. 1 4' The EPA (1984) study documented elevated concentrations of a variety of contaminants in creek sediments downstream of the Western Processing site. The contaminants detected in the creek which exhibited substantial increases in concentration adjacent to or downstream of Western Processing included metals, solvents, and hydrocarbons. Organic chemical concentrations (i.e., solvents and hydrocarbons) declined rapidly to below detectable levels within approximately 1,000 feet of the release site. However, elevated concentrations of metals were found to be transported more than one mile downstream of the site (beyond the last EPA sampling location), and likely affected all downstream areas of Springbrook Creek (including the P-1 pond). The principal metal contaminants identified from the EPA (1984) study were cadmium, chrominm, lead, nickel, and zinc. Remedial actions' at the Western Processing site (e.g., off-site disposal of contaminated soils) were largely completed by the end of 1987. In } December 1988, Converse (1989) conducted a follow-up study of metal contaminants present in sediments in the vicinity of the site, examining the same creek areas previously sampled by EPA (1984). Their results did not indicate that substantial reductions had occurred in the creek's sediment metal concentrations. However, the large variability in observed sediment concentrations may have masked any such decline. Again, the most (downstream sampling location (located approximately 1 mile upstream from the P-1 pond) exhibited some of the highest metal concentrations. Cadmium levels, for example, were reported at 12 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in the most downstream sediment Page 4 { I Hart Crowser J-3276 sample, compared with upstream "background" levels of less than 0.2 to y 2 mg/kg. Metal releases in -he vicinity of the Western Processing facility and neighboring industries have also been documented as a result of regular water quality monitoring activities performed by the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro). Beginning in early 1979, Metro has - monitored concentrations of metals in waters at several locations in Mill and Springbrook Creeks as part of an area-wide water quality planning program. The location of Metro's primary sampling station on Springbrook Creek (Station 0317) is depicted on Figure 1. Station 0317 f- is located approximately one mile upstream of the P-1 pond. The Metro water 'quality data indicate that a significant decline (P < 0.05; regression) has occurred over the past 5 to 10 years in the concentration of zinc within the creek (Figure 6). The other metals may also have declined similarly over time, though the variability of these data (largely due to a low frequency of detection) limits any such assessment of trends. Metro data also indicate that Springbrook Creek was previously (1980) the major anthropogenic (man-caused) source of zinc to the Duwamish Waterway, accounting for nearly one-third of the total documented release of this metal to the estuary (Harper-Owes, 1983). Based on the aggregate Metro data (Jan-79 to Feb-91), average water quality conditions at Metro Station 0317 in Springbrook Creek have been summarized and are presented in Table 1. Table 1 - Summary of Water Quality at Metro Station 0317 Average MTCA Surface Water Metal Concentration in ug/L Cleanup Standard in ug/L Cadmium 4.0 ± 0.2 0.4 Chromium 21 ± 3 11. (as Cr VI) Nickel 30 ± 3 57. Lead 22 ± 1 0.7 Zinc: all data 208 ± 13 38. '89 - '91 66 ± 8 38. = Page 5 Hart Crowser �_- J-3276 Compared with MTCA surface water cleanup standards, the l_I concentrations of several metals within Springbrook Creek, particularly , cadmium, lead, and zinc, have historically exceeded surface water quality cleanup standards (based on aquatic life protection). Given the results of the EPA (1984) and Converse (1989) sediment investigations, the predominant source of these metals was located near the Western Processing Superfund site. The historical water and sediment quality data available from EPA (1984), Converse (1989), and Metro (unpublished data) clearly identify a release of metals to the Springbrook Creek drainage in the vicinity ofthe Western Processing site. On-site groundwater quality data collected ?_ during the Western Processing RI/FS confirm that all or a portion of this release was attributable to the Western Processing site. Although �h l i ) other facilities located in the vicinity of Western Processing may also have contributed to the observed metal concentrations, only the Western Processing release appears to have been thoroughly documented. The release appears to have affected the entire drainage downstream of this area, including the P-1 pond. Metal concentrations within the creek were at or near their maximum levels during the 1984 dredging program. Accordingly, sediments dredged from the P-1 pond during this period (and deposited on Tract A) would be expected to contain elevated metals concentrations. Given the association of elevated metals concentrations with relatively fine- grained sediments (Dexter, et al., 1981), highest metal concentrations would be expected in areas receiving the hydraulic dredge spoils. SUMMARY OF FIELD INVESTIGATIONS i, ` Previous On-Site Field Work The findings presented in this report were based on available results of field work performed primarily by Earth Consultants, supplemented with data collected by Hart Crowser. All relevant soil boring logs and laboratory analysis certificates are presented in appendices of this _ report. The boring and sampling locations are presented on Figures 2 and3. Page 6 Hart Crowser J-3276 Relevant previous investigations included: ► Boring logs from a geotechnical evaluation of the western portion of Tract A conducted by Earth Consultants in November and - December 1985; ► Shallow boring logs and preliminary chemical analyses of the dredge spoils on Tract A conducted by Earth Consultants in July 1990; ► Boring logs from additional geotechnical evaluations of Tract A conducted by Earth Consultants in August 1990; ► Additional shallow boring logs and supplemental chemical analyses of dredge spoils and adjacent fill soils on Tract A conducted by Earth Consultants in November 1990 and January 1991; and ► Shallow boring logs and preliminary chemical analyses of the soils on Tract B conducted by Earth Consultants in February 1991. The original geotechnical evaluation of the site (Earth Consultants, �.._ 1985), consisted of five borings on the western portion of Tract A. The depth these borings ranged from 39 to 69 feet below grade. The boring logs from these exploration are presented in Appendix E. These explorations were originally designated B-1 through B-5. However, because of the large number of explorations on this site we have renamed these borings BNB-1 through BNB-5. The subsequent (1990) geotechnical investigation conducted by Earth Consultants in Tract A (Phase VIII, proposed Black River Corporate Park) consisted of six borings (B-1 through B-6) in the proposed building locations. The depths of these explorations ranged from 39 to 64 feet below grade. We used the stratigraphic information and moisture conditions encountered in the borings from the above geotechnical work in conjunction with available information on adjacent properties to develop a conceptual model of soil conditions and groundwater occurrence underlying Tracts A and B. The compilation of this information is presented in the Cross Section A A' (Figure 4) and B-B'(Figure 5). Page 7 Hart Crowser J-3276 The Preliminary Characterization of Dredge Spoils on Tract A (Earth h^ Consultants, 1990a) consisted of seven borings drilled to depths between 4 and 8 feet below grade. All of the sampling locations were located { within the hydraulic dredge spoils area (B-101, B-102, B-103, B-104, B-105, Figure 3). Shallow soil samples were collected from these borings at depths between 1 and 2 feet below ground surface, and were 'i submitted for chemical analyses. A deeper soil sample collected from boring B-103 (4.5 below ground surface) was also submitted for chemical analysis. The B-103 location corresponded to the middle of the dredge spoils area where the fill thickness was greatest (approximately 6 feet). — Soil samples collected during the Preliminary Characterization were analyzed for priority pollutant metals (EPA method series 6000 and 7000), total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH, EPA method 418.1), volatile organics (EPA method 8240), semivolatile organics (EPA method 8270) f and pesticides/PCBs (EPA method 8080). The soil sample which exhibited the most elevated metals concentration was also submitted for Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) analyses to assess the leachable metal fraction. r-- Following receipt of laboratory data from the preliminary Tract A investigation, in November 1990, Earth Consultants conducted a =` supplemental study of four hand auger borings (B-201 through B-204) within the hydraulic dredge spoil area. Each boring was advanced'to the contact between the hydraulic dredge spoils and the underlying native or fill materials. Samples were collected between depths of 2 r-; and 4 feet below ground surface. All soil samples submitted for chemical analysis represented the hydraulic dredge spoil contact. These samples were analyzed for priority pollutant metals, TPH, and semivolatile organics. A further supplemental investigation of the Tract A area was conducted in January 1991, by Earth Consultants. This study consisted of 10 hand auger borings advanced to depths between 3 and 7.3 feet below grade. All of these borings were located outside of the hydraulic dredge spoil _} area. Soil samples submitted for chemical analysis were collected from depths of 1 to 1.5 feet below ground surface, and composites of samples collected at 1.5 and 4.0 feet. Each sample was analyzed for cadmium and mercury concentrations. Selected soil samples were also analyzed for priority pollutant metals, TPH, semivolatile organics, and Page 8 Hart Crowser J-3276 pesticides/PCBs. Seven of the 10 samples submitted were also submitted to a separate laboratory,for independent confirmation of the cadmium analysis (Table 3). The Preliminary Characterization of Fill Materials on Tract B performed by Earth Consultants (1991b) consisted of six hand auger borings advanced to depths ranging from 2 to 6 feet below grade. Soil samples were collected between depths of 0.5 and 1.5 feet, and were submitted to a laboratory for chemical analysis. Determinations included priority pollutant metals, TPH, semivolatile organics, and pesticides/PCBs using methods described previously. Field Work Conducted for This Study On April 16, 1991, Hart Crowser collected five soil samples from Tract A (HC-1 through HC-5) and one sample (HC-6) from Tract B using a hand auger. Details of our sampling procedure are presented in Appendix A. The soil samples from Tract A were collected at depths ranging from 0 to 0.5 foot below grade, within the root zone. With the exception of HC-1, soil samples were collected at the approximate location of previously collected samples (Figure 3). All soil samples were analyzed for cadmium (EPA method 6000 series). Sample HC-6 collected from Tract B was also analyzed for mercury in addition to cadmium. Two selected soil samples collected from the hydraulic dredge spoils area (HC-2 and HC-3) were submitted for analyses of leaching potential i�4 for selected metals. The leaching test was based on test procedures for column desorption studies, as developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Hill et al., 1988). Leachate samples were analyzed for cadmium, lead, nickel, and zinc (EPA method 7000 series). A detailed description of the methodology is presented in Appendix B. In order to facilitate an evaluation of compliance with MTCA cadmium cleanup standards, samples of plant tissue were also collected at Tract A, concurrent with and in the immediate vicinity of the soil sampling locations. Plant sampling sites included HC-1 through HC-5 (Figure 3). The plant tissue samples were analyzed only for cadmium (EPA method 7000 series). Page 9 1 Hart Crowser J-3276 - ; Quality Assurance/Quality Control A total of 50 soil samples (37 for Tract A and 13 for Tract B) were submitted for chemical analysis to either Analytical Technologies, Inc. (ATI) or North Creek Analytical (NCA) Laboratories. Of these samples, 12 were duplicates analyzed separately by the two laboratories to evaluate comparability of metal analyses. Along with the sample results, the laboratories included quality control data for method blanks, laboratory duplicates, matrix spikes and (for ATI) results of analysis of standard reference material (National Bureau of Standards 2704). Collectively, these data can be used to assess the validity of the chemical determinations. Overall, the chemical data collected to characterize site conditions were found to be acceptable for use in this report. The results of all determinations conformed with established protocols (as defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), with the exception of some of the beryllium, cadmium, and mercury data. Qualifications for these selected data are discussed below. Beryllium. Two laboratories utilized during this study reported significantly different beryllium results. For example, every Tract A soil sample analyzed by ATI exhibited non-detectable concentrations of this - metal (at a 1 mg/kg detection limit). By comparison, every soil sample analyzed by NCA from Tract A was reported to contain detectable beryllium concentrations, with concentrations up to 1.8 mg/kg. In several cases, the samples analyzed by the two laboratories were collected from the same general location. Data quality associated with both sets of analyses was deemed acceptable, though somewhat different analytical procedures were used by the two laboratories. Because of the apparent discrepancy in beryllium results, and also because even the maximum reported beryllium levels were comparable to the average background concentration in the western United States (1 mg/kg; based on USGS compilations), no detection of beryllium at levels of concern in Tract A was assumed. IL Cadmium. Similar to the beryllium data, an analytical discrepancy was observed between replicate cadmium analyses performed the ATI and NCA laboratories. For example, all soil samples analyzed by ATI which were collected beyond the hydraulic dredge spoils boundary contained non-detectable cadmium concentrations below the 1 mg/kg detection Page 10 ; i, Hart Crowser J-3276 limit. By comparison, all such soil samples analyzed by NCA were reported to contain cadmium concentrations ranging from 1.6 to 2.5 mg/kg (Table 3). The cause of this discrepancy has not been I determined (all routine QC data were deemed acceptable). However, additional QC analyses performed by ATI noted an apparent matrix interference associated with site soils, resulting in an upward bias (by 1 to 4 mg/kg) in the cadmium concentration determined using ICP methodology (EPA method 6000). All ATI determinations were therefore performed using appropriate AA/flame methodology which L J was not associated with an apparent matrix interference. For the purposes of this report, only the ATI AA/flame determinations were considered verified determinations of cadmium concentrations. All of the NCA determinations were flagged "J", denoting that the reported concentrations are considered estimates. - Mercury. With the exception of determinations performed on soil samples collected from Tract B on September 14, 1990, all mercury analyses were deemed acceptable. However, matrix spike recoveries of mercury analyses performed (by NCA) on these Tract B samples exceeded control limits, resulting in a possible high bias to these results. Accordingly, all such mercury analyses were flagged "J", denoting an estimated concentration. The sample exhibiting the highest estimated mercury concentration { dii (B-2-1; 8.1J mg/kg) was re-analyzed by ATI, though this determination was performed outside of recommended holding times. The result (1.1J mg/kg) was well below the original NCA report. In an effort to further verify the original mercury detection.at B-2-1, this location was resampled on April 16, 1991 (HC-6; Table 3). No mercury was t detected in this sample at a detection limit of 0.15 mg/kg (ATI analysis). These data indicate that the original detection of mercury at 8.1J mg/kg was likely spurious, and was not verified through subsequent re-analysis and re-sampling. .11 Page 11 Hart Crowser J-3276 NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION Identification of Chemicals of Potential Concern Soil samples collected from Tract A have been analyzed for a total of 143 chemicals. Most of these same chemicals have also been determined on samples collected from Tract B. In order to provide a preliminary screening of potential contaminants, information on the analytical detection frequency, maximum concentration, and preliminary a i (conservative) MTCA soil cleanup standards were summarized. These data are presented in Table 2. Of the 143 chemicals analyzed, only 21 have been detected in one or more soil samples (Table 2). Most of the detected chemicals are metals. Relative to preliminary MTCA cleanup standards, only the concentrations of five (5) of the chemicals detected at Tract A exceeded conservative soil cleanup standards. The chemicals of potential concern at Tract A, as identified through this screening procedure, include cadmium, chromium, nickel, zinc, and TPH. At Tract B, only cadmium and mercury were identified as chemicals of potential concern. The S distribution of these chemicals in site soils is discussed below. Summary of Analytical Results from Tract A Soil Conditions The upper 4 to 12 feet of soil on Tract A consists of fill materials. Shallow hand auger and truck-mounted boring samples were collected within this fill (Figures 4 and 5). In general, fill material encountered outside the area defined as the hydraulic dredge spoils consisted of a silty sand. The thickness of this sand increases from the P-1 pond toward the west and south. The upper 1 to 3 feet of the hydraulic dredge spoil area consisted of a brown silty to very silty sand. Boring B-103, located within the center of the dredge spoils, encountered the thickest section of this material (6 feet). Underlying the brown silt were alternating layers of clayey silty and silty sand (Figure 5). Page 12 Hart Crowser J-3276 Chemical Distributions Cadmium. Of the chemicals detected at Tract A, cadmium was the constituent which most commonly exceeded the MTCA Method A cleanup standard (2 mg/kg), and by the greatest degree (Table 2). Since the occurrence and concentration of the other metals were also correlated with cadmium, this chemical can serve as an overall indicator of metal contamination at Tract A. A summary of cadmium concentrations observed at Tract A is presented in Table 3 and on Figure 3. The maximum concentration of cadmium (28 mg/kg) was detected in a near-surface soil sample (B-102A) collected from the central portion of the hydraulic dredge spoil area (Figure 3). Overall, cadmium concentrations detected in the hydraulic spoil area were highest in the upper 3 feet of brown silt and silty sand materials, exhibiting an average concentration within these materials of approximately 10 ± 2 mg/kg (12 samples). Based on the available data, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 cubic yards of these materials were placed on the site and would be expected to contain similarly elevated cadmium concentrations. Cadmium concentrations in soil samples collected beyond or beneath the dredge spoil area were considerably lower at less than 1 to 2.5 mg/kg. As discussed above, an apparent analytical discrepancy exists between replicate cadmium analyses performed by the North Creek and Analytical Technologies laboratories (Table 3). The apparent discrepancy, however, only influenced the characterization of low-level "background" cadmium concentrations in areas beyond the dredge spoils area. Analytical differences had relatively little effect on the determination of cadmium concentrations within the spoils area. Chromium. Only one soil sample collected from the site (B-102A/1') exhibited a total chromium concentration (maximum 120 mg/kg) exceeding the 100 mg/kg MTCA Method A soil cleanup standard. This soil sample also contained the highest cadmium concentration iv encountered on the site (see above). All other soil samples exhibited chromium levels well below the MTCA standard. Because of the low r ' frequency and small magnitude of elevated detections, chromium levels at the site conform with statistical compliance standards as outlined in MTCA (WAC 173-340-740[7]). Furthermore, since the B-102A/4' Page 13 f 1 l_. Hart Crowser J-3276 sample contained no detectable hexavalent chromium (the most toxic f i form of chromium and the basis for the MTCA standard), chromium was not retained as a chemical of potential concern. Nickel. Similar to chromium, only one soil sample collected from the site (B-102A/1') exhibited a nickel concentration (maximum 57 mg/kg) exceedingthe 40 mg/kgcalculated MTCA Method B soil cleanup standard. The B-102A/1 soil sample also contained the highest cadmium concentration encountered on the site (see above). The I ( Method B cleanup standard in this case was based on groundwater protection, using the ratio of Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) analyses relative to the total soil concentration of nickel determined for this sample. The Method B cleanup standard was also based on the proposed drinking water maximum contaminant level (MCL) for nickel of 200 ug/L. All other soil samples exhibited nickel levels well below the MTCA standard. Because of the low frequency and small magnitude of elevated detections, nickel levels at the site conform with statistical compliance standards as outlined in MTCA (WAC 173-340-740[7]). Accordingly, nickel was not retained as a chemical of concern at the site. Zinc. Like nickel, only one soil sample collected from the site (B-102A/1') exhibited a zinc concentration (maximum 1,000 mg/kg) exceeding the 600 mg/kg calculated MTCA Method B soil cleanup standard. The Method B cleanup standard in this case was based on groundwater protection, using the TCLP:total soil ratio for this sample, and considering the existing drinking water MCL for zinc of 5,000 ug/L. The B-102A/1' soil sample also contained the highest cadmium concentration encountered on the site (see above). All other soil samples exhibited zinc levels well below the MTCA standard. Because of the low frequency and small magnitude of elevated detections, zinc levels at the site conform with statistical compliance standards as outlined in MTCA (WAC 173-340-740[7]). Again, zinc was not retained as a chemical of concern at the site. TPH. Of the 15 soil samples collected from Tract A which were submitted for TPH analysis, only one (again, B-102A/1') contained TPH at a concentration (maximum 240 mg/kg) exceeding the MTCA Method A cleanup standard of 200 mg/kg. (Based on detailed volatile and semivolatile determinations performed on this sample, the TPH materials present in this sample were not gasoline components requiring Page 14 Hart Crowser J-3276 the lower Method A standard of 100 mg/kg). However, replicate analyses performed on a sample collected in August 1990 from the same location (B-102B/1') contained a much lower TPH concentration of 89 mg/kg. Further, none of the individual hazardous constituents which comprise TPH (e.g., pyrene) exceeded conservative Method A or B standards. All information considered, the reported detection of TPH at Tract A was likely spurious and is not an identified chemical of potential concern. Because of the low frequency and small magnitude of elevated detections, TPH levels at the site conform with statistical compliance standards as outlined in MTCA (WAC 173-340-740[7]). Accordingly, TPH was not retained as a chemical of concern at Tract A. Summary. Based on the site characterization data summarized above, only the levels of cadmium in soils of Tract A exceed statistical (detection) provisions of the MTCA cleanup standards. Based on the available data, approximately 2,000 to 3,000 cubic yards of hydraulic dredge materials were placed on the site, and would be expected to contain cadmium concentrations above the Method A cleanup standard L1 of 2 mg/kg. Other areas of the site contain cadmium concentrations at or below the cleanup standard. Detailed Method B risk-based cleanup standards for cadmium are discussed in a subsequent section of this report. Summary of Analytical Results from Tract B Soil Conditions With the exception of soil borings B-5 and B-6, soil samples from Tract B submitted for chemical analysis appeared to be collected within the native material. This material consisted of alternating layers of very silty sand and clayey silt to a depth of at least six feet below the ground surface (Figure 4). Fill material encountered in borings B-5 and B-6 consisted of silty to very silty, fine sand to sandy silt. r�. Chemical Distributions Cadmium. Although cadmium was confirmed as a chemical of potential concern at Tract A, concentrations of this metal at Tract B were considerably lower and not necessarily indicative of site Page 15 Hart Crowser J-3276 I • contamination. Cadmium concentrations at Tract B ranged from less than 1 mg/kg to an estimated maximum of 3J mg/kg, with no apparent spatial pattern in concentrations. Similar to the low-level Tract A cadmium data, an apparent analytical discrepancy exists between replicate cadmium analyses performed by the North Creek and Analytical Technologies laboratories (Table 3). The overall average cadmium concentration measured in surface soils at Tract B was 1.5 ± 0.3 mg/kg (13 samples), below the Method A standard of 2 mg/kg. Furthermore, all verified cadmium determinations of Tract B were below the detection limit of 1 mg/kg (ATI data). Cadmium cleanup standards will be discussed further in a subsequent section of this report. Mercury. Of the seven (7) soil samples collected from Tract B, only one (sample B-2/1') exhibited detectable concentrations of mercury above the Method A standard of 1 mg/kg. The estimated maximum concentration of mercury in this sample was 8.1J mg/kg. However, a re- -- analysis of this sample (though conducted outside of sample holding times) indicated a substantially lower mercury concentration of 1.1 mg/kg (see above). Further, a subsequent re-sampling of this location (station HC-6) did not reveal any detectable mercury at a detection limit of 0.15 mg/kg. Including the 8.1J mg/kg detection would result in a conservative estimate of the overall average mercury concentration in surface soils at Tract B of 1.5 mg/kg. This estimated average value is roughly equivalent to the Method A MTCA cleanup standard. Because of the low frequency of elevated detections, and lack of replication of the maximum concentration, mercury was not retained as a chemical of concern at Tract B. REGULATORY CLEANUP STANDARD COMPARISON Overview of Method B Procedures The MTCA Method A cleanup standards comparison presented above identified cadmium as the only chemical of concern present in soils at Tracts A and B. However, in this context the numeric Method A standards are used only as a conservative initial screening of chemical concentrations, and do not necessarily define cleanup standards applicable to a site remediation action, should one be undertaken. As discussed in WAC 173-340-705, the use of detailed, risk-based Page 16 Hart Crowser J-3276 procedures for setting cleanup standards are applicable to all sites, as long as sufficient data for this purpose are available, and the person conducting the cleanup action elects to utilize that method. Ecology ' currently recognizes the Method A (routine) cleanup standards as providing equivalent or greater protection than Method B standards, thus establishing the conservative nature of the Method A (screening) values. Method B cleanup standards for cadmium in soil are set on a case-by- case basis and must be at least as stringent as all of the following: ► Concentrations which protect human health and the environment due to direct contact with contaminated soils, as determined using equations and standard exposure assumptions detailed in WAC 173- ' 340-740(3)(a)(iii). For cadmium, the soil concentration which is protective of direct contact exposures is 40 mg/kg (Appendix D). For comparison, the maximum cadmium concentration detected in soils at Tract A was 28 mg/kg, and thus not indicative of potential direct contact concerns. Tr ► Concentrations which protect human health and the environment due to inhalation of contaminated dusts released from site soils, as determined using worst-case dust emission models and standard exposure assumptions detailed in WAC 173-340-750(3)(a)(ii). For cadmium, even under worst-case dust emission conditions, the soil I , concentration which is protective of potential inhalation exposures is greater than 500 mg/kg. Relative to the maximum cadmium p concentration detected in Tract A soils of 28 mg/kg, no potential inhalation risks are identified. ► Concentrations which protect human health and the environment due to consumption of vegetables grown in contaminated soils. ` Based on standard exposure assumptions developed by EPA Region i 10 for risk assessment, the tissue concentration which is protective of plant consumption is 8.1 mg/kg (dry weight basis; Appendix D). The maximum plant tissue concentration observed at Tract A was 3.5 mg/kg (dry weight), and thus not indicative of potential vegetable consumption impacts. ► Concentrations which are estimated to result in no adverse effects �— on the protection and propagation of terrestrial life, including plants Page 17 i '� Hart Crowser J-3276 and animals. For cadmium, plant growth appears to be the most sensitive of a variety of ecological pathways to cadmium accumulations in soils. Based on an environmental profile compiled by EPA (1985), plant tissue concentrations of less than 3 mg/kg (thy weight basis) are not associated with decreased growth or yield, even to sensitive crops. Plant tissue concentrations provide a better measure of the "bioavailable" fraction of cadmium present in soils than the bulk soil concentration. Since the EPA "No Observable Adverse Effect Level" is equivalent to the maximum observed plant tissue concentration at Tract A, (3.5 mg/kg; Table 4) no terrestrial ecological impacts are indicated. Tract A vegetation is also luxuriant, particularly within the hydraulic dredge spoils area, and not visibly stressed by site contamination. r ► Concentrations which will not cause contamination of groundwater at levels which exceed the groundwater cleanup level established F under WAC 173-340-720, which in the case of cadmium is 0.005 1 ! mg/L. Soil cleanup standards which are protective of groundwater are determined using the following criteria: ; �- Concentrations that are equal to or less than 100 times the groundwater cleanup standard (0.005 mg/L x 100 = 0.5 mg/kg), unless it can be demonstrated that a higher soil concentration is protective of groundwater at the site. Using the "100 times" equilibrium partition coefficient (I.) discussed in WAC 173-340-740(3)(a)(ii) results in an initial estimate of the soil cleanup standard which is protective of groundwater of 0.5 mg/kg. Since this value is lower than the conservative Method A standard of 2 mg/kg (and also lower than natural regional background levels), additional analysis of groundwater protection was performed to refine the Method B calculation. This analysis is outlined below. Groundwater Occurrence Underlying the Sites (r- Based on previously conducted geotechnical borings (Earth Consultants, U 1985 and 1990b) groundwater is present underlying the site at depths between 15 and 20 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater was encountered within the slightly silty sand and gravel zone and in about the lower 5 feet of the stiff silt (Figure 4). Approximately 10 feet of { Page 18 Hart Crowser J-3276 r stiff silt to loose clayey silt and 5 to 10 feet of a silty sand fill lies between the groundwater encountered and the ground surface. Based on ground surface elevations presented on Site Plans for Tracts A and B by Leason Pomeroy Northwest Inc., the elevation of the groundwater surface is between 0 and 5 feet above mean sea level. Groundwater elevation contours for the local water table aquifer (South King County Groundwater Management Plan), show that the regional water table surface in this area is about 10 feet above mean sea level. Therefore the groundwater encountered in on-site borings likely represents the regional water table aquifer. There are no water supply wells completed in the water table aquifer within a mile of Tracts A and B, based on our review of the well logs on file with Ecology and presented in the South King County Groundwater Management Plan ( (EES et al., 1991). The local aquifer system lies within the alluvium of the Green River Valley. The groundwater flow direction for the aquifer in this area is generally toward the northwest. Water levels in piezometers and boring within the site area indicate that the groundwater flow direction locally may vary from the regional direction. In general, the local groundwater flow direction appears to be toward Springbrook Creek and the P-1 Pond. This flow direction may reverse locally during periods of high water levels within the P-1 Pond (e.g., the P-1 pond may recharge the local water table aquifer). Perched groundwater was noted in several hand auger borings advanced on Tract A. In general, the perched water was encountered above the contact between the silty sand fill and the underlying silty clay to clayey silty, which is interpreted as the former ground surface. The slope of this contact would determine the local flow direction within perched water bearing zone. Based on our cross sections (Figures 4 and 5) the perched water would likely flow south and west or away from the P-1 pond and Springbrook Creek. Topographic maps for this area generated in 1959 show that ponded water was present on the southern t- boundary of Tract A. This is consistent with the slope of the underlying clayey silty to silty clay observed in the borings advanced on site. Page 19 Hart Crowser J-3276 Soil Leaching Test Results Based on the occurrence of groundwater beneath the site (though separated by approximately 10 feet of a silt aquitard), a leaching test was designed and implemented to evaluate the potential for vertical migration of metals from the hydraulic dredge spoils. Details of the test procedure and results are provided in Appendix B. Comparison of leachate quality with bulk soil chemical concentrations from the leaching test were used to derive an apparent soil:groundwater equilibrium coefficient (Kd) specific to the hydraulic dredge spoils. Using data collected from the first volume of water (5 inches) passed through the soil column, an average Kd of 1,500:1 ± 200:1 was computed for cadmium. This Kd value is considerably greater than the "initial default" value of 100:1 specified in the MTCA regulations. Using the empirical Kd derived from the leaching test to compute a soil concentration which is protective of groundwater quality results in a calculated cadmium standard of 7.5 mg/kg (0.005 mg/L x 1,500 = 7.5 mg/kg). Since this concentration is less than cleanup standards calculated based on direct soil contact, inhalation, or plant tissue concerns (see above), the derived concentration of 7.5 mg/kg becomes the overall Method B soil cleanup standard for cadmium at the site. r- Based on the available data, the 2,000 to 3,000 cubic yards of hydraulic dredge materials which were placed at Tract A would be expected to contain cadmium concentrations above the Method B cleanup standard ti of 7.5 mg/kg based on groundwater protection. All other areas of the site (including Tract B) contain cadmium concentrations below this cleanup standard and do not require remediation under MTCA. � I LIMITATIONS Work for this project was performed, and this letter report prepared, in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the nature and conditions of the work completed in the same or similar localities, at the time the work was performed. It is intended for the exclusive use of First City Washington for specific application to the referenced property. This report is not meant to represent a legal opinion. No other warranty, express or implied, is made. Page 20 Hart Crowser J-3276 We trust that this report meets your needs. Sincerely, HART CROWSER, INC. CIA ON R. PATMONT Vp(�( - JENNIFER G. MARTIN Principal 11 Project Hydrogeologist CRP/IGM:sjy blackriv.fr Page 21 jr Hart Crowser J-3276 REFERENCES Converse, 1989. Mill Creek Environmental Assessment. Report prepared for R.W. Beck and Associates by Converse Geoenvironmental Services, Seattle, Washington. Dexter, R.N., et al., 1981. A Summary of Knowledge of Puget Sound Related to Chemical Contaminants. NOAA Technical Memorandum, r OMPA-13, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Boulder, ti - Colorado. Earth Consultants, 1985. Excerpt Boring Logs from report. Earth Consultants, 1990a. Preliminary Characterization of Dredge r- Spoils, Black River Corporate Park, Tract A, Renton, Washington. E-1990-12 Report prepared for First City Washington, Inc., by Earth Consultants, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. Earth Consultants, 1990b. Excerpt Boring Logs from Earth Consultant Report. Earth Consultants, 1991a. Additional Characterization of Hydraulic Dredge Spoils, Black River Corporate Park, Tract A, Renton, Washington. E-1990-14 Report prepared for First City Washington, Inc., by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated January 7, 1991. Earth Consultants, 1991b. Preliminary Characterization of Fill Materials, Black River Corporate Park, Tract B, Renton, Washington. t__ E-1990-15 Report prepared for First City Washington by Earth Consultants, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. Earth Consultants, 1991c. Preliminary Characterization of Fill, Black River Corporate Park, Tract A, Renton, Washington. E-1990-16 Report prepared for First City Development by Earth Consultants, Inc., Bellevue, Washington. EPA, 1984. Western Processing, Alternatives Assessment Study, 1983 Data. Report prepared by EPA Superfund Branch, Region 10, Seattle, Washington. Page 22 Hart Crowser J-3276 EPA, 1985. Environmental Profiles and Hazard Indices for Constituents of Municipal Sludge: Cadmium. EPA Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Washington, D.C. r-- EES, 1991. South King County Ground Water Management Plan. Report prepared by EES, Hart Crowser, Pacific Groundwater, and Robinson and Noble. r- Harper-Owes, 1983. Water Quality Assessment of the Duwamish Estuary, Washington. Report prepared for Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle by Harper-Owes, Seattle, Washington. Hill, Donald O., Tommy E. Meyers, and James M. Brannon, 1988. Development and Application of Techniques for Predicting Leachate Quality in Confined Disposal Facilities, Background and Theory, Department of the Army, Misc. Paper D-88-1. Metro, 1991. Unpublished Water Quality Data for Metro Station 0317. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Washington. Metropolitan Engineers, 1971. Foundation Investigation Enlargement I Renton Sugar Treatment Plant, Renton, Washington. Prepared by Eugene R. McMaster, P.E., Chief Foundation Engineer for Metropolitan Engineers. Shannon and Wilson, Inc., 1965. Soil Investigation Earlington Industrial Development. Report prepared for Pacific Coast Railroad Company, i Seattle, Washington. Page 23 I Hart Crowser J-3276 Table 2-Summary of Tract A and Tract.B Soil Results Sheet 1 of 4 Tract A Tract B Preliminary On-Site On-Site MTCA Soil Detection Maximum Detection Maximum Cleanup Frequency Detection Frequency Detection Levels I ' Metals in mg/kg Antimony 0/15 32 U 0/6 32 U Arsenic 15/15 15 6/6 14 20.0 A Beryllium 9/15 1 U(1.8 N) 5/6 0.93 J 1.0 B* Cadmium 21/27 28 6/13 1 U(3 J) 2.0 A j Total Chromium 13/15 120 6/6 33 100.0 A Chromium VI 0/6 1 U - - Copper 15/15 97 6/6 41 1,000.0 B* Lead 8/15 110 6/6 100 250.0 A Mercury 6/22 0.88 7/8 0.15 U(8.1 J) 1.0 A Nickel 10/15 57 6/6 30 40.0 B* Selenium 7/15 1.1 6/6 7.3 240.0 B i Silver 1/15 6.6 3/6 0.86 NA Thallium 6/15 0.095 2/6 0.23 6.0 B Zinc 15/15 1,000 6/6 97 600.0 B* Semivolatiles in mg/kg Benzoic Acid 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2-Chlorophenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2,4-Dichlorophenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2,4-Dimethylphenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 4,6-Dinitro-2-Methylphenol 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 2,4-Dinitrophenol 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 2-Methylphenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2-Nitrophenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 4-Nitrophenol 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U Pentachlorophenol 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 1 Phenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Acenaphthene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Acenaphthylene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Aniline 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzo(a)anthracene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzo(a)pyrene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U ' Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 1/15 1.1 0/3 0.875 U 70.0 B 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Butylbenzylphthalate 1/15 0.20 J 0/3 0.175 U 16,000.0 B Page 24 Hart Crowser J-3276 . Table 2-Summary of Tract A and Tract B Soil Results Sheet 2 of 4 ,1 Tract A Tract B Preliminary On-Site On-Site MTCA Soil - Detection Maximum Detection Maximum Cleanup Frequency Detection Frequency Detection Levels ' 4-Chloroaniline 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2-Chloronaphthalene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Chrysene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Dibenzofuran 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U Diethylphthalate 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Dimethylphthalate 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Di-n-butylphthalate 1/15 0.86 0/3 0.875 U 8,000.0 B Di-n-octylphthalate 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Fluorene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Fluoranthene 0/15 0.175 U 1/3 0.131 3,200.0 B Hexachlorobenzene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Hexachlorobutadiene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U - Hexachloroethane 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U ^; Isophorone 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2-Methylnaphthalene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Naphthalene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 2-Nitroaniline 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 3-Nitroaniline 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U 4-Nitroaniline 0/15 0.875 U 0/3 0.875 U N-nitrosodiphenylamine 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U N-nitroso-di-n-propylamine 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Phenanthrene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Pyrene 1/15 0.21 J 0/3 0.175 U 2,400.0 B 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzyl Alcohol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U 4-Methylphenol 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U Benzidine 0/15 4.375 U 0/3 4.375 U Benzo(b)fluoranthene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U _ Anthracene 0/15 0.175 U 0/3 0.175 U t � Page 25 1 ; Hart Crowser J-3276 Table 2-Summary of Tract A and Tract B Soil Results Sheet 3 of 4 Tract A Tract B Preliminary ' On-Site On-Site MTCA Soil Detection Maximum Detection Maximum Cleanup Frequency Detection Frequency Detection Levels Volatiles in mg/kg - Acetone 0/6 1.0 U — — Benzene 0/6 0.050 U — — Bromodichloromethane 0/6 0.050 U — — Bromoform 0/6 0.25 U — — Bromoethene 0/6 0.50 U — — 2-Butanone(MEK) 0/6 0.50 U — — Carbon Disulfide 0/6 0.050 U — — Carbon Tetrachloride 0/6 0.050 U — — Chlorobenzene 0/6 0.050 U — — Chloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — Chloroform 0/6 0.050 U — — Chloromethane 0/6 0.50 U — — Dibromochloromethane 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,1-Dichloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,2-Dichloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,1-Dichloroethene 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,2-Dichloroethene(Total) 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,2-Dichloropropane 0/6 0.050 U — — cis-1,3-Dichloropropene 0/6 0.050 U — — trans-1,3-Dichloropropene 0/6 0.050 U — — Ethylbenzene 0/6 0.050 U — — 2-Hexanone(MBK) 0/6 0.50 U — — 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone(MIBK) 0/6 0.50 U — — Methylene Chloride 0/6 0.25 U — — Styrene 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — Tetrachloroethene 0/6 0.050 U — — Toluene 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0/6 0.050 U — — Trichloroethene 0/6 0.50 U — — Vinyl Acetate 0/6 0.050 U — — Vinyl Chloride 0/6 0.050 U — — Total Xylenes 0/6 0.050 U — — Page 26 1 1 Hart Crowser J-3276 L Table 2-Summary of Tract A and Tract B Soil Results Sheet 4 of 4 Tract A Tract B Preliminary On-Site On-Site MTCA Soil - Detection Maximum Detection Maximum Cleanup r Frequency Detection Frequency Detection Levels Pesticides and PCBs _ in mg/kg Aldrin 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Alpha-BHC 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Beta-BHC 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Delta-BHC 0/9 0.013 U 0/3 0.013 U Gamma-BHC(Lindane) 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U �- Alpha-Chlordane 0/9 0.065 U 2/3 0.041 0.8 B Gamma-Chlordane 0/9 0.065 U 2/3 0.032 0.8 B 4,4'-DDD 0/9 0.013 U 0/3 0.013 U 4,4'-DDE 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U j ' 4,4'-DDT 0/9 0.013 U 0/3 0.013 U I Dieldrin 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Endosulfan I 0/9 0.013 U 0/3 0.013 U Endosulfan II 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Endosulfan Sulfate 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U Endrin 0/9 0.013 U 0/3 0.013 U Endrin Aldehyde 0/9 0.02 U 0/3 0.02 U Heptachlor 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Heptachlor Epoxide 0/9 0.0065 U 0/3 0.0065 U Methoxychlor 0/9 0.195 U 0/3 0.195 U Toxaphene 0/9 0.228 U 0/3 0.228 U 1 PCB 1016 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1221 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1232 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1242 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1248 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1254 0/9 0.065 U 0/3 0.065 U PCB 1260 2/9 0.14 0/3 0.065 U 1.0 A Other in mg/kg TPH 13/15 240 3/6 92 200.0 A Cyanide 0/9 0.13 U 0/6 0.13 U Total Phenol 0/6 0.2 U Notes: f A Cleanup standard using Method A tabulated values(WAC 173-340-740[2]). __ B Preliminary Method B cleanup standards. * Method B standards calculated using site-specific TCLP data to address - potential leachability(see text). Beryllium standard based on the average background concentration in the western U.S. reported by USGS. U Not detected at indicated detection limit. J Estimated value;matrix spikes outside of control limits or sample analyzed beyond holding times. __ N Tentativey identified chemical; detection not confirmed. NA Data not available. 7276.WKI/CLX �- Page 27 - Table 3 - Summary of Cadmium Concentration in Tract A and Tract B Soils Page 1 of 2 Depth of Cadmium Mercury Date Analytical Sampled Sampling Concentration Concentration Sample ID Collected Laboratory by in Feet in mg/kg in mg/kg Comments Tract A B101A-1.5* 07/19/90 ATI EC 1.5 8.8 B102A-1* 07/19/90 ATI EC 1 28 B103-1.5* 07/19/90 ATI EC 1.5 1 U B103-4.5* 07/19/90 ATI EC 4.5 1 U B104-1.5* 07/19/90 ATI EC 1.5 1 U B105-2* 07/19/90 ATI EC 2 1 U B202** 11/12/90 North Creek EC 2.5 12 J Collected at Bottom of Hydraulic Dredge Spoils B203** 11/12/90 North Creek EC 2.5 11 J Collected at Bottom of Hydraulic Dredge Spoils B204** 11/12/90 North Creek EC 2 2.8 J Collected at Bottom of Hydraulic Dredge Spoils HA-1-1 01/15/91 North Creek EC 1 2 J 1010439 01/15/91 ATI EC 1 1 U Duplicate of HA-1-1 HA-2 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 1.6 J HA-3 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 2 J 1010441 01/16/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-3 comp HA-4 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 2.3 J 1010442 01/16/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-4 comp HA-5-1.5 01/16/91 North Creek EC 1.8 J 1010443 01/16/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-5-1.5 HA-6 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 2.4 J 1010444 01/16/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-6 comp HA-7 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 1.8 J HA-8 comp 01/16/91 North Creek EC 2.5 J 1010446 . 01/16/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-8,comp HA-9 comp 01/17/91 North Creek EC 1.9 J HA-10-1.5 01/17/91 North Creek EC 2.2 J 1010448 01/17/91 ATI EC 1 U Duplicate of HA-10-1.5 w'b HC-1 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 10 w oqc, HC-2 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 12 N 11 N.) HC-3 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 15 0D HC-4 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 20 0 HC-5 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 1 U co (D n I ----I I-- 1 I I I- j~--, -- ! J ; _I i- I I I--- - -- - I I--- 1 f 1 ' —_ I - - 1.---- 1 ---I Table 3 - Summary of Cadmium Concentration in Tract A and Tract B Soils Page 2 of 2 Depth of Cadmium Mercury Date Analytical Sampled Sampling Concentration Concentration Sample ID Collected Laboratory by - in Feet in mg/kg in mg/kg Comments Tract B B-1-0.5 09/14/90 North Creek EC 0.5 1.9 J 0.57 J 1010430 09/14/90 ATI EC 0.5 1 U Duplicate of B-1-0.5 B-2-1 09/14/90 North Creek EC 1 3 J 8.1 J 1010431 09/14/90 ATI EC 1 1 U 1.1 J Duplicate of B-2-1 HC-6 04/16/91 ATI HC 0-0.5 1 U 0.15 U Sampling Site Adjacent to B-2-1 B-3-1 09/14/90 North Creek EC 1 2.8 J 0.83 J 1010432 09/14/90 ATI EC 1 1 U Duplicate of B-3-1 B-4-0.5 09/14/90 North Creek EC 0.5 2.9 J 0.33 J 1010433 09/14/90 ATI EC 0.5 1 U Duplicate of B-4-0.5 B-5-1 09/14/90 North Creek EC 1 2.5 J 0.28 J 1010434 09/14/90 ATI EC 1 1 U Dulicate of B-5-1 B-6-1.5 09/14/90 North Creek EC 1.5 2.8 J 0.33 J 1010435 09/14/90 ATI EC 1.5 1 U Duplicate of B-6-1.5 EC - Earth Consultants HC - Hart Crowser 3276T3.wkl b Lix w 1 w 0o w rt CD N rr N.) V rn n n 0 E cn CD n I Table 4 — Summary of Cadium Results for Soil and Plant Tissue Samples, Tract A HC-1 HC-2 HC-3 HC-4 HC-5 Soil Plant Soil Plant Soil Plant Soil Plant Soil Plant Cadmium 10 0.79 12 0.55 15 0.62 20 3.5 1 U 0.10 J Concentration in mg/kg (dry wt.) Note: J Estimated value. U Not detected at indicated detection limit. PLANT.WXI CL ro � x i w oa w n (D N rt Cr% C) O ri 0 (D ri V4:-::-A-l;'.i:-c-%';.'•r:'icinity.Map ct; i i .,�j \i\i•t) i,,,,;,'\''.' .i...4 1...'A:...I,‘l: -'•,,o.'tI''\.'/_-._ )j;.:,;,-:.mk,1i\..0.1 43:1g,C1/ m.'..ir.1t eI.4-6„t....-.1 II-'.'1-.R1.:..P-I.iI uI.-.,:.6:-.1.i-.:.l-kr--.!u1--,-,r•—'G-'..'.-d,'7\7'''4•,'.-i°,''r>' -•\.--S\- IIA-..i...-ff....T....".--.'-i.-._--E-__r4_--:a.-.-.-jI___-1 f: C4 Black r k p rr _ F tI(,. 11F) i,: N / 1\ J/ I '� I� '1 • 1;.'r {tPar,.v, 1 i �-� ■ III:`: .I r .Gano -'%4 /J �,,. 4%, ° IO)i,, l _--iv 1 ,'. , (,( 0/#1 I. ~ 111011611. Su.sta ' otp.-___ Barrit.:---. jig °'''\ .,-157.14t1 i 0:Plk.'' • 1 --•--‘--•-,•----,----/%2 1--.:IC1_ ,•4 ‘-'.7 „.l,)ir.l;',.;''„.....,,i1 07l,._ _,-.:'•.:,'.1...L.:-_-.o7.g..m-._ ,ti,.t,io,,l :0.1.a .tg— _ ,‘Ai■■ , I � oQ\\,=\1_.s§,=,7l,='._,.s§g, •d�l� "'mod, t'y'' \r —- . _--: ; R irt`• r ro f rod \ , �4 jg �:.\kl11 ti. •• '.!-,:.:,.'..:...- ..14,1 l4i4.c: ,o. p ,o: --,.-:•:-72,..-._-.'7'4''_-,.i--1-.1.'rif,A:,7i-,V1\a1IiI � ' . ,1� � i�ii. , Y iloog Metro Sampling - , / .1i . `-,� , -- • i •tlr - F iota Station 0317 /8° 7 , �, ``mtr r 1 o m i 4+. ..__:__..„. :.._ w CI Cy III _,% - _ = T, 1. a l ,Taib.li,,�) iii, \ ' 2i��,, [)� ''' to r! _-__ -_ 51/41.htst -�PP S ;:ping -. ...... II o _ - it ::s�I'�II . �,� Su°sta r ° -. _ _ ►- i� _. 1'. 11Eks ;00 1 _ I • RENCON o Z_a •�+ , 2'piiip ,,,,. „ , \ 7., . .:. d 04', /• 1 ::1 8 . oio-= -•:-- --,4 Sqi statr. MI Or IN �i/ I-i I --= 30 \ i ‘\..i. t I wila to co 11 , 1 grAilv ! rit = i \;II .14 I,-- I:- — , .:ti iigiii 1 i ,7,1 .7,) 1 II 0 — . ' awl g Ili". so r:r Ill ,— 1111 II ''sf t ' ..-4011,11 'If'. A I� IL _--— 4 �I�i`� I_r I��:�I II IIIIIIIIryury1I1 I� `1:7$ .a�i :en I. I . r' . Lv �����V 0�'`!`::�:?II � >� : II I Orillia� o ° i ��//�BM,d 1fj, . 1=1 i QN CORP :DY �'4 ` t/ ./U .\: :�I RI ' -K --� CA___i__ •BOY ,/ risri 1��� l it • 1 ‘ ; ' •35 / ubsta▪ ` IckI 36 MI /pe°-� 1ill; Jr,,,?. ,1-: , 43 '= "1:\,*,/ 111 g '� 43- I•ill•let ,. e1) / ; 1 p� h � I ' -.l L' ... ., I . ...: 11:1 , ,.. ,, o Substa r in"'�� t--111 . 18I —_� RED Ilai . . !_ r: fs I ,.o.ifi _ I�\ ail! IIII[, . .. 1�'�i�lirrr . ' l �\�\i"r11Ti- 'a 1 Western Processing a •• ° ] `� - Site •i `- ' ', �`�� � V� 11- o t iti; s 196rn sr • I IN � \ r I en°Driv 1' f7 Note: Base map prepared from USGS 7.5 minute Quadrangle ���IJLI\ of Burien.and Renton Washington dated 1987. 0 2500 5000 J — — J-3276 6/91 Scale in Feet Figure 1 Site and Exploration Plan Tract A and Tract B P-1 Pump Station ccc) rTh ::: Line P-1 Pond 60 O BLACK IyEA Pump Station ForebayC7 0'rj ,- --_Dr". r 1 Property Line i /�rr,/ `�� I B-1Q• v / ®B-3 \ / I _ A BNB-4 N, / / I 0 A' • B 1 8B-5D BNB-3 Oq B-6e ( ` • I < m kFSOq�Fq�F • • • • ��� • B-1® 1 // B-26 Tract B `' m I'. �4lF:0. ** , BNB-2 Tract A • (HC-6) `� Approximate Location of / / 1 Hydraulic Dredge Spoils / / 1 00 \ • 1 B-3® B-5® J cr I 1 i e• • ( �`4/ B-4e / a 0 �9 F� 4. HC-6® Hand Auger Location and Number (Hart Crowser, Current Study) • Approximate Soil Sampling Location (See Figure 3 for Number) 8-10 Boring Location and Number 500 (Shannon & Wilson, 1965) 0 250 G i B-1e Boring Location and Number 0 Groundwater flow direction based on piezometers on Renton Sewage Treatment Plant Scale in Feet (Earth Consultant, 1990) (Metropolitan Engineers,1974). BNB-2 S Boring Location and Number © Groundwater flow direction based on water levels in borings drilled on adjacent property (Earth Consultants, 1985) (Shannon &Wilson, 1965). A t A A►'i Cross Section Location 0 Groundwater flow direction based on water levels in borings drilled on site (Tracts) V and Designation (Earth Consultants,1985 and 1990). HARTCROwSER �— Approximate Groundwater J-3276 6/91 Flow Direction Figure 2 Cadmium Concentration in Soil Tract A P-1 Pump __� Station Forebay P-1 Pond // \� -5 10 <1 <HA-1 HA-2 H HA-40 # •2.0J <1 B- B-204® ilesiokottiiitto B-202 28 <HA-10 _146 SHC103 'S '-------- < 0 B-104 B-105 j 11�_ ��' I� ` F<�A_ •OHA-44 1) .HA-3 Approximat cation of 1.9J Hydra redge Spoils 44/ • % ‘ Pr \ HA- So co •14 k. (I 0 "AU- k , 1/4,.,/, HA-8 <1 • --A__ B-101 S Boring Location and Number (Earth Consultants. 1990 and 1991) HA-1 11, Hand Auger Location and Number �,c-o (Earth Consultants, 1990 and 1991) 'per�� lc' 0 HC-1® Hand Auger Location and Number (Hart Crowser, Current Study) X::::* 8.8 Validated Cadmium Concentration in mg/kg (See Table 3 for Sample Depth) Note: Base map prepared from drawings provided by IPN Architecture and Planning 0 100 200 MI entitled Blackriver Corporate Park Phase VIII dated September 20, 1989 Scale in Feet WSCJR J-3276 6/91 Figure 3 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section A-A ' Tract A Tract B - m m Tr N co c . I I N r t r A m m m m m I m w I m A' West cc - Hydraulic Dredge Spoils U `m I East 20 oo E - .r....,:" r.S • y"W o li CO, ` , f Silty SAND.,,..(. ." `''` �:4..' afi A� . ,- m Wetlan d ..--, ' ,,rY f;; .<.-.te ';"�: ra, 6k'APl'.y "VhVSy c1 j' 9�" : 7 . ; . , a4' Fyg�Cq igiA k T ug4 c %ik igr, �„ h- . Sandy SILT with organics a , :� . . � ; z; " : F« : . s : Cla e SILTf1;....- litsr.x eli = W;:-. , /12 �_ -r�_ Silty,fine SAND 0..- ` �_ 4 _2 k r-----------7 �� Clayey SILT �_ __r `? • Clayey SILT �1 Silty fine SAND ?�' �/ SAND and GRAVEL -20-- iv" �-_ - m u_ %;% " Coarse SAND and GRAVEL ------___.-- —����i 1� I- 0 �_ ��-- �_�'_�,—�� -��- �' -? ? - -z�J— Silty,fine SAND fir' ��—,� ����Silty,fine SAND �__a) `—� SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE /%? i> �-- —1- --�- CO -40-- SANDand GRAVELwith ��i2 some SILT Silty.fine-coarse SAND and GRAVEL /'% ik f� —-�_____- -60- - - Fine SAND with Clayey SILT lenses Note:Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolation between borings and represent our interpretation of subsurface conditions based on currently available data. Horizontal Scale in Feet 0 200 400 0 20 40 B-1 Well Number Vertical Scale in Feet Well Location Vertical Exaggeration x 10 . tWater Level ( At Time of Drilling) A V x Taows 5R J-3276 6/91 Figure 4 Generalized Subsurface Cross Section B-B' Tract A c� Hydraulic Dredge Spoils 4co 1 r co B CO• I North S20Uth --�``_ -- I Brown SILT Z I - -C Medium to coarse`-- \\. m SAND with SILT `\\\\ ;:>. ����� �� �•. �m O Fin e SAND -`_ . 2 O ClayeyI Q. SLTwit h layers ers w Silty SAND(FILL) of Silty SAND i Q. '...�.. ' >:.,-,.:..`:n'�.....e..h...r.:..a..,•....y........�.�.;3 �'. ,sa.„.„......>.,::' : s �." Sa e\ ." `.��, 3 Y Za a. z.t,. v... .< . .._ . � < a- .. . . ... . : .. .W A, c : .. own green Silty CLAY. ,,,7.: .. . Drk brow stff SILT, "' Cla IL . ? mo ;.,.,.:A .....^... .,... ," 0,,:-,., . a,, a . a.;.': ,�� Wit; .�Y > ' ' . ` ' ::. _ a : . .. . . ....' ,.-e,.. .'.:^..,:,.:.,. ...0.....' S'3 �0»�$ �^aJ��.W q P,1„Y ,az., .. i �.'> ..�.,....>.......on. .v6 ,. . .}<.. :. rw:. .�.vm:.:. ::am :: ."..@ 3¢ �:. fi�.ax, s'''" ��0... - � s� 4.� xs Ys 0F a : `: v � ?a� xo �s4;,'...:..:.�y. ...,:k�.,,.;�.:...;Kg... t,:. o'�' :�,a " v. Y,fj.:': ws O S,W ' $nro:� : gfi ,7 *s 49 o h?%:Iftr."*opiir.i.;',,, S � .' «:���z:: ,:� � . n ' �a• sf E 3� " � ? ,., R .. t� > , �� � ;a .n .. ;�.:f .a:!:�4: . •.�4 Gra loose SILT �aY. A:. � ` �. , F ,,� ¢ 9 e i} 7 s..,. x f : : • $A' {', . � :�/ � r :,./ F . s ,.4h °� #I; sa Gx S! .S : �. ��.� •:. . . r; C ' � �a : qi:l .O`''�s • :r; F$ a xa: � ^? , : sY ; "s£ .:. . Y ..>a �l.Y�.?�� ' •F.a• z?ma.. s.� �'F�" ' sY b•• :.c:7 aa:s:•x x••.r:.*.� :�� � .�s w „g `�. 2�$ �.��r •:Ph�VA�� r:; x�;ari�.,,s� 20 aW,: : � tg ... : �� . : .•:-' 'sad. :#:.•: - � z° :. � s � a • • • • Silty,fine SAND —10 — _ — -1_ L— —20— — Coarse SAND and GRAVEL ___---�_ mI W . C l —30 — __� — V H ^14 Silty fine SAND �� J— // f-� 1- _ SAND and GRAVEL with some SILT 0) ` 40— SILTSTONE // /,,� .. — • Notes: 1. Contacts between soil units are based upon interpolation between borings and represent our Horizontal Scale in Feet. cp interpretation of subsurface conditions based on currently available data. 0 100 200 2. See Figure 4 for Legend. 0 10 20 Vertical Scale in Feet Vertical Exaggeration x 10 Trend.in Springbrook Creek Zinc •Concentration • Metro Station 0317 •81GD • i 700 - I •600 - �o 1 C O 11 • .400 - 1 U C O N j /1 II 1\til\) [ 100 - 111/ Jan-78 Od-80 Jul-83 Ma•-86 Dec-88 .Sep-91 Sampling Date u HIIRTCROWSER J-3276 6/91 Figure 6 Hart Crowser .J-3276 . • • APPENDIX A • FIELD METHODS Hart Crowser J-3276 APPENDIX A FIELD METHODS SOIL SAMPLING Soil samples were collected for chemical analysis from Tracts A and B using a shelby tube. The shelby tube was pushed approximately 6 inches into the ground. The tube was removed from the ground and the end of the tube capped and taped. A portion of this sample was submitted to a contract laboratory for chemical analysis. The remaining soil was submitted to the Hart Crowser Laboratory for in situ soil density tests. Prior to sampling the shelby tubes had been decontaminated used an Alconox solution followed by successive rinsing with tap water and deionized water. Two soil samples were collected for the leaching test described in Appendix B. These samples were collected using a shovel. The soil samples were placed into a lined bucket and transported to the Hart Crowser laboratory for the test. The shovel was decontaminated prior and between sampling using an Alconox solution, followed by successive rinsing with tap water and deionized water. PLANT SAMPLING Five plant samples were collected for chemical analysis from Tract A. ( '} These plant samples were collected in conjunction with the five Tract A soil samples for chemical analysis. The plant samples were collected adjacent to the shelby tube sampling location. The plants were clipped Pi closed to ground level. Enough sample was collected to fill an 8 oz. jar these samples were submitted to a laboratory. An additional sample was collected from each location and submitted to Raedeke and Associates for species identification. The clippers and additional sampling equipment was decontaminated prior to and between sampling as described above. Page A-1 I, Hart Crowser J-3276 CEDAR RIVER SAMPLING A sample from the Cedar River was collected for chemical analysis using a 5-gallon plastic container. The water sample was collected from the river near Highway 405. Water from the Cedar River was used in the leaching test described in Appendix B. A portion of the water sample collected was submitted to the laboratory for chemical analysis. I'r I' I I ;f tl Page A-2 ,Hart,Crowser J-327. • • ti. A • PPENDIX B ,,:.. • 1 L-EACHING:TEST.PROCEDURE ' • • 16 • • ; • .. • ,' • •, • • • • • • • • • - - • r Hart Crowser J-3276 APPENDIX B LEACHING TEST PROCEDURE The leaching test was designed to evaluate the potential for vertical leaching of metals, primarily cadmium, from the on-site dredge soils. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess potential cleanup requirements for cadmium in the dredge spoils consisted with MTCA cleanup standards (WAC 173-340(3)(a)(ii)) which would protect the local groundwater quality. A limited evaluation of other metals such as lead, nickel, and zinc was also conducted. The leaching test set up and procedure was consistent with the recommended test procedures for column desorption studies presented by the Army Corp of Engineers J. (Hill and Brannon, 1988). Soil samples from the upper six inches to one foot of the dredge spoils were homogenized and placed in a double-ring column. The soil in the column was compacted within 10 percent of the measured in-place dry density. Water was carefully poured into the column to minimize soil disturbance. The final water column over the soil column was 10 inches, this hydraulic head was maintained during the leaching experiment. Prior to leaching, the system was then allowed to sit for 16 hours to allow the fine sediment to settle. Water used for the leachate test was collected from the Cedar River, located in a drainage immediately to the east of the site. The Cedar River was chosen for the leachate test because its water quality is well documented (i.e., predictable) and expected to be similar to precipitation quality in the site vicinity. Low concentrations of metals (well below MTCA standards) were detected in the Cedar River water samples collected for the leaching test. rl' The leaching procedure results in the collection of water from both the inner and outer rings of the soil column. The volume of water collected from each ring and the time were recorded to evaluate the rate of flow through the column. The pH and conductivity of the leachate water d ! were also monitored. Table B-1 presents some of the leaching test parameters collected during the test. The hydraulic conductivity calculated for the two soil samples were consistent with the soil descriptions of a slightly silty sand (HC-2) and a silty sand (HC-3). This Page B-1 --w Hart Crowser J-3276 indicated that significant channeling was not occurring in the soil column. Timer ring samples were collected for chemical analysis, these water samples are less likely to be effected by the sidewalls of the column. Table B-1 presents the cadmium concentration measured in these leachate samples. These results are preliminary. The maximum concentration for cadmium (0.016 mg/L) was detected in the first leachate sample collected from HC-3 (HC-3, S-1). It should be noted that the first few inches of water passing through the column " represent water which has been in contact with the soil for at least 16 hours. The concentrations of cadmium in the initial samples likely represent a maximum concentration for water in contact with these soils. The concentrations in the leachate for both HC-2 and HC-3 decreased as the amount of water passing through the column increased. The leaching test data can be used to derive an apparent soil:water equilibrium partition coefficient (Id) for the site dredge spoils. Using data collected from the first 5 inches of water passed through the soil column, the average Kd value is 1,500:1, with a standard error of approximately 200:1. 1 t 1 r1 it 1i Page B-2 Hart Crowser J-3276 . A Table B-1 - Summary of Leaching Test Parameters f . Cumulative Cumulative Inches of Water Sample Cadmium . Time in Min through column ID in mg/L HC-2 40 2.82 44 3.44 HC-2,S-1 0.0080 49 4.01 63 5.78 HC-2,S-2 0.0062 85 8.30 90 8.92 HC-2,S-3 0.0046 Average flow rate through column - 80 ml/min i Assuming 10 inch head - hydraulic conductivity = 2 x 10-3 cm/sec Total cadmium concentration in soil = 12 mg/kg. r=• HC-3 '' 128 2.65 HC-3,S-1 0.016 236 5.00 HC-3,S-2 0.010 • 301 6.63 406 9.38 486 11.36 541 13.02 HC-3,S-3 . 0.0082 Average flow rate through column - 20 ml/min Assuming 10 inch head - hydraulic conductivity = 5 x 104 cm/sec Total cadmium concentration in soil = 15 mg/kg 1 tir .1 ,lA Page B-3 • • - 'I- art C - ' ,LEACHATE:SAMPLES CERTIFICATES`.:OF ANALYSIS `: . 1• • 'ANALYTICAL TECHNOLOGIES; INC. r ^ 1 _ .! .,fir • f - .r. rj • fr' AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 560 Naches Avenue, S.W., Suite 101, Renton. WA 98055, (206) 228-8335 I/ ATI I.D. # 9105-015 Jl May 20, 1991 Hart Crowser, Inc. 1/) 1910 Fairview Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102-3699 Attention : Clay Patmont Project Number : 3276 Project Name : Black River Corp. On May 1, 1991, Analytical Technologies, Inc. , received six water samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached LI analytical schedule. The results, sample cross reference, and quality control data are enclosed. It Ji (� 1�iI Emily C. Carfio i Frederick W. Grothkopp Senior Project Manager Technical Manager FWG/elf �I 11 AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 1 ATI I.D. # 9105-015 SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET I/ CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP. i ! ATI # CLIENT DESCRIPTION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX 9105-015-1 HC-3-1 04/26/91 WATER 9105-015-2 HC-3-2 04/29/91 WATER 9105-015-3 HC-3-3 04/30/91 WATER 9105-015-4 HC-2-1 04/30/91 WATER 9105-015-5 HC-2-2 05/01/91 WATER 9105-015-6 HC-2-3 05/01/91 WATER �l r: TOTALS MATRIX # SAMPLES 1 WATER 6 ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty (30) days from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is required, please contact our sample control department before the scheduled disposal date. { )�Analytical4ethnologies,lnc. 2 ATI I.D. # 9105-015 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP. ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB • CADMIUM AA/GF EPA 7131 R LEAD AA/GF EPA 7421 R NICKEL ICAP EPA 6010 R ZINC ICAP EPA 6010 R i 1 � I � � r 11 R = ATI - Renton SD = ATI - San Diego T = ATI - Tempe r_ PNR = ATI - Pensacola FC = ATI - Fort Collins SUB = Subcontract ,lr ` AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 3 ATI # 9105-015 METALS ANALYSIS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : 3276 - PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP. SAMPLE MATRIX : WATER Lj PARAMETER DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CADMIUM 05/02/91 05/03/91 LEAD 05/02/91 05/09/91 NICKEL 05/02/91 05/15/91 1/ ZINC 05/02/91 05/15/91 _r. 0 L AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 4 ATI I.D. # 9105-015 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : WATER PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP. UNITS : mg/L HC-3-1 HC-3-2 HC-3-3 HC-2-1 HC-2-2 HC-2-3 REAGENT PARAMETER —1 —2 —3 —4 —5 —6 BLANK CADMIUM 0. 016. 0. 010 0.0082 0. 0080 0. 0062 0. 0046 <0.0003 jl1 LEAD 0. 093 0. 030 0. 017 0.014 0.008 0. 007 <0.005. NICKEL 0.04 0.03 0. 03 0.03 0.02 0. 01 <0. 1 ZINC 0.95 0. 67 0.57 0. 65 0.56 0.38 0. 007 1 3 L AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 5 ATI I.D. # 9105-015 METALS QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : WATER PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP. UNITS : mg/L SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC CADMIUM 9105-015-6 0. 0046 0.0045 2 0.0055 0. 0010 90 LEAD 9105-015-6 0. 007 0.008 13 0.032 0.025 100 NICKEL 9105-015-6 0.01 0.01 0 2.40 2 .50 96 ZINC 9105-015-6 0. 376 0.394 5 2.90 2.50 101 % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) x 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) x 100 Average Result I ) 1 ----r 1. 1,, 4_ �1--------' _ __ ., __'t 7 _ .� � �_ "^ -�� .('-____•i _ _ � -'ter i •! �1 if z i I tY __ f _ _ 1 i S� � 1 I " tSample Custody Record DATE 5/1 )'1 I PAGE / OF_I__ CROW 19f0 Fairview Avenue East Hart Dowser, Inc. Seattle, Washington 98102-3699 LAB NUMBER TESTING JOB NUMBER �Y// N ��1(2 t. - o[ PROJECT MANAGER Z PROJECT NAME ii/l cL I L1Q(_ l�J 1- Z OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS/ P5 .rY) 1 i i v COMPOSITING INSTRUCTIONS SAMPLED BY: tt) tl u. O I _ is). i O LAB NO. SAMPLE TIME STATION MATRIX I Z \g- - / /40--.3- / Ill /;for war Y- 1 (id Nu01 cll Gill E,ari)lC-- - (7-1 ,IC- 3 -�2 zi/ 9 i 9:/6a X I -"Val Avil(,n d _ otl,kif - .3 h r-: --3 t/ 3v °/ I /D '-556u 1 t1- 7,{c.r�1 0_44- r• S I11 et - I1( .ra - 1 /3v 1 /U..(Ka, ) 1 6 it 3 5i i fc 1 /1:00 - >( 1 rt_ri 64 .1 keerP 4- /0,1-,0,j n.i); ,ea.ii _71.2) 1+4-2a_- / uD: c,01. ---) RELINQUISHED BY DATE R RIVED BY DATE TOTAL NUMBER METHOD OF SHIPMENT � ram, r� s. t > - 1/(, ktet--jam-' /' t:;2/_, 5 // OF CONTAINERS (0 I Alt: / • SIGNAJUR I T11 SIG A UR / • ��� �1 111{�ri I f'I;;t 1. y TIME /U/lJ/C TIME SPECIAL SHIPMENT/HANDLING del'c'c.1-101 (L44tLC1 a,4 4(LW1l OR STORAGE REQUIREMENTS /l/ 1 ��� t` PRINTED NAME PRINT NAME -�/ / ,v2�t f�/ 9 f - 1- I I l 144,U:� -r. a o() 3� (1/ a ad/ L e, COMPANY COMPANY Pio 1 9 I RELINQUISHED BY DATE RECEIVED BY DATE �� oil nti iM•ek Iwo c 1:%ovi• `� l v'G I { DISTRIRI ITIAN• Hart Crowser, • f . ' f ♦ _ - - ' 2, ' , . ! r •,, rig. 1' ' _ ry .. ,r • • ' .- • ' . APPENDIX'C " . • ' •. CERTIFICATES:,OF;ANALYSIS ' ' - ' ' - . . ANALYTICAL,TECHNOLOGIES, INC. -. r- AAna1ytcalTechnologies,mnc. 560 Naches Avenue, S.W., Suite 101, Renton, WA 98055, (206) 228-8335 __ ATI I.D. # 9103-284 April 18, 1991 • Hart Crowser, Inc. 1910 Fairview Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102-3699 • Attention : Clay Patmont Project Number : 3276 Project Name : Black River Corporate Park I� On March 29, 1991, Analytical Technologies, Inc. , received 17 soil samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached analytical schedule. The results, sample cross reference, and quality control data are enclosed. r . 4L4(Se;-e/. . Amed,W;.XIXJ141, / ( / / � J y/ Emily C. Ca ioli Frederick W. Grothkopp Senior Project Manager Technical Manager FWG/elf I 1A5AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 1 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 r" SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET 1 CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. '' PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK r ATI # CLIENT DESCRIPTION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX 9103-284-1 1010430 01/14/91 SOIL 9103-284-2 1010431 01/14/91 SOIL 9103-284-3 1010432 01/15/91 SOIL '/ 9103-284-4 1010433 01/15/91 SOIL 9103-284-5 1010434 01/15/91 SOIL 9103-284-6 1010435 01/15/91 SOIL 9103-284-7 1010439 01/15/91 SOIL 9103-284-8 1010440 01/16/91 SOIL 9103-284-9 1010441 01/16/91 SOIL r 9103-284-10 1010442 01/16/91 SOIL 9103-284-11 1010443 01/16/91 SOIL 9103-284-12 1010444 01/16/91 SOIL 9103-284-13 1010445 01/16/91 SOIL f 9103-284-14 1010446 01/16/91 SOIL /; I 9103-284-15 1010447 01/17/91 SOIL 9103-284-16 1010448 01/17/91 SOIL 9103-284-17 QC-1 N/A SOIL rTh i ce, TOTALS MATRIX # SAMPLES SOIL 17 ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE _ The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty (30) days from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is required, please contact our sample control department before the scheduled disposal date. AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 2 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB CADMIUM AA/F EPA 7130 R MERCURY AA/COLD VAPOR EPA 7471 R MOISTURE GRAVIMETRIC METHOD 7-2.2 R @ r Y j R = ATI - Renton SD = ATI - San Diego T = ATI - Tempe PNR = ATI - Pensacola FC = ATI - Fort Collins SUB = Subcontract � I J AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 3 ATI # 9103-284 METALS ANALYSIS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. ; PROJECT # : 3276 a` . PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PARAMETER DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CADMIUM , 04/10/91 04/11/91 MERCURY 04/09/91 04/09/91 i rj r . r—, LiAndytiCalTeChr101OgieS,Inc . 4 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK UNITS : mg/Kg ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. CADMIUM MERCURY 9103-284-1 1010430 <1 -9103-284-2 1010431 <1 1.1 9103-284-3 1010432 <1 - 9103-284-4 1010433 <1 - 9103-284-5 1010434 <1 - 9103-284-6 1010435 <1 - 9103-284-7 1010439 <1 - 9103-284-8 1010440 <1 - 9103-284-9 1010441 <1 - _, 9103-284-10 1010442 <1 - 9103-284-11 1010443 <1 -- 9103-284-12 1010444 <1 - 9103-284-13 1010445 <1 - 9103-284-14 1010446 <1 - � 9103-284-15 1010447 <1 - 9103-284-16 1010448 <1 - 9103-284-17 QC-1 3.2 - REAGENT BLANK - <1 <0. 15 ICI it , J 1 AnalyticaiTechnologies,Inc. 5 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 METALS QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK UNITS : mg/Kg L) SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC CADMIUM 9103-284-6 <1 <1 NC 30 32 94 CADMIUM 9103-284-16 <1 <1 NC 29 32 9]. CADMIUM 9104-054-9 2.8 2.5 11 38 39 90 CADMIUM NBS 2704 N/A N/A N/A 3 .3 3 .45 96 MERCURY 9103-275-4 <0.15 <0.15 NC 0.52 0.54 96 1-1 NC = Not calculable. IJ fi ri % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) j ! x 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) x 100 Average Result ti Jl AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 6 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 GENERAL CHEMISTRY CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PARAMETER DATE ANALYZED f� MOISTURE 04/02/91 r-: ti r- 5 ' i AnalyticalTechnoiogies,lnc. 7 i ATI I.D. # 9103-284 { GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL FI PROJECT # : 3276 I -` PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK UNITS : % L" ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. MOISTURE rn 9103-284-1 1010430 16 -- 9103-284-2 1010431 37 9103-284-3 1010432 29 1 ` 9103-284-4 1010433 20 L 9103-284-5 1010434 23 9103-284-6 1010435 24 r- 9103-284-7 1010439 12 L 9103-284-8 1010440 20 9103-284-9 1010441 23 1--h 9103-284-10 1010442 26 9103-284-11 1010443 21 H 9103-284-12 1010444 24 9103-284-13 1010445 18 l�, 9103-284-14 1010446 19 ' 9103-284-15 1010447 19 9103-284-16 1010448 22 r• 9103-284-17 QC-1 <1 i, r i t ' Ic r' r-. 1 I ' Analytical Technologies,lnc. 8 ATI I.D. # 9103-284 GENERAL CHEMISTRY QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL Fti PROJECT # : 3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK UNITS : % �. ATI SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD RESULT ADDED REC 4 1� . MOISTURE 9103-299-20 24 24 , 0 N/A N/A N/A �-- MOISTURE 9103-284-10 26 26 0 N/A N/A N/A r-i I • t ; % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) X 100 } Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) } X 100' Average Result t_. 111 91 ' 3-ZFS Hart Crowser, Inc. Sample Custody Record DATE 3 29 PAGE 1 OF I Y.YII CRoW 1910 Fairview Avenue East Seattle, Washington 98102-3699 JOB NUMBER . 27 Q LAB NUMBER TESTING k co PROJECT MANAGER C (G y �G +,F Z (� T Q PROJECT NAME 4�I c, ;v"r (0.- \f L e ►�Lr V, I — _ -� o OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS/ f ' • 000MPOSITING INSTRUCTIONS SAMPLED BY: 4 '~ o L. 0 U Z LAB NO. SAMPLE TIME STATION MATRIX V �� 1 '/Iti /cil 1010430 5ui �, 1 ---4 ( 2))) 1 1 1 I 1u ( UL�73 1 ' ! C� „ l S1rrlr.,1 5,, ( it(r,r0,e 7 lAS J rl 1 Il1l () li a Z Y I IY1cLl, a4 ) G) Gr\ .. ) 4 101 u Li 3 3 1 c:1,1,4. .. . I ("S)C '3 (Lotc� 4 1 `t. 1 fo '(I5/c\ l i01oL13 r- . y. 1 _7 '1ic ►sI Int Di/-cg : I 1 I lbhl l,.;It n44 0 1 x 1 I.J . lit tat�,(( 1 x 1 k) 1,1 i n i d bi `l 2 1< 1 it 'lllt4q ( inI fly yh t) I RELINQUISHED BY DATE /R CEIVED BY DATE TOTAL NUMBER / -� METHOD OF SHIPMENT �� �y 3� ��I j()/(i/C.,, jl�� OF CONTAINERS \jt SIGNATUR, nSIGN TUM / r C' I r_ll ��4h)L-}- TIME f l f JQ/,�. yl�� TIME SPECIAL SHIPMENT/HANDLIN OR STORAGE EQUIREM REQUIREMENTS PRINTED NAME / PRINTED NAgE I-i -4 rf.l,1srr A 1 1 a3t COMPAN RELINQUISHED BY DATE COMPANY RECEIVED BY DATE C L DISTRIBUTION: SIGNATURE SIGNATURE 1.PROVIDE WHITE AND YELLOW COPIES TO LABORATORY TIME TIME 2.RETURN PINK COPY TO PROJECT MANAGER PRINTED NAME PRINTED NAME 3.LABORATORY TO FILL IN SAMPLE NUMBER AND SIGN FOR RECEIPT COMPANY COMPANY 4.LABORATORY TO RETURN WHITE COPY TO HART CROWSER _z l_ _ f i 1 l --t Hart Crowser, Inc. DATE 79 2 H�TCROWS e, Washington sh Fairview Avenue Fast Sample Custody Record I�I PAGE 2 OF Seattle, Washin ton 98102-3699 JOB NUMBER 3 fi 7i. LAB NUMBER TESTING rn PROJECT MANAGER. - r11 r)r� z - PROJECT NAME 13Ici I / (Le (,,,p,r-k Pic" k Z n OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS/ 1 O ' V COMPOSITING INSTRUCTIONS SAMPLED BY: yy ( £ 0 L .)-k v,, SSW _. �c `J O Z LAB NO. SAMPLE TIME STATION MATRIX i2 '1I6i9I 10laci'Ai Su1L * I i -3 I I 11,/ct j lot c 0 ((t/c- I i,.1 k1IL IGi his () (1y6 X I I IL 'II 3 Iy 1 1 0I h yLik x 17 (1 r— i 5 U I I, �/� t • RELIN qISHED BY DATE ECEIVED BY DATE - TOTAL NUMBER I �� METHOD OF SHIPMENT l.(� , VL„� 3�q q Ni ,Q,(��_ ,-3/2,/ OF CONTAINERS C A 8 SIGNATUR I I SIG ATU E Qc,.,),,,,i- 9i9. NNt C V_ TIME SPECIAL SHIPMENT/HANDLING IG�; TIME U OR STORAGE REQUIREMENTS PRINTED NAME ( PRINTED NAME :_ �i: Mac- All /d3b COMPANY COMPANY RELINQUISHED BY DATE RECEIVED BY DATE DISTRIBUTION: 1.PROVIDE WHITE AND YELLOW COPIES TO LABORATORY SIGNATURE SIGNATURE TIME TIME 2.RETURN PINK COPY TO PROJECT MANAGER • PRINTED NAME 'PRINTED NAME 3. LABORATORY TO FILL IN SAMPLE NUMBER AND SIGN FOR RECEIPT COMPANY COMPANY 4. LABORATORY TO RETURN WHITE COPY TO HART CROWSER 1 UL AnalyticaITechnoiocgies,Inc. 560 Naches Avenue, SW., Suite 101, Renton, WA 98055, (206) 228-8335 1 C . ATI I.D. # 9104-184 r, —; June 24, 1991 Hart Crowser, Inc. 1910 Fairview Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102-3699 Attention : Clay Patmont Project Number : J-3276 Project Name : Black River On April 16, 1991, Analytical Technologies, Inc. , received six soil, five plant samples and one water sample for analysis. A QC sample had been previously been supplied and was analyzed with ,these samples. The samples were analyzed with EPA methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached analytical r schedule. The results, sample cross reference, and quality control data were issued in the original report dated May 22, 1991. Enclosed is an ammendment to that original report. The soil cadmiums were originally analyzed by ICAP; for consistancy in the data base, the digestates were reanalyzed by AA/F. The results of the reanalyses are reported in this package and can be substituted ` into the original report. 4 LI Emily C. Carf' i Frederick W. Grothkopp Li Senior Project Manager Technical Manager j; FWG/tc 1 ! AnalyticalT'echnoiogies,Inc. 1 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER ATI # CLIENT DESCRIPTION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX 9104-184-1 HC-1 04/16/91 SOIL 4`- 9104-184-2 HC-2 04/16/91 SOIL 9104-184-3 HC-3 04/16/91 SOIL 9104-184-4 HC-4 04/16/91 SOIL 9104-184-5 HC-5 04/16/91 SOIL 9104-184-6 HC-6 04/16/91 SOIL 9104-184-7 HC-1PT 04/16/91 PLANT 9104-184-8 HC-2PT 04/16/91 PLANT 9104-184-9 HC-3PT 04/16/91 PLANT 9104-184-10 HC-4PT 04/16/91 PLANT 9104-184-11 HC-5PT 04/16/91 PLANT 9104-184-12 CEDAR RIVER 04/16/91 WATER 9104-184-13 QC-1 (FROM 9103-284) N/A SOIL 9104-184-14 QC-2 (SUPPLIED BY ATI) N/A PLANT TOTALS MATRIX # SAMPLES SOIL 7 PLANT 6 WATER 1 ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty (30) days from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is required, please contact our sample control department before the scheduled disposal date. i J L-' /gAnalyticalTechnoiogies,Inc. 2 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB CADMIUM AA/F EPA 7130 R CADMIUM AA/GF EPA 7131 R LEAD AA/GF EPA 7421 R MERCURY AA/COLD VAPOR EPA 7471 R �- NICKEL ICAP EPA 6010 R ZINC ICAP EPA 6010 R MOISTURE GRAVIMETRIC METHOD 7-2.2 R I I 2 � R = ATI - Renton fl SD = ATI - San Diego T = ATI - Tempe PNR = ATI - Pensacola FC = ATI - Fort Collins SUB = Subcontract LAnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 3 ATI # 9104-1.84 1 i _ METALS ANALYSIS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : J--3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER SAMPLE MATRIX : WATER PARAMETER DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED i R CADMIUM 04/19/91 04/30/91 NICKEL 04/19/91 04/30/91 ZINC 04/19/91 04/30/91 ' ,I LJ r-. r-G LAnalyticallechnologies,Inc . 4 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : WATER PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : mg/L ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. CADMIUM LEAD NICKEL ZINC 9104-184-12 CEDAR RIVER <0. 002 <0.005 0. 01 0.021 REAGENT BLANK - <0. 002 <0.005 <0. 01 0.006 I it 1 AnalyticalTechnoiogies,Inc. 5 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : WATER PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : mg/L SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC r CADMIUM 9103-265-10 <0.002 <0.002 NC N/A N/A N/A CADMIUM BLANK SPIKE N/A N/A N/A 0.412 0.500 82 LEAD 9104-184-12 <0.005 <0.005 NC 0. 043 0. 050 86 NICKEL 9103-265-10 <0. 01 <0.01 NC 2.02 2.50 81 ZINC 9103-265-10 0.043 0. 037 15 2.29 2.50 90 ! �I it NC = Not calculable. % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) x 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) x 100 Average Result 1 LAnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 6 ATI # 9104-184 { METALS ANALYSIS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PARAMETER DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED -- CADMIUM 04/19/91 06/19/91 MERCURY 04/29/91 04/29/91 i i I L_ AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 7 r ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS RESULTS CT CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : J-3276 ; PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : mg/Kg ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. CADMIUM MERCURY 9104-184-1 HC-1 10 - �__' 9104-184-2 HC-2 12 - 9104-184-3 HC-3 15 - I 9104-184-4 HC-4 20 - I 9104-184-5 HC-5 <1 - 9104-184-6 HC-6 <1 <0. 15 REAGENT BLANK - <1 <0.15 I i i I } 1 ' { I f I � 4__ I I A AnalyticaITechnologies,lnc. 8 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : mg/Kg SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % - PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC CADMIUM 9104-184-6 <1 <1 NC 27 28 96 MERCURY 9104-184-6 <0. 15 <0. 15 NC 0.78 0. 60 130 MERCURY BLANK SPIKE N/A N/A N/A 0.49 0.50 98 , NC = Not calculable. % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) x 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) x 100 Average Result I )l AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 9 ATI # 9104-184 METALS' ANALYSIS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. II PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER SAMPLE MATRIX : PLANT PARAMETER DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED �_-_' CADMIUM 05/10/91 05/14/91 I-, i I r i , , L, ( r-- 1 I /, \Analyticaliechnologies,Inc. 10 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : PLANT PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : nag/Kg ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. CADMIUM 9104-184-7 HC-1PT 0.79 9104-184-8 HC-2PT 0.55 9104-184-9 HC-3PT 0. 62 9104-184-10 HC-4PT 3.5 9104-184-11 HC-5PT 0.10 REAGENT BLANK — <0.01 1 �1 , / \it,AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 11 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 METALS QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : PLANT PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : mg/Kg SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC CADMIUM 9104-184-11 0.10 0.09 1 7.3 50 14* CADMIUM BLANK SPIKE N/A N/A N/A 49 50 98 BUFFALO RIVER CADMIUM SEDIMENT N/A N/A N/A 2 .8 3 .45 81 NBS 2704 * Out of limits due to matrix interference. - % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) x 100 } Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) x 100 Average Result { / \AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 12 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 GENERAL CHEMISTRY CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PARAMETER DATE ANALYZED - MOISTURE 04/18/91 ' it Ir ii LAnalyttcallechnologies,Inc . . 13 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : % i ATI I.D. # CLIENT I.D. MOISTURE 9104-184-1 HC-1 47 I 9104-184-2 HC-2 42 9104-184-3 HC-3 36 9104-184-4 HC-4 40 9104-184-5 HC-5 15 9104-184-6 HC-6 23 G`' I ,l AnalyticalTechnoiogies,Inc. 14 ATI I.D. # 9104-184 GENERAL CHEMISTRY QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : HART CROWSER, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : J-3276 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER UNITS : % ATI SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % PARAMETER I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD RESULT ADDED REC r=` MOISTURE 9104-182-4 15 14 7 N/A N/A N/A MOISTURE 9104-217-3 14 14 0 N/A N/A N/A w1 I I a, I 1-7 % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) X 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) X 100 Average Result 1- � c4 AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. DATE ��1,�4 ( PAGE OF 560 Nachos Avenue SW,Suite 101 Renton,WA 98055 (206)228-8335 Chain of Custody LABORATORY NUMBER: Q 1 o4 — 1 gL-I' PROJECT MANAGER: C lc ` a �y r,-, ANALYSIS:REQUEST:< ;.;::.;:.;;:.;::. .:. COMPANY: i{-t, '1--- Clc_9-C.{)e-•✓ w w :::::::<»::::>:::::>::>: :>:: ADDRESS: -o w m in v T `� o - w U w ( LLLL ? ............. i., o a_ G7 U _ d ,, o ,d a Q w v 3 1'1- s.:: 2 PHONE: SAMPLED Witi z t -J . M p j Z co $ as B y r - m »: :SAMPLE.DISPOSAL'.INSTRUCTIONS >':>>» > <>': .' E o } - m - y ° ? _u a V i,_ '� ................ O Z U U d d Z O a- (L $ O N L tk E ❑ATI Disposal @$5.00 each l\\ ieturn/\t = a O c7 c� = a O n = w ►� c7 $ o ° N = - m � IQr m . 80 — ~ .omg � � � � i3 SAMLLE 1D `. `.:;<;> : : : : ;; ': DATE : :;:T1ME• MATRIX LA1B ID: 6 8 m 03 2 2 co a oo m 3 v `a t-- ° w a- m o"'o `"o ao z. k c I /►c�14 I ,,:\ i.... I _ X I.4c.- -2- 2 X .1 : Ifc -3 3 :i ii-C - `i 4 - X :t NL---_5 5 - X <i: 1'+z -I ' b X :� - _if�- 1 y- Ptc..�-- .7 X ice_ 3 _ `: 14 - Li. PI- li (0 ?( T.':::, iR-- .S PT X ••., (f £iu-e.�. wal . I?J - a\bcX :X ` ,i : Eli OUTS ED.B .?is>::<:»:.>1RELINQUISHED PROJECT INFORMA ON ::':"?;:;':;:: .;<.>':<<::: ::;.;:: '�::SAMPL.ERECEI:.::::::<:::<:'<��. . ................ : X..::.:::... • ... .... Y... .......2. RELINQUISHED•BY: '>;> '3::. •PROJECT NUMBER: "r� -3) 7. TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTAINERS Si�ture. Time: Signature: Time: Signature: Time: PROJECT NAME: (3 iG. it. (2;vt r- COC SEALS/INTACT? Y/N/NA t PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: RECEIVED GOOD CONDJCOLD y Printed Name: Date: Printed Name: Date: Printed Name: Date: ONGOING PROJECT? YES NO ❑ RECEIVED VIA:0 +... >:< .PR .,.. ,.HTL#ORRATION 1S REQUIRERO#!RUSH;P:.ROJEGTkegii :` m• y: Company Company: .. : A..soV .:.H €::::€::;giip�.!;.:1 33E-C.EIYEU..PY ::<::<:<: <::>:::>:°:>::i'.<::::REC EDGY LAB ...; 3.' TAT: NOR 2WKS ' )(RUSH) 24HR 48 HRS 72 HRS 1 WK �.. • • .........:.•( ) GREATER THA 2 ? YES ❑ NO ❑ (LAB USE ONLY) =t /,,Time: Signature: Time: Signature: Time: SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: j ,/} �� 6)3°1 ��r�t ✓1— j I r*a 11 r4 l/ Sts yrt n me: dte:Printed Name: Date: Printed Name: Date: NC rk. fSliEck Si - it 1 itkei, gi6/4/ Company: Company: Analytical Technologies, Inc. ATI Labs: San Diego(619)458-9141 • Phoenix(602)438-1530 • Seattle(206)228-8335 • 'Pensacola(904)474-1001 DISTRIBUTION: White,Canary-ATI •Pink-ORIGINATOR N° 49Rh -- ----- -, .---, ;—-). , --- - ,, ., ---, ;---- -3 gyp , , wow ' _ ,,, ,...,, , ,____ L-- , , ---...--_. 2ho AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. DATE illik/7) PAGE 560 Nachos Avenue SW,Suite 101 Renton;-A11-03 55-(206)228-8335 Chain of Custody LABORATORY NUMBER: 910-f—(Ekt-1 .........••...........................,„..„:„......-:::::::„.„.„..'.:.:''::.'.'.' PROJECT MANAGER . ANALYSIS"-- --"--..-•- "REQUEST . . : ' , ' • • ,:iiiiiiini:iiMii::iiii:!i::i!:;i:iii.:i•a:::: COMPANY: i•le...4 C,..A.,,q,-- 2 . co , 2mi.; :T.etgotwein - COg. .i.i.:;E::=.4i ;.! ADDRESS: ra in CO E5 Ps i" iii g -i3 g 1 ,s < . ai ct — 4 03 co o F., ?".g... ft•li. PHONE: SAMPLED BY: k....4/-T /13. ! .2 5 g Z CD Pi :8 X eti 1 " :1 1 ±' P03 lg. 0 lAll •Lfl.ti. H.::::.: ....:'::1.:"..."..:.*'::'::!,::SAMPLE DISPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS.W.:.:W'MhWa to• I 21 0 0 El rn, 21 2 co cc a e 1 R i 2 ;k ve. ,. . Ei AT1 Disposal @$5.00 each ralfetum ox z, yi° 8 99- § 0 8 w - cv „) x I- .` ' i2 8 T2 .:g •`; :2 '.........'.--sAmPLEID*.::-K,:::.]:,,,isi::,:,:::,::,:i-ii -ii.".;DATE:: : 'IlIVIE; -11/1ATRIX kA1.110: m 03 .0 2 03 12- O-3 Z.03- v. v 8 I— I__ a(- I (c„,, ‘1,1i3- ...5?-4/) S . I 13 . Gc-2, CsLi.' I, 114-4-7-a- cicq:-/- if .Y\ .-;:'i:•.,,;. ;432iiir40 ::::::::.::•,; . , . _ . • • . . . •:i:::„.:,., -----k--: RELINQUISHED EIVisliiiMV:fiEliNQUISHED.BYtM.WV RE!INQUIHED13 °'Si .tUre: • • • • :Time: Signature: Time: Signature: Time: 'PROJECT NUMBER: TOTAL NUMBER OF CONTAINERS gna PROJECT NAME: COO SEALS/INTACT? YIN/NA Printed Na • Date: Printed Name: Date: Printed Name: Date: PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER: RECEIVED GOOD CONDJCOLD i ONGOING PROJECT? YES El NO 0 RECEIVED VIA: Company: Company: prim AUTHORIZATION jS REQUIRED FOR'ROpktpRogc.1„. ::: ::::.;:: :;:::0ii ,,..,,..,,........, :;!. .!..00. ::otdEeNtoty. .,iii9::iiiigii;1.!§ . ;Ft .c.py.go..ey.;:a.;4e) ]'.. ,'.:: TAT: (NORMAL) 0 2WKS I (RUSH) 0 24HR 0 48 FIRS (3 72 HRS Ell WI< ll". -,•••:•,- •: •••••••Time: Signature: lime: Signature: Time: GREATER THAN 24 HR. NOTICE? YES Ei NO 0 (LAB USE ONLY) tu i Vii . _./ SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: .,:. 'dii e: ate: Printed Name: C c &. -- L&/.4°. "1.,,rec/ Prl•t 'IQ APL 4/6/41 Date: Printed Name: Date: 5c (115. 1 O A-27 Company: Analytical Technologies, Inc. ti Company:g-- 784/-1ATI Labs: San Diego(619)458-9141 • Phoenix(602)438-1530 • Seattle(206)228-8335 • Pensacola(904)474-1001 DISTRIBUTION: White,Canary-ATI •Pink-ORIGINATOR KI° 4 9 7 • '' �' ''+ 'Ha'rt Crowser' ;. J-3276 APPENDIX Dr . SUPPLEMENTAL MICA ' • - . - - --CLEANUP:;STANDARD,INFORMATION• - . rl ,. , ; ' ., - 11 � � - - ' , - .r :T' •�:��i - - .. ii Hart Crowser J-3276 4r APPENDIX D SUPPLEMENTAL MTCA CLEANUP STANDARD INFORMATION Cadmium Reference Dose (RfD): 5 x 104 mg/kg-day (water) 1 x 10-3 mg/kg-day (food) Soil Direct Contact (WAC 173-340-740(3)(a) (iii)(A)): RfD = 5 x 104 mg/kg-day (based on water exposures) ABW = 16 kg SIR = 200 mg/day AB1 = 1.0 (conservative) FOC = 1.0 Cleanup Level = 40 mg/kg (Soil) is Vegetable Consumption: RfD = 1 x 10-3 mg/kg-day ABW = 70 kg VIR (from EPA Region 10 1990 Risk Assessment Guidance): 1,790 mg/day (root crops) 2,020 mg/day (leafy vegetables) 1_ ,f 4,810 mg/day (garden fruits) 8,620 mg/day TOTAL (dry weight basis) AB1 = 1.0 FOC = 1.0 (conservative) Cleanup Level = 8.1 mg/kg (Plant Tissue) Maximum Plant Tissue Concentration (reed canarygrass) = 1.5 mg/kg Maximum Plant:Soil Transfer Factor = 0.068 (see Figure) Plant Protection Cleanup Level = 8.1/0.068 = 120 mg/kg (Soil) 4j Groundwater Protection: Groundwater Cleanup Standard for Cadmium: Existing MCL = 0.005 mg/L MTCA Hazard Index Calculation = 0.008 mg/L Resultant Method B Standard = 0.005 mg/L Page D-1 Hart Crowser J-3276 Preliminary Leachate Analysis: TCLP Concentration for Cadmium = 0.23 mg/L Soil:TCLP Concentration Ratio = 120:1 Prelim. Groundwater Protection = .005 * 120 = 0.6 mg/kg (Soil) Soil Leachate Analysis (see Appendix B for Method Description): ): Soil:Leachate Concentration Ratio = 1,500:1 Groundwater Protection = .005 * 1,500 = 7.5 mg/kg (Soil) Page D-2 Hart Crowser • - • : ' . •. J-3276: • • ` APPENDIX'S BORING LOG ANDr,CHENIICAL DATA : FROM'PREVIOUS REPORTS . • • • • • +- • ICY, r 1 .• r r ' I Hart Crowser J-3276 • • • • ,j _ BORING LOGS. EARTH CONSULTANTS " ' -_ • NOVEMBER AND:DECE• MBER'1985 , • ' ` . • • • • r . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 'I • 1 • • • • • • r Y - • y, • L , f • r-' I s A 1 ' , it _ r� / �` Approximate Scale Iii mom i 8-4 � � � ` O 50 100 aDOft I' F---- S 8-5 S B-3 sl'AIrci LEGEND •// St \ . IS B-3 Approximate Boring . \ B-2 ` Location 'S \ ‘ / S B-I /7// Approximate Limits of ,i , 1 \ - ,..-.. ,, 1` / Proposed Deveb men t/ \ \\ \ \ \ Property Line ` \ Reference Site Survey By Bush, Roed a Hitchings, Inc. I _ - -- -- - --- - ---- - - Dated 12/4/85 a �;� �'Ic N Earth onsultants Inc*.\t. i I GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY D Boring Location Plan CD Burlington Northern Property Renton, Washington I . Proj.No.884-4A I Date Dec. '85 I Plate 2 - BORING NO. 1 Logged By RWB 22- Date 11/13/85 ELEV. (N) { Graph CS Soil Description D ftp jh Sample Blows (%) Ft. ml Dark gray sandy SILT, moist, medium = 17 18 dense (fill) - 5 !__' Becomes dense at 7.5' - :I: 39 22 — 10 ("" H. ''H' ml Brown-gray mottled SILT, moist, medium . :I: 21 32 .. ' II i I dense - 152 11/20/85 Q. : sm Grades to: - 6 26 !I I I i:':;:? ml Gray silty fine SAND to sandy SILT, wet,..--- 2QZ 1 1/1 85 �--�--- loose - . , sp Gray gravelly SAND, wet, medium dense : = 27 26 .� . . gP — 25 ;i • • - 30 •'••' - Becomes dense at 32' = 43 19 *4 .: - 35 : = 40 12 i :•!; - 40 �!•� _ :I: 31 18 • • :••••:*• • —45 ml Gray-olive SILT, slightly clayey, . = 9 35 C=1.0tcf moisture above plastic limit, very soft - I, I with seashells throughout, medium plas- 7 " 77-177:--- '�ra3es to: ticity - 7 27 ;1 ysilty - :: :' ml Gray-olive sandy SILT to SAND, _ h ,:12:.:. :::.... sm wet', loose with- seashell fragments — 55 T-T�T'; --- sp Gray gravelly SAND, wet, very dense = 54 12 —60 59 12 ; - 65 - 7 55 13 `~I Boring terminated at 69 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 20.5 feet during drilling. 3/4" PVC standpipe installed to bottom at boring. Lower 20 feet slotted. Boring backfilled with cuttings. IT i r Li BORING LOG i.' (i 1 BURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY FT RENTON, WASHINGTON ! Earth l Consultants Inc.qlotqvqpi • 1 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 884-4AI Date Nov. '85 [Plate 4 i I - BORING NO. I Logged By RWB I 1~', Date 11/13/85 ELEV. US (N) Graph CS Soil Description ft;h Sample Blows (%1 - Ft. ml Brown sandy SILT, moist, medium dense = 26 20 (fill) - 5 I - 30 19 ^ i '11 _ 10 ! m1 Brown-gray mottled SILT with organics, _ = 17 33 qu=4.Otsf 1 moisture below plastic limit, very �•T --- -stiff,_low to medium plasticity - 15 FT E 11 11 ml Gray SILT, moist, loose - s 11/12/85 3 12 N77'.,,.' 20 :'-• I: i-.1 sm Gray silty fine SAND, wet, loose - 9 31 4...r.1± !'-- (t! !...ti. -- 25 :t:;a t:� ,�: _ = 14 31 y;:. ...;_•:o--- - - 30 sp Gray SAND, fine to coarse grained with = = 32. 16 3" layer of sandy gravel, wet, dense - 35 Becomes medium dense _ i 11 : - 407 : --- -------- 1.T. I::i0 sm Gray silty SAND with some gravel and 8 22 4Ea1a: seashell fragments, wet, loose - E:;:�:Ia.�.N:!: — 45 -) ROk:k:f. Becomes medium dense _ = 19 22 1'L•d.dJi. ... 5 W . --- Grades to: :I: 21 29 i• ;:; _.• sp Gray SAND with some silt, gravel, and - 55 iITI: :: sm seashell fragments, wet, medium dense " ;:{:l:i.f :I: 26 23 'f ; - _ - - ss Light brown-tan sandy SILT, dry to - 60 U moist, medium dense with medium plasti- = 95 18 =_= city lenses (weathered siltstone) T ', Becomes dry, hard i Boring terminated at 64 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 19 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings. , 1_ J r . r Li L BORING LOG / I! 1 1 lit BURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY r ' RENTON, WASHINGTON j Earth ,,y Consultants Inc.i GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 884-4AI Date Nov. '85 (Plate 5 1 _____ BORING NO. 3 Li Logged By RWB y Date 11/14/85 ELEV. `, (N) • _ Graph CS Soil Description Depth Sample Blows (%) Ft. ml Dark brown sandy SILT, moist, dense, 34 17 low to non-plastic. (fill) - 5 ili ml Dark brown SILT, moisture below plastic : T 14 41 qu=2.75tsf 1 --- limit, very stiff, medium plasticity — 10 I ml Brownish silt to sandy SILT, moist, Push 24" 29 1 - - loose — 15 1.I.'k' --- ------- - Q 11/=/85 7 26 . i'•G:r'E •E'r sm Gray silty SAND, fine, wet loose - 20 l !}} - { fit }#�# k T 14 26 f {tri::t i.' _ 25 FL' lili'iliiiiill:'i .,1.•I• {1 --- -------- — 30 E 20 ▪ i` gp = 32 17 ' ▪ •:i: : sp Gray gravelly SAND to sandy GRAVEL, :— 35 r wet, dense • .▪ •' 20 20 ::. . - 40 r . - �' Becomes medium dense at 42' _ = 24 17 ill '.;;••• •• P•• . 45 t� � { .: sm— moray sixty tine SAND with some gravel - Z 14 21 } =ti�1t▪ i1=11 : and seashell fragments, wet, medium -. --- — dense — 50 . •`.f " .. `'P Gray gravelly SAND with silt, wet, - —_ 46 15 •: : '"".:.: sm dense Boring terminated at 54 feet below existing ground. Groundwater encountered at 17.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with cuttings. 1 I (_J r { BORING LOG jit { Ali BURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY r Earth Vt RENTON, WASHINGTON LiConsultants Inc. • � GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Prof. No.884-4A I Date Nov. ' 85 f Plate 6 L__ ; , BORING NO. Logged By RWdB -1 }— Date 11/14/85 ELEV. • i_ . (N) Graph US Soil Description ( tDepth Sample Blows (oi) , Ft. 1 i ♦♦♦♦i♦ Y ♦♦�♦�♦�♦� sm Brown to gray silty fine SAND, moist, - = 20 22 ♦♦♦♦ - ♦�����♦�� medium dense (fill) — 5 L11 ml Brown mottled SILT, slightly clayey, ^ = 8 35 I moisture below plastic limit, stiff, —10 � I, medium plasticity '- M1'f ' sm Brown silty fine SAND, moist, loose y1 ./20I85 Push 24" 27 , :1:1:1:3:�:� ....1. -15 :i:;czi: L:i: --- - - _ 11 1 5 • l::: + Grades to: - Y / 12 36 Il ���� sm Gray silty fine SAND, wet, medium dense-L0 q. .t f::F::: I. 13 36 �, r sp Gray SAND, fine with silt and gravel, -25 = 17 26 �••!'•':•: sm wet, medium dense —30 r' : :, Becomes dense F = 38 14 —35 : l1;: Becomes medium dense I 26 19 +} —40 (-::: .. Becomes dense at 42' I. 35 21 1..1.. Fi.. r ss Light brown-tan SILT to sandy SILT, y45 �ll __ moist very dense with medium p acti- _.— city iens'es weathered siltstone)� T. 57 20 r , Boring terminated at 49 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered �. at 17.5 feet during drilling. 3/4" PVC standpipe installed to bottom of boring. Lower 20 feet slotted. Boring backfilled with cuttings. f, I a F In I►/ BORING LOG pBURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY RENTON, WASHINGTON H I Earth 114 )IS. P/ . U- Consultants Inc. • • GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 884-4A I Date Nov. '85 !Plate 7 i i i 1_}i FT -• BORING NO. ___5____ I Logged By RWB • ' a Date 11/15/85 ELEV. I, r i (N) Graph CS Soil Description D`eftp;h Sample Blows ( ) 4 Ft. �--- 400 0 _ 24 32 u=4.Otsf���‘� . ml Brown SILT, at plastic limit, very :I: q •••• *. ___ stiff (fill) — 5 ���������� Brown SILT with some fine sand, moist, : T 5 29 �� • ����y�� ML loose (fill) —10 iftt fl �������� With soft clayey silt lenses - T Push 24" ai II�O4 - 15Y11/2 5 ��i♦ ___ f•f• �;l; f{ i; sm Gray SAND, fine, wet, .loose to medium - Y 11/1 5 11 30 .1.iN....,..,.. dense —20 i j sin With wood fragments, loose at 23' - :I: 5 34 { —25 `'MaEl- —= I 50/4" - 20 - -Cray-CHAT- moisture below plastic limit, 30 qu=4.0tsf _ sexz_stiff. to hard, high plasticity - ss- Light tan to light gray SILTSTONE to - • = 50/4" 13 SANDSTONE, moist to dry, hard =—35 II Becomes dry - ,-- 50/3" 11 Boring terminated at 39 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered -.,,I at 17 feet during drilling. 3/4"' PVC standpipe installed to bottom of boring. Lower 20 feet slotted. Boring backfilled with cuttings. - U • U Li -I } 1 . �_,H BORING LOG BURLINGTON NORTHERN PROPERTY Earth 01101lik RENTON, WASHINGTON --` Consultants Inc. ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 884-4A I Date Nov. '85 tiate 8 ti -, '- . . - • ,• • . ... ' :Hart Crowser . , • fiP • . . ' . : . , -J-3276 . • _ . , ' . BORING LOGS AND : . . CHEMICAL:ANALYSES TRACT A ; -, • • • EARTH:CONSULTANTS .. - ; JULY,1990' - , s ,y; • • p ' • • •• f" •• • I� ,-.. . " 1 Client: Project Name: Boring No.: First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A . 101 Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet . i MLp - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 7/19/90 7/19/90 L i 1 Mic rotip c I. Depth 82 Surface Conditions: . d Reading Sample o m c. in v E 1 (ppm) ID to 8 _. Feet co DU) } 1 .•I f". 1 - ii t;;. S Brown silty very fine SAND (dredge spoils) , 1 � t:: t S damp, well sorted > •: R sm I :: a:: 3 ml Brown sandy clayey SILT (dredge spoils?) , j4 moist, very fine sand / b ml- Gray-green and mottled gray-green and brown cl clayey SILT/ silty CLAY, moist J"- l Bottom of borehole J ' 6 7 — i - 8 ' I � 9 • 1 o — _ 2 1 3 J 4 r 5 c j Irv;1 i ) Notes/Location Boring terminated at 5.5 feet below existing grade. NS - not sampled NR - no sample recovery Boring completed as El Monitoring Well Log of interval from 0 to 2.5 feet below ground (See Plate for details) 0 Piezometer surface is based on auger cuttings D Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. Mj (] t_; J Client: Project Name: Boring No.: I_, First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: 1 1 A ff E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger 1 , Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet MLP - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 - 7-19-90 7-19-90 1 it i Microtip 3 E. 5. Depth U$ Surface Conditions: ! Reading Sample o in v (ppm) ID m�j .g Feet =N ! I NS Brown silty very fine SAND (dredge spoils) , ,_J NS damp, well sorted B101A- sm 1.5 '` IN l ••'• 2 NR 3 — Bottom of borehole — 1 4 -1 ,_ i 5 — f 6 r — • , g _ rr f T' I g — �IJ o — . ( ' _• ,___] -__ 2 • 3 L - I 4 — 5 fir-, i 6 _ Notes/Location — I, Boring terminated at 2.5 feet below existing grade. NS - not sampled Boring completed as Ej Monitorirg Well NR - no sample recovery r _ (See Plate for details) Q Piezometer ® Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. t 1 I . Client: Project Name: Boring No.: First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Dolling Method: 1OZ E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet MLP - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 7/19/90 7/19/90 i ' Microtip 2. Depth cn— Surface Conditions: Reading Sample o in U (ppm) ID to 8 . Feet r ! NS Brown. SILT (dredge spoils) with minor clay, t ® damp, rootlets ITk1 ml 3 Mottled gray-green and brown clayey SILT/silty ma/cl CLAY with lenses of silty sand, moist; minor organics- Bottom of borehole I � 5 — • 6 _. • ,71 7 — i 8 -- 9 — 0 t t 1 2 -- 3 — 4 5 — I ilj 6 r l Motes/Location Boring terminated at 4 feet below existing grade. NS - not sampled Boring completed as n Monitoring Well NR — no sample recovery (See Plate for details) Piezometer XO Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. • Client: Project Name: Boring No.: First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Job No.: Drilling Contractor: -Drilling Method: 102A r l E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Li .Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet MLP - Split Spoon I Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 7/19/90 7/19/90 r' i Mi 'otip Depth Cl) Surface Conditions: Reading Sample o in v (ppm) ID m c3 1 Feet NS Brown SILT (dredge spoils) with minor clay, NS moist, rootlets 1 B102A- ' ml TT NR___I Mottled gray-green and brown clayey SILT/ L_ ,-,I ' NR m l silty CLAY (inferred from nearby B102 log) 3 L - Bottom of borehole 4 — } 5 r — 6 -_ . g _ --- 9 ---- • f j 0 i t — 2 — 3 J 4 — 5 — it- — I h j + Notes/location r Boring terminated at 3 feet below existing grade. NS — not sampled Boring completed as 0 Monitoring Well NR — no sample recovery (See Plate for details) El Piezometer ® Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. i ' l r } Client Project Name: Boring No.: 1 i First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: 103 F-1 E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet MLP - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 - 7/19/90 7/19/90 i - ^l 1, Microtip 3 c Depth U2 Surface Conditions: Reading Sample o = R in U E (ppm) ID m 8 .€ Feet j rn .4C NS ml Brown SILT (dredge spoils) , moist, abundant organics 1 --- -- -------------------- -- B103- Brown clayey SILT with layers of brown silty y1.5' 2m very fine sand (dredge spoils), moist, very _ - abundant. organics, wood chips --:, 3 4 • B103- 4.5' 5 6 NS--- --------------------- IraNSMottled clg y-green and brown silty CLAY, 7 moist, soft, minor organics g — Bottom of borehole 9 — i • 2 , 1 .. 3 — I 4 — 1 5 — Notes/Location Boring terminated at a feet below existing grade. NS — not sampled Boring completed as El Monitoring Well (See Plate for details) 0 Piezometer i__: 0 Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. - i Client: - Project Name: Boring No.: First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A 1 0.4 Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: 7 I E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet IMP - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 1-- 7/19/90 7/19/90 MicxotiP 3 Depth V Surface Conditions: i Reading Sample o�IQ in -! (ppm) ID 5c3 .' Feet j co s 1 NS Brown silty very fine to fine SAND (dredge �_; spoils) , moist, very silty ■ t B104- sm FT 1.5' 2 . NS i • NS Mottled brown SILT (dredge spoils?), moist ml I ml Gray-green gravelly sandy SILT, moist, very j mu $ ml `fine to fine sand, fine gravel J _.Gray-green clayey SILT moist, abundant •1 6 organics Bottom of borehole -`1 7 L- I 8 — . 9 — Lj 4 ; t c d I 2 — it 3 — 4 .._ 5 '16 — r- 1 Notes/Location Boring terminated at 5 feet below existing grade. NS - not sampled NR - no sample recovery Boring completed as 0 Monitoring Well 7 j (See Plate for details) ri Piezometer ® Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. ( Client Project Name: Boring No.: First City Development Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Job No.: Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: 105 1 E-1990-12 Holt Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Logged By: Casing Elevation: Sampling Method: Sheet MLP - Split Spoon Start Date: Completion Date: 1 of 1 7/19/90 7/19/90 1 + Microtip I. Depth U Surface Conditions: Reading Sample o in v (ppm) ID 8 .. Feet ?N m >:: NS Mottled brown silty very fine SAND (dredge ) 1 Ell sm spoils) , moist, very silty j-Th ( B105-2' '' 2 ! 3 sm Mottled brown and gray silty SAND (dredge 4 spoils?) , moist, very silty n, � X miter Graygray-greenclayey to cla a SILT (ml/cl) , moist, - L_C ' 5 _ abundant organics Bottom of borehole H 6 — + 7 — I } _. 8 r- i1 9 = i J 0 — i_ — }- 1 2 3 — —i' . 4 1 — 5 — ;---] — 6 — Notes/Location L I Boring terminated at 4.5 feet below existing grade. NS — not samples Boring completed as Monitoring Well NR — no sample recovery (See Plate for details) 0 Piezometer 2 Hole abandoned with bentonite sealed to surface. ,-- i 1 cl alyticalTechnologies,lnc. 560 Naches Avenue.S.W.,Suite 101, Renton. WA 98055. (206)228-8335 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 August 17, 1990 Earth Consultants, Inc. ( l 1805 136th Place N.E. Bellevue, WA 98009 Attention : Marcus Pierce Project Number : PR-1912 Project Name : Black River Corp. Park, Tract A On July 20, 1990 Analytical Technologies, Inc. received six soil I . samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached analytical schedule. The results, sample cross reference, and the quality control data are enclosed. This is a partial report as it does not contain the mercury results. We will send you the complete report when all the necessary data is available _ Karen L. Mixon Frederick W. Grothkopp Project Manager Technical Manager ': 1 FWG/elf 1 L I I- - LAn � 'alyticalTechnologies,lnc. 560 Nccnes Avenue, S.W., Suite 101. Renton. WA 98055. (206) 228-8335 REG, ATI I.D. # 9007-176 Fa G 24 1990 V011s l August 24, 1990 1 Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 136th Place N.E. Bellevue, WA 98009 Attention : Marcus Pierce Project Number : PR-1912 .71 Project Name : Black River Corp. Park, Tract A On July 20, 1990 Analytical Technologies, Inc. received six soil samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA. methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached analytical schedule. The partial results, sample cross reference, and the quality control data were sent to you on August 17, 1990. Enclosed are the amended pages to the report previously sent. Please replace the original pages with these updates. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you. iC) C\LCAQ".. . Ne`N•1/4x/C3 \CS. f‘-x)G • Karen L. Mixon( Frederick W. Grothkopp Project Manager Technical Manager { FWG/elf IAnalyticaITechnotogies,Inc. 1 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 I SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ATI # CLIENT DESCRIPTION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX 9007-176-1 B101A-1.5' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-2 B102A-1' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-3 B103-1.5 ' 07/19/90 - SOIL 9007-176-4 B103-4.5' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-5 B104-1.5 ' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-6 B105-2 ' 07/19/90 SOIL I ' l_ l ji 1 I 1V 1 TOTALS MATRIX # SAMPLES SOIL 6 ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE j The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty (30) days from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is required, please contact our sample control department before the scheduled disposal date. AnalvticaITechnoiogies,Inc. 2 __ ATI I.D. # 9007-176 , ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE , : CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK .RIVER CORP, TRACT A ANALYSIS TECHNIQiTE REFERENCE LAB I '; VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS GCMS EPA 8240 R r SEMI-VOLATILE COMPOUNDS GCMS EPA 8270 R ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES & PCBs GC/ECD EPA 8080 , R ANTIMONY AA/GF'. EPA 7041 R , i _.' ARSENIC AA/GF EPA 7060 R BERYLLIUM AA/F EPA 7090 R CADMIUM i /F EPA 7130 R CHROMIUM AA/F EPA 7190 R l L.. COPPER AA/F EPA 7210 R 1 '' LEAD AA/F EPA 7420 R MERCURY AA/COLD VAPOR EPA 7471 R NICKEL t_' �/F EPA 7520 R SELENIUM AA/GF EPA 7740 R .J SILVER AA/F EPA 7760 R J' 1 THALLIUM AA/GF EPA 7841 R ZINC AA/F EPA 7950 R ' ' : HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM COLORIMETRIC EPA 7196 R I_ { CYANIDE, TOTAL COLORIMETRIC EPA 9012 SD PHENOLS, TOTAL • COLORIMETRIC EPA 420.2 SD i 'i CONTINUED NEXT PAGE LAnolvticolTechno{ogies,inc. 3 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE CONTINUED CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS IR EPA 418.1 R MOISTURE GRAVIMETRIC METHOD 7-2.2 - ' I _ � - ji R = ATI - Renton 1 SD = ATI - San Diego T = ATI - Tempe PNR = ATI - Pensacola - FC = ATI - Fort Collins ISUB = Subcontract 1 AAnolyticalTechnologies,Inc. 4 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY i CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A __ PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg I, EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ACETONE <1.0 ; ' i BENZENE <0.050 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 BROMOFORM <0.25 BROMOMETHANE <0.50 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 ' CARBON DISULFIDE <0.050 • CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 CHLOROETHANE <0.050 CHLOROFORM <0. 050 CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1, 1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 '- 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 CIS—1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 TRANS-1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0. 050 l ETHYLBENZENE <0. 050 j 2—HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 4—METHYL—2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 1 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 J STYRENE <0.050 1,1,2, 2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0. 050 j TOLUENE <0. 050 1, 1, 1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0. 050 1,1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 �- I VINYL ACETATE <0.50 VINYL CHLORIDE <0. 050 ` ' 1 TOTAL XYLENES <0. 050 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES i1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 129 TOLUENE—d8 105 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 99 ,i . I 1 I / \AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 5 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 � 11 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. I_ I _ , � i { r- I 1 , I j iI Ai AnalocalTechnologies,Inc. 6 - ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY __- CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 T_II PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 , RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT ' COMPOUND RESULT ACETONE <1. 0 I BENZENE <0.050 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 - J BROMOFORM <0.25 BROMOMETHANE <0.50 2-BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 CARBON DISULFIDE <0. 050 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 II CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 i CHLOROETHANE <0.050 j CHLOROFORM <0.050 CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1,1-DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1,2-DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.050 1 1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 CIS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 TRANS-1, 3-DICHLOROPROPENE <0. 050 ] ETHYLBENZENE <0.050 2-HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 4-METHYL-2-PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 - iMETHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 STYRENE <0.050 1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.050 TOLUENE <0. 050 1 1,1, 1-TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1, 1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE <0. 050 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 f-- ) VINYL ACETATE <0.50 VINYL CHLORIDE <0. 050 TOTAL XYLENES <0.050 H] SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES 1 1,2-DICHLOROETHANE-d4 106 TOLUENE-d8 91 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 85 - i _ 'l i J AnoIyticalTechnoiogies,Inc. 7 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 lVOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS I i ; CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED , j COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. IJ 1 1 \AnalyticolTechnologies,Inc. 8 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 l VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 ,i PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : .07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg ,1 EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT I 1 COMPOUND RESULT 1 ACETONE <1.6 I BENZENE <0.079 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.079 BROMOFORM <0.40 BROMOMETHANE <0.79 J 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.79 CARBON DISULFIDE <0.079 1 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.079 i CHLOROBENZENE <0.079 CHLOROETHANE <0.079 CHLOROFORM <0. 079 j CHLOROMETHANE <0.79 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.079 1,1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.079 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.079 1,1—DICHLOROETHENE <0.079 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.079 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.079 ; 1 CIS—1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.079 TRANS—1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.079 ETHYLBENZENE <0.079 l 2-HEXANONE (MBK) <0.79 4—METHYL-2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.79 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.40 iI STYRENE <0.079 t 1,1,2, 2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.079 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.079 TOLUENE <0.079 1 1,1,1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.079 , 1, 1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.079 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.079 VINYL ACETATE <0.79 VINYL CHLORIDE ,<0.079 TOTAL XYLENES <0. 079 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 102 TOLUENE—d8 81 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 76 ' 1 AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 9 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 l VOLATIL E ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' SAMPLE MATRIX SOIL DATE ANALYZED 07/25/90 EPA METHOD 8240 UNITS : mg/Kg RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT DILUTION FACTOR 1 SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. • ,11 ` l 1 1 I ] )\AnciyticclTechnologies,lnc. 10 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 I i VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 ` l. � PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT ? , COMPOUND RESULT ACETONE <1.0 BENZENE <0.050 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 - BROMOFORM <0.25 BROMOMETHANE <0.50 '` 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 CARBON DISULFIDE <0.050 — ' CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 CHLOROETHANE <0.050 _ CHLOROFORM <0.050 1 , . CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 � I : 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1, 1—DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 CIS—1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 TRANS—1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 ? ETHYLBENZENE <0.050 ` " ! 2—HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 1 4—METHYL-2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 STYRENE <0.050 J 1, 1,2,2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.050 �,) TOLUENE <0.050 1,1, 1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1, 1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1I VINYL ACETATE <0.50 ' VINYL CHLORIDE <0.050 TOTAL XYLENES <0.050 iSURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES i 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 114 TOLUENE—d8 95 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 89 LAnaiyticalTechnologies,Inc. 11 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 �_. VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED H COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION t ; 1__-' NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. • 17. • I ' I__1 Ily � i 1—] 1 L AnolyticolTechnologies,Inc. 12 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-4 --,1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 IF PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-4.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg _1 EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ACETONE <1.0 r 'i' BENZENE <0.050 _', BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 BROMOFORM <0.25 BROMOMETHANE <0.50 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 CARBON DISULFIDE <0.050 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 ti CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 CHLOROETHANE <0.050 CHLOROFORM <0.050 CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1, 1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0. 050 1 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 ri CIS-1, 3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 L. TRANS—I,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0. 050 ETHYLBENZENE <0.050 U 2—HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 4—METHYL-2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 STYRENE <0.050 1,1,2,2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.050 TOLUENE <0.050 ill 1, 1, 1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1, 1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1 VINYL ACETATE <0.50 VINYL CHLORIDE <0.050 TOTAL XYLENES <0.050 111 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES ' i1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 113 TOLUENE—d8 87 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 83 ) - 1ti ILAnolyticalTechnologies,Inc 13 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-4 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 lVl ,- ; PROJECT NAME BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-4.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg 111 EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED S COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 194 OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. M I I fi n�f i � ill f I� ri-I nI II )Jl AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 14 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS ly � DATA SUMMARY r CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg '._ EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT , COMPOUND RESULT cl ACETONE <1.0 BENZENE <0.050 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 BROMOFORM <0.25 l BROMOMETHANE <0.50 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 CARBON DISULFIDE <0.050 1—I CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 CHLOROETHANE <0.050 CHLOROFORM <0.050 I CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.050 4=1 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 CIS—1, 3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 TRANS-1,3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 ETHYLBENZENE <0.050 2—HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 4—METHYL—2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 - STYRENE <0.050 1, 1,2,2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.050 ` TOLUENE <0.050 4 1,1, 1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1, 1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 ;l VINYL ACETATE <0.50 t_ VINYL CHLORIDE <0.050 TOTAL XYLENES <0.050 3. SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES A 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 107 1 TOLUENE—d8 99 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 91 i I ZAnolyticalTechnologies,Inc. 15 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 r , 1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 Il CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION � i. NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. i . i1 f 'I LAnalyticolTechnologies,lnc. 16 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 � 1 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY 3 CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED 07/19/90 PROJECT # PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 , 1 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT i COMPOUND RESULT 1 ACETONE <1.0 I BENZENE <0.050 BROMODICHLOROMETHANE <0.050 BROMOFORM <0.25 ` 1 BROMOMETHANE <0.50 2—BUTANONE (MEK) <0.50 CARBON DISULFIDE <0. 050 ii CARBON TETRACHLORIDE <0.050 y CHLOROBENZENE <0.050 ' .% CHLOROETHANE <0.050 CHLOROFORM <0.050 CHLOROMETHANE <0.50 DIBROMOCHLOROMETHANE <0.050 1,1—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 v , 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROETHENE (TOTAL) <0.050 1,2—DICHLOROPROPANE <0.050 ' CIS—1, 3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 TRANS—1, 3—DICHLOROPROPENE <0.050 ETHYLBENZENE - <0.050 2—HEXANONE (MBK) <0.50 4—METHYL—2—PENTANONE (MIBK) <0.50 METHYLENE CHLORIDE <0.25 iSTYRENE <0.050 1,1,2,2—TETRACHLOROETHANE <0.050 TETRACHLOROETHENE <0.050 TOLUENE <0.050 I 1, 1, 1—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 _' 1, 1,2—TRICHLOROETHANE <0.050 1 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.050 i ! VINYL ACETATE <0.50 VINYL CHLORIDE <0.050 TOTAL XYLENES <0.050 I SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES _ 1 1,2—DICHLOROETHANE—d4 110 TOLUENE—d8 95 BROMOFLUOROBENZENE 90 4 , AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 17 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/24/90 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/25/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8240 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION NO NON—HSL COMPOUNDS FOUND > 10% OF NEAREST INTERNAL STANDARD. • ' -- If :1 1 )(\AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 18 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 1 � ' � VOLATILE ORGANICS Li QUALITY CONTROL DATA L CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE I.D. : 9007-030-11 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07/10/90 H- PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 07/17/90 ) EPA METHOD : 8240 MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg I~ c_ DUP DUP SAMPLE SPIKE SPIKED % SPIKED % ; , COMPOUND RESULT ADDED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD ,, . 1,1-DICHLOROETHENE <0.05 2.50 2.29 92 2.09 84 9 TRICHLOROETHENE <0.05 2.50 2.37 95 2.39 96 1 BENZENE <0.05 2.50 2.33 93 ' 2.30 92 1 TOLUENE <0. 05 2.50 2.17 87 2.40 96 10 CHLOROBENZENE <0. 05 2.50 2.26 90 2.30 92 2 rTh I I ,^1 11 % Recover y = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) r X 100 Spike Concentration J-1 RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) X 100 7-11 - Average Result it L (---,I L. AnaiyticolTechnologies,Inc. 19 =' ATI I.D. # 9007-176 I4 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY . CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A l PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A i PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 i_ ,. CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 . SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ^! i ,\ i N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 PHENOL <0.17 i-_4 i ANILINE <0.17 I ; BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 f-- ' 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 ti 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 _ 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 r`,r, N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 ! H HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 a ISOPHORONE <0.17 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 ____ 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 1---),. BIS (2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE • <0.17 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 -` NAPHTHALENE <0.17 J 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE • <0.17 '.--- HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 (~ ' I 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 ! f 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 .-- 1 DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 '- 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 �' � ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 1_,, 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 ,----.l . - _ " CONTINUED NEXT PAGE r 1 / �anc.ys�cailechnologies,inc. 20 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 SEMI—VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT DIBENZOFURAN <0.17 2, 4—DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 2, 6—DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 !_ 1 DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 4—CHLOROPHENYL—PHENYLETHER <0.17 F , FLUORENE <0.17 4—NITROANILINE <0.85 4, 6—DINITRO-2—METHYLPHENOL <0.85 N—NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0.17 4—BROMOPHENYL—PHENYLETHER <0.17 HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.17 PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 PHENANTHRENE <0. 17 ANTHRACENE <0.17 DI—N—BUTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 - FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZIDINE <1.7 - PYRENE <0.17 BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE <0.17 1 )j 3,3—DICHLOROBENZIDINE <0.34 BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0.17 BIS(2—ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE <0.17 CHRYSENE <0.17 DI—N—OCTYLPHTHALATE BENZO(b) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 <0.17 BENZO(k) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZO(a) PYRENE <0.17 INDENO(1,2,3—cd) PYRENE <0.17 � ! DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE <0.17 ! BENZO(g,h, i) PERYLENE <0.17 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES NITROBENZENE—d5 66 2—FLUOROBIPHENYL 91 TERPHENYL—d14 73 PHENOL—d6 60 2—FLUOROPHENOL 70 2,4, 6—TRIBROMOPHENOL 70 LAnolvticolTechnologies,lnc. 21 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 -1 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION 1 OXYGENATED HYDROCARBON� 24 0.25 TETRACHLOROETHANE 271 0.29 r r__ ti • r-- I � x ) —11 1Lj AnolyticalTechnologies,lnc. 22 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY 1 H CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 1 CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT J COMPOUND RESULT i N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 PHENOL <0.17 j i ANILINE <0.17 J BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 r 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1 ' i 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 l BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 1 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 BIS (2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 1 N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 i ) HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 ISOPHORONE <0.17 ° jl 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 -- 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 1 BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.17 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 r° NAPHTHALENE <0.17 ? 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 1 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.17 ' ' HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 r- 1 DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 1 j ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 nj a_ r CONTINUED NEXT PAGE ,-: LiL AnolyticalTechnologies,Inc. 23 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 r7 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) _ Lj CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # PR-1912 DATE SAMPLED 07/19/90 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 (-7 . PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 ),__ CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg -} • EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 Li : RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT U. DIBENZOFURAN <0.17 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 f_,., 2, 6-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 1J- DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 FLUORENE <0.17 4-NITROANILINE <0.85 4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL <0.85 N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0.17 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 Ly HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.17 PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 �_--, PHENANTHRENE <0.17 i ANTHRACENE <0.17 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 FLUORANTHENE <0.17BENZIDINE <1.7 PYRENE <0.17 , BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE <0.17 �,.,,r1 3,3-DICHLOROBENZIDINE <0.34 BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0.17 BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE <0.17 �--i i CHRYSENE <0.17 ;j ,.,, DI-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 -: BENZO(b) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZO(k) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 ) i BENZO(a)PYRENE <0.17 INDENO(1,2,3-cd) PYRENE <0.17 .DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE S -� <0.17 <0.17 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES )i , + NITROBENZENE-d5 82, �i ' 2-FLUOROBIPHENYL 75 TERPHENYL-d14 68 fl PHENOL{ 70 1 2-FLUOROPHENOL 71 2,4, 6-TRIBROMOPHENOL 86 l r- ( 1 ) AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 24 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 1 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS (- CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg - EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT l SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION ` BRANCHED CYCLIC HYDROCARBON 1335 2.9 TETRAMETHYL HEPTADECANE ISOMER 1733 1.2 TETRAMETHYL HEPTADECANE ISOMER 1836 1.8 TRITETRACONTANE 1959 0.89 { UNSATURATED HYDROCARBON 1974 0.96 • J I - 1 f - *lcc v-savTechnologies,lnc. 25 .' `v' ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 i` SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY t- CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 ' CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg j-- EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT ,,_' COMPOUND RESULT J N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.54 - PHENOL <0.54 -1 ANILINE <0.54 BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.54 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.54 r1 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.54 1 c 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.54 BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.54 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.54 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.54 +� ' BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.54 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.54 rt N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.54 i' HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.54 NITROBENZENE <0.54 ISOPHORONE <0.54 y1 2-NITROPHENOL <0.54 ` 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.54 BENZOIC ACID <2.7 Fi BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.54 \ ! 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.54 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.54 1NAPHTHALENE <0.54 i ; 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.54 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.54 rl 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.54 1 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.54 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.54 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.54 y}{ , 2, 4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <2.7 1 I 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.54 2-NITROANILINE <2.7 I' DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.54 ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.54 '� 3-NITROANILINE - <2.7 i ACENAPHTHENE <0.54 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <2.7 4-NITROPHENOL <2.7 _I HCONTINUED NEXT PAGE i- r -1 LAnalyticalTechnologies,inc. 26 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS ' DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) ''i I - CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 ' PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 ! RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT iCOMPOUND RESULT DIBENZOFURAN <0.54 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.54 1 2, 6-DINITROTOLUENE <0.54 DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.54 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.54 -1 FLUORENE <0.54 4-NITROANILINE <2.7 4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL <2.7 _ , N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0.54 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.54 L:, HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.54 PENTACHLOROPHENOL <2.7 ,-71 PHENANTHRENE <0.54 ANTHRACENE <0.54 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE <0.54 FLUORANTHENE <0.54 " BENZIDINE <5.4 L PYRENE 0.21 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE 0.20 J 3,3-DICHLOROBENZIDINE <1.1 , , BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0.54 BIS (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE 1.1 I CHRYSENE <0.54 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE <0.54 - . BENZO(b) FLUORANTHENE <0.54 1 BENZO(k) FLUORANTHENE <0.54 BENZO(a) PYRENE <0.54 INDENO(1, 2,3-cd)PYRENE <0.54 DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE <0.54 �- BENZO(g,h,i)PERYLENE <0.54 i 1 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES h� NITROBENZENE-d5 58 -- 2-FLUOROBIPHENYL 87 TERPHENYL-d14 111 i PHENOL-d6 69 2-FLUOROPHENOL 60 2,4, 6-TRIBROMOPHENOL 70 j J = Estimated value. /) AnaiyticalTechnologies,lnc. 27 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED PROJECT # : 07/19/90 PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION I C21-C22 ALKANE 1734 5.0 CYCLIC HYDROCARBON 1785 1.8 C21-C22 ALKANE 1837 8. 0 - UNSATURATED HYDROCARBON 1924 2. 6 ALKANE 1960 3 .5 • 11 -'I • i �^ J r� I ,. 1 I 1 11 112AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 28 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY 1 CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg l EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 i RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT ! 1 COMPOUND RESULT N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 - PHENOL <0.17 ANILINE <0.17 . BIS (2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 1 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 BIS (2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 j1 N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 _ - HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 ISOPHORONE <0.17 1 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 �� BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.17 _ - 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 � i NAPHTHALENE <0.17 I 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 1 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.17 `` HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 I 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 i DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 i ' ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 11' ,J ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 1 1 CONTINUED NEXT PAGE 1 )LtAnalyticalTechnologjes,Jnc. 29 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 - ! L_ SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 -, PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 i , PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 - CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT i i , DIBENZOFURAN <0.17 - 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 ' 2, 6-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 P. FLUORENE <0.17 4-NITROANILINE <0.85 4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL <0.85 r-, N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0. 17 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 ' HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.17 PENTACHLOROPHENOL 0 <0.85 I PHENANTHRENE <0.17 �_ ANTHRACENE <0.17 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZIDINE <1.7 PYRENE <0. 17 (_ , BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE <0.17 3,3-DICHLOROBENZIDINE <0.34 BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0. 17 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE <0.17 ' CHRYSENE <0.17 _ �1 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 BENZO(b) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZO(k)FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZO(a) PYRENE <0. 17 INDENO(1,2, 3-cd) PYRENE <0. 17 , DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE <0.17 I ' BENZO(g,h, i) PERYLENE <0.17 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES j NITROBENZENE-d5 67 2-FLUOROBIPHENYL 85 r_J TERPHENYL-d14 72 1i PHENOL-d6 57 2-FLUOROPHENOL 63 F 2,4, 6-TRIBROMOPHENOL 80 • l ` LAnolyticolTechnologies,Inc 30 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 1 - SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # PR-1912 DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 _l CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED 1 COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION OXYGENATED HYDROCARBON 26 0.64 B TETRACHLOROETHANE 271 0.35 B B = Also found in blank. r / \ A.ncwncc!Technologies,Inc. 31 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-4 -Thi SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY r I CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 �_� CLIENT I.D. : B103-4.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 H RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT - COMPOUND RESULT I N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 PHENOL <0.17 i ANILINE <0.17 H�: 5 BIS(2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 I ' . 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 c BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 = BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 J ISOPHORONE <0.17 ' I 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 -- 1 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.17 _-J 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 I I NAPHTHALENE <0.17 4-CHLOROANILINE <0. 17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 1 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.17 L1 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 ,, 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 . 1 DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 � ) ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 r ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 J 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 a= CONTINUED NEXT PAGE - I �_'_i I,' LAnolyticarrechnologies,Inc. 33 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-4 H SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-4.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION j OXYGENATED HYDROCARBON 28 0. 69 B J TRICHLOROETHANE 54 0.22 TETRACHLOROETHANE 272 0.41 B -7 J B = Also found in blank. i ' • iJ I l )1\AnalytjcatTechnologies,lnc. 34 L ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 ri SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS I LY IS DATA SUMMARY LI CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 -1 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 4 _ CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg 1 EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT 1 COMPOUND RESULT -- N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 _ PHENOL <0.17 1�'1 ANILINE <0.17 1 BIS (2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 i `1 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1_ BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 -- ill 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 fl N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 -1 ISOPHORONE <0.17 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 -' 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.17 _j 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 -1 NAPHTHALENE <0.17 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 --,) 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.17 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1 2,4,5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 . 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 p DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 I ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 -- 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 L_ i 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 CONTINUED NEXT PAGE i I L AnaiyticalTechnologies,lnc. 35 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) 1 CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 --1PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 I RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT _1 COMPOUND RESULT 11 DIBENZOFURAN <0.17 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 2, 6-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 FLUORENE <0.17 , 4-NITROANILINE <0.85 4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL <0.85 N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0.17 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.17 PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 i PHENANTHRENE <0.17 d ANTHRACENE <0.17 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE 0.86 - FLUORANTHENE <0.17 j BENZIDINE <1.7 PYRENE <0.17 J BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE <0.17 3,3-DICHLOROBENZIDINE <0.34 BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0.17 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE <0.17 - CHRYSENE <0.17 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 - BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE <0.17 - BENZO(k) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 BENZO(a) PYRENE <0.17 INDENO(1,2,3-cd)PYRENE <0.17 DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE <0.17 BENZO(g,h,i)PERYLENE <0.17 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES NITROBENZENE-d5 90 2-FLUOROBIPHENYL 88 TERPHENYL-d14 103 PHENOL-d6 72 2-FLUOROPHENOL 66 2,4, 6-TRIBROMOPHENOL 88 4 / \Ana lyticalTechnologies,lnc. 36 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 'I PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION IOXYGENATED HYDROCARBON 27 0.84 B TETRACHLOROETHANE 266 0.28 B SATURATED ALKANE 1733 0.30 IBRANCHED SATURATED ALKANE 1836 0.47 � I B = Also found in blank. • � l . -! I LAnolyticalTechnologies,Inc. 37 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY i Is CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 _ , PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg --, EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT I COMPOUND RESULT -' ) N-NITROSODIMETHYLAMINE <0.17 PHENOL <0.17 ANILINE <0.17 -11 BIS (2-CHLOROETHYL)ETHER <0.17 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1, 3-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 i 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 BENZYL ALCOHOL <0.17 , 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 1 2-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 BIS(2-CHLOROISOPROPYL)ETHER <0.17 4-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 1`--P N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 I ' HEXACHLOROETHANE <0.17 NITROBENZENE <0.17 ISOPHORONE <0.17 jI 2-NITROPHENOL <0.17 1_ 2,4-DIMETHYLPHENOL <0.17 BENZOIC ACID <0.85 l BIS(2-CHLOROETHOXY)METHANE <0.17 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 - j NAPHTHALENE <0.17 _1 4-CHLOROANILINE <0.17 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE <0.17 __ I 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 2-METHYLNAPHTHALENE <0.17 -H HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE <0.17 2,4, 6-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.17 2, 4, 5-TRICHLOROPHENOL <0.85 2-CHLORONAPHTHALENE <0.17 2-NITROANILINE <0.85 1 DIMETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 Ij ACENAPHTHYLENE <0.17 3-NITROANILINE <0.85 1 ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 2,4-DINITROPHENOL <0.85 �-- 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 !i CONTINUED NEXT PAGE l 1 A.Anc:yticalTechnologies,Inc. 38 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 { SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY (CONTINUED) L_ ' CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT (- COMPOUND RESULT - DIBENZOFURAN <0.17 - _ 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 2,6-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 DIETHYLPHTHALATE <0.17 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 FLUORENE <0.17 � 1 4-NITROANILINE <0.85 4, 6-DINITRO-2-METHYLPHENOL <0.85 N-NITROSODIPHENYLAMINE <0.17 4-BROMOPHENYL-PHENYLETHER <0.17 HEXACHLOROBENZENE <0.17 .-, PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 PHENANTHRENE <0.17 _; ANTHRACENE <0.17 DI-N-BUTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 FLUORANTHENE <0.17 . BENZIDINE <1.7 - PYRENE <0.17 _ ' BUTYLBENZYLPHTHALATE <0.17 J 3,3-DICHLOROBENZIDINE <0.34 BENZO(a)ANTHRACENE <0.17 1 BIS(2-ETHYLHEXYL)PHTHALATE <0.17 _ ] CHRYSENE <0.17 DI-N-OCTYLPHTHALATE <0.17 BENZO(b)FLUORANTHENE <0.17 - , ; BENZO(b) FLUORANTHENE <0.17 ' BENZO(a) PYRENE <0.17 - INDENO(1,2, 3-cd) PYRENE <0.17 DIBENZ (a,h, )ANTHRACENE <0.17 1 1 BENZO(g,h, i) PERYLENE <0.17 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERIES I � NITROBENZENE-d5 73 2-FLUOROBIPHENYL 68 TERPHENYL-d14 80 PHENOL-d6 66 L-- 2-FLUOROPHENOL 63 2,4, 6-TRIBROMOPHENOL 68 ! IT1 )' AnoiyticaITechnologies,Inc. 39 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 I SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS ANALYSIS TENTATIVELY IDENTIFIED COMPOUNDS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8270 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT SCAN ESTIMATED COMPOUND NUMBER CONCENTRATION } OXYGENATED HYDROCARBON 24 0..61 B TETRACHLOROETHANE 267 0.26 B B = Also found in blank. ••n I a I-I LAnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 40 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 i SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC QUALITY CONTROL DATA CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE I.D. : 9007-087-2 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07/25/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 08/06/90 EPA METHOD : 8270 UNITS : mg/Kg MATRIX : SOIL DILUTION FACTOR: 2 RESULTS BASED ON "AS IS" BASIS DUP DUP SAMPLE SPIKE SPIKED % SPIKED % COMPOUND RESULT ADDED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0. 17 3.3 1.6 49 1.7 52 5 ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 '3.3 2.4 73 2.2 66 9 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0. 17 3 .3 1.3 40 1.2 36 11 PYRENE <0.17 3 .3 2.6 79 2.1 62 24 N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0. 17 3.3 2.0 61 2.1 63 2 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 3 .3 0.86 26* 0.99 30 15 PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 6. 6 6.1 92 5.3 79 15 PHENOL <0.17 6. 6 4.4 66 4.4 67 2 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 6. 6 3.8 57 4.4 65 13 _ 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 6. 6 6.4 95 6.5 97 2 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 6.6 5.9 89 6.1 92 3 1 I * Out of limits due to dilution and matrix effects. - - i % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) x 100 Spike Concentration 1 '1. RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Spiked Sample - Duplicate Spike) Result Sample Result I x 100 Average of Spiked Sample f LAnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 41 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANIC ' QUALITY CONTROL DATA CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE I.D. : BLANK SPIKE PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07 25 90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 07/30/90 EPA METHOD : 8270 MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg DUP DUP SAMPLE SPIKE SPIKED % SPIKED % COMPOUND RESULT ADDED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 3 .3 2.0 60 N/A N/A N/A ACENAPHTHENE <0.17 3.3 2.3 70 N/A N/A N/A 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE <0.17 3.3 2.7 80 N/A N/A N/A PYRENE <0.17 3.3 2.6 80 N/A N/A N/A N-NITROSO-DI-N-PROPYLAMINE <0.17 3.3 2.2 65 N/A N/A N/A 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE <0.17 3.3 2.0 61 N/A N/A N/A PENTACHLOROPHENOL <0.85 6. 6 6.0 89 N/A N/A N/A _ : PHENOL <0.17 6.6 2.8 43 N/A N/A N/A i 2-CHLOROPHENOL <0.17 6.6 3.2 49 N/A N/A N/A ' ' 4-CHLORO-3-METHYLPHENOL <0.17 6.6 4.1 62 N/A N/A N/A 4-NITROPHENOL <0.85 6.6 5.4 81 N/A N/A N/A i � J Li' j rnl Li % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) .._I x 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Spiked Sample - Duplicate Spike) Result Sample Result x 100 f Average of Spiked Sample } I I ctL7AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 42 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : N/A ' l PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/28/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ALDRIN <0.0050 ALPHA-BHC <0.0050 BETA-BHC <0.0050 GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 DELTA-BHC <0.0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'-DDD <0.010 P,P'-DDE <0.010 P,P'-DDT <0.010 DIELDRIN <0.010 ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0.010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 _, PCB 1016 <0.10 PCB 1221 <0.10 PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 - PCB 1248 <0.10 PCB 1254 <0.10 PCB 1260 <0.10 SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 102 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 95 iL AnaiyticalTechnologies,Inc. 43 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY I . `y CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, : INC. DATE SAMPLED N/A PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : N/A t. PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/27/90 CLIENT I.D. : REAGENT BLANK DATE ANALYZED : 07/31/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT ..s 1 COMPOUND RESULT a 'i ALDRIN <0.0050 t ' ALPHA—BHC <0.0050 BETA—BHC <0.0050 GAMMA—BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 DELTA—BHC <0.0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'—DDD <0.010 11 P,P'—DDE <0.010 P,P'—DDT <0.010 DIELDRIN <0.010 j ' ENDOSULFAN I ,. <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0.010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0. 010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 PCB 1016 <0.10 PCB 1221 <0.10 II PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 ,� PCB 1248 <0.10 Y PCB 1254 <0.10 PCB 1260 <0.10 II SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY 111 DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 120 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 105 • II ) \AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 44 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-1 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY y , CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 CLIENT I.D. : B101A-1.5 ' DATE ANALYZED SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL : 08/ UNITS mg/Kg /90 EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT -- i COMPOUND RESULT ALDRIN <0.0050 ALPHA-BHC <0.0050 , BETA-BHC <0.0050 GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 DELTA-BHC <0.0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'-DDD <0.010 P,P'-DDE <0.010 P,P'-DDT <0.010 -1 DIELDRIN <0.010 ri ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0.010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 v1 PCB 1016 <0.10 PCB 1221 <0.10 , PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 IPCB 1248 <0.10 PCB 1254 <0.10 PCB 1260 0.058 J SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 98 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 85 l J = Estimated value. 1 j,. AnolvticoiTechnologies,Inc. 45 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-2 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 CLIENT I.D. : B102A-1' DATE ANALYZED 08/03/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT 1/1 COMPOUND RESULT 4 1 ALDRIN <0.0079 ALPHA-BHC <0.0079 BETA-BHC <0.0079 GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0079 DELTA-BHC <0.0079 CHLORDANE <0.079 P,P'-DDD <0.016 <0.016 P,P'-DDT <0.016 DIELDRIN <0.016 ENDOSULFAN I <0.0079 ENDOSULFAN II <0.016 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.016 F ENDRIN t ENDRIN KETONE <0.016 <0.006 HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.007<0.0079 rll1 METHOXYCHLOR <0.0799 TOXAPHENE PCB 1016 <0.16 PCB 1221 <0.16 <0.16 PCB 1232 <0.16 PCB 1242 <0.16 PCB 1248 PCB 1254 <0.16 PCB 1260 0.14 J SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY +i DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 85 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 79 ' J = Estimated value. LAnalyficolTechnologies,Inc. 46 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-3 I ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/31/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ALDRIN <0.0050 LA ALPHA—BHC <0.0050 BETA—BHC <0.0050 GAMMA—BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 7 DELTA—BHC <0.0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'—DDD <0.010 i( P,P'—DDE <0.010 P,P'—DDT <0.010 DIELDRIN <0.010 ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0.010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 • ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 j METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 PCB 1016 <0.10 PCB 1221 <0.10 U) PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 1�1 PCB 1248 <0. 10 IR,i,; PCB 1254 <0.10 PCB 1260 <0.10 i ) SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 103 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 92 rJ- z AnoiyticalTechnologies,lnc. 47 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-4 111 ORGANOCHLOR INE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 CLIENT I.D. : B103-4.5' SAMPLE MATRIX SOIL DATE ANALYZED 07/31/90 EPA METHOD 8080 UNITS : mg/Kg DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT 1 j ALDRIN --� ALPHA-BHC <0.0050 BETA-BHC <0.0050 11 GA.laA-BHC (LINDANE) <0. 0050 <0.0050 41 DEL_`A-BHC <0. 0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P -DDD P,P'-DDE <0. 010 <0.010 P,P,-DDT <0. 010 DIELDRIN <0.010 ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0. 010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 II ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 H HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 { f METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 PCB 1016 PCB 1221 <0.10 PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 I PCB 1248 <0.10 ' PCB -1254 <0.10 PCB 1260 <0.10 <0.10 ' SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 92 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 76 111 L, AnolyticolTechnologies,Inc. 48 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-5 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/27/90 -' CLIENT I.D. : B104-1.5' DATE ANALYZED : 07/31/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : • SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ' ALDRIN <0.0050 '1 ALPHA-BHC <0.0050 BETA-BHC <0.0050 GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 DELTA-BHC <0. 0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'-DDD <0.010 P,P'-DDE <0.010 P►P'-DDT <0.010 = DIELDRIN <0.010 ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0. 010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 PCB 1016 <0.10 ` PCB 1221 <0.10 PCB 1232 <0. 10 PCB 1242 <0.10 PCB 1248 <0.10 ' PCB 1254 <0.10 _- PCB 1260 <0.10 - SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY j DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 126 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 104 l ,1 AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 49 ATI I.D. # 9007-176-6 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs ANALYSIS DATA SUMMARY CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. DATE SAMPLED : 07/19/90 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE RECEIVED : 07/20/90 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE EXTRACTED : 07/27/90 CLIENT I.D. : B105-2 ' DATE ANALYZED : 07/31/90 SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg EPA METHOD : 8080 DILUTION FACTOR : 1 RESULTS BASED ON DRY WEIGHT COMPOUND RESULT ALDRIN <0. 0050 ALPHA-BHC <0.0050 BETA-BHC <0.0050 11 . GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 DELTA-BHC <0.0050 CHLORDANE <0.050 P,P'-DDD P,P'-DDE '---' <0.010 P,P'-DDT <0.010 y DIELDRIN <0.010 ' ! ENDOSULFAN I <0.0050 ENDOSULFAN II <0.010 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE <0.010 ENDRIN <0.010 ENDRIN KETONE <0.010 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 � HEPTACHLOR EPDXIDE <0.0050 METHOXYCHLOR <0.050 TOXAPHENE <0.10 PCB 1016 <0.10 PCB 1221 <0.10 PCB 1232 <0.10 PCB 1242 <0.10 -' 1 PCB 1248 <0.10 1 ' 1 PCB 1254 <0.10 j PCB 1260 <0.10 i SURROGATE PERCENT RECOVERY DIBUTYLCHLORENDATE 123 DECACHLOROBIPHENYL 104 1 1 ' I ,t ) AnalyticolTechnologies,Inc. 50 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 1 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs QUALITY CONTROL ti j!I CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE ID : 9007-125-5 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 I, 1 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 07/29/90 ' " EPA METHOD : 8080 MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg 1 DUP DUP i SAMPLE CONC SPIKED % SPIKED % ! COMPOUNDS RESULT SPIKED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD 1';��� GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 0.031 0.0415 134* 0. 0376 121 10 HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 0.031 0.0414 134* 0.0361 116 14 ALDRIN <0.0050 0.031 0.0419 135* 0. 0323 104 26* 1 DIELDRIN <0.010 0.077 0.117 152* 0. 110 143 6 „ ENDRIN <0. 010 0.077 0.117 152* 0.105 136 11 P,P'-DDT 0.039 0.077 0.133 122 0.126 113 5 I _ * Out of limits due to matrix interference. I ri 1 1 �� % Recovery = (Spike Sample result - Sample Result) X 100 Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Spiked Sample - Duplicate Spike) Result Sample Result X 100 li Avefage of Spiked Sample ice ,/ `AnalyticalTechnologies,lnc. 51 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 f;' ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs i QUALITY CONTROL -, CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE ID : 9007-176-5 PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07/27/90 1 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 08/09/90 t EPA METHOD : 8080 MATRIX SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg DUP DUP SAMPLE CONC SPIKED % SPIKED % � '' COMPOUNDS RESULT SPIKED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD I I GAMMA-BHC ,,-j (LINDANE) <0. 0050 0.031 0.0395 127 0.0406 131 3 HEPTACHLOR <0. 0050 0.031 0.0325 105 0.0334 108 3 � ' ALDRIN <0. 0050 0.031 0.0302 97 0.0305 98 1 MS MSD DIELDRIN <0.010 0.078 0.077 0.107 137 0.107 139 1 • ENDRIN <0. 010 0. 078 0. 077 0.123 158* 0.118 153 3 r P,P'-DDT <0. 010 0.078 0. 077 0.101 129 0.108 140* 8 1 _: b * Out of limits. ,,i I !---,1 I % Recovery = (Spike Sample result - Sample Result) X 100 Spike Concentration IRPD (Relative % Difference) = (Spiked Sample - Duplicate Spike) Result Sample Result X 100 Average of Spiked Sample li lAnalyhcolTechnologies,Inc. 52 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCBs QUALITY CONTROL CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE ID : BLANK SPIKE ; PROJECT # : PR-1912 DATE EXTRACTED : 07/26/90 i_ PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A DATE ANALYZED : 07/28/90 EPA METHOD : 8080 MATRIX : SOIL UNITS : mg/Kg DUP DUP SAMPLE CONC SPIKED % SPIKED % _ V COMPOUNDS RESULT SPIKED SAMPLE REC SAMPLE REC RPD GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) <0.0050 0.027 0.0268 99 N/A N/A N/A HEPTACHLOR <0.0050 0.027 0.0229 85 N/A N/A N/A ALDRIN <0. 0050 0.027 0.0209 77 N/A N/A N/A DIELDRIN <0.010 0. 066 0.0852 129 N/A N/A N/A ENDRIN <0.010 0.066 0.0866 131 N/A N/A N/A P,P'-DDT <0.010 0.066 0. 0796 121 N/A N/A. N/A % Recovery = (Spike Sample result - Sample Result) X 100 Spike Concentration '__' RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Spiked Sample - Duplicate Spike) Result Sample Result X 100 Average of Spiked Sample if )AncryticalTechnologies,Inc. 53 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/Kg B101A-1.5 ' B102A-1' B103-1.5' B103-4.5 ' PARAMETER -1 -2 -3 -4 ANTIMONY <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ARSENIC 6.4 13 2.6 2.9 - - BERYLLIUM <1 <1 <1 <1 CADMIUM 8.8 28 <1 <1 CHROMIUM 42 120 9 8 COPPER 51 97 14 15 LEAD 32 110 <10 <10 MERCURY <0. 15 <0. 15 <0.15 <0. 15 NICKEL 29 57 9.3 6.7 -`y SELENIUM <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 SILVER 6. 6 <2 <2 <2 _,_ THALLIUM <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ZINC 390 1, 000 26 28 1 J l AnolyticaiTechnologies,lncI . 54 1ATI I.D. # 9007-176. METALS RESULTS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. MATRIX : SOIL a IPROJECT # : PR-1912 lPROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/Kg B104-1.5 ' B105-2 ' PARAMETER -5 -6 FI ANTIMONY <0.5 <0.5 ARSENIC 2.5 1.8 BERYLLIUM <1 <1 CADMIUM <1 <1 1__ CHROMIUM 7 5 COPPER 8 9 i 1 LEAD <10 <10 MERCURY <0.15 <0. 15 1__ + NICKEL <3 <3 _ SELENIUM <0.5 <0.5 SILVER <2 <2 '- THALLIUM <0.5 <0.5 ZINC 20 20 i Li f'-;i h-I',1 - J A AnalyticalTechnologies,Inc. 55 �; ATI I.D. # 9007-176 f s� • METALS QUALITY CONTROL L CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 5 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/Kg L ! PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONCE REC ANTIMONY 9007-176-4 <0.5 <0.5 0 2.1 2.4 88 ARSENIC 9007-176-4 2 .9 2.4 19 6.6 3 .1 119 ' BERYLLIUM 9007-176-4 <1 <1 0 29 31 94 CADMIUM 9007-176-4 <1 <1 0 14 15 93 0 CHROMIUM • 9007-176-4 8.5 9.1 7 66 61 94 COPPER 9007-176-4 15 14 7 49 31 110 LEAD 9007-176-4 <10 •-. <10 0 290 309 94 MERCURY 9007-052-1 <0. 15 <0.15 0 0. 19 0.57 33* MERCURY BUFFALO RIVER SEDIMENT N/A N/A N/A 1.21 1.44 84 ; NICKEL 9007-176-4 6.7 7.1 6 163 153 102 'l ` SELENIUM 9007-176-4 <0.5 <0.5 0 1.0 1.5 67 SILVER 9007-176-4 <2 <2 0 31 31 100 '--( THALLIUM 9007-176-4 <0.5 <0.5 0 1.7 1.5 113 1 , ZINC 9007-176-4 28 27 4 63 31 113 * Out of limits due to matrix interference. Due to the necessary dilution of the sample, result was not attainable. • r - • 1 Lj- % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) r, t x 100 t Spike Concentration RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) J x 100 Average Result 1_ ILAnalyticalTechnoiogies,lnc. 56 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/Kg B101A-1.5 ' B102A-1' B103-1.5 ' B103-4.5' PARAMETER -1 -2 -3 -4 TOTAL C CYANIDE <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 --. , HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM <1 <1 <1 <1 PETROLEUM V HYDROCARBONS 66 240 13 39 TOTAL rr PHENOLS <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 J 1 )LAnoIyticaITechnojogjes,jc. 57 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL ,' PROJECT # ' : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS mg/Kg B104-1.5 ' B105-2 ' PARAMETER -5 -6 TOTAL r "! CYANIDE <0.5 <1 HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM <1 <1 PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS 14 12 TOTAL PHENOLS <0.2 <0.2 J 't 1 l ,I I r r i ,..L AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 58 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 i L' GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS 1 j CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 . PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ' ; UNITS % B101A-1.5 ' B102A-1' B103-1.5 ' B103-4.5 ' -- , ' PARAMETER -1 -2 1 -3 -4 u MOISTURE 28 37 18 19 __'. i i 1 ' � li r• 1' rl . : i ,__, „----,,.] Li ,- .1 ul -4j . 1 AnalyticolTechno(ogies,Inc. 59 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 GENERAL CHEMISTRY RESULTS : CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS � , k B104-1.5 ' B105-2 ' PARAMETERS- -5 -6 MOISTURE 14 13 • 7-1 Imo; 1 I r { '!1 / \AnolyticolTechnologies,lnc. 60 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 r-yl GENERAL CHEMISTRY QUALITY CONTROL sni 1 : CLIENT EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. SAMPLE MATRIX : SOIL PROJECT # : PR-1912 fPROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A i: !~' PARAMETER UNITS I.D.ATI SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % RESULT RESULT RPD RESULT ADDED REC TOTAL I CYANIDE mg/Kg 9007-176-5 <0.5 <0.5 0 4.1 _ 4.0 102 TOTAL CYANIDE mg/Kg 00742505 <0.5 <0.5 0 4.3 �- } 4.1 105 HEXAVALENT fl CHROMIUM mg/Kg 9007-176-6 <1 <1 0 9.7 25 39 i HEXAVALENT I-'j CHROMIUM mg/Kg BLANK SPIKE N/A N/A N/A 20 25 80 `_- ' MOISTURE $ 9007-176-6 13 13 0 N/A N/A N/A ~ : PETROLEUM 1_- . HYDROCARBONS mg/Kg 9007-155-4 110 93 17 315 248 83 r TOTAL PHENOLS mg/Kg 9007-176-6 <0.2 <0.2 0 1.42 1. 60 89 r-, rl F 1 . i_ 1 d { , , ! , ; p ` j % Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) X 100 1 � Spike Concentration --rijRPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) X 100 Average Result • __, : L Anai ticalTechnolo ies In�/ g � C. 560 Naches Avenue. S.W.,Suite 101. Renton, WA 98055. (206) 228-8335 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 - ( September 10, 1990 ! } Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 136th Place N.E. Bellevue, WA 98009 Attention : Marcus Pierce Project Number : PR-1912 Project Name Black River Corp. Park, Tract A __ On July 20, 1990 Analytical Technologies, Inc. received six soil samples for analysis. The samples were analyzed with EPA methodology or equivalent methods as specified in the attached analytical schedule. The partial results, sample cross reference, and the quality control data were sent to you on August 17 and 24, 1990. ` Enclosed are the results of the additional analysis you requested. Please note that these data are paginated to be appended to the previous report. IN--C.3.su..) .‘ ....N) 4ttl-14-< /‘417171111-9r ' ! Karen L. Mixon Frederick W. Grothkopp — 1 Project Manager Technical Manager FWG/elf 1 I LAnalyticalTechnologies,Inc . 1 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ; ; + SAMPLE CROSS REFERENCE SHEET CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ATI # CLIENT DESCRIPTION DATE SAMPLED MATRIX 9007-176-1 B101A-1.5' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-2 B102A-1' 07/19/90 - SOIL r 9007-176-3 B103-1.5 ' 07/19/90 SOIL j 9007-176-4 B103-4.5 ' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-5 B104-1.5 ' 07/19/90 SOIL 9007-176-6 B105-2 ' 07/19/90 SOIL TOTALS MATRIX # SAMPLES SOIL 6 ATI STANDARD DISPOSAL PRACTICE _ The samples from this project will be disposed of in thirty (30) days from the date of this report. If an extended storage period is- required, please contact our sample control department before the scheduled disposal date. )( 1 c \A.nciytica!Technoiogies,nc. 2 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE i CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. ---, • PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS GCMS EPA 8240 R SEMI-VOLATILE COMPOUNDS GCMS EPA 8270 - R ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES L I & PCBs GC/ECD EPA 8080 R ANTIMONY AA/GF EPA 7041 R . ARSENIC AA/GF EPA 7060 R BERYLLIUM AA/F EPA 7090 R CADMIUM AA/F EPA 7130 R '__ CHROMIUM AA/F EPA 7190 R COPPER AA/F EPA 7210 R LEAD AA/F EPA 7420 R MERCURY AA/COLD VAPOR EPA 7471 R NICKEL AA/F EPA 7520 R ISELENIUM AA/GF EPA 7740 R SILVER AA/F EPA 7760 R THALLIUM AA/GF EPA 7841 R ZINC AA/F EPA 7950 R ZINC ICAP EPA 6010 R t _It HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM COLORIMETRIC EPA 7196 R , I CYANIDE, TOTAL COLORIMETRIC EPA 9012 SD PHENOLS, TOTAL COLORIMETRIC EPA 420.2 SD CONTINUED NEXT PAGE J ' Ana!yticaITechnoiogies,Inc. �7 3 . ATI I.D. # 9007-176 ANALYTICAL SCHEDULE CONTINUED CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. �I PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE REFERENCE LAB PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS IR EPA 418.1 R MOISTURE GRAVIMETRIC METHOD 7-2.2 R II it I -I� tl R = ATI - Renton SD = ATI - San Diego T = ATI - Tempe PNR = ATI - Pensacola FC = ATI - Fort Collins_ SUB SUB = Subcontract LA,,aiyficalTechnologies,Inc . 61 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 METALS RESULTS CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. MATRIX : TCLP EXTRACT PROJECT # : PR-1912 PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/L B102A-1' PARAMETER —1 I ARSENIC <0. 005 CADMIUM 0.23 CHROMIUM <0.02 COPPER 0. 08 LEAD <0. 1 NICKEL 0. 16 ZINC 8.6 I ,1 / \AnciyticalTechnologies,Inc. �__ 62 ATI I.D. # 9007-176 r'i METALS QUALITY CONTROL `� CLIENT : EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. MATRIX : TCLP EXTRACT PROJECT # : PR-1912 ', PROJECT NAME : BLACK RIVER CORP, TRACT A UNITS : mg/L • SAMPLE DUP SPIKED SPIKE % I PARAMETER ATI I.D. RESULT RESULT RPD SAMPLE CONC REC Fl ARSENIC 9008-150-8 <0.005 <0.005 0 0.048 0. 050 96 CADMIUM 9007-176-2 0.23 0.23 0 0.70 0.50 94 CHROMIUM 9007-176-2 <0. 02 <0.02 0 2.11 2 . 00 106 r COPPER 9007-176-2 0.08 0.08 0 0.99 1. 00 91 Lil LEAD 9008-041-1 9.9 9.9 0 14.9 5. 00 100 NICKEL 9007-176-2 0.16 0.15 6 4.86 5. 00 94 nil ZINC 9007-176-2 8.6 8. 1 6 12.5 5. 0 78 1 ( I t ' I . : I !, . 17i1 j I • `J • i 1 1 Recovery = (Spike Sample Result - Sample Result) ; { x 100 - Spike Concentration _. RPD (Relative % Difference) = (Sample Result - Duplicate Result) I l x 100 Average Result i . \,), . (i 1Earth Consultants Inc..j (;.,it,,-1 tnit al Fri int t rs,Geologists&fan ircxtrtx•rtt:ii Sc7r•ntistS / �� • CHAIN OF. CUSTODY RECORD` SHEET r OF niZ - 1°iIZ.-- PROJECT SAMPLERS: (Signature) LAB NUMBER DATE Mc>;rc445 L . Piti.r�. / '?c Luc11c,r c TIME SAMPLE TYPE naz REMARKS o-no m 1 n _o o V C 9 m T, rf,j I m y 5iol/� - I- 6•t .7/0/70 m o I B/c2 - J 7/r91 io I 1 " 3._. I. 5/ .7/'7/70 13c:z) k r wr L, 7// 7/?0 13.2-0 x r �:,� t.r -� 0/0'1 - f''� i//7/70 /L/2o 1 I - (` C7Ic 5 ' Z r 7//7/70 /S .X. 1 } Dc, /�(, i��o ��L.it J!c.tr lyCiT IZTL ! r r IL.f JI 4c a ov c.' / 82yo 5270 ! ( t..... .—,e.c if�/ '.t.:�-�s R :«�t°C— 1 c //`•t it'-..t 1L rb' ! 1... �:-G-'(�( 1 /" A-Is 4-r,t-'C.41--4i -.?..C. 4.— Sc:/`14--1) / %, - - ar • A \ -1--tVC?.e. 1 RELINQUISHED BY: /Sronarure/ RECEIVED BY: ISignarurel i 7JtLu� _____ - F-` � • DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: Is;onarwel �� Iti�ft J 5 ru I RECEI D BY: (Sign �e)( DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: is, . ucel REC I fD BY: Isignarurei � ' / yi, TE/TItitE • i RELINQUISHED BY: • ISggnature/ RECEIVED BY MOBILE LAB FOR FIELD DATE/TIME ANALYSIS: IStpnarurel F IDISPATCHED BY: IS', narurel DATE/TIME RECEIVED OR LABORATORY BY: DATE/TIME 1 IS%q lure/ METHOD OF SHIPMENT: /°`�"` ( �` J t_ 7/'c` I /r S Distribution: Original • Accompany Shipment I l One Copy- Survey Coordinator Field Files _-- NORTH -' =CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101•Bothell, WA 98011 <4;:ia?..:4'�v-��>:�JTKyi.. >... h.}x�M;..y:4T:!p;::is:-�h'r.:v...:.... ::. +4"i •n ._......:.a:H.x{vw..:..:. i:ti%::i:.-r:x:• �1p �/� /��p /��/ �] ....- .+n � �� .:. }.'• t..':.,.F .,,.vv?i:^:.x'!Yk�•:.i �3.P..i�C?.i;s�,�•.1�� �vl`11I.\..LQ�. :-�.v..::.:n:Nii.v.'"::n:}ktil iir'YWk•�•k'':>x:Gril..v.9Y.,iri•.�i.:\Jti-.iii^:i:'ihn'S.ti:,�'�ri$'.::is :.v::i:-}.iti•:J:{il..Yn'F4si v.'i:::iv'-Yvv:}:-:::...At<.;ti-.'S�.::........... ..,:..�.i�.....,x....x,..:...x.v...�,.::x::...:::...::r>:;;:-:;r.U:n:::i-;>:<.,.N>.i::>:;;��>:::;»:»>r�:<>:::s:};�8549,92v:>::> ;;Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp. Park,Tract A Sampled: Aug 23, 1990 1 „1805136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Matrix Descript: Soil Received: Aug 24, 1990 • ;:Bellevue,WA '98005 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 (I.R.with clean-up) Extracted: Aug 24, 1990 Attention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 008-0402 Analyzed: Aug 24, 19900 . .>:w. tea. «{:r . x . £ ::W :::::."� v»:irvni . Reported: Aug24, 1990<t -:.;:\::�--:...a^�.c::,M;..w ..: °;..x ..:45: irk:" . r..+-.:,•:,a.::2? ,rxx,... ax ..g waW.•a.wCiwE,+TYmMnYM.I:.Cv'nJt n:l..x: -:5•:.?nhi..:.c:•::s!t�.;•.+,s'...''.::?`:�i..:'-'"'°`::R:�?i �ix�:;;r,,r,:..<::iCxSrii iii:.:.f..:.::i.;,.fi•,:ia:,:•;wv:;+;,ii..i:..,,..,.r.. , \`4ti.wx,:w.�vnn:mn+�:{{tii+ •:i-ii::•::i-iihti4.ihi{irvv}`.•XS:.v ....0 ../,..Y'�,:::rr: :..r'::.. ../..:. •-.xr/•:,','4xiiw4:rti';�: a.�a�::::...•i:�;r;:b;:;s7C:�.,•_.:r;:�nw".:;cri::•ia:.:.:::r�.::.�xx:.:£;ii.;:: f>�sb..:.: ;::r>.-:�:::5;:G`;ry<• >:::rhv.:2v:?r,'r.'s�Y.;:v I TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS Sample Sample Petroleum Oil Number Description mg/kg I (ppm) 008-0402 6102E-1' 89 1 1 Li 008-04.03 B102B-2.5 56 } l • ] • - Detection Limits: 1.0 H Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. ' i RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL elIZOis""---,. - J Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 80402.ECI <1> • =Hart:Crowser • r • J=3276 • • ' . . . , . BORING LOGS FROM- • : . • _ GEOTEGHNICAL EVALUATION • •• '.'‘TRACT.A • • • ' . • - :• • • ' ,- EARTH CONSULTANTS- . .. AUGUST 1990- I I B-3 1 Property Line \ ii B-4 II B6 A 8-5 ® le _. B ZI-_ 0 I �� B B-I r ' 041,..,._ 1• N 1 -r ( . 1 ihhi. .1 ._sto itv q ` At; F S. .. i it •- w r . • LEGEND kO r, 111 I SiB-I Approximate Location of ECI Boring, Proj. No. E-1990-I I, Aug. 1990 I Reference Job No. 89017 Site Plan I Proposed Building By LPN Architects a Planners Approximate Scale Dated 9/20/89 Nommol . 0 50 (CO 20Oft. iki ��. .14\ Boring Location Plan I d Earth Consultants Inc. Black River Corporate Pork, Phase ME li/ f/\ (A1Y<[iL1IC:J IJIf(YHT(5.(k•UW$61tid IJl\'IfuM1111C11.11$(11111(lIS Renton, Washington 1 Proj No. 1990- I I Drwn. GLS Date Aug.(90 Checked SD Date 8/14/90 Plate 2 BORING NO: E3 1 Logged By SD Date 7-20-90 Bev. 20'±*. US Depth -\./V Graph cs Soil Description (ft.) Sample Blows mi Ft .,*,::''' ol 14" topsoil and sod - ....::;:1•7..;•.- _ m-sp Tan sandy SILT, moist, medium dense . :I: 28 18 ••-•a:,:.••••.: ' ' +:-•:•:••.:.::. -medium dense - 5 , 1 1i;*• - • Black silty SAND, moist, medium dense - m-sp - -sand becoming fine grained -loose 6 22 - __ ::.1•1• 4•••• — 10 . :iiil.,]:..-.%-, • . . , ; :•:,:c.-%•.•:: -silt increasing .. 3 29 - ::0:1:::.::-• . ::“.i.:......: -very loose 1.15 -silt lenses . - ' - ' ':•il.:-Ii"...:':; -wet I 4 35 ::•,:;t:V.:::.; -loose - 20 :Mt::.% -24" water on sampling rods -- -loose - 8 23 :: ::w -wond fragments - 25 I.M':•::. p-sm Black SAND, little silt, wet, medium - dense _ - 1 ::•c::4:•••:..... -heave, spun out ' ::::?::•:•::i:. - 30 28 28 Ht.;...%.: ::,,....:. -medium dense _ ___ ii:V,;:.::•.• _ -36" of heave, washed out - :I: 42 17 -some gravel - 35 *..::1:4;•'. :1 -dense .:•1:1%.:.:.: . -bentonite slurry added --- lilip:;.•;:.' • - 1, ' <-1.--:V.:.•:: -gravel - 40 38 13 . ' ,::1:•1:,:::•:': -dense --- . rri;:;71,illif— _ • sm Gray silty/clayey SAND with shell - 3 25 fragments, moist, very loose - _ 45 -shell fragments sp Black SAND, wet, dense - 32 22 -dense - 50 _ -very dense _ - -T- 51 19 .-- Boring terminated at 54 feet below existing grade. . . Groundwater encountered at 19.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with bentonite and cuttings. *Elevation assumed. Other elevations are relative (----- to this. \..- rSubsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis,and • judgement.They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. -.2— BORING LOG Earth Consultants Inc. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, i ; ‘• il ; ,-„,i, / \•.• .),,' ‘ •.;if, (k,,. ,,•,,,i,,,i fitIglIIVITS.Geologists&iinvironntelltal SCiellILSIS PHASE VIII TRACT A '44;:‘, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ; .. --, Proj. No.1990-11 Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-9-90 I Plate A2 ! , --, , . • _ I BORING NO. B-2, Logged By SD .,-- Date 7-20-90 Bey. 20 1± (N) US W Graph cs Soil Description Depth(ft) Sample Blows cy. 0) —1 ' Y ..""' '' l ol 12" topsoil and sod r- t' ''.....yri: :1•V:1:1:i:1:.1::.1. _ liml,i:a!:f sm Black silty SAND, moist, dense 7 35 16 , , i„, 11 RH' ml Brown SILT, moist, hard L. 5 P,K404 sm Gray silty fine SAND, moist, medium ,- Illi4it dense . :I: 10 36 -mottled —10 , 1•ii::-.:1::iii i.f -medium dense - -loose ' - =I:L 1 5 ,It 4 24 .t.gisp-sm Black SAND, little to some silt, moist,: I loose '-_I: 4 32 -loose L. 20 ::::;:,:.::::,...• E -slurry added - ::: 8 31- -loose _ 25 4 i;1•:•:•....... - _ '::..,'".:P.•:::: , ..::i.c..-.....-. -little gravel 1 32 27 , ',;:::ii :::• -dense _ - .,:::,••••••. — 30 : ::'-::::%•:.:.:.: - i•:•;:::••••••• - r:;;Y: -gravel - 1 24 23 -medium dense -_ 35 ' !•:.::-." _••x::,:.••: - , . -gravel - _ 30 29 Hf::;it:.:*•:: - -dense - 40 _ _ ' ',.'i?•;t:.:'::•: - -very dense - 1 73 17 . ; •• 45 .... -heaving sand :..x,:.r.w.% -very dense - 50 14 ' ' Boring terminated at 49 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 19 feet during drilling. . , Boring backfilled with bentonite and cuttings. --, . . • . • , 1 Li Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests.analysis,and judgement.They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. BORING LOG '7'. 1445 • K RIVER CORPORATE PARK, ( BLACK Earth Consultants Inc. PHASE VIII TRACT A ,.,\I /\,7\7)N,I Geowchnival lingigitiis.Grolmisis&linvironnitimil Scirriksis KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ! . Proj. No.1990-111 Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-9-90 I Plate A3 1 _' BORING NO. B-3 Logged By SD Cff , Date 7-20-90 � Elev. �Cr ± ' (N) Graph CS Soil Description D(fip)) Sample Blows (%1 Ft -•= °`° ,.1 of 12" topsoil and sod T- ml Brown sandy SILT, moist, medium dense _ a: 22 23 -roots _ 5 -medium dense ` -mottled = 4 28 -loose ` 10 i '. :::iii sm Black silty SAND, moist, loose : .... -loose 6 28 — 15 •:i •:•::;: : -loose _ T :i•: :::ii — 20 `•••' .. " -3" piece of wood 12 151 r.: _ :E:;.:: - 25 •-. :}sp-sm Black SAND, some silt, wet, medium - ...• dense - = 14 28 -silt lenses _ 30 ":"�• `` -medium dense -pea sized gravels :* -medium dense 26 25 ;__ -heaving sand — 35 { -loose - . - • ' li:s ml : 6" thick gray SILT layer, wet, soft U. 6 25 ` �:. •r. :,: P-sm dense1•�. Black SAND, some silt, wet, medium _ 40 :##•••3:1:f••1rf sm Gray silty/clayey SAND with shell - :I: 9 33 #:::;: :{ fragments, wet, medium dense #••• ilis -shell fragments �f:1•: -medium dense :�::i: �.._. - = 22 28 3ii:;::''44 -medium dense - 50 :� -shell fragments c..3.; G ` = 22 25 sp Gray gravelly SAND, wet, medium dense - 55 -dense I 44 11 _ 60 • -dense - __ r::▪ ..... 38 20 Boring terminated at 64 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 19 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with bentonite and cuttings. Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole.modified by engineering tests,analysis,and judgement.They are not necessarily representative o1 other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation.by others of • information presented on this log. } BORING LOG Earth Consultants Inc. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, \,I1; t �11 t rllmimic,,itllgii,'ersogusts&hjw,roflnxnl;ii$(I,Tmm PHASE VIII TRACT A 'y KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON -`- Proj. No.1990-11 Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-9-90 I Plate A4 Y, BORING NO. B-4 Logged By SD i Date 7-20-90 Bev. .20'± :': _ (N) _ Graph CS Soil Description Depth h Sample Blows ,—, 1 Ft �__, "..'"."'' ."". 1 of 12" topsoil and sod r-- ml Brown sandy SILT, moist, medium dense - = 19 22 !"l -sand is fine grained _5 1 -medium dense - -mottled I 10 17 -medium dense —10 • sm Black silty SAND, moist, loose - `�'f:::<•: - = 4 17 ::: -loose _15 ,"'`'::::: -grades to black - ff - = 8 31 :i :�::: -loose - _ 20 1 i1:: _ ::: -loose - :I: 8 36 :� _ 25 ::>:: - - :: -medium dense - = 11 30 _30 - 1 .:::::{:: -some small gravel - = 17 34 -3" thick gray silt layer _35 :t.i,' ::,:::: •:` -medium dense - • ' , .: -medium dense - 23 18 Boring terminated at 39 feet below existing grade. . • Groundwater encountered at 21 feet during drilling. 1 • pexploratory by engineering tests,analysis,and Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this hole,modified judgement.They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. `, BORING LOG (4),, Earth Consultants Inc. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, ; , mii/ 6c-014.i-11111(111 lillitillills.ci.il,oiis&f:,ivironnx„l:,lsii iisu, PHASE VIII TRACT A KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON `, Proj. No. 1990-11l Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-10-90 ' Plate A5 . , I BORING NO. 13_725_ Logged By SD . : 0 Date 7-23-90 Elev. :t i 0 (N) US W Graph CS Soil Description Depth(ft.) Sample Blows Ft. rio, :1:1:3?f:•tj;i: 0" topsoil and sod - 11.01w sm Dark brown silty SAND, moist, medium - MO4M dense; -mottled, very dense - I. 60 17 , ;4:!:,.,!:,•,:::1: HI ml Gray SILT, some sand, moist, hard . -mottled _ :I: 12 42 qu=.75 -medium stiff -- 10 tsf _ -soft I 3 39 .4 ......[. . •t :.:... P-sm Gray silty fine SAND, wet, loose - 15 :-..::::.. •21 24 iii'.:V.:sp-sm Black SAND, little silt, wet, medium - 20 ' iV::i:.:.• dense -medium dense - ::-•.:•:...- _ :•c•:•.•.;••.; -very dense _ :I: 42 24 _ 25 -water added - r......::. -loose - - 8 27 _ _ 30 -heaving sand - -some gravel _ :I: 40 12 -very dense L. 35 -very dense - _ :I: 19 20 1 • ,,.,-,xv 001:..1; sm Gray silty/clayey SAND with shells, 1_40 wet, medium dense - glgi'lliii -some gravel - "nic.-... .pp-sm Black SAND, little silt, wet, very 1_45 = 50/5 25 dense 1::1•4"'-'' - _ - -very dense 7- 77 24 Boring terminated at 49 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 16.5 feet during drilling. Boring backfilled with bentonite and cuttings. , . . , • i • Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysis,and judgement.They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of information presented on this log. ' BORING LOG ! ,,_<7•:':Ei, I.i7iii-a ..1 j• mN.Earth Consultants Inc. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, . 0J70,. ,r 4) "161.1 0.( .c. ,Hino ,N. 0 m. 0 ,1, ,,m.m ,&1, is., mbi,, PHASE VIII TRACT A 'I KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Proj. No.1990-11 Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-10-90 I Plate A6 • ,-, 1 BORING NO. B-6 ,---- ' Logged By SD . . cr Date 7-23-90 ! ' , em Iet I 1 (N) US Depth W Graph CS Soil Description (ft.) Sample Blows ini 1 Ft. 12" topsoil and sod r- I,.wtil:!:_41 sm Brown silty SAND, moist, medium 27 27 , , ::,11.•,; 1 dense r: 5 I . ml Gray SILT, moist, stiff _ 1 1 - I 4 43 -mottled - -- 10 „ -soft _ I II .-1- nRig I sm Black silty SAND, wet, medium dense - 11 35 15 : -.. : ..:..E•:-1:.1.1.1: Ii14 .. ;'..igi i ii -medium dense - I. 20 28 Mal, - 20 Black SAND, some silt, wet, very dense : • '.:i-...... -some gravel :I: 41 26 -__ 25:1:.'--t:I.*:•:•:" -dense - I-very dense 30 53 25 - -; : j:1:1::::••.y.• - 1 68 14 L: Rtl*p-sm White very weathered SANDSTONE, wet, 1_ 35 hard - pi.....%.: -very hard T 50/2" 14 :.::1:i::.:::::: • - ! ' Boring terminated at 39 feet below existing grade. Groundwater encountered at 17 feet during drilling. -- Boring backfilled with bentonite and cuttings. ,- ; 1 i . 1 , • (—T . Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations et the time and location of this exploratory hole,modified by engineering tests,analysts,and judgement.They are not necessarily representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use or interpretation by others of ._ information presented on this log. „rj% BORING LOG.1 ,, I) Earth Consultants Inc. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, lfialij . - , . . _ , 7 ,, (A111(111111(41 Imwiwt rs.(wolig,isis 44 Im,mminonal Soomsi, PHASE VIII TRACT A ••if \iro. AO KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON 1 .! • Proj. No.1990-111 Drwn. GLS I Aug'90 Checked SD I Date 8-10-90 I Plate A7 !___. .. • • Hart.Crowser , - ' J-3276 • BORING LOGS AND CHEMICAL • ANALYSES 'OF . , - :. . • DREDGE SPOILS TRACT.A . . • • ,• - '''''-'...:-EARTH CONSULTANTS • JANUARY 1991 En fronmenzai aurrny 1-uy H I , Project Name: Sheet of 1--,, ?clack River Corporate Park, Tract A 1 Joo No.: Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No: • 1990-14 I MLP 11/12/90 11/12/90 B-20 1 Driling Contractor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Hand auger •i Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: • ❑Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer ®Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microtip 3 c 61" Depth V$ Surface Conditions: Reading Sample .2 Do z. in co E • m co 0 = 6 Feet =cn II'!i' IWi 1 ml Brown SILT (dredge spoils) , moist to saturated, CI minor clay, wood chips., very soft �I 11 2 1-IIH1 3 ml • Gray-green clayey SILT, saturated, brown, --1 mottling, medium stiff - r f 3i,-1: 4 sm Gray-green silty fine SAND, saturated, minor clay -_ Bottom of borehole .., 5 — 6 — • 7 8 --- 9 — • 10 ,---- 11 — f J 12 --- • 13 --- 14 — I • 15 — 16 --- • t7 • 19 —, Notes/Location f .Groundwater encountered at 2. 1 feet %i (i4 el 1 Earth C0l$U1taI1ts inc. \1 1 • Proj. No. 1990-14 Date Dec'90 Plate B2 J _ Subsurface conditions deckled receeeent our observatens at the tine and location of the err:Memory hole,metaled lied by enpneenng teamanalyse and judgment.They are not ssr necary reoreaersa1ee of other tines and locations.We cannot accept responsrbiey for the use of interpretation by others of Inorrtgtron cemented on this lop. Envi:onrrr€ntat oaring Log •1 Project Name: ' Sneet of l:1eick River Corporate Par':, Tract A 1 3 1 Job No.: Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No: 1990.-14 NlLP 11/12/90 11/12/90 B-202 Drilling Contractor. Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Iland auger ;I Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer El Abandoned,sealed with bentonite ( Microtip Sample 3 c '�6 Depth U.8 Surface Conditions: ; Reading ID s in E (ppm) °D 8 :353 Feet P rn .:'i;,i ml Brown SILT (dredge spoils) , moist to saturated, !.i;:, 1 � !,. I minor clay, wood chips, very soft i:•:: 2 B202-2.5' 3 -- Bottom of borehole - > 4 ---- 5 -- lV 6 7 -- i 8 — i . 9 --- . - 10 11 — • 12 -- i 13 — , l _ 14 — 15 — 1 _ 16 -- - ' 17 arEtl 18 -- I 19 —, i--, Notes/Location 1 ., Groundwater encountered at 2.1 feet ' iiid) Earth Consultants Inc. I / eeaaf..eY e+�a�mn^•F,.yra,..e�ot soars J Proj. No. 1 cio0- '4 Date ': Plate 7 Suasunaas eondnons cleoaaed represent our observations at the time end location at this esobf story hole modered by engineering teats analysis and inerrant.They are not neeeuary reoresertale,of other times and locations.We cannot aceeot responsibility for the use of intetoretaton by others of intortrahon resented on this tog. Environmental tsortng Log Proje=Name: Sheet of Black River Corporate Park, Tract n 1- Joe Nc.: Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring No: i1 1990-14 MLP 11/12/90 11/12/90 B-203 z._ Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Band auger Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: ❑Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer ®Abandoned,sealed with bentonite 1 1 Miaotip ;c a'" Depth V$ Surface Conditions: !; s J Reading Sample 4 6 f- in co B (ppm) ID CDcg m Feet di ;I I ?itlip sm Brown silty very fine SAND (dredge spoils) , 1 moist to saturated, wood chirps lir B203-2.5' .i T.1::{ 2 J - Gray-green and brown sandy SILT (native soils?), 3 cal saturated - } I _ - . 4 — Bottom of borehole 5 — * . 6 — 7 — 8 — 1 9 — 10 — 11 — n 12 — 13 — ir , i 14 — 15 — 1 u • 16 — 17 — Ij 18 - . 19 — i I Notes/Location ,I,f E�,. Groundwater encountered at 1.g feet ,'/ �hI/'� Earth Consultants Inc. 1(l01 1 cart rims Cm�..Fiaaererrm.t6mi.n of Proj. No. 1990-14 Date Doc'90 Plate -B4 Stbeurlaaa mrdnom depicted represent ow observations al the time and locator'locator'of this exploratory hole.modified by enparoenng teas.analyse and'augment.They are not rtecsssriy representative other times and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use of interpretation by cetera of information presented on this log. cnvtrortneliLCls 04..li iiiy L.Us \ I 1 f Project Name: I Sneet of Black River Corporate Park, Tract A 1 1 Job No.: Logged by: Start Date: Completion Date: Boring.No: 1990-14 MLP 11/12/90 11/12/90 B-204 • Drilling Contractor. Drilling Method: Sampling Mehoc- Hand auger ii 1 Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer in Abandoned.sealed with bentonite !� Mlaottp sample 3'c ti.c Depth US Surface Conditions: ' Reading p s W in ca E .u (PPm) ID 413 S to Feet co ..tv-,r:;:: ,,;,.,., sm Brown silty very fine to fine SAND (dredge , . :a:,'k?: : I spoils) , moist to saturated lft4. B204-2' :?:i;�a. ; 2 I Gray fine SAND, saturated, minor silt, musty q _ tlf.i sp organic odor, more dense than silty sand above '• !i;!!' ml Gray clayey sandy SILT, saturated, fine sand, %_ 1 medium stiff, musty organic odor f ` 4 _ j Bottom of borehole ji 5 — 6 — I_ 7 8 — Ij. g 1 -i : 10 — I� 11 — , 12 — 13 — _ J 14 Ii 15 — 16 -- 1 1 11 17 — i`=I] 18 — 19 — Notes/Location ,pr � a (' Groundwater encountered at 1.4 feet ��iill i I/ rth Consultants Inc. Proj. No. 1990-14 Date Dec'90 Plate B5 Subsurface conbtns oea our ed represent o obsenratonl it the time and locaten of the exploratory tole.modified by enpneenng tests.analysis and juogn rc They are not necessariy o arepresematwe d other tiros and loofahs.We cannot accept responsibility for the use of interpretation by others of information presented on this log. NORTH CREEK = ANAL` TICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 •}}:L[:.}}!n}}i:;:i'r i:1]ii isii:................................ :......:. ..\.x........�C.::::�v:m:::::::::. x::::::::::::::::nv::::. 0Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: , Nov 12, 1990's ':.1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Matrix Descript: Soil Received: Nov 13, 1990 ' Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 (I.R.with clean-up) Extracted: Nov 21, 1990 ` €s=Attention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 011-0248 Analyzed: Nov 21, 1990'< Reported: Nov 28, 1990€>'s ii\C}.ivii:i{ii}::ii:Li ii;}}}]fiii::�:}i:>.•'.:}ii......................................v. ..L:....................................................................n..................4:::w:•• ....:..v:w:::: r.'.r v;nnrt.•::v.v::: ".. :•}::::•}:}:::?•}:}.;:•}:L}}i}'rL}}:w:::"i'�}}+}:C:• ?'Y'v L:�L'iiiii::i+:i:ii}:i}::�i':i:•':}:?i:::•i:•'�ii:^$ii i::ii'i:�iji':L'ii:}.:.... ••••••••••• •........:}:r2+." n........... x........:::::•:::•:\iLLv:i:.•:4i:•:iiL4:iL•}:•i:LLi+.L.};:u:•::is i:L•::Lti.}}}}:};v:ti:{{v.L..........u....n.v.:....n...:....... v.L•:v.::L:•.LLLLL::+.:A::;:::•::::vv,::'.i L.YL LL•;L•;L•:tip:!L::::::;•}::A..:.:.:.......:......n...n.n....... :....... TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS Sample Sample Petroleum Oil Number Description mg/kg dry wt. u_ (PPm) 011-0248 B202-2.5' 55 011-0249 B203-2.5' 65 1 011-0250 B204-2' 19 !_3 i -i II Detection Limits: 5.0 Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. TH CREEK ANALYTICAL Please Note: "r Report was amended on December 6, 1990. of Cocanour Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <1> NORTH CHEEK ANAL T CAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ?•:L?4:^'f.{?{•i:^X iii:viiivi}iY.?4%dii}i:?4':4i:':?::: . Earth Consultants Inc.:::.�:::. ••• Client Pro ect ID: B Ia••ck.•Rive��-r Corp., E••• -••1990-.• . �.�.-•..13 •••��•••Sampled:�••• •••Nov•--12,�--1990> ::`1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B202-2.5' Received: Nov 13, 1990 ' Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Nov 26, 1990° r. :::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0248 Reported: Nov 28, 1990:W::: E:P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 1.0 N.D. r i•.• n':.4. 0.......}.....T..4..T..T..T.....}..#{:T.....fTRT.... y►{t(�.�y�::::.:�:::::::•:::::�:::::::::::.::. :1YiYi••••:i:• :::-. ::i`}i:?i�ii:•i:•: ::: .:: .::::: :•:•::: .•. .. ..............................._ ..,.................................................................4x�.4aT.;:.?:>:;::.;;V!��:.V..::::::�::5;::::::::..... ,......:...: �:��::.:*�: �.;:..••*T.>:: {•:::;�T�:;:Y:;;:_::;�S:YS::¢:::::: :;;: 13 /�Y Y•Y•Y•Y Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y1Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y................4 OSV:(::v:�i:�ii:v:?{•i:•iiY�Y�%�%�%�%�l�%�%�%�II�%�%�%�1(�1(�%YiK%v:�i:�iii:�jii:�ij:�:Y{is�i:�i:i�i:;�:�i};:::ii:�}::}::ji}::::i:�ii:.........................................:............:........................................... Ladn......t.y:syr:•;:•:;:•;:;{•::{•::;:;:::.;::;:::?.:.::-;:-;::«.:::,:?.::•::::•::{:•>:??•::•;:;:•::-:: .;:.::{{.::.::.::.::•::.>s>..>.�...:...>..... ................................................ X•X•X X•X•X•X•X•Y X•X•Y•X•X•X•Y•X•X•X•X•X•Y•X•X•X•X•XTXiX•JIi................�/•�/JY:?: :ti• :•i}}}i .n:..:.:.�:::...Z.::::: :::: :: ::. : .0 r11/:::..:■.:.}..��:i.::;::.{:::j:;':i:::::::i:i::iiif:i:>:ii:Ji: i::y:}.Y v,. v.:}:::i::::tiv�?:i>::i:4-. ir:4::.:}.v?;::i:;(:::i:::i':iii':v'viiii i. }�.:j' ?: .T\ .��ii1T:1�/.H.H.TRT%H.TrMH'r r.•.T},H;H.H.M:HW.H:N:1...........• :••.•:•.••••.•..5.�XX.��%�R:%�R•R•X•RTR•R:%�%�%�%}Ri{::i:}}}iii::i:h:.. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. :. .;;::::v::•isO::r:•:ti4:p}ii:ii�::�?Ti'�i:i:::i'i:>:j}?L;i:;}v::i•:L;ii:;i{:ti:is4:j?:�:iYtiL'{i:}A:::i{L;i::ii:?4:6:•i:?4iii:.iii:?viii:vi::i:C: ::� {•:iti4:•i:01?i?4iii:XS?4i}}}iXJ:?h:v:J'•iii}-u ::::::::::::::..:....................... .......................................... ! {tT T f}•:tf.�T�T.;T{•}.-{..T..T�f..�iTkTiT..T�W:iiii;{•i}iii}iiio}::.:.:::::::::::::::::::..fQ}i}x}iT%Tif%1-..... ....fi.TxT.i.#'�S•:x:nw::::::.�T�:::::.�:::::::::.:::::.:....:.:. K K K K•.•K K K•K•X•X•K•X•K•K•K•K•K•K•K•K•R•K•X•X•K•X•X•K•..n..........t/•O{/.:�:V. �:ii::>iiii;::iiii:��•;•••...••••................�•�••::.:••:•:•••..•.••:•:::::::::::::::} .:: •:?'>::ti•ii:�ii 4ii:4::•}}}}}}) Nickel 1.0 N.D. G rYY i..... ... ......Ri++i..�r....��.#RTi:�ai�tr..4 r.�f:�#.•.....4�.Ti+k}R4x+niTF.'Ti�i�r#�+e�r.}rt�k#F..i. /^� /� ....::,... .....::•:::::•:::::::::::::::: ./�:r�.�e':::::::::::::;'::<:;�;::i: ,.,r.�:::::::{:�.;�.:�..��O;H V,:::�:�:�:4>:�:;�:�:;�:;:;::;:...., .;a... ........R.RfxT.......t•.+.T:r:•>:•:•:?•:s:>:�>:Qr.V f:9i..s:•::.:s::•::•:>:•;:•::;?•:�:•;� Silver 0.10 N.D. >�'#tall€uY Ri1•:%�%�ll�%�%�%�lf�%�%�%�}�i:�?ti�i:�:4:•isG:4:4i}ii:?hiii:{4}i}i}i}i}i}i:?:iiii::•:^:ti???v}i:iLiiiiii}::i}:'ryri:�}Y' K K K X X•X•%•X•X•X•X•Y•Y•Y•K•K•X•X•X•X•X•X•K•KTK.............Vi.4��/5O'?:SiY�iiii:.��'.riL•;•::::::::::vi::::::i;}:::::. ' i4i:v>)};}}}i;4;{.:viiiiii: ,.�'.C.: :;.;a;.isi;; .;...22:.... .:.i.:i:.:isi.is:i::it:i:::' . :? 2:attis.:;:;:.:.:.>'•i%:.:a??:?. :. :.:.i.:.:::::i:::::5::>i<'?5iiii?::./�'•in�. X x•x•x•x•xfxfx•xf••• ..... R x x x x•xfXTxTx•xTx•x•x•x•r.•xfx•XfX•x•X•X•x•x•x•R•x•x•x•x...............Y 43•Q�S3i�'is�i�i�i:<i�ii:<i�'j:i[;:;.?.5..:� :iSiiiii2�i2%iiii;2[isi[j:;:;:`;:^.;}``:.'•S.�^�i`[ /�/�''>•?s::•4:•r::n:•i:Y::n:�:a::;. ....................x r•x•RfR•fx•Rfx•a•R•R•RTR.•R•Rfx•..•X..............�.`.t�7::{:::.•,;:?::::o>:•;:;;:+.;<o:;•;::: 1 Anaiytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Cocanour Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <2> NORTH CREEK .===- ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990:::: 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B203-2.5 Received: Nov 13, 1990 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Nov 26, 19901i.iii.i Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0249 Reported: Nov 28, 1990:: E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS _ Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 1.0 N.D. Aroe........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ]Chtt......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ Mercury 000io Lead 030 Nicker 10 , Silver 0.10 N.D. .................................................................................................. - Anaiytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <3> NORTH CREEK -;:ickNALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 pjEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 19901 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B204-2 Received: Nov 13, 1990 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Nov 26, 1990 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: 011-0250 Reported: Nov 28, 1990 E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg (ppm) mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 1.0 N.D. -,,C..titorniumu0440.4444444zN44.0.0:gg44:44.4WAVAINNE:;0113 COpter .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. • Silver 0.10 N.D. .0 . ] Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <4> 4 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 i;Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project Black River Corp Park, E-1990 B Sampled: N.A.€ 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Method Blank Received: N.A.= ::Bellevue, WA 98005 Analyzed: Nov 26, 1990 :.'Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number BLK120390 Reported: Nov 28, 1990 ` E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. Arsenic 0.065 N.D. Beryllium 0.65 N.D. Cadmium 0.65 N.D. Chromium 13 N.D. Copper 3.2 N.D. Lead 9.5 N.D. Mercury 0.065 N.D. Nickel 10 N.D. Selenium 0.13 N.D. Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. Zinc 0.95 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. •RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010436.ECI <13> __„ : • NORTH • ' --- --- AC REEK --, --- ..ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 ii1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 ... ... ' . "Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix Soil ..„,. ::.• "Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 011-0248 to-0250 Reported: Dec 6, 1990 4 , . , . , L QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ( ANALYTE Petroleum Oil Sb As Be Cd Cr Cu EPA Method: 418.1 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Analyst: K.Stark M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig --. Reporting Units: mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. Date Analyzed: Nov 21, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 -- QC Sample#: 011-0248 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 ---) U Sample Conc.: 35 0 8.3 1.0 6.4 24 26 1 , Spike Conc. Added: 520 250 2.5 20 25 50 75 , Conc. Matrix Spike: 400 200 11 19 33 75 94 Matrix Spike %Recovery: 71 80 100 90 106 102 91 F-' ? ; '--' Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 420 250 11 20 28 79 62 1---", Matrix Spike ..-,---- Duplicate %Recovery: 74 100 96 95 86 110 48 1T Relative %Difference: 4.4 22 0.9 5.1 16 5.2 41 iT N RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 Spike Conc.Added -.-,— Cer--OA"--------- Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 '--3 Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <12> _,;' it , _NORTH _ CREEK 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200• FAX (206)485-2992 ..... Inc...... Client Project ID: Black River 90 3 "Earth Consultants Corp.,p, ``1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 :.'Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil • igAttention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 011-0248 to-0250 Reported: Dec 6, 1990 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT , ANALYTE Pb Hg Ni Se Ag TI Zn r EPA Method: 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Analyst: M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig Reporting Units: mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. mg/kg wet wt. Date Analyzed: Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 Nov 26, 1990 QC Sample#: 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 011-0249 Sample Conc.: 22 0.50 6.0 0.65 0 0.54 190 Spike Conc. l Added: 75 0.25 25 1.5 10 1.5 10 Conc. Matrix Spike: 90 0.75 39 2.0 11 2.1 200 -• Matrix Spike %Recovery: 91 • 100 132 90 110 104 100 i '�- Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 88 0.74 28 2.1 8.2 1.6 200 Matrix Spike Duplicate %Recovery: 88 96 88 97 82 71 100 ,--- Relative ' %Difference: 2.2 1.3 33 4.9 29 27 0 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 ' ' Spike Conc.Added Cle-r--6,4^^---- Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 _ of Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 Laboratory Director 110248.ECI <13> O.TH CREEK ,- _ ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 Earth o su aInc. JBlackRiverCop., E19..90 13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B202-2.5' Received: Nov 13, 1990; 'Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990€'' :::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0248 Analyzed: Nov 20, 1990>I Reported: Nov 28, 1990 .........:...... ::...... SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg pg/kg dry wt. Acenaphthene 156 N.D. Acenaphthylene 156 N.D. Aniline 156 N.D. Anthracene 156 N.D. Benzidine 3,900 N.D. - Benzoic Acid 780 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 156 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 156 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 156 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 156 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 156 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 156 N.D. IBis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 156 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 156 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 156 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 780 N.D. ;~ 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 156 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 156 N.D. - 4-Chloroaniline 156 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 156 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 156 N.D. 2-Chlorophenol 156 N.D. 4-Chiorophenyl phenyl ether 156 N.D. Chrysene 156 N.D. r Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 156 N.D. Dibenzofuran 156 N.D. __ Di-N-butyl phthalate 780 N.D. + 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 156 N.D. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 156 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 156 N.D. — 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 780 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 156 N.D. Diethyl phthalate 156 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 156 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 156 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 780 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 780 N.D. I NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 110248.ECI <5> NORTH H CREEK �y� ■/�_�/�y j -.ANALYTICAL ICAL I i ' 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX(206)485-2992 li Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990< 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B202-2.5' Received: Nov 13, 1990 ' i-- iiiii Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990€'' :::::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0248 Analyzed: Nov 20, 1990 Reported: Nov 28, 1990 ...is ti:�i`S:'•'::nSr>i:mi}iiiii::ii}iii{:'iiT??:ai:'.'•::viii'•}iiS'riiii<jii};)};:'r::v:i}i:J:{}4vp•. SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg pg/kg 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 156 N.D. r=1 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 156 N.D. ) Di-N-octyl phthalate 156 N.D. Fluoranthene 156 N.D. Fluorene 156 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 156 N.D. , Hexachlorobutadiene. 156 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 156 N.D. Hexachloroethane 156 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 156 N.D. ' ` Isophorone 156 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 156 N.D. 111 2-Methylphenol 156 N.D. 11 4-Methylphenol 156 N.D. Naphthalene 156 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 780 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 780 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 780 N.D. Nitrobenzene 156 N.D. 2-Nitrophenol 156 N.D. 1 4-Nitrophenol 780 N.D. N-Nit' 156 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 156 N.D. • Pentachlorophenol 780 N.D. Phenathrene 156 N.D. Phenol 156 N.D. (—) Pyrene 156 N.D. ' 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 156 N.D. ' 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 780 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 156 N.D. I T PCB-1260 780 N.D. L. `? Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. •RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL - ,•• . Ctram.______ Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 110248.ECI <6> i : ORTh = CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)'481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ::::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990' 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B203-2.5' Received: Nov 13, 1990 : Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990 ' i `gAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0249 Analyzed: Nov 20, 1990 Reported: Nov 28, 1990 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results F,' pg/kg pg/kg dry wt. Acenaphthene 175 N.D. -__ Acenaphthylene 175 N.D. ' Aniline 175 N.D. •• Anthracene 175 N.D. Benzidine 4,375 N.D. Benzoic Acid 875 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 175 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 175 N.D. _ Benzo(k)fluoranthene 175 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 175 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 175 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 175 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 175 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 175 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 175 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 875 N.D. - 1 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 175 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 175 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 175 N.D. r—. 2-Chloronaphthalene 175 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 175 N.D. __: 2-Chlorophenol 175 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 175 N.D. 7 Chrysene 175 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 175 N.D. Dibenzofuran 175 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 875 N.D. t1,3-Dichlorobenzene 175 N.D. t___, 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 175 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 175 N.D. r 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 875 N.D. 1 2,4-Dichlorophenol 175 N.D. L-- Diethyl phthalate 175 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 175 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 175 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 875 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 875 N.D. l ' I j } . r", NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1 110248.ECI <7> NORTH _-_ CREEK ANALYTICAL LJ 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 I .:::::.::::.:.:: :::.. .:. ... . .. .. :::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990' s.1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B203-2.5' Received: Nov 13, 1990 <Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990`:iiiii ' NAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0249 Analyzed: Nov 20, 1990'€i ;;. Reported: Nov 28, 1990€ i '; SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg pg/kg 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 175 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 175 N.D. Di-N-octyl phthalate 175 N.D. ---' Fluoranthene 175 N.D. Fluorene 175 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 175 N.D. Hexachlorobutadiene. 175 N.D. - Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 175 N.D. Hexachloroethane 175 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 175 N.D. Isophorone 175 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 175 N.D. - 2-Methylphenol 175 N.D. �; 4-Methylphenol 175 N.D. Naphthalene 175 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 875 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 875 N.D. L_i 4-Nitroaniline 875 N.D. Nitrobenzene 175 N.D. - 2-Nitrophenol 175 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 875 N.D. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 175 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 175 N.D. Pentachlorophenol 875 N.D. Phenathrene 175 N.D. Phenol 175 N.D. r_, Pyrene 175 N.D. + 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 175 N.D. \---` 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 875 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 175 N.D. --1 PCB-1260 875 N.D. l ! _, Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. ' • :TH CREEK ANALYTICAL __:' .*, 6tCj — • • Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 110248.ECI <8> n _NORTH 1- _ CREEK n, -.-------_,A:ANALYTICAL ' 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ' :.::.;;;:EarthConsultantsInc. ::::Client Project I : Corp., E-1990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 1990 41805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B204-2. Received: Nov 13, 1990 :::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990 €'Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0250 Analyzed: Nov 18, 1990 ' Reported: Nov 28, 1990 : 1 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg pg/kg dry wt. i Acenaphthene 116 N.D. Acenaphthylene 116 N.D. Aniline 116 N.D. _` Anthracene 116 N.D. • Benzidlne 2,900 N.D. -- Benzoic Acid 580 N.D. ' Benzo(a)anthracene 116 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 116 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 116 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 116 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 116 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 116 N.D. 1 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 116 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 116 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 116 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 580 N.D. .' 4-Bromophenyi phenyl ether 116 N.D. • Butyl benzyl phthalate 116 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 116 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 116 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 116 N.D. 2-Chlorophenol 116 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 116 N.D. Chrysene 116 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 116 N.D. j. Dibenzofuran 116 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 580 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 116 N.D. _ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 116 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 116 N.D. r--,- 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 580 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 116 N.D. --' Diethyl phthalate 116 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 116 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 116 N.D. I. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 580 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 580 N.D. (---i NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 110248.ECI <9> 1 NORTH CREEK --- = =ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 • FAX(206)485-2992 ;;; ;:> C » »: : » ; : > ,>> ; EarthConsultantsInc. ClientProject ID: BlackRerorp., E- 990-13 Sampled: Nov 12, 199 0 <11805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B204-2' Received: Nov 13, 1990ii .- >Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Nov 15, 1990 : Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 011-0250 Analyzed: Nov 18, 1990' - Reported: Nov 28, 1990€ SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) __ Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg lig/kg 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 116 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 116 N.D. Di-N-octyl phthalate 116 N.D. - Fluoranthene 116 N.D. Fluorene 116 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 116 N.D. _ Hexachlorobutadiene. 116 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 116 N.D. Hexachloroethane 116 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 116 N.D. Isophorone 116 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 116 N.D. 2-Methylphenol 116 N.D. 4-Methylphenol 116 N.D. Naphthalene 116 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 580 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 580 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 580 N.D. Nitrobenzene 116 N.D. - 2-Nitrophenol 116 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 580 N.D. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 116 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 116 N.D. , Pentachlorophenol 580 N.D. Phenathrene 116 N.D. Phenol 116 N.D. Pyrene 116 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 116 N.D. - 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 580 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 116 N.D. ' PCB-1260 580 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. • 'TH C EEK ANALYTICAL k_ __. "a' - • Cocanour ,i Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 110248.ECI <10> i. _NORTH _ CREEK _ ANAL` TICAL L',.. 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 :?:Tii:viii:`:?}:::}.'•ji:'r:;;ji:`yj)y,}}:r::i:•:.:i<}iiii:::tii:'2•'.:n�ii$i'ri:.......jjj:i:}:};•:viii:i�i':i5i:vi:i$i^isiii?::i:i:;i::i:::$:'::i::::?:i 1�::i::'rii}<i}L{<t{i}:iii:Isis:?:.}:•?:ti•?}:v:L?:•:•??:•:i•: EarthConsultantsInc..........................:.:.. intv.: ... ... ....:.. - ............:.........:......:.............,........................................ .....:....:................ C e Project ID: Black River Corp., E-1990 13 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Method (units): EPA 8270 Ng wet wt. Q.C. Sample Dates >' }Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyst(s): T. Fowler Extracted: Nov 12, 1990 Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample#: BLK111290 Analyzed: Nov 13, 1990 Reported. Nov 28, 1990 igi .......... 4 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT a l._. Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Conc. Spike Matrix Duplicate Relative r—� Sample Spike Conc. Matrix % Spike % % Analyte Conc. Added Spike Recovery Duplicate Recovery Difference Phenol N.D. 100 36 36 43 43 18 2-Chlorophenol N.D. 100 78 78 86 86 9.8 1,4-Dichloro- N.D. 50 37 74 • 37 74 0 benzene N-Nitroso-Di-N- N.D. 50 46 92 48 96 4.3 propylamine 1,2,4-Trichioro- N.D. 50 42 84 43 86 2.4 benzene L 4-Chloro- N.D. 100 95 95 100 100 9 i 3-Methyiphenol Acenaphthene N.D. 50 41 82 43 86 4.8 C 4-Nitrophenol N.D. 100 37 37 36 36 2.7 2,4-Dinitro- N.D. 50 46 92 48 96 4.3 toluene Pentachloro- N.D. 100 71 71 69 69 2.9 phenol ? Pyrene N.D. 50 53 106 51 102 3.8 IF TH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 Ir'- Spike Conc.Added ti Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 of Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 Laboratory Director G 110248.ECI <11> : -- 4i) A \I Earth A i Consultants Inc. CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD SHEET I OF r P. ti -t. . M. L. P,e-.. i - PROJECT a-tot-co- 13 SAMPLERS: (Signature)43 I0 -K lA..c.r-t:-c. C,:,e.p Po- 4e. ) TT'A-C.-4-i4 M,,,,..,('Cu 1-• R ev:c.� //' -4.4 Ld E✓� • {/ ,0 A., LAB NUMBER DATE TIME SAMPLE TYPE 8qcs REMARKS z D of C 9 Or = Z ,por.„ a� m g C 9 m a 9 1 m of ✓r7c.Cv►rie ex,. frtetztls 15 203 .2.5' I'/ii./go /6 /o )c Zlr' r e a oy - z' i(/izJRc, /630 X i 1/ A n ,, e- h S 4,�e I r'H' v�-I g elk r'1c 1 h�Q /'�l S' • (, 1 l se...".% vo 1 c -Q e_ o ,.r,,„ )2EP 4 t t.jk 9 c J-7 a j CY.AtiCY RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: (signature) RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME 1 RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME I RELINQUISHED BY: IS RECEIVED BY MOBILE LAB FOR FIELD DATE/TIME ANALYSIS: (Signature) Il DISPATCHED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR LABORATORY BY: DATE/TIME (Signature/ 1 w i ( 11-12-10 3,.I c1Z METHOD OF SHIPMENT: Distribution: Original-Accompany Shipment One Copy-Survey Coordinator Field Files ' • A. Hart Crowser <: 7-3276 • • • - - BORING LOGS AND. " , --. .. _ . • • • I - P. „ , -. P CHEMICAL ANALYSES . ' • :. ;TRACT.B, • • EARTH CONSULTANTS- , • -• . . . • - .' - - . FEBRUARY 1991 i 1 ' iwii V.ii•1G..►Ci ..ra..•.w w►w r1"--fl F-o Name: Snee; ,..+ec a^Y Cf):'L)Urdtc Park, jria t •r. — Jc No.: Logged Start Date: Completion Date: Borth Nc: 11 1990-15 MLP/PJM I 1-14-91 1-14-91 B-1 Drrliina Contractor: Drilling Metnod: Samo'ng Method: • Band auger ^ IGround Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: ••J ❑Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer ®Abandoned, sealed with bentonite p Read to Sample o- s Depth Surface Conditions: I9 p s in cnE tpPm) ID ©g =a, Feet =ion i B-1 - 0.5 ml Brown sandy SILT with rounded fine gravel, i 1 damp to moist, soft, trace of clay, decreasinc gravel downward, abundant rootlets --577:77. :t?".g; 2 sm Brown silty-_very fine SAND , moist, slightly 1 ;= '', mottled i':11 3 ml Mottled brown clayey sandy SILT, moist, very 't soft, very fine sands, minor rootlets I 4 imi I i j j ml Mottled red-brown and brown clayey sandy ;:;:i.' 5 SILT, very moist, very soft IT 1 ;i i i mi Gray-brown clayey SILT with thin layers of �; ,I I i I 6 very fine sand, moist, soft, -slightly mottled Bottom of borehole at 6 feet. —;I I 7 r- 1 8r- - I 9 • 10 L , 1 11 12 I__:_j rii 13 14 — LIr- -!.1 17 — -� 18 — 19 Notes/Location _ Groundwater was not encountered. �rII``''i� w al Earth Consultants Inc. I' 44 Proj. No. 1990-15 Date Jan'91 Plate A2 r_'� Saslataoe contains Mooed represent our observations at the tine and location of this exploratory hole.mod'died by enpneennp tests.analysis and juopment.They are not nen�y wD•>Qaraatire d amen times and locations.We D d cannot aept responsibility -n y for the use terpro tatan by Mars ot inlamau ese s on txnted on U loc. / / z_rivrora-nErc.a, r+D:1f; ,..o; 1r I Pro ter...Name: Snee: Jl: - Vt': Ccir:nora_e rsztrh, ;'. -:c. Job Nc.: Logged Dy: Start Date: Completion Date: Borfr>_ Nc: I�' B-2 i y 1 :990-1s I MLP/PJM 1-14-91 1-14-91 Driliino Contractor: Drilling Metnod: Sampiirr Metnoc: ]anti citCf?r 1___' Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring well 0 Piezometer 12 Abandoned,sealed with bentonte ; Read Microtnip g Sample c C. a Depth $ Surface Conditions: 1 co c (pPm) ID m g o, Feet cii • Dark brown to mottled brown sandy SILT, ts:_ . •:, ml saturated, organic rich, minor clay, abundant. i , • ' 1 rootlets 1 ii Mottled gray and red-brown clayey SILT with 2 1 pockets of fine sand, wet, soft, wood debris 1 i 3 — Bottom of borehole at 2 feet. i 4 — 5 — i 6 _, 7 r— i • -- - . 8 — i i 9 L._ • ��! 10 — • 11 I J 12 — , 13 — .:i 14 --- 1 15 -- 16 — J i 17 — 18 1 19 — 7 • Notes/Location • Hand auger refusal at 2' Ili�� e I Earth Consultants inc. Perched trroundwater near surface (l 1 �6"1 "'ca' "GeolOg " " "" �E'" � ua'So' ,.J Proj. No. 1990-15 Date Jan'91 Plate 713 1 Sue:atom conditions deciaed represent our observations et me tine and location of m's exploratory hole.modified by engineennp tests.analysts area judgment They are not necesarir representative of other tens and locums.We cannot accept responsibOy for the use of interpretation by others of information preserved on tits toy nviro:,i,enza, o3rltl. :.os `Proiect Name: _ t Sr.ee: ^.1 actf: 7:var Cote t orate Par)., Tract. F I _ _ .ioo Nc.: Logged by: Star,Date: Compietion Date: Boring Nc: 1990-1; 1 MLP/P.T*: - 1-15-91 1-15-91 I B-3 , J .___ Drilling Contractor: Drilling Metnoc: Samai:ng Metnoc: • 7 !: nd ;auger Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: I` 0 Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer ®Abandoned,sealed with bermnite r' I Microtip c u3 Surface Conditions: 1 1 Reading Sample o £a Denth I` m ID m =oa Feet =r co n i Brown to dark brown sandy SILT with rounded I' fine gravel, moist, minor clay, abundant I__' i;I:;l I rootlets F-3 it ii;i;l ,, ml Mottled gray-brown and red-brown clayey SILT j :. l with very fine sand, moist, soft, minor rootlets I`` hill 3 nl Mottled gray-brown and red-brown sandy clayey Hi!I SILT, moist, soft, very fine sand i1 it _11 I;i;jl 4 ml Mottled gray-brown and red-brown sandy SILT i}''::1: sm \with clay, wet, soft, fine sand I- ,---, 5 Mottled gray-brown and red-brown silty fine • SAND, wet, very soft 6 — P . Bottom of borehole at 5 feet. 7 8 — I 9 T ' 10 — 11 H12 f i 13 — 1 i • 14 r i 15 — 16 L i 17 — 1J l 18 — 19 ` Notes/Location d,�� 44) TiL Groundwater was not encountered_ witi rtti Earth Consultants Inc. or w ,l Proj.No. 1990-1.5 I Date ,Tan t 91 I Plate 7,4 1 S,nsutaee condacrs deniaed reoresem our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole,madded by engneedng teats,analysis and iumment.They e n neararry representative of other toss and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use of interpretation by others of irdorrretion seemed on the to. �:Ivt.-:. imen.a: oQrc:w :.oc Froiec:Name: I Snee: ..yeck Rive: Cor:orn tr•• P,rk, -Fc' F l i Joo Nc.: Logged oy: Start Date: Completion Date: Bonn_ Nc: 1990-1 MLP/PJF: - 1-15-91 1-15-91 B-4 Drilling Contractor: Drilling MetnoC: Samai:ny Metnoc: -- Hand auger - Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: , 1 ' ❑Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer ©Abandoned.sealed with bentonite '� ! Reading Sam IC ple o s a Depth v2 Surface Conditions: in en E (PPm)g ID m 0 6 Feet =en �'-4 0•`' ml Brown to dark brown sandy SILT with fine to !; :1 coarse gravel, moist, soft, subangular to 1 rounded gravel decreasing downward, ahunda _ ;: I, r.root lets e. PH:: 2 ml Brown clayey SILT, Hoist, stiff, slightly; 1: :i 1 4. mottled ;::I ml Mottled graN,-brown and red-brown claye"r SILT 3 ' cl I with minor fine sand, nois , medium stiff. r , 7 . : 4 J Mottled gray-brown and red-brown sandy silty CLAY, moist, l soft, very fine sands r Mottled gray-hrowu and red-brown interbedded 5 -- silty SAND and clayey SILT, moist • i i Bottom of borehole at 4 feet 6 . (� , i 7 ._. 8 — , 1 9 --- 10 — 11 — - - 12 — 13 14 -- 15 JI 16 --- 1 17 -- -_..] 18 — 19 • Notes/Location iii4 'iA V Groundwater was not encountered 1."• (I ti Earth Consultants Inc. 1 107 1 4aaaeeot t,t®nm.G.*m .h e.ra...w Sms -, Proj. No. 1990-15 Date Jan'91 Plate A 5 Stasuitace conditions oeaaed represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole.modified by engineering tests.analyse and judgment They are not neceesariy teptesersatroe of other tortes and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the use of interpretation by others d information presented on this lop. r.:tvi onmer:a. no:Ind .o; 1 =-pe. Name: f Snee: .-lac}: Riv"r Cerporatp Ps-7h, .rac+ ' • _ I - No.: Logged by: Star,Date: Completion Date: Boring Na: B-5 I' 1990-15 I MLP!P. F. - 1-15-91 11-•15-91 Drilling Contractor: Drilling Metnoc: Samphrs Metnoc: Hand auger iGround Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: ❑Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer M Abandoned,sealed with bentonite 1 Microtip Sample 3 o a Depth i R Surface Conditions: Heading ID .Q >a W in cv E (PPm) m 0 to Feet =to j ,: ml Mottled gray and red-brown sandy clayey SILT, I I'" moist, stiff, trace gravels 1 H:: 1 ;,i 1.� r p-5 I I.t,1 • Light brown to dark brown sandy SILT with /'' � \ rockets of fine sand and gravel, wet, soft, / 01!tf 2 ml '�J.aY.es of n:tint:= l ` Mottled ra and. red-brown cla a SILT with ml I pockets of �ine sand, moist, soFt; trace wood1 111111.! � 3 :�i:i t.3 sm Mottled.t.?? e gray and red-brown sandy SILT with thi •-. lenses off fine ine sand, wet, sort, la verpc1 ( l ii ISM4 mi-sin structure I hill ml Mottled gray and brown silty fine SAND with - silt lenses, wet, loose, trace rootlets 5'— Brown to dark brown interbedded sandy SILT and silty SAND, moist to we=, slightly mottled 6 Dark blue-gray sandy SILT, moist, mediur stiff wood fragments H . r Bottom of borehole at 4.5 feet. 8 . i I 9 1` 10-- �r i . 11 — I ' 12 — 13 --- 14 — r {1 15 s_. J 16 !I L-' 17• Li 19 -- ! 1 Notes/Location Perched groundwater encountered at 3.5 I Earth Consultants Inc. feet, 1 i 1 crowd of knoncos.emu.a ww.nviol sperm. — Proj. No. 1990-15 ( Date Jan'91 Plate A6 I I Sudwtaoa conditions depicted represent out observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole.modNied by engi ee,ing tens,analyse and ryogrtsnt They are na ne esaariy representative of other times and locations.We cannot accept,esponsibiliy for the tee of interpretation by others of intornation presented on this log. rivirorimeiiidI tbuiiri -p�^,y, 1 Proiec.Name: I Snee: '1aCr: i�1� C: :):"t?C)r�.a:/• Par:-., Tract v .goo No.: I Logged by: Start Date: f Completion Date: Bonn✓ Nc: B_6 1990-15 Il MLP;PJM i-i5-92 1-15-91 . . Drilling Contractor: Driliing Metnoc: Sampling Metnoc: __ Hand auaer 11 • Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: l•� • ❑Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer ®Abandoned,sealed with bentonite ^; Microtip Sample o a_'- Depth v. surface Conditions: 1 (pPm)g ID m 6 t- a Feet =ro 4 sm I Brown gravelly silty fine SAND, wet !1 r•: s•i 1 sm Dark brown silty SAND, noises, loose, some ;_F, 1 .5 5 :.'•.i : rootlets, trace rounded gravel., slightly a. •}••:•e} mottled �111111 2 ml Dark blue-gray sandy SILT, moist, medium 11 fif,l stiff, abundant wood fragments and Grasses, i 3 i trace gravel, (old soil horizon) r :. s:=r: sm ! ; -,i , ;. Dark blue-gray silty fine SAND, moist,t Him, 4 ml Dark gray-brown SILT with lenses of fine sand, r $ moist, soft, abundant grass and rootlets I r ; Bottom of borehole at 4.2 feet. LI 6 .-1 -'; 1 - 7 - 8 _ ni 9 — • . (�;1 t0 — 11 — ELI 12 — • 13 f— I' - i • 14 — • I 15 — --1 16 — -', 17 — - 18 — 19 — Notes/Location (- t Perched groundwater wan encountered near \/i `` -rEarth Consultants Inc. i surface. Wit MIU l it r>cd Ga2Ce ra.Enwverlfd Sam."' Proj. No. 1990-15 Date Jan'91 Plate h7 i 1 Stnstaface conditions deoiaed represent our observations el the firm and bcaton of tors exploratory hoe.modified by engineering tees,analyse and pigment.They are not necesviy i represaraative of other tines and locations.We cannot accept resportstslay for the use of Merpretatron by others of intormation presented on!hes bp. NORTH CREEK ANAL'Y'TiCAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX (206)485-2992 iiEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-1-0.5 Received: Jan 18, 1991!ii:ii Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0430 • Reported: Feb 13, 19911.:ii, E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. - Antimony 32 N.D. IAtsernc .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Beryllium 0.65 N.D. • Copper ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Nickel ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Seig0100.:04,==f;:.-;4::a:::.=4=.'4=4.====4g4.14MMENP:.:.1ft..4i................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Thallium 0.065 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL S Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <2> NORTH CREEK• 7- '11 A N ALYT 1 CA L. 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone (206)481-9200 •FAX (206)485-2992 iiiEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991g _ 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-2-11 Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0431 Reported: Feb 13, 1991:::: E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. - Antimony 32 N.D. ................................................................................................................................................................................................ .Cadmium 065 ............................................................ ................................................................... .................................................................. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Silver 0.65 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH EEK ANALYTICAL i Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <1> NCRTh CREEK 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX (206)485-2992 — Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 _ 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-3-1' Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0432 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. :CtitOMi......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N•RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL , • ot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <3> ORTH CREEK ANALYT1CA,L 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 :: 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-4-0.5 Received: Jan 18, 1991iiii . Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991 AAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0433 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 I E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Cadmium8...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Copper * 32 :33 ................................................................................................. I Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <4> NORT1-1 CREEK JaiNALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 xEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 *:11805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-5-1. Received: Jan 18, 1991 OBellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991?:.qi igAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0434 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. ......................................................................................................................................... Thallium 0.065 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. •RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL .t Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <5> NORTH CREEK 7-'-ANALYT]CitaiL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 'i - 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, B-6-1.5 Received: Jan 18, 1991 .Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30, 1991 •:.!:•iAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0435 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. At:000i04444.44.4"440. 444:g.:.04...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... SeryJiii#Ogg4a4........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. , ! ;— --• Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL cot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <6> OR uTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 pEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: N.A. - >':1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Method Blank Received: N.A. ' :::::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Jan 29-30,iiiiAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: BLK012991 Reported: Feb 5 1991 E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. Arsenic 0.065 N.D. Beryllium 0.65 N.D. Cadmium 0.65 N.D. Chromium 13 N.D. ICopper 3.2 N.D. Lead 9.5 N.D. Mercury 0.065 N.D. Nickel 10 N.D. Selenium 0.13 N.D. ' Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. - Zinc 0.95 N.D. • - - Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N•RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL • Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010436.ECI <15> NORTH _CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Co su tnt In•• .a s c Client Project o�>:::v::ect ID: Black:: r:Co..r... Riv a pPark,Tract B Sampled: See Below s1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil Received: Jan 18, 1991iiiii `::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis for Cyanide Extracted: Jan 28, 1991 :::Attention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0430 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR: Cyanide Sample Sample Sample Number Description Detection Limit Result mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg drywt. 101-0430 8-1.0.5',1/14/91 0.13 N.D. 101-0431 B-2-1',1/14/91 0.13 N.D. T. 101-0432 8-3-1', 1/15/91 0.13 N.D. 101-0433 B-4-0.5',1/15/91 0.13 N.D. 101-0434 B-5-1',1/15/91 0.13 N.D. 101-0435 3-6-1.5',1/15/91 0.13 N.D. II 1 ' r RI Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL ICCo anour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <10> _NORTH CREEK � ANAL 9 I CAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ::•}i}•{•:•�::T'i:•}::j}:;i}'.;y;j.`,.}}};.};:n;L+,.;ti4}?}}}:{?:::nx}}}i}{{G:{{^}:p}:�}}:'L}:n}:•}'•}}::::}}iii}}}:�iiiri�ii}::,}.;isiiii^iii:i{4'^:^:•}}i}}:�:^:•}i}:{`�}}:hi}}}i}}}i:J:4}}}...... ...:........:................................::::•"...n.x...F..........::.::::.w.{n:::::::::rr::::}}}:tivw:::;;v:....•;..... ......................... :.....:....:...:::}::::x:::::::::::::::::::::.v::w::::::•.. ............. .........{�.m::::::::::::::::::.v:::m:::x::::.v::::::::.v ... .......................tv. ...................................r..... t{i.nn....,.......::n....:....:.::.:::::::.v:::::::::::.}::i Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 15, 1991 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Matrix Descript: Soil Received:. Jan 18, 1991 ::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 (I.R.with clean-up) Extracted: Jan 29, 1991::iii gAttention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0430 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991':, Re orted: Feb 13, 1991€ ' ......t....n....... (:S:iv::::::L:t:•}i::}}i}y{:}i}}iiiiiS':iiiiii':}:^:::.:{}'::.'iY:.`�'rSi+ �..t ................... rt.::.{n..tv:i.}}}:}i...............3i}:4:}i}}}}i}ii}}i:y:•::is:::::}::::i::i:::tii::•}}:}}ii:�:.......:•i::}:?viij'}�i::i:?ti:::t......n..........n.....n...n,,,{;;;,n..a....,a..L.:.:...n:. \..14\{L•::•:{{{.:u:i::.CxwvvL.:v::,.::::::i}:{:•:vi:}rv}vu::•::::::::::::::::•.a:::::•.a:.:::.w..w;;;:.v:n::•::avnw::::.;{{::::•.u0;{{•:{v:L:L.:{.}+:{{bi:{{4:{{{{{{4}};;{{LL•;•:{4: TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS Sample Sample Petroleum Oil 1TH Number Description mg/kg drywt. 101-0430 8-1-0.5',1/14/91 92 101-0431 13-2-1',1/14/91 N.D. 101-0432 B-3-1',1/15/91 N.D. 101-0433 8-4-0.5', 1/15/91 33 101-0434 B-5-1',1/15/91 50 101-0435 B-6-1.5', 1/15/91 N.D. I !, Detection Limits: 6.5 ' Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N• -TH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour 1 Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <13> NORTH CREEK A AA'`'lT 3CAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ' •;, a h Consultants Inc. ................:. ntProI Project Black River Corp Sampled: Jan 1991 ,1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-1 &B-2 Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991€> :iiAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0436 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 • Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 N.D. delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC (Lindane) 6.5 N.D. .;: • .... ... ................ :N:,•:t!:4�.,.....:.....i.ii..+.M..+.-.r-.+�4st!#ru;,.r.�.+.4..4,:t-....:.:::::::..�::::.�:�:J.................. -•-•-- -.:;:.:.:.:;i::::::>.::: al..ha Thl ordale•�Y1Y�4iii::::::j:L?{:iiiiiiir:?iiii:Ji:{:?ii$isi::v:4iiiiiijv?::i:^)ii:�:%:ii;{:ii:}i}:ii+iii:!:}':i;ii:{j}}iii:i:. ::: J::iviiiiiiiiii:vvii4:4:v:Ji}}is4:•isi4iiiiiY:•isLi'+:•i'iSiiiiiiii?:+•iii"•:::::::::::I� /��/ Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•[•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y• • v::::::::::..:..:wvv:::•::::::•::.•.::::::};v.��w:::•.�::..•..:8::::?�::::.•:r::; :' :iiiiiiiiiii:ti^iiii}}$i:tiCi'�+:i':y !'. .. .. Y•Y Y•Y•YJ[•[•Y•Y•Y•Y•Y•.:::.::,:_:::::::::.�::11.�v:•iii}i;:v:::Y:•ii:•' Y �f•Y•Y•Y•Y�Y�Y�Y•::4:•:�i}i}isSi:G�:iiii:i:iijiiii:i:iiiii:iiiiijii}i 4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. Dieldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. Endrin 13 N.D. Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. PCB-1016 65 N.D. -- PCB-1221 65 N.D. PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. PCB-1248 65 N.D. PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. i-� Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N H CREEK ANALYTICAL Sco Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECl <18> ,, =NORTH CREEK -- - -ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 a Consultants•� �• In . Client Project ID: BlackRiverCorp ark,NTract••Bu m Sampled:•J.••.••Janu••15,••.1991l € 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-3&B-4 Received: Jan 18, 1991 ::::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 iiili >Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0437 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 Re orted: Feb 13, 1991€ :. .::.........: ::::::::.::.:.. : .::.:::.::::..... ' ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) ' Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results `- pg/kg dry wt. Ng/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 - N.D. delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC (Lindane) 6.5 N.D. r i• ;.;...::. ..:::::.�:::::.:::::::::.•.Yaa. :Y::•ii:.iiii::•ii::•}::.;.i..�.i..Yi"•Yi..i..i i ........ :. .. .....�.:..................................���f;Tn:.....................T�........ ...T..T..T..?..TR...T.....1..T..4�-i-i�ii.....Y.d?}i}i:•YG:4}• 2:;:ji:;i:;i'F,.i:2{:i�iiiiiii:Ji:�:i'ri: I� �an �Y�IfY•�Y Yid:•i:•i:•i:•i}}:i•:�:}:::isJ:J:4:v::i:•isisS:4:•i::fii:i{�iiiii:vii:^:?•i:ii4iii;::y y:ii::}:}Si]i?i?:.+: ":iiiiiirriii:{::LL:ii:ii:�iiii:i�iiiif<{:i}ii::iiiiiiiijiiiiiii$::?:?:ji::iii::i::i::iiiiiYi::i%i:i' . P � Y iY Y•Y�Y•YiYiYiYiYiY•YiY•Y{YiYiYiYiYiY•Y�Y�Y�YiYi::w::::::::::::. . /�,.i{+fn}>}'p:.; .;•i:ii::•i::�ii}i � .. v.................�.�:???:�i:4:•:4:4iii:�{Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�YiY�Y�Y�Y�11�1�I�YiY�Y,Y,.iijj;i_;:ii}iiiM:siM1{'r,:!;:y::;is;:;:j!;?:;i}::�::(>{::�ii:;: 4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. Dleldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. , Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. F Endrin 13 N.D. Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. PCB-1016 65 N.D. ,_: PCB-1221 65 N.D. PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. PCB-1248 65 N.D. PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. I Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N N. -TH CREEK ANALYTICAL '.., , Ot3c, Scot Cocanour -- Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <19> _ NORTH ___ CREEK - -ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. a s Client Project Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 15, 1991 ; f`s1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-5 &B-6 Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991>' ...Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0438 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991iii Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ... p ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results Ng/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 N.D. delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC(Lindane) 6.5 N.D. gamma-Chlordane 13.0 N.D. ' alpha-Chlordane 13 N.D. I-. 4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. Dieldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. ., Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. ' Endrin 13 N.D. Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. PCB-1016 65 N.D. PCB-1221 65 N.D. PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. PCB-1248 65 N.D. ''° PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. v_. i— - Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N• •TH CREEK ANALYTICAL , 41 , . , _ Scot Cocanour —, Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <20> NORTH __CREEK -f A _ALYT [/ AL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206).481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 : .::: :::::u::: :::::::::::::::::::v.:::: ::::.::: .i: : :::iiyij'r'riiii.. ::::.:�::.::::::.:.::::::..:::::............ � : ::::::. ::::::x:: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . : :::::::::., }......nv.n....::.::.::n:::::;};}:�}}:}}}:•:::}:::?•:?4}:•}}:i:�}}}i}ivviii:?•}:4':•}}}}h+::::.}v}....:....vv:.•........ ........:..........::...............:::.�:.y::::• ':Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B . Sampled: Jan 14, 1991 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-1 &B-2 Received: Jan 18, 1991:iiii Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, iiiii ::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0436 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ti4ii':viiiii is i:ti'i:v�{?':;:;:i;(:;:C+i:}; v:4•wn?w:::x::•nv::;:;;}.,.;::?.:::::.:vv:i;}L:?ivi:%i:ii�i.'?i•'.?}:'.:iiiii: ??^:C}::•wi}i}'':4; }}::::•:�}:}::•}::.}}:�}}•?:.}:.}•:^:•}}:• ............n:tit•:v.::..:..wx.:^::::n:.::::•::. ..i+:.vna..;;^:..:... a..........• .. .:. v...a:.:n.:.n:...........:n4•}:....x..........:..:.:xw unL;({•:n..n.n.,.,..•.•....:.:.................:....:...::.:...:........n........... ' `i SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results r-', pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. i - Acenaphthene 130 N.D. Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. 'r Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. -i ' Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. - Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. 1 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. -• 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. ',~fi 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. - Chrysene 130 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. ' ' Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. . Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. . i NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <1> )`- - NORTH L __ CREEK r ANALYTICAL ' -, 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 .:;;Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 14, 1991• € 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-1 &B-2 Received: Jan 18 1991 .--- Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 ' :::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: 101-0436 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991iiiii Reported: Feb 13, 1991€<' SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) __ Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. ' Di-N-octyl phthalate 130 N.D. Fluoranthene 130 N.D. Fluorene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. ' Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 N.D. ' 2-Methylphenol 130 N.D. 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. -= N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. Pentachlorophenol 650 N.D. _ l Phenathrene 130 N.D. Phenol 130 N.D. ---, Pyrene 130 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 - N.D. --' 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. Ji Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL : ) ce.35,,.. Ce:c6,,,______ Cocanour ' Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 1010436.ECI <2> -NORTH __ CREEK ANALYTICAL `- 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX(206)485-2992 ::::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B Sampled: Jan 15, 1991 iiig !s1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample•Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-3&B-4 Received: Jan 18, i::iii - ilBellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 :::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0437 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 ' Reported: Feb 13, 1991 > SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. erg/kg dry wt. Acenaphthene 130 N.D. —, Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. '—' Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. ' Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. L : Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. ' Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. - Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. ' - 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. - Chrysene 130 N.D. ' Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. - Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. - Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. _ 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. - 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. --' Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. _ 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. i - NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <3> NORTH __ CREEK -' ANAL -]CAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200• FAX(206)485-2992 ' Earth••Consitnts <::>::>:<:............................... ... .... ..... .. .................. ..... ...... .... ua Inc. Client oject ID: Black River Corp Park, Tract B Sampled: Jan 15, 1991: : 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-3 &B-4 Received: Jan 18, 1991 ? Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 f> • ' <'Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0437 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991` ': • .• Reported: Feb 13, 1991i.1 :.4... •••ib: }}.. j SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) _ Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. Di-N-octyl phthalate 130 N.D. Fluoranthene 130 N.D. Fluorene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Methylphenoi 130 N.D. ' 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. • N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. IPentachlorophenol 650 N.D. Phenathrene 130 • N.D. Phenol 130 N.D. Pyrene Y 130 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 'N.D. 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors ' required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N•RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL . 4 • Orc.,,,,,—___ Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 1010436.ECI <4> _ N O R �ANALYTICAL +K __. A q��NAL■ ■ ICAL 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 ' Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B :Sampled: Jan 15, 1991 iiii- i1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-5&B-6 Received: Jan 18, 1991 __ Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 iiii 'r ii Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0438 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991'< u < Reported: Feb 13, 1991€ 11 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results i- . Ng/kg dry wt. Ng/kg dry wt. - Acenaphthene 130 N.D. Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. _ ; Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. 1 n Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. t Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. • 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Chrysene 130 N.D. !� Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. y NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <5> =NORTH __ CREEK - _ANAL ■ ICAL 1 z 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 .EarthConsultants���Inc....... im Black ::: :::::;.r�:.;:p Park,Tract;:::;::i� ;..' 'ProjectRiverCo � �6���.����..� �•���•������Sampled:���.����•v��Jan.��1�5 ��:�1�991iiiiii 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, Comp. of B-5 &B-6 Received: Jan 18, 1991'iii Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0438 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 € `' Reported: Feb 13, 1991 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results f_,. pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. - 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. - 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. Di-N-oc yl...:Phthalate::.:::.:::::: :.;::::::.:::::::;:::::::::.::::::::..::.:....................... ...........1.30.............. N.D. .H.wN.Nww�a•..�r.«:.s.H.�..t..N.axtr.M:M:M:wH.w:iwN.M:M:Mw:ar:t:•:::::•::i::r:»:::•:::: ............ Fluorene 130 N.D. T-; Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. L ! Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. ?i Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. !_` Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methyinaphthalene 130 N.D. a— 2-Methylphenol 130 N.D. 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. - Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. ! 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. l 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. }— 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. --1 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. r--! Pentachlorophenol 650 N.D. Phenathrene 130 N.D: V Phenol 130 N.D. ~ Pyrene 130 N.D. ; 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 N.D. - 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. r- Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors ! required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N n :TH CREEK ANALYTICAL 41 b, arc.,_____ _ Sco Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 1010436.ECI <6> r • NORTH CREEK IT = . ...ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 • ::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B i 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 , Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil Attention Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0430 to-0435 Reported: Feb 5, 1991 .....ii::Oi:;•i::.}Y:••i::4'4i:?:;•isM'•i}::.:::.......:::::::.::•iii'•i:4:fiii:4:4:^Y: w::;:}iiii}}iiiX : w:n .....•.....:....:\:.... ....:..:....3.:.:......:.:...:............ y` QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Sb As • Be • Cd Cr Cu Pb r� " EPA Method: 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Analyst: M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig Reporting Units: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg • mg/kg mg/kg Date Analyzed: 1/29-30/91 1/29 30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 �_ QC Sample#: 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 _i Sample Conc.: N.D. • 5.1 0.51 2.1 25 31 25 Spike Conc. Added: 150 2.5 20 25 50 100 50 r Conc. Matrix Spike: 120 7.4 19 25 79 120 64 Fi 1__ Matrix Spike %Recovery: 80 92 92 92 108 89 78 ( i Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 130 7.0 20 27 90 130 67 Matrix Spike r--! Duplicate ti %Recovery: 87 76 97 99 130 99 84 fl Relative 1 %Difference: 8.0 5.6 5.1 7.7 13 8.0 4.6 ^ N• 'TH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 i Cer._,,t,„________, Spike Conc.Added ( �, . Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 it Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 Laboratory Director 1010430.ECI <18> r . NORTH __CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 iiii. ; ;;;: ;;: ::> ;; : :::.;; .. .... . ...: ; : ; ; ; ; ; ; :;:. . ;_ : ; ;:.:.. . . .. . . ... .. . . . . . ... . . __ :::Earth Consultants Client Project ID: 61ackRiverCorpParkTractB 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 :':::Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil :;':Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0430 to-0435 Reported: Feb 5, 1991 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Hg Ni Se Ag TI Zn CN- EPA Method: 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 9010A Analyst: M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig Reporting Units: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg ! Date Analyzed: 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 1/29-30/91 Jan 29, 1991 QC Sample#: 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 101-0435 '__- Sample Conc.: 0.25 21 4.4 N.D. 0.0090 57 N.D Spike Conc. Added: 0.25 150 1.5 10 1.3 20 2.0 Conc. Matrix Spike: 0.60 170 5.6 11 0.90 74 1.9 - Matrix Spike %Recovery: 140 99 80 110 69 85 95 Conc. Matrix - Spike Dup.: 0.57 180 5.8 11 1.2 74 2.1 Matrix Spike --. Duplicate %Recovery: 128 106 93 110 92 85 105 Relative % Difference: 5.1 5.7 3.5 0 29 0 1.0 N• :TH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 :::. :::: . . C . '. qt, Ce:co., _____ __.: I •�r Relative%Difference: Conc. - x 100 S • Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 Laboratory Director 1010430.ECI <19> _NORTH _ CREEK ANALYTICAL. 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract B 11- : 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil Attention Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0430 to-0435,.... Reported: Feb 5, 1991 ...n..............:/....,;E.......... .....: :: , vn...:,C•:.,Vn.x{..n.f.:....:,,:-•..: ..:..•..:. :. . ....{.\,.:....:.f:•;{.:n.::::..::.:::.::v::.:..:}.L,{{.4.::::..::...v....x..:..:..:::vim.\.n::vn..::::.::::x Ir ' t QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT J ! ANALYTE Petroleum Oil Lindane Heptachlor Aldrin . ' EPA Method: 418.1 8080 8080 8080 Analyst: K.Stark S.Kouri S.Kouri S.Kouri - Reporting Units: mg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg Date Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 QC Sample#: 101-0435 BLK012391 BLK012391 BLK012391 __. Sample Conc.: N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Spike Conc. -- Added: 521 8.3 8.3 8.3 Conc. Matrix Spike: 394 6.0 11 7.1 -- ' Matrix Spike % Recovery: 76 73 130 85 r I - Conc. Matrix __ Spike Dup.: 376 6.8 13 7.8 a 't Matrix Spike Duplicate %Recovery: 72 82 155 94 Relative Difference: 4.7 12 8 5 N a - H CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 } , ' Spike Conc.Added Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 Sc. Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 - Laboratory Director 1010430.ECI <20> ' rt..1‘ �E.: ,,A) A ..-' , - Earth Consultants Inc. I`/ `VJJ�, Geotechnical Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientists CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD - I. ! ./ SHEET OF —lggo-13 i PROJECT SAMPLERS: (Signature) p 1a-c k 1 Gap Pe ►'s . na.c a:, / _c4- 13 ra S L r pt ' ``�LCLat1 LAB NUMBER DATE TIME SAMPLE TYPE z°; REMARKS > m y 9 r0 o D 2 Wes"` O 2 Z 73 Z m y i n . 13-1-0.5 ' !1 PI/q/ l3aS X I 1010k130 13-2.- I ' ifiq 1 !Paz: k 1 i 010 4 I l 3-3- I ' _ 1115/it /s2o x 1 locoL13Z 1 6- —o•51 if1 /g/ /1 /0 (010q33 - 6 _.5- 1 / )J/SIq, /265 ) i .lord 31 13 -6 — /. 5 / /1/5/'1 /3/7 X ( 1010y35" A n- I . e��.h s. 1 �.�Q-- �,.<.I c,y .0 ill pal GA L+. 1 A. 9a1- PA- l8 .L 1 a.tora C scl c S°`►"`P � rpm- � � ). Th¢.•� � (_ 1p. 8-1 a..4Q 6—z 1 6-3 ' IS-9 • o. 1 8-5 a...Q (3-6, Av d1,�e � ,,10436 ' t•h. Q.Q C, pc; t 4-c 5a+^11�`� SQ sti-v c,ls.-�-tSL� a�'�,anv...c,,� (.. M $2.7c) % C h Esv. .. LP Ra' _t,/PC as (, ..°A- taBo'j . 1- 5-Pnar 9' 17t2 ca 9 11.t. o.xp ` Set- -L. }n ccvi_l�<is. I 3-8`I RELINQUISHED BY: (signature) RECEIVED BY: !signature) DATE/TIME 101Oy3 `1 cbut� �. . -r( I .i RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME M_ 9 I l 6 5 3 RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature! RECEIVED BY: (signature) DATE/TIME 44iiiii rtjRELINQUISHED BY: /signature/ RECEIVED BY MOBILE LAB FOR FIELD DATE/TIME ANALYSIS: (Signature) DISPATCHED BY: (signature) DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR LABORATORY BY: DATE/TIME I Signa re 1 ,„...... ..1/44.4,...1 METHOD OF SHIPMENT: S r-6o_ Distribution: Original-Accompany Shipment One Copy- Survey Coordinator Field Files • • _ • Hart .Crowser- Jr , . • J-3276" - . • • BORING LOGS,'AND . •' It• .,. .. : ' . , _ '. - . . CHEMICAL'ANALYSES • • �. `. TRACT A ,_ , - - . ^ ,EARTH CONSULTANTS ' - • . ' ' - "FEBRUARY=19'9.1'° • .. ' 7 • 1 , =IJVIIUlliliC11Lai I:JNIIII t-ism 1 Project Name: Snee: c• Black River Cr.rpor,e-e Park, TrE _ • , F. __ .too No.: I Logged oy: I Stan Date: Completion Date: Boring Nc: 1-1A4-1 i 1990-1i: If r-S.LP i)Jr: ::,-91 3-2.5-91 i I Drilling Contractor: Drat_ Method: Sampling Metnod: :_:,ri Aurtc.r Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: ' 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer Q Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microtip ;c '' De th to Surface Conditions: Reading SaIDple m . o in (f) (prom) o, Feet m sp Dark brown to gray-brown fine SAND, moils: , _an € 1 _ f.i.ne rootlets, well sorted HA-1-1' it:i Mottled gray and red-brown si.1ty fine SAND = l 2 — moist, loose, trace grave] 1.•',•• .- ' 3 cal Dark blue-gray sandy SILT, moist, medium stiff, __ - I-= 1 fine sand r 4 _ Intl Dark blue-gray clayey sandy SILT, moist, stiff f ; Bottom of borehole approximately 3.6 feet_ 5 — 6 7 • 8 • P • 9 10 ` 11 • ;1 12 - • -'.J Ci t f { 15 — 16 , I U 18 19 — - 1 Notes/Location - IhiHiA c a Earth Consultants Inc.Perched g.r ttindwater encountered at f °°'a"""""°"°°'>;`°°'°°""•E""`d""'o'S'"'� 1.5 meet. Proj. No. 1990-16 Date Feb'91 Plate :.2 • Scosudaoe conciliate depicted represent our obsonatons at the errs and location Cl this aspbratory hole•modified by engneenng tests.analysis and judgment.They are not necessary! . ,eoresertatnre of other limes and Iodations.We cannot accept reeponsOt[y tot the Use d interpretation by others of irdorrrotion presented on this log. rr1Vfronrei..al DOifily LOB 1 =roject Name: _ ! Snee: c• .goo No.: I Logged by: Star. Daze: Gomoietion Date: Boring Nc: /� n i~ i090-1E, I .':i.P/P3t: -91 -LtI-91 .HA-2 Drillina Contractor •Drilitm Method: Sampling Method: .. : Auger Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: ❑Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer 0 Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microtip Sample o a Depth v$ Surface Conditions: Reading 4 c0 in ? ID m =Q, I Feet cn V: ::.i sn Mottled gray-brown and brown -silty fine SAND, E: :4 moist, loose, abundant fine rootlets t r::;r sp Mottled dark brown and gray fine SAND, moist, HA-2-1.��m -4-1 loose, well sorted, trace fine gravels r °• = : 2 •i;1 mottled brown and gray silty fine SAND, moist, r ;ii 1no'e. w,-1 1 gn•-tr�tt ' . f sm- Mottled brown and gray silty SAND/sandy SILT, • .''`F 3 -- ml pockets . .� moist, well sorted fine sand, some of , *:-p: silt, minor fine rounded gravel lr � 4 s Mottled gray and red-brown fine SAND, wet, HA-2-4.0 ► p loose, well sorted r - - '-- .- sp Dark brown fine SAND, saturated, loose, .,; :s: 5 well gray � !q mi- sortedrminornfinelroundedy rave moist, well 6�1 and grasses (old soil horizon?ji, fine rootlet Bottom of boring•.approximately 5.5 feet. 7 _ 8 — 9 ___ 10 — 11 — 12 13 — 14i— • 15 — 16 — 1 17 ---- 7I 18 - 19 — i Notes/Location • Groundwater encountered at 4 feet �r1-' (; yt ) Earth Consultants Inc. --- ` /\ CErarr lot Onpns [:is amel=a Fi vry e>a.nl Somas . Proj. Nc. 1990-16 Date Feb'91 Plate Subsurface conditions depicted represent our observations at the tune and rocaton of the etporatory hole.modeled by engineering tests.analysis and judgment.They are not necesseriy rlovaaarsat,ve of other times arid location.We cannot atSept responsibility for the use of itlerpretatmon by others of mlofmatien presented On IMs log. C:iviro[li-Tient►dt Duittli..; ►..w.. Prolec:Name: I Snee: c' '.il:'.. ` :, Cr(:)ryr,-i7 mar.., �.... T. I . Joc No.: rogged by: Star Date: Completion Date: I Bonng No: HA-3 1990-lr '.L,P/P.7r. 1-.16-.'1 1-16-91 Drilling Contractor. Drilling Method: Sampling Metnod: :ianc Auger 1 ! L I Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer ©Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microti rn Surface Conditions: Reading Sample o o Depth co E (PPm) ID f9 of Feet in" • ..:•:=:r.. sin Brown silty fine SAND with rounded fine gravel, r i-I : � l •. wet, loose, abundant rootlets i �- 1 — SW Mottled gray-black and red-brown medium to coarse = SAND with pockets of silt, 'saturated, bolo, it 2 _ sml lmoderate sorting, minor rounded gravel Mottled gray-brown, brown and red-brown silty SAND/sandy SILT, wet to saturated, fine well 3 sorted sand, loose, minor pockets of silt, __ :} trace fine gravel ,il 4 l- HA-3-4.0 Mottled dark brown fine SAND, wet, well sorted, 5 loose, trace silt pockets --,l sp L Gray-brown and dark gray fine SAND, wet, well ) 6 sorted, loose, minor rounded fine gravel Bottom of borehole approximately 6 feet. 8 I 9 — 10 f , i iL I 11 — _,] 12 13 . 14 ,— 15 16 1 , 1 • 17 _ ! J 18 - 19 — f Notes/Location t11U/ vU Earth Consultants Inc. Perched groundwater encountered fmoasr Icw rs@xR c°°rcaeu i E+wvanseat Somme at 1 foot. Proj. No. 1990-16 Date Feb'91 Plate A4 r Stlosudaoe condoms depaed represent our obaenatons at the time and location of this exploratory ho{e,mod/ie0 by enpneenng tests.analyse and jeopnsnL They are not necessarily 4 representative of other tines and locations.We cannot accept responsibisy for the use of interpretation by others of irttormation presented on this log. Environmental boring ��i...:, i Snee: o` Proleci Name: ._ acr isivas- CornorF;- -ark, Tra7_ i_ _ - Joo No.: I Logged by: Star.Date: Completion Date: Boring No: HA 4 199G-16 r,LP/e.'._ 1-16-91 1-16-91 Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Hand auger Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer 0 Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microtip ;c Depth 0 2- Surface Conditions: Reading Sample s °� in E (ppm) ID m 0 o, Feet vt • _ ! Brown, black, gray-brown and red-brown _il_-: 1 `� sm fine SAND, moist, well sorted, loose, mr..fled, IIA-4-1.5' occasional pockets of silt, trace fine rounded 2 — gravel i . •1 i :i 3 — HA-4-4.0' ; IHi;I 5 ml Dark gray to blue-gray clayey SILT with minor fine sand, damp, stiff, abundant grasses and rootlets, (old soil horizon) ir •6 ml- Dark brown clayey SILT/silty CLAY, damn, cl stiff, slightly mottled Bottom of borehole approximately 5.5 feet. 8 — 9 r 10 ,— I 11 ---n 12 — 13 --- j 14 - 1 15 16 — !-_i 17 18 -- J Li . Notes/Location 40:1A 6.°4411 Earth Consultants inc. iGroundwater wa_ not encountered j . Geolca"ca"'�'��' `eErwro"'e"�n` Proj. No. 1990-16 Date Feb'91 Plate >5 i Suteu4aar conditions depiaed represent ow observatone at the tine and bosten 01 this etpbratofy hofa.moaned by engieenng tests.analysis and judgment They are no neoesszq' representative of other tines and locations.We cannot sa:ept responsibility to the use 01 interpretation by clown of inlorratcon presented on the log. i�111111 Gill01 rOVltriv ......1 --, ii Proiec:Name: I Snee: .lob Nc.: Logged oy: Star, Date: Completion Date: Boring No: HA-5 _:'9`.-it I r:i c�,F'ii T:, i—l — 7.i .-16-9] l -- Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: Sampling Metnod: ::and duce, I Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: l,]Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer 0 Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Reading Sample c ti a Depth U$ Surface Conditions: in co E IPPm)g ID al0 = 'a, Feet m • o: "':off - sra [iclta].ed (1ra��-brown and rc_c3-brown J 1 aoo 1 1 .S/\ND, wet, loose, ahund,lrtt fine rooter+`� . .°ee il[1-5-1.7� 0000°e cy; Mottled black and dark gray—brown tnPdiuri tr.e e°° coarse SAND with pockets of red—brown :lilt, Y .e ; 2 _ 1-7 1 °Oe a°e saturated, moderate sorting, loose J ooe e 3 Bottom of borehole approximately 3 feet. 4 .-- 1 _ 5 — i 1 ) 6 — i 7 I i ` ; i 8 — i 9 10 --- 11 -- I 12 13 }} 14 — • 15 — 1 1 16 --- i t- 17 — 1 18 �_ 19 _ -Tl Notes/Location rt fit` Perched groundwater encountered near surface. .1 1!�1d Earth Consultants Inc. ! Boring was terminated at 3 feet due to Ji �Ui! +. • s�� '_- �- repeated sloughing of borehole walls. Proj. No. 3 990-16 Date Feb'91 Plate Ab —� Suosurtace rmdnions depicted represent our observations at the time and location of this exploratory hole.moddted by engineering tau,analyse and juoprnen;.They are na n.aiaaiy ._ reoreserxative of other tones and locations.We cannot accept resporssiaatty for the use of interpretation by others of information presented on this log. Proiec:Name: f Snee: e Job Nc.: Logged by: v Star.Date: Compietion Date: Boring No: ('-lc r:�,l�/r:T.. I 1-1h-91 1-]E,-91 I HA-6 j _99 '- ' Drilling Contractor: 1 Drilling Method: . Sampling Method: Hand Anger 1 Ground Surface Elevation: `Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer 0 Abandoned,sealed with bent unite Reading Sample 3- oL Depth u Surface Conditions: I (PPm)g ID m 0 =m Feet co • � ,p Dark brown and gray-brown fine SAND, mo.is_, I `; 1 _ t loose, well sorted, abundant rootlets; .-;1..] mottled Hit-6-1.5 :• ., —, I I 2 Ff ij'• 3 ml Mottled gray-brown and red--brown sandy SILT, ►r:�;:;:: -'-1 c:.t:tn, soft, very fine a sand - • `f`r < Dark brown and y- siltyvery i < . ? t sin gra brown fine SAND, •l..,:t I moist loose, well sorted _ r• HA-6-4.0 le r o' .f7 Mottled brown and Tech--brown silty fine SAND, b ::{s' ^ sin r 5 mint.: well sorted I 1 , . sp Black fine SAND, moist, well sorted, loose 6 r Gray-brown, brown anti red-brown silty very,msown ,i1�;. fine •- SAND, moist, loose, well sorted some' llottliic sp Dark gray-brown fine SAND, wet, loose, well I. 7 — sorted iif! f 1 6 _I ml Dark gray clayey SILT, moist :;tiff, abundant grasses and rootlets (old soil horizon) f- j i 9 .� Bottom of borehole approximately 7.5 feet. r-- i 10 -- !1 11 — 12 .._. Li 14 -- ll • 15 — t 11 16 I 'l 17 -- • • —1 16 �— 19 -1 Notes/Location 1 a ,I Earth Consultants Inc. Groundwater encountered at 5.5 feet. toe, �l�/ e > a� ars� Proj. No. 1990-16 Date I'eh'9l Plate =-7 I I St ataee CSndtions deckled represent our obaenateas at the tarn and location of thus esobratory hole.rood/red by enpneennp tests.analysis and judgment.They ere not neorsssy —- reoresersat.e of aver tans and locations.We cannot accent resparabity for the use of interpretation by others o:irtormatton presented on this log. Environmental Boring _og Proiec Name: Snee: JOD No.: Logged by: Star, Date: Completion Date: Boring Nc: HA-7 1990—le. r:;.i'/P.r:. .-lc--t)I 1-1,-1 Drilling Contractor: Drilling Metnoc: Sampling Method: ianc ;,ilget- Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well ❑Piezometer 0 Abandoned, sealed with berranite Microtip c '- Depth o2 Surface Conditions: J Reading Sample o R is W in cn E 1PPm) m d a Feet =in- • �::•::_ sP Lac.- fine SANDmoist, sorter.,loose, well '1 Black unclant rootlet sr •! 1 sp- Brown rpd-brown and gray-brown SAND and ci HA-7-1.5 ▪ .; sm sand with pockets of silt., moist, fine to Jerk- , 2 — fine well sorted SAND, loose, mottled ; 'l i 3 i :;!I— HA-7-4t• '',�t 4 ~ Tell Mottled gray and brown clayey SILT, damp, ee ° —1 medium stiff , minor fine sand, trace rootlets r 1 t° °e 5 sw Black to dark gray medium to coarse SAND with — j : pockets of silt, wet, loose, moderate sorting, 6 — trace rounded gravel and wood chips • mi- Dark gray sandy SILT/silty SAND, moist, fine SIB sand 7 —" ml Dark gray clayey SILT, moist, stiff, abundant grasses and rootlets (old soil horizon) - 8 — Bottom of borehole approximately 6.3 feet. 9 • 10 - . 11 12 13 Hi • 14 • Li 15 — 16 17 ,8 19 I_ l Notes/Location ,,,t d t f-` ) Earth Consultants Inc. Groundwater encountered t 5 feet (- 4))��� Goot«dercal Enemas.Geologists 6 FJ1Wvnerial Scams --- Proj. No. 1990- 1.6 Date Feb'91 Plate .'8 S4Lsuttace ccedtions depicted re cewent our observalans as the tore and bcaten of the'reparat ory Itola.'radioed by engineering teau.analysis and judgment.They are na r>eoetsarsy representative of other tines and location.We cannot accent recxrrmDaey for the use of intetpretatrat by others of information presented on this log. .'tvtro[1:...: 1:at 0Jr:nu ._o0 iProle Name: 1 Sheet at t Jco Nc.: Logged oy: Start Gate: Completion Date: 1Boring Nc: HA-8 199 - M"�„ .In --: C ir. F - ;h- 91 ] 6-91 — Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: :land 1liigeY Ground Surface Elevation: Hoie Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer CI Abandoned,sealed with bentonite Microti1 E I I Reading Sample s Depth �2 Surface Conditions: (ppm) ID m Jon Feet cn • - su Dark brown and red-brown silty mediur; ;.c. �-.ar;e ,s,' _I SAND, wet, loose, moderate sorting, .1bun(17:•-- r V. 1 fine rootlets. minor fine gravr-1 I [1A-8-l.�r Z°�t SW Red--brown fine to coarse SANE), saturated, ,r•...• 1 loose, trace fine gravel r ::=: 2 �� rw Red-brown gravelly fine to coarse SAND, 1 ;. saturated. loose, fine rounded aravr 1 r •=:s"' Dark gray and red-brown slaty fine to medium 1 3 mil r14:4c: SAND, saturated, minor fine gravel Mottled:; f :;;_ gray and brown silty fine SAND, ..): e — sn saturated, loose, well sorted, some pockets of ''= silt, trace rounded r-1.xix.:1:; travel and rootlets i-- i '1•:'i 5 ^ nl Dark gray sandy clayey SILT, moist, medium l•I I: : stiff, some pockets of medium to coarse sand, . :i;•••• 6 — trace gravel, becomes dark gray-brown downward Bottom of borehole approximately 6.2 feet. . 7 — 8 — . • -- 10 1 t 11 -- • ._.} 12 • 13 1 16 ,-- Lii 15 , } 17 -- 18 _ 19 ,— 1 �. Notes/Location Perched groundwater encountered near 1 '/ ) Earth Consultants Inc. surface ewmurrol Engineers.emnQru•6,°.a.m,a,wars Proj. No. 1990-16 I Date Feb'93. I Plate 119 li Stos aiaoe conditions deoiaed represent our observations at the one and location of the exploratory hole.modified by engineering teas.analysis and judgment They are not mown! noreaersative of other times and locations.We cannot accept resconstisy for the use of interpretation by others of irdarrmuon preserved on this log. I CnvironmEii mor111i3 ion Froiect Name: _ Snee; Joo Nc.: 1Logoed by: {Star.Date: Completion Date: 1Boring Nc: HA-9 990-16 i MLP I! 1--1 J-9 i 1-•1 7-9] Drilling Contractor: Drilling Metnod: I Sampling Method: } hand AugerJI Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer El Abandoned,sealed with bens site Microtp Sample c o' Depth u,$ Surface Conditions: Reading (PPm m)g ID U j in ? E a Feet rn '_'�`.:::- : -;:, Brown to gray-brown fine SAND, saturated, -o- ::;: 1: 1 silt, trace fine gravel, abundant rootlets -- , t-„ 'Ti-- Mottled brown and gray sandy SILT .and ;il t�: HA-9-1. �m .1• + wet, very finef• c �{.,...;.. 2 � SAND, moist,t to tofine ..any., •.:_... • minor fine. gravel , trace rootiet_. L;: :c :;. 3 — j !: HA- -4' :+ i.i.-1 i ri rai ;: 5 — li1 f ;'.i i I 1.'!i 6 — pal Blue-gray clayey SILT, Taoist, minor very fine I!ji! i i!I i sand, some rootlets (old soil horizon?) ,. 7 J ,, ml Mottled gray and brown sandy SILT, moist, . g _ very fine sand, minor clay .. - Bottom of borehole approximately 7.3 feet. 9 — 10 — I 11 — . 12 — , 'i13 — 14 • 15 ' 16 — I�-- 17 r 1 18 _, J 19 — Notes/Location ,f -) 1 Earth Consultants Inc.Perched groundwater encountered wilt (te.4' u COOKO.,,v,E„a„el GmloilaisaE,,,,,,m,,,Q,v,Sonoma near surface Proj. No. L990-•16 Date Fe-gib'91 Plate r:io ' ri Subsud Me condtions depicted represent our observations at e tree and location of this exploratory hole.modiied byanalystseenng tests.analysts and ludgrrtent.They are not neoesaarey ' tepreseroative of other tones and locations.We cannot accept responsibility for the tee of itte-- Y rprentton by others of information presentee)on this log. /lvll V/lllrt .,..l JJllily .-Ny oles;Name: ( Sneer c'.=r Li .. - • 7-. . ' - xo No.: rgged by: {Star.Date: I Comotel on Date: Bonn No: HA-10 .j !,._.h I -91 ( ; -91 Drilling Contractor: Drilling Method: Sampling Method: Hand AUr;,•'r L 1 I Ground Surface Elevation: Hole Completion: 0 Monitoring Well 0 Piezometer M Abandoned, sealed with ben nite Reading t Sample s C . Den Depth N$ Surface Conditions: (cam) ID m 0 =to Feet Dui. • • ...a..;;- sp Brown to gray fine SAND, moist, minor fir', i l 1":: rounded gravel -. HA-1S- � 1 — ml- , i T/� 't�: SAND, damp, veryfin 1. t Brown sandy ST;� �i.L sa sand j , sin Mottled brown and gray silty fine SAND, moist, 1 • __ iii 3 �_ trace rootlets — �••"`' ,m Mottled brown and gray gravelly silty fine • r• .,. . I' SAND, moist r lml Mottled brown and gray sandy SILT, moist, very fine sand 5 —• Bottom of borehole approximately 4 feet. 6 7 8 — 9 10 — • 11 12 — _-1 13 14 — • , 1 15 16 i 17 --- 8 19 — — Notes/Location Boring was terminated at 4 feet due to 'Uf �rl Earth Consultants Inc_ repeated sloughing of borehole walls Proj. No. 1990-16 Date F•-b'9i I Plate A i s:n.*a Defa condoms ced r etxeeent our observations of me true and bCalrOn ofthat BDltxtslory twfe.misdated by engirreennp Pests.analysisand judgment Theyare not o neeaar' savesenatNe of cow times and,orations.We cannot accept restonsrbioy for the use of interpretation by others of information preserved on this log. NORT1-1 _CREEK 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: See Below:;::: »1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil Received: • Jan 18, 1991 ' :::::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis for: Cadmium Extracted: Jan 31, 1991 il.lAttention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0439 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991. LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR: Cadmium Sample Sample Sample Number Description Detection Limit Result mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. 101-0439 1-1A-1-1' 0.65 2.0 1/15/91 101-0441 HA-3 Comp. 0.65 2.0 1/16/91 101-0442 HA-4 Comp. 0.65 2.• p 3 1/16/91 101-0443 HA-5-1.5' 0.65 1.8 1/16/91 101-0444 HA-6 Comp. 0.65 2.4 1/16/91 101-0446 HA-8 Comp. 0.65 2.5 1/16/91 101-0448 HA 10-1.5' 0.65 2.2 1/17/91 I-� i F DTI Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <11> A NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: See Belowgii 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis for: Mercury Extracted: Jan 31, 1991ii i0Attention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0439 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 _ Reported: Feb 13, 1991g LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR: Mercury Sample Sample Sample Number Description Detection Limit Result mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. 101-0439 HA-1-1' 0.065 N.D. 1/15/91 101-0441 HA-3 Comp. 0.065 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0442 HA-4 Comp. 0.065 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0443 HA-5-1.5 0.065 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0444 HA-6 Comp. 0.065 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0446 HA-8 Comp. 0.065 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0448 HA-10-1.5' 0.065 N.D. 1/17/91 - ' Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. •RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <12> NORTH 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 MEarth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: See Below - 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil Received: Jan 18 1991 liBellevue,WA 98005 Analysis for Cyanide Extracted: Jan 28 1991iiiii !Oktention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0440 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991g Reported: Feb 13, 1991 r LABORATORY ANALYSIS FOR: Cyanide Sample Sample Sample - Number Description Detection Limit Result mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. 101-0440 HA-2 Comp. 0.13 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0445 HA-7 Comp. 0.13 N.D. 1/16/91 101-0447 HA-9 Comp. 0.13 N.D. 1/17/91 • Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. • :TH CREEK ANALYTICAL a, ' Citzoi 4 Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <21> NORTH CREEK - -7- -ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200• FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-2 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991iii IAttention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0440 Reported: Feb 13, 1991iis: E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. Nan.... .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Beryt ..................................................................... 7.Ca.. Chromium 13 N.D. Lead 9.5 N.D. - Mercury 0.065 N.D. Nickel 10 N.D. Selenium 0.13 N.D. Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. ; Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour ---, Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <7> NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991i::•:•ii 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-7 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue, WA 98005 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0445 Reported: Feb 13, 1991i,: E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. .............................................................................................................................................................................. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Chromium 13 N.D. Lead 9.5 N.D. ' Mercury 0.065 N.D. Selenium 0.13 N.D. Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. Malytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N• ;TH CREEK ANALYTICAL se st Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <8> NOFITI-1 _ CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX (206)485-2992 ••4i^iii:G:4};}}}}}}}:^iii}is4}}i}iiiiiiii}}:L}iii?}%i3ii}}}}}?iii}}}}iii}?iibii:ii:!ryii}iii}i::•:±iXvi::4i::+.�: Earth Consultants Inc. Client Proje t ID: B lack River ...:. ...... ................... ..... ....... ........... . .... Corp Park,Tract A •�� Sampled: Jan 17,�••1991<? < 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-9 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991: : Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991iiiiii :::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: 101-0447 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 < E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. A.:,• a ..- a a .... ..- ........... .................. ......................................... • � .... .... .................•....... f..I..te.4..4i.}..}..4tT.::.,4.;}i.}.:t.;4krf4.+,.Yr:::::::.�:.:;;:.;�..,...,, ::::::::«::::::::. +.4i"::'::'.:'::'.:':'::'.r :'..}:Si'Si::ii;:;:ii:>. y:::::v:w:.:.:.:w::v:::n::�.�::::::::::::::::•:::::::w:::::.�w:::::::.tw::::;; •. .:::::::::i::::iiiiiiiiiiiiii: Y Y Y Y•YaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaY•Y1Y•YaYaYaYaY•Y•Y•Y1YaYaYaYaYaY:..................L�6>V:�:�ii�:�ii:�:{:<?::::isvY�ti�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�Y�I(aY�Y�](�1(�Y�II�<�%�i�Yi�:i�:�ri?ii:ti�:�i::O�JS•iii:•iiii:�ii:Jiii:•iii:•i:•i:�i:�: .......:.....:::....:. Y YaY Y Y YaYaYaY•YaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaYaY•Y•Y•Y•Y.Ya.t................. :::::•:::::::::•::... •�:4'^iii;.;.}:•ri�:��"�'+tiii�ii}}y}ii3iij}i}iiiii?: CPS ....w'{'•:};::,>.;:.'ti::'r:: ;: }i:i:::: ....+:>.i...ij:::: y:::•.::i: i:i:i:? 5:.:jy:j?ry.....:}ti i:ii:i::.{;(:::3•ri:•i:!.ii::i:. II.•I.�.:♦I.�.HN:f..H.H:F...1.lI.FR.�.N.HH.H:HYI..I.1..lI.M.M.H:FI../l;.N.:.• 1: •::::. ::::�.::is v:::::::v:?:^::::::::::::i}iiii::w:'?:{vi:V:.y:"vii::::.:::!<!�:is... :..:..... •...:.::..:...... ......:..:::::::::::•:�:�::}:'ii:• i:•ii:•iii:••:i�:i��:•i::vi}is�:•:hii{•i:�i:.iii:�:iis2•ii:�:•ii;:?};.;i.}:•:<�i$iiiji}}}:v�i::. '.:::ii::i: :'3:4:•iii:•iiiii•:j. •.i.r. .....Y. Y Y.Y.x.Y.x.n.Y.n.�...Y.a.<.A.�}a...............��::::•;::•:::•>:•>:•::;;::• ::•:� :�>: as a aa. aa.aa �f Lead 9.5 N.D. Mercury::::::::::::.:::.:::::::.:::..::.:.::.:::.::::.:::::•::..:::::::::::.::.:.:::::.:.::.:::..:::::::......................0.065....................•........................................... ...... ......N.D. \I\IY•Y•Y•a•l1•\•\.\.\r•Y�111�,,,,,_,,,,\•a;^?iiiiiiiiiii:<vi:<t:::;._ ...1t,1!l,<�)t�lt,��It���\�}.�11)I.1[•R•�•ll•...............�.� �1ee .a:a....: :.:.y::r':i::i::::::+:;+i:.. • ............. Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. l<1. ....Y.Y..Y Y•Y•Y•AaY•R•n•R•1[•Y•Y•Y•Y•R4Y•Y•11.11.Y.Y.Y.R.Y.Y.R.R.R.f1.Y.Y.����lf�R..iiii;:•::::::::;.Y,.�\�,��jii:::+i}ii:};i:.iiiin�l.1.R.R.R.Y.R.Y.1f.R.11.11.Y.i1Y.Y.R.I!•i:Li:i�:}i:?•i••i��iiiiYi:^iii i•ijii�iyiiiiiiiii::i Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. ORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <9> NCB iT CREEK -ANALY11CAL _ 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 :::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: N.A. '1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Method Blank Received: N.A. <'Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 ` ;;Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number BLK020191 Reported: Feb 1, 1991 .... ...............................................n.....a..........a....a:....................................n..................n.........n.........................::!y:yi:ji::l::iiiiiiii::::T:;:;i?:;<?................................. E.P.A. PRIORITY METALS Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results mg/kg dry wt. mg/kg dry wt. Antimony 32 N.D. Arsenic 0.065 N.D. Beryllium 0.65 N.D. Cadmium 0.65 N.D. Chromium 13 N.D. Copper 3.2 N.D. Lead 9.5 N.D. Mercury 0.065 N.D. Nickel 10 N.D. Selenium 0.13 N.D. Silver 0.65 N.D. Thallium 0.065 N.D. - Zinc 0.95 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Scot Cocanour -1 Laboratory Director 1010436.ECI <14> 1 — NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL { 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX(206)485-2992 ::t :;:5::::%"<:::Sr;:r< ::;�::::::::::•'>:;::::<:;;;.;:.;::<;:;r�:::�r:;•:�:�::�r::::;::r::.:;;;:>::,:.:::.::::.:::.:.:�:::::5<';;:.>:::ir::;::::r::<.:::.:i::::;r:..: :':Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 ' ' 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Matrix Descript: Soil Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 418.1 (I.R.with clean-up) Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 Attention: Marcus Pierce First Sample#: 101-0440 Analyzed: Jan 23, 1991iiIiii Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ...n...............v................:......................vn.....r........n..n.....n�..:rnv.jj4::i?:<:$;::{::?:;{y;;:}:isii::ivi:v'iiii:•ii::i':;:ii::•ii:+4iiiiiyii}:58:•i':i:>.:j;j;:yi:i:$i'4:�i::<'vi:•':}jyii:•':ii:{:iiii}iiiii�iii'iii}iY::v G:�:.:??:isi:`:L:}}i:•i�':i:r:`iii::i}j '.':•.':ii?::i}i}'riii: ................ :::::::::::::::::::w.}i:i is:C:�{.:::.:::....................rr:S:4:4:G:•i}:^:?ii^ii'vi::;::: TOTAL RECOVERABLE PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS Sample Sample Petroleum Oil Number Description mg/kg dry wt. 101-0440 HA-2 Comp. N.D. I 101-0445 HA-7 Comp. N.D. 101-0447 HA-9 Comp. 23 Ij Detection Limits: 6.5 , _ Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. N• -TH CREEK ANALYTICAL I Scot Cocanour 1 Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <14> =NORTH -_'CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-2 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 22, 1991€< €;:Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0440 Analyzed: Jan 23, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. - alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 N.D. delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC (Lindane) 6.5 N.D. Chlordane 65 N.D. 4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. - 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. ' Dieldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. r Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. Endrin 13 N.D. Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. ----; PCB-1016 65 N.D. PCB-1221 65 N.D. - PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. PCB-1248 65 N.D. PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. - Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. •RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL ', • Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <15> I r _ NORTH - CREEK _ ! 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 . Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 `< 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-7 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 > __ €;'Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 22, 1991 ' < Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: 101-0445 Analyzed: Jan 23, 1991 ' Reported: Feb 13, 1991 > ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. - alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 N.D. .' delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC (Lindane) 6.5 N.D. ., Chlordane 65 N.D. ' '4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. Dieldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. -- Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. Endrin 13 N.D. - Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. --, PCB-1016 65 N.D. PCB-1221 65 N.D. PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. ---I PCB-1248 65 N.D. PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. -i --, Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL 4 ..' Cr._6.,,,_____ Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <16> NORTH 'CREEK 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX (206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID:......... River.....oa..Prk,.. ..... A........ , Samled: Jan 17 BlackCorp Park,a Tractp , 1991 i 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-9 Comp. Received: Jan 18 1991 i<Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8080 Extracted: Jan 22, 1991 ' Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0447 Analyzed: Jan 23, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES AND PCB'S (EPA 8080) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Aldrin 6.5 N.D. alpha-BHC 6.5 N.D. beta-BHC 6.5 N.D. delta-BHC 13 N.D. gamma-BHC (Lindane) 6.5 N.D. Chlordane 65 N.D. 4,4'-DDD 13 N.D. 4,4'-DDE 6.5 N.D. 4,4'-DDT 13 N.D. Dieldrin 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan I 13 N.D. Endosulfan II 6.5 N.D. Endosulfan sulfate 65 N.D. Endrin 13 N.D. Endrin aldehyde 20 N.D. Heptachlor 6.5 N.D. Heptachlor expoxide 6.5 N.D. Methoxychlor 195 N.D. Toxaphene 228 N.D. PCB-1016 65 N.D. PCB-1221 65 N.D. ` -• PCB-1232 65 N.D. PCB-1242 65 N.D. PCB-1248 65 N.D. PCB-1254 65 N.D. PCB-1260 65 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. N• •TH CREEK ANALYTICAL • c• Cocanour Laboratory Director 1010431.ECI <17> NORTH ___ CREEK 1 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200• FAX (206)485-2992 ' ; Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 19911 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-2 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 - gBellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 ?Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number: 101-0440 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 < Reported: Feb 13, 1991>; SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Acenaphthene 130 N.D. Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. ' Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. 17 Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. 1 • Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. __ Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. _ -• Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. ' Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. _ Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. ( 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. L Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. - 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. --; Chrysene 130 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. • Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. L 3 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. r- 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 N.D. 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. 1 • NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <7> FORTH - CREEK -i -- =ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 ? 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-2 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 - ::::Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991€< >Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0440 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991?' iii Reported: Feb 13, 1991 r- SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. - 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. { Di-N-octyl phthalate 130 N.D. -; Fluoranthene 130 N.D. Fluorene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. i ; Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. - Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. ' Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 N.D. - 2-Methylphenol 130 N.D. 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. r--, 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. - N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. - Pentachlorophenol 650 N.D. i Phenathrene 130 N.D. - " Phenol 130 N.D. Pyrene 130 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 N.D. __ 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. ' -- --, Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL r j----! e&-tit i Scot Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 9 1010436.ECI <8> = NORTH H i. -! _= CREEK -- = = ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ' :: : : > e : ; : .>.:.::: �im : nig : , : : : art ConsultantsInc. Client Project ID: BlackRiver Corp Park,TractA Sampled. Jan 16, 1991 _; :;;, 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-7 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 l?ii __ »Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991ii ::::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0445 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 Reported: Feb 13, 1991€< SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results ( pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. Acenaphthene 130 N.D. Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. in Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. --' Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. ( Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. -- Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. - 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Chrysene 130 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. -- Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. _' 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 • N.D. ' 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. --' Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. L_ NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <9> -- - CRT] '- _ 7._CREEK ANALYTICAL _- 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ] Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp Park,Tract A Sampled: Jan 16, 1991 iii1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-7 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 iii >'Bellevue,WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991€' 'Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0445 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991 `<' Reported: Feb 13, 1991 r- SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. -- 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. Di-N-octyl phthalate 130 N.D. Fluoranthene 130 N.D. Fluorene 130 N.D. - Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. . Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. -- Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 N.D. - 2-Methylphenol 130 N.D. ' 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. ' Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. r__ 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. - Pentachlorophenol 650 N.D. '.' Phenathrene 130 N.D. --- Phenol 130 N.D. _ Pyrene 130 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. ! __, Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL f (." tI-- &fr - . ar_dy-,-- Cocanour -1 Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 1010436.ECI <10> 'SNORT 1—i CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200 •FAX (206)485-2992 :b4?ii:•iR:iii:ii?:•iiii::•:•iii:O:i?4: :> : Black: ::ID:::.i::::<: :> >: .. Tract :::.;:Sampled: 99 .:: >Earth Consultants Inc. Client ProjectRiverCorpCo p Park, - 0805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-9 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 _ i Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 ` ::':Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0447 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991iO Reported: Feb 13, 1991€ SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. - Acenaphthene 130 N.D. __ Acenaphthylene 130 N.D. Aniline 130 N.D. _' Anthracene 130 N.D. Benzidine 3,250 N.D. ` Benzoic Acid 650 N.D. Benzo(a)anthracene 130 N.D. Benzo(b)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(k)fluoranthene 130 N.D. Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 130 N.D. Benzo(a)pyrene 130 N.D. Benzyl alcohol 130 N.D. Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 130 N.D. ' Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 130 N.D. '-- Bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 130 N.D. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 650 N.D. 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. Butyl benzyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4-Chloroaniline 130 N.D. _ 2-Chloronaphthalene 130 N.D. 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol 130 N.D. {. _` 2-Chlorophenol 130 N.D. 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 130 N.D. -, Chrysene 130 N.D. Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 130 N.D. ' Dibenzofuran 130 N.D. _ Di-N-butyl phthalate 650 N.D. 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 130 N.D. 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 650 N.D. ' 2,4-Dichlorophenol 130 N.D. Diethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 2,4-Dimethylphenol 130 N.D. Dimethyl phthalate 130 N.D. 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol 650 N.D. - 2,4-Dinitrophenol 650 N.D. - NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL Page 1 of 2 1010436.ECI <11> i i NORTH ___ CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 iiiiEarth Consultants Inc. �.;>::.;;....................:.:.:: Client Pro ect ID: 'black River Corp C o rp.:.::Park,Tract:A:..:.;.:.:.:.............. Sampled: ampled........Jan.... 16, 1991:``: 0805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Sample Descript: Soil, HA-9 Comp. Received: Jan 18, 1991 : pi Bellevue, WA 98005 Analysis Method: EPA 8270 Extracted: Jan 23, 1991 ::1 €::Attention: Marcus Pierce Lab Number 101-0447 Analyzed: Jan 29, 1991:` Reported: Feb 13, 1991 SEMI-VOLATILE ORGANICS by GC/MS (EPA 8270) Analyte Detection Limit Sample Results _ pg/kg dry wt. pg/kg dry wt. i 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 130 N.D. ! Di-N-octyl phthalate 130 N.D. 1 Fluoranthene 130 N.D. Fluorene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobenzene 130 N.D. Hexachlorobutadiene. 130 N.D. Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 130 N.D. Hexachloroethane 130 N.D. Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 130 N.D. • Isophorone 130 N.D. 2-Methylnaphthalene 130 N.D. - 2-Methylphenol 130 N.D. 4-Methylphenol 130 N.D. Naphthalene 130 N.D. 2-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 3-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. 4-Nitroaniline 650 N.D. Nitrobenzene 130 N.D. _ 2-Nitrophenol 130 N.D. 4-Nitrophenol 650 N.D. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 130 N.D. N-Nitroso-di-N-propylamine 130 N.D. - Pentachlorophenol 650 N.D. Phenathrene 130 N.D. Phenol 130 N.D. Pyrene 130 N.D. 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 130 N.D. _ 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 650 N.D. 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 130 N.D. Analytes reported as N.D.were not present above the stated limit of detection. Because matrix effects and/or other factors required additional sample dilution,detection limits for this sample have been raised. ORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL t Cocanour Laboratory Director Page 2 of 2 1010436.ECI <12> NORTH ___ CREEK ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell, WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 :,---' � < Earth;:C:;;:n;;: ltant;:.;:ln.;;.;:::......................miii.:;:;:1;7 Pr<.;: ;::.;t ID: BIB::.;:.;:;;:Ria:;.,:;:.:;:.;;f:.;:-;:.>;>::'»:.:; :::;>:.>:;t :......................mi:1....................... ........ o su s c C e olec ack a Co p. Pa k,Trac __ ii.ii1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 >Bellevue, WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil ::;Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0439 to-0448 Reported: Feb 1, 1991 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Sb As Be Cd Cr Cu Pb EPA Method: 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Analyst: M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig Reporting Units: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg ' Date Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 QC Sample#: 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 1 Li Sample Conc.: N.D. 8.3 0.78 1.5 11 18 N.D. Spike Conc. Added: 150 2.5 20 25 50 100 50 -1 Conc. Matrix Spike: 130 10 16 22 66 100 44 - Matrix Spike %Recovery: 87 68 76 82 110 82 88 Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 140 11 19 22 65 100 48 Matrix Spike Dup Recovelicatery: 93 108 91 82 108 82 96 Relative %Difference: 7.4 9.5 17 0 1.5 0 8.7 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 Spike Conc.Added Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 SCO Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 --1 Laboratory Director 1010439.ECI <19> 1, NORTH _, __ CREEK _ ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 •Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 -_-- ::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID• Black River Corp. Park,Tract A 1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 :Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil 1.ilAttention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0439 to-0448 Reported: Feb 1, 1991 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Hg Ni Se Ag TI Zn _ EPA Method: 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Analyst: M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig M.Essig Reporting Units: mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Date Analyzed: Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 Feb 1, 1991 QC Sample#: 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 101-0447 Sample Conc.: N.D. N.D. 0.39 N.D. N.D. 26 j Spike Conc. Added: 0.25 150 1.5 10 1.25 20 Conc. Matrix Spike: 0.26 150 1.8 10 1.2 41 t_ Matrix Spike %Recovery: 104 100 95 100 96 75 Conc. Matrix _ Spike Dup.: 0.26 160 1.9 10 0.98 43 Matrix Spike -, Duplicate %Recovery: 104 107 107 100 78 85 Relative %Difference: 0 6.5 9.5 0 20 4.8 N•RTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 ( Spike Conc.Added 41•': Ceraik"------ .: Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 .t Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 - Laboratory Director 1010439.EC1 <20> _ CRTH CREEK -- - _ANALYTICAL 18939 120th Avenue N.E., Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 ::::Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project ID: Black River Corp. Park,Tract A '<1805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 ":Bellevue,WA 98005 Sample Matrix: Soil "Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample Group: 101-0439 to-0448 Reported: Feb 1, 1991 iiiiii QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT ANALYTE Petroleum Oil Undane Heptachlor Aldrin I __ EPA Method: 418.1 8080 8080 8080 Analyst: K.Stark S.Kouri S.Kouri S.Kouri Reporting Units: mg/kg pg/kg pg/kg pg/kg Date Analyzed: Jan 23, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 Jan 23, 1991 QC Sample#: 101-0445 BLK012290 BLK012290 BLK012290 Sample Conc.: N.D. N.D. N.D. N.D. Spike Conc. Added: 521 8.3 8.3 8.3 Conc. Matrix Spike: 367 6.9 11 8.3 Matrix Spike %Recovery: 70 83 130 100 -- Conc. Matrix Spike Dup.: 349 6.8 11 8.2 Matrix Spike Duplicate %Recovery: 67 81 130 98 Relative %Difference: 5.0 1.0 0 1.0 II NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 Spike Conc.Added ii ,,, 6:riel.,„.1/4______ Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 cot Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 -,i Laboratory Director 1010439.ECI <17> NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL �__' 18939 120th Avenue N.E.,Suite 101 • Bothell,WA 98011-2569 Phone(206)481-9200•FAX(206)485-2992 Earth Consultants Inc. Client Project II: Black River Corp. Park,Tract A — 10805 136th Place N.E., Suite 101 Method (units): EPA 8270 (µg) O.C. Sample Dates _- il Bellevue,WA 98005 Analyst(s): S. Scot Extracted: Jan'17, 1991 Iii ::Attention: Marcus Pierce QC Sample#: 101-1643 Analyzed: Jan 22, 1991 i_i iiiii Reported: Feb 1, 1991 QUALITY CONTROL DATA REPORT Matrix Conc. Matrix Spike Conc. Spike Matrix Duplicate Relative Sample Spike Conc. Matrix % Spike % % Analyte Conc. Added Spike Recovery Duplicate Recovery Difference - Phenol N.D. 100 76 76 78 78 2.6 { - 2-Chiorophenol N.D. 100 79 79 80 80 2.5 1,4-Dichloro- N.D. 50 39 78 39 78 0 benzene N-Nitroso-Di-N- N.D. 50 42 84 40 80 4.9 propylamine 1,2,4-Trichioro- N.D. 50 40 80 40 80 0 benzene 4-Chloro- N.D. 100 92 92 90 90 2.2 - 3-Methyiphenol Acenaphthene N.D. 50 44 88 43 86 2.3 - 4-Nitrophenol N.D. 100 89 89 94 96 7.6 - 2,4-Dinitro- N.D. 50 36 72 34 78 8.0 toluene _._! Pentachloro- N.D. 100 98 98 89 89 9.6 phenol Pyrene N.D. 50 55 110 52 100 5.6 NORTH CREEK ANALYTICAL %Recovery: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of Sample x 100 Spike Conc.Added it,.4. Cr)reeiv... ........._ Relative%Difference: Conc.of M.S.-Conc.of M.S.D. x 100 •t Cocanour (Conc.of M.S. + Conc.of M.S.D.)/2 , __ Laboratory Director 1010439.ECI <18>. . • 1. 4.1 lc 7_ ^A .,;t 11) Earth Consultants II/ `r�� Geotechnical Engineers.Geologists&Environmental Scientis CHAIN OF CUSTODY RECORD SHEET l OF / PROJECT SAMPLERS: (signature) �' 7?7 . t. 81 k b fA)41 -P PdA'k r 7 1q t,rcu 5 L. r / "/u-c.t�-at -C,[. LAB NUMBER DATE TIME SAMPLE TYPE o°Q REMARKS z m -I D O D o CI) 9 r- SiSi= Z rn m c m 33 m z m 1 1G1139 11/4 —J I/ 1/15h / 1501 X - I CM�,r,y.... 0446 14A-2£ 1' //16/q/ 1O2 X c„-nposk '`lItltt1 HA -3 C&•;. , i f I4 hi 1 lye x Sam ,A Doti, HA -LI Gine i f/&/ / l zz8 X /nSiii'`z rt w 0`i N4- 5— ( .5' I/i /9! /33o X h»e. .s4.wt -•i"— tat44 o Bg* riA-Ltik.sx , x #4- cart",,. feiwitlq HA -6C6iy d/z/5/ 13S0 X O LIII 1-1 A--7 C r. p i j/cl9( 14/4/0 x )'e°ifyigf i . IttemIC 14 -$ C i/I414t 1 S�7 X EpA- qa/o j �PM� 31 09 4 4-9 CnMp r I17 1i l 12.56 x' pr ey ' . RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME .n, 1.. _ RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY: (Sig nawre) DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: IS RECEIVED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME RELINQUISHED BY: (Signature) RECEIVED BY MOBILE LAB FOR FIELD DATE/TIME ANALYSIS: IS ggnature) DISPATCHED BY: (Signature) DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR LABORATORY BY: DATE/TIME (Signature) METHOD OF SHIPMENT: S 34 Distribution: Original-Accompany Shipment One Copy- Survey Coordinator Field Files rr= 'M C.i a HIIRTCROWSER Earth and Environmental Technologies 1910 Fairview Avenue East r • Seattle,Washington 98102 206.324.9530 4041 Ruston Way, Suite 2A • Tacoma,Washington 98402 4 206.759.6000 1201 Jadwin Avenue,Suite 204 Richland,Washington 99352 ' 509.946.4344 2550 Denali Street,Suite 705 Anchorage,Alaska 99503 907.276.7475 = - "'`� _14 Five Centerpointe Drive, Suite 240 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035",•• 503.620.7284 • 353 Sacramento,Suite 1140 San Francisco,California 94111 415.391.1885 it One World Trade Center, Suite 2300 Long Beach, California 90831 . 213.495.6360 it J I NVI ,RONMENIA MPACT STATEMENT MICROFILMED BLACKRTVER CORPORATE Park TRAmAiB OFFICE BUILDINGS CORRECTED ISSUE e City of Renton 200 Mils Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Prepared by: j,j. Jones & Stokes Associates,Inc. Bellevue, Washington March 1991 %0 iatt CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttman,Administrator May 10, 1991 SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII Final Environmental Impact Statement Dear Recipient/Party of Interest: The Black River Final Environmental Impact Statement included a section on cumulative impacts, reflecting the potential for development of several projects in the vicinity of the Corporate Park. These projects included the projected expansion of the Metro Wastewater Treatment Facility. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for this project was released just prior to the Black River FEIS. The Final EIS included erroneous information which necessitates a revision. This letter documents that revision. Attached, please find an errata sheet for this item. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call 235-2550. S' ely, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Principal Planner 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ERRATA SHEET Please substitute the following paragraph for Paragraph 3, page 3-62 in the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. Offensive odors could occasionally be generated from the treatment facility and extend beyond the boundaries of the site, even with Metro's proposed odor control plan. These odors most likely would come from mechanical failures, emergencies or system upsets, or, infrequently, unusual circumstances during day-to-day operations. These odors have the greatest potential for crossing Tracts A and B when the prevailing winds are from the south and southwest. 4. %0 ` CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department. Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttman,Administrator April 4, 1991 Dear Interested Party: • Due to a possible collation problem at the printer's, the FEIS you received may have been incorrectly put together. To reduce any possible confusion this may cause, we are sending corrected copies to you for your further review. We ask that you dispose of the original copy you received. You will kindly note that the new document has a different colored cover. Thank you for your forbearance. Since there has already been time for review,the comment period time will not change on this. Donald K Erickson,AICP Zoning Administrator i 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttman,Administrator March 27, 1991 • Dear Interested Party: This letter is notification that the Environmental Review Committee .(ERC), designated as the SEPA responsible official for the City of Renton, Issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Black River Corporate Park, Tracts A and B on March 27, 1991. The proponent is applying for a Building Permit, a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, a Clearing, Grading and Filling Permit, Site Plan Approval,and a Routine Vegetation Removal Permit. The FEIS augments the Draft EIS by providing additional research and findings, publishing and answering letters received on the Draft, providing additional mitigation, and incorporating by reference a number of documents. These documents, listed below with an asterisk (*), may be viewed at the Renton Public Library, Main Branch, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, 98055. All others are available at the Metro Library, Exchange Building, 821 Second Ave.Seattle,98104-1598. 1974. Auburn Interceptor EIS *1980. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Wastewater Management Plan for the Lake Washington/Green River Basins, EIS and Appendices. Report No.910/9-80-077 1981. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Final EIS on the Wastewater Management Plan for, the Lake Washington/Green River Basins. 1983. Draft Supplemental EIS for the Puget Sound Facilities Engineering Report. 1983. Final Supplemental EIS on the Puget Sound Facilities Engineering Report 1983. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle/Draft and Final EISs,Sludge Management Plan. • *1984. Final Supplemental EIS on the Renton Effluent Transfer System Alternative for the Wastewater Management Plan, Lake Washington/Green River Basins. 1984. Public Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS on the Renton Effluent Transfer System Alternatives for the Wastewater Management Plan, Lake Washington/Green River Basins. *1985. Draft EIS on the Plan for the Secondary Treatment Facilities and Combined Sewer Overflow Control. *1985. Final EIS on the Plan for the Secondary Treatment Facilities and Combined Sewer Overflow Control. 1986. Final Supplemental EIS for Secondary Facilities and Combined Sewer Overflow Control. 1988. Final Supplemental EIS for West Point Secondary Treatment Facilities. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON NEWS RELEASE NOTICE OF.FEIS ISSUANCE • Description of Agency Action: Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement on March 27, 1991 on the Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII and VIII (ECF;SA;SM-071-88 & ECF;SA-109-88). ERC will issue a mitigation measures document on the above project based on information from the DEIS and FEIS on April • 1990 and March 1991. Description of Proposal: TRACT A The proposal includes phased construction of three office buildings ranging in height from one to four stories. These buildings would provide 183,600 square feet of space. Surface parking would accommodate approximately 800 autos. TRACT B The proposal includes phased construction of three office buildings ranging in height from three to seven stories. - These buildings would provide 286,200 square feet of space. Surface parking would accommodate approximately 500 autos and another 800 stalls would be provided in a three story parking structure: Location of Proposal: The project site is located on Oakesdale Avenue. Type of SEPA Review: Declaration of Significance, SEPA Scoping, Draft EIS, Public hearing on DEIS, Final EIS. • Documents may be examined during regular business hours at Development Services, Third Floor, Municipal Building,200 Mill Avenue South. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section APPEAL: Any appeal as to the adequacy of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements, pursuant to WAC 197- 11-68 must be consolidated with an appeal on the agency's decision on the proposed action. The mitigation document Is this agency's decision which may be appealed together with the FEIS. These appeals may be filed with the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, by 5:00 PM, 20 days after the issuance of the mitigation • document. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK, TRACTS A AND B OFFICE BUILDINGS CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON For the Review and Comment of Citizens, Citizens Groups, and Government Agencies In Compliance With The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 Chapter 42.21c, Revised Code of Washington and Revised SEPA Guidelines, Effective April 4, 1989 Chapter 197-11, Washington Administrative Code Date of Issue: March 1-1 , 1991 i , FACT SHEET Title Blackriver Corporate Park, Tracts A and B Office Buildings Description of Construct as a four-year phased project, 3 one- to four-story proposal and office buildings on 12.07 acres of Tract A and 3 four- to alternatives seven-story buildings on the 15.7-acre Tract B, Renton, WA. Tract B will also include the construction of a three-story parking structure. Tract A. Alternatives analyses include: • Alternative A-1 -Tract A Proposed Action. Construction of a single-story 23,600 square foot building in 1991-92; and two four-story 80,000 square foot buildings in 1993-94 and 1994-95; and • Alternative A2 - No Action Tract B • Alternative B1 - Tract B Proposed Action. Construction of a 71,000 square foot four-story office building in 1991-92; construction of a 58,600 square foot three-story office building in 1992-93; and construction of a 156,600 square foot office building and three-story parking structure in 1993-95; • • Alternative B2 - Construction of one seven-story office building (285,000 square feet) and a four-story parking structure; and • Alternative B3 - No Action. Location of site City of Renton, King County History of Proposal History of proposal presented in Section 2.3 of the April 1990 Draft EIS with supplemental information provided in Section 2.3 of this Final EIS. Appendix B presents a history of the heron colony. Key historical events include: • 1979 - Property purchased by First City Development Corporation and zoned General (G); i • Property rezoned to Manufacturing Park (MP) with conditions for rezone approval (see Section 2.3 of this FEIS for conditions); 1, 1r- • 1984 - P-1 Pond excavated; • October 1986 - Property rezoned to Office Park (OP); 1 ' • August 1988 - Phase VII (Tract B) site plan submitted to City and City determined need for EIS; • October 1989 = Phase VIII (Tract A) added to EIS; • April 1990 - Draft EIS issued; • May 1, 1990 - Public hearing on DEIS; • Comment period for DEIS extended from May 11, 1990 to May 28, 1990; and • March 1991 - Final EIS issued. Proposal's sponsor First City Developments Corporation Date of Schedule is tentative pending decision on EIS and site plan implementation review. Lead agency City of Renton Responsible official City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Contact person Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator Planning/Public Works/Building Department (206) 235-2550 Attn: Mary Lynne Myer Ii List of possible permit, Building Permit approval, and license Shoreline Substantial Development Permit requirements Clearing, Grading, and Filling Permit Clean Water Act - Section 404 Authors and principal Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. contributors to DEIS 2820.Northup Way, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98004 ! �. 4 ; • ii DB Associates, Inc. 401 Second Avenue South Suite 220 Seattle, Washington 98104-2883 INCA Engineers, Inc. 11120 N.E. 2nd Street Bellevue, Washington 98004 The Transpo Group, Inc. 14715 Bel-Red Road, Suite 100 Bellevue, Washington 98007 Subsequent environmental Supplemental analysis could be required if significant change review occurs in the proposal or if new information about impacts is identified. Such review could include Determinations of Significance, preparation of Addenda or Supplemental EISs, or preparation of new EISs. Location of background Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. information 2820 Northup Way, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 822-1077 Cost of copy $10.00 to public I iii DISTRIBUTION LIST } Federal U. S. Environmental'Protection Agency Region X U. S. Army Corps of Engineers U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service U. S. Soil Conservation Service State Department of Ecology (SEPA Register) Department of Natural Resources Department of Wildlife Department of Transportation Department of Social and Health Services Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Office of Public Archaeology, University of Washington Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Regional Metro - Water Quality Division Metro - Transit Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Puget Sound Council of Governments Seattle - King County Department of Public Health Seattle - King County Commuter Pool Local Government King County Department of Public Works, Surface Water Management Division King County Building and Land Development Division SEPA Information Center King County Parks, Planning, and Resources Department; Attn: Erik Stockdale King County Soil and Water Conservation District iv it City of Renton Mayor; Attn: Mayor's Assistant City Council Hearing Examiner's Office Planning Commission Parks Board Public Works Department Parks and Recreation Department Police Department Fire Department City Attorney SEPA Information Center Planning and Community Development Department Utilities/Services Puget Sound Power and Light Company Washington Natural Gas Company Pacific Northwest Bell Libraries/School Districts Renton Public Library - Main Branch (3) Renton Public Library - Highlands Branch (2) University of Washington Library, College of Arch. and Urban Planning King County Public Library System Renton School District No. 403 Newspapers Seattle Times - Eastside Edition Seattle Post-Intellegencer Daily Journal of Commerce Valley Daily News v Journal American. Private Organizations and Others Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce City of Kent Muckleshoot Tribe Duwamish Tribe City of Tukwila Seattle Audubon Society Nature Conservancy Friends of the Earth ry Sierra Club i. 1 ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT DISCUSSED IN THIS FINAL EIS (1) NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (a) Earth (i) Geology Reviewed (ii) Soils Reviewed (iii) Topography N/A (iv) Unique physical features N/A (v) Erosion/enlargement of land area (accretion) N/A (b) Air (i) Air quality Reviewed (ii) Odor (iii) Climate (c) Water (i) Surface water movement/quantity/quality Reviewed (ii) Runoff/absorption Reviewed (iii) Floods N/A (iv) Groundwater movement/quantity/quality Reviewed (v) Public water supplies N/A (d) Plants and animals Reviewed (i) Habitat for and numbers or diversity of species of plants, fish or other wildlife (ii) Unique species Reviewed (iii) Fish or wildlife mitigation routes Reviewed (e) Energy and natural resources N/A (i) Amount required/rate of use/efficiency (ii) Source/availability (iii) Nonrenewable resources (iv) Conservation and renewable resources (v) Scenic Resources (2) BUILT ENVIRONMENT (a) Environmental health (i) Noise Reviewed (ii) Risk of explosion N/A (iii) Potential releases to the environment Reviewed vii affecting public health, such as toxic or hazardous materials (b) Land and shoreline use (i) Relationship to existing land use plans Reviewed and to estimated population (ii) Housing N/A (iii) Light and glare Reviewed (iv) Aesthetics N/A (v) Recreation N/A (vi) Historical and cultural preservation Reviewed (vii) Agricultural crops N/A (c) Transportation (i) Transportation systems Reviewed (ii) Vehicular traffic (iii) Waterborne, rail, and air traffic (iv) Parking (v) Movement/circulation of people and goods (vi) Traffic hazards (d) Public services and utilities (i) Fire (ii) Police (iii) Schools (iv) Parks and other recreational facilities Reviewed (v) Maintenance (vi) Communications (vii) Water/storm water (viii) Sewer/solid waste (ix) Other governmental services or utilities viii Table of Contents Page Chapter 1. Summary 1-1 1.1 Introduction and Background 1-1 1.2 Overview of Events 1-1 1.3 Proposed Action and Alternatives 1-5 1.3.1 Tract A 1-7 1.3.2 Tract B (Phase VII) 1-7 1.4 Applicant's Objectives 1-9 1.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1-9 1.6 Adverse Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated 1-30 1.6.1 Tracts A and B 1-30 Chapter 2. Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-1 2.1 Introduction 2-1 2.2 Supplemental Project Area Information 2-2 2.3 Supplemental Information on Project History 2-5 2.4 Project Need 2-8 2.5 Description of the Proposed Action 2-8 2.5.1 Tract A 2-9 2.5.2 Tract B 2-11 2.5.3 Mitigation Measures 2-13 Chapter 3. Supplemental Description of Affected Environment, Significant Impact and Mitigation Measures 3-1 3.1 Introduction 3-1 3.2 Earth Resources 3-1 3.2.1 Topography/Soils 3-1 3.2.2 Foundation 3-6 3.2.3 Seismic 3-7 3.3 Air 3-7 3.3.1 Air Quality 3-7 3.4 Water 3-8 3.4.1 Surface Water Movement/Quantity 3-8 3.4.2 Water Quality/Runoff 3-10 3.5 Terrestrial Resources 3-13 3.5.1 Vegetation 3-13 1 3.5.2 Shoreland/Wetlands 3-15 3.5.3. Wildlife Resources 3-17 3.5.4 Unique Terrestrial Resources 3-20 3.6 Environmental Health 3-26 ix 3.6.1 Noise 3-26 3.6.2 Hazardous Waste 3-30 ' 3.7 Land and Shoreline Use 3-31 3.7.1 Relationship to Existing Land Uses 3-31 3.7.2 Relationship to Plans, Zoning and Shorelines 3-32 3.7.3 Light and Glare 3-46 3.7.4 Historic and Cultural Resources 3-47 3.8 Transportation 3-48 3.8.1 Traffic 3-48 3.9 Public Services and Utilities 3-52 3.9.1 Parks and Other Recreational Facilities 3-52 3.10 Cumulative Impact 3-53 Chapter 4. Comment Letters and Responses to Comment Letters Chapter 5. Citations 5-1 5.1 Literature Cited 5-1 5.2 Personal Communications 5-4 Appendix A. Zoning Code Excerpts and Overview of Comprehensive Plan, Green River Plan, Zoning Ordinances and Development Standards, Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance - Refer to Draft EIS for this appendix. Appendix B. Revised Life History and Effects of Human Disturbance on Great Blue Heron Colonies. Appendix C. Noise Monitoring Data - July 20, 1990 Geotechnical Drilling. Appendix D. Foundation and Seismic Analysis - Refer to Draft EIS for this appendix. Appendix E. Supplemental Air Quality Information. Appendix F. Hazardous Waste Study(Complete Report Available for Review at City of Renton Planning Division. Appendix G. Inventory of Flora and Fauna. Appendix H. Transportation Management Plan Blackriver Corporate Park Trip Generation Analysis. Appendix I. Flood Storage and Stormwater Detention - Tracts A and B. x . List of Figures Figure Page 1-1 Regional Map 1-3 1-2 Project Location, Proposed Development of Tracts (Phase VII) and B, Blackriver Corporate Park, Renton, WA 1-4 1-3 Location of Tracts A and B, Blackriver Corporate Park, Renton, WA 1-6 2-1 Land Ownership in the Vicinity of Project Area 2-3 2-2 Wetlands on Tracts A and B an Adjacent Areas 2-4 2-3 Historic (1977) Conditions (Pre P-i Pond Construction) on Tracts A and B. Blackriver Corporate Park 2-6 2-4 Alternative Al - Site Plan for Proposed Action 2-10 2-5 Alternative Bi - Site Plan for Proposed Action 2-12 2-6 Alternative B2 - Seven Story Building With Parking Structure 2-14 3-1 Tract A Illustrative Plan with Setbacks, Berming, and Building Height Limitations 3-3 3-2 Typical Cross Section of 5-foot and 10-foot High Earthen Berms Located Between the Heron Colony and Development and Along the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek 3-4 3-3 Tract B Illustrative Plan with Setbacks, Berming, and Building Height Limitations 3-5 3-4 Significant Environmental Features/Recommended Setbacks; Tracts A and B, Blackriver Corporate Park 3-22 3-5 Five Minute Leq Values (dBA) July 20, 1990 3-27 3-6 Comparison of 15-Minute Leq Values (dBA) at the Black River Heron Colony, January 23/24, 1990 and July 20, 1990 3-28 xi List of Tables Table Page 1-1 Environmental Elements Analyzed in Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements and Page Location in Each Document 1-2 1-2 Summary of Features of Tract A and B Proposed Actions 1-8 1-3 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Tract A Alternative Blackriver Corporate Park 1-10 1-4 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Tract B Alternatives Blackriver Corporate Park 1-24 3-1 Comparison of Selected Pollutants in the P-1 Pond and Typical Urban Runoff to Water Quality Standards 3-12 3-2 Consistency of Proposed Actions for Tracts A and B with City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Policies 3-33 3-3 Peak Hour Vehicular Trip Generation - Tracts A and B 3-49 3-4 Daily and Nightly Peak - Hour Trip Generation Comparison 3-50 xii Chapter 1. Summary Chapter 1. Summary 1.1 Introduction and Background The First City Development Corporation (FCDC) is proposing to develop portions of the Blackriver Corporate Park in the City of Renton. The project site is located northwest of Renton city center and east of the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle's (METRO) Renton Wastewater Treatment Facility (Figures 1-1 and 1-2). This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) has been prepared to satisfy the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements (Chapter 43.21C RCW) and to address comments received on the Draft EIS issued in April, 1990. SEPA guidelines (WAC 197-11-560) allow the lead agency several options when responding to comments received on the Draft EIS. These include modifying alternatives, including the proposed action; developing other alternatives; supplementing the analysis; making factual corrections; and explaining why comments do not warrant further agency response. This document supplements analysis in the Draft EIS, makes factual corrections and provides responses to letters of comment on the Draft EIS. This chapter provides an overview of the proposed action,the project alternatives and the environmental impacts and mitigation measures. Chapter 2 contains supplemental information on the project area and project history, a more comprehensive discussion of project need, and a description of the proposed action and alternatives. Chapter 3 provides a supplemental description of the affected environment, significant impacts, and mitigation measures resulting from additional studies conducted from May through November, 1990, while Chapter 4 includes letters of comment and responses to those comments. This Final EIS also includes six appendices containing information that augments the Draft EIS. The following summary chart(Table 1-1)presents a list of environmental factors analyzed in the Draft and Final EISs and the page locations for those discussions. 1.2 Overview of Events The Draft EIS for the Blackriver Corporate Park,Tract A and B office buildings,was issued April 11, 1990. A public hearing on the Draft EIS was held May 1, 1990 and was attended by approximately 50 people. Oral and written testimony was taken (see Chapter 4). 1-1 Table 1-1. Environmental Elements analyzed in Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements and Page Location in Each Document Environmental Element DEIS Page FEIS Page Topography/Soils 3-1 3-1 Foundation 3-3 3-6 Seismic .3-4 3-7 Air Quality 3-5 3-7 Surface Water Movement/Quantity 3-17 3-8 Water Quality/Runoff 3-21 3-10 Vegetation 3-28 3-13 Shoreland/Wetlands 3-31 3-15 Wildlife Resources 3-33 3-17 Unique Terrestrial Resources 3-37 3-20 Noise 3-43 3-25 Hazardous Waste None 3-29 Relationship to Existing Land Uses 3-48 3-30 Relationship to Plans, Zoning and Shorelines 3-49 3-31 I - , Light and Glare 3-65 3-46 Historic and Cultural Resources 3-67 3-47 Traffic 3-67. 3-47 Parks and Other Recreational Facilities 3-68 3-51 Cumulative Impact none 3-52 1-2 Seattle a Tacoma . =ial . • shington /� Olympi. Nomiligeri Bothell • ` Woodinville •Duvall 99 k% • '�1kl n i .Redmond Mar 405 -tom. '` Carn. ion ;:: AtikMedin. '.. :;r<- •Bellevue f. -5 1 J Issaquah uah Rent. upper s e ton Cedar kwila Mtn. Vashon l nd rJ'+ Isa Maple 17 ... Valley r• Project Location Figure 1-1. Regional Map 1-3 , 1 /'fe,L e Luther King Way ç 150 w SITE 0. ill �a RENTON SW 7th 'I BLACKRIVER -o GradI Way CORPORATE m 1-5 PARK = -_ -- 405 1 To Sea-Tac l y-- Airport _== 4 Miles ii . fi FP) Southcenter Longacres U ' i. n O w w 0 m w _ Valley General w / Hospital a S 180th Figure 1-2. Project Location, Proposed Development of Tracts A (Phase VIII) 11 and B (Phase VII), Blackriver Corporate Park, Renton, WA 1-4 I Written comments were to be received by the City until May 11, 1990, however, at the request of several reviewers the review period was extended by 15 days to May 28, 1990. Over 200 letters of comment were received on the Draft EIS. SEPA rules (WAC 197-11-460), state that the lead agency shall issue the Final EIS within 60 days of the end of the comment period for the Draft EIS, unless the proposal is unusually large in scope,the environmental impact associated with the proposal is unusually complex, or extensive modifications are required to respond to public comments. The issuance of this Final EIS has been beyond the 60-day period from the end of the Draft EIS comment period recommended in the SEPA rules because of the unusually complex nature of the proposal, the additional information needed, and the complex nature of the mitigation measures proposed. A number of additional studies and analyses were conducted in response to the comments received: • Additional terrestrial field studies were conducted on Tracts A and B and at the great blue heron colony (Appendix G); • Water quantity and quality issues were further investigated (Chapter 3, Section 3.4; Appendix I); • A site investigation was made on Tract A in response to concern about potential contaminated sediments dredged from the forebay of the P-1 Pump Station (Appendix F); • A traffic analysis was made comparing the Proposed Action with the results of previously conducted transportation studies for the Blackriver Corporate Park (Appendix H); and • The cumulative impacts of the project were analyzed (Chapter 3, Section 3.10). The results of these studies are presented in Chapter 3 and the appendices of this Final EIS. 1.3 Proposed Action and Alternatives The proposed action of FCDC is to develop office buildings on that portion of the Blackriver Corporate Park known as Tracts A (12.07 acres) and B (15.7 acres) (Figure 1-3). Two alternatives, the Proposed Action and No Action were evaluated for Tract A. The proposed action for Tract A is construction of three office buildings in three phases. No Action assumes the site would remain undeveloped. 1-5 Three alternatives, the Proposed Action (B1), Alternative B2, and No Action are evaluated for Tract B. The Proposed Action is development of three office buildings in three phases while Alternative B2 would include construction of a single seven-story building and a four-story parking garage. No Action assumes the site would remain undeveloped. 13.1 Tract A Alternative Al (Proposed Action). The Proposed Action for Tract A is to construct three office buildings with surface parking in three phases over a four year period. Phase 1 is scheduled for construction in 1991, Phase 2 in 1994, and Phase 3 in 1995. Table 1-2 presents a summary of features of the Tract A Proposed Action. See Figure 2-4 in Chapter 2 for a full description of the Proposed Action for Tract A. The development is intended to be consistent with the Office Park (OP) zoning designation of the site and with the environmental constraints and great blue heron management guidelines defined for the site in the Draft EIS and Final EIS for this project. Alternative A2 - No Action. Under Alternative A2, the No Action Alternative, the site would not be developed and the objectives of the project applicant would not be met. The site would remain open and available for development at some future time, consistent with the zoning. 1.3.2 Tract B (Phase VII) Tract B is a 15.7-acre site located east of Tract A and north of Oakesdale Boulevard (Figures 1-2 and 1-3). Two project alternatives (Alternatives B1 and B2) plus No Action (Alternative B3) were defined and evaluated in the Draft EIS and this Final EIS. Alternative B1 - Proposed Action. Alternative B1 is the action proposed by the project applicant. The proposal is to construct three office buildings in three phases-Phase 1 scheduled for construction in 1991, Phase 2 in 1992, and Phase 3 during 1993 and 1994. Table 1-2 presents a summary of features of the Tract B Proposed Action and Alternatives. See Figure 2-5.in Chapter 2 for description of the proposed action for Tract B. Alternative B2- Single Seven-Story Building with Parking Structure. Alternative B2 would include the construction of a single seven-story building and four-story parking garage (Table 1-2). Alternative B3 - No Action. Under the No Action Alternative, Tract B would not be developed and the objectives of the project applicant would not be met. The site would remain open and available for development at some future time, consistent with the zoning. 1-7 Table 1-2. Summary of Features of Tract A and B Proposed Actions . I *Alternatives Al B1 B2 Project Feature (Proposed Action) (Proposed Action) (Single Building) Number of Buildings 3 (phased) 3 (phased) 1 Building Square Footage Phase 1 23,582 71,000 285,000 Phase 2 80,000 58,575 Phase 3 80,000 156,625 Building Height feet/stories Phase 1 24/1 57/4 93/7 Phase 2 57/4 45/3 Phase 3 57/4 93/7 Parking Garage 40/3 50/4 Number of People 935 1,450 Parking Stalls 791 **1,296 ***1,151 * Does not include No Action Alternatives (A2 and B3) which assumes no development of the site. ** 496 stalls on surface parking and 800 stalls in three-story parking structure (Phase 3). *** 551 stalls on surface parking and 600 stalls in four-story parking structure. 1-8 Table 1-3. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Tract A Alternative - Blackriver Corporate Park Impacts -Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Topography/Soils No significant adverse impact - No impact No grading or other outdoor construction addition of up to 10,000 cubic shall be done during the period from yards of fill for regrading plus February 1 through July 1 within 800 feet 5,800 cubic yards of fill for of the heron colony, and from July 1 berm; action would be through August 1 within 600 feet of the consistent with Valley Plan colony; policy since site was previously filled. Movement of Unless otherwise determined by WDOE, contaminants minimized by low the contaminated areas on Tract A shall be permeability soils and covering sealed with asphalt or concrete; with asphalt and concrete - '71 surfaces. See "Hazardous Permanent signage shall be established to o Waste" discussion. warn utilities of the location of contaminated soils; and All soil for berm construction shall be free of contamination and suitable to support trail, side slopes and native vegetation. Foundation No significant adverse impacts No impact Auger cast-in-place construction techniques anticipated - single-story shall be used in lieu of pile driving. building (Phase 1) to be developed with conventional shallow foundation; Phase 2 and 3 buildings will use auger cast-in-place piles or driven piles. Seismic No significant adverse impact, No impact Design of buildings must follow UBC site has low potential for standards. liquefaction. Air Quality Not applicable, no parking No impact None necessary. garage planned. I 1 1 I 1.4 Applicant's Objectives The objective of the project applicant is to develop professional office space within the City of Renton that is consistent with OP zoning. The applicant has defined a demand and need for office park space and has over the years shown an intent to develop the remainder of the Blackriver Corporate Park property. 1.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Tables 1-3 and 1-4 present a comparison of impacts of alternatives for Tract A and Tract B. The tables present analyses of environmental features as discussed in detail in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIS and further in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS, a brief description of the impacts of each alternative on those features, and mitigation measures proposed to minimize the impacts. s Eighteen environmental elements were analyzed in the Draft and Final EISs (please refer to Table 1-1 for the list of elements). The following criteria were used where possible to evaluate the impacts of the proposed actions and alternatives: • Consistency with local, state, or federal laws, or regulations, and local land use plans and policies (e.g., City of Renton ordinances and comprehensive plan; f ` wetland guidelines; SEPA rules); • Meets or exceeds recognized quantative criteria or standards (e.g., water quality criteria for freshwater organisms; EPA noise criteria; WDOE proposed cleanup standards for hazardous waste, etc.); and • Impacts on regional or statewide populations of threatened, endangered species or unique species. - 4 1-9 1111 Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2(No Action) Mitigation Measures Surface Water Movement No significant adverse impact No impact Compliance with City of Renton Public due to capacity of P-1 Pond. Works drainage requirements and consistent with the recently adopted King County Surface Water Design Manual; As a part of the drainage report, the applicant must calculate runoff volumes from the site and conduct a Level 1 downstream analysis; The city will review the need for a wet pond system prior to discharge of runoff to ►� the P-1 Pond; and FCDC or subsequent owners, along with the city,King County, SCS, and other abutting landowners shall participate in the preparation and implementation of a management plan for the P-1 Pond. Surface Water Quality No significant adverse impact; No impact Prepare and submit Erosion Control Plan assuming use of biofiltration to City(see Section 3.4.2 of Draft and swales and incorporation of Final EIS for details). Mitigation measures mitigation measures described to be defined by the city during site plan herein. review. At a minimum; Install and maintain oil/water separators; and Install biofiltration swales per city and WDOE standards. Vegetation Permanent loss of 11.6 acres of No impact Plant native lowland trees and shrubs on grass and shrub vegetation; no edge of P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2(No Action) Mitigation Measures endangered or threatened (see Section 35.1 of Draft EIS for species species. list); Develop detailed planting plan and specifications which mimics native plant community composition and structure; Participate with the City of Renton, King County and SCS in a shared-cost coordinated planting program for the portion of the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek shorelines along Tract A; At a distance of 600 feet from the nearest N heron nest tree (in the main heronry) on Tract A, construct a benched 10-foot high earthen berm and vegetate with 20=foot tall native evergreen trees and native shrubs; Construct a 5-foot high earthen berm along the remainder of shoreline of Springbrook Creek and the P-1 Pond on Tract A and plant with native evergreen trees and native shrubs; Provide a visual buffer between the heronry and development by spacing the evergreen trees and shrubs on the benches in a staggered manner; and Insure optional plant survival and plant growth by requiring irrigation and maintenance by the applicant. Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Wetlands Loss of 0.1 acres of wetlands No impact Mitigation for the loss of 0.1 acres on Tract having low functional value. A shall be provided by creating an additional wetland area adjacent to the old Black River channel on Tract B. Wildlife Resources The loss of 11.6 acres of No impact Plant and maintain a linear buffer of native terrestrial wildlife habitat is an vegetation along P-1 Pond and Springbrook impact that cannot be fully Creek (see Section 3.5.1 of Draft EIS for mitigated. species list); and Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm within and along the 600-foot setback from the main heron colony, and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek; Vegetate the 10-foot high berm with native evergreen trees having a minimum height when planted of 20 feet, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6- to 8-foot tall evergreen trees; Establish a pedestrian trail on the development side or on top of the berms and a viewing platform to allow screened observation of the heron colony; and Construct a chainlink fence between the trail and Springbrook Creek and pond to prevent human intrusion. Unique Terrestrial Resources No anticipated impact to heron No impact The following mitigation measures are feeding habitat if guidelines specific to Tract A, other measures follow and mitigation measures are that are common to both tracts: employed; potential short-term Tract A Environmental Feature • Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures noise impacts; impacts of light Establish a no-build zone for that portion and glare, potential changes to of Tract A lying within 600 feet of the flight pattern of herons, noise, nearest heron nest tree; and incidental heron/human interaction. Tract A building height limitation of four stories (57 feet) between 600 and 1,000 feet from the heron colony and 200 feet from the P-1 Pond; and On Tract A, only one of the two buildings (B or.C) proposed within 800 feet of the heron colony may be under major outdoor construction in the first construction season ►� (July 1 to February 1). Common Mitigation Measures Prior to construction of buildings and parking, construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm along the 600-foot setback from the main heron colony and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek; Prior to building construction,vegetate the 10-foot high berm with trees having a minimum height when planted of 20 feet, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6- to 8-foot tall evergreen trees. In addition, deciduous trees and shrubs shall be planted to provide additional screening,visual and biological diversity, and wildlife habitat; Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Densely landscape surface parking to minimize the visual impact on great blue herons; Irrigate and maintain plantings along the berms; Establish a pedestrian trail on the development side of the berm,with access to Oakesdale Avenue S.W., and a chainlink fence between the trail and the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek to prevent human intrusion to the P-1 Pond; Construct a viewing platform on the trail to allow observation of the heron colony and P-1 Pond; Hood all windows with a view of the heronry located above the height of the 20- foot tall evergreen trees and within 800 feet of the heron colony; No construction except the berm and landscaping specified as mitigation, shall occur within 600 feet of the nesting colony; To minimize the impact on nesting herons, major outdoor construction activities (see Section 3.5.4 on this FEIS for definitions) shall be excluded within 800 feet of the colony during the period from February 1 to July 1 and within 600 feet of the colony from July 1 to August 1; Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Auger cast-in-place foundation construction techniques shall be used in lieu of conventional pile driving; Create dense vegetated no-build buffer adjacent to Springbrook Creek to provide a vegetated route for herons leaving and returning to the colony; and Construct the buildings in earth and natural tones; all glass should be non-reflective, coated or tinted glass; and Develop a plan to monitor the effects of construction activities on nesting great blue herons and establish a committee to develop and implement the plan (see section 3.5.4 of this Final EIS for monitoring details). Noise Short-term significant impact No impact Outdoor construction activities shall be during construction. Most restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. during significant noise would be the summer months and 7:00 a.m to 7:00 caused by major outdoor p.m. during the winter months; construction. All construction equipment shall have sound control devices no less effective than those provided on the original equipment; All construction equipment shall comply with pertinent equipment noise standards of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency; Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures The applicant must comply with the City of Renton's noise ordinance (Zoning Code, Title 8, Chapter 7 - Health and Sanitation); Auger cast-in-place piling construction shall be used in lieu of conventional pile driving; To minimize the impact of construction noise on nesting herons, major outdoor construction activities shall be excluded within 800 feet of the heron colony during the period from February 1 to July 1; and. �--� Earthern berms shall be constructed to vcreate a physical barrier and to aid in reducing noise levels from the site. and Soundproof all noise-generating units such as air conditioning units. Hazardous Waste Low potential for surface and Same as Al Unless otherwise determined by WDOE, groundwater quality the contaminated areas on Tract A shall be degradation from sealed with asphalt or concrete; and contaminants. Permanent signage shall be established to warn utilities of the location of contaminated soils. Relationship to Existing Land No significant adverse impact. No impact None necessary. Use Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Relationship to Plans, Zoning No significant adverse impact. No impact None necessary. and Shorelines The Proposed Action is consistent with the comprehensive plan, zoning and Shoreline Master Program setback requirements. Light and Glare Potential minor impact of light No impact Use of downlighted light structures in the from buildings and parking that parking areas and trails to confine light to can be mitigated. ground level; Use of dense evergreen vegetation along earthern berms and as a part of landscape ,-.. •plan for parking area to reduce light from automobile headlights, since Tract A has oo no existing dense, tall-growing vegetation; and Use of non-reflective coated or tinted glass on all windows and hoods on all windows facing the heronry located above the 20- foot tall evergreen trees and within 800 feet of the heron colony. Hoods may be removed once the trees have grown above the height of the hooded windows. Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2(No Action) Mitigation Measures Historic and Cultural Potential impact to cultural No impact Conduct a three-phase archaeological resources on western 5 acres of survey(site inspection and surface coring), Tract A. evaluation, and report of the 5-acre western portion of Tract A; Cultural resources monitoring by a registered archaeologist during excavation; and Development of a contingency plan (notification to State Historic Preservation Office and Tribes) for actions to be taken in the event cultural resources are discovered during construction. I Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Traffic Alternative Al will generate No.impact FCDC shall review and revise the TMP to 2,160 vehicle trips per day. increase its effectiveness. These revisions The trip generation will be less shall include evaluation of goals identified than projected under the in the TMP (a reduction of 10% of SOV Grady Way Transportation trips) within two years following building Improvement Study. occupancies; A report shall be submitted to the City showing the results of the evaluation. If targeted goals are not met, additional incentive for HOV participation shall be installed (i.e., establishment of a vanpool operation). The incentive is to be determined by the City of Renton and No FCDC. The subsidy shall continue until the 10% goal is reached; Provide a free one-month bus pass to tenants (on a per 1,000 square foot basis) at the time of each new tenant occupancy. The passes should be for peak hour, two zones- maximum requirement; Distribute site-appropriate transit and ridesharing information to new tenants and annually to all tenants; Display site-appropriate transit and ridesharing information in prominent public locations; Appoint a Transportation Coordinator to promote and coordinate the use of public transportation and high occupancy vehicles; an Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Provide lighted and hard-surfaced pathways to Oakesdale or S.W.7th Street for convenient access to transit and rideshare locations; If the 10% rideshare is not met, design and implement a guaranteed ride home program for registered vanpool users; Design and implement a parking management program which provides preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles; Promote an alternative work hour program; Establish a performance goal for high occupancy vehicle use; Conduct transportation surveys/monitoring to determine participation and interest in HOV and bus transportation; Provide secure bicycle parking; The Grady Way Transportation Study will be reviewed to determine the option for crediting the applicant for previous improvement contributions; Provide adequate lighting and restricted access to the parking structure to insure adequate tenant protection. Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2(No Action) Mitigation Measures As required by City of Renton ordinance, hauling hours for large construction vehicles shall be prior to 7:30 a.m.,between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., and after 6:30 p.m.; Large construction vehicles shall follow prescribed haul routes; and Truck and wheel washing must be accomplished on site after each haul trip. Parks and Recreation Incremental increase in the use No impact Construct a pedestrian trail from • of City park facilities as a Oakesdale Avenue along the earthen berm N result of project. adjacent to the P-1 Pond; and Construct interpretive signs and a viewing platform to allow screened observation of the heron colony and P-1 Pond. As additional development occurs in the Cumulative Impact Incremental conversion of land - area, mitigation measures should be zoned O-P to office park use; established by the City of Renton for each increased soil disturbance and project to minimize the adverse effects of incremental increases in the proposed actions. sedimentation in the P-1 Pond; incremental loss of wetlands (and replacement with mitigation) native vegetation and associated wildlife habitat; incremental increase in local levels of CO and ozone in region; possible impacts to nesting herons if sufficient setbacks and buffering are not provided; possible conflicts of Tract A Environmental Feature Al (Proposed Action) A2 (No Action) Mitigation Measures use and management of the P- 1 Pond; and increases in ambient noise levels and traffic levels in the area. W Table 1-4. Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures for Tract B Alternatives - Blackriver Corporate Park Impacts - Tract B B2 (Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Topography/Soils No adverse impact -addition of Same as B1 No o impact No grading or other outdoor construction up to 36,000 cy of fill plus 4,300 should be done during the period from cubic yards of fill for regrading February 1 through July 1 within 800 feet of for berm; action would be the heron colony, and from July 1 through consistent with Valley Plan policy August 1 within 600 feet of the colony; since site previously filled; no impacts cause by contaminants All soil for berm construction shall be free since material from pump station of contamination and suitable to support forebay not deposited on Tract trail, side slopes and native vegetation. B. Foundation No adverse impacts anticipated - Same as B1 No impact Auger cast-in-place construction techniques all phases would require use of shall be used in lieu of pile driving. auger cast-in-place piles. Seismic No adverse impact -site has low Same as B1 No impact Design of buildings must follow UBC potential for liquefaction. standards Air Quality Significant adverse impact - CO Same as B1 No impact Impact would be less than significant if concentrations in garage could following design is incorporated: exceed the maximum one-hour and eight-hour ambient standards Minimum of 40 percent open sides for in absence of adequate open area three-story garage, 55% for four-story and two exits. garage (side facing heron colony must be fully enclosed); In the event a four-story garage is constructed, lower levels of each garage deck shall be a minimum of 55% open to the outside (side facing the heronry must be fully enclosed); Tract B B2 (Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Top level 100 percent open(but with a facade or wall on the heronry side to minimize line-of-site to the heronry); and Two exits (on side opposite colony). Surface Water No significant adverse impact due Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (Table 1-3) Movement to large capacity in P-1 Pond. Surface Water Quality No significant adverse impact Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (Table 1-3). assuming use of biofiltration swales and incorporation of mitigation measures listed herein. N Vegetation Permanent loss of 10.8 acres Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (Table 1-2) plus (without additional mitigation) of following: scrub alder, grass, and scrub cottonwood vegetation; no Insure protection of majority of mature endangered or threatened cottonwoods per Ordinance No. 4219; species. Increase the setback distance on Tract B from 450 to 600 feet from the heron colony to development. This will result in the maintenance of an additional 1.5 acres of native vegetation, thereby reducing the permanent loss of habitat to 9.3 acres; and Plant additional native shrubs and trees along the western boundary of the site in the area designated on the heron flight zone. Tract B B2 (Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Wetlands Building and parking would be Parking within 25 No impact Establish buffer around the old Black River constructed within 25 feet of feet of wetland channel wetland averaging 50 in width feet edge of old Black River channel edge and no less than 25 feet in width in any one wetland. Loss of 0.04 acre of place; wetland is to be mitigated by creation of wetlands. Mitigate for wetland loss by creating wetland adjacent to the old Black River channel on Tract B; Develop detailed planting plan; and Develop drainage plan with biofitration prior to discharge of runoff into wetland. 01 Wildlife Resources Significant adverse impact that Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (Table 1-3) plus the cannot be fully mitigated loss of following measures specific to Tract B: 9.3 acres of terrestrial wildlife habitat. Increase the setback distance on Tract B from the heron colony to development from 400 (as defined in the DEIS) to 600 feet; and Plant additional native trees and shrubs along Springbrook Creek and between buildings, parking garage, and heronry. Unique Terrestrial No anticipated impact to heron Same as B1 No impact Mitigation measures same as Common Resources feeding habitat if guidelines and Measures defined in Table 1-3 for Unique mitigation measures are Terrestrial Resources plus the following employed; potential short-term measures specific to Tract B: noise impacts;impacts of light and glare, and potential changes Increase the setback distance on Tract B to flight pattern of herons; noise, from the heron colony(from nearest nest and incidental heron/human tree) to development from 400 to 600 feet; interaction. Tract B B2 (Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures As an option to the 10-foot high berm previously described for Tract A, the applicant may backfill to the wall of the parking garage (to a bermed height of 10 feet), incorporate the trail and viewing platform and vegetate with 20-foot tall evergreen trees and native shrubs; Tract B building height limitation of four stories (57 feet) between 600 and 800 feet back from the heron colony and five stories (71 feet) beyond 800 feet; vOnly one of the three proposed Tract B buildings (D,E, and F), may be under major outdoor construction during the first construction season (during the period from July 1 to February 1). The parking garage may be constructed in phases,with interim parking provided on Tract A as necessary; Maintain mature cottonwoods, specifically along the historic Black River channel, at the northern portion of the site, and on other portions of the site supporting mature trees (e.g., near the south portion of the site); and Plant additional native shrubs and trees along the western boundary of the site in the area designated on the heron flight zone. Tract B B2(Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Noise Short-term significant impact Same as B1 No Impact Same as for Tract A (See Table 1-3). during construction-most significant noise would be caused during major outdoor construction. Hazardous Waste None. Material dredged from the Same as B1 No impact None necessary. pump station forebay was not placed on Tract B. Relationship to The proposed seven-story Phase Alternative B2 No impact The seven story building on Tract B shall be Existing Land Use 3 building would be three- to would be three- to reduced to a height not to exceed five (71 ,.- four-stories taller than buildings four-stories taller feet) stories. The building height would be in immediate area, however, zone than buildings in more in keeping with other buildings in the oo has no height limitation. immediate area and immediate area, however, the proposed therefore not density for Tract B would not. consistent with existing land use. Relationship to Plans, Phases 1 and 2 consistent with Height of No impact The seven story building shall be reduced to Zoning, and Shorelines Comprehensive Plan,zoning and Alternative B2 a height not to exceed five stories. This Shoreline Master Progress would be "mid-rise" height will still be greater than setbacks. Phase 3 seven-story inconsistent with the "low rise" policy in the Green River building inconsistent with Comprehensive Valley plan. Comprehensive Plan policy of Plan policy of low low rise office buildings adjacent rise office buildings to the P-1 Pond. adjacent to the P-1 - Pond Light and Glare Potential minor impact of light Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A(see Table 1-3), plus from buildings and parking that the following: can be mitigated. The reduction in maximum building height from seven-stories (93 feet) to five stories (71 feet) will reduce light and glare. Tract B B2 (Single Environmental Feature B1 (Proposed Action) 7-Story Building) B3 (No Action) Mitigation Measures Historic and Cultural No significant adverse impact. No impact No impact Same as for Tract A (see Table 1-3). Traffic Alternative B1 will generate Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (see Table 1-3). 3,020 vehicle trips per day. The trip generation will be less than projected under the Grady Way Transportation Improvement Study. Parks and Recreation Incremental increase in the use Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (see Table 1-3). of City Parks facilities as a result of project. Cumulative Impact Same as Al (see Table 1-3) Same as B1 No impact Same as for Tract A (see Table 1-3). 1.6 Adverse Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated 1.6.1 Tracts A and B The Proposed Actions (Al and B1) will result in a localized increase in CO concentrations but at levels below the 1-hour and 8-hour ambient standards if mitigation measures are implemented. The volume of stormwater runoff and pollutant loading to the P-1 Pond from Tracts A and B will increase with development, even assuming use of"Best Management Practices" for mitigation. The Proposed Actions would also result in the loss of 11.6 acres of terrestrial wildlife habitat on Tract A and 9.3 acres on Tract B. These are impacts that cannot be 'fully mitigated. The result would be a local reduction in populations of terrestrial wildlife species (rodents, songbirds, California quail,raptors and carnivores such as raccoons), even with the protection of adjacent areas and development of linear buffers along Springbrook Creek and the P-1 Pond. The loss of the grass and shrub habitat will not significantly affect the heron food supply or feeding activities. The proposed projects will likely cause changes in flight patterns of heron to and from the heron colony, occasional disturbance during construction and during day to day use of the buildings and parking areas. Mitigation measures will reduce but not completely eliminate those impacts. Monitoring will be required to assess the impacts during the construction and post-construction periods. The seven-story building on Tract B would be taller than existing office buildings within the immediate area. The reduced height of five stories would be less intrusive but I ; still not fully consistent with the size and density defined in the Green River Policy Plan (City of Renton 1984). The projects will also result in incremental impacts to air, water quality, wildlife habitat, and land use associated with urbanization of the area. 1-30 Chapter 2. Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives Chapter 2. Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.1 Introduction This Final EIS has been prepared to satisfy requirements set forth under the State of Washington Environmental Policy Act (SEPA, Chapter 43.21C RCW) and in the SEPA guidelines (Chapter 197-11 WAC). WAC 197-11-560 defines the content of Final EISs. SEPA guidelines (WAC 197-11-560) allow the lead agency several options when responding to comments received on the Draft EIS. These include: • Modifying alternatives including the proposed action; • Developing and evaluating alternatives not previously given detailed consideration; • Supplementing, improving, or modifying the analysis; • Making factual corrections; and • Explaining why the comments do not warrant further agency response (citing sources, authorities, and reasons that support response). This chapter includes supplemental project information,supplemental project history; and a description of the actions and alternatives as proposed by the proposal's sponsor First City Developments Corporation (FCDC). The supplemental project information and project history has been presented to clarify the location of Tracts A and B relative to the riparian forest and other surrounding lands, to clarify the historical use and the wetlands on the site and to present in greater detail the chronological events associated with the project area. The description of the proposed actions and alternatives presented in Section 2.5 of this chapter represents the actions as proposed by the project sponsor, FCDC, and does not include mitigation measures identified by the City as necessary to reduce the magnitude of impacts. Those mitigation measures are presented for each of the elements of the environment in Chapter 3 and summarized in Chapter 1, Summary. 2-1 2.2 Supplemental Project Area Information - Based on comments received during the public hearing and from letters received in on the Draft EIS, it was evident that clarification of the features and characteristics of the project area was necessary. Many of the comments received referred to surrounding parcels under the applicants' ownership but not a part of this proposal. In addition, public comments also referred to recent developments on property in proximity to the proposal but under different ownership. Figure 2-1 shows the location of the project area (Tracts A and B) in relation to surrounding lands, specifically the P-1 Pond, heronry, and the riparian forest. As can be seen in the figure, the P-1 Pond, the heronry, and the riparian forest are owned by or under the control of the City of Renton. The land parcel north and immediately east of the heronry is owned by FCDC. This northern parcel is not a part of the proposed action analyzed in this EIS and, to date, the City has not received a development proposal for this parcel. Land immediately east of FCDC property is owned by Rivertech. During late 1989 and 1990 a three-story office building was developed on this property. A number of reviewers of the DEIS referred to Tracts A and B as wetlands and to the fact that the Black River riparian forest was identified in the 1981 City of Renton Wetlands Study as the most significant wetland in the City. Wetland surveys of Tracts A and B were conducted by Jones & Stokes Associates' wetland biologists using the Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetland (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1989). This method is also recognized by the Washington Department of Ecology as the preferred delineation methodology (Lynn pers. comm.). Most of the land on the project sites does not meet the definition for wetlands based on the three parameter methodology. Wetlands that do occur on the project sites include two isolated depressions on Tract A totalling 0.1 acres. A 1.1-acre remnant of the old Black River Channel and a 0.04-acre - isolated wetland are located on Tract B (Figure 2-2). The two isolated wetlands on Tract A and the 0.04-acre wetland on Tract B would be eliminated by the proposed development while the 1.1-acre remnant of Black River Channel would be preserved. Mitigation for the loss of the 0.14 acres of wetland is presented in Chapter 3, Section 3.5.2 of this FEIS. The 1981 City of Renton wetlands study was conducted prior to the construction of the P-1 Pond and clearing of riparian vegetation north of the City-owned riparian forest and the heron colony. None of the wetlands defined as significant in that study would be filled by this project. The 1.1-acre remnant of the Black River channel (classified as an emergent and forested wetland) located on Tract B (Figure 2-2) represents the only part of Tracts A and B identified as significant wetland in that study. This remnant portion of the Black River channel would be preserved as open space/wetland under the proposed action. Buffers with an average width of 50 feet would also be maintained around the wetland. 2- 2 jI - Legend \ _ S.W. Sunset 80 y // Project Area ` ul`D`a'a NORTH �l Wetlands Tract A and B Boundaries APPROX.400' • • • • P ••4. • ` v P-1PUMP ` , PANT:i::.:.:.:.:..::..::..::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.......::::::::::::::.:::.:.:,::::.;;.::::::::::::.:::::.:!::::::.:......::.::.:..::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::: ::::::----::::::::.:.:!":*:4t::;::11:::::..:.:.:::.::::: ::;:::::::::.::::;::::::::::;:iiiiiPi:::::.:Miilr: Nii::.:7.r co !::. :::.:.iiiimii::.:.:.:i::::.:"" ... .."."- ��� /.;:' :'• Adi1.1Acre ......1( •.• Monster Road4/�::;: " A Wetland 1 z ••.�•• E::h' �!�� S.W.SeventhSt. '�' / ' . �6 0.04 Acre ••. Wetland .�` 0 I AcreWetng Oaksdale Ave S.W. •p• (total) ••� METRO • . Source: Map Modified from Renton 1981 Figure 2-2. Wetlands on Tracts A and B and Adjacent Areas Prior to the construction of the P-1 Pond, in 1977, Tracts A and B were part of the Earlington Golf Course (see Figure 2-3). As can be seen in Figure 2-3, with the exception of the historic Black River channel on Tract B both tracts were sparsely treed during that time. During construction of the P-1 Pond in 1984, Tract A and a portion of Tract B were filled and regraded with uncontaminated soil material excavated for the P-1 Pond. In addition, Tract A was used as a construction staging area and a portion of the site received sediments hydraulically dredged from the King County pump station forebay. Those hydraulically dredged sediments were the subject of an investigation conducted by Earth Consultants during July 1990. Once pond construction and regrading of Tracts A and B were complete, the disturbed area was seeded with an erosion control seed mix and shrubs and trees planted along the edge of the pond and side slopes. Additional trees and shrubs were planted on the side slopes of Tract A by the.SCS during November and December, 1990. 2.3 Supplemental Information on Project History The following supplements the project history as presented in the Draft EIS. This discussion answers questions of commenters and provides additional information for clarification. A number of commenters referred to extensive clearing that had been done on Tract B in previous years. Figure 2-3 presents an aerial photograph of historic conditions (prior to construction of the P-1 Pond) on Tracts A and B. At the time of the photograph (1977) much of the site was a part of the Earlington Golf Course. With the exception of some scattered trees on Tract A and the historic Black River channel on Tract B, a majority of the vegetation was grass. . During construction of the P-1 Pond in 1984, soil material removed to create the pond was placed on Tract A and portions of Tract B (Earth Consultants Inc. 1990). The entire area of Tract A was filled and regraded to elevations ranging from 18 to 22 feet. Approximately 50% of Tract B was regraded to elevations ranging from 13 to 16 feet. Pertinent chronological events associated with the project area are as followed: • 1979 - Property purchased by FCDC from Burlington Northern with part of property used as a golf course and zoned General (G); • Property rezoned to Manufacturing Park (MP) per July 1980 Draft EIS and February 1981 Final EIS for Earlington Park. Proposed project at that time included filling remnants of old Black River channel on Tract B. Conditions for rezone approval included following: 2-5 . . • . . p4 ,..,. .... .,, .. . „.. .. . ,. , • . .„.., ," ..N. 4-• ,..4 .1,. h.1..,.,,,.. 4:••••• e i I .j, .. . , ' '.. : /'• . i•'i, ".,%' . ' . ...•..;1s,t,,,'4 .." ..n....„ 4•4,-.-.6 ,,,,,..,••••:4;.„ b• ,. .„.,,..,,jv . . .,• . .::. , . .4t..,.'... :,...- ,•;,. p'.;}•'4•,?it•It-Ok 1lic''4,,,, - •• )i, ?,•,.' , C'.... • .i ; ,I,; .. . •14:41214.:'•'`''' .4...:. v.-,-- : .•0',.•-,•- lei.t„-.'.. J• ,c.,"r ....''',i ,.•-,,:., . 'v;, i','pf.A„V-v,'.•,,,,... ..z il•.%',.•:',$),40•',.%,154;:z,:44-.'.,or-4,e/fgiV..,,t; ,'.•.',-, ,,,,;41,Vt.',.•W' ):::4i'i-W4,,..:',,',/,.‘7...;;-Y, '"'`''''.',''' ,',..,.',... .'3,:7,-,.''',' • fik'f's41,;'•*V.. A.,A.::',.k,,,,LA?' 1,*-•'''',:,; 0:411%;'.r,10.*0:4,1 PA'',,, 1:!. 1' / • ...,f'.'''''‘' ''' A'.3.:`4.1:•,3%),:;T:f44''''PAPAI.,4440;f010%...li: ;--.,:::,;..k... • -...-....4.-,...):' ,,.,,,.:,,:.,,,,c„.if ;..;;,ag..j.d. ,....•: .„,., ., •.•.f.,t,,:, . . , . rotA ii....e4,4...y,i ,„1"'" - •..;!,,,42::-,?,:v 7,i,f-,:;t-.r,-;1;144..,..tr,• .-1,,,-'-Lrii;;1,-0:.'14.0,v6,4‘.' ''';,,r/I'..4,':4:1•;:tt-”A'')i>,.'.,01.";004.,•„',. ,,,',A;Vq:..T'f.:' '• ,:',...F4;2Z;:. g'-,, ';•';it,.s .- 4-,,-•t,-",,,4-..T. ,., ,,,,',.-t ,N., ; -, 1.41.4,-,,,, . ,,,,,--„,.-..3...,,,,te ,,..,....,;.,, . .rt,p4„ :4,•,,,,, ,-1.,,..1,„,: ,i„.,.;,a.i.1 , 4,;,,,i,,,,I, ,,.-.ti-;,,,,,,,,,,A.,,,,:*,„,;.44.„..t.,„:„;,f,, ....; ..,,,..t.,.„,.:,.t ... . -,,,,ov.„44?:,,,45, ,-.• • ,..,,,..-../..• '4,',; .,,,,,,,,,',41,,,•‘.40.0,ii'.44.4-e•Af•-..)-014..- te.,1.4'",k••, •,-•-',--,.„4.-,•.•,415„ 40-71",,..,,,,•,,,,,,,,',4,001,4#, .t,,,t;0,,,A j„„-,.0,--4,,,':;-).,.,..Q,4 1/2,,....,•....,:;..,„1:,44,... . ., ..:„.-,..:.. ..Y 0.41,0,,,-0,,,,,- .. : : v.,.,,,,,,,—i',0,8--,„-T,i,,,11„;•••/,-;:4.,0,-..,-.,.-.1„.,..:4,Iii-,-..-,r, T.-.,,,, ,-;/•,1,0,,, -445 viol-„„...:•,:,i,,,,,./.„1.,,,:t 4-,w s.,41,',,W,;.;„.,..',,,,47 r/4400)4i y',;•,...,,.,.-:‘,,,,•..tAr , -„. 14' 5... Attq;0.,.A...-'..t,'.:1.ri •,• • ,,,,, -,,,l;':'.„,.,.;/...3;r .4....„,,,,..;;04.,,,:,„4.*".A.M1'',Nli:t.V,1:0.7 11-';„0„,..01.o,#,,,i-rh..ttfit:&..i, .0,,,,,,•544e.A.,,',....,'t.'„1.4.,•?''..4.',Ar 4.414.,,,,.•','kw , 4,,...,T., ,'•'•.. .f.,2..i":,.,..1,, 1"..''...::` ..•' . ... .„ c . li6.2.r.40-1...4:;k'•,:,..:,'?4":4.L4','';'"./,*",,i&'..","'/Y;:::•40;;;''.".•:',,;,%/')..4,,If'I.e.:74:',,":7,,;•14,,''ilitiAt' ",f,4,1,I4*}.34,JA,VitA.V.,,,44N`e' 40);Wit-'''','''''' ,".. .;,,,,',';,.‘;',.''.1,', ',::,-•!,,..., ,'.,s6',.,, 'f':;:i,....,•,:i.-'!-;,,•F CZ .';'*;:...f:i':%(1,1;'::'e:...,.fi., ..,.„"-.0J'2'.'''?.,4Mf.,,itl'•/1,,,,4''Pe';',.V-. '6'5'i'lKiiik '; :OP:.''.'4:ci iszi IV,F4'47;',/.;;YA:r if; ,,MA•.,,.;:;•:r''''%.4,4g, 1 t;!::., %'; i'''..:1;',"P'' ''.I.4'&' "I;C::''';'• ''.....:....?..••• ;,;•,..'' .' ,p,,rt-..,;-(•,',.,,;/,;/,/?".s.;,',4.,,A,,44 A':t.ip,,A 4,-,,';,..:...4Y,.,:r.,';': 4'1•',''.-.- "*.",;,,,, t.,,r.„.„,..:,,, . '',A;le:4;;;V-‘:,:151%.,•,,,,•' • prv''.9.74,""ve• vr..,::-.•I'-',47e/- ".,"•' 'CA*ri;'';'.&' 4'..,.,!";. ''';... :''',',, CL 6-10 •,•-',-,-,4 -•••,,,y, -,i,e,p..4,,,,,..,6p;:-#2,,,,v,,,,,,,i,,,y, ,,,,. .,..,;•14..,,-"A,e, *.lt. . 1.5`.4k11','t re" ' 1,1'.4,,...'..".-x.;;710,/,..- . ' `i''"W''''' - ';'/,'' '-''4' /'''' '''-''''''''''''''' ''''''.-"''''''' '• ,..4....,4,,*,,,, ,,,,o,,;;%,!..../. ',..;/ '..:.:144,,,,, ./.4,',4.',,...,,t, 4,4,.../...t,•;',..4', e.;.:4;t,r-'41,igkeealPV?:iii, ',,,;:0?*57:',*,A,Vy'•'.:•:.4".At?,,;;4:-„4.".*,,i141;,,', 1,,,..,'1,*,,Te$0:44451 "A' dr1p$,H%%140';; •,?(',4'''' -''''ij,,-'L)0.i. 7.ii!..qq;•;40'1.'4,.. •*"•:..'..:::::". i il• 14, 1,, (1)4'34?•, ,i;..fizr,,:,;,:i• .i.V,.re/A/ f'..:.'„';;,le.l•r.',,Ir.•`,Y.1*,.,,r.'4.A,,,,n,v ! ,Xj,,,,,,.‘•,';•f rob 4,,,,,,.11131;;;',vpiti Ilf -..*:,- '')W,'Lgs,.1,:.::00A4.4uf,f;,,7,/„;„•,/'',,,-P.1 4,gio.."-•,.,,,:,,,;;0.• r',..:i...,..AgyA.;.., ) fo,u.,••••Apy.1,,,o,, 41'.....:„:,-,4,,,. ,,..;.,„, ,,.,..tob.a•. ,..,.•,,,..o.,.,....):A t,',,,f.`44,‘ ,,,Ate .p 'X,r'-,...9-04:A.7',C,I,..irti,44";•0,•:'' ', •':......, .1A te...*In- •.;-TiN.;..).'• /4.•!:,:,...',YA''.!`•1'..1 .4- o :!;i:gWO.',4;?..V;,'(',#/,`/44#14''*44,T,"4.%"•.:',4'..:••.•A',10,z;',,,,,,'; . t•'.1",*1.......';),71,./3i)0';/".''.•".1i0-7,,,fet, tfki,Ia.i:i4f1 .ilyriii.„!'i' iZt-,4•,.--i.„, ••' ,.''' .Q. --..:14,1110. ;„,,.,.n '5 e-, • - Cri ,•,A..ik,4,?; .),.. ,• *to;4414;k1;I. , ;•.,,All ;;;::,14,A4.0•AW-,4 , ; •,:*,Vor't• - 1- :*-...°.-- .• ,• , ,1;;;.i, ,. Aff,',:kr,,: i7r,-.-,-,`',-- . s.- cAi'LA.4.4i ,‘",f.A. ,rAf•foiti.,'.- -'".t.';41.:'1'. '',--,,. '''''.-4., - •g' -.•A ..; ;''',:it ' ..1 ../K,'.P " ,„..). 1 . ' 'f•:.,r.':.,:i.,,, 0 ,‘,..,;t1t.;Vii.,:i', -':',;*:,...',..,'.;'•,.,i4.•,„4,, it•i: .14' .i„ ;4„.'.l'.i k •.• .., .:k AtzLI,• .& ,,,:, ..„,k';''7'"'q,i,;t'V.,.\ )f.,. •...,.i%.,......:ii,,',,fr: 4rA41/111'.4-0 ..1.'''•A'..044:7.•.,..A... ',.... ••,...44...le!`-',L,••• . .5.;',,.:1• iF,,':•z ..!,,.'11,4,,,,.• .f, ...„I. '.t. . • .....,..: • ,, 3... ,,.........., ?,./.- •'' 4,,.4.',.1.'il.' ":.'•,..k., X.444,•,',.:,, 'ft''',1,','.ultri<,,,i,les"i:.•• ,...t,P1 '.•:'..,`i• ''c•,••'"•-•,#,Asf''-'1• ov5-2'4'''•T•<•'',`,Jr",:,:"'/Ntriiit,..5V.`•:Yli, 4.`t...?!..t:4:144A4VV-:',',"C44..\ /4,'4'..:'••••: zi- le.,'.Y.;';•,,,, L_ ...1) .. .t.r14:.'41.- •,<!A:4*4414'' r'f,r;;;Ite;2:',•;44,e,;:*lk. ',it;i et.,,f•:::.„,,,,', ?--itz:, ..0,411.,0:-.ii:...,,,,,•'.,',i,:n:npz.ks0§-;•,,t-',4.•'StN.4::•.‘",t1„.....1,‘„,.(*ki,,,,, . :igi-ir-4, •At.c,..-.41; 0 , „„• , ,.,p,.-5 4,-..,/,,,.:-,-,40,,,,,,s,„!.i,,. .,4-„;144,,,AA:,..4.0 40,4 i'.:''.,,'' '...,t,:,,;'",". '',,:'N'AiAr:A''''':,:y'l t.,`,.^1,$.'",,,,.`,,44.N,*i;.*•'.''1/4.44-11?.,:',i,,,44,,..17,4;,-..,;,,,,.. •V".. .,‘":,_ Nt foi,l,liz.,,• w• ‘4,1,11,.,.;,>?,,,....N:.i.',;(.:,,:.:,..;;;.:',:.„.: lit . ,.•:;",st.44:*-6.,!,,, ,-,,:,,,;;,.ow,:;:q04,1,4!":4,4--4.:i--,-.,•:A.:... ,••• •,,,s„,..;k:,..,•'....*#,,,,...;..c...,:.5, ,-.?,,, . , . Ltis.ic,--„,z.,,::,,,,,:,,,,,v..,,.,...",-0,,40.0.:,:,;!;..2.4,.-1,4,1t,47,,.7,..4s4;:t,t.„:4,1 ,.\sy •4. .,:::::r.,.::,...,, y $ o ,,•11.,.. ,,,;,;:.4y...;44„kiv,,,,.:-...,.2.e-9..:p.,,,,,, ,,. .1,,vt,,,,,,, ,,4., 1,,,,,,„. .,,vev...i,:„.:,, ,,,,,.. ,,yft..,::7-4-1,, ‘. r...z,, i 1"-o-',.,i, AO, vi•!*40t,•4R•?•*'41$.4 k\444.,,_ •-",•:.•:;'"vi":,, ',..-..,'?..'4'.`.. - •"',v•b.•,-•,,,,p74 ovo-,, , 4.d.,,,,, •„‘-,,,,A.,/,:i.,,,,....-....,-/ >e• d''', ' :V f,i,` '. -4.../.,,:'i t.ri. ,,.••leg'e..0,--',-.• ,,.,,,.•... .ti,,,x,;,t,.•.:?i,k 4,,h4),..),•14.,`';::. 4._ (•,'*;.,:-;,:.;•,.• : .*•,$4•;.0-.?"1,:•.t..t.4,/eFli•Vte, •1":,:e.' ;1, ,•'‘:xi,4,:,•••1,,t,k:tr,..i.N.,:tc ers'- •.-,,...•:,.., N;vi,:t....•*,,,.*- ,..::;',4,,,.,,.t.24.%0i7,4:94,k,!4,F,'.,-.P,,,,,4A Nk. ,C,4k."'.1,., .,,...t.:,.,f0,,,•„.---;,,,,:i, 1- , .- ,.--,4,'„,,,,"4:.,,11,),,',7,_-:,--:,!;'.;,-.•,,,,,:,-.,4;:.•.,„....,1:41..,: -7:;•, ..',.. .....Vit ,,,.,.;,,044,,,-.4.7.,,,..,..„4,,,,,,,,,,;;:,:. •1,,,,,,,,,,..:N,;,,;41A,,o. f,=-,.,,',.„..,,,a;.„,,.e,'.;, 's•:,:c.T.4--.,,,,...z.,:x•,-...,,,i,,,,,...,.,:cii:,.-K.,,,A.,:0-.1,, tkir-..,„ . 4,-.4,10)04.,..,!,04.-; 0 ;,,;(.,..4„.•,,,,,04...,.4„,1,,,,N,.„?...:,:4,„,•,-;,,,,I..i,.;,,,4,,,,-;:,;...,-4,-.47AyA ,-.„-,,A,4„,...;.1,,•:„,,,,,,,...,. .. 0.i,,,..,,..,•:',44,;•;,,,,,24,:,--„,i0,c...4„;;,;,,,.A.0•„;,-,;-.4z,,, -ii.-.,,,,,,,,,,..4.!?• ,,,,s,...t4' le 1`.\\ vii,...v.04,,irs,t,4,.f!, ‘',,,,,,,,:..,.1'.4_1,1,,.1)4,,,,,,,.„,e,s.,,,......41..„.„,.„,,,,r, ,,,,,,„....„. ..„,, ...,.,• .:,..,,,..„...,..;‘4,4„:„..4 „.s„).,,,,,.v4,,,....,5-,,;,,i-t:.::„..1p.„*.1,,..f...;,... ,..,,,`,..S.,,,A,z,,,l.,.....t4,,,,,,,N.:,•:,...!,,..s.:.,.e:„....,,,•,-4. ,,:k.,,,,:i.,,,,,f,',; *,,, .:44,,„ ,• •... 4,\,t, -.et: i,•••..,,, .. > foe,s,,,HIAA,T1,-;!Rie,',01.414•ey,•. .,,,,,.,,. .:;„'.."„. : ;,-AA:.q,,,,',,f4,,,o. ;.;.);.,..7 .410',5e..:,.,•,* ,.'T4.;4...;-,,, ,,z,,;,,,,,,:„."„!..,A,1,%i(v.,,:c.,4',,,,:A.••;,v-,,,k‘<4:41:.,-„,;..4 Akktt,,,,,:,*,,\,,,,,,,\ ., Q.,..c.,qp,, 0.;;Iasf,,,r)kr,,,5„p),-,-.01h,;,,,oft>1.:,0!” ',' -,:-,4-m, ',.4,1'1,.:ii.,,,,A.,,sivii.,•: ,..,,,.s.,,,a,A.,,,urt.,,,..i?•....,-,...•,:.4,,,,. k•,.,;.trs,.',$:',••;,-.i.r.,-,A..NAZ.,;"1.1-' 44C"'IN N, •.o. 4..... '4,..46. 's41.,•/, -.,,,,, •. 4. p.:\ -,,..44.\-zjim. <.,.. '",1' CC tifigS,''..e,'&'irrtrT, "•;L•5•/‘;14iki. iffritit:' ',V r414'..7,...' ,;i7r,A1.8`;k:%:•Yrr',•47.;,'„,',jt,"?';, .V. 0,..k.'''''::',,'1, A''''''4'44 kz..4 %4,. X ..'4,',.t1;ii'''i4.•N'N'"•*•<lit-Oa\ t• ‘14',4...'"S'1 ''' IN'it'el?'/4.1•Pr`A'%•rh'i"',:i•'.9.`•".'f:c••••',''''•4'; 7.,"e,;,..1.75•4.-. * -4,1i, '.',4.,'• .3,. .,1:.,i,'I-vi-.-:,:it,T1,!fit'..w.::'‘1:q...t4:1‘..v;:z:%'ilAN N -NOV4**$4,(4httz:*4",4,,,.4%•,- INZ4,4,N4w4,,:ik'ty<, ,11', .,•..4.'pki",!,",,4:•;•,'"•,...,-;,r."-,,'''',,,,P,'„'..t:r.A •ii'''.4.•,,,k8Z,:f.'%,,,•., ..;,..':','',•••"N"I'.'ilkti.41. 1.V.W .:"!....i.'•••!4:'.,",•fi'''it'A';k,',,'4.4),*,,‘,44\:4 AtfekIgt'•'‘'4‘•••eti,i4t-,Nno,r42'..44,44.,,,,,,,,IX40;',.: 0 !;;;‘,,r‘" 40•24.,:,'/' :',47.vA."..',%,q,".',(4,,A. ,..'....',./,', 1'.''',"'?*.,*. •-•:-5'4",',;••il',44.4;.., :.1..:114!:4..-r",."••••••94?.:t',..• i k,'.'1'.v.; i:".,,',a'..`;%",4,1t4F4NA>0'4,*:.,,4,, ''''it**:ikkt,c,"%:4744rtlitat4,24>03.t) al l';'(';NI :V%''("4,,::.;4:.;:i4:'q-,:•,c,:':;:*.',' ,,,,i„.1.7:- 7-'''''''4)..',:'- L'As:1 •ke'''';17.4‘54. ''',4i,,-„-',4 k,,,,i4,'A.Yits&':`"*. ::ki ';'-A,'4.:::• ,1t35,4,P.,',4,g CC %i344,,\N,41,4*,VA.,"''''",40, 4. .. \ \ k.49,...yi,,,?,..,..:4,i.,,,..4i.,,,eli(t.,,,,; 3,.,‘it,,,i0 .,.4„'',i,t'1'.,',. ','1 P-..,:. •Ili.. is%:.1',.''.'i','..y.S t'-'71.:'• •„10 rii,11-el''t°,,,Zqi,Z:',.;:';01,^;•?P,Vr.4. 4'•,40444.4.. ->-:__1 .14.!??tti,;4,,\44$4:;°ts.zi‘.4,' ,,,,1,, K.4,3 ,,,',Acv,,,,,:ottf, ,,i..,,.:,,,.'1,,e,y0.01.... , ,40:„;,•,",:yrk-,,i',....%-.,,,,'''4§5ff.:;,:,,,,,,-;*1:,,l't,,x,,,I• : •1 h.,f)".."!'i!,..,Ir.!t';'-li'A.',V","4.?;::ZN :',‘.!..k",`4:4it';`, °=li.1 "414%,^1.44,V.I.kiNft4INi...* f,,.;e-, z•,„,:.•.x.4,..,,,,R,qs•z•iA,,, , ,,,,,:4,,..,i(,..,,,a-§77,,,,;144 ,-.0,,,,1/4-•',Ail,-,,,„-,,,,.,,,;--,-,,,,;,,,,,o,.-7,-;•••-••/,4,.:-'-t',,,,,,„ ,,'4,'';',. ...:!,11.<!,"P'4;!,;,,':'ti'l''IP':,4‘.4N2`.':,C° '..•t..?...!tt$:› = Z NS!,1.44‘'1,‘\IN*,444,"19S* • 40iii.'01.11,041;r:;.:74'";,..' '.3,-A,;•;:.5,1 ,:-',-:.'T'. ois'*,„,.., ,,, '..'",.41,'.... 4z101.:;:'' .: -,:eir::.o ,r,4. k!'I kz.,;';-,;,...-:,',;, .;tN•ii,:illxi(_,,— -•,,,',!...1:4,•f:14' 1 P_0 zce :,'k,:,..kztii.4,;,sip.,,.,,,Nitt1444%,,,,,,,,,„•,41* co 5t*.,,,,,,,,.-.L06„,,.:*Ekg;-..c4f. ,A.,..,..- „,-,4,-k• 41-, ,,,.-7,•',..-z'...!,,;:-.:,,,410 .,..--10.43:3,,,, ,.....4.•,-,-174., -4.,,,, ,,!,,-;-.,:::,..,,,,:ii,30.,:,,,:.,,04 zr ,si.;,,,,.Iigt..i*. to< - ''....4'"A•Na'C1114SY*474,:e'0W/ttAt vp Wr.;VAi';'1,11W4i4WWit'•;•A, ,10:;.wA"..."•-•li'l.,' ..61..."'; .' .-••"--•-•• •:.•'.AL A'At ''.rq 44;r4.,4'. N .4.! , t;i.„":,,,"'..„; 4,;:,0„;,,V,i).,';',. ,•.,!;;N,tAlt.; —-I= il•.,,,N,k4*%ft„V, ',-.4,K,441,,,.., "C3 Igk.:,.ay,....t7offl.,ny: ..,44,e.o,f., .....,...-,v;•6:-,1 ,o; -, - . ..,,-4.4.var.'4 1610-,•k. 4 ,,,....4,,,(p..1.541.,;..;.,.-,,,,-,,7,,,,,4..2\4,,,,cc Is,`"i3t-`4..k:‘„„A). 2 CD 0 c.',OtibtS,,‘V..44%%'-jq:'44` 1; '..:IN,..:,..;v*0(<-.•-•,„4,,,,,6,1,,ejz...• ,44,,.,,, ,:1„ ,, - , Ar.,, • ,.),,. :.,,,,,,,,.....,, • ,i,,,,,',, ,,,,„,•:,,,;,".,,S,',8.'„*.•••,,,,,,,,;:1/4,* ,41,',N.F-- Nv,q-.ANN, . C w...4.t,,,,'",'S,,,I.0,.,,,,,,,, ,..0,,,,,,4,,,..,, .,..4.0,N.A...,„ V r 0',4',.t, '4. .,.•4'",•7••. % .W..L.'...%'''.v i:.".*Ar IP,iliWI''R.'''.,,..''',, ;:r•!.:,4,,4,,',4,'tf.,,„' .„1.,,,V.4.1,1,1 ...,,; 1.4:Vg•t:N/kti N 'Airig16.);;Iett' ,,,,''Z'111,i4..1,V40.:,',•••,.'4.1,1,*•.'."1,;, '''''''eat.''';IVP l''' k ' 4:'..44A!- ''!)''.f''',,*. N' ' t4'41-''4.44')3'0\•.'Y'%,''-'-'1::,',.:0,0-"....,..•VPWS,VitZt.,'i4.4N,,k:‘,'e,,,,41%,%/,,,,041,,:.,)„,"440;...,.,4).g:'..; CZ (4.'k,,,'?%;'llit."•.7; "..")1:;.'''''';'.,,,, ".'.:•:..44*. ; '/"•:t,"-,V3,_,,,.'..4 ,'4,),.,4";-*.:' .;"-",.'411'1'4*, .4f, ..`.;,:.44 1",11. ,'...;.“7..1',;;*;);'N''''V''',K44'4.4:1:44;:44!>?4*.N.'4/6:4:::#NA‘INT 1"Y'frT''''Ylt A " /-..f,';:v,"' '..-e'<'0,:reig,'"'4•'.4-1,-:-: 94,y,--44.1tr.faks t'---friF--.- -''''','':' f, 4.,0*,,,-;,34,,.;41.y,-,y,i.•• ,:kk•4,,.,,iso , '' ,,,,Nt,:o.v,,$• . , -4.4,;b,;;,,r;.1,.,,.;.Ja.,:t;,1/4.,,. 94.4,y,d < N,P446,v),„°4 —- .. f,k;it,.,..t,,,,;•4.-,.,..•„„-.404,t.ti,-.-'..:4',.•.-:)..:,,:e •:e.lfr,., .i. ,',0wiitts-s‘.4:,zi,\,:Fif,,Nk-,3:Lk.fs. ..;..iiPli;$0,1'AI:4..,44..t.',f4..x....v,‘ ,••,,,,..-,,,v,%i, .,,, Af'4‘,.,7,,x5.4-.. ..'go eva.''';..;44: ,' '.* .:(4. ,.....-A''. *:-tett,':,'' ''.?;44.4"'01;SP''‘X.:-'S •4'N'It'iS.'i';':3,*44t;',1„.44i4N.,..;,„„Vi',;,91441,Vi.:4#4tNNNS,,Virl,":•••4,-,f1'# ,Y cn k,.....„..,;.:.,.. , -1,./.0„W•44,..V.,14,„tot ,,.;,,...!.,,x,„, •,,..,.,.E. :„•,..•„,,,,;.9., !-,-...0. ..• ,,,,,triep•.y4,..,.4.r...,„,,,. ,,.,,,,,z,,....„„,,,;4...‘..,,„•.,...,),;,:-,•r,.1„:.*„.v.,,,..A.,,,,mk,:,.,.1;,,,t,44•1•.%^.... t-ti,,,,c. i,...,„,e,,t...„,.P.,•,,• • 4_, f"k?.'"A.'''.9,;.•..'1,; i__ ,V. : -4.'.'' 1;),Ayvi,', 1-4;„0,14,,,,..4„, ...-,,,...,-4,i,,,..,t,„;..-.,..,L,,,o,i,,,-,, . • z.0,t40,..A•kw.14..,,t,,,,, ;14,,,,,,,1-3.,17,,..,,,,,;,,,:,...!,,,,,i4.0,q.,,,,,,,,,F.,4,{K000.,, %N.•01(kw...i''.4.e: , • .......1••4`.$;41"...,'•' 'cc it*re ''''''''•‘...• ..44''',L••'14.1"i4.,;:1,'"'-'7--N. •••••<• .•‘'*'.4'.54•••:,,''f .•.,"4;„„'40.„ , .., ti,,,i4.*:).•.-!°41.tire,44,,ii•ZPV•45?.(434t*.k.3.k,7,'N'S,N•k2,*).vAkO*0;',*M''''',,,iiok.", 1"...e,;',440,..k• • 0 .!7-0....).P.v. 0 .k''4•,,, IP.."'!, 1,7'7>.•.1rf',!4;•'.>"'411-,'.y'.-i i.'l''''. .,'.Nh',1,:'N't1P4','','".°, ‘.."'n,'4. '''',%;''''.',',,t,''''''?.1*(,...r, ,f,,,,k-i.,k.,;4';t4gilxii,firk,V,::$A..,:v.,,ftwArt.,„,A.,,%k, (.4.1>N;:,;,19.:::',':,;.1'.0,,,,ifle.,-;:iv ' CO • • .W...)17,if,1,1; < ina jp,.?:,x4?.ki.it4:',41.f.tt',1W;.?,(:.,,,.., •',vt.:',;4.;:,,,..'MA.t),:".,;04,10,4,-- •.A..,,,:g*.i,t;y1. iairoy4.14N,k,p'ffi,,..:$4,,:‘,V,VRA0,4szf;-.140,klq,,,:-1,..MT•2..:4..`,. '• 1' ' . '!..,''.14,,N%,eft,: °- a ,,1114,1.•;:,.1,'.411..'ia:i...4(.4"tA'.,i.:V t:,,,.,'1*.4F,„'.:4A:e1;.`":. ;,g0,0 >. Alfillr .110,444%litik"44‘'••47A.-;`,444giat,0*ZO'it'iC.Atf;4,,Vit.g.%:-;4:4 1 " • E''. . ,.....tt441t.,.13,, 1::: ..7.,,,,A.4 .:'.'.14;k4r4;:',•14A;'te'',-04.t",4'..i.',A,!;14.'"??,.....41,,:;,.4,Vii•WI Z 1,,ittyki,v?:,,,,'",10*itttiNt191 ste04:44.‘,44,1it:',, (4:!:11,t,Tik.4k$1;..?:•%i",•0,4;"44.$",:',k,%fi L,:' .3:,•,1i..4',1,4, Li • t4/P;A,.1),;11;5/:..W17,4,•;,y1g'?,9•?..al',...$14.'.'lri:!..,(.:',41":..00,:-.E. ei.q.k.::04 0 :Iwg"'',L 'i-'4:5:',,Pplg'.>:ifiX414AP,. :Vf",,,,eg4,4*',--W.,Z.4s,..,'.4./0,'•'':::?,',:,.. ',.;•:'•"•':''..,.420; C <..',,,,t:',;!i..1 .4•• Z TOP, '14';4.1.:.". .7.;73,1,44.44 .7,t":0;47.1t)'4,'•••••• ....• '',.'5;:','•V.;: '....'re'-' .:,2-'1-T1,1.?,,44'0.,•'LIJ--I tr.' 41,40.•t4gIrsiJA.14:1A'Ateivs.',,,'?,,n',AseerviA,,0_,,,,,•ee,,,i?:,e4 v,,,,,4 .4..-e„,a::,,, : :'..-,...'iY,f.", ,,f,-7,' .4.,''-';--3,04aFf4i-:•,;•444V..:*A•11,4',41:c;I:''' '';)d.‘;', 1/ S.'•041,411 0 ;';','44":"P'.5A'sg-1004.'*:•174twaz:teit4 ',„ViP ''4,41•,;;;4!4:.4.."itiki".:Ag• .c'tfir,',#"* 0 ,..•:,,,,,;,..A.,;,,,:t;,,,.*•,,,,,A.., ., .,.,,,,,,;...f,,,k,,,,,,.;•,„4,,,;.,...,4,4,wy,,..,,,,,4,),.,v.:,,1••, ,..2,,,,,,,11,i,.,),.:..m.,2k,,,,,,,,,A--I 0 ',,, -,s1.1,4*4',,,,'?4,10,5,44,Teofft.'f>",*',,,1,04-•,',.e.,;',#,i,:f,,„:e,:::..,,,,-.itc,-,,,t*.,,,14,'•,<:1,1; -..11 ,..„J.,rA,!,,.,,,;•.;,,„,. .,. .,,,ic.,,,,,,-, .44,y;•,,71:,,,A.,;?,„-;-. 4:4 r7,,,51,,);,i-.1.*i.--;i. •'' '.''' :fy..f.i,';,-?•,,:1,5:1-",,Ve.iv CO '44401A,?..144'4Z'...CA,licta.41,efrt:r•V''.,' • •'''''‘. .tcl•il 1:'''' ''.1'4'.';krflfrt je,1,..14ikil'V te ....-„,„ :•*,...:.p4Ai,/:‘,...vb.,t,,,,;.‘,..4,4,t, 1, .;;44..:ki;,,,,e,y. •;,-, :),.,04. ,;Iry,,,..,,,,i.1 .<.'„ .1-,•,t, ..;11'....il.,41,04;•?,1-z .F''f,rA44',1,0'7'.../14.'kaiTteP:4 4ii•;,,44' ' Of'.I,. " .`f*ciii•er 'ig('',:,1•:fa.5;:,>Z1,x.S"';'::e C kr,..r,..,A‘A-Ri.;.i i.ylz"!t,t:...eir,.,f, ,,..,:...i.. ...., ;.a..,,,,,... ei,oi-I i•p•i4ut4e••it,;....,.., ,,,•;,*,az..::, i•T;A,k,,,..t...)011 or 0 i''".i.,,f4A-g,4•Nt4•0."--AlWiti,:i'• -- .-4-'4‘,4.0,. . -,..., .::•„..,, .e..:,44,,,,,„i;., )44?),,kz:,..: ;.:. .;:: - ..,,,-4,:;,1;_,);,,,,,,,,I.,,,,,,,;. %f,,,,,...)..,s,'ft,*;!.1...,4g, z,.',*#.4•„4::7117%,'OR .. ••:,5,-z: '....f.,','„A- ."..','.,...,-:.:tS:Ing Lij cc 1°,114,,,.:•tt,,;:',",:'4,),:riiI4 '<00-0'..vx,,,,N.,-.,-:'N,,,• .,.:;,,f,.6e,...."•4,i..1•("W''',14:;4•••;11"0.1,.-;•:.,'.-?43,•" 0 . 4.1'.,:;,:.;''.:.,,a..p.'A,7,-.-":,v, ,,,, 4.41.7:,,' 1,14-r.4Aly.,;;;7..•..i.e..7,,s.,1,,oni,„,. .., -.,./4.,.-.....v .1.,,,,A A;,,,:.,,,.1,,,,,voi,i) =w.1.,k*,,-:?f....., ..,,,,-rot.,,,,frortx*xvitm-X4(tkakaiti`,./tr..•-•":-F.4r,'...?.V4,'if!4..F.e'.';'!"004, • , kff;i.,114,),, k4.4,'N;'.:'?..):.".4);:r.1,. ;4,1,74..',,r?,:;;;,.._,..i.-: ;.... .'_.•-. .,...:,,.A1,...::::.:-y,-06 I.;.,,' k..i,(,D= ;' ..1*....!i" ;.''',"„4.?':NiIVZ.,,,_'•qt,':::;.ti..".k,.:k4!"01:%."Niaz-4,. 4-, -..1P5`4,r-a`"4-/°404-1,2-7.?44-41.'"K ''4,-...f''°'.4.4-''',..',: ....?7!'..44,47,„0:11.*,,I;'''',. `Yd,,,t, ',,,,::k ',..,,,,ki,„.:•clo,,..> 1 1 fi,,..it,,. ,44`i!.44,A,,i-",'‘,S1,:..44`;04.1.4"44,\140,0 • `40.',44?:47,41t,„‘,,N1'''.'''''''',..2V,„,'''vi.:.;11Wv.ii,4;,{•!..cie:gil.':' C.) '';',14i. ,0„'-.4,..:.!%.4,T,..ir.4;k4'5;;;Ftli.....;,•"::$'.1).".;":,.°X.. '...,"•,,:,;,.:410.,;1','"A.1;i:S!.., .,,,:',441,, .,•>.,.. ,:i:,fiti.4 ,,„:,1, .„„A:',•,,,..:f.'",,,..1,;,p,Z0'4,,,:e4.4Ws0,W44:„,,N+24,::$. .,,,;t4?441,,,,,e*,,q.z.Z.0)4 Y Tb,tzi.,0:if:.;••,,TA . = :141.k.•,.,')?:7:,;',',•'''',2,C'''1.)1;-'51.‘,?.•.`'...,:-.11`.;`,:),,i.."*;;'.y....?„.•,1,j.,1$1,4"N:-/A4.f TA.,:mr.:,,,.it0.4.,. ::::,.., , : 4 ,..,,,,,,c.,,,,14;•i.‹,4, A',,i,:,!`",.:; a4VX•;,11.1g •;1444.1,,,,4% NA:,%.,AV:144;i 0 0,11i.g:::;.:". . i... T tAY441i';',4 4q-)14-",'117'V 4, :, •.„1".• ,r..,„,tas,,v,,:-,..e,cfs'*,!..ex•A i.40,w4•..:- t ON.. c..11. le '4.A-4:,,t'2':••-'k,.fe AN,.•. ,:k,,..-1-..-x,!..,4,,,,,,,,--40,,k‘,,fiN, --4„,:04\• ANNict. 0 '4,!.A.4,,,,.-:4,.-0,.00". 4-, .•,-,,i',..-"tt.1.v01,;.p,k, fr/v,,,- '-',4,x1§,..-,,IN..:: •,,,,',-,,,-,,,;..-0,,,47-A ..., - .4•,,,,,,. ,tii.. •.t..,• ,,,y . '.'.1.,',,4 ,-t„V,',,,,,,,,..tb,,:i.%,?,13,*,`,A.g44-1`,...,,10,4„,,,..„„ ,k. •\ 4:!{..,74L N, cc clj`,1,,,;.,.',,,Lit't 4 ;.',,,I'll'Ve%9;01'el'$;;?4'),..4":4'Ut.',,411:1,: -::,e'6111";.:4'1::''i7PI:V1k04, t .., '6'''I's,`...".t;':.-ic 'Tqc,.,.'4og,,,-. 4i,4,.*•0,,,,,,o'44*,‘,".ex.„,„Av,,,,,N . • \,..-.%,,v,....t..;4"CO PADit''' '. 1 U) -.‘,..,,ti,.:,.,,,,N,,...,„1,..,,,,,• ..;,s1,..,,.,,„ ,, , ..,,,,-.4 r,..,,A,,,::.,,A•,,,t, ,;t:',;,,, 1,it: ','.',15,. .,*••....'A., !. ft,.. ......!.2. i's...,..:f$^0.0‘)r,,'''':i.:,,,....., •;•...„ti,'1,.741.,A,Zt.<4m,-'3\--,1„4,<4.-,,,h, tt!ig.44,474.4.,,,<,4 0., e,-s.vi,m,i- C .-...,..,,,.,••:.-''..,.,„0„.'t8,-1••••'c41. %, '••"'*1%.,a`''Thli.. C.' .... • ''''tY Wi: '''.,kir.4;',' . 14.':' •' 'N''''.1'S!''''°''11.,(0ji .ei\A"l'itl•V‘"44,;:"INA''' ^\ • '4%;.0"...ftet...t•'1: ..-j..X.• c,,),..k*,, 40 ''.0, .'i.-';':',40,;,'"Oii k(,',44,4,k - ,',71;',.44;.,r4•'%*i.;,,4'h :44:35 ,It:. , .. ,:zt,n4,,,..,,': A';';','-k.r„,,i'."`,13.t,',.,p, .4.t?.t,-;.„,.4,,,,%."'.t.,, ...4,......0,3,dSft.‘,41 , '' l't,'' OX,11',.> ,''‘..tiV:r4,40,V40k,i,osik• \ .,k4Z•VV.16,4;:t;.S-...-UJ ii*,,,„,p, .. 0 4'..,!.,F1?}',5.!';'iy,.:*4,;:,:.4,A.,.Ac',::i',;-", .M7,4,41-;1- ,,.,01;%:, .11T'..A.::',...q1M•;•,.i?:f.q.-,1,0 i 4444,-R,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,(,,,,,,,p,,,,t..4.&,-vism,.1*„.1-Ns-:::„.„,..$4,vss:44,ir 4. CC U-I„ tt,, •:.'4'e,, (.) ti‘ 'i..),f11;:ke,:lYtis;;;:Ktil,;;;41,;: '1•743.'W,*'4• 7‘;: litt.K4P4Q,`.NZni'.C;;.. ''''..'NY-"if 4:1i14';(.4 •• C) )-,•.W6t ilta:0;,.t:C;ANNN-4:1'.44titt4V44,44;\.1‘1.e"(k•144,•,1'<;1 4.1 CI-" 1.-.6VV' C /0-14.y.,...:,&`•,iigit..,i0, •::'.'1,;‘ ,.,'qP,4,4,1*,1,,,,',•,*.,4,,IN.,...! ..• ".t'.,g,'$1.,, ,.!t...i,.:1.•4 „z ii;,.....1,',.., v'.'.,•,;%•,,,.x.,`,'",.'",... .N.'tN•'1',N,..'''t;'444W. .M.„\-Nk :'"a•i$.0.' ci)° :4;"4:0 \ veit -0 .2.'g'#.1.4 .4r)':_"t$',!,'"'.:47,ii.-,..,•,,„',;,',S."'4,94;',/67:',...le.A.,X ,:;;Yli".4,:.0,Pi,.,•c .''' ..i0.• ..cg..‘ s.,,'il'. 13._Ld poo,,,,•,0V4,..),:zk.4'.,-,..y.t0.44x4 Nak74::::*,k.,$4.44,041.,..,'4 .... -,,100,4 , •••• •:.....4i.to,,,,,;,t,';i...-44:;,:vo,•• „•;;.i.,!..,:104. I:, :.,:f..,-;=„z,e..*i,-,p,ifvv.1,7,4,.• •.:4,,f, :ii.p.)i.-,f,f • .,Asfili,.A.,. ...,.,•;.1„.......,,,,m,:,,,,,,4,%.,,,.:40 .,.y.,,, ,ks,,,,t,&,,,Av Al,m43.A.,,4•1., ,. •, c •sl,s;,;./...,.;•,..r4z,:cf.,0:. ,,,•,...A.,,,,„:At i.,„1.;-•••••ioi,%, ..-i,..,,,,0 . ....•.1.. ,:',,.z;.,..1.4. iff:'',•P 1,,.w,..,r...,4',Va."4,11•••'.4'-:',..k•:3'k:-Wi'i;;SI,W ''''•Nike '44..44r,44,' N.4..N'''''ie TA.VVAIrt,.'4'''.% :4 „1:::p5;,,.. .`“. 464,1T.;„4,,INV,44,,,...4;1,N,k3 4,--;;;`,Mi.!;X1';.'r':••:' ' ".,„:c.,*•:•.":0'•!':i1,,f7P,:'?.P.P•A•,"''''•••,14''Ilk'.' ',Ii*'i.", =•)'4';'k''',,'";:;!?'01.'474,, ''%"4*,,;.,"%k. 4,e-,..r.4,4,41i,v.4.7,: (.0f0,4-.A11,,40,4,,,:,,fti 0 ''''.,:,:o.;::;•kb,:b..,;'sillic; 1,.,fix,;•.,0.10,,,,'"fkr.7,4 Ai:ti:4:4.,'Atk,'".*!'„''; ;''(..?:-/:-3.,";,!'"• ."' "VW.,;; i-0,li'r'I''••'$;;IP-,N.F.INk'N 4 .)tt•W•''‘4N4,,,'''','4"Aii‘t4 oft''4:"04/.,,,f1,1fef',;,,,,,tei..1 CL ,,,:,,,5474y.0,:,,,,,.....4,1hoa:•;.:.;;:c,.4,:.,.;•:,,,,z...,cii,N.,,,;.ii*-4p.,;,.•/'• .-4.-.6,,'y iv.,i! •••.•:.,., ,::,,,•,, ',..," , ,-"..tavis,,,,q,:igx•gs-A. ,,l- ,kki.k.:1,kx' t1•4.40,4;,coo ••v ,%.,,,,,Privf061,:1-4 ,.,..,..,,.. ,,,r4.,,,s.ei. ;,,,,,,,.444.....„.,64.,,,,„,,,i.i,.,,,,,,I. ,•,1„.,$,.,,,ja 4.,,,,..,y4,,,,., .e..,,,.,. •,..,........„...,,,,,,. fle I ,,,,,, •1'...,..t',?.....I,'i,••• 0...,..:',42.•••Ii.,,,x,,,,,..ttA ...., .NiSkki.. •Vs, '..,,..,.%,4. •,,. .,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,.....,;‘05›,, r,''"'"' ''..'''..,''''''i4IfAIte''' ff,".4'.. *'":',.'",1e.'',1'..1<.+A 4..•'',44‘,.,;:f.r:''',y '' .V',/•,,i,dg S•"'P,','C.' ,,d''‘a *.i'f' '",' 'feAfk‘. '• "0'‘••••'',..",'''..''''.etk••dr' 1 'N•..01,,,,,,, 4,,•04,.0.---,,,,",,,,F,A....., 1— i :A...„...,04.7,;.4,0,,,,...4voi..,,,„,,,,. 4:,,t.d.• ..,,,,';,...:1........a..,.,..-$14,1, ,,4•,•.' v.:2'i ,e •,i5.".(;, '.'N?,1:1„,V4t4,40,;=-4";.''',etc.,,,...itt.A.. ... vi„ts; ‘,..e.I.,40.k..‹,.0.4., ,"?'.,..1#4,A,';',,icrie..f,,,,,:'.''':';',Y":„.1"1 t \ •,, i•,4,Y.k*..'lzi,,,**1,1•,c,:ei,,,r7**•• •••`, ,,••,'•,-,.....,/,o, -Jo.*...u. 4,4..'„• -)i s4,. . •,,,r,•,..i.,.,,,, - ,..,,,,,,.,..407,4.x.r...,;4.,,v,: t4t, ,,,-,%!4,.,,xtvit.g0,,,,4, :..,.3,4f3k,loovr:).04Zis4.1i?.?;;!,:44.j.i. 1 :•.,?,. ,*.gf<;-,art;s0,41;w1,,,t,/v. s'alk 4x,-4.,,..ti•-;‘, ,,t1 •, •fr liN:',..,' te,''': r.'''2.,;..0:"NPA'•;{,% 6,. '..•irt-t; .r„.,:v'tiv:,..'4,-..% 1- • '%••-.1kN,%.;*-.4;.,014,2",%•,,4,414eit,h14-,:; fr;:',A.q. A.'t CL t....,,,",•,41u,:',!$,' i.. .„.?4,-,:1-4,i-•••,,x,,7.'''. ' -14.-:".41.',‘.."-;;:f!,.0.-•:;,- 0,,•44,-;,7z• • 42?,.'i -;-..:'...f.y-kir40, vi:,,,,-••-e,,,...' ...va ,,,,,.0i:,•.xit,„. , ,.• N•42.0w , .., -,),-.qp.r,,,,,..,,-„:,,,,-;.0,q,,,,•1.44,-•.,:...4-401.- --..,fti•:-.:;4,. ,,,.''•:,1;,.;**4.44$4^"A"..;4'.;';: 1`•;..&.„„*„,;;'''",s4k.'..".;?.?•41inill7. J 'Ir:.' ."..',*.L.;':(4:j,i4A1,24.,',. 0 i,„..,':',.,'ii•f:1",:. '411,'''''t.t.".‘. w '''':' ,'i",b.;h41# .! ..',,,,t4.1,V:PM,g,24,;:',4,6,4A.,,,,144..1,1 ';4:i.••••...;"47`40r*ti••,'.',4.1'..7„.,'..-7,.•..,--,,,„v,p..-4,t.,:,f;,,,,,w,.. ,,-.,.,, ,,!' , ..,,...,)..,,,s.2,...„.i,i.;',:ii.<,.;,..i•:,....,;.:,.,,;1 0 Nti,,.z:Ti,;'•7",•,„1.,4ti s,11,0,'4,,%,\V&\'';‘,,a.s‘'ZL'oer ..:!.:•••2,,,P,t10;i:1:>."1."'...'.1"s.:0>,..;,,'.•::,..,:,!...i.ts i f, ,n, ;.:g:,,,,,,tikik•„:,44,,;,•,4 ,•„•,.......,-;::,y„,,41, ,,,„(!,,,,„4-:- . •,,,.,,, ,;-)1.414.-...•:::::., -.,-,,,,,,,,i,,,:v-;;; :31-:;.4k; cc erk.-!..*;,„,,,,,;ket-5-,glittyv.'cit•o„ :.NI.‘"41,‘,,NA':"1.;'''1,,Ettpaq',4W-e04•*;,1A''"7-' ''' At .,...1 ii a) s_ .:-.,. ;,..............,..5::pgr.N.43-24F4.016":,-2.-;,.,i.....-...,1../0. ..#14-TA ..,4 ly..i'A"••,A,...:,k,;'?„,...441,;4•.?.,ir, 0 ,::4,1.,.. .„4"4., „,,,' .;,,, 's,..N.,.t„,,,,t,1/4v.„.:,-,Rm4.,L4.•,..41,, ;;;;;:,.!,1,,,,,,,,,,:i.:Jsejf•-5..p.0,,.,v,:a.,..„::.,:,A.,,,,,ij....,..e.i... -,,N:',.,•;;'..,:';,A,,,!:-27.4.cp7, 0-7i:,..4....,, ,Acte-- Ipi-P:,,:i• ,,,,i'f•;;,,•',gf...•,•:.,•,•••••.(4.,...,,,,,A,:0.0fits,,>g,11., z D...;:41''''''t.7: ''°;'.-'''. Ltt$NAN".4,1*Witt.7 i,.11, ,1:,/,;"•'...W:i;•. ,SP4;&-41•;? CL • '''.is'',-:':,••••:::''''',.'IteAs4404.v•Iv:'•,,:vitt4 ,r0F,A•'i ..!-,,4-'; ,,','',A...'4,.'4,m'i,.• --,,,,,,..::frv:,4 E !FE!4 r , 'Ak.,.,0004,V4,4:0.,-4,0-viii-:‘,4/P.i, ,?,.,N:lyi.,'xd-.r,l,':04-;-;i,,c.f?,-;:14,4-:. .-..- 41,..,, -:,:i..,...:$,., ,..ve,,,i,i,;:,,g)40`;44,14.e.`•it f.'f• •->.(7•V'''''' e;,•;'.' •'', .Y4;i:;;•' ' .•. ,-,.3 .'''. Itth..k )?:?o, AktttA44•16,*Vi411.14,0i .::?:'.•';vi,',1ft,', ..i*::.,,ik...14',,%,VVti•''.. 4;4.,,,I.1 "' •• ''''' C,,... .I1.%. 4 ..t!lj., .•I'',',.;.;4,% '711 •;-1Yr."41,'•':+%,'e' :1:).!•,:;•4 ,...n LI- V...1,tg?';'' ".;14.,'f li„4,V.M.A.kkrne:41h.',4'•:-0•;7,,f'i;•.,, ,1„:„,v...4.,..7..,p,yaxa,f,,•$:-•?;•,„;•,, u) .04:ztArii-4:; .,.;eqki,zif,..41..,,,it.i4,; "'sk:,. ',' .• 44;Y: AI,I.c,;; '.;-'.'.1i (1)LU 1.4-'f'•s,':frAca:', et;41;%-&.k•'.*N.'41444NSN'irt,l'-'•• 14.1z,--tm'i";::t:re.T.,z•.-,44',0,,,47..A.1',14 T., 4.. .i :kt,,,.,",,,,,tc--,..(c.:;,:,,,,4,0z1,1-1: All, -e',.,',,,-,,,..4i.): fn U-I, T.Yre04, ,,,,,,i 51/44.'.4...ti".AN•NNNIkt147,- ,4„.Vkii-;-tt'';.-'r ').Ci4A:,5f4g.,4,PYT::.,t;.0.,• ' C tflt,.....k,.A.,•;:t.--p.,A-<•••. ,,.,.g.,,s:.v,:•., , ; . 4.1.A.k.'t.044 4•.b/14.,-tviA, , •/•";"• ,' • -',fi•:•••,.,w,f,q' '''',4' • tif,likvt::.\.....,...:';.......,.'•,..". '-,':;•,4[44,,.;,'*-4,41,4:4,•,9,AF,•;ik*O4,Joosile..•.,,,14•,k.,,, ,,.. •:-&-,.:is-,•4:70,.•,;:i;,. ;.-_-;6- f:004,,,,11•,‘,,*,,,,,,,„:„A,ti.,,,N,N,,t,„Aaktt,, ,,,,,,,*,.i.„.,.,.*:.i'.' ..,,,.,441*p, 4.. ,.'.,•*. 0 88::Iyi (i.„ ,...- ...1., ‘..littYx..,..16...,*.i,ti.c...L.:,....0,,.........,4114vii0,,,"/"-M4,Yt'f'ti',' ..01-,Y;At'''Ai '''' ,;•14.4.:.,1;-i..,t;;!,:`.;01,'1,44,,,,N444N.14\1,,, . .-,.,..-,?;•• ,..,.i....A.;-d41'0,,,;:1&,:- 1 '''',,-..••i•-• eviy,,,,,,i,k4,1,,,,,..p,:,•4:,,,,t,..4,2„4,,,,,41.1r,%,}, i... -',,,e,, y,...,.. t . , ,„,-_„,V,,...,c•Akki.,c4.kkN4,,,...40,4,•%,,,,,kif f•';zi.,/,,.•• ,,,,.gcl.T?.Y-Y,v, . .„. ,..„. ..,., .4.-; 1 ,.•i,."14..\\\:t ' ,:'.*. :.;',If!,. ..., ?' •, .'!...:••••n144-:-?,,#..4 "16.-*14:•-'.....`,' ;.: .1'," ot111`,.". ..5r..!,>+.01",';,.:1`!' '..cr.:'-',,,,Ovtfl.,,tt,,tilk;',V4A4-0tin,' ,r ',4•4eAplaNt? ',,,,A ., i„ ,.., 7/,,, :.;,,,.',./.,,,,,i,,,,-...,,,;.,, ,loemel.ti,',,,,4,"•*,,i ,..-N;)•,•4: q.4.',-.*.A..z,„.,1,.' • „:).....0,,4..kfri.,', ,,, ''•,.,„4..i,ni,;:k.,*:Aif?,,*',:q1,,'1,. .'.,fr", 4.-4,'-,ci.ilc. ,..,..4 ,\‘\it 7,.:,..:-,4fA:v4 VI:'...1,..-xy"..4%;.,,S435,3117,.KOr'' ' . ' 'e,/'' ./. '''..Nit,.;. .4';'.-4,4,401' ;k;i••-,,,,..:1';'•1'%:•',.''''4.Aa,V,V.:.'.•••":' ..,/i• Kt".,; C ,,,,'0, ' A'''.,-1;•''''.4'.',I.fd.r.c.•••'.'..-'<e4'...*7,04/vVI.,.' ,, '. .• .0,./4,-,,,,,,i,.,,,,,Pkfvtr.:4ptt,A,1,,,,,4sf.isnik:Av.,.,spz,..:,,,4 .11--:- .:40.1,.,.; • ;',..!rf..-',..' . ' ;,,,L,-0 44 4 , . .,„,.. ..„,„,„,„.14„,,,..,'..7:,-:',-4e.'-',.::', ,,''' i '''`e' ..4.1',•J.-x0, " • - 4,.......••••.z i.).-04",vit,./.2,50,1.4sla .,..,k*'4 4.'v'.n,>..,,,wv,,,.*.gc:%.i-5,,..: ' ' ..,:„i'f,).3,... •••- ' 0 :ilkAitAX‘.''. '4.4::?::.....1.4(/::1:;;r<4 • -k-.4r4,:".1:4'..#. .01,74....jtli'j.,,,,,....--' T.F.;:jpA.0..%-.4*.1.46.14.tA,z,.),,,,,•..A.,kkk.,.;;:4,k44,•,-;':-44 itdi., .0 . ,,ifttkii4.t;;IIL . ,.. „,/,,,.„......,..o.„,,,,,,,.,.....f':''.f.,;11,4>it;t1; ,,i;;;e:e' ',,,':'',^'''I.,:';i,',*.47' :W'''•:::4,,'• ,7i 34-. tV f"•,,,,+:."3 NV$.1.4.te?'",l''‘I',••• , 14, ..".'2',....,.:.''l . ..,:'' .C,„1.4.‘,7%.,' ''.:It Ai:,4,1'4 pist,...,'-,,i,...,,,;.-;::`,.,1:,''.-.."!:......"•,,.;,...,..: ,t...... -.F....pi.;',.:^...,,.'.10...4 ,1 kino,".„,,,,..,‘,1.:.,.4,..,.„4}41,Q.0 y ,.,i,..4.7,::94 ,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,,,„, ,,,,...,..\\ ,...‘ ., ,,,,,,., ,,,,,.... ...e,„... . (4.,'', ,•,,I 40,44.,,,,,4 ,,...,,,,,,...4,t1....,P',.i.,..t',,,yilkil s' .P".4.,,,sW, • .,.1,''''44,11.,' ,3•41.,'•,';',,,i,AN.••••AONN.‘,,V. , -,.. A-4". ....a., . .S,P.''Pl.P'2'...'",,.., ,1.• %. ... ,,, 1.1 .'.i .4 i 4,;1! ,. • • ..: ^it.4 Zilf.. ."..*,11... li` • . .•...'.,•,4.1 0 -..,..,..:,, .4., .r. ,f•fr.k.:k, ,:,,,i .;,,,•••,„,,,,,..v..,,,:,,' .•,.14" . ,,,,t0';',,,,?,.t...\\ '. Q17 S.•...., . ,...,-•••-...r.,1 „ A. •,,,,,..g.,- .i.,,,,,..,..,,,..,2...,./t,„ '' ,, .. •;•,,:.,. .', ,' ,,I,,,‘,...,6X IA,,,,,,,, ,....,,...„'',,,,N, , 1 . 'A•;4•4".:,'',,,e`,),,sc,;, \., , ,,,':-...*,1,1,14_,.44).4 '.4,,,•.1'S ...4,1;4-,,,,,,vre•,,-.1. ,.•-,.,,.y. . ..'...,......,. ,..,•...,4.:,,.,,,,,,,I.,g.e,..,,,,,k,,,o,;.%,.,,-.4,,-x...,&-,,,,N,•,,;,.: 4..o.,;....„„, ., ..:ry•••'%'1• ..c.•• v ilii ••:-.,,,...2.‘,.,,,''..,,.'Aff-,,..N., , ,•"-:,-,•.-.••,,,,,...:.:•.: :•- '..:.:'•.•>•. i.....J" ,;,:..:•.....•.,..,.•:',",f.r :•••••••••i•-•,.,;):•N,,ge,..:0,•.,,it.,,,...4 ,I.,...-,,,J.-- .•„ z - N. . :• •...,,,,,,,K1,14,A..,,.. \k • A' ''' l'''A C.,'' ''. ?›, '.1....•::4 ''',' ' •.•‘ • "•'' ..':'','•' ,.. ' ',`1'''''.... '1, 'I r:''''tk 11,...' ''tilVq...As k k`.- t'','A-' ••4,,,' .",••,I.,,•\. .k- ‘. 41, •-.,;,4, c 4. 4.1.4• , ',.1', ,''A.,,,•''%,s'‘• • '. ' • ' • ,". ' •,,..vr.ii Lk:.,',„,„„N;..+? 1";,.:,,,-;,41.0,,,,V,,,. * ','4,C''-'':$,,N.',,,''... 0 *,., .X..t.':1,1(..!:2,..` \NI\ N, •" 4,.* e !••fr.,-7.1iii•• ' IN, f4f.' .'' I. , • k:•,..,.'.;'''4i. .s.,,•-4„•••44,0%,44,44.4.11,6.4'=.,V,Pi,"• - •.;?-',..,...li p / 0) 4,vtrIze,A,,,04... • . . \ .• ' N,,-,,• •,. •-vi,-,.= •—• • , -... - :. ;,;,',,,),* •,:,,,,•18.:, !,04.,..„1,tv,v;:4, k . , , \ ,,,,,t,:if. ---,.....•i ,3,: .. t N.-e •Ar •'..---tfip•e• • .F.,2# , ...4,,........,•:. .• • ...-,'...:,', ' . for,4-q•,4i,',/,1*-•i•,,,,,,, ' ,t.A.1,,,k'%e•..,,4t, .i.,"..,,' ' ie. ,' "4,-tAIll'i'23,* < irii..,:;%',4%Y":!„7..-,.5.,,;.......,%:..,\,..., ,, ,,,,,. 4. .,„,,.„,..,,..: ..,... .„. .;,,,,:,,..,••, . • ...:.r,......•,•• .4,..:•,4:4?..7.4.,,rt-,-,R,41....,,,L,..... 4-4,.‘,4t.t. •:‘,,,-4. ,••... .. ..v• - ,..:,,,,-.:,...4 %.......- ,k),..,4,i,...i, -,•L•i 'n i.i.T,...W...V r • , ' ...fir',/iV,' *litpt,-1....1,4.7'It,,,,-.. tkt\.,N. NI,k•.-5:,'.,,,,.,'e.:..„,„,4.."44. .', . ,• ..•,..,,.... •....:.: .A,,3•,,,,,m,v4 ,,,,,, „.h..0,,,,,k,,f,,-,,,,, ,„.1....,,. . •.,n.,,,,.....„„•i g F..) 1 ,. -.., •vtit,<17' ,‘;';',•' '4` NAV, . ,:,•,.•'. 1.4•1:,, 1,,'• , '''`,.. ,,.• :•'.. .' , •• ,-:"• ••'•• ' 't,•''' ',•''.','-'11.0; '0'.4 -4‘..,11.&1,0) • '.."• ,,il•f., c.., g.5 ';.:0k,„...i':k:,,,,v.a.,,,,,...a,;,1,.;.:::,;14,........ \I",,, •,.. - -,.t,..,--.,',.. ,,.7-. ',...,;,;,.;,-.:::.:.,,...„,.,,..,..; :.: , -.m.sixp,e-4.1,-.4•1„-';:i7,::,Witi?'0 . .• , .. . LU =<• -8 . ,,,,,,,2„-40).."..t.ri,*;',1,..w„.•/••,;,,,":21..„,‘\•,:„„, •'....-.: .y,••::, 1,i..• , , •..,,,-,,•-..,,.,..•:..::•:;.,,,•;4;•.,,,,..:.., ,.. .,.... ,,,,40,.,.,4,,, ...,A...;,:.....,...,,,,....: ....,.....,..44:!,,.,., , ,.,4.t,.-4. .. > 8 0 it g,„tTs.,,,,- ,-,..');-?-04rt,.X '''');,v NA41‘\ . .t -"":-. , i.'•:•.-,.-; ji."'... .:--1.tig.(Y..$1 '. '.. ' .<,':%.'"P.tt't .''''I'M 'i ' ' ..<,;f*A;v.,. ,; , - . . . •'' ' LL,. -6 tciri 1 4-/ -3, .,.t:..,,i- ,.•,.1,,z'„...-.F,,,-•..,‘,:,'..',:',:.,... -.., •,..,.ir .....•.,,•coi.,k,,, .1r•,(13• '•ntz-:---.1-A .: •:••••:',:-.,•:,•••••':•••: ,, ..3/4' -,..1:;451-,„1.141?;,-. 4',r1:"..,.%,4,44..f.t":'''r,• •;-."•:;4ch,'`*,,''''.'..."'•,..)`.., \ :. ,-,,'• -,:,,,,,,,-,.--::..-.•::..::•, -.•;:7'''..,7.:,.:',;.';i.:,..„' E..:,..,;:,,4,;,,?';,,1,,, ,#0,10,4..k.,..,,,....,. ,s4ret..i- , 4........i•)-•: . .. . 0 a 6 o co CI) - . -' AV 1.4',,,,,',,•*X-vp. 4,4.,,,,./..t.;.,Nok,•,..'•,.•,-,,2>, -• •-: 7;;',•iit", ,-•:!••'.•••''.•,...,. ;,:....:..:`.. '...;:',..•.',, ,o.'„,;,4,,,,-4,.:. ..61et..':...., '.. -sr%:•.,., A 7..'-': A ?,,,;,,A4 ci •— ‘,014,,,,, .,..i.',-,..q.m:4,,•.-Aizt.-...4$,,,'4,05„.; .„,.:,,...„..z.. ,.. . '11,o.....,,,.,',. ,,... ,•..'',1Z;'ej.•••••''" .',:.!:.?::',,A e„444.1, .,..„pv..,:tit..Y4.;,.4.-- •. 1,...,.., '.=.' ,:.;•,..,:. .• ,..-e ..- 2 • • i',11,43,ViAk.,'.), " 'Ili:'.40-.•,,,;:,...`;st:::...,,,, • , If,,1;,-,:x"7,P,,!...„.PA ,_ ....,,,,,,..,,x. k,,-,, •.,-, . r-- 'yte,,,...../..... • .,;". . •N,...... . . .-,,,,,,...? 1. '..:': ',4'.,.:....., .: '.';.,.:•:''!k:610:. ••,4'-',,IR 'r',4 '‘/'•-` - .a.t, ::•.,.- -,...f ' ..Z,,„?'!..:;.5;. ';`.,.,,).!;;'..'f','.ie 0 i,..;?, ,`,1,.!.V.:,'„ t• .\s'',:•••'-'s-• • / / '...'''...„-'• .' V,:.-',' • '-:r' ••:',,14,!"''.'.'''14".0,,z yly :,. ',' •1-''. i i',7i#Fr:irt,'. ..e" ..,r. 1 1;11,115 0 .It.' . • , ii'd,: V,V,,,*),4"..',',,ii:gi".. }-UJ *4"."":,''/A;.••-t,53,';?ht. `•••-,• •••/. •.• , •. .'.,;••-,:',1;; ....,,g,....:,../.*_. .., .,'Y '.0••=4,, t•.‘..t1.• -7•'• t i •••• t 1,„*".•k, •-,rAr .;,)A, ••'.••`'...`.''•':,'''"''''; ','%.'C'''.,40.1;;A yf'44.'*4,...,......,,.r,,,,, ( 4 .....0.,4;„... I. • 1,,,,,:;hi ill ,I..1. '&1,1 WO • ' "l'otOtt'...4-2:.":41,14;:. cc :•..i•••t:4.i.,Irt• -., >‘• 'ims''Lt. •• :,:•?:,.„,,,e,.:1Ai...-?...,`4..f,.A.. t •„:. ;;.: .,,,,;„.,.. ,:. .„ ..C.t.*; ....,..o4i.*-...,, ,vo....iv , --I CY) 4:01,,,,';:t1,-;,,.4:,90:.3,,,,,4,,,4, II 2 ?isr,,,-,t„,•,:rw.",<-4,,ej-..,,i,•i„.,•:',/,::,,,..:: ,.... • • •-i,•tA•-,16.2:•1 7.`.';',....'1,../4',',V .,C4.0.,0 • . • 0#•ift ': I -se *. AT'k'4,... •' '40 ' 1 :..• irl,,,„:,,,::.,.: .y,,.-..-'," 7....:::•::-' ' ,--- -:._A• ''. - • -,p4,--,;,c.44.- g.•;, -• CV. k t,',.•:"..,?t,,r,,V.'"'1'•;''• 4,1 ''?1,''Ve.,,,,t4.! •".- 1 *jir-• •';' • .4.:•,:?:.;,‘..;;',•:•c,% ,''R •'''''' ' .." ".44:4 NIT ' ,;')abit.''':,4.,"r- - .„,,e,,_ . ,,,,,I.,,,i,,,,,,x.„,,,,,, ,_EL is,..o1,4.y.-t t,;•>-,,,,I.7,,,.,,„. :•,...:... .,,:,'"!:',-;•1, -,,-4,•,: .:. ,ig.,,,. ,I,.. :.,...4..,,,,,,c,•,-,1-,,,,,.e;-..t-syt'fl ,t'.4:ileA,''.''.:,.4'd,;'".';,1, r— '''•,..1,ti"',4f.:,;,'t, `,,,,'4... ,.4-N,,., • ,r,,,i.... 1.. ; .,1,a,. .-..,../1,,,,,,..r1v404;e4 ":k.,,,,-,3q::";;;:-:::.,•'::/„.'iv,:, 0 U- 4.%•,.•4(k-,...4:;;•q,,,-6.-4N, -,,,:;,!,.. .,.., 4;., •• ' v. ,e . '.3.4,,,,,,14..1.• <,.;?-,1,44.4 a) . :..:4.4.4.,,k,,ft.o, z 0 76,,,,?-4.*-5,4-.2,-,.-;/•,;-:..-i.: , * '4,• '- . •..,:..3.....,...: • :-....„......?.:.:;,;.y.y.,.........:•",..: , . ,„ -v .-. „,,,.......,.....,,, , . ,.. . .,.,...i...,..;,,...........- .... .1_,. . t. 4, .• . .I -,.....,,,-...„),,. 1... ...44-A,-,,,..i.v,,e- vp,-.:•,,,,.gy5--4,.,!.4 f.,?,Te. ...„•-•,,• ‘'v,. , ,. ..,,,bA.... ... ,,. • . ,!......tVt .' ,..:,....! ,. .•-....4 i,,,,,,,rxri,.!4,,,rxt-;,...,,..,04,,,,,.,,,,.,re,,,,,,, e,, ..,,. '...',.-f. 4,..t..9..4,...y.',4is<.•••••.•..3,...,',1..,..,-,', ., • •••-•• • Li.. . , . •- -- i . . . L.; . - -• , - - - -. -- - - - Right of access easement to deposit soil excavated from P-1 Pond into First City property; - Temporary access easement provided to Metro facilities through First City property; - Dedication of 17.5 acres by First City to City of Renton for P-1 Pond; - Dedication of 0.58 acres for drainage easement along northern property line of Tract B; - Dedication of 9.51 acres for Oakesdale Avenue S.W., LID, Southwest 7th Street, Powell Avenue S.W. and Naches Avenue S.W.; - Participation in LID for Oakesdale Avenue S.W., Southwest 7th Street and Naches Avenue S.W. in an amount exceeding $3 million; - 1980 traffic analysis for City of Renton; - Relocation of storm drainage into Naches Avenue; and - Archaeological investigation conducted by University of Washington. • Shoreline permits SP-093-81, SP-090-01 issued by City of Renton for P-1 Pond excavation; • June -November 1984, Soil Conservation Service excavated 17.5-acre P-1 Pond; • August 1984 and August 1985 - First City Phase I and II site plans approved, buildings completed on Powell Avenue; • August 1985 - Update of 1980 traffic analysis; • September 1985 - Supplement for August, 1985 traffic analysis update; • December 1985 - First City Phase III site plans approved, and buildings on Naches Avenue completed; • October 1986 - Property rezoned by City of Renton from MP to office park (OP); • September 1987 - Grade and fill permit (SP 100-80) approved by city council for Tracts A and B; • May 1987 - Tract B site plan for BCAC facility submitted for seven-story building, application withdrawn; 2-7 • October 1987 - Phase IV A and B and Phase V site plans approved, buildings completed; • May 1988 - Oakesdale Avenue Southwest and Southwest 7th Street LID completed by City of Renton; I • August 1988-Phase VII site plan for seven-story building on Tract B submitted, City determined need for EIS, Tract A added to EIS; • August 1989 - Phase VII Tract B site concepts modified during EIS process; • September 1989 - Phase VIII site plan for one-story building on west portion of Tract A submitted for approval, project added to EIS; and • October 1989 - Phase VIII incorporated into Tract A site concept modification process. 2.4 Project Need Several commenters to the Draft EIS questioned the need for additional office space in the Renton area. The City of Renton zoned Tracts A and B as OP in 1986. The Grady Way,Powell and south Oakesdale Avenue Southwest area has developed as office park uses since the mid-1970s. This project is a continuation of that office park development. The marketplace has shown a demand for office park space in the Renton area. The project (i.e. market demand and economic feasibility) are determined by the private sector and not by the City. Under, SEPA (WAC 197-11-448 [3]) EIS are not required to discuss methods of financing the proposal and economic competition. The City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance allows inclusion of economic issues a an option. During the scoping period, the City of Renton received no requests for economic or financing discussions. Thus, this EIS did not include these elements consistent with Renton's SEPA ordinance. 2.5 Description of the;Proposed Action The Draft EIS presented two alternatives for Tract A: Al -Proposed Action and A2 - No Action, and three alternatives for Tract B: B1 - Proposed Action; B2 - Seven-Story Building with Parking Structure; and B3 - No Action. As previously mentioned in Section 2.3 Supplemental Information on Project History, FCDC has been planning and constructing office buildings in the project area since the early 1980s. Building construction has been in phases,with Phase I completed on Powell Avenue 2-8 I ' 1984. The proposed actions for this project represent Phase VII (Tract B) and Phase VIII (Tract A) of development by FCDC. The preparation of the Draft EIS for Tracts A and B began in mid-1989 at which time FCDC had not identified specific site plans for Tract A and proposed the construction of a single seven-story office building (285,000 square feet) on Tract B. At that time, the. proposed action was a single seven-story building to be sited within 350 feet of the heron colony. Using environmental guidelines developed by the City's consultant,FCDC revised the proposed action to include three buildings (B1 Proposed Action), a new single seven-story office building with parking structure alternative (Alternative B2), and a site plan for Tract A(Al Proposed Action). Those revised Tract A and Tract B proposed actions,Alternatives B2 and no action,were analyzed in the April 1990 Draft EIS and are presented in Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2 herein. 2.5.1 Tract A Alternative Al - Proposed Action. The Proposed Action for Tract A is to construct three office buildings with surface parking in three phases over a four-year period: • Phase 1 is scheduled to be constructed in 1991-92 and consists of a single-story ±23,582 square foot office building and associated parking to be built in the western third of the site; • Phase 2 is scheduled to be constructed in 1993-94 and consists of a four-story ±80,000 square foot building and associated parking to be built in the eastern third of the site; and • Phase 3 is scheduled to be constructed in 1994-95 and consists of a four-story, ±80,000 square foot building and associated parking to be built in the middle third of the site. The project, as proposed by the applicant, will include a vegetative buffer between the development and the P-1 Channel, a biofiltration swale for stormwater,pedestrian areas adjacent to buildings, landscaped surface parking, a total of 791 parking stalls, and adherence to zoning and shoreline setback requirements. The development is intended to be consistent with the OP zoning designation of the site. Figure 2-4 presents the proposed site plan for Alternative Al. Mitigation measures to be required by the City for the Tract A proposed action, are presented in Chapter 3 and summarized in Chapter 1 of this document. 2-9 • .-Quarry r• b 411t GIAkNQL 7 PUMP STAT{ON fletrrili �•• `a!•-!'"-:...� eo ems••` :4 ° 'J'i V4 e. qJ ..N~' F+m.e !°i- o / 3Cd Phase 1994 -I .�--..— ,T�-.- _ ` "�_b Ma utaa'. I 1Iv '0 '7••• :.= = .. \ P-1 Channel % t II Sewage Treatme 'e4sw •y��> V�• • SS�• • � P45' �•• ` VICINITY MAP 1'=200' `� pcoe r q • \• .\ • ur L-7- , . SUM Tc. 1 -- --, , c,4 e-- ., . N -,..7-- ., .,. .. -\.- --.0.64, \:\ .r. xs 000 • `" TTTITITIT�T _ ie .... , ii. lc -....._\._; . --..., _A. .. :` p / sr4/4 ) Finish Floor ..' i r i ` i 1�11��f�. a Story <•'� --17/ - ewsn...._ ______0111.11° . \.:11111"5.7. 1 4114ratir-are-41141 . 4- ------i '''ill° ''''4* - f-:.-1-----445z..7/ . lit:- ''z'.;.at:gT:I14/.1.1.111; "re% .. 'fisill \ t .. , :i '�^ ! �~ '10i�;-: •. ., p�acNc ACT A ;\� r/ j �:� • NOFTFiEF2N PROPERTY. 4. r-, :::boN • ,3 •'�''/.- -• lir," .• ii .t e �tt ± 525,536 S.F.• "� : \ i ,• �o� Building Area f 183,582 S.F. eras,:arm.ounce? _ / ~ S Footprint t 63,582 S.F. - • _ , . \• a-:.-; I Gross Coverage ± 34.996 Est Phan 1990 / ?.�� It. \� o,w,. It:s '� i ZSite Coverage t 12.1% 0073 ,.:i • • d Parking f 791 Stalls �� �� e \ = 03 •s ratio ± 1/232 S.F. C* ` S k I 4 •`' ' I v • t : ... TRACT •A / BURUNGTON NORTHERN �� s \e �""��`r Q — �__ a ALTERNATE SCHEME �A� TBLACKRQ:::i:- mis °n' CORPORATE. . VN RENTON WASf9NGTON z: — •—— — — --- — 22 Z] z< 3 F=., e.wsr est er FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. ` $ ; Txe Pre Sneer.Awe"° PHASE VIII _ — — — — r/lO Seare.VJ.07�7R7o1521E1U Z . • Figure 2-4. Alternative Al - Site Plan for Proposed Action • 2-10 . Alternative A2 -No Action. SEPA guidelines (WAC 197-11-440) require that the No Action Alternative be evaluated and compared to the other alternatives presented. Under the No Action Alternative, the site would not be developed. Tract A would be left as is and available for development consistent with zoning of the site sometime in the future. The No Action Alternative would not meet the objective of the project applicant to develop the property. Under No Action, however, there would not be any of the environmental impacts associated with construction or operation of this proposal. A proposal to develop the area under the current zoning could be presented to the City at some later date. If left undeveloped,woody vegetation (trees and shrubs)would likely continue to encroach on the area. 2.5.2 Tract B Alternative B1 - Proposed Action. Tract B is proposed for construction of three office buildings in three phases: • Phase 1 is the construction of a ±71,000 square foot, four-story office building with associated surface parking in 1991-92; • Phase 2 is the construction of a ±58,575 square foot, three-story office building and associated surface parking in 1992-93; and • Phase 3 is the construction of a ±156,625 square foot, seven-story office building and a three-story parking structure in 1993-95. r.. Parking for the completed project will include approximately 496 surface parking stalls and 800 stalls within the parking structure. Other features of the proposed design include preservation of the 1.1-acre wetland in the old Black River channel located in the northwestern portion of the site; retention of a majority of the mature cottonwood trees located on the south portion of the site; landscaping and buffering of development from natural areas; and adherence to shoreline and zoning setback requirements and restrictions established for the protection of the heron colony. The site plan for Alternative B1 is presented in Figure 2-5. Mitigation measures to be required by the City are presented in Chapter 3 and Chapter 1 (Summary) of this document. Alternative B2 - Seven-Story Building with Parking Structure. Alternative B2 includes one seven-story office building, a four-story parking structure and surface parking (Figure 2-6). The development is designed to be consistent with the zoning requirements and environmental constraints of the site. The proposed office building is expected to provide ±285,000 square feet of office space. Parking will consist of±551 surface stalls and ±800 stalls within the proposed parking structure. As with the Proposed Action, this alternative includes preservation of the old Black River channel and associated wetlands; retention of a majority of the cottonwood trees; landscaping and buffering of development 2-11 . ` �MQY J16JS ca,.,r /// laL.�..+EO, C.B•G.•. ``j ] 1� / PI..Gor•pwRy.4/ '//// / / 2�E♦EAP,Kci / v/ti.I1C.9?I JET / / . Y rK.corrowaaa2 W �- // !L /,• i i / I `, q f ` gv i gyp.,, H l/ O�tontion paw /r 1.\� r � r VICINITY MAP J / ! " S b•tSOv'E „,„ 1 twE v.rtw(vwr / �'r►/ ���f-tom - -},; .:-.1�: .�. ���' . ��3, �_�_ \ r 1 -_ -r7{i-O'i . C00.1.OPnM7K .,. IJ �., / r •tt, .•ro ram11 + , . s a n ti \ \\\ / : •��~ f ! i SI , ' ; SQJTHCEn IEN I.�. II �C. n _ `�h: � 1` co::P..:f l•1 •�yy r- r. I KI: :. iI I � 3rd Phase-1992-3 +/' Qom` %a It. 1' /':I % i r �; g \\ rviii,rarwr,y iiUfC /r (�� % a \ 1 i /'!I ‘ 0 . • '" f s ` v;�i I j { - HERON EXHIBIT .if-)- .:.,i)r . 'Yb: rI d ni� �s • l II /c :c.. , SSdPla' °I k \14 \ \ , „ .� .,(' 1. 1,-,.a on°., k•,I . .4 -,.% . .:„....,..„\pc,c,.....:y 0 \,.. \ t , ___. --; 11,. ti, :4 . . . 1 , iiii -. \ERIRII.si R..• , I I I/ , /0 :4•/"/ il 1 / ilik-l--- 0. .. s K `.mil , 1a ���, '*� /A/ rlrR NI, ;\ ` �'�I I a :�n-: c-+•t�C_ -1 � ` )1e;V---- 'Ir'1`."i =aP i v '/vi` !'y r J... -'. 'r1!~ '�=� �e �`sy��S I ] ,t 1 ,1a t` N ` / t i� ` 1st Phase-1990 . . IIIIN. "�T , "dr UU _ =/ '/ .MC•C"si,E 4.w.3fo CivKi ` - +� tib '�+�"�.a„r, _ � I� ir- i i .s _`c- c+sE.ne..r v eE-'wr..�o • • , \ s .. ..."- 444 \s k1. • e,�• / oo..r rra • ` `., '•/ .# /1 BLACKRIVER pr. . Site Area =683.762 S.F. '�i r ��y ,�`�+ .-l_ Area 2286,300SF. '``-i+ •-1. 7 / CORPORATE PARK 1'd h' . s419X .�;. J. i „/ Gross Coverage I r /� -Q-.3S i• Site Coverage s3 6% (Includes Garage) I .• '-same . E,� ••�•• I o•n'� 4 ate- •,';4a�"��,; RENTON WASHINGTON -.�,.. `• I - 2- / vc -'- FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT CORP. i Parking .1.296 Stalls 1I220 S.F. ..4- �"c.—� `\ r-` , sar vd 1301 a-E-7 .b Standard (2800 Structure Parked) .k^• -,D- .�� r • Compact \ TRACT B H.n c �� \' ALTERNATE SCHEME KA`; 2nd Phase-1991 �`� -� With Striae.Parking -. .__..) Figure 2-5. Alternative B1 - Site Plan for Proposed Action , 2-12 • - from natural areas; and adherence to shoreline and zoning setback requirements. Figure 2-6 shows a site plan for Alternative B2. In the event this alternative was to become the applicant's proposed action, the site plan would need to be changed to reflect the revised heron guidelines (Appendix B) and mitigation measures presented in Chapter 3. Alternative B3 - No Action. Under the No Action Alternative, the site would not be developed. Tract B would be left undeveloped and available for use consistent with zoning of the site sometime in the future. The No Action Alternative would not meet the objective of the project applicant to develop the property. Under No Action, however, there would not be any of the environmental impacts associated with construction or operation of this proposal. 2.5.3 Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures to reduce the magnitude of impacts were defined in the April, 1990 Draft EIS. In response to comments received on the Draft EIS and from additional research, the City has defined additional mitigation measures. The mitigation measures presented in the Draft EIS plus new measures identified since completion of the Draft EIS are presented under each environmental element in Chapter 3 and summarized in Chapter 1, Summary. These mitigation measures will be the basis for a Mitigation Report to be prepared by the City following publication of this FEIS. The Mitigation Report will set forth the conditions required by the applicant if the project is to proceed. 2-13 • N.—W'[.n =.•O.15 00.1- - 1/ . 1 • w La t.w \ f'I !/ DelentkIn Pond [ / ! ' • "� ( _ o, �' ��; �- tom-_ }v .[.,� ` 8'[ r-fir------•_ •��}, i [ :\\I\eucKcom.A.musvutit I w.~ e f:1 __ _ IIy-CII� SIA LC ` \ 4i. • ' _• 1 _ i 'f ,•~ -(^�.• _ •/ _--\-,). .,,:r�� A. 1'- ,�3 e; i - am(S SOUT aNfEN[Efl - 1 a 141 , -�.:- GEn4 _ 1991 7 Stary Off cz "r: 1Q: �p �i>�1i! •1 =-'T, SOON With • \t� o wnn raricing Structure im__________ ���'�\ j . \``�\ g r '\ .t ee i • ). ` '• I - HERON EXHIBIT • . /,‘/if,. ..- . - . ...._,.. NIL .,4./ •, • • k /f �, / E ' DRf A71bCa� ' I ! ,� •�It �.1:I , :1 �--��--I f l�j{L/ ` •r _ �- nand STgEEg C i �: _ [ -1il [ % -'�. .1\ II ` l:/ • j/ . I !I 1 I1 -^r J = NEPON Poac[nY 'I . I . 1,, - 447/ / , i e. . /4 ...11;4' 4 „„,i III / e / / i e / 1es 1C>r so- s l' ~.�� '1:�'1 _ r.7 E I.tnq Pn.w• • • fi .. .v/ , ,,, ,..,.. . . .,,-,.,.. - : , . .,., , . . .. lit r [ ` 1 • 1411 \� I ' m ; ; • / ' %:-�- . '...:'-.------:---;-.. .SS. " -- ' ,— 6 ' '--• ' ` - _ __ *.. ` 9 a t' r l?' ' _ wtc c+r— vrc..-E0 e. \ 4v�„`` ` dale A�� AS`..:• _ ..T . yr��Vy , /:�" c� / a.Y�•.�, ..• - `` tea-. �a . TABULATION / '� eye • BLACKRIVER VN Site Area '_563.762 SF ;�2. .` �. , • -` .•a+ona.v =� ` Building Area -•_26s.000 S.F. r ,4r j;l ;;2�,., 1pn CORPORATE PARK RENTON WASHINGTONGross Coverage s41.7% 1 °� rye ^y: Site Coverage 217.6 S (Includes Garage) • I % _'j r-,4 - - --- FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i Parking �1.351 STALLS (V211 SF.) �ta-- ` om `s ,rr M 50 wA ud `. _•. 1r Standard \` ``, Handicap Figure 2-6. Alternative B2 - Seven Story Building with Parking Structure • 2-14 Chapter 3. Supplemental Description of Affected Environment, Significant Impact and Mitigation Measures 0 IChapter 3. Supplemental Description of Affected Environ- ment, Significant Impact and Mitigation Measures 3.1 Introduction In response to requests by reviewers, of the April, 1990 Draft EIS, this chapter presents the following information: • additional description of affected environment where needed; • additional impact analysis where appropriate; and • identification of mitigation measures to lessen impacts. The mitigation measures identified include those presented in the Draft EIS plus additional measures developed since the April, 1990 Draft EIS. 1 3.2 Earth Resources 3.2.1 Topography/Soils Affected Environment. In response to the Washington State Department of Ecology's (WDOE) concern for possible contamination on FCDC property (Tract A), during July, 1990, Earth Consultants,Inc. conducted soil investigations on Tract A to identify subsurface materials and to collect soil samples for laboratory analysis. The source of this potential contamination was from material dredged from the P-1 Pond forebay (immediately south of the King County pump station) and deposited in a settling basin on Tract A during construction of the P-1 Pond in 1984. None of this potentially contaminated material was deposited on Tract B. WDOE was concerned that contamination from numerous known contaminated upstream sites, may have migrated downstream in Springbrook Creek and _ settled in the forebay of the P-1 pumping plant , 1 On July 20, 1990, sampling of Tract A was conducted by Earth Consultants, Inc. Sampling was conducted in the area known to have been the settling basin for material dredged from the P-1 Pond. Samples taken at five locations were analyzed for priority pollutants and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) (see Appendix F for details). 3-1 Samples were taken to depths ranging from 2.5 to 8 feet in depth. The soils in the area of investigation were found to be brown silty fine sand and brown silts of varying depth (1 to 4 feet), underlain by sandy clayey silt with lenses of silty sand, and gray-green clayey silts (Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990). Results of the study showed that priority pollutant concentrations were relatively low but that cadmium (28 mg/kg) and TPH (240 mg/kg) were present in one soil sample (B102A-1')at concentrations exceeding WDOE's proposed industrial soil cleanup standards (10 mg/kg for cadmium and 200 mg/kg for TPH). Concentrations of chromium (120 mg/kg) and zinc (1,000 mg/kg) were also elevated in the same sample while the concentration of silver (6.6 mg/kg) was elevated in a second sample (B101A-1.5'). WDOE has not proposed a cleanup standard for zinc and silver (Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990) (see Appendix F). Chlorinated pesticides were not detected in the soil samples. PCBs were detected j in two samples at concentrations well below WDOE's proposed industrial soil cleanup standard of 10.0 mg/kg. Several semi-volatile organics were detected, one (pyrene) at a concentration (0.21 mg/kg) considerably less that WDOE proposed cleanup standard (20.0 mg/kg), the other three, Di-N-butylphthalate, butylbenzylphthalate, and Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate have no WDOE proposed soil cleanup standards (Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990) (see Appendix F). Volatile organics, total phenols, and cyanide were not detected at or above their respective detection limit in the six soil samples (see Appendix F). A toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) was performed on sample B102A-1'. Based on the TCLP, cadmium, chromium, and zinc appear to be relatively r immobile, with less than 1% of the metals leaching from the sample. Additional soil sampling and analysis of TPH in the vicinity of the one borehole showing contamination suggests that the TPH contamination is localized (Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990). ' As a measure to further reduce the potential impact of the proposed action on great blue heron nesting, the city will require the applicant to construct earthen berms between development and the P-1 Pond and heron colony on Tracts A and B (Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3) (see Sections 3.5.3 and 3.5.4 for more discussion of this measure). Construction of those berms will require the import of soil to the site. The mitigation section below specifies soil conditions for that berm. Impacts Tract A. Results of the site characterization study by Earth Consultants, Inc., indicated that the dredge spoils on Tract A are underlain by a clayey silt and silty clay layer of lower permeability which should reduce the downward movement of contaminants on the site. Additionally, the construction of office buildings and covering of asphalt and concrete surface will further reduce downward movement of contaminants. 3-2 P-1 Detention Basin 10' High Berm with 20' High Trees Viewing Platform • Trail i� �� �r5' High Berm with 6' to 8' High Trees 'il�ll�l''I/I� V/ Ilj'.,I, vingi I u. A� l a I I '�I l i I�j;!i111111Pi ih 90 'tli ( •eat a i-0,t"." 1 4�" r1,.r `+ IEa tr f fi r Ih II N I I ['III G �; tk Y T 1 �.s r• � II �1�'� � �yF;hrPr4ti `t st t Y�k..{•.�� �! s �s ��;� +t�;<i+ I I I ,{'I II�I�II'I I I I'y l l I M • 71 5l A t1Y t � . L, 1� r i0 ,.t�l i WV:` If � t.!' '�,c r �'�. �d �� �, , ( I lI d I�I I� Ilf I 14 � I II..:4 ,1: jl!);f 6 L�OC,, <r' t �0 tr'w(F •' } t I II r I II, II iI I ail I,! �I-I h I tt n; .f4:: U, i• 4"Ty,F 1... .t f „ .', L 11i�4 F 1':� - ,.A•f* Y4".� 1..V.J 'n I I I I ® II 1 II' 61. t� 7 r Yt Mel+..,.l� 4S t;./ k.�� 6 f �., lA !"h��y i._° 'yt`.s �,' ♦ I Vf :1.„.g Inp S�j �'tp "'�.1,IP�i'S.,.rYti'+l,v4v,i.^: 1jT"�'��o rifz,t1�1,;'i1,t iVO4 n !. :: :•:.♦ ' j! ' I ,I� :u'11 �I.. III I I it ,�. F �,' ,4 t J.t Z. Edge Heron f. ....,,mo t: ` _ ; � `".` �' �,;t`'r `, ,,:'� :rx :�: • ♦ u b I E. G of ., e :r" ram. :".. �R y54 S ,ry t g•o�Y —, ^: .•� •l.iigii i:1a}i:{. uH II M �..r. : � :c: .;� -r.�.a~�:=,�r�k:r�,:, a:;•: ::::::::::::; :::"::� "slid � Flight 1 • I 0.. id r. I � Co rridor r f � I I :♦ I j 'I :: I I yr• I` I i ::ti• I �j I I t ti I: I I I I ��I II I' :: fIII f II u'. D wF3( H Vjel k F S CI. D 44 ` 4 : :: : Trail 1 - / %.. Trail and Observation 0' 150' NORTH / Area Fenced Figure 3-1 . Tract A Illustrative Plan with Setbacks, Berming, and Building Height Limitations . , t I I I Fence(4 s) • Evergreen and 1 Deciduous Trees ?-"J r 14,‘ \ A. _.._, , , 0$: • . • ski iu .:f`, . 7,,+, , 0.6.„..,,,..,_ .. - .,; , , Parking Trail Berm 1. 411.4, , *ii 42'minimum width Shrubs '4 , - AL , 1 Pond .4 ` ; i 1 5' High Berm ,' i 1 I , Evergreen and -1 Fence(4-61 Evergreen and , Deciduous Trees--�\ Evergreen Trees Deciduous Trees / . 1 ki fi.44- f.'" •c. I *1 i b Trail j ro 1 I, , Berm _ ji 83'minimum width I Shrubs i i 0 CD 1 . I Setback from • Pond -4 I I- heron colony 10' High Berm Figure 3-2. Typical Cross Section of 5 Foot and 10 Foot High Earthen Berms i -- Located Between the Heron Colony and Development, and ! • Along P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek i _ Drawing is conceptual and not to scale. , ! 3-4 Closest Rookery Tree I0 -1..t,tti P-1 Detention -'7‘ \ .tli . - �:� Basin H I' .... Trail ®p��5 cli �; Existing Trees ; i F°11:1k P w•Edge Heron / i Pilatform ,:. �f Ede .Q Flight Corridor ( t \ r__ , - 9 Heron N �Nag %� � light Corridor w i / \Itee5 h I 1 s - 1 \ili°r? e ! _�_° tpp.....'...".... .....1.11 ,:7:-..'"g ---'-'-•--,":",4 -: /vim r f ...,.-,;,.,.-,,,,....:1.ry � 5,�yt .:rf_rryr,�`�%,?i? ..� f l y 7:wY>/ _ 5'.-.3 4(kW.5':... -' .. 1 • • %\ CC. ;`r''— 1-� ��� oar :�� �: �/ I i Jyzr+j.�' �yt' �r L .::::::7:S�:i::7:�Si :::•S AS 1 �i�`�� = ,-`a.:A ,i__- a ..=gq:; r.:•i•i% 3:;:.:..7 ::r s*...:: Rit'il:::'. •- : le f � �--= -s_ :ram= :..•: .:.::::.i.:::;::1_•:.•.••.:. •• i;;.,; :::4'711:.:::::.lii:::-‘ # • t� -_C. rfY:C'- -=•. �_�=,• : i�::: ;:::5:•::1�::::ii::.:: S:S:SS':�:1 «i:;'::5•: ^ V•. di Y 1 l i ii.:T ri.. I Its J .:5 r rii .ftiew oq • s::: :: : ::s:::::i::::; ;;: :'r ' Trail s • . _�°� �.` 10 , Scale: '=1 Figure 3-3. Tract B Illustrative Plan with Setbacks, Berming and Building Height Limitations 3-5 1 Tract B. Tract B was not sampled for contaminants since material dredged from the forebay was not placed on that part of the project site. Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIS included the following mitigation measures: • 'To minimize the impact of grading activities on great blue herons, no grading should be done from February 15 through June 15." This measure has been changed to the following: • To minimize the impact of grading activities on great blue herons, no grading shall.be conducted within 800 feet of the heron colony during the period from February 1 to July 1 and within 600 feet of the colony from July 1 to August 1. • Unless otherwise determined by WDOE, the contaminated areas on Tract A shall be sealed with asphalt for parking or buildings; and • Permanent signage shall be established to warn utilities of the location of contaminated soils in event of later excavations. Additional discussion of construction timing is presented in Section 3.5.4, Unique Terrestrial Resources. The following measures apply to the construction of the earthen berm bordering the P-i Pond and facing the heron colony: • All soil used for berm construction shall be free of contamination, and shall have structural integrity suitable to support trail and side slopes; and • Soil for planting shall be of sufficient quality (nutrients and drainage) to support native plant growth. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Placement of up to 10,000 cubic yards of fill will be required on Tract A and 35,800 cubic yards on Tract B. Fill will also be required to construct earthen berms on Tract A and B as mitigation. 3.2.2 Foundation Affected Environment and Impacts. No additional information needed. See Draft EIS for discussion of Affected Environment and Impacts. Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIS stated that soil conditions on the site are judged to be suitable for building construction, including the use of conventional shallow foundations for one- and two-story structures. From an engineering standpoint, either auger cast-in-place or driven steel piles would be suitable for buildings greater than two stories in 3-6 height. However, auger cast-in-place pile construction is quieter than driving steel piles (see Section 3.6.1). • Auger cast-in-place construction techniques shall be used in lieu of pile driving for buildings that require pile construction. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Noise would be associated with foundation construction. Impacts of noise are presented in Section 3.6.1 of this document. 3.2.3 Seismic Affected Environment and Impacts. No additional information needed. See Draft EIS for discussion of Affected Environment and Impacts. Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIS included the following mitigation measure which remains relevant: • "Design of buildings must follow UBC standards. Calculations shall be made to determine the need for battered piles for all pile-supported structures." Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. None. 3.3 Air 3.3.1 Air Quality Affected Environment and Impacts. No additional information needed. Please see Chapter 4 - Response to Comments from the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Board and supplemental information in Appendix E - Air Quality Modeling. Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures apply to Tract B since no parking garage is proposed for Tract A. The Draft EIS stated that based on the results of the CO modeling, the three-story parking garage for the Proposed Action (B1) should have the following features to ensure that CO levels do not reach unsafe levels in the garage: • "Lower levels of each garage deck should be a minimum of 40% open to the outside (side facing the heron colony must be fully enclosed to minimize disturbance to nesting herons); • The top level must be 100% open (but with a facade or wall on the heronry side to minimize line-of-sight to the heronry); and • Two exits should be constructed (on the side of the garage opposite the heron colony)." 3-7 The following changes to the mitigation measures have been made for this Final EIS: • The measures defined in the Draft EIS for the three-story garage remain unchanged; • In the event a four-story garage is constructed, lower levels of each garage deck shall be a minimum of 55% open to the outside (side facing the heronry must be fully enclosed); • The top level must be 100% open; and • Two exits shall be constructed on the side of the garage opposite the heron colony. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Localized increase in CO concentrations,but at levels below the 1-hour and 8-hour ambient standards if the mitigation measures are implemented. 3.4 Water 3.4.1 Surface Water Movement/Quantity Affected Environment. A number of comments regarding runoff from Tracts A and B were received from reviewers of the Draft EIS. Several reviewers were concerned about the discharge of stormwater runoff into the P-1 Pond., The following discussion is to clarify the purpose and function of the P-1 Pond and pumping facility. In 1984, as a part of the East Side Green River Project, the U. S. Soil Conservation Service created the P-1 Pond, on land which was dedicated by FCDC, by enlarging the forebay of the Black River pumping station. Figure 2-2 shows an aerial view of the area prior to the construction of the P-1 Pond. The Black River pumping station and forebay area are shown to the left side of the photo. The P-1 Pond was created to primarily control stormwater from the Springbrook Creek watershed and tributaries. Stormwater stored in the pond is metered through the Black River pumping station through the Black River outlet channel to the Green/Duwamish River. The pond was designed to handle a 7-day 100-year storm event (Straka pers. comm.). According to Allmendinger (pers. comm.), the highest water elevation achieved in the P-1 Pond during the November, 1990 flood was 4.5 feet, an elevation which is 15 and 9 feet below the elevations of Tracts A and B respectively. During the storm, the water elevations in the pond were controlled by pumping flood water into the old Black River channel west of the pump station. ' I I As a "detention pond", the P-1 Pond also intercepts sediment brought into the pond from Springbrook Creek. The sediments accumulate in the pond, resulting in a deltaic formation of islands and channels. The access road around Tract A and adjacent to the pond was created to allow the City of Renton access to the pond for maintenance, including 3-8 the periodic removal of accumulated sediments, a maintenance activity that may be necessary at some future date (Straka pers. comm.). In recognition of the need to control stormwater runoff from the increasing amount of impervious surface area, the City of Renton recently adopted King County's Surface Water Design Manual. In addition,in June, 1990,WDOE published a technical review draft of the "Stormwater Management Manual for Puget Sound" (WDOE 1990). The purpose of that manual is to identify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control stormwater quantity and quality in the Puget Sound region, as directed by the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority (PSWQA). Both documents will be integral parts of the stormwater control program for the City of Renton. BMPs are defined as "physical, structural, and/br managerial practices, that when used singly or in combination,prevent or reduce pollution of water and have been approved by Ecology" (WDOE 1990). BMPs include two groups - source control BMPs which keep the pollutant from coining in contact with stormwater, and stormwater treatment BMPs which consist of various methods of treating stormwater. The City of Renton review process requires that an applicant prepare a detailed drainage plan during the site plan review phase of the project. At that time details regarding the type, size, and location of the drainage facilities will be reviewed by the city. Because the city has adopted the King County Surface Water Design Manual, all drainage facilities (pipes, open channels, and catch basins) must be sized for a 25-year storm event, and receiving waters.must be able to accommodate runoff from the 100-year storm event (Straka pers. comm.). Impacts. For all project alternatives (Al, B1, and B2), the City of Renton asked the project applicant for further information regarding agreements that Blackriver Corporate Park properties be allowed direct discharge of stormwater to the P-1 Pond without onsite detention (Parsons pers. comm.). Correspondence from the city regarding storm water detention in the P-1 Pond is presented in Appendix I of this document. Upon legal review, the city will make a final decision during the site plan review stage based on those agreements. A determination of the need for any additional detention requirements will be made at that time. Additional information on water quantity appears in Chapter 4 Response to Letters of Comment, specifically the letter from Walter Trial, Ph.D. (letter No. 83). Mitigation Measures. As previously mentioned in the Draft EIS, hydrologic mitigation measures would be determined as a part of the city's review of the detailed drainage plans for the project and any agreements regarding discharge from Blackriver Corporate Park properties to the P-1 Pond. Mitigation measures for Surface Water Movement/Quantity include the following: • All plans must meet city code to control runoff, sediments and pollutants entering a receiving water and must be consistent with the recently adopted King County Surface Water Design Manual; 3-9 • As a part of the drainage report to be submitted by the applicant during the site plan review, the applicant must calculate runoff volumes from the site, a Level 1 downstream analysis and design biofiltration swales using methods outlined in the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual (recently adopted by the city); • In the event no detention is required, the city will review the need for a wet pond system prior to discharge of runoff to the P-1 Pond; and • FCDC or subsequent owners, shall participate in the preparation and implementation of a management plan for the P-1 Pond. Other participants will include other abutting landowners, the City of Renton (lead agency), King County, and the SCS. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The volume of stormwater runoff from Tracts A and B will increase with development. The Level 1 downstream analysis will determine impact of that increase. 3.4.2 Water Quality/Runoff Affected Environment. A number of comments regarding water quality were received from reviewers of the Draft EIS. The following discussion provides additional information on water quality conditions and impacts. The water quality of the P-1 Pond, Springbrook Creek and Naches Avenue drainage swale was discussed in the Draft EIS. As mentioned, the water quality in the system often times does not meet state Class A water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, fecal coliform and temperature. In many ways the P-1 Pond presently acts as a wet pond detention basin for the watershed. Wet ponds are detention ponds with a permanent pool of standing water and wetland vegetation. The purpose of the permanently wetted area is to provide a quiescent zone to settle out small particles over an extended period; promote bacterial action to decompose organic pollutants; and provide a medium for soluble pollutant uptake by wetland plants and algae (URS 1988). An unknown percent of the pollutants presently entering the P-1 Pond either drop out with the sediments or are taken up by the emergent plants in the pond. Because of the poor water quality conditions in Springbrook Creek, the Green/Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan recommended that a comprehensive water quality plan for improving water quality in the Black River basin be developed and implemented. Specific components of the plan include a reduction in the deposition of sediments, improvement of fish passage throughout the tributary reaches, and maintenance and enhancement of existing wetlands as habitat for wildlife. Additional recommendations were to improve the operation and maintenance of the pumping station and forebay relative 3-10 to water quality and sediment quality. The plan is in the process of being prepared by R.W. Beck and Associates, consultants to the City of Renton. The City of Renton recently adopted King County's Surface Water Design Manual (King County 1990). This manual includes requirements for controlling water quality and design features for wet ponds. In June, 1990, WDOE published a technical review draft of the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin (WDOE 1990). The manual includes BMPs for the control of runoff quality from a variety of land uses including professional services (i.e., office parks). Table 3-1 presents a comparison of selected pollutants typically found in urban runoff in the Puget Sound region, to water quality standards or criteria. The BMPs are designed to reduce the pollutant loadings to receiving water using such methods as biofiltration swales and wet ponds. Impacts. The impacts of Alternatives Al, B1 and B2 were defined in the Draft EIS. The quality of runoff from development on Tracts A and B is expected to approximate the values for urban runoff presented in Table 3-1. Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIS include the following: "Mitigation of construction related water quality impacts for both Tracts would be in the form of an erosion control plan as required by the city. This plan will include the following elements: • Identification of clearing limits; • Installation of silt fences around the perimeter of areas to be cleared; • Installation of a rocked construction entrance; • Excavation of sediment ponds and ditches to carry surface flow to the ponds; • Installation of rock check dams in ditches to slow flow and trap sediments; • Phasing of clearing to minimize the amount of exposed soil; • Immediate seeding or covering of exposed cuts as recommended by the geotechnical engineer; • Mulching of all areas exposed for more than 30 days; and • Weekly maintenance of all ponds, ditches and other erosion control features and more frequent maintenance as required by weather. 3-11 Table 3-1. Comparison of Selected Pollutants in the P-1 Pond and Typical Urban Runoff to Water Quality Standards Ecology/USEPA Pollutant P-1 Pond` Urban Runoffa,d Standard or Criteria" Cadmium <2 ug/1 0.4 ug/1 1.4 ug/1 Copper 2 ug/l 27 ug/1 3.9 ug/1 Lead 10-900 ug/1 57 ug/1 .10.5 ug/1 Zinc 11 ug/1 149 ug/1 84.0 ug/1 Oil/Grease 0.11 ug/1 15 mg/1 10 mg/lc Fecal Coliform 240-1600/ 980 org/100 mis 50 org/100 mis 100 mis a Geometric mean values for commercial areas; concentrations of individual samples often exceed the mean by factor of 5 to 10. b Acute criteria for freshwater at a hardness of 20 ppm. Ecology effluent guidelines; all other values are receiving water criteria or standards. d Source: WDOE 1990 e Source: 1989 water quality sampling; April 1990 Draft EIS. 3-12 Mitigation for operational impacts on both Tracts would be the installation and maintenance of oil/water separators and vegetated biofiltration swales. Swales would be designed to meet the standards set forth by the Washington Department of Ecology. These swales are effective for removal of pollutants at flows at or below the two-year, 24-hour storm. For larger storms, some water quality improvement would be gained from detention in the P-1 Pond. The effectiveness of this detention would depend on pond volumes and pumping schedules. Other than biofiltration,mitigation measures for Tract B have not been specified due to the absence of a detailed drainage plan. Mitigation would likely take the form of proper design to ensure that the additional volumes generated by development would not increase erosion in the channel at the north end of the site." As explained in the Draft EIS, biofiltration swales would be utilized on both Tracts A and B to remove a portion of the pollutants from impervious surface areas prior to discharge to the P-1 Pond. According to Wang et al. (1982),biofiltration swales can remove between 60 and 80% of suspended solids and metals,while Little et al. (1983) reported that 67% to 83% of oil and grease and 0 to 85% of nutrients could be removed through the use of swales. More recent evidence indicates nutrient capture to be 25% or greater (Homer pers. comm.). The remainder of the nutrients remain in the water column, and eventually move to other receiving waters such as Puget Sound. An additional mitigation measure to be considered by the Storm Water Utility section of the City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works, would include the treatment of runoff from paved areas in a wet pond prior to discharge to the P-1 Pond. This pond would provide additional water quality treatment beyond that provided by the biofiltration swales. FCDC or subsequent owners would participate in the management plan as previously defined in Section 3.4.1. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Even with the use of biofiltration swales, wet ponds, and implementation of an erosion control plan,20%to 40%of suspended solids and metals, 17% to 33% of oil and grease, and 15% to 100% of the nutrients originating from the project site will eventually enter the receiving water. 3.5 Terrestrial Resources 3.5.1 Vegetation Affected Environment. A number of comments regarding vegetative resources of Tracts A and B were received from reviewers of the Draft EIS. The commenters requested an inventory of plants and more information regarding the value of the vegetation on site. As a result of those comments, additional field inventories were conducted in July, 1990. A list of plant species occurring on the site and in the adjacent P-1 Pond and riparian forest, is presented in Appendix G of this document. 3-13 As previously mentioned, prior to the construction of the P-1 Pond, Tracts A and B were part of the Earlington Golf Course. As such, virtually all of Tract A (with the exception of scattered deciduous trees, most of which were removed during construction of the P-1 Pond and Oakesdale Avenue) consisted of grasses. Much of Tract B, with the exception of the large black cottonwoods near Oakesdale Avenue and S. W. Seventh Street, the remnant of the old Black River channel and drainage course on the northern boundary of the site, consisted of grasses, pioneering red alder, and black cottonwood. None of the species or the vegetative types in the area to be impacted by the project are unique or considered sensitive, threatened, or endangered in Washington. Please refer to Figure 2-2 for an aerial photograph of Tracts A and B prior to construction of the P-1 Pond. Impacts Tract A. As mentioned in Section 3.5.1 of the Draft EIS, under the Proposed Action (Alternative Al), approximately 11.6 acres of grass and shrubland would be converted to a developed site consisting of parking areas, buildings, and landscaped vegetation. Tract B. In Section 3.5.1 of the Draft EIS, the estimated loss of grass, shrubs, and scrub cottonwood and scrub alder under either Alternative B1 or B2 would be 10.8 acres. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures for vegetation defined in the Draft EIS include: • "FCDC should plant Puget Sound native lowland trees and shrubs as a dense buffer along the edge of the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek on property owned by FCDC. Plant species shall include Oregon ash,red alder, cottonwood, willows, Douglas fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, native shrubs, and ferns such as red-osier dogwood,red elderberry, sword fern, snowberry, and vine maple; • FCDC should also cooperate in a shared-cost coordinated planting program with the City of Renton, SCS, and King County Surface Water Management for the portion of the P-1 Pond shoreline along Tracts A and B (e.g., maintenance access road) under the jurisdiction of the city and King County; • Develop detailed planting plan and specifications which mimics native plant community species composition and structure(i.e., spacing and grouping of trees and understory shrubs and ferns); and • Insure protection of mature cottonwoods on Tract B that will be isolated in surface parking and adjacent to buildings by avoiding impervious surfaces beneath tree driplines and following requirements of Ordinance No. 4219." 3-14 The following measures apply a 1 to all alternatives: • All mitigation measures previously stated in the Draft EIS remain relevant with all "shoulds" changed to "shall"; • An increase in the setback distance on Tract B from 400 feet to 600 feet from the heron colony to development will result in the maintenance of an additional 1.5 acres of native vegetation. Retention of this additional acreage will reduce the acreage of impacted native vegetation on Tract B from 10.8 acres to 9.3 acres; • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running within the 600-foot setback from the main heron colony (located in the southeast portion of the P-1 Pond), and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-i Pond and Springbrook Creek (see Figures 3-1 and 3-2). • Planting of trees and shrubs along the earthen berms on Tracts A and B shall include native lowland plants as previously defined in this Mitigation Measure section plus a double staggered-planting row of douglas fir trees (heights are prescribed in mitigation measures defined in Section 3.5.3) along the berm ; and • Irrigation of the berm and vegetated buffer and maintenance are required to insure optimal plant survival and plant growth. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The proposed actions would result in the permanent loss of 11.6 acres of vegetation on Tract A, and 9.3 acres of vegetation on Tract B. 3.5.2 Shoreland/Wetlands Affected Environment. A number of comments regarding wetlands were received from reviewers of the Draft EIS. Many commenters were concerned that the Black River wetlands defined in the 1981 "City of Renton Wetlands Study", would be impacted by the proposed action. The following section is to clarify the relationship of the Black River riparian forest wetlands defined in the 1981 study and this project. The City of Renton wetlands study was conducted in 1981 prior to both the construction of the P-1 Pond and clearing of the riparian forest north of the heron colony. In that study, the Black River riparian forest located north of the P-1 pond and the remnant portion of the old Black River on Tract B, were identified as wetland. The wetlands north of the P-1 Pond and the area included in the P-1 Pond are not part of this proposal. The P-1 Pond is a detention facility constructed by the Soil Conservation Service to store stormwater runoff (see Section 3.4 for further discussion of the history of the P-1 Pond). Over time,the P-1 Pond has become an important wetland area supporting a variety of wetland plants and wildlife species in addition to serving the hydrologic and water quality functions of storing and "treating" stormwater runoff. 3-15 Impacts. As a part of the scope of work for preparation of this EIS, surveys were conducted to identify the location and size of wetlands on Tracts A and B. As mentioned in the Draft EIS,with the exception of the 1.1-acre remnant of the old Black River channel and a 0.04-acre isolated wetland located on Tract B, and two small isolated depressions on Tract A totalling 0.1 acres, none of the land in the project area is wetland. Preparation of a Corps of Engineers 404 Permit application may be necessary to satisfy permit requirements for this project. Tract A. The impacts of Alternatives Al and A2 on wetland resources would include the loss of 0.1 acres of wetlands formed when Tract A was regraded following construction of the P-1 Pond. The two small isolated depressions include soft rush and a thicket of pioneering willow. The functional values of these small wetlands is very low since they were formed as a result of regrading activities associated with the P-1 Pond. The wetlands are hydrologically isolated and lie approximately 15 feet higher in elevation than the P-1 Pond (summer water elevations). The vegetative structure is poorly developed and wildlife value is low. Tract B. Under all alternatives, the 1.1-acre remnant Black River channel wetland would be protected, while under Alternative B1 and B2, the 0.04-acre isolated wetland would be eliminated by development of the site because the wetland is located in an area of proposed parking. The functional value of this small isolated wetland is very low. The wetland is hydrologically isolated.The vegetative structure consists of reed canarygrass. The use of the remnant Black River channel wetland for biofiltration would result in changes in the composition of vegetation within the wetland caused by the increase in the amount of water in the system. Upland plants species would be reduced while emergent and facultative wetland species would become more prevalent. This would not be considered a significant adverse impact. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures for wetland resources identified in the Draft EIS include the following: • "Establish a 25-foot wide no-build buffer zone from the edge of the wetland in the old Black River channel; • Develop a detailed planting plan to revegetate those portions of the buffer zone adversely affected by past construction activities on the site; • The planting plan shall include use of native lowland trees and shrubs previously defined in mitigation measures under Section 3.5.1 Vegetation (of the Draft EIS); and • Develop a drainage plan which would incorporate use of biofiltration swales followed by discharge of stormwater into the south end of the Black River wetland. This use of stormwater would provide additional water to the wetland to insure maintenance of emergent vegetation." 3-16 • Additional mitigation measures identified for this Final EIS are listed below. The 25-foot wide no-build buffer zone around the old Black River channel wetland has been changed as presented below. • The buffer around the old Black River channel wetland shall average 50 feet in width with a minimum setback of not less than 25 feet; and • Mitigation for the loss of approximately 0.14 acres of wetland (0.1 acres on Tract A, 0.04 acres on Tract B) shall be provided by creating a wetland mitigation area on land adjacent to the remnant wetland in the old Black River channel on Tract B. A conceptual mitigation plan should be prepared and approved by the city and WDOE,followed by preparation of construction drawings and specifications. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Construction of the proposed project on Tract A would result in the loss of 0.1 acres of wetland having low functional value, and 0.04 acres of wetland on Tract B, also of low functional value. Loss of these wetlands would be mitigated by creating additional wetland on Tract B. 3.5.3 Wildlife Resources Affected Environment. This additional information is provided in response to comments received on wildlife resources of the project area. Appendix G presents a list of birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles observed or potentially occurring in the project area (including the P-1 Pond and adjacent riparian forest). This list was developed from observations made during field studies, from wildlife species information documented in letters of comment (see Chapter 4 Response to Letters of Comments), and from species information from the Black River Office Park EIS (City of Renton 1981) and a variety of other sources (see Appendix G for literature cited). Based on the list of mammals whose ranges include the study area, 36 species of mammals are known to occupy habitat similar to that which occurs in the vicinity of the project area. Six species of mammals or their sign have been observed on the project site or in the immediate vicinity (Appendix G). As many as 85 species of birds, including waterfowl, may occur in the vicinity of the project area, as well as 19 species of reptiles and amphibians (Appendix G). During July 2-4, 1990,JSA wildlife biologists carried out small mammals trapping on Tracts A and B using Sherman Live Traps. Trap lines were established along transects throughout each site. Appendix G presents the locations and results of the trapping. The only species captured was the deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus). More deer mice were captured on Tract B (six during 30 trap nights) than on Tract A(one during 48 trap nights). This was undoubtedly due to the more diverse habitat, such as downed logs, slash piles, variety of ground cover, shrubs and trees, on Tract B than on Tract A. No trapping was done in or immediately adjacent to the P-1 Pond since no development was proposed in that area. 3-17 I I, The trapping results indicate a low population of small rodents. Very little sign of small mammals was found on either tract, especially on Tract A where vegetative cover and duff layer is sparse over much of the site, particularly where dredge spoils had been deposited during construction of the P-1 Pond. Impacts al Tract A. The impacts of Alternative Al on wildlife resources were identified on page 3-34 of the Draft EIS. Based on the results of the additional field studies, the proposed action would result in the incremental loss of 11.6 acres of grass/shrub terrestrial wildlife habitat on Tract A. With the exception of the remaining buffer and berm around the P-1 Pond, and scattered landscaping around buildings and parking areas, wildlife habitat on Tract A will be eliminated. Construction of the buildings and parking area will temporarily disrupt waterfowl use on that portion of the P-1 Pond bordering Tract A. Waterfowl will move to portions of the pond further away from Tract A or to other feeding and loafing areas in the Green River Valley and Lake Washington. Once construction of buildings, parking, the berm and visual buffer are complete, waterfowl should become accustomed to conditions. Tract B. The impacts of Alternatives B1 and B2 on wildlife resources were identified on page 3-35 of the Draft EIS. Impacts to waterfowl would be minimal because of the buildings setback from the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek. Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures defined in the Draft EIS include the following: Tract A. Under Alternative Al (Proposed Action), mitigation measures that would minimize the adverse impact on wildlife resources of the site include: • "Maintenance and planting (as a cooperative program with the City of Renton) of a linear buffer of native vegetation along the edge of the P-1 Pond and .� Springbrook Creek. The linear buffer will provide edge (ecotone) of habitat between the open water of the.Pond and the developed uplands; and ,. • Construct all buildings in earth or natural tones with non-reflective coated or tinted glass and hoods on windows facing the P-1 Pond and heron rookery". Tract B. The following mitigation measures were identified for Tract B in the Draft EIS: a • • Plant native trees and shrubs in the buffer along Springbrook Creek and between the buildings, parking garage and the heron rookery; and 3-18 • Construct all buildings in earth.or natural tones with non-reflective coated or tinted glass and window hoods on windows of all buildings (Phases 1, 2, and 3) facing the heron rookery and Springbrook Creek." The mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIS have been modified and other measures have been added to further reduce project impact and to provide additional wildlife habitat.. These modifications and additional mitigation measures are as follows: Tract A II • Construct all buildings in earth or natural tones with non-reflective coated or tinted glass. Window hoods shall be installed on all windows with a view of the heron colony located above the 20-foot tall evergreen trees and within 800 feet of the heron colony. Hoods may be removed once trees have grown above the hooded windows; • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running within the 600-foot setback from the main heron colony (located in the southeast portion of the P-1 Pond), and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek (see Figures 3-1 and 3-2). This berm will provide a visual barrier between the proposed parking area and the P-1 Pond, thereby further reducing the impact of human disturbance on wildlife use in the pond; • Vegetate the 10-foot high berm with trees having a minimum height when planted of 20 feet to form a visual barrier to the P-i Pond, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6- to 8-foot tall evergreen trees. In addition, deciduous trees and shrubs would be planted to provide additional screening, visual and biological diversity, and wildlife habitat (Figures 3-1 and 3-2). The planting plan should be integrated with the existing vegetation on the side slopes between Tract A and the P-i Pond; • Establish a pedestrian trail. behind and on top of the berms, with access to Oakesdale Avenue S.W., and a chainlink fence between the trail and the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek to prevent human intrusion to the P-1 Pond; and • Construct a viewing platform to allowed screened observation of the heron colony and the P-1 Pond. Tract B. The following additional mitigation measures will be provided for Tract B: • Construct all buildings in earth or natural tones with non-reflective coated or tinted glass. Window hoods shall be installed on all windows with a view of the heron colony located within 800 feet of the heron colony; 3-19 • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running within the 600-foot setback from the heron colony, and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering Springbrook Creek (Figures 3-2 and 3-3); • Vegetate the 10-foot high berm with 20-foot tall (at planting) evergreen trees to form a visual barrier to the P-1 Pond, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6 to 8 feet tall evergreen trees. In addition, deciduous trees and shrubs would be planted to provide additional screening, visual and biological diversity, and wildlife habitat (Figure 3-3); • Establish a pedestrian trail behind the berm, with access to Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, and a chainlink fence between the trail and Springbrook Creek to exclude human intrusion; • Construct a viewing platform to allowed screened observation of the heron colony and the P-i Pond; and • Increase the setback distance on Tract B from the heron colony to development from 400 feet to 600 feet. That increase will result in the maintenance of an additional 1.5 acres of wildlife habitat that under the proposed action would be converted to a developed site. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Loss of 11.6 acres of terrestrial wildlife habitat on Tract A and 9.3 acres on Tract B will be unavoidable. In addition, there will be a short term disturbance to wildlife during the construction phase of the project. 3.5.4 Unique Terrestrial Resources Affected Environment. In response to comments on the Draft EIS, additional research was conducted regarding the locations and sizes of great blue heron colonies in King County. That additional information is presented in Appendix B of this Final EIS. Many comments on the Draft EIS were received regarding great blue heron use of the study area. From May through August, 1990, additional field observations were made of heron nesting activity, foraging, and movement to and from the nesting colony. Many of the comments received from reviewers provided additional information regarding the past history of the heron colony and observations of heron use of the P-1 Pond. Conflicting information was received, some indicated that no nesting herons were observed during construction of the P-i Pond in 1984,but other information provided to the Hearing Examiner indicated that nesting was observed. Other information indicated that, prior to construction of the P-1 Pond, herons did feed in the old Springbrook Creek channel and forebay. Since completion of the Draft EIS, additional field studies have been completed on the project site. Nest and young counts were made during June and July, 1990 and an inventory of other wildlife and flora was conducted (see Appendix G). Additionally, noise 3-20 monitoring was conducted during test borings and hazardous waste sampling conducted on July20, 1990 on Tract A (see Section 3.6.1 of the Final EIS). Surveys of the heron colony indicate that.approximately 31 nest structures were present on six trees during the 1990 nesting season, an increase of 14 nests (82%) from those reported in 1989. Since observations of nesting did not occur until mid-June, the total number of occupied nests at the beginning of the nesting season was not known, however, the Audubon Society reported 30 to 37 nests during counts in April, 1990. During observations on June 16th, 24 occupied nests were recorded, containing 54 young (2.25 young/occupied nest) with two other occupied nests containing brooding or incubating adults. During the 1990 breeding season, the heron colony continued to expand. Nesting herons occupied three more nest trees than were recorded during 1989. The three new nest trees were located away from the principal island nest site. Two of the nest trees were located approximately 200 feet northwest of the island. The third new nest tree was located approximately 1,000 feet west of the main colony and 850 feet from the P-1 pump station (see Figure 3-4). This nest tree contained a single late-nester. The egg-laying was estimated to have been during the last week in May. Because great blue herons are considered to be colonial nesting birds,single nesting great blue herons are unusual,particularly with a colony nearby. The use of additional trees away from the main colony during 1990 suggests that few additional suitable nest sites remain on the island and that the expanding nesting population must move to adjacent trees. The expansion of the nesting colony will most likely be to the north and west of the island where a large number of suitable nest trees exist. Impacts.As a result of comments received on the Draft EIS and review of additional literature and case studies, the guidelines for siting the buildings on Tracts A and B have been revised and are presented in Appendix B of this document. The most significant changes to those guidelines include the recommendation for construction of earthen berms between the heron colony and development,planting 20-foot tall evergreen trees (height at the time of planting) on the berm between development and the heron colony, increasing the building setback on Tract B from 400 feet to 600 feet from the nearest heron nest tree, and reducing the height of the proposed seven story building to five stories on Tract B. Tract A. The previously defined isolated heron nest (see Figure 3-4), located 1,000 feet west of the main nesting colony,is located approximately 500 feet from proposed development, 100 feet closer than the 600-foot setback from the main nesting colony. The 600-foot setback distance to development was not applied to this single nest because 1) the single nest is not a part of the main nesting colony,2) other alternative nesting locations are available in the immediate vicinity of the main colony, and 3) the single heron nest is not representative of the typical colonial nesting habits of herons. Tract B. The impacts of the Tract B proposed action and alternatives will remain the same as defined in the April 1990 Draft EIS. 3-21 Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures for Unique Terrestrial Resources (great blue heron) defined in the Draft EIS included the following: • "Shifting the Alternative B1 (Proposed Action) Phase 3, seven-story building further to the slightly east and south to minimize potential impact to great blue heron; or • Shifting density (i.e., building height) from Tract B to Phase 1 of Tract A to reduce the height of the Phase 3 building". As previously mentioned in Chapter 2 of this document, since preparation of the DEIS, additional mitigation measures have been developed to further reduce the potential impact of the Tract A and Tract B projects on great blue heron nesting. A discussion of wildlife other than great blue herons was presented in Section 3.5.3. Tracts A and B. The following are mitigation measures common to both Tracts A and B. Measures specific to proposed actions on each tract are identified by tract where appropriate. • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running within the 600-foot setback from the main heron colony (located in the southeast portion of the P-1 Pond), and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek (see Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3); • On Tract B, as an option to the berm the applicant may backfill to the wall of the parking garage (to a bermed height of not less than 10 feet), incorporate the trail and viewing platform and vegetate with evergreen trees of a minimum height of 20 feet when planted; • Vegetate the 10-foot high berms with trees (having a minimum height when planted of 20 feet) to form a visual barrier facing the heron colony, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6- to 8-foot tall evergreen trees. Other deciduous trees and shrubs shall be planted on FCDC property and on city-owned property between development,the P-1 Pond,and Springbrook Creek to provide additional screening,visual and biological diversity, and wildlife habitat(Figures 3-1,3-2 and 3-3); • Irrigate and maintain the plantings along the berms to insure continued optimal growth; • Establish pedestrian trails behind the 5-foot berm and on top of the 10-foot berm,with access to Oakesdale Avenue S. W. and S.W. 7th Street and a chainlink fence between the trail and the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek to prevent human intrusion; 3-23 • On Tract B increase the setback of buildings and parking from the main colony from 400 feet to 600 feet as measured from the nearest heron nest tree in the main colony; • Building height limitation of four stories (57 feet) between 600 and 1,000 feet back from the heron colony and 200 feet back from the P-1 Pond on Tract A (Figure 3-1) and between 600 and 800 feet on Tract B (Figure 3-3); • Building height limitation of 71 feet (5 stories) beyond 1,000 feet from the heron colony on Tract A (Figure 3-1) and 800 feet on Tract B (Figure 3-3); • Construct viewing platforms to allow screened observation of the heron colony and P-1 Pond from Tracts A and B; and • Hood all windows facing the heronry located above the height of the 20-foot tall evergreen trees and within 800 feet of the heron colony in order to reduce reflective surfaces. Construction Schedule. The following mitigation measures will apply to the construction phase of the project: • No construction shall occur within 600 feet of the nesting colony except the berm and landscaping as specified as mitigation in this FEIS. Construction of the berm and landscaping must comply with the time limitations set forth for construction within 800 feet of the heron colony; • To minimize the impact on nesting great blue herons, major outdoor construction activities (preloading, grading, foundations, structural steel, installation of dryvit panels, roofing, and hardscape) shall be excluded within 800 feet of the heron colony during the period from February 1 to July 1, and within 600 feet of the colony from July 1 to August 1; • Interior work (interior work defined as rough-in mechanical and electrical, glazing installation, interior shell finish, and tenant improvements to be conducted behind enclosed structures) may be carried out at any time once the berms,building shells and window hoods have been installed. Landscaping may be completed at any time once the berms have been built; and • Auger cast-in-place foundation construction techniques must be used in lieu of conventional pile driving. Project Phasing. Mitigation requirements for phasing development activity on Tracts A and B shall be as follows: • Construction activities beyond 800 feet from the heron colony may occur at any time except that building construction must be phased to avoid cumulative impacts as follows: 3-24 - Tract A - Only one of the two buildings (B or C) proposed within 800 feet of the heron colony may be under major outdoor construction in the first construction season (during the period from July 1 to February 1). The proposed building (A) located beyond 800 feet from the heron colony may be constructed at any time; - Tract B - Only one of the three proposed buildings (D,E, and F) proposed for Tract B, may be under major outdoor construction during the first construction season (during the period from July 1 to February 1). The parking garage may be constructed in phases, with interim parking provided on Tract A as necessary; • Grading, site preparation, and preloading activities for building or parking garage construction on Tracts A and B need not be phased, provided the timing of these activities complies with the time limits set forth under construction schedule. Monitoring. Monitoring requirements for the construction and post- construction period of project development shall include the following: • Develop a plan to monitor the effects of construction activities on nesting great blue herons. This plan shall be developed prior to issuance of grading and building permits and in consultation with the Washington Department of Wildlife; • A monitoring committee shall be formed to develop and implement the monitoring plan. The committee shall consist of representatives from the applicant, City of Renton, and public. The Washington Department of Wildlife shall have an advisory role to ensure that the monitoring effort is consistent with any other monitoring programs in the region; • Monitoring results for the period from January 1 to June 1 will be presented in an interim report used to determine the need for additional mitigation measures such as screening of construction or alterations in construction timing and methods; • The results of monitoring (January 1 to December 31), shall be presented in an annual report to be presented to the committee for review. The annual report will describe the condition of the heron colony, present the results of monitoring and impacts of construction (vis-a-vis other factors such as weather conditions, availability of food resources and other regional factors, and comparison to similar urban colonies); • Results of the monitoring shall be used by the committee to determine the need for additional mitigation measures such as enhanced buffering, screening of construction activities, noise mitigation, and alterations in construction timing and methods; 3-25 • Results of first-year monitoring shall also be used by the committee to determine allowable construction activity (i.e., the number of buildings/parking structures to be built at any one time) for the ensuing year-two construction period; • Monitoring shall continue for one year after completion of all project construction. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Unavoidable adverse impacts will include changes in heron flight patterns to and from the heron colony, occasional disturbance to herons (feeding and movements) during construction and during day to day use of the buildings and parking areas. 3.6 Environmental Health 3.6.1 Noise Affected Environment. Several comments were received regarding the impact of noise on herons, particularly with regard to the use of pile drivers and the appropriateness of using an "A" decibel scale vs a "C" scale when analyzing impacts. Chapter 4, Response to Letters of Comments includes detailed responses to those comments. In particular, see Chapter 4 response to comment No. 14 from the Seattle Audubon Society regarding the use of pile drivers and decibel scale. Impacts. On July 20, 1990, JSA staff monitored noise resulting from by geotechnical drilling on Tract A. The drilling, carried out by Earth Consultants, Inc.,was conducted from a distance ranging from 700 to 1,000 feet from the heron colony. Equipment used in the drilling operation included a truck with a diesel-powered percussion-type drilling rig, a pickup truck, and three workers. A Larson-Davis Laboratories Model 700 noise monitor was placed at the base of the heron colony and directed toward Tract A. Noise conditions were monitored from 7:20 AM to 3:22 PM. During that same time period, a JSA wildlife biologist observed the response of adults and young to noise caused by the drilling activities and other background sources. At the time of the monitoring, approximately 10 young herons still remained unfledged on four nest structures. During the monitoring, adults returned from feeding forays from the east, south, and west. Figures 3-5 and 3-6 present the 5 - minute Leg levels (in dBAs), and a comparison of 15 - minute Legs measured during January, 1990 and July, 1990. As can be seen by Figure 3-6, even with drilling, the July 20, 1990 15 - minute Legs were less than those recorded during the January, 1990 ambient noise monitoring. 3-26 • • 5 — MINUTE dBA LEVELS DRILLING 700-1000 FT. FROM ROOKERY 80 . 70 — 60 — _ _ .. M _ r . _ r J r ^ . r P- �! J , 7 _r _ 7 7 r7 ,. . ,". , 7.. , rr 7_ ..... rr ''77 lww 50 — r,rr,+rr r .. rr..,rr_ r� 7 rrrrrr Jr „ ) +✓v7� .. rrr r_'rr_^.`/l•, .v ."1I r.Lr/, - _ • ..I rr„rrrrr✓r,r Jr,,,,rrPrr,+„rrr r�C,.74/ +r�+.JL r�+r7/r r./rr ,�r Y`+rr J�. 4 Q, N Q rrr I r I 1f +r✓rrrrrrrrrr,r,rr,✓,rrrr,r 1L rr I ' .rv.,,,,rr,+`r I��Jy,1r/14r,A;(Jlrr +Jrj.,/jr+ :JV1 ,,,),, Cr 40 — rrrrrrJrrelrrrrrrrer+rNrrrr)IIrrr+J) JSS..JrA ,.•r,vlr`I,n/JJrr),Lrrl, .,,),^r��AA J IIIJ r+J1 +I r..,olJIrr J ,rrrrrrrrr/-,r r,r✓„r/Irr,+r/J,rrr,,r rr Nlrrr rNV e'vyi•r r.Nr Jr��.,VI r r'IN4 ryiAL •I�n ,.� AO,r✓r, I II I (� W rrr,rrrrr✓rrrrrr�n.r Jrrrrrrr11r, hJJrr M+,.r+rrlr�rrrr,y,,,/I/,rr`Jyr.�rrlyJ /v/t,.�. 1J,+,,rlr4rr.^r+ ND 30 - , , yrr • ,rrr r V,,,,rr+rl.r r,.Jrrr r,Vr I+r,l•Il�r rrr/,,A,... ..., ..u+r/�J r r�.,+r�•..1S,.1.,r.r,vY, Z rrrrrrrrr/rrr JrJrrrr/Irrrrrrrrrrir r,r,NArrr ,r rJ ,vre,Ar/r+r,rrfrrr+rrrrrvr//YAqr+ry',.v rrr., r,Jrr Irr+rrr„rr,rrrrrrr/lrr,r,Irrrrrrr rrrvtr, ye,,rr +rrrlrrJr.lI�rr,vrrr,)+MJr+4v /r✓,.rr✓r+ • ( I rr,r.✓r,,,,,r,, ,,,, rrrrrr +r,Nrr/ rNrrw�,rrr✓rr+,rrJ✓r�r, .... vrrrl.ar 1•1 ,...vrr 70 -- r,,,VVrV,rrrrrrrJrr•,,rrr +rr,r Jrr.4-A, r!/rrr/Jrrrrrrvrrl.• rr. r/ dIIV .rr r.rrv.rr•r, ,rrrr rrr•. ,,rrr //,.rrr• .sel•r•Cr•r•.r•r,r ,y1 I rTrrr•,.r/�•+foal,.,J,r•..rrry,r+.v(r I r,r,rrrrrrrr,rrrrr, rJ•r,rrrrlj n,,vr,0 .w.w,,.l.rr rrr r,,',.. /•r,,,,/'v J+r'�1(w r'!...Hr.j" CC ff f' 1 10 — rrrrrrrrrrr,r,,,rrrr N,rr'✓r+/rr/� II,// rr)/�,r,�r J{�I,�r J4,N+ . rv�•/fVINv"M. s;:: rrr+ rrrrrrrrrr, ,,Jr,rrr/ re. r✓� r,rr/ rr , e ? .. .�rl.,rr+,r,rr ✓rr, •rrrrrr Jrr , , n,,,,, r.v' .�rr• Ir)+,J,+Jrr,vr+rr.r.r'r,,,,I, ,v,/rlrr 0 I Irn r,A el 1•,,,n, Irr,t'Lr I,,,,rrhn,I„rrr,m r,r,et.rv.rrr.rl I 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL Figure 3-5. Five Minute Leq Values (dBA) July 20, 1990 1 5 — MINUTE dBA LEVELS 75 70 - t t 65 w Q 60 - Q J F 55 - W Z 50 - 45 - 40 , ., ,... . , , ,,,,, , ,., , �. 11 AM 2 PM 5 PM 8 PM 11 PM 2 AM 5 AM 8 AM 11 AM BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL 0 7-20-90 W/ DRILLING + 1-23/24-90 AMBIENT Figure 3-6. Comparison of 15-Minute Leq Values (dBA) at the Black River Heron Colony, January 23/24, 1990 and July 20, 1990 During the period of drilling and noise monitoring,young and adult herons continued to use the P-1 Pond and adults returned to nests from feeding forays to the east, west, and south. In addition, waterfowl (mallards and Canada geese) flew to and from the P-1 Pond during the drilling period. There was no observable change in use of the P-1 Pond or heron colony during the monitoring period. The drilling was conducted during the latter part of the great blue heron nesting period, a time that is generally recognized as less sensitive than the early months of breeding, since young have either fledged and left the nest or are within one to two weeks of fledging (Kelsall 1989). The noise monitoring data are useful in adding to the scientific knowledge regarding the response of herons to certain activities and noise levels during the latter part of the nesting period, but cannot be considered as representative of the response of herons to noise during the early part of the nesting period. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures defined in the Draft EIS included the following: • "Outdoor construction activities should be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. during the summer months and 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. during the winter months; • All construction equipment should have sound control devices no less effective than those provided on the original equipment; • All construction equipment should comply with pertinent equipment noise standards of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency; • Auger cast-in-place piling construction should be use in lieu of pile driving; • Pile driving activity should be limited to the period from August 1 through February 15, the least sensitive time period for great blue heron use on the site". In response to comments received on the Draft EIS, several modifications and additions to these mitigation measures have been made. These include the following: • All "should" wording for mitigation measures 1 through 3 above is changed to "shall"; a • During the construction period, the applicant must comply with the City of Renton's noise ordinance (Zoning Code, Title 8, Chapter 7 - Health and Sanitation)regarding maximum permissible environmental noise levels. The noise levels (EDNA) on residential zoned properties (R1-4 and G) from a noise source on the project site, cannot exceed 57 dBA (except during the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the noise limitations are 47 dBAs.. For Office Park land uses, the maximum permissible EDNA is 60 dBA; • To minimize the impact on nesting great blue herons, major outdoor construction activities (preloading, grading, foundations, structural steel, installation of dryvit 3-29 { panels, roofing, and hardscape) shall be excluded within 800 feet of the heron colony during the period from February 1 to July 1, and within 600 feet of the colony from July 1 to August 1. Interior work (interior work defined as rough-in mechanical and electrical, glazing installation, interior shell finish, and tenant improvements to be conducted behind enclosed structures) may be carried out at any time once the berms, building shells and window hoods have been installed. Landscaping may be completed once the berms have been built; • Auger cast-in-place piling construction shall be used in lieu of convention pile driving; • Soundproof all noise-generating units such as air conditioning units; and • Earthen berm shall be created on Tracts A and B along the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek and within and along the 600-foot setback facing the heronry. This would create a physical barrier to portions of the P-1 Pond and the riparian forest that would aid in reducing noise levels from the site, particularly from the surface parking area on Tract A. The general rule is that berms can reduce noise levels 6 to 7 dBA for a distance of 150 to 200 feet. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Noise would result from construction activities and to a lesser degree from occupation and use of the site following construction. 3.6.2 Hazardous Waste Affected Environment. Comments on the Draft EIS were received regarding the potential for hazardous waste contamination on Tract A. According to WDOE, the site could have been contaminated by sediments deposited on Tract A from dredging of the P-1 Pond forebay. WDOE requested that FCDC conduct an investigation of Tract A to determine if the site showed evidence of contamination. On July 20, 1990, sampling of the site was conducted by Earth Consultants, Inc. The dredge spoils were sampled at five locations and each of the soil samples were analyzed for priority pollutants and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) (Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990). A portion of the report presenting study results is included in Appendix F. The entire report is available for review at the City of Renton Planning Division. Numerous soil samples were taken. Cadmium (28 mg/kg) and TPH (240 mg/kg) were present in one soil sample at concentrations exceeding WDOE's proposed industrial soil cleanup standards. Concentrations of chromium (120 mg/kg), zinc (1,000 mg/kg), and silver (6.6 mg/kg), were elevated in two other samples. A toxicity characteristic leaching procedure(TCLP)was performed,a procedure which determines to what extent toxics could leach into the groundwater. The test showed that the potential contaminants of concern (cadmium, chromium, and zinc) (volatile organics) detected in the dredge spoils exhibited relatively low solubility (low mobility) and/or appeared localized. This means that the contaminants are unlikely to migrate from the area of contamination. Because of its 3-30 localized nature, the TPH contamination may have resulted from leakage or a minor spill from heavy construction equipment stored on the site following dredging and filling. Aerial photographs of the site seemed to confirm this assumption. Impacts. The dredge spoils are underlain by soils of low permeability, which should reduce the downward migration of contaminants. Additionally, development of the site would cover much of the property with an impermeable asphalt and concrete surface, reducing infiltrating rainfall and significantly lowering the potential for future contaminant migration. Consequently, potential for local surface and groundwater quality degradation resulting from these contaminants appears low(Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990).No significant impacts are expected. Mitigation Measures • Unless otherwise determined by WDOE, the contaminated area on Tract A shall be sealed with asphalt for parking or buildings; and • Permanent signage shall be established to warn utilities of the location of contaminated soils in event of later excavations. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. None known at this time. 3.7 Land and Shoreline Use 3.7.1 Relationship to Existing Land Uses Affected Environment. Since the issuance of the Draft EIS, the three-story River Tech office building with surface parking has been constructed on the parcel northeast of Tract B. Property to the southwest of the Black River pump station continues to be developed. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle has indicated an intent to expand it's Renton wastewater treatment facilities. No additional land use information beyond that presented in the Draft EIS is necessary. Impacts. Under Alternative Al and Alternatives B1 and B2, the DEIS description of impacts are unchanged. The seven-story Phase 3 building would be the most significant change in land use. No other buildings of that height are in the immediate area, however there are other seven- story buildings within the City of Renton. The City of Renton does not have any restrictions on building height in the OP zone. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures included in the Draft EIS included the following: 3-31 • To insure greater height compatibility with established buildings in the area, mitigation could include a reduction in the number of stories in the Phase 3, seven-story Tract B building or a shift in density from Tract B to Tract A. The following mitigation measure has been added since the Draft EIS: • The seven story building on Tract B shall be reduced to a height not to exceed five stories. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. As proposed, the Tract B seven-story building would be taller than existing office buildings within the immediate area. With the reduced maximum building height of five stories proposed as mitigation, the project will be more in keeping with the height of existing buildings. 3.7.2 Relationship to Plans, Zoning and Shorelines Affected Environment. Table 3-14 in the Draft EIS presented an analysis of the consistency of the Alternatives for Tract A and B with the City of Renton comprehensive plan policies. That table has been revised and presented herein as Table 3-2. These changes assume the implementation of mitigation measures defined throughout this chapter. Impacts. The discussion of impacts in the Draft EIS associated with Alternative Al and Alternatives B1 and B2 remains relevant. Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures defined in the Draft EIS for the Relationship to Plans, Zoning and Shorelines include the following: Tract A • "Maintenance of the vegetation on the site once the project is in place must be in compliance with the vegetation management requirements described in the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance (see Appendix A); Tract B • Impacts associated with the incompatibility of the seven-story buildings proposed in Alternatives B1 and B2 with the height of buildings in the vicinity of the site could only be mitigated with a reduction in the height of the proposed buildings. Buffering would not be sufficient; and • Inconsistency with the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance regulations regarding protection of trees to be retained on a development site should be mitigated through redesign of the parking lot. No paved surfaces or construction activities are to occur within the dripline of trees to be retained. Maintenance of the vegetation on the site once the project is in place must be in compliance with the vegetation management requirements described in the ordinance (see i� Appendix A)". 3-32 '' Table 3-2. Consistency of Proposed Actions for Tracts A and B with City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Policies Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Environmental Balanced Development Urban development should Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. compensate for the services that it requires. Open Space Natural vegetation, ravines,slopes, and Alternative Al - consistent. water bodies should be preserved to Alternative B1 - partially consistent- retain open space. vegetation to be lost, small portion of wetland filled. w is w Areas or strips of open space should All alternatives would be consistent be retained and enhanced to serve as with this policy assuming mitigation buffers. measures implemented. An additional 2.6 acres of buffer would be established on Tract B. Wildlife Habitat Wildlife habitat should be designated, Alternatives Al and Bl - consistent. preserved, and enhanced. Wildlife habitat would be preserved to a greater extent with additional setback on Tract B. Vegetation Desirable natural vegetation should be Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. retained wherever possible. In unique and/or fragile area, Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. desirable natural vegetation should be Significant vegetation, including retained or enhanced. cottonwoods and majority of wetland vegetation is being preserved. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Healthy trees should be retained where Alternatives Al and Bl- consistent. possible. Resources Natural resources and areas having Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. scientific or educational value should The Black River channel is to be be identified and preserved. preserved and with proposed mitigation the heron colony would have a larger buffer zone. Surface Drainage Storm waters should be retained on- Alternatives Al and B1 - retention on site and then released at a natural rate site may not be required because the c.,,, and quality. receiving water (P-1 Pond) is presently a detention pond and dedicated by First City for this purpose. Final determination of consistency will be made following City review of site drainage plans. Precipitation should be returned to the Alternatives Al and B1 - partially soil at natural rates near where it falls. consistent - precipitation to be discharged to P-1 Pond. Development should be designed to Partially consistent - majority of the facilitate percolation and to minimize site proposed for impervious surfaces impermeable surfaces. on Tract A although proposal is within the guidelines. Less impervious surface would be on Tract B. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Development should include On-site water quality improvements appropriate design and/or equipment (biofiltration swales) are proposed. to ensure clean runoff. Project must conform to city stormwater requirements. Final determination of consistency will be made following City review of drainage plan. Waterbodies Public access to publicly- owned areas Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. along waterbodies should be provided. Development should be designed to Alternatives Al and B1 consistent - the allow the most compatible and vegetated berm and buffer will be tw aesthetic use to be placed near the compatible with the P-1 Pond, waterbodies. especially the wildlife use of it. The proposed trail is also consistent with this policy. Development should be designed and Alternatives Al and Bl - consistent. constructed to incorporate features of waterbodies. Development should be oriented Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent. towards waterbodies. Soils Structures should be built only on soils Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent - with adequate load-bearing capacity pilings would provide structural including structural design adequate to integrity for buildings greater than accommodate existing soil conditions. two-stories in height. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Economic Fiscal Balance Activities should not overextend public Alternative Al and Bl- consistent. facilities or services. Urban Design Landscape Landscaping which enhances the Consistent based on to 12/12/89 site primary design should be place around plan. all structures, in the interior of parking lots, and along the periphery of the site. 0' Refuse and/or other unsightly areas Consistent based on to 12/12/89 site should be screened and landscaped. plan. Landscaping which is suitable for Alternatives Al and B1 - consistent- screening and buffering should be as long as vegetated buffer is provided between use area. established as recommended. Buffering would be significantly improved with proposed mitigation. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Landscaping Design& Maintenance Materials and designs should reflect Alternatives Al and B1 - partially the function, scale, and type of area consistent - the landscape design being landscaped. appears to scale on the site plans although the trees won't reach the size shown for many years, existing cotton- woods to be retained will provide landscape more in scale with proposed buildings on Tract B. An adequate irrigation system should This will be enforced through a be installed where appropriate. landscape bond. Plant materials should be selected to This will be the responsibility of the promote safety and minimize City during design approval. interference with utilities and traffic. Desirable natural vegetation should be Consistent. incorporated into the design where appropriate. All landscaping should be well This will be the responsibility of the maintained. City to enforce. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Landscaping that will improve wildlife Consistent - the proposed vegetated habitats should be encouraged. berm and setback will be vegetated with native lowland plant species. Landscaping should be compatible with Partially consistent- plant species such significant natural conditions. as Lombardy poplar on Tracts A and B not native to area.A majority of the mature cottonwoods would be preserved. Proposed berm will enhance natural conditions. Signs Signs should be compatible with the This will be determined through the scale and architectural style of site plan review approval. development. 00 Landscaping should be installed Determined through site plan review around signs where appropriate. approval. Traffic hazards should be minimized Determined through site plan review by proper location and design of signs. approval. Commercial Commercial Structure &Sites Structure should be adequately set Consistent. All setback requirements back and buffered from other uses. would be met. Site plan design should provide for Setbacks of structures are adequate; efficient and functional use of land. the proposed Phase 3 seven-story i - Category Policy Assessment of Consistency building on Tract B has been reduced to five stories. On Tract A, some parking will be a long distance to buildings. Proposed mitigation would further minimize the impact of development on wildlife resources. Transportation Facilities Transportation facilities should be Consistent. coordinated with and integrated into the surrounding land uses. The development of property should Consistent - the applicant was the provide for public street improvements major contributor to the Oakesdale necessary to serve the site. LID. Specialized transportation for the This will need to be enforced by the handicapped should be accommodated. City. Maximum consideration should be Consistent. given to aesthetics of transportation facilities. Trails Trails should take advantage of views Consistent. and amenities. To improve pedestrian safety, trails Consistent. The proposed tract along should be separated from vehicular the berm will be separated. traffic. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Trails should be constructed to provide This will be determined during site user safety including lighting. plan approval. Utilities Storm Drainage The man-made storm drainage system Storm drainage to include biofiltration should incorporate the natural system swales. Consistency determined during with appropriate measures to assure site plan approval. safety. Polluted water should not be Storm drainage to include biofiltration discharged into the storm sewer swales. Consistency determined during system. site plan approval. New developments should be designed Preliminary plans are consistent with to provide for safe collection and this policy. Final consistency discharge of runoff. determined during site plan approval. Sanitary Sewers All development should be connected Consistent. to a sanitary sewer system. r Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Area Specific Policies -Green River Valley Policy Plan Urban Design Ample landscaping should be provided Alternative Al - consistent. throughout a developed site, including Alternative B2- consistent- ample along property lines, to provide a landscaping is provided on the pleasant environment, minimize the 12/12/89 site plan. The five-story impact of development, and enhance buildings on Tract B are less intrusive the visual experience from adjacent than the seven-story building. properties including hillsides. In addition, landscaped buffers should Alternative Al - consistent. be established adjacent to public right- Alternative B1 - consistent. of-way, between areas of incompatible land use, and long water channels and The proposed berm and additional ~ wildlife habitats. setback would serve as a buffer between the development and heron colony and P-1 Pond. Planting strips proposed adjacent to right-of-ways. Parking and loading areas should be Consistent. adequately screened and landscaped. Planting strips proposed throughout parking area. The additional 2 percent natural Consistent. landscaping required for developed sites in the Valley by Soil Conservation Service Environmental Mitigation Agreement should not be dispersed throughout a site, but should be aggregated in one portion of the Category Policy Assessment of Consistency property. Where possible, the required 2 percent landscaping for adjacent properties should be contiguous. The design, placement, and size of To be determined during site plan signs should be compatible with high approval. quality development. Storm Drainage/Flood Control New development throughout the Consistent. Valley should provide on-site and lateral storm drainage as part of the i,) overall storm drainage plan for the .. Valley. Transportation New development should help finance Consistent. FCDC has already off-site street and traffic control contributed to improvements in the improvements in proportion to the area. additional traffic impacts created. Utilities New development should provide for To be determined by the City. utility extensions to service itself. Wetland/Wildlife Wherever feasible, unique natural Alternative Al -partially consistent- Habitat/Floodplain features should be incorporated into 0.1 acres of wetlands proposed to be developmental plans to preserve the filled, with mitigation provided on character of the Valley. Tract B.. Alternative B1 - partially consistent - 0.04 acres of wetlands proposed to be filled but mitigation will be provided on Tract B. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Significant natural features- old Black • River channel, cottonwoods, P-1 Pond and heron colony to be protected with proposed design. Remaining wildlife habitat in the Consistent -habitat adjacent to the Valley should be preserved or its loss heron colony and buffered by should be mitigated. vegetation planting. A total of 20.9 acres of upland wildlife habitat would be permanently lost from the projects and only partially mitigated through landscaping and berming. Areas that provide wildlife habitat, Consistent so long as mitigation such as designated wetland greenbelts measures are carried out. Mitigation and stream corridors, should be large proposed in this FEIS would provide a enough to provide suitable cover for greater degree of buffering. wildlife and buffering from adjacent uses. The City's 1981 Wetlands Study should N/A. The wetlands defined in the be used as a basis for establishing the 1981 study would not be disturbed. priority of wetlands for acquisition and/or protection. A substantial portion of the Black Tract A- consistent since no riparian River Riparian Forest should be forest occurs on the site. preserved in its natural state as a unique remnant of the Valley flora. On Tract B significant cottonwood trees would remain, and the Black River channel will be preserved. Category Policy Assessment of Consistency Majority of the remaining Black River forest is to the north of the site and not impacted by project. Whenever feasible, retention of natural Partially consistent -.0.14 acres of wetlands should be pursued as an wetland to be filled but mitigated by alternative to structural flood control creating additional wetlands on Tract measures. B. Recreation Provision of recreational opportunities Consistent - pedestrian trail would be should be an integral part of provided. development in the Valley. Recreational opportunities in the Consistent- recreational facilities Valley that serve both employees and provided can be used by the public as the community should be encouraged. well as employees. Firms with large numbers of This will be determined through site employees should develop outdoor plan approval. recreation facilities. Wherever feasible, Consistent. The trails and viewing greenbelt/openspace/wildlife habitats platforms would provide passive should be managed to include recreational opportunities. recreational opportunities as a secondary objective. A pedestrian/bicycle path system Consistent- trail will be built to separate from the street system and a eventually connect with trail system at system of bicycle routes should be Fort Dent Park. incorporated in the developmental plan Category Policy Assessment of Consistency for the Valley and should connect with other trails or recreation destinations. Land Use - Manufacturing The area west of Powell Avenue S.W. Alternative Al- consistent. Phase 3 of Park/Multiple Option and north of S.W. 7th Street between Alternative B1 partially consistent - the the P-1 channel and the Burlington five-story buildings proposed on Tract Northern railroad and generally B, are mid rise, not low rise. The size surrounding the P-1 forebay storage and density of Tract B development is pond should be specifically designated more intense than small or medium as manufacturing Park/Multiple scale. Option - Office. The implementation of office and other similar service and light industrial activities in low rise building structures should be encouraged. These small to medium scale office and business park uses should be harmonious with their setting and should take advantage of the amenities offered by the forebay pond and Black river Forest. Large scale warehousing and industrial uses should be discouraged. The remaining areas designated simply Consistent. for Manufacturing Park/Multiple Option are intended to provide the opportunity to choose among a wide range of light industrial and compatible heavy industrial, commercial and office uses. Several modifications to those mitigation measures have been made for this Final EIS: • The seven story building on Tract B shall be reduced to a height not to exceed five stories; and • With the addition of the proposed mitigation defined in Section 3.5.4, policies relating to preservation of wildlife habitat would be met to a greater degree. For example, the additional setback would allow for the maintenance of 1.5 acres of additional wildlife habitat and would further reduce the potential impact on the heron colony. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The five-story buildings are considered "mid-rise" height which is greater than the "low-rise" policy for the area defined in the Green River Valley Plan. 3.7.3 Light and Glare Affected Environment. A description of existing light and glare in the study area was presented in the Draft EIS and will not be repeated here. Impacts. The impacts of Alternative Al and Alternative B1 were presented in the Draft EIS and will not be repeated here. Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures defined in the Draft EIS remain relevant and include: • "Use of downlighted light structures in the parking areas to confine light to ground level; • Use of a dense evergreen vegetated screen between development of the P-1 Pond and heronry to reduce the effect of automobile headlights, particularly on Tract A which has no existing dense, tall-growing vegetation; and • Use of non-reflective coated or tinted glass and hooded windows for the sides of the buildings facing the heron rookery". In addition to the mitigation measures defined in the Draft EIS, the following measures will further reduce the impact of light and glare resulting from the project. • The 5-to 10-foot high benched earthen berms shall be constructed on Tracts A and B to further reduce light from the parking area and buildings. The combination of the 10-foot high berm and 20-foot tall evergreen trees located 600 feet from the heron colony will substantially reduce building light for 30 feet of the total building height for the sides of the buildings facing the P-1 Pond; 3-46 • The building setback from the heron colony to development shall be increased to 600 feet on Tract B. This increased distance will further reduce the impact of light on nesting great blue herons and wildlife using the P-1 Pond; • Window hoods shall be installed on all windows with a view of the heron colony located above the 20-foot tall evergreen trees and within 800 feet of the heron colony. Hoods may be removed once trees have grown above the height of the hooded windows; and • The seven-story building on Tract B shall be reduced to a maximum height of five stories. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The buildings and parking proposed for Tracts A and B would result in the increased light from buildings and parking, and glare from automobiles, not all of which can be fully mitigated. 3.7.4 Historic and Cultural Resources Affected Environment. As mentioned in the Draft EIS, extensive cultural resource surveys and archaeological excavations were previously conducted in the study area as a part of the proposed Earlington Park project. Review of past archaeological studies conducted by the University of Washington, indicated that with the exception of a 5-acre parcel on the west side of Tract A (formerly Burlington Northern property not included as a part of the Earlington Park project), Tract A and all of Tract B were previously surveyed for archaeological resources. Impacts. Given the fact that the extent of cultural resources on the 5-acre western portion of Tract A is unknown, construction could impact cultural resources in that area. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures should include the following: • Conduct of a three-phase archaeological survey (site inspection and surface coring), evaluation and, report of the 5-acre western portion of Tract A; • Cultural resources monitoring during excavation by a registered archaeologist; and • Development of a contingency plan (e.g., notification to State Historic Preservation Office and Tribes) for actions to be taken in the event cultural resources are discovered during construction. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Unknown at this time. I � 3-47 I 3.8 Transportation 3.8.1 Traffic Affected Environment. A number of comments were received from reviewers of the Draft EIS relative to the impacts of traffic resulting from the proposed project. In response to those comments, additional trip generation analysis was conducted by TRANSPO comparing the vehicular trips generated from the proposed Tract A and Tract B projects ,_ with the Traffic Impact Analysis for Valley 405 Business Park (TRANSPO 1985 and the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study TRANSPO 1988). The trip generation analysis is presented in Appendix H of this Final EIS. - Impacts.During the construction period,there will be a short-term increase in traffic on Oakesdale Avenue S.W. because of delivery of materials and commuting construction workers. This increase is expected to have a minimal impact on LOS and traffic congestion. Table 3-3 shows the peak hour vehicular trip generation for Tracts A and B, while Table 3-4 presents the daily and PM peak-hour trip generation comparison of the proposed action and the Valley 405 Traffic Study. The proposed action (both Tracts A and B assuming Alternatives Al and B1), is estimated to generate 35% less daily traffic than assumed under the Valley 405 Business Park Traffic Study (TRANSPO 1985). Comparison of the proposed project with the Grady Way Transportation Study (TRANSPO 1988), indicates that the trip generation of 5,800 vehicular trips per day would be 140% less than assigned in the Grady Way Corridor study model (TRANSPO 1990; see Appendix H). The potential traffic generation of the Tracts A and B office buildings are less than those previously analyzed for the Valley 405 Business Park and the Grady Way Corridor Study.The proposed action has been adequately represented within the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Study model. Mitigation based on that model was previously completed by the applicant through LID assessments. Mitigation Measures. The Blackriver Corporate Park Transportation Management Plan shall be updated to incorporate the following measures to reduce the number of single- occupancy vehicles and to encourage alternative modes of transportation: • FCDC shall review and revise the TMP to increase its effectiveness. These revisions shall include evaluation of goals identified in the TMP (a reduction of 10% of SOV trips) within two years following building occupancies; • A report shall be submitted to the city showing the results of the evaluation. If targeted goals are not met, additional incentive for HOV participation shall be installed (i.e., establishment of a vanpool operation). The incentive is to be 3-48 Table 3-3. Peak Hour Vehicular Trip Generation - Tracts A and B AM Peak Hour2 PM Peak Hour3 Location/Land Use Daily1 In Out Total In Out Total Tract A - 183,582 gsf office 2,160 295 45 340 50 275 325 Tract B - 286,300 gsf office 3.020 430 §5 495 25 395 470 Total - 469,882 gsf office 5,180 725 110 835 125 670 795 1 Daily Rate - Ln(T) = 0.75 Ln(X) + 3.77; 50 percent enter, 50 percent exit. 2 AM Peak-Hour Rate - Ln(T) = 0.86 Ln(X) = 1.34; 87 percent enter, 13 percent exit. 3 PM Peak-Hour Rate - Ln(T) = 0.83 Ln(X) = 1.46; 16 percent enter, 84 percent exit. Where T = number of trips X = 1,000 gsf building area Source: Transpo, 1990. Trip Generation,Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE),4th Edition 1987 3-49 Table 3-4. Daily and PM Peak-Hour Trip Generation Comparison of Proposed Action and Valley 405 Traffic Study Daily PM Peak Hour Valley 405 Blackriver Valley 405 Blackriver Traffic Corporate Traffic Corporate Location Studyl Park2 Studyl Park2 Tract A (Area VI) 3,025 2,160 345 325 Tract B (Area V) 4.380 3.020 470 Total 8,240 5,180 845 795 Per Figures 1 and 9, Traffic Impact analysis for Valley 405 Business Park (The Transpo Group, August 1985). 2 From Table 3-3. Source: Transpo, 1990 3-50 • A report shall be submitted to the city showing the results of the evaluation. If targeted goals are not met, additional incentive for HOV participation shall be installed (i.e., establishment of a vanpool operation). The incentive is to be determined by the City of Renton and FCDC. The subsidy shall continue until the 10% goal is reached; • Provide a free one-month bus pass to tenants (on a per 1,000 square foot basis) at the time of each new tenant occupancy. The passes should be for peak hour, two zones - maximum requirement; • Distribute site-appropriate transit and ridesharing information to new tenants and annually to all tenants; • Display site-appropriate transit and ridesharing information in prominent public locations; • Appoint a Transportation Coordinator to promote and coordinate the use of public transportation and high occupancy vehicles; • Provide lighted and hard-surfaced pathways to Oakesdale or S.W. 7th Street for convenient access to transit and rideshare locations; • If the 10% rideshare is not met, design and implement a guaranteed ride home program for registered vanpool users; • Design and implement a parking management program which provides preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles; • Promote an alternative work hour program; • Establish a performance goal for high occupancy vehicle use; • Conduct transportation surveys/monitoring to determine participation and interest in HOV and bus transportation; • Provide secure bicycle parking; • The Grady Way Transportation Study will be reviewed to determine the option for crediting the applicant for previous improvement contributions; and • Provide adequate lighting and restricted access to the parking structure to insure adequate tenant protection. Mitigation measures to reduce the impacts during the construction period shall include the following: 3-51 • As required by City of Renton ordinance, hauling hours for large construction vehicles shall be prior to 7:30 a.m., between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., and after 6:30 p.m.; • Large construction vehicles shall follow prescribed haul routes; and • Truck and wheel washing must be accomplished on site after each haul trip. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Increase traffic but at levels planned for within previous traffic studies for area. 3.9 Public Services and Utilities 3.9.1 Parks and Other Recreational Facilities Affected Environment. Several commenters to the Draft EIS requested that open space/park be considered as an optional use of the site. The impacts associated with that use were not evaluated in this Final EIS because open space/park does not represent a viable alternative to the applicant. A discussion of the open space/park option is presented in Chapter 4,Response to Comments from King County (Letter No. 8). Please refer to that discussion. The applicant has indicated a willingness to include pedestrian trails and viewing platforms as a part of the design for the Tracts A and B projects. On Tract A, the trail would begin at Oakesdale Avenue and follow the five-foot high earthen berm along the west side of the applicant's property bordering Springbrook Creek (see Figures 3-1 and 3-2). A viewing platform would be located approximately 550 feet from the heron colony. The trail would then continue west on the berm to the west end of the applicant's property. On Tract B, the pedestrian trail would begin on Naches Avenue, cross the old Black River channel, follow a berm along the northern edge of the property, and exit on Oakesdale Avenue. A screened viewing platform would also be located approximately 550 feet from the heron colony (see Figures 3-2 and 3-3). The trail and screened viewing platforms would aid the city in meeting the demand for park facilities in the city. The trail would be oriented toward passive recreation in the area, and limited to pedestrian use only. Impacts.The provision of trails would likely encourage public use to a greater degree than presently occurs, particularly during weekday lunch hours. Mitigation Measures 3-52 • Construct trails and viewing platforms on Tracts A and B as previously described; and • Provide educational signage along the trails and at viewing platforms. The two trail loops on Tracts A and B would assist the City Department of Parks and Recreation in achieving their goal of establishing a system of trails throughout the city. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. None. 3.10 Cumulative Impact 3.10.1 General Affected Environment. A number of commenters to the Draft EIS requested an analysis of the cumulative impacts of the proposed action. Cumulative impact is that impact which is associated with the continuing changes in land use and activities in the immediate area surrounding the Tract A and Tract B sites. As previously mentioned in the land use section of this Final EIS and in the Draft EIS, land to the east, north and southwest of the P-1 Pond and riparian forest is zoned O-P. Land immediately north of the P-1 Pond and surrounding the heronry, is within an open space easement owned by the city. Land to the northwest of the Burlington Northern railroad tracks is an active rock and gravel extraction operation outside the city limits and within King County. Land on the hillside due north of the tracks is also outside of the city and within King County. Impacts. The development of Tracts A and B will result in the continued conversion of land zoned O-P in the area to office park use as allowed for under the City of Renton Zoning ordinance. The development of that land will be required to comply with the zoning ordinance and other applicable ordinances and regulations within the city. It is anticipated that the city will use its discretionary authority regarding the consistency of proposed development with policies of the Green River Valley Policy Plan. As the area becomes developed, soils will be disturbed and moved onto and off of development sites. Although projects must comply with grading requirements of the city, loss of soil from development sites is anticipated, particularly during storm events. A percentage of that soil will enter the Springbrook drainage and will be washed into the P-1 Pond where it will accumulate and eventually be removed as a part of the stormwater control maintenance program. Silt and sediment has accumulated in the P-1 Pond to the extent that non-emergent vegetation such as black cottonwoods and alder is beginning to grow on the deltaic deposits. Removal of the vegetation and deposits may be required as a part of the city's overall maintenance program for the pond. 3-53 Implementation of the WDOE's stormwater manual and Best Management Practices will eventually aid in reducing the amount of sediment and pollutants entering Springbrook Creek and tributaries. Stream restoration efforts such as those planned by the city for ,, Springbrook Creek, would aid in improving habitat for fish and wildlife. Any proposed development in the vicinity of the project area will be subject to State and/or Federal wetland regulations, which could mean replacement of lost wetland. Even with the wetland regulations, some incremental loss of wetlands is expected to continue. This proposed project will either avoid development in wetlands altogether or will mitigate by creating wetland to compensate for impact to 0.14 acres of wetlands on Tracts A and B. This action therefore would not contribute to that incremental loss. For the immediate future, black cottonwood vegetation on the north side of the P-1 Pond is expected to continue to grow and to replace trees cut during 1987. Trees (black cottonwood, red alder, Oregon ash) along the south and east edge of the P-1 Pond will continue to increase in height and stature, providing additional visual buffering to adjacent land uses. Air quality in the region is expected to decline as the population in the Puget Sound region increases. The project will lead to an incremental increase in the local levels of carbon monoxide and an incremental increase in ozone in the region. The project will also result in the incremental decrease of wildlife habitat in the City of Renton. This will result in lower populations of wildlife inhabiting grasslands and shrub/scrub habitats such as those present on Tracts A and B. As additional development occurs in the area,the use of the P-1 Pond as a great blue heron nesting site may be adversely affected if sufficient setbacks and buffering are not provided, particularly on the undeveloped area north of the riparian forest and heron colony. The use of the P-1 Pond by herons could also be affected by management and maintenance of the P-1 Pond for stormwater control. Noise levels in the area are likely to increase with the continued expansion of gravel and rock extraction at the Stoneway Rock quarry, increased air traffic from the Renton airfield, and noise related to office park use in general. Traffic on Oakesdale Avenue Southwest and Southwest Seventh Street will increase with the project, but that increase will constitute a small percentage of the traffic volumes forecast and planned for the area (TRANSPO 1990) (see Appendix H). Mitigation Measures. Measures defined in the Draft EIS and this Final EIS will mitigate most impacts associated with the proposed actions. As additional development occurs in the area, mitigation measures should be established by the City of Renton for each project to minimize the adverse affects of the proposed actions. 3-54 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. As the area urbanizes with this and other projects, incremental impacts on air, water quality, wildlife habitat, and wetlands will continue. 3.10.2 Metro Wastewater Treatment Plant The information presented in this section (3.10.2) and in section 3.10.3 was received after this Final EIS was completed and printed. As a result, the discussion of these projects is presented only in this section of the Final EIS, and is not referenced in the Table of Contents or presented in Chapter 1 Summary. Additionally, literature referenced in these sections is presented on the last page of this chapter (Chapter 3) rather than in Chapter 5. Affected Environment. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle's (Metro) regional wastewater treatment facility is located due south of Tract A and southwest of Tract B. During the preparation of this Final EIS, Metro announced the proposed expansion of its facility, and on March 22, 1991, Metro issued a Draft Supplemental EIS (SEIS). Review of Metro's Draft SEIS indicates that the proposed treatment expansion could impact the FCDC proposed action. The following discussion describes the potential impacts of that action. Metro is proposing to enlarge its regional wastewater treatment plant at Renton. The existing secondary treatment facilities will be retained and new facilities added to provide increased treatment capacity. Present sewage treatment capacity is 72 million gallons per day (mgd); the expanded facility will handle 108 mgd, the projected year 2005 flows (Metro 1991). Four treatment facility alternatives were evaluated in the supplemental EIS. Components of these alternatives include liquid stream process facilities, solids stream q process facilities, nonprocess facilities such as influent pumping and odor control, site planning, and construction sequence/schedule. Phased construction of the treatment plant expansion would begin in 1991 and be completed in 1996 (Metro 1991). Presently developed portions of the Blackriver Corporate Park (earlier development phases),lie 300 to 400 feet east of the eastern boundary of the wastewater treatment facility. The south property line of Tract A lies 300 to 700 feet north of the northern edge of the treatment facility, while the edge of Tract B lies approximately 300 feet northeast of the treatment plant. Odor. A hydrogen sulfide monitoring program was conducted at the treatment plant during June and October, 1988; June and September, 1989; and September and October, 1990. Results indicated that the highest measured odor emissions originated from the diversion channel in the primary treatment area and the scrubber/thickener recycle lines return to the settled sewage channel. Other odor generators include primary sedimentation, primary effluent collection, grit handling, and solids handling coupler (Metro 1991). The locations of these odor generators are in the southwest and northern portion of the treatment plant. 3-55 According to the Supplemental EIS,only five documented odor complaints have been received by Metro in recent years (Metro 1991). Metro has an ongoing odor control program which includes chlorination and venting air through carbon scrubbers. Metro has also established a planning policy of not allowing odors greater than five odor units "dilution to threshold" or greater at the fenceline of the treatment facilities. Dilution thresholds are defined as the "number of volumes of odor-free air that must be added to a volume of odorous air to reduce odors to the threshold of detection by an average observer" (Metro 1991). Great Blue Heron Habitat. The northern portion of the wastewater treatment site contains two connected wetlands totaling 1.77 acres. These wetlands lie between the existing solids handling area and Oakesdale Avenue (Metro 1991). The wetlands provide minimal breeding habitat for several amphibian species such as tree frog, northwest salamander and long-toed salamander (Metro 1991). During site visits in December 1990 and January 1991, great blue herons were observed foraging in the open water portions of the wetlands (Metro 1991). At it's closest point, the wastwater treatment facility lies approximately 1,300 feet west of the great blue heron nesting colony. Aesthetics. The municipal treatment plant consists of two major clusters of structures, the largest (primary sedimentation, aeration basins, chlorine contact, and solids handling) occupying the southern portion of the site, and the smaller (solids handling) occupying the northern portion of the site. Except for the administration and associated buildings, the structures are industrial in appearance. Much of the site is visible from nearby elevated viewpoints, including the existing office buildings in the Blackriver Corporate Park to the east of the treatment plant. With the exception of coniferous tree planting along portions of the northwest side of the site and shrub and tree planting along Springbrook Creek, little tall vegetation occurs on the site. Traffic. The treatment facility operates 24 hours a day, generating septic and sludge truck and employee traffic. Table 3-5 presents the type of vehicles and frequency of vehicle traffic at the treatment plant. Operational staff at the treatment plant work shifts from 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. and from 6:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. Administrative staff work 7:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (Metro 1991). Trucks haul sludge to and from the plant via Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and Road "L" which is an extension of S.W. 7th Street on the eastern boundary of the treatment plant. All other traffic to the treatment plant enters the site via Monster Road S.W. or Septage Road via S.W. Grady Way. The existing peak hour level of service (LOS) for the intersection of S.W. 7th Street at Oakesdale S.W., is "C" during the morning and "D" during the evening. An "A" LOS occurs at all times at Oakesdale Avenue S.W. at Monster Road S.W. (Metro 1991). 3-56 Table 3-5. Current (1990) and Projected (1996) Metro Treatment Plant Traffic at Renton Treatment Plante Vehicle Frequency Existing Future Vehicle Type (1990) (1996) Digested sludge trucks 10-14/day 15-20/day Septic tank trucks 66/day 100/day Screen/grit trucks 6/week 12/week Polymer liquid trucks 6/month 8/month Polymer dry trucks 2/month 4/month • Commercial trucks, 6/day 8/day deliveries of supplies Metro trucks and cars Maintenance 30/day 60/day Operation 20/day 40/day Chlorine railroad car 2/45 days 2/25 days Employees (shift crew) 24/day 36/day Employees (all others) Monday through Friday 200/day 300/day Saturday and Sunday 4-18/day 8-36/day Bicycle 2/day 2/day Visitors 10/day 20/day 1 Vehicular frequencies are one-way trips. Source: Metro 1991. 3-57 Impacts. Expansion of the Renton wastewater treatment facility will result in impacts to surrounding land uses, including the proposed office buildings in Tracts A and B. Five subject areas-odor,great blue heron habitat,aesthetics,traffic,and construction scheduling are discussed below. Tract A. The three office buildings proposed under Alternative Al (Proposed Action), would be located 600 to 800 feet due north of the northern boundary of the treatment facility. Surface parking would be closer (within 350 feet of the boundary of the �V wastewater treatment facility). Construction of Alternative Al would be from 1991 through 1995. Tract B. The three office building proposed under Alternative B1 (Proposed Action) and the parking structure, would be located from 400 to 600 feet northeast of the northern boundary of the treatment facility. Construction of the buildings would be from 1991 through 1995. Alternative B2 (Single Seven Story Building With Parking Structure), would be located 400 to 600 feet northeast of the northern boundary of the treatment plant. Under both alternatives, surface parking for the Tract B buildings would be closer to the treatment facility. Odor. During the construction period for wastewater improvements, disturbance of odorous treatment facilities may cause occasional high odor generation (i.e., exposure of odorous sources to the atmosphere). During the construction period the sludge digesters will be taken out of service, thereby temporarily reducing odor generation from those treatment components. Based on the results of wind direction monitoring by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency and Metro, the potential exists for the Tract A buildings to be exposed to ;: winds from the south (and therefore blowing over the treatment facility) for 19 to 21 % of the time, and from the southwest for an additional 16% to 18% of the time annually(Metro 1991). Buildings on Tract B may be less exposed to odor since the site is more to the northeast of the treatment plant. Light and variable wind conditions,with no clearly defined direction, would be present an additional 18% of the time. During these times, there is a likelihood that odors from the treatment facility will be evident to occupants of the Tract A and B buildings. The significance of this impact will vary with the atmospheric conditions and the cause of the odors. Mechanical failures, emergencies, or system upsets would result in a greater likelihood of significant odor impacts, while impacts from the day-to-day operations will be less so long as the guidelines for Metro's odor planning policy are met (see mitigation section). The potential odor source closest to Tracts A and B will be the sludge truck loadout area located on the northern perimeter of the treatment facility. By 1996, from 15 to 20 sludge trucks per day (as compared to present daily traffic of 10 to 14 trucks per day) will be loaded and moved off site. Mitigation measures are proposed to reduce the odors from that source. 3-58 Under No Action, existing odors generation would continue or be reduced as Metro continues to maintain and improve odor reduction practices. Great Blue Heron Habitat. The two wetland areas on the treatment site are proposed to be maintained and a vegetated buffer zone established to minimize human intrusion and to provide additional cover for wildlife. Noise, traffic, and an increase in human activities associated with construction of the -f' wastewater treatment facilities may discourage herons from foraging in the wetlands and displacing birds to other foraging areas in the valley. Construction activity may also cause a change in use of the P-1 channel as a corridor for feeding and movement of herons to and from the colony (Metro 1991). The impact of treatment facilities operation is uncertain. Aesthetics. Proposed treatment improvements would result in construction of new DAFT tanks with odor control at the north end of the site, and secondary sedimentation tanks near the eastern edge of the site. Two of Metro's alternatives (Alternatives 3 and 4)would involve construction of trickling filters (10 to 15 feet in height above finished grade) in the interior of the site. Without screening of the Metro property,the new Metro facilities will be visible from the upper stories of the two proposed four story buildings on Tract A and the five story buildings on Tract B. Views of the treatment facility from the proposed single story building on the north end of Tract A will be limited by the low height of the building. The existing and proposed treatment facilities will continue to present an industrial character to the area. Under Metro's No Action, the present visual character of the treatment facility would be retained. Existing trees and shrubs planted as a buffer, would continue to increase in size, thereby further screening the site from pedestrians and motorists using Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and S.W. 7th Street. Traffic. Phased construction of the treatment facility improvements would commence in 1991 and be completed in 1996. Increases in traffic would occur slowly over time. Table 3-5 presents the projected traffic volumes for the year 1996. During the construction period(1991 to 1996),construction-related traffic is projected to average 200 to 300 one-way trips per day with a peak of 425 to 475 trips per day for several months during late 1993 and early 1994 (Metro 1991). The construction trucks and contractor employees will use Monster Road S.W. and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. (Metro 1991). Construction-related truck traffic on Oakesdale Avenue will increase substantially during construction of the Tract A and B office buildings and the improvements to the treatment facility, particularly during the peak construction period of 1993 and 1994. 3-59 The greatest increase in operations-related traffic will occur via S.W. Grady Way and Monster Road. Only minor increases in traffic, primarily sludge haul trucks, will occur on Oakesdale Avenue and at the intersection of Oakesdale and S.W. 7th Street. The 1996 LOS at S.W. 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. is projected to be a level "D" during the morning hours and level "E" during the evening. These LOSs would occur with or without Metro's project. The projected traffic volume increase on Oakesdale Avenue S.W. resulting from the treatment facility expansions would be less than 2% (Metro 1991). Under Metro's No Action, the traffic growth rate of 1.5% to 2.5% is expected to continue, with or without the project. Traffic increases associated with the treatment plant expansion would be less than 2% on Oakesdale Avenue S.W. Construction Scheduling. Phased construction of the wastewater treatment would commence in 1991 and be completed in 1996. Construction of office buildings on Tract A is scheduled to begin during 1991 (single-story building), with the two four-story buildings being completed during 1994 and 1995. Construction of the single-story building will be year round, whereas construction of the four-story buildings will include outdoor construction limitations during the period from February 1 to July 1. Construction traffic to Tract A will therefore be reduced during that time period. Construction of the office buildings and parking structure on Tract B is also scheduled for the 1991 to 1995 time period. As required by City of Renton ordinance, hauling hours for large construction vehicles will be prior to 7:30 a.m., between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., and after 6:30 p.m.. Construction activity associated with the Metro treatment facility will peak during late 1993 and early 1994, at which point the construction-related one-way trips are expected to reach a maximum of 425 to 475 per day (Metro 1991). Mitigation Measures Odor. Metro has defined a number of mitigation measures designed to reduce the impacts of odor of present and future operations. These include the following: • During construction, avoid still air and hot weather conditions when disturbing odorous treatment facilities; • Service odor control units on a regular, scheduled basis and respond to odor complaints immediately; • Avoid over-chlorination to avoid noticeable chlorine odor impact to surrounding I areas; • Develop an odor control system to meet Metro's fenceline standards as mentioned under Affected Environment; 3-60 • Construct odor control facilities for the liquid stream portion of sewage treatment to include such things as a headworks stack, covering of aeration tanks, improvements to aeration system for the aeration tanks, and sealing of trickling filters; and • Improve odor treatment in the solid stream portion of treatment to include pretreatment steps, enclosing sludge truck loading area, and eliminating odor seepage from sludge digesters. Great Blue Heron Habitat. The following mitigation measure is designed to reduce the visual exposure of the wetlands and to improve wildlife habitat: • Establish a 25-foot buffer around the existing wetlands. Aesthetics. Metro has identified mitigation measures designed to lessen the impact of the proposed improvements on the aesthetic features of the site. These include the following: • Build a vegetated perimeter berm during first phase of construction to partially screen the existing and proposed facilities; 1 I • Add planting and berming to interior areas of the site to break up the mass of the facility as viewed from surrounding hills and tall buildings; and • Create major tree groupings to block views into the facility from 7th Avenue and Oakesdale Avenue. Traffic. Metro has proposed the following mitigation measures-to reduce traffic-related impacts of treatment expansion: • Provide information to neighborhoods and businesses to be affected by construction; • Schedule construction operations to minimize impact to peak hour traffic operations; • Participate in the City of Renton's "Grady Way TBZ" under Resolution 2827 by contributing $207 per trip generated on an average weekday (total contribution of $44,091). Construction Scheduling. No mitigation measures specific to construction scheduling were defined in Metro's treatment facility expansion EIS. The following measures should be considered to minimize the impacts with other construction activities in the vicinity: • As required by City of Renton ordinance,schedule Metro and , Blackriver Corporate Park construction traffic to avoid rush hour traffic periods; 3-61 • Metro and First City Developments Corporation shall jointly prepare a construction traffic management plan equitably designed to address such issues as common haul routes, traffic control, etc.; • Metro and First City Developments Corporation shall coordinate in establishing an equitable street cleaning program for that portion of Oakesdale Avenue and 7th Street impacted by their respective truck traffic from the sites. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Odor. Even with Metro's proposed odor control plan, offensive odors will be generated from the treatment facility and extend beyond the boundaries of the site. These odors will occur as a part of day-to-day operations and most likely from mechanical failures, emergencies, or system upsets. These odors have the greatest potential for crossing Tracts A and B when the prevailing winds are from the south and southwest. Great Blue Heron Habitat. Added disturbance on the site may cause herons to alter their present foraging use of the wetlands on the Metro site. Aesthetics. The wastewater treatment facility will be visible from west facing four-story offices on Tract A and five-story office buildings on Tract B. This view will generally be as an industrial complex. Traffic. Traffic volumes will increase during the construction period, particularly during late 1993 and early 1994. Traffic volume increases will increase by approximately 2% on Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and less than 1% on S.W. Grady Way. Construction Scheduling. None known at this time. Relevant References to Metro Wastewater Treatment Improvements. The following is a list of environmental documents previously prepared on the Renton wastewater treatment facility: • 1974. Auburn Interceptor EIS; • 1980. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Wastewater.Management Plan for the Lake Washington/Green River Basins, EIS and Appendices. Report No. 910/9-80-077; • 1981. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Final EIS on the Wastewater Management Plan for the Lake Washington/Green River Basins; • 1983. Draft Supplemental EIS for the Puget Sound Facilities Engineering Report; • 1983. Final Supplemental EIS on the Puget Sound Facilities Engineering Report; 3-62 • 1983. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle's Draft and Final EISs, Sludge Management Plan; • 1984. Final Supplemental EIS on the Renton Effluent Transfer System Alternatives for the Wastewater Management Plan, Lake Washington/Green River Basins; • 1984. Public Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS on the Renton Effluent Transfer System Alternatives for the Wastewater Management Plan, Lake Washington/Green River Basins; • 1985. Draft EIS on the Plan for the Secondary Treatment Facilities and Combined Sewer Overflow Control; • 1985. Final EIS on the Plan for the Secondary Treatment Facilities and • Combined Sewer Overflow Control; • 1986. Final Supplemental EIS for Secondary Facilities and Combined Sewer Overflow Control; • 1988. Final Supplemental EIS for West Point Secondary Treatment Facilities; and • 1991. Draft Supplemental EIS, Metro Treatment Plant at Renton. 3.10.3 Rabanco Black River Waste Reduction Center In addition to the Metro treatment facility expansion, the Rabanco Black River Waste Reduction Center project is presently under environmental review by the City of Renton. A pre-draft environmental impact statement has been prepared on that project. The project will be a waste recycling and transfer facility employing manual and mechanical processes to remove recyclable material from the construction and demolition debris waste stream, to process some of the recyclables, to package other recyclables for delivery to processing facilities, and to package the remaining waste for shipment to a disposal facility. The site is located in northwest Renton on Monster Hill Road, east of Foster Golf Links and west of the Renton Concrete Recycling gravel pit and FCDC Tracts A and B. While the Draft EIS has not yet been issued, traffic and transportation, noise, air quality, wildlife, and historic and cultural resources are expected to be the environmental elements of concern. Preliminary research indicates that the proposal would involve , transporting construction and demolition debris by large trucks using the regional highway system and local arterials near the site. Concern has been expressed regarding the potential impacts to road surfaces within the City of Renton and the traffic impacts on Oakesdale 3-63 Avenue and Monster Road. Preliminary estimates are for 31 truck trips during the morning peak period and 26 truck trips during midday. LOS may also decrease at Oakesdale/Grady Way. The increase in traffic noise along Oakesdale would be 5 to 6 dBA (TRC Environmental Consultants 1991). Because the noise increase would be 5 dBA above ambient, this is considered a significant impact. Air quality is likely to decrease as well because of cumulative impacts of the proposed facility, the quarry, Metro, and increased traffic along major highways. The Draft EIS for the Black River Waste Reduction Center is scheduled for issuance late in the spring of 1991. Mitigation Measures. Mitigation measures for the Rabanco project will be defined during the SEPA process for that project. The Mitigation Report for that project will identify mitigation measures required by the City. Measures could include common use of a construction staging area for projects in close proximity to each other, and construction phasing and transportation mitigation measures similar to those defined for other projects in the area. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. The unavoidable adverse impacts associated will be defined in the project's Draft EIS. wf 3-64 CITATIONS Literature Cited Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. 1991. Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement - Metro Treatment Plant at Renton. Preliminary Review Copy.March, 1991. TRC Environmental Consultants. 1991. Pre-draft environmental impact statement - Rabanco Black River waste reduction center. March, 1991. � I I Y ` I I 4 3-65 Chapter 4. Comment Letters and Responses to Comment Letters .n LIST OF COMMENTERS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK TRACTS A AND B OFFICE BUILDINGS File Number Commenter Date Federal Agencies 1 U. S. Department of Interior Fish & Wildlife Service Nancy Gloman May 29, 1990 State Agencies 2 Washington Dept. of Ecology Donald J. Bales May 25, 1990 3 Washington Dept. of Ecology Terra Prodan May 31, 1990 4 Washington Dept. of Wildlife Theodore A. Muller May 16, 1990 5 Washington Dept. of Transportation May 15, 1990 6 Washington Dept. of Ecology May 3, 1990 City/County/Regional Agencies 7 City of Tukwila L. Rick Beeler May 24, 1990 8 King County Office of Open Space David Tiemann May 25, 1990 9 PSAPCA, Anita J. Frankel April 24, 1990 10 METRO, Environmental Compliance Division, Gregory M. Bush May 18, 1990 Interest Groups 11 Citizens for Renton Wildlands f Preservation, Susan Krom May 25, 1990 12 1pn, Royce A. Berg April 27, 1990 13 1pn, Royce A. Berg May 21, 1990 4-1 File Number Commenter Date _ 14 - Seattle Audubon Society I Gerry Adams May 25, 1990 15 Seattle Audubon Society/ Citizens for Wildland Preservation Robert G. Sieh and Susan Krom May 25, 1990 16 Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation, Susan Krom May 9, 1990 Private Citizens 17 Susan McNally May 23, 1990 18 Senator Michael E. Patrick April 24, 1990 19 Jean Spencer May 31, 1990 ,; 20 Mary M. Anderson April 26, 1990 21 Lawrence Forrester No Date 22 Betty Lambert April 30, 1990 23 J. A. Matter April 29, 1990 24 Mr. and Mrs. T. W. Hauff April 28, 1990 b 25 Joyce H. Frank April 30, 1990 26 James H. Culler April 29, 1990 27 William N. Christie April 30, 1990 28 Peter M. Hudelson April 30, 1990 29 John and Julie McCone May 30, 1990 30 Elizabeth Storm May 6, 1990 31 Susan Smalley May 7, 1990 i 32 Elizabeth Lundstrom May 5, 1990 33 Ken and Ada Shannon May 7, 1990 34 Mr. and Mrs. Orville Radel May 5, 1990 35 Lois Nordquist May 7, 1990 36 Charles R. Dowd May 6, 1990 37 Mary A. and G. James Kenney May 1, 1990 38 Shirley J. Winton May 3, 1990 39 Deborah Dowd May 3, 1990 40 Elizabeth Culbert -. May 1, 1990 1 41 Christopher R. Schultz May 28, 1990 42 Thomas C. Reiter May 4, 1990 43 Phyllis L. Vigal May 4, 1990 44 Elizabeth M. Seafoos May 4, 1990 45 Paul and Sharon (illegible) May 2, 1990 46 Walter A. Kuciej May 7, 1990 47 Mike Shannon May 9, 1990 4-2 File Number Commenter Date 48 Mary Jo and Oliver C. Rouse May 9, 1990 49 C. Scott May 7, 1990 50 Andrea S. Cohen May 23, 1990 51 Eve Gadbois May 9, 1990 52 Theresa McLean May 9, 1990 53 Susan Konichi May 9, 1990 54 Rayna Holtz May 9, 1990 55 Jay Nelsen May 8, 1990 56 Beulah Hillstrom May 10, 1990 57 Emma Amiad May 8, 1990 58 John P. Kelsall April 24, 1990 59 Range D. Bayer May 18, 1990 60 Rhonda E. Chapman May 11, 1990 61 Doris McGougan May 10, 1990 62 Allegro.Berrian May 11, 1990 63 Mark McLann No date „� 64 Aaron Heide No date ' 65 Tom and Peggy Bishop May 9, 1990 66 Terry L. Lingbloom May 10, 1990 67 Gladys M. Krohn May 11, 1990 ,, 68 John Kohlsaat May 9, 1990 69 Mark and Jean Ouellette May 21, 1990 70 Lori Levin No date 71 Julie P. Bonwell May 21, 1990 72 Marcy Beyer May 11, 1990 73 William Bolanos No date 74 Virginia and James Wood May 6, 1990 75 Jane Lindeman May 8, 1990 76 Janice Martin May 12, 1990 77 P. Dee Boersma April 25, 1990 78 Elizabeth J. Miles May 19, 1990 79 John M. Wolf May 15, 1990 80 Beth L. Healy May 21, 1990 ' _ 81 . Ralph M. Evans May 18, 1990 - 82 Krista Rave No Date 83 Walter T. Trial, Jr. May 23, 1990 84 _ Donald Norman May 9, 1990 85 Christine Linden May 25, 1990 j 86 Marty Murphy May 14, 1990 87 Paul Julin May 21, 1990 88 Amy J. O. Forrester May 28, 1990 4-3 File Number Commenter Date 89 John Peard May 24, 1990 90 Susan Margolis May 25, 1990 91 Mary M. Anderson May 23, 1990 92 Christopher P. Clifford No date 93 Marilyn McGill No date 94 Lori Levin No date 95 Keith Peterson May 18, 1990 96 Jean Sundborg May 20, 1990 97 Sheryl and Phil Lundahl No date 98 William N. Christie April 30, 1990 99 Unknown May.9, 1990 100 Margaret R. Gourley May 18, 1990 101 Peggy Dunlap, Tom Makey May 10, 1990 102 Cynthia Mack May 24, 1990 103 Alma Newsome May 24, 1990 104 Jim Bernthal May 23, 1990 105 Andrew Carpenter No date 106 L. Scott Forbes No date 107 Susan Krom April 26, 1990 108 Keith Peterson May 18, 1990 Form Letters 109 Kay Moilanen May 23, 1990 110 S. W. "Stan" Murphy May 23, 1990 111 Theresa M. Howard May 23, 1990 112 Sherwood B. Martin May 23, 1990 113 Luanna T. Martin May 23, 1990 114 F. Karboly May 23, 1990 115 Lloyd G. Edwards May 23, 1990 116 Sandi and Dave Sager May 23, 1990 117 Shellie M. Bennett May 23, 1990 118 Rowland J. Martin May 23, 1990 119 Mike Setzer, Jay (illegible) and (illegible) Brunk May 23, 1990 120 Sally L. Martin May 23, 1990 121 Mr. and Mrs. Glenn Boyes May 23, 1990 122 Ken and Denise Bronger May 23, 1990 123 Carroll H. Nevermann May 23, 1990 124 Terry Grefthen May 23, 1990 125 Tatina Grefthen May 23, 1990 4-4 1 File Number Commenter Date 126 Evelyn R. (illegible) May 23, 1990 - 127 Sharon Elliott May 23, 1990 128 Rachel A. Young May 23, 1990 129 Mary Ballestrasse May 23, 1990 130 Mary Pergamo May 23, 1990 131 Carol Lyn O'Neal May 23, 1990 132 Bobby Joe (illegible) May 23, 1990 133 John W. (illegible) May 23, 1990 134 Mary J. Graves May 23, 1990 -- 135 Thomas E. Stoeser May 23, 1990 136 Dan Claudon May 23, 1990 137 Juliana R. Stoeser May 23, 1990 138 Stephanie Shein May 23, 1990 - 139 Vivian G. Cook May 23, 1990 140 Jennifer Boyes May 23, 1990 141 Kristin Cook MacKay May 23, 1990 j 142 William T. Cook May 23, 1990 143 M. L. Perry May 23, 1990 144 Mrs. Kay Donald May 23, 1990 145 Lyle Perry, Jr. May 23, 1990 146 Edward J. Gion May 23, 1990 147 Paul D. Shafer May 23, 1990 148 David Halwell May 23, 1990 149 Daniel Pohto May 23, 1990 150 Laverne E. Graves May 23, 1990 j 151 Barb Holt May 23, 1990 152 Alice, Harold, Donald, and Kathryn Deacy May 23, 1990 153 Phil Polizatto May 23, 1990 154 Susan Krom (Public Comments) May 1, 1990 i 4-5 -} J,w, .,ti ' United States Department of the Interior ~_ these situations has circumstances different from the proposed project. There FISII AND WILDLIFE SERVICE is not sufficient justification to conclude that the rookery near the proposed �`' _ Blackriver Corporate Park would continue to be successful simply because other Fish and ent Wildlife Enhancement, l rookeries have appeared to,co-exist with development activities. 2625 Parksont Lane SW, Bldg B Olympia, Washington 98502 206/753-9440 FTS 434-9440 The proposed project has the potential to create a significant disturbance to the Blackriver heron rookery. Impacts from the ofee building development 5 ii May 29, 1990 would be permanent and ongoing, not one-time-only events such as logging (an activity which occurred near this rookery previously). The proposal includes construction of surface parking lots to within 400 feet Mary Lynn Myer of the rookery. This would introduce year-round, day-long, human and Department of Community Development automobile disturbance. Use of the office buildings would introduce permanent City of Renton 1 activity, with people moving in and out throughout the days. The closest 200 Mill Avenue office buildings and the parking garage would be within 600 to 700 feet of the Renton, Washington 98055 rookery. This is within the 750-foot buffer sone that is recommended by Washington Department of Wildlife ■ management guidelines. The proposed seven story office building would reach the same elevation as the heron nests. Re: Blackriver Corporate Park, Tracts A and B Office Buildings- There are no trees that could act as • visual buffer between this seven story Draft Environmental Impact Statement building and the nests. Any buffer trees planted during project construction would not reach this height for many years. Dear Ms. Myer: To avoid the risks of disturbing this rookery to the point of failure, decline, or abandonment, the Service recommends that the maximum set-backs The L.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the above referenced recommended in the Department of Wildlife's great' blue heron management draft environmental impact statement. The following comments are provided for guidelines be implemented for this project: your consideration when preparing the final document. Potential project No human should be initiated at any time of the year 7 impacts to resources of concern to the Service have been addressed in the within activity feet of any nesting tree. This includes the draft document. The conclusion that the adjacent great blue heron rookery construction75 feetand use of office buildings, parking garages, parking would not be disturbed if the proposed development guidelines are implemented .A ons, and recreational trails. is not supported in the draft document nor in appendix B. Consequently, potential impacts from the project may be more severe than assessed. There should be no exterior construction or new activity within GENERAL COMMENTS one-quarter mile of a rookery during the nesting season (January 1 , through August 1 of any year). Unique Terrestrial Resources SUMMARY COMMENTS The proposed project lies as close as 350 feet to the Blackriver great blue heron rookery. This rookery has been establishing in a rapidly developing The great blue heron is a migratory bird, protected from take, capture or kill urban valley. With increasing development, there are greater disturbances to under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Disturbance of great blue herons and the rookery and more restrictions on feeding areas. great blue heron rookeries should be avoided. The extent to which a project may impact nesting great blue herons may be due The proposed project has the potential to significantly disturb the adjacent to site specific conditions such as height of nests in trees, year-round Blackriver great blue heron rookery. It may create enough disturbance to foliage in nesting and buffer trees, height of buildings or other structures cause abandonment of the rookery. Potential sites within the valley to whichcr relative to the height of nests, and many other factors. These factors at the 3 this heron rookery could relocate are limited. The great blue heron project site have been considered in the draft document. Even with all known population within the Blackriver valley may be adversely affected as a result. factors considered, great blue herons in similar situations may still react To minimize this disturbance, the of tioned maximum development set- differently. Whereas some. rookeries may not be disturbed by a particular backs should be incorporated into the project plan. Implementing these set- activity, this same activity at another rookery may be enough disturbance to backs would entail some re-designing of the development. cause the herons to abandon the site. Appendix B described several projects in the Pacific Northwest where LI successful rookeries are close to human and industrial activities. Each of 2 4-6 We appreciate notification of this project and the opportunity to comment. Please call Ann Remsberg at the letterhead phone/address if you have any questions concerning these comments or if the Service can offer technical assistance in the development of the final project plan. Sincerely, rti ?1Y1 ncy Gloman Acting Field Supervisor AR:fs c: WDW (Muller) WDW (Nongame) 3 4-7 • • Placement of a pedestrian trail on the top of the berms,with a screened Response to Comments from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service(USFW): • viewing platform of the heronry and P-1 Pond on Tract A;and 1. Supplemental information and additional mitigation measures have been • Establishment of a maximum building height limitation of 57 feet(four- provided in this Final Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). Please refer • stories)at 600 to 800 feet from the heron colony and to a maximum of to Chapter 3 for additional information. Additionally,Appendix B has also 71 feet(five-stories)on Tract B beyond that distance. been modified to reflect additional site information and literature review. The 600-foot setback is a distance which is judged to be sufficient to protect 2. Comment noted. Additional mitigation measures,including establishment of the heronry. The 750-foot distance recommended by the Washington a 10 foot high berm and a setback of 600 feet,have been defined in this Final Department of Wildlife (WDW) is judged to be unnrMcsary given the feeding The issue of impacts to heron feeding areas extends beyond the scope additional mitigation measures proposed and the fact that over 10 acres of tall of this project to include all wetlands and bodies of water that represent a cottonwood and Oregon ash trees suitable for heron nesting lie 700 to 1,000 food base for herons. While wetland regulations have become increasingly feet north and west of the proposed project. These trees are part of the stringent in recent years,more is needed to protect riparian and shallow-water riparian forest deeded to the City of Renton. These trees would be available habitats on streams and rivers that provide feeding habitat for the heron. for nesting herons in future years in the event existing trees become 3. Responses of herons to disturbance may very well vary from one rookery to unsuitable as nest sites. During the 1990 nesting season,four new great blue the next,however,the information available from rookeries located in urban heron nests were found in trees located off of the island supporting the main areas represents the best that is available to use as a basis for identifying colony. Please see response to comments from the WDW for additional impacts. Additional mitigation measures have been defined in this Final EIS thci fission of the agent a recommended setbacks. to further minimize potential impacts and the possibility of abandonment of g Comment noted. See above responses to cotmments the heronry. See Chapter 3 and Appendix B for further information. 4. Comment noted. See response to comment 3. 5. The long-term impacts have been identified. The no-development setback of 600 feet, when combined with other mitigation measures, is judged to be sufficient to protect the heron colony. On-going monitoring will also be required during the construction phases of the project. Should the herons • react adversely during early phases,later phases may be re-evaluated. 6. Comment noted. 7. As additional mitigation,this Final EIS has identified a number of measures including: • Increasing setback from 400 to 600 feet from the heron colony on Tract B; • Establishment of a 10-foot high benched berm on both Tracts A and B located between the heron colony and development on both Tracts A and B(see Sections 1.6 and 3.5 for further discussion); • Planting 20-foot tall evergreen trees on the berm benches; • 'Establishment of a 5-foot high berm vegetated with 6-to 8-foot evergreen trees and a fence along the property line of Tract A west of the 600-foot radius setback from the heronry and to the east along Springbrook Creek; • 4-8 • • 'li•_ dt• • STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mad stop F'V•ll • ()lynpi.,. Washington 98504.871I • (206)1596000 • 2 Letter to Mary Lynn Myer May 25, 1990 MANNINGDIVISION May 25, 1990 CITY OF REIJTON Page 2 MAY 3 0 1930 Ms. Mary Lynn Myer we recommend a detailed pre and post-development monitoring �7 city of Renton RECEIVED program involving vegetation, water quality and quantity, and I 200 Mill Avenue South wildlife for the P-1 wetland and any other satellite Renton, WA 98055 wetlands. Dear Ms. Myer: A contingency plan should be developed to address potential 0 future problems (e.g. marsh lose from a significant increase Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft in hydrologic inputs or contamination from storm water 0 environmental impact statement (DEIS) for the Black River pollutants). The developer should be held accountable for Corporate Park by First City Developments. We reviewed the the expense of the contingency plan implementation. DEIS and have the following comments. CONTAMINATED SEDIMENTS In general, the DEIS does not appear to address the entire area of the proposed development. Development in the A It has come to the attention of the Department of Ecology vicinity of the P-1 wetlands and the heron rookery must be y that possible contaminated dredge spoils are on-site. These addressed in its totality before impacts can be adequately spoils are from the dredging of the Black River Impoundment evaluated. We noted this in our previous comments and we are (aka P-1 Pond). This "pond" forms behind a dam and a concerned that the cumulative impacts may not receive majority of the sediment carried in Springbrook/Mill Creek adequate consideration. are deposited in that impoundment. WETLAND IMPACTS In 1984 the U. S. Soil Conservation Service dredged the existing P-1 pump forebay as part of a forebay expansion Buildings B and C in Alternative Al and the parking garage in project. A.water dredge was utilized and the discharge Alternative B2 are proposed within the 600 foot buffer zone. 9- lagoon for the dredge operation was located at the site of we understand the buffer zone was required by the Hearing the proposed construction. (Mary Anderson, personal Examiner in a 1987 decision. Has that buffer zone condition communication, 27 April 1990). been removed or changed, and if so, by whom? Sediments in Springbrook/Mill Creek are known to exhibit high How wide will the buffer be for Tract A and will it be 3 levels of contamination, exceeding Hazardous Waste Inspection planted with native vegetation? We recommend a native and Cleanup Draft Cleanup Program (HWICP) Standards and, in vegetation buffer at least 100 feet wide for Tracts A and B. some instances, dangerous waste criteria. A list of known contaminated sites which have historically discharged into Small depressions referred to in the description•of Tract A 4 Springbrook/Mill Creek is attached. could be wetlands. Compensatory mitigation is recommended for any unavoidable impacts to these wetlands. Due to the known historical contamination at the proposed site, it is being considered a potential contaminated site by It appears there is a proposed pipeline through Tract B ( 6r the HWICP at Ecology's Northwest Regional Office. wetlands. We strongly recommend an alternate route that 1 avoids wetland impacts. Unavoidable impacts to wetlands In addition to the usual impacts from project construction, should be mitigated for. other impacts are likely to result from the investigation and •� clean up of any contamination on-site such as well drilling, The wetland in tract B should have at least a 50 foot wide core sampling, excavation, backfill, etc. buffer around it. • 4-9 --. -- - Letter to Mary Lynn Myer May 25, 1990 Page 3 In view of the potential for significant adverse impacts to wetlands and wildlife habitat, and the potential risks from contaminated sediments, we will continue to look closely at this proposal. The City of Renton should seriously consider whether the proposed intensity of development is appropriate for the site. If you have any questions on wetland issues, please call Ms. Terra Prodan or Mr. John Marshal of our Shorelands Program at (206) 459-6835. For questions on contaminated sediments, please call Mr. Norm Peck of our Hazardous Waste Cleanup Program at (206) 867-7047. Sincerely�,/J _Dana Donald J. Bales Environmental Review Section DJB: enclosures (7) cc: Norm Peck, NWRO Rachel Bennett, NWRO Terra Prodan, BH John Marshal, BH 4-10 • Response to Comments from the Washington Department of Ecology(WDOE),Dated May plan will be to address issues beyond those directly related to this proposal. Those include issues of water level management and water quality in the P-1 25, 1990: Pond,habitat maintenance in the pond and surrounding city-owned riparian 1. Comment noted. Please see Section 3.10 regarding the evaluation of forest,and human intrusion and recreation in those areas. Development of cumulative impacts of development on the Black River heronry and wetlands. this mitigation plan will be the responsibility of the City of Renton. The evaluation includes an analysis of impacts likely to occur to resources in 9. The issue of contaminated sediments on Tract A has been addressed in the area as development continues. Sections 3.2.1 and 3.6.2 and Appendix F of this Final EIS. 2. The 600-foot buffer zone,as well as other stipulations set forth by the Hearing Examiner are still in effect. The City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee will act on the proposed project and EIS during the site review process. Based on the information available,the Hearing Examiner will once again rule on the conditions for project approval. Those conditions could be as previously defined in the 1987 ruling or could include other conditions. 3. Three buffer widths have been presented as mitigation: 1)a 600-foot setback from the heronry to development on both Tracts A and B;2)an earthen berm setback(to be planted with native trees and shrubs)from the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek to development;and 3)an average setback of 50 feet with a minimum of 25 feet around the wetland in the old Black River channel on Tract B. 4. The small depressions on Tract A(approximately 0.10 acre)were formed as a result of the filling activities after the P-1 Pond was excavated,and serve no important wetland functions. Proposed mitigation is to create an additional wetland area adjacent to the old Black River channel on Tract B. 5. No pipeline is proposed through Tract B. The line you are referring to may be the centerline of the old Black River channel,the wetland area to be avoided. 6. The proposed buffer zone for the old Black River channel wetland will average 50 feet with a minimum of 25 feet. 7. A construction monitoring program is proposed as a mitigation measure in this Final EIS(see Section 35.4). Because the project must conform to the city's surface water design requirements (the city recently adopted King County's Surface Water Design Manual) and because the P-1 Pond is, by definition, a detention pond, no water quality monitoring is warranted. Wetlands will be monitored as a part of the mitigation for the loss of 0.14 acres of wetland. 8. The practicability of such a contingency plan is questionable since the P-1 Pond was developed for the primary purpose of storing stormwater(lows from development occurring in the Springbrook Creek watershed. As an alternative,the city is considering developing a management plan for the P-1 Pond and surrounding city-owned property. The purpose of the management 4-11 STATE Of WASFWGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Response to Comments from the WDOE,Dated May 31,1990: nu:Stop PV•11 • Olympia. Washington 98sW E711 • pow.59-woo 1. Comment noted.The change is made in Section 35.2 of this Final EIS. May 31, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Project Manager Community Development Department Renton City Hall 200 Hill Avenue S Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: We had two additional notes to add to the Department of Ecology comment letter of May 25, 1990 on the Black River Corporate Park DEIS: "WETLAND IMPACTS" should be SHORELP.HD/WETLAND IMPACTS Also, if you have any questions on Shorelands or Wetlands issues, please direct them to Terra Prodan at 438-7106, as the Shorelands coordinator on this proposal. Sincerely, �WGR/T/LPr-- . Terra Prodan Shorelands Specialist Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program TP:dh • 40oa 4-12 • 1 d.e.. F. if,/• 1 Kaar Huller to Myer STATF(lf WASFWK.T(NJ May 16, 1990 DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE Page 2 16018 Mill Crcck Blvd.. Mill Creek. WA 98012 Tel. (206) 771113II N..4. 44;., • Hay 16, 1990 `.�a`�• 9� 7' clY of the colonies over time. However, in those cases where the number • of nests are i ing, it is not clear whether this is due to �'N 9nx increased breeding population, or whether nests are being abandoned 3 .'-1l and rebuilt further from the disturbances; as reported by Werachkul Mary Lynne Myer (4 ;�h eta 1 (1976) and Simpson and Helsel' (1976). Senior Environmental Planner J To then state that all these heronries are "viable," we believe, is Department of Community Development without foundation. 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 The "heron protection guidelines" developed with the use of these I 61 RE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR BLACK RIVER CORPORATE incomplete data, are therefore, highly questionable. PARK The third apparent deficiency in the document is the complete failure Dear Ha. Myer: + to inventory the wildlife resources utilizing the site. Our personal visits to this site have revealed that at least six additional wildlife species should be added to the list presented in this Washington Department of Wildlife (WDW) staff has reviewed the subject document (Section 3.5.3 and 3.5.4). We have ob d widgeons, document and our comments follow. buffleheads, goldeneyes, shoveller., gold finches, and pine ■!skin■ on GENERAL COMMENTS: this site. We suspect that a thorough and comprehensive wildlife inventory would disclose use by eighty, or more, species. These would The most striking deficiency in this document is that it suggests include fish, reptiles, amphibians, small mammals, and additional bird putting public resources at risk, without establishing the need to do species. so. In a recent telecast (King Broadcasting, April 25, 1990), King TV I • We do not believe that failure to conduct adequate field work is an news staff reported an almost 30 percent vacancy rate constructed office buildings in the greater Seattle recently excuse to provide inadequate mitigation of impacts, or to fail to area. With this disclose impacts. level of availability of already constructed buildings, it seems needless to encroach, with the mass density described, into an ' This document's focus, relative to the natural environment, is almost environmentally sensitive and unique area. exclusively on the heron colony, and seemingly, ignores impacts to all The second most striking deficiency relates to the great lengths the the other wildlife resources which depend upon this site. �I authors have gone to in starching out case histories of heronries We are not suggesting this by thatthe h y is not important, but which supposedly "coexist" with development--because they inhabit rather, that all other w Le important as well. sites close to it (Appendix B). H , the ecological data necessary to evaluate the real viability of these nesting sites (Table2- SPECIFIC COl0iENTSr B-1, Appendix B) is lacking. ' • Viability, as it applies to a wildlife population, describes a Table 1-2 (pages 1-5 through 1-14)1 the table states that significant condition in which a breeding population produces enough offspring to f t trial habitat will be lost, implying that terrestrial replace a major portion of its own members, over time, and exchange wildlife will also be lost. This is true. In addition, h , the f] members with other breeding populations (genetic drift). The number year around use of parking ithin close proximity to the P-1 / of individuals in the population must either remain stable or increase pond will create disturbance impacts to this imp quatic f over time. as well. Our visits to the site have revealed year around use of the pond by waterfowl and wading birds. Table B-1 does not list the number of herons in any given colony, nor does it show whether the colonies are increasing, decreasing, or 3 Secondly. the table states that there will be no significant adverse impacts to herons so long as •heron protection guidelines" are 8 remaining stable in size. It only gives the number of nests in most 4-13 Huller to Myer Huller to Myer May 16, 1990 May 16, 1990 Page 3 Page 4 followed. The discussion in Appendix B does not seem to support this wildlife now using the project site, and replace these species with �� statement. A number of case studies are given in Appendix B, h "crows, house sparrows, starlings, rock doves, etc.". Presumably, the none of the examples included a man-made development including a seven 8 etc. would refer to Norway rats and possibly tercel cats. Only one of story building and over 1,200 surface parking stalls (tract A and B) these species (crow) is even classified as wildlife, and then in such close proximity to a heronry. It appears that the so-called primarily as a pest species. heron protection guideline's are more an attempt to maximize economic return--given the physical constraints of the site--rather than an We do understand that a few other species of "urban wildlife" will use attempt to develop the site in an environmentally sensitive manner. the developed area as some form of marginal habitat as well. However, the resultant change in wildlife species diversity does not constitute In our opinion, the preferred alternatives for developing these two 1 Ci mitigation in any real sense of the word. tracts propose to play a kind of "Russian roulette" with the heron colony. This section also describes changes (negative) that will occur in species diversity of the wildlife using the P-1 pond. Although the Page 1-15, Mitigation Measures; we agree that reducing the size of the City of Renton pond access areas adjacent to the FCDC properties will /g building would reduce the impacts to some extent. Not only would the provide some excellent buffering of the pond (as soon as a multi- building itself be less intrusive, but a smaller building would also /U layered mixed coniferous-deciduous forest establishes itself), we require a less extensive parking area--which, in turn, would help cannot imagine any real mitigation being accomplished by this reduce human disturbance. vegetative cover, for many years. Section 3.4.1; Surface Water Movement/Quantity; Page 3-19; paragraph As stated before, we do not believe that the heron protection prior to Impacts; this paragraph refers the reader to a discussion of ,/ guidelines presented in the DHIS will substantially protect the wetlands, in Section 3.4.2. We located this discussion in Section heronry. These guidelines are not consistent between the two tracts, 3.5.2. and they impose a more significant risk to the heronry than can be supported by the available literature. Section 3.5.1 also makes reference to this same section. • We have included a draft copy of the Washington Department of Wildlife Page 3-30; Mitigation measures; it is unclear from the drawings in Management Guidelines for ... Great Blue Heron(s). We requelt that Section 2 (Figures 2-3 and 2-5) just how much area FCDC is committing these guidelines be implemented to protect herons on this site. 1(O / to buffer area for the P-1 pond and heronry. It appears that the area of their lands proposed to be committed to mitigation is only 15-20 /L- In our opinion these guidelines contain the substance of a less feet in width. It would be more appropriate to seek out means whereby biased, more balanced, survey of the available literature on heron the project provides its own mitigation within the confines of the ecology. site. Please note; These guidelines, under Management Recommendations, give Page 3-33; Section 3.5.3; the wildlife inventory given here is a range of distance that should be disturbance free during the incomplete. It is difficult to imagine how successive environmental 0 breeding --based on site characteristics. Sinee, on this impact documents could have been prepared for these sites, since 1979, site, the potential disturbance will be unsceeened and line-of- and no actual physical inventory has ever actually been made, to sight, the maximum distance of 1320 feet (1/4 mile) should be support those documents. Imposed. The year around no disturbance buffer should be 750 feet (or more) in width. Page 3-36; Mitigation Measures; the so-called "mitigation measures" listed here are not really mitigation in any real sense of the word. /a/ In summary, we will briefly reiterate the major points above. Our Webster's dictionary defines mitigation as a transitive verb, ''11 . VDV finds the DEIS deficient in three major areas. meaning "to make or become milder, less severe, less rigorous ...." . At page 3-34 the DHIS states that this proposal will eliminate all • 4-14 Muller to Myer May 16, 1990 Page 5 LITERATURE CITED I. The need to place these wildlife resources at risk is not clearly substantiated. Simpson, K. and J. P. Kelsall. 1978. Capture and banding of adult 2. The information upon which the "heron protection guidelines" are Great Blue Herons at Ponder Harbour, British Columbia. Proc. based does not truly represent a balanced synthesis of the 7 Colonial Waterbird Group 1978371-78. available literature on herons. Werechkul, D. F., E. McMahon, and M. Leitschuh. 1976. Some effects J. The DEIS does not provide a detailed and comprehensive inventory - of human activities on the Great Blue Heron in Oregon. Wilson Bull. of the wildlife resources at risk. 88:660-662. . There is no true mitigation proposed for impacts on terrestrial wildlife, waterfowl, or shore birds. . WDW recommends that the WDW Management Guidelines for Great Blue Herons (copy attached) be followed as a means of mitigating impacts to the heron colony. Thank you for sending this document,_ we appreciate the opportunity to comment on means for protecting the state's valuable wildlife resources. Please give these comments every consideration in your decision making processl Sincerely, OTheodore A. Huller . Regional Habitat Program Manager TAH:kh • c: Habitat, Olympia • • 4-15 Washington Department of Wildlife nits may tolerate duwrbttnce because nests are built in coniferous true• whose foliage naturally bolters the effects of human activity.or they may be Management Guidelines for Influenced by proximity to heavily used fomging eeas(Webb and Forbes 1982). Species of Concern LIMITING FACTORS: Availability of suitable habitat which provides undisturbed nest sites and ark, quite feeding areas in the vicinity of breeding colonies. MANAGEMENT• Individual heronries should bo evaluated independently for their vegetative ardea herodias Great Blue Heron RECOMMENDATIONS: structurem dpastexposuetohumandisturbances. Where herons arc unac- customed to disturbance or alternative habitat is lacking,heronries should be kept free of human disurbance within an 800 foot to 1/4 mile radius of the nesting colony during the breeding season,between April 1 and August 1 RANGE: Found throughout most of North America and extends Into much of Central (Patter 1980,Hoover end Wills 1987,Simpson 1984). A smaller permanent and South America. buffer should be designed on a site specific basis to protect the Integrity of the nesting trees from windthrow and to provide screening from adjacent de- WASHINGTON Statewide. • velopment or distw),fnce.Where possible,this permanent bulk:should en- DISTRIBUTION: • compass a7SRLZia-radius around the nest trees.The buffer cone should be closed to human access when herons are present(Parker 1980);human access HABITAT Great blue herons occur near all types of fresh and saltwater wetlands includ- should be closed or limited during the non-breeding season to protect the In- REQUIREMENTS: ing seashores.rivers.swamps,marshes,and ditches.They occur at most etc- tegrity of the buffer vegetation. rations,but arc more common in the lowlands.These herons are colonial breeders,generally nesting in tall deciduous or coniferous trees near wen- Great blue heron responses to human activities near the breeding colonies are lands. Although occasionally tmaie trees or bushes,and artificial structures not predictable.In situations where alternative habitat exists,It must be re- have been used(Bruce 1986,Btu el aL 1980),nests are usually constructed membered that heronries may naturally change location or fluctuate in size. In the largest urea available.Per example,a study in British Columbia found Human activities which may cause colony relocations should be avoided un- that most heronries occurred in trees over 50 ft.tall and no nests were found less similar habitat is available within 6.25 miles of the existing heronry In trees under 30 ft.high(?,ark 1976). (Simpson 1984). • Great blue herons feed on aquatic and marine animals found in shallow wa- Surrounding feeding areas,especially wetlands,should be protected within a ter.Terrestrial feeding in fields for mice and voles may be important in win- minimum radius of 23 miles of existing colonies.This Is especially critical ter,especially for herons in coastal areas(Simpson.pers.comm.). Although where herons coexist in areas with high human activity(Hoover and Wills documented distances from an active heronry to a foraging arts range from 1987). 2.5 to 18 miles,most are located within a radius of about 2.5 to 3 miles from the heronry(Short and Cooper 1985). Pealing territories vary from year to Nesting tree loss.either naturally or through disturbance.may represent a so- year with respect to site or location(Hoover and Wills 1987). rious problem if availability of suitable alternative great blue heron habitat becomes limited.Therefore,stands of large trees at lout 50 ft.high and at Alternative nesting and feeding habitat Is probably critical to great blue her- least 10 acres in extent should be left in the vicinity of heron breeding colo- ong.Colonies usually exist at the same location for many years,but some sties and feeding areas.These sites should be located a minimum of 1/2 mile herons may naturally relocate their colonies in response to increased weds- from actively used roads and at least 250 ft.from developed watafronu lion on eggs and young by mammals or other birds,or declines in food • (Parker 1980). availability(Simpson et al.1986).Heronries built In spruce or Douglas-fir trees may damage the host trees over time,which may also influence colony Efforts to increase awareness of great blue heron nesting colonies should con- relocation()Win 1986). connate on inventories,Information exchange,and education.Nest situ oc- cupied currently or in the past should be Inventoried regularly,and local and Great blue herons are shy birds,generally sensitive to human disturbance and state agencies should be made aware of their existence.Where vandalism Is frequently the target of vandalism(Parker 1980,English 1978). Herons have unlikely,posting signs at herottrka may help to increase awareness of the Im- abandoned heronries because of housing and industrial development,high- patience of protecting nest trees. way construction,logging,actively used roads,and repeated human intro- . sions into colonies(Leonard 198S,Parker 1980,Kelull and Simpson 1979, REFERENCES: Blue Li.,CJ.Benny,and T.E.Kaiser. 1980.Pollution ecology of breeding Werschlcul et aL 1976), great blue herons In the Columbia Basin,Oregon cud Wuhington, . Murrcle 61:63-71. Other studies suggest that some herons,which are frequently or consistently exposed to disturbance,may habituate to human scdvisies(Webb and Forbes Bruce,A.M. 1986.Nesting of great blue herons In young managed forests 1982).Thus,herons nesting in different locales may have different tolerance • of western Washington.Unpubl.tech.report for Weyerhauser Co. levels to humans,with colonies located close to human activities responding • less to disturbance than those In remote areas(Simpson 1984).Certain colts- English,S.M. 1978.Distribution and ecology of great blue heron colonies 4-16 on the Willamette River.Oregon.Pages 233-21s in A.Spruni IV,1.C. Ogden.and S.Winckler,eds. Wading birds.National Audubon Soci- ety Research Report No.7. Iloover.R.L..and DI.Wills.eds. 1987.Managing forested lands for wild- life.Colorado Division of Wildlife.Denver. lulln,K.R. 1986.Decline of second growth Douglas-fir In relation to great blue heron nesting. Northwest Sea.60(4):201.203. Ke1saD,1.P.,and K.Simpson. 1979. A sheep year study of the great blue heron in southwestern British Columbia. Proc.Colonial Waterbird Group.Vol.3:69.71. Leonard.W. 1985.Inventory of peat blue heron rant colonies in southern and western Puget Sound. Unpublished report to Washington Dept.of Wildlife. Mart,D.M. 1976.An Inventory of great blue heron(Ardea herodias nest- ing colonies in British Columbia. Northwest Sci.S0(I):32.41. Parker,J. 1480.Great blue herons(Ards herodiar)In northwestern Mon- tane Nesting habitat use and the effects of human disturbance.Unpubl. M.S.Thesis,Univ.Montana,Missoula. Short,H.L and R.I.Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models:Great blue heron.USD1 Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(10.99),Washington.DC. Simpson.K. 1981.Factors affecting reproduction in great blue herons (Ardea herodias).Unpubl.M.S.Thesis.Univ.British Columbia,Van- couver,D.C.,Canada. J.N.M.Smith,and I.P.ICdull. 1987.Correlates and consequences of coloniality in peat blue herons.Can.J.Zool.63:572.577. Von,$IC..A.A.Ryder.and W.D.Grant.1985.Response of breeding great blue herons to human disturbance in north canal Colorado.Colonial Waterbirds 8(I):13-22. • Webb,R.S„and LS.Forbes.1982. Colony establishment in an urban site by great blue herons.Murtdet 63(3191-92. Wersehkul.D.P.E.McMahon,and M.Lauchuh. 1976.Some effects of human acUvitles on the great blue heron in Oregon.Wilson Bu1L 88(4):660-662. 4-17 _ - Response to Comments front the WRW: 5. Additional inventory information has been provided in Section 35.3 and in Appendix G of this Final EIS. I. The City of Renton is not responsible for establishing project need (i.e.,market demand and economic feasibility). Additionally, the SEPA rules 6. Section 3.53 of this Final EIS has been expanded to include further analysis • (WAC 197-11-448[3])state that information not required to be discussed in of impacts on other wildlife. the EIS include methods of financing the proposal and economic competition. The feasibility and 'need" for the project are therefore dictated by the 7. A vegetated buffer is proposed as mitigation between the P-1 Pond and the marketplace,that is,the demand for office park space in the Renton area. edge of development.This buffer will be planted with shrubs and trees native to the Puget Sound lowlands. As an additional mitigation measure, an 2. The literature review was purposely directed toward heronries occurring in earthen berm is to be constructed and planted with evergreen trees. A urban and urbanizing settings because the subject Black River heronry lies chainlink fence will be constructed to prevent public access to the buffer area. This measure will greatly reduce the visual and noise impacts to wildlife in the within an urbanizing area. These case histories provide information most relevant to the issues that were addressed in the EIS for the proposed project pond. —namely distance of heronries to development,types of disturbance,species 8. The guidelines have been modified to include a greater setback from the and heights of nest trees,and,when available,information on the history of heronry(600 feet)on Tract B,plus additional measures(e.g.,berming and the heronry. Information on the case histories was derived almost exclusively height restrictions based on distance from the heronry). Please refer to from the existing literature and communications with biologists and naturalists Appendix B and Section 33.4 for additional information. familiar with the resource. The use of existing literature and information from biologists are recognized and accepted methods in wildlife investigations. 9. Comment noted. Given the lack of time and funds to conduct exhaustive studies, resource management decisions oftentimes rely heavily on information in the literature. 10. Comment noted. The term"viable,"as used in the context of Table B-1,pertains to the fact 11. Coaunent noted. that the heronries contained nests, nesting adults, and fledged young.The term"active"is a more suitable term to use in this case. Table B-1 has been 12. On Tract A the width of the buffer on FCDC property would vary from 20 changed to reflect the more appropriate term. feet adjacent to the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek,to 60 feet(540 feet of the 600-foot setback would lie on City of Renton/King County property)from 3. Few, if any, of the heronries identified in Table B-1 have year-to-year the heronry to development. On Tract B.the width of the buffer on FCDC information such as total number of nest structures, number of nesting property would vary from 20 feet adjacent to Springbrook Creek to 260 feet attempts, number of productive nests,clutch size,number of eggs hatched, (340 feet of the 600-foot setback would lie on City of Renton/King County number of young fledged per nesting attempt,or number of young fledged per property)from the heronry to development. In addition,as identified in the productive nest. In most cases, only the total number of nest structures Draft EIS,FCDC would contribute to the planting of shrubs and trees on City observed by the researcher were identified. In the absence of tagging and of Renton/King County property abutting the P-1 Pond and FCDC property. tracking of adult birds,there is no easy means to determine the reasons for increases or decreases in the number of nests in heronries from one year to 13. The Final EIS has been expanded to include inventory information (see the next. Some of the year-to-year increase is probably related to recruitment Appendix G). from young fledged from the heronry two years previous,or recruitment from _ heronries elsewhere in the area(e.g.,herons either leaving a marginal heronry 14. The Draft EIS recognizes the loss of 11.6 acres of upland grass habitat on or from young unable to find additional nest sites in other heronries). In all Tract A and 10.8 acres of grass and shrub habitat on Tract B as a permanent of the case histories listed,herons have nested and returned to the sites in loss of existing upland wildlife habitat With the additional setback,the loss subsequent years. None of the case histories have shown complete of grass and shrub habitat on Tract B would be reduced to 93 acres(see abandonment by the herons, rather the information shows the ability of Section 35.1 of this FEIS). The EIS did not suggest that replacement of herons to continue to nest in the vicinity of disturbance. existing wildlife with 'urban'wildlife to be mitigation for that loss. The replacement of existing wildlife with'urban"wildlife is a presented as a part 4. Information regarding these case studies is the most representative of of the discussion of impacts,not mitigation.The mitigation proposed is to heronries found in urban and urbanizing settings. 4-18 improve the quality of habitat along the edge of the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek through additional shrub and tree planting. 15. The berming and planting of evergreen trees proposed as an additional mitigation measure will further minimize the impact on wildlife using the P-1 Pond. Shrub and tree planting along the edge of the pond and Springbrook • Creek will take time to establish(approximately five years assuming use of three to four year old plant stock). 16. The WDW guideline for a disturbance-free zone of 1,320 feet during the breeding season is unrealistic. 'Disturbance' already occurs during the • breeding season within that zone. Oakesdale Avenue, the Metro sewage treatment plant,the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks,and the Rivertech building are all within line-of-sight of heron nests.The concept of a 1,320-foot disturbance-free zone during the breeding season and a 750-foot disturbance- free zone year around is confusing. For a disturbance-free zone to occur at this heronry during the breeding season,and a year around 750-foot wide disturbance-free zone to also occur, occupied buildings and streets within 1,320 feet of the heronry would need to be vacated during the breeding season,and reoccupied for the remainder of the year.There is no basis for the implementation for such a guideline in an urban setting. 17. Comments noted and previously addressed. • • 4-19 Response to Comments from the Washington Stale Department of Transportation (WSDOT): • COP.. 1. Comment noted. A copy of the Grady Way Corridor Transportation ;r Washington Stale o„a„iOiiit.oi, Improvement Study has been forwarded to you. pA' Department of Transportation S : la yW hansourimon D,swu I 1117S S E :kllh I1.iru tleIIevuc,Waslunlpun I IIIIM)7.r..Sa11 (2001 S62••1000 May 15, 1990 PLANNING DIVISION I::Ty OF RFNION • MN 1 7 19J(1 Ms. Mary Lynne Hyer, Project Manager j r1-GF-IVL,[) Community Development Department ' Renton City Hall 200 Mill Avenue S. Renton, WA 911055 DEIS Comments - Black River Corporate Park I-405 Dear Ms. Myer: This letter is in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement review on the above referenced project, which we received from the city of Renton. • This proposed development is to construct as a four-year phased project, three (3) one to four-story office buildings (183,600 square feet) on 12.71 acres of Tract A and three (3) four to seven-story buildings on the 15.7 acre Tract B. • Tract D will also include the construction of a three-story parking structure in 1992-93. This development is'located at the intersection of Southwest 7th Street and Oaksdale Avenue • SW. • A development of this size and location will have an enormous impact on state highways in the vicinity. Interstate 405, State Route 181, State Route 167 and State Route 900 will all be impacted. As stated on pages 3-67 and 3-68, "analysis of transportation was not identified as a acoping issue by the city of Renton and not included as a part of this EIS." We are referred to the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study written in 1988. According to our records, we have not had the opportunity to review this transportation study. To properly review this DEIS, we will need to review the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study. . Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Chuck • Gleich at 562-4105. n /- C�J�Sci e , � �/ 11•r.►. !c 4-20 p I]YtlLnil tL (5tCIlel E .ILr(U Gttu'1UIt '•, { tketiu1 , 1S..a,r lT11t CV W�HNCTl1N STAT(or W&SI IWGT(NJ OIPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY J MO-lsl. a.e Al f. • Kad.I•.uI.. Waa oil Ww.YdIn141t1I • I-u,.it...'-"III J150-1:.U11 •Ise N( • Kean..., Ll",1•.wi....••.71•/1f1 I • (.1aq.h•.••• April 23, 1990 May 3, 1990 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON TO: Carol Fleakea Dave Jansen MAY 2 2 1990 Lee Dorigan Ching-Pi Wang Bill Yake Jerry Dewitt TO: Environmental Review section RECEIVED 6 •e- "-)'v '�� FROM: Norm Peck FROH: Norm Peck, NWRO i//iii..'y,:cf SUBJECT: Hill Creek Site SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park DEIS (comment deadline . 11 May 90) The Hill Creek Site concept should be examined carefully befure proceeding with cleanup. While it is a simple matter to say this site is downstream of Western Processing and must be part of the contamination from Western Processing, the reality is much more It hag come to the attention of the department that dredge complex. Several other discharges which have a high potential to spoils resulting from dredging the Black River Impoundment affect the quality of sediments in that particular reach of Mill (a.k.a. the P-I pond). This "pond" forme behind a dam, and Creek are known to the Department. ' Known discharges which enter, the majority of the sediment level carried in the Mill- or.have historically entered, Hill Creek between Western $nringbrook creek are deposited in that impoundment. Processing and the next railroad bridge downstream are: In 1984 'the soil Conservation Service (SCS) dredged the 1 exiating P-I pump forebay as a part of a forehay expansion gource contaminant s. project. A water dredge was utilized, and the discharge Hytek metals, paint wastes lagoon for the dredge operation was located at the site of the proposed construction. (Mary Anderson, personal communiveLiun, 27 Apr 90). • MARALCO metals, salt Sediments in Hill-Springbrook Creek are known to exhibit Crosby and Overton various high levels of contamination, exceeding HWICP Draft Cleanup Matlack Trucking petroleum, HazMat tank wash Standards and, in some instances, dangerous waste designation criteria. A list of known contaminated sites treat Western Steel/ hexavalent chromium which have historically discharged to Hill-Springbrook Creek Hydraulic Repair i is attached. Design Due to the known historical contamination of Mill- Lindahl Cedar petroleum, metals Springbrook Creak on the proposed site, this site Le considered a potential contaminated site by the Hazardous Waste Investigations and Cleanup Program, Northwest Regional Office, Washington Department of Ecology. NP:cj Attachment • 4-21 1CUL061-MOM eardous N Invest'_ ' 6 Cleanup Irogr.. Hill Creek Site April 6. 11,9 April 23, 1990 Page 2 Sources or potential HY[P ID EPA NO sources of toxic contamination known to have CI II SIZE NAME WAS MARE' LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST Clly i1P STAFF OTr:R historically entered or currently enter Mill Creek above • CAN (upstream from) Western Processing include; N-17-0010-000 0900171/81 C2 6lh Avenue South Landfill 2101 6th Art S. Seattle 11171 DC Boeing Kent Space chromium sumpdischar a N-17-0041-000 D017815111 N A.1 linda Coogan, 3/405 Pacific Hay S Federal Nay 11003 Center ' g N-17 0012 000 D061583/13 CT Aft Metal finishing lac. 321 Pontius N. Seattle 1/101 N-17-0043-000 D001286881 C2 Ace ial ' g lac 121 S 16th Seattle 18101 LO 6l N-37-0001-000 D900514426 a acme Landfill Rosman Late Rd Acne 11220 Kent Sewage Lagoons metals, PCB's N-11-0011-COO 0900726442 C2 Acne Plating Voris 601 N 35th Seattle 11103 Salmon Bay/Seattle metals N-31-0039-000 Cl AceelLUSts Acme • Acne 11220 COOP Steel Mill N-17-00/3-000 D001218847 CI Advance Electroplating Advance Co.'s 11303 1th Are S Seattle 18101 10 DC N-17-0011-000 0091118915 CI aimYelling Prod 7100 14th Ay S Seattle 11108 LI IC G.E. (Kent) Apparatus PCB's solvents, N-17-5013-000 C2 Sluts Copper 1 Irass Alaskan Copper 3200 Sloth Ave.S. Seattle 10134 CV,OL G.ReE. ( ent Apy petroleum 1-17-0031-000 C! Alaska Pacific Fisheries 2360 V.Colanders Way Seattle 11111 DC,LD N-17-0940-000 D063351506 C2 A Can Company 400 Baler Bled Seattle 11110 N-11-0041-100 D009261317 Cl i Tar Ce RICO 1700 N Rorthlate lay Seattle 18103 II F':ow Mole/Flow various aH-11-3011-000 ' • • C2 AN-lei. lac. ! : • c' '.711023Nth'Are:'S:75= Ls'!1(ent9!tle!IR!:1l0321f1C;NP:i ' Industries Y-17-0051-000 00/2476108 C? Ond-All Electrochroae Inc 6332 6th 5 Seattle 11108 ortea Dovntoun City of vAaawuo (flevla kills re 1-17-0006-0Il CI ARCO-lank Fare Atlantic Mali 1652 SY Lander St. Seattle 10134 NT,OC Kent Storm Drains p F N-17-9032-000 001/622331• N Argent Coca Laboratories - 14121 NE 40 St Redmond 10007 N-31-0000-000 0061477117 N Arlington Ford Hey 1 1 Highlands Dr Arlington 10223 CI East Kent Highlands various (fish kills reported) N-31-0009-900 D980171013 CT Arliegton/Marysville 1111 Arlietoa Airport Arlington 11223 Eastr ent ins p ) N-11-0006-100 D910413670 ' CI Asahipen Anerica, Inc. . Seattle Paint P 1121 SY Spokane St Seattle 18134 DC • N-11-0116-000 D009:49616 CT Ash Trove[feast Vest, In Lone Star Indus 3801 E Marginal NayS Seattle 00131 DC N-17-0OST-000 D037311177 N Ashland Ch ' I Co 131 fifth As S tent 18031 In addition, numerous LUST's are known for the vicinity (East 1-17-0054-000 D041920534 CT Ado Processing Inc 434 Y 35th Seattle 10103 LI M. Valley Corporate Park, 4, Salmon Terminals, 1-2, Boeing/Kent N-17-00?1-001 N Atlas Deeolilion Future Rescurce 1013 3rd Seattle 11104 LO Robbins), end several spills of unknown origin have occurred, M-11-3020-000 Cl Auburn Abandoned Fire Sta 700 Auburn Yay S. Auburn 18002 6C,OP I would recommend caution in proceeding with a Site Hazard N-!)0021 902 m ' �. ;olio hack 2131 Siplh Ave S Seattle 18131 DC LI Assess-Ant or cleanup process in an isolated, central reach of N-17-0055-000 D9E0722.50 I+Mailler Aulobody Shop 3734 A St SY Auburn • 11002 Mill Creek. As an alternative, I would suggest a careful N-17-0051-000 D0 4 4 6 0114 5 Cl Bainbridge Isl.gin Irene 280 of Vincent St • huedadge 90022 Oi,SS NO gg N-17-•A)31-000 D01160NI3 9+Ilesl Logging 21015 SE 432nd St Eaumclar 11022 systematic study of sediments in Mill Creek and its tributaries, M-17-0164-000 D980723084 C2 Inside Disposal Co. Sunset Disposal /201 Y Marginal Way S Seattle 11106 from the East Kent Highlands to the Black River Impoundment, with N-17-0058-000.0070114107 C2 Bellevue Plating Co lac Platiag Co Inc. 1313 121th PL ME lellerue 18005 selection of priority cleanup locations selected on'the basis of N-31-5002-000 C2 lellingham National But '163 M.State St. IellingA+m 11221 MP that sediment survey. The entire length of Hill/Springbrook 1-37-0014-000 D180311703 E2 lellinglu-Old City Dump Old Cill Dear Roeder Ar Bellingham 11223 IS Creek is heavily industrialized and urbanized, predominately by 1-17-3030-000 • Cl lird Jobnsoa Company 1601 Fainter Ave.E. •Seattle,VA 11102 IR DC "high-tech" industries which commenced operations in the sixties N-31-0010-000 D076633351 C2 !cringer leery Fare 621111th St.NE M 'Ile 11271 and seventies. That period was characterized by the use of N-17-0060-000 1980173/11 Cl 011th Nugget Nine-NE/Cree Black Nugget load • Issaquah 1102/ high-toxicity products and associated wastes, but was prior to the N-17-0061-000 D9801/3734 C2 !lack Nugget Nine-Roc1 le Black Nugget Road Issaquah 11027 widespread use of modern storage, waste treatment and spill N-17-0012-000 0180175676 CI IIad Nugget Mine-S//Cree Black Nugget Road Issaquah 11011 control practices. Recognition of these facts and a thoughtful M-17-0070-000 D910833661 CI MR-Roundhouse Site Roundhouse Site Tracts Parallel to MS Slplosish 11211 IS II approach to cleanup of Hill/Springbrook creek sediments would 1-31-0011-000 0011583464 Cl losing Card.Alepla:Ev 3003 V.Canine RI Everett .11203 LC result in more effective use of available funds to remediate N-17-0002-000 D04133/131 C? toeing Co-Mere 700 15th Street SY Auburn 11002 LC historical contamination of that stream. N-17-0203-000 CI klieg Co-I /ihasp I Steel 1311 E Marginal Way S Seattle . 11101 LC 15,2C NP:War d-11-0064-000 0000711122 •W loving Co-tat Iaaroya'••A • '4-^20651 11'St''`'"{icy lent?P.S6im.'P:1I0319A!f IM-17-0063-000 D011610716 Cl loelm Co-Tat Space Ca''•1 in, ' .... t0t03'61tleivrS"t .teatIsf 11032'lt'A cc: Ron Devitt • M-11-0021-003 0110171260 Cl Seelig Co-North field Ellis Ave. I E.Harpist Seattle 11101 LC DC John Glynn N-17-0021-010 CI•Ioeie Co-North fld.JPI Ellis Are. l E.Marginal Seattle 11101 LC M-17-0066-000 1001236/11 N helms Co-Plat 2 7755 E Kariba!Yr S Seattle 11124 IC LC • 1-17-0063-000 0001262171 CI lode,Cs-Iatim • Eighth and Lea ' Into. 11035 LC,W N-31-0012-000 01101/3711 C2 klieg Cr lilalip lest S 11224 31th NE Narysrille 11270 IC N-17-0067-000 10f3631116 'L Seeing Ieeelopaatal Cot 1723 E Marginal Wy S Seattle 11124 IC OP aN-17-0061-000 105251136/ '-N' Warden Chemical Cempierol' TIe''r.•v 142ltist•Are Nis+ss!1 tedtleTallegeS D910311Misavner9 1-31-0013-000 D180133563 N loslevard Part • N Eat Sayelee Irhe klllagham 11226 N-17-0061-000 111110131231 C2 lee Late Leedlill 1 111U St 1 llle/tuj Rd Tuteile 11111 4-22 EC01061-NITRO • - ECOLO61-BURG • a:ardeus Waste Investigation 6 Cleanup Prop.. .aardous Waste Investigation 1 Cleanup Progra. SAIS Alphabetical Listing April 6. 1190 . SNIS Alphabetical Listing April 6, 1190 SITE SITE . EPA NO CAM SITE MANE ALIAS NAME LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST CITY ZIP STAFF OTHER HYCP II EPA NO CATS SITE MANE ALIAS MANE LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST CITY TIP STAFF OTHER 000 L Bronson May leeaco 1408 treason Way Renton 96055 LC,RE N-17-0092-000 0980723803 C2 her Tel Industries 221 Ar SE'I el Cedar Tro Issaquah 10027 -000 0980639942 C2 Bryant Landfill 6306 Grandview Rd Arlington 982I3 6C N-31-0016-000 0009241413 N Frank(rooks Nanulacturin leis 1 Orleans St Iellinghae 18225 J6 -000 A Purim/SIT Suburban Sewer 10th Ave. SR I SY 154th Seattle 18166 MP N-15-0005-000 098063113f C2 Freeland Landfill Hey 325 Freeland 18277 -000 0980654551 CI Sutler Hill Lagoon Septic lank Lag N of Kelleher Rd by Old H Burlington 18233 SC,ON N-11-0003-000 0980611I10 CI Sas Nor►s Fertile Nil Can Washington Nato 2000 N.Morthlake May Seattle 98103 LC,LI -000 0071655182 CI Cabot Ind. Heath Plating•%0202 S:100th St•ra•ssgiclent A0111M4a4111180310LTi14 M-29-0001-000 00092/0412 M Central Chemical Corporal Allied Chemical 655 N Tens Rd Morristown 18221 IF -000 0980222441 M Campbell Residence 031 E Woo Rd Iellinghae 18226 J6 N-17-0013-000 001302344/ C2 6 1 lisposal Corp 1413 NV Ballard Nay Seattle 10107 -000 1980638993 M Cathcart Landfill 14521 Nil 1 Snohosish 18290 DV 3-11-0094-000 0980631702 C2'6 landfill Seoesee St 143rd Ave.So Seattle 10111 -000 @98063999! Cl Cedar Falls Landfill 16901 Cedar Falls Rd SE North lend 11015 CI N-31-0016-000 0900076012 Cl 60 East Corp.Landfill Si Moray Landfil 1011h'S1.SE 139th St. Everett 11201 -000 0047848122 CI Cedar Hills Landfill 16645 221 Ave SE Issaquah 18038 DS.6C 1-17-0001-101 0085117145• CI Mollea Finn Oil Company Wfslern Pacific 2137 13th Ave. SW Seattle 18134 IC -000 09806655:2 C2 Cedarville Landfill Cedarville Road Iellinghaa 98726 Cl D0 M-12-0016-000 0012425385 C2 Svardssan Products, Inc. curtsies Cheat 13333 Monster Rd S Seattle 18118 -000 L Central Painting 4741 Y. Narginal lay SO Seattle 11106 DC 1-17-0091-000 0980639165 M M I M 0leson Landfill NE 152nd PI NE 6 SE 155th Woodinville 18072 • -000 0046499770 Cl Ehauoion Intnatl-lellard Ballard Bill Si 4023 13th Ave. Vest Seattle 18107 DS,LD 4-17-0098-000 0980639961 C2 Haller Late Landfill N 125 St E of Aurora Seattle 10133 -000 007803513T 4 Chem Securities S/stems 10602 NE 311h PI Kirkland 98033 1-18-0012-000 D000111844 CI Hansv+lle Landfill 31643 Manville Rd, NE • Little Boston 91316 -000 0000711689 •CI Ches:entral Solvents Co • vs— y:1601 S 110th St:m¢:rc-wsiKent•ynn►na m198032;{Y.11 N-17-9099-000 09E0631124 Cl Harbor he Landlill Nest Seattle LF Harbor Are SW 1 SY Florid Seattle 11124 DC -000 D000812109 C2 CM•eiical Processors Inc 134 S Lucile St Seattle 98108 4-15-0006-000 0980639116 C2 Rustic late Landfill Nestle Late Rd-3 Ai salty Oak Harbor 11227 J6 -000 00008317:5 N Cheaical Processors Inc 7500 Detroit Ave SY Seattle 18108• 4-11-0001-000 0980639511 1 Hobert Landfill 23421 276th Ave. SE Issaquah 18027 SC,AO -000 0000612117 t2 Ch I Processors Inc Pier 11 Seattle• 18111 DC N-17-0101-000/010215164 I Honeywell Inc 3303 Shilshole Ar NW Seattle 18101 LI -000 0000064568 N Cievron USA Inc-Asphalt 20555 Ricbaond leach Richmond Bch 18171 N-17-0102-000 090063/211 Cl. Houghton Landfill NW of NE 60th 6 120 An NE Kirland . 18033 -000 0053818340 C2 Chromium Inc 1005 S King . Seattle- 98104 4-1/-5003-000 Cl H.I.Construction/Arrow 1 Richmond beach 11241 15th Ave.NW Ricbaonl leach 18171 6C -000 008250676/ N Circuits Engineering 1802 180th SE Bothell 98011 JS N-17-0103-000 010061954i N Ideal lasic Industries Edge of Toms 6rotlo 11281 -000 D9609/5619 C2 Coal Creel Mine-Old Nord 1661h Way SE,Sect. 36 Issaquah 98027 M-11-0104-000 0041580176 N Ideal Ionic Ind-Cement PI 5400 M Marginal ray Seattle 10101 -000 00659V1904 N Columbia Count Marine Or hellinghaa 18225 1-29-0015-000 CI Impact Industries-Sulphur 1325 Hwy 237 Rt.Vernon 18273 IP,JB -000 8180639635 C2 Constitution Ave.Landlil Constitution Ave 6 Porter 1 ton 98310 4-17-0006-021 Cl industrial Office Cosplee 2955 Ilth Are SW Seattle 18131 DC LD -000 ci Country Junction Store Sno ss wViss Art Orchard. 1r3e6 J N H-11-0105-000 0009491200 C2 Industrial Plating Corp 2411 6th S Seattle 18134 IC -000 D980640015 N Coupe/Ole Landlil! Hey 20 Oak Harbor 98277 N-17-0106-000 0007142733 C2 Inland Transportation Co 1737 Corson S Seattle 11101 -000 D022460898 4 Crosby I Overton Inc 3406 13th SY Seattle 98134 DC H-17-0107-000 D980974/21 C2 leterbay Old Landfill V Wheeler St 6 15th Ave V Seattle 18111 -000 605P3490t N Crosby 1 Overton In: 2032 Huaholdt lellin9haa 98225 N-15-0007-000 0048169040 N Island Disposal Inc. Disposal Inc. 523 Huy 20 Couperille 18231 -000 0980971391 tl Crossroads Nall Dry Clean NE 8th 6 156th Ave. lellerue 18005 4-11-0030-000 0009265321 CI J N hater I Company Inc 5015 Lake Vashingta•Ilvd Renton 18035 6C,SS -000 00616024T8 4 Crowley Environmental Ser 3400 E Marginal My S Seattle 18134 OC 4-31-0011-000 0053823011 C2 J I Sailer 6 Company-Arl 6520 188th St.NE Arlington 11223 6C -000 0980639058 E2 Callus bay Landfill Cultus lay Rd. Whidbey Island 902/7 N-17-0108-000 1980to4593 N J J Jaclsdn Septic Tank S 15671 SEI31►I Renton 18055 -000 Cl Custom Circuit Technology ' 11801 NE ll5th Kirkland 98033 MP N-17-0101-000 10092:9071 C2 J ' Paint Mfg Co 760 Aloha St Seattle 11101 -000 CI 0 I L Ventures Property 5339 Roosevelt Bay NE Seattle.WA 98125 HP, D N-31-0026-000 D9601:2101 C2 Wear Coons Inc 6065 Eiclerrille Rd Ferndale 10241 000 CI Garit Construction Co., I 21313 261h Pl.S. Seattle 18198 SC 4-17-0111-000 D900631511 Cl Censor,Landfill. 48 Ar NE, so.of NE Rothe Kenmore . 11155 -000 CI Day load Industrial Park pay Road W.&H■y 305 Bainbridge Isla 18110 6C,071 I.(-17-5011-000 ' • ' 'CI Kest Snags Lagoons ' '•ti'' J:4fS5 ef'1 212 St•&6lth'0v ICeatT * gsa rs-10032EMC%pJJICy -000 0019241174 M 3iaensional Eng' ing 1407 E Marginal Ny Seattle 18108 N-17-0037-000 00012/1501 CI Een■orth Truck Company 1801 E Barging'Way S Seattle 11108 IC -000 C2 Diversified Industrial Se 7627 Upper Ridge Road Everett,Ma 18203 MP 1-I1-0112-000 D980176221 C2 [leg 4 Coal Co Miee,A SE Nercastle-Coal Ct Iercaslle 11001 -000 0960639676 C2 Curall Landfill. • 22905 Old Wood/Dural Duvall 96019 N-17-0021-001 • I King Co Airport Naioleoa= all Ellis Ar S Seattle 11108 IC,RE -000 Cl Ou ' h Fill Site-DOT 001 Landfill S. 124th St.1 S.A.91 .Seattle 96168 Mi;OC I-31-5004-000 0041332052 CI King Fiberglass Arlington Airpo 11105 I3rd Ave.NE Arlington • 11223 NP -000 0180975304 C2 Ou h River-toeing Plt 7700 E Marginal Nay Seattle 18124 DC LC •• M-31-0011-000 1900131017 C2 Lake Sood■in Landfill 10520 Frank Paters R Stanwnl 11212 6C -000 Cl 0 ' h Shipyard, Inc. 3638 I Marginal Tay SI Seattle 98106 DC RI N-17-5015-000 CI Like Hills SIP-f V L1 S Ish P►ullS of Bellevue 16052 LI -000 0980139132 C2 Eastgate Abandoned Landfi Bellevue Airper 2805 160th Ave SE • Iellevae 98000 LC • N-31-0011-000 0110833683 I Late Aoesiger Landfill 11611 lubugse Ad Snohoalsh 11210 -000 Cl Elec►rofiaishing Company 310 'A' St.S.E. Aubure VA 98002 NP N-3I-0004-000 0100511612 L Late Stevens Landfill 131st Ave.NE Everett . 18251 6C OM -000 D1110679771 C2 Enuaclar Landfill ' 29000 SE 440 St Enumclaw 18022 M-11-0113-000 . Cl Lake Union Irydocl' 131$Fainter Are. East Seattle 11102.L1,1C -000 0480631405 C2 Everett City Landfill 2902 36t1 St SE Everett 98201 I-17-0117-000 Cl Lake Washington School Di 1141 122ad Ave ME Kirtland 10033 SC 000 CI Everett Tire Fire 3002 Wetmore Everett 90201 OC,JY N-ll-0113-000 0980176161 C2 Laolsburg Nine-Rogers Sea . Kent-Galley Ad 1268th A Slack Iiamad 10011 IS,MP -000 0180722326 C2 Everson Goshen Ispl T311I, I3E,Sec 21 Bellingham 11247 CV • I-17-0114-000/003813331 I Lee I Eaetes Task Lines 2411 Airport Yy S Seattle 11134 IC -000 1900178081 C2 Factories Pit(Sunset Park 132 Are SE 1 SE 30th Bellevue 18006 df-11-0115-000 1010115725 Cl LIDO 'layside Waste 17113 S 116t►•w^4^ er"teotv/a'i7NRIOR 71031vCW7S?I -000 098051173/ C2 Federal lay Landfill• .. S 352 6 1-5 Puyallup Auburn 18002 41-17-5003-000' • Cl Linda(Property''r••.''R Lladal Cedar Ho-12ad Ave.6.-6 S:s116th•S EnN1r.ga mmes1I0324Noveoe• -000 Cl Ferndale 7-Eleven 120138. 20/0 Rale St.N. Ferndale 11241 NP,CI I-17-0006-102 YA0001261111 C2 Lockheed Shiphldg.Co.Ta ' 2121 16th Ave SI Seattle • 11134 IC -000 0027429141 N Fiberlay Inc 1151 Pal ' Ave I Seattle 19101 1-17-3001-000 Cl Longview Fibre Ca. 3101 E.Marginal Say S. Seattle 11134 I1,IC -000 1980915111 Cl First Ave'tridge Landlill TOT Landfill 1700 block of 2nd Ave SW Seattle 11101 DC LI, E M-17-0021-007 I Instead Industries 3300 Airport Na R. Seattle 11101 LI -000 CI Floral Crest Nursery 7432 S. 131st Ave. Seattle,WA 11178 MP I-21-6006-000 0001252040 C2 LIV Energy Predicts 500 Metcalf St Sedro Wesley 11214 -000 Cl Floyd R.Hunt, loc. • 3211 S. 251th Pl. Seat • 16032 111,08 I-37-0027-000/900511411 C2 dual ladies Reser.Peep Met Rolle Rd Saillaghes 1112i • 4-23 . • , ,� I • HOLM-INTO ECOl06Y-1160 .ardous caste Investigation 1 Cleanup Progras • ,...ardous Waste Investigation 6 Cleanup frograa SMIS Alphabetical listing April 6, 1170 SMIS Alphabetical Lisllnl April 6, 1490 SITE SIZE EPA N0 CATS SITE NAME ALIAS NAME LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST CIII 11P STAFF 01HER HOCP ID EPA NO CATS SIZE NAME ALIAS NAME LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSES!C117 II/ STAFF OIHER 000 0980833925 C2 Luaat Shore Duap N.y 520,611 of City bellinghas 1822E S-31-5005-000 CI Olympic Foreign Auto Wrec 211E Fullos St. Everett 11201 000 018083511E M Lyndon Airport 8631 Depot Rd Lyndon 9822E CI N-11-0132-000 901/481103 M Olyspic Hose Care Product 1141 NM 50th Seattle 18107 000 000918865/ N Lynnwood Plating 1107 116th SO• Lynnwood 98076 CI N-17-0006-001 A Olympic Pipe Line Co. 2444 13th Art.'SM Seattle 98134 DC 000 1900113985 C2 liar Products Inc. Industrial Nine 26000 811 liaaond/Ravened Seattle 18051 N-21-3001-000 9000611146 l Olympic Pipe Line-Allen Allen Pump Slat Hwy.20,Vest of Avon-All lurlington 98133 CI 000 1053822623 C2 Magnolia Fertilizer 1144 lallard lay Seattle 98133 r9-17-0206-000• • ' • 12 0lespic Steasshlp'Co:;'.ln- '4•r•'•• ,,,,,.1220.5 212th St• +►P!,Cent!FSJP1erre4F18031v10141r. 000 CI Nalarley Asphalt Co. 1100 Dallas Ave. S. Seattle 98108 DC N-18-0004-000 0012804971 l Olympic Vies Sanitary L11 Irea-Air hopes 10015 Sit lareep White Rd Port Orchard 98344 DY 000 1900439/36 C2 Maltby Warehouse i Field S End of Ti.Id Maltby 98290 !1-31-0023-000 0980639064 M Aso Lasdilll 31705 1.1 C ph Arlington 18223 CI 000 0000/1184i N nannesaann tally Corp • -v • :':1301'5 110 St emn:rpl:'Ctormeibu►n'r9g071sY S-21-000E-000 D980639090 C2 P N Northaest Duap Hay 20 S■inoaisl I I encodes 18221 000 ' ' • ' Cl Saralee ' '7'-- • •.•••.. '.r1730 S:'202n1'1i!.!7.!n•MtCenealanCra!'I:SIO32111Sjatin 4-11-0028-000 0009249210 I PACCAR • Pacific Car 6 F 1400 N 0th St Renton 98055 LC,6C 000 1980118944 N March Point Landfill Yhitaarsh Ouap/ 1/4 Ai E of IN's Whitears Anacortes 9812E IF N-11-0133-000 D980724223 C2 Pacific Chea 6 Cleasial C 2200 4th S Seattle 18134 DC 000 D980639827 M Marine Disposal Corporal' Pier 3$ Seattle 9813E DC M-17-0134-000 0051219960 C2 Pacific Ch ' 1 500 71h Ave.S Kirtland 18033 NP 000 60980974521 Cl Marine Vacuum Service. In 1516 S.irahaa St. Seattle 98108 NP N-17-0021-011 L Pacific tree 4 Metals 2230 4th Ave.S. Seattle. 981I5 ll 000 D180/22607 N Haritise fuilalog • 911 Nester, Seattle 98136 N-17-0135-000 0980637210 C2 Pacific landfill S of 3 Iv SEf8hite River Pacific 9801E 000 106334659E C2 Mast ft Metal Finishi 1115 Harrison St Seattle 98109 N-17-0201-000 C2 Pacific Marine Environ. l 1600 Sand Point May ME Seattle 98115 GOODS 000 0040051356 M Selo Manufacturing 2843 N Saldie Rd Oak Harbor 9827E 9-17-0006-010 C2 Pacific Mol Co. 3200 116 Ave.SW Seattle 9013E OC 000 098634076 C0 Meridian landfill Corliss Landlil 1/0th N 6 Meridian Ave. Seattle 78133 5-31-0015-000 0980979679 Cl Pallister Paint 1037 Center road Everett 98204 CI,L1 000 0009272741 C2 Metal laundry Incorporate 614 126 Seattle 90122 9-11-0119-000 0003181143 Ci Falser Coking Coal Co. 3140E Hwy 161 Black 0iasond 98010 05,5S 000 0000834026 N Metro Alhi ',salient Plan 3380 leach OR SY Seattle 98116 N-17-5004-000 CI Petersen Site 431S Ilth Ave.NM Seattle _ 1810E SC JN 000 CI Metro Late Union Facility 1102 N.Northaese Way Seattle 98103 LD,OC 9-17-0137-000 0009277511 4 Pioneer Enaael Manufactor 5531 Airport Way S Seattle 99108 000 D980639470 N Metro North Pus lase South Sect. Cor N 165 St. 4 1st Ave NE Seattle 98133 6C,RD N-11-5012-000 Cl Pioneer lumber 6 Treatise DECO, Inc.! 1080 V.Wag Seattle 9811E LI 000 N Metro South lase 11111 E.Iareimal Val S. Seattle 91168 N1,OC M-17-5029-000 D0092;7511 CI Pioneer Porcelain fuel Pioneer Enamel 5531 Airport Nay S. Seattle, Wp 98101 MP 000 C2 111I0-Central Operating 1333 Airport gay S Seattle 98134 DC 0-18-0013.000 0980915058 C2 Pioneer Quarry Site-Pr000 T24N,R1E,Sec 20 1 ton 98310 . 000 • CI Mill Creel Site• .v s•• s-:W.'gal ley So/S S.°I961A-Ceatrn Ir-r 9I032rCY1•a 4-17-0139-000 0980/39686 4 Poles Incorporated 126 102 NE Ielleeue 1800E 000 Cl Mobil full Facility-Rent r •"2423 Lind Ave;SY.••n Rentoa.lvtrr'•984SSsLC,NPv N-174011-013 CI Precision Engi • 1 12131 So lirector Seattle 18100 11 L0, J 000 Cl Mobil Oil-Canal full Pia 1101 NM 45th St. Seattle 1810/LO RI.S 9-17-0140-000 005931506E N Preserralive Paint Ccapan 1410 Airport May S Seattle 6101 000 'El Nobel Ni!-Everett. full Mobil Oil full 2131 federal Ave Everett 98201 CO N-31-0009-000 0980175007 M Pt.Roberts Landfill Yhatcos County 2010 lesson Rd Point Roberts 11261 ON 000 CI Eobile !ruck Service 221E 4th Ave.S. Seattle 9813E AI,XC N-17-0141-000 0008031191 E2 Puget Sound lug 6 large Crowley Mantis 1102 SW Massachusett Seattle 11121 000 09E0915951 Cl Scarce Landfill - 1280,116E.Sec26 Monroe 98212 N-11-0142-000 D980/38553 I Quadrant Corporation 34461 1th Ave S Federal Mal 18003 000 1169E1772858 CI nonterey Apartments Site Union i6 C8/Arn 622 1st Av W/0ueen Ave N Seallle 96109 OS,OC N-17-0016-000 0980639215 CT Osendall Terminals Reilly Tar 4 Ch 4303 late Washkogtoa Blvd Renton 18035 6C 000 B980726327 Cl MST Ch ' Is, Inc. Port of Seattle S020 W Marginal SI . Seattle 98108 DC 4-17-0170.000 09805118/1 CI Ravenna Landfill U el M MontEd,S of NE 45th 1 E of Noll Seattle - 1110S LI 000 Cl At Vernon Gasoline Spill College Vy 1 Freeey Dr-S It.Vernon 98273 MOM 0-11-0125-000 D9817715E1 C2 Redondo Oil Pit. King Co. 16th Ave S 6 SV Dash Pols Redondo 18054 000 0009250364• C2 Murray Chris-Craft Cruise Unillit, Inc. 9th 1 N ' lellinghaa 98225 N-11-0144-000 D980/23910 C2 Reicbold Cheaical 5100 V Marginal Mal Seattle 98104 DC 000 098091110E C2 Newcastle Mine fisher Sho Coal Creek Dere Newcastle Coil Cr Rd, Sec Issaquah 98027 N-17-0100-000 0980918001 C2 lentos Nilhlaods landfill Highlands landf NE 3rd St.,V of NE 411.5 Renton 16053 000 0930977250 CI Newcastle Mine-Air Vent Newcastle Coal Cr Rd, Sec Issaquah 18027 /N-17-0147-000 09/0439452-•C2"Ilenloa.Jonctia Landfill- firs, r--•a 1100 Nonster-Id An..4 lehton,taln 40910531151 000 0980/23152 C2 Newcastle/Coal Creek Land Palmer Coking I Newcastle Coal Cr Rd, Sec Issaquah '18027 10,6C M-17-0148-000 0980439314 N Mentos Transfer Sta S Mf NE 4th St . Renton 1605E 000 09f01:3231 C2 Mewhales lisp 1 site Vest of Nemhsles Westlake 18203 CO N-17-0044-000 0098554046 A Repair Technology, Inc. Ad Hard Ch 400 S.16th Seattle 1110111 013 Cl Mon-Ferrous Metals. lac. 2905 13th Ave.SI Seattle 18131 OC,LO M-17-0125-000 D009212302 C2 Rhone-Iseleoc Inc. . Monsanto Corp- 122E E Marginal Vy S Seattle 1110E IC DL 000 005131542E N Noolsacl Valley Disposal 210 girdle/Lynden lyndes 1826E N-17-5008-000 Cl Rose Sill Plata 1510-60 122nd Ave.NE Kirtland 18033 LA 000 000126016E N North Coast Cheeks! Co 4300 17th AV S Seattle 16108 N-17-011E-000 D001261/61 N Rudd PAW and Varnish Cs 1101-30 8Sth Ave V Seattle 11111 000 0000066081 CI Northwest Cooperage Co.. Second St. Ditc 7152 let Av S Seattle 9810B DC LO N-31-0023-000 0001250036 Cl R.S.Nate/ Intl Corp Foot MI Csrsrall Na Ielling►as 16223 6 000 D058367152 C2 Northwest Ward ervace I Vestere!ant Pr 1500 Airport May S Seattle 91134 IS,DC N-17-5009-000 Cl Sammie lead Cs.Site 1.1.1. Inc.;le 647 S.Alasta.St. Seattle 16101 MP 000 1180/31223 N Northwest Garbage 1121 110 SE • Bothell 98011 M-31-5007-000 CI San Joan foals 11300 lathull FIay.SE IS.R lothall . 16012 NP . 000 0009424317 CI Northwest Petroch ' 1 C 708 N Teaas Ad,March Poi Anacortes 16221 IF N-17-0006-103/04/681316 Cl Seafab Metal Corp. 2100 l6th Ave.SI Seattle 1813E HF,$C JS 000 0180/7920/ C1 Northwest Pipeline Corp.- Suaas list 4138 Jones Roe Sumas 18295 L. SI N-17-0006-104 0048681316 L Sedate Metal-Surface lap 2700 kith Ave.SM Seattle 1113E If 000 1180724145 M Northwest lransf Ser 6510 216 St SI UaitC -Mantlale Terra 98043 N-11-0150-000 D900726314 C2 Seattle City Light Store'Sooth Service C 3613 Fourth Ave S Seattle 11101 tO 000 118083341E N Northaest Transforler Ser 33721 1th Ave S Federal Val 18003 N-17-0004-011 002/470426 Cl Seattle Iron I Metals 2155 11th Ave.SI Seattle 1113E MT,MC 000 C2 Northwest lrnsfrar-6codai Off Goodwill Rd. by So.Pa Everson 98247 N-17-0131-000 0980833141 I Seattle N Truster Static 341E N 6 Cur II - Seattle 11113 000 Cl NV College-Assemblies of 11102 NE S3rd'St.• [trilled 1803E NP 11-17-0153-000 000153353E I Seattle Pest Intelligence S21 Mall ST , Seattle 11121 000 C2 MW Marled St.Site Fentrom lndustr 2101 NV Mulct St. Seattle 1810E IN,LI • N-17-013E-000 D009252016 I Seattle Rendering Voris SEES$130th IL Seattle 11141 • 000 101755132E C2 M.C.Mac►inery 17025 Vest Valley Hwy. Tokeila 18111 TN 11-11-0155-000 68083382i N Seattle Ss Transfer Stall 1100 26 AV S • Seattle • 11111 • 300 111063,113 C2 Oak Harbor Landfill !oldie Id Oat Nailer 1627E J1 11-17-302E-000 CI Seattle Steer Cs. (lest A 100 Pat Ave. Seattle 11101■i 000 100/157243 Cl Oeser Cedar 730 Marine 1r lellisgbae 18227 pc 11-17-5023-000 • CI Seattle Stems CM.Miter 131E Vectors Ave. Seattle 11111 IF, 000 C2 Olivine Ash landfill 021 Thomas II. Iellleghaa 11226 N-17-003E-000 D001243151 C2 Seattle Steel, Inc. MUlehes Steel 241E SI Rsdever Seattle 11116 IC • 4-24 ECOL069 -XYRO csucuml -mm�Y airdcus waste Investigation 1 Cleanup Progra. .ardous Waste Investigation 1 Cleanup Progra. ERIS Alphabetical Listing April 6, 1990 - SMIS Alphabetical Listing April 6, 1990 • SIZE SIIE EPA NO CAI6 SIIE NAME ALIAS NAME LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST CITY TIP STAFF OTHER HWCP ID EPA WO CA16 Slit NAME ALIAS MAMC LOCATION ADDRESS CLOSEST C111 II/ STAFF DINER -012 Cl Seattle, Port o1-Leclenb leckenbi Co. cl 9811 46th Ave SO Seattle 98134 DC 9-18-0018-000 0980139092 C2 VIP Landfill litsap Vy/Oyster Day I ton 18314 -000 D980825163 CI Seattle, Port al, Jere 5 26th Ar SY I V Marginal A Seattle 98176 N-31-5002-000 Cl Wallace River Park Yell 36010 Highway 2 • Startup 90293 CN,AP -012 CI Seattle,Port of- !trmana Port of Seattle Seattle 18134 DC 11 1-11-5011-000 CI Washington Industries !Iortheest P(eti 925 S. Dakota. Seattle 18100 LD -000 N Sedro Maley Gas Spill/Le 220 Ferry St. Sedro Woolley 98204 JH.OH M-11-0116-000 0027400181 C2 Washington Natural Gas 311 S 3rd St Renton 10055 -000 CI Se.iahsoo Resort Property Alaska Packers 9550 Seeiah.00 Parkway Slaine 90230 JH,6C 1-17-0111-000 0050822170 C? V Ce.eany Inc 1451 XV 46th Seattle 11107 -011 CI Shell, Old- ter. 18/Port Seattle, Port o Part of (crewel 21 Seattle 10134 DC M-11-5028-000 CI wester.letteriee, Inc. Fist lattery 1121 M.Y. Slth St. Seattle, WA 18101 NP DM -020 CI Shell- Tank Fan 2720 13th Ave SW- Teraina Seattle 90134 lI,DC 1-17-4006-105 D780604668 C2 Weyerhaeuser Lab Pacifii Resins 3133 11th Ave.SW Seattle 18134 DC -000 0980911333 C2 Siapson Paper Co.-P-alp P Simpson Lte Pap ME of S Srd Ar at 48th St Everett 90201 M Sl-5UO3 000 Cl .Weyerhaeuser-Lumber Mill 101 E. Marine Viet Or.;M Everett 91201 DC,JY -000 D071651173' C2 Sinclair 1 Valentine, L.P 155 S. Andover St. Seattle 98108 DC 4-17-001B-000 0067156409 Y Widinq transportation Inc 24300 Pacific Hoy S Cent 19031 RD -0N D90002372/ Cl Sisco Landfill 7500 Vade Rd Arlington 98223 9-11-0196-000 C2 Willie's Lake Fitch Miller Mi Mt.laker-Snoqualeie Nat F North lend 18045 MR -900 0989976010 C? Snohomish Landfill oath SE I 118th Dr SE Snohomish 90290 1-11-0019-000 D009248I07 Cl Wyckoff Co-Vent Seattle 2801 SY Florida St Seattle 18126 DC -000 D920732280 N Sn0-ling Garbage Company 8901 Pillows Rd Aediond 98052 1-17-0025-000 0009252321 Cl loll kiss Foundry 3100 Harbor Ave.SY Seattle 10126 DC,LD -000 /1960511596 C2 Southpark Landfill S Park V of 5th SW Seattle 98168 -011 CI Sternoff Metals 7201 Marginal Val E. Seattle 98108 DC „i w/,��.. Qrvuv>ra. ��,•• -.�,►.. •. - pvlaM+r.•vartl!R�tNaIl,a+"91 -000 0041482757 Cl SternofI Metals Corporati Oalsdale Associ•1600 SW,Ilyd'St•rfA'W 'Aentbn[pllraFF418055?lP.ris 7 ��yq,..4ivrX _.__sal• -000 CZ Stone Property 7100 Rollin Hill F.d.ME lainbridge Isla 99110 10,8S ! •AlN+F�ItFt„rsl:i ).. are."' a'I"'^-�.I"" -000 0920916328 Cl Strandley/Manning Site Ron's Auto ince 15225 Willow Rd SE Port Orchard 1/366 CV 16 Y „tr-..>n„pp,pase�yy staalisnmips7pUh[s -000 0980916047 C2 Strip Mine Ho 3 Tooth Way SE Issaquah 98027 • eew••t�E/W: '/q��t:i+-.r (�T�'ire/ue-� �R^ -000 0980639264 C7 Susan River Dump Site tributary to Frazer Suess 99295 .1 -�� tF.j�.�,�1i►.ri bi 1„. -•-•.rre+T•�• r^�s�•"V!nnKt RatOrfc��ai+ '7J�y -000 0009249392 C! Sundstrand Data Control l 15001 NE 16th St Redmond 99073 6C JS �'iU •,i 1,��••{{ifJL-4(yrM'pn;�yn}c�' ••.F.epFvsFa,negozersgn�3l lggtslF)IIIDIIiiiW�I0P7 -000 098066/817 N Sunset?art/lath Lake Dump S. l36th St. 1 18th Ave. Seattle 98101 as sCi61 1 ten.;n.';rtwwW"pn;rsS••} •rtnirquitrrir • sipR lZii riltingniFViglreAO -015 CI S.16th Street Ditch 16th St 1 Duaasisn Rini Seattle 90108 DC LD -023 CI lento Marketing I Felini 2225 13th Ave SW Seattle 99134 MT,DC •000 • Cl Ike Alley Shop ill! Broadway Everett. VA 99201 NP -000 0070207362 CI thereat Reduction Landfil 2521 Slater Pd Bellingham 90226 NF,JS -000 C2 Thompson Property 172?tulshan St. Bellingham 92227 NP -025 0009259468 CI Todd Shipyards Foreer 8ob11 0i 1001 16th S8 Seattle 98134 DC . -000 090013361i N looter Frcperty Site 22936 164 SE Cent 98031 -000 D580639256 N Tulalip landfill US H.y 99 at(bey Slough M Ile 98210 . -000 2045335742 C2 lyre Lustier 1 Mfg Tyre Cedar 1 Lu 3137 A St SE Auburn 98002 • -000 0009245250 C2 Union Oil of California 11710 Unioo 8d Edmonds 98020 -000 0988466311 Cl Union Station Site Metro- HIP Int Jackson St. 1 Ith Ave. Seattle 90104 DC -000 D021820022 C2 United Construction Suppl 18290 Andover Part V Tukwila 98208 -000 V044105244 N United Services 3450 16th Av Y Seattle 98119 . -000 0044030013 C2 Jn' I Manufacturing C 14410 NE 110th St. Yoodineille 90072 • -000 Cl Unocal IuI1 Plant 10042 lentucky St. 1 Gratt St. lellioghaa 18111 NP -000 Cl Unocal lull Plant, Orcas Orcas Landing Orcas 1e?00 NP • -000 • CI Unocal Friday Harbor hulk First and Court St. Friday Harbor 18250 HP -000 CI Unocal-Seattle Marketing !road St 6 Western Ar 1 1 Seattle 98121 DC -000 0680030931 C2 US EPA-Manchester Laoora VA State Dept. 7411 leach Pr.E Manchester 10353 G00011 -000 C2 US Naval Hospital-treat Toone Road 1 ton 18312 60000 -000 N US Naval Station Paget So Sand Point Slat 7500 Sand Point Nay NE Seattle 90115 .600DM • - -000 2170090020 C2 US Naval Supply Ctr-Dreg N of Wycoff St between 1 1 ton 98314 ' -000 2170023426 Cl US Navy Supply Colter' Orchard Pt/Little Cl Rochester 98353 -000 2110023418 C2 US Navy-Paget Sound Shipy 1st street 1 ton 98314 -000 1170023361 C2 USYAVI-HAS Whidbey Isla Hwy 20 1 Ault Field Rd. Oak Harbor 90218 -000 2971590003 CI US-Defense Fuel Supply P OFSP Muliltto I 1 Front St. (by Lorelaodl Rukilter) 18275 DC,J9 • -000 0980639785 C2 U.S.Mary-Camp Vesely N V/Chico-Nildcat Lake Ibiscorporat 10310 -000 Cl U.S.?rioting lak Corp. 17300 Vest Valley F Tutuila 11118 NP,PE • - -021 Cl Value Plating l Metal Sol 3201 llth Ave SY Seattle 18134 DC -000/980639603 L Vashoo Landfill 18050 130th Al SO- Sunset leach 10070 • -000 N Vashoe-Mile Missile Silo 7 elles So.Sf Vasba Fer Hasho,Island 18070 NT NEI I . -000/009257841 C2 Veras Chemical Company 20102 tlst Av SE Snohomish 18290 • 4-25 Response to Comments from the WDOE,Dated May 3,1990: 1. The issue of contaminated sediments on Tract A has been addressed in Section 3.6 of this Final EIS. A hazardous waste study was conducted and a portion of the report is included as Appendix F of this Final EIS. The entire report is available at the City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works. • 4-26 • • l V. -:• Response to Comments from the City of Tukwila: 1. No response required. 1-Y OF TUKWII A SOUTNCENTfN 80ULCVANO.TUKWILA.WASHINGTON 97IIW I•ti•I.�L•UOW 411 Sr..o Gan I.I f.11.... Mo...* May 24, 1990 Donald K. Erickson 7 Chief, Current Planning Renton Department of Community Development Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 - RE; Blackriver Corporate Park, Tracts A and B Office Buildings Environmental Impact Statement Dear Mr. Erickson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the subject E.I.S. The City of Tukwila has no comments at this time. Please inform Vernon Umetsu of my staff (431-3684) of any significant changes to the project proposal or new information which comes to light. Sincer . ick Beeler, SEPA Responsible Official • file b:rntn.eis 4-27 - _ - - _ _ 1 _ r 1 nature preserve, beyond its obvious importance ae: a heronry. 2) The degree of importance of the heronry within the context of King County is not explicit in the DEIS. Although other heronries within the county are listed, the FEIS _ should indicate the locations of all other known heronries 21, in the County and should include information such as observed breeding activity, seasonal variations and total numbers of heron residents. The mere existence of the May 25, 1990 heronry on the site does make this site one of regional significance and therefore one on which strong protection Mar L M 8 measurements, beyond minimum standards should be Y Y nne Y er Senior Environmental Planner undertaken. Department of Community Development 3) Section 3.9.1 makes no mention of the fact that funds to 200 on AvenueSouth acquire land directly adjacent to the proposed development Renton,, Washington 98055 site have been approved by the voters of King County under the 1989 Open Space Bond Act for protection of an 7 Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Black River environmentally significant area known as Black River J Forest. The proposed Black River Corporate Park could Corporate Park potentially have an adverse impact on the environmental Dear Ms. ,M er health and aesthetic quality of Black River Forest, - Y however, with no analysis of the effect of the proposed The King County Office of Open Space has reviewed the above- development on the Black River Forest it is impossible to referenced document and our comments follow. determine what the impacts will be. The Black River Park Corporate Park Draft EIS lacks key 4) The DEIS lacks a serious analysis of wildlife and plant analyses that should be incorporated into the Final EIS for life at the site. While much of the wildlife on the site that document to be considered adequate and complete. may be fairly common on a statewide or national scale, ti many of these species may be very rare within the city of Renton itself. Thus, this site may provide one of the few 1) One area seriously lack in analysis is the alternativeopportunities within the boundaries of the urbanized city Poe of the site as a public park or protected open space. of Renton for residents to observe wildlife and plant' life Potential uses of the site for a park could includei many in a setting that maintains a degree of wildness. A more activities beyond "bird watching3. . and lunchtime complete inventory of the diversity and abundance of flora relaxation" listed in Section c.u.e (nvir. and Other and fauna at the site should be included in the FEIS. Recreational Facilities) to include environmental education and interpretation, linkage to hiking trails and 5) The FEIS should also include specific information in an other uses in keeping with the sensitive nature of the appendix concerning the exact feeding locations and flight site. patterns of the herons nesting at the site. The two Heron ✓ The analysis in Section 3.9.1 notes briefly the names and ,,// flight zones seem to pass conveniently around the proposed 5 .1... building sites. Are these two zones averages of total rough directions from the site of several local parks, ' numbers of flights? How much variance to these two zones however, they should be noted on maps, with exact exists? have any herons been observed flying directly distances and uses of .the parks indicated. It is not through of overhead of the exact proposed building • possible to determine any effect of the proposed project locations? on those parks or gain a sense of the geographic appropriateness of the site for a future park or nature The impact of the building plan, as currently proposed, preserve. Also, an indication of other sites Renton that should be analyzed after the above-requested information has currently or potentially could serve as nature preserves itbeen gained. The presently proposed mitigation measures do for controlled public access shouldbe includedin the not incorporate this information and therefore should not be FEIS. Without this analysis, is impossible to considered as currently adequate. Only mitigation measures determine the relative importance of the site as a local that take into account information gained through this 4-28 further. study should be taken into consideration so that the City of Renton may adequately protect the flora and fauna of the site, including the Heronry, as well as make a better determination of the appropriateness of the site as a nature preserve park with controlled public access. Sincerely, David Tiemann Open Space Planner King County Office of Open Space 4-29 Response to Comments from King County: on 1990 nesting season field observations,a majority of the adult herons were observed to enter and leave the heronry from a northeasterly direction,flying I. An Open Space Alternative does not represent a reasonable alternative to the over the Rivertech building in the general direction of the Cedar River. A project proponent. WAC 197-11-440 defines reasonable alternative as those smaller number have been observed to fly due west over the pump station in which could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal's objectives. This is an the direction of the lower Green River,or due south over Tracts A or B alternative that could be pursued by others. One scenario for open space toward the Green River Valley. Feeding flight paths at other heronries have includes the following: been reported by other investigators. For example,Kelsall(1989)reported that a majority of herons nesting at the Point Roberts heronry tended to fly Under this scenario, the purchase of FCDC property on Tracts A and B either northeast or northwest to feeding grounds from the heronry. Herons would be considered. Funding for the purchase could be sought from a in that colony"routinely cross quiet urban areas at treetop heights,day and variety of sources including the King County Open Space Bond Issue Program, night,and detour or fly high when there is unusual activity on the ground'. Urban Wildlife funds,the City of Renton,the Washington Wildlife Coalition, Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation(IAC)and private funding 6. Comment noted. Additional mitigation measures have been identified to groups (e.g., Bullit Foundation,The Trust for Public Lands). Funds from further minimize the impact of the project. See response No. 1. those sources,or other sources that might become available could be used to purchase the property. At the present time the City of Renton has S633,111 available for purchase of open space lands. Under the Open Space Alternative,Tract A could become part of the City's Open Space Program. Uses of the site could be oriented toward the maintenance of wildlife habitat and passive recreation uses. Such passive uses could include a pedestrian trail set behind an earthen berm. Trees and shrubs could be planted to create densely vegetated buffer between the berm, the creek and P-1 Pond. An observation platform could be established to allow viewing of wildlife in the pond and the heronry. The trail could join with a similar trail on Tract B and could become a part of the City's Pedestrian Master Trails Plan. 2. A comprehensive survey of heronries throughout King County has not been conducted, nor is there much information regarding the number of nests, successful nests,number fledged,for those known colonies. Shipe and Scott (1981)reported six nesting colonies during their survey;the WDW resurveyed • three of the colonies in 1983 (in Murphy 1988); and in 1986 and 1987, Murphy(1988)found that four of the six colonies reported by Shipe and Scott were abandoned and that six new colonies were confirmed. Since the Murphy study,several additional colonies have been reported and are presented in Appendix B of this Final EIS. The WDW/Nongame Program has data on heronry locations,but no surveys of those heronries is conducted on a regular basis. Based on the limited information available regarding the status of heronries in King County,the Black River,Dumas Bay,and Lake Sammamish heronries are among the largest known heronries in King County. 3. See response No. 1 above. 4. An inventory is presented in Appendix G of this Final EIS. 4-30 Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency 200 W..t Mower Stm..t,Room 205 S..uI..Wahinpton 98119.3965 • T.I.phon.: (2061 290-7330 1.800.562.3566 F.c.Imll.: (2061295.7431 April 24, 1990 9 Ma. Mary Lynne Myer City of Renton pIANNING DIVISION Department of Community Development CINNINGDIVISI 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055APR Z 5 1990 RECEIVED Dear Ms. Myers Dlackriver Corporate Park DEIS • In response to your request for comments on the Blackriver Corporate Park-Draft Environmental Impact Statement, we are submitting the following air quality considerations. The air quality impact analysis section of the DEIS 'was generally well written and documented. Unfortunately, there • was an error in determining carbon monoxide concentrations downwind of the proposed parking garage. It is physically impossible for natural process to produce ambient concentrations that would exceed the highest concentration occurring within the garage. Therefore, this' analysis must be disregarded. In any respect, based upon the concentrations predicted within the garage, it is unlikely that the parking garage traffic will cause violations of any ambient air quality standards: This will, of course not be true for traffic on adjacent roadways. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Anita J. Fran el Air Pollution Control Officer GSP1vjd • i To.. am.� Oro, Pao.K...rMom r Ir.V.,.Om. a.Wore ..r,..r.e.,rr lop ies • • 4-31 • Response to Comments from Puget Sound Mr Pollution Control Agency: • a cumulative downwind pollutant increment greater than the internal 1. There is no computation error in the parking garage air quality analysis concentration of any garage level. presented in the Draft EIS. The parking garage air quality modeling 2. Comment noted. A Transportation Management Plan has been prepared for procedureownwin used the CALINE3 model to. generateLikemost d dispersonion factors for the Blackriver Corporate Park to reduce traffic into the area,thereby reducing downwind employs outsideGsthe garage. t dla n.incrementsmodels, air emissions along Oakesdale Avenue. Additional mitigation measures to CALINE3 employs multiple a Gaussian plumeg,different fer g garagen. evPollutant) rddivein reduce single occupancy vehicles(SOV)are included in Section 3.8 of this contributed by sources(e.g., levels)are additive in Final EIS. all Gaussian plume models. The mathematical formulation of the CALINE models depends on plume additivity. The documentation reports for the CALINE models are explicit on this point: • Benson, P. E. 1979. CALINE3 - A versatile dispersion model for predicting air pollutant levels near highways and arterial streets. Interim Report (FHWA/CA/TL-79/23). California Department of Transpor- tation. Sacramento,CA. 176 pp(see pages 7,20,and 31). • Benson,P.E. 1980. Background and development of the CALINE3 line source dispersion model. Interim Report (FHWA/CA/TL-80/31). California Department of Transportation. Sacramento,CA. 193 pp(see pages 134, 136, 148-152,and 168-170). • Benson,P.E. 1984. CALINE4-A dispersion model for predicting air pollutant concentrations near roadways. Final Report(FHWA/CA/TL- 84/15). California Department of Transportation. Sacramento,CA. 261 pp(see pages 8, 18,20,and 32). The additivity of plume increments from multiple sources is inherent in the mathematical formulation of Gaussian dispersion models. Plume increments remain additive regardless of the spatial distribution of the emission sources. Additivity is not affected by having a vertical array of sources.instead of a horizontal array. A closely spaced vertical array of sources will, however, generate much larger maximum ground level pollutant increments immediately downwind from the source of footprint than will a horizontal array of the same sources. This occurs because a vertical array of sources will have co-located ground traces of plume centerlines while a horizontal array will have horizontally separated plume centerlines. With a closely spaced vertical array of emission sources such as a parking garage,it is entirely possible to have larger pollutant concentrations outside the garage than inside any single garage level. As the plumes disperse downwind,the pollutant concentration increment contributed by each separate garage level decreases continuously from the initial internal concentration. The additivity of multiple co-located plume centerlines,however,can generate • 4-32 memo - Municlpal0y of Meleopolilan Seattle Donald Erickson Exchange Building • 821 Second Ave. • Seattle,WA 98104-1598 May 18, 1990 May 18, 1990 Page Two - Provide lighted and hard-surfaced sidewalks or • Donald K. Erickson, AICP pedestrian pathways to facilitate safe and convenient Department of Community Development &cease to transit or rideshare service locations. City of Renton - Design and implement a guaranteed ride home program. 200 Mill Avenue So. Renton, Washington 98055 10 • . - Design and implement a parking management program. Draft Environmental Impact Statement Initiate an alternative work hour program. . File Name: Blackrivqr Corporation Pau( Dear Mr. Erickson: - Establish a performance goal for high occupancy vehicl= use. Metro staff has reviewed this proposal and anticipates no - Provide preferential parking for high occupancy _ significant impacts to Metro's wastewater facilities. vehicles. However we have the following comments regarding Metro's water quality and public transportation services. - Provide a financial subsidy for employees who use HOV. Water ouality - Conduct transportation surveys/monitoring. • Drainage, temporary erosion control, and wetland mitigation - Provide a bus stop passenger landing pad.plans should be completed and approved in detail prior to the final version of the EIS. It is difficult to adequately 4/ Provide secure bicycle parking. assess the efficacy of proposed facilities, mitigations,. and y temporary erosion control without a presentation of the For assistance in revising and writing the transportation complete proposed design (in the case .of the drainage management plan, contact Carol Thompson, Metro Market facilities) or of the actual plan (in the case.of the Development, at 684-1610. temporary erosion control). Public Transportation Overall, we are pleased to note that less than one stall per employee parking would be provided. The ratio appears to We note Lhat elackriver Corporate Park has an existing assume a 10% mode split transit/ridersharing which.is Weanterthaton. Management Plan (eMP However, it would be reasonable. We recommend that parking spaces be allocated to give preferential location to carpools and vanpools.timely to review the existing TMP ani update it according to the following actions and/or conditions. - Thank you for ,the opportunity to review and comment. - Provide a free one-month bus pass to tenants at the Sincerely, time of each new tenant occupancy. The passes should be per foor ripeak hour,' two zones - maximum requirement: two �y t. Gregory M. Bush, Manager Distribute site-ap propriate transit and ridesharing Environmental Compliance Division information to new tenants and annually to all tenants. • GMB:lag5203Dis lay site-appropriate transit 4nd ridesharing information in prominent public locations. cc: Carol Thompson •- Appoint a Transportation Coordinator to Larry Adeyeal P promote and . coordinate the use of public transportation and high occupancy vehicles. 4-33 - Response to Comments from METRO: 1. As required by the City of Renton, a complete drainage plan and erosion control plan will be prepared following the site review process. Drainage design will not be undertaken until the project has been approved by the city. Drainage system design and the temporary erosion control plan will follow the Renton Storm and Surface Water Ordinance(Chapter 29,Sections 4-2901- 2918)requirements. • 2. As a part of the conditions for project approval,the project applicant is to revise the existing TMP to address the 14 points identified in comment 2 of your letter. Please refer'to Section 3.8 for additional trip generation analysis conducted by TRANSPO and a description of mitigation measures. 3. Comment noted. 4-34 Citizens for - R..rllon Wildlands Preserva,.ion • May 25.1990 i I.and if placed in or near the central downtown district.would comply with sold policy. I 4O and it would also contribute to the achievement policy V2. Mary Lynne Myer.Project Manager Community Development Deportment . ♦ ♦ Section 1..4.page 1.4 and Table 3.14.pages 3-30 through 3-e0: I too.hove evaluated the Renton City Hall 1 1 consistency with local and state lows,regulations.and policies. See my letter to Mayor 1 200 Mill Avenue South Earl Clymer.doled May 9.1990.In addition-the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program Renton.WA 98055 is applicable. Subject: Blackriver Corporate Park draft EIS.doted April 1990 Table 1.2: Tract A: Dear Ms Myer. Topography/soils: No grading and filling should be done from January 15 though August C 1 as this is the courtship,breeding-and nesting period for this Colony,based on site- i As president of Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation.I represent over 200 active specific observations. volunteers whose goal it is to preserve the acutely fragile ecosystem at the Blackriver Riparian Forest. Foundation: The foundation will be adequate only if taken to bedrock level. This is especially in tight of seismic concerns(see below) Gl 1 om extremely concerned about the proposed development's high potential for 1 significant adverse impact on the herony and other wildlife that lives or winters of the site Seismic: Testing neecs to be site specific. Verification that the site hos low potential for Tne real measure of success or failure on this ecosystem is the long-term effect on the I liquifaction should be verified with on oppropriote agency or firm. • now well-established heron colony that hos existed relatively undisturbed since 1985. Air quality: ls applicable because of the introduction of 1.942 to 2.087 vehicles. The According,to independent internationally recognized heron experts,this development effect on both humcns and-wildlife needs to be shown. The oir quality measurements 10 is likely to destroy or.at a minimum,result in a much diminished wildlife area. need to be token during inversion conditions in the winter and evaluations based on �' those conditions. !nc,dentclly.any reports of heron nests prior to 1985 ore unsubstantiated. I A enerdl comment that applies to all mycomments- referringto WAC 197-I1 080. Surface water movement: The P1 Pond was of or near capacity during the flooding gpp early this year. Surface water runoff and the paving over of Tracts A and B could hove which applies to incomplete or unavailable information,when there ore gaps in relevant severe impact on the PI Pond. li information or scientific uncertainty concerning significant impacts.agencies shall3 mo:ce clear that such information is locking or that substantial uncertainty exists. The Surface water quality: This needs to be monitored on on ongoing basis by the agency shall weigh the need for the action with the severity of possible adverse Deportment of Ecology. impacts which would occur if the agency were to decide to proceed in the face of uncertainly. If the agency proceeds,it shall indicate its worst case analysis. Wetlands: Potenliol for signnficant adverse impact with the paving over of Tracts A and I Z B. My specific concerns ore as follows: Wildlife resources: Tn is impact needs to be fully mitigated. If this is not possible.the page vi..the following are applicable; project should not be approved. Buffer must be in accordance With WDW guidelines. (I)(b)(i)Air quality.(1)(c)(iii)Floods.(2)(o)(iii)Potential releases to the environment of a minimum. If this does not result in an effective screen.i.e..if the heron colony is not affecting public health,such as toxic or hazardous materials.and(2)(c)(i)through(vi) exhibiting the same vigorous health that it appears to be currently enjoying prior to Transportation. development,then the buffer must be reanalyzed and additional vegototion provided 13 until the health of the colony is revitalized(or,if it is clear after serious attempts at . Section 1.2.1.page 1-3: The'rookery protection guidelines'defined for the site ore . improving the butter that the herons ore pushed beyond their tolerance limits for based on inaccurate and misleading interpretations of published reports. I hove 6 attached the comments of Dr.John KelsaO,Mr.Range Boyer,Ms.Marty Murphy,and-Dr disturbance.then this encroachment needs to be studied by a recognized heronexpert ond'published`in recognized ornithological and b'xding publications,with the Scott Forbes os they relate to this draft EIS.including Appendix B. effects clearly spelled out. Documentation of the effects of human disturbance needs to be generated so that next time we don't make the some mistakes.) Section 1.3,page 1.3: The need and demand for the office park space hos not been • defined. There is a high vacancy rate of new office space. I believe that it is at a 30% If nonhooded windows ore used.!]1 windows need to be mode of nonreflective gloss. level,according to a televised report on KING.Channel 5. Even if that were not true. Tinted glass is highly reflective and hos caused the death of many birds. This office there ore better,less environmentally sensitive sites that should be developed instead ' development must be viewed from the perspective of a bird.not a person--all of the of this one. birds wintering over or living year round of the site are well capable Of flying around and i y over flpy structures we build of the site. The nonreflective windows should be approved For example,the central downtown business district in Renton Is In need of on enconomic boost. Development of office buildings may well be qn effective and by on independent agency,such os Dept.of Ecology and on independent expert appropriate way of providing that boost. According to the City's Comprehensive Plan birder,preferably one selected by the Seottle Audubon Society. If hoods ore used over on page 12(Economic Goal),Item B.Districts Objective.Policy#1:Districts should hove the windows,these,too,need to be approved os spelled out abeve. Incidentaly,if any an efficient and functional relationship between various land uses,and Policy 02: - reflection shows through the hooded windows,then nonreflective gloss should be Declining areas should be rehobiltoted. fie proposed project does not meet Policy required regardless of whether hooded or nonhooded windows ore used. 1725 Pierce Avenue SE , Renton,Washington 98058 _2- 4-35 - -- -- -- - .. - - -- - • Unique terrestiol resources: See note regarding Section 1.2.1.page 1-3. Establish buffer I/5' Section 1.5.pogo 1-16: I defer to the expert comments of Dr.John Kolsoll•Mr.Range in accordance with WDW guidelines.at a minimum. The vegolative buffer should be in !1 Bayer.Ms.Marty Murphy.Dr.Dee Borsmo,and Mr.Ted Muller. accordance with Seattle Audubon Society recommenotions. General comments regarding this proposed development: The issue regarding this Is the exclusive use of notural tones appropriate? I know that it is common practice. proposed office development Is actually a much larger Issue. The City of Renton.olong however.I wonder if It increases the liklihood that birds may fly Into the structures. Some IL with every other Puget Sound community,needs to determine what specific qualities contrasting edging may provide o visual cue to birds. It may be worth investigating. the Puget Sound region offers that attracts and appeals to Puget Sound residents. This No exterior construction activities should take place between January 15 and August I region still possesses abundant natural beauty: Plentiful.clear water.relatively clean air at (most of the time.anyway)•and open spaces set this region apart from other industrial of distances specified by WDW. Currently both tracts ore unscreened and line of sight cities.such as Los Angeles.Detroit.and New York City. We need to identify what makes to the colony. Therefore.no exterior construction shall take place within 1320 feet(per this region special,and then develop comprehensive community and regional plans WDW)during the breeding season,which is from January 15 to August 1.If odequote • /7 and policies to ensure that those qualities are not destroyed. Our current mode is to buffers are established•in accordance with Seattle Audubon Society destroy tract by tract the fragile natural resources that we love. Do we wont Puget recommendations.then the WDW should be contacted for appropriate distance Sound to be known as o place where developers(especially foreign developers,such between exterior construction activities and the heron colony during the January 15 as FCDC)can come In and destroy what little sensitive lands remain. We seem to be of through August I breeding season. the mind that if they offer enough cosh.that we wit accept the price we hove to pay for • Noise: No outdoor construction activities shall take place between January 15 and the losses of our natural resources. ii August I--see conditions stated in preceding paragraph. This statement needs to be Section 2.3.page 2.3: Correction: According to my lost count of the nests.which specifically conditioned. occurred in early March(just before the trees leafed out)•the total for the 1990 season 2.1 will be between 30-37 nests. This includes a new expansion in o tree located Impacts from pile driving cannot be mitigated. See Seattle Audubon Society approximately 200 feet west of the primary colony. The new expansion contains at least comments. I! 4 nests. See photocopy of photograph,which is included In my attachments. I counted 3 unused nests in the primary colony. All of the nests in the new expansion were Auger cost-in-place pilings should be required,and pile driving not approved for this occupied. site. for structural stability in the event of seismic disturbance. Figure 2-1: According to my observations,the heron fly into and out of the colony from Relationship to plans.zoning•and shorelines: Comments in Appendix A section. I je all directions. There is no'heron flight zone.' This is an especially unseasonable assumption when the total number of herons is token into account. The colony-contains 28 Light and glare: Potential significant impact of light from buildings and parking that between 54 and 68 herons.and their numbers alone would indicate that these birds will needs to be mitigated. Both tracts ore going to contribute equally to this problem,and, be traveling to and from various feeding grounds throughout the area. The flight paths therefore.both tracts should addressed. 2f ore entirely random. Reflection from windows is addressed above. See Wildlife resources. Section 2.5.2.Tract B.page 2-5: It is essential to determine what reasonable use of the land would be,os opposed to ignoring the environmental concerns. Please refer to the 2/ Historical and cultural: Was this the exact site where on archaeological study was hearing examiner's report,doted June 9.1987 for o synopsis of concerns(file number SP- performed(James Chatters.1982)? I hove heard that it was not. Even if it was.Mr. 27, 100-86) Chatters was on contract to FCDC when he surveyed the site. An independent study is warrented.according to Mr.Chatters. Section 3.2.1.page 3.3(among others): Mitigation measures-replace'should'with Traffic: •This development will hove a significant adverse impact and needs to be 'will.' Use of words like'should.'Could:'may.'etc..ore entirely unacceptable in this . Z3 document. This appears to be a sty way to avoid mitigation,even though it is .10 described fully in the DEIS. If the impacts cannot be fully mitigated,the development mentioned as a mitigation method.When toothless words such as these ore used. should be put on hold until mitigation has taken place. there is no assurance the the mitigation wig be performed. I will note those occuronces that I see.however,I may miss some. This document needs to be rewritten and at of Comments regarding Tract B are basically the same as for Tract A. I hove two comments to odd: these terms replaced by actual mitigation measures with words such as'will.''shall.' etc. to ensure that the mitigation takes place. Unique terrestrial resources:Walking and jogging trails and other forms of recreation J Section 3.2.2 page 3-4: Mitigation measures: 'Would be suitable'needs to be 3/ should not occur closer than recommended by independent heron experts and WDW. Zr replaced by'will be used.' These recommendations should be based on site-specific observations. The 480 feet proposed is much too close to the heronry. This will unnecessarily stress the birds. Section 3.2.3.page 3-5: Mitigation measures: 'Should'needs to be repoced by'will.' 1 3Z • Relationship to plans,zoning•and shorelines: Agree with'reduce building height. No Section 3.3.1.page 3-17: Mitigation measures: 'Should'occurs three times)needs to structure within 1800 feet of the heron colony should be higher than the lowest nest! This is lc- be replaced with'will.' 35 crucial. See statement in Appendix 8.page B-6.'at of the great blue heron nests in rookeries visited for this study were located In the tallest trees.' Section 3.4.1.pages 3-17 to 3-21: It seems more appropriate to use the 100-yeor storm as a basis for this development,especloly in fight of its location to the food control pond. Also,the severe flooding that occurred eorty this year could wel indicate that it is more 3y • - 3- • - 4(- 4-36 oppropriote to consider the worst case analysis(see page I of this letter under'a 131 Incorporate o droinage plan which incorporates(not would Incorporate)use of 14 biofdtrotion swales... general comment'). (Page 3-21 continued): Tract A: 'It can be assumed??' Shouldn't this be investigated Section 3.53.pogo 3-33: II is important to note that the primary reason wildlife hos by the appropriate agencies? Statements such as these encouroge increased risk to 3 s- gravitoted to this wetland site.is because It hos remained relatively undesturbed by yrp the environment. If we don't hove enough information on which to bose a decision,we humans on a day-to-cloy level. There hove been some serious Invasions to the wildlife need to get that information in order to avoid repeating problems.such os the flooding area,but they have been short-lived and very sporotic. This development represents a that took place early this year. • permanent invasion into the area.which will have significant impacts on the entire ecosystem there. • Mitigation measures: 'could'needs to be replaced with'will.' 3` page 3-34: Regarding mammalian and amphibian use on Tracts A and B: I have seen a Section 3.4.2.page 3-21: Considerable information is known about the water quality of number of garden snakes on both tracts,and hear what sound to be a substantial if 7 the PI Pond and in Springbrook Creek. See the Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant population of frogs at dusk. Also.there is are beaver at the pond and along Springbrook Application for the Black River Water Quality Management Project,dated February 21. 3 ( Creek. See photocopies of photographs.which are attached to these comments. The 1990.and released by Ron Straka.a civil engineer in the City of Renton Public Works beaver opparently are newcomers to the site.as no Indications of beaver were Department. observed prior to this year. page 3-23:Tract A Impacts: It appears that o detailed grading and erosion control plan 3‘ Section 3.5.4.page 3-37: I hove observed eagles feeding.foraging at the site. Dates of needs to be done In order to accurately anticipate impacts. Is a high flow by-pass of eagle observation cue 3/11/89.10/26/89.11/12/89.1/6/90.and 3/25/90. A majority of• 118 the swots needed? use occurs from early January through August. Tracts A and B do represent important heron habitat.especioty in the winter months. They feed on the voles,moles.etc. I page 3-27: Mitigation measures: An Important consideration in the erosion of the PI hove seen the remains of regurgitation from herons on the Roots A and B. Pond is theseasonal raising and lowering of the water level. It is imperative that the water level be retained at winter levels all year around,and not dropped as is standard page 3.38: There are four cottonwoods.not three that make up the primary heron practice during the tote spring,summer,and early fall months. The adjustment of the colony. This makes me question whether he has actually measured the trees.os stoted water has a severely negotive impact on the site for a number of reasons. See my letter 39 in the text. It also is o good time to ask for specific information about Mr.Von Wormer. to Ivan Lines of the Spokane Soil Conservation Service(you hove a copy in your files). We hove been following your reputation os on independent biologist for o number of My primary concerns as they relate to this proposed project ore the effects of years. Your opinions and conclusions hove not been consistont with most people who increased siltation raising the floor of the PI Pond.with the result of the area turning into hove significant training and experience. Because of the vital Importance of the imacts more of o marsh than remaining a pond,and the elimination of on effective water buffer of this particular project,we ask that you respond truthfully to the following questions between any construction and development on Tracts A or B and the heron colony (incidentally,bios are Included for each of the expert reviewers,unless The City of (and other wildlife living in or near the protected forest). Renton olreody has the information): page 3-28: It spears that a detailed drainage plan needs to be done in order to q0 Education: ocurately anticipate impacts. Section 3.5.1.page 3-29: We need to discourage the removal of any cottonwood or o What school did you attend. 9 older that would act as a butter between the protected forest and heron colony and 4( o Your degree is in what subject? development. The developer con scale down the project and design around the trees. page 3-30: Mitigation measures: 'FCDC should'(occurs twice)needs to be replaced o What year did you graduate? I Z with'wilt.' o What was the title of moster's thesis(if applicable)(please enclose copy Gramatical construction of this section is poor. The third bulleted item should require not or indicate where one can be located)? only the development of a detailed plan.but also all the follow through thot assures thot I y3 o Whot was the title of your Ph.D.disertotion(if applicable) (please enclose this will be performed and maintained in the long run. Long-term moinenonce is copy or indicate where one con be located)? essential for the success of this area. Publications: Section 3.5.2.page 3.32:Impacts to Tract B: The City of Renton.with the assistance of the Department of Ecology,needs to determine what habitat this should be.and then III o list of papers published.along with publication titles(enclose copies): ensure its development.maintenance.and protection. page 3-33: Mitigation measures: The lontin plan needs to be carried out and o How many years of wildlife field experience hove you had.I.e., nesting g p g ys patterns,behavior patterns,nesting success:and biological data,such as toxicology: maintained,as well. Revegatotion of affected current os well as past(In other words, all)construction areas need to be performed. o What ore your methods of study(must be in accordance with accepted The plantings Al not should.Include... ornithological standards)? 4-37 • • In general.this project should not be approved until FDCD shows that it is providing I p genuine mitigation measures that ore hosed on accurate information and proven effective. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on:this draft EIS. Please keep me upraised of this project. • Sincerely. Susan Krom President • enclosures • • • • 7- 4-38 Response to Comments from Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation: In December,1985 burning bans were not in effect but it is estimated that the entire month would have been a burning ban because there was very little I. Comment noted. wind during the month(Swigard pers.comm.). Please see Section 91(Mary Anderson)response No. 17. 2. Please see response to letter from Mary Anderson. 11. See response to comment 4. The monitoring of surface water quality from 3. Comment noted. runoff is not the responsibility of the WDOE. That is the responsibility of the City of Renton. 4. Air quality,hazardous materials,and transportation are topics that have been addressed in this Final EIS. Flooding was discussed within the context of 12. No significant adverse impacts on wetlands would occur with the project. Surface Water Movement/Quantity (Section 3.4.1) of the Draft EIS. As Mitigation for the loss of small wetland area on Tracts A and B is presented mentioned in the Draft EIS,the P-1 Pond was designed to store and release in Section 3.5.2. The old Black River channel wetland on Tract B would be stormwater under a controlled program. preserved and would include a buffer averaging 50 feet and not less than 25 feet in width. 5. Comment noted. The guidelines have been revised to reflect additional mitigation measures(see Appendix B). 13. See response to comment 16 from WDW. A setback of 600 feet with a 10- foot high berm and dense evergreen planting between the heronry and . 6. See response to comment 1 from WDW. development has been added as a mitigation measure. Monitoring of all phases of construction will be a requirement of site approval. 7. Comment noted. 14. Comment noted. Nonreflective glass will be a requirement for all windows. 8. The mitigation measure regarding timing of construction has been revised to Additionally,windows facing the heronry within 800 feet must be hooded include a grading and filling activity closure. Please refer to Sections 32 and above the height of the berm plus trees(30 feet). 3.5 of this document. 15. Comment noted. 9. The analysis of foundation and seismic impacts was conducted by INCA Engineers (licensed structural engineers), and Golder Associates (licensed 16. The likelihood of herons coUisions with the proposed buildings is highly geotechnical engineers). In addition, site-specific geotechnical tests were unlikely. Most bird strikes occur during migration and usually involve song conducted on Tract A during July 20 through July 24,1990. birds colliding with reflective glass windows. 10. An analysis of inversion conditions and air quality is not necessary since the 17. Comment noted. See response to comment 8 above. number of vehicular trips estimated for this project is less than earlier projections (see Section 3.8). Inversion conditions vary from year to year 18. See response to comment 8. based on weather conditions. Inversions may occur almost daily,with the severity reflected in the number of winter burning ban days. Past records 19. Cast-in-place angering has been identified as the preferred method for from the Puget Sound Air Quality Control Board indicate the following foundation construction. information: 20. Comment noted. Year Number of Burning Ban Days 21. Measures to minimize the impact of light and glare were addressed in Section 1988 to 1989 15 3.73 of the Draft EIS.Specific mitigation measures were defined. 1989 to 1990 14 1990 to 1991(to Date) 10 22. The archaeological study conducted by the University of Washington in 1980 did include a majority of the project area(Appendix E,City of Renton Draft The number of burning ban days per year generally ranges from 15 to 20 days, EIS, Earlington Park,July 1980). The western portion of Tract was not and depends greatly on the wind and temperature. included in the study but,is discussed in Section 3.7.4 of this Final EIS. 4-39 23. Comment noted. See respo a to comment 2 from METRO. have volunteered on the site. These trees must be removed as a part of site development and cannot be readily incorporated into the site plan. 24. Comment noted. The setback for the pedestrian trail is now approximately 580 feet. 42. See response to comment 30. 25. Comment noted., The lowest nest is approximately 110 feet off the ground. 43. Comment noted. Maintenance will be a requirement of both FCDC and the An additional mitigation regarding height limitations is presented in Section City of Renton. 3.5.4 of this Final EIS. • 44. Comment noted. The discharge of treated stormwater into the old Black 26. Comment noted. River channel will be addressed as a part of the drainage design and will be discussed with WDOE. 27. These changes have been reflected in revised Appendix B of this Final EIS. 45. The intent of developing a planting of native vegetation is to minimize the 28. Comment noted. See response to comment 5 from King County. need for extensive maintenance in future years. A requirement of the planting program will be that plants survive and be monitored for a least two 29. Comment noted. Please refer to response to comments from King County. years following planting. Plants not surviving will be replanted.See response to comment 30. 30. The specific conditions regarding mitigation measures to be required for the project will be established by the Environmental Review Committee. 46. Comment noted. The intent of establishing mitigation measures for this project is to minimize that effect. 31. See response to comment 30. 47. Comment noted. An inventory of the site is presented in Appendix G of this 32. See response to comment 30. Final EIS. 33. See response to comment 30. 48. Tracts A and B have been judged to represent marginal feeding habitat for herons. No voles,and few deer mice were captured during two days of live 34. The city's requirement is to analyze a 25-year storm event. trapping conducted by JSA biologists during July,1990. Vole runways were found to be lacking on the project site. 35. Runoff will be routed through biofiltration swales to the P-1 Pond. See Section 3.4 of this FEIS. 49. There are four cottonwoods on the island,however,only three support heron nests. The fourth tree is leaning and may therefore be unattractive as a nest • 36. See response to comment 30. site. 37. Comment noted. See Section 3.4 of this FEIS. Mr.Van Wormer can be reached at lES Associates,1514 Muirhead,Olympia, WA 98502. His telephone number is(206)943-0127. 38. See response to comment 1 from METRO. The need for a high flow by-pass will be determined during the drainage design phase. 50. Comment noted. 39. Comment noted. 'The development of a management plan to address such issues as water level in the P-1 Pond is presented as a mitigation measure in this Final EIS. 40. See response to comment 38 above. 41. The most significant trees on Tract B are scheduled to be preserved. The loss • of trees mentioned in the Draft EIS are scrub alders and cottonwoods that • 4-40 A:elute:VG and Plonn • ' { r , ,` fi r -/ r1 ti�' ti( !. Loosen Pomeroy Northwest,Inc Royce A Berg.MA. Suite 300 Seattle.iNActlol(206)b871070 ' Response to Comments from LPN,Dated April 27,1990: I. See response to comments from LPN,dated May 21,1990. April 27, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer 12 City of Renton Community Development Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A & B NW 88041 SUBJ: Draft Environmental Impact Statement issued April 9, 1990 Dear Mary: Per review of the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the above referenced project, we believe it is important to document the events that led to the current proposed actions, i.e., A-1 on Tract A and 8-1 and 8-2 on Tract B. The draft EIS is not clear on how the alternative actions evolved and what mitigation was incorporated into th1 current proposals. The original submittal for Tract B reflected a seven-story office building (located adjacent to the P-I pond) that would function as a buffer between the heron rookery and the parking areas with the old Blackriver channel being filled, per the original approved EIS. This was the basis for the current draft EIS. After reviewing the preliminary EIS consultant comments, First City revised the alternative proposals (A-1, B-I and B-2) per the consultant recommendations (including revising the building locations). This initial concept is currently reflected in the draft EIS, Appendix B, figures 2 and 3 on the Great Blue Heron. This provides the public with a copy of the original submittal, but also confuses the issue in relation to the proposed alternatives which preserve wetlands, establish heron flight zones and locates buildings per EIS consultant recommendations. cP pectfully, RAB: • cc: Mark Miller Don Erickson • via fax • 4-41 PnPomerov Northwest Ina,Rom A.Berg.AIA.1127 Pine Sheet Suite.SOO Seotlle.WA96101(2O016034030 Letter to Myer/City of Renton Page 2 PLANNINGO:VIS10:: To combine all comments in one letter, we also need to reiterate the ::ir:;":F'rt,I,,).' fol lowing: May 21, 1990 13 • • 2 ;yg 3. The original submittal for Tract B reflected s seven-story office Ms. Mary Lynne M er .r— building (located adjacent to the P-I pond) that would function as a City of Renton y `1 E =:::�i-p buffer between the heron rookery and the parking areas, with the old BlaCommunity Development Dept. currentthe cbasis rfor athe 1per being filled DEIS. After ereviewing the original oved EIS. T his was preliminary EIS 200 Mill Ave. South consultant comments, First City revised the proposals to the alternates 3 Renton, WA 98055 (A-I, B-1 and B-2) per the consultant recommendations (including revising the building locations). • RE: Blackriver Corporate Park This initial concept is currently reflected in the DEIS, Appendix B, Tracts A and B figures 2 and 3 on the Great Blue Heron. This provides the public with NW 88041 a copy of the original submittal, but also confuses the issue in SUBJ: Comments on draft EIS relation to the proposed alternatives which preserve wetlands, establish ECF;SA;SM-071-88/ECF;SA;SM-109-89 recommendations.zonesheron flight and locate buildings per EIS consultant dated May 11, 1990 R. .ctfull Dear Ms. Myer: Per our review of the Draft EIS and the public comments presented at the public meeting on May 1, 1990, we are providing the following comments for the •oy. 1+g record and review of the EIS. Pr!ident 1. VEGETATION TABLE 1-2, Page 1-6 and reference P.1-11: mitigating measures p B:mp ▪ ..participation with the city of Renton in a similar planting program with King County and the S.C.S. on land adjacent to the P-I and and cc: DB7i6E.i1 k'sonA Springbrook.' Mark Miller Dean Erickson We feel this requires clarification or rewording; the land that / comprises the pond, Springbrook and the buffer from the high-water line • to the current parcels A and B property lines was dedicated by First • • City to S.C.S. and Renton to create the pond. First City should not have to further participate in funding off-site landscaping. The • landscape program established by S.C.S. included the natural grasses that exist today and provide the visual amenity and habitat as • photographed and painted by the speakers at the public hearing for the DEIS. We recommend this read as previously quoted in earlier drafts: 'City of Renton should coordinate a similar planting program with King County and S.C.S. Engineers on land under their jurisdiction.' 2. ITEM 1 ABOVE AND PER PUBLIC TESTIMONY AT THE HEARING OF THE DEIS: It is important to note that the habitat, pond, tree and grass areas photographed and presented in slides and artists' paintings at the hearing will not change with the proposed developments. These areas, 2. the buffer from the pond to the ew parcel lines, the existing significant trees and wetlands oh the parcels will remain intact. ' 1 Loosen Parma/Noifwstsl Inc.Royost A Barg.ALA.1127 Km Street Suns 300 Sb a s.WA 9a101(206)583-5030 4-42 • 2 3 e�� w u�• 0 o.a 3 3 c o w OCa c O .e u u.o-, 3 `-, DE • , ;o � b a •O o u 1 ° H n^ o •� g .701eay.5 N ._..LIJ ° I DO 3 L.. u y a s N e4 8 '3 �y� s • e e 0 3 4 e0e�w .0 •� 9 LO o e e oOO.. u J;jj Z ;.o ex • 6 6, ` ° 1 o e I IDid S. 8L ii 6 3 @ G 0'I 7e ° 0 eJ ri _- •. • . std First City Wangtan,Inc. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK - SITE IMPACTS • NWSSO41 May,st,'1990 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ORIGINAL PROJECTS REVISED PROJECTS • Y2 r ti ... .' ''; ;•PART OF OLD BLACKMER PERTHE '�E• NTIREGYEGETA�ILD O N DSIGNIR R CHANNEL PCANTTREES . .. <,... ].a. ORIGWALELS PRESERVED.. ' ? 1+:t �` .•17ACRESDEDICATEDTOCREATEP-1POND. TEAND �ASS ACRES'PRESERVE0. 5 }";�•w ' . 0.7 ACRE PRESERVED. ..�,�,, • . j n. •;j • •NATURAL AREA EASEMENT.OLD BLACKRIVER +�.ia�Lvu CHANNEL,HERON FUGHT PATHS,INCREASED •• '`a '4."• '•r •'COSTING VEGETATION IN NATURALAREA EASEMENT SETBACK/��DA►LSIGNIFICANTTREEAREA3 ' • • .yc"1 •i PRESERVED O.TACRES. PRESERVED. WIJDLJ HAB T •SIGNIFICANT TREES PRESERVED. .wn.DLIFE FOOD SOURCE IN NEW LANDSCAPING. - •20 ACRE RIPARIAN FOREST'NORTH SIOE P•1 POND. •ADDn10NAL49S ACRES PRESERVED. ` � i;. • W.. •20 ACRE RIPARIAN FOREST-NORTH SIDE P•1POND. 1i,.. •--- .6`•:; 'a "�.``• y. 1`�•• s �Ye:i'`ram. ••OLIWATER SEPARATORS �EE,;-+: ' .`' ,1, : l„y� - OILWATEA SEPARATORS AND FJ05TiNG STORbt SEWF3t i O � NG SWALF mfrt +.�,:. �,,�� ,�,�- AT OAK SDALEANDNACHES. -nµp VV 1T, - l.";`-- ;r `•DISCHARGE TOE70STINGBIOFILTERINGSWALETO THE; •TOTHEOLDBLACKRIVERCHANNEL- -.r, - - �-.•.•._ '.fi,. •TOE)OSTING BIOFlLTERING SWN E AT NORTH � �_s'' �Q _w. � {.�.,,. - NORM _ •BUILDINGS SETFURRHER BACK FROM ROOKERY. 4' ' `�, ��' •ADDMONALHERONFUGHTPATHSESTABLISHEDAN 'II ,� PI`. � PRO TEOTED. • 'r . •PROTE NAL NATURAL ARFJS AND BUFFERiSADDED• r ..o g h�• •BUILDING LOCATED BUFFER ROOKERY FROM 4. •� ET.E. ON •P,,t�,- • PARKING AND PEDESTRIAN AREAS. ADDACRES. • L' • �;Y �t4j?!11�6 !.' Ltii�S�,;17 1 •4.85A BUILDING DESIGN CHANGED TO REDUCE MASS IN 11 -.- __ __� ._-._ - I _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ Obeattle Audubon Preloading the site may press.buried wastes into the water table. )ectetp The installation of auger or driven piles may expand the migration .14 of hazardous materials. No construction activity should occur on 1 the site until investigations by the appropriate agencies are ►tutthtgnn Nonprofit Corporation - complete and all the potential impacts are identified and remedied. The FEIS must fully disclose the results the all investigations May 25, 1990 relating to potential hazardous wastes and provide appropriate mitigation to address all potential impacts. Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner EARTH: FOUNDATION. Section 3.2.2 Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South • The most significant concern relating to foundation construction is Renton, WA 98055 , the driving of piles and the potential impacts of noise to wildlife (see comments under Environmental Health). There appears to be some inconsistency within the DEIS with respect RE: Draft Environmental Impact Statement to the proposed mitigation measures for driving piles. Please refer BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, Tracts A and B Office to the following statements of proposed mitigation: Buildings Table 1-2; (Tract A page 1-8) mitigation measure for noise: "Limit pile driving activity from August 1 through February 15, the least sensitive time period for great blue heron use Dear Ms. Myer, of the site". n_ The Seattle Audubon Society is comprised of over 5000 members and Table 1-3; (Tract 8 page 1-10) mitigation measure for driving .'' is incorporated as a nonprofit organization under the laws of the piles: "None necessary." State of Washington. The Society is dedicated to the protection, preservation, and enjoyment of wildlife, plants and their Page 3-4; Mitigation Measures for driving piles: "Not supporting habitats, and to the wise use of natural resources. We mitigation would be required." are concerned about environmental issues throughout King County including the City of Renton. Page 3-47; Mitigation Measures: "Pile driving should be limited to the period from August 1 through February 15, the Our conservation committee has reviewed the Draft Environmental least sensitive time period for great blue heron use on the Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed development of Tracts A site." and B of the Black River Corporate Park. This letter summarizes our review and lists the concerns which must be addressed in the The FEIS should clarify if the proposal includes a mitigating final EIS (FEIS). measure to exclude the use of driven piles for a portion of the year. EARTH: TOPOGRAPHY/SOILS. Section 3.2.1 • The DEIS (page 3-3) indicates that pile supports are only needed As indicated in the DEIS (page 3-1), both Tracts A and B were for structures greater than two stories in height. Due to the subject to prior filling in 1984 during the excavation of the P-1 significant impacts proposed by the use of driven piles, the FEIS Pond. A former Soil Conservation Service (SCS) inspector present should consider a project alternative where the structures are during the filling activity in 1984, recently submitted a letter to A, limited to 2 stories in height. the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). The letter J (dated April 26, 1990) indicates the possible presence of hazardous wastes on the site, and requests an investigation by the Hazardous Waste Section of the DOE. It is important to note that the P-1 Pond is located downstream of the EPA "Western. Processing" • superfund cleanup site. • page2 81718 25th Avenue N.E.•Seattle.WARMS•206-5234113 Printed on Recycled Slack 4-44 • WATER: SURFACE WATER MOVEMENT/QUANTITY Section 3.4.1 (pages 3-17 through 3-21.) WATER: WATER QUALITY/RUNOFF Section 1.4.2 The following statements are from the DEIS: As indicated in the DEIS (pages 3-21, 3-23) limited information is • available concerning the quality of water surrounding Tracts A and Page 3-19; "No detailed drainage calculations regarding existingflow have been made,..." B. The historic data ranges from nine to' sixteen years old. .••• Although additional water quality sampling occurred in the summer of 1989 (page 3-26), the DEIS (page 3-23) states that the sampling Page 3-20; Table 3-7. "Runoff volumes have not been was limited. Additional Studies must be completed to accurately approximated for Tract B." determine the existing levels of water quality surrounding Tracts Page 3-21; "Tract A. Quantification of runoff impacts have A and B. been approximated due to lack of a detailed drainage plan. The current water quality standards as administered by Washington 8 Page 3-21; "Detailed drainageplans have not been prepared for State Department of Ecology (DOE) must be presented in the FEIS, g 4 P P with a detailed comparison to the existing and future levels of Tract B." water quality surrounding Tracts A i B. In addition, the FEIS must These statements illustrate the lack of detailed drainage plans and demonstratg with a detailed plan and by calculation that the 9 proposed water quality facilities (i.e. biofiltration swales) would calculations needed to truly assess the environmental impacts of be of adequate length and depth to satisfy the DOE standards for a the proposal. The FEIS must include a detailed map showing the point discharge. location of the existing drainage basins and drainage features discussed in the text. The FEIS ,should also include a detailed To simply state that, the proposed swale "... can be expected to drainage plan showing all proposed storm water facilities (ie. remove between 50 and 80 percent of the pollutants associated with inlets, outfalls, oil/water separators, biofiltration systems, and particulates" (DEIS page 3-23) does not guarantee compliance with retention/detention systems). DOE standards. The FEIS must include a design which demonstrates The DEIS fails to provide a detailed analysis of the potential that the storm water discharge from the site will comply with the of accelerated erosion in the stream north of Tract B, DOE standards for pollutant concentrations, not percent pollutant impacts removal. The design calculations which substantiate the estimated resulting from increased runoff by the project. The DEIS (page 3- performance standard should be included within the appendices of q 21) states, "The stream is actively eroding the channel bottom and the FEIS. banks." The DEIS proposes to postpone the detailed analysis of this stream to a later date when more detailed hydrologic calculations have been completed (DEIS page 3-21). The detailed WILDLIFE RESOURCES (3.5.3) evaluation and specific mitigation should not be postponed but • included in the FEIS. Duffer Width: ; The most significant adverse environmental impact proposed by the The DEIS (pages 3-20, 3-21) indicates that the project is subject Black River Corporate Park is to wildlife. The most likely species to the Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance, but of wildlife to be affected is the population of great blue herons apparently the standard requirement for storm water detention is nesting immediately adjacent to the site of• the proposed office not required due to a prior agreement. A copy of the relevant park. Although there are many aspects of the proposal which will portions of the Renton Ordinance and the a copy of the agreement significantly impact the existing heronry, the lack of an adequate 9 should be included in the FEIS. The FEIS must evaluate how the agreement has authority over SEPA (WAC 197-11). buffer is the most obvious. The DEIS (page 3-21) refers to personal communications with Price As discussed in the DEIS (page B-12), the width of a buffer is a and Berg. The FEIS should reference who these individuals are. function the how well the heronry is screened from the surrounding ( disturbance. Due to past clearing and grading activities on Tracts The DEIS (Table 3-7, pages 3-20, 3-21) incorrectly refers to runoff A and B, very little vegetation remains to screen the heronry. Due "rate" (cubic feet per second) as runoff "volume" (cubic feet). 1 to the open view south of tate Department maximum ld ife widths are The FEIS should correct the error. warranted. The Washington State Department of Wildlife (Doer Draft Management Guidelines recommend a 750 foot permanent buffer and.a • page3 page4 4-45 1320 foot buffer during the nesting season. Inconsistent with the including the measurements taken at the Black River and Peasley- DOW recommendations, is the proposed Black River Corporate Park Canyon Rookeries, the noise level data presented for construction which proposes construction within 400 feet of the heronry. The equipment (including pile drivers), and the sound response data DEIS suggests that a landscape planting of trees 20 feet in height from the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality, utilized dB-A will adequately screen buildings two to seven stories in height criteria. The "A" scale approximates the frequency response of the from the heronry. The DEIS ignores the recommendations of the q human ear. The frequency response of an avian ear (ie. a great literature and justifies its own proposal by presenting examples of blue heron) may be very different from the human ear, particularly heronries which exist with reduced buffers. None of the examples for low frequency sound. It appears inappropriate to employ dB-A given in the DEIS represent a disturbance as large and tall as the criteria to evaluate the impacts of noise on birds. The FEIS must proposed Black River Corporate Park. The dense tall trees reevaluate the potential impact of noise by utilizing a scale surrounding the examples presented in the DEIS are dissimilar to which approximates the frequency response of the avian ear. A "C" the open buffer currently existing on Tracts A and B. or "Linear" scale may prove to be more appropriate. The FEIS must include an alternative which complies with the The DEIS (page 3-46) utilizes a noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per Washington State Department of Wildlife draft "Management doubling of distance. It is important to note that open water Guidelines for the Great Blue Heron". exists seasonally between the site of the proposed corporate park and the heronry. Due to the presence of water, the attenuation rate of noise is reduced by refraction, particularly during the cool Breeding season: morning hours. Therefore, a noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per The nesting success of the heronries discussed in the DEIS were not doubling distance may yield inaccurate results. The noise response measured, nor were any studies conducted to measure possible at the heronry may be much louder than the current evaluation recruitment. Therefore no conclusion can be made that the colonies suggests. presented in the DEIS are truly viable. Wildlife, including the great blue heron, may be very sensitive to �/ The mitigation proposed in the DEIS suggests no human access or 10 low frequency sound and vibration. The DEIS fails to adequately exterior construction activities should occur during the period I review the potential impact of low frequency sound and vibration on from February 15 to June 15. Recent research on Pacific Northwest the great blue heron. It is important to notethat the vibration Great Blue Heron colonies by Trowbridge and Bayer (in press. Oregon association with the construction of the METRO pipeline in 1987 at Birds) indicate that breeding activities may be present as early a Pigeon Point in Seattle coincided with the abandonment of the late January. Research by Forbes etal (1985, Canadian Wildlife adjacent great blue heron rookery. The FEIS must thoroughly Service) on great blue herons in British Columbia indicated that evaluate the potential impacts of low frequency sound and vibration the breeding season may extend through mid-July. The FEIS must on wildlife. The evaluation must include the review of auger cast- revise the currently proposed mitigation to include a breeding in-place piles, driven piles, and air-conditioning or other season from January 15 through August 1. equipment placed upon or adjacent to the proposed buildings. Table 3-12 (page 3-44) of the DEIS indicates that the monitoring ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; NOISE: equipment used to measure noise levels at the Black River and Peasley Canyon rookeries was placed upon a "slow response" setting. As mentioned above under "EARTH", one of the most significant A "slow response" setting will tend to miss the peaks of loud concerns is the noise and vibration generated by driving piles and intermittent noise or "impact noise" and result in a lower dB the potential impact to wildlife. Page 3-46 of the DEIS states, measurement. As indicated above loud intermittent or "impact "Studies have indicated the great blue herons will oftentimes noise" may significantly impact the great blue heron. Sound level become acclimated to an established level of noise intrusion, but meters placed upon a "fast response" setting should be utilized in will be more bothered by loud intermittent noises." The DEIS (page 11 the FEIS. 3-46) also states, "Given the relatively short distance from Tracts A and B to the heron rookery, there is a clear potential for Under "Mitigating Measures" for noise (page 3-47), the DEIS disturbance to herons from pile driving operations during sensitive states "If pile drivers are to be used, they should be modified or time periods." designed to generate peak noise levels of less than 95 dBA at 50 j feet (see Appendix C for information on pile driving techniques Throughout Section 3.6.1 and Appendix C of the DEIS the noise data designed to reduce noise levels)." Our review of Appendix C finds and response criteria are presented as decibels on the "A" scale that the techniques recommended to reduce peak noise levels are (dB-A). All of the data presented in the DEIS regarding noise, based upon an article.by Harjodh S. Gill published in 1983. It is page5 page6 • 4-46 important to note that the Gill (1983) article was based upon o Landscaping that will improve wildlife habitats should be research conducted at the University of Southhampton in England. encouraged. . (GOAL III., OBJECTIVE D., POLICY 9.) ' 7- The DEIS fails to provide assurance that the english pile drivers recommended in the Gill (1983) study will be available for use in The current proposal does not appear to be consistent with these Renton. Our review of the latest revision (1989) of the "Rental policies and must be addressed further in the EIS. Rate Blue Book for Construction Equipment" (Dataquest Inc.) found no listing of any of the pile drivers recommended in the Gill I The following is a list of Comprehensive Plan policies presented in (1983) study. It is also important to note that the sound levels the DEIS (Table 3-14), in which the proposal is inconsistent and measured in the Gill (1983) study where taken from pile drivers will result in a significant adverse impact to the environment in driving "Sheet" piles not "H" or "Can" piles typically used to general and specifically to the great blue heron. support buildings. The information presented in DEIS provides little assurance that the pile drivers actually used during o "Areas or strips of open space should be retained and construction would be quieter. enhanced to serve as buffers." Note: The natural buffers ,. - surrounding the heronry were severely altered by past ' activities on the site. The current proposal to enhance • the existing buffers is inadequate. LAND & SHORELINE USE o "Wildlife habitat should be designated preserved , and Title IV of the Municipal Code of the City Renton, under Chapter 6 enhanced." Note: Much of the designated upland habitat 6 "Environmental Ordinance", the City has substantive authority to will be lost with out an equivalent 1:1 replacement. The condition or deny approval of a �roposal to assure a significant wildlife habitat retained to the north of the proposal is 13 impact to the environment is avoided (4-6-22 B.,C.). A decision to inadequately enhanced with an appropriate buffer. condition or deny approval of a proposal must be based upon specific policy. The City Code (4-6-22 E.) lists the specific o "In unique and/or fragile area, desirable natural policies or refers to the codes, ordinances, resolutions, and plans vegetation should be retained or enhanced." which contain additional polices under which approval of a proposal i may be conditioned or denied. o "Natural resources and areas having scientific or educational value should be identified and preserved." Comprehensive Plan: one of the plans listed in Code 4-6-22 E is the Comprehensive Plan, o "Storm waters should be retained on site and then , which contains policy specifically relevant to this proposal. released at a natural rate and quality." Section 3.72 and Appendix A of the DEIS attempts to provide an overview of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to the Black River o "Precipitation should be returned to the soil at natural C Corporate. Park proposal. The DEIS appears to have omitted portions rates near where it falls." of the Comprehensive Plan. The following two (2) relevant objectives contained in the Comprehensive plan appear to be missing o Landscaping which is suitable for screening and buffering c: from the DEIS: should be provided between use area. J. MARSHES, BOGS, AND SWAMPS OBJECTIVE: Selected marshes, 12 o Structures should be adequately set back and buffered k bogs,and swamps should be preserved and enhanced for from other uses. water retention, wildlife habitat, and open space. • o Site plan design should provide for efficient and 1 K. WATERSHED OBJECTIVE: To preserve and enhance water functional use of land. quality and quantity, water sheds should be protected. • The current proposal does not appear to be consistent with these In addition, the following policies of the Comprehensive Plan policies and must be addressed further in the EIS. appear to be relevant to the proposal but missing from the DEIS: o Activities must minimize pollution, there by protecting the public interest, welfare, health and safety, and the • City's image. (GOAL II., OBJECTIVE A. POLICY 1.) (emphasis added). page7 page8 4-47 - - -- -- - - -- Green River Valley Plan: 1981 Wetland Study: Another plan listed in Code 4-6-22 E. is the Green River Valley As noted above, one of the policies of the Valley Plan is to Plan, which contains policy specifically relevant to this proposal. utilize the 1981 Wetland Study to prioritize the protection of wetlands. However, Table 3-14 of the DEIS indicates that the 1981 Section 3.72 and Appendix A of the DEIS attempts to provide an Wetland Plan is "N/A" (Not Applicable), which clearly contradicts overview of the Green River Valley Plan as it relates to the Black the policy statement of the Valley Plan. Appendix A of the DEIS River Corporate Park proposal. The DEIS appears to have omitted ' fails to mention the 1981 Wetland Study. I. the following policy form the Valley Plan.: On page 11 of the 1981 Wetland Study, the,Black River Riparian o "Development standards that ensure high qualityForest is assigned the highest value rating and is described as development and encourage compatibility of adjacent uses being considered the most valuable wetland in the City. In should be established for industrial, commercial and describing the site the study states, !6 office uses." (emphasis added) (Section C.3.) ". ..It is large, fairly isolated, has high overall wildlife The current proposal does not appear to be consistent with this diversity, high wildlife potential, and has extremely unique policy and must be addressed further in the FEIS. vegetational character composed of a complex of old riparian species. The interaction with Springbrook Creek and the P-1 The following is a list of Valley Plan policies presented in the channel detention basin increases its wildlife habitat value." DEIS (Table 3-14), in which the proposal is inconsistent and will result in a significant adverse impact to the environment in • general and specifically to the great blue heron. It is important to consider that the evaluation made in the 1981 wetland Study and resultant high ranking of the Black River o "... landscaped buffers should be established adjacent to Riparian Forest was prior to the utilization of the site by nesting public rights-of-way, between areas of incompatible land great blue herons. use, and along water channels and wildlife habitats." The FEIS must include and address the relevant portions of the 1981 o Parking and loading areas should be adequately screened Wetland Study. and landscaped." • • o "Wherever feasible, unique natural features should be CONCLUSION: incorporated into development plans to preserve the e, . character of the Valley." I The Seattle Audubon Society continues to be sincerely concerned about the significant adverse impact the proposed Black River o Remaining wildlife habitat in the Valley should be Corporate Park may have on the environment. The DEIS currently preserved or its loss should be mitigated. fails to provide reliable information upon which the City can base o Areas that provide wildlife habitat, such as designated a decision. There is no assurance that the proposal is consistent with the policies of the City. The FEIS must address the concerns wetland greenbelts and stream corridors, Should be hraeand raised in this letter with further study, additional alternatives, enough to provide suitable cover for wildlife and and revised mitigation. buffering from adiacent uses. (emphasis added). o The City's 1981 Wetlands Study should be used as a basis for establishing the priority of wetlands for acquisition Sincerely, and/or protection. (emphasis added). (� o A substantial portion of the Black River Riparian Forest GIA3v`40-eAv Jt should be preserved in its natural state as a unique remnant of the Va]lley flora Gerry Adams The current proposal does not appear to be consistent with these Vice-president. policies and must be addressed further in the EIS. GA.JH page9 pagelO 4-48 Response to Comments from the Seattle Audubon Society: - mammalian cochlea, it has about ten times as many hair cells per unit of length. This shorter, broader 1. A hazardous waste study of Tract A has been undertaken by FCDC. The, construction of the hearing mechanism of the avian ear results of that study are presented in Section 3.6 and Appendix F of this Final suggests to Pumphrey (1961) that birds are less EIS. sensitive to a wide range of frequencies than mammals, but more sensitive to differences in intensities'. . 2. Wording in the Final EIS has been clarified regarding mitigation requirements for the noise associated with pile driving. The mitigating measures as The shorter length of the avian cochlea suggests that birds in general may be proposed in the Draft EIS were for the noise generated by pile driving(Table less sensitive to low-frequency acoustic vibratory energy than humans. A 1-2, and page 3-47). The mitigating measure limiting pile driving for a summary table on the hearing abilities of various animals compiled by Lee portion of the year still stands. The reference in Table 1-3 and in Section 3-4 and Griffith(1978)tends to support this conclusion. The frequency range of relates to the issue of engineering aspects of the foundation(i.e.,what type maximum sensitivity for the birds listed(i.e.,starling,house sparrow,crow, of foundation would be suitable given the site conditions). Since from an sparrow hawk,long-eared owl,and mallard duck)is 1,000 to 6,000 Hertz(Hz). engineering standpoint either driven piles or auger cast-in-place piles were acceptable, no mitigating measures were necessary for soils. The impacts As one would expect,the frequency range of maximum sensitivity corresponds associated with noise of pile griving were not significant enough to warrant well with the frequency range of bird vocalizations. Data compiled by Dorst reducing building height to two stories. The impacts could be mitigated by (1974) and Nottebohm(1975) indicate that the typical frequency range of limiting the activity to the ileast,senaitive time period for heron use on the site. avian vocal signals is 500 to 10,000 Hz,with the frequency range of maximum acoustic energy being 500 to 8,000 Hz. Sonograms prepared by Robbins et 3. See response to comment 6 from Walter Trial on stormwater runoff. All of al.(1983)indicate that the frequency range of great blue heron vocalizations this is to be done during site plan approval. is 500 to 2,200 Hz. 4. According to the project engineer, hydraulic calculations regarding the The frequency range of avian vocalization and auditory sensitivity apparently capacity of the ditch will be made as part of the drainage plan during site plan falls in the mid-frequency to high-frequency range (above 500 Hz). The approval(Bell pers.comm.) physical size of the avian ear and the ranges of sensitivity indicate that the birds are probably less sensitive to low-frequency sound(less than 500 Hz) 5. See response to comments from Walter Trial. than humans are. The A-weighted filter response strongly de-emphasizes acoustic energy below 500 Hz and slightly emphasizes energy at 2,000 and 6. Comment noted,refer to the reference section of the Draft EIS. 4,000 Hz to correspond to the response of the human ear. While still de- emphasizing low-frequency energy,the C-weighted filter response places more 7. Comment noted and correction made. emphasis on low-frequency energy than the A-weighted response. The linear scale does not weight any frequencies. Thus,using a weighting network that 8. See response to comments 6 and 14 from Walter Trial. emphasizes low-frequency energy relative to the response of the human ear, such as the C-weighted scale,would be inappropriate. Considering these 9. Additional mitigation measures have been presented in Chapter 3 of this factors and the absence of strong data indicating otherwise,the A-weighted Final EIS associated with setback of development from the heronry. See sound level appears to be the best available single-number measure by which response to comments from the USFWS and the WDW. to evaluate noise impact on the great blue heron. 10. Comment noted. The word'viable"has been changed to"active'in Appendix The attenuation rate of 6 decibels(dBA)per doubling of distance is based on B. The closure period for outside construction has been revised. Please refer hemispherical radiation from a point source. This attenuation rate assumes to Sections 3.2 and 3.5 of this document. total reflection of acoustic waves from the lower hemisphere(the earth)to the upper hemisphere (the air). Thus, the presence of open water will not 11. The frequency response of the avian ear is different from that of the human decrease this attenuation. Atmospheric,terrain,and vegetation effects have ear. Welty(1962),in describing the hearing ability of all birds,stated: not been included in the sound attenuation. This, in general, results in a conservative estimation of propagated sound. In theory,the thermal gradient "Although the cochlea of the average bird is (cool to warm)caused by the cool temperature at the surface of the water in approximately only one-tenth the length of the the morning will bend sound waves down to the earth. This would result in 4-49 i less attenuation over distance. In reality,however.increases in sound level there were no short,intermittent noises,the use of the slow detector response (i.e.,less attenuation)caused by thermal gradients are insignificant over the was appropriate. Any measurements used to quantify noise from pile driving distances under consideration here. or other short,impact-type noise sources should be done with meters set to fast or impulse response. The magnitude and extent of the potential disturbance to the great blue herons is difficult to predict. Specific noise and vibration criteria relating to Although many of the pile drivers listed in the Gill (1983) study may be the thresholds of perception and/or disturbance of the great blue heron would available only in Europe,Delmag pile drivers have been used in the United be needed to make a detailed evaluation of the potential noise and vibration States and should be available. The Hawker Siddeley Resonant Driver Unit impact.Then,using analytical methods,an estimation would have to be made 400 has a listed L,noise level of 76 to 82 dBA. Hawker Siddeley Canada of the noise and vibration that will propagate to the rookery. Because specific Ltd operates this unit out of Vancouver, British Columbia. It would be noise and vibration criteria relating to the thresholds of perception and/or reasonable to expect that this unit would be available in Renton. In addition disturbance of the great blue heron do not exist,this type of detailed analysis to noise-limited equipment that may already be available,the Gill document is impossible. describes noise-reduction techniques that appear reasonable to apply to conventional,untreated rigs. One measure is to look at the increase in noise caused by an event or events relative to the existing background ambient noise levels. In the analysis The Draft EIS or the Final EIS cannot provide assurance that a given piece presented in the Draft EIS,a peak noise level of 106 dBA,with an equivalent of equipment will be available for use in Renton. The way to provide sound level( )(i.e.,energy average)of 97 dBA,is used for a pile driver at assurance that the 95 dBA limit will not be exceeded is to specify noise limits 50 feet. Over distances of 400 to 600 feet,the peak level is reduced to 84 to in the construction contract documents. The contractor then.becomes 88 dBA,while the Lky is reduced to 75 to 79 dBA The average background responsible for finding equipment that will operate within the specified limits. These documents should alsohow noise is to be measured. In this L�measured on the site was 56 dBA. The peak propagated pile-driving specify levels are 27 to 31 dBA over the background level,and the Lty pile-driving case, the specification should state that A-weighted peak noise levels levels are 18 to 22 dBA over the background level measured with a fast detector response(less than 125 milliseconds)should not exceed 95 DBA as measured 50 feet from the pile driver. Grubb (1978) flew a small plane low over a great blue heron colony and found that a noise increase of 20 dBA above the background noise level had The noise levels listed in the Gill document are from drivers driving sheet no disturbing effect on the colony. This indicates that a 20 dBA increase piles. The document states that'noise produced by the hamster impact and above the background ambient noise level may serve as a nominal disturbance the exhaust of working fluid was dominant over noise from other Boraces.such point. Although the noise increase relative to the 1..,of the pile driving is as ancillary equipment'. In general.one would expect noise associated with about 20 dBA,the increase relative to the peak level is greater than 20 dBA, sheet pile driving to be greater than noise associated with'H'or similar piles suggesting that there might be an adverse impact on the rookery. because sheet piles have a larger noise-radiating surface. Another more general approach is to examine the impact that construction or 12. A majority of the policies that were omitted are ones that are directed to the other human activities have had on other rookeries. This approach was used city rather than to the developer. These policies do, however, give the in the Draft EIS(see Appendix B). The Draft EIS provides several examples developer an idea of what is important to the city. of human activity near heron rookeries that did not result in observed adverse The planted berm buffer proposed as mitigation,as well as the preservation impact. and enhancement of the old Black River channel,would improve the wildlife From this review, guidelines were developed for building setbacks and habitat on the site. acceptable construction activities for the site. These guidelines are intended - Chapter3 provides a revised list of mitigation measures that are now to be to mitigate adverse noise and vibration impacts on the rookery. In particular. part of the proposed project. With regard to buffer the proposed 600 feet the measure of limiting pile-driving activity to the period from August 1 setback from the rookery. the 10-foot high berm, and the 20-foot high the through February 1 may be the most beneGdaL evergreen trees would provide a much better buffer than the setback was The purpose of the study summarized in Table 3-12 was to compare the proposed in the Draft FJ& existing ambient noise conditions at the Black River and Peasley Canyon sites. Because the background noise level at each site was steady state and because 4-50 b. Wildlife habitat would be preserved to a greater extent with the proposed are also planned between the proposed development and the adjacent right- buffer. of-ways. c. The proposed project is designed to preserve wetlands vegetation and the b. See Response to comment 15a. Planting strips are proposed throughout the significant cottonwood trees on site. The site vegetation is being enhanced parking area. with the buffer,described above,and other landscaping. c. The significant natural features of the proposed site would be the old Black d. The heron colony and the history of the Black River would be of scientific or River channel and a portion of the cottonwood trees. The old Black River educational value and should therefore,according to the plan,be preserved. channel is to be preserved with the proposed site plan. In addition,parking The buffer proposed as part of the mitigation measures has been determined has been designed around the large cottonwood trees where feasible. to be adequate for the preservation of the colony. The portion of the old Black River channel on the site is being preserved with the proposed site d. The significant wildlife habitat on the site, which is the old Black River Plan. channel,is proposed to be preserved. The buffer,described in response to comment 13a,would provide additional wildlife habitat and a screen between e. Although retention of stormwater is not currently part of the proposed plan, the proposed development and the heron rookery. during site plan review, the city will determine the need for additional retention. e. The buffer proposed as part of the mitigation measures has been determined to be adequate for the preservation of the rookery. The portion of the old f. The EIS acknowledges that the proposed project is only partially consistent Black River channel on the site is being preserved with the proposed site with this policy. Not all precipitation would be returned directly to the soil plan. A large percentage of it would be directed to the P-1 Pond. E The city's 1981 wetlands study identified the wetlands in the area of the g. The buffer mentioned in response 13a would be provided between the proposed site as significant. See Section 3.52 of this Final EIS for a proposed project and the P-1 Pond. Other edges of the site are adjacent to discussion of the project site and wetland location. None of the wetlands in uses similar to the proposed project, therefore, other than the required the 1981 study would be adversely impacted by the project. setbacks,no buffering would be required. Even so,proposed landscaping and retention of existing vegetation will serve as partial buffer. g. The portion of the Black River riparian forest on the site is proposed to be preserved to the maximum extent possible,with the preservation of the old h. See response to comment 13g. Black River channel. The majority of the Forest is located to the north of the site. i. The proposed site is zoned for office park development. The propnsrd office building concentrates a large amount of office space in a much smaller area 16. See Section 3.52 of this Final EIS. than with low-rise buildings,and is in this respect,a more efficient use of the ' site. It was acknowledged in the Draft EIS, that the seven-story office building is not consistent with the low-rise development of the surrounding area. As a result,the height has been reduced to five-stories. 14. This is a plan policy that is directed toward the city and city's need for more stringent development standards.This policy would not be directly applicable to the proposed project although it does illustrate the City's desire for high quality development. 15a. The proposed berm and setback described in Response to comment 13a and further described in Chapters 2 and 3 would serve as a buffer between the proposed development and P-1 Pond and the heron colony. Planted buffers are also planned between the proposed development and the adjacent right- of-ways. • 4-51 ' pL'NrnNG DIVISi0h , •,s gchlOt; REQUEST TO WITHDRAW OR SUPPLEMENT '':'' i n '/:1' Burden on the public BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK DEIS r^ ' The public is recognized as having generally more limited ATTENTION: City of Renton and members of the Environmental resources. But the environmental review of this document is Review Committee dependent on public participation, as is all review under SEPA. 15 It is clear from the effort the public has undertaken so far and We, the undersigned, respectfully request that the City of the testimony heard at the public hearing on'May 1, 1990 that Renton immediately withdraw the draft environmental impact the inadequacy of this document is to the extent that an statement, issued April 11, 1990, and reissue the document at unacceptable and unrealistic amount of effort and cost must be such time that the document is completed in draft form. borne by the public to correct the document. Alternatively, the City of Renton may prepare a supplemental draft environmental impact statement. The City of Renton is responsible for preparing the DEIS. When the document is as incomplete as this one, the City will rely on Document was released prematurely the public to complete it for them. This is an unacceptable burden on the public and shifting of responsibility by the City. The document in question, the Blackriver Corporate Park DEIS, contains numerous errors in fact and omission. While the Effect of incomplete document at this stage purpose of the DEIS comment period is to identify these errors of fact and omission, it is reasonably expected that the The inclusion of omitted information would allow an document would contain sufficient information that would allow understanding of the proposal, alternatives, and impacts. An the public to review the proposal and understand the most overwhelming number of corrections and additions to the document significant and vital information concerning the proposed will next be published in a final environmental impact action, alternatives, and impacts. The document in its current statement. The review and comment period for the public at the form is incomplete and does not allow this. final EIS stage will be seven (7) days. In seven days the public will need to review and comment on an insurmountable The errors in fact regarding this matter appear to be assemblage of information that we should have been reviewing at straightforward. However, when faced with the insurmountable the draft EIS stage. burden placed on the public because of the preponderance of errors of omissions it becomes impossible by reading the DEIS to The existing document effectively removes the public from the fully understand the facts relating to this proposal. review process at that stage. At the public hearing on May 1, 1990, preliminary comments were Comments Submitted Separately provided to the Environmental Review Committee. These preliminary comments clearly outlined omissions in the City's Although we strongly believe the DEIS should be withdrawn, as environmental review. Those omissions include, but are not set forth above, we are submitting separate comments so that our limited to the following: comments will be part of the formal record. Those comments • detail the inadequacies of the DEIS. For that reason, the o Failure to include citations of references mentioned errors and omissions referred to above are not repeated again in in the text; this letter. o Inclusion of references that were erroneously stated • as references on particular subject matter that were Conclusion in fact not related; o An incomplete overview of the City of Renton The Blackriver Corporate Park DEIS is incomplete, inadequate, Comprehensive.Plan and Green River policy plan. and has been released prematurely. Under these circumstances There are extensive typographical the burden on the public is beyond reasonableness. Elimination errors. of the public from any portion of the environmental review A more accurate description of the document is "preliminary process must be avoided so that we are all assured that our draft" or "rough draft" EIS. The release of this document was premature. 1 2 4-52 • Susan Krom Black River Bird and Mammal Count protection provided under SEPA and the City of Renton environmental ordinance is available and realized. Sightings of 2/14/90: Submitted this ,)'f day of May, 1990. �' _ ��_ Cormorant 4 Seattle Audu on Society Citizens for Renton GB heron 30. Number of resident GB heron wintering at the Robert G. Sieh Wildlands Preservation First Vice President Susan Krom, Director heronry range from 7 to 15, until breeding season begins in mid-January, when the numbers start increasing rapidly and the heron gravitate toward the cottonwoods where their nests are located ACMIS\M000•2.t o (during the nonbreeding season, the heron loaf in the shallow parts of the PI Pond. along Springbrook Creek, and in alder on the north shore of the P1 Pond). Starting in mid-January, the heron move to_ the cottonwoods and many will perch on top of nests (these may be the dominant birds laying claim to those nests). On this date, three nests of the total 23 nests were not claimed. Hooded I pair, in courtship display. merganser Goldeneye (sp) 8 pair Scaup (sp) 10 pr Canada geese 12 flying overhead from Springbrook Creek Small nest 1 (may be bushtit) Mammals: Beaver number unknown, but many sapplings have been taken down by the beaver. Teeth marks are evident. (south side of P1 Pond) Rabbit 1 Opposum 1 roadkill 3 —l- 4-53 Moles number unknown, numerous mole burrows observed Response to Comments ftram Robed Sleh and Susan Kromt Other dates: 1. Comments noted. Bald eagle: 3/11/89, 10/26/89, 11/12/89, • 1/6/90, 3/25/90 observed onsitc, feeding, foraging for food. Kestral 3/28/90 flying by and over heronry while herons sit and stand on nests. Note: cottonwoods have not fully leafed out yet. Kingfisher 1/10/90 (day after flood) Have observed kingfisher twice before, but did not note dates. Pheasant, I pair 10/20/89 Have observed pheasant three times before, but did not note dates. Hawk (sp) Observe daily during winter months. Numbers range from 1 to 8. Most are red-tailed, but Coopers, Sharp-shinned have also been sighted. California quail heard. number unknown. year around Goldfinch 100+ (7/89) Nesting takes place during August on the south field (Tracts A and B). The goldfinch are drawn to the site because of the concentration of thistles, a primary foodsource and source of silk for constuction of their nests. Great horned owl 11/1/89, 1/90 2 possible nests on hillside overlooking site. Fish reported: Coho salmon Cutthroat trout —2' 4-54 - —� Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation Mayor Earl Clymer Issue 1: Ineffectiv rrent procedures for public comment 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 90055 • reduce substantive citizen impact on the final project. May 9, 1990 16 The evening of May 1, the City of Renton held what many citizens viewed as an unfortunate sham of a public hearing in the Council Dear Mayor Clymer, Chambers. The presumed objective of the hearing was to provide a forum for discussion of the proposed development at Renton's This letter outlines the concerns of citizens for Renton Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heronry, as spelled out in a draft wildlands Preservation and concerned Renton and other Ring county environmental impact statement. residents. Nearly 50 concerned citizens filled the Council Chambers and Our concerns are as follows: i witnessed a demonstration of apathy on the part of the City. • Although Mr. Erickson and Ms. Myer were present, none of the o Ineffective current procedures for public comment, actual decision-makers attended. If this issue is a priority in which reduces the potential for real citizen impact on the eyes of the City of Renton, the decision-makers should have the final been there. project/ o The City of Rentonpi willingness to accept a proposal Had they,besn, this would have provided them an ideal as incomplete and inaccurate as the Blackriver opportunity, in the context of a public proceeding, to ask us corporate Park DEIS/ questions about issues brought out during or after the-testimony that needed clarification or elaboration. Additionally, it would o The City of Renton's lack of commitment to its own have provided us en opportunity to ask questions of them. we Environmental Ordinance (SEPA) and Comprehensive Plan. should have had that opportunity. Representatives of the developer, First City Developments, attended and were available On a positive note, i would like express my appreciation for the to answer questions. efforts of Don Erickson and Mary Lynne Myer (who very recently Duringthe hearing, each joined your staff). They have consistently made themselves person was limited to five minutes of available and, during the rare times we needed them to, have gone testimony. Lets be fair to both sides here. The DEIS took over the extra mile to research a question or locate a record that was a year to develop, write, and finalize for release. The 1" thick document is highly technical. To be allotted only five minutes hard to find. If not for their assistance and willingness to be to testify does not allow citizens, especially those of us with available, public participation would be considerably more difficult. In addition, we would like to express our expertise, to even begin to adequately describe our concerns. appreciation for the extension of the comment period. The five minute rule should be increased to a minimum of 15 minutes (or more, as appropriate) to allow for situations such as Unfortunately, the way this process is currently structured, the these. City of Renton staff must rely primarily on information furnished • We realize that additionalopportunityis available to comment. by the providers of information, who are paid by the developer, We will be submitting detaied ritt comments to the City. But for a DEIS and final EIS. one of the purposes of the hearing, as stated by Mary Lynne-Myer, The City of Renton Environmental Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan • was to provide people in the audience with an opportunity to clearly spell out established policies and goals, which require learn from the testimony of other citizens present more about the Renton to impose mitigating conditions or deny projects that are proposed development, and use that testimony in their written not in keeping with established policy. comments. Our greatest concern is that the decision to develop the site may We also realise that the hearing was taped and that the testimony have already been made by the City'of Renton. will be transcribed for the record. But personal contact is essential. Reducing our oral testimony to yet more text on paper Please note that we are sending a copy of this letter to the ultimately degrades its value to the realm of just more developer. We believe that they recognize it is in their best paperwork. interest that a full citizen review of this proposal take place. The five minute limit and apparent lack of interest on the part of the decision makers was inexcusable. lie were left with the • distinct, and hopefully erroneous, feeling that the'City was 5040Aahwocth AvenueNodh • simply providing lip service to enforcement of environmental Seattle lveslenyton 88103 (206)tt34-0222 4-55 • policy. Public comment seems to be sought only to satisfy We will be submitting separate written comments to the city, as technical procedural requirements of local and state part of the DEIS review process, confirming those deficiencies environmental regulations. touched upon during our brief testimony and addressing other Issue 2: The City_of Renton's villinaneSn to accept a proposal deficiencies as well. AA incomplete and inaccurate as this DEIS. Because the proposed mitigation measures are based on erroneous One of our central concerns with the DEIS is that the document information, glossed over, or completely omitted from the DEIS, contains not only errors in fact, but also errors of omission we respectfully request that the DSIB be withdrawn and revised. (see Attachment B, the comments of Range Bayer, and Attachment C, Alternatively, the City should develop a supplemental DEIS, which thoroughly addresses omissions in this DEIS: the comments of John Kelsall). By accepting an inaccurate and, especially, incomplete DEIS, the City imposes a great and conclusion: unacceptable burden of effort on those who are least able to identify the omissions. The 70-45-day comment period and our This issue merits your attention and notion. our efforts stem limited resources do not allow us to adequately address the from a genuine desire to preserve a special and extremely fragile omissions, quality of life that still exists here in Renton. Qualities ouch This is, after all, what the City, the developer, and the as these have been lost in other areas in Puget Sound. prepares of the DEIS are paid and equipped to•do. Responsigle resolution of this issue, in compliance with local and state policies, will preserve this unique community resource The way this process is currently administered suggests that it that all too easily can be destroyed. is effectively controlled by developers. The City should act as We respectfully request your response and solution to this urgent a greater authority whose responsibility It is to ensure that matter. development occurs only if it is consistent with established policies. The decision to develop could easily be railroaded Thank you. through with little regard for the inadequacies in the DEIS and public concern. Sincerely, Even if by some miracle we discovered all of the omissions, they would not be addressed until the final EIS. That provides us even less opportunity to comment and impact the final decision. • - In addition, the limited mitigation measures that are offered are Susan Krom often couched in "shoulds" and "mays," rendering the document Director toothless in terms of what it actually promises to deliver. cc: Nancy Matthews, Council president, Renton City Council Issue 3: The City of Renton's lack of commitment te. its owl City of Renton Planning Division Environmental Ordinance (SEPAL and Comprehensive Plan. Don Erickson/Mary Lynne Myer, City of Renton Current • Planning Division We, the citizens of Renton at1d employees working in Renton, Hark Miller, First City Developments Corporation sincerely care about the quality of our environment and the long- term interests of the community, and the City's concern and caring is explicitly spelled out in Renton's policies (see Attachment A) to protect Renton's quality of life. - • According to the DEIS, the proposed Blaokriver Corporate Park development will have a significant adverse impact on the environment that cannot be mitigated. Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the policies it incorporates authorizes and requires the City to impose conditions to mitigate adverse impacts, and where those adverse impacts cannot be mitigated, to deny the project. Gerry Adams, in his testimony at the hearing, specifically references some of those policies. • 4-56 Attachment`A Policies: The following citations include pertinent Renton and Washington 1. Existing open space that serves a public purpose state environmental policies. This is not intended to be a should be retained and made available for a complete listing. variety of open space uses. CITY Or RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2. Natural vegetation, ... and waterbodies should be preserved to retain open space. Purpose: The primary purpose of this Comprehensive Plan is to define and establish the poliqy relating to the development of 3. Open space should be located throughout the City the community as a whole... (pg. 3) and incorporated as an integral part of all development. Factors to be considered (not in order of priority) are ... public interests prevailing over private interests. (pg. 3) 5. Areas or strips of open space should be retained and enhanced to serve as buffers. The purposes of the Comprehensive Plan are: • D. Wildlife Habitat Objective: Wildlife habitats should To inject long-range considerations into the determination of be designated, preserved, and enhanced. (pg. 9) short-ra:5ge actions. (pg. 3) ' E. Vegetation Objective: To preserve scenic beauty, Plan Elements. The Comprehensive Plan may include any or all of prevent erosion, protect against floods and landslides, the following optional elements: (pg. 4) minimize air pollution, and reduce storm drainage system costs. (pg. 9) 8. A recreation and open space element, indicating a comprehensive system of areas and public sites for ... open Policies: space areas; 2. In unique and/or fragile areas, desirable natural C. A shoreline element setting forth policies concerning vegetation should be retained or enhanced. restoration, and natural environment; and historical, cultural, and educational values; • F. Resources Objective: Natural resources and areas having scientific or educational value should be E. An environmental element indicating environmental conditions identified and preserved. (pg. 9) and natural processes including air quality and wildlife; e J. Marshes, Bogs, and Swamps Objective: Selected marshes, F. A land capacity element_ indicating suitability and bogs, and swamps should be preserved and enhanced for capability of lands for uses such as preservation; water retention, wildlife habitat, and open space. (pg. 10) J. A unique site element identifying sites of historical, archaeological, ecological, or scenic significance. M. Soils objective: Development should be harmonious with the soils. (pg. 11) General Goals, Objectives and Policies (pg. 8) IX. Community Facilities Goal: I. Environmental Goal: To establish and maintain a harmonious relationship between the developed community and its natural E. Heritage Objectives The City's cultural and historical environment. (pg. 8) heritage should be preserved. (pg. 25) A. Balanced Development objective: In order to maintain Green River Valley Policy Plan (pg. 31) en acceptable quality of life, land use decisions should be based upon a balance of public service, 7. Open Space/Greenbelt (pg. 41) economic feasibility, and environmental considerations. (pg. B) Policies: e o Springbrook Creek, where it maintains an alignment C. Open Space objective: Open apace should be obtained separate from the P1 Channel, should.be designated and retained in selected areas. (pg. 8) • greenbelt. A-1 A-2. 4-57 Summary of Recommended Community Park Acquisition Priorities: 1. Such conditions are necessary to mitigate specific (pg. 76) probable adverse environmental impacts identified in environmental documents prepared pursuant to 2. Acquire city-wide wetlands this Ordinance; and 4. Acquire land for trail links, greenbelts, urban connectors/dividers city-wide. 4. The City has considered whether other local, State, or Federal mitigation measures applied to Note: See the Renton Environmental Ordinance, which follows. the proposal are sufficient to mitigate the The Ordinance, in conjunction with Comprehensive Plan, describes identified impacts. conditions used to impose mitigating conditions. The Valley Plan • is included in the Comprehensive Plan. C. The City may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as: RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE (SEPA), TITLE IV (BUILDING 1. A finding is made that approving the proposal REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260, i.e., Code of General would result in probable significant adverse Ordinance of the City of Renton environmental impacts that are identified in a FEIS or final SEIS prepared pursuant to this Section 4-6-3: Authority: Ordinance; and The Cites of Renton Deseesses the authority to deny or Condition 2. A finding is made that there are no reasonable actions in order to mitigate nr prevent probable significant mitigation measures capable of being accomplished adverse environmental impacts." that are sufficient to mitigate the identified impact; and Section 4.6.2, Intents • A. The City of Renton, recognizing the critical importance 3. The denial is based on one or more policies of restoring and maintaining environmental quality identified in subsection E of this Section and declares that it is the continuing policy of the city, identified in writing in the decision document. in cooperation with Federal, State, and other local • governments and in cooperation with other concerned E. 1. The City designates and adopts by reference the public and private organizations, to maintain following policies as the basis for the City conditions under which man and nature can exist in exercise of authority pursuant to this Section: productive harmony. a. Fulfill the responsibilities of each D. To the fullest extent possible, the policies, generation as trustees of the environment for regulations, and laws of the State of Washington and succeeding generations; ordinances of the City shall be interpreted and administered in accordance with the policies set forth b. Assure for all people of Washington in this Ordinance. productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings. • F. This Ordinance sets forth methods and procedures which will insure that presently unquantified environmental c. Attain the widest range of beneficial uses of amenities and values will be given appropriate the environment without degradation, risk to consideration in decision making along with economic health or safety, or other undesirable and and technical considerations. unintended consequences; Section 4-6-22: Substantive Authority: d. Preserve important historic, cultural, and A. The policies and goals set forth in the this Ordinance natural aspects of our national heritage: are supplementary to those in the existing authorization of the City of Renton, King County. s. Maintain, wherever possible, an environment which supports diversity and variety of* B. The City nay attach conditions to a permit or approval individual choice: for a proposal so long ass f. Achieve a balance between population and resource use which will permit high standards A-4 A.S- 4-58 Response to Comments from Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation Letter to Mayor of living and a wide sharing of life's Clymer. amenities. 2. The legislature/City recognizes that each person 1. Official letter of response from city is following. has a fundamental and unalienable right to a healthful environment and that each person has a responsibility to contribute to the preservation and enhancement of the environment. WABRINOTON ADNINIBTRATIVE CODE: WAC 197-11-030: Polioy. Agencies shall to the fullest extent possible: • o Find ways to make the SEPA process more useful to the decisionmakers and the public, promote certainty regarding the requirements of the act, and emphasize important environmental impacts and alternatives. • o Prepare environmental documents that are supported by evidence that the necessary environmental analyses have been made. • o Encourage public involvement in decisions that significantly affect environmental quality. • o Identify, evaluate, and require or implement reasonable alternatives that would mitigate adverse effects of proposed actions on the environment. • WAC 197-11-080: Incomplete or unavailable information. (2) When there are gaps in relevant information or scientific uncertainty concerning significant impacts, agencies shall make clear that such information is lacking or that substantial uncertainty exists... The agency shall weigh the need for the action with the severity of possible adverse impacts which would occur if the agency were to decide to proceed in the face of uncertainty: If the agency proceeds, it shall indicate its worst case analysis. Note: All gbjective data, attained through accepted scientific methods, show that the Blackriver Corporate Park project, if allowed proceed, will significantly impact the great blue heronry and fragile ecosystem that exists there. • • • A-t. 4-59 • • • Response to Comments from Susan McNally 1. Additional mitigation measures have been presented in this Final EIS to May 23, 1990 minimize the impact of the project on the heronry and other wildlife(see Chapter 3). Ms;. Mary Lynne Myer 17 Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave South ' Rentcn, WA 98055 • Ms. Myer: I am writing because I strongly object to development of property- in or adjacent to the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Buildings and/or parking lots in that area will disturb the herons and most likely cause them to leave. Other wildlife in the area will also be adversely ' affected. I work in a building on Oaksdale, near the rookery. I see ' geese wandering in our parking lot and ducks swimming in mud puddles at the nearby construction site. If the forest and rookery are destroyed or disturbed by noise, glare, pollution etc. the wildlife will have nowhere to go. • Wetlands promote and sustain life. By destroying them we eventually destroy ourselves. Sincerely, Susan M. McN¢1Yy.' 815 South 249th 53 Des Moines, WA-981.99.p 878-8507 • • 4-60 - Susan.Krom May 15,1990 Page 2 • • May 15,1990 lollows state guidelines as sit up under WAC 197-11.550 and 580. After the FEIS is Issued.the City of Renton will review the document and deride whether a project should proceed.'No decisions have been made on this proposal yet. Susan Krum,Director If the city believes that the project should be allowed to proceed.It wt.then tittle•separate mitigation Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation document. This docurners decals exact measures which the proponent will have to follow,and has the • 3640 Ashworth Avenue North tort d law.As you can see,we have not yet progressed to the mitigation document stage. Seattle.WA 98103 Issue 3:City of Renton's Commitment to the SEPA ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan RE: Letter on Black River Corporate Park Draft EIS Ref.File ECF;SA;SM-071-88 ECF:SA;SM•109-89 AllCitydepartments arecarefully reviewing this DEIS, Including the Long Range Planning Division. caretakers of the Comprehensive Plan.The Comp Plan,dearly,wit guide our decisions on the project. In Dear Ms Krom: • addition.I encourage you to remain Involved. Informed publicInput Is Invaluable to us throughout the process. I continue to believe that SEPA b one of the best tools we have for meaningful citizen Thankyou foryour letter of May9, 1990,concerning the Black River CorporateanvoNemenL nit Park Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). I share your belief of the importance of citizen participation and careful environmental review. I believe the City has done and Is doing lust that. forif you have any questions,please Don Erickson,Chief of Current Planning,or Mary Lynne Myer, Project Manager,at 235-2550.And,thank you for an enjoyable lunch last week. I have asked stall to review your letter and assist me In an appropriate response: This letter reflects both Sincere) my Ideas and theirs. Y. Issue 1: Ineffective current procedures for public comment . • The City of Renton encourages public participation In many ways.The EIS process was Initiated for the Mayor Earl Clymer Black River Corporate Park project In order to discuss the Issues clearly,publicly and completely. The State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)process In Renton allows for public discussion through letters,and oral testimony via a public hearing. While the hearing Is not mandatory,the City believes it facilitates a time and place for all to testify equally. The hearing and the rules were set up for this purpose. Issue 2:Completeness and accuracy of the DEIS • Your letter questioned the objectivity and completeness of the DEIS. The City strives for solid Impact assessment. For all EIS work,the Department of Community Development chooses the consultants and manages the contract. The consultant is not allowed to talk with the applicant except as sanctioned by the City staff. This encourages objectivity,academic freedom.and dear analysis. Many other Jurisdictions do not limit consultant/applicant contact. Some allow the applicant to hire the consultant and manage the contract by themselves.We feel our system Is superior to the others and fosters objectivity. AR city department ant reviewers d the pro-draft documents. Even with this preliminary work,the DEIS may need additions end corrections.The public comment period Is set up to allow for wider review. Your letter and the attachments,as well as other letters from reviewers d the DEIS.are very helpful to staff to Insure completeness of the document. I have sent a copy d your letter to the Department of Community Development. Staff WA review ail letters and discuss them with the consultant. The casttant wit then prepare answers to all ktqulres of substance In the Anal Environmental Impact Statement(FEIS). That document Is the proper place for all additions,rewrites,and corrections to the Draft EIS. This procedure • • 4-61 • ' • • Response to Comments from Senator Michael E.Patrick: 1. The city will consider comments received from all reviewers of Draft EIS when reaching its decision. Washington Sta►e Senate • Ol.mpia O(ficc: !Ionic Address: 10•11 i:.'Pinions Building IK'Q19 I i+1h Avcmlc Olrm�i. Washington 9Ki(/i Senator Michael E.Patrick , r 4 Ncnwn\\a.I npion 7S(i•702 47tli Legisbtive District (264l 6s1-6o.K • SCAN 298•7692 SCAN 27•721i April 24, 1990 • 18 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave South • Penton, WA 98055 SUBJECT: Dlackriver Corporate Park Environmental Impact statement • Dear Ms. Myer: I would like the heron rookery in the Blackriver Riparian Fores to be preserved, and recommend that the City of Renton criticall review the Blackriver Corporate Park EIS, dated April 1990,41 • considering carefully the comments from the-Citizens for Rentor ! Wildlands Preservation and Seattle Audubon Society. • ^_.`.an% you for your consideration. Sincerely, • Michael E. Patrick • State Senator 47th Legislative District MEP/eb cc: Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation Seattle Audubon Society • • 4.-62 i j •PLANNING DIVISION ' o-vv.,•... 0 c..c.,,h I Z.t- -C.,•.Ll,t:..L}' C;TY OF AMOY, (� V apse. 9sagc (W. .3p snots 5 I3 L I S v Vl�*-J..�C... .?c�At U!•,.. 1,..,,,ak k-N t.+: cti.�:+. J'JN- 6 Apo , (W �9c. 9 0 wa, &,13 114.4 Lu•c...,,t 5 •a. a..:., .kf.,t� .r. ea/finial, �'Vnfiin9ton p�OJdb v - rEIVE[ 2 s 5.11 9& • .kt, 491,-Y,. 4 -U c - .c1 � , u �.u- Q to-K...„, '� •19 Vt..% ow>t<%. is, �' -L.:- t‘.S:44c.4....1 U� -ko,,,A SL 9 .a;s., r2R,.,z�-.% 5� beef+-`, a �•+.�x• o•>.�, t,.a. ,cr,, .� ". - `^ ,,A. 4.,.4. v...r: ; NL4.. wt.Git, av #t ,r.;, %-,,.-c,X,%_,- - - -XL LA•-:-AX 0S o..ct W 1 �, , �• —` -G�. iV ►1 cl lv:1/4 i a �4-k-j., 11111E 3 o xi. ''"mil -i -c -r.,4 Los. '►AS-L:c), ••,:-,_ 031-0-.....$ 114 4-k-ku...,•-ci-ti tit I �'' S1-•. .I.a �'C n '� cvZo., -n lw++v� . k •-^•„ QW�, �,C a,d p-L�VhLAA;l i,h ;tn, - ?-P A- �`T.'t^^a• 4-1/4„.•�W,,a,-t . T43 cWLCI lti. )1,,,., d t..,,.s,Su41.,►.•t ('a.A. w4, -CA. 1t>, o- r ‘)4 ..1.14 ..ks—,- .. .KA,...,. 11-34..v. 1..Al.y,,., .c c4-L..vw'& C-- ( ^Nc6. Gov1/4,4xT•ta-c.X.ti\, P.M Ct-C/CJ42nL0I - r 41_71i u.n,Q,W.t t - + 71 l^-la/.l- 1 A0 u'4, ' J-`. J 'aQ�,�j)n GJ�w -t1 ,. ►L.b+�C,/ '�+w S` iax o-A 3LL a, -lti. .X FJ ,Q&%b-1 o . Y1.P-t AK, l�N.0.412 d.;1 C). YLLO .J. -'�W-eA- sr �t t - L �-c�-z-� 1 fin!-ram., J.....w •r >_.�i.t1• Lo-ltu c�. �^- C �+i G.- u+� Gte-3 16-4 . O,M. " T�iA�' 1 h— �w : V r s,C 1 J-� •� (),..<..Icsr Yw �►-0 ,i kt, ci AIR 0-P b , 2,,Z4c,,•1. �'�^� �cfi 4-63 Response to Comments from Jean Spencer. 1. Sec response to comment from Susan McNally. 4-64 Construction was completed, vegetation was established over the entire site creating what is now a widely recognized and important wildlife habitat area in the Puget Sound region. 2575 Simms St. Lakewood, Co 80215 From memory, I estimate the excavated site to be from three to four April 26,1990 feet deep, fifty feet wide, and from three to four hundred feet long. The sediment placed in the above section was removed from the forebay in roughly an area the size o! nine feet deep over the Mr. Norman Peck entire original area of the entire original forebay area. ious Hazardous Waste Section 20 I did not realize that the Department of Ecology until I reviewed the 'City of Renton Centennial Clean Water otential for this site was so Fund Redmond , WA Grant Application for the Black River Water Fax Delivery to 206/867-7098 Project', dated February 21, 1990. Quality Management Dear Mr. Peck: This application describes the Black River as highly degraded. This judgement reflects land use changes, the I am requesting that the DOE Hazardous waste section investigate industrial waste and the destruction of wetlands. Also mentioned a potential hazardous waste site. I am also requesting that tests are the conditions in Springbrook Creek. The Western rt and any other measures necessary be performed to insure the safety Plant is located in this latter dr Processing of the site's ground water supply and the surrounding sensitive cleanup site along with Mill Creek Rhich huperfund as a ently beA ensaccepted wildlife habitat. by the EPA. High levels of turbidity, conductivity, total The site is located in Renton, WA. It isphosphorous, solids, ammonia and metal contamination is available just upstream and to the from Metro's data on this system. south of the P-1 pump plant situated on the property of First City Zinc concentrations ih'sedifient samples were the second highest of Development. Upstream of the site is the Renton Heron Rookery, the all twenty samples taken in 1987-88 in stream surveys byMetro. Black River Forest, and a large drainage area including the western The P-1 pump Processing site. DOE Shorelines is currently active just above and p p plant forebay is mentioned as a possible probem site. My primary concern is that the area of dredged sediments could be north of this potential hazardous waste site. Attached is a map indicating the location. highly toxic and, because of the sandy medium, may be contributin Following are the reasons why this may be a hazardous 'waste site concentrated toxics to the Green/Du:ramish River systems. g and the reasons for bringing this issue to your attention at this I am also concerned about possible' time. recreational activities, degradation of construction nhabitat offiCepa and In 1984, the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) enlarged the forebay various other hazards. , of the P-1 pump plant for stormwater control and wildlife habitat Currently, there is a draft EIS out for public comment on this site enhancement. I was one of the two SCS inspectors on the site through the City during this construction. This activity occurred in 198i or 1984. of of,office buildings Two of the three alternativessover propose eriod The forebay was enlarged to a twenty acre holding area encompassing construction office and parking areas the the junction of Springbrook Creek and the remaining Black River ends May 11, 1990 hazardouspotential I am concerned about the City waste site described above. Tof Renton tissuing this channel. Part of this construction activity included dredging the P-1 pump plant's original forebay. A large area was excavated to informstbefore of this Site is evaluated. I am requesting that you m provide a place to Out the materials from the dredging. A water the environmental/developmentalproblem and that sou suggestsu that they halt dredge was used to dredge the original forebay. I remember seeing process until such preventingquestions can the water drain from the dredgings and taking on a metallic.sheen occurrencee dof dangerouss acion maybe helpful to them hazardsy e the as it occasionally overtopped the retaining berm and returned to conditions due any presented the forebay. I do not believe this was the result o! the presence by concentrated toxics in this area. of iron oxides in the soil. No one that I discussed this with knew if this was hazardous and if it would be better to leave it in the • forebay or to dredge it out of the existing water system. The soil materials dredged from the forebay were primarily sands. After construction was finished, vegetation was reestablished on the site. The area containing the dredged material appeared to harbor a monoculture of grass. • 4-65. I am available for future questions if needed. Please feel free to contact me. I would like to be included in any mailings and Q updated on the progress regarding these issues. Please keep me informed. z O ~ Sincerely, L lu ria,I ti. QM lice/ Mary M. Anderson 303/234-9365 to sA Z o c1 cc: Don Erickson, City of Renton o It Bob Sieh, Edwards and Barbieri I. d o w r Susan Krom, Citizens for Renton Wildland Preservation Q 0 I �..„�t Jerry Adams, Seattle Audubon Society I Z - : i V. si a -n o1/4� to k' 3Ep \4W�2 • P• c • t ►, Z C / . i4ot �Vo R W ‘4.‘ • .: V y NI 3 yO Keh la y �� sw£ Y 1:= 9ti H 7 a. 2- 2 XO 1 D Wq o / R. ��v Zis o /9./.5N� t k I - � o . o I \ 0 1. • 0 I 7 �� W 0 W P :.1 q a d4 v • '1. N • M V t a 4-66 f0/C •-y WI-/INI ni'�utsfr�ew TNe Bcquc f:ivc[ L✓HrcQ d<0H�/ry i eint., c.c"4#.'r Fe,JFct ', 21"/e0 this grant proposal,Is bounded roughly on the north by Empire Way S., on the west by the Green River,on tho south by the Renton corporate limits,and on the east by Benson Metro data also show consistently high levels of turbidity,conductivity,total phosphors; Road(see attached map). solids, ammonia, and metals contamination. Zinc concentrations in Springbroc sediment samples were the second highest of all 20 samples taken in 1987-88 by Met The project area is the downstream portion of the larger East Side Green River in their stream surveys. Metro data also document a depauperate invertebrate blot watershed,located east and south of the Green/Duwamish mainstem within the cities of While coho salmon are known to return to the system,Metro speculates that tributarie• Renton, Kent, and Auburn and in unincorporated King County. It includes the historic such as Garrison Creek,may provide spawning and rearing areas since the conditions remnants of the Black River, the Black River pumping station, Springbrook Creek Springbrook and Mill creeks are unsuitable. (Renton), Panther Lake and Panther Creek, and various small tributaries,wetlands and small ponds. Significant upstream tributaries include Mill Creek (Kent), and Garrison Studies by the Department of Ecology suggest that some of the low dissolved oxyge Creek (Kent). Portions of Springbrook Creek have been altered by construction of a problems may be due to the Influx of low oxygen groundwater. In addition,the lack flood control channel (referred to as the P-1 channel) as part of the U.S. Soil gradient and minimal meandering In the constructed channel sections inhibit r Conservation Service's East Side Green River Watershed Project. Runoff from these aeration. . tributaries enters the flood storage forebay at the Black River pumping station. This water is pumped through the Black River outlet channel to the Green/Duwamish River in rThe Western Processing recycling plant site Is located upstream on Mill Creek (Ken. the city of Renton. This site has been designated as an EPA Superfund site and will be the object of clean: for several years. Recent data have documented high levels of zinc and cadmic Background Information contamination in sediments In Mill Creek. This contamination has resulted in the rece designation of the creek itself as a Superfund site from the Western Processing plant Water quality in the Black River basin reflects the rapid conversion of landuse from the Kent-Renton city limits. Mill Creek is a major tributary to Springbrook,representir predominantly rural, forest, and agricultural uses to urban, industrial, and commercial approximately a third of the tributary drainage to the Black River basin. These high leve development. Residential construction in the valley and plateau areas has created of upstream contamination represent a significant source of concern for the city excessive erosion and sedimentation in essentially all tributaries. This has resulted in the Renton,given that water-end sediment-borne contaminants do not stop at jurisdictior filling of wetlands and choking of salmonid-spawning gravels. These and other boundaries. r problems,including barriers to fish migration,are documented in the King County Basin Planning Program's Black River Basin Reconnaissance Report. Additional toxic contamination of water and sediments In the Black River basin may el be occurring as a result of Industrial discharges, industrial spills and stormwater run Baseflow water quality samples have been collected by the Municipality of Metropolitan within the valley. In the lower basin, where Springbrook Creek flows adjacent to t Seattle (Metro) on a monthly basis since 1979 at the mouth of Springbrook Creek stables of Longacres Racetrack, high levels of fecal coliform contamination have be (Station 0317) in Renton. These samples have consistently demonstrated extremely observed. poor quality and frequent standards violations for dissolved oxygen and fecal coliform. For example in 1987-88,the most recent year for which data have been analyzed,eleven Future growth In the basin is likely to exacerbate these water quality problems. The 1t out of twelve samples did not meet state Class A water quality criteria for dissolved Community Profile for the city of Renton predicts a 23 percent growth in population oxygen,and twelve out of twelve samples did not meet state criteria for fecal coliform. the Renton planning area between 1990 and 2000, and a 65 percent increase betwt The relative lack of vegetative cover along the channel also results in'high temperatures 1990 and 2020. end occasional violation of temperature standards. • 4-67- • • An additional problem In the basin Is the hydrologic disconnection of valley wetlands Response to Comments from Mary Anderson to Norman Peck,WUOE; from the channolized portions of the stream system. This disconnection means that 1. A hazardous waste investigation has been conducted on the site and the pollutants entering the stream channels are not being absorbed and/or biofiltered by the results are presented in this Final EIS in Section 3.6 and Appendix F. remaining wetlands as would occur in an undisturbed system. Given the already degraded water quality,it is Important that the channel alternatives being considered for Completion of the East Side Green River Watershed Project be designed to maximize the • water quality benefits that can be gained from the inclusion of natural or constructed wetlands and biofiltration swales. Furthermore,the designs need to consider re-aeration. potential. A final problem area concerns the design and operation of the Black River pumping station and the flood storage forebay. Standard operation procedures allow the accumulation of significant runoff In the forebay prior to discharge to the Green/Duwamish River. During this storage, pollutants such as oils and greases accumulate on the water surface and are flushed to the river in the initial pumping.. These pollutants may contribute significantly to degraded water quality in the Green/Duwamish particularly during periods of low flow. Proposed Source Control Strategy The Green/Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan recommends that a • comprehensive and systematic water quality management plan for controlling and improving the quality of surface waters yl the Black River basin should be developed and • implemented to address the problems discussed above(Recommendation 52). Specific components of this recommendation Include improvement in water quality throughout the Black River basin; :a reduction In deposition and contamination of sediments • throughout the basin; an improvement in fish passage and access throughout the tributary reaches; and the maintenance and enhancement of existing wetland areas, Including the pump station forebay,for utilization as habitat by wildlife and water-birds. Additional components to be included in the overall surface water quality management of the Black River basin are Improved operation and maintenance of the pumping station and forebay relative to water and sediment quality and the incorporation of water quality and fish passage considerations in the channel alternatives being considered in the flood water storage and conveyance designs for the East Side Green River Watershed Project. 4-68 _ _ , - - , e ,;'--- ' C) : • 6 _ _ ca-L N.S . NALK• Response to Comments from Lawrence Forresten 1. The Final EIS includes mitigation measures to further minimize impacts. The N _4,.... I \--j 0,-;,''••- ,./1A1-1jAig'.4-7 40 • (..5tA_ eit.d. e=AA. ciitty46 setback of development from the heronry on Tract B will be 600 feet. ,s/ )..dt- .111-tl"k-- kpCLACLA .. 67/1_,0t ev2id &I,is . -- . 21 2. The food supply of the great blue heron will not be reduced by the proposed project since neither Tract A nor Tract B support a substantial prey base for IAA- 0_0110- -A79 L/YILL.4 attbstial---- 4,1 -6'ziv ,/ia.1,41-co' do herons. See Section 3.5.3 of this Final EIS for further wildlife discussion. F-5-RAAk2) e0(91 aAkiL 4-6, 61/40)0009/AUidc q ld_ am& 4.Q.O. -ata--•st-4- cts-,-Qsz-62 .--i\c--A- . „„ „ wAlm.-- osuut -ava-k- Jew ele.. ,.41.. 6a.a..09.iolcz,, . A.th tbziA. ',xeci-kv--tha t0132,4- Uthi -15- 0 ,e/2.4- Cri--ardA,Akizallo „. OLIO CIS doeu,, ,,,,K-z'' 1 (Ark2 arNackv.azc,J0-4p. ole-kbo , pienirth. ci- li„.±, ..Ale*.0 L.,_eck.L.,4 ef\PA ds+Lerpia, , cud 0_nt.6,11,01. 0"k. JA/t 01,41j • tikki- 11 iell elh-. \- - MaA:Ktut eji -1k d.1240•Cri.c.p4 CMI cuia_ 66 CA,tx,44/LLO:1-• Mk_.1Dia,OLIAIAL,54- cx_rLcL_ JA)1111 etko„I/LA...L.4-th ja:jd-ccf z LvtisA LCON.) ut..- . tzt-tx2cAci)AvLats.( 0,/...v:J4 t-c,-, , jJA.cl ikzlx.,kaar1 - ,.4.,,ol_A.,k. fakazz_ 6\67,_,AVA C.)...Q.Zsi* 4zKli) ,*46-c,,MCd, -.UAL I-NNe'il.fi 10\AistKl. ,N.A144j\l , 0:3-X\o.,a4MILZ.U\ QZ,33-k&-i-C&LC- , 0.1b.\•\A% \, ,...Q \St.o.), 6.11.1.. alaACrv .. . /24:1kiiiy. ".7-- • ..we.15.19froll-esker • 4-69 - - - r 'I ` ' ( • 0L-i -4..-,7 e k,_„(4,.r�p()7 'r° �, )-)--,79^'r r•ry "--0 . 74-#[i• "J'rr-( J' 2 to ')—..-*vT-rkr wr)_O%".-?`1 '.U_+-•J //ff-- 1 YlV!�� J.r ' '11,'� y+1"'"ri'�0 ''b) -rM vvi'V' "1' - ( 3 V '-'.v 9 6 - /-h L. I-�7• - ,,�, 6+,,v< �.,,,-,P, �..,. )-, ,� 6— !y n).„J) w-r44�� � e 'Z1+ /rv.-r t r.✓r, .ry^.....•'k.9.Y./I.•M� T..-n4/ c�.wrrv�F .'r.J �'"`•f-i'`n'� .nnr.-„I�y) c-ls.�„�S i+a.,7 vu ,� • ` 7 !! )' V7' '7 1?/.u-J-v-r-v wr Y-^,,.,:"^'•'11 `.'v,/.) p }mob?)'J 9 h .....„v_z-•-+v inn ‘74,12 vu. drrir- � 97 Y",',(.( ...y P." ,...q r 1.rwr2",Vr,.r1 -..4.4 "--ar 1 1(W13,TZo S s.gig 6 li Pi ....) .+1e) • • 1,N(�ry•y ( ,'.Y,L;,r ,.,,,,,..)-..,-,'I ,-d—,-mot,( �l•�,c' _ ,..n-,yL( ',)Yv-)7 I.M.�.+ 's-...'D L ,, YU� 0" t _-_�+J—T y-,4,—.w )W+.ivw�v...n?. V1; N.,,�+�-„L+ 'i I . r J_ fir_ .„a.J Lr.l.r.,.,-..w.t.v+-1.-+ - -u Y,1 '► •q•• .,. ) +--•7;--47:" .,:lJr 1-n •.vl. 'le-,•, ( ,,,,,�/ 11 J �/ Y 044 log r '.." / • 29 April 1990 Mary Lynne Myer . Senior Environmental Planner Pt 816 S. 216th St., Apt. T-530 Dept.of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Dea Moines, WA 98198 • Renton, WA 98055 April 28, 1990 Subject:Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery 2 3- Mary Lunne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dear Ms. Myer. Dept. of Community Development ' /�w 200 Mill Ave. S L y� A majority of my eleven year work life has been spent near the area of the Heron Rookery. Renton, WA 98055 In that time span many of my lunch hours have been spent observing the wildlife around the area in question. I used to walk the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and in and around the Dear Ms. Myer: - Earlinglon Golf Course. In those days it was hard not to disturb the herons while watching their behavior. PRESERVATI121 OF RENTtII HERQl ROOKERY are These days I make use of Oaksdate Street to commute to work as well as for noontime walks. We have enjoyed visits to the subject rookery, and/alarmed by dev— I observe the,ducks,Canada geese, and heron from the sidewalks and bridge. What currently elopent proposals which would terminate it. exists is a decent compromise between development and habitat preservation. These magnificent birds are sensitive to public encroachment, and While I appreciate the new road, the exposure of the Heron Rookery by the Blackriver deserve an ample buffer sate surrounding the Blackriver Riparian Forest development is deplorable. The construction and occupation activity and loss of privacy to the and !:Aron Rookery. The EIS you are considering would not provide this. herons which this development will cause leaves me cold. It saddens me. At least my walks are momentary;the proposed buildings and parking lots would be permanent intrusions. Accordingly, we urge the City of Renton to reject this development and thereby preserve this wildlife refuge. The wildlife which use this area must be given the opportunity to exist and thrive. They need the space and conditions which currently exist in order exist and thrive. Allowing these Sincerely:, lands to be paved and peopled will damage the habitat. The development will be too close to the rookery and cause the herons to leave. The development will take away nesting and burrowing !"-1- -/.. areas from other wildlife, perhaps causing local extinctions. Mr/Mrs. T. W. Hauff I strongly urge that the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery be set aside from (870.8532) development and preserved. Yours sincerely, f d...A0 J.A.Matter 2566 24th Avenue West Seattle, WA 98199 Work phone: 393-3918 4-71 • - _ Z4-17 • -7(.0( a/ d a4 ,7C0 a'14 s.7 14 77Clicy d4/61 -ra rig /2,95z. A1710 If 7t.r.i jp -4:14f• •C.;' • • • 1.4 'd // ° of/20if! 114-// .9 -14/ /7 " 0 • It - z ocf)A -941 1-1-- 1 417/14 2' -4 vs". a7 -f yi 4 4 • .417/ LA4r7140,ct erild7317.6 • yi7a7,11:7 1/41b a•eyi jy p or/0' /77 •i .7*4 o" f1- 1_ / y 371.4 •••• -1.7/12 n I 0 e.-21 R1 .1 :4 4 ly d r 14 /..t 'iL:N 4.741 .f.;I "4 ,1 144 X"..7 „..f (2 V-14 /)"4-1 Q5-n cu ,.,y7z '16-1-1 • ?1/4.ty /1 57. 4 7/y1-' 424 2014 4-7,4r, P140 /01.141, kr, 17)4 lo W-N 4:3):12, AN( t -1:11 Id/ 7,, p i.,74:40 pu,,j_4_ gAfj.1D.3e-a 4_! 011."of L • R'.0 7 a.4. ki-SAJ-11 v./if:we "AA -/•./:, 71.. r.0 c? 4 b C . -1/ cf • .D11 /P1.1- 29..• en< re A f Irpri jJVY1j „wt.. tct vim 11 of of yr fr 4 old '72 700 74! ' ••••• -14 r v 35-0v, • 1.4.0.42,44 Os- 1.-71 144/1 V //V (ley r., p, p .54 •r7 r - • •• • 4."P 14,dorm 00*0 (jr 9Z v1 Q vw 74 4 17.P: 9 Z 714 44 vid cf.44 J" •a.7 Irrir -* a• .7) A 1-1, vfe_i y.0 4 041 y.2 4 iv • r. •- " L4 14-4y r pk7/ 19 Obh POC - *c • 6 - — /14 0?0,1 "y J '04.: • ki 10.07*pa* h I i '7 c S' •u 7'L 1.7•>�C.c.. .� 4 ►s•. ... Mary Lynne Myer April 30, 1990 •41- c./y CG t h C e - rt e f ,1� .- 7Lj,'c, ,C•e,/c,r. Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development .f' -/•k c' /-/e r .- iQ n e ry ye s ; -%E:,— 200 Mill Avenue South ' Renton,WA 98055 •/'�7 1v r /C( /r k ea. De-, i- /y`.% M • adam: . G / 7L4e / 96'O c .1 tv/ds a )-rtei.tA9v •f-• .e , 'y / Ny r0 5,6 /1 [.�� r� ti I am writing to you and your office to express my dire concern over the proposed development in the Black River Corporate Park area which is immediately adjacent to In r n ' r . h e G' 71-4 N p/pQJ`.re the Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Urbanized encroachment on this o I /5(R y t +-t J a )L 7�1r r' C. -$r i,t s sensitive area will displace the sturdier species of fauna and will destroy those less adaptive species. Of course, the floral species won't survive under tons of concrete S e' e , kk y r Cr i^ •c-rc t It 4' r i e 144 cr r and asphalt,either. 7 6 ✓'/v F -C. 6h t c Y 14;/i f 71"t f-ir 4 I- Full mitigation of this development's impact is impossible. Irreversible harm will make extinct this precious piece of ecosphere. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) •4— a v►._ 4 r u d/i% 7Le '' '} "''i h o "' states that'significant adverse impact'will result. Air quality,water quality, and other _ 9 �� P q Y. r e-lf r v e .m— nJ 511 h life"quality'will be degraded. I urge you and your office tore-evaluate this situation. A corporate office park can be a- 9 C a �t. developed almost anywhere-why here where it will destroy wildlife? It is said that a AT, - s 7C.0 r `i •et r%, :a•) �h r 4 _ person who destroys something that is man-made is a vandal -- a person who destroys something that Is God-made is a developer. yet J '74+- / r We do not inherit this earth from our ancestors-we borrow it from our children. If Black �� River Corporate Park is allowed to further develop and encroach upon the forest and • ' 64 A rookery,then the children will have to visit a zoo to see"examples'of what could have •.. been. • Your office has the authority to prevent environmental rape. Act now, before the memories fade away. • • William N.Christie,M.S. Environmental Scientist 26611 198th Avenue S.E. Kent,WA 98042 630-1258 • 4-73 • 2600 NW 56th St. 110 May 30,1990 - Seattle, WA 98107 April 30, 1990 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer • Dept.of Community Development Senior Environmental Planner • w 200 MillAvenue5outh - Dept. of Community Development 18 Renton,WA 98055 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery • 29 Dear Ms. Myer: Dear Ms.Myer: I am writing in response to the Environmental Impact This letter is in regards to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which was Statement issued on April llth proposing development for the released concerning development of property near the heron rookery in Renton. south side of the Hlackriver Riparian Forest and Heron This is myfirst letter to the Cityof Renton. Our feelings concerningthis area are very Rookery. As an environmental professionalup and concerned strong, nd we consider Rentn fortunate to have such a habitat, nd the proper local resident, I am writing to you to express my strong p p concerns with the proposed development of this site. conditions that invite the herons to nest here. My husband and I first saw this activity severalyears a o,before Oaksdale was a completed thru street,and According to qualified reviewers of the EIS, it is highly nesting Y g likely that if this site is utilized as planned to support we have driven and walked this area many times since. One Sunday evening we an office park, the 24 to 30 nesting pairs of herons now stopped to observe a pair of ducks at a pond just off of 7th•Avenue near Oaksdale, present will be forced to leave. Not only are planned and as we watched,a pair of quail and several rabbits appeared. Unique in that we buildings and parking areas too close to the-rookery, but were only a few blocks from downtown Renton. . the increased activity associated with the development will disturb the herons considerably. Other significant I was born in Seattle,when the Smith Tower was the tallest building, and grew up in disruptions resulting from development will include loss of Bellevue;and my husband and I have lived between Kent and Renton,on the East habitat for food for the herons as well as habitat for other Hill since 1968. We have watched the valley gradually disappear,and the stagnant wildlife. air gradually increase over the years. Our son is still involved in farming on the south side of Kent,and to walk the fields and to see the beautiful soil,with no rocks,that This tract of land represents one of the few remaining local the river deposited over the valley before the dam was built,is a real experience. havens for a range of species facing increasing pressure Unfortunately much of it is now covered with asphalt and buildings,and the birds from development and population growth in the region, and and wildlife are fast disappearing. once lost such habitat is irreplaceable. Considering the high degree of commercial and residential development We now have a chance to save a small part of this once beautiful valley. Developing already existing in the Puget Sound region, it is extremely this land will drive the herons out,as their tolerance of humans is very low. They important to preserve this unique ecosystem. I urge you need room to hunt for food,and to feed their young,without outside interferences, to reject the proposal for development of this sensitive but with people,cars,buildings and noise, they won't stand much of a chance. Not . area. only will we lose the herons,but the small animals and birds that live in the field will also be doomed. As a side note,on my last field trip through the area,we observed Sincerely, a mature bald eagle roosting in a nearby tree,the highlite of our trip. n t Please consider your actions on this issue. . Sincerely, ' Peter M. Hudelson 400 hn&Juli cCone . 10115 S.E. 07th' Kent,WA 98031 (206)852-0115 4-74 I y • • May 6, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer O Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave S. Renton, WA 98055 Re: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery Dear Ms. Myer: I am writing this letter in response to a notification from the Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation group of the planned development of the area adjacent to the above- referenced heron rookery. I am a great supporter of wildlife, and feel that too much development is detrimental to our local wildlife populations as well as man's ability to live in harmony with our fellow creatures. We depend on one another for survival, and when the wildlife goes, we go. 1 feel placement of the buildings and,parking areas, as proposed, is too close to the heron rookery, and without adequate buffering, will cause all the wildlife in the area to be disturbed by the noise, pollution, and movement of people and machines. If this occurred, it could cause a disruption of nesting and reproduction cycles. I also feel that the proposed paving of the area will.eliminate habitats for other wildlife, and local extinctions could occur. This I feel would be a dreadful loss, one which is preventable: 7 Sin c ely ours,'Ar Ws...-.;k,71_, E1 beth Storm 1 39 S.E. Wax Rd. Kent, WA 98042 630-2302 4-75 7 9L-b 7r7c-elTlx-- azaa--loo o'or _ip .447-iY )I?9,7- -viA• T, ,.e- c -ur. :.,- ,;— . , .,2 • , -z.. �//L� gym -� -4 -. -s-„ f'77 -�~.r_ -virt �.�- �—t -„ Via,,,,- ' "'.."'" i . ... .. .......-._ •_--D►,. m. -11,5 . . . • -y�-.,-r- ,-a?-= `'7/� ,1,,,�y�ic ,.._- ,'iA''. . • yr (y! �-►tia'y's- �--3 " � .._ ... - -aT:��y* -xy�+4"' • , e_osx,47,„_p7 r-wy....erne-cgo-v 8.2;7 U c/ � -, r-.....2, fir . 4'W -6 -';'/L"r:ri- ,........ r / v -.�.b +/!sr -a✓ 7 T — � yV /��� - V -/ „"�'��"e7r , � /- v 7 - 7/'' vim►" -a, / -/-v- ''' 736- Cf2 ' ?07 'tea','G- 'r. iv f?7ub "o -d-c-7-o-v-2---0,7 •"Arr.,--07- .4-ya. ""Zr-r'Ni/9 •-0-‘4.0-vry g.:',17.1,„ ...,-,...., ,„..7 ""x")' ,-'y/ �/- "2J "A. 14,7 ,9--ez.l 06 4/ 'G C(j --- ) "''^-7 . .. /y'/Y /'`4' —.4-`4 17 1 .. Y (P_('p,h d•f'" /VPf"'(yl/ Nay 7, 1990 • May 5, 1990 Mary Lynne flyer wept of Community Planner 33 • Mary Lynne Myer We much enjoy the birds, including en occasional Senior Environmental Planner Dept of Community Development heron, at Coulon Park r.n the Cedar diver Trail 200 Mill Ave. South, The Blackriver Kiparian sorest and Heron Hook- Renton WA 98055 32cry would provide environmental and educational Dear Me. Myer: opportunities that should not be lost. This letter concerns the further development of land Ken and Ada Shannon near the Renton Heron Rookery at Blackriver Corporate Park. The Rookery has proved itself successful since its creation in 1984 and it would be tragic to let anything interfere with it now. When the habitats of wildlife are gone so also will be the wildlife. We have a great responsibility to see that this . doesn't happen. (✓v� Let us protect and encourage our heron population by • limiting growth around the rookery and following the • guidelines of the environmental impact statement. 11721 78th Ave. S. Seattle, Wa. 98178 Sincerely, !ram 772-1658 Elizabeth Lu:(dstro© 7705 S. 117th St. _ r% Seattle WA 98178 • 772-0386 • • • • 4-77 • May 5, 1990 - • • 34 35 Mary Lynne Myer . Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South qv 7' "r:1:1 Renton, Wa. 98055 Mary L. Myer and members of Dept. of Community Development, Gary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner, *.apartment of Community Development, We are concerned about possible development at the Slack- 200 ::.ill Avenue, South river Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. We are retired, Ren:on, Wa. ,3055 • have lived at this address for 37 years, live less than 5 Re: Proposed development near the Renton Heron Rookery minutes from the Rookery and have enjoyed it for years. It and Blackriver Riparian Forest is not a park but a natural area with water, grass, herons and other birds. If buildings are allowed any closer than the ones already built, we fear this area will be destroyed. Please use your influence to save the wonderful The herons and other wildlife will leave, a snecial area natural treaFure which the City of Renton still has, not will be gone. We have parks to go to but this is not the only the unique heron rookery and habitat of other same. Natural areas such as this not only preserve the waterfowl, but *he ancient riparian forest which cannot be wildlife but give you a special and good feeling as you replaced. I feel that the present EIS is totally inadequate walk the path, see the birds. You can almost forget that to protect this natural wonder, an urban Walden still intact. not far away are buildings, pavement and people. We urge you end your committee to do whit you can to save I hope that the officials of the City of Renton will realize that the natural environment is a priority item now .this area for all of us. with most ci-izens. Renton will receive more benefit and recognition nationally 'from Preserving their rookery and Sincerely, ancient font than from the erection of a few more office . buildings. .<*�'4i^�� v''Ow"y`t '`�`k Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Nr. and Mrs. Orville Radel 12005 71st Ave. S. Sincerely. Seattle, Wash., 9ti178 4 '_ i " f �,,,�� 772-6031 �'� • Lois Nordquist 13503 Empire Way S.. 301 A, Seattle. Wa. 98178 . Phone: 277-9490 copies to: Mayor Earl Clymer Cnwiww D7 tlww c'w4.1 4-78 • • May 6, I;,0 Charles R.Dowd 3200 West Concord Way N446 Mercer Island,WA 98040 Mary Lynne Meyer,Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South 36 Renton,WA 98055 Dear Ms Meyer I am writing to protest the proposed development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Introducing first the noise and disruption of construction and then the steady intrusion of nearby human • occupation will drive away the first the herons,then the migrating ducks. and finally even the frogs and smaller animals. When we lose this tiny remaining piece of the Black River life system,we will have finished destroying an entire wetland. All that will be left will be water and dirt with nothing alive in it but people--during working hours. This is not a guess. We have the dismal example of Tukwila Pond where I could once count 18 species of ducks in a morning before work and where now,because of development,I see only Canada Geese. If there were an entire floodplain out there,rural and wooded as it was in my youth,I wouldn't be as loud in my protests. But that whole area has been given over to development that doesn't support anything but hawks and rats and remediated toxic waste dumps. We have let the developers have"just one more development"until they've nickle-and- dimed us out of the whole valley. Let's save this remaining scrap where,in spite of everything,nature manages to exist. Thank you, C.R.Dowd • 4-79 7916 Olympic View Drive NW disturbed by noise, glare, and movement; and that much Gig Harbor, Washington 98335 ' valuable habitat will be destroyed by paving. The EIS May 1990 itself states that the proposed development will result in a y 1, "significant adverse impact that cannot be fully mitigated." Mary Lynne Myer, We urge, therefore, that the prospective developers be Senior Environmental Planner required to revise their plans in a way that would avoid Department of Community Development 37 such impact. A wildlife habitat of this quality 200 Mill Avenue South is too rare and valuable for us risk its destruction. Renton. Washington 98055 Sincerely yours, Dear Ms. Myer: (2 We learned recently that development has been proposed • for the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. We are very concerned about the adverse • effects this development could have on the herons and other Mary A. Kenney wildlife in this area. G. James Kenney, M.D. About two months- ago we first visited the rookery area. We counted 22 nests and could hardly believe our good luck • in being able to watch, at close range, these beautiful, complex birds, as they tended their eggs and later their young. Last Sunday we witnessed whole families of Canada geese--moms, dads, end fluffy yellow chicks--swimming in the pond and resting along the river. bank. And we have greatly enjoyed watching and photographing the many other species of birds that live in this relatively undisturbed wetland . - The Rookery wetland is a treasure that it would be unthinkable to jeopardize by allowing inadequately buffered development adjacent to it. In our opinion, the area should be scrupulously protected not only for the sake of its inhabitants, but also for human benefit. The need to preserve our few remaining pockets of wetland in the Puget Sound region has reached urgent proportions. The denser our • population becomes, the more we need, and the more we owe it to future generations to preserve, these places where people can observe the fascinating life cycles of our fellow creatures, learn about their habitats and nature's rhythms, and experience the tranquility that such areas impart. The Renton Heron Rookery area, because of its special beauty, its tranquility, and the fact that it already is home to a wealth of wetland life--including an impressively large flock of herons--is especially worthy of careful preservation. But experts who have reviewed the EIS for the proposed development have concluded that the development would have a critical effect on the area and would even cause the herons to leave. Audubon Society members who know the area in detail say the proposed buildings and parking areas will be • too close to the heron rookery; that herons And other ' wildlife, because of insufficient buffering, will be 4=80 3200 Wes.concord Way Apt.446 May J, 1990Mercer Island,Wa.98040-3227 Thursday,May 3. 1990 Ms.Mary Lynne Myer Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Senior Environmental Planner 39 Department of Community Development Dept.of Community Development • zoo Mill Ave So 3 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton.Via. 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: RE Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery :'m writing this letter with a deep concern for the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. It is my understanding there are plans to Dear Ms.Myer: development the entire south side of this area. You can imagine what this will do to the heron population not to mention I am writing to protest strongly the recent EIS that proposed the other wild life. If buildings are too close to the rookery, if there development for the entire south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and is not adequate buffering, and if area is paved this is bound to be very Heron Rookery.detrimental to to the herons as well as the other wild life. The riparian forest and heron rookery provide Renton with a unique We must learn a lesson from past performance we have witnessed in other • areas of our country where there has been absolutely no concern for helping opportunity to save a fragile habitat and to help an even more fragile• preserve our wild life treasures. Washington State is not exempt from species. Several weeks ago,I took some friends for an early evening walk to bad performances either. see the rookery from a vantage point across the river. We were awe-struck urge you to do all you can to preserve this area so that we will not as we watched 35 to 40 adults herons guarding their nests or fishing in the Ilose our wonderful wild life treasures. river. We also saw river otter,scaups,teal.mergansers,mallards, bufflehead,goldeneye,Canadian geese,sparrows,wrens,and killdeer.to Sincerely, name a few. pdaliZedi Z //-0.- -- I realize that Renton must consider its own self-interest,but this Mrs. Shirley J. Winton development will cost more than can ever be measured. Renton is already 7800 NE-24th dotted with two and three-storey office buildings,many of which stand Bellevue, WA 98004 empty. Is another empty office complex so important that Renton can justify the destruction of an irreplaceable nesting and feeding habitat? 454-3867 Quibbling over the placement of parking lots and buildings or arguing about glare and noise is irrelevant. Any development of the area should be . prohibited. Renton would benefit mightily from a new park. . . Sincerely, ����7 a �O l r Deborah Dowd, (206)236-1142 • 4-81 May 1, 1990 25219 Lake Wild. C.C. Dr.S.E. Maple Valley, Wa.98038 Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. Of Community Development • 200 Mill Avenue South Renton. Wa. 98055 40 Dear Ms. Myer, I am writing in regards to the Renton Heron Rookery (Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery),I live in the Lake Wilderness area and have been walking along that lake for two years now. There used to be some active herons and eagles.Recently the cutting of trees for a housing development and the general hubbub of workers and their trucks seem tohave disturbed the herons habitat and the nests are no longer occupied. • I am concerned that without buffering of thebuildings and parking area near the Renton Rookery we will sodisturb the birds that there too we will see them disappear..This rookery so uniquely situated near down town Renton is a wonderful educational tool for our children. I would not like to see wetlands completely paved and lose such a wildland habitat where other animals as well as herons live. I hope the city will consider carefully the further building in this area and its effect on the wilflife. Sincerely, Elizabeth Culbert 4-82 • .• • • .. . . ! • .: .. • ...' • * • . • * •• • . :;: ikii.:12;•,,i)„.y.A..th. -1-1.,..- FUNNING DiVISION •—•. •NI 6i.Fr/ /I f 0 , . .. ..,. 117-7.-7-. .. • . . . . . • • .• . /244. •• 'MAY •:.7.. 1990. , . . . .;:iiazt.. . . .714.4 21...e.L:k. RECEIVED. -.b OA- ./i/5. 401...... :. 41 •- . . h- - • •• • ,- •• • • • •itA,64.24.s:iy. • • • • • . . / - ,••••.. . ., ••• .• • • .* .77.,.. .•:::•,••••....;:.... ..4.57..."...44.....•...." ,:•,leif.s.,p5,:.,7:•; • '.-...; :.....cylr.,.A:.' ••:-* ••..,44‘...,.,._e_...7.,4• •'•• ' . .. •. • . '. Oita,' • • . .. . . . . ,. . . P.4-esi • •'•••••.;•:.,. ...••••••••?:•:,-%:••••.••••,'7"•...•/::',4:,:,i...s•.•!..ii:: •:... :7; 7:,..; - ... . •• ••.• .:• • -• ;; ...? ,` -161• •.:;.3(41 ....•.•• . . *.• elT4 :....:•-•71. -:":••••. ..'••• '.' 7..'''''•:.. i•ii...e.e.: 1%:‘,i••::••••:•••.:•:',:.f,::...:•..ii•-; ;• -• , ...;•-•',s.::.T.%::',•:•••.:/...1;•6k,r;A..^•::1/41.:4•••••''!-4.T.:.'i:Y..•-:.••••••:'"•':.•4.:.'..4Z‘'.....ijd....,:: ..• • •As.....T12,44: -/A 4_ • cle,,,,, . 47- ?...C--;• . . •. . ,,.e........4 ,:,.......,V;7.,.,:j.....4.,-''''•••••7't..:Y,•,,:F.e........e•fili;,14•'ily):1‘L , • • .. • • .0• . '.• ••••• - • • • •— • •0-•••••:,'....!.....:'.•••-'2'..'.,:7.4•,•;`,.134.;.*:.•,, •:..•!;..:-.:,.....p.::,...,,. ..• . .......::... . :: .. .......,4 •...id : .. . - .r 69te. -:676:: -.ccoir • ....: .., - .:.. -,••:,....:,, :i.'......,,,----..,2,,.."..5.q.p...L.L.e.A:': *.'':•13.1;.* ••• .:••M:44,•4C.A4-C.Q..''4•4''' .: ..." . ;:-....7.7.. .:::::if.r...?:* ,,,,,,,:":"1::; : :.....*:.... ':;.:*.',.L • .. .. . ::.:•,i1.. :::::: . , .* ,7*.C. o i:•:..c•:,-.'1.•;:1•••• ;'....:./1.... . ..•••......;•/,..::••••••:: .ei_,_,,,,:(41_ ••• .... . t•:. :. •' ..3; " ...'...,e,A...':'.:7'...•- .iii-:=•iT .:• '4•' .. .: ..::.'•••1;:•••••••/?;:ij. . • • 1?-;11:. .: •::;.'*;:::.:•*4*;•'.•• • 2...: ::,•;.•'•:::'.. 1*'-' .:: •:* •:').; •:•.* .:. .. ... ,.. .. ,. .. . _ /)..... .. ..* - • * • . • Lac: : • • 74el- Y/A;etthi&4244 Cl-ej ,'....'*:..:•.". ....,..„....'..I::,.;4...!...';.....:,,:!,1'K,;11„ .';;i•s,.1.'C.:....14,15, ...:.•...:: ;,,. . /N _•.:.•,. .'..: ;•. '1".::...... . ..174?;.......:,......::.. .%,::-.".!'• :'•:• , '• * . .:‘‘...:..:- 4:...", .-.'..'1":1 .i..1 ..-..':ft!::*':.::-.'. 1.1:'•':.!.,/•••••f..:•.....• .... ...• .•. • !• •F;ridc..P-1-;•.:+•1/4-• ,• ••••• 6$ 2._:•• •) lel..:••.,,r-•%44.4.4__ •• ...,•-:-7- •%•••:''•••••12-:7•7:::;.:;.•::::•-'.:•1.•••••••••••.^•:.;!.••••;,•• ••'.:'....:...:;. :•V!••;•4_ek•alL,41-'• •• • •.•......7.,,,,:;:i:.••:.,......::...;:ctc.!:.•s?e..:.1,i.ii'•i...:!. .li:'.. OW•,f.:!;.•• •••.• "......•••,......!......:::.•• :• • .• : . ' • • . .• • •.../2, 440,. il.74(0. e,t )24.4 .(r. ft ..2,......:;--:.,...1.:: ,....-•;;..: :.• :,:;:k!,,4:,. .,.:1::fi.,. : ::-:• ,...'..: ,......:..-..:-.::.........-..::-.'::•...-.. .. •-:',:. ...:- . ....k.:;•.-.;?.•!•.ff.:kI,..;-i.t. . ....-- ' . .....: T::;-.,:-.:: .?..':::; y:.;•.:.', ;.:;..',......::::',...*::: . ..' r • • :•••.:•• -5( .. ... :.• -,- :•• ,..:',,f, 1-eL':- ...e..r...e?/-46t-e ..:.. . ...•- •• •••••• •.-:-.):_,-;z...,:i,-....,-;.4:: ::-:.... .,....„:„..:-........:;•:•.•••.. :•-• : • • .. . . . •-•:•:-:.••""...',?...2..i.;:14,-;.: :,....;:;::!.vi..,....-,;54;!,?,...,...:,..r,,..• • • • , ••d:Pi- - . :..... ..r..C.P(- 1J.(.-:-:: ' .:'''. ..'.. r .... • - - //. :W.•:i*.•:.:•...':• *:f.:... . . . ... ... . ... :.:i7F..:.';A:y.•::.::-.;,1;•:••.:1•:Z.,',1:til: .:;•:;.i.:.;;;;.:':-.z.i;:i!;-• ••.!•••:ci:!.::: f':;:t ,,-,r.:•':!,,74:,.:',':"*.•:.-.:' •,: : .:: " ;•-•r:**.% - • s fa: ,.........,:... .-....,:.•••••5z-•ri.zic:;,.••:•17::-.,...,w,!:i.:;:',%';:,V.:.;,••••....::.:•...., . ' .......:.:.. . '::::.:,'...,.'. •••••,..;;::-:,-71$Rii:::.':::::':11',-cr;a:z.i',4",,,,:...;........-..',..;.:;.:.:..-,14,;',..-...1z:.....-.;,.s.,.;:,....,::........::z.:,... ...;:.,-. .;:... '.'..• ...e...i.r. .:*.,-.0.._•e,...i:;-,.,,--4.:.-.-..:...zy,e._.4....,•::::.Re,,...-,:. .... ...,..:.... .. .:........... . .. . .i...,,,.--..,•-e....:„,..)...,,,...,.....1.......,,,•• ;,..wv...!::::t0.4:;........Fk.„..:/:. ,,a2.4/2v-: ":.:.:•......- •• •-•• ::- :..,!:;i-.;?:-:,.::,.....i:*:.;(..:,-4:i...3,2-5:. - - -, "--: -.,?---...0.i.:..;,;(...- ......:-..:•. :..•...• i.• • i......•.... :::...:,..::•••••. .:•7.-•.:',..e.,..•••••!...-•:.:,.:.: ::::;.,....:•:-.....:•....--.....!,...• :.•••:•...:--,?:.•.,=.;•-:;•••••- ••••:::-..:y.:••,..,:-..,•••.". .:. • • • .,..,.: • . . •,.. •,.. 4......,:•::1,;::,......:.•,;:t.:, ;:',..A:''.....Y ..:y634...y-......•. '.?,: . :.. ... .-. . :..:......F;';1....4".;t:.'':::.: ;;.:114:%:?.1Y‘...;:':..,..!',.rti..,./:"''' '''':Ill'F':...;t:W).;4.1..-1'.4.''''f'.':::.-,..,...-':;:?;...'"..-...': .1... S.•: : . eiltA,i14V...,:.;.. - :'•;•'4..e.:.A.V.*.:...... • .,. ... ...24-.(f-...----." •; " .',. • ,•-••..--.t..v•••••eik4.;,,,,,!:7:3•I• ...;:i.E7 ••••••77%1••••::••••:.-Y.• .•••7;::,•::1:10,*.•.:•••::•:::1-I.'.•7.-... .*•' • : ••:: •'••••••::7;:`••••:-•••••••••••••••!•.:•,••::•?i,.;;•'7•••••%••••••.•4.••••••7; 77;•7;••••••;:t4 - :kt,ti,-•.'•• •:•;:•:7''...:;.:.Y..,:fY•.!:,:...:;•::75 ••.'::.••'. ;, ' .: .,..:.:?'::':.:'.4;`...•...;.:!:-....,' ..:....;',%. ..:.t.'4'; ?..iV•..*:":--?*.4.e..-7;;;-.1•..i.".•3::,..:;:„1; i.;::•;..•'....);::i•••••••,.'• :.•,. • 57:;-:•.":.:_''.7;11(: ... :-17....••.;,..-.•••';,L7•.,-:••%;:-.4.:'..,;(7..:•i,1•7*.Y.::...•••,••:‘• •:•••.•:•••• :.•:•: .:1.:...,:,...::., ,.:-.•;".''...:i;•i'.'-•' •3:;.;!...z:•••fi•;; ;•.4.k45i1::'il:::-• %;'•:•;'(A.71:1'::i'...:Z47):.e: ff:7-. •: :..-•:. 5.g.;;•.%-....i?-.17.17- 7.*4%Fi4;: .7'-iilif-:•:.:..1i;‹,li4z..:,:CN,,..q.:; ,.;17-•V:. •••••:•:;',•••••• ••'.:•.,i, • : •••- •• `,:••••••••••••••••..:::*•••• ;••••••••........,,,:7.••:.•,•„7::•/•••• :1;•••:.1 •:'•,,,--,7:,•14:,,,•••.-r•,:c.•••,..*,,..:.::v;.,:-• ..!••••::..... .,••. . • ;..•••••.••••••:,.....:!•: r.,v•i.„..rk+.•:,.•••••f•i.•......-.. •.,.. ••••••••••4••• ••.-•,••••..'.4..t•-••.••••••••.•,.',..•.-..../.''..•-,••;•.t.,*•••••..;•••;-,...•-•.:,:.1••;?:.,:•..:•:•,,,••••:,.•.:,;:•••••`'••.f-:.;',C•.';:r.• . • . •••••..i••••:':::::,:::•:..i: :":•.: .:•!••.7.2•:•:•*••••,:! •,••! . •:•••••.‘,,-;.••,•;')'i ••.•!;:••••••:-'•••••••('•.,•••,: • • :• •• • 4-83 May 4, 1990 Mary Lynne Meyer Senior Environmental Planner 14048 S.E. 80 Street 980588 Dept. of Community Development 42 Renton, NA 200 Mill Ave. So. Renton, WA 98055 May 4, 1990 A Ms. Meyer: �F I am writing you about my concern for the Black River MaryLynne Myer, Sr. Environ. Planner Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Plans to develop the Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue So. area into an office park are in many ways destructive for Renton, WA 98055 Renton. Although short term profits may be realized from this activity, long term quality of life issues for Renton Dear Ms. Myer, will be adversely impacted by this construction. It is my understanding that development has been proposed Environmentally the placement of the office park is a very near the heron rookery in the Blackriver Riparian disaster for the wildlife living there now. The geese. Forest. Because of•your responsbility in environmental ducks, herons, and other animals now residing in the area planning for the Renton area, I wish to inform you of my . will certainly leave because of the proximity of humans, strong objection to further disturbance of the heron rookery noise, traffic, and destruction of habitat. The biological area and to the riparian forest. I awsure you have habitat is too delicate to be disturbed. probably already heard the long litany'of pleas for the status quo in many areas, but this particular place is so The groundwater reservoir in the Puget Sound region is delicately balanced, of such long-standing historical value, quickly losing the capability to replenish itself. As an and so unique that another call for staying the bulldozers increasing volume of wetlands and swamps are paved over the seems justified. ability of the reservoir to be recharged will diminish. The proposed development is too close to the heron rookery; Wetlands, as you know, serve a filtering function in the noise, movement, pollution and glare of parking lots and cleansing water that enters the ground water table. In the buildings would certainly "spook" the birds away, and would United State west of the Mississippi River water is and will surety exterminate any local wildlife unfortunate. enough to be more of a problem in the future. Why are we destroying have been living there. all the wetlands? I can't imagine that one more McDonald's, Jiffy Car Wash, Have the impacts of a greatly increased volume of traffic in the area been considered? I would be interested to see the Video iffosk Buster, etc., willano enhance the world jobo all opinion of the State Department of Transportation on this fewewen someone does get o pond for0 per hour s).or a more weeks, or a ticky-taoky condo • few months). development. Humans have emotional needs as well as physical and financial. I believe the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Please consider the long term consequences of this office Heron Rookery should be kept as it is; development can take park development. In the final analysis I feel you will place in less destructive areas. realize that there are, and can be, many office parks in Renton. But there will never be another rookery like the Sincerely yours, one we have now. Respectfully, 424" 'e Phyllis L. Vigal Thomas C. Reiter 18001 I13t4 Ave SE Reti�H WA 98055 255-4650a1) 3g3-1'1VIM 4-84 - - r • t • and ,. ... . . .. 0 2 1-'kt-A.,: r.:9 C 4 44 4 ' t - • • 45 a 0 a Yi;;u_ Q,, . ..� , ..._.._....- .. _. . • . Yam_ , Lv,q Moss .... .Q._. a-. ��L:��„...�. �k.,k�,.r IICi �.e-., — dam✓ �� ..' /�ia-•-�-, ,,,���,/ Lcutbi— • Jtt:�r_eJ�.. �. � io.,..._...�_ ._ cl d' r ,,,""`,� °-' .. -... .--—••----- .__ o__.-, -.- .. ( o..e.a-- ��: (�:J,� . ..3//W /r7is AL se., ,-/J n P 6v, c(/ {�oa3 . ....- -___....__..-_ _a---•�nl_ _-- _F¢Cca Q -- :'T k•-... ... 49 q . ....(11,b4C".G, �7-...... .. .._._.-..___.�.._,__.._._.L, W ..... ._. _ Q CF-.•. - ,1?1:51-'st- r.T._ ti.cnea. ,.. ..... ..... . • 4-85 • -'/7/9i1 /' r T ..ee.� - � : �-L 46 47 05-09-90 l c K...` -c- .fio- _ -._.4- o, t .13 - 4---_ 4. .4(..--,-..ti. P-9 Fo-t-— - _ Ali-`ems X-c-c-tki - Mary Lynne Myer; T 1.4_ _.,--(.4...... .., Cl 3 -e, f - 1 ^^fr,+w I am writting to express my interest and concern about developnent near the i.acL &4 v 4_ . _ ..-•.f-€- �-"`. .- ^^^� - 1'L- "...- L.. BA RIVER RIPARIAN FOREST AND HERON ROOKERY. In your decision making please consider 9 ,r -t (- L�-�- �' - T/ �7^ �I C "'. 714 ' 1""""`' place ent of buildings and parking areas so they are not to close to the Heron Rookery. ....LJ-1,- D,b-A,'-G- . L.' -'-'- C 1*"� /"-c-,4-`-1 Every effort should be made to allow the Herons and other wildlife to remain undisturbe c.p&.. /wa.,.. ,r .... . j .. 71L. . ,..r..i-t_ ���a,-.`..."- '4 -.. -- (_ - by movement,ent, light, noise, glare, and air quality. It seams to me that good planning w-i C,-.....-+' .. .49 ' ' ' 6,4�-N and decision making nod can allow this Heron rookery to continue ururoleste9 by ..[f ,.,•e.-4-... ,..4.... ..›.... . by development. I believe this will add to the value of any development in this ,,...nw0. .,.,:J.-L. - -74- area. It-,Aq-',4.- . Ccw�. • , ./`+- - 'Thank you. c.c^,L.,- 'r,-- )4,- �!l'� �."Ggke- --/- - - ,31.....t_ / .ti c - - o/f-_ � ' �-, Mike Sharuirn ,;...ro� ...-. 74- t,,,.c-c.- ,_. lf,c�.,..,.C_ �-,,-G v-.f ,.v�ti-.. . --fe, c,, ... _e...... . r(_.,.A.L.. .A.... — c.---L.(-,. _A i �� ,,...,..w -& h-,..,.. .•....C '-d- .-- .2.�/c c.....ti c.r - - v ..... . rI -� - .. tcbti LT ex_ .4.AV CI CO- 3s3q a7A/c.. Ai. .2i3 Sfa7TL E i w.a. 9T/i g nP7 oo .i • 4-86 Renton, Washington t May 9, 1990 Mary Lynne Myer 48ta� %%l, ��c,th A A Senior Environmental Planner // ' �'F�7 Department of Community Development ''/� ? .� 200 Mill Avenue South �jQ , ,(yam A,c.cY�� e,[�et�"—�-�� ' Renton, Washington 98055 Ze Re: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery n1/[, Dear Mary Lynne, c C 4 d � ` �/;; 144.0-1 /fay As you already know, we all can see the "asphalt 3ungle, orc(� /�'� �"`°'�-" the high rise apartments, the endless housing developments, / the office buildings and land where trees no longer exist y Qa,4,� ��,..y in our area. / A We surely do not wish to eliminate the chosen sight of the �`e`u ` magestic herons and other habitat at the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery by not insisting that adequate buff- -�"``6.4. -�-¢^m.d.-, -cif -'" ering and trees be left for their protection and the visual • pleasure of many . . do we? a7'-. /c�,,..- X /LLGGx 'c j Respectfully Simi ted, //• , / •.. ik-�L. et--e. �� � r" f M y R se � 7 Oliver C. Rouse 821 Edmonds Ave. NE a Renton, Washington 98056 t Telephone: 255-7381 4-87 •r ru'. - ,.�.,t.. Andrea S. Cohen ' "J7J�+� )' 61s In ird.\'.t. -rI e.de���s'-� t�r.Lz.,,- L ..Y•�,�...e.-,� . Smith.. Il imbing,u„98115 006,t:;-60/S51 50 v (2 Hay 23, 1990 '-1 l `,e---- v� 14 / e Q S-V Mary Lynne Myer �i� � � - - Senior Environmental Planner �L �G� ..L A �j` Dept. of Community Development200 ,,��////77 1 ,�+ Mill Avenue South 'Lee-pt../.,e po �vc.fj7- r Renton, WA 98055 Dear Hs. Hyer: _ //� I am writing to express my concern over the possible l/a .( Gi4 �Ci destruction of the heron wildlife sanctuary that would ./ result if the Blackriver Corporate Park development is G / Z allowed to proceed. � � ..QZ�J . L%Cx�.CJ In contrast to the draft EIS analysis, I believe that buildings and parking areas would be too close to the Heron Q/t-e-10 -, J!0G1: 44/GJ ar'—' Rookery. Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be severely harmed...yet another irreplacable -- ie. loss in a precarious balance between.nature and man. t��Ge Cfi / .774_ 4 Hy concern is a personal one. It is not as much that I am �� ; anti-development as it is that I am pro-wildlife preservation. I find the relentless destruction of the few `� .�� remnants of peace and beauty we can find in our daily lives 7�J/,/to be a tragedy. 1:7, J� � � , In the past year and a half that I have been working in 67444 I :2)- Renton, I have witnessed an onslaught of destruction of ` Y c� . natural beauty. I am truly sorry that the choices that have /66 er-ce _ been made in favor of development have taken such a toll. ' If this development goes forward as described in the draft ^ I I EIS, the herons and other wildlife most likely will leave ,the area. If they do. I will miss them) Sincerely. (..4-1"44111 . Andrea S. Cohen 4-88 ,... ..__ . .. , IL('- ...), i-.:...• • ...,/ . I..L:,; .. iLlet.:-.1. . . . '1 7114.-nuat 7-trutt Wilt&•-• au .)bAloti. 1 ' L •• 1-i • .(,, i,A ii.,. - . 52 ept.1 a-no-puma, AteAdirm.4.7 olog toestsr4 giry F14/ Pp 711. 1.€ ave 40• kiiu-n, km. qr-p 2.tAimt..1 Mk. eon-- -rur .1.......y1-• 04" C.V%..ml..,%it il.1..:.1e41C(CV ivki,"I- . 4.1 0-Ci 1-1.4 -MC.vi W.- . g-1 (tt D s's" 4 . .- . H 14-11t....-. qg (2/11t- 14/1-.A. 1 Xa ..44(112412'?ICY""7"44411°Mt'X 4• 'fit 4$1:1#-J(-2 I; -a,y, C.crtc.ow n-ecA OV.r.,u.-1- 4_,. .(1..4.A re.... c.c; 44..,_ xwe.249nw,a .ftedext- arldawj'Mt. Lislatelttui4eti/14actietZintor %\Av_.14-14,e- ,1..,v-;,,,-, 1;re:zit' neqk 4164-c,-; ecci-.2.1. evyth &coy igoo.447... 77‘..6. d.wifinrn.14,2"..p,o-a+Lit,id.47....-p,A064, -414 ti.,0.1‘0L.:\-- .-1,...,.. ,T,i,,s, 0,e.'J t.., 1.0 el-Vc•tutt 4(e.c.S E.— - ›:AiLLAY a_ -nutlet. gl.t. (.4-sirit4:ad Aito. &Ka I'414.-.4tz411(AAt- Nn...1-r fri 4L- •',Uri 1 Am.% .Irkt•'Nei 5(11 r A OLle, 4-;-;.- L rt.:nc. a,ki& ,61tLAL to LVIQ vnail...414-c7.4. eca4).4...511-7(4..4tre.vei,,,.VLt. .1.- J--,.:.-tt.,./,_. -ievti• --IL (u.,,-..,.pil 0-c .4f,,. -,...-r.yr,-,-_,* pa r cum.x. Az.mi,JT...." lin.-.git. b€4;44;,ds 44t4-PlAA71 A.c,,ie..1 GA.,ou..,-d- 4,,t -1 f.... 1.pnci:xi vatel .4 •i-P.J... loi.,-i-i-u-- 2.,,,-,„,s •-•• c.LA A \c,z_, no.-1- r v....Li-AO -1,3 AL.. w,....:,1.-... 6/5"1- 4") c1-4'-'4' 4 2w- 1 a*IX #470/4. bo •tito 7iA)1/1, ievax-i VA; XA.I... elike-Z?, AUillt rd0r14.744.117 Z14.ts. ./0,t-ae. 1,,,,2.itoli u.! Lim iiAre.'i . ..rtolc,c_. cto if-al.t..ppu.a..a.;),(AL-Mt, AA-AA-.• in Of ba VI i% 1‘911)td%• ...- :ncl..0.11 j .19 elm1144 AfPu-C4SC-- Ziaul41 Ca"/YCLI AL(lf- 1-4t1•71.-M•iii-Cts olaJt, ...---r likieto Fl`Leo n zmeit...4.4.;) bul JUN A i i 135 A.1.4 0,1 a f 4.44 4 4A-.e. 0 ue tukAie.....-. i% Seitlite., btA-1-our tkIkAr4, 4-4,d . -. 1,1},,,iwwiSch.atk k Y--tertnn.VJe- lx.,e 4-1,., 1,A._4 0,, Amu t.1 4i-inu...dr.) mcntii In Keerlrn•Vje- Ceire, "0 i-t* Af...... LA,.., L,,,,A 'Alb cuiAufe.... 1 . . leu.04...)k•rv..iit? . • • . • • 4-89 . • /.2509 VIIti ie l g 7r �, �c� . �t;��'�U A14 y , %9 9 a giait. 67 /''ls �l�¢�' S 5 71(4' o4r - `Yr, 54 L,��y '� �"" � / Tip eerned abo #re rrivsed` l,Uy1 CGk�t[� ar,O vwi % .ryRr„,,, #j.,a G n al eVelor-Pla at f j e 374CK 1✓er g0 • lo : �, Ri�oer�a,�, �Urosv� a.H� � �nry. �ti AQ. the ,2k!Gipr o//e&iVay ant, lo Ito.. 1 luceni -- -Al: q /J par/ ;i as clog zt: ,4_ ai,( 1 i. Al-dm:ip 1 0 I k . t. - 4.— 71, &rap," , 4 a,-ya ete- 40 ,Le. d u alums — %wo.-74e ; vrattiar Adc Qec �»u �' rrfi h ti row {ire herorrr / d43 e Ca� L /ne;? itie,A G a'y' .n� /�tGs�?'Idx�- ac fi7r�li . �elv� -i anti �.P.0 �l ... � �aae .lug � , ��cCe'cf , Air S «IGS itii, „„,..61 fail meei A4letz .. P Moe, do m� a ca S'�,c,�rel X"r_ 'till, 4D iv_ 16:4,1rzza6 . T 6(246 we . lb big atm r . „Jai Lds.:, ,/ 2 -11302 4/7 IA 5A/ Kit //44J A1' "so 76 Rairet--#f 5' 3- 2593 4-90 N. LO w°U -� 1 T -m,-•yr-'t-f .y,,,, 0.11,}3 ,c^cam *cog' rolt‘ 1 lr")'"`"\f' IN-"1 z--.1•yr % tr—lry .....s • opy, t%•-•-viat-,i"-r-o ,��"Z-rz „r 1, ,. - •-c `,p ' :''- `ter,-,, �,` )- Qom' u -F M Jtu�; ;, S , .GIs Z C • co In 0, 4 ''''' -4 1 .1'' $ fl I 1,4 t 1 I ii k \ 1 i C.,, N .. .`` • H ''l )0 • ' 1 \N .3 1 . c_ 1— i 1 )\ 4:1 1 4 6c., • 7 :0 i 1 . i 1 . Nt :.1 tk i . r . . . cl 1* _ . rt -io 4 ..4 p . ..t'- f13 . -- .- I- -i 1iit ill q p ii ..ti, i., , . , i -, i. , I . t 11_0 ob _ , -1. . ., tclki rli'. 1 q -41 • '.1 .1 4 �L: , , ,., . . ., ,, , 1 ci k ).„-s , „-- i -, , , , , 4 , 1- 110 ,--lk It - • , , _ __,. , . ,.., .,,._ --3 . , ll'IlL,t ,', 4,,,i, , , Response to Comments from Betty Lambert,J.A.Matter,Mr.&Mrs.T.J.Hauff,Joyce Frank,James Culler,William N.Christie,Peter M.Hudelson,John and Julie McCone, Elizabeth Storm,Susan Smalley,Elizabeth Lundstrom,Ken and Ada Shannon,Mr.&Mrs. Orville Radel,Lola Nordquist,Charles Dowd,Mary and James Kenney,Shirley Winton, Deborah Dowd, Elizabeth Culbert, Christopher Schultz,Thomas Reiter, Phyllis Vigal, Elizabeth Seafoos,Paul and Sharon(illegible last name),Walter KucieJ,Mike Shannon, Mary Jo and Oliver Rouse,C.Scott,Andrea Cohen,Eva Gadbols,Theresa McLean,Susan Konichi,Rayna Holtz,Jay Nelsen,Beulah Hillstrom,and Emma Amiad: This Final EIS includes mitigation measures to further minimize impacts,including extending the setback of development on Tract B from the heron rookery to 600 feet. See response to comments from King County. The city is aware of the wildlife values provided in the P-1 Pond and adjacent riparian forest. Much of that riparian forest has been deeded to the city as open space. • The city has targeted funds for purchase of some portion of the entire area as open space. However, the amount available, $650,000, is not sufficient to purchase the properties Included in this proposal. 4-36 4-92 2 • CUMMEN'1.5 Ou THE BLACKWATEU t:ol:PuuATE PAUK URAF1' oL planl.s, amphibians, reptiles. birds. or mammals. Scienllllc ENVIUONMEN'1'AL STATEMENT OF APRIL. 199e nomenclature is not given for Lhe Lew species that are specifically mentioned in the text. Vegetative habitat. components are mentioned. by58 but only in qualitative, rather than quantitative, Lashion. From the text, it appears that biological investigations on the ground J„h:, P. Kclsull, Ph.D.. N.F'.Dio. may have been limited to a single field trip - 'the field visit in 22 Deerfield Drive mid-June" (p. 3-31). although "field visits' are referred to (p. Della. British Columbia B4) In connection with Lhe heronry in Appendix B. Canada. V4M 2W9 The Leal. particularly "3.b.1 Vegetation' and '3.5.3 Wildlife Resources', Is lull of qualifiers that reinforce an impression that Jnlruducliu,, there was no on-site description of current biota. Such phrases as "Species such as Timothy...are present'. 'an extensive shrub zone My comments en the 3lackwaler Corporate Park draft environmental characterized primarily of red alder and black cottonwood'. 'trees statement are confined to those portions where I have some of approximately 100 to 130 feet in height', 'Species such as red experience and expertise. They are those sections of the main alder". "it is likely that predators use these wetland areas". report dealing with plants and animals and, particularly, with 'wildlife most likely to utilize the site include". "Appendix V - Lilc history and effects of human disturbance on "Walerfuwi...may nest', du nut lend confidence that the authors great blue heron rookeries". Because I have not visited the site. had more than a superficial idea of what they were writing about. my review is concerned only with the technical accuracy and adequacy of wnat is said in the EIS. 1 do not comment specifically In general. plants and plant associations are described somewhat on proposed mitigation measures or alternative plans because. In better than the onimola. The authors at least know the colloquial my opinion, the biologlcal baseline is inadequate for such names of a number of grasses. herbaceous plants, shrubs, and trees. considerations. The reader yetisa reasonable idea of the sorts of vegetative. 2 associations that will be lost with development of the site. but A strong first Impression waa.that the EIS appears to accept the no idea of the importance of that loss to the surrounding corporate park ueve!opment as virtually a foregone conclusion - environment. that the only decisions remaining ore those of how best to provide ' for the retention of some habitat and wildlife around_. the _R,eferuncq ls_made to a dozen or so bird species, although it Is not peripheries of the site. The heron colony and P-1 pond are the only ' clear if they were seen by the investigators, or are merely wildlife values given more than superficial consideration, and the mentioned as being possible occupants of the site. corporate part: design is modified, perhaps only slightly, to lessen impacts on t:,em. A "no action" alternative is mentioned In A few mammals are mentioned by name as well, but again with no connection with each section of the development, but Is nowhere certain indication that they were identified through on-site seriously discussed. No information is given on the importance of investigation. One would like to know what the investigators mean the existing site to local wlldlile, to the local environment, or when they say "Few mammals, other than mice. voles. and adaptable to the quality of life in Renton. What is planned for the residual 4 predators such as racoons. striped skunks, and opossums will be riparian toreut adjacent to the site? From the scant information •tom sustained." What are the is that, through inference, will not supplied, it seems that the corporate park site may supply some be sustained? For that matter what species of voles and mice are wild land that complements the residual forest by adding they talking about, and in what numbers? There are some rare and considerable biological diversity. Interesting vole° and mice In the Pacific northwest. and there are also some extremely common ones that provide much food for • predators. Including great blue Ir . Are there shrews, moles. Deficiencies in the EIS other small species, or other large species, present? • The most serious, immediately apparent, deficiency in the Things are even luau clear with the 'amphibians and reptiles". No environmental impact atatemegt is the absence of biological .amphibians or reptiles are named. Insects are not conoldered at Inventory. Biological inventory is usually the first, basic, and 2 - all. necessary step when making an environmental assessment. It is difficult to imagine attempting biological description of an area I would like to have some assurance that the site is not without first knuwine what is there, but that is exactly what the ecologically important to a larger area, and that it does not Blackwaler Corporate Park draft attempts to do. There .are no lists contain rare or endangered life forms. No such assurance can be • • 4-93 • • 3 4 given ur interred from the us as it stands. 1 '- be much greater than 11 Lhey arc not. • I The engineering aspects of the Environmental Impact Statement may 1L would also be useful to sec consideration of the elevation of be well done and Lhurough. They include some hard data, and appear the heron'a nests in relation to that of the planned buildings. One to have some substance. but I am nut. qualified to judge Lhem. I can would suspect. although I know of no directly, conilrmi ) data. that state, however. that, excepting some aspects of. Appendix U. the buildings that ovcrluok nests would have a much greater impact than l,iol,�gical aspects of the environmental statement are simplistic ones below nest level. We know how high the.planned buildings will and supecticial in the extreme. be. Relative to them, how high are the nests? Will the roofs of the buildings have human activity areas? IL is nut evident. from the EIS, what configuration for buildings Appendix I: and the great blue heron nesting colony and parking is most likely in the planned corporate park. The plans shown in "Appendix H" aro not the same as those shown in the main Q The description and discussion of the great. blue heron culony, body at. the work. Considering the huge size of outdoor parking v adjacent to the Dlackwaler Corporate Park site. is surprisingly shown on some of the diagrams, it seems surprising that the authors limited, considering the prominence given to it in the E15. did sot attempt Lo analyze the effect of car park activity on Iliologiral data relating to it appear to be almost entirely jj nesting herons. Whit about night time activity in the corporate derived from unpublished reports and conversations. The colony Is 1 park? Herons may make feeding tllyhls day and night. not well described. We are told that the nest:: are in a grove of "140 to 150 foot tall" black cottonwoods. We are not told Ll,e The authors have done a commendable job of locating selective number or extent. of trees used for nessting, the heights of the references. particularly from the northwest, that demonstrate that nests above ground. the condition or viability of the nesting herons may maintain colonies despite much environmental grove, or the condition and composition of the subcanopy disturbance. Their data show, however, that such colonies are vegetation. almost invariably small. The average number of active nests in the 6 colonies shown on their Table 8-1 is 18.6, with a range from 0 We are not told what disturbances the nesting herons are subject to 50. That Is about half age colony size for the province of to now. We are not told if there are alternate nesting sites in British Columbia, and some other venues examined (Kelsall 1989, the local area, in the event that development for the corporate Forbes et A. 1985e). • park should cause abandonment of the heronry. We are not told why Lhe heron established themselves where they have. Were they The instability of such small colonies is demonstrated by the fact perhaps displaced from some known previous site? My second hand that they are short lived. Table 8-1 shows no record for any of.the • information, slightly different from that given in the EIS. is that colonies prior to 1985, and the text suggests no significantly the colony has had progressively increasing numbers of nests - from longer history for any of them. By contrast, large colonies. In 3 in 1986 Le over 30 in 1990 -(S. Krom, personal communication). large and secure acreages are known. if only through oral That suggests a reasonably secure, undisturbed, and increasingly tradition, to be long lived. For example, a colony of upward to 200 important nesting site. nests In Tsawvassen. British Columbia, that was destroyed by ,Q logging in 1955. had been at the same forested site since the turn The CIS lacks, or is less than precise on. some basic Information of the century, and probably long before that. Urban development concerning the heronry. Where, and on what, do.the nesting herons forced it to move several times !n [I.e next 18 years. It reloeatec • feed? Do they use the adjacent park and pond site, or do they go about 1973 in a forest of 1 hundred acres In Point Roberts. further afield? Feeding locations are determined by the simple Washington, where it now has ±3a5 active nests per year: Large • process of observing the directions of feeding flights, and colonies are also more productive than small ones, fledging more following those flights to their sources. The finding of feeding / young par nest. It is believed that some small colonies might not locations may be simplified by detersiining what the birds are /p produce enough young to maintain themselves without recruitment eating. That determination is often made by examining foodstuffs form nearby larger colonies (sec Forbes 4l g/. 1985e. Forbs g, al. . commonly dropped over the sides of active nests. Colonies often 1985b. Kelsall 1989, Butler 1989). . have more than one feeding area. Have those matters been • investigated?. The EIS plans heron flight corridors between The authors should qualify their repeated use of the Stanley Park buildings in the corporate park, but It does not indicate that heronry in Vancouver, and the Delta River Inn heronry in Richmond those corridors are ones that the herons actually use. In fact the (not Vancouver). B.C. as eaawples of tolerance to vehicular and EIS is vague on that point. If the buildings will be in the direct human traffic. The Stanley Park colony indeed tolerates much human, and commonly used flight paths of feeding herons, their Impact will and some vehicular traffic. However. It should be noted that It has • 4-94 - • • 5 6 had L.o years ur prugreasrvely greater di::turbanue in which to sites due to disturbance are legion. 113 condition. It has not been remarkably successful despite having excellent nest trees and room to move around, extensive feeding Yoe et al. ll9Hb) experimentally examined the reaction of nesting habitat. and virtually no avian predation. The Delta River inn il herons Lu disturbance by humans. and may have produced the most hcr'unry. in 4 noisy and busy ulte, is a real anomaly. However. the I/ definitive study to date. They found. and other authors agree, that trees involved provide the only feasible nest sites in an extremely herons arc less tolerant of disturbance early In the nesting cycle rich feeding area near Vancouver airport. Theoretically there is (i.e. during courtship, nest building, egg laying. and early room tor.• many nests. In Lact•, only a few birds (3 nests in 1990) incubation) than they are later in the season. Visibly disturbed tenaciously hang on there (Scott Forbes• personal communication). by an Intruder at en average •of 560' (170 m) in March, they That heronry is not viable in the'usual sense of the word. and tolerated inlrunion to within 165' to 210' (50 to 65 m) for Lhe . certainly nut something Lo be emulated at Olackriver. balance of the season. Like moat other authors on the subject. Vos el a1. believed Lhat herons may be considerably disturbed well There are some oddities in the summarised data [staling to small before they actually provide overt evidence by flushing from the nest. Their recommerrdaliorrs for a buffer zone around heronries was , heronries in Table 0-3. First, the distances between human activil'ieu and "Rookeries" (in my dictionary rookeries are for 820' (25U m). the greatest distance at which herons were flushed rooks. Cor•v_us iuglieges, although the term is'sumetirnes applied to from the neat by an intruder. plus' 164' (50 m) as a safety margin. places where seals and penguins haul out of the water) arc obviously rough approximations. Curiously, the approximations used Hunt recent recommendations for the protection of heronries suggest In the table are often different from those used in the J2,_ 1.000' (30b m) as a zone within which there will be no disturbance accompanying. descriptive text. The discrepancies are sufficiently oL any sort during the nesting season. The most comprehensive. frequent and divergent as to make all the given distances suspect. recent guidelines, of which I am aware. are those of Bowman and Stranger still is the status ,rating giver[ for two of the heronries Siderlus (1984) for Lhe Province of Ontario. The Wnshington'State in Table U-I. What were the criteria by which the Pigeon Point Department of Came draft management guidelines for heronries. cited heronry. that had only 16 nests in 1986. none In 1987 or 1908, and In the EIS. are alone in recommending a 656' (200 m) buffer zone. whose current status is unknown, was judged to be 'viable'? Its' In leaving much to the discretion of biologists when recommending viability seems to be most uncertain from the data given. The buffer zones, they forget that few biologists have experience or Spencer Property heronry. with only 6 nests In 1988 and no knowledge of the needs of nesting herons. The ±340 nest Point subsequent data, surely has unknown, rather than "viable, status. Roberts colony has come perilously close to destruction, and may .yet._go,..because a state biologist apparently did not thoroughly The authors appear to have selectively ignored a substantial investigate existing and planned encroachments on the nesting area literature suggesting that persistence of heron nesting it (see Kelsall 1989). disturbed sites Is an exception rather than a rule. The corporate park development will certainly impact the adjacent heronry. perhaps even cause its abandonment, despite suggested safeguards. Literature references Wecschkul et al. (1976), whom they cite. observed that heron nests within 486' (148 m) of a logging operation were inactive. While I frequently edit draft manuscripts for technical journals. nests 71.9' (219 m) from the logging were active, birds were including the Journal of Mammalogy. Journal of Wildlife Management. shifting nests to Lhe side of the colony distal from the Canadian Journal of Zoology, and Wildlife Society Bulletin, and for disturbance. Simpson and Kelsall (1978) compared two similar heron 13 book publishers, consulting companies, and the Canadian Wildlife t colonies, one severely impacted by development of a housing Service. -It is rare. in my experience, to see literature citations f subdivision nearby. Toward the end of the breeding season in 1978. handled as carelessly as they are in Appendix B of the Blackwater 88% oL nests In the undisturbed colony were active, but only 27% Corporate Park draft. If a structure is no stronger than its of those exposed .to development were still viable. The disturbed weakest .link. the Blackwater Corporate Park EIS is hanging by a colony was abondoned by the birds the following year. Corbett et thread! al. (1905) described a classic case where a large heronry of perhaps 200 years standing was abandoned following progressive The following citations given in the text, figures. and Table B=1 human intrusion ever a period of 30 years. Some of the factors were - of Appendix B are not given in the jtgtatglg_cj g". There may construction of a causeway to the island site, progressive be others that I did not note in panning. enlargement of encroaching camping and parking facilities and. finally. confinement of the heronry to unsuitable coniferous forest City of Seattle 1986 - Table B-1. p. B-11 where herons killed many nest trees with their excrement before Cottrille 1950 - p. B-4 finally abandoning the site.' Examples of herons abandoning nest llonny 1971 - p. B-5 • - 4-95 H Henny l4/2 - p. 11-4 Georgia. ,1111i Vermeer. K. and I1.W. Butler (eds.). Ecology and LPN. Inc. 19t:0 - Figs. 2 and 3, status of marine and Shoreline birds In the Strait of Georgia. Mark 1975 - p. 8-4 • proceedings of a symposium spu::wired by the Pacific Northwest R.N. Thorpe and Associates 1985 - p. 8-9 Bird and Mammal Society and the Canadian Wildlife Service. Simpson et al. 1987 - p. B-6 Canadian Wlldlile Service. Special Report:112-119. Taylor end Rcshkin 1981 - p. 8-7. 8-11 Van Wormer 1989 - Table 8-1 Corbett, C.N., K. Robinson. and C. Roberts, 1985. A review of the Webb and Forbes 1982 - p. 8.7. B-8, B-10 Itustico island heronry In Prince Edward Island National Park. Parks Canada. Atlantic Region. Natural Resource Management In addition the following anomalies were noted in, the "Literature Planning. Technical Report (with Ammendmen.ts). 34 p. C l t_ed_", Forbes. L.S., K. Simpson. J.P. Kelsall. and D. Flook. 1985e. Great "Short and Cooper. 1985." are given twice. blue heron colonies in British Columbia. Environment Canada. "Simpson. K. and J.N.M. Webb. 1987." Is not a bona fide reference. IS Canadian Wildlife Service. Delta. 78� p. It may be a contusion of papers published by Webb and Forbes (1982). and by Simpson. Smith. and Kelsall (1987) given in my Forbes. L.S., K. Simpson. J.P. Kelsall. and D. Flook. 1985b. .literature citations below. Reproductive success of great blue herons In British Columbia. I may have missed them, but I did not see "Henny and Bethers. Canadian Journal of Zoology 63(5):1110-1113. 1971." or" U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987." cited in the text. Kelsall, J.P. 1989. Tho great blue herons of Point Roberts - history. biology, and management. prepared ler Point Roberts Some of the references given are incompletely cited. Four of the Heron Preservation Committee, Point Roberts. WA (unpublished last five literature references for example. on page 8-16. provide report). 32 p. author, dale of publication, title, and pagination only. They give only indirect indications of where they might be found, thus Simpson. K. and J.P. Kelsall. 1978. Capture and banding of great • thwarting the essential purpose of literature citations, which is blue herons at Pander Harbour. Britlah Columbia. Proceedings to allow a reader to look things up personally. of the Colonial Waterbird Croup 2:71-78. ..Simpson, K.. J.N.M. Smith, and J.P. Kelsall. 1987. Correlates and consequences of coloniallty in great blue herons. Canadian Conclusions Journal of Zoology 65:572-577. Since the developers of the Blackwater Corporate Park are clearly Vos D.K., 11.A. Ryder, and W.D. Crawl. 1985. Response of breeding playing brinksmanship with the Renton heronry. and possibly with great blue herons to human disturbance An northcentral other ecological values as well, it Is reasonable to expect that Colorado. Colonial Waterbirds 6(1):13-22. any environmental assessment of the site should be systematic and comprehensive. Unfortunately, the biological considerations In the 14 Webb. R.S. and L.S. Forbes. 1982. Colony establishment In an urban draft Environmental Impact Assessment are inadequate and flawed. site by great blue herons. Murrelet 63(3):91-92. They should be upgraded to reasonable professional standards. Fur example, they should be acceptable to a panel of professional Werschkul, O., E. McMahon. M. Leitschuh, S. English, C. Skibinaki, biologists In relevant fields, using the same sort of criteria that - and C. Willi 1977. Observations on the reproductive apply to peer-edited technical publications. ecology of the great blue heron (Qrdga herodi83) in western Oregon. Murrelet• 58(1):7-12. • Literature cited above Bowman. 1. and J. Siderius. 1984.I Management guidelines in for the • /1441)144d protection of heronries In Ontario. Ontario Ministry of , Natural Resources, Wildlife Branch. Toronto. 44 p. JohP. Kelsall . April 24. 1990. Butler. R.W. 1989. Breeding ecology and population trends of the great blue heron. &Irdee herocnel janninl, in the Strait of • • 4-96 • 1959 to 1965 liologiat 3. Educational leave in Australia Resume of Perth. • 1959-60. Research biologist for eastern Australia. National Parks. Pioneered studies of behaviour JOHN P. KELSALL Ottawa. Ont. and morphological adaptione of moose and deer and for snow end investigated factors involved in 22 Deerfield Drive Sackville. widespread "moose sickness" in eastern North Delta, British Columbia N.B. America. Canada. V4M 2W9 Telephones (604) 943-8763 1948 to 1959 Technical, Officer 3. Biologist 3. For Canadian Ottawa. Ont.. Wildlife Service. led research on barren Occupational Vancouver, ground caribou 1950-59. Developed new Objective Consulting assignments in any aspect of B.C. and techniques for biological research under arctic renewable resource use or research where my Yellowknife, conditions. Made short term investigations. education and experience can be used to N.W.T. from Alaska to Greenland, involving beaver. advantage. arctic fox, musk-oxen and other life forms. • Reported many new records for plants, birds and mammals. Educational leave 1950-51. ' Experience Highlights Education Ph.D. in Zoolog y. University of Western 1981 to President. Kelsali Research Ltd. Consulting in Australia, 1965. date. Delta, ecological research, review and resource Post graduate studies in Ecology. University of B.C. management for various clients including the Ottawa, 1960-61. Banff Centre School of Management. Beak Post graduate studies in Wildlife Management. Consultants Ltd. LGL Ltd. Environcon Ltd. University of British Columbia, 1951-52. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Northwest Territories Department of Renewable M.A. in Bionemice. University of Toronto, 1949.- Resources, National Parks Canada, Canadian Biology. B.A. in Acadia University. 1947. Wildlife Service, and The World Wildlife Fund. Completed courses in Field Geology and 1968 to 1980 Research Scientist 2 to Research Scientist 4. • " ' Mineralogy. 1954 and Intermediate Government Delta, B.C., Reed. December 1980. Directed and reported Administration, 1965. Edmonton, -research on great blue heron ecology, and Alta., and environmental assessments of.National Wildlife Professional American Society of Mammalogists Nanaimo, areas and reserves. Developed a curriculum and Affiliations Arctic Institute of North America (Fellow) B.C. school in Renewable Resources Technology for Association of Professional Biologists of the Northwest Territories; the first class British Columbia•(past Director) graduated in 1979. Developed, directed and Canadian Paraplegic Association reported research toward learning geographic International Oceanographic Foundation origins of birds from their feather chemistry. Ottawa Field-Naturalists Designed, conducted and collaborated on major Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada studies ornorthern wildfire ecology and Pacific Northwest Bird and Mammal Society (past adaptione of large mammals for life in snow. Canadian Vice President) - Studied and reported the ecology of 3 IBP The Wildlife Society (Certified Wildlife sites and a proposed National Park in the North. Biologist) Presented papers or otherwise represented employer, the Canadian Wildlife Service, at many Bibliography Authored, or coauthored, 72 publications and national and international meetings,1948-1959• many unpublished reports, mostly dealing with original research but including research and 1965 to 1968 Research Mana&er 1. Biologist 5. Directed the management plans, environmental impact Edmonton, research program for Western Region, Canadian assessments. bibliographies and administrative Alta. Wildlife Service. Responsible for all research documents. Won The Wildlife Society's award for.. the western National Parke and Arctic. and beet monograph in 1968 for "The migratory cooperative programs in the 4 western barren-ground caribou of Canada"; runner-up for provinces. Acting Director of the Western the same award in 1958. Wrote and read 48 radio Region through 1967. Left management because of a preference for research. page 1 of 3 Page 2 of-1 4-97 • ••®IBLIOGRAPHY • John P. Kelsall • October, 1980 Bibliogravhv broadcasts for the Canadian Broadcasting contd. Corporation, 1969 to 1971. Personal Photography, creative writing, reading, world Publications Interests travel, northern history and ecology, swimming, KELSALL, J.P. 1949. A study of bird populations in the apple orchards of collecting Canadians. the Annapolis Valley, Nova Scotia, with Po y particular reference to the Personal Born 30 September 1924. Canadian Citizen. effects of orchard sprays upon them. Can. Wildl. Serv., wildl. Manage. • Data Married, 3 children. Height 183 cm. Weight Bull. 1, series 2. (M.A. thesis, U. of Toronto) 69 p. 84 kg. Wear glasses. Service with the Royal Canadian Air Force, 1944-45. pensioner. KELSALL, J.P. 1953. Caribou calving studies. 1951. Arctic Circular 6(1): 6 - 7. Physical Limitations Physically limited by spastic paralysis of the KELSALL, J.P. 1953. Biological investigations of the Thelon Game Sanctuary. legs. Upper body and arms unaffected. Can Arctic Circular 6(1):7 - B. drive vehicles with hand controls, travel locally or internationally if required. KELSALL, J.P. 1953. Barren-ground caribou movements in the Canadian Arctic. Assistance required when faced with physical Trans. 20th N. An. Wildl. Conf.:551 - 560. barriers to a wheelchair. Health otherwise satisfactory. BMIFIELD, ;..W.F., FLOOK, D.R., KELSALL, J.P. and LOUGHREY, A.C. 1955. An aerial survey technique for northern big game. Trans. 20th N. Am. References References and a detailed bibliography on Wildl. Conf.:519 - 532. request. .KELSALL, J.P. 1957. Continued barren-ground caribou studies. Can. Wildl. Serv., Wildl. Manage. Bull. 12, Series 1. 148 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1957. The barren-ground caribou cooperative investigation October 21, 1986. 1957-58. Rept. No. 1. Can. Wildl. Serv. 12 p. • KELSALL, J.P. and L4UGHREY, A:G. 1957. The barren-ground caribou cooper- ative investigation. Rept. No. 2. Can. Wildl. Serv. 51 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1958. The barren-ground caribou cooperative investigation. • Dept. No. 3. Gan. Wildl. Serv. 22 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1959. A poisonous fungus in the Northwest Territories. Can. Field-Nat. 73(2)2130. KELSALL, J.P. 1960. Co-operative studies of barren-ground caribou, 1957- 58. Can. Wildl. Serv., Wildl. Manage. Bull. 15, Series 1.. KELSALL, J.P., LOUGMREY, A.C. and STEWART, R.C. 1960. Arctic expert test. North 7(6)217-20. MACPHERSON, A.H., )(ARINGTON, C.a.. and KELSALL, J.P. 1962. The barren ground grizzly bear in northern Canada. Arctic 15(4): 294-298. • One of three finalists for The Wildlife Society award for 'the out- standing publication on wildlife ecology and management' in 1957. • Pape 3 of 3 4-98 2. 3. KELSALL, J.P. 1963. -ground caribou and their management. Can. KELSALL, J.P. 1970. Interaction between barren-ground caribou and musk- Audubon, Nov. - Dec.: 144 - 149. rats. Can. J. Zool. 48(3): 605. . KELSALL, J.P. 1963. Review of "Land and fresh-water mammals of the •KELSALL, J.P. 1970. Migration of the b -ground caribou. Natural Ungava Peninsula" by Francis Harper. J. Wildl. manage. 27(2): History. Aug. - Sept.: 98-106. 304-305. KELSALL. J.P. 1970. Chemical elements in waterfowl flight feathers. KELSALL, J.P. 1964. The decline of the caribou. Oryx 7(5): 204-246. Can. Wildl. Serv., Progress Notes No. 17. 11 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1965. Insular variability in the tammar (Protemnodon KELSALL. J.P. 1970. Comparative analysis of feather parts from wild euaenii) of Western Australia. Ph.D. thesis. U. of West. Aust. 107 p. mallards. Can. Wildl. Serv., Progress Notes No. 18. 6 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1966. Additional bird observations at Bathurst Inlet, KELSALL, J.P. 1970. Some breeding records for birds on the central N.W.T. Can. Field-Nat. 80(3): 178-179. Coppermine River. N.N.T. Can. Field-Nat. 84(3): 306-307. KELSALL, J.P. 1967. Review of "A continent in danger" by Vincent Serventy. KELSALL, J.P. 1970. Ob ions of birds and mammals at Bluenose Lake, Can. Field-Nat. 81(4): 294-295. N.W.T. Arctic 23(3): 190-196. FLOOK, D.R., FULLER, W.. KELSALL, J.P., SCOTTER. G. and WISHART, W. 1967. KELSALL. J.P. 1971. Die Wanderungen der B -Ground Karibus. Das Resource administration and development in the Northwest Territories Tier, Nr. 4, April. pp. 4-9 and 55. (A brief of the Alberta Chapter, Canadian Society of Wildlife and Fishery Biologists to the Advisory Commission on Development of KELSALL, J.P. 1971. A range extension for the bushy-tailed wood rat in Government it tie Northwest Territories). C.S.W.F.B. Occasional Alberta. Can. Field-Nat. 85(4): 326. Papers 2: 6-11. KELSALL, J.P. 1971. Hinterland Who's Who. Woodchuck. Can. Wildl. KELSALL, J.P. 1968.-Hinterland Who's Who. The caribou. Queen's Printer, Setv., LAND Pub. No. QS-9083-000-ES-A-1. 6 O. Ottawa. 6 p. (published•enonymously). KELSALL; J.P. and TELFER, E.S. 1971. Studies of the physical adoption of •• KELSALL, J.P. 1968. The migratory barren-ground caribou of Canada. big game for snow. Proc. Snow and Ice in Relation to Wildlife and Can. Wildl. Serv., Monograph No. 3. The Queen's Printer, Ottawa. Recreation Symposium, Iowa State U. 134-146. 340 p. KELSALL. J.P. and PRESCOTT, W. 1971. Moose and deer behaviour in snow • CLARK, A.H.,Kelsall, J.P.,and PARKER, G.R. 1968. The land snail fauna of in Fundy National Park, New Brunswick, Can. Wildl. Serv., Rept. Fundy National Park, New Brunswick. Nat. Museum Can. Bull. 223: 5-22. Series No. 15. 27 p. THOMAS, D.C.,PARKER, G.R.,KELSALL, J.P.,and'L000HREY, A.G. 1968. KELSALZ J.P., HAWLEY, V.D. and THOMAS, D.C. 1971. Distribution and • 'Population estimates of barren-ground caribou on the Canadian abundance of muskoxen north of Great Bear Lake. Arctic 24(3): 157- mainland from 1955 to 1967. Can. Wildl. Serv., Progress Notes No. 3. 161. 5 p. XELSALL. J.P. 1972. The northern limits of moose in western Canada. KELSALL, J.P. 1969. Structural adaptions of moose and deer for snow. J. Mammalogy 53(1): 129-138. J. Mammalogy 50 (2): 302-310. - KELSALL. J.P. and CALAPRICE, J. 1972. Chemical content of waterfowl LOUGHREY, A.G. and KELSALL, J.P. 1969. The ecology and population plumage and population diagnosis. J. Wildl. Manage. 36(4):-1088-1097. dynamics of the barren-ground caribou in Canada. Ecology of the sub Arctic regions. Proc. of the Helsinki Symposium (UNESCO): KELSALL, J.P., KUYT, E. and ZOLTAI, S.C. 1972. Ecology of the Fort 275-280. Reliance-Artillery Lake area. Can. Wildl. Serv. 99 p. 47 maps. KELSALL. J.P. 1970. Review of "Reindeer ecology and management in Sweden" KELSALL, J.P. 1974. Snow goose primaries as indicators of age and sex. by Folke Skuncke. Arctic 23(1): 67. Can. J. Zool. 52(6): 791-794. Won The Wildlife Society award for best publication on terrestial KELSALL, J.P. and YELPER. E.S. 1974. Biogeography of moose with part- wildlife in 1968. icular reference to western North America. Naturalists Can. 101: 117-130. • 4-99 4. 5. KELSALL, J.P. 1977. Review of "The biogeoche.istry of blue, snow and Ross' PANNEKOEK, W.J., KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1974. Methods of analyz- geese" by Harold C. Manson and Robert L. Jones. J. Wildl. Manage. 41 ing feathers for elemental content. Environment Canada, Fisheries (4): 807-809. and Marine Serv., Tech. Rept. No. 498. 16 p. KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1977. Identification of origins of lesser snow KELSALL, J.P. 1975. Warble fly distribution among some Canadian caribou. geese by X-ray spectrometry. Can. J. Zool. 55(4): 718-732. Proc. let. Int. Reindeer/Caribou Symposium. Biol. Papers U. of Alaska, Special Rept. No. 1: 509-517. KELSALL, J.P., TELFER, E.S. and WRIGHT, T.D. 1977. The effects of fire on the • ecology of the boreal forest, with particular reference to the Canadian •KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1975. Experimental use of a helium atmos- north: a review and selected bibliography. Can. Wildl. Serv., Occasional phere in X-ray spectroscopy. Can. Wildl. Serv., Progress Notes No. Papers No. 32. 58 p. 49. 4 p. NOLAN, J.W. and KELSALL, J.P. 1977. Dell sheep and their habitat in relation KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1975. Some aspects of variability in the examination of biological materials byx-ray spectroscopy. to pipeline pe proposals in Lnorthwestern Canada. Can. Wildl. Serv., Mackenzie 9 y Can. Valley Pipeline Investigations, Ottawa. 64 p. Wildl. Sera., Progress Notes No. 50. 5 p. • KELSALL, J.P. 1978. Use of chemical analyses to diagnose waterfowl populations. KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1975. Abstract of Proposed I.B.P. area at Forensic Science: Symposium Proceedings, April 13, 14, 15, 1977. Alberta Caribou Point, Mackenzie District, Northwest Territories, Canada. Fish and Wildlife Service, Edmonton. pp. 131-166. (41 pp.). In IBP ecological sites in subarctic Canada. D.K.B. Beckel (ed.). U. of Lethbridge Production Services, Lethbridge. KELSALL, J.P., TELFER, E.S. and KINGSLEY, M. 1978. Relationship of bison wieght pp. 62-63, to chest girth. J. Wildl. Manage. 42(3): 659-661. KELSALL, J.P., BURTON, R., and PANNEKOEK, N.J. 1975. Chemical variabil- SIMPSON, K. and KELSALL, J.P. 1978. Capture and banding of adult great blue ity in plumage of wild lesser snow geese. Can. J. Zool. 53(9): herons at Pander Harbour, British Columbia. Proc. 1978 Conf. of the 1369-1375. Colonial Waterbird Group, New York. pp. 71-78. KELSALL, J.P., KUYT, E. and ZOLTAI, S.C. 1975. Abstract of Proposed KESLALL, J.P. and BURTON. R. 1979. Some problems in identification of origins I.B.P. area at Fort Reliance-Artillery Lake, Northwest Territories, of waterfowl by chemical profiles. Can. J. Zool. 57(12): 2292-2302. Canada. (32 pp.). In IBP ecological sites in subarctic Canada. D.X.B. Beckel (ed.). U. of Lethbridge Production Services, Leth- KELSALL, J.P. and KLEIN, D. 1979. The state of knowledge of the Procupine bridge. pp. 16-17. • caribou herb. .Trans. 44th. N. Am. Wildl, and Natur. Resources Conf.: • • 508-521. , KELSALL, J.P., MULLIGAN, T. and LAPI, L. 1975. Chemical examination of • feathers by an electron beam. Can. Wildl. Serv., Progress Notes KELSALL, J.P. and SIMPSON, K. 1979. A three year study of the great blue heron No. 55. 7 p. • . in south-western British Columbia. Proc. 1979 Meeting of the Colonial Waterbird Group, Lafayette, LA. pp. 69-74. KELSALL,J.P., PANNEKOEK, N.J. and BURTON, R. 1975. Variability in the chemical content of waterfowl plumage. Can. J. Zool. 53(10): TELFER, E.S. and KELSALL, J.P. 1979. Studies of morphological parameters affect- 1379-1386. ing ungulate locomotion in snow. Can. J. Zool. 57(11): 2153-2159. KELSALL, J.P.,SHACKLETTE, H.T. and STEERS, W.C. 1975. Abstract of KELSALL, J.P., TELFER, S. and SIMPSON, K. 1980. Indirect determination of Proposed I.B.P. area at Port Raduim, Northwest Territories, Canada. ungulate foot area. Can. J. Zool. 58(3): 464-466. (15.pp.). In IBP ecological sites in subarctic Canada. D.K.B. Beckel (ed.). U. of Lethbridge Production Services, Lethbridge. KELSALL, J.P. In press, The use of chemical profiles from feathers to • pp. 112-113.' determine the origins of birds. Proc. Sth Pan African Ornithological KELSALL, J.P. and BURTON, R. 1976. Variability in the chemical contamin- Congress, Malawi, Aug. 23-]0. 1S P. ation effects of gunshot. J. Radioanal. Chem. 31: 451-459.. KELSALL, J.P. and PANNEKOEK, N.J. 1976. The mineral profile of plumage • in captive lesser snow geese. Can. J. Zool. 54(2): 301 - 305. • 4-100 6. • 7. Major Reportsl 1KELSALL, J.P. and LOUGNREY, A.G. 1955. Barren-ground caribou resurvey. C.W.S.C. 277. 21 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1946. A study of the Kentville Bird Sanctuary. C.W.S.C. 732. 20 p. )KELSALL, J.P. and BANFIELD, A.W.F. 1956. Barren-ground caribou populations and utilization winter 1955-56. C.W.S.C. 278. 7 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1946. A study of the waterfowl populations, waterfowl activit- ies and waterfowl environment on the marshes along and near the interpro- KELSALL3 J.P. 1957. Caribou feeding habits on forested winter ranges. vincial boundary between Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. C.W.S.C. 733. 13p. C.M.S. rept. 7 p. HEWITT, O.P.., KELSALL, J.P. and LEMIEUX, L. 1948. Annotated list of birds KELSALL, J.P. 1961. Aerial survey - Camp Gagetown (N.B.). March 20-22, 1961. observed in the James Bay Region in the autumn of 1947. C.W.S.C. 411. 7 p. C.W.S. rept. 10 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1948. mammal and bird survey New Brunswick National Park June 4- KELSALL, J.P. 1962. Wildlife inventory for management at Camp Gagetown. July 4,1948. C.W.S.C. 34. 34 p. C.W.S.C. 1773. 23 p. KELSALL, J.?. 1948. Wildlife and geological observations from Task Force 80. KELSALL, J.P. 1963. The moose, Aloes americana americana (Clinton), of C.W.S.C. 401. 38 p. Fundy National Park, New Brunswick. Paper presented to N.E. Wild. Conf., Portland, Me. (kimeo.) 15 P. KELSALL, J.P. 1949. Baffin Island caribou survey with population estimates managementrequirements for KELSALL, J.P. 1963. Research and big game in and recommendations. C.W.S.C. 1. 20p. Fundy rational Park. C.W.S.C. 977. KELSALL, J.P. 1949. Beaver survey September 16-22, 1949. C.W.S.C. 113. 10 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1965. Fundy National Park snow study. C.W.S.C. 1762. 31 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1949. Beaver survey September 7-8, 1949. C.W.S.C. 114. 8 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1965. Sew Reconnaissance of the Cape Breton Highlands. KELSALL, J.P. 1949. Investigation of the white-tailed deer population on C.W.S.C. 1776. 15 p. Beausoleil Island, Georgian Bay Islands National Park. C.W.S.C. 44. 6 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1965. Caribou introduction. Cape Breton Highlands National Park. XELSALL, J.P. 1951. Caribou winter range study 1950-51. C.W.S.C. 61. 18 p. C.W.S.C. 1734. 35 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1951. Report on caribou calving studies 1951. C.W.S.C. 84. 24 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1966. The barren-ground caribou tagging program in the North- . vest Territories. .C.W.S.C. 1029. 10 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1951. Thelon Game Sanctuary. C.W.S.C. 198. 20 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1966. Fundy National Park snow study. C.W.S.C. 1777. 45 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1954. Expedition of the Vermont Animal Foundation to the Thelon Game Sanctuary. C.W.S.C. 197. 15 p. KELSALL , J.P. and , V.D. 1967. Status of barren-ground caribou north of Great Bear Lake,eke, 1966. C.W.S.C. 1096. B p. KELSALL, J.P. 1955. Barren-ground caribou resurvey 1955. C.W.S.C. 84. 6 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1968. Pesticides and mammals in New Brunswick forests. C.W.S.C. 1192. 25 p. KEISALL. J.P. 1969. Feather chemistry andwaterfwl origins. Progress Report No. 1. C.W.S. rept. B p. 1 Excluding numerous minor reports and reports subsequently published - the KELSALL, J.P. 1969. Feather chemistry and waterfowl-origins. Progress Report Canadian Wildlife Service report library contains over 30 additional documents No. 2. C.W.S. rapt. S p. ' authored by Kelsall since 1946. C.W.S.C. numbers are those assigned by the CWS central library but not all such numbers are known to the author. KELSALL, J.P. 1969. Feather chemistry and waterfowl origins. Progress Report No. 3. C.W.S. rapt.• 6 p. • XELSALL. J.P. 1970. Feather chemistry and waterfowl origins. Progress Report No. 4. Elemental content of primaries from captive waterfowl. C.M.S. • rept. 3 p. • 1Substantially revised about 1963 as C.W.S.C. 1732. 4-101 9. 8. KELSALL, J.P. 1971. Problem analysis - body chemistry and waterfowl origins. C.W.S. rept. l0.p. KELLER, R•A., ALL, J.P. 1970. Partial list of vascular plant species o the Vaseux Lake area. C.N.S., Delta rept. (esisaeo.) 17 p. 1cELSALL, J.P. 1971. Revised project plan - body chemistry and waterfowl origins. C.N.S. rept. 10 p. SIMPSON, K. and KELSALL, J.P. 1978. Preliminary studies of great blue heron • colonies, 1977. C.W.S:, Delta rept. 20 p. KELSALL, J.A. and TELFER, E.S. 1971. Morphological•parameters for mammal locomotion in snow. Paper presented to Am. Soc. Mammalogist, SIMPSON, K. and KELSALL, J.P. 1978. The Wilmer National Wildlife Area: wild- Vancouver, June 20, 1971. 7 p, life and habitats. C.N.S., Delta rept. (mimeo.) 39 P. KELSALL, J.P..SALTER, R., SHARPE, L., KELLERHALS, R.,and 2OLTAI, S.C. 1971. KELSALL, J.P. and BISDEE, J. 1979. The Porcupine caribou hard and its range Fish and Wildlife inventory of Driedmeat Lake, Alberta. Alberta Dept. an annotated cross-references bibliography. C.W.S. rept. (mimeo.) 219 p• of Environment. 180 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1974. Arctic Islands pipeline overview studies - birds. Problem analysis and project plan. C.W.S. rept. 13 p. TELFER. E.S. and KELSALL. J.P. 1974. Sexual dimorphism in ungulate hoofs. C.W.S. rept. 3 p. KELSALL, J.P: 1975. Project plan - study of the interlake sandhill crane population, Manitoba. C.W.S. rept. 25 p. KELSALL, J.P. 1975. Whooping crane project, Canadian Wildlife Service. Western Region. C.W.S. report 25 p. • KELSALL, J.P. 1975. A proposed functional structure for Canadian Wildlife • Service, Pacific and Yukon Region, Environment Canada. C.W.S. rept., 14 p. • KELSALL, J.P. 1976. Research proposal for the development of a curriculum in renewable resources technology for the Northwest Territories. Proposal for Renewable Resources Manage. Advisory Committee, N.W.T. • 9 p. KELSALL, J.P., KELSALL, J.I. and KELLER, R.A. 1977. A curriculum in renewable resource technology.for the Northwest Territories. Rept. for the Renewable Resources Manage. Advisory Committee of the N.W.T. 165 p. KELSALL, J.P. and SIMPSON, K. 1978. Project plan - ecology of great heron colonies on the lower mainland of British Columbia. C.W.S.-, Delta rept. (mimeo.) 13 p. • • • • Note: Between April, 1971 and June.'1977, 48 radio broadcasts, mostly on • northern and Arctic conservation and historical topics, were written and read for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Most were used on both the Trans-Canada Network and Northern Service, some on overseas networks, and they are currently (1979) being rebroadcast by the Northern Service. • 4-102 - _ Response to Comments from John P.Kelsall,Ph.D.: 8. See Figures 2-3 and 2-5 for parking area locations. Parking on Tract A will be approximately 700 feet from the heronry,while Tract B parking will be 600 I. 'The 10-acre riparian forest north of the site is designated as perpetual open feet from the heronry. 'The impact of lighting of the parking area was space by the City of Renton. Section 3.5 of this Final EIS includes an addressed in Section 3.73 of the Draft EIS and is discussed further in Section 3.7 3 of this Final EIS. At a distance of 600 feet from the heronry,herons will expanded description of the site in the context of the surrounding area and Renton in general. become accustomed to the daily movement and noise associated with humans and automobiles. 2. An inventory of flora and fauna is presented in Appendix G and further described in Section 3.5. Please note Figure 2-2 of Chapter 2 of this Final These points have been addressed in the Final EIS. EIS showing the condition of Tracts A and B prior to construction of the P-1 Pond. At the time of the photo,both sites were part of the Earlington Golf 9. Comment noted. There is no conclusive evidence to indicate that'small' Course. Tract A is still dominated by orchard grass,while much of Tract B heronries are less productive than large heronries. The presence of a large is going through a more rapid successional change(i.e.,alder and cottonwood number of small colonies may suggest that herons have adapted to environmental conditions(e.g.,more fragmented habitat)that prevent large have sprouted and are becoming a structural component of the site). colonies from becoming developed and sustained. The lack of large expanses An exhaustive listing and quantification of all plant, amphibians, reptiles, of tidal flats(and associated large prey base)in the Seattle area may be one reason for the lack of large heronries in King County. Werschkul et al.(1977) birds, and mammals was not justified for this project given the fact that found that the size of heron colonies on the Oregan coast was related to the neither Tract A or B represent unique habitats. Based on information size of adjacent estuaries The only two large estuaries in close proximity to provided by the Washington State Natural Heritage and Nongame Wildlife Seattle are the Nisqually delta and the Snohomish estuary which support large data bases, the project area does not contain endangered or threatened species. heron colonies with each located near thousands of acres of shallow tidal habitat. Even the McNeil Island heron colony in Pierce County,located on 3. Comment noted. an Island far from extensive development, is small (30 to 40 nests). That heronry also lacks extensive intertidal areas in the immediate vicinity. Mark 4. Additional information on the heron colony is provided in Appendix B. EISs (1976) in his review of British Columbia Nest Records Scheme, found numerous small heron colonies throughout British Columbia rely, to a large degree, on existing literature and data as sources of information since neither time nor money are available to conduct in-depth 10. Table B-1 shows no record of colonies prior to 1985 because of the lack of scientific study. recorded information on those colonie s,not because those colonies did not 5. Appendix B includes further information regarding these exist. Only in recent years has there been any interest in identifying the 8 g points. The increase locations and size of heronries in the area. In addition,small colonies are in the number of nests during the past five nesting seasons does suggest a obviously less noticeable than large, therefore, making detection of those reasonably secure nesting site,however,not one without disturbance. The heronries less likely. Once again,the commenter is assuming that large heron availability of the large grove of cottonwood trees as potential nesting sites colonies,have in the past or should presently(>10 acres)adjacent to the heronry makes further increases in the size of the fragmentedbe, t feedinge In habitating County. at heronry likely. I suggest that this is not likely given the that occurs in the area. For example,if only 200 acres of small wetlands arid 6. Appendix B has been expanded to cover these points to the extent that several small stream or ever corridors occur within the foraging range of information is available,given the inherent limitations of a limited number of nesting herons,that colony is never likely to support a large number of nesting birds observations during the nesting season. Please see response to comment 5 Such is the situation throughout much of King County. from King County regarding the flight zones. 11. The Stanley Park and Delta River Inn heronries were used as examples of the tolerance of herons to urban settings,not necessarily to be emulated at Black 7. The heron nests in the three occupied trees on the island are located at River. The proposed setback of development(600 feet)for this project will elevations ranging from 100 to 130 feet. As an added mitigation measure,a be considerably greater buffer distance than occurs at either Stanley Park or building height limitation of 57 feet has been established for the distance from the Delta River Inn sites. 600 to 800 feet and no greater than 71 feet in height beyond that distance. The roof areas of the office buildings will not have activity areas,however,the top floor of the parking garage will have vehicles. 19 4-103 12. In the literature,the term"rookery"as it applies to heron colonies,is often used interchangeably with the terms"colonies"and"heronries." In Appendix B the word"viable" has been changed to"active"to provide more accurate terminology. As previously mentioned in response to comment 10,historic information on heronries is non-existent or skimpy at best. Such is the case with the Pigeon Point and Spencer property heronries. Recent discussions with a resident living near the Pigeon Point heronry indicates that the herons have nested in the area in each of the past five years even though the site was previously reported as abandoned by Murphy (1988), the WDW, and the Seattle Audubon Society. The Seattle Audubon Society went so far as to link the "abandonment" to noise caused by construction of the Metro outfall. The confusion appears to have been caused by the herons shifting their nest site approximately 200 feet upslope from the site as it was recorded in 1985. The Spencer property heronry appears to be a recently established colony, but according to Spencer(pers.comm.)the number of nests has slowly increased over the past years. 13. The proposed mitigation measures would prohibit outdoor construction within 800 feet of the heronry during the most sensitive time, from February 1 through July 1. The 800 feet distance is considerably further than 719 feet, the distance at which Werschkul et al.(1976)observed heron nesting to be • unaffected by logging activities during the nesting season. In addition, the setback of development from the heronry has been increased from 400 to 600 feet on Tract B,the same setback distance as proposed for Tract A. While there are examples of heronry abandonment due to disturbance,the examples provided in Appendix B represent case studies closest to the project area in King County,Washington and are,therefore, more relevant to this project. 14. This project has accounted for the sensitive nesting time by prohibiting outside construction any closer than 800 feet during the period from February 1 through July 1 and a permanent no-building setback of 600 feet. 15. Comments noted. Appendix B has been revised to reflect these changes and the literature cited expanded accordingly. 16. Comments noted. See the above responses. 4-104 No activity should be allowed near this Great Blue Heron colony after ' January 15. Few researchers have made observations at Pacific Northwest f.^T•)•�11'' Great Blue Heron colonies before mid-February, Marty Murphy dlo! 1::•-r .01 but Mur h (pers. .fi GAHMKEN PRESS comm.) noted herons at the Black River colonyon 25 December 1986 and t.l•�'Z..a•,,° 13 February 1987. Also, herons were presen as early as January 28-30 at • P.O.BOX 1467 two Oregon colonies (Trowbridge and Bayer In Press). Since Vos et al. NEWPORT,OR 97365 (1985), who studied the effects of human disturbance on Great Blue Herons, concluded that disturbance should not be allowed near heron colonies after 18 May 1990 herons first arrive at a colony, activity within the buffer zone around the Black River colony should not be allowed after January 15 to minimize the risk of disturbing early nesting herons. Ms. Mary Lynne Myer i Evidence that allowing human activity such as construction or land Senior Environmental Planner clearing near a Great Blue Heron colony in February is detrimental is that Department of Community Development200 construction work done near the Black River colony on 18 February 1987 Mill Avenue South resulted in an average of only 2.0 young fledging per successful nest (i.e., Renton, Washington 98055 a nest that fledged young)(Murphy 1988). This is less than the 2.2-3.4 young fledged per successful nest found at other Great Blue Heron colonies in the Pacific Northwest (Henny and Bethers 1971, Werschkul et al. 1976, 1977; Dear Ms. Myer: English 1978, Simpson and Kelsall 1978, Warren 1979, Trowbridge and Bayer In Re: Black River Corporate Park Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Press). T I have studied Great Blue Herons in the Pacific Northwest for a number of years and have published about a dozen papers in refereed, scientific The DEIS on p: B-5 suggests that Great Blue Herons will nest in small journals about Great Blue Heron nesting and feeding biology (see Literature trees or shrubs if large trees are not available. While this can occur in some areas within the range of the Great Blue Heron, I know of no Cited at end of this letter). instance, and the DEIS gives no examples, of Great flue Herons nesting in I have read the DEIS and am concerned about the inadequacy of the shrubs in western Washington or Oregon, so this is hot currently a likely proposed guidelines to protect the Black River Great Blue Heron colony, alternative in the King County area. I urge that the following guidelines that are partially derived from the Washington Department of Wildlife Nongame Program (1988) guidelines be followed in the construction of the Black River Corporate Park: The DEIS misleadingly suggests that Great Blue Herons can tolerate 1 human activity near a heron colony. Human disturbance such as logging, l+ 1) Ho disturbance within 800-1,300 ft of the heron colony be allowed during construction, or repeated human intrusions into or near a heron colony the breeding season from January 15 through August 1. during the breeding season can cause total abandonment of a Great Blue Heron • colony (Mark 1976, Werschkul et al. 1976, English 1978, Kelsall and Simpson 2) No disturbance be allowed within 750 ft of the heron colony throughout the 1979, Forbes et al. 1983, Murphy 1988). year. Further, the authors of the DEIS have failed to mention that the mere 3) Stands of trees at least 50 ft high and at least 10 acres in area should presence of Great Blue Herons at a colony site does not mean that the colony . is `viable" (see p.B-3, B-7, and B-10 in the DEIS). Herons can be present 5 be preserved. • at a disturbed colony but if no young are fledged or if fewer young are My reasons for recommending these guidelines are on the following produced than are necessary to maintain a stable population, then the heron population is not truly viable (i.e., self-sustaining). Herons, like gulls pages. (Bayer 1983), can return each year to a disturbed site (especially when Thank your for your time and consideration in considering my comments there are few nesting sites as in King County), even though their nesting on the Black River DEIS. success is poor. The case studies cited in the DEIS to show that Great Blue Herons Yours, ,,�,, tolerate nearby human disturbance are incomplete because nesting a�""_"j`— �`1� / successlue not giveo forh airy of the sites. le,Disturbancecan cause sin Great } Blue Herons to abandon their nests; for example, 90-93% of nests in undisturbed colonies were active, which was significantly greater than in Range D. Bayer disturbed colonies (Werschkul et al. 1976. Simpson and Kelsall 1978) or than the 75% active nests observed in a disturbed colony studied by Webb and Forbes (1982). Although some Great Blue Herons that abandon•their nests may • renest, some have apparently abandoned nesting for the entire nesting season • o,,,o of R oanac of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS Page 2 of 8 pages of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate park DEIS 4-105 because of disturbance such as construction or land clearing (English 1978, The DEIS suggests that disturbed Great Blue Heron colonies are 'viable,' Simpson and Kelsall 1978). Other herons that abandon their nest and go elsewhere to nest will probably do so at a more distant heron colony and 1p but this is misleading because the nesting success of disturbed Great BlueHerons can be less than necessary to maintain stable population numbers. thus have reduced nesting success because herons typically nest near their Although Henny (1972.33) estimated that 1.91 young per pair of Great Blue foraging areas and if forced to nest farther from their foraging areas, they Herons are necessary to maintain a stable population, he included data from can have lower nesting success (e.g., Simpson et al. 1987). birds reared and banded at National Wildlife Refuges. where Great Blue Herons evidently survive much better than elsewhere (Bayer 1981c). Bayer There are at least six examples where the nesting success of Great Blue (1981c) estimated that herons reared north of 40 N latitude and away from Herons at disturbed colonies was lower than normal. As previously National Wildlife Refuges would need to produce as many as 2.33 young per mentioned, the 2.0 young fledged per successful nest at the disturbed Black breeding pair to maintain a stable population. Since the number of young n River colony in 1987 was less than that at other Great Blue Heron colonies. fledged per successful nest is 0.2-2.1 young greater than per breeding pair jf Second, Werschkul et al. (1976) found that the average Great Blue Heron or per nest (Vermeer 1969. Henny and Bethers 1971, English 1978, Warren fledging success of 2.20 young per successful nest at a disturbed colony was 1979, Collazo 1981. Webb and Forbes 1982). a minimum average of at least lower than in three out of four undisturbed Oregon Coast colonies. Third, 2.11 young per successful nest (based on Henny 1972:33) or perhaps as many Simpson and Kelsall (1978) found that, in 1978, the average of 2.06 young as 2.53 young per successful nest (based on Bayer 1981c) must be produced to per successful nest at the Pender Harbour colony in British Columbia, where maintain a stable population from non-National Wildlife Refuge colonies such road construction and tree clearing for a housing development were occurring as the Black River colony. The breeding success of 2.0 young per successful nearby, was less than the 2.6 average at an undisturbed colony; in 1979, nest at the disturbed Black River colony in 1987 (Murphy 1988) is clearly when human disturbance at the Pender Harbour colony was"reduced because the below current best estimates of the reproductive success necessary to development was abandoned, the average number of young per successful nest maintain a truly viable (i.e., self-sustaining) heron population, and it is increased markedly to 3.0 (Forbes et al. 1983:38, Simpson et al. 1987:576). also questionable if the breeding success at some of the other disturbed Fourth, the 2.14 and 2.20 young fledged per successful nest in 1978 and colonies mentioned previously is adequate. • 1979, respectively, at a colony in Idaho about 680 ft away from railroad ,On p. 8-10. the DEIS misleadingly indicates that Great Blue Herons tracksut and about 1,320eft away from a campgrounds (Collazo 1979:4,s 1981)tu waeds ! established and maintained colonies at sites of disturbance that was about 0.4-1.2 young per successful nest less than at a much less disturbed colony in Idaho studied in the same years (Warren 1979). Fifth, Webb and "obviously acceptable" to the herons. This conclusion is baseless for Forbes (1982) recorded a nesting success of 2.33 young per successful nest several reasons. First, the herons really may not have had any choice but at a disturbed colony in British Columbia, which is comparable to the number to nest near the disturbance; if they nested farther away from their feeding of fledglings per successful nests at undisturbed colonies, but the areas, they may have had even lower nesting success (see Simpson et al. proportion of abandoned nests was high at their colony, so that Great Blue 1987). Second. Great Blue Herons indicate their displeasure with Herons in their colony only fledged 1.75 young per nest. which is less than disturbance by moving their nests away from it. For example, at disturbed than found per nest or breeding pair at less disturbed Pacific Northwest colonies, active nests were significantly farther away from disturbance than et colonies (Henny and Bethers 1971, English 1978). Sixth, and finally, a were inactive nests (Werschkul et al. 1976). and herons that abandoned their Great Blue Heron colony in Stanley Park in Vancouver, British Columbia is nests because of disturbance then built new nests at a disturbed colony famous for being near ongoing human disturbance from passersby and is cited farther away from the disturbance (Simpson and Kelsall 1978). Third. this in the DEIS on p. 8-7 as an example of a colony that has persevered with DEIS fails to mention that the kinds of human disturbance have differed disturbance since 1921; however, the authors of the DEIS did not mention between their examples of disturbed colonies and that while Great Blue that this colony, perhaps because of disturbance, had moved at least twice Herons can become habituated to some forms of human disturbance, they are since 1921 (Mark 1976:37, Forbes et al. 1983:48-49) and that the nesting less tolerant of others. The proposed Black River construction beginning on success at this colony in 1980 and 1981 was reduced to only 2.05 and 2.18 February 15 is a type of disturbance that could adversely affect Great Blue young per successful nest, respectively (Forbes et al. 1983:48). In Herons because herons have sometimes responded to construction by abandoning summary, there is ample evidence that nesting success at some disturbed their colony or nests and because herons are most sensitive to disturbance Great Blue Heron colonies is less than at undisturbed colonies. early in the nesting season (Vos et al. 1985) and herons can first arrive at • their colonies in late January (Trowbridge and Bayer In Press). Disturbance such as construction or land clearing can lower nesting success by causing those Great Blue Herons that do not abandon nesting to The DEIS implies that if a disturbed colony grows. then the colony is leave their nests in haste (which can break eggs or knock young out of the viable. This can be fallacious unless information about the nesting success nest) and expose their eggs or young to predators.or inclement weather that at the disturbed colony or knowledge about the fate of surrounding colonies may kill heron eggs or small young (e.g., Simpson and Kelsall 1978. Kelsall is available. For example. the DEIS indicates on p. B-8 that the number of !Q and Simpson 1979, Vos et al. 1985). Disturbance can also delay or impair nests at the Lake Sammamish State Park Great Blue Heron colony has nesting so that young fledge later and are smaller than average, so that increased; what the DEIS neglects to mention is that the growth of this their post-fledging survival may be much less than for fledglings from colony may be because of the abandonment of a nearby colony at Weowna County undisturbed colonies. Park (see Murphy 1988). There appears to be a shortage of available nesting - sites for Great Blue Heron colonies in King County (see Murphy 1988), so • herons are forced to nest in the few sites remaining, in spite of disturbance. Page 3 of 8 pages of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS Page 4 of 8 pages of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS 4-106 • In summary, since the DEIS fails to give the nesting success at any of only one of the four references cited is a Thesis at all! the disturbed colonies cited as examples of herons tolerating human 4) p. 8-4: The Milner pers. comm. is not listed in the "Personal disturbance, the DEIS' conclusion that disturbed Great Blue Heron colonies /0 Communications" at the end of Appendix B. arc "viable" is inappropriate and questionable. On the contrary, there is 5) p. B-4: Two references. Mark (1975) and Henny (19711, are not given in ample evidence that some forms of human disturbance, including construction, 6) p the 4;"Literature Cited' no Cottrille the (1end nd)of Appendix"Literature Cited" at B. can hurt heron nesting success. the end of Appendix B; this should have been Cottrille and Cottrille (1958). The distance guidelines of the Washington Department of Wildlife (WDW) 7) p. B-5: Henny (1971) is not in the"Literature Cited" at the end of to eliminate disturbance around a Great Blue Heron colony are reasonable and Appendix B. should be followed. The WOW has undoubtedly spent time and care in 8) p. B-6: There is no Simpson et al. (1987) in the "Literature Cited" determining their guidelines, which (in my opinion) contrasts to the at the end of Appendix B; however, there is a Simpson and Webb sometimes sloppy preparation of the DEIS' Appendix B (see below). The WDW s (1987), which is presumably what is meant here. "Et al." properly recommended buffer zone of 800-1,300 ft around a Great Blue Heron colony refers to three or more authors. is reasonable because Buckley and Buckley (1976:27-28) recommended that there 9) p: 8-7: Two references, Webb and Forbes (1982) and Taylor and should be a buffer zone of 1,000 ft around colonial nesting waterbird Reshkin (1981), are not given in the "Literature Cited" at the end colonies. Further, the average distance between active nests and of Appendix B. Further. Taylor and Reshkin (1981) is an incorrect disturbance was 718 ft at one Great Blue Heron colony (Werschkul et al. citation because there were actually three authors (see Taylor et 1976). Additionally, Short and Cooper (1985) and Vos et al. (1985) both al. 1981 in the Literature Cited at the end of this letter). recommend that a buffer zone of 820 ft on land and 492 ft on water be 10) p. 8-7: Reference to J.[Jill] Parker(1980) should be to "she" not maintained to avoid human disturbance. The case studies in the DEIS that "he" as in this DEIS because I don't know of any men named Jill. are given to•indicate that herons can tolerate human disturbance at closer I wonder if the authors of this DEIS actually saw this reference? distances are either for less obtrusive disturbances than the construction 11) p. B-8: Webb and Forbes (1982) is not in the 'Literature Cited" at proposed for the Black River Project or for disruptive disturbances that may ff the end of Appendix B.not have occurred during the Great Blue Heron's breeding season. Using the 12) p. B-9: R. W. Thorpe and Associates (1985) is not in the I?"'" Black River Great Blue Heron colony as an example, construction in February "Literature Cited" at the end of Appendix B. definitely disturbed the heron's nesting in 1987 (Murphy 1988). 13) p. 8-10: Webb and Forbes (1982) is not in the "Literature Cited" at the end of Appendix B. On p. 8-7 of the DEIS, it is stated that Taylor and Reshkin (1981) 14) p. 8-11: City of Seattle (1986) and Taylor and Reshkin (1981) are (which should actually be Taylor et al. 1981) concluded that not given in the "Literature Cited" at the end of Appendix B. recreational activities during the nesting season could be allowed 15) p. 8-12: No explanation is given of who the "WDE" is. within 575 feet of the nesting rookery." This DEIS' statement is erroneous; 16) p. 8-15: The full citations for Bjorklund (1975) and Cottam and Uhler Taylor et al. (1981) actually recommended that limited recreational use be (1945) are not given. no closer than 574 ft (175 m) of the heron colony. The DEIS correctly 17) p. 8-15: There is no such word as"Fynamics." interpets Taylor et al.'s (1981) guideline on p. 8-11. The proposed Black 18) p. B-15 and B-16: References are not in alphabetical or River Corporate Park would involve a more intense form of human disturbance chronological order (i.e.. Palmer 1962 on p. 8-15 belongs after than the limited recreational use considered by Taylor et al (1981), so Murphy 1988 on p. 8-16; Van Wormer 1987 should be before Van Taylor et al.'s (1981) buffer zone of 574 ft and, certainly, the 400 ft Wormer 1988). buffer zone proposed for Tract B of the Black River development (p. B-14 of 19) p. B-16: Typographical errors such as "Auccess" and "Lertxchuh" are the DEIS) could be inadequate to maintain a truly viable (i.e., self- inexcusable. sustaining) heron population at the Black River colony. 20) p. B-16: Short and Cooper 1985 is listed twice. 21) p. 8-16: The Simpson and Webb reference is incorrectly cited; there are actually 3 authors: Simpson. Smith, and Kelsall; but no In my opinion, parts of the DEIS' Appendix 8 were hastily written with Webb. inadequate care. The sloppiness in the writing of Appendix B indicates to 22) Throughout Appendix B. Great Blue Heron nesting "rookeries' are me that the proposed guidelines for Tracts A and 8 in Appendix B on p. B-13 referenced; however. Great Blue Herons do not nest in "rookeries.' and B-14 may not have been thoughtfully enough researched and are inadequate. only the write th at Rook Bl e epHe onss in rookeries. It is more nest in heronries or colonies. to The sloppiness of Appendix B preparation is apparent in the following items, which are by no means all the errors in Appendix B: 19- Literature Cited 1) p. B-2: Erickson (pers. comm.) and Allmendinger letter are not given in the "Literature Cited" or "Personal Communications.' 2) p. 8-4: Contrary to what is written, Lowe (1954) contains no information Bayer. R. D. 1978. Aspects of an Oregon estuarine Great Blue Heron about the Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias); Lowe (1954) is about population. Pp. 213-217 in A.Sprunt IV.J. C. Ogden. and S. Winckler a different species. the Gray Reron _ cinerea). (ads.). Wading Birds. Nat. Audubon Soc. Res. Rep. No. 7. 3) p. 8-4: It is not true that any of the references that are cited as Bayer. R. D. 1979a. Bald Eagle-Great Blue Heron interactions. • Murrelet Doctoral dissertations are really Doctoral dissertations. In fact, 60:32-33. Pane 5 of A oaoes of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS Page 6 of 8 pages of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS 4-107 Bayer, R. D. 1979b. Great Blue Heron attacks Horned Grebe. Bird-Banding Great Blue Heron. U.S. Dept. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 50:264-265. Div. Biological Services, Biological Report 82 (10.99) July 1985. Bayer, R. D. 1981a. Arrival and departure frequencies of Great Blue Herons Simpson, K. and J. P. Kelsall. 1978. Capture and banding of adult Great at two Oregon estuarine colonies. Auk 98:589-595. Blue Herons at Pender Harbour, British Columbia. Proc. Colonial Bayer, R. D. 1981b. Great Blue Herons "mousing" in western Oregon. Murrelet Waterbird Group 1978:71-78. 62:91.. Simpson, K., J. N. M. Smith, and J. P. Kelsall. 1987. Correlates and Bayer, R. D. 1981c. Regional variation of Great Blue Heron longevity. J. consequences of coloniality in Great Blue Herons. Can. J. Zool. Field Ornithol. 52:210-213. 65:572-577. Bayer, R. D. 1981d. Weights of Great Blue Herons at.the Yaquina Estuary, Taylor, T. M., M. Reshkin, and K. J. Brock. 1981. Recreation land use Oregon. Murrelet 62:18-19. adjacent to an active heron rookery: a management study. Proc. Indiana Bayer, R. D. 1982. Great Blue Heron eggshell thickness at Oregon estuaries. Academy of Sciences 91:226-236. Wilson Bull. 94:198-201. Trowbridge, E. M. and R. D. Bayer. In Press. A 1-3 nest Great Blue Heron Bayer, R. D. 1983. Nesting success of Western Gulls at Yaquina Head and on colony near Neskowin, Tillamook County, Oregon. Oregon Birds. man-made structures in Yaquina Estuary, Oregon. Murrelet 64;87-91. Vermeer, K. 1969. Great Blue Heron colonies in Alberta. Can. Field-Nat. Bayer, R. D. 1984a. Foraging ground displays of Great Blue Herons at Yaquina 83:237-242. Estuary, Oregon. Colonial Waterbirds 7:45-54. Vos, D. K., R. A. Ryder, and W. D. Graul. 1985. Response of breeding Great Bayer, R. D. 1984b. Vocalizations of Great Blue Herons at Yaquina Estuary, Blue Herons to human disturbance in northcentral Colorado. Colonial Oregon. Colonial Waterbirds 7:35-44. Waterbirds 8:13-22. Bayer, R. D. 1985a. Bill length of herons and egrets as an estimator of prey Warren, N. M. 1979. Ecology of Great Blue Herons on Silver Creek, Idaho. size. Colonial Waterbirds 8:104-109. M. S. Thesis, Univ. Idaho, Moscow. Bayer, R. D. 1985b. Interactions of Great Blue Herons and gulls. Wilson Washington Department of Wildlife. 1988. Draft, recommended management Bull. 97:538-541. guidelines for Washington Endangered and Threatened Species and Species Bayer, R. D. 1989. Great Blue Heron killed by striking an overhead power of Concern--Great Blue Heron. Nongame Wildlife. line at Coos Bay, Oregon. Oregon Birds 15:197-198. Webb, R. S.and L. S.Forbes. 1982. Colony establishment in an urban site Bayer, R. D. and E. McMahon. 1981. Colony sizes and hatching synchrony of by Great Blue Herons. Murrelet 63:91-92. Great Blue Herons in coastal Oregon. Murrelet 62:73-79. Werschkul, D. F., E. McMahon, and M. Leitschuh. 1976. Some effects of Buckley, P.A. and F.G. Buckley. 1976. Guidelines for protection and human activities on the Great Blue Heron in Oregon. Wilson Bull. management of colonially nesting waterbirds. North Atlantic National 88:660-662. Park Service, Regional Office, Boston, Mass. Werschkul, D. F., E. McMahon, M.Leitschuh, S.English. C.Skibinski, and G. Collazo, J. A. 1979. Breeding biology and food habits of the Great Blue Williamson. 1977. Observations on the reproductive ecology of the •Heron at Heyburn State Park, Benewah County, Idaho. M.S. Thesis, Univ. Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) in western Oregon. Murrelet 58:7-12. Idaho, Moscow. Collazo, J. A. 1981. Some aspects of the breeding ecology of the Great Blue Heron at Heyburn State Park. Northwest Science 55:293-297. English, S. M. 1978. Distribution and ecology of Great Blue Heron colonies on the Willamette River, Oregon. Pp.235-244 in A. Sprunt IV,J.C. Ogden, and S. Winckler (eds.). Wading Birds. Nat.Audubon Soc. Res. Rep. No. 7. Forbes, L. S., K. Simpson, J. P. Kelsall, and D. R. Flook. 1983. Great Blue Heron colonies in British Columbia. Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, Pacific and Yukon Region, Delta, British Columbia. Henny, C. J. 1972. An analysis of the population dynamics of selected avian species with special reference to changes during the modern pesticide era. U. S. Dept. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Research Report No. 1. Henny, C.J.and M. R. Bethers. 1971. Population ecology of the Great Blue Heron with special reference to western Oregon. Can. Field. Nat. 83:205-209. - Kelsall,J. P. and K. Simpson. 1979. A three year study of the Great Blue Heron in southwestern British Columbia. Proc. 1979 Colonial Waterbird Group 3:69-74. Lowe, F. A. 1954. The [Gray] Heron. London, Collins. Mark, D. M. 1976. An inventory of Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) nesting colonies in British Columbia. Northwest reice 50:32-41. Murphy, M. 1988. Status of Great Blue Heron colonies in King County, Washington. Western Birds 19:37-40. Short, H. L. and R. J. Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: • Page 7 of 8 pages of Bayer's Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS Page 8 of 8 pages of Bayer's Coments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS 4-108 • Response to Comments from Range D.!layers (e.g.,Yarrow Bay,Ross Island,West Delta Park,Stanley Park)has continued over the years in the face of such disturbance. I. Please see response to comments from USFWS and WDW. 8. Comments noted. See response to comment 7. Undoubtedly low productivity 2. Please see response to comment 14 from John P.Kelsall,Ph.D. reported by Murphy in 1987 was likely associated with the logging activity that 3. The Draft EIS is not suggesting,nor is it expected that,with the abundance took place from February to mid-March,the most sensitive time of the year (;E & P for heron nesting. That activity came within 200 feet of nesting birds, a of tall trees in Western Washington(e.g.,cottonwoods,Douglas fir)great blue distance that everyone agrees would be expected to significantly disturb herons would nest in shrub vegetation. In other parts of its range(e.g.,San nesting birds(to the point of reduced productivity)or cause abandonment. Francisco Bay area),great blue herons have been found to nest in shrubs The proposed mitigation measures would prohibit outdoor construction within when no other nesting sites were available. 800 feet of the heronry during the most sensitive time,from February 1 to July 1. In addition,the permanent setback of development from the heronry 4. As the commenter states, there are examples of heronry abandonment, will be 600 feet. however, the circumstances causing that abandonment are not always well known. For example,Murphy(1988),reported abandonment of the Pigeon 9. See response to comment 8 regarding proposed mitigation measures during Point heronry in west Seattle when,in fact,it only moved approximately 200 nesting season. The Black River colony has over 10 acres of cottonwoods and feet from its previous location. A heronry on a relatively isolated portion of Oregon ash(100-to 140-foot tall)available for potential nesting to the west McNeil Island moved for no obvious reason to its present location on a small of the existing nests. This would allow herons to eventually nest at a distance offshore island(interestingly less than 300 feet from an active bald eagle nest further from the future development if'so inclined. located on the same small island). The case studies presented in Appendix B show that herons do tolerate human activity in the vicinity of colonies. 10. Not enough is known about the movement of herons from one colony to • another to state that increases in colony size can be attributed to the S. Please see response to comments 9 and 10 from John P.Kelsall,Ph.D. There . is inadequate information comparing the productivity of"urban vs"natural" abandonment of other colonies. For example,it is not known if herons from (for lack of a better word) heron colonies to show conclusively that urban Weowna established another nesting site(as was the case with the Pigeon heronries are less productive(in terms of young fledged per occupied nest) Point and Crystal Lake heronries,both reported by Murphy 1988 to have been abandoned). Simpson et a than are natural colonies. Many factors affect productivity; weather, predation, found that of 21 banded herons identified predation,food supply(a factor that could be quite critical when comparing in 1978 in a Pender Harbour,British Columbia colony,7 herons(33 percent) fledgling success of large heronries located near productive estuarine or bay were not seen is the colony in 1979. Simpson et al.(1987)stated that the feeding grounds,to small heronries located inland and supported by more lack of nest site and mate fidelity is associated with frequent movements fragmented freshwater wetland or riverine feeding areas),and disturbance. of heron colonies and the willingness of herons to switch from colony to colony between years..." 6. Please see response to comment 10 from John P. Kelsall, Ph.D. 11. See response to comments from the WDW. Also see response to commentDetermination of nesting success at each colony was beyond the scope of this project and would best be accomplished through a comprehensive study 8. The setback on Tract B has been increased from 400 to 600 feet undertaken by the WDW. 12. Comments noted. Appendix B has been revised. Nest abandonment at the Black River heronry could lead to re-nesting at more distal (northern) portions of the riparian forest. During the 1990 nesting season,four additional heron nests were found in trees more distant from the proposed Tract A and Tract B development sites. The nesting site does meet the WDW guideline of having at least 10 acres of area with stands of trees at least 50 feet in height. 7. The productivity of disturbed heronries may well be less than those in more natural settings,however,the use of many of those heronries as nesting sites • 4-109 May 11,1990 Dear Ms.Myer, 60 Response to Comments from Rhonda Chapman: I am writing in response to the Environmental Impact Statement,of April 11,regarding the 1. Comment noted. The purpose of preparing the EIS was to minimize the Blackrivcr Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. impact of the development on those resources. The City of Renton is continually developing policies and regulations to consider those First,I want to tell you that this was a tough letter to write. Not because I didn't know what environmental resources you have identified. I wanted to say. But,because I wasn't sure what it was acceptable to say. So,I decided to 2. Comment noted. See Section 3 5.4 of this Final EIS for a discussion of the say what I feel and hope for the best. (I think it is important to mention that. I spent a lot ofheronry. time trying to compose the"right"sort of letter. I would imagine that some people got frustrated and gave up). 3. Please see Section 1.6 for a description of the additional mitigation measures designed to further minimize the impact of the proposed project on the heron I am very concerned about the impact of proposed building near the rookery. As a matter of colony. fact,I am very concerned about building and growth throughout the entire state of Washington. I am a native Washingtonian. Over the 36 years of my life I have seen the state population grow and I have seen the impact on both the environment and the quality of life. I have always spent a lot of time camping and hiking here. Even as a child,I was impressed by the purity of our waters,the beauty of our countryside,and the abundance of wildlife. I don't want to see that destroyed. Not only for my sake and the sake of future generations. But,also for the-sake of the planet! As higher intelligence beings,it is our responsibility to protect our planet and it's other life forms.We have already done a great deal of harm. It isn't going to be easy to repair the damage;some of it can't be repaired. We • need to change now. We need policies and regulations to preserve what still exists today. We can not bring life back from extinction! I am not a scientist. But,studies indicate that,should the proposed building occur,the herons will abandon the rookery. This rookery has grown considerably over the last few 2 years. Since,we do not have an over abundance of herons in Washington this may be an indication that the herons have settled here due to a loss of former habitats. Are we trying to run these beautiful birds out of the state? Do we want to eliminate the species?!? I know . • that isn't true for all of us. My primary concerns about this site are:proposed locations of buildings and parking areas are to close to the rookery. Without adequate distance and buffering,the herons and other 3 wildlife will be disturbed by movement,light noise,air quality and glare. (These are shy, timid animals. If they feel threatened they will not breed comfortably and they will probably be forced out entirely). In addition,paving the area will eliminate habitat. Which could result in local extinctions of other wildlife,too. Please,do anything you can to save the natural wonders of our state. c anks, ' Rhonda E.Chapman 1-11-310 o a-- . 4-110 w 'MI,t:,+e_„, jib-9 f'/96'-" s=Ae 9d . PLA";Uti DIVISION Response to Comments from Doris McCougan: v i::7Y U lENTO:4 • S . .. e Q ,��� MN ' 4 .;9j0 1. Comments noted. The mitigation measures have been identified to minimize ln.^� /P/ the impact and the likelihood that herons will leave the site. The proposed ''), ' e-rr.->)-,--, • .61-.,/, a;.,-'. . !.. R'x-• • ; 61 setbacks,in coordination with the P-1 Pond,Springbrook Creek,and riparian n r�`f -�cs =i= forest total over 25 acres designated as open space. ,. "`--`/1 . 'i!''^'"-.-ems ll .Q:..-:ii-s.,- 61.c 2. • i1,—._/. / -„urn: Q.. ,�'P�,.k. .,1. orio '7��/,�- , • • . ,. ` : . , . .-, ot� :" .. . :em "" .'• • 4-111 Zii-v . -P-ia-''ry gn ")41-/IA -e,-P-e-regi'l'irP 7-3*---A-TA—n . 7-7-1 A ->!''47-Y."175')- rP-- - 'ri .&& -"' - at n n-7. -7 urry. 72" -70 °P /2,2---14,_ ir-r7=14A,D47-ry)-7-p --,,,,-y2,-,,4 -1?-rg.--0,c2-0-4 7)6 I Co) ) /L 7z- — c b' - --a-W c2-r 1,-a-v-r-d- (fr ) Sss8 -sLL ry I. 1-- -r' ^ '1 6-0 /51h - LII-c _ _ _r� ,, -,ro v7 e 'i,fir aa-re •-rYil er r ---rv1- -D ' -9 -fre- •-r-oot, _7),, ..i.e.c) /7 yr:fria h "�'�"' -P-„ ' -rr�°- ' " " -1-a, � -e-4-0�-� -'gyp- -r- �4-r� 9 ""',e274 ("1". j=*.Ls e-'dt . A GI n _ : 177AIL 9Ia W-T, ' ?"-ke7.771/411.V.kr. -Z9-.7 118.' ' '''-�J-c .Ss06,b i r'J .1 `-t-n,a __„U/ yyy�r Op Z 9 e 0' "i -,vt4,• - gq/i- _DC0-rle- 777-r,) r »•-k. .,-.7-7-py-.r'1 -.,- ' So-/ ..-p2 va -+ -Y1- ' 0b-/I-S kl C5' /1 li/. i CLa,o, C 7Jc,dc Per-e..44 7? 63 333 McKec -14.:,:ai a&'lc llnly. _F tali�1 14) (7 1/je' 4-e-44-dliec..7 -7e; cer),1 /20,4i4./. ��JZ%�LE 71 ,10 -e/1 " � ,�,� [ary L7n�tr frl1et , Sr11/Yr v►10.Tlt v+,hc(' �Ga ww1 7i% iyit�Lt/1 / apt: of Ct►Y+..u�«;h� ��t�pauHf � � 2 Cc` ifl;.C( A '1u c S c�,f� 64 t-���� V a�.ea°' t- AZAt gmfth, LA gauss 2'4 ri- . oe.t i 11144 '111ys4, � tyJnr7%Ie�.l �s►+i'+,�,( .4%1sIrlL..r# g fss.Ltiste�` -��a �,'Gpc�, J� n � or t. •.tultit 1,IcL: , 1• � �V �-•�f�/I 8�(� i{L'1^LE• 'Y�+n� � �.4. 1 '�'i- _4.[.fCfi�".1 / -i a.�ea — arc e . P-�:p N Fat awe Flew, P ub . /�� -�"`9 �'.t .R•�t,t.�•l•w,.,S 4 •� �.c.�.Pttc4.ry4 ct.wt G�a-G-G � at- fib 1''.'.11.,;,9 ♦ �et.444A A & 1ti-c :�. .k to i� 4.c." A4-Kt_ f 7j • T41 4..0 tti[.!-•1 I l..i'•9 6wit 4. 614A.NCC A."5 .1tteilk M.6lr tts..,,Jt 1 .i.l a R.t%1n( cu%t i444 , u•I.,4 6�-�,.t I ,d....elt_ilizei ,u1,.tfl4Aat.t l,it.utsled. f0,2 1614 {., 11.43, 104.1-i:,5 1 i;,,r,.. LJ1J-12 r.24.,;.,a4c. 1^al-t ..* ,4 et-el wit.(l/c r7y4 )70C-1 6w,.� (ct ak .eA4l nt,A c,{i G•.n 1:.y rw" . /r /// Qkc.]i'c .Ve.�tJ a .Wlr t -fr. Sot iti.,.{ 'f'k•d �I ,, 4/4-0 Au* -(`., 1 1. .."" ltlh. -441 co • 4-113 Response to Comments from Allegro Berrian,Mark McLann,and Aaron Heide: 1. Comments noted. See response to comments from Doris McGougan. 4-44 4-114 Response to Comments from Tom and Peggy Bishop: 1. Comments noted. The development setback from the heron colony has been increased to 600 feet for both Tracts A and B. In additional,a 10-foot high • earthen berm with 20-foot tall evergreens planted on top has been added as 909 SW Langston Road • a mitigation measure to further improve buffering. Paving and other Renton, WA 98055 65 impervious surface area(e.g.,roof tops)will be necessary for development. Setbacks and tree planting in the parking area will result in a minor reduction Mary Lynne Myer of impervious surface. Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 _ May 9, 1990 • Dear Ms. Myer, We are writing regarding possible development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. As residents of Renton who value the natural wetlands we have in our city, we ask that your department take a very active role in protecting the local wildlife. Specifically, we request that • , 1. Buildings and parking areas are not placed too close to the heron rookery. 2. Provide adequate buffering•so that the herons and other wildlife will not be disturbed by movement, light, noise, air quality, and glare. • 3. Allow little or no paving of the area. We live on the West Hill and love seeing the herons fly over our home. This issue is important to us. We hope your department understands the magnitude of the decision before them and makes every effort to protect.a natural habitat that • cannot be replaced. Vrderely, .. • Tom and Peggy Bishop jp j TUr H: 277-9790 W: 657-8523 (Tom) • • 4-115 • May 10, 1990 Response to Comment,hom Terry lingbloom: Mary Lynne Myer 1. Comments noted. See response to comments from Doris McGougan. Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South 6 6 Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mary Lynne Myer: I am writing in opposition to the proposed development of the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. As the population of King county increases, we are losing more and more open spaces, which translates into wildlife habitat loss. A large part of the reason people are noving here is the quality of life. Ironically the quality of life is decreasing as our wildlife habitats are destroyed. The Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery is particularly precious because it is located in an oasis of industrial and commercial complexes. The herons and other wildlife located there have been squeezed into this or dislodged from their normal habitats by development pressures throughout the King county. The proposed development would likely destroy this area as a wildlife sanctuary and breeding area. It truly saddens me to watch the constant destruction of our open spaces. I have lived in Western Washington all my life and have watched the development roll over a lot of open spaces I hiked, played and bird watched in. The pace at which we are moving right now is astounding. If we do not preserve some of these areas now, there will soon be none left to preserve. By allowing the office buildings to be built as proposed, the heron rookery will likely be abandoned. The buildings and parking areas are simply too close to the nesting area. The herons, as well as other wildlife, require a buffer which would shelter them from movement, glare, noise and air pollution. The proposed development would violate all of these. I strongly urge you to protect this area as a wildlife habitat and not allow the adjacent development to destroy it. Thank-you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Terry L. Lingbloom 7058 7th Avenue N.W. Seattle, WA 98117 4-116 Response to Comments from Gladys Krohn: /712 // /47C 1. Comments noted. ;P " .'5 - 6 7 -.� ���- s✓ -�.' • • 9.n-3 5 �5 - 36/3 • 4-117 May 9, 1990 John Kohlsaat. Response to Comments from John Kohlsaat: 12057 Bellevue,S 42nd 006 • 1. Comments noted. See Section 1.6 of the Final EIS for mitigation measures. WA 9SOOG (206) 562-3103 2. Two small isolated wetlands totaling 0.10 acres would be impacted on Tract Mary Lynne Myer A and one wetland totaling 0.04 acres would be impacted on Tract B. Senior Environmental Planner �� Wetlands would be created on Tract B to mitigate for that loss. Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South 3.- Comments noted. Renton, WA 93055 Subject: Blackriver Corporate Park DEIS I would like to express my concern about the above Draft Environmental Impact Study because of the following reasons: • An active Great Blue heronry, the largest in the Puget Sound area. exists'adjacent to the site. • The EIS states that proposed construction poses a sisnifcantly adverse impact on the heronry the cannot be mitigated. • The proposed building and parking lot locations are too close to the heronry and without adequate buffering,noise,glare,and reduced air quality will all threaten the herons in their mating/nesting/feeding rim- als. • Proposed paving would reduce habitat of other local wildlife and possi- bly cause local exstinction of some species in the area. I feel that the loss of wetland and possible loss of the adjacent heronry is not out- weighed by any gains(increased revenue to the city,jobs,etc)to be derived from the proposed corporate park. Wetlands are crucial blocks in a rapidly weakening environment. This project would clearly have a significant adverse impact on the Blackriver wetland. I recommend that the proposed corporate park be denied until all possible impacts of the proposed construction are adequately mitigated and the scale of the project drastically reduced. • Please keep me informed of the continued processing of this application. Sincerely, fleAtevs...74_ ohn Kohlsaat • 4-118 5-21-90 Response to Comments from Mark and Jean Ouellette Mary Lynne Myer 1. Comments noted. This Final EIS has considered those concerns. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave. South 2. Comments noted. See response to comments from USFWS and WDW. Renton WA. 98055 w 3. The P-1 Pond (wetland)was originally constructed to serve as a regional 69 stormwater detention facility for development occurring in the Springbrook Creek and Blackriver Corporate Park area. As required by City of Renton Ms. Myer, code,the stormwater system for the project must be sufficient to handle a 25 We have been following the proposed development around the year 24-hour storm event Blackriver Riparian Forest & Heron Rookery for nearly a year, and have become increasingly concerned about the 4. By definition,with the exception of the old Black River channel on Tract B, wisdom of such activity. After attending the May 1st public the Black River wetlands do not include either Tracts A or B.the old channel hearing, our skepticism was strengthened. The speakers from a on Tract B is to be preserved. ' the Audubon Society and the University of Washington presented a number of legitimate concerns regarding items included in the EIS, and omissions of pertinent information from the EIS. Their professional expertise allows them to be able comprehend the long range implications of accepting the current proposal, and they have serious concerns. So do we. The proposed placement of buildings and parking areas is too close to the heronry; there is inadequate buffering. Both n the Washington State Department of Wildlife and the Fish and !� Game Department recommend buffers that are greater in distance and composed of larger trees than the developer has proposed. Paving the area would eliminate habitat for wildlife and substantially alter the hydrology of the wetland. Though the developer has added a storm drain filtration system to the 3 plan it is unclear if the system could effectively handle the run-off of either a major rain storm or a lengthy period of rain. "Overflow bypassing" is not acceptable. There is growing agreement that Open Spaces and Wetlands are valuable in their own right. In 1981 the city of Renton acknowledged that the Blackriver site was the premier it 7 • wetland in Renton. The loss of such a unique and scarce resource to yet another isotropic office park would be a tragic loss indeed. Please reconsider this proposal, it needs a great deal more study. Sincerely, Mark & Jean Ouellette 3912 1/2 NE 105th St Seattle WA. 98125 4_"' • 4-119 Response to Comments from Lori Levin: 70 1. Please refer to response to comments from King County (letter No. 8), comment 1 for discussion of open space. b .her wA-q e51- ham`/ _ S1cMn(It,nest In Ms sand Csi M -r-�—" Deaches.the piping plow b lire d In r gbpby `iliSy,yt�), development,brach nereadon,an nundi D nee . numerous 0 ww!wrested for too ewer thin20_psI a the n 1.1�NIN;1 "•••• a—71 — 1pemw.slaed shorebirds rvMve the 04MAT.. Wore NIN:. Si fl Conservancy snd the Michigan Dep men yyfl1tss urai MYR"an row wain'to preserve the dwindiin 'MUM! 'piper nests "'• r in Mlldwneu sure Park. (� •yll •y!.. ' R oeie,R. ,t,c1 if-, Va(a4 4&- ,`r;C•`.;;' f;::.: '- 4-nds(/; l s1{p13 mac G nn6/1l er 16laC/G �GRro F St Envy�&hn e is . T�Nature Cbnservanry s- e.'111/71 1g1S North Lynn Stnat ArlIn;to..VA 22209 a poll MI• • tw 7 puuNod in MI,The Nanh Coma.+nnde ban Nkmalbwd per. mnseerrwwntnrgsnlrwhm that mem and man,w„mne than lnn �OD {1)i�l��(/l S., lure pnwms—the Logs*Meaty rawer sysnan in Me world. / *,� tV.f Intndw ucy rtrnnAv duao air S1l pee year and include a subscription 'we'41` b,In Mr 9NIo oanerrvMgca:inr. G gO J-- • • 4-120 • Response to Comments from Julie Bonwell: NAMING DIVISION i:ir10F!iE'iC'J 1. Comment noted. May 21, 1990 WW1 / 4 1990 • fief:�1.9 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner 1 • Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Renton Heron Rookery (Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery) Dear Ms. Myer: It is clear to me that noisy construction, polluted water run-off and human disturbance in general will force the birds off their nesting grounds. We should consider ourselves extremely fortunate in having a spectacular showing of herons nesting in our City. Everything possible should be done in an effort to protect their environment and keep them here. Molded correctly, the Rookery clearly will become one of Renton's main attractions as the eagles are to Skykomish River. Very truly yours, • J ie P. Bonwell 616 - 146th Avenue S.E. Renton, Washington 98056 (206) 223-0800/271-0680 • 4-121 Response to Comments from Marcy Beyer: 1. The setback on Tract B has been increased to 600 feet plus additional May11, 1990 measures have been developed to mitigate impact. Wildlife use of the P-1 Pond and the riparian forest adjacent to the pond will continue with the project. Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 72 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: I'm writing to protest the proposed development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery as discussed in the Environmental Impact Statement released on April 11. Human encroachment on the heron rookery will have a devastating effect on their nesting, raising of young and overall health. There are over 24 nesting pairs of herons at this sight--they will undoubtedly leave when confronted with the noise, light, movement and diminished air quality that comes with a large concentration of people. The siting of buildings within 400 feet of the birds is absolutely unacceptable. Herons are extremely skittish--which is why this is one of the only rookeries left in the Kent Valley. Please don't let this one disappear. In addition, paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Other species will probably move on to try and find the dwindling open space and green areas they can live in. This is an area that already supports a thriving ecosystem. Please mitigate the existing development plan to.allow for wildlife. Sincerely, �/�`�'/_�"�� Marcy Be r �/ 3213 Conkling Place West Seattle, WA 98119 • • _5 4-122 VC G/Ze_ /'` - , Response to Comments from William Bolanos: V77 &i1-�. 1. Comments noted. See Section 332 of this Final EIS. e®,zcP./2,7222 (/ _ a_ fre- P.� 73 �:YZ GI' _ /'iAc*.Rfvrr i.94r ANr NCroN /rOoKPr i - tk4, =lain de/111724-'•,71-,..0 12 (5. „,,,,,„.:& 9GLn,tnrtaa�J Garin ,,,, O o e-etY cz-e er:ette /a-,6-.-e_ioz t�.,gg.G Qiu�tOza-D-;j4.4-11. .4.7-1 &Y7 iz. a-71 lug--�6 04e. • e,,,67, „,y1,6„, ,ex.A.,,, /6,4r. and 42.- -f4ZIld 6t76;fIeel=e-cr per . 8 - aid Za . 17 _ - . Lieti:Aw a•lAWo3/J1 11 A R 3G.3t. CUAHS�N.14.2e 4. P1f -11 Q41< Lu ( 4-123 � ' . f7?c Response to Comments from Virginia and James Wood: 1. Please see response to comments from King County.No. 1. 74 13e,- S p tom EL rt CC ,1 - . /7 7-d t F�-L��`/�►y lifer .3/ f!v/— t��e.✓�rL.t �` / 7 - �• � 0z • 7.5 2-5- 5 3)-3-6"—6e e 4-124 SZI-i • ?s.'01/ pier A,—yard *y4 244d ' o/wvMy ' -mrs v -4.1 • 'q 477, 4a,2Uuc/0 A?/0 -21u •7'/.►M 4, -2.rn'►4 -27 s 7ir1 M'J yr, s)1 ' tiw ns ouipois p 4 40-2y0 u,cd,/vs,r uo.�b�`1'' r727 •shirD ?I,/p/'M 1p ,4; 0 good oad h 00 8 /140 7 y4 �./r 11,y',v /ou b u,)/e,I a�,a •���„5,2°1/..1 v/ 5'l s"v •3 •S .�. 4q/ " v./ 727S/oJ di!,pf S�,gvq �!5 g.Iq ly1sw,7p 267 pPe" 1/91'/'v 1 �J1 p,+n roof' -2nym du/rot s �y� a'o �uhav�do'nsI/7 'cczo/ 6&>>,Jvd'/u.lp/"'q nnu ?, suo44,/,vD7 �s 42Ji oocy vary./ pHr 492.15 v o,a�►d,� J2/1.0 vy 3 ?114 N, ?, ,p/,M _nyio ru u 's„w„y -7,71 f o s7,977y -2y4 op os 'sitnunn0- 4 b 1.4.4 'rkI-7 ,„, p 4,Jv/gJo '9-257'Zi ?no/ VII1SrnWaQ clA 141.7 .V7'I 4 71-1 5 V IL3f _mo s,7 'Od b b'/'1 `uomy yPio 7Nl.,"n f///'G+/ 00C • lvowdopir)C7 hv„unuo'orp g01)0 _novz/J ,v.q V0..1/i1U JR,T/JS' r' 1 Response to Comments from Jane Lindeman: 1. Comment noted. Two small isolated wetlands totaling 0.10 acres would be impacted on Tract A and one wetland totaling 0.04 acres would be impacted on Tract B. Wetlands would be created on Tract B to mitigate for that loss. See response to comment 3 from Mark and Jean Oullette. 4-126 i —— d 1 Response to Comments from Janice Martin: 1. See response to comment from Jane Lindeman. Hay 1 . 1990 Ke:! Lynne Myer, 76 S'er:io_• Environmental planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mary Lynne Myer. Any development of buildings and parking areas in the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery will disturb wildlife and probably cause species extinctions. Thanks to the actions of selfish and greedy people (people who should be deeply ashamed). this very special natural area could be added to the growing list of destroyed wildlands. Please do not allow this development. Si nra.eY�yi %' ice Martin 133 A 30th Ave. Seattle. WA 98133 328 3154 • 4-127 PLANNING DIVISION UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON CITY OF RENTON The present habitat for the heron rookery is not ideal but all better sites have SEATTLE.WASHINGTON 9819, been lost to development. With the restoration of this wetland area the PPR 2 6 1990 production of herons,waterfowl and other wildlife would be increased. The• 2 _ present E.I.S.does not consider the restoration of the'wetland but this 3 P�ECEIVEp should be an important option for several reasons. First,over 9090 of the EngineeringEn',ex.FM-I2 r„d n wetlands in King County have already been lost. It is not in the public's (20;p 543-1812 interest to lose any more wetlands. This is an important wintering area for (20G)5 many resident birds and would be of more value,if the wetland had not Donald K. Erickson April 25, 1990 been illegally filled. One option that should be considered is the restoration Chief, Current Planning of the wetlands. City of Renton If development was allowed,where could the birds move? The 200 Mill Ave South WA 98055 7 7 present site is one of the few wetland urban sites that birds can use for Renton, breeding and wintering so that the proposed development must be compatible with the heron rookery and use by shorebirds,waterfowl and Dear Mr. Erickson, birds of prey. The evidence suggests that the development is not compatible with the heron rookery and further, that wetlands will be lost damaging a I am writing about the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for variety of wildlife Development that reduces wetlands could be allowed in • the Blackriver Corporate Park Office Buildings tracts A and B as addressed very unusually conditions that were in the publics interest but there is no in the Revised State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA). evidence that this project has such.redeeming value. Moreover, there are legal questions about whether this wetlands could be developed since There are several activities that have taken place on the land prior to federal law protects them. In sum,no evidence is presented that makes it this proposal that were illegal and should be fixed. Partial filling of the site 1 in the public's interest to develop this site. In fact,there is evidence that the has been done and all this fill should be removed since it fills part of the public interests,natural resources and wildlife will be harmed. wetland. Since this has occurred on the land during the ownership by First The report points out that a disturbance free zone for the herons of City Development Corporation they should pay to restore the wetland to its 820 feet over land and 500 feet over water is needed. Many scientists would original condition. argue that this space is not enough. In any case,the proposed development Because the development site sits next to land regulated by the • does not meet.the heron's minimum needs for protection. The goal is not to 5- Federal government the National Environmental Policy Act should apply see if the heron can survive closer development but to protect the herons. and the E.I.S.should be done under the federal act and not just under the The proposed development should meet the minimum requirements given State Environmental Protection Act. The Council on Environment Quality in the USFWS Habitat Suitability Index model. Even if this standard is (C.E.Q.) supports the need of public involvement in their memorandum when they state' used the evidence on how easily herons are disturbed strongly suggests that Public review ris°comsat%if the proposal is a bacdedine case•r..*gym there is a this distance is likely to be inadequate. 9- reasonable argument forprrpara0on ofan ELF or when Clear is sein a rrpnblie �awersy�rthe proposal.' This requirement alone should make NEPA Buildings that are taller than the trees in the area may not be apply to the present case. Further there is a question whether the Black compatible with the rookery. The height of the proposed buildings are likely 4, to be a for the birds. River should be restored'and salmon reintroduced. The present EIS does If problemhe minimum buffer standards of 820 feet is used and development present des how the developmentcould impact a salmon run. Some of the allowed to proceed it should proceed at the developer's risk There should be thepr esBa development done illegally may ions the Marine Fisheries Becausec of several requirements with the permit. First,a monitoring study by couldBack Riverto runs in the reaa, the National athe NEPAs Service scientists should be required and be conducted to assess whether the birds have interest in the area and this would mean that would show any sign of desertion or the number of roosting pairs drops. If any 7 apply. The present EIS does not address these federal interests. adverse impacts can be quantified,all development permits would be immediately revoked and work permanently curtailed. Thus, if Moreover, there are concerningc the problemsr n the conclusions s drawn development is allowed it should proceed only as long as there are no stronglyg the EIS statement popoe the heron rookery.e Scientific evidence adverse impacts on the herons. If there are adverse impacts,the developer ookey indicates that the proposed are no longerer islikely to harm becausethe heron 3 should be required to halt development and immediately begin restoring the rookery. Note that heron rookeries no easily relocated site to its original condition. there is not other habitat for the birds to move to that is suitable. In the past The EIS states that there are not wetlands of significance on the site. e wereds could move•because other don were available even if s moveo areas As I have stated,this is not true. It is true that part of the wetlands have D not siteas good as the site ower reproductive However,if theand from the • already been harmed. Serious consideration should be given to restoring . present they will have lower reproductive success and many may die. . , .v.' Iry Recycled Paper • 4-128 • • Response to Comments from Dee Boersma: this site to its original condition i.e. to the condition before the developer or g - 1. No illegal filling was done by the applicant on either Tracts A or B. Tract A others filled and drained part of the site. was previously filled and regraded during construction of the P-1 Pond. As a wetland, the site has a storage function and further Portions of Tract B were also regraded development may add drainage and runoff water to this wetland. The quality of this water from the development is not likely to be good. The 9 Two isolated wetlands created from the regrading activities on Tract A and increased runoff is likely to have petroleum products and even heavy metals,compounds that may damage the wetlands. The EIS should totaling 0.10 acres,would be filled while one isolated wetland totaling 0.04 address these issues. acres would be filled on Tract B. Mitigation would be provided by creating This land is one of the last remaining urban wetland areas. As such additional wetlands on Tract B. Please see Figure 2-2 for an aerial NEPA should apply and the EIS should be reviewed by the federal agencies 10 photograph of the site in 1977,prior to construction of the P-1 Pond. The site that would have interest in this habitat and area. These agencies include at that time was a part of the Earlington Golf Course. the Dept.of Commerce and the Dept.of the Interior and the Env. Protection Agency. 2. NEPA does not apply to this project because no federal action is proposed on the site. The applicant may need to file a Corps of Engineers 404 permit Sincerely, application as a part of project approval. The historic Black River was diverted in 1916. The large majority of the old channel(with the exception of the small wetland remaining on Tract B and the channel downstream of the pump stations)has been filled and developed over the years. Water quality in the watershed would need to improve considerably before salmon populations would be viable. As previously mentioned,the P-1 Pond was P.Dee Boersma originally constructed by the SCS as a stormwater detention system,a function Professor, Institute For Environmental Studies and it now provides and will provide for future development in the basin. Department of Zoology -ram:. 4 fir. u �• ��r�, 3. There is no evidence to suggest that herons move to new nest sites any less �'"4� �'' frequently now than in previous years. See response to comment from Range Bayer (letter No. 59) response No. 10. Wetland restoration was not considered for this project since none of the wetlands affected by the project are significant enough to warrant protection and restoration. The City of Renton wetland study(1981)identified the area north of the P-1 Pond and Tracts A and B as significant wetlands and worthy of preservation. This project would not affect that area. 4. See response to comment 3. 5. Please see responses to comments from USFWS and WDW. 6. The building height would not be taller than the height of the lowest nests on the island. 7. A phased development program is proposed by the applicant and a monitoring program during construction and development has been defined as a mitigation measure. 8. Please see responses to comments 1 and 3. 9. See response to comment 2. 10. See response to comment 1. • 4-129 Response to Comments from Elizabeth Miles: 1. Comments noted. There are other heron colonies in King County. Please see May 19, 1990 Appendix B for a description of those sites. The intent of the mitigation, measures is to minimize the impact on the herons. Please see Chapter 3 for PLANNING DIVMMU a description of those measures. l:llY(IF RFIJTOIa Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environ. Planner MN 2 3 1990Dept. of Comm. Develop. Q 200 Mill Ave So. �iLCi_�Vi=i� 78 Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms.'Myer: I am writing in response to the EIS that proposes development • for the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. hs developmentrs, i.e itlwillhave causeextremely toserious leave.consequences offor the herons, parking areas are much too close to the theo buildingsTe and is inadequate. The herons rookery. The proposedeby bufferingent will be disturbed by movement of people and vehicles, noise, light, and air pollution. There are no nesting sites left in King County and if this one is abandoned, the herons will have no place to go. One can always recreate office space, but it is next to impossible to recreate a nesting place for the herons in this county. It ' is very important to save this rookery. Sincerely, be.*h a—Nike) Elizabeth J. Miles 22431 1Oth Ave. 9o. Des Moines, 4-130 r -- • • ' , ,1 ' , - ----. - . i •, . L. ,: 11111.'- '_ . . ._,-__ • . Response to Comments from John M.Wolf: 1. Comments noted. 2. An inventory of migratory birds and a discussion of impacts has been added ni:r .rvironm,..nt::1 1.1y Lynne Mie r 79 to Sections 3.5 and Appendix G of the Final EIS. ..--1..r.r:•:r . Depart:eent of ::ccreuhity 7.:eveloo:r.-.3:t :all .-.-oeaue Liouta 3. Traffic impacts have been further addressed in Section 3.8 and Appendix H :Iento::, .ics.linLton 9.,055 of this Final EIS. Lzar Ma My r: • 4: The setbacks of 600 feet have been established based on information at urban "• colonies in King County. Additional mitigation measures have been defined you fcx sxts114:.1:-., t,..; 1:..zr:Jid ror c...m.u.nt... rl,r t:.... 41....!*.erIv-r Oorporate. lark Draft Invironm,atal Imy:ct Statement (DELO. to further minimize the impacts. These are presented in Section 1.6 of the . Final EIS. it 1.. 1:%..).etLnt to..:t nny devaloprnut n.:cr tA ..:.1::::Kriv.r :'(1. .r1...1.: - Forest and Heron Rookery be considered carefully and co1ely 1 ' 5. See response to comments from WDW. bec:Juse of the limited number of similar sitee In tl•zis •..r..,.. - In t.:e eection on life Resource: on ;.:3• e 3-33 I rcr.lr..:1 r.e. I 2. 'discussion of ti.e mil;ratory birds that u:3e the *2-1 pond snd tt.e impacts of the project on them. • After Zrivinc home from the Renton litrry after reinz- thc DEIS 3 on a "Pridsy afternoon I'asve doutta about Grady Ws; bin c 1:11: to nandle the traffic volumes as discussed on :23i:,*F; 3-67 zili3 • . On paLe 3-10 it is ststed tit "A majority of tIle informstion svallz.b1.1 reL.ardinL the effe2t 01: numan oe:tiviti:.s on a.ri.".t neron rookeries is associated with .:itb.r short-term. constrzation- • • - related activities or in areas were rookerise :,..iv.e been :sta:11:-,1.e• il sitar construction. only limited•infrmi:t.ion ::::11.ta r:,;.-.3%.1 . t':le effects of construction activities on e..:1.stin, too;t:.ri•le. .1:1:::wiee, very littli: infornwzion exists re,,..rdini: d.it'cauka needed to erovide lont.-tarm protection to uston rookeries." Due to too importance of•tae site 6=1 the l:;ck of ir.for•entior. on 5 ti:e impact of the project on tut heron rookery it ne:ma to 77If: tit • . • instead of proposin6 uuidelir.es tact allow construction .:loaer to toe site taut tue cuidelines of AMA:4.ton D-spart:sr_t of .111:51If • should.hi used.1 or this project. . . . Sincerely yours, . . . ,b104.%- 7n. tdo4k - • . •. . John M. Wolf . • • • . .• • . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • . - . • . . . . . . . • - . . . . . . . . . .: • - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • 4-131 • Response to Comments 1Fom Beth Healy: • 1800 North 35th Si. 1. Comments noted.,See response to comments from King County,No. 1. • Seattle, Washington 98103. 80 May 21, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer PIANNINGDIVISN)IJ Senior Environmental Planner ':!)Y:J:nrN)fd•I Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue S. t v.! gin Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: :Ei..T I understand that the City of Renton is considering developing the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and the Heron Rookery. I am very concerned that this would render the area uninhabitable for the herons. They would be affected by the noise, light and movement that parking lots and buildings would create. As a birdwatcher, I know herons are quite sensitive to and fearful of human presence. I feel strongly that we need to maintain the environments in which they can live--and particularly breed--undisturbed. I would urge the City not to develop this particular area. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, • Beth L. Healy • 4-132 \ = Response to Comments from Ralph M.Evans: 3306 NE filth 'Place. Renton. WA. 96056. I. Comments noted. The parent company of the project applicant was May 18, 1990. associated with the Victoria Hills project. Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, $1 Senior Environmental Planner.• Community Development Dept. . 200 Mill Ave South. Renton, WA. 98055. Subject: Blackriver Corporate Park d. the Heron Rookery. Dear Ms. Myer, I wish to express my opposition to any development immediately adjacent to the Blackriver heron rookery. It appears that this is the only such area in the south end, and surely the only one in the city of. Renton. With all the other areas available for development, it would seem the only objective in-exploiting this particular site would be the elimination of the rookery and the adjacent wild-life habitat. Another concern relative to the proposed development has to do with the developer. If this is the same organization which was responsible for the Victoria Hills project. they have a relationship with the City of Renton thatlgoes back many years, most or it pretty rocky. If the Victoria Hills:project was an indication of their • typical performance, the City of Renton might well expect another extended period of bitterness, confrontation and anguish it this project is approved. At the same time, the rookery could be lost forever. I urge the City of Renton Planning and Community Development Departments to approve only the "No Action" alternatives defined in the DEIS. for both "tract A" & "tract B". • jecere I,v. • R: I • H. vans. • • • 4-133 WA. Mb. Oc_er: • 82 vwa o..cast.- "vti.AD £4J. .L.0.&0 siikR. - o 6't,i y 16. p2cod oy cexce v 1.6o -loo ?) -lie Verov Rosket of ib 13/4C'h. /'01)2.e1 6velop,.ie,crf are-. C\xe •0.i.7 - e-ay.6:1- cr4. .34.ri 4x ov--' c4 o �A.)e- veo.d 14).s. .EZS oiNd ora_ cf,,u-te did:F.111 44 � f�• +�'� •p 6. . d� s I--AA-n(1lh i,�ad vA,oa.+-e. Pc 6I, 616 - ,I.Adam, +cry__-do Juu.eu.. S' s�-�o�x\—-�o :ocus Deeds .G-v?/-t t,es jr7ovs y ,u '-' ..4, . P' o ' _ .ace o.�c:514-. •. .3...x�� `e-ve/o rs h� b -r- Zoues &pproXJ( d < .5Do • Gaud 4 Qom 418 a. w.a-'°� .v+.do ftt.e descried e.u. b; 9o.).�'�.x..,Orec ga o 0.cAZ6, JN ) c\%- Be. cx_y_ deR;51 o u •ia.�a�eAed,feu Sle u(d v/s r+ t, •r� �a 'c a _'co fro, cs*_esr. 9 c* ,IattAz. o JAfj ..ea+..t.ec�,+d-deve/ip r d ,f.i ee CuaVm ► -/c u ' 1 ax d � '&. .. , %4* ar- 9 oxc)-JcA �- �-1 .,In.i{dei a�'d +`rzrhed 1a110° "a re0... •� v, ,°�` - :u�+L—a. 4- e�ud _iv-r„m 6'PR. :2 - eeJ;fy u.n s Ye,�( ,UP4 I ve , ( 3\AA.,�'_' -x`co, 2a Xi.- -v o 'C�s 4.3 •s ) . �. Ire wws ,cam J.I{/QA e�vd, ( y.wk: `s° _ ,)cam er.iry � CiakeA,a ax.- rd 5 �' Ja 6a n6 4"SsleO,,,we- .is c� ate-9 cal o ' -a., ate., 1.3)s..,xs c ��� • �I ado -�, J.1-U.�� .n s�.� `cs� cM- �,ro u are- re�� 41 ve ,,G LA°c.ud„beca�ss ' .Q9w G.,,,e 1 ,aCu xa.lcd, c,W Joy tiCa lied cd ,-a:Lul / �\ .el,�h e,, k at ).14. 'a.6s A s& � k e l ✓tr. . di c��0t c Jke doi-e- .�tof.�.C�` a- • . .X-,==cam- �� -c�- J.sa- a` 4sotJ+.6�' "a,+1d 1r.4 tea..,,- .�.c). . a.er*9.- • . • cr»..A t,.r o ert.r' -st'`4� . � .Z a -\t5Qx,,s1.,t's 6oQA&Okr� �' i. O p+exs Z ,as, _ cv.3.-ki,rcK.e.... 65t) ,4 . - s150\ 4-134 - - i WIN 1 Response to Comments from Krista Rave: 1. The Pigeon Point project to which you allude was never built. Additionally, the Pigeon Point heron colony is still active,contrary to other reports. 2. The location of the development project which you mention is not clear. If you are referring to the Pigeon Point area,the heronry was found to be active during both 1989 and 1990 nesting seasons. Please see Appendix B for more detail. 3. Comments noted. 4. Mitigation measures relevant to your recommendations and identified in this Final EIS include a 600-foot setback from the heron colony to development, construction of a 10-foot high benched earthen berm between the colony and development on Tracts A and B,planting of 20-foot tall evergreen trees on the berm,and development of a pedestrian path and an observation platform approximately 580 feet from the heronry. A mitigation measure regarding the placement of air conditioning units and the control of noise has been included in this Final EIS. A berm with evergreen trees will be placed between the P-1 Pond and parking area on Tracts A and B. Lighting will be necessary in parking areas for security and safety reasons. Lighting will be low intensity and directed downward to the ground. The use of non-reflective glass is defined as a mitigation measure in the Final EIS. 5. Monitoring of construction has been identified as a mitigation measure in this Final EIS. �- 4-135 622 NW 51st Street COMMENTS ON THE BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK DRAFT EIS Seattle,Washington 98107 83 Page 2-3.Paragraph 7. Development of a three or four story parking garage within 600 May 23,1990 feet of the heron rookery cannot be considered as mitigation for the any of the I alternatives. Likewise, changing the previous plan to site a 7 story office building a Ms.Mary Lynne Myer,Project Mgr. distance of 720 feet from the rookery, cannot be considered as mitigation of impacts Community Development Department created by the development. Renton City Hall I 200 Mill Ave South Renton,Washington 98055. Page 3-1. Paragraph 4. Because both sites have in the past received fill material from Dear Ms.Myer: the P-1 Pond,the potential exists that this fill material is,contaminated from upstream activities. The Western Processing Superfund site has impacted the water and Enclosed please find my comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) for the Black River Corporate Park. Having been born in Renton and raised in the Puget sediments of Springbrook Creek which flows directly into the P-1 Pond. Elevated metals Sound region I have taken a personal interest in this and other similar development concentrations have been observed by Metro in sediments of Springbrook Creek. No projects in the area. As an environmental scientist I have been professionally involved in water quality related issues in the Seattle area for the past 11 years. Consequently,my mention is made of these data in the DEIS. Because the fill material present on these concerns and comments on the DEIS tend to focus on these areas of the environment. sites may be contaminated,the potential impacts of disturbance must be addressed for I look forward to reviewing the Final EIS and trust that my comments and concerns will all pertinent elements of the environment including fish and wildlife habitat and water be fully addressed. quality associated with the site. Sincerely, 1`�•L\ ,/ qn � Page 3-17. Paragraph 4. Air pollution problems resulting from the parking garage for ���� i either alternative are said to result in possible air pollution problems within and beyond 3 Walter T.Trial,Jr.,Ph.D. Tract B. Does this include the heron rookery? If so,what are the potential impacts? Also,inversions are only mentioned. What is the incidence of inversions in the Black WT\BLACKR River Basin? Their duration,frequency,and associated air quality? • Page 3-17. Paragraph 5. It is stated that'the parking garage for the Proposed Action Ai (B1)should have the following features..' Use of the word"should'does not ensure that the mitigation presented will be employed as part of the project and therefore cannot be considered as true mitigation. Page 3-21.Paragraph 1. The pertinent sections of the Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance need to be presented in the DEIS. The last sentence In this 4 paragraph is unclear. What are the onsite project facilities? What is meant by'the receiving water(P-1 Pond)will be able to pass the 100 year flow/ Does this consider cumulative upstream Inputs? 1 4-136 Page 3-21. Paragraph 2. A detailed drainage plan must be prepared before a proper the width of the proposed blofiltration swale? Will runoff actually flow the 200 foot length 13 assessment of impacts can be made. An approximation of impacts is inadequate and of this swale? This is not demonstrated in any of the figures provided. How will it be inappropriate in the DEIS. Biofiltration swales are discussed here for the first time with maintained? How often? no description as to their locations. Assumptions about runoff being routed to such 6 facilities are inappropriate. The use of such facilities must be specifically described. The • Page 3-27. Paragraph 1. How will the oil/water separator be maintained? How wide will location and sizing (length and width) of these structures must also be presented in the 350 ft long biofiltration swale be? Where will it be located? It is unclear from the order to evaluate their capacity to carry(and to treat)a given flow. The last sentence in figures(e.g.2-3)provided how any of the proposed biofiltration swales will operate. Will this paragraph is unclear. What is the unused volume of the P-1 Pond? runoff flow the length of the swale (i.e. 350 feet) as the text would lead the reader to itf . believe? Or,will runoff only flow across the width of the swale(no numbers provided)to Page 3-21. Paragraph 4. Again, detailed drainage plans are necessary in order to the P-1 Pond? This needs to be dearly identified. In addition,those runoff pollutants of evaluate potential impacts. On-site detention facilities need to be described'and 1 concern must be identified along with the specific pollutant removal efficiencies for the identified on the alternative site plans. What are the runoff coefficients assumed for each identified biofiltration swales. of the alternatives? • Page 3-27. ('aragraph 2. If sediment could enter the P-1 Pond it could also enter the Page 3-21. Paragraph 5. What is the excess capacity of the P-1 channel? Based upon g Green River. Quantify any potential impacts to the water quality and biota of the Green L� what storm flow conditions? River as a result of erosional impacts from the project. I Page 3-21. Paragraph 6. The final sentence states "Mitigation could include Page 3-27. Paragraph 3. What are the specific impacts associated with vehicles and I/6 improvements to the channel at the north end of Tract B...' Unless mitigation will or CI landscaping activities? These must be identified. would be implemented,then it cannot be seriously considered as part of this DEIS. The integrity of the entire DEIS is compromised by such wording and phrasing. General. Fisheries impacts to the Green River and to Springbrook Creek are totally 17 Ignored in the DEIS. What are the water quality related impacts to fisheries in these Page 3-23. Paragraph 4. No mention is made of the potential impacts that would occur waters as a result of the proposed project? as a result of spills of construction chemicals,oils and grease,diesel fuel,etc. What are the potential impacts to water quality and other elements of the environment arising from 10 Page 3-27. Paragraph 4. It is stated that'This plan would likely include the following contaminants introduced from parking areas and landscaping activities associated with (mitigation)elements". Such language makes it impossible to evaluate what the plan is normal day-to-day use of the proposed site? What are the estimated quantities of these actually will provide for mitigation of impacts. The reader cannot tell which of the contaminants based upon the proposed areas of parking and landscaping for the site? elements identified are actually part of the plan. The word 'likely' suggests that the mitigation elements Identified may or may not be implemented. Page 3-23. Paragraph 5. What constitutes proper, erosion control? How much • sediment will enter lower Springbrook Creek,the P-1 Pond,and the Green River? What I( Page 3-27. Mitigation Measures. Item 7. 'covering of exposed cuts as recommended Id are the potential impacts to water quality and the associated aquatic biota from such by the geotechnical engineer. What is recommended by the geotechnical engineer for erosion? this pr°j • Page 3-23. Paragraph 6. What is the magnitude of the increase in contaminants a. Item 8. Should read"Mulching of all areas exposed for more than 30 days'MI 1 ZS associated with impervious paved areas? What are the contaminants Involved? What is I 330 days. . • : 2 3 • 4-137 southern portion of the Black River wetland considered a major adverse impact? If so, 30 Page 3 -27. Paragraph 5. What are the standards set forth by the Washington this should be stated. Department of Ecology for the design of biofiltration swales? These must at least be 21 included in the appendix to the DEIS. What are the proposed locations of these swales? Page 3-41. Paragraph 6. What are the specific distances involved in the statement 'Viable heron rookeries exist in close proximity to parking'lots at the Peasley Canyon 31 Page 3-28. Paragraph 1. What are the pond volumes and pumping schedules that will ZL rookery near Auburn, Washington, and adjacent to the Delta River Inn in Vancouver, determine detention effectiveness? B.C..." Page 3-28. Paragraph 2. The absence of a detailed drainage plan makes it impossible Page 3-42. Paragraph 1. What are the specific distances involved in the statement 3, to evaluate whether the mitigation proposed is sufficient to reduce the potential impacts "Although other viable heron rookeries in Oregon and Washington occur in close I h of the project. Without a detailed drainage plan the DEIS must be considered Z3 proximity to buildings..." inadequate. The statement "Mitigation would likely take the form of proper design" is inadequate. What would specific mitigation be to 'ensure that additional volumes Page 3-42. Paragraph 3. With regard to the statement'The long-term impacts of the generated by development...not increase erosion in the channel at the north end of the height and location of the seven-story building on heron use of the site is uncertain.", 33 site"? what are the'potential adverse impacts associated with this plan? Might the herons abandon the site? Has development In other areas adversely impacted heron nesting Page 3-29. Paragraph 7. Where are the significant vegetation resources of the site I Zi sites? Identify these potential adverse impacts. located? These need to be identified on a map of the site. , Page 3-42. Paragraph 5. Identify the potential adverse impacts on heron use of the site 3d Page 3-29. Paragraph 8. The last sentence must be modified to read "filling or I/5" given the height of the building. While the long term impacts on heron use may be development of impervious area must not extend under the dripline of the trees'. unknown,at least the potential adverse impacts must be identified. Page 3-30. Mitigation Measures. Throughout the DEIS mitigation is described as Page 3-43. Mitigation Measures. The statement'Additional mitigation could include the something that should be done by FCDC. All such language must be changed to will be 24 following..'is totally ambiguous and does not Indicate what, if any, mitigation will be done. Otherwise,the mitigation described cannot be seriously considered as something employed. In addition,the mitigation items listed are unclear. What is meant by'shifting that will,in fact,be carried out by FCDC as part of this project. the seven-story building further to the slightly(sic)east and south to minimize potential impact to great blue heron..."? How far should the building be'shifted'? How and by Page 3-31. Paragraph 1. Where is the map that delineates these two small ,Z1 what degree will this reduce potential impacts? depressions? Page 3-46. Paragraph 5. What are the distances involved in the statement"...great blue Page 3-32. Paragraph 1. Where is the map that delineates the 1.1 acre wetland? 128 herons have nested successfully In pjgeg proximity to substantial generators of noise'. 34, What are the decible levels which will result In blue herons being "bothered by loud Page 3-32. Paragraph 6. Where is the map that delineates the 0.04 acre wetland?I ZI intermittent noises'? What are the distances and decible levels of disturbance involved Would filling this wetland be considered a significant impact? In the example rookeries presented? Page 3-32. Paragraph 7. Is the potential alteration of species located within the 130 Page 3-47. Paragraph 3. The statement presented is not dear. Use of the phrase137 • 4 . 5 • • 4-138 — ' "should not cause any adverse impact"is ambiguous. Will noise associated with daily the Affected Environment. activities in the office complex cause any adverse impacts to great blue herons present, l�� or not? Page 3-68. Mitigation Measures. Use of the word 'should' is, as noted for other mitigation in the DEIS,ambiguous. Page 3-47. Mitigation Measures. Again, use of the word "should' when describing mitigation measures is ambiguous. There is no doubt that the mitigation described 3 should be implemented for this project. The question is,will it? • Page 3-63. Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance. What are the provisions of this 3q ordinance? These must be presented in the DEIS. How will these provisions be met for each of the Alternatives? Page 3-64. Shoreline Master Program. Discuss in detail the inconsistencies of thel t f 0 proposed office park versus a water dependant use or urban shoreline for the site. • - Page 3-64. Comprehensive Plan. Explain how a seven story building (Alternatives 81 t{ and B2)can be a viable Alternative for the DEIS it it conflicts with local land use policies. ( . Page 3-64. Zoning Ordinance. What are the Environmental Performance Standards that I!{L must be met for any of the Alternatives? Page 3-65. Mitigation Measures. What are the specific inconsistencies with the Land a3 Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance? How many trees are involved? Use of the word "should"is ambiguous and does not ensure that this mitigation will be employed., Page 3-66. Paragraph 5. The text indicates that"Because of the height of the proposed .ey phase 3 building(seven stories)a mass of lit surface will be immediately adjacent to the • great blue heron flight zone on the west side of the site.' What are the potential adverse impacts of this mass of lit surface on the flight of herons? On heron nesting? • Page 3-68. Paragraph 1. Traffic related impacts cannot be excused simply because • they were not identified in the soaping process. If, in fact, the Grady Way Corridor L Transportation Improvement Study addresses the impacts and Issues related to traffic, . this information must at least be summarized In the DEIS. Page 3-68. Paragraph 3. The information presented In this paragraph is not related to Ii `16 • 7 • 4-139 Response to Comments from Walter Trial Jr.,Ph.D.: 8. See response to comment 5. 1. Comments noted.This Final EIS identifies additional mitigation measures for 9. Comment noted.The unknown word'could* ou ether was because el cause until drainare ge numbers the proposed action. are 2. Findings of a hazardous waste study conducted on Tract A are presented in 10. Construction and use of any commercial building site presents the possibility Sections 3.6.2 and Appendix F of this Final EIS. Fill from the P-1 Pond was for spills and the production of runoff containing chemicals. Although placed only on Tract A(see Mary Anderson letter). quantities cannot be quantified,the project will comply with City and State regulations regarding nonpoint runoff. 3. See response to comments from Mary Anderson(letter No.91)response No. 17. 11. As part of the drainage plan,an erosion control plan will be required by the City. The elements of this plan were presented in the DEIS. Sizing of 4. The specific mitigation measures as required by the city will be presented in sediment trapping facilities will be based on the methodology presented in the mitigation report to be prepared by the city. King County Surface Water Design Manual. This methodology and the listed features of the erosion control plan are the current Best Management 5. The City of Renton has recently adopted King County's Surface Water Design Practices recommended by the City and the State and have been judged to be Manual. As such, all drainage facilities (pipes, open channels, and catch effective at controlling erosion and removing sediment from runoff. The • basins)must be sized to pass the 25 year storm event. Receiving waters need applicant is not required to provide measures above those recommended by to pass runoff from the 100 year event. The P-1 Pond,the receiving water for governing agencies. Exact quantification of the amount of sediment that will this project,was designed and constructed as a detention facility. As such,the reach receiving waters is not possible. capacity of the pond is adequate to handle runoff from this site,also runoff from upstream areas when fully developed. The pond is capable of handling 12. The primary contaminants of concern from the paved areas are oil and grease, a 7-day 100-year storm event(Straka pers.comm.). In addition,upstream lead, and petroleum products associated with vehicles. Estimates from areas are required to possess onsite detention prior to release to the pond. research concerning quantities of pollutants vary, and it is impossible to The pond has never been filled to capacity,nor have the pumps been run at predict the precise amount of pollutants. their maximum rate. At this point, it is unclear whether the Black River Corporate Park properties will need to provide onsite detention due to 13. As stated above, the exact dimensions of the biofiltration swale will be previous agreements and the proximity of the P-1 Pond. The City of Renton calculated as part of the drainage plan. In order to meet DOE's criteria, is withholding a decision regarding detention requirements until the applicant runoff will flow the entire length of the swale,and sediment will be removed provides additional hydrologic analyses as a part of the site plan review if it attains a depth of greater than 6 inches. Mowing and disposal of grass (Parsons pers.comm.). in an area where trapped pollutants cannot enter watercourses is also part of the maintenance program. 6. According to the City of Renton,detailed drainage plans are not required at , this stage of the analysis (Straka pers. comm.). Drainage plans will be 14. The City of Renton has no requirements for maintenance of private oil/water submitted during the site plan review phase of the project. Without these separators. The width of the swale is unknown at this time(see response to plans,it is not possible to size each of the drainage facilities proposed for the comment 6). On Tract A.the wale will be located at the extreme north edge site. The project engineer has allowed for biofiltration swales as discussed in of the site. The location of the swale on Tract B has not been determined. the text. Design of these swales will be commensurate with that set forth in Runoff will flow the entire length of the channels to achieve maximum the King County Surface Water Design Manual and the Washington State pollutant removaL Removal efficiency of blofiltration awaits varies. For Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound heavy metals,Wang et aL(1982)reported consistent rates of between 60 and Basin. The exact dimensions of the swale are unknown, as they are 80 percent for suspended solids and metals. For oil and grease,Little et aL dependent on calculated runoff from the site. To meet the King County (1983)reported rates of 67 to 93 percent,and rates of between 0 and 85 design considerations, swales will be designed to handle a 2-year pre- percent for nutrients. developed release rate. 15. See response to comment 11. Erosion control measures and biofiltration 7. See response to comment 5. swales will prevent the majority of sediment from reaching the P-1 pond. Additional settling of sediment within the pond will further reduce the 4-140 'r • quantity of sediment available for transfer to the Green River. The amount 34. See response to comment 33. of sediment reaching the Green River cannot be quantified, but is not 35. See response to comment 33. anticipated to be of a magnitude to impact biologic resources of the river. 16. See response to comment 12. 36. All urban heronries used as case studies in Appendix B are subject to noise originating from man-created sources such as automobile traffic, railroads, 17. See response to comments 12 and 15. gravel extraction,motor boats,airplanes,and helicopters. No decibel levels were determined for any heronries other than Black River and Peasley 18. Comment noted. Canyon.This Final EIS also includes noise monitoring of geotechnical testing conducted on Tract A during July. 19. A geotechnical engineer has not yet made specific recommendations for the 37. No. According to studies of other urban heron colonies,noise associated with project. These recommendations will occur at the time of the submittal for daily activities in the office complex will not cause adverse impact to the great grading and building permits. blue herons present. See Section 35.4 of this Final EIS. 20. Comment noted. 38. See response to comment 25. 21. See response to comment 6. • 39. Please refer to page 3-61 of the Draft EIS for a discussion of the performance 22. See response to comment 5. standards(or provisions)of the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance. The ordinance is also provided,in full,in Appendix A,pages A-14 to A-24, 23. See response to comments 6 and 11. of the Draft EIS. A land clearing and tree cutting plan must be submitted to the city for approval as part of the environmental review process. 24. The significant vegetation resources have been shown on Figure 3-4 of this Final EIS. In regard to how the provisions will be met. It is stated on page 3-29 (vegetation section)of the Draft EIS that no significant plant species or plant communities occur on Tract A because of past human disturbance. 25. Chapter 3 of this Final EIS identifies the mitigation measures. In addition,the city will be preparing a mitigation report on the project. Vegetation on Tract A primarily consists of grasses and scattered shrubs. Even so,Tract A would need to be included In the clearing and cutting plan. 26. Please note response to comment 25 above. • Tract B retains more vegetative diversity,with the most diverse area being the 27. See Figure 2-2 of this Final EIS. northeast corner where mature black cottonwood forest remains as well as a portion of the old Black River channel wetlands(see pages 3-28 and 3-29 of 28. See Figure 2-2. the Draft EIS)..The old Black River channel wetlands and a majority of the cottonwood trees would be retained. The majority of the vegetation on the 29. See Figure 2-2. site to be disturbed would not be considered significant because of past human disturbance to that portion of the site. The land clearing and tree cutting plan would have to be submitted and approved by the city prior to any 30. No it is not considered a significant adverse impact. clearing or cutting of vegetation. 31. Specific distances are presented in Appendix B. 40. There is a full discussion of the Shoreline Master Program on pages 3-62 and 32. See response to comment 31. 3-63 of the Draft EIS. The Shoreline Master Program states under the discussion of the urban environment: 'Because shorelines suitable for urban 33. The potential adverse impact is related to the proximity of the seven-story uses are a limited resource,emphasis shall be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-dependent industrial and building to the area set aside as a heron flight zone. As a mitigation measure, commercial uses requiring frontage on shorelines.' All uses, though, are building height has been reduced to five-stories. allowed. • 4-141 41. The project is a viable alternative in that all of the zoning requirements are followed by the proposal. There are no height restrictions as long as setback requirements are met. The only policy that could restrict the height of the building is in the Green River Valley Policy Plan which states: -The implementation of office and other similar service and light industrial activities in low rise building structures should be encouraged." The word should, though, implies that there is room for negotiation with this policy. The purpose of this Final EIS is to provide information to the city,interested agencies and groups,and the general public so that a decision can be made as to whether the proposed project is to be approved for construction. 42. The Environmental Performance Standards are presented in Appendix A, page A-12 of the Draft EIS. 43. As is explained on page 3-65,the inconsistency with the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance is that the plan shows impervious surfaces within the dripline of cottonwood trees that are to remain. The ordinance requires that no impervious surfaces be within the dripline of existing trees. With respect to the mitigation,the measures presented in the Draft EIS and in this document are advisory. It is the city's responsibility to determine which • measures are to be implemented if the proposal is approved. 44. The seven-story building has been reduced to five-stories thereby reducing some of the building mass. As mentioned in the response to comments from King County,the heron flight zone along the P-1 Pond does not represent the only access and egress routes used by herons. Changes in flight patterns over Tracts A and B are expected until herons become accustomed to the change in land use. 45. The traffic impacts have been further addressed in Section 3.8 of this Final EIS. 46. Comment noted. 47. Comment noted. See response to comment 25. 4-142 - - -- 5 Letter to M.L Myer Donald Norman May 9, 1990 May9,1990 4420 Larchwood Ave. I have based my comments on several years of field research investigating the Philadelphia, PA 19104 impacts of pollutants on herons. This was the subject of my Master's Thesis research at Western Washington University. I cannot stress strongly enough Mary Lynne Myer that the real issue here is planning how to manage sites such as the Blackriver Senior Environmental Planner for the long-term survival of wildlife. Department of Community Development City of Renton 84 200 Mill Avenue South Herons need trees,large old trees,which means that those big cottonwood Renton,WA 98055 nesting trees have to be protected,kept alive,and nearby trees groomed for future duty as nurseries. The proposed planting of buffers,and other mediation Dear Ms.Myer; efforts should be set up for the long-term,not to satisfy the short term SEPA guidelines and the current conscience of concerned citizens. I was contacted by Susan Krom of the Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation to comment on the Blackriver Corporate Park DEIS. I first visited I have proposed that a trust be set up. The city of Renton,local conservation the site in March of 1989 to discuss the great blue heron colony there to a group groups,the Washington Department of Wildlife,and the surrounding land of 50 Seattle Audubon Society members,many of them Renton residents. I am owners would provide funding for educational aspects such as viewing areas, familiar with the area having done research at the Renton Sewage Treatment protection such as fences,and tree evaluation. Only with such long-term Plant when I lived in Seattle. The heron colony has grown over the last five commitments can I see a future for wildlife anywhere. Herons are indicators of years,indicating its potential as a successful colony. It is certainly a wildlife the health of our environment,and having a colony in an urban area for spectacle for an urban area,and deserves a plan for long-term preservation. monitoring is an additional reason for preserving the colony. I am sorry I am too far away to actively participate in this project,but I remain interested in the I am pleased with the dedication of the authors of the DEIS for their sensitive outcome. review of the impact of major construction near the heron colony. The use of Northwest native species plantings as habitat mitigation will improve wildlife c nc•reiy,/0 habitat over the existing spoil areas,and has the benefit of low cost , rlj• maintenance. While there will be differences of opinion over the possible Donal. Norman cc: Susan Krom effects of the proposed construction on the future of the colony,I believe all Kelly McAllister,WDW parties share a concern for the future of these magnificent birds. We are lucky Seattle Audubon Society that herons are adaptable birds,and the chances are good that the birds will not desert the site. Much more information on herons in Puget Sound is needed. Careful scientific documentation of the consequences of this project will provide a better understanding of the dynamics of planning our lives in better harmony with nature. Let us not turn our backs once the solution is decided. • • 4-143 Bladolvor Corp.Park DEIS Comma. 2. D.M.Norman 5-9-90 Written Comments on the Introduction . Draft Environmental Impact Statement for I have limited my comments on the proposed office building development at the Black River site in Renton,WA to the impacts on the great blue heron colony there. I The Blackriver Corporate Park was contacted by Susan Krom of the Citizens for Renton,Wildlands Preservation to Tracts A and B Office Building comment on the Blackriver Corporate Park DEIS. I am quite familiar with the site having visited it several times during my mantel's thesis research on great blue herons by at Huxley College of Environmental Studies at Western Washington University in Donald Norman Bellingham. I am now a predoctoral candidate at the University of Pennsylvania in 4420 Larchwood Ave. Philadelphia. I have enclosed a summary of my research activities to establish myself Philadelphia, PA 19104 as a knowledgeable biologist on the subject of great blue heron biology. May 9,1990. Disturbance Presented to: As a biologist who has studied great blue herons,It is my opinion that a 7 story building built as close as 400 feet from an active heron colony should not be allowed. Environmental Review Committee A 660 ft.guideline recommended by the Washington Department of Wildlife was not Department of Community Development City of Renton followed,though a great deal of Information In the literature suggests that this distance J' 1, 200 Mill South Avenue may not be far enough. As documented in the DEIS,herons do live close to human • Renton,WA 98055 structures. In some Instances these distances are less than 660 feet,but the herons have moved into areas alter the construction. The typical reason for this behavior is the lack of alternative nesting sites. Herons acclimate to the narrow noise and visual Summary of Comments on the Impacts of Construction buffers because of a lack of disturbance. This prevent usually prevent abandonment. Upon the Great Blue Heron Colony In Renton,WA No information on what methods will be used to evaluate the effects of Phase One construction in Tract B upon the heron colony. The presence of herons in the 1. No construction should be allowed within 660 feet of the heron colony. area,or birds attempting to breed does not mean that there has not been any 2. No information was presented in the DEIS on how disturbance levels will be disturbance. Only by the measurement of breeding success can the evaluation of the 2. measured. No information on what methods will be used to evaluate the colony be established. No measurements of the breeding success of the colony were • effects of Phase One construction in Tract B upon the heron colony were discussed, given,especially during the spring disturbance of forest clearing within 200 feet of the colony in 1987,and during the 1984 pond construction. No data on the relationship 3. Any construction should be halted on January 15th not February 1st. between disturbance and breeding success were presented for other heron colonies 4. A committee should be established to evaluate the outcome of any construction and a filed In the DEIS. evaluate the efficacy of buffer revegetation. This committee should have funds in trust,provided by the builder,the city,local environmental groups and other Noise at the Black River site was used as a measure of disturbance,yet It is well 3 land owners to provide long-term monitoring of the project's outcome. known that herons may habituate to noises that obviously do not threaten them. No studies,however,have been done to examine the reproductive success of colonies 4-144 Blackriver Corp.Park DEIS Comme, 3- Bladcriver Corp.Park DEIS Comma. 4- D.M.Norman 5-9-90 D.M.Norman 5-9-90 exposed to excessive noise. I have studied the heron colony at Ault Naval Air Station the region,herons appear to have recovered from past reproductive problems,though on Widbey Island that is less than 500 yards from the landing strip for Navy jet 3 local effects of pollutants at places such as Commencement Bay may be exerting bombers,and found that breeding success was comparable to nearby colonies. some effects. Anyone familiar with that area knows the noise level is excessive. If weather has been followed and determined not to be a factor,and food Without records of the breeding success of the Black River colony,it is abundance is measured under the colony and found equal to previous years, impossible to obtain an idea of the possible effects of construction disturbance. I have disturbance could be presumed to be a major cause of nesting failure. Necropsies of compiled the breeding success data from the 1984 study funded by the National chicks found under the colony can be performed to distinguish between starved, Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA)and from my thesis research into a poisoned,and healthy chicks(Langelier 1989,unpublished thesis research D.M. summary table(Table 1)(Calambokidis et al. 1985). The data from the Auburn colony Norman). This information could have been obtained on several visits over the period ip in Peasley Canyon is also available for 1984,in which 4 of 10 nests were successful, if of study this colony has undergone for the preparation of this DEIS. Counting the and averaged 2.9 young/per nest. Typically,almost 90%of nests are successful for J - number of chicks in the successful nests was an essential aspect of evaluating this this subspecies(Butler 1989),and it is estimated that a reproductive rate of about 2.4 colony that was not performed. A registered wildlife veterinarian was available at the young/successful nest is necessary to maintain the population(Forbes et al. 1985). Institute of Wildlife Toxicology at Western Washington University during the From these calculations,it is obvious that many colonies in Puget Sound are not preparation phases of this report,and Ken Langelier,a DVM on Vancouver Island has replacing their own numbers. The colony may appear to stay the same,but this is due performed necropsies on many herons to consult with other vets. This extent of to the influx of new birds. Without measuring the reproductive success of the colony in evaluation in the preparation of a DEIS,unfortunately,has not been a requirement by question,and also noting the numbers of first year birds,it is impossible,without the state of Washington. banding,to know whether the colony has been disturbed or impacted. Periods of No Distubance At Heron Colonies Measurement of Disturbance - The arrival of herons and commencement of prenuptual activities at the Black I propose that any heron colony with less than 50%of the attempted nests being River heron colony may occur prior to February 1st. Other colonies,such as the successful,and with a reproductive rate of less than 2 birds per successful nest is Dumas Bay colony in nearby Federal Way show activity as early as mid-January. The 7 defined as being adversely impacted. Sources of the lowered reproductive success period before nesting is much more critical to prevent abandonment than the periods can be reduced food availability,poor weather,predation,pollution,and disturbance. ' later in the breeding season. It is better to resume construction activities earlier in the No research on the primary food source of the Black River colony has been done. No summer than to allow heavy construction until February 1st when herons are present research on the effects of weather on heron colony breeding success has been done, J at their colony. I propose that any construction should be halted on January 15th,not and the microclimates of the Pacific Northwest would make this quite difficult to February 1st. generalize. The resurgence of populations of Bald Eagles puts many heron colonies in danger,as Bald Eagles have been documented to eat heron nestlings(Norman et Flight Zones • al.1989). Judging the Impacts of toxic chemicals upon herons is difficult. Despite a • • No data was presented for the flight zones presented in Figure 4 of Appendix B Q decrease in available habitat,heron numbers appear to have increased in the past 20 of the DEIS. Unless these drawings are the proposed unobstructed paths available to V years,perhaps when effects of pollutants were greater. Herons continue to show the herons after constriction,their relevance is minimal. The directions herons fly eggshell thinning from DDE,though DDT was banned almost 20 years ago,and the when approaching the colony within 1000 feet of the colony is variable,even when effects of dioxins on herons is a major research effort in Canada(Elliott et al.1989). In birds are returning from the same feeding location. 4-145 Bladviver Corp.Park DEIS Commer 5- Blackriver Corp.Park DEIS Commis' I1- D.M.Norman 5-9-90 D.M.Norman 5-9-90 breeding biology of great blue herons. Because the subspecies of great blue heron Remedial Action at the Site • that occurs in this area ranges from Puget Sound up to Alaska,there is great interest No information was presented in the DEIS that indicated the duration of long- on the part of Canadians to impove the level of research on herons in Washington. term commitment to maintaining the vegetated no build buffer. I recommend that Over half of the estimated population of the subspecies occur in Washington state,and cottonwood and red alder be planted as they are the fastest growing trees. They are movements across the border are common. Other than my research,the only other project that has attempted to evaluate the biology of great blue herons in western also less expensive than the large evergreens necessary to provide a buffer zone. Though they are not as complete a buffer as evergreens,they will be larger,and will 9 Washington was the 1984 NOAA survey. This project was funded to evaluate the j'O protect the integrity of the colony trees. Additional cottonwoods and alders should be effects of pollution upon herons. A previous report by NOAA had reported high levels planted around the colony to increase the size of the wooded area. This will certainly of toxic chemicals in herons from Seattle,the Pigeon Point Colony,and from Tacoma, allow the future survival of the colony after the current cottonwoods are destroyed by the Dumas Bay colony(Riley et al. 1983). Major research,on the other hand,is the birds. I am currently involved in documenting the rate of deterioration and death of ongoing in British Columbia. Another heron expert,Range Bayer,lives in Newport, cottonwoods and alders in heron colonies. No allocation of funds or method of Oregon,might be available to evaluate impacts of this project. Michael Brandman evaluating the effectiveness of the remediation/enhancement of the site was Associates,a consulting firm near Los Angeles,has expertise in the evaluation of presented. I commend the planners of the vegetation enhancement for their selection impacts of construction on heron colonies. At least one expert from outside the area should be on the committee. This will allow an impartial voice on the committee,and of hardy native species. provide contacts to other parts of the country. A Monitoring Committee for the Black River Heron Colony Summary I propose that a committee be established to monitor the outcomes of the Questions about the survival of herons at small urban colonies versus the three project,with funding to maintain the colony and provide environmental educational opportunities for the people of Renton to learn more about their heron colony. This large colonies north of Puget Sound(Samish Island,Birch Bay,and Point Roberts) remain as an important research issues. Research needs to be undertaken to committee shall be composed of representatives from the city of Renton,the property determine the stability of these urban colonies. As western Washington continues to owners,the Washington Department of Wildlife,a scientific review committee,and grow,the quality of life we cherish will hopefully not be measured by the miles of local environmental groups. It is desired that funds from all of these groups can be set freeway,but by the numbers of heron colonies. The Renton colony,along with the into a trust for their use in maintaining this area Projects include the yearly evaluation other urban colonies,can provide and care of trees in the colony area,and construction of the appropriate viewing areas /Q .important information on the levels of environmental contaminants to which we are also exposed. Efforts to require several years of • with good signs. If fencing is necessary,it can be funded through this committee. background monitoring of heron colonies within 1000 feet of proposed projects should Local environmental groups and the Department of Wildlife can offer field trips to local be undertaken under wildlife protection legislation. Further research may allow even persons. better methods to estimate the bounds of disturbance. I recommend that any committee established to evaluate the impacts of • distubance upon herons include Dr.John Kelsall,retired Canadian Wildlife Service biologist,or Rob Butler,a biologist with the Canadian Wildlife Service,both of which live just north of the border in British Columbia. Dr.Kelsall has been involved In evaluating the impact of human activities upon herons in the Pacific Northwest,and Rob Butler is currently completing his PhD at the University of British Columbia on the - 4-146 ' i Blackriver Corp.Park DEIS Co, rots-7- D.M.Norman 5-9-90 Literature Cited Great Blue Heron Activities Butler, R.W. 1989. Breeding and ecology and population trends of the great blue heron Donald Norman May 1990 (Ardea berodians fannini)in the strait of Georgia.pp 112-117. In:The Ecoloov and Dept.of Biology-Leidy Labs status of marine and shoreline birds in the Strait of Georgia,British Columbia. Spec University of Pennsylvania Publ. Can.Wildl.Serv.,Ottawa. Philadelphia, PA 19104-6018 Calambokidis,J., S.Speich, J.Peard, G.H.Steiger, J.C.Cubbage, D.M.Frye,and Professional Activities L.J. Lowenstine. 1985. Biology of Puget Sound marine mammals and marine birds: Population health and evidence of pollution effects. NOAA Technical Memorandum. Heron Related Publications National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,Rockville,Md. 159 pp. Norman,D.M. (In Preparation). A retrospective analysis of changes in great blue heron Elliott,J.E., R.W.Butler, R.J.Norstrom,and P.E.Whitehead. 1988. Levels of (Ardea herodias Jannini)population using Christmas Bird Counts. polychlorinated dibenzodioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans in eggs of great blue herons(Ardea herodias)in British Columbia,1983-1987:possible impacts on Norman,D.M.,S.Speich,J.Calambokidis,R.J.Kendall,and L.F.Klff. (In Preparation). reproductive success. Canadian Wildlife Service Progress Note No. 176. 7 pp. Levels of eggshell thinning in great blue heron colonies in Puget Sound. Forbes,L.S., K.Simpson, J.P.Kelsall,and D.R.Flook..1985.Reproductive success of Norman,D.M.,G.P.Cobb,and R.J.Kendall. (In Preparation). Levels of great blue herons in British Columbia.Can.J.Zool.63:1110-1113. polychlorinated biphenyl congeners and chlorinated hydrocarbons in sediment and eggs of great blue herons(Ardea herodias fannini)from Commencement and Samish Langelier,K. 1989. Post modem examination of 43 great blue heron nestlings in 1988. Bay Washington. Wildl.Vet.Report 2(1):17. Norman,D.M., I.Moul,and A.Breault. 1989. Bald eagle Instrusions in great blue Norman,D.M., I. Moul,and A.Breault. 1989. Bald eagle instrusions in great blue heron colonies. Colonial Waterblrds 12:215-217 heron colonies. Colonial Waterblyds 12:215-217 Norman,D.M., G.Cobb,and R.J.Kendall. 1989. Use of Great Blue Heron Eggshell Riley,R.G., E.A.Crecelius, R.E.Fitzner, B.L.Thomas, J.M.Gurtisen,and N.S. Chorio-Allantoin in Toxicological Research. Institiute of Wildlife Toxicology,Huxley Bloom. 1983. Organic and inorganic toxicants in sediment and marine birds from College of Environmental Studies Report.8 pp. Puget Sound. NOAA Technical Series Memorandum NOS OMS 1. National Ocean Service,NOAA. 125 pp. Norman,D.M., S.Tank, R.J.Kendall, P.T.Haug,and H.Webber. 1989. A Review of Environmental Contaminant Studies in Washington Inland Marine Waters Wildlife and Development of a Relational Computerized Database:WILDTOX with • Recommendations for Future Research. Report submitted to the Office of Puget • Sound,Environmental Protection Agency,Region 10,Seattle,WA. 141 pp. Norman,D. 1988. Measurement of fluoride in great blue heron eggshells as an indicator of dispersal of an environmental pollutant. Huxley College of Environmental Studies,Environmental Biochemistry Report. 12 pp. Masters Thesis Topic Organochlorine Pesticides and Polychlorinated Biphenyl Congeners In Great ' glue Herons from the Puget Sound Ecosystem. Huxley College of Environmental Studies,Western Washington University,Bellingham.WA. - • Committee Chairman:Dr.Ronald J.Kendall(now Director,The Institute of Wildlife and Environmental Toxicology,P.O.Box 2278 Clemson University, Clemson,SC 29632). • • • • 4-147 Heron CV D.M.Norman May 1990 2 Heron CV D.M.Norman May 1990 3 • Research Grants Great Blue Heron Colony Field Work Cont. Norman,D.and R.J.Kendall. 1988. Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Great Blue Herons 6. Whidbey Island Naval Air Station Colony. Eggshells and Chorio-allantoin in the Puget.Sound Ecosystem. Funded grant proposal submitted to the Washington membranes(CAM),April and May 1989. Collection was part of a National Institute State Department of Wildlife($5,000)and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service($7,000). of Environmental Health Sciences project to TIWET. Institute of Wildlife Toxicology,Huxley College of Environmental Studies,Western 7. Point Roberts,WA. Mapping 1988,1989. Washington University,Bellingham,WA. 61 pp. 8. UBC Endowment Lands Colony,Vancouver,B.C. July 1988. Eggshell collection. 9. Crofton,British Columbia colony,June 1989. This colony is located at a pulp Professional Presentations - mill on Vancouver Is.that is being monitored for dioxin contamination. Assisted Ian Moul,a graduate student at University of British Columbia,in Non-lethal Methods of Contaminant monitoring with great blue herons. and Pollution behavioral observations. Monitoring of Marine Wildlife in Washington State:Transboundary Research Issues, 10.Washington State Dept.Wildlife,July 1989. Survey of Totten Island Colony Poster session at lath Annual SETAC Meeting ,Oct.28-Nov.2.1989,Toronto, (near Olympia,WA). Eggshell Collection. Ontario. 11.Maury Is.Colony,Vashon Island,WA. 1988. Eggshell Collection. 12.Pigeon Point colony,Seattle,WA 1988. Eggshell Collection. Great Blue Herons in Padilla Bay. Presentation and Field Trip,Annual meeting, 13.Black River colony,Renton,WA.1989. Eggshell Collection. Friends of Padilla Bay National Estuarine Reserve. Bayview,WA. May 12,1989. 14.Tulalip Indian Reservation Colony,Marysville,WA,north of Everett. Eggshell and Chorio-allantoln membrane collection 1989. Monitoring Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Great Blue Herons:Use of the Chorion- Allantoic Membrane. Presentation at the Joint Washington-Oregon Annual Wildlife Community Activities Society Meeting. February 23,1989,Hood River,OR. Pollution Monitoring in Puget Sound Utilizing Great Blue Herons. Presentation to the Reports Public Involvement in Education program on Vashon Island,sponsored by the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority and Friends of the Vashon Library,October 26,1988. Current Status of the Great Blue Heron Colony near Birch Bay State Park. • August 1989. Submitted to Washington State Parks Commission. Pollution Monitoring in Puget Sound Utilizing Great Blue Herons. Poster Session - presentation at the Second.Joint Meeting of the Colonial Waterbird Society and the Comments submitted for Environmental Impact Statement,Gulf View Golf Pacific Seabird Group. Washington,D.C. October 12-16,1988. Course at Point Roberts. Dept.of Public Works,Division of Buildings and Code Administration,Whatcom County,Washington. April 1989. Pollution Monitoring in Puget Sound Utilizing Great Blue Herons. March 18,1988. Poster Session presentation at the First Puget Sound Water Quality Authority Comments submitted for Environmental Impact Statement,Blackriver Research Meeting. Seattle,WA. Corporate Park,City of Renton,Dept.of Community Development,200 Mill Ave.S.Renton,WA 98055. May 1990. Great Blue Heron Colony Field Work Field Trips • 1. Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge Colony,north of Olympia,WA. Collected eggs • and chicks April to May 1988.Samples analyzed by US FWS. Vashon Is.High School, May 1988(Maury Is.colony) • 2. Dumas Bay Colony,Federal Way,WA. Collected eggs and chicks, April to May Seattle Audubon Society, Feb.1989(Renton Black River colony) 1988. Samples analyzed and archived by WWU. Thesis Colony. 3. Samish Island Colony,WA. Collected eggs and chicks, April to July 1988, Presentations eggshells and Chorio-allantoin membranes(CAM),May-July 1989. Mapping 1988, 1989. Samples analyzed and archived by WWU. Thesis Colony. July 1989 Presentation to the Samish Island Community Club. Blue Heron 4. Birch Bay State Park Colony,Whatcom County,WA. Eggshell and Chorio-allantoin Beach,Samish Island. membrane collection 1988,1989. Mapping in 1988,1989. March 16,1989.Presentation to Seattle Audubon Society monthly meeting,Seattle, 5. March Point Colony,Anacortes,WA. Eggshell and Chorio-allantoln membrane WA. collection(CAM),April and May 1989. August 11,1988.Presentation to the National Wildlife Federation Conservation Summit.Bellingham,WA. . May 1988. Presentation to Vashon Island High School students. 4-148 - - -. - - - . \ - ,}. ------ - - - - -_- -fit - - - Response to Comments from Donald Norman: 7. The closure period for outside construction has been changed to February 1 through July 1 within 800 feet of the heron colony. 1. Comment noted. The setback for development on Tract B has been extended from 400 to 600 feet. In addition,a 10-foot high benched berm with 20-Goan 8. Comments noted. See response to comments from King County. tall evergreen trees will he added as an additional measure to screen the site. The histories of disturbance of all heron colonies is not well known. As you 9. Both evergreens and.deciduous trees are proposed as buffer vegetation,the mentioned,in a number of cases:herons have moved to the sites following evergreens closest to the development and on the earthen berm, and the development. Unfortunately:no definitive studies on the response of herons deciduous trees (including cottonwoods and alder since they are already to progressive development have been done. dominant species on the site) closer to the heronry. The long-term commitment will be that the buffer zone not be developed in the future. 2. A detailed monitoring plan will be generated as a requirement for development. The design of this monitoring plan will be developed in 10. Comment noted. This committee approach will be considered. See response consultation with the WDW and biologists as suggested in your letter. to comment 2. Appendix B has been revised to include additional information on productivity. Also see responses to comments from Dr.John Kelsall and Range Bayer. Conflicting information has been received regarding the presence of nesting herons during P-1 Pond construction. According to information received from Mary Anderson,herons were not nesting at the site during construction of the P-1 Pond in 1984.while testimony received by the Hearing Examiner noted that berms were present. 3. During preparation of the Draft EIS,the lack of information on urban heron colonies became evident. The noise data generated for the Peasley Canyon and Black River colonies was an attempt to develop at least some rudimentary information regarding ambient noise levels at the colonies. Your information regarding the Widbey Island colony is appreciated. 4. Information on breeding success for the Black River colony was derived for the 1990 nesting season. This information,along with that to be derived for the 1991 breeding season, will represent the pre-construction baseline • condition. Please see responses to comments from Dr. John Kelsall and Range Bayer. 5. Comments noted. Your suggestions for defining adverse impacts are appreciated and will be used when developing the study design for the monitoring program.Please see responses to comments from Dr.John Kelsall and Range Bayer regarding factors influencing reproductive success. With regard to bald eagles eating heron nestlings,Spencer(pers.comet.)reported that a bald eagle attacked both young and adult herons at the Spencer heron colony in Redmond,Washington,in August,1990,killing one adult and three young. 6. Breeding success was determined for the 1990 nesting season and is included in Appendix B. As you mentioned, the opportunity for scientific study of heron productivity is considerable. • 4-149 2011 Evergreen Point Road Bellevue, WA 98004 Page 1-4 May 25, 1990 • Not enough detail re. runoff to P-1 Pond and Channel ( amount and quality and duration) Mary Lynn Myer, Senior Environmental Planner • I doubt the sedimentation would be "insignificant." 2 Dept. of Community Development J 200 Mill Avenue South • Loss of 11.6 acres of shrub/vegetation and wildlife habitat cannot Renton, WA 98005 85• be mitigated. Please verify the figure, 11.6, • Not "minor" but major inconsistencies with CP ( p. 7 of Hearing Examiner's To Ms. Myer and the other Officials of the City of Renton: Report -HER- of June 9, 1987) -I am extremely concerned about the adverse impact of the Blackriver Table 1-2 Corporate Park, Tracts A and B. • Fill has impact of destroying grass/shrub vegetation which is home for Appreciation of the significance, ecologically and esthetically, of this many animals and birds and is an important part of the ecosystem of unique, prime area of wildlife and beauty, is of utmost importance. Once this this "unique and irreplaceable...critical" habitat. (Wash. Dept. of importance is established and recognized, the adverse impact of the proposed Game) development is clear. Also clear is.the fact that if you, the Officials of the • Driving piles is disturbing to wildlife. It must not be allowed. City of Renton, allow such development to proceed, you will be (1) acting / • How can there be no impact on air quality when 791 cars would be coming L contrary to your own policies in the Comprehensive Plan (CP), (2) acting con- and going? trary to policies of the Green River Valley Policy Plan (GRPP), (3) acting con- • The changed surface water movement must be detailed. It cannot help trary to the Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan (CPRP), (4) acting contrary but have impact on the wetland and nesting and feeding . to the Renton Environmental Ordinance (SEPA) , and (5) acting contrary to Washing- • The grass/shrub area is very important to the beauty and feeling of ton Administrative Code (WAC). You will be letting down the citizens of Renton the site. All • clamimportant to it. Should it be destroye. who trust you to abide by these policies, which are reasonable, far-sighted, W present are y just because the species present are not endangered? Certainly, use admirable, and necessary to the quality of life for present and future generations. . such as these ere endangered! If I were you, I would think long and hard before doing these things. • Heron protection guidelines are inadequate! According to the thorough visit to the site, including a walk beside P-1 Pond, will convince any research done for the HER. "Four agencies with expertise'in environmental environmentally sensitive person of the need to preserve this site. (Those who matters have indicated that mere restraint during this nesting season will are not sensitive to the beauty of open spaces and wildlife will not understand. not assure the preservation of the resource. These agencies all indi- . But didn't the last King County election show clearly the feelings of the eaty hat a more permanent window.'one of distance, and not solely of e majority? It did.) I strongly urge everyone involved in decisions re. this J of•time, is required. The distance is really not disputed - it is gen- project to visit.this inspiring place. I think the best way is to take a lunch from a nearby deli, walk along City property by the bank of the channel and pond, artily agreed that approximately 600 feet where a vegetative buffer already find aears t to eat exists, and approximately 1.000 feet where the vegetative buffer is minimal goodspot your lunch, and enjoy feeling like you are far out in the are the minimum distances required." The buffer on both Tracts is minimal. country. It truly is amazing, but you can't really appreciate it until you have spent a little time there. since the trees remaining on Tract 0 are deciduous. Therefore, the setbacks on both Tracts should be a minimum of 1,000'feet from the nesting. . I think you have the authority and reasons, based upon the above mentioned • - a . trees to have a chance of saving the heron rookery.- policies, to deny this development altogether. I do not thl,k the ad impact • No construction activities should occur between Jan. 15 and Aug. 1, can be mitigated. If you nevertheless allow work to proceed, a buffer of at least • Mitigating plantings of tree. should be tall enough to obscure build- 1000 feet from the nesting trees and 200 feet from the channel is necessary. Even ings before construction. Just lent t does not create a then you will be risking the loss of the rookery. That said, I will proceed to plant t Young int out some s buffer! Four story buildings Sr. muds taller than 20 feet! . The po pecific objections I have to the DEIS. They are as follows: whole "buffer" plan is ■ joke. 4-150 . - . -3- -4- 1 I have seen herons coming and going from many directions. They do not I n • enjoyed by many more Renton citizens, as well as people fro.n the I /" appear to use a certain "flight zone". / greater Seattle area and beyond. • The relationship to existing and potential land use should be carefully Additional comments addressed. Walking or having lunch by the pond would be adversely impacted • The losses and adverse impacts described on 1-15 and 1-16 are reason by the presence of all those buildings and cars. The cars will add O enough to deny the development proposed. • distracting noise and fumes. The feeling of peace and inspiration one feels • I disagree with the last sentence on 1-16. The whole water shoreline. 2 due to the beautiful naturalness of the whole site would be destroyed. islands. wetland, and g ds contribute to the ideal heron environ- The ' potential fore truly outstanding natural park must not be under- ment Renton now has. (You can't buy that!) It has not been spelled out estimated. how, exactly, each one of these factors will be changed, but we know they • The "dense evergreen vegetative screen" appears toA made up of deciduous 9 all will. plants which would be bare much of the year. (Figure 2-3). • According to HER, The Wash. Dept. of Game recommends that "All wetlands • Since this site was special to Indians and artifacts have been found here, would be preserved, along with buffer zones as follows: 100 feet around it cannot be true that there is no significant impact. I feel this intermittently flooded wetlands, 200 feet around all other permanent issue is being (sadly) ignored. /O surface water. These are to protect the feeding for herons end /3 • Not consistent with plans and policies mentioned above. nesting/feeding areas for waterfowl." According to the HER, "This Table 1-3 buffer was also suggested by the Federal and State agencies and is reason- • The same comments re. fill, pilings, "buffers". able. The record reflects that development within the suggested buffer • The use of the word "should" in many places does not sound definite zones will have en effect on the birds." Beyond the 1,000 foot zone for enough. (See Air Quality, for example.) the rookery trees, there should be at least a 200 foot buffer along the • Inconsistent with plans and policies. P-1 Channel, and mature screening in place before construction. • Same comments as above re. loss of grass/shrub/cottonwood -- 9.3 more • The allowing of filling in Tracts A and B was an environmental mistake. iii acres. (Please verify number.) -- contrary to Renton's policies. Therefore, that fill should not be • Planting additional trees will not mitigate the loss of this additional allowed to be an excuse for further mistakes. wildlife habitat. • I am disturbed by the amount of silt that is allowed to enter P-1 Channel • Again, all development must be at least 1,000 feet away from the rookery. !, and Pond. Renton has such a wonderful wildlife habitat now. It would / ' • Buffer trees must be tall enough to hide buildings from the rookery -- be a shame to lose it. Please do what is necessary to maintain the little before construction begins. remaining wetland and the other conditions supporting the wildlife there. • Again, herons do not stick to a certain flight zone. As development goes The word, "fragile", should be taken seriously here. on in the Valley end other areas, feeding places will change anyway. • On a recent visit, my brother. (former Supervisor of the Salmon National • No construction between Jan 15 end Aug. 1. Forest), his wife, and I counted fifteen Species of water-related birds. I' • Walking and jogging should not be allowed within 1,000 feet of the rookery My Salmon, Idaho, relatives couldn't believe there was such a beautiful. during the same period. natural spot in a city. . • The buildings should limited to the height which can be effectively • All surface water impacts must be analyzed in terms of a 100-year storm. screened from the rookery by buffer trees. • Re. page 3-23, a detailed grading and erosion plan should be provided and '7 • Parking garage hasn't been designed yet. Design of garage and lighting impacts determined. and exhaust and exits and screening need to be detailed. How can light • I have become aware that many developers operate on the "principle" and glare be the same as Tract A? that it is easier to get on with a project now and deal with problems /j • I feel the increased use of City Parks facilities would be mostly by the they cause tau, rather than do it right. (They often only get workers in the new offices; wh , a natural park at the site would be slapped on the hand anyway.) Errors resulting from lack of h or 4-151 disastrous on this fragile, prime habitat. The developer won't be able 18 This Canadian developer has come close enough to this special area. Ho has to fix them, but he doesn't have to worry about that apparently. dons enough hare, don't you think? He should be made to leave this remaining • There are too many unknown consequences in this DEIS. valuable wetland, with supporting surrounding , alone. As you know, he • There should be detailed drainage plans for both Tracts. '4 wants to develop the ngth side as well. But he is wisely going one step at a time. • Re. page 3-32, no further fill of wetland should be allowed. The further 1 (I feel his entire plans should have been presented at once. Then the destructivenes destruction of wetland cannot be mitigated and should be unthinkable. of it all would have been even more obvious.) How much does he care about the • The 25 foot no-build buffer zone is ridiculous. quality of life of the citizens of Renton? How much do you care? Here.ie your • On page 3-34 we read, "Development of the site will result in a change in chance to show the citizens you care very much and are willing to do what it wildlife species composition from natural to more "urban". How true. F takes to save this area for them and their children. That most people value - To allow this would be a serious violation of policies mentioned above. open space and are very concerned about its disappearance, is clear. Please This cannot be mitigated. listen to them. • The old Black River Channel will not be undisturbed, since water quality 114 • and quantity will change. (Page 3-35) • Re. Table 3-14, I feel the claims of consistency with the CP re. Open Sincerely yours, Space, Wildlife Habitat, Vegetation, Resources, Surface Drainage. Water- - bodies, and Storm Drainage are wrong. 22.* Christine Linden • Claims of consistency with the GRPP re. Wetland/Wildlife/Habitat/Floodplain are wrong. • Educational value of a natural wildlife area such as this is great. The CPRP (p. 71) states as an objective, "Conserve areas with critical or • unique natural features -- such as stream corridors, wildlife habitats, shorelines, and wetlands -- especially.if endangered-by development." To allow this • development would be to ignore this objective. • The HER states. "In all honesty, with the unique character of the heron and the fact that they are considered a valuable scientific and educational resource, • it seems inappropriate to experiment and see if they survive the pressures of development. The observations of a number of similar rookeries show that it is �J 7j most reasonable to err on the side of caution and not to permit unnecessary v intrusion into their environment. Hr. Van Wormer testified that heron rooker- ies are becoming fewer and fewer as suitable habitat has been reduced through development of roads and buildings." Please refer to the comments of Hr. John Eelsall and Hr. Range Bayer, experts, regarding the ad ffects of development on heron rookeries. Information • does exist. • • I urge you, the Officials of the City of Renton, not to take chances with this prime, critical wildlife habitat which Renton is so fortunate to haves • How can you compare loss of dollars with the loss FOREVER of the natural • beauty and educational value of this amazing site? • • • • 4-152 Response to Comments from Christine Linden 13. Comments noted. The buffers defined as mitigation are presented in Section 3.5 of this Final EIS. I. Comments noted. Please see response No. 1 to King County(letter No.8). 14. Comments noted. 2. Please see response to comments from the USFW and WDW regarding setbacks. The urban shoreline designation,which is the designation along the 15. See response to comment 3. P-1 Pond, allows development within 200 feet of the pond. The proposed buffer, including earthen berm, will be vegetated with evergreen and 16. Comment noted. Appendix d provides an inventory of species reported on deciduous trees and shrubs. the project area,P-1 Pond.and riparian forest. 3. More information is provided in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS and in the 17. The city requires evaluation of a 25-year event. Summary, Chapter 1. The P-1 Pond was originally created to store stormwater and sediments resulting from urban runoff in the Springbrook 18. Comment noted. Creek watershed. King County and the City of Renton have a maintenance program for the pond which includes periodic dredging to remove 19. See Section 3.4 for further discussion of water quantity and quality. accumulated sediments and unwanted vegetation. The purpose of the road along the P-1 Pond is to allow access to the pond for maintenance. The city 20. Comment noted. is considering developing a management plan for the pond. Approximately 11.6 acres of wildlife habitat will be lost on Tract A and 9.3 acres on Tract B. 21. See Section 3.4. 4. Comments noted. The loss of grass and shrub vegetation has been identified 22. See Section 3.7 for further discussion of policies. as an impact that cannot be fully mitigated. Auger cast-in-place pile construction has been defined as the preferred construction method. These 23. Comments noted. Please see response No.1. The information from Dr.John points are further addressed in this Final EIS. Kelsall and Range Bayer has been reviewed. 5. Please see response to comments from the USFWS and WDW regarding setbacks. 6. Timing of construction activities has been revised. Please see Sections 3.2 and 3.5 of this document. The buffer now includes evergreen planting and construction of an earthen berm 10 feet in height. 7. Please see response to comment from King County regarding flight zones. 8. As a form of mitigation,public access to the site will include a pedestrian trail and observation platform located 580 to 600 feet from the heron colony. _ 9. Planting the dense evergreen screen would be required as mitigation. In addition,deciduous trees and shrubs would also be planted as mitigation. 10. Archaeology has been further addressed in this Final EIS(see Section 3.7.4). 11. Comments noted. See responses to comments 4 through 10. 12. The use of Tracts A and B,the P-1 Pond,and adjoining riparian forest has been further defined in this Final EIS. 4-153 5/14/90 Murphy - Black River Corporate Perk DEIS - 2 Donald K. Erickson Re: DEIS, Black River (4) FEEDING OF'rWILD BIRDS - The feeding of wild birds, in I 5l particular Mallards and Canada Geese, must be prohibited by the Chief, Current Planning Corporate Park. Tracts A68 introduction of a city ordinance which includes a fire for so City of Renton feeding. 200 Mill Ave. So. Renton, WA. 98055 (5) FOOD SUPPLY - GREAT BLUE HERON- Although I noted 86 occasionally some adult heron feeding in the ponds, any fish brought Dear Mr. Erickson: to the young vas delivered by adults flying to and from the south- southwest. Possibly the Tukvila ponds are one source, if they have You have, for this phase of ttie development, received not since been drained for a shopping center. Since only fish is testimony from a number of recognized and highly respected fed to pre-fledged young heron I postulate that during the critical period prior to fledging the P-1 ponds are lacking in fish, or from; persons in the scientific community, namely to my,knowledge May possibly to4late fall. My reasoning is as follows: Dr. L. Scatt Forbes, Dr. P. Dee Boersma, Ted Muller, Dr. John Kelsall and Mr. Range Bayer, The Great Blue Heron and other (a) The diet of the Double-crested Cormorant is schooling wildlife are indeed fortunate to have such advocates. I urge fish. Four cormorants were present March 1 and 4/21/87. but not emphatically that the decision-makers carefully study their before or after those dates. documents. (b) Bufflehead, totalling 30 pairs on December 25, 1986, (1) BUFFER ZONES - Guidelines established by the Department and in less but still substantial numbers from November 1, 1986 of Wildlife recommend at least 750 feet. In view of certain through May 1, 1987, are partly aquatic vegetarian but become fish- unresolved questions re ag rd g human disturbance at Great Blue eaters during winter. Since these are diving birds it is difficult to Heron colonies, I firmly this guideline should be honored. determine whether they are eating aquatic foods or fish. (2) A. NO=DISTURBANCE DATES - While the British Columbia (c) Only one other species, the Hooded Merganser, eats Heron, as both Forbes and Kelsall indicate, settle in at their mostly fish. Twelve pairs of these were observed only once in 35 colonies in mid-February as do the Marsh Island and Samish Island visits, on November 8, 1986. heron 70 miles north of Seattle, At each of these colonies there q _ is no sign of heron in either Padilla Bay, Samish Bay or the trees h (6) PILE DRIVERS - On July 21, 1987 I noted through my spotting until mid-Februaly. Pair-bonding, nest defense may take place at scope that six young heron loafing in the nest tree froze in an erect both the Renton and Lake Sammamish heronries anywhere from late position at the sound of a pile driver near Springbrook Creek. The 7 December to January's end. On 12/25/86 I noted 8 heron present sound created a substantial echo that bounced off the hills behind at the Renton heronry. On February 13, 1987 I counted 28 heron - the colony. please note that date of heron present, well after the there, far more than 8 nests could accomodate. These were probably fledging period between June 20 and July 1. heron seeking nesting sites. I therefore am in agreement with Bayer that no disturbance should be permitted from at least mid- (7) Dr. Kelsall describes the absence of a list of biological January. diversity at Black River Corporate Park. I submitted such a list H. Young heron fledged at the Black River colony between to the Planning Commission in 1987. The table attached, adapted from 8 6/20/87 and7Y1u87. I was unable to visit khe site duringthat the original chart presented, accounts for eater, shore and land birds. Only one mammal vas noted in 35 visits to the site - a dead period).. On the July date I counted 6 juveniles, loafing on the beaver along the south berm, cause of death undetermined. Coyote islands in the pond. It must be emphasized that recently fledged. 3 scat vas also present in this area. I found no raptor pellets here heron do not leave the colony for at least two to three weeks past but believe they would be found on the hill beneath the trees there. the fledging date since they must gather strength to forage in a wider range. In summary, the- no disturbance dates must be from Finally, I am in full agreement with Dr. Kelsall that "the at least mid-January to August 1. I further emphasize that in large developers of Black River Corporate Park are clearly playing brink- colonies a week or more may pass before all fledging occurs. manship with the heron and possibly with other ecological values as g yell." Developers stated in 1987 that they considered the Great Blue (3) SEVEN_STORY STRUCTURE- This not only poses a threat to Heron "an amenity," This materialistic •vies/, not only of heron but the Great Blue Heron and songbirds but is totally out of synch with 1f of 'a whole ecosystem, is responsible for the precarious state of not only this site but with the entire business park areas. 1 wildlife and its habitat throughout the United States, particularly when city governments are willing to trade off natural areas for A suggestion to erect the building on tract A is totally economic benefits. . - unacceptable since it would then be directly in the flight path of Mrs. Natty Murp y the heron, their major route particularly during nesting season. 2016 Bordeaux Lane Half Moon Bay, CA. 94019 4-154 `-- -, - - - Response to Comments from Marty Murphy: 1. Comment noted. Please see response to comments from WDW and USFWS. 2. The outside construction closure time period has been revised to February 1 through July 1. Please see Section 3.5 of this Final EIS. 3. See response to comment 2. 4. Comment noted. The location of the seven-story building has been changed to be closer to S.W.Seventh Street. Heron flight paths probably vary with the location and abundance of food supply. 5. Comment noted. Limiting public access to the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek will prevent feeding on wild birds. 6. Information regarding food supply is appreciated. 7. Comment noted. Young of late nesting herons were observed on nests as late as August 6th during the 1990 nesting season. 8. The information you provided has been included in Appendix G of this Final • EIS. 9. Comments noted. 4-155 May 21. 1990 Response to Comments from Paul Julien Nary Lynne Myer 1. No riparian forest area would be Impacted by this project. See Figure 2-2 Senior Environmental Planner showing a historic picture(1977)of the area and locations of Tracts A and B. Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South 2. Comment noted. The setback for Tract B has been extended to 600 feet. Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ma. Myer: 87 3. Please see Section 3.8 for further discussion of transportation. Please consider my comments regarding the Environmental 4. Comment noted. Mitigation measures have been defined to address these Impact Statement for the Blackriver Riparian Forest and impacts Heron Rookery. 1. Reducing the size of the forest through additional construction would squeeze out many of the species currently living in the area. 2. Construction too close to the heron rookery would 12. place a great strain on the viability of the rookery. 3. The infrastructure is not adequate to support more traffic in the area. Specifically, the railroad crossing has had many close calls for those currently using Oakesdale, and•the large number of .7 dumptrucke going to the gravel quarry present hazards due to the debris they leave and their continual obstruction of the roadways 4. Without a substantial construction-free zone around the rookery and pond, the wildlife (including the herons) would be continuously harassed by the noise, activity, air pollution, and building and auto glass reflections. Thank you for giving my comments serious consideration. I work in the Blackriver area, and this issue is important to me. Sincerely, Paul Ju in 7001 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115 4-156 • 417O2"I)c,s /-11.,t s,'; J-1. L IS . r/3cn Fetil ,Was 5cc.•,ra,, I. ; .rtd. Liz a lr.1tm+ a{ .b...). �rafC:.col tic.vc L:.?ew..T cA tl„ {, :��^(s �o J•Y7'13 gH� ie,"I c�ti"(• The .?lan C►.-4"1..:rcrs to...lei.,c.� ln..,•,. kI•. . (:YP.CtS U e (8 r i%v� . l iA- , U .t4 � 4 11N .e...:e;cN de Lr• SFr �'1ry H[KoitYy. T rtal '.t .✓ok. .1ts 1,0.l;c'vt. IA,e...+F E.alcV t."k lq.e.• ct'f t e f wharf vw :.�1•:ti Vtr c‘.t k.tv. /11s. M�. L� nne /� R R 2 ..0,,:. ,..,.i‘‘ s.•..4.4.;cc , es rc.....11. tM acrrtc-k A Cj Stn�ot- Cnv;rt.bi e„-4e-�c' lant tet_ v v 1o�r, bw�ld,�t. el‘. L�e-ei IS be✓e'tier .a:It errisi . ite- iIannved xve.v. , J e- e.et. c){ C...4.,.hn.....v.i6i)e.ve.ii„tet.t cA.c �1..es,1+e^e -0^X,t 11,0 04. .iil. 5.,..re C.vt•rI..N r` e7-c S,,.it 'R sw 1(a, .. -1' t i[.•.•..e. .10.E Mdi flvrwuv S.0 • �J J A4-1 i.lci.Y ?rc.Ke W KAV:-t. 1 �o � . 1`u curt eootecv,. we..LA �••,,n •4r. alc. e�1 tt_ �f t entir , I.Wess IA i.t J-4GK q$6S5 J --7)ecw Ms.it,t 30,r, ""fk� rI[rna:•L... of 1 ..a.. [t�t4..tc tep ttn.r'i /�t�fq Jscc� �e^c- U.,t. �1..:4 k]r�c� r..lzo JJ 1 1 Sc.•.t...a Clkr `vo W t.. !'1 lit;bk ee4rccAi..�c. ..4 tt i_ la...:el s.•-•r{.:ct. e{ LP:'1L. T .a..� e:1^,,. C'.'- yo ."• le y:a .yt,.; 're se-r J r..t.i.t•o GA.&dl e..•vt t e-r n:, O � {� J tricks w be�nrnronlssrnl cer n`.tiv:n,:rr 10..:1aL.,•.eJ tUtc.. /1(c{ onl.... oC4 ree3a.rr.4r� 1lL... .?e9,e:etit- nitut1.1ti.v.+ at At...,_ 'FZtat4.." :vc^r IZ;(setnc..... sv. b.-•l {L.. �1,,.;s cc ult..cc. -t�.... a*�c.:. am e..:lnh� ��•�r b.•{(i-r.J v c'�it }-ore:A- r..•.6k• 1•Icrtv.eltoc,ka.r... . bvz,z1. to...1,, .tteJ egiac:.44:41s ..::II rrg..ti n... .... Kit.... 1,e4(1. ...( 4t•.t.m,..,� [c.l-iv:t--JLA II.. .611.. Ere c cs ..eay. errs.a1.4.iA.. ri %Art 4e.C. srczec.k.w.c, .>t i 44.•. r. '-acv.4.N. ![sir,lw:t: i ha ;t 4i'3;A..A, '3. ;•• lU•...sltc.t , a_ S.1 L....V.cn W1.v:C.b. ._:Il estkow.r 044Li/ wt.,t .4.t AILL. ,?la ..)k: k 1^c'vt_ . a•0ev,ti.trl t.1 i.L:e_ 1n.car;vtc • a,'td, revel ki,..c_ el...y.p.i k C.1S kl Al.,.. t� •St'^r ^ti 3 %,,;:ll O.IS.0 Via l'rv.no 'a.loLt. .:+.•lt ca"i1 h...r_Ir.CK % 1v.t 1ru.t:Vt ire.r,k.V. , Ti rO Jt_aer& etc_v.:.ci,7 N..•.:� c?r'Oje C+. �1.i-f4 C.•f i.. G. rt..-..1..t•.' '- C.��i e.tJ . V `e I 11 .�� :u+.vr... �.t� p(e�tL.t.�vr4..� �l.u..(ir� lam eL5 t.n ab i'ru�.i v e .S e ALA. ervt et.,eC . T(o,:ve.4 , as Tre•se•,Alcot. ,:. Au_ r.\.:.:-Et e,s , t_•k.:cAs �rp4osal d.sC,tib<oC .. X1.a � _ ol.r.. t Gla e>la rt is ,tc i. .fj.v, wl a'{ ca e. ctrrct. 1 t f a Gb.ie•vC- -MA s. "Tr eee.-1 A s4w.. tol lat nu,cA.. rvw re_ le..4...A.;L,vtol Y e ce :rst ,-b.. .ArL.o.tf,It't. A'T e.n.{ ol..re LOy.n.x+ t.�k.nJ 1 lr.te Gtt LW. 'LW 0 4:o Co...vti/(& :k .ktrt_ cooker-Ss -e-tiOb..:i(C eV. .r •s:oLL, •O+ :.C eAr .q &race+, i e.nol '�, 6ee..6lcs— me. T hcvr_ s4uool a:6 ttse. <ol < c.4- 1'1WtnivhWC 1.14...0. imam:*am:* .to M CV►e►4vreA 41.e.Ye. •rra CA 3 ;a alvecoi.., -he.(.* 0 ,a.nek_ Convent_ slink .* ae.ws :i^ et ay. u.v1om?calf e.l vic..r h-ecwlt,� es fl - a. lass en-kn.s:ye. aLac(.c+{iwuxt -alaN. 4r t.r_# • A pS t.e- (ceke^c. bree.s• CtAta.r:rte.. .j,.e,re. Inas ILO. AL rookc.rJ te..lwrcr_11. .s.t.h co.-kok lAr...et.. vr....clo. ts4 tit al. gov-es�' ivt4••vk-.(�v- Gt...rre... J� Ar.c� cy�ot.,l lirv.t N•rc+ s:r�t. I. Fa:e ice, xc lnuw cv►n itvtl of fro?et �lay.. O{ Twit% +c.c.* a bv.* ltM[iNq u..L �a�.�,YC CaY.Skc.xckas.. a_OAv:hcs cool -614- e u.. kl.L^rc- t or I...-a,L.rct t..l,t. W VAIN...loa 1 `l ol:. ��a1[.,["�'t°J u.� �.,rouye4.. �t e�w.ve�xsx.� .is (n..sl Brous, W i-l�.e t Ole�Si.An y�n.J '�+• b:rdi, I r L-k ,-�'•e1'eaFt n'.ta[.Ire Were l�t[tiV: JIW i no indi�;rx ALA krCGs is rl o us to bs•ki 4.. •-3,....; . . ` l] J '�K v.rit ; K t�fc vteft1dOece•C, .a e_2so a Coster -No a1,.A- 5.tvtS:iivC �v4le....ol, av o't r&L"L. o-� U e. • 4-157 • ....:,,sI raw tt-� �(ji ack II vr-r 1-6:'(rK (r.eta(yv: 4t.v�Ot .�•. P• : :•.:1,14.c.k- ?c'Y a^� ,-rf it ( ,;ryt:�4l c.•..t , >c 1 ir,_.•l , • ex. i'kz•. 4.L •'., Response to Comments from Amy Forreslen 'ft w\cL�IL.:.L,l L e , r..:i:. t� �: (�� •tl.L •Jl rr o._r.<t_,:. `1 1. Few trees occurred on Tracts A or Bin recent history. Please see the 1977 ��r b�(•. ti l..til 'tit (. (r T �1.r �- photograph of the site. Only since construction of the P-I Pond have shrubs ,; �.,� ;.{ Y( ���,.,,.,.,,, and trees been planted. The mitigation measures of setback,befitting.and t constraints to outside construction activities will minimize the impact• btP_lt< lu lal\+w CC.rit. .6 qr., .cc.sx.ta;1J 1••• %"wN a i•� u'; _. c• �.lar.* aw �� ; � r M� , 2. Comments noted. The location of a seven story building has been shifted ?� /ir.d. k1•.� c aCr r.r� � ,i..(ts t'•ty.,. ts•\•• ;;� , y„( closer to S.W. Seventh Street on Tract B and the buffering expanded to bi r Fl, c �.of t 1 I include a 600-foot setback,berming(10•foot high)with 20-foot tall evergreen �<Y w(: •i1,c. tat,•le (:-t crt- {llr_t 0•4e'.'v(y Jct. '?r`{i l: :4., trees. may ,ne,rc r rcK t (e t : 'fitLi •� �:•c . r.Y; x Eu�r ;tv` b«t 3. Comments noted Additional buffering through the use of earthen berms and Av../ n1 4 t^j�• w:t of t: c . evergreen trees has been identified as mitigation in this Final EIS. Saving of r(�<• cil,s.�l •\o ( ,,. the mature cottonwoods was seen as an alternative to removing them for .1 rr wt r n r y } t�,,,,A� development.That mitigation measure has been maintained in this Final EIS. \-jc c lv C (Y fr i.,,Jl Lc:1,:c r:C (" No forest would be impacted by the project. Please see Chapter 2 for a C.S •gyp en(��.14 c•kL-i-•r Orrc. (el�i(il5 Nr�t_n `tc� .4..nfl rk_u c�:. nl • description of historic conditions(1977)on the site. 1 4. Comments noted. .E . c.•.lcl Isl >�l4 t„L .c.r CIA 1. r 4 � c\•l •l 13. 11...:S Lt�•(..1.12....r� c•\ y�L • rlc l&,il L C >A, � rILN L(4�.14vzt .t�C aw:..(a �V•%./'•l_ r.t'Sl.:I,�YM j�:,t•C. curG V.A. i••��•y(' �<(�.1:1 5 f.(c.•r.?..•1._.,•� St.,:_u.rc / j7t.cv 9.(J' • . O. • • • • • • 4-158 • Page 2 • Comments on Black River Corporate Park DEIS May 24, 1990 Ms Mary Lynne Myer, Project Manager the City of Renton adopt more protective buffers than the Wildlife Dept.'s Renton City Hall 89 guidelines in light of the fact that the Black River heronry is located in an 200 Mill Ave. S. area already developed to a large extent. It would be prudent to double the Renton, WA 98055 3 1,000 foot buffer during the breeding season (ie... to 0.5 mile). A 0.5 mile buffer has been recommended for protection of breeding herons im a number of Re: Comment on Black River Corporate Park DEIS other management situations such as on our national forests. Of course efforts to identify and preserve the feeding grounds that the Black River herons utilize Dear Ms Myer, is also vital to your overall management policy. I have recently had a chance to look over the Black River Corporate Park DEIS and Thank you for this opportunity to comment on your draft EIS. Please keep me am very concerned that the office buildings proposed on both Tract A and Tract B informed on future actions related to this development proposal. will have adverse effects on the nearby Black River heronry. The proposal calls for construction and development activities so close to the heronry that it jeopardizes the continued breeding success and conservation of this precious Sincerely, natural resource. 5214.67 ,,, 121�tt-t• I have had the opportunity to study Great Blue Herons at various nesting colonies John Pe throughout southern Puget Sound, investigating aspects of their nesting biology and the 1704 E. 5th Ave. effects of pollutants on herons. This experience and a familiarity with the Olympia, WA 98501 - scientific literature concerning Great Blue Herons leads me to question the claims of the applicant regarding the effects of disturbance this project may have on the heronry. In Appendix B the applicants position(that this project's proposed guidelines would cause little if any disturbance to the nearby heronry)is derived with numerous erroneous assumptions between different heronries, with lack of consideration of important factors such as nesting success, and without thorough documentation. Put simply, selected literature and personal communications about herons appear to have been collected and manipulated (or unprofessionally interpreted) to justify aims of the building project. Breeding colonies of Great Blue Herons are a very special and relatively uncommon resource in King County and other heavily urbanized areas. They deserve special consid- . eration and thoughtful policies to provide maximum protection from'disturbance. Because herons are largely dependent on feeding in shallow fresh or saltwater habitats, 2 their relative abundance or scarcity is a partial indicator of the quality and quantity of our areas wetlands. Like the canary in the coal mines, the herons can serve as valuable "indicators". They are a terminal link in many aquatic food chains and therefore can be indicators of changes affecting aquatic ecosystems. They are also sensitive to environmental disturbances such as construction, logging, and human disturbances in or near their breeding colonies. The Washington Wildlife Dept. has developed management guidelines for the Great Blue Heron (cited in Appendix B) which should be considered the bare minimm acceptable 3 for protecting the Black River heronry. These guidelines call for approximately a 1,000 foot buffer around a heronry during the breeding season (Feb.1 - Aug.1 in this area) and at least a 750 foot buffer at all times. I would strongly urge that • 4-159 Response to Comments from John Peard: 1. Appendix B has been revised. 2. Comments noted. 3. Please see response to comments from the WDW and USFWS. 4-160 • 14001 Northwood P1. N.W. increasingly dramatically in number each year as they are at the 2/ Seattle, WA 98177 Black River site? Ia the fledgling success rate similar? Why 2, Seattle, May 25, 1990 are there no meaningful statistics? 3. The "alternative" designs for eech tract are not viable Mary Lynne Myer alternatives. The only alternative proposed for Tract A is no Senior Environmental Planner action. Why was there no proposal that would reduce the size of Dept. of Community Development the development and locate the buildings farther from both the 200 Mill Avenue South shores of the pond and from the heronry? It seems the buildings 3 Renton, WA 98055 90 could easily be located farther from the nesting site. Was the i Re: DEIS - Blackriver Corporate Park and y a foregoneg conclusion? The 7-story building p 4-story parking garage alternative for Tract B can hardlybe considered to have a minimal impact on the heronry. It is Dear Ms. Myer: ingenuous at best to argue that a small buffer of newly-planted trees can reduce the impact of a 7-story building. I write as a concerned citizen. Having grown up in Renton. I have wit d many changes - not all of them good. The 4. There is no discussion of the effect of disturbing virtual paving over of the valley floor is dismaying, but the potential'1Y toxic soils. The DEIS notes that the original fill encroachment on sensitive areas rings bells of alarm. The heron was composed of sediments dredged from the pond area. A ,r rookery area wetlands adjacent to the proposed corporate park is superfund site lies lust upstream. It ble that the +� one of those areas. It was the highest ranked target for fill material contained hazardous substances. What is the effect preservation in the 1981 Wetlands Study. on the environment if these soils are disturbed yet again by construction? Clearly, a soils report dating from 1979, before The DEIS has a number of shortcomings that are clear even to the dredge and fill operation, provides no basis for sound those unskilled in evaluating such proposals: analysis. 1. The proposed buffers are insufficient. The proposal for 5. The DEIS gives only superficial Consideration to Tract A places buildings within about 700 feet of the rookery; on wildlife other than herons. It does not even include a detailed sr Tract B, within 600 feet. Actually, the proposal for Tract B is list or inventory of other birds, is or aquatic creatures. not clear. The Guidelines on 8-14 appear to propose a no-build I am not a scientist, but doesn't en adequate t of setback of only 400 feet from the rookery. Data from the June 9, impact on wildlife begin with baseline data concerning the 1987 hearing concerning the facility indicates that governmental wildlife population? • agencies recommended greater buffers. The U.S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service recommends a 660-foot or 6. The DEIS discussion of the CAI.v's Comprehensive Plan greater radius of no-construction and no-human-activity buffer 4 omits critical goals and policies. Strangely, the discussion on zone for the heronry with a 200-foot buffer for the pond A-1 through A-3 completely fails to mention the, "waterbodies . shoreline. The Environmental Protection Agency stated that less oblecti've" and policies and the "marshes, bogs and swamps than a 1000-foot buffer would be insufficient without heavy ob)ective," which .are discussed below. forestation. The Washington Department of Wildlife recommended a buffer zone of 800-1300 feet (cited in the DEIS on B-11). The City of Renton has the authority to require pl to reduce planned development to minimize the impact on adjacent Furthermore, there is no data correlating the size of the areas. buffer with the value of the wetland or rookery. it seems inconceivable that the same size buffer should be recommended for The Renton Environmental Ordinance adopts a number of SEPA areas of unequal value. rules by reference, including WAC 197-11-650 - 680. The Ordinance adds that the section contains the rules and policies 2. The discussion of the effect of human activity on the for SEPA's substantive authority, including the power to mitigate heronry seems misleading. Comparing the effect of a park end or re,ect proposals. According to the Ordinance, the policies ride lot or a boat launch area with the effect of constructing and goals set forth ere intended to supplement the City's seven buildings, one of which is seven stories tall, is like existing authorization. comparing apples and oranges. Most of the rookery iea discuss dense vegetative buffers or light human use. The number The City's Comprehensive Plan sets forth a number of goals, of people accommodated by office buildings has no objectives and policies. Within the envi tal goal, three counterpart in the other discussed sites. Furthermore, there is objectives and supplementing policies merit note: . . no discussion 'of the true health or viability of. the heron ' populations in the other rookeries summarized. Are the nests H. Weterbodies Objective: To minimize flood damage, 4-161 • minimize the need for storm drainage facilities, promote recreational opportunities, protect wildlife The City should use its extensive authority to require a habitats, and enhance adjacent uses, natural revised DEIS which p to viable alternatives that really waterbodies should be preserved. reduce the size of the planned complex, increase both the extent • and quality of the buffers, and provide meaningful mitigation for Policies: the powerful impacts of a large development. Such action would be consistent with the executive orders issued by both President 5. Selected marshes, bogs and swamps should be Bush and Governor Gardner requiring state end federal government preserved add enhanced. agencies to exercise their substantive authority to the extent legally permissible to. protect wetlands. (See, e.g., Wash. State J. Marshes. Bogs. and Swamps Objective: Selected marshes, Exec. Order No. 90-04). Anything less represents a lack of bogs, and swamps should be preserved and enhanced for understanding of the emerging national conscience concerning water retention, wildlife habitat, and open space. wetlands as they affect the quality of human life. • K. Watershed Objective: To preserve and enhance water Respectfully submitted. quality and quantity, watersheds should be protected. • Additionally, under the heading of "Area Specific Policies," Susan Margolis the Plan outlines specific policies for the Green River Policy Plan. Those policies include: Remaining wildlife habitat in the Valley should be preserved or its loss should be mitigated. Areas that provide wildlife habitat, such as designated wetland greenbelts end stream corridors, should be large 61, enough to provide suitable cover for wildlife and buffering from adjacent uses. The City's 1981 Wetlands Study should be used as a basis for establishing the priority of wetlands for acquisition end/or . protection. • A substantial portion of the Black River Riparian Forest should be preserved in its natural state as a unique remnant of the Valley flora. The Plan specifically references the 1981 Wetlands Study. On page 11 of the study, the Black River Riparian Forest is named the most valuable wetland in the City: • It is large, fairly' isolated, has high overall wildlife diversity, high wildlife and waterfowl potential, and an extremely unique vegetational character composed of a complex of old growth riparian species. It provides high value open space and aesthetic qualities. The interaction with Springbrook Creek and the P-1 channel detention basin increases its wildlife habitat value. • Significantly, the Study was prepared before the large influx of blue herons. Although heron use in the area predated pond construction, nesting there has grown substantially each year. Now, over thirty nests mark trees both on the island and on the northern shore of the pond. It has received substantial media • attention, with'reporters and biologists frequently referring to it as the largest heronry in the Puget Sound area. • 4-162 - - __ - Response to Comments from Susan Margolis: I. -A buffer zone of 600 feet has been defined as mitigation. This buffer will also include construction of an earthen beret with 20-foot tall evergreen trees planted on top. Please see Chapter 3 for further description of mitigation measures. 2. Comments noted. The lack of comparable disturbances in the vicinity of existing heronries was recognized in the Draft EIS. Please see responses to comments from Dr. John Kelsall, Range Bayer, and Donald Norman regarding nesting success. 3. The buildings on Tract B have been shifted further away from the heronry. The setback distance has been increased from 400 feet to 600 feet. The applicant was asked to develop an alternative that included a parking structure in lieu of surface parking for Tract B. As previously mentioned,the height of the seven-story building has been reduced to five-stories. Please refer to letter from King County regarding open space. 4. Subsequent analysis of Tract A has been conducted and results presented in Sections 3.2.1,3.6.2,and Appendix F of this Final EIS. 5. Comment noted. See response to comments from King County and Dr.John Kelsall. 6. This Final EIS includes further discussion of city policies as related to wetlands,as mentioned in previous responses to comments(see response to comments from the Seattle Audubon Society). As previously mentioned, Springbrook Creek,the P-1 Pond and acreage in the riparian forest deeded to the city,will continue to function as wetlands and wildlife habitat with or without the project. The Black River colony is not the largest in the Puget Sound Region,but is among one of the largest in King County. 7. Comment noted. Mitigation measures designed to lessen impacts are presented in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS. Figures 3-1 and 3-3 present setbacks and height limitations. 4-163 • Pool-e Z �n before construction. Also, they were seen flying into the forested Mo.Th Lynne 1f1, e r area that First Cities Development Corporation !FCDC) illegally Mayor, 1990 logged in 1987. In February of 1985, three nests were establ,sl•ec at C,i4 C c R er\A-c.11 ==" Simms Street the heronry. These were the first known nests on the site. Lakewood, CO 50215 ZOO M,U Ave. 5 1 called Henry Allmendinger, P-! Pump Plant Operator for King County, Rer.ionl t .D4. 61$055 91 on 5/23/90. He does not know when he first saw nests on the site. 'He remembers the presence o4 three nests at the rookery, but he is not sure of the year or if it was before or after construction of the 4orebay• He Is sited on page 3-5E, para1-ap- as the or,'y evidence of heron nesting on the site prior to construction. MA�,-1 L n n The first point I am making Is that the heron at this site have shot '1 e, no tolerance for construction activities during the P-I pond creation because no rookery was established. • The first part of my letter cc•ns'ists of some points ! want to The second point is that contrary to the DE!S, Great Blue Heron at the elaborate on which may conflict with data presented in this EIS. Renton Rookery have shown no tolerance to construction activities Next, I shall present some observations concerning t'e DEIS within one thousand feet of their rookery. Several pieces of evidence specifically by sections. Last, I shall sketch some reasonable support this finding. alternatives for development, if development must occur on this.site. !n early February of 1987, FCDC logged the riparian forest directly In February of 1984, 1 was employed with the Boil Conservation. Service north of the rookery without a permit. The logging started in the on the Green River Project. I was a member of the survey crew for t*.e morning and was observed by Marty Murphy. This logging stopped at preliminary and final surveys for the construction of the P-1 pond. noon when DNR put a stop work order on the site. I visited the site Also, 1 was one of two Construction Inspectors on the project enc was early that afternoon. I had never seen the heron in such a state of the Lead Inspector for the landscaping done in the fall of 1984 an•: excitement. They were making a squealing sound and were obviously in 1985. During this eighteen month period, I averaged four work days disarray and distress. 'During the next three days, 1 visited the- site ' per week on the site. Surveys for the construction included running a once or twice a day. This is the only time in the six years I have line across the approximate northern edge of what are now Tracts.A and been associated with the site that no Great Blue Heron were present at 1 B. A series of parallel lines were run every fifty feet perpendicular the site. It appeared that they had abandoned the rookery. On the to thin main line. These. parallel lines went '.nor. what is now fourth day after logging, the heron began to return. The only apprc•xiately Oakesdale Avenue to the Burlington railroad tracks.. construction activity then on the site was north o4 the rookery on the Februaryto of lg9? was a recently logged arta. The City of Renton had allowed the cut logs to The only large nest observed from - be removed with, many restriction and a very small crew. It appeared hawk's nest located north of the old 4orebay area near the pump plant. the logs were almost being skidded by hand. That tree was saved for this reason. A topic of conversetion often . dealt with the' question of whether or not heron were nesting on the The no-construction dates that FCDC claims are most critical to the site. The entire survey crew and several members of the construction protection of the heronry are inadequate. In early to mid-January crew were on the 'Took-out for nests. Mr. Bill Cokeley, the SCS heron are in and around the rookery trees, starting'to pair, etc. Project Manager for the P-1 pond project would often say that hi February 15th is approximately four to six weeks late. 14 construction thought a heron rookery would move into the trees that currently hold is occurring in this four to six week period the heron may never nest the new rookery. Bets were even made as to whether or r.ot this woud at all. Its not like when we go rent a romantic cabin. We know the happen. Bill was convinced that the large trees that would be on the date of availability and expect its use no sooner. Some years the island after construction would be ideal habitat for Great Blue Heron,• heron nest early, some years later. The Great Blue Heron cannot A main survey point was located at the base of one of these three may:. comprehend a tion as we can. They require a larger window for trees. 1 remember eatingc lunch ath the base on that tese. Never in breeding activity. The time of no-construction should be from January the eighteen months I grk around thoses trees did anyonee. observein I to August 1. The Renton Hearing Examiner's report continually cites gmany legal documents showing that the benefit of the doubt should go nests. • to preserving this site and Its surrounding habitat. • However, heron were often seen feeding in the old fnrebay and channel I would like to include the Hearing Examiner's report and the 1 4-164 y _ _ — _ _ - Y ' R ye. -3 PG tit `F I /0 documents It cited in this letter for consideration and to show the structures that are built on the sits. inadequacies. of the proposed development and DEIS. Page ?-8, parag-t.ph 2 states that in April of 1989, Van Wormer observes The area between Tract 'A' and the P-1 pond was successfully planted twenty-three occuppied nests. In, June, 1989 only seventeen, nests were. and developed for wildlife. It contains a trail known as the access occuppied and eight were unoccuppied. Construction of the new J maintenance road that has been a trail since Its construction. The // building NE of the rookery at about eleven hundred feet from th developer has suggested a cooperative agreement to add new trails and rookery was occurring during this year. Also, the Burlington railroad to replant this existing path. There is no reason for more trails or tracks were occuppied with housing cars beyond one thousand feet from any alterations to this existing area. the rookery. This d=ta suggests that the activities close to the rookery reduced the successful nesting. When vehicular traffic patterns are evaluated for the site, all four I 'Z parts of the city should be considered, not just the Grady War I find the flight patterns described in this DEIS curious. Are these • corridor. flight patterns something that the birds are allegedly using , currently? Or are these the patterns that FCDC would prefer the heron ,1 The number of parking lot spaces seems excessive In light of the use? I have seen the birds use these patterns. I've also seer, them planned occupancy. often cut directly across Tract 'A' to the Green River. They have flews on a straight pattern to the southrn end of Lake Washington and The Black River channel and Springbrook Creek should have at least a also west over. the pump plant. I don't believe the birds will honor one hundred foot buffer. Observation of twenty-five foot buffers has pi particular routes when any one of 1 •may be required, shown that such practices are of little use to wildlife. Such become trashed, trampled, and have excessive use be. people. Following are specific points from the DEIS that I would like to torment on. Experts have stated repeatedly that a six hundred and sixty foot buffer is the minimum needed to protect the rookery. The Renton Tract 'A' has mitigation measures that contain phrases such as 'shoulc Hearing Examiner suggested a one thousand foot buffer after evaluating ,. be', 'would be', 'should have', 'should occurs', and 'should comply'. laws, testimony, and studies for this site. FCDC continues to plan The presence of such words prevents FCDC from being committed to any buildings closer than the six hundred and sixty foot minimum buffer definite. actions. The City of Renton should require more definite would allow. language and commitments. The past actions of FCDC have shown that such a requirement is wholly reasonable. This developer has engaged FCDC proposes a seven-story building for Tract 'B'. This would ir, illegal logging, the installation. "of illegal drainage systems, seriously disrupt the heronry and would not fit into the site /� failed to meet Renton's Tract 'A' tree planting requirements, and has development plan. This building would be a center of activity for the misrepresented facts on the DEIS checklist. FCDC has also proven area and would act as a focus of human activity. This building should difficult for the Renton City Council to manage during the development have been placed in _the previously developed tracts away from the of an apartment complex located between Benson Road and Old Benson rookery. • F:oad. Air quality has not been add d in regard to its effect on the it is difficult to evaluate a construction efforts' long term effect rookery. Studies have shown that poor air quality can seriously without a drainage plan: Such a plan should be required in the final I effect nesting success. At 68th and Empire Way, FCDC is developing t. /, . EIS. large apartment complex. Each of these apartments will have a fireplace. The combined effects of traffic and Increased wood burning The 'no build zone' should include parking lots as well as structures. I 7y should be evaluated. The developer contends that people: should be excluded from walking Chapter 2 states that FCDC 'voluntarily deeded' a twenty-seven acre around the P-1 pond to protect the rookery. This requirement would be parcel parcel to the City of Renton. I was under the impression that this pa- unlawful and would not serve the 'public interest. The pedestrian CV action was required of the previous owner for a zoning change and did traffic on the access trail has posed no threat to the heronry. The not involve FCDC. main threat to the rookery is FCDC. Iq The Renton City Council required a two hundred foot treed buffer at Lighting near the site should be minimized so the heron are not the edge of the thousand food radius buffer on Tracts 'A' and 'B' (see / disturbed. attached sketch). FCDC planted only one hundred and fort,' feet of I this buffer and should be required to finish planting. It appears . Hon-reflective glass and coating should be used on all sides of any to that if this buffer were planted, the buildings proposed for Tract 'A' 4-165 Fca9 e S `e.,,3 0, \N C �''�` would impinge on it. is J vl Tract 'A' could possibly have abandoned coal mine tunnels beneath it. I VI ice, 00 . One such tunnel was discovered during ?-1 pond construction. Th•s 4 0 hazard was not addressed in the DEIS. . . n w s iy Z . \5t.%% / Tract 'A' is a potentially contaminated site as determined by the ° I 00 Department of Ecology. Dredged spoils from the Black River cutlet Z t • ¢O were placed on Tract 'B'. The potential for the presence of hazardous J s- F v waste should be evaluated for both tracts. d: / IL 42 f Signage should be included or, site that will inform and edecate those I Z1 '^ orking in the heronry area in the ways they may contribute to the 1\� r ?-4 / protection of the rookery. i A ' / I In conclusion, I would like to state that this DEIS is inadequate. The 'no-action' alternatives are the most reasonable. If developmentY must occur, the existing habitat near the rookery should remain tY undisturbed. Fewer than one half of the proposed building should be v Q H:y allowed, and these should be situated along Oakesdale Avenue. The ZZ \ majority of the parking could be placed across the surrounding o 14/ O= J thoroughfares. The dense tree buffer should be located on the edge of \ tx 1 the developed area. 'a 0 {W-aiN Thank you for allowing me to comment on this DEIS. * s e u v1 lc — Sincerely, li C Nq M K 4<0� o 1‘1C) -6 M. s"37'4 0---- \ /:: pL Mary M. Anderson- CZ 303/234-9365 I .2F � _ Li z I �- ol 113m oLS ti il v` \ K ' %'Y la _ _ Cj a • `� A � ! i7, , v�i vx � 7 Z7 ( /� Z f 2 w " . • �� i ; : 3 f' � w z w • _ i. A ; • b I: < ' " ; 4-166 Response to Comments from Mary Anderson 15. Comment noted. See response to comments from the USFWS and WDW. 1. This additional information regarding the history of the great blue heron 16. As a mitigation measure the seven-story building has been shifted closer to colony has been added to Section 2.2 of this Final EIS. S.W.Seventh Street and Neches Avenue S.W. 2. Comments noted. The closure time to outside construction during the nesting 17. The literature on air pollution effects on wildlife is limited, with most period will prevent impact similiar to that resulting during the logging quantitative work having focused on one of three areas: operation. In addition,the no outside construction dates have been revised to February 1 though July 1 within 800 feet of the heronry. • Heavy metal toxicity near smelters; • fluoride toxicity near phosphate mining processing operations;and 3. Comments noted. The fact that more nests were unoccupied in June than in • Add deposition impacts on aquatic species. April does not mean that the nests were abandoned because of construction activities at Rivertech. Herons are known to fledge and leave the nest as Even though there is little literature on the subject, basic physiological early as mid June. Those nests could have been unoccupied because birds considerations indicate the CO effects on wildlife will be similar In kind to had already left the nests. those on people (see Appendix E of the EIS). Numerical thresholds for detectable effects of CO exposure will undoubtedly vary for different wildlife 4. See response to comments from King County. species. 5. Comment noted.Terminology specific to requirements of the proposed action Laboratory studies using small and medium sized mammals(mostly dogs,rats, will be established by the Environmental Review Committee. mice,rabbits,and monkeys)do not indicate any extreme ranges in sensitivity to CO(Coffin and Stokinger 1977;U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 6. See response to comments from METRO. 1990). Few references to CO effects in birds have been found in major reviews of CO toxicity. One study noted by National Research Council(1977) 7. The no-build zone will not include parking. indicated that chicken eggs exposed to 425 ppm CO for 18 days exhibited a 25 percent reduction in hatchability. Another study noted that newly hatched 8. Additional mitigation measures set forth in Section 1.6 of this Final EIS chicks survived CO exposures of 10,000 ppm for 32 minutes while older chicks include a pedestrian path and an observation platform located approximately had lower survival times(4 minutes for chicks more than eight days old). 580 feet from the heronry. Access closer to the heronry will be prohibited. The limited evidence from laboratory studies does not identify any mammal 9. Comment noted. or bird species that are markedly more sensitive to CO than people. 10. Comment noted. As a further observation,wildlife species that are tolerant of human activity and disturbance seem to have no difficulty maintaining viable populations in 11. The maintenance road will be used only occasionally in the future for access urban areas or along highway rights-of-way. This suggests that extreme to the P-1 Pond. Public access will not be allowed. Replanting of the area sensitivity to CO(relative to human sensitivity levels)is not common even from the P-1 Pond to the edge of development is warranted. The shrub and though'nantral"sources of CO are limited. tree vegetation is not adequate to provide buffering or wildlife habitat. n produces a seedily Because COdetectable change in blood. 12. This Final EIS includes an additional traffic analysis. chemistry,there is a vast literature on human sensitivity to CO. Ambient air quality standards for CO have been set to protect sensitive individuals. As a 13. See response to comments from METRO. result,ambient air quality standards for CO are many times more stringent , than occupational exposure standards. In the absence of even drarmstantW 14. The buffer along Black River channel wetland will be variable and average ' evidence that wildlife in general or birds in particular are unusually sensitive 50 feet with no less than 25 feet. The proposed berming and replanting and to CO,the federal ambient CO standards(35 ppm for one hour and 9 ppm limited access to the maintenance road will provide sufficient buffer along for eight hours)provide a reasonable aiterion for assessing the significance Springbrook Creek. of air quality impacts. 4-167 The air quality analysis presented in the EIS predicts low CO concentrations for the vicinity of the heron rookery as long as the proposed garage is constructed with an adequate number of exit lanes and adequate facade openings. lithe recommended garage design considerations are implemented, there is little potential for significant air quality impacts on the heron rookery. 18. Error corrected. The deeding was done by the previous owner. 19. The development would extend closer than 1,000 feet from the heronry. Supplemental planting is defined as a mitigation measure in this Final EIS. 20. The issue of contamination has Been addressed in Sections 3.2.1 and 3.6.2 of this Final EIS. 21. Comment noted. Signage could be included as a part of the trail system. 22. Please see response to King County(letter No.8),comment 1. 4-168 I have been to all the rookeries on the list in Washington. The descriptions of the activity and the surrounding environment contained in the document portray a 5 Mary Lynne Myer 92 poor picture of how the sites exist. To describe the community Development G proximity in numbers of feet, only a sketchy detail of the 200Mills Ave S. tree and foliage coverage, and no accounting of the i . Renton, WA 98055 topography does not accurately reflect the conditions at Attu those rookeries. 1 ,, Dear Mrs. Myer; FLIGHT PATH 'i", i I am writing to comment on the Draft Environmental Another glazing generalization in the document is the •,,. ( impact Statement (DEIS) prepared for the Blackriver so called "flight path" of the herons. This supposed path k�i.; Corporate Park Office Buildings. is detailed within some of the maps in the DEIS. I have I believe that the document has a number of substantial been to the Rookery, and live near the Rookery. The herons ', ?' :- problems. These problems range from a slanted presentation do not limit themselves to the narrow confines of this '... of factual information to a lack of specificity that makes supposed flight path. The size of the colony is growing •.,,. each year. In the first few years the main food source for ,,,' it senseless to attempt to evaluate the project. the herons was at the mouth of the Cedar River. At times I will point out the major flaws that I have been able .. ,::Pe to find in the document at this time. If' there are any more almost a dozen herons can be seen crossing the airport at I will write to you to point those out also. dusk heading toward the Black River Rookery to roost. As the colony has grown the movements and forays for t`•:.O. APPENDIX B food now take the birds into the Green River Valley. Some of the birds from the Black River Rookery feed as far south ''••r _r:- Almost all the information in appendix B omits, or is as the Kent Lagoons, and I am sure some even further. I ' 1•... missing valuable information needed to determine the impacts have watched the migration of the birds in and out of the T..11.',` of human activity on Great Blue Heron Rookeries. There are Valley each morning and night. The birds do not limit eight Rookeries listed in table B-1 page B-3. The table of I themselves to a set North Eastern Flight Path as the DEIS " • "rookery status" all eight of the rookeries are listed as indicates. The birds now are going out in all directions as e:s%••%` viable, and yet under the table "approximate i of Nests" the the competition for food becomes more intense. •.:': ''. list states unknown. If the number of nests are unknown at There is no set flight path in and out of the Rookery, • =^'� a Rookery then the status of that Rookery is unknown since and the assertion that there is makes the document very ;..h' misleading. number of nest could range from 0 to an infinite number. • In fact the last listed number of Known nests foe the Pigeon ' Point Rookery vas 0 in 1988. WILDLIFE �I. The document does an insufficient job of describing the particular settings for each of the rookeries. In the The DEIS makes only generalizations about the existing "aj; 'instance of Peasley Canyon the make-shift parking lot sets wildlife on the proposed constructions sites. On 3-33 the '. .almost 500 feet from the nesting sites, but is also almost document examines "wildlife most likely to utilize the '1 300 feet below the nesting sites. The nests are on the top site". It also speaks to animals that "may" nest or feed . ' 'near the top and edges of the Canyon while the parking lot along the edges of the P-1 pond. ;:,,sits on the valley floor. This type of language would seem to indicate that the Almost all established Rookeries that have tolerated drafters did not take the time to examine what vildlife is ...:close human activity have only alloyed for traffic or on the site. These general terms only state what would (41 ' .:'mechanical intrusions. Birds in general are tolerant of .. "likely" be on the sitq or "may" be on the site, and do not ',,!" re, and yet become intolerant if the people start stepping account for what is on the site. :,'nt of the cars. The fact is that automobiles move in I could briefly give you a list of the wildlife that is s'onsistent patterns in set areas, humans do not. on the site. Red Tailed Hawks, Each of the Accipters • - Although it can be shown that Rookeries will tolerate Coopers, Sharp Shined, and Goshawk, Merlins, and on one ,attic, it cannot be shown that they will tolerate human occasion a wintering Peales Peregrine. Bald Eagle, and ::,"ement within close proximity. Tvo of the three rookeries lif Osprey have both been seen perching in the trees above the .t the list that have human housing near them have an P-1 Pond. Great Horned, Screech, Barn, Short Eared, and Sav noun atatus.(Pigeon Point, and Spencer Property) Whet Ovls have all been seen on the site during nesting season. 4-169 You must insist that a field study be done to determine I Response to Comments from Christopher CIIRord: 7 exactly what is on the site so that the impacts to those species may be mitigated. i. Please see response to comments from Dr.John Kelsall,Range Bayer,and Donald Norman. CONCLUSION 2. Comment noted. Appendix B has been revised to include additional The DEIS must be updated or redone so that the information. information necessary for making a decision on this project can be fully examined. Other options must be presented. 3. Comment noted. Human activity occurs in close proximity to several of the Those options must include some plan that would eliminate any buildings on either site that would be taller than the heron colonies identified: Yarrow Bay,Delta River Inn,and Stanley Park. trees containing the Rookery. Evidence indicates that herons become accustomed to activities that are not perceived to be a threat to them. Sig ed 4. Both Pigeon Point and Spencer property heronries were field checked In 1989 ap - -- - and again in 1990. Neither was abandoned as of the 1990 nesting season. Christopher . or 2721 Talbot Rd. S. S. See response to comment 2. Renton, WA 98055 (206) 255-6495 6. See response to comments from King County. 7. The Final EIS Includes additional information on wildlife. Please refer to Section 3.5 and Appendix G. Habitat for those species will continue to occur in the P-1 Pond and riparian forest area north of the pond. 8. All buildings will be lower than the trees on the island containing the heron nests. 4-170 Response to Comments from Marilyn McGill: 1. Comment noted. 93 f U yr.- -fa 'ter_1 (2OOketi I pls.+.is dar would I,t a�e. a ddnwe4 &7o,._-L u L ka.OPRzur - pf'c.Qar �� dt� hutm. Ja1i w. GG>✓Gam,-Ccb suck- vtAgal. wia tt e- s ibs -b us. Ply d w � . ei cat,:ta Pro. is• (� is bo—a-c��'-Potrusu 'Re. / faCt�,.ta. a.ck 4sia% Mail Ow..-ft+aSr�t be-r surpoob uo-mac[ -4(0.-0Aim erns iriekA tiwua) aui I r Q(e usr I tom'cam. 120110tibse,L•..cam r 4-171 -- --bw w-k...r... G,;,Lit°ur.- Ta.v.�.v.wa.....A. a..n..r. eTM .aa�:�........, a i='� Response to Comments Itom Lori Levine "'t,o..a•o.l .on w."."..a hat... YLj by U.S. POS•'c �•...•• r 11tlG hl •ri i I. Comment noted. Deaf' Qt't r. U 1 OFFICIAL .•rR:sl5'_ PAY S s.uppotl- 51T '•;.. .a •! ---5-- - •_. ,,, pastry ,. 94 ,1e{ t� E r^I L( Thayer �- al,d", F�✓�st� Yea 1/1 d f v c f/Ands ilia"- I t ov,✓01"Ys`iW°'`' Nantes ►3l vd.'ep/•eie5o .1 faaae-( . ,jil /lk vL y All A 5 ;tL ;5 ti i7u�-T5 et hl,•&a'1 r/��c. D'c Q bf'110)co(( n!'�I406 5• d I f a gip de u.e%pr►-0 '�'�a`c�� (,/ '�// ��/ lei f! 54f1.Uis1 �GIMUI / o5S Save ants, 1.c d 4-172 May 18, 1990 Response to Comments from Keith Peterson: Mary Lynne Myer 1. Comments noted. See previous responses to comments relating to setbacks, Senior Environmental Planner noise,automobile activity and impervious surface. Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 95 Dear Ms. Myer, I am a citizen concerned over the proposed action to be taken regarding the development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. The current course has no apparent means to minimize the impacts of development on the wildlife inhabiting the area. I have some specific concerns. First, the plans have the buildings and parking lots placed too close to the heron nesting area. Unless there is adequate buffering, the wildlife living in the forest and rookery will be disturbed by the increased human and automobile activity. Finally, paving the site will eliminate habitat for wildlife. Some species would not be able to survive in the area. I recommend we find a solution where the expansion of human development cooperates with the natural environment rather than conflicts with it. The time and energy - the short-term frustration - will be insignificant when compared to the long-term benefit by all. eith P terson Kirkland P'08z2_4Z65— • 4'.3 • 4-173 • • • • I further add these concerns: Community Development Department o The developer proposes to place the buildings ;-+d I Y Attention: Mary Lynn Myer, Project Manager parking areas too close to the rookery. Renton City Hall 200 Mill Ave South • o Noise, pollution, light, movement and glare can not be Renton, WA 98055 ' 96 adequately buffered by any of the plans proposed. I read the term "window hood"in the DEIS, but read no explanation Dear Ms. Flyer, of its design, function nor reports of its usefulness ir: c projects. The DEIS is inadequate when it introduces a term that is not explained nor justified. The only way to On May 1, 1990, you and I were in the same Public Hearing eliminate the effect of these elements on the wildlife is Room for the City of Renton hearing on the Black River NOT TO BUILD. Corporate Park DEIS. That room and event is a very critical part of the American citizen participation process. I honor- In conclusion, I have followed this land use issue for two the City for following the SEPA procedures and establishing years. My pathway started with an incidence of wetland the format that allowed so many eloquently informed and destruction adjacent to my residence, to attendance at the concerned residents to speak for the record. However, no National Wetland Forum in May 1980, to membership on Seattle Q tape recording, can capture the serenity and liveliness of Audubon Society Conservation Committee, to frequent walks (J that the artist's paintings of the Black River Riparian and visits to the Renton Heron Rookery. This rookery was my Forest and Heron Rookery brought into the public hearing. "first" to discover and to learn about. I urge Renton to preserve its health and longevity by denying the development I wish to highlight several -very noteworthy comments that I as presented in the 'DEIS. If agreement to deny is not concur -with and that I believe must be addressed by the reached, then the city must follow the advice of all experts City. on herons and wetlands to require and enforce all mitigations they suggest. o Dee Boersma, University o- Wash. suggested that the contiguous Soil Conservation Service land requires federal I am writing to the Renton Parks Department to urge that government involvement through the National Envronriental that agency purchase the site. I am also writing to King Protection Agency processes. She also pointed out that the County Conservation Futures Tax fund to urge generous �y restoration of indigenous salmon runs by Federal Fish and funding for the site. There is a higher and better use of "11 Wildl_i_fe_may indicate NEPA requirements. Air want/ issues this piece of planet Earth than for the Black River are another concern that would bring in the L'ra tO s4nd, Corporate Park. auto emissions and CO amounts in the region, not just in the • proposed parking garage. Sincerely, a Joe Miles made a very thorough critique of the ^EI;= 1- ,JLet.„, . . section on Heron Rookery numbers, sites and viability. His can Sundborg comments show that the DEIS is sadly incomplete, inaccurate • and misleading in Appendix B. • o Renton residents and taxpayers do not want Rentnn known ( 3 • for its business parks and office buildings, they want it known for the preservation of areas of natural and wildlife values. o The "birder" count by the man who spoke from his heart 1.( 1 and from his statistics of arrival and departures of the herons refutes the DEIS reportage of "Heron flight paths". • - o The final speaker made brief reference to the c / vehicular traffic problems and raised a very important 5 question about the impact -of increased office space. 4-174 Response to Comments from Jean Sundborg: 1. See response to comments from Dee Boersma. 2. Appendix B has been revised and additional information is provided in Chapter 3 of this Final EIS. 3. Comments noted. 4. See response to comments from King County. S. Traffic has been additionally addressed in Section 3.8 of this Final EIS. 6. Please see Section 1.6 for discussion of additional mitigation measures regarding setbacks. 7. Comment noted. Definitions of terminology was improved in this Final EIS. 8. Comments noted. 9. See response to comments from King County. 84 4-175 Th.7 Ph wpm 4 5iin Q�li�4s�ydabl/ �`� I✓ � /''f u / Response to Comments from Sheryl and Phil Lundahl: Pad.r"0....A JuAyA"�."m.iuw. p 97 Deaf, I 1. Comments noted. OF ICI vitUV4I P/e45E51pp0 . 0.u•�.oe 4� , SrieavG- F uNATeU6- 9,:` :/. Pi -Sei►ill- ptE. I ,,,46 REli TON 724/1/ - . v/ ry 1till/-/INAS °WY M&Tek /���l��w , ��, ,�� 'for co,4101 DEv%e- uhi .d / f �IjcivT ion,of 1 /Lc 6,7-0/5.r as. 5-marl k Site d • • • 4-176 I Mary Lynne_Myer April 30, 1990 72(. l!tnszi- /34_4",. GL'•ic Senior Environmental Planner • abr7s./ / 1..1 .lw.�A-- Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South S,.,iu,., wA ',Pg./- Renton,WA 98055 98 7:/�,� %, /9f�t Madam: 99 t-kf i, l y^qt Al Ve.', Sealer Er1tr. Pknifer I am writing to you and your office to express my dire concern over the proposed • development in the Black River Corporate Park area which is immediately adjacent to 0`A/' or �No"`��,ly C�[`t(r/�r`t,•'%f the Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Urbanized encroachment on this Zoo i.4/l Ave. 3. sensitive area will displace the sturdier species of fauna and will destroy those less ge•oib;, 14/4. 1IC'5S adaptive species. Of course, the floral species won't survive under tons of concrete and asphalt,either. • Gear .Is. /17er, Full mitigation of this development's imp=:cat is impossible. Irreversible harm will make Z Gfrr wit hit ,n resrc:uv k me. extinct this precious piece of ecosphere. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) states that"significant adverse impact"will result. Air quality, water quality,and other ^vrn.,alr?.;f•:l i.vrrGt ytufr'.t°e.aF rticm+'i orto9 life"quality"will be degraded. detrdoprne.1f {w -the Stout Side of the Q/attriver 41ti ran Fifes t iid tiert,i Roe.kery. I urge you and your office to re-evaluate this situation. A corporate office park can be rf i5 Mr caner-0 >'heJ 1`k "We've:T f of developed almost anywhere-why here where it will destroy wildlife? It is said that a bui lelierp an/ pae%+45 fo/'s aft lD0 Ow /c person who destroys something that is man-made is a vandal -- a person who destroys something that is God-made is a developer. the. Nr.'ra.a (C,:kE!y, kncl llcsc f fttr h.:Z�S and ofAer w.iei 66e wilt be elf:fff:r'brd by We do not inherit this earth from our ancestors-we borrow it from our children. If Black Aioliemt.1f, /,..t1 , 4'P 1 t'abfy, e4crse sand 51ur'e River Corporate Park is allowed to further develop and encroach upon the forest and • t.,,,fir ouf 4e(efuak 64 M.,. In odd.heel, rookery,then the children will have to visit a zoo to see"examples"of what could have av,^ the a/ea c✓iIl e. ;nn a.,id/,l been. Ilyb,'/rif• aeet rHay ca.t,se fail ei'h^che.45. T hart. byte r' Your office has the authority to prevent environmental rape. Act now, before the . the t't.:tPly are t ste memories fade away. am very erware of .th „ e. itaoto9e Gdeollot e.1f . of ffie itrei c.,1 Cause. efease elate e,'e+r f r. • 1 11 . William N.Christie,M.S. v 4rItfe Environmental Scientist • 26611 198th Avenue S.E. • Kent,WA 98042 630-1258 4-177 May 10, 1990 100 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner 1 01.. May 18, 1990 Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner We are writing to express our shock over the proposed development Dept. of Community Development near the Renton Heron Rookery and Blackriver Riparian Forest. 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 This area is very unique and a real treasure to Renton and the county. A rookery of this size is rare. To place office buildings Re: Heron Rookery near it is a crime. The office buildings can still exist but an Dear Ms. Myer: adequate buffer area around the rookery is essential. Without I am very concerned about development in Renton, and a decent buffer zone, the herons will leave. particulary about the proposed office buildings that will abut the Blackriver Riparian Forest and heron rookery. It seems So many people,including present occupants of the nearby office clear to me that noisy construction, polluted water run-off and human disturbance in general will drive the herons off their buildings, enjoy the beauty of :his special area. Once destroyed, nesting grounds. I believe we need to step back and look at these areas are gone forever. the effects rampant development in Renton has on its wildlife. It is easy to say that the birds can go elsewhere and that Please reconsider this proposed development. humans need office parks, cities need revenue from growth._ • Please consider that one more office park means more and more encroachment by humanity on the natural environment. If we do not change our attitudes and start considering the ecosystem Pe•.Dunlgp and all of the creatures that live in it, we ourselves will die Q,/�[v as a species. Please be a leader in the fight to save our ' sensitive wetlands and breeding grounds for other species T omae Make besides ourselves. 15639 16th venue S.W. Sincerely, Seattle, WA 98166 243-7226 Margaret R. Gourl y 4-178 di' I71 /7 yo • 16605 1127th S.E �� gi -,c.Gt, Renton, Washington, 98058 May 29, 1990 pp 10 nL Ms. Mary Lynne Myer pp ,(,� Senior Environmental Planner • ♦ Department of Community Development 103 Wet- ' /q�O Ss 200 Mill Avenue South nn Renton, Washington 98055 �/.l.Rit, Md. . 2-}Lu..t t, • p Dear Ms. Myer, 0. tx._,^ e..6('2'14.'"' / L This letter is in response to the environmental impact statement V ,t e ,fti 4. , .Ld d .-L,(t It hie,t.Pf k which was released on April 11 as part of the effort to develop the ;cam"7� 4.10-44kr- 44440e.tUbt-t cv•xdoir.ve area known as Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. e �ce:e f "/ Last summer a friend took me for a walk in that area,just �A � 1 about a mile from -Valley Office Park" where I work for Boeing, and OCd � ^`{ vR�� . I was amazed to see an enormous blue bird flying around in the open cL�.c-a-a -L"6f space near the tall trees. It kept its distance from us, and I can't QMd l�ts� '�` ' _`•--p'�' �' help but think that the experts are correct when they say that P .• eu f 14-e,ti,rn Ii "1- /"`�"""'� " 'c-"'' allowing these birds distance from the noise, artificial light, and Ce-stbdd t 'autt 160 u ei k ti l� d,L,rcon7� activity of people is necessary if they are to continue to favor us dGl�! C'e with their presence in Renton. ' I believe that developing any of the south side of this area will A iIti cause the herons to leave this habitat which they have used for many years and will contribute to the overall decrease of their population in the state. The public hearing had taken place before I heard about it, so I 4444ttilY. I want to take the opportunity now to urge you to deny any proposal by developers to encroach on this area. eptaiLi AttA Respectfully, g0` l" S. 40.47 f k'a • il0 SS Alma Newsome • 4-179 • Response to Comments by William Christie, Unknown Commenter, Margaret Gourley, Peggy Dunlap,Thomas Makey,Alma Newsome,and Cynthia Mack: 1. Comments noted. Your views will be considered in the decision-making process. 4-180 May 23, 1990 This rookery is one of only about a dozen left in King County: most of the others are very small in comparison. There are very few places for this heron population to go if Mary Lynne Myer this development pushes them out, since 90% of the wetlands Department of Communityy Planner Development Senior Environmental t 104 in the county are already lost. 200 Mill Ave. South Rather than threatening this rookery and the other waterfowl Renton, WA 98055 and wildlife living in the area with this large-scale development, we have a unique opportunity to preserve and Dear Ms. Myer: protect this area. Wildlife enhances everyone's lives, but Li is especially important to those of us who live and work in I am writing in regards to the Draft EIS. for the Blackriver urban environments. I strongly support the City of Renton Corporate Park development being proposed near the in any efforts to acquire this site and surrounding intersection of Oakesdale Ave and SW 7th St. I attended the wildlands. This would be an investment not only in the public hearing May 1 and want to express my concerns in environment but also in our children and future generations response to the presentation given on this Draft EIS. who face urban environments totally devoid of any wildlife and preserved natural areas. I work in one of the new Blackriver Corp. Park office buildings on Oakesdale Ave., and so I've been fortune enough Sincerely, to see first hand this precious wetlands and wildlands habit �� and the waterfowl who live there. I also observe the growing human congestion due to continued development and "441 have serious concerns about its destructive effects on the environment in this area. Jim Bernthal In spite of the mitigations proposed, this development is 3023 NW 64th St. far too large in scope to avoid damaging impact on the Seattle, WA. 98107 wildlife that currently lives in the area, especially the herons who nest in the rookery trees. A seven story building, three 4 story, and a three story building are '1 _ going to enormously over-impact the area, even if there were no wildlife habit nearby. Those large buildings and all the cars, traffic congestion, air pollution from cars, noise and glare will certainly pose a dramatic threat to the herons, • particularly during breeding season. Research indicates that human disturbance within a distance much greater than the distances of buildings and parking lots discussed in the Draft EIS will interfere with the herons' reproduction. And it will probably result in the herons abandoning the site. Buildings of this size and height can't help but impose tremendous disturbances, both • during construction and once in use. Much smaller scale, one story buildings would be a more reasonable "mitigation", constructed at a distance from the rookery that provides a buffer supported by the scientific research. • Past logging and clearing have virtually eliminated any buffer to the visual and sound contact between the rookery and the proposed development. With seven, four and three story buildings constructed, the 20 foot trees proposed would in no way provide the visual and sound buffer the herons need to stay in the rookery. 4-181 Response to Comments from Jim Bernthal: 1. Comments noted. 2. Please see Chapter 2 regarding logging and clearing on Tracts A and B. 3. Please see Appendix B for further discussion of heron colonies in King County. 4. Comment noted. • 4-182 • Andrew Carpenter that rookery. Have.any of these case studies included a more I /.j 939 24th Ave S. detailed analysis of the vitality of the heron rookeries? Please Seattle, Washington include any such information in the final EIS. 98144 Additionally, appendix B includes no examples of herons being adversely affected by proximal development. If any such studies Mary Lynne Meyer • +05 exist they should be included in appendix B to insure an unbiased Senior Environmental Planner 1 conclusion. What are the thresholds at which herons will abandon an Dept. of Community Development established rookery? 200 Mill Ave S. Determination of the age of the Black River heron rookery is Renton, Wa. critical in assessing the tolerance of this particular rookery to human G 98055 disturbance. The "sketchy" historical accounts of nesting herons prior to the construction of the P-1 Pond (reported three years after I am writing to you after reviewing the DEIS for the proposed the pond's construction) (B-2) should be further clarifed. How many Black River Corporate Park. I strongly support the No Action nests existed? Were the existing nests, without.a doubt, blue heron alternatives for both tracts A and B. I feel that the DEIS is nests? inadequate, incomplete, and lacking in justification for adversely For the heron rookery to thrive, not only the nests, but the affecting the valuable Black River Riparian Forest and Heron ecosystem in which they live, must be preserved. The water in Rookery, on which the office park is to be developed. The DEIS states ^ Springbrook Creek and P-1 Pond is already "quite turbid" and that a need for the corporate park has been identified (2-4), but y polluted (3-23) and, with development this will get worse. Turbidity �] within the DEIS there is no detailed analysis of this need. Given the of the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek will be increased during r value of the Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery, and the construction, and pollutants associated with runoff will increase priority for its preservation, the demand for office space would need when the development is completed (3-23,3-27). Surrounded by to be overwhelming and without alternatives to justify adversely this polluted water supply, will the diet of these particular herons be affecting the area. What research has been performed in identifying more dependent on mice, amphibians, reptiles, and vegetative matter this need? What are the detailed results of this analysis? than the diet suggested (for the average heron) in the ecologic A 1981 wetlands study cited in the 1986 City of Renton overview (B-5)? Comprehensive Plan claimed the Black River Riparian Forest and If the.polluted water does cause the herons to adjust their diets Heron Rookery to be the most valuable wetland in Renton. (p. 42). to a greater dependence on terrestrial resources, there will be no Obviously, developing alternative sites, in which more resilient or consolation for the herons when the tracts are cleared, graded, and less valuable habitats would be disturbed by development, is when 75% of the land is converted to impervious surfaces. Is there preferable to development in the proposed area. If other sites have any proposed mitigation for the proposed devastation of the blue not been considered, they should be. If there are possible herons' food web? • alternative sites for the Black River Corporate Park, where are they? The Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery cannot The volume of traffic in the area proximal to the proposed support a development the size of the Black River Corporate Park a corporate park is already beyond capacity; it is daily characterized 3 while retaining the existing ecosystem of the great blue herons. Of by slow-moving-to- standstill traffic jams. What will be the impact the alternatives offered in the DEIS, I strongly, support No Action. of adding 2100 automobiles to the morning and afternoon rush hours Additionally, I support the purchase of this important area, by the on Interstate 405.? City of Renton, as a preserve. The case studies of the tolerance of heron rookeries to human disturbances in appendix B are incomplete. The case studies of heron Y . rookeries surviving close to human developments do not make note of the vitality of those rookeries. The number of nests in a particular rookery are not necessarily indicative of the reproductive success of • • 4-183 • Response to Comments from Andrew Carpenter. 1. See response to comments from WDW. 2. Please see response to comments from the Seattle Audubon Society. 3. This Final EIS includes further analysis of traffic impacts. See Section 3.8. 4. See response to comments by Dr.John Kelsall,Range Bayer, and Donald Norman. Additional information has been provided in Appendix B. 5. The thresholds are not known. The setbacks and other mitigation measures defined in this Final EIS are meant to avoid abandonment. Other case studies have been added to Appendix B. 6. The history has been clarified in Section 23 of this Final EIS. Please see response to comments from Dr.John Kelsall. 7. The P-1 Pond received runoff from development upstream of this project and will continue to do so with or without the project. Herons feed in wetlands and in rivers located northeast,south and west of the site. The P-1 Pond is used by herons primarily for loafing and as a secondary feeding area. There is no evidence to suggest that herons will shift to a greater diet of mice, amphibians,reptiles,or vegetative matter. 8. The P-1 Pond will continue to exist with or without the project. The greatest effect to the heron's food supply comes from filling and total elimination of wetland feeding areas throughout the Green River Valley. --9. Comments noted. See response to comments from King-County,No.1. 4-184 ry . I • REVIEW OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR BLACKRIVER that herons will remain at the site during the prolonged and intense disturbance anticipated f 3 CORPORATE PARK from construction activities fa the present project proposal. L. Scott Forbes,Natural Resource Management Progam, Simon Fraser University,Burnaby, 106 Great Blue Herons ere sensitive to human disturbance during the nesting season. Numerous British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6 examples of colonies being dislocated by various tams of human disturbance are documented in Forbes et al.(1985). A theme of Appendix B(and elsewhere)of the DEIS.is that herons I have been asked to evaluate the DEIS fa the Blackriver Corporate Perk with respect to the sometimes nest in dose proximity to human disturbance,ipso facto management guidelines for potential impact on the heron rookery located north of pond P-1. Construction is to take place protecting heron rookeries are too stringent(e.g..Washington Department of Witdife q on two tracts of land(A and B)southwest and south of the rookery,at distances x 400 ft from the A management guidelines:800 to 1300 foot buffer during the breeding season,and a permanent rookery. At present.the rookery exists in a relatively undisturbed location(no regular y 750 foot buffer:USFWS recommendation of a permanent 660 foot buffer). Quite dearly,none of disturbance occurs within 1000 feet of the heronry,and noise monitoring(Table 3-12 of the the above guidelines have been observed in the development of the Blsckriver Corporate Park DEIS)indicates quiet conditions at present). Great blue herons characteristically choose DEiS. Specifically constudion is to occur as dose as 400 feet from the heronry,and only a undisturbed sites forbreeding,although as noted in the DEIS,some exceptions do exist. Also. 600 foot buffer is to be implemented during the heron breeding season. I consider these heron rockeries are usually located near taaging sites,thus the local wetland and terrestrial minimal buffer zones to be inadequate to safeguard the existing heron rookery. If construction habitat may be important as feeding areas. activity occurs as proposed.abandonment of the colony site as a dyed result of human disturbance is a strong possibifity. The proposed development poses four principle risks to the heron rookery: As noted in the DEIS Appends B.the response of herons to human disturbance is variable,and (1)disturbance of breeding herons during the several construction phases of the project. thus subject to some uncertainty. It is deer that this uncertainty has been used by those preparing the DEIS to dtoose mitigation measures that deliberately assume a very optimistic (2)elevated levels of human activity resulting in disturbance to the rookery when the project is response from the herons(e.g..tolerance of high levels of disturbance). The deficiency of this complete, logic is obvious. For example.if 1000 herons colonies had residential developments built within 10 feet of the colony perimeter.undoubtedy 1 or 2 would remain after such disturbance,the (3)degadation of freshwater aquatic habitat which may serve as foraging sites for local herons, other 998 a 999 abandoning the site. That 1 a 2 colonies but of 1000 remain with that level of disturbance Is not adequate justification for routinely allowing similar levels of disturbance. (4)loss of terrestrial habitat which may serve as auxiliary foraging areas fa the herons. A colony located adjacent to the Delta River Inn,between a highway end a perking lot is cited The first two of these are related to disturbance of nesting herons,the latter two are related to the frequently throughout the DEIS as evidence that herons MI tolerate high levels of human availability of local foraging habitat for the herons. I shall addess these issues separately. disturbance. These observations ere derived from a short note that I co-authored(Webb and Fates 1982). (Webb and Faber;ere cited in Appendix B but the reference is not included in Begs gs of Disturbance on Nesting Herons the literature cited of Appendix B-I give the correct citation below). It is accurate to state that The proposed construction activity,and subsequent levels of human activity after construction is these herons tolerate high levels of human disturbance. However.I believe that my paper has complete pose a significant risk to the heron rookery. Forbes et al.(1985:pg.77)recommended been used to build a specious argument In the DEIS. One must consider the co text in which that activities such as construction,land-cleering&etc.should not be carried out within 500 m this colony occurs. It le found on See Island.immediately south of Vancouver. Most of Sea . 0 of the heronry(1642 ft)from mid-February to mid-July(the approximate duration of the breeding Island was dewed of trees suitable fcr nesting herons around WW II. However,extensive season of Great Blue Herons in southwestern British Columbia)and tither recommended that n gasslands exist on Sea Island which contain abundant populations of voles on which herons whenever possible,such activity should be carried out gyleik the heron nesting season. I teed(herons from the Delta River Inn colony feed almost exclusively on voles,pers.abs). It is suspect strongly that the nesting chronology of herons in north west Washington state is similar dear that herons nest where they do simply because they have no alternative. The herons have to herons in British Columbia.and would see no reason to alter the above management been faced to accept what would otherwise be unsuitable habitat. Herons nesting near human recommendations. The mitigation procedure recommended in the DEIS(no exterior habitation frequently indicates imited availability of nesting habitat. This is a paNatterly acute construction activities should ocar within 600 ft of the rookery during the period from February problem near urban centers(e.g..Vancouver. Seattle)where urban sprawl end Industrial 15 to June 16)falls far shot of Forbes et art.'s management recommendations with respect both development have steady claimed most of the woodand areas suitable for nesting herons. to distance and and temporal duration. Whether breeding populations of herons can be maintained over the long-term In dattrbed habitats is unknown. ft is wet estabished that herons in large colonies exhibit it higher treeing Disturbance&ring nesting from construction activities is of particulr concern. Loud noises success than herons in small colonies.et tend observed in many colonial birds(e.g.,Forbes (e.g..tucks,power tools&etc.)(stub herons from nests.leaving eggs and small chicks 3 1985). Colonies In disturbed sites tend to be quite small in size(e.g..there ere only three vulnerable to dulling or predation from crows/ravens. That the colony has remained at the ocapied nests in the Delta River Inn colony this err.para.orbs.). Titus it is important that we present site even though it was subject to some disturbance in the past in no way guarantees protect existing colony sites In relatively sites. 4-185 J QQentalLl(g lg cLa Si a&WtPIl • CURRICULUM VITAE Overall.it is dear that the proposed construction on Tract B poses the grater threat to the nesting herons:such construction would occur in closer proximity to the rookery than 7 LYLE SCOTT FORBES construction on Tract A.and would cause the loss of productive wildlife habitat(as indicated in the DEIS. HOME ADDRESS e315-11675 7th Avenue Unfortunately I can find no systematic observations of habitat use by the herons in the DEIS. Richmond, B.C. V7E 4X4 (Tel: A2,72-5373) making it impossible to assess the importance of the local terrestrial and aquatic habitat for 8 BUSINESS ADDRESS NA'�yrti� Iecevy1b�fourea Mcuim ertIB4� �0��m foraging herons. Both Tracts A and B support populations of voles and mice which are frequent s I forage items for great blue herons. The proposed development could impair the terrestrial Simon Fraser University R foraging opportunities for herons. Burnaby. B.C. V5A IS6 (Tel: 291-4502) ` C .,,µ' A 001 As well.I can find no adequate inventory of the aquatic fauna,nor can I find systematic DATE AND PLACE OF BIRTN po&E 1 s. • observations of freshwater habitat use by the herons to evaluate the Importance of these areas 9 October 2, 1958, Vancouver. B.C. �lifPAar (Pond P-I,Springbrook Creek)to foragng herons. Herons are generally.secretive when � foraging,end sensitive to the presence of humans. Human disturbance on Tracts A and B MARITAL STATUS .• during and after project construction would very likely result in diminished use of these areas fa Mare led, no children �6 • • s fcraging. If these are important foraging sites,this could pose a significant threat to the nesting UNIVERSITY EDUCATION colony:dose proximity to good leading areas is an important attribute of most heron rookeries. •The impact of human activity on aquatic foraging areas could be mitigated by construction of • /0 p .D. vegetation buffers(e.g.,low shrubs,tall gess,&etc.)along all.riparian areas,sufficiently dense SEPT. 1989.- Simon Fraser University. Department of to obscure human activity from tr wing herons. Biological Sciences - Supervisor: Dr. R. C. Ydenberg, Biological Sciences The effects of the development on water warily is a concern. Pollution of the creek and pond from runoff(toxic chemicals,automobile pollutants)from the industrial site is almost inevitable. It I I Thesis isimportantthatt4stormsowers(oftensurreptitiouslyusedforthedisposaloftoxicchemicals) Environmental variability and genotypic conflicts during from the industrial park enter the creek. Significant pollution could degade the value of the reproduction In families of ospreys. creek and pond as foraging sites to herons. Scholarships LITERATURECITED__ _ _ Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Post- - -- Doc toral-Fel-lowehip-(decl-lned-in-order—to-accept_post- Forbes,L.S.,K.Simpson,J.P.Kelsall,and D.R.Flook.1985.Great Blue Heron colonies in doctoral fellowship with R. Peterman,- Natural Resource British Columbia. Environment Canada.Canadian Wildite Service. Pacific and Yukon "Management.. Simon Fraser University) Region,Delta,B.C.,Manuscript Repot,78 pp. Natural-Sciences and Engineering Research Council Post- Fcrbes,L S.,K.Simpson,J.P.Kelsall,and D.R.Flook.1985. Reproductive success of Great . graduat e':Scho l arch l p• (May'86/Apr i 1 ea]• . • .• Blue Herons in British Columbia.Canadian Journal of Zoology 63:1110.1113. ' ..Slnion Fraser.Graduate Research:"Fel lowships•.(Sept..88/Aup, . site by Great Blue •,.897•. - . ': .•: :- • ;:� . Webb.R.S..and L.S:Forbes.1982.Colony establishment in art urban :. ,. ;.•. .. •...;, :; :.: .:, : : • :'...''.: Herons. Mttrrelet 63:91-92 +;Preeid•'ente Research�Stipend•,(SFU):.(May=88<A igc' 983";::•!,2- iy.x. r",tIafiirtoit mbla•Post-.S.condary Schol'icatiipsirii -lcd:• S'.'" ' '•;i;: „du rldg 1997/8e` ", •-,st-... :, 4 ;f... • . •;,,.?. • ,' "�~�•'+� +:�° �•'••• ,t:•rt,.....�;:.. ') 'e;N4�sii�.�:�r'�:1... •c."y ..i9: t:?r roib. l�.k«�yt:.;....;,:ii. '.;r._;���":if`:',•.tom., iac-°:. r''•rd;:t%,�-' �:;;: • 'p•:.,; -TIiZ}ieo$d3oleiioii••RiDCp¢uctl Rip -;teple�';.4Suiri;lV¢1•r t�•'-�f,•��h%�'`.� r �x4i:i;"e'keol'e5. >}eflbv�.o(iri!"GzEco ogy-Seiri[nay;•�l!7trjfinaf:'?'=''•`=�.in'''�- -'�'�-. `''" y ..j 4. t••-• r-t',,••ti li n•:4-•:r41;.�f'3•r:t:C:.'•:r.s•- r .... �Bblli.i•�-. '� 7 ••'�.-%v,.:. Q,r.%'••..0*r " iv:r.-:„:: •7 4':4 lV .a f{,.C- •t.J t r. 7\n t ,t s..•d "Trv.':. +.,. 4•..�,X 7�. �7;:./'tt,.•[ !',•f''ifiCiy, ,f t'•�. .f�'�~•.p,,��/��,.• A IS•. fa•: 41 NJY S•. ^.41,%.4:4,:4 Y4 . YIP• or; •s L '•iV.71 7,�„��'• '-.:.�•�.�.. tt;�,-l�ljv /•1 .0.�.'L.G-:''ram �'•�. • �_- f ��: ;.si••i�• , �.P�'N:(��...'•r•i•'#✓.'.;•,,•a' /�. t"-,w r'7-(-' ali•;hi�..a_ i.r• d•S '''r- 1`.:: ' - r,,.• 4:.`t r-•: •w..:;',..:�-:11`,• ... si k-� .f,v,4.:it •. .a t...:i•\: .t,,fY.�• i' i..-J...�:.r•�'!t')' : •,:r.•�.ti•..Y'+,+% t''�'-� .'., y'• ?':;:: • 4-186 M.5.11 Forbes,•L. S. and D. R. Flook. 1985. Notes on the occurrence 1985 - University of Manitoba, Department of Zoology - and ecology of black bullhead, Ictaluru5 mesh.. near Supervisor: Dr. S. G. Sealy, Zoology Creston. British Columbia. Canadian Field-Naturalist 991 110-111 . Thesis The feeding ecology of western grebes breeding at Duck Forbes. L. S., K. Simpson. J. P. Kelsall. and D. R. Flook. Lake, British Columbia. • 1985. Reproductive success of great blue herons in British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology 63: 1110-1113 Z'• Forbes. L. S. 1985. Extra-pair feeding in western grebes. 1981 - University of British Columbia. Department of Wilson Bulletin 97: 122-123 Zoology. dcdol ��1 Forbes. L. S. 1985. Eared grebe nesting at Creston. British PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE rjl� r�bfA�L �� Columbia. Murrelet 66: 20-21 �� 07 iB Chapman. B.-A. and L. S. Forbes. 1984. Observations on • May-August,techniciann79 tn 1984 s.f�1 _ere detrimental effects of great blue herons on breeding Field c-Yukor for Canadian Wildlife Service I+V (Pacific-Yukon region) •�,� Black Terns. Journal of Field Ornithology 55: 252-253 PUBLICATION LIST �pn,Jl� I. Forbes. L. S. and E. McMackin. 1984. Extreme aggression In l prl`��y great blue herons. Wilson Bulletin 96: 318-319 REFEREED PUBLICATIONS: JOURNALS 1nNnA :d Forbes. L. S. and G. W. Kaiser. 1984. Observations of Forbes, L. S. 1989. Prey defences and predator handling 0 breeding bald eagles In southeastern British Columbia. behaviour: the dangerous prey hypothesis. Olkos 55: Murrelet 65: 22-25 155-158. Forbes. L. S. 1982. Prey manipulation In the great blue Forbes, L. S. 1989. Colonlal!ty in herons: Lack's heron. Murrelet 63: 89-91 . . predation hypothesis reconsidered. Colonial Waterbirds 12: 24-29. Webb, R. S. and L. S. Forbes. 1982. Colony establishment in an urban site by great blue herons. Murrelet 63: 91-92 Forbes, L. S. and S. G. Sealy. 1988. Diving behaviour of REFEREED PUBLICATIONS: SYMPOSIAmale and female western grebes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 66:2695-2698. Flook. D. R. and L. S. Forbes. 1983. Ospreys and'water Ydenberg. R. C. and L. S. Forbes. 1988. Diving and foraging management at Creston. British Columola. pp. 281-286 In: In the western grebe. Ornis Scandinavlca 19: 129-133 D. M. Bird (chief ed.). Biology and Management of Bald Eagles and Ospreys. Harpell Press. Ste. Anne de Bellevue. Forbes, L. S. 1988. Western grebe nesting in British Quebec Columbia. Murrelet 69: 28-33 NON-REFEREED PUBLICATION; TECHNICAL REPORTS • Forbes: L. 5.• 1987. Feeding behaviour of great blue herons • 'at Creston. British-.Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology Forbes; L. .S. 1985'. The' nesting ecology of the western grebe . 65:•.3062-3067 •• . In' British.Coiumbla. Canadian Wildlife Service Manuscript Report. Delta, B.C.,. . . ':-Forbes•..;L': S: 1987.••Predatlon on adult.great blue herons: Is ' - ;ft.:impoeteht?%Colonl'al' Waterbirds: 10:_ 120-122 • • - Forbes,.,L•ti• S...K:•Simpson, J•.P.,KO!sal l•,• and.B.:.R:'Flook.: • . - 983.�Qreat•blisliKherori•:colonl;es:.th British ••••:• ^::•� : '''.,-. 8 Canadian WI ldl•ife.Service Mariuecrip.t'::Re•oi't}.. �1 p ••�fti �•Forbes•,?L•::$.,k1986:,The-:•t•lming..and.dlrectl'op of�•food,fllghts. �(revise��: �,Ca- •• • -.. .- _ .. r-a of. •DeltaerB:C::` d: '' .•t�..:�, .y:•.<%r'• ;v6'.�' .r!A:,.••:- ..�� � �.f"ran.'air"1•nlandeareat..bitie her Canadian•Jou n 1•. ; ,�;; 'r,.�1•'• ,�.:yr•µsr-1,L:;-•;;=:,y}�Y•- . x ::Zdologl}'•64's":667=6fi9,; • .. • :;''r:•4: `.d o 4` iiii,II.•sR�:Tri'oolcs�•' - •'y- '� :••s-,, qq`y..");° ..,• :t, • • 1989v Gre6 blue::hero'ri RillOnlqe:: tleli,Col:" ' f�c£r+�l Z.�/.: +-t:. • • • • :. ,.. .a> q i �i•.{DeltaJ�i:BLC:'.., :' s.(_'V.;i' ''•7 if.. 'y: •,i: ':}:., -,r.. .. • - • • • „ 'v :.,• •.. .••.f�/'::riqf:VI .l iR•T./!•• �•�:'1~i4,:rc: ..�.[�. i#: •yr... :-1.'•'•�=- • • • �.M1,L •:rr yy �� ti', ;:. .,:thy;,./.� t . .Y • • . • R.•.+, K •1: • 4-187 Response to Comments from L Scott Forbes: 1. Principal foraging by herons occurs off-site and not in the P-1 Pond as evidenced by movements of adult birds during feeding forays. • 2. The schedule for no outdoor construction has been revised to February 1 to July 1 within 800 feet of the heronry. Please see response to comments from WDW. 3. See response to comment 2. Disturbance will be intermittent once the project is constructed. 4. The breeding season no outdoor construction time period has been revised as mentioned in response to comment 2. Additionally,the no-development zone on Tract B has been further setback to 600 feet and an earthen berm and 20- foot tall evergreen trees added as additional mitigation. 5. Use of information on urban heron colonies in Western Washington and Oregon was judged to be most representative of the conditions at the Black River heronry. 6. This additional information has been added to Appendix B. Please see response to comments from Dr.John Kelsall. 7. Neither Tracts A or B represent feeding habitat for herons. Sampling of rodent populations during 1990 showed low densities of deer mice and no voles. Rodent runways are extremely sparse with little duff layer on Tract A. See Appendix G. _8. See response-to_comment.7._Observations of-feeding forays during-the-1990 nesting season indicated that adults feed primarily to the south and north east of the project area,probably in wetlands and streams in the Kent Valley and Cedar River watershed. 9. Comment noted. Mitigation proposed would include an earthen berm along the perimeter of the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek with planting of dense evergreens and deciduous trees and shrubs. This berm would obscure the parking areas and human activity from the P-1 Pond. 10. See response to comment 9. 11. This issue has been addressed further in Section 3.4 of this Final EIS. 4-188 • PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON To: Don Erickson p+ Z 7 !9911 Response to Comments from Susan Krems cc: Mary Lynn Myer gE(E\'ED From: Susan Krom 1. The EIS comment period was extended 15 days. Date: April 28, 1000 Subject: Blaokriver Corporate Park EIS extension request O� Due to the complexity of the subject EIS, limited resources, yrevious commitments of our experts, and delays in locating pertinent files in the City offices (files were archived by the City of Renton), we respectfully request a 15-day extension, making the deadline for comments Saturday, May 26. If accepted, please let ue know if the date mill be changed to a workday. Thank you. . Sincerely, Susan Krom 393-2411 cc: Seattle Audubon Society 4-189 • May 18, 1990 Response to Comments from Keith Peterson: • Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner 1. Comments noted. Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 108 Dear Ms. Myer, I am a citizen concerned over the proposed action to be taken regarding the development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. The current course has no apparent means to minimize the impacts of development on the wildlife inhabiting the area. I have some specific concerns. First, the plans have the buildings and parking lots placed too close to the heron nesting area. Unless there is adequate buffering, the wildlife living In the forest and rookery will be disturbed by the Increased human and automobile activity. Finally, paving the site will eliminate habitat for wildlife. Some species would not be able to survive in the area. I recommend we find a solution where the expansion of human development cooperates with the natural environment rather than conflicts with it. The time and energy - the short-term frustration - will be Insignificant when compared to the long-term benefit by all. eith P terson Kirkland O)Bzz-qus--- • 4-190 He. Hary Lynne Hyer, Senior Environmental Planner Me. Mary Lynne Hyer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton. WA 98055 Hay 23. 1990 1 09 Hay 23. 1990 1 1 0. Dear He. Hyer, Dear Ms. Myer. ' This letter is in regard to the Blaokriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blaokrivsr Corporate Peil(• • draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. 1 have a number of concerns about the proposed development, have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to Buffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton ie responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that afoot. Hy specific concerns are as follows: Hy specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areae are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. sloe, to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement. light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur, wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the Site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely. - Sincerely, • e .7x1 ,\„} k,q HD l L.A4J n) 22/f ar)F.J S s . t +R g g o.�s— ! W. ThW^MUIPHY 52$W.»u Naas��/J TOn1 Y�� Ruts,.WA 11956 !Y.(20C u1-np (2o4) .uG = 77P.3 Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under 'Sincerely," and direotly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code). and home telephone number. 4-191 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 90055 1 1 1 Renton. WA 98055 May 23. 1990 May 23, 1990 112 Dear Me. Myer, Dear Ms. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton ie responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you' for-your-consideration to-this--- - place-at-the-site.. Thank-you_for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent ieeue. — - Sincerel , %xr� 7 ly Z*4 /�- e s.1Cewooa a Mwscred Q?//#../al 7/?r-rff .7S57-/zoo A,fa,,-, e/,s2 Jro S 770 - 06&,s-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under - . your signature, print your name, add your address (including your signature, print your name, add your address (including' : city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city, state, and sip code), and home telephone number. 4-192 i Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior.Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton Dept. of Community Development • 200 Mill Avenue South The City of Renton Renton, WA 90055 200 Hill Avenue South 113 Renton. WA 96055 . Hay 23. 1990 114 Hay 23, 1990 Dear Ms. Myer, Dear He. Myer. This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I .do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too • o Placement of the buildings and .parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. .Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely, _ , • Sincerely, 37ag T'ar/< / ve /1. eni"o;, Wa, . `l�OS ,5s--13 e-r Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under' .' your signature, print your name, add your address (including' Your signature. print your name, add your address (including city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. '"city. state. and sip code), and home telephone number. 4-193 Me. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Ns. Nary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton. WA 98055 Renton. WA 98055 May 23. 1990 115 Hay 23, 1990 116 Dear Hs. Myer, Dear Ms. Myer. This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton ie responsible'for ensuring that this development does not have that affect, that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering. the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be ad ly disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o. Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place--at_the_site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. ---- -_ Sincerely, Sincerely, / / Ja/nd� 4-,Da,�4- trr . , Sa.nd .* 'Dayr 1" UAND C;EDWARDS l O a S IV. 3 g,• Dame I. AtSemegAtLaw 1>!/• NIL Sad!' D.n. WsMOW0MOWaD6)a Y 6)643-5950 V(JV�LI • Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely,' and directly under'' , your signature, print your name, add your address (including ' your signature, print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city. state. and sip code), and home telephone number. • 4-194 --- - - — • Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Hary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton. WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 117.: May 23, 1990 118 • Dear He. Myer, Dear Hs. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: Hy specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too . o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering,' the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare. and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to•any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely, ` ' Sincerely �� T itaW. - 1\-Sdi7.161116' Row(arxi s.ri SHELLIr m . GeNNE.7T 66( '1—ciy(or /ke ,T4J Ren{an ((//}- 9Poss• Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including' your signature. print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city, state. and zip code), and home telephone number. • • 4-195 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Hs. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton. WA 98055 • Renton, WA 98055 May 23. 1990 119 Hay 23, 1990 120 Dear Ms. Myer. Dear Ms. Myer. This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. - have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife willbe adversely disturbed by movement, - wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place-at--the--site. Thankyouu__for_ your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. �.' urgent issue. ---- - - Sincerely, Sincerely. G ...5„, 1 .: Sal L• Ha..-1+n y .4 i4/ Rend Wi' ?Arr.-?A5 • on, Ricaive-- ilkij ete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- E SERVICES under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under iVANTAGE TIR your name, add your address (including ' your signature. print your name, add your address (including' ode), and home telephone number. city. state. and zip code), and home telephone number. • Mike sewer mwweer wa mme scrum 12a51 "2222 . • .WA9Sa55 4-196 9 M . Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner' Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Mill Avenue South Renton. WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 • Hay 23. 1990 1 21 Hay 23. 1990 1 2 2 Dear Me, Myer, Dear Ma. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April.1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse • environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the propoeed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: • Hy specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering', the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be ad ly disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave.. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed ae to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the mite. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. . Sincerely, • Sincerely. . gr/AJ&f,/es.,z,yzl)g -e-Z—,- 7t...--"J 4-cii)9-- Aen.i.e.,,L., ,2,3- Zel,/ _,-1, -76T 7 cZei - 4 01--v—L-7LE • • 4-197 J--21L -90 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Ns. Hart' Lynn. Myer. Senior Bnvi tal Planner PLANNING DIVISION The City of Renton Dept. of Community Development CITYOF,IfNTON 200 Mill Avenue South The City of Renton . Renton, WA 98055 • - 200 Hill Avenue South • MAY 2 3 1910 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 123 May 23, 1990 ' U ECEjVED Dear Me. Myer, 1 24 Dear He. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact ae a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that effect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: Hy specific concerns aro as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering. the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be ad ly disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. ,wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. 6_,/� Please-keep me-informed-as-to-any-development-that-does-take j+laco a+ the .+ Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this I urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely, Sincerely, . �p / / �1/7/L�K-/ ��� 3 1;t y (f',c er . CARROLL27UH.PLACENE NE. AH /807 teAPON 9E/e AU F. AUBURN.WA UOO: A9-r M17)/O 2 26-p706 . Pleas. note: To couplets this letter-- Please sign your ns...under `Sincerely,' and directly under your signature. print your nase. add your address (including' city. state, and sip code), and hose telephone number. 4-198 - �- gall i == . _ ` Ha. Hary Lynne Hyer, Senior Environmental Planner Hs. Mary Lynne Hyer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development PUNNING DIVISION The City of Renton PUINNING DIVISION The City of Renton I:I1Y OF RENTON 200 Hill Avenue South CITY OF RENTON 200 Hill Avenue South Renton. WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 MAY 2 3 1990 Hay 23, 1990 MAY 2 3 1990 Hay 23. 1990 i•i EC: I VEl Dear Hs. Hyer, RECEIVED Dear Hs. Myer, 1 26 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blaokriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I 125 draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development, have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: Hy specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry.. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. • o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o • Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur, wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue, urgent issue. Sincerely, cerely, *Taco t!uaL • Tar/Am 6arrtiE,✓ ieO7 ONI(N A V NE RENTON, WA 98oS7. 22(.-87O(, Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: • To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely,' and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including' your signature, print your name, add your address (including'' city,, state, and zip code), and home telephone number.. city, state, and sip code), and home telephone number. 4-199 • Me. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner He. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development PLANNING DIVISION The City of Renton The City of Renton (:ITYOFRENTON 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton. WA 99055 MAY 2 3 1990 Nay 23, 1990 �/ Q Hay 23. 1990 itECEIVEt) ' Dear He. Myer, Dear Ms. Myer, • • This letter is in regard to the Blaokriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the fiver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development.Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: • o o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate bufferins, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare. and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o , Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. • Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as -to any development that does take place-at-the--site.----Thank-you--for--your-cone ideration to_this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely. - Sin e_reely, ye /at/It/A yortc7D 511 itr n, EI l:e r{- Z.ctie/A: C/aunl • i3 so 3 M.L«. ws-� ac2y9/ /,�A✓e,SO ea -Jib I �esi 7' ,��s,Gll�. Q8/9� �,e,.J-i./e u�a . 9gl7dr . a 55 -oiq3 - • • Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note:- To complete this letter-- • . Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely.' and directly under your signature. print your name. add your address (including' your signature. print your name. add your address (including ' - city, state. and sip code), and home telephone number. city. state. and sip cods), and home telephone number. • 4-200 �ii ''' 1 • Ms. Nary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Me. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental 1Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 May 23, 1990 Dear Ms. Myer, Dear He. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park ♦2 9 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I 1 draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I 130 have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect, that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. • o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may oocur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely. Sincerely, 1v13td r.c ss•e_ 3// lJ lu: ;4 • Ma.►'"� �u..fie r� D t 1 So/ - 5'7z1 A've• c /I,I�X l AK� ' I / Se�rr/e, le A , TIii1 044./�,ts��rr)'t' pA,h e (�o[) 7-I J 6 6 9Pod J' Ca)G 6 o7 J;�- 6���) Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including' your signature. print your name. add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city, state. and sip code). and home telephone number. 4-201 • 1pfeliiii.,461 ipti ]ipt,441itv • 43 . s Mar Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner alig w Y, • Dept. of Community Development g' laia v w b g9. ?�' ab�gg , o Z 5 g d a The City of Renton � a gg T a r� 200 Mill Avenue South + aZ o s� 9 0 0 Renton, WA 98055 � � S E • May 23, 1990 hFo �a Dear Me. Myer, 1� i0� �„ !,�t§`lvl t�r wL}j�, 2 �or ta3g This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park 131 L„•,..•,y, ,••-,3 ,i.ir`v' `"�' .t,.., �d,.3 Ea '5qq "1ti 1229° draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I ;,!y Y r•i' ;�''�••. '4 ;7r ''• a i�b Fo have a number of concerns abdut the proposed development. .+���.:,tt•..�y.:� •• •. .,,s; b a „E o Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse ;}'• i'i: .• • '"•r '; '�'�-'?'iir .,yry-. ' E 1' :'w �j environmental impact as a result of the proposed •tl,.,,;:r, _ '••'•r'•• Y a . 24,..E... avr� e development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring +P "ri• • • ;;; q " °g a3 o R that this development dose not have that affect. '; '' . 'T C Ey3 8 $3 a u o o. My specific concerns are as follows: .+. • p _ ,• 1. d w y . o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too „a, • x, 4,: r;q„r 'x. P .s g' O o a close to the heronry. •}fr , P ')1 I Y `; ••f;; �,-� `n +t r:'* E p ,a�$.2 . o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other •+' ',+tV.W'' t S'••}; LV ' •.' I g• a 5 �•c wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement. .-; Sn ' r• j light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the "y'�'`%''..' S ,•:".'I�'ok� {.1.x % c g heron will probably leave. • tK•! , pox g y �' '_ � f U• L� 1 , { ���LONw C o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other P.. 't 'r�`{ ' ' h i;404 ., ogt1 a ocv wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. • 1r r� 1 t' ' :i' t b`di.. _'�".,1- Please keep me informed as to any development that does take L.`A�_:._ ., . :_., x u ' place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this E$Aij{ 1111114 .�5� — — urgent issue. — — — — — ill! $• i s.+� aSincerely. tin .4:1 3.yLa a/a• )1 as hi 15ql 7O 'G o...`"� ' cle4, a ,+1,r�-•.f g:: �MON . l gi , Care I Ly h 0 )1 Cq I �,, 217., d ,v« • O ■MO/ , p1,3 f9, . f a b� w a� t Yip _gx1 l @g au hw rhA igg .(f) i.0 ■aaa, gr,q-n-y3 CD .Q) i liql 1411 ! .Please note: To complete this letter--Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under ag• ISelikr3givt/41—J m 1$ your signature, print your name, add your address (including ' Cu) . EiS v .m Z a.g g Y • city, state, and sip code), and home telephone number. . (1) 6 . 19'e1 g4 a i :' . , .. 1 Ri2. ..,. oc 4 - i g 1 1.RI Vis l 111 4-202 = — _ l l _ - •.4= 1 . • • IAF . • a /-� 2 - Me. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner [ .. Dept. of Community Development r--- The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South �o 1 = Renton. WA 98055 �< 7 V :::r2: .1:::r. 2 61111 1 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park 'I J draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I (•' % ms iv 704 have a number of concerns about the proposed development. ,,n.::,.., -% Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse is 411) .-• '- '� 4`b' environmental impact as a result of the proposed Ci • .,. �• •' development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring � ' ..4=. r o ,r ' `, that this development does not have that affect. • z C",• •t o N7t �'o My specific concerns are as follows: .wc.r o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too 01 01 • •' --•`• •-• 1 W close to the heronry. 2 _ �i` : o Without adequate buffering, the herohe and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, 0. �A_ `,P3 � ‘l� V light. noise. air and water quality. glare, and the Z I P . 1,t co ' : 3N heron will probably leave. • k _i J Y ;f. -, W , . o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other Z • �i' �u 1- w o f , a�E wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. 1,1 . t l.,,5 .. ✓'� r h vt i< �� Foo .c 4 LY- . �,., et aat2 2I- e U J,J ¢ Please keep me informed as to any development that does take x, p 0..v f 3o,4�1 o • place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this el. ; ..- ,\, y�o.2� urgent issue. .`i • ��4 tom•. /tT e i o Sincerely, • • 1.�„ a r� (47L a 3•• 3 Div i - 1 Y 71S now/ • • J • 0 i� a 2- i f I •11 c Please note: To complete this letter-- ee e S Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under It 3 a. i your signature, print your name. add your address (including' q) city, state, and sip code). and home telephone number. c\,, L!M U3 • 4-203 ,... . . • , • , F....,,-7,-..-„, .......t.,r7-.:„.--.:...-... .i...........,..,;.,..-...gs.,i......,p-f5t,nr-. ;..:...:;...7 north of the rookay.and the c Res*cuers hurry r ~:..,1::,:i743,,,;,f..i...,:_.-.7.z, >,:;.".., , .....,-,,,1 „. :,,...,t ,•I of Renton has promised 336,C riA.;,„?4•Tq-ii...., .12.,..,.4. • •,..,. ,..,„.a.. ,:_i.r"-_-....1..:':i.:,..'..f.' more,asking prices for the 20 . , ei ,, ,...4.4.4..,..*,.:-.. ,,,,..„„ :,. 3ex0 acres have reportedly2 ,e. been • r '- '...T-44'..%.1';-. -..-ivg:T4..4-- %.'''''-I?'''C.-.:"•77jf:::i 'You d"on't find these . Faatt_5,-7...,4..._.*-'''•(-;•C s7.:4 .,-.L.;?..•15',7:....`,'•'r...' ••••••• to save heron .. . . s,...,...,4„..4...a....0v.3..-pr-,•.•..., .4. 1:4-•'-kiirt7:-.-->'--1,-- ,..z.-- r'l!• • . .., .,'Z;f,•....,..:;;;1-"r".....-4 anymore,"the crowd was told '.i...'r-if'r--,-1 Bill Hutsinpiller,Renton's sup; ...;• .--i;,-,- -,,,-;-..,:s r•".'....-k.li • .47,•-- ....c.r.;:i• , -. .. .. .-- ,....--.H Intendant of recreation."It we. Y,.--?,;,-.'"---izr-- .-y..c.ir ''.?"''• • • - •• - ,11..-, critical time five rookery in tim •,•,...„.._...„.„ :•.......n. -•-t..i.':.1'4.;-. • .. .- . .'...i..1 -; • tim years ago.Ni -• iri3"..,--. ",,y-7.i.:-• -..;';•-. -. -:.•.-s. * ve :.;‘•.f..- s a er e- e •.......,.....„.,.,, K--•-.-, • . ".."' • , --,., •---...,-.1 Also on hand were four .....;-,....-.i..--.2,•0.1.-r4--,--iri•••,,I.. .......,: ..:,:,:. •-, '....,..•-z- .;‘,...s.n.5.-1,../...,11 U.S.Rep.Mike Lowry and stir ,r..7.:---a.,-,!.;;:f.4.-;!:44.-V ,''''.i!"41"..Z '1, .,•-'‘,.r.k.!,..•;;;.--.:''l Sen. Mike•Patrick.. R-Rentc by BM Dietrich view the iffids'plight •:'..' . •:-..4.,:•.,••-•.'sr'...i.z:1!•-A,5',...7-?;..ti,..,- .-..4,,,,_-,4;/. . • •... r.-*:?-,,•:. •!..•,;%1 'both of whom said S53-milli Pain staff reporter The pond.and preke?verin the Kr-,.. ,..,,,,-".•:-.;. ,.'''' - ...c.-i.,..,:..i'. ." . .-.;',W,S. 1:',...',;-,:i. ..'--,.•,44 appropriated for land acquisiti former channel of the now-de- -s*':,,7;c113t-TOrriF-z•. ••••: •• '-' - •Vi.,,,W;;-'isi...-.!'. by the Legislature this ye RENTON - One of the re- hint Black-River. Is home to ---4-..t:,-...„-P'if. •••,4'..."1.4 .•••,-:''••14 ,,•:• - •, s.k•-••• •...."--7e-"L' 3 should help acquire such siti gion's newest and biggest heron about'85 breeding herons. 50 Ir.,'"o• i:c..2• i..'-z..,...-,..•,;.',....;.- ..•.:..'-....-.4.'^ • -",,i The Renton rookery is on nesting areas Is as besieged as other Species of birds,fish,bea- ..,...-..,_.•.1 purchase priority list , . the Alamo,and it remains to be vet and raccoons.Audubon natu- .0;-.../i.4.-•.:-..i. .'7..- . ---i-^11."z-:-• 5 „-.........-i'./r:7-•0. - 1/ 'This is only going to seen If money from nig County alias said. i---....;• - . :,....,...ti::illg,i LI*-./.-,;;;14.z,...:, .,,...--.v.T.r.,/,-,kit-,:, ---...1 protected by putting It into SOT taxpayers,Renton and the Lego- 'The Renton city refuge near . . ... .;.• -......1•.....f.; •.i• - -'..'"". .;.,••-:- • -:",-••".'fi --•'^..'-'•1lund of public ownership."SE 'Mae will ram it In time. the.southern end of Lake Wash- Lowly,who co-chairs a coaliti; In the past five years great Ington is a reminder of what once A male blue heron tiles to its nest In a rookery near Renton. seeking S450 million over • blue herons have built more than were four square miles of wet- I years for land acquisition. 20 nests on an island of cotton- lands In the area. sewer plant and a 137stoty build- and filled much of the property, Preservationists are In a ra wood trees.The sanctuary,result- Much of that flood plain b ing under construction, but construction was halted by against time, however. Stork ing from the aeation of a drain- now a business park.The over- First City Developments has the state Department of Ecology land values are reducing t . age pond by the U.S.Soil Coosa- looking hills,which an historian proposed developing an addition- because recessaly permits had puichasing power of such or vation Service In 1984, Is evi- told onlookers once had cedar al 150 acres around;the nesting not been obtained. Environmen- byupto25percentayelr. demo wetlands can be rebuilt trees 15 feet thick. are now area with two sevenistory office tal•impacr statements on the of Agricultural and business k Now, however, new develop- crowned with apartments and buildings end a five-story parking flee buildings are due this year. hies.meanwhile,have blocked meat threatens to crowd the brushy alder. garage,said Susan Krom.who is Although a recently approved bill In Olympia requiring no r herons out of the site.Yesterday The heron rookery is also organizing a campaign to save King County open-space bond loss of wetlands.Patrick said I about 75 people led by Seattle surrounded by a railroad track, the rookery. I issue has pledged 3624.000 to- fate of the bill,stalled three yea Audubon Society turned out to two roads,a rock quarry,a Metro The firm has already dear-cur ward purchase of wetlands just remains uncertain. .‘, . e . . . -_, t•J. 2 .. . .. • . . .. . 1 , . • • REN ToN HERON PF\R• • . . . . .. . • •C. 5 -....____. _.. 44-nAt.c. . . tog-rc.Aai Cs , .--.-'''-: '''' •s'-; °'' '''''' '' —,.. 1 _l' s....-s'irlk•-,_ e;4''': .„apiti LA, . •,..,,,r .., .4:.4.4..,..:, ..•!, . • VtZt4aL -.iir is,..•! ..p--• '. •, v',v...._'Ti. i•h!cr^. .s..414••• ),. ..,.• .: Cau.rtei .444,4 .. • ...---- , ';:t.'. L -,tit. • . . ".41-.11.1'4•171) ...,, • \., •. .••!...7.-- -- ,-;:•i - • 5 ;a:!1:4..?. • i , ,• . trOgE5r ) rit. _.,ESE R.,:/°' dolp . ,Itrott52.7`.,•4..1. J.,-."------13 iefu.ki vs/IT L kW OS 1 •S • (rittaAvii ......7 •••'. •• .1-il bt pumly. 01 - • Rs 4filt-rcco sirE • '•• • • IFLANT vv.' ratv.mkaielr• Irs%)_1„.........c ., .....= O... 00.o isdriDi N.,)„. ,a, .... ...... .. ............ ......" PUOLIC tao"Lki..•AL( ..."... L.," Of-emir- • PAIL ._ -• Plkerricrill -1- ...• alepke rftrZr.ca )1 ( rIC_: OUit-O,LIGS 1--11 I • .- et% ts prtf..t int, .; f r,orrice co•-rp.2 jti . PC443613e7.1 _ 0/66.4gp.,..443...7• N . ..6„,. -) . 0 . . 2 . z ,. . . . - • -.• .• . . , . . . , .. . , lt-t•g/ s . 11.1e.tr,z erum‘gow's`r6j . • Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 Hay 23, 1990 • Dear his, Myer, 133 Dear Hs. Myer, 1 34 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. Hy spedifio concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave, heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely, Sincerely, /� X�,(ZI--.4 --/&e-,-..._ Qt Iasi go .�p �O Z �j91 �0, ca,,, h. A. 9 fa$4 asp 7 fi 0 Please note: To complete this letter-- vU - Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please note: To naeluns r 'S letter-- Please sign your nut under Sincerely." and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including ' your signature. print your name, add your address (including ' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. pity. state. and sip code), and home telephone number. 4-205 He. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Hs. Mary Lynne Hyer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 • May 23. 1990 135 Hay 23. 1990 136 Dear Ms. Myer, Dear Hs. Hyer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse PrPrimarily, 1 do not nottwantathe heshet nry to tto proposed ffer development.environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect, that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: Hy speoific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o PlacePlacemen the theobuildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. ry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may. occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. _ urgent issue. Sincerel r Sincerely. • r/iVoMA S L. StaeSe.r —..., c.).... f ,e cur sa. d1 .Ic . 9io,vo2 ' . sQ�tte.. 4.,. Rana ee Al w, I4/.4. Fr°.4. .226- 934? . Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under your signature. print your name. add your address (including' city. state, and sip code). and home telephone number. 4-206 r - • Hs. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner The City of Renton Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South • The City of Renton Renton, WA 98055 200 Hill Avenue South ' 1 37' Renton, WA 98055 May 23. 1990 1 38 Hay 23, 1990 Dear He. Myer, Dear He. Myer. This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park have a number of concerns about the proposed development. draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse have a number of concerns about the proposed development. environmental impact as a result of the proposed Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse development. The City of Renton ie responsible for ensuring environmental impaot as a result of the proposed that this development does not have that affect. development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, e. Without adequate buffering, the herons and other light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, heron will probably leave. light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other • wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this Please keep me informed as to any development that does take urgent issue. place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this • urgent issue. Sincerely, Sincerelyot . ....„144014e,, 2..4441.7-rt ;171.-. #-_J.. ,, ara.A.. ,,40/A,A64.drele-Set" 0.47 /1/se 9io ,v �P°ip� �39.4 /Pe.w7 N, L 'A. 9ro.s'4 - P "Q161/ � il/ t� -tad-- 9.3 Al Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including ' city, state, and sip code), and home telephone number. 4-207 • Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 . May 23, 1990 May 23, 1990 • Dear Ms. Myer, 139 Dear Ms. Myer, • 1 40 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry tosufferadverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect, that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My specific concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and g parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave, quality, glare, and the o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. —Sincerely. —_ Sincerely, — ------ Sincerely, . V1r'rAnJ G. Good= '�Gb�Ai Ir` - ,o.,' ,f. 36 " G 2 0 3. So 2L&4' �� ROA)70.4 A. 75'o 1-Z . It-UASS (yW . 1U.2+ y -1Yla� 18032—. Please note: To complete this letter-- $$oZ O 6 Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. 4-208 _ _ 7 — Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental PlannerlANN!N6DIVISI0N Me. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South 200 Hill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 May 23, 1990 Dear Ms. Myer, 141 Dear Ms. Myer. 142 This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily. I do not want the heronry to. suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. Hy specific concerns are as follows: Hy speci'ie concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement. light, noise, air and water quality, glare. and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. Sincerely, �, / 7 / Sincerely. Kit si7�1 ccx�c.. r-in.cco.Y ae4;24d-•1770z/1-..--- 322.5 to/'t I# .&"1 Di . u1 Fr-0 4.7H(:1y4.) fVM.-1--• cLD K_ 0- gt3053 IGI8 (J 6 • 3m �4e •L{oec) A. 9 TO St 7ZEN r", k.1i .255 goo S. Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- • Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under your signature. print your name. add your address (including' your signature. print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. oity. state. and zip code), and home telephone number. 4-209 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Ms. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South The City of Renton Renton, WA 98055 • 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 • May 23, 1990 143 May 23, 1990 144 Dear Ms. Myer, Dear Me. Myer. This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to.the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. 1 have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My epeciiic concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare. and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. place at the site. Thank. you for your consideration to this urgent issue. Sincerely, • Sincerely, --22e)atAAfre, Mrs. Ku onaloi ��►r Nag PL I WA'- '/80STo a).6- 9276 Please note: To complete this letter-- Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under Please sign your name under "Sincerely." and directly under your signature, print your name. add your address (including ' your signature, print your name, add your address (including ' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city. state, and sip code), and home telephone number. • 4-210 _- _ s = - Hs. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner He. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development • Dept. of Community Development The City of Renton The City of Renton 200 Hill Avenue South 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 145 Renton, WA 98055 May 23, 1990 Hay 23, 1990 .1� Dear He. Myer, Dear Me. Myer, j;s".V�i This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park This letter is in regard to the Blaokriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer ad environmental impact as a result of the proposed environmental impact as a result of the proposed development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring that this development does not have that affect. that this development does not have that affect. My specific concerns are as follows: My spedifto concerns are as follows: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. close to the heronry. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the heron will probably leave. heron will probably leave. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. urgent issue. CQ/w areJ S. CT is tv Sincerely, Sincerely, 1 iide- cii, ;Tw oltT h A✓e• -SO- • ReNToK p1- /,Pt S Po 7r al O -L, r"/e. e N/ iri teC T tV e-7 7 Ad r`r w i 4 G-/Ff Con't of ,ei 2 r 7" AKd .e o 4 .Se c o i,id 174,w X 7 ' ' i' 7'., Ai(e f,R A Goad .r Ise-1,A 7 lefv .6:,e all w.lri,'nAA !vi// Ptoue Ye eT4eet. 4 tea..r, iv;%4ovTe'J% ro 'AY,dAde" 1 APeL 7'&. r TAt en✓i lam me,,T4 bfaTs ,FRe T,A-,,,,d Te ,►la c, Ater4,Ai7" F1o"i Go✓eR' 'eJ Please note: To complete this letter-- Pledge note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under "Sincerely," and directly under Please sign your name under `Sincerely,` and directly under your signature, print your name, add your address (including • your signature, print your name, add your address (including' city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. city, state, and sip code), and home telephone number. , I Je kivi b...R I;me c,ok rd be s)..e.,.7-.477;4- it' orI1'C ` dit'ea r, 4-211 June 3, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development Me. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner City of Renton Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South The City of Renton Renton, WA 98055 200 Mill Avenue South Renton. WA 98066 Dear Ms. Myer, May 23. 1990 I have a number of concerns about the proposed Black River Dear Me. Myer. 148 Corporate Park development and the draft environmental impact statement dated April 1990. In my opinion, the 147 This letter is in regard to the 8laokriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Iardct Statement, dated April 1e80. I precedencee over this development. As a resident on Lake welfare ofthe blueheron nesting grounds shouldtake have a number of concerns about the proposed development. Washington visited daily by one or more herons to fish off Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer ad of our dock, I feel strongly that preservation of these environmental impact as a result of the proposed magnificent birds should be our highest priority. I do not development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring want this nesting ground to suffer as a result of the that this development does not have that affect. proposed' development. I hope it is within your power and responsibility to accomplish this. My specific concerns are as follows: My concerns with the proposed development are: o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heronry. a) Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too close to the heron nests. o Without adequate buffering. the herons and other wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement. • b) Without adequate buffering, the herons and other light. noise. air and water quality. glare. and the heron will probably leave. wildlife will be disturbed by movement, noise, deteriorating air and water quality, and possibly o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other reflective glare off of buildings and automobiles. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. There is a high likelyhood that this intrusion into the heron's habitat will cause them to leave. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take c) Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take • Si lys place at the site. Thank you for your consideration of this •�a�ei _ urgent issue. ' incerely, ' - ce: ,4,1.17E . Paul D. Shafer 4t,4' 0#4' '" CV 11230 Rainier Avenue South Seattle, WA 98178 (206)772-1902 Please note: To complete this letter-- Please sign your name under 'Sincerely.' and directly under your signature, print your name. add your address (including' city, state. and sip code). and home telephone number. 4-212 = _ Hs. Mary Lynne flyer. Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development PLANNINODIVISION The City of Renton 1.I1`f ld IIEIITUN 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 MN 2 4 1990 • Hay 23, 1990 RECEIVED Dear Hs. Myer, This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park Hs. Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner 150 draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I Dept. of Community Development have a number of concerns about the proposed development. The City of Renton PIAflNINu01VISION Primarily, I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse 1 49 200 Hill Avenue South (:i1fOhAN:ON environmental impact as a result of the proposed Renton. WA 98055 development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring MAY 2 •; !990 that this development does not have that affect. May 23. 1990 I 1 ECEIt1Eu Hy specific concerns are as follows: Dear He. Myer. o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too This letter is in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park close to the heronry. draft Environmental Impact Statement. dated April 1990. I have a number of concerns about the proposed development. o Without adequate buffering, the herons and other Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement, environmental impact as a result of the proposed light, noise, air and water quality, glare, and the development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring heron will probably leave. that this development does not have that affect. o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other Hy specific concerns are as follows: wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too Please keep me informed ae to any development that does take close to the heronry. place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. o Without adequate buffering. the herons and other cerely. wildlife will be adversely disturbed by movement. light. noise. air and water quality, glare, and the ./i/ heron will probably leave. D�d k,'J o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other {✓� / • wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. ////2 Sa-73 P/ Please keep me informed as to any development that does take Rya,.. um Ze0 place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this ) 2, 7—Ir.�yy urgent issue. (a) Sincerely.41F:4 • Please note: To complete this letter-- C411 Please sign your name under `Sincerely.' end directly under 44-1 reel lnhlYe your signature. print your name. add your address (including' 904-N • city, state, and zip code), and home telephone number. A L R6,#7110 NN.4 9V-C6 • 4-213 • • May 21, 1990 Me. Mary Lynne Myer. Senior Environmental Planner 1'IARNINiiDIVISION Dept. of Community Development PIANNINGOMSION 1•s:/:ir pFhiu;,! The City of Renton f.QY Of RENTON 200 Mill A South Mary Lynne Myer FIN/2 4 MORenton. WA 88055 la 2 s 1990 Senior Env. Planner Dept. Comm. Development May 23, 1980 200 Ni Avenue South ii CEIVCU RECEIVED of Renton, WA 98005 151 Dear Me. Myer. 152 This letter ie in regard to the Blackriver Corporate Park draft Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1990. I Dear Ms. Myer: have a number of concerns about the propoeed development. Primarily. I do not want the heronry to suffer adverse environmental impact an a result of the proposed I am writing in response to the EIS on the Blackriver development. The City of Renton is responsible for ensuring Corporate Park. that this development does not have that affect. This development will have a critical effect on the heron My specific concerns are ae follows: rookery. It will most likely cause the herons to leave. The proposed buffering is not adequate. The herons(and o Placement of the buildings and parking areas are too other wildlife as well) will be disturbed by light, noise, close to the heronry. water pollution, air pollution,and daily movement of people and their vehicles. o Without adequate buffering. the herons and other wildlife will be ad ly disturbed by movement, I feel that this area should be set aside as a park for the light. noise. air and water quality, glare, and the herons. There are other locations for an office park, but heron will probably leave. there are no other nesting sites for herons in King County. It is vitally important that the Blackriver Riparian Forest o Paving the area will eliminate habitat for other and Heron Rookery is preserved. wildlife. Local extinctions may occur. Please keep me informed as to any development that does take place at the site. Thank you for your consideration to this urgent issue. - Sincerely, — -Sincerely, • e- 40- Qlt�[�,(� 1 Mice Jje �a7 L!/l..?z.•.rex/u ct•. .c Barb Holt Y 479 Bronson Way N.E. Rpi:O A* �• ` � `'1, f)K , Cigd S S Renton, WA 98056 • ROA c��e4 J..) 3 G 7C Ems. Please hots: To mplete this letter-- Please sign your name under 'Sincerely.' and directly under your signature, print your name. add your address (including' pity. state, and sip code). and home telephone number. • • 4-214 • • May 22, 1990 Mary Lynne Myer PLANNINGDMSION Senior Environmental Planner O.HYO.,F.IIi4N Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave. S. Wel 7 4 iIOO Renton, WA 98055 r;FCFIV i) Dear Ms. Myer, 153 I an very concerned about how proposed development will adversely affect the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. We are already encroaching on their habitat enough as it is. Proposed placement of future buildings and parking areas are much too close to the heron rookery. Without adequate buffer zones, herons and other wildlife will be disturbed by movement,, light, noise, air quality, and glare. Furthermore, paving the area will eliminate habitat for other wildlife and local extinctions may occur. It is not such a great leap of common sense to know that we only adversely affect our own well being when we begin to tamper with the health of an environment whose intricate interdependencies we ignore for the sake of short-lived profits for a few individuals. Please work to prevent devlopment of this site. Sincere} Phil Polizatco 4709 Meridian Ave.' Seattle, WA 98103 4-215 ' .' and _ , ',_. .'-. :.) , - i" • gimp , . . - . . , _ ' ---- . . 91Z-t • • ••• •:.•' •-.-'. ; •••-1- -----•-• :- . . • • _______. _ ._......... .. ' I _ • • • -. , ,. LW)1.7rIA4.517017-1 LI 19111 111TWIT519-STT7JaMpUgl/21,0 ..--7-....• ! .:•'-'!::-.-•I' 40 q L.-cif#trim s di.xtb i 04.7.313-AXTMITzoOCIV1734771 . ...-,-; L. .:-:---------. -------.---------- - • •-• --- -- --- •' —CIPCM--01.212•171151.31111741.14 4,0.4! )..1171S-2C1771-101rr--7 ___... . .. •- •• • • • • • _ . . . -p.71:074cgurnanr-ltimu-gril-wrop 1 so id.4-s-ximr---c _.------ -- --- ....__ __ __ __. _ _____....____. . --—-- 01:11-9:10".)712C„Itaill511.1,rireFkraig3:1— .._ . _ ________...._._._.... . . ___ ... .... . • i ---------- ___—• • •••---•---- ---- I--p..7-nztraTeqn-lou acranxera9.rprcirtravolicurprivifoogm' !-----uvw----s-rniag---AgpmfgazOw (..,0_07f--;• irrxt4 1 • .. . .... _.. . ... . . . .. ..... .... . . .. ..... . . " ........ .. . .. . . . . . ... ..- . . - -.-- . .-- --_-,-,..- .PLA.u.i. ii-ii 6 0,1:1 -,1147111131,TJITEKTOTTITA-7g1TTOW -, - _____ --•-- ••• • -----• •- -- • -! --1:1-470197W41-.C14.110 dl,10fTSTVOL.pui.051,1.1 .pri - .. :.- , ___. .__ _ — -- ----•-•-•------1.----------- •---tiv-p-cAncrottcons-rh1.901-.4-a 4 193 uck-FrIn-cr.'-a-pcum . .. . _............... - •• •• . , . ---130 17 iScaogcl-tin* P-frS .i.t.4 crvi-din: ... . -17rirr5Treisurorr-Acto-A-huvw vs-.1.11q `35r)J ?Li+ dq, • . . . . . —__ _ . . .----- — • 1 ...-.. -------t--------- ----tow 51144- 11pdgi ;hod wAr2.3 1.) ...)bn 199L.ps i _ ________. _ . .. ._ _ ... ........... . .. . . . . ........ .-•------- • • • • -••- si 5.11441,19#16 • . 1 1 -I • 1 i . • r _ -- . - • - • • -• •••• , - -zoniciwu-A-05-pup . ._________ ___.... _ .. .. ...... puosciars-ocrizcm---g-opq--;74-gm-vm„55.D.icfcce:.. . _ • —53(34-40-0:100-VDTICUNITPXDIS.IXO J9 .1-rhi Pi ,411 ----- ! .. . ... . . .... --........ .. .. ... ........_....... ...... ............... ..._ ..... ........ ........... . .---—--Ciattriaon-axds-s vt-puv-s-5w1:14,-rm-ardcri:bei mot-— fst-,--u-9cf:,-1.1zirjo-Jr19-spxcliav-6(3.1v4aFidn--4Trel-eroP(4 I --••-------------00-cps--cyrpp w-Lisiv- • - . .i),..?iprilipv=7-• --- - ...--1-7------ • •IP1)nZrW:1TrfJriTlr-r°CllWdCIGtrhi"-iClt9}•SCTCV-5.1--S.Ite!--7- -- —•••• .--.?..tp-1..0-4z;to'siuricivcrinocriztrria:rpgai ---gcr-ritivvi.-- i • ____ -------•-----• • -•---— -------- .•krixfo".".1 auil 51v rurrn.-,i ay.x-Trgo-hcitx--7-#.4. p---iflozs..4)..)ci ur=rirTnT! ,.....____ -.;o-40 bo.rptinc f..nojx4 ciaj.57,JvArofircop-prp_-0, -- ----tri-a-v-o-gorPa3CIDTSIYT?Cl.FC10"a1;Pd7p7701 :11-1a-T — --- .. - Li 2.E41:4.4)./SUOD WA),$.1 I.li-. .A19.1. 110(1 cl9ut sluu.11,115,--4-acpz2fratircra:fv-a:gqr•cgmrangg —Ouri-T.aw1-4-0-72firoi(-si ;.30.ixioui AjDT:it PCIVS1ratiC/19 p.-- *hi 100 -tronii-affig-gc4---4-em.o.LpTIATTg-T-447.).-ne,f119: ---• ••-------•--------------1------- - ----pgrA.:,?Xic7J1UP7-r-g9103:617,01;pr-sit44. bvi.upatr-cuos . . .,:...: . 1 .. ! • • —7 Gi;g3Ci071,7rarTFCCIOGIIVI qt•.A-1 06-i7Z-V • ! . . . 1 4*r:I1 j ,if: . , . 4' t pth ,A.\,49,zf,.... 1 i. .1 ; t., . / 4.‹../. .. , - , ; :.:i .1 ....r �.� D .. , �. • P o -✓ (z.7., :.. . ,. _ ,` 1 .; , . , --. , c, .4 0 . _ • • !.. P I I • � i e. t4 L:( • I i• . j 2' ,,,, fD I 4-li ' . ( 0 z. . 'e, . . • s •,,,\ (-( Q.,' 19 r ' . .A . • • . \ \ � Pn . .. - . .. . \\ ' 9 - . .,..(2.) Do 1r'ov Utiwl tbcst L ird..5 mov„a ? or N .--i N kaegA r T Jc�n : s . __ . .. _. ._. (-BvAK SiHr8"0 . orr-.,___.-.... ,-_-_;,'.--,,,,..;,,q, 4111W.it';F:;5.77- V `.� --------7—c---- I ��� lit J 0�1iP r9rr �. 1' r i ,i li I. r..f =p ,, . . Z.- 1 ' . - i •/ ,i/i .0 \It> , I 1 . I' 4a, --iv,t4,4 .......?3 1 p , .(_, ..( #- u . 1f 'i 1111 _ . P---, y 7 6 .' .(0—Th I. , , , . . _. . • i Po , , • /Gs j ICJA)f p,, • Al All— . 0 ( N...---- I ; 1 r j .' j} 6., iis-•!-...i,# /Ill • i ). (%\ • s 4 --. i - :.....F,,„ ,. .. ... , , . - .:: . 0, ,,./. ...... ,. .. . /a , i . ., ! cr- /-\ :- ��- L. ./' O o U -- ---- -- - ._. -- . ---- -. r n r T nO✓ V I R n • • • • i . ': . . . . , ,,,,. .. . 1 • 00 cV ., iaz, • .i. . _ _.---7,-.4— ,-.--,*•'', Iii • ��;:..-_.:1ji JJ_ �C\2 voo�er••• (. 1 i. . • .1 );:i!•'•// \s .6.,..c,tz 9\,Aces .1,,c b 1U E -i . :F N- cz.^.po ' a.14.12.. - if ifi � o..j c ovn . ejv ;_ki e %\ \\e' � s I -\\,.11 fi....4 LAs,kk - c60,1 . cc0% wavy\ `bW4\ v\ 0.\00.(\60 I:e ' ?� • , Jl' \pss ." -;:;&:".".-"" IP (i qiick`.- lvt, '� ' . \,. . ' ' ; mil\ct - \cIv d. ,, - "1/1.`;��V ,' b e5 , %, ) \^'� s `mac• .. S 1 c o r Naha �. Stuck- a s y o cA pre Decea- jkoks# ,Rod sr�ft. one-. -�-0 say I go�- pack. -� m - � a�nn `11 . . . . Qa.�Ly w � s1� - :1ra. 4- o u� S to - '"tea- r, 5A J3 c �- ` - `` p u►, W O VA. �© s 2.a��� ac�.i ov � ,Rg -I-0 -}-ea P‘e--"ase- . chow rn ►�otan, oc c�ea�vet© cQ . 040AIla s� �-la P t�� Nou may b \/o u 'V� sioPtritm W . wave- a- '-ee" ` * aAr-eatly, b‘A.A. -x. A. d, ra £ �e-�-e P eck 51tAce.reWl waobal� s ho �. �t,.a,�� I S :r4(3Z �! can. a1\ o 4- �`�,.lycove ies, '--'a-r "1�i. 'fie- '� 'a k5 b ck V-Mewa a v421) k &tort, . -NANA-re. its3/4e o WM . "beta. tea. Zugrvd*. y .be - -- 1-2, 1• D11-' Li 1 tVIVil 4-219 • _ _ $ tti . . _ . ea ii . ., 4300trn21-4-ttettitivacer. Ago A MEADS!NEWSPAPER • WEDNESDAY MORNING ' APRIL 4,1990• • Ri ik HIP1i:111iq 3717 :::i.41s•if. ,�� ,�r,Y�''.E '``P ii• S li•A, P•tirr•"tc•Tly 4414. * idly ..a. 11 as 3 ip‘;'...v"-1r r: a «iJ i+ .n.t.IL'-- ���}}},,,1.., .1 j. G7F r ;A 1 '1.. _ - dills ' •I• ' ff ,l 't.i't iyrlJ , trt4 �';?. y fJ� c��} � c4-.cr ltitfl ..mi • • f t + i \1 .a f 4 F'Y x {r+� x as4 y- li• t.'"/, if• l' tii'14 :t . + r}',1t 7.1. 1 f,•i 1,tt .. •2. • p r j"tir l t. 7�c cl 1.' J•., • s s¢as ip pp f± 1 f.� 1 .i f l� a y �\,. 7 .. 1 ty �f i�Yt•.'S i,tn i( I � il7YQddi? a. r'��.: `1 l,'.1,1``e �'� yit) `:� v� � � �,:.iL�� �� y j�ett, ` , •{ik, ,, 1�� � if1t_ '�` 1 ��" �1� 't'�J.c, 4V _ -67 i ",-*.` •';.;.. M it '.L'v 1,) ; Dbr+1\ ri w - r l�;y( f '.V' -. ]✓'•' .r Yr '>Ir '{t a. 9 11 4 iJ.-" 'i A i tr . Ai fF + ��� v .1, q , `ems. 7_ . !91*WI • i A'i % rl jP� +?vat t r :ri'in�fV t + r' lr y 3' ''''•..c=4 r Fil ��...iE+F�7�� C r• ii L44 'R, tt�}f- Ctr-�/.. ,1 f;t i)�+I.Y ^'Sr• ►� t-ar , ,.. l7 ' + H`' - 0. " �,: �e tflx ,. ,-�p: c 1 c l: c t N f` l i Fb Ycj➢J,`-r' C o ..01:, 4w t 1 �_. n .a. ry 1 IFre1 i✓ :.T^ 7 '2 Y . .1f 'F � � 1 , v- 4. 4?! h .+.'it:�'a.._ 3 +` �, 4 tSO?'i '.t.\,,.. }.�i•u�r' t: ►,Jtslc:1',14.;e me`µ• _, ... _-_ ,/ ` l� ES.. f+ ^, r -i 4,1 IS• • r... • S c�^W,..r1P'rt,`... ;LJ a. i•r•�ifrol �:r �•ri''„..A:i' il'...+' j ixp.:i y':`GG....`\7'. . .-.- • ,..: 10: fa* , - ..1. ii%t �: k ."4.-Al.: V Sr.:),74?ie...ck:vel,;T.:1: Faso ,a.,,% „.-t-i- ' a�' ; fG• •' • `' l �{�1 ••�:4:. 1(3r i ac Ch...i a+. 1 1 y �-e I�] � • l::-.ii•. - t , p .} '1 Ay,.4. �.o\� h. � Pr 'F.�C7 .C,��' �Z` !"�M '�ik•u: 3-=�y5�7Q5L►"'.oL�'[..S:i�.".�'. f !� © N N �f A. irmrir. ea5ei Ib ( bti ,' Ica " .I it+) t (Ve-fw Lands( 1 i I( . _13 . o.ni mai., �� . a u s C T. e S p c c i A /l ...._ -, birc 's . rfa oref- b� r� -_ 1 3 - the. C3 _ _ - • okiren , ...4,...„,.•$0,0k4rf Ar,: •1, if/P '. .......mue,,161., _ I. ,a,41cark 4 .6t. .....vit,,, ,r ,. it , CavOl ••• •-•• ,.'4 NI i , „its, .., . ,. . . • ..... :. , , , _ rit -, .v ;'• ,' I ,' ulna ti ".•:ai /�yej • 1 ..<N..' - - .•it, 0 -4'. Ticli TipAw-r----. .-. . •:;',.,:t• A fu- 5.-•.t:',.,t4;344,4* -'.i• k r7 vitt ''•81.:ti I L.:A i.-.--ig .,.: .:... :.; • . 1 , ,....., -ir , ::. ..:.; ‘,),.,„.. , • . . , pi. 1,_ ..,.:. •••1- .V>• .' ' -it!] :' i• .-• •"L'Il• kk , et. ‘''•;' i....4. ''z'amill .. ''..t.,1•1 ' • /A 4•>.;r ,,,k,.• • ••a•f• ., . • . 'tr.. < ,•. ,- :411r,..V.17:1'.11-g.c... :';t.. 4 VII* . - .•awe: ----•::::.- . .,_ - ..q 4 •1 ". sqr9A''-•41:el..;;° 11•;:1;:*. , , .. . . \ . :•],ell, . I It........r.• ••;,,4*---,..." "...Fe Or.. •.r....t,110 4. :11 t 1 . ‘ 4! .1:: ' 'it: • '-''. y 4 ... -'. , '31.4 41., ,./ it„ •-ip441 I., ..• N‘ •rt..,..,\.: „,....,,...,... .......44,,;,4).i -,-..;.-1* ,.7 , • p...i. ,,. .•' i .t,(P r i•,• ..'°. N , , .....-...-;. v.-.....-. $ A,- _... -.4',-.5017 - -1','''.Plik,•!:;,.."--:• : ti..-.-6'7•414 • -'4 • . :--4 iii,•1'..4 .••, A .21 -...',471e .:4.11;41. ./1 ft 4!°-..1 .... .:t• I' el; l'AVilt s, . - `11W 'lk. • ...;..f.,Lie.,,4 I_...",-,pT,./47,, "114 ' vEnfte• .1 4'.1:1, .'1 4:1: ..4 ...•• N411ap,sn'..,. - ..* :-••' I J‘,..,,„e•Ni•••...,.„ .....,..4.. • - ,• aiV .,• 1'.k 100:'446 '. I.t.A,41!...",,i,..i.e..7:'.,.•..•.....,”.•'..7.1t 41m',7,.-.-.--3 1'-',..1..*.,9..-...'.'.'-,.)P'4 z'4l'Al,9ii.:.'i i‘a0-q,e,•V#,'-44 p,,/-)i‘‘O-,.i•).'..1l1 3)::PVsle • F..-ig.•_..t...1' ..,,. -l-=Z ,..t 4..:,,,•*Abcf,Z....c....I.4..1 s....a."il,,„OiA•.ik•8vi rkr4'• 1 t .7":L4 " i. . 'f...''111•1 , ..\..4..: ,'.%•..,."• c,C.:.,.•.•• •.-'• air-,...... .1.1A501.11,1P'.. -*111F.„iii. .•... ' •5116,e lik • . s'_‘•_,T.,..t4.-:,. '•-- --7:‘ k' - . ....,..,...) I ••••:FC ..r:'<.;11:,..17jr rdeo........ . .. 4 fi -'47•E'T '1/1'4\:. .--;44 ....--. 1Sb• t. 4 4 . b.. '• , •.:11Fir . 1Nt •-..----i`l' ' :244; .....•414 ,_,A. , . ...:bass.,„ -.-.-.-.......„„„.....i.„, „i3,-; ,......,.,N..,-;7:..,....4'.1 464 IA',-.* -..•.14F,--lit.. 1 t• , . Qat% le 4erlkor•. . . ......4 . - . . .. • . .. -. -r%\.•.1'.,,i'....'-?,-;'0. 2,*-4,," Alt- r-iligt%I. :,.`.."0.1:40Vii. •-• 4a % :•.• -..,,:t.,..........1 •••• I• • . .4'j,.. s .st -vr., . '6...)&iti •--- -,,,, Aist\s„. .. • 41,...-..,.1 ,... .. '\.• '4.7,:.-..f.,..1-v •IN.- -rielltia,u. ici--• .K laiilki- .. • • LA .N. 11 % •• 11.,•"' :. .;•-•- t..1-•41141N • i .„•.' ••- ..r• •'`', f i A ••••.0.41. -...--N."7.• ...'. NO, •••••....- 1 ....•••••• •-NA 4 ... •• -:• - • - Ili ,.‘!'..--"•-•:- --.1tS"liTc.r,;-7-;;:T. •.te • ' dii__ ;- .2..v., • -. . .4 mit ..-;.-k.. .-..• :, ''..0. T. .•-•• . ••••••••• ..; •f,/'11 'si•\••IS!. •••t• *--•1/41.71tIt'.11k., 11.' y,:11rA• ire 1 . . .k _.-5.%.,%:..,,,..-.L. . ..-•:-:..:%t.i.:,-e.,.-...-git. i,.--.•:...• •--, ...--.--._ 4l'ilklir_ ..t..1- oh-,, .- . „ • •• I.) k \ Fo.4 k-t•4 ...= -- ••.:•:-..-,-.ttiv..-F---...=-_ft.--4 eilx-..,-,.....a.,__ **--'--- _ 7.v.-4'*.klit• .. -..-: ' .. ...&, . • .,.s! ah.,3 .% tn.:b.:a:......L'. • _ ,..::.1..C•4••••2-''•••"‘l....... :1.-.....4.:•. •:•:4,3 ...• °it&•rAf:! .. '''S:%it.0 1;iSt.-.fr%.,:-.1;14 .-'. ..-......ZW!- .;•O AIL ' 4 % .I VI'4 I 1 I I I r•' -41F1 '''S. Oh'. * liks '1••• --or4orr 41.• . . • : . ..•"*. 1-4re.(74!•:;1.7 ,7;S,i7- ''.7.- -• '";-..'• tiT.I.T.7.17:774&nAp...!'""iiii;;:"--..;-;,....-.;'<;:. 1 f 4 I 1 1 1 k-''! 4:11 F. .11 - . • •'if ' -••••• kt,*1;i1,ft,.. .,--_,c;•,:*.:..,A,,:-At.„.04.1" „„„ •4 • ••'4'',1•1 -.111 •••••••••••.•"..1---AG'it-•,•"....i- 1.• '-ing•••;'..'"'-.1.1.°:ijik, `t 1111141P:1 dar'....:41..13:7‘ 1.11:gbilihk• IPV‘ - '‘°-)eaWili...; •, , .1._vow _2,. .2,2„:- •-•irkt•gzsgrAm,. "4 • '-t'•4•;7"-..:"v"..---'611%:46: 447.1.--:'-'AS•eif.t.P;'. . P(SiitZ14.::N.:41•N•jr_..• '...*44f,.. 1.4•"!..:114;f:Vjir•„,14ei ...;1 •13.:4.4edil ' N• ••4"....,4!'?-'•"V,•;.1;•••.!..r..41•.-----) v." Ifi•Je;:ar •Atii• lle ',"NelliVr„.•:-.ii., :;' ..1,1. ...'! -. • 'If, - . N."41...;:-;"...--.6";t0ig "-icr, •,.. .....,„,,,,_,...,,,,,,, , . •• ........s. ....,,,f,11 ./. ,eirttytositi,-,7•,,,_111 liN 1 ra7.---i r4 ft. 'Iv, III05,01N41, •-'4 . .-...-41rb- ,:i••I t Ji3 10„i.e.,. )/P.: ,••• -,AtF. lk-•' ,/ V...' AO, ...••••••, •1 . , -fAi i".2 -.4./ 1' '.'t el00'. 4e145L3IF ,-.silk. 71->'' ASIV#4*•,414...... #:..4••, 7,:.* 2, ..,•-'-.0.2 --,j..ydr• • vr sm 11-rt. ,r• - c•I'-' 41:,• • I- 5• 1 • . t. .4,..; t ..--.P 1 2 1 rit--Ae • •lr • '•!'"r ' . 's •' --- (••1 ti. ela‘td:t. .rA'/....•t3 ....... -.#0".i "' ' .lit' I .. ir) . .zr - .. • -VO _ A'4,-'1 u•Itar- /lit kt5p1;! -•..r.,1,.• 1 ass alz• 1;9. 0.•US e„,. V .2V .i I • -• --. -..;;••Vit•:.-.• ••:. €11 i . - 1 4.a .mi blj 11/1 pa. • - •...„.,...:.:::..-..--• . ....,....:.,..,..E.,...-.• Nir.,.!......,.. l•••-...- . ....':...t.'.....::::::i•1.•-:.•••E...,,•'.•:1 a..11.,t.1%.ytE4111.!';:•,-,%.0ift.'1 1 t i ilai e• 2 fi P... 1!•1 111H 1 tia ,,, - -AY 1 i la tiEl?2341.1t' i 4 22 8 i 11:5 '.....••••• .,.,.r .,,.,,,,.....4. ...y..z,......,v, , 1 ir r.,z.,... . ..... lifrg 33 'Salo' g , - t-I., '• •••• •'-'1.10 .;•t••:•,e. 3 g .22.8r.e° 5 .e... •21 1 g %g I i - • r•:• •:•iiiiv-:. a yr?.i'6,.•.-;I:smi.......1 .4,t4.i.kts' .„:-,,i• • g ea 3 prizglx.t.,112,gael-11 B. .011. ! - -.(-.';: •up6....,_.41:-.-.. .....,7,-,.4.,,... .i.,..z.-r iii§if. i1,1 „1. s. -14-Eraill 1.1 ilk; .... • • a• • C.'--..-1;11 -.A ••; ',.."77i. ..,•".r•?1,1..t..--1'.1•.-t.' Iv -,;.4.11 . •• •..:.,..... 4g. •1)i• •- 4. • • • r . -•-•.-•-•r• rxiiitiFic . :-..-), .,----,::v.,. • ,. ..,Hi .... - ...:44;;•,.. :NAs:.,-.....!:... 1.\---'11 I . .0••••.- • • ' ' •4•' -4.''• • ' S-1 •I ./..114'...r!s•.t"."y I? . R!•-q 4 -•'•r• -,,.-- -.z.....-- ,-:t 3.-.11 .• ivNII;r7,01,,„., ,!.• • ''- '.• ..'" - ellit. • " '0 ',1'' .1 73,••-ti....• i#71•1;411;0 . '....i: .•:.'-!...r.•,--.z5",lt ..;1•4.A.2.-.;-.7 . • . •-.-4•-•.1a1. it, s ••'1.'•11;i.:t', '.0,..,..47,fikia•i./.1• ,.;a a -. 1 11 ail '*:.;'•-• iilL'7.• •1\1.-:•;'7.=?*,:i• . .,•217•27•7-.7A7FP• .t. ri.,..q.• 111,Nri,!Pe.9.1`.! i:Iii.s...•:k.i i i 5.41 • kl_42,.;:.•:'bri •!" ...!,;ir4. ..1.. 1,1/46-i ..:5',.."''' -....e.. 4.,-;..-' o :.' ...,i.- 'd 1 ; I Si' .,:,..7-.,...,,,,-,._,,,,,.... -,,,....k-Ti5?„.,,, g•. 1.v...h... . . ,.,_,IS .1 • •.:•-•.„4, i tik12'•••• ''.• •':.:, :. : ‘,-;p-;,..v •••,,,+.1 t::;,_,....•.... ..c"...4.•:-7.; i -. -. r...7'• •aoweE. ••-:.• 'i- Pi's: '•••• • ..• ' •".;'• "•• 2 ilm z .-Y..11,1.4?..t.i.;;..1.-..-. :.•-i•-,,!..nt.'i'i- 4-, ..• !"\ktir ,I...: Jti.t,,..4 ,•, .. • ,44.....:i • .:. . - Eli 2 . 1.: ' irl.":411;a41...•ii AV A 114 I j.. 6 - i. ::1;4". ' " '. .• pr.,::.ii ,,,Ts;-'-:,4‘i./...0,1.1A-.:1-,z; 1:•4111,•• .,-,%cit.z.gi i...A.-......i -•:,g i A ijuni 1 •• :1 .. v•.-.-:.--,:•ti.7; .r.•••• ••-q,..,.:-.-g-E,-,-=e4:.-----..-f-,....,'.: ‘; • -1-tii-• .. .',VP.A•i:)il..,.i 1:' a 2 /1.1.2111 .1 ,rz.f .%.11,•:•:;:l•,..c1c-.:4• ;•., •••is..t: -•‘•;1'i••i•t.•I.- Q -; .--,1. •1 }it .4'3., 'P'.! 1 I- 4 pi r.,...4,:i-.•'-i,i':1- t•••••,,Ii.,;4:, 45:.',i,,,.:::...,:-. ;•-•...-,-.\,. .1-4 7 ,,,t..•j.z.f.,r„,..4... .3..14'• it .:).•0. 1...,. i 5 . f .1 I- 1\,$, $ •-1,.•1. .• •i 14,-.I Ai,:••.7i:.`s•-:ii...10,-'4-:-::-:.':f.-..2rt'f..if.i:' ;-... • ' ii t-,'._ii111- - ' ''iv.- ''1, * '• • •o .7.c.. ii,‘dg .--I,5-- 'z'..,;_,---;-'4.,,-._•••--..-.4,‘:;.-.,.. .1..-.. , . ... p.- A 14.1 ''.,-,-,"-N..n. ••' • '..-.7.* • I•t).. 4 ;.1r, '41. NA' if• Ili't. L.IIVOt• 1 1 Tiii.... 1 ,' .1 •,:.:1- lb-. ..4-7.1*,,-.7----/.., •: -117:7::r:,,7-'1..1.-'4 v-i,:•,'-‘"'Ii). ? ,i• ,-,.,),;1.._ ' 11 4- i ' i 11011 A II r 1 .11".•-•• :0,t.,-..-4•..z,:t." •1:•:'4.•;,:t• 2:-....-4,..:-.3i irq I'd, '.:2., . iVtA•1,,:4'.,,,V' li . -.. ,'••• : ...v....4 - .... ?•'....;••• •:.Z.;.:. 1--.-•.!:;f,•.;jtryir.;11'.;•,./if.•4•-•.tt•!;'''All'i't . •• •.' I.. i"i‘ ••a-'''11 1 ..I A •1,4.,/ -.1•••••i..4t-....,i:7.•,.(J;.,.. .. --.„....c,;-L.T•i•,-L, .-•-,-f:`,s ! -' i; •',1-1, ';• 1%,it,,,..q,.4,:,••-‘' ir .1 •11 •i•I ! '4-11; •;. -.?1:::-.,.'..--•1•:•;q1.41:',....P.;,•',!..F:A•A.7:",p.sii:yir 7'14 1. 4''‘,. . '‘,.. ' I. .. •,:13'• • 4ii . /..I• .... 1.14: $ ••••`'. -1. - . 1•••10 le • •:r .•:, 14:2ii big il °Hill Ili 1.•=. r (-'4" . •.. . - • 1,".,-;Z:•Vet 'T'11;• • ...-•,.2 •_!: • :. 4. Z Z. o• .§ X '-'1 ,'"•E• ?. r., ‘e.... 16-:•iSa •4 it.li.,.:3....!.,........%,o1-. ...f../4 i .. ipu Toil.s m.t •• L '1, ...'; ;,.I•i', ;, •.••,-12•t:0••• :.,..117 iP•Fi3Z•c•V .1 • im.._-:.• ... ..ik•isvi.ig•I 221.1]// 'a 9•11• ti t ‘.I ie.? kil="t., l'it..14;?Vrlpfl "il ..?;60.•'-,' ' W:•;.1- .1 4, .it. at 11 1 g. v: fl.r.1., - 't- :5*.$ir L''...'. 1. 6 • .....•...L.• - pm.• . •-d.: - ••.:. . .. ...: i•qt'''n ••• .,•17:1. .3,14.4,ri • •• cf - ". • • • C••• '.11 &•115g nC;11•31•2119.4Z4 • •• 4;\ .•.tf4fg)ts;'. ._•_....a,,,?ji,.';• •t•ike4..1; ibi • ' : -= •-•%'• 1 i III lc' pig •11 ; i.... -:. - ...,i..,_,--...,. , •: ...• .):-A ; 44;iNV-1-'•%?Pe.:-:•444-'h••570.,v-.‘4,-. -3`> 1* -f,.=• Z• ,.:.- 1.1,..41 -z' 4f&:-g 1-X it4 ap.,..,-.1. -..*-.1 711,V1..4,•,1„.,4,,,sil,*;1,,,,,,, y.,,,Pli,r.. ..,rxi,n1„. 1, ... .:'. CI) ,c ,i..141.1.11pj z.tii iiiI:J:.• 1 i! .. • •.:5-It'z - c' ..4. ..-e;4, .4. .L'f...;,.....s.4.,' ...,,.:;•>,•; lik,-r k• 1.-F-0. ••• *--lfj-1 . 1..:• • •11"P 1-1 /1,11Till ' ••-:, : sftilf... t4,...,\Illitial . !:1, ' ' .di% .01 ii.....-- --:'''..•: .111 'II .t '• •1 .:*... / , :IV:\. ' • 4'4 -171:". • • IA0••::uo :1„;;;',•-•• :•:.-611• filiviilt if. • :::,..,.-,a:;-.--;. .1,-.-=-... .: ‘1.),;4..10, 74.i•en,.. i •=•'•> •:0‘.; : •:•.g 1 issll 4111 Ms . . 4..' : I..?: .•'•-•'.:-.:? •.1 - 1.. . • - : • it: :.,t• i -.1;.-c,.,.../2,::.-,4. ....I. ,,..t...,.:6;,:..---,:; .. t...., . 1,1,4 :w :(/)•,-0 .1 Ellir 'Ili411 iiet „..1... . 'iti), ,.", t,i4•-•;' • .• -0 .s. • ,.. .5i R runi.11 lif.i044 14*• kl -=,:::-...Y-.--:--,-,./iiiP, Al.; V., .,.,' I 4r.., , • • . . .... ..tp-t.. ... ._ _ - CI I: El t• 'I• • • ' ".'- - . . , - i •14,1' ,; ,, , . , , . . • , . , . - _ - • . . • -4111*III III 11.11K t. -......4. •,.4••,.;..1.11111,••• i ;Al., , .• L , .rg•:.V. 1 illiblaw.-:s 4111111i"''''‘r*-1:1•:;-'''''''''‘‘ . +4.'. :•' i'.i f:e''...:'.1"; -44;'t.:1..%::rir..:.- .r.,. Ale- "...., '''• ..,, ... . . ! ''.:',. . : A.",-- -Iry . . .• . t. ... ..ak • zz -. ... ._ , .,,,..,..„. ..,..4e. .... ..,.., . .... •ii,ii..„..„al " .... ........ . . r . .., .. • ..•v;.•......t.,.. ,..,.....:... ....• -,.,,:$,.... ...-•:••' .f "•111e6;7,4 ,i,:..v.:efi.. ..114:...41,...:-....'W.. ,,..i. ..' ••• ,.....•..' 41124111110;44-411 811/1Mair".. : .; -;. . . ... [.. . .:.....!4 in * • • • ,)' 1 6 .•.. 0.. .• r. ,'‘ ,7.ligei.',1:;. .,'\'...: .;::.r'-:''4' ''''.-.:2.s. :14'' .1 1;26 5' .7,t-. ...•. . •...r4:. , .•.• .1. • -Ark , •••••' , ... ,.., , • 7.......-,,..• . ...:.4 . ,:.. :,..z..,,sliiik..*.t 4 Fain,. 1111C P . .. •. ':te4.1-t . %. . . . Y. • 11111111110iii'•••• ....••• NII,' t. :'•tV„,Z.:0:...:4111:‹1..:.' . . "X:.447.....t..'1 •.••••:,oft;Attl,i I • lb. .A..T.IV• •• ..:431.P., •!1•.‘ • '. ..:\4,::::S. "'....;-•••_,..1„„•• ''•.. ''._,Vi , -, ... . • 4.4Zbl\ -"''.......'' .....' :: •V•••,:,7,ii.iii,..1,,,,,.%•h•,.•\••;;;I:41i,,,,,,,V?f...--.••:•4,.4:-.. .• • ...2.4..lir c. •, . .,. s. •. . ft. • . . ,.• . • . . .........,..... ..5,-, „,.......-.. - ...... ......-z,.. -.., • ,s7.,...-:.,..,••1.. ...1,:-.7..----...-4....;t•;.-4.........4.,,Not, , . .. . .......v.0:e..), ..:. ..". , ,..c.....4„. . .. . -,0.0„.........,. .Ajw.: _-:......:„. - ,..-,-:-.. ......:--.:.:. . . ., , o_.„....`'to...`'..1101, :tsc•••• . : Wilri":'. k• . •ili'...Z...,..,--"":' .•• • ' --",-4/.1,....... .... -.../7.1::.W't .6._. 46...t.: ir,-;--..-• ..... .....* ....46'taki: .., ..• -' -.. '''' -40---....,s•-w otia.....• . -• - — . .„,,,,••%;... • ....if; . ...‹,. . •........ , ,. . • . ,.. .ar.• ..#Ago ...•.. • •- - ...... • .. • Ali I I aW% Ire .•..... -4,44 r•••• •4.110. 14.• 'Zi'''..• ' ..:400P.4 ;: 'A '3A7711%-•••;,::%...1 . "...411•1',."e,:ti ;•!".'''.1...4. '''''''"l''., ••"*'• rtr f - i '.....: •'''''t•-. AVI-2.:;,- . • V-Alg ‘'e94,' 1A0L-%.:-•-"' •:-11::•'%:::: • Na, - i;•• ..'4111/Iii."'.,.'!"-'%;.-:::AtiFk--.,- '••'A.'.,',1., .16-u;-4.*i.i.-'.. 4SirFAP-41 • . .• '- '' -'tell!!.- —14 ,,,.., s.,. ;,,,- •ii.idirs.:-404..•'•'-' -AP • ; ...,. k ...11 t.... . . , ......•. .0 Al.. it, at.3417'100110.11,0440;•-: • •1.:•,.• • .,;...7..,:;.4.2...4.-14.: . 4 ; . . • .., .' - • .... . 4 P-I ie - .6.,•• -..w...... N4.....,..i.: ...:,,,„.....4•7;,-,,,-,.....t.I.,....z.ve • ,..1,01r. ...,,, ; •J,-,..;..;..:::.:•.. ...4........Amri".'18,41.xi::-...:.,;:::.. ....1:.,..„„ -....c.-- ,„.e...,:t:,elmar,,,,,,_,;Aillzia," .":.., .4.11111Witiviw" - A. ••••0; ..... .7.4. ---°...- ...,...•7,. • Afiltik s r Alleir,,,"If *--..,.-- •;..-tith...‘1.f.r1 . . :--:. ,...:.of. •:r..:F.:•:...;;;,::-,a •• "..:‘,11.1".-/-10..7.,•AS IPA, A. valt.,,i41;:- 03 Ore,... -.--, . •1,,,,,,...4r.f...,_,- .1,0* •;.• .116', - '..1•;'..t.:A4V-4:i • ti It- .i..t.t.4" — .-...--.:•••=.'I.4'.,. -.,ttO' fr.a .4 ir-,,?'''''.-r•••i.4117•J"•'".'414,1a.- •• ' . 4,----/i* Tle'__,/.:. trel. :74t44,X41.%-t`% 4.t'il ' .3;1.'t •• . 'oli.,igir -Illis,.....4. f.,.:•IIN••......01 • •--• rAlii;firi. • -......•••••!Ta...:-..-....v.0 - ,,•,,,:,....• . • . ....:::::',ts•ft:r• , -.-. ........,-, _ ;•Arm,,, ,....- ..:-;.--ti:i•-• • tkli111&_,,I,k --11115 ;4"• -........ 44".-. dr • '••.-- 1• • "Ili'glilek_ . ..............••0 . .....,..:0.. lk 16.1.4e,... ..., ',.. ...110.0,,,,,,,06...., 1,r •..:F....r.,..• ...44":"-........... ,Iiiii.•- • .. • •-• ''' - --!501V0.0.4...:--....r.;;;:iiii. ..-C.111.• ..., ak .1 lir .... -- 4.6V4:;•;''.111111/10"7:•Ofiniiirir .ft7i..le • ', ........ : .... .....:- Wie. . ..z.-,:f.6 itt...4.104,600 ;--:10.1-41111.1‘F .. •••••', • 11.6k libilho..-. .W'''."411r1r,..""- • .-.141 ••'' - % • .,,,,,--- - ..,.., .00/ ,.......... •A r--.7 .16.A.4_4 P".....44'..:2:-.1-7 ,_.,dr.. --w*-...,.,,,,,,7-41.1"1.•Y:'7., .- .i& • V 44%-,4 • ..-.. - ra'a,.... -...-....qpilkat7.7.,.".:7.,••tc. .4... -•,--::'••,=•:-°*:c.-;:. •L,....*,;a•.,,,,,•••..,. •. L '''' --7 ‘11011-W.Fee-71-,--11 ,..:ett•••"-.. . ..,Alk:i.4.7,t. • ,. 44,40....---e:;-.•••;•,...c-4.• AM,.••• , ..r....,• 41-...i.i.;•;„.•,,„..,•,: 4 • .. ..r.' "..... 'Vt-•-.. T ...aim' •.:a.•rip. k". • • •--.1e" -0 -rn)le• ;Am ...Agit ...., t''' e,„,,,),„ .„....„.,.. • • • ,...,,,.. 4 sib&.,.......,•... i..1... ::...„...e. ..,..% .7; i.,.../.,....., .... .6...tse :--I ...ts• Nartr.4.''....-''"....,;',-;.100P. •42t „i. I -,. ___,. _ .... i ,... . A'. .• - • .• ... •i/...:-•-• -AA( ....,..,...z.%,.. .„. . i ye P ... -40F F--47 .44......4%L AT,Eillikarh'' .=:.fr..-. .. • r t ...., • --..• , •- - •. - '4.Ft Off r r Arl: •:- _ .........-.:,.7•Iii...i.". .. . .. • . • 4;:' , . ..: .• ilk itz • • . ... ....,,...... • , . . ., ...; .....;,,. ..o.„.„f,4••.11:.•_4,..,• ..1.._ ......4...• A ri, .. . ,.;:-. \- • ..,.:.79. Of° . .. ........., ..:.j... '" ',Ardi,-.- • '• • ...- .t. ; .- . ,I. •• • ii-4w...,:, ..• .. \:,1::• • • . i: , . ..0.... :0 _ •,.. , ,. ) V .•;. r. •.O'.. . 1.: ..: -.! •...... _- a"- I.-*=,44- % • . '• ag',.. 4°4 16.-LIPIC Pi lille):;'•:*4 7: i .:$14; - . ... . ..,.. .....: • • .{. e .,"...•‘5,700-4 .• "•611110V,....'e, ...;' _416.4 . ..o0r;. i., /•.•„•,:z4:,. • - At - -quire - i• -"'"-'1 ilk-,.• 4-r• r!...". Ailliiiti•Y •-, ..'- ' -.......;,44.-•'•-..•••!,.:--.-...--. I -..mr.- .:..3;,1...„.........!... ,1,,„.1:,,L:. l. '., •. I .-. • ; .. *1_,-*" •'w.r.••:•••: .• ??•11 411 • tie . ... !.) • ••••-...c. .4....44 ' ....e.p. X... 1:• e ....„Ar .._ ... 7.1—.,'`\•;,•..1. ... . ,. -. A0410P . ... .. i; • hik,V), _ . .e .. - -•• 110?- .10:14go 14 te- .•.ell'r.--E: • '..1,.• p../.-ivt, I. ..de'•# -•., 1 •z• . • s:-I.-,-_ • • • • -, , ..„_ ......., •...1s_r.,. .._ 7: K•,-;_,w, 4..,,,„ •- "'•' -- --- - -.-,‘ ••!1•- . • „„,,.. let . -•.:.7.k.)...7 •• .ipoilow, - • . . . , . . . . _ . • ' . 4... • e . * - • .. .. • )111P.T.i: .......... ; _lb: •- .. • .-• .02... • - ...IIVI . ----ir•-•&I , - -•e- 111W.t.4 r.W :-:' '- *-7- •-•. --s 1! . . • ... _ 4. •a•ar •...1, . • . . • . . • liZZ-V a -,.- .-...•- ob!‘.: vi 4,,,,,..„,., s,p4,.!...9.24- to.71/41 ctz-Lt ** i r.4S-Tk3 US-- m , r.4 •- - _.• .. . .... S-ra Npararri 4 1. ..._... ..- .- . . . .... . ....1....z...„.41 rcird....,..,•;;•::::;;;.... 0,, . .I..... , . .., 40,:is,Swoo-Brad :r.ii*.:"...." `u$ .!•,?s•-i' ...t 41r-rd.,- ' f . ow SIVA,Air **TAP .11•Wel '0.1.1101t=2--41, onpu,s,r,c.n•Al ..,,. . - ..••• ...W../ .1.11 .#103:1*. A, -Ari ...,,, .fr. _• .„,.......,.1c... •••••).:.:, .• ..• - .v?i••••, .•, • ftri-,-.-,-,,,,,w/f, i 7 vp,of.size..4.72,....,..;;;,.-. ,. - . • .. • •zr.a__,IA4,,-•,./..0,,f7.. D1,..- /0,4r-44-;.s. •...I'd,. t'k•" ,..,... •,,Y•ye,,„..•,,, k*, -47 i ril-c -eiii=c••,. ... i - Ai . • ••••.- • •• - , .., . ,!--r,A-.:41,-44•-.4 Le....•$ ,,,,4,,,..• t, 1 9 e•,:l't,•.:.•.f.f 411 4 r r‘or4------ . .• ..,...._-,•:..•.kg...,,51i.,-; -Ali , •., ,4_, f / s\.. , , .----,...-".;.2.--o•P'S- if_tr:••_•77.--,11 ;v4. p?. ,, • • •,,v,•to:tr,f,.,:e.„.44 .,.•,‘; .‘..„ •*•:, ...' .• • . • . • ::, • . :.',..r.,,•,:',4':--`4. irli 'kiri,,i,t;.'0,,i•- \ • r--:(4' L'i:W.Ati,'s A'/P:ei.?:::'-*-741` 7::-:---4,-- ,,,.•:,-- -•;,•-f.,.•:e-••:s, 'iq-4)., .4'4... Cj.::::‘.. /....zi.,.,./c:10:. 7.07.-•&:':-",*:ZJ'A'4.1:-.----)P..•'.19.f4,.-0.',6:*..... ---. -•- .....::,:.:••,„.:.. , • .. . .... ... .• .• :-:, *•.• .. -.-...,i,,,-,c,s-,i.,..t••,p...,. :- ?... • ---. ..•p• .1... ,..-,,,," riVie7.1.11.1.'• ......- ••••••"'"•"47;."0..;.1.7:........L. -:,,,".• -- -J. ;-•• ti 1.0. f .. . • ‘ % ' •' 's•-' .' ...;(1-,' ,,s%":.•b*:'4%,.,.!:.!4i:A ' ,it..,0:1-e. •••••,-,-;..,-••••: •41.-,..:.:..-•;,..,,.,„...--Z.Q:41,:.,f.--••••,;- 7 4"." • r• 1 ,....L.. ... • , ,.6. : ", et.; : ',.••!,..., V,..i':..••aly..iig;,/.'i, • • • .3,4714110?"..'!.%14.,.03.'er-or/...i0A10114....,itgoimi,,,,....--.L.-......- ki Itf:.•.,,,.,. .. , .. ...,.....,.-,,":1', ',: :I, ts?,:.4\$.,;.%#.14/Vi,i•P'„,g1' .; 'i•z9' , .. .,..•1. 'f• , .•.*; ••, V', W... tati.2. -ie'a• 'Ploy • I . • .'11**.'e'741. .14"&Z....,7-• .4;?"",-,... .*I!' i.‘e.L..;...:1 .,;"‘t•-,1; !, ;'•'0,4,144,. t•,:,..,...0,•1!"-,`,•,',Z 1 I r•, , .8 ...,./.,.....: " 9...41;', ...•%t• ':'.' ••." : '--.41 V. • ;1 •.• ••,I, ...- • ,k•.- ..s.....t,' A.A1 ;Afil%7;7.7.7-<:;:a..Z Sti'.:12:-. .'0'46‘.0,,,,,.,,a&-L. • '• .:'.'1,'"" 1.4;:•i '?.:',.!.' ,,i •,Arh.. .:li;!...e. ..Co' ,74,- .--...;•,•-•,,kr;::••:.,•. 1 ,erci&v,,, ,i, .1%;r1.--,••••te."A= --46-,- •"''. 'w,,litz..‘s"4tr '. • ' .1-te".....1.-4'14.!-E. '-:, '•'..•• 1t;• '; ','"1 cl..- ..4s•tek,e,.:',,,•wit-x'te,., 1 ,„,,,,,A _„,...7.- ....,,-..J.,•,,,,,,..46, ••,:9 44,,,,._•'- ..._ _. . •7j'---1,1”4 A mh,,e,,,,,..-•••.;•-ire-4;-.*•/11711Nr;:1,e,„.„...„,,.,. . , 1.'.1=''..•.,.:t'a. • :b••,t•••••••t-qv:,' Vt-../,/ ?Ale. •.z'.., i,`3,,70 4-.el i..i.;•1• 1 4.('"-;+ '1. •.•••••4.-'1Z-.• is-t- '-;':-•ti.--• 'It, !I:• e,." ••: •0* • , .._,•,.,,,,P.,., IV,-- :',C/i.r4,-'41i,, .--,,,tr•':•,:l.'*.y'.•.•'I !ii-v .,.4.-.:1k,,,,.$.:,, .. ti• .,i -,1-i.: 01.. '. ay!,iiii,,i,:., . v.i.':- *:-P,,.:(`'-,), ri 1/4.,,;yiLt)f.. --, 'rill;4;•VI:f4 i •,. -,_:•,_•__,...__I.ofd 11,...,2.4 .--....,..i. •-•.".41P-.4 11/411tLe .1..„.p ' , -s., ,t, .,. ft.. ile.t.%--s...; -.,.-- •':',./;'•••:•.2-`,''...i:1''..... ''',.;•;''''. ', /fie; l'Ot% 7 . i,.14./..')l'i.c.:,., . , ••••:....,• ',,..::: .... •I,. • S'•'- i 4,01,1'‘• • i',//:4/..!•.',..:* ' •C' .;.;'.1/4 d GI . 0- .. ..-1 iN.---,lir.- -... ---- ,.1 "IP; ,‘,„ $'C,3,..,,::1-7.. ,--....- • ••.' I. 14 44\7370/4'4.4 • . .I:4'" . it, ‘. .' ' .• <.'g4# 74 4 ri..:1*Ir*. • • . ,f,••,, , „ ,• rk Iv" V•, No1 It r .....!''..1: It ),I : • ' • '''- ' /...-r-r- ...- tet Iti ...ir&NO•raii:•••••,•• , • 111%.1• •• ' •••N .....4 ,,,,,,r_tw.:„-:- • ..-_,..,•;- ,...,..-4_,-..,..,• .--•,-....k",.... 1?. ......_ ,, •.,,, . ..,. .„.4.- •cip.-...41,1,,,,, -r.--:P..?;:,-.7,. .;',. ..-:.$ .. ..--..g 1:-- - ' •-•• • • - . vc." , v.•,,-it.-.4i .s.i,.•• ,-41,.,...,f'..4,,...-....:1!::1•4...14-e_...,i771-'4u1, •4•Pp..,..0 4 ,...4w.... ., „ . . _. .......,. .--."-:, •• ...------...•=1..... ,..•.--.......,•:- ,...-.4;,•-t....,,,...----...•,.1.7" •----- _.:i.1.,....J. -....5.17,16;z•••?.z. .w...,.;•t,..t.t7.1' .,17,.....---4•;:,.-.•:-,,sko...s.?..--7, -......._,- ...-••,:-..-.:- ... ... ---,,, ...,,,,„„.„m,.,k.......,...._,..._ _-__1 ...., ....,..,..:.-.• ..t lb,- .-.i.'....'.....,..•::-.•.....- •••..,i'•-C.;•g.:•,^,-.tc•-onia:•.10-.1.4*:"-- 2.--.:.1-1-,.1. ,',.-44Tels: ai0":4.01 .' ''' 442.1.,...%....*4;c21 ,117-f.;-1:!"--.0,''''';i:iv,-...-- - •--•- •.-4: .....4. ...110c-Ar.- ...;;Alb,',,,--...-. .,::: ..-A„..... 40411" ,.,....,,,,----•._ '-....„-.7x. -..)- 1. %------":•-V4,,gra,ii•__ •vo•-,rel.' - ---• , • - of*--,,,ri_•, V..,..,,,,, p,r.••••,..; --,F ,„ 17.4f,,J5....01-..--..r .-....- °.....". •.',77.`..; .!' qt.....,.',...-• ....r.a..:14, ,.P;,47,..,t,fa. ..; .74. "15-7:i:c ;::--',..-....,. .. ..... • tz.a.,...!•-,T,1,-•-•,..94..?.. •-y1 • ..e.e;:k.7:---:"J`f•-•:',- ''• -i="•1•111%."'"=.6--z*•.:-...--'1'hze'l",:.--er.-71,-,,P,.,-04'.1•z-.7-,.. z9z--..:<.:-•-.=,.;.,--,,:"' .,...1 • ,,....:.---.:.-^ -...?ri%•.:.:•;,, ' -- ,-.....- -,41=ea-1 -,.. .-•.--7,4:47.5-,-,:r. - -• , . 11--*v - I •t‘s`l .•!;;;0'N'el•-‘ - ' ''' lb.'''., . C.,.. '....•.7,4.'7:--•••.*"..". .".-........7 • ' '...-.• '5 421),W...," 7:--ii..,...k -: " ,--.,-,-;,-;:a..-...,;,,. ..-....;',...,...,.. - ...4...), -..• •, . •• • .••••..• g e•.10 .°:**-47.....:.•4 •ri•f'°..7•1‘ %)51,'!le.:fir-,4'Pa',4::!-"•;7•-11,••?.?'-•.fit....7. .7•4,j,*',..-;114:.k.•%-::::.....*` •-- • • . '•:',2"•,.'ll .!........, 1..., ,v. .• 0 .0. ,..;: ,.. ... „-1,..... ..,...,,fr.•• • , - go'••:..• .4.1::jr,CI),4 ...,•••,--.;:i's.-'RC ...6>e.,...,i4.1.k.e .4, .....,,-,*_le ,, • ,:.:,,,,,• •,!j, , •:,........, ..,..;',. ';,* 1 1‘•• .'..,.,•..1."t.;,••,.'• :•*:•.t''1':•1 itl.11,4 •I. -4..... ' C.f... ...N. ..4 3,-; ...,--4-„14..,A --,...ca.r.,...36 al:ts'•.....••••it•te...91114ixa7,. "V.?• I .r:'%•••4AZ.,;,:-•.. .•••• A '• • l'••••t•f•,1 .. •,e.o.".•, .... .,. -• •-•w:•.•'....,%.•1&-:.q.:.•''.••••::•:.•,;;;--z--:'-.4,,t-a•- :::-.'"•'•.,IA"t•i:': 11:sil--4. ' • i.7'.•;" ..',7';."•-• ,„.k, . ; .': ••.,.. . 'i •\‘. ,".:,,A.?!•••7 !.%;: 1•11,..-.#, . •ra:.7"7-.• ... i,'f".•••••tT1:-.-.•,:.--. .... __,4;Av.i rieli•-.1?,:- ..-v-- -.,.. ---, • o':•:::.,;,P,,,,•,1 4 i.“,!:,.. ..,!.,.:••, •1."r. .!:t •,'' s i;.%. ‘5,.t•', Cv.;'...',q.,.;.t.te . . . ...1... ...... ......,,..,a-:74,t-.. ..z.....,,,-.. .,...5,.;...,,;.:..;u4z,.-";•:-„zi".,,--- --,-, ---- -. . `•: '"...'.•••,,,4., .,k;4...,..*•.t.:Z.,S.... .4..4'. i.. Z4..4• 44.:4 rnt4e.,,1,e#.14..4.•4:.:‘..4 5:4 I,:,:'•••1••• ..,;,/,'.,'f..,,,,,s,„,..- .',.:•,;„ ..4• V::•?•7'..1••••••,••761/4/ • '.‘,..•' ---: a •vh, •V.+9• t;/11-;•*•di t':1;Ciitt4...,;;*..4‘i...-5,.C:15)::11:3:';'...,.. ..:174t:'.... "2t:.t ::::si:'1441'7:..i I 1 I'6 .1.'LI :::.:::.: ,..••••...Ts.SI., 11, - t% %.!•":•*4V.C. '''..1.'.,`..' ......... ...•'''Ci: 1'...1\''.. •' iN, i .: ... ,::::.... 1‘ 1;,116. ......, - ..;..-,1 -.... ,,-4,_ _.,' • OkZ,,mititizi "ils4 i Aft:••,\Cti!V:',)'.:;:it'..s .s-', ..''' '''• , ,.m.....:,...ve.7. it....... . . ..::, ... . ..,....„.„.,,_,.. .r. :.•••:•'..'•I s‘t•"!..," r,‘'%, ,i.‘„0•. ..,• ...• '..'1,,,,',4.,4.• •.• 1 '4:i •••••-.' ' l'v•'••`.•••••c--V el\11-11K;,...••• ,.,. • %" .e.vtv..„•,•, -,k,epl-,.,;•-• 1:-94 liv, , ' 1N7'''••' 4...."A'• 6-111.•• . I., ,;".•4:.-•.;4!,0.4.,..• ..;::M!..r.,.:j,i, 1:..k.2., ,t,r1.., .1 4,1tar:0•7..?‘•• ..paili toi•44-A•.., .,, -v•Ii.V.--- • • ,••:.•v.P.:•••••• ,•,...,"4-•,t, ; ..ti::1,::,;;•••••').•‘ `;,..,:••••-••1-'- • "4•• ..; ::: •; ., t,-.,r.„,....4.4k. .. . ..,-4-?.,74,. - • ‘,/....• ..„...s.z.:::.:,,,i?., .;•• .0%A%.'FA'.. . •i ,i ,-,v,IN,.,'.,V;I!r.VA.VP•• r". ik• . .•.- ...4:.,', ....1•• ,•54:a • A • •',,,,i 4,t...'',dr,/,o,...c.‘„",,,,,,41;i..( •-•viiywar•et , 1.11tr.V.;.4)=_•7--•Ir"-Iltteree. ird 4 • - --"` tk.'•;/:•:•;.,-•_..,:..t.)...,r;.• 7,i'•••-Nip ks.•,,,,...,c.1..:'•••^„.A.,..5.,••••,f4.:'.t•t'g:V;'• 1..11. : a t, A. ,- -sc.,41 41,;;1,1--"-`,141.5iiiv,__.. a - „,...,..,-t-4-shi.‘..•,. ,,:i;..r"41k14.(,...','47'4*.•%.04,.?;..;,;•:-.-\A-..,t,y;cti..s:',•::-',3:1.1 :f.:.!, I •::••-•'..4 15,1-,,,f:...:.-P•T..2.I. .3 ‘ ki;,....04er,':,t1-2-4 6.*,.,,..f,44;coil•s• .....,_:_t_ ,..4.1. *. .-" ..!;,....7,w V-4;1 k.7, 'lt,'.••1'.#• .!•::.3,'"04,;:•.4.•;,Ti',;:,:* ._,,, ,•. .s:... :k A....1. ii,..0.:.41101,:::,:...:.t‘,,,:Lt.‘1:,;.•11,.•:..,..;•16...57141.4•),..i,,Z11?)11.7444...L‘r :15.611'`Iikla'al i 1::1441iVZ41)"` ti1/4•01•7;.i7:44: ' 5''kifillielm... •••L' ...'''..ii.r..‘...017.e r44... 'i•opit,* 'r....'.. 74,•,....-...",. ,,,,e.,•,...•. ' • - ...2t ..• :.!...1,.„. • , r, ( . • , . z• •..,.......,,• • ,..,,, T,,,,,,,,........--,„--_, ., ,e• ,.., . 7'.. ... .- . ';'''..'. ' • ••• • • ' i'. ..- ._,.,.,:,•:),•-•.,•,. t• - •.. .1' tI - -.r.. • \• 7,../.X.':-• • ..'"-ii•ra" . 03 c ..)..o.e..:,j. .. e''...7 %.,....:e...1.:*%4 f4;C • • •. .1/J....eq.;•,., .4.::•''' -V e e_ . , ..„... . , • !-,. • . • I •;•..,:. :,i e:••••.,.,... .„.• ... .... _0-••1 :I;••*1•4 f 1 .1• - . . ! • .... ..!fi?•14.-• ......‘ 1 • - . • . EZZ-V . , . . . .• . .. .. . .. .: • .• _ .--- . i • . • - . -_ . -_... . • •- .- _ . . • 1 •-.1•-•••-amiss ••••• -..="-- '-' - _ _ -- . (11)%W•IS. • • •• ,... • ' . • • ..•...•.,. • .:• .• • • 7.•••••• .••••••. • ilej,-, '• '4'j i k. • '• ; ••,$"•' ti . 11/4 4.;.:S:!.t.•'..,%• :I t .• • ....--........_. jI .. • ; • t . . . •I.' ' 11' I i 1 1 t' • -- .. • . . /• • • $ :.A i 1..•. . ' .I.-..... - • ' • ' • • • .,''.. . ' 1 - . • ' / •• . . .• / . .• • . V. i • . '' ' • -.. I .%. ‘ . ,,t• . • • •• , ' • .. ' \• . 1 . • . • .. ' • :;.....:'• '..:•.;•:•-•4-$144 ..-;14' '''•'•''..." • ••••'' . : . '' ' . •ii ‘,..i •;....W1.1, . • . . . . ' ' .:. _ • . • • .....*.R.:...`: $.:: ... . , .t. ••' . 4• %t••••fr.'4.V.r.S.:.;,.. .: i I f.AI 11. • •it 4.4,•• ••• •. "A.,•-•••".. ' . ::. p•':.•,i•,,r.' v.. ., • . ..... .1%.;., , - v.. -3..?"'s - • '. .,•,%Z.'....• .4.;••.:•••••••:••••-• ...4••q;••..'•••.',,,••,e• ••,'::.. •• Mr: •"•.• . ..,. • \%it• ' • • It ii,:s.e..'ft:'hi-• •_ - _ _. - :.'...•••• -." -•• .- ••• •" •.-;.::••::•,,i,%,.,I•se.'• :1...''.• - C.,7,41..",.1,,,,....,,i', • . ". . ' r-si...k..," .. . • . ': •••..4S.:..._.••• • '..•.4,4 c••.7.c••?.. -,..., .1r.. .,w4r, r.• 't.• • ir,...%.F1.• • ,'4 1,. ,%-ii,'' - •• . ' '' '•!k '-'..• -..f _f k,`":1,1--•- •- . htf , - .1..d) i••,,, •.41,• • • w . • • . .2.,-.....,,,, .c.ic,..-- ,..• • - 7471. . •••r,,„.,,,, .:.: .\\7v, .‘",,, ..4 -... . --..... .,,,,:,.....,r• I s •1• ..40, , .............:,.. • . , ... - _ .... I . • [ - . • . ,1011c. . 01:"IC‘- 0 .. , . .// • . N4%11 e. .0. • .'• ,- .7. ••' .gi .1• • .t... 4aini 110.‘ •.v." • • •P ! .0 .. .4 . ....• ..".v.111 =.%7 t•....-- •-- , -!-•:-: - --7-=7.--:••- -:-.',-"Fre0Z=-- -• :•; , •,...:$• • . • i& ..i•WA,..a. to.'t°rA ..t. • ••. 1,.... "It, . ; i •7,••.• • •w•-0.1h.:• ' ..:. • li• • .•'--1••••. ITlibr. .I.• ...:- E. 1:•:-••• • -.:..... .. - .r•-:.:7-. ''- '/ .•^•...:: * MI.1•••• • I. . •• • •••••''• • .:**7•fr::%••• ....... '• •...-...,_ if'411:e•''••••L 1141k11°.7•;• ••.".. "...Y. . .C.:••••• • V .dr" •. .l .fir z ... „IL Atar pi ..i......1..w ..... .46 • .... C iv. -- P.1" ..48,ft. _ .,,S'Ir..',.'".• '' -/.-1. - - N.%. 1400,..... ..10.\44 ,v.. .t... fil.;•4 bi. 40... : _dow.. .. ,..iii ....„,......: . ....„ • . cb..... • ia 11 ......•:••j:&Z. •• . 0. :!;..1•...:.....,...:••••,..„• . •...J ••,* 4•0`." Viren.,l•. •• _,. g.t. .•••• ) li. ;••1.41‘•ri,e4 •' 7 ei...:" fr." ai V ........01p. ( MIL'‘...' •` •''.a "',/Azr, ."! • -.••N ---,wit*. •• • % • . • ia. •--...„••..:...*....1.:.i.,; -2411-8,111 ar . ., itk.1••,* •t• 1 4. '. :.,•• 1,4* \•"-.k ,.......... . .....:,..,. ...: . A \-. , i . . • • •0‘;',..47.r..:•-• A-10141'•.:.','-':01.,...a,,illviiiiillf. . r-:.:f::.--... ;cr..:r..• . s•\( ....,...... A...,,4' • ; e% • i. '••' ...F.:Y:N. l',I••. ' ".• . ! : '_:;,;,-,..44 114 . .. . • " 5 . i 1 .. .... ,:. i "ow ,i ' •1°1,:‘I rot , .'.. • • •.._••• -.•1,•-•• ••••IQ 4.....•, •.. .,•••,• •i:".... •4 *-• : '%•\ ' `.,•,d•, . ••• •S' '!••• • liAeLtyyikk... A00" • kr.4.... • ' Als .1444 • %-c•'et 4, ..,fri' - V li• ••••• •. • ,• •'a,,,...., , •V‘• ••••Z. •••.,4.•••• •eit1/4,",..",4•'-O." . ... \•Z` • • I I; t 4.1 ,.,..„...„.,WV-. •......: .,•*7 ••-;....la A.•,- .$....., 47,. ' 1 I .%.t.Z. .. iikkillir.• :••••‘ce• lji •11'••.... : so .:,/ • --Kx=-.-.:r ( .• a V.1:kr -' .11,, viliew, ..::. ,.• 1 ev.:..--. i• „sr. A Illa,_46eiC...--.1 k)k l'. I t ...4. to", .., ; 11001 .1 -•,.ii.t. r-Qik, *N.„,:,‘0 4 mik.'" - iii • , ..4i..•4- •• •F.••F" "dp.• '‘'`,..-71.1 a RAW"..• Alt .1'. %-•••,,, •1'• •, 1:. i. • 1,lb., V 1.• .••• ..i.-z-.: • "k A ',11\•., • i l N. !VII .1"---,16, 110.11, . .. .. •; ,-"7-E...., kiwi.•'" •A \ • • ",3 •' 1 .."' # %Mr .1ii.. All• ,....• . . 1 • i" • • - •••.11 40.00,,,O .4 ....... .• • •I N•41, . . 4 ..... 4„,;,.. .,.............„ .:........„......, •• .. • ., N, ‘71k,'•- !I 1. - • • 0' i ., • ...-_-. •-5-:ed a.: •• .4 • ." 1 ir i \ 163V11PV.°7‘ir 0 • .:-.77-7;:-....7'.. =An:. .",. :4. ‘II - .ile • • Pl4. • 2%,"! WOO. 1.4 ....- .. f. Ir.,. 4.- . .. . . , .... ._ - . , SZZ-t • ` /', • .a. :�" ',' _L,.� •���.•.• .v- ",. • if• ,' �• >. •r • !,f �� �— :11•� :�to rva• • ,•, tF1.•rJ • :1 1• . I a-►soy%,I'r"n IAw14 ��^"p.�'IVf% • .. "'-. �.. ._.�f�_ _ . .1• tti, � a 1 •• ^ P ; • T• I' . • i \�l - �iyy.S ' T . � 'i: ` " � ,, J r ` C' .t,. f.";y11 • r �'•: ;;om., , .:, -.., .;,�`•.:,. ��-` 'f :c.-1,;.>j�i. f ?'L....:.yl•n y- '(. :.ii?qs•fi>[T+ •n'''•./:�1.'A'•..t ir.,.k_:',..; t:l:..;,•;Pr:=w`•,t•+`ice. %now CS1 TY � � (�•• ' .•= i - ; fyy..11 rif°9 '• y a'I 7..,,: VIP,4.iJ ♦:• APl f •�'"'--" � 0L►1 �}J ..;•a V!�• .• ••. • 1 +L `1 1 ' �. r'i • =�•,0:-.,, • ca r.•• f`1,l!.'!r.... , 1:?'cc.• `;a '•s,s •'.•.r:Ise:'.h Ao wNs'•ill p,,34,�y, %,1..:r•• •,,,....0.--: ;', .. •,Lh It• 'I,."fir : kll I'y•. s • '.,,• ,fl l t1 it (•.'. •".•.,.j\ 1\l . \VI 1 /4.1 '.)1'1,.\‘1V••1-t• ,tk�j:,.fah:."�; . '• ', .. •d.' :r:• ,' 1 1 .,),b•l,•,.:'i'`._ S - - _ _y " - _ /L _ * -• •mil%,'.• p ,:4'1 fir;.11,1, lss, i ' '-•-•'.'7'..:: ' ..t1.!-' '-----4,!..• ..."4-•7..'-',;-::,,-.'• a .1- •o c;,ii I 1i1dD1pi II i;s6gi -I—I0.1C—.., 11ii4l .. :i,i}, $` `it' } N _ l lfii4:l li si iI ! !1 l381i!T1!i. i1 ..g'•. -�tfr.Ilf/ S afii rt �,il�e' f rig. • ..`..r- _ - V x'\_'G i �•-•• r4_: - ?.:..-• . 6• 5 lam. ` 3 :•!11'111l- f jI. ... j :t .�., . s i If ,1i s11:i/r lf- -s■ - ,, ` :_'�, i i!is :ill i . - .....,_;:,...:,,.,:i,;‘,,...:._r:-:,-,-,...„....„,..,: if.ss.,,,43 1 itsibi 1./11 , : Q s 'i -:. ti II� a z }�� lilla. I --..:.,1.,..-• ,, ts,,.• .-4-..... .--.-.17.7.:.,-,-,.--.,--. i II}Itilishiji . 1 ,, :14 : 1.4a' aiii —ii •.i.. ! ---,-...: ti 1 F Aill i 1::11 ■ T� d i ipi $rFA}I t�lvf `` r �'-•�' • rj� • i V 1` Ill $ i3 s , k �--� tit.:-� � s . I� ii}j � !� S� ZIt •;•_:i.cl�A•ic1i. .'kz-f<- '�'^ i r•�T Ili it: !- 8� +` ' i ,'. .: . - ! I 111'1 I■� a • x ii l 1 I' ll _' .,. ' •all{{ 1 qq pit:.!' ..• •*. +-� Ili d I tar i _ O E i i. • N N • • • • r••_-;:ter..� •y=i1_./Y ':�:..(•:�':4�....7 +•Y:;1...:.•:•-l''�'i"i.r:•..i,.. •!•.'i...:%4^‘i7•.. '• • .•f.•�~ •.!: - r ..•• •.l..t+:g.A ilY 'T '4' ��r-�'• r !S-+''••L`• �.r�F r •-.:'. t •S. / i fit;. .!t^:.�., -. • _ -:5;=�:� ....!; .-..c;1�r�''•'riv`:"ti �•.� '. aSa:i1 �.�' r�-.�I�;v:..��tc .. .t..• _• �, 1r `:t_ °"?,..t`i•(:{•. .:•?,4. r.t• '�1{' ,,:v`ei-- ' is • •i' ~'�.w' •.tQn�'4Y •y•�am' III 'Y•=i^.'t`w•i• • '1 ],� r" !: • __. • L •�' '• .r' • •$•• ' • ` • '• • t I •:'.., ' •....2•ir . 'a•, ♦ � � ' .i• •-1.`.� „:r.. - "i •• ;>` ' �.. +C✓•ti a !r' T-.` -i. iiti-mac '. d . - -: •• ' •�rr•'�� n " `':Rrt � •r -, ? � . Ay l,. ' • • • • • • t, • - - . • • • • ' • • .1 • • • r, f s South.End looms as:: next Bellevue' F E ^ z •'•$150 million corporate park spun multi-/t6ry boom in office buildings d�) yllAaote.tetltl. 0° ..e ......,b.r..y.w. fj �b 1 �V . I S .•. p'• -• "I -•R .•.•.. �'l""to.erw Z.f L-•'`'�..•�•�l'A� o.r B,rc... r.w...W • f N-•. 'tyF.sin mow lreYbjr ` C-'- ry..d.4 i•rl.e C...w f..• ll a t J ( f S,a.-,-,..- . .r Pali W rA ei..ey .C��•���- .n r 2...6 w r i.r.o..r.. l:3 t''' � �• ' 'fib !• .br lw.i..r l7..il11. �� r Iblrw.a.....rr...r..bn ;;� 04, `I;I [ d r r 1• r fi - lba .Mr.r... .,ARIA ...i I ...."� . 1. t1'p-• '� • . .�z}i :a t:eA4..+r.w.tr•..Niooliih_ To ' r--?, Art PA". '"Bond{...,. ♦ J _ _ t] rewire ••�1.•"If•er• t''ar .m.. err how sYy� �• 4y�,1\•� •t / _ _r �;• 1 '+ i •+4 it '� � �� r r•wrr:. .aw. .. 111 i+:: ��11�J ♦- a lrf f L .h..r1'• •• r.+._ • /_KiYfd � t eater y f.•.. �. yy •7z. • $$ �f BMW v�{ Y yxs F..-�.M■ //.IY/■w• 1r�i ` ``\'S'f/iavy �r j> :-a g •' *j L ex e s r r� bet �■.gn ,+� Ci C:.'i `�'� 1 1 •. l ail wit• `� .. -tt; •.f :aa.:q WC y s, yr Lrn,,,-..r..•'+v"•1:• 'ifs ow a ,•, �•. i� ,�f�`F' .!''tj ' rr+`...w.alr. .•• �•NaIrrr. oh/mu • w�..w.O w.lNAxrn.. f'�+r ! 9. `� a�'.'�' Cowry Born nl', i�I ii`,(� .t ;..r w .. ...M+r:10. •tiMr7.6.• . �■.■r No or � ...Or l!w.w Mop.. Camp I.Cam Crow rb er•baba slob wrho ' ht-A.A /1`►.. l..1 ,'• (( '� Y ndrrrO..A.In. yr .��•w r•Il.•■► .f..rh•�■. Irr� Ow•9 G...mho brown�Y P 1... I i / t. .4• r�� .r■i■rr....l..rr..r�.,i `��.y ndrlrrl..r .e.. Bond`r..e..1..rr.....• 9 ` S � ` t\ r 4• - •Bond.rt..css r •1'• ,r w'r b w ...r. C % Ihe•N. w n v , 1 t w ae•p.wr.rw uw:`~.�..a�"'lwrw.r« -r.rr....i .i� ...� ...err N...br,er, ; `1/ 7 ' " • I .+.w......rr �w re.••.•/.. wrerrbr ■on Boer. ••...•••• ■ 's(r�, �`�1.51�11„ r„'y �a.y..Or Mu r r M.� .r.smoggy ,a rpn.o.y"yl tar "ar "....:m:'.. c..""a..."th".: !1 1' �1,! 1 >�It i^�', a..o•.•fllr-.Il d •b. ,t.t.•Bond r... /...nee rrew l/.a.id. """rf M^.r.• t , t , i� F y�4 ' � y "i•��r�..:... *,.. r. .pro ,. .N ',ate, r hard ban.,.„,a• hr..T.` r 10.1:.p r;.`ba: 1 r y, ( S , r'1w1..r.ti INPN •/ ew..••o.n r) ! Y �••l ! Iwlw. r w.rb BM w "I..Ph.Or N.A .ww w bah i, 1 yyr,�t !7�'�� .nti •+ • ti •' v I.....•r tL wrat. r►r n•.-wr r.Yr y r Cho w r..rr lo r`r..•.r sr" n•.. 4.•."....r/Bond.I. »Iew,.e 4?(�� '�'. /. �//�, 1 t 7fAD 74 wrr ~...... -...B..lg c..,..r. 1r.rb.W'r� ....//A' ?,4 •'Li �►�e A•. ..a..r*w-r.°..'r ...—......1 r..Yrp.ar .rdr.•..Iwr'x�'.e•w r.■.f.rr.f�tor r..or. pt 6 _ C Q ...v laird Boil brio by Y. Nr...n=7•I.•I.1.. r wL/. .Wi. bar er rib._C•..11�'N.'•M� t (_7R ����� � �1 �'•i( pa�i T �• LI �---� reeb.r .,�,,..•i... :n •T.f.r ,.ti.....•:1 5LL `V 3 ..b �ppp tlt 1 0 r ° 5 O _7 r.�..�j/wrM.Fi..Mw1 Atli � 1 � � � �r����SG O �_. .......___� i ...w..i...bu":;.f.AW Y9 Rf IOQt I \/- ,11V R I Mho"rr..a•.ir. i ■ fAi F /'� nrrti nano w.....Rah E���Byy7�[� r �fplyg(l B "i O C) i e 1 w..�i�4'.... w.wM �'e'� Y�9� + � .i Ci =�11y I^ / 1' CD— �O� 1a ▪ �..r�~���...► qii 11 1Q 'L•.11 e •r a. CD CD ro I b. -?1:.. • Thereload 'Artonl.n"'wr'"`i oe•e�. �t 8 9 6� g6 � 3l x i fir.bw...,ol.w..... 16 ES t E?, �'F !r .�-ecc,• — X - li`Gn�...n..H....rrn. II •••A:f�•.e r E rEr $� P - t yl "All Time Boer b....i NIelEgr 7if17t:t11grtilig6. t �- �1�+4 WI.......Miwl�vY PAr i t 5 T nT= z n'-t l -�° :- Best Seller on —b.N..N •wr... - t & � �[ �i��3Qi Y f[ E 0 ♦V m ',A. ♦ Om:,Cr oo bwr4 R S*`t� t� A 1 :a �amyx ,^: - : How�to Sell' b+.r+.e...Mr..�ei.... 1 g t L !! ,fit. O m I ;W.�.ebbe r:=. r :(a Z r•e/CUM r L I y�.p. •IFS ii!111 . i 111111.1r, I CD = p' - z Comes to Life! e.r..b,w,e�•.i,.. Thin ..Mf•r u_..b..... r g fill g 1 l •ar*rfw bat WI bhp 1 ? !ft t r fflll Lai ,'1 Q- • oPHnB.lhenation9 mow....Cho'..n e a 7 • leading sales trainer steps lr•.i:bwrb"'harm at Or E' a t ! .i. out from between the a ea or...r wA •r cw.r.M. :1iitorta hill' yai(f(J(I. t=D 5 . IMK you hbrenowme6d '�'raAwMr tl to teach bad war Pon Sr WAN own ow $($ .' f*�4n {k� f ,I Ii 3` • ,��t (' >S •11. [8Btliinateehniquesln ham duo.ow.horn He nos Abaft trawl r.n•w. pl %ha rood ma harp Mid rot l , 1 II i f, 1%§ s i . � � ems■:e�pm=ban.romp ...•N aRg••• ,g1. f �wiOrti 1k,,•te,�a , ••..Mr.rrwrri MAW i � �' fry.•; rt........... �rd t ii;r I( ig ti l l'i sf The booYe hod and enr eelll BIdOB My nude k a 3aM6 ' I..r.l 'i.q".me almw JiIJ:!lt1IJF r • lab Ifil ore Ibr •ri✓S � � e� f II tT, arrrnar ( j (i a 1t [E Y i �'i' ,. 1 ThurWay•Anil 24.1990•ate Day Only, 10 '• wand ten. r.end. � � r a(fFi [(r` � •� j • 1900fiRhAThh venuentinlintel �w,:merrlNiN:.�r m. joi�r11 /. I. idi llq l • ' -(� ' •�attlC.w In..-.Mr+y...I. • • .may. Washington _i..'':wr—+I hoard pp tali as if ! ( 1 • •• Pir: t tf f tall 5.p`ff rat P T t. 'i'. ' it i :-A ; j1 1 fien Joun Dowrr/Ipmez,,a.fel iteflsfrr77.d yl ��I�Iy�cw...�..I�.'•s lnr y■Y. ... s .. 1-800.342-6999+ a•+" w Carry ail r.r l.. • 4-227 • 1 1 • Response to Comments from the Form Letter Sent by: Kay Mollanen,S.W."Stan'Murphy,Theresa M.Howard,Sherwood B.Martin,Luanne T. Martin,F.Karboly,Lloyd G.Edwards,Sandi and Dave Sager,Shellie M.Bennett,Rowland J.Martin,Mike Selzer,Jay?,and?Brunk,Sally L.Martin,Mr.and Mrs.Glenn Boyes, Carroll H.Nevermann,Ken and Denise Bronger,Terry Grefthen,Tatlna Grefthen,Evelyn R.?,Sharon Elliott,Rachel A.Young,Mary Ballestrasse,Mary Pergamo,Carol Lyn O'Neal, Bobby Joe?,John W.-?,Mary J.Graves,Thomas E.Stoeser, Dan Claudon,Juliana R. Stoeser,Stephanie Shein,Vivian G.Cook,Jennifer Boyes,Kristin Cook MacKay,William T.Cook,M.L.Perry,Mrs.Kay Donald,Lyle Perry,Jr.,Edward J.Ginn,Paul D.Shafer, David Halwell,Daniel Pohto,Laverne E.Graves,Barb Holt,Alice,Harold, Donald,and Kathryn Deacy,Phil Polizetto. This Final EIS includes mitigation measures to further minimize impacts,including extending the setback of development on Tract B from the heron rookery to 600 feet. See response to comments from King County,No. 1. The city is aware of the wildlife values provided in the P-1 Pond and adjacent riparian forest. Much of that riparian forest has been deeded to the city as open space. 4-92 4-228 - _ BLACK RIVER-PUBLIC COMMENT JOE MILES SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY SUSAN KROM I want to point out that I've lived in this area lot virtually all my life around Renton and South Seattle. I am a CITIZENS FOR RENTON WILDLANDS PRESERVATION 154 civil engineer,I have my bachelor's from University of Washington. I'm a licensed civil engineer In the Slate of Washington and I have a bachelor's end master's science degree In wildlife biology from the University The Black River forest and Y Me been Indeed to be an eroeptionally valuable site the CityW of Idaho, First of an, to briefly cover what the 8atlle AUDUBON Society Is, Is we're a nonprofit Renton and by r fng C and tn addition, organisation,we have over 4500 members here locally end our society Is dedicated to the protection and we may quality for state funding through the Washington Wildlife preservation of wildlife, plants and supporting habitats and we're concerned about a variety of and Recreation Coalhlon. The ate was rated es the 01 wetland In Renton according to the 19e1 Renton Wetlands Study that was performed by the City of Renton. In addition,the she was accepted KingAudubon Society tunes not the opposed Northwesto including thed we of Renton. I want to point out the Seattle �� � Audubon Society Is opposed to development and simply want to review development to see that County as en open apace she after undergoing rigorous eiaminatlon by the King Canty Open Space appropriate mitigations and guidelines are placed on developments so that they're compatible with the Committee,which Is now called the King County Office el Open Space,which found the site to be high In wildlife resources that are present at that site. We've reviewed the draft EIS.I've read it at least a couple the established criteria developed by the Committee. Some of the reasons that this site stands apart from times myself. We'll be sending you a letter with our written comments. We have concerns over water others in King County is that It satisfies so many criteria that establishes the value of open apace In terms of quality,noise,the wetland,the species listings for the site,but since we are limited to Just a short,brief buffer wildlife habitat,access to water,as a scenic between high Intensity uses and the fact that it was time.I'd like to focus my comments on those particular points In the DEIS that relate to the heron use of Immediately threatened by development. Plus,it's my understanding that the Renton Parks Department is this site. First,let me begin by describing the site Itself. I'm sure you've an been there. As you view the planning to apply for grant aid assistance to acquire and preserve the site,a portion of which the City site,the heronry can be seen clearly from Oakesdate Avenue and visa versa Is true. I'm sure that from the already owns,which was pointed out here In the introduction. The City will be applying for matching funds heronry,the herons can not only see Tracts A and B. but the Metro Treatment Plant end Oakesdale from the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Coalition which Is administered by the IAC,which Is a state Avenue. It's unfortunate that the past grading and clearing and logging permits have virtually eliminated 3 level program. This particular area attracts an unusually wide variety of wintering wddfowN,plus of course, the entire buffer that once existed around this area and there's a clear visual contact end sound contact It's attracted the heron rookery. As far we know,the heronry was established In 1988. In 1988,its first year, between these two tracks end the nests. After describing the site,I think the question Is going to come three nests were counted. This year,lust before the leaves unfurled,we counted somewhere between 30' down to what Is the appropriate buffer,building setback buffer,to place on this development. First of all, 37 nests and there's a range there because sometimes it's difficult depending on where you're standing,It we have to look at the literature as the DEIS has done. I think from reviewing their document and certainly affects your count. But it is somewhere between 30.37 nests.The heronry has also expanded not only In other references that aren't Included in their document,the literature cites 800,1000,1300,one reference terms of numbers,but it's also expended In terms dares.There cre at least four new nests lust west of the even recommends 1600 ft setbacks from sensitive heronries such as this one. Focusing locally what Is primary rookery site and I heard Just today that there's a possibility that there are nests also to the east end recommended,the US Fish and Wildlife recommends a minimum 660 ft buffer. What Is the Washington this is Just a matter of a couple of hundred feet away. So it is expanding. This is a ten-fold krxease in lust Department of Wildlife recommend? A permanent 800 ft buffer with at least 10 acres of trees and those four years. One of the primary reasons the heronry is growing so quickly,is that it's relatively undisturbed trees should be 50 feet tall. A permanent butler with 50 foal trees In It,800 feet from the heronry. Then a by humans. If we develop the site,according to this EIS,we risk losing the heronry entirely. And even If a 800-1300 foot buffer free of human disturbance during the breeding season. So the local agency,the pert of the heronry survives,it will probably not ed'bit anywhere near the same vigorous growth and Department of Wildlife for this state,Is recommending an 800 ft buffer with 50 fool trees In h at a minimum. strength that we've observed In the last four years. Yet we In M likelihood,suffer a serious decline hi use. So then we look at what is the applicant proposing for this site. On page B-12 of the draft EIS there's The dramatic increase In size and strength of this heronry is indicative of the importance of this site as a sentence which states,I quote,'The setbacks for distance from the rookery to the nearest building differ widlhe area. According to the EIS itself,the development wit have a significant impact that cannot be dl from those previously recommended by the Washington Department of Wildlife(which I think Is a typo In mitigated. This situation Is not as simple as mitigating filing In ofa wetland. We cannot move the heronry 2 there also)and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The differences are based upon she specific features of to a location that we feel Is less commercially viable.The herons vs"remain or leeve as the conditions that tree height and vegetative buffering.'Well,I question what the difference Is. Certainly,if they've eliminated S we impose allow. It redly is up to us to preserve their home.This heronry and wiidlie area puts Renton on all the trees on this site,the buffer should be greater. So they're site specific differences somehow modify the map. It's something that no one can buy. The people are going to point to Renton as a champion of the State recommendation of an 800 ft buffer. What are they proposing? They're proposing to plant 20 ft wildlife and the environment for having the fareelgte to protect the largest heronry In Puget Sound. This Is _ trees In the buffer area and on Tract A be within 600 feet and on Traci B within 400 feet on a site that you a situation that Renton shouldn't turn Si beck to. Nobody knows what the limits of the herons are. II we can virtually see the nests from, anywhere on the site. The Justifications -why do they make this buid 1000 feet away,Is that too dose? WI 750 feet be oiayf Some people may want to push the Omits of conclusion. They reference several site studies and I visited many of these sites myself and are famliar these bird,but I woad prefer to be coeservatM,giving them the most and the best that we can afford to with them and the ales are showing that there's disturbance very dose to existing heronries. I find that the give them. An Important point that I do want to emphasize here is that it's not Just for the herons that we ' buffers are not compatible. For example,the Yarrow Bay one,I was visiting Monday.I estimate the trees to want to preserve this site,l's also for us.The Black River Ripener'forest and heronry Is an oasis of solitude be between 50.100 feet tall.300 loot buffer,very dense,not Indicative of this site at an and they reference in the middle of Industrial South Seattle. For those of us living In the city,there are few places for us to go that as a site where there's an exception to the rule. The disturbance Is not compatible with the case where we can enjoy solitude and the peace that a plea like this offers.. The most satisfying are those studies.They have many studies in which It's en individual home,or a swimming pool ore boat launch and Places that remain undeveloped•that all have wildlife and still offer us a feeling a timelessness. We want they even admitted In the DEIS,there's no example In which they propose a seven-story office building with to preserve this spectacular quality of Ile that exists here by creating a place where both humans and parking,such as this proposal. Also,I want to point out that the DEIS carries a theme that these are ell G herons can coexist. The Black River Ripertan forest and heronry offers us that kind of haven. This she is viable significant also because k Is one d the last remaking lowland deciduous forests In thepopulations of Great Blue Herons. Therliterature shows that on manyvi o thepo nests are the percentageei Puget Sound�- use of the nests Is the indicator of whether they're viable or not. How d the nests actually being • used because herons can be present at these sites end not necessarily nesting. And we have studies which show that the herons are present but they're not nesting. Maybe only 70 or 20 percent of the nests are actually being used where a viable population 90 percent are used. This draft study doesn't Include that kind of data. Also the nesting success,the hatching rate from the individual sites are not identified in • -Black River/Public Comment-2- 4-229 the DEIS. Typically,2.5 young per nest Is a successful average. Murphy,In 1988 at this site,found that enhanced by proper management and planning therefore,the policies below should be pursued. And with only 2 were hatching per nest.The Lake Sammamish study Indicated an increase in population. Again,no that statement o1 the environment from 1986,end one of the interesting facts are that these policies are Indication ell'what success the nests were and that also there may be some recruitment from an very specific and very,very strong Including remaining wildlife habitat In the valley should be Inoserved or f0 abandoned heronry nearby as stated in Murphy's study In 1988. The Stanley Park example they give. It's law should be mitigated. The city's 1981 wetland study specifically mentioned in the Comprehensive Indicates a heronry that's In a park. There's no listing of the fact that the heronry has been abandoned Plan,should be used as a basis for establishing the priority of wetlands for acquisition and/or protection / twice and has been reestablished there and there may be a tack of alternative nesting sites In that area and It's that 1981 wetland study that lists the Black River Riparian Forest as the City of Renton's number one they keep coming back and it's been referred to because of the disturbance that they've left,at least twice. premier wetland and,In(act,since they mentioned that,I went ahead end started a review on that particular I have several pages of points. I guess I'd have to say that it's unfortunate that the applicant has several parcel. You know that there are 14 wetland units that were evaluated in that study. The City of Renton has months to prepare a DEIS and I'm linked to five minutes to comment on It and only 30 days to read the authority to condition and properly mitigate this project and deny It if necessary. We see nothing to document. Indicate that alternative proposals have been suggested that would not adversely and significantly impact the heronry that exist there. The protect,as It's designed and described In the DRIS,certainly has the potential and in aft likelihood,wik do that. JERRY ADAMS, SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY • EUGENE HUNN First of alt.I'd like to make one quick comment about some statements made earlier today. I noticed that SEATTLE AUDUBON SOCIETY when Mr.Erickson made his presentation that he claimed he thought the rezone requirements set aside • some of the area that has already been set aside now,the 20 acres I suppose,the treed area and pond that I'm president of Seattle Audubon Society ard'professor of Anthropology and Environmental Studies at the . were set aside Is what helped create the heronry end attracted the herons. I have problems with that. The University of Washington and author of Birding In Seattle and King County,a book on the birds of this area, condition that attracted the herons probably existed then and Will exist today whether or not any published In 1982. In the process of writing that book.I did my best to find Great Blue Heron rookeries and conceptual Ideas of setting aside property occurred,I doubt II the herons had any Idea that was really there was a Wildlife Department study that was published about that time,which Identified lust about a half going on there. Our organization reviewed the DEIS,as Mr.Mies pointed out,and I had the privilege of a dozen In King County. Since that time,we've discovered some more and others have been established. looking at Appendix A,which Is quite enlightening. Appendix Al.the overview of the Comprehensive Plan, Including this Black River rookery. But they still remain few and far between and I know of only about a Zoning Plan and other provisions and ordinances and that particular overview spent a little over three dozen In the county and most of those are relative small. So we consider Groat Blue Heron colonies such pages describing the general goals,objecthns and polices of the Comprehensive Plan and some of the as this,to be an extremely valuable wildlife resource. Seattle Audubon Society's primary concern Is with area specific policies of the Green River Valey Plan. 1 went In,of course,to check startling with the . the impact on wildlife,al sots of Impacts,but especially in the urban areas of the impact of development • environments/ordinance of the sky to nwle pure that those two plans wars indeed substitive authority that and urbanization. We believe that wildlife enhances everyone's lives end that It raises the quality of our Mr.Erickson mentioned earlier,the Green River Vaksy Plan and the Comprehensive Plan,sure they're own lives and to eliminate or reduce k Is to make our lives less valuable and that it's especially valuable to there. And,additionally,there's a purpose that's stated with that Comprehensive Plan and In part,the have wildlife habitat In the center or heart of our urban areas. So a wildlife habitat that still exists in those purposes of the Comprehensive Plan general goals are contained In the DEIS,but there's a portion that Is locations Is of critical Importance. The Great Blue Heron Rookery here Is very special and the Great Blue 8 of[Merest,that's the ordinance that initially states that this part contains the riles,policies for the SEPA Herons are magnificent birds with wing spans equal to that of the bald eagle: There are also many other su tethtive authority,such as the decisions to',fidgets or relict proposals as a result of SEPA. And,so wetland creatures that share that.habiat and I remember my first encounter with the Black River,back those two parts,the Volley Plan and the City Compreha,Ns Plan,are very Irstrmner aI and I think they about 10 years ago when I responded to a report on the goshawk nest In the cottonwoods along one of the shouldn't be treated lightly In their coverage In the DEIS.In fact.the coverage In the DEIS was of such that greens on the old Eadington Golf Course,which you may recall lt you've been around here for a little whte. k left a lot unanswered.There's a tremendousamount of omissions. Appendbc A lists the goals,objectives Ill And I didn't find the goshawk,the nest was too well hidden in these hugh cottonwoods,but as I was and policies and gives a brief kesrpretation of tech In aetusilly,al the pertinent policies wereomitted walking walking down the railroad tracks behind this wonderful riparian swamp,a kite stepped out of the swamp from the overview contained In Appsndbc A. Although It says these are the policies,whet we're looking at end walked across the railroad tracks and looked at me lore while and walked on. So,it's these kind of are oblooXhns and goals. Further,the overview states that there are 10 gods on the Comprehensive Plan experiences that are something that I would hops our children and grandchildren might be able to enjoy. that are described through the ot4ectives,when In fact there's 13 of them and I think that anyone could Specifically with respect-to the appendix on the assessment of the Impacts of disturbance. One thing I pick out a copy of the ComprelensM Plan,could go out there and count them as essay as I could. The know Is that the appendix Itself, states that only limited Information exists regarding the effects of letters A-M,there's 13.It appears dust whoever is doing the review must have missed a page and in act,a construction activities on adding rookeries,likewise,very little Information regarding setbacks needed to whole page. And fury enough,then were pages that dealt with the two relevant policies that are actually provide lag-term protection to heron rookeries. So,there's going to be a risk and a gamble In allowing objectives at this point. One entitled']-Marshes,Bogs and Swamps Objeo ",it's amazing they left disturbances close as Is contemplated in this project. Also,the 8 heron rookeries studied which In the that one out and the watershed objective.OIL The review of the Green River Valley Policy Plan,because k Import of the report.I think was to suggest that they are capable of withstanding substantial disturbance. was mentioned. Agate,no Ipecac policies mentioned.none at at Except that when we get into looking However,there was one colony which was abandoned which had 16 nests in 1986,this Is the Pigeon Point through the Green River Valley Plan,again,we find specific policies,lots of specific policies,Including colony In West Seattle. It was abandoned in 1987 and 1988 and may perhaps be showing a bit of a Q statements and a cagoule for mailing the policies. I'm going to reed the rationale right now. Because 1) comeback this year. But isn't Interesting that the consultant made no reference whatsoever to that I the undeveloped environment of the valley Is domaatsd by wetlands,marshes,bogs and swamps. 2) abandonment In terms of trying to provide an explanation or a cause of the cause of it It is my These wetlands and other parts of the Green River Floodptakn provide essential habitat for numerous forms understanding that It was coincident with a major Metro tunnel project In that area and I'm not sure a that oil wide%espeddy birds and smell winds. 3)Wetlands are also valuable as natural flood storage areas, was the cause of the abandonment of the colony,but It suggests that disturbance can very well lead to the Pollution filters,open spaoe,educstbrd resources. 4)Moat of the wetlands and wiles habitat of the abandonment of a colony. So the danger exists and I think it's important for us to spare on the valley have been converted to when devetopmert 5)Protection of some of the remaining wetland areas conservative side II you don't know what the results of our activities are going to be. Also,I'm very would provide mitigation for habitat lost 6)The dry currently owns the 20-acre wetland parcel for wetland concerned with the cumulative facts. I started going down to the Green River Valley in 1973 and every purposes.Iwbita,open spate,wombed. 7)The addle habitat value d undeveloped areas may be year,I've gone down there,there's been less there. I sill remember seeing a berenstein deravings,that's a -Black Over/Public Comment-3- •Black River/Pudic Comment-4• 4-230 , e - - • secretive marsh dwelling relative of the Great Blue Heron which le extremely scarce now km Western Theysimplystate that these exist, So because of Washington and this was right near Und Avenue. is now underneath an office bold where that nest my own observations,o c I wouldd recommend that the EIS i I Mg not be acceptable until the consultant can supply some meaningful documented Information on the heron site was located 10 years ego. So the Green River Valley has been fast disappearing and whie each little flight patterns and then address mitigation measures that would list the impact on those flight patterns bit may not seem like much,when you add It all up,the herons very shortly may have no place else to go. based on the actual observed and documented flight of the birds. GLEN MARTIN DAVID BEADON CITIZEN CITIZEN I happen to be en artist and from an aesthetic point of view,to me,it's a very,very rich resource we have I'm a Renton resident and have been for 10 years. I'm here as a private citizen,although I too am familiar here and there aren't very many places like this. I late to think that we would ruin this so that our children with Susan Krom and her presemtkm organization,of which I'm a member. I have not hed a chance to or as Susan Krom rnentloned,the average person won't have the opportunity to find a place of peace and read the DEIS statement,but I do have a couple of comments to make,more general comments. One Is relaxation, If youN ever gone then and Just spent the time standing there,I've seen weasels hopping that I'm very much In agreement with earlier sentiments expressed regarding the fact that there seems to around. From what I can see,perhaps unless someone Is going In and chopping down trees,there's be a lot of emphasis on the herons,but I don't understand why there's so much emphasis on the herons. perhaps beavers In there,there's a lot of wldiife that's not being looked at,we're just addressing the birds / they're lust ono aspect of the whole wetlands wildlife situation here and personally,I feel Ms kind of sad that much are quite Important,but there's more there that,N les taken away or If the environment Is I Q we have to zero on lust one aspect of the whole thing to make our point,so to speak. It's as N only the impacted enough,they're not any longer going to be there and people aren't going to have the opportunity herons are valuable enough to warrant this attention and I find that unfortunate. As far as development In to experience It. To have the opportunity to have this so dose to where we live and work,to erase that to general goes,development Is fine If It's done under the right circumstances and I lust hope that everyone ler take that away,Is Ina sense a rape to not allow us to experience things like we can now. To see that go,to the City government realizes that even though development bring the city money,is generally forever. me,has provided actually Impetus to make these paintings so to preserve something that I'm afraid is not Once you have development,it's there and you can't bring back what was there before. I'd prefer having a going to exist very much longer and I really think that the community should really consider what they're little less development In areas that need special consideration so that we can have natural areas end all Its going to lose. What are you going to gain by having these businesses put In here? Think about what wildlife for coming generations. And one other concern I have Is that I'm under the impression that the you're going to lose and I would like to think that maybe these paintings would give you an Idea of what Is developer owns quite a bit more property In this area that Isn't mentioned In this DEIS,specifically an area there and what you might lose. - north of the.I guess k's called the P-1 Pond,the due area on that map on the far right,and that would be I . guess between that end the railroad tracks end I'm kind of curious to know why that area hasn't been 19 addressed In this statement and I'm fearful that maybe the developer Is playing a game of divide and GARY DUVALL . conquer by attacking or proposing to develop parts of the whole property that they own. I wonder what CITIZEN the reception would be N the development planned for the whole area would be,I'd really be curious how much the developer Is going to gain by developing parts at a time and submitting those parts for evaluation I represent myself,although I am well acquakted with Susan Khan and the Renton Citizen Group end with rather than submitting a plan for the whole area that the developer owns. And after hearing that there was members of the Seattle Audubon Society. IVe lived In the Pacific Northwest for over 25 years and have some illegal or unsanctioned dear cutting In that area a while back,I find it rather interesting that the City is seen the destruction both of this valley and other mess so I have considerable interest h this,but the even allowing the developer to proceed this far until all that's resolved. specific point I wanted to address tonight Is that starting in late September 1989 and continuing through the present,I've been doing bid coots In the area from Grady Way north along Spningbrook Creek . through the rookery area to the P-1 pond darn. I've limed this to waterfowl,shore birds,herons,of course,and any raptors that I might happen to see,I've made the gmltatlon on this because of the constraints on my time. During the seven month period,I have had 20 days when I have made quantified observations of the water birds and so on present in that area, What I would Ike to specifically address Is one point it the EIS,km Section 3,5.4,on page 339,paragraph 1,It states thet a constraints analysts was performed by the consultant to Identify among other things,the Ingress and egress routes to the rookery.. Sknlady,the last point on page 339 under Tract A,Identifies SprI gbrook(reek as an Ingress and egress to the rookery. Also on page 340,under Tract 8,the third bullet Identifies the Might zone along Sprkgbrook Creek. On page 342,the first full paragraph Identifies heron flight zones sleep the east and west sides of Tract B. These flight zones are also drawn on Figure 4,Appendix 8 on the map. Now my own observations,based on these 20 days of quetilled observations along that arse over the period of seven / months simply do not support the/dstencs of such flight zones. Moat el the heron flights that I have • observed have been from the area north of the rookery and the wetland beyond the forest where they come flying In after feeding or from the trees on the north side of the Black River channel just before you get to the P-1 pond where they loaf frequently,pertiersiy km the hit,spreading their wings as they sit in the trees. So they fly beck and forth from there to the rookery. Beyond that,my observation of heron flight Is • that It's almost totally random. At any given day when Ill been out tere,I have seen herons a tArg from any particular direction. On days when I haven't counted or are going to and from work or traveling In the Renton area,I have seen herons flying overhead and I weld be hard pressed to get any quantified as to which direction or where they were coming front The EIS does not present any quantitative data on this. -Black River/Public Comment-5- -Black River/Public Comment-6- 4-231 Response to Public Comments•May 1,1990 Public Hearing Comments from Glen Martin: 10. Comments noted. Please see response to comments from King County Comments from Susan Krom: regarding the option for preserving the site as open space. 1. Comments noted. Please see response to comments from King County Parks 11. The significance of the heron flight zones has been clarified in this Final EIS. (Letter No.8)regarding open space. The City of Renton has approximately Please see response to comments from King County (Letter No. 8) and $624,000 allocated for land purchase in the Black River riparian forest area. Chapter 3,section 35.4. 2. The information regarding the number of heron nests has been presented in this Final EIS. The setback for Tract B has been increased from 400 feet to Comments from David Beadon: 600 feet. Please see Chapter 3 for a discussion of mitigation measures proposed for the project. 12. First City Developments Corporation(FCDC)does own additional land in the area. Please refer to Chapter 2 for further discussion of land ownership. Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for development of land Comments from Joe Miles: north of the riparian forest and heron colony has been delayed. 3. Please see Chapter 2,Sections 2.2 and 2.3 for further discussion of the history 13. The clearing was carried out north and northwest of the heron colony and not of Tracts A and B. on Tracts A or B. 4. Please see response to comments from the Washington Department of Wildlife(Letter No.4). 5. The building setback for Tract B has been increased to 600 feet. Please refer to Appendix B and Chapter 3 for additional information. 6. Although none of the case studies identified for this EIS are identical to the proposed action,they are representative of the type of land use conditions that nesting herons will tolerate. Please see response to comments from Dr. John Kelsall(No.58)and Range Bayer(No.59)regarding the question of viability and nest success. Stanley Park is an example of the tenacity of herons to continue to nest in areas of disturbance. Comments from Jerry Adams: 7. Comments noted. Please see Chapter 2,sections 2.2 and 2.3 and Chapter 3, section 3.5.2 regarding wetlands on the site. Comments from Eugene Hunn: 8. Comments noted. Further Information on wildlife resources of the site is presented in Appendix G of this Final EIS. 9. Please see Appendix B regarding the status of the Pigeon Point heron colony. 4-232 Chapter 5. Citations Chapter 5. Citations 5.1 Literature Cited Coffin, D.L., and H.E. Stokinger. 1977. Biological effects of air pollutants. Pp. 231 to 360 in A.C. Stern, ed., Air pollution, third edition,volume II: the effects of air pollution. Academic Press, New York, NY. Dorst, J. 1974. The life of birds. Volume I. Columbia University Press. New York, NY. Earth Consultants, Inc. 1979. Preliminary soil and foundation investigation Earlington Park, Renton, Washington. 9 pp. plus appendices. Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990. Preliminary characterization of dredge spoils, Blackriver Corporate Park, Tract A, Renton, WA, October 2, 1990. Forbes, L.S.,K. Simpson, J.P. Kelsall, and D.R. Rook. 1985. Reproductive success of great blue herons in British Columbia, Canada. Can. J. Zool. 63:1110-1113. Grette, G.B., and E.O. Salo. 1986. The status of anadromous fishes of the Green/ Duwamish River system. Report submitted to Seattle District/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 213 pp. Gill, H.S. 1983. Control of impact pile driving noise and study of alternative techniques. Noise Control Engineering Journal 20(2):76-82. Grubb, M. 1978. Proceedings of the Conference of the Colonial Waterbird Group. Kelsall, J.P. 1989. The great blue heron of Point Roberts - history, biology, and management. 31 pp., plus maps. King County. 1990. Surface water design manual. King County Department of Public Works. Lee,J.M. and D.B. Griffith. 1978. Transmission line audible noise and wildlife. Academic Press. New York, NY. Prepared for Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, Boulder, CO. 5-1 Little, L.M., R.R. Homer, and B.W. Mar, Assessment of. pollutant loadings and concentrations in highway stormwater runoff. FHWA WA-RD-39.12.1, Report to Washington State Department of Transportation by Department of Civil Engineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 1983. LPN,Architects and Planners. 1988. SEPA environmental checklist-Blackriver Corporate Park, Phase VII office facility. 16 pp. Metro. 1988. Quality of local lakes and streams: 1986-1987 status report. Publication 167. Murphy, M. 1988. Status of great blue heron colonies in King County, Washington. Western Birds 19:37-40. National Research Council. 1977. Carbon monoxide. National Academy of Sciences. Washington, DC. Nottebohm, F. 1975. Vocal behavior in birds. Pages 294-321 in D.S. Farner, J.R. King, and K.C. Parks, Avian biology. Volume V. Academic Press. New York, NY. Olympic Appraisals. 1990. An overview of office park (OP) land, Renton, Washington. Prepared for City of Renton Parks Department. Pumphrey,R.J. 1961. Sensory organs: hearing. In A.J. Marshall,Biology and comparative physiology of birds. Academic Press. New York, NY. Renton, City of. 1986. Compendium - City of Renton comprehensive plan. Renton, City of. No date. City of Renton zoning ordinance,Title 8, Chapter 7-health and sanitation. Renton, City of. 1987. Report and decision of the hearing examiner for approval of a special use permit to grade and fill property on Blackriver Corporate Park property (SP-100-86). Renton, City of. 1985. Shoreline master program. 46 pp. Renton, City of. No Date. Miscellaneous correspondence and files associated with Earlington Park and Blackriver Office Park. Renton, City of. 1981a. Wetlands study - A reconnaissance study of selected wetlands in the City of Renton. Prepared by the City of Renton Planning Department and Northwest Environmental Consultants, Inc. 24 pp. plus app. Renton, City of. 198 lb. Final environmental impact statement - Black River Office Park. Prepared by R.W. Thorpe and Associates. 5-2 -�a Renton, City of. 1981c. Final environmental impact statement-Earlington Park. Prepared by R.W. Thorpe and Associates. 33 pp. Renton, City of. 1980. Draft environmental impact statement-Earlington Park. Prepared by R.W. Thorpe and Associates. 130 pp. plus app. Renton, City of. 1981. Draft environmental impact statement - Black River Office Park. Prepared by R.W. Thorpe and Associates. 115 pp. Robbins, C.S., B. Bruun, and H.S. Zim. 1983. Birds of North America: a guide to field identification. Golden Press. New York, NY. Shipe, S.J., and W.W. Scott. 1981. The great blue heron in King County. Washington Game Department, Nongame Program. 33 pp. Simpson, K., J. N.M. Smith, and J.P. Kelsall. 1987. Correlates and consequences of coloniality in great blue herons. Can. J. Zool 65:572-577. Thorpe and Associates. 1981. Final environmental impact statement - Earlington Park, City of Renton. 71 pp. plus app. Transpo Group. 1985. Traffic impact analysis for Valley 405 Business Park. Transpo Group. 1988. Grady Way corridor transportation improvement study. July, 5 1988. Transpo Group. 1990. Blackriver Corporate Park (Valley 405) - trip generation analysis. October 2, 1990 letter. URS Consultants. 1988. Final Report-City of Puyallup stormwater management program. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1990. Air quality criteria for carbon monoxide. External review draft. (EPA/600/8-90-045A.) Office of Health and Environmental Assessment. Washington DC. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1950. Migration of birds. Circular 16. Frederick Lincoln, Biologist. 102 pp. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil survey - King County Area, Washington. 100 pp. Van Wormer, R.L. 1989. Letter dated June 29, 1989 to J. Ives regarding 1989 blue heron survey data for Black River Corporate Park heron rookery. 2 pp. Wang,T.S., D.E. Spyridakis, R.R.Homer, and B.W. Mar. 1982. Transport, deposition and control of heavy metals in highway runoff. WA-RD-39.10. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia, WA. 5-3 Washington Administration Code. 1989. Sound level measurement procedures, Chapter 173-58 WAC. Washington Department of Ecology. 1990. Stormwater management manual for the Puget Sound basin. Technical Review Draft - June 1990. Welty, J.E. 1962. The life of birds. W.B. Saunders Company. Philadelphia, PA. Werschkul, D.F., E. McMahon, M. Leitschuh. 1976. Some effects of human activities on the great blue heron in Oregon. Wilson Bull. 88:660-662. 5.2 Personal Communications Allmendinger, Harry. King County Surface Water Management - P-1 Pond Pump Station- telephone conversation, November 29, 1990. Bell, David. Engineering. Bush, Roed, & Hitchings - telephone conversation, August 17, 1990. Berg, R.A., A.I.A. May 2, 1989. President, LPN, Architects and Planners. Meeting with J. Ives, JSA. Chastain, Sam. February 2, 1990. Superintendent. City of Renton Parks and Recreation, Renton, WA. Telephone conversation. Coppock, P. Architect, LPN, Architects and Planners. Letters and numerous telephone conversations with J. Ives and A. O'Leary, JSA. Erickson, D.K. March - July 1989. City of Renton, Zoning Administrator. Numerous telephone conversations and meetings with JSA staff. Homer,R. January, 1990. Professor,University of Washington Environmental Engineering. Numerous telephone conversations. McAllister, K. July 5, 1989. Wildlife Biologist. Nongame Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Wildlife. Telephone conversation. Meyer, Mary Lynne. October 9, 1990. Current Planner, City of Renton Planning Division. Memo to Jonathan Ives, Jones & Stokes Associates. Miller, M. April July, 1989. Vice President of Development, First City Developments Corp. Numerous telephone conversations with J. Ives, JSA. Nordin, R. July 6, 1989. City of Renton, Assistant Transportation Planning Engineer, Transportation Services Division. Telephone conversation. 5-4 Parsons, R. Supervising Engineer, City of Renton Public Works - telephone conversation, August 15, 1990. _ Penland, S. May 31, 1989. Urban Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Wildlife. Telephone conversation. Price, C. June 29, 1989. Stormwater Engineer, City of Renton. Meeting. Roed, B. June 28, 1989. Principal, Bush Roed and Hitchings Engineers. Telephone conversation. Samek-McKague, J. May - July, 1989. City of Renton, Department of Community Development. Numerous telephone conversations and meetings with JSA staff. Spencer, S. October, 1990. Property owner, 18610 NE 95th Street,Redmond, Washington- telephone conversation. Straka, R. Engineer, City of Renton Public Works - telephone conversation, August 15, 1990. Swigard, K. Public Information Officer, Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency - telephone conversation, February 19, 1991. Van Wormer, R. July 5, 1989. Senior biologist, IES Associates, Olympia, WA. Telephone conversation. 5-5 Appendix A. Zoning Code Excerpts and Overview of Comprehensive Plan, Green River Plan, Zoning Ordinances and Development Standards, Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinances OVERVIEW OF CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ZONING CODE, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND GREEN RIVER POLICY PLAN Comprehensive Plan. The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan of March 1986 is a general and flexible program which is intended to guide development but is open for re- evaluation. 'The purposes of the Comprehensive Plan are: • To improve the physical and social environment of the City as a setting for human activities -- to make it more functional, beautiful, decent, healthful, interesting, and efficient; • To insure acceptable levels of access, utilities and other public services to future growth and development; • To promote the public interest, and the interest of the City at large; • To facilitate the democratic determination and implementation of City policies and development; • To effect coordination in development; • To inject long-range considerations into the determination of short-range actions; and • To provide professional and technical knowledge in the decisions affecting development of the City." (sic)(p.3) The Plan is divided into General Goals of the City and Area Specific goals and policies. General Goals. Objectives, and Policies. A series of long-range goals, objectives, and policies were developed that are relative to the needs of the city. There are 10 goals of the Comprehensive Plan that are described through the objectives and are implemented through the policies. The following outline delineates the relevant goals and objectives. • Environmental Goal: 'To establish and maintain a harmonious relationship between the developed community and its natural environment."(p.8) Balanced Development Objective: A balance between economy, availability of services, and the needs of the environment. Open Space Objective: Specified areas should be selected and maintained as open space. • A-1 Wildlife Habitat Objective: Wildlife habitats should be designated, preserved and enhanced. Vegetation Objective: Preservation of vegetation to preserve scenic beauty,prevent erosion,protect against floods and landslides,minimize air pollution, and reduce storm drainage costs. Resources Objective: "Natural resources and areas having scientific or educational value should be identified and preserved." This objective is also a policy. Surface Drainage Objective: Surface drainage is to be controlled "to remove harmful materials and sediments, replenish ground water resources, and minimize erosion and floods." Waterbodies Objective: Natural waterbodies are to be preserved "to minimize flood damage,minimize the need for storm drainage facilities, promote recreational opportunities, protect wildlife habitats, and enhance adjacent uses." Soils Objective: Development is to be compatible with soils. • Economic Goal: "To promote a sound, diversified economic base. Objectives are to encourage fiscal balance and employment." Fiscal Balance Objective: Balance between municipal costs and revenue. • Urban Design Goal: 'To promote aesthetic and functional harmony and to provide a proper balance of residential, commercial, and industrial areas." Landscape Objective: Landscaping that is used for buffering,screening less attractive activities, and minimizing detrimental impact between uses. Landscape Design and Maintenance Objectives: Design and maintenance to produce a desirable effect and to promote safety. Signs Objective: Signs that are compatible with the site and surrounding area. • Commercial Goal: 'To promote attractive, convenient, viable systems of commercial facilities." Commercial Areas Objective: the creation of sound commercial areas and revitalization of declining areas. A-2 Commercial Structure and Sites Objective: Commercial structures and sites that are well-designed, constructed, and maintained. • Transportation Goal: "To promote a safe,efficient and balanced multi-model transportation system." - Facilities Objective: Creation of viable transportation facilities and removal of non-functional ones. Trails Objective: Trails that are well located, designed, constructed, and maintained and form trail systems throughout the City. • Utilities Goal: 'To ensure an adequate supply and equitable distribution of utility services." General Objective: Utilities that are well planned, located, designed, constructed, and maintained and upgraded where necessary. Water Objective: Assurance of an adequate water supply and distribution system. Storm Drainage Objective: Assurance of an adequate storm drainage system which minimizes the impacts on the natural drainage features. - Sanitary Sewers Objective: An adequate sanitary sewer system is provided. Area Specific Policies -Green River Valley Policy Plan. Following the general goals of the Comprehensive Plan are area specific goals and policies. The proposed site is included in the Green River Valley Policy Plan. The general goal of this plan is that the Valley Planning Area "be developed with a diversity of high quality industrial, commercial, and office uses. The Valley should be the principal growth area for these uses within the City of Renton. Development within the Valley should be compatible with the availability of services and transportation and with the environmental objectives. Specific goals for the Valley are: - Land Use Goal: "To promote development of the Valley in a diversity of high quality industrial uses, together with commercial and office uses." • Economic Goal: 'To promote land development and commerce that will enhance a stable, diversified economic base for residents, employees, and businesses in the City of Renton." • Environmental Goal: "To ensure that development of the Valley is harmonious with the natural environmental setting,while minimizing pollution and other adverse environmental impacts." A-3 • Urban Design Goal: 'To promote a functional and aesthetic balance among industrial, commercial,office,recreation,and other uses in the Valley through appropriate design standards and a logical land use pattern." • Transportation Goal: "To promote efficient transportation within the Valley and adequate access to and from the Valley Planning Area." • Urban Services Goal: 'To promote the adequate provision of utility services (including storm drainage control), community facilities, and recreational opportunities in the Valley."(p.31-32) Zoning Ordinance. The City of Renton zoned Tracts A and,B as Office - Park in 1986. Until 1986, the City zoning had been Manufacturing - Park. The purpose of the O- P district is to "provide areas appropriate for professional, administrative, and business offices, certain manufacturing activities, and supportive services in a campus-like setting" (Zoning Ordinance Section 4-718, which is the Office Park District regulations, is included in full as part of this Appendix). Uses. The final decision of the on whether a use is permitted within the O- P Zone is made by the City of Renton Building and Zoning Department. Uses must be either listed in the zoning ordinance or be of similar character. Principal uses permitted in the O-P zone include: • Administrative and professional offices; • Medical and dental offices and clinics; • Financial offices such as banks, savings and loan institutions; • Schools and studios for art, crafts, photography, dance, and music; • Business and professional services; • Research and development; • Educational, cultural, and social activities; • Product servicing, wholesaling, warehousing and storage of articles, products or merchandise from previously prepared natural or synthetic materials or ferrous or alloyed metals; • Day care facilities; • Hobby kennels (maximum of 8 adult dogs or cats); and • Motion picture theatres and similar recreational and entertainment facilities (Zoning Ordinance Section 4-718 1988). Accessory Uses, which are uses that are incidental to a permitted use, include: A-4 • Parking garages; • Recreational facilities; • Retail sales of products of merchandise produced as a permitted use; • Repair activities ordinarily associated with a permitted use; and • Storage of petroleum or natural gas of a certain capacity and placed underground. Conditional uses,which are uses normally prohibited within a zoning district but are allowed with a conditional use permit, within the O-P zone range from churches to on-site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities. Conditionally permitted uses are allowed when judged by the City Hearings Examiner to be consistent with other existing and potential uses in the zone (Zoning Ordinance Section 4-748(A)). Residential uses are not permitted in this zone. Development Standards. Standards relevant to the proposal include: • Site Plan Approval-the City requires approved site plans for all developments within the O-P zone. • Setbacks: 60 feet or 20 percent of lot depth, which ever is less, from streets (if the street is a major or secondary arterial the setback shall be a minimum of 30 feet). 20 feet or 15 percent of the lot width, whichever is less, from any property line that does not abut a public street. An increase of 1 foot for every 2,000 square feet larger than 25,000 for the footprint of a building adjacent to any building or structure (structure is defined as "any object constructed or installed by man") up to 100 feet abutting public streets, and 60 feet in other yards. Setback areas shall be unobstructed and unoccupied except for off- street parking and loading, driveways, entrance roads, lawn sprinklers, walkways, landscaping, ordinary and necessary utility service facilities, utility poles, lighting fixtures, identifying and direction signs and underground installations accessory to any permitted use. With approval by the City one of the side setbacks may be reduced of eliminated if the total width of both side setbacks is at least twice the width of the minimum setback specified above. A-5 • Height - setbacks shall be increased one foot for each additional foot above - 45 feet for buildings adjacent to all uses but other than residential. _ • . Landscaping - a minimum landscaped setback of 20 feet is required from all public streets or rights of way. The City requires landscaping for all areas not covered by buildings,structures,or paved surfaces. In addition,areas set aside for future development, such as Tract A,may be hydroseeded. When parking lots are adjacent to one another, perimeter landscaping is not required. 1 A-6 4-718: OFFICE PARK DISTRICT (0-P): (A) Purpose and Intent: The Office Park Zone (O-P) is established to provide areas appropriate for professional, administrative, and business offices, certain manufacturing activities, and supportive services in a campus-like setting. (Ord. 4186, 11-14-88) (B) Uses: In the Office Park Zone (O-P), the following and similar uses are permit- ted. The Building and Zoning Department may determine that any other use is similar in general character to the following specific uses and is in keeping with the intent of this Zone. Upon such administrative determination,the subject use shall become a principal, accessory or conditional use, whichever is ap- propriate. Unless indicated by the text, definitions of the uses listed in this Zone are consistent with the descriptions in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual. 1. Principal Uses: In the O-P Zone the following principal uses are permitted: a. Administrative and professional offices. b. Medical and dental offices and clinics. c. Financial offices such as banks, savings and loan institutions. d. Schools and studios for art, crafts, photography, dance and music. e. Business and professional services. f. Research and development. g. Educational, cultural, and social activities. (Ord. 3937, 9-16-85) h. Product servicing, wholesaling, warehousing and storage of articles, products or merchandise from previously prepared'natural or synthetic materials, or ferrous or alloyed metals. (Ord. 4186, 11-14-88) 189 A-7 4-718 4-718 B,1) i. Day care facilities. (Ord. 3937, 9-16-85) j. Hobby Kennels: A maximum of eight (8) adult dogs or cats may be permitted after satisfaction of the requirements in Section 4-749(C)1,a. (Ord. 3955, 11-4-85) k. Motion picture theaters and similar recreational and entertainment facilities, subject to the provisions of Section 4-730(C)2. (Ord. 3980. 3-24-86) 2. Accessory Uses: In the 0-P Zone the following uses are allowed where incidental to a permitted use: a. Parking garages. b. Recreational facilities. c. Retail sales of products or merchandise produced as a permitted use. d. Repair activities ordinarily associated with a permitted use. e. Storage of petroleum or natural gas or any of their by-products, provided that the total storage capacity is less than ten thousand (10,000) gallons or other applicable unit of measure, and that storage of such products is placed underground. 3. Conditional Uses: In the 0-P Zone the following uses and their accessory uses may be allowed by conditional use permit as provided in Section 4-748 of the City Code: a. Churches. b. Heliports. c. Personal, recreational, and repair services, and retail uses, subject to the standards of Section 4-718(C)2. d. Additional uses as identified in Section 4-748(D)1. (Ord. 3937, 9-16-85) e. On-site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities. (Ord. 4186, 11-14-88) 4. Prohibited Uses: In the O-P Zone the following uses are prohibited: a. Residential uses. b. Automobile, motorcycle, truck, boat, mobile home, trailer, and recreational vehicle sales, rental, repair, service and storage activities, except repair and maintenance may be permitted if incidental to a permitted use. c. Any outdoor storage or display of materials or products. ' d. All other uses not included in Section 4-718(B)1 through 4-718(8)3. (Ord. 3937, 9-16-85) e. Off-site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities. (Ord. 4186, 11-14-88) I A-8 189 4-718 4-718 (C) Development Standards: In the O-F'Zone the following development standards shall apply, except as otherwise provided by this Section. 1. Site Plan Approval: Site plan approval shall be required for all developments within the O-P Zone. A building site plan shall be filed and approved in accordance with the City Code prior to issuance of any building permits. Each building or other development permit issued shall be in conformance with the approved site plan. 2. Standards for Retail and Selected Service Uses: For those service and retail uses identified in Section 4-718(B)3,c, the following standards shall apply: a. The design of structures, including signs, shall be generally consistent in character with surrounding uses. No drive-up windows or outside automobile service shall be permitted. b. No exterior display of merchandise shall be permitted. c. In order to avoid the negative impacts of strip commercial development: (1) Retail or selected service uses shall be developed as part of larger, planned commercial, office or industrial complexes having common architectural or landscaping themes. Such retail or service uses shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than fifty percent (50%) of a jointly developed building complex. (2) Direct arterial access to individual uses shall occur only when alternative access to local or collector streets or consolidated access with adjacent uses is not feasible. (3) Roof signs shall be prohibited. Free-standing signs shall not exceed ten feet (10') in height and shall be located at least twenty feet (20') from any property line, except for entrance and exit signs. 3. Setbacks: a. Streets: All buildings and structures shall be located a minimum of sixty feet (60') or twenty percent (20%) of the lot depth, whichever is less, from any public street or highway property line. In any case, if the adjacent public street is a major or secondary arterial, the setback shall be at least thirty feet (30'). b. Other Yards:All buildings and structures shall be located a minimum of twenty feet (20') or fifteen percent (15%) of the lot width, whichever is less, from any property line which does not abut a public street or highway. c. Adjacent to Large Structures: The required yard setbacks adjacent to any building or structure with a building footprint greater than twenty five thousand (25,000)square feet shall be increased one foot(1')for each additional two thousand (2,000) square feet of building footprint, up to a maximum of one hundred feet (100') abutting public streets, and sixty feet (60') in other yards. 189 A-9 4-718 4-718 C,31 d. Adjacent to Residential Lots: Whenever a proposed use in the O-P Zone shares a common property line with a lot that is designated any residential use on both the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map, the minimum setback contiguous to the common property line shall be fifty feet (50'). Whenever an adjacent lot contains a residential use and either the Comprehensive Plan or zoning designation or both is something other than residential, then the appropriate setback and landscaping adjacent to. the residential lot shall be determined by site plan approval. A site plan decision to require more than the minimum setback and landscaping shall consider the long term viability of the residential use, the presence of other residential uses in the surrounding area, and such other indications of stability as owner- occupancy and housing condition. e. Use of Setback Areas:All required setback areas shall be unoccupied and unobstructed except for off-street parking and loading, driveways, entrance roads, lawn sprinklers, walkways, landscaping, ordinary and necessary utility service facilities, utility poles, lighting fixtures, identifying and direction signs and underground installations accessory to any permitted use. f. Flexible Setbacks: With site plan approval and subject to applicable Building and Fire Codes, one of the side setbacks (not adjacent to a public street or residential use, as defined in Section 4-718(C)3,d) may be reduced or eliminated if the total width of both side setbacks is at least twice the width of the minimum setback specified in Section 4-718(C)3,b above; and the rear setback not adjacent to a public street may be reduced or eliminated if the front setback is increased accordingly. The site plan decision shall be based on a finding that, with reduced setbacks, the architectural design, building orientation, circulation, noise and glare of the proposed project will be compatible with adjacent uses and with the purpose and intent of the 0-P Zone. - 4. Height: Building heights in the O-P Zone shall be established with consideration to adjacent land uses and shall be determined as follows: a. Adjacent to Single Family/Low Density Multi-Family Uses: No height limit shall be required provided that for each one foot (1') of building height there shall be provided one foot (1') of yard setback on the periphery of the site where the office park use is adjacent to a single family or low density multiple family use located on a lot designated Single Family or Low Density Multi-Family on the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map. b. Adjacent to All Other Uses: No height limit shall be required provided that all required yard setbacks adjacent to such other uses shall be increased one foot (1')for each additional one foot (1') of height above forty five feet (45'). c. These setback/height requirements cannot be modified by application under the P.U.D. process. 5. Landscaping: a. There shall be a minimum landscaped setback of twenty feet (20') from all public street or highway rights of way. • A-10 1285 4-718 4-718 C,5) b. There shall be a minimum landscaped setback of ten feet (10') or one-half ('/a) the required setback, whichever is less, from all other property lines. c. A minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the site shall be retained in landscaped open space. A maximum of one-half ('/) of this requirement may be on the roofs of structures, provided employees and the public have access to the area.A maximum of seventy five percent (75%)of this requirement may be within the required perimeter landscaping. The twenty percent (20%) minimum landscaping requirement may not be reduced if a site is developed as a P.U.D. d. All areas not covered by buildings, structures or paved surfaces shall be landscaped. Areas set aside for future development on a lot may be hydroseeded. e. Where parking lots are adjacent to one another, perimeter landscaping shall not be required. f. Any wall surface greater than thirty feet (30') in width lacking windows or doors shall be softened by landscaping or architectural features, such as change of texture or wall modulation. Such landscaping shall include trees over six feet (6') in height placed no more than thirty feet (30')on center or in clusters. g. With site plan approval, the perimeter landscaping setbacks required by Section 4-718(C)5,a and b above may be reduced in width up to fifty percent (50%) if the equivalent square footage of landscaping is provided elsewhere within the site. Site plan approval shall be based on a finding that the alternative landscaping arrangement provides buffering and site amenities equal to or better than that which would be achieved by strict application of the Code. The relocated landscaping shall not be located within the rear setback of the site. 6. Refuse: No refuse, trash, rubbish or other waste material shall be dumped, placed or allowed to remain outside a permanent building, except in nonflammable, covered containers or dumpsters, which shall be screened by fences or landscaping. No refuse shall be stacked higher than the screening fence or landscaping. 7. Parking/Circulation: Parking and circulation standards required shall be as follows: a. Access:The principal access shall be from an arterial or collector street and shall be oriented to the least traveled street whenever two (2) or more such arterials or collectors abut the site. b. Parking/Circulation: Parking and circulation areas along a common lot line with a residential use located on a lot designated as a residential use on both the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map shall be allowed only if a ten foot (10') wide sight-obscuring landscaping strip and a six foot (6') high solid fence are provided along the common boundary line. c. Parking and Loading: (1) See Chapter 22, Title IV of the City Code. • 1285 A-11 li 4-718 4-718 C,7,c) (2) All loading docks and roll-up doors shall be located,at the rear of buildings or screened so that they are not visible from any point along the abutting public right of way. (3) At no time shall any part of a vehicle be allowed to extend into a public right of way while the vehicle is being loaded or. unloaded. All loading and unloading maneuvers shall be conducted on private property. 8. Environmental Performance Standards: The following minimum standards shall be met by all activities within the 0-P.Zone. For all activities which may produce objectionable or otherwise prohibited conditions, the property owner or lessee shall furnish design specifications or other scientific evidence of compliance with these standards. a. Noise: See Title VIII, Chapter 11, Noise Level Regulations. b. Smoke: (1) Visible grey smoke shall not be emitted from any source in a greater density of grey than that described as No. 1 on Ringlemann Chart. (2) The provisions applicable to visible grey smoke shall also apply to visible smoke of a different color but with an equivalent apparent opacity. c. Dust, Dirt, Fly Ash or Airborne Solids: No observable dust, dirt, fly ash or airborne solids shall be emitted. d. Odorous Gases and Matter: No odorous gases or matter in a quantity sufficient to evoke a response from the average person beyond the exterior property lines shall be emitted. e. Toxic Gases and Matter: No emissions of toxic gases or matter shall be permitted. f. Vibration: No vibration shall be permitted to exceed 0.003 of one inch (1") displacement or 0.03 (g) peak acceleration, whichever is greater, as measured at any point outside the property lines of the lot or site. This shall apply in the frequency range of zero to five thousand (0 - 5,000) cycles per second. Shock absorbers or similar mounting shall be allowed to permit compliance with this specification. g. Glare and Heat: (1) No glare and heat from any source shall be permitted to be unreasonably objectionable beyond the exterior property lines of a lot or site. I F (2) All exterior or wall mounted lighting fixtures shall be directed away from public streets or rights of way. Exterior lighting fixtures shall be equipped with hoods or reflectors such that direct light rays extend no more than ten feet (10') beyond the nearest property line. 9. Signs: See Chapter 19, Title IV of the City Code. (Ord. 3937, 9-16-85) • A-12 1285 4-719 4-719 4-719: AIRPORT ZONING: (A) Zones: In order to regulate the use of property in the vicinity of the airport, all of the land within two (2) miles south and one mile east and west of, or that part of the area that is within the City limits of Renton, Washington, whichever is nearest the boundaries of the airport, is hereby divided into airport approach, transition and turning zones. The boundaries thereof are shown on the Renton Airport Approach Plan numbered No. 1, dated March 1, 1956, which Plan is made a part hereof. (B) Height Limits: Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no structure or tree shall be erected, altered, allowed to grow or be maintained in any airport approach zone or airport turning zone to a height in excess of the height limit herein established for such zone. For the purposes of this regulation, the following height limits are hereby established for each of the zones in question: (Ord. 1542, 4-17-56) 1. Approach Zones (Shaded Dark Red on Plan): Height limitation to be one foot (1') in height for each forty feet (40') lateral separation from a line which is two hundred feet (200') south from the "Displaced Threshold" at Station No. 10+00 as shown on revised Renton Airport Approach Plan, No. 1--R, dated May 17, 1960, which Approach Plan is filed herewith and by this reference is made a part hereof. (Ord. 1829, 5-17-60) • (See following page for continuation of Section 4-719[B]) A-13 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 4219 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING TITLE IV (BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER ENTITLED LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING ORDINANCE AND ESTABLISHING PENALTIES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Title IV (Building Regulations ) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended by adding the following chapter: CHAPTER 36 LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING ORDINANCE 4-3601: TITLE This ordinance shall be hereinafter known as the "Renton Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance, may be cited as such, will be hereinafter referred to as "this ordinance, " and shall constitute . Chapter 36, Title IV. 4-3602: PURPOSE This Ordinance provides regulations for the clearing of land and the protection and preservation of trees and associated significant vegetation for the following purposes: A. To promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Renton; B. To implement the policies of the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as revised in 1984; C. To preserve and enhance the City's physical and aesthetic character by preventing indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover; A 14 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 D. To implement and further the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan for the environment, open space, wildlife habitat, vegetation, resources, surface drainage, watersheds, and economics; E. To ensure prompt development, restoration and replanting, and effective erosion control of property during and after land clearing; F. To promote land development practices that result in a minimal adverse disturbance to existing vegetation and soils within the City; G. To minimize surface water and groundwater runoff and diversion; H. To aid in the stabilization of soil, and to minimize erosion and sedimentation; I. To minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization of soils; J. To retain clusters of trees for the abatement of noise and wind protection; K. To acknowledge that trees and ground cover reduce air pollution by producing pure oxygen from carbon dioxide; L. To preserve and enhance wildlife and habitat including streams, riparian corridors, wetlands and groves of trees; M. To promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the City's natural topographical and vegetational features while at the same time recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g. disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, protection of scenic views, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover, N. To promote the reasonable development of land in the City of Renton. 4-3603 : DEFINITIONS A. CALIPER shall mean the diameter of any tree trunk as measured at a height of four and a half (4 1/2) feet above the ground on the upslope side of the tree. B. CREEK means those areas where surface waters flow sufficiently to produce a defined channel or bed. A defined channel or bed is indicated by hydraulically sorted sediments or the removal of vegetative litter or loosely rooted vegetation by the action of moving water. The channel or bed need not contain water year-round. This definition is not meant to include storm water runoff devices or other entirely artificial watercourses unless they are used to store and/or convey pass-through stream flows naturally occurring prior to construction of such devices. C. DEVELOPED LOT shall mean a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located. which cannot be more intensively developed pursuant to the City Zoning Code. and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to City Subdivision ordinance. D. DRIP LINE of a tree shall be described by a line projected to the ground delineating the outermost extent of foliage in all directions. • A-15 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 E. ENILANCEMENT ACTIVITIES shall mean removal -of noxious or intrusive species, plantings of appropriate native species and/or removal of diseased or decaying trees which pose a clear and imminent threat to life or property. Enhancement activities shall not involve the use of mechanical equipment. Enhancement activities may include the removal of pests which pose a clear danger to public health provided that such danger is certified by the King County Department of Public Health. F. GROUND COVER shall mean small plants such as salal, ivy, ferns, mosses, grasses or other types of vegetation which.normally cover the ground and includes trees of less than 6 inches caliper. G. GROUND COVER MANAGEMENT shall mean the mowing or cutting of ground cover in order to create an orderly appearing property so long as such activities do not disturb the root structures of the plants. Ground cover management shall include the removal of vegetative debris from the property. H. LAND CLEARING means the act of-removing or destroying trees or ground cover including - grubbing of stumps and root mat from any undeveloped lot, partially developed lot. developed lot, public lands or public right-of-way. LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT means a preliminary or final plat for a single family residential project: a building permit; site plan; or preliminary or final planned unit development plan. J. LAKES are natural or artificial bodies of water of two or more acres and/or where the deepest part of the basin at low water exceeds two meters (6.6 feet). Artificial bodies j of water with a recirculation system approved by the Public Works Department are not included in this definition. K. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT shall include all motorized equipment used for earth moving, trenching, excavation, gardening, landscaping, and general property maintenance exceeding twelve (12) horsepower in size. L. NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION EASEMENT is. a restrictive area where all native, pre- development vegetation shall not be disturbed or removed EXCEPT for removal pursuant to an enhancement program approved pursuant to this Chapter. The purpose of an Easement is to protect steep slopes, slopes with erosion, landslide and seismic hazards. { i creeks, wetlands and/or riparian corridors. This Easement shall be defined during the review process pursuant to Section 4-3613, and shown on the recorded plat or short plat. i l M. PARTIALLY DFVELOPED LOT shall mean a lot or parcel of land upon which a structure is located and which is of sufficient area so as to be capable of accommodating increased development pursuant to the Renton Zoning Code: or which may be subdivided in accordance with the City of Renton Subdivision Ordinance. N. PERSON shall mean any person, individual, public or private corporation. firm. association, joint venture. partnership, owner. lessee, tenant, or any other entity whatsoever or any combination of such. jointly or severally. O. REMOVAL is the actual removal or causing the effective removal through damaging. poisoning, root destruction or other direct or indirect actions resulting in the death of a tree or ground cover. A 16 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 P. ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT shall mean tree trimming. tree tonning and ground cover management which is undertaken by a person in connection with the normal maintenance and repair of property. O. TREE shall mean any living woody plant characterized by one main stem or trunk and many branches and having a caliper of six inches or greater, or a multi-stemmed trunk system with a definitely formed crown. R. TREE CLTTIXG shall mean the actual removal of the above ground, plant material of a tree through chemical, manual or mechanical methods: S. TREE TRIMMING shall mean the pruning or removal of limbs provided that the main stem is not severed and no more than 40c1. of the live crown is removed. T. TREE TOPPING shall mean the severing of the main stem of the tree in order to reduce the overall height of the tree provided that no more than 40% of the live crown shall be removed during any topping. U. UNDEVELOPED LOT shall mean a platted lot or parcel of land upon which no structure exists. V. WETLANDS are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated soil fonditions. Wetlands generally include swamps. marshes, bogs and similar areas. 4-3604: ADMINISTERING AUTHORITY The City's Director of Community Development, or his duly authorized representative, is hereby authorized and directed to enforce all the provisions of this Ordinance. 4-3605: GENERAL PROVISIONS A. There shall be no tree cutting or land clearing on any site for the sake of preparing that site for future development unless a land development permit for the site has been approved by the City. B. Tree cutting is permitted as follows except as provided in Section D below: 1. On a developed lot; 2. On a partially developed or undeveloped lot provided that: a. No more than three trees are removed in any twelve month period from a property under 35.000 square feet in size: and b. No more than six trees are removed in any twelve month period from a property over 35.000 square feet in size. • A 17 ORDINANCE NO. 4 21 9 C. Land clearing in conformance with the provisions of Sections B and D is permitted on a developed. partially developed or undeveloped lot for purposes of landscaping or gardening provided that no mechanical equipment is used. D. No tree cutting or land clearing is permitted within 25 feet of any shoreline area. within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks, in a wetland area. or on parcels where the predominant slope or individual slope is in excess of forty percent except enhancement activities. E. Any person who performs routine vegetation management on undeveloped property in the City must obtain a Routine Vegetation Management permit prior to performing such work. F. Any person who uses mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree cutting. landscaping, or gardening on developed, partially developed or undeveloped property must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. G. No provision of this ordinance shall be construed to eliminate the requirement of permits for the purpose of developing the property with substantial permanent improvements such as roads, driveways, utilities, or buildings. 4-3606: REGULATIONS FOR THE LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY A. When a development permit is submitted to the City of Renton it shall be accompanied by a land clearing and tree cutting plan. This plan shall be reviewed as part of the environmental review process pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act and Title IV, Chapter 7, Section 2800 of the City Code. B. All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall conform to the performance standards set forth in Section 4-3613 unless otherwise recommended in an approved soil engineering, engineering geology, hydrology or forest management plan and where the alternate procedures will be equal to or superior in achieving the policies of this Chapter. C. All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall be conditioned by the City to ensure that the following performance standards are met. 1. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or contribute to landslides. accelerated soil creep, settlement and subsidence or hazards associated with strong ground motion and soil liquefaction. 2. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or significantly contribute to flooding, erosion, or increased turbidity, siltation or other form of pollution in a watercourse: 3. Land clearing and tree cutting will be undertaken in such a manner as to preserve and enhance the City's aesthetic character and maintain visual screening and buffering. A-18 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 4. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time, consistent with an approved build-out schedule. 5. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be conducted so as to preserve habitat consistent with reasonable use of the property. 4-3607: EXEMPTIONS The following shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter: A. Removal of trees and/or ground cover . by the Public Works Department, Parks Department, Fire Department and/or public or private utility in emergency situations involving immediate danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility; B. Removal of dead or terminally diseased or damaged ground cover or trees which have been certified as such by a forester, landscape architect or the City prior to their removal. C. Maintenance activities including routine vegetation management and essential tree removal for public and private utilities, road rights of way and easements, and parks. D. Installation of distribution lines by public and private utilities provided that such activities are categorically exempt from the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act and Title IV, Section 2800 of City Code. 4-3608: ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS Permits for routine vegetation management shall be processed in accordance with the purposes and criteria of this section as follows : A. An application for a Routine Vegetation Management Permit shall be submitted to the Community Development Department together with any necessary fees. B. The permit shall be reviewed administratively within a reasonable period of time. C. Any individual or party of record who is adversely affected by such a decision may appeal the decision -to the City's Hearing Examiner pursuant to the procedures established in Title IV, Chapter 30. A-19 • ORDINANCE NO. 4219 4-3609: APPLICATION FOR ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT A Routine Vegetation Management Permit Application shall set forth the following information: A. Name, address and telephone number of the applicant; name and telephone number of the contact person, if any; • B. A time schedule for all mechanical equipment activities or routine vegetation management activities. C. A plan for the specific work to'be performed. D. For routine vegetation management on undeveloped properties, the application shall include: 1. Standards and criteria to be used for routine tree trimming and tree topping; 2. Standards and criteria to be used for ground cover management; and 3. Standards and criteria to be used in determining the location for use of chemicals including insecticides and herbicides. E. For use of mechanical equipment the application shall include: 1. The type of equipment to be used. 2. A description of the specific work to be accomplished using the equipment. 3. The measures proposed to protect the site and adjacent properties from the potential adverse impacts of the proposed work and equipment operation. _ 4-3610: REGULATIONS FOR ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT A. Any routine vegetation management on -undeveloped property requires a permit pursuant to this Chapter. Permitted activities may include the use of mechanized equipment except as provided in Sections C and D below. B. The use of mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree cutting, landscaping, or gardening on developed, partially developed or undeveloped property requires a permit pursuant to this Chapter. C. For all properties, no land clearing, tree cutting, or ground cover management activities except enhancement activities are permitted in areas with slopes over 40 percent; slopes over 25 % with class II or class III landslide hazards, and slopes over 25% with class II or class III erosion hazards, as identified by the King County Soils Survey, King County Sensitive Areas Map Folio or the City of Renton Environmentally Sensitive Areas Maps. D. For all properties, no land clearing, tree cutting or ground cover management activities except enhancement activities are permitted in wetlands including a minimum buffer A-20 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 area of 25 feet, riparian corridors including a minimum buffer area of 25 feet from the high water mark of the creek or stream, and in the 200 foot state shoreline area. 4-3611: ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT CONDITIONS The Routine Vegetation Management permit may be denied or conditioned by the City to restrict the timing and extent of activities in order to further the intent of this Chapter including: A. Preserve and enhance the City's aesthetic character and maintain visual screening and buffering. B. Preserve habitat to the greatest extent feasible. C. Prevent landslides, accelerated soil creep, settlement and subsidence hazards. D. Minimize the potential for flooding, erosion, or increased turbidity, siltation or other form of pollution in a watercourse. 4-3612: TIME LIMITS FOR PERMITS Any permit for Routine Vegetation Management shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of issuance. An extension may be granted by the Community Development Department for a period of one (1) year upon application by the property owner or manager. Application for such an extension must be made at least 30 days in advance of the expiration of the original permit and shall include a statement of justification for the extension. 4-3613 : PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMITS A. There shall be no clear cutting of trees on a site for the sake of preparing that site for future development. Trees may be removed pursuant to a development permit which has been approved by the City. B. Trees shall be retained to the maximum extent feasible on the property where they are growing. 1. Where it is not practicable to retain all trees on site due to a proposed development, a plot plan shall be submitted identifying those trees which are proposed for removal. The City may require a modification of the land clearing A-21 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 and tree cutting plan or the associated land development plan to ensure the retention of the maximum number of trees. 2. The plot plan shall identify the location of all areas proposed to be cleared including building sites, right-of-ways, utility lines, and easements. Clearing should not occur outside of these areas or more than 15 feet from the foundation line of proposed buildings. 3. No land clearing, ground cover management or tree cutting activities are permitted in a Native Growth Protection Easement except enhancement activities or the installation of essential roads and utilities where no other feasible alternative exists pursuant to an approved development plan. C. The City may restrict the timing of the land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions are necessary for the public health, safety and welfare, or for the protection of the environment, or to further the purposes of this ordinance. D. Native Growth Protection Easements may be established through the subdivision process in environmentally sensitive areas including but not limited to the following areas: 1. A buffer area from the annual high water mark of creeks, streams, lakes and other shoreline areas or from the top of the bank of same, whichever provides good resource protection. 2. Areas in which the average slope is greater than 40 percent. 3. Wetlands. 4. Any other area which is determined through the environmental review process to include significant vegetation or other valuable resources and which should be protected. • E. No ground cover or trees which are within a minimum of 25 feet of the annual high water mark of creeks, streams, lakes, and other shoreline areas or within 15 feet of the top of the bank of same should be removed, nor should any mechanical equipment operate in such areas except for the development of public parks and trail systems, and enhancement activities. F. The City may require and/or allow the applicant to relocate or replace trees, provide interim erosion control, hydroseed exposed soils, or other similar conditions which would implement the intent of this Chapter. • G. No land clearing, ground cover management or tree cutting activities except enhancement activities shall be conducted in a wetland, except for the installation of roads and utilities where no feasible alternative exists pursuant to an approved development plan. H. When tree cutting or land clearing will occur pursuant to a building permit, protection measures should apply for all trees which are to be retained in areas immediately subject to construction. These requirements may be waived individually or severally by the City if the developer demonstrates them to be inapplicable to the specific on- A 22 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 site conditions or if the intent of the regulations will be implemented by another means with the same result. Where the dripline of a tree overlaps a construction line, this shall be indicated on the survey and the following tree protection measures should be employed: 1. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the dripline of any tree to be retained. • 2. The applicant shall erect and maintain rope barriers or place bales of hay on the drip line to protect roots. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. 3. If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. 4. The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the dripline of any tree to be retained. 5. The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (1) the area defined by the dripline of the tree, or (2) an area around the tree equal to one foot in diameter for each one-inch of tree caliper. 6. The applicant shall prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover which are to be retained. 4-3614: VARIANCE PROCEDURES The Hearing Examiner shall have the - authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Ordinance pursuant to Title IV Section 722, and Title IV Chapter 30. 4-3615: VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES A. A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a misdemeanor. It shall be a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this chapter is committed. B. Any person who shall violate any provisions of this ordinance shall be subject, upon conviction in court, to a fine not to exceed 51,000 per day and/or 5500 per tree. In a prosecution under this ordinance, each tree removed, damaged or destroyed will constitute a separate offense. 4-3616: PUBLIC AND PRIVATE REDRESS A. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter or of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such A-23 ORDINANCE NO. 4219 • violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. B. Restoration shall include the replacement of all improperly removed ground cover with species similar to those which were removed or other approved species such that the biological and habitat values will be replaced; and C. For each tree which was improperly cut and/or removed, replacement planting of a tree of equal size, quality and specie or up to three (3) trees of the same species in the immediate vicinity of the tree(s) which was removed. The replacement trees will be of sufficient caliper to adequately replace the lost trees(s) or a minimum of 3 inches in caliper. D. Restoration shall include installation and maintenance of interim and emergency erosion control measures until such time as the restored ground cover and trees reach sufficient maturation to function in compliance with the performance standards identified in Section 4-3606. E. For any parcel on which trees and/or ground cover are improperly removed and subject to penalties under this Chapter, the City shall stop work on any existing permits and halt the issuance of any or all future permits or approvals until the property is fully restored in compliance with this Chapter and all penalties are paid. SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of June , • 1989 . Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 5th day of June , 1989 . (� \4 \ \4% r 4 Earl `Clymer,; Mayor` Approve as to form: Lawrence J. Wa en, City Attorney Date of Publication: Published in summary June 9, 1989 i . ORD.90 :5-11-89 :as . A-24 Appendix B. Revised Life History and Effects of Human Disturbance on Great Blue Heron Colonies LIFE HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF HUMAN DISTURBANCE ON GREAT BLUE HERON COLONIES Introduction. The First City Developments Corporation (FCDC) proposes to construct office buildings ranging from one to four stories on 12.07 acres known as 'Tract A" (Phase VIII) and three office buildings ranging from three to seven stories on 15.7 acres known as 'Tract B" (Phase VII). The Tracts lie adjacent to the Springbrook Creek, Renton, Washington (Figure B-1). In November, 1988, the City of Renton made a Determination of Significance on FCDC's application for Site Plan Review and Shorelines Substantial Development Permit for Tract B (Phase VII), stating that a SEPA EIS was necessary to address, among other issues, the effect of the project on "flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species. . ., light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife, species (including heron). . ." This technical report presents an overview of the proposed project and a description of the study area, defines the study approach, and provides a brief account of the life requirements of the great blue heron. Lastly, this report includes an analysis of effects of human disturbance on herons and guidelines designed to minimize adverse impacts of the project. Proposed Project The proposed project will include the construction of 183,600 square feet of office space on 12.07 acres of Tract A and 286,200 square feet of office space on 15.7 acres of Tract B. Construction of the three buildings on each tract is to be phased over a four year period beginning in 1991. Included with building construction at both sites will be parking and site landscaping. Figures B-2 and B-3 show the proposed site plans for Tracts A and B. Refer to Chapter 2 of the Final EIS for a more detailed description of the proposed action and project alternatives. I B-1 i��e Luther King Way Ae r�r6 a �a��� �-> m SITE ill RENTON SW7th BLACKRIVER - Grady Way CORPORATE CD1-5 PARK = . - _ —405 101111-01. To Sea-Tac Airport = -f 4 Miles cn /Th V Southcenter Longacres �/ . O P7 C m a m 2) i Valley General w i Hospital S 1aOth sc Figure B-1. Project Location, Proposed Development of Tracts A (Phase VIII) - - I and B (Phase VII), Blackriver Corporate Park, Renton, WA B-2 • IOW RATION - • � '. J. z' ,his ,.G n . p V\�• I��tfi1{�:/ /3rd Phase-1994 �\n.+wex+- wMsf..Iq .FI .ti.-... • P-1 Channel • _ \ VICHWY MAP Tet00' �� °�P - \\ .1,IN, .c.....L., , \:\ .., ' . \4111111111,,,.----v-:.„.....----/...:..lir- mac/- �; ... V _ i +4 \ - ♦\ �,iheilli"Pireisk .•:--*4'-4.--- '.\:'....‘ \'‘I 111'' 4.Ir >r�opoo ♦ !•..- I • tlottttllut PROPERTY it.NO W TABULATION �� 1.( ' '.►. . ♦ j <7// %. )1 , ' , ` • / •FootPrint ± 63.582 S.F. / \..'•• -. - •- \ ' ' \1st Phase-1990 n. t. � .� gilSite Coverage t 121% �` ; 1 • Parking ' t 791 Stags. 4ptb� _!! ��� - -\� °�. .. ratio ± 1/232 S.F. Sq \ .— -�-•�1 ,••=4. ............. 4, ...,. ,. AD A_A p wwi.` • .. • BLACKRIVER ;; ®s_ 1 17\11 ma Ruse-1993 '° - _,_ S I CORPORATE aeeo,t TrPARK A57a161ON r. — - - -r-- - eft ia.:cec�ca; ' o PHASE VSI -.- -- - - Figure B-2. Site Plan Tract A II d" . r-,0....1 F i' _. `o — f aw.a.Iw e ' ` • -"� �.\� VICINITY • MAP I � `{ —, ^t�� •..�•� ;r-- - '° ai .`r • • .I; .• .�' ••...;'• •/: .\\ iris •• i. ,a.. 1.017 - •\ •L7I ::ySa,iue iG. '� �' Q1� (. \.. r 11,. ;. ..� ` / ' ` • ��• �; , i i HERON EXHIOR )i i i .., t 11--oh. 0; %IA' . . I ,::' ../// ...V--\--- \ .4. - tt:- i I al ; , ' '' •V • 7 • • :� � = , • 7 ,. : ..V...._...:, _ .....-- . \:,...„. ‘.:.,......Vett" .. t IN\ 1\di t.......7.••••• -it, /4 // :r1,,,\,:r. f , AA\ , 1 mg-4aik . •....,,X1 i . pik, a s.c. I: • ,oh•,- jr.V.,:„... _;._-.,. .___.... .K. r • 20 . � ' iii�r lam` , . """.'''' TABULATORSR•kw �� P�'.."yefr ,. �.�, BLACKRIVER Mang angAzle MUM°° -_ i)."' ;•/y;/ • I _ CORPORATE PARK //// Spa Commis WU%Masks Gams) ` I' /�� /pl/ ,I ,1•17; ROM" WASHINGTON I = I . Parking slat Sm smo SF. —;' l •1/ f!�f I ST CITY DEVELOPMENT CORP. Swismeard -°. ` / 1`, TRACT B '"• r DAPha _IMI •,�� ALTERNATE SCHEME fA,W s.+aa,Pakiq •�J Figure B-3. Site Plan Tract B • � r • Description of Study Area The project study area is located within the City of Renton corporate limits, approximately 0.75 miles north of Interstate 405 and approximately 0.50 miles east of the Green River (see Figure B-1). Land east of the site is industrial and office park. Land south and west of the site supports Metro's Renton wastewater treatment facilities, office parks, and light industry. The area north of the site includes the P-1 Pond, riparian forest, Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and an active rock quarry. Springbrook Creek, a channelized watercourse draining the northern portions of the Green River Valley, lies between the two tracts. Tract A is open and treeless,having been previously filled and regraded with material dredged from the King County pump station forebay and from construction of the P-1 Pond. Upland grasses and Scot's broom dominate.the site. As a condition to a grade and fill permit approved by the City for the site during 1986, FCDC planted several rows of poplar trees and Douglas-fir within a 200-foot buffer zone bordering the pond. These trees are approximately 10 to 12 feet in height. Tract B is vegetated with grasses, alder, Scot's broom, pioneering alder, Oregon ash, and cottonwood trees, several of them greater than 48 inches in diameter. The northeast portion of the site is a remnant of the historic Black River channel and is wetland as defined by the unified wetland methodology established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other federal agencies (Figure B-3). A 17-acre man-made pond, known as the P-1 Pond, lies north and northeast of Tract A and northwest of Tract B. The pond was constructed in 1984 to detain stormwater flows from the Springbrook Creek watershed. The lower portion of Springbrook Creek from Grady Way to the P-1 Pond was channelized to convey stormwater flows from the Green River Valley to the P-1 Pond. Stormwater is pumped through the pump station at the west end of the pond and discharged into the old Black River channel and thence into the Green River. In 1984, all of Tract A and approximately 50% of Tract B were cleared of vegetation and regraded during construction of the P-1 Pond. Material from the pump station forebay was hydraulically dredged to a large excavation located on Tract A (Earth Consultants 1990). Construction of the P-1 Pond resulted in the creation of approximately 17 acres of wetlands from what was previously grassland (portions of the old Earlington golf course). Following regrading, Tract A and portions of Tract B were seeded with an erosion control grass seed mix and the edge of the P-1 Pond planted with a variety of shrubs (see Appendix G of this Final EIS for list of plant species). The P-1 Pond supports a variety of wetland vegetation and wildlife species, including waterfowl. A list of vegetation and wildlife observed and likely to occur in the vicinity is presented in Appendix G. B-5 Study Approach Information for this study was derived from three primary sources, 1) review of existing literature relative to the Black River heron colony and the life history and effects of human activity on nesting great blue herons,2) communications with biologists and others knowledgeable of the colony and great blue herons, and 3) field visits to the site. Literature Review A substantial amount of information has been published on the life history and ecology of the great blue heron. Much of the information is found in life history accounts (Bent 1926; Palmer 1962), in published journal articles (Jenni 1969; Pratt 1970; Teal 1965; Murphy 1988; Mark 1976; Cottrille and Cottrille 1958; Henny and Bethers 1971; Werschkul et al. 1976), or in special reports, correspondence and Masters theses (Parker 1980; Van Wormer 1987, 1988). Personal Communications During the course of preparing this technical report, biologists and others knowledgeable of great blue herons and heronries were contacted (Penland, Murphy, Van Wormer, Owens, McAllister, Pesek, Schirato, Schaff pers. comm.). Field Surveys During January, 1990, noise monitoring was conducted at the Black River and Peasley Canyon colonies. A continuous noise monitor was placed at each nesting colony and background noise recorded for a 24-hour period. Noise data was down-loaded to a computer and printed on a spreadsheet format. Noise data (peak instantaneous and average noise levels) were then compared with noise literature and sound level data. Additional noise monitoring was conducted in July, 1990 during soil testing carried out on Tract A by Earth Consultants, Inc. as a part of a soil contamination study. During May through August, 1990, field studies were conducted on Tracts A and B and at the heron colony. These studies included small mammal trapping,vegetation surveys and counts of heron nests and young. B-6 Life History of the Great Blue Heron Ecological Overview The great blue heron is the largest and most widely distributed of American herons. It is found throughout much of the United States and Canada. The great blue heron is migratory throughout much of its northern range; in western Washington at least a portion - of the population does not migrate. Great blue herons live within or near wetlands, along rivers and estuaries and coastal areas. They feed on fresh and marine fishes (approximately 72% of their diet), insects (8% of diet), crustaceans (9% of diet), mice and shrews (5% of diet), amphibians and reptiles (4% of diet) and vegetative matter (2% of diet) (Cottam and Uhler 1945). Palmer (1962) characterized the great blue heron as a wary but highly adaptable bird, with individuals often fishing in suburban ponds, in backyards and near fishing docks. Herons breed after their second winter (Henny 1972). The breeding population (and some subadults) gather at nesting colonies in western Washington in February and early March. During that time, males establish territories, begin nest construction or reconstruction of old nests,breeding, egg laying and incubation. As a general rule, hatching extends from March to April, although later nesting or re-nesting may extend the hatching period. Clutch size varies from 3.3 to 4.2 eggs per nest. Solitary nesting is uncommon (Palmer 1962). Young herons become fledged in approximately eight to nine weeks from hatching (Henny and Bethers 1971). An average of 2.6 young were observed to fledge per successful nest in western Oregon (Henny and Bethers 1971), while Schaff(pers. comm.) reported 2.2 young fledged per nest at a 53-nest heronry on the Nisqually National Wildlife Refuge during 1990. Fledglings may return to the nesting colony from feeding forays for up to four weeks following first flight (Ives 1972; Murphy pers. comm.). In western Washington, a majority of young have flight capability by mid-June but most young stay in the vicinity of the nests for feeding by adults which continues after first flight. The fledging time for late nesters may extend into late July or August (Murphy pers. comm.; Ives 1972; Ives pers. obs.). Nesting Requirements Great blue herons are colonial nesters and in Washington generally nest in tall trees. In other parts of its range, herons have been found nesting on ground, rock ledges, sea cliffs, duck blinds, tule rushes (Scirpus sp.) and in small trees or shrubs wherever trees are not available (Washington Department of Wildlife 1988; Palmer 1962). B-7 Nesting habitat requirements generally include the following components: • Grove of trees greater than 1 acre (0.4 hectares) in size; • Trees with sturdy branches for nest placement and an open canopy for ease of egress and ingress; • Tree height may be variable and dependent on the proximity of disturbance factors to the nest sites; • Nesting sites are generally close to water, not more than 820 feet (250 meters); and • Foraging requirements are for shallow, clear water with a firm substrate and adequate populations of huntable small fish (Short and Cooper 1985). While the above represent optimal nesting habitat components, deviations have been recorded. Several reports have noted a preference for tall or the tallest trees in a grove for nest location (Jenni 1969; Ives 1972). All of the great blue heron nests in heron colonies visited for this study were located in the tallest trees or on a slope where the birds were situated above the surrounding terrain and a majority of the surrounding trees. Heron nesting has been recorded in highly urbanized settings as well as undisturbed sites. Because of the need for water in close proximity to a colony, herons are often found nesting near areas of high human use such as along lakes and rivers. Herons will either return to the same colony each year, or may move to other established colonies or establish a new site when conditions are suitable (Henry 1972). Consequently, the size and number of heron colonies in an area may oftentimes change from one year to the next. The reasons for change in colony location and size include human disturbance; natural events such as flooding, fire or wind; depletion of nesting materials; changes in food supply; or effects of excrement on the nest trees or understory and predation (Simpson et al., 1987; Werschkul et al. 1976). Simpson et al. (1987) found that of 21 banded herons observed in a nesting colony in 1978, 13 were on different nests in 1979, 1 was on the same nest, and 7 (33%) were not seen in the colony. Parker (1980) surmised that small nesting colonies have become increasingly common in recent years, perhaps in response to the continued reduction of large expanses of undisturbed riparian habitat that could potentially support large colonies. Black River Great Blue Heron Nesting Colony General Description. The great blue heron colony, known locally as the Black River heron colony, is primarily located on an island formed when the P-1 Pond was constructed B-8 during 1984. Additional nests occur in adjacent riparian forest to the west and northwest of the island. The main colony is located approximately 500 feet from the northeastern boundary of Tract A and 350 feet from the northern boundary of Tract B. The heronry is located on the edge of a riparian forest dominated by black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) ranging from 2 to 5 feet in diameter at breast height (DBH) and ranging in height from 140 to 150 feet. Red alder (Alnus rubra) and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) also occur throughout the stand, dominating a thick understory comprised primarily of red elderberry(Sambucus racemosa),nettles (Urticaceae urtica),vine maple (Acer circinatum), red-osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera), and tall shining Oregon grape (Berberis aquifolium). During 1990 field studies, little decadence was detected in the stand (including the understory), an indication that defecation by nesting herons has not yet had an adverse effect on the nest trees. Nesting. According to Short and Cooper (1985), great blue heron nesting habitat includes groves of trees greater than one acre that are close to huntable water and contain trees with sturdy branches and open canopies for construction of and access to nests. Huntable water is shallow and clear with a firm substrate and contains adequate populations of small fish (Short and Cooper 1985). With the exception of a lack of clear water and adequate populations of huntable small fish, each of these general nesting habitat components are met at the Black River heronry. Foraging areas occur off of the site and generally within five miles of the colony. No studies of foraging areas of herons nesting at Black River has been conducted, however, likely feeding areas include the Cedar River and Tributaries, wetlands in the Green River Valley and the Green River. The age of the nesting colony is not well known. Van Wormer (1988) reported evidence that at least three nest structures were present at the time of construction of the P-1 Pond in 1984, while Anderson (1990) stated that no heron nests were ever observed on the site during 1984. Table B-i presents available data on the history of the nesting colony. Nesting information prior to 1987 is lacking. Based on field observations by Rex Van Wormer, wildlife biologist, during the 1989 nesting season, 25 nest structures were located in three 48- to 54-inch diameter, 140 to 150- foot tall black cottonwood trees. During field surveys conducted by Van Wormer on June 10, 1989, 17 of the nests were observed to be occupied and eight nests unoccupied (Van Wormer 1989). During field surveys conducted in April, 1989, Van Wormer observed 23 occupied nests, six fewer occupied nests than were observed in June. Surveys of the heron colony during the 1990 nesting season were conducted by JSA staff. Results indicate that 31 nest structures were present on six trees, an increase of 14 nests (82%) from those reported in 1989. Observations of nesting were not made by JSA staff until June; consequently, the total number of nests occupied at the beginning of the nesting season is not known. On June 16th, 24 occupied nests containing 54 young (2.25 B-9 Table B-1. Characteristics of Select Great Blue Heron Colonies and Adjacent Human Activities in Washington and Oregon Adjacent Distance Colony Approximate Human Colony to Colony Location #of Nests Activity Nest Trees Human Activity Status Comments Reference Black River 1987-8 to 10 Road Black 7(X)-I,(X)0' Active Logging within Van Wormer, Renton,WA 1988- 18 construction, cottonwoods, 200 feet of,colony 1988; 1989 1989- 17 logging(1987), Oregon ash. during March, 1990-31 office park, 1987 office railroad. building construction within 1,000 feet 1989. Lk.Sammamish 1985- 14 Public boat Black —330' Active High level of Murphy, 1988 State Park, 1986-21 launch,boating. cottonwoods. human activity in Issaquah,WA 1987-29 area during 1988-unknown summer. 1989-unknown 1990-unknown ll �'...L Peasley Canyon 1989-27 Park&Ride, Red alder 600' Active Colony size has Van Wormer, C Auburn,WA 1990-unknown roadways. increased from 10 1988 • nests in 1983 to 27 in 1989. Ross Island 1989-40 to 50 Gravel Black 200-300' Active 300'buffer Pesek,pers. Portland,OR 1990-unknown Extraction. cottonwoods. established,birds comm. now nesting - within 200 feet of activity. Pigeon Point 1986-16 Single family Black 200' Active Occupied in 1986; Penland pers. West Seattle,WA 1987-0 residential. cottonwoods. no nesting in comm.;Murphy, 1988-0 1987;observed to 1988;City of 1989-unknown be occupied in • Seattle 1986; 1990-unknown 1989 and 1990, Aslett pers however,number comm. of nests unknown. ,1 , Adjacent Distance ' Colony Approximate Human Colony to Colony Location # of Nests Activity Nest Trees Human Activity Status Comments Reference Spencer Property 1983-3 Single family Douglas fir. 75-100' Active Established in Jones&Stokes Redmond,WA 1984-3 residential. 1983.Nests in 80- 1988;Spencer, 1985-3 100'Douglas fir pers.comm. 1986-3 trees;adjacent 1987-4 propertyto ed 1988-6 to t within 50' of 1989- unknown trees. 1990-6 Yarrow Bay 1987-6 Condominium, Black —200' Active 1985 estimated Murphy, 1988 Kirkland,WA 1988-unknown tennis club. cottonwoods. year of 1989- 10 establishment. 1990- 11 ed ,'., West Delta Park 1989-20 to 25 Railroad Black 50-100' Active Within Portland Van Wormer, : ' Portland,OR 1990-unknown switching yard, cottonwoods. city limits. 1988; Pesek,pers. log handling yard, comm. golf course. Kenmore 1990- 15 Parking,fire Black 80-300' Active Parking lot for Washington Bothell,WA station, cottonwoods, King County Department of apartments. alder. Police 80 feet Wildlife 1990; from nearest Ives pers.obs. nest;three-story apartments within 300 feet. , young/occupied nest)were observed. Additionally,two other occupied nests were observed containing brooding or incubating adults. During the 1990 breeding season,nesting herons occupied three additional nest trees than were reported during the 1989 nesting season. Although all of the additional nest trees were located on the north side of the P-1 pond, each was located away from the principal island nest colony. Two of the nest trees occurred approximately 200 feet northwest of the island,while the third, a solitary nester,was located approximately 1,000 feet west (850 feet from the P-1 pump station) of the island. The westernmost nest tree contained a single late or second-nester; it is estimated that egg-laying at this nest occurred,during the last week in May. Single nesting great blue herons are unusual,particularly in the immediate vicinity of a nesting colony (Palmer.1962). As reported in 1989, nests observed on the principal island nest site in 1990 were located in three large black cottonwoods. Nest height ranged from approximately 125 to 145 feet off the ground. Similarly, the two nest trees occurring 200 feet northwest of the island were also large (4 to 5 feet in diameter) cottonwoods, containing a total of three nests, all of which were approximately 130 feet off the ground. The sixth nest tree, an Oregon ash approximately 100-foot tall and 20-inch diameter, contained a single nest constructed 40 to 50 feet above the ground. The progressive increase in size of the Black River heronry, from three nests in 1986 to over 30 nests in 1990, reflects the importance of this colony in maintaining and increasing local great blue heron populations. Foraging. The P-1 Ponds are used for limited feeding by adult and fledged young herons. During July and August, 1990, fledged herons were observed by JSA staff to make only limited use of the ponds for feeding and/or loafing. This low level of use may have been due to the very low water conditions in the pond and poor water clarity. Water in the ponds was rust-colored, with low visibility, and was shallow with low inflow from Springbrook Creek and the drainage ditch located on the north boundary of Tract B. Observations indicate that water clarity is poor in the pond throughout the year. In past years the ponds have been stocked with fish, however. Pond elevations are controlled at the King County pumping station. According to Allmendinger (pers. comm.) summer water elevations in the P-1 Pond are maintained at an elevation approximately 11 to 2 feet below the winter water elevations. Reducing the discharge of water through the pump station during the heron nesting season could increase the water elevations and ponded surface area, thereby improving foraging habitat for herons. Newly fledged herons eventually move from the pond to more productive feeding areas in the Cedar River and Green River Valleys. Van Wormer (1988) found that 95% of the adult herons returning to and leaving the colon jy on feeding forays flew to the west and southwest of the colony. During 1990 field surveys conducted by Jones & Stokes Associates, adult herons were frequently observed flying south and east of the colony. Based on field observations by Duvall (pers. comm.), herons using the Black River colony leave B-12 3 and enter the colony for no established direction. Many birds were observed flying west, east and south of the site. Numerous potential foraging areas occur within five miles of the Black River colony. These include the Green (0.5 miles) and Duwamish (0.5 miles) Rivers to the west, Panther Creek (1 mile) and Panther Lake (4.5 miles) to the southeast, Lake Washington (2 miles) and the Cedar River (1.5 miles) to the northeast, and Angle (3.5) and Bow (3.5) Lakes to the southwest. In addition to these areas, Puget Sound and Lake Youngs, located approximately 6.5 miles west and east of the colony, respectively, may provide additional foraging habitat. It is possible that these potential foraging areas may provide potential nesting habitat as well, however, as habitat in these areas has not been evaluated in the field, the potential of such areas to support heron nesting colonies cannot be predicted. Disturbance. Since the Black River nesting colony was established, it has been subjected to a variety of disturbances and intrusions. Historical accounts of the colony prior to 1986 are sketchy and contradictory. Allmendinger (letter of 3/2/87) reported seeing nesting herons prior to the construction of the P-1 Ponds and forebay (report and decision, Office of the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, June 9, 1987). Anderson (1990) indicated however, that no heron nesting was observed during construction of the P-1 Pond. Contrary to the Anderson observations, Van Wormer (1988) reported that three nests were believed to occur at the time of excavation of the P-1 Ponds (including creation of the island supporting the colony) in 1984. Based on review of aerial photographs of the P-1 Pond and heron colony, if herons nested in the area at the time of the construction of the P-1 Pond, draglines and other heavy construction equipment were likely used within 50 to 100 feet of the colony. During 1987, a large portion of the riparian forest between the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and the P-1 Pond was cleared and partially filled. Logging activity took place from February to mid-March, within 200 feet of the colony and during a time of nest selection, nest building and pairing. According to Van Wormer (1988), at that time the colony contained eight nest structures. Since 1987, various degrees of disturbance to the colony have occurred as a result of construction at the Metro wastewater treatment site (1,500 feet from the colony), construction of Oakesdale Avenue (1,100 feet from the colony), continued routine activities on the Burlington Northern railroad tracks (1,000 feet from the colony), continued rock extraction at the Black River quarry (2,400 feet from the colony), and ongoing office park activity on property adjacent to Naches Avenue Southwest (1,000 feet from the colony). Additional current sources of disturbance include traffic noise from Oakesdale Avenue and I-405 (3,700 feet from the colony); frequent plane, jet, and helicopter flights; and disturbance from visitors to the site. B-13 11 , Other Great Blue Heron Colonies in King County Fifteen great blue heron colonies have been identified near lakes, rivers, creeks and marshes throughout King County (Figure B-4). Colony names and recent nesting status of each are presented in Table B-2. Eleven of these heronries, including the Black River colony, occur within 3 miles of Puget Sound,Lake Washington,or Lake Sammamish. Great blue heron colonies in King.County contain from three to over 30 nests. Black cottonwood, red alder, Douglas fir, and western hemlock are tree species used for nesting in the King County colonies (Shipe and Scott 1981). In addition to the Black River heronry, nesting was reported at the Peasley Canyon, Pigeon Point, Yarrow Bay, and Kenmore colonies during the 1990 nesting season. Recent nesting surveys have not been conducted at the remaining heronries; however, nesting activity was detected at the Discovery Park, Dumas Bay, and Lake Sammamish State Park colonies in 1987 (Murphy 1988), and at the Spencer Property colony in 1989 (Ives pers. obs.). According to Murphy (1988), herons abandoned the Crystal Lake, Seahurst County Park and Weowna County Park colonies in 1986, while the Black Diamond and Phantom Lake colonies were abandoned in 1987. The current status of these abandoned heronries is unknown. Effects of Human Disturbance During the past 15 years, numerous scientific studies have been undertaken to determine the effects of human activities on great blue heron nesting colonies. Increasing development and more intensive human use of the land has resulted in a greater need to understand the ecological requirements and tolerances of nesting herons. Recently the Washington Department of Wildlife (WDW) developed guidelines for the management of great blue herons (Washington Department of Wildlife 1988). Their guidelines indicate that responses of great blue herons to human activities near the colonies are not predictable. Herons have been known to abandon colonies because of housing and industrial development, highway construction, logging, active roads, and repeated human intrusions into colonies (Leonard 1985; Parker 1980; Kelsall and Simpson 1979; Werschkul et al. 1976; Bjorklund 1975). Werschkul et al. (1976) examined 12 heronries on the Oregon coast either undisturbed or subjected to logging activities or roads. Five of the 12 heronries had been affected by logging operations. Werschkul et al. (1976) found that the number of active nests was higher in undisturbed vs. disturbed colonies but that information on fledgling (young per successful nest) was inconclusive. B-14 Table B-2 Inventory of Great Blue Heron Nesting Colonies in King County, Washington* Map # Colony Status (Reference) 1 Black Diamond, Grass Lake Abandoned in 1987 (Murphy 1988) 2 Black River, Renton Active in 1990 (Ives pers. obs.) 3 Crystal Lake, Woodinville Abandoned in 1986 (Murphy 1988) 4 Discovery Park, Seattle Active in 1987 (Murphy 1988) 5 Dumas Bay, Federal Way Active in 1987 (Murphy 1988) 6 Lk. Sammamish State Park, Issaquah Active in 1987 (Murphy 1988) 7 Maury Island Unknown status (Murphy 1988) 8 Peasley Canyon, Auburn Active in 1990 (Ives pers. obs.) 9 Phantom Lake, Bellevue Abandoned in 1987 (Murphy 1988) 10 Pigeon Point, Seattle Active in 1990 (Aslett pers. comm.) 11 Seahurst County Park, Burien Abandoned in 1986 (Murphy 1988) 12 Weowna County Park, Bellevue Abandoned in 1986 (Murphy 1988) 13 Yarrow Bay, Kirkland Active in 1990 (Ives pers. obs.) 14 Spencer, Redmond Active in 1989 (Ives pers. obs.) 15 Kenmore, Bothell Active in 1990 (WDW 1990) * Modified from Murphy (1988). B-15 • SNOHOMISH • COUNTY . I15 V3 114 13 ::.. .:. 12 VAR R Nititilei.V11 ■2 KING ir AfaVi COUNTY ,;;;P • >::.; :::.;;• ;.;:•;n slaws) ` .(l now ` :»Q ':.. ::: : <> ■5 Legend ■g V1 V Abandoned Cobnies' ■ Active Colonies' . See Table for names of cobnies — NORTH 0 10 20 I I I PIERCE COUNTY KILOMETERS Figure B-4. Locations of Great Blue Heron Colonies in King County (Modified from Murphy 1988) B-16 „ r Mark (1976), conducted an inventory of great blue heron colonies in British Columbia. He found records of heron colonies dating to before 1920. Many of the earlier recorded colonies had been abandoned or destroyed by logging or development. Mark (1976) concluded that when a heronry is abandoned, the birds are generally able to relocate easily, provided that large trees remain in the area. Other studies have shown herons to tolerate noise such as highway and railway traffic as well as human movement. Webb and Forbes (1982), reported that four great blue heron nests were established in a single row of planted trees located between a hotel parking lot and a heavily used roadway system servicing the airport in Vancouver, B.C. During a field survey in June 1981, the authors observed three active nests containing 7 young (2.3 young } per successful nest). A second colony, located next to high-use areas in Stanley Park, Vancouver, B.C., has existed since 1921. Both colonies are located in coniferous trees. ? j In several letter reports, Van Wormer (1987, 1988) noted great blue herons nesting adjacent to a railroad siding and industrial park near West Delta Park in Portland, Oregon. Taylor et al. (1981) conducted a study of the effects of recreational activities on a great blue heron colony located along the Little Calumet River in Indiana. The biologists concluded that, based on intrusion impact tests (noise tests,helicopter intrusion, group trips to within 280 feet of the colony), recreational activities during the nesting season could be allowed no closer than 575 feet of the nesting colony. Parker (1980), conducted a study of the effects of human disturbance on great blue herons in Montana. She determined that while nesting colonies have been found to be long- lived in other portions of the country, in Montana herons appeared to move frequently in response to development and disturbance. Parker suggested that the decrease in size and age and the increase in the number of colonies may be due to the fragmentation of riparian habitat and the loss of extensive woodlands able to sustain large and long-lived colonies. In Washington and Oregon, a number of heron colonies are active in urban or urbanizing settings. The following section provides a brief overview of several of those colonies. Peasley Canyon Colony, Auburn,WA In Auburn, WA the Peasley Canyon colony (approximately 27 nests), is located within 300 to 600 feet of three busy roadways (Highway 18, Peasley Canyon Road and the West Valley Road), a Washington Department of Transportation (WDOT) Park and Ride lot, and a single family dwelling (Figure B-4, Table B-3). The colony is located on the side of an east-facing slope of alder, cottonwood, and Douglas fir trees. A pond and wetland lies between the colony and the Peasley Canyon Road and Park and Ride facility. Land west of the site is undeveloped and is vegetated with bigleaf maple, alder, and Douglas fir. According to Robert Caldwell (pers. comm.), the WDOT Park and Ride lot was constructed in 1983 at its present location. Although the location of the lot as originally B-17 proposed, was shifted from the south side of the Peasley Canyon Road to its present I; location to avoid possible impacts on the colony,a "defacto" parking lot had been created and extensively used by commuters at the previous south side location (Caldwell pers. comm.). To avoid possible impacts of construction on the nesting birds, and as a condition of project approval, no construction was allowed from February through June, 1983. Lot construction extended from July through September, 1983 with no observed adverse impact on the herons. Spencer Property, N.E. 95th Street, Redmond,WA During the 1989 and 1990 breeding seasons, approximately six great blue heron nests we re located in 80-to 100-foot tall Douglas fir trees on a 1-acre lot located near Bear Creek and Avondale Road, Redmond, WA (Figure B-4, Table B-3). Property immediately east and west of the site has been cleared of trees to within 50 feet of the nest trees. According to Spencer (pers. comm.), the herons have used the grove of trees for nesting since 1983 or 1984. Based on known literature, the Spencer heron colony is unusual because of the close proximity of the nest trees to occupied structures (100 feet). The level of disturbance on the site is relatively low (lawn mowing, wood cutting, barbecues, barking dogs, etc.). The tolerance of the herons to human activity at this site is probably due to the height of the nests (80 feet) and the visual buffering provided by the foliage of the fir trees. Webb and Forbes (1982) suggested that the dense foliage of fir trees at the two colonies in Vancouver, B. C. reduced nest visibility and buffered the effects of human activity. During the 1990 breeding season, a bald eagle raided the nests, killing three nestlings and one adult. The eagle returned to the colony several times (Spencer pers. comm.). Norman et al. (1989) had reported bald eagles eating heron nestlings. Yarrow Bay, Kirkland, WA The Yarrow Bay heron colony is located near the Yarrow Bay condominiums, apartments and tennis club (Figure B-4, Table B-3). The nest trees are located in cottonwoods approximately 200 feet from a swimming pool, cabana, tennis courts, and four- story apartment buildings (one-story of which is parking). A narrow asphalt walk lies between the apartments and the colony. While the area between the colony and the development is densely vegetated with willows, alder, scattered cottonwoods and salmonberry, few trees are tall enough to provide a completely blocked view of the nests from the pool, walkway or buildings. Land to the west, north, and south of the colony consists of forested and shrub wetland varying in distance from 1,000 to 1,500 feet to the nearest development. Human -- use and movement near the apartments occurs frequently, particularly during the summer months. Of the heron colonies evaluated for this study, the Yarrow Bay colony lies closest to a continuous moderate level of human activity. Nests on the Spencer property in B-18 c Redmond are closer to occupied dwellings, however, human use of the site is light and dense vegetation provides a substantial visual buffer. During the fall of 1989, construction of several office towers was begun at Yarrow Bay approximately 1,200 feet south of the colony. These office complexes will be approximately five stories in height. Additional office development .is also occurring approximately 600 feet southeast of the colony and to the north along the Lake Washington waterfront. The heron colony was active during 1990 and birds were observed on nest structures February 9, 1991 (Ives pers. obs.). ', Lake Sammamish State Park, Issaquah,WA A. great blue heron colony supporting approximately 29 nests, is located in black cottonwoods at Jensen's Cove in Lake Sammamish State Park (Figure B-4, Table B-3). A public boat launch lies within 150 feet of the colony and noise and recreational activities on the lake are frequent from spring through fall (Murphy 1988). Even with the frequent disturbance, the number of great blue heron nests has increased from seven in 1984 to 29 in 1987. No nesting data are available for 1988, 1989 or 1990. Ross Island, Portland, OR The colony is located on Ross Island in the Willamette River. Gravel extraction activities, which began in the late 1970s, are ongoing within 300 feet of the colony. The gravel company signed an agreement with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to maintain a 300-foot vegetated buffer between the colony and gravel extraction activities. There are no seasonal limitations imposed on extraction activities (Pesek pers. comm.). Gravel is extracted by dragline and loaded aboard barges for transport to a crusher on the mainland or to other locations on the river. Activity is fairly constant and the noise levels are high. A log storage lagoon also lies at the edge of the buffer zone. The colony consists of 50 to 60 active nests located at heights of 80 to 100 feet in 120-foot tall black cottonwood trees (4 feet in diameter) (Table B-3). Since the buffer agreement was put into effect, the colony has expanded in size so that a number of active nests now lie within 200 feet of gravel extraction activities (Pesek pers. comm.). li Pigeon Point,West Seattle, WA The Pigeon Point heron colony is located in red alders, big leaf maples and possibly Douglas fir trees on an east facing slope above the Duwamish Waterway in West Seattle (Figure B-4, Table B-3). The colony held 16 nests in 1986 but was reportedly deserted in 1987 and possibly during 1988 (Murphy 1988; Penland pers. comm.; Hunn pers. comm.). B-19 During a field visit to the colony site on June 24, 1989 by Jones & Stokes Associates staff,great blue heron young were observed perched in alder and Douglas fir trees,however, no nest structures could be seen from the point of observation, approximately 1,000 feet down-slope from the nesting colony. According to R.W. Thorpe and Associates (1985), in the early 1980s, the heron colony was located 600 to 900 feet from Alaska way and 150 feet from a Continental Van Lines loading facility on West Marginal Way. During a visit to the site in 1990, no nest or young were observed at that location (Ives pers. obs.). According to Aslett (pers. comm.), a resident of the area, the great blue herons have nested continuously in the area since 1986 and that during 1990, herons nested in two locations, the main colony located approximately 600 feet southwest of the historic nest site, and a second smaller nesting colony located approximately 1,200 feet south of the historic colony in a residential neighborhood. Land use adjacent to the colony includes single family, commercial/industrial development and open space. Kenmore Heron Colony, Kenmore, WA During the spring of 1990, a great blue heron colony was discovered on the north side 111 of the Kenmore Park and Ride on NE Bothell Way at the end of Northeast 181st Street and approximately 600 feet east of 73th Avenue Northeast (Washington Department of Wildlife 1990) (Figure B-4). The colony, located in cottonwoods and alders, was reported to have 20 active nests during 1990. During a reconnaissance survey in January, 1991, 15 nest structures were observed in 13 nest trees (Ives pers. obs.). The nest trees are located in a wetland associated with Swamp Creek, a tributary to the Sammamish River. Nest trees range from approximately 15 - 36 inches in diameter and approximately 60 - 80 feet in height. Land use to the south and west of the colony consists of parking, roadway, King County fire and police stations, and two and three-story apartments. Nest trees vary in distance from development. One nest tree is located approximately 80 feet from a King County police parking lot; a majority of the nests are 110 to 150 feet from the parking lot. The heron nests are located 300 to 370 feet from apartments and approximately 500 feet from 73rd Avenue Northeast. �. West Delta Park, Portland, OR The West Delta Park colony, located near Force Lake and West Delta Lake golf course, is approximately 10 to 15 years old. The nesting colony, consisting of 20 to 25 nests, is located in 80-foot high cottonwoods (2 to 3 feet in diameter), adjacent to an industrial area (railroad tracks,warehouses) (Table B-3). The colony is within 50 feet of the railroad alignment and 150 feet from the nearest buildings (Pesek pers. comm.). According to Pesek B-20 (pers. comm.), there is limited human activity on the railroad tracks and in the vicinity of the buildings. According to Van Wormer (1987), construction of the warehouse, golf course, and railroad switching spur (all within 150 feet of the colony) were completed with the colony in place (18 nests in 9 trees smaller in diameter and stature than those at Black River). There were no conditions for construction (seasonal construction or setback requirements) of the warehouses (Van Wormer 1987). Garibaldi, OR Approximately seven years ago, a great blue heron colony consisting of 20 to 25 nests, was established on vacant lots of a single family home subdivision in Garibaldi, a small coastal community located in Tillamook County, OR (Table B-3). The colony was apparently established by herons displaced by logging activities in the area (Pesek pers. comm.). The nests are located in 60-to 80-foot tall alder trees less than 200 feet from existing single family homes. According to Pesek (pers. comm.), alders are the only tall trees in the area. Summary of Findings - Effects of Human Disturbance A majority of the information available regarding the effect of human activities on great blue heron colonies is associated with either short-term construction-related activities or in areas where colonies have been established after construction. Only limited information exists regarding the effects of construction activities on existing colonies. Likewise, very little information exists regarding setbacks needed to provide long-term protection to heron colonies. According to the USFWS Habitat Suitability Index model for great blue heron(Short and Cooper 1985), optimal nesting habitat includes a disturbance-free zone of 820 feet (250 meters) over land and 500 feet (150 meters) over water. While these distances represent optimal nesting conditions, research has shown that deviations have been recorded. There are many examples, as previously described, where human development preceded heron colony establishment. Spencer property, WA; Yarrow Bay, WA; Ross Island, OR; and the Delta River Inn colony, Vancouver, B.C. (Webb and Forbes 1982); are the most notable examples. In all cases great blue herons established colonies at locations of known human intrusion and disturbance. Great blue herons established nests at distances varying from 75 feet to 300 feet from ongoing human activity. Colonies located close to disturbance (Spencer property and Delta River Inn) have been established in coniferous trees, suggesting that the dense foliage of conifers reduces visibility and provides "seclusion" for the nesting birds. B-21 West Delta Park, OR is an example of a colony established prior to construction activities (construction of warehouses and golf course). In this case construction was carried out during great blue heron nesting activity and the colony continued to be viable after construction was complete. At the Pigeon Point colony in West Seattle, WA herons nested within 200 feet of a moving company loading facility in a commercial/industrial zone. It is not known whether development preceded the colony. During 1990, they nested at two locations, one within a residential neighborhood. Research suggests that great blue herons nesting in cottonwoods and other deciduous trees establish greater distances between the human disturbance and the nests. The Yarrow Bay colony (in cottonwood trees) is located within 200 feet of ongoing human activity and four-story apartment buildings. This represents the closest known colony site to an area at which there are tall buildings (four-story apartments)continually used by humans. The Ross Island colony lies within 300 feet of ongoing gravel mining, and newly established nests may be even closer. The Peasley Canyon colony also lies within 300 feet of busy (and noisy) highways. The colony at West Delta Park in Portland, OR is located in cottonwoods and within a few feet of railroad tracks (intermittently used) and 300 feet of occupied industrial buildings. At the Kenmore colony, nest trees vary in distance from development. The main colony is located 110 to 150 feet from parking lots and 300 to 370 feet from apartments. Management Recommendations The WDW/Nongame Program has established management guidelines for great blue herons in Washington (Washington Department of Wildlife 1988). The guidelines indicate that responses of great blue herons to human activities are not predictable, and for that reason nesting areas should be kept free of human disturbance within an 800-foot to 1,300- foot radius of the nesting colony during the breeding season (February 1 through August 1), and that a smaller, permanent buffer of 750 feet should be closed to human access year- -- round. Additionally, stands of trees at least 50 feet high and at least 10 acres in area should be preserved. The WDW recently withdrew its management guidelines pending the outcome of further investigation by WDW including study of the relationships of heron colony size/nesting sources in the Puget Sound region, to distance of human disturbance (Schirato pers. comm.). In a February 20, 1987 letter to the City of Renton, the USFWS (1987) recommended that a 660-foot or greater radius no-construction and no-human-activity buffer zone be established from the center of the colony. They also recommended that the buffer zone be revegetated with native Puget Sound lowland plants, that all buildings and parking lots be constructed as multi-level structures, and that the buildings be sited to act as a visual/sound screen between the parking/service areas and the colony. At the Pigeon Point heronry in West Seattle, Penland stated that WDW considers 600 feet as a minimum buffer width,but that a 500-foot setback would be acceptable so long B-22 At the Pigeon Point heronry in West Seattle, Penland stated that WDW considers 600 feet as a minimum buffer width,but that a 500-foot setback would be acceptable so long as modifications to a proposed Multi-family Planned Residential Development were made (City of Seattle 1986). Schirato (pers. comm.), reported that a 75-foot permanent vegetated buffer and 600- foot no-work zone established for logging was insufficient to protect an 86-nest heron colony located 0.5 miles from Totten Inlet, Thurston County. The colony dwindled in size for two years following the cutting, and was abandoned on the third year. At a proposed single family residential development at Miller Bay, Kitsap County, the WDW recommended maintenance of a vegetated buffer varying in distance from 100 to 150 feet from a heron colony. An additional recommendation was that no road or home construction occur within 800 feet of the colony from February 1 to May 31, and within 647 feet from June 1 to July 31 (Washington Department of Wildlife 1990). In a Montana study on the effects of human disturbance on great blue herons, Parker (1980) recommended that a minimum of 10 acres of old-age cottonwoods be maintained for heron nesting, and that in an established colony, a permanent buffer of 80 feet in radius should be established and closed all year. Additionally, an 820-foot no-entry zone should be established during the breeding season. Taylor et al. (1981) recommended a 575-foot no-entry buffer zone around heron colonies located on the Little Calumet River in Indiana. In studies of colonial nesters along the east coast, Buckley and Buckley (1976), recommended excluding all foot traffic within 1,000 feet of any active colonial nesting waterbird sites (including great blue herons). These recommendations were for National Park lands in relatively protected settings, not urban or suburban lands subject to a large number of ownerships and existing and potential land uses. The literature indicates a wide variety of buffer zone recommendations, some based on field observations and studies, others based on "scientific intuition." The case studies previously described show that there are a significant number of examples of tolerance of great blue heron to human disturbance. Successful long-lived heron colonies in the Pacific Northwest have been established or maintained in urban settings at distances varying from 75 to 300 feet from human activities. Nowhere in any of the literature is any distinction made as to setbacks based on such factors as topography; vegetative type (evergreen vs. deciduous), height or density; surrounding land uses; or distances to existing intrusive activities. Field observations and biologists'reports suggest the tree height, density and tree type are factors that influence the distance of heron nesting to areas of development or human activity, and that with dense vegetation, nesting herons may more readily accept disturbance at a closer distance than at more open sites. For example, herons have established nests in conifer trees within 75 feet of occupied dwellings or parking lots in Vancouver, B.C. and Redmond, WA. Herons are B-23 it nesting.within 200 feet of a swimming pool/cabana and four-story apartments in Kirkland, WA (separated by a dense growth of willows, cottonwoods and wetland shrubs). A second factor of importance (at least in colonies observed in the Puget Sound area) is the height of nest trees in relation to the surrounding vegetation and surrounding land uses. In all colonies field-examined and researched for this report, great blue herons either nested in the tallest trees in the immediate area or at a prominent location such as on a steep hillside. This preference for high nesting sites may be for ease of ingress and egress to the colony and for nest defense and security (e.g., wide field of view for potential predators). A third factor common to the colonies is the presence of a relatively unimpeded route.for movement of adults to and from feeding areas, and the presence of vegetation - immediately adjacent to portions of the colonies. For example, at the Spencer property in Redmond, fields, pastures and vegetation border the colony adjacent to Bear Creek; at the Peasley Canyon colony dense vegetation lies upslope and to the north of the site; and at Yarrow Bay, Kirkland and at Lake Sammamish State Park,wetland vegetation and/or open water exist adjacent to the colonies. A fourth factor is the availability of suitable alternate nest trees in close proximity to the colony. At the Black River colony, over 15 acres of suitable nest trees (large diameter cottonwoods and Oregon ash)lie immediate adjacent to the main nesting trees and at a greater distance from Tracts A and B. During 1990, three additional heron nests were established in two trees within that grove. Management guidelines specific to the Black River nesting colony were developed based on results of the literature review and the site-specific features of the colony, including tree height, presence of water, ingress and egress to the colony, tree location and density, disturbance history of the colony, surrounding land use, and the results of the case studies. Given those factors,guidelines for building setbacks were developed for Tracts A and B. ' Blackriver Corporate Park - Tract A Site Tract A lies southwest of the heron colony and approximately 500 feet to the edge of the northern site boundary (Figure B-5). The 500 feet from the.colony to the northern ' site boundary includes open water of the P-1 Pond, scattered wetland emergent vegetation, and a strip of grasses and 10 to 12-foot tall poplar trees planted on the site in 1986. The present elevations of the site were established from disposal of material dredged to create the P-1 Pond. No vegetated buffer occurs between the site and the colony. Because of the open view of the nesting colony from Tract A, it is recommended that a 10- foot high berm with 20-foot tall evergreen trees be placed between the buildings and the nearest nest tree'in the main colony. The building or parking should be set back be a B-24 . • I `G O IVA �2 ....4"ilvv••Ksv,--,4\.•• .-:;.....s.,,,,••••-, ,A.:'_. : _,.?..,-;..,4,.,•";-.., .--0,••'-. —. ',,,,•,,r• If• • • '• `• • . aft -. , , ,<:_, * [ e:i ••.'c' . i�t ,,•/ly [t 1i .a• -i t �" i 1,k.. , Lj.�"4� 4•si ' i't `v ! , t, ,.,t' 'e£.t<iU 1. ,� �,h 1' • Js 4G t .vioY f•..t... •,,,,z t� it ,' y 3t`i�r n t`:i1,}c`�1 �♦ t .,,,,,►,- .1} '�,i y,'' ' .. y1 �� ' \�i,C , ' `,, ' ;�i t " '< •j ISF ' rIW 'i„ `,SL-1 ry,�1 • .`\.: t t'..� 9r i,• f Ss:','•?+•1> Q •4 �{'l�l If "P��,.1,;•�l'� ; L YZ .a,.,•. r tt�'``� r-C3'. ,• ''�n r ; '0r, is +::v 'Y•r+, v ,....1s,iiji t ''41,,(, • �,'�:iS" r• r.yi�. �` y S'E.•Si it r' ,. + r l��fN t lr, •:, '.,; t • s `• v'w�:, t♦ s�• s 1' J ,r tic < ✓ s ' • \ '`�.T� ,,. � 1.y'L� t?i *i i1 rS ;: PPi f ! + (ijr"' t" .17ji • 1�t1,, � � v s. , ,t ti r� V ,,d " ''� yqt tD' • S1 p1\11? • Sy r:' 3 1* • .. -art K Z. f C „G `4o,�1i*a. " : ! ,,, e �Yi,;'F 1 '''Z'S� '.,.0#0�,`'t '�\ ti"''1.aGl.rwv 3�V!il ty: .'A Fa i.? £` .••' * O - .,,ti,•' ' / ° a ZZ$f,Z'c.;!� �♦w� '11'4`y'�iii� YnF ♦ \� y •.� et � t ti:, t��i..t "1, �� $ ,y:.'�:6zf•4 ,r� 1,A a ,,r �� ill•l�4 ,'r�.[1 + � ���O�E",I<5'Z�"';2�+i 4�,,^B},'^jE��l��`4�` `17��' '{v 7}jF t f�, `' •'� _ .Tn w ' e•`�`, ',y d �.•t4>Ei1-...p..oh�1� ''t i� t•.- 1'a +� vv..% a` �, ,. v\• i' ( t' >a rY.g +.:x•,` a .. \p�`Lit.(,& yi ',c' 1''^ 5 AI\;'�.*i�`'" e\• b'i• •, f, •'• KK.." • }7 +• r• dy ,:. • •.+' i' ' T•t ian � ,$,,. tip•_,.' �e��\ J`h,),.. t't,. � �`-,- -r4 +/• ! `-- - ,mot` � :ai, nb{''4xt� ia.y:y. 't"•Ai. tr�:'n!•• +ti �' �j� �\\ f; v� ':f , i • < • `.,r ,S3''.,,.`,vH•i:2 .•.7•a' "'_ *a18s2t..7:ti �- {.tislr'e _ J<"•-xY'',, ,. ( :'tt,,4R, V. ,...; rfi >7'' ,t;,t ' J.' ;K ` •i WR.11,4914.-1,4-i ', q ., Icl Tiz;'. ,.* •k,..ct+. rw.. .• .'1•' • • �1rE r,; s Y`.!i ' ' jr. r' `'gam:.:.t-" .• ,FY �,+alj ,;; t£' (�tttV`;V�.R�,:�y,.�5•,fi">.,,+s'•,s� t � :••�, f �Y' y`�rY^t7�.i,' tE,`" .b � 'il' i,a. r,j i y �' i kx 3 �'i•n , r _ i 9;}'i,�"'(£, •• <=,. ';�• f [� � yyyy^t.!o�. i Nr Y tt °t. t %i:". Jat i. + k . —_ ...:*- ttf^'t f. 44 '.• 7y'<f. N .Sf�pt pi•. {s ,if,, T 7i` ' cf� I a; 1, • �j!� 3:ty;rke,"lit,, t' ez.t�4.t 4-tw..ye f E ., 5) A , . •/ . T 3 ft.''":�:4•,,V .'ti+i -F: •...� , •'is r , t;,; T+y' u1` + y�;'••- ,�, i'�,"•°,r t5 , r. •fy.! 1 I' ,cx{'T!'Si '`.f 7`_� ,'.��,s, r�r,.•,�c '1VoNN. - ,it .'fi r t j.F ,.i. \"Rt,t.X 4 •j' r".fi o-.9 sg •91,E i e P,ip ': 4 'r ti,:ti, 1 I' a . ',Pl,-'R SY. 3f r r.,1',4'4,-, t'' _ ,t.d 1Stx` y .., 4•ar,,,Ig •, - 1 ; . gi Y;l . . . ,,' h r` • .t;; U•� ' ���ill,,, t S 3�i�y;pi ', +.• f �.. r '''''-*.4,,,i. .4%.le-\ )11:‘,.."'fi::;?.'.144.%,";7$,VV..i.,til..1..'1.r,;:i:.4.1''he'l*.. //Ifif.''' ' ..,•,'"`3''''; ',,,,,x,t,t,5r;'"... 1°-,4 L ttLt'• „. 1.`�i` se " tt L "" lr'i' J:, S+ , Pt r: 'I' `�' •,11'•T;'• SS3 Y K•�,4iti j s,.,....*",F" 11�}}. r -je}c L1,.;;a• A'( r:� n I ,<�.� ,e ii:alS' r�e• 'dt .• •,4�,p. ;a rr"U s Of SFt.), E's' `iO4.-av 7•< �� t ',• I '%�` '.'�,..�. h 'ct• „P st' `r; x S7t .'( r .+ 1\ k IS U 'i, Ilyp'� ,�4 t 7`•kr °.i y yl�c�' tt 7`r `Y , O�'�+ CO .t�,':k":h;t1;c r �`d.,,,4 ' �y•�I • t '' f'' •'47 tY•�. : st • •t• �`ti.? ' .O 6t '� tr.l�h^i"fY✓ .,,; �•S1, -•• ry R t '`•? .40,, r ',/i.✓,''r , 44: y� ''•eq,,..t r:f?y,s ✓} •f�A;,; ,,h/r.J. 3 f�, ✓t',tiCO '�1 t ., 1 t /, '..:/'i;.T yr{`� Y n +:b . 7{+j•A' `!,i r"41:'' 7i 4 1.��( ••s.. � '4;�r'dll 't coV/ j'' ''S: 3f.� 1�. `,5 •tS 'lx,•k`S .�.' e<• • i s);: O Q� y�=<r ;`v'%.`'{`•�:ti r>"f;:!��i'yy/N y"r. i ce. :+.p?7t,r;� ;'i",. ,.7: .,,,,,i' �r t� "4m %' `:lti;a`1{� S 2);4 • $Y <•.if'� { �` `e.' fif•.1'111 • W >ei, . 't('y8".�t,''""" r, c1;"r''�i'T,,je' / :.t: r:3' I. ,k ',,. $i. %.4..-"!H.,• rI`,i C f v.1:;•7.,,i,.?ir� :e.4,:. ,3 .:/;;':fat"J7.*,'r F„it„,'.:•''' • a, '4O t !' +. ! ! 5n .d*'j r",,.Z.,Y ' �,b •t. '6;Y'' a.,,I I, o U '.4 ;);t. !1!p�T rt !y'+'' t�..f7.t �, t ! v,F: N Q) CC N ' '` ` ,I .:� •r3' 1,+; 1, i ,9t : y1',,,tic + . ,i O. ;;� , ya i i im CD • '�" • 'S•u .�Y•'. I:':: .u.:Nr:;a"'i ir?!'. '•r< 'fib i. r[ ,•: L ...,-,...-.. 41) :,,,, • • .,,,::• eta I C , a •• r• !!!t!l±Ell '.' ;, a4u ��An ' 'r` B-25 minimum of 600 feet from the nearest active nest tree in the main colony. Additional planting (preferably cottonwoods and evergreen trees) should be planted in front of the berm. Specific development guidelines for Tract A are as follows: • Set back all buildings and parking a minimum of 600 feet from the heron colony; • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running along the 600-foot setback from the heron colony, and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering the P-1 Pond and Springbrook Creek; • Vegetate the 10-foot high berm with 20-foot tall evergreen trees (height at time of planting) to form a visual barrier to the P-1 Pond, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6 - 8 foot tall evergreen trees. The evergreen trees should be planted in a staggered overlapping pattern to provide maximum visual buffering. In additional, deciduous trees should be planted to provide additional screening and wildlife habitat; • Buildings 600 feet from the nearest nest tree should not exceed four stories; any , - taller buildings should be 800 feet or further from the nearest nest tree in the main colony; • Create a dense vegetated buffer along the eastern boundary of the site to provide wildlife habitat and a vegetated travel route for herons along Springbrook Creek (see Figure B-5); • Buildings should be constructed in earth or natural tones; any glass facing the colony should be nonreflective; - • Hood all windows facing the heronry located above the height of the 20-foot tall evergreen trees and within 750 feet of the heron colony; and • Outdoor construction within 800 feet of the heronry should be excluded during the period from February 1 through July 1, and within 600 feet from July 1 through August 1. Blackriver Corporate Park - Tract B (Phase VII) Site Tract B (Phase VII) lies due south of the heron colony and approximately 300 feet to the edge of the northern site boundary (Figure B-5). The 300 feet distance from the colony to the site boundary includes open water of the P-1 Pond, emergent wetland vegetation, and cottonwood, Oregon ash, and alder trees varying in height from 50 to 123 feet. Much of the site to the south consists of low-growing grasses and shrubs (Figure B-5). In 1986, a double row of poplar trees were planted along the west edge of the site adjacent B-26 to the P-1 Pond. Remnants of the cottonwood forest are present on the east and southeast portions of the site. Guidelines for Tract B (Phase VII) are as follows: • Set back all buildings and parking a minimum of 600 feet from the heron colony; • Construct a 10-foot high benched earthen berm running along the 600-foot set back from the heron colony, and a 5-foot high berm along the remainder of the site bordering Springbrook Creek; • Vegetate the 10-foot high berm with 20-foot tall evergreen trees to form a visual barrier to the P-1 Pond, and vegetate the 5-foot high berm with 6- to 8-foot tall evergreen trees. In addition, deciduous trees should be planted to provide additional screening and wildlife habitat; • Buildings 600 feet from the nearest nest tree should not exceed four stories; any taller buildings should be 800 feet or further from the nearest nest tree in the main colony; • Create a dense vegetated buffer along the western boundary of the site to provide wildlife habitat and a vegetated travel route for herons along Springbrook Creek and along the northeastern side of the property (see Figure B-5); • Buildings should be constructed in earth or natural tones; any glass facing the colony should be nonreflective; • Hood all windows facing the heronry located above the height of the 20-foot tall evergreen trees and within 750 feet of the heron colony; • Plant cottonwood, Douglas fir, western red cedar, Sitka spruce, hemlock, grand fir, and native shrub vegetation at the northernmost portion of the site back 600 feet from the nearest nest tree. The evergreens should be planted closest to structures, the cottonwoods closest to the P-1 Ponds; • If more than one building is planned for the site, the buildings should be constructed in phases; • Outdoor construction within 800 feet of the heronry should be excluded during the period from February 1 through July 1, and within 600 feet from July 1 through August 1; • Construction impacts should be monitored during and following construction; and B-27 • Create a dense vegetated no-build buffer (location and width shown in Figure B- 5) along the western boundary of the site along Springbrook Creek, and maintain existing dense vegetation along the northern boundary of the site to provide a vegetated ingress and egress route for herons leaving from and returning to the colony (see Figure B-5). B-28 CITATIONS Literature Cited Anderson, Mary. 1990. Letter to Mary Lynne Myer, May 23, 1990. Bent, A. C. 1926. Life histories of North American marsh birds. U.S. Natural History Bulletin 135. Washington, D.C. Bjorklund, R. G. 1975. On the death of a midwestem heronry general notes. The Wilson Bulletin, Vol. 87, No. 2. Buckley, P. A. and F. G. Buckley, 1976. Guidelines for protection and management of colonially nesting waterbirds. North Atlantic National Park Service, Regional Office, Boston, MA. Cottam and Uhler, 1945. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service leaflet no. 272. Cottrille, W. and B. D. Cottrille. 1958. Great blue heron: behavior at the Nest. University of Michigan Press, Pub. 102. I Earth Consultants, Inc. 1990. Preliminary characterization of dredge spoils - Blackriver Corporate Park, Tract A, Renton, Washington. October 2, 1990. 9 pp plus appendices. Henny, C. L. and M. Bethers. 1971. Population ecology of the great blue heron with special reference to Western Oregon. The Canadian Field - Naturalist, Vol. 25, pp. 205-209. Henny, C. J. 1972. An analysis of the population dynamics of selected avian species with special reference to changes during the modern pesticide era. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Research Report 1. 99 pp. Ives, J. H. 1972. Common Egret and Great Blue Heron Nest Study, Indian Island, Humboldt County, California. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report No. 72-9. 39 pp. Jenni, D. A. 1969. A study of the Ecology of Four Species of Herons During the Breeding Season at Lake Alice, Alachua County, FL. Ecological Monographs, 39: 245-270. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1988. Great Blue Heron Rookery Investigation, N.E. 95th Street, Redmond, WA. Technical Report. 13 pp. Kelsall, J. P. and K. Simpson. 1979. A Three Year Study of the Great Blue Heron in Southwestern British Columbia. Proc. Colonial Waterbird Group, VOL. 3:69-74. B-29 z Leonard, W. 1985. Inventory of Great Blue Heron Nest Colonies in Southern and Western Puget Sound. Unpublished report to Washington Department of Wildlife. Palmer, R. S. 1962. Handbook of North American Birds. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. 567 pp. Mark, D. M. 1976. An Inventory of Great Blue Heron (Ardea herodias) Nesting Colonies in British Columbia. Northwest Science 50(1):32-41. Murphy, M. 1988. Status of Great Blue Heron Colonies in King County, Washington. Western Birds 19:37-40. Norman, D. M., I. Moul, and A. Breault. 1989. Bald eagle intrusions in great blue heron colonies. Colonial Waterbirds 12: 215-217. Palmer, R. S. 1962. Handbook of North American Birds. Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT. 567 pp. Parker, J. 1980. Great Blue Herons (Ardea herodias in Northwestern Montana: Nesting ) Habitat Use and the Effect of Human Disturbance. University of Montana, Unpub. M.S. Thesis. 61 pp. Pratt, H. M. 1970. Breeding Biology of Great Blue Herons and Common Egrets in Central California. Condor 72:407-416. Renton, City of. 1987. Report and decision, office of the hearing examiner, June 9, 1987. Seattle, City of. 1986. Findings and decision of hearing examiner - planned residential development at 4601 - 16th Avenue, S.W., Seattle. Shipe, S. J. and W. Scott. 1981. The great blue heron in King County, Washington. Washington Game Department, Nongame Program. 33 pp. Short, H. L. and R. J. Cooper. 1985. Habitat Suitability Index Models: Great Blue Heron. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biol. Rep. 82 (10.99). 23 pp. Simpson, K, J. N. M. Smith, and J. P. Kelsall. 1987. Correlates and Consequences of Coloniality in Great Blue Herons. Can. J. Zool. 65:572-576. Taylor, T. M., M. Reshkin, and K. J. Brock. 1981. Recreation land use adjacent to an active heron rookery: a management study. Indiana Academy of Science, Proceedings 91:226-236. Teal, J. M. 1965. Nesting Success of Egrets and Herons in Georgia. Wilson Bulletin. 77(3):257-263. Thorpe,R.W.and Associates. 1985. Draft Environmental Impact Statement-Pigeon Point. B-30 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Letter to Donald Erickson, City of Renton regarding Blackriver Corporate Park Development. February 20, 1987. Van Wormer, R. L. 1988. Technical Report on Recommended Setbacks for Great Blue Heron Rookery. October 3, 1988. IES Associates. 10 pp. Van Wormer, R. L. 1987. Technical Report on Heron Activity on Blackriver Corporate Park Property and Recommendations to Reduce or Negate Impacts from Clearing and Grading Land South of the P-1 Canal Pond and the Designated Natural Area Easement. 23 pp. Washington Department of Wildlife. 1990. July 11, 1990 letter from G. Schirato to R. Kimball, Kitsap County Planning Department re Miller Bay short plat. Washington Department of Wildlife. 1990.April 5, 1990 letter to Robert Titus, King County Deputy Zoning Examiner re Kenmore great blue heron rookery. 2 pp. ` Washington Department of Wildlife. 1988. Draft, Recommended Management Guidelines for Washington Endangered and Threatened Species and Species of Concern-Great Blue Heron. Nongame Wildlife. Webb, R. A. and L. S. Forbes. 1982. Colony establishment in an urban site by great blue herons. Murrelet 63:91-92. Werschkul, D. F., E. McMahon, and M. Leitschuh. 1976. Some Effects of Human Activities on the Great Blue Heron in Oregon. Wilson Bull. 88(4):660-662. si Personal Communications Allmendinger, H. November 29, 1990. Supervisor, King County Black River Pump Station - telephone conversation. Aslett, R. July 22, 1990. Resident at 1505 Southwest Alaska Street, Seattle, WA. - field meeting with J. Ives, JSA. Caldwell, R. June 19, 1989. Washington State Department of Transportation - telephone conversation. a ti. Duvall, G. Testimony at May 1, 1990 public hearing regarding Draft EIS for Blackriver Corporate Park, Tracts A and B. Hunn, E. Testimony at May 1, 1990. President,Seattle Audubon Society and Professor of Anthropology and Environmental Studies, University of Washington. Testimony at public hearing. B-31 Hunn, E. Testimony at May 1, 1990. President, Seattle Audubon Society and Professor of Anthropology and Environmental Studies, University of Washington. Testimony at public hearing. McAllister, K. May 31, 1989. Wildlife Biologist, Nongame Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Wildlife - telephone conversation. Murphy, M. June 2, 1989. Avian Researcher, Half Moon Bay, California - telephone conversation. Owens, T. June 1, 1989. Wildlife Biologist, Nongame Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Wildlife - telephone conversation. Penland, S. May 31, 1989. Urban Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Wildlife - telephone conversation. Pesek,J. June 16, 1989. Regional Nongame Wildlife Biologist, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife - telephone conversation. Schaff, W. October 11, 1990. Assistant Refuge Manager, Nisqually national Wildlife Refuge, Washington - telephone conversation with J. Berglund, JSA. Schirato, G. October 17, 1990. Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Wildlife, Region 6 - telephone conversation with J. Ives, JSA. Spencer, S. October 1990. Property owner, 18610 N.E. 95th Street, Redmond, WA - . - telephone conversation. Van Wormer, R. May 31, 1989. Senior Biologist, IES Associates, Olympia, Washington - telephone conversation. B-32 Appendix C. Noise Monitoring Data - July 20, 1990 Geotechnical Drilling 30 SECO \ 3 -FIVE HISTORY 70 65 — . 60 — m v w 55 - D CT ,n 50 — J C Z 0 45 — 0 W 0 to 40 — 35 — 30 7:00 AM 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11 :00 AM 12:00 PM 1 :00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM BEGINNING OF 30 SECOND TIME PERIOD 15 — ml \ UTE AVERAGE d3A LEVELS DRILLING 700-1000 FT. FROM ROOKERY 80 70 - ,--• 60 - . Q CO - _ - - - - -o - - - - - - \/ , / 7 / / / / r / ._ / , / - w 50 - r , r r r r / r / / _ D / r / / / / / / I / / / / / / / / r / / / r / / / / 7 - / / / , / / / / r , , / / r r / / / r r / / / / / r / / / / / r , . / 0- 40 - / / / / , / / r i / / / / r , / ., / / / / / r / r / / / , r / C) J / / l r / / / , / / / / / , / / r / , / / I / r / / / r , / / NW l r r r / r r r r v r r r r r r r / , r r r r r r r r r r / / I- D 30 / / r / / / / / / 7 / / / / / / / / r / / r / / / / / / / / / Z / r l 1 / / r r r / r / / r r / / , / / / r / / r / r r r / r 2 'rI / / / / / / r / r / / / r / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / u I / / / r / / r / r / / r / r / / r / / / / / • , r / / / / 20 - i / / / / / r / / / / / / / / r / , / / / / / r / / / / 7 / / / / / / / , / / / / / / / / / / l / / / / / / / / r / r r / / I / / r / / / / r / / / / / / / r / ✓ r / / / / / , / / / / / 1 0 - / / / / / / / / l / / / / / / / J / / / / / / / r / / / / / / / r / / / r / , / / r r r r r / / / / r r r / / r r / / / / r l / / r / r / / / / / / r / r / / / / / / r / / / / , / / / 1 0 1 I I III ! I T 1 I f r l r l 1 r l I r r r T 1 r r r 1 Y r r l I I T i IT! ! ! ! r r r 1 p r r r 1 r l I r r r l-r r r r i 1 IT! 1 T i I l 1 l r r l r l r T r r r l r r r r) l r T1 r l r l l r l r 1 r i 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 11 AM 12 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM 4 PM BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL _ J 1 HOUR AVERAGE c3A LEVELS DRILLING 700-1000 FT. FROM ROOKERY 80 70 - Q m 60 - • D - _ / / Q 50 - / / -- / / / / r / / / / / 7 N / / / / / / / J0Id 40 - / / / / / / / W 0 / / / / / / / ce / / / / / / / Lu > 30 - r / / S. r / r / r / / CC / / / / r / / D O / / r / / / / I 20 - / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 10 - / / / / / / r / / / / / / / / / / / / / 0 I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I l I I T I I I I I I I I I I I] I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 17 1 I I I I I I I] I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 17 1 I I J l I 1 I I l I l I I l t 7 AM 8 AM 9 AM 10 AM 1 1 AM 12 AM 1 PM 2 PM 3 PM • BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL HOURLY AVERAGE c3A VAL , E 80 70 - -oo 60 — — X 1 �c X _X _ x X X X � ' W — — - D —< ,) /< X R x F x x x — — — _ X x x < " Q 50 -r/ Jx n< x x x x x x x x x x �. x _ _ x x x p' n< Pi 7 /X / 7X X x X x X x X X x x x x x x x X X t�� OWE aa)i 7 7 .7 7 x x X X x x x x x x X X x X x x x 1 77 W 40 -7 7 7 7 x x x x x x x x x x X x x x x x x $.. 7 g 0 0 7 7 7 ,n< x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 0 7 x x k x x x x x x x x x x x x x x .4 r>< $: jf x X X x x x x x x x x x x x x x x �' r �' Q 30 -;� /� x ,� x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 77 cK D 7777 x X X x X x x x x x x x x x x x x Oj 7 0$ OI ,x �c �< x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x I 20 7 7 7 rx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x A' 7 A' I r 7 7 7 7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x g 7 p: r� �< r�< x x X X X X X X X X x x X X x x X A 7 A 10 — >< „< x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x I., �< I„ < 7 < ' x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x O' i�< o' 7 7 7 7 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 11,4 /X or 0 l r -, 1 r 1 -I 1 1 1 -I r 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 11 AM 2 PM 5 PM 8 PM 11 PM 2 AM 5 AM 8 AM BEGINNING OF TIME INTERVAL 7/// 7-20-90 W/ DRILLING XX 1 -23/24-90 AMBIENT d3A PECE \TILE 3ISTI3 TIO \ S 66 II 64 — n 62 — ' 60 — a m -o Ii 1 -1 J V;1 Id ►`1 1:,1 J 56 — a I (`1 t lv W IIRH%1 a RR,I D 54 — aRRa \I11\1 N w 52 — RaRIIJ Cr ri f. a- 111 0 5 0 — � I`R 1 1 z ,J D ( 11 0 48 — �11a f1 46 — ' 0 '-I.1 44 — 42 11111111111111 111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII. 111111 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT OF TIME EXCEEDING NOISE LEVEL 0 1 -23/24-90 AMBIENT + 7-20-90 W/ DRILLING 30 Second leg Noise Levels at the Black River Site July 20, 1990 Beginning 1 30-Second Leg Sequence by Start of 0.5 Minute Interval for Each 10-Minute Block of Tire of Tine Intervals ; 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 7:00 AM 1 :10 1 :20 1 56.5 55.0 52.0 51.0 50.0 49.5 55.0 60.0 57.0 50.5 53.0 54.0 52.5 53.5 53.5 50.0 52.5 54.0 50.0 51.0 1 :30 1 51.0 51.0 54.5 50.5 52.0 52.0. 50.5 52.5 52.5 52.0 48.5 51.0 52.5 60.5 52.5 51.0 56.5 59.0 62.5 56.5 1 :40 1 53.5 51.0 48.0 48.0 52.5 56.5 53.0 50.0 51.0 50.5 55.0 53.0 55.5 56.5 53.5 60.0 60.0 58.5 58.5 49.0 1 :50 51.0 49.0 50.0 50.0 52.0 50.0 49.0 50.5 53.0 57.5 52.5 50.0 49.0 46.5 41.0 51.5 53.5 51.5 50.5 50.0 8:00 AM ; 48.5 49.0 49.5 48.0 47.5 47.5 47.5 48.5 48.5 50.0 48.5 57.0 49.5 49.5 51.0 55.0 51.5 52.5 58.0 52.5 1 :10 1 48.0 47.5 49.0 48.0 49.0 49.0 48.0 49.0 48.0 47.5 49.5 49.0 48.0 47.0 47.0 47.5 47.0 43.0 52.0 55.0 1 :20 50.0 52.0 51.0 48.0 47.0 48.0 46.5 48.0 47.5 48.0 49.0 57.5 48.5 46.0 53.0 52.0 49.0 53.0 53.0 49.5 1 :30 51.5 47.5 49.0 49.5 52.5 51.0 51.5 56.0 55.5 49.0 46.5. 46.5 46.5 46.5 46.0 46.5 46.0 47.0 55.0 54.5 1 :40 1 47.5 47.0 48.5 49.5 47.0 48.0 49.0 48.0 61.5 49.0 58.0 56.0 59.5 57.0 47.0 43.0 49.0 50.5 57.0 60.0 :50 56.5 46.5 46.0 46.5 55.0 51.0 57.0 49.5 47.0 48.0 46.5 46.5 52.0 47.5 51.5 46.5 51.0 50.5 47.0 50.0 1 1 - 1 9:00 AM 1 47.5 51.0 49.5 48.0 47.0 46.5 48.0 48.5 46.0 46.0 46.0 48.5 47.0 47.0 46.0 48.0 45.5 46.5 45.5 46.5 1 :10 1 54.5 55.0 53.5 53.5 47.0 48.0 54.0 54.0 43.0 47.0 47.0 48.0 49.0 46.0 47.0 47.5 46.5 46.5 55.0 52.5 .1 1 :20 53.5 S3.0 55.0 54.5 50.5 49.5 52.5 51.0 46.5 50.0 47.5 49.0 57.0 43.5 47.5 46.0 4E.0 48.0 49.5 47.5 :30 49.0 47.5 47.0 46.5 48.5 51.5 50.0 41.5 47.0 47.5 54.5 52.3 55.5 50.0 47.5 49.5 48.5 48.0 53.3 58.5 :40 1 51.0 50.0 46.0 49.0 51.0 53.0 54.0 50.5 53.5 50.0 43.5 46.0 50.5 53.0 52.5 51.0 59.5 51.0 57.0 52.5 1 :50 49.5 46.5 46.5 48.0 47.5 49.0 59.0 57.0 45.5 43.5 51.6 47.0 46.0 47.0 43.5 48.5 54.0 68.0 59.0 56.5 1 10:00 AM 1 49.5 57.0 59.5 54.0 47.5 48.0 43.0 48.0 51.5 52.0 51.0 50.0 56.0 59.5 60.5 57.0 58.0 54.0 50.0 50.0 :10 1 46.5 46.5 47.0 49.5 55.5 55.5 53.0 55.0 53.0 59.0 60.5 61.5 60.0 60.0 62.0 50.5 45.5 46.0 46.5 49.0 :20 47.5 47.0 46.5 50.0 49.5 48.5 46.5 46.0 46.0 49.0 55.0 61.5 64.0 49.5 48.0 45.0 47.0 47.0 47.0 47.5 :30 ; 43.0 47.0 46.0 46.5 47.5 48.5 50.5 48.0 47.5 45.0 54.0 51.7 50.0 43.5 47.5 47.0 46.0 47.5 47.5 46.0 :40 46.0 46.0 46.5 45.5 48.0 47.5 48.5 51.0 51.5 52.5 65.0 63.0 62.5 45.0 40.5 45.0 44.5 40.0 43.0 51.0 1 :50 55.0 54.0 53.5 52.5 43.0 51.0 49.5 51.5 50.5 56.0 49.5 51.0 51.5 51.0 60.0 60.5 51.0 51.5 54.0 56.0 11:00 AM 54.0 52.0 52.0 49.5 48.0 52.5 53.0 52.0 51.0 59.0 58.5 63.0 64.5 61.0 52.5 54.0 51.0 50.5 59.5 60.0 • 1 :10. 1 51.5 50.5 49.0 49.0 48.5 51.0 51.5 50.0 50.5 52.5 56.0 50.5 46.5 55.0 49.5 48.5 46.0 46.5 48.5 50.5 1 :20 51.0 50.5 49.5 47.5 47.5 49.5 46.5 51.0 50.5 50.0 51.0 54.0 51.0 59.0 61.0 60.3 61.5 52.0 50.5 43.7 :30 52.0 50.0 51.0 50.5 49.5 48.5 47.0 47.5 49.0 53.0 49.0 43.0 51.0 43.5 43.5 46.0 51.0 43.5 49.5 43.0 :40 48.5 49.0 48.5 48.0 56.5 54.5 51.0 51.0 47.5 46.5 47,0 47.5 47.0 50.0 46.5 47.0 48.0 60.5 57.5 46.0 1 :50 1 58.0 51.5 50.0 49.5 57.0 49.5 52.5 52.5 50.0 49.5 48.0 47.5 46.5 45.5 45.5 47.5 51.0 48.5 47.0 47.0 ' 1 1 12:00 PM 47.0 46.5 47.0 48.0 43.0 57.0 60.5 59.0 57.0 52.0 51.0 51.5 52.5 51.5 51.0 46.0 46.5 48.S 47.0 46.5 :10 1 47.0 47.5 46.5 48.0 48.5 44.5 46.5 58.5 54,0 47.5 - 46.5 47.0 61.5 60.0 60.5. 56.5 48.5 48.0 46.5 45.0 :20 45.5 49.5 60.5 61.5 53.5 . 60.0 49.5 49.0 46.5 43.0 46.0 45.5 46.0 53.0 47.3 48.5 47.5 S2.0 48.5 49.0 :30 1 .48.0 47.5 48.5 51.0 49.0 47.5 46.5 49.0 49.0 52.0 . .47.5 48.7 47.0 55.0 54.5 50.5 53.0 50.5 50.5 53.0 1 :40 51.5 51.0 45.5 46.0 47.5 48.5 56.0 . 56.5 50.5 51.5 51.5 49.0 50.0 47.0 48.5 51.0 56.5 57.0 52.5 55.0 1 :50 52.0 51.5 53.5 51.5 52.0 51.0 45.5 43.5 56.5 52.0 49.0 46.1 45.0 45.0 45.5 47.5 46.5 47.0 46.5 46.5 _ / - 30 Second Leq Noise levels at the Black River Site July 20, 1990 I Beginning I 30-Second Leq Sequence by Start of 0.5 Minute Interval for Each 10-Minute Block of Time I of Tine 1 1 Intervals I 0:00 0:30 1:00 1:30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 1 1 , 1 1:00 PM 45.0 49.0 47.0 45.5 48.5 55.0 52.0 51.0 53.0 59.5 58.5 51.5 46.5 45.0 46.5 46.5 58.5 52.5 47.0 50.0 :10 1 51.5 51.5 49.5 48.5 48.0 47.5 48.5 49.0 45.5 44.5 44.0 48.5 50.5 50.5 49.5 49.0 53.5 58.0 58.5 64.5 : :20 1 '61.0 61.5 61.5 59.5 56.5 49.5 52.5 51.0 51.5 50.5 50.5 51.5 50.0 49.0 46.5 45.5 45.0 47.5 47.5 45.0 1 • : :30 I 47.5 47.0 59.5 49.0 47.5 51.0 51.5 54.5 53.5 45.5 50.0 49.0 51.5 43.0 48.0 50.0 49.5 55.0 55.0 55.5 1 :40 1 55.0 45.0 46.5 60.0 60.5 62.5 50.0 48.0 49.0 49.0 58.0 57.5 54.5 53.5 47.5 47.5 48.5 49.5 46.5 46.0 : :50 1 49.5 48.5 60.0 46.5 52.5 47.0 50.5 50.5 48.5 44.5 45.0 46.5 51.5 46.0 55.5 55.0 46.0 51.5 53.0 54.0 • 1 2:00 PM I 47.0 45.0 46.0 45.0 45.0 44.5 46.5 46.0 46.0 47.0 44.5 50.5 48.0 47.0 46.0 45.5 45.5 46.5 48.5 45:0 1 :10 44.5 44.5 46.0 46.0 43.5 45.0 45.5 46.0 48,0 55.0 54.0 53.0 45.5 45.5 49.5 49.5 44.5 44.0 45.0 46.0 I :20 45.5 45.0 45.0 46.5 46.0 44.5 44.5 44.0 43.5 45.0 46.0 45.5 44.0 43.5 43.5 43.5 43.0 44.5 44.3 45.0 1 :30 1 52.5 47.0 45.0 45.0 44.5 43.5 44.0 44.5 45.5 47.0 45.0 45.0 50.5 49.0 50.5 45.5 46.5 55.0 50.5 47.0 :40 1 48.5 50.5 45.0 43.5 44.0 43.5 45.0 44.5 46.0 46.0 46.5 46.0 47.5 47.0 46.5 46.5 43.0 46.0 44.3 47.5 :50 1 47.5 45.0 45.5 46.5 50.5 54.0 50.5 49.0 49.0 44.0 44.5 45.5 45.5 45.0 45.0 44.5 44.5 47.0 47.0 43.5 , 1 3:00 PM 49.5 45.0 46.0 45.0 49.5 44.5 46.5 48.0 53.5 52.5 51.5 45.5 46.0 48.0 46.5 49.0 46.0 47.0 46.5 45.0 . :10 44.5 48.5 45.5 45.0 46.5 57.0 52.0 47,0 47.5 48.0 50.5 43.0 47.0 46.0 47.0 44.5 44.5• 56.0 4=.3 61.5 n • • v Noise Data Summery for the Black River Site July 20, 1990 Beginning Hourly Summary .f 5-Minute interval Noise Monitoring Data dsd (dB A) _. Time Average Interval -eq 110 1333 150 190 lairs 7i00 AM :10 :15 :20 55.0 80.0 54.0 51.5 51.0 49.0 t •25 __._ ir._ * 54.0 51.5 J0.J 43.0 * 53.5 51.5 50.5 48.5 :25 57.0 82.0 * 61.0 54.0 52.0 48.5 * er 51.5 50.5 8 :45 57.5 62.0 * 61.0 56.0 54.0 49.0 3 :50 52.0 77.0 * 54.5 51.5 50.0 48.0 * :55 51.0 75.5 53.5 50.5 49.5 43.0 8:00 AM 51.8 48.5 73.5 * 50.0 48.0 47.5 47.0 * r :05 53.5 78.5 * 57.0 51.5 50.0 47.5 * :10 48.5 73.0 * 50.0 48.0 47.5 46.5 * :15 50.0 74.5 3 51.0 49.0 48.0 46.0 * :20 49.0 73.5 * 51.0 48.5 48.0 46.5 * :25 52.0 77.0 * 52.0 49.0 48.0 46.5 * :30 52.0 77.0 3 51.5 48.5 48.0 46.5 * III :35 50.0 74.5 * 51.0 47.0 46.5 46.0 3 :40 53.0 78.0 * 50.0 48.5 47.5 46.0 * :45 56.0 81.0 4 59.0 48.5 47.5 46.0 * e� r -, :50 52.5 77.0 * 51.5 47.5 47.0 46.0 * .CC 1Q to C %Y.J r 3 JM 52.5 50.0 48.0 46.0 * 3:00 AM 52.8 48.0 73.0 * 50.0 48.0 47.0 46.0 * :05 47.0 71.5 * 48.5 47.0 46.5 45.0 * ' :10 52.5 77.5 * 54.5 49.0 47.5 45.5 * :15 49.5 74.5 * 50.0 48.0 47.0 45.5 * :20 52.0 77.0 * 54.0 50.5 - 49.5 47.0 * :25 Jairn.0 i.i r _r.J r 51.0 49.0 48.0 46.5 * :30 48.5 73.5 * 50.0 48.0 47.0 45.5 * :35 53.5 78.0 * 54.0 50.0 43.5 46.0 * :40 51.5 76.0 * 55.0 50.0 48.0 45.5 * :45 53.5 78.5 * 53.0 49.0 47.0 45.0 * :50 52.5 77.5 * 53.0 48.5 47.0 44.5 * :55 59.0 84.0 * 61.0 53.5 50.0 45.5 * ; 10:00 AM 54.7 53.5 78.5 * 53.0 48.5 47.0 45.0 * :05 56.0 81.0 * 58.0 51.0 49.0 46.5 * :10 54.0 78.5 * 57.0 52.5 49.0 45.5 *' :15 58.0 83.0 * 53.5 48.0 46.5 44.5 * :20 48.0 72.5 * 50.5 47.5 46.5 44.5 * :25 56.5 81.5 * 60.0 51.0 47.5 46.0 * :30 48.0 73.0 * 50.0 47.5 46.5 45.0 • * :35 49.5 74.0 * 52.5 47.5 46.5 45.0 * , :40 49.0 74.0 * 52.0 47.5 46.5 45.0 * :45 58.5 83.5 * 52.5 49.0 48.0 44.5 * • :50 53.0 77.5 * 55.0 52.0 50.0 47.0 * :55 55.5 80.5 * 56.5 51.0 . 49.5 CO * C-8 Noise Data Suaaary the Black River Site July 20, 1990 Beginning Hourly Summary of 5-Minute Interval Noise Monitoring Data (dBA) of Time Average Interval Leq Leq SEL Lux 110 L33 150 L90 Lain 11:00 AM 53.7 53.5 78.3 * 55.5 50.0 49.0 46.0 a III :05 59.5 84.5 a _ . J 7.J 50.5 48.5 44.5 :10 50 ` ° ° 46.0.J 7J.J = 53.5 50.5 49.0 :1551.0 76.0 * 45.5 _ 54.0 50.0 48.0 :20 49.5 74.5 * 52.0 50.0 49.0 46,0 :25 57.5 S2.0 * 55.5 51.0 50.0 48.0 •J 51.5 76.5 * J_.J 50." 43.5 46.0 T ..:J 49.3 74.0 51.5 47 46.5 ..e :40 51.0 .40 iJ 7` * 55.0 49.0 47.5 46.0 � :45 53.5 78.0 51.0 78.0 * 54.5 51.0 49.0 45.0 a :55 4/.J 72.5 * J0.0 48.0 46.5 44.5 12:00 PM 53.0 55.5 80.0 54.5 48.5 47.5 44.5 * . :05 49.5 74.5 * 51.0 47.5 46.5 44.5 * :10 51.5 76.0 * 51.0 47.5 46.5 44.0 a :15 56.5 81.0 * 52.0 47.0 46.0 44.5 * :20 56.5 81.5 * 55.5 49.0 48.0 45.0 * :25 49.074.0 * 47.0 45.0 a . J 53.0 48.0 :30 49.0 74.0 * 51.5 48.5 40.0 46.0 a :35 52.0 70.5 55.5 50.0 48.5 46.0 * :40 52.0 76.5 * 53.0 46.5 45.5 44.0 a , :45 53.5 78.5 * 57.0 49.5 47.0 45.0 * :50 52.0 77.0 * 55.5 49.0 47.0 45.0 :55 46.5 71.5 a 48.5 46.0 45.5 44.0 a 1:00 PM 54.0 53.0 77.5 * 57.0 49.0 47.0 44.5 * i :05 53.0 78.0 a 57.5 49.0 46.5 44.0 * :10 48.5 73.5 * 52.0 47.5 46.0 44.5 * :15 57.0 81.5 * 56.5 49.5 47.5 44.5 * :20 58.0 B2.5 a 57.0 47.0 45.5 44.0 a:25 .i.J 48.5 73.0 a 51.5 4e.0 45.0 43.5 :30 53.0 77.5 * 55.5 47.0 46.0 44.0 :3J 52.0 77.0 * 54.0 47.0 46.0 44.0 * :40 56.5 BI.5 * 53.0 47.0 46.0 44.0 * :45 53.0 78.0 * 55.5 49.0 46.0 43.5 a :50 52.5 77.5 a 52.0 46.5 45.5 44.0 a :55 52.5 77.5 a 53.0 49.0 46.5 44.5 * 2:00 PM 47.2 46.0 70.5 * 47.5 45.5 44.5 43.5 * :05 47.0 72.0 * 50.0 46.5 45.0 44.0 * :10 48.0 73.0 * 47.0 46.0 45.0 44.0 * :15 49.0 74.0 * 50.5 46.0 45.0 43.5 * :20 45.0 69.5 * 46.5 45.0 44.5 43.0 * :25 44.5 69.0 * 46.0 44.5 44.0 43.0 * :30 47.0 71.5 * 48.5 45.0 44.5 43.5 * :35 49.5 74.5 * 53.0 47.0 46.0 43.5 • * :40 • 46.0 71.0 a 47.5 45.5 44.5 43.0 * :45 47.0 71.5 * 49.0 46.0 45.0 43.5 * :50 49.0 74.0 1 52.0 47.0 46.0 44.0 * :55 45.5 70.0 * 46.5 45.0 44.5 43.5 * C-9 z . ,I Noise Data Summary for the Black River Site July 20, 1390 Beginning Hourly Summary of 5-Minute Interval Noise Monitoring Data (dBAI of Tice Average interval Leg Leg SEL Lmax L10 L33 L50 L90 Lain n.00 nu y r +n p J.V+! I ri 62.3 '.J !J.(.. * �B. 'FJ.J YJ.l 43.5 :05 4S.5 73.5 * 43.5 47.0 46.0 44.4111 z :10 50.0 75.0 * 50.0 46.0 45.0 44.0 :15 43.5 74.5 # 50 5 6 iC 0 4n 5 J�,.J 4G.� 't,.l.l] 43.J .. Notes: Leg = equivalent constant noise level for the specified tine period SF1 = single event level (cumulative noise event integrated over a i-second period) • Lma:i = maxiaum 1-second average noise level 110 = noise level exceeded 10 percent of the time 33 = noise level exceeded 33 percent of the time • L50 = noise level exceeded 50 percent of the time 190 = noise level exceeded 90 percent of the time Lain = minimum 1-second average noise level # = data not valid • C-10 Appendix D. Foundation and Seismic Analysis RECEIVED n Golder Associates Inc. QCONSULTING ENGINEERS JAN 26 199U INCA ENGINEERS January 25, 1990 Our ref: 903-1005 INCA Engineers Inc. 11820 Northup Way, E. Bldg. Bellevue, Washington 98005 ATTENTION: Mr. Dan Russell RE: GEOTECHNICAL INPUT FOR EIS TRACTS A AND B BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK RENTON,WASHINGTON Dear Dan: The purpose of this letter is to provide sufficient response to the EIS process necessary to determine the impacts of construction during the installation of the foundation systems required for the proposed buildings. In preparing this letter we have reviewed the Preliminary Soil and Foundation Investigation Report, dated April 9, 1979. Based on discussions with the project architect we understand the proposed office park would include buildings ranging between one and seven stories in height. In summary, we have determined that for the standard foundation support systems considered feasible for this site, there are no perceived impacts on the environment as it relates to the construction process or final product. For structures ranging between one and two stories in height we would expect a preload to be used for site preparation and conventional shallow foundations used for the support of the building. Impacts associated with this type of operation, as it relates to the foundation system would be associated with the transport of fill material to the site for preloading, and the use of a clean well graded structural backfill. Based on our experience in the project area, structures over two stories typically require deep foundation support. The two standard pile types used in this area for deep foundation support are driven steel pipe piles and drilled auger cast-in-place piles. In general, for the range of loads anticipated by the project structural engineer, and the economics of the pile alternatives, the auger cast-in-place pile would probably be the foundation support system of choice by the owner and engineer. Auger cast piles in this area are typically 40 to 60 feet in length and are designed for an allowable capacity of approximately 50 tons. Based on numerous projects we have been involved in with using auger cast piles, there are no GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.•415. •'4ETN AVENUE N.E..REDMOND(SEATTLE).WASHINGTON.U.S.A.98052•TEL.(206)883.0777•FACSIMILE(206)862 549E•TELEX 5106002944 OFFICES IN UNITED STATES•CANADA•UNITED KINGDOM•SWEDEN•AUSTRALIA January 22, 1990 2 903-1005 perceived impacts on the environment during construction for this system. Steel pipe piles are typically driven 40 to 60 feet below existing ground surface and are designed for an allowable capacity of 70 to 100 tons. If the steel pipe pile support system is selected,we would expect ground vibration and noise during the pile driving to be of concern. However, based on our experience during the pile driving for the S.W. 7th Street bridge spanning the P-1 Channel, which is supported on driven steel pipe piles, we would not expect any noticeable or serious impact related to the installation of driven steel pipe piles. We understand that seismic design input is also required for this project. As project geotechnical engineer for the Renton Waste Water Treatment Plant immediately adjacent to the site, we not only provided detailed preload and pile design recommendations but also completed seismic design studies. Those details have been provided to you in an earlier transmittal. If you have any questions.or require additional clarification following your review of this letter report, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, DER ASSOCIATES INC. David M. otton, P.E. • Associate DMGcIa cc: Mark Miller, Vice President of Development, FirstCity Development Golder Associates Appendix E. Supplemental Air Quality Information APPENDIX E SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION THE SUPERPOSITION PRINCIPAL IN PLAIN ENGLISH By: Robert Sculley Copyright (c) 1989 by: Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. Sacramento, CA 95816 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Dispersion Models 1 Plume Additivity 1 References 2 i Dispersion Models Predicting the ambient air quality impacts of pollutant emissions requires an assessment of the transport,dispersion,chemical transformation,and removal processes that affect pollutant emissions after their release into the atmosphere. Gaussian dispersion models are frequently used for transport and dispersion analyses. The term "Gaussian dispersion" refers to the type of mathematical equation used to describe the horizontal and vertical distribution of pollutants downwind from an emission source. Gaussian dispersion models treat pollutant emissions as being carried downwind in a defined plume, subject to horizontal and vertical mixing with the surrounding atmosphere. The plume spreads horizontally and vertically, the pollutant concentrations diminishing downwind from the emission source. Mixing with the surrounding atmosphere is greatest at the edge of the plume, resulting in lower pollutant concentrations outward (horizontally and vertically) from the center of the plume. This decreases in concentration outward from the center of the plume is assumed to follow a Gaussian ("normal") statistical distribution. Horizontal and vertical mixing generally occur at different rates. Because turbulence in the atmosphere occurs on a variety of spatial and time scales,vertical and horizontal mixing also vary with distance downwind from the emission source. Dispersion models calculate pollutant concentrations at particular locations ("receptors" in modeling jargon) by applying appropriate horizontal and vertical dispersion factor equations to the initial pollutant concentration. The proper dispersion factor equations are determined from the position of the receptor relative to both the emission source and the centerline of the pollution plume extending downwind from the emission source. When more than one emission source affects a particular receptor location, the total pollutant concentration at the receptor is the sum of the individual pollutant increments contributed by each emission source. This is called the additivity or superposition principle in most air pollution textbooks. Most texts (e.g.,Dobbins 1979, Seinfeld 1975, Seinfeld 1986, Stern et al. 1984,Turner 1970) provide no discussion of why multiple plume increments are additive. A few references (e.g., Strom 1976, Electric Power Research Institute 1979) mention situations in which multiple plumes may not be strictly additive due to heat or chemical interaction among the constituents of the plumes. Because it may not be intuitively obvious, the reason for the additivity of multiple plume contributions deserves a more thorough explanation. Plume Additivity The use of the term "pollution plumes" may imply to some that the pollution concentration at a given location would be the average, not the sum, of the incremental concentrations from each overlapping plume. The pollution plume terminology suggests the analogy of physically mixing fluids (air in this case) with different pollutant concentrations. E-1 1 I This particular fluid mixing analogy can be visualized as pouring buckets of water with different salt concentrations into an empty swimming pool. The final salt concentration will be a weighted average of the salt concentrations in the incremental additions of water. Why, then, are separate plume concentrations additive in atmospheric dispersion models? The simple answer is that there is a flaw in the swimming pool analogy as presented above. This flaw involves the total volume of fluid present as additional salt contributions are added. In the swimming pool analogy, the volume of water in the pool represents the volume of the atmosphere. Pouring buckets of salty water into an empty swimming pool increases the volume of water in the pool with each incremental addition. In an atmospheric dispersion modeling context,however,the volume of"carrier fluid" (air) at a receptor point remains constant regardless of the number of overlapping pollution plumes affecting the site. Thus, the proper analogy for Gaussian dispersion models is one of pouring different sized jars of salt into a swimming pool already filled with water. The resulting pollutant concentration is the sum of the incremental additions of salt. In more technical terms,Gaussian dispersion models operate by predicting the spatial distribution of pollutant molecules, rather then simulating the physical mixing of fluids. As a more concrete example, consider vehicle exhaust emissions. There is clearly an air flow out of the exhaust pipe. This air flow, however, originates in the surrounding atmosphere. Air is drawn into the engine from outside the car, then is returned to the atmosphere with an added increment of combustion byproducts. The net volume of the atmosphere doesn't change. The only addition to the atmosphere is a mass of pollutants produced by incomplete fuel combustion. In terms of the swimming pool analogy, this is equivalent to pumping water from the swimming pool into an aquarium, pouring salt in to the aquarium, then pumping the water (with the dissolved salt) back into the swimming pool. No all air quality modeling studies employ Gaussian dispersion models. Building ventilation models and indoor air quality studies frequently use other analysis methods (e.g., box models and mass balance analyses) that explicitly address changes in air flow (total volume or volumetric flow rates). In such cases, weighted averages of component concentration increments are entirely appropriate. References Dobbins, R.A. 1979. Atmospheric motion and air pollution: an introduction for students of engineering and science. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY. 323 pp. Electric Power Research Institute. 1979. Mathematical models for atmospheric pollutants. (EA-1131 Research Project 805.) Prepared by Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories and Decision Focus, Inc. Palo Alto, CA. Five volumes. E-2 11 Seinfeld,J.H. 1975. Air pollution: physical and chemical fundamentals. McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York, NY 523 pp. Seinfeld, J.H. 1986. Atmospheric chemistry and physics of air pollution. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY 738 pp. Stern,A.C., R.W. Boubel, D.B. Turner, and D.L. Fox. 1984. Fundamentals of air pollution. Second edition. Academic Press. Orlando, FL. 530 pp. Strom, G.H. 1976. Transport and diffusion of stack effluents. Pp. 401-501 in A.C. Stern, (Ed.), Air pollution. Third edition. Volume I: air pollutants, their transformation and transport. Academic Press. New York, NY. 715 pp. Turner, D.B. 1970. Workbook of atmospheric dispersion estimates. (PB-191 482.) National Technical Information Service. Springfield, VA. 84 pp. E-3 Appendix F. Hazardous Waste Study (Complete Report Available for Review at City of Renton Planning Division) PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON - • PREPARED FOR OCT -- 5 1990 FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT E E ;r-r.F 777A--4-'44-4-4 d e e Marcus L. Pierce Project Hydrogeol 'st teven P es Senior Hydrogeologist PRELIMINARY CHARACI RIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Renton, Washington E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Earth Consultants, Inc. 1805 - 136th Place Northeast, Suite 101 Bellevue, Washington 98005 (206) 643-3780 222 East 26th Street, Suite 103 Tacoma, Washington 98411-9998 (206) 272-6608 F-1 TABLE OF CONTENTS E-1990-12 PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 SCOPE OF WORK 2 PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION 2 Information Review/Site Reconnaissance 2 Project Background 2 Aerial Photograph Interpretation 3 Site Survey 4 Drilling and Soil Sampling 4 Methodology 4 Borehole Geology 5 Soil Sampling Analytical Results 5 Priority Pollutant Metals 5 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 6 Chlorinated Pesticides and PCBs 6 Semi-Volatile Organics 6 Other Contaminants 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 7 Potential Contaminants of Concern 7 Other Detected Contaminants 8 Potential for Environmental Degradation 8 STANDARD LIMITATIONS 8 CLOSURE 9 TABLES Table 1 - Soil Sampling Analytical Results ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 1 - Site Vicinity Map Plate 2 - Tract A Site Plan LIST OF REFERENCES APPENDICES it Appendix A: ECI Proposals dated June 11, 1990 and July 23, 1990 Appendix B: Letter from Mary Anderson to Norm Peck dated April 26, 1990 Letter from Norm Peck to the Ecology Environmental Review Section dated May 3, 1990 Earth Consultants, Inc. F-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS E-1990-12 APPENDICES (con't) Appendix C: Aerial Photographs/Photodocumentation Appendix D: Borehole Logs Appendix E: Laboratory Analytical Results ii Earth Consultants, Inc. F-3 C Earth Consultants Inc. • `r) �� / Geoirchnical Engineers.Gel Ik,gist,,14 11\'IrI01111'1110i SeIf9111hlh October 2, 1990 E-1990-12 First City Development • AT & T Gateway Tower Seattle, Washington 98104 Attention: Mr. Mark Miller Subject: Preliminary Characterization of Dredge Spoils • Black River Corporate Park, Tract A Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Miller: The Environmental Services Division of Earth Consultants, Inc. (ECI) has completed a preliminary characterization of the dredge spoils located on Tract A of the Black River Corporate Park in Renton, Washington. The proposed scope of work was outlined in ECI's June 11, 1990 proposal and July 23, 1990 revised proposal (Appendix A). This report summarizes our project approach and findings. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The findings and conclusions presented in this study are based on our interpretation of information currently available to us. This summary is for introductory purposes and should only be used with the full text of this report. On June 6, 1990, Ecology requested a preliminary characterization of potential contamination in the spoils hydraulically dredged from the forebay of the P-1 pump station and pumped into the former retention pond on Tract A in 1984. Ecology is concerned that. contaminants discharged from the numerous upstream sites with documented contamination may have migrated downstream and settled into the forebay sediments (dredge spoils). In accordance with Ecology's request, five boreholes were bored in the former retention pond and six soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis for priority pollutants and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). Cadmium (28 mg/kg), and TPH (240 mg/kg) were present in soil sample B102A-1" at concentrations exceeding Ecology's proposed industrial soil cleanup standards. Concentrations of chromium (120 mg/kg) and zinc (1,000 mg/kg) in sample B102A-1 " and the concentration of silver (6.6 mg/kg) in sample B101A-1.5" are also elevated. • 1805-136th Place N.E.,Suite 101,Bellevue,Washington 98005 222 E.26th Street,Suite 101,Tacoma,Washington 98411.9998 Bellevue(206)643.3780 Seattle(206)464-1584 FAX(206)746-0860 Tacoma(206)272-6608 PRELIMINARY CHARAC:1ERIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 2 A toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) was performed on sample B102A-1". Based on the TCLP, cadmium, chromium, and zinc appear to be relatively immobile, with less than 1% of these metals leaching from the sample. Additional soil sampling and analysis for TPH in the - vicinity of borehole B102A suggests that the TPH contamination is localized. Post-1984 aerial photographs show heavy construction equipment was stored near the former retention pond, and the TPH contamination in sample.B102A-1" probably resulted from leakage or a minor spill from this equipment. The potential for degradation of local surface water and groundwater, resulting from contamination detected in the dredge spoils, appears low. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of this project was limited to the following tasks: • Review of available Soil Conservation Service (SCS) records and available aerial photographs to assess the approximate aerial extent and thickness of the dredge spoils on Tract A. • Drilling and sampling the dredge spoils at five locations. • Analysis of soil samples from each borehole for priority pollutants. • Preparation of this written report. • Liaison with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the City of Renton to develop the soil sampling program and coordinate field activities. PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION Information Review/Site Reconnaissance Information on site history and the emplacement of the dredge spoils on Tract A were obtained ' from ECI's project files, aerial photographs, conversations with Soil Conservation Services Inspector Mr. Rod Denherder, and visual reconnaissance of the property. Information from these sources is discussed in the following subsections. Project Background During June to November 1984, the Soil Conservation Service --(SCS) enlarged the forebay of the P-1 pump station for storm water control and wildlife habitat enhancement. The forebay _ Earth Consultants. Inc. F-5 PRELIMINARY CHARAC1ERIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 3 was enlarged to an approximate 20-acre holding area which encompassed the junction of the former Springbrook Creek and the Black River Channels. This project is commonly referred to as Phase 1 of the construction of the P-1 Channel. A contractual agreement between First City Development and SCS allowed for soils excavated and hydraulically dredged from the forebay to be placed on adjacent Tracts A and B (formerly the Earlington Golf Course) of the Black River Corporate Park. During the enlargement of the forebay, the area adjacent to the P-1 pump station was hydraulically dredged and the spoils pumped into an approximately 500 feet long, 50 to 100 feet wide, and 3 to 6 feet deep excavation (retention pond) on Tract A. - On April 26, 1990, Ms. Mary Anderson, a former SCS employee involved with the P-1 Channel construction, sent a letter to Mr. Norm Peck of Ecology expressing concerns regarding the potential presence of contamination in the forebay dredge spoils on Tract A (Appendix B). Potential contamination sources would have included the documented hazardous waste sites, such as the Western Processing recycling plant (EPA Superfund site), which are located upstream from the forebay. Contamination from these upstream sources may have migrated downstream to the forebay and settled into the sediments deposited adjacent to the P-1 Pump Station. On June 6, 1990, representatives of First City Development, Ecology, Earth Consultants, and the City of Renton met to discuss the potential for contamination in the dredge spoils on Tract A. During the meeting, Ecology requested a preliminary characterization of potential contamination in the dredge spoils, thus prompting this investigation. Aerial Photograph Interpretation Aerial photographs showing the location of the dredge spoils on Tract A were reviewed (Appendix C). Oblique angle photographs, which were taken on November 5, 1990, were enlarged to facilitate delineation of the retention pond containing the potentially contaminated dredge spoils. Mr. Rod Derherder, an SCS inspector involved in Phase I of the P-1 Channel project, reviewed the oblique angle aerial photographs and agreed that they clearly show the - retention pond for the dredge spoils. In order to locate the approximate boundaries of the former retention pond, the oblique angle photographs were cross-referenced with a March 1985 aerial photograph taken directly overhead (Approximate Scale: 1" = 1500') which shows the outline of the retention pond. The approximate lateral dimensions of the retention pond and the distance between the middle of the retention pond and the southern edge of the P-1 Channel forebay were estimated. These estimated distances were field checked during a site survey. Earth Consultants, Inc. F-6 PRELIMINARY CHARACTERIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 4 Site Survey Tract A of the Black River Corporate park was visually surveyed on July 18 and 19, 1990 to evaluate the general site conditions and locate the former retention pond (see Plates 1 and 2). The subject site covers approximately 10 to 15 acres and is presently bounded by the P-1 Channel (north and east), Oakesdale Avenue Southwest (south), and a small park and the P-1 Pump Station (west). The subject site is relatively flat, with a slight depression near the center of the property. Grasses (1 to 4 feet high) and occasional small willow trees cover the surface of the property. Near the center of the subject site, there is a slight depression with the approximate dimensions of the former retention pond. The area appears to be well delineated, except near the presumed western boundary of former retention pond, by an abundance of reed canary grass and relatively soft, less compacted silt and very fine silty sand. The distance between the edge of the P-1 Channel and the center of the depression also correspond to the approximate distance between the edge of the P-1 Channel and the center of the retention pond estimated from the aerial photographs. During the site survey, the borehole locations were marked and positioned along the center of the slight depression. Drilling and Soil Sampling Five boreholes (B101, B102, B103, B104, and B105) were bored along the center of the former retention pond on Tract A on July 19, 1990 in order to identify subsurface materials and collect soil samples for laboratory analysis (See Appendix C - Aerial Photographs/Photodocumentation). Due to poor sample recovery, two additional boreholes (B101A and B102A) were bored near B101 and B102 for the sole purpose of collecting a soil sample for laboratory analysis. Locations of the boreholes are shown in Plate 2. Methodology Each borehole was bored with 8-inch outside diameter (OD) hollow stem auger to a depth of 2.5 to 8 feet. The entire thickness of the dredge spoils was penetrated at each of the five borehole locations. Soil samples were collected using a split-spoon sampler lined with pre-cleaned 2.5-inch OD inner brass tube liners. Lithologic soil samples were manually extracted from the brass tubes and logged by an ECI geologist. Brass tube samples selected for laboratory analysis were sealed at both ends with aluminum foil and non-reactive plastic caps, labelled, refrigerated, and transported under chain-of-custody to a certified .hazardous waste analytical laboratory. Cuttings produced during the boring of each borehole were contained in labelled 55-gallon drums, pending the laboratory analytical results. Each borehole was backfilled with activated bentonite chips. Earth Consultants, Inc. F-7 PRELIMINARY CHARACI'bRIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 5 Borehole Geology The dredge spoils varied from approximately 2.5 to 6 feet thick and were primarily composed of silty fine sand and silt (Appendix D). The native materials underlying the dredge spoils were primarily gray-green and brown clayey silt and silty clay. Groundwater was not encd'untered in the five boreholes. However, during recent geotechnical exploratory boring on Tract A, groundwater was encountered at depths of 16.5 to 21 feet during drilling (ECI, August 1990). Soil Sampling Analytical Results Table 1 presents the analytical results for six soil samples (see Appendix E for original analytical documentation). In each boring, one soil sample was collected from the dredge spoils at a depth of 1 to 2 feet. One additional sample was collected from a depth of 4.5 feet in Borehole B103, which penetrated the thickest section of.dredge spoils (6 feet). Each soil sample was screened for priority pollutants including volatile organics by EPA Method 8240, semi-volatile organics by EPA Method 8270, chlorinated pesticides and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) by EPA Method 8080, priority pollutant metals by inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy and atomic absorption spectroscopy, total phenols by EPA Method 420.2, and cyanide by EPA Method 9012. Additionally, each sample was also analyzed for hexavalent chromium by EPA Method 7196 and total petroleum hydrocarbons by EPA Method 418.1. Priority Pollutant Metals Priority pollutant metals concentrations were relatively low, except in samples B101A-1.5 and B102A-1". Cadmium concentration were elevated in both samples B101a-1.5" (8.8 mg/kg) and B102A-1" (28 mg/kg). Chromium (120 mg/kg) and zinc (1,000 mg/kg) concentrations in sample B102A-1" and the silver (6.6 mg/kg) concentration in sample B101A-1.5" were also elevated. Given that the land use in the vicinity of Tract A is primarily commercial and industrial, the applicable Ecology cleanup standards appear to be the proposed industrial soil cleanup levels (The Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulations and Proposed Amendments, Chapter 173- 340 WAC, July 1990). The proposed industrial soil cleanup levels for cadmium and chromium are 10 mg/kg and 500 mg/kg, respectively. However, depending on potential off-site receptors, depth to groundwater, local groundwater quality, and other site-specific conditions, Ecology can lower any proposed or mandated cleanup standards or develop new site-specific cleanup standards for a particular site. Based on the elevated metals concentrations in the two soil samples, the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) was performed on soil sample B102A-1" for selected metals. The TCLP is designed to provide a method for determining the leachable concentration of metals Earth Consultants, Inc. F-8 . PRELIMINARY CHARACI ERIZATI ON OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 _ October 2, 1990 Page 6 in a solid waste or soil. An estimate of the solubility (or mobility) of metals under specific laboratory conditions is determined by the TCLP, which provides information on the potential impact to the surrounding environment. The leachable concentrations of cadmium (0.23 mg/1), chromium (<0.02 mg/1), and zinc (8.6 mg/1). in sample B102A-1 " were less than 1%, which suggests their mobility is relatively low.. Currently, Ecology has not proposed a soil cleanup standard for zinc and silver. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons The concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were relatively low, except in soil ' sample B102A-1". A TPH concentration of 240 mg/kg was detected in sample B102A-1 which exceeds Ecology's proposed industrial soil cleanup standard of 200 mg/kg (The Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulations and Proposed Amendments, Chapter 173-340 WAC, July 1990). - The elevated TPH concentration in B102A-1" probably represents a localized leak or minor spill from the heavy construction equipment that was stored on Tract A after the dredge spoils were hydraulically pumped into the retention pond (See Appendix C - Aerial Photographs). On August 23, 1990, ECI bored and sampled a borehole (B102B) located approximately 3 feet ' east of Borehole B 102A using a clean hand auger. Soil samples were collected in clean glass - jars from depths of 1 and 2.5 feet using sampling protocol discussed previously. The soil samples were also analyzed by EPA Method 418.1 for TPH. The significantly lower TPH concentrations ! ` detected in B102B-1' (89 mg/kg) and. B102B-2.5 (56 mg/kg) suggests that the TPH contamination is very localized. Chlorinated Pesticides and PCBs Chlorinated pesticides were not detected in the six soil samples analyzed. PCBs'were detected in samples B101A-1.5 and B102A-1 Concentrations of PCB 1260 were 0.058 and 0.14 mg/kg in samples B101A-1.5" and B102A-1 respectively. The concentration measured in B101A-1.5" was estimated by the laboratory because their detection limit for PCB 1260 was 0.10 mg/kg. PCB 1260 concentrations in both samples are well below Ecology's proposed industrial soil cleanup standard of 10.0 mg/kg.for PCB mixtures. Semi-Volatile Organics Pyrene, di-N-butylphthalate, butylbenzylphthalate, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate were the only semi-volatile organics detected in one or more of the soil samples. Di-N-butylphthalate, butylbenzylphthalate, and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate are phthalate esters that are commonly used in the production of plastics. Due to their common occurrence in plastics, phthalates detected in laboratory analytical samples often result from the.use of plastic sample containers or gloves (Personal Communication, Analytical Technologies, August 29, 1990). Earth Consultants,.Inc. F-9 PRELIMINARY CHARACIERIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 7 Di-N-butylphthalate was only detected in sample B104-1.5" at a concentration of 0.86 mg/kg. Currently, proposed soil cleanup standards do not exist for Di-N-butylphthalate. Butylbenzylphthalate was only detected in sample B102A-1 " at an estimated (below actual detection limit) concentration of 0.20 mg/kg. Presently, Ecology has not proposed a soil cleanup standard for butylbenzylphthalate. Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate was only detected in B102A-1" at a concentration of 1.1 mg/kg. Currently, an Ecology soil cleanup standard does not exist for this contaminant. Pyrene was only detected in B102A-1 " at an estimated (below actual detection limit) concentration of 0.21 mg/kg. The proposed industrial soil cleanup standard of 20.0 mg/kg for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons is significantly higher. Other Contaminants Volatile organics, total phenols, and cyanide were not detected at or above their respective detection limit in the six soil samples. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The following summary and conclusions are based on observations and interpretations delineated in the body of this report. • In response to Ecology's request, ECI conducted a preliminary characterization of materials dredged from the P-1 Pump Station forebay into a retention pond on Tract A in 1984. Preliminary characterization included sampling the dredge spoils at five locations (B101A, B102A, B103, B104, and B105) and analyzing the six soil samples for priority pollutants and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). • Most of the detected contaminants of potential concern were found in soil sample B102A-1", located on the west side of the former retention pond. Potential Contaminants of Concern • Cadmium (28 mg/kg) was detected at a concentration above Ecology's proposed industrial soil cleanup standard (10 mg/kg) in soil sample B102A-1". Concentrations of chromium (120 mg/kg) and zinc (1,000 mg/kg) in sample B102A-1" and the concentration of silver (6.6 mg/kg) in sample B101A-1.5" are also elevated. However, a toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) was performed on sample B102A-1" and the leachable Earth Consultants, Inc. F-10 PRELIMINARY CHARACIERIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 8 concentrations (under laboratory conditions) of cadmium (0.23 mg/1), chromium (<0.02 mg/I), and zinc (8.6 mg/1) suggest that these metals are relatively immobile. • Concentrations of TPH were relatively low except in soil sample B102A-1 " (240 mg/kg), which exceeds Ecology's proposed soil cleanup standard of 200 mg/kg. However, the TPH contamination appears to be very localized. TPH concentrations detected in samples B102B-1 " (89 mg/kg) and B102B-2.5" (56 mg/kg), which were collected approximately three feet east of Borehole B102A, was significantly lower. Other Detected Contaminants • PCB 1260 was detected in soil samples B101A-1.5" (0.058 mg/kg) and B102A-1" (0.14 mg/kg); however, these concentrations are significantly lower than Ecology's proposed soil ' cleanup standard of 1.0 mg/kg for PCB mixtures. • Semi-volatile organics were detected in soil samples B102A-1" and B104-1.5" at relatively Iow concentrations. Pyrene (estimated 0.21 mg/kg), butylbenzylphthalate (estimated 0.20 mg/kg), and bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (1.1 mg/kg) were detected in sample B102A-1", and Di-N-butylphthalate (0.86 mg/kg) was detected in sample B104-1.5". Proposed Ecology soil cleanup standards do not exist for these contaminants. Potential for Environmental Degradation • The potential contaminants of concern (cadmium, chromium, silver, zinc, and TPH) in the dredge spoils exhibit relatively low solubility (or mobility) and/or appear localized. In --' addition, the dredge spoils are underlain by a clayey silt and silty clay layer of lower permeability, which should further reduce the downward migration of these contaminants. Therefore, the potential for degradation of local surface and groundwater quality, resulting from contamination detected in the dredge spoils, appears low. • Future development plans for Tract A include the construction of office buildings and covering most of the property with an impermeable asphalt and concrete surface. As a result, infiltrating rainfall will be greatly reduced, and the potential for future contaminant ! migration will be significantly lower. STANDARD LIMITATIONS The findings and conclusions documented in this report have been prepared for specific application to this project and have been developed in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill normally exercised by members of the environmental science profession currently practicing under similar conditions in the area, and in accordance with the terms and conditions Earth Consultants, Inc. I F11 PRELIMINARY CHARAC;t.RIZATION OF DREDGE SPOILS ' First City Development E-1990-12 October 2, 1990 Page 9 set forth in our proposal dated July 23, 1990. Conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions based on our interpretation of information currently available to us and are made within the operational budget and schedule constraints of this project. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. This report is for the exclusive use of the First City Development and their representatives. Any future consultations or other professional services to others requires prior written agreement from First City Development. Any such services to others are new work (a) requiring formal agreement with the new client, and (b) done on a time-and-materials basis and in accordance with ECI's prevailing Standard Fee Schedule and General Conditions. Conditions between boreholes may vary. A potential always remains for the presence of unknown, or unidentified, or unexpected, or unforeseen surface or subsurface contamination in areas not explored. Further evidence against such potential site contamination would require appropriate subsurface exploration, sampling, testing, and interpretation. If new information is discovered or developed in future work (which may include excavations, borings, or other studies), ECI should be requested to re-evaluate the conclusions of this report, and to provide amendments as required. CLOSURE We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding our scope, methods, findings, conclusions, or recommendations, please contact us. Earth Consultants, Inc. F-12 TABLE 1 Soil Sampling Analytical Results Tract A - Dredge Spoils - Black River Corporate Park Renton, Washington July 19, 1990 E-1990-12 Sample Concentration (mg/kg) Contaminant B101A-1.5- B102A-1' B103-1.5- B103-4.5- B104-1.5- B105-2- Priority Pollutant Metals Antimony <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 ; Arsenic 6.4 13 2.6 2.9 • 2.5 1.8 Beryllium <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Cadmium 8.8 28 <1 <1 <1 <1 Chromium 42 120 9 8 7 5 Hexavalent Chromium <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Copper 51 97 14 15 8 9 Lead 32 110 <10 <10 <10 <10 ;� Mercury <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 <0.15 Nickel 29 57 9.3 6.7 <3 <3 Selenium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Silver 6.6 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 Thallium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <05 Zinc 390 1000 26 28 20 20 - Total Petroleum ' Hydrocarbons 66 240 13 39 14 12 Detected Chlorinated Pesticides and PCBs PCB 1260 0.058a 0.14 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 Volatile Organics (No volatile organics were detected at or above their respective detention limits.) Detected Semi-Volatile Organics Di-N-butylphthalate <0.17 <0.54 <0.17 <0.17 0.86 <0.17 Pyrene <0.17 0.21b <0.17 <0.17. <0.17 <0.17 Butylbenzylphthalate <0.17 0.20b <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate <0.17 1.1 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 <0.17 Total Phenols <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Cyanide <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1 a Below detection limit of 0.10 mg/kg. b Estimated value (below actual detection limit). • Earth Consultants, Inc. ' ;� F-13 If • �� F �v�I •a• r 1 t • 1 - >'ST HAZEL' ST d :paSi' L S • 3:i ro h•• 4 z is, a t: 41., �9 1 Q•Q Q d > to S H E z 1 ::ice;.:; Q� �� �5�� i+� N ST' a'fOUNTAIN ST�...k' S ASTw000 l�' I• ki\ > ce :P._.' . . °I 9' - ST n S < LEO Mg.T • , QQ' r5 112T -lt2 M ST 2 r ,. • Q:\ S . 113TM .-«� �N $Twr• cs 0 S 114TH< ST 4. .o ='I\� 141M _ r = �S 115TH to �:c , ,e ,1^ MP" i t '. ST • ^. e i i .. IISTH 3 S 116TH VI \� .1:f1 Sl > s • f14TM ST �� , f. $ • Q 11 ,M S Q �:h S: IITTH ST 9 stwrwsr �$ 118TN \ Q 7, r� �"y ''RH n �� S�'6 = Ili 1 n -2 yy o 5111T .►L TN--- ; hp . S a , .e !=1 S 118"PL j.4srN.v slk—AV c14, 1• .!: 6' 5 119TN� , S.119111 ST a.w € 1'IR17V ••••` ` y S NIPER T t0 S. . 120TH S 'In h. h .r„ . 4 120TH!::PARK f22ND ut :�\ Jsr 5 121ST Sr an nt, ;i Q p� 120.•?"H G 12 _s ST to 4 I •v L '�6.� m I II71 a, > 1 4 •.:5 :� 5 S 12N1 u1 ST.'7- ~JA� \ A 4'c In Q I S 122N• • . 0 $i4AY. :..' �����$ 124 N ST\\ s N ON {DI S NI O ^N.Y.;:;:::..,-' o..t•.t JR7 liP..Ik n'S' \ \ > 121TH •� t„ _ .ti r iliili HS '124 ••:4�_',•v_.., �ak'bA'g • © Q S12sTH ST V" •t• •:` L vJ 3 zI. > . g O Z t .S \\\ . ST T ~ •1 t n S 1� IL \\ > , StM U�t' 1 to LOCrG ST it y Ltrf iA .. \ZT qiil, ,rhT "4 Si z .n S. 1791n>fT > © �� • , \ ST / •i a12rTMN PL S� 12VTH ST _ ,pEy ' S 130TN _ ST I F S170TH i_ t I p rip ,S qC'0 9.9 ISIST. s S u LANGSTON .RD � SI 1 J \ 'L % •11 Sr 13 •• ALT H •!' �ID,IG � JP�► \ Op y i _ I T S 1715T C7 r � cA \�C 1• f Q T S 133R0 ST ■ I S `2N0 ST . A +1� :,µ� 'y ., S 13�TH o .o : t.S C�'~ .. F� S 1351H 13�r" ry .�t r� •; ies;ps!• L• 61 S. fail, ,y 3 srR; KiiyG s CL'iWL'!$_ �' ::Q:a���r."i:"• J-r cam:.:' \ = S 13ETM ST�R _ Y�` I p0 . CO Q S. ��,A Nthia:, �11:f-i� 9jv: : srr.E h4 c.t• \\ •—b��.n I l� •4 -z E t if i 1 -.TiUo c N,... 4r��,+1-•\ : ®i I LAtit S �y•� W. _ i, e` SWF >,..,. .c a...... Y::.�:�\ 1 9 sr N f Y n• .Yid• .. j � • b' N>J::� 111 gµurs. 1i.;�:.1':i \, RIVE- A5%'�H— ', 'EARLI T© u 1 JRHS & - 1il. L4�"\' CT);pC2. '•:...L'�z.••�`' t 1I ��J�♦ t-.. ,.y ::�. , fig:, 1 .E, C 4 PL .� lA R• !T : ,.. -.. i,:EARLINGTOW `•••t = > ?.:1 144 H$T ;.. d GOLF• COURS;/ I Sw f S 1461H ST r la I.'••0 (T2P(T.1 ^ • ::�;_, - :. ..,:..: ,; y 0 Reference : King County / Map 34 By Thomas Brothers Maps Dated /L (.11Ea: iiik) Vicinity Mapg �i Earth Consultants Inc. Black River Corporate Pork, Phase MEE Renton, . . Washington Proj. No.1990-12 I Drwn. GLS I Date Aug. 190 Checked MP I Date 8/14/90 I Plate 1 t F-14 • PN.,........... ropert Line,: 4rtill— iiii/rIlar. T`T_TA 8-102 T T O NoB SB'102A &B'q3 &8-104_ r� 101. le S) Oq o Sq -A1,.FN �o LEGEND 60 @-IOt Appoxitnate Location of 1 — t t ECI Soil:.Sgniple,. Proj. No. E-1990-12, July. 1990 RT Reference Job No. 89017 AeT a Approximate Boundary. of Site Pl i m / Dredge. Spoils By LPN Architects a Plae-s Approxerote Some Dated 9/20/89 • 0 ro Ex) 2C0ft. ,,• ',�. ,,,,, Tract A..-Site Ran LIProposed Building �°(l` 4) Earth Consultants Inc. Black River Corponote Rork, phase MI Renton,. Washington F-15 1_,., Prot No. 1990-12 I Drwn. (IS I Date Aug:90 Checkrd MP' 'Date ,@/iq/go I Plate 2 LIST OF REFERENCES 1) Earth Consultants, Inc., Geotechnical Engineering Study. Black River Corporate Park. Tract A. Phase VIII. Renton. Washington. E-1990-11, dated August 22, 1990. 2) Washington State Department of Ecology, The Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Regulation And Proposed Amendments, WAC 173-340, dated July 27, 1990. 3) Personal Communication between Ms. Karen Mixon of Analytical Technologies, Inc. and Mr. Marcus Pierce of ECI, on August 29, 1990. Earth Consultants, Inc. F-16 Appendix G. Inventory of Flora and Fauna \1 Table G-1. Mammals Likely to Occur in the Vicinity of the Blackriver Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Common Opossum* (Didelphis marsupialis) Masked Shrew (Sorer cinereus) Trowbridge Shrew (Sorer trowbridgei) Vagrant Shrew (Sorer vagrans) Dusky Shrew (Sorer obscurus) Northern Water Shrew (Sorer palustris) Pacific Water Shrew (Sorer bendirei) Shrew-mole (Neurotrichus gibbsi) Townsend Mole (Scapanus townsendi) Pacific Mole (Scapanus orarius) Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus) Yuma Myotis (Myotis yumanensis) red Myotis (Myotis evotis) ea Long-legged Myotis (Myotis volans) California Myotis (Myotis californicus) Silver-haired Bat (Lasionycteris noctivagans) Big Brown Bat (Eptesicus fuscus) Hoary Bat (Lasiurus cinereus) G-1 Common Name Scientific Name Western Big-eared Bat (Plecotus townsendi) Eastern Cottontail* (Sylvilagus foridanus) Eastern Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) Beavers (Castor canadensis) Deer Mouse* (Peromyscus maniculatus) Bushytail Woodrat (Neotoma cinerea) California Red-backed Vole (Clethrionomys occidentalis) Townsend Vole (Microtus townsendi) Oregon Vole (Microtus oregoni) Muskrat (Ondatra zibethica) Norway Rat (Rattus norvegicus) Black Rat (Rattus rattus) House Mouse (Mus musculus) Pacific Jumping Mouse (Zapus trinotatus) Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Longtail Weasel* (Mustela frenata) Striped Skunk (Mephitis mephitis) Coyote* (Canis latrans) G-2 * Mammal or sign of mammal observed on project site or immediate vicinity. Information from: City of Renton. 1981. Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Black River Office Park. 115 pp. plus appendices. Burt, W. H. and R. P. Grossenheider. 1976. A field guide to the mammals of America north of Mexico. 289 pp. Hunn, E. S. 1982. Birding in Seattle and King County. 160 pp. Field obeservations and results of Shufman live trapping, July 2, 3, and 4, 1990. G-3 Table G-2. Results on Rodent Live Trapping Trap No. April 3 April 4 Vegetation/Comments Tract A 1 0 0 Tall reed canary (R.C.) grass 2 0 0 Fescue 3 0 0 Fescue, clover 4 0 0 Short fescue, clover 5 0 0 Fescue, R.C. grass 6 0 0 Moss, fescue 7 0 0 R.C. grass (1' tall) 8 0 0 R.C. grass (5' tall) 9 0 0 R.C. grass (5' tall) (bait missing) 10 0 0 Velvet grass, fescue (2' tall) 11 1 Deer Mouse 0 Velvet grass, ryegrass 12 0 0 Seedling willow and alder, moss 13 0 0 Fescue, clover 14 0 0 Bare soil, clover, moss 15 0 0 Fescue, clover 16 0 0 Fescue/captured 2 slugs 4/4 17 0 0 R.C. grass, vetch, adjacent to willows/rodent runway present. 18 0 0 Clover, wet soil, moss, softrush 19 0 0 Fescue (8" tall) dense 20 0 0 Fescue (8" tall) dense ..' 21 0 0 Fescue (8" tall) dense 22 0 0 Fescue (8" tall) dense 23 0 0 Fescue (8" tall) dense 24 0 0 Orchard grass, clover Tract B 1 0 0 Tall fescue 2 0 0 Clover, trefoil, fescue/slug and garter snake 3 0 0 Tall fescue 4 0 0 Fescue, clover 5 0 0 Edge of bare pile of soil, short blackberry G-4 Trap No. April 3 April 4 Vegetation/Comments 6 0 0 Short blackberry, fescue, clover 7 0 1 Deer Mouse R.C. grass, Scot's broom 8 0 1 Deer Mouse R.C. grass thistle 9 1 Deer Mouse 0 R.C. grass, Scot's broom 10 1 Deer Mouse 1 Deer Mouse Slash pile surrounded by nettles 11 0 0 Edge of slash pile, fescue, nettles 12 1 Deer Mouse 0 On slash pile, nettles, thistle 13 0 0 Edge of slash pile, fescue, nettles 14 0 0 Under downed log, blackberries 15 0 0 Clover, fescue, dock/trap spring, no bait I G-5 P-I Channel Detention Pond — 0 dij 111 Illy I ris 3 ts•• N 14• . 2" d 1 1yi 23. a O 16.1 10 13 • • 13 _ 14 u� aksda�e4t. •--i--r _7 s .d ,•• �, 10 __ --1 -• u enuesw •--•--.i=- •#_-3_ 2., •---- g Z 12•• 17.E • .�..... 1 5 6 .•-.•--•-.�15 • • 21• 4 .•.-'••- • •• `- 0 2 3 Tract A •--•• '• �`ry`�� 5 eAz TTract B4144N\ y*• NORTH 0 200 I 1 Feet Figure G-1. Rodent Trapping Locations on Tracts A and B. Table G-3. Avifauna Likely to Occur in the Vicinity of the Blackriver Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Pied-billed Grebe* (Podilymbus podiceps) Double-Crested Cormorant* (Phalacrocorax auritus) Canada Goose* (Branta canadensis) Gadwall* (Anas strepera) Mallard* (Anas platyrhynchos) Northern Pintail* (Anas acuta) American Wigeon* (Anas americana) Wood Duck* (Aix sponsa) Northern Shoveler* (Anas clypeata) Blue-winged Teal* (Anas discors) Green-winged Teal* (Anas crecca) Cinnamon Teal* (Anas cyanoptera) Canvasback* (Aythya valisineria) Ring-necked Duck* (Aythya collaris) Lesser Scaup* (Aythya affinis) Common Goldeneye* (Bucephala clangula) Barrow's Goldeneye* (Bucephala islandica) Bufflehead* (Bucephala albeola) Ruddy Duck* (Oxyura jamaicensis) Common Merganser* (Mergus merganser) G-7 Common Name Scientific Name Hooded Merganser* (Lophodytes cucullatus) American Coot* (Fulica americana) Great Blue Heron* (Ardea herodias) Green-backed Heron* (Butorides striatus) Killdeer* (Charadrius vociferus) Spotted Sandpiper* (Actitis macularia) Western Sandpiper* (Calidris mauri) Ruffed Grouse* (Bonasa umbellus) California Quail* (Callipepla californica) Northern Harrier* (Circus cyaneus) Sharp-shinned Hawk (Accipiter striatus) Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) Northern Goshawk* (Accipiter gentilis) Red-tailed Hawk* (Buteo jamaicensis) Rough-legged Hawk* (Buteo lagopus) Bald Eagle* (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) American Kestrel* (Falco sparverius) Barn Owl (Tyto alba) Great Horned Owl (Bobo virginianus) Belted Kingfisher* (Ceryle alcyon) Band-tailed Pigeon* (Columba fasciata) G-8 Common Name Scientific Name Rock Dove* (Columba livia) Rufous Hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus) Lewis's Woodpecker (Melanerpes Lewis) Downy Woodpecker (Picoides pubescens) Northern Flicker* (Colaptes auratus) Olive-sided Flycatcher (Cantopus borealis) Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii) "Western" Flycatcher (Empidonax sp.) Vaux's Swift (Chaetura vauxi) Tree Swallow _ (Tachycineta bicolor) Violet-Green Swallow* (Tachycineta thalassina) Barn Swallow* (Hirundo rustica) American Crow* (Corvus brachyrhynchos) Steller's Jays (Cyanocitta stelleri) Black-capped Chickadee* (Parus atricapillus) Chestnut-backed Chickadee* (Parus rufescens) Bushtit* (Psaltriparus minimus) Red-breasted Bushtit (Sitta canadensis) Winter Wren* (Troglodytes troglodytes) Bewick's Wren (Thryomanes bewickii) Marsh Wren* (Cistothorus palustris) G-9 Common Name Scientific Name Kin Ruby-crownedKinglet* (Regulus calendula) Golden-crowned Kinglet* (Regulus satruapa) American Robin* (Turdus migratorius) Loggerhead Shrike* (Lanius ludovicianus) European Starling* (Stumus vulgaris) Cedar Waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum) Hutton's Vireo (Vireo huttoni) Warbling Vireo (Vireo gilvu.$) Yellow-rumped Warbler (Dendroica coronata) Orange-crowned Warbler (Vermivora celata) Common Yellowthroat* (Geothlypis trichas) Red-winged Blackbird* (Agelius phoeniceus) Northern Oriole* (Icterus galbula bullockii) Western Tanager (Piranga ludoviciana) White-crowned Sparrow* (Zonotrichia leucophrys) Fox Sparrow (Passerleea iliaca) Song Sparrow* (Melospiza melodia) Savannah Sparrow* (Passerculus sandwichensis) Rufous-sided Towhee* (Pipilo erythrophthalmus) Dark-eyed Junco* (Junco hyemalis) House Finch* (Carposacus Mexicanus) G-10 Common Name Scientific Name American Goldfinch* (Carduelis tristis) House Sparrow* (Passer domesticus) * Observed on project site and immediate vicinity (P-1 Pond and riparian forest). Information from: City of Renton. Draft Environmental Impact Statement-Black River Office Park. 115 pp. plus appendices. Murphy, M. No date. List of water, shore, and land birds noted,Black River Corporate Park, November 1, 1986 to July 21, 1987. Peterson, R. T. 1990. A field guide to western birds. 432 pp. Hunn, E. S. 1982. Birding in Seattle and King County. 160 pp. Field surveys conducted from January through August, 1990. G-11 Table G-4. Reptiles and Amphibians Likely to Occur in the Blackriver Project Area Common Name Scientific Name Salamanders Northwestern Salamander (Ambystoma gracile) Long-toed Salamander (Ambystoma macrodactylum) Rough-skinned Newt (Taricha granulosa) Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon vehiculum) Ensatina (Ensatina eschscholtzi) Frogs and Toads Western Toad (Bufo boreas) Pacific Tree Frog (Hyla regilla) Red-legged Frog (Rana aurora) Bullfrog (Rana catesbiana) Turtles Western Pond Turtle (Clemmys marmorata) Painted Turtle (Chrysemys picta) Lizards Western Fence Lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis) Northern Alligator Lizard (Gerrhonotus coeruleus) G-12 Common Name Scientific Name Snakes Pacific Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) Common Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) Western Terrestrial Garter Snake (Thamnophis elegans) Northwestern Garter Snake (Thamnophis ordinoides) Rough-skinned Newt (Taricha granulosa) Red-backed Salamander (Plethodon vehiculum) Information from: Stebbins, R. C. 1966. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA. 279 pp. City of Renton. 1981. Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Black River Office Park. 115 pp. plus appedices. Hunn, E. S. 1982. Birding in Seattle and King County. 160 pp. G-13 Table G-5. Common and Scientific Names of Plant Species Observed in the Vicinity of Tracts A and B and in the P-1 Pond, Renton,WA Trees/Saplings black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) Lombardy poplar (Populus italica) mountain-ash (Sorbus aucuparia) Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia) red alder (Alnus rubra) weeping willow (Salix babilonica) Shrubs butterfly bush (Buddleja daridii) bittersweet nightshade (Solanum dulcamera) Douglas' spirea (Spiraea douglasii) Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa) red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) rose (Rosa sp.) Scot's broom (Cytisus scoparius) sumac (Rhus glabra) tall shining Oregon grape (Berberis aquifolium) vine maple (Acer circinatum) willow (Salix spp.) Grasses and Forbs bird's foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) bluegrass (Poa spp.) Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis) common mullein (Verbascum thapsus) common plantain (Plantago major) common cattail (Typha latifolia) Straw colored sedge (Cyperus strigogsus) G-14 creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens) curly dock (Rumex crispus) dandelion (Taraxacuna officianale) English plantain (Plantago lanceolata) fireweed (Epilobium angustifolia) horsetail (Equisetum arvense) Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratense) lady's thumb knotweed (Polygonum persicaria) `^ marsh speedwell (Veronica scuttellata) orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata) oxeye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) prickly lettuce (Lactuca serriola) purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) red-top (Agrostis alba) reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinaceae) Russian thistle (Cirsium vulgare) small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus) soft rush (Juncus effusus) spike rush (Eleocharis palustris) St. John's wort (Hypericum perforatum) sweet clover (Melilotus alba) tall mannagrass (Glyceria elata) tansy (Tanacetum vulgare) timothy (Phleum pratense) velvetgrass (Hokus lanatus) Watson's willow herb (Epilobium watsonii) white clover (Trifolium repens) yellow flag (Iris pseudacorus) G-15 v�a�STArf i, �4 Z :URT SMfTCH ::.. 4 r` Director 4'4 1889 ao STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 600 North Capitol Way, GI-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-0091 • (206) 753-5700 August 17, 1989 . Betsy MacWhinney Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1808 136th Place NE Bellevue, WA 98005 RE: BLACK RIVER OFFICE PARK EIS T23N R3E SECTIONS 13 AND 24 Dear Ms. MacWhinney: We have completed a review of our files for information on significant natural features in the study area. The result of this review is presented in the enclosed material, which summarizes the occurrence of special animals reported within or adjacent to the study area. The Washington Natural Heritage Program will mail, under separate cover, project area information concerning special plants and plant communities.. We hope this presentation will be useful to you. This response is provided for your information only and is not to be construed as an official Department of Wildlife environmental review of your project. For official Department review and comment, mail env,ironmental impact documents to: Washington Department of Wildlife, Regional Habitat Biologist, Ted Muller, 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard, Mill Creek, WA 9gn17, In order to ensure the protection of the special species occurring in the study area, we recommend that the specific locational information presented here not be published or distributed. . If your office should publish or distribute general information from the enclosed material, please provide the Nongame Wildlife Program with a draft of any document in which information from the Natural Heritage Data System is incorporated or referenced, and cite the System as follows: Natural Heritage Data System Washington Department of Natural Resources and Department of Wildlife - Nongame Program c/o Mail Stop EX-12 Olympia, WA 98504 (;-16 Betsy MacWhinney August 17, 1989 Page two The information provided is not to be taken as a complete inventory of the project area and does not eliminate the need or responsibility to conduct more thorough research. If you have further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us at (206) 586-1449. Si• :rely, -ichard H. Taylor • Nongame Data Systems Biologist RHT:pr-b c: Rocky Spencer Ted Muller Dana L. Base Enclosure G-17 • Enclosure 1 ELEMENT OCCURRENCE SUMMARY Introduction The Natural Heritage Data System was established by the State of Washington and the Washington Natural Heritage Program of the Nature Conservancy. It is currently maintained by the Heritage Program of the Washington Department of Natural Resources and by the Nongame Wildlife Program of the Washington Department of Wildlife. The database is comprised of "element occurrences. " An "element" is a natural feature of particular interest because it is exemplary, unique, or endangered on a statewide or national basis. An element can be a plant community, special plant, or special animal species. An "element occurrence" is a reported or confirmed locality of a native vegetation community, or of significant habitat for a plant or animal species of concern. Information on element occurrences in the state is collected from herbarium and museum specimens, scientific literature, knowledgeable individuals, and field investigations. This information is compiled in the Natural Heritage Data System for use in land-use planning and evaluating the status of Washington's natural features. This enclosure summarizes the special animal occurrences reported within or adjacent to the study area and catalogued in the Natural Heritage Data System. The Washington Natural Heritage Program manages similar information concerning special plants and plant communities. Format The Element Occurrence Summary table lists those special animals that have been reported to occur in or adjacent to the area specified in your information request. - The first column lists the U.S. Geological Service (USGS) topographic quadrangle. - The second column lists the township, range, and section. - The third column, entitled "conf." (confirmation), lists a code indicating the specificaity of the locations recorded for each element occurrence. Confirmation Codes C im The location of the element occurrence is known to within a 1/4-mile radius. In addition, the locality has been confirmed. U The location of the element occurrence is known to within a 1/4-mile radius, but at this time has not been confirmed. • -1- G-18 N = The location of the element occurrence is known to within a 1-mile radius. This information usually is derived from secondary sources. G = The element occurrence is locatable only to a general area, usually denoted by a geographic name. This information was derived from secondary sources. - The next column contains federal and state status information. Status Codes for Special Animals Code Explanation FE Federal Endangered - A species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. FT Federal Threatened - A species which is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future. The state status given in the second column under "Element Status" is based on status evaluations conducted by the Washington Department of Wildlife, Nongame Program. Code Explanation SE State Endangered - A species which is seriously threatened with extirpation throughout all or a significant portion of its range within Washington. ST State Threatened - A species that could become endangered within Washington in the foreseeable future without active management or removal of threats. SS State Sensitive - A species that could become threatened if current water, land, and environmental practices continue. SM State Monitor - A species of special interest because it: 1) has significant popular appeal,; 2) requires limited habitat during some portion of its life cycle; 3) is an indicator of environmental quality; 4) requires further field investigation to determine popu- lation status classification; or 6) was justifiably removed from Endangered, Threatened, or Sensitive classification. If code column is blank this species is currently unc::_- consideration for classification as either endangered, threatened, a:::.sitive or monitor. - In the fourth column the animal species is named. 'r -2- i, G-19 - The fifth column, entitled "Crit. " (Criteria) , lists codes that the specific criterion/criteria used to evaluate whether a habitat location is significant to the species. Element Occurrence Criteria for Special Animals IO Individual occurrence - Any record of the species constitutes a a. special animal occurrence. HC Herptile Concentration - Five or more individuals present in the same location. CR Colonial roosts B Evidence of breeding - nest, young or eggs, adult visiting probable nest site, nest building activity (i.e. , carrying nest material) , breeding display, agitated behavior and distraction display (i.e. , feigning injury) . RI Regular individual occurrences at the same location - Observations of less than 10 individuals that have been made during at least three different years, not necessarily consecutive. RSC Regular small concentrations - during migration, breeding or winter season of over 70 individuals observed during at least three different years, not necessarily consecutive. Comments The enclosed information represents the reported element occurrences currently catalogued in the Natural Heritage Data System. The Data System is constantly updated as more current and historic information on element occurrences in the state are reported. Consequently, some of the element occurrences reported to occur historically within the study area may no longer be present. Likewise, areas within the study boundary for which element occurrences have not yet been reported, nevertheless, may support special animal species. Finally, if information is needed on specific plant community or special plant occurrences within the study area, please contact the Washington Natural Heritage Program, (206) 753-2449. For additional information on specific special animal occurrences, please contact the Washington Department of Wildlife Program, (206) 586-1449. -3- G-20 Enclosure 1 ELEMENT OCCURRENCE SUMMARY - S►ECIAL ANIMALS RE , BLACK RIVER OFFICE ►ARK EIS T23N R3E SECTIONS 13 AND '24 Quad Name T R S Conf . Fed . State Element Name Crlt . 0cc . Renton/4712242 23N 4E 13 C PM Ardis heradtas ( Grist blue heron ) 03 128 a N Appendix H. Transportation Management Plan Blackriver Corporate Park Trip Generation Analysis GUIDELINES .FOR THE . . • • TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN OF . BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK - RENTON The property shown on the photograph, which is-hereto attached and incorporated by reference , is commonly known as BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK (BCP ) . This Transportation Management Plan (TM?) is designed to address BCP 's transportation needs , and their impact on the City of Renton. BCP is collectively owned by First City Equities ( FCE) , a Washington State General Partnership, and First City Developments Corporation (FCDC) , a Washington State Corporation. The intent of the TMP is to encourage the reduction of single-occupant vehicle trips to and from the site during peak hours and, as a result, reduce daily vehicle trips impacting the roadway system in the vicinity of the park. It has been determined that the following Guidelines for implementation are consistent with the foregoing objectives . FCE shall periodically consult with King County Metro Commuter Pool Staff to provide services and assistance in implementing elements of the TMP. ADMINISTRATION FCE shall administer the TMP. The TMP shall be coordinated and directed by an individual designated by FCE. Initially. said individual will be Kathye Allen, Property Manager for H-i • BCP, Kathye Allen will hereinafter be referred to as Employee Transportation Coordinator • (ETC) . The ETC of the TMP may exercise all those duties and functions which are specified or implied by this TMP.. The powers shall include establishing and/or revising reasonable guidelines of the TMP, with the cooperation of the City of Renton and Metro. The ETC will request each lessee to designate an individual as the Lessee' s Transportation Coordinator (TC) , who will be asked to provide information as requested by the ETC. Duties of the TC are outlined below. If, at some time in the future , FCE determines the need and chooses to select a Management Committee , it shall have the power to do so. When the Management Committee is selected, the tenants shall be offered the opportunity to serve on it , at least in an advisory and representational capacity. At that time, the selection process , size and scope of the Management Committee shall be determined by FCE. The Management Committee shall be coordinated and directed by the individual chosen by FCE as the ETC. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR (ETC) 1. Shall incorporate the following information in the Tenants Manual: . A. Information covering alternative transportation methods ( i.e. , location of Metro bus stops and routes, ride H-2 . , share information, etc. ) . B. Ride-matching applications for the carpool program., to be provided by Metro: . C. A memo, incorporating information provided by Metro, which encourages employers to consider: 1 . transit pass subsidies as an employee bonus; and 2 . fleetride, in which an employer allows company cars to be used by employees for commuter carpools during the morning- and afternoon. D. Memo itemizing the benefits of flex-time . E. Memo which encourages employers to participate in dedicated and/or subsidized vanpool or paratransit programs , to the extent such programs exist . 2 . Work with Metro to establish new bus routes or modify existing bus routes to pass by or through BCP. 3. Provide Metro notification of employer occupancy dates and resulting estimated employee numbers on an ongoing basis . 4 . Cooperate with Metro in Metro' s efforts to provide, install, and maintain at least one ( 1 ) "Commuter Information Center" (CIC) in an accessible and highly visible common area. The CIC will provide information on transportation alternatives . The location of the CIC shall be chosen solely by the ETC. 5. Survey employers and employees on an annual basis to determine ( 1 ) the effectiveness of the TMP, and (2 ) provide Metro with the number of employees using H.O.V. (High Occupancy Vehicle ) modes. The ETC shall reveal the results of said survey to Metro. H-3 • • • .METRO 1. Provide information materials to the ETC as well as stock the CIC. • 2. Provide technical assistance and training in developing information systems , parking management programs , flex- time benefit information and promotional programs . 3. When requested, advise the ETC of surveying, monitoring and evaluating program's effectiveness. 4 . Make public vanpools (paratransit ) available on a first- come , first-served basis when they are available and when demand is present . 5. Provide ride-matching information and services for cars/ vanpools . 6. Investigate the potential coordination of employees of nearby sites for participation in a collective TMP, if desired or necessary. TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR (TC) 1. Maintain and provide ETC with a list of companies ' times of operation and employee count . This will assist the ETC and Metro in their efforts to monitor BCP''s public transit needs. 2. Distribute an opinion survey, provided by Metro, to determine the demand for vanpool and other transit modes annually. 3. Periodically distribute information which encourages employers to considertransit pass subsidies as an employee bonus as well as the benefits of flex-time work schedules. 4 . Provide Metro' s ride-match applicatons to employees on H-4 a periodic basis . • MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE The duties, powers and responsibilities of the Management Committee shall be determined and outlined at the time that FCE determines a committee .is' viable . It is agreed that FCE shall have the sole power to modify and implement this TMP. However , FCE agrees that , if and when it modifies this TMP, FCE will: 1. keep the spirit of this TMP in mind, and 2. consult with Metro for its input on the modifications . To the extent that FCE and/or FCDC sell all or part of the BCP to other parties , the new owners shall not be bound to comply with the terms of this TMP.. However, FCE agrees that it will explain the benefits of this TMP and encourage any new owners to cooperate with Metro in incorporating a similar document for their purchased property. H-5 RECEIVED UUI -,3lyyu • Transportation and Traffic Engineering PLANNING • DESIGN The- Transpo Group October 2. 1990 TG: 90380.00 Mr.Jonathan Ives Jones&Stokes Associates. Inc. 1808 - 136th Place NE Bellevue.WA 98005 SUBJECT. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK(VALLEY 405) - TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS Dear Mr. Ives: As you requested,The TRANSPO Group has estimated the trip generation for the proposed Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B office buildings. This letter summarizes our findings and compares the resultant trip generation with the values used in the previous Traffic Impact Analysis for Valley 405 Business Park(TRANSPO.August 1985). We also reviewed the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study(TRANSPO,July 1988) to identify any potential changes in the recommended transportation improvements related to the proposed development of the Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B. Project Description The Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B office building project is located on the north- east side of Oaksdale Avenue north of SW 7th Street. The current proposal calls for devel- opment of up to 183.582 square feet (si) of office buildings on Tract A and up to 286.300 sf of general office space on Tract B. The two tracts are part of a previous development proposal called Earlington Park containing almost 2,000.000 sf of warehousing and office/business park space. In 1985,the Earlington Park project was split into two developments: the Valley 405 Business Park and the Washington Technical Center. In August 1985.TRANSPO pre- pared a traffic study for the Valley 405 Business Park,which included development of the proposed Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B office buildings. The Valley 405 project. included a 144,000-sf office park for the Tract A site and.a 216,000-sf office/research and development space for the Tract B site. Trip Generation Estimates of traffic that would be generated by the proposed Blackriver Corporate Park were developed using regression equations for General Office (Land Use Code 710) as reported in Trip Generation(Institute of Transportation Engineers; 4th Edition. 1987). Table 1 summarizes the project trip generation. The TRANSPO Group,Inc. 14715 Bel-Red Road,Suite 100 Bellevue,Washington 98007 FAX:2061747-3688 2061641-3881 H-6 Mr.Jonathan Ives The_ October 2. 1990 Tmnspo Page 2 Group . Table 1. Trip Generation-Current Proposal AM Peak Hour2 PM Peak Hour3 Location/Land Use Daily1 In Out Total In Out Total Tract A-183,582 gsf office 2,160 295 45 340 50 275 325 Tract B-286,300 gsf office 3.020 4Q §,5 is_a 75 195 47Q Total- 469,882 gsf office 5,180 725 110 835 125 670 795 1 Daily Rate-Ln(T)=0.75 In(X)+3.77;50 percent enter,50 percent exit 2 AM Peak-Hour Rate-Ln j T)=0.86 Ln(X)+ 1.54;67 percent enter; 13 percent exit 3 PM Peak-Hour Rate-Ln(T)=0.83 Ln(X)+1.46;16 percent enter,84 percent exit Where T=number of trips X= 1,000 gsf building area Source: Trio Generation,Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE),4th Edition, 1987. Table 2 compares daily and PM peak-hour trip-generation values for the current Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B (as shown in Table 1)with those previously used in the August 1985. Valley 405 Business Park traffic study(areas V and VI). Table 2. Daily and PM Peak-Hour Trip Generation Comparison Daily PM Peak Hour Valley 405 Blackriver Valley 405 Blackriver Location Traffic Studyl Corporate Park2 Traffic Studyl Corporate Park2 Tract A(Area VI) 3,025 2,160 345 325 Tract B(Area V) 4.380 3.020 500 470 Total 8,240 5,180 845 795 1 Per Figures 1 and 9,Traffic Impact Analysis for,Valley 405 Business Park.(The TRANSPO Group,August 1985). 2 From Table I above. As shown in Table 2.the current proposal is estimated to generate 37 percent less daily traffic, and 6 percent less traffic during the PM peak hour. The large decrease in daily traffic is due to lower daily trip rates for general offices compared to the office park trip • rates previously used. It should be noted that the 4th Edition of Trip Generation also reports a significant reduction in trip rates for office parks. The current project would generate 5,500 daily and 720 PM peak-hour trips based on the office park classification. Traffic mitigating measures are based primarily on peak-hour traffic conditions. Therefore, since the current proposal generates slightly less traffic during the PM peak hour. no change in traffic mitigating measures would be anticipated. H-7 Mr.Jonathan Ives The October 2, 1990 TrañspoPage 3 Group Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study The Grady Way Corridor Transportation Study (TRANSPO.July 1988) divided the study area into 12 traffic analysis zones. Zone B (see Figure 3 of the July 1988 report) primarily includes Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B. The Grady Way Corridor study model and traffic forecasts allowed for future development of 890,000 gsf of office space in Zone B, which far exceeds the 470,000 gsf proposed in the current proposal. The model also assigned a trip generation of 13.100 vehicle trips per day from Zone B, which is 150 percent greater than the current proposal. Since the current proposal is more than adequately represented within the traffic model, no additional transportation improvements would be needed to mitigate the project traffic impacts. Conclusion The potential traffic generation of the Blackriver Corporate Park Tracts A and B office buildings are less than those previously analyzed for the Valley 405 Business Park and the Grady Way Corridor Study. No changes in previously identified transportation Improvements programs appear to be warranted. I trust that this information meets the needs of the City of Renton for this project. If you have any questions or comments please call me. Sincerely. The TRANSPO Group, . W.Toedtli, P.E. Transportation Engineer LWT/sbw H-8 Appendix I. Flood Storage and Stormwater Detention - Tracts A and B OF J e PUBLIC WORKS . DEPARTMENT Uy Q DESIGN/UTILITY ENGINEERING • .235-2631 n MUNICIPAL WILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RE • '. 88055 'tlko sot �.L BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH awl 5 '`:0 MAYOR B • r May 21, 1982 Bush, Roed 8 Hitchings, Inc. , P.S. 2009 Minor Avenue East Seattle, WA 98102 Attention: Mr. Robert H. Roed Subject: Washington Technical Center Flood Storage and Storm Water Detention Gentlemen: In accordance with previous correspondenece and technical data supplied by the firm of Bush, Roed & Hitchings, tne., P.S. regard- ing the proposal for the handling of storm drainage and storm water storage as it relates to the Washington Technical Center; the City of Renton assumes the following position: The City agrees that the developer would be allowed, at his cost, to relocate existing natural storage to an area that is to be dedicated to the City for storm drainage purposes commonly known as the P-1 Channel.bacicwater pond. The existing natural storage is that area below the 100 year flood plain elevation. For purposes of preliminary calculations, elevation 15.0 was used to determine the existing storage. The natural storage available has been computed to be 108.4 Ac-ft. The net result of the developer's proposal is that 108.4 Ac-ft. of usable- storage below elevation 15.0 will be available before and after devel- opment. Also, an additional 5 Ac-ft. will be required for detention purposes for a grand total of 113.4 Aft. of available storage after development. Based upon the engineer's computations, the development will displace 71 Ac-ft. of storage and will require 5 Ac-ft. of storm drainage deten- tion. The existing area designated for the backwater pond has 16 Ac-ft. of existing storage. After development. the usable Storage available in the pond area should be 92 Ac-ft. :These numbers are subject to revision based upon the true 100-year flood plain elevation which is to be defined by the Rational Flood Insurance Program and future refinement based upon the developer's ultimate devel- opment plans. Also, the City agrees that this procedure can be accom- plished In phases provided that, at no time. is the storage available less than what currently exists. Bush, Roed & Hltchings, Inc. -2• May 21. 1982 if this is not a true and falr Interpretation of our understanding. please advise. Very truly yours, -"4.9LL,t4111! Richard C. Houghton Public Works Director OGH:Jft cc: Loren Davis THE PLAT OF WASHING ON TECHNICAL CENTEP 6I/2 SECTION M. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST. W.M. NI/2 SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST. W.H. • :CITY OF RENTON iesotsruac. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON F P•0 t 6•t 1 Ina I.1fM01 a ltec 114I1M 0(-W aI iptTlly V.I11Witt wm trb.ai ar *Mat 31.Mad a Mow.is WIN.s•Rcf 4 Oa.O .sll'tf tEIMI. rdwlt sal4t a1;Igl100 M Iifl SUCH ROW C NiTC1R tfhw.dl•AT Iwt *W04441000 lows ortot MI/T•Kla1 tuft/ T> i► ?AC.. P.S. OUT s. salt! Sall.!•410 O(/ly a.Mrt se tot mono 4NK or [a.t. 004100 00001104 M44 Its.•,aCt.ahwa 101K•N•aces.att►It a0►wtr ONTll0461O ` �• 1 �7 a.' so •• ntata./au to.tw Imo/'rM/wty,004000000 c$1at4 raltrIrttr 0•• �,, - wc Iv at1wd a4 a w/•l.l toil di*tot awn/AC CI CMI.*0<pr 044oted•He Aims ra a.atco•lw out fog Wow,tr wlw4 M OP K,nl{, t 1W Littlltr Trottsit TOf 14 O< *coo./ Ilflt H aeUO vox1.0 3*. Okla rot carat•roa/..4/04.s OlnaKT M OI.•7I=TT TO O.T 11OIt1�jTM Sala O a 1 111 7sr0+a.044f t•ergo 1 U. 1.001 k 1RwMt, co...•fIV to war 10avlTIIK PIK•..to WA;WO 0IN710 IKST aro artt 44 cR.T.CO..t,R.Ira 1 O•0•tn D c4V V I4Orid 31•Ta.$*I 21 fey111. ROC Ire test out a t4/a till Wtw1.R0Otat•11L hiK 10.a NO 11a paisicky 1+3i•1R...MITI$T 00 ed.1 Ol00 k Ng sew Ia•Ka(0 l0:0.0 t atoso M. L1 4•)4 It4T 10 Tit wnFcaT tog a TK IN MT IIOC 1tAlK1K al 400.10 IMAM WU Mitt O 144 M UP OM 060104 k�Lt NCIIk WSW Wu.4 ova motor, .C.1 Il*q-V...y.Twtwt;!ill patteltf re Out 44003 aottawuc 4110T/ls. 7l•77134*Kit Kai mu 01/BOLT 11111 Ma RII 10 a I011?Ifs.It4T ststosr nor Omer it/u4a a.4101T Mats TO)1K MUTAT 4100.10-,V trac` test M 1.tith6l1 to Itb•l4rt 4ttbl I/.t0.OMAT I.l Al �.1� se logos 0 tell0y0dfl•C0,000 rend.ld QOM AAI10R'1 rwz taeUi AMA ITr iii,t' .0 73K U10 nohow.st.Itoorces OaR MAIIg1K int la.T111Ia/R1I. O�VMlt 1$O..441 ' 10Q toeltl triode an.40.oits.ill.tun KSft$T 0100.01.I0/LIK. 1721.17 PUT a sit IOW M tiM US M a fIOJO Am s&a®t cow 1.1. Utrs 1t14 wta wcT asttt/LT KOC OM0 t or MC slaws!OF f7I.N RUT TO ,n...d a NOWT•Tacocts oixt•Deal u•O•'•s.•Ks/7t1.3c RV 10 4 IOW M Tot; w>at1I sltf da-.&T L14 V 14 u10013011R11 WOW KO tV•0•q.IRM MO van stoma h SOX�01t71.••OI'2a'our&4O Tads/Ael1 t1:.T1I1pLT�i 1H0et-Otl*T INN I47•17 RfT 10 04 00111 0 Oi rRtac a a 42.61,001 Or.1•c coot To OK leaflj•*I 1Kt1t*►at1 tora•Ktlta.7 4atc III. I Iliad•to tos t alit:s3 wort ats TRRt3 s IMII.WC sA.o. •T.siMT-p.of t NK iO*14 Al MC 9111/Att t.4M.tii tan to l etohet smog p>P0 palfst T1ftNL Ittcsilp&T micsm. r mama.Tact ottot•f2ylgs.KIT tom/lvv To AK roof to t1rlri.vot To 1I.K ats. tun ta>Latcflal)a or 1 I►a W1 •a/2T.RL Rol mots coot p 14 w t.Ion it tt.tatIty m o 0.. wine t oft c.tgott Co01 t t d M Is»S, Clot is 4/C 10IT4 or*$.T7 PUT TO 11E wine IKOIWTil.as.lttttTatt tmrltavarL mos lotto! $ l4 4t'10 1 ($1 MAI V.At tkq OM ` �+ Oo4.rOdi SOU 1CRtee 4t•K'tt3+Oft kOi MN at �R/TM K Imst.YKRT tilt•UMI V a auTMIri r 7tt.1/IRTf 1004E tone 1 b'7ie.1'us.sum A4 lam tag a TRH T4iC1 17 a WWI r 170.It K'• '.�� Ow ] M/ICtc/k >s i . 4:01d3 MIR, kW*4I.27121'PO IIAG t&q W11.MK 410'At tom 1110.tv.tr ail.W.2w0 SA•LtK•I awn RtAO 3o14*ss 31*.04 Itcnp Nv V„,•_�� Intl► T•gla sant q'Rq!'ha.04 Tale KM1IK Mal eats hobo t I4101 Wl.T Way we sat ILax TK ta1 UK• !MC TM 74 a$t2Tatot•3V.77 Pr v mRl.�s teal boat um 1 V 1,'test 404 tie MT Lt.171.31 IWT 10 Tut ICON tole I hoof attar tow twit AU o N01.0•T otT focus.AtTaseaees so Kt r lei fond vI.nit K ism 14a411 Di 1et0a 007/OS'LVOr(ill 400 laa Waft the T4L•.IT rut 1011K pat tot a PO UMW 131 w T a1fa1 f/ CI ar lt•M MR ION 401 gam l ill44 lla at+lalata aI rotor).MS .4s sua(Mt tin sm..'ma low/vut 4714611.1.1. MCI at seMlti aTi I+r+•aw r ON W 1+/w a w.♦ sdh IPiMCA1Mt tt,ll4 a1tQi WNW M iOL 10 Rantter at,M ivnottsione.tI ItTR ilk; MIM•1kf .mom tKRMt 11113 Rua a14 s'b4p1T m 14 Tl t 4i W M•r•01/01.0 Ru 11>ett1T.*vcrua.TystIC Ufa 4eu41 Ira Kb/04U b•r*Lwi e.At 1plj itActutte t Gnawed**4lC .AA. Ira trot 011Racp. Imo lwa4C*4aw\LLa temiti MI/MO O 7 aJMI ,us too. KleMI aMOMNava tow. or o Mala AIL pus poAtt K11. l�ll101tAits ��• �*f�^... Mal.* '.MM+ • &W O wMak 11/0 sti Wa.uls ail IRK sumo aim avow* iglu. maw. ", -%.a MOW Mares K Met WI ai NMtt•T!1"nor.t4tt. • • WV. adeL0 sMmo sAida=MK. I•MIOI �Y...�1 •/...� L.ta.•f1L RTOPaiwi lift t.O as1 VV. MatpsTN4_ iCtr at Mow om j stlritlegR M 4111C110.1 wt. T rvt IC at•s/ttsrp 1014 t .._Jj V .�... ., ►,Y .to K aleM•1>r K s•some.a./au soot*,a at Gals 4 a uSsal sr. sit Ccoro Mc.4sa mad ,Ar K R�z..is lot IOC 1s rrri Ittswwart.a o 40 aRa 'IIcta Sit WO wir.of T p K Tit R 1w Mwa Oct am mbar.IC7 opt WO w/AM iDligtsib*1a lot am ao Amon%UiCM tOR1000.M.M Oar 17a101 7Mlf te 7 OM 4 017/47 q in WV.N IA*Mi0s11t14 Ix Lf1wr taewelta.Onsank!tflsy a1 Tlt O11t1fM►iM. mom AM stlltllfp .4,=.1w p SI* vent t w am II VOWS Mt lilt Mr M'KA tea vetAtilitafter • f s•1wa tad pdb,,,rja la.tt� a.ta b O�.I,aGa.rglO.M% .„a_...n..p.. (,. .,, .....e di w,_icL�ow ►. C'T�4 -�-4 - silk tat:21°1'wpm ri V%""1421121"? 4 CDOM 4'w l•� K•0,1$I C icrIttlaTt VIM.01 Nom et 114 It♦XLTr•lot Ntt O7wCii twls ,` _�+ aL TOKO .TMt•aL�JI•Wtls PLOT ' et .s+•►Rua. atblaL as silt EDA T. TO/Mils r •�,��r NN`v MNttlt Ot MOM all Q1 MS b . t.: t + I. s t*Rtt AiAMlw arRndl• tt../: SHEET 1 Of 5 THE PLAT OF WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER. 63/2 SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP- 23 NORTH, RANGE. 4 EAST, W.K. NI/2 SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST. N.M. CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON, - mums= PAIL 9t'/o . tl11i1s.- r k WI ).s t .M PUSH ROW £ NI>r fa. D v:.. ►.1i. I I: , I sew-� ti4r�i� j alp ;-' �*..aser :.or:r1. a GTON �0.1 { W , a EORLINA.L PA AP 4 11 1.• 1 t• %tiWwvo...e3`PAGE •1 t 'MOMS AVE. B.M. 1 1 :�. Pro 44.60 a:. . t . ...1h`�......�. ,P a14... S reMklri�rNn sr Itatiw iswu t446441 --.I 14$41 t i . t aa aa.. ' i 'i •iI••• w•`. M . t K ••r.rr•. wr• 1 •.r.r.w •a.• 10 so 1t+us. 1• iv 4 1 I N iI � "' . v «'' 1If 1 • •SS. . P.M +w. r.� 4 .W. iwtz, t �� II( 1 ile-ai *Los •t Z • 'rover r•.a Oa ..... & ) I 1. 1 1 1 N �trtlG %, t1O. x Mi2 l 1 , ,� 14-i. 1 10 11 - ... 4.064 s a►is. 1 L J 1 . wawa w % P AVE. S.W. • • 't - 4 • .�.,..� I 1tt ..4 • 5 = trF j «s' ��*; c c I, t,.le 4.4 of j Wert i Q w1 it i "c a`«` II t 1��. l �' �� �"; 8iti 9 i1 ;. 1d1/saiKKwu �1 .4• (�gO�atw111• 4 'I 0 1 � i . M s`1 i •x•SCriftecm�ao - -c 4 , %. '-� ~TV faifl/sti=••�.�1 ` I. biss s Chstiof 41 !!r .4 , I. ` III 1 K-ro i• AR ' - Mta../• ^ bri p i 1 it':"A.741 el""1111 i 1 , • �1 111g r M•wwtti R.fe. l [,Ir i II if CI; PO 6I E I ,� 14 ' = R� weavitomw.w cm-pity t�et . i. � t 1 mi :1300..04 .....e.)V\\ Iit Its` a o 1 _... -Yti ra4.4WM -C1.141tr NIWile ,1rl'\ 1111 2 -1 - J ~+! p'C I . RVAI) • GAS ••• t i —w i w. )] -• + ` ovate r i +%• ND.SU6'YLEMEte'.F,LS EET 2 OF d .—lam 4,, ` `s /.tcba-RENTO44 s4.'C`.41E1 AN...��55.��-'' - - - - WASHINGTON THE PLAT OF TECHNICAL CENTER SUE SECTION I3. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. i1.N. NI/2 SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. W.M. •_ CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON '' !i t!- r,L,., w 4 AOCO *RTC*mGs. Znc.. P.S. ♦ i :I.I +II 122 t ` rf�Ar� J L .. IRIlf1.iAtOlrr! ! 4,4 �,1 w�7 ` , `� ra'� /4 ti / , �'[Y $'.. it �_ ��"`` IBCle 4 1 .a,, T -.... ,�- �i �, 0. ,fie ,I h '4.. 06.. ,.„„„., —•••••• 4 ". -'0' • Iv :.% is • « �f�KaTtfMW[iH f ,,L- . /11116/} 411 � 4 r tf I 1 \ ' 7 11 ' �1` •3i ,wwr/ it 'W s -�/4 ma . : .pa ., j• MP., 9 .6 MIMI rs w . or...Nc esNpleuvr CA lltMeart •411t 611 4f t N '1 • .rr• a.. .• ' • •rp _ +.w •r.w Iwu ,Qq / . ' `T A /0"A4 _-.,`""ter' . 'rN " �'�"� • w'�i w•4 I • .` � bkk k*Ce4 "5 4 (12 , 3...-- 04 . li• ........... q I I1, t I I I t ' awfre i � a = SHEET a OF THE PLAT OF , WASHINGIUN TECHNICAL CENTER B1/2 SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST. N1/2 SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST. M.M. • CITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON 4. azuvx us AL y�y•) rya _____ ocAw ROCO $ H2T 4ZbRq =Ilc.. r.i. .N a R • t I ,.7 ,I/:/. j ` • : ! / ,• ; CC� WI . M� KTCtsT- AIICA I / /• " R 1 1 I . P OE p�T�ENT leOtiT BASIN PARCEL 10. �.. I il tkv • h%IIL is sp CIT \VING UINEFINE0 EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE LAND ENCOMPo►SEO BYTHE PLAT OF WAHINGTOH TECHNIW. CENTR FOAiW MITI01 CONTAINMENT Oi?STaI1U MfwiQR RUKQ F AIIO -N I alai . WA7$R$TORIGE W{'YIL SAID OE'ENrIOii A O FtOOo �`.......—�_ WATER STORAGE IS PAOVIVE� AR THC SAW P*.AT. Qt , 4.t AREA TO SE WINED AT TIN' TIME TRACTS AL 8 ARE ill •. 4y\ PLATTED P410 LOOTS co smolt 1v1.Y L*00s.REMAINING �;s•i ,.•ill ii: s�`'r \ g AREA TO SE USED 9Y CITY OP RENTON FOR FL000 ..i.s. ' 1 f i+T WATER STOAAGE4AS THLY SO CHCOSE. , •s\ • ri1 w•my44� 44.11 aerate 1 ir I .1.�vo It T • 61 liC a. � _ s aa Q ; • ,^ t • !j t t •.a+rK oe« rj + n • .. Ior� 4r` i .r limn, _ACC.KrT I-: f I 42 fI GAM Tur,+ Arr ) I '� 44/ II • M� 1Al —.. Ammo IN ,rF d4./s ..mow .r « «... .,., ,• p ♦�1a v }N. j % ! SST4OF5 \ . . THE PLAT OF • WASH I NGTCJN TECHNIC,. L CENTER . S!/2 SECTION 13. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST. M.N. N1/2 SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTA RANGE 4 EAST. W.M. CITY OF RENTON KING.COUNTY. WASHINGTON �s� ' m l�l 0 auoi.RNA $ATC142,42. Vie. P.S. ,,,•; is 1--------- P .L AVE. S.M. • - • • ..r.. t r 11 .1 is 9 11-1 i ii li . , tily ,?Y1N.►t►(Mc ;1 iL ' q4.47.•-ireammirry_____../..a...—.1 ..1,1 I\ .y—�.. .r ,I ., w..4 ffi Yltutr 6Mc ,�� .` -.. , —— r_ _ ' i .`i�+�'�..►� . rss tq�l, K`k i a. itoU aw.May kit, t 1 A � YrKKr f�ra+tiM �! l `1 !I ••••• •'..°"......' - 00.46 .- 6°I. 6 �'�t pAgKWA t v •V TUR� STR ' • (18E 40 SHEET 5 OF 5 • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: altCe. DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp LAA,0/7Z AG o PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII �''�I SArrOAIN NOV BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 1 1991 LOCATION: '' SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services ') 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 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. Signature of Director or thoriz epresentative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 51/Lcua, kaAJeJ eAp&,(, sfraiiv welAA van U1J a_U ov- mac. Le u&u, pfrtrA/LL) sioste44/L) ba,v(ko. > si/( ,(1;(. b-0 p a_bLu 66 bek, 12vutin DATE: 121 of I SIGNATURE OF DIRECT OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht r i DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: CL r DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S) ECF;SA;SM-071-88 ECF;SA-109-89 164,4, PROPONENT: First City Development Corp C�,Op-Qifr/S�'olV�rvyo PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, : VIII NOV 2 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 61* ( % : '99� LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use I 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities ��oo��,, COMMENTS: /f °� �OGUGGr(�L �1 ) 77O/7 7 / '. 0 94e4 Prileek- 1/4 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. //H/q/ Signature of Directo or Authorized epresentative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 • ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED / PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OT APPROVE? i404/441-04 Affpfral /7/4 t0-7 ii/C w � G / � c J' Ok%"tar- rr elip, '07 s..7 , /i(474/ ,/,/ ,/,p,Ree7 co ( .7T 7/ ym t9Aa4hei4 - DATE: SIGNATURE OF IRECTOR OR AUTH RIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WQRKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET °od ®PRS la, oN REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Se fix' uck i+leZ &er 7 3 f 1 DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/9'1c4/f APPLICATION NO(S); ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities �. COMMENTS: rP- % TT4 01ED c°44m5h TS Fie/ 6'-/o -9'J 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. .4 Signature of D et or o thorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvshl DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-1 09-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 101...47.1 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED S 6Ci CC4M N 3 1'Ife9,4 C -/g-V I! ,q DP,77ON) C /Y7 � �r � 6 617 TO n , )oev(v T/M/-t c4l5'r41c f imilt.yis 4-42 /9 -114117- or e0(6.40/A/6 ���'-P�✓�'� DATE: //-1� 7/ SIGNA URE IR CTO OR AUTHORIZED REENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht • • DEPARTME OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBI' WORKS ENVIR_.__'MENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW : ET 3EVIEWING DEPARTMENT: seuyr U `tfi )ATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 ,PPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;S S M;RV M P-109-1,$°j ROPONENT: First City Development ROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ,RIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently acant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at.683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be leveloped with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, mndscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a ieron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at our stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. i he applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River )asin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. VI Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land,use/shoreline impacts. _OCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: - BUILDING AREA(gross): MPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY I. Earth ?. Air 3. Water t. Plants 5. Animals 3. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation e 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation ' t► 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: Goo L�-CrjvtS/ PRd1 acr 15 Win/IN T Y Dl/w%9M/s1/ F_STv4y /347-5//v m 11- 1NH 5.¢N/PlAY 5514,fi!Q RvNS 50777i1-4T 406,G 1f6i- P°Ig TON F40NnA/6. f 0 7'ry p bet) 5 '5 7 ' NO $, 55w /14 AP S/tete, 55 M All yot.56 (2) 4i/A/L,4/665 tV air , 5to, O F 04 5/044Le, Da vGN ANG/ivee'/e eompbcc • L°C47/oty oC' Ti 'SE /t'14Nhtot/-S Pe//9/Nc pffAL',,v pIQ1='4A'4z FaK 6/140/N6 palmier ,4►°nI4 cI TNN, noT IN 55.14/5-A, Mo1a/fl UuM /14 4. 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. 6_1' _ ' I Signature of Di�o Aut rized Representative Date Rev.6/88 ernrvsht �u1 r r� t r.. ,� 'Y � n 1rI X 4 p P t� " r7' h�II r i4,' 4�1�r ::.7s. .. 1 tnr ,N tiM .4-` 1 I rf j ,044;mrr VO4; 'A#e4r 1 its .y x rr' d h r I.1: 1;� t�L* r., � 3 s fs. 7l7i. ,4�.,, r / DEPARTMENTOF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLLv WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET IPPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-80 j 'ROPONENT: First City Development 'ROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII IRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a urrently vacant 27.76 acre site (Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, tndscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a eron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at bur stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. 'he applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River iasin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. n Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address Identified environmental impacts •these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. .00ATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP: 23N RNG:4E SEC:24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches '0: PUBUC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT X DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: pi-AN A e VI W APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS 2 NOT APPROVED l�ur� fN�- ti>�ltiry s 1a 645- /N4M4LX0 /n,' 4Cc cp�e/,24ENcF e-viry city o F ArlwaN 5T 1-NOTAP5. — P1NAL p 5/ -N FeA 6c./4.00/N6._ /0/x/'P'Pt,7 /4�pL/ c4 T/iN 5' (' 6 ri IN C cN Po 4 ,z Wit /T ' C//7' O P A/z/V/v>V 5r4 rib AA0S (A7r4c.i/m-,o). PRO F G.T 5 !/ig7, C f- 7 D ALL M1//O4-/C43« -,b — . LoJ'Yf- /r FI -rrs, 7&.F 4-TT?9 179: D F/E sfiL ?, — pRovl/JF <LF'o9 wtE /� ?u'Fh�ly 5 l,� ,l4 !¢N,Q � v774.//-r� LriV E$ / 5 FaLGok j: FTwEF/V 1 .v5 4/y'O w'9rEA / Eyfp L 6Ey) S '/3. 'T t--/Nr g e.. e. /g //N" 5/DAVIT oferp ty L//y,E j li jeil6f? � DATE: ' SIGeTtrarlICTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE • REV.5/90 levrvshl roar Iva i..w11Mare-r..cri9 rr.ic rYt.lirLVY - - O DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ❑ PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ❑ OTHER APPLICANT: JOB ADDRESS: A/. R-1 77A r�z(�� 1i , NATURE OF WORK: / DATE RECEIVED BY RECEIVED FROM COMMENTS DUE WO# PROPERTY MGMT. GREEN # FEES APPLIED ❑ NEED MORE INFORMATION ig LEGAL DESCRIPTION O NOT APPROVED FOR ❑ FRONT FOOTAGE ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE APPLICATION OF FEES ❑ VICINITY MAP ❑ OTHER It is the intent of this development fee analysts to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below will apply to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements(i.e. underground utilities,street improvements, etc.) PRIVATE DEVELOPER HELD PROJECT COST LATECOMER - - LATECOMER AGREEMENT NO. PER. FTG. FEE WATER — O— SEWER -' f7 — OTHER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT y FIG. SAD FEE WATER — e)— SEWER — O -- OTHER'4;, /�� ? _ _. __ _ ._. u SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-WATER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$940/lot x Apartment, Condo,each multiplex unit$545/ea. unit x Commercial/Industrial $.126/sq.ft. of property x (not less than$940.00) _ 683,76Z Sb /59.o/ SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-SEWER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$470/lot x Apartment, Condo,each multiplex unit$270/ea.unit x Commercial/Industrial$.063/sq.ft.of property x ,,{ (not less than $470.00) 683,76 "'3` 0 77 0/ TOTAL: P9, 2.37.o2 The above quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees,side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. - oo P/ease 25/ fee__ c1 �11i0� w/i!cA ate eu7cs pose .7 (see red- I/1e c.o.)" enTs a#0.cAer.! herdo r ' a Signature of Director or Authorized Representative DATE tom ' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS cl aY OF RENTO 9 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEETNOV ig9i REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Covlsivkc.,hovN Se VIGe . thLD 9�a c �®� DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91� APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 INC;DIVISION PROPONENT: First City Development Corp crr.o'F RENTON PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII- NOV 0 4 1991 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 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. /F4 5? Sig ature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht i DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION L CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Cv, v.k-tcy% &xU(Lee �PPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED fr,/46, DATE: /U 7 CO SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS , iN 1y1S/� l Nro�v ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET NOV 0 5 ,99' REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Fa-►' -S DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Y, NED PROPONENT: First City Development Corp NOV / r 1991 PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII PARKS& RECREATI0 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare • 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: ..��� �/���/ =�� � ,� '6467 C.r/r)2Z/< ,4A1.44._. /� eat 271-Cuzi-V „Tat_ 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. Tgnature of Director or-Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvshl n 1 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET/ __—� rot-ra APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109'89 lay PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. &riteReAri®iv PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES 11 PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: L— APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED zat-i,--- DATE: //— 5---- 7/ SI ATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 dewvshl • - DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEETRENTON FIRE DEPT. �; FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: -Fire— Pr,v� av) NOV 4 _ 1991 DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: l t/� OVG APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp `dl ika PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII 4, ° o,` 64 fi1a<,o BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: .� �0 OAt_4' LOCATION: // �1 SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): " °� IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth V 2. Air v I/ 3. Water 4. Plants / 5. Animals v 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare V 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation / 15. Public Services v ' 16. Utilities COMMENTS: •V0 Waor iM 4c/S /Med J � • 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. LAivn Signature of Director or but orized Representat a Date// 59/ Rev. 6/88 envnrshl % .f DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-1 09-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: c j_0 Alien /'S i2 '- APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS y NOT APPROVED 3 AlAaVe S k C' r�eicH / /; ®e� ara 1.:ofri �d Ate C1J lo / goody �.. T�OwS . / lit4 A4fr.. Ci-14CsS 0ov eitl ]� ro 4 Moo J -L -mil iPe. iie srioten/ aCCesS I-0ah arc A)o f adc aje_ co, ac.CeES f ctpct atocr k� r0ai�t�,� S So 4I44• do4•/ 'Nteel trhiti rahus A l41i5t TjM 're) 1°o o-6E a p r203 par ouc4t, (M. n� /e.cdr 6onrr+213ti.-r. totoe"17"44rc.y TO Fr tQ£ Mrr4-1ln,DAv Ez D Fo /=urwi2F 614,19' rr op 4 vAL1 F--Pg n4noro yo ezDacL kt.sIteNsL -TAML Yb 4c-eyrAiitc DATE: /0/7 SIGNATURE OF DIR CT R OR AUTHORIZE►' REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht yi 4. ':'x"+.•i..'ti',.-.."..,C.•rr�,,.,+'..-,t"fit :tt"'^"r+�.., �,..�,,.K,et..:•4,..�,,,t• .: ::::•:•:::::.;:; ;>:::.::: >:•;.•>:.>:•;::;:;:•.::;:�;: : :<::::>:•:::>�>:>::CITY•.OR'>RENTCIN:�: :�: >::<`::i :> <:�:>:;:»s:; :< :�:;�:::» :<�::: > ; :`:�:: :s:::::� : >:: :::>: ::<::::::::; RT MI.''.f .t ::;: > > :�� >s:i iiit.i >'. ::: ` :::::':: >::>:: : >> »::: : :: ::: �:G MIVIUNITY'DEVEL IMENT.DEPA . M .v. ........ ......... ............................ .... > M R PPLI.�..:::..„�TI'O.N :: > < >> >> »� >< <> REVISION SA;SM-071-88' TRACT B :>EE >:T1: .N &..FS NAME: _'REZONE $ First City Washington, Inc. _SPECIAL PERMIT $ _TEMPORARY PERMIT $ ADDRESS: _'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6000 X SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ -— - - -- -- _SPECIAL PERMIT $ CITY: ZIP: X GRADE&FILL PERMIT $ • Seattle, Washington 98104 (NO.CU.YDS: ) _'VARIANCE $ TELEPI-IONE NUMBER: (FROM SECTION: )'' (206) 624-9223 _'WAIVER $ ROUTINE VEGETATION CONTACT P:ERSON'��APP:LICANT: :::: -MANAGEMENTPERMIT $ .: :.... :... .... .... ...... .. . . . . .. .. .. NAME: ('JUSTIFICATION REQUIRED) Dean Erickson X Shoreline Permit ADDRESS: SUBDIVISION: $ 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6000 _LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ CITY: ZIP: _SHORT PLAT $ Seattle, Washington 98104 _TENTATIVE PLAT $ _PRELIMINARY PLAT $ TELEPHONE NUMBER _FINAL PLAT $ (206) 624-9223 NO.OF LOTS: PLAT NAME: I. :P:R JEC :INF: RMATI. N::s.-..- O O O PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ • Blackriver Corporate Park Phase VII, Tract B _PRELIMINARY _FINAL PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdal e and West of Naches BINDING SITE PLAN: $ KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): MOBILE HOME PARKS: $ 918800-0140 _TENTATIVE EXISTING LAND USE(S): _PRELIMINARY Vacant _FINAL • PARK NAME: . EXISTING ZONING: NO.OF SPACES: OP ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ PROPOSED LAND USE(S): PROJECT VALUE: $ 3 Office Buildings with Parking SENSITIVE AREA: Structure ' ' APA: 1. 2 OTHER _N/A SEWER MORATORIUM AREA: YES NO PROPOSED ZONING: TOTAL FEES: $ SITE AREA(SQ.FT.OR ACREAGE): DATE PAID: 286,300 S.F./15.7 Acres POSTAGE PROVIDED: YES _NO Building Area : .::::::::.::.�::::: .:::: •: : ri .:. i:,{i•i:�::i::i :i:�i:.i..:i:C;•}:�:�ii:� �i:•i'•.i::•::•ii:.;...::•i:.::.iii'.::.i:•:,:•:i}<•}:�iii:•::�i:i�i::.: :.:.:.Tkls sectio�:.to.:be':.com leked:.b. :•GIt. :.stafl.:•....:::...•:•:..:.: .< :. .:::.. :: ..: : .:..;:;:::::.:: .::.':::::.::.•:::.:•'.'. ,:::i ..:.:�.........;rA:::.'.:.;: :::::::•>:.:.: :::• ....:.: Cl File um r ; .•'` >;:_>: ' ` ``'` ' ' :: ' : ::'',: ': :: :ECF::: .SA . R: ::SHPL....CU:..:L ...:PP:.....FP:..'.TP ..•.S.P...:: RUMP.•..::.:.. ..:.:.;:..:::....:...E.::........:.;: .. ::::, . .. .. ....... s. :. . .: .:::..:.W...;PLJD...;;::;FP[ID.:;.>: M :.;:SNIE'::;::::;PMHP:::;:FMHP...::B.SP...:•::...:.:::::....:: ... .::: ' : :_. .;..:. :. :: :: ::::::.::::::::::::..::::::::::.:::::.. ::;: :>;::::::�:;: ::;;:.:.::•:.;:.:;:•:::::.:.;;:;::::>::::::::;:: :::::::::::<;:::::::::::. :: . . ... :: ..... .: ... . . .. .. . .::: lea �e::atrach�a:se orate� .e... ........................... :::.�:.�:::::::::::::.�:::::::..:•:.:.........:....:.:.:..::::::.�f:tnore...� aCei$;re t��red,. .. .�...::.......:..::...::.:P..::..::::::.......)......:.....:...�.:.:...::::..:..:.:�:...:...::.::.:::.•.:.::•;»::•::•>:•;;:.::::•:: • SEE ATTACHED SHEETS • . • • Dean Erickson. , • , , being duly sworn, declare that I am (please check one) /the authorized representative to act for the property owner,_the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. • SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 4thDAY OF November 19 91 'NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON,RESIDING AT: % Kirkland r 1 (ST Pv.s AA. (nl e., • J ann V� French • - &I +' tau (Nye/of Notary Public) (Signature of Owner) 53 :N.E. 137th Place 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6000 (Address). (Address) Kirkland, WA 98034 . Seattle., Washington 98104 (City/State/Zip) - (City/State/Zip) • (206) 823-9818 (206) 624-9223 (Telephone) (Telephone) . •Acceptance of this application and required filing fee does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other material required to constitute a complete application are listed in the"Application Procedure." !RtnMastr 2/90 `~ 4 BUSK, .(OED&HITCHINGS.INC. • • Legal Description 8lackriver Corporate Park • That Portion of Tract 13, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, Pages 98 through 102, records of King • County, Washington, lying Northerly of Southwest 7th Street as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100643, and Westerly of Nachos Avenue Southwest as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100644, records of said County. • • lirl;;;;% RH . 86230 & 86083 pr987 /74 / 6 1,J:o/ LH7, 86230 • tr • Jf �I'• ,°Al LAND S4 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,>) Architecture and Planning ,_.t'• PoPomero Northwest, Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030. SA; SM-071-88 REVISED SUBMITTAL OCTOBER 1991 TRACT B PHASE VII BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK DESIGN NARRATIVE This proposal represents substantial design modification with over 5 different schemes through the Environmental Impact Analysis and subsequent Memorandum of Agreement with the City of Renton. The concept consists of 3 office buildings and a parking structure. The office buildings have been reduced to 5 stories in height or less. One 5 story of ± 116,400 SF, one 5 story of ± 91,550 SF and one 4 story of ±78,350 SF and a 4 story garage relocated to the northeast. The biofiltering swale and wet ponds for site drainage are located to the southeast at the old Blackriver channel to provide additional water to this existing wetland and as an additional transitional buffer to the existing wetland. The wetland of the old Blackriver channel and its existing buffers will remain intact and be enhanced through a mitigation proposal . The mitigation is for filling one small depression on this tract and two small depressions on Tract A per a 404 permit from Army Corps of Engineers File No. OYB-4-014798, approved 5 September 1991 . The wetland mitigation concept is attached as part of this revised submittal . All significant trees around the perimeter of this site and the wetland areas will remain. Some significant trees in the center of the site will be removed. In addition trees planted by First City Washington 2-3 years ago along the P-1 channel and pond are noted and have become significant and will remain. A 100 foot buffer area is maintained from the ordinary high water line of the P-1 channel and approximately 30 feet of this on the subject property is enhanced in a landscape area along part of the P-1 channel and per the section on the landscape plan. Where the existing poplar trees were previous planted by First City and now stand 30 to 40 feet high, the tree planting will fill in around the existing trees. The existing stumps left by the city during excavation of the P-1 channel will be moved into the N.W. area of the site to form additional habitat in a new natural area. MANNING DIVISION cm(OF RENTON " ® s 1991 Tract B. November 4, 1991 Page 2 Access to the property will be through existing curb cuts along S.W. 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. The fire lane around the north of the garage will be gated off to prevent other than emergency or maintenance access. Exterior building materials will be fabricated panels with glass and glass curtain wall . sections. A central entry plaza for building D & F will be used to tie with the garage access. Building E will have a separate entry plaza. The garage will be painted panels and the north wall will have no opening and extend 48" beyond the top floor to buffer the natural area. Recreation areas will occur in two locations to continue the horseshoe pit facility in Blackriver. Passive seating areas will occur at these locations and in the main entry plazas and transition plaza from the garage. NOV 9 5 1991 VED Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 Architecture and Plannin i if Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A„ 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 _, IN rJ.N•.aYi . .. -,. • TRANSMITTAL UN 3 1 1991 • To: Lenore Blauman Date: October 31 , 1991 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. S. ProjectName: Bl ackri ver Phase VI I, Tract B Renton, WA 98055 Project No: NW 88041 Attn: Re: SA;SM-071-88 ! Site Plan Approval Revisions ' Description: 11 prints revised site, landscape and grading drainage plans, dated 10/31/91, per city memorandum of agreement 1 original and 10 copies 8-1/2 x 11 reductions of revised site, landscape and grading drainage plans, dated 10/31/91, per city memorandum of agreement. 11 copies 8-1/2 x 11 revised Bldgs. D. E. F and garage floor plans and elevations, dated 10/31/91 , per city memorandum of agreement. 11 copies 8-1 /2 x 11 vicinity map 1" = 200' 1 8-1/2 x 11 colored vicinity map 1" = 200' . 1 print each colored site and landscape plans dated 10/31/91 11 copies Wetland Enhancement Concepts 11 copies Addendum for reference SFPA checklist " Remarks: • ❑Sent per your Request ® For Approval ❑ Other: ❑ For your Use/Reference ❑ For Distribution • ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records Hand delivered ' By: Paul R. Coppock for Royce A. Berg cc: W/encl : Dean Erickson, Amy Kosterlitz ' W/plans: Lauch Bethune, Bob O'Connell . SA;SM-109-89 SA;SM-071-88 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK TRACTS A & B SEPA CHECKLIST REFERENCE ADDENDUM Additional Permits Required fi 1 . Hydraulics Permit Department of Fisheries 2. 404 Permit Department of Army File No. OYB-4-014788 for 0.14 acres of wetland fill Permit approved 5 Sept. 91 • Dimsloti ct�CIF INNIA �ti5io�1 Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 - •. . . .. . _ . .. . . . . - . , - • . . • • • - . • • - _, ..• . -., , ' •- _.-:,, , ...: . _ • . .. .,. , -: • . - - - • - : : . __ :• • _ - , _ •. — . -. -• • - • •• - - - - - - -• - . . . -. . --. - • - • ' - - - - . . • ..• - :-- - - • .- •. .. • . . - . . . • . ... . „ .. .. . ..,.' . . - :...-..: • ,-:-...,-: :---,----;-- - '.-•---.'•.--:-:':-:•J-",.---•:--r.,-- •*.-.''..--f--:v... :;--..-.9-...•-•••".:---".. ;::-..- ...:::_. - :.--- .'...•-•;.,-=,v:.-:,-_.•,: 11-_::..,;;,1_,--.:_••••.•.::,.._. -•::..--_'. .,.;v._,,..;,.,•.:, .-., .„.,-..: ...,,,.-_.._,,i:-:,-,,,__;".;-i,.,::_,..,;:,--“..`-'-';-4::: "•';..' s,-':ii:::_6"4:::_,''•:"-->"--i.-41-FTX-.4-a., -7-i--3.i'ej,;,i,---.1:4 ,-;.1.-5" ;52,,-;..i.s;5.;--iii;',:;iif.....i:-.L.:,,,::f•.1--5tri.71T,17.4,7'-` ,- ;:7±-‘-7..=;t:,. .-..--z.•,,';?-i'-,141:-?7-- - -:;_t:•`-.4-1•'.:=7,.c ' i 5-•.---7----?.?...'''-''--:-12-,."---'i'-.•-=..•.-''''n;<-:;,---':::-,'':-"- •-•-''''''''-6:7-.-2--;:f,i'''--7:::-:-",•:•!';,-'-''',-:',;-..'.'.7-.=•'e-'''-e:'''-',-->•1.-:.*,..1.i.);•...:4-;"'-',-‘-' .-4.-.4-iu-ii.44.-:-'"4".t.'_e-,.-&*4'1Z..,i.:.,:r.,-, 4 0-5:;.-?.7::-_p-,4-::-,-:-.;=• ••:-'.,74,,•'... .;..,!-,f-try,. .,,..:„-b.•Ze !,•v:.•. -,-.•-,-..--- -...-;. ..;;'.-'•-• +.•, - .; sy. ; -..;:.-', •-..-. •-•--•-•,.:_..,.-.:_-•,-:-..--..•:-.... , •.•-.-.,••-. • _ .-:, -•.- .•-, •.., .: "r----:'-'- ..-:".;,4..-<-47:*;(4'-g-t.:,---.F- v*--.'-'-'•-"4- --.... .'.z,i*'-:.,Fik.st::.:1-••r,',7-N:*-7.•,-4,7.'.',.-.-?,:.--n-t-:,-:.°-e-,.-,:.':. •---,,,'..T.'47"::,-, :• --'„ ,.,- ,--,-7 --•-_ .7_ --- - ••- -. •- . -• .•,- - - -... •-. - - --: • : • , - . --- .-_.-:.• • -. : - :., ;:, ___. .... . -..,:... ,• - . _ ,- - • • - -... • : ..- .. - . ,-.- -.:-.._•,-f.,;..,-,:•.•,:f-",!'..-:::::---..' -‘- ., .•:-;7'.-::•,... .-._-7-:;".:-.,,,•:-.-"_.,•••;:',,,• •-2,...:--•"•:-.---s..•"--,i- "-•.,...:,:-•-'..:--.-;" '';--...-• -.": _• ..--.'-_-..--.: ,; -"--.-z-----..:'_ -...,•-•..--:-•-::-.-...-- - :-...-, : -•--:1---,--';`,-;.------:.,.--.'- --.---:-,7:::'::•-.-.:'.i.----,'-.---f--f---'_:-_"'",-----.'":,-;'-f.--.:'--....:-.:::::..V.;;=':-.L --...7:....:-.---,-----'-,-:::','-'-.:- '''-- -I.!:-.':-':' .--f.:::,'.-- .' --,'.-',-3.5'.-':-,-..--:---- . • --.... --" .. • . . --'' .., -;:::---- -'..*:1:' '--.---.2:]••:.:I:.. :.-1-.::--,-''-': '''2 7.-"'":". •:.'-. 'IL;-";.": ' -.", I': 'I-:- • •'•"- '•- • ' ' "- -' ; •...- :: . - "--.-.- *:-- •:"..-. --‘-: ---'.".• .r•- s.-: -:•-. ,-._:. :_;..."':--:-!:•::--*---- ,•-::::;,,,.-1::U",: "•.:-.:"-:;--"-',_'..-;V".---.:f..":-,?-:,....,-,:-.-,:4';--:-,..i.'..--_-•:-%'.-7.-,.•7:----•_-,.:::, ,,:z:-',".f-;:_:--."-,-,----;:•.;.,,,;,-.....f,..',`:,;•2;,-: '.- ..,.,..., „.. . ......, .:• .--..,•-•.-...-2-•:,,.•••r• . : , . : - ,.....-....,•.„...,,-.,.,,.,..,.:,,,_•,,,..., . ...,.: •:,,,...-.-.-.,•. r,.:,-..... -_. _•_-... .:_. i', :_ ,•.'7,_-_:•::::•,-,_, _,...;•. -:•,..•.--:.-,•,-,",,..-.:,.--:.-:-":-',:':,: ••••:7":".-":5"-';'"-Trr,':"...:•::-:•::::-,".:-..,ii•-:--..""-:"--,.-,-"-:!"-.:`1,.";,.-.:j:---7?•5:--8`'7,:4••:.::",-2!---;:-.:-.,%:-.,::.-;:.-::::".-,;?-s--7.:"..z-',;:;,"-"::{;-,C..-.:-.-1,7",':"- ii.'-',-,'.'"-":-=f-1,:i,;•-:::7:-"_':',-;::-:-3";'.i.";`.V.:i,';',,-- - '. '-::‘...:----:•••."----, '-."---".-,-•-•••;,-,-,?-••',":-..-•••';',•-'"" "•••:•,,:".r-:.::'r-',.:7:•;.:7'.:-7,---.';',.=:'"•...-"--::-!""::':-.:-.:--%r1.7:;=:-,:; ''':..bv,:7'F.----,':':::•--.:.:7--''.:'-4....,---2,..:-:..i-f--•:._-.:-:_.':--: ---.--::-..'-: ',7-.':- '.'-'',. ;-:!: "-`.---- --,:---•-•-'-.. ',---,----'-':'---,.._-,-,-;:-;:-... -,k--;:-:.,''''.;"'...."-:-%:;"''---....."-2--:7.•'..."';-•:::::;1-.--''ri,..,:-..,'k:',4-. .f....-'1:,::-.:1-:-Z--=•"-'' Vt._fig;-....T-?..5.:E..4:-.4--'-',:4-,,--,.';7---'"::-l'.!--',':--'t-- --=`.--4-..kt.--,..n:/;. ---';::-.-.:'-:-.17=`;-';'.------'"---..'"..•-•---•`-2-...:_--,,-; --,-,-, ,---" ,,-,.-.'7,--•;;:z,, -.:.,.:;1.0.--',,,,,,,-,,••":::-.: :-.."2-f.,---;-...'-!`4.••:-7-:-_,-...,-":=Z:- z;L.-,-f-:-:-,-.---z-f.:;;;...,:;„:•',-;„;:',,,.,--....,:"..,".gri-r.3t,:-..•:-,-7--, •---= ''.:=:*--•-•••<-,..1;:,‘,-.,:----:,_...,- ,-• • .-"" ••-•"'"C" :'''.7-''': :''-' .- -.;--:-.;1:-'•--.:-',-7-- - -:-:,;;I:'-rr:'•--21,-:'-'.,,,,,. ., _-`t'•1'.'.:;?,...-4,---';''''-'"''''''A S."---j;-'-':-.-'-.1-"1.`5^"* ":''s'---''''‘E'-'-'-.'------'-'-'-‘- - --... .--4,11=-11".n.A . , . . ... ,,q,........ e" .. ..c.A.2... > ...,„....,,,,,,, ..,i:,_: :::::.-:-.';'.f7:4-:-t:.; . •-•.-.-.'__-• - -. - - ' -- Under the new ordinances;--she-- dictions to:say;-'What-do' .?;•'-,,. ..:-.;-,..,-•K„,..,.„3:1:.„1-.., .....--.r...:,..,_,J.,,.j:,.;,:zi,,,,..-14.7.-;,-ri.:,..„•;:::',,A:',.-4,-,_-i-f..i..•=-.,,,--74.....,-,..A..'1.'2,.....:F::"..i.L:4] ,-,-,-;-.- -=2,4•-•••••=9-4-•••-f ‘?,,,...:.-.7:;---.7...7.:,,,7•••=7,-,--.-/-.-i::-:-.7z.,,,--.----.--.7.L.,..7.,• _-.,;,;•,.: r•i-".":-.."•:5"!:',":•:_:"-::,-:€:•—• •;,:•••.- "•:,,,:,,,,,-",...-,,--'..,..;i;:,:•-.•-..„,---;,.-L,1.-,,F,,--,,,,-,•, R()N: .New , said, some properties in the Valley... for our citizenry9.;Do we,want wild- - ."::::,--'-9=-.7".:7;-'•- ••=-',,,..'-',`..-N:29-:',%-'2-•-W1?-7-e'-'5•7:•-•: 7,•-_-,1*---:',•;.,9A.-5.-9:f.-,-.-.---r,1---,-.-..2.-:--47.7.:;-,.-.,-..,-,;.-f-_••;:::,- .,-....,,,,-_, ....„....., „;-..-..2,-....,:„.,.,;:,. .-_,... ........„.t.-_- ..--7..,-.:,_•-,:::::=• -!-.:..-:••:„.......;-,•:,-.:•`?. "-F-:':,:,,•-e•-..-::::•;-: 1, v.-:---N.;,- :'- . 0 are going to be "seriously affect- life for aesthetic purposes. If that s a. • c_-__.f,:-.1,--.-_•„••=i,-,-_--,_._;-.. .. -,-:.:_:-.:E - -::-:-/:_-.7,-z.,..z:-..i..,:....:.-1,:..-::::; ,..,..,..,. '-';T:i;":;=--Xf-i];;;':'.--.T::: ;..:;71-7- 1.-; -•'..': .' 4 ..': ''''''''''f.l.:;::5:7-1;':`.: 7'-'':.-?-' -'4.-7-: rules will-seriously , ed.), : . — ' ' goal, they should,set out to manage -.... . '1,.:'•':-;r:,:,,,--•:,.!-,-,..?,...-',:e;',..,.,-11_,...-.1.---L:-S,;„'..*:9..,,..„.:-,,-,2'...,Ii-i-2_7&___:•:-.-,...„.z.*-...y.::,,_,"-;.,it,.._.'--4.-.,::29-i:._,_.-L,.->i...7-2:-::,.L:.-...-.,::,,:...,-k....,,,,,,,s,...7-....,,...':-.1,tny...,..-1';!...-.t.....:„,...:-?..',..,;:y.:.•,,..._._4••.,:,. . .. . 1.-...-:.-....:,....•-•,:.•,`;',-.,,,f...--4';'`.;:.,:_,--7-:-te,,,-,:....„?.-_•:-:-:,..4'',-;.., -,,,..„,1,..7,1•3;.,,-.77`.',....r--,,,,,,,..;.-,_-.;-!:!.Z..A.ff:.:.:_:<-1.. pr..-r-e'i'-ti...r_0%.,..v„.,-•-••,-7;‘,,..-.;.:7---,..-:1..!%'.,„-,...," ;-::,-.:y 4,77 ..r,...,.!-.10,...-•:..4-:!--‘:--,.F.:5,-*„..-....,.ii-. ,k,.....4-;,..,..,:: e . ..'-:. —.:'-•- - . ' . The city also has open space accordingly _;...-, ',. : -- ---- • • ' • - --affect' properties acquisition programs.Areas like the One problem is that no one knows ' ,F,...-..-s--..:'5,..17,,,,,-%.:-:.,:*::.::,"*-..::.:::,:x-_,..:9-..7,,f.•.t...7.-=7..r........:;_,..i..7,4.:-:.-9.7.,..3:•,:;-t7,'",,,,..7_,---..fj,,:,,,,,-.--;...9,„-:.'::::9,,-..,;--..:::.,-..,•:,:,!--.:=7._-..'_-,...,..:,\.-.,,,•:::,-;. ..::•..„-7--„.::._1:,:!..,,-...:-...:.t.;-::.-,..,c. ,:::::-.•i.--;,-'.-•:•i:,:-..--'..1--.4.2-:-.._?....-,z-,,_,••.-..,--.,.:_,•-•.:-•-•,..----,,,•::-• -•:----::;-;.•;•-•‘:•::,•--t-;•,..:•..,:•..,',:-,.t.,,,--.;--:.-:-.;-•-t•I•c•..--:::.:.:,---Ez•.....7.-- :::-'1.':--::::-.;-;•,"„::::71-'-_ -;*•,',-,-*;7.-,.----....-1--,',•• .,--;.,,--,::•"-:-.-:-11•••;: •-•'2: ::--':--:- -:-...r:','-'-. -- :.'-'•::.,•::;-F-:':::!.':;,'-`-I,=.1"-.--':-*_•'-'/-•tr•'....-•'...i..--',.:T:.:7:-:'••=:±-=-:,---.:-_,--:•-',--''':.-;7:-:,••----1-`; :!:-;:f'.-:!--;,..--f. '1-;',,:;,•-•,,-:•;:.,.: .,.. ,-.:.:.--.1.--1:• ---...-.1 -','""'.1 ,""- "7- _,;"::.:7-.:'::•?t::-...•.:::-.,.-E-:::::,..-2.;-.:.---_-;--,-.::: . heronry are being acquired.for open for certain the threshold of what ;: ":3..."';';'-;'•-,:'-'''.:4':-;•:'.7" -'',---,":'f:•i'•••::: :.;,.*:-..i=;.,-:;_•- .:;- -,-.•:'f.-:?..::::---:;•7-7,-:,?:.::4....:: :-:-:-T._-.-:•.- space whenever possible, she said. „ negatively affects the herons or oth- "Somewhere man needs to fit er wildlife,he says. :.,„2-•••••9.7.,-.......=,•-„;.-...-",?:-.:,•,--::-.-:-.....t.:.:,-;:',",-.r..-..-7-i;..:.-,;,,..... ..;',,:f..2:-:?;-=.7'..-;::::....-...:-..:4.:.!:;-.::::•1:-..,..:1_•:•;:-..:;V:::...?-j.;.--.7•Ls....•-;:-.1: :.-..:-..,: -•,7 .:-.: .---..---....: i.-.1-.,•'-"'•....:.',•, --::::•-:,.."7:--.7,--1...--, Continued from page Al : .:•:-!.-,1.--- -;:•'-:,•:',......?'6-'.:-;_r-4-:-;.-: . .,:•,-.'..-;:-.-::::,-7-1-,::.C,,....D.----.1', •-••••:'',-•"/-:N.t.:=1-5......',";-...'X.7:-.-" --.:''. -•.,..!-_ --_-...:`.L.:.,....*:,,',4-.7 i:.--;:'.-.:::::•,--;,'•ii-3,- ::'",.- 7.._..-..':-.-•=:.._.::;:f-:s:' ..-::-.."--::`_.:-::1:, in said planning commissioner -- In the next few weeks cityoffi . ',...7,---T...,..::-.;...F.:,...: --.:::,,:-;.;-! :.:,::.,-:;t-,.',.5-.;:.-...,.:12:.:,.:..,.,;:.,,-,_::7-:::--7,1.,.;'.,,1!„-..;::::11:z1-;:;›...-:.:7-t:_;__,•,.:7._.„,-,',-ti.:•.-_,-;;..-4...,•••:?ic.....:- ..;'-'••••:--"-:::".:1:.:::,::•-•.--- .'-:-.:.;`,•-:;„::'''•:--:':-'---•••:::'7:7,:•,---•:"- --;:---:::.'•-----, .:- •-:,:-"There's no way we can eliminate Rich Wagner. "How we do that ! cia.ls re expected to make a deter- ,,..-,....,........,,,,_;:„.,;,-,=„›,,F.,,.,..:.„.:_,-.,....,-_,.;..s.:-,,,;...._. _,..„,...,.,........,,,.,, _,,...:t•s,:.:„.i.i:17: .,::.,,..,;...., ,,,....,:,,,:.:..._11....:...:, s—:: ' :—.. .;...... : '-.1...—.. this link. when we destroy the qual- what we call growth management. mination about what they think ...z.--,':_::',--..:.,.:.:••-1;...-:.:..;...;;;;.::-;._'7_,T-',.-ii. ;;:,,J.21..]....,.-.. .,-.....-..5:-•,-_:%..-.........,?-_yr-;:•-.,1•::.:.:::.-_,...,_,..,*.-.1•-_.-,.,:.:.,7,--,„,...,-...„..:,:,:-11 ,...........,•-_7:..,.E.-.2,.'-r.;I::,:-,•-•= -,. '2.'1;',*-''''''"''''--'''''''-'::-.1'-7.:-'-:': ':'-:'".-r''''''''''''-':-'-''"..."--":-..--•;::"'"'f:•'• ity of life for these animals, we're .'•-•.,,f•-••:••7sfc--.: 7..,:;••---....",-,:!...':: - ,-,'•7 f•- ;:,:-':•;.;',;.' '::: -:•_:••• ...:,-. -;..-.. ,','"'*-*:.: Ted Muller, regional habitat pro- should be done to rtnhieenBtlatockeRnsivureer -:-'7•:::••i•,---*--,;•-t.'4-•---,---•-- -:-;-;•- :-..•:-.-:,:::-,-.:-.,,,..7.:•-•-•:-,..,..---•.-,-1,-;-,7,....-,-,,..,::.,---:-_,--,,,;:.....,,..-7-„,,,,...,,.,„..,-,...„..,,„,. -..:":-....•• ,•,• --...„--,:-.-...-;_--_ .-,..: -;,:.-.--,,,..:-.:_--::::::-•-•-•.:., ••••:,-,•::-7,:.-,••:-....,::::::.-.ialso destroying a crucial link for. gram manager with the Department Corporate Park p :If-.;,.•,-_-„_.:-:-...-:.,,....-„:_,,-,:...,-,,-.:. ,,,.....,-.„,,-,;,::...„,!,,•,---,4,,,•:•,..-.,-..:7.., ,,..4:„.,:-..7.:::;;;;;•,- -; •-,izr,-„-14-..i-,--efrsmus 9' 0.-rgWii7---4411e--, 4'44V-A -#:1••-l':*:0-!iltt• -1.1ftt- f!' !91-'7.7:`-?•'-'::: :-. ,.7,-.50.,1,i.,:k;i.:-&-.4-,;.•-.•:_s.:.:--4-....99.--,„%;•1-.17:•..-7t.1.- 4,.,. ..-.,•-:.-•,,&-.4.,..,,,,,,-=.7:-.4:-...,:-.L.-x,....,..-..,,:: ::,:e-, • of Wildlife, said local jurisdictions protection ••••--95-'-'''' ''-'17- 2-•:--*---•' -:'•:-•`:t•-f,';‘-•••:;;=-''.-9:::•-,-7 '-' .'- 9•':'---- -J'S'f!:.',7•:,**,_:,] Kay Shoudy,Renton's long-range like Renton have had weak environ- heronry. pro- ,.: -.•,* ---•;•-.'::-:-•':-.. :..:•.:•..-."'-:,':','•.:'-:*: . .'„---? :.--:::: • -;::::-,.. ,...-7f-.1::. .--•-1 -,:: •:,•;•:.•.- • • --.7-.-':..'.. . :- - -.:- - ;-....I planning director, said the city is mental protection laws in the past. - -• • . _.,.. • tecting wildlife are really simply a •. :• _. •. . - .... ,. .. , . . . . . • . :' • • - : - : • • -- • - !working on new ordinances to • The Department of Wildlife has ma,t,tIetrtoaficears ' • •-•-• ' - . ''.- . ' : ' * ----••-•: -- .' •- 'address sensitive areas as part of the not had authority to regulate ithacnireesticof open space to . • . . . ,.._ . .._. ... .. .- . . .... ... .. ,.. . , --•.::' - . - -. .. • : .. • - , • *. • state's Growth Management Act, use decisions and could only make have wildlife,"he says. •-• - - - .•-, --._ . .... • . . . . . • _. .•• • - .;••-•:-.:;72.-.-.,: ::__;-..- * *: '..':'-:? •:::":--.-,:::?2.,';':•:-.7 :".-,s'....,--..-;•':,E,..",,,--2. ....,',-- .:• " '" ' " •• • " " I" "".""•:- ..•.. : :: •, _ ",• : , 1 • ' .•-• which dictates that jurisdictions will suggestions to local jurisdictions.. When anildarriefeallsavceosN:ered with •,' •*.'-' ::*•:. : ,:.: '-_•f-:„_::_ *r.,-.•-• • :- •-•:-:- ' .".-• •.'• •::" .*, .I plan for growth. "It really falls back on local juns- concrete,w • - • _ _ : -.. • .. ,• „ . , ,. . ,.... ... . • .. ,. „ .,. . _ . . . ....., ... _ . . . . _ .,. . ...- . _ • . . . -. :_. , . _ , • . . •- _ -. - • • • , • • . . . . . • • .. .. . - •- . , . -- . -, .• - • . -- .. __.• ,. • . .. •, •,:. - i _ . .. . . • -- • -•• - • ...,... •-•,- .: .• _- -..... ..„. ,,, ,..._,..:.,„.,.... ._ ...:-_,._,.....;,.... _.,.:•-:/.:::,,,,•:•,J-•.:....-..-_,Lk:, , -...:,,,..--,-:•-•.;. ...7.:„-,.-a-r:•,-•- ...-_-v:-.-..- -.•;-4..:, -:Avi:.,'..-,•,..v.-,,,P*IiRz!-:-iiWtii..0-.: --.-t.:-:,,-:;:.;;.•: -r.-,-,,:-'.:•tk.9A:F:F ;-`,..---4P---:,-;;.-z•-? ;--.,,%.'i••9•-:i9:4e--.:•;&,53--,V-97,-,.t--4...:=n-••- ••••• •"-• :••••-•--;.--r;.--,-.--=--•:::::•,' *-..- •••-si--.•• -----....:,;, ......=,:- -: --..,-.-57:.7-:::,.:;.,,.::,:fili-.4-••••:-..:_•:„_-:_ir,..2.?;::i-:,,,,,L-,-.!.. .4._;„1.,....-,a,.--3.,..";::::-..t ,....i,,:,..-feis;,,,:,,,-;;;•-4.--ci.,-.NA.;•:-77.:4•;.,-,,;.:s-9,-9,....,:--,-;4•:==•‘:t.-:;1-99•2.-V492:;:- -`•- .1.-:,.--;7:(•,, .:7 ,y,,.vy ...,, •,,,.....-,:, .:••....._,-,-.,..,..•:,-.:-:!,..=•:, • --:.-... .._ -----•:.•••••••-:,.----;:,..- . -7:.,.7-::-„:„..-..••-,••:.., --.. :„....,,,i.e,2-. 2. 4.-i"*=-7P-tiC:?--..-.t.;:t.'-i-'i3,,AS:V'-f5•:'!,, =',;g •• •::-'''''.--...• '•- "..-t: :`;- -'-:'•1.---.- -';'• ---"-' "" ':'---.-":- :-'Y:--• :- -- - • • :- - - - - _- •- • , -,: ' ..--: -- '..- j,..:_-, ---..--. -',, _ :_ '-..:-- '-; : ...- -- -f.-- -.•. ......,:.-"•':.--.• .':_..,.-''-..,-:._-.: - ... . .- ..•_ . . _,,_ :. ..: _ .. ._ _ , . -4 . : - • • .. . • . . - .. _. • ;.*'. . .. ' s* * * • •' -*. . • •. .._ .. • I . . . • •,.. . . • „. , .. . .. -- • . .. •. ' . . CONCEPTUAL WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN Black River Corporate Park Prepared for: Mr. Dean Erickson First City Washington 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6000 Seattle, WA 98104 Prepared by: Jones & Stokes Associates 2820 Northup Way, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 822-1.077 October 31, 1991 g a Table of::Contents Page INTRODUCTION 1 BASELINE INFORMATION 1 Wetland 1 - 1 Wetland 2 4 Wetland 3 4 Wetland 4 4 Wetland Functional Values 5 Groundwater Recharge 5 Groundwater Discharge 5 Flood Storage 6 Shoreline Anchoring 6 Sediment Trapping 6 Food Chain Support 7 Wildlife Habitat 7 Active Recreation, Passive Recreation, Heritage, and Education 7 Fishery Habitat 7 IMPACTS TO WETLANDS 8 Mitigation Proposal 8 Environmental Goals 9 Plan Overview 9 Existing Condition of Mitigation Areas 9 Detailed Work Plan 10 Performance Standards 13 Monitoring Program 13 Contingency Plan 13 Performance Bond 14 CITATIONS 14 Attachment A FIRST CITY WA 10/31/91 1 List of Figures Figure • Page 1 Vicinity Map 2 2 Wetlands on Tracts A and B and Adjacent Areas 3 3 Wetland Mitigation and Buffer Areas Follows Page 14 FIRST CITY WA 10/31/01 11 __- List of Tables Table Page 1 Planting List for Black River Corporation Park Mitigation and Buffer Areas 12 MST CITY WA 10/31/91 111 • . 1 , Etulington • Golf Course`,. •.,%,. mi;'4!•gi !,!.::,,,:i:',;:: . •• e 01,;:.:,:..,.....,,:w., .2.,.:::::1:,:.::.,:::::::::,:,. '`. •-•,:".•":.•,..i.:..:e:,: . •, . .,.., SITE I --,-----. "" _-...„--- . . TUKWILA .....-. ..' . •4 ' cl...:,;:'''''.... .. , . RENT 0:5 LOngailtn 0 Race Track _. ...,• .4 •-•,. • ..,. , . :)....::•.' . -5. •. • • 0 fq7.-A.Liv-A-liez,4••?-?•7;4.,-z• • MILES . _ — . „_ • . ______ ,.....4.,...........a.ma........ . . - _ Figure 1 . Vicinity Map FIRST CTIY WA 2 10/31/91 . - . . • 'ten Q,C1/4 R A, P-1 PUMP PLANT .- P 1 POND' \ --. , ;, w 1]. _ ,� NORTH f � t.1 Acre t 1 , / .0 �vi z Wetland APPF-10X. 400' . /� ,4 o be retained) Z` • TRACT 13 �, I,VGRS?$fr✓od r / 3 a i. R S.W.Scver0 St. Leger►d i ' . ii/o• ..0.04 acre g`1k' Wetland VA Puoya?, J 0.1 Acre daksda!e Ave S.W. :la tilled} Wetlands "ca-1, total)' lobe tilled) ... . 1 Fact A aM B Bou-dares METRO r Figure 2. Wetlands on Tracts A and B and Adjacent Areas dogwood (Comas stolonifera) occasionally appear. A small portion of this wetland is emergent habitat. Soft rush (lunch eff tsus), orchard grass (Dactyks glomerata), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) are the dominant herbaceous species in the emergent portion of the wetland., Soils on Tract A have been mapped by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as Puyallup fine sandy loam. Puyallup fine sandy loam is described as a soil formed in alluvium, typically found in valley bottoms, and not listed as hydric by the SCS. Soils in this wetland were observed to be low chro.zna silty fine sands with mottles. As previously stated, this site has been graded and filled. The soils observed are compacted fill material. Standing water was observed within the wetland. The primary source of water is precipitation which does not percolate through the compacted soils. Wetland 2 Wetland 2 is a palustrine emergent wetland that occurs as an enclosed depression on Tract A, This wetland has also been disturbed, and the vegetation lacks diversity. Soft rush is the dominant herbaceous species. Soils in this wetland were observed to be low chrome silty sands with light brown mottles. Standing water was observed and is likely due primarily to precipitation collecting atop compacted fill. Wetland 3 Wetland 3 is a palustrine emergent wetland that occurs as an enclosed depression located on Tract B. Dominant emergent vegetation consists of common cattail .(Typha latifolia) and reed canarygrass. The SCS has mapped soils on Tract B as Woodinville silt loam. Woodinville silt loam is listed as hydric by the SCS and is described as a poorly drained soil formed in alluvium and is typically found in stream bottoms. Soils were observed to be low chroma .loarns with mottles. Precipitation and storm runoff are the primary sources of water. Standing water atop of the compacted fill was observed during the field investigation, Wetland 4 This palustrine scrub-shrub and emergent wetland is located on Tract B within the historic Black River channel, Dominant shrub vegetation consists of red alder saplings, willow saplings, and salnlonberry (Rubies spectabilis); red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), Oregon ash (Fraxintus latifolia), and red-osier dogwood occur occasionally. Dominant emergent vegetation consists of common cattail,purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria),small- FIRST CITY WA 10/31/01 fruited bulrush (Schpus microcarpus), reed canarygrass, and soft rush, A small forested area dominated by black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) and red alder occurs in the northeastern portion of the wetland. This wetland is located in a depression at an elevation approximately 15 feet below surrounding the upland fill areas on Tract B. Soils within the wetland were observed to be black mucks to a depth of 3 feet. Standing water or surface soil saturation was observed throughout the wetland area. A. 4- to 5-foot diameter concrete culvert placed in an approximately 50-foot-wide fill berm divides the wetland into northern and southern portions. The culvert invert elevation is higher than the wetland elevation; water flowing through the culvert is most likely only during high storm events. The primary source of water within this wetland is high groundwater levels. Water flows north from this wetland to a small channel which connects to the F-1 storage pond, Wetland Functional Values To create a wetland to compensate for one that is being disturbed, it is important to understand the existing functional values so that these functions can be considered in the replacement wetland. It is, however, extremely difficult to quantify wetland functional values. Methodologies developed to quantify wetland functions and values are usually not appropriate for small, relatively urban, or disturbed settings. For these reasons, this discussion is highly subjective. Eleven functions are identified by the Federal Highway Administration's Wetland Functional Assessment Method (Adamus 1983). Relative values of each function at Tracts A and B are briefly discussed in this section. Groundwater Recharge Certain wetlands can contribute significantly to recharging regional groundwater. The majority of hydrologists believe, however, that most wetlands do not perform this function (Sather and Smith 1984). The value of a particular wetland for groundwater recharge is . probably related to the edge to volume ratio of the wetland (Erwin 1990). Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 are small, enclosed depressions which are primarily fed by precipitation. Groundwater recharge is not expected to be a functional value of these wetlands. Some groundwater recharge may occur in Wetland 4. Groundwater Discharge Wetlands can be valuable as groundwater discharge sites because they can help to maintain stream flow during dry portions of the year. Because Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 are FIRST CJTY WA 10/31'91 5 primarily perched surface water wetlands that do not assist in maintaining streamflow, groundwater discharge is not an important function. However, Wetland 4 is an important discharge site due to its location in the historic Black River channel and its connection to a drainage channel that flows into the P-1 pond. Flood Storage By storing stormwater, wetlands can serve to reduce runoff peaks into slower discharges of longer duration. The flood storage value of a wetland varies with a number of factors, including topography, soils, surrounding land uses, and the type and amount of vegetation that is present. All of the wetlands on Tracts A and B occur in depressional area Flood storage values are significantly greater in Wetland 4 due to the large size of the system, association with other systems, and its location within the historic Black River channel; Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 provide some flood storage values, however, this is limited by the small size of these wetlands. Shoreline Anchoring This functional value is not applicable to the Black River Corporate Park project. Sediment Trapping Wetlands serve to purify water by removing sediments, excess nutrients, and toxic chemicals through a variety of mechanical,chemical, and biological processes, This function is particularly important when a wetland discharges into a watercourse. Wetland 4 provides significant water purification due to the dense emergent and shrub vegetation, slow movement of water, connection to a drainage channel which flows into the P-1 pond, and its large size. Wetland 3 is densely vegetated with emergent species which provide some water purification; however, the enclosed nature of this wetland limits this function. Wetlands 1 and 2 are limited by their small size and lack of connection with other systems. FIRST CITY WA 1O/31/91 6 Food Chain support Wetlands can be highly productive ecosystems that are used by numerous species for nesting, spawning, rearing, and feeding. Primary productivity is usually high in wetlands and is generally highest in emergent wetlands that contain water year-round, because they support fast-growing species. Wetland 4 contains a mix of emergent and scrub-shrub community types. The year- round presence of standing water in some portions of the wetland and the variety of emergent species present augment food chain support functions. Water is present seasonally in Wetlands 1, 2, and 3, which are small isolated systems that are not expected to provide significant food chain support. Wildlife Habitat A number of species are dependent upon wetlands for all or part of their life cycles. The wildlife habitat value of a wetland is dependent in part on its structural and species diversity of plant communities, the proximity of desirable upland habitat, and surrounding land uses. Wetlands 3 and 4 are surrounded by dense Himalayan blackberry (Rebus discolor). This offers protection from human intrusion. Passerine and prey species utilize the dense vegetation of Wetland 4 and open water present in Wetland 3 as cover, nesting, and feeding habitat, Additionally,the adjacent stream channel and riparian forest augment the excellent wetland habitat provided. A heron rookery has been observed north of the wetland area. Wetlands 1 and 2 may provide habitat for passerines when. standing water is present. However, the small size of these wetlands limits the wildlife habitat value. Active Recreation, Passive Recreation, Heritage, and. Education Wetlands can provide valuable opportunities for recreation and education, such as bird watching or studying a natural system. Wetlands 3 and 4 are not currently used for recreation or education due to the surrounding dense Himalayan blackberry which prevents human intrusion. Wetlands 1 and 2 are not used either, due to their disturbed nature and the absence of formalized opportunities for education or recreation, • Fishery Habitat This functional value is not applicable to the Black River Corporate Park project. FIRST CITY WA 10/31/4t 7 IMPACTS TO WETLANDS First City Washington proposes to develop the Black River Corporate,Park offices at this site. Facilities to be developed on Tract B include three office buildings and one parking garage.This construction would require placement of fill in approximately 0.14 acre of wetland. Placement of fill would occur in emergent Wetlands 2 and 3, as well as in scrub-shrub and emergent Wetland 1. The two emergent wetlands that would be filled are currently dominated by common cattail, soft rush, and reed canarygrass. The scrub-shrub and emergent wetland that would be filled is dominated by willow saplings, shrubs, and herbaceous species such as soft rush, orchard grass, and reed cannarygrass. The City of Renton will require an average 50-foot buffer with a 25 foot minimum, buffer. Mitigation Proposal Mitigation includes avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for adverse wetland impacts. According to the 1990 State of Washington Department of Ecology Model Wetlands Protection Ordinance, mitigation consists of the following steps, listed in order of preference: • avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; • minimizing the impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technologu, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; • rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; ® reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance of operations during the life of the action; • compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; or • monitoring the impact and the compensation project and taking appropriate corrective measures. The degree to which this mitigation plan adheres to this list is demonstrated in part by the project history. Initial site plans included filling all of the onsite wetlands and developing the entire property. The recognized value of the historic Black River channel FrIllSr CRY WA 100101 8 • wetland prompted the project applicant to redesign the site plan layout to preserve this wetland. In addition, impacts to this wetland were further reduced through the implementation of wet ponds for detention and biofiltratian swales to improve the quality of stormwater runoff from the property by the development. • The wetlands proposed to be filled were selected due to past grading activities and limited functional values. The proposed creation of additional wetland through mitigation involves restoring historic wetland. Environmental Goals The specific goals of the mitigation proposal are: • • • e to compensate for 0.14 acre of fill in wetlands 1, 2, and 3, by creating 0.21 acre . of wetland contiguous with.Wetland 4 on Tract B; e to improve the structural and vegetative diversity in the wetland; • to improve the water flow within Wetland 4 and allow establishment of new wetland; e to provide an average 50-foot buffer with a 25 foot minimum; and o to avoid impacts to the upland forested areas during construction. Plan Overview Two areas are proposed for mitigation; both of these areas are contiguous with Wetland 4 and consist of filled portions of the historic Black River channel (Figure 3 at end of report). Each area will be prepared by clearing existing vegetation and over-excavating soils to a depth of 2 feet so the finished grade is level with the existing wetland. Topsoil will be imported and placed in the mitigation area to provide a suitable planting medium and to achieve desired finished grades. Following the preparation of soils, each area will be planted with native wetland vegetation. In addition, wetland buffers will be planted with shrubs and trees to provide additional protection to the wetland. After approval by all parties, detailed construction drawings will be developed by a landscape architect from Jones & Stokes Associates, who will work in close coordination with a wetland biologist and the project engineer. Existing Condition of Mitigation Areas Mitigation area 1 is a 50-foot-wide band of fill that has been previously placed across Wetland 4 (Figure 3). The fill currently supports an upland forest and shrub area FIRST CITY WA • 10/31/91 9 dominated by black cottonwood, red alder and Himalayan blackberry with salmonberry and red elderberry commonly occurring. Mitigation Area 2 occurs along the southeastern wetland edge (Figure 3) in an upland forest and shrub area. Red alder, black cottonwood, and Himalayan blackberry are the dominant vegetation; evergreen blackberry (Rebus laciniarus) occurs occasionally throughout this area. Fill was observed throughout Mitigation Area 2. Detailed Work Plan Topography and Grading. To achieve elevations which would match those of the surrounding wetland, fill would need to be removed. In Mitigation Area 1, the fill and culvert would be removed by an excavator working from the upland areas at the west side of the mitigation site. Prior to the start of work, erosion measures would be in place to ensure that the fill removal would not allow soil to move into the wetland. The area would be over-excavated by approximately 2 feet to allow for soil rebound and the placement of about 18 inches of topsoil. This topsoil will be compacted to 85% proctor density. Side slopes between the upland and newly created wetland areas would match the surrounding In Mitigation Area 2, soil would be excavated by equipment working from the east side of the existing wetland. The site would be over-excavated by about 18 inches to allow placement of topsoil. This area will be slightly higher than Mitigation Area 1 to promote growth of species adapted to less saturated conditions. Side slopes between the upland and created wetland will be no steeper than 3:1. Hydrology. Hydrology has been called the "single most important factor to consider in designing and implementing restoration/creation projects for specific types of wetland systems and their related functions,'" (Erwin 1990). The premise of the mitigation project is that the greatest opportunity to achieve the proper hydrologic regime is to locate areas that once functioned as wetland, but have since been filled. If the fill is removed and a suitable planting medium is established, the original hydrologic conditions will promote the growth of wetland plants. The source of water for both mitigation areas will be the high groundwater levels which exist in the surrounding wetland. Removal of the culvert and associated fill will reestablish the direct surface water connection once present between the northern and southern portions of the historic Black River channel. Soils. All imported topsoils will be compacted as called out in the Topography and Grading section for Mitigation Areas 1 and 2. Soil compaction and grading will be such that proper planting conditions will be achieved. Vegetation. Mitigation Area 1 will be planted with emergent species tolerant of water regimes ranging from standing water during the nongrowing season and early growing season, to dry conditions by late summer. After grading, the area will be hydroseeded with a mix containing meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis), F1R6T cny w. 10/31/91 10 red fescue (Festuca rubra), and marsh speedwell (Veronica scuteliata) (Table 1). This area will be planted with a mixture of emergent species and a few shrubs. Emergent species to be planted include soft rush, common water plantain (A1ism a plantago-aquatica), slough sedge (Carex obnupta), small-fruited bulrush, and hardstem bulrush (Scirpus acutus) (Table 1). The outer edge of Mitigation Area 1 will be planted with a few red-osier dogwood and salmonberry. Shrubs will add an element of structural diversity to this area, which will increase opportunities for wildlife. The black cottonwood and red alder that presently occur in Wetland 4 are expected to provide an adequate seed source for re- establishment of these species. A wetland scrub-shrub community will be planted in Mitigation Area 2, The goal of creating scrub-shrub habitat is to increase habitat diversity in the wetland. Species to be planted include salmonberry, red-osier dogwood, and willow(Table 1). A few Oregon.Ash trees will also be planted in this area. Mitigation Area 2 will also,be hydroseeded prior to planting; hydroseed will help stabilize soils during the period before trees and shrubs become established. All plant species used in the mitigation areas will be acquired from commercial suppliers in the Pacific Northwest. region. This region is defined as Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, if any of the species mentioned in this plan are not available at the time of construction, substitutions will be recommended by the wetland biologist. Limiting the plan to commercially available species prevents the practice of collecting from existing wetland sites. Limiting the procurement area to the Pacific Northwest should help ensure that species used are adapted to this region. Post-Construction Functional Values of Wetlands. The following is a discussion of the expected functional values of the wetlands after construction of the project, as well as mitigation areas. Post-construction functional values for Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 will be permanently lost due to the proposed placement of fill. Post-construction functional values for Wetland 4 will be affected by the proposed creation of two mitigation areas contiguous with Wetland 4. The creation of two mitigation areas contiguous with Wetland 4 increases wetland size, community diversity, and provides surface water connection between the northern and southern portions of Wetland 4 (Figure 3). These factors augment flood storage, sediment trapping, and food chain support. The mitigation areas will be approximately 0.21 acre larger than the existing Wetland 4 acreage;therefore,the flood storage capacity will increase proportionally. There may be an initial reduction in food chain support and sediment trapping values until vegetation in the mitigation area becomes established. However, because the total wetland area will be slightly larger after mitigation, functional values should eventually increase proportionally to the increase in size and planting with faster growing emergent species. Several functional values are not intended to be goals of the mitigation areas. Post- construction groundwater discharge and groundwater recharge values are expected to be similar to existing functional values, Shoreline anchoring and fishery habitat functional FSRat CrtY wA 10/31/91 11 Table 1. Planting List for Black River Corporation Park Mitigation and Buffer Areas Mitigation Mitigation Buffer Area No. 1 Area No. 2 Area Trees Oregon ash (Fraxinus tatifolia) X Big-leaf maple (Acer tnacrophyllunz) X western red cedar (Thuja plicata) _ . X Shrubs red-osier dogwood (Corms stolortifera) X X salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) X X willow (Salix spp.) X vine maple (Acer circinatum) X hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) X Douglas' hawthorn (Crataegus douglasii) X salal (Gaultheria shallop) X. Herbs soft rush (Juncus effusus) X common water plantain (Alisma piantago- X aquatica) slough sedge (Cares obnupta)• X small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpur) X hardstem bulrush (Scirpus acutus) X Hydroseed Mix meadow foxtail (Alopecuras pratensis) X X colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis) X X red fescue (Festuca rubra) X X marsh speedwell (Veronica sutellata) X X FIRST CITY WA 10/31/91 12 Attachment A • • ATTACHMENT A Wetland Report This report presents the results of a wetland evaluation conducted at your request by Jones & Stokes Associates on March 25, 1991. The site, which is located north of the junction of Oaksdale Avenue Southwest and Southwest Seventh Street in the City of Renton in Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East of King County, Washington (Figure 1). Based on this investigation, four wetlands were determined to be present. • Methodology Wetlands at the site were delineated using the methodology outlined in the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation 1989). This document represents an interagency effort whereby the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS),U.S.Soil Conservation Service(SCS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) present a unified approach to wetland delineation. This approach requires examination of three wetland parameters: soils, hydrology, and vegetation. For an area to be considered wetland, a positive indicator for all three of these parameters must be present. Each parameter is discussed further in the following paragraphs. Hydric (wetland) soils are defined as those soils which are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic(wetland)vegetation. Hydric indicators include low soil chroma, mottles, gleying, and high organic content. During the field investigation, soils were sampled with a hand-held soil auger and examined for hydric indicators. Areas possessing wetland hydrology are inundated either permanently or periodically, or the soil is saturated to within 1 foot of the surface for a week or more during the growing season. The site was examined for indicators of wetland hydrology, including ponding, soil •saturation,water-stained leaves, and cracking at the soil surface. In areas where no positive indicators of wetland hydrology were observed but positive wetland indicators were present for soils and vegetation, wetland hydrology was assumed to be present. Hydrophytic plants are those plants that grow in water or in a substrate that is at least periodically saturated. Commonly occurring plant species have been rated by the USFWS as to their frequency of occurrence in wetlands. The rating system uses a range from obligate upland (plants that occur in wetlands less than 1% of the time) to facultative (those occurring 33% to 66% of the time) to obligate wetland (those occurring more than 99% of the time). For an area to be considered a wetland vegetative community, 50% or more of the dominant species in that area must be rated as facultative or wetter. Vegetation throughout the site was examined and data regarding vegetation, soils, and hydrology were recorded on data forms that are included with this report. 1 Earlinglon GoII Course • SW 71h St. • • • •••,1 SITE TUKWILA • soollte_. "ler sz siv11 0' RENTON • .• Longacres Race Track 157 -33 < , CD -••• 0 .5 1 MILES • Figure 1 . Vicinity Map 2 Wetlands were identified onsite with orange and black striped flagging affixed to vegetation at a height of 4 to 6 feet at 20- to 50-foot intervals. It is understood that the flagged wetland edge will be professionally surveyed. • • Site Conditions The subject property is divided into two parcels designated Tract A and Tract B. Tract A is a parcel of 12.71 acres west of Tract B, which is a parcel of 15.7 acres situated in the City of Renton, King County, Washington. Springbrook Creek divides Tracts A and B. The property is bordered by Naches Avenue Southwest and Southwest Seventh Street to the east, King County.Pump Station to the west, and Oaksdale Avenue Southwest to the south. Riparian forest and a pump station pond (P-1 pond) borders the property to the north. The topography of the project site is generally flat. Portions of both parcels were previously filled and graded in 1984, 1987, and 1988. The majority of Tract A is upland and primarily vegetated with herbaceous species. Diverse upland and wetland vegetative communities typify Tract B. Wetlands Four wetlands were identified on the subject property (Figure 2). Based on the USFWS Classification scheme (Cowardin et al. 1979), wetland habitat at the site would be classified as palustrine forest, palustrine scrub-shrub,and,emergent. These wetlands were. • not identified during the King County (1981) 'wetland inventory. Vegetation, soils, and hydrology of the wetland areas are described in the following sections. Soils on Tract A have been mapped by the SCS as Puyallup fine sandy loam and Tract B has been mapped as Woodinville silt loam. Puyallup fine sandy loam is not listed as hydric by the SCS and is described as a well'drained soil formed in alluvium, typically found in valley bottoms. Woodinville silt loam is described as a poorly drained soil formed in alluvium, typically found in stream bottoms and is listed by the SCS as hydric. As noted • above, the majority of both sites have been filled. Wetland,1. This wetland occurs as an enclosed depression south centrally located on Tract A. A mixture of palustrine scrub-shrub and emergent communities typify this wetland. The wetland has resulted from surface water collecting in a depression resulting from past grading. The shrub portion of this wetland is dominated by willow saplings (Salix spp.); red alder saplings (Alnus rubra) and red-osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera) occasionally appear. Soft rush (Juncus effusus), orchard grass (Dactylic glomerata), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris - arundinaceae) dominate the herbaceous layer in this wetland. 3 • 4111 e • . , 10111111Pp P-1 PUMP PLANT _ iii.. P-1 POND'-�� O3f NORTH r , _ • Za1.1Acre/ ; WetlandAPPROX.400' mMonster Road 1 % yt a (To be retained) �� S.W.Seventh St. Legend0.04 Acre0.1 Acre Oaksdale Ave S.W. 5 Wetland VA Project Area Wetlands (To be filled) Wetlands ftotal) To be filled) . Tract A and B Boundaries METRO Figure 2. Wetlands on Tracts A and B and Adjacent Areas Soils in this wetland were observed to be low chroma silty fine sands (10YR3/1 and 10YR 5/1) with orange mottles (7.5YR 4/6). The soil most likely consists of fill excavated from the adjacent P-1 storage pond. The fill has been graded flat and tightly compacted. Approximately 4 to 6 inches of standing water was observed in this wetland at the time of the field investigation. Approximately 1 to 2 inches of water flows east in a poorly defined ditch and enters the wetland along the western wetland edge. Precipitation unable to infiltrate the compacted fill soils is the primary source of water. Wetland 2. This palustrine emergent wetland is located along the eastern edge of Tract A. Wetland 2 is an enclosed depression bordered by an embankment along the eastern edge. Similar to Wetland 1, this wetland formed as the.result of precipitation collecting in a depression caused by the uneven grading of fill soils. Soft rush is the dominant emergent vegetation throughout this wetland. Vegetation in this wetland is sparse and lacks diversity. Soils in this wetland were observed to be low chroma silty sands (10YR 3/2) with light brown mottles (10YR 3/3). Approximately 4 inches of standing water was observed at the time of field investigation. Precipitation is the primary source of water in Wetland 2. Wetland 3. This wetland is an enclosed depression, south centrally located on Tract B. Palustrine scrub-shrub and emergent vegetative communities typify this wetland. Dominant shrub vegetation 'consists of, willow saplings. Reed canarygrass and common cattail(Typha latifolia) dominate the emergent vegetative layer within this wetland; soft rush occurs occasionally. . Soils in this wetland were observed to be low chroma loams.(10YR 3/2)with mottles. Approximately 1 to 2 inches of water was observed in this wetland at the time of field investigation. Standing water is primarily due to storm run-off and precipitation. Wetland 4. This wetland is a drainage swale located within the historic Black River channel along the northern and eastern property edge of Tract B. The wetland is approximately 15 feet below the elevation of the surrounding fill and forest. Wetland 4 supports diverse palustrine scrub-shrub and palustrine emergent vegetative communities. Dominant shrub vegetation in the southeastern portion of this wetland consists of willow saplings, red alder saplings, and salmonberry (Rebus spectabilis). Salmonberry • continues to dominate the shrub community throughout this wetland. Red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia), and red osier dogwood occur occasionally throughout the wetland. A small canopy layer is established within the northeastern portion of the wetland and is dominated by black cottonwood (Populus 5 trichocarpa) and red alder. Common cattail, small-fruited bulrush (Scirpus microcarpus), purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), soft rush, and reed canarygrass are the dominant emergent vegetation throughout the wetland. Soils within this wetland were observed to be native black mucks to depths over 3 feet with a color of 10YR 2/0 and no mottles. Approximately 6 to 12 inches of standing water was observed throughout the majority of the wetland at the time of the field investigation. Surface saturation was observed in areas lacking inundation. The water source for this wetland appears to be high groundwater levels. Water in the wetland flows slowly north to a small channel which connects to the P-1 storage pond. Wetland Functional Values Wetlands are considered to be valuable resources due to their functions in water pollution control, flood control, wildlife habitat, and as aesthetically pleasing open spaces. Wetlands identified on Tract B of this site serve to provide many of these functions; the- Tract A wetland provides minimal functions. Wetlands serve to purify water by removing sediments, excess nutrients, and toxic . chemicals through a variety of mechanical, chemical, and biological processes. Wetland 4, on Tract B, has excellent biofiltration potential due to the dense vegetation, diversity of vegetation, the large size of the wetland system, and its connection with a drainage channel that flows into the P-1 storage pond. The lack of a distinct water. inlet to the wetland, however, limits the actual biofiltration function of the wetland.:. • Wetland 3 is also densely vegetated with a variety of emergent species and has some biofiltration qualities. The lack of a surface water inlet and outlet, however, severely limits: the hydrologic functions of the wetland. Although Wetlands 1 and 2 of Tract A are vegetated primarily with emergent species, their small size and lack of association with other systems significantly limits potential biofiltration. The wildlife habitat value of a wetland is dependent in part on the structural and • species diversity of plant communities, the proximity of desirable upland habitat, and surrounding land uses. The diversity of the vegetative communities of Wetland 4 provide excellent habitat for passerine and prey species. The proximity of Wetland 3 to Wetland 4, in addition to the diverse emergent vegetation and presence of open water, also provides moderate to excellent wildlife habitat. Furthermore, the adjacent riparian forest, stream channel, and heron colony, as well as protection from human intrusion by surrounding dense blackberry, greatly enhance the wildlife habitat these wetlands provide. Passerines may utilize Wetlands 1 and 2 when standing water is present; however, the small size of these wetlands greatly limits habitat for wildlife. 6 • The flood storage value of a wetland varies with a number of factors, including topography, soils, surrounding land uses, and the type and associations with other aquatic systems.. Flood storage values are significant for Wetland 4 due to the large size, association with other systems, and its location within the historic Black River channel. The proximity of Wetland 3 to Wetland 4 and the depressional topography enhance the Wetland 4 flood storage value. Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 provide some storage values due to their depressional topography, but are limited by their size. Impacts Development of the property would result in filling the two wetlands on Tract A (Wetlands 1 and 2) and the filling of Wetland 3 on Tract B (Figure 2). This would result in the loss of 0.14 acres of wetland. Grade at the location of the wetlands will be raised approximately 2 feet, resulting in the placement of approximately 450 cubic yards of fill in the wetlands. No filling of Wetland 4, the remnant of the Black River channel, is proposed. A buffer averaging 50 feet in width will be maintained around this wetland system. Conclusions Evaluation of this site using the Unified Federal Methodology shows that four wetlands are present; two within Tract A and two within Tract B. All four wetlands identified would be classified as palustrine emergent; Wetlands 1, 3, and 4 also include palustrine scrub-shrub vegetative communities. Wetland 4 provides substantial functions and values. The Washington Department of Ecology Model Wetland Ordinance categorizes wetlands into four classes, with Category 1 wetlands being the most unique. Based on this system, Wetlands 1, 2, and 3 would be rated Category 3 or 4, while Wetland 4 would be rated Category 1 or 2. Citations • Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LeRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Publication. FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal manual for identifying and delineating jurisdictional wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC. Cooperative technical publication. King County. 1981. King County wetland inventory. 7 JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins Date: 3/25/91 County/City: King County Wetland #: Plant Community: PSS/PEM Plot #: 1 weather: avercast VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Saliz spp. sapling, FAC-OBL, shrub 2. Phalaris arundinacea, FACW, herbaceous . 3. Juncus effusus, FACW-F. herbaceous 4. • 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? yes Rationale: All dominant spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam SCS hydric list? yes Is the observed soil a Histosol? no Depth Matrix Mottle Glev Texture 10" 10YR 5/1 7.5YR 4/6 no silty fine sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: chroma Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY • Is the area inundated? yes Depth of water: 6" Is the soil saturated? yes Depth to water: surface Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? yes Rationale: saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the sample plot a wetland? ye• Comments: JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Black River Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 Wetland #: upland Plant Community: herbaceous upland Plot#: adjacent to wetland weather: overcast VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Agrostis spp., FAC-FACW, herbaceous 2 Dactylis glomerate, FACU, herbaceous 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 50% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? yes • Rationale: . 50% of spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? n o SCS hydric list? yes Depth Matrix 10" . lOYR 3�3 Mottle Glev �� Texture yes no silty fine sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? no Rationale: lack of chroma Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? no Is the soil saturated? no Depth of water: Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation epth to water: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? no Rationale: lack of saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE is the sample plot a wetland? no t omments: _-JJONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland • Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 Plant Community: PSS/PEM Wetland #: I Weather: nver Plot #: 2 cast VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Salix spp. sapling, FAC-OBL, shrub 2. Phalaris arundinacea, FACW. herbaceous 3. Juncus effusus, FACW+, herbaceous 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 1 00% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? yes Rationale: All dominant spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? n o SCS hydric list? yes 1 -oil t 0-9" • lOYR 3/2 yes no Gley, Te tune no fine sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: mottles Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? yes Is the soil saturated? yes Depth of water: 4" Depth Other .field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturrat onto water: surface Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? yes Rationale: saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL. DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the sample plot a Wetland? yes Comments: Otte; spp. include Ranunculus repent. • JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site Wetland Field Investigator(s): Den County/Cit • man/Edwins Y• King County Date: 3/25/91 2 Plant Community: PEM Wetland #: Weather: overcast Plot #: 1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Iuncus effusus, FACW+, herbaceous 1- • 4. 5. • 6 4 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? sand/or FAG: Rationale: 100% All dominant s yes pp. are FAC or wetter. y SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? no SCS hydric list? yes D�oth 0-8" a t 1 OYR 3/2 t l 1 e 1OYR 3/3 v t exure no silty sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: mottles Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? yes Is the soil saturated? yes Depth of water: 4 DeptOther field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:to water: Is the wetland surface hydrology criterion met? yes Rationale: saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the sample plot a wetland? yes '•ommentc: JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 WPlant Community: herbaceous upland Plot and #: upland Weather: overcast #: adjacent to »etla VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Agrostis spp., FAC-FACW, herbaceous 2. Plantago lanceolata, FACU+, herbaceous 3. • 4. 5. 6. ?. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 50% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? yes Rationale: 550%of spp. are FAC or wetter. • SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a. Histosoi? n o SCS hydric list? yes eDth MatrixM-01 t 10" 10YR 3/2 noGlev exture no gravelly sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? no Rationale: lack of mottles Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? no Is the soil saturated? no Depth of water: Depth Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:to water: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? no Rationale: lack of saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE:. Is the sample plot a wetland? no Comments: • JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW - Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 Plant Community: PSS/PEN1 Wetland #: 3 Weather: overcast Plot #: 1 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Saliz spp. sapling, FAC-OBL, shrub 2. Phalaris arundinacea, FACW, herbaceous 3. Typha latifolia, OBL, herbaceous 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? yes Rationale: All dominant spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed. soil a Histosol? n° SCS hydric list? yes e t Matrix 10" M ot tle lOYR 3/2 yes no a tore o loam Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: mottles Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? yes Is the soil saturated? yeS Depth of water: 1_2" Depth Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturraionto water: surface Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? yes Rationale: saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the sample plot a wetland? •,c,: Comments: JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 Plant Community: herbaceous upland Wetland #: upland Weather: overcast Plot#: adjacent to wetland VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Cirsium arvense, FACU+, herbaceous 2. Plantago lanceolate, FACU+, herbaceous 3. • 4. 5. • 6. 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 0% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? n o Rationale: None of the spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? n o SCS hydric list? yes Rum. Matrix 10" 10YR 3/3 no Gi v Texture no gravelly sand Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? no Rationale: Iack of chroma Comments: fill material HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? no Is the soil saturated? no Depth of water: Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:Iepth to water: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? no Rationale: lack of saturation and inundation • JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE is the sample plot a wetland? no om.mentc: , JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s): Denman/Edwins . County/City: King County Date: 3/25/91 Plant Community: PSS/PEM Wetland #: 4 Weather: overcast Plot #: VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Saliz spp. sapling, FAC-OBL, shrub 2. Phalaris arundinacea, FACW, herbaceous 3. Typha Iatifolia, OBL, herbaceous " 4. Juncus effuses, FACW+, herbaceous • S. 6. 4 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBI; AC Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? a and/or FAC: 100% Rationale: All dominant yes Spp. are FAC or wetter. ' SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? SCS hydric list? yes epth Matrta n o D 10" lOYR 2✓0 ottle le no no Texture • no "muck" Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: chroma Comments: HYDROLOGY • Is the area Inundated? no Is the soil saturated? yes Depth of water: Other field evidence of surface inundation or Depth to water: Is the wetland hydrologysoil saturation: surface Rationale: criterion met? yes saturation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALI= Is the sample plot a wetland? yes Comments: • i . JONES & WETLAND DELINEATIASSOCIATES - ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOON DATA R Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investigator(s). '-Denman/Ed wins County/City: King County Date: 3 #: Plant Com / /91 y: PFO/pSS Wetland #: .4 ►nunit Weather: overcast Plot #: 2 VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum I. Alnus rubra, FAC, canopy 2. Populus trichocarpa, FAC, canopy 3. Rubus spectabiIis, FAC, shrub , " 4. 5. 6. 4 7 8. 9. Percent of dominant • Is the h d species that are OBL, FACW, and/or F y rophytic vegetation criterion met? AC: 100%Rationale: All dominant yes sPP• aze FAC or wetter. 4 SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? n o SCS hydric list? yes at 10" r;K tt 1UYR 2�0 � no no . no "muck" Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? yes Rationale: chroma Comments: HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? yes Is the soil saturated? yes Depth of water: 6" Other field evidence Depth to water. of surface inundation or soil saturation: surface Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? yes Rationale: saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE Is the sample plot a wetland? yes Comments: Other spp. include: SAsrn.. SAR.A. RILA. and PAAR. - JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES WETLAND DELINEATION DATA FORM ROUTINE ONSITE DETERMINATION FOR Client: FCW Project/Site: Wetland Field Investiaator(s): Denman/Edwins 91 County/City: King County • Date: 3/Wetland #: u u Plant' Community: upland shrubpland Weather: Plot#: adjacent to wetland 1 C3St VEGETATION Dominant Plant Species, Indicator Status, Stratum 1. Rubus discolor. FACU-, shrub 3.4n 5. 6. • 7. 8. 9. Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 0% Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? no Rationale: None of the spp. are FAC or wetter. SOILS SCS Series/Phase Woodinville silt loam Is the observed soil a Histosol? n o SCS hydric list? yes Death agirix Maw 10" 10YR 3/3 n o g le Texture no loam Other hydric soil indicators: Is the hydric soil criterion met? no Rationale: lack of chroma Comments: HYDROLOGY Is the area inundated? no Is the soil saturated? no Depth of water: Other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation epth to water: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? no Rationale: lack of saturation and inundation JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION AND RATIONALE • Is the sample plot a wetland? no Comments: CITY _ F RENTON -b `' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator September 4, 1991 Dean Erickson First City Washington, Inc. 700 Fifth Ave, #6000 Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Mr. Erickson: Enclosed is the latest heron report from Jones & Stokes, Inc. As I mentioned in the previous correspondence with you, I requested Jones & Stokes to stop monitoring efforts as of July 18, 1991. This report incorrectly states that monthly monitoring will continue from August to December of 1991. This is contrary to my earlier instruction to Jones & Stokes. I will reconfirm with them the ending of the monitoring. You are in receipt of the billings for these efforts. Please call me at 235-2719 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Mary Lynne Myer Principal Planner cc: Don Erickson Pat Prewitt Jon Ives, Jones &Stokes, Inc. Jeff Bergland, Jones&Stokes, Inc. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON AUG 3 01991 •. RECEIVED • JONES& STOKES ASSOCIATES. INC./2820 NORTHUP WAY, SUITE 100/BELLEVUE, WA 98004 206/822-1077 FAX 206/822-1079 DA 1"E: July 18, 1991 TO: Mary Lynne Meyer, City of Renton, Long-Range Planning FROM: Jon Ives 0.0 Jeff Berg! n d SUBJECT': Status of Black River Great Blue Heron Colony as of July 9, 1991 This memorandum presents-the results of the continued monitoring to assess the 1991 nesting status.of..the-.Black River heron colony_:The July 9,1991:survey was conducted as part of an ongoing monitorinee-ffortaiiitiated,subsequenttonurnerous bald eagle attacks on -the colony during the earlystages-:of:the..1991..nesting,.season_ Similar surveys were conducted at the colony in May and:June 1991:..Results.of al11991.surveys are summarized in Table 1. :. Methodology A 3-1/2 hour field survey was conducted on July 9, 1991. Survey methods were - similar to those employed during the May and June surveys.and included monitoring the colony from observation points on Tract A and on the north side of the riparian grove, as well as surveying the nest structures within the riparian grove on foot while watching for additional nest structures and evidence of active nesting_ Results Great blue herons were observed on three occasions during the survey. One heron was seen flying north over the Boeing office buildings east of the site, one was seen landing and perching in a snag along the P-1 Pond, and one was observed landing and foraging in the P-1 Pond. Each of the herons were adults, and none of the herons were observed simultaneously. Renton.First Ciry 7 Final EIS July 18.1991 Mary Lynne Meyer July 18, 1991 Page 2 As observed during the previous surveys, nests in the main colony and in the adjacent riparian forest were vacant_ No signs of active nesting, such as recent whitewash, egg shell fragments, or begging calls of young, were detected. No additional nest structures were observed during the survey; however, it was discovered that one of the nest trees identified in Figure 1 of the June 21, 1991 memo was mapped incorrectly. The nest tree, which is located immediately north of the main colony, is correctly mapped in Figure 1 of this report. • Conclusions June and July surveys of the colony and adjacent riparian forest revealed no active great:blueheron:nests•or..evidence of nesting activity. Thus, it is lamely that 1991 nesting atte liimtimthese..areas>have‘been abandoned. A small number of herons are apparently contimting..to forageinkthe.,P-1.Pond Asmentioned:n theJune 21;.1991 memo,apparent abandonment of the:199Lnesting -- effort...'at he colony do.esi<not necessarily imply that herons will not nest at the colony-in the: flit tth Monito ' ' .:Wsubsequent nesting seasons would be necessary to accurately: assess he*:status:oE1he Black River colony. Monthly monitoring surveys will continue:from Augusttbrolig •December of this year to confirm findings to date. .. . _• • Renton_Fins City 7 Fula!EIS • July 18 1591 • Table 1. Summary of 1991 Survey Results -- Black River Great Blue Heron Colony Survey Date # of Nest # of Nest • Comments Trees Structures 2-2-91 4 29 Severn hero .sobseived in•maiii colony and in P-1 Pond. Pair formation and net ferise not vet underway. • 4-6-91 6 38 First :s rvey.follo,;;,•;,g report .of bald eagle attack. Only 7 of the 38 nests had ac Y.. g e'lrc�.ba off.: Remainin 31 nests were either under const`i:ction or"liad adults standing on or near the structures. 4-14-91 6 38 Leaf cover complete;:observations of nests difficult. Eleven nests observed with incubating adults. Status of remaining nests unknown due to leaf cover, High activity in colony suggested colony was active and egg laying/incubation was ongoing. 5-17-91 6 38 No herons observed in main colony or adjacent nest trees. Three adults observed entering and leaving center of riparian forest. No additional herons were observed. 5-20-91 9 41 Three nest trees discovered in center of riparian forest, One heron flushed from one of the newly-discovered nest trees. Nests in main colony and in adjacent nest trees were vacant. No additional herons were observed. 6-18-91 12 45 Three additional nest trees observed in center of riparian forest, No recent signs of nesting activity (eggshell fragments, whitewash, etc.) observed. No herons observed near nest structures. Two adult herons flushed from P-1 Pond. 7-9-91 12 45 Three adult herons observed near P-1 Pond; no herons observed near nest structures. No signs of nesting activity observed. No additional nest structures detected. Renton,Firsi City 7 Final EIS July 15,1991 • • . , . - ••••• • • • ••• ••,,:10,4t::::...:.:'.1. . .' • - .•......,... . ,,,... ...,,K•v• $..•,,,,t. „...„:.:w.t•ikA.:Eitg.,:g....g...0:,:A:(::,p,51,•::::::,,K,..,e,,.'..6..,.P..0 i .. ?'•:::'•:•..'4,4 • :".?-••::::.':...-.....:§,-W••:''!•-v.•'. *. • ...1,4.:.,,,E:.:,:... •.: .0....0..F.gi..,..Ativ.s.• . ,. .e.•. .g ske.mig:•,smogg:Ilint...sosz•W.,•:, ,',1".•:,..i.i..-,i•:•,::• .•ig 3k"• .... ...:::,.:':;'*'''''''' ,.. .:,.. ;:...... ,,:.<:•,11.,:.••: ,......s,,,:,&::::;:::v.p,,,:,:::,• •..3,:,.., • s:,•4.•:::X:mg‘t.:,..:,:v..„...N ... :.e•ef.',,;•-••,,,e•••.',.....:•...5:•.•;.•••••••.4, . •%::'''..:4.%•1?••i,:•..../1. 0..:•:••• •• i" ••..••.•••i'•.;.'Ii.•:V•:::%..it•N•.•:::: ' 'XX.-. 4 %ik•.4:•".4.P*WWW•4% $•./ Ct :,1 1 • . •i r i K ...':',..*: . i:!:'s. •........'',S....,g.•:••...••'• .•:•••*::.;..."•......r:i.', :• %,g1fFt •4•1•.',k!..44sC."41•1•M\k?...A••••}4.0''V...1110. '•• •••f••••••4‘;,.f.••• . , . ,,,:;::.:•.::....:: ... . .....:gi:4,..:e,,,,,t....,:.:...4. .:.:::•••!••• ... :•••..s:. ;:i:::,.:w.::.....4 -,,,,,s,.‘r.•,:k.:.:4*•4::.,•1,:,z,1*.A•s:i:•:'$•:,, 'i,,..A- • ' •': .•:•,;i;:i'?.. .:. . ...,.:....„,........:.... ••• ,..„A•.... v• ...:V..1•••••,... . ......:,,::•.--,:a**•••.•sa.,./44,>,•• ••4•••, :“.:tiV4••,•41•:‘,••:.k.:.:.%S.S'::••••}•%AAA...•• • '. .• Et'•:'' ..W.i)ifa:fr3*::.:iffi,:•;,:i%.,;‘•:•i•••%•i,....,...•••.•• •,,,;...i.:....;:: .....t.:•• • ..:•d.•:%.•j,t,ti.',i4:0::•:•• ,.te'l re•Cji.A:VIse "• •''' •• .f;i:.:ii•I :•:•:; •,A..40,••• fk. ,...::.•••.•:/.•,•,,.::, •:... • ,....vAgg.V4i,ag,k.:**6,Wkiretio`'.'' • ..........:;...40:r.,,„,:.:/..• ..., ....,•,...... 1,.$•,......x.,. ...:v..,.vme*s:4:41,..i ....i.,..:0%•w'•••...634,A,s It'• 4 '%.. . .• ...: .... ...".:it.. • ..„....„••,,,,,,,t,"Et..., .: . : • • : ,:..„,,s. ....,,,,, • . ...,..:„.:,::.~,.0,3..)....,,,,,,,,..,,,,,, ••:.,0,..,...,..•;,..: •,,.,..•,.4... :. ....,.„ „,,..:,. , ... . ...,...:„.,..•.:.:::.,.., :.1..:M:•:•.%;•;:li:4:0,Wk....:••,s4..t.,••-§4.,4% ••••••:: :'N'sy '' 3%.4.1% 1 4f,::.:••..........••:••••i • ; .*i.:!'!';'S/,.Y.S':%i'/I:•. '..•,•• ...• .1•:;;•'•if:.?M•':••••.::i.%%.:.i.n::.•ig'..P.ig!'•'Sq?:VA•tik tiait•?6•..,..1g....ti ..‘,A,\. •'. . i''.*:11,•'• ' t ,•0 1, ,..• :::f....t.• .:':' . . .......a...4..,••?...:)..!,41,,/,•:., ... • •-•:...„.,;•• •.N.::.:::::•.i4,::::;;;i,:t,r0:1W.:•44...::11:::40...U.kxrt.W..k:,s‘:*ks;.\ •''• "' y '‘'' ',$••' %... .;,,:i.z.,..or•..;i*:..,••s-,..-.'...,•••:. ,. '•..:.. .;:?.efe.•••";i.i.•,:oi..,:;:f..,:::*•:::::n.•;,•;:.‘,..;:t•:s.:$1,....'•,:• .,. s':44,.. k• ''.• ' '. ,l•t,p• •,:,••;•.:g. • /....?0•,144...„•::.:.:•:,,,:• . •••'.4:i•::•'.4:01 ::•?:::•::i•.::::::Ig:b• C•A`,,VVV•:.4••'`, Y " t•''s,,•",C;$.4•1>kktii,P,U • .• ':•. % . , ./.41:•,,..::4, •.:•.::..•. •:., ,..;•:,...'„,,,•$(;:EA•X::::•.:••:...:•%:.::::%iP:;:::reee•ey'••••••:'•-••": :. '4,w*.:3&•'•3 '.1,10:' '•'1‘S;‘''•-•••1> %:::::f0'/',,,,:•,.::••••••,..::4 • • ',. .•.••••:4...5.4'....:.:c;i••••••:19:I t:$••:.1:',•4:::).;.•?'••:f• ' ..•• ' .. `-n•. *' `'my-q,,„',k,‘••• •• •••ef !.,?• . ..... .. ::••:•:::'•:::••••• •/'••%" •:•• '.'.'':.:•:•3 Pe'••:f...........s4k::'''' OP41.•1:::f•fa.1054*,‹. .4.,i,'\ .r,.,,.k,•• •"A•kfilkask ioN,At'tck•A Ilk. .. . ....::::•::::;;;Ave•'0 • ..,,.. • •-•i:.,..:4<,.„i)...;4•',...v.••.•sf...-`. .":' 4'.,U;•t?,?-i.%/Y,?I'''PAiels"",?aV•Akr,c,f,§4,* s•itz,..?•: •.,1:. •••• . F.::::::::,::$ • • •-••••-.•:•i.:...::.:i.t. '''''''''''''''''''' ' •i Al q-S.I.t.:Ikt, - ' *•;•',-"P'i.:5: .::...?.(1:i1;',i11.::"..a1•5•,...1.;i•••:••••••:44/iti;4144,gF^M,...,\,e' .'...:••%•-•f:::.;;;I.::•;:;;;.::q.is:40N:,::#*Vff 1„:::••..„ .,11 •s'•'•1 ''';••X".;'>i.f.....'‘..i,•':::-.::;i!.•;k4:',.1.'.•'-r:..i:;:-.................'.$:ET.i;:::-i.i.L.•:.(...;•, . '-' ......''4'it't??N.'••Z't:'..i:'';','%4: ••'$• .'..i . -'"'•- • - • Ve,Y 9'''ii---• ' •,.'• •••:,.:•/..A:: ::::it.g.:::: ::.•::?....,:•::••....?.:•:•••::::•,,:,,.:.0V•k..t...,,a':• •.•:-•.• ::•.••:•:..,.••••:‘,..•::.:, .4...Tr?!. ::••••• . •• t. •• • .,Ais •.• :•-•-::••:•-• .•• • • •:" ..: - - ,„ti,o,f.,froms!...i..?..„...,>• ...•4,*?,„,,,..t.,..::,:;:,.s.:04A0,,,.*. ,T...,;.;...,:„.:„.:......i:::.;A:ez.',...:••11.112,,,...V.1%:.. ::::..• ....4%.4:'i..0:).'IL:iT.:V...4::i.NI.3%::"'.. 14.30,,,,l'%0,..•-,• •,lf:i•••i.sj •.:. '..•,. ..• / :1:•:•:.....A.'4,•%. :•.:;:::::*0. • '. :•i,.4•:1•••••.1..:.•N:••:.":::...4.'...1, 4:'•.:•;::.::% ..:•••:%. 4,.....••••::, ... . 'LP .-,...... l'A•'."*ilsi•::%,,::•:%?.?n.l.s`.,.•`,3Z.,,.. ' •• • ... (..i:4:•••'". •if..A;:ii' ic."';‘...: •.:1':.:gig.ttf.•'•: ,.:1'ft....'."si::...:•%"...::•:.%$•,.•? ••••• ••• .:'•• •Al.:• ..,.;';= .,.,Y.,Y'w•;,,.ves..%3.?',.,q.'?$';•y‘;:, ::•:•- .. ... . .i; :.......................... •s'4.1:..,i':•::;:":iV:N".:, •:::,,.: -,•:::P::.*•.;.•.::•:::;:)..P...c.';'....i',..':".• ,;:srl".f'•-•Nr"71.g.;',..,:•••••;.,.. '.",....;f:•‘/•?;`..,...,:v.stx‘•••.1;:;•,..';,? • •• • ... -.,_ ,,,:.:i.::,•„:. .....;;;K:.::::•:•:::1:•;,...: ••• •:••::i.'•.:??.;:4•:..1•.:• •,•••+ ie.•.t."•:.•::::..:Ii•:?••;..v.••:.$<,':%, .,...,,••• •-..:,. .-. : :•.P"-:•;:.:.:..:,•cs,•..,:..1.•;;.••','J•.,,4,?.,,.... ;•' 14;yy.•0..x.::•:..i;iv..:,...::?:::, :::,.,>.0 v:il.K.:45....::::"...i:k:.s 4.0•:...•::-.% •.,:'.‘.:.1..:...:•:.1•':•:.i,i.:4:,': • •: •- ::-*.•::,:?••:::•••'•.4.....::', 51.:.:'' ':.1,•:•••:.I•:5. .`,•.•,,,•:.;:'f. •• •4.... ; :fAt.ii::::,3(A•s., ::gi:$1;;'li.N::1•PA:',:::':::•?g,:*11 If f'''.:'.•,:t....:•;:,..,•:'.".'•'•.'i:.:•:;.:•.%.:fi?*.: •. ••:. ••••••••••:"'"'::" l•';').?tr'••(••::-.'1 4::••'V.:.:.•:,•-•IF:C4:;•••• . - .••• •• ..• . •:.:•\'?a,,,,FI•:$.:1.•f*.I;I::':i, .4.:>•.$ f*:•••M's0(*ill Ili,•9:-:':f7'.,::•E•?;:.:'.....:.:•••.::::,:::(:' '':.•• ,. . ..;:•,.;;.::•::/I':•:f.'::::1•Pf••:;•••f.:.1. ..S..:•:•%;••••:::;•:•.:'..':,i:• ' . ':•:..... •'.. :.. . •. •'•:•• s.„„‘7.4,.. ,/4f sf":".;:....,..0•::::: ...t,,•.• .;4:,;::••,,, ii:..‘,.g•: ;:.„1:e• .::, ;,, :„:::•:...• ... :. • .. •• '•'::::::::*Ut.'...Y?:••••';',...:,•.::,:::::';':••••if,::';'•..-•'. . . ••••• • •.. • ,i ...... ' '••',....ii,,,/44.;,:0<•&0 .'..g*"t ,:Vi‘..1''' .-" ',',:-;;•:: •"••i••:);•:*.' ' ••• •0 ...• ., . • ,•• • t:.,:', ....'' , ::,..A4:i:••• ••• te,0::*•,1 ••*5.P...:..., 3A•ff.4<, ••'•'•:i:.;:.: .:;••:: •••••;'..*:'• • '. • •• •'• • •, ... . . ..,. ./0 • ." P. i• : ..- ::::.:;.?.i:••••::.••••::•:::::....:•-•::::::•::•ir'f? .',,i•Tf,:•:','••.."."1 1:S.L. ,•: • :•:...:•• • ••••••'••:•••,.....„..i..K..;K:•,:•:!:p.:,,s;,•••...,•;,...t :..;;.::...:.•• ',.....,,•..Fst ••••:.;••,..: ...::•••••.:•:,:.:•:.,••:.•:.?..1•••.';••••, , .:•::'• •-::••••••••'•••••••••.:1*, '::.• • • •:.• .: •:.i.I.g.,.. ...::::,ii':'f:: . ••,.• „. •:,::.,•.:.::::•.:::::::,:i•••$• •-.4. •,••••••• •:•••••:::::: :if:.s• •.•- -••••••••.i.:.:;E::.....:••::11. ;::,•••1...i:••,,,i•1•.•••••.,•••:•;,,,:::•i::,,,,....:::.,•• •••••• , . ••. • . • . $;•;:t•:•!.:1•,:••:::::1•••.:..?.:;:.•:;••;'.•:••• • '•• ••••.....• . ..;4••, ..; • .:li..••.• .'• .•;.•'''''''•••''''''''..... •••''.••••••••'". ... . • • 44!4•A:. ..•••• 0."`K.t'::::',:•:1:•:•04•':f.:4 V 6'11- --4:..'j..:it.4.('.:'.iiAi. " i•;'-- - •:: ..*:.i...:•*f • 2ii•'•'..:Z.:C•cs.J.fi.......*;. • •, •••• : -• :• • •••••i•:)... , • '••••• ..,44.P.••" •• - .•:,..., ‘ .. - _ • -- ----• •wii.,*;••:••••:?‘••p4,::4-.,4,,g. .„-.:r<4-.,-i.,-$•A;;Pi..,.-- .:---,-.--4.•--:::-:::--,Wz .,,":;,i',;,..•,..,t4 -,„:;••-,....-_-,._: ---1:.'•7-:.1-21---_i.,::--: -,4--,, ,,..• --.-1,.,•,-.,.-:'..'!i,---r-,..7-:,-.--- • ... .. --- .:•,?•:-,:o•••..k...,•:*•=:.-1•:••,,-.3,-,--00,..-4,. ..,N.v..1..•-,...,...:::: ...... --.. -.. : .:.:,.;,,,-.:„.:.:.,...:-....,..-..„:..,,,,,,,,,,,-..., -- . ..:: •.-• ..--•.•::•,.i •i.•••.,5 .....i . -.:•••••• • NR.41.$4.eA•,. .1...--eq.:,,x.. ::„.ii?..40,..s.‹.s.4:',:i•-•!:.:.5;r. • 4,11,,k?;:....::•;.›..:4.••••••,/f'f',..Z,1•4•74:k0.40i\OW..•;.;•••'/' •.- .: , .:.,si••••;.•:••,4.7.r.,...•.54.1,,qi?'•ft::.•, • '.: • '..... .:.:•:.44,:• ,::.•••/...,;,••!...:•:•••••:;•:::•,•:P.: A44:::.:ek,,',..„;53.:,5..;•.:,il,:,•,...::.,.„..„,$. ,. :. ....:.1;,...,i..:.:,:f i••••?$:,i.f.'$;,:,;:•;:1,::'.•?..,:,g:.1,-i.:••*.;..:%••?;,•%•fa?•••••:'•;•1•,••'.%•:••:••:•••••.:.•1:••• .• F•;;',...et.t.1.3.:.'.• • • • f.';'.I.,;::••,4• :••••i:::••:::3.•• • •: ' -.+::::,(4,70%010•WO•A .44;%::::lift:•:0:%::••:::: %'%:>‘;'•:••••:'5,•2,•V•••••,.?••:::-.'•11'..,•:")•'%:.:r.:: :•••%•"•.-•:'•:•%. :1*•:.-4.:4•••<•:::•• •(-....4•:••L.,:i•s•••::••• - ffi-,-. • -„, ,,.-:...:i.,:‘,,...)il 4,:..0::•• ....:7.2•.•... ..••• ••• • . -.. ..,/,(•,-• ,/ ;.v.,..e.,/;.,-,,,;•ti:..:••'•••:,, ‘.,..4::•.•,...,,-;....).:-:4•• • ....:•.7:-.•:••• •••:•:•••••••,;•••••-•••••:i;!:.•-c.'- •'• :. •••,-••••••.::-.;•• . v 7.: 05 ."-7",?0,.•.:(s•#'.?;• *A..0,4•15.......:1•,::?•f-7..::•:::).4* ::.•-•. :'... " '....:5:".•';i:.:..:...'.:. 3 '• :0.• '%...i:)•- , '••...."' ••••. • :. ••.4.,•......,„-. A.4:.: $,., •,,,,,i1, ,<4.:„,.,..z.:•• •%.:•;.;•?......e:';:‘•.• ...• . ,'0•..:. .,• •...f.:.i•..:.:f g',;: • .•.•.: .,:•:...........i.l.....,...,:...::".5i,.::".s. ri•:.•:... . ,,..••.:•:.....,••: :i...•••,,,;';z4 •••: •.••:..7.4', d4 ... . . . gil:g4c,•?•:e"::%:•::if:i•::):P.ii:•,'...-1,:::,t"';''S,K*4..4"g•:.1:4:•:•:•:•:.:.:,:•.....4':"1 •A• • - i:'• ' :',. E":i•"•••:•:"E .••:::.EiE;E:EiMpl:•'ik,E4EW,..,.....lith',1:Ek ::::;:... ff:•••itif.:•1,,,:;•:E;?,::;•••.:,- •': % .e. : y:; ::.:..".*, „...E;:s.',.:"% ••• •• -- •••••• • • •- ":• •• • • -.... ..:- • , ::.E.::?,:isEi§Ei:E<:::•::::•:. :•:•;0::•Me% ••••1A4101P.:5..j:'••••:.•••••'•• '.../k'l• - *, ,f.•'f•i....*.":':. .J.::::..'.."*;':i:„'...,:•,.::•:: :'. ' !'.7' •::•:'•'-'..:.f••••• ,:.•,..;; .:••.,•.-.:.•::.::...:. . ..... ••-• " ' ••..• • • ' >-‘ .,...,„:„:„..;:g::44.:t:g":::::::::'::::.:•:•80; ••••4 .ii• ..,i;:-••••• .. , . .. . . • . . C •••••••••:•,,,,,•••,:•..r:•:•:•,:••,0v:,,K0 •.,- ,...,,$: ...:•:::.:.......,':..0..••••::.,,.. .:.f.::::(... ,;:;••••: .::*..:•:,::...„i.::.,: .,.,... .•:: •••••••••• I,/ '•'''•":: •••••: •':•• ••• :: :::::;1•?;::;::•:::::.:::.:•::::i:::.:,..,,:•1::::;+:,,y ::.•••,.,-,....„.,,,,,, 0 ••::4:::::.?.:KV.:eklio•J;.,:,::41.4> •..•4.$4,'•••40',..,••.. • •- -i• e'''';':••••:'::.::.•'••••••i:.::'......':•:.2 *. . . ,, •••:•••i iit:1 •:.. .. :: :.;•:.......,:..5J:•: • ••':':• ..* •:.' s• • - .-- - iti...r.i.Vg.gi•Miigi:%'..f.:A.0,•1 5.4.,•• Y"...f,,,,Sre',%. v,' t;..a‘i... -.......- ,. .':f`4•::! r 1. ::...::..:..: ..: ... ....-,..: ..':t,:. '.if I.''..r11111"e>4 *.•...i.': ..r.;.•..:...:.'--''•...• •-.:.: - .. 0 , „.:...:::f i:,00....iNAii:g..,.i:E •0 ••,..,.'1, 1 ,4t.....:it*icifi. t:',. - ',..;.....!: ‘..„or. .':..:: •T.:.i •:•.:....:* '.:...1 ,. .*f:.i..::,..:..•l•`' 1,7,.zietli* ,•• ::::% •:,.:-...ff'.....t *.•.:*•, ...":.'• •.: ...u.>„?..,:i•i:::iA::s...:•0,,to-t,,,.,•-:„. ,.,.•••'A,,:," •.4. :•, •:• ':1''•,:...; •f' '::•:'.•• 0 .:.:•.:::.:••:*:::.i?,•:::: :::: :14.::rt..:...:(.;.,,14...:,•;f4is „••vi..1 ... 31'.V11-,,.. .:, f•••• " ......':••...-... • •.:•••••••,::::::::. ...........;;:.**E!..•:.:::;:i:::•:'::.:•7••••. 'itg*:••;...:•:,f'•". •. :••':. ' ......•::••:.•::•:•*••••••••..:••.....:;•••!: * • 1 •I:i;i;V:.:i•:ii•?1•N:k;::,i•Wt,,Wsp•W<*i •• ?•A i."•'••'•‘:•1-srir*.'. '1 '••••••***:':':*;.•••'.....:7.: . C :%ii..f..:,..f:41;:M.Ri4rakiAttA.6 tl;ri:i.‹,:i "1:!$ •.,•:0,1-'1,.. ••:,•:•:..•:..."'.•,..„,S, ' ••••,....:;•:•:,:;:;•••,:f •.•:::„p.,";.):•E,:„::•:::::.:.'.. • .:• • ....,. ....::.'••••• .. • .••:::•.•••••:"::::•••••'"•••:•••'' ' .• I?i"O'•:'14g::iii•ii0:41 P4.•-•40:4bi•40, ••",'0•1•:)i:•• 7: l'.., ./•:t . •:. •• *:•:•.i".:•:••:..:..• ••;i:'...• •i:•i•'..;:•:'•.•:.'• :•:.::':•E.-..:.......- •.:..••.•.•,•... '''•••.•:••":':"•' • ....• •" •'.'• • • • . : Q) •.°A.,,,V4rikg:1,:Ofg:tOittik/;%4. .•(444",..,'. i • -•:,:;.-if.".; -..........;:'.• ...."..::::.:?. . .s.:; .. ••:!•:::-•;-:-..,.:41:::.9,::.1,-,i..?.::::.. :,: i.).',.:,.::....-:::-•,...,-:•:„Y.Y.:::'!.."-:i:%.' .-.• . .::.,,i.....:....... ; • - • i .. . . • •• .••• .•••••„ .•••• • .:.:. ,?0•......:,...1.•4::•3::av:.•0(1.1,4r.„..1. ..t.:,••,:?::•;.•:., •t.P.,t•,,'•:, • . •'..:::.;Ei i''...• :•:• •...::•.: ••:'.:::.••*,•:.i:::.::."•:'.:. '••:.,...... •..... .• •:-.......'.... .••::...%:,• ' ::',:*. ,9;':): :,igik:r1W...F.V..:d.,:Witi.fi:i-11:i•,:-...?1E,'!•,. •• •'•'.::';'::.:.1'...•,, .... • •:.... *.:.•:.••:•:.'.....,,.r.i.;::,•••••••,•.;:::•PE.: .••::•.:-......?•:;:;:•,;"*)•'.::. •:. 1. •'•:;•::1..;:.•••••: : :: •• •. • • C13 ....:i• . '':iliENii.:.4..:1,..,&:,•.14,0:!"•::..Itte.W,ieiP:•''..n:r'.•':"'::••:••'.:••':••••::...;f:":."../. • •'''''.•;:•E•i•••`: ••',;'....' • •:•.•i'•:•' ;..f....:.'••:•le'• .:•?•'.-:;.: ::•••:•...•.•:,,••••....i;...;;••.i,,•1..:•-.••:':::.......".........•::::jt• • • • = :•:4,4••••::::0:..toz,< ..4y.g31.1.1 ,......:::ii•;f:s•;::..4,:i•••"t......••:q..:;...:;•:, ! ,• ...:,:.. . .:15.. V;41.i::APA•::4"; .14; .i.p.,I.•,.P:•.e.c.::::::.g,..,-,:r.,..i.....• ...........::::•••••:•::•....:-........1.:::..... • CO ::.:,.?„:4??:•,,,,..,:::;.,..owp...;,4,,,,•.13PE'ro • ••••....-1 .• ..:::•••:......-..-..-, ••:L.::•...,,,....-.:. . .. ..• ... ••••••••:..!:.....:.:::?: :>1:.....,...;:,,...'.E '': . ''•'' i.: ...•.. .. • • • . ...: - 4..i......;.0i%f::ii•i.%::::::?„4.1,:::,...: .:4a:• • •••:: tlif,9: . • ' •" • ••••• .''' ' • ' •"' '•" .••••.:.:.. : :f••;•,,:•;.;.•*:f•.••:: .',...!...:•••••f.'''.•' '..... ••••••••.:• '• : ' • • 4--4 J . •: • .., . ... . . .,.... .. . . ... •• •••• .• . .••••• • . . . ...... .. ... .. . .... ,.. ..... • • ,•. •. •. • •.. • • CO .,, . , . ........ .••....,. ... .. . ..•.. •••••••••.• • • ..• ••• •. • ••• •• •• :....1;A:••:•••:::::>':•:::i:::::::lig:::.:MON:4N,IW., , • '• • •'• •:. :•:•• !.: .',..":1,.• . ...:• '•'.:.•e. • • •• ••••.F.::•••,:•:'•..:%,:•f•••••••.:•'.••• •."••'':••:••••••''f•.•:::. ••• :."••.••••:.'• '. •.•. • 0 .:Y."0,A..;.:::....:::::::;::,:1:0::::1::?1,'••,,ak; '',...4::.K.•::?:•.;:liiniVat•Waltr: .0:'•••: •••:%••••:::f.::.• •:•••••;?•••• ••::!••••• :;•••••:•..?.;•.1.••••• *:•i." :. :.• •... • •• ':••••••••••-•• . • 'T....-..•.:.% ...". '. •".•........."."..:"" "".. :.. ":'.. . (5 .::::,:::•:::::;:i:::::...,•:::> M: ..,.•.4.•,,,,..'•,..••••........• '....:' •' .•••, . •.• .,•••'••:; ••••,' . .:,;••..V.ii•.:1:i•iiii.••••:i i.:ii::"•il:.:.:i:::a..:g•11. :•r•r'....,•1 .•:•••••••.• .'•:.:. •• ••.••.•..••...•...1•.:•:* ••• ..:•:•• .•::::.•• ":. ••••••••:;.:;'.1'...?..•:.,..'.• ••••1:•::••,..•;•.:•'.• ••. ••: •••:••••••i: :••'• • .•,....•••.••••::' :.•/ i. • i.. :••0....i:: :::i:::::;:::::.•••it:i:•AM:';•:••••• ••••: ••••••• • ..: ...':................. •••:-:. v::::. ••, ;.•: •...•:",..-.:i::.:. •..,..•::.s:-...:••••...i si.•::.i.•:•:.••• .....:-::::.:••••••:::-:•••:.••••::••••::: -,•::::. .•i•i,..i.j.:.. ••••• •:-••-•• • CD , :•.:7:'...:.i.....:.:•,g .:.,•,:er.• :........:•• ... '•.• •..:•:::.:'.:ic•i•.ip,t::?; .;i.V.::',":•:.tet.:::....,.. ••:...:-..."....:••••:.••• ":•••••,...i".•..' .:•• .. • ': :.•:: • . • •. -.•...::••••••••••••:.•:.•4,•:•:•:•.:•.•••:"•...:: ..•::•:.••'...::... ...•.••:,•••.:. •:•• .) ...... •. . CC „:.::.:„•..:•::::::::::::•:•.:::•:::i:•:v":::;""••It- . ..•:::::•:::::::.M::::::::$::.:V.:4::•::•:::".g..::.•:4i• . . .• , :„•;•:::::::4'.1,1::..i:i::::::g;K.:i0;':.,?:,4 fir:.W.,i',:'.'", .:.". ,.••:• "1 :. ....*:• '•• ," . • ::•:*:. ':"":" •. . .f . •'• :".•.:.. .'s.'1"f:.....::•*.•."-.....•..".'t••••:%;::•::..i.:.i..*:..''rfi5.: :;P:.•V•' .."::• :i• . . -- .:.*:':?:::.E.••E•,::::::E•i*:E3. kEEE..IiMIE:::::E.•::iViii: 1`...:IEE' : i •-lc • C.) •••••.:::.::::::!::ili:4:::::::!::rf.E11::.:1:::,.i;s.,•••4.,:,...,..E,t.;E:?•,,,‘(:.,•• ._,... ._,. . :;',.: ,.•.....1:..?..,._ . ..., _......1.•. _ ,,....._::.:FL E.:_.:',1...•••••_1,_:_,: . ..;,..4‘....,•• E.' ' "'-'•:"" •: " .::, ,,. ..i,,.,,_ .,:..;:..7,..,..r.,...:••''• :• •-•••'•";!.1,:t...,5'.:_:,,":„....".;•-,._..,.• Ct I m E..:.• • :•:'. .:' ....::::::.E.,•kE.,:ii.NA:•'•'•;E:::E.r i>,...:.:*;'•';- ' """-^`:.%••-• :.,- -----,•--- - ----..--.T.•(:-:--••':'---4------r ...... .. . ,• .. •• •- ..••... .. . . <1,...1... . . .. • • • ••••••:...;.:.''': ''.4v:.i.i.s...i..goi.......•, • • f.. < •,.....:•••:•: •:•:••••.::. ••••.i. •,,.... 1?..,,f,,....:,',4 r;;y:'...:i.- :. ...•r Cll :. ...• :.- . . .,...,••:$.1:?'<.11::•;:::4:i.• • •• •..•.n.L1.....:•.•:*:.•• ••. .,•• ••,: , • :•.,.., . ..• ,• .. .. .•::: ..i fft. ., ••• i .:..J••-,:.:•,.....•••• ....::i i:•:•:,.. ...f.,••;••?..:'.. ....:.T 4 • :•" *:. • •:it.:•. 1:i..,„44;1•:"4•••• ''': ......?_';'• '••,.::i•:”... ••••::.• •,..,..';'•.. •.:.•'•'••••••••••• • • ";i::71,...,•N ..."•••:t••tir •• "" •••• .'•.. •• •..4 ' . 0 '• . ' 4-, :‘, •••.0.A.::;,S:H•:,.:‘4. •*.,?31....i,.. •• .....• '...... . •••:..'•.:k 1......i:'".•.: • •':':. • .:,• .,...'.:•' ::. ;••:•%....;..' ''', ..•:•.;;S:.:::::.*:•••.:::.!......:'....:'.:..::• ,.....:.';.,::: •%.-2:.:!;,:,'-':,:ei.i,:e.1,.....:',:.:,:.• "'•,•: • • (iii •% •• -"•••• .::,.. •.. •.'' ; ..•" :E......:?'1:..'.... ;E!...•:•••.•..':....•'-•-..:.:•'...:5•'''s•i •:::: :t••••;;;;;•••%•.'.. ''Ia...,.: • ...'•'• -1-* .. : ,.$'4,4'g,_,... ,,,,r„1, • • • • •• •• . . . a) • % . . . .::::f.' :.$.i..':::C.W,,,,..5r,"1.0:•''''i'l.'F'.' •••i:•i:::..' .:....•..*•...-:.:.•': :, '• •••..•,,•r....,, . . . .•. ......•• ..•• • • •, • • • •- .. .. • • , . .. .... . CD •'•••::.: :'... :;>:..•.'':.•".::.:/:.; • ::'.:''... .'....:••••••'•••• .,":.•;;:;•i":::',.'••I.' ••..' :::..i:::i:'.%.-••.:ZA,N;71. 1::•.4i)',4A ..:.•'.......i.:;: ...• . •. ..". 7....f.: .. ..'.,''',.:,; • "•',..:::.:'....:.. ....j:.::. ;,. s :...:.:...t..:.•':;:';','•••••:.:••:;:...••..". • .• ..:.*.:••%..'i...%:"•1:c..-• ••"-. ' 1-• f• ..•:::".i:i3i:......:;?:iii.V1,;'A.:q., Mit,. .. '.•:1.: "•:..... .,•••• (,,,, ......)., ........: .,i•;;'.• .:f.....;,••••••:'•:••".':::::'.•••••::::::•.••••• •.•••••• : • •::• '''.:'*:::...::::':••••*:':.'":' '.... ..- • ci) ••••i&,••• :,.:::::::::,,n:vst,....k,,,,,,,,A,,,,4-.•••,. ..:. •••••••:.:: .••::::•?0•••.:••••,:•:::::••?1:.::::..:.-,,,?•,3-N,A-*A4 ••••••••• ••:-..i ••,...i'• "••• ••••••• • • •:. •i::::.....,...:.....:•::••:•• ••••••:: /::•:‘,....,•:•.:••::••••.:•...:.•: •• .•...., ,......„-, ..: co • ••- • • o) r-• '*:.••::6''. c,•!...:::',;::,...y...i::',,e s.\-,,,,,:-.3:%,z,k,,,%•::t, 4,,,;•- ••••.• • •:.:s .. ••••:.:•. ,•:. • ....•' . ••r • ........4. ..••.•••.• ••:• • ". . •. • • '••,... ..::;.., • • •,....,: ..,•:.,:-.44-4:;,:t.......,:.:: ,:;:n•v• i%: . •,,. .. .. .. ...... • . ......... ... .. . ,• • •• •... •.• •... •• . .. Cr) ....?;•:ii:••••• ';':.;:%:••''••?;• Th'', . •:4','";•":''''',F ,•• . . ,. ... .. . ..... ,. . . • . .. . . , .., . . . .:. , . • C - • • • •• • • •. •- •• •••'••:•;".:5:1"•••i'ic'..4:4:i•k•Ps. • '''..A••‘p.I'j,'"?,\:. ,....••••': ••••:-... ..y. :.;.•••:.' . .. ...:.i:.•„,•:.';:i•• ',••:l',.....•••;....,:.:•••••:',.i••„:::.••••••....:;....,:•:: ,-•::•?:...•.•::. .,: , •.• fi?,.:'.:.:A::::"•:'';•ivt.• iten.;'4':f.‘..3,, ,,. ,,,,,,.. :.::,..... ::... . . • .••• .: .. :, ...••,... ..i. •.1..:.:.. ::.4::•:•••:.•"*.:. '...'•••:: ... ....:• .•:.......••••• . ........'::: . . ' .•':- . ••• 't= .E.... ..i....-.2:.:.!..:•,,•F.::!i•.•:•,;cK:,,::4Y-T,`,"g:g,..,,.5.6.•‘,•ty,?,,:e•. : •••••::•.:• ••••••:::,:.: .. ...:•• •i,•.•::•:.:•.:••::.....i..:•.••:::•"•*:••:•.c.:.••.:.•....i •: ".: •••.:.. •f.• •••:.. . :•••••,. . .:• • = a...... . ••:.g.:::.:•:4". '":41-gg!is a'";:r\>,:••'' •4.• .•:•f. ' ':• .' ' ••: : .:.. .• . •,:. . ........:•.?4,:.:•.•::".•::•:.• ....: ......,••..:: ..........••••• • • •. . .:;: • : ,,,,•••••. .::••.%. .g .e...:•3:g... -....,,Vg.,•,•tk",•',4,, .:: :.•••:.;..f: •••••••: •'',•-: :•.: :,- . "...:•:, ,: •,-;-..: ::••f•i::.;.*:•:::.:::...:::1:•::.••••).:-.:',:".•.i'::."i i;'C..:.•';'.*:•::.:•.::...•:"••••.::•;••::::''•••:-••••• ' .• •. -C3 ,'•:•::••" .ir• • ':::::,44‘..1•..‘..s.1.4V,:it :::.::.i.:•:::i.. . '':....•• ''. • •'••..•:.. •4:: .••:,e'., 1'4 ;!*::::i::::....::.::•:i.:':•:•:•::•...i:::. '',...j2/.. •.....:•:••••::'.'"•••: :•:"••••••:'•••:;•''' •••;•t•'''••" • ::. - a) ...:,.„... :.,. ••!:„:,,,ii,.:•• •„a4„.•„h4.•,..., 1:. ..... ••• :.•::•••••••:. .....• • :...:,......... Ni..../.'A ii•„:..i:•,:i:••••••:..i:•,:*:•:;:•••:"•(:;•::.•••:. .i..*:..,•:•••..;•••:•••••••••••••••• ' :"•;•:::.:'•:••• * :•:. . • , ;.:i:k.::.4•••••:•::.; ,Vit,"•1,......IkyiN'e,...:,..N.• : ••••• .. ; . •: *:••" ':::•..,..: ' •;:f ....••:'...••••:•.I.:2. ::•••::::.•!.: : •••:••••4•:.:•.: . • • ; .• ..• • '. .•••:•:f••;f4.0.:.iy,44:rftt""‘''''' • • ••••:':•' • • •'•:• • --.i...?..;%,..:%•,' •:3•4:'•:t%ft,,Vip ••:...:i.:.'••:.L'.::•:c*:4 •••': •.•:•*::••• .• •••-f.'!".7""/:..••:••'••:.:••••••I••••••:••:-. i::.• ...,....••••i ':•i'1:•,:.:•••i•••:.•%,.".,:•••%.••• •. : CD 4'.. • a) .,,..4.• :i..1,.. .;;;,,:,k-,,,,i;,4.‘ki>4,ci,..-1m; ;:•.,,..•' ;.••••:..i:,••.".,,,,.. '...... :: .:.:. ..!t,.I....„ : ;'....:i•;:e1::.:......2...:•...: •:: •: .. ..•:::.•.:..:i..y..,.....:.:•.•:•:. • .. . •. •4:i• •••••:••4•••::.Ai.f, '„..••fij,:::,•41.iri . • ••••4 ..,:•;•::::.::• ....... e..:• ,1%...•.: '41.213'v.v.?" •.••••••::::•••••: •.•••• " •••••••::.::' :"::.• ..:..:;•:•••':::•: .i'...i.:••::.•• • . . • , , 4.g.. • : • .0 .1_ :t:k•t1• •• ;.•:::••,:•::::.:".•::::.:L '*•,"/.,..",..A,0;:lir;tt,...,:e.:•••:4:1;',,P.J•se.. •• • •'r•'4.1) '••: • •-:•• '"1'. - ' ' .....:'?•'•":•••••• ••:•••••::. '•••• :.:.'.•':• •••i••:: :*•:••••-• ••'••"•":.. •• • 0 • • •.• ••••" ••:.,•::i.,...O.,.§.i.. ‘'''...., .r,O,N.q.:c4..to...• • : '.,i,',4•':"..:• • •••:' ••. !,:..., :•:.:i•.••:••.•• ••• .-...' ...:.::' •:.:(• :i:-..•••.:•••••:: • • ::::::::.4%Er•• %. •' • :.:.• :.%,••:.::•" : '*...Y.I.,.•:,c.,,k+•,•Et..3;•:"s••••::E.. •,' •''• • :1;::•;;EU.i.:.EE`.--- • : • " 0) ../4:...•..::: . . • a) :: __v..... .••••••••• :..1..,:„:.:*•..• , . • ••••• ..:::....... :... 5.:. .$,4,..9•.: c.,..?..,,,,,,,,1,1•,...,g,..,,. :: ... • 4 : ,ti,.;... .. :•••••::•.i..;:. .,......:• " • •• • - ...:••••:,••• ..i. • .%.: 4:N::::„..,:,.." •..:.:::i.ig:::.•:.•• , • •:,••:?,?:.•••,.....4:44,4t•••••§1•Te.,-44:1•,,,o,Nc.,i,..0.•,,,,,,%••••••.,;• •••• , ,i•••••:••:::',:: %1:4,........i••••:.• •'•• •• ••• ::..:•'• . .•'2:.: ...•:i :.: • •••:M:P.":. :•. ': •. ,•' .:::.•:I>ti.f...,,,..!E 6,,o;,:vdilt:.6.••-.4.,:t.:.!••V.'?:.•:::.:.:.f. . .,. • L.. .?g,":5$.::•::ii:::::......:• .... . , •• •;.:•••,.,...,,,,,:.....,;4•,.ggyq",f,..ki4,Els,,,.fy s:.??,1.:,..,,,,...:.....1 ,. : 1...._ is ki...••::,•rgi:::•4:i•:. • \.. ... ..,:il...1..7.:,„,,,:•.,,,4,.,;•..;•-t.•e%..• Ii.41..:...„,t.??,..i.4„1",14!,;34,...‘::.:!:._•:i.!..:::::;:„,,•,.:.:.,...: . , ... .,... ,.::.......,,,. , '• •' .:."'•';.r. 4',V.I.A.til ::'•4:•ii:' P'1:f•A's•;,'":.•:••••.••••'..•i'.... . E.. E•• ' ...•••'• •• •• i::: •• • ..• ••• • ••• • " ..:./.. . . • '• . : . • :E.:, .V."E:siEEE:::•e:E:••:•:•• . • 0)y:, . ••:,".:4:0,,i:,*.• ••: •":s.. , •. ::.:.:1 <,I. ..::),„:tf/t1,4,',5!..rtIVEf.:V•E';.',•E'.;•:,-.::?..i.:.'i'.•:.!y:•%: :ii,:i; .• '..• . • • •: :••• :* :•••••::•'•E" - " '•:.:•••:: ••••" - •••• • ' • • ';• • c- CD 34': •:••••:. •:i:•1•R4,::•::*: ••:•,••.••.: •••••4••:: .,,Pv;• ;:•••:?'•,',P6i•••7:?•:•:?:•:.4,::::::•:?::v••?:•:•:(A:•;••••:,..i.••:•:•..,, .: ..••: : ....•. !•:,i. ., f.•..-.; •c •• ....-.. •• •• :* ,. •.••:: •:i"A: ii •? s....„..A. .;•...4.v„.,4.,.;A:•.:.:........••:...,.:;;,.....4;.:•:.:;•.,:::.:i......................... : ...,.':i.:',•::• J.'Z . . .,. ''‘'i k''•i;.::•, '.0q.•:,: ::••••, f:p1::::.,:(4.';'-wq''..7,•'••s."•.'51A''....lii;•••••••••::.•,.5 :..i:... •"..2.?).•.'1•::';"•:**."''.i:{i:.:.:•i..:::••:••••k ':.;71.•... . •••• . .• • 1 ..;;:t t• ..:,•Ng':,•4:........i.i. ..4..sgA.4.,-IAFtr:..,',4•.•?.:,:•,....::.,i,04::4.:::: :".•*::•:•.-c••;••:::*:•4:.•;••:•.•;:•••••'•:X. ••• • : . .. --)4.•-• 1,,t s.4.,,',)..:S.,,,...,•„e;:•;......,,,,,:•,46....,,,.4.•E.•:...::).t:::*•ri?„'.....,:v•:;:i1".;:*., ::, • ,,...., ....z, .,,,\•4;.,.::,..,.::.,..4%. , ,.(00,....,:v,,,...,:..,..:45.,z.::.:;.:,•:,;,... .,,..,:s.i.........:,,c..:•: -..• ..?i . .• ....., • .. . . .... • .. • .• • : - . ---%:) ., . - r • • . . : .:.i..-,..,. , •. sski;....15:::::., :4...• ,............:••;:••:i1,:.,,,,.,,,,i..:...i.:.i...f..:::::;..,,:.:',...:. :14:::::ci::•;•••1'r:II,i'>1•'.:,.::•:.:•:' i'1 s*:::'..i...> :• : • .: ' • •• • •''" ' '•'. ." .... .•• .. •• • ....: • cn .:•:.:.„:.-„s:. .. :-:: tkg.g.,s.::•,w.,,,ip..og,,,,...•:•;......,•....,; vst,.;,,.0.,,I,,•:..i.....,..„:„1,..;,s,•:••,::::•0. 1„::,r.::,.:5:::.::,.1•: ::.?:.:'•'',n'f. ••:-...i....i.1 .••':.• .. '.:• ,•.:...,::!:•••:•••••'..i.;.• ' '••••1' ••''. ' ":' •• :: '':" • '• • " . C .,%%,:t:.••••;t:i.,.•::;i:,.:.0..:M•4•.. . ......: .,:':•:,40 ,..,:*:.5 ,$:1:,iks., :•i.;"::::;i•••••.:;iii<•::••••:•••••.::,::11• ••..:.:••:. :••••••••:••::: :•••••:::.*::.••••• •• •'••••:i•••:• • .-• f•• •:'*•••: • ,•.. .• • •• 1.•„41$y“,::::„1,,:, A.::, :;.:K5j,.,,,:•,•,;.; . •. .••...,,,.',...,S1?.:,21:.,.::.:,,,,..,..,,A.:i›...V.,...:V :,.:: •::: y .,i;••:,....,:.;.: ...,rt. .,, •• .-.,.1,.,•,..i.:::.4:••;...,•••:..•: • ..••.: . •• ,•' . • ••••• •• • . • 0 ';:.. ;:.,:. , ''...i","4';'•.)'','•,:', . ,ii.:..1 .",:?,•?1:•:f•?::::. .t . .,%.:,:i,,i.:.. ;:s..•0•1r.4.4..•..,'•• -i.l'%•••••1E:•:,..;:....›.::-.".,.::::;• ...1A : • •..;..:.;: •-' '• .4.-- .ta 4•::::.• ::::::4:,.\':t2:"‘k,,,;..!:*::!•!*;,%.,•:,.I.:•4E;.44-:. •ft;::i.:;..:•:: ::Z5,.f.VA.z•s‘,, .,:".;•:•:43..:*••••;•' ;.:•;•;.?...)....::':'n1•:''..1.1.:'••••••• .%• .•'. • ':'.:••••..•:.' :.•,.::" :1••• • • •• "E:1,.4.: .:.:::,..i:'•:.M.:i.':.N. . .,.•VA:: 4'......11f0i::1:; ..i'/i.i :4.ti.' . .:N.::;.t?:.sq.i •••514;sV••:';• i:V':•%:..f.; *V):::N••::1•;.:::•':':••.: :.1::•.••1:f:•.:::..::*:'-..::' '•"%::" ':'' •: .: : Q .•;:::: 1 •:m?:...,1:e;;.....,:if..m.:41,,,,,:w•Ii:E.4,•:?;E:.•,•:•;;;;;."1•. ,: •• :':•n:"..E:•::;;.•,`,:/:,.V.,:.:::':i'::':•••%•:•‘:'•:::':••••••••:;:•:`''':••:•.•'::"4''''::'•:"••: ••••••••••'•'..: "••• ••••• .•'' '.'''::••:• •• ':••'• '' '' • ' .' •••, .................... :3::%, ,IAE:k::31:.•::::E.:."4:,•:.''':. ' '.,E>. •:'0....:%:,.':'.•:•`•'•:••:',:":•'4 E1:4I's.'k,>s /. ;• •:.1".,••;::*::::•:;•:. :Efig::::::•;:::,;""E.,:s,;1':",:'...; ,'•'E.,''....••::.* ...'••••:. ••'• •.':" ': '•••'•• ' •: .•• :. 0 kcf:'‘';'•:.i:/•:•1,4"if':•::KW::::V.:::::":4:::':'1.•,>;•'••i::•••i•k:A:,:i'i.'"'•.,..1••;:%.,::".1.,Es"Z::••"••'?if•:::%•4.:.'ii:i•E:4:iri'•%"•.'k.'?1.:(•••.1•••:'•*.c:•••:;::'.•:•%:.-Y'...,.."fillYZE:•,•••••••: :••...:*-;',:,::•:,...'. •:......•,:. % E*. •,.,f.....i:::'........ ....,......:.... .•:,.., . : . -I •':"E;::.''. ..%:: .••,.k.1:: :&' :Ii•i:,:.":•Ii.,.:::,..n:>::•k:•!::•:g.'::?:k•.• • ..,...:i.z.,,i.?-::'...:.,.::::&4,•iv,,;,:tsp.n?,1•.•t,if.'?•::1E., :1••.i4.:i',...„,:::,,i•7•4...•::::?.:•:.•:•••::.:ii::...1••:••... ..:.•.s........':...i.........•:. ., . .•. . •••...": .. •l•• - . • - ..., .::.,,,...:,.,.,,.:„:::,....•••1:„. •.!...1:•,i,:....:.,:•.:.;i:,„•,•.:,::*:Y4.,....,,,.,,...?:$;:os. .,•1 kl,,,:.41.i.,,,,:,i„....i•:::;:::,•,. .,...,.!. .,••••••'••••::.....:.:...:;;...:,.•-,..:::•••.••.:::•:"•::•::••••• ••.....••:•.••:. ••• . •:.::: • • . •• ••. • : . a) 0..„1:;•...,:.„4„.,::::•„...„,:,,,;;;:•:;.„;„, .,,...„,, t*:.,•:,...,i.1„:1::::•:,1??::.....i:i:i..,.3-, .,-;.,5,4,-,;.,42.,,,;4p4k.,,,,,..,..,1:.s.„4,4.,:',,,i•:,•32.:•,.1:.:6"4" ":.••:::.7:::Y..'.•'•?•".:•::'••i':.i.::'..i....:•:'••::. •::. •-f ....-.•: : ,.. ••...• .: . • • : •. .1'.1.4:1E.'1,"/;;;.:...•li.ikk,•Y:4•:;••• k.,10••,::•:1;:•1,:::"1::.-•?:': 4.1*.i,.'?..13:,?ei.1%zik•-•,130kie5a--..vii.,,, ,:i.:-.:,::g•::....v:•.:•:.•- •:.•--:;,•:,•:i,,.....:-....,:::,::::L:..., ..:-.... •-,....::.... .:...: -.::.-.: •••• ....... ..,• ::„..., . . .:, .•. ....--, co i;..k.•?,?: ,•: •,:::::::.:::.E:ii.... ..A.:::.:: ....:. ,.. ....0:,:,.. ..:.i:,?,:o.,:.;%.-1.)...:4::,..Vits.tti,it,P : `?.A...,.•cf.:•:*::...:.•••:•••••;::'.4;,..::••••:I.:........•:•••:'''.'•••••• •': : •/ \•:':••:•:';••••••:••••••:'*••*-•••••:•...:*:•''•• .'• :• : ••••• X ..4. ..i.;4::i;:i,41•••,iiii::?::.i':.p.••%•1:i.;•::,•:.:?,4§4;:i...`:i':$3*:.....:.§;:::•.4.%'•,-1,.:*'.A4sErt4'..14.:. Toiv.,,31:V.i.lE",:: :.:•:?"••:',..'...?.i.::::!::••<i:-.'•'iti:•,-;:•::..:::•::.:,....i.:.:•1.-:•:.‘:••:„::,... !.........4,:••.:....::•.f.:::•:•....:.•„<:•<.......s..„: • ;I. .,. ''.",. '•-40.••••'•:•••••>'' 4.,,.4• ::''V•k:•: :••WE'. •••1:''.:::•?:c•••'•:.*::lifi•;••,•• ..0% kik).i0<;X1,?:.'':>•:•?•i'.'*.e;••4.f.: ::•:•••:',:f4•••••.Y.,•::•':•••:.'::'••f:;•..:.:.•," .;- ....:•••f:.•,.:::.;,::, ...:';',:.:•:•:•;.„.•:.:::.y...: ' .: , • 0 •,::-:i.. ?"•••;:•••;::!;•::•..::.:Ar.•:. ••••:.. .•••:,:•i:... •:•1\1k.. ••:::4. .:. :•,;:•:.04::.•41 • 1'4%$•.,:,<,•,. 0,::,,te,..,.,••-••••:••••••••••.:••::,:f. :...:.,:•.:1.::•:::,:,,••„?..,:7,•••....::.:•,..::..•.....:••• .• •••.,•:•...••••••••:....::;!....:.,:. ..:i:.:••::.•• ...• . : L._ a. •:::%..-;.:i:::,,:::::•••:.4-4,....:•••.,.:.1..4.-441• •$::::.• :.„,•••."::, •,...tk•••• .•:•:,••.:•:::::-•::,..:•.:,....-,.:k-:..14,...• .4 •:ss:.",;:is.::•,•:.:••••:•?.•.f:..f: ::!.••:-.•••%:"•••::•::,/::•••f••••:fJ,•'.:k:. ••••••:' •••• . ::••:.:.:••••:.•...:.:'••••":.:•••:f:I:'•"* •:.. • i •..• 1:,:;••If:';':if•:2•::::f,..:5•1:.:::.!•;f:>9.:':d,..i&'',...•4::::..••••A:%:.••••••f:•;•0:AIii,:••:: .f W.•',Y .":••5••••P'ZF,••••••••:••••:r•:•;'?'•••::::•%:(4'••i:.1%•:i :•::.•:':••f :•'1••••:'••:•. ••• • :%:''i•••••:••••ii':"*"•:•••••:••f•••%;1:'::•••••:,::2•:•i•:' E; `•.' ', a ,„:•:::?..i.t:::::;:;..:4•2.. ::....'.'4'."4N0:,ff"shi:•:':•`4:,..'1Ct. ••:1 .tikt.1. .0i,•••,*•44,1, ::: .?f!'5.4•;.:i .lit.;'•••...:...:i*••••:.::•:•.•:!•••• ••::?;•;..i,::•::•••:: ••••••••.....'::i...:%.'Ff•••••::•:•••11'.:.:'.:*.i...::::..::'•5•:::.:'..?•;:'•.'"i••:!..:. .I:'i.....i.:. Ei:•:.„:„:„.,..,:....„....ici:,....:,;:,..„.... .r.t,•„„.... ...„. ,,,A::„,.„,.,:::k.:..:.,: ...4 1,'..1,I,E4:;.:%'•,%'z''.?•:•?1%.1•''':)IE'''•"-•:•:'•"-:: •E: ..E.: '.:' •;•••• .:::i'':. : •:' •." ••••••E:;•••••••••••::••%I:::••'''•••:•.;... •-• .•-• :.E; '•••E:''.?:i.. :"•:M‘i-A, •$\":::,...s. •• ''.*•,,I,•:::,,?,c'esi.is4k:ft`t...6';..:":.,:f;•:..:*:•*.:..:•:.':i;:••...!?.:,...1 ••'.:i:....: :•.*•..'ci.'v,••.:',-,: •..'.- ' :::.• .:".::•'...'..........• .'.i ,:.'.• . '. • %''''.::•?,•?..f(%.•x:•%i-i*:*:".,:*;•:41,..i.'''.i.:?:,:Wsfrs."1•IN, '...•••6. ••. . ,:i.:M...:,::;•$i•i,:::: .•' :,4ik:,,,,14,k,?;;:<•:•:.;.:•:::::•::•;..:...1.•,:rif:.ik ':t.':,::'.::* ..•: • ,:it's•k'':•.: ..:*.: • f:..*,•::..•.•".:J"::.••••:.•••••.... ••• • ••.. • .t if. 7-- ;0•:,e,%:.'`'.,i:,:...•::;:.'...r.....1.:.•,::.::.••,s:41,:i':i•••:',P1t.5e:••'''N.'.V\' *•:•• •:••••Nifti.:4•••,'••4',A,\A'.4)14•::•:...f"i••::::':.";•fi'•::•.:?.!...*:i..i:.:'r•••• .."••'''. :.::: ••:•.: : •. :•••i ••.•• ...."....": " • •• 1 .. . &g,•414• :.ii.r.'..4::.•i'i:,::.'.:•:::.:,::•:.........::::,.:•:i::2v4'' ' '••si''• ).•• •;4•111:k 11.1%l's•I`i'4:11'`•$??.,:l:'...:•:':1•.:•::.;:i:i'...i.:•• •.; •::*f:. I''.'•••••:l'4";.:• :',. . •'''•'•'.•:.::•:1::.:•.::::;.:•••:••••:L'•:.. •••:•••••••••: •'. ' ''.. a) ,._ ',i',•.*!:.;:::•:::,.......;:.:%;j:,„..'6.-.....,1:..a:::;:ti• Ci..,;::::..ii.?...P:•:4:*!....'?:;:i..Y;-::•;)..,1?,!.•••%•.'.%• \•%,•:11$.0.11,ti..K11.?iffi.. ::.;:,:•:•.,:.:::::•:;.:::::;•••• •;:4:::::: .:t?:•:". •••••••:•••!?•A f.•:•••••••'' ••• .:::::::,':....Y.•:.1.........;•.::'•:•:%•••••::::::'.•:::: ....; .: ...Y.... : .4't.k.•••:4:• •;•••...:.:.,:.:•,....: .: ..:.;e .?e.........:.. ....k,,,... +:II" .• '''':•A."•V'.....;;.4.1t1. '''Y's".••••;•$•:::•,•.;.•::-:•::w..:"::••••:•:•••••''.. .;..v:••••''•'••: ::••••':.' • • • •••.:::':•.:••••••:-.::.•••...'.••• : .'• • • ' • . f54,e•%:• ,:.i f•,.;..;,.....:f4••••:.,,.::.1..::,..• ..,•..::•..,,e. ..::•.••,.•;.•:...k.,•i s.;..:.,154:.5.,4;4.f,.h1t, ts.; .bx. •::: :::A.:4,+..4.:?.V. <0V??,•; .3,,- ..,;..:::••'••..i.:2.:::.?:..:.?.?;:',:`:,'.:....-n•;'"...•:5.,.i•:5':•• '••• .•.."•i-.•-'•::••I.':..-:•,.•:.•.'......:.•:.:'-•. :.'. ' ,.'• . .C- )( < ... 11. •:.....F:••• ::::::<:,.:••:::-.•-•:,,,i.• ••••••..':•••:••••::•:::•••:.,":::.:••:...f........::••••1.:.•,.. A0,4,;So.. ,s41,:•.1,::4.:..,:•••.:sk •.V,-;...,-..: I.• ,, :.. •. ,....•.;. • • :.:...• ;•• • . : . • .• ...• .• -,••?1:•••:, .•-•::..'"1,"....;:.••..i.:....s, .••. •• -, •••'• :.••. ••,,k,,,, .. .:,,,,,,m,m•?.:$::•••.,'•••• .r••••: ...'•.•••'• • --:.. •••• -"• ••P....:.:i • •• . - - -• . . . , •••••• • :•...I,c,,e,•••It.41:ez<ie,,,,tv,atot:1•4•.:=, . •I.„0, •....... ,...'.,,,.,••,, ,.:...••.... ;- ;:. - . . • • • • ,••• • • .•• . , DEPARTMC'`-T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUPS'"r WORKS ENVIF;_ . IMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW ET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: seLacx U4 he 11; , DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91cti)©A G DR, APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 dog/ ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-10941 PROPONENT: First City Development �ts '70i PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a urrently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking,,on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan Impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: Cod L1 ci1 ' — PRd1a6r 77- IN TIFF A ef- 1Mi5I/ Fsrv,9 y /34-5/N 12- 'Neff 54N/T"4Iy 5 4' At RvNS So '7W ri..5r id 4061 '? /5 f"cArlON or olhX5D4-Lig.: fAhvyy 7'VG y o-rq fbt/ 565 7 NO ' . SEwBfik N1rf/o 5/tO1 'S 55 MAN f/` -t (2) 4X1/4 G5 o N arR �IDF oF D�4KFr5/�'4L�, PF ,/GN ANGPS/47 ig , Z) eolyf/4/4 Lo C47/1 N o, Ti 'SE /LI/9 Nhio -F� Pv/i// . vtm w,NG jolv5/4)1,47e,g, Fork V'viz,o/NG nR/4( / m°n&1 c•g TfvN, 1161. ►N 56.14/5-A. M /101QtvM Matt 4,. 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. 44ripo` -1-. 6-it -l l Signature of Di ok7oPAuthorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 envrvshl DEPARTMI;~ `7 OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUP''"7, WORKS DEVE___'PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW ;EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8141 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (Including a heron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP: 23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT )( DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Pt A-N loci v' W APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED — P�r t..Pf NG- 5 frP 7a 6 e- /(v sML L JJ i A, 4 cc o A/)4 /CfJ '-v/T� city o F AaivroN Sn91v,� Ps- - FINAL Aug/G-N Foie Li/40/A/c- , zJ ur ,4,4"L/ c47-/oN 5' '4 4 6 U- iN con!po lc44 R JVG, rill/77/ city Of AS/V/ N ,''V T/" ANDS (A7r4c,h/F-p). PRo-066-T 6OI Gt -'o 41_4, A10,410113L6 Fr-F, 7tF_ 4-TT'-A 5/› /5-7, plfovl6F' C LF ReNtE lb6.7 46.11,7n► 5 F_w _x 4 %/ ®17514X /77e../ �.�Pf=-5 4-6 F ,Lt !G h F_Tzv2F/U 1 of A NA O'9?'AA iekiEff rot S E4) S 13- t=Ju h'_re0 5704' 1 ofi 9/fir //y4-: / #1,1&14 DATE: `/ ''7/ SIG ATUR CTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht DEPARTMI OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUE WORKS ENVIL.:.1MENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW _EET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 6,n yyN WateAc DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP 09 S%1 Jtfg a I ' )6, PROPONENT: First City Development �W 46- PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII I V6 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: / 4(E- j/yy jry ?/AE 4c '//=- fe,• c77cN l77 /5 4O-/Q5-/Yt 70 T/{,E /)-/ Cbel N/Y G /%4#1f rp/ 9' P7f9/,,i)10-, WOv'O 6-07'0 , )349' 4/re 44E566,/7Z' p-vin4 /6O—/A / L- 0i044/ey Voll,776,1Y5off- sty' 6iNcg 5/� //=•/c, /-'r , p oe /04,/9 r S fir'f1�U/ousG.)a ®F„0!C09T,-! I-O, rou/ O O, S7-001. VA 7 40 PE-T YY 7674 /MO flog, 7 if 7/M.9F 6s v, i t'0 �'" 8r�, AI APB( 1/1T, Z.), 5 rnw r /,'iNfova./i W( L'/CL /F 11 C v/GQ/2,® Il A'PL �W cr i F'L©.) 57-0446# llecc..1ft S>!j %U0 01-r/ /q p,T/z/v77®Al. 5644o 514-8/rtc,r4-0` GA'P.'0-4.5 a, MTMR 0e-,‹ eio 73( 002 ty 1,0e/I'1WED (NY 517E, ZaVyt t"/(fi7/®fv, Mwty/7o'/' c -, '4 /1/7U 47/e( 6114a, /3eivEx 60OO. ,7211041105 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 whey additional information is needec to rop rly assess this proposal. gee, ©f F/6V, 1/t%o ilpfretu//c P o)eCt At",VaV wit/ f3-e U'Prcr/r e Ave,/ 6-/91- et( Signatur:o/I ire •r or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht DEPARTM ' " r OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUr 'C WORKS DEVE_.__PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW . EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SS M;RVM P-109-8/1 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental Impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP:23N RNG: 4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: pi-16 N APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS X NOT APPROVED 61-00/0 Ti`ct dFs/GN 5/1(44C t/a IN fCco/8?D4WC . f f% //irc /S/YG Co, 5oF,c1C/- C0 47 ' 06 (6-N /4A-NL'41 i A-NO 5(411,c /N co ?A '1fef-77 1=6-647 'fy1') IDENr/ /p /N 5 -._c/7c)/1 3,y, 2., o rf�� FaE s xo� 7 /5 oJa.c r T 'tif10arMAY w�# )5/'cv Co6vt o(- /044/y /5 A/V /.Zi//aMT4Nr c, /5riT 5iNC B�/Poivagr7 FKe-NGS aN 17e.,s / -/ C6/1N/Y poP4/f,9 7x. 2. 7Ui /'7/7" fi co(Yc F-p u/it4pifs4//y/ A!Y!) PCI' /477-46114570 94agr M Mier o(` -1//s 5/7' /L.4N PRoc 5S_ 3, 'A7rj v#L/7 0t/#7'/(9oNPs Gl./c.L O,- I 'S-O ///F�,o foe /ma's, 4Lso, 7P!c/A L ft aurilaftia6,T 6 OF 7/ ff.0 M/1-NC1,RL /'?US7 / /c//'/ -uf 7,5i) io 0nT,4,f/te/N�- W NF-�'let6Q coAL�S C/N(r p1,.47i o/G/&r�'4T 5F/Bi GP/^Q c, s) AGQF_ 6f r'Q(>//R/_-A� oNLy ,Dto/N/3&i5- N10/4 Aoop rcd/G c 43F_ ALo' To �TLt4 Np5 COhr/7 0c_ MV5i 6r Df 5 fG-(V/) //YTO 57-oA, i w4-TE/ '4C/C/ry 5o 7 64f T /QOo,a 004/6)46- ' F l,o%' TO CX,,TL'ND 5 Dotes NOT Aer CC,D "gr. DF Pi l-o6oiu1/;./iT_ s l .AND ®�''ad�Fzo I`, 2aNr r// Poe'17oi of= 7/4 Sy57 .m d�"U)/(j To 7NE P-/ polyp, C r rV rP 4 v/6'f=S / e-ta m 'Ar41 5 /46-drF, a/( '/Y'7` / ai P ''' a,(i Vyj-/A) h`t'O>P PLAIN. 151116 (orfry gNcx/LD co6/74C7TD TO 0074 /N 1iyt o, 42.TloN o/v M.M.Y//iaxi FLxx,O rLFP/'i 7tC/N OF r' P-) FoG4 F.LA'v.17/oN /5 co,vTPQtLF,B ,fay DATE: 6 _ /1-99( SIGNAT RE Or IDIREC &OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AgE4N6 0eP �°044105 6j6'�� 'ei')%/,(�D {//,y)/ /1/i/6- Coc',v y! r Q VA. / �y REV.5/90 devrv7, ie. vll+(�cm4/1/e( 1.p 71-6-r �l NiW7??X'D Jw.w1 e�s /Jti 2 -1 T F1' 3O / o—yg FLOOD A t• 11 CONTENT LIST FOR DRAINAGE REPORT FOR CONCEPTUAL DRAINAGE PLAN A. Stamped and signed by a Washington P.E. on the front page. Complete Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet that is enclosed. B. Briefly describe the construction involved. C. Describe existing and proposed on-site drainage features. D. CORE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS 1. Show that Core Requirements 1-5 in Section 1.2 are addressed. 2. Show that all Special requirements in Section 1 .3 that are applicable to this project are addressed. E. Use the SBUH/SCS hydrograph method to compute required on-site detention. (Using 2,10, and 100 24 hour design storm events for pre-developed and post- developed conditions (6 separate peak flows). This should show sizing for the peak rate runoff control(retention/detention) facility, with a routing table. F. Biofiltration preliminary and conceptual design calcs (per Section 4.6), if for project site sub-basins with more than 5000 square feet of new impervious area subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. G. Wet pond sizing preliminary and conceptual design calcs (if there is more than 1 acre of new paved impervious area and meets other conditions of Special Requirement #4). H. A Level 1 Downstream Analysis, as described in Core Requirement #2. (Level 2 or 3 analysis may be requested later if a downstream problem is found or anticipated from review of the initial submittal of the Drainage report). ALL REFERENCES REFER TO THE 1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. 91-242:KDS:ps DEPARTMEia OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUB1.IC WORKS ENVISIOPINIENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW IIVET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: s py lilt t t Vile c MAer, DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 4,- /p;°� APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ' ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109_41 ���, 'gam PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time,'we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals • 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: "''PRC7F-LT !S Nor rN Atkur FeA, 10/{01-c/T0 N lPF�9 pDQ o�acr- /S , f 7Y/fl ooed-N rtri vim 1°111 P S 5 & W 2 Ot bpi 6S c'QE / M/ 1i L,E = fen '/�I4.0 Fi4 Licv4'0, 2. " we9W Nl,/N 0 INS Pet -tLa/y - oe4h6-S,D/4ZE coiti,,A5hfr-n S wF' /0 N ILLS fox< tb/1-1-41V1i/N .XT u-N 6 to N 7N0 uG rf PRof°/- 71', C F_/= ,KTT4C,1,E,D I NF011441-17c N• 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. Signatu .Dire r or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht • DEPARTM1 Vf- 7 OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUI="{'-r WORKS DEV __ PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW 1,.� APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;S S M;RV M P-109-8$1 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG: 4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP:23N RNG: 4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT X DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: PA/4N A F-v/e r v APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ,XNOT APPROVED wATriZMA//4 sill NG- /4 NA 4/„rGASw/l T`JRSQ W4 rM's c.4N/Y —T 100. .P�7FS m11-,FA ( / C. A 1=IlRF_ FL0%v Alt 4'U/# f&N7` /5 C Lc.zi -7-� fay 744E_ F'Ra MAX1/2F,gL ., /� r ,c- lR Rv,m&,d � F YG6' p5 Soo &pm Fa& EirftF.-J' 44 AO/ EA AEA(11F_D /IN O 'N,O -'h` , po LY bf,12 4 i4 w'47iVQ/14 4/t / s, 3. ?rile C I n o F / l N -oN frtjiier4,1rzQG"'t idN ibLA1 V G'r N , t 4 v//ors // yr4&z-s9— TroN o F A 16 tr wATx.R NlAI N 1 hwouo-b/ ?1i45 /040,4 r ry, S IB 7-/%0. Airry-htp� M,n T o� 7h coMf'. PI- 4R-- /N6011,60RA-7 ' /41" A0-'1 s Sv��P cr �r�r4 1*Ye.1-4:046-Nrlc/z s�s�� 19 -/rAc, D � t� �° 5N`E►^_-r)• 5 Ys1-7•5/L► r N r4 6co'IP4Nt w/?j t 7T /> D -,1)I14/ T/,-G fi4NDA414tVS. 01,01,0 fr;?-0rti_ DATE: 6^/$ -if SI NATU F ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 6. /4/4 l IvI /ty CC-64-14X WG55 V'� .�� /�N O T/L✓P7, A-5 AW-4(A44 Ay REV.5/90 devrvsht c' 0 F J,(J 15:^tiviy, �\1 J%�f`���, 44 rM/1a , % .........sli io; II , _I6 $;;.-V ,...... 0 -k\:-, -,. I 4<,/N.:,?....i.. > ..,\---- :. -,. /A --4,0# 4N-\&bt,N4- ••NN 0 _____Ity-A/k,.--' ,1 4.* __ *..\ Am JC �7a1 \ '' 1 i - _._JLJ 7 \. - \ ME 121h ST' Il dPQ ` Ill-� 1-� p 1 1 1-5f_ ET5- 11m sr - _ S ' - Eimrt J11sm ST S 6m Sr �_ i1ieS �"- -1-'-..-: f if , 1 ( , -7 r— "- rC 1• > Q '�r°d' __�J nem s. _.J a L_] �nm [R •.ra �c a4 \�4v 11 IIr U rill" - �nm t� -• r li t r' c..,e _- I �.1 s I g r--1 j% 1, ��non h 1 s_7 i2i 1�_JL1•rt� )) i a \ $ revs \* r �slknr,` s ,I. -I,-1r l \ , a, - tII �4-ero,. iz+, m I \\Adirk, /1 y,n� ,.I I iti , 14 CO i '\''' 'i 1 ' j---7 :4 4,0,2. ./)--4.., i41,64-1-L15' Lissi I libill" _ ';. '\ /II ' idir., . , ,, L i .,-,<,,,,,. Lir' ------,-- ' -••.. " Mil& ''-~Al hili Dr*, ., 7 A 1.; I I'T'C:SIITA f '_130M.777 �' ,�- --- Ali 11.i� ,..,,,. ..... ....• ....._ .....„‘ _.,, ,.....____ . . .,,,11 asimapwA4 all -‘,, ,-„ , "El 4,1r1,,ry# • 11),E,..- e == St 1 1111 Uril 1'�; iiIJ!he AAt, Wirjilli 1,147: • • ilimitc • • dak oliff N g ‘ .,,-,,, ,‘ pi, :yrs r ;Ilk os.,.,, ,, ...-ki CNN ivilm / t I E. _ rr—1 r 1-- 1 ON wig, i 1 ....;••••„._ _... _._ ...__._,,, . lit Ill .. r „,, v, ...A.-.4.1...12,1 - blur .„,,, , ,digg to& ;,,,,_, , , imik_ _,,, . r { ^ _Ism , -'. ,,, ;, Or -ilk_ I PliPt / L. ill .rum , EU j 21A 5T II I lla Iar . .. . ,. _ —rb, .., _ (C �� minim vi - t 44 il I 4111 ��� I ,' SOOS Cr . ) rill �J �I I, s :i: sr r'' kilkillIPI , ..,..4 ir_ i INTERTIE 1' Xici: $ ''°A1-1°I bI °I tr 4\ il: 1, , , LE 189th ST t f. ./_...A.'. i ,.I - ) 1.1 a Ji"li III I, LIjiJI / LS ITLM-,, ( ,e, ,, . i �I1 it seal .:ems,I i; I vn I a,, Iii I I alinglor/.:7:rna. 111 ,_ i - bwn ■ - I SODS CREEK ' ,, I i ie t y . \ ; INTERTLAMIHr tf7 'I-- _'------ �_ Ji..J■ __,_ r" ST II_ _ \Ni41eA cv/lrjf? fr fr I w i , " ' iiiii I §8 5+491'I 1! (( rsc 7aam sT ,� gr rI S M1ne ST IF—---�I n _� 11 , ••11 pti(VY 91.E CITY OF RENTON A + DRAFTING STANDARDS Description When construction plans for site improvements, including water, sewer, storm drainage and transportation improvements are prepared and are to be constructed within the Renton City Limits or service area, then the project plans must meet the standards and requirements of this publication. 1. All plans shall be prepared on standard 8. Control line distances and features shall City of Renton mylar sheets (or photo at no point have an error of 0.2 feet mylars of these sheets), which shall be (scaled distance) on a 20-scale drawing. obtained from the Planning/ Building/ 9. Use of a lettering guide is preferred but Public Works Department . public very neat, legible, free hand lettering is information counter on the fourth floor acceptable. The minimum lettering size of the Municipal Building. The standard is 1/8th inch. This is to ensure the plan sheet size is 22 inches x 34 inches. If is legible after microfilming or reduction CAD is used, City of Renton title block, to one-half size. etc. shall be incorporated into the CAD drawings. 10.Use the standard Washington State Chapter of the American Public Works 2. The Professional Engineer's seal, signs- Association symbols as supplemented by ture address and phone number shall be current City of Renton Standard Details. placed in the title block area in the lower right portion of the sheet. 11.Match lines with matched sheet number 3. The drawing shall be in ink or perms- shall be provided where plan is drawn nent photo mylar. No "sticky-back" or on two or more sheets. Where plan is pasted pieces shall be allowed. The shown on three or more sheets, include base map showing existing features shall a total site plan key map at scale 1" = 100' or 1" = 200' to cross reference be screened to one-half tone. portions of the project with their 4. Use City of Renton Datum (USGS 1929 corresponding plan sheet location. Sea Level Datum = King County Aerial Survey)for survey reference. 12.All division or phase lines shall be indicated showing proposed limits of 5. All existing and proposed improvements construction. shall be located and dimensioned to City 13.Existing and proposed topography of Renton survey monuments, mono- contours shall cover the entire site and a ment lines or street centerlines. minimum of 30' beyond the site Dimensioning must be done by boundary. Existing topography should stationing and offset from these control be screened. Topography contours shall lines. be shown at 2 foot intervals (5 foot 6. Scales: Use Horizontal Scale of 1" = 20', intervals for slopes greater than 15%, 10 and Vertical Scale of 1" = 10' unless foot intervals for slopes greater than otherwise required or approved by the 40%). Elevation labeling shall be shown Planning/Building/Public Works Depart- at 10 foot intervals maximum. ment. (Note: complex utility locations may require a larger scale plan to show the necessary detail.) 7. Draw the plan so the North Arrow points to the left or to the top of the sheet. Page 1 CITY OF RENTONWI DRAFTING STANDARDS �II II 14. Show and clearly label property lines a) Cover sheet drawing. (with distances and bearings), right-of- b) Removal/grading/paving/storm way lines, sensitive areas and set backs drainage drawings (large projects and all existing and proposed easements may require separate removal/paving with their recording numbers. Show drawings). existing and proposed building c) Structure/retaining wall drawings as- footprints. sociated with civil improvements. draw- 15. Label all streets by City of Renton d) Construction erosion control ings. names. e) Sanitary sewer drawings. 16. Plans shall include a key for f) Water systems drawings. abbreviations and a legend for.symbols g) Street lighting drawings. where such are used. h) Traffic signals drawings i) Signing/channelization drawings. In addition to 'the drafting standards j) Landscaping drawings (for right-of- listed above, the following information way landscaping). should be included within the utility and k) Traffic control(detouring and/or transportation plans as appropriate: construction sequencing) drawings. I) Miscellaneous drawings. Plan, Profile and Cross Section m) Composite utility drawings. Information Required (General): 3. Existing Improvements and Topo- 1. Each submittal shall contain the follow- graphy: Show all existing underground ing project information on the cover and surface improvements and sheet or first sheet: topography in proximity to the project. The information must be shown for the * Title: Project name(add explanatory full width of the right of way or the note if project name has changed). easement and for a sufficient distance * Table of Contents (if more than 3 on either side of the right of way or sheets). easement to show possible impacts on • Vicinity Map (Scale sufficient to adjacent properties and/or the cover project limits on one sheet or relationship to related facilities. 1"= 200', whichever is greater). Information on existing surface and ' General description of site, including underground City of Renton facilities Quarter Section, Township and may be obtained from the fourth floor Range. information counter. Other utility in- * Name and phone number of archi- formation may be obtained from the re- tect/engineering firm preparing spective utility owners (i.e. Puget Sound plans. Power and Light, U.S. West, Washington Natural Gas, etc.). 2. Organize the plans such that they are separated into type of improvement and 4. Include a composite utility plan sheet PI drawing order. Each improvement type showing existing utilities (half tone) and should include all plans, profiles, notes, new utilities. Scale should be 1" _ sections, details, schedules, diagrams, 50'. Composite utility plan should etc. for that facility. The required order indicate all utility crossings and call out of drawings is as follows: invert elevations of pipelines at all cross- ing points. Utilities of concern include water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, power, cable TV, gas, telephone, street Page 2 • pti�Y 0,� CITY OF RENTON ; DRAFTING STANDARDS lighting, traffic signal wiring, signal 10.Submit two (2) copies of the drainage interconnect and sign wiring. report in accordance with the attached 5. Label call out for each section or detail "Drainage Report Content List". in the plans. Section and detail call outs 11.Incorporate City of Renton storm water, should be shown on both the plan and sanitary sewer, water and temporary the section detail and should include erosion control plan notes into assigned section/detail numbers and appropriate plan sheets. (Notes plan sheet location number. attached) 6. Sewer, Water and Drainage Improve- 12.For building permit applications, submit meets: Provide profiles of all proposed the quantity of blue line or black line sewer, water and drain lines. Show copies of the plans as are required by existing underground improvements the City's Building Section. For non- within ten (10) feet of where they cross building permit related submittal of or connect to the new improvements. engineering plans, submit four (4) Show the _ storm water drainage copies of the plans along with 2 copies discharge point to a public system or of the Storm Drainage Report, to the 4th natural water course. Provide drainage floor Customer Service counter of the system details whether or not detention Renton Municipal Building. of storm water is required. 13. Stationing shall be provided on all 7. Grades: All profiles and cross sections centerlines and reference lines. All must show the proposed as well as the intersecting street centerlines, utility existing grade. crossings, right of way lines, property 8. All watermains are required to be within lines, railroad crossings, drainage utility easements granted to the City of structures and signal and light poles Renton in a form acceptable to the shall be referenced by station and offset. Utility. Easement widths for watermains Curve date shall be provided for road- shall be 15 feet minimum width and way centerline and right of way curves. shall include area sufficient for all All PC's, PT's, PRC's, PCC's and AP's shall necessary appurtenances such as be stationed and offset. hydrants, valves, meters, blocking, etc. In addition to the items listed above, the Easements shall be shown on the following should be included within the watermain plan sheets. (See Easement plans: Criteria Section). Storm Water Utility Plans: 9. Sanitary sewers and storm drain lines 1. Label all manholes, clean outs and catch not within street right of way shall be basins in sequential number. Label rim within easements granted to the City of and invert elevations and catch basin Renton in a form acceptable to the and manhole size and type. Utility. The easement widths will vary according to pipe diameter, but shall 2. Include flow direction arrows on all not be less than 15 feet wide. storm lines. Easements shall be shown on the 3. Label pipe size, length, material and sanitary sewer and/or storm drainage slope. plan sheets. (See Easement Criteria 4. Include datum and benchmark Section). information on each plan and/or profile sheet. Page 3 sr p l CITY OF RENTON C. DRAFTING STANDARDS + ,°, + • 5. Show spot elevations of pavement in d) Specify the construction sequence. parking lots, and run off flow direction e) Provision for perimeter runoff arrows. control at property boundaries. 6. Show roof leaders and footings drains f) Show all cut and fill slopes, connecting into conveyance system. indicating the top and bottom of slope catch lines. 7. Show all stubout locations for future g) Provide all necessary details to connections. illustrate the intent of the TESCP 8. Include section details for rockeries in plan. grading paving plans. h) Show interim catch basin sedimentation protection. 9. Show the following for all storm water I) Show all drainage pipes and ditches. facilities: Include pipe inverts, minimum a) Show and label at least two cross- slopes and cover, and ditch grades sections through detention pond. and dimensioning. One cross-section shall show the j) Specify areas to receive special control structure. treatment such as jute matting, rock b) Show location and detail of lining, sod, mulching and seeding. emergency overflows and spillways. k) Provide all necessary dimensioning c) Provide invert elevations of all pipes, and details for sediment traps, inlets, tanks, vaults and spot berms, pond storage, pond outlet elevations of the pond bottom. Call structure, filtering devices, inlet/ out pond volume and dimensions, outlet stabilization techniques, and design surface elevation. control/restrictor devices, rock d) Provide plan and section views and check dams, silt fabric fences, pond details of all rock protection and inlet baffles, and other design energy dissipaters. elements. e) Section and plan view on Waste Water Utility Plans: restrictor/control structure must be 1. Label all manholes and clean outs in shown and adequately detailed, sequential number. Label rim and invert including size and elevation of elevations and manhole size and type. orifices. f) Show length, width, and bottom 2. Include flow direction arrows on all width dimensions for all biofiltration storm lines. I and water quality swales and storm 3. Label pipe size, length, material and water conveyance swales. Include slope. sectional view, showing side slopes and design depth of flow. 4. Include datum and benchmark g) Include seeding material inform- information on each plan and/or profile ation. sheet. 5. Show spot elevations of pavement in 10.The Temporary Erosion and parking lots, and run off flow direction Sedimentation Control Plan should show arrows. the following: 6. Show all stubout locations for future a) Proposed topography. connections and side sewer connection b) Clearing limits. stubs.. c) Location and details for construction entrance. Page 4 Ue Y � CITY OF RENTON • • DRAFTING STANDARDS .'N` ° Water Utility Plans: be selected, and modified to suit the project conditions. 1. Show "before" and "after" connection details for watermain connections. 8. Plans for watermains located in Refer to.City of Renton standard details easements over, on and across private for samples of connection details. property shall contain the following 2. For utility crossings which involve information and standards: vertical offsets in water line, provide a. Locate watermains in driving lanes detail showing the crossing, including (not under parking stalls). vertical bends, blocking, shackle rods, b. Show locations of all hydrants and pipe invert elevations. (proposed and existing) within 300- 3. Watermains south of SW Sunset and east feet of site. of SR 167 will be polywrapped. c. Show location and size of Detector Double Check Valve assembly for 4. Show locations of vertical crosses for polypigging of new mains. fire sprinkler vaults. Also, show location of fire department 5. Call out types of fitting connections (MJ connections, direction of pumper = mechanical joint, FL= flanged, PE = ports, and distance from curb. pain end, RJ=restrained joint). d. Show size and location of domestic 6. Hydrants shall be free and clear of all water meters and of irrigation water meters and the associated double structures, landscaping or other check valve assembly. interferences for a minimum of 3-feet of e. Show location of carports, clearance around the hydrant. dumpsters, and mailboxes. 7. Show Renton details for the following f. Show primary hydrant within 150- items (note that 12 point minimum feet of structure, and no closer than lettering size will be acceptable for 50-feet. Hydrant leads over 50-feet Renton notes, and that "stickyback" is long shall be minimum 8-inch not acceptable): diameter. a. Fire hydrant Transportation Plans: b. Appropriately sized water services Roadway Improvements include but are and meters. not limited to paving, curbs, gutters, c. .Compound meter, when used sidewalks, driveways, curb ramps, storm • d. Temporary or permanent blow-offs, drainage structures, street lighting, traffic when used. signals, signing, channelization and e. 12-inch gate valve, or > 16-inch landscaping plans. butterfly valve in vault, when used. f. Air-vacuum release valve, when 1. Establish base line or centerline used' adequately dimensioned from at least • g. Irrigation water double check valve two known reference points or assembly,when used. monuments approved by the City of h. Detector double check valve Renton. assembly for fire sprinkler vault, when used. 2. Adequately dimension all improvements i. Details of watermain connections. off of established base line or centerline. Note that the correct detail(s) should 3. All plans 'shall be stationed, with true point of origin for stationing Page 5 CITY OF RENTON 0 4 aec% DRAFTING STANDARDS • dimensioned from monument. If 0+00 for luminaire schedule, notes and stationing point does not coincide with details. monument, tie in with station equation. 14.Traffic control plan is required on all Stationing should increase from left to right-or bottom to top. projects. 4. When possible street improvements in 15. On composite utility plan, show right-of-way should have profile drawing overhead and underground electrical and communication facilities. beneath plan view. 16. Plans for structures shall be full 5. Provide adequate cross-sections to dimensional and shall show complete assure that proposed improvements will construction elevations and loading correspond with existing conditions, diagrams when applicable. All plans and with City ordinance requirements shall provide the necessary detail for improvements. required for preparation of bar 6. Provide adequate information on schedules and bar placement without roadway geometry, including PC, PT, the necessity of making separate shop or PRC, PCC, AP, radius, curve angle, placement drawings. Structural steel tangent length, curve length and all use shall include such detail 'that shop other information required to drawings can be prepared without adequately establish the geometry. additional design. Provide adequate information on 17. Each submittal shall include on the first roadway profile, including vertical curve approach grades and length. of vertical or second sheet of the Transportation Plans a "Summary of Quantities"' curve and all other information required to adequately establish the profile. describing the items to be removed, relocated, or installed, and their 7. Provide spot elevations and slope quantities. callouts-where improvements abut with existing pavement. Show top of curb Easement Criteria: elevation at suitable intervals along Utilities and roadway improvements that curbline, and all break in grades. are to be a part of the public system and 8. Provide profile drawings for all private represent a part of the City's capital roads, and.for driveways whose slope improvements shall be constructed in exceeds 5%. - public rights of way or easements. Easements granted to the City of Renton for 9. Include all appropriate City of Renton the placement of public utilities shall be in a standard details in plans. form acceptable to the City. The following 10.Show bearings for all new roadway information shall be provided for all- alignments. easements: 11.Clearly call out existing and proposed 1. Legal description, which shall be right-of-way, and dimension. certified by a registered Land Surveyor 12.Show all existing and proposed or Professional Engineer if it is a Metes easements on plans. & Bounds or a Centerline based 13.Design street lighting, signals, signing description. and channelization, per. City Standards, 2. A scaled drawing on 8-1" by 11" sheet and include appropriate City of Renton showing the easement in a clear legible Standard details. Also include table of manner. wiring schedule, wiring schematic, table Page 6 oti`�Y CITY Y OF RENTON • ,", . DRAFTING STANDARDS then a separate right of way plan shall be prepared giving the following plan information. a. Easement limits, easement centerline, centerline stationing, bearings and distances. b. Location of the utility within the easement. c. Distance from the utility line to the easement centerline. d. Centerline stationing and offset for all valves, fittings, meters, hydrants, vaults, manholes, blow-off assemblies, bends, outfall structures, utility crossings, intersection with street centerlines and property lines. e. Watermains, sanitary sewers and storm drain lines shall normally be located 2.5 feet off of the easement centerline. f. Easements for utilities shall be fifteen (15) feet in width or greater if required by the Utility Director to accommodate larger pipe sizes, access needs or other special requirements. • Page 7 DRAINAGE REPORT CONTENT LIST A.) Stamped and signed by a Registered Washington P.E.on front page. Complete Technical Information Report(TIR)Worksheet that is enclosed. (see attached) B. Briefly describe the construction involved. C. Describe existing and proposed on-site drainage features. D. Core and Special Requirements: 1. Show that Core Requirements 1-5 in Section 1.2 are addressed. 2. Show that all Special requirements in Section 1.3 that are applicable to this project are addressed. E. Use the SBUH/SCS hydrograph method to compute required on-site detention. (Using 2,10, and 100 24 hour design storm events for pre-developed and post-developed conditions (6 separate peak flows). This should show sizing for the peak rate runoff control facility,with a routing table. F. Biofiltration design calcs (per Section 4.6), if for project site sub-basins with more than 5000 square feet of new impervious area subject to vehicular use or storage of chemicals. G.Wet pond sizing design caics (if there is more than 1 acre of new paved impervious area and meets other conditions of Special Requirement#4). H. Conveyance velocity calculations(show that major conveyance pipes velocity >= 3 fps). I. Conveyance capacity calculations. Show that all conveyance pipes on-site have capacity for the 25-year design event(Hydraulic grade line > = 0.5 feet below rim of structure). Also show that the 100-year event conveyance fulfills Core Requirement#4. J.A Level 1 Downstream Analysis,as described in Core Requirement#2. (Level 2 or 3 analysis may be requested later if a downstream problem is found or anticipated from review of the initial submittal of the Drainage report). TEMPORARY EROSION/SEDIMENTATION CONTROL A. Proper design for containment of erosion on-site shown on construction plans. B. Calculations for a sediment trap (for sites less than 3 acres) or a sediment pond (for larger than 3 acres), as shown in Section 5.4. ALL REFERENCES REFER TO THE 1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL. • Page 1 of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT ENGINEER AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner Project Name Address Location Phone Township Project Engineer Range Section Company Project Size AC Address Phone Upstream Drainage Basin Size AC PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION PART 4 OTHER PERMITS E1 Subdivision DOF/G HPA IT Shoreline Management fl Short Subdivision COE 404 0 Rockery Grading 0 DOE Dam Safety n Structural Vaults Commercial FEMA Floodplain 0 Other Other El COE Wetlands El HPA PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN Community Drainage Basin •. PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS El River 0 Floodplain 0 Stream n Wetlands El Critical Stream Reach I Seeps/Springs Depressions/Swales IT High Groundwater Table • CI Lake El Groundwater Recharge O Steep Slopes El Other El Lakeside/Erosion Hazard PART 7 SOILS Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Velocities • Additional Sheets Attatched 1/90 Page 2 of 2 . ' ' King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET �. 1-ART 8 DEVELOPMENT UMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT Ch.4-Downstream Analysis n Additional Sheets Attatched PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION El Sedimentation Facilities El Stabilize Exposed Surface CI Stabilized Construction Entrance n Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Perimeter Runoff Control I—1 Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris 0 Clearing and Grading Restrictions El Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities 0 Cover Practices El Flag Limits of NGPES El Construction Sequence El Other Cl Other i•ART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM • Grass Lined Channel El Tank El Infiltration Method of Analysis El Pipe System El Vault n Depression 0 Open Channel El Energy Dissapator 0 Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation El Dry Pond El Wetland El Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage 0 Wet Pond El Stream CI Regional Detention • Brief Description of System Operation Facility Related Site Limitations IT Additional Sheets Attatched Reference Facility Limitation PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS (May require special structural review) El Drainage Easement 0 Cast in Place Vault Cl Other fl Access Easement El Retaining Wall El Native Growth Protection Easement 0 Rockery>4'High n Tract 0 Structural on Steep Slope n Other I•ART 14 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER • I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site.Actual site conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the attatchments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided here is accurate. 1/90 • UTILITIES EASEMENT THIS INSTRUMENT, made this day of 19_; by and between and ; and ; and ; and ; 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$ • paid by Grantee, and other valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, 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: U#1/2 4/5/ESMTBNIP/bh • Said heretofore mentioned grantee, its successors or assigns, shall have the right, without prior notice or proceeding at law, at such times as may be necessary to enter upon said above described property for the purpose of constructing, maintaining, repairing, altering or reconstructing said utilities, or making any connections therewith, without incurring any legal obligations or liability therefore, provided, that such construction, maintaining, repairing, altering or reconstruction of said utilities shall be accomplished in such a manner that the private improvements existing in the right(s)-of-way shall not be disturbed or damaged, they will be replaced in as good a condition as they were immediately before the property was entered upon by the Grantee. The Grantor shall fully use and enjoy the aforedescribed premises, including the right to retain the right to use the surface of said right-of-way if such use does not interfere with installation and maintenance of the utilities. However, the grantor shall not erect buildings or structures over, under or across the right-of-way during the existence of such utilities. This easement, shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding on the Grantor, his successors, heirs and assigns. Grantors covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement. and ; and ; and and CORPORATE FORM: STATE OF ) ) SS COUNTY OF ) On this day of 19 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of , duly commissioned and sworn personally appeared and ; to me known to be the and respectively, of the corporation that executed the 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 authorized to execute the said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year in this certificate above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at U#2/2 • 4/5/ESMTBNIP/bh • • N44Qr.4,0.21 ;k. WA�RL11.1e EASE1►tE►.IT SICss'f t; 4 i b.0-t D1STR1ou-no, FACILITY DAKKDALE .4.W.4 Mo1J4TER RoAp ;r, , ,, REIJTnIJ t WA6L11N(oTo�J • ..• ��` $ . • Trab. �'� ` I; 4TA sn+91.44 ail �s 11+16.t(Mo.ISzER RR) t•G•t� �% b. .S1n.4�� (7r1 srvF S.W.) ). * ewes 2,•e_ A4 ON S TE RD. 0� y -�.R•236.M ' 333.76' r 1' Vie;►-' L•lair.is . • .��, • ' 1 y I • 0 4.260.Ie:, t • • y o� g ` ¢ESMT. •- (/1 �' dr--•S.EO'15'09 tJ. Q' t Parcel / " s i Parcel • 449.985 Q Sq•fl.- 309,997 S fw" (Ind Voo.�0ooc A kY E. e I STA Z�r1.4;9 i ke,. of Rood) / ti • de FSMT: . I 4.�L'11'14'h1. u s 03 jj,1.n. / ,. 111.05' �I' c.c. . .9Z6Ad/ng • _.. _ . „.-4TA 22+5134 P.G.n STA too y'�•,�_9/6.t2• Of a - +2.1..55 ry Q ESMT.//S.P7 _ • (t.tv+11�.)a 4.'10'061S W. :l' b y l01.'71• " /•" STA • v • 21+44.1.1 STA{,+Sq.So ESMT. Ob Nare C9 a d.1�22'4a w. a 4,er;7 41,-1. ''' 0I11T 4Sax' 4T b0+� ...ee7.s0_ ..:. � .... n Nt4.6 Oa. D N O1. 21' •40•W 14 /ei sewv8G A 15+get. P �' 26.33 dts E41+1T. 4,ESHT.„ h i \ ESMT. PoI.1T�A ST4 4 t'41.'S 1 E: 4.0b o1 p• W N.1'224o Ml. 4TA IC+29.5', 20+15.4; g STAB 0•00 s ST I.+Sq.se, II; 14tc.b3f. E4HT . , j 'to gr. (o►u.ES AL.E)' . ' _STA� S. se 6-1 to"t l • STA0+00 is STA�;,,4 t1•Sv'( • S T 4t,9�.50 STA ESMT. . o COAIGESDALE) t I • b Co.41' /"or e/ 4 ., d. tsar. {o S ' 6/2,557 Se.i • .4+1-i 50 •I l'i.lEdce S. .:r oq"AJ. 4E4MT. Ic 41.40 S.t G'03'ext.'4. a Parcel z 1.11.bb' 4 450,002 SQ.FcsFa_ • s Iii • rT.•4TA 4 'Ad,: t 4 i4Mr, $ 150e00' STA 0+ . 4.erodeo v.!... '.'tA 1tM Ca 0A�) in"' f,4c /.236.99' STA 10+01..4A Y •\•P A• MAY •. %. ! fir, MT. �,, A'74%373% ' STA 04-0A.11. 1' • .!' ..14 - . ..4 ESMT• t 4. O�oq • 14.b o' IJ.Ir oD'1i."e. . p IM.1/4' • ,6' .S«1 ' 241 : I • Poore' 1�01T ,6•4' ' • ;ro1.IT... • VIA'I+oo.ttlr ,.. N iE4MT. yip .g ST 2+1.1.44. 4 S0'el,'Oq 1J • p1�9 •1' _wiry\'' k E�Ti « f►.00' ••- 4 KMT. (11`�. STis'W RA ;1�N.Zq.•ao 1ls t. ••• 0 4.1'S1.'SI"E, i.t S0 , • % �' Ti.ie.i a See 01 Oq N%'1,.So - 13�. • 4 KMT - _•_ ... ... TA 4.4-gS.41. N.ts•s I'2.4 1.1. 4 ESMT 4 ESHT. ' ' ►1.22'�.o t3'W. 11.00 ,N. 1'SI.'S1 W. Ig1.52' STA t+A0,44. 21Z.5S' ST/j S4-0.4,01 • • • 61.:%or. 24 BUSH,ROED i HITCHINGS,INC. •OWL ENGINEERS&LANO SURVEYORS • • SEAM WAININOTON 323.4144 . I, 064244 o4- b-o1-al 0 SANITARY SEWER NOTES & ilCIFICATIONS 1. ALL WORK MATERIALS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CITY OF RENTON UTILITY DEPARTMENT AND THE LATEST EDITION OF THE WSDOT/APWA STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 2. THE HOURS OF WORK IN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE LIMITED TO 8:30 A.M. TO 3:30 P.N. ON WEEKDAYS UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AT 235-2620. ALL STREET CLOSURES, PARTIAL OR FULL, SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND 911 SHALL BE NOTIFIED 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION" PREPARED BY WASHINGTON STATE CHAPTER AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION, LATEST EDITION (APWA) AND CITY OF RENTON STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. 4. ALL LOCATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THE TRUE AND CORRECT LOCATION SO AS TO AVOID DAMAGE OR DISTURBANCE. 5. A PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE AND A 24 HOUR NOTICE SHALL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO STARTING NEW CONSTRUCTION. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO SECURE ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION. (INSPECTION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY OF RENTON).. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE UTILITY DEPARTMENT 24 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF BACKFILLING ALL CONSTRUCTION. 6 CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS, METHODS AND SEQUENCES OF CONSTRUCTION AND FOR THE SAFETY OF WORKERS AND OTHERS ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. 7. IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN STREET USE AND ANY OTHER RELATED PERMITS PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 8. PLANS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF RENTON, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARMEMT SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER ALL OTHER PLANS. 9. A COPY OF THESE APPROVED PLANS MUST BE ON THE JOB SITE WHENEVER CONSTRUCTION IS IN PROGRESS. 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE CITY OF RENTON WITH AN AS-BUILT DRAWING OF THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM WHICH HAS BEEN STAMPED AND SIGNED BY A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER OR LICENSED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR. 11. BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED EQUALLY ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PIPE IN LAYERS WITH A LOOSE AVERAGE DEPTH OF 6 INCHES, MAXIMUM DEPTH OF 8 INCHES, THOROUGHLY TAMPING EACH LAYER TO 95 PERCENT OF MAXIMUM DENSITY. THESE COMPACTED LAYERS MUST EXTEND FOR ONE PIPE DIAMETER ON EACH SIDE OF THE PIPE OR TO THE SIDE OF THE TRENCH. MATERIALS TO COMPLETE THE FILL OVER PIPE SHALL BE THE SAME AS DESCRIBED. 12. OPEN CUT ROAD CROSSINGS FOR UTILITY TRENCHES ON EXISTING TRAVELED ROADWAY SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITH CRUSHED ROCK AND MECHANICALLY COMPACTED. CUTS INTO THE EXISTING ASPHALT SHALL BE NEATLINE CUT WITH SAW IN A CONTINUOUS LINE. A TEMPORAUY MIX PATCH MUST BE PLACED IMMEDIATELY AFTER BACKFILL AND COMPACTION. A PERMANENT HOT MIX PATCH SHALL BE PLACED WITHIN 10-- DAYS AND SHALL BE PER CITY OF RENTON CURRENT STANDARDS. 13. DATUM SHALL BE CITY OF RENTON, U.S.C. AND G.S. 14. ALL DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE SEEDED AND MULCHED OR OTHERWISE STABILIZED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE PREVENTION OF ON-SITE EROSION AFTER THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. 15. ALL PIPE AND APPURTENANCES SHALL BE LAID ON A PROPERLY PREPARED FOUNDATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 7-02.3(1) OF THE CURRENT STATE OF WASHINGTON STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION. THIS SHALL INCLUDE NECESSARY LEVELING OF THE TRENCH BOTTOM OR THE TOP OF THE FOUNDATION MATERIAL AS WELL AS PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF REQUIRED BEDDING MATERIAL TO UNIFORM GRADE SO THAT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE PIPE WILL BE SUPPORTED ON A UNIFORMLY DENSE UNYIELDING BASE. PIPE BEDDING SHALL BE PEA GRAVEL 6" ABOVE AND BELOW THE PIPE. 50 16. SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) RUBBER GASKETED ASTM D 3034, SDR 35, OR DUCTILE IRON CLASS fC: 1 17. IN UNIMPROVED AREAS, MANHOLE TO EXTEND MINIMUM 6 INCH AND MAXIMA 18 INCH ABOVE FINISHED GRADE. IN PAVED AREA, COVER 'MUST SLOPE IN ALL DIRECTIONS TO MATCH PAVING. 1 SASESPEC:If/amd CITY OF RENTON I, STORM WATER DRAINAGE NOTES 11/30/88 1. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS,A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING MUST BE HELD WITH THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, DESIGN ENGINEER. 2. All construction shall be in accordance with the"1988 Standard Specifications for Road,Bridge and Municipal Construction"prepared by W.S.D.O.T.,and the American Public Works Association(APWA),as amended by the City of Renton Department of Public Works.. 3. The storm drainage system shall be constructed according to the approved plans which are on file in the Department of Public Works. Any deviation from the approved plans will require written approval from the City of Renton Department of Public Works,Design Engineer or Storm Water Utility.. 4. A copy of these approved plans must be on the job site whenever construction is in progress.. 5. Datum shall be U.S.G.S.unless otherwise approved by City of Renton Department of Public Works. Reference benchmark and elevation are noted on the plans.. 6. All sedimentation/erosion facilities must be in operation prior to clearing and building construction,and they must be satisfactorily maintained until construction is completed and the potential for on-site erosion has passed.. 7. All retention/detention facilities must be installed and in operation prior to or in conjunction with all construction activity unless otherwise approved by the Department of Public Works,Storm Water Utility.. CI 8. Grass seed may be applied by hydroseeding. The grass seed mixture,other than City of Renton approved standard mixes,shall be submitted by a Landscape Architect and approved by the Department of Public Works, Storm Water Utility.. 9. All pipe and appurtenances shall be laid on a properly prepared foundation in accordance with Section 7-02.3(1) of the current State of Washington Standard Specification for Road and Bridge Construction. This shall include necessary leveling of the trench bottom or the top of the foundation material as well as placement and compaction of required bedding material to uniform grade so that the entire length of the pipe will be supported on a uniformly dense unyielding base. All pipe bedding shall be APWA Class"C",with the exception of PVC pipe. All trench backfill shall be compacted to minimum 95% for pavement and structural fill and 90% otherwise per ASTM D-1557-70. Pea gravel bedding shall be 6"over and under P.V.C.pipe.. 10. Galvanized steel pipe and aluminized steel pipe for all drainage facilities shall have asphalt treatment#1 or better inside and outside.. 11. Structures shall not be permitted within 10 feet of the spring line of any storm drainage pipe,or 15 feet from the top of any channel bank.. - 12. All catch basin grates shall be depressed 0.10 feet below pavement level.. 13. Open cut road crossings thru existing public right-of-way will not be allowed unless specifically approved by City of Renton Department of Public Works,Design Engineer.. 14. Rock for erosion protection of roadside ditches,where required,shall be of sound quarry rock placed to a depth of 1 foot and must meet the following specifications: 4"-8"/40%-70%passing;2"-4'rock/30%-40% passing; and-2"rock/10%-20%passing.. 15. All building downspouts and footing drains shall be connected to the storm drainage system,unless approved by the Department of Public Works,Design Engineer or Storm Water Utility. An accurately dimensioned Certified as built drawing of this drainage system will be submitted to the City of Renton upon completion.. - 16. Issuance of the Building or Construction Permit by the City of Renton does not relieve the owner of the continuing legal obligation and/or liability connected with storm surface water disposition. Further,the City of Renton does not accept any obligation for the proper functioning and maintenance of the system provided during construction.. 17. The Contractor shall be responsible for providing adequate safeguard,safety devices,protective equipment, flaggers,and any other needed actions to protect the lift,health,and safety of the public,and to protect property in connection with the performance of work covered by the contract. Any work within the traveled right-of-way that may interrupt normal traffic flow shall require an approved traffic control plan by the Traffic Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works. All sections of the W.S.D.O.T.Standard Specifications 1-07-23, Traffic Control,shall apply.. 18. Special drainage measures will be required if the project location is within the aquifer protection area. EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY OCCURS, A PRE- CONSTRUCTION MEETING MUST BE HELD WITH THE CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, DESIGN ENGINEER. 2. All limits of clearing and areas of vegetation preservation as prescribed on the plan shall be clearly flagged in the field and observed during construction. 3. All required sedimentation/erosion control facilities must be constructed and in operation prior to land clearing and/or other construction to insure that sediment laden water does not enter the natural drainage system. All erosion and sediment facilities shall be maintained in a satisfactory condition until such time that clearing and/or construction is completed and potential for on-site erosion has passed. The implementation, maintenance, replacement and additions to erosion/sedimentation control systems shall be the responsibility of the permittee. 4. The erosion and sedimentation control systems depicted on this drawing are intended to be minimum requirements to meet anticipated site conditions. As construction progresses and unexpected or seasonal conditions dictate, the permittee shall anticipate that more erosion and sedimentation control facilities will be necessary to insure complete siltation control on the proposed site. During the course of construction, it shall be the obligation and responsibility of the permittee to address any new conditions that may be created by his activities and to provide additional facilities, over and above minimum requirements, as may be needed to protect adjacent properties and water quality of the receiving drainage system. 5. Approval of this plan is for erosion/sedimentation control only. It does not constitute an approval of storm drainage design, size nor location of pipes, restrictors, channels, or retention facilities. 6. During the time period of November 1 through March 31, all project disturbed soil areas greater than 5,000 square feet, that are to be left unworked for more than twelve (12) hours, shall be covered by mulch, sodding, or plastic covering. 7. In any area which has been stripped of vegetation and where no further work is anticipated for a period of 30 days or more, all disturbed areas must be immediately stabilized with mulching, grass planting or other approved erosion control treatment applicable to the time of year in question. Grass seeding alone will be acceptable only during the months of April through September inclusive. Seeding may proceed, however, whenever it is in the interest of the permittee, but must be augmented with mulching, netting, or other treatment approved by the City of Renton, outside the specified time period. 8. For all erosion/sedimentation control ponds where the dead storage depth exceeds 6 inches, a fence, a minimum of 3 feet high is required, with 3:1 side slopes. 9. A temporary gravel construction entrance, 24' x 50' x 8" of 4- to 6- inch quarry spalls shall be located at all points of vehicular ingress and egress to the construction site. AJH/tp/002 - . ( " 6 © LAiT Vr RCNtvrl-:PARTMENT OF PUBLIC WOF ' Ji ` r ,—v j THESE NOTES SHALL APPEAR ON ALL PLANS SUBMITTED. 1. All work materials shall be in conformance with the standards and specifications of the Cry of Renton Utility Department and the latest Iedition of the WSDOT/APWA Standards and Specifications,as approved by the City of Renton. A set of approved plans shall be kept on site at all times during construction. 2. The hours of work in the street rightof-Ivey shall be limited to 8:30 AM to 3 30 PM oe weekdays odes otherwise approved in writing by the Department of Public Works at 235-2635• All street dams,partial or full,shall be approved by the Department of Public Works 24 hours in advance. The Police Department.Fire Department,and 911 shall be notified 24 hours in advance. • 3. All locations of misting utilities shown are approximate and it shall be the contractor's responsibility to verify the true and correct location so as to avoid damage or disturbance.-For utility locate call 48-Hour Locators,1 424-5553. 4. All water main pipe.to be cement lined ductile iron pipe conforming to AWWA C110 and C111 or latest revision,thickness Cast 52. Cement mortar lints and seal coating shall conform to AWWA C101 or latest revision. Pipe Faints to beputh-on or mechanical joint. Bedding to be class C. All ductile iron pipe installed South of Sunset Blvd. ppire Way,SR 900)and Wes of SR 167(East alley , Freeway)or in soils of high resistivity shall be polyethylene wrapped per ANSI/AW WA C105-77 Standards- S. Cast iron and ductile iron fittings shall be cement lined, pressure rated as Doted on plans, and in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82. Cement lining shall be in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C104/A21.4.8S. If fittings as 3 inches to 12 inches in diameter and have mechanical joints,the Gain shall be in accordance with either ANSI/AWWA Ci10/A21.10.82 or ANSI/AWWA C153/A2133-84. 3-inch to 12-tech diameter�tings which have mechanical joints and/or flanged jotrtis shall be in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10.82 or a combination of ANSI/AWWA CI10/A2 .10.82 and ANSI AWWA C153/A2133.84 such that the portion of the litho with a mechanical joint(s),may be in accordance with ANSI/AV/WA C153/A2133-84 and that portion of the fitting with flanged joint shall be in accordance with ANSI AWWA C110/A21.30.82 Acceptance testingin accordance with section S3-53 of ANSI/AW VA C153/A21.53-84 or with section 10-43 of ANSI/AWWA C110/A21.10-82 shall obtained by the contractor and transmitted to the owner. , 6. Gate valves shall conform to AWWA CSOO and shall be iron body,bronzed-mounted,double disc with bronze wedging device and 0-ring stuffing box. Valves shall be designed for a minimum water operating pressure of 200 PSI. Gate valves shall be Clow List 14,Mueller Company NO.A2380,or Ptf&H. All valves 12'in diameter and larger,shall be installed in a vault. See water standard detail for 12' Gate Valve Assembly Vault and 1'Bypass Installation. 7. Fire hydrants shall be Corey type (opening with the pressure)conforming to AWWA C-SO4-80 with a 6 inch inlet and a M.V.O.of S inches,two 2.11 inch hose nozzles with national standard 7 inch,60 de es V.threads,O.D.thread 4.875 and root diameter 4.6263,1-1 inch pentagon operating nut opened by turning counter clockwise(left water maim inches 8. tshhall be atl water ra miin nimum of 48 inches below finish grade. Whereches and smaller to maintain a minimum cover tility conflicts occur,wwa below ter h terns are tobe lowered to cleear. and larger 9. All water mains six(6)inches in diameter and larger shall be cleaned with pipe cleaning'PIGS'prior to disinfection. The'Poly Pip' shall be Girard Industries Aqua Swab-AS or approved equal,2 lb/cu ft density foam with 90A durometer urethane rubber coating on the rear of'PIG'only. 'PIGS'shall be cylinder shaped with bullet nose or square end. The City will assist the convector who will perform the cleaning operation. 9a. All water mains and services shall be pressure tested to a minimum of 200 PSI or ISO PSI over operating pressure,in accordance with the specifications of the City of Renton and the Washington State Health Department. All pressure testing shall be done in the presence of a representative of the City of Renton. 9b. All water mains and services shall be disinfected by the injection of a S0 ppm(Minimum concentration)dtlorine ter solution. Dry , Calcium Hypochlorite shall NOT be placed in the pipe as laid. Chlonne shall be metered/injected is accordance with Section 7- 11.3(12)E or 7-113(12)F of the Standard Specifications referenced in 1 above. 10. A preconstruction conference is required prior to any construction. A minimum of 3 (three) working,days notice is required for scheduling.Prior to scheduling the precon a permit information sheet must be supplied to the Utility Engineer's Office. Twenty-four hour notice will be required prior to starting new construction. 11. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to secure all necessary permits prior to starting construction. 12. Installation of corporate stops, water services, lines and meters shall not be dome until all se:vice agreements,meter appliations, construction permits,and payment of fees have been made to the City of Renton. 13. All connection to existing mains to be accomplished by the City of Renton,except wet taps which maybe made by approved wet tap contractors with prior approval of from the Department of Public Works. AU accessary excavation andmateriais to be supplied by the contractor and be on-site prior to City notifications. 14. Inspection will be accomplished by asp rr�esentative of the City of Renton. It shall be the contractor's,espoesbUity to notify the Utility Department 24 hours in advance of backfilling all construction- The contractor as well as the Engineers shall keep as-built drawings. 1S. Contractor to provide plugs and temple!),blow-off assemblies for testing and purity acceptance prior to final tie-in. - 16. All joint restraint systems(shackle rods,nuts,bolts,etc)shall be as manufactured by the Star Manufacturing Company of Columbus Ohio or equal approved in writing by the Department of Public Works . 17. Asphalt and comae street paving shall be same to a minimum depo f�to a u�ts d7dindcheormAeowed to concrete,pavement,sidewalks,curb,gutters,arid driveway appo depth an misting expansion joint. 18. A temporary cold mix asphalt patch shall be placed on the day of initial excavation with a permanent,sealed patch to be placed,to Coy ; of Renton policy,within ten days. Call for subgrade inspection prior to placement of final patch. Trenches will sot be left open over night without prior written approval of the Inspector. 19. For Oty projectso chemicallpt�lore shall theb PVC pipe used PVC shall be schedule 40 in unimproved areas and schedule 80 wader • as. All pe August 14,1989 J DATE /14/89 (WATER UTILITY - GENERAL NOTES SHEE1� 4. • r I' 7 Ab,=/G S/GNAL NEAP NOUNT/NG DETAILS a' A 4sa irirt. i _____,2 4-i i- jil+ Y 1 � ' ' ■ 6" !/A�('/A�L E -lam !/AR/ABL E !/.4ip/A 3L.E �� I MAST ARM L.EN6THH 6] PEVESTi '/AN II cS/GNAL Nitro II /VAST AZ'M All" F/LLET fl/EL,O N ......."TOP-MOUNT PLUMS/ZER' IL .� 0 T .� 1 2 P/rdE ' POLE MOUNT GOUPL A/6 TERM/NAL BOX TUNNEL `/SOR IL I ', 1 i /O'D" PEOES/;E'/AA/ PVSH,�uTToic/ II : Tie � I I• O ...:7.) oi i ,6ACKPLATE 5" _i_L( 1 I . 3.11C('PLATE i DETAIL SHEET DEPARTMI ` OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUP'-!C WORKS ENVIh MENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW EET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: VohSTvu e-Sv1 lC..€JJ p „,�f� DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: rot-- Lif %yr ,0V APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 klAy „ 0`, ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8fr1 ® 499y PROPONENT: First City Development r k. ti PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ttl BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each),'open parking, landscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities -r. � COMMENTS: �Z% Sa v"1 dy �. " / " - 444"--4-e--141rTh /too )8tar ra,3.g, e.4.0 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. 5' G 1/ Signatur of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 envrvsht • �- DEPARTMI'� r OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PU WORKS DEVE, =PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW' 'EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 E CF;SA;SS M;RV M P-109-8f9 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC:24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWIN DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht DEPARTM'T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PU7'"'C WORKS �, ENVI NMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW .'IEET N/v/�`osa REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: eLLArrekeiRcurV11 � 4`>c�n 'V DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 0 6 f APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 � 99� ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-881 lr ,. PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan Impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS:J ,.A115,e,a/lap a.' TAP �i ,i p4,Wee✓"�A� '`T�jQr'i Ct,«��Qc� l evG rfT, '1,trvlv/4, S c-G 4,d "a.,-'k i /Vae e,i ar /e5,-.e r''— p7a,,,,A-..-/pt 7.' >A'eE- mar' el'`''fc tz _4 6d® — ;"r76i-er �r f�tt� s y f/ � ` ` ® �� �Gd2� f 7lll'rfr "�76i'G/ `mac' lJ pfeva,-.... --2;,:w ' a/ f�� ���/ A z i 7eL I 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. /77 Si nature of Director or ed Re esentative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvshl Ciig6r,,, A 42,v -2‘,..(-7 ,v2'y /.,. "-2c* _I,V .,/,,e . IC,: ''''' d 2 --q 1 ./100,,,T -�/ 1/ ..2_,9,0,4J - ro/ fW -47/, /Al€7 1 d' o 'd//7---72 c 1, >w, gg "0 / J� �' .We' ' ,per _______'? '. -->..k ... ,,A-- ,7 .2..7 ---pf,,,,,,,7‘ ----- 2/ ,--- (1 ii p yte,i0 ,L ., ter,"71,7`s .s ,, ',� p b' 6-1 47 C'` ��av ��,v ip moo/ . '5i d.59 r±.?„).i,'Z �2' /: j/2' - ,ram — 121V27,I di J 14e,yi/1-'7 2,,p7.2-9----e iel i 0H--....:72,_ --a.7",/,-,.O' c .i'ioi,e7.4,/ -"-- e4- 77'7A'',/ ,"1-,0,c 0 4,�d�21�/27 ,4-7,1 17/ 9/1- ram!V d ,'~ A/i J -7/9 �� .//,"'"fr", -07j7.1_. ' ---;/--3e ----- //,-4/,7 ii,7 ,/ ,,7,A1"eie, #.2 /,--,a,,,,,p../if ,i- f,e7 wo d---•-,_:-/..,,a/.-0,7 ____22 / ,/___y_fs-A1 ---Af (7)-717,,,- ,7 ___.. ....,_ - -, ',-1 e ',-<, --- 7P7 "99'°- 1-f-".--(7" C 11 /J- z--/19-,a,/ ,,,,, 0 ' ,0',,,, 77 . -/frri,./j / `--- "2 A ' ''". 71 a- ' d klY 4 'sue 72. a7, . ,•/o a,,2 .%.-705,,, d . .--2• i,/,a 1-4'` ---- ----1 7',�-�2a vd -2 2✓ ,--erde7, — ,dip - '5 ??Z "'I9%' i 'IAllriiir .gyp 0?)/. .,,, ,,--7�� :'dv, .�",i A7 old'-'l'n"/, , '.,.. _ ,,,, x? ,T 4 a.e...-0ld,,,,," -7.-r ,jam dv,o- -4,. .4.,,,/, . 22._ 7,- ,2-‘,„_.c7j' 44-9,, wdv,vv: - 9'___2..~,I.. , , .5_14,7y2),„ /,-,7,79 Ar4,,,, 5.-:y/dez.-- - 7;/0T___2...--- v,". 6#7.7".37,, i r .Dy ai 4,9i,mod L/s 0,77•e- 7-7n?' .2.M�1.e.‘?,1v,,/ -v wji-i,J. g DEPARTM—"T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUP'='C WORKS DEVI_ _iPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-BM PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E - SEC:24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: e,/,!'j,�i���i APPROVEDPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED DATE: . _ SIG A UR OF DIRECTOR THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht ,4111 DEPARTME="'OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PURuf:WORKS P4.4 ENVI[. IMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW, :EET c frit, S�o� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Pa. J(I/� oiv DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/ 1 199' APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 Ii � h ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-81111 � 11 CL PROPONENT: First City Development MAY 2 9 1991 PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an o fI leark o_R ex on a c� rrently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square.feet)—`'lT-ra QA�f r fisad to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open—�arking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and'landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: u _ fr1/4— We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probabieiimp ct or areas where additional Information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 77( i ture of Direct or uthorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 envrvsht DEPARTMI- •OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUE ; WORKS DEVE:�_PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW} EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SS M;RVM P-109-88 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review, the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED • 2. %� =' �v DATE: O SIGNATURE OF DIRE TOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvshl DEPARTMF OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUr WORKS ENVII'__ JIMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW' ti ,EET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: pp11C,� DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 � �DIVISION ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-V1 �� o�y PROPONENT: First City Development JUN � PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII 1 y �99� BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an officepar•' it o xQn a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract . l �r,,9 osed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services \./ 16. Utilities COMMENTS: R(A c e_) axp6uvilivLe- i Pa-c,j' ()AAA-, b bcoto),-, u1 crti, am- sc,ppn—-f` cc o,L 6 VVt,t_fi' ��'Crivv viAt ct4.1,uLw /LQ (A-t4 0-&Q_ • pa 06LA cL8 . 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. vl, ki D LQ I cg Signature of DirectoVorAuth' i ed Representative Date Rev.6/88 envrvsht DEPARTM--'T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUr'''C WORKS DEVI=. _PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW IEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-01 First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/Vill BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts -- these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG: 4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: �P APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED waiL pGALL/P 5 oG_Gt-2..J Sko u,C.cu o pw 2 0 i k€c-t ODATE: O O(0�I SIGNATURE OF DIR TOR 0 THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht DEPARTM,—"T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PU"° ',WORKS - ENVI .NMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEVI JEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: rG uP..V'Y6 aln ,wvicrryo� �Div/e/0y� DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 0� APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 Ai ., I99 f PROPONENT: First Cit Develo mentSA;SSM;RVMP-109-8A1 ���; 1, c� Y p PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/Ianscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • �/ 14. Transportation I/ 15. Public Services t 16. Utilities COMMENTS: NO M4.1.4 .r twlcct5 kit) 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 formatio is needed to properly assess this proposal. �a 3d, /?9/ Signature of Director or Authorize.I esentative Date Y Rev. 6/88 envrvsht DEPARTMI` -OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUI; WORKS DEVEL__PMENT APPLICATION REVIEW EET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SS M;RV M P-109- ,8r1 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts --these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with respect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline impacts. LOCATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP: 23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION X.,,FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: g()A. 6'e j ta,4 .r l APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS SC.NOT APPROVED • -�• i31� . K57i'k�1( 7ryi CS a K I á /% Vide Incotma /.ice ,, Uat+-a 'Goole e_ o /oirII:K QAtic e �or Cf t-e •cU 6) 'it- Iep7i CCCCd5S Qn �( �GItn%/1 rir�,'`ts die •Vot Altred/ OS VOKUI C‘o-r 7 i D ti / ww I. " DATE: 3 SIGNATURE OF D CTOR OR AUTHORI` 1 REPRESENTATIVE / REV. 5/90 devrvsht 401 CERTIFICATION OF NOTIFICATION OF ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS/SITE PLAN 1 * * *FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY* * * PROJECT TITLE: � V'1 Gr T'�O2d .V%r APPLICANT: (�-=,BC.k 11 attik APPLICATION NUMBER: SA 'oil- 88 TA Lol The following is a list of adjacent property owners and their addresses. A notification of the pending site plan application shall be sent to these individuals as prescribed by Renton City Code, Chapter 7 Section 38 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 relating to site plan approval. ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER King County 500 A, King Co. Adm. Bldg. 377920-0090 Seattle, WA Damson Birtcher Fund c/o Birtcher Properties 918800-0080 - Commercial 15660 NE36thSt, #208 Redmond , WA 98052 City of Renton 200 Mi11 Avenue South 918800-0150 Renton, WA 98055 232404-9098 First City Developments 800 5th Ave, Suite 4170 132304-9024 Corp. Seattle, WA 98104 132304-9083 132304-9086 918800-0140 • • I CITY OF RENTON AUGRI7C 04198 BIALIDING/TONING DEPT. • - 41. • ASSESSOR'S NAME ADDRESS PARCEL NUMBER • • CERTIFICATION Paul R. Coppock , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property owners and their addresses were taken from the records of the King County Assessor as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me. a Notary Public. in and for the State of Washington residing at 'fit g on the Ord day of Q.v..wah VzR2NAZZ . YNa • SIGNED: (___ / CERTIFICATION OF MAILING triyp StTt�a �ravat 0� SituoMA�ht I. 9tw4Lr&k. �ereby certify that notices of fpt re ailed on 30 1911 . to each listed adjacent property owner as prescribed by law. ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me. a Notary Public. i and for the State of Washington residing at on the 3o — day of 00.111 @ IIIIIi 0`,41.1ET J. A••i e QQ;:siuk.tbe•. �••. SIGNED: 2tuatEL 18 NO ��,"". N 142 PUBLIC 9 • 1$07t�. 9,{tb..4)1 FORM 20B öJi JONES&STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC./2820 NORTHUP WAY,SUITE 100/BELLEVUE, WA 98004 206/822-1077 FAX 206/822-1079 DATE: May 21, 1991 TO: Mary Lynne Myer City of Renton, Long Range Planning FROM: Jonathan H. Ives EL. Jeff Berglund SUBJECT: Status of Black River Great Blue Heron Colony as of May 20, 1991 This memorandum regarding the status of the Black River great blue heron colony. has been prepared per your request of May 15, 1991. Throughout the 1991 nesting season, the Black River great blue heron-colony has been attacked numerous times by an adult bald eagle. Reports of eagle attacks have been reported by Susan Krom of the Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation, Jones & Stokes Associates (JSA) staff (Denman pers. comm.), and staff of the City of Renton Parks & Recreation Department (Betlach pers. comm.). These attacks have left the status of the heron colony in question. Methodology The great blue heron colony has been surveyed by JSA several times during the 1991 nesting season, on February 2, 1991; April 6 and 14, 1991; and May 17 and 20, 1991. During these surveys, the nesting colony was observed from observation points located on Tract A and on the north side of the site. In addition, on May 20th a survey was conducted within the riparian grove. Information gathered included notes on breeding activity (pair formations, nest establishment and defense, copulation, incubation, etc.), and number and location of nest structures. Results February 2. The heron colony was visited on February 2, 1991. At that time pair formation or nest defense had not yet begun. Several individual birds were observed standing on or next to nest structures on the main colony. Other•herons (10 - 12 individuals)were observed in the P-1 Pond. Approximately 29 nest structures were observed Mary Lynne Myer May 21, 1991 Page 2 in cottonwood trees in the main colony and in the Oregon ash located northwest of the island. Nest structures were easily observable since trees had not yet leafed out. April 6, 1991. The colony was visited following our first report of the bald eagle attack. The colony was viewed from Tract A and from the north side of the site. A total of 38 nest structures were observed in the main colony and in three trees located southeast and northwest of the island. Of those 38 nest structures, an estimated 28 nests were located in three cottonwood trees in the main colony. Only 7 of the 38 nests had active incubation. The remaining 33 nests were either under construction or had adults standing near or on the nest structures. No nesting activity was seen at the north end of the riparian forest in the vicinity of the 1990-season isolated nest. Nest structures were still readily observable since trees had not yet leafed out. April 14, 1991. Leaf cover on the trees was more complete making observation of nests difficult. Eleven nests were observed to have incubating adults. The status of the remaining nests was unknown because of the heavy leaf cover, however, judging from the amount of activity (herons entering and leaving the colony, squawking, and courtship activities) the colony was active and egg laying/incubation was ongoing. May 17 and 20, 1991. JSA wildlife biologists visited the site for approxiamtely four hours on May 17, 1991, and 3 hours on May 20th. Nests in the main colony and previously identified adjacent nest trees were vacant. No herons were observed on the pond or leaving or entering the main colony area. On both days the colony was observed from Tract A and from the north side of the forest. On May 17th, three adult herons were observed entering and leaving the center of the riparian forest. This area of the grove was not field checked on May 17th but was checked during the May 20th survey. On May 20th, three nest structures were observed in three cottonwood trees located in the center of the riparian forest, approximately 1,200 feet south of the pump station and 600 feet north of the northernmost edge of Tract A. One adult heron flushed from one of the nest trees. The status of the nests could not be confirmed due to the height of the trees and the Mary Lynne Myer May 21, 1991 Page 3 dense foliage. These nests appear to be remnants of the colony that have attempted to renest in the riparian forest. Conclusions It was evident from the May 17th and 20th surveys that the herons have abandoned the historic colony at the east end of the P-1 Pond and that several pairs are attempting to renest in the middle of the forest. The,status of these nests is unknown at the present time, but at least one of the nests appears to be active. The whereabouts of the other herons is unknown. They have either 1) established a new colony elsewhere, 2) joined an existing.colony elsewhere, or 3) will not breed this year. Late nesting and renesting is a known phenomena with great blue herons (Pratt 1970). At Bolinas Lagoon in California, Pratt found late nesting until mid-July, and in one case, nestlings still on the nest in mid September. How late herons can successfully renest in western Washington is not known. The full nesting chronology of great blue herons (from the time the first egg is laid until the young leave the nest) is 118 days (17 weeks) (Pratt 1970). Because of this long chronology, it is unlikely that any renesting attempts later than mid-May would be successful. Nest attentiveness by great blue herons is known to diminish late in the nesting season (Pratt 1970). I recommend that additional monitoring of the colony be conducted during June and early July to determine the status of the those renest attempts. The presence of young on the nests is easy to determine, paeticularly during feeding time when squawks and calls are very evident. says he got some bids, anu iuullu —•• the work die city wanted would cost heal: dance revue with a 195Us Mettle. JL,, , ,, fl for summer . IF ",• L,,Js erons . . .„ part OT r . .... .. , . . t ' stil . Bi k • . .\ , 4`..• '•-,' ' • - . • . r •,',1”, ,0., APO'S • • concerns k•••'.1.4 4:415....,'' . . • '. , 4'fiii,"".•;;;..v.:•, . ' _ .By TI NA HILDING W Valley Daily News x-,,,, ...1, ' 1 .. . 4,w, ''. 1 RENTON-City officials will continue O•iii:74.i,„;.";., . • . ' . • . . . , , , , , •,, , , • , .• to include a nearby heron rookery in their ';••,-',-;.,•••,.''.,l•' . , .. ' • •' • ' planning for the proposed Blackriver Cor- • porate Park project for now,despite ques- rt, ',:•",,,;:'Y,;‘,::,P1',44- • -,,;,,,,, i• :, , A •, • „.. .,,,,,„ ,°. tions about the viability of the rookery. .,'„a, '•:.3-',.`1,','••!'- ;',•'.`:•;;•';•4 • 4' :`.." ‘... • -• '.1. '1,' ' ' • The city environmental review commit- ',YIP, ; :',,, , ,:. :'' ..,,,'. •',•:.',' • :',!.•.. ',• %, .‘, 7r .':. '... •*.6; . ' • • ., •II. V:4;',...::'kizo, •".41-tr;',.i.l,:i.5%.,, ,,,tr;....47:7, :ii: ';,;:,,,,,,,,.;`,,R.,':"..;,-;-` .f,..' : •:',,-,:,0't''.''',,„ •;:, A ,• :.,41 .., •tee is considering how to address the busi- ',:v`914''',!;;':', 4. ''',..:1':--z'2',":''.V.•'•',!•::..:, '': -• " "c: ' '' '• '"•••,',',,,.., ''...- • ':),1,„, -,': : ,` ' ''',-''..• . ••••.ness park's environmental effects,on the • .,,,,;nearby heron Colony. . ,! 4,,t7tx,,,, _•i,,,,,;.t, ;,,,,,„-4 ey,...,, ,,17,'.,,,,.,..:,.,,,,...,,, ..,' .,., : , ,•r.:,.. r :.' ,%. ,,,,cr,-e.„, ,..,, • "Because of the uncertainties ihvolved kit,$50i41.,,- 744r,:!';;;V•X`;',••',.•,:.:,:',••: : ' , -• ' • . ., • , , ''' - • , ,... •• with the heron rookery,'they'(the review ,i,r,v4.averft:-1.-,„ ;,•, .., ''„-q-4:V -':V„'.:, .,,f!, ,.- , ..,,.: ',, ,„„,,,,r,,,,,,,,,, =,-'4',. ', ''1k70,10.1rVirp:'.4., 15,.0;4.WA*1-itit.,.."24r,,c;i7-1 ,-;.,•,..-,...i ., •••'Itt,,. ...:;t.,. : ,-. •:,:. - ,., ,,, .i:••committee) have decided'to maintain a ' ;''').4"1: ':':''''v ''''.1.'.,..174t,t'4174.1 ‘Aiii:7.;‘4%ers.$ ' • ••,'1,ttittk.,..,,,• ...Cr;; ;,.•,,•:'''•• .; ,present.course of action with protections .` ;-? r.:`-:'‘'',- P , ., ,,-, .,. ,A44.,,. -.%. ':••, •',Y,A.:!;•`;, i••• . ' • , ,,,,, , ,•,,,,,,c, •:.,,,,,vi,,• ,'•, A ,•-,y,:ls•rt,s* 7.1 -:: .,4,2-•r, e,e:.":,;...tr.-...Y :-, """"""..........."1"......... 0,•;': W'' ori::.'';:;-,,r,f,',..",,4;,..0"arli_•,:',,v2",:,.':,-.0`,'' ,e''''',,,-,. .4',1C :"I`Nr;,t..,1,..;:.,.,r.'-' 'If are ',, t,..- ',''',5/4,,:ztSASIV:: <t•,„<,;>;,,.....:-.? •;;;Ver:,,:'4''''717:"',`,4Z.,,v.,,a' M:11,1,,44#14-CIV. .., '•,,, .t.';,,,',,f,';,,,,Lv.' ... 4•, •II the herons 'i''''i ,..-4''''- . ..:, Aftlitt;..1g,WOO :=44,'01,"41r.4s,Akf')W• .'4. • : , • . • :.1.,-...4" ''' .":-11...,' '..1; '...,-....',,, ,-.-_,,„„,„oltr*.,'"-- ,,;,..,S,',:li1d':'`''''..'''.".:',r.''.,,'it"'SI::-',•Z:.:,,`;.i-,., j ;{i.1k re%levNeif;ri?1 'the pi,,rrne , ',/t",.., 4,' •....4'N' '.-',,, N":1:'`44...• '-', i'')..44Y44$4;i0:,44114,10.4.4i4.1604, ii, '' d'ior -,4w ;€,41.;34) -II-;.. •.11' relocating, LIG!1 i i...,''' . '''' '''+'1,'".0 ,, k'','' •'. ' •• -3 . • - ..•• •• -- "all trees are-..".• •' ..-- •. • ' ' ,'",-,;4:11., .; ',:,.':- 4q,:•,,r,A,4: /4,,,,..;4,`,:',.7‘',9Y .,V,4g,VAW44:5.41.5^c'lli X0:44.'41..lit:kiRWA • and r going 4.,,, ,L, , - ,, .-?...,;,,s,,,, ,.. - :,,,,„ Y' '.',e' ';•T. 1,:6Z,..) 44101•''')ir;t1A4,•StS•0^''''4*‘‘'*'`"°,''',V^ ! 1 ,t.,,,,,Vri?„,,,,,,',...,. ",„.3f2.,i,/,',',1,4'.`‘,, ',..* ..1•/, '. .•'''S; ,',..,-.Y.'e:iY•0",,V.7t, ;41nO:V.4)',0 IA,S7,...e'f'.,(..0VqAMAAS:!', . .'+,,A,iP,”',.,) ;., , OP!' „7, , izs .„.k,,,,,$.4., T r'-',, ,.,-.,* . ''.4-,„.^;.•,..., "-,,,.,:pg"'.< .,,-m,,%,<.!..i,.,..14,,, ,Aq.,-, , to be in the wrong : . Valley Daily News photo by MARCUS R. DONNER ., , is playground equipment winter storm. Though winter weather may be behind us, . ,' place and they 1 re not onstrates by playing on a . summer seems distant: the National Weather Service doing any good. iater State Park during a says temperatures will reach only about 60 today. ' Steve Penland,Department of Wildlife .' ' —_---.--:------.-------- • , recycling in the mitigation until there are assurances that the rookery is no longer viable," said oluntarY Mary Lynne Myer, a Renton planner working on the project. )ets wi t h initial confusion pne"dnI stw,'"se'asl hlmwcf hsicnige nttoif isce ue nwcehratta ihnatyp,- • .. - Those who support the heron colony than 7,000 Auburn households may have days, and reqtiest"two-can service," for have been concerned about the pro-posed caused some confusion. After studying which they will be billed$14.50 monthly. business park, which is proposed for the ing pro- the list of drop-off sites, a few people A study found the "average house- .27-acre site of the old Earlington Golf tount of • asked if they must'drive newspapers to . .hold" should be.able to recycle, Brook-• Course, because they say human sidential one site, then drive elsewhere'to deposit 'house says, and get the.remaining trash encroachment disturbsthe skittish herons. ;actions. • glass or aluminum cans. ' into one can. . • , • The committee considered taking plan to n But the sites'listed are just the existing There are other options. Residents who another look at the measures because of quest the ones,Brookhouse said. recycle or who produce little garbage can • recent eagle attacks on the heron nests, get them "When the new service goes into effect 'get a free 20-gallon can, or a free 10-gal- and the departure of herons from the main ction at this summer, we'll begin phasing in.addi- Ion can,for which their monthly fee is$6 colony. The herons are still..in a nearby ' tionat sites,"Brookhouse said. • or$3,'respectively.• wooded area but are not nesting in•the i 0-gallon There will be more than 30 "full ser- For$14.50 monthly,the city provides a. main colony. , i increase vice" collection sites in parking lots 60-gallon wheeled garbage container;and • John•Webley,a member of the commit- around Auburn,Brookhouse said, so peo- ' for$22.50 monthly, a 90-gallon wheeled tee and'the'city's community services to save a ple can go to one location to deposit news- garbage container. , • director, said he agreed to go forward it if they • papers,'glass, aluminum and other recy-: • The program also offers a free 90-gal_ assuming the.herons' presence because of •ottles and' '.. clables.1 • : 1 '•,,... • • - :•' Ion container for yard wastes only, for . the uncertainty involved. - .. :tion sites , Residential customers now are billed' $4.50Monthly. "I think it would be irresponsible for about$9 monthly'for collection of one or.: :. During the first week of signups, anybody to assume the herons are gone," recycling two garbage cans. When new rates take ., Brookhouse said Friday, nearly 200 he said. get people effect in June and July,all households will:. %households requested the 90-gallon yard An environmental study recently pub- recy clahle be billed$7.50 per month for collectipdof '•.waste•containers: Residents of 20 house- fished,on the effects of the proposed busi- ection cen- only one can. . , • '. ' ; holds asked for a 20-gallon can, and 31 ness park called for several measures to errands. If they want to use two cans, the muSt. requested a 10-gallon can.Fourteen want- " protect the herons. • ....k. to more , telephone City Hall at 931-3047 week- ed the 60-gallon wheeled container. One recommendation includes restrict- • ing buildings on the site to five stories, . . , • , . • since herons prefer to nest higher than surrounding structures: One of the six buildings proposed by First City Develop- ments Corp. is seven stories. . ' . . . . ., • The recommendations also include for-" . . . . won't make mtich difference in a race that 'funds will be subject to the contribution bidding building within 600 feet of the • he predicts will cost close to$250,000., • limitS. . • ', . . heron nest and building a IQ-foot dirt hill- ing County ..• Reams said.he had been prepared to . Under the county,s new campaign-fi- side with 20-foot trees on top to further ) some extra:. •abide by whatever the Prosecutor ruled. - nance law, contributions are limited to protect the herons. The construction sea- hanks to an "I certainly agree that it will cosi.a lot . .$35.0 per person and$1,000 per organiza- .,son would also be restricted. nty prosecn•- of money to run countywide,but whether tion during election years,with a$100 per * Representatives from First City Devel- or not I could use the (leftover) money , person limit during non-campaign years. : opments were unavailable;but Steve Pen- , I Reams and had no bearing on my decision to run,",•he' •' Pullen, who philosophically disagrees land, an urban wildlife biologist with.the ,--:---•cm said. "If the ruling raises inconsistencies .with any restrictions on campaign financ- Department of Wildlife,said he thinks the - - ----...,. ,..rrinnion ing, said he may propose that the council city should look again at the measures ---'".-1" because the herons May be relocating the " --- .,,n.•.w• 14 t` y1 o t a •N y; v .B� ,,,..� yf n LI', + � ' . 5,., • }, , . f t:•'''''Y .:.''4", ,i,1.+F.,('f' 1 4•ix': ',. r::: 4:4•.''.A, i'•,�• ti. '' ! Valley Daily News by MARCUS R. DONNER place, an. Bey re riot'�.•' • • { � �t r ,�,����;,d��,� winter storm. Though winter vve�'. - , may be behind us, � r � "' `. �. )ment doing anygood. ,,:..:,.. r .; h;� , . f on a summer seems distant: the National Weather Service , fotr 1k. ring a says temperatures will reach only about 60 today. , :;rN ,. • __.. Steve Penland, Department of Wildlife ,Y,i` . �,I • — ----- ;thy.,, r r Ohl' d?�` fir,.. in the mitigation until there are assurances „�, ,t ,,.,,`,, Ing that the rookery is ti longer viable," said torecyci Mary Lynne Myer, a Renton planner , ;::: workingon the project. 1;;Tirl ■ ■ ■ ■ "It's matterpof scientific uncertaint I ,r,t" ,a,y'1�:''' and we'll be watching to see what hap- �n�'" it Iiiltla con uslon �;1, pens," she said. ! ';;^.6:0• Those who support the heron colony '•;r.�'''t'�' ^1.,. have been concerned about the proposed ' .,t•.;,x:. ,: I Auburn households may have days, and request"two-can service," forf ' '-'A `' S " business ark, which is proposed for the ., „,0i�jx!i;l�� ' ,e confusion. After studying which they will be billed$14.50 monthly. 27-acreines par of the old proposed Golf ,'� tv�i„� drop-off sites, a few people A study found the "average house-• 4.7,-;r'i44t:r,�, ' Brook- Course, because they say human ;.... G 44tii :y must drive newspapers to hold" should be able to recycle, encroachment disturbs the skittish herons. +' ,+f R Tyij'Y en drive elsewhere to deposit 'house says; and get the remaining trash g rr 'e a' �a� ,''u, ti.' ' into one can. • The committee considered taking 'S�•,''�tr�;�o minum cans. another look at the measures because of v �G;'MV�,�'F. 1', tes•listed are just the existing There are other options. Residents who . .r';=,' r l,' '' recycle or whoproduce little garbage can recent eagle attacks on the heron nests, ayr�;,.,�, 1,,,,t'(,„> .house said. Y g g ,.2,?N 4;•,a„,it-,. and the departure of herons from the main I ;� �o .,ly',,,,ti; 1e new service goes into effect get a free 20=gallon can, or a free 10-gal- P u° 41.1 r, we'll begin phasing in addi- lon can, for which their monthly fee is$6 colony. The herons are still•:in a nearby ta',.v�'�q;trp ,lr' wooded area but are not nesting in the • a if'b „1t4•! " Brookhouse said. or$3, respectively. .r� ,t, „ . main colony. �, zw�,,i�;°�,•f-' 11 be more than 30 "full ser- For$14 50 monthly,the city provides a i06044,.,•," ection sites•in parking lots 60-gallon wheeled garbage container;and • John'Webley, a�member of the commit- . f • :i t, � ..:. Burn,Brookhouse said,so peo-. for$22:50 monthly, a 90-gallon wheeled tee and the city's community services t.;f,4;,t�k;t, .', director, said he agreed to go forward s ;'s'�M;E'��,1+'f'+ o one location to deposit news garbage container. assumingthe herons'presence because of • '� • �n.ry1,4'�( P • '. :ring,�;r�.;4 :r ss, aluminum and other recy-: 'c The. program also offers a free 90-gal- the uncertainty involved. . 1,... ;. '` ' lon container for yard wastes only; for • "I think it would be irresponsible for Rr;•„;,:l it - ial customers.now are billed • $4.50 monthly. anybodyIthto assume the herons are gone," '"0.:,,, t:," onthly for collection of one or During the 'first week of signups, y ,,1..,,.,,'..• he said. �. irr;::y-,�;:..•��.c:.' ;� ,,e cans. When new rates take . . Brookhouse said Friday, nearly 200 "', ne and July,all households will households requested the 90-gallon yard An environmental study recently pub- • I , g,,•.;;;,;,f';:, lished on the effects of the proposed busi- ,r• : '., c,';::''' '.50 per month for collection of waste containers'. Residents of 20 house- ' holds asked for a 20-gallon can, and 31 ness park called for several measures to • 4p� m. protect the herons. ' ant to use two cans, they must requested a 10-gallon can.Fourteen want- • protect recommendation includes restrict- i . City Hall at 931-3047 week- ed the 60-gallon wheeled container. ing buildings on the site to five stories, since herons prefer to nest higher than 4. ;:;t•i surrounding structures: One of the six , : �� ��� buildings proposed by First City Develop- � : ,;,^ .4, ,;'• ® e u s e ments Corp. is seven stories.The recommendations also include for-,",ti 4� 4t: ., :e much difference in a race that 'funds will be subject to t• he contribution bidding building within 600 feet of the } ;. ; s will cost close to$250,000. limits. heron nest and building a 10-foot'dirt hill- . 1 i said he had been prepared to Under the county's new campaign-fi- side with 20-foot trees on top to further ,,; .vhatever the prosecutor ruled. ' nance law, contributions are limited to protect the herons. The construction sea- l • iinly agree that it will cost a lot $350 per person and$1,000 per organiza- son would also be restricted. ., to run countywide, but whether' tion during election years,with a$100 per.. Representatives from First City Devel- ! . could use the (leftover) money person limit during non-campaign years.. . opments were unavailable,but Steve Pen- aring on my decision to run,"he Pullen, who philosophically disagrees land, an urban wildlife•biologist with the • the ruling raises inconsistencies with any restrictions on campaign financ- Department of Wildlife,said he thinks the �', • ms with the county's campaign ing, said he may propose that the council city should•look again at the measures • fit; support clarifying the.regula- ban the transfers completely. because the herons may be relocating the id His concern isn't with the candidates nests in the nearby wooded area. Ir(, ie was whether surplus funds for assessor, Pullen said, because they "If the herons are relocating,the berms t er political campaigns could be would be grandfathered. and tall trees are going'to be in the wrong I ; ;,, . s a candidate's"own resources" But given the prosecutor's ruling, Pul-' place, and they're not doing any good," 11, under county rules, there are len said a candidate for county office he said. "That's one of the problems deal- Ik. sign limits or restrictions. could set up an election committee for a ing with wildlife species. They're not all I , ;' I. election officials weren't sure. legislative race, gather money beyond the that reasonable and you�can't sit down and ,i is • :ouncil members said they hadn't county's contribution limits and then show them blueprints. to allow transfers under the new transfer all the cash at the last minute into Penland said he thinks the heron colony i I • ns that started this year. a county campaign. is well-established in the general area, ( ,:I • • eng's opinion, however,•the sur- That would create an uneven playing and the wooded'area"should have been • 1 must be considered a personal field for an incumbent who must abide by considered as a possible nesting site all i • under the county's campaign-fi- the county's limits. along. w. As such, he said the money What Pullen sees as a.loophole in the "As far as I'm concerned,we still have sed for political campaigns with campaign-finance law is one of a number a very viable colony there,: . he said. I r;'••• • . ation,as allowed by state and fed- of problems that he, along with council would assume,they would remain'there {y•,+r members Ron Sims and Audrey•Gruger, for a number of years." Kr, , now wants the county rules hopes to correct with an amended ordi- City officials said they will continue to '. ` . I to specify that surplus campaign nance.. . . monitor the situation. ,t$f;'. lt': • ... , .._ _. ...... :.1+.✓r, 't1.°r'.,t.,.:;, .,,fir';' •!:a,. - !y:'i' ..;:;:).;;::.,:t. .• • . • w/; a`aiy'y,b''Y;. i 51r._ •r'• ..r.; _rt• K't �.:t• g. Fu, ' .t.kr,.. t „� _• t;;+thy„5 '. ar;,._• t.:y, L'.,e '• .-. .]'',...,.`.' li;`-e n}kSi'"b*t •' •L}ri.0 2@:?,A-16,-,_'. 'i:,.ei:N;,,,,.• _ OF RED 4t ° J zcITICEo �09A09g OSEPj OF . PENDING SITE PLAN APPLICATION • DESCRIPTION • • BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, PHASES VII/VIII ECF;SA,SS M;RVMP-071-88 EC F;SA;S S M;RV M P-109-89 THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO DEVELOP AN OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ON A CURRENTLY VACANT 27.76 ACRE SITE (INCLUDING TRACT A AT 525,536 SQUARE FEET AND TRACT B AT 683,762 SQUARE FEET). TRACT A IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDING A AT ONE STORY, AND BUILDINGS B & C AT FOUR STORIES EACH), OPEN PARKING, LANDSCAPING, RECREATION, AND A SCREEN(BERMING/LANSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE ABUTTING WILDLIFE HABITAT (INCLUDING A HERON ROOKERY). TRACT B IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDINGS D & F AT FIVE STORIES AND BUILDING E AT FOUR STORIES). THIS TRACT WILL ALSO INCLUDE A FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGE, OPEN PARKING, ON-SITE RECREATION, LANDSCAPING, AND A SCREEN (BERM AND LANDSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE NEIGHBORING WILDLIFE HABITAT. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BASED UPON THE PROXIMITY OF THE SITE TO THE BLACK RIVER BASIN. A ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED,AS WELL. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: NORTH OF SW 7TH, EAST OF OAKESDALE AND WEST OF NACHES PUBLIC APPROVALS REQUIRED : • ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW • • SITE PLAN APPROVAL BUILDING PERMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ;ANYTIME PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE .REMOVED • WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION OF 4 , • v d © z NOTICE �� 09 b• OO,pgTEO SEPZ�M' OF PENDING • . • SITE PLAN A DE S C R I P T I O N • BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK,PHASES VII/VIII , ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-84 • THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO DEVELOP AN OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ON A CURRENTLY VACANT • ' 27.76 ACRE SITE(INCLUDING TRACT A AT 525,536 SQUARE FEET AND TRACT B AT 683,762 SQUARE FEET). TRACT A IS r . .. PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDING A AT ONE STORY,AND BUILDINGS B&C AT FOUR STORIES EACH),OPEN PARKING, LANDSCAPING, RECREATION,AND A SCREEN (BERMING/LANSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE ABUTTING WILDLIFE HABITAT(INCLUDING A HERON ROOKERY). TRACT B IS PROPOSED I • TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDINGS D & F AT FIVE STORIES AND BUILDING E AT FOUR I , STORIE . THIS ALSO INCLUDE A FOUR STORY PARKILANDSCAPING, ANDCT A SCREEN (BERM AND LANDSCAPING) WH CH SEPARATES THE SITEGARAGE,OPEN NG FROM HEENEIGHBOR NRECREATIONEIGHBORING 1. WILDLIFE HABITAT. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BASED UPON THE PROXIMITY OF THE SITE TO THE BLACK RIVER BASIN.OCATIONQ ANGD/OR WILL ABE DDRESS:AS WELL GENERAL LL • NORTH OF SW 7TH, EAST OF OAKESDALE AND WEST OF NACHES ' • PUBLIC APPROVALS REQUIRED : • ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SITE PLAN APPROVAL BUILDING PERMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE RECEIVED BY THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ,ANYTIME PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 • THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED _ WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATION I , Taminu6 Syt.Ar6uJiCK , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT _ 3 COPIES OF • THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN 3 CONSPICUOUS ¢S¢C59$,g ., ®4,445 ,,,,OR NEARBY THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY ON 00 'MaiaCi Imo) o i o NOTARY �:en ET: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a C u) : �* yJotaE' Public in and for the State of Nashi ton ▪ 7� P nn// t`G PUBLIC��r.ks ai i n on the SIGNED : A,®1.(� >.( J ®ice •F .•9 199• G 1 OF RED A cs Co z DTI CE ..... 09A CO'Q OgrEO SEPZ"'� OF PENDING SHORELINE APPLICATION FILE NO.(S) ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-89 APPLICANT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO DEVELOP AN OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ON A CURRENTLY VACANT 27.76 ACRE SITE (INCLUDING TRACT A AT 525,536 SQUARE FEET AND TRACT B AT 683,762 SQUARE FEET). TRACT A IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDING A AT ONE STORY, AND BUILDINGS B & C AT FOUR STORIES EACH), OPEN PARKING, LANDSCAPING, RECREATION, AND A SCREEN (BERMING/LANSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE ABUTTING WILDLIFE HABITAT (INCLUDING A HERON ROOKERY). TRACT B IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDINGS D & F AT FIVE STORIES AND BUILDING E AT FOUR STORIES). THIS TRACT WILL ALSO INCLUDE A FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGE, OPEN PARKING, ON-SITE RECREATION, LANDSCAPING, AND A SCREEN (BERM AND LANDSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE NEIGHBORING WILDLIFE HABITAT. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BASED UPON THE PROXIMITY OF THE SITE TO THE BLACK RIVER BASIN. A ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED,AS WELL. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: NORTH OF SW 7TH, EAST OF OAKESDALE AND WEST OF NACHES PERSONS DESIRING TO PRESENT THEIR VIEWS REGARDING THIS SHORELINE APPLICATION MAY DO SO IN WRITING TO THE .RENTON PLANNING DIVISION. COMMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIAL SHORELINE PERMITS MUST BE RECEIVED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE LAST DATE OF PUBLICATION. CITY OF RENTON, PLANNING DIVISION 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH PHONE: 235-2550 . THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION A ti ( ° ) 0 SEP OF PENDING SHORELINE APPLICATION FILE NO.(S) ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM:RVMP-109-89 APPLICANT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT • DESCRIPTION: THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO DEVELOP AN OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ON A CURRENTLY VACANT 27.76 ACRE SITE(INCLUDING TRACT A AT 525,536 SQUARE FEET AND TRACT B • AT 683,762 SQUARE FEET). TRACT A IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDING A AT ONE STORY,AND BUILDINGS B & C AT FOUR STORIES EACH), OPEN PARKING, LANDSCAPING, RECREATION, AND A SCREEN (BERMING/LANSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE ABUTTING WILDLIFE HABITAT(INCLUDING A HERON ROOKERY). TRACT B IS PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED WITH THREE OFFICE BUILDINGS (BUILDINGS D&F AT FIVE STORIES AND BUILDING E AT FOUR STORIES). THIS TRACT WILL ALSO INCLUDE A FOUR STORY PARKING GARAGE,OPEN PARKING, ON-SITE RECREATION, LANDSCAPING,AND A SCREEN (BERM AND LANDSCAPING) WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE NEIGHBORING WILDLIFE HABITAT. THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BASED UPON THE PROXIMITY OF THE SITE TO THE BLACK RIVER BASIN. A ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED,AS WELL GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: NORTH OF SW 7TH, EAST OF OAKESDALE AND WEST OF NACHES • PERSONS DESIRING TO PRESENT THEIR VIEWS REGARDING THIS SHORELINE APPLICATION MAY DO SO IN WRITING TO THE RENTON PLANNING DIVISION. COMMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIAL SHORELINE PERMITS MUST BE RECEIVED WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE LAST DATE OF PUBLICATION. CITY OF RENTON, PLANNING DIVISION 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH PHONE: 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION - CERTIFICATION I , 1%/1.mr(6 SaAfeW)._ , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT 3 COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN 3 CONSPICUOUS PLA,C,E5��ON OR NEARBY THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY ON S'- 3 o -`11 • �vee Gp,1ET J.p mcoo �sslorv� �!V • �,'•; �T: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a :° NOTARY -T JotaEy Public in and for the State of Washington • • 02•▪ : PUBLIC c s � - SIGNED : / ., .t,� � d in on the �`vt, ,, Y iaf G/ Op p�,�a seWAS�eoo®o . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . ..... .•• .. - . • • . : • . ',I.'Auburn'Black Diamond!Covington'Enumclaw•Fainvood!Kent•Maple Valley•Renton s Tukwila....:,..,.'.,..:!,4 i'......,;.:,--...,:,,,...,, :.:.,..1,t:!,;.• !...:....WedpesdaY; May 29, 1991 - • , • , . , ., :.,., „,.:.., , . • . . „ . • • :•. J;. . ; .:rcl•-•,••;,:, 411•i41,..:-, •.. '4.•;• 1...•..:-..s4,.••• /.;':.i .KA•:' ...',.; •1.!. i b•.:V.P.;• MINIMMINIMINN ... • • '....4 • .. .' •C,110,4./.1,04,1 t!..-.1.44••;;"U• 'I!.';• • I 1'4'1 se!•L'• " •!•" •• - !“••• Er".•••• : ' ;'- •1:,,....•'•' •IPPP-1•N;4•;'''':'..•:''l'.'"1 `7A-1,11;`' ''"fl"r"44 11:1;:•I'''.1 ).'•11 •• '. , •••'.'•-• I t..;,• C--i. .,-4; it3,1.'ci I,it.41•••11 -:.....,iL,i,,.1...41.-1.1,-. •.•:•.11,o1-••,,•124...t...,' ..r,• ' ••• '1 •I ), !:.••:. V•.:.;•..h.•:?:i.'.:-. .?. . . .• • .:Di .• •,;f• IS rI. .t.i.;.,::, ero i, ry... cu. .,.. • ce,,,..„. 0 .. , . ..., • . ..,1 i• 4...i. t. , •_, . ..„ ,,. ,...,..:..J.,„ ,,,., . .,, ::, it.. ..„... :,.. • • , writers . , -. .i. '•••1' i. 0 II - • ,• - • . : • ; ; :.;. .....,.-,•;v.-, ..to:...,,, ,.•••.1, ...,•iyo.voling.4:1414f. .,4:, If'':.-••,•!:•••.! ••••.• -.-.P1'...."' ...:3....1j'•'''.' ' • i:.c':'!.:',.:. ;::-:. ,..!,,;.!,,'•J.z:v.:‘,•••••i•;•:. ,,,Itc...-..'iir.•...,-11.•. ii, .0, •;.:. I;'... .i,i.:•, ,•::i'..k.O.)1•,.-.'• . •:•••11••••:%!- • ; '• •• I 1';P..,•!''•:'•••••k•-;' ••t. 1.1:‘,..1 :01141..o..litit. .„.;.itilz.-. I.,.-„i- : it i•f.i...,•,..,1,1•;10,..4i:it.4; i14.'• ..'; .4:" ; •;.'• ••• 4.' '•,.• ,4 !';. •.•'•;. ',•,•.0',:. t•s! " •...:••• t% •,, ••• ••'..,r. 411; 4'• !.•.v. •' . .. 1.,.! 441 4.1`41 ir .....')1`..i.- , •:,.'4. -• ••,. ...;:; ,. ,.e.; •.. ,-./:...--A,.:. •...:•-.e,7:.i .1..j.',.•.' ) .. ,•;A••,,r. ; • 1• •. i'••••••• it. ....r.•;"..C.:'...'.;''.'• ..-,,,!..e.,,I:,,I,:.1.:3.;,,,,%..1,pp r.• . ...i. ..;::,........1...,)t!•;1:::...,1,1,...!•;; •:i-.. . •.... .•,, •!: •... • , .; !•:,"... •• •:,....., 1',...,,:‘,. ,+.1,...:I.: ,.0,.A1,-....,-• T-•,,...f.,,-,..U.,...',...,! •:-."••,"'-:,..'..:' •';.••••••, 1:' : ., • • " . . ." ‘. :, 7" '• • .: -••• •.: ; •• ,1,"-•; Ilr: '/... •• •'''' • •• '''''• • '•• ' -'.• • %.• :•., : '' ''• '. TINA HILDING.-•4•4 L:r•../•ile-44)•ittl'hill:1/0 ti•gi 'Nobody wants to see.the herons leave•.:•*;birds.privacy Further; of ice.building, id needs of this.group,she said :king v'Ol.:.,:' ' BY •• •.•:,:;•;i :.;oi-,....!.•1;;,,-.. .,1•,.•-; '.I.,. -. •.....::. • • • .• . .,. . . ...., . . •••. Valley Daily News '. D Erickson' called theproposed mett ?:i:•41-Y.;1 i:,:t.".c';''..,:•:!,..7:••;•. ,..1)ve think they are.a resource to the corn- windows must be coyered24y.1:4C:.v.:... .,.;.;: ....•.-: on. is Seattle,.. i..., .i:....2.1 ..J..a...v ,, :.;•:,,.. : ,,,-•• • ,• • -: .:1.-i•• 1 • Gen-••i •L' 4.' .4:‘' -! • '•t.'• Duringconstruction,• ,.e• uipthent.must......•sures"an educated guess.",..;:•,1.:,..-:.•,.:; Buildings in n proposed'office Park will!•s,:munity.',...!!:.;. i.• .0..,,.•'..,e,•:. ....• •. -...:•- - . .q. • . •,. be restricted to five stories to protect nearir4.';‘,,,The proposed affide.park.Calls for six: have sound-control devices,•and a.tempo, ,1••"It's not'absolute,"..he said::"There' : ireceives2io00 ii: •pull out c. -.by herons,'Renton zoning officials have%!.r,..buildings on 28 acres.of the old Earling-..!!rary noise barrier will pe'ereeted•-to pro- no magical formula anyone can "..decided.,i,i..1.:'1,1••i;•.;I.L .4 ± ,_ .. .!•711!;,!k!.!1•.iton Golf Course site developer,First•:. tect the nests,,,., ......r.,:.:.,..,i.:,1•••j,:.j.,':;;;;i:t.i.',,.•ii....;:•:1.•• ,•'1.',..••••;•!;' book that:se s.this is what•it takes t :::..„.'.T,,a;mimmiZe!the'BlaCkriVer..Cer•Polately.,,City,Washington Inei,initially applied for..::::.,.The-.monitoring?•coiromit eel.Will'i:pe.::- ..kaeepliermis here There a lot of var, onsumer.,'::, J to help ,y: rark s effect 9.4 the heron•colOnyei.build-P•ii•:, at least one of the buildings to be seven•i,: made up of a Renton officiali:a..First Cliff,:ables here we have absolutely no contn . ings also'will!lave to be 600 feet from the..1.,f; tories.:::-.1,:.1.,,,,-..;,.,17.1,.....,•'!. ; ,i44....„,.,,.,.....•: i, -• .•. .••Washington representative•and:#ft.ietnber.:••over,,o,..•5Y.•,..41 .••., •••:• ,....f..r. .:. ,. i,.;•• .1 .. el ;e,s '.' main rookery, construction will.not be The nearby heron:colony was first not- .leaf. the public Based on information the f(1::•'.'Nobody';feally'kiiows,•so we're face ,, .:1, • allowed between Feb 11 and Julyil•Withimi-ect in the mid-1980s after the construction i'•committee receives from biologists; thei',; with trying;to balance.certain econom' lig phone •... . • . •• i,.800 feet of the colony and the herons will„;-•••,...yof flood control measures in.the old Black ,?'group will report the herons twice a ' development 2 with:;trying.. to•.maintai consumer • • 1 , be moriitored,.`i?,F6.1.:1-,.,.;...- r..,0.....V,....:14:.:,.;••,,..ia...f.,INRiver'channel, The colony later grew to .'..4year. -• t..,•,.....:• :;: 1;...,V.,.,0.,••,., .... ....1,1 i 1.1; unique wildlife habitat.".:-. - •:.:,".•.;.- .. : in specie • • • • • "The Environmental Review Commit- more more than 30 nests in 1990.:':4,;, . .' . ...).....If there are changes in the birds: activi- Dean:Erickson;.with First City.Was' . . '• '1 tee(a group of city staff)has.spent ncon2,',V1.4.•,This spring, however, eagle attacks on ':..ty• the.group could recommend changes, •:;ington Inc:;;.!said company officials di re hensIve .: ip training :• '' siderable aunt of time.trying tolwork.:•;1:the main•colony resulted in.the loss of '• such as altering the construction schedule not not want to comment on the requiremen • out a reasonable Set of mitigation'meti•;:rflYoung and the birds may be relocating to a •:'or relocating buildings::..•.-.......':; ' ':,,;.-!1... i;:,,,.....:;.:..::.until they.had.a chance to review thei l si and invesT ci. sures, and we think that this package has-;??; nearby forested area.•,..,...::..?,.:,.,••,•. ..• • •• ,i••,•::: .. Susan Krom.with Renton Citizens for::.,The.protections-are part of a more ti i; unteer ' • mn Seattle. '. •. achieved that,'," said Don Erickson,..Ren•A In addition to the and size•: Wildlands- Preservation said she had con .:::...50-page documenta.a , .• . , •?. : . . - ton zoning administrator ' I think,*ith',11,'restrictions,'..measures to protect the her-•-.• cerns about adequacy.of the protectionsi:..,i; Hearings!on the project site plan at •r a period , ' .the'Monitoring:.provisionio.we:can.seeiol.onS: include construction of a 10-foot !:, Although 'city offiCials.*:.looked.at•Other .environmental 1 review are• tentative l'•••••'': ' 'how-successful.1We've..:beerili:I.If•(we berm with;.20-foot trees between .the l' urban heron colonies to establish the mear,:- scheduled to start July 9 before the Rent. :...1. . ,., e...1,;• sportation • i'haven'f,:we'll haVO to make chringes;';‘... .7':development.and.the nests..to give the "...sures,they didn't take a look at the specif- .i hearing eiaminer.,. .,... . . ...:.,.. •• •• 1.• • • : I .!'i. .• • •. •••:•iho.: 113 i:.1-•• -•••• . •i•, •• r . It for their -;., I .;.. .,.I 1..,•fa,;)•,,..iiii..)04..,,.,01,1,,,,vil„,,k..,4;31.,,-,,,,i;iii,i;........, .. :, .• :•. •• . . • • .. .:-.• ...:•.. ,,.. .r ...*::•t ••':.,- ...:•". .t • -i.il!.!.1: :•-•:--•,. .“.!'• : ,. idra WO:Ili! !.r.),t!:.0.;:••:]#1.15. VV.P.Ii!r;54.,.iirkii.1 ).!itliti.i•i?4;i•:ii ;!':' '.•4 ' i . ' f 1' ''.. . . '' '. . . . •• • • 1.i,;. ',.iirii .i.' ;4 1;1 1.11'011;4441:411:16°4h7 7:',OW'1:41'"14Y1';. . • . . .;• ! . ‘• '.. ..... - . „• . . - ; , .. ', ,•;..,;1,.,•'. - • ,"•:.., •.'.'• '''. • . 1 . ;.,i!.,.:. ;:" A. :• . • ..: ;'.'••; „.. :114 wil•.....e.?1;11)01; ip..s.•:,•!. ... .7 -..' ..,•I.r.:•;7•1••....•;.,•,t)•••• l'i ' - • .. • . - ' , • •'- • ' "'• . '••;: ;- 'li.' ' At , / .Y 111.U.V.) ... 141,1„.", . ' 14110141' OMNI:. •.4 4• ,, • .. 4 , •, .. . . ... . i , , tti :111,,, . - • ;•. (. ... ri-A,., ..?..; 1„...:11.71., :•.1i1;.....i.f.," ' .....;:..''.'1 f:.,:•,:::'.•.•:,..A:•:,•••'''';.•..1 '.;"i• o.,.....1[1:4;;.;,,:„„::;.„..;;•.......... •: ! . Iii":. ...• ",5 1111, •'. .` . ii',.fi:;‘,t,.1 ..) 1 4. , ,,• ,, • 11., w . . . . • • it - 4,1 -i, . .. ., .. ,i • •••••• , .. . . . . . I .,:i. 0•'.lk,...0'..ita,s1.i.• 1 ....*0,4,'. __,_;.:•-;.;....,:47 41,'..;1,:.,' • •:••„.•;•'i, I: -....:41,•.',',1:•4...);,A,,,.1...:••,: • ;.•.; 1(.., I , i.reet•,:c., ' ,..; . .......1.:... • t;ii.ii.1, ......',.;!T:40,411....ov,,,..,:,,cui•Ii .1,(?.'.. '•• 't'V.4 :!' "3...,15. ...:: :::;.1.1...:.',17'..,1:,.,...,•-,:1::Ir. 7. ::-. ...,..;;.4. ; ,' ...-.H....;',........,.,...........'•••.'.::..; •.,.:-,...i,:.,'!.. ..:.„........;..ii,..1..1......r.:...,..;1'............ ;1.:...:,...:1•:::;:;::i..:1,:::......:..,....,..........., ..,t....z:,;1‘ .... mils while:O • ;... I ...C%'.11f.frill..••••it.i,..tr:,11•41,;',.:" IN2...,:.itsg0.1.1641.i. .., • . - ... „at;i• . ..t ,- It- t.',"‘.. ••--la-4' '..... „,,,,,-f..2_1,4 ue .,...,',:,...:.,,,..-,. , •„.:A:••••••.:.,.... • •-•,.„. j.....•-!..:.!:;,,...,...•, .• .••..• • . . ,. .. . , • ,,.. /;,.„.., ,,;•,..,,,.;•. 1ikti.tiltup.ii241.14., ..-.) ••• . ,. . .4.6.... • • ' . ','. ;'t,'NI 4";.^ 6' ... . ..,,,?.. 1,'',1'`.i'NAtil."A. e'..•- : • " -,.•r: -'.; ..:..!... -:. ..1...t:'•4'..(I;iqt 1;1 ' et•. .C.S 't.•''••; •• ich of the . ; -ink; — c:••• I.''•('' '• '.! •..:1 li.r.....! ' . .: .,-,, .':•• ' .;!„, .1 t.'511,4i a4,,,:r.,,fy ,111'4•,.; ,r,'4.1.ier.Pfituir,Ir.;-- •v t- '. ',:!..:1,•,::11..,•,. ••';•,..f.l.',....:•;•...;', •• -„,: ,.I 1.,1.:Z.;i. r....AI"'i.':.• . lc Vrit il. • 4- - • - '-•• •• •••;;"11 'pe".; !"..!:. ' ''''! .' •• -.!i!.7..1).-q., :S.T,. i i " :i.• •• '' .:n Auburn• .; :,; i.1) , • itY:.?,•00 ii, • ..•.. - . .•„q•••.t.J..44,,,,,,,,..: ..,-,.,..•141,-;,..-....,. -.• ,.'1 1 i•. .lit. ."1,3•• 1,t... ,?.,•16.4 .•„...,...•:;: .!i..IAA...1,110.1... ...,.•.. ...-• ..c 14. • • -: :::•:-. ••••••":,:. .i 0 •.*".-...!.:44t....!A.t,• -,••.',. vot 1 . t ',:, • •4-•.;.'.• .i '-,•,.:,'4,..,,,. 1,..10:4 1111,..........-1-....-1,..,,,i.:?....,;:J:• •,.,..•,:',.,:. •• •;,...- .. - . i .. .4. • . . : •1'.','01.01.!'i .:: ‘• • ,z).', , .4'• 41-, %.;,. '• '.'r•t .-e bii a-'''‘' .'tq V' • Y.:•",!n•',511i'..: .i- •'1 i....1..-.•'.-:-.,,':,••::- '•'''',''• -I : i"•s• • . ... y,i,„,;.,..,„k,.13.1v, •,..,,.011,•i6,-iii',• a 4•#',Vi. i!: .'•, .. ' ... ::16'.:1•All'IYOril,•? ..•:.tt.• 1(*'.*:,- ,;:`-,,.. -". :. ' - '%•:/.".'. 11' •'.' 'Aci/ ' il :- :'I- :,!!?;:i1).-14.•iAlf,•ti.!•,..)-J .7 •!: along East.' '. . I....L. -..J;-..,..,....:•.;..-....-•.s7ri,i-,;.. ..;-;..•,,,•.„.i.,,••,..j•I• ;, .„ I.14: 4.,:oi,lk•,••.A.iii,..i,Itit. jr.,'1#41,1N;14' .. :1, 1,,,,,, . „ ".' 4; ....1 .' .‘:•.;;'• ....ti,;.,.t•!•;:,F'''. .. .1 ;'. „1.. . •construe- . i'Ill ..ii••:‘,1q: --/,/te..;10. 4. i'..4-.?• .1 .(i.-Ii'',?;III ":.•:" •.• . .'.7••;4'0'''' '4.',1:‘.'t' ",1••:, -!:* '.'4 ri5.1i1 ;-• .• ii**.`47 zerY, .7",-1,:-., 1p. : :4--:-.i--:::!••••:.,1.1,,J;•‘•• :••I''• : .': ..,..:•••••••!'s . . - •t.l. ice". • , ii. •-• •,..?4,..e.1. :•,.., , . . ,:24,.i•44,i•sa:.. ‘ ip: ,;.,-..;:,...•„,,,- ,:-.•,,,,...., .•., c..,,.,„1.7.T.A.,..,.. ,k„..:,....ff.;,: !I:7'.'.. •i;,. .0 11.! ...,...,.: ; 1') ..:.1.cili.V 1"i• '', • ••• • ... '-..:N•1::,,i.:4-..:.%1' •g)t3-•,, ':i1.-.''1,4 Eff4 4.4'7;a1144,A, .. '..!,11.. '! ,' e1.t...:;.... 1'0'60 i ri. 11;'• l; t specifies i ,• .I.!`t• . f. , businesses .e :• 411 ! -. it•;:',:;; ':;i -, • k: „, • .'• • ,.'"1••:::-444•••:••••• :A .W.041'''t•'•.-, • . •''•••' 'frit - ' A' ' - .. " - "." 1 . 1" " • 1!",. ,,, A 4 iArl''' ';,•;' r•t••. 4",), if, r.4.. 1-..•ep14, • :.:. I.,.::::, ). .Isr„ ...e.111..,. ,:. ..••r•4 . : ...t., ...., •;:l• 4,.-1 . ,. ... ., ,.. „4„ ., „:, .,,,,,,:t..:,..„,,,,4-,,,• ..°11._-, ..,...,....... .....!..I.4“4., 1',4 tiC ,•.'-• - 4 • •;e: 11 Ai ,I•.: •. 'ar%•,•,... • ' '''.-•t:-..,'I-•- •••',I4VL .- ‘,',.:t '1.1.•4 t 4Irls;•16 i-4V•4•re--r•'' .', • :14, .it ll'k.%PO i•,64' • . •-1.-.0.4.4i, 4 es molder ; ;'. : •:';'.151:;:, ;•••:•!;01,1.4z,.•' II:,- ; , •1: i 1.:. 4 ' e,.. ti,,,,,A.p.,,,,, • - • --.--. i,..,. ,,,,t-:. - f>r ., ...'k.ii•k‘L',-. ;. fi ly.:-.1., ,.•!,; ,'• 11,• ,. ,,,:,:.i.•'..-,z, ,,. .1,4 ii*.i,,W,/, -,4`,,i,,. . '• • ''.).1%;fi..;;11iIr.a41:Kiiif 1••••i.,. , •••.?!':':•:Ai-.1•141114•Pti 1V•ir,g. -..-.,, i'•.tt:.:,t1'...v'.',.4:'N-,, ,•;, •• 1(. ;.1•1".0,;.''- • ..Oil,F0--„,. :I's.. •.; ' ',.„ :.•:, .;.1,,.: .,,,..:444:1-.!!',•;f'.•.-•,'.',"....i...• ',• •,•!::.:1. •.: ,,..,,-,.• .,..v.,,,M", k 41,1;VA'•....;.•'`'. ,X••'t..,. -. r : qt,Tt.,A"'.•.;t' ; .....;;`,i.l.':•,•7',/1.•''•• !.'V.%.6.,'••;•••‘•• ;., ,!•••;1•':•• 44.,Pri,:x•Lis' i::41.4W • •.t..,:A 41.4. and under-''' :' ' k ‘‘'..- . ';'' I's" .' "'•;•';;•• 1. -.'711, ..iP v'••'4 :lir 1 • •• ;::',:i Vzi ..?.' ••'•"1,-;!:,‘-;.4:••• /,..-:'•;41 P.H:::.`,1i,'-''''i'lep'. 14::. .?•'4.::;1.‘•• Vit lra ii44.,ka•P•1:4•k'••.:z:44 1. ,.: !i§- ,. i•• ,!il ftii li i, •.-,,-.:.... ' .4 •a:;.,..,. -44.4f. . : w!,....-, iii.,-'ai kis#lil.',-744,..,••.. • s.r. -s„Yti . 11)•.',A.,:..b,.\.• I:51,4,...,1.4:P'.• r. ..••..• '••• ‘.' • -41.. lworth and. .: . ,I• li 1,;:. ,A' ..,ttirc 10: • .,,,,,-4, .... :IN.:- • — ':::,.:'''j _f."'e,•;';';44',V..',:rti.1;4—i-:Y.'ir4,•-• ." ' .,• .V.'• •• •:f'-'1•"•••• ;;•.;V.*:,•4*. - •• ' ' '.' • '•"*--'• .'••;I: 5) - ,iiipit, .uq; . $4i1;4%,'"ILe ,itit• ..2... ....,1,''' t,..-,:-,Al'i I,'..h„Itlit.„.,•'•;::',,,t.„"k1:712:.„...---' .,,-,.. -,,....-,-77. .t,.1:',,i'.,?,,?,:::.f.'..:' l'e•-1)::,...': :' . ..:'-.I .., . „ ai Includes - : i, •..;, , .a...r.,..0......,: 1,1•144: •••.' • ', •'.: :`1;-, ' 'RNier•-ir.e. i---ft''', ''''.,- 7.:, 4,..`i• i,,.'•4.:• .,1;•::14.••.... '.. , ' • I.,:,.•\, '1,, L.`..t;'•!li•Ji,f;lir i•.f....•i 1).,..4- •1, I,i‘i ify i -:, ••• ...4.4.,,,-.,. .J 0.,....• -)." 4,:-.. 0,'•i•'•1'14. -•..,-, .kJ.'''ISV.1 ', " `N."1.1. •44••• . ''k'',',..i; 't'Q•'-'7 ;-i•''Te • ' .* • il.j.ok ....- ,-k,i...,.;:.':`,,Z• A I,. „e.•I.! :.1, bk'vel. i;1 . • • • 0. .a.7:.;•..p. it: 7.' 4., 4141'4'....• ,f4" %, 4 ,j4'V44,‘'..,..;,14,,• IV, ..,.4iti) 14 4 4...,••I.,:;'‘, :$ •;•'••••.,..?.r...,44,e,••,;1-',V• ,,,..,.."1'4,.:1 •,!'1'4'1."•;.14,,14444/64 ByBRENDA DAY ..,•:.••• -:- •:• ....,•'ii.r.1''•'.;''..';';'1:' .'' .,,..',.':...., r.i.‘.•.' i•: 4.'.. 0.• 1-4`;-..-. . :. ....' ••1 ,,. .(,- .g. ,I.,,..1:':'.' ...... .,. ';,,,,• ' .4. .. .. :•••.'"....'./:11. -•!-, ...,,:. ;‘,• s‘. •.iii lt •,,.. :.(,!••!•;.• ..'.,. -.•,• a •_.40, . NOTICE OF PROPOSED SITE PLAN APPROVAL/SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT/ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION . RENTON, WASHINGTON A Site Plan Approval/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit/Routine Vegetation Management Permit 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 NAME/NUMBER: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-89 DESCRIPTION:The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and � Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a heron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping) which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. GENERAL LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental Review Site Plan Approval Building Permit The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings, or prior to an administrative site plan approval. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and/or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the Development Services Division at 235-2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. . i. , , ---„,,a/,,,//1 ----- �r"°� ra4 131 {� II — - -__' - - l VICINITY MAP \� I! ti / ''/' ./.. ).11 \' • i I I P.;.,n '°cxn? r lj • F �1. 8\1``` - ..:,.-,.n ;r _..._-- '� �.,/ ` .a.�.o u•. HERON EXHIBR • is OA _ ,' /' � � ' era° ,..' • > � 1 v IM i�,ef„ >`r!1 Y/,rI:_� ... ,?"' `' ; c(..:...°.., dam, 1' \ _. /1,I`/,'' / '!7/1 1 .1, /-, .. I� ` U . \ \\ Ill '" , \) �./� �41 ...W_____, 'Illti,,----r-1;',---y7 ' "• .4 %No ..„-.? jp ��I."CS II.:' `mo `...,-1�\y "r :_' ),,....,. - , 4 - .. ,` Fr/ ,,„, .._. , it 4 •TABULATION ``,'`.•;--•W:... � ei. .\ � r"w. • Site Area =683.762SF.. .... � .':-, �,11 ��=-.- , BLACKRIVER VN Building Area 2,286,300 S.F. ---• Gross Coverage _41.9% -,� ,, CORPORATE PARK Site Coverage 9%IFoo• c,. `` -- 1 `\ R. r 9+; ,,,,,,,•.,,F,s ..,.�.... RENTON WASHINGTON Parkingr > \` FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i II ep sia r�..,•_[-- u •„. / ASV ,tl Compact _e.Slara'a(2l.r\) flr.u<ap ,c Slar, _1,3B0 Stalls (o'er ss.) , genmalot • !; e- �o )1- 1 ! g / PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF REfNTO eac- APR - 5 1931 RECOILED cx_a exx,(N\v, \--; re_ OA\ie % koseavvr s © ► - � � ga9 it) n (A c- Spac-A- oP)Aa N-=E F \ \ck_c <, Q; Oec-- C.F393, o rake Po .FIC. J Jd4jd),J A C j 0-P PLANNING DIVISION \) c.)71 I CITY OF RENTON • I APR — 5 1991 • T Gno4- s'C A . , erodes RicinVeDrj r(-cor:\b,.\-,-i- Lks caus-e G c ore c/esbr !f lave, ;Pero cmd // n mcv 2,I \;ck *\ (.. \u -.'vk . \ oO<eyn ‘ :s A\N cor ck.\\ -‘74\ cNNT/60,1sL/avN y,„ \Qde., \T \€ or'ls, c ors'A-ruck‘61r, 6Ai\ i\-\Q._ 0E.VcC.,-€. but"'cflt tt\c, (At, eco,co e � .-e- Yc-u-orlz. W d 1 01- CO'm•c -q-\re j.\;c\J cvyire, o.\-\ :k L.A)oaLi u t-00,4hc tike_ ryl (xG. a ,"1 42..c �, \oki _xy \,-.\-QsnA3 '-VNR., *RA— W'N 's)(k.15, 1_ -Eh I € g (4-e. s r Tporticoi A brockyse. Ono PLANNING DIVISION , . . CITY OF RENTON APR - 5 1991 RECEWED 1 .4.. 7 -..d -1)11erl. MCI( -1-1)ke b)lei e 1-1&rrn Ond ‘t•he 0 h7k clatim0-15 q 1- 7L hove 0 11 6,,r) -1.-11 c r 6., cmci r -t---A,/,0A ,/-1-7c77 .90 Cti 51)ce i Id .hic-1 ke cs butig1/22 Mete, Sk itT -11 611)(15 (4/6.404cfrv:-the. t 1 1 I Vlifltrfler-e., pao mor t 1 -P fh o qi i 11; were -J-f--iierc-e i \ ar-4 Gco4 ..e. C0,1(\npQA:r-,e_ G ‘13 ,1 \<e...., J i'vk \ac-r- C1-7ril111 7-2a ejlc,, /tiof dB ..:_, PLANNINP ',VISION CITY Oi .KTONI 00 4 APR - 5 1991 MafcAl • 6) eEVED TO T'nQ. c., I V v O rfl c'ot n The. Bite ROO rd- 6 rn Mick yil• to uz. bet,00.46 e, LT Mr)e. cce5k D , I \ \i)eick 002As . 3, I -1-11 n u_iots „sprec,la I 4-0 P0 n e_e_L ill a roL3! Ile (it)ed wesir fo Me, Rookery * we. in e'Vc;1 There oo 7: ! a.iblo‘l\ct‘ift -Jround ex/.40 clon\;- wn+- 14etrn ..)-(3 .\\ 9 (4€ c. r Ot.,o? le, cm a. i• it) frik -.For 1--1-7 ro p2 6 14, Cc o Frit,0.1--1 777 d §ra.alc ct fr )la RitpalAye,rtlThci BPLi il 1 I TC? Th I I I 1 I I 1.--,y 0 f 3 ANHINGA r-----,,„„,,,c,K-,E,.,--R„----- ,, , ,, i 10) ,,,„... "...-. - ., 0 5 Ree 11 4 o i z 5. r •, . ' ,T, Z 1 >- ..,, !:k-:.-.7.-_-li, ,. ./%...,:j' ‘ 'rj, ,e0„cf--, ,4',;‘,3",.kqt:,.4,,„T,,,,,,ziz• ' '. `, (t.tf ,41.,:\•,,,o.wo < , •, i- , • , ' , i -.. •,• p., t BLUE.GRAY TANAGER S EF,1 1ft a . 1`,.T-/ ,'. i ;.,''••A t;:-.....• 0 c 0 -- - .. ., .. .',.7,..:-k. ,1 ' ...,, ,* c f : N-.." - • .--:;--:-'--:"4:-- o .,,-1` f q..... ifizi> .\''y' ''• ''' *r-s .'1 ,•—•. ',. * 1 . rr, gui,"ir•-......"';,,` .1. l',:‘,. ',4.14.4 .''':,:i=,':4: 6 'i at '' ., .',7,!,....ti,-.'--- ---...-".-' ' ,,,f, ;,n, z'''`f:i-4- ,,. . 4., '.1 .'\-7,,,T,' 1 1,;,?, ' ••.t, , 00,-.01 ,„irre. < , _ m ,,,'g:N"."-I.I,'1'7, --. '_,.:-:. '....._Li'',..' --Ill 5 'i i 'E. '':' r v' • . - t (6) n t.,-n`:,' * ,,, -* N,..,,,„\i•-At (ii :.1 0 F. " `r----- ,,,.7, 0 - • , , '.:71'..',1,;, ti'''''' ' ''-'..,':'--, Pn 4.4......‘ 1‘.) :,.., - _. _ _.•-•=-0.,...„ k. c s ecivr) 1991 NITIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION /. C I:' „ \ 1,14.„.c,s.34...' ?,2(:, .......,,, \rt 4 _n_p-n_,-• -n'_...'' --n e n---. - .n..5 :._ • ir,./kik ., I.-i'fc`&;',-, _. :, 01991 NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ..... .........._, I 1 O..1.9_9_1..N......... WILDLIFE .. FEDERATION I I • I 1 i I I @ I I , i I I , I / I . . I . . . . . ... I ...- . . This U.S.stamp, 1 t'-0- ......0 n .: .. along with250- ��I � „: ,nC�''j) l,� l� g o s9 __ pQ,� f` %%}, ofaddiGonal� J co isequivalen _` ` ''14•-paus � 'i C`1 the'F'stamp -' 4N" y 3 A R Yosemite' - ✓ _ \PO 01/4-k6oc--- Cilry‘QA----- 4PR 4 NOW :\, o s.f ,. w..� t• b Leeson Pomeroy Ntdrthwesl.Irx;.,Royce A Borg,I+I.A. 1127 Pine Slfeel.Suite 300 Secillle.WA 98101 (206)58 -8030 May 14, 1991 PLANNING DIVISION Mary Lynne Myer CITY OF RENTON Senior Planner Community Development Department Mg( 1 5 1991 Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED Re: Blackriver Corporate Park Phase VII & VIII Tract A & Tract B NW 88041/89017 Dear Ms. Myer: For your review we have attached schematic plans relating to property development of individual buildings. Note site building, parking, berms and screens would be established within the dark black lines and the balance of the site would remain natural unless already developed. R- .pe, fully Royc A. Berg Pre dent RAB:fvj cc: Dean Erickson Amy Kosterlitz Mark Miller via fax 8/E'd 8020-E8S(902) Si331IH9dI Nd1 SE:VT T6, VT JAI iN - MAY 14 '91 14:36 LPN ARCHITECTS (206)583-0708 P.3/8 v g e to rn a {kk 6; • .' - =< • 1 + i 1 'A e NORTH[:71 " up 40 11 ,, 1.tr",e—wjp i c ...:i*1 i'si, 0,-- . i ' 446 ' �r : PH I c g ?ttI \ / ,,,' 41,, t.. . i .1 g r • l+ •, a4� i /': 1 /" / .11 1 i , ... , , S PEo p ..,,,. . . ..` r { +.,„ 1 , t �4 fcl.,- , 1 / --, i \41. K .\.�"•w{ '\\' �. 1 -1t t I i /° �� I4t = a >e•-•. '• . Ifr- ;I / .• ) -,,,r..._,,‘-.,..i)1/44 .1 s rn " li i 4 ) ) ,) t II lit' • Ai X \ ;? ; '. gg1 / / 4/414 - �i/ /! ~' , te r' or \y/ �I lif 11 \ :/` ( ( WI _4 1 !) T, / • I , ...7 I .4-,' ,c it -An... \ \ \ \ Ze. . t '1 7 . • / it/ . 5 . \ ,. 11 1 ' t‘ 1. 1., ,,,,.,, .,,, , ; lu , , ./ • 0 — *.. \ . :: . , ‘ 7. 1 .if • le , 11 . ti ti II l',.. / I ./.4i* "*IF- (.1% '• ''' . . '1., * 43 Nk .�`/ ► � ^ � tee+ f fl' C' / ...,/..•' , . / / s / I ��. 't >ell ,i ifhl ✓�,. ,,,fir ?i ( P " -• • \. , f I„; ,• • /fir % 1 1 + .I .e,., . 1 t ..1%""-,id r i i — \ a �+ ? 1 f 1 1` 1 r _ 4 , till I . i. \ ; f I i 1 r.. ,P-7 Channel III i ` �} ,. ...p1-14'1415.4.A.hevreo"Ar.'-'..:...'" y� 1 -. -- - R�; ` ; �.L. ... �- �� Pint City D.rt10om4M$GatO. Ir` i !! `i !RI ; 1 $ ,, Blackriver Corporate Park x. _ � �3 ,s--: . PHASE Vify , II I { Renton,to 'vn "�"1 ♦ ♦ I I i!81 Y 't wm...mo r MAY 14 '91 14:37 LPN ARCHITECTS (206)583-0708 P.4/8 ilr 7' y / i r r array �ii it v_; ti a yt46 I el en i / i W o fc 7. " .., .fie ii[li ,; ,1 b y \ I jil 1NoRT. } ID Y, T� d '�• r k li [:;7 e i Fil •rz • [ . ,:i _..,-,:.• ter. ki 2 2 1� 1+ 1 / ( yy• ,- rk•0 . 9 g re,1 i a it", ra 1 T, 12 i ; g ',.4 6 1 z, ' .---- .S N fil A /, / ,,/ ,'" 1 1 i 1‘ 1 2 • filci1—. h;',;:!:\ \.•,\• Ate / V / .. ,/ := 2 I I 1 '‘ ''',-`;`-.•-• ,,..i-v.,,•J'''''.0 ii ;.41 ? • \ ':'/.--TA'.7-sgli,- / :* ';••/ al ; • 11 gl IgEg •‘ti / i - • -mi g 1 V. i." ': Ye r'. '. . if44,,/' II/ b 4 1 m` 111Qh_ " ` / i: Aro ef1 ' /,/ 4t./.1zz.. ..i. ik 1 V / ..., ..i • i!t \ ,:e.,$.' tv iiiii , izi , 1,...1 if .04,-;_z_z_.:-. e N I .I ii1 , ), .. / ., . !( +mm� i (J :a ' , AI( i( S'13 2 -ri 4� t � Y � ti�A i .•y 4, 4 ; $3 0 � l y,• • + .a� ` nr - r, ` , a^ 1. 4 y,,� ,r t it ' ' $ � :K i: / Ai ". i \ f r $\ \ \ - ill i Y; li {�4, } . 14 , it '\�yy . ,. ` \ ` /I ii/ sr ;I,\ \,.‘"/ 19 t / s i ...• :::\ 11 1 ' r?# $ 1:. \ 4 „III t& A / / I' ,..7A . . Gt\ id. / i__ , ‹........‘,. . „de , • ! i1J ,t rw` I'.•, 1 1 AA 4 fit , •f - ` r 1 t 2. ' /\/ //oys WI. I 41b%\ ''A' ,, .. 1. /,/ lit ., —...— - "- 1 !rti ;P-t Channel i �?,.``y _.ilia_ , __JAI,:'� ' r. 8 £111,1 r ti �._ _. # 0 - Fkai Clty Deralopm,ntu Corp. ts„ m I. r _' Blackriver Corporate Park 1 i 57 Ii ?I , . .- - PHASE VI11 t z I' S ' Renton, W 'On �"' 0 • �� ii :, - ,. , .. 0 u, a > , ,„t4 .0 no .,........-4 '4,./ AAR , i I • I' ,14.61 t 1 '114 . 11 LII. J f•p7.� ' /i7-'s, / r nU q i�Y0�mf111 • • r}.,r• . 13 : E4111 re ,.I! :*: , .. ,-..., 1.44 .' / . ., ** . /' ,;• % '4/ — 93 2 gi 0 rn i =A 1/4F y ' , '41 I I..„ I / -4 I 1-I A - C s 00 '' � 1 \ r1 j I.- Q, - / . ! / '" a Ill ' ' ') • r /1 141\ '/4 � ,,. i ! ! t!*;4 / 'cr . ki i r / „, , , ( / V 1 4'. "N.'`.... ii.:,!.t 1,\11 1.,...7.'s?, , , .. ,... AA. I 4 \ % ;it ' - --. r I :A %;4 1\ / • 4 17 , LA. . , \:.,., , k. i , , eiAl \ x CI% i S. . ' W\ • 11 ril 1,, ',.' 'if- ,„41-.../. , ;• ., '1 ' il'o. ' *. ifr 0, l'\% ) i 1 .,\I.,,,. , i .,, ..• ,,,,,e, to . ',a / I i.1.0 r / 4P,.0 1 ,......a4) . 1,ZA x iii %. il t !r * -., f t„............,i 1 I it; . '-I I it .— re* , ro " EE a�... i .,.;. . i • ..is � \-t \ 'Jr / —.- 4.30.1 -''. .....' ..• i 14 W �P-1 Channel S��a�.,� ^ • aa.• �` 3 _ W. N •'{ Fk■1 City D.r.l{pM{Ili{GOfp r.4 i Blackriver Corporate Park jl I PHASE VIII. I i of RiintOn. N' •pn �'•r, y tA 3 £3& 0 A 3 2 .' 'r ' I y •',p ...` 7:7 rye M�w I t_ ? lik ii Frg*"s- Pi r z roi '2 o ;tit, • .j l •F.11.v+,'.'�t„sev ,Z Y,`, Nt i FR } R8 r . to 1 3 r�g 7:z/. •.1, -.:..._ ` ^~� ' 3„, li 7 x st d it i i i 1 i 5u » I. rQ "' • 9 j� ,.N. 1 I gil I K / l• 4 v� • r! A Ts y a •'' fey,r..v: �' atw4� al . 1 #11 .,:1'... . ' ' .4:400) Hr': .4 ' .."4:"-'00.4 I / i ,•,; ..... . ..)-447,11rip, . 1h% . ........ .., , •.;01 pet S�F ri ? '91 •�. w 1 y, r J * I �S f, �s• 7 11 j '.' ♦ ' r' r e • , , ' / i 4. t s '� i e ' , 9a ` • S r �I I �' / Z . , _... , .... ..,... . _sir..•- M. . , , •I. -/-- iill. . , .,. .1.1) ,,, ., ,... :.... \ aal .'lf \ I i 1 . i jf." , ri'il ...!;atili.17s5'. " ‘. ' . . l'1411 'ILI] I 1 .. ,Ty.--..„„ .. LW ' ik ,.., ilit. • 7 1 I i 1 ''c / ..... . .. •"-1-.-:...„1\ . .2. , ' .l'...1- ,. ... JA .4,, ''-iN„:1N. t, ..fr ' i'd .•-•.: 5, - . 't•,': ..., Nt:1::!...).11.-',L. iii k j`/ 1. -.. I ii fr � •:� i , t. :" 4„. ,..,0-43f.i.:',•.• 2..1. i' ; \•s ,/ -•• 44,-\p., • 7.• .. .":.' : . •, A ii . •• -f.r.-�.:..----...»-��.: .--4 • • r z �. S I t. a • I it fJ 0 It in / m a 11.1,1 XI res0 1 11_,_ l ' > m 0 .9.4 iitely; -;.›....„,..,,..4,./.4 1 , . 1.,:, i , ,,-.4„...„?s,,, . .„,,..„,,,i, . . . . 2 ag m l'AP%N,,) ej C4 V It; 1 - I ll i' 1 . NORTH 1 ,�M�Ii! i '� 1::::7 1. = 11 . r i it ➢..8 to y 'Int City De•eiopment■Corp. ;, �,. _ `__ B!ackriver Corporate Park 1 VI!Q __ - PHASE VII TRACT 1 ... Q r t- ,�Ib t _ -.. -�', r Renton, WasNt. • 1 • • •G in s) C1 fA ••yi tLl} i 1 . ....-..... •` ;--�`••+ K+ „y i• • ' ••' y,I = w , u G m J•� ;51 t .�- `h-7.s�11...•rrrA.,.�f_ ,.,... �.t�•,4• ,-• , .,ii II P .-." 1 t ,-. r,-1.7. :..,.......2zt: ,:-......,. ,r , G l'f*,%? n ii ; y ..f � g', »toliftt% ti~tA• t I 1h txtx 1♦ M i.H .A 14 !i 14 i j i. • hhh i i ijq ti ' ' )jr G ------_—, •mow _ f h. 2 ` I ♦ 1 \ �Y%.K![M,I�.. h�-�••ti per, /�. • I1 1 1-- .11 t'..7.; ''• --:-— , ,yi. ...5.\ - ...--:,..:F.:•. „... , --,47.--. N - I r 1• I M f 1/ r ' r ." • rya_ - y i f • 'l / I P '' it .,.•- + ,it -,/,;,- ,;. i tr i p p .. : ,., ,. . ' \ ''' /VI.11 p. / \i:: \, u t_ . .\s\a` \ f �; t. } ,/ �' / ,, r J Si' - \ Y rlvj - .O- �� \. \1\ • _~Its i.• L • '•• •1 AL /l�,i //I rr,•s�` •� `� I 9y N qua+\ ' �r s ` '`- , ' i1ri/ � 1 ,4 _ , ,. .i '; j , ' • fir'^ , : 1.1d .' _ • 1 1 ,4;0 -',:-.;-..‘. iol V.,/ ; :.0""...1 : ' •:114••••••7 i ..04 a.....------: 1 ` L fyl $ '•.100 t ' 1 i ID z o =33 5 73 ". , , . . A ` 41� III . t. NOMA iEE./. • . i , • .-\\.] It '> lj�i�'j FF4 ' i I iii, . i IL • r . ., a • II y �� :�9 .� _ First City Dw•lopm•nts GafA• It _ - Biackriver Corporate Park ? § _ _ PHASE V!I TRACT S V'' it a ( E._..'._' I ,'+' mutton, Wsarr++ •AIA'/' •A•iF w1.�nrIi�I71�:...�ssillr4.y ✓ ,F + .ter C. ./. b N C1 Ta N yN `A 1.1i� I i,_,.s' ' r•w, -ia4:r •:_.. „•t::...'p',.y fir 'it 1 g g M 5' . ^=�r i Iil ' y } •~•�.y .l {tea"'-•' w 6 2 ? ? it s r.. "` i 11 ..' `-7•I.�w`:tz-• `{ M xr. -��'hty ♦ yt �0 10 G Z I 1.1= �•• �_:�'. mow` IF 1: �v. v t. l A 'tItli - g : /it i 1 4' / 4 , 1/ 4 ......,. -r....,'448:- - - --......- --4-7-------..:.-„_,...--.. A..., ,.. 1 / ft ii ,.•.to -1.- troogoioall ...s' ‘ . ' ".."4.eir -9;it ill p , -• .,,-'0. , .0 : • -#•. al, 1 4 ..,..„4.4.41.t... . . . rg i /. ,- - 1...t r 21 t ,/ .... ;,,...,2 ....•:. \ ...., - - / 14 , i p / : w..,%,,,- \ 1 ,•••t, .Va._ i d 1:,y 4* / ...; . 7-- I r./ f ki • / ..-'`,',„,.., . - iti tq ..4!' '‘..01‘'' 'II *: ‘ .:INr,1111.'.', 1 • 7. '.:q1".A1.''••••.3•.%'\\.Ii4ir,It.' :,*1.* : i, � i mil'�. \' L ,/ .....',Nit ''1 :Y\ ^' . .ram • + "1.1..1 �'?... t'IVY .Mfr 1 / `; m .�:_..4441/A, (. J \ • + j4£‘. 1, ,J�• R t 5{4 ti�• • t. ,. •.•• 11,„____ • i�i i:.•,._- E vi Z d `\• \ . • ,„.:,•}�13f• : ".— �•��.wr F!2 .' ,es till t., J -;-------..,.„),-..,---?:-:.:: ::::,,is.,..,t •a'_•-• ,. ii. ✓ 11:• .�!� yr�+-.�1...+..�.. -ram... .A 0 co '},SFy l\Lj` •S1t .`,4y '• �•-r�1 (e Qj`� t �'.' gir • �' 11 • °z e'l7 1 �' {7fpv 3'1 i' I.iit iltiit '7 +�� 1� 1 Pc v. g ° 0 z„ i.l. Y p I, 1". ," . • . sID le• 1 it E �!�_,-� J/ '/ I' R1 x ses .);,, Ilf; ; A, i .../.0 + 41 44 PC < AI %Icte.7.,.`* ,S.• zissm t.,..„s.„! 5,, (7 1 ,r. w. 11.Yt.•• - • • b$4431174: { t 0rt � • 1 1G t ' e . iiIIIIiiuilunnuiiiiiultiii -_ m Pint C'W Developments Corp. OliiLitb Blackriver Corporate Park z 11 rr g c.; =_ _ ___.., . ? ,._„,-37,.,..,_,..,,.,,,,_:::.,....,:,,r,„7. PHASE ill TRACT B 17."' -4,,,II _ _,,..,,,,,:,-,:,,,.„........:,,,,„: • 7 J _ 1 FACSIMILE/TRANSMITTAL CON _h}SHEET LPN ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS, INC,/ROYCE A. BERG, A.LA. 1127 PINE STREET, SUITE 300 SEATTLE, WA 98101 206 583-8030 (20 ) 5 3-0708 (FAX) PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON DATE: c-*7)th f Kw 1 5 1991 TIME: 07r' RECEIVED DELIVER TO: r//4 Ir. COMPANY: a iA4 1e7 .-7-i 3 _ ., v ,,44ae4r FAX NUMBER: c)7,3(1---_„23---43 NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET: r PROJECT NO: NW freq 01:PN PROJECT: ;,,rcc __ O A L,...--00 ITEMS ATTACHED: /— .67,re. ' _ -j-c:tic...--frmr.rc.. /2-9-A.S • • FROM: d'rl.r - SENT B : If you do not receive the Indicated pages, please call the abo a number. Thank you. 8/T'd 88LO-E8S(98Z) S1931IH9dU Nd1 SE:PT T6, VT AIN 1 r,,.v.. �,� ar -w -•r'�y i -F ° r. -,.y: •`• 1.y,. C a, 77*4r a Architecture and Pla ilr4- - '•""' " . ' ' " • ~'*` Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc..Royce A.Berg,A I A..1127 Pine Street Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 , k= , FiECE *al FEB 2 5 1991 MEMORANDUM OEVELO MENT ERVVL � DIVIS TO: Lenore Blauman DATE: February 22, 1991 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. S. PROJECT: Blackriver Phase VII Renton, WA 98055 PROJECT NO: NW 88041 SUBJECT: SM;SA-071-88 Per request of Laureen Nicolay, please include the tax assessors number #91880-0140 with the application for Site Plan Approval and substantial Development Permit. BY: Paul R. Coppock lit/ mp cc: Dean Erickson Laureen Nicolay Royce A. Berg *}"' Cf f�i'c,i,ecttJretadiP,iIQ, KYJc,.iea 1t+f+ v, F- � 5+ -�Gsc,� .r•� rX'. ,, ti T i" Y t- "x K'r'dck 'a fk" tX rf['�4s "t ri' �+hn j14 S tr° t "x'`a. '✓ �.5.+ '`° ,.,'�•`f,•F•� `:�tiwF: �r T t r 1 "rfss et i.44,,,t p"`�w ,.'se e`'�` " ",r � 4 '7b„' 4 "J7f.?°k':# Pas* f•.. r*r a r ig . ,.A;TX"—e y, • 4`. t4v4. -„,ems ;u <r .. o 5^9.+y w.,t . X r4 3 3- Q Jr 'l +'ti+J k / 3 +' ✓' tiF ti Y 4'jj 4 •e riK '.(- - a t ^,s"' c w• 4 '�`r' t+ �1 * e, l�c� YS`Y}. .r,. y _ s, s+c.f ti.i" r.i tim% s f .�. ,fip R.rs •+.-vs- a�.k x. ..#. ha-SF 'x._ .d..; Q ay is`: � E�,t "jy,.� 1}' g ' %y 1 +` +{yr,1 i ,: •�., a �4k�,2k *. B e, y, 1-1";;r 'si• r i^�"41 i:r,> } 1G,r a. 7 �'1.",g5+st.+''`' 44 t Tf' J �..0 i '•n w Y;G �,'1 s y� g St,S�F�m 4 ..,w,4 +.WN�i�. : f`.�l, � ''}' �>'w,•JSM� '4�'YqR. -5rr Y.r'-, , �1`•' :: L"easort rnerq'r'No hitestr f`d'UbY.CecA'Berg'M A,�,1427JR'�°e'Street Swte43Q0:Se¢tfle UPIA„9•&1ct1,(2O6)583',8O3O +.`^`k'}k• -�';•S�; ht``:"r ,.'`F•K'"`:.; }. y x._,t t' ,.try t�i".J.ty.„Y W.:-..;7,^I `>.. .fir..�L'oc'i:'.. ,%"i�'.. s'.:+.s�G, TRANSMITTAL To: Lenore Blauman Date: February 21, 1991 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. S. Project Name: Blackriver Phase VII Renton, WA 98055 Project No: NW 88041 Attn: Re: SA;SM-071-88 Description: 11 prints revised site, landscape and grading plans, per city comments dated 2/21/91 1 original and 10 copies 8-1/2 X 11 reductions of revised site, land- scape and grading plans, per city comments dated 2/21/91 11 copies 8-1/2 X 11 revised Bldgs D, E, F and garage floor plans and elevations, per city comments dated 1/30/91 11 copies 8-1/2 X 11 vicinity map 1"—= 200' 1 8-1/2 X 11 colored vicinity map 1" = 200' 1 print each colored site and landscape plans dated 2/21/91 11 copies Historical Narrative ONW • • 11 copies Chronological Narrative °vr( -�9�. Remarks: ,ks` r,:1yY ❑Sent per your Request ® For Approval ❑ Other: ti,st'' ❑ For your Use/Reference ❑ For Distribution ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records Hand delivered By: Paul R. Coppock for Royce A. Berg cc: W/encl : Dean Erickson, Mark Miller W/plans: Lauch Bethune, Bob O'Connell . ,...- -s•-, • xx s: , -_ m-ill r1‘..n.rr‘ ri • • RIPARIEST PRESERVE --Illtaeir'or /4102,46‘ #0 141 ;Vttre • ---....-- fhoorkii11,eqr441. . 4 a ,i,awirowit4,•firip -. - • .:•:-,. :. . 4,06,..„ ...40„ _ • , . # 4/4...;. . . '14 1 _ . • .. • -..i. . r 0 --: ii•-•., • VACANT •4!' '4 7. : .44'0 . - 0 ' It. .-e - •-• • - • 1 1 $ ... • . . .s- '''.:, \. i ‘. :.'. 107 / • • 4 'l OFFICE ••... t • • •• • L__Js ',••:•,: \ , :. 1. VP' •• Of.t. j;e‘‘:: . - --...... • I kr... •• -. _ • .. . .. ." - . . . • . . • 4,:i -:::: - -..-.-i .. . . - • .3 ,ri, ; . 401.4•:b1-1°-.'. ' tik. °' *: .': :• . :' ''.. % • . O e. 1‘,.• : ..... W. .. Vigna,5'. oh 4...-i, .. .. JAIN:,141164401k'..7,-Ntir''.0.. ------Wje 4,'OMBri-Orri": i . -•dgq• .°1542144101---vid'eges‘v03T '...... see, ••...._.".„,---__• ,,AT:'NI __... ._'''-',10,-.. ___ .. ;a......ilg ...611/- -''''''',. ':'' - ' ' N ar.- , N....... • tollimillap,......- Atop 46. , :se a li,v7.61. -..1',...--tollarli. . -7-.4.i'iCasTOP .• •-. . 1 '-- r- • 'its al li, •••--....k..1‘*- a • ...7Y-.4"'I; ;.-.-,-t e-I...S4riA.4.3,.l•11.l. P:-'•14ro 1•4•A,4..4...•..k......-.(;.4e-1t:I1••f t,mis',i,•0_.i ...\P-,,.,.1..D.-,t‘EN T• E• NTION POND i.i .i 4.s.,.a.,•0•'L.A.t.*i tit,i'll i.r,.r.-a,i'-t•a...Aplt iaa..li r iG-•.-.-.s..•)l_-e 0_.-t-t-__r4_-64_:.-.-1 4-_=-1.,1-6.-,.?„-,'-,.•-.4-m.1,--.0401;iC-.44_7e,-.°•,ffiP1,.-•i;•A--4•_-0V,,_*I F...4 a..---- .:,.-,,,•--',.-m.'.-....:-.-0t•f2 Aaj..i.,!1•N1,IoI...1 A:16),. 4-,-t...4-4IA-.N,1--,4-;.,.i s.T1ri .-ie;,.„•d-ro j,ak- 4 .1.S..t.'.. w1....•..Y ••e-I'-C' i,-* l / 0 d i 3 ) 4 A (ASo . t , ) N - 4 . •-: ; nri.iidt•Y Y.. .-111•. -f'.•. .t'.:•.,. •••• • PROPOSED . .•.iq•i 0:•.,o ir,.42li.,r.:4.t1-.,il)--. \I ,. /4•. LV;i,7&,fleli/‘s4..t o:...,.40 ,p0°,i.5t7t0g-r.iepW...04o‘o 4v.sT---ol1.e 4X o1,N,• .*\ \\1..\21.ki1.,.''e....(s.1i.;im%A40-,,,.0.',,.,4.„ •. •l 0i • OFFICE 1.. • • • OFFICE / *Fs"' . •45!/' p '.1--v-Ra. Are '1,4 a ii •-•• i - vir' ; ' .zokZ. , .:. 1, fr.-- i,'"Wi' ". % .-.-.4 ,2 .giti: • .,_ , .. - 11...."••• 'iltip - ' '1 ''. ., vi.„-A 4.-ItlkiA3--.: ,•. A '::7.•'k A)s., 0140-, 441W:A W"9 .r-1 kip ,. ‘..,„,74111 --, 1 .k•,.,. . _.......r.,....4...**wr,..,- ,,,,•,.‘,.%1 .• • ‘, r. Ai ..•••• ,...•v. 41.:L:e • . . - i . • .:.: s.-- :afar c t% Wir \ti. .1.. ATP , i __Ifriii,. ...0 . .i. • WI., "*. . • — . -:,...,. ' 0..c.- /8 g A...Ft ti,,,,, .i .. _ .,.,„, .. . - `•414( VIM.-L-440XLefai:+- .- .••• .: -.• -'. • ' • - •• TN -r".- , (--161114-\ j -'-".. 7> ' .ili% ..: "1 ' Cla ..., • aZi-----. . .s t. • , .'''. 11.1.-t- ; ft. r 1., • , 0 .- t41 I' ii. AIL. A I', . .1,I. - : •114,,, ,•.-, -I- •••.=, ...'"- '7treablf '''''.'0-*'4?'''. AA o, . •_ . ,, ,... , .,,, ,, A_ '----;-1.*0 VI ----Iv ••' -'--.:---- •• ------„. .. ,.. ‘ 05104. ,AT4.--.4.„""k b•- 4,-, Iglf - 1 I %-*. • ',e0.45‘ _ • 441"., ‘c vi."'.. . • i mi. 2- 111*-1.111::=4,y_._ .IP IITV•Filk" :.:-`•fteINitZt7 Ail" •Yr -' 44c-A :M.IAN,' „WC' life : ..-..."7.IP::=1- .4,' .-. ' .• ---' W. 'RA 1,,,S1.M •.....31....,..e -4V \ • • . il- IIII4err ••'4>..-..--'4V•••" • 1 • s -110 •IP7 TY/f riiiV,e; i. 11' k , .e. s.•." VA",..„, 4' AgT1 1 •L'.. .it.•*- • . / 4-43 I , u,1 4L .. ;,,,.. ,c+ .Q,V,,,Zaft:'• • ,•:• :t4r.7:4, • " -"h•-1.‘ I". • ' AA SA '• ' O'ci oi a:1 colot,!4."•-tift,•., NI%s . •:.".,- '4"!....41-4%. ' 8,.' At, lit •,,y. -/. • .7,4V ••• '41: • y. -. ,:oh i f.....;.,.' ...• r g.,,b -I Fr- 71'7''4b1741. 49 i .'8-Pe.. 0,._..":0111.te. ....- ..,.. titi • :-.0". ,,.. ,,,A.,. , • . I. „ ..r..,.....„ • . •wesio ......N,, itsi,o, ••••.r.,- • /P. , • wir,V9 ;44' ' 160•16 it • ••''`....t.uAt..• 44* ••#.0IL ink 4 r.e*-?.0 •I-. • ./.,:: ... . '.0..... .10..II..iiiitvec. \s s ,..2.........r."7";....::74,2"..4.7.1•1544.".. ...4 frik*.-.2;7"itt....k..4.'4...k`1141441-046.1114111111V:41::44:1/. . ':1)1r;...416..-.11411771‘..4' . -- • •''•11100.,:•:`4N, 0• •-• .. .: „,„ \ 02;-‘-;20.....:"•111116 4116; 11"11111-Nwo. •., d..\---,...,....„. - -. ..,.. ••......,,iii:.:•-447„,eta . ,„›..____ st„. .4.4,r.:;:. . los • ill* • .p .i. • OFFICE -^..... 1' ' 1$ ''. ' ..-•1.6.7, NI.. 13- ' -.4.1v."---- -•-:•7-74::* e% ,,,:, . 1 8 ir , , , ......... . ._, ,,..„.„ . ., . • _._) . , ,. . . ..,..........,. •.. . ,.. ,. ,....... ..,4„,._ ., : ''' ... • OFFICE -VICINITY MAP METRO SEWAGE •--------r."- gb."'. -- '"wi'.....1111t: .11111110%). t‘Nif - #4,1? TREATMENT PLANT , .s k • . Atri-e . 1. a. . ..„, " .. . . • NORT1 • • • 1"=200' .. ••._ . • • • „, I . ' .1.ex./..ColTolweeso••/// x-s, / . PLO.WOO/•Gor 4 . • / • :`,7°-,4V,07"1"f-,E' . s 11" // i 4.0...COTIWAOCO XI., O-I...rm.:14 He,..r / ...., L, -••• L. / A al '')k144,..... .0, • . „ .,,,,,.... 4 ,....,..,.....,:.. . I—.S.., '' . • ..Nd 1 . / 1 e \ ...‘V'''''•!k41- 44C,C,e, ,..... . • " CZ • N, --,,--,-,., , 0_ .i.,...--- P-I Channel . § - '430,-1,...,6. pOorleOPI WE- I I VICINITY MAP/ . -•.4--1,c.,4:-.. SWIM MOM a) . .1-• CZ / .. , _ .. u'coRMIRE MIPIRriprof FMK .upp--..........001111111111 L. 0 0. M Pond ./ . tor /-- —— - - _-':.-.-...-.'•11—"---- -- z 2-\--- •-,;.-, --- /N '• .. I re. I i! 1 •._:-.1 St...1.. nonsI1 a I.I.S ScUTIHCENTErl 01. . L.. 0 "s„\ /' i i..4.1,,, ______ ii- . Tx.•/ ";• • 1.;• /.... :.) 1 - 1: ...!....1.: '1; . .; X -u e cc /,,, , ' • ••• . s! us I-- - -, i . . );.. . ., j , . i y VALLEY 0 y.. 1..A4 • ' 'ff...'.. ,... a I< ., - GENERAL 0,111111414"16N. , • i • .• ..r:. I _ •I I''''..''''r • .., •n ft, .:.c.... Ir. . 1 . ! 1 , 114. 00iii,;01I. ... ' ‘''' ‘‘‘.•„,-ISL. • r ) ' ' I I, _ r '1 A \..-' i / -1!-!....W...;.:-..." - stV.0,4\,•.•;,t':7'). Vt. VO:, , ''. /f? ' . 1 i._ , I I ) .//..I,/2 3/./ lee la. ..1. 1 ti • .-..... • / 4. !/ u , I' c't 1._,•, •., .:-•'' .,.-,,!.,.t...., , _ , - ii),...:2, .0.1,4111,,0%, oP•r •":-. ' ' ogi! -•'' '''''t c A, At 4.• • ...!‘; , • \ y• •\\ • c'c\ilk -.')•-24401r-7. ,k. ::11,14 -,-,'''fibla I!!-,„1. \ ': ' • . ' " - ••••• - -,•,,,, \. \. \ 4,", 46" 4‘t1.-' , A g 11‘....2,,r..4i...'",:1'„7.f, Stli*Vik,A*0 % \*° I. Li-t7,, ii. '' ',. , • ...! I,\ t :0 -\7)1F. 9\. -Drainage D11.C ‘- • 't1' -.;.-"' 'a - - --'ra- r1r. CO n_ k' ..•. T.01 . // 1/ , ,•,........,,,,.. • /f; ' • - ‘ e k` ...,..4\,, ., : . . / j .-4 A-** -1-\'v' '• . 41';''''‘' 14."')-!: 014W ‘IN .,' N\ ir - I p / . ip::-..c.1--A— \ 1,..:::'..\;:m,:,.....8-4,- !:,,.. _: : . , , ;,... '...- - a-, ;••• •••L' .‘.‘.‘; \ *-. \\--' \ • 1 \Eal•tiro PM.E pl........ . .......... ....... , .., L .. ?„....---- ... r4SORIPT$0•4 We.1 A x 1''t - ,,•'; - . -•• .1-••,-.- ,'Pr,,---.,."-•• . , .. 4 I.'.1 . • IR 443 ;;('''''k f..'---- 4.7,:',:; '''.-.:71k .* ‘,,, a0`ii,"'-4.:•`'..'•,,..: ..' -. ..t. firS1 _4,/-;r•-tl• T ,.-L . .......,.-, .v,P :•-1 ' 3 ", • ;,,+=6, t... •:;,-:''. .,-;--,. ,7-,3.- , 41.-',.„.,. !.._,-,. .,,.„ sw —13—"..!-------- -.;,z-g.,,,—, , ' ... '-( ,,....L.,....1."...ILL.;;;..„.LL L/6 . x I i o I Xi., .,:.,,,"" ....- \ 11 1......i:.•,...:::' II. V••'''.....1.yat,-..••:. .'.:• 1.•••01rwF srleltil.. yt•.::.- -,-‘.--I:"-_- ...-_-'7.*'--r'"7 1 11 103°1a ' I illt 2 r•i: •Q,;•,:!•••:,.,-:,!.•:- ••:,;\ rr,"7:. -tr_• t . 0 KNI 11:1:ti-H'-. rr -r r (...)--.•. laza, WOOL.16. . lilla I (c_. -.., . .,.... ...... .... . •\,... -. '.../._:. ''S - '..'"- .. :,..'"//.,,-;.........f-=.,,k ..j.t.;.64.T.4 ' •,..: \1....60.IP.\ 1,, \\_s i•1 .1..f. i aka .,, '..',., -si:ca :- 4 4',.',..,.. .- ,'-.." ..---- .-7..-,,-.•-r.,;.,s-A. _ —.--.7f).'--13- -.-.;,- ir• ,..- v,-, kW? .: ., .' i 11 ih.. ,,, r• ..:7 44.-•7, '.'.:/-\e .,,,,,..,,,_;:;3 1--r•...1--:'\. ------- - -,..•-.....,.,............A. TT'4,0o- t'''.79?*r""..7-'----•7-4 +::,70:101 4. OW ---'7.--:..- -' / ,... / CAYITAIG.00.0 Cur .Wxr-......P...L.W.coo.C., a...4w.,1..exu.SO...../K..a ..... ,...•P••r••50.0,T.,c..\s.e1v cso.\—A—05,,--..—i-..--.—.-.r--,--,,-,--,--.:_!i 0.......... *ela/te rte.."tkU°S.W44./.r q...W.. ......:.1 &/ .......eme•IT To x£.-VAZ/O•C-0 \ ,k 1 s 0,0171.0 cL00 cur . ..,s, r• ,,,, :‘,..„ \ 0' / , • TABULATION '' ------,-* '-'-:'•'. I N\.IN-, .1- ' *.". . BLACKRIVER VN .......r..z.f..4...,..:4‘,.._ --::._ • , ,.......: A„. ••••• .,,,. 0 ., .., -,-'7' Site Area -1683,762 S.F.„, -....„....... '''' ._ .....::,,,,,,,,-..i.cs, e. ,./ // CORPORATE PARK ..Building Area ±286,300 S.F. SITE PLAN .......... -......., Gross Coverage ±41.9% -... il....k..........o..-- r:10,:r."' ..1/ .•13',. .•,: it•:,.. RENTON WASHINGTON . ...., ,..Ree-7 ..., ! i S., s., Z.' 2P/../-..1p0A....40-Irs Or Site Coverage 9%(F.411,1111 e55t C•11.190) FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. z ••.' ••••••,....--. '`..-----A , .).„, .s./ 71 . 6ct 501 501 134\\ ComPact ±304 Stela (213.7%) s`s, / \ g L., Handicap ±16 Stale „ \- :....-1,380 Stalls (1/207 SF.) . „s \ mat .1-4o.11 ma..1....k. • cmc..11nd i t . i " usm ur / a..cono+.mro..y ' 4.S'OM.COT,WVAY,D / • w/nor +uccr i PLANT MATERIAL LEGEND / • Yw.[onw.vwD w/ �� 11, � ,rr.rz•, a.z«�,.e»-ru pGr.l..,na r•wsv.ri-rtehP.h OLUS.H..J,l4T r /0401 • •\ ,+,c - O rrr,a•a1 „geor vct .^,o, -y' ,r.s•v,.. ,..la Mkr[4:• ,.he P1 ChM.' ,II •\�` -_ `�w \nogi� �,e. I i s ,ww,nrw-v+ee,v�,wn.o,Iwer.w..sr,i e�,+aGv,. _ P-1 Ch ' `` , �' i Y ate, �wt c,�yp� LL i .,..;1 `� ` ,_ _� \ I �jy}.' �rw Na�rrrfa wrna..-/e14 to ,7•v(.r' sv.+'�c- Q� III' / ;� --_- _--I see•isoo•-- s•zr '- -� �enWr•1xv+ •+ram rn--14,, :1;cwf..v�3we PnFINe .. 1 \_ �. \s a i \I ate,', ler+ tea,-I �e•r.l 0-,. •,r1•w-•.on�a (Z - e - n ___-'�,.. V ` 7 Ie.a".N+rNiw N�a,h4..t;f,..w,�....y n0,tf Fvt- L J/ y��Vi/:J ro �t(y '- - ' `'� p1\- 1 • I.-0 ;�� AbMy,n,FCV o GR.-wv,�rvt,/aFKVI / '+,//�I \s9o%oom�••� n..r "!, \ "Wr ` ____ �' J I I 1 �?.\:r,.a 71wN Iw�eNnuDl N .ANVj riuFps.t4^ .... 0 / t)il YI, ¢¢-' _ _. —• 4 �' - �.I I ino/ / .e n•cco t•hfn a sS•vr. a m \ 77// / r / .-•• • � �.� — - -1� I luo.r •1.' ' v-.-N,•ectee N-xD a»+veK al•e^val R eW.w-6,-4 Q O I- ,,,,A:I �7J77Jj \ ♦` I ' • `�, i I _) $;:._.(.3 Vl^'bw I C )CL A W1f'r �'I G'13•Y+i+.�' . .\ if , �,` �•/: ,,- I., •I. I. ' z�P _�I/3((�"F�rf u�( m °. I I. ; vR'� hi v'n e�.v,w,-r�r. I I.el�^'a�R' o"• ' _ L \� p/,l i' vdli f/if•i I f I /I11 •I : -I-'4-4 '''- x y1;ef•�` `f 1 ,-r,+.s xu'-.' B�&* n'r ' IhT„! 0 \ I �I .1'i•�% i���%i!! ,i�'•'�\ :1\• b1/� - it I y e.�.,Nr p."(tc E > > o .9 • �� i, �,iV,�.•fJ' � .+:.� 'L'g -w1. x 17 OGfv....1u•nWeF¢r gNNUM, re..xfro.+n• m s'Yol„eta..i,,o, 1, ' y���i'1 �'',�y,Dr" r �.�. I � a,°' N nnu4+-H-fq r1 > •L/ .g{bcc lR.'L '-i f !�4'G 9 �j,4 fl • � ." 1 .d.,-_ n I u, '•' y 0 444-IfcrK roVn i �jj „ fhs yjR• �� ;,r.y. iA'y�..,,�: iarr : I : O D-eV sr�di rl.eci.efXts( .wcIHUH o.laG+H- o n' rs„..wrrw'J o.e' .inn ��.--..:�'.A►!{,••�yw.: \ •.f^+E�/� d �t�i �� I ( U p IriWr1 ftu'-I a+w•ca+w oaW.'zYrNHin >. () U) . ,�.�•,-Jr • St t• plT� p� kl. r O f�zaf vi-rNne`•z-tNs� - xwvt ��':;ry'~ '• 14 �•1 1 .�`:�;� ) I' �'� Y.i') I I� �i Fev o-oeRf-eeFFf �vr+r.lwt•+ ,rvFpiww+n• V (z$ Q o t ,� i ;aN• n: a� I,/ {�� I - O ae9 anr.L Rz,.✓m0 royry,>. ,fra.air£fr• e Y . 4i,;ii:ur:. s.•:- V �� \ f! :N �5�� i i v O..w f„•.r. Fo wrww rye = .c�e"rw"'�"' •a'a`�-`iv d� '� 'ivr ♦ ,\ .} _ `R,I� ��, I i r O•-1)- W A A,rn cukk+l-f fWisn. wHWri• LL W a. ¢ [ s •e V, ,a f 1-lA . -- : ' .' I I Mil ti. • 1 i- ' e n f d4 mees v pv-, fVrrr ' ?di' a,.v cw e 3J w.. f r, C: `. \1i�,1 s p'v 1 11 i mMvv,..;Yv) �"'a 1 I�•v�Nv Fin -gv.•a4.-c n6..wu, / 1 i / ��;�, `�\ .,porgy v i ,�.,% 11; It. i h r✓ i�I i �� .. ,lrp�}i'`'St� . 2 /\� 45t P y� �ja'.�u. :,,,, .1,44,0, g 4 I, \,•-„, ,.. i�/ '`�,`< • _. VI .♦i- i ,e� �Q vim` ,, A.�/ / 14, \5 �2. .`` \ w ,\ ,',��QP°�,� / 1 �'7�E�1. � ` `i'�`�,1�H, llt� ,�t 1 s"'^'IY^r3-, j; If offilt 0 '\ . ,., 1ph. • I, 0 a' /1 :'�l [�" „'.' re-Yr++ �'4t-�tr,' � I'II `•, / 'I i.'.' �',••lv.xa c.n .•I s .Y ` \ FS i � , a r n72\2r • 4' i yras_�s4.ca�) • io n.�sro, :l I tor r�i '7. � rdit3' f\4.• -c r�r•.,a t , e golf ,f`at, .f f Y. �,.T p, 4..Ft..)a„+..rt�o-.m► PP. w.vw cr o-.rt u I11 ti 1.I s" !i I . f .41, . ,, �i��ttry i"' `a .., �4��D _ i _ •� Mae Pam,r6JU 1 �. •:� �i'b'>."g, 5 i :j am-` �. ,0..,+,,: �, �.•� J.� ••* ��_ _z_""u `a ��'r�., v.�ra+..nci:�a I eri ', C'� , .)141: � , `l\A7i�11% '�"�Jl d i �`__' �. =i'i �¢`' '-ltTw Ne.rf'.4 Ala" -F rn FM't+'Y'f wf t �: % �i gI'� '`%i� ;: Tr,____:,,,___._ of Vie✓. , it ;P-(''' -4 'yO fil.l. .a` , '7eit.4_,R, . _'1\ O .,4•stw q p*ropyi/ Ake\!• ; lire".� '7i. 'AO, !L i'g• ,. -v.co„-w °"n- - -�r +►R` e''^$` »;!l� "^'_'•� +\ I .' r• ��.... 4. �' 'w�`.�.e:i -.+,...•ems T.' 0,.' - e nn m%asT•-:- 'L5' Q L�5!. b�1��•- ll�! Jl' , �• • TEo.,o�onu 04.44 c T r„e•---- _ •.� ,- A ...x r4 t4 . .,v, i' %/- t ' •°dal•Ave ,. ^I�` f ,`. t\116t ,a`:I+. a l .•v.. \-.g.•vvir v'nc- w�w.,F•le.7tuwrs•x �.c�- Ave S.ly J� i� -.73; •........\. 1I •- 4y^ ;v Dw-.,r rW. i.s • • • • • a t�.r�-- -- _�W CI VER I CORPOT PARK1 h NDSPE PN vy F75.. RENTON WASHINGTON xEM� FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. zz 41 / eyanu... 4"14' • / 1 . i • G"A" II Q.1 .1 v _ /. / • -,• ::•: // ',. -,• •• •• • • . - :•-• ' ri! •• % li•F 4 ray • j•`r/ r j ; / r ,J.1/ I F �' t s'b . t'/ / •- /8 e i , / S/ + 7 • !^! I.L9 . 1 e (" y' lir ii 1 1' ,. ` fad `�Ca,� ! oa*q a .•%r , btE- is • ?� • 1G•°I .../- .1/ . :. ,% ' ,..- .,„. ili& '.r, , I. i di A. / ip t I3 ..,...,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,I,,,,,I.,\ . , • „ ,,, , . , . .. . . .:-- , vi,,, -‘. .. ,, , . ., . „,.,. , • , \ .. 7 ..,, .. li, ..,c.,, - i ;--- •-:. .\,',. . \• , ", S ,7!t 1,Xt:, ‘s! Vs ‘16 4, . ': 01_,... 141:1 ,,,) / •.::1 Nso i \\ v, ..s.`,\ ',.., c , / %. . 11111111.0*Iri. - . \ :., .1. . . N-:,".•. ,..•,.....:.., -- . '-'-• '‘.14. *t. . . 01.000-111-P ‘4.----:- ___..... \-6.' • 741:111% =s .-- roe .\ `� Up t milt _��� \\ i • I ‘i 'i' � `�; i 6h'F I VI '1 „ .., , .lbw ! 1 k ' • 1. I S_ 5.?A i ..:ii , . I ' i m �—z— .. - d • S! :} L E coucETunL LRG,,,Je.L.10 urILIr,PLA.1 — —• +e� gyp• p II }' 6"...RIVBR mRroR>n ruck .P....',..,e --"--- �/'�" BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. ./y '�. i t- E p Y — ------ CIVIL ENGINEERS 6 LAND SURVEYORS SEAL2 p a E; • iIR ftA a�uartM rz4F 14?tI' c ,r..x•c ;;, .r �� p R[.lro.! ii !T�_�1 ULDu irl.l- -2 O �_ • • 75'-0" I 95'-0" I 30'-0" 1 • a • --- disN. a a • \ \ O L \ AMU I\ M \ ELEVATORS ■■■■[ I •`- ■■■■■\. • -- a a a • L • a a IMIIIIMMIIIIIIIMMIr _�■\. o imtamm a �m•••• • In En���■..;a■® �C■■■■ ELEV. .�6C�© 1E a `ol ,�E:��� EQUIP. ■■■■ • 1111111111111..E 'I11111M111 in °o a 111111111111'.., 'MMO 11111111111 I STAIR ' STAIR I ELEC. --I• •TELE. •- -• • L•--• JAN. a a I• a a , FIRST FLOOR PLAN THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN • a a ----•\ a a • \ \ \ \ \ \ • a a a • a • M_I M■■� PERM.—■► • _ e■i ► E1 Ill ��■■■■�� � • a NM � a I• ■■■■'IW11111111101,., 111�1�I1111 a 111111111.., 11111111111 I±_,• a 1 L•__• a a a a a SECOND FLOOR PLAN ' FIFTH FLOOR PLAN •, ,oa— ' BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII Allk • I First City Washington, Inc. W aK +b A 8¢e AI/l PC ICI ' '°"p5�` 1e�° 5 Story Office Floor Plans ( BLDG . D) #NW 88041.1 1-30-91 S9oTG VA 08101(106)583E61'1 0 20 4( ..-, : ft --Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass -- Mechanical Screen . Ty.Ica •----_____ - —---. .---i . • • • . 1:49-r. 4, 1111111111 -11.1 MINIrinillIMI\ . . LAIIIMMEMMUMEMMARIBMIlli al I BSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11111111111 . . lallINIIMIIIIIMMINIMMIIIIIIIIMIr WI • . I igOVIMMEMENNIE I MI el ism. annimuninissaisuummint ' Bill TO .."-Th -.' • • • k=rmr-i- I. 114 ( -__ ;4 ini inuninmnonananonnumninsuninsi . ./ ..) 9 444 .,1g4 liniminnuini IT II •a>,,, ..4;"41 ill ImmIMOIMMOINIUMMINUMMINNIMIMIMIll .\14..Z.Prd -F-: _ - inmalummullit mil Al • lj, Ila inniummumumunnimi . . WEST ELEVATION .• NORTH ELEVATION. TION . . . • . . . . , , . ----.... • z-Exterior Insulating Spandrel Panels •. --_... - Reflective-Glass-at-Entry.- --___ .--- ...--- .- Only • • .. . __ .---------- ..__ .• • --. i • - • - J -,. _ III 1:4 _ •all I 1 li I.is IIIIIM ilium II . . 1 • EIMMMIVIIM1311. _ • ., . .--e..•.0,..ar 11111 11_a. m..i u i.E.s. ' .4Th','" ff1 _111_1 1 .1NMEMI I LNMa IIs III IIIInInIIIaI, r, .• 4. MIMILMBi Eil I - e • . . SOUTH.ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION _ . . . . . . ,. . • TRACT • - BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII. I tatacitocngterso . _ prl First City Washington, Inc. itimilltrrotobacni. ft ma err is Ar'4 acillo • • RI 5 Story Office Elevations ( nn. n ) ,__ II_II, NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-91 . -O" 100'-O" i i i i \\\ o / �, :: `\ o / � o n / \ b ■■■■co / STAIR ENE� ' \ Iimiiiiiiiniii ' 1ilmiilul111'■■■■angmoi \\ TAN. ■■■■� ELEVATORS ■■■■� ELEC. Oa , ...."C ELEV. EQUIP. WI ..1g■m. NO tllllllllllll' 'lllllllllll' co W� gunman wsimIIIIIII11 - FIRST FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR PLAN / i / '' / /tl / \ ■■■■ / \ 'II�III '■� ■ / ' _ \ „ o ■ ■ � ■ �iiIIIIIIIIIIIW milmi �_ _ \ o 1.imiluimmin� _�_'lllulll lln NIIIIIIU o BM ll1_� 01miiiiiii1 8 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FOURTH FLOOR PLAN ti aro BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII AxtoectveI First City Washington, . Inc. W Leann w14,...1.+c NORTH• 4i "sue aie �i�.. W..vw�,t0 4 story Office Floor Plans ( BLDG . E) #NW. 88041.1 1-30=91 0 20 40 Hooded Overhang Reflective Glass at Entry Only Iii I ILtlllliinninniiIL Ilt. I.QI.. �..��.��.��IIII■ in:i.■ �.I�.L: o uJ ■I■I■■■■■■o.1 ,, 1.111111M11 III MI I■■IR MWIIIIII— __________,__ NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION =" • Typical Mechanical Sc - erior Insu a andrel Panels Tinted Vision Glass 4r7 i , � II11IIIIIIIIII.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1I11I1I1lIIII /111 (111 [ 111111111111111111I111111111111111II � ( IIIIIIIII [ IIIIIIIIIilim 11111111111111111 I. ��i mil i ( Il � 111111111IIIIllllllllllllllllllllllll ! lull IIII111111 II 11 n WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION TRACT 11B" - BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII }azldCJ�....i.'g ,,. ;1_ First City Washington, Inc. poc •4 rgs-: .- -_ 4 Story Office Elevations (BLDG.. "E") NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-'9 •--.; 0 p • I L_ • • •L-1 I STAIR ELEV. EQUIP. I IIIWWIII /► p Ilwlllllu rp, • ■�I�iieso", ��mmm�ll� p ��p��40. o - �S� �•TORS INlllllin �I �� Iwllmw �j��.��'����I► . 'InIIImIII�C ����♦`♦�♦•p/ 'IllllAIR lig�������-V p ������V p S AIR ����V ♦��r� Showers ® �.)♦�♦�.�♦� ��=��= p 1st fir only ��������7 0 110'•Yv�A��i TELE. In p • r p • 1 • I!v ELEC. N\ 11 L ROOFLINE / N. ROOFLINE \ -_ am. LINE OF 3RD • • ==Q FLOOR p - I p L• air • • 1 FIRST FLOOR PLAN L•__• • THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN 120.-0" 80'-0" • -•-1 p p I •I--II I p` umlllwl luuluwl • ��mnnlllll� .'ImIIIIIn11I:�'' ii1P 1iiimIIIIlI �� ����������r D p 7reu �� .....1 p • p • • 1 6S �� \\ I \ � I `� --- OMf�\ CIA • Eg • Ea p 1 � •— p FIFTH FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1..... BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII • First City Washington, Inc. NORTH �O^ "A, #N W 88041.1 1-30-'91 0 20 40 "-`2.1'`w"°'a 5 Story Office Floor Plans ( BLDG . F) xor�o.xn cnro+Roes sns aaw Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass Mechanical Screen Reflective Glass at Entry Typical ` Only ,,N- . .,,.___-, l im eln RuMingli illH MM :Ii�11taiI;E II. - -II IJJ 1 1 l 1-1 11 1 r 1 1 .l I I.L_I I l 1.1 I I-I I I I I TTJ -- (' 1 1 1 •11-1-1_1 1 ' I`! ll, I111Il_III1 .1111I11 ' . ii1I1IlIIIiDT I . 111 ,r- J ,� -., i�tIBUhiii■IIUl■IlUAI■ III11I11III 1 din 11i a C` II ► 1111111 . i11111ii II NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION Exterior Insulating Spandrel Panels Reflective Glass at Entry , lllltllltllllllllIIII-III it Irllril �- • �J !( I1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.111 i li 1 lrllllli:.� ■a • ` ^ 1 1-t i l l 11,�i � ' I ,� yam, ' T 11 I I I I.l 1 1 1 1 Hill 11 11 r 11 4,i., mum rltlt-i ;l:i;;zI.I1_R_l s aad s do p ( ti I I l l i I I 1 I I I Q d° ma at lb 1 mu IN 1 ■ _ III III II III 1111111111111111 _ SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION • TRACT "B11 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII pn . First I � City Washington, Inc. le= , � "�' 5 Story Office Elevations (BLDG. "F°) NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-91 (•-; 12 MH1 [ 1 IU12, \ II l IT : • , a -c•lL• • • G — UP TolTo 1T Zy � ZCC2NDtGVUli I j I I - \ 1 \ — % i • '77-- I \ ' 1 I • I k \ 4 = _ I I -.III 1 2 6 ,�-1c, , ,,o r j Iil4 I--Al 1 1_►: I . 11 I I I I illek7.e51,01' Al FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN I1z i" 6��5. 1.111' 1 I.I-I I ( ;.I. I1 I I I I I 1111111 I I I I I I I I Idyl": .tL, G I !. 37o'.I J 1D 3�� o 4 UP. s G :bow 1>7 2JJ D U L T✓7 '3I `� = iIHi1I [IHIIIII111I _ZI . � I I I I I I I I . I I I I . — _ 11 1 ► I . ► 11 1 1 14I _► _ I I I 111 I I I I . I I 1 I I 1 _ 1 E- I 1 1 ltH I 1 \ H I , irl 7-- 0 3 -1 G o V f7G1 0 .2a ‘8c FOURTH FLOOR PLAN:_.. THIRD FLOOR.FLAN =-_ BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII I7NIipn.WovdPo'mJ .. TRACT ��g�� First City Washington, Inc. AAIANCE>fi P,no s cor.wro aoo 44��'°'°°°" 4 Story Garage Floor Plans NW88041 Scale: 1°=60' 1-30'91 • Tinted Glass at.Entry Concrete Spandrel Panels rt�kr•1 i T I. l • I' I I I >. I I o ] ti '\ • SOUTH ELEVATION • - . I' H.c...1.1,.....= .1.1 . . 1.„. ..... . .. . .....,..... =,, . - • _ WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION _...i_________________---- - . . Reveals & Painted Panels NORTH ELEVATION No Openings• TRACT11�11 - BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase :V11 Ipn -. First- City Washington, Inc. r . � • - . _ - 4 Story Garage Elevations - NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-'91 IA :- +,r Architecture•and ri • r • 1 •�, 4 ! } • Leason Pomeroy Northwest Inc -Royce A.Berg. A I A• 1127 Pine Sheet Suite 300 Seattle WA 98101(206)583 8030 HISTORICAL DESIGN NARRATIVE January 9, 1991 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PHASE VII TRACT B (SA;SM-071-88) NW 88041 Tract B site plan approval was originally submitted in August 1988 and was a two-winged 286,000 square foot seven-story office facility situated on the northwest corner of the property. The building was sited as a permanent buffer between the development and the heron rookery. The site plan included surface parking and filling of the old portion of the Blackriver Channel per the original Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in 1981. The original sub- mittal was declared environmentally significant because of the relation to the heron rookery (which is -not on this property but to the north on property ded- icated by First City for a preserve and the P-1 detention basin) . A new EIS for the property was started. Preliminary data and comments from the city staff and the EIS consultant rec- ommended relocating the building further away from the heron rookery per the bubble diagrams provided by the city. The building was relocated to the south, with a parking structure utilized as a buffer and to accommodate the parking due to the lost land for additional buffering and habitat for the rookery. Alternate B-2 reflects this submittal in the .f'inal impact statement , and as B-3 in the earlier July 1989 draft impact statement. Alternate B-1 per city recommendations, reduced the size of the building into three buildings: a seven-story, three-story and four-story with a parking structure. Alternate B-1 evolved per staff and public draft EIS comments into a seven- story building on the east side of Tract B, a four-story building to the west of the seven-story, and a three story to the west of the four-story building, with structured parking as a buffer with a blank wall facing the rookery. The setbacks from the rookery were increased from 400 feet to 600 feet, with an additional 10 foot high berm and 20 foot high evergreen trees to supplement the open habitat buffer at the edge of the new setback from the heron rookery. Per city recommendations, this evolved into the current submittal which reduced the height of the seven-story by transferring area to the• four and three-story buildings, resulting in the initial 286,0000 square feet in two five-story buildings and a one four-story building with a structured parking garage. Significant impact and variations recommended by staff and EIS consultant have resulted in a concentrated, expensive development with structured parking on a small portion of the land originally zoned for office to maintain the same amount of buildable square footage. The increased rookery setbacks, addi - tional reserve and buffer areas forced development on a small , condensed por- tion of the site. The increased architectural- land use restraints, increase in buffers and preserved habitats (directed by City of Renton and the EIS con- sultant) substantially buffer the development from the heron rookery. w_t Buildings are designed with earth tone colors, hoods or overhangs on the rook- ery side above the thirty foot height level , and within 750 feet of the rook- ery. Tinted glass is utilized versus reflected glass, except at the main entry points to the building which face away from the rookery. The property for 0akesdale Avenue S.W. and S.W. 7th Street was dedicated by First City and were improved, including utilities with the majority partici- pant being First City (in order to develop these properties) . Density of development is well under the traffic proposed to be generated in the Trans- portation Studies. First City funded the study as well as the L. I.D. with the understanding that traffic and L. I.D. assessments for specific projects would be offset against these costs or to the point the assessments exceeded L. I.D. costs. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 ` �w �~ ' ''-[�fAR-07-'90 17-05 ID:JONES-STOKEB ASSOC TEL NO: 1-206-641-�3147 #392 P01 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON Jones & Stokes Associates, /nc. � . « 18O8 36th Place, NE! ~~ �8R O 7 1990 Bellevue, NA 98085 k� ��u 2061641 ?088 � m�=�*��N&����� � ���� . 208/64/-3/47Fmx ' | | ' V�� [___j Mail Fax || || Overnight Courier ' |o� _ - ~ »����x DATE: 7/5^�� CLIENT; -- -- -------- ----- - ----- -__ ------ PROJECT/ Ace�0p~ Lj Pet-your-request | For your review For your — ' F] Other: Descri ~� ---------- ' -------- -- ----'------ -- ---_-__-- ' _ ---- - _--_ - _ - � ` • . .........,...._ ___.. . .._-....„.„...)., ./„. . .7,_._:____r___„...._•., „,..,,,•.••• .,..„../..„, ..„.. I I ... ..:. L 01.-,'''.'2.' 1 v.. i tf• '' 'Air z_ep4-?%,, . ,,,,, 1.: ...,,04 ___ i"/ ,....., 1 Ir lot. 41; . .\ ,er , . §VI li • 7. A,•*, !np . - , . • ., ,:.: .., , , t, . .._.. ,.! • - 1 . . . ,_.. . .. cy-:--- . it •l 41 , 0 / A 1 414a. ' '.._A Ii! /° ,, •..... .,,,. . I I , ,• ''1, , 4 : 1/rA 00°. i t 11 I , i 12‘.. At . 4../....„.„,---... 0,, „. 5— t if •,.:•/a ......• .., \.., I 41K itt / .1 /I ,... / L-1-2.. ....7- ii k,i / / ':-". • i '`A- „L:,- - 1 --‘, , - 11 ) pelo,,,,.:,../, ,. .•:.;,..L. / ,.•0 ...... .., I ' / 1, id ,:,,d 14, 1 i "%e"' ', •- .'"-t'`....'' ' - r- .%••••':/i • di /,-• , ..., t • 1., \ •,./ , e,ii.: ,..1 ,..„ . • . ,.. ... ..... .., , , ,• ,....., . • .0 _0 ,‘ .. \ 0,_ .,,i; . . „. , . .. .. .1/4...._141,4\ ,,a,, ,..., ..s.r.. \ y, ,_ \ , . .,...e„,„-, • . . .„. ,. ir \N tily , . , ,.., ,, \ . .,, .., , ,/, , ,,.. ,• ,,, ,. . : *A ..: ,,,, , , ,,... „ , , \\.. ,..4„,..,„i ,t.„ , , , , ...., - • ,, ,,i). . i , , „4.0.. , ... -..... .. d,\ IL, , ,--• f 'lig '''' ' % / t',;\\ ,...4,40'•-• ,.II; 1- 7,:',. .. ez • . v.,, . , /1 . L . .1‘I ' .-• '. „:.-__ \ •.*, I .5.):... 1,1 0 .1-,1 ,•,- , ,.., "... • , \ ,.\ ,I,... , t* ,, V, 1 . \__, It _ad,. ** . I 41. .•'1' \ i f/ , • • 't , V, . -*. tAlUi 1 . '\ .. t- .4). ,i , i . -. ' . ', .• ''' ... - .1 : ilk ti/ , 1 ,,N.. %., 4,, _ • 041411-, . . AA. it., 0 ../c,;•.,. • . . ,I elr14 • dA14\ ' ‘.k. 4, :; „1Pi.Xr'4j,i.•,`1:,,,,,.s..,'`•,1Pk1. ,1 Ax\17 ,—,I, 7/\,,,..\..„i;,y...;,•,:,\,..(/:.j//i:.I--d 1 r_.,-r.-.4.6•v'4•••-4.*,-v-,/1.4.7#?•!;---.-:'•,'-.',.-..-„,\k;k -.•'','-•1-'^.4..i,-.i-,','-;:.:..::..:• -- ,i t p4 ; - , 1 ...1a MR -.. ....., '1.'4 ',',: , '.--i:-/. '• . - •-'",.---,-,-.X:71.;;;.!',4,-,,,;-Lot,,;,...!17,7,..:=.4.,:r.:..._........,. g1/4. ' kit\ iii ... ..: ...y:',:',. . .2 , ,,,,,...7-F-•-•.--- ;.. ...V., 0 ___ bl46. • • \.''.. ." -L.. - :-.--'''.... " ""--'-`°""i\ .' 'ft ' ' ... a, ..,--7'..- --. 1.14,411 )..4 - • . ‘ .'... Cs-.---• /.- ".•,;;;-"'-': 1 • V - 10 i ) I . t nr,. a d___../.....-."' • .1, ' . ..A i ,14 1 g ' 11°0 i il : .-.---.... IA' la I A ' 1 ' 4 li, 1 t_c_..;,_, 4100 J 6 '. .,'. .". 0" '.‘r)• \\ \ Z ID je . N.,.:.x. ; N... , v.,...,-7FT-. • '), if. -...„,:.: ,,..:„..) Cfr lirt • , ,) b> 9\1\ i : ...s . • ,S;k1 4;1 i . . ,...•::: 1 - I Ill 1 LI 'VI ' I .. _-. _— C1 , .I it )c• 1 ,I: , L, --- .........WI I . .....— • Olr at,!,.ly NAA,QL,A0Ata Corp. .)i : • t Blackriver Corporate Park ffil ii f i PHASE VII TRACT S i I 110A1C, tVAtA:A0,0A iz't i. il rr - APEN010101115.0157:919i • . --- . i . ,.... lit:2 ----- ,ra_I G C44 .14,TM__T4-,CI_OM __T.MM 1=1 -Inccu c=,..inrc_cmminr.(7T rM. JT MC _JM_i1W1.1 . , R 1.its r4 t 4,, . .4.,..wir / 2 O'-..-SN,7 ii / Tle p Li * • ;I'1,, : 411 ir ' 1.1/1 4 71 — k Inffts /' --,": i'.... 1 _ !IllrrLi il' / -...47/•-,-,lf- 4( 1 / • y If /7,..;,,.:E.A., _ T \ ',' '''f•%A.1 ' , TO: 1 / , -1 • •-i ., -,', 1.:( ill / i • - . I// _,. ._-,7 . . I. . . /rP#i".14' • . . ' ,,d/ ,'1 qd 1 eg:' . '4/, "1,t-4.--,' •1 ? !fire' / -9•., litii! . @ 74] • .' 147' '7 .' r . • 1. - -__',... 7 ! P -.' \\‘‘) . ,•1.-.,-eF6--z,'..,:.'- / \F;:t -.. •..e . li -- _i , I ...... .. . Li ' N •• g r•-il - )1'. .. i • .-7 1 ',..,-,/ .„, -...! - -- RI 1'. -,t:::-.) - * • c ,4 , -27,1a m :..- ' I _----- / / -,,;;;4:-., --." :" (4':';('''..,,.- . 11'. .. ' ti T 52 Q °'1 E, 4 i ill0i Pli ? 4 R • 11"› 0 I/ ,/ /0/ ' ./1j '?-C-,,t- L,4,•..k. / .... . ' • a Az / /44.:// ..,71 ii .i.,,,,. 4 • . . • ' //' rY ' ;1.• ' III,,. . • ,/ .• ,,,:i-- ,i•I ' .. ;' Fr? it. co p W; , / /." .4=.7 ' 2 ll , it 7 .,,o''' .--1.1' . '.,1.‘,. ' \ , - L. • 9, 4,y1 . 444 ;E'141 /.3 . , • ... //''' 9. /j'''', / .0 e'..-,-----' \\\ \ 'it..NZ.ti'., P.5 b . 3 1,/ '' - ,:7'.,,%;"2„.---V---7'-,- ) U \1\, \,, A. \ ''',.. p3 • 0 5, 0, , i f/ '",./ ' • \\ \ \ \\ 5\ 1\ a : / ;.. /1:4/,,e,,,,,-.9;i \ ,,.._,-;---..;,. ,, \ \\„..\\ •,• ,Ilikeit,\ t . , \ \ „. ,,,\\\ \ \ ''' • \ ' • • ' - A\ V., /A , ol;/ ./ / • Il \\ , \, .,:c., x 1,, , / .. ) ., • 4/ :l : /le . .,.) 1.„..\., ,,:\ :., ), „ .r.,\ „:::,,25,, c,. . .X .. . e• -Irk ir ,... • I/ ' /ill il-,\ 1:. \ '''',\,/ •••• \.\/' ''') ...Y \ „ • itI/ !.1 / • !'i"---__trti \ ,,,4‘\ ,.0_,_...,._-„\-, 1\c...4,,,,\'' '1 144- / , ''.1. / ) .C._.------_,_ --'...,--. c;'‘,,--•\ .,,,p'''' "-, „ ...„.‘„ \ 6 iI /0., 1--, . / ,..,:,:.,., t____ /7;•,, Ifir:4, \ 1,-..\\ 1 , 1;1 1 ' 1 ' ' , / • \ lid J. 4• . ' II/ IR . .. ,.„. • 1 ; ....---2•3- '' ea 4117 A . t 7. ...._. \. \„,,,,,,...). , , • .,.. . , + ,..,L•_.. _/__ ___,,,,,,„....,. • .4 I I 1:t!"\'' ("I'"-.::q!:*11-- ---'-`'^-__,\ .:;:,...--...-. •'.'," /S.'1 _ / I 1 ,i1 i . ''*, 1--2:Cl.'il--,. l'I '*''' ,.•. .. , . ,7744,4 -..._ •....,!.4-, 7 . d', • • 11416 IN,' t ....... a ,: p..1 clutrmei ' •-• ,. . - . „.-- 111 - - .. . - ..rwrommik - - . .. . . I H Se I I 1 [ ;1 -,-, - :„ . . Flrel GU).DsvilflOr,4011 CP,D• i.6 i p iil I 1 .z1F t.''' „.''' ., Blackrivor Corporate ParktaiP 7. PHASE VUi & TRACT A Tiootol,YitiihIPOPOn V -..i A . •i... • — ' -ip Illifik0mi:t.7 . P CM-I 7a.C.1-1. )bT,..7-T17.11-cigi7-T :nu -P q I -InqH qqA-ilq-qHnr:1-11 qP T.i:). A,-.)17.1-NHIJ 4� S 'Architecture and Planning ' ` ' -r •, y • n Leason_Pomeroy Northwest Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101(2(56)583 8030 • December 21, 1989 - Mr. Jonathan Ives Jones & Stokes Associatestl 1808 136th Place N.E. D E C 2 2 1989 Bellevue, WA 98005 . , RE: Blackriver Corporate Park Phase VII NW 88041 Dear Mr. Ives: Please find the following summary in response to your request for information regarding the above referenced project: TRACT A 1 . Proposed, parking is ±651 stalls, plus an additional 140 stalls in the revised Phase VIII proposal . 2. . Please find the landscape plans enclosed. 3. Approximately 900 to 1,000 people would work at the completed project. 4. The owner does not wish to provide a parking structure for Tract A. 5. No split parking for surface versus parking structure is provided. 6. The Tract A and Phase VIII site will balance cut and fill to minimize the need to import fill to ±10,000 cubic yards. Limits of grading are indicated on the site plan. 7. Based on two inches of rainfall for a 10 year storm, the approximate amount of runoff for Tract A and Phase VIII would be 68,625 CFS. TRACT B 1 . Please find landscape plans and 11 X 17 site plan reductions enclosed. 2. 1:35,800 cubic yards of fill would be required to develop tract B for the alternate schemes. Limits of grading are shown on the site plan. 3. Approximately 1,450 people would work at the proposed project. A breakdown for the three building option would consist of: ±300 people in the three-story, ±360 people in the four-story and ±790 people in the seven-story office building. Letter to Ives December 21, 1989 Page 2 4. Parking developed with the first phase would be approximately 323 stalls. An additional ±267 stalls would be added with the second phase, with a total balance of approximately 706 stalls to be added with the third phase. 5. Based on two inches of rainfall for a ten year flood, the approximate amount of runoff for Tract B would be 59,000 CFS. Please find additional elevations and site plans enclosed. Sincerely, Paul R. oppock PRC:mp cc: Mark Miller Jeannette Samek-McKague (City of Renton) Royce A. Berg enclosures • DECki 22 1989 Leason Pomeroy Northwest, Inc., Royce A. Berg, A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 .� ,.R ,. Cs¢,•�;}y:4:'2' �.•9 '6•.. 4 "'�7� u1- ♦ 3•„;,f r* '.i �}'..!•, , r ,1[ e' `�• r.7-' , r.. I... � r • f!' =Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc„ Royce A. Berg,A.LA., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 • TRANSMITTAL To: JEANETTE SAMEK—McKAGUE Date: 11/8/89 CITY OF RENTON 200 MILL AVE S Project Name: BLACKRIVER PHASE VII �� \ RENTON, WA _��_ - r Project No: NW 88041 Attn: 3 1989 Re: • Description: • 2 COPIES REVISED 11" X 17" SITE PLAN, DATED 11/8/89 (SHEET 1A OF. 2) • • Remarks: • ❑Sent per your Request ® For Approval ❑Other: � ❑ For your Use/Reference El For Distribution ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records • • By: PAUL R. COPPOCK FOR ROYCE A. BERG cc: MARK MILLER . JONATHAN IVES ,;.; ;; v 4 APPENDIX B . • LIFE HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF HUMAN DISTURBANCE ON GREAT BLUE HERON ROOKERIES • Revised 09/11/89 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction B-1 Proposed Project B-1 Description of Study Area B-1 Black River Great Blue Heron Nesting Rookery B-2 Study Approach B-4 Life History of the Great Blue Heron B-4 Ecological Overview B-4 Nesting Requirements B-5 Effects of Human Disturbance B-6 Peasley Canyon Rookery, Auburn, WA B-7 Spencer Property, N.E. 95th Street, Redmond, WA B-7 Yarrow Bay, Kirkland, WA B-8 Lake Sammamish State Park, Issaquah, WA B-8 Ross Island, Portland, OR B-8 Pigeon Point, West Seattle, WA B-9 West Delta Park, Portland, OR B-9 Garabaldi, OR B-9 Summary of Findings - Effects of Human Disturbance B-9 Management Guidelines B-10 Blackriver Corporate Park - Tract A Site B-12 Blackriver Corporate Park - Bract B (Phase VII) Site B-13 References B-15 Literature Cited B-15 Personal Communications B-16 - i - LIST OF FIGURES Following Figure Page 1 Location Maps Black River Great Blue Heron Rookery B-1 2 Office Site Plan B-1 3 Office Landscape Plan B-1 4 Recommended Setbacks - Northside B-12 - ii - LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Characteristics of Select Great Blue Heron Rookeries and Adjacent Human Activities in Washington, Oregon and California B-3 - iii - LIFE HISTORY AND EFFECTS OF HUMAN DISTURBANCE ON GREAT BLUE HERON ROOKERIES Introduction The First City Developments Corporation (FCDC) proposes to construct a seven story office building on 16.4 acres known as "Tract B" (Phase VII), with potential development on 12.71 acres of "Tract A" which lies adjacent to the Springbrook Creek, Renton, Washington (Figure 1). In November, 1988, the City of Renton made a Determination of Significance on FCDC's application for Site Plan Review and Shorelines Substantial Development Permit for Tract B (Phase VII), stating that a SEPA EIS was necessary to address, among other issues, the effect of the project on "flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species..., light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife species (including heron)..." This technical report presents an overview of the proposed project and a description of the study area, defines the study approach, and provides a brief account of the life requirements of the great blue heron. Lastly, this report includes an analysis of.effects of human disturbance on herons and guidelines designed to minimize future adverse impacts. Proposed Project The proposed project will include the construction of a 285,000 square foot, seven story building on 16.4 acres known as Tract B, and the potential construction of an office building on 12.7 acres on the adjacent Tract A. No design for Tract A has been completed at this time. Included with building construction at both sites will be parking and site landscaping. Figures 2 and 3 show the proposed site and landscape plans for Phase VII (Tract B). Refer to Chapter 2 of the EIS for a more detailed description of the proposed action and project alternatives. Description of Study Area The project study area is located within the City of Renton corporate limits, approximately one half mile north of Interstate 405 (see Figure 1). Land east of the site is industrial and office park. Land south west of the site supports Metro's Renton wastewater treatment facilities and light industry. The area north of the site includes the Springbrook Creek and ponds, and riparian forest. Tract A is open and treeless, having been previously filled from material dredged from the Springbrook ponds. Upland grasses and Scot's broom dominate the site. As a condition to a grade and fill permit approved by the City for the site, FCDC planted several rows of poplar trees within a 200-foot buffer zone bordering the Springbrook ponds. These trees are approximately 10 to 12 feet in height. B-1 , b *j<Dp& ,_ ( ,S) C/3 EMPIRE WAY )7' ..:.::::::•:::::....... . co '.:'.-• .::::::-:f::::::::::::: RENTON -•••• •-:*•••-•:•• • • SW 7TH ---e,i:-•-..-.-::::•::: k :::i:''.--.. •:-.-.:.-. , BLACKRIVER\ pARK -.....-:-.....-..-.......-.•• .;. - 405 u) DJ TO a; SEA-TAC AIRPORT 4 MILES , LONGACRES SOUTHCENTER m (1) > Cl) 7C -I C/3 D VALLEY .-- m GENERAL m HOSPITAL S 180TH I / .000- Figure 1. Location Map Black River Great Blue Heron Rookery. Er7i 1 FZrN ...... ,..K// , • .c.oh.r•a...•P cr.i4 1M.....izc.oh......)..0.......••...•.—\-,`-•••.•`,. •",•••.,.....' ••••"-...,......-..-.t-.1.0.:I. LV‘1.1.....E.:.. .::.G.:..?..AL 7I../D..r..ES.'r'..0.'•'IR'i.•'I.•P•''T•''•'•I'O N ==Ea Dc — r;r.d•.•....0.6.4..t..z,........4......4..4..:.:.....:.:..:.,;6 I0...,t...... ......-:. .........• ... ../ , -s..-C. .1 i VICINITY MAP • Detention Pond ''." :\ '.7'.:----- .----. '-' 1 !/ ----,haute' • . .. t snso....y_. .. (• . i .„:„... ... .- • reir.•94 4 14 . ,,,,,r-.•:-— • ...' ....r-_-_,---.'r-.' ! I ;. -- .1., ,\I\k,%. 1.........., A /I i -,•-•_; --....-' "---,,,,,r-,-=..- • .;...•"::\.k\ , .4,621,;!,...: -.,.:. t 1-c --,---.: egaglit plipprigis ' PAAX I ii, I - . S-e0'000.11); :% , .), 1...4:.....'11.441erly..4.1:...;:r.--_-..e4 j,- . ..., I I ...... _ % • •..,•::.....-ii-I-H-1-i-1 — !..ti.1 I..•,. Vhul 0 a // ...L.,'I:T------,,,,,..-.. . ::—..- c.- .: . ---------,-..4-04W11rsl 171"5-7-4; =Hai = 1 - I I .a .. • .\\ I I / ' ':.)-. • r ,r - I • I •I. i t I'; . WIN GUAM ../ r C• 143SP11.1 , we.....we•eee' :I.;.... ." I 1 II+I f' 4.-44--+"---i t•••:;.,1.1, Ei . c..° i . I I MN \. \‘ ‘14..."110.•114,044.4.00— I it ...• . , ---- ... •....••' .•! > • . -- ° .1.. • V i' i.• — "v-K....0,41.14 .. fig., ,....4.44a••4.••••••.••• HERON EXHIBIT • q ! ‘le41, rrn1a__ :•-•. A ' . / i• /7 ifpollA 1 1 1 ./. 1 • *4 it. — :1.1 • —% / • • ,i_.:....,,,,,,./----/ %%IP...i . i —_ ' 4-••)11, • "c _ i " --------\ .4: , , , 4 I •' •/ 1 II .. • /, /4 1... •• ----. 1 k •,,•rr ..a. 1-\ ' / .ij/ .. . . . ,- • . ..." -... c....i...t.00.ta...0 7 ....-.7 ••••co-,441M..:Zi.,..4 ,;••• - ..... '' te•• a* ss • . --,.7.N... \,. ...'.• r. . C- ,Il! / .t.'/"..‘/ .116......•ii..:..."T.. ... . • -. /•• s. • ‘I, • .a•••••••once, ,tei,- ne,,,...4-• iri.-4... .. ,,.... I .-. ''. ..•V ' C.:;:c........... '''b. "••••'"..4.7--.1...e...:-..4 , - • , ---_ k • ,... .,..„......... ., , .:, s. •4 1 .4............S. •_-__.7___ . / ••••,.... '•'‘i /7 , / ...--4_.-.... CZ-z) ...,.._ -----•• --....... •--....., .01‘. .4 0 •4, • . ...t ; \ /////./:. ........ .....„„ .......„ .......„ K.... r•Ci.:N2j..', . ' N. .....,.....— z---- zr-- --:...—_—.- - • • ,-. • i.: — v • . . “ 1 -..,,- Ns) 11 .- 1,...... '1 ,...,...,,,....• i, „,„ ............ k *A • ‘• . • 1 ••••-...... ••--r.--. 4:-.4 ••••••-.....: '7.4.Lat ELI. --...... --......... ........... N 'i i:::\\3.2 1:11.L.32' • I V , ' / ' ,,.ol:11:1:.:7;..1...).2 1...:"..4'...."... ‘I.:-:.:;--r:;.-.:9 2.-1:-..- --=1'3 ".....".........,•......,... .. ,,,,,K • , . „,....., - .. .....,.• ..,,,,40070 r.,....••• \`‘.... ... ... ;le „Le..., ..... .:.., . ' . ,L ,• , it 1: • V ....... . / cil/C.' . ?..i:, , . 1 '''' i.; .f. ...----Q-- _.„,_.• *...''..... .. .7:f.L:77:::i:: ::::::::.. -• . • iN...>:>. lor.,,..;.... ‘ -C. :, ... .' J; Ix- ,...1, ' .:. -:-.7.:7..• .-.:.'z . .. -4...... 4 • .**/ 11..,--.4.-•••.. . . ( , ---.-- . - .2-E-r--. '''‘...••-• I. I Z.=••••••., , . ---........ ---.•. ...-.. • ..2.-.."..1.44.1..tz.,-.--..... ._7gri,y-,........ ..., .. .27.-t. ''' ' „A....4e it.....•••• '1•-•_4,.... .44c.,K•4,0.02......4.44 • 4...4-14•••4 4 W."44 C•re 4..4. / tsv.., . r / , ....................'v....K. 0... .7IZ . •.:. • .V .'. ; % . 1.0.46.2.•9 V! vAr....-11.0 0 ‘, .i.......... 4 7•7,2,-.0.. ''. ".... . .., ttijx,.. f , ,.,z + ,.. • ..'.,/ •::-704.*.^....: •..--4- "' ""...4 .., , et*. .......7"4/44e .1-.:.z,.. .0. // \......,.,,,,...,,,.....• 1.4.44 ••••••.... ... V.••••.s.4,,,..... ••••••••.' '' 4.,.,. if/- .V....It ..: . #••V 0 v.,0// ....C...."V.to. • ....1.4.4.../.. . .....„..... K.trz..... 4.!! . •' '• ••••74.......,• " • ••. 04. 0.. TABULATION ----........_ •••,,...71- !. „..10. /. ... •• i'`•• .N, v. ./.__..4 444.41_,,Nor• . k......e.......- Slte Area :683,912 S.F. • • . Building Area :285,000 S.F. Gross Coverage :41.7Z I .-............•,. t..41.0.r. V.P:, .1‹..,...o Figure 2. Site Coverage :6.2Z I "• ,, ' ;.•• ....I.,••••• •••• i • Site Plan,Tract B (Phase VII) A • r / .. Parking - ;.....e...:,..- . Mir.c....tt l.'..?o. . • In. . Standard 11,052 Stalls \ ,. 4.. 7-Story Office,Blackriver Corporate Park, Compact 2355 Stalls :25Z Renton,WA • H......... 117 Stalls 11,425 Stars . . Source:-LPN,Inc.1988 • / /. 7-NH :i '�, \ j Drainage Dttch ,,3 Q[ �: s � fl I•h `!'tip � � -a • .:7--s.. -e.,4, ___I4..., z /` _ ® P-1 Channel 0 ,•:: - - 4 ` 0 Detention Pond , �`lcc1_ " a �!\`_ i - e --i-1 ' . '. .L.- -. ._:_. .1''..s'rr"7"-L.7.17.Ltig•C4Pr .."4 .. ' xtt, tiii . /4.1:1 ni-, I,/ e-e1.7— ••' ea* wee Qom e, ..."4... LI- ., 5 .i... 43 // ,; _7 sue" ._ Future Building oC\:. '\\ 4' ilI • t gJt / :•:,.q,' Flag Plaza � r:/ �.r►W...$' iei G405-gaoke s* 4 •w4rw0 11: L' El.- - ;. ` Existing / 7 stores• e `i' �' �� r r Phase III i /sy/ it • / •+::!:-..t=1'. -7c=z-7..'Ala. i:iK•N /, 4,,, .,, Ci? I \• .' \ �1:. ,t. sp:„. \:,.:1 1 I !1 RA,NyW _ di ,-- ...aP� rI. �N. • .�;� �. Il- 1' •f % 4.- 4, •n:� "�...f' ... //,� �w �• �_`` am. \... f•,o`� ' v -, ' lc* Vos. OS ‘kl-:-.9- / t.....„IN sa.. . 1c),, t.. FhI iro 11 a' 7 ss @•..6../.1 -.....Stok "•.••*". %1‘'w, \..,- 1. ! ` 1 r:` ® •1 Fut ure Patk 9 I \iJ y'. 9 `� �a�. 1 r ! ♦ \ .4..'.'.'•...4\1 A .(,I i.e..•/.•.r 4%t /•.i/!,( (�� ®' r° Structure i ! w @ r•. ��. — Ltr:.,31.._ scr;:...„.-----rg 4., , ,,.".\,....,,,, _-., •-; � ref 2:7 a ._ .,t �d. +ram ';14 �_?3 4.° !� /A .sue �' .........sIOCNI..4,.-_,:- -.. ..., glik"------&.!..40 1(: (ip 4...to _ iii, , \ ,, ___.........„.s.w. ... ... , .,,(. ...• • ,.,„:4 , ,..i.,.. . ---17 ____________ .k -.,...0. sveir:•:' P-1 Channel 3, �% \�� �O+y.' _ 4�► Figure 3. "�""` `,_�� , =aSfefiPcl = lil�,� Park, e•uac..t""`..""hats......s.•14 40 Renton WA,-. .. ...._...Lt a ea"w1Y 1, f l- 7 t ae .,o..•so".rage ,;o.swr.a_.w � �Jl . _ 'N �‘ Source: LPN Inc.1988 M..era1 O..W..a Lu-ruvr. In\ .''' Gtci V... L KL..WI ,6A4i4.414, Tract B is vegetated with grasses, alder, Scot's broom and a remnant riparian forest of cottonwood trees, a number of them greater than 48 inches in diameter. The northeast portion of the site is a remnant of the historic Black River channel (Figure 2). Black River Great Blue Heron Nesting Rookery The great blue heron rookery, known locally as the Black River heron rookery, is located in cottonwood trees on an island formed when the P-1 ponds were constructed from March to August, 1984. The rookery is located approximately 350 feet from the northern boundary of Tract B of 500 feet from the northeastern boundary Tract A. Based on field observations by Rex Van Wormer, wildlife biologist, during the 1989 nesting season, 25 nest structures were located in three 48 to 54-inch diameter, 140 to 150- foot tall black cottonwood trees. During field surveys conducted by Van Wormer on June 10, 1989, 17 of the nests were observed to be occupied and 8 nests unoccupied (Van Wormer 1989). During field surveys conducted in April, 1989, Van Wormer observed 23 occupied nests, 6 fewer occupied nests than were observed in June. The age of the nesting rookery is not well known, however there is evidence that approximately three nest structures were present at the time of construction of the P-1 ponds in 1984 (Van Wormer 1988). Table 1.presents available data on the history of the nesting rookery. Little nesting information is available prior to 1986. The P-1 ponds are used for feeding by adult and fledged young herons. Newly fledged young herons appear-to use the shallow ponds for feeding during July and August, eventually moving to more productive feeding areas in the Green River Valley. Van Wormer (1988) found that a majority of the adult herons returning to and leaving the rookery on feeding forays flew to the south and east of the rookery. During July and August, 1989, fledged herons were observed by JSA staff to make only limited use of the ponds for feeding and/or loafing. This limited use may have been due to the very low water conditions in the pond and poor water clarity. Water in the ponds was rust-colored with limited visibility. Water was shallow and limited to narrow..streams of inflow from Springbrook Creek and the drainage ditch located on the north boundary of Tract B. In past years the ponds have been stocked with fish, however, water levels in recent years have appeared lower than previously occurred (Erickson pers. comm.). Pond elevations are controlled at the King County pumping station. Reducing the discharge of water through the pump station could increase the ponded surface area, thereby improving foraging habitat for great blue heron. Since 1984, the Black River rookery has been subjected to a variety of disturbances and intrusions. Historical accounts of the rookery prior to 1986 are sketchy, however Allmendinger (letter of 3/2/87) reported seeing nesting herons prior to the construction of the P-i ponds and forebay (report and decision, Office of the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, June 9, 1987). According to Van Wormer (1988), excavation of the P-1 ponds (including creation of the island supporting the rookery) was carried out from April to B-2 Table 1. Characteristics of Select Great Blue Heron Rookeries and Adjacent Human Activities in Washington,Oregon and California Distance Rookery Approximate Rookery to Rookery Location #of Nests Adiacent Human Activity Nest Trees Activity Status Comments Reference Black River 1987- 8 to 10 Road construction,logging Cottonwoods 200-1000' Viable P-1 pond constructed 1984 Van Wormer,1988;1989 Renton,WA 1988- 18 Logging within 200 feet - 1989- 17 of rookery during March,1987. Lk.Sammamish St.Pk. 1985- 14 Public boat launch, Cottonwoods —330' Viable High level of human activity Murphy, 1988 Issaquah,WA 1986- 21 boating in area during summer. 1987- 29 1988- ? 1989- ? Peasley Canyon 1989- 27 Park&Ride,roadways Red alder 600' Viable Rookery size has increased Van Wormer,1988 Auburn,WA from 10 nests in 1983 to 27 Bock pers.comm. in 1989. td W Ross Island 1989- 50 to 60 Gravel Extraction Cottonwoods 200-300' Viable 300'buffer established, Pesek,per.comm. Portland,OR birds now nesting within 200 ft.of activity. Pigeon Point 1986- 16 Multifamily Cottonwoods 200' Viable Occupied in 1986;no Penland pers. West Seattle,WA 1987- 0 nesting in 1987;observed comm.;Murphy, 1988- 0 to be occupied in 1989. 1988;city of Seattle,1986. 1989- Unkown Spencer Property 1988- 6 Single family residential Douglas fir 75-100' Viable Nests in 80-100'Douglas JSA,1988 Redmond,WA 1989- ? fir trees;adjacent 1 property logged to within 50'of trees. Yarrow Bay 1987- 6 Condominium,tennis club Cottonwoods —150' Viable 1985 estimated year of Murphy,1988 Kirkland,WA 1988- ? established. 1989- 10 West Delta Park 1989- 20 to 25 Railroad switching yard, Cottonwoods 50-100' Viable Within Portland city limits. Van Wormer, 1988 Portland,OR log handling yard,golf Pesek,pers. comm. course. " No recent data available. In 1972, 136 great blue heron,101 black-crowned night heron and 440 great egret nests. September, 1984. Based on review of aerial photographs of the P-1 ponds and heron rookery, dragline and other heavy construction equipment was likely used within 50 to 100 feet of the rookery. During 1987, a large portion of the riparian forest between the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks and the P-1 pond was cleared and partially filled. Logging activity took place from February to mid-March,within 200 feet of the rookery and during a time of nest selection, nest building and pairing. According to Van Wormer (1988), at that time the rookery contained eight nest structures. • Since 1987, various degrees of disturbance to the rookery have occurred as a result of construction at the Metro wastewater treatment site (1,500 feet from the rookery), on Oakesdale Avenue (1,100 feet from the rookery), continued routine activities on the Burlington Northern railroad tracks (1,000 feet from the rookery), at the Black River quarry (2,400 feet from the rookery), and on property adjacent to Naches Avenue S.W. (1,000 feet from the rookery). Study Approach Information for this study was derived from three primary sources, 1) review of existing literature relative to the Black River rookery and the life history and effects of human activity on nesting great blue herons, 2) communications with biologists and others knowledgeable of the rookery and great blue herons, and 3) field visits to the site. A substantial amount of information is available on the life history and ecology of the great blue heron. Much of the information is found in life history accounts (Bent 1926; Lowe 1954; Palmer 1962), in published journal articles (Jenni 1969; Pratt 1970; Teal 1965; Murphy 1988; Mark 1975; Cottrille 1958; Henny 1971; Werschkul et. al. 1976), or in special reports, correspondence and Masters theses or Doctoral dissertations (Parker 1980; Van Wormer 1987, 1988; Ives 1972). During the course of preparing this technical report, biologists and others knowledgeable of great blue herons and the rookery were contacted (Penland, Murphy,Van Wormer, Owens, Milner, McAllister, Pesek pers. comm.). Life History of the Great Blue Heron Ecological Overview The great blue heron is the largest and most widely distributed of American herons. It is found throughout much of the United States and Canada. The great blue heron is migratory throughout much of its northern range; in western Washington at least a portion of the population does not migrate. Great blue herons live within or near wetlands, along rivers and estuaries and coastal areas. They feed on fresh and marine fishes (approximately 72 percent of their diet), insects (8 percent of diet), crustaceans (9 percent of diet), mice and shrews (5 percent of diet), B-4 amphibians and reptiles (4 percent of diet) and vegetative matter (2 percent of diet) (Cottam and Uhler 1945). Herons breed after their second winter(Henny 1972). The breeding population(and some subadults) gather at nesting rookeries in February and early March. During that time, adults establish territories, begin nest construction or reconstruction of old nests, breeding, egg laying and incubation. Egg hatching extends from March to April. Clutch size varies from 3.3 to 4.2 eggs per nest. Young herons become fledged in approximately 8 to 9 weeks from hatching (Henny and Bethers 1971). An average of 2.6 young were observed to fledge per successful nest in western Oregon (Henny 1971). Fledglings return to the nesting rookery from feeding forays for up to four weeks following first flight (Ives 1972; Murphy pers, comm.). In western Washington, a majority of young have flight capability by mid-June but most young stay in the vicinity of the rookery and nests for feeding which continues after first flight. During a field trip to the Black River rookery on June 21, 1989, many of the young had not yet achieved flight capability. The fledging time for late nesters may extend into early July (Murphy pers. comm.; Ives 1972). Nesting Requirements Great blue herons are colonial nesters and generally nest in tall trees but have been found nesting in small trees or shrubs wherever trees are not available (Washington Department of Wildlife 1988). Nesting habitat requirements generally include the following components: • grove of trees greater than 1 acre (0.4 hectares) in size; • trees with sturdy branches for nest placement and an open canopy for ease of egress and ingress; • tree height may be variable and dependent on the proximity of disturbance factors to the nest sites; • nesting sites are generally close to water, not more than 820 feet (250 meters); and • foraging requirements are for shallow, clear water with a firm substrate and adequate populations of huntable small fish (Short and Cooper 1985). While the above represent optimal nesting habitat components, deviations have been recorded. Several reports have noted a preference for tall or the tallest trees in a grove for nest location (Jenni 1969; Ives 1972). All of the great blue heron nests in rookeries visited for this study were located in the tallest trees or on a slope where the birds were situated above the surrounding terrain and a majority of the trees. B-5 Heron nesting has been recorded in highly urbanized settings as well as undisturbed sites. Because of the need for water in close proximity to a rookery, herons are often found nesting near areas of high human use such as along lakes and rivers. Herons will either return to the same rookery each year, or may move to other established rookeries or establish a new site when conditions are suitable (Henny 1972). Consequently, the size and number of heron rookeries in an area may oftentimes change from one year to the next. The reasons for change in rookery location and size include human disturbance; natural events such as flooding, fire or wind; depletion of nesting materials; changes in food supply; or effects of excrement on the nest trees or understory (Simpson et al. 1987; Werschkul et al. 1976). Parker (1980) surmised that small nesting colonies have become increasingly common in recent years, perhaps in response to the continued reduction of large expanses of undisturbed riparian habitat that could potentially support large rookeries. Effects of Human Disturbance During the past fifteen years, numerous scientific studies have been undertaken to determine the effects of human activities on great blue heron nesting rookeries. Increasing development and more intensive human use of the land has resulted in a greater need to understand the ecological requirements and tolerances of nesting herons. Recently the Washington Department of Wildlife developed guidelines for the management of great blue herons (WDW 1988). Their guidelines indicate that responses of great blue herons to human activities near the rookeries are not predictable. Herons have been known to abandon rookeries because of housing and industrial development, highway construction, logging, active roads, and repeated human intrusions into colonies (Leonard 1985; Parker 1980; Kelsall and Simpson 1979; Werschkul et al 1976; Bjorklund 1975). Mark (1976), conducted an inventory of great blue heron okeries in British Columbia. He found records of heron rookeries dating to before 1920. Many of the earlier recorded rookeries had been abandoned or destroyed by logging or development. Mark (1976) concluded that when a heronry is abandoned, the birds are generally able to relocate easily, provided that large trees remain in the area. Other studies have shown herons to tolerate noise such as highway and railway traffic as well as human movement. Webb and Forbes (1982), reported that four great blue heron nests were established in a single row of planted trees located between'a hotel parking lot and a heavily used roadway system servicing the airport in Vancouver, B.C. A second colony, located next to high-use areas in Stanley Park, Vancouver, B.C., has existed since 1921. Both rookeries are located in coniferous trees. In several letter reports, Van Wormer (1987, 1988) noted great blue herons nesting adjacent to a railroad siding and industrial park near West Delta"Park in Portland, Oregon. Taylor and Reshkin (1981) conducted a study of the effects of recreational activities on a great blue heron rookery located along the Little Calumet River in Indiana. They B-6 concluded that, based on intrusion impact tests (noise tests, helicopter intrusion, group trips to within 280 feet of the rookery), recreational activities during the nesting season could be allowed within 575 feet of the nesting rookery. Parker (1980), conducted a study of the effects of human disturbance on great blue herons in Montana. He determined that while nesting rookeries have been found to be long-lived in other portions of the country, in Montana herons appeared to move frequently in response to development and disturbance. Parker suggested that the decrease in rookery size and age and the increase in the number of colonies may be due to the fragmentation of riparian habitat and the loss of extensive woodlands able to sustain large and long-lived colonies. In Washington and Oregon, a number of heron rookeries are viable in urban or urbanizing settings (Table 1). The following section provides a brief overview of several of those rookeries. Peasley Canyon Rookery, Auburn, WA In Auburn, WA the Peasley Canyon rookery (approximately 27 nests), is located within 300 to 600 feet of three busy roadways (Highway 18, Peasley Canyon Road and the West Valley Road), a Washington Department of Transportation (WDOT) Park and Ride lot, and a single family dwelling. The rookery is located on the side of an east-facing slope of alder, cottonwood, 'and Douglas fir trees. A pond and wetland lies between the rookery and the Peasley Canyon Road and Park and Ride facility. Land west of the site is undeveloped and is vegetated with bigleaf maple, alder, and Douglas fir. According to Robert Caldwell (pers. comm.), the WDOT Park and Ride lot was constructed in 1983 at its present location. The location of the lot as originally proposed, was shifted from the south side of the Peasley Canyon Road to its present location to avoid possible impacts on the rookery. A"defacto" parking lot had been created and extensively used by commuters at the previous south side location (Caldwell pers. comm.). To avoid possible impacts of construction on the nesting birds, and as a condition of project approval, no construction was allowed from February through June, 1983. Lot construction extended from July through September, 1983 with no observed adverse impact on the herons. Spencer Property, N.E. 95th Street, Redmond, WA Approximately six great blue heron nests are located in 80 to 100-foot tall Douglas fir trees on a one-acre lot located near Bear Creek and Avondale Road, Redmond (Table 1). Property immediately east and west of the site has been cleared of trees up to within 50 feet of the nest trees. According to Spencer (pers. comm.), the herons have used the grove of trees for nesting since 1983 or 1984. Based on known literature, the Spencer heron rookery is unusual because of the close proximity of the nest trees to occupied structures (100 feet). The level of human activity on the site is relatively low (lawn mowing, wood cutting, barbecues, barking dogs, etc.) The tolerance of the herons to human activity is probably due to the height of the nests (80 feet) and the visual buffering provided by the foliage of the fir trees. Webb and B-7 Forbes (1982) suggested that the dense foliage of fir trees at two rookeries in Vancouver, B. C. reduced nest visibility and buffered the effects of human activity. Yarrow Bay, Kirkland, WA The Yarrow Bay heron rookery is located near the Yarrow Bay condominiums, apartments and tennis club. The nest trees are located in cottonwoods approximately 200 feet from a swimming pool and cabana and four story apartment buildings (one story of which is parking). A narrow asphalt walk lies between the apartments and the rookery. While the area between the rookery and the development is densely vegetated with willows, alder, scattered cottonwoods and salmonberry, few trees are tall enough to provide a completely blocked view of the nests from the pool, walk or buildings. Land to the west, north, and south of the rookery consists of forested and shrub wetland varying from 1,000 to 1,500 feet to the nearest development. Human use and movement near the apartments occurs frequently, particularly during the summer months. Of the heron rookeries evaluated for this study, the Yarrow Bay rookery lies closest to an ongoing moderate level of human activity. Nests on the Spencer property in Redmond are closer to occupied dwellings, however human use of the site is light and dense vegetation provides a substantial visual buffer. Lake Sammamish State Park, Issaquah,WA A great blue heron colony supporting approximately 29 nests, is located, in black cottonwoods at Jensen's Cove in Lake Sammamish State Park. A public boat launch lies within 150 feet of the rookery and noise and recreational activities on the lake are frequent from spring through fall (Murphy 1988). Even with the frequent disturbance, the number of great blue heron nests has • increased from 7 in 1984 to 29 in 1987. Ross Island, Portland. OR The rookery is located on Ross Island in the Willamette River. Gravel extraction activities, which began in the late 1970s, are ongoing within 300 feet of the rookery. The gravel company signed an agreement with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to maintain a 300-foot vegetated buffer between the rookery and gravel extraction activities. There are no seasonal limitations on extraction activities (Pesek pers. comm.). Gravel is extracted by dragline and loaded aboard barges for transport to a crusher on the mainland or to other locations on the river. Activity is fairly constant and the noise levels are high. A log storage lagoon also lies at the edge of the buffer zone. The rookery consists of 50 to 60 active nests located at heights of 80 to 100 feet in 120-foot tall black cottonwood trees (4 feet in diameter). Since the buffer agreement was put into effect, the rookery has expanded in size so that a number of active nests now lie within 200 feet of gravel extraction activities (Pesek pers. comm.). B-8 Pigeon Point, West Seattle. WA The Pigeon Point heron rookery is located in red alders,big leaf maples and possibly Douglas fir trees on an east facing slope above the Duwamish Waterway in West Seattle. The rookery held 16 nests in 1986 but was reportedly deserted in 1987 and possibly during 1988 (Murphy 1988; Penland pers. comm.). During a field visit to the rookery site on June 24, 1989 by JSA staff, great blue heron young were observed perched in alder and Douglas fir trees. No nest structures could be seen from the point of observation, approximately 1,000 feet down-slope from the nesting rookery. According to R. W.Thorpe and Associates (1985), the heron nests are located 600 to 900 feet from Alaska way and 150 feet from a Continental Van Lines loading facility on West Marginal Way. Land use adjacent to the rookery includes single family, commercial/industrial development and open space. West Delta Park, Portland, OR The West Delta Park rookery, located near Force Lake and West Delta Lake golf course, is approximately 10 to 15 years old. The nesting colony, consisting of 20 to 25 nests, is located in 80-foot high cottonwoods (2-3 feet in diameter), adjacent to an industrial area (railroad tracks, warehouses). The rookery is within 50 feet of the railroad alignment and 150 feet from the nearest buildings (Pesek pers. comm.). According to Pesek(pers. comm.), there is limited human activity on the railroad tracks and in the vicinity of the buildings. According to Van Wormer (1987), construction of the warehouse, golf course, and railroad switching spur (all within 150 feet of the rookery)were completed with the rookery in place (18 nests in 9 trees smaller in diameter and stature than those at Blackriver). There were no conditions for construction (seasonal construction or setback requirements) of the warehouses (Van Wormer 1987). Garibaldi, OR Approximately 7 years ago, a great blue heron rookery consisting of 20 to 25 nests, was established on vacant lots of a single family home subdivision in Garibaldi, a small coastal community located in Tillamook County, OR. The rookery was apparently established by herons displaced by logging activities in the area (Pesek pers. comm.). The nests are located in 60 to 80-foot tall alder trees less than 200 feet from existing single family homes. According to Pesek (pers. comm.), alders are the only tall trees in the area. Summary of Findings - Effects of Human Disturbance A majority of the information available regarding the effect of human activities on great blue heron rookeries is associated with either short-term construction-related activities or in areas where rookeries have been established after construction. Only limited information exists regarding the effects of construction activities on existing rookeries. B-9 Likewise, very little information exists regarding setbacks needed to provide long-term protection to heron rookeries. According to the USFWS Habitat Suitability Index model for great blue heron(Short and Cooper 1985), optimal nesting habitat includes a disturbance-free zone of 820 feet (250 meters) over land and 500 feet (150 meters) over water. While these distances represent optimal nesting conditions, research has shown that deviations have been recorded. There are many examples, as previously described, where human development preceded heron rookery establishment. Spencer property, WA; Yarrow Bay, WA; Ross Island, OR; and the Delta River Inn rookery,Vancouver, B.C. (Webb and Forbes 1982); are the most notable examples. In all cases great blue herons established rookeries at locations of known (and obviously acceptable) human intrusion and disturbance. Great blue herons established nests at distances varying from 75 feet to 300 feet from ongoing human activity. Rookeries located closest to disturbance (Spencer property and Delta River Inn) were established in coniferous trees,which suggests that the dense foliage of conifers reduces the visibility and provides "seclusion" for the nesting birds. West Delta Park, OR and at Black River, Renton,WA are examples where rookeries were established prior to construction activities (pond excavation, construction of warehouses and golf course). In both cases construction was carried out during great blue heron nesting activity and the rookeries continued to be viable after construction was complete. At the Pigeon Point rookery in West Seattle, WA herons are nesting within 200 feet of a moving company loading facility in a commercial/industrial zone. It is not known whether development preceded the rookery. Research indicates that great blue herons nesting in cottonwoods and other deciduous trees establish greater distances between the human disturbance and the nests. The Yarrow Bay rookery (a cottonwood rookery) is located within 200 feet of ongoing human activity and four story apartment buildings. This represents the closest known rookery site to an area at which there are tall buildings (four story apartments)continually used by humans. The Ross Island rookery lies within 300 feet of ongoing gravel mining, and newly established nests may be even closer. The Peasley Canyon rookery also lies within 300 feet of busy(and noisy) highways. The rookery at West Delta Park in Portland, OR is located in cottonwoods and within a few feet of railroad tracks (intermittently used) and 300 feet of occupied industrial buildings. Management Guidelines The WDW/Nongame Program,has established management guidelines for great blue herons in Washington (WDW 1988). It is mentioned that responses of great blue herons to human activities are not predictable, and for that reason nesting areas should be kept free of human disturbance within an 800-foot to 1,300-foot radius of the nesting colony during the breeding season (February 1 through August 1), and that a smaller, permanent buffer of 750 feet should be closed to human access year-round. Additionally, stands of trees at least 50 feet high and at least 10 acres in area should be preserved. B-10 , In a February 20, 1987 letter to the City of Renton, the USFWS recommended that a 660-foot or greater radius .no-construction and no-human-activity buffer zone be established from the center of the rookery. They also recommended that the buffer zone be revegetated with native Puget Sound lowland plants, that all buildings and parking lots be constructed as multi-level structures, and that. the buildings be sited to act as a visual/sound screen between the parking/service areas and the rookery. At the Pigeon Point rookery in West Seattle, Penland (WDW) stated that WDW considers 600 feet as a minimum buffer width, but that a 500-foot setback would be acceptable so long as modifications to a proposed Multifamily Planned Residential Development were made (City of Seattle, 1986). In a Montana study on the effects of human disturbance on great blue herons,Parker (1980) recommended that a minimum of 10 acres of old-age cottonwoods be maintained for heron nesting, and that in an established rookery, a permanent buffer of 80 feet in radius should be established and closed all year. Additionally, an 820-foot no-entry zone should be established during the breeding season. Taylor and Reshkin (1981), recommended a 575-foot no-entry buffer zone around rookeries located on the Little Calumet River in Indiana. In studies of colonial nesters along the east coast, Buckley and Buckley (1976), recommended excluding all foot traffic within 1,000 feet of any active colonial nesting waterbird sites (including great blue herons). This recommendation did not take into consideration nest tree height or the buffering effects of tall or dense vegetation. Additionally, these recommendations were for National Park lands in relatively protected settings, not urban or suburban lands subject to a large number of ownerships and existing and potential land uses. The literature indicates a wide variety of buffer zone recommendations, some based on field observations and studies, others based on "scientific intuition." The eight case studies previously described show that there are a significant number of examples of tolerance of great blue heron to human disturbance. Successful heron rookeries in the Pacific Northwest have been established or maintained in urban settings at distances varying from 75 to.300 feet from human activities. Nowhere in any of the literature is any distinction made as to setbacks based on such factors as topography; vegetative type (evergreen vs. deciduous), height or density; surrounding land uses; or distances to existing intrusive activities. Field observations and biologists reports suggest the tree height, density and tree type are factors that influence the distance of heron nesting to areas of development or human activity, and that with dense vegetation, nesting herons may more readily accept disturbance at a closer distance than at more open sites. For example, herons have established nests in conifer trees within 75 feet of occupied dwellings or parking lots in Vancouver, B. C. and Redmond, WA. Herons are nesting within 150 feet of a swimming pool/cabana and four story apartments in Kirkland, WA (separated by a dense growth of willows, cottonwoods and wetland shrubs). A second factor of importance (at least in rookeries observed in the Puget Sound area) is the height of rookery trees in relation to the surrounding vegetation and -" B-11 surrounding land uses. In all rookeries field-examined and researched for this report, great blue herons either nested in the tallest trees in the immediate area or at a prominent location such as on a steep hillside. This preference for high nesting sites may be for ease of ingress and egress to the rookery and for nest defense and security (e.g., wide field of view for potential predators). A third factor common to the rookeries is the presence of a relatively unimpeded route for movement of adults to and from feeding areas, and the presence of vegetation immediately adjacent to portions of the rookeries. For example, at the Spencer property in Redmond, fields, pastures and vegetation border the rookery adjacent to Bear Creek; at the Peasley Canyon rookery dense vegetation lies upslope and to the north of the site; and at Yarrow Bay, Kirkland and at Lake Sammamish State Park, wetland vegetation and/or open water exist adjacent to the rookeries. Management guidelines specific to the Black River rookery were developed based on results of the literature review and the site-specific features of the rookery,including tree height, topography,presence of water,nest and buffer, tree location and density, disturbance history of the rookery, surrounding land use, and the results of past field studies of the rookery. Given those factors, guidelines for building setbacks, heights, configuration, and building materials were developed for Tracts A and B. The setback guidelines for distance from the rookery to the nearest building differ from those previously recommended by the WDE and the USFWS. These differences are based on the site-specific features of tree height and vegetative buffering. Blackriver Corporate Park - Track A Site Tract A lies southwest of the:heron rookery and approximately 500 feet to the edge of the northern site boundary (Figure 4). The 500 feet from the rookery to the northern site boundary includes open water of the P-1 Pond, scattered wetland emergent vegetation, and a strip of grasses and 10 to 12-foot tall poplar trees planted on the site in 1986. The present elevations of the site were established from disposal of material dredged from the P-1 Pond. No vegetated buffer occurs between the site and the rookery. Because of the open view of the nesting rookery from Tract A, it is recommended that building setback be a minimum of 600 feet from the newest rookery tree. Additionally, the area from the edge of the P-1 pond to the nearest structure should be planted with native vegetation, preferably cottonwoods, to provide future wildlife habitat. Specific development guidelines for Tract A are as follows: - Plant trees and dense shrub vegetation at the northernmost portion of the site from the edge of the P-1 ponds back 600 feet from the nearest rookery tree; • Construction of any buildings should be no closer than 600 feet from the nearest nest tree and not exceed four stories; any taller buildings should be 1,000 feet or further from the rookery; B-12 • z �� 44o �o .0l 2 2:{y::k;,;;4)" ..;3Sl:I:,BHY' S.•. ''^ 's M ..•�w.�.r2�/.r _ �� ZiA' .' .. .!,'l� ,kit'Y'. �•s: \ :`h,:':: 'a% :':,;.+f,•r.,r , is *.:% ' 1 Y,•¢ :i t' 3'`'i vl.'tl:?. 1� ,,w.:,,f. 44..w."; /.. : lig‘\.%\k+VM‘Cilt•161, • '. W. • .., •,..,g4:";.?,iFt ot • { $�'••, , p::i "Y'o • �. ?I !r,• i� `('• 'rfn. `{ /: e•,..*,w•' x• , '2,. ,t. ,v>' ,i � ;,! .....•,, '!� 'zi' '6a el.v�r ,<E.,,S�'„tw.7/3' .n':fl:• %tS ,r,.5f.i' �y�,,� ,f.: �� w;`: \., ,i�• ,.Z :e'' `s:'•YY%t s ,! .}fV,•t 3 :. ;:'t .4 •! ., � .• \Y~ :•I'.;' • '.i, .,,f a'C'+ .f ^ .f. 1 A':! > �ftx' "<t )1- i ''',:4 •t 'r �yN t Fx ;ft� .= '`7V. • �`l.l+, .,i'• •S;...'!YL':. TZ '9/ ,. `@ ..�• f 2;'t7. `at o, £: • .;4;:yy:> A, '.,t.,yg4. t ;. .-, :� c)::i`: ... . f "i �.1 9 r 1T:1' ,''AS �,p�i =� • • a, Y Y t`. • I"'� iQ\' � • `ry,. °,R'•i ''�4 '`!'Y`�`rsrDj•.� �!.Xi:i` ..�lr .� Y.f ri1 .1' .11t k, e, ,t„•.., .�• �Et rY �. .... y'"t. `a:i �' �{ f.��� n .�`' `:,). t.`.:. 'fir') • ,�i' ,/ �• '{ ✓s •y ,F. st;:, a .4 '•'nsS ). �l s, r ,� st !ij:•sS. ky� r•" .•i,':' .,: a `St,, �.y • �';��7 S rj CI l..f 3'rt £ +�at i•:s.r J Y•` .'yi`„� fi, • pV) 'ro-• • '•2;'•R. L's' • ;5s. £:Y Z ii A't• ,a, •.,, \' h.,.1 `,y ,tYt. V`3,3 •s %Sf,,. •••••..: .fS, \ A fi "•Sn 1 k ./.•ys.';,'. �.•.�': �{ h'''tf!' '}i�': ,Y'�i�'L :kv'. .,f' S,Y' • '.;5:`:".0 • :P `•t.' ,;h\'� iT Y 'F"'y'si{:::f . ';0."('�. �y YQr °f ", •f<} ":t;?:,'s'."•^"` t i ;;) `4x..• •.4. '`Jf:..'t"'. .3 Y f-- ;, s,X.K•%Y•; •.J; :::•i E.y w�• �'riQ.,... wjiS• • "' S^i!:L, �°t :"t „! +Y.. 1f..+� ^' •y .'� ;"Y�: Mr�j sj;?k4` , i L ; s 'x'{ r3 r(,:.,3A c:o,t. »`)L %, t�•:, '�04 ��()� „SSs,' ..r.t •��''<� :�,. t '�;, ;w� XY�.)^°? ,F""'°'' r't. i;'. v"Ck.Y .'si'}'���: ':!: tky"',r;,n:•L'f� $.`•:;.....,:et, ""1;:,...:45•• "' i.� „r< J•. 2i ,., .tl•'• i'.' :ttkF's �,✓;.:.z r,. `.' t o. ^t H✓... r',;/.� ' : Y ' : •� t•,;, '„ "� ..t Ar. •:1,'jt,:XEfY":} ••f` >o :I't£, . a. ol�„ti:�y, :.A' ,, ;•i1�. �Y'. .I,o', ./i•� YYA' � .,. 'i`nt, r* ,.�jj. QA ti`'�x� «,5.».� , , .' � � l ..qr, .s,; � „ t<L' 'Y.. .,(i;`..;:','O 'k,,b.! 2 r'br•�," X ;'. ;I :r S, ;i•'',' vt1 : �iy�, Hitcx :h :•t''' �... fi'��'�` ./!k, :.;. r;,:` t�,; .,1.4r�� 1 t:"'�Fh t;' t�. 'I 6":..� •�• ai .�, /d E: ia2.;.. p���,,':,j��, .��, 31: .1 .4 :;•{•I,.i;;Sr .t .:t6';.,•.:.,,'.` t:':r�,'•.•.f�, v�. .S;`.,•4,1.•<.i» '^4' .; s,L.i.• v.t.s'3`: n. i- Y;``�,,','�il•,�' �,f� `%fYisEr' �, ,.� �;:f•s;5 .t. �.` .!.a '.g;;`'• 'G': xa,1' :�J'.; 3r��' is.. L.� xy, , 1 ' ,ifY,'Gs'' y �L .` '; ( / .ly ' kf i �Atl, E; v<� ,'' f. :, £.SLY r'1 4-* 3� 1 • y4.: lsfy '. / N r .,^ {\" �� "' Rl .:=.�`>,{• *`;`•' •fi /t %!y r'/�''",f!ylr, �. '�' �3..: �Sa''3 .a Q... ,,•:. 7•t` 'I:y4... ) \i/ ,�tY'� ilt ,a ! .r,•yr'(y`�'r,A, 4 ,'LA. 'i' ;.'';.1. 3iY:. ?•hK,'.. .i.'.>}'f'' �"r :':k ' i/' yam.!, .;x,`tr,,t ,A,f! :•,..„,,"..,::,?,* , g .t' y','N, "33� � f' ' > 1 ` e.•, ti ri 4.,"• l .�,l a ,°.. : ,?`•b: .K'';• 'c'; ':•14:.;..�% ;, L ,. ` "keq..,:47•` 'f: ': {r lk •Mr�,"1`.v ,.. i •t.' y0, t,t.: J,�• F. •7• . k `y,sFii;. .a>r rol < .y, {t:�>.; \ :t,. f� ',3^s. r \ Yi.�i.'�T '�'r`l,.i • `;•�`••... / �v t. r. _:tij,. !{•t ' ,' `' .t;1 F syhy r Xt»�y ^l5;:i ` •1 :' .r.."shy,b f.. ° .'f4. ,;1 .,1„ pf�. •3i, :,'•.1si;..,•:••0,—•'t Q; ,'? .•s, ,,, I `••fl,` :, f�,•" 's'A'`s'5':,3: .:u,. +r'1�:s;`•4:•1 .G.i kZ <.s�' 1 :� e.� •,ao •iillZ"s. 'r k `�,�✓✓ks .6 ,.s,••fi. ,'Yt 'ii;' • '>,. 1 -'„d'i.�i l..-K-'}it'v,w..'�i� •t- ,, la�", f'i"�f<�,�-+ 's33.,_q..1, , •:;dry+::��+, !1`; H s;•g. >S i5 '... �`,,Y, t lii 'IrN• 'f`',',.:": +,s`i1`:•'�� Y, ,44',i,`.440..r" •Igit t . .Lz' 'zrs)y,(,'„ ro4f,` :kif„„ .£: ,3g..: h'yt.. ZYE a+!r k ,�W ��Qs yy�y/' is '{fir 2k;;1;✓''����tt 414, l�.y,•'23!•Fl:t'•�th:i:°yC,,t' •p'3.'�`5;��(y.•Y:t; .`�:a�t :�y ,f.,'z?'�•L''{.• � '?iY, 5�7.�E �';%' .�%f. 't�•�' • rs.t;• �..� ..fe,rrb. /4, , '4„ ,;s7, "a,,,, z1,,iii,4r`•tr' ,,"7+l .q., ,41k"t47�. `�•: 4 R ,:;''.sl,.1 .io..•.;.. `w 9 '+t`;• '. •. ') F/,f ;l!, ,•Q.,y• ,,•) '(:�f> ,�:. 5. :...,', '`! r .:>s' kV•' k'•:)• v V ly':'S^kl PM tt • $.11,4•(e!f,:' °'i%% i•i �,'rt}4j.O t`Y 4',,e. .,....r;.+.'i:LA}•'1.,Nic1 'g: ,'%�•' y• ,—,'s;r.;fr.Y ,Y`•it t 4'.:,,.".. YX ••.' :f•�i z;: 'yi .,t;.: `�} S r,Q.t.s�. /py'•,j e „ "/,. y;Y.•:li,;.e%St.:7�it�!•...r!'Yyy,�•ttr'+•'•r 't"••'.:a:i4',. Hf rl" s,4:`21 j'; ,.su.s•',".' !<:z.;: +Y,k..,S s•� 1'/'v A:,/„i;;:... 4: ho:, ,x,,ga\ ,,i,. .I, .�?{' •fm,..5. ''s 4.,•C>.;t;H,,.er ,<r'•'i ... 'i iE:!r'!at'• ,%•D ,x: %a„ �r.•i• ,f/.,, i li;! r:% s1s?, aF.V.. Ltgt;t.S' tr •,v6 •A 11.i ,, •L. Y.,.;y ~" ":'<! Q� /fr„ 6 •! ',g. is e F' ,s';\r t.'•: C H �Esr,.f. w s�.fy..,%: s .n:/5H:/"' .?cw f1f,i.,l,�li4 fhtirif I.l. a'�•r � ,!s.nr. 'C�• "i; �[ fa i• /.'/rF3Yf,% h: '4h"" l'.'>;.i' .�.. .r .}, 'v Tk•. SX ',:q!�f% tom 14,14(``s`'v f:I.'`•,!• :'1f 4prr/�I.r' ,,y,/4 ,j '0 / '44;ti. 17.t.J,, ;3.4'A e,l' .,w�:r+' . y. k RC 'oi! .i tiss. .'bra; y. V 1/, y..,,;,c/„ tt,•:dtkv;;,.,n4cart:�I� 'i"t•'�� 0 !' •t � ,!� f..•., L,�•' ,.�:••.y�y /,rrx,kr s:,;i:. '"%)':�' •;�g"a• !r. 4 �` 4s''�. t iC. ••9. ,: t'i;L. `.'i: `z .� � ; .#?�' �£! 0,q/"Y i'e• )b.,^:.1• ?I t' Sy t.;( $. `'{:•}•:M;''r ,,,'�.�' S:: ":;V:' i '')., dff`'f. ';%/%/ �a%, J ;' ":t.:y,;r�• Jy'i; d.�,Q;nr.'/ .,f y:e�'S: • ,A '.c.�.°.�a.('�i:'IYf'. .�`r43: ,�� .��•' 3!�i Y, ••• ,' �'Q •.. > '� I:%t a •••A MK'' `y 7 • •r•11\ ! .cyy ..V y.. ,,Y,L' ..'k:. V r �' :;��ji//! �Q ,•R) f� �. ",�. ,A.A.d.'�4s..,�ft.a . • "�.. •,,,�5 `,5e:.ln!y OF y„f:< ;i/^$`,'' • , ; ., . .�,,gc{; ky'r,Yij"/ '!dT°4yb'; 1yS�3 '$ ,r. .,�f y.. .,.�T o,xr,S..: ;YFhsf:'• :L. ;. yw dx'.�r/y..,r, 4''' :.f v, •.'c:''*:•..rr.. '•-• TG'fi `.d �:`':�: 2 '.r" •— ��..1 c.� , lf�>t). vq.•v��? ��r�u::�i,� '�.,,�} t• 't;ii.,_. `a `�r., .z+t:k..,. w:.:.,: Al:„,:• .{y; s�f,»f q, • tgs• "'�.1 J. •'<' . .h. .' '��4 Ti; T �,f`r..y. ?t: yy��'`:,2',`,t' t"i`;.!:� ,tv' t'"'% •.. �Vy( ��••..�� s '``.`�.;"n t�V.`s�' w I Sj�V' t:;�� '•Plf' '.za .�,!. •11k5.4:\.'' .s k'.� , .,'`. i::'.s 'Vr,:y l�. [. S. i CO M t ..'t ice°' 3' s t �:; •y �, :��H'/".� �,�x" 'r 7,,' ;' !., • r•i: is ( C�3 H, re'!a�',y �',t. '?'J� tl'�i9Hr \17.0,,:t.„ SyL. .:dry?'`ys.'g>X:!.:��.��`Y•!k,�{ �r�%. oti`.. .,S ,M1t �'y:'�'Y;?., ..jx,jHt;6 Y4: y,�� �2, i��': • l� ,'�,r::Y,.`,4.'�, {;:fi.r 0 y£v,•' 6/.< .�.?.i',/'y,��Ci .:4,,, q� ) 5�"�• Ylv.;.;.::-..,- ; '1 1140 A:Y�" x•• J rye i"..T ,>e'i: ( :•<,3. •;:ta ':.','�'E /. ` y"'o�!s:s`s:�: �.I �+`'�a' .. T4 v � 't ';."ii� Y; �tY'f yg "'.3.$'°;s0 :...f.4 g ` •4L0,!4v..�;,: ., 4'�4 ,E f. �` 1% f,• • ►•£ s•�:� ' I.YY ' `t;tl .d/4.l•Z:' ' ,� D,f yty� 'n':5,;.. ' itwerp, .fin, V,ty;2 ,,,.. Es a.1'. �� », £i • � ,f; �•! '^.;^..! "'ft�. � ``'�,'f,�,y!{`s h �{'.c�v .•9{y.. :f.;• �"+ '°`,� � /:y:•r,"�H�t3.(;x:� •',$�%�s. rJ,.ri�rt',: *AI.' '"`�•fi • a�,Il'*"*,, 1. ' ,f1Vt '' " �.s : kf .. f ice( ^,.'�tsf";;�$ • 1w.&,„ 11a W }. �?n,''�94,ll.." •t Y A ''NA,j/,�t�4,4,t.. �' ,•, l!):x..t:go„t:i,;M 'i. r: `� t.t,•'�Nt C §S ,t t 1\ �' �.likk ,. Q' Qk f�'c, 1'.,r•�'4 � r k�yq o/L� `V!�•iY�Y�"g r`�,:.s., k:.''�'..3 •A :::,:: Q al K•;FR ;'•".,K .,. g'1W \ f ;` <,r.•r� y.ri S 2�'9i�C { l"• Q't�.h',��' A+,. Y,`k, :.GS;' f•.;� ,y:a•;1P%,s ,b `/..;, y� n'i{ 'k at.",9 iY6.1�G flSi.`k�"f 'a3Hy{•`#yi',' 'h l.. y'SS:+'rp;. 'Y :• f. .,`r"`j'?F :• J y`b•+'y z ,,,,'A?(i � �b.,0.r' $4,44,\tb.,,,E> gf b ..*• `�;• k"43 �� `' .$,t''! tt'4. L( x.. i ! ?'.S /?:.•;,. '» !�3 4n�a, )tA, 2 i Z t, ,� y sr<'� kro,�.y''•4tr %�'�Uf % :• '•5%y.,• ':i �5, L°;. �•.�lgr'Q,,RI:0,r `pY�� .. , ; �",; ,j� �.. ., •,... 4&g l 'u :y3Ly Z k4t�� h.; s;.. 'Yyt. S:Lr •V !{i ys 0 3h,. i,,. s't t, v.x�, r:`� ,• .:.: "yat, '£1.1 �;•,'Y� o't°r +''.l'A. :; '!'';:f,f .`ii> ''�!t� ir. :'€:" Y 'YVt'slk‘it:AN‘Irt.'1';.M.;••••C: i '`rk' +A ., n • 'w. '•'x.:ry ••��jj;,,, :1.;i,£�'��!,. tif,.1'` .vc";4 '�zr �EE''".��,`,falsi�7. 'i:fE:,ty��f"�eY`k•�`,�"j, ' k '�$;�ewy..wa✓,?� 4 �� �+Sa::r••�,,, "�Xro •G�; »h �•; �' •'tft3,':ri%�,'!b,, :,; %h!,:t.: s`;;e: %Y:';;%/i'. �'�� y4t;;L,.kr1'�!f. n;;� . .�. .�,\• • •,caret ' w a,..6`' ".a: ,„x q�� •:.r;,`.7i,.;. ,i u.. ,! y,. kQ.'• ..Si�" ,t st, +4 .7 tit•,ey Y, . % t`r ��•1 'tt,.,' 'Yt) ha4�' L, i b .,,f y! y,."'Y�' r�, ♦,$; ., A• ::%1 .t.Y'�'I:, r':4 ;:'j:' �, 'y 'b,'f ", � ,\w. + V ,,• �1'. .4�..i;F,kY , `,� r.sy.%'%a''',h^,: ;£, Y /' Ff,:';»;;Y 4'p r�Y" :`A,>: .. ,� ..t,`r •sb,' fti4 ,I:Ita {`, ;;•`Hq Z'-sr ,tt(fsf; .. f `E.. °'V . •r.!;;' ,;?'.'';'�,r .. yok �i't, ,.5;4 . ,i!• `�y. :rir ii*% t% 4 '.:f�,b:".{ •`° sa,\'::'f�q d,s. / PA w3 )" �'"t'••4!2`t :•d 0 ,'K3. �3 f,% f'. { if ,�i,/'f ,.�.,.xa�;�!;'SY <<sjf.y�c..ti:;�!'s.t-LItit ‘ttkit' '.,,;lj `•'' :ff' r k t,4s. j ,�, v(,3:to •off 3"' ss� J,�f f}:�•:, <.s,,.53Y�4 L :: $ty',st' -.� �. :I, , .� .. . O', 1•f �: s •r 4. v "r " %t.. .. f r s y' < y `rt't?y" `.k i �I►�.�kq P ' '�L �/ .'`be' .1,;:p .y, i3`k{, „;4,;„': ,�`ij5„.`Ss 0/•..A.x3i1 .i`%r'?':' ,i i •17, .3.; �, , �,Li;xi ., ,; R ;.�: i'�'. ryr?< ^`!st'i F{ i1.<<'`, j,... f„ :j :``:<'`' :' ;y; k.;.:•:t , p r •. � k, s , .11s d %»;;:'!"' %,T' . `tfrt ^;zi;?,t ,t'' .T.,:` � ,gs W • f,g ) ti, � fr.,, r i4Y',�r �' fq.� •s 'i�' H f'"ni'' Viz'',iL„1 r`'.`v3E;•3ri{;'.: •(. ;:x>.: �*. ♦ • �'+"Ys I.,3.k ,b .'t, '1. .;'� re gs..::' ; 3...K• ` '.f ,co.:'b,r. 3 �4•... < : �s \ !r I;E x'r ,�,zz .:r „, • s',, `s� ,� F`t"> .<Y8,,,f,;;q.• " •'q� `Y:' • •lu•l{p♦♦ � ', :f•4 •�.vtt���q ,t^fl �rS, k,s�.j, f)! SfY`:{`�,��Y?�•fs s::;.Y:f`' 'n E. ;y.� til N. }} •:'` nY '�' :§yy /. 'E;"`., F.'•.'. 'i;"i'� 't 6ik frtq'v.r.�•,�y;i � �Yy:��•,. •,•1 „'. ,1`', :,,,,F ss1!� % :,`.5``:�t�i',' `i!i'. .'`r '3`>'S tK: ,S^ y •{ !... t<. 'Y� .7'``'SSYf{{/y r?f .��? t�.,:l,.,{E: ;7 >9?;v,, �f>:ti:`:. !5(;,`�;', ;�Sy;,j';"'x., � ^ ,•/� �l{1� ..�•�C•] ti'�., (� •! Li*lr>,Y.F' '.:sff; /, {s:J,ay;3," { Y!4"✓:: .f� y., ark,"<lyt.;''�IV' f>:::;.G;kli�.t�, .YYF�.. .h� �S 4''i '.'3��yp],��' '1t} �,r,� '1 'i�,'li`{�6,•:'/ki � f of '��,.":>2 4 ", .,: ��[Y r S,4,,,f.;:r„is, F f f�y �� '�`:'.b•� ..1 l�" :F.�./� Zi J�,` if bY,.' .t. ,'S�,'�`/,'`.'. viC'f:.,13 Y>/;:.: t.•"i�,%f� .Gr, 11 ^} �, •,'.'Y ; c'. <yy ryr<,; fF ,:fti{^, a:t �,� I' ,'Y'^•`'. ,sf'ff. H' , +i:. �:j ...;."`h NI g jl. ,x, u 1 r'd •<" .1SvYr, r:?%3' t .� '4•(�{'..• Y ' ,r ».i•" ;.k; f/ ',k ».. 4, `ts s � .• ..}. '�H"��x��ld'i' +lh � j 'r,,H x, ,f .h.}s•.,, i:r si�'':r'<#4' ';<';.:�t,�' :1'Ya,y>fE:E;'5.3::ffkt%� '�J�?r�!' sT, 3.� •.✓r`.# s'!3'�i%,+:�" Fq •p' �;i h. � , : ;;y3 3 Y;F%i7 ;E"' f 2,.1 k,;i;f..1',.. .yg r, • E' ,L' 3,X �;;yyyy,,�r(t..,,/i�' F*. �} ,.,.. tr�,, ..F£: .dD v' !SH.L:' ..,,,;ir; . .Y,...„...„.,,,`f v/s ':ff: , "rl',!':".,: 't i. •'t•'''•. s''•'•i•'.7^• yt.\F. %r/'f,'y,' r43`/ ;V, r�� `•; iZ n.. F,j:>/'ff. rYyt: v,:)..,....• '°. .,1� •� .� f�3:i%;•.j !.fs.' ,ii,,s,!.fy J c'Y/3`i'ii. "CQr. ..1• �'t'��jl , 1 .}l.h. ;/g4 �! �s'+' .ys ,(,t,, h e%.` c,Y/.� •.: ^ "fft �} .'•r•'+IS+.1� '1"• •si` /• !�fr. .f, qq ,:3'r :::f'; !4' :`3'.?;.0-".`' 'S' '�"�"fit ' 3 ,^� ,s/ �rY'P;'% A E%.: `(Jk�;! `';,,, z.,/,4 !,<s�>;s::py,,��/� i�%y, ,i� "3�.• ,1;. * ti' •(,5.ve#,}cy :i ",s.f 3y yc,< ..'i''.Sr£S"•!,:; .Sn , <.;y`•;'23i2g.j L =.} .} sl ,Y6s;,,• {y: ± •:?!.:'" 4. .;;:'•kY:fy s;,.. .:'4r. i,.f iji>'%'': ,i..%f ff??,,,• Y ) a' r y,i .yfS S•bra' 'r/y„4nf .$f .eY ,: : :'k, \ °s; u„ �G'%•`.: a 'iViAl,{ '"::sf rt, : •,{r .i•#}. !*; 'A`,n f`;.:W.,V,fY� f< s/ x 1. ;b.:Nii.F'."rr �y: �; p 'Pry / H /j.,,` 3y f ..Y S f ka. „� ?:.• `•.4?+r- .S �?'�F,r :, ` ••ef.• i�`✓l bt•: .//• 3:f. ,3 f.,':fs ii,,, .vx !. '!:>yj '•%•;..t . 4 ' ,!' •n!, .r2� •��••ft'+... b .', s Fh<%J' it:f v,•t ..).'�.!{ ;'� .:.{y.•ks.f 5?i';?"<•,�.'�,>:'' ,�YrX. �lz`,.'. C� �f, y,,,lyrt •f. .Y�;Q, .K 1 h Al. F'{;:': "1`,,,, ,%2f'Y!: ,;af 'So'n /`� sr;..n '>&" Y>r„ ,t..3 J`+ "1,' .) .f" •.,Yr .r.r r,.. %'st'z,f. fa.✓ .'L•:;1.:`: ay.sr.a:' , `: '3Fi'.y, yy.fS, :}+ j f �1g�k�"j/: 'S) �? .yl/lfN ,� ;Sf`'r .'.:`S:. „f<E.li.;sfi,':�,s i' z�3�''ii` /�; .Y�I.t,;r�,!�3':£" 's'y' .:ta`!• 2..i' 7rFs /f/,is'>exl!'y' ; .s' `d'sc i:sc,:.,.y,sz:y .kS�?,s•,.� ,s. n�:ij,'4;:y Y ,3.s.g.;: :!•,L, :.; CO :.i•,l,il•�'�'�' •>,t �� „s ,'f•f!' t'G' { ;'t•,`:u./••3' 4'.k>f;Y;%�� ^s .! i.:/;'•ri.W;.!{ ;fsy!///r. .,7k .li( �..:,,. , vi.r,3l/..sal/: .'ci,:r''si=r'j..Y:r,�,{...<. `!S' • �r C� :•fs"• � �iai.�� 'n'�3=t"•i�%'�/F'•.•c` �j�ry :;t:.. •nfF �!.�„ Slrt.� ��;!a;.S,Hk} ::,60; '.5�`yi�, y"� • ff',,''"�fy ::F. ..`•'' '� alh S, v f. :r%./. .a";{Y{3: ] !,is .`rJ'!.. ,F r;•„,,.n,s'T i:: •„cF' ,•'i {. y, ,'''.y,��- `,i __2Y,� •.V /, • :'Zi<:''!!.,, >:>i;`yyam. 'y£Y.:c.'• •9, r,:C,. 4., .a v %k r5! .:/y,�r, .f.�. etc..,it ` . ••'f-•1! rb,w`st. te4ys 4W.,:.{' '. % .,N.I 'A,T ',�'. i;.'y/'. urf;f%j..fA, 3...(i' iV: ,.. � t,.�k.,%,. ,,, ,e '�rla• ':z ?i%( :.r„ .�fH! rrf,.t� .r�� .s {'�,w .,l,{.E•" �sr 1: ,l :';;.' �X.sxi ., ..(°I 4 .+: ;"i .{:' 4' >::w;$ 3£,f" 'f!' .f.:• .k✓? • "4%' f )Fy 'f<: y: 1 x:%`�`,;, r/! �' .b <• :.�r'.JI �e:�, ;2. t, ,KI .:3;n, !.k?f,,,ff Yi2:;, / j;r� .f f.. 7,j' i,;,!.z' /t<..• s`,1.; .f,rr'•F Y 2ryf e +? �i` ri: rs',, ,.:, k:E:,i 1,!., �:,:.t .r »•/.r�✓r •• "X`:��, v! <': :Y. yp s ;��ryy/ � / • ����QQjjO0 :•'i" � / /'rf '^y; >•�.:�:�n! !n. .x!.S4'/:Ss F.y. .fr / //Y 5Y rH` :t•.,. / ,,SS 7 .+tY ,� „,,,,:Y ..\,.ry'`. T)•"4 +ri�� d'., 4 '•'�tY •':•l, v %{)k'::>`:•.'s`' S i... s..�.:,��3.. t { t,: 44��,, ':, ,.�,:saf, � £,� £� i��r/., ,;%•; Y..F' sf% .s ;'r4 't•rl J'r. ':!} � 4l''.%•t. IE•.:,I..,. 'Ssq ./nrr ., ^r£ ..r/ r//y l'Y>r i^. ,,,•,.,s. L!...3k3F,. ' r6'i, f, '`Ei: t,., .£. '�r, .ai. � a/,s ,�. fy ,H.' Y.s;i '�,'.css;t44'4,:4"8'." .�y' s t:Ls`;.':.,sty.. yk •,1,}.. Y6' .2 y,1' h£;. ,! ,,,,', 0' i3 o.'.:'f,. n�;, :jk.f.t-!r'::.. ', .. .:f 3if v:46v "` '•H ^1•' , .r yF• y ,.y': E3 ;;..4 {� {!f�', / :>:cxr. ,f,f kr h 4'Zf'�i,u \.�t V .x. ,i� , '3� •:fv s.Y:f% !d9'."' `:�•rn �S1 ! Y. :�,'� ': x x. 'i• }[' /�s/ /., s..xyi `?t, k.s^f "trr f'."' ; Y .3t•. )>':Lk!:y. :} s r` bi ;•` w' .1 J /i ::F. {. �. ,i•. x3 ;si,,,' yb t "rsrFy">,,, ff .; f '!' '::``,. ! y ,., .k.: O ':°, h�,:pL ! .Mj .s, q' +'`( / jr.rf. v; £s.:#:r yF.tty:: 4'S "s, ",.,. !' s ,'E>E',3: �Y'. t. 9 .4 �.}�: Dn ,3: ;., .A. 'Y. ,:2; I aY y fH '.'ft�.'xnrk.,f,.:r y /�r5 Y•rl /;,3'7/ ` err r,!'; s..;, !f s;.: .' 2.•y';s;2 :';,• r.�.> '� nr V'' tia4 f%, Y''1 f,'f7,4 S.!L•'•¢`,Y),. lrti•f!• n)!'I4',jii%.fi IS 4J�:Y , ;fr rf';. •'11 v '•p' a Y`• •t'. �'�',, /,y,s. ,,F.{:k>.;': .,s' %'• Y, r'Fy>:.Y.,ri f: 'r'''!£ f s`';.::C: `Y•JSS2. :f.:..• :4 !i 4 g.f%%cc����•F:%%:. `.. ?Y,.a,. n/•,,�.!r., � £' .';fi sSz'fa ill! ( • sY `•'� ' f Y S't"/.; 3 .T.0 r ''3 6 ,.¢' ;s'' N, * y, $, � mi,1,,,E<. lt3C;;'Gi:,si Sy 3/+ i .,,,::: kit ,[y, ./. ! r .f'li;: �. �4`,�.E ��3: YF'"..., �i) t•r'F Y,+�� '� •• �:E,'/ �rr j2,...r;{ ;'.•»ti: .9/•...r`(!i�" s� i �''r,f,'f,,;' .fr..rf. ,l .� fH/'yy,/'°', ,sky;, 'C�' f:°tt ,:'�. `1'.. a !� ��� ,i"E:,s....<f. .y'.' ,e n3• w, .s.,,,{,2' f:t sq s:. {'.:k H'^'df •••f h!%t At,'.0 •r ,�' f� ,� y�� f.•,.. s:.;t, y', ,f rj'• " k` tis•7y� 4a1. a / � :3a' izr£!: '�"F' F fgg, srs.!'• .n.i.;s.f!! kss ,n r g' x3• .,,:,�LG»,°��. '! �„ "�§>''Sls `•:jE•.-{&, •.;><�%°:'�,•: r � ./.�,•5.,,'sY,Y..s. �;> •tiy pfge, �, 'E�v:'f' °°,,be.,i :in a>;`!0� s , ;� X•1''6. './ f`�<, 3`• , w •;•lip,,e,a %s :.r.,k,!' i•Yh. 'L. � !/ of/, i(F L'iy. .y.,; :�: rff' :�t�.��'.��' os'�'�o''�'.i k;r �� ' f!bf� Y,iJo: � fi' ...: ;.t�ti', ! .c>r,f,J',..k'//1'y/.•#� ✓/ :'iii.f .{•.,/5Rr`s/gg .�F,..,9i n7.G :.. ., .f yf :k(!d;•l,`'..GY o xt" ',ib ' � %f.c ,f rFF FY':%` � .,.f;Y..Y "I�%.`' ,f,��•S. R/ �y;;x. g' '::,•rw,.'; ?�y' t.! �'y:k`s� tit:, y,4 �i� s'f• .: ?:.r% •s':t't.4p'i"• 4. ,:3• ..% ,�i , �;�.,, 4 4. r 3 f p7`s, e, y' v t.;'.fi <a *. f ,•,Y•„' ') 'l'. ���� yl,. �1,�;�; ..{, ��,;:;,� � sV. /j'�'.. 1;'li s.Y,Sr ,t.. .r�'• '[R;`: +!��p }•:r•°�., .,�f�,.l ''1 f� .O' :"'Ti) tYls, Y 't' tisY,/�/!'j; 't ��y<Y�%., r;{y�• ^•, •F yap� il;�V.•r +>♦ '?1� {r�r ,"!':` aj. rx:r,� Yt: • :.Y: 5F:`('t3• /`�3 N. 6'/ 1,.:'� i'Y;' ''� `511G,.Y �„���; t+,t.yy�yj ,A..C,If'' F ,,3�L'. V�rl, •%.'., f,t :t .)� "1 r'rkj �r :ik' ?p: l :F' • 5�•' Y,`. .s:'•!1`r L't.,.r.�, •' ` '>`6•,c .q;+l 's "'1t,. !:' fy ,y,,. jc ,',. f fy!%''Y, :v�`n; :,Yi.. `•` :4)`: ..,vim / . v•:t ��':,:, „,�;t13J ,3' �} � k ;n, f, s ,€ S,s'� `y'%', t .y, 1,:. l�. 7'rt;i' ''1 fi, `.'{,. 'fjf..�;: "'JOY L ,t 'Y F,',. r'y�` I' r' y':;{:2� '� ;{y " . 3'�i0: .. ,t,F2'"�. %' 't. (Ao rr (/:'':, ;` s4 ••5$i,.V.,r, •4?,;•„l?• '):'%¢: /;!✓„4fr r„t4s•' f �t•<> ';r<�.' 'F.. «..x, 1,�f. .ii;f +�,•,••afl/�`1� � .!%, :l.. ��. :at.s tss:l�S.i.,yY' ,! /., •',y...s;`,�.,'',:j.. .�''r;?,gu' ,i...f.s: "/4 ^S?''ys' v, a: •F'J�/// r.,��`' ys.�:,` r i, tY` '?t:';." n? ks�r:,£y`l3rk../5/., �{'!;%''/�Y�f�J/.t.% ✓ � •"y)i,',H'f` �v � +f '>}�,4., b`,<_ ,.yf� y �y / .,(.j•+ c t /.xtk:k,!�. q..� ��..:;�• •1,^ Z •" ', ' b"' t.3.,,', v','s�{ 4.%" A:` :>,F, /. ,y.,,;..0g; �'/:y Y3.;,, p' t'�'f •{, l ;:%%/'' O �>�"x�ti.�. y S/ "�ks,�� .L. ,s, •�Sa`�'.�`! �:r. {3�,1.. $,F.n: ,s.f;�r !f s� ^'�% r,�� '^Tt L, ?��:. / �. +,fff l �y, r� ^ s,!//` SF:' D4 ': l..;�.. j`'.�',��.�'''��`�'���5< ,'S'%H �Z�•,.S2t :j'f°'`)f.t ',�;.43, ii Yy�"�i;�F'Y�,W r..C:'F.i;'F:,.3'"'i�Y. y5��y '.f" l'`'..,.`1i2,3; ),/ F�` /f :r4.vi:t'j���,/''��.n ';�: Y %f •µti `%e! 1 t JH• A;!f,. t5r's" %:•.y` >F`.:" .fY ,.r`v � I!•i;+'•, .' ' '! ,: rfR": ,!�00• :4 r`.`d..% :' 4 .r•.'r•� '•`r5.f£:i 1 {'st; .r; 5'F';'y:'.,v :5:, stt "f•<`` `'.4 !y',,5,)R, t .t•,f. J .,i !� ,ySy;::: %:�,�'. k, /, r.y<YF;4 ,,t � : ,j�,f.v...y ,r ii.tV'. •.:N: by 'fl.l,::S+, �"' ��`�` +`!'•' •'sS<:k' ,.:. , {:" ,l4: r.•!^Ef` ;R�' •;; .•f%':, !/` st,f N \��..�. ? '.t � �!"e �d�,� ,f!' ri' ;y�z;'s�%�:Ff. ,,;fci»,�a�:�;:.;�.,`'ERF, ':�..,: s;j�``>.'S. ..7•%' if �:'3:' 's•yxk ,{ 'kk y :;� •+ }yi' „ Fr• ':,• :II „•,T..r f",x,,). .,fi.f� ry. t ,.. ;'.•.Y."?'7 �% i£' Yr'f.•yrst 6i1 Fyf3y r '' i ! e 'Y:%f.:`•�°o'<y,..si f• "�! .: yr %%js.s„ r< ', `t:<.,4.0.. •.:1•r.!y'�%'; >.m.';r,7' f9 .,4 H •re ., �` a�� ys'.`y' �'�':. ;E%.9: :3'<'! ::'Cc.Y/l,n{:%%j" 'S yr,.:✓/• h :5.:1' .f:: •ft; .rr'1'%.�)` �Y`'3 r. £ ! ,f.,,il,..H,� ;.//.•//at6.{YGY' '.,/./:''':'.:'•.'i 4` !. y,"n:"..,4.ttiv:.•` •n'� .�'.;5 r,(.:. ? ,f,v `i.e S 3 .Htt ✓f n G•, f d`' 'y: .• f`;S /<: `—.. ,.Lf .!••`>. ''�'..+te:f£ .fl• •'iF" �yEtf s•!y,.;�;;:''f ..ems%`�:� %�:/,::":;"%i.s,�� ;r;•r`' 'i'&'.�'Y,y:%:. :4sl:s r ;:j?s, :)S.s.F t�". + i' `v -:E£i.'N . .. �'�3y ) 4 .s„ ;3. n..1V4;: 4V^:' yt %£ .l ,, sA.. .t's' :..ff .t.yY't:• F t £"tf. P %;.J;•i lffy' '•1;0, :'f,/r ;;'.s,>'!`:'ss ,i 'j:b <%:s �%y%t':�`` *•fir./r.:'t•'�:'" °;;�•;y,y •�'3`` "f`• »•� ,,•' ,•,£, �.f;• �. /T �. .!,,�..#.%��%::3`H• ./.,.�, s.f r.. '�3 �,s; i?.°: !�9 -.a L�•< s Y o�. .� { r'cs'. :! Ex, ; r. �G a�;Y %' � i;t/.r ::� 0•t .,.s '�:•,.f', ,5.4. 'F y •. ' At y,,. y .rc . ,I. !�. ' ;";:feF•`.• .'.,W,f'!. ,j7. ;,/. .• 'k.i w� 1 •:Y•:{{ ..nT • `A'' •��.�� r.f� r %. �r.i..�<`.k:.k.� L!f�: /�/, ..,a,fk:`;+:!..f 5.t 5:Y S'.::','? tf.. •.Y.r 4 sf., ,,H3. :c ra�• ,F' `a `'�`' ..s,,.fr` "•H; :�', y :•st•:k� %/'.� f'.fy,;t. ,�frj, ^' p.� :.� �s'!+`::$`,E' 4 nl, , 3' .A .!}10, E' '�lyb: f' f7?::!":y' :.rs•Y' E% it.". i{ti"` // ff�." `rYf.. i�: f•S:� Y, r �S: j `. ` ..� y fi'!/;.t, ,' S.:3,r .2d�;f./, ' F£ff:•.%4;s,',Y.,::,•s;. ,rk.'�j lAw;r .;:a::•4.. �' .>�<''•.f. ..f='.. �i�k/ .ffs�!'•,5..../^ � 7'`&£S..'' :•%.t az " '*"e 'E, :FF.`�of Ifrl'f•i 1`F .Y`�'' / /�' � •`„'9'<• Y•r` .�/ ,o•. :..{.{.yt!f. iv,'j`.Y ., 3!T'.i ':�k'}: /,. ':Y�.ry.f:. 'f, r • ry n rsl s'r4 LYx .,''}l, d• .t i :�: Q •,l// Sn.";�,:i'%� atiYi. • !7 • ✓/rt: ••1� yr, • '. :04: ,v :�:i.' t' S2 t r o 44.Y,.. 3. •t :^F •.f" 1 ,'! 9.,:,:}V.,:e:!",,,,,,`:•*.••41C:k:eA S.:l.. Y:F•:!{ �r'r`; �:`:y�i,f .1; Jfr� �y.;'/iG:'S'...r{[ .�X/'t v .� , •ra •oF;!�i/, r�.r..\'H.. t„ r ., y '!Y,k?o3 :/�• ,,GG ! p � �1 .s. ,rik �.:: .h�:: .� *k:. .G, ,r.6r:s'•.�y. ,fr.E tf' ,:�" Y r t. r3w.. ��',, i :'£''";/'.;:;`%',%. 'i't'�, �s<:�...Yf•,Y'"afl.Fs,." ..r: •i� f kt I�' ,, y '/, , ,y ;i .;s/� ,.�1���'.i, •d i•z..,,.,:,. .�': :1•. ;i.ji i+» 'tY1.�.ta ri , a ./ i/. '•!i4:145gq..,r/.,Fr f,. i?; ':i;'; •r 'tta /f't"t '%k,+ t r`}.L%/ FR .L i 1; Lh,%,?" ,.,•1���, `.' ,.4:'• 'L%r. , f {•. r.3t�r%,r r) 7:s49 >2l,'r„„'1,�:'%'{: �<r3•�'�a,)•,. ,N J'"Y1.4 t r.• ff' t � ,f,.�y l•�:%.:?. � ! /. yif/i 4r ��X�,cam £�s4 4 y .1• ryk {r z5,3z .Irt s' '� 'J�sll';•,�5;`�.g...:> ''o„j;:.!�Y;3;�'.Y#`'`'� i .lfi<': 4, `;r;,,3.: ?;ft,,; ,.Y' �rf. �yY kYtr';j.'`",�f%�J'•1.Y �t^ A` 'C �/ ,'d/,''�/� G.IY:�/'s ;.3':;/. 1... .{, .. �rY%' fb..• f!'<.,;�;,.>`r.ss,!'y;s.,/,n;L,yxL.r ;.,a.•+,.�.� '� ,?� 'Yip 3''"b'w' :�,/,.f r," ;i�'%� :3.'!'•':�fi;,',' is/�Y%.�'rr:E lf, /�f f � {�if �'r{ 7.! H, ff% % .,/. ,>s r: 'q14 4•' '�', `!s4 :tS1<'•,?rS,. • f/ /.�' ^,. 1 :7►'.(::`.',*..'7'S) , • ,' ' :'s{�sf'1.!�: ;'%n! j4 � �"' 9. �<,,/ .y %:L%i,?s.r.;:y.lc�f,,/�,:.Fi`,<¢,.f�/."if: :�1,. (` sy s'.3.e'. s/I y�£.�a4.,, cs.`z><3:t r .r',,�• i,f .i.: � . : `i�r"t .c:X:r.nf••"'4:£•.. .t,t . ;'.mi•."..�., f. 3�j:�t,,f" ;'s:»iz' .? •�. s!f f. .y 2•? �f /.y/ �s'.: :;t.. ^;{i':.: HJ. '� Y Y.%�'` 6 ;� y.., �"" 'y :!)T'f1Y rf'Ss•1.!'rr.!��:'£,.; r,;,x ;y� r,.n..';"�i.,;'/f�' f`;Y�.� �: '?: ;s#::r...s.'Y':1:�'�: :>r .. ^y%D ../ �� �... nsc.:,%�',. rg: Ysa �f.:r c✓n'V':: �: r/ ,r/k,.:�:" is •:�yd' ,! air rs„>..ta.•,"4:%,r.,//,fi, "sE '° .�� 5•Ak,..,,, .y;'s r/. /�i'"Y: :)•<s :>iiF:'£'`• •':4:!y;F,'� •.:'%':,... .:fYr. s:Yrr.i.YT:, .S 6,,„`;%b�'.t .a. ,Ss�y.' �' ..1'f .:ft .Y;i`'" r,f';%'t,Y• ���� ''� ��'1.':. fk`•„�/ ,£.;;r»�iS { t,.%�: :•%r ..1 'ir�'•9'f s%f s :b• 'Q!:.s.. ,^ :s:%' , •' f.,f .,,n, ....� .,F.:;�., .as. . :�..Y:':•:.: ......,.r�4�sr,G.yk�•:: 'sf"..Y/l{':/nf„ !tF. :>... , r;;: yr, ,.j, vk:r ::ti•. i/Sx' 'sf"/ •':..it • ..t+Y n4F' Y '`� f. /5 4Y4'• / • v y. /.,.'!'�'' .s b s ;y,l:. Y ,yY,y" 'xS1. �•> ,i�/ ' "'Y %t4 f�' F• ✓ ,�"HF9 �3 ri a.s' .t Y •kS �+'� rt. •'� h•nr'/ y/'t E< „»%k�!•:� :'�:.it`::;:s!, as�Y,sr ,1:""`'r ;f r/;!� � t� • s•,:..;:;.::'• !�'r fk:, �/ y,: Yff a, ,y• i:�yf s' •S+y,:..n,F ,L,. .,/, to .{ Y..' .fo;tE,{ `'f� �'3,.`:� • ''� ,uf Y tY Y. s i, rf}'i' ':w •.f 3�5•0` GF q� 4 ty �: ,z•4.' •`;f•f /'S � ��[ n,ly f' `b .a`. Y!r / ,.`fir+ .°:4` .S'•'' 'ln?r :' , r.3 :I':'(` '/r .j� oy., /:i.t.s i:,f•E: :11 � r,a. .r .% '%t.y r Ys:!iS.y''i`�� ..2f' 'n,Y P�. (•'' if.�!/.,t,k ;.,t:: '.'7;. „Oil .I.'' `iM.r. ;1` •,��..� <ft n 3 :"„sf.. l :.. t•� r t 3!3X;yv'75 Ha.tsty #,`k'Ml�. .'. "Y f'��k,"'i,¢ '✓'S '�ai~�'' r?�.'';.. �4 `:{ ��S. A Y.'1 d. irl'r�i st` �...`.la;:%''•. ff%:. ):'^gA`.... '.',,W; '),.r r,JL. ''y',;�' ^d::<;,••.s.' ..4 1 r, w. F./'. s{` :.i! 5.8 'tyii'.!,f�. 1' �r�. >ue t' , ,.'" •. ''O.4, ..c,3 E,`f r'` �M .i 6 .h'. f tx, f;! `SS:'y yt, .s y, ::...r..r�k'f'.,.,F..y :, .^I.,/a;{;"',.n .J•s �iij'Skj:•.,i r,E �3 r ^••� r.l ,y,. '.'Y1 f ,. ` r /f,'r ./�"y.#yf" :3•�::,i'. ��Y;;; '4! :;4`: `y !Sir y Y�v. ..%4 r fi5F5 t Y ?,y's. 'i'� .yi:•i b, :fir•!; f« ✓, „/ �•a :.✓ '%� 5:L �.t,, ��' .Yr'r i:Ei.f" �,f f''�'Yy<r �1:,.,Yr� 5,4.sttf;..�...,p,l`sF:Ff, ,f; .. �t✓;,:r k.Ffr .:�..,;Y.:: s`/a •n rtl:"s:�. L,1. �y �..;;� ;�`:;:rr,; .,!,..,.:.3 trY, >, ,'<t", x <t.« 1 .�! t f' :fit#S:o`ifWiJs w3`:T.•. ,�'.r r 4 .''rx •kI!,•„r ,,.).f<! ,� 5£: `{E •,;<,°r`.a. �. 1 1;,� /rj. 'af •3;;•1!`x: :� t, a r j'� .ti>i'' ,.E,;?:;L''ys f�t�r ..�•,.'% l'.s't/! t. ,,.^tr�•1:y�.,:yk!x irk,2,, `/k„�{.f,,,. s,, 'F,3k« aF`.Y' 3 .,/r 4. 'r,r:%'Y ,srr:,m u¢,y•4'3. ,f ,.::."'s',' .. £ /�.i.. sf ,•i1•, ,,t•{#,! L,r,r yy ,tjy ��p,y" ::'y�.f ,f✓:" :i%:;t '..fly. ;s%' ;'ift.,,.s...,3., kt ..M':.•�•' y Hi *Gy;ts'tS%` r•Y'�'":%5'`'Y.i S •'�E •.:Y:SY, .l. ky7F{ � cry S✓•,'yi :y'. ' f, �,§• i`X.. ySn' f tll"; f a ,:'� Y.ss`r./.:;fs.,"fr • • ':s:�. S.f�.•,'r• E,.Ty is ( s�ti`'i' f • ) 6, ,f' s n �. si: f>�s{ :k" • l l' tl' /i,' r rs4?E' 1..Y ..t!' ,n, �'y rl 5 ".i Y' •;F' ..sf�'t1` 4 'tk. '•L : ra,,; , :�. fr f, y r•u ..< f k • '3 f' / t J 3;r "t nw• �,,£ •7y" • rl l ..fie s! ,Y:: ':y ,:s r t:.r k• • tf s� t' L.a.'b:" L ,y,,, • #'. a, h x;f. ..3k1, • i . i rf r' • tt .�:f'� V>sF s'�!f rf: 'F;. ry ¢ ry �'. � ask` f a L• s ` c��." ram'.; G:�`'` • ff f Y7. �. rr4f� :%tJt �.. �ikr sC fi%`H/ "ft . I. ii 3. Ss! 7r' � /z`3:f xK ly ,,, `'f�7..f' ,f t,; E/• �] k Sf. nr,syr �pY� J54 .,r • .:k-t+�:i.k 'Ff. • .1. r cam: 'E� x rj. ,f !.n rh d. =�2 I T:' <.it'1'; •si H,, 'Yt S fI(lfr /• •fi A • fo ('G •f �„ k'» flf N 6• .s rrl.�kr .}fs. `f3 i O i.ki,,f ,; f: 4{ Y r•' :i> b: ry,% 'r •lot r•b r'. T. �F,.�lit f:`s%:...3, 1 >i' r '$ r4Y/' 3•Y • f �.':lF ✓'r r,j Y {.. •to . .. ...:.w.f•c,,;'::rY..:.., � . ( :,n: ., f�,fix.'<karl�57,.!'f.';,�.144.t�'°fC.YY,.tii/ y/`x ...... .... ..• ,.. , • Create dense vegetated buffer along the eastern boundary of the site to provide wildlife habitat a vegetated travel route for herons along Springbrook Creek(see Figure 4); • The building should be constructed in earth or natural tones; any glass facing the rookery should be nonreflective, nontransparent or hooded to minimize possible disturbance to herons; - Parking should be sited on the side of the building opposite the heron rookery; • Walking and jogging trails and other recreation are permissible closer than 600 feet once buffer vegetation has achieved 10 feet in height; and • No restrictions on timing of construction activities unless closer than 600 feet from the rookery, then February 15 to June 15 closure applies. Blackriver Corporate Park - Tract B (Phase VII) Site Tract B (Phase VII) lies due south of the heron rookery and approximately 300 feet to the edge of the northern site boundary (Figure 4). The 300 feet distance from the rookery to the site boundary includes open water of the P-1 Pond, emergent wetland vegetation, and cottonwood, Oregon ash, and alder trees varying in height from 50 to 123 feet. Much of the site to the south consists of low-growing grasses and shrubs (Figure 4). In 1986, a double row of poplar trees were planted along the west edge of the site adjacent to the P-1 Pond. Remnants of the cottonwood forest are present on the east and southeast portions of the site. A number of factors were considered when establishing guidelines for building setbacks and construction activities for the site. These included type, density and height of existing vegetation; height and location of the nest trees; surrounding land uses; site topography; known ingress and egress routes to and from the rookery; and the unknowns of great blue heron tolerance to human disturbance. Guidelines for Tract B (Phase VII) are as follows: • Establish a no-build setback from the rookery of 400 feet; • Plant cottonwood, douglas fir, lodgepole pine, western white pine, and native shrub vegetation at the northernmost portion of the site back 400 feet from the nearest rookery tree. The evergreens should be planted closest to any structure, the cottonwoods closest to the P-1 ponds; - If more than one building is planned for the site, the construction should be phased, with the first phase of construction done at a distance of 600 feet or greater from the rookery; • Response of herons to construction should be monitored during and following construction; B-13 - Once vegetation in the buffer zone has achieved an average height of 25 feet, and assuming no impact to herons is caused by construction of the first phase, construction of the second phase can be carried out to within 400 feet of the rookery; • Walking and jogging trails and other passive recreation activities should be located no closer than 400 feet from the rookery; • Surface parking or a parking structure should be sited on the side of the building opposite the heron rookery; - Create a dense vegetated no-build buffer (location and width shown in Figure 4) along the western boundary of the site along Springbrook Creek, and maintain existing dense vegetation along the northern boundary of the site to provide a vegetated ingress and egress rout for herons leaving from and returning to the rookery (see Figure 4); - The buildings should be constructed in earth or natural tones; any glass facing the rookery should be nonreflective, nontransparant or hooded to minimize disturbance; - Any building construction within 600 feet (400 to 600 feet) of the rookery should be accomplished only from June 15 though February 15 of any year. B-14 REFERENCES Literature Cited Bent, A. C.. 1926. Life histories of North American marsh birds. U. S. Natural History Bulletin 135. Washington, D. C. Bjorklund, R. G. 1975. On the death of a midwestern heronry- General Notes. The Wilson Bulletin, Vol. 87, No. 2. Buckley, P. A. and F. G. Buckley, 1976. Guidelines for protection and management of colonially nesting waterbirds. North Atlantic National Park Service,Regional Office, Boston, MA. Cottam and Uhler, 1945. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service leaflet no. 272. Cottrille, W. and B. D. Cottrille. 1958. Great blue heron: behavior at the nest. Univ. Michigan Press, Pub. 102. Henny, C. L. and M. Bethers. 1971. Population ecology of the great blue heron with special reference to Western Oregon. The Canadian Field- Naturalist, Vol. 25, pp. 205-209. Henny, C. J. 1972. An analysis of the population dynamics of selected avian species with special reference to changes during the modern pesticide era.U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wildlife Research Report 1. 99 pp. Ives, J. H. 1972. Common egret and great blue heron nest study, Indian Island, Humboldt County, California. California Department of Fish and Game, Wildlife Management Branch Administrative Report No. 72-9. 39 pp. Jenni, D. A. 1969. A study of the ecology of four species of herons during the breeding season at Lake Alice, Alachua County, FL. Ecological Monographs, 39: 245-270. Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1988. Great blue heron rookery investigation, N.E. 95th Street, Redmond, WA. Technical report. 13 pp. Kelsall, J. P. and K. Simpson. 1979. A three year study of the great blue heron in southwestern British Columbia. Proc. Colonial Waterbird Group, VOL. 3:69-74. Leonard; W. 1985. Inventory of great blue heron nest colonies in southern and western Puget Sound. Unpublished report to Washington Department of Wildlife. Lowe, F. A. 1954. The heron. Collins, London. 164 pp. Palmer, R. S. 1962. Handbook of North American birds. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. 567 pp. Mark, D. M. 1976. An inventory of great blue heron (Ardea herodias) nesting colonies in British Columbia. Northwest Sci. 50(1):32-41. B-15 • Murphy, M. 1988. Status of great blue heron colonies in King County, Washington. Western Birds 19:37-40. Parker, J. 1980. Great blue herons (Ardea herodias) in northwestern Montana: nesting habitat use and the effect of human disturbance. University of Montana, Unpub. M.S. Thesis. 61 pp. Pratt, H. M. 1970. Breeding biology of great blue herons and common egrets in central California. Condor 72:407-416. Short, H. L. and R. J. Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: Great blue heron. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biol. Rep. 82(10.99). 23pp. Short, H. L. and R.J. Cooper. 1985. Habitat suitability index models: great blue heron. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biol. Rep. 82 (10.99). 23 pp. Simpson, K. and J. N. M. Webb. 1987. Correlates and consequences of coloniality in great blue herons. Can. J. Zool. 65:572-576. Teal, J. M. 1965. Nesting success of egrets and herons in Georgia. Wilson Bulletin. 77(3):257-263. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. Letter to Donald Erickson, City of Renton regarding Blackriver Corporate Park Development. February 20, 1987. Van Wormer, R. L. 1988. Technical report on recommended setbacks for great blue heron rookery. October 3, 1988. IES Associates. 10 pp. Van Wormer, R. L. 1987. Technical report on heron activity on Black River Corporate Park property and recommendations to reduce or negate impacts from clearing and grading land south of the P-1 Canal Pond and the designated natural area easement. 23 pp. Washington Department of Wildlife. 1988. Draft, recommended management guidelines for Washington endangered and threatened species and species of concern - great blue heron. Nongame Wildlife. Werschkul, D. F., E. McMahon, and M. Lertxchuh. 1976. Some effects of human activities on the great blue heron in Oregon. Wilson Bull. 88(4):660-662. Personal Communications Caldwell, R. June 19, 1989. Washington State Department of Transportation. Telephone conversation. McAllister, K. May 31, 1989. Wildlife Biologist, Nongame Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Wildlife. Telephone conversation. B-16 Murphy, M. June 2, 1989. Avian Researcher, Half Moon Bay, California. Telephone conversation. Owens, T. June 1, 1989. Wildlife Biologist, Nongame Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Wildlife. Telephone conversation. Penland, S. May 31, 1989. Urban Wildlife Biologist, Washington Department of Wildlife. Telephone conversation. Pesek,J. June 16, 1989. Regional Nongame Wildlife Biologist, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Telephone conversation. Van Wormer, R. May 31, 1989. Senior Biologist, IES Associates, Olympia, Washington. Telephone conversation. B-17 // n�c iUi' ��ILI� i 1Z RENTON RENTON CITY COUNCIUIG 2 9 1989 Abbreviated Meeting August 28, 1989 ; l [;.a L"E(�� 1 E icipal Building Monday, 7:30 p.m. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Earl Clymer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF RICHARD M. STREDICKE; Council President; KATHY A. KEOLKER- COUNCIL MEMBERS WHEELER, TONI NELSON, NANCY L. MATHEWS, THOMAS W. TRIMM. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL MEMBER JOHN REED. CARRIED. (Position held by Councilman Hughes vacated on 7/3/89.) CITY STAFF IN EARL CLYMER, Mayor; DAN KELLOGG, Assistant City Attorney; ATTENDANCE MARILYN PETERSEN, Deputy City Clerk; DAN CLEMENTS, Finance Director; RUBEN NIETO, Personnel Director; LT. DALE BAKER, Police Department. PRESS Kathy Hall, Valley Daily News APPROVAL OF MOVED. BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL MINUTES COUNCIL APPROVE THE COUNCIL MINUTES OF AUGUST 21, 1989. CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. • CAG: 89-052, Maplewood Finance/City Clerk reported bid opening 8/18/89 for Maplewood Golf Golf Course Bridge Course Bridge; 6 bids; Engineer's estimate: $166,000.00 without sales tax. Refer to Transportation Committee. Rezone: Polygon Hearing Examiner recommended approval of Polygon Corporation rezone for Corporation, R-019-89 1.2 acres located at 901 Sunset Boulevard NE from R-1, single family residential zone, to R-3, multifamily residential zone, R-019-89. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Space Needs: Mayor Clymer requested discussion of Council/Mayor space needs. Refer to Council/Mayor Committee of the Whole for discussion at Council workshop on 8/28/89. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Utilities Committee Chairman Keolker-Wheeler presented a report regarding Utilities Committee the waste reduction and recycling study, referred 12/5/88. The Utilities Garbage: Waste Reduction Committee met with the Solid Waste Coordinator and the City Attorney to and Recycling Study review the proposed solid waste ordinance. The Committee recommended that Council accept this ordinance as presented and refer it to the Ways and Means Committee for proper legislation. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See Ways and Means Committee report later.) • Planning and F• Planning and Development Committee Vice-Chair Mathews presented a Development Committee': ' report regarding the request for release of right-of-entry for First City' Release of Right-of- Development Corporation (Alterra Corporation Rezone, R-129-80). The Entry: First City property is located north of SW 7th Street, east of the P-i channel, and south Development Corporation of the railroad right-of-way. Staff reviewed the matter and reported that-the right-of-entry secured by the City from First City Development Corporation is in compliance with a condition of approval for the fill and grade permit issued for the P-1 East Side Watershed Project. This condition requires the applicants of the fill and grade permit (King County and the City of Renton) to secure the leases, easements or other legal agreements to allow the temporary or permanent storage of dredged spoils on the properties abutting the project site. Based upon the Committee's review, it was recommended that the City Council approve the release of the right-of-entry as requested by Bogle and Gates, attorneys for First City Development Corporation, since the City has completed the excavation of the P-1 forebay and channel. The Committee also recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the appropriate documents. MOVED BY'MATHEWS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Suite 4170 800 Fifth Avenue Seattle,Washington 98104 (206)624-9223 Facsimile(206)382-9752 [IRVCity DEVELOPMENTS CORP. 6 ,gg 4 Vti f iJd l riH l�,.� June 26, 1989 5) JUN271989f- Mr. Donald K. Erickson C l I U t CITY OF RENTON Department of Community Dev. Planning Div. 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Mr. Erickson: Today, I reread the City of Renton' s letters dated November 1st, November 7th and November 8th of 1988, as well as February 16th, June 8th and June 22nd of 1989 all dealing with Blackriver Corporate Park. As I have mentioned to you in the past it is not possible for First City Developments Corp. to continually police against hunting, multi-terrain vehicles, helicopters and trespassers. As you know, approximately a year ago we spent substantial amount of money to barracade and post the entire acreage. At that time we also solicited the support of the City of Renton Police Department to help patrol this area. I will, however, revisit the site within the next week with Jerry McCann of Continental Dirt and report back to you with what, from a practical standpoint, might be done to help reduce the ongoing illegal trespassing. Also, as you know, with the commencement of construction of Rivertech Associates three story building at the north end of Naches Road, there is another large area of the site that has been opened up for construction purposes that cannot be policed or controlled by First City Developments Corp. . Very truly yours, FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. Mark Miller Vice President Development MM:sp cc: Jeff Goltz �i CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor Planning Division June 22, 1989 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation Suite 4170 800 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Fencing at Black River Corporate Park Site Dear Mr. Miller: • Attached please find a,copy of a letter sent to you on June 8, 1989 by mail and as a "FAX" on June 9, 1989 regarding the above noted site. The letter indicated that you would have one week from June 8 to tell me how you intend to comply with the • conditions outlined in the letter. We are uncertain whether or not you received the letter since you have not yet responded and the deadline has expired. Therefore, in order to be certain that you receive a copy of the letter so that you have an opportunity to convey your intentions to comply with these conditions, today I am sending a copy of the June 8, 1989 letter to you by courier for delivery this date. You will have until 5:00 PM, June 27, 1989, to reply as requested before we begin enforcement action. • ely, • teit12- Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Terra Prodan, Department of Ecology Shorelands Management Section MS PV-11 Olympia, WA 98504-8711 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 - �� ^� ^-^-" �^ _ 121 SW 171 Street Seattle, Wa 98166 May 12, 1989 PLANNING DIVISION v ^^"`'~'~'~'^~'~'^ �[7�0�A�NTON Mr. David Schuman =^^ " °^ ^^^`'=` First City Equities ���� � �� ��A� ^800 Fifth Avenue - "�^mv a� ~, �°°� Seattle, WA 98104 y� /� �� R Y0 K� � UUi� V� i� Ul0 (� �� Dear Mr. Schuman and First City Equities, In January 1989 I first heard about the conflict over the use of wetlands containing a Heron Rookery in Renton for your Black River Corporate Park developments. I understand this discussion has been going on for several years; I was out of the U. S for two years' I have a keen con�cern and interest in land use use decisions and have chosen to use my personal time to follow selected issues and to speak my opinions to appropriate parties. It is in that spirit that I write to tell you that on March 11 1989 I visited the site with the Seattle Audubon Society. More ' than thirty of us learned the archaeology, history, wildlife habitat, drainage control , and recreational aspects of the area in question' I saw the results of actions taken to drain wetland water, to cut down large native trees, and to remove native plant habitats. I saw sketches of proposed building locations that do not appear to leave adequate buffer for the Heron Rookery. I believe that the proposed uses for the land by First City is in opposition to what I consider suitable use of this very important wetland, wildlife habitat, and historical site. I intend to join the groups and the individuals who are monitoring the City of Renton procedures for dealing with your proposals for this land I have entered my name as a Party of Record with the City; I am~ telling other people about the Heron Rookery, taking them to see it, and explaining the controversy about how land will be used. I would appreciate receiving a response from your company. Perhaps you can elaborate for me how your plans would include the Preservation of the aspects of this land that we citizens consider valuable. Sincerely Jean Sundborg � ' / / :. . . . ,.., cr • ‘ '89 02/08 17:54 ' FCDC SEATTLE • t • . • • '' . . . ......."-- •• — .• . PLANNING DIVISION ' - ......,.7 ... •., . .. . GUY OF RENTON • FEB • , EVE VE . 1 1989 . . : . . • . • .. • .,.: ..,.„,„. . • .. : ....,,,...;,„:„..„,,,,,, .. : .,..,.:.,,;i'3 it-e•P , . . ; , ..i::.• ..10...j•• •••:'........ 4:t. :41.....•:•#.•;;;•::..itei'•. :4s.,i)•:".. :.: ••,...,!,,.,!,,,T .:•• ii; j:k .‘de.;G;i'/;::•;"'•': .' , .tkd; 1 .tic, .:41. . . , 7v.„73v.,•-'" • .7. .,li 0§..;* 2,v, ! • i , • • , 1 )..... . •....:o'wo.-,04 :..,...40. r„,,. •• . . .... .. .. . TRANSIVIIIIAL. SLIP ' 44—Art,01401 ' .;•=4?'2.1'Ae.. 4i;•••'1111 .,k-...1.- 4% .••••••'•'; •••',..? .4 ,ppill;f4jrif,10•'''••• •1r m•••lj• .••S,4,•k.,,,...:.., :::,.,.!.4,y e..,),..1.... 4,P-STI,'W.k1.1%•••' :;,,,,4 .::. • • ' •.:,, ,„‘,..0',f•:7••!••••• .•• • J:.I..., . •• •. "r" '.. . ' ,I4Y 65 .eA4'. ,:. ....... ..4...f 4,:!• •• • .To •• • .• •4• . .: •-. ,,,.#4.....04:ei, stspri•,,, ,1,,.... .,,, .,,,t • • .. ..•••••,....,, :.v..,r04 wA , , .....e . ?t.,...... ,,,.. , . .,•.1,;,;•11 ,,.. f: '''..• ;4,::'.'.y.I.1....• Atid di••. e*'..,.N.ebiTtfiN,1 •• •. ••,.'i I.4:•!!:.. •'e: . ••• IWA'•••‘•'‘i.•, .1•1•+Kii lup.1,7,,... '• 4,flp 1.:' "":::'` 4.k.;./A•st!'n"•.7. •.N,....;;!„.........: :,..,....,,, • . Aj:....• • ••,, .1 •Itil:..... .N ,.... :4-•. - • •• .• ' ..:‘•0.: . , Date••••,..;:ii.:••• ..i.'410.1;', ' +' • " ' • .,„.. •,.,.. ,.*—...... .,.. . . plit.? ae . .1-rhos'attached liudadal.h.11. . ,.„,...1 .. • .? -'Y..: 3 •'' eCI:•0 41:a•••,I• ...:•:,,•.;••••.• A.'1:.;11if' .' ,.,",•lut. •.`• .,. u: •••••, • : ine ;vco 1•1 4. •4 .1• klArTV:MGM*d t.,-,„4:40,4 wWi ;.:',1-.•;c.i'••.• oce;$,15ti !050.itiposp!prn..,k,ts.i 1 ).•!7?0,,,IvtNkiFiqt-4..4.. ;• -.,.:,.,-, . . k ••• ••• "7,0 Eind fotun% 4'.F __,._. ..i.walWiligPRa* .. •• ..'.n...).ploase -,4.44.; .. .• • o!ttir.,aP0m .-7-' • , • , •./,a' : ' r.ON's'''''........'''.••l'‘•',..'li'4714:`,dt.',V,. ','er-1"'N.,••ni ,.' ; '-olimilatia ..,`14,:iPt..,,•<. •,'..;c4(t?:•;1•Ifie,.‘ , a . 14 "%.iii 0;Y-41:L. •_,,i,-,..749.c''.'•:;4-e::::1.(:', c: . por YOUr re*PG I ,1 ..• Itke:/;;41:fi:::5VT04,k,4' -44'1":4_,:ri;1.: %>•••4•;.: '• ••''• •-=•••:;?-5*W4i4Asr Z•1:.. ,n':40.*.clk, ••::65`.1 • .. ,-...1:::;444#4 : .'.4 . !.•ACISSK•1 KIP•e'''''''•Th.4".4 .:lotT. --:..17':-.-------makt4i,i . (i: .::;.i.%..,.:4-.,'.4... .-.•,. ,'77--.,,,,.,...,,,, ''''':;'•".•••''''. 1•• - • ----.,,,.%:.4.;.:kivrb,,,.:.' 1.,:.",-d'nc.c.4:,'... -4..-1.01.,...- *. f. .'.* .,?: • s . .. 4..,... :.i,,•10...!:, •A• • .. ; ..,kt......1. .-4,..-a• • ..q.•1". ..;.:.,,,,,....E.4,:x.p..iki..,t.:41-.:-.:;i- „i?:fi.,..... •4::.•:..,,,•,!;,',404...tir 1 v•''.'' •.•.:1';:.:...o.: ..,.,,,.: •;fr.•••'......Z,'''.•'k....• '•••. •P ,, .• , , .: . •,..• • "s. ••8::i iliti••••' . .., •.T.1!....1:.,,li,......•;;•:,..1.1..S.1. .•...' • : .''.• ' •t•4/.':'.:.k.:'•."•- I ml: .•-; . _Ltoo •••.:•••4''ri • . ' • 1.'•11' sl;•,•4 • .. '. • .••••• :•'.1.:,...1.;.!.:•:ii•v•?,4::‘,C;...izteljtt•414::•.:,:::. ..!,..,%::•;•::.•'g f.if..1•,...',7:_ !.' ' '''''',..•'.:13t.'1,:l , •' • ., fY4•1;.• •I'•• 1'4,..:. ", ...k.....::..(''..,..,i; ,., . .'" ::''•,::,..1.-•$,V; i 4..,‘. .•.. . . • •• :—• • •' • .4••• • ';%2A. .)...sioe.,. ,$141,0,,,..... . . I I . • . :.',•...1(1•44:!.Ae.iti life.::'tiV:,:: :.:.e••• .;... ,••..•A.1.4,i.. . 4. • "•.,l',..i yi,Fe zW"-•':••:..4,.:1' •I.••"" • - -...:•;•.;- •••'• •• itt,..32i.' • •• .' •V•••••..ed l'i:e'S'i. 4.:• • •,.r1131.1.:„,,...0.1. 4,ii•by,•1‘.4(4.,S..,•••• . 1.....,,,..,./.''.:•••,•' :',...;t::'''AI' ''•..Nitlict''4 1:#,A... ?!e..4.i•.• . •';'.';1.:• ••' •:•••••3!.....•;,i•V... , /0 .1 •/ IA." ": DeperiMint 7".g.'".'"•Is'•• • 03 COVB11 •''....,"; .. ' d•;:"0,... •.r.,''.d ' ad•I AICIVIS..;,; .• • itD g:Vii)44"11 ' ..;I 1 . ,) .71, •• . . • " •• . . . .. .. . i ••• . • • • . . i . L. _tHlILL u2 4 . BOND NO. 111 3264 3930 Black River Corporate Project Name: PREMIUM: $504.00--- Perk. (Phase V) City of Renton File No. y LANDSCAPE PERFORMANCE BOND First City Developments Corp. dba WHEREAS, ,First City Equities hereinafter refereed to as "the Principal, " has applied to the City of Renton, WA hereinafter referred to as "the City, " for Approval to defer completion Qf landscapin at t-o,-e,enre,tttmt the project known as Black River Cor orate Park, (Phase V) � • on a _site located at 1000-1100 0akesdale Ave, , S.W.-,• Renton WA , and WHEREAS, the City approved the requested action on December 23rd , 1988 , and WHEREAS'; the approval granted by the City and the provisions of the Renton Community Development Guide require certain improvments to be made in connection with construction of the project, which improvements are ,shown on the approved site plan and other required plans and as further defined by the. conditions identified in the City file, . NOW, THEREEoRE, the undersigned Principal and The America Insurance company , a corporation authorized to transact surety business in the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as "the Surety, " agree and bind themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, unto the City in the sum of Forty-Two Thousand and NOj1QOths----•-:-- ( $42,000.00---- ) , lawful money of the United States, according to the following terms and conditions: 1 ) In the event the Principal shall not have (a) completed • all improvements required by the above-referenced conditions, plans, and file within the time period specified, (b) paid all Gums owing 4 to contractors, suppliers or others as a result of •auch work for which a lien against any City property has arisen or may arise, and (c) obtained acceptance by the City of the project, sll on or before December 28 , 1989 , then the Surety shall, within twenty (20) days of demand of the City make a written commitment to the City that it will either (a) remedy the default itself with reasonable diligence pursuant to a time schedule acceptable to the City, or (b) tender to the City within an additional ten ( 10) days the amount necessary, as determined by the City, for the City to remedy the default, . up to the total bond amount. The Surety shall then fulfill its obligations under this bond. according to the option it has selected. If the Surety elects option (b) , then upon completion of the remedy the City shall notify the surety of the actual Cost of the remedy. The City shall return, without interest, any overpayment made by the Surety, and the Surety shall pay to the City any actual costs which exceeded the city' s estimate, limited to the bond amount. 2) If the Principal or Surety fails to complete the improvements as requested by the City, the City' s employees and agents are hereby authorized to enter onto said property and perform such work. This provision shall not be construed as creating an obligation on the part of the City or its representatives. 3) In the event any lawsuit is instituted to enforce the terms of this bond or to determine the rights of any party f • hereunder, the prevailing party in such litigations shall be entitled to recover from the losing party its costs, including reasonable attorneys ' fees, incurred AO q result of such lawsuit. 4) This bond ehall remain in full force and effect until the obligations secured hereby have been fully performed and a bond guaranteeing maintenance of all improvements for a period of G 1 ( I ) year (s ) from acceptance has been submitted to the City in an amount of not less than ten ( 10% ) percent of the cost of the improvements and in a form suitable to the City, and until released in writing by the . City at the request of the Surety or the Principal upon expiration of the period specified in paragraph 1 above, DATED this gjth day of December , 1988 • FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS {i0R_p. dba FTR$T CITY EO11lt1 ,$ (Principal) By: THE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY �J da.442e.,./.....-(Surety) By: 1 'rf�'x-c.c-C /-�` Renee G. Bassell - Attorney-in-Fact _ r- �+•+-U State of California O, December 27, 1988 ,before me, the undersigned, • }ss. a Notary Public,of said county and state, personally appeared County of San Francisco Renee C. Bassell _ and personally known to me to be the Attorney-in-Fact of , The American Insurance Co an the Corporation that executed the within instrument,and known to me to be the person who executed the said instrument on behalf of ""' ""'•"~«N+I•q.III„ooN; the Corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that such ,• Cf F F I C I A L SEAL Corporation executed the same. y !ii^! N. VYF S •-" ! 13a NOTARY PUBLICCALIFORNIA , = i CITY AND COUNTY OF CIS _ o'v My Comm SRN FRANCi 90 i �/� Commission eapirpg�y l5, i9pp -- 41..u0000uulN,.el.n.11lnfNnllq,p/pNp,NNfr.0 NOTARY PUBLIC 41 CITY OF RENTON .Y' t ..IL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION December 22 , 1988 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Black River Corporate Park Phase VII Administrative Appeal AAD-118-88 (Ref. File ECF; SA; SM-071-88) Dear Mr. Miller: Please be advised that there is a correction to the public hearing notice sent to you on December 19, 1988 because the determination, issued was a Determination of Significance rather than a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated as stated. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter and I regret any inconvenience this error may have caused you. neldjr. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp (Copies sent to Parties of Record on Page 2) 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 Mark Miller December 22, 1988 Page 2 cc: Robert Sieh • Edwards & Barbieri Attorneys At Law 6501 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Mary M. Anderson 13618 SE 180th Renton, WA 98058 Royce A. Berg LPN Architects 1127 Pine Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Tim Kraus Offices of Richard Arambune 505 Madison Street, Suite 209 Seattle, WA 98104 Muckleshoot Tribal Council c/o Morgan Bradley 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98002 Washington State Department of Ecology Gerald W. Marbett, King County Building and Land Division Gregory M. Bush, Metro Department of Wildlife Joe Robels, Department of Fisheries w► .° ? .4'ttCORRECTION NOTICE ?=< NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING • ARENTON HEARING EXAMINERJ' 4;-y ` AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION °'—RENTON,N, WILL '' rA PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY ' ;THE RENTON.HEARING EXAMINER IN . . Audrey Benner ?;COURTROOM #3 AT THE RENTON DIS- ,being first duly sworn on oath states TRICT'COURT'ON TUESDAY, JANUARY that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the ,'10;1989 AT 1:30 PM TO CONSIDER THE ••u;riv '_FIRSLC.)TY•{DEVELOPMENT,CORPO- ' VALLEY DAILY NEWS Appeal of specific conditions of a Determi- nation of Non-Significance-Mitigated Issued •: • Kent Edition • Renton Edition • Auburn Edition tEby the Environmental Review Committee IT for a 7 story office building known as Black Daily newspapers published six(6) times a week.That said newspapers River Corporate.Park Phase VII;:Adminis= 'trative Appeal#AAD-118-88,(Ref.file ECF; are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six ":'SA;;SM-o71-88).;Property located north of•; months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published :,SW 7th.Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW ; in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King ::'and west of Naches,Ayenue and east of the . +P`1 Channel.'--�. :,i,5;: ,:5:•.kt;j.t.,!ii::;;. ,.��.' Count Washington.The ValleyDailyNews has been ap proved g as a legal v,a".Legal:descriptions of the�files'noted . newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for s above •are on file.in the Renton Community King County. ;,Development Department •j;!•,•:;;,:.:,•; i .All interested persons to said petitions are,invited to be present at the public hear- .ing on'January 10, 1989,'at..1:30..PM to The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the Kent Edition ; express their opinions. '�::=1 "t;'.:,t;',• , Renton Edition x , Auburn Edition , (and not in =Published December 28, 1988 Valley Daily News R5171 Acct.051067 ;. supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers }: 'r.;a- .s-.;:t• during the below stated period.The annexed notice a 2 Notice of Public Hearing (Correction Notice) was published on December 28 , 1988 R5171 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the • sum of $ 21 . 28 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 10 t h day of .TA n„a ry19 89 Notary Public for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington.. VDN#87 Revised 11'86 1 %i 0 CITY OF RENTON ..LL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION December 19, 1988 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Black River Corporate Park Phase VII Administrative Appeal AAD-118-88 (Ref. File ECF; SA; SM-071-88) Dear Mr. Miller: A public hearing has been scheduled by the Renton Hearing Examiner in Courtroom #3 at the Renton District Court on Tuesday, January 10, 1989 at 1:30 PM to consider your appeal of specific conditions of the Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated issued by the Environmental Review Committee for the above noted project. All interested persons to said petition are invited to be present at the public hearing on January 10, 1989 at 1:30 PM to express their opinions. Should you have any questions or need additional information please contact my office at 235-2550 and talk with either myself or Jeannette Samek-McKague. nredir Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp (Copies sent to Parties of Record on Page 2) 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 - Mark Miller Black River Corp.,J= a Park Phase VII December 19, 1988 Page 2 cc: Robert Sieh Edwards & Barbieri Attorneys At Law 6501 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Mary M. Anderson 13618 SE 180th Renton, WA 98058 Royce A. Berg LPN Architects 1127 Pine Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Tim Kraus Offices of Richard Arambune 505 Madison Street, Suite 209 Seattle, WA 98104 Muckleshoot Tribal Council c/o Morgan Bradley 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98002 Washington State Department of Ecology Gerald W. Marbett, King County Building and Land Division Gregory M. Bush, Metro Department of Wildlife Joe Robels, Department of Fisheries • 51067 ,!._3 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING•; ;-'.1 .,r RENTON HEARING EXAMINER: ;'' :14 ;;> RENTON,WASHINGTON i. A PUBLIC'HEARING WILL BEHELD BC' !THE'RENTON HEARING EXAMINER COURTROOM #3`AT THE.'RENTON;DIS41.'` AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TRICT COURT ON TUESDAY,°JANUARY; '.; fr10, 1989''ATo1:.30}PM_TO CONSIpERiTHE'i':' Audrey Benner kFOLLOWING "" i� a�.1 • .k; being first duly sworn on oath states FIRST-CITYti DEVELOPMENT CORP04 that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the RATION r, „x,�•.,..��•ztt �- 1 � •:;: . �; j,,Appeal.of specific conditions of a Determi.{! nation'of Non-SIgnIficance-Mitigated issued by the,Environmental Review Committee '. VALLEY DAILY NEWS fora . orpor office buildingbuildiha known as Black : RlvertiCo 'ra�te''Park'•Phase VII;'Adminis�' • Kent Edition • Renton Edition • Auburn Edition trative Appea;#MD-118-88,(Ref:file ECF;" fSA; SW071-88):Property`located'north.of .SW ph Street and.Oakesdaie Avenue SW; Daily newspapers published six (6) times a week.That said newspapers andwest'of;Naches:Avenue,and east of�the'. are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six I?-1.'Ctaannel;:ts arj;Y�,.a? "¢ �,}ias months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published r h al?d@$cilptlons,Oehlie files' rioted•? are`oh file-ln'/the Rentpnpitnmunf i in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King IiDeveioPMertt Department:`F',"r4z *) ii•IX County,Washington.The Valley Daily News has been approved as a legal 3AII;Inleteeted:'persons;to'sald petitlonsi„ are lnve;1. bb`newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for n Na P ;g1nt etjthe.public hear=l j KingCount � 441Q= M o. Y� g • "�'•„� J a'ter:,rw� ,�c;{�;:-..r�S;i::t ezpress�tne.[tfbpin(oris'" 1Publistie -tebember-22; 1988`Valley The notice in the exact form attached was published in the Kent Edition Daily News R5163 Acct.1i51067;` Y1''` X DailGrR5163 Acct. ••,g ru•ia. c , Renton Edition , Auburn Edition , (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period.The annexed notice a Notice of Public Hearing was published on December 22_, 1988 R5163 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the • sum of $ 21 . 2 8 • • • Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3 0 th day of Dec 198 8 Nota ublic for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington. VDN#87 Revised 11%86 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING -EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER IN COURTROOM #3 AT THE RENTON DISTRICT COURT ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 10, 1989 AT 1: 30 PM TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Appeal of specific conditions of a Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated issued by the Environmental Review Committee for a 7 story office building known as Black River Corporate Park Phase VII, Administrative Appeal #AAD-118-88 , (Ref. file ECF; SA; SM-071-88) . Property located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue and east of the P-1 Channel. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Community Development Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 10, 1989 AT 1: 30 PM TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. Published: December 22, 1988 . OF R4• „ 0 z hiciTicia - o ' 09�r6O SEPI �OP City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner will hold a PUBLIC HEARING . in CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL ON JANUARY 10, 1989 BEGINNING AT _ °�A:-w-' 1 : 30 P.M. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AAD-118-88 CONCERNING: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION APPEAL OF SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF A DETERMINATION OF NON- SIGNIFANCE-MITIGATED ISSUED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE FOR A 7 STORY OFFICE BUILDING KNOWN AS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK PHASE VII (REF. FILE ,ECF; _SA;_SM-071-88) 4', ►T, EMPIRE WAY • 97, . • • �`� _ SW 7TH RENTON • • !+ BLA.CKRIVER` CORPORA?E FAo�Ry War PARK 405 4.00 DJ TO E SEA-TAC AIRPORT 4 MILES •- 0 LONGACRES , SOUTHCENTER : • .i•i.i: ; ,,:. • m i. j) tn • n n VALLEY m m GENERAL -< z HOSPITAL . GENESL Lo r1 IV A ®/OR J1K-12 . ��ss . PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. Y FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION o 1 HI') 4i 0CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION December 19, 1988 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Black River Corporate Park Phase VII Administrative Appeal AAD-118-88 (Ref. File ECF; SA; SM-071-88) Dear Mr. Miller: . A public hearing has been scheduled by the Renton Hearing Examiner in Courtroom #3 at the Renton District Court on Tuesday, January 10, 1989 at 1:30 PM to consider your appeal of specific conditions of the Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated issued by the , Environmental Review Committee for the above noted project. All interested persons to said petition are invited to be present at the public hearing on January 10, 1989 at 1: 30 PM to express their opinions. Should you have any questions or need additional information please contact my office at 235-2550 and talk with either myself or Jeannette Samek-McKague. S rely Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp (Copies sent to Parties of Record on Page 2) 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 ° Mark Miller Black River Corp tte Park Phase VII December 19, 1988 Page 2 cc: Robert Sieh Edwards & Barbieri Attorneys At Law 6501 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Mary M. Anderson 13618 SE 180th Renton, WA 98058 Royce A. Berg LPN Architects 1127 Pine Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Tim Kraus Offices of Richard Arambune 505 Madison Street, Suite 209 Seattle, WA 98104 Muckleshoot Tribal Council c/o Morgan Bradley 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98002 Washington State Department of Ecology Gerald W. Marbett, King County Building and Land Division Gregory M. Bush, Metro Department of Wildlife Joe Robels, Department of Fisheries City of Renton • Environmental Review Committee MEETING NOTICE DECEMBER 12, 1988 To: Larry Springer Mike Parness Ken Nyberg Ron Nelson Glen Gordon • From: Don Erickson, Secretary Meeting Date: December 14, 1988 Time: 10:00 AM • Location: Third Floor Conference Room Agenda attached below. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 14, 1988 Third Floor Conference Room Commencing at 10:00 AM TIME/KEY PARTICIPANTS NEW PROJECTS Airplane Paint Hangar Expansion/ "Camo" or 4-41 Building ECF-079-87 Application for the expansion of an existing paint hangar of approximately 7,000 sq. ft. to the Boeing 4-41 Building. These modifications include additional scaffolding and platforms for painting, HVAC systems, new hangar doors and increased structural support. The project is located in the Boeing Industrial Aircraft Center located south of Lake Washington, west of Park Avenue North, north of North 6th Street, and east of the Cedar River. DISCUSSION BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 (APPEAL OF DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE, SEE ATTACHED) Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285,000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 10:00 A.M. Renton Municipal Building December 14, 1988 3rd Floor Conference Room MINUTES ATTENDING: Ron Nelson, Building Director; Ken Nyberg, Acting Public Works Deputy Director; Mike Parness, Mayor's Administrative Assistant; Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator; Glen Gordon, Fire Prevention; Jeannette Samek-McKague; and Margaret Pullar, Secretary. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Mr. Nelson. NEW PROJECTS AIRPLANE PAINT HANGAR EXPANSION/"CAMO" OR 4-41 BUILDING ECF-079-87 Application for the expansion of an existing paint hangar of approximately 7,000 sq. ft. to the Boeing 4-41 Building. These modifications include additional scaffolding and platforms for painting, HVAC systems, new hangar doors and increased structural support. The project is located in the Boeing Industrial Aircraft Center located south of Lake Washington, west of Park Avenue North, north of North 6th Street, and east of the Cedar River. Discussion: Ms. McKague located the site and reviewed the proposal, including recommended conditions regarding the new filtering process to reduce impacts on air quality, the transportation and haul routes of the generated waste water, and the type and location of semi automatic valves located in the catch basins. She noted that concurrence is required from Metro and Department of Fisheries that the waste water will not contaminate the lake or river. Regarding the proposed valve, Mr. Parness suggested that these be required in the vicinity of the 4-41 building with a note in the conditions that further meetings with Boeing be scheduled to discuss long term use of these particular valve closures on the whole Boeing site since the City would like to see the Boeing plant upgraded over time to meet today's environmental standards. Mr. Gordon suggested that a screw-type gate valve is more effective and reliable that the proposed clapper valve. Discussion followed. Decision: Mr. Nelson made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nyberg, to issue a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with staff Condition Nos. 1, 2, and 4; changing Condition No. 3 to require the installation of semi-automatic valves, acceptable to the Public Works Department, in the vicinity of the 4-41 Building at the loading and unloading locations; adding a note that further discussions be scheduled with Boeing to talk about upgrading the catch basins and long term use of valve closures and the possibility of working with Metro and the City on a Transportation System Management Plan for the entire plant site; and, finally, a note that concurrence from Metro and Department of Fisheries regarding waste water contamination will be required as a part of the Shorelines Permit conditions. The motion carried. DISCUSSION - GENERAL APPEAL OF DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - PHASE VII Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285,000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue and east of the P-1 Channel. Discussion: Mr. Erickson advised that an appeal of the Determination of Significance issued by ERC was received by the Hearing Examiner on December 5, 1988. Mr. Erickson located the site, noted that the DS required a new EIS, and gave a brief history as to the reasons why this particular determination was made. These included the fact that the earlier EIS was program' atic for a M-P rezone (current zoning is O-P), that the earlier EIS discussed entirely different uses on this site (minimum 20% office), and the earlier EIS was now over eight (8) years old. He stated that he talked with the City Attorney who indicated he feels comfortable that the ERC acted appropriately. Everyone agreed that the determination was appropriate considering the history of the project. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:55 AM CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER Earl Clymer, Mayor Fred J. Kaufman a December 12 , 1988i PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON Jeffrey D. Goltz D DEC 12 1988 t1 LANE POWELL MOSS AND MILLER nl 2 Evergreen Plaza Building 711 Capitol Way Olympia, Washington 98501 Re: Administrative Appeal #AAD-118-88 ' First City Development Corportion/ Black River corporate Park (Phase VII) Dear Mr. Goltz : This is to confirm that the Environmental Appeal hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, January 10 , 1988 at 1: 30 P.M. in Courtroom #3 at the RENTON DISTRICT COURT (see location map attached) . The hearing will begin promptly at that time. This hearing will be limited to an exploration of the pertinent facts relating to your Appeal of the Environmental Review Committee ' s determination with respect to the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII application. No oth-r issues will be addressed at that time. If you have any questions regarding this hearing please contact this office. Sincerely, 7k:a j FRED J. RAUFMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJI/dk cc: Earl Clymer, Mayor Lawrence Warren, City Attorney Ikon Erickson, Zoning Administrator �N Members of the ERC. !r^ 1 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2593 scare Christine Gregoire AXXX a € cxx v :' �� Director �Hi 1889 aOy PLANNING DIVISION STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY DEC, 12 1988 Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-E 0 2 (� O n(� (� J December 9, 1988 �C L,C �I/ �C, Mr. Donald Erickson City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Erickson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment during the scoping process for the Black River Corporate Park, Phase 7. We would like to commend the City for the decision to do an en- vironmental impact statement on this project. In addition, we would like to submit the following comments: The checklist does not mention the wetlands which exist on the site. Please note question 3 .a. 1 (Water, Surface) of the checklist, which asks, "Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands) ?" The SEPA process cannot be adequately utilized by local governments, other agencies, and the public unless the checklist is carefully and accurately filled out. There are, in fact, wetlands on the project site. These wetlands were documented by the City of Renton's wetland study (1981) and substantiated by the Department of Ecology (field study and letter from Mary Burg, wetlands ecologist, April 27, 1987) . These wetlands are associated with Springbrook Creek and the Black River. The checklist states, "all fill and excavation will be con- ducted outside of wetlands" . This seems to be in conflict with the above cited report on Renton wetlands, which shows the area as an emergent wetland. It has been suggested that this wetland could perform important functions such as storm- water filtration, open space, and habitat. We are curious as to why these uses were not included in the site planning. Virtually the entire site is proposed to be building or im- pervious surface. We would like to see some redesign done to incorporate the wetland into the development, and preserve its functions and values. "No net loss" is the policy of the Puget Sound Water EB>3 •` Letter to Mr. Erickson December 9, 1988 Page 2 Quality Authority and this should be perpetuated to the greatest extent possible in the Puget Sound area. This is particularly important in areas like the Green River Valley where over 90% of the wetlands have been lost. If you have any questions, please call Ms. Terra Prodan of the Shorelands Program at (206) 438-7106. Sincerely, Barbara J. Ritchie Environmental Review Section BJR: cc: Linda Rankin, Shorelands 0 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER Earl Clymer, Mayor Fred J. Kaufman December 7, 1988 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON Members of the ERC D EC 8 1988 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South _ MO V I J Renton, Washington 98055 Re: First City Development Corporation Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII) Gentlemen: This office has received an appeal of your determination in the above entitled matter and will schedule this item in due course. Please forward all relevant information regarding this matter to this office not later than Friday, December 23, 1988. If this office can be of any further assistance please feel free to write. Sincerely, FRED J. IMJFMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK/dk cc: Earl Clymer, Mayor Lawrence Warren, City Attorney Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator City Clerk 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2593 • LAW OFFICES LANE POWELL MOSS & MILLER A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING -�;j 711 CAPITOL WAY RECE®V t OLYMPIA,WASHINGTON 98501 (2061 754-6001 DEC -5 1988 JEFFREY D. GOLTZ Ci T Y OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER December 5 , 1988 Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: First City Development Corporation, Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII) Dear Sir: Enclosed for filing are the original and one copy of the Notice of Appeal of Determination of Significance in this matter, along with our check in the amount of $75. 00 to cover the appeal fee. Very truly yours, DWELL MOSS & MILLER 1A4 / Je y D. Goltz t JDG/j JDG0127 Enclosures cc: Donald Erickson, City of Renton (w/enclosure) Mark Miller, FCDC (w/enclosure) SEATTLE.WASHINGTON ANCHORAGE.ALASKA BELLEVUE.WASHINGTON MOUNT VERNON.WASHINGTON LONDON.ENGLAND 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 BEFORE THE HEARING. EXAMINER 8 CITY OF RENTON 9 In the Matter of First City ) NOTICE OF APPEAL OF 10 Development Corporation ) DETERMINATION OF File Numbers: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 ) SIGNIFICANCE 11 12 I. APPEAL 13 Pursuant to RMC 4-2823 , First City Development Corporation _. 14 appeals the Determination of Significance (DS) issued by the 15 Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton (ERC) on 16 November 16, 1988 , and published on November 21, 1988 . A copy 17 of that DS is attached as Exhibit 1. 18 II . APPELLANT 19 Appellant is First City Development Corporation (FCDC) . 20 The person authorized by FCDC to receive official notices 21 regarding this appeal is: 22 Mark Miller Vice President for Development 23 First City Development Corporation Suite 4170 24 800 Fifth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 25 (206) 624-9223 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 1 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA.WASHINGTON 98501 Q08)7546001 1 The attorney representing FCDC in this appeal is: 2 Jeffrey D. Goltz Lane Powell Moss & Miller 3 The Evergreen Plaza Building 711 Capitol Way 4 Olympia, Washington 98504 (206 ) 754-6001 5 FCDC requests that notices of any hearings or other 6 proceedings in this matter be sent to both Mr. Miller and Mr. 7 Goltz . 8 II . STATEMENT OF FACTS 9 2.1 . In 1979 and 1980 , First City Equities (now FCDC) filed 10 applications for various permits for development of the 11 Earlington Park Site, which consisted of 109 . 31 acres bounded by 12 Powell Avenue S.W. on the east, Grady Way on the south, the then 13 proposed Valley Parkway on the west, the Black River Riparian 14 Forest on the north, and S.W. 7th Avenue on the south and east. 15 First City Equities also sought a rezone of the site from M-P 16 (Manufacturing Park) to G (General Classification District) . 17 2 . 2. As part of the development plan for the overall Black 18 River Area, including Earlington Park, FCDC conveyed substantial 19 property to the City as mitigation for any adverse impacts 20 caused by such developments. This conveyance was for a number . 21 of purposes, including greenbelt and riparian forest preser- 22 vation and drainage. 23 2 . 3 . In conjunction of these permit applications, the City 24 of Renton required an environmental impact statement (EIS) to be 25 prepared. The draft EIS, entitled "DEIS Earlington Park" , was 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 2 711 CAPITOL WAV OLYMPIA.WASHINGTON 98501 2061 754-6001 1 prepared for the City of Renton Planning Department and 2 published in July 1980 . 3 2 .4. That DEIS provided the City with information on which 4 it was to base its decisions on the various permit applications 5 pending before the City, including information on impacts on 6 traffic; hydrology; wetlands; wildlife; water quality; surface 7 water runoff; flora and fauna; light, glare, and noise; traffic 8 impacts; and all other subjects required to be considered by the 9 City and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the 10 regulations promulgated thereunder. 11 2 .5. The Black River Corporate Park, Phase VII (Phase VII) , 12 which is the subject of the DS here at issue, was part of the ' 13 Earlington Park development. 14 2. 6 . A Final EIS (FEIS) was published in February 1981. 15 2 . 7 . The environmental impacts of Phase VII were analyzed 16 in the Earlington Park DEIS and FEIS. 17 2 .8 . Since the publishing of the Earlington Park EIS, a 18 heron rookery was established in the Black River area, near the 19 Phase VII site. That EIS therefore did not address thoroughly 20 and specifically the impact of the office park on the heron 21 rookery. 22 2.9. The Phase VII project was not constructed immediately 23 following the publication of the Earlington Park FEIS for 24 several reasons, including the lack of completion of the 25 Oakesdale LID by the City of Renton. 26 2.10 . On August 3 , 1988, FCDC filed with the Planning LANE POWELL MOSS 6&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 3 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA,WASHINGTON 98501 (206)754-6001 1 Department a new application for a site plan approval, a 2 shoreline substantial development permit, and a grade and fill 3 permit for the Phase VII project. 4 2.11. In conjunction with the applications, FCDC filed an 5 environmental checklist which referenced the earlier Earlington 6 Park EIS. 7 2.12 . The information necessary for the City to evaluate 8 the environmental impact of the proposed Office Park is 9 contained; in preexisting environmental documents, particularly 10 the jlington Park EIS. To the extent that additional 11 environnmental information is necessary, that information should 12 be obtained through either a Supplemental EIS (SEIS) or an 13 addendum to the Earlington Park EIS, not a new EIS as seemingly 14 contemplated by the DS. 15 2 . 13 . The substantial rights of FCDC are prejudiced by the 16 DS as issued by the ERC in that it appears that FCDC must bear 17 the cost of the preparation of a totally new EIS covering a 18 broad scope of issues already analyzed in earlier environmental 19 documents. FCDC will suffer financial harm to the extent that 20 the environmental review process delays construction of the 21 project. 22 III. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR 23 In issuing the DS, the ERC committed error in the following 24 respects: 25 3 .1. The decision in the DS is clearly erroneous, arbitrary 26 and capricious, affected by error of law; beyond the authority LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 4 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA,WASHINGTON 98501 (206)754-6001 1 of the ERC; in violation of FCDC's constitutional rights; and 2 otherwise erroneous in that: 3 3 .1.1. It purports to expand the scope of the 4 environmental analysis to those areas already covered by 5 existing documents prior to the formal EIS scoping process; 6 and 7 3 . 1 .2. It purports to force FCDC to finance and 8 conduct an environmental analysis beyond an SEIS relating 9 to the heron rookery near the site. 10 3 . 2 . The DS was made upon unlawful procedure in that: 11 3 . 2 .1 . The ERC failed to serve a copy of the DS on 12 FCDC as required by WAC 197-11-360; 13 3 . 2 . 2. The ERC should not have commenced a scoping 14 process because only an SETS was required; and 15 3 . 2. 3 . Even if the decision to commence a scoping 16 process was within the discretion of the ERC, the ERC 17 attempted to define too broadly the scope of the EIS prior 18 to the commencement of the formal scoping process. 19 IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF 20 FCDC requests relief as follows: 21 4.1. The Hearing Examiner reverse the decision of the ERC 22 to identify in the DS, and prior to the formal scoping process, 23 areas for discussion in the EIS other than those relating to the 24 presence of the heron rookery near the site. 25 4. 2 . In the alternative, the Hearing Examiner should remand 26 the DS back to the ERC for further limitation and definition of LANE POWELL MOSS S.MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 5 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA,WASHINGTON 98501 (206)754.6001 1 those potential environmental impacts of the proposed project 2 which must be discussed in a Supplemental EIS. 3 4.3 . To the extent that the ERC has determined that a new 4 EIS is required (as opposed to an SEIS) , the Hearing Examiner 5 should reverse the ERC and declare that only a Supplement need 6 be prepared. 7 4.4. The Hearing Examiner should grant any other relief it 8 deems appropriate which is authorized by law. 9 Dated this 5th day of December, 1988. 10 Respectfully submitted, 11 LAN OWELL MOSS & MILLER 12 13 c , / � J ey D. Goltz le 14 Att neys for FCDC ,5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 6 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA.WASHINGTON 98501 Q061 7546001 EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF EIS File Numbers: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Description of DrQnoeal: Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285,000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. proponent: Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Location of_proposal: North of SW 7th Street and oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Neches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. EIS required. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.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: 1) ground hydrology and nearby wetlands; 2) water quality, particularly in regard to the rapacity of the existing drainage ditch to handle runoff from the sits as well as that of the plus or minus thirty (30) acres of impervious surfaces to the southeast of the site; 3) flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the Heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species, whether plant or animal; 4) light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife species (including Heron) ; and 5) traffic impacts. 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 or other approvals that may be required. Your commments must be submitted in writing and received before December 12, 1988.:._ Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee c/o Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 206-235-2550 Appeal: You may appeal this determination of significance in writing pursuant to RMC-4-3016 accompanied by a $75.00 appeal fee no later than 5:00 PM, December 5, 1988, to: Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. to Determination of Significance Request for Comments on Scope of EIS Black River Corporate Park w Phase VII Page 2 publication Date: November 21, 1988 pate of Decisions November 1/ 1988 f� } Ronald G. Nelson ' 1.1 nger Building Dirr - or anni . Ma agar � � idI/" fiiiiiimiV ir" Ny,e ,-� Acting a • eat. • > ; -igighk CITE OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER Earl Clymer, Mayor Fred J. Kaufman December 7, 1988 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON DEC 8 1988 Jeffrey D. Goltz r(a E 1 nn LANE POWELL MOSS & MILLER l� Evergreen Plaza Building 711 Capitol Way Olympia, Washington 98501 Re: First City Development Corporation Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII) Dear Mr. Goltz Your appeal filed in the above entitled matter has been accepted. Once we have scheduled an appeal date we will notify you. If this office can be of any further assistance please feel free to write. Sincerely, FRED J...-KAUFMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK/dk cc: Earl Clymer, Mayor ;,awrence Warren, City Attorney ✓Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator City Clerk Members of the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2593 �j h -: METRO Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Exchange Building • 821 Second Ave. • Seattle,WA 98104-1598 December 5, 1988 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON DEC ? 1988 r Environmental Review Committee Juout L c/o Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Determination of Significance File No. : ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Black River Corporate Park Phase VII Dear Environmental Review Committee: Metro staff has reviewed this proposal and anticipates no [significant impacts to its wastewater facilities or public transportation services. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Sincerely, Gregory M. Bush, Manager Environmental Planning Division GMB:wsg 1.411 ' LAW OFFICES LANE POWELL MOSS & MILLER A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING 711 CAPITOL WAY OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98501 1206)754-6001 JEFFREY D. GOLTZ PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON -� D EC 6 1988 December 5, 1988 (� Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: First City Development Corporation, Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII ) Dear Sir: Enclosed for filing are the original and one copy of the Notice of Appeal of Determination of Significance in this matter, along with our check in the amount of $75 . 00 to cover the appeal fee. Very truly yours, AN OWELL MOSS & MILLER IA II.) -4(40 Je y D. Goltz t JDG/j JDG0127 Enclosures cc: Donald Erickson, City of Renton (w/enclosure) Mark Miller, FCDC (w/enclosure) SEATTLE.WASHINGTON ANCW)RA GE ALASKA BELL.EVUE.WASHINGTON MOUNT VFPMON.WASHINGTON 'ONP)ON Ft If:. f It 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 BEFQRE THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON 9 In the Matter of First City ) NOTICE OF APPEAL OF 10 Development Corporation ) DETERMINATION OF File Numbers: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 SIGNIFICANCE 11 • 12 I. APPEAL 13 Pursuant to RMC 4-2823 , First City Development Corporation 14 appeals the Determination of Significance (DS) issued by the 15 Environmental Review Committee of the City of Renton (ERC) on 16 November 16, 1988, and published on November 21, 1988. A copy 17 of that DS is attached as Exhibit 1. 18 II. APPELLANT 19 Appellant is First City Development Corporation (FCDC) . 20 The person authorized by FCDC. to receive official notices 21 regarding this appeal is: 22 Mark Miller Vice President for Development 23 First City Development Corporation Suite 4170 24 800 Fifth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 25 (206) 624-9223 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING u DETERMIN TI^N OF F7ECNTFIC xy^E - I 711 CAPITn!'M' OLYMPIA.WASHINGTON 98b01 1 The attorney representing FCDC in this appeal is: 2 Jeffrey D. Goltz Lane Powell Moss & Miller 3 The Evergreen Plaza Building 711 Capitol Way 4 Olympia, Washington 98504 (206) 754-6001 5 FCDC requests that notices of any hearings or other 6 proceedings in this matter be sent to both Mr. Miller and Mr. 7 Goltz. 8 II. STATEMENT OF FACTS 9 2.1. In 1979 and 1980, First City Equities (now FCDC) filed 10 applications for various permits for development of the 11 Earlington Park Site, which consisted of 109. 31 . acres bounded by 12 Powell Avenue S.W. on the east, Grady Way on the south, the then 13 proposed Valley Parkway on the west, the Black River Riparian 14 Forest on the north, and S.W. 7th Avenue on the south and east. 15 First City Equities also sought a rezone of the site from M-P 16 (Manufacturing Park) to G (General Classification District) . 17 2.2. As part of the development plan for the overall Black 18 River Area, including Earlington Park, FCDC conveyed substantial 19 property to the City as mitigation for any adverse impacts 20 caused by such developments. This conveyance was for a number 21 of purposes, including greenbelt and riparian forest preser- 22 vation and drainage. 23 2. 3 . In conjunction of these permit applications, the City 24 of Renton required an environmental impact statement (EIS) to be 25 prepared. The draft EIS, entitled "DEIS Earlington Park" , was 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 2 711 CAPITOL WAY - OLYMPIA,WASHING ON 98501 (206)754-6001 1 prepared for the City of Renton Planning Department and 2 published in July 1980. 3 2.4. That DEIS provided the City with information on which 4 it was to base its decisions on the various permit applications 5 pending before the City, including information on impacts on 6 traffic; hydrology; wetlands; wildlife; water quality; surface 7 water runoff; flora and fauna; light, glare, and noise; traffic 8 impacts; and all other subjects required to be considered by the 9 City and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the 10 regulations promulgated thereunder. 11 2.5. The Black River Corporate Park, Phase VII (Phase VII) , 12 which is the subject of the DS here at issue, was part of the 13 Earlington Park development. 14 2.6. A Final EIS (FEIS) was published in February 1981. 15 2 . 7. The environmental impacts of Phase VII were analyzed 16 in the Earlington Park DEIS and FEIS. 17 2.8. Since the publishing of the Earlington Park EIS, a 18 heron rookery was established in the Black River area, near the 19 Phase VII site. That EIS therefore did not address thoroughly 20 and specifically the impact of the office park on the heron 21 rookery. 22 2 .9. The Phase VII project was not constructed immediately 23 following the publication of the Earlington Park FEIS for 24 several reasons, including the lack of completion of the 25 Oakesdale LID by the City of Renton. 26 2.10. On August 3, 1988, FCDC filed with the Planning /� LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDP'C " L�:MINA'T IuN Ur SiGNIFLCANUE - :3 71I CAR 1O, iA 1 of the ERC; in violation of FCDC's constitutional rights; . and 2 otherwise erroneous in that: 3 3.1.1. It purports to expand the scope of the 4 environmental analysis to those areas already covered by 5 existing documents prior to the formal EIS scoping p g process; 6 and 7 3 .1. 2. It purports to force FCDC to finance and 8 conduct an environmental analysis beyond an SEIS relating 9 to the heron rookery near the site. 10 3 . 2 . The DS was made upon unlawful procedure in that: 11 3 . 2.1 . The ERC failed to `serve a copy of the DS on 12 FCDC as required by WAC 197-11-360; 13 3 . 2. 2. The ERC should not have commenced a scoping 14 process because only an SEIS was required; and 15 3 . 2.3. Even if the decision to commence a scoping 16 process was within the discretion of the ERC, the ERC 17 attempted to define too broadly the scope of the EIS prior 18 to the commencement of the formal scoping process. 19 IV. REQUEST FOR RELIEF 20 FCDC requests relief as follows: 21 4.1. The Hearing Examiner reverse the decision of the ERC 22 to identify in the DS, and prior to the formal scoping process, 23 areas for discussion in the EIS other than those relating to the 24 presence of the heron rookery near the site. 25 4. 2. In the alternative, the Hearing Examiner should remand 26 the DS back to the ERC for further limitation and definition of LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 5 711 CAPITOL WAY I OLYMPIA.WASHINGTON 98501 (206)754-6001 1I • 1 those potential environmental impacts of the proposked project 2 which must be discussed in a Supplemental EIS. 3 4.3. To the extent that the ERC has determined that a new 4 EIS is required (as opposed to an SEIS) , the Hearing Examiner 5 should reverse the ERC and declare that only a Supplement need 6 be prepared. 7 4.4 . The Hearing Examiner should grant any other relief it 8 deems appropriate which is authorized by law. 9 Dated this 5th day of December, 1988. 10 Respectfully submitted, 11 LAN OWELL MOSS & MILLER 12 1.1 13 J ey D. Goltz AG 14 Att neys for FCDC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 LANE POWELL MOSS&MILLER NOTICE OF APPEAL OF EVERGREEN PLAZA BUILDING DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - 6 711 CAPITOL WAY I i OLYMPIA,WASHINGTON 98501 1 1706''54.60" EXHIBIT 1 • CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION or SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OP EIS File Numbers: ECF;SA:SM-071-88 Description of Proposal: Application for sits plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285,000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Proponent: Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Location of proposal: North of SW 7th Street and - oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Neches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. EIS required. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030(2) (a) 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: 1) ground hydrology and nearby wetlands; 2) water quality, particularly in regard to the capacity of the existing drainage ditch to handle runoff. from the site as well as that of the plus or minus thirty (30) acres of impervious surfaces to .the southeast of the site; 3) flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the Heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species, whether plant or animal; 4) light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife species. (including Heron) ;• and 5) traffic impacts. 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 or other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before December 12, 1988. Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee c/o Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 206-235-2550 Appeal: You may appeal this determination of significpnce in writing pursuant to RMC-4-3016accompanied by a $75.00 appeal fee no later than 5:00 PM, December 5, 1988, to: Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals° Determination of Significance Request for Comments on Scope of EIS Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Page 2 Publication Date: November 21, 1988 Date of Decision: November 1 . 1988 Pj‘t9-1/------- Alp , Ronald G. Nelson nger Building Dirt . or • anni . Ma agar iglie: „-- Nybe .rP- Acting -- . c • 'PQot. ti CITY OF RENTON ..LL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION November 22, 1988 Muckleshoot Tribal Council c/o Morgan Bradley 39015 172nd•.Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98002 Re: Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII. ECF; SA; SM-071-88 Dear Mr. Bradley: Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Determination of Significance for the above referenced project. • If you have any questions, please call me at 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 ® CITY OF RENTON NAL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION November 21, 1988 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section Mail Stop PV-11 Olympia, WA 98504 Re: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith are copies of Environmental Determinations issued on November 16, 1988: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED EASTWAY CENTER - THE LEITZKE ARCHITECTS ECF;SA;SP-102-88 Applicant is seeking: 1) site plan approval to construct a commercial center to replace and expand upon an existing commercial structure; and 2) a special permit to prepare the parcel for new construction. The property is located at 3901 NE 4th Street. The fifteen (15) day comment period for this project will end on December 6, 1988. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize it's Determination unless comments.received require a reevaluation. Following the finalization of the Determination, there is a required 14 day appeal period. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE . /BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow the construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285,000 sq.ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 1 Environmental Determinations November 17, 1988 Page 2 Further information regarding this action is available in the Community Development Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Agencies, affected • tribes and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS (see attached scoping notice). Comments must be submitted to the City of Renton by 5:00 p.m. on December 12, 1988. If you have questions, please call Jeanette Samek-McKague or me at 235-2550. S' ely, Donal . Erickso , AICP Zoning Administrator cc: Mr. Gerald W. Marbett, King County Bldg. & Land Division Mr. Gregory M. Bush, Metro Department of Wildlife Mr. Joe Robels, Department of Fisheries DKE:mjp NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION "NV!RONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Public Notice RENTON,WASHINGTON P-1 Channel. The Environmental Review Committee Further information regarding this action (FRC)has issued a Determination of Signif- is available in the Community Development Ice for the following project: Department, Municipal Building, Renton, SLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - Washington, 235-2550, Agencies, tribes, PHASE VII(ECF;SA;SM-071-88) and members of the public are invited to Application for site plan approval and comment on the scope of the EIS. Corn- shorelines substantial development permit ments must be submitted to the City of to allow construction of a 7 story office Renton by 5 p.m.on December 12, 1988. building with approximately 285,000 sq. ft. Any appeal of the ERC action must be of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Deten- filed with the Rentor. Hearing Examiner by tion Pond. Project located north of SW 7th 5 p.m.on December 5, 1988. Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and Published November 21, 1988 Valley Daily west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the News R5149 Acct.#51067 � d �Hi a I . AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Audrey Benner ,being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the VALLEY DAILY NEWS • Kent Edition • Renton Edition • Auburn Edition Daily newspapers published six (6)times a week.That said newspapers are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King County,Washington.The Valley Daily News has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the Kent Edition , Renton Edition x , Auburn Edition , (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period.The annexed notice a Public Notice was published on November 21, 1988 R5149 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $ 25 . 60 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2 9.t hday of Nov 19 88 Notary46dblic for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington. VDN#87 Revised 11/86 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued. a Determination of Significance for the following project: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285, 000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. Further information regarding this action is available in the Community Development Department, Municipal Buildling, Renton, Washington, 235-2550, Agencies, tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. Comments must be submitted to the City of Renton by 5 p.m. on -December 12, 1988. Any appeal of the ERC action must be filed with the Renton Hearing Examiner by 5 p.m. on December 5, 1988. Published: November 21, 1988 CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF EIS File Numbers: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Description of proposal : Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow construction of a 7 story office building with approximately 285, 000 sq. ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Proponent: Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII - Location of proposal : North of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. EIS required. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43 . 21C. 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 : 1) ground hydrology and nearby wetlands; 2) water quality, particularly in regard to the capacity of the existing drainage ditch to handle runoff from the site as well as that of the plus or minus thirty (30) acres of impervious surfaces to the southeast of the site; 3) flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the Heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species, whether plant or animal ; 4) light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife species (including Heron) ; and '5) traffic impacts. 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 or other approvals that may be required. Your commments must be submitted in writing and received before December 12 , 1988 . Responsible Official : Environmental Review Committee c/o Donald K. Erickson Zoning Administrator Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 206-235-2550 Appeal : You may appeal this determination of significance in writing pursuant to RMC-4-3016 accompanied by a $75. 00 appeal fee no later than 5 : 00 PM, December 5, 1988 , to: Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. - . Determination of Significance Request for Comments on Scope of EIS Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Page 2 Publication Date: November 21, 1988 Date of Decision: November 1 , 1988 . G Ronald G.. Nelson L nger Building Dir or anni Ma ager Nybe g Acting is • es—Direct I ' Am, :Gd NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION ;;1 APPLICATION NO. ECF-071-88, SA-071-88, SM-071-88 APPLICANT BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK — PHASE VII rl !kf PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION • OF A 7 STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROXIMATELY 285,000 SQ. FT. • OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS • NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS- OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. • THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (E.R.C.) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION } ><I DOES DOES NOT t HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. •"J AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT • tj< WILL WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. THE CITY OF RENTON WILL NOT ACT ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE BELOW. COMMENTS MUST. BE RECEIVED BY '''A AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., DECEMBER 5, 1988 FOR FURTHER ,INFORMATION, CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON . 4 PLANNING DIVISION AT 235-2550. 7 '. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE > ';! WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION. • CERTIFICATION JERRY F. LIND , HEREBY CERTIFY THAT SIX (6) COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT WERE POSTED BY ME IN SIX (6) CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON OR NEARBY THE DESCRIBED PROPERTY ON NOVEMBER 23, 1988 ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public n and for the State of Washington residing in KC-10 tnV`� , on the2S Mp SIGNED : c}�, day of vim} \c)\ (i &-'"2Qe, N OT E ENviRoNmENTAL DECLARATION APPLICATION NO. ECF-071-88, SA-071-88, SM-071-88 APPLICANT BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - PHASE VII PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A 7 STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROXIMATELY 285, 000 SQ. FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (E.R.C.) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION NI DOES DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT WILL WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. THE CITY OF RENTON WILL NOT ACT ON THIS PROPOSAL FOR 15 DAYS FROM THE DATE BELOW. COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., DECEMBER 5, 1988 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION AT 235-2550. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION. 41, ® CITY OF RENTON oilk DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION November 18, 1988 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 RE: Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Dear Mr. Miller: This letter is to inform you that the Environmental Review Committee completed their review of the environmental impacts of your Site Plan approval request for property located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-i Channel. The Committee on November 16, 1988 decided to issue a Determination of Significance because of unanswered questions regarding the following impacts of the proposed development on: ground hydrology and nearby wetlands; water quality, particularly in regard to the capacity of the existing drainage ditch to handle runoff from the site as well as that of the plus or minus thirty (30) acres of impervious surfaces to the southeast of the site; flora and fauna, particularly in regard to the Heron and other waterfowl in the area and sources of food for these species whether plant or animal; light, glare, and noise as it potentially affects wildlife species; and traffic impacts. Because the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance, an official scoping notice is being circulated. There is a twenty-one (21) day comment period during which comments are solicited from various agencies, jurisdictions or individuals who may have an interest in the Committee's decision. The comment period will end December 12, 1988. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize it's selection of appropriate consulting firms to prepare the required Environmental Impact Statement on the project and coordinate the final selection with the applicant. 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 You may appeal this Determination of Significance in writing pursuant to RMC-4-3016 accompanied by a $75.00 appeal fee no later than 5: 00 PM, December 5, 1988, to: Renton Hearing Examiner 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call our office at 235-2550 and ask for myself or Jeannette Samek-McKague. For the Environmental Review Committee, C7Iriljta, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:mjp cc: Tim Krause Office of Richard Arambune 505 Madison Street, Suite 209 Seattle, WA 98104 Royce A. Berg LPN Architects 1127 Pine Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 • City of Renton Technical Advisory Committee MEETING NOTICE November 14, 1988 To: Nancy Laswell Morris Don Monaghan Steve Baima John Morris Gary Norris Rick Stoddard From: Don Erickson, Chairman Meeting Date: November 16, 1988 Time: 8:30 a.m. Location: Third Floor Conference Room Agenda is attached below. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA November 16, 1988 Third Floor Conference Room Commencing at 8:30 a.m. TIME/KEY PARTICIPANTS NEW PROJECTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK- PHASE VII jECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow the construction of a 7-story office building with approximately 285,000 sq.ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. FORREST CRESTE APARTMENTS DOMINION DEVELOPMENT ECF;SA;R-093-88 The applicant proposes to rezone the site from G-1 to R-3 and build approximately 200 apartment units on 11.73 acres. Project located east of Duvall Avenue and South of Park Terrace (NE corner of Duvall Avenue and SE 124th Street (extended). SW 10-23 N5E Technical Advisory Comi.....zv Agenda November 16, 1988 EASTWAY CENTER THE LEITZKE ARCHITECTS ECF;SA;SP-102-88 Applicant is seeking: 1) site plan approval to construct a commercial center to replace and expand upon an existing commercial structure; and 2) a special permit to prepare the parcel for new construction. The property is zoned for commercial development. The property is located at 3901 NE 4th Street. WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING STUDY - CITY OF RENTON/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ECF-115-88 Study evaluating current waste collection, approaches to waste reduction and recycling, policy issues and recommended recycling program to be incorporated into the City's Solid Waste Management Plan. Location - city wide. • City of Renton Environmental Review Committee MEETING NOTICE NOVEMBER 14, 1988 To: Larry Springer Mike Parness Ken Nyberg Ron Nelson Glen Gordon From: Don Erickson, Secretary Meeting Date: November 16, 1988 Time: 10:00 AM Location: Third Floor Conference Room Agenda attached below. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA NOVEMBER 16 1988 Third Floor Conference Room Commencing at 10:00 AM TIME/KEY PARTICIPANTS DISCUSSION • P-1/P-9 VALLEY IMPROVEMENT/WETLAND IMPACT -- STATUS REPORT NEW PROJECTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow the construction of a 7-story office building with approximately 285,000 sy.ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. FORREST CRESTE APARTMENTS DOMINION DEVELOPMENT ECF;SA;R-093-88 • The applicant proposes to rezone the site from G-1 to R-3 and build approximately 200 apartment units on 11.73 acres. Project located east of Duvall Avenue and South of Park Terrace (NE corner of Duvall Avenue and SE 124th Street (extended). SW10-23 N5E Y •'Environmental Review Committee 1111 Meeting Notice and Agenda 10:00 AM, Third Floor Conference Room EASTWAY CENTER THE LEITZKE ARCHITECTS ECF;SA;SP-102-88 Applicant is seeking: 1) site plan approval to construct a commercial center to replace and expand upon an existing commercial structure; and 2) a special permit to prepare the parcel for new construction. The property is zoned for commercial development. The property is located at 3901 NE 4th Street. WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING STUDY CITY OF RENTON/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ECF-115-88 Study evaluating current waste collection, approaches to waste reduction and recycling, policy issues and recommended recycling program to be incorporated into the City's Solid Waste Management Plan. Location - city wide. 11. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE 10:00 A.M. Renton Municipal Building November 16, 1988 3rd Floor Conference Room MINUTES ATTENDING: Ron Nelson, Building Director; Larry Springer, Planning Manager; Ken Nyberg, Acting Public Works Deputy Director; Mike Parness, Mayor's Administrative Assistant; Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator; Jeannette Samek-McKague, Senior Planner; Steve Baima, Fire Prevention; Margaret Pullar, Secretary. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Mr. Nelson. DISCUSSION - GENERAL E&H PROPERTIES - TEMPORARY SURFACE PARKING LOT ECF;SA-108-88 Applicant seeks site plan approval for the construction of a temporary surface parking lot of approximately 268 spaces. This lot is intended for use by employees occupying the Park Plaza Office Building until completion of the construction of the Park Plaza Parking Garage. The site is located at the northwest corner of North Sixth Street and Park Avenue North, and is bounded by North Sixth Street to the south, Park Avenue North to the east and the Park Plaza Office Building to the north. Discussion: Mr. Erickson reported that the traffic issues discussed last week with Public Works were resolved and the Determination of Non-Significance was published as required due to the time constraints of the project. P-1/P-9 VALLEY IMPROVEMENT/WETLAND IMPACT Mr. Springer reported that there is an executive meeting scheduled to discuss this issue per the direction given at the last meeting. NEW PROJECTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK - PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow the construction of a 7-story office building with approximately 285,000 sq.ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 Detention Pond. Project located north of SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW and west of Naches Avenue SW and east of the P-1 Channel. Discussion: Mr. Erickson located the site and reviewed the proposal. He referred to a September 27, 1988 letter from LPN Architecture and Planning responding to the staff recommendations from the June 17, 1988 report for this project. He reviewed each item including the grade and fill issue, the location of the office building in relation to the Heron rookery, the parking space efficiency, the impervious surface, and the lack of visual screening between the building occupants and the Heron rookery. He noted that the issues seem to be the rookery and the wetlands in addition to any future development on-site that is not addressed in the application but indicated on the maps submitted for consideration. Mr. Erickson stated that there was a lengthy discussion of this issue at the TAC meeting this morning resulting in a recommendation to ERC to issue a Determination of Significance with a focus on land use, water quality, traffic impacts, and impacts on the Heron rookery with a note to the applicant that the DS should include any future buildings and could include First City Development on the north side of the P-1 Channel Forebay. Discussion followed regarding this recommendation. Mr. Springer made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nyberg, to issue a Determination of Significance to include any future structures on-site, to require a supplemental project EIS to the 1980-81 programmatic EIS, to focus on wildlife and fauna specifically (not just land use as recommended by TAC), water quality, traffic impacts, impacts on the Heron rookery, hydrology, transportation analysis, and to contact Public Works to make sure that the applicant is getting credit and has paid the required fees for the Grady Way Traffic Improvements. The motion carried. SO ERC Minutes November 16, 1988 Page 2 FORREST CRESTE APARTMENTS - DOMINION DEVELOPMENT ECF;SA;R-093-88 The applicant proposes to rezone the site from G-1 to R-3 and build approximately 200 apartment units on 1.1.73 acres. The project is located east of Duvall Avenue and south of Park Terrace (NE corner of Duvall Avenue and SE 124th Street-extended). SW10-23 N5E Discussion: Mr. Erickson noted that this project was put on hold during the TAC meeting this morning until Storm Water Utility Division reviews the project to determine whether there may be significant adverse impacts due to the storm drainage situation on-site. Mr. Springer noted that the location is near a recently proposed annexation and suggested that staff contact the long range planner assigned to the annexation to obtain pertinent information that might relate to this project. EASTWAY CENTER THE LEITZKE ARCHITECTS ECF;SA;SP-102-88 Applicant is seeking: 1) site plan approval to construct a commercial center to replace and expand upon an existing commercial structure; and 2) a special permit to prepare the parcel for new construction. The property is zoned for commercial development. The property is located at 3901 NE 4th Street. Discussion: Mr. Erickson located the site and reviewed the proposal. He noted that TAC recommends issuing a DNSM with the conditions listed by staff in the report. Mr. Springer made'a motion, seconded by Mr. Nyberg, to issue a Determination of Non-Significance- Mitigated with the conditions recommended, adding one additional condition that the applicant shall develop a temporary erosion control plan during construction. Discussion followed regarding right in/right out turn lanes and methods to aesthetically soften the outer structure wall. It was noted that these types of issues will be addressed by other departments. The motion carried. WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING STUDY CITY OF RENTON/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ECF-115-88 Study evaluating current waste collection, approaches to waste reduction and recycling, policy issues and recommended recycling program to be incorporated into the City's Solid Waste Management Plan. Location -- city wide. Discussion: Mr. Springer stated that a discussion would be premature at this time inasmuch as copies of the study have not been available for review prior to the meeting. He indicated that a complete draft of the study was supposed to be delivered this afternoon. Discussion followed regarding the time frame to issue a determination in relation to the public hearing scheduled by City Council on December 5th. It was agreed to schedule a special meeting on Friday afternoon to review the highlights of the study with appropriate department representatives in order to obtain their comments for the next ERC meeting at which time a determination could be issued. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:10 AM • 44,vPLIA-' City of Renton Technical Advisory Committee MEETING NOTICE November 7, 1988 To: Nancy Laswell Morris Don Monaghan Steve Baima John Morris Gary Norris Rick Stoddard From: Don Erickson, Chairman Meeting Date: November 9, 1988 Time: 8:30 a.m. Location: Third Floor Conference Room Agenda is attached below. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA November 9, 1988 Third Floor Conference Room Commencing at 8:30 a.m. TIME/KEY PARTICIPANTS NEW PROJECTS $BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK PHASE VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Application for site plan approval and shorelines substantial development permit to allow the construction of a 7-story office building with approximately 285,000 sq.ft. of space within 200 feet of the P-1 detention pond. Property located north of S.W. 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. and west of Naches Avenue S.W. and east of the P- 1 Channel. DALPAY FOUR-PLEX ECF;SA-090-88 Applicant seeks administrative site plan approval to develop a four-plex. Proposed development is consistent with Land Use and Comprehensive Map zoning designations for the subject parcel. Property is located at 715 Sunset Blvd. N.E. Technical Advisory Con ti' Agenda • November 9, 1988 Page 2 RENTON 91 APARTMENTS ECF;R;SA-106-88 Applicant seeks: 1) to annex (under separate application) a 4.286 acre parcel of property; 2) to rezone parcel to R-3 zone, and 3) to obtain a site approval to develop the parcel with 91 multi-family units. Property located in the 11000 block of S.E. 76th Street. E&H PROPERTIES, TEMPORARY PARKING GARAGE ECF;SA-108-88 Applicant seeks to construct a temporary parking • lot (approximately.268 spaces) for use by employees occupying Park Plaza Office Building prior to the completion of the Park Plaza Parking Garage presently under construction. Property located on the northwest corner of North 6th Street and Park Avenue North. , e 0 C‘745k NORE ., _.,� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TMENT *o O��O/vil � ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET s!� L 8TO4,' REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: TI I(-fi�y D QA O DATE CIRCULATED: _OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE:_NOVEMBER 3 , 1988 O EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES- BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 0 ° o - - ° ° 2 . Air ° ° 3 . Water ° - ° ° 4 . Plants ° o ° ° 5. Animals ° o ° ° 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° o ° . 7 . Environmental Health ° o 0 0 8. Land & Shoreline Use ° o ° ° 9 . Housing 0 0 ° o ° ° 10. Aesthetics ° ° ° 11. Light & Glare ° 12 . Recreation ° ° 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° o ° ° 14. Transportation ° o ° ° 15. Public Services ° ° o 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: We have reviewed this ;pp '_-,tion with particular attention to those areas which we have ex.ertis:- - nd e identified areas of probable impact or are where additional info - ion needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Di •ector or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 REN'P►[v COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D NTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 - 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: x UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Or/L/Ty .E-/V6-/N,5,Ee/lv6, APPROVED x APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED I UTllln�i PPROVAL SIIB� G� - N A g 1 ,1 (..E a*4 c k. VA(-via b, .M�,b r Ed ON TO LATE S AGREEMENT-tr�!'.7:1 _ ,_ L./.0.-. ...., ,.,,:..„ ,„:. $4 -) AT Me7Ei .• 7 y s LATE CM AGREEMENT-.SE;:::l _ Hpi S�EEYELOPMERT Cif E-MIER S � .O¢ s4 T. X/S'7Qes 6/b/Dvo1r:)_ 02 355. G8' SYSTEM EEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SEWED y, 4'.D4/so- - x /s 7 ac s CQvp,-ox.)_- I gZ .3 5-61 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA MARCIE-WATER AJC) 31o�a i SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA C�AE: E-smut 1 l�lD APPROVED WATER PLAN YrS Q u r w ►�y��• 1k- s i `I APPROVED SEWER PLAN Y� BACK FLOW PREVENTION DEVICE APPROVED 6lR WRAC LocATIONS DES (S) REQUIR O. SUBMIT CERTFFig Ti$T BY FIRE DEPT. �.� R6IO FpR EACH D.viCE FIRE FLC�"J ANALYSISlate/6 PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. :)raladA____ DATE /1- — ig SIGNATURE OF DIR CTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 /l z-S8'L?Ig,,S4 I',- ')-ate. ' t \Ns N..., . \ iiimh -"F..:i.,..;', -'-zi.',e‘Fi -`->, ''' ell/ • • 4'1°4/gill''-'t.„'N": • • ,....-, . ,,,, - - w, " • \\NN.44,11. i.",:lr'l--.1'A'I •••t ',$*: . . , ^1.,4 •• ...• I , ,-- ,/ ,......, 2. 4 ?41:4:7:‘, . ;:l I ........ ,.......' 9.• $ , : le .9. '''''',P . r.i C. ....... (, s's, ! .„............,......... • .., 1 ,,,,,,... .,..,i..• 1 • \', 1 ' ' ' t.•• • ....;,•!.`^•/..1:: •. . 1. , 1 s.' C) " • s„ .• . . 1 -.-z.-7...,... a /OK)I @-' @ 4 v . ..,.,.s ss • ..... 1 tci) . • • •.s‘' 0 • I ,C) . . • IN ' 7\) . N-....... (S+ . . SZ„E ,5:4 ,=7- /5 ,, ......... , / . . ,,,i . .. to . oil goo. - - , . ,s\\ • •- .'s . • C? : • . .9 f. /I --k-\\®' ® a .......,..„.......... _,... _.....i.t /2 . L •-• •--- • • .- .:,.... a# A.C:3 t..--. 1 1 bilit.... 4°/ / 0 1 Zi r ''', ..._ 43 4 . "*"4 .- I- fii- a ..,.. ,-„ ......„.„..... jirpm; ;•.2411 \:\ -S .' 2 ' k.• i . .7.-,---•\:-.3.-<'......-.;, •!, ..... ii\\ k ...LM, ... , z ,, .. , . , ,..,...._ .. „.... - ,, a" ' • „\,...,• .--..„.,, ifr 4) ',,,, ,. -.........,, • ...._ ...„‘„„ .....„ ../,"..,' • ' \ ,,.... ......1111......1 ,J0 . ..... .. w P p 17 ;...-.%-.%40'. .;..(.,-, kt . ---"--. -7 •, . • I, . /7s4k•• ‘ (11 . ,,. !e • \.. ...-- i---„,_ ‘,..:: . <:°:.;;C.-• , _ •, ..'S1.1411CP /0 a! t .a ..- 0 c.)i ID 1 N i''I..' . - : •.• 4,,‘k : , 1...... .\4,4\\‘‘,' : • : .4.-. I IZI " • •••• ... ....-- 41. • , Ns •,• .4. ! : D., 1:7 1,_ .' , ..: ., 10 ' ' itini,. .: '. (,C). ' ii • ...., (i,,, T. gr7t- " • 1 • ....,c‘-e• , v--. .4. 0 ....,•• ...• .04' ,, • u .(:) ,. 4,.d: _ i %. \\'t /0 H 111 ' , ' n ..,N I - .: ,, . . "• , x ..... , , . VI 1.11 \ \1 —iv rtr ,I :...P o°U ,...„1 X I ; I X ..4..i.:, • \ 's, ..i •1 \:. , • I i •I I i • : ‘‘ . ...:.,... 1., • l• tr..‘ .-,;......: , • Aio, at It, ,... .> • ' . . r : . ' f.s.. ..............., r 4.. ..,1 - • 1 , ..— gme491 ' 41 /0 ...... .,........... _, , c A L Ik‘ -= .). ,c7A _\ ,.....\ ....\ . ! lip . , . • * . : : d •• • I,r C) ./. ic;:, /44,c? It's /7 t iri° ‘k \ N• ; ., . . % ...... . ,• .._ , ...- 0_. z" 4°. ire ,( - ,-0-Avlokt -- ,.. • -.)f.a. ..e..... .kil-:. - • f.. l• 1,---... % ‘ 1 ,, , ...--. ••.........mit, --.. /7 I ..A_ L-.. 1‘k •fi 4 \ \ v-:-.----- -•0004°-.. -TV ' -P. AV 4:00414 .: .........f...?...10 Atia. 1:....i 4,:;;........,..,...,..;!014. ,,.,,,..,..i.....,....,.,.. .............::,,,if,...:::•ii .:..:::::' ,,;,,','Ll: 11';,.14.414.411111 1-11 '. ' 1111.1:11 1 . ...^) i'Ll'..: ....-7z..11 % t ---, I - 40:::0;....................- ........:::.-.00 !..:......,-.-...Ito • ,.. % .. •.. ........... .... .......,.........:..-00.!1...;........... -."1- . ..., 1 Tr• 11... hl.•: 1:: ••• •1 •• •... 11 I . - .... .........,...... 1 Ado 4r-.......lica • .., -- .. ... ........).•-••• 1 ...0:.,• ,,r , ... ,.• I .. . j,....... , r• rill Fl .c....• 1:,.,....--...,,,:: ,, „II 11 : ... 2:111:1(;)' *.t...i i.i... ..:..^...,'.1 1 .t... I. '" ' .-- y ,;‘,..) . (ill* 1 . I.! i i,,. •,,;..-,,:i ..i.r., ! i • ! . fb 1! ! I • ' 4 - • •Li Li. .: ......••••••-•••-•••-"'""*"- /),' - -,;;•0 I< Oil _,,,,,(.4..,,....,-..........-. .....---- , „, ‘.'.......„ .,.......-....-................... . ... ........ ..... • /./. ' .1 s\\ ..'.''. ".- .....,... ..•. , . .. ..".......-: .. \ -- ..., ............ ......... ................. ..... // ; 4.4\J '.:' Ci;'...... ... ....-- .;;;:,..----•••-• , .,... .::.......:....... '"'"'......"":... --..:.............................,...............-........... ., ,....... ••• .... ..... '""..^.....'..."'"'IiT:FEi g'Yr i••'• ....., ..... .,...._..........._ ..,--q- --- :•,...1 . . 1, • i /„..........„.. .....,, : : - 1,-;:".::-'"„--;•:•;::--. --' ( - l',-.(1-'•-•-"-''' • „ -•••-•• ‘"1.• .,,,.. ,--7., 1....rri'l 11 ,.! r- • , - , , 1.:-. , .." ' : ! ' - .'-- : z••• 4- . ---..• I i i I •,• .1:,• ii:t.; 'A\ I N-01•A$1,5*. 1;?,..I. ) - --1°r•-• -4 t.::•. •.• :0 • i . .1 i : i \ „:• : ! i rr r Litt)„: : • 11,4.40 n r, : : ,Tr. ,TT 0 1 AV Q9-1.1.1.1.....?•".1 IA .L.0 1 ' r 0 ; '. i.. .3 i . I. .........- • if ,. • • .„ ''' It "... • I 4/. III 0 ......"-... •,-^c k e• -Trrrt 1 1 1 : . . • , {Ft, . . 110.-'.::::-.. .. • • I U \,, , Thili 'III I ' 1111414 \\ .i•'.• • ). '''I- •• ,-1-:y1••• -1..' :•1 li f •:\ ' --- • ;11.-e,k)••••,- !••• •••• ..., ...py CKith RE, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ORTMENT I, Aop�2s, CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET �� �V 4.v ENVIRONMENTALC C �O .0. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: fhtic.X., f DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE:_NOVEMBER 3 , 1988. EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth ° ° 0 0 0 ° 2 . Air ° 3 . Water ° 4 . Plants ° 5. Animals ° 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° 7 . Environmental Health ° A 8 . Land & Shoreline Use ° 9 . Housing ° 10. Aesthetics ° 11. Light & Glare ° 12 . Recreation ° 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° 14 . Transportation ° 15. Public Services 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are whe a iona_l_.inf rmation is needed to properly assess this proposal. ature o Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 REND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 - 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU K. POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED X APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED -7/ f Af %�/ ti4,e/4 FA S DATE I/ // SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 REA. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APITMENT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r- \:)1, 1[0.11n DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE: P4ME,MBER 3 , 1988 EFC 071- 88 D OCT /��c��o�/� • APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 c _? PROPONENT:_FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION C O l, •8 )1, PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII U ` if BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth ° ° "y�.9 O O y e O 2 . Air ° O O o 3 . Water — ° o O o 4 . Plants ') ° O 0 • \ O 5. Animals ° O O • 0 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° o O O 7 . Environmental Health ° O o 0 8 . Land & Shoreline Use '*.� P ° O O / -. 0 9 . Housing ° O 0 O 10 . Aesthetics 0 ° O o 0 11. Light & Glare ' ,, ' ° O O - - 0 12 . Recreation ° O 0 0 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° ° 0 o 0 14 . Transportation ° . O O 15. Public Services ° O 0 0 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: ( _ I /� ( \ _ } I �} C --J•i] ..-,..0 Lo__..._LT�j[_a_L_:'N 0-.D LL.: l.F.,--e-- _:i -tr'? -'L-k h. -.Xtti. - ,-.?_�/e-k- .,7 1.� sz..:C `.6.---2,1) r:.,,2 _., rr,,t , £I c? 4), 1 .rVV' R '-"4 if �C.•�.-(s.^,e.11. .. ,,-.)0:,_(.. ..7 r,.L_ � �p�-�4..F � ...E1-i�..J.,y..{`. �..i-, ..�.t /n_ .,f�.�.i ., q l.a. .,-; „J:. , 1 ') , k-4.i` _ s--...-•�'...CL.Z-L-AA, CL.O.,,A,,c i.'e'V.--r,t'\. i„,.4_ t' J-•Gr [ 1 � gy " ` '�-�...� , `�, ,. `IL'.=r C-C; V 4... C (`--0L.. „�.�. :.„ y:c. -, `1. tom" „ C,...A,. C C' `s .4• 1 G e_s �. ri-<." ,-;.:7��,e3,-U`e 4,e L L.F C^ b-i, 'it.-+._.ai.r i.F.a..r CA--`vrr 4 L-,-e-..L-0-V�"l.«.r L + ,,,kin a...:!``...:.. , 1- 6-1,,,, ,-6,,,,r, , We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are where additional 'nformation is needed to properly assess this proposal. --- /- - Signature erector or Au orized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 RENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D RTMEI DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIE SI- tt RENr0N ECF - 071 - 88 OCT ? 6 1988 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 E C LS 4 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285,000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE _ LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED f i 1Av-e"�"*c� eJ. 1 °� c_.=� f7.) a. 4-1) :ed DATE //- iL-,.k/P SIGNATURE O DIRECTOR OR A THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 Jilik e RE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TMEN of alto,01 N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW S �: j` -AOV 3 9 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: in�y'LKq I 88 II /? /. DATE CIRCULATED: _OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE:_NOVEMBER 3, 1988 EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88 , SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth )4 ° . . . 2 . Air e X ° . . . 3 . Water 0 0 ' ° . . . 4. Plants X ° 5. Animals ° . . . 6. Energy & Natural Resources 0x 0 ° . . . 7 . Environmental Health 0 s. ° . ° . 8 . Land & Shoreline Use 0x ° . ° . 9 . Housing ) ° . . . 10. Aesthetics )C. ° . . . 11. Light & Glare ° 12 . Recreation x ° . 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° . 14 . Transportation ;‹ ° . . . 15. Public Services X ° ° 16. Utilities 0 >4 . COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal./ Signature of Director or A�ithorized Representative Date g P Rev. 6/88 REN'i ROMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 - 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-0.71-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION . PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: K ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3 , 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: _SiF 1 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS X NOT APPROVED alga? t.tAti g44145 iietim,16- *far" Dizilkwe Igo6 /e0 DATE I ,41g SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AU ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 p AIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTOARTMENT,t C/n,N�Nr0/ NOV OF fin,, ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SH , I. ? AFNT ��� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: I Y ►C hr' - �988 �1 DATE CIRCULATED: _OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE:_NOVEMBER 3, 1988 EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: _LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth / / ° o ° ° 2 . :er 3 . 'V// ° 0 4 . Plants ° O 0 0 5. Animals -,� ,. ° O 0 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° O 0 0 7. Environmental Health /,,' ° o ° o 8. Land & Shoreline Use ° ° O / 0 0 9 . Housing a/ ° 10. Aesthetics rs ° O 0 0 11. Light & Glare • / , ° ° e ° 0 12 . Recreation ° 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° ✓ : /° 14 . Transportation ° o r o 0 15. Public Services ° ° i3O 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are where additional in. ormation i zneeded to properly assess this proposal.c 1 , 1,--L.--(,f / .t //e/ t/ - 7 Signature of Director` or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 I y r- REO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTL .RTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF — 071 — 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK—PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7— STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION x, TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3 , 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: / , , APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS KNOT APPROVED d L a?�L _ l i ..}I 7\ t),d! ri' Jkr-, ,' , `'r ., F',� ;11 ( Fir( /1.IN }..1 Ld //V;e r j'r r 1( •,,c .4G.._l ri rA„;,/ 1 2 L ,?E�. ( ,( , :_ /LO 1- e ass( ' (.• A I., rl /. 7 ' + I ., (-- ) -/. !r (t)le' - ( / (d «rt/L"J - ti 1) , y , f � r, � r J Pb) ,'s;' , :i;�G tor.l!'t c t<'c it,(,1,>>/ , (J i ,l� ,- '(•l. _ . _ ;_�...-f ( . • . . fi '` DATE l %/. Al? SIGNATURE'OF DIRECTOR"'OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE / L, iji / REV. 6/88 ' ,o r EG-4 < gill", CDi(f)DR,7 ,H k /_ p ( ? , - - 5-I- 0 ,--,ic 6,7,) ,- ',.,__c___. /0/3 1/4Y / / / ry,1 r',CL. ' �C err - r. ..fj r :„s �/....5 <�{ i in. I c'✓U Cat 0 el S po,„),), A.,)e. S.(-0 , r • 4 3 €c1 c `3 x f.-.1 '') t, `a Z .�l� r 45 n 0 ec .5aec - o as, 1 vcclC �Qe. (r2F� �rY,_t;'/ .. 01 .I.) .f`^ ` e V oa, %)cc-- ____ .. ,_ _ 2. / d"'-�t`S'-5-' / 11 1 f `J :!{ e o_ce (N -. 7.7:- ,1 Sr r j 4/C,i-, i , lc 0 J _,,..,se ` /a, 7h .57s1 -,,J 6=7„.„d L./(4i P,l r'�_.,;r r .S:,{D(7 :v R1«�\r ' 5 pk., q,. z. s 00 0 f:',-; efr( -4) 4,1 -7„,,.._ 1 V -401 00 �r'�.r,� 'A r._ f e l X —7 per "b+ -777 _TAJ s. rtt l f %- / _* . ; C' pr-ts( //,, > I� r r' '� (�F"r',r'' r rl '.�,L, /c.f),€-)LJ p RON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IPARTMENT �NN//v ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEE ' C �FAEN��S��N ofr REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: f r n ?980 DATE CIRCULATED: _OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE:_NOVEMBER 3 , 1988 EFC - 071- 88 • APPLICATION NO(S) : _SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND. EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth ° ° 0 O 0 0 2 . Air ° . . 3 . Water ° . . . 4 . Plants ° . . . 5. Animals ° . 0 . 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° . . . 7 . Environmental Health 0 0 . . . 8. Land & Shoreline Use ° . . . 9 . Housing ° . . y . 10. Aesthetics /\ . x . . . ii. Light &Glare ° 12 . Recreation ° ° . . . 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° . . 14 . Transportation ° . . . 15. Public Services ° . . . 16. Utilities ° ° COMMENTS: £.r Me ev'1?o peel a t/ ve`jrc/e GC cl e ff /-c7a rwic,fYec( 76 he ft--e01 ly wee 74- 6......-de? i9r de re.e/iev' i c( eY( neve 11ey2l4%Ue aeweA97ciC i#1,a(-74- ok 71he r,i4 6ecavie c (4j- G ,.-dfli... rA owe if cll.T e s?O floc h a. a/C. nc fe .y 7'4 e /44,drz e' + g • I • S/fee h- fki 74 . .6 c-71- p d if/"/'ew Md- i// r 0ifr-e to f/JPc/'mil /frea7CL�1c�� fa it l-¢,ceI G� l GCo`1lo �� fie der 7 ... 8f r/ ' e 74 i'/ /i J 74,- /-%e 6/c y de. Gliio-t M'40id / he firo ve"de c�_ Cv<7k Me flu ea / ,6i 6ccyck Gal-7"1 , ?L d a671/ e or- I'c�r!-dam <P� /'BC�Ccc rz o w. �c7�i c' 7 (J 0 C (/ "I 6.; Cc./-del k<'rlr Near r%ea, c 6 d Lace !,- <J fird��it' / ah . 'e_ The v par k.ha, a/-ra. /7 cl&Q-ae'd c/114/ „r m0dej1F«ts1.1'. S/wce Me f'— (;n /' 7 cie-0-4'. "'iced 111 e C/Z ve?"- cove r 6744 ear./ Cegy REOL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT glIkRTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: /1kr 74- ttOP A C f% 1 -/G� APPROVED )( APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 71 e de.�d�v B ar e,- f`j o G�- eGh Pier-�� 7�l e ``o w e�2 C67-i _ the �!l I/ 1-a /-4, 74 a., t 6 u tee!/`4eh!G ,,-6/«7i 2_- .)/74 cle- de pdeJi'r<Q _ c(4 7 e.r off -7iree 74 04-- /9 74- 14r4<Lr 3. frdewde oche .!'rage I ce'//, e/- "%e 6%�he-/c e"af {ef: 174 AVvi 1/ 76(1//i//c./ "4/-' Awe '.,-4€) of*e_ DATE //2//K SIGN RE OF DIREC R OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE or G a/cv ' - 4.4.....40 ad, el `eer ]Le ,REV. 6/88 5. /JP 6/e114 74,7 2 e f ip -A PMSION RE. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Lill UniT CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SH OCT 2 8 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1aA ,� ECElyE DATE CIRCULATED: _OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 3, 1988 EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285,000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth ° 2 . Air ° 3 . Water ° 4. Plants ° 5. Animals ° 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° 7 . Environmental Health ° 8 . Land & Shoreline Use ° 9.. Housing ° 10. Aesthetics ° 11. Light & Glare ° 12 . Recreation ° 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° ° 14 . Transportation ° 15. Public Services ° 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are where a di ional inform tion is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signa re of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 11 RENTCUMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DE4ENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 - 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: (B '- c. APPROVEDKr APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED . - C DATE It "a j -- 02d) SIGNATU F DIRECTOR OR AUT ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 PLANNING DMSION , I CI1Y OF RENTON E COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT b�.i..,. r''_t: ,nFlreoeot n v , OCT 2 8 198 r fife Prevent nn Brn'a"•_ E IRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE IN E REVIEWI G Db R WI: -9(ram. pvev-o'rhn- DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 26, 1988 COMMENTS DUE: NO,�EMBER 1988 l'Ai EFC - 071- 88 APPLICATION NO(S) : _SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORTATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT.OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET 0 THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF S.W. 7TH ST AND OAKESDALE AVENUE S.W. AND WEST NACHES AVENUE S.W. AND EAST OF THE P-i CHANNEL. SITE AREA _15.7 ACRES_ BUILDING AREA (gross) : 285, 000 SQ.FT. IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 0 0 ° o ° ° 2 . Air ° o ° 0 3 . Water ° 0 o 0 ° 4 . Plants ° ° 5. Animals ° ° 6. Energy & Natural Resources ° ° 7 . Environmental Health ° o ° 0 8 . Land & Shoreline Use ° ° - ° 9 . Housing . ° o ° ° 10. Aesthetics ° 0 o ° 0 11. Light & Glare ° ° 12 . Recreation ° ° 13 . Historic & Cultural Preservation ° ° 14 . Transportation ° 15. Public Services v• / ° o ° 0 16. Utilities ° COMMENTS: 1 ,�e �� -IzA1---YY1 4/ O -lute Sit ` a- Licy _..442:e " . ._,X,i-e-.Tc.t.eza- . We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or are where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. / /61-4.404--- &PC/ or4 Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 I. REN .T�COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEFi 'MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 071 - 88 APPLICATION NO(S) . : SA-071-88, SM-071-88 PROPONENT: FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORPORATION PROJECT TITLE: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK-PHASE VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND SHORELINES SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 7- STORY OFFICE BUILDING WITH APPROX. 285, 000 SQ.FT. OF SPACE WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE P-1 DETENTION POND. LOCATION: LOCATED NORTH OF SW 7TH STREET AND OAKESDALE AVENUE SW AND WEST OF NACHES AVENUE SW AND EAST OF THE P-1 CHANNEL. TO: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE: ENGINEERING DIVISION TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: UTILITIES ENG. DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION PLANNING DIVISION SHORT RANGE LONG RANGE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BY 5: 00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 3, 1988 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED Any development and/or construction shall com ly with current Fire and Buil ing Codes and Ordi- nances. A second m s of proved access is requ ed. Fire Depart nt access roads/lanes shall be paved minimum width 20'; minimum height 13' 6". Yes L No Preliminary fire flow calculations show a fire flow of v?SUO is required hydrants with a minimum flow of ,/Uc gpm each is required. Primary hydrant is required to be within /So feet of the structure. Secondary hydrants are required to be within s di feet of the structure. An approved automatic sprinkler system is required to protect the total structure. Yes "V-No All fire department access roads are to be paved and installed prior to construction. Yes IV No _ All fire hydrants are required to be installed and approved prior to corostroAlurl:.,Yes_ No LGv • DATE .-e4 /yf/ SIG ATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 6/88 A REQUIRED FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS 1. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION NAME U.B.C. CLASS OF BUILD ADDRESS FIRE MGMT AREA 2. DETE IN5 T OF CONSTRUCTIOL•� CLASS (CIRCLE ONE): I - 1I IV III V FIRE-RESISTI NON-COMBUSTIBLE ORDINARY WOOD FRAME MIXED F "MIXED", SEE SPECIAL INSTRUCTION FOR AREA AND BASIC FIRE FLOW) 3. DETERMINE AREA: GROUND FLOOR AREA: FT2 (A) NUMBER OF STORIES: TOTAL BUILDING AREA: '? 56 erri-c-) 4. DETERMINE BASIC FIRE FLOW FROM TABLE 11, USING AREA (A) : S , 7S2/ GPM (B) 5. DETERMINE OCCUPANCY FACTOR ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: /4/37. 5- GPM (C) IF LOW HAZARD, SUBTRACT UP TO 25% OF (B): IF HIGH HAZARD,, ADD UP TO 25% OF (B) 6. COMPUTE SUB-TOTAL (B+C): - CIF B+C IS LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) A/2/Z 4 5"' GPM (D) 7. DETERMINE SPRINKLER ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: 3 Z3 L( d 2 `7 GPM (E) (IF COMPLETELY SPRINKLERED, SUBTRACT UP TO 50% OF (D): IF LIGHT HAZARD OCCUPANCY AND FIRE RESISTIVE OR NON-COMBUSTIBLE CONSTRUCTION, SUBTRACT UP TO 75% OF (D). S. DETERMINE EXPOSURE ADJUSTMENT?: USING THE TABLE AT LEFT AS A GUIDE, ENTER THE SEPARATION AND ADJUSTMENT FOR EACH OF THE "FOUR FACES" OF THE BUILDING IN THE TABLE AT THE RIGHT: SEPARATION MAR. ADJUSTMENT EXPOSURE SEPARATION ACT. ADJ. 0 - 10 25% MAX. NORTH A,/,g' ADD / 5 % 11 - 30 20% MAX. EAST -f- / sv' ADD - --- % 31 - 60 15% MAX. SOUTH -r- /5 U' ADD % 61 -100 10% MAX. WEST W5' ADD /4 % 101 -150 5% MAX. TOTAL % OF ADJUSTMENT 150 OR 4-HR WALL . 0% MAX. (NOT TO EXCEED 75%) : ?(j % (TOTAL % ADJUSTMENT TIMES (D) ADJ7 S TMENT: -I•- I-Z9 7 . 75' GPM (F) 9. DETERMINE ROOF AND SIDING COVERING ADJUSTMENT: CIF SHINGLE COVERING, ADD 500 GPM) ADJUSTMENT: GPM CG) :1. COMPUTE ESTIMATED FIRE FLOW REQUIRED: (IF D+E+F+G IS LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) CIF D+E+F+G IS GREATER THAN 12-000 GPM, INSERT 12,O30 GPM) cIhd . g%5-- CD+E+F+G) REQUIRED FIRE FLOW: SOC) GPM (R) /;/ 'r l i' SIGNED: .5- =t,c-d, xi (�ATE �C1 d, .,/7 `C • fib CITY OF RENTON ..LL DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor PLANNING DIVISION October 26, 1988 Mark Miller First City Development Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 • Re: First City Development Black River Corporate Park-Phase VII ECF;SA;SM-071-88 Dear Mr. Miller: The Community Development Department has formally accepted the above referenced application. It has been routed for departmental review and is tentatively scheduled for the Technical Advisory Committee on November 9, 1988 for consideration. If you have any questions regarding the scheduling of this project, please contact our office at 235-2550. (....Sinc ugly � J Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE/mjp 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2550 // • IES ASSOCIATES • ftt 1514 Muirhaad Olympia,WA 98502 Ph:(206)943.0127 8835 SW Canyon Lane October 3, 1988 Portland,OR 97225 Ph:(503)297.6081 TO : David Schuman 16300 Christensen Road Building 3 , Suite 219 Seattle, Washington 98188 : SUBJECT ; Recommended setbacks for great blue heron rookery by City of Renton. • Introduction : . This discussion is a response to the conditions imposed by. the City of Renton on First City Developments ' site in the area historically identified as Black River Corporate Park. The site in question has been cleared for a number of years . It is bordered on the south side by a man-made retention/detention ditch and business developments , along the north and east by remaining portions of the original black cottonwood forested habitat and on the west by recent clearing, a border of black cottonwood and the P-1 pond. . The area directly west of the proposed development site is an . area that was logged in 1987 as a part of the proposed Black River development. Logging was conducted in February, prior to the 1987 heron rookery nesting season. Logging activity took place at a time when the adult birds were in the site and were selecting nests and pairing in preparation for active nesting. Logging was ended prior to the first week of March as recommended by IES Associates by a stop work order. Additional clearing work was allowed after March 1, to remove the downed logs and clear the area, to avoid the loss of marketable timber. At the time of the logging, the great blue heron rookery consisted of eight constructed nests. During the remainder of the 1987 nesting season, work continued on the metro sewage plant at a distance of less than 1,000 feet from the. rookery in a dire t, open, unobstructed line of :vision, and within 200 feet in som areas of the flight pattern of the herons to and from 7 „....._ • n:TPi' a�. [d >< C,. ^ 4 .4t MGM t''i ..�r'�_ � ` .- /� v8rvg,e }tip YyrM`xY�i;ti,.,.�+ t` ',..,2tt•� MAa���"�n''.�v'*,w+r^'�'oA�"'T / W�'f xyYYq�,"a1bu�A . ,' ;:, „, . YIP7,7„1."1.,,.,. ]]rr` -- j y ''�wWwM1 "wx....�.u,,,,f•" �, •� �.•.. - First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3, 1988 the rookery. Oaksdale Avenue construction was ongoing during the latter portions of the nesting season. Some work occurred, i.e. bulldozer, dredging , dragline activity, within 1 ,000 feet, in a direct line of vision, with no tree obstruction, from the rookery, and in places within 150 to 200 feet of the P-1 canal and the food gathering / food flight pattern of the great blue herons. The logging retained a 200 foot buffer from the center of the rookery to the outer edge of a retained old growth/black cottonwood/cedar buffer area on the east site. On the north, the 20 acre natural area was retained, providing buffers in some areas up to 5-600 feet deep. This natural buffer creates a physical obstruction to the line of vision and a noise and light buffer between the rookery and the area to the east where the proposed develop would be located. During the nesting season, 1988, construction on Oaksdale Avenue continued in areas within 1,000 feet of the rookery, and within 200 feet of the P-1 canal and the feeding and loafing area and flight pattern of adult great blue herons moving in from the valley back to the rookery. Construction paralleled Springbrook Creek which is a waterfowl and heron feeding and loafing area. Work continued on the Black River Corporate Park within the same distance from the rookery as the proposed development site. Cleaning of the retention/detention ditch , lawn mowing , maintenance activities , and road construction continued within 660 feet in some places and well within 1,000 feet in most other places throughout the 1988 rookery nesting season. Landscaping at the edge of the pond and within and along the south border of the P-1 pond and P-1 canal within 250-400 feet of the rookery were conducted during the early stages of the 1988 nesting season. Nesting Results : In 1987, during the logging, the height of construction, building activity, paving, jackhammers, draglines, bulldozers , etc. , the rookery increased from 8--10 nests and the nesting success , i.e. 3 . 4 young per nest, was the highest of any recorded rookery in western Washington and Oregon. This is also higher than the national average for nesting birds as identified in most publications on great blue herons. 2 First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3 , 1988 In 1988 the rookery increased £ withrom l0 to 22 an average of 3�2 Eighteen of the 22 nests were successful young per nest. Of the three nests that were unsuccessful , all had initial nesting activity. ast one it waswas abandoneded Of o tithe ave had young birds in the nest before other two nests, one was a nest that had ears,ns successfully while ullthe seused in the rookery for at least the past two y cond was a new nest that was built in extremely close proximity to two established nests. Literature Citations : The literature that is being cited for setbacks is based on two studies in isolated natural areas are s were here there has been no no human intrusion and where the feeding The disturbance to one estuarine and freshwater marsh areas. area was logging, which occurred up to the edge of the rookery and, in one instance, removed a portion of the rookery trees. Roads and logging activity was the first exposure that these rookeries had had to human activity. A second paper deals with a park where the public a ceon ss was human intrusion of birdwatchers , people walking , observing and interacting with birds, and by boat traffic around and under the rookery In the logging area, the literature reports indicate that the birds abandoned all the ethe disturbance flusheds. However, in lthe with the authors it was noted that birds off part of the rookery s and cano sed abandonment of other continuing anon ing studies were. rookeries. In the flushed areas, s after the made to determine the nesting Th�ccess of the data relativebtodthe park and construction activity ceased. the human and boat access to as leavetheed to nes nesting siter disturbance g the and flushing, forcing the birdsthis nesting period . The rookery was not abandoned during t Their did take place . period , and successful nesting recommendations were for setbacks during the nesting Season to ocumentation ted avoid the disturbance even though ke ghlace� din both instances,that successful nesting did p were feeding in natural birds were in fairly natural areas, streams, freshwater marshes, and basically undisturbed areas. In the Black River area, the rookery is believed to have consisted of approximately three nests prior to the ramova and ltof the golf course and the digging of the P-1 pond 3 . - -- j ycv.s•s-n First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3 , 1988 construction of the pumphouse. Work was conducted in June, which would have been at the peak of the nesting season for these three nests. The rookery island was created during the dredging of the P-1 pond . The open pond and the optimum conditions that occur were manmade and were constructed in the midst of an area that was rapidly developing. The birds that were using the rookery prior to P-1 canal construction and shortly after P-1 pond construction were using the golf course as a loafing and hunting area, and using the natural forest as a loafing area. After the P-1 was completed, the birds were using the P-1 pond and the islands in the pond , the forested area directly adjacent to the pond, as well as other areas in the forest. Birds used the low willow area that was cleared during the logging, as well as the willow ponds north of the area and north of the railroad tracks . • In 1987 , after the logging , birds continued to use the forested area that was retained and continued to use the . forested area north of the railroad tracks. They also used the P-1 pond for loafing . Evidence from extended periods of observation indicated that the birds were not using the P-1 pond as a feeding area. In 1988, additional time was spent monitoring movements of the birds in February and March, and later in June, in their feeding forays to and from the rookery. 95 percent of the feeding forays take place to the west and southwest in the Kent Valley. The areas that are being used as feeding areas are in borrow ditches, adjacent to freeways, along streams and in ponds and open areas in the midst of development. The major feeding areas for this rookery and the Auburn rookery are the pasture areas between Highway 167 and the West Valley Highway, and between 167, the railroad, and Auburn Way west of Highway 167. These areas are partially developed, have rail traffic and heavy freeway traffic , and a significant amount of cross-valley traffic on 15th through 37th, 72nd, etc. from Auburn to north of Kent. There is considerable heron activity on Green River, the edge of the Green River, along the Longacres racetrack adjacent to the Group Health headquarters and in the Springbrook Creek area that runs through the area. These immediate areas have three major north-south arterials as well as a series of east- west crossing roads. 4 - _.i.c .}, _ ,:x::+' _ F>u o•;r1Rvr..�;..::fl:'a:.�? rr.:..._.ti;.;s,_—..:?i-:7=!+dwr...r� . - =S. - :; First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3,• 1988. The herons ' feeding activity appears to be dependent on habitat availability, with little, if any, regard to the amount of traffic or surrounding buildings. These birds were also documented flying north to the edge of Lake Washington, and are believed to be part of the birds that perch, use the docks, feed from dock edges in Renton park in the southeast corner of Lake Washington and in the docks in front of the Boeing area and 'along the west bank of Lake Washington. This evidence indicates that the great blue heron using the Black River rookery is a population of birds that are acclimated to heavy , human activity , traffic noise , and ongoing construction noise that has occurred in this area for years . Based on their continued use of the P-i 'pond and P-1 canal during the metro construction, the logging, and the construction of Black River Corporate Park and the Oaksdale construction, these animals appear to have adjusted to this human activity in their nesting patterns. Two additional rookeries, one at Auburn, Washington and one at Smith/Bybee Lake in Portland, Oregon, are also adjacent to heavy traffic and human activity. The Auburn rookery is at the juncture of Highway 167, Highway 18, the West Valley Highway, and overlooks a Park and Ride that has been constructed in the past few years . This rookery also increased in size in 1988 . Birds from this rookery fly north and are utilizing much of the same hunting grounds that the Black River Corporate Park rookery is using. The Smith-Bybee population overlooks a railroad , log handling yards , and expanded development that has occurred in the last five years on one side and a golf course which has been constructed within the last 5-7 years on the other side. golf course and golfing activity occurs within 100 feet f rookery trees in this area. The railyard is a switching yard, so there are starts, stops, and human activity within 100 feet of the pits,y trees on nest number, and continues rookery . This to have 90-95 rookery maintained has percent nesting success every year. Both of these rookeries have adequate food supplies and a central core of nesting trees that are ideal . These two factors appear to be a greater regulating factor in the use of a rookery than does human activity if the rookery is established in an urban area. 5 First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3 , 1988 Data from the two year study of the Black River rookery and the history of two other known rookeries that have been monitored for two years, indicates that site specific data is necessary to accurately manage urban great blue heron rookeries. The datum does not support the need for excessive setbacks if certain conditions and time constraints are implemented . To date there is no supporting data for arbitrary 660-1,000 foot or wider buffers around the Black River rookery. The literature references are not relevant to the conditions that exist at this area and fail to supply any biologically defensible recommendations for excessive buffers surrounding the Black River rookery. The proposed site to be developed by First City Development Corporation is separated from the rookery by open space, and large trees. The area in question is not regularly use by herons for roosting, loafing or hunting. The major flight patterns for adult feeding forays is south and west away from the proposed development site. The distance from the rookery is well outside the range of ongoing impacts that affected the Black River rookery, the Auburn rookery, or the Smith/Bybee rookery over the past two nesting seasons without causing an abandonment of the nests. Because of this, IES, based on our data, our recommendations at the end of the 1987 season, and the support of those recommendations by the nesting activity in 1988, cannot support the Washington Department of Wildlife or the City of Renton' s setback recommendations. Site specific biological data substantiates our opinion that construction activity east of the. Naches Road SW extension to the railroad track would have no significant impacts on the great blue heron feeding areas, loafing areas, or nesting and brood rearing activities. Additional buffer zones cannot be substantiated by biological data. IES Associates data and setback recommendations put into the record during the 1967 hearings on Black River Corporate Park have been supported by the 1988 nesting season. General setbacks, based on non-site- specific data , which are repudiated by the site-specific information, should not be allowed as a criteria for regulating development activities in the proximity of the rookery. If the State and Federal Agencies can provide site specific data relative to urban rookeries or data specifically related to the Black River heron rookery , that demonstrates that 6 First City Great blue heron setbacks October 3 , 1988 development beyond 660 feet would be detrimental , then additional buffers which respond to this site-specific data would become appropriate. Until that time there is no data to support restrictions on the proposed site, either from the total development or period of work. This constitutes the report of IES Associates , 1514 Muirhead, Olympia, Washington. Sincerely, 7 R.L. Van Wormer Senior Biologist IES Associates 7 Architecture and Planning G � r1 Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I,A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 27 September 1988 ._. , 77 ' OCT 3 1988 , •1I S L I' t11,1 j'l. I? ft, 11 �l; i o Mr. Don Erickson Zoning Coordinator City of Renton Department of Building and Zoning 200 Mill Avenue South, 3rd Floor Renton, WA 98055 RE: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK PHASE VII; 7—STORY OFFICE SITE PLAN APPROVAL SUBMITTAL — 3 AUGUST 1988 Dear Don: Per our meeting with you in September and subsequent review with the Owner, we offer the following comments for consideration in relation to staff recommendations from the June 17, 1987 report for this property. We direct your attention to the September 14, 1987 Renton City Council minutes relative to the clearing and grading permit on this site which said: 4. "Building locations are not predetermined in any manner by this recommendation and this recommendation is not precedent setting in any fashion concerning the issue of building location. Normal City processes such as ERC and Site Plan Review will determine the building locations." STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. "That the proposed office building be sited an average of 500 feet from the Heron Rookery." The current location of this building is predicated on using the building and the building height as a buffer from the Heron Rookery in addition to the existing tree buffers between the building and the rookery. This approach was developed in conjunction with Rex Van Wormer (biological consultant) who has been monitoring the rookery and providing status reports on the rookery. • Mr. Don Erickson City of Renton 27 September 1988 Page 2 2. "That existing mature trees on site be retained to the greatest extent possible." The majority of significant existing trees on this site have been preserved per this proposal. It is difficult to preserve all trees, and it needs to be noted a preserve area was already established at the north of the site along the swale area as part of rezone mitigation in addition to other trees preserved per this proposal. 3. "That the applicant be required to construct a parking garage to lessen the amount of pervious surface". There is no city ordinance requiring a parking structure to preserve pervious surface. The pervious surface on this site is approximately 24%, which is typical of developments in this area and beyond the minimum 20% required by code in this zone. The site is adjacent to a large, 20 acre natural preserve and a 17 acre detention basin. Parking areas on the site can be reduced visually by placing the building in the middle of the site and allocating parking all around the building in a typical manner to other developments. However, the building was placed on the edge of the site to act as a buffer to the rookery (see Item #1), which we feel is more important environmentally. The perimeter areas are heavily landscaped and provide additional wildlife habitat in conjunction to the large areas off site. The natural area easement was set aside as a habitat buffer, therefore providing an additional buffer on a buffer should not be required. 4. "That the existing marsh/wetland area of the old Black River channel in the northeast corner be retained (not filled in and paved)." This area was referenced in the original E.I.S. to be filled and all drainage from this area was to be tight lined into Naches (per City of Renton direction) to drain into the biofiltering swale at the north of the property, which was preserved in an easement for such. This has already been completed. The biofiltering swale to the north, per previous reports from Entranco Engineers, is adequate to filter this site and the balance of development to the south without additional biofiltering areas. Waterfowl and bird habitats are provided along the north property line and atop the banks of the P—I channel and on the banks of the channel. Additional areas are beyond what is required by ordinance or code or reasonably necessary. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 Mr. Don Erickson City of Renton 27 September 1988 Page 3 5. "That vehicular circulation and parking areas (noise, glare, etc.) not screened from the rookery by the proposed building be set back at least 660 feet from the heron rookery." Additional setbacks from the rookery for parking are excessive, the building buffers the majority of these areas, as do the major stands of trees preserved along the north property line. 6. "That the proposed new office building be designed to be as harmonious as possible with the natural environment through the use of earthern colors and textures, non—reflective coated glazing. . ." The building has been designed with neutral colors and the only reflective glass used is at at the south entry between buildings. All surfaces facing the rookery will be neutral . 7. "That construction activity (until the building is hermatically sealed) be limited to the months of mid—July (or whenever all the fledglings leave the heron rookery), August, September October, November, December, January and February." We propose all building construction activity within 600 feet of the rookery will be limited to the above schedule until the building is sealed or "skinned" at the rookery side. 8. "That all mechanical systems be acoustically buffered so as not to exceed a noise level of 75 decibels measured at the source or 70 decibels at 400 feet from the center of the rookery." Mechanical systems will be acoustically buffered. 9. "That all exterior lighting shall be shielded at the source to ensure that it does not result in visible glare." All exterior lighting shall be shielded to eliminate any glare or light dispersion off site. The angle will relate to light control standards in premanufactured fixtures. Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A„ 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 Mr. Don Erickson City of Renton 27 September 1988 Page 4 10. "That any areas used for vehicular servicing or the loading or unloading of hazardous materials be provided with a membrane to prevent infiltrants of hydrocarbons to the soil layer, with asphalt covering the sealant." No hazardous materials are programmed to be unloaded. Oil water separators per City standards will be utilized before discharging water into the biofiltering swales. 11. "That all glazing facing onto the natural environment to the north be non—reflective coated tinted glazing ." All glazing facing north, north west is non—reflective. 12. "That on—site parking not exceed the minimum code requirements." Parking on site could be reduced to a 93% efficiency factor to determine the net usable of the building (1325 parking stalls) to meet City ordinance. Further reduction of parking is not required by ordinance. Handicap stalls are shown and additional stalls will be designated for carpool and van pools, near main entries to building. 13. "That provisions shall be provided for on or near the site to accommodate bus service and transit users." Bus service will be coordinated with METRO when METRO deems the area and occupancies at a level to justify stops. 14. "That passive recreational facilities be provided for which can include tables and chairs in lawn areas and/or in plazas as well as additional seating areas." Additional seating, passive areas will be provided with a par-course exercise station course being added, to tie into the entire development of Blackriver. 15. "That a clearly delineated and separate pedestrian circulation system be developed between this and abutting parking areas, and sidewalks." A major pedestrian access way is programmed from 7th into the central flag plaza with additional paths along the P—I channel and along the drainage easement. These areas will be night lighted as part of parking lighting. Leason Pomeroy Northwest, Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 . • Mr. Don Erickson City of Renton 27 September 1988 Page 5 16. "That a late commer's fee of $12,885.00 as well as a traffic mitigation fee (not yet approved) for the S./S.W. Grady Way be provided by a Letter of Credit or bond for the amount of $1,149,291 .00." Traffic mitigation fees should relate to the First City participation in the 0akesdale L.I.D., and should not be part of this development. We trust this adequately addresses the issues raised in the June 17, 1987 staff report on our previous application for this site. Your continued support and assistance in processing the current application of August 1988 is appreciated. Respectfully, l 'oy e A. Berg R,B:db cc: Mark Miller, First City Development Corp. Leason Pomeroy Northwest, Inc.,Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 -LH \--Va_ Q. N .9 -No csiNn Q .51 ..1- 10_1_cN"--a91 SAY c-sn. Q>S - 99C-n Qcni- Q9174) a Q, --3 Cr-7-3 -kiVccioJk qcNV 7,1 9-0 on9D9Qt .9 (1- MY)1:--)- s 9)41:- c.N• 1 STI.CN-9-\A)-3?)\-'-n Q-9 Ksrn C)- 1-1;"1°-)-c-st--A -NS-Qczt-Q Cl _I-V1-1-1- cr) Q-Jc'sisql • QD-)-1 ,0 9V-U- -a.91_Locl c)Orla- 5 -8 -9J-.7N • Lir-o 9}v cu_ _Al 01-0-aa. (N9vv\AYT, Og_ cr-,3cN - - -11-) . rn4-) wiarr) QL SN01.1,-7 7) 9 1 --(1) h- oh v. -9-a -0(7 \-oso-d 3Q ),101_1_-7-___>_T_,9: ku.-) 19 15 i-P6._S'9 ) sN4N:\ 9ca -y)c-)2-) 9150-a. 3a a s) -7caS9aQ2Tal: 1)11:: - 0-1-N --- Ir)-EY) D-,•1 9 ca. -C)3_ --?) 0 (- s914 c7:-) ) )Q. • (- 1(77 )--.1crk.0 VAJ,- c' \AA 8.0-)-9T-\3c1, • 1 WI- 'a-c) s v\f- . • • orp T • . H 7) k FC! l•-;4-17( 2.D c o`r uma's- • - .q /(9/S8 - • O (L TL_� L(o�-�' r°SN t �_5_ TO T - S1�kv TG Tti E 1DE4CLO PE 2_ EC>V. 1(�GE�l LSt0(�STC� IIS _-- • - t. sr\ W_P�S_StK)-T _SELL_ ZIP, 6 Rjj . _ C_Q_wi O T• T ��(v�E;_-t�J t ►N-T_ • TO • D6 l�_fit t-L-E_ w 2 _Co(V`(\r\ SA(E 1 F T_t-F R EN E �`� ©2 tJc �. l�0(�1 E �8 M P\U y Vc-.o('Le E,b_) _I NCO-Cz-M E S CO iJ_G U�Iv G (ZTPSI 6J----N� SS S -ICE2D--- ---- m E iv T E -l0 -- 1 S Q•,Oi \ --.I_N CO_ E OF TICG �e IDNV Ca(__M EK3T 6g.,I0IP_ 1_S T6- --- -- C-_T =-r-Re, -TO CZ_M.►'ul_ ,N I. Ed(2__ LOLL 3o 'p f-� M-f'� `PEo P LE w\ tc,N Y N-P.\U�_ E�.�--t T-1--l S Ta ---- - w A.-.TC 6F- t_ � (_F Tt CCa IA/ M<4UT s_ w��E r o sT s"FRa-po_stoy_ A S_ PR_6. 4oS E_ a_s / sku,Lk 6DE 2GSc..,--r76 . o Tc `Z t E 0�� U.tJ L '2�=(3.1_�_T_� —_ TO 6 -T_ f S_ ( N` k&h-ttL T_RE --- -- p CA,_ c- -TO IT 02E r -r - LtkG 5 S( SL-L TEE G��E f �� ��c 2 �P-_Tco1 -Ai. losi - LE\ { D_0J Sac\k-k) C( u`S_i� t - - - S5-E M..S O aQ_t o � �C�\fez ENTol �( N (vOT__ (ACC PYTH-IS- -. - 2oPczSe\L, - - --- ------ 5 To 2 NA 11_,p_j_�)_C,- -T�-1� Eft 2- T G cc.S 1=-To- r, • • •• o „ . • tt. • - • , • , •. • •• , , • • • c • • t 7.r."'' r-"•• " e)J LK). CD.Re-±c-r. si-rEs c_._)1Q6. s 1_6 tpi3t Eô 6Ts\P-DS . • -11/4RE t IS \i-eg_Li OCT-. .(A.c--TIQE, ' To TELAS - R.1 PAZW7ic\-T-_-6 -1-31_JaC koc F-KV. LLE • IN.Lso, T3E 71-6_ TliE • MAGR-Pc7OP--Li —a‘ ePvT_A AW _ t_ LLSIL 1•_) A__(\N_(16-@_ ' • 16 TBLAK_cA\)6- UeEciRTs .F0P- c-b c-LF6, -1-171_13 ) EC_,T. IS • tk--1-. c-f?...st_E; wiTR. Trt-texac QWLf-TE6e_ LTH c)(\n--E -Pe-E -GIQTLc -PAR-K_ik)6 LoirS. . _PLows. .34cK ( io-r=0 e f\ • _ LE L(Ape.0E, "ra tb6 E_VvpLoy6D . PA 271SnP`b6c , N__\ffcik)7MiN_JiNKicTE-_ /6\kk)(A-PQL, f, El 5 s eiRi -Prev2--r-iNc.q 13, --Ci`c, NA1 KtPoWL-e-t;)_6 -1-146144 . oF - - - --DOEs icviq STO.g- i _ • -43.k_ko_,'Dtt & F\1\- D -t-t-Tp‘.3 ( 66,13 be-c-AAct , 03Q0NA.(cALLy____ -- ETtS cnoLyT _ 16.1D )._7k. P 1kc f_oiV ,11.1k6c)e-1_6(L)f_ L- RweeT ccg.paepz---e id3 li ter-^ Hr,, C< ri �;f�" d` �ti o.a�,1 L,1 ,. • E I s ELOLFF b y 711-4-4 N G1 [IQ' RE-Lr� S l 5 S iZG D\ ORlC��N( PL c L $T l TYP-E N)S 3_ Loc— 'Fen_K__RooKc- _<(i_f4 K)-D • S=i Z<E- 2 _F.. ._-G Re( r- �3_L�� tveez _.- _ad Lac- �v G_G A Ks 9_ac- -- l _LT kt �T IJt L� cow i'��J_TOI SO�E2TT E_.R_E,SP00sL,(1( V_I T_EE(J.111-1_TFoCL- .--r-i2(4_ C 2E.Q_J- 9 )v e-s E3 ►vim = G c�(�_ �lv�-L� -r( ��2c �E / P_Peo c_ 2-3 • _Tt-Ll S-----1_S L1 _lam 6 C�LC�o�c,Tl_DOTU LSd 1 F2o M -_- 1-1,4 - 7=ST0 RI -k- m L LD f Iv G-, rl"'t K-ps,-M.uSqA IN\,_P fv C�1 (�E SPEG L C-S_ --TI-k_ Ls GS-ALSo_ 1( _G_ LE oLOG_L__C_l4L-S_(-1-E OF - \f N1.0 , - - - ---- R E QT-O f•-) H fN S TFA sT Ex S+z - pc_ -Elul L L _ l_S_ 1�-�T_l C 2 L pL____� l-fvx_P_a s C _ AEU bou S REfs21N_G- xf IIJCc� - { t.1), � G c �-r c� c C=o �z - ► � g T OE ) RECOct RE - ST 2��-�EP CAN�1`�lC� S_-T_4P4Q) " lS ib-1�_c Gf K • -F R�N`s c�tJ � P T s -c�4s _-P2o Pas NL w_c-� ( 07- c -• --- Fo1.1-bw G G_T- S O ld fRE_C��NM N�- T_�O S-L --- -15LuF-F_e�_7ZQ C -n4 E tokks.. IT1-E S- - '' 6.� 4,.: 1 e • ; REc� w�yv�CND PcT101�-J —I c�`T_��'�CT--f'�v�__U L_5 3cJ�.ILl�1t36J - Lo-t- _- LID c_Ps-T_t_O_PJ• , tl�C 2L f�►2 C � Po ,_ 12.6 (�E_LC�/��VT_ STtA.0 S.L-v L_N C-) Pc -D K)GS- I&RE_ • 10T E - u._F ��2� S - fOSE-,_Ttt-VATI A ALI INYDiC EE • MEt/ ( G REr�TQ_ I Cl vNo i R 5 KEAN RD2o EKr� jYt/_lU l Ec� c� rv`C� f r'Z e e- f3 9--714.t-S D Pt S , tt P,4 cAQ 6 3, 5 ( 4-y 13 E tt ow K)TT l `r -rt-t-c_S__ 'Peo?c zsrot c_._. po C s 1�o T E�T__.Tt4E 12-_ ReQcLt_e-E.m_C S— c2-1 i�T—ANT', T__gG tee is _ A .5c t S_r-HIV"fi1A !f'4I.PA-c_T 710 `>-tIE_ FJJUI ok-__ — -M - -i-,-/ F=u.i_t_ tom L S LS e E.0 u i_Re D ,__. _ }C -PC�_op_ois c St6MF.I G -rof P_S FC_GTS_7"Lf G--Qu LrTLi._O F- -7,� .E 6ks U r eo N Elm c)_/ mac, -I--_ L S__Ls -rats 1(&Q r__r2 6 s e_c_s, -T _c,e E_► r2c LOTS_ _O la rc, P L e cs —_ - -- r'v`QAL-T s- P.ELA�E T) --at_LS_Yvk.Ass(U - -------__A L_T62/)P�T[_U S_ (3-E-Pc.,u2T14C2_-eg-PAO 2c D_1_D(5Cr.ISs ___ -- — c_c o Do uolV , (v (����C�N( l G-p �E o E i uN�o(Z� 1s-t-o - Ps0Pos ,- - - _At✓Sc� es-E (40 4 -Pe t2- CT -Peoc,E�S f-S Nod'- - ( N ("('r NTH _1�,�� tF -� kC v�G�� NG Sl z�C EN'l_P-ON 1--PL. _ .. Gb N Orr-Lb f� (\NO -Co .SU)EP T Lc S-, - CO OD L-1-1o1�L5 Re4u,tP(f 6_Ps N Vic..; 404 r2 r\-k_ c _ - - E cp EiOT_+ -— -- -- — — 0 (O c t l Sl d 1s__)_/_ __FEEL,EL, -T- fK (��N-ro�1i t s�u O_ �_--_--- �� it .) 1-17 (5__`Pe_c*c C__ -t�t{'64� LS --- - , t C.1 (z) ") • • -s !. • fi • • ! t-7,.•1 n''Cle. !jj • " -Fr G (vk c _ 0 - -r7-0 S -Fri S S 1-r-6 su_e_t2o •1_1S G F_Za(‘- 7Lc---LL e .c,_ PLA tv\ to _ fe._46,D ,Wp1 Po3D . /IQ - A 0 YV\ • - 3Co 1 • - r, a :CS • • - 9rt[- 07/-68 „ ' 4 CITY OF RENTON POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor August 23 , 1988 Mark Miller First City Developments Corporation 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: Submittal for Seven Story Office Building for Black River Corporate Park Site Dear Mr. Miller: • We have completed our review of your applications for Site Plan Review and Shorelines Substantial Development Permit for the above referenced project. We cannot accept the application at this time since the project is virtually the same as the previous project (Ref. File SA-038-87) for which we had several concerns affecting the project layout. Secondly, the site plan does not reflect the conditions and environmental concerns raised during the approval process of the fill and grade permit issued for the site. Since there are several issues posed by the application which need resolving, I feel we should meet and discuss the above applications as soon as it is convenient for you to met with staff. If you have any questions, please call me at 235-2550. Sincerely, CD401411t Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE:MCK:mjp 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2552 Architecture and Planning -- r Pnpomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A,I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 TRANSMITTAL To: Jerry Lind Date: August 19, 1988 Dept. of Building & Zoning City of Renton Project Name: Blackriver Phase V I I 200 Mill Avenue S. Renton, WA 98055 Project No: NW 88041 Attn: AUG 2 2 198: Lift Re: i Description: 1 Original Affidavit of the Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit Remarks: ❑�YySent per your Request El For Approval El Other: For your Use/Reference ❑ For Distribution ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records Please include this Affidavit with the Blackriver ,Phase VII Shoreline Application by First City Developments Corp. submitted Mail By: Paul R. Coppock J2126, cc: Mark Miller w/Enclosures r•i rii AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION A� OT CE OFPf:PLIA�C)A�ION FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT Audrey Benner ,beingfirst dulysworn on oath states `Notice is hereby hasiven that First'Cityoevelr .opments Corp. filed an application for that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the !a substantial development permit for the construction or development,of 2 Seven- ,Story Office Buildings located at: North of VALLEY DAILY NEWS :S.W. 7th of , West of Neches Avenue and S.W., East of Oaksdale Avenue SM., and 'South of the P-1 Detention Pond within • Kent Edition • Renton Edition • Auburn Edition ;Section(s) 13,24 of Township 23 N, Range 14#,W.M.,in the City of Renton,King Coun- Daily newspapers published six (6)times a week.That said newspapers • ty, Washington. Said development is pro- are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six posed to be within P-1 Channel and/or Its associated wetlands. months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published Any person desiring to express his views in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King or to be notified of the action taken on this County,Washington.The Valley Daily News has been approved as alegal application ould notifR the Building and Zoning Deppaartment, Renton Municipal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for Building, 200 MITI Avenue South, Renton, King County. ,Washington 98055 in writing of his interest ,vithin thirty(30)days of the last publication of this notice. The notice in the exact form attached,was published in the Kent Edition I • City of Renton Building and Zoning Department Renton Edition x , Auburn Edition (and not in 10-85 supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers Published in the Valley Daily News S August 10 and 17,1988.R3096. f during the below stated period.The annexed notice a c4:• Notice of Application was published on �10 and 1��9 R8 _, R 3 0 9 6 • The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $ 45 .00 Subscribed and sworn to before me thisl 7 th day of August 19 R R Notar ublic for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, -• King County, Washington. VDN#87 Revised 11/86 Architecture and Planning v E Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 August 5, 1988 POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF RENTON Jrry Lind City of Renton j AUG i 12 1988 200 Mill Avenue S. 11 r0 f`, A }� Renton, WA 98055 l lS d RE: Blackriver Corporate Park Phase VII NW 88041 Dear Jerry: We have enclosed a revised Site Plan showing bicycle rack locations, and Xerox copies of the proposed bicycle racks and light fixtures. The proposed building floor area is ±285,000 s.f. , building efficiency should be approximately 93% which would be an area of 265,050 s.f. as defined by the City of Renton for gross floor area. This number may vary slightly with the development of the floor plans. If you require additional information or have any question, please do not hesitate to call. Respectfully, * . Paul R. Coppo k pal Enclosures cc: Mark Miller Don Erickson Royce A. Berg "I/ � - - / ` ' �\ \ I rai/0 _ do_.......,,.......... ____,, , __:. _:_s________ __________ -___-,liturm- .:441-4- -- NA\ \ vtot; - - TI $ & moo ,r ' ' S 90',00 00 474 I / .. ..7 ii. imi 111111111•11•111•11111 III MI „ /1111 IR — - I I I i 00 - - - - - -WI - 18 1 J TILi1Y �-r1T • I c VATI0N -I .} %Ce- TRAG-�I E-Lic..c�u \ \ \ RI ,' 4 0 I \11 / 4/' 4 Pi// ' III / �_/. 1 --",rfr""- ( \ \ N. ICP. 0, ///, ''''. (S i i \ \ 1 \11 11 I I 7 / ..L � \__./aI �z-t•JCY / - i / '* i•'' ••••••€) e e 0 O o . , , , � � ///// / ���� 0.-: -GYMPVL TYP, I / / I Olgro_ ' i 0 • * ii ,.„....„)„,,Ix 4 . ,,, 2 1 / / / 7 Stor es Q : , ►•i���G�.•i•')/ , ...„/ 0 - . 4 NI4 �1Q ♦ 0 / ,of i , 3y ►� i / ...,„ i • i2/ ....----..-- , Hcp, ilk', ,,,,„ , / , / to . * / _,.... / \\s? ZN (. \ / itt)::41 :----z--zz,t...*/ *7 , \ \ \ \ 110/1 / • - ,0 Pftlirii sLc& / i \ . 4V F ACE / \ 1 7 /// ii.... Alb., V Y Tilli deb / \\ \ / I 6 / / (---) C-- \ 1 L. / t, . WALLS ► / ` \ I // ---------.... i 411* lc" \ 401h.. ,, / \ \ \ / I \ G 1 ' y .. ;• - s !uualI? S . ,-• •s..a . �,' . -., ;- a 1* t •.. � ; • • ' ^•; '! • "'A`, ' ' `�: r % ( � ..,, . • - ♦��� ■ x: ;� '.. ' ��~ T -. ; �;• . •� a =:�a l 4 :r - '• • �y� r•.1 seam ■■ ■ • � '. . , - ..�, ` t ■MINIM ■■■ Iit. saodweo pue we0Q ■ .� w :; -, ,� "_. '~~ :... .,.,�,. .�.10 sueinelsad ❑ ■ -. - . .�: , = •''- • ■■■■■; ..� :�:1 : i . ■.■ slodap snq pue well ❑ ■ _ 4.a.i. Sill■ MINN s6u!pinq ao!ii0 0 I. -^. Y ,,, ' 9` ; -- :: . f III saxeldwoo luawpedy 0 ■ •.... •.'' + Si0ooS ❑ ■ ' may - IIsiauao 6uddoyS 0 ■ � ' y N. suoinlsu! sno6 !ad p +• - •t 7!',l • r i 1 ' i:• ■■■ ■ III : - sialuao n m ; spuna6!(eid pue s��ed ❑ • ■ _ =_ " :.. ill i saIs�an!un pue sa6aioO 0. •■ ; ; ' a s' •„ `� - •■ t - '_. „ - ;palelsu! l � o . • . .. .. � ' • :° ~ ' IN uog4!a ayl Low u! suoleool Ma; If ■ :;,i . , . • A : s s. 2'", mum aoASo sa6enooua pue iayl aonpaJ ■ — ...- It Litt Low `Ma!n pi u! `lua J ino paoeld aq ■ _\,Q _ ` I ' of glow au; smog, u6!sap lensnun au ■ • _ z_ .t ..• ... / , .. 111 •alaiosgo mow lots leuo!;uanuoo ayl ■ • '�'��.; � , 'NEWS ■■■■ 6ui ped a ol(o!q u! uog ■ ---ca :,,..::,,�a..:� �•!`,, . ,, apew sey leyl .�1 I ■ .• EMU •enouul anb!un a s! )1oea uogq!d aqi • ;. R:== '" a �t ■..■ .■L.. . :�. ail�.. . :..'1611'1:1111111111111 11;117f I . ■! , III■•,■■,..■,■!!1! !!! ' ...liM.�J .1... S..S •;pimp padow pus api(o -as •�tepol pala�iiew 6u!MJed ap�(o!q to edict •Janes-aoeds snopuawaJl a s! u6!sap lep ■.SI. ■..■ ■■■■ -!q Iuanaid pue s6u!punams mil aoueyua ;sales ayl Toed uogq!d ayI swim s!yl-pain! -ads ayl•spadow ;sow pue saloAo!q to saz!s ::::■ SUSS !imp 8JayM 6u!Ilas leanloal!y3J5/due u!iRuau -u! 6u!aq wal `uaipl!yo IcIle!oadsa 'aldoad lie alepow000e ueo pus `sjoeJ leuoguanuoo ■■■■■ • -!wad paoeld aq ueo �{oeJ ayl •an!snJigoun sluanaid sa6pa dmeys Inoyl!M ub!sap wool uo se s�(ennap!s 6u!uo!I!sod inoyi!M panoas SSISI • pus aidwls Ai6upwis s! u6lsap sli •6ulieadde awl ayl •A !i6alu! i5Jnlonas sainsse wol Allnl aq of siaayM yloq pue aweij aloA(o!q ayl MUM ■■ A einidinos pue an!Ioaue s! `saloAo!q Ted 6u!lelnpun NI pue aouels!sa JayleaM sl! moue u6!sap uado aq. •6u!�iied api(o!q .ol ■.■.■ SS II oe uogq!d ayl sanl6 pals paz!uen e6`load i a ■■■�■ of aoeld ales a 6ulaq oI uomppe u! ` toed uoq d I i ao!nap loadllayl Aim a s! cooed uogq,d ay; SUII , ■■■■ -Isnd•spadow pue sapAo!q 6upped to walsAs ley; aouap!luoo is!lo�o!q ay; san!6 •uo!lon�is ■■■■■ "" -q!d ayl'�ioed uogg!d mil of paioelle Aimee awl aoueualu!ew pue aige�np `Al!lenb Ay _uooiieingnl aoa!d-auo a6ne6�neaH �tl!moas SINUS aye(aI!uoldtiyi pue lapel!O.6•a)siiool padeys a si Toed uogq!d ayl •ease awes ayI u! iloe� MUM -aoysas�oy �(ir�noas-ON Jelndod mu pue ieuo!Iuanuoo e to a6elols ayl algnop 6u!pla!�( S! )IoSJ pawJol Aianb!un s!yl to sanleal u!ew ■■■•■ S■S■ al/3 to auo •Iuawua!nua s�(epol col pau6!sap ■.S.■ ■■S■ 'pasn aq ueo sao!nap u!eyo pus�iooi piepuels �ioei al/ u! aoeds uado liana y6noayl wal ■■■.■ EMIIIV •aidw!s s! )ioeJ ail of a1oA3!q a 6u!ano -led 6u!Iewelie ue u! paoeld aq ueo saioAo!e doer aioA3!q ISi!l ayI s! 3{oed uogq!d ayl ■.S.■ 1:idol.iiiiullil:I1I■■■■..I■■UU.S.IU■■■..■......■■■`111.■ )13e ■■■■■■■■■■.■■.■■■.■IL111:L:■.::■■■■■ ' Illilllllllii.U5UIRUSSSSUIli........................................ SS„■,■I,S,SS illilli..... ILL;.......... ■.......■. ■■..■.■.■.... ■ ....■.■...... ■■..■.■...... 11111 .IIIIII: uoqq .11I::I:IIIIIIIIIII:II:IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII::::::lam■J 11....... ■■........■..■.■.Silt.■■■■■...■........ urn, . r■ i oro .,,. ...� ;. ��r ,_ �- . � ADVANTAGES OF THE RIBBON RACK: r �+ -; �`•` ,• .,. + it, 7 A! ❑ Maximum security -� ':; �`' `� °� teJ'` y rJ. ,ti- i�, ,.,,,,. ❑ Fits all bicycles and mopeds ;.�" �a'�;• • N.�. '• • .y ok ` 'r "ram : ❑ Spacesaving—uses 50% less area •� t�c,'' �`- ��r1t,r than old fashioned racks �. ., .�� f* • • - ,-y 0 Maintenance free •r \ \ `- ` , 0 Safe. .childproof...no sharp edges -'f r; • r .` ` % '� or corners ' - " = =`�;�‘ ❑ Attractive one-piece tubular ►�, ` construction 601:. . ..,M �„ = -a.`. - t — :❑ Vandalproof "` ,••• `` • �-,�� `�:4� ❑ Heavy guage rustproof galvanized steel i t • , _ • _ -,. -.;; *t� `,•-: ❑ Weather resistant II l < r / / `�... - :\ 0 Accommodates. all locks K,',..:...-.� . T" q� : ,' .:•:-......:,,, : 0 Compatible in all architectural settings • i. ; • a�>: : -.- = _ _- '.•- • -❑ Reasonably priced ■ MAXIMUM SECURITY ■■■■■■■■■■■■l - _ MINH . IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHHhIIHHI SPECIFICATIONS III i fvlodel RB-7 • ❑ All units are made from ASTM 53 ' �i� ir- SCHEDULE 40 galvanized steel pipe �_ / � � � (2.375" OD x .154" wall) ��� • ❑ Installation methods are in ground ■I■■ I —� anchoring or optional flange mounting ❑ Custom architectural finishes are III . available in a wide variety of colors T 35'." or metals(brass, chrome, etc.) 97a".� 32 " ❑ The Ribbon Rack is modular, III • custom models are available for any odd number of bicycles s Delivery time:six weeks from receipt of order. }.). . • The Ribbon Rack is patent pending. I . - FLANGE T � For prices and additional information contact: • MOON • �� t — GROUND • LEVEL Standard Number of Rack • BRANDIR ENTERPRISES, INC. - 'Model Number Bicycles Length 1ow' 200 PARK AVENUE,SUITE 303E, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10017 IN-GROUND „�� (212)972-0093 RB-5- 5 36.375" ANCHOR MOUNT 3 - - RB-7 7 62.375" ~y - -Look for us in Sweet's Catalog' • 4 . _ , . _ ItHH111ItHh1l I . • • • . .v,. ,:- .w...--o.......- *e.7.g•--..,1,4•1.1...;:r' - Li'-'?q,..•''...,•':".V.:'‘'.:', '. : -',.. ''2.. • :,-;" :• ••:-''' ' .::.rit..,,c 'i ''.-..,'..------• -.•r ''1-4,If ,it':-;:;.;.:1'.'r; V*-41-,:-..:"-.it' Z';'!-i-.4:,'-Z:'sf-le,.1i114.,V4;5f i.:j4-41-t':::,f...t:la','I.'' . "":>:14.4: 1,--:''i:::;.--t.i. ::''',.1....;..'f--.f..'.:-.;''' '--..., :''.',:'• • •:.'--' ' '1 T-',4;--Nris 2•-••:.--'•-1:.s '4:9-...,4-•:,o't,',,S1 %I-, - 1: ':..:,;;,,,,.,.:.!..),•,.,-N.:',...',-•ti,i-tx•_,,i,---2.6.,- ,,••••••*.s.',•;--.1.7.-,•:-.'-•,•.- Vt...••..41-.1,-;,-..-ir:,...,.• :•,,-;cr.•.t311.4.e`:','... ,--- '4.r.:1:T-'1••".:7,,,...4.•, .`'•Ttri.-:; .:411,Q:.-ira;14.-t•Lb:,:j,1.?g: V.?!:''-',- ••••':-"k.-,'•.',1'P'. 7-,:7 .--, .7-..•- --• •••.:•..:::-•., -•• -•:. :: ..-.41.,-iet:'=::4.-'. ..:\.:-. .,:•.:,-,,.?:".',.:-1,:''': •:',•-`t,"-----.46---.....t:. ,a ;1--",..t.,-,.•:,7-------•?:‘,,e,-,---- -" --.4,-,- ---,,iv,••,•-•!---,,,---- LE..„ ',•,.,4r •.!-J•t./7.:;,-;•-•-:;,74,1,;i4::..,..---A.LA%-,,,..i--:,..,47.i''',.:.-•••rt.;•-••••,.'17,-.$,,, 4444...,... --",...4::: -..,..,1,i-•:....:,..,....4.0..„;:s....,.„,...4..fl-e-.....,,0•.:.,ty„.4-4::•& •••'1-•.4i;•••,3.7.'-••••:•t.-41,5,,rt'i;4•;•.....i•)_,••••••'.4,- -.f.'1:,:,..-.-2..4-1:,•-•.-. -- ...•.••••.:.-•••••;::•:::.s.7,••',-.:•'. -...•:: - •• -.1.• • • !..•'..:1•4?!..4-!-,:,,..' r-r-"----.:ifTe:..t•)t-,...71;)7,-*:4:::::4"::.,:.):7-,•-ti‘..P" .44s..7"'''''..1'.'':••••:t1::,74'+,:":;:-."•17.:;;Y:;.,',.:: ::-:::-.Y:-..'.%1.1-Y.-•-•.,1:' :-'•:%-1::::' 7;••e?'•''''-:''•:'•• .• ' ." .- •''.:! •' -• ' • - P. .....4.410-,••••••• F .:..t:.•,:-.--;:•-••.:„,..:.•--....-"-7,..-...3„-•;;;•,.•-•:•:-L••;,,...'::.:.,i.t. .,...,-,...„. ••••.: . .4 1•.1'7 '',.-if: .":.",-,...:..,:'-•.•;•, • '' ...•"I'..,:';:".,. ... :: --,,*'..:,!... .• • ...; . , -.`,:i+. ..li;.; •.2;t-:.:••••-,:;.::.',14;cri.---•.:,...,0-1'1.2. '.4• --- - • ,.1`;'•7; ''.!,.:,••.! ',... ' •-•'•.;.. • 7, "-* .. '... ' • .. . . :• - •„.• • , • . - .,. - ... .., : • ..,- •:',";;;j;;;I:,"rt... ,.,''"`""••4.7,21...":t•..tfir...:Tr.,i:-'17 0.'41.•.T.--..' ,,. ••. . • • • . , '' ..V A`,.('`k•, ,I`-..f3 Pi",r;„*.`11%;.:.....`..r;i:.ii,,,...4.4:"....:.,:":2•-•,•-, ... . . . ... • :.....•..ke...,,.,,-,.......,•...•i•......•,.•=.i.,..•1:•,"• ..;.'•- .,.-.,•-L•-i. I•l_a,l:_:••..;.:.-..,...,:....,.i....,„-.:,".......•?,•,.,•...-•.:,,-..i.,t.•.•..-.•Li•!.....-..t.-,n..,,.•,-•.,p4:...:._;.-.,.-:•g_•:4.,.........„,.:.•4-,-,.,l.c.,,.-...,,•.„.•i.r.?fT.1,,.L..•..5-..1'7.;.,.•".,...4-••.•. L• .'::••7• •-.•,f.WrF.'-':-..f.;•--•: •,.....ir••••f:-:,•.,.-.--'• ""-•..•''' -',...;,;".-. :1•........,••::•:..-- oo cli ' I' .f•,';•',:."..."'•" . •-••.•..•,.•.•...•,._... ..-.•':-,,- .•• • •--_ ••--'•• •••.•... . • ...... ..... . ..:.....:;,....,%.!;-,'.;11:i'•"."-•' •••••••':•,• ••••;•••1:•,i,•••••••-•1:7"-••"-#.•-•:•:"..:''',..'..-.*1.:%:*.r--;:1--,-.'!".. ..4.0.:„,-,..1-'..:7..;':. •-:_•..7...,:'...;01,-... 7_,-,,,..1•-• -,,,•-....,;,:::"f-,••,.•`‘•,-. ••,%•. ' ."' •-•:, ' ..... -' : •. --, . ••.:,....%•,-..!•.-.-.-• ••7;.'cf•••`:i•-.,, -••:. ,.. ,•:-. :'-.:•i,:,...-:•:.•.•••••''q .,...!-. ,'":•"?.."'• .':...".':."1".."1'-.'''-'•':Pi-7:1"'": ''.` • . ::.;..;•-•,"'.-.'..•,----..:'- -. ...• ' :-'. . ... • ' . • .1::•".,-...''-'.'..•',----,'-.1.r4,-.•'......-•••..-•'-.'-' •' --ti.--;--,•• . - '::.li' i•':. '•-erl'•':': .-'' '.• ':'.., ' .:•-: ••.;^,'• •• . .' •• . r-• : -........ P. • .. ,-.. . • - •,''-'4•".••-1.....7; i.,...'" .1".••: 4'.....s.'' • •-r..:• 1;•iir- ••••••=•,•:• •••••••.,••...;;•v .„: :•.--. -•• •-••••• '•- '• • •.-- ' ;•••' :`AA" ••• • • '. - - • • . ,_.',"-14,....'..g,,•i-'..„.. ,•. -.. ..,r. -• ,.!.2:2i:•1.••••:......:„.- .-";.-.•-.....::::-. ,....--.--:.•,• -••,;,,-, •• -..-..1.... f • ,:' -: • ' •-,-i,'.."-t---:1.'".:':•',1-. ...:1,44••••;`..- .---.:•.- --.-'..:,..r."'.:.:-.*"..:.-.:C:.:-,1:7.....!;'-• -.'-•''.4:••;•' '...,: ''•,..' 1•,... ..••,...• •-• . - , .. . ..-. ' • '' - •- • ..:..,;...•!....:1,4.':- ...i......;•--,,,..:i 7.,,.7,:,:;ff,.,.- _:1-.••_„11-,.•'::,...,:l',7,_,' .::'''.f,l, ...•-......f;' .:••.-" . , , .• ' .4.,.... -i...4*.-..'---••'....r.-.4... ..4_ .- .4.,...,...- •.:-.--.4: •:-.-.• -.. ,••,-- ..• ... • - . . . • . :.-_-,!.....:...„,..,- - •,,,z..,--,7.....r.7.;-_, •••••-, .• - ... .••,i.re,.,.:.;.•• - .,.::•-•,..•• . . - , • . ._ . . . •. • - • . .. ..:....:;-_-,.i.-. ••;,...-:•-,..-,,,.,••......-- --::.,.;.•;:-...„?-•:: ,:A.,-.....-:. - . . _ ,:r• • '!- '!' 'V r.`"."44;"'.7,11*`':•••/''tf'S-4:-:';'7•''sP:•.,i:.,-4 •.,:'..,.'. ..''' _.•-.7 f•‘_',.-•,' •.",..','''' ••• • ••,.. .... '.• .• ..:'..:L . --;;Ktp••:t:ri.....!.1'-!-!;•.,-;', .."-••:...-....;,-,•`-r-.43.7..t... :••• ..A 2-40.-r-.71.4.•• • .• •• ---- - . ; 1,4•N •••••'•-•-c-:-7•?••-•• , '....••' ../'''- • ":*-P...;q4A:1:37;'.,Zi..!');:..r-.'V-7....7,--:-..........:..,..27:'•;-:-• . ' 1-:‘..." ''''.1••'" .:,r,•• ' • • • . .• , •- • . . . ..A.:.,-,--;.•.,-(._-_,I.-..:.--7.-.1..--k 4_-7'i,- ...••;•.r--- ..'1748:44 . . - ,:„:„.x.r.;.,---.:--, •k.-:.----....-,•.:-....,•-•-.-..,.e--....,.,--__ .. - ._- • • • . .. ... ---Ai...,........4".,2-r••-3.,.:,..-.,..,• ;-•'1..,::,.....i:-:.--- ..i.Fr ... ....... • ••• . . - ,.. •• • . - 6,...A.--,,,•••••t;.••;:-.,-••:•,;., •,•,:'•",-....;2• .-..••,.......;;-...,2'.....,..,• "::'-`:•'•"'''''''• •-1114'. -r-i; .."';• '..,'..`T‘:'i•7••••: -- ':'•.',...''''':'-'2,:',.'-..,, . -- . ..-,,,,,-,:„.i.17-5,,• .-i..,,7,-. • . "9"- -4; .•: - :-:•.:•,.,.. . . ..., ;.....,,••frt ' ..i'...'-.-...7;,':. .4-at..*'•••••• -.,••••.-..:,-..:r.r.:-..i7,:t- 4., - -.• ;.,..,•,'"'',";-:•.:.: "Clir,t.....-.:-,11•14iir.,1:: • . .7'-. ''.. •- ••••',0•1:-.r,.....••-•......; ,,,,,....., %.............::•••s• •:••:': '. ';-4•-:-..114741‘",.1%i'l,ri--':,- .,,•:.••:.;'-',..--.1 1',...1•-•:.:••••-*:'••'S•i••••....• t'••••3•-:•••••te:!:•1•••Ve't.1•••' .•••••••'4'4'. '.1'A.•31.tip: •••'••• '''••!il'i•'4".....,..,.,;-,..1 •r...,- 4.•-•‘;-.-t-,.”..*-7-4.•,..v.,,,,...,.:. ..„...4..."07.......„,,,-,..._, .1 . •.'• .. .._ -_:. .4..1gli.:•.".;,i.c..,::;:-...;:e.,-:;;.=-• ....t.* ..;.r.-4.....c.v."..'",-?..f.*:;....y.jr. ...,4 •• -.....k.O.:1,-,-_.-.:...r .•-7.-- •-:,,•:,.....::•,•...,....,..,...-•_:-. .• -• • - . .- . ..„"---e-'-';..:-"..n-..-.T.:---• - ••'4''''.1''''-;•litctAi ..if.',.. 1-.1L.,. :1"*---- ....4.:-'1;;(.2.,(1.4-121;:;-"-."'FfriP• --"-tzri-47.:`-•••:.1*:‘' ;.--:• ''.- ,.-.:-......,-,T. -"'-.fat -••-•,•••:. • ...::::....• -.,,--. '--.....,4.•:-/..- .7'.:V.::: • ' •': '" • IA •• • :'''':,• '-".' ...• 1.• lir".t.(1•:";.:•••;,-.'..:•`:'•.j.•-.•,.7•'•-•- ••••' -..-.'i:ILV''.7.:•',..,•-•.•.• -••'. -* -'1*--.:.'3-',,4 4.-.,.,.-..,...:0.l.t,t.Z 3t,rt.4.;.•t•4+•7•-1.7•,-•.1t•.•e0,......„ :'.:;'....2.5„..-i.*:.;--.=:t,a''',.4..,.t-.•.,.'•..,.5..-rf .'-,:°;•1••.4.•.••.:'.t: -.;.' -.":.4.';.'•;.;_;.",-''"-"-i..,.'..'..'- •"• A1,-4A.-..+7-3--,7..-:*4t. - 1 .•a•,•'.,.'.•'-i.,.N.i.,• ir,..'...s.."_•..T...-.:_:i•:.,,'"-t-•"4s_'.ri,.-..'':..'l.::.-3•::,1.., •-.,'P;:..."•..%'.tA..:?..2r....-,:.s,.-,:, ...Li.:-.:'.,4..*:•;."7-:;-•!•.!-:•1*.1'.*3::;,,..'..?,',••- .'.”..-.-4..,'t"t.r"••'.•.-".t2-i. 4f`•,-s,3-",7'i;.r,1.4t4,-.*.:0:,,-l'-"•,•,k•.,1,-.-4.7N-A.1-4-,•,U,;T-tz--,,l-,r.:L,g.:'..1:.5,,7.r..1"p-.''-,4'r,.-„,.sk•.Pt(.1.;r.e..1:i•_1..ig.5.-.•:,-:-,::•..-,n•,•.2-4-7-tr:c1:,1.-.'t4`;F.,.r.:.!•-:;.i!?1i.-7•'•7 •t:•,•q'•'*;;•'. • •*-• EXHIBIT _ 4 l...,.„i ' r 1,r,;•,--,t.--v...7-••..„...• • •4-,-,'''' '. *,..-`'." 1.71- .-' -":. -:'""- 'li' • .-a-iiz4-ift.i.i.1;.•v::. ' Note light standard for .. ,„... ., • -•-'il --;:•-;'lit ---c• ...:•Tts•- 44. '-,...., '•••4- ,.- -A, ' * .' type, shape and color only, _- .... • "...::-...-L. --. ,--.---,_, ..4,30' ' t-si,,Act.-,•.•• :....,.. ..,..lw A I.. .,,ILp.'..:. ..,-....".:..,:..., ,....a....-t.•.-• :,". ...'• ' ;:1.11i&,: . r..,.,,.% •--,=: 7!;-„ ••.:& 61. .f • ',. :., 2.i.?, -1...• Manufacturer may vary. • •--.•--7,-4.-...,1••,.. - -: ''.-,-,••:---,s --ifr-r.s.' •C.-'-.., •* • •'••••.' "%a'4 lit'• ;..4;:.P.1.P.‘i.„.1-1',:. ....--;•7:.it..- ,...•••••••Nr• .0 ,••24 -. p•• A • .. -• , _, •-•,' •5 ,...,..... ..„....,,... - •••:. it:A..• •4'-.•-7-- •-'" •i.2;ta• • -; • PIO-r. --rt.:u•,.,ti,f1.•,i...... • ' - - •-'.-..ii.Ji-'. •-.-:_----..-- .414.- : lir ••,. - •!-,.••.7- :. ,.; •0"4,'-•;''t Itt;.,..,....v.lec...f.ti.t,,.:,,,,,,ii.::1,i..i... • • ,... •.. • . ilki--.-7:;••••••.' ---- '- t ••.w.........-, . .- •••t* l•. .1; • . • . 4-.;,•.#7.'2'., •.*:,. ., . ••••E-qe.--. ...7-.,:.-..i-jig:'•''1 0 . %; ••;,:•.,- '1.;•, it ..:':;:rkfr..7•••Fe:-t`...,C, . ' *..t-7-...,,.:-. .i•--, .•--, -- .:. 4•..' ----.,‘..:.:.•10,t1....X..1" *: `'.. - --,'• 4 '•s," 1.-' .'••7., •.„0::•• '• -1.; , ' ' . . .. „• _ ".i14;.:;;‘:!.,....• __'I I P-...-•r ._,...;.:'... .-; i;•:• 'at;hioNtit t'.41.:ViLt•:•.`- , IS. ;1 :II .!?.1-,,_,_74.:-. ..-4,7 ,...i....1 • ;.-: :•,•:::•• 'W _ .,,,i..i.,.....,..., f....,„t.0,,..: .z....., .... . . - ,....S..-.: •-s. ':1 . ? I „s: A ----4.:..,. • ....., 1•„, ii,,..;,-h. -;,,..,•,,'...1,,f :•:4..,•••••1.:,1L.,..- •.4' . . • , :- . .,..• . - .... „..4....-... ....4..;...ip.'• . ._,.._, _ .t, i,• Is 1 • I; I -. •.;. 1 !. r !,.s .i ••1.,•: ‘:':,......' ' • •• ...1,.: z,„? :era,: 1:. .. t.'-.....,..- •-',.....0.•til...;...1- ...a......,L..;n-,r........... ..f. ,;.c... ,. ...,'"f • I i I ""'I;• Il .. i; 1 i ....: ''' :•- ..• '&I:4'". .2:ii,tcr:11. ..!.-0.•!;!...,suz-1.. ••••:,•,e,AP-:' •!f.."-•-....F,:. s:•-•-”,-•Is I.'-..v" '. "... "g• _. .., * ' '' '. ' "r''' ' "' A F:' 111.5WIDW .41W5.4..---- "It•••X'"4.t k.‘" ''''tgtr..... -1g,ti Ek :tg.: i-..i-t.- . 7-"....„,„_•2.,.':." ,t• , • ,-P : II ii• 11 • - .,.„.,_E 1.,.., -..-.: • ; t • ,,,....t.ir.tit • . .. .-.i•-•.:,;-- MOM I I '1'‘•111111 •• ‘': .....i. 4.1..1 . •••• '1' ..4. ••:••Ate-A V•;••"et• tt,t-g''13-*!ttn 4- .'-'i':,- 11•70,,,,A;r:k.,..t,:. .o '7.,-.1.-..iiiie,4> .:•. . ,.:_, -, k)F, •••1- I'V: ,•'' I"„ri Ai(..ti • ,bi ..-114..... -1'P •It • _ . .. ...:E.' •• .,,...:1.-......7.tiSt. . it i ; • .• .-••-'• 1 • . • .°.•II. iii J.1 ' 10 - IA ii.,-• -. '..1.•-^i.i. • V.L.i...,,,i1.0.1„-..11••••-,-..•.,,,,,,, • - •..• ',: . • PP".....1 • • ; .. ..,-, , • .. . .1 A. ....ti. II e alte_i:,:$` jr-a.t.„..1E....1-:.. . 1 ..I.• .....:t'. •-• i'4....;', . • .:\a ' •:.7•''••,...Y. __. j, ) "P-77.7.. f,-,-• li.:ICIO Woo• . -- • .'24.Z.....L.:n.,.. .. •. ,,,.,, '. • "12r:j lifir . . ?;•• . .r•pt--a-nve„, -`•'•t:'-- : ,iiir...t, .• . - ---.6. caw_'t. . •.... .4 a ....-Ilk .4...,... : - ., .:... --..;--,- _......-- ...,./ ,,. . '_k.- :.j.e.i.•,.?4:i‘-7... .'4.-.:;17. . .1.t. 0,','%./.,--,..7:11t.•..-''''' --,-.-_- . ' -S -_,... Nt-1-4-*•-:.:;•_. ••/.`7.-?-=‘;-.7,1-1:at ... VS'i lIt'W .. . -,‘ • -,•. '--, • - ,,..0 .----.. ..., -. t• ',TA'i.,;.;:p•-;,-lier,44.1.,. ; .•.,.:,,:ridr..•'''•iS4';.., -..,.., ./7.---••:-. • '?iii.':f.4.!,F4s ,#..',F..,..-„ 1-:...tr.*T-;..”. - • --..a.W.••,.V4I1L•41.;:./.' .. ...- -•7".•;V:-.11'..;:s• - • ik •''' .t; , • ,.-..,,zr...,_4,,,;:.'s •J.... • .• •..,{• •••• j j.. t ' ••••'t.'Iri •".•jii.ti,..•'-1.• .'..'4S611P,:•:t:..'••••4;.4;:i'l$'‘. 't 4•'.. • '...:.Ff:-.....tP• .I. .'.. re.1/4,Z.• • . • '..aei...i.21 111.2T7.;.• . 7,......4•1111P1 ••• .• . '....• ....• a.......••••••."."41,7.1.14•11.17.1k.rt•Ar,',1"*.eW„S.r.....,./.OS.,T.r. „.,....1,..,,-• J .. .‘, .., •jii,S. ' • ....•'.....,•••:•:,t 4,j•••.:•••, . : ...lig.,1001.7.„,.•••'.....„ '. •...„ 'IN% .•'. •...N... ..i..'t;.',.5:'..i'...,tS•‘:!P',.Z7'.... .•...-....V7'7:.ft••;,•••1:- ..i...!!'-.7 Vr.,:_--4-....-...1F:11:'. ''.. - • •.:...4-.-'•'-.7-'"•••4...•:-. sW, ' ..,...,- -:.:41••1,.....et:4'..,1:yiFii'.::."............ nir.';'‘.:7••'4-'0'••,•••te.ts•c.•••"'T••• - •' -.4.1.-3:1..-11,•;!:• .......At.....,.-....,• . .,..: . • r......... --. •-•-•:,. ••:t'..,...„4. ...'r-..1"..r.:'.-4::-. ';P:t.-..C•:•.::',.;,....4-.%.-::.;•-•„...v.:.,..ti'lt.`,.,...,11?;.:i'7:,•....t•••".....R.-.'..+V•1-- :-....-:=4,..":',-• '':r.t...,..4.Ay..-:',...• -. '.. ..-----.....*- •- • • ..-'4V161``',Ye. '' ' ' ....-•' •"",t--9-'7' •-)...no...., 4•.1-.. .,. .,.......t. .7....,. ....... ,--•'`.•-• ...,:x.,...,• '. ..... •-•a.t7...•• • ••••;?,,....A.::.:p•:•:',.•••••••',,C,,.:,..c.:,....,•;:,.......s.,.4 t; ,:lif:......,•:,;.,,......4,.........3.G.,..: ....1 .. . ,. •7. . 77,......:;e.....4):.:..."...t.•2, 4''''.." fr......'dff;d: ..e; " .!%-:1:...f.41, . , . II :', ..--t,11;-, .,v-TV 4.4:14.1:-,.,.•.`3-:"...'',..:.-...'.i.i;:;-.-...:'.' ".;47'•:".'-::4:5'r.,q.'IL:.:•'•-.7:,.1-.7zi 4.;. •' -;, •••••%:PS.V.°.-il•?:•'•••5'''...L44'-''''Z'Y''':•47,....:-•1•.'...,=...r.,'.. ••r•Vt.!"..•?.•::••••2.-rt .......„. ..,,.., . " •""•,..,*4.--•"Ni •. .,,,.r•' . •. w3..tr,:l'rf-,,.. ....",.',c•••..>,:''..... ,..••.!..1.:...„/.r.,.A...1..,,,.,,....,...A`..:.I.,•,•.•..44..:.:...."...:-:.r..,.;,::.....z;i.t'k,2i..,'•:'!,.7. , . -.••- -;•--.••::.t.7.•-•:•i•-:-.'.. • .., :••.. .... • 3.,7,.7,1. !t:',7..... -..•::--..-:..-',..5.'..•...•.•-.•..,.-:t-.e•r••7•-•1.:.'4,.,.11 1,.7„'-7.••:.•.-:•;•1::•--7-V-•;-•%•:•-.•--"7•::..g.::..4.:...1..-...-•1'•.;':''.':.'-.„..'.......:,••'':••-:...•,;•.t-...l.I•.--. . . .1'•:. .,.• .'. Tr,4-r, ': '1'•.'•'''4'T-1'"..'.;'..:6•"•;,•.`1'ii"•.-'.;,..,:•:••:•(i.,;:2-•i••.•.,•'!':i'•;, • '...,..i.,*:.-,A•-._4'....,.•.4,.V., :i.:-......:: TYPE --.--•--• .„ . ..lc..„.. -- .,•,,:ki„,, ,,-..i.4`...';'• ••:...C..-;1:,'-7,•?••••M•...?t•-.T•••• • 1. , . „.7.; ' 7.••••',7,,ictk,,,,; :•.- ,• *.• : ,,,.-.:t. 1 •• • 4'...f...ri! ";•.. ,c.-..••1• ..: -.v",:• ....• ;.”--• ••..: P. ' . -...,,,J..... ,,...3t, -Ct.,...•q..,,,,•T.,..1,..•••••,47%,. .',••••.}. . ',:t1'`1•.:•'••••''•,•••It•••.....••'• , • -'...27,•: .:-....::.....-4-t 1',..,...,.•,•4.-:••;;;;,r •,..• , ... '...•-•'• ••••'••••••1;3.rZ.41,„:•.4;A•47".,;?.,X...r. !:.;11,-,;-• SV.,..,:r:•;•',... 3i. • :f•••,.,.4,:i• 1-1-•'" ...••• -'••••• •:-- ,...i.-"•: .•,':.. • 11P :. -:e.si;•7:-Pkei)tx.••:.:/. I-•4•t-;,..:7;,•X•ri! -- .• • ••••. ••• "••••-••:=.!7 "41..r. .t• ••• . .. . . ......,... . . . • • . . ......,...s•..„,.....:, ,,. .4........ • ,.,........„.. . :. • . .. . ..:,,....; ..... •::.•..: ..• :, .. ........ . .• . _ . .... .... . . . .,.. , • .. • . • .. . • .. . _:„..:.,.„.,,,,.........._ .... ..., .:, .,•,.... ,„. . . . ‘ ,... .. 2”...,*;•4,-1-1,•A` * • . . • . • . •• - • I l- . . • • . . ; • • . / . -___,• --7—} 8 . -------"1--A— C. r"//7•.::‘ • . ry •_ \ g_... • . l F." 04 _ _ A 1• 6 0 0 0 AR� ' Length 33 1/4" Width 22 1/4" Height 10 1/16" 7 :— • - _ 111L ' Lo . , © © 0 , 7/8" • A R L II W Wid 62 dtthh 16 3//44"" Height 8 1/8" --\\ - fr— . . ..o .lir \116\ --_ . ri....:;14( . BOTTOM VIEW C..�•:.... A 4 Pi...... AI tti These controlled large area floodlights are trolled light distribution area. At the perimeter for illuminating large exterior ground areas of the Illuminated area, light Is sharply cut-off around big complexes such as special events similar to a wall of light against darkness, centers, sports arenas, shopping malls, coun- virtually eliminating polluting light or spill try clubs, etc. The fixtures provide an even light. Both ARL-I and -II fixtures are approved distribution of non-glare light within a con- for ANSI Types II and III distributions. • Product Features - O Fixture Body Extruded aluminum body with die-formed top pan. Minimum thickness is.064". Full length extruded aluminum hinge. Corners are continuous welded and . ground smooth. After primer coat, finish is electrostatic spray baked enamel. Standard colors are lava black or Aztec bronze. Other colors and anodizing available on request. • 0 Lens All are flat, clear tempured glass. Exclusive extruded polyvinylchloride and high temperature silicone gaskets around entire lens assembly insure posi- tive protection against moisture, dust and bugs. 0 Reflector Preformed specular aluminum, step type. Reflector set to achieve IES Types II and III cutoff. • O Ballast Mercury vapor ballast — constant wattage autotransformer. Reliable start- ( ing to -20°. Metallic halide ballast — autostabilized circuit with peak to RMS voltage. Reliable starting to -20°. High pressure sodium — minimum power factor to 90%. Reliable starting to -20°. All popular voltages available. All ballast packs are removed as a single unit. O Lampholder Glazed porcelain "Grip-Tite" lampholder. Screw shell is nickel plated to prevent lamp from oxidizing and freezing to lampholder base. Center contact is heat treated beryllium copper alloy. • O Lamps ARL-I 400 watt and 1000 watt mercury vapor 400 watt and 1000 watt metallic halide 400 watt and 1000 watt high pressure sodium • ARL-II 100, 175, 250, and 400 watt mercury vapor 175, 250 and 400 watt metallic halide 100, 150, 250 and 400 watt high pressure sodium OHeat Barrier Insures long life of ballast. CO Bracket For pole mounting 8", 12", 18" lengths. For wall mounting 4", 8", 12" lengths. Section A-1 Page 95 re: f t .d Ordering Information e... ARL-I ARL-I-MV-400 400 watt mercury vapor Side Pole Mounting ARL-I-MV-1000 1000 watt mercury vapor AL-8"-S Single B" arm ARL-I-MH-400 400 watt metallic halide AL-12"-S Single 12" arm ARL-I-MH-1000 1000 watt metallic halide AL-18"-S Single 18" arm ARL-I-HPS-400 400 watt high pressure sodium Box Bracket Mounting ARL-I-HPS-1000 1000 watt high pressure sodium ARL-I-B Single to quad. box bracket ARL-II-B Single to quad. box bracket Wall Mounting AL-4"-WL Single 4" arm • AL-8"-WL Single 8" arm AL-12"-WL Single 12"arm ARL-Il ARL-II-MV-100 100 watt mercury vapor Tenon Type Mounting ARL-II-MV-175 175 watt mercury vapor TAL-12"-S Single 12" arm ARL-II-MV-250 250 watt mercury vapor TAL-18"-S Single 18" arm ARL-II-MV-400 400 watt mercury vapor TAL-12"-D Double 12" arms ARL-II-MH-175 175 watt metallic halide TAL-18"-D Double 18" arms ARL-II-MH-250 250 watt metallic halide TAL-12"-T Triple 12" arms ARL-II-MI -400 400 watt metallic halide TAL-18"-T Triple 18" arms ARL-II-HPS-100 100 watt high pressure sodium TAL-12"-0 Quad. 12" arms r„ARRLL--II- watt�ah pressure sodium TAL-18"-Q Quad. 18" arms ..-- - ARL-III-H sodium-250 250 watt high pressure sodi TAL-12"-N Double 12" arms A L-II-HHPPS-4 0 wa ig pre sur dwm TAL-18"-N Double 18" arms • Mounting Arrangements -. Wood Pole Mounting SIII—. D We-' l WOL-4"-S , Single 4" arm Q WOL-8"-S Single 8" arm WOL-12"-S Single 12"arm WOL-4"-D Double 4" arms WOL-8"-D Double 8" arms WOL-12"-D Double 12" arms T N illiB 0 Lighting Distribution — Example for ordering fixture: Type II and Type III ARL-II-MV-400 (Type II) Section A-1 Page 96 � I Poles C.c 11 • • I ► ( t • I I L • . Sguere Aluminum Square Decorative Round Tapered Seven Stour) !leers Tapered Squire Tapered Recteogeler Weed SAB 8' to 20' Aluminum Aluminum SUB 4" 12' to 24' Steel Weed WPR 10' to 30' CMK-IV 8' to 18' RTAL 20' to 35' SUB 5" 20' to 32' (8" taper to 3)4") WPT 10' to 30' WPC 10' to 30' CN1K-VI 20' to 30' (light duty) SUB 6" 24' to 39' SZB 12' to 39' RTAH 20' to 35' 1 *j. (heavy duty) Section A-1 Page 97 Ce.: " .,ie v.,_ - 1 , 175 Watt `I 1 Metallic Halide ARL-11 Horizonte!Isolux 2 I 1 I IES Type III I I Values based on 14 foot mounting height. Correction Factors For Other Mounting 1 I 1-- I - Hel.hts N \ i$ cD l 1 I . .I 4- • 1 1.75 - 5 -1- -a ' I I: 2 t 1 Catalog No.ARL-II-MH-175(Type III) 05 — `-- Number of Fixtures:One 3 2•5 —4-- _---.f Lamp:One M-175,rated 13,200 lumens, horizontal. Classification:IES Type III,Medium Cutoff. Isolux lines of horizontal footcandies x Candlepower peak location Half peak candlepower trace I • 1 , I I 5 I _ 1 2 2.25 3 3.75 5 • 7 Longitudinal distance In units of mounting heights c Ale I I 250 Watt I I 1 ` • r sue Sodium 2 i f ARL-II Horizontal Isolux I I I IES Type III l Values based on 12 foot mounting height. 1 ` 1 I t ! Correction Factors For Other Mounting Heights I I 1, I 1 ,",. o x ` i I I " r 1 = rim +., �rit: ry ; ►t-;. 1 I I rJ sit 4 _�. nr r. It •• - t� - 1 1.75,-----� --- — -1-� — }- • :. 2 �11 � ' 1 1 1 1 CatalogNo.ARL-II-HPS-250III 3 2.75----+------I— (Type ) 3 l — �----. Number of Fixtures:One Lamp: One LU-250,rated 25,500 lumens,horizontal. I 1 Classification: IES Type III,Medium Cutoff. Isolux lines of horizontal footcandies a I tx Candlepower peak location = ---1 -'-'Half peak candlepower tracei L 100 1 2 3 3.75 4 5 • 7 Longitudinal distance In units of mounting heights ,2*.,....:........,,,.t............; . .,..:„.„.-p....,-. ... 2 ~ r;€ i`� r...,.,..,..-. ` . .�,. , Paseo Square • ,, 1 _': Bollard 63/4>>, ,,,,..:....... .... ..........:... . 1 .,...• ,. •.. ... .. .1,„...... 1..1., .....r„. ...,....A.,.,.... t. .....,...-4.4'.' ;4t,•••••-.•.!•;b1. - Walk k Lights` , z � .- ; � . • , ^,C _ .� • ,.,, Enclosed and N 0 r- '"' w " i �� ,. s Gasketed sketedt-�+_ ,= .� .•4_� �� 1•4 llint�.� i �' *" -'�•' rt '•r r I.� 1 ;;!+ ..�-�'�.i ' --.ram • -r'7+:.. ? • 1. '' / . ;{ ._ems• . .'` rr ,.'.........+ ;if' #: .— • r . ! • +L • Specifications • HOUSING: Heavy-duty post and top cap constructed of extruded aluminum. Outer housing lifts off for ease of i maintenance. Four tamper resistant screws securely lock the housing to the anchored base. LENS: Clear vs" thick acrylic bonded to housing with silicone sealant. The sealant allows for differential expansion while maintaining a permanent bond, and providing a weathertight, bugfree and dust-tight enclosure. REFLECTOR: Specular aluminum, optically designed for low brightness distribution.• LAMP: (by others) See chart. BALLAST: Mercury vapor C.W.A.-H.P.F. High pressure sodium regulated H.P.F. MOUNTING: Sturdy cast aluminum base with four 3/i" diameter by 12" long anchor bolts on a 41h" diameter bolt circle. FINISH: Painted satin aluminum (standard). Finish Options* Catalog Numbers SUFFIX ABLK --Anodized Black (simulated DUBK LAMP 1 Symmetrical Distribution ABZL —Anodized Light Bronze (DU311 color) ABZM —Anodized Medium Bronze (DU312 color CBS-t00S-MV- 100 Watt Mercury Vapor ) BS-70S-HPS- 70 Watt High Pressure Sodium v ABZD —Anodized Dark Bronze (DU313 color) DU311 —Duranodic Light Bronze �BS-100S-HPS- 100 Watt High Pressure Sodium. DU312 —Duranodic Medium Bronze CBS-150S-HPS- 150 Watt High Pressure Sodium 8 DU313 -Duranodic Dark Bronze Directional Distribution ch DUBK —Duranodic Black CBS-100D-MV- 100 Watt Mercury Vapor EP —Enamel Paint — SoRclfy Color CBS-70D-HPS- 70 Watt High Pressure Sodium • . . CBS-100D-HPS- 100 Watt High Pressure Sodium Options CBS-150D-HPS 150 Watt High Pressure Sodium OP Opal polycarbonate lens Specify voltage OLOv LEX Clear polycarbonate lens . GR Anodized gold reflector DIEVINE LIGH suesiciary,l KMae Iry TYPE •See Back Page for Description of Finsihes. i E W union Made *Nt.'s •"0d,t! 1•n,,., roe •,00•ted 10 e0.Or KIDDE rl . C00I•'N+1 1'1d0 ti•S•:t;•In Ann .n•1,10 h+V._pit AQIIti—• •r•n •:L •:'1, 100I..n l Ou.,Kho,.•Q•,•If11•d,n •,O CO.0/ • .•'-1. V +n+sE.at :l tw titgEE T.Ic•NS•S Gr► It'iS R1 all 0'n•lJ'W40 48 f c‘. ISOFOOTCANDLE CURVEd CBS BOLLARDS • 175' 14' 105 7 35• 0 35• 7' 105 0 J5. 100W MERCURY VAPOR \isLamp Type: H38JA100/DX \' j 3 T Lumens 4200 1 10.5' ,n ..........................e." 14 17.5• • 175' 14 10 5' T '35' 0 35' 7' 10$ • . 0 3S. 100W HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM 4 • Lamp Type:LU100 T Lumens: 9500 6 2 ______......../toy To Convert to 70W High Pressure Sodium • • with LU70 Lamp Multiply by .61. 14 .........>" • 17.5 . 17 5' 14' 10.5' 7' 35 0 3 5' 7' 10 5' 5 tA, 20 30 0 0 0 t00 t20 J5. 150W HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM • 1\\1 %\,. .,.,.,.....s... ...._ ..... Lamp Type:LU150/55 7' Lumens: 15000 los• //— ...i........„........„...., 1. . DEVINE .LIGHTING 17.5' Subs.d.ry of Kick*.Inc. KIDDE C ' 4645 EAST I1TN STREET.KANSAS CITY MISSOURI 34127 .1 WSJ 2414410 I I4 Architecture and Planning ttYh 171 x_ b 3, Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 TRANSMITTAL To: City of Renton Date: August 3, 1988 Dept. of Building & Zoning 200 Mill Avenue South Project Name: 7 Story Office Renton, WA 98055 Project No: NW 88041 Attn: Donald K. Erickson Re: Site Approval Submittal Description: 7 copies Completed Site Plan Approval Application with Legal descriptions and Affidavit of Ownership. Includes Original . 7 copies Completed Substantial Development Application with Legal Description and Affidavit of Ownership. Includes Original . 7 copies Environmental Checklist 8 copies Letter of Design Intent 7 sets Prints , Site Plan with Vicinity Map, Grading/Drainage Plan, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations 1 set 82 x 11 PMT reductions of above drawings 1 Application Fee Remarks: ❑Sent per your Request ❑ For Approval ❑ Other: ❑ For your Use/Reference ❑ For Distribution ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records Submittal for Site Plan Approval and Substantial Development __ i permit. CITY OF PLIMN Eftm HAND DELIVERED f '` �t .4 t' By: Paul R. Coppock AUG O ? Jd8 hAf11,"w�'bGrs'��'/701`3Fsri(�5� cc: Mark Miller w/encl . i :, kY. o _ E::) , _ ITY OF RENT( FILE NO(S): SR� O'1► -�� G,6 ® '� BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT ECG ����r88 .N,vo� MASTER APPLICATION NOTE TO APPLICANT: Since this is a comprehensive application form, only those items related to your specific type of application(s) are to be completed. (Please print or type. Attoch additional sheets if necessary.) APPLICANT TYPE OF APPLICATION NAME FEES First City Developments Corp. a REzoNE*(FROM TO ) ADDRESS 800 Fi fth Avenue, Suite 4170 d SPECIAL PERMIT* CITY ZIP 0 TEMPORARY PERMIT* Seattle, Washington 98104 ED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT* En SITE PLAN APPROVAL • I))7(F) 5� TELEPHONE. Q SPECIAL PERMIT FOR GRADE AND FILL (206) 624-9223 No. of Cubic Yards: CONTACT PERSON Q VARIANCE* From Section: *XXX SHORELINE PERMIT Requiredon dam' NAME �� / Mark Miller ADDRESS ' SUBDIVISIONS: 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Q SHORT PLAT CITY ZIP ED TENTATIVE PLAT Seattle, Washington 98104 ED PRELIMINARY PLAT TELEPHONE Q FINAL PLAT (206) 624-9223 0 WAIVER (Justification Required) OWNER I NO. OF LOTS: NAME PLAT NAME: First City Developments Corp. M ADDRESS (formerly Fi rst City Equi ti es) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: 800 Fifth Avenue, Sui re 4170 Q PRELIMINARY • CITY ZIP 0 FINAL Seattle, Washington 98104 P.U.D. NAME: TELEPHONE (206) 624-9223 0 Residential Industrial QCommercial Q Mixed LOCATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: PROPERTY ADDRESS North of SW 7th, East of 0akesdale and West of Naches. CD TENTATIVE EXISTING USE PRESENT ZONING PRELIMINARY Vacant OP FINAL PROPOSED USE PARK NAME: Office Bui l d i ng NUMBER OF SPACES: t /06d �c ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE ✓ SQ. FT. ACRESn P AREA: 285,000 S.F. Bldg . 15.7 Acre Site I O # -7 � TOTAL FEES (�L���j p.sny,i tri: ;.F:.twTcym STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING DATE~S;T,AMP� U tl Y p�FJ� �'! APPLICATION RECEIVED BY: \ r. u � ., ;T .1 °��" R APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: `4') L'`'' AUG L'' t, ,* 0 Accepted P�U(LpIU�iJQN1N� DEPT. 0 Incomplete Notification Sent On By: (Initials) DATE ROUTED ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED BY: r� C, APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: 1 _ ED Accepted . QIncomplete Notification Sent On By: (Initials) 'li\\ ROUTED TO: [g Building Design Eng. �;�( Fire Parks Police PolicyDev. al Traffic Eng. Utilities �, • • •. Legal description of property (If more space is required, attach a separate sheet). SEE ATTACHED. AFFIDAVIT B. Mark Miller . being• duly sworn, declare that I am [X�X authorized representative to act for the property owner,C3owner of the property Involved In this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the Information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 31d DAY OF a�, �,�3C 19 SS . NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, RESIDING AT • eSKs\ n-" -TN•k (Name of Notary Public) 0 (Signature of Owner) Gexvv4 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 (Address) (Address) Seattle, WA 98104 (City) (State) (Zip) (206) 624-9223 (Telephone) Acceptance of this application and required filing fee does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other materials required to constitute a complete application are listed in the "Application Procedure." Form #174 r- • BUSK, )ED & HITCHINGS, INc. Legal Description Blackriver Corporate Park That Portion of Tract B, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, Pages 98 through 102, records of King County, Washington, lying Northerly of Southwest 7th Street as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100643, and Westerly of Naches Avenue Southwest as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100644, records of said County. First City BRH Job Nos. 86230 & 86083 April 28, 1987 /744/ 8s/,,r o/ ALH/Surv. 17, 86230 @Q• Of h,fr� 2• eNl GISTE 41�I f o �l LAND • • doo • • 111 1 !11 rim rr P • AUG4 rVAj' f J 1 • BUIL O:P,I!;/7.0NI !G rJEPT. Architecture and Planning Ipnn1 Pomeroy Northwest,Inc., Royce A. Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 First City Developments Corp. Blackriver Corporate Park Seven Story Office Design Narrative This proposal is for the design and construction of two, seven story office buildings of approximately 285,000 gross s.f. at the Blackriver Corporate Park by First City Developments Corp. The building is sited as a man—made buffer off the P-1 pond area separating parking and service from the 17 acre P-1 detention pond which was dedicated to the City of Renton by First City Developments Corp. for flood control . In addition, a 27,000 s.f. area at the northern property line is designated as a natural area and will provide an additional physical buffer between the development, the P-1 detention basin and the Heron Rookery on the island to the northwest of the buildings in the pond area. Significant existing trees have been preserved along perimeter areas and in the parking areas to the maximum extent possible to provide mature landscaping. Additional trees and shrubs will be added to buffer the parking area. Sod and hedge rows along the perimeter streets will buffer the parking areas from the public. A main access drive will provide walkways to connect the parking areas and public streets to the main entry of the buildings. Access to the property will be off existing Naches Avenue SW, existing SW 7th Street and Oakesdale Avenue SW. Exterior building materials will be prefabricated, painted panels with glass strips and glass curtainwall systems. A balance of reflective glass and tinted glass will be used to emphasize and highlight entry points and control heat gain in the building. CITY OF RENTON AUG 011928 �► ECF: , 67 - ' t o z City of Renton LU: fSo71s 9,� P ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 444.0 SEP1t-e� Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21 C RCW. requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental Impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for allproposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide Information to help you and the agency Identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid Impacts from the proposal, if It can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly. with the most precise Information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases. you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations. such as zoning, shoreline. and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems. the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal. even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or Its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. , Use of Checklist for Nonprolect Proposals: (Please Type or Print Legibly) Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies. plans and programs). the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal." "proposer," and "affected geographic area." respectively. CITY OF RENTON trt-Tii)2C, cig v • AUG o�iY BUILDING/ZOMMG �''� Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 4 3. WATER a. SURFACE: 1) IS THERE ANY SURFACE WATER BODY ON OR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF THE SITE (INCLUDING YEAR—ROUND AND SEASONAL STREAMS, SALTWATER, LAKES, PONDS, ' WETLANDS)? IF YES, DESCRIBE TYPE AND PROVIDE NAMES. IF APPROPRIATE, STATE WHAT STREAM OR RIVER IT FLOWS INTO. There is the year round P-1 Channel which flows into the detention pond: to the west and a biofiltering ditch to the north. Drainage off 7th along the old BlackRiver channel has been tightlined into Naches Avenue per City of Renton direction and E.I.S. (1981) for Earlington Industrial Park. 2) WILL THE PROJECT REQUIRE ANY WORK OVER, IN, OR ADJACENT TO (WITHIN 200 FEET) THE DESCRIBED WATERS? IF YES, PLEASE DESCRIBE AND ATTACH AVAILABLE PLANS. Yes, parts of construction will be either adjacent to or within 200 feet of the P—i Channel, and P-1 Detention pond. 3) ESTIMATE THE AMOUNT OF FILL AND DREDGE MATERIAL THAT WOULD BE PLACED IN OR REMOVED FROM SURFACE WATER OR WETLANDS AND INDICATE THE AREA OF THE SITE THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED. INDICATE THE SOURCE OF FILL MATERIAL. None. All fill and excavation will be conducted outside of wetlands. Source of material is unknown at this time. The dry channel referenced above in Item 1) will be filled to the biofiltering ditch area at the north property line. 4) WILL THE PROPOSAL REQUIRE SURFACE WATER WITHDRAWALS OR DIVERSIONS? GIVE GENERAL DESCRIPTION, PURPOSE, AND APPROXIMATE QUANTITIES IF KNOWN. The. proposal will require no surface water withdrawals but will alter the overland flow of runoff water due to the proposed contours and elevation changes. 5) DOES THE PROPOSAL LIE WITHIN A 100—YEAR FLOODPLAIN? IF SO, NOTE LOCATION ON THE SITE PLAN. Portions of proposal are below the 100—year floodplain of elevation 15 ft. The creation of P-1 Channel and P-1 Detention pond by SCS eliminated the requirement of flood ponding storage on this site. First City Developments dedicated the property for the detention pond as flooding and wildlife mitigation. 6) DOES THE PROPOSAL INVOLVE ANY DISCHARGES OF WASTE MATERIALS TO SURFACE WATERS? IF SO, DESCRIBE THE TYPE OF WASTE AND ANTICIPATED VOLUME OF DISCHARGE. No. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 5 b. Ground: 1) WILL GROUND WATER BE WITHDRAWN, OR WILL WATER BE DISCHARGED TO GROUND WATER? GIVE GENERAL DESCRIPTION, PURPOSE, AND APPROXIMATE QUANTITIES IF KNOWN. None. 2) DESCRIBE WASTE MATERIAL THAT WILL BE DISCHARGED INTO THE GROUND FROM SEPTIC TANKS OR OTHER SOURCES, IF ANY (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial , containing the following chemicals . . . ; agricultural; etc. ). DESCRIBE THE GENERAL SIZE OF THE SYSTEM, THE NUMBER OF SUCH SYSTEMS, THE NUMBER OF HOUSES TO BE SERVED (IF APPLICABLE), OR THE NUMBER OF ANIMALS OR HUMANS THE SYSTEM(S) ARE EXPECTED TO SERVE. No waste material will be discharged into the ground. A gravity sanitary sewer connected to existing city sewer system will serve the user of this proposal. c. WATER RUNOFF (INCLUDING STORM WATER): 1) DESCRIBE THE SOURCE OF RUNOFF (INCLUDING STORM WATER) AND METHOD OF COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL, if any (include quantities, if known). WHERE WILL THIS WATER FLOW? WILL THIS WATER FLOW INTO OTHER WATERS? If so, describe. Surface water will be collected by a storm drainage system and pass through sedimentation/oil/water separators before being directed to the nearest biofiltering ditches and storm drains which ultimately drain into the P-1 Channel and/or directly into the detention basin per E.I.S. 1981, for Earlington Industrial Park. 2) COULD WASTE MATERIALS ENTER GROUND OR SURFACE WATERS? If so, generally describe. There will be no waste material generated by the construction. Any sediments in surface runoff will be properly detained in sedimentation facilities. The majority of sediment will be removed prior to discharge. Post construction run—off will pass through sedimentation/oil/water separators prior to discharge to receiving waters. d. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL SURFACE, GROUND, AND . RUNOFF WATER IMPACTS, if any: Oil/water separators, silt traps in catch basins, and biofilter swales will be employed to reduce the amount of pollutants entering the P-1 Channel/pond. Sheet—flow through grassed areas and swale vegetation will act as a biofilter to remove additional contaminants prior to stormwater merging with the channel. .Open ditches for collection, temporary sedimentation ponds, and erosion control fences will provide protection during construction. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 6 4. PLANTS a. CHECK OR CIRCLE TYPES OF VEGETATION FOUND ON THE SITE: )( DECIDUOUS TREE: 'LDE', MAPLE ASPEN, OTHER cottonwoods, low, nashington hawthorn EVERGREEN TREE: FIR CEDAR, PINE, OTHER )e SHRUBS GRASS CROP OR GRAIN WET SOIL PLANTS: CATTAIL(TTERCU, BULRUSH, SKUNK CABBAGE, OTHER — WATER PLANTS: WATER LILY, EEL GRASS, MILFOIL, OTHER OTHER TYPES OF VEGETATION b. , WHAT KIND AND AMOUNT OF VEGETATION WILL BE REMOVED OR ALTERED? All vegetation in the proposed project site area may be removed except larger significant trees. The project site is covered primarily by grasses and shrubs. Also see #10—c of this checklist. c. LIST THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES KNOWN TO BE ON OR NEAR THE SITE. None. d. PROPOSED LANDSCAPING, USE OF NATIVE PLANTS, OR OTHER MEASURES TO PRESERVE OR ENHANCE VEGETATION ON THE SITE, IF ANY: Proposed landscaping is shown on the Landscape Plan. Existing significant trees will be preserved where feasible as outlined in No. 10— c of this checklist. The landscape design will incorporate and enhance the 27,000 s.f. natural preserve to the north, a drainage ditch/swale enhancement program has been implemented at the adjacent development to the east. 5. ANIMALS a. CIRCLE ANY BIRDS AND ANIMALS WHICH HAVE BEEN OBSERVED ON OR NEAR THE SITE OR ARE KNOWN TO BE ON OR NEAR THE SITE: For this section Reference: Draft & Final EIS "BlackRiver Office Park 1981 and 1982" and Final EIS for Earlington Park, Feb. 1981. BIRDS: AWK HERON EAGL SONGBIRI ., 1 — sparrows, seagulls, ducks, misc, migrating s orebir•s with heron rookery near NW corner of site. MAMMALS: DEER R < BEAVER, OTHER FISH: BASS, SALMON TROUT, HERRING, SHELLFISH, OTHER — near site at P-1 c annel b. LIST ANY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES KNOWN TO BE ON OR NEAR THE SITE. An immature bald eagle was sighted soaring over an adjacent site in the spring of 1987, but there is no known history of bald eagles' use of the site. • Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 7 c. IS THE SITE PART OF A MIGRATION ROUTE? If so, explain. The P-1 channel and pond attract migratory waterfowl and shorebirds. d. PROPOSED MEASURES TO PRESERVE OR ENHANCE WILDLIFE, if any:' 20 acres of BlackRiver Technology Park (adjacent to the north of the detention pond) has been retained as a preserve and riparian forest areas. This area will provide natural habitat for any wildlife in the area. Future development includes adding new trees and landscaping to BlackRiver corporate Park and additional landscaping will extend existing preserves in future developments. 17 acres of the Valley 405 Business Park have been deeded to the City of Renton to provide wildlife habitat and flood control for the P-1 Channel and detention pond. An additional 27,000 s.f. (this proposal site) have been set aside as a natural preserve area buffering the riparian forest to the north. Special native vegetation plantings have been added along the drainage ditch to the northeast of this proposal site by The Mitchell Nelson Group and Rex Van Wormer (Landscape Architect and Botanist, respectively). First City Developments would implement timing for outdoor construction within 650 ft. of the Heron Rookery to be exclusive of March 1 to June 15, so as not to disturb the herons during nesting season. Proposed erosion control and post—construction runoff control techniques will mitigate water quality impacts to fish and other aquatic life. The proposed building is sited to screen the heron Rookery from the activities in the parking lot. Existing significant trees will be preserved on site where feasible. The project landscaping design will incorporate and enhance the 27,000 s.f. preserve area at the north portion of the project site. 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. Use of gas and electric power for heat, lights and air conditioning. b. WOULD. YOUR PROJECT AFFECT THE POTENTIAL USE OF SOLAR ENERGY BY ADJACENT PROPERTIES? If so, generally describe. no Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 8 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: Meets Washington State Energy Code requirements 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. ARE THERE ANY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDS, INCLUDING EXPOSURE TO TOXIC CHEMICALS, RISK OF FIRE AND EXPLOSION, SPILL, OR HAZARDOUS WASTE, THAT COULD OCCUR AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPOSAL? If so, describe. no 1) DESCRIBE SPECIAL EMERGENCY SERVICES THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED. No special emergency services required or anticipated beyond what is already available. 2) PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH HAZARDS, if any: None required or anticipated b. NOISE 1) WHAT TYPES OF NOISE EXIST IN THE AREA WHICH MAY AFFECT YOUR PROJECT (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Normal background traffic and construction noises from adjacent developments and street. 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 the site. Short term: Construction and affiliated traffic noises from normal working hours between 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Long term: Normal traffic noises. 3) PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL NOISE IMPACTS, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. WHAT IS THE CURRENT USE OF THE SITE AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES? Site: Vacant undeveloped property South: Vacant 7th Avenue land being developed West: Sewage treatment plant — Under Construction on Phase II. And ' Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 9 vacant undeveloped land and P-1 detention basin. East: Office warehouse buildings North: Undeveloped (Future office and RID Buildings part of BlackRiver Corporate Park) & P—i detention pond. b. HAS THE SITE BEEN USED FOR AGRICULTURE? If so, describe. Not in recent past c. DESCRIBE ANY STRUCTURES ON THE SITE. None d. WILL ANY STRUCTURES BE DEMOLISHED? If so, what? no e. WHAT IS THE CURRENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE SITE? OP f. WHAT IS THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION OF THE SITE? MP/MO-0 g. IF APPLICABLE, WHAT IS THE CURRENT SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM DESIGNATION OF THE SITE? Urban along P-1 Channel. h. HAS ANY PART OF THE SITE BEEN CLASSIFIED AS AN "ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE" AREA? If so, specify. No — However there exists 27,000 natural preserve at the northwest portion of the site. i. APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD RESIDE OR WORK IN THE COMPLETED PROJECT? Approximately 1,450 at the project completion j. APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY PEOPLE WOULD THE COMPLETED PROJECT DISPLACE? None k. PROPOSED MEASURES TO AVOID OR REDUCE DISPLACEMENT IMPACTS, if any: n/a 1. PROPOSED MEASURES TO ENSURE THE PROPOSAL IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PROJECTED LAND USES AND PLANS, if any: Compliance with land use plan and use is compatible with adjacent uses and with comprehensive plan and zoning designation. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 10 9. HOUSING a. APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY UNITS WOULD BE PROVIDED, if any? INDICATE WHETHER HIGH, MIDDLE, OR LOW—INCOME HOUSING. None b. APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY UNITS, IF ANY, WOULD BE ELIMINATED? INDICATE WHETHER HIGH, MIDDLE, OR LOW—INCOME HOUSING. None c. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL HOUSING IMPACTS, IF ANY: n/a 10. AESTHETICS a. WHAT IS THE TALLEST HEIGHT OF ANY PROPOSED STRUCTURE(S), NOT INCLUDING ANTENNAS; WHAT IS THE PRINCIPAL EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIAL(S) PROPOSED. ±90 feet plus screen for roof mounted equipment. The exterior will be glass and composite building panels. b. WHAT VIEWS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY WOULD BE ALTERED OR OBSTRUCTED? None c. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL AESTHETIC IMPACTS, if any: The building is designed with an irregular shape and decks cut into the facade of the building to reduce the scale and mass of the structure. Existing significant trees have been incorporated within the Master Plan. Existing mature trees (30" caliper and larger) and grove of semi—mature trees (10" to 30" caliper of 5 or more) strongly influenced locations of buildings, parking, and circulation paths. Existing semi—mature trees (10" to 30" caliper) located within planned planting areas adjacent the building and parking will be saved. Large existing trees with weak form, severe storm damage, dying of old age with broken tops and decaying branches, or pose a safety hazard will be removed. 11 . LIGHT AND GLARE a. WHAT TYPE OF LIGHT OR GLARE WILL THE PROPOSAL PRODUCE? WHAT TIME OF DAY WOULD IT MAINLY OCCUR? Lights from parking lighting and exterior building lights at night time. Environmental Checklist - City of Renton Page 11 b. COULD LIGHT OR GLARE FROM THE FINISHED PROJECT BE A SAFETY HAZARD OR INTERFERE WITH VIEWS? no c. WHAT EXISTING OFF—SITE SOURCES OF LIGHT OR GLARE MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPOSAL? none d. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL LIGHT AND GLARE IMPACTS, if any: Control light dispersion from pole lights and building lighting to prevent on—site and off—site glare. 12. RECREATION a. WHAT DESIGNATED AND INFORMAL RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES ARE IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY? Fort Dent Park and Longacres racetrack are near. Future informal recreational opportunities are planned in the infrastructure landscaped paths and ponds to the north. Paths to be open to public. Exercise stations to be designed with the paths and incorporated into the Master Plan concept. b. WOULD THE PROPOSED PROJECT DISPLACE ANY EXISTING RECREATIONAL USES? If so. describe. no c. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL IMPACTS ON RECREATION, INCLUDING RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PROJECT OR APPLICANT, if any: Addition of jogging and foot trails are proposed with exercise stations. Paths to be open to public. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. ARE THERE ANY PLACES OR OBJECTS LISTED ON, OR PROPOSED FOR, NATIONAL, STATE. OR LOCAL PRESERVATION REGISTERS KNOWN TO BE ON OR NEXT TO THE SITE? If so, generally describe. no b. GENERALLY DESCRIBE ANY LANDMARKS OR EVIDENCE OF HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, SCIENTIFIC, OR CULTURAL IMPORTANCE KNOWN TO BE ON OR NEXT TO THE SITE. None. Archaeological dig was sponsored by First City Equities and conducted and completed by the University of Washington in 1981. An archaeological excavation of a prehistoric Indian living site, sponsored by First City was conducted by the University of Washington in Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 12 1981. Significant artifacts were removed for study and a report was compiled (James C. Chatters, Project Director, January 15, 1982. Interim report on excavations at Earlington Park to Department of Anthropology and Museum of Man, Central Washington University). The Project Director also indicated no further study was required and that construction and development would not damage the archaeological value of the site but would, in fact, preserve it by not disturbing it further (letter from Chatters to David Schuman, May 12, 1981). c. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL IMPACTS, if any: None. The archaeological investigation was concluded. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. IDENTIFY PUBLIC STREETS AND HIGHWAYS SERVING THE SITE, AND DESCRIBE PROPOSED ACCESS TO THE EXISTING STREET SYSTEM. SHOW ON SITE PLANS, if any. Direct access to•S.W. 7th Street, Naches Avenue S.W. and Oakesdale Avenue S.W. , ultimately to Interstate 405 with on/off ramps at Rainier Avenue S. to the East and Interurban, via Oakesdale and S.W. Grady Way to the west. b. IS SITE CURRENTLY SERVED BY PUBLIC TRANSIT? . IF NOT, WHAT IS THE APPROXIMATELY DISTANCE TO THE NEAREST TRANSIT STOP? No. Approximately 3/4 miles to public transit with new transit stops being considered by Metro as entire Park develops. c. HOW MANY PARKING SPACES WOULD THE COMPLETED PROJECT HAVE? HOW MANY WOULD THE PROJECT ELIMINATE? ±1,425 stalls provided. None eliminated. 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). Naches, 7th and Oakesdale are all completed at this time with curbs, gutters and sidewalks.. No new roads are required. e. WILL THE PROJECT USE (OR OCCUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF) WATER, RAIL, OR ' AIR TRANSPORTATION? If so, generally describe. No. f. HOW MANY VEHICULAR TRIPS PER DAY WOULD BE GENERATED BY THE COMPLETED PROJECT? IF KNOWN, INDICATE WHEN PEAK VOLUMES WOULD OCCUR. Daily Trip Rate: 21 vehicle trips/1000 s.f. 5,985 daily trips Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 13 PM Peak Hour: 2.4 vehicle trips/1000 s.f. 684 vehicle trips/PM peak hour Based on Trip Generation and Informational Report, 3rd Edition, published in 1982 by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. Also reference Traffic Impact Analysis for Valley 405 Business Park, August 1985, by the Transpo Group. g. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS, if any: Proximity to bus line and other developments to incorporate car pooling and transit bus use. The Transportation Management Plan for the BlackRiver Corporate Park is in place between First City and Metro and is operating successfully. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES 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. Project will require normal fire protection and police protection already serving the area. b. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL DIRECT IMPACTS ON PUBLIC SERVICES, if any. 16. UTILITIES a. CIRCLE UTILITIES CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AT THE SITE: ELECTRICITY, NATURAL GAS, WATER, REFUSE SERVICE, TELEPHONE, SANITARY SEWER, SEPTIC SYSTEM, OTHER. b. DESCRIBE THE UTILITIES THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR THE PROJECT, THE UTILITY PROVIDING THE SERVICE, AND THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES ON THE SITE OR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY WHICH MIGHT BE NEEDED. Electric power, gas, water, sewer, telephone. All utilities are directly accessible at the site and at the adjacent street requiring minor excavation to extend to the building. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 14 C. SIGNATURES I, THE UNDERSIGNED, STATE THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND COMPLETE. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE LEAD AGENCY MAY WITHDRAW ANY DECLARATION OF NON—SIGNIFICANCE THAT IT MIGHT ISSUE IN RELIANCE UPON THIS CHECKLIST SHOULD THERE BE ANY WILLFUL MISREPRESENTATION OR WILLFUL LACK OF FULL DISCLOSURE ON MY PART. Proponent: .. 1 .1//� Name Printed: Royce A. Berg LPN/Royce A. Berg Architects & Planners See attached exhibits for list of documents relating to project site. References: 1. Grading & Fill for Valley 405 Business Park: a. City of Renton Grading and Fill Permit Application No. SP-100-86, approved through City Council appeal decision September 14, 1987. b. Renton Shoreline Permit Application No. SM-004-87. c. Environmental Checklist No. ECF-024-87. 2. Blackriver Corporate Park (BCP) — Phases IV and V (property to south) a. Renton Site Plan Approval No. SA-090-87, approved. b. Renton Shoreline Permit Application No. SM-013-87, approved. 3. P-1 Channel, City of Renton: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-093-81, completed. b. Renton Special Permit No. SP-060-81, completed. 4. Earlington Industrial Park: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-91-81. b. Preliminary and Final Plat — Washington Technical Center. 5. 0akesdale L.I.D. , City of Renton: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-004-81, completed. 6. Miscellaneous References: a. Shipe, S.J. and W.W. Scott. 1981. The Great Heron in King County. Washington Game Department, Non—Game Program. With letter of February 12, 1987. b. Letter of Independent Ecological Services to First City Equities of January 31, 1987, pertaining to the Heron Rookery. c. City of Renton Wetlands Study, 1981, unadopted. d. Letters from Corps of Engineers noting property not subject to the Clean Water Act, Section 404 jurisdiction; December 16, 1985 and March 4, 1987. e. Letter from First City Equities to City of Renton with enclosure, dated February 23, 1987, pertaining to Site Plan Approval of Phase IV at Valley 405 Section of property. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 1 A. BACKGROUND 1. NAME OF PROPOSED PROJECT, IF APPLICABLE: BlackRiver Corporate Park Phase VII Office Facility 2. NAME OF APPLICANT: First City Developments Corp. 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT AND CONTACT PERSON: Mark Miller or Royce Berg First City Developments Corp. LPN Architects 800 Fifth Avenue Suite 4170 1127 Pine Street Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98104 Seattle, WA 98101 (206)624-9223 (206)583-8030 4. DATE CHECKLIST PREPARED: July 10, 1988 5. AGENCY REQUESTING CHECKLIST: City of Renton Building and Zoning 6. PROPOSED TIMING OR SCHEDULE (INCLUDING PHASING, IF APPLICABLE): August 1989 to August 1990 7. DO YOU HAVE ANY PLANS FOR FUTURE ADDITIONS, EXPANSIONS, OR FURTHER ACTIVITY RELATED TO OR CONNECTED WITH THIS PROPOSAL? If yes, explain. Future office building and parking structure on this project site. 8. LIST ANY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION YOU KNOW ABOUT THAT HAS BEEN PREPARED, OR WILL BE PREPARED, DIRECTLY RELATED TO THIS PROPOSAL. EIS for Blackriver Office Park by R. W. Thorpe and Associates, April 1983. E. I.S. for Earlington Park by Thorpe and Associates, February 1981. See Attached References 9. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER APPLICATIONS ARE PENDING FOR GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS OF OTHER PROPOSALS DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE PROPERTY COVERED BY YOUR PROPOSAL? If yes, explain.. None. Also see attached references. f. Letter from Barbara Moss of FCE to Don Erickson of City of Renton dated April 10, 1987, regarding Shoreline Designation, with memo from David Morency to Barbara Moss, dated April 13, 1987. g. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers File Report re: Wetlands Determination. h. Department of Ecology, Wetlands Determination dated April 27, 1987. 7. BCP — Technology Park Reference: (property to north) a. Rezone: City of Renton, File No. R-057-80. b. E.I.S. for Blackriver Office Park by Thorpe & Associates, April 1983. c. Grading & Fill 1) Renton Grading & Fill Permit: Application No. SP-024-86, Permit No. B- 12251, issued. 2) Washington State, Department of Natural Resources, Permit No. F.P. 09- 10246 for Forest.Practice, issuance date: 3/29/87. d. ADMAC Building 1) Renton Site Plan Approval Application No. SA-057-86, approved. 2) Renton Building Permit Application No. 4236, expired. 3) Renton Variance Application to extend Naches cul—de—sac, No. V-058-86, rejected. (Private road approved by Hearing Examiner. ) Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 2 10. LIST ANY GOVERNMENTAL APPROVALS OR PERMITS THAT WILL BE NEEDED FOR YOUR PROPOSAL, if known. City of Renton Grade & Fill Permit City of Renton Site Plan Approval City of Renton Substantial Development Permit (Shoreline) City of Renton Building Permit 11. GIVE BRIEF, COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF YOUR PROPOSAL, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED USES, AND THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT AND SITE. THERE ARE SEVERAL QUESTIONS LATER IN THIS CHECKLIST THAT ASK YOU TO DESCRIBE CERTAIN ASPECTS OF YOUR PROPOSAL. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Construction of one 7—story building with a total of 285,000 s.f. for office use on a 15.7 project site of BlackRiver, corporate Park. Parking for the building will be provided per code requirement. 12. LOCATION OF THE PROPOSAL. GIVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FOR A PERSON TO UNDERSTAND THE PRECISE LOCATION OF YOUR PROPOSED PROJECT, INCLUDING A STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY, AND SECTION, township, AND RANGE IF KNOWN. IF A PROPOSAL WOULD OCCUR OVER A RANGE OF AREA, PROVIDE THE RANGE OR BOUNDARIES OF THE SITE(S). PROVIDE A LEGAL DESCRIPTION, SITE PLAN, VICINITY MAP, AND TOPOGRAPHY MAP, IF REASONABLY AVAILABLE. WHILE YOU SHOULD SUBMIT ANY PLANS REQUIRED BY THE AGENCY, YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DUPLICATE MAPS OR DETAILED PLANS SUBMITTED WITH ANY PERMIT APPLICATIONS RELATED TO THIS CHECKLIST. The site is located in the south half of Sec. 13, Township 23 N, Range 4 E, W.M. , and the north half of Sec. 24, Township 23 N, Range 4E, W.M. it encompasses the property to the east of Oakesdale, north of SW 7th and west of Naches and south of P-1 Channel Detention Ponds. In general the project site is the northern most part of Tract B of the Plat of Washington Technical Center. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE (CIRCLE ONE); LAT ROLLING, HILLY, STEEP SLOPES, MOUNTAINOUS, OTHER b. WHAT IS THE STEEPEST SLOPE ON THE SITE (APPROXIMATE PERCENT SLOPE)? 6% at any ditch area. 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 upper 5 to 13 feet is soft to stiff clayey silt. Beneath the clayey silt is loose to medium dense silts and sands with varying amounts of gravel. Environmental Checklist — City of Renton Page 3 d. ARE THERE SURFACE INDICATIONS OR HISTORY OF UNSTABLE SOILS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY? If so, describe. No. Soft and clayey silts are compressible and buildable. e. DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE, TYPE, AND APPROXIMATE QUANTITIES OF ANY FILLING OR GRADING PROPOSED. INDICATE SOURCE OF FILL. Approximately 55,000 cubic yards of fill will be required to raise the base grade above the flood plan elevation of 15 ft. as required by the rezone. Source unknown at this time. A percentage of this fill has already been placed by the City of Renton through the Oakesdale L.I.D. along Oakesdale and 7th. f. COULD EROSION OCCUR AS A RESULT OF CLEARING, CONSTRUCTION, OR USE? If so, generally describe. Erosion could occur during a placement of fill material . However, silt fencing, sedimentation ponds and other measures will be taken to control the erosion. g. ABOUT WHAT PERCENT OF THE SITE WILL BE COVERED WITH IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AFTER PROJECT CONSTRUCTION (FOR EXAMPLE, ASPHALT OR BUILDINGS)? Approximately 73% of the total area will be impervious surface. h. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL EROSION, OR OTHER IMPACTS TO THE EARTH, if any: Erosion control ditches, silt fences, and sedimentation ponds will be used to reduce or control the erosion during construction per City of Renton standards. 2. AIR a. WHAT TYPES OF EMISSIONS TO THE AIR WOULD RESULT FROM THE PROPOSAL (i.e. , DUST, AUTOMOBILE, ODORS, INDUSTRIAL WOOD SMOKE) DURING CONSTRUCTION AND WHEN THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED? IF ANY, GENERALLY DESCRIBE AND GIVE APPROXIMATE QUANTITIES IF KNOWN. Normal emission from dust and vehicles during construction. Normal vehicular emissions after the project is completed, and occupied. b. ARE THERE ANY OFF—SITE SOURCES OF EMISSION? No c. PROPOSED MEASURES TO REDUCE OR CONTROL EMISSIONS OR OTHER IMPACTS TO AIR, IF ANY: Reduce dust by sprinkling with water. _ 0398Z CITY OF RENTON . Building & Zoning Department (206) 235-2550 SHORELINE MASTER APPLICATION APPLICATION FOR: OFFICE USE ONLY: Application No. : 91--61 0 - 8" IMF SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT ECF No. : Ca1 I-88 PERMIT _ SEC-TWP-R: I_I CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Date Approved: II VARIANCE Date Denied : _ Publication Date: I_I EXEMPTION Comprehensive Plan: I_I REVISION Zoning: Water Body: STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING pp Date R'e�c 'yeidtl�`g�a I: Application Received By: `Qi\j& ' ). <A f Application Determined To Be: ', 'ill' , ,1 1R F, O o Accepted o Incomplete !�i Notification Sent On: BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. By ( Initials) : Date Routed: Additional Material Received by: Application Determined To Be: o Accepted o Incomplete Notification Sent On: By (Initials) : In addition to the information below, the applicant should include a site map and any other pertinent information which will assist in the review of this application. The Building and Zoning Department reserves the right to require additional information needed to evaluate the application. APPLICANT TO PROVIDE INFORMATION REQUIRED IN ITEMS 1-10 THROUGH 14-16 BELOW: INFORMATION: l: Applicant Owner X Purchaser Name: First City Developments Corp. Lessee Other Mailing 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Address Seattle, Washington 98104 Phone: (206) 624-9223 2. Name of First City Developments Corp. formerly First City Equities Property Owner Mailing 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Address Seattle, Washington 98104 Phone: (206) 624-9223 3 . Contact/ Consultant • LPN Architects & Mark Miller of First City Developments Corp. Mailing 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 • Address Seattle, Washington 98104 Phone: (206) 624-9223 PROJECT INFORMATION: 4 . General location of proposed project (give street address if any or nearest street and intersection) Project Site: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale, South of P-1 Channel Detention Pond , and West of Naches Avenue. 5 . Legal Description (if lengthy, attach as separate sheet) : SEE ATTACHED 6 . Name of adjacent water area or wetlands : P-1 Channel and P-1 Detention Pond 7. Current use of property and existing improvements : Vacant land currently with no existing improvements. 8 . PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY and proposed improvements (be specific) : Development of 285,000 S.F. Office Buildings with parking on 15.7 acres of the Blackriver Corporate Park. 9 . Proposed construction costs and schedule: A. Total construction cost and fair market value of proposed project include additional developments contemplated but not included in this application:_ Construction for the building shell is estimated at $10,000,000. Fairmarket value: approximately $23,000,000. B. Construction dates (month/year) for which permit is requested: Begin August 1989 End August 1990 10. List any other permits for this project from state, federal, local governmental agencies or the City of Renton for which you have applied or will apply, including the name of the issuing agency, whether the permit has been applied for, and if so, the date of the application, whether the application was approved or denied and the date of same, and number of the application or permit: Plat of Washington Technical Center. Rezone: City of Renton File No. R-057-80, and prior rezone action in 1979. Site Plan Approval from the City of Renton, Application to coincide with the Shoreline Application. Building Permit and Grading Permit from City of Renton; future application. Note: For additional references , see attached. ITEMS 11, 12, AND 13 TO BE COMPLETED BY LOCAL OFFICIAL: 11. NATURE OF THE EXISTING SHORELINE. (Describe type of shoreline, such as marine, stream, lake, lagoon, marsh, bog, swamp, flood plain, floodway, delta; type of beach, such as accretion, erosion, high bank, low bank, or dike; material, such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any) : • 12. In the event that any of the proposed buildings or structures will exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above the average grade level, indicate the approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view. 13 . If the application involves a conditional use or variance, set forth in full that portion of the master program which provides that the proposed use may be a conditional use, or, in the case of a variance, from which the variance is being sought. ITEMS 14, 15, AND 26 TO BE PROVIDED BY APPLICANT: 14 . If applying for a variance or a conditional use, complete the variance or conditional use form. 15 . Project Maps: Attach to application accurate site plan and vicinity maps. Refer to application instruction handout for map requirements. 16 . Additional information (If necessary, attach as separate sheet) : SEE ATTACHED • STATE OF WASHINGTON SS CITY OF RENTON ) Mark Miller , being duly sworn, certify that I am the above-named applicant for a permit to con- struct a substantial development pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and that the foregoing statements, answers, and information are in all respects true and correct to the best of. knowledge and belief . Signature Subscribed and sworn to me this 9Sv6 day of Clu.%I.A V32 Notary Public in a for the State of Washington, residing at t FORM 177 • • BUSK, .<OED & HITCHINGS. INC. Legal Description Blackriver Corporate Park That Portion of Tract B, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, Pages 98 through 102, records of King County, Washington, lying Northerly of Southwest 7th Street as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100643, and Westerly of Naches Avenue Southwest as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100644, records of said County. First City _ BRH Job Nos. 86230 & 86083 April 28, 1987 //e, 8,s/AS: ALH/Surv. 17, 86230 L HI TC/j, O yi •.e , z Z �GiSTER4O .1',46`l zs/O Os? �<41 Lit", • • • References: 1. Grading & Fill for Valley 405 Business Park: a. City of Renton Grading and Fill Permit Application No. SP-100-86, approved through City Council appeal decision September 14, 1987. b. Renton Shoreline Permit Application No. SM-004-87. • c. Environmental Checklist No. ECF-024-87. 2. Blackriver Corporate Park (BCP) — Phases IV and V (property to south) a. Renton Site Plan Approval No. SA-090-87, approved. b. Renton Shoreline Permit Application No. SM-013-87, approved. 3. P-1 Channel, City of Renton: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-093-81, completed. b. Renton Special Permit No. SP-060-81, completed. 4. Earlington Industrial Park: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-91-81. b. Preliminary and Final Plat — Washington Technical Center. 5. 0akesdale L.I.D. , City of Renton: a. Renton Shoreline Application No. SM-004-81, completed. 6. Miscellaneous References: a. Shipe, S.J. and W.W. Scott. 1981. The Great Heron in King County. Washington Game Department, Non—Game Program. With letter of February 12, 1987. b. Letter of Independent Ecological Services to First City Equities of January 31, 1987, pertaining to the Heron Rookery. c. City of Renton Wetlands Study, 1981, unadopted. d. Letters from Corps of Engineers noting property not subject to the Clean Water Act, Section 404 jurisdiction; December 16, 1985 and March 4, 1987. e. Letter from First City Equities to City of Renton with enclosure, dated February 23, 1987, pertaining to Site Plan Approval of Phase IV at Valley 405 Section of property. f. Letter from Barbara Moss of FCE to Don Erickson of City of Renton dated April 10, 1987, regarding Shoreline Designation, with memo from David Morency to Barbara Moss, dated April 13, 1987. g. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers File Report re: Wetlands Determination. h. Department of Ecology, Wetlands Determination dated April 27, 1987. 7. BCP — Technology Park Reference: (property to north) a. Rezone: City of Renton, File No. R-057-80. b. E.I.S. for Blackriver Office Park by Thorpe & Associates, April 1983. c. Grading & Fill 1) Renton Grading & Fill Permit: Application No. SP-024-86, Permit No. B- 12251, issued. 2) Washington State, Department of Natural Resources, Permit No. F.P. 09- 10246 for Forest Practice, issuance date: 3/29/87. d. ADMAC Building 1) Renton Site Plan Approval Application No. SA-057-86, approved. 2) Renton Building Permit Application No. 4236, expired. 3) Renton Variance Application to extend Naches cul—de—sac, No. V-058-86, rejected. (Private road approved by Hearing Examiner. ) - Or - 0 5 PLANNING DIN,,,,rA CITY OF RENTON JUL 1 91991 * RECEIVED T JONES& STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC./2820 NORTHUP WAY, SUITE 100/BELLEVUE, WA 98004 206/822-1077 111 FAX 206/822-1079 DATE: July 18, 1991 TO: Mary Lynne Meyer, City of Renton, Long-Range Planning FROM: Jon Ives Jeff Bergl d 6'--* SUBJECT: Status of Black River Great Blue Heron Colony as of July 9, 1991 This memorandum presents the results of the continued monitoring to assess the 1991 nesting status of the Black River heron colony. The July 9, 1991 survey was conducted as part of an ongoing monitoring effort initiated subsequent to numerous bald eagle attacks on the colony during the early stages of the 1991 nesting season. Similar surveys were conducted at the colony in May and June 1991. Results of all 1991 surveys are summarized in Table 1. Methodology A 3-1/2 hour field survey was conducted on July 9, 1991. Survey methods were similar to those employed during the May and June surveys and included monitoring the colony from observation points on Tract A and on the north side of the riparian grove, as well as surveying the nest structures within the riparian grove on foot while watching for additional nest structures and evidence of active nesting. Results Great blue herons were observed on three occasions during the survey. One heron was seen flying north over the Boeing office buildings east of the site, one was seen landing and perching in a snag along the P-1 Pond, and one was observed landing and foraging in the P-1 Pond. Each of the herons were adults, and none of the herons were observed simultaneously. Renton,First City 7 Final EIS July 18,1991 Mary Lynne Meyer July 18, 1991 Page 2 As observed during the previous surveys,nests in the main colony and in the adjacent riparian forest were vacant. No signs of active nesting, such as recent whitewash, egg shell fragments, or begging calls of young, were detected. No additional nest structures were observed during the survey; however, it was discovered that one of the nest trees identified in Figure 1 of the June 21, 1991 memo was mapped incorrectly. The nest tree, which is located immediately north of the main colony, is correctly mapped in Figure 1 of this report. Conclusions June and July surveys of the colony and adjacent riparian forest revealed no active great blue heron nests or evidence of nesting activity. Thus, it is likely that 1991 nesting attempts in these areas have been abandoned. A small number of herons are apparently continuing to forage in the P-1 Pond. As mentioned in the June 21, 1991 memo,apparent abandonment of the 1991 nesting effort at the colony does not necessarily imply that herons will not nest at the colony in the future. Monitoring during subsequent nesting seasons would be necessary to accurately assess the status of the Black River colony. Monthly monitoring surveys will continue from August through December of this year to confirm findings to date. Renton,First City 7 Final EIS July 18,1991 Table 1. Summary of 1991 Survey Results -- Black River Great Blue Heron Colony Survey Date # of Nest # of Nest Comments Trees Structures 2-2-91 4 29 Several herons observed in main colony and in P-1 Pond. Pair formation and nest defense not yet underway. 4-6-91 6 38 First survey following report of bald eagle attack. Only 7 of the 38 nests had active incubation. Remaining 31 nests were either under construction or had adults standing on or near the structures. 4-14-91 6 38 Leaf cover complete; observations of nests difficult. Eleven nests observed with incubating adults. Status of remaining nests unknown due to leaf cover. High activity in colony suggested colony was active and egg laying/incubation was ongoing. 5-17-91 6 38 No herons observed in main colony or adjacent nest trees. Three adults observed entering and leaving center of riparian forest. No additional herons were observed. 5-20-91 9 41 Three nest trees discovered in center of riparian forest. One heron flushed from one of the newly-discovered nest trees. Nests in main colony and in adjacent nest trees were vacant. No additional herons were observed. 6-18-91 12 45 Three additional nest trees observed in center of riparian forest. No recent signs of nesting activity (eggshell fragments, whitewash, etc.) observed. No herons observed near nest structures. Two adult herons flushed from P-1 Pond. 7-9-91 12 45 Three adult herons observed near P-1 Pond; no herons observed near nest structures. No signs of nesting activity observed. No additional nest structures detected. Renton,First City 7 Final EIS July 15,1991 - :•}:•:;; • l ;tit • •.:/ %' ,..• • .. ,+:s.!lH, :S:iY:!�i.;.•:;F;Si•,••::::%:' i>.! ,c• �i: f••: . 7•:4 9Yr,.... ��a ��/ i !y r• 1tt .r r•.. Y ,.?::. ';;• }fir . i: �j ''Fi'`vf. ;... 4'r. fiy..,. 1/• x!F;..' '!''��l1}'•.!•:ii i!'r'[ J,;;i.�:%S:::Y<. ;. • • ,r .,:?%r.; :•i,:y'•4•:::!•st:•t,•%•'• ssiF3,[,'}Y'. •C//%/,.;. !,;,..,. I ' y• Ir/��./ C.!.!.F,n..!>ii}H/,.'�%!4f1.•t•i::•'..'�'�r!/Y/,Y ihf�if�,( �:.Y / ri C ii•�i?::!.•'::}%J • •!� r�y' /.'n • :';•.!/r ''y'J/. /.i"`'4r:'•.: ;,F.,`y �FfF� R! t;' :.t 2'r. ' .ybytiii:i'a, ,fit 'y:.• :Fi••/::• t;+::ii• i' .d • • fr ':. . is<//r!• ::yr•: s} %\.+'"�•i fiy/'r. ,i: ::;:,.%a Q <:,jq,fir' ••••<> • .:..;0: A a:(''•. • %• r i;: • 'U••.tiY",`'i.%'4','' •,.,'.% t . -�}`,• •• ' r : 1 f. :/ rrj;',''"`,!ri.' :,i ^¢' li:�' ??ii fc !'r/:, /., :;ram' .,;.} :;;,• .n,,:,{•"4.' • ,j'' • y raj' •�? ? ..,¢:, Via!}k air,. ,, f" "JrOi, :/. ;. •r/; . •.i 't•- r4'• .• 'y, y %£!%"aXI H/)r.•Y'r' w ��,,w. .err .,r.• • r• '/ <£.4',.t "7/• •4.'-. :o-tf. {n • Y H g• t. y/ f/ .,//,• j. .:'d; �,§,'•i ,• .iii: .z" , •1*•:• /��''!',::,•'} ;.:t:..•<ji };:4:, -/. �.:r.:i ryF,i%•• .,. iy•. :!4• . •{',• `/"W, yr.!•lis I.F. ' :pit. ''/" %•'?':.v�i>%? • •S• •' .r;. /�:.Yam::, ,. • • • •;''r!4,. .trF H, :Y.`'} • .•i;j`` •'•i.,.,.!ri• ! i :'' :!•r}.{y;y:.n:'-J, ,�. . x• . :%ii.;%•'i/;,'J. ''././• ` z .:•`} '% ; 'v:t • ,�- 4/.". n4?•,7„3. ,,tp>.•:.r:_•', -i.::.,y�f y ; i"Yk•'.'.`.'--r• - '. ,".iC ...._ • • l.,r --; ,1 r r/' , .// JryYr., , , ' ' y ;. •!! ;�:''•:A;.i! r':/��lf. r ::?Y4 L ;"? 4: �f/'J ' % C' • i{, ': r/ f,/ :• tF•%i•'rr%; .,. .iy }! j / .f 2. r • /// 4 : , si4 '• % ' ' •1'/f / • • ' '/ r :H �.. , ir ./, ,: 4 ,.. /, , ' .• • i • F/ �r � .J / `:' ' f ; ? ' i / '' • r " • ��� ti' •tf' / /; . j0:•• •'%i,. J ' .. .. /.%ii! r:/ • ram, L .r� if -r;fy'r.' � i' / r, jf4 ' ,r/ F4..;%ri: rr �'3" .. . y ,iJ.• % . . • S 9 ;"'d'� { a 'y: [ i •• • k' 4 , Ciyz . r • • . f � . • % 1 r ••ar . • / ; "-,' • • • • ` ' ir/ • a 0 r. :% r/ .. ::..•. ..;:.. • !V,: :•tip F.4yiX.::• �� • f•. /' 0 't{•:• • �r .f. f r'd'/' ^'Jy. /4 eie /�� ,i V/ i 4:v'C :: : : ...:: ... ..:i:t•.}i: .. 'fir/'!•' • • :.r• ^' v7 ti': 'r" o• r.� i t� • l f. ''�4 • • • • •• CO CZ i:v "•'f x.SY: 4' •! •<:.: L }:fFy r:f.;.. /3))/fitri b§•.. SS , • • ���';/)[Sr'`''r%gr:" :k: iti3" t'cA F'' ;:j;•:.v, '% ,/.;t 4:•)...,4C, ;i•;4::•g;•.r •• • S�!,.`!t •• r:" Sa:.: 0) • • ,;+adt[!::2%S':•'y[',5::'•r,$�: -• •• �a��;P�i+ !SC- . r .''r/r4 ' • • . '3:'-r"1=' ,,n 0) a; l; • b , :Ft , j:t:':icy,•,}.k %Yi. " .•:P: > . CD 'Y ••.,4:•';:8it. ,,,• '•• . , ;`',C..'.,, ,::a:•: • .r j tf 'gp:}:si::•"y.,,,.....5:;+::.:}ni.-;t. JJ S+r: -a i:: W^` }t :;� L .. .;.. ;.;:•''.:':. ':} ,L'ram� S-•:r•' :'i'ti.K44K ::tt /r 'lJ} / 4..} •Yf`> ''; • 4'r !'!'n .. A'• r 'iii�: «(.g,`. 43'.r'r,.;:i.'•''ilVd Q•t u.i; HS <\: ''�,: • ::S>;. y.. • ';:L}::•• ;'y',R.; ..j.Y+•4.;.-+t•.;r +';v` r ,Y;:`';i • > . -'1' •• .F r j; ts! co rc::• �. ,. :rfH:� J../r.' `,d<., } rF' r, : •1�a FF•' F 4 ¢} g " ' {' ', x H:' � r s' 'x � . Oj r:'a -x % : t1-i r • . .of .v, f :- ., M L � �- 'J.: ..n <'..yt .rr•� } n!.y V / iA •w {{, 4C.rr, : r X• . •;.t!•. b4'iH H ri> : ' 4• F '4�r'' C��f ';.n4i v y {,f'tr !•/•. Y • • • • • Or 'f- • ��, ffc , „r ? i'r ...... y CC w •'iGirJ •, A` •�.,'t� '7. {S` vi nr/ �/ •�4; ,FJ t>. 'K't�• 'k ,F.:i s}. ?:.fioi•: }i Kai: ..r •:Ya. .!: F. •h :.,7G:•'is ..,%'l •• <" �ti :K '4 < t%" < i� O '.4r•' f F. .yr! • .i • L :f:li'` sr .t>•••+'c5:2: }% ,'}' .,$:' .:f-.l�S '•srt, • • • • • • , %F•. • a i�n •••.:. ¢, .,t;v • Q <. [n\�h •f �t4, ,r/ a •4f: • rr. 4 r-. v,S • .r Jr,qp F�' Q yet F>•. is%{. +2i v+. _ •rf T��,,FF�Y,,,: :>a• }: ;.�.�}.;4. '''•:$;Kti[f :yy`,. ,i;•':ii#•4yy� .. 4• • /�) H H' ?: r' W�. y •:j ii: g i } ' ..r: .f •.4' vH+ .4+ �,4 't>ir :•.:46!'.i f!:ti''4:%4 :.i:4.[:i.y. 4' -AU • • • • f v/•', .:1:• • % ./. :;;}.t, �;, •:Ys:::{;•'•s••i:::,;;. .: C ;bral. ''r, ;G :o• • y' +:H• 7A. `�^. •i.>�Ki{t>} '•.t<:.'yr::'• ,. A�.4 y,rt.>Y `Y.`'r, N+ �••','+ v .7 • 1 ,+ :5's . 5pt-O-II-oO PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON • JUN 2 51991 RECEIVED • • JONES& STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC./2820 NORTHUP WAY, SUITE 100/BELLEVUE, WA 98004 206/822-1077 FAX 206/822-1079 DATE: June 21, 1991 TO: Mary Lynne Myer, City of Renton, Long-Range Planning FROM: Jon Ives Jeff Berglu d 115 SUBJECT: Status of Black River Great Blue Heron Colony as of June 18, 1991 This memorandum presents the results of a June 18, 1991, field survey conducted to determine the nesting status of the Black River Heronry. The June survey was conducted as part of an ongoing monitoring effort initiated at the colony in May subsequent to numerous bald eagle attacks. During the May survey it was determined that a number of pairs had apparently attempted to renest in the middle of the riparian forest. Methodology A 4-1/2 hour field survey was conducted on June 18, 1991. During the survey, a Jones & Stokes Associates biologist monitored activities at the historic colony and riparian grove from observation points located on Tract A and on the north side of the site. Additionally, the riparian forest was surveyed on foot for nest structures and evidence of active nesting (begging calls of young, adult nest defense, eggshell fragments, whitewash, etc.). Results Two great blue herons were observed during the survey. The adult herons were perched in a small snag along the P-1 Pond and flushed upon approach of the surveyor. The herons flew out of sight around the northeast end of the riparian forest and were not seen during the remainder of the survey. A total of seven nest structures dispersed in six trees were counted in the approximate center of the riparian forest during the ground survey. All nests were observed in black cottonwoods. Visibility in the forest was extremely limited due to dense foliage; Mary Lynne Myer June 21, 1991 Page 2 consequently, additional nests may exist. As observed during previous surveys, nests in the main colony and previously identified adjacent nest trees were vacant. Although small amounts of whitewash were seen under one or two of the nest trees, no signs of recent nesting activity were observed in the riparian forest. Additionally, no herons were seen or heard during the 3 hour ground survey, suggesting that the nests in the forest and at the historic heronry are currently inactive. It should be noted that several cleared trails were observed which connected most of the nest trees in the riparian forest and that many of the nest trees had been marked with numbered flagging. The trails and flagging were not present during the May 20 survey. Conclusions No active great blue heron nests or evidence of nesting activity were observed at the historic main colony or in the riparian forest during the June survey, suggesting that 1991 nesting attempts in these areas have been abandoned. Although two herons were seen perching near the grove, no herons were observed near known nest locations. High predation has been known to cause abandonment of great blue heron nest colonies; however, it is important to note that apparent abandonment of the 1991 nesting effort at the Black River colony does not necessarily imply that the herons will not return in subsequent years. According to The Review(March 20, 1991),2 years of bald eagle raids on a heron colony on Bainbridge Island resulted in abandonment of the colony. Two to three years following the abandonment, herons were again nesting in the colony. The preponderance of evidence to this point suggests that great blue herons are not currently nesting in the historic colony or in the adjacent riparian forest. Monitoring during subsequent nesting seasons would be necessary, however, to accurately assess the status of the Black River colony. Additional monitoring surveys will be conducted during July and August of this year to confirm findings to date. Table 1. Summary of 1991 Survey Results -- Black Rivet Great Blue Heron Colony Survey Date # of Nest # of Nest Comments Trees Structures 2-2-91 4 29 Several herons observed in main colony and in P-1 Pond. Pair formation and nest defense not yet underway. 4-6-91 6 38 First survey following report of bald eagle attack. Only 7 of the 38 nests had active incubation. Remaining 31 nests were either under construction or had adults standing on or near the structures. 4-14-91 6 38 Leaf cover complete; observations of nests difficult. Eleven nests observed with incubating adults. Status of remaining nests unknown due to leaf cover. High activity in colony suggested colony was active and egg laying/incubation was ongoing. 5-17-91 6 38 No herons observed in main colony or adjacent nest trees. Three adults observed entering and leaving center of riparian forest. No additional herons were observed. 5-20-91 9 41 Three nest trees discovered in center of riparian forest. One heron flushed from one of the newly-discovered nest trees. Nests in main colony and in adjacent nest trees were vacant. No additional herons were observed. 6-18-91 12 45 Three additional nest trees observed in center of riparian forest. No recent signs of nesting activity (eggshell fragments, whitewash, etc.) observed. No herons observed near nest structures. Two adult.herons flushed from P-1 Pond. • .... . .....,.. ,s,..:•••••it>,::0,1::::.,,1:44:1•;;;:••••••:::::•.%•:ini,..:•,::::::M:::i!::?i•;:::5i.,.:!i•.•:•:•':::•:•>::i..•••••••::::>;:::.•:••••••••••:•••••• ••,'.•4 •'•:•••,>0 .1;' ' . :1.:.• 0.e•::•:.. ., ' ."''''' ',.::.l'::•G,..:•••:...:•$•••••:::•••14r.0,..:?..:0:::•:••:••••,•.:.:•.::•:...•:•:••••:::•••:,..,:•:•••:4,••..."••::‘".4 414", ;':•"2:::,,' ••••'*:::: ...k • . '' .44::::„. ••:: • •,?r,"•:::ti.:i••:•.;:,:;,::.;...,i*,:1,..;•:::V.,::::::::i.:',W:::::•:•;::•.•::•,...:-,;,..::•:•;:.;•":"...*::T;i•ii•:'":•::•i';::::::`"'"4:::... .; .''''''S'4" ;•;:' •'''' • ' • .::.:,:::.4 ' .:.......g4;:.4::4;A j7.,... ... . ..;...... ..:.... .. ..::......,...,..4.r. .,...........e...t,...%,:....4...;.;.:.,:•.•,:;%;:.,....:::::$,„......:.,.....:::::!:;...::.:',:...: .? •1>Nfi, •• .' •.:. . ...! ' • ;>,,:•,,•••••0'4,4•0••••TA••:.• • ••::•%yr•:.::::'• •?„'•::>:.:::• .. . .••••••'........,,O.•:%:::jUR.?.?:';:4::.N.%:':::•:.••:;%.„:;..i••••••::;..I.R.:••••:&•:. .:i?::^ .. .••'"•;q''.!:•••: ,.*•'•'.• . •• ,. .. 4.::?•': •:: ':::$?.;;•‘.:".:.•i'... '''..,,..,*; :::::ii;i....V.;••••• i....:;/:., .f.1;.. ':1•:•:'• ';'••••:::, •••,.....•• %fi;:„:..;i:'..:.::„..1‘•%.:'.•';':Yr'','.$.:*•;•i;::',..;,;:•.;•;:•!::.: i.i''•.**••••i:i::?•ii:::::r:• , ,, •11.?...:,,Wir• ,.i..0,;,:e.-,•.-;:.•:)....../:,,,,,,„:„.4.:, -,.:. , •.::.:r::.:•.;. '•......,•.1.-...::::.v..:,..i::.:::ii,....,::;;::„..A.::::::..ii.;:ii•::::::::::.!,•::ii.:::i.i:ii...0:: ,,,,,.::.:„.v::::i•:.• . ., :•.•4 %•'4'••77••••••:•••• • -'1•':••••••:%•:•;•••••>:•:%••,,,:••••:••• •..... .•;:K...."•:.%••:?••••:MK....4.:•':.::. • 's!••••: .. :. •.•-. .i: . . „,...,„;,....,,,„11.., , .... , ,,,.,.. .....,.,;,,. ......„„,.:.. ....,,,,,. ....,,,:.:.:....:•:::,?,„,:::,...„..:;:,:•...... .:.'.':5:::i1:•.::::•.;..;:li...:.:r•::•::::•:..i.:.i.::::5•:::. •-•":72., ::. ,.4 ••• • .':.: ..... .;:.x.:,.,..n.....::::::.,,,...,...:...,,.:„•' •%..::ex.:,:•.:...t.,:4•••::•;.:.:::.::ZI::...::•:•;:::.0*: ...,..0/.,5?:.,... :••• . .. ....AII:::: "•, ., •, .:;.4.,:;.;.+•*... ,4'.:." ..:•:::,,.:.;:„, .„ ..i....(.1.::::•"e...:.i.<......"': :.• ...:• .... ri..,..:•:•;; :4•':•:0.•:.::r•,•• , X.:x•..:'", 1 : v•••:• ::::•••:•.::•• ••• ••••••:.•4..:,..:•::t::•,•••••.. .•• ••••.:::••:?:•::••"i- •:• ::4%:'::•••:*::Vcwif•.v.,.../...."' ,,,e;g1;:e.: •",'..,,.-;•li.' •,;:>•:..•; : .,., , „...:.: :::..:At;:f;;;i::;:•::..;:•.;i:-.Cri;....i•ii::;:•:::::::•%:%;...... inii;:i....P:'...;:jiieg.0:x::.. ., . ,•4'... .., • • ..•./•:: ii::;,:';::::::i...:....'..•....::•.:::::•::.:... .f.i1:,::: ••••• •.:.:',':•:.V:••,'?•?:•:::••••:•:•v4:•••::•':•:•••:"::••••:.:•"::•••,•*•• ;.,• .i• . • : •1 •:rg'.::::::.V • • -• •.•i•-/•:60•• ...:i.A.:?....i:ViM•.• ...i:i:••:::::::::':••.%•':'''"'::•'''"-':''''''•:•.••:''.."4 .'•••••••••:•.".••••"•••*.*•••••••••••••••••A••"' ' ••••::::•:.....••••••••••.: -:•••••;•.:.::(A....::.:::•••::•:•••••::::*;i.:.:"::''N::':::::::,..'• • ,, .... . • • • ....":•;::;(1.....• 0.A....; ... 4,,:',•::,..... .4,:i:P:,:ii :zli::.s': ...:;.•:; •;::::::•:::::::•'' ••:.:•••••• •;*.."::',4•:•::•;p9,0•M:1:4;•:•:::::::•:•:4"• • • *:::::i....:/*."'„,.... ., /..„,:. •, • . .,iy„g;;;;;;;; ..,.:;e:.„..,,:•;.:...:;$50:;•.:::ii :::•::‘::i....:';':;;,.;4:.„4:4, ..s.•••:>;:•:,::::::.:X::,:v\:::',..:%:: ::.:*::.::::,:•:;•,::',.::•:.s'::1$ '% . „....... ...::::::d•..•:',, •fs'ig-..44 . . • ;'4:•i•li•;:i:•::.:...!::e;i:,..;%fr?r;;;?,...4ri..e ....>„%/./j4.....,;%.':'',. :1#i:l..?%..:A::: :1!.:..i:.:•.:1;;';';'0":. <,...• : '•••:I:: ••••••‘,. . •.' ':':***,t..1b . .. .„......?::::,...;i:.::.::°.. •P!':,',?; •'%%-• :':,,,.'/:.•-,''. .....:.,'"':',.'•••;,..:..?,;4?%.'0';'.1•-•-: '.....-:,;:iF.i.:...i:;;I:0:',',:.,...4:;V.. ,,s l'•'•' •• . ..„..„:..„.,.„.....„..:.,:„....*:.•,,,,..,,.,:... • .,:•,.e..',.•,.....1":;:,'.,..:.;,•kr,....(!5'1..,,,. ..• .•.„*:if..:.i.:;:i•:::::4:•;:t:' ,',Iii. :Sg ,,:.:::•..........4 .i,•;:i1:?...::::..„ .;•;;;•:••••::...?......::''.• :::.:ek:i:i!.:,•;.',.., '•...'. . ...4; ' ' '.•' , •- .../•,.::::Mi::::i•&.44/A'.:.e.. . .. , .. .:••%•4.15;i :i;;„,,,•:.:1.,:,:fAA,:,1:f,?'.4::;..-:.1•.ei ,i.••:.'if...1.. i••;;:,;'' .;;..'. ••,%,:•.:•,.''-,''•', l'' ,....., '..%•':, .:'•: •:•grt:T/WX...1.:f' .. ...,.4:4:r..e....;•••:.::::44eg”•••:....:.:(• " :.,;• .::.;•:•::Pe•r•%,'• ••••;.'f.".:5'' . :...', '.'''' r• ?N..: '-;5,;'....:5: ;0''''"/:7• • ' .,..• .; , AI' '': • .i..•.i.:40;.,:4.ii•:.•:::„.•......,'....../;,/,..•• ,,,:•..... .:e. •••:4.•:•:••..;:;,..,•, • :..,;•,••,,.. ..:....,,f/..... 1••• ..;,:••••PP:•:: • • 0. .'*'.•>`;,,,•,0.,•'...*••••,', ':.••, i••>• 4,,' '•'- •••4 .,0'.§ ,... •:w.:!:i....:::„.,:,:4,,,,:: "P•:::,.• .4:,;;;;...,•;%:•::::i'•::::„:„::.:%/.4:A,..:i:;:::••;.......,., '. •....•-•: .::„.‹::,/,',. ''4•••/-.4.44,i,;,*".-*' ••„sei.••4'•4<•>••••,*(s. 4 - 1%. • .:,';..;.,:::,:.,:e....::.::::.•:?.' ....,.:::.:i:o..:,..,,,g....!:.:...N....?.:.;, :::.:.*..::..„:.........,::;i:i.:•::..;1.:.:;..:-,-; i ..:'.;.,..,..?::', .. .'.. ..: •.:.•%...:4,v,;r-,,,A,c,.,-.:. '',70.7.0Z.2,1,--:'',.....t'',''' . :•' h: '. kIN•Zi.:',4,••:'ii!'•1;•::::1: ..3..0. :..' ,...:•.:•:•••••.A5' ..':: •";''''.';'''.:::1. '' ' • .• • ,.-'•''.• ;••••••.'1;•.;•'':,4:t'",'••'••'-vAl••••','' •' ".• :'.11' ••••: • ' ,,,P- •: ;0.;:',.,:': •, .., .:•;:i.;::,:v:::::k:•-v :::::::...;:::::::.:;..:4,::::::::::1:4','•;•:::::,••-•: • •,.• . ''• •.--41 • -• . ';•.:',..., :•: ,•:../.;,..,:.:;.;, ...5;••••••• ... :. • ,., .,..., '• . ...:,4'.• ,,,,..4,•:,/,...1.:::::„. ....:::.„.., , . . .: .,,. . ,i:.x:•:,'••:' • 0,.i,,,:.;.•„;::,..,.., ::.:.:si: . ....... ...... .........„.•:,::::i:i::::•2.,k.,::..,:•,,s•.••" -• :. „;„# •-... . :•,,,..,. „...„.;.,.„,....„,•••„.,. .......:.,..::•:,•••: ..:: :.:,...-...:::N.,.•....„:......, • :. •., , . , :•••,,•::.,.:,..:-..: . . • ....,.. • 4.,•::...... ..-...„4„.....,,• :•.:,:.::',•:...,:.%.,...:.:.•••:,:. - ' - . ::,.....::„, ..••:•, .;.", ......... •. ::.: : .-.•,•,. ...- • • As#' • ."7 ••••:::,1:•::%;•.....,:•••••• •'• ,';••••4/":'-''•: ,••'.....-%::-•": •.1••••:,%* '. ' •'••' .• • :,/1$.0%, .. , . . "..,../.. '••'..''::. •:. ::::•.:, ''.•• ••••:.'•Z;.;.•:"%•'•.;', . •:.•.:*"-;•/ •. •„: „ '•• i..e$:;;'?>.... „ ,-,),:%', ..,;Li•••••••••''' •"'• % •'''. •.: ..,•',....1- •';';'.,.... .Fo.':‘,.: :•,:. „ A.• . •i•,' '•• 5:i .'•' ••'.?"/•.,'5' . - ' : . :.':i...% .'..'?'.; '.., ,1 •%"44,.....,,,,...- c,.•s•.., :‘,..•: .„. > ....i.:•::::. .-. :;:•::::.):: .,.;. •'-•'•• ........./ Yik, 4 r•.., :....• . ‘- .,',, ,,,,,. •,,r,,,:.•;4' ..,,....• . • •..,.•.• ...,.1,-,......, ,, ..,,,,A. I '• . '4114.;•••,..,,A,X../., •..'.9. • • .. -- _. ..:''.......• ..• •••••:•::•:;••••••1....00•:•::.::%•L ,' • • 1.1. •: •:"Mu' '..r;h. "..,,.,.y .....„--,•. 'V.a....:-C;',Ze4/‘ "....'A'..4'.% ".7' •bffn.......-,....,‘,4,04,-.....--,,..''41.... .,.7-..4.2. ,/..*,,..0.14..,'..1:..;,:.4;....•...=-1:-7.:-1....:.-4 .te........ ........-t.1.q.,..:...',..:.',V, -- ".,:::?:i.:,.........:,,,••••-..,:•••:..,::::•.:' :.::::.:q.„:"''''.---,•?',--'-7.:....•,:;:.V.....!...."./,,' •4.•'..*:::-.''•'."'f•'- " '::.Q.'/"::::•••:?7,/•:.7.4/•:''A• ".•.' -'5•••••• ••-% . ••I ; ,. . . •.•%:••••.: •.:•••:,,, :::'',/e.,n,..,„;$..i;s:: :;1.al'%.4.0,,.;:f, •.,,:- „. .:,• .$;%,•/;•/r40%.7,:ft$'••./. •;.1.5•2 ,'• ''.••.% .. .. ••.':i•:,.......:. ;:;•:?%::.:',/•:••• •:///,',/•:'%::..•::••••••.: •y• ••.,,, --'• '''...•;,•;/".,;,•/„.4.,"54..,.$.,//',40•>,,,.c.:,,,,,,,,•/„.$:,,,,%,,,,:%•% :%*:•.••.:/...4•%•• ,.•.4.:. 140 .... • . ....:eWi:..i...il:.•.•:;:•<!E;.)1:....;,.%:,:;l„,:..:X„.r.5„'„A.•:..:;.4:.;.'.,:::.$,/::.:,.a;•:••..••:,.',m..).'.0.:,..::.::,:.i:/:::.!.7;7,..;:.4.*,;.:•,'*",-6:,./,1::g::g,,.,*:.,:„:.,.0.•/.-."i.1/i..:4.:/:.4.:•i.i/,,::::i.:'i..,,.„i...,10-0!1:,-.',i.0::e:..::.k:v:.„A..:;,:a:„:::::;::.,::„•:16?i•.::::;*::::.,::;::•g:s•.:::$::::,I::ii*:0.::.:.g5„::::,v.:.i.:i1.;::.:'4e:::.i:::0;:..::.1.:.1::w::,.:;::0i::144•:::..(:„41.;'•,:,rg,',.,.47,,e.t.,f.;•,1z,/,,g./.5,%s•,)(,-;7f.-;,5.,.'..;,.,,;,:,•P:i.-?.s:i'.:,','7•',V:.-.-.i.5,'.'.:li,,f,',':.'..,,.;„.'.:...„.,.„:s:...,..:-•:;..••:.•....•',"....•.;......:•...•.;.-••.,:.;:,•;s...•:,.:•.:.,.•.,,,..:,,:'•',4,,••,•,.„.,%:,,,•,',.0"••;,K...p:.....•,.0.;•,,•../%..,,.).e,.,,,,:,.i 40,f,./;,4,,,*•law4:4;;;;A3.,.0ftc,W,f•,,.0/P,1',',;:.*;:;?4;,.1;0"%0/,.;)/.:;t•..„„.,,.::;;::./e/.."-:."4:,",:•W(,::""".'•"•,'•%:'•;,...'.40'.•,..•::.:•:.•••••,••"••''.".••,.:..'0..-.,. .-'...>.:..,''..;..::'.;".'•,":•.:•.',.:.....‹.,'.I%.::•:••...••'•••••*••'••';-:••-••>-•;".:....:.:Y..:.::.••<•1••'•';:''.'.:3'.,'.'.:',:A:'•:'/••":„..•:••.•.•".,' ,"•• -...4,..%••..•*•,•"..`.:••.:•s..'f,.•.':•);...,,,,,...1.;10 ::.K 'v . 4 . V . .:,:.:';N„,'.'-.:...-......k.,..:.'.,.,,:,,,1,•..,`.*.,4'',,-•(-•''4..',4.,.',•).k.3..$',,„!';,.,,>,,,it,'1.f::..,1;.f.:. :• :•'..1,.;:Y...:::::";:::.:;•::::::*:':ii•W:Kti:::::•rAl..ii::K•;:.••IrA/,/,r;•f.'.•/.,,:',..... :•if ••:. '...:•-• :.........' •,: .....4•-.v.-.• .•, • • :; :,1) 1 - :•!:'•.:::. .:••••••.,• .'i •• .. • •:- ' •••••:••••••..' ' ;;..•...:••..•••....•,...;:.•..,h:,::s•.•j•.:•.•...:...•::.;,7:i'i:.i:...:i,::.:•S.::...:.:":•..::..::••:.i:,.:.i::::i:•:,•:•.::..:.:,'•:::i:•:•:.:•:•::::::;•.•?:;5::‹:.:.::.i.'::6:::..:,::!:::.•::-:0.,:.:.f:;:::;:::4:'.l:.i•.:.i•..•i:•:Y;•:1:i::::•:i1:•.,..%:'.:W.::r:•p.:•.:::...•::.::4:,):„:.i:,::,f:i./*V•V4 4:s:..:..t.:;3..•::•i:x1•::*::l.s.<;"•:.•/ /I"".;"/• '. ;•.4'..;..•••."'::' :4- ..::..0C••O••.•.,./#, •'•••••••.:'.4:.•.••."•-:..>;f••.•;•'.• '.>::..•"'•,•4•::•.'•0.:.'"'.4,.::14•,?•"....:„:.,';.:.'".,•.' •.;• •.c;:•.'.•,.'„.• A• P,- 1..,.s•..:5,-c;:c.; ••::.i:....lie,.;:....•..-,,.• '-4•,;-•-..•...•'' •' . -•: • '0":' l:' • ••C> 0•••• .••)A • Tr •-•• .:•:>;;;.;•f; ;..5 e•-••••••',.i-: •• % • • 0 •.:..:.:•:.:.•!..:•i::...:::::i:::•ti:Wie.:•;::14.:iiii":01:?::::::•W„10...,,.," *- .; • ., . .. :* ••••••••> ,.... • •••• % :•:•• c ,.:.• 'I CI • ••<'< i'•-• . .:••••,.: ••• ••••.: ' . .• •. . •:....::::.::•••i:::•;:i::;.i:.:::.:;::••A:iiii.O.:!4.iii:!:iiii:Z....•50.:VIr4g' - 0) •••• •*. '' (..) ,:.•:::•:%.:•:...::•:.:•,•:::•::.z::••:•::::::•.::::::•::::::•::•:•:•:•rf 7/ • • .:.• '.> •''.';'; OW.•• CO . • . .•:;:f.•;-... ''.:. •••;• ::: ••• . .,, . .. .•• ::::.:•..i...•;•:::.::::•:::.:•:;•:•..:•:•••4 ::::.::::.•:•:::,5::.:•. ,,4:4 .0%,:*$•.. • • " •' '. • •*:..'•'• '' •• •...........•''•.:.••. ....4W0. ••'CP) ..''.'''' ';.7%;':k."'1•;•••'.'' •• ' • ?••••':••••..•••• . C ,:,.:•:•••,:•::.,..;..x.:.•:•:•:::::•:*:•.::.:.:.:•:.::0..e...::%:::::PV :*...•....:.::,:::::*:.:.:*:::::&:i:::::i::.:::nii:K*;•:.*.•••••::..n'::•:::::/.::.*::.'.', V ..% •• •• •••% ':•%.4..... ...0:.; ,?:•','. '‘I.r.,i4„0-4,.., ,•,•,-.::•:•-•-•• , • •:. ::::.•-••:•••• .... , 0 • .••• „../.:::,,::-....,,,„•••••:„/ ,...-- • • ::,.:. • ..,.,..,.,,, •,%•,-:• , :. .fr,,,?,-: •••-,--,."-,'",..e. ,,,-,,": •••••• ••••••• • ..„.;.:. 1- :.%::i:i•g::.:i::::..i:,..I.:::,:...i::ii..1::::.....„•:::::::-.:.:.„.:,...:„.„..„•,...: ,:...•,••• •5„,„,.. ,. • 1. :::::„.0„.„„,„ .„4:.::::,iiii::,!•:?ii....iy:..:. gi..?••: ::i..:Aw./.4y::-...,.,a, ,.-:•;::::.:„:.*:-.:•::::::::::::4.:•„::::::.::::::.:::.-f:::4.:::i:::-....."1. ::.••••• '••••••,...../f.,.. • ••••:•:.i:5•••::::::::*:•:::::i:.:•i*if''i' i:n;:1:A';$'W.t.::11:t....'..;43:! 117• • ..• .::.••••/- "• " a) *.•ki:•;:j•:::0:::•••;:r::.:.•:i':?.?:•:::•:•?ilihmk. ::••*,w•%-E,•%-,•%;',. ••••,Klt.i•:::•:,.::::•&•:i;:.i:iia•;iMiiil:':i,':;,:ii0400:••,•••?0%(.--'"i• (•:•::','••-;:••:•':•-•'.., • •,••••, '• ' • • • • ' ••''''''''''"" ''''''• '''z 0`1 ' '• . ''''''' :.. . .:. ....... 4..::•..,:,,;,,..-,..:„,, % ,,,,4::: ••.;.‘,;:, . ....', •...."• ' . ' M ••• •..,Aii i•.:.::•;•••••••iiiiiiDili40.•:.•":„.e:•••:'11•W.,.44,, , ".?..' : .••• .•••;',......:.:' •••• :.%•'••'•.-' ' 03 :... ,v;,....::•5:.::.•••1:.::.:2&•.::::,,,:m:::;;;::!:,.••••.5,A;--vs.4- ••1.'"•'.'''•••• • '..:''' ' '•' .". '.'''••••' ''• . ..e.•(00*:.:::••:...?..,::::::::::::::•t::0;,•*i•x:::,:::;,...,W,:••Irw • ••m...::•,•4f::.:e.:::?•:il•i:r: :.,..09,.,..4:••;.,w..i;.?:ii:..,:•• • •••• ••,:,: .:. .•:".....".•.:/.....,.: •••-. ., . -. • • ,.... • .. •... .: :..„,.....: . ,•.;:•„ •::••••:.... .-:...•.....:•••••..::•::: • .:••.....". • • • • 4.. ,. „:.:::::::::„.•,.:ii::.•*::i;.:::.:...:;:i:A.K.I.:::?:•$.504.••''' • ••"•‘..••:...: ..::".. .- :'.:. •:. •• .• ..i,:,...:;::.:.;....:.:1:,.:.wi.i.i:.::::.::i.::::,:::.??.:v...$.::•::::5,4:. ' 0 . ..w.:::4:,;••••,:,:::5,!•::::,:::.:::•:•;.:.::•::5i::•:..,::••:::::•;::::.0M:;•,:i*.• • •• .. ';:••" •, ' :. ''1•.: „ • • "• ' .•:.''..,...". .... .".•:'••n": :.''."•••:•i••.'",..'"4".9.',%.'••";'.., :.t... •'.?,•.:-••'' '' '' ,:, • i... • •• ••• ::•"';. • ••••••V....:•••• ••••,* ••• CU•14: .• ••• •..2.:E,:: ,;.,::'::' ... .....i.••: ..,:, .: ,..."..•„....:x..::•0,,,i•.:.:•.:.;ii:i:g. :!: ::.:?...::ii:i;;ili:.:.:E:::!il:::i::*..4i:::::::. .4 4';''."4:-..%;:'• ... ''' •.. • ' : •e::<•:;i3f4i.:;5':':i'ffl,:'.1::Ni::f.'ii4iigl..V%.,,,.P:'' ' :".•-•1:.',/••••'•••:•••••:x'''.' ...'1".•-•.• .. • ........'-' •-:'..• '' ••E••:•..:. • ..%.;•••••••,....;•%...E:,;,:,,. -.. ....,:::,•,:iic,:,::"..;•;;;:' .'f;:•...2.•::•>•A:-:. :...,•,,s,•••.; % •••'• •:%.t.....ii:W:::::?it:P:gi:Wi'• ::4.%;• :N• •••• ':'• a) ••••••::.:•.....5::::.-R.:iiir.,:::::,v:%:eii..,••:., % •..,. :.,,• .• . •-••••.,%-•..... •f.. .. • ,•-•„?:.-,%.:,.• :.. : ..:„ ".% ::.:„:„.:,..,.....„ .•••;:..?.•...-:::.•••••••:.:,..ii.....„:.:„..:.•%.,-.<„...,i;;:i-.•;...- ,--.....::: • , > . .. •••••••:::::::-.:•:::i•::.:,w,::• ,i,:i:iiMt,,:••••0,,:i:•,e,.,• -'••••*•••. • • „...,,..• •• *.i.i.„,:wl•ii:?.?..::mbil-i:ig.,•••• • ,'•f.•,„, . . '•• % " •••• ••,..-.:. • • ..-- •:•••• • " .• ••• ''••• ' ' •"••••••:---":;••• •? :•''''''.•**'•• • :' ........,....„:„•:.,..,:e„.::::•::.:e::,.1*::.•:: ::...:..„,.....:„:•:..:•::w.„::.:.:" ... • " .....„...„:„.:•*„..::•••••:„...:::::::::::,.:-.::::- ,„ 54 _. ...::::„,...?..x.w::•:::::.•":i:io,,i:ir.:::4:::::i::: „••• -,. : .-.'-: ...-z• •: •••. . ••• - • :-• ••:: .•• .. , ,.. ••.,„. .. : .... ..% • % „...f :', .. --•:..-••••,..,•••,•i„,......•.. :-:••••••::: ")•••?w •.•J-f.: " ...' i--•••• , ••,-:-::...„•••••••••:44,..a.::34;ii:•:.„., ::: ::.:::::4:e:. 4,..::. •:••• - • • c.) . „ •••......::: ::•...i::::,:x:•• ••••••:-::c:.,,..,-:::•: .1..::•••-4' .• ri..,• ,=,,,,,i' .. . .,. ' .. -. *, „... • ., • .'••••. •:4'''.•. • ,:.'-.?.,' , •••.•'• ••••••••":";:f;•";;;"::: Ar,`"§ .- *;••,. . , CZ •:•.:.::.:::::::•;.:n.:Af::•::::;E:X•::.:.•••::: ::::0:::i:::% •,' ,' • a) ..".4''''''.* . I , . •'......:..:%:..:.:..... ."::.*:...*.••"i,..:':ic$Z;./:',:0,.. •' , '".ft'' CD•. • ,.•-' i ill , : ., .• ;••.......• ••::..:::::::::,•: :.:.:::.>i:•!>:::i4r.•'.a;i:l...''" "i".." . ..., • >,• . . •• . •. • •..., .••••:Y.,i.i.0:..:.:.::.::;:t.::.0".:::•;A:.• „ •11'' -•-"',4-:',: • • '. „. • • , • ..... .... .•::. . ...:..::.•:•,....;1:,:::.:.,.:::••::::•.91::0:::>*i:. .•- ''• :''''•>: ''....:': ••'''•:-::.............-' ,'.. •••........• ;. .: ii.-Al '• • ' a) ..„ • • • -.•,.... •• :•••:....•:•: :::;f:,:j...::"....g.'.:V:::•0.:AW...-';',1',.• •.• • =• ••• ...,,i••••••••:•;.:::•.::•:•:::•,::::::*:,::*:*,'::E::::.::::?..*•:. :..."...' '' •:. • ... .••• ••,.. , . ".• :.... • :;.' ' :.. •• • ••••;'../".:•.•' .•••••' :;,,,,,-,....4 •:.i...." -":4-;,''. 4-. • . . „ . , ,..... - % .:.•... •.••...:.•'."..:...•...r.,:..i•..;:.:•.•,:.,...4i•..,•.f.:.,t,::.g.:.•..4r...••,...,-.•::&.•::.':•.„'..?•".?:••;S••::„,.:::;',:.;g;.:.:'i4•.V<.::21:r:0•ei:4,:V•0S.N4.r t3 .L:iVi;;,.i4::%::0•;:,*.:i}f:..1:1:;:.1'4.::•*•5::..•*•:l.V:•%:.:e:4•:i.:..0i*.7.::L:..!.,;1..,:..::ix:.::•:'•::.:::.:.ik:g:.:::1::i.l;:'ieq••i••:ai%:i::ii%•::i4:R.::k:•::::••?E:10:"...e•':..9•::e,•''x•:•'.;0;'t•%'•''':....?•."'•%•••••••'•.•••••'':••'••::•.."•:•.I•• ••••.;.•.-.....'...•.:•:•.•%•:'•.:•....'-.:.ea,ft'p,•'..r....'.•• ".-.-'W,:•.•..•••.....•• '' '".••. ••••"••••••.••,%.•':•'•::••.-,•....,Y•.',•.••,•;•:,:3:".:..:..••'•:**•••-i:"....•:•:.•f••.•'•"•:.•::••:.••-•:••.••.•?.„,.•;:':,,•::•..:••-.•:•••:••:•:••.''"..' .:•:.:,,:,%......."*•:.,,:•,•'•5•.,4%••.;.i,.-,:•,.:'::r•'%,',,•.?,;E...-,.:::•.?..•'.:..:%'•.••:,:,.•:::!••''.::,.''• ' ?.,,k.','•',.'-:•`*„-""--•. .•".',••••-•.•,•':.••'•-"•,:t•,..•?,:::',:':•.:,: '• 017•IC-Z.) x, . il4 • 444 44 0) 0 0 ."•, 5. , •• yc,4•v:::::.,:. .. .. , o) . •:••.:.,••••••':::',:..•:'•:•t...i:ir.:i iiiiiiei:i.i.::•.•'. i::•:••••. •". '. :'' - ., . , .::.•i... ••••••.. .:,••• •.••.. ;...,,-...: :,:. .••• .•,. f••••:' :.• 1'f..*.:. -..•'....114 r••• • :" ,., CO 0) .•:•.;.4.., . • •.'• , .•::::::::::::4•i:•::... •• • .• '.•..:,..., . . ••. •%;:;41:,:i::*::i:•:M... • i f . .. • •' :••• :•::' • .... :. :-• ••: :' • • ••• • : • •. .. • •••' • '''''' .• . •ix ,; , .:%W.„.,.*:4.•: ..,•• • . •• C)) . ... ,•:...••••;'••...ig,•' ::•••1 : -.:::N.••::K. • .•'• .. . ...,:.••.•..•.$..4.4::::,•;%..,r::::i•••$:4•i:, ...:s•i:::. :••• •• .• • ...... • ....: •••• ••%•.:::::.1.:;:::•:::::: •:::i:•••:::: '... •c: ..•.-..."e.':.....i..>4:1•: .‘ :•;::::.....i•Oi::".••••• ,:•• ••• *" •• ••.* • • ; " • • /;•' •*: -* • ': .".'••:• .'•'•/..••4;". :.. • "..:,:. ,-:•:%,t:•:;':irN::::•:• ••••••::.'0...:•4;•.:•::i,li.%:;:%.*.•WO' ..*- • ..• .•• * • '••• •• ••• *.' .' :••::' •••.";•;:* ••' ••••••"*.'f ::,••."...*s 5."., ••••*. •".... M .• .... ::•• ::',.•::::/.,.......:i'i:s"ki*.?::V.::::::W:•••••;....:••• * ..• •"••• • • C.) •"•;•..);',. .:•,..• •V:::::M4.0.i,i,'",:l.:.:;.; ... •.. ,. . :.. . ,;.:., ... .`.• ':."'.,•..'..,...5:i:;,,::V•,.:;•::„.• •;.:...i"..i..-ii:...E:i..,..':...••.,:•.;•:.":?„..i:,. ,.:::•. . '-.....•.........:::.:.:i•§..':.;::.O:•::::„•*".•„•..•.'". ••......".?.:„."„•,$•:-i•:•::.:••;i:A.0...1.•.'.•.•...:.%.'..::..'-:i...:.::•;p::4•••:.•,*i:;.:.•„:,:.::..:;,:„;:..::;,i:)i:::..$:•.4.i:•4,.:•;.,•;‘?.;*•;:,;:,•:.N•,•,i•:.:•::i•*,:..:ii,..•A::,:•.,:1i::,,,:::...a4:•:v.:•;i.i:;?i,.:i::ee•:.i:i•,::i:i:,*i;:q.:::?::.,:?:;.:i::.:•1•::f:..i:,::.:p::...::::.*.:.:;:.:.,,..::,.r::.::.,2..::•",:!:•.iW•:.i.W.!i.i:.:•:i,:'.i.::::.r:4-::i.%:::..•*::•::::::•;.:,-:::•:.::::i.:.:i•Y..0::,/.".:•.•.:.i i.?•.•::.•:.•:.•••.•.::•:..••:••::::.:!.•:,,i..:..•4?•:.,,..r:4*..:?:,!::. 1:-•;,:.•:.,10:::%:41.,.,0)."....:;4:1•,•A•'4.:..:`..1.::",i'i•.,1,i.'k••o.:Vj.:.::.*::‘.::',::•-•.?:o•.•••'.••„„•.•,.:.,.....:.:A.,.••:.•.,,,0„•..'..',•'rD..:.••..,.,,.../,:,::.0..,:••/,:•::,,,,.i,•.i..v,i A/.•q.':.pt.....;n.•1>.,.,;':-*:,'%:::,-"•v.,:.. ,.:.;%:.;••;;".'„,:;.":•-•.•.•.:-:.,..:..-,-'.•"•,••:•:'•'•••••":•'• -•-,%.•C.•.•'..,,,,.O0-.Y•.::'.4--'1•:..,:.;,x,-•,•:'.7,(','''1'.....*i,..,.','.:-:.'•:..•..••.''..••:''••••:•`.•:;•,*.?'•:.;•.••:•.•..•.•'•.'•••••...,••":..:•'•:...-.;',•.'..-''1'„,,:•.•.•:,.':;":.::.,..."•..'•:.•'•:.•.:':.:;,'.S-:..I•:•1,:'-'.,'.....',.::.•..,•..:•;,.•%,.,•1(•......•;,,.;?'1":..••1-•.:.•:••••••::••••••.•:.::..,.:-.:..P.',..•'.•.;..[•.•k-.,•--v:••-.•.:.•••,:-•".••'.'•,.,..,..-,,"..•.:,•••.•'•,•".,*-••..::."':.;-,...•.:•:..••-••:";•••:..-•••••-,•.- :.. :•..,,.•,. ,.• :-• - ;:,•' 7 ii . af3) " 4, n . . ; " ' % ; 0 •••• . . -• ;:.. ; ,... . . .' ' • " a ,0 , ,-„ : a)). . .. . .. ,•„.,-:.i.::.:::••t(i..•• -•••••,••••• .....:::::•::....;::••••:.:....0... :... :••:::. •••,...:::•!•,•• • • \44. ••••• . • . ".••i:i..:••••.--.,:,,:i....,:iiii,:a•iww. • .• ,•;:•,..-..:„,--:•:••%: •...-.."........,„,..:„.„.:.„„.4.a.-,• .,..0.,,,,,,,,.. ••• - • . ••, .:•.•••ii,;i:%iii•;•?::iii:. ?.:••••,..:,•i•,•-•:•••••••,,,F ---•••••••--- • • . • • • • ••. , .. • , •• ••• . .•, •.. .. • • •,, , . . .. ..-•;:.,.:.•,:i:.:.....:,::.:.:•••:.:,:nz.„4-,:-.,::::,.. --•:,,,-. ::, --, -•,::'••• •:•••••••• • . • - ' ,: •••• -• -••;-., :•• : •"••• - : , ..I-. , cn : (I) 4•' :0:0:••:::."••;‘4•::.:<''',.,"::..."...-:,-;:•:•:;:...;..,ii'':. •.;•';‘;;;•••.'.:'; ...-::: ••••?:i:'::'•:•?:•• •:•.i:....i:: •: • • 't;i:'....:,1;i::: '..1,;•.-:••,::::i:„K:ii:, '.0.' •*:,•':... ......4t::„a.•,,•• .:1•,••':••...,,'-::-.?;e4;•;3%':?.;t.'•?,?::.••i•'.- .1.....:''' K` Z.••"•••...::t:S •' •• ... . •......:,k, sf:. :'..iii.:.::::i....:,.' ••••••'g•::•:::::-i. ..;,:::,..i.:,;:',.:•:.-•;,;;5.,•%:•-szy•fftSi,..C.....':s:•'.-..:-.;.''''..''''..'",.-''',..,,.:54.;•'.• '-• . ; ‘4... ,, ...... ::.:. ::.:.1*i:::• . •,•:,::;.*:e ,t,A -4...,,.,..,;•.,:s.•,1..,-3,, ,:z.:,, .-i.- ,.:•.‘ >.<•:::.i?.."..<1 ••;',..,.-3.1:•• ....:, •.: . •.:....,.., ,.:. .:,:.:::.,,,:..:•:. . ::::...::••.,•;.. •:::.....:••••••0‘.... •,,,:.<,,,,,,,,,,. •...:n.,...42,-,.... ,',•,;, „:.•..,...-<9.••:..;."4,./., • . . .• ::. ..•:':::;.:••$ •.;:' .::,•1'• ••.•• * ; * • I. °u) .•i„,:::,:•..i.S.:•: •,:t.): :::„.:4..:.:€.:i., ... ••...,:f.k : •.• . ,„,+..),. , „„•: fti,,......,.,... s 1 .,,. \,.,.f,,..., • • , . •.,:.... ,.0...... 71,.. St.:::.:•.;:::::ti;•:. •••••••,nf ii.....• •• . • .Ilf,..V,S 4.:"..• ''....,,..AP.,...0 4 rX, ;,' ':..V.",,•:/•....' ..3,,,,,‘'.........:1'..'r,*,•••.•..}:.• .... .......:::.P.,••• •,...... • • . ....“........‘ . :.5C '.../,,;%X$.n.k4; ..',Y '''.''‘i,:(...''' '.'....'4..":':. .•".....,lt.....1,. *if ..:.:....V..•:`:...:.....••.". " • : • )...,:::::*''4,• ..., ..5......3.'‘:er•tS..f;•..';.r'......' ,..‘.4 • C I.... S..:..:::::•••• •... •......:...S. ...........• •. .......... ..e.... .:.,:::‘..:....:•,.. •.••• •...••i‘.....,?:.4...-?•;'•••••",:...--5,'-ne:•5'.:4,45.;, ;.:?.•..1..:4,,,f,... .-:.f•;;•..?•tf.C.,"::.";,,x• : • ..•.•-•'.:,...•'....*•'.,..,..;,.'..:....:,.......'?' .': ) , . - • '. . ' 0 ,.44,5.,.......s‘,/,..:„.:::',:s :s.• ....:...:::.,:•:•••': •••• • ••• ,...:,,•••••• ....:)1,1:::C.:1A,4"..e.., . s. A1.,.,. /3..s<,. „,„.4. x.,4.,..* ., „ts ••':',13''''s'••••'''''....-;•°••••• ':';'''•••••':• -.1" ' ".."- • '• ' . '','..f,4•5f.....,::•,•,:....ilc;:...,'.'):,...", .:t.q:::.-1.%...xii.., 4,;.:•„.1.,...,.:1•:::::•?: ic5$S*3"it , :i1,1**.,, „.;04;...s.•.•:*,...f,',?,)'`.....:;;;Ati..9.0?0';'01'.:10A:, :''' '.••••••';.,:i:*.x4:;'',3'"*:•*::•?••••• •f":.• :•1%;•''*:'.2.•'::•••••••••• .: ..,•••' \ .• ' 1r-1m ,,...,...,),:;,..-.....:::::::,...:;::..;.....:!.:.::::.:!I ..:..ii:: .::::::.N::: ..iiiii.::.roi:i.,§i.i.i. ::::',..'.5.•1:e.:.. 1..:...•?:.ii,.. ,;:.::::g&:::,w,..:;.;?.;.:',Z1sT.:.:',-,1;.•:•.„,:v.e.':..of'.,e•t.e.s.-.%:ti;m0.-A-VE1,1:1„4..;,.,•••;?Vy.,,,,....':::.:>-.1'.'• •"..::::::::::1;.`...f 2`..k!,:.:....":,7.-f:..::;:. .i •.',', , 6 %. '-.'.4...': ':.k.:::..N.:1;0151,...i.:•:.:.:1:•••:::..;;P.liffiri.....:,::•41iittf;5:t;044tli,!N'..,,e...::, ...&"•:;.4.01riail!.',?...:". .!ri''•'':..:!....... ..-1 '' ;••••:..1":......';'1 1,'.;•••....i.::.,...II.,....;;i•••••:...• :::•• .1..•, '. ,• '1 '") ,4. .,% :K1'•::.:.•ii.l.:.W•.:.;:•Vii;...4.4 :"::'i:.i......:::..3.e.,..$4.4...vt.r.';Y1%. ;.-tgl'< •..f.telfits;'),,...04.43,,,.. e.PU:lel.'>•:•e,'"0 f.:•• '.'''...'...:1-1.!:.••'.r I.'•••:-.........;••••...:f::'g.::•••::;...,"•••.::•::.::;'' •. ' :.: • .;;-: j _9 ....: .•:......4.,.....:...:r• .*:,AS:.. .s.:isg.;,:.„;••:.:.i:..:,:;:...): ::;4? .4..irApf:„.:*:;.?•A:::.at.;:,'S46,...f7k.:;„:„?..041.0!;.§:M.::..",i.".f..., ....,......., ' :.....:',.', '::. -...-.';'..•.'".•: ':::". ...:'.j,,•••-••••"•.:•• • ' • ; "'.:' -.,,,,,•;......,••••/,•••:••;.,s.:::::::,::::•••'1',',:ii.:.''::i,iii;igig,;:'i:',•.:Sp,::%".'•:.•:.::.N.V;1.,`"",%S.W.'...1?f,„,, .1' ..'.'s'W 1,;:f.' . :::•••.:.i•••••:••:::•.:-..:••••••:.• '.':*•'•.*:*..i...*:''''''•••fk;"...; :'.5:.....:"'• • ;"* • •• ' :. " II CD ' ,„: ?:..:;;,,....:•,47,;•-•:...E::.. •:. ••••„. •,:i,?:4:...i.:,::.•;:?:.:„.:-:,,...sli:e:•,• •••••.4,$•/••••-1.,,,-,•?:-.1.:%Iis'4,3„Aute,i,•.-„,.3%,?„.,-.,::::,,,':".„5:-.:,,,, ••••••,,,,...•-•::••••:••••••,-••-•::,......,,'.. ..-...:•.,•...:„/,‘-: 4...".•••• .... :.• \ • . n„ s ,,, • - . 4.... -,*??•.-.:.•:.,,,„:„•,,„: ".,...:•?.:- .. •:... •0:::::,::..,...-:„.••:.•,:::•.:* ....,:+701.%A.....,,,,01„w......v.:,:-..„,.-:•:,..:. •••„:-•••.: •,...--:•:::,. :••• -::"•••,,••• - - • • •-f-,• :•••-••••;•••i- •-• . • . , cti ff;',••••••••• •.:••••••:::: ,••••••••:-• *:::••,:i„. :,.. •,:.„ '1:i:•;:iitt.":':.::1.:::•:•':'•::•,":;:. 0;':""••ss': .....,..,.4 . ... .... •,1 ....2:•-•,,,I., ,,k:,•••••:.:::•••••• , ,:,..„. . :•i:•• :, ..•: .•:••:-:.,-•'',.,.....:•i.::•••::..:-.... ........• • ,... E ._. ......,...?:..,,,,i,..;:..:.::. ,:...,..;;i:i:,;.i:,...: . ..,,..., .,.,,,.:..;*,•'. .5.$,•.. ,/r..i.- .1.....:•:',..:•:;.,,,... ..,, (.. •.:•.:•:'•..•:•:.:::...,..• .: ,..... ,.,.•::7, .:••.: .:::::. ... .. .-j • ' ' - X . ... . . :,.. f..}.,;,...:.- ?''...;1,,,.. :.. ..„<„0,•fe..::•: ,:•:;i:,V i:•:.,<•ii;.:;•ilin.',": :'.:i.:::.: ..4:9eig.A*:0. :•4' .. r..••;1-7"e''''' ' •'•''''- '" ' ''- •' ''''• '• . . . :- •'-'''''. 1 ....-3..:* •.:-- -:.•• . :4 0 ::. •:.--...,•,', ...,..4'ii- .%,4....i• "'':ttl...:1:...::q:$. .:5::::::;::''.:',.:'.4•`..../el..'4..::''.;.c.s1;E,'..:il, '..,<:•r•''.•-.,....- - ,-.'-•,::•-•'k,"k.... -.';-'•:-/-' ...-•:"-•.• ••••••••-•--'; ''r.4.:''''''''-i•'•-• • ':- • - . . ,_ • .....,.......,.:. ...> ..,...*:,,,:.,..,,t;....,:ig::. ",::,a.. „ .:: :::iii::•, ..,,......,...".0,.......,„,::,0 ..,..,t,,,,,-.,.i...,...,,,,-:,,,,:n:..i...,, ;.•.. ...,:„.•,,,,,,„. ...,•• :.,• • . :,j,......:;:::, ,..., ;•. ; , .. a_ •., .,. ,.::•:.••.:::„.-,,,f.'4,1.*..,..b'...... .•:::...:::1 ••••;::4iii.: "Vi:17,4; '$ ::::•:::.;.4::: 41) .:,,,..2. ,..-: ::.::•.?4,,,.:,: .•...,,,,••:„.,-,4 . . ... .,,...• .: .."..,-..,.•:.-::::,:::...• ,-.'.".....•::: , .,. , , - o..„••••••„:„.„,•„:„.:;•;.,.:,,,........:.t..„..,,,•:75: ;:*,i,i,:„.%S.'"i.,.§%.:„•:;iiikaA:•:i•i:..;••::;ilki!.,..i..?":1•:ir•c.i:i...e:,..,;:*.,...,:itf,,.4..-.. ;f.%•,*;:'..".1,,..:•• ,'".•....• % ..,:."<<•.i. . •••.:•• •'' '.:-'4:•:•%*:. ••.••••'- • ••••: s'• • : < .,:f..:••••fi.',:11.e....:.••••.:••••'•X,7,'":'.;••,•'::'.ii;•••••;?:.••Iiiif,.••:•:t 'tiF•::•:,•:i.•':r: :6.$•:'•:"•'••,e•;.•;:1,•:1,..:-::•-•''<I:.fli'5% '.-/ -•'::•.. •. • •:,...5.:•;•:• • • ••'•:::'•v*'•'.•''•'•'•":'1:.?••?••• ••••.• • v..4•:: • clii,4 ;:?:',%.;•.4,W•i*. •'• ••'.5fK/S".',•0••••K .'''V•• •• . :00:'.•::e.".:. .fg:,%% : .•:°(.:"•e'.. •'',,ref-X ??-•' •':....; "1.*.•:' '';:*' ' •••,•''1,sr4g-;.•, •• ••••i•••••• •:::•'''''..0,.::•••;:.''.'.•'.-'•••.x.'•., • ..•-•.'' : '`. •.' •S':$,,,e0,rvi'AV:::'-.•f•'..;"•41.:•.....?..•,5X :).......li•,.*:,•• •4:•':: ::::: 4>:.• •••':•'; "•41:••••.:4:::-%:••%:%*•'';i. ;i.*:••:: '*;: • i'i•••‘i...V;;‘:,..' :***•••.'• •''''•• i''••••••••••:.-'•*'•••••••••.: • • ' '.! P il t-- ..::.i..:,..0,.....:.:,,,.•,..• ,.•..•.••••••41::•.,. ;,;,..fg, ••:••.;:..•,,...q::.:„. :;:i.14•::: •:**:......,?•;:.•:,..:::;;I::•;.::. ,iii,:: -.0;•,.4:;,::::..,• .,,• .,',',• • •../ : , . •• :' •:3•-::•,•,,. .: .•• -, .. •'• e• :..;... .. •:.,..:::...,403:;:.'''A ....... ...', . ,•?...er. ',.,,...:::::'..;:".,.''..r.::f..... ..:,:eitV*%'':::;"•':.:::;....".'0,,:.•••.44*. ,;PAY,•.3..• '.V..? .:>:."• • ' • ••••Ir..,' • 4.•,.•'''. . ', :...,..,•;.• •,.';'' . i : : : •.'' .1. a) 4.,:,..w.;. •••-•% • ::-•••••••• •- •• • .;•'. -,,,.,•••:,.:•;:i, ',.;fv.:'.4 ,ii:,:g,•••:4•••••:•:•:::,:••::.,:. i....,:, .- --•-•: 4..,•,.,••••;..-: •- • ,: ... tgi::::. ...,,-..:.•-.:3„,-..?• .......:„...••,,:.....,44i.,ov:t.4•1::.•f?$ •,:d.g':$,,A.,,:-,•':•••.1:':: *.••••,i:,:.,...1'..-k.;A,....e.4---tf:;•• i••••:•":•:%-....,<,',•„:::;• •• ••• -4••••• ••••::41 ••••,•,•••• , •••••••-•-•,i•-:-••• ••• -:•-•:"-• ". " "- • = Fr.:..•.'„:•::•: e:::•••••••• •:-•:•-•t••••-:, •:,,,-k••••,; ,,-,••,-r:••••ti:i: : • ,,, :i•::.::.„' ,•::?::,..:.:?....:•,; • ,. .....-. .. .--:•.:„...:.....,,„,,„••,,,,:,:,A •••••::•.i.••,.....i.,--- .,-,:•••••::•••••,i,-:,.:.E.:,••••:,••• • ••• ,•.- cn ),....•....„:*::::... .:.„.,i-:::.„,„,....„,....:•••••••„4. . : •....,..-„...,•*„.„, •::i:Iii::i„1,,,..0.. .:.„,:iiii%.:iii,...1::.::•ilti:.::::::..........:i•.::iy.:...-,.4.:::41,0-i:-..,,,,,:.,.:•-:-/.,•••,,•,.-:„•••':•:-••• ••.::- • :•--,•:••• -•,• ...f.,,..•••••••:-.i••••••••••••••••' • ••• • '... • • •.. , ,. . .,.. • :...• ..'.:•• %, .:• •....•. ..•..%• .... ,.4...::44:0;...:::‘ ..`:e':::;:ft•••:"....::.•:.,. ',"%:::',',“”','''' V.'S.? s , . /"., .....r.. :l.;...:. 1 ..10.t.'t.'....../.;....• •:••1 .,%.:....‘...,• .• . . '' '...'' UM '. .:.k,./...':j.:!:,,.:::.•:..it, • .: • ••:....?•......:.''......'7t'ar,,,g4:4:10g0X"Iii:ig.....::::i.i::::::::1::...:%.*::.•::?;::k.!:,.: .'''''I'Y,',1'..7,.:;Vi{,..,:‘..,Ce, '''';'.';'ia:i'A F...1,1....r„,l'i,.,':, •:•.-.1..„-,,,.......'...: .. , , • ., •• . , - • . • • • • • • • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Dolores E. Ashbaugh ,being first duly sworn on oath acct. #51067 • states that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the • VALLEY .DAILY NEWS `---NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING. ' HEARING 600 S. Washington Kent, WA. 98032 RFNTON RENTON WASHING ONER • , A Public Hearing will be held by the Ren- •ton Hearing Examiner at this regular meet- .' Daily newspapers published six (6) times a week. That said newspaper: ing in the Council Chambers on the second is a legal newspaper and is now and has been for more than six: floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m.to consider I months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and the following petitions: published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in ' BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, Psf E II I Kent, King County, Washington. The Valley Daily News has been & ECF;SA;SSM- approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the 1�•�'i of Washington for KingCounty. The applicant is seeking site plan approv- Stateg y I al to develop an office park complex on a ' 26.9 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Valley acre site (including Tract A at 488,352 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square Daily News (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distrib- feet). Each of these two tracts is to be uted to the subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed developed with office buildings,open and/or notice a public notice. #6,759—City. of Renton, structured parking, recreation areas,interior and boundary landscaping, and a screen notice o f .public. .h e.a r i n g. • (fencing/landscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The • applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Sub- stantial Development Permit based upon was published on December 5 ,. 1991 the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management • Permit will be required, as well. A Special The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is Permit may be requested for site prepara- . the sum of S 5 9 -,9 4 I. tion. Black River Corporate Park, Phases ' VIINIII, are the final projects conceived for the development of an_11.5 acre office park I complex which was initiated,ins i'979 'rh(ee- f tracts("A", "B", and,"C") areli cn ltid'ed4im these combined final actions.The„project his • Subscribed-and s rn before t ' 1.1.tilay of Dec. .9 1-. `located--north or Oakesdale Ave: &West of Naches& 7th. Legal description of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Municipal Building, •Renton. • ary Public for the State of Washington All interested persons to said petitions residing at Kent are invited to be present at the Public Hear- ing on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. to King County, Washington express their opinions. vow#83 Revised 11/91 -Published-in--the--Valley Daily,,News;: December 5, 1991 6759. , • ` rs • S AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Dolores E. Ashbaugh ,being first duly sworn on oath acct. #51067 states that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the VALLEY DAILY NEWS CITY OF RENTON 600 S. Washington Kent, WA. 98032 JOTICE OF ADDENDUM ISSUANCE i)escription of Agency Action: Environ- mental Review Committee (ERC) issued an Dailynewspapers six (6) times a week. That said newspaper addendumS to the Final NovemberEnvironme9tal publishedp Impact Statement on 27, 1991 is a legal newspaper and is now and has been for more than six on the Black River Corporate Park, Phases months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and VII and VIII(ECF;SA,SM-071-88&ECF;SA- 109-89). ERC also issued concurrently with- published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in in the same document, mitigation measures Kent, King County, Washington. The Valley Daily News has been on the above project based on information approved as a legal newspaper order of the Superior Court of the from theo Don of FEIS,r and addendum. ppby Description of Proposal: First City Devel- State of Washington for King County. opment Corp proposes to build a four-year phased project, including three one to four- ,. story office buildings on 12.07 acres of The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Valley , Tract A, and three four to seven-story build- Daily News (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distrib- ings on the 15.7 acre Tract B. Tract A will mmo- uted to the subscribers duringthe below statedperiod. The annexed alsoa the buildingsde surface parkingtAt. Tracact B will date the on Tract Tract B will notice a public notice #6743-City of Renton, notice include the construction of a three-story parking structure and associated surface of addendum issuance , parking. Location of Proposal: North of Oaksdale Ave. &West of Naches &7th December 2 , 1 9 9 1 Type of SEPA Review: Addendum to the Was published onFEIS and Mitigation Measures amending the May 1991 Mitigation Document and The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is FEIS. 9 9 g Documents may be examined during reg. the sum of S 52 . 45 ular business hours at Development Servic- es, Third Floor, Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton, Depart- ment of Planning/Building/Public Works, Development Planning Section Subscribed and s rn before t • 1 o t�iay of Dec , 199 PUBLIC HEARING: A public hearing on the Environmental and Land Use Impacts of this project will be held on December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m. in front of the Hearing Examiner, City of Renton. PUBLICATION DATE: December 2, No y Public for the State of Washington 1991. residing at Kent Published in the Valley Daily News King County, Washington December 2, 1991. 6743 VDN/#83 Revised 11/91 • .�-.:�:�,�-•,-:-Ate;..._.-....,G-,.. - . ^,y�y"� P:PrOF—RENT°10N1 NING DIVISION STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY MAR 2 6 1992 Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000 htC IVED March 19, 1992 Mr. Mark Miller First City Washington 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4170 Seattle, WA 98104 Re: City of Renton Permit #SSM 071-88 Mark Miller - Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit ll992-13071 Dear Mr. Miller: The subject Shoreline Management Substantial Development permit has been filed with this office by the City of Renton on March 13, 1992. If this permit is not appealed to the Shorelines Hearings Board on or before April 13, 1992, authorized construction may begin. Other federal, state, and local laws regulating such construction shall be complied with. Unless an appeal is filed, this letter constitutes final notification.of action on this permit. Sincerely, eP„,t74-teLf; Pa ricia Trerice Permit Coordinator Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program PT:del sdp.mg cc: Don Erickson, City of Renton 11111 3 L~.1 4,7 071-8? 4: CITY fuF RENTON "AL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator March 2, 1992 Dean Erickson First City.Washington 700 Fifth Avenue#6000 Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: Black River/Phase VII and VIII Dear Dean: We have received a letter from the Department of Ecology requesting additional information necessary for a determination upon the shoreline permit for the above-referenced projects. As this information is not available in our files, I am forwarding the letter of request on to you for your attention. You should provide the City with three copies of each document;we will then transmit one copy of these materials to the Department of Ecology and retain two for City files. If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact me at 235-2550. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Project Manager cc: Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney Attachment(1) 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 STATp - 1889Oy STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000 February 25 , 1992 Mr. Don Erickson City of Renton Community Development and - Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South • Renton, WA 98055 Re: City of Renton Permit #SSM 071-88 First City Washington - Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit #1992-13071 Dear Mr. Erickson: The subject Shoreline permit was received by this office on February 13, 1992. The review period will not begin until we receive a complete filing of the following material as stated in WAC 173-14-090. See Enclosure Please send us the needed material on or before March 26, 1992. If we do not hear from you within this time, we will return this permit to you. Please do not hesitate to call the permit reviewer for this project, Donald J. Bales , at (206) 459-6762 or myself at (206) 438-7432. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Patricia Trerice Permit Coordinator Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program PT:del Enclosure cc: Mark Miller, First City Washington 41, (-• r • r Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Renton Permit SSM 071-88 Ecology Permit 1992-13071 The City of Renton imposed conditions on this shoreline substantial development permit (SDP) , some of which are contained in the Memorandum of Agreement (Exhibit D) , and the Hearing Examiner Report (Exhibit E) . 1. Reference Hearing Examiner Report Findings at paragraph 27: Mitigation for filling wetlands on Tracts A and B will consist of dredging the Black River channel. This dredging and spoils disposal are not discussed in the SDP. It is not clear how dredging wetlands to create open water will mitigate for loss of wetlands. a. PLEASE PROVIDE LOCATION, VOLUME, AND SPOIL DISPOSAL SITE INFORMATION ON A CORRECTED SITE PLAN. b. PLEASE PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF HOW THE DREDGING COMPLIES WITH THE MASTER PROGRAM REGULATIONS CONTROLLING DREDGING. IN PARTICULAR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT REGULATION 5.02.O1C AND DREDGING REGULATION 7.06.03A. 2. Reference Hearing Examiner Report Findings at paragraph 28, and Conclusions at paragraph 23: The proposal does not contain any provisions for public access. Paragraph 23 requires the applicant to provide specific public access easements to the shoreline area for Tracts A and B at this time. None were included. a. PLEASE PROVIDE A CORRECTED SITE PLAN SHOWING THE REQUIRED PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENTS FOR TRACTS A AND B. 3. Reference. Hearing Examiner Report Decision at paragraph 4: A Wetlands Enhancement Plan is required but was not included. a. PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY OF THE WETLANDS ENHANCEMENT PLAN. �aF,STATE O� 4.:t:n • i • 1859 ao STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000 February 25, 1992 F�� 2 } 1992 Mr. Don Erickson v �'y City of Renton Community Development and V Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: City of Renton Permit ##SSM 071-88 ) First City Washington - Applicant Shoreline Substantial Development Permit #1992-13071 Dear Mr. Erickson: The subject Shoreline permit was received by this office on February 13, 1992. The review period will not begin until we receive a complete filing of the following material as stated in WAC 173-14-090. See Enclosure Please send us the needed material on or before March 26, 1992. If we do not hear from you within this time, we will return this permit to you. Please do not hesitate to call the permit reviewer for this project, Donald J. Bales , at (206) 459-6762 or myself at (206) 438-7432. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, i Patricia Trerice Permit Coordinator Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program PT:del Enclosure cc: Mark Miller, First City Washington Black River Corporate Park - Phase VII Renton Permit SSM 071-88 Ecology Permit 1992-13071 The City of Renton imposed conditions on this shoreline substantial development permit (SDP) , some of which are contained in the Memorandum of Agreement (Exhibit D) , and the Hearing Examiner Report (Exhibit E) . 1. Reference Hearing Examiner Report Findings at paragraph 27: Mitigation for filling wetlands on Tracts A and B will consist of dredging the Black River channel. This dredging and spoils disposal are not discussed in the SDP. It is not clear how dredging wetlands to create open water will mitigate for loss of wetlands. a. PLEASE PROVIDE LOCATION, VOLUME, AND SPOIL DISPOSAL SITE INFORMATION ON A CORRECTED SITE PLAN. b. PLEASE PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF HOW THE DREDGING COMPLIES WITH THE MASTER PROGRAM REGULATIONS CONTROLLING DREDGING. IN PARTICULAR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT REGULATION 5.02.O1C AND DREDGING REGULATION 7.06.03A. 2. Reference Hearing Examiner Report Findings at paragraph 28, and Conclusions at paragraph 23: The proposal does not contain any provisions for public access. Paragraph 23 requires the applicant to provide specific public access easements to the shoreline area for Tracts A and B at this time. None were included. a. PLEASE PROVIDE A CORRECTED SITE PLAN SHOWING THE REQUIRED PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENTS FOR TRACTS A AND B. 3. Reference Hearing Examiner Report Decision at paragraph 4: A Wetlands Enhancement Plan is required but was not included. a. PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY OF THE WETLANDS ENHANCEMENT PLAN. : .< : : >: ...... ..... :: >: ...: .; IT.Y...OF...r'2EN.T.ON......:: :: :: a' •• T. N .D7. . 1S ON 2 I A. .I ..0 ::.>::.:.::::�:::;.::•:;::.:;:::>..::::::.:.:.:.:::.::.:.�:.:.:.,,....::.:::... .,.::....:::::........ .... :..... ... ... �-LING::::::< :::»:>:>::�::<:::>::::>::::::.>.::::;: ::=:�:; On the 11th day of rulu, , 1 g1Z. / I deposited in the mails f t' e nited States a sealed envelope containing S �tn� ?eYYV1i\-- documents . This information was .sent to: Name Recresentina e-f 6-13. `1 • Gc . • -4\VS-t- • • • • • • • • (Signature of Sender) cljAajo, •Subscribed " 'ftb.rn to me this //Y� day of _ 19 ,.s` IkGA` C7.../ c;721, , •cn N ••� �� • : „ Y L. Not -Pub id in and for the •6 e�C Sta e f Washington residing • /gg ,N(a S s��` therein.., .Na:..... CITY )F RENTON waLl. Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann, Administrator February 7, 1992 Ms. Patricia Trerice Permit Coordinator Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Program Department of Ecology Baran Hall, Saint Martins College Olympia, Washington 98504 Reference: Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for The Black River Corporate Office Park Phase VII (Tract B) (ECF; SA; SMP 071-88) Dear Ms. Trerice: Attached please find the Shorelines Substantial Development Permit for the above referenced project. The permit was issued by the City of Renton on January 30, 1992. Together with the permit are the following enclosures: Attachment Description A. Affidavit of public notice/publication B. Legal Description C. Copy of Application, including o Master Application o Project Narrative o Vicinity Map o Site Plans • D. Environmental Review Documents o Draft EIS o Final EIS o Mitigation Document (Memorandum of Agreement) E. Hearing Examiner Report 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton. Washington 98055 We are filing this action with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General per WAC 173-14-090. Following your review of this permit and attachments, if you have questions or would like additional information, please contact me at 277-6181. Sincerely, • r Donald K. Erickson,AICP Principal Planner cc: D.O.E. N.W. District Office Office of the Attorney General City of Renton, Plan Review Section First City Washington CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: ECF;SA; SSM 071-88 (TRACT B) DATE RECEIVED: Initial application received in September, 1988; revised application received November 15, 1991,. DATE OF PUBLICATION: August, 1989 (See Exhibit A) DATE APPROVED: January 30, 1992 (Hearing Examiner Approval) • DATE DENIED: N/A 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/denied a permit: This action was taken on the following application: APPLICANT: First City Washington • DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking to develop an office park (Black River Corporate Park-Phase VII) on a vacant 683,762 square foot parcel (Tract B). This development will include three office buildings, a parking structure, open parking, and landscaping. ' This project will be part of a complex which includes two additional tracts. Tract"A"will be developed with offices, open parking and landscaping. Tract"C"will be preserved as a natural environment. The applicant is also seeking a shorelines substantial development permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River corridor. See Exhibit B attached. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit C attached. SEC-TWNP-R: See Exhibit C attached. WITHIN SHORELINES OF: Black River/P-1 Channel; Springbrook Creek STATE SHORELINE OF SIGNIFICANCE (YES/NO): Yes ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION: Black River-Natural; Springbrook Creek- Urban. APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: City of Renton Shoreline Master Program shsubdev • • The following section/page of the Master Program is applicable to the development: Section 6.02; 6.03; 6.04; 6.05; 6.06; 6.07 (pp 23 -24) Section 7.05 (pp 26-27) Section 7.17 (pp 37-38) • Development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and conditions:. Memorandum of Agreement (Environmental Mitigation Document) (See Exhibit D attached) Hearing Examiner Report (Exhibit E attached) This permit is 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 hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be issued until thirty (30) days after approval by the City of Renton Building and Zoning Department or until any review proceedings initiated within this thirty (30) day review period have been completed. ,41\flD �Z Planning/Bui ing Public Works Administrator Date cc: D. F. NW District Office Attorney General's Office City of Renton, Development Services Division City of Renton,Transportation Systems City of Renton, Utility Systems Applicant • shsubdev CITY ,..1F RENT ON ••� Hearing Examiner Earl Clymer, Mayor Fred J.Kaufman January 30, 1992 Amy Kosterlitz Buck & Gordon 902 Waterfront PL 1011 Western AVE Seattle, WA 98104 RE: First City/Black River Corporate Park Phases VII & VIII File No. SA-109-89 Dear Ms. Kosterlitz : The Examiner' s Report regarding the referenced application which was published January 14, 1992 has not been appealed within the 14-day period established by ordinance. Therefore, this matter is considered final and is being transmitted to the City Clerk this date for filing. Please feel free to contact this office if further assistance or information is required. Sincerely, FRED J.KAUFMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK:wmb cc: City Clerk Building Division Planning Division City Attorney 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2593 cz 4 CITY OF RENTON Office of the City Attorney Earl Clymer, Mayor /:? Lawrence J. Warren C *i Jq VF C ic , 1 e 99 January 22 , 1992 HF4R7NG �NiArp M�NF TO: Fred Kaufman, Hearing Examiner Jay Covington, Mayor' s Executive Assistant Lynn Guttmann, Administrator, Department of Planning, Building, Public Works John Webley, Community Services Administrator Chief Lee Wheeler, Fire Department FROM: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RE : Construction Phasing for Black River Corporate Park and Site Plan Approval Dear Department Heads : This memorandum is to memorialize the various discussions held on January 21, 1992 concerning the hearing examiner' s decision on the Black River Corporate Park, and specifically the more detailed phasing plan that he required. It was determined that the more detailed phasing plan should be submitted to the administration for review and approval . Should any party be aggrieved by the final required phasing plan, then the appeal would be to the hearing examiner. Since my conversations were not held at the same time and same place, I thought it wise to confirm the understanding with all parties . Lawrence J Warren LJW:as . A8 . 78 : 71 . Post Office Box 626 - 100 S 2nd Street-Renton, Washington 98057- (206) 255-8678 ti • January 14, 1992 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPLICANT: First City Washington, BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK Phases VII & VIII Files No.: SA-071-88 & SA-109-89 LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale & West of Naches SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. Two tracts (portions of Tract A and the entire acreage of Tract B) are planned for development with an office park complex to be located on a 24.03 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 acre site. Each of these two tracts is planned to be developed with office buildings, open and/or structured parking, employee recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping, fencing, and landscaping which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, a Routine Vegetation Management Permit and a Special Permit may be requested for site preparation. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Division Recommendation: Approval with Conditions PLANNING DIVISION REPORT: The Planning Division Report was received by the Examiner on December 10, 1991 PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Planning Division Report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The hearing was opened on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit #1 - Yellow File containing application, proof of posting and publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit #2 - Color Diagram of Tracts A, B & C Exhibit #3 - Small Schematic of Tract A ' First City Washington, b1-ak River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 2 Exhibit #4 - Tract A Elevations Exhibit #5 - Small Schematic of Tract B Exhibit #6 - Tract B Phase II, 4-Story BLDG E Exhibit #7 - 5 Story BLDG D Exhibit #8 - BLDG F Exhibit #9 - Garage Exhibit #10a & #10b - Large Site Plan & Landscape Plan Tract A Exhibit #1la & #llb - Large Site Plan & Landscape Plan Tract B Exhibit #12 - Vegetation Management Plan (2 sheets) Exhibit #13 - Fill and Grade Plans A & B Exhibit #14a,b, & c - Traffic & Parking Estimates and December 16, 1991, letter to Dean Erickson The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by the City Attorney, LAWRENCE J. WARREN, 100 S 2nd Street, Renton, WA 98057, who noted that he was representing the Planning Department Staff in reviewing the report because of his work on the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Mitigation Document was appealed by citizen environmental groups as well as the applicant and Mr. Warren had conducted a series of meetings to come to agreement, which resulted in an MOA that modified the original ERC Mitigation document. Mr. Warren paused to express appreciation to the people and agencies who had worked on creating the MOA, including the Departments of Wildlife and of Ecology, Gerry Adams, Susan Krom, Amy Kosterlitz and Dean Erickson. He then noted that the primary mover for the change in the MOA was a change in focus from strictly protecting the rookery area at the Black River site to also focusing on creating and protecting habitat on Tract C. The goal was to give the herons as much choice as possible, plus preserve the other wildlife species on the site. To accomplish that end, the city of Renton had purchased the great majority of Tract C with an option to purchase, at a predetermined price, the three remaining lots and an option to purchase part of Tract A as a staging area for access to the shoreline. Mr. Warren noted that there were some toxic materials that had been dredged by the city out of the P- 1 forebay and placed on the site and which were under a Hold Harmless Agreement granted by the city to the property owner. The level of toxics in that area tested very low with "capping" a probable method of handling. Ironically, the major threat was seen to be from percolation of the toxic materials back into the P-1 forebay from whence they came. Mr. Warren continued, saying that the garage and some of the buildings had been moved to shield the herons, making use of the natural trees. Shoreline access is provided by a city-owned 70-foot-wide boundary around the western part of the exterior of Tract A, and a similar amount down Tract B and Tract C. The extent of the public access to the shoreline would be limited to some degree, depending upon the heron nesting. The applicant had complied with the Shoreline Management Act, environmental issues and shoreline issues. In response to the Examiner's question, Mr. Royce Berg F - First City Washington, inack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 3 pointed out the high-water line on Tracts A and B. Mr. Warren stated that the applications were for approval of the site plan, issuance of permits for shoreline development, and fill and grade. Fill and grade activity was expected to be at a minimum since the site was essentially flat and fill would be needed only as individual building pads were prepared. The Examiner stated that the ordinance required specific detailed drawings for special permits such as fill and grade, saying they seemed to be absent from his file, and schematic or illustrative drawings didn't seem to meet that requirement. Mr. Warren stated the applicant could produce the detailed fill and grade plans, but to continue, he pointed out that one of the different aspects of the proposal was the phasing, suggested for a period of eight to ten years. Initially, the applicant had applied for development on one tract and staff suggested that the other tract be included so the entire project, which amounted to a total of five buildings and a parking garage, could be dealt with at one time. The Examiner interjected that the present or future Examiner would not necessarily grant the future extensions which the MOA seemed to require. Mr. Warren noted that there was no intent to require any extension or tie the hands of the Examiner or the City Council. The applicant would have to make an application, show good faith and progress, and the environmental groups also would have the opportunity to comment. He said that the site plan conformed with city requirements, was permitted under the Comprehensive Plan, and was generally consistent with existing and proposed land uses on the surrounding developable areas. The intent of the landscaping in this project would be to create a 100 foot, dense natural landscape barrier between the office buildings and the shoreline. The Examiner said the heron seemed to loaf on some of the flats and muddy soils on the south side of the pond, abutting Tract A and questioned if that was being protected. Mr. Warren stated there would not be absolute protection, but there would be a better chance for the birds to loaf and feed in an undisturbed fashion, since there was an elevation differential and the buildings had been pulled back. The biofiltration swales and wetponds were pushed outward toward the water to provide an additional buffer and the city had purchased the western part of Tract A and all of the adjoining portion of Tract C to provide substantial protection. The Examiner questioned about the landscaping requirements being modified or waived. He wondered how an MOA can modify ordinance requirements of city code. Mr. Warren said that, in general, the city ordinance permitted phasing. To which the Examiner answered that the ordinance required clearly delineated phasing and he felt that this wasn't the case. Mr. Warren noted that the focus on the phasing was to require continuous construction rather than which building had to be built when. He said the applicant felt it was more advantageous to let the market drive which parcel was to be developed first, as long as there was continuity. The Examiner asked about the buildings being shifted and how much leeway there was, and in what areas the landscaping did not meet code. Mr. Warren answered that there was minimal leeway in shifting the buildings at all unless there was some minor shift due to a fire access issue or overriding health/safety issues. He said that the landscaping had not been checked out absolutely against the code. In preparing the MOA, Mr. Warren said his concern had been minor deviations such as the requirement of the applicant to put some of the landscaping on the city's purchased portion of Tract A, to which the city agreed. There was also a requirement for hydroseeding as erosion protection if the building did not proceed in a timely manner. He described the planned landscaping. The Examiner asked about compensating storage of stormwater, and Mr. Warren stated that when the P-1 forebay was built the applicant dedicated 17.5 acres to the city for the purpose of building the forebay and there was an agreement that the P-1 forebay would be considered compensating storage for this particular location. For stormwater management, detention and retention, there was the P-1 pond, biofiltration swales, and wetponds on the prow of Tract A. Three small wetlands on the property would be filled with 450 cubic yards of material and an enhanced new wetland created on the northeast corner of Tract B. There would be no negative impact on area property values. Mr. Warren continued, stating that the original plans showed that,there would be 6,125 vehicle trips to the area, but that number should be diminished because there was now one less planned building on First City Washington, ,;k River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 4 Tract A. The applicant had met its traffic burden by dedicating land for Oakesdale Avenue and had built more than their share of Oakesdale, through the LID. The Examiner asked how traffic would affect the intersections of, Rainier and 7th, Oakesdale and Grady, and Monster Road and Sunset Boulevard and whether there was an elevator in the parking garage. Heads nodded yes. Mr. Warren stated that the applicant had reduced the parking allotted on the property. The area shown on Exhibit #10 near the pond and P-1 channel was an existing maintenance access road, to which there was access from the area which the city is to purchase. The applicant had dedicated an easement at that end of the access road off of Oakesdale which the city would develop, and the applicant would dedicate further easements to the city as necessary. The site had adequate public shoreline access which would have to be limited during the presence of the birds, as the city tries to balance public access with wildlife needs. The birds are to be further shielded by landscaping and fencing. Approximately 18,000 cubic yards of fill will be placed on Tract A and 35,000 cubic yards on Tract B between the buildings and the parking garage. The Examiner again asked for a more orderly filling plan for the site so that there were no random loads of fill dropped haphazardly in 24 acres of land. He asked that the applicant address that more clearly. He also asked why, if the applicant was building above the flood plain, the city had to be held harmless. Mr. Warren noted that it had long been standard practice by the city to obtain a Hold Harmless Agreement. AMY KOSTERLITZ, Buck and Gordon, 902 Waterfront Place, 1011 Western Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104, representing the applicant, First City Washington, began by briefly thanking everyone involved in the process including Mary Lynne Myer, Lenora Blauman, Larry Warren, and her client, whom she felt had come a long way in terms of accommodation, and citizen.appellants, Susan Krom and Gerry Adams. The Examiner said the only problem that he had with the MOA was that staff was supposed to be very supportive of this application and if someone had left a stone unturned, staff seemed to be bound in having to support the application. Ms. Kosterlitz stated they tried to recognize that. With regard to the phasing, there could be a two-year extension to the eight-year site plan approval if substantial progress had been made, if there was good cause for such extension, and if so granted by the Hearing Examiner. As long as the applicant addressed the city's concerns such as that holes not be left in the ground and that erosion be controlled, that should not make any difference. The applicant would undertake the wetlands enhancement at the time of the fill, so there would be no piecemealing. Addressing the Examiner's concern about potential change in building locations, Ms. Kosterlitz stated that building footprints and the locations were set. Minor adjustments could be made, but major adjustments would have to be agreed to by the city and the Examiner. ROYCE BERG, LPN Architects, 1127 Pine Street, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98101, clarified locations of the wetland areas on the Exhibits, and pointed out the landscape areas in excess of code requirements. He also noted that the finished floor of each building was above flood plain. •Not above the flood plain, the three wetponds and biofiltration swale would drain back into the P-1 channel. The high and low areas where delineated, and he pointed out how fire department requirements for turning radius could be accommodated without relocation of buildings. A routine vegetation management plan was submitted, finding no significant trees on Tract A. Tract B had 287 existing trees, and of the 35 to be removed, none were in the perimeter, nor adjacent to the wetlands, nor in the buffer zone. All the property adjacent to Tracts A and B is designated as urban, shoreline, with the only natural shoreline occurring north of the pond, about the middle of the riparian forest. The Examiner asked whether the shoreline status of the site had been approved by the Department of Ecology. Mr. Warren said that the natural area stops on Tract C, and if the P-1 channel extended forward through Tract C, that would be the approximate break point between the natural and urban zones. Mr. Berg pointed out the pedestrian links and recreation areas. The Examiner asked if there was a potential for reducing the number of parking stalls below that required by code. Mr. Berg replied that the reduction that staff had come up ., .,;;. with now,was.a matter of policy.. On Tract B,,.those parking stalls would come out of the garage. The parking stalls on Tract A would be reduced at the far outlying areas nearest to the rookery. . • First City Washington, -Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 5 On the parking issue, Amy Kosterlitz stated that 544 parking slots on Tract A and 1,217 on Tract B did reflect the parking reduction, since original parking figures were higher. JIM MacISAAC, The Transpo Group, 14335 NE 24th Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98007, explained the source of the numbers used for trip generation, noting that 5,180 was the number filed in the EIS and subsequently, had been down-sized to 4,670 trips per day. Each phase of the buildings would operate as an office cluster. Staff chose to use the "office park" designation, which is defined as office use plus having support retail, restaurant, and health club facilities to create more of a total environment. Those kinds of activities would draw more traffic to the site, other than just employee use, but he said it was his understanding that those kinds of activities would not occur on this project. If office park were the correct choice, then approximately 700 more trips per day would have to be added. He felt that a general-office designation might be more correct and would generate lower figures. He also noted the numbers in the staff report didn't reflect the way the buildings would be built, but rather treated them as though they were five separate buildings scattered around the city. Mr. MacIsaac noted the date on the letter, Exhibit #14c should be shown as December 16th, not October 2nd. Asked about the impact on the intersections, he replied that earlier phases of the Black River Corporate Park were going on during the Transportation Benefit District (TBD) study. The study done on Grady Way showed it would accommodate build-out of all these areas. The earlier study assumed that the intersections would bear the increased traffic, and there should be 25-30 percent less trips now than what was first studied. The Examiner asked about peak hours. Mr. MacIsaac noted that 10-12 percent of the daily traffic would occur in the p.m. peak hours and between 8-9 percent in the a.m. peak hours. BOB O'CONNELL, Bush Roed Hitchings, 2009 Minor Avenue E, Seattle, WA 98133, commented on one portion of the staff report concerning some of the peak-hour computations, noting that the report showed Phase VIII as having 363,136 square feet instead of the 525,536 square feet shown in the previous proposal. The building to the west of the site was dropped from the plans, which accounted for the difference in the square footage. The Examiner asked about compensating storage and whether fill on the site would displace water beyond what the P-1 channel could handle. Mr. O'Connell answered no, stating that information on compensating volume requirements was contained in a letter submitted to Staff in 1987. The Examiner asked if the storm drainage plan would recharge the enhanced wetlands or would most of that water be released into the P-1 channel. Mr. O'Connell commented that in Phase VIII, or Tract A, they were not concerned with recharging or supporting wetlands and the water would be discharged directly into the P-1 channel. On Phase VII, Tract B, the drainage had been split so that the portion that would naturally discharge into the P-1 channel would be going that direction, but the majority of the drainage would discharge to the east to create and support the wetlands. The Examiner questioned whether these plans met the drainage requirements of the city. Mr. O'Connell answered yes, and stated that on both sites the roof drainage would be split to achieve better water-quality treatment. However, the applicant had not actually submitted for a fill and grade permit on either site, but had prepared a conceptual grading and utility plan. In answer to the Examiner's question about flood plain elevation, Mr. O'Connell stated that the 100 year flood plain elevation was shown as 15 feet. The applicant had calculations which were available concerning the stormwater quality facilities for the site. Regarding low-level contamination, The Examiner asked if there was any problem with the westerly portion of Tract A affecting inhabited portions of Tract A. Mr. O'Connell noted that the drainage flow was from south to north, so that should be away from all the developed areas of the site. DAVID MARTIN, Transportation Systems, regarding level of service calculations on a number of intersections, said all of Ahe traffic generation for the development was covered in the traffic study done by Transpo in 1988. Based on those projections, a list of improvements was generated and money First City Washington, :k River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 6 was to be collected as development occurs. In the next year or two a signal is planned for the intersection at Sunset and Monster. The Examiner asked about side streets and problems with left and right turns across 7th, and wondered if the driveways were sufficient. Mr. Martin stated that a number of those intersections were mentioned in the report and those projects would be programmed as money was collected from developers, but were not programmed at this point. Based on what he knew of traffic there, driveways should not be a problem. Mr. Warren interjected that the TBD was drafted with the intent that people would make a fair share of contributions to the necessary improvements on each of the intersections that they might affect. Calculations had shown, based on the number of trips generated by the project, that the applicant had made sufficient monetary contribution. The Examiner asked whether it was possible that Oakesdale was overbuilt to the detriment of some of the adjacent streets. Mr. Warren answered that he believed Oakesdale would become a major carrier/distributor line in that area of the city. RON STRAKA, Stormwater and Utility Division, regarding compensatory storage and detention, stated that the area for the P-1 pond was dedicated to the city for flood storage as part of the plat of Washington Technical Center, and that included use by these parcels under discussion. The requirements were waived because of that detention, but the applicant would still have to comply with water-quality requirements, including wetponds and biofiltration swales. The Examiner asked about the storage capacity in the pond. Mr. Straka stated that they had predicted 92 acre feet of storage would be required, and the forebay contained 213 acre feet. Because of the changes in conditions and because the build up was not to the magnitude as previously envisioned, there was excess capacity which the city was using for flood storage and in the operation of the Black River Pump Station. TERESA McLEAN, 7004 S 130th, Seattle, WA 98178, a resident of the area, commented on the parking in Tract A which had been moved from the south side to surround the buildings. She realized the number of spaces had been reduced, but wanted to know why the location of the parking was changed. Regarding the height of the buildings and the height of the parking garage, she questioned if any of the construction would be underground. About enhancing wetlands, she understood that some small wetlands would be eliminated, but wondered if there would still be the same amount of wetlands and she wanted to know how "man" enhanced wetlands. She also asked who would occupy the buildings. She understood that a certain number of parking spaces had been allocated for carpool parking and wanted to know if Renton had an ordinance about the number of carpool parking spaces required as a percentage out of the total area. The Examiner stated that in the MOA there was a wetland enhancement plan which talked about expanding the wetlands. Ms. Kosterlitz stated that the parking on Tract A was moved in response to environmental and citizen groups concerns about having the buildings that close to the wildlife habitat and relocation was part of the negotiation in the MOA. There was also a drop in elevation from seven to five stories in the buildings, in response to concern about bird kills. She said the tenants would be general-office-type tenants, similar to other tenants already there. With regard to carpool spaces, the Transportation Management Plan required for this project contained a goal of 10 percent reduction in single- occupancy trips. Mr. Warren interjected that the goal applied to any employer of over 100 employees. BOB DENMAN, Jones & Stokes Associates, 2820 Northrup Way, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98004, reviewed which wetlands would be filled and where the enhanced wetland would be located, noting that .14 acres total area would be filled and the plan was to create .21 acres of wetland (a 1 1/2 to 1 ratio), creating both emergent and scrub-shrub type wetlands habitat on the east side of Tract B. He noted, this would be creation not enhancement, in that workers would be removing old fill from an area that once was wetland, placing topsoil, and replanting in an effort to create wetlands with a higher functional value in _terms of their hydrologic/biologic importance than the ones being filled. He acknowledged that some created wetlands had failed and the primary reason had been inadequate First City Washington, i3lack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 7 knowledge of the hydrology of the area. Since the hydrology already existed in this site, the native hydrology that.used to occur in that,wetland would be restored.. .. Ms. Kosterlitz commented that a five story building is 71 feet high, and a four story building is approximately 57 feet high. GERRY ADAMS, Seattle Audubon Society, 28803 NE Big Rock Road, Duvall, WA 98019.stated that the MOA was the result of a settlement of many of the issues that the Audubon Society and other special interest groups had relating to the project, to the impact on wildlife in general, and to the Great Blue Herons. Since it was a settlement it required a considerable amount of compromise, for example, as a result of negotiating a settlement for this project, the city of Renton was involved in acquisition of • an adjacent parcel directly north of Tract C, and an overall part of the habitat area. With the cooperation of the city, the citizens, and the applicant, he hoped that enough input had come from all sides to have addressed all the issues. SUSAN KROM, representing the Citizens for Renton Wildlife Preservation, 3640 Ashworth Avenue N, Seattle, WA 98103, commented on the capacity of the P-1 pond. She had visited the site after the heavy rains and noted the water level was within two inches of the maintenance road, so it didn't appear to her as though there was a lot of excess capacity. Regarding traffic, she stated that she works across the street from the site and uses that area extensively. She had waited up to five minutes to make a left turn on SW 7th, and she felt traffic volume was substantial. She also noted that she counted 20 herons at the site on Thursday, December 12th. She suggested that the landscaping should be the type that would provide year-round protection and visual screening, windows should be non- reflective glass that cannot be easily seen into by wildlife, and that the project should be done as much as possible in one phase to avoid prolonged disruption of the wildlife. The Examiner stated that there hadn't been very much discussion regarding the herons, and he -.supposed everyone had assumed that the Audubon Society had done their best to protect the birds at this point, and the Examiner had not gone into it extensively because he felt that the MOA had covered that. There were some monitoring questions that weren't really discussed, and about which there still might be a question. He asked if there were any buildings east of Naches. Mr. Berg answered that there was one building east of Naches and another proposed which was now delayed by concerns from citizen groups. The Examiner said that building did not seem to have had any effect on the herons, as they seemed to be coming back. Mr. Berg stated that it did not have any affect. When this three story building was constructed, auger cast pilings were used to avoid pounding and auger cast pilings were also proposed for this project. In addition, telephone poles and netting were used to screen the work from the birds. Ms. Kosterlitz noted that the applicant had contributed more than its fair share on traffic mitigation. Regarding drainage, there was agreement to use the P-1 channel and actual calculations on runoff showed more than adequate capacity. The MOA set out the monitoring of the impact on the herons of building construction. She stated that she felt her clients had complied with all the requirements and asked for approval. The Examiner asked for an additional two weeks to get his decision out due to the holidays and planned vacation time, to which there was no objection. 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 11:48.A.M.. First City Washington, .;,7,* River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 8 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, First City Washington, filed a request for approval of a site plan, together with requests for a grade and fill permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for two parcels of property totaling approximately 24 acres. 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 sites are located on both banks of the P-1 channel directly north of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. 6. Tract A, the western parcel is an irregularly shaped parcel with the P-1 channel and the convex curve of the forebay for the east and north boundary. A portion of the parcel that will be sold to the city forms the northwest and western boundaries. The southern boundary is formed by the gentle curve of Oakesdale Avenue S.W. The portion of Tract A that will not be sold to the city is approximately 363,136 square feet or approximately 8.34 acres. The portion to be sold to the city totals approximately 3.73 acres. 7. Tract B, the eastern, pentagonally shaped parcel is bounded on the east by Naches Avenue S.W. and on the southeast by S.W. 7th Street. Oakesdale actually forms its southwest boundary. The P-1 channel and forebay form its western boundary while a drainage feature forms its northern boundary. This parcel is approximately 686,762 square feet or approximately 15.77 acres. (The scales used to draw the major exhibits for Tracts A and B, Exhibits 10 and 11, are different and make visual comparisons and references inaccurate. In Exhibit 10 the scale is 1 inch = 40 feet, whereas in Exhibit 11, 1 inch = 50 feet.) 8. In reaching its SEPA determination, the city settled two appeals concerning the adequacy of the EIS prepared for the project and the appropriateness of mitigation measures that were imposed. The appellants included the applicant contesting the mitigation measures imposed by the city and various environmental groups contesting both the mitigation measures and the adequacy of the final Environmental Impact Statement. The environmental groups were mainly concerned about the impacts of the proposal on a Heron rookery located adjacent to the property and on the loss of the unique riparian environment located immediately north of the subject site. The settlement resulted in a Memorandum of Agreement (hereinafter MOA) entered into by the city and the various appellants. The MOA sets forth certain conditions for development of the site, attempts to provide additional flexibility for development while preserving amenities on or adjacent to the site, and spells out various rights and obligations under the agreement. It does not abrogate existing land use regulations. " First City Washington, niack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 9 9. A description of Tract C, another parcel owned by the applicant north of the two subject parcels and north of the forebay, should be included to round out the discussion of the MOA. It is a crescent shaped parcel on the north side of the forebay. The city proposes purchasing approximately 32.5 acres of the approximately 46.75 acre parcel to serve as wildlife habitat and open space preserve. Options exist for the city to purchase the remainder of the parcel. While it is not part of the immediate application, it was included in discussions and settlement to encompass all of the property surrounding or including the Black River riparian forest ecosystem and to resolve many of the interrelated issues in a uniform and unified fashion. 10. While references will be made to heron and a heron rookery in some of these findings, the active heron colony that was located north of the site for a number of years was disturbed last year during the nesting season by predation from an eagle or eagles. The various parties have hesitated to speculate on the long-term consequences of that disturbance on future patterns and success of the heronry. There was an attempt by the heron to move north into the more protective forest canopy but how much success that effort had has also not been established. Heron have still been seen in the area in the recent past and continue to at least visit the general vicinity of the forebay pond. Therefore, any reference to the heron or rookery is based on past patterns and locations. While a considerable effort has been made by the various parties to protect the heronry, the effort was also aimed at protecting and preserving the general riparian environment. 11. The applicant proposes developing Phases VII and VIII (7 and 8) of the Black River Corporate Park. Tract A would contain two office buildings and open parking. Tract B would contain three office buildings, a parking garage and surface parking. 12. The proposed office buildings on Tract A would each be four stories in height and each would contain 64,000 square feet of office space. The buildings would each be 57 feet tall. The buildings are irregularly shaped 7-sided buildings. While the buildings are not rectangular, their rough footprints would be about 82 feet wide (east-west) by 195 feet long. The articulated facades will face each other and flank a plaza-like landscaped area that provides seating and courtyard amenities. The buildings will be slightly offset from one another, somewhat skewing the symmetry and adding to the visual interest. The open or surface parking will surround the buildings in all directions. The applicant proposed parking for 571 vehicles, while the city requires 544 parking stalls. The applicant has agreed to meet the city requirements. 13. Incorporated in the perimeter landscaping will be storm drainage wetponds to treat runoff from the surface parking areas. These wetponds will be located along the northern lobe of the site. Landscaping areas will be incorporated into the immediate envelope in which the two buildings will be set. As indicated, a landscaped area is located between the two buildings. The perimeter landscaping varies in width with the deepest buffer along the north margin of the site, the area nearest the forebay and heron rookery area. The city owns a 70-foot-wide uplands area between the subject site and the forebay. This area contains a maintenance road and additional landscaping features. The landscaping will also be incorporated into the parking aisles, breaking up the asphalt expanses. The site plan does not provide the required landscaping along the "L" shaped property line in the northwest corner of Tract A. There is no landscaping proposed adjacent to the parking stalls in this area. Instead, the applicant proposes utilizing the landscaping and buffer provided by city property in this vicinity. First City Washington, mack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 10 14. As indicated, the city is acquiring the westernmost portion of Tract A where some contaminated dredge spoils were deposited with the construction of the forebay pond. The applicant and the city have proposed utilizing some of this city owned (or to be owned) property as part of the required landscaping for the project. (MOA Page 18 Section 4). The ordinances in question do not appear to permit such an arrangement. 15. On Tract B, the applicant proposes three office buildings with differing footprints. Building E, proposed_for the southwesternmost corner of the site, will be four stories high and contain 78,350 square feet of space. It will be approximately 220 feet long and vary in width from approximately 55 feet to 110 feet. Its eastern facade will be the most intricate, stepping in and out, while the western facade will be straight. 16. Building D will be in the south central portion of the site. It will be five stories tall and approximately 71 feet high. It will contain 91,550 square feet. It varies in width from approximately 85 feet to 115 feet. It will be approximately 200 feet long. Its eastern facade will be the most complex, widening as it steps to the north. Fifteen foot indents will be notched from the northwest and southeast corners of the facade and, along with the eastern facade's major articulations, will provide a break in the apparent bulk of the building. 17. Building.F, like Building D, will be five stories and 71 feet tall. It will contain 116,400 square feet. It will be about 220 feet wide (east-west) and vary from 75 to 150 feet in length. Its major feature will be the articulations along its southwestern facade. 18. A four story, 57 foot high parking garage will be located in the north central area of Tract B. The garage will be 328 feet deep (north-south) by 262 feet wide. The garage's footprint will be rectangular. The applicant proposes a closed north facade to minimize any intrusions into the preserve area or the heron habitat. The garage will be served by an elevator. The Police Department is concerned about garage security and has suggested that the stairwells be open to view, that emergency telephones be available on each level, and that a security system be installed. At its closest side, it will be approximately 60 feet from the site's north property line. The parking garage will accommodate approximately 900 vehicles. The site will also provide 459 surface parking stalls for a total of 1,359 stalls, whereas only 1,217 stalls are required by code. This would provide an excess of 142 parking stalls. The surface parking will be located around the various buildings in the south two-thirds of the site. The applicant will reduce the number of stalls to meet code requirements. 19. Buildings on Tract A and the parking garage on Tract B were relocated to move either taller structures or more intense uses away from the buffer areas and heron. Similarly, the low scale open parking was considered preferable to office buildings near the pond adjacent to Tract A. The blank wall of the garage was considered less intrusive than office building windows and the comings and goings of hundreds of employees. 20. Landscaping, or at least open space, will be a major component of the development on Tract B. Approximately 37 percent of Tract B will be undeveloped and left as open space and natural areas. The eastern quarter of the site will consist of wetland components, landscaping and natural preserve areas. The north margin and north third of the west margin will also be natural preserve. These setbacks are intended to provide buffers from the forebay pond and to preserve wetlands that are either located on the site or will be enlarged or enhanced. The applicant also proposes a dense hedge of evergreens to provide screening around the natural area. This would be offset from some of the other plantings proposed in the area to provide an effective screen and minimize unnecessary intrusions into the habitat areas. First City Washington, tsiack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 11 21. ...Larger landscaped areas will be located around the Tract B office buildings and, particularly,` along the west side of Building E, which is adjacent to the P-1 Channel, along the west and south sides of Building D, and along the south side of Building F. A landscaped walkway and small plaza will separate the parking garage from Buildings D and F. Landscaping will also break up the parking areas and aisles. 22. The project was originally estimated to generate approximately 6,125 average daily vehicle trips at completion. One building has been eliminated from the proposal and others reduced in scale. The applicant and staff have based their respective calculations on slightly differing methodologies that base the outcomes on whether the uses are classified as office park, general office, or campus type development. In addition, the numbers found in the reference manuals have been changed in the recent edition. The estimate of traffic varies from about 5,000 to about 5,200 vehicle trips per day. In general, approximately 10 to 15 percent of the total vehicles trips can be expected during the peak-hour commutes. In any event, staff and the applicant agree that the applicant has provided sufficient funding to accommodate the anticipated traffic that will be generated by this proposal at build-out. These traffic estimates were contemplated when calculating the transportation improvements for this area. 23. Tract A will be served by two driveways located along Oakesdale. The interior aisle arrangement offers reasonable access and turning space. Similarly, Tract B has two driveways. One of the driveways is located along Oakesdale, while the other is located on 7th. A small parking area and driveway are located along Naches, along the east side of the complex. 24. In addition to the already funded improvements, the applicant is devising a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to monitor and manage traffic reduction programs for the complex. In addition, staff has recommended that the complement of parking be reduced to that required by code to further discourage traffic by making less parking available. 25. The site is located within the 100 Year Flood Elevation. All site improvements and finished floor elevations will be above the flood level to prevent damage to property. The city has requested a Hold Harmless Agreement from the applicant in the event that the buildings are not properly located out of harm's way during a flood event. 26. Drainage will either enter the P-1 channel or drainage swales and the Black River channel. Staff has indicated that storm water control will meet the adopted standards of the city. Staff indicated that there is also sufficient capacity to handle storm water in both the P-1 channel and the Black River channel. During storm events any water displaced by filling the site will be handled by the P-1 channel. Staff indicated that the applicant is entitled to credit for dedicating approximately 17 acres of property for the forebay. This credit is sufficient to compensate for any storm water displacement that occurs as a result of adding more fill to the site. At build-out, the project would be expected to generate approximately 92 acre feet of water, whereas the forebay has capacity for approximately 213 acre feet of water. Under the city's adopted storm water regulations, the applicant will be required to do the required downstream analysis, although,there is some discussion in the MOA of an exemption from onsite detention. 27. The applicant proposes filling approximately 0.14 acres of wetlands on Tracts A and B to accommodate the building envelopes. These areas have been analyzed and have low functional values in terms of wetland characteristics. Two of these sites are located on Tract A. One is located centrally along the south margin of the site. The other is located centrally along the east First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 12 margin of the site. The third wetland is located on Tract B, just south of the south end of the Black River drainage channel. . These are relatively shallow and generally resulted from differential settlement of imported fill materials. To compensate for filling these areas, the applicant will create approximately 0.21 of new or enhanced wetlands. This will be done by dredging portions of the Black River Channel located at the eastern edge of Tract B to deepen the wetland and enhance its wetland characteristics. The enhancement entails adding depth for water quality purposes and planting wetland plant species. While wetland creation and enhancement is a relatively new technique, the enlarging/enhancement of existing wetlands generally meets with more success. Wetland plant species already established can expand their territory in enlarged wetland areas more easily than if they were just introduced to a newly created simple pond. A berm or dike that divides a portion of the old Black River channel from the main body.will be removed in order to facilitate water flow in the entire channel area. The effort will be bonded and monitored. 28. The issue of shoreline access is somewhat complicated by a number of factors including mixed ownership, incomplete city studies for open space, trail links and habitat in this area, and the reclusive nature of the heron. In the vicinity of Tract A, the city owns the 70 feet immediately adjacent to the P-1 pond and actually has a maintenance road just up from the pond. The city controls a similar 60 foot wide buffer along the west edge of Tract B. The city is working on its Open Space and Wildlife Master Plan but has not completed its proposal for access to this area. Finally, one of the major aims of the parties has been to design a project that minimized its intrusiveness as.much as possible and to control access to limit disturbance of the heron rookery. Heron are particularly sensitive to human intrusion during nesting periods and the object of much of the design was to move buildings and heavy use aspects of the project further from the heronry. 29. The applicant proposes phasing the complex over eight to ten years and has requested that any approval be so conditioned. The MOA has authorized this ten-year time frame while trying to assure compliance with building code provisions and limitations. City regulations limit site plans to two years unless additional time is provided under a phased build-out. While the Site Plan Ordinance permits phasing, it requires "clearly defined phases and specific time limits for each phase. If the time limits of a particular phase are not satisfied, then site plan approval for that phase and subsequent phases shall expire. The Hearing examiner shall also determine if such a phased project will be eligible for any extensions of time limits." (Section 4-31-33(J) While the MOA spells out a required progression, it does not indicate where development will occur. It does not specify whether development will begin on Tract A or Tract B or bounce between them. 30. The applicant proposes importing fill materials to the two sites in order to prepare the site for development. The materials will raise the site to allow finished floors and structural improvements to be located above the 15 foot, 100 year flood elevation. Approximately 18,000 cubic yards of material will be imported for Tract A and approximately 35,000 cubic yards will be imported for Tract B. Of this total approximately 450 cubic yards will be used to fill the low-quality wetlands (discussed elsewhere in these findings). 31. The importation of clean fill will require approximately 525 truck trips for Tract A and approximately 851 truck trips, if 20 cubic yards are moved per trip. Haul routes and hours of operation were not described but are usually subject to city approval to minimize impacts on either residential zones or rush-hour routes. First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 13 32.. The applicant has indicated.that filling will proceed over a period of.years to correspond with the development. The applicant has not described any particular phasing. Staff has recommended that hydroseeding follow any fill that is not built on within that same construction season in order to prevent erosion and dust. 33. Staff has indicated that the technical plans submitted by the applicant for the grade and fill permit comply with city codes. A written certification will be required to assure compliance with ordinance requirements. All fill activity that might result in erosion or degradation of water quality is governed by the same requirements as storm water discharge. 34. All grading and filling is subject to conditions outlined in the MOA with particular reference to limitations that restrict major activities during certain times of the year... 35. The MOA permits the applicant to make minor modifications to the site plan and staff has indicated that some buildings may be shifted in minor ways to accommodate such things as fire access. 36. There are no significant trees on Tract A. Approximately 35 trees will be removed from Tract B out of approximately 287 trees. These trees will be removed to:permit development of building pads and associated parking structures. 37. The areas within two hundred (200) feet of the various water.bodies in this location are governed by the Shoreline Master Program since these water bodies have been designated as having state-wide significance by the Department of Ecology. The shoreline designation of the area is divided, with the Black River corridor designated as natural and the Springbrook Creek designated urban. CONCLUSIONS Site Plan 1. The site plan ordinance provides a number of specific criteria for reviewing a site plan. Those criteria are generally represented in part by the following enumeration: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; b. Conformance with the Building and Zoning Codes; c. Mitigation of impacts on surrounding properties and uses; d. Mitigation of the impacts of the proposal on the subject site itself; e. Conservation of property values; f. Provision for safe and efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation; g. Provision of adequate light and air; h. Adequacy of public services to accommodate the proposed use; First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 14 • -.The proposed use appears to satisfy these and other particulars of the ordinance, although a .: number of aspects remain vague and these issues will require refinement. 2. The staff report seems to indicate that the site plan submitted is merely schematic and "typically more detailed architectural, landscaping, and engineering plans will be submitted with building permit applications.... vesting has occurred with the signing of the MOA ....[and] based upon those stipulations, the analysis and measures proposed herein (except those required by Code) shall not restrict the appearance, siting, construction or operation of this development." This is contrary to the way other applications have been handled. Vesting prior to the review of the application at a public hearing is not possible even with the parenthetical exception. Site plan review is supposed to review the horizontal and vertical placement of buildings, the spacing between buildings, and effective design and landscaping plans. Although assurances were provided at the hearing that only minor modifications might occur, this review would be wholly unnecessary if the plans can be altered in any significant fashion. Therefore, this review is based upon the submitted plans and they will not be considered merely schematic or conceptual for this purpose. Since this review will result in approval of the site plan, it is the site plan submitted by the applicant that shall govern future development and not some potentially modified site plan that is not even in evidence. This approval is based on ordinary interpretation of the ordinance. Minor modifications as described by Ordinance may be permitted but any other change will, as usual, require appropriate review. 3. Through the MOA, the applicant and the city have attempted to build in a flexibility that normally does not exist in the site plan approval process. In the area of timing, the codes require more than a brief reference to market conditions as the determinant of phasing. The Ordinance requires specific phasing of any project that will be approved for an extended time limit. In a complex of this size there would normally be no problem approving additional time, although other projects of like complexity have been completed in less than the 10 years the applicant has requested. The problem is that the applicant has presented absolutely no time table of any kind other than buildout in an eight to ten year time frame. That is unacceptable. The initial two year time limit was mandated to screen out speculative projects and to provide certainty for the city that property would be developed in accordance with a current Comprehensive Plan. Either a project is built in two years or its vesting lapses, at which point its continued currency can than be reanalyzed against any changed circumstances. While extensions are permitted under reasonable circumstances, such extensions are tied to specific phases. In other words, are buildings on Tract A going to be constructed and started within 1 year or will the ones on Tract B be started within two years? It's inappropriate to leave all of this to some vague time frame that provides little or no certainty but vests in the applicant the current environmental, zoning and comprehensive planning regulations for up to ten years. 4. The applicant's preference for a market-driven approach to development as opposed to the "clearly defined" phases required by the Ordinance is inappropriate given the plain terms of the ordinance. If the proposal is not completely speculative then the applicant must have some idea of tenants who need buildings of the size and scale now proposed. In that case, detailed phasing information seems a necessary prerequisite to any kind of planning. The city does not want partially filled sites and partially graded sites sitting unused and unsightly for extended periods of time. Phasing is absolutely necessary to avoid such consequences and to effectuate good planning. It was a similar absence of planning and appropriate oversight that resulted in the depositing of contaminated dredge spoils on portions of the subject site and on Tract C, and resulted in the improper filling of portions of Tract C in violation of rezone restrictions. First City Washington, tsiack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 15 5. Additional scrutiny was applied to these parcels when the initial fill permit was applied for a. number of years ago, because the applicant wanted to fill the site in piecemeal or even a random pattern. Without additional information about phasing, we might revisit the rejected piecemeal approach that would permit a fill and grade operation that continued for five to eight years and where soils are deposited at random locations and in one or two inch increments. Such actions would result in a continually disturbed and unfinished appearance. This cannot be tolerated. In fact, both the grade and fill ordinance and the site plan ordinance require detailed phasing schedules and strict time limits. 6. The applicant's concerns and desires for flexibility are understandable, but the ordinance does not provide for the latitude requested by the applicant nor the latitude granted by the MOA. The continual disruption and unfinished-looking property is not acceptable. A settlement of an administrative appeal does not provide a legal framework for setting aside any ordinance requirements. Such a result could lead to inconsistent application of mandated code provisions based upon the separate agreements of the various parties. If the code provisions are to be varied, a specific amendment or modification of those provisions by the City Council seems a necessary prerequisite. That way, code provisions affect everyone equally. 7. In a similar fashion, there seems to be no latitude that would permit deviating from the required landscaping provisions of city code. The specific area in question is the "L" shaped property line in the northwest corner of Tract A. There is no question that the applicant has proposed sufficient, and in some cases quite generous, landscaping, particularly for Tract B, but this does not negate the requirements found in the code. There is no landscaping proposed adjacent to the parking stalls in this area. Instead, the applicant proposes utilizing the landscaping and buffer provided by city property in this vicinity. If a similar project were going in next to a city park,,there would be no question that the landscaping required by code would be required of adjacent development. 8. The project must comply with all codes and ordinances of the city and there does not appear to be any method of waiving provisions of the code by agreement of parties, even as the result of a contested appeal. If such modification or waiver were possible by mere agreement (as opposed to amending an ordinance outright) could the parties, as an example, waive the height limits of a particular zone or even the limits on what is a permitted use in a particular zoning district? Can the city and any applicant agree to modify the normal requirements found in the Zoning Code and permit a taller building than otherwise permitted as a tradeoff for other compromises? Can the city permit a duplex in a single family zone in a similar tradeoff? Certainly not. While these may be dramatic examples, height and permitted use are no more or less mandated than landscaping setbacks or detailed phasing of extended projects. The applicant will have to comply with the normal code requirements unless the code is specifically modified. 9. Since it seems certain that a more concrete proposal must have generated the original application, the current uncertainty does not appear justified. Therefore, the applicant will have to submit a detailed phasing plan within two months of this decision. 10. With those preliminary matters aside, it appears that on the whole the project serves the public use and interest. The proposed office use is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan's designation of the site for office park uses. The subject proposal is more park-like than many of the complexes that have been developed in this area. The property sits at the edge of the P-1 forebay pond and straddles the P-1 channel. The open space afforded by these amenities comports quite well with:the.Comprehensive Plan designation. The applicant will also be preserving and enhancing certain of the open space characteristics of the subject site, • First City Washington, y_:.ck River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 16 particularly on Tract B which will also have an expansive buffer on its eastern edge where wetland preservation and enhancement will occur. The combination of city efforts and the applicant's efforts will reflect quite well on the finished product. The city's open space in this location will enhance the value of the applicant's project. 11. In addition to being compatible with the official map and accompanying text suggesting this site for.an office park, the preservation of open space and wetlands by the applicant is also compatible with those elements of the Comprehensive Plan governing open space elements, wildlife habitat and landscaping. The applicant has taken great pains to avoid intrusions along their northern property line which might disturb the rookery. While obviously not avoiding all development, the plan appears to be sensitive to the unique environment found immediately north of the site. 12. Tract B concentrates the more intense uses away from the natural areas. While the garage is quite large, it was decided that with a closed north facade, it would be less intrusive than occupied buildings with windows, upper level lights and people. Similarly, the decision to place surface parking, a relatively noisy activity, on the north side of Tract A was favored over office buildings, since vehicles present a much less formidable obstacle and visual barrier than would an office building. The occupied surface parking area is less than one story in height whereas the four story office buildings would be over fifty feet tall and again, there will be no windows, or upper level lights and there will be less people. 13. An analysis of a project's compliance with building code and fire code provisions does not generally occur under site plan review. Detailed review occurs with building permit application. 14. The project should blend well with surrounding development. The buildings south and east of the project are similarly sized and landscaped. The development should not adversely affect property values and, with the exception of increasing traffic in the area, the project should be an acceptable neighbor. 15. The development of the subject proposal will alter the appearance and intensity of uses as is expected of any development. The site and most of its soils have already been disturbed and its wetlands modified by earlier development patterns. The proposed plan preserves unique characteristics of the site and protects surrounding property in a reasonable manner. The landscaping proposed along with the setbacks, buffer the unique natural areas both north of the site and along both sides of the stream corridor. The plans accommodate the unique wildlife habitat that has survived or flourished, at least until the eagle predations, by locating and scaling buildings in a manner which presents the least intrusive features to the north. 16. The buildings present differing heights, thereby providing variety in scale, while the articulated facades reduce the apparent bulk of the buildings. (As an aside: the idea that the proposed plans that are the subject of this review are merely schematic and are nominally binding would make it impossible to make any determination as to this project's compatibility and would render this review irrelevant.) Not only do the articulations and facets provide meaningful relief from the large bulk of the buildings but these details furnish an opportunity to introduce landscaped nooks and additional visual interest. 17. The plans provide adequate parking, although the excess parking, by encouraging additional vehicular use, could counter any reductions achieved by the transportation management plans. Therefore, the allotted parking should not exceed that required by code. Besides encouraging additional traffic, excess parking usurps open space and reduces landscaping. The ERC, unlike • First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 17 the way it has treated other projects in this area, has not required the applicant to set aside or place in reserve additional parking until the need for it is demonstrated. While the complex is being developed, parking between the sites will be shared or parking may be provided on the adjoining lot as long as sufficient parking is provided and city approval is granted. 18. Circulation patterns on the plans appear reasonable. The flow is generally circular around the buildings. The applicant has limited access to the street system to two major driveways for each complex thereby limiting interference with the arterial streets adjacent to the complex. There are pedestrian links through the parking areas to the buildings, between the buildings, and to the public streets. 19. Besides the peripheral landscaping along the site's boundaries, the applicant has proposed landscaping within the surface parking areas including between aisles and at island ends. The buildings are set off in their own respective landscaped envelopes. 20. The site will be served by the city's water and sewer systems. Staff has reported that adequate capacity exists to provide service to the subject site. The applicant will be required to comply with all storm water requirements, including those for water quality and treatment and for a downstream analysis. Once again, the MOA cannot be substituted for ordinance requirements and depending upon the outcome of downstream analysis, the applicant cannot be exempt from normal code-mandated detention, save any compensation offset required by prior dedications of land for the forebay. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit 21. As discussed above, the office complex proposed by the applicant is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan's map element which designates the area for office use and appears to comply with most aspects of the Zoning Code. The project also generally respects the natural areas north of the site and the creek-side environment which runs between Tracts A and B. Extensive buffers and wetland enhancement will aid in this preservation. 22. The proposal meets or will meet all required riparian setbacks from the pond, channel, and wetlands. The applicant has set aside extensive areas on Tract B for preservation of wetland and upland habitat. Similar, although smaller, set asides have been made on Tract A. 23. The discussion above indicates that there are some uncertainties regarding access to the shoreline adjacent to the site due to the location of the rookery north of the pond and the preliminary nature of the city's planning efforts. Nonetheless, public access to the shorelines is a primary aspect of the Shoreline Master Program. Therefore, the applicant shall provide a specific easement to provide access to the shoreline areas adjacent to both Tracts A and B at this time. If further study negates the need or appropriateness of these easements due to the proximity of the heron rookery or other wildlife they can be vacated or modified as appropriate. The applicant should provide pedestrian easements through the site in the vicinity of the westernmost driveway and near the northeast corner of Building B on Tract A, and west of Building E and near the northeast corner of the parking garage on Tract B. Special Permit for Fill and Grade 24. The proposed fill and grade appears to serve the public use and interest. Once it has been determined that the site is suitable for development, fill materials will be necessary to bring the First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 18 grade of the site above the 100.year flood level. The applicant will be importing material, approximately 18,000 cubic yards for Tract A and about twice as much, or approximately 35,000 cubic yards for Tract B. Three wetlands with low functional values as wetlands will be filled. The material will be spread over the approximately 24 acres the sites encompass as necessary to provide for elevated building pads. In addition, some limited excavation will occur to permit wetland enhancement along the eastern edge of Tract B. 25. The total estimated truck trips, approximately 1,400 trips, will be spread out over a couple of years or more. Staff was not concerned about these trips although staff will monitor and control haul routes and hours as necessary to limit interference with rush-hour traffic or other contingencies. 26. Since a substantial portion of the work will be near the pond and channel, erosion control will be required. The permit and annual license will have to comply with all surface and storm water regulations of the city to ensure water quality and quantities do not exceed city limits. 27. Again, it will be necessary for the applicant to more clearly delineate the phases of operation. It is inappropriate to continually dump materials on the site. Not only would that lead to a lengthy period of unsightly conditions, but it would extend, unnecessarily, the city's need to monitor haul routes for dirt and monitor water-quality issues related to erosion and dust control. In addition, the applicant will be required to hydroseed any portions of the site that will not be developed prior to the beginning of the wet season to minimize erosion of newly filled areas. 28. In conclusion, there is much to recommend the project and that is why it is approved. But there are also a couple of issues that need resolution in a more definitive manner, namely the timing of development on the site and compliance with all ordinances of the city. Once those matters are corrected, the project should be an asset to the city and, hopefully, the occupants of this proposal and residents of the city will continue to enjoy the unique wildlife that cohabit the area. DECISION 1. The applicant shall provide a detailed schedule of phasing for both the grade and fill activities and the office building construction within two months of the date of this decision. 2. The applicant shall comply with all landscaping provisions of city code. 3. The applicant shall comply with all provisions required by the MOA of November 20, 1991. 4. The applicant shall, in order to address impacts to the natural environment, enhance existing wetlands and provide all wetland plantings in accordance with its wetlands enhancement plan. Enhancement shall occur in conjunction with and at the time of wetland filling. 5. The applicant shall comply with its wetlands enhancement plan. All reporting under this plan is to be made available to the Development Services Section. 6. The applicant shall, in order to ensure that site development and project operation do not unduly impact the off-site wildlife habitat, provide city's Development Services Division with copies of-each and all reports concerning heron activity which are prepared pursuant to the MOA for First City and the Citizens Appellants. First City Washington, tsiack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 19 7. The applicant (and its heirs and assignees) shall, in order to mitigate on-site and off-site impacts, maintain responsibility for replacement of all relocated and introduced landscaping on Tract B exterior of the laurel hedge within the landscape area or the landscape extension as the terms are determined in the MOA; this assignment of responsibility shall be confirmed through provision by the applicant (and its heirs and assignees) of a landscaping surety device to protect wetland plantings and landscaping exterior to the laurel hedge within the landscape area or the landscape extension as the terms are determined in MOA equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be implemented, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, at the time of the issuance of the construction permit to continue in force and effect until five years for wetlands plantings and three years for all other plantings exterior of the laurel hedges, following the completion of all improvements approved in conjunction with this permit application. 8. The applicant (and its heirs and assignees) shall, in order to mitigate on-site and off-site impacts, maintain responsibility for protection, maintenance and care of all relocated and introduced landscaping on Tract B interior of the laurel hedge, and all relocated and introduced vegetation on Tract A interior of the laurel hedge; this assignment of responsibility shall be confirmed through provision by the applicant (and its heirs and assignees) of a landscaping surety device to protect interior upland and street boundary upland plantings, equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be implemented, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, with the issuance of the construction permit and to continue in force and effect for three years following the completion of all improvements for each phase approved in conjunction with this permit application. 9. The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties during the site preparation, provide a plan with the following components: a) an erosion control element; b) an agreement that a certified soils engineer (selected by the applicant, with city approval, and funded by the applicant, or its heirs or assignees) will make inspections of the site at reasonable intervals during all filling activities; will provide copies of all reports made to the city; and will immediately report emergencies to the city; c) an element to ensure that hydroseeding of any portion of the subject property that is disturbed is completed in the event that there is to be any significant delay between preparation and construction of structures. 10. The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties, provide an agreement to hold the city harmless in the event that flooding occurs on the site because applicant has failed to construct its finished floor elevations and site improvements above the flood plain, this agreement is to be approved by the City Attorney prior to the issuance of any site preparation permit. 11. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate on-site recreation impacts (as based upon 4-31-33D.1.i of the Site Plan Review Ordinance): i) of the Site Plan Review Ordinance): i) provide passive recreation centers such as picnic tables and benches as shown on the schematic site plan as approved by the Parks Department; and ii) install showers within office. 12. The applicant shall revise the parking plan to provide a maximum of 544 parking spaces on Tract A and 1217 parking spaces on Tract B. The plan shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of the first building permit for Tract B. First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 20 13. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Parking and Loading Ordinance, obtain approval•of off-site parking plans for Tract A and/or Tract B from the Development Services Division, in advance of designation and implementation of the off-site parking area to ensure that service to Tract B employees does not unduly remove required parking for employees on Tract A. 14. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance 4-31-33D.1.f, improve the safety and efficiency of on-site circulation by marking on the site plans the pedestrian circulation paths linking structures to parking areas, recreation areas and the public right-of-way. The location and dimensions of those linkages will be confirmed prior to the issuance•of construction permits, in keeping with the MOA requirement (Section II.D.4.) that specific site plan features be established at that time. 15. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, 4- 31-33.D.1.i, to reduce emergency service calls to the site and to increase efficiency during service calls, incorporate the following features into the parking garage: i) open stair wells with transparent glazing material on each level; ii) emergency telephones on each level; and iii) a reasonably priced and efficient security system which enables the garage to be closed and locked, in keeping with the MOA (Section II.D.4.), specific design plans for these improvements will be reviewed and approved with the construction permit. ORDERED THIS 14th day of January, 1992. Ye+,'tom--.JL FRED J. KAMvIAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of January, 1992 to the parties of record: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney David Martin, Transportation Systems Ron Straka, Stormwater & Utility Division Amy Kosterlitz Buck & Gordon 902 Waterfront PL 1011 Western AVE Seattle, WA 98104 Royce Berg LPN Architects 1127 Pine St, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98101 Jim MacIsaac The Transpo Group 14335 NE 24th St, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA ,98007 • First City Washington, Black River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 21 Bob O'Connell Bush Roed Hitchings 2009 Minor AVE E Seattle, WA 98133 Teresa McLean 7004 S 130th Seattle, WA 98178 Bob Denman Jones & Stokes Assoc. 2820 Northrup Way, Suite 100 Bellevue, WA 98004 Gerry Adams Seattle Audubon Society 28803 NE Big Rock Road Duvall, WA 98019 Susan Krom Citizens for Renton Wildlife Preservation 3640 Ashworth AVE N Seattle, WA 98103 TRANSMITTED THIS 14th day of January, 1992 to the following: Mayor Earl Clymer Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Don Erickson, Zoning Administrator Lynn A. Guttmann, Administrator Members, Renton Planning Commission Jim Hanson, Development Services Manager Gary Gotti, Fire Marshal Ronald Nelson, Building Director Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Jay Covington, Mayor's Executive Assistant Transportation Systems Division Valley Daily News Utilities System Division Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 P.M. January 28, 1992. 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 16, 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. 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. First City Washington, niack River Corporate Park SA-109-89 January 14, 1992 Page 22 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. . , • .., . ----- • -.„_:-..7.-: . —..."-='_:- ....- . • '' , _....... .,-. • •••••-••• •••• . 4m4 ' • Ism t 7 1 • -1 i j);-7. :...Z.,:•a. E ESL=4......r=• •4•%.'' . CC;,4,....... . 71-.7.= 1/7011 atri17-_==.7...'-.. .....7.. .•••=. • fl- --- kr--•••• ..- - , - •. , . CD •••••• CZ p.Z.4,11.2.4.2.2,210 1.....2 • 3... 0 , LANDSCAPE AREA IN BUFFER . 6 .... ." -•• • • ,iik0 1... --... -------.... . P-1 Channel ..ds• ce,,E. . . ,.. ___Ip.......27..........Z1111,142.. :. ... '.....„ e5‘Ge 1.740:015411.0iiiiiilAiiiiie.:,4: \, . 0 • g C) ..... ..-,- . 44:1:iis e , '` .>---.....___,__--"CT< \s‘cA • . .i..."'Wv *•;" 4''.171%.,--''''':".c."-"k".44"• - ' , '.• -i• > > .§. ,,f'..-- -•!„, ,„,p1 • .--. , • I,_„, .' .51ty .. •••N 4 .•-.•a;. ?iteN * 6.1tiVe•-:4 ''''S.- .W\ •‘ ; ... iii ; 1 ., •,. .......- __on. ,,,,,.-, : ........ . .., -.4.N...., co-. - a•'-''' #-"'''.••••• ...•i . C.) CO b . '''''''N..',. N7,.....tZL.F.t.* 1..4i. C...4. ,.•2.'*':;''' .....'.1..N.v... Ift IL.* 4 s7 144 all t .-- • 0 , , /............................_..\..........._.....................\ ‘,......... ..... „,,.,......... .._...____z._.__._.._.,..,_.,.......„,..„,..„:. ...t..I....,. 5 as < g - -, , .. .„ ...,,..." .. :..v, Ig.• V 0., 'N.\„...2:-.."-- "". .44,-, *N.' 4..'"Ilii; ..." ‘ . •:. \ \ . -->-----,, -- . .',?,,,.,\\...m.4..m. 0. Va;t01.01%,„,, N1/4. 'lel 1,41....„ry, • ii.'ro„.'Stil I:• '• 1 i l•Nt..k li--- 03 a. 1 --„, -........ .. / x . ........._....0, •-••.-•-...-. t•\ .•... :. 4 _, ,-;lf.-41,"(4s /1 4'', hp,: ',: 7 ..• 1 I ,•,....t......-, --,,•• ' \ 11`. • -.•- 1 1 .1, , • .:\ : q••,.\ • •-:N% . jup ••••ri'•- • • li --./ ../2 .....-:72...„). I N... ). . ..:. ...... ,. , L1212.2.1 11.2-112.... . ....... i 47. . 1 I j• '.' / . . . ./ -----„,,..,„... k-,....„1":______________-•-•- 27 . ...,•'-" . • -- . • -.....,.............. . 111 .. z f .- , 1.7 ... • AtIrr.ot, / i )Y0.• 1 / • - ILO,' • . to. ‘,...,........—...- -.-,..4., I 0. i • *DAM.Fr*291.2e.*11- ''. '''''''''• '' .11....47/. 1t4"ti '''''III..: fid.'In. It ,II. ti:/at....,......kt / et' Wt,.. •• i • `•. 41/n ,2.11,6 VI," ..tiltpir ... /i...i. '''' ref••' • ... "4.1•9• / / • 8,4 12....• . " . ' 1.: •kS. • .t. • .- ANt44 , ., , \,..t...-. , ...., --. he, r.-....., .10- • 11_,,...-zstur; s. iit pp.-. / / . • \ is.,..,2tz.,i ,---04thz.7...44 'h.-4- .. •114 ••"!. - .0%e-t..rioe or:. . ke ' -..„,„...-- ,.., t...• a,: '...".44. - 10",,...,„0"4‘ ' 'Ile" ,..re 00.••••1•06-,1,- Y., .s.', . ;,44°' :4";101;0•VstAti. / •5(.1.,,...J‘46.0-4,7,... • ) // l'ilt•e:-.'44%.2•4,.__*4*ili;.•,.-PrO ' .Th:lt s'fi . '040."1."AtitalAC: . I i , .. .•11177-1 1 • .2 • ' / I ....TS RA.,......1.2.... I) / '.-...----'----' .....OF 0 .tft..._, 1# V" 7- •44:' A' -.1.4);g1 • __ . — _ . , , .........4,..... ..1., ilihr-•ell 1 l''' - J 6..4'4t0116:,, '1.. • ,.- - & Olk ...,_, i ... 17 ..„ *MIP•'.:tf.V41. '.........? .10 27 2 • AI,Z." 2:ielt 5-14-*-4 i- . • ..4. 4 1 : , 1 -- .,,,........ "'''--.,.„,,: ' 't•-•-..t... ,, // -•-••,..s lorirty k. ".4,..1Z:=. jtrtf--:-•:. ,410 'fili., : i i ti ct ...,.....-....., . --,,,...,411,44:-.! _..„.14.,0 ...... , 3 er— 111 4,:tk4 "ott.• i' ,, C C '4.—.. 1• . -. • * ' I ( C'' ..i'. ••• . -',,,',..„ -......... .. . g -rfk AcT A 4- .PLANT MATERIAL LEGETD 0 8:°44.•••145.144'1.-"'d -"11 .....-- •• im :?.:,-_--,-•- -..,.• . ______.---.e..a . /.., .--•`-*•-‘114111'.-.„ -111611.111111111101W-1161 ....• • (2) ,./.. ru.44%./.1 .4K-410-lic01.rkekf,•2400., -----"'-------------....................._ze ------1-----. ------- _ 1 , I -..i, - I 1 1 • • =_•=-..-r.. f*.-.4.4.n....4 ... -! . ... ...... :2 2.: _ - \ .21•1=••••• . 7 4 ...IL= ' 0 410.04.4447•40.14•xtvg.-see,ot,er-ttairb.f_a...T.0,...,4 t.....r.. • 1 \ d .. ..— .— LANDSCAPF:PLAN • • ' BLACKRIVER — ........ .—.,,,,t, ......... \3'-t,,,•. ,,,',qv,. \.7\1 1 . ' .• • CORPORATE PARK tit-- 4,..rof.--vet. ....40,....onts1 Fa,.0+,a.Pvirs r......,<Me ()oe.4.........4..4,1.4 1.44.g.0-m,........ •,....... . . et• • •,. F....2..tn........... F•12,2•1; .2.112 Wt.rhi 66.1.12. X 2 Is." 0440.4so. . 22.2,12......* 22.......1...... A awe," ke-i-r -1.--e4,-- RENTON, WASHINGTON •0 4./...mc.r-(eh..., 4v,40-‘..1-10..6..ol ...== **an 4 ex.****...*>•tabal..11.212.2.2.12.....s.........,...i FIRST CITY WASHINGTON.INC. ..12,...*, .............t. ....0,.......,1121.1.2*,.22.2.1 "/C=.-3 1.2.* , _ F•-.121 ;0 e,-.44,5ai 21....4.-OFF2.1. ....41.2.-1 ,11.0.1:421- 0**.ol, A4.14.1:7 CC 1-ID ki7 zucela-er Ph.,--trwr-V- 0 24'7.1.:.'17.. PHASE VIII *o 0..o•-orgewhof - ..........4aawn ebre.6......,,, z MM.",1.•;...Tr'oa.' ...f.='-''''6sa"'"•-' 0 oco er.s.c. cr.s...4220 gaikt... .you...ier.0 • 1 2C. ,..7. MT. A 0.....1.,pe-tr.• Cana. .4.211.....- JOB NC •00.7 5.,(1:1 NO C., 1M,Fin-c,tr tH..4. ., ..i e lirlw.t*. • ...0.....1....not rta.o....t /..44.-1-f olbr,......r.i.tHanl• ).7. `.,.1.o-,E;4 --•-•...., 'RAM,476 • SITE PLAN h,401 1 :•-•,:,... i, , . • . dik- ...,--- IIIIHLI1111I1iIl . lI11 lull IIIIIII ,4„ ,„I � - 1 1 I I 1111 I I I I II11 1 , 1i_ . Ll I i I IrII I, II1 0 ' �dS r , l i rI , I t i I I I i I i i I �. � i , � � �je VI , _ 4 r • WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION East Elevation Bldg C sim. Mechanical e`- Exterior Insulating Spandrel Pane �-T4 d Von Glass . \-t; 1 ] I -41 11 I IIIIII ! IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11IIi / IIIIIIIIIIII31/I III III I- 1 111I1I1111I11IIIIIt111III111 IllIIIIIIIIIIII l_l III .4e I I I I T A� 'IimnimI I ' II' I III 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I t I ':.,• ,4 ' Mimminsammalli EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION West Elevation Bldg C Sim. TRACT 'A' :_i :�-_ :BLACKR.IVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VIII N j en -=_ = FirstCityWashington, Inc. 9 s n c. _°2 = ' 4 Story Office (BLDG. B bldg C sim.) 89017 Scale: 1°-40' 10-31-91 2 • .+vt..nL,... aOJSQT.I- y p;.'../ . w/GaG-+640•,.L-C: ``•/ III/ ',I1 'j / • / • l.rro1.•.w0/ k i / H a . \ \\ I 0- I S wo. •4, y- P-1 ct'aY.,.l `• �\ \�\ `.-_-�_' (-/� '•/1,.E- I MONUMENT SIGNai DatentSon Pond ii. / /'-.\`r 5 ea•,s°v EE.�-"t--,\T. S.ST 1 1 I 4r,:l i l.. \lam \- I \ `�•']I.••.,S\�7�_ rah, ., w. Jl 1.• "/ \\\��_, c:` •al .__ •' y--0`i OI WR0.:RATETE A !/'/•� -�-• 5 aaLCOP�E x)..)f _�7�_ 'It�_ I 1 �}I- if':) , l \ •- y:•(^ - � 1 • i I .3 wn\\ /=' Iavw.l.r. `\ J- / \ _ •! 13 I Ib�¢.•oe cow.ra F sonvicuni On /1,:6:' \ \ \.- �''! -� • 0 CC �u /I e• \\ \\ I • '- imp • i ,. .I. : 1 - 11• x:cr••s..lew•rn'. c f.... \'�` .1I, I $ I \\\\\\ \ of:j' �� 1 �lP► r, I e•,..e..e-,r -� Iw,. - o o I ' \, o�',\ /r• �s°v_1 "� i • .,1- �iMrit-- J1 °1 •_ ..vwe m L. 1% an•\ s /'/ / : `� !/ ,.© \. � f )° VICINffY MAP - o I • 1. • • Cn 3 f \ .. �\�� 101 �•� Ill'•-' , il• I1 a I er moo..•. •!- �•�'--' V :/. • I 1 • 1. \� �~ = c • �%; %, '/ 98 C-,SO)'� � % ;Q 'I I +.j, ./- •,d./ {i-�ii 4"� uses N u. m Ll. ¢" '§, • • 0/ • ..r ,/ y v��yjj 4{y sv r / r :#,^ / �'�!� i I fW\ \\^ y •,/ 1'1� 111 �:� 1--d.1,.wT.n i ; .. • ._ i vs /. ". /;j R /l� . - `,``�`.a.Y1,� �5,�,*¢ \ 1 ,, -U I-,a.m.!�_y'• _ - 1� 1 . : f Ir '-�•t�S�', ..1. �, j I \\. • .��41 Ilik �ba' ,'.d .� ��, r. - \ t i-.• i i e.,.uu•cv,»..■ •._•-...� wnsrr 1 r ,..- ' .7•• / ;7 Y9F7> \ ! i�� / Oft-Pe \ �� -�\ rt t 1 `'t' '1 I SITE 1 i.., , ,/ ,. nr.) / , '/!,-k ISF 7/ / 1 / ••t •� 1i.5.°16�t'� r\ ;��I 4" \/�S I Ir �' I t •• -. 1 �' I:A✓'- I �T ,f1 _ S-- • •\l' _ _ 1, �: y�xs•1-awx' ___I'c I'' reeve...Ia..,r."• , ♦f • a•. ' _L. r�l.i .. `jam" p c-.n..:c.w•,c-._.o-.-m if 1 I•. I • 6 i1 05 f i�.9' i,r- •'.J \ y _50,- ` a.y• , /�,ly I I-; +- •f4f •'S. •is.' i+•t`�•' 7 +ate Pr° lb f•'. rf/ 43 `. _ by•...+�, - -- - -- \ •• w �� m.. 1 `••• jT. 'W . • y ,A/ --- ' 1 Ll L-J I rmes^a..s•..s+ac�I,l 1 ••I ' .•N k r -__ \ •.:, . �/. ,tj� "��\^ .ice• \�� C .:..-. 1 . r p: , e rso / VICINITY MAP E��s�_�cve:=-� ,;c x �Z fl�i�,` to - ,�� . ,/ / ��� -:.a...441, -r=.s-NS - 1 \\ R\ '`•`-off//}�,(� /�-� `JT _, \ e • - \y.7 / /.i, c..�.E...Evi cam- -S'J \ I '•`•''�••t '•F „, \ / / / ate Ps;Cv_K,- ,!H \ 1 \ I .t-•. . /T�\ y ro,w.av aw4�+ 5 ,�-.�` f •I Y•/IU�S\` �� � ...�I, II - .T`(l' �e �/ �Exr..-9�7, ���� TABULATION ••e.,...c„»� .�-.` y sc6rwx • Site Area ±683,762 S.R. = i•`. {, . --- � ,� BLACKRIVER Building Area ±286,300 S.F. - _ �� .. ,�;_ =- ;., %, CORPORATE PARK • Gross Coverage ±41.9% 1-.),s• '. L4,ri. N. SITE PLAN • o'/'�s �d ,.z•:vis'':i. RENTON WASHINGTON c Site Coverage ± Iootpri excl. arage) o ., . s o • Parking ±1369 Stalls(1/211 SF.) �= `` �-' FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. z Standard ,• 21071 Stela m O-•Et7m _• ;rl Compact SCe iV0%). \\ 4. i\\ • Handicap 215 Stela • V I CAM I Tr j MILTS , . -,.� \\` • 4011. w sew. P.M FY Or 1 •,-•o.r iE a,:a.c J A-1 / -•L., asit b `1, _ RON ROOKER rlf y • tiY •FUPA IE �t'FOREST PRESERVE ,+ � � �e 1 b 4"'fd ii„,_ . . ' r • II. „••.Ticoisii r,/, . ..:e. ,ip 410,-,-::,- .: . '04 : 4. . 61031s'4.0 "(10--.. - A •,,..4..., _ '..-; .. _ .• • / • VACANT 'j I.lte -N, i y: h OFFICE • • 1 . _r•4, • .• -.,,,.. • • • t ma's, .,,,...• . ‘ak • .,. .. 40 .,., rti - 40. --449,-An • • - •� �0 Wit':-,• -.... . • itit:.,,! ..iiemaraz4-54-:• lapr- egoaiwitill 10. P-1 DETENTION POND / 13M0 ` Vr• ,•„!` .,;eI' f - - . -'• - , ... .f, . c\ , -• ., ei 41 • .,,.,A ft•,- 4'\ . OilVI :•' \16 .\..• . , -,. r,._. . . 1A,,z, \-; •••. •...• ' Via' • •. —. ;iiIt-iir:%7.I)--.\\ " 4 Al 1...),I//... .7!•3"........•..n.,:., ..is_.'.t__•o_,.:-::_s_--#- • t 1� .x 1 ..,''l f,•,..-: .%t:''.,,i.:rr. II=' _, ,....,4-it. . o t ' c i i" try- e! !n OFFICE Qv/ ..,,,,,iit- _ „.. ...„ .:„ . . . ::.,,e.,z),.:i., 1, , , ,,‘,..4., . .,_..,,,. . • • • PROPOSED M !R / ,.... t.:• z}• ., r'j;„3„.ta;*,l,_i- ••:".,..,..:., �, ! +II \ \f g � L • . OFFICE r. \0 j , C�1 ' i. . 1 :' k?i • . . Ili] • i a! - • .., . . - .- i4 fk,..t T y4. 41' �yy e. T��` A 4 4 r- — 1:�'..•••.•11 /_ . ka1 •,�'V—/7. • iy,C�-. iy _ SI�•.t-: - \ cr lf• 0 ■J �j1� • %t ��7 • �y � 5`°�ad��'f , T%-L 1 •Sm 1• E a ' L 7s(�11+,��irai. +A. 11/4 ? •:r. ." Ei sT tt,., ': ii: •'•s , ; �. 'JP • �,..• ... ,-( ••y' / .t • .� i\ 4.. • �'.55 50 F _Y - ,S Imo- I :1'. m m . -:: • —.... '. . . , • . ilk:,.10. lik::,1.,:.4 P'..,1". .....„.4,.:...>„...... • 'iT s ',' wir4 r ® .S.W C �.,w - -`J4 ,Fi• ^.,.•rA W" 7 e'er; • `t • •r...4���+JAI`:- �•�� sue: ' OFFICE - 4 2 4111/ThAjlipolalW014% % itio\-- --. p.' .;-•,.. .......76:-.i4..trivir, s„ %/---- ----..f 0.." • 1 .X:::;:)..,..;____:„.---\ --`• -. _ .44:74.....-,,,, -,:, %., r _.,N.N r.. --• it:-..;gi., . § I° - • ..„---- :\ - E \ ;r ... , OFFICE VICE. }' I C ITV AP METRO SEWAGE ,.. ..,.......,....FA. -••ftct,. ••- • .• gipoLoiN _ • '� Its fa • TREATMENT PLANT r',. •Aai ; ` < < %o-.E K,rO+ j UJJ Y l ! . . z 1// / / - -4, • \ .\ 1 , � L P-1 Cnam.l Cg' ` \ __"�-_ (.. 0 �.� I .PLANT MATFASAL.LEGEND C� D.t.ntfon Pond 1.• �\ _J-1 'L� I (i/�7� �m.p9\;`'�•`--- __ / i --,,,, .•Ab.l - !ati`1..,ne..-wsv-rvfia. +qv/- Q- . jl �� - _� - �� i _ g sue; �„,,,'Pas .,,f,,, , a trrvp+. .v nn f. a) 1 �_�- ...�-. � ,•1 ~ -"I y-a , Off- • CZ /�� 747 .".` F-,'w.naw4na�..r.'tM1a-1x"°`-<w,�.�1 ^-•+t`1'o.s•�`..'L' a D] • 1 "( •\ \ -\_,....- A T )� 1._1� o i I t..warp rem;1 .-� °i �P,.vrrw.a...1LE - L � ii .(p ,I .. -c._ -v.....-, +N�' t r'�l J- t \\ I I 13 I ) .I ,r 0-,,,,-, "'"''....6-°Me n (D Q �\. r 1 •S,/ •,.el.0.,,t•.� '• .•,6°.;,\\\. , p,r-\ 1I i I ,/• Id, �� .++�e-,�,Ieo o aa�.v�n,,.r4.-I •/HP' / CC o \�• ; •ri'/if •• .:.•CO \•'\\\ %` lf' " �I • r1 iI-1 c• •;"j/ • 1< li 7R�tc�a.,'"°,,`...W„-""^r Q. "tPa+ri,•.ro.r,w.+t•••a-/ L I- �`',+ /� `I • 'v+s', t.\\ •�y 1 \' •• , ri- . I I�•Af �-,u*v lallaa It ;. '+, / - i?'"�\\\ \ \ `.o. 6 /f ti • .•.• t, I e.-u..r-,- 1---T 4i,. N-xv A.--c-r ai•e-,w o' E+.v,..-snL E j 1,41,3• EL p,l' I• +.'� s. p�lj I I } �� _ i e«� m x 9 t w e aznA+/ w.l. r i u 1 'b ..r..t� 1 r N; �0 i ' ,."^`?n`+t,� .J.�H tt•Tn.vo_ir.>' �'C1 w,v,�zf n.,.,N .nnw,i'c.w,-I .•1 �, 10e.9 ,r Ell io+ V" t �,' �++k 4.t 1 r °ewrrcl ++�er�trf Itiwi a✓+t- i ....1 /..•'•� .:.• .. I:c . :. '`a�!1 r `\ 1, 1, ; • r t•O FeO r<ttm-rr Ar°e•r,wro - K o w° ,,u x�.,w. / d, r r :/:. {i. '.1` �j k 1 : _ o .c°°,mot az xbo okr. .°w,rrt ,/ ;'e +�.;J'. .^` .t. Yv _-\�'•• • � "� '�5t\ ,1 l 1 ><p.nw eo-o eo,,. w+*1:.-+-- /'. #' / / J .*kt iQ,a Ytih it ..-.;‘i;---- ��r�� n' I .f J\ t 1 . PiG-1;.-rlv l.r..n-1. h//i j,' ; / 'f. .v ai;: : :.,:. ���,, :';1y ti \A ; 1 G r ssw rf+vt . z . �' i. 411 Mv. - . \ /�'O-Ob, • ,t_ y�1•`,`.. s�\� 1F 1 Ran kw PA..mom �rr.t.�"�c�„•..,r,� / r. .fig..i,, •el. f+ .y-•06 ' NW. k •-I'. 1 1! . ..ei ,a\134/ (4111111k ,. ... .Ipri 7. icac°r.>E N '/ ,;/; '", :.• �. e1 ., \'��,1\\ �r• ��\ �1I. `Qa ''_.. 1%' 11 ` ' _ -^'— ., .. t kv>4, • i' i +L- + �t�i' U .\ ,I/ f v`677 40- •. x-zs''t-a vx•,/ _ -•- 11 m-ocs,~.., 1 f :'/ P 4 v •y Y_ �,,,;I�-r4•- *ems •�PyK'!.:. 3�-t - - - -m i. Jr I , l I f *Az:itirr�fi/► ` , fit! 7' i� Jib Myi,--- W..01 ....1';a.. _•t,• -.-'�- 1_-�`' %-i.r.-.,..� �Y! I _� +rs+c.,s �i-1,r l� i 1 At- II���,�I�i n IV: i�+..r• �. la``\ •qt�r\ Gw ,,70 �•�'}p,*j�,,.ti•,�i•'�••r .r°- �i ° �� �._._-. .�._-, -- ——— '_ant'gip .p�, �F,,'.•0��lv=�/ . I s �1�:�y�d_� 1,9;,�a • • ` Wit; Ait �+ I��/i•, lk' I ++�� •eF��`I •+`. V It:4/ ,} , i m_ti.o," i_• e„+T•GR,1. -�.__ 4p ,�'+(i `�� -. Itl '1' U / ,, ` ` )^rv..�•?'E._•' ' �, / •_� ''xiE�f����� try�,`I4 ��� �* :v3�` ��` �.'/Y • \;� iY r �,E ycV 4 ►�� w.vi' - f91,� �t ,vor+ " ✓�1, ,p p /./..„:...,.....,_ LANDSCAPE AREA W BUFFER f ,aky"`?AM , BLACKRIVER \}r'''''":=` .i,' •` /r 1M • CORPORATE PARK \ off/ �� RENTON x • LANDSCAPE PLAN WASHINGTON r- \\'' 1 / M V FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i Jr, k so ao ,eq • • �.; it af-P • a °. • \• no eeo.i�...,n wa . • --Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass -- Mechanical Screen Ty is To.p. N • FAI iIlillliTTI-T lit 421 T.iIII I11I_IIIII III.IIIIIIII IIII1 • jilal ,� Ilii_T iiii�-JI �C c MN _f 1AIiLiILILSIIiIIil.III_IIIIII ( IIIit. o �1<r I I I I I I [ I I 1 T i 1 =`1ii ( rj �- d _ ► liliiiiiIIIIIiITI 2-1 LL IS L NORTH ELEVATION. WEST ELEVATION . Exterior insulating Spandrel Panels._- - •�-,z.,... . - T-- , • I _ I I I I I I 1 I I e NEMO I l u 1 ti t l t l 11 ts- l 1 11 1 I" • lf: lll l � : • 1�; =l l i [ I I (t._L1_! 1 �} . suusum • II m _ 111I l l� l : IId IInMOinn>,1 ) 'mod• i Iu1 nr_ � �i'i -, AAM 11i _.11Gf I Ili G-i-i I I I I III 1 i l l 1�3 I I 1 I 1 ' M ". SOUTH ELEVATION V EAST ELEVATION . TRACT "B'1 a- = BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII. First City Washington, Inc. -•.m«m __ 10-31-91 • _= Y 5 Story Office Elevations (BLDG. °DPI) NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-'91 } - In 1 // f12 ` / iiiIIIIIMEIM-..01 ..I dill Na '„ 1 11'11jj II 1 1 I 1 l 1 1 1 I II 'III • I I I I I I I l I i 4 g. ■11�■1111iw111I111111 .11111111111111 IN 1� -IS f 1 IV t i T i I l i i i if MI f O III11111iIIIIIIlt.u ,n. 111ii_— ii� IIJi Ji11iliIIlI1IIJ� tp —� • 1 '� EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION • • Typical Mechanical Sc - eribr.lnsu a andrel Pa Tinted Vision Glass -� - llliiillli1II1111111111111111111111II111111d• mil 1 i TTIT7 11 1 1 1 U 1 1 l 1 1_l 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 ' I l I . II 1 11IIIIHIl11II111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Ill CHI I l _l ) 11III1IIIIII1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIllllII ill II1II L 4l1I i II1Iii1_1I IIII • WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION TRACT "B" =_ <-:��.-1..BLACKRI VER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII I __ _ _--_ First City.Washington, Inc. =: .. Via, 10-31-91 • 5-*-5:'=4)E= 4 Story Office Elevations (BLDG.. "E") NW88041 Scale: 1°=40' 1-30-'91 , - Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass Mechanical Screen ' Typical :,aai1. 1111Th a..UIIu11ea1111.uUa■�i, r,nanumni inn am::1-- ;.■a>tmiiA f :IIIIiI1•IIUIUlUUhlIUIIMINIIIIIII 111 ------- IllininUIUIIIRII i 111mom jig imaimmlommilmommimimmemommin o leeu• = um A:so I 111111ii111UU11IUhu 1el■niIM11111eeee•1 „ii■. .iui,a.s11t .741111.,:,la■i.-1 - � J - a : ::tleeeeeeeeiemnienni d . 1, a IleeeerMEI All ; - 1111 :-.: .•.mmie am aim : sy • : NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION - Exterior Insulating Spandrel Panels -� 1 1 � l i t-I I I t1Y i i I HI I I I I I I I I I I I I I IJ I I I I I I Ii IV;11 T� II I1 I I i 1I Ill � - I )I<t'LLIi , � 11 1 ; ill I�I ,i l l l l l ! I l l l it l l l l l l I I ,l 11 =- I i �l— II i 1 1 1 1 it ~ twit i_ L. It1 1 1 1 l i. o� i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i1 i c A 1 • •, „./.6 • 1 1 1 1 yd4. ° . 1 11 I tl 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 , 16463(1 I I I f I I I �V l 1 1 1 1 1 1 L1 l l l l l i l l l 11 LI 1 l' SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION • • TRACT 11B11 =_ BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII I -,- First City Washington, Inc. ^ 0-31-91 °f°" 5 Story Office Elevations (BLDG. IIF°) NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-'91 8 . . . _ ..--• -- ..__ • I .> . . 66.64 •,,-,.,::: -:-.. -::-,:t:IIMS2 . 6-1[7...4 --- \i r . \• _. . . . . - . . . WEST ELEV . __77/<------ _____------ Tinted Glass Ainted Cancr .anels 115r 1 4 _________________ L_. . . . I I al smiamnesemi,_:, 4 ,, d;'. 111_ *45J - 113321M,--sssillimmi, 1=212m52 m=illEgisml—4.— — 1 NORTH ELEVATION - SOUTH ELEVATION • , 8. mtEsies i ii_____EliagEai Man. . . _ EOM MEM EAST ELEVATION TRACT "Bil . . 1 ---- -: 1-i-4--4§ BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase V11 4 First City Washington, Inc. 10-31-91 •''.A.1f4-t74.,Ht ? 4 Story Garage Elevations NV188041 Scale: 1"=40' _. , . . . , . . . . 0 • AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ' ) )ss. Counts' of King ) WANDA M. BRITTS being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the _ 14th day of January ,1992 affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the, parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 14th day of January 1992 No ary P is in and for the State of Washington, residing ki CM.Am , therein. Application, Petition, or Case V{: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK SA-109-89 (The minutes contain a list of the parties of record.) LB ILD I (PA U N::M NC .................. . The a lication s listed are in order gf.applicat�ori.�umber only and:riotnecessa::y;,::.:.::..::.: :::.,.:::,;:.,:.:.,::.,,:., `:�the. ::w�lf::be:hear »:Items:will::be::called;for::hearin :;attf�.e::dlscretlon::of_tF�e:Heanng;Examiner;:::: :.;;; : :::::::.;:;::: PROJECT NAME: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, PHASES VII/VIII PROJECT NUMBERS: ECF;SA;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SSM-109-89 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a 26.9 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 488,352 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Each of these two tracts is to be developed with office buildings, open and/or structured parking, recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping, and a screen (fencing/landscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. A Special Permit may be requested for site preparation. Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII, are the final projects conceived for the development of an 115 acre office park complex which was initiated in 1979. Three tracts ("A", "B", and"C") are included in these'combined final actions. The project is located north of Oakesdale Ave&West of Naches&7th. hexagnda CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: January 21, 1992 TO: Wanda Britts, Hearing Examiners Office FROM: Mike Dotson, Property Management, _ SUBJECT: Verification of Legal Descriptions for Lux Corporation and Black River Corporate Park We have reviewed the legal descriptions as supplied to this office concerning the subject development sites. In regard to the Lux Corporation legal description, we find that the submitted description corresponds to the map as attached hereto. If the map represents the intended site, then the legal description as submitted is sufficient. In regard to the legal description for the Black River Corporate Park, the legal description is sufficient for the site as shown on the attached map. (Note: it does not include any portion of Tract "A".) If you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at x-6192. Thank you. 92-057.DOC/MDD/bh FIRST CITY — : 'K RIVER CORP. PARK PHASE_ & 8 SA-109-89 1 - - • BUSK, .cOED& HITCHINGS, INC. Legal Description Blackriver Corporate Park [ - That Portion of Tract 13, Washington Technical Center, as recorded in Volume 122 of Plats, Pages 98 through 102, records of King County, Washington, lying Northerly of Southwest 7th Street as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100643, and Westerly of Nachos Avenue Southwest as deeded to the City of Renton by deed filed under Recorder's No. 8702100644, records of said County. First City BRH Job Nos. 86230 & 86083 April 28, 1987 /Yes/ 8S/lf:40/ ALH/Surv. 17, 86230 ‘1,i;L HI Toy, ' QQ of I. N� J410` sir x „0 At tM 0 ..,..,. • 4 • • • 1 L • nzn..-... w scwc.L i !1 • /1 [IV/ ,T` �' j • 54 / •1 e- i• - V+ ll /55\ I 1- ,� •� --�--- .PLAXr MATERIAL LEGEND cts a,a •\ �� ° � ° ,e ,..o. ems, f n- II-I \.' '> ti` i a. `� ' O v++s4 .ry.,s.< ., s+ rrw•4 r. .a va .1% -.1'- \ ',, , I-i-a'u of'-- 0 .,..--.,. •°r,x -r.a,r,.,wnt.e,ra-+( ,w..r, ,d Na-,1. RS r, 7 \�\\ �M1 1 j ! ��/SS�7.a. 1=,••n• ,-w.,rw-tr.w n.-..w -. { O /�.' _ sorooave \ i,.^�. - —T .� •_ ____ + ` 1 I `-' M1./A.4 n•..,w,-,M1a••Mrk aa-a0 .}/s.1•r..rLl. /J -—— —.- ) .. { �`•. ;•o r ro,ar•F Tov+ •.bp n-0,..bredi fw Po,f-,rn,.-,n..F lr+e - 1- ,z) 7 `\ \ -`J k''_tA `' ? 7 i i .pool-rear,f'rnw. b.v 14: N,M. r„na-a. O F-- 11 .f -G.\�-+-f-wv. ,l' T , :Y ,I' I i.i ) - 'wsw+ , i •,cv,.hmo54W nev,. ....hi,-oM6 Q �.• `++ It I. .8 , � • . ... �?►I.. r .\\ i I! !) b.nr.—,b.,d� �m_mo, , U Cr , - ••. / •:: •fi r �' 1 -.'w'. \�\' i� '`�t Ie M! '. �,I II. •, . I I' ..�-w*r ' _> = - ., \ „ J r e•�.c..c•-,r wl, a .F xv a...-o,tt ai,a-,ai d t+.s..-'1,.L E rI `��\ `A ' ., sao_1. . i�I'�\ / ' Jam. ♦ {�I' \ — 'f..." ---; 1 ,X _% �/'/i '1 I,.'u r..a+-•a.1! 4-.01 r.'-,s, ...,-+,a• o 'L r �i 1. /�__^ Kr-- a y, a o % • 1V. II i' _ �'} •I' _ _� ��,��% Ir.. I';1 m , I _ 1� r,ron, :F a...., -n.o,._5'✓"-•1,.+•wf; PH.�. ��• I "\''/', a� .� O �i �� ��•�o�•F.,lr I 'I'�' • _ ,I' iI rt 5, ., I m� �•..w r!{Cr.�-?wv: - Y.I•I ////�/ _ .l ,i; a ,`, ` ' ' r I 1 i i a m [l .1 ., 1,,.w .b-1n'Nf;;,/ '� {�4--- ,�l.- 4 •1:•-../L _ I i e.�e..: t x0 Irw o.�-r,,.��{ f+pWr,n.� I.II: 1 t +' ►': I � • �ti� ( tti A I I '`""^ wm"' ,�..H-r i .••,)• Y 0 a,,.rza-(r • ,�o`a-t . "? I / i J;'[� iy .1 ,i ••' `►' yi f, q 1 \a`� r 0 o-W',,'-'H ,r.rt,.arXfhf Mwi ai---H- r f. I r % /5`' �, �.� �/ ti O�'1 ��.`, .J.'1��11� �• n 0 c fvr+-mr '�' . z`. •• iw ,• ( \^ \ � _ 1 �' K 0 •wo a oe' Ff Y w ,e rg__.v i , • -i1I a i .{i. Ie •�. , Q Fco Ono, fttr•ex?0 WM,/ •rG.A Ir'PI pp cow wr.K--+•-- • /` ,.1,• • '11. • •,04614 IA row I v� y ` ,`�I Ol I`. \!J .,; Z' r' Iwr' rv,+ s„-..e+,+%w_q t !,Oil: •/ /�'�•,:.L ��,: Iw.r.•�i `\ •Z�.� t`•.;'� 'r60���r op- %� ���,.I �' ' l •, :1 •• - - : Pr) •. l ,. :� ,v ��., von•_;. \P t�\a�T .. '; — 1; •. ; ;' ; • :::r ;. f• -R ,ivvr. ,!�, I. r� �il. 'e5.�'DI A i` i. _- —------ r: r4. '1 �''f4 - IC.'''' [[�� !� `• �•-' s v-•ry-aw, dl�' '.•'.:eft �r .�-��_ �,. r.•-_ ,K,o,-.o•, wr< I Iry `.r V 4� •t Y I. - - - .+r���•1 \"4:-.Gr{oY`G '{.has r� • e:••. �,1 -__. <- 4Gu. I ill' �I J K� �1 '.ice �;i�.'•�,Q..:. G t -�-"tn''._k. .-n.,. ',: .I ; `a. �a1 L`s}y �• ,•�;'. •�•�: 1Gdf" _ - -s'•,—�,-p-�. ., =- »•s,...•.,,.�e.b • ,! r�{�� • " i t �*i%r ZI*4. •_ 1- 't+ - - - r `" — ---- �rsre...4�..�,1,4,, �� I, .•7. ,•�i��p _ i '.� r'4 _ ,1,1 �. ,�N l 6'� .r�i -�.� }U'.. :r= I-1 • I V(' .- - - •<n:.,,+m•a a.a. • ` i,�\ d 8101 r , 1.r, ��: t��\ �''� J �`a"�'� r• ^i? --T j.�' - _ 1 - _ `1'., I • ._V�1I[ `�t��I t�l 1 I No.... SR 4,1I1,t j .j'L�VO ♦i�[ b �l -Ira �q . w _C.1Wg .. • ® • = �_ . - .444: t11110-. '' '_. V. voi , `v a. • LANDSCAPE AREA IN BUFFER r ;•r'�` '' _= . i vie , - 1.,,-•'' ' g.r,,cc.ra,=-„ Y� �`r 4,•.• •.. • . III •:za: '.-I ott��!; ' ••mnr,•rG•:az- 1 > � ...:gym ., ,.i `�.. --. -. :''. ,'�'�% �f CORPORATE PARK • - I• .may .,�.�.r ',. �''' - = LANDSCAPE PLAN I ' \" `-'°'r• a?r/ r a` �, RENTON WASHINGTON r { I \c `.` � � i4 Fn FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i , '• It-( / --- I. vo I, • d -- •1••n 0 ..t • .. \ .,M ..,rY• • -: •.•1:. (-Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass , Ty ic -----------__ -- _ _ Mechanical Screen • — ---- ------2- . . ' I •-r.o.),. .,‘, . . •. . . - liflill11T-111111i11.1111111111 ( 11 • . . 1 . 11111111 rtAtti.iwttilimitilli . . ---) • .,---\ --, • -i. 1 i _ , • • , imillitimi 1 1 . ( n f 4 . c"--- . ."i* _ •. 1 111111111- 1 _111_11111.11111111 . i . • . • .ELEVATION. . WEST ELEVATION . • • .,- NORTH - • . _ . - . • .•. . . . . . . . • • - • . . • . • . • . • • . - . • . • . . . , . • ,- _ Exterior insulating Spandrel Panels • .. . • - •—_____ . • - • / — . • l'--/ . , __ • - 1 --1---7-1 ----- \ i , I 1- 1 . l' ii 1111111111 _1 1 1 11 1111- .1 • • 1 . ill 1 I Ill- ; el . timati 1 ' t ttlitui_11_114 - - 1 ----'/-) • 1 • , _ .. . 1 1 11 , 1 11 i ., .-,-,-c----P- . i 1 1 iii J I 4 I I •:;!F7,-;-- , ' - . J , • 1 1 . 1 _ 1 • It , ' III , I , it i 1 i --.7-...-11 11 ' li iii 1 I 1 1 1 1 1111 11111 1 I .L.' • ' • - • . - • • SOUTH ELEVATION - - , EAST ELEVATION • . •,::_ .., • . . . . . . . •.-- - . • - . •• • . . • . • • . . . - • • • . •. . • . • .• . . :. . • • - TRACT. 'B" • • . • . •. ..t;•-g.„.•,..-t-4::&-,..iw:i‘zto.• BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII. • .. jai First City Wa . shington, Inc, islivwsivrA . 10-31-91 1-t."-- 3.tmossooputp... . . 5 Story "-40' 1-30-191 7;S:.*•',Ve-YzIfi:1 Office Elevations (BLDG. "D") NW88041 Scale: 1 - .,.. . - • • . en. • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT: First City Washington PROJECT NAME: Black River Corporate Park, Phase VII and Phase VIII FILE NUMBER: ECF;SA;SSM;SP 071-88(Phase VII -Tract B); ECF;SA;SSM;SP 109-89 (Phase VIII -Tract A) LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. Two tracts (portions of Tract"A" • and the entire acreage of Tract"B"are Included in this application. A portion of Tract"A"and the entire acreage of Tract"B"are planned for development with an office park complex. This complex is to be located on a 24.03 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including a 363,136 square foot portion of Tract"A"and all of Tract"B"at 683,762 square feet). Each of these two tracts is planned to be developed with office buildings, open and/or structured parking, employee recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping, fencing and landscaping which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the development based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River corridor (P-1 Channel). A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. A Special Permit Is being requested for site preparation. A 3.73 acre portion of Tract "A"will be purchased by the City, using municipal funds; this acreage may be Improved by the City at a future date in an as yet undetermined manner. A 32.5 portion of Tract "C" will be purchased by the City; this acreage Is not planned for development, but Is intended to serve as a natural preserve. The City also has an option to purchase the balance of Tract"C,"which may be subject to future development applications if not purchased by the City. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: First City Washington 2. Applicant: First City Washington 3. Existing Zoning: Office Park 4. Existing Zoning In the Area: Office Park, Manufacturing Park, Public Use 5. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Office Park 6. Size of Property: 24.03 acres (Property to be developed) 7. Access: Oakesdale Avenue 8. Land Use: Vacant 9. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Black River Riparian Forest; P-1 Channel East: Office and Manufacturing Uses South: Office and Manufacturing Uses West: METRO Treatment Plant; Manufacturing uses C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action File Ordinance Date Initial Annexation -- 1745 4-14-59 Amended Annexation -- 1764 5-27-59 Amended Annexation -- 1928 12-22-61 Rezone to Office Park -- 4020 10-13-86 j 4 . y , s REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vlll PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 2 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities a. Water: A twelve Inch water main Is located on Oakesdale Avenue. b. Sewer: A twelve inch sanitary sewer line runs southeast along the portion of Oakesdale Avenue which abuts the subject property. c. Storm Water Drainage: An existing twelve Inch storm sewer traverses Oakesdale Avenue S.W. adjacent to the subject site, leading into an eighteen Inch storm sewer on a portion of Oakesdale Avenue located south and west of the site. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: Metro Routes #163, #240, #340 and #912 serve Grady Way, approximately 3/8 mile from the site. No transit service Is now available on Oakesdale Avenue. 4. Schools: Not applicable. 5. Recreation: Fort Dent Park is approximately one-half mile west of the subject property. A par course Is located on Oakesdaie Avenue (provided by First City with a previous development). E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-31-16, Office Park Park(O-P) District. 2. Section 4-31-33, Site Plan Review. 3. Section 4-10;4-31-27, Mining, Excavation and Grading. 4. Section 4-31-34, Landscaping Ordinance 5. Section 4-14, Parking and Loading Ordinance 6. Section 4-22, Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance 7. Section 4-9, Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1. Green River Valley Plan, City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Compendium, 1986 (pgs.31-50). 2. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Compendium, 1986 Environmental Elements, (pgs.8-11); Industrial Goals, Objectives and Policies, (pgs. 18-19);Commercial Goals, Objectives and Policies (pgs. 15-18); Urban Design Goals, Objectives and Policies, (pgs. 11-13). 3. City of Renton Shoreline Master Plan, Sections 2,4,6 and 7. 4. Memorandum of Agreement, November 20, 1991. G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1. The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a 24.03 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (with the project to be located on a portion of Tract A totalling 363,136 square feet and on Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Each of these two tracts is to be developed with office buildings, open and/or structured parking, employee recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Springbrook Creek and Black River corridors (P-1 Channel). A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. A Special Permit application (for grade and fill) has been submitted to be employed as/if necessary to support site preparation activities. A 3.73 acre/162,400 square foot portion on the western side of Tract "A" will be purchased by the City, using municipal funds. The. City is agreeing to assume full responsibility for this area, which is contaminated (as defined by the Model Toxlcs Control Act), and other areas where the City deposited dredge spoils and excavated soils from the P-1 Pond. This parcel of.land is also potentially suitable to serve as a wildlife habitat (MOA Section 1.18). Following segregation of the contaminated area on Tract"A", a 363,136 square foot portion of that tract will remain in private ownership and available for development. prelmrpt REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER • Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vill PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 • Page 3 • Tract"C", (46.75 acres) which Is partially a riparian forest, Is located to the north of Tracts "A" and "B". At this time, the City has agreed to purchase a 32.5 acre portion of this tract with government monies from a variety of funds (METRO Plant Expansion mitigation funds and King County Open Space monies). This area of the tract will be preserved, under provisos developed In the MOA (Section 1.18) to protect wildlife habitat and wetlands abutting the subject site. The City also has an option to purchase the 14.2 remaining acres of that tract; specific plans for purchase and/or use of that acreage have not been developed and are not a subject of consideration In this application. In addition, natural and/or buffer areas will be required to be provided on Tract "A" and Tract "B" (as set forth In MOA section II.B); the size and acreage of these areas is described in the MOA (11.B.2. and 11.113) and is discussed in detail in Sections G.4. and G.5. of this report. The MOA (Sections 1.4; 1.8; II.B.) describes consideration of public shoreline access within these tracts under the aegis of the Shoreline Master Program,and in coordination with the City's proposed Open Space/Wildlife Master Plan. Schematic site plans have been provided by the applicant. Typically more detailed architectural, landscaping, and engineering plans will be submitted with the building permit applications. However, as the MOA (Section II.D.5.) stipulates, vesting has occurred with the signing of the Memorandum of Agreement. Based on the MOA stipulations (Sections II.A.3; II.C.; II.D.2/3), the analysis provided and measures proposed herein (except those required by Code) shall not, restrict the appearance, siting, construction or operation of this development. Under the MOA (Section II.D.2: , the project being developed on Tract "A" (that portion which remains under the ownership of First City) and Tract "B" is to be implemented in phases. The construction of the first office building Is to begin within three years of the Hearing Examiner's approval of the site plan; the construction of the fifth office building is to commence within eight years of that approval. There are no requirements for the sequence of building,construction or for development of one tract to be completed prior to building on the other tract. These development periods are different from those periods normally permitted under the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance, as a result of a settlement negotiated as a part of the MOA. (Note: The site plan currently under consideration is revised from the original application materials [1988/1989]. The applicant seeks site plan approval for a complex with five office buildings and one parking structure on two tracts -- Tract "A" and Tract "B". Each tract will include parking, employee recreation areas, Interior and boundary landscaping. !I 2. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21[C], 1971, as amended), environmental review was undertaken as described below: At initial submittal (1988), the then proposed Phase VII of the Black River Corporate Park office park 1 complex Included development on Tract "B" only. With revisions, as suggested by the City, development was added to Tract"A" (Phase VIII). In 1989, a site plan was submitted which Included three buildings on each tract. Environmental review was formally undertaken. At that time, a Determination of Significance was issued, based upon likely land use/shoreline Impacts; aesthetics; Impacts to earth, air and water; impacts to the natural environment (with particular attention to a nearby heron rookery); transportation impacts; historical/archaeological Impacts; environmental health Impacts, and public facilities/utilities impacts. An Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by Jones & Stokes for the proposed developments on Tract"A"and Tract"B". The EIS was issued in March, 1991. A Mitigation Document was established by the Environmental Review Committee, in May 1991, based on that EIS. The Document was appealed by First City, the proponent, and by a group representing several Puget Sound area environmental protection organizations(e.g.,The Audubon Society). In response to these appeals, the City appointed Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney; Jay Covington, Executive Assistant to the Mayor; and John Webley, Director of the Community Services Department to negotiate an agreement among the appellants. The parties developed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA),dated November 20,signed by the Mayor and the appellants;this MOA Is attached for reference. The MOA serves as an Addendum to the EIS, reflecting: a).changed conditions in the vicinity of the site (e.g., eagle predation in the heron rookery); b) modifications to the proposed development plans for Tract "A"and Tract "B"; and c) the inclusion of portions of Tract "C" to be purchased by the City and to be set aside as a habitat preserve. The MOA also serves as a revised Mitigation Document for Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII, pending approval by the Hearing Examiner. 3. Representatives of the various City departments have reviewed the application materials to Identify and address land use impacts anticipated from the schematic developments. Comments have been Integrated Into the text of this report. 4. SITE PLAN APPROVAL CRITERIA: Section 4-31-33(D)(1) lists ten criteria that the Hearing Examiner is asked to consider along with all other relevant Information In making a decision on a Site Plan application. These Include: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan,its elements and policies; The office park complex is permitted under the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Office Park for this site. • em. '7 I REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vill PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 4 The Green River Valley Area Plan calls for the development of office uses In this section of the community. Proximity of similar, compatible uses and accessibility to major thoroughfares also enhance the appropriateness of the site for an office complex. It Is anticipated that the area will continue to be designated for office/industrial uses following revision of the Comprehensive Plan, owing to the value of having related developments located contiguously,and due to the accessibility of properties In the area to major roadways. The MOA (Section 1.24) outlines the manner in which the planned development addresses relevant Comprehensive Plan elements, including Commercial Uses (V); Urban Design (III), and Environmental Elements -- such as open space (I.C.) and preservation of wildlife habitats (I.D.) through the protection/enhancement of the Black River riparian forest, P-1 Channel, Springbrook Creek, selected wetlands, and habitat areas. The MOA (Section 1.24) also lists other City policies and programs which are "the basis for the environmental conditions"therein. b. Conformance with existing land use regulations; The intended office complex is described and limited in the MOA (Section 11.111) so that the applicant will be allowed, in the development of Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII, to construct two buildings on First City's portion of Tract "A" and three buildings (plus a parking garage) on Tract"B". The planned development, as allowed under the MOA, Is a principally permitted use In the underlying Office Park designation on the Land Use Map (Office Park Zone [4-31-16]). The presented schematic site plan generally addresses development standards for Office Park uses (4-31-16), such as lot coverage and building heights. However, landscaping Ordinance requirements have been modified/waived under the MOA(Section II.B.4). (See Section G.4.) Modifications to the applicant's number of proposed parking spaces will be necessary to achieve compliance with the Parking and Loading Ordinance (4-14); these modifications will be discussed below In this report. (See Section G.4.f.) c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses; The planned Black River Corporate Park development(based upon the below described schematic plan as revised in conjunction with the MOA) is generally consistent with existing and proposed land uses on surrounding developable properties In the vicinity of the site. Those properties Include private office complexes (e.g. Washington Technical Center, Boeing, Black River II - IV), and private industrial uses (e.g. Container Corporation). Public uses are also being developed or refurbished in this area. Project Description The schematic site plan being reviewed herein Includes two office buildings on Tract"A" (Buildings B&C, each at 64,000 square feet/four stories), open parking, and employee recreation areas. Tract"B" schematic plans indicate that development will include three office buildings (Buildings D &F at five stories and Building E at four stories). Building D is to be 91,550 square feet. Building E is to be 78,350 square feet and Building F Is to be 116,400 square feet. This tract will also Include a four-story parking garage, open parking, and on-site recreation. Landscaping will be provided In accordance with section 1113.3 of the MOA. Site layout is to be in accordance with section II.B.I of the MOA and buffering in accordance with section 113.2 of the MOA. Schematic landscape plans have been submitted and approved. Impact Analysis Staff have Identified potential Impacts (as generally defined In the Site Plan Review Ordinance) from the intended development to the surrounding built and natural environments. The Green River Valley Area Plan calls for the development of office uses, such as the planned Black River Corporate Park complex, in this section of the community. A number of similar, compatible uses exist on nearby properties. Based upon the proximity of the Black River Riparian Forest (which hosts heron nests), particular attention has been directed in the MOA to the preservation, creation and enhancement of native habitat. For example, the development is located at a minimum distance of 600 feet from the heron rookery (MOA- Section 1.22; MOA- Exhibit E) --except for a portion of the garage and Its related improvements. The reduction in the buffer which had been recommended in the initial Mitigation document is supported in the MOA by the Inclusion of portions of Tract "C" as a preserved natural area and by the addition of buffers/preservation of natural areas which provide significant and substantial wildlife habitat. prclmrp! REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vill PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Pal ge5 The MOA (Section II.A.2) establishes any required monitoring of the Tract"A" and Tract "B" Buffer Areas and the Natural Area (including wildlife habitat areas), during construction and operation of the office park complex, to ensure the preservation of those sensitive areas. This section of the MOA enables the City to participate appropriately in the monitoring process. Based upon the schematic plans, and to supplement environmental mitigation measures • established in the Memorandum of Agreement, staff have recommended site plan conditions generally described below (and fully delineated In Section H of this report) for Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vili. These conditions are recommended with the understanding that measures proposed herein (except those required by Code) are consistent with the MOA(Sections II.A.3; II.C.; II.D.2/3). o A commitment to Install hydroseeding if building does not follow site preparation within the same building season.. o Development of an exterior lighting plan,which in addition to including a sufficient number of lighting fixtures to adequately illuminate the development within the site (MOA Section II.G.2.), ensures that down light standards are used as the Illumination sources. o Installation of a landscaping buffer (MOA Section II.B.3). Laurel hedges have been approved for this purpose. Alternatively, and with the approval of all signatory parties to the MOA, the applicant could select native, drought resistant vegetation (such as dogwood, elderberry, vine maple) as a supplement to "one row of evergreen shrubs such as laurel". li d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the subject property; Staff have Identified potential impacts (as generally defined in the Site Plan Review Ordinance) from the intended development to the subject site in the following areas: land use, aesthetics, wildlife habitat, . environmental health (e.g. noise, light/glare) transportation, and public services/utilities. These impacts are addressed in this section and in other appropriate sections of this report (e.g., G.4.f; G.4.g; G.4.h; G.4.i). in reviewing the'schematic plans, staff note that for the combined development (Tract"A"and Tract "B"),the various office structures, parking areas, landscaping and recreation areas appear to have been coordinated in a manner which is generally compatible with site characteristics. For example, the, tracts are generally sufficiently large and appropriately configured to allow the planned project. The terrain on which development is planned is essentially flat;the underlying soil (both native and fill) can support the intended structures. At the present time, the site Is vacant, and thus no development will be displaced. The site is located in a flood plain, however, site improvements and finished floor elevations are well above the flood plain area. Proposed design features for the office buildings create an attractive, functional development, including the respective siting (location, set backs) of the office buildings, similar size and height • among structures, thematically Integrated exterior materials, articulated facades, and selected glazing materials which reduce Impacts to wildlife habitats. The MOA (Section II.E.4/5) permits First City to fill approximately 0.14 acres of wetlands on the subject property but requires the applicant to mitigate for the proposed filling on Tracts"A"and"B" . . by creating new and/or enhanced wetland area adjacent to the old Black River channel on Tract"B" . . . (based on a) schematic wetlands mitigation plan . . . submitted to the City as part of site plan approval." A buffer averaging 50 feet(but no less than 25 feet) around the old Black River channel wetland on Tract "B"is also required. The mitigation plan is consistent with the guidelines established by the State Department of Ecology(and.generally employed by the City of Renton)for protection of the habitat. This improvement plan is also consistent with enhancement/preservation plans established for other local developments. Wetland monitoring plans are established as well. The applicant has provided schematic upland landscaping plans for Tract "A" and Tract"B" or the Intended development, including introduced Interior and boundary landscaping, a "buffer area" of "landscaped and natural vegetation, and preservation of a "natural area" adjacent to the buffer area, (each element of which is as described In the MOA Section 11.6.2 and In Section G.4.c. of this report). As noted in Section G.4.c., the MOA (Section II.B.3) calls for the applicant to extend the 30 foot wide landscaping buffer from the Buffer Area to the parking garage exclusive of the fire lane area as shown in gray on the schematic site plan. Staff have, In order to address impacts of the project to the site, Identified and established recommended conditions as listed below for Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII. These conditions are intended to comply with the MOA (Sections II.A.3; II.C.; II.D.2/3) and may be incorporated Into plans which are to be generated under the aegis of the MOA. • o Drafting and submission of a "hold harmless" agreement which releases the City from liability for any flood damage to the site (also see G.4.I) occasioned due to the finished flood elevations and site improvements not being installed above the flood plain as has been proposed by applicant. x 'r prelmrpl REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING . December 17, 1991 Page 6 o Wetland enhancement/restoration shall occur In conjunction with wetland filling. This condition Is established in order to: a) ensure protection of wetland size and quality; and b) control erosion. o Hydroseeding (with appropriate native plant materials) each tract In conjunction with site preparation activity on disturbed portions of each tract should development not follow after site preparation in the same building season. This condition is established in order to control erosion as required by the Site Plan Review Ordinance,the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance and the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance. e. Conservation of area-wide property values; The Black River Corporate Park office complex is not expected to have a negative Impact on area property values as the project will result in the: 1) development of now vacant parcels, thus increasing property value; and 2) development of a project which Is anticipated to be compatible with uses on neighboring properties. Also likely to conserve property values is the purchase by the City of environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. portions of Tract "A" and portions of Tract "C" to be preserved as a wildlife habitat). These purchases should serve to assist in buffering"working" areas of the project from the Black River corridor,designated as a"natural"area by the Shoreline Master Program. f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; The Transportation Systems Division reports that, when fully developed, as originally proposed, Black River Corporate Park (Phases VII/Vlii) is anticipated by City calculations to generate approximately 6125 ADWVTE (ITE Transportation Report). A building has now been dropped from Tract"A," and so the number is diminished somewhat. Evaluation of transportation impacts to the site and abutting roadways from Black River Corporate,Park Phases VII/Viii was provided In the EIS. Local/Regional Circulation Impacts Mitigation measures have been established in the MOA. Briefly,the MOA calls for a Transportation Management Plan, which is described In the document (MOA Section II.F.2; MOA-Exhibit J), and which is"to be implemented at the time of building permit." The MOA(Section 1.4) also designates credit for an historical dedication by First City of ten acres of property for the construction of Oakesdale Avenue and other nearby streets, and a historical contribution of three million dollars to an LID for the construction of Oakesdale Avenue; no additional transportation mitigation measures are Included in the MOA. Provisions in the MOA are sufficient to address local and regional transportation impacts. As directed by the MOA (Section II.G.3.), at the time of construction permit review, staff will establish reasonable measures controlling hauling hours/routes for construction vehicles, to address off-site circulation impacts, in a manner which is consistent with restrictions for other area developments. On-Site Circulation Impacts Based upon review of schematic site plans, staff believe that the safety and efficiency of on-site circulation would be Improved by marking on the site plans the pedestrian paths linking structures to one another,to parking areas,to employee recreation areas and to the public right-of-way. Parking and Loading [4-14] • Under the schematic site plan, approved In conjunction with the MOA (MOA- Exhibits F and G), the applicant is permitted to develop 128,000 square feet of office space on Tract"A" and 286,300 squareieet of office space on Tract"B", exclusive of the parking'garage. The Parking and Loading Ordinance (4-14) calls for 544 parking spaces for Tract "A" and 1217 spaces for Tract "B." The applicant has proposed 571 stalls for Tract "A" (27 more than the permitted 544 stalls). For Tract"B", 1359 stalls have been proposed including approximately 900 stalls in the garage and the remainder in open parking areas or 142 more than permitted by Code. Staff believe that the above-described parking reduction is necessary to help to ensure the effectiveness of the Transportation Management Plan by limiting vehicular trips to/from the site, and to achieve the staff's interpretation of the Parking and Loading Ordinance concerning building efficiency and parking reserves. The MOA (Section II.F.4) permits First City to provide parking on Tract"A"for Tract"B" employees, should such service be necessary during construction activities on Tract "B". Off-site parking within 500 feet of the subject site is permitted under the Parking and Loading Ordinance. Parking on Tract "A"for Tract"B" employees may not reduce parking for Tract"A" employees without prior city approval. • pr"Imrpl REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 7 g. Provision of adequate light and air; Based upon the schematic site plan provided by the proponent to the City, it appears likely that Impacts to light and air circulation on the site have generally been addressed by: 1) conceptually adequate separation between buildings; 2)the provision of open active employee recreation areas; and 3) provision of passive open spaces. h. Mitigation of noise,odors,and other harmful or unhealthy conditions; Air Quality: Air quality impacts may potentially occur as a result of: 1) construction activities; and 2) operation of vehicles. To address operations impacts to employees and passers-by, the MOA contains measures to allow constraints which limit Impacts from vehicle operation on the site. Conditions reported in the MOA and recommended by staff include: 1) a Transportation Management Plan;and 2)venting of the parking garage. Noise: The development is anticipated to result in the generation of noise type/level which is typical of Impacts anticipated from construction and operations of this office complex. Because the corporate park Is generally planned so that structures, employee parking and other features are well-coordinated with abutting land uses, sound Impacts are not anticipated to be significant to nearby occupied sites. The schematic site plans generally depict a project design which orients employee work centers and vehicle travel corridors away from environmentally sensitive areas. The parking garage will be closed on the'north facade. In addition the buffer area and natural areas are designed to provide a visual and noise buffer to sensitive wildlife habitats. Light and Glare: The MOA and the schematic site plans generally Indicate an intent to locate the proposed complex so that structures, service areas and their attendant lighting are sufficiently separated from environmentally sensitive areas and improved in a manner which limits impacts to those areas. For example, window glazing is planned to be non-reflective minimize light/glare Impacts to the local fauna. Landscaping (native vegetation and introduced plantings) will also limit light/glare impacts from vehicles. Illumination sources on the lighting fixtures will need to be down light standards. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use;and Public services and public utilities are generally available to serve the site, with a combination of standard Improvements required by;regulation,and with special Improvements required as a result of specific site characteristics,described below. 9 o Storm Water Management A conceptual storm water management plan has been established under the MOA (Section II.E.),which calls for compliance with the City's Surface and Stormwater Drainage Ordinance, including the "use of wet ponds, biofiltration swales, and any required downstream analyses." This section of the MOA further states that "review and approval of First City's schematic drainage plan will occur at site plan approval, but this approval shall not . . . Impose requirements which exceed or are Inconsistent with this Agreement . . . that run-off from (the project)will enter the P-1 Pond without detention." Design/engineering of specific features (such as wet pond configuration, containment of contaminants generated by vehicles) will be established at Issuance of construction permit under requirements established In the MOA. The applicant is also to receive credit for detention/retention requirements for a historical dedication of 17.5 acres of the original 115 acre site for the establishment of the P-1 Pond. The MOA (Section II.E.3) calls upon the applicant to contribute its proportionate share to the City for the implementation of any water quality management plan to reduce Impacts on the P-1 Pond. Credit may be given for prior land dedications. o Emergency Services The City generally has sufficient resources to provide police services to the site, with standard, Code-mandated improvements (e.g. accesses, signage, building Identification, illumination). However, In order to reduce service calls to the site and to Increase efficie^^"during service calls, the Police DepartmQnt has recommended that the following featui >e incorporated into the parking garage: pen stair wells with glazing material on ea.... Jevel; b) emergency telephones on eacl. ._:al; and c) a reasonably priced and erelmml REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING , December 17, 1991 • Page 9 b. Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance requirements for the underlying existing Office Park use designation? The general compatibility of the planned/schematic development with the underlying Office Park use designation is reviewed in Section G.4.b of this Report. c. Compatibility with site and vicinity land uses? The subject site is presently vacant. The general compatibility of the planned/schematic complex with site characteristics and with vicinity land uses is reviewed in Section G.4.c and G.4.d of this report. d. Compliance with the Shoreline Master Program The Shoreline Master Program includes both general goals/policies for development adjacent to shorelines of state-wide significance, as well as setting specific guidelines for commercial uses adjacent to shorelines, including SMP Sections 4.01, 4.04, 5.02, 5.04, 6, 7.05, and 7.17. The Memorandum of Agreement (Sections 1.4; 1.8;and II.B) describes the ways in which the Black River Corporate Park complex compiles with various local/state policies and guidelines which have been identified as significant in the MOA. • Office Complex Based upon the schematic site plan, the development Is designed and sited to address use compatibility and aesthetics as required by the Shoreline Master Program. Development set backs meet or exceed set back requirements (7.05.02) from water's edge on all riparian corridors. Section 6.06.01 of the Shoreline Master Program calls for developments to preserve unique features and wildlife habitats and Incorporate those features into the development. Based upon the schematic landscaping plans, Including preservation and enhancement of wetlands, buffer areas and natural areas (as described In Section II of the MOA), these criteria appear to be generally addressed. Public Access Section 5.04.01.A. of the Shoreline Master Program states that the objective of the Urban Environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing for public use, especially access to and along the water's edge. Section 5.04.01.D. of the Program states that In order to "enhance waterfront and ensure maximum public use, Industrial and commercial facilities shall be designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities . . . and access points. . . linked to non-motorized transportation routes." Other Program policies also address public access requirements. For example, Policy 4.01.02(A)(2), calls for preference to be given to uses which . . . provide public access; Goal 4.04.01 calls for increasing public accessibility to shorelines; Regulation 6.04.01 calls for trails for public use, Regulation 7.05.01.C. calls for Incorporation of public access opportunities; and Regulation 7.17 which establishes criteria for trails. The MOA (Section 113.1) stipulates that design and implementation of an additional public access plan may be provided but will occur at a later date when the City has completed an "Open Space/Wildlife Habitat Master Planning Process" and has "adopted a final Master Plan for that area." This implementation schedule Is reported to have been established so that public access can be coordinated with accesses selected under the Open Space/Wildlife Plan. Staff supports the concept of coordination of public access activities. In order to address the Shoreline Master Program requirements at this time, and still provide opportunities for coordination of public access under the Open Space/Wildlife Plan, staff will recommend that: I) First City provide an easement within the first 40 feet at the southeast corner of Tract"A" at Oakesdale Avenue to allow pedestrian access from Oakesdale Avenue to the 60 foot wide strip of interceding shoreline property owned by the City; and Ii) the City, as a co-signator of the MOA, consider whether or not to permit this corridor, which parallels the shoreline,to be used as a pedestrian public access trail. Staff will call for the access trail on the First City tract and the maintenance road to be gated and signed for the purpose of prohibiting public access during the months when nesting and/or fledgling activities are taking place in the vicinity of the trail; this is consistent with plans for gating the maintenance road which are stipulated In the MOA. The City will install any necessary improvements and hold First City harmless from any claims, causes of action or damages arising from the installation or operation of this shorelines access. This plan will facilitate the installation of an additional public access if provided for In the master planning process. e. Compliance with the Mining, Grading,and Excavation Ordinance? Not applicable. 6. SPECIAL PERMIT: The applicant is seeking a Special Permit (Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance 4-10; 4-31-27) to ailc xcavatlon and grade/fill activities in or to prepare the site for the above- described developme prior to the issuance of construction/build , _ aermits. nrnlmml REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 8 functional security system which enables the garage to be closed and locked. In keeping with the MOA (Section II.D.4.), specific design plans for these Improvements will be reviewed and approved with the construction permit. o Recreation I' The applicant has included active and passive recreation areas on the site (seating areas, horseshoe court) and has provided access to a par course Installed In conjunction with earlier phases of Black River Corporate Park. For Phases VII/VIII, there will be additional passive recreation centers such as picnic tables and benches as shown on the schematic site plan as approved by the Parks Department. Showers should be provided In buildings as well to accommodate employees using the par course and/or commuting to work by bicycle. Regional recreational mitigation is understood to be achieved by historical contributions of acreage (MOA 1.4)and by public access to and along the adjacent shoreline corridors, as called for by the Shoreline Mitigation Program (see Section G.5 below). o Utilities: City regulations and policies -- e.g., Uniform Fire Code, Comprehensive Water Plan -- set standards for utility services to the,site. There are existing utility lines along Oakesdale Avenue. Specific extension locations and configuration must be coordinated with the Utilities Systems Division to ensure compliance with ordinance requirements. A fire flow analysis must be conducted;a looped connection system may be required for water service. Code-mandated utility Improvements will be required to be installed by the developer. J. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight. The proposed complex is expected to have a generally positive impact on surrounding properties and on the local area as a whole by providing for attractive, functional use of the site and by effective mitigation of off-site impacts. Also likely to prevent neighborhood blight is the purchase/preservation of environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. the contaminated portion of Tract "A" and portions of Tract "C" ) as a wildlife u, habitat. These purchases, which are intended to provide preserved habitats, should serve to mitigate project development Impacts to the Black River corridor, designated as a"natural"area by the Shoreline Master Program. 5. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM: A substantial shoreline management permit is required for Black River Office Park Phase VII/Viil under the City's Shoreline Management Program, based upon the proximity of the Black River corridor (P-1 Channel) and Springbrook Creek,which have been identified as water bodies ' of state-wide significance by the Department of Ecology, and designated respectively as "natural" and "urban"shorelines by the City of Renton, under its Shoreline Master Program. The Hearing Examiner, in reviewing Shoreline Master Permit Applications, is asked to consider the Shoreline Master Program and other related criteria. The following regulations/criteria have been determined to be applicable for consideration in evaluation of the proposed project. a. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan II The general compatibility of the planned/schematic Black River Corporate Park development with the Comprehensive Plan Is reviewed In Section G.4.a. The Shoreline Master Program also requires an evaluation of those provisions of. the Comprehensive Plan which address use/preservation of shorelines. For example, Black River Corporate Park would need to be consistent with Policy 1.A.2. which calls for development to be compatible with the natural environment, with Policy 1.C.2. which calls for natural water bodies to be preserved to retain open space, protect habitats and minimize flood damage, and with Policy planned which calls for preservation of significant natural features. Staff believe that the office park complex,as schematically presented, Is essentially compatible with those policies. I, In order to appropriately achieve compliance with the Intent of the Shoreline Master Program, the II SMA and our Comprehensive Plan, however, staff believe It will be Important to consider providing additional public access to and along the affected shorelines. The MOA(Sections 1.4., 1.8 and II.B addresses a process for providing additional public access to the shoreline through a master planning process;these plans and recommendations are presented In Section G.5.d.of this Report (below). prolmrpt • REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 •- Page 11 • As noted previously, In the event that project construction is significantly delayed beyond the completion of site preparation within each tract, then hydroseeding and other appropriate erosion control systems must be Introduced immediately to prevent erosion and Improve site appearance. • h. Protection of the Public Trust The subject development, as modified by the MOA and with conditions established In conjunction with special permit review, is not anticipated to result In harm the persons or property, and, therefore,would not be detrimental to the public interest. Similarly,the above-described mitigation measures/conditions for site preparation and subsequent construction (or hydroseeding) should ensure that the permitted site preparation activities do not place an undue burden on public services. • C 11A 0 As established in the Memorandum of Agreement(Section 111.B.2.), staff recommend in favor of Black River Corporate Park Phase VII/Vlll (Files No.071-88; 109-89),with the following conditions: • 1. Site Plan Approval • • a. The applicant shall comply with all provisions required by the Memorandum of Agreement of November 20, 1991. b. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance, provide a more detailed storm water management plan for the site to supplement the conceptual storm water management plan which is hereby approved. This plan is to be provided in conjunction with the construction permit application,as described In the MOA. • c. The applicant shall, In order to address Impacts to the natural environment, enhance existing wetlands and provide all wetland plantings in accordance with its wetlands enhancement plan which is hereby approved, enhancement shall occur In conjunction with and at the time of wetland • filling. d. The applicant shall comply with its wetlands enhancement plan. All reporting under this plan Is to be made available to the Development Services Section. • e. The applicant shall, In order to ensure that site development and project operation do not unduly Impact the off-site wildlife habitat (as mandated under the Site Plan Review Ordinance 4-31-33 D.1.c.) provide to the City's Development Services Division with copies of each and all reports concerning heron activity which are prepared pursuant to the MOA for First City and the Citizen Appellants. • f. The applicant shall landscape the site in accordance with Its landscaping plan which is hereby approved, and the MOA with the location of plantings to be based on schematic plans, dated October 31, 1991. g. The applicant (and its heirs and assignees) shall, in order to mitigate on-site and off-site Impacts, maintain responsibility for replacement of all relocated and Introduced landscaping on Tract "B" exterior of the laurel hedge within the landscape area or the landscape extension as the terms are determined In the MOA and all relocated and introduced vegetation on Tract "A" exterior of the laurel hedge within the landscape area or the landscape extension as the terms are determined in the MOA; this assignment of responsibility shall be confirmed through provision by the applicant (and its heirs and assignees) of a landscaping surety device to protect wetland plantings and landscaping exterior to the laurel hedge within the landscape area or the landscape extension as the terms are determined in the MOA equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be Implemented, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, at the time of the issuance of the construction permit and to continue in force and effect until five years for wetlands plantings and three years for all other plantings exterior of the laurel hedges,following - the completion of all improvements approved In conjunction with this permit application. (Note 1.g.1: The City will be responsible for management of properties under municipal ownership.) h. The applicant (and its heirs and assignees) shall, In order to mitigate on-site and off-site Impacts, maintain responsibility for protection, maintenance and care of all relocated and introduced landscaping on Tract"B" interior of the laurel hedge, and all relocated and Introduced vegetation on Tract "A" interior of the laurel hedge; this assignment of responsibility shall be confirmed through provision by the applicant (and Its heirs and assignees) of a landscaping surety device to protect Interior upland and street boundary upland plantings, equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be Implemented,to the satisfaction of the City Attorney,with the Issuance of the construction permit and to continue In force and effect for three years following the completion of all improvements for each phase approved In conjunction with this permit application). A (Note 1.h.1: -The City will be responsible for manaF^—Int of properties under municipal • ownership.) oretmrD% REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vill PUBLIC HEARING . December 17, 1991 • Page 10 The MOA (Section 1.24) does not establish mitigation for site preparation (filling/grading activities) except to state that the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance was referenced in the preparation of that Agreement. Under Section 4-31-27 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance 4-10- 3(B)(2), a series of basic criteria is established to be used by the Hearing Examiner to determine whether the proposed excavating and filling operations are'compatible with existing/planned future land uses. In addition to achieving compatibility with these below-listed criteria, the applicant will be required to comply with all provisions of the underlying Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance. a. Size and Location of the Activity Approximately 18,000 cubic yards of fill material must be placed. on Tract "A" and 35,000 cubic yards of fill must be placed on Tract "B", including both stabilization of upland areas and filling of wetland (wetlands fill is 450 cubic yards), in order to provide a suitable base for the planned structures/parking lots and related Improvements (e.g., landscaping, sidewalks) within the project envelope. The property is vacant and the1 terrain throughout Is essentially flat, vegetated wetland upland areas. Studies indicate that portions of the various tracts have been filled previously; the existing fill in the development area is free of hazardous materials. The site is located In an area which includes flood plains. b. Traffic Volumes and Patterns In conjunction with proposed import, fill and export activities, an estimated 525 vehicles trips are anticipated to prepare Phase VIII (Tract A)I for development and an estimated 851 vehicle trips are anticipated to prep[are Phase VII (Tract B) for development. These estimates are based upon an average load of 20 cubic yards(which is likely to be hauled in double-trailer trucks). Transportation Impacts (e.g., traffic volumes, haul routes, noise, dust and debris) related to these site preparation activities will be addressed In conditions recommended for construction activity management. c. Screening, Landscaping, Fencing and Setbacks In the event that the building/construction permits for the office building and parking areas are not available at the completion of site preparation, or In the event that the applicant delays construction of the project (or any portion thereof) for a significant period of time, then hydroseeding must occur following site preparation to prevent erosion. The Land Clearing/Tree Cutting Ordinance prohibits vegetation management until the Special Permit is approved and the RVMP is issued. d. Unsightliness, Noise and Dirt The proposed site preparation activities may result In an unsightly environment, and will create noise, dust and dirt. These impacts are considered by staff to have been addressed, in part, In conditions established by the Memorandum of Agreement for management of fill/grade activities and for protection of the natural environment(Section II). A construction management plan,as set forth in the.recommended conditions, shall be required. Staff will recommend that filling activities be supervised by a certified soils engineer. These conditions are consistent both with the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance and with the Site Plan Review Ordinance (4-31-33 D.1.c/d). II e. Surface Water The site is located in the Valley Drainage Basin (in an area where the water table is within a few feet of the surface on portions of the site). Conceptual fill/grade plans submitted by the applicant, mitigation measures established In the MOA, recommendations submitted by staff In conjunction with this report, and Code requirements (e.g. Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance) should serve to ensure that site preparation activities: 1) do not negatively impact the Drainage Basin; 2) are conducted in a manner which allows construction of appropriate specific infrastructure (storm drainage systems and utility systems) at site development;and 3) are conducted in a manner which supports structures, Improvements and impervious surfaces. f. The Length of Time the Application of an Existing Operation has to Comply with Non-Safety Provisions of this Ordinance. Not applicable. g. Reuse of the Site The applicant has provided schematic plans to develop the site with five office buildings, a parking structure and outdoor amenities (e.g. recreation areas, enhanced wetlands). The development applications are being considered concurrently with this Special Permit Application. The Special Permit is intended to allow site preparation while the construction/building permits are under review and/or in advance of installation of buildings planned for later phases. prclmrpl j 7 ) REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/Vlll PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 12 The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties during site preparation, provide a plan with the following components: a) an erosion control element; b)an agreement that a certified soils engineer(selected by the applicant,with City approval,and funded by the applicant, or its heirs or assignees) will make inspections of the site at reasonable intervals during all filling activities; will provide copies of all reports made to the City; and will Immediately report emergencies to the City; c) an element to ensure that hydroseeding of any portion of the subject property that is disturbed is completed In the event that there Is to be any significant delay between preparation and construction of structures. (Note 1.1.1: Filling is to be achieved according to requirements established In the City's Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance.) (Note 1.1.2: No tree cutting or vegetation management may be undertaken except for vegetation relocation for buffering and landscaping until a fill permit and a RVMP have been issued for this site.) The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties, comply with the City's storm water ordinance. k. The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties, provide an agreement to hold the City harmless in the event that flooding occurs on the site because applicant has failed to construct Its finished floor elevations and site Improvements above the flood plain, this agreement is to be approved by the City Attorney prior to the Issuance of any site preparation permit. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate on-site recreation impacts (as based upon 4-31-33.D.1.I of the Site Plan Review Ordinance): I) provide passive recreation centers such as picnic tables and benches as shown on the schematic site plan as approved by the Parks Department; and ii) Install showers within office. m. The applicant shall revise the parking plan to provide a maximum of 544 parking spaces on Tract "A" and 1217 parking spaces on for Tract "B". The plan shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of the first building permit for Tract"B". n. The applicant shall, In order to comply with the Parking and Loading Ordinance, obtain approval for off-site parking plans for Tract "A" and/or Tract"B" from the Development Services Division, In advance of designation and implementation of the off-site parking area to ensure that service to Tract"B"employees does not unduly remove required parking for employees on Tract"A". o. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance 4-31-33.D.1.f, Improve the safety and efficiency of on-site circulation by marking on the site plans the pedestrian circulation paths linking structures to parking,areas, recreation areas and the public right-of-way. The location and dimensions of those linkages will be confirmed prior to the issuance of construction permits, in keeping with the MOA requirement(Section II:D.4.) that specific site plan features be established at that time. p. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, 4-31- 33.D.1.1, to reduce emergency service calls to the site and to Increase efficiency during service calls, Incorporate the following features Into the parking garage: I) open stair wells with transparent glazing material on each level; 11) emergency telephones on each level; and iii) a reasonably priced and efficient security system which enables the garage to be closed and locked. In keeping with the MOA (Section II.D.4.), specific design plans for these improvements will be . reviewed and approved with the construction permit. q. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance, 4-31-33.D.1.1, develop an exterior lighting plan including a sufficient number of down standard lighting fixtures to adequately illuminate the site: This plan shall be approved by the Development Services Section at the time of Issuance of building permits. r. At the time of construction permit application,the applicant shall provide a construction mitigation plan, Including the following elements: 1) an erosion control component; II) .a component for scheduling hours of on-site operations; ill) a component for scheduling hauling hours/routes; Iv) a component for wheel-washing of construction vehicles prior to their leaving the site; v) a component for watering the site periodically to control dust and debris; vi) a deposit of$2,000.00 (to be maintained at that level throughout the activity period) for street cleaning; and vii) a component for providing the street address at the site entrance to facilitate emergency service provision. These plans are to be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department and the Fire Prevention Bureau, as appropriate, prior to Issuance of foundation preparation/building permits and are to be Implemented In conjunction with construction. 2. Substantial Shoreline Master Permit a. The applicant shall comply with all provisions required by the Memorandum of Agreement of November 20, 1991. b. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Shoreline Master Program, enable public access to and along the P-1 Forebay shoreline as provided in the MOA if approved by the open space master planning process. First City shall provide an easement within the first 40 feet of the pielnupl REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII PUBLIC HEARING December 17, 1991 Page 13 southeast corner of Tract "A" at Oakesdaie Avenue to allow pedestrian access from Oakesdaie Avenue to the City's sixty,foot wide shoreline maintenance corridor. The City shall consider permitting access to this corridor area, which parallels the shoreline, to be used as a limited pedestrian public access trail. The access trail easement on the First City tract and the City's corridor are to be gated and signed for the purpose of prohibiting public access during the period when heron nesting and/or fledgling activities are taking place in the vicinity of the trail; this Is consistent with plans for gating the maintenance road which are stipulated in the MOA. The City will Install any necessary improvements and hold First City harmless from any claims, causes of action or damages arising from Installation or operation of this shorelines access. This easement shall be granted prior to the Issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the first structure constructed In conjunction with Black River Corporate Park, Tract"A". This trail (and connecting linkages) shall be preserved and maintained until a permanent public access trail Is developed. 3. Special Permit a. The applicant shall comply with all conditions required by the Memorandum of Agreement of November 20, 1991. b. The applicant shall prepare specific fill/grade .plans, based upon the conceptually approved fill/grade plan, Which fully delineate the type/source of fill and which document the manner In which compliance will be achieved with the Shoreline Master Program and the Mining, Excavating and Grading Ordinance of the City of Renton. These plans shall be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department prior to the issuance of the first site preparation/building permit and are to be in full force and effect during all construction activities. c. The applicant shall provide a construction mitigation plan as detailed In Section I above. d. The applicant shall, in the event that the building/construction permits'for the first phase of the development are not available at the completion of site preparation, and/or In the event that the applicant elects to substantially delay construction of the project (or any portion thereof), upon the completion of site preparation, hydroseed all open areas on the site. NOTE A: The applicant shall be required to comply with all City regulations (e.g. UBC, UFC) and to pay all fees (e.g. utility connections) required in conjunction with the construction and operation of Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. NOTE B: The applicant may need to work with the appropriate state agencies with regards to any required state approvals. . n.nl.nml 1 cif r oifi r-Dv I Sio , DEPARTMa OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUS! WORKS p 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET 5 1991 �N w REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ��( DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 (� COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water • 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health B. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation . 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 71* /4 WcLm 4ôo/I 1/ -le n/v07 or4/ it f 7 �02ii PovM'L 0 sq -/P a7/-a2 M(/' ' '-evP .4/0a)o) ar6T-4 /opnZD ,411/ 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. ROO 14 9/4/ Signature of Director or Authorl ed Representative Date Rev.6/88 envi hl Jik DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU T POLICE DEPARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES f PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION S N BY 5 oOLD BE PROVIDED N NOVEMBER WRITING. G. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: 0, /f/1I/MR APPROVED PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS I)1OT APPROV W/PRO p/al Mfrfr t//a 9 4 ,7taleW-rVa (2ag g°(1 DATE:_ Gj SIGN TUR 0 DIR CTOR OR AU HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 dovrvsni • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: RICe— DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 • APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA-109-89 03otvtstots PROPONENT: First City Development Corp ;;rt'r'''t:t'- PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase.; VIII I `) A �9�1 sic BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: }4i) a LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBAABRLE PROABABLE MORE MINJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Alr 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 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. IN (A ,&h-- 1201' ' Signature of Director or Au horized Ffebresentative Date Rev.6/88 vvrvsi,1 f l DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES �I PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: r APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED DATE: 2j t I SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR‘MITHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 drvivshl I. 1 DEPARTMvENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUELIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 6 V1:? 1 Q DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): :ECF;SA-109-89 PLANNING DIVISION PROPONENT: First City Development Corp CflY O riENTON PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase. VIII OCT 1 8 1991 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: IL:q,:;k::11 'E LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): JIMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR MORE INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Alr 3. Water 4. Plants • 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 1 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: A ! We have reviewed this application with particular Informationneeded to properly assess this proposal. t Is alnd have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional f)/,:ei) Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 , envnmVil, - d ors 0:10 • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: - ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase . •;' VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 2.6 PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES j PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED i I Ifilr/71 DATE: ! l/3— '9/ SIGNATURE 0 DIR CTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS opC :041_�o 0 T NroN N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET 1 ���1,4 A;. �99/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Seu) DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): :ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase. VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: L'bCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR INFORM MORE it IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth • 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health r8. Land &Shoreline Use .9. Housing 10. Aesthetics hi. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 114. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: F TtA Gl2rD coATM,51)r;T- F t. r 6 7( We have reviewed this application with particular tional ittention to those areas niormation is needed toin which we hav expertise properly assess this proposaind have identified areas of probable Impact or areas where a Signa um of DI 'c/.•r or Au ra � zed Representative Date Rev.6/88 • envrvshl 1 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase, VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT '\ DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES E PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: PAN fL1/5V/t Gf� APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS X NOT APPROVED 66 g 67 r4LC// : (e7iti7%ff7'Tc /Ae4-(1 - I ( VV// c 6M) .�/�'r : C/77 `///- '6 rr Tv• A F Ci u F T- /9- ,Pow N y/71 1 cif .tC (t1 01(1-LYs9s 45 A fn/ OF f50ttpoyG- P / T *von n f7MZ, •/ 3/��'� �/��'t-� DATE: f r -12 7/ SI •NATUR , oil DIRE �R OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht DEPARTMEt' JF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUfjt-t7q,Nurt ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SI- hET .VIE W ING DEPARTMENT: S2lkY u41` G� \TE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 'PLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8$1 iOPONENT: First City Development iOJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/Vlli 11EF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently cant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be )veloped with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, ndscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping)which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (Including a :ran rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at ur stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen term and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. le applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River isin.; A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. n Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by le Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts I these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with !spect to anticipated site plan Impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land,use/shoreline impacts. OCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Nachos ITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): APACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE RMATION • IMPACT IMPACT, NECESSARY MAJOR l • Earth • Air i. Water t. Plants i. Animals 3. Energy&Natural Resources T. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing • 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services • 16. Utilities COMMENTS: coG L1CT7c 41 rpd1 /6 l.Ui77//N 7HE j / ,t1,sf/ FS77/ y /34ts//v. a 12.- ' Nell 54N/T'4AY 51m / 'NS i91-oNG ?If/- f °k17'N o% o4hxs,0 f-L-ig' FF0"Nn/v (J O7ff ,d/ 19 S65 7 N 0 $, 55t4 etik Map Met S 55 M J. t hloZXS (2) Ag4/L4A Gg ON No04i e/ 0/' OF DAfS5•54Lg, I�wiNege-i,? ro cowf'/A L°(A7/oN or ThS5- �"' M4M,?Oz-F,5 P"A'//VG plQAU'/N - piQ�=r4ip4T F61s;2 Y vt4p,NG pr1?, n- ri-ePo c.g 7(aq, ~ t'(o'f I N 5 5,14/�A. M ota/r1/ 1 M /Wt Z4. 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. r4 0/#o**f Signature of Di of.J.oduthorIzed Representative Date Rev.6/88 ermvsht ..y Y' {v:•.r r •rlt : �i-f h�r • yy v •':d;. ,,. . Gj. .yb .f riC`r�,•�r'3+1 '�r�� � F �V�. ,, '4�2' .75'V �lr�1�,1'. ` J r"�r�W.- DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC vvORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ,PPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8$1 1 ROPONENT: First City Development ROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII 'RIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a urrentiy vacant 27.76 acre site (Including Tract A at 525.536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, indscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a eron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at )ur stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. he applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River iasin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. ‘n Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental Impacts - these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan Impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. .00ATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC:24 TWNSHP: 23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Nachos "0: . • PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU • POLICE DEPARTMENT • • 1C DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: ' COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Pi-AN APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS j( NOT APPROVED — uI c.ptN - 5> 'lti tS 1a 64-- t/vo¢LL8-zi ./A/ 4 cc .z/)4t MC47' CC2/23' — riNAL A . S/G-N Faa lbv/Lp/!VG- / � �T/ N ►3 U. i N c QN po AW R NG e /T7/ G/ry D P A, N/otY 411.51,T/mac 1r4 rib ANvs (,q7T4c-I//p). PR6'��Lr 5 vl9V ct 7 0 Ott AI0pL/ciro FI -his, 7 eF 4-Tr L 1�p F/S /'5 7' pRovibE <LFA/PFNt,E. Ib6.7e.p'e_rrh► 5 F--t,e,gfiL 4HO of-614-A vp ','y Li I $ 4 Fe LGowd: . ' S '/36744—f f y fw �9 Nso 5704'41 MI/ DATE: -/ SIG ATUR SECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE • REV. 5/90 dMvmh! 1 , \1 - ❑ PLAN 1';y EW ROUTING SLIP 0' DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET OTHER • PPLICANT: )B ADDRESS: ATURE OF WORK: t I COMMENTS DUE WO# 1 ATE RECEIVED BY RECEIVED FROM RoPERTY MGMT. GREEN M ' • C. FEES APPLIED 0 NEED MORE INFORMATION LEGAL DESCRIPTION ' 'I • ' g NOT APPROVED FOR '` 0 FRONT FOOTAGE 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE r APPLICATION OF FEES 0 OTHER �I 0 VICINITY MAP that the fees quoted below will apply to It is the Intent of this development fee analysis to put quoted teesrar/owner due on notice, and payable at the time the construction permit is the subject site upon development of the property. All issued to install the on-site and oft-site Improvements (i.e.undergrtund utilities, street improvements,etc.) LATECOMER COST PRIVATE DEVELOPER HELD PROJECTPER. FIG. FEE LATECOMER AGREEMENT • NO. - O -- WATER ' SEWER OTHER FfG• SAD FEE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT — WATER —0 SEWER OTHER UNITS SUCC FEE SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-WATER Sin le famil residential dweilin unit$940/lot x A artment,Condo, each multi lex unit$545/ea. unit x �/ �� Z 7 • 5-4Commercial/Industrial $.126/sq.ft.of property xS �l (not less than$940.00) • UNITS SUCC FEE SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-SEWER Sin le tamil residential dwellin unit$470/lot x A artment, Condo, each multi lex unit$270/ea. unit x 'Commercial/Industrial $.063/sq.ft. of property x S"Z5536► 3 �� , 7 7 I(not less than $470.00) � 3 Z 6• 3 ! TOTAL: $ 0 x The above quoted fees do NOT Include Inspection fees, side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. rr n ,� � � S l red_ �r n e CMP/7S O/� a u c e S � See. �- j• D. O 2 s 7 -z- 9 DATE - 'Signature of Irector or Authorized Representative 1.0..e...n...,.nw.nti'AA. 1: .•i1I;.,,:'..'.........''.......•'.-,.'•'...•.•.•...••.•;.::,••..'....•...:.:..:'.'-.,..;_....'.'.';:.'..''',.:!..'•'.,:.:..:'.".'„'.•;'.'%.'.yi'•,;i;.:'•,!.;.;'.i,:,.;,..,'.',':,...•";•••..•.!.:.:•.,,'...•,.t:t.11i P,.i,.i''.,:.'(:•' ..,::,•,'.,,,.'....,,..s.........,,,..••....•....••.•'....:...:•..;.:..•.'-•.;:.'•'...,q.,,.,'.,:.•Y.:-.'.•,:-..,...:.,,..:.;•..'.:•",:,.,..'•!.:.,:„,....,........,.'•„....,•....!•..,.:,.:..;..:•.,....':,'•...,„...•.:.iJ,,..',.,i.:......•,..,i..•.;•...,:.‘..::......,y•;'.:•.,„,'••.‘...•.:.....,..'.......••,,'••,,••.:.•.:::'.•..',:,..........•!`:....-...:'.,;.,....:...,..,.....:!;.,.:'..:,;'.,,,.••.•:;:..:,".;.•;.'...;•,..2.!.-.:.;.,'`.:.•1,;.•...:.'°..••:....,..-!...,-:.i,.•:..;,•.:''..:.'.:.'.;:,.:..;r.:!.e..i•..!.•:,..,!.,...,•.,.;..:..‘.•,..........•'..:.'..:..,..;'.•..•.,‘,;"..?.•1..1.1•',.•,";-,s..';,,.'•.:.,i?,,''..,V,.'".ii.i.A..t.;,'iR•:.'':v•,:i:4t'i.".....i.;i,ocrt;i.,..;3:!;•,.r':c,;::,:,.,-•.:,,.,;:.:.rf.,i.1:.;.:';1'H.,''.:,.:.•'.....,•,:1)1.,.,,•.,,4:;,„‘k1,.i.i4';i3::1)'„r71',,,i'-.;,:..r;'3..:,i',-....,„..,. .7 V .S :Ar. .,;'6„4:.;i,:c,.07;!,.;.t..i,.kt'i;,.,i;4c,'.-,7...:•,.„.;1.:.1:.,..,7''..,..;';.;,..4.:.;.'.,..!..,.:,4)':,?.:.;V•.,t.,,.;..:,:..:•...,;..,1.:-..'!.,f t,i...,..'...::..i;.,.:;.::.::-V:..:.:,:•',.p'7,.;.-V.,;..4;;,t,.,v„:.''''.,•,.0..•.:.•.,1r.,.:'‘,.,4,'4,,"..r...r:.j..,...,::,41.;1,(.;.:?,..,.;?:'m2'.•••',e:,•..(•j,;.:.:,•V...1':4;4.,..':,9‘.,,„.:!::....,•1:':'y.A.:,,;;•:...‘!..:::;':i*.,1,!.,f 4-,.!. ,t•v,•!,:ri,,.,O.:.,:',..,.)........:;.;..'.•,..,:...:'i•.,.:,;:,.,:...,:,.‘..'....':•.:..'.•.;,.,J.:•.........:.,..:..n:'...,'::••..•....;.f:‘:)'...::.-.•.:'•..;.,•,':.;;„,.•..:.'•..•.'.:......;.:...•'...,,,:,;••.:.....''.I.:;:•....:.....'...:,."•:'".:'.:—....•1..;,'..,..9...•.:'!;::..:'':.r..i,."g 1..:......'...•..0:,.:.•',',•:.':.'1,:..,'..:•„:..*-,;,..;.-...'...'::...1,L,..,•'.':;0.,•:::.,•.,;%,-,•.:.,..•'..:..!.,.•',•:..•••';.:.,i;A.,.:f.,...:,.•'..;,'l.i...".;..;';'.i,",,.';..:.1.,,:;::1.1.";'.J:•...•;,.,'...':."•.;.•..,,::.,:,.*,:‘-:?...•....::..,•; •f wl u.7 n 'T 1 �t ( `rl r 'f. .1.;' .I'',1 ,1 �r. •11� ;,�; ,:1,;,•:'';',,.•.•.s.,'1:,;;;•.'•.:..,!..•.,?....••.;.:!••.:...'.•.•;,.•..'.',•,.7••,...•;..'.•.•,,';';•..,...i•..::f-•'."•,..:,,,.;2..-.,..:.'....•-.••.'•:..•.!••:..'':...f•,........:•.•.:..;..'.,:•..•....:,,.!....•.::..:.....:•,.:.:,;''•..•,•,,:;,1'.•:.-,•..c..,!•-,„.,'.h' I ,yf' r 1't. ,•t. rl• . ,R' 1 1 •J. 1 4 o.' Yr j., :r. t.." w.y'. !" 5' %J .t' 1 ,''tla q *1 t.. '• 1S 1 ,f- 1'A •Ji :1 •P f, '.I t y: 11'' ' 1 f +hn 1 1'I f t v�i Ir•� ,• 1 , 7hp I.. �'V i Ire 'y �'p,' 1 'f:,1 Ir ,yr t"( R L ,f. .1 I" '!, 'I';':,! 1. ';,. 4..iti,'�':'' „51y;0'( :r i.': '1', ,41i' , t•. ri' ( d t'.' f tf 77' '1.� ..4'.: 1' 1 "5• < 1• r'i hti• 1• 1 r. x- I 1' �f`, I ,u\ a• �L4 "�17- .t R 1 1�1'. 1• !i 'j., '..1 i 1 ,yl' 'S1 r,Al i i��:;,i y o'' r 1 J• ! Ir.rk •A :,A: 1' '.r., a; .A.. 1p -r. r ^d. 1, J'v'. .1'is •�i 4,ri' '.1 •1 •I• 4: 1•,r •J, n\N l L ` 1' 1';' y,' S .ti5:. •l , n, a 1 �r A' :-1 1'• .M1 L� j� J ei iV.: CC4 1 ;{. !r: I'i i 1 �r' r •a� •I r•1 •! •r. a 'i ' L J .'...•.'.•::::..•....,,.':...„;.:.;...•.,'....-?.:•...:-.,:..•...i!...i:.......'y•...:...S....;:.:'•.‘•.•.,.•,.....•.."-.•.;...... .•!:..-•,••.•• .:,•. ,,.•' I! 1. .11v is f'� J Jt- !' �r' t f •r• , :,y •• •i1' ( y� ' r :•41y• • 5�i;'' r i�i i i�. r t :Y11 •,',�. ! , I �'1 DEPARTMEN i OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBL__ NORKS PLANNING LAN ING DIVISIo ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET of nr.:NTON N • ' �`_ ,^._ OCT 1 3 7991 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: l�J DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 """ j APPLICATION NO(S): .ECF;SA-109-89 • PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants • 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: o rc 144CO Cos/f,/)/ ; 'Wont • 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. SI na idof DIi c •, or Aut zed Representative Date Rev.6/88 envrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT.PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: f) ,tj1. t.I APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS x NOT APPROVED 6-ii-i(t Jakp - 5 11411� DATE: (( — 11-7( SIGNATURE OF '1 ' ; ORTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 L ' T II 'devrvshl DEPARTM;:' "' ')F PLANNING/BUILDING/PU,;; 'r WORKS ENVIR-t IIENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW i ET • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 1.0404,- tAtlt- ea DATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 • •\PPUCATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-801 PROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/Vili 3RIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be Jeveloped with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, tandscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/tanscaping)which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (Including a heron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by the Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. LOCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of`Naches SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION 4 IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air • 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals • 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • 14. Transportation 15. Public Services • x 16. Utilities COMMENTS: NET /N Avrrc MoTt5c770 N• p�Q o76G7' lS w i lY//Y /)c2 NTo - -1-1 f-4P 55 (Mfi -0/V C c,h?E' /41/4/L4 , & : f q 6 t A 60G•F_ 5 F4 (Z " w'17Er..a N14/N l9 tHs11( f/,J ) 7.9 ta/sr - o 4hr-s44 tE toil-rF/ corwm tfi-/Y 5 t' Prism c-ffl-ts /oft tb11-1-°ViiniN 'XTV-N5Io N T8OU6/f PRoI°E--N7-y EIS 4-77 -cff,ED I Nfofl4 9"T/dN, 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. Signatu Dire r or Authorized Representative Date • Rev.6/88 • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • CATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8p1 'ONENT: First City Development iECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII =DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex ., a ntly vacant 27.76 acre site.(Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, .caping,recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a a rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen n and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River I. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. nvlronmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by I :nvironmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address Identified environmental impacts octlto anticipated site plan Impacts,s,ur convenlence. At thls and that you suggest measures s to mitigate we are s hosethat land use/shoreli review the ne proposedprojects with p ATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th Eat of Oakesdale and West of Naches PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES j DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES 4 • PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION • _OTHERS: • • )MMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE )MMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON JUNE 10, 1991. :VIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: FAA-N A F-1141 • APPROVED •APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ,XNOT APPROVED INAfrig/t4/11/4 NA 41-/G-/kl 1151YrI X Q v//dr_/Y7'� cr4N/Yo7 f8 DriTSN/st1D P CiNTc A r!/4F_FLCLv AF---qu/l,',( , 7- /S .41_c_t, ? lay 741E F►NF / Th1F 4R Rv!Ir wXcF,r DS S°O 60,1 r o Ao1aD IQvt iA , 13 ND !� �v 1NG1wA-TicQ/41,4lhr 'PILLr.�• foLy6e.lpio 04,41.15 AMA/h15, ;He in of IQvN1rN lAwier 2 4G,t1 pN5/74,Aivs/PE 4)4 4N R av/em s /Nyrgc� �r kt/AT -R M/41 N .1 /5'-A 0064, ?44E /0i A" 'R77, 5444 7h4E TLt�N O r A j6 1°1-41y. PC,R/ -4 - //YColvocR,1'T , /4',c Tiro Milt) T jQo�l ?h`� c�ti1�' .bE5/G-N .D A4WING-S•�rC�4 cE �fi.v ��ivie�r fi s(s r97�rA 1 Su��F.-G'f- 9 14LLr i4y°J° -14 0-1 ^:i- Net "AP'1Nt' 77} 67 4,4 D 'ibri4 `7 YC- ,, �fi4NAA�tnS 71�12 5 ySTl„/!'t 1� DATE: 4^it `q •I NATU F ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 5. tild4 i�n iiy cc}� 1--Xxisic�y s V�i .Ti- $N C' T/4'T7 -S /r 5 /? -41/mq/f�p /3 y REV.5/90 •vrvfhl ( 1 ,T try 0 �/(� {�`C t, ply, d• • • LI I; . aq • �. 3 • .I \ \- ;„.. ,,,:r. 1 )' Gr •-- L�/_fI Ii.„ ,5,\. ` �\ N. f i,.panel 1 MM r _ __\_iI Jinn, )1_T \\ nCaOl MY rK Izo, 5, ...,.. a•�r .. ,pJ i 1 1 iii7k, -_5i I s_QN7Msr L__ )b� l ,t, • �:. ... .. .!ri. ., ... • , f ,_5_,__ .- IL'Ib sr—�-'-`= l_.?�..J C__... I ;II'''.sl - - ` 2'Y , J svlle IC'..)f.'•'Rv ) y /.. 4./. I ,.. .„,, , IM ,,, r . . J .. \ 1._ If "� II u f`lr -}car .)(I iln�f !j ,.. ,,, r 7 1 .(1 / ,a i.II,.I 1 11_»n.Il[S-A... t] ir, 1� 1I � ' IIl II - , L,kn'• ;,i. ): .,.•1� 11 1 i i IIIY R1 II • '�.c(I�.1,./,174p\ / HI II• I}/II IAI1.:I � j1117i11 I. YtlI I. It 1` II N !U —I I Or t(��`?1,., >,5„ .h I I `�,li ".` -I i1 W, 1 s-sa-... ` . \1 1 ill .ew»� A" S.i„, -,P-v. _11 �r•p�' I �51 i , Sud I �t,,.t' rl. --. ..... L kill.Its It,�l.,.a,.l t , •I,Alin "' �, •m st 'k it,,... I; it �il • II:�, f,. . MF1,\)`_Il ' iaT '_ r.o rr,,, t; ifyjii,...„ l not w I ; :Z bAt �l� I '� i '' tirtklif —.�•- .. �'1 ,.ICI' /: '\ J,� I.•.. �e-1 � �4 ii 1... pr1.�� ,a••RtAU 1: 1 �`r 4. p•., loll 1. ♦ `ems r} •- ,ii .. . 1i I oil ' tom,•.kill inaN 147E ' • •• \lir ? i III Ss 16 , siIFF : , , : .26 ii. • ' ; 1,0 W aiNIdTlI r+ ;49) `' i ' j. ; , ` %ill. /4.. .*......;-; • ..1 '',...., ra VI NI!' \IPAN - \ fsl ,•:' 1 1 ii i. • ' alli �-. I . ill r i) I !i!1t *I1 ,,\ • ( 1t'I 'w' µM ' ` S�S C r, ' It A; : INT RTII \\)1 I L `r. �..:::.::: :� %/ r 1 I yi 51 '\v,y/r_1�� 'w lA tg Ni.. • Mr.laau���Il.rwl: :i a:' G��/ I w1 N r. . ! II •,.. d 51 +� = _' , • a.... i I .., . , rt, .... Ji I IS ii.......,.. 11 Iv: .1 Ii • r S JIz mm� N1 ,` ;1,,,All ,,., , III I 1 i-=. ZI r4's e0 t.�.,-_ _________ !(- - \ \\,,,, 1 1 I r :i ! .� Icik 1 il , I 1 11 .. �, 41,.. r INIh S7 1 1'r ; ~.I r(O 11 II �/�IIII a. .II 't ' f '=1 _-', -maw 7" l SOOS CREEII K �'nq_il.+'JLJ4I,Y-,-I' __ , . .� / 1-s Iopt! I ^�► I { INTERNit q lino st_ tp� �I 1 tx 7[q faro R � lr ; 1 = , n/I i II II _II I� c. i c? 1\ s Ilwu sl i-=-__ — — — ..,,, 11 r- , �_-_— g,aaa!, l- 11 Iii ! m - ` 11 I� .34 ,. • �lr 1 I N �` . liy il�' 41i3U Si. 1 1 j ' _s Isaa sr •��,—_ I 1 I s_1r g I sr_. . ( i :b .• . L ',1lAi 1 Vcb4-rEn cok0 101- ')4 I , • 1 l' . r .,. , ° I '. Imo' I,la" . .k:'; < o B ' I rII - o '1 !o I`._S fi?d f l-- '---- f..11 It`-i pi:r hi-14' • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase; VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: f�h��+-� J ��� l doT 5/�dr � a s.7 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED e 47- /-&,-/, i j C DATE: SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED PRESENTATIVE • REV. 5/90 devrvshl . r . I 1 E•U " I . c I\,-� I.. i J SL. 1\\V i C �) =1i LA N S PoI TA T(nN. , R E V i E vo Co v1 f & N-. 5 . . L.1.. C K I 1 V�- i- col--;,. IJ ..A _.i.-�. f-ik lc., l /rH�.A5E�- TT N! o.`/ ,. I Z 19 I . uUiUi . I-I-►. . . W W W W W W ___ VI N N � �� �_� vO L vc a d n� - ...Y 1 � �11? � - i s000 :1` - , N \o C. 1-1_2_„d -e a<,-i•' o in p r)1'=_e. ;d 3- A0(, , c,U 1 r� _ ( _ I 444 U f ro`S 1 •••• '1'1t_'..yr IKj'r"�1' JZc•1" ic`1.! fA)1 r4 CI CI CI el0 , ij I r1)6Ou CA-1-Ie-+e, b1 , r1_1.S vt:.:... Ioc.psi-er1 i,-, -I C G ke zdy ula .4 TA o I J . 13 621 oD0 E (peel; -4-5.)'n -e.. z� -V-3 (di C .62.1. oDo s'q, .P�_.c��-, --4. S�{oti=lc,s IZgJono Tvf-a/ bid• ;, SQi= -, • Lii ci--) ..- 01 � r� L-h (x) -I•- 3 , 135 - .orB3 11-h IZ .'c a� t3,'13S 7. O ' e3� • ' `� �- J,43�✓ �I- 1 __ ( i , a 5 ,� >- 7 T - q N e 0 • T 1 ) -7 e ;3 , 7--- �� 1 l G ,';r�s �o>- Body , r�4.c • 170 X . 1703,?`-' � 3Z 6tf 7- t-a/ s4.,C • • 1101`E . 13a d i",,,°. ,-, { i- 1 e Li J ti - e.e_ al �/� •�sid. SJ�, t•a-, c x 1 �--I t- • 8a Ill l,),-.4-- i 1'1 IVllx-.n0 (n�,I 1 .SG ; � 'C ,'!f'-RL,/lcci. S. r! C4./Cu/ f 1tz. '{;! i^ ' - '9'I, .fit: ,'I .j,. c�{r•�-;I,r•nx ry:•1'q.,'rlS T ,iiyS.ir�. ,.1.;'...;r p; •1'•.;:.',I�:�i i.;` ;a,�r a'' ;;is ,i.; .l•.r +' .,'' •'J. tr.'• ;1' •J..J' 1 C; • ^I •:17.' ''E+.' .4 R1.)J: 'r!(i!•1!,... .A. .1•. 'a :, •'ii7.p •.), �,' ,I:: . �)••• :,:. 'i' `r, •r'r ,•t +•I ,e iti,:1; ";,xi. ki .?i1�L% ti. .,,.�' r:.,i'.•I. .,!ii, .,i,. +" :1 • .:'4;',i rt {•, ,liiii ,, 17JI. ;,•. ',�,.: y .r,) i�'..f l' ..• 5..:, ,'i. : t, i�: ,:p r{ a �, 't t�:'(�.;:1'r••a•.•',:., I 'ii,l�•�f.' ..tn ,' :}i•' .y,';,., i, . r.: ''t•'•y+�:I: �',< :. ,1:� 1, + ::.. .It: ,li.(}.h t.A rI( a '•t;: '.i ly '1;'� Ci,�,,. (Y. 1 yy ••'t•r'> •'i�`'S�• .)i :It' L,i ,.. ,.'f;' S+ l.j•, r.4.1"�.V, ya, ,1��: � ;,tr,,;. i°:71. 1. , 'i�° ':I�' pl. • ,.�,' .r' :t1.'J .n: 1 S(;. 1 v i. ,t:•r'': :�;:':r' 1 ,'' iJT`; I '.'1 .,,. :I 'i i1� r'.• ti."i: '4 �/t. 1: 7 ••p r,J r l 1 ''I?1! :!;' .h' 4 !'.''1 I li i' r' 'll'^ (. •a� 'I: �Yi. r• 1. n:�' • �yur • : �, '.a •'f:'` 'u" :J::. r1:� d. 1''. ,'�•'• �;i7:' i' .�,. 'i.�'' ':t i4 �')� 1 1r•I, l� ''� • �{1. 1 :t 11..: .,q'. ,.l.�i, a M�'/,. 1 I'{t.,i .:4'' .'1 .,y ,ti;, ,t' t�•'r .,{. ,tl .?!r'r(.'.,� .).:: s,'b:" t t- :I E.,;.,,,i; .t ''7- �• 1 t' 1 '"i': 'I• F', ,•a •i l..a' aii• '.1, 'ri'4. 41'l l�, j i1C ,5: !! '!y' ,.1,. 'f .1 r. rt5 t �.i14,. .1 it '9, :le.; •,:'',' "r ':1: 'Y,. 1�' i�' :�i-�•t 1 it:'t. .f:. 1'.::,nr r .� `1Q•. d. ,. 5'a. I'., .J. :Y. :r''' ... il'` .'Y 1 ,'L' y�' `y. �,r, ,•{•.a. y � q j;, •'�:1 r, 5�,r r� '1), ':i.•v" +.' "• • '!';�, a::r•:,th'd ,: :4,1y1 :)r•1'I�l • �.'),i 1 •t,,,,....A:' - '{,. . .:, {.: ry ,t':.LY,: rl' / ,S .t.. •A" „r•• Y i'i'' :.'!' t ,ri�{ �. 'Y' '1' I:: �i: t.y .�S' ,•{: �,:.: f+1 .'1.7'�I .�•, r� .�, ',',t t. , 'i 1'•., 1.!'1 't�ti, ''r'.:' )" t1•�' .Cr 1 sill .%. i:ln .?.,,:. ,. y, '1 •) tie•Y . 1';••1:.y ,1. af,i.r' 'i I.' •w r ti �. • .5 .I' ,t. ) y: ,�i �' r" • •Ii i1i 1':ri' �• �r .' (aN rt rt' i .' i i �: 1. l'' 1 1'1.'. ' E. r i r �I, �!:' ,-t' 1i1 �,'i 1., •r. t1' '^• ! It t �'Y•f' Y..5(.. '1, ''t .. .I�' !r.. 'rt, .,., p, 7 ,.'1' .A, 1,• , ,I, ,1r :ir' y •�l.L� :'kl' . ��:5t1 'f t l ` / q' It• , �1' t' t: 'fit,.::'•', ,' • t "L ii �IY ,;� f"' '•1 I iris J.:.I i,t • ••i" :t .r• "r i .1, "U' t, Iv 5'. .� 'i'•� ''li r�l • r k !t. r"`6 i. ' .r1' t' '7p, Jr i , tip'• •,�:• 7�q,1: �� .Y! xe a`i' ;u i' .,'• r.:r, is fs. !i� 1' y %( •r q' .Y 1 1•(•1 ''•I�' 'Y • r• J!' tr" r •.t.:: :1: •r,t '.{!• +t ,.:f, .1;. ., '!. r'1• .�,it;. t:'r.C•?r, i,{-,r ,I; ,.t• :f, y r•j r 1' 1 !S':. .li: Syr 'ti� 'rl" Y l' 11 c1, 'r•. ' '. 'F• +1• 'q' •tom d .r •\ q, ,t.,I f:. .r•' tb�'i;. 1� 1.r--. i' I i�,. t 'f '7' ':S.i i� I BI c c l� 1 Ve-Y' CO-�, 1'7 c]Y!a lc, 1''24.P-}�' 1 ) Se* V I I.] • G I r c-� fi -1 Nov1 I2. , l99. I • . B L. tG b :.I3 '.. . . • . • W W tY • •IR�,+e. L y) ( T— ) - •Or zr3 3�. .1_ X j 1-- '3, 4 n.5 . 0 0.0 —— U { Cl?.35 L h &4, c) -L- 3 A 36 .00 •_' 01 e 35 ( +1 (9) +- 3,9-:-2.) aa� 3 -I-- r.+1 Ja ' 9 35 aaev - �6r9/ • • ' 411 o X ) 00a $ 17oo Odo , `" -- T F .F:.-,,- 13I dJ 1 1J, . • *._, I�� I- �J� 0 �Gl"fit �r,d 1�-�G11I d� ©�SSau e a 5 7 1 cDo -I-o 4 -l.j , �J 5 I?l, -. C- I� � I �7D �( l u �O 1 7 v v c.) r-- TB L �e • • • . • ( : : . , • • • .1 •t{• ,v.•'i•'L.:i.t•.fir•• 71r•i, ,•1:;. ..?.1,x,:%,1;'.4 .�,•.. ':I,1'r . : r'�' ..i t" i r•^r. . iY. r Y•. t,. `,t.r.... r 1'. , �'i� r fj'I. ;,, tt. 1. 4 .j. f' .1 /1 .j. �/ 1:. I. ,I ,1 Y' rie' • ▪ y.. 4: .1'•r•• �t: .IV •I I •1••,. a •4 il'' ,..;• :•1 ��t' ,1p: p'1 ri�•{!, •f''lr),'•t:"�! + �{'>: 7• •tt'::A 2".. . • �;• ,,'j!•i;1, . .,1 i�!'=.1.., .t,:' :!>�1''• •,. •.;', .,I {, .�Y f, •\ 1 i' I 'i' .'+ • 1 1 f 5 11. 'r I'..'' tir, C'' •:` • • • !r•i' q •,t ▪ rr,i•,: •;';'r'.;1• .I,,•i;; .t II 't..y,r, ilt'•., ::::: ; ::'1.:t .:;. 'i, r r•� *1 •1 { .�..., ifs 'tier: .'%ice•�:'• r•`�:Y• 1. �ti•.r �,r x :C :1 •• It" • 1 r It , • ,I ;, rt "'t f t 1' A" :'1` '�hr 1•1 `Lp II ..i':r:' `1'• �I''�.�'',"� •t� •17, •Y, ft.,' ':1, 1'�' ..1 I ;Y 'r' �•� -1 { �.Iq;li ..y t.., L : ��•i't: 'a,. !.;•,.r,r. •:G,.• 'I': ' ''• '' `.�"' ,1:• ,' .it'<.ni :r:'Il (''11.• ,- .q )).i., .1.• •.i;% • • .If:ia1, ti.. .1�1,. r.l' t. rYr :,r ll;,l' .7 :i t �Ir'.,1� 1 �'1:.. iF t 'r 9 1 i'�' .'i '. '.r ''1 i''.'';•1.1'rly f. ,i�l r. .:.:•'F";'.'•: .i; i;' .a' ' :... II r .i j:{, u e r s r�� 'r.t f . i' y*1� r,;i: r.l :?f E. r �- Z�' ; d 'r' ,i• d• r 'i r v f1, .t., 1•1 h: t!'P ,t• "d 1. 2r 1,1„ 4. ;1 I.l 'i 1' • • �'1 'i r "1• 11 • '.r yr J .2." t' rs .., r qq��Y'•1 'il .0 1' 1. ::t t • I. `it ' OPr � 11! ry p' DEPARTMEi`. JF PLANNING/BUILDING/PURL NORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: S-I UiCs tr DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 pi A APPLICATION NO(S): ;ECF;SA-109-89 ryiNgoly/ GAF PROPONENT: First City Development Corp /�f oN N 01/ f PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase' .VIII ,t, 3 1991 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ' ) LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water X 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: Ls)pr.r .Z. n 6.:T V" N /tI O 6o/r14%/3/J/?-7V) / 573/Z e "G4- 12.ela)d.(Z.�wl i✓T ►g,v. Tf /La yr P26"/ /71.a,n/ /S67". /Z- Zr - /? -J P.Ew' /4�dz,e .'-.E4r g L/!T/f• T/ /Z ,*7 -6" !t///110/Kr-/Z),✓ 7-X 4"/7.4,/��� c r�l,FL Z , 1..9,a T iL G2 J Are., tt. r — /e f7e. s L f✓e-r P 5 ,3;vp 4. (fl-S) Jae D/ 7 f i/?%1 /1. ,z- Pe•-.,..! rc f��. 2�i� fv � da heol c iZe-WW-c'✓�- 6•777r4;,7.e !u/t4 a'µfir Gcfy eW ZKEi✓7a.i, L., 47llc.,-.4., 6dOi.vnrC /01117W a f 770 /; �,,� lop y.- 1'4 in'- t3/4 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. /0z/€5, I S gnature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 envnrshl DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: • ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase. VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: II LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: . TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION II TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES , DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION II OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: az � ! 5Z e-f c �crisi,-A APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS X NOT APPROVED f 6✓ (7,134 WA -42_ /'.�2191-40,/L-clAor — / 5 lj/ /�L /jam � Sll�.s•� ,¢�J� c.c..— ,/ " 77,4e /.7( /-23,r, ievyp �tI'�r lv i2 / i�ft�/✓ttr� 6/7�7��itn�er47 CrV./ ee", Rehf/e'l C iil-e:/"td ,G f/ "1/Y47 G9 44/41- v?z5 lZ S� a- , ca.4` Aim 7e/,9 7Ty //7 -0-7 ��C�/;�.�5 < Ao f � s us L�� f I Avi.`:%Ik� ;1- ,,,e 1-14a iN 5`in✓�/: gef /�av 77%�;?�li� 7 a f? r74,Ae>4✓Y7 0 /,4 t' /4L Art. ,y.- 5/71/3' ('G,P,,v el-GE tr.4.t 4).-V •/j. /mod %mac; dO G,/ DATE: /02/L�/ SI NATURE OF DIREC OR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht I ' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLn, WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET CITY(•of- °rv!SioN REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ?OA" OV `) 1491 DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/911 Qi 1/Efi APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp "'""'�- •� PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase . VIII vov _ BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 1991 PARKS&RECREAr10 LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants • 5. Animals ' 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health ' 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation ' v 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: � � �y-..L ,1 l-, - t�-Pro er- C. c479 °/7-'c— ��" r 4-7 eVIY,.. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas In which we have expertise and have Identified areas of proba . Impact or areas where additional Information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Ignature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrosld • RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC W RK JV 4 1997 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE L PARKS& Ric REATIoN APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase.: VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: II PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES j PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED • DATE: //r SIG ATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 • devrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIl VdORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET NOV I.) 4 1991 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Co INSAvulfA 6Y\ seyV IGeIJ DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): • ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase VIII CI dy BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: i LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing [/ 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 12"-14 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. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvshl DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION t/L6NSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES J PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED wira ,,// '/` . �t./69'1A•... DATE: /4 V / SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 , } devrvshl • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORK NTON FIRE DEFT. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ;;;;E PREVENTION BUREAU REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: frr PrtVel(V4IM �,��,; ,�O�ED DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 111121 /01/ APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA-109-89 P�i �,l; oIVisioN � PROPONENT: First City Development Corp roroN IVUW 0 6 �991 PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phaser VIII 1 H{. f (� • • ,R .41k r BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health V 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics ✓ 11. Light&Glare • 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: D IR 'or a wvi4L S 10 J. 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. 011 //0/ Signature of Director or Autho ize Representative Dat Rev. 6/88 •• • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phase, .VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES 3 PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. • AMFr REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: " ' APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS )C NOT APPROVED ,,�� di� �•i ,e çor C�c�aa� 'file. .���or ,�, �.l• e r, �e r� � .F�o t0 ;ego. wrox. c - Mt�( befirdm.ed access /•o itti s �o I(�A 7-1-4,4 144i KS Qh do 410 roviofe Ad cr/7 CCe.sS • 7, ' Awe101:as (pp aspos Ali_ To egetasE 443 i c.T O 0E Iz 7/1/A). 2ECO;ti MWD Comp24647-Z 140/oravo JMT y TD Frg M iri ¢-4-7 e l fi-+NA 6)4E- f3ti1'4°1N0 01= f1 V/Iccf_y Frits. s n-T7-o)V 7o tez4wE iebspo/JSc yam() 71) 44c�/o /3G • 4 DATE: 11 7 / 7 SIGNATURE OF IRE R OR AUTHORIZE • REPRESENTATIVE dc4 11 15I REV. 5/90 Emergency response time is n,. •:than seven minutes. Request that appiic,, darticipate In the Fire Mitigation Fee program for construction of a fire station In the Valley. .A I �� M exam. ;(6•A71 l�l•y: spr47 S 'WW�G.O ride affirm - - -- :-1A. 1- C +C 7 7 .. Wei,. === :'� �;, �i 5_, - 11I- . ''' - *gran . a ......„.,_ t... .„f., .1 'ii . - _:_1 �` R 9a-r um,re. aaleir a+°wn+,c pare M/bus ` - ' wer�t.°o.r c Al TREATMENT RANT "ec;M...r=, ,~• - d ,4% — .' MONUMENT SIGN vIC>riir MAP 1`=20D' mLO/4.4ETeeC,. . Poe _ __ _ iii .4 O . —� Detention Channel ..'�` Pec0g9 ��� !1' (� 0 47441. 111111P *--%-N \ _ worm.[a it _ _ �•nt.rr // . ,ems � --_ �\�.N \ _ .INS ••�j� ,♦ � �' � \ . e �/ Ill • 7�ie a %�� v .411 `\�� ; I N z •, -ia ii, 1 ' '44 ' - Iisot.\‘' I -t.,\ 'If VIIP ill,' , Pir.?„2" 4-116% I x• \\.11- u\f` cis ,'` .` a tl• ,e (-- . W7t ::44fr7 1 1 II * 1/444 .:/./ :O.UiVii......... /' • / / • v. woviceaer. ewna\ �k. Mlr�e - O \1"IliF 1�- (�+- ass'pi•• llatp�•ii / I ?� • • rs w.rw•.•6 e5°.�e.r ��II� \ ai�o p� :. �' \i'••A� •••i q !I / rO °ESrnrvna DATE •A,. ! snar-.2, •tb\ 0 4_o� ) �•'•.•r. • \ 1 / II .nr..A..�. rye. O s r C4 ' , ,/' r` •w••••�►�i•. I II / wne ewerae..m+,.I ww.a.m.n•r•rm c r /A 8/Te8 1 as��0. 4ae \ ear• • 'j.7A Alpi�.•i0••�+t�•i•�•i�••M- \/r 1 i I II 1 - I FRA I•rr in..mom, 6+Kr+r.ryW ur� q% � b. .,,.._. 't1.0ria}i OOTi•••i: *.+rr a _ I N— II 1 5•ca w�wr.M ,T.. io ir . • ...:.....a....",_ / r . AV I ' 7 A•D I ••� I . / •'♦ 4. TRACT'A' c' 44413447,43 AI o ,�Vic' v J �' !j:�1 lir III �e �Zlog �� I 1_ I • TABULATION _ 3 \i. 1 t� m • hA cam.•xIM:P.Eslumro 4'� 41111* $'� �� p ` OrSite Area ±363,136 S.F. s sD °sear d.L i , hBalding Area ±128,000SF. c Iwmr+ • e..cw ,s,e.i • � -,-c - ` a Gross Coverage '""""""..1,'". / gigte,.....e4 ant.. * 1.... / .-,es-": '.. --- — \ Site Coverage 2° -----7` Parking . ±571 Stalls(1/224 Si'.) —I 1 I i — Standard _776 Suds (LG'..u'M.M6rJ.aC• Sz - z f za COMPACt 2167 SW.(327%) E.DS7wi OATS or _ _ \ _Sr SITE PLAN NenBeM .n..mar .d \ r..e,...+- Ten. BLACKRIVER �/��� CORPORATE PARK FNLI RENTON, WASHINGTON % °�"4 w"p�� � so nKiCANEDC UT* FIRST CITY WASHINGTON,INC. --- - - PHASE VIII .aa NO.:MIT SHEET NO a: • ODA.M: SITE PLAN hiao� CME«: • LANDSCAPE AREA IN BUFFER dIP-1 Channel ec • j ` mow. g1! �;~ _ '' ,\, o m i e-' — — �� \giro rr• �_ �• �cT: `�'.t > > 7.8 i ?_ :e-� \ \,E� i :.y am ,i�!� �,ri All' ,,• . ` A.W'er '''-'''' -'*:•:\.13. ft: ...lk ' '1'4 s*qt. . . .11.,,, #44-469,, t ... \ ••y e \ -- 1 s\ __, 1`I y 1. ,Its A 1 /A� , ;1Y 1. y ~ I — p, 1.1 • -.Eia ,E ccuse s,ra'_A •Ii '�7/A5 wP � \ * * w•p�+ Si i :; -twwaif � �;,• uronoe3 err Nwrxrr \ E it' • 11.-A ilk --��ya^m' ;/ L' f, �P 41 dr r, . a :.LW �`i 4;1111sGA P1 / p *� IJ3 r'•� ♦l •/ � 4ti-a�K/` / NC ocsC4o:::.. a.- /� e8 �• n• A sa. �if N"fi�3T'•��i� ,' Id -: 7 •.m vw vie...•r.._rr / �!e•9 , �'�' �►, J�' 'I� ,.s•Lr • I � Ivre rw ce�..x..nw_..:.�e • +I 6 \V6'`�\•9.=�F i., . A••: , �R-/r ! •rs ws�..r rr /�Jam\ \ 4`.e L .=_I�/ `-',r >.� J� D2'_YI it I-....o 1, • 6 -./J •� • J • y L 1/ _ •I I i Q =✓`T..w ` \, ' -���``,�''+\\ Jul `f !' • „• 1.1'." r-i fir`- d��' C I c • -142,ru'° • ..-1-1411111111111111111111" b��,�„ . • _ 0 ,vr:,erf. I°`"` ,i..1"`�'• LANDSCAPE.PLAN BLACKRIVER bFP4.no.,.�a..v ,fi ,z..,• tom+ ',4° �\ CORPORATE PARK •—-" , -'1 , " .Ana-tomVN ._ �,API. +.a+ .rr '-,.' ' r i RENTOH, WASHINGTON M.,• PA�+•cY ��•' � #��� M1f'V r'1"LF"� rsmw i +-.ce+• . •.4+r on+u Y o uwr�r r�N •rvm-..�-m.�wh 'f ha�F^ far !qI•••4•Mre. -- FIRST CITY WASHIHGTOH,INC. C�.,..s•.,ryo6u-,n•a.,%wf, a..•,r,•N,6 IV(. T O �nLI. /1. 4g4.•K Er:-.-:i,-..: �+a*s,�,lev dcf ra+m.•r+t�a.ra+.h� ! •O FAO afFts+f liev0^,'r,�+, ��fi•'+RIri ° PHASEVIII(1 _ -_' � .da.+0 gaol..eau.,i,+{,PWAF ilry.Awa fAckf,0-, K 0 Flo -i Au-1 �.,aaurr�bote.r.�rr.. t 2➢' ,e 5D6'1 i4a•r e,,,.+...a a••m,..F •••11/ .“. O •e0 01.•L ctt.,,m0 roi'rvr. .re,..04Myq.•. , ^=¢•'•� c,-• agrc,+ • -- - v.+l,.ewar 9 s0 a•.Onif el•e i 4 Iivw+•i}+. .O.,na Cane- wrfl(i..�- as roc:•••+vls.¢t�ND 0-.la-•iwW q.awu,rn cuttia•!r suSrn .weru�e.M. 3.-[: p.ic. SITE PLAN h,4o{ 1 ' c . . ' . . I ' . I/ I •• '..I. . I ' .. • • • •i •/ i . :. , 1:' •' I ••-•• . • . 1 . • . . / I . . • • .."'''‘./1/ • • 1 . . . . . • .• . i 1.• .• • • • •I.0rISTI rt ,04.4.v. .----.•• 1 ) . I V . _ ,:. • • i, . . .: _... • /[7/170 1-14‘ 4' . • -7 I i ,- ‘ . /. ....a • , 0 ig..•.......-;;;- \ ;"4-'•:IA i.. • . . . \c. . o filt. AI5 ' ce /., .4vIII( t, S'A; \ • F.13 • d I. ,t b .... ,, . . \ 1'1'1 ,..;__ ,,,,,•L.,....:%A....;,', '7.2) .1. . . \ -‘14110- -...i,. .C., :-FilV ''• ..- \: . / ,'. • /›' 400,-..‘NeSr • 11114k \ ...- , 4 r , , •7,.,„. . ..-... N I A I ''')- ;i4 % - . zrt....0.,TA :NH.C c.iii 1 // .0., . :IN\ ..;.. . • .. 1 ...." ,1 ...._.. ..tr. t.1 ' , e, .1 OP' 1... 101/11110k\ I ( i r. ..___ / _, .. --i. P rk ilf 0,, / v \ ... • \ 4 iilitipp.-1,44b0.- ..,,,t __ifd /i \I A A. 0 t i li • /2 \l•4W— e ,,,, 0 , \ .0 • /e4 - ' - _ . n ._ .001 . ,, .-----T -1---111:11I. _.Y. '- ''' 41r. .,.••f . )•• Fr,-I C HA Alil./e z -.. -- / ....-- . . ..•--l --•--.. .---, /11 ---11 ---1-\ 1- --.. - ....,. . ,..! • .". -•••• ''......, 3M11111 , Z..---1.1. • ..-•.. CONCEPTUAL PLAN .. _ . I - -• A 1 _ . . . .... .-. - .. - _ T R ACT 'A' g .4 '• ..... _... . .. BUSH,ROED&HITCHINGS,INC. BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK — . _...._. . _ _.„01dift... CIVIL ENGINEERS&LANI)SURvE VOUS SEAL ".---. rzoma r c,n FIRST CI TIES EQUITIES :7_-,.,g Mg IrAx.,4,WiTq ir•f/P TTIPF Imm.••••• ;LI re•ey..1.1 N.-II r,.V.•: g_AAN Aly.A.NthAs..qiel_L5 r_iLl mim.i E • RENTON WA •—• • • • . • . . . . . .__.. . • .': t BV-0- 30' 60.--0" .1 . -• . • . : . . \ •• • ' . • .. . .. • . _ • b iiii •• •• .• . . .. . .. . . . - • ., . .. . . .. . . . Sill - • . .. -cvl co milmilmmnirAWITIlk MAIL ROW MilinrM1.1111[1. 1 JANITOR II Clm ill , • . = I iiii I"STAJR ELTELE.EPEVUIP. litiblitlel •• ELEC. IMIZr 4, . , SHOWERS 1 • b ELEVATORS . - \ - • - FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN •I ! . ! - . I • .. ' OM 1 NM 1 limn , 1 Mai I Me :112,-11; lin, / 1 // 1 . • \ \ :.. THIRD FLOOR PLAN • FOURTH FLOOR PLAN • . TRACT 'A' Iging.4".iw. BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VIII AI 1 p ,t .,-,-nf_- _-A First City Washington, Inc. AIA Roc.. ‘11. N OATH ••••••• •••• _. . a?• 17:.vw; 4 story Office Floor Plans (BLDG B bldg C sim.) 89017 10-31-91 0 20 40 . , • , . _,-------- , --------- I i 1 1 1 111111.111111111111111 1111111111111i 1111111 r: 11111111111111111 , Il 1 , ; 11 11lir irnili4 0 crshII I I 1 1 I , , 4 I • _, d T— iii V,/ r . - ID II tr.' 1 III 111111 IN 1 i .14, — 4 ; 1 51,, • < , . WEST-ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION East Elevation Bldg C sim. Mechanical-Scree— ---......... —Exterior Insulating Spandrel Pane ----Tin cte 1 ‘____fl.lon Glass .________-------- ------- . \I 111 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimiiiiiiii , ..1 „ , , , „ , „ 1 ;/, il „_, , „ „ , „ , „ , , „ , , , ! , i , „ „ , , „ „Al II HI I _I I. 44 ii IIHIIIIHHHHHHHHIH1 1 I 11 1111111111111 11111111111 EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION West Elevation Bldg C Sim. TRACT 'A' E3LACKRIV-ER CORPORATE PARK Phase VIII __ _. ., , 1 - -:;- -;: . First City Washington, Inc. Amr--...... . _f......v,..... 4 Story Office (BLDG. B bldg C sim.) 89017 Scale: 111=401 10-31-91 . . • ` • . ' • • .VACANT U4"W r- d • - _ I \� •. • • • QUARRY a; _ • \ . . .0:4. .t,4t-- • e wool d6 - 0-.s' • • • . 1k,rI e 0 . RIPAltL FOREST PRESERVE' HHEE °,' R OKER (.144,4 d) co is_yitow.....z. . ....A..,464 . • • 46.04,..wpcillope4".4.477,„4„0•6-- ' r *•-:4-(..: . c7,, .7.70::_,. •_ --:,.. • 4,-...., .del: _e03 • • .• - • - '10),Lre 4 -..- -,.. . in. 444a Of4 Ac : - - li:'. ..:.:416:11:::41-1,4..,,c60.-'0:33. 0:0L.4)..";,.. ii."24.7:: . • w• gt :1°.-IvtibillIA*1144: _ii_la_.soiha.&... _:_.:....64110. . ' ‘. . " -44144:Ne . . 411. .:- .1. , :::,.....,.:..\:N_,,,,,,,Alii, .( 0.,(...-.. . vb..", ,-edi ., ,,,, - .-.. :, .. ,.. , .:.. ,. _ ,.., . \-_ 44. , . , fs - '../41) . .,-- -..., #6. ,i0-144j).-nopi.... ivoopi \if- 111. p"'1.• 04. •:l) �; P-1 DETENTION POND -� � - (0) .-,_.-----e-r•--o, • yft,..._ ,iit't..-')- - • , 1p.,, ,,z_:f.;...,,,frowili-44._,, .. o.,... . 40- 2 . — - '•% A.. '�'o 9 "-ems f'' \ t . ..."., ..01 .1,,,, IL;'•,. - af:01 e- A.A sa m...... .., .... • . dip \ �La7fLc �� \•' �1�-\....``� �'a `r-, �_ z n' y�/��tj ' tea' , •\•f -. 1•+ l[/ a� of ,,e- ' • ��_Ir `.� �� i�� �,. ••1 '�V •.�:yf .. �".,,6L_ ' r.-+F=• }�) I �l! !-`���_ \. / \^,1. > .ter— i'��= / J ! � " j' _ `�► J " ( y w r �' ) • t � irgio. i: • . 1 � � 3: i ... mo; , • 4. 0i - •IR, - ' A� • C • ir- ) ( ' '� .. . • �Hi4' - • i •,� fa,', s _. . . • •i . , itt... Cel 4114..., 's- .. wrw.t:' , i ;Al A • meik,,..; , :„ , -F__-in.A '''--k_„ '. /Ei MANUFACTURING ••' + 1�` `"_� ..a t , • �~'rli7iik.1 t.... ~e I-til)." •b ,- PROPOSED OFFICE . .VICINITY M .-A-s.P 4 : R I OAKESDALE AVE S.W® ® i,"',® r. 14;`. ... i —2 Lu • -yr' ler -fir-- =--.6-x-' '' '-ekl.-•--\---?, .- NORTH ~ I _ METRO SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT , ::•••'• '.:-:'- -•' _., a `ti ,.) DEPARTMEL . iF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUB1 WORKS livNj;vi � • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET "r7)"°r'R° ION u-h ��� Lvov r 319�� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: (-L�(- \A . b'`�'/�_, ; DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 '' V,k4) APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII • ' BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land & Shoreline Use (,( 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light &Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic &Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: r r 7PI- ClyliD C m f,'c' 6`/lS / /, 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. ///� Signature of ! jctor. Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 • • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT • x DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES jI PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: A.4 i J I2(/7/(A9 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS x NOT APPROVED ?t�661) C e/ /Y7`5 F)e -F/ 14 )D /P7 )1 /0I -�!/1//y1A'Y "GUf^ Ss " ,44v F/i ,damRvr'ry/77 ,7 13c//z.,D//YG: F f s . y soo r F/At? f /N Tip/S 64/' If/V YDU rti ILL N F 1) 7a /6 F M'7'7 4 1// / OO 6.zy S 10 V y U4/ z/77 ©F 775,/5 r U/,r, Z) FLo�� Gf41 moo-- D4h� DATE: SI ATURKDIR R OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvshl DEPARTIVI1 DF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUIU` -" WORKS ENVIRL.,...V1ENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW z . :ET 3EYIEWING DEPARTMENT: Weatr ' (AAA t"l 1 e 8 )ATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 • PPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-801 PROPONENT: First City Development • PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/Vill 3RIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently iacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be Developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (Including a 'ieron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at •our stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen ,berm and landscaping) which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. the applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River ,asin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental Impacts - these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan Impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. _OCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdaie and West of'Naches :SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources • 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use • 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light &Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • 14. Transportation • 15. Public Services !fir` 16. Utilities COMMENTS: Q�F�T I NOT ill AA1)(F ) 1r C77o N / eg. ) o ae, - /S w /71/i/Y ,c)owNro N l°/'QJ`�SS G � 2-oN Lp4FSS c/N Ay4/fib L I q6 t /' /30 -E_ 5e: 4 Lev&Lj (2 " M'l/N tNSPit t-h-1b yA_o o 4h-6s4/9 Zf iqo tAi1-rF oti >Y 5 we._ / N cty.LLS' F0oc N �XTu-7V 5!a N -rNouc ff P /° 71'1 Fg l`-7re5LC Nfoll4 1-7toln. 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. K—i `TS - 1( Signatu Direr or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 mash! DEPARTMEN1" F PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC.`., ;JORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 'PLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-8,$' IOPONENT: First City Development IOJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/Vill 1IEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is seeking site plan approval to'develop an office park complex a irrentiy vacant 27.76 acre site (Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, ndscaping, recreation, and a screen (berming/Ianscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (Including a :ron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at ur stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen term and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. le applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River asin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. n Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed.developments. The Statement has been evaluated by I �e Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with aspect to anticipated site plan Impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. OCA ION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP: 23N RNG: 4E SEC: 24 TWNSHP: 23N RNG: 4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches 0: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION • TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING . PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION, OTHERS: ' :AMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON JUNE 10, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: PAAI'1 4F—vl�1�- APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 2. ,VvATriQM.A•/N S/ NA 4l-/GAt9I5 Yr MSG?v//g rM'S CAN/Ye-7- /9 e. Dii7'failmiNF,o ti/yrG A llQF_ FLC)/Q 1Ql-qv/.tj�'�I,+N�" /S c#9�c.r,c.g7i /3y VIE Pig F /t1.41256 1-L ., IF 77/E ./4 R 4jQ� d /• �/i4��[_acv XGF S 2. coo (�-pi rol' E17M -J P)Q,OV 7'JJ �9 G�apEO v4T�. �1Lc AVo.. AF1) . 4J4 OtJND -rl/t� /3t//6.P//vG•(5). poLy w/r4� G �7F��MA/s! rt�e (in of 46.14r0u1 w4T �Mido_b`-Aiv /ve 4944N RE Q /N5//OA . I TLoN or. A 16 " wA-r A• rt/1(N '1 / °G,bf 7/SAfi P40/15:14T7, SDI, 1' f�'f �-P M i r-No/h c cM 1'• //YCo f toor 9-T .p /7/6-N R6Ll A `rc4r n pith Nr f 5 CSC 197;7-Achw1 F_F_ 5N'F.\-1- • 2 S�STt� N �GcoAP4 w/77} 1 .7P /Y D �t 5. D �N pA��D s T�1 5 1� DATE: ^/p ``l/ SI NATUaF ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE /4/1/(V,., /N C L 6/4.14M 1t1C. 5 �'J f�,7� , IY 2"T/L,/77 :.S r4 5 /q v4r p /3)y REV.5/90 de�,ni 692 C'/j'y 0 p. j,Q�/1tie 1 ..'.. .�... • .-.r„v.,vu•[�.r• • •C7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ncd1EW SHEET ❑ PLA__ _ -VIEW ROUTING SLIP ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ❑ L /� OTHER APPLICANT: F AA ( I k4 O h JOB ADDRESS: A/ ,r t '`v' 7� , of o� /9-- b,r_4lr NATURE OF WORK: DATE RECEIVED BY RECEIVED FROM COMMENTS DUE WO# PROPERTY MGMT. GREEN # FEES APPLIED ❑ NEED MORE INFORMATION Q. LEGAL DESCRIPTION 4- Cl NOT APPROVED FOR • CIFRONT FOOTAGE ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE APPLICATION OF FEES ❑ VICINITY MAP ❑ OTHER It Is the Intent of thi's development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice, that the fees quoted below will apply to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements (i.e. underground utilities, street improvements, etc.) PRIVATE DEVELOPER HELD PROJECT COST LATECOMER LATECOMER AGREEMENT NO. PER. FTG. FEE WATER r O— SEWER — OTHER — 0 — • • SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FTG. SAD FEE WATER — D SEWER O — OTHER b � 0 ft44 /7?'- _ �.. • SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-WATER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit $940/lot x Apartment, Condo, each multiplex unit $545/ea. unit x Commercial/Industrial $.126/sq.ft. of property x /� 76Z Fi $6/S9. O/ (not less than $940.00) • (a SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-SEWER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit $470/lot x Apartment, Condo, each multiplex unit$270/ea. unit x Commercial/Industrial $.063/sq. ft. of property x 683 � Lrt3J l7 771 �� J (not less than $470.00) 7 TOTAL: i2.q 2 .3/.o 2 The above quoted fees do NOT Include Inspection fees, side sewer permits, r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. P/ease ✓er71�i 1� Gfr'S: ��Ja AlG6w ��O w,4/icA 1Gre�ir�S � Se rn (Sec r-cci- //le C.omenTs11 a7TtacAcG� her o •) r ' • � ! L././4 h�*., .7-2— 9/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative • DATE ./t.v..../►«�./I«.rr/I IH IPA pp � ' t ,. ,[ 4 "':•i;' y.i, i1 it �ir.,1r^F r. i 4 • :�:I• .'r:���J't�I .:..•S:Y',11r,:::•,.':+,t'y; ',•t,':�,:•it.r,..1...E;cf;'l�'�'; ' '! �i I:,.,. .V r•�'• 7r.;:'. '`i�•�pi.t� • t7t''I ; •1 �. } � '�:: i i 7. .I:,, ..r ':�!' rY:••i.r:'�!�•!ON•J\'r"r • :t ": .:. ... •/� •.•n - A: �i r' 1:''r.y •i"I�:.1;�'"i�iPf 1018':• • • ,r�, . • 'l'� 'p4y1% . q :'.' �;r !', ,i: �•~rJ;• •'IV'T"i. • c%i nil::: If t r.l:t' •.1j'i:.,,,. ;f �' -1. '1.I,,.. t' I• • t '.., • .! • ,. . 1,I' :8"i'.; .: 1l. •J•`' . 6•F 1 • :yet[. n. #il t.l:d:.` a i i.:‘•' • I. •I� '�. .i'w r.rJ,:, '1i`" •Ft S� .'••"t.r:h., '•l.i •• • •'i:• • . r'. , ,r r [ ' '' . si: ':I.'r:, 'I.:: •'i;t.:�ii;::.,r;:i•,.i; %Ji: ,il�i° •:�:...t.'Yr.,+. 1 • • • : .� ��' : '.,' ,:•i .j,'t'S:. '�. ','IL:�Fes.' `'1L•: .,i 6: .��I:r',;1:,.:�'�y;.i'. .:,: :1 y: ::lk m „is•a) \,k 1 I )•). li „. , A I .... (� 11���' \�11 JI�It? _11_r _ \ CD n.ul r,rk 'K It„. II 4'(i _.:,i leu sr s_f(n�y,,L..L )G\ i P.• �= 'Jig I_ [. an�JC r{_ ��i Ilan ‘" 1 •~ 'U.J. sisjih /.-i '''' \ ' F.,'„, e. 1ih lbIIN._ _I1" !l_J[ii,g f c > &<'k t , • ri, Nk4=t z _.11- . i` _1LI,oN.] . \ y �. t\, ... �� f p•.' ;L 11 1,' , ''+; I ; 5,_`;I:ia�rI:Jf s.:]L'�,1'7 P}, 1r'11 1. 1,k, ;+j., 1 IY•1: 1' 1 rp, \ ligI ';S!11; ..1 % i ,-Sqrl I:'•� Ki• u , I \�:.�.i CI )1=�'_it:,�il:,l• i�,if�:1 •-- 111r +!!r 5,I. 11 , !,A •hi' r 1 -,' �i' ',•k i/Imo'.' ''•..I� ,r - -,..---..,I g 1 ill ,,,,,,"7.° . gad .. \\'I\ ,. Id 'L „h. .) .. .. ..,„,,..,........,•.. „.., ,,..,.. , .. ,. . . , .,.,Slatut:. /7 • .I�fl`, i •4. , li , ; i ,.I ( ' . N • \ 1p ... , . r.. .. •••,...Inikh 00,1,11 I Iiiir. .1.' . .- ;.;°:..;S .. . .1.":...:''''.. , . 111°ft ,Ng.#2,.li I:i.1%' •• ��� _ � �� ' 1111111 P •Z N LOSi OM I4nL • 4.,. • %.• V. mi._ji: .ipyikk, ...\•., 4. IH.I..k,;-1: .,t,„,.. ... ...... lin . ...-7‘fiL .--\.-. .. ......... '''..,•-•,1:. • -.--..--- - v MI , ip 4 !Ilk iii.1:7-ZI ,. - ..ii . r` i ‘• . \* ' '.'I' t 0' . a.:. I- II •0"1114.;. — . .• 1 1110.‘ • 1 I Ili ": ,y .. ' rA 'n1 I./'0. i' . +— 1. . F -,\" .- ,, ',r ' >•,^ 10 ,, .._- ' 11 1 L-r '� \ -� . •4 • Iv/'4);-''..:::?•••.,- ‘,..AL__;;E•_,;,_ - . ' _ ___. _ ....up 7.4\,\IIIN V . . , '....1 I 111141 .- 1 ..''.1.I . II -'- l: 1. *1 ir. ?A.. illireali* • 1 lira, . 4,..if I (( 1 ill, al II I e PailupaLig ,. 1 111111111111P I •i� III II L_:. . .,. IM n 1R, rrrr .11,11 A SI • \ 1I II. 1+,f1 !� 1r ,r,:, :11 RTI1 )) 1 - 11 i Ifi‘ 2.117107° . r..13:i".:3't)l'k'.\--ji t4 tol vi l'i 7 il • A N. .6i I \1 q r.I k !� / I 1 s1 '� +� I .� t,. y ,u' P.i M I t Y 1071. yy ^ r r _ A'11, I..11LL��}}��,� ;� S 1�¢1 S 1rA0, II , , \ . ` s.ISU i.ii. IIIII — . ,e� := • '� _ t: a I; 11 nit sI •• k. �. w ,I 1 I '` �..rM. �91�.FT`� flwileill. I . c: _I) _ •11- c._I.;. 11 J x lsli__Iµ"1 �� - /, —�,J � SooS CREEK A'e'.._iI;+LJI_�'`,�.,,1 167° 11 / INTERTIE __�I ner:r�_ • 1 �I N l I Nu e a ILas,R 1-_ u-..,1 I II E -,/ nM I o= __I /iv .:i fl 11 M r asl� sr1I, G-sI�Imsr- IIe '--== - II 1 1 --- g,�omr. ��I I V c -_ q 1 1.1L-1.:\ / 1 " II i li I 1 1 1 1 I1 sr 1saA sr II Z7 LA 1-5IraA AIL IL I 1 1 M1111 — jl yc!4TE/Z Coft9G4 10G4N I " z1 I • :. I. rr - ,:- VIVA�I � l`1I,• , !;' t MA •N Sr ill 1Fii 1_3_101.41 11 I Ir- elmi&=,1,. r ._ . DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 &ECF; • PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. L REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: eve%pleti 27 14PPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED • �e a a c h e�� �p y GH `at 717tip c7, DATE: A/ iz / / SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED ESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 ie. • • TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEW COMMENTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK/PHASE VII SA-109-89 Nov. 14 , I g q 1 1 Corporate Park Phase VII: Located on Track B which abuts to SW 7th Street • between Naches Avenue SW and Oakesdale , •Avenue SW Three office buildings as follows: a) D & F is 4/5 stories respectively • ( b) E is 4 story 1 . Transportation mitigation fee when paying for Bldgs. D, F & E all together: - Bldg. D is 91,550 square feet Bldg. F is 116,400 square feet Bldg. E is 78,350 square feet TOTAL is 286,300 SQUARE FEET • Note: Trips calculated using ITE 5th Addition for office parks: Trip rate: Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(X) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(286.3) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 (5.66) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 4.72 + 3.435 Ln(T) = 8.16 • li T = e8.16 T = 3,494 Total trips for Bldg. D, F, and E. Mitigate fee for Grady Way TBZ: $170/trip • $170 x 3,494 = $593,980.00 1' Z f=c...e. • Deposit $593,980 to Account No. ��5 i -r`:-' i.=. f i /C� ' CC 79 GY.a4 Vy r-gz. / &f/c i€1I1.", 7./ 8 /f city Note: Building mitigation fees may be paid separately but at a higher individual cost. See attached supplement sheet. D:91-449:CEM:ps • 4675:. 7. ,,; r y. 'f 1- 1 '{ 1:r' . . ..t • • 00, • •• % dP1• ::.'. 'i.%,. ii: �i? •';f l,l" "iI•,1': '.r':•:f:ti ). �. t •i' Y':' is';,:1;;;;. E•dY: •:�:,; :!' ;''; bd,-:� 'nt' • :;,t'�!;.:� .,�,,....:ori; s. . '1� .�f f•.'it.;•1, •.. .4 1't4r•.i i. '`' �;1'i 'i'' l Y ,f L q. i:i ' I • • 've:, ( i 9:s''r a J'�;t `r� tY • ' ,ht •.r'. '1.:,,.ri,. 4:, .:1, • • 'ill Yx. ''f• J;q :c: •.i: .1.• rt �1'- d ,.1F , .t ¢' .l� •t i .ti.r�i �:'�'.': '.tip • .f V.. r•'f ,!,�,1.i'. •,,•... " l .1'•.I"i1il i1 .. • :4 !,•'('• r .t': •.yy �\:•c• • ,'1' • : .•t i h..�1! .i.' `7, • rr�.,,.•1+: '1'. Ia/ , ••)'A.1 y' tJij •1� 1' •.1 y •1.• ••`,' • il. 'i i r. 4:,i. •i..l 1.I(j f:.1 .)•:'�'•.•.Y'., .j� ;I: • 4i: :(. ::�' ..r'' ;ice 1 F, tK ,:� 1 'r 1'r: I III � �+' :j%,Si;: r'.,;I': I•: .1':''rt 1 r'i•'::� !71 t•, '1' .7, '1 :t .I.'i ',' ,i" rt' • !l'+ .!1 :I'•j;'%i • 't y :�' 1"' .•.�• '.I).:i.. '•:+': '•'r4.• :1 .. .. ':�. ,1• i. :�'r, '`'• ;� ••\.. :•�''. ,;q•''4 't4 ,'}• n'n L:f.'t�!...ui r r.. .'j: �) •il. YJi'• 'I �'U �Yti •4' 4• 1•tt• : : rr• .t�' •��1 ,:.:K. �t:.', .Y. • .11. t � • i ,!1"). �it1�a• jj :F•• '.ia I • 1� i • if F '1 .A r• �. /i .hY;i =! :r:f,P 'ii`{y. 1, '•1' • '. '`!'•'.i. ,l�'i 5'1. ``'.A'h f l I,. .Ir + 11yy 'J.l.'t .'�• a '.'� t: } r / +i�• :il' 'S• J' •i. 1 j .Y .J'1a't .l•.n !f'.'I.'ll 4 .1;� /A:^i••.• i. ,1 • 'l`r''+:''•i'1t .. 'ry•1I ,...• iti.l' ,1• fY'r•1 •r :t,i:. ..11• ,a (i Yi ( .., .'1;; •,') .1]I S 1•. •'%,I• :!I� :e. ^'1'` .r':yyr.lY 1;,. I''Tt�r;1 rr,, • • •i y•. 1.. 'S•,,' •1: /• 51'V'•1 5:.1[•1•' 4 '1.44'A i.y{4,1..V.i� r1,•.''1 '1•• ..l'.:,' '7. i'.. .'1. :i1•. I' •I:' •I I). � '1. 1. )•1• '.�' i 1!' :1.'., 1 • �.':;{v. •.1;'i1` i. I.".y'r" ,t�'d.•:r'. `:1i 1 '..tr, :.1''Il ,.j :.1''•i.i••a. '1'• .i, :i' ,li 1'•;,! • ,T • • I• ' .'1'• l' h { '1 1.' y •'•pi i 1' i i'r I ; ' `S5' .J'f+ 1•' •j`:1.t t i:::?.' r•n:t 1'. �,. I.;• I':' '' • J' ! ,.' •'h, fk {'.I.517 4t ,,j'I • • t•1l+. • ;./,! a •'4, 1',• .I. r•.�'. ** :•i. i ,Y .:\: :'t • .1' ti.�� '..!.•;••if ,J;..,4;• :i'{.'-T..f-^;,• 1^•'v.:'1.. .:�• ,i,., ,'',1, J•1''• f ,•A'r t;+r.i~ 1'.'1 1: '"1 I�i. ' •'r.• :., ,'1 \ ,. ):: • 574"NI' l.1'• 'ji�+;',I.. f :1.J•rr• 1 • .:Y •t�' ,ir'.1'. . ` t., i 11 7 Th � r' • r1, �. I r•. v ,t. ., jr 'tie, .1 l' • :'p; �i• I'}t ,l!!: :I ''i; :i;1r:.rl�..y°.Ic• .c• 'ji' ;t:.• •,.iB� 'i"'• "�' .r 'f1!'t .}:..yy�tt .ti � ail ')• .i .' �. Il.' '.i. n •1l'. .'.i.' .i`'I'11.,•-....-.i�•• ':Fii�� ;,., 11.i+�•'".•.' �3: ',t.r. :i. • .{•:'•: e'. .•'iiti. � •.lr rl,: i:' Y td• 4. U j°L. ' •r' •I: •h','u'•. ,f." 1 �5' i •.P.,N:'t:-; �h` '1Y1-.h1.. 1.) :I• !•?! :1..,('i_�' Ft:i•�' (.lulu �[ • U• �, ''- ,,' ir:.:{j•r..;'7'7. F:t.;y ?, ..+ Ijt:Y;••1 : ,• •.1• • Al: it1'1'' F. A c, •'I� ill.'ri .l' • •r'. • .. •.�.mi: ... ,. •'1.L''l,_u•l .'.i.,•... •,. ........:i)•'.t •i•.ili._..t...tl1:,l`!!....1........C•RT•:.1�.. .•�• ',."., L' ... . • . 1.� • hP' • 3 i rfa c d l,iJ l�l•O- b 9 I ` I =- .I • 8 o'L c;r 4 c + (GPaz) U-7 5. a 'O - , (.....1S� b' s •+ �`<) ul-k 5 --0 ' C� = (1) �-f'�J c� ! '`_L - 2 sod ._t ,(p1rJ sdiJ.1. I '1 °-1--' odI' 1 = - 9 U.)' E ---I- L 6 ' . �-,,,1 , 2 -I- (mac' 1 ) 9��3 ' o = 5 /7'g P \Q-l' -iii) (-4-1 '7,21/46 ' C) -= • • IA c' Ja 1EL {Q , p YiDiEj •.k a-f . 14 Q n I•1 a - II AAA �h r h _I /.1Z�) r L AN • N-� E/i ' .•r c - i b ) ` C s'c o 0 0 ___ 52./7 ' L-4 Co95•1t ) 1 5 L e. '•• O mmm mmm r2'1--t-1 1 ,1 VI 1./1vii • a. ° oat 9 16 6 / ' Z ! ,/\°I\f n , k-{ i P, .,7(-7 /2°h 17/;?( c1/-- •c'?:/ '-:�_..1 �C a/h Di nvo ) --Z_ ci-.l .-I_ (--- .v • I-'P 1-0 // ( JSY(jd `/.c'i=',1 7•/ 2 •(•+:,/•L J �-JIII ��✓ '(( / '' i tt �/ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS r'f»'(*)F4n"Ivisi N ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET NOV 1 3 1991 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: n-m l "`-"r kr) DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PR MORE OBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR INFORMATION I' IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 11: Earth 2. Air 3. Water X 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy& Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use , 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics II 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 115. Public Services II16. Utilities X 1 COMMENTS: 277zIgfrr �.�%�r �z i717- Tr/vT/J" AnvD Go/'7/7- t--1oI�y ‘1C—ca_ a_G_v--lLNr it i I'/, COL) )6- P4y..,/7 f/" i1/ / K/'Y E /1/07- X-I£el 1)1/2.G D Rtz: /-1'Cn g/.-7,E/y 7- �cep/2D.F0 ,d/1'4 714C 7z,-'l v7- 04151h �'N z G c.a t Cf;vTT� • GJ+� � l'xwrc ty ' Ike I y tteS Ar'� g_fdlu 2lp 91,71: Of ,1'/f.44-L/s.S' /9));z' VL,c "g f z 7- '/'ro✓fir 12e i„•r i T ,��G4�clii?.//� 1 64-971/ro;En/8 �7er"7/ rnCl /Ale rlt "fr 4.V; y 1.-1 E7 -irX/R • 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. X), i/,//9/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date • I Rev. 6/88 4 1 • w • emmht • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 &ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: • LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING PLANNING DIVISION BY 5 0o P MN SHOULD BEON NOVEMBER PROVIDED IN 112, PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO TH 1991. C REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: (4 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED i-w,/if/,G ,j//7q IL 113/3i1 /)/Stcn44"i) /jNl) 4,r75/74,z/li> �r /1cc07-0i6.,t:A q�i�, �� c;,, , 4 y ur-ct-4--e USA C{'i� 0 a5 t 5 r1 I�'(a.✓w . C:/7'/ /a-nr�r�=���2rt-c�v�5 ��� -WC va-'� 4 / ��44,,RHO .•4,— /i h e9 Wi; My., )3 I v t, (i-v-LAA-L o�. �j Kx.L d� 5//z��✓N o N »7 P L.L.! off /�J✓11ef/N eve 5 i7`,<'� �GdLi/y /.--/z/.�/•f'TI)/Y`5 //77Z/ � � C /�v •TZ) ,4— //9/A'"7"/i /4.7 /— 4 c /J o/J "G.9r..r 7"U,ic,/-17-7,/y e,. DATE: /// /Z/ / SIGNATURE OF DIRECT R OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devMni • I' ii DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: VIck--V-KL111) DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91o�vrsiorJ APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 r jr►r�_� PROPONENT: First City Development Corp ctn,OF _ ^. R�Ivroni PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII OCT .1 8 1991 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: k I,� • ��y A LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY ;1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 14. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy& Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health j 8. Land &Shoreline Use 2(111 19. Housing 10. Aesthetics 111. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities J�,(� COMMENTS: Esc ' 5 `�-1� Gv- ?(e: / .•5��, (YI (cZ-� �c I"(����i' / `' 5 J.1_c2ay1 5��d c: c (04j w \ r L1 j iVh.AN,i S k `l G-U ciA 51- u �C1-n° 5, ".�+�' � (see. ..t1Z<41 c4'.)� PGA 1� �fi 1v ! f�' SG.s (CC Cj !^e - f 3) '�'•M L�-1 l�`c� c- j9�Nn l•�g�c.� Gt-S r'Av` t4 ,_ �cc� I ( � I J I' veca�'1.tTy-- a• rupp hoL�S 6J7-S J`/' I 'e 5 i\m/i t z/5 c7 (; ���4 GQ a f> c� cl�fy=/�c�-i l� '1 c 1vt.v�c s,�-e Et��►�r-r-e '`_'G1m i`c., cQ, ti)Oc.c ? `1 i d l OS k/ 11A-1 i)vi c•wt 3 r1 c 5 c'✓' LE•,1'l�z f p�`�d�` ci zrt �'k( i� .'cc`�j�cv\ ) ��S GLC�C�_vi„x„, s�� C��as / Y c y ce b eL9a(Lt `116A 17 to-e - ci,dS •";c /-g-;5'. r<<4/(y/ 1-0t,ot I IL P 1Pd p'cr A ) zr ala j alucl.o5 LL,16.7e.75 i ce. f We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas In which we have e pertise an91 have identified '1 areas of probable Impact or areas where additional Information Is needed to properly assess this proposal. re•vn e:P. // ,-/g - g/ Signature of Dlrec a or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 cnvrvshl DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED Y)APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS • NOT APPROVED -e4��� 1?.41r(- % I D c '� ^'i�'k:�.ving„, ' f Cc.✓� ,� CC.s� ) nr1,C-c��,SGv` � : ge., . , _K,)..�� an ;1,�.cI..2s. L,,5 c L,efr i G ((N P'4,1 oP G i DATE: `( ( 5 l �� � / SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 drv�ni DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: }altce- I DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA:SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp ','''`' PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII 1`1 t11 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: h.. 11991 LOCATION: 1-2 SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PR MORE OBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY I •. 1 Earth 2l Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: • . 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. \IL( 61 I Signature of Director or . thoriz d- epresentative Date Rev. 6/88 , • envrvsl,l ly . l DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 & ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION • CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ' PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONSTS REGARDING WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMM PLANNING DIVISION ON BY 5 00 P.M.P M. ON NOVEMBER 12, OMMEN TO THE 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED PLVIUMt nOUn --) Sk6 uuCA, aueJ C4P,v� Sf-A-,v w wuf-c,� 6ay.vt a,(_um FLU ( e,v ,tr11,c,ko , Jou (,(A__(gy p-coL .pfAcA c.e_, SVre,vvu . (DQ,(/cacjv Stta va_ CGS.. O loe,L, t_i DATE: 1121 cl SIGNATURE OF IRECTbA OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 dnvivshl DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: It ur \ V DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S) ECF;SA;SM-071-88 ECF;SA-109=89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp ' PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, .' .VIII t3f011 15 199 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: A;�,� ft% LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR MORE INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land & Shoreline Use 9. Housing • 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic &Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: 47Gj %G /i&�i G�] 7 /7, UGGtIo�t. � ��� ��/ � '. et 0 //A4 - � - 71/4 41,14?-9. • 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. M/00 , /0 ' q/4/ Signature of Directo or Authorized epresentative Dat Rev. 6/88 V • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-08&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII&VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION • UTILITIES ENG.SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION • _CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES _DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: SUGGESTIONSCOMMENTS OR REGARDING NG. PLLEASE PROV DECOMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON NOVEMBER 112, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: /""`jN�i/�� APPROVED *APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OT APPROVED -�� � ��� r77s-",z � 5 DATE: SIGNATURE OF [RECTOR OR AUTH RIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 • • • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WQRKS • •• ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET c:;1 OF?�M,9hN I My DEPARTMENT: Sew LA-1- ,� ,1 31 911 DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11 i12}6 1 �``� APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-80 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII• BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MAJOR MORE INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth • 2. Air 3. Water Y 4. Plants • 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare • 12. Recreation 13. HtstorIc&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services h 16. Utilities COMMENTS: r A T1-4 cis/E 090/0F7-iT3 Fipm 6—/15-9'i • 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. 69 ,ty�ram- /,-, -7/ Signature of Dor o Ihorized Representative Date !!! VV Rev.6/88 • • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: • ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII&VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ' LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: _PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 • ENGINEERING SECTION _TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTILITIES ENG.SECTION _FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT X DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION y _CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES _DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. n REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: /0r 4 N /'�F U/, 1z, APPROVED _APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 5r� ,477'6c6e15D Cc/4M7 173, I=/P0-?/7 / ADP/77ON) F c Urs J�i`/_�• Rf61-/7 TO RvAuFT 1)06v/v9l7,,f/t c44p4c/?' nN9Lyti/s / 5 44 Mill Ott ic.,o/A/ 0°,EA'4(/r- DATE: 1/l SIGN U CT /OR /4HORIZEiDRE ENTATIVE REV.5/90 • • DEPARTMErI -OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUB,' WORKS ENVIRI,:iMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW S.c.ET IEVIEWING DEPARTMENT: set xr u{-111jie J LATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/91 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 .PPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-461 ROPONENT: First City Development ROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park,Phases VII/Vill RIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently scant 27.76 acre site(Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed to be 4eveloped with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, mdscaping,recreation,and a screen(berming/lanscaping)which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat(Including a ieron rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings(Buildings D&F at live stories and Building E at our stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage,open parking,on-site recreation,landscaping,and a screen berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. he applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River resin.A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. to Environmental impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address Identilled environmental Impacts I -these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time,we are asking that you review the proposed projects with aspect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. .00ATION: North of SW 71h,East of Oakesdale and West of Neches ;ITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): MPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY I. Earth I. Air I. Water n 1. Plants 5. Animals 5. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing • 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • • • 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities • COMMENTS: Got LC/-JoN — rR d 1 aCT /6 vnTtf/N T M/ Ol/w%9,tt,5,V 7-1/ Y /3,t5/e/ - 12-'Neff 54N/774i Y Rv/iS SO4,775' yST /94o61G AcM77aN o /tf 1 F1QoNT7NG 13°TH PIM S6'5 7 Fl N D g sawaA M.4P Sffou5 65 M Ay fblrx_s(2) 4V4/44/0cg ON N012R/ y/,OF OF DAf5 549LE, Dag/�N coNfbi Loc47/oN of Th55Sh Pvfi/A1G p/QAwhve- F°cQ /%I&O/NG PMR41 rr / 01341 c4 Trorr t(o? IN Sr.vE-f4 Mot./1vA1vM A-K 4.. 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. /ti14/0/014*1• 6"11 -'hl Signature of DI ot_. 'ted Representative Date Rev.6/68 urnnN • • i. • • .,«r::1;'.•ri..i `;:I.yl':��i�G':.i'U/L":.w t'.:T:?.:F:.�uP='ylaF --- --- DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS % DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET • 'UCATION NO(S).: • ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP.071-88 • E C F;S A;S S M;RV M P-109-8. 9 OPONENT: First City Development • OJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park,Phases VII/Vili IEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a rently vacant 27.76 acre site(Including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed be developed with three office buildings(Building A at one story,and Buildings B&C at lour stories each),open parking, dscaping,recreation,and a screen(berming/lanscaping)which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat(Includi E at ng a t on it stories).rookery). h sract B is tractt will proposed lso inc ude a to be four story parking garage,open d with three office buildings parking, (Buildings recreation,&F at five storles and landscaping,and a so eon am and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. o applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River sin.A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. I Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has bean evaluated by a Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address Identilled environmental Impacts these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time,we are asking that you review the proposed projects with spect to anticipated site plan Impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. )CATION: SEC:13 1WNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC:24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th,East of Oakesdale and West of Neches • PUBUC WORKS DIVISION • SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/01 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTILITIES ENG.SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT • DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON JUNE 10,1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: F1'•AN l, (/I FiW _APPROVED _APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ..,( NOT APPROVED �joft,p/Ne- 9 W (Y re, 1e?-- I(\ O¢L(.. -J /A/ 4ccvo rAls,c, 1o//7/ G l r'Y o f Ar Nro(y Sr,y N,p,VQ n/C 7/'o N s,5r yl[C — FINAL D/3 5/GN FoA 6 v/L.p/NG-G d��T/� /t�1Y nu. IN cant poky!RN S '/T' (rY 171 ND A105 (A7T HF_p). - pRa")E-e-r 5 einVfl C/- o AJaduc46 - -PF�.1--oN.y -iyr Fr F , 7 Ea 4-Tn9-o/fl5::D Ft=C 5/fwFt-7, — pRovl/ / .& thr.7c-fret-EN 5 F—w/J . /441,0 017/ 4c dp -y I.(NF-5 " Fo z-tatvs: to /9 F_fu.EB/V 15w n/Y,0 wgricii /8/IPEAI IOL owl) / N� 5/0/0/ of/9/N M. JI 4Cil,kl��� DATE: ti`/r6-V SIG ATUR ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE • REV.5/90 • 1 I i I I I • 1 • • , r y.,.,•.+n...•an,cr.,rac na e,a •1 '0 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 0 PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP • 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET 0 • l �±..,,[[.. �/J� -77-7O�THER f IAPPLICANT:c 1A ( ,t.P � /.'•r. " -�7 i Jf� I JOB ADDRESS: Al ei/ /1/ 77A /:rr� r� //A.i, - f1 , !.d e!-/f I NATURE OF WORK: / I . DATE RECEIVED BY RECEIVED FROM COMMENTS DUE WON PROPERTY MGMT. GREEN N r .. FEES APPLIED 0 NEED MORE INFORMATION la LEGAL DESCRIPTION aP O NOT APPROVED FOR 0 FRONT FOOTAGE 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE I APPLICATION OF FEES 0 VICINITY MAP 0 OTHER • It Is the Intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below will apply to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are due and payable at the time the construction permit Is Issued to Install the onsite and off-site Improvements(I.e.underground utilities,street Improvements,etc.) PRIVATE DEVELOPER FIELD PROJECT COST LATECOMER LATECOMER AGREEMENT NO. PER. FTG. FEE WATER — SEWER — h OTHER —O SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FTG. SAD FEE ' WATER — SEWER OTHER ,& .e/ &d,.rnesk.1'7-pe SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE•WATER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$940/lot x Apartment,Condo,each multiplex unit$545/ea.unit x Commercial/Industrial$.126/sq.ft of property x ‘9 76Z,Y/ ��7j/.S9.O/ (not less than$940.00) SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-SEWER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$470/lot x Apartment,Condo,each multiplex unit$270/ea.unit x �� Commercial/Industrial$.063/sq.ft.of property x (not less than$470.00) bt937�!1' //7.3i 077.0/ 12/ pp TOTATOTAL1:i 2 3l.02 K e The above quoted fees do NOT Include Inspection fees,side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. at/ ''‘ 4' P/erne 've,-,15' y'r d/•s/ rlel<L C6,3cr/PT/oq wilt' 0764B071,J //Anse ICT� See red-line CO.r,rnen')`J , 4751.chew hereTo.) n ,/.c—EJ,7A----,, 7-7- / Signature of Director or Authorized Representative • DATE • ' ./,•n..,/b,...nr./,n IA. •1'c t. Y t s:. • •u:: • : ,.. ','': ..-•,;.,,,.:•:.;,...,•i.•••:!.;.:* ,'•...-.; ::;.:,...,:.,iii.Y.'...f.•-.:.,s0,...g.',..::,•.1.T.z:.,:.,.••.•••.':...•••i.•••:','•:..".';':•••••,. •'. ..4,' i' Ss r I } (,14 'I.'.-/,A il•' r,,. A. :.AIL'' .(' • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS Clime^=f trFON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET NOV u 1 1991 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Covl kiav\ Se fc2A .t,rt DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 �r aNhtr•�uwistoia PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII:. NOV f)4 1991 )r:�.r;� BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: aa VEJ. LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBAB MAJOR INFORMATION LERE IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Alr 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. HlstorIc&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas In which we have expertise and have Identllled areas of probable Impact or areas where additional Information Is needed to properly assess this proposal. /7- t Sig ature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII,. .' BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION _TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTILITIES ENG.SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES _DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION — OTHERS: COMMENTSD BE PROVIDED IN PROV DE COMMENTS T REGARDING THE(PLANNING DIVISION ON BY 5 00LP.M. ON NOVEMBER WRITING. PLEASE12, 1991. I� REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Coh'tY osA &XVI&ea //APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED "1 ''i"Y 0 ✓N—_i- DATE: /f' C/1/ SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE • REV.5/90 r».-%. nrt r� DEPARTMENT OFPLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS Frr4vroNry ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET Novf n, 19,1 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Fo-t'k'S DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE:pp1--1/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 lf'0EIVED PROPONENT: First City Development Corp NOV 4 1991 PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII • PARKS 8 RECREATION BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE IMPACT IMPACT MAJORI N O NECESSARY 1. Earth • 2. Alr 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health ' 8. Land&Shoreline Use I; 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare / 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation ' 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: ._e't L./J4Zc r. ... n -,-- tii✓c ��/,...C. ge.42-e,-,4_7 c,-[...4.--4---fr (e 41, X.!: (IA419 GV•ea ,Z7L- ,g0.- Ott �! �" • 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. __,..,..„4. A � //_.5---_,, . Ignature of Director or uthorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS IV°V S DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 'ct 4 199y APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071.88&ECF;SA-109- 9 �'AHK y,REC PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. 13Eg070N PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park,Phases VII&VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTIUTIES ENG.SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT _DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION _CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES _DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES _PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION _OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED ✓ APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED • DATE: � z— /J J SIG ATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 • ` • `'.- DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS . ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEETTON FIRE DEPT. RREN PREVENTION BUREAU REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: +—;re— Prck.fer4'a i. NOV 4 __ 1991 DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 1 f hj!VED APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp q�Mt� ,,f PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII f r.) s{� , .41'.. 1,' ink BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: ,",6.- 0;l \ee LOCATION: '� :° SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): 40 PROBABLE MORE IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLEMINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPA T NECESSARY 1. Earth L.,2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals / 6. Energy&Natural Resources j/ 7. Environmental Health -I 1 8. Land &Shoreline Use k 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities ✓ COMMENTS: AV d lv1 a or in+ R c f S ith I t°i ' . V / We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas In which we have expertise r ieand have Identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional Information Is needed to properly assessthis proposal. • 11 5 9f Signature of Director or pp orized Representat a Date Rev. 6/88 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION 1`FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ev ch • %- APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS x NOT APPROVED S ct i e i G K 7L i A C o,rr a/•o,l defeevseis e � o lief �aUe gyp/ S . Ate 4.Atlito/- G-q.GSS DK b° AKO0j4t-L tp b J / cce MLA arc , diadted k•c/¢- çoaces ire oQe �c�l.>a.e� -sS � .� � n/k ra� uailit,n S • So 4-� , vCo t1 And al`ou wc� -� ��s�40IJ5t T/mot `ro f gopast o P12.03 zcX oVEyZ ( M /NiregcdAtit4�.U� 0-one nei d,tm i)IC d"7" rtY TO R O-E M i rc 7Olt) /0 po l=u.rtidt dHiLDINq £/ VIAU- F j-((L 5T)4T?or) `(a aDtic >t &2.s ONSL YFML. 'V 14ce /9L4' L/M // / q� r , DATE: l! / SIGNATURE OF DIR 6 . OR AUTHORIZE', REPRESENTATIVE AddGcl III/ • 1 5/90 Emergency response time IT mere than six minutes. Request that applicant participate in the Fire • . • • Mitigation Fee program for truction of a fire station In the Valley. • •• REQUIRED FIRE FLOW CALCULATIONS 1 . HAZARD IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION NAME: �j)/,t.r�, t ., �. ( '1, / K�1� J! � � � 1 ' °• �lf 11 .F3.C. CLASS OF BUILD ' '�� � ADDRESS : ��(,) �. . /( . l ' ' • ', `} FIRE MGMT AREA 2. DETERMINE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION - CLASS (CIRCLE ONE) : I -<I .- ) IV III V FIRE-RESISTIVE NON-COMBUSTIBLE ORDINARY WOOD FRAME (NOTE: IF "MIXED " SEE MIXED SPECIAL INSTRUCTION FOR AREA AND BASIC FIRE FLOW) 3. DETERMINE AREA: GROUND FLOOR AREA : FT'2 NUMBER OF STORIES TOTAL BUILDING AREA: //(,f //dd (A) . 4. DETERMINE BASIC FIRE FLOW FROM TABLE #1 , USING AREA ((1) : . `jV • GPM (13) 5. DETERMINE OCCUPANCY FACTOR ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT: - j f/12 , `j GPM (C) 1F LOW HAZARD, SUBTRACT UP TO 25% OF (B) ; IF HIGH HAZARD, ADD UP TO 25% of (B) 6. COMPUTE SUB-TOTAL (B+C) : (IF B+C LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) I! �;)/� , �, GPM (D) 7. DETERMINE SPRINKLER ADJUSTMENT: ADJUSTMENT:, 2 •J /( .. , M1.J GPM (E) (IF COMPLETELY SPRINKLERED, SUBTRACT UP TO 50% OF (D) : IF! LIGHT HAZARD OCCUPANCY AND FIRE RESISTIVE OR NON-COMBUSTI[LE CONSTRUCTION, SUBTRACT UP TO 75% OF (I)) . 8. DETERMINE EXPOSURE ADJUSTMENT: USING THE TABLE AS A GUIDE, ENTER THE _SEPARATION AND ADJUSTMENT FOR EACH OF THE "FOUR FACES" OF THE BUILDING IN THE TABLE AT THE RIGHT: SEPARATION MAX . ADJUSTMENT EXPOSURE :SEPARATION ACT. ADJ. 0- 10 25% MAX NORTH •. r ADD /6 $ 11 - 30 20% MAX EAST : i " /5jd 71 ADI.) () $ • 31 - 60 15% MAX SOUTH ' /:; ) 7 ADD 0 $ 61 - 100 10% MAX WEST ' P(//0 / ADD f,j $ 101 - 150 5% MAX TOTAL % OF ADJUSTMENT 150 or 4-11r WALL 0% MAX (NOT TO EXCgEI) 75%) J 6.) $ (TOTAL % ADJUSTMENT TIMES (D) ADJUSTMENT: ; 82 !/, );1j - GPM (F) 9 . DETERMINE ROOF AND SIDING COVERING ADJUSTMENT: (IF SHINGLE COVERING, ADD 500 GPM) ADJUSTMENT: + O GPM (G) 10. COMPUTE ESTIMATED FIRE FLOW REQUIRED: CJ (IF WE+F+G IS LESS THAN 500 GPM, INSERT 500 GPM) ! ��,�'.� (IF D+E+F+G IS GREATER THAN 12,000 GPM, INSERT 12,000 GPM) ' ) (D+E+F+G) RE _UIRED FIRE FLOW: `Ijl5O(/ GPM (II) 11 . SIGNED: \ � ' \ ,ZI,L j.-Irtl' • DATE: / ''/ / . (// ,1 :•-• a ..na+ nw�s cagy com--.a.c..,_\ + }.E . + • �, WT la L. / • F7 cnel°r.1 C$(�\\\N __`•_. (, •1 0 Fa,av�,v I,e. ; .PLANT MATEPoAL LEGENDas Detention Pond qL �\ \\\ j .� K.l • o r, b-f•.t.n1e r.rvR:rvAa r IN y C �. I r�-y� p�yal I�/ !- ter �1-` I I i"U�.�I M f Y. NV ,eg .2i1+'-Poe,or,WfLB,�w( 1a..f i Mfl Nr.6”. L . •� r��--'.\s w•roro•[ _ n^a. - - -�"-�e==�.�--�+�-- --- I i "`iii(,' ... Mro..� rex-wa-feel,na-tr.w ems{ " • - :'.' / ——— •.V. -..• , • • (\4 :.. .' �.J ;� n. mWo Ir aWF,,,, -rb+u M1r,.,.bbfeAl H�ccu.,�-iM.a.yr.F'M'+ - L` 1 i I > re ;l•m ='. it • \ .\. \\`` ,;./ � \ \\ •;�� ! I ;i I` I "` ••`(i� 4 �si.Awr rr°Ffr.Lv. .. L ~ ` `:\ ,� j - 1 '•�`� - ` �1 M� \ 4/ '` r 1 I •i� a°e..'e�•-�r w..H+�atp �wo a tl'a. o 0 V hl.` :P // n `- -\\',<\ •0, E i. •.•I I � N-x0 ar•v+tt al•s-vi Q Hrr..vfn{ a \, ,\ +�' f e°v_y,.. ![�\ ��i' /i,,J �;; ` - �Otr° ! 'Y/,/i/i,� `q' [tbn'+o-sh•-arft• +1��1[�.IB;.,...+�aV• m > / 15 _ 7, 1v I.ri•a X.•w \ �3• 1 1 - _tti Lai rq.'"' L• 1' 4; l;ri � •`l (ti� +I' � !; ;�`� r. �•�/� �.13 ym 4 IA I - •RPe mow. ---- U ; N:1 1 ,-! '-`'� u r r1f N.F�j. I,',; !Il 4.6 h -*AAA--9wr,'++n,d,!Kvl: At*, - !I I ,.I .•w.a'' i `f'_•��{�1����,.�w a - !,\' :7, 1. I O FR.R�,- 1� CO d r>.a., \``�1 $0.7 O` ,1 I I I.- mtc•.,o.�;n w.�w•: ` x J fx.,. rw+ 'tq +a..-. /� I• I �i1 i `� 9°• ,r 'I ^�:.1 [ `1 `,� -4 , �! i �y+� 1 <• t i1 'r,.w_'TV.) Al e o- H r♦x�.ea'tF'< Mw-1 a1..f.M • - 11•. j ('�• �• a f: �, • � uF' \•4�rf �,..1 I y1 ,a O 'nor.i fw'-I a,n-�-Iw .xN' ln-1r, I ;7. ' , + a � ',' �J a 1/�4. I I I \�.` `� I 1 1 x O C.fe v a:0*r, Nfaw+`yG^ /•s :b� ;� � _ i'1i -y � � d•`w '\ �+^'-�vlp'IC'n-i c I` i r +•O.•..rN4- Fla•-Ir+wn euNYe+r aViv Ilan/ , i4. .e sa. ./ . 4:1. •,[.- - ,,,, p:t\\ ,� , `� :I 't�1 f Mn 1 hG..t t 4r,„ ,�,•,r. .:. ,„ "^d (I. 1+ + . \• :R.. a 0` ter+• .'� -St ctk. \; . - 1 i i /. ./' i tj�'•'pit . 'i. - ��° �A\i�' / ( 1.� h 1 iIr)ri - j� 1 ( i j II e.a? I. i \ fie*. •nor l�` -'' s,• - �I A��' 1., 'qth'.; : .-rL — !J I I,1 -`Y of r / (s ie1 \spa►{• /r� \ jA `f�'f�'� �� -- I• ICP T �� 1!o i (y'► % sw{�\54 _ ; �.�F" dl�"I 1 a-al-� °>� �-.... la.iv F '1'�1 s - - _ I°n.,ec'.,� i • �.:♦ 1 - Fer, ' ✓i f� i•.- /( y! �-�-.-.. .o °[au.row are ';I. .1 I �. �. fD>•ff iJ f\ _ 'r!{f� 3� Id *�f•l.fP, .1�i'•`f: }�1-1 a+o, T L,-a"'�{'¢' — - c I' al. , 111/ ► f 'It\ 4.�je•';t..°r��'.J' r�;iim vim...' --.- ,-�' :-...----.»,.a I ..r—.. �J r�'r...c 7�u re :aye• l' iyy A '••- - --:`.:m i--: � a` I'. (lc.. .']. r 1. i ••ilrS�i• y•` • [�*- `-,r,\'tee-,f'..._ krzte ,p^ �`� �U ..fib • ., - Lr_- I. y�>_c=L_ .an.,actaa na,.�l1 1 li '' •40r. ["�• y �1ias,,.. .'+•I �•�� `'G. f��1 '�i��.:'.�'• ', '��r- __ :If •_ .__ +�e....r ee \ 1 1\ dd•�� ► !`'1 : ` iv+ � -' ��!. v4 J ': ° .-- -, -- _ {¢ � --' -1 rI\A -, lit, 'I'�''�%)t;.5 , 1t i\ 1 h.., r • ,�Osi-.4,P ,(41.0...•v°4%. t411 4r ‹ik, �A ' , o n _�iti' ___---.___— e -'- r�3+`�;�C., [ --•--.-—. j' -`C,r I • ,'W ili ,,c ...!jai- Alljii.-V4 \• ',�`15, :r4+ _�.o.� '--- -- r.. \ l� _ - �-`!l�:°,` �."- i/4 P 1IPS-•- ti •- ���i r` /`/ AREA W BU\` `\ ,p4 �`4ys�^' q ..;140„\��`:...,� O0 t-r1,k�''.w `� ✓.'• .e. . ;'//,-.'" .w LANDSCAPE FFER PON o�ei..• `�:S, - -� °`g•N;A-` ` . •.4, ���'.S�n -�'� ,v4� yas• /./ oo.wrr+. . • 1die,.�I� .`ee%a .``'�" .�s �Q ,• ,�� - BLACKRIVER VN . -- _ ` CORPORATE PARK P+• � p . .. - . RENTON WASHINGTON Q LANDSCAPE PLAN ��-, . •' }r j N �_� FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i '\ 11 • !j-1 to sn 9° Taal41, .. _` - :,, .: • • • \ M MC.°aD.1� Co.. fIT 19°s • m,,,h+ 6!6 • • 1 , • • Ii 6 l /- a} ( r 2 1 fEa - ° • - v, \ i o.t•Con Pond /1 l's `.. ' P�"TM I MONUMENT SIGN I I• C. • • / • -��Ate'.- —_..� \ ,- ,oj- _ •'r hF-1-a\�l D� BAIXRNER j w'sAcREs \` ii ' �5� /I `1ww r ` ' �F • ! \� -' c;Q 11. wmcElirr O D U C ' `�� • I. •• •b — ,^ .. ' I . ,�\ n ' ;. 1 _. > \`1} 1, �'e+:L.Kre.x�Isys / / / �/ ///* •--••• • �i tit \I /�4,..=4. ), I �_ VICINITY MAP • o .Y (11 ' I '. l4 I'. 1 1�'-es roa r:m�.•.. / / p ♦ ♦ .a+, R� I 1 ', _ >. U Cn 3 I / • 1. ') \ 1If • _ _ ' 11. g•I ,aar•s • •• a • i _ "'';I. I • •- ,;.�11 'il�" _ o — z Ir1i `,••i / i.'•• unlit. ° 9e5"r i: IQ •II -''�'-• /a•.-c,�i {t--I1 •"• E+tr.osw�:c`-cs /�� u. m [L ¢ , Ti/ / / / /.:..��j�.}•r t. /; - / T: cry,: W gym•it':'H-"�,'\ \, \‘::' 0/ . • • ( :fir r .tea `�� •.I'. 1 u = i i�/.-�. oes I Snr yyE ,h'.� 1i1 1 �S \ > 1---0..i..w Oral-, _ /' 'it ' %//u� ,R//-/-./// - .`'A ii0 tie-- i -- J II �i\\i t '11 `: 1-�, V1EL •• • •• • • log _ •I I I •c:—. .v'�� `+. +��♦ ., .5. \.•s.,'9'►,,,,. �\` -• J/ !I:!-`�-•1-r __ o __ `` l no u,u.rnri� � r� \�\. w — —, ......a •,� tl ; tc �F ;;• ,t. •• ✓' r'' — S. - 'e^.• ur d.y I/IffIII /\ ?r /T_ �, v. _. / •�' - s� _ �..�, 6 �.a' - - - -- •�T\� �•r.'� ;�.IIc1 ;'• 1 �, ` / . ��ji: - .•` •' -�ip v��'� a.i; - \: wry-_ \� I I 1 LJ <-J \\' 1, , v Uif1 �� 4. �: o\1 ,� \` �:' "/- u c VICINITY MAP c.mso.J.// 1i 1'�' Wirres VAI d I! ,'�1.0'01, ,,�Gaj / `.qr<"•r<'c u:.es.,.,lm ",a• H _- / ^`T ia_ .wtim 0 .✓ . - •,•- �1� / , -�a..:.rf_- Yo-.�_zc�. - ` - _ r ♦��,.` ..,-, ....''''`,..' pitt.411111p + re. \ : //- e/' ,t cJec Gs.-- aEo4�4F .•cs. `\ ` \ !� P,•� �-- • �""\`, �' _ a• / /.ice G. ...E.,r TO be-VK..t9 • y cG `asz. 0 �ekOj°04 ' "4'....•.• r , I..>,����.+ - ►e i- �, :/ 1/ `.i`e.:g e...e S,aE EEC;<c- '� A• j's w-� \ ��'�� I��� • l': ., `` 5a" / -�.`ai ..-rP. TABULATION •""-"•16 Cue J • Le • � a aro x Site Area ±683,762S.F _✓ • \i `' ,F.y ,.' _. , _ BLACKRIVER VN Building Area ±286,300 S.F. - `\ -�•� `,-'__ -5 •/ /,�j Ipn s verage •419% ' • / CORPORATE .PARK = SITE PLAN Site Coverage .-9• footpri excL rage) I • • °. /,mwe.ns � �4r; RENTON WASHINGTON Q Parking 11359 Stalls(1/211 SF.) �:G`•V �`—� • `` /-j // FIRST CITY DEVELOPMENTS CORP. i • -E7 . Standard •.T, 21071 Stair al Cr-cKJ.� _.,D. / fl-, tD Sd 9b lac{ Compact tle°s 20%). ,\ r 1\� Handicap 215 Stall • ' \ -r\ . • ♦ - \ JC.p crawl SKL!nu Cf •. / CHECK.+-c . • tiw,, I / ; • ;1--bi 1 P.I (.r+4N � A,E( , ii.r_......._\_ . • ,.. RSp •. . • . v N • A . 1P/ . • (Pt • N `i�. .4 o i+f� "Iir Tijt:TA V� Itileadillir R:- 1'.' . /-__ I A Ojit4 All:\6, '',Y4 1:il''T.°' >s A,-' t""--- -__!.k 47,, ,..:2" .. , t borojer,,...--s=3-vi....,.. , , . / _, v.,'t , r 4, . .,,,, 41.,, ..,....-k------ . , . , , .. 1i I. �► 1a�' ° 4 s iX i„,,, .4 ,.,o's -:°fir, o le iiiri 't", i ,c1 t` `" ,,, / % r ./ 'J�a I'�'V ;►' .0 b.• 1' "gyp• �. iN> � II .tir . :t '' n II. •{ L 1 I p• • 1 r l, V p; P n I)\\,00010 A r\ . .x• I o Ii (} aP A4"... 4' ill.._r ...ill r -0e000 timpoweji.c.A, . ' l' !z I )1 li-'4 . ' --- . v.••• .t, —."' 'Ll..,i414:4116. v :.. , -s i N Nc 474 ,tf .• .tt, ' i f ,...q. ' • >. N.*I +ate\ ,•r:'� A • 'III I i k " ' LI 0. y 6• NALli sir A �• I .1. ------"r-• I r • 7 (III 1' I !lIj ) ,: • • fr m[I v •\ . y 0 • I CONCEPTUAL PLAN , 1 1 I P ' TRACT 'B' " __ __ _ BLACIORIVER .CORPORATE : PARK _ BUSH ,ROEDR NANDSUNGORINC. L . . 1 � CIVIL ENGINEERS 6 UND SURVEYORS $�I, l roir.e•FIRST,CIpF5• £ UI I,E" iF ! 1, .0, ao•ww.ew, eum..w.u:m ,H `F' J oG�mM,rHtrr41Y�L V' REN :X.1•.,.}'•r-i.:a:=_s_}:•. i aac emu, ;Aft Naiz>.a i T-i • Is •] • • • - I I STAIR ELEV. EQUIP.? 1 Elgin lr� •I u1A10�1 ,�i ❑ 00 Ill il S AIR I �.�.�• iA4 0 0 INN ���jAg\I ♦���V it Showers ® )...♦ •..�� • 1st flr only r��.����• ♦♦��� ♦ �417.74�°��Nal TELE. IDI -- • • -• •1 ••��•ir• En ❑ • \� �� , \\ J ROOFUNE \` EnROOFUNE� N \ < LINE OF 3RD \l• _- • I • FLOOR L_; • ❑ ❑ • FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1 -_ =• • •, THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN 120.-0- 80'-0- I•J ,02_,i1 ��•J ,..• • I•L-1 L . I ■ 'Kw", It mo w, • �,: : mmi �\ \: . . \ _ \ 1 N. i Imm um I _ \\� No ROOFLINE _= I =_ I SECOND FLOOR PLAN I'— • ❑ TRACT 'B' FIFTH FLOOR PLAN BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII - First Cit Washing ton Inc. Ob Y � � NOATN _.m, 10-31-91 v _ �= 5 Story Office Floor Plans (B L D G . F) #N W 8804,., 1-30-�91 0 20 40 60'-0' i 60'-0- I 100'-0. I o ♦ c ■■■► 1 MN ME co STAIR ■■t■ I iiia lll■■■■ • JAAN LuIN ELEVATORS o ELEC. 23 Egg'C ELEV. EQUIP. 1 in roI u: n ii9 Wco 11 , i, in THIRD FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLAN t• ./"I \ /�J / I h i //I MI6 MI ,,,,„,„1 ilin:ww111 1--, _______, , l� IA 7 SECOND FLOOR PLAN FOURTH FLOOR PLAN TRACT 'B' ---: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII mr First City Washington, Inc. NORTH ;a:: �: 10-31-91 sow 03° story Office Floor Plans (BLDG . E) #NW 88041.1 1-30-91 0 20 40 3 1 .-•---".----------gi -------77--- - . -- - -- • -.... '' mmisialli...111 ....M111111111 snmid 110111MMInl_all ..011 ..ili _...is --- hibillEHMI .i. 4 If. mum' 1 ....... II ill 1111 • I ' 1111111 I i JIM 11111 n INN INN INN iiiiiiiiiii) -' o : , I ME MI ME EM r- - 0 l- I NINNIINNINNIII IN ID 1111 IEN EAST ELEVATION . NORTH ELEVATION • Typical ' Tinted VisioGlass - Mechanical Sc erior Insu a andrel Paaels inn • ---------------"--"-"-----------. v• ii1111111111111111111_1 1111_1_111111111_1 1111111 • , iiiIi , 11 111111111111111_11111111111111111111111 Iiiiiili 111111111111111111I111111111111111111111111111 tiiiiiiiiii 1 1 frIlid t11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 - 1 1 il WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION TRACT UBH BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII \ First City Washington, Inc. :_. --—7.7eivtimtarstiZ 10-31-91 4 Story Office Elevations (BLDG.. "E") NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-91 .. . e . - . A ''. -Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass Mechanical Screen . . T sic. • . I jai=a1.111111....MIN:-7-- :I TiTI1111111111111111111111111111 • .. • - . • .‘11111111111MIll Nunn a .11011- LI SELAIHT. ittiltill11111111111Ilt . 1 I On I• i7- (--- "-)-,. 1 o IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITII I -.0-4\ ''' • 't1E3(, -.) I MU 1 li . _. ,,,45f. im I 11111111111111111111.11111111111111111111111111111111111 1 ./..„ ., iminissimmin.. I--ai ,; . 1-1--1 ...,,. r-- . . . WEST ELEVATION • • . .• NORTH ELEVATION. • - . . • . • . . - . .. . . . . . . . . - -- 7-Exterior insulating Spandrel Panels • _ .. •:-_,..... ---__ -•:..... . ...._—... :------ -— .. . . -- • . , ( . , 7--1------• \ , - II II ,11 i I I 1 . - 11111111_11111 - 1 I I le I 1-11illAt Will ill _ll111111_11_1Itt . . ' . 611- Mk /". ' , . J ,....y :-II• r_IR 111-NM MINIMIIIIIMINIMMINIIi k: •• . V111111 , 1111 11 ,---,,,, . ' . MI 11111 I MIMI Iseismim 1 -`111_1...1—• lillINIMIII Inns 1 - 1111111111•111 . , I I: I 1 1 1 I I 1 __j -.-_--Is_ I i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 II I 1 1 1 [ A . SOUTH ELEVATION • . . EAST ELEVATION . . . . • • . . . . • .. . . .. - . .. TRACT "B" . . .. . .----z----'27..- --i--&----i BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII. V 1 ,...:f.--_-: First City Washington, Inc. .....-„;ciii. 1._.m.....,.. --_ ,, • 10-31-91 • :::" -------.7 ----- T-i; 5 Story Office Elevations (BLDG. "D") NW88041 Scale: i"=40' 1-30-91 ,...._ ....-- - , Tinted Vision and Spandrel Glass Mechanical Screen • Typical I l� 1!.I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 11 t1 f I 1 I 1 111 111 !j � � �lif I l I I I I I 1 1 Q1 ��= MAL ] l 1 11j I l I I l I l l l l l 1J 1 1-LJ Ir I l 1 J I l I l 1 1 Til 1 II I I I J_1_L_J��� 7.' l lii l i l i t i m i l l I I i s n i l I I I l l l I I I I I 171 1 ► 1 1 1 7 I I t - - � 1 % J '0 1 ( I LI L I I i I i I IJ I I I U I I I I i 1 1 I I J I I II e cite ll I l I 1 Ti l l l I1 I I ::>s-Ill as = _ 11 111 I I I I_i I I I l iz411_I I l L111 Iii l I J III I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l ! ` :°i E 111 =1 NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION r ' Exterior Insulating Spandrel Panels I rll_iIilly - i ' I I {I-1111lll11111111III11I11l1 Il �— ll I I • III II - h,�-z` l ---�1 -< I � II � � (l_I! I I l i ! I l l l J l l l l f l l l .I l>t l j lialir" II iII ;., I i ` 1ink _i li_ It I • a , -'-II111111111111111I ] II Hill _ I 2aaa ° 4 1614 III I ��� ' I '` �'�'` I 1 1rallllliliillllljll1111ti , _ SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION TRACT "B" i _ ,--== = BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII I1..:- _LL4= First CityWashington, Inc. 2 10-31-91 • 5 Story Office Elevations (BLDG. IIF`I) NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' 1-30-91 242.-0. .20'/ ; �- 1I1I111I11I1I1I1111111 �giTAIR/ - ' I I I III I I I f' - _ IIIIIIIIIlIIIi1IIIlIII J 99 *: _i — 1 T 12 3 3.-- -HT 3 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3_ I -- o— o o rc--n cc . I I — 3 3 3 � 3 C 3. 3 3 3 3 3__3 3 1 �— I —— _ I I -- 3 3 I=1 ,0 3 3 33 3, 3 3�3 3 3 3 i _ n 1 3_ 233 3 3 3 3 3" 3. 3 3 = 3 3 3 I �— 1 =_ — I I I —— — — I I I I I I i -- I 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 o3�3o 3 3 I -- I 1 --Z I I s -- — I • 3 3 3 3 I 3� r.3 3 N 3 _30 cc . 3 3 3 I 3 _ 3 '� 3 I T 1 -_ _ T 3 3 I 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 D 0 3 • 25 25 25 i 25 25 23 I 22 i. 1 I. �. .7----•, LCI �• r �_- _ , • , I - 1 2 2 2 31 I TAIR 1 � I111I1I11I1111I11C1 = , ;V II ills H 111I1 22�f illl ! I ! 1lill ! II, 111 ! I �ZIr ! N. n +, 0! I I LELEV'ATOR �J FIRST FLOOR PLAN SECOND FLOOR PLAN FOURTH FLOOR PLAN Third Floor Similar ' • TRACT 'B" . RPO TE PARK Phase 'VII dilzx_pr„,,,,_,..17N First City Washington, Inc. - `° 4 Story Garage Floor Plans NW88041 Scale: 1"=60' 10-31-91 . , ____- —•-- ----__. __ 1 lk---- it. 0 I Millilil .. — . — : .1114 .'4.•1 11.1W =1.11.11.1 • . - -U -- - -' • . i \ WEST ELE . 1 1 ___------- Tinted Glass .ainted Cu= nels , . _ /---------- --___. ___-- ---,.‘ . . . . • ' . ._ . . . -.- •-. P° lir_xi - AL60:1 -- .--i,-,..-1_: .:--,:i:---•-•- --, ..---:. :---,,---_-,--i - 10 ._ • .m: . ., .------ ----- --- - NORTH ELEVATION , ' SOUTH ELEVATION -.-------. a-, ----.---- -o t to. ,.,,,, ,,;,Iowa-,,,,-_, _-„,,-.2 • ME . If _ - =:-'"----':--"--i="1.1 NEMINEMMINIIIIII gi EAST ELEVATION TRACT "B" - . --------- IJ-j BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase Vil ® -4 7---i.-w First' City Washington, Inc. .z .1„-,_-..44, ----- - -.7.,-.).,..„ 10-31-91 Story Garage Elevations NW88041 Scale: 1"=40' ,- • . 75.-0' 95.-0" 1 30'-0" i • 1 - l'J '• 1\ 0 0 • \ . .0. • 1 L • :. -. _'. MERE . I \s____ • \ - ELEVATORS-1111111111•1111 • • L • • • MIMII . : 1111111.MMIMININNEY rt 51- 0113..r RR ci • 1...111111111.. •m!`..-ra.MEM • - :• . .0 .-- -44. 11LFR ..,.. . .. • sEo....04 i cn'Ca w 111W-Ldll 11 IIE a . • in NIIIIIUN CI • 0 - Nigial . . ELEV. EI-g....,.,iimiiii jima. * EQUIP. - • • In.„,.cc MIN II lo co . a MIMI II. .• . I AIR STAIR I ELEC. TELE,z___i , • • .i!..._ • -1 --1 I JAN. . I . .. . • ,• • a 0 I i• •• • FIRST FLOOR PLAN THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN . . 11 •I -, • \ i-C :•1 \ 71 LL'\ a)• 1---E-761 IMBRUE ino.. ' II= Br 4•11h, E2Mill 1 1 --- =Pk =.•-•• .f---aannpi •-..1 lou ,... ,_ . ja".... 1•11 NIZIAIIMINIIIMIIMIIM ,__..,:•••• •i; mu 1211 1- 11111111111 BEI 1 1 . .•:- ,±_ • • . R . . ' • • !• - •••1 • . T ril 701 :i3 •. . SECOND FLOOR PLAN .. FIFTH FLOOR PLAN TRACT 'B' BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Phase VII I ... :-,:,,:::,,- First City Washington, Inc. VW NORTH $ 10-31-91 5 Story Office Floor Plans (BLDG . D) #NW 88041.1 1-30-91 0 20 40 - , fE•,;11."'2:; V-:::".;:,-; _ .. .,-. . . _ RON ROOKER 714. • RY R=�IEST PRESERVE ��: ��f" : /��� t i ; 1t _ _ eidayig. . . ,.. .__„,„al 0_, ...., jilt .--.±: Jr ifrip,74,....;,. . • - $40•;;. •ram VACANT '� i> '% , ..;4 .,:o... • • -4' 11 OFFICE • P`d, \ d �1.,1`q=� �.� r• .rvt �SC— '4'. 9 4 M".. _ - k •ti • • ,i �1'' i.- :0 lq�f'tie . a•r.f'ti 'i `! ..•�. �c` i 14 t� .C .. hli:4.'qta...�►.•..:n•.+ --_f�a!]/• V� !JI � _ ‘,•. = 0 �� q.. d !f ;'* �_rItiy{ ;-- .r» fir ,. ;, r P-1 DETENTION POND / . +:- ;®/ ;'r' I. ... . a ‘ 1 s a €2t•:"— \ d5C\ -.P.'-'41; ` .7'....:(...)--6," .Y It t•I.:...:• :..eir: 4 A.4e, • -pi I -i \c-N ....• .‘,,,,,•p.„- •'. -. '‘‘ lir,\\.t:. \.. ,.• ....* • ,41- • ` • ` � \\ - d ++++\t+�� • :-- ° 'a' Mal 1[t• �' ,,�i _ is �, ) • :P....41:...:t Q _� i�, i . .' ` .4111 �* d 3 I .;IIII (� :4* OFFICE • • • .0111, t ,--GAPS‘W.:;' IS ".7.1.(' i'.:. i.`.4.-. ."...• . . ‘ r'i i'l i s . . �t I: ¶ i: ' _ ••' i r. '1 ��y .V. -PRPOSED M / /f �. `'-- y t. . f "li� `r .i•,l `OFFICE � t, f.� . . F,, .it '.F •.1 ti•� • c:45 A • • • •. Of ::;./..4.771---/fr .- , 7.4§ i /=; k' .� �s�psf�noo. 11, I r'v>i,,�- fa70•, ' 0 StArk,a2iik.....,.....0.04xi ( + :::..:. \ili, _�� it s��ti•wa` -�. , +'I ® ..s .s- \,sys tea^r w�v s? t v •k + Tale ' ..N•!• I� f �tr �•��.I _\ /_.: y ,\� ter'-,•,, 4:41- ,es- _.. Fly '•... 4ji� i . ..5r. F :. �� ® �k/ ~-. is .w `�I� ice ;.' :11�� �. . . .N r \ .• Vim' _ •tom �... ' / . i . =•t��illpe �'� �,r•w.• r��`'���4 �� .►�"�./Y ��♦` OFFICE . . •- - •_. . ••.• -. --tve.... • .__. - '9 ,e‘ • . ,,..• . .... .,, ,..i..-5 ...444. - „.. -... ......., ... :, ,T,„43.416. ..,4 . I . . . E ,.. .... . .......:.: „.. ., ..,‘ __.., ..„„ii,„.,„,... ,. .:...........,... \t5 90. % - ill , METRO-SEWAGE—. ="•1, -: "S ~ - — � t OFFICE �tOi IC `-IT Y AP ,` TREATMENT PLANT 11 -4tat }•�p•� gTAT 'ry),4 a = . 1889 6y ` Kt STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY 4 Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 4 - 0O ?O December 18, 1991 ��a' � %' . Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Black River Corporate Park Addendum issued December 2, 1991 Dear Examiner: Thank you for providing us a copy of the above document. Acknowledging that there is no comment period for such a document under Chapter RCW 43.21C, the State Environmental Policy Act, we submit the following comments for your consideration. We wish to remind the applicant and the City of the requirement for a shoreline substantial development permit before construction may begin. This process includes a 30-day appeal period after receipt of a complete filing by Ecology. In addition, a conditional use or variance permit requires Ecology approval. At the time we receive the permit, we will review for consistency with Renton's Shoreline Master Program. We wish to particularly point out the language in Section 4, 6, 7.05, and 7.17, among others, requiring public access to publicly owned shorelines. We also wish to state, as we have in the past, the need for mitigation if any wetlands will be impacted by the proposal. We will examine the project proposal and endeavor to ensure that no net loss of wetland values, functions, and acreage will occur, in the area under shoreline jurisdiction. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you wish further clarification, please feel free to call me at (206) 438-7106. Sincerely, 1lAk6d 4 Terra (Prodan) I egy Shoreline Resource Specialist Shorelands and Coastal Zone Management Management TPH:cs 3 0 46 CITY JF RENTON "LL < . Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before-Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton,Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 / Joyce n. rren:c Eve Gedbois Edward J. Gion 26608 Princeton Ave 21422 - 29th Ave S 403 Whitworth Ave S • Kent. WA 98032 Seattle. WA 98198 P O•'R. Renton, WA 98055 • Pu k e:ori J • h1«eff Goltz Office of the Governor S 'v M.J./L.E. Graves Lane Powell Moss 8 Miller State of wasnington 905 N 28th P1 711 Capitol way Legislative Building • Ag,kll Renton, WA 98056 Olympia. WA 98501 ]lymph, WA 98504 Robert M. Hastedt Mr/Mrs T.W. Hauff Beth Healy 13513 M. L. King Way S. #=204 816 S 216th St. #T-530 8 n Seattle, WA 98178Seat N 35th St Des Mcines, WA 98198 Seattle. WA 98103 • ' William J. Hecker Janet Heineck John Hendrickson 23415 SE 264 12035 - 32nd Ave NE, #402 777 - 108th Ave NE. 41700 Maple Valley, WA 93038 Seattle, WA 98125 Bellevue, WA 98004 Walter Trail, VP Suelah Hillstrom Marie Hoffman Herrera Env Cons, Inc 81B S 27tn St 3510 SW 170th 1414 Dexter .Ave N. #200 Renton, WA 98055 Seattle. WA 98166 Seattle, WA 93109 Barb Holt Brigitte H000es Peter Hudelson 479 Bronson Way NE PO Box 672 2e00 NW 56th St Renton, w4 98056 Kent, WA 98035 Seattle, WA 98107 • Gene Munn Lauri Johnsen Paul Julin 1816 N 57th PO 3ox 161 7001 Sand Point Way NE Seattle. WA 98103 Renton, WA 98057 Seattle, WA 98115 Francis Karboly Or. John P. Kelsall Mary/James Kenney 211 NW 7th St 22 Deerfield 7916 Olympic View, Dr NW Renton. WA 98055 Delta. B.C. Gig Harbor, WA 93335 V4M 2W9 CANADA Gene Duvernoy King County. Dept. of John Kohlsaat King Cty Oft of Open Space Public Works, SWIM 12057 SE 42nd St 1621 Smith Tower 701 Dexter Horton Bldg Bellevue. WA 9800o 506 Second Ave 710 Second Ave Seattle. .WA 98104 Seattle. WA 98104 Tim Krause Gladys Krohn Susan Krom Offices of Richard Arambuni 9235 S 192nd 3640 Ashworth Ave N 505 Madison St, Suite 209 Renton. WA 98055 Seattle. WA 98103 Seattle, WA 98104 LeAnn T. LaFond Betty Lampert Lori Levin 1411 Grant Ave S, PG103 747 - 96tn Ave NE e00 Neches Ave Renton. WA 98055 Bellevue, WA 98004 Renton. WA 98055 Jane ,Lindeman Chris Linden Brian Lumsden 1006 - 103rd SE 2011 Evergreen Pt Rd 15500 SE 179th Bellevue, WA 98004 Bellevue. WA 98004 Renton, WA 98058 Sheryl/Phil Lundahl Elizabeth Lundstrom Cynthia Mack 600 Neches 7705 S 117th St 906 High Ave S Renton. WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98178 • Renton. WA 98055 Kristin MacKay Eric Magelssen Susan Margolis • 3225 Sahalee Dr W 3040 Ashworth N 14031 Northwood P1 NW Redmond, WA 98053 Seattle. WA 98103 Seattle. WA 98177 Mr. John Marshall Glen 3 . Martin Janice Martin wetlands Specialist 1520 NE 1J7th 133 A 30th Ave Dept of Ecology • Seattle, WA 98125 Seattle, WA 98133 • Baron Hill, MS: PV-11 Olympia. WA 98504-3711 .. •• • Hier . • M� «-t •Ih ��`T 7 Rowland Martin J. A . Matter Dee McClellan 661 Taylor Ave N'W 2566 - 24th Ave W 9146 - 121st SE Renton/ WA 98055 Seattle, WA 98199 Renton, WA 93056 Susan McClellan Jonn/Julie McCone Marilyn McGill 14001 Northwest P1 NW 10115 SE 207th 2221 N 40th Seattle/ WA 98155 Kent/ wA 98031 Seattle, WA 98103 Doris McGougan Mark McLenn Theresa McLean 24820 - 11th S PO Box 227 7004 S 130th St Des .Moines, WA 98198 Vashon, WA 98070 Seattle, WA 98178 Susan M. McNally Metro Elizabeth Miles 815 S 219th, 43 Transit Division 22431 - 10th Ave S Des Moines/ WA 98198 821 Second Ave Des Moines, WA 98198 Seattle/ WA 98104-1598 Joe Mills Marty Murphy Nature Conservancy 22431 - 10th S PO Box 3070 1601 - 2nd, Suite 910 Des Moines, w4 98198 Half Moon Bay/ CA 94019 Seattle/ WA 98101 Carroll H. Nevermann Don/Alma Newsome Lois Norclquist 27 U P1 NE 16505 - 127th SE 13503 Empire Way S, 4301A Auburn/ WA 98002 Renton/ WA 98053 Seattle/ WA 98178 Mr. Don Norman Carol Lyn O'Neal • Or. Gordon 'Orians University of Pennsyvania 602 - 29th SE, 463 . . institute of Env. Studies Dept of Biology Auburn/ WA 98002 University of Washington Leidy Labs Mail StopFM-12 Philadelphia/ PA 19104-6018 Seattle/ WA 98195 Mark Ouellette Senator Michael Patrick Mr. John Peard 3912-1/2 NE 105th 109 - B 1704 E Fifth Seattle/ WA 98125 Olympia/ WA 98504 Olympia, WA 98501 Mary Pergamo Keith Peterson Daniel Pohto S11 Whitworth Ave S 212 - 10th st, #4 11112 SE 73rd P1 Renton/ WA 98055 Kirkland, WA 98033 Renton/ WA 93056 Phil ?olizatto Puget Sound Council of Mr/Mrs Orville Raclel 4709 'Meridian Ave Government 12005 - 71st Ave S Seattle, WA 98103 126 First Ave S Seattle/ WA 98178 Seattle/ WA 98104 Krista Rave Dave/Sandi Sager Alicia Sazma 501 N 65th 1025 N 28th P1 1455 S Puget Dr, ;F304 Seattle/ WA 9.'103 Renton/ WA 98056 Renton, WA 93055 • Ruth Schaefer LaVinda Schefield Lavinda Schefield P3 Box 12362 ' 11621 - 140th SE 11621 - 140th SE Seattle, WA 98111 Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 93056 Bonnie Scott Chwin Scott Keith Irvine 2312 NE 9th P1 12513 SW Cove Rd Seattle Times Renton, WA 98056 Vashon, WA 98070 31620 - 23rd Ave S, 4312 Federal Way/ WA 98003 City of Seattle City of Seattle • Seattle-King County Commuter 821 2nd Ave • City Comptroller Pool Seattle/ WA 98104 COO 4th/ Rm 101 Engineering Department • Seattle, WA 98104 City Administration Bldg • Seattle/ WA 98104 Mike Setzer Paul D. Shafer Ken/Ada Shannon Advantage Tire Service 11230 Rainier Ave S 11721 - 78th Ave S 205 Logan St S Seattle, WA 98178 • Seattle, WA 98178 Renton/ WA 98055 Mike Shannon Christopher Shultz Mr. Robert Sieh 19417 - 203th Ave SE 10234 Marine View Dr SW Edwards A Barbieri Renton, WA 980558 Seattle, 'WA 98146 701 Fifth Ave/ Suite 6501 Seattle, WA 98104 Sierra Club Susan Smalley Vausa Smith 1516 Melrose 14714 SE 188th P1 23211 - 125th SE Seattle, WA 98122 Renton/ WA 98058 Kent, WA 98031 • Jay Spencer Jean Spencer 1303 ra33rdcer Ave S Ofc of Archaeology & Seattle. WA 98144 18-9 Jones Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Historical °reservation State of Washington 111 W 21st Ave, M/S KL-11 Olympia, WA 98504-5411 Oept of Social/Health Services Elizabeth Storm q2 1crn Jean Sundberg State Office Sldg Mail Stop: GE-4 , 39 Sc Wax Rd 121 SW 171st St Olympia, WA 985u4 Kent, WA 98042 Seattle, WA 08155 Kurthy Tord Walter T. Trial, Jr. 11621 - 140tn SE 522 NW 51st U.S . Dept of Ecology Renton. .wA 98055 Seattle, WA 98107 Federal Building, Rm 1992 Seattle. WA 98174 U.S. Soil Conservation Service Puget Sound Water Quality Marilyn Weindorff 140 Rainier Ave S Authority Renton, WA 98055 217 Pine St, Suite 1100 16482 - 109th Ave SE Renton, wA 98055 Seattle, WA 98101 Kathy Wilkins Shirley Winton 4258 - 37th Ave W 7800 NE 24th John Wolf Seattle, WA 98199 Bellevue, WA 98004 13434 - 42nd Ave S Seattle, WA 98188 Virginia/James Wood Mr. Dave Wortman 7525 S 135th Friends of the Earth Rachel A. Young Seattle, 'WA 98178 4512 University Way NE Des91 -Des Moines,es,h Ave S Seattle, WA 98105 s, WA 9819R, Mr. Gerry Adams Dan Allen Seattle Auoobon Society11361 M. Anderson 28803 N_ Big Rock koao 1455 S WAet 6Or.05 �F'.�04 lento SE A8u9h Duvall. WA 93019-6414 Renton, WA ?8055 n'enton. wA 98058 Shelly/nary m. Anderson Robert Anderson Mary I 2575 Simms St 1 -a7thtAS Lakewood. C 9021513511 N. L . King Way S. 308E a5,0 Seattle, WA 98173 1 - 47th Avege 1 Seattle. WA 9811 8 • Mr. & Mrs. Bangerter Renate/,.r avid 3eedon Shellie M. Bennett 10420 - 111th Ave SE 1725 Pierce Ave SE 415 - 212th Ave SE Renton, WA 98055 Renton. WA 98058 Redmond, WA 98053 Royce A. Berg Jim 3•ernthal • ! Allegra Serran LPN Architects 3023 NW 64th 710 N 35th 1127 Pine St, Suite 300 Seattle. WA 98107 Seattle. WA 98103 Seattle/ WA 98101 . MarcyBeyer e Yr Dee 3oersm= 3213 Conkling P1 W z Bill Solanos Seattle, 4A 98119 Seattle. S King 3e36 Evanston Ave N, 415 ttle., WA 98T44 Seattle,, WA 98103 Julie 3onwell Mr/Mrs Glen Boyers Jennifer Boyes 9610 - 146th Ave SE 25 U pl N` • 6203 S 238th P1, 44102 Renton, WA 98056 Auburn, WA 9.8002 Kent. WA 98032 Paul 3rase Kalman Erauner 2500 - 81st Ave SE. 4342 26 , Mr. David BricklinGndr Mercer Island, WA 98040 Seattle, WAAn988109e N Bricklin• t GAye, S 1424 Fourth Ave. Suite 1015 Seattle. WA 98101 Ken/Denise Bronger H.H. Bumheardt Burlington Northern/ Inc. 20 - 62nci NE 12527 - 35th S 208 Central Bldg Tacoma. WA Seattle, W.A 98168 810 3rd Ave Seattle, WA 98104 Camp Fire Club 7-87 Andrew en Car c/o Roseann Johnson 3Carpenter Rhonda Chapman 9 - 14035 SE 122nd St Se attle 24th, Ave S 6726 - 119th Ave SE S"c WA 98144 Renton, WA 93D56 Renton, WA 98059 William N. Christie/ M.S. Chris Clifford Andrew S. Cohen Environmental Scientist . 2721 Talbot Rd S 26o11 - 198th Ave SE Renton/ WA 98055 Sea0 - 23WA NE Kent. WA 98042 Seattle. WA 98115 Patrick Conn Container Corp of America Elizabeth Culbert 14720 NE 1st P1. 4G4 PO Box 479 25219 Lk Wild CC Dr SE Bellevue, WA 98007 Renton. WA 98057 Maple Valley. WA 98038 . Mr/Mrs Deccy Evelyn Doly Ka Donald 407 Whitworth Ave S 430 Whitworth Ave S 1211 N 28th P1 Renton, wA 98055 Renton. WA 93055 Renton, WA 98056 . Charles/Deborah Oowc Mr. Gary DuVall Lloyd G. Edwards 3200 W Concord way, 4446 2040 Boyer Ave E 1299 - 156th Ave NE. 4120 Mercer Island/ WA 98040 Seattle. WA 98112. Bellevue, WA 98007 Sharon Elliott Ralph Evans Barbara Faville 13503 M.L. King Way S. 4A4O1 I 3306 NE 11th P1 14300 SE 176th, 4N5 Seattle/ WA 98176 Renton, WA 98056 Renton. WA 98058 Dr. Scott Foroes Amy Forrester I Lawrence Forrester No . 315 - 11675 Seventh Ave 4702 Davis Ave 'S. 425-101 6025 McKinley P1 N Richmond. B.C. 1 Renton, WA 98056 I Seattle. WA 98103 V4M 2W9 CANADA I • • {:�' cr '>> `' ham. C.I e.` (-ran-0'R eiciniriv :''d� �P;F`-" '+": S ., -���` t'-a.+*'v•,e r_}�t -•,;.4 i44: � j,,_...! :1,AP,j •r 4.;s.z`'Y`.fP.I•"t:%✓~t'S`.'.''Q4.. !c: �,n'',�...i V 4 ry r ntr°•, ,,. .Y� .: tt'n ..e,, ix �5 g,.t t -H -.j- yi�ib4 Y5 +Y, i 3. ♦ .T �A' ...dal 1 Z 'T.1.' .y` ,1,*, rl. �..4._, .s`--, „h E4,tt .n f 4;:,N•-4- F ,,".-�1. '..sa. ; �1.. +;•'k'�v:. ; �'f'1'f rr thrt v.t F Off.t Ft,'r + a sae.'''' .i.-T}a. .,�+ :L. '.;q -j. . 04 ,txrp say, aYe .t tay r '"+ 7 , �` . ,,r., , e (� rw + '11-.2#; Y�L° � Sly k` C 1C'r i l ter 9r i ?T F Yw 5 ♦ a 4 r R y 1 a ('ti+t 1;•e� 1 .ei �' h�i; Rai 4b0'�f!1�5��"y�*ft�j1S ;� s'•-�l t.Ify � s a i'a ' t f. .'t, r.;' 4f. is S i�7 ♦ x + � s Y l s � t Y�41¢��f r*dr . jj i, ♦r Sys .� ih.F"7#o r. f, ,;:..r[ �. It...�.,�'_'�1�+,'��.+� .»''���•f'*��,':�#+.5. .,.:t.�1.r�.�y -n +�l'.1 .+if.� � r,.F V' .-.: _ 7`� ,,i';4 t', r *� Yt r M1 r'. is '`` _ LeasonyPomeroy;fOrAllw�st m e Royc 7A;Berg7A l �f112'i Pines Streets Suite;300 Seattle>:WA 9810'1 (2O6)583.8030 , ,,.yff. 7� .�_-i5.t . '♦.rem a,'_..Yi.i. e4>, 4• ,',G:tra•.^--'rr` 2+:� :4� a ✓. .. i . - TRANSMITTAL To:ileAoP emal440 Date: cecGA'iC.GQ 4-5 !✓✓/ CITY OP Pei t o Project Name: et CgR/v 718 Project No.: AW 68011 Re: $/3J5M) 011 ',e5e' �J Des �pAJ SM; /O )-QQ,,,, / CoAcif2P EC r!w6 - )(,� OA/ /POP 7.7eitCr , , ,,, 4 c, no / !.¢--f2, Remarks: Via: ent per your Request ❑ For Distribution El Mail ,,,e5' For your Use/Reference ❑ For your Records ❑ Courier ❑ For Review and Comment IIIOther ❑ Hand Deliver ElFor your Signature ❑ Federal Express El your Approval ❑ Hold for Pick-up By: ,j4,r ��karpez,-- CC:,reiI ity ,e47 / 4My Aoc arz ct OF • 1111 o Oq 0�P 4TFO SEP'�E� City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner will hold a PuBLIC HEARING In CITY .COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL 00 ON DECEMBER 17, 1991 BEGINNING AT 9: A.M. P.M. CONCERNING: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, PHASES VII/VIII ECF;SA;SSM-071-88 & ECF;SA;SSM-109-89 THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO DEVELOP AN OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ON A 26.9 ACRE PORTION OF A CURRENTLY VACANT 27.76 ACRE SITE (INCLUDING TRACT A AT 488,352 SQUARE FEET AND TRACT B AT 683,762 SQUARE FEET). EACH OF THESE TWO TRACTS IS TO BE DEVELOPED WITH OFFICE BUILDINGS, OPEN AND/OR STRUCTURED PARKING, RECREATION AREAS, INTERIOR AND BOUNDARY LANDSCAPING, AND A SCREEN (FENCING/LANDSCAPING)HABITAT. WHICH SEPARATES THE SITE FROM THE ABUTTING • THE APPLICANT IS ALSO SEEKING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT BASED UPON THE PROXIMITY OF THE SITE TO THE BLACK RIVER BASIN. A ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT WILL BE REQUIRED, AS WELL. A SPECIALPERMIT MAY BE REQUESTED FOR SITE PREPARATION. BLACK RIVER CO • PARK, PHASES VII/VIII, ARE THE FINAL PROJECTS CONCEIVED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN 115 ACRE OFFICE PARK COMPLEX WHICH WAS INITIATED IN 1979. THREE TRACTS ' "B", AND "C") ARE INCLUDED IN THESE COMBINED FINAL ACTIONS. GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: NORTH OF OAKESDALE AVE .& WEST OF NACHES & 7TH FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DIVISION 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT I,EXPSTR PROPER AUTHORIZATION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, PHASES VII/VIII ECF;SA;SSM-071-88 &ECF;SA;SSM-109-89 The applicant is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a 26.9 acre portion of a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 488,352 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Each of these two tracts is to be developed with office buildings, open and/or structured parking, recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping, and a screen (fencing/landscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. The applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. A Special Permit may be requested for site preparation. Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII, are the final projects conceived for the development of an 115 acre office park complex which was initiated in 1979. Three tracts ("A", "B", and "C") are included in these combined final actions. The project is located north of Oakesdale Ave &West of Naches &7th. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Development Services Division, Third Floor,. Municipal Building, Renton. All interested persons to said petitions are invited to be present at the Public Hearing on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. to express their opinions. Publication Date: December 5, 1991 Account No. 51067 hexpub lko CITY F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator • December 3, 1991 Dean Erickson First City Washington, Inc. 700 Fifth Ave, Suite 6000 Seattle,WA 98104 SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 Dear Mr. Erickson: The date of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton,Washington. 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. If you prefer to make other arrangements to receive the staff report, please contact Kathleen Childers,277-5582, or Sandi Seeger, 277- 5581. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, C )J(1 Donald K. Erickson,AICP Zoning Administrator hexf r/DI<E/kae 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 1 >:.:::::.:::::;>:::::::::::::>:.::::::::::;>:>:::::;::::;::::;:;::>:::::::::»:>;>::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>::;:::::::::>:>::::::::::>.:::::::::::::::::;:>:::::::::»::;<::>:::>:::;:::::::::::: :: Ble ;::::WOr3> < : : :DEP1lI�T �. ENT>�:r`�:PI�iXNNIIV:G�:B•U.rLD:rN� �� pU C ... .... .. ............................ ...................... :::::::::::::::::•:: :::: ::::>:: ::::::.:::: >:::::: :::::::::::::::::::>::::::::::::::::TEC .:::AD: ..I . :> O i AGtCGtOUNQ ' APPL'>� ,,,,.:d `' ` > ` : #:ii :Ci y>Equit e:: :: < �< : :�< : ' > :> < :�::>: : > ::< > '< '......>::>::. .:...:::.: .A..P IGANT......... First i. ..... ui t s. :::.�::.�::::.�:::.� :.�................. ..........:::::::::.:::::::: :::•:•:•:::::::::.#�.RO�l�CT.::::::: ::::::::: ::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::giack.Rie.r..Car .o..ate....a..k.p.base.:.:.:I.........d::....h.:...........1.........:....:.....:...:....�.....:::.....:.:.:....:...:<.:. ENV[F3:0•[vMENTA :: F-IE�K[JST ;<:::::::::?: CF SA,SSM.0...1..8 ...P.base,Vll:: Tr...:.:. ).,.:::.�:.:.......... ... ........... ......::..::.:. ... :: C��SA .S '• ii Q -88i�P. �,Y./ act:A: 1.1 ; :.r.. :)r•i �I�I�r•r. :ir..r.r��+r1:. r .r ii;�`'rrr r,r„rrrr.,.<����$����'.;I';��I���IIFI�'����I�I��I��FI��''r''t��i11���,',',I�',1�1,�,�1,�,r r r r r:r r r r r r'r•r'r'r'r�r,�r r .r r'r�r':•�r'r•r'r,r r r r r r r r r'r'r r.,r r i•r','r'r r,.,r�t�1���41li=�������� .:r.:r .r.rr r. r1�ir r,rr,rr:r:,�r,.r r.r.r.r.,.r.,,..:.rv.r. .. .. „ r,r.,'rrr.r,rr.:.....r.r.,.r.r.:.r.r.r.:.,.r.r.r.r.r.r.,.r,.r.r..r.r r.r........... .. . elo .. n.. :>:;�>:<:::::> I3ES�R[P.:.T[�N::.C?F::PRC?PbSAL.::•..: ::..::.�:.�.Th.e. llcant::is:..seek[n >.site..: lan .. .t:oval:to.:de.:......p...... ... .........p ::: :f e< .d.. :•:::::•::::t ' ••o• •. 8. cre. : o:::t:':'>cw16titl. ;Va.p.4nt:27 76:acre:site:'includin Tract:A`at:4�8 35.2; s;.: uare.:.:e.,t.:an.....: .::.•:.:.:..::..:.:..mplex.:...!?.:a:�.:.:�:�.:.:.....pArtt...►.?: ..:..:.....:.....:...Y................. ...................... (.. :::.::::9. %::: • ::...::::::.::::..::.:.....9... :..:....::.:..:.: :..:�.•: .>:::;:•;;>:•;:•Tr ct:::B::: t::6 3 7 ar :<f t >:::E h;: f:::th ;two.tra t :.is:.to•:be:develo edwith.:;offfice:.l uildin••s,`:o p"`eri::and or;;: : :: ::::..-•::a:::.:$. 62:.:s•ua eleev::::::::aG..::Q.::::::es . :::::::::::p.:s:::•:..::::: ::.:..... g,.:-........::::. ::::...:: g....,,.:..p.:..:..::.:.:..:/..:..: ...: :::: tructured::: arkin ':>::r:ecreation:>areas :::.interior.::: nd>::bounda: .:::landsca .in ;:;and::::a:;:screen.::::.fencing/landscapin:g) c.::: r b tt : >: d e.'. abitat<:<A:::Q 8.5..;acre:3.7':1.84:>s. uare<:.foot::: ortion;:::.of Tract: A;;: :::::>::>:::>: whi h.:se.,a,ates:the;;site:::fr..om:,th.e.�e..u..m. :wil...1.lf.::.h............: ...................../.....::�:.:::.� :q. .:: �::::::::.:p:::.:: .:.::.. .... ..:.; .<. .. >.:: ::::::::>::::w. ::s:::o I :::o ev :e• :: i e::. ;t a existence.::of>.contamination::::(as:;defined:::b :::the.Model:T:oxics::: ::::: ::::hi.ch:: .p,F..suitab:e: .:r:d..:::e1opm..ntbyyirtu..::of...he........................... •6; .::..::::. ::::::. : .::::. ::::::::::::::::::: .:..:......... ....::.:::::: :. ::::::;::: : : tr :A t wi ::b >: . . . . ;.:b .....th :>Ci ....a vin ::: to:::. f::4 2>:,..,.uar•::::feet::in: •:r.ivate>owne:rshi :::and:;: WH:i ...ol..:.:.:e).,..•..:...:ll.bt9: .Purchased:....X.....:..6.::O..tY.:.:1%.:a..•:...0::::a:::19.. !..:Q......::.$$,3 ...ti:. .:.::5.0.. :F9.;i..::::::.� ::.::::::::.:.p.:: .... :.:.>::.;:.: :.;:.>.available:for.::.develo ment ::The>total::develo able:: ortions::of::the>combined:;tracts:;e. uals 26;9.;ac:e.. :: ::::::;::; :::.;< :.:.:.;;;: ..00 i:q s•-•. .-.. : :; .: ::::::: >:: ::: :::: ::>; ::; ;>::: a g:i ::>;::::::::: ..:ift:: :::::;::::: ::>;::>::::: : :::gli::<>:: :::> ;:::*::::-.6.: .1.0...i. ::::: :'::: •. >. ti . in co: u ction:ith:. .:»>:: .:».::.:: .:..:..: :.:.::::.::.: : :: ::: <Tra:ct:: >:at:32;5cres>:has;;rece.nfl ;been::inci.u.ded:.as:::a:: artnftFas:site.:;under:;consid.era..on:.::.:.. ...nJ n................,,,.: ... ..........t e:>a ov :::.d a .i e 1 me.t.. r. o al ...T <:::;C•>:•.as::be.en::: .urchased:b >th.e:C►t:;:with::a:::combination. o.; :: ....:::::h. .. b..::e.:.:escr.b.ed.:deve.:oR.::::: .p QR s :rack.:::.:::h:.:..::.:........P.... ....... ..:........:y::..::.::. :..::y:..::.:.:..:..::...::........ . ...... .. :...: ::.;.it.:t::::::::::::: ;;N:::::.: :::> : ::::s:>::::::::::>:....i:::::...... ::::::>:::::::::::;: overnment::and:: rivate::funds::::::This>traet<will:be:: .reserved::as;a:natural::;aba..;:.:::.............. ....,:.,,,;,.:; :.� . .:.. : ite o�":•i e s :::::: ::»:<T :: ca' :;. ee n :a::: .elina::S:ubatantial:::D.evelo .meet::P.errn..t::ba it u:a.n:k.:.::.::oxrm:ty.;...:::.n:: ......:.....: ::::.�::::...h.::a .p)l. ..ntiselse.:s.. kl.:. ....::... :ar...:......:....... . ...........::.:.:..::..P:::::.::::.� . .:::.:::::....:.:.:. ..:R.::....... ..�.;. .....::::.::... .::...:: ..::::.:.:....�.: :::::::::::>:;::th ::BI ackRiv r:<b as . :::.:::Ro i n e::;. t tion:• an e.•.ent:m....Nit will:::be:>re. ui:::::::as:well :A:::Special:Permit.may:: ..:..:e....:..:a...:.:.:..:::..:e:.:.::a...:[n...:!�.......:ut..n..::V.e9.e. .:.:...�:M.:...:ag :.m.....:..:.::::::.�................::::�::::::::::::::. :: ::.:.:...................:::;:;:::;::. ;ration :::::> :: :::::: :r>:>:::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::;:>::: :>:::: ;:>::>'::::::::>::>: :: ::::::::::::::: : :: ::� :;:::::>::<: ::::;::. :::::: ::> ::::::be:;re::•uestedfo.:r:site. :re ;ara....... :•.•.:. ..:...:. .... ................................ ............:•:.:::..:::::..:: :::: .:. ........... ...... .... .............. ......:....:...... ::: :: v;:: `'`o ec s h >;: r it e :>: ::::;:;•.:;At::t.ik.ii,nie.4. Technical::Adviso:.::Co.mmtttere Inesin ::calle.d.::� .on>fo:::.e..ie..:;.th..: :.: P.:....:..:..:a::1s..:. :pr..1....:.......:.::..,. »::; :>::> t:• ntl � to >I e:: s t I n': horei ne:::im ts••:and:to su ge.st maasures•:to';mitigate;those:impacts:.: :::::: : :•res.pec.::tQ.:a:::::c..Pa:.d:aCrd.::.s.::(.:!::e:.R.a .l..$.:..:....1:::..).....p.....:.:�.:.:..::�::.�:::.•:.99...:..:.:::. .:.. .. :::.. :. . . :.:.: r. :::::>::::::: which>are: not::addr. ssed>.:in:the:.:M.OA::>these>:measur..es::are>:tobe:•com .atible:with,:measures:;established;:i•n;th•e;: . 0. . ��ih•••�i�i•?�i•?•�•?•i�;�;•i.�i•;�;•i•;;�;�i•i•;•i;;;;i�;�;.;�;•;•'•?;�i�;.� ;�;�?!•;�i.i�;•i!i�;�';�;;�?•i�ai•i•i�'�;;�i•;•;�;;;�;•;•;i? ;;Is;i;i;?;i;i;;;;;;;i;;;i;;;;;'''�;,;;! '!'r4�i��`��r�������'�`�'�`i'�'i`���'�'i'i'�'i'i'i`i'i'ii'i'`i'i'i`r'i'i'i'rri'i'i r r r r`�'i'i`i'i`�`.i'i'i�i�i�i!i'i'i`i'i'i'i'i`�'i'i`i'�'i'i'ii!'ii' `i'i'�i'i'i`i�I�tv��l�1�������� r:rr r:r. r frr :rr. i'i4'i' rtiti'i' rrr,rrrrrr.r.v,.r....r.,.r_,r.:.r.r.r........ r.rr, ,r!.!r.,n.r.,.r.:.r.r:,rr.r .... , : r,r r,r r ,rr,r,r'i'i'�' _rr,.:.�.r.r.r,r.:a.r.r.r.r.r.r.r.,r.,.,.r.r.... ........... !' i4' ii':'''i'i•r;rr r r,�,:r'r r r r'r',{r4!,:rl,yrh.rtiprr''i'iri'�'i'ri'i'i'... ...... .................. .......... .. >o:N N::r: %:[?. : :`.. . . :0 1N-7f: :E s;> f;;:: e. .esd...e.an...West...f.......ch. s:< •:'•::: •:;:��QCATlO.....QF....f3.Q.P.Q.SA4�::�::�:���:::::: :�:�:��::::�::��:�:�:�:N..tti�:o;5.........h.....a.t.o. ... • • • 1 11 • Technical Advisory Committee Staff R. t Black River(Phases VII and VIII) • December 3, 1991 Page 2 • BACKGROUND History • Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII, are the final projects conceived for the development of an 115 acre office park complex which was initiated in 1979. Three tracts ("A", "B", and "C") are included in these combined final actions. At initial submittal (1988), the project included development on Tract "B" only. With revision, as suggested by the City, development was added to Tract "A". In 1989, a site plan was submitted which Included three buildings on each tract. Environmental review was formally undertaken. At that time, a Determination of Significance was issued, based upon like'ily land use/shoreline impacts; aesthetics; impacts to earth, air and water; impacts to the natural environment (with particular attention to a nearby heron rookery); transportation impacts; historical/archaeological impacts; environmental health impacts, and public facilities/utilities impacts. An Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by Jones&Stokes for the proposed developments, and was issued in March, 1991. A Mitigation Document was established by the Environmental Review Committee, in May 1991, based on that EIS. The Document was. appealed by First City, the proponent, and by a group of citizens, representing several environment el protection organizations (e.g.,The Audubon Society). • The City appointed City Attorney, Lawrence J. Warren, to negotiate an agreement among the appellants. Mr. Warren developed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), dated NOvember 20, signed by the City (Mayor Clymer) and the appellants. This MOA is intended to serve as an Addendum to the EIS, reflecting: a) purported changed conditions in the vicinity of the site (e.g., the vacation of certain portions of the heron rookery); b) modifications to the proposed development plans for Tract"A"and Tract"B"; and c) the inclusion of Tract"C" in the study area: The MOA is also intended to serve as a revised Mitigation Document for Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. • The Environmental Review Committee approved the MOA on NOvember 27, 1991, and directed staff to submit a Site Plan Review analysis and Mitigation Document (which is intended to substantially support the MOA) to the Technical Advisory Committee for review and action. - Currently Proposed Projects Office Park Development • The site plan currently under consideration Is revised from the original application materials (1988/1989). The applicant now seeks site plan approval for a complex with five office buildings and one parking structure on two tracts--Tract"A"and Tract "B". Each tract will include parking, recreation areas, interior and boundary landscaping, and a screen (fencing/landscaping) separating the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. Undeveloped Area • A 37,184 square foot portion on the western side of Tract "A", which is not suitable-for development by virtue of the existence of contamination (as defined by the Model Toxics Control Act), will be p.urchased by the City, using municipal funds. The City is agreeing to assume full responsibility for this area and other areas where the City deposited dredge spoils and excavated soils from the P-1 Pond. This parcel of land'is also potehtially suitable to serve as a wildlife habitat when it has been appropriately remediated (MOA Section 1.18). Preserved Natural Environment • The City has purchased (with METRO Plant Expansion mitigation funds and King County Open Space monies) a 32.5 acre portion of Tract"C", a riparian forest, to the north of Tracts "A" and"B", with an option to purchase the balance of that tract, totalling #### acres. Tract "C" Is to be set aside to protect wildlife habitat and wetlands abutting the subject site (MOA Section 1.18.). In addition, natural and/or buffer areas will be required to be provided on Tract"A"and Tract"B". A public shoreline access trail will also need to be developed within these tracts under the mandate of the Shoreline Master Program; a section of tl15e trail may traverse that portion of Tract "A" which has been purchased by the City. The Shoreline Master Program calls fbr such improvements to urban area shorelines where principal uses are not water-dependent. • INTRODUCTION As noted previously in this report, environmental mitigation measures for the Black River Corporate Park have be n established In the MOA (Section II). At this time, therefore, the Technical Advisory Committee has responsibility for making recommendations for site plan/shoreline permit mitigation measures. As stipulated in the MOA, these recommendations are to be based upon the schematic site plans now available and should address criteria established in the Zoning Ordinance (e.g., Site Plan Review Ordinance, Landscaping Ordinance). Based on the MOA (Sections II.A.3; II.C.; II.D.2/3), measures proposed herein (except those required by Code) shall not restrict the appearance, siting, construction or operation Of this development. • Technical Advisory Committee Staff; in Black River (Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 3 LAND USE ELEMENTS 1. Whether the proposed action(s) are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and with Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives and Policies applicable to the subject site? The office park complex is permitted under the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Office Park for this site. The Green River Valley Area Plan calls for the development of office uses in this section of the community. Proximity of similar, compatible uses and accessibility to major thoroughfares also enhance the appropriateness of the site for an office complex. The MOA(Section 1.24) outlines the manner In which the signators believe that the development addresses relevant Comprehensive Plan elements, including Commercial Uses (V); Urban Design (III), and Environmental Elements -- such as open space (LC.) and preservation of wildlife habitats (I.D.) through the protection/enhancement of the Black River riparian forest, Springbrook Creek, selected wetlands, and habitat areas. The MOA (Section 1.24) also lists other City policies and programs which are "the basis for the environmental conditions"therein. 2. Whether the proposed action(s) are consistent with the Land Use Map designation for the subject site? The proposed development is consistent with the underlying Office Park designation on the Land Use Map. 3. Whether the proposed actions(s) are consistent with City ordinances and regulations? Office Park Zone [4-31-16] The complex, including the structures, attendant landscaping, recreation areas, parking facilities and access routes, generally address development standards for Office Park uses (4-31-16), such as-lot coverage and building height . Under the MOA (Section II.B.1)'the applicant will be limited to two buildings on Tract"A" and three buildings (plus a parking garage) on Tract"B". Site Plan Review [4-31-33] Site Plan Design: The site plan now being reviewed is revised from the originally submitted application materials (1988/1989). The*applicant is presently seeking site, plan approval for an office park complex on a 26.9 acre site (including Tract "A" at 488,352 square feet and Tract "B" at 683,762 square feet). Tract "A" will be developed with two office buildings (Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, recreation areas, interior and bounda0 landscaping, and a screen (fencing/landscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. Tract "B" will be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at four stories). Building B Is to be 64,000 square feet, Building C is to be 64,000 square feet. Building D is to be 91,550 square feet. Building E is to be 78,350 square feet and Building F is to be 116,400 square feet. This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen (fencing and landscaping) to separate the site from the adjacent wildlife habitat. • The project planned for this currently vacant site Is to be developed in phases, with construction of the first office building to begin within three years of site plan approval by the Hearing Examiner, and the construction of the fifth office building to commence within eight years (MOA Section Il.D.2). There are no requirements for the sequence of building construction or for development of one tract to be completed prior to building on the other tract. Specific architectural, landscaping, and engineering plans have not been submitted with this site plan application. The MOA (Section II.D.4) calls for these plans to be submitted with the building permit applications. Vesting is to occur with site plan approval (MOA Section II.D.5.). Based upon schematic plans, and,where permitted under the MOA, staff may make recommendations, to achieve compliance with the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Based on this Ordinance, staff would recommend the following actions in order to mitigate off-/on-site impacts from Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII: o Development of an exterior lighting plan, which in addition to including a sufficient number of lighting fixtures to adequately illuminate the "working area" of the site (MOA Section II.G.2.), ensures that the Illumination sources are directed away from the on-site wetlands, buffers and the Natural Area. [4-31- 33.D.1.c]. o Development of a plan, as allowed by the MOA (Section II.A.2) which enables the City to participate appropriately in monitoring of the wetlands, Buffer Areas and the Natural Area (including habitat areas), during construction and operation of the office park complex, to ensure the preservation of those sensitive areas. [4-31-33 D.1.c/d]. o Development of maintenance programs which assign specific financial and services responsibilities for delineated landscaped areas, buffers and natural areas within Tracts "A" and "B". (Also see Landscaping/Native Habitat Section below). [4-31-33.D.1.c/d; 4-31-34]. o Development and implementation of an education/information program for construction workers and employees,to encourage protection of the native habitat, Including, but not limited to guidance concerning reduction of air emissions from their vehicles, and reduction of sound levels (from human activity or the . operation of mechanical equipment). [4-31-33.D.1.c]. Transportation: Section 4-31-33 D.1.f. of the Site Plan Review Ordinance calls for a review of safety and efficiency of on-site and off-site circulation with a proposed development. Evaluation of transportation impacts to the site and • • Technical Advisory Committee Staff S F_, _rt Black River(Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 4 abutting roadways from Black River Corporate Park Phases VII/VIII was addressed in the EIS and mitigation measures have been established in the MOA. Briefly,the MOA calls for a TMP, which is described in the document (MOA Section II.F.2; MOA - Exhibit J), and which is "to be Implemented at the time of building permit'. The MOA (Section 1.4) also designates credit for an historical dedication by First City of ten acres of property for the construction of Oakesdale Avenue and other nearby streets, and a historical contribution of three million.dollars to an LID for the construction of Oakesdale Avenue; no additional transportation mitigation measures are included in the MOA. With this site plan review, staff believe that the safety and efficiency of on-site circulation would be improved by the addition of marked pedestrian paths linking structures to parking areas, recreation areas and the public right-of- way. The location and dimensions of those linkages will be confirmed at the time of construction permit issuance, in keeping with the MOA requirement (Section II.D.4.) that specific site plan features be established then. As directed by the MOA (Section II.G.3.), at the time of construction permit review, staff will establish measures controlling hauling hours/routes for construction vehicles, to address off-site circulation impacts, in a manner which Is consistent with restrictions for other area developments. Public Services: Section 4-31-33 D.1.1. of the Site Plan Review Ordinance calls for a review of availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. Areas of staff concern/recommendations, related to this section of the Ordinance, include the following: o Storm Water Management A conceptual storm water management plan has been established under the MOA (Section II.E.), which calls for compliance with the City's Surface and Stormwater Drainage Ordinance, including the"use of wet ponds, biofiltration swales, and any required downstream analyses". Under the MOA, the City"agrees that there will be no requirements . . . inconsistent with the agreement that run-off from (the project) will enter the P-1 Pond without detention." This section of the MOA further states that "review and approval of First City's schematic drainage plan will occur at site plan approval, but this approval shall not . . . impose requirements which exceed or are inconsistent with this Agreement." Design/engineering of specific features (such as wet pond configuration) will be established at issuance of construction permit under requirements established in the MOA. The MOA (Section II.E.3) does call upon the applicant to contribute its proportionate share to the City for the implementation of a water quality management plan to reduce impacts on the P-1 Pond. The applicant is also to receive credit for a historical dedication of 17.5 acres of the original 115 acre site for the establishment of the P-1 Pond. o Emergency Services The City generally has sufficient resources to provide emergency (fire and police) services to the site. However, In order to reduce service calls to the site and to increase efficiency during service calls, the Police Department has recommended that the following features be incorporated into the parking garage: a) open stair wells with glazing material on each level; b) emergency telephones on each level; and c) a security system which enables the garage to be closed and locked. In keeping with the MOA (Section II.D.4.), specific design plans for these improvements will be reviewed and approved with the construction permit. o Recreation The applicant has included active and passive recreation areas on the site (seating areas, horseshoe court) and has provided access to a par course installed in conjunction with earlier phases of Black River Corporate Park. For Phases VII/Vlll, staff will recommend the introduction of additional active recreation centers (e.g., half basketball court) and pedestrian trails adjacent to the buffer/natural areas to provide view points to on-site wetlands. Further, the par course at the west end of Tract "A" will need to be relocated away from the City's portion of that parcel and on to First City property. Shower areas should be provided as well. Regional recreational mitigation is understood to be achieved by historical contributions of acreage (MOA 1.4) and by the future development of a public access trail to and along the P-1 Forebay/Black River shoreline, under the Shoreline Mitigation Program (see Section 4 below). (To the extent feasible under the Shoreline Master Program goals for public access trail provision, the City will permit the applicant to coordinate the location/installation schedule for the trail with the development of the Park's Master Plan.) Landscaping/Habitat Preservation [4-31-34] Under the MOA (Section 11.B.4), the "City has agreed to waive its standard code landscaping, yard, and set back requirements . . . to the extent that these requirements exceed or are inconsistent with the landscaping and setback requirements set forth In this Agreement." The rationale set forth in the MOA for this exception is stated as follows: "The City recognizes that unique landscaping and setback requirements have been Imposed as part of this Agreement to deal with the unique sensitivities of this site, which requirements do not meet the strict requirements of the City's zoning and landscape ordinances, but which meet the spirit and intent of those ordinances." Based upon the proximity of the Black River Riparian Forest (which hosts a group of heron rookeries, both active and abandoned), as well as the existence of wetlands and valuable habitat areas within the site boundaries, • Technical Advisory Committee Staff I in Black River (Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 5 particular attention has been directed In the MOA to the preservation, creation and enhancement of native habitat. For example,the development is located at a minimum distance of 600 feet from the heron rookery (MOA- Section 1.22; MOA-Exhibit E) --except for a portion of the garage and its related improvements. The reduction in the buffer recommended in the initial Mitigation document is supported in the MOA by the departure of the herons from the adjacent rookery during the 1990-91 nesting season. Section 11.112. of the MOA establishes landscaping/buffering requirements for Tract "A", including a "landscaped and natural vegetation buffer located in the area within 100 feet from the ordinary high water mark of the P-1 Pond/Springbrook Creek . . . with no development or activity in this Buffer Area except for the landscaping, fencing, irrigation, . . . Public Access . . . and activities necessary to install, maintain and repair the Permitted Buffer Improvements." Within the 100 foot buffer, approximately 60-70 feet of the affected property is in City ownership (as a result of the City's purchase of portions of Tract"A") and 30-40 feet belong to the applicant. A similar 30 - 40 foot landscape area will be created on Tract"B",together with an additional 30 foot"strip extension of this buffer on Tract"B" between the Buffer Area and the parking garage . . .". First City will be required, under the MOA (II.B.3) to maintain the landscape/buffer area belonging to the applicant on both Tracts "A"and "B". Staff will recommend that all native and introduced landscaping on portions of Tract"B"which belong to First City should be maintained by First City; landscaping and native vegetation on City property should be maintained by the City. Vegetation on the City's portion of Tract"A" should be maintained by the City. The MOA (Section II.B.3) calls for the landscaping buffer to be"comprised of one row of evergreen shrubs such as • laurel". While laurel is acceptable, staff would prefer that the evergreen shrub row be developed utilizing native, drought resistant species (such as ###########). In addition to the above described buffering, First City will be called upon to create a supplemental planting barrier between activity centers on Tract "B" and the adjacent "Natural Area" generally located on the north portion of the site. The MOA (Section 113.1) calls for the applicant to locate natural vegetative materials, wet ponds and biofiltration swales in that area. Access to the Natural Area will be restricted for the present to persons conducting maintenance activities; the MOA does not specify who shall be responsible for maintenance activities. Staff will recommend that the Natural Area be maintained by the applicant, under the landscaping bond established in the MOA (Section 11.B.3). A plan for providing access to and along the shoreline via Tracts "A" and "B"will need to be developed as well, as mandated under the State Shoreline Management, Act and the City's Shoreline Master Program. As noted previously in this report, to the extent feasible under the Shoreline Master Program goals for public access trail provision, the City'will permit the applicant to coordinate the location/installation schedule for the trail with the development of the Park's Master Plan. This topic is discussed in Section 4 (below) of this report. The MOA (Section II.E.4/5) calls for First City to "mitigate for the proposed filling of approximately 0.14 acres of wetlands . . . on Tracts "A" and "B" by creating an additional new or enhanced wetland area adjacent to the old Black River channel on Tract "B" . . . (based on a) schematic wetlands mitigation plan . . . submitted to the City as part of site plan approval." A buffer averaging 50 feet (but no less than 25 feet) around the old Black River channel wetland on Tract"B" is also required. The mitigation plan is consistent with the guidelines established by the State Department of Ecology (and generally employed by the City of Renton) for protection of the habitat. This Improvement plan is also consistent with enhancement/preservation plans established for other local developments. The MOA (Section 1.4) provides credit for historical activities, including dedication by First City (or its predecessor) of 17.5 acres of the total, original 115 acre site for"the establishment of a regional drainage detention facility known as the 'P-1 Pond' and for associated wildlife habitat" and "20 acres of riparian forest for permanent open space and wildlife habitat." The MOA does not address schedules for buffer installation; staff will recommend that buffers be installed as an initial site preparation activity, prior to filling/grading, Introduction of utility lines and/or building of structures. This requirement is established in order to: a) mitigate on-site and off-site impacts (e.g. aesthetics, site integrity) as required by the Site Plan Review Ordinance and the Landscaping Ordinance; b) control erosion as required by the Site Plan Review Ordinance and the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance; and c) achieve consistency with requirements set for other developments within the City. Parking and Loading [4-14] Under the schematic site plan, approved in conjunction with the MOA (MOA- Exhibits F and G), the applicant has been permitted to develop 128,000 square feet of office space on Tract "A"and 286,300 square feet of office space on Tract"B", exclusive of the parking garage. The Parking and Loading Ordinance (4-14) calls for 544 parking spaces for Tract"A" and 1217 spaces for Tract"B", based upon a gross leasable area of 85% for each structure. The applicant has proposed 571 stalls for Tract "A" (27 more than the permitted 544 stalls). For Tract"B", 1359 stalls have been proposed Including approximately 900 stalls in the garage and the remainder In open parking areas or 142 more than permitted by Code. As permitted under the MOA (Section II.A.2.b.), staff recommend that the applicant be called upon to reduce parking spaces on both Tract "A" and Tract "B" in order to: a) achieve compliance with the Parking and Loading Ordinance; b) achieve at least minimal consistency with requirements set for other developments in the area of the site; and c) honor the spirit of the TMP, which Is Intended to reduce the number of vehicular trips to the site. The MOA (Section II.F.4) permits First City to provide parking on Tract "A" for Tract "B" employees, should such service be necessary during construction activities on Tract"B". Off-site parking within 500 feet of the subject site is permitted under the Parking and Loading Ordinance, however, staff would call for a parking plan to be approved by the City,to ensure that service to Tract"B" employees does not unduly impact employees on Tract"A". • Technical Advisory Committee Sta port • Black River (Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 6 • 4. Whether the proposed action(s) are consistent with the Shoreline Master Program? A substantial shoreline management permit Is required for Black River Office Park Phase VII/VIII under the City's Shoreline Management Program, based upon the proximity of the Black River corridor and Springbrook Creek, which have been identified as a water bodies of state-wide significance by the Department of Ecology, and designated respectively as "natural" and "urban" shorelines by the City of Renton, under the Shoreline Master Program. The Shoreline Master Program Includes both general goals/policies for development adjacent to shorelines of •state-wide significance, as well as setting specific guidelines for commercial uses adjacent to shorelines, including SMP Sections 4.01, 4.04, 5.02, 5.04, 6, 7.05, and 7.17. The Memorandum of Agreement (Sections 1.4; 1.8; and II.B) describes the ways in which the signators consider that the Black River Corporate Park complex complies with policies and guidelines which have been identified as significant in the MOA. Staff note that the MOA (Section 11.111) stipulates that design and implementation of a public access plan be delayed until the City has completed an "Open Space/Wildlife Habitat Master Planning Process" and has "adopted a final Master Plan for that area." Staff is concerned that this delay (to a date uncertain) may violate both the general spirit and specific policies/regulations of the Shoreline Master Program, such as Policy 4.01.02(A)(2), which calls for preference to be given to uses which . . . provide public access; Goal 4.04.01 which calls for increasing public accessibility to shorelines; Regulation 6.04.01 which calls for trails for public use, Regulation 7.05.01.C. which calls for incorporation of public access opportunities; and Regulation 7.17 which establishes criteria for trails. In addition to concerns about creating a development which lacks consistency with the Shoreline Master Program, staff is concerned about the loss to the public of an important viewing corridor and educational resource prior to the development and implementation of a Master Plan. Staff believe that, in order to address state regulations and local policies, it may not be feasible to delay the construction of public access trail to an uncertain preparation of a Master Plan, based upon both shoreline management regulations and based upon the fact that this area has been identified as being one of the most significant natural resources in the region. Staff will recommend that a specific schedule be established for the completion of the Master Plan, which will facilitate the installation of the required public access trail in a manner which is both coordinated with the Trail Plan and Is provided In a timely manner. In the event that the Master Plan is not completed, adopted and implemented by the completion of the project, staff recommend that provisions of the Shoreline Master Program must be met by the development, by First City, of a public access trail' to and along the shoreline via Tracts "A" and "B" prior to the issuance of the permanent Certificate of Occupancy for the final structure in the Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII/VIII). Note: Staff will call for each/all trail(s) to be gated and signed for the purpose of prohibiting public access during the months when nesting and/or fledgling activities are taking place in the vicinity of the trail. 5.' Whether the proposed action(s) are consistent with the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance? Approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill material must be placed on Tract "A"and 35,000 cubic yards of fill must be placed on Tract "B" in order to support the proposed development. The MOA (Section 1.24) does not establish mitigation for site preparation (filling/grading activities) except to state that the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance was utilized in the preparation of that Agreement. • Based upon the amount of fill to be imported to the site and the possibility that site preparation may occur substantially in advance of the construction of infrastructure/structures, a Special Permit may be required. The applicant will need to provide a plan which addresses the criteria established in the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance (e.g., fencing, hydroseeding). To ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties, as well as the viability of the development, the applicant has proposed and/or staff will recommend: 1) elevation of structures above flood level so that they will not be Impacted during flooding of Springbrook Creek or the Black River corridor; 2) provision of an agreement to hold the City harmless in the event that flooding occurs on the site; 3) construction of containment devices in parking areas and the parking garage, to ensure that contaminants (e.g., fuel and oils from vehicles) do not enter Into the wetlands, Black River Corridor, Springbrook Creek, or water quality control areas. As a result of the sensitivity of the underlying terrain, staff will recommend) that filling activities be supervised by a certified soils engineer. These conditions are consistent both with the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance and with the Site Plan Review Ordinance (4-31-33 D.1.c/d). NOTE: A Special Permit must be approved by the Hearing Examiner following environmental and land use review. This application can be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner with the site plan and shoreline permit application. ::<.C ::::::::>::Rl�GO1VIIVIE.NDATlO...S..................... ....:.::::::.:::::::..::.........................<....::..::..:::::... .: As established by the Memorandum of Agreement (Section 111.6.2.), staff recommend that, in the event that the Hearing Examiner deems it appropriate to act in favor of the environmental'mitigation measures and site approval established by tripartite agreement in the MOA, the following conditions be supported: 1. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance, provide a specific storm water management plan for the site, in order to ensure the preservation/enhancement of the wetlands, the Black River Corridor, Springbrook Creek and upland areas on the subject property, as well as to • Technical Advisory Committee Staft ,,Gaort Black River (Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 7 protect neighboring parcels. This plan is to be provided in conjunction with the construction permit application, as described in the MOA. Storm drainage systems for each tract are to be fully installed prior to the introduction of landscaping or construction of any structure on the tract. (Note 1.a: In the event that Storm Water Engineering staff determine that there is any required interconnection between systems to serve Tract A and Tract B of the project, then all of those interconnected systems shall be provided in conjunction with the construction of the Infrastructure for the first phase of the complex.) 2. The applicant shall, in order to address impacts to the natural environment, restore/enhance existing wetlands, and provide all wetland plantings (as proposed in the MOA), in conjunction with and at the time of site preparation. (Note 2.a: The applicant will need to work with the State Department of Ecology and the U.S. Army Corps to ensure that the proposed wetland fill plans are acceptable to those agencies.) 3. The applicant shall, in order to protect the wetlands on site, provide a plan for monitoring of each and all of the wetlands areas on the 26.9 acre site, during site preparation activities and construction activities (for all infrastructure, structures and amenities) to ensure that these areas are being properly preserved and maintained. This plan is to be approved by the Development Planning Section prior to the issuance of site preparation/building permits. Monitoring reports shall be prepared and be made available to the City as stipulated in the Plan. 4. The applicant shall, in order to protect the Natural Area on the site (as defined in the MOA), provide an access easement and a covenant agreeing to allow the City to undertake monthly monitoring during active construction periods and annual monitoring for the first five years of operation (following completion of all structures) of this Area, to ensure that these areas are being properly protected and maintained. These documents are to be approved by the City Attorney and duly recorded with King County prior to the issuance of site preparation/building permits. 5. The applicant shall, in order to ensure that site development and project operation do not unduly impact the off-site wildlife habitat (as mandated under the Site Plan Review Ordinance 4-31-33 D.1.c.) provide copies of reports prepared for First City and the Citizen Appellants concerning heron activity. 6. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate on-site and off-site impacts, construct all landscape areas and buffer areas of native, drought resistant, evergreen vegetation (with location of plantings to be based on schematic plans). Plans for these Improvements shall be approved to the satisfaction of the Development Planning Section prior to the issuance of any site preparation permit and Implemented in conjunction with and at the time of site preparation. 7. The applicant (and its heirs and assignees) shall, in order to mitigate on-site and off-site impacts, maintain responsibility for management of all native and introduced landscaping on Tract "B" and all native and introduced vegetation on Tract"A"for the life of the project. (Note 7.a: The City will be responsible for management of properties under municipal ownership.) 8. The applicant shall provide a landscaping surety device to protect wetland plantings and Natural Area plantings, equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be implemented, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, at the time of the'issuance of the site preparation permit and to continue in force and effect until five years following the completion of all improvements approved in conjunction with this permit application). 9. The applicant shall provide a landscaping surety device to protect interior upland and street boundary upland plantings, equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the value of those plantings. This surety device is to be implemented, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, with the issuance of the site preparation permit and to continue in force and effect for three years following the completion of all improvements for each phase approved in conjunction with this permit application). 10. The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties during site preparation, provide a plan with the following components: a) an erosion control element; b) an agreement that a certified soils engineer (selected by the City and funded by the applicant, or its heirs or assignees) will make daily Inspections of the site during all filling activities; will provide routine reports to the City on a monthly basis; and will immediately report emergencies to the City; and c) an element to ensure that hydroseeding of the entire subject property is completed immediately upon the completion of site preparation where there is to be any delay between preparation and construction of structures. (Note 10.a: Filling is to be achieved according to requirements established in the City's Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance.) (Note 10.b: No tree cutting or vegetation management may be undertaken until a fill permit and a RVMP have been issued for this site.) 11. The applicant shall, in order to ensure the continuing integrity of this site and neighboring properties during operation, provide a development plan with the following components: a) a design for elevation of structures so that they will not be impacted during flooding of Springbrook Creek or the Black River corridor; b) provision of an agreement to hold the City harmless in the event that flooding occurs on the site; and c) a design for construction of containment devices in parking areas and the parking garage, to ensure that contaminants (e.g., fuel and oils from vehicles) do not enter into the wetlands, Black River Corridor, Springbrook Creek, or water quality control areas. 12. The applicant shall, In order to address sound and air quality impacts to persons, and to sensitive wildlife habitats, develop and implement an education/information program (written brochures) for construction workers and employees, to ensure that they do not engage in practices which result in the generation of: a) excessive air emissions from their vehicles; and b) undue noise levels from human or mechanical activities. Materials for ' Technical Advisory Committee Staff ncport Black River (Phases VII and VIII) December 3, 1991 Page 8 • construction workers shall be approved by the Development Planning Section prior to issuance of site preparation permits and shall be distributed periodically for the duration of preparation/construction activities. Materials for Black River Corporate Park employees shall be approved by the Development Planning Section prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy and shall be distributed to each new employee, for the life of the project. 13. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Shoreline Master Program, provide a public access trail (with interpretive signs) to and along the shoreline adjacent to Tract"A" and Tract"B". This access trail shall be provided under the aegis of the Master Plan described in the MOA (Section II.B.) in the event that this Master Plan is adopted prior to the Issuance of the permanent Certificate of Occupancy for the final structure in the Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII/VIII). In the event that the Master Plan is not so adopted, First City (or its heirs or assignees) will be responsible for the provision of a plan for that trail for approval by the City, and shall construct that public access trail to and along the shoreline on Tract "A" and Tract "B" prior to the issuance of the permanent Certificate of Occupancy for the final structure In the Black River Corporate Park (Phase VII/VIII). Note: Staff will call for each/all trail(s) to be gated and signed for the purpose of prohibiting public access during the months when nesting and/or fledgling activities are taking place in the vicinity of the trail. 14. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate on-site recreation impacts (as based upon 4-31-33.D.1.i of the Site Plan Review Ordinance): a) provide additional exterior active recreation opportunities within site boundaries, b) relocate the exterior court from the City's portion of Tract"A"to the First City portion of Tract"A"; c) provide pedestrian trails (with interpretive signs) adjacent to the buffer/natural areas to provide view points to on-site wetlands; and d) install showers for employees to use following exercise activities. The plan shall be approved by the Development Services Section at the time of building permit issuance and shall be installed prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 15. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Parking and Loading Ordinance and the Site Plan Review Ordinance (4-31-33 D.1.f) revise the parking plan to provide a maximum of 544 parking spaces on Tract "A" and 1217 parking spaces on for Tract"B". The plan shall be approved by the Development Services Section prior to the issuance of the first building permit for Tract"B". 16. The applicant shall, In order to comply with the Parking and Loading Ordinance, obtain approval for off-site parking plans for Tract "A" and/or Tract "B" from the Development Services Division, in advance of designation and implementation of the off-site parking area to ensure that service to Tract "B" employees does not unduly impact employees on Tract"A". • 17. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance 4-31-33.D.1.f, improve the safety and efficiency of on-site circulation by the addition of marked pedestrian circulation paths linking structures to parking areas, recreation areas and the public right-of-way. The location and dimensions of those linkages will be • confirmed at the time of construction permit issuance, in keeping with the MOA requirement (Section II.D.4.) that specific site plan features be established at that time. • 18. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, 4-31-33.D.1.i, to reduce emergency service calls to the site and to increase.efficiency during service calls, incorporate the following features into the parking garage: a) open stair wells with glazing material on each level; b) emergency telephones on each level; and c) a security system which enables the garage to be closed and locked. In keeping with the MOA (Section II.D.4.), specific design plans for these improvements will be reviewed and approved with the construction permit. 19. The applicant shall, in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance, 4-31-33.D.1.i, develop an exterior lighting plan Including a sufficient number of lighting fixtures to adequately illuminate the site, while directing the illumination source away from the on-site wetlands and the Natural Area. This plan shall be approved by the Development Services Section at the time of issuance of building permits. NOTE A: While the Washington State Departments of Ecology, Fisheries and Wildlife have completed a preliminary evaluation of the planned project, these departments will be reviewing the proposed development, in detail, following City action, to determine whether the complex, as designed and located, meets state requirements and is eligible for necessary construction permits, such as a hydraulics permit. NOTE B: The applicant shall be required to comply with all City regulations (e.g. UBC, UFC) and to pay all fees (e.g. utility connections) required in conjunction with the construction and operation of Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII. COMMENTS:O 1F:R EV I E1N:ING' D.E P;ART....... ..... .............................................:...:..:.:::::.:.:::::.:........................................ ....:..I.....I..,.:n....{I...�I.,I.,:,.I:..i„:...::I::.,.,:I,..rn:.......:......:...�:.:......:.....,..I..............:........I..,:......,..:.,..,..........,......:...In....................:.................�.........................,......:...: :::•:•:•:•:•: ::....:•.,.........I:.....,.......:..:......:....... • • • :�::::: >::>:<:::>Various::.Cit ::d•e••artriients>:fiav'•:::reviewedandcommerited:.0 on::the> roect;>Tl:ese::commen.:s;::s.:u.'mi...e:.;in............... ............... • .;:.:;.;:.: :.>:.<:<::>:<:>::;::::::�::::::»:::::::::: :: ::::«::�>;::>:::: .: teal:;;Advts.4.�: ..�o....:m.:..:::.::.::.....................:.:.:.:•:..::..::.....................:.::::. December 3, 1991 To: Gregg Zimmerman Mary Lynne Myer Gary Gottl Sam Chastain Penny Bryant Jim Hanson From: Don Erickson, Chairman tin ::D t :::::::>»::>::::'C..e. d.....;;:C1:�i'::e.�be1'��:��9..............:.:::::::::::::::::::::.:...............::.:..:.: :..::.�::.:.:.......�:.::•....:..::.:.:..::..::..: m. 3 t� n-:»>::> ::;:>::«:»:>;::;::>7h :. .IQ:or�:piite�ei?:Ce.fro.a............::.:.::.::::::::::.:.:::::.................:.::.�:..::...:•.::....�.�:..::...•:..::.::...:...:•:.�: Agenda is listed below. TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA DECEMBER 3, 1991 Third Floor Conference Room Commencing at 1:30 PM NEW BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK, PHASES VII/VIII ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-89 (LENORA BLAUMAN: 6168) The applicant Is seeking to develop an office park complex on a currently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings, open parking, landscaping, recreation, and berming/lanscaping which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat. Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings. This tract will also Include a four-story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and berm/landscaping which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. The applicant Is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River basin. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required, as well. The project is located North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches. cc: Michael Kattermann lac Laureen Nicolay Architecture and Planning 5 Pnpomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.LA., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 S.A. ; S.M. 071-88 REVISED SUBMITTAL OCTOBER 1991 TRACT B. afrt,cP- �Arr®Q iv PHASE VII DEC3 BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK1991 GRADING NARRATIVE It is the intent of First City Washington, Inc. ("Owner") to phase site grading with each building to be constructed; however, Owner may, due to site and seasonal conditions, or tenant market requirements, expand its grading and preload/surcharge activities to include all or portions of the remaining site related to the other buildings to be constructed. It is possible that if site grading were phased with each building, the preload/surcharge building pad material used to reduce settlement for the first building(s) might be transferred to subsequent building pad(s) , minimizing site activity and the need for additional imported material . Ultimately, a portion of the imported material will be distributed on the site as structural fill and fill for the parking areas. Current preload/surcharge quantities for any one building are expected to range from 8,500 cubic yards to 13,500 cubic yards. If preload is required for the parking structure, approximately 40,000 cubic yards of additional material could be required or reused. Export quantities are estimated at 3,533 cubic yards. Approximately up to 675 vehicle trips are estimated to import the preload material for each building. This preload material might be transferred from the Phase 6, Phase 8 or adjacent pads on Phase 7 (Blackriver) projects if the construction phasing for these projects permits. Approximately and up to 176 trips would be required to export material . The estimated number of vehicle trips is based on an average of 20 cubic yards per trip. Construction schedules, site improvement, hours of operations and mitigation measures will conform to normal City/Owner Agreements and City standards. Initial site preparation for any one building is projected at up to two months; however, the placement of preload could occur prior to the actual grading on filling of the site. _____________C•ITY TREASURER CTY REG/RCPT : n2-21882 12-03-1991 CASHIER ID H 4:28 am - 8000 MISCELLANEOUS RE $15,000.00 . GRADING & FILLING FEES C is)0.000.00.345.81.lJ0.000011 TOTAL DUE RECEIVED FROM: FIRST CITY CHECK $1,000:O0 TOTAL TENDERED $1,000.00 • CHANGE DUE • $0.U0 PROJECT WORK ORDLH PLANNING & ZONING FEES No C NAME: /I�y�'1 . PROJECT: 511 - SA ' ` O 1 I J 62e/14g-ed.) :.:::::. :::. :.;:.:;.;:.:_:<.: :.;:.>:.:;.;;: :.:>:.::«:::»»::>:»::>Trancode:::::::>::: ,::Account:::.::::.�::::::::::..:::::::::::::.::.:::.::::.Amount::.�:::.....::.:::..::.:..:..:............:..:...:..::. Annexation Fees 000/000/345.81.00.02 • Appeals & Waivers 000/000/345.81.00.03 Binding Site Plan/Short Plat •000/000/345.81.00.04 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 000/000/345.81.00.05 Conditional Use Fees 000/000/345.81.00.06 Environmental Review Fees 000/000/345.81.00.07 Preliminary Plat 000/000/345.81.00.08 50% Final Plat (General Fund) 000/000/345.81.00.09 50% Final Plat (Park Fund) 101/000/345.81.00.00 Final/Preliminary PUD 000/000/345.81.00.10 Grading & Filling Fees 000/000/345.81.00.11 ! V V v V V Lot Line Adjustment 000/000/345.81.00.12 Mobile Home Parks 000/000/345.81.00.13 Rezone 000/000/345.81.00.14 Routine Vegetation Mgmt Fees 000/000/345.81.00.15 Shoreline Substantial Dev Fees 000/000/345.81.00.16 Site Plan Approval 000/000/345.81.00.17 Special/Temporary Review Fees 000/000/345.81.00.18 Variance Fees 000/000/345.81.00.19 Other Misc Planning/Zoning Fees 000/000/345.81.00.20 Maps 000/000/341.50.00.00 7041 Photo Copies 000/000/341.60.00.24 Publications 000/000/341.60.00.24 Postage 000/000/05/519/90.42.01 7055 Sales Tax 000/000/231.70.00.00 9998 :.>:.>:.>::•:>::.::.>::.>::•>:::::;:;::::;:;:::<;y;::i5:%i::::::::::::;:isist`::::::;:::::::::;:;::::i::::::::::::i::::i::i::':t:5;:;;:i::i::::::::r::::;:::is2:::::::':.'�.'•:::t;:i::::::::i::::::::;:i:::::::::i;::::::�:;;::;;::i:;::;:i;::;:::;i`::.K BY: Jr-0 DATE: P-P iC/) ) Architecture and Planning pn Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.I.A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle;WA 98101 (206)583-8030 TRANSMITTAL To: Lenore Blaumann Date: November 27, 1991 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Project Name: Blackriver Ph 7 Tr B Renton, WA 98055 NW 88041 Project No: Attn: Re: SA;SM;071-88 Description: 1 copy of Grading Narrative 11/?//91 1 check for $1,000 Grading Fees Remarks: ❑Sent per your Request ❑ For Approval ❑ Other: ❑ For your Use/Reference ❑ For Distribution ❑ For Review and Comment ❑ For your Records Lenore, the Master Application filed under site approval SA;SM;071-88 includes grading and fill along with required information and gradtny plans HAND DELIVERED By: Paul R. Coppock cc: Dean Erickson w/encl Royce A. Berg Amy Kosterlitz Architecture and Planning Leason Pomeroy Northwest,Inc.,Royce A.Berg,A.l A., 1127 Pine Street,Suite 300 Seattle,WA 98101 (206)583-8030 P G �yr,G'0E-} �� November 26, 1991 2 0 DEC Lenore Blaumann ilc�- City of Renton � 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: SA;SM; 071 - 88 and SA;SM; 109 - 89 Blackriver Phases 7 & 8 NW 88041/89017 Dear Lenore Per one November 25, 1991 telephone conversation the grading and fill quantities will be in excess of 500 cubic yards. It is the intent of First City Washington, Inc. to improve only the area required to accommodate the phase under construction. However, seasonal conditions, monitoring or other criteria may dictate that preloads be placed or grading completed prior to construction for the following phases. Since the special grading and fill permit for speculative fill over 500 cubic yards requires Hearing Examiner approval we intend to submit for the permit with this Site Plan approval . Since ely, k di (/ , .. //Paul R. Coppock PRC:fvj cc: Dean Erickson Amy Kosterlitz Bob O'Connell Royce A. Berg -i`r : CARING�FOR'P:°''H�rHER41!�5;.:_ .sa:,! j_,. �t:. ` -'' +4+{>Ik'F:-dfuL17,9KHJ'SI�S�'.'S4f .. • • -ii -,..:,.;": 3. f, , •,'.•., a y�j.,l �Mvl }i (ya ,5ti''S. "" -�•V. • '6 OCI N'e -i•.''.: -' _ talie , . set _ A - rfii::, : :,V1'L0,-',� :a.. F.,:.C„ ",' '{' ,�.�!` ';Pc-e�iti #'+`•! y..,.,.f.��'-t �•fi; ',,1 y.;tvv' r :4•::n{� '-,`,e 5'. 7.'Y.ri,i.:. J -:ie. i.r.s° ,.;�}- �1r�r�'..; „'i :!t: r, 11.' • c�4 - 14,N,,t.4,to-; 0,1,,i ....„,,,:_::,�'- Sri,-. fit, - _ �.;. !. 4. 'r• '�r m ., :.Sf. 'x 1 PP S i e.?'a 1•+f1._r;f�;j', �':1' y�`1 .G, ,.4�' 7 ` i,( I�, C.V.�1`''? ,-. •, "i,i td T. t41Jft`i`1g�:i,tSY;iii3Wfitrr yIjgy73S +ro;i j c•_..:,,, d i {: H iNKStto peisister4-,- . d�wateher"s a?Canadian developer, `P. ',.Y` ;rp, y•e•vi„+'. r.'r.J.' l:r+ .u:c.'- et•a�•y ,: ri71 . and a mymad-,ofk' ublic;offi'ials'r;oii' of;Kin .Coun s;o, many; ra i'ias�•:/fe}afIunnRg,;d"e`velopme it 'sr°natur&{has;come..' d.!to a•ha enain 4 i, •� ..J.r' * 'tJ ri; .1., Y!.h`:_'+f >?.i*'^t-: 7i'1:eA:L=:ch.Gi_.rt'.J `'r.. This time•te-settin twas`Itenton''i The: otential'wictim'was a, ':'-'rql 4 f v. ,. r,..�g. .-. :. p. .-,5•• �lY.,. I a'{ l._,. 4R'rT::Ts'd S%.•t J, r f e cJ•r. 'jfotested,v�etlanc ana[�$resident'Herons 4'The:eiicroachriient': :. .,r t .P. t sr a�•, t: uY.-.V.Ny., C,w. ,:I,',-;:i8 Si','rr_:+' : 1=)"�' :z was,:a proposed:o'ffice:•p' '''':t:;<:;,;�..r J,_y r.�{::'. r. ,..• ,;{°`I; st weel Citize is,:ior R iitori Wi1dla icls preservati•on„and:;. ;^ • .First-City,\X ash iiigton;acsub'sid�gry�of�C;aiida_:!'srFiTst�:Ci` - ,'" iii.r"'" ': ,'`;�settled'their.dis ute;overt .: .. ._ p 113. •���r _ :�-, Corp,� -- r;a'business.•pa�`'`-'�,�+'.. ready approved-by,Rentoi ,?." @r. " ' , fy7officialsjfor property; r ' ':<::,. . 4}narZoriaacres::' `,` <_':.:;::„, , `.�f. _.�,:�a•., rr�:ssgv;r a., >f'•-,f'�.� tf.?±_!•i'e<t s%�. �> it ,,. �`�-,;. )Env>,ronmentahsts'were:;°. �� •. <.>{ ,�;y • e "' ,i .- ;IR•..En..,=a" , l , .,� ,c n Ste.n ' '{ 4c Y. Sa .•' 3•4:; wori�ed'tt fine col'ony'Yof> ;�.+ x � ' �� r. 4 {f'}7, i aAs ae•-a�a wrrtr..+...' Y�j ;, x �yn��,cLa+, k '. t i --. ea baue herons�`oneiof ;r'� f „4:..t1.:- ,',V M. Y>>.. t� .,y{ > .r;:i art~ t�•• t wl 0.-.8,1, 'Mc 11.#41i.z;t r' ', t °"Y,', J> . �:. ,-. the la"r s n.the;r u eta•,,. °.v, i , :#'`s ;f:,-i .hefiid area would bead_ = rg,y�:,,4> , ,d; > X ,.. :,z>�>,.::,. . ., 4.4p.,ii.- 3)v i u5 r .�.p)• z. }' >u'a 7c• x ! a �,' 7 ;; crscy.affegted•,by,_the�pro-gv,sz K ' if,- + � ,/ `�� ,E' posed B ackriv ('orporate` F ,l`ci " ry•f; 7� r , ,1adit;ivp .rl_3-!` ir1f TJ' �, e• •• ' }S y , ark:. ;:4 A „ S ,,, � 'Ai ; :..ti c 'T#ae ,'a eed to drd r y P'. :s,7iY' :•I • =their=appal -f: ity•approval_= " � 3' ` .� 'tom Y h.-_..Ja%u. •cr-r 12 ..:Jr,aYs.`..5�`� ��'.�",P•� �a �H,�Y:tcs,�. • i of°th'e:project after Renton ti ,, , -TI.v. ,..r.:.,, 4?,• ,,officials'announced tie city; b, �, ;� r; vi+ll�tiuyy3 aGrescsuzroun((�����,,4nIlit k � ,' r ing t't a hettois'. ' fs*3The�:;%';,d lot�' 1s ;1.�;�� �r` „,purchase,,,,.,,s."tl e.wet= `` « #,'',.. 1 -land acreatge that, ,•• bet sr{ 4 s ,a ' g �'�x` , p k ; ., t,l,v-r r3 t�i i ,, , ;Ir protected'in a,commercial'_ ;i't'1 .' �' ( "- '',:' ' 117r t - t`i-'t'� 5- �. ��; 1 D., "�.,�.+...� ::�`r;in.;('' t ri .r, �.1'. ).'' . ,z�..and'1,. ,,,rial'areai•tfiat., .,, #^', fii p ::�;';.�,�'s'E.<:�;' '�, ::33.j.it ` i;. .,f - ), nrlt- as:6oggY, o!% a•ndr3,:,J;J`. • ''..¢ i...,,,' ; `it.,v�yycr' !yS',:.., forests. • E'.` 1: ',+is'\'' �:t' .„T ie tran"sacti9n;willI t€�r tw ,., �r /,i,� ,, i4: A WI:leave'sufficient•acreage for;;-`i- V-: R .• .. -'"g 1 - ' . ,Firs}e; iy Washhngton o 6; i`, : ,;;'4' i� ' i .1,i proceed:with:its;office park;;,°r. ;R;cn• aJds;Hi p/s itie;Tm�. �' y; pi',and assure,a,600=foot buffer , Heors; nestle 1n acotf t ` ' . ... •i!,,,..-:wire ,„,,r•:sa.k(v.? :.. .. iR'enton5commercial,-- i ' 'Part,of�alieci�opey•= .'. :, � ",=•$S .,,.�� ::, `'Sf.rs TCs - v; vr1rr .:. •i t; ..(:•:•4.i,i. i'SEsila:;6' -'.-.. --,V7Sh 4..- ",•;_ „ 838,000a v c•ombs from the c, . ,.,. opdn space bonds,',lesser :' }; `t.' 4.,•amounts`f the the'.City-of;Renton and,environinental grou ir_:,. c sF; a J It 1r:.R. 7 ' •• S'„Y; T,. The bLlk:ofthe purc}iase'pr(ce $3:milli9n-is;from mitigation-' II .�7's: )' I t PP. �' t6 J.-d - .., -i :,:p lt`t, i .-s :funds paid by`lliletr`o,as a trade=off'for Renton s appro,,,.-i f w:r' ' / �'eJic ans� n.,o its'ina or_`'sewa e=treafin'e't�facili m,:tlie i '�` ?All parties:should be•..congratulated-:on their willifign §s to , >; 'c': fin'd'a;compromise that.protectedthe:_her`.'on'nests'tut�more':P4s'' 7; �'_{ cru•cial-evgn.than,that:willingness;;was.;ttie vailat ih 'of, bl[c','' i d"ollarsfor.=outri"Nt'u"r`chase of setisitiveaands ,= j r: .:.,,;. !' k, THe`settlement em nstrates;'oncela ain`t•he'wisdoin of':^ ' l: ,' :public;policy,and° ublic.financi•n " {p 4 g';to)protecti enelave4,7 A1k':fu` 1 habitat-within-the= r an'z n -'' n �. ,;;_f, at u lz" area i '' i . .i r;,,; a::w r,. _ , .1,i:•:;'..'.'-i'i•i.D.'ii'i. `•E,Y°=,y45,,,A,.....L.. i%/,:,...., _ ;iiY4:rt:..•.•,;y t.;,:?' .-,4'' �`. - • 3-:t'' =;..tit' - 'f¢'n:•••i',';:j••V,K,'. .. tii .,iti^, tY :,-:.'. .,.'., �,d.µ,r. i,4i.r• C::a-r%J,1rsr,' ,'•.F,f,' iriu y'`::.,`.;• -. ..,.. :.,.. 4,;,�. (Seattle Times:.editorial-staff•••1:.ersl•are Mlndy;Cameron;:lance;. Diehie 'Don.'Hann'ula, Richard Lars`en,;',Terry'T'dng; Jame"s..Ve's"ely :71 ¢.Dickion'•W,i1hamsor},) t t t' , I rS� .r::.! '�-•"-` : '. ,,,r ,v? L ri._t ,,., .,t1t:, .,, - ;7.`�,,:.1io : �- }:' .t ,u.._..v ,)„,, `;.«'�i ;'.JE' '•'.....,,'. "t` '.:..- 1'A.,....-k::.'g t•e�,` 'rc .r'<'•tctr<'i'� .,t., .i^:!.• ..r-"':1'•:_'' T•,,',; ''. 4k:'i' -.. .i .'�T'i";r��,..,,,�I:iaa:t' � i-w,i ks.: ,.4 .r+,,. �,-'E li e.^�}rh,-` F�S1:C;rt>,s.R.,:�':,.-- a%9,:: Syr,l.�;].�n:,'; - :]`�,, ;%..4_ �t.. "3� 'M1,i-:.>,•. 'J;�q '.,7v:..'s.. ..: I, 4.:;.G; '•tr ':.pz:"rJ '`i•�:.. .i('- - :ram :�_.,'i' n�,�'�" - - .$i"�"- 5`,: � .1'(. d'{,:<`. _ ./`f3':�F�L' riffi .:1:. •.L.r� :.1.. _ ..:r-:�- .5:.. .c iv �. k`fv;;.;+ra s --r�Jri.t�, ,yam,; - :fir,;,ri .j'-,'_3��,5 A3'..;5.::�' .yr.i' ::iii' ,_ .: �'':��'+r��'lyi ,e,,��" -h�'.��:,.d ''v: ,�'t',,':e:'i':;r''? �'�`i:., �t-�:.,t[,.i�-`., .,.v,,:f ;..:t.:��'et;{:J:,: "4L'�--;J..ri^;i:"fi is y I•'r: ri?, t w:J:,-�y�'r,..t. .`s'`^.::[> '1,•%,:�'�:rfN�c{Y``,i!..s;; ;•%3,vt'e;=�iia,,� :4t; '� �: :�,5 .�l-,:.?'-.r:�?i-rr:tti.SJ,�:.i.,:,�. Wit::., `�i - :;• .�_ 4,,.9r•.,s4:.i� �,� ,T Y:i"' �''� 1.... ,,,,, 1 SP«-; c_..,, - - ``'a- ."i'i:., 'X 5:, i 5r-:,r-.,., ::g;:e'i'::'.,.-yr`.S�y=",•?,�t'�• - a` was: .;i"'°,x :! _ - �F11 ,_ hy' �ti: .w-.,a,-:,•.r..• - .']a � � e;r,x i..'•r %:=•�•I��:�,:''" ..l t�. t..rn.:y:.�T-.,..S':':�.-s•�ocn:,a�.: °.rt-• . �,,'5.! u.dr"' Ni'C,tr'�r4rN.` �.�'i .Dy ifJ1,:'.ri:-'?'"i ar�.'P��. r_ �i ;"=.i:•:,i.•.!`I...t• ..k'.G'.xc=5>!.n�.r. i` �i, r ,ryit!'¢y y�'-y-N. t...C,t S{: 'ln i'074. :t..;;�•• �,a.,.•,r ' .._•1:� ,j>:::.:i!s.,.�z�., .1, •$gt(n��.11i°"' 1,�`�y�.v.ir" *,': gr-- t i,�y- 'd',1::a..---•rr.,r.'i'i:["� :.t r:L.ry ,r.,'`,^,••':.;`a_-.t's�=%"`ti 4'. , i'. '".A, 4'SW.,i.: sal" yw;Ta;. '?tir',.r^•i.' Y�^• tSv%if.;. �•fl,.;,i• �'Y,=.'i: .•. cam,-r ii:.i e'9.,5��':5='tr„r':;J. .. . . : ... .. - • ',- OPINION - j• t, _ �. 1 ::t(n k - tit 't. '1 ...;'- . .. ‘.!., ‘,,,,, H T.^ iy. 9 - ii,■ :ValleyDailyNews;.-"' :, - r. - .t.> ::Robe `J.:Weil,°Presidents Dick Ransom;;V'.P.%General Manager.Jack Mayne,Editor•] i + r •.t :1 E �toria s - �-•d t e, : : Pro ss � d f j: 1•res de� - . . .• • •• • . side.} • . ,.• •:., •• • • , : , , sid . : .: e..:b. .;,. :,:_. . : : ::•:,.:::::;:,....,:„','„,:: ... : ;,.,,::::::. lr ,y.: . • . ...:.. .... . • • • .•• ..• . hanks-to'the;willingness'Of'all i. : . ••. . ... . : . .. •.: •. •• • give'a little, .a'key''`urban wildlife habitat in .... :, . •. . •: .. , : TRentonf.will be preserved.:..:: : .;,';,' .. .. . . : .. . . . Under;an agreement finally,hammered`together last week, First,City,:..Washington;will;go;_ahead:, with:construction•'of;.its;'BlackrRiver:.Corporate ' ... Park While:cr"itical wildlife;:.habitat will'be°pre-._ served,. _ ,) ,,av:.r _,.-;; : - . ; _ Key to;tlieettlement wasthe,•City;of Renton's. , purchase;of 36_acres.of forest and wetlands for wildlife habitat,doubling the;amount of protected ;' wetland,cin;;a,;commercial;:iand•indus trial,,area• • • where most other wetlands:and:forests,have been ;. lost• ;!: '. The property`was-purchased"using'$3,million:, - • from Metro;' $838;000':from'`.operi-space bonds ' . and King County's conservation futures;fund, • • .$400,000, from,the..cify,,and a,smaller,amounf, • ' from environmental groups ,i..;-:;x: r,:":.:, .Four ,environmental.'.groups' - persistence ' brought'the other parties to:the.table;i but the• .1 • -• . agreementf'couldn't have been struck'•without the j cooperation of First City'Washington"and the .t City of Renton. . :Allowing•for the continued•commercialization ' of South;King County:is important to,the,area's • economy,_but,saving:something of what was here before the concrete and steel is:important,'too. i That's why'agreements such.'as the one struck last'week.are:::'nec`essary'to'keep"progress'in'bai=.' ance with our natural heritage.,i ;: . .: pT",,. November 18. 1991 _ Renton City Council Minutes _ Page 376 i. Fire: Mitigation Fee Fire Department requested approval of draft fire mitigation fee policy. Policy Refer to Planning and Development Committee. CAG: 90-082, Cedar Utilities Division submitted Golder Associates consultant agreement task River Delta ediment order #1 (CAG-082-90) for Cedar. River Delta sediment sampling project Sampling (Phase I), (Phase I); required expenditure $17,777. Refer to Utilities Committee. Golder Assoc. (Task Order #1) MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. INFORMATION ITEM Administrative Services submitted third quarter, 1991 Insurance Log, Claims: Incidents & containing all reported incidents and claims with the exception of industrial Claims 3rd Quarter insurance claims; 128 claims were processed from 7/1/91 through 10/31/91. Report, 1991 CORRESPONDENCE Correspondence was read from M. L. and Zoe B. Gibson (1215), William and Citizen Comment: Kay Donald (1211), and Charles & Gayle Shure (1201), North 28th Place, Gibson, et al. - Trail Renton, stating that since 1944, a privately-owned trail has existed from Park Access 28th Street North _ and Burnett in Kennydale (known as 28th Street North) which has been used at Park & Burnett by, garbage trucks and local residents for access. The petitioners requested that a no-outlet sign be erected at the Burnett Street exit and a concrete barricade be installed at Park and 28th to close the access to the general public. The letter also suggested that those individuals who need to use the trail at the west end could continue to do so under the proposed configuration. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL REFER THIS ITEM TO ADMINISTRATION FOR REVIEW AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Correspondence was read from David P. Tracy, attorney, representing Mr. Robison - Crestview and Mrs. Sam (James) Robison, owners of Crestview Apartments located at Apartments, Special 305 Lind Avenue SW, Renton. Mr. and Mrs. Lind requested exemption from Utility Connection the special utility connection charge for installation of a lawn sprinkler Charge Exemption system. Under current Code provisions, the charge for the 75 units would be $40,000. The property owners agreed that if any additional units are added or the use of the property is changed substantially, appropriate special utility connection charges would be paid at that time. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL REFER THIS ITEM TO THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE. CARRIED. WSDOT: I-405 S-Curve Correspondence was read from Terrence G. Paananen, Project Engineer for Project Report the I-405 S-Curve Project, reporting that: 1) Installation of the pipeline casing under the freeway has been completed, Main Street near South 5th Street has been restored, and the traffic configuration on Main has been returned to its preconstruction configuration. 2) Cutover of the first Cedar River pipeline has been completed, the second cutover will begin between 11/18 and 11/22, and the third cutover will take place prior to Christmas. Mr. Paananen will be present at the 12/2/91 Council meeting to report on the I-405 S-Curve project. Citizen Comment: Vaupel Councilman Edwards entered a letter from Versie Vaupel, P. O. Box 755, - Human Rights Renton, 98057, regarding the Human Rights Commission and affirmative Commission, Affirmative action. Ms. Vaupel urged that the Commission not be abandoned, and that Action the Administration act affirmatively to recruit women and minorities for boards, commissions, and committees considering City issues. In response to Councilman Stredicke's inquiry, Community Services Committee Chairman Tanner advised that review of the Human Rights and Affairs Commission procedures and composition has been referred to the Committee and will be discussed at a future meeting. OLD BUSINESS Council President Nelson presented a Committee of the Whole report stating Committee of the Whole that the City has been negotiating to purchase property at the Black River Acquisition': Black River Corporate Park using various financial resources. It has been reported to the Corporate Park Property Council that the negotiated price to purchase the desired property is approximately the sum of $4,238,000.00. Of that sum the City has available from Metro, the Open Space Bond Issue, and Conservation Futures funds, the sum of $3,833,000.00. i 1 November 18. 1991 Renton City Council Minutes Page 377 iiThe City funds to be invested would be approximately $405,000.00 plus associated costs of closing the transaction such as surveying of boundary lines, processing of boundary line adjustments, escrow fees, etc. The City Council authorized the administration to proceed with the acquisition of these properties and to report back to the Council on the best available source of funds to pay the City's share of this purchase. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chairman Mathews presented the Committee following Committee reports: I' Planning: Vision 2020 Referred 12/3/90 - The Planning and Development Committee agreed that recommendations from Vision 2020 should be considered by the Planning Commission.before a final recommendation on the Comprehensive Plan land use element is sent to the Council in March. The Committee recommended that this item.be referred to the Planning Commission. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning: Building Referred 6/10/91 - The Planning and Development Committee reported that Moratorium, R-3/R-4 the Planning Division staff is working with City Attorney Larry Warren on a Development process for reviewing private.rezones and comprehensive plan amendments during the interim period before the Comprehensive Plan is adopted in July, 1993. Since this may also be appropriate for the R-3/R-4 zoning, the p. Committee requested that the staff report back to the Committee with a recommendation. 'The subject will be held in committee. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* In response to Councilwoman Zimmerman's inquiry, Ms. Mathews stated that the Planning Commission set an expiration date of 12/31/91 on the recommended R-3/R-4 moratorium because the Commission anticipated that development of a preferred land use alternative would be completed by the end of 1991. However, Comprehensive Plan timelines have been extended. In response to Councilman Tanner's comments, Ms. Mathews said that the Planning and Development had favored a site-by-site review of zoning requests; however, the Planning Commission felt that such a process would be too.cumbersome and time-consuming. Ms. Mathews said that the Planning and Development Committee does not share the Planning Commission's view that a blanket moratorium should be imposed, but the Committee is concerned with the zoning of large parcels of property that might change the /�\ face of the community'before the final Comprehensive Plan is adopted. *MOTION CARRIED. AG: 91-087, Boeing Referred 11/4/91 - The Planning and Development Committee recommended ongacres Office Park, that the contract between the City and Jones & Stokes Associates to prepare Jones & Stokes (Adden. the Longacres Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (now funded at #1) $289,000.00) be amended to include: 1) A study of regional socioeconomic impacts likely to occur with the development of Longacres Park. This study will cost $10,510.00, and ;! will be funded entirely by The Boeing Company; no City funds will be used for this study. This amendment would increase the total value of the EIS to $299,510.00. 2) A study of regional transportation impacts likely to occur with the Longacres Park development. This study will cost $118,744.00, to be funded entirely by The Boeing Company; no City funds will be used for this study. This amendment would increase the total value of the EIS to $418,254.00. The regional transportation study will supplement a local transportation study. This study, which will cost $50,000.00, was funded by Boeing as part of the initial EIS contract. Findings from the regional study will be used in the Longacres EIS. These findings will also be used in the planned update of the City's existing Valley Transportation Plan (which needs to be amended for the new Comprehensive Transportation Plan). As the City will benefit from this regional study, which is funded by Boeing, the City will credit Boeing against future regional transportation mitigation for Longacres. November 18. 1991 Renton City Council Minutes Page 378 The maximum "credit" that Boeing could receive is calculated at $45,000.00 (from the proposed $118,744.00). The precise amount and form of the credit will be finalized when impacts are determined and mitigation measures are established. The City will not give cash credit to Boeing, but would reduce the fees which Boeing must pay to the City for regional impact mitigation. Local mitigation fees would not be affected. NOTE: To date Boeing has paid $289,000.00 for the EIS, $82,000.00 for environmental and land use review, and $166,000.00 for professional staff services. MOVED, BY.MATHEWS, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chairman Keolker-Wheeler presented the following Committee reports: CAG: 90-079, The Utilities Committee recommended concurrence with the Administration's Cottonwood Lift Station, recommendation that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute RH2 Engineering (Task Supplemental Agreement #1 to Task Order #4 of annual consultant contract Order #4, Adden. #1) (CAG-079-90) with RH2 Engineering to perform additional work on the design of the Cottonwood lift station replacement. This supplemental agreement will be in the amount of $12,035.00. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY ZIMMERMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 90-048, Honey Referred 10/21/91 - The Utilities Committee recommended concurrence with Creek Access Road the Administration's recommendation that Council authorize the Mayor and Stabilization, Fisheries City Clerk to execute Supplemental Agreement #2 for the Honey Creek Biology & Stream Sanitary Sewer access road stabilization project (CAG-048-90). Ecology Services, Watershed Dynamics Supplemental Agreement #2 allows Watershed Dynamics to perform extra. (Adden. #1) work in accordance with Section X of CAG-048-90. It is necessary to have Watershed Dynamics perform this extra work in order to ensure that the project design is completed in a timely fashion to meet Washington State Department of Fisheries' construction window for 1992. MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY TANNER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 91-002, East Referred 10/28/91 - The Utilities Committee recommended concurrence with Renton Interceptor the Administration's recommendation that Council authorize the Mayor and Project, RH2 Engineering City Clerk to execute supplemental agreement #1 for the East Renton (Adden. #1) Interceptor Project (CAG-002-91). Supplemental agreement #1 allows RH2 Engineering to perform extra work in accordance with Section X of CAG-002-91. These items include materials and presentations needed to assure proper environmental review, public involvement, and agency concurrence necessary in order to meet the objectives of the original scope of the project. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY TANNER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chairman Tanner presented the following Committee Committee reports: Citizen Comment: Referred 10/14/91 - The Community Services Committee recommended to Podrabsky, Seattle-King the Council that $6,000.00-be appropriated from the year-end fund balance to County Senior Services - . cover the shortfall in funds for the "Meals on Wheels" program serving City "Meals on Whee s" _ of Renton residents. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Parks: Open Space, The Community Services Committee met on 11/6/91 to discuss the onservation Futures , identification and commitment of matching funds for the King County Levy Fund,(Black Ri 'r Conservation Futures Grant Program for the Black River Riparian Forest Riparian Forest, King Open Space Bond Issue Project. 'County Black River Riparian Forest 50% Grant $200,000.00 Conservation Futures Levy Fund 50% Matching $200,000.00 King County Open Space Bond Funds The Committee recommended that the Council authorize the Administration to confirm the allocation of match monies for the Conservation Futures Levy Fund with referral to the Ways and Means Committee for preparation of November 18. 1991 Renton City Council Minutes Pane 379 appropriate resolution. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 91-082, Open Referred 11/4/91 - The Community Services Committee met on 11/6/91 to Space, Interlocal discuss the amendments to the supplemental agreement to CAG-082-91 Agreement, Cedar River between the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) n 8 P DO and P ( ) Pedestrian Bridge the City of Renton. The supplemental agreement is for construction in the amount of $463,565.73, for the Cedar River pedestrian bridge as part of the Cedar River Trail Open Space Bond Issue Project. An escape clause has been provided in the event the cost estimate is in excess of $10,000.00, and the total actual bid exceeds the estimate by more than 15 percent. Funds for this project will be derived from the Open Space Bond Issue Program. The Committee recommended Council approval of the supplemental agreement between the City of Renton and the WSDOT with referral to the Mayor for signature. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* !i In response to Councilwoman Keolker-Wheeler's inquiry, Parks Director Sam �! Chastain said that the Cedar River Trail will pass through Liberty Park at Houser Way, enter Cedar River Park under the east columns of the I-405 bridge,.and cross the Cedar River to the south side onto the existing railroad. The columns of the present bridge structure will be cut off, and the pedestrian bridge will be erected on the top of those columns. *MOTION CARRIED. Acquisition: Open Space, The Community Services Committee met on 11/6/91 to discuss the acquisition Puget Western Parcels, of the Puget Western parcels within the Cedar River Trail natural zone. This Cedar River Trail Natural 41.55 acre acquisition is part of the Open Space Bond Issue Program and will Zone be purchased with open space funds. The estimated closing date for this transaction is 11/30/91, subject to Council approval and a satisfactory site assessment report. The Committee recommended that Council concur in the acquisition of the Puget Western parcels. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY ZIMMERMAN, COUNCIL HEAR INFORMATION ON THIS ISSUE AT THIS TIME. CARRIED. Mr. Chastain reported that the sale is contingent upon: 1) Final sale price of $72,000.00 (cash terms) or $83,000.00 (extended terms) 2) Satisfactory hazardous waste assessment. 3) Approval of project scope by the King County Open Space Citizens Oversight Committee. 4) Approval of change in scope by King County. Mr. Chastain stated that the City has obtained items 2, 3, and 4 above. He stated further that the staff recommended acquisition of the subject property at the sale price of $72,000.00 (cash terms) from Open Space funds, with a z transaction closing date of 11/30/91. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY EDWARDS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. CAG: 90-029, Interloca The Community Services Committee met on 11/6/91 to discuss the Agreement, King Coun amendments to the Conservation Futures Interlocal Agreement (CAG-029- Open Space Conservatio 90). The amendments allow for a second allocation of funds with a Futures Levy, Lake $100,000.00 allocation to the Lake Washington Vistas Open Space Bond Issue Washington Vistas & Project and a $200,000.00 allocation to the Black River Riparian Forest Open Black River Riparian Space Bond Issue Project. `rest The Committee recommended Council concur on the amendments to the Conservations Futures Interlocal Agreement with referral to the Mayor for signature. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, ' COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways & Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented the following Committee ordinance for second and final reading: DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS "vt ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET m'aFRP soroN REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: w0.`tr U-Ft ( 'et- b ( ; 3 199' DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 `iiii"4"1) APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services - 16. Utilities COMMENTS: r�I= "17 j%D c 044/Ii16fl 7S f/ o44 6- /a- c:74 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. fist,/ ///, -7l Signature of it`ctor Authorized R presentative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht • DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP; RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: /" ,p 52 p/'/-(A'J APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS A NOT APPROVED E. 4 T tiff-1, C o(et/iA Fil dNt 6 D /P e9N FJ/M. ,c Ze9Q) M'4v E f y ,elq , , 1'/-/YRc / oA &O/G.6/4/ F (S 4/ Soo E F/i F ozv 1 FQ 1114 i Nr l //V 777',/ / ' E y06/ N FAD 7a /6'eNF0X RA Low "610 5/ %° t///qlf , V4/L1 -/ F S / ll �/ y+ �jd!�� 4L'? DATE: l/—/ — f SI ATUR)�9 DIR R OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht �.�. > . "'Fdi{{Y6iG�i�iF3�14Yil5mNT-, .,./iif[i61Ni0SS► .-r. ._., >. ... _ .. ..�.��� DEPARTN ,_T OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PU C WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW tE1/IEWING DEPARTMENT: Wcc,Y U4-1 tr6eti )ATE CIRCULATED: 05/28/9-1 COMMENTS DUE: 06/10/91 • PPUCATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-109-801 'ROPONENT: First City Development PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex on a currently ✓avant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A Is proposed to be Developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, landscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/Ianscaping)which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a rieron rookery). Tract B is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at 'our stories). This tract will also Include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen :berm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. the applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River lash. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. An Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by he Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address identified environmental impacts - these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with espect to anticipated site plan impacts, and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. i_OCATION: North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West orNaches 317E AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION . IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land&Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare _ 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation • 14. Transportation 15. Public Services ,l I 16. Utilities COMMENTS: rr ,pRa7� Ago)rFF. PRo1e5-c17o N MARA 141 o7>- /S w/7 Y/A/ ,(���ly jz��-vN SS(.A115.1 2 ON ( 1046- 5 ofE /}`'�9/l-► 4 A/3o -'F 56. 4 L IZ " w47Ek fr14/N t5 /1`157) 1W c.1;-n 1414 - o41T6s4/1 Z ' / N c/fL-CS' f=oAs 'Ti,4o&G/f PRo/mv", S F_!s 4-7Te4-C h`$D 1 Nf�oI'4iiq-7/dN, 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. AAn Signatu Dire r or Authorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 env,vnhl •. r 3iirlitgatAble galreartAMAgiiiiitt Yir Bkz o,-,h: drw sa rsa�, .. •. DEPARTMEN-_ F PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLI(_ ORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 'PLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SSM;RVMP-071-88 ECF;SA;S S M;RVM P-109-8fr IOPONENT: First City Development • tOJECT TITLE: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII IIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant Is seeking site plan approval to develop an office park complex 0 a irrently vacant 27.76 acre site (including Tract A at 525,536 square feet and Tract B at 683,762 square feet). Tract A is proposed be developed with three office buildings (Building A at one story, and Buildings B & C at four stories each), open parking, idscaping, recreation,and a screen (berming/lanscaping) which separates the site from the abutting wildlife habitat (including a !ton rookery). Tract B Is proposed to be developed with three office buildings (Buildings D & F at five stories and Building E at ur stories). This tract will also include a four story parking garage, open parking, on-site recreation, landscaping, and a screen erm and landscaping)which separates the site from the neighboring wildlife habitat. )e applicant is also seeking a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit based upon the proximity of the site to the Black River min. A Routine Vegetation Management Permit will be required,as well. Environmental impact Statement has been prepared for these proposed developments. The Statement has been evaluated by I e Environmental Review Committee and mitigation measures have been established to address Identified environmental impacts these measures are attached for your convenience. At this time, we are asking that you review the proposed projects with spect to anticipated site plan impacts,and that you suggest measures to mitigate those land use/shoreline Impacts. )CATION: SEC: 13 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E SEC:24 TWNSHP:23N RNG:4E North of SW 7th, East of Oakesdale and West of Naches • PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 06/21/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG.SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT X DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING&TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: ' :OMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE :OMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M.ON JUNE 10, 1991. iEVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: /"1 A-N fi F—!/'/e l t1 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS XNOT APPROVED . 1,v/3-r/Q/+4,4/N S/ / o'/v'titrit'r y41=7Q v/k r/eig G¢N/YcT / e D�TF�Q/�?1T►F_A fi NT C i4 F!/FF_ FLa-v yQ/:Q v1,tTAA1,+/Y T- I S e-4 L c•g?i ray ?ffF F/Q r M•4� 1.96•LC. /F TI/F_ !�F—c;?(.4 1. 50o 6pAt Folk E17fF...J P O T 4 _OopEA l.L//1-T -.l4�.g//y Qrg ivF1�►A i o'Nt 7/?9 P//V6.(g), poL\t*#)440 Gt/'lifri5 p/PIA/A15 3. rile in o F .N roN w/fir-r44 e_641 p11EH N s rvE X4 41•1 R F 4 v l/i s 141514 c4 TrON or- A /6 " rtiA? .A /"1/4/N T M4o '& 74 1dsQof5 TY, SF T/s4 mi"Tel-e-hteP r'140/14 corm. I04N. P1.1 5, McoleitioRi4,7 /4,4 ,b E S/G,N tJ A4WI NG-S- 4u/n cr t tiLL_ Ay°I°c(014t E Owe.z-oppteNr f 5 s,58 /97;rA 951 D - 16-m cv/NT )2 5Y57-7r,/P? i-N liccoRP44v 6t.f77,' 67 xb 4A4F-7//vc- vt-AND44D5. /�2ltiJ�GyY��+ DATE: 6-it -1/ it NATU F ECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 6. t't, /At /!y CL 1QXWcF5 !nJ�.7'!'i' rN C'?•/4/rl .•s i49 /'t !i//47fZP /3y REV.5/90 levrvsht '7 6( C try 0 p 0:-/1L>eny, r ra = ono u r.oILAr I•t*L+[1.11C.YP11 r WILV* L 13 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ❑ PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP ❑ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ❑ OTHER APPLICANT: JOB ADDRESS: NATURE OF WORK: DATE RECEIVED BY RECEIVED FROM COMMENTS DUE WO# PROPERTY MGMT. GREEN # FEES APPLIED ❑ NEED MORE INFORMATION ❑' LEGAL DESCRIPTION 4- L� NOT APPROVED FOR ❑ FRONT FOOTAGE ❑ SQUARE FOOTAGE APPLICATION OF FEES ❑ VICINITY MAP ❑ OTHER It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below will apply to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are due and payable at the time the construction permit is Issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements (i.e.underground utilities,street improvements,etc.) PRIVATE DEVELOPER HELD PROJECT COST LATECOMER LATECOMER AGREEMENT NO. PER. FTG. FEE WATER — 0— SEWER — f9 — OTHER - D,-- SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FTG. SAD FEE WATER — D — SEWER — O — OTHER, ,le/ SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-WATER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$940/lot x Apartment, Condo,each multiplex unit$545/ea.unit x Commercial/Industrial $.126/sq.ft.of property x (not less than $940.00) 683 76Z 86 /5-4.O/ SPECIAL UTILITY CONNECTION CHARGE-SEWER UNITS SUCC FEE Single family residential dwelling unit$470/lot x Apartment, Condo, each multiplex unit$270/ea. unit x Commercial/Industrial$.063/sq.ft.of property x 7 (not less than $470.00) 683762 ----1713/ 0 7.7. 01 TOTAL: P? 2 31.02 The above quoted fees do NOT include Inspection fees,side sewer permits,�r/w permit fees or the cost-r Toff water meters. P/ecse verii5 <Yr'•c ?�Ja71e, G�G6G//D7/On //W/IcA GIc4ecfl s p4Se .r�[L— (See red- /Ile C.orr,menTs /a7Tacheci here-lb .) 'r. W - a \ _ s —722A, f, ,, 7-2-9/ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative DATE r/t.d..../I.►/t.w It 1/►r K n ‘zi I ) ) t - i \74.-"AyA--s,,,,44; ‘1,,_. ,>\i ,, CD ll �y�aCD "30J( T rc�ul run F� t htn '. f;(-1 r_ir,r____ C.....a_.±..11_PtX 1. I 1 — ,CSC-its+._.S f n,a sr C. ...:_-)\ 1 �' i J 1LilA•015-6:1C£r -� C �G'sa]r 1 . �.. r. p"l ..,„?.,,,hrit_T.„______. Y '1111° vsr NAV ifi1 py.�.{' ,,` v>_ Ii i s 1L til._I(_�L �(] +• I. I • I NW p' \ Pi , ► „IA ''. = 1 i \ V _ 1,x, I '\\ J�u IC\Jy lest n I "" t �• '� o N ea �, PCs. : ISIP ■' 114 I lil—e'I ' , ,D i 111 i , r,, r✓ I ll ! — A II ,+� - -— � [4 -� -- 1r ---- ' tili� i ? ;S. I - IlI } 1 ^l : 41111 gilt � I r •; writ, .. . ,__ ...,:,, .._ ,.......,,...„ ... "" 1 ._ itk .... A,. I" p, -..- ,s ,... .14-e . 1_ ,---. - ,, Iiiisii lip)I I"41#,;4&• II .... ......... ____,.., ..... . ..., J*ir 'a gab, 4- IIIiim i mitiho a. .., .•• ... - f''''f',..,,..,-** ,,_,„.,. aat „ 1 • IIIc '''','.*t."enI.CA." w , n., • 4 1 si.ki.„ p ''-, 4 • Ihin al*. tZgliAdli'Vik 'filial'/ I ‘ il , • \ ........... Ira rejlipi,, r1 ..N, 1.Aigossar , ,/ t a Mr j L' I iti_.,••••Piii41"• ------, ---- Is\ iii -I" , , air wiii-A • . , •tiii —•... \ Q F" 1 .ILL .-. r 11- .4:::-...,,,ti._ illiagirmi , $,. V ,.,,,,,,s, _ ... 6*- -Kr--- T 1 1 I wu aa• i, i1 '' 4 (� I i I. \'. :. I Ilt . '..,..,Isi II 1 111 er i --- "Atli .2-.. rs,,711 ciiiios-7-7 c all I mils \�\� 1 bI i� =c ttan Siil A,1571;a;r� y 11 1\ 11 ����Cw1 x 9L' I..: ., i,I I .1sr ? vl w �\�` 1 m . :II y • lip I, ..,,, , .. on __ IPAfir - II I Ia sw_y<n j1 It. s eu S 24, :.,,� II ,,,,.., ,,,.. all , `(_ \\ . (Arm 16 I ll tia s� OW I II ! ` �_�1::11---I t I � � � 'll ~ � a�"� _ 17•ps r y1\ �tE ____„..,„ __,s, \ ,, is LI / . , II INTERIM 1 __It g_J ua,!� 1 N _ I / sill • a -I s1;last 1jr—If..-.; // ' i fir_ `in 1 1 S s tkjsr W I screw Cj sr cr - - 4. 1 1 o-\g S 4' c= 'PI r f 1 1 \\ m1I.!! j ' It_f I 4 II \\\ ; ,r�'� SF 1IOM sr. ..i `� - ...J I SE 1r.,a 1 s ii -I V‘I/4ThP4C0410 rG/ ty i s ra�' e L' 1.\-,1; ; ' ' , t i II << ,mot„ irI I. ; �f_� � Pu„ _i;,11 r� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET c • OrR•Vision► ENVIRONMENTAL Mo� NO 13199 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:�1r•OI,A5ro -�-t '` � �� DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 I COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 �E APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 - PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air F 3. Water 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use - 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: e.e. 'c ir' 14.1 t ►Tal-to -Pee 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. /AZ /7 Signature of Director or Authorized Represen a Date Rev. 6/88 envnrshl • TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEW COMMENTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK/PHASE VII SA-109-89 NOV. 12 , Iqq Corporate Park Phase VII: Located on Track B which abuts to SW 7th Street between Naches Avenue SW and Oakesdale Avenue SW Three office buildings as follows: a) D & F is 4/5 stories respectively b) E is 4 story 1. Transportation mitigation fee when paying for Bldgs. D, F & E all together: Bldg. D is 91,550 square feet Bldg. F is 116,400 square feet Bldg. E is 78,350 square feet TOTAL is 286,300 SQUARE FEET Note: Trips calculated using ITE 5th Addition for office parks: Trip rate: Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(X) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(286.3) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 (5.66) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 4.72 + 3.435 Ln(T) = 8.16 T = e8.16 T = 3,494 Total trips for Bldg. D, F, and E. Mitigate fee for Grady Way TBZ: $170/trip $170 x 3,494 = $593,980.00 7B z. Deposit $593,980 to Account No. /O5 !�� iz/.3/G - %L , , GYadY Wy / rrv- 7V S //5I C1t ' Note: Building mitigation fees may be paid separately but at a higher individual cost. See attached supplement sheet. D:91-449:CEM:ps 'CT 1rJ r^�d, . r1 .1 --, $ ' Z I -- -�7 2 1 1 X n L 1 -- 52-vr'0 -I- 1-79 ' Lnc' -1- .(�E '-0' 5 6 • Q _ 9E6 , r ( S:'aL U7 Fa ,a 9 0' -1- Lx) sk s ' 0 _ (-- Lid .-- --F J , A____i_ 7 5 CM ca., . ib,Lo z2/7 ' + (-7L417 ) 9 va ' 0 Sq- h am - 4 (x) 1-4/ G g Q •O — (J— A 1 D _1--r. d 1 A 1- ' 5Q 18 ,cr , p11 tea._.! t. c74 ! v ,/ >� 3 0 N I..)N 1 ' . PI 'J- IQ4 �-i �I - _1 'PPP E~,(7 , �r° 4 L.L l �, E.Yli - -I- ( z5 't ) �! e'o � 000 c 1 (Q ( 1 �VI �n,7 � --1- 1'j�a'I�� � � �� �Q _ mmm r' ` e -1- i k) I `-`= '-Q -- (-a .` f _ L , 1 / b 6 / / z I .. '^Q1\( , 0-1 J ,O/1-71 j^7 /`.1 A//1 f 7D Ls-r- :.,,,y -a _,a_,, 7z vv h /-�� v. T ;. ( �_ /`it c7SY(c--/ _,l•C..,5`ti <-/ P, .(,,�.%1-L -,i,c7/1 1 yl:YE( 40 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;_ -" PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII .. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: , TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: .J g.ve/©piece f J )ce y APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED dr DATE: A/ -iz /9'// SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED R ESENTATIVE REV.5/90 devrvsht TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REVIEW COMMENTS BLACK RIVER CORPORATE PARK/PHASE VII SA-109-89 Nov, rz i q q Corporate Park Phase VII: Located on Track B which abuts to SW 7th Street between Naches Avenue SW and Oakesdale Avenue SW Three office buildings as follows: a) D & F is 4/5 stories respectively b) E is 4 story 1. Transportation mitigation fee when paying for Bldgs. D, F & E all together: Bldg. D is 91,550 square feet Bldg. F is 116,400 square feet Bldg. E is 78,350 square feet TOTAL is 286,300 SQUARE FEET Note: Trips calculated using ITE 5th Addition for office parks:. Trip rate: Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(X) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 Ln(286.3) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 0.835 (5.66) + 3.435 Ln(T) = 4.72 + 3.435 Ln(T) = 8.16 T = e8.16 T = 3,494 Total trips for Bldg. D, F, and E. Mitigate fee for Grady Way TBZ: $170/trip $170 x 3,494 = $593,980.00 1 z 1c.e. Deposit $593,980 to Account No. /05 ,/ 2' , %D , CDO GY dY Wy 1-g1 /'i K r'/V', 7v s // I city Note: Building mitigation fees may be paid separately but at a higher _ individual cost. See attached supplement sheet. D:91-449:CEM:ps -7 r� .1 � ' �, �- -\7 g i 1 x_ o 3 '��1a Sd ' +I 1�1•01 I c3c I 1 -= L . S -,•/i' -l- 'fig ' 2 �Lh C -1- (Ic ,b7' S v ' 0 = Q •o�j QS 2/ i X L I d 'o°7 1 = _l = c2 z h Cx) L-1 C-1-) -��' � Ci • tCT ' ?J . � + , • 1.1 12 AN000 Hmo 1 1v.i / b 6✓ v. • ' 7. 1 -a ,, (1 `4'77�C7/�1��vtif- :c �/Z1 h D t `I-. �r1 !- Q cR P°4-J / /fit `") 7t� / y: ` -t.v<1-, J, _._ i .)-'(8 r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS cfn'oFcnoi� ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET NOV 1 31991 elkREVIEWING DEPARTMENT: fd l(� k � IV DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water X 4. Plants 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: A.44 ��rTtii2 /�f ic�T/�xi AND 4.0,-n/7LiN5AyOi2y 4.--x)g-v -E. ZV r4 1 g-- FL it l4 i �N /-/-/ /Old y✓ �/ 3? /la-iN :4 '/4/65. /i' /2— U1 7 Reg- A'612hii,444- gace,RA€O ,C /PG4-7- vF k//95th4/G 9 aiv `9.EG14s//"a-e Cf'<v>�'L� -/ l��j� 1ti £QLW,,.t) ' A„( 'tiesA-2$ o Rol)0% /''i ci /E�" I J7/Zf77/L�G racy- 7- / A-6 crIa-e f°-e iifa/ /2 u,/Zlc D 4CV-1u1,.1/O a i � n Gvf-la �z=9•�s'' 4,ry / N2.� W/T/-% /' r �� •..�,,.�� 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. ////i& Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Rev. 6/88 envrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: (11-7/it9 5/5%1 /„2145/eri GU✓ 4:4 /172/1'4/ APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED ri?4,71, J/4 g /N ✓r}e1,.,7‘4 -- /HO-5 y/`ALL 132 4,--3/6y40 /0-A0 iis/2ve f) y ce/2-a/0,,c� t/- Gil /'1/�� /2 vro ;` ,7-7 /4T/D r/A o= ///9 - 2/ NACU AZ 7 C/7y ,419r. 9<?,)21 C�v�S n� -c 5/0 e D C5 r 5 Y I14e.-4,1w a.Q 71.2ov‘.D �r«�'J� D2.g�// C- ��Gr3/y /�i�V GA�Gcvl�flo,,O I� Si ', h I an.p•� !—� c L,.,j) !-/Dls/,s/ oN 77X /7G-97s! //Jv7lefi e 5/ 7 � L7//- ,�/—//// T/�rv< a/' i /3� • ;,��ir 7/c% 'T0 �r- 7.� /I?//4,pt� F,/a / r�»f Q 60 —u ' �i /-u C>% 77o/y �� 40 DATE: /// 1 / / SIGNATURE OF DIRECT SR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Ltrv-00(Rome(Pix-i&-K-ukt DATE CIRCULATED: 11/01/91 I COMMENTS DUE: 11/12/91 APPLICATION NO(S): ECF;SA;SM-071-88 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp c oFo DtvtstoN RENToN PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII ®Cr 9 1991 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: 1/ SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA(gross): IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: PROBABLE PROBABLE MORE MINOR MAJOR INFORMATION IMPACT IMPACT NECESSARY 1. Earth 2. Air 3. Water 4. Plants —� 5. Animals 6. Energy&Natural Resources 7. Environmental Health 8. Land &Shoreline Use )(1Et 9. Housing 10. Aesthetics 11. Light&Glare 12. Recreation 13. Historic&Cultural Preservation 14. Transportation 15. Public Services 16. Utilities COMMENTS: �t 5(1- �e.10Ce_ ri (.\,1 ,.._ +6' 1\N V As N`e, am,- w �G l ,ANAL s, 5 t G _ , ' Ji`ct-\, `���, Sa � � �'rr�c�l�d�, Q uo 1170.5es ;re. s 41,4 �,005�5� ( 51�t/t.Ld a-150 A4 6( �S v- e, �r y s1,15 1�ov\ on V•evh�� LHa` kwazS/G-e Gti� ems. P ,� w. toe nos k C� // i i�<�� ,t 3 y �p l iM l s G -��`G[ G�ems / G i �1/c� /a on' ' � kcc,/c,c9-; (:G y/ p4ri � '�KiI r� a�12 ��-sl,�,� 4M ib/e? atl6 ,lac 5 ✓�`�, i1�s5 �ce rh- 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./- t y #216:11/ 0/ Signature of Direc or or Authorized Representative Date Rev.6/88 envwsht DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET APPLICATION NO(S).: ECF;SA;SM-071-88&ECF;SA-109-89 PROPONENT: First City Development Corp. PROJECT TITLE: Black River Corp Park, Phases VII &VIII BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: LOCATION: SEC: TWNSHP: RNG: TO: PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION SCHEDULED TAC DATE: 11/19/91 ENGINEERING SECTION TRAFFIC ENG. SECTION UTILITIES ENG. SECTION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU - POLICE DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION CONSTRUCTION FIELD SERVICES DEVELOPMENT PLANNING PLANNING &TECHNICAL SERVICES PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION OTHERS: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5:00 P.M. ON NOVEMBER 12, 1991. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ' NOT APPROVED --lomantLe i 54t\ 5 194/I %_/. 53.V 4( -e-�Pfl !Yam' kaQp /ev2 t f� ,U,.e4veg ,446Y1 PP-S .�c�Sie tt,„ papKtl, a\n ;Uac.k.g.5 LIA/v22- 5 1\-°r- 7-5 /7 UC4"4 v>n ore , vz./7 04 DATE: / //S SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REV. 5/90 devrvsht ;f m • _ } • d ,; —w%cx vasiveplant has been destroying , :,mar :.z ,�,. „wry° . .:.:. This in Y g Ginn <Broadifoei. ,` r. .,d) X,.14a �,„t1.,.,. ': .-.., sY .Y. #` ;, _ k ;°; `G '. t <:,-�,. ' • wildlife habitat and reducing the water t r-. - t_ ��'- may. ' ": ':is '; it .i,�. `,.. w '. local - x ��. � abilities of - -- �' � �+. �ation and retention - - .� �...,,�s .f-, filtration.r•:tcir,.�}i_r"� : .e,' ?�s,„z�>x- � :"d;f". `'s5""' _ � Editoi;;'s`n�te wT{ie;thtrdtimstallment m,;:�::: p. gathered from the 1 , ` , ¢ s ,,,a . ;� -wetlands:•.Infoririation r:1:E;f/4.9„1...:a. .(.0447.7,,P.k.P.ift..4,'-i0t,c./:!.K0.it. Y1..5-.. r ` ,1 �Y�t ',,NR a 4 ' rf : [his series;explored th_a stat_us'of wetland �,SS • Stre.-m-Team's survey was sent to the` ' e�;�i�.•.:."'�fs:�_,- ..'t lJ �- • :_ ,..':. .� k %T,-*`,4.».,ti�.���y"-;'.�'b"�.��,��3-�s,7NY;� y,,.;`� : r6:.tgq�on°at;the local,`level:7:4i.F f nal k 's'• f Kin`County Environmental Division installment.d scusses.the:concent of � 3'' <; .King .County • ,';„'• ,,.x,., , -r y', ;: and the Department of Wildlife.for use Y^toration=the: -h'iloso-h and: �' , r A.6z.•4- k ,r"J a ,�,: e d for control • wetland,c�to , p . P ) � ,�, , „- r��.s, ...r<F_, in determining then e the facts.: - °a_� - `"°,� . ;r�:"�` :et fYe..;', • measures. ( "'h ITare most ��I "�-,:,. Enhancement projects =-� _fax.,..> .•:,�, k<..,.,.,, .a. ,, •e : #. � "g appropriate in urbanized areas where . The'conce tof restonn degraded °°"``g ' wetlands have'become isolated P.. .. g;. ..:� / ��"��=r:µ;'w.a...;:-;�:;;:••r.. , and are wetlands;has received a great deal of: III / _ '. 4t ,f sometimes subject to intensive adjacent r- :: attention recently from:policy makers,:::' ; =._';''' _a;<.,k;1<,• ':'f%i-1 s' ,: :: ��\\% .,;:. land use. One rule of thumb is that dev• - •'.'s,•plan.,'` ..and_scientists.' , :;,,=,SxY='4 , ,'=; y , � 1;, r';. wetlands not•be enhanced unless a Enhancing;restoring, and creating " recognized alteration has occurred and wetland's:.,addresses twb;plaguing issues;: _ - the method for,reparation has been fully The first;isme,'poor condition:of,existing�.::. . p ' in'Oran s Harbor:The project,-`.: • -explored and planned.Enhancement project. Y._,. P P • wetlands that si'e suffering,from.pol•lu began in.August 199.0 at,a cost of.roughly should not be targeted at high quality lion;'.filling;;sedimentation;and.other;..:.;z. $1'million.Initial surveys inilicate.that wetlands. human;induced affl ctions`:Thesecond" {ish are using the area,but the,system • problem is'the issue'of compensating,for. . must pass the test of time.::_ ' the ongoing'loss;of wetlands'through- <; - RestoringWetlands . mitigation. i.": = • :,:.,, Compensatory mitigation:generally: Enhancing Wetlands Restoration of wetlands has an includes restoration and %r:: '--�,=_� , .' '< important role in the Puget Sound basin creation;;Enhancement:improves the ' Enhancement is afar.simpler task.A , • where so many vital wetlands have been condition.of'degraded wetlands;to ;;;;;,-...-.;, typical enhancement project-might ' • - lost to shoreline and upland development: :__.provide higher quality,functions Restora include the removal ofinvasive or.exotic Because restoration involves the reestab .�:.�. tion:reestablishes:wetlaudfuiicfi'onal�,� i._'species;which,frequentlyachoke out the lishment of lost functions,the rate of characterishcsand;processes,which:have;.`..;.,.;•native.::vegetation,and interfere with the -success for restoration.projects is been lost:;Creation establishes awetland natural water flow Ot1ier,examples of somewhat.higher than for creation. •. at a,site:that historically was„not.a_ ,:,:e,nhancementkinclude removing litter:and : ` Typical restoration projects involve wetland; ,` n t 7 : -},,:', . debris;and even excessCsedimentation tt =-`removing.dikes or berms that prevent the ;:: y natural flow•of Water,-Pr removing fill ; „ •.;, = �'„<, ;.,z',�.,, fthat ma haveaccumulated as a'result:of�: , Creating-Wetlands erosion upstream.:Tliese types of projects and reestablishing natural wetland- f,:.::.tS.ii.,. <<_ ;,f;• . make excellent community service ;vegetation.In some cases, the original -.-'n' °4.-- 'd '' ,� unteers:;';%',"''�' characteristic of wetlands, atior,�•..;r�,, -t ,;, '§Y - ::cs€_ , 'programs for,vol ,..,.:, ;:•- "- - hydric soils, Creation of::a wetland;s.• •0'.:•,.a- :.. . " ad,tr` e ".,.,.-,,: ., ,r,9y...,_;.. . [,' ... .; The`City`of Bellevue;has had.tremen can be found under artificial fill.The extremely,diffienitand°costly:,task:It . = u • • "'4 ""'.„,• dour success using:Streamifeamvolun ' •presence of this type of wetland charac- requires,manipulating"the natural'system "'9. 1"'"• ...-•uo`'`rtr` "4'''�'=r .r' ' 'teers for wetland momtonng;and en= _.teristic is helpful in restoring the natural to establish`t• he'necessary hydrology. - . haneement projects:For two,summers • ',.. "functions of the historic wetland: Soils ed T. removed';°annt ometimes -". - ' y- A$5 million habitat restoration volunteers have identified arid`surve ed 1 replaced:The establishment of native • pujrple loosestrife also known as the:'„'' , program has been proposed for the lower chal engi g t s:is..freguently water sotils, : tpurple Plague(see illustration.next•page:)'" . Duwamish River and Elliott Bay.This . challenging task..Once the soils,-'_ lk '. •• . sr�: e and vegetation.are.in place;it may take.. `it :+ - n • , -*Sl,; • (AY `: „r, a r-;ytt,s. is ;..s' years for the system:to.become estab-' ,Qy. ikc lished.'And more importantly,iri Many . • Yr:'. 4: `G•-, cases;:the_systems havenot succeeded. Artificial Wetlands . s�� = ''' Comprehensive.planniiig`and long-term . -' " '- ' "' monitorin of:created;wetlagds.are. . ..:s Artificial wetlands are engineered level of pollutants rn'.,the runoff, and g and managed to provide the valuable ":the decreased quantity of natural •'critical;to:successful,wetland systems. .. . . ` . - ' :. One'of;the requirements.for mitigation is • functions'of a wetland system such as - wetlands.Artificial wetlands are not to re lace the wetlandwth'more acreage filtering out pollutants,trapping , _- " intended to act as natural systems, P:;,, •'sediment,-providing:wildlife`habitat;' however, as they are usually not than wa's';lo'st iri orderao compensate for.--,,, .• therrisksiniiereri'in mitigation.projects and even storing:floodwater:These -..: 'connected to a natural water network. {:_ facilities are necessary,because of the... .Examples of artificial wetlands `,.?There.are::very:few:,wetland'creations •: _ - increased quantities of-stormwater: include grassy swales,wet ponds,and Corp of igideeget a beennnd a or The'',`'; runoff in.urban areas;the.increased .' - detention/retention facilities. �y• Corps'of Engineers liasaeen working.on' ` _ a four acre estuarine'slough creation ' - A f ° F", • ' -' - .-.. # 1�;' h:' •- :'c; mac;_ : .r,••L..l�` t;P' � iv =tia . PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON NEW 81990 May 6 1990 {'j;Ms. Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave S. Renton, WA 98055 Re: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery Dear Ms. Myer: I am writing this letter in response to a notification from the Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation group of the planned development of the area adjacent to the above- referenced heron rookery. I am a great supporter of wildlife, and feel that too much development is detrimental to our local wildlife populations as well as man's ability to live in harmony with our fellow creatures. We depend on one another for survival , and when the wildlife goes, we go. I feel placement of the buildings and parking areas, as proposed, is too close to the heron rookery, and without adequate buffering, will cause all the wildlife in the area to be disturbed by the noise, pollution, and movement of people and machines. If this occurred, it could cause a disruption of nesting and reproduction cycles. I also feel that the proposed paving of the area will eliminate habitats for other wildlife, and local extinctions could occur. This I feel would be a dreadful loss, one which is preventable. Sin rely ,ours, /(5-12/0 Air G El ' beth Storm 1 39 S.E. Wax Rd. Kent, WA 98042 630-2302 Ct1 ysd .o-4 /c l t%_ %„_._ May 6, ly�UU Charles R.Dowd 3200 West Concord Way #446 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Mary Lynne Meyer, Senior Environmental Planner PLANNING DIVISION Department of Community Development CITY OF RENTOf1f 200 Mill Avenue South MAY 8 1990 Renton, WA 98055 OWED Dear Ms Meyer I am writing to protest the proposed development of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Introducing first the noise and disruption of construction and then the steady intrusion of nearby human occupation will drive away the first the herons, then the migrating ducks, and finally even the frogs and smaller animals. When we lose this tiny remaining piece of the Black River life system, we will have finished destroying an entire wetland. All that will be left will be water and dirt with nothing alive in it but people--during working hours. This is not a guess. We have the dismal example of Tukwila Pond where I could once count 18 species of ducks in a morning before work and where now, because of development, I see only Canada Geese. If there were an entire floodplain out there, rural and wooded as it was in my youth, I wouldn't be as loud in my protests. But that whole area has been given over to development that doesn't support anything but hawks and rats and remediated toxic waste dumps. We have let the developers have "just one more development" until they've nickle-and- dimed us out of the whole valley. Let's save this remaining scrap where, in spite of everything, nature manages to exist. Thank you, C. R. Dowd 77-T,.�_ VI i I PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON MAY 8 1990 RECEWED May 5, 1990 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wa. 98055 Mary L. Myer and members of Dept. of Community Development, We are concerned about possible development at the Black- river Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. We are retired, have lived at this address for 37 years, live less than 5 minutes from the Rookery and have enjoyed it for years. It is not a park but a natural area with water, grass , herons and other birds. If buildings are allowed any closer than the ones already built, we fear this area will be destroyed. The herons and other wildlife will leave, a special area will be gone. We have parks to go to but this is not the same. Natural areas such as this not only preserve the wildlife but give you a special and good feeling es you walk the path, see the birds. You can almost forget that not far away are buildings, pavement and people. We urge you and your committee to do what you can to save this area for all of us. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs . Orville Radel 12005 71st Ave. S. Seattle, Wash. , 98178 772-6031 r,�ycaG 4-/g/sA 4111[ May 5, 1990 PLANNING DIVISION Mary Lynne Myer CITY OFRENTON Senior Environmental Planner MAY Dept of Community Development 200 Mill Ave. South,Renton WA 98055 RCENE Dear Ms. Myer: This letter concerns the further development of land near the Renton Heron Rookery at Blackriver Corporate Park. The Rookery has proved itself successful since its creation in 1984 and it would be tragic to let anything interfere with it now. When the habitats of wildlife are gone so also will be the wildlife. We have a great responsibility to see that this doesn't happen. Let us protect and encourage our heron population by}! limiting growth around the rookery and following the guidelines of the environmental impact statement. Sincerely, :Elizabeth LuAdstroiu 7705 S. 117th St. Seattle WA 98178 772-0386 r _ -_-__-- -__-- PLANNING DIVISION /(//^//'JI NI y CITY OF REfviON .�j MAY i 1990 RECEVED 11-84 *-64 / a-71- ottA-.-Lid-PrAl c- . /W /6e7e sGi. 4' �a x�I s-/ro/sue v� 7;v4s - — Y I PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON MAY 7 1990 RECEW D May 4, 1990 Mary Lynne Meyer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Ave. So. Renton, WA 98055 Ms. Meyer: ' I am writing you about my concern for the Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Plans to develop the area into an office park are in many ways destructive for Renton. Although short term profits may be realized from this activity, long term quality of life issues for Renton will be adversely impacted by this construction. Environmentally the placement of the office park is a disaster for the wildlife living there now. The geese, ducks, herons, and other animals now residing in the area will certainly leave because of the proximity of humans, noise, traffic, and destruction of habitat. The biological habitat is too delicate to be disturbed. The groundwater reservoir in the Puget Sound region is quickly losing the capability to replenish itself. As an increasing volume of wetlands and swamps are paved over the ability of the reservoir to be recharged will diminish. Wetlands, as you know, serve a filtering function in cleansing water that enters the ground water table. In the United State west of the Mississippi River water is and will be more of a problem in the future. Why are we destroying all the wetlands? Have the impacts of a greatly increased volume of traffic in the area been considered? I would be interested to see the opinion of the State Department of Transportation on this development. Please consider the long term consequences of this office park development. In the final analysis I feel you will realize that there are, and can be, many office parks in Renton. But there will never be another rookery like the one we have now. Respectfully, Thomas C. Reiter I S30o 11 L *\4 Ave 5E p1et45t, OA '18o55 a55-4650 CH) 3q3. (Lj(wj r-- /cc2'f-W ,s ,4j/Qe I/ i PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON MAY 7 MO RECEWED 14048 S .E . 158th Street Renton, WA 98058 May 4, 1990 Mary Lynne Myer, Sr . Environ . Planner Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue So . Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms . Myer, It is my understanding that development has been proposed very near the heron rookery in the Blackriver Riparian Forest . Because of your responsbility in environmental planning for the Renton area, I wish to inform you of my strong objection to further disturbance of the heron rookery area and to the riparian forest . I am sure you have probably already heard the long litany of pleas for the status quo in many areas, but this particular place is so delicately balanced, of such long-standing historical value, and so unique that another call for staying the bulldozers seems justified . The proposed development is too close to the heron rookery; the noise, movement, pollution and glare of parking lots and buildings would certainly "spook" the birds away, and would surely exterminate any local wildlife unfortunate enough to have been living there . I can 't imagine that one more McDonald 's, Jiffy Car Wash, Video Block Buster, etc . , will enhance the world at all (even if someone does get another $5 . 00 per hour job for a few more weeks or a ticky-tacky condo for a few months) . Humans have emotional needs as well as physical and financial . I believe the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery should be kept as it is; development can take place in less destructive areas . Sincerely yours, /e /6i/(/9 Phyllis L . Vigal ,r4 11F4, $///%o 3200 West concord Way Apt. 446 Mercer Island, Wa. 98040-3227 Thursday, May 3, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer PLANNING DIVISION Senior Environmental Planner CITY OF RENTON Dept. of Community Development MAY 7 1990 200 Mill Avenue South • Renton, Wa. 98055 RECEIVED RE: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery Dear Ms. Myer: I am writing to protest strongly the recent EIS that proposed development for the entire south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. The riparian forest and heron rookery provide Renton with a unique opportunity to save a fragile habitat and to help an even more fragile species. Several weeks ago, I took some friends for an early evening walk to see the rookery from a vantage point across the river. We were awe-struck as we watched 35 to 40 adults herons guarding their nests or fishing in the river. We also saw river otter, scaups, teal, mergansers, mallards, bufflehead, goldeneye, Canadian geese, sparrows, wrens, and killdeer, to name a few. I realize that Renton must consider its own self-interest, but this development will cost more than can ever be measured. Renton is already dotted with two and three-storey office buildings, many of which stand empty. Is another empty office complex so important that Renton can justify the destruction of an irreplaceable nesting and feeding habitat? Quibbling over the placement of parking lots and buildings or arguing about glare and noise is irrelevant. Any development of the area should be prohibited. Renton would benefit mightily from a new park. Sincerely,nc ikelail a-01 Deborah Dowd, (206) 236-1142 . • - - twiiiiwaffiffiwiwiwirAll CITY OF RENT ON -Q--) N W-Z-------7 UP.GaS T7A----G-=.L-.Is(5 Planning/Building/Public Works Department -N- --.DEC 29i J.4.--=',11 ..•i i ' L. ' '' , i ..,-b \ I '.4. i 200-Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 , C -1 sii . , 32 * . '-,.•:",,f4 r.mETER--. - h*- 4 kil Vi. ,..i.--. k i 9.862162 Z, CV (sii-V r jennif r__ w Boyes in 1 6203 238th Pl, #4102 • Kent WA 98032 ! v.- T,. . .------- ---Ti -Of DELiVERABLE. 1 AS AD5RESSED . 1 ct'' 1E61 0'1 . Iii Q1 UNABLE 0 FORWARI.: "-----4-71,1 4- VI V c: • iltiuliddilinillwililiilll RETURN TO WRITER 4/ .3-0° • • io PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON MAY 2 2 1990 RECEIVED I 11644- • r� • t s „C:re r this 1 the io re t <t1 to Mill enter, dd./onf•Jei ;.4"TI47"3r - KIK144 111. • . Mill Creek Site pril '13 , 1990 • • • t , : . • t Ion known to have 1 crcek abuve F4St• nt L'red. of Imaries, with i_.asie of orook nattily by r Ihw sixties of • , * rior to the Tpil : would late PLANNING DIVISION May 3, 1990 CITY OF RENTON MAY 4 1990 Mary Lynne Myer E""F( E VE * Senior Environmental Planner lo� Department of Community Development 200 Mill Ave So Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: I'm writing this letter with a deep concern for the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. It is my understanding there are plans to development the entire south side of this area. You can imagine what this will do to the heron population not to mention the other wild life. If buildings are too close to the rookery, if there is not adequate buffering, . and if area is paved this is bound to be very detrimental to the herons as well as the other wild life. We must learn a lesson from past performances we have witnessed in other areas of our country, where there has been absolutely no concern for helping preserve our wild life treasures. Washington State' is not exempt from bad'per•formances either. I urge you to do all you can to preserve this area so that we will not lose our wonderful wild life treasures. Sincerely, Za44,- ;=-__ Mrs. Shirley J. Winton 7800 NE 24th Bellevue, WA 98004 454-3867 !'f7 2Yra9 ,Sr//A/9. /. %/r c / ' | PLANNING DIVISION - ! C[[ OFRE0TOJ Y � / K�A� r�m 7 1OUM / _-- / RECEIVED |i '| ! - - - -- - - � - ----r' - - --------' i' ----- - -- `-`- - ` -�---�- -- � ' ------- -- - � --- ----- -- -- ---~� -~�7�' ' �/~°- ------~~- ---^�---'--- ---'- -- ---- ---- '---- °f=�-- — ---�.-�' ' - ' - ' ' '-'---------'-- - -- -- - - -'----' -- - / ^o` - --''�1-----' '-- --'-- - - -- -- - -- ---'--- -- - ----' --- - - / -_' -` '- ---- --- _- _ -'_-_----' '- _ - -- - - -- ---- ti 7916 Olympic View Drive NW Gig Harbor , Washington 98335 May 1 , 1990 PLANNING DIVISION Mary Lynne Myer , OIIYOFRFNION Senior Environmental Planner Department of Community Development MAY 81990 200 Mill Avenue South Renton , Washington 98055 FFECE ,s Dear Ms . Myer : We learned recently that development has been proposed for the south side of the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery . We are very concerned about the adverse effects this development could have on the herons and other wildlife in this area . About two months ago we first visited the rookery area. We counted 22 nests and could hardly believe our good luck in being able to watch , at close range, these beautiful , complex birds , as they tended their eggs and later their young . Last Sunday we witnessed whole families of Canada geese--moms , dads , and fluffy yellow chicks--swimming in the pond and resting along the river bank . And we have greatly enjoyed watching and photographing the many other species of birds that live in this relatively undisturbed wetland . The Rookery wetland is a treasure that it would be unthinkable to jeopardize by allowing inadequately buffered development adjacent to it . In our opinion , the area should be scrupulously protected not only for the sake of its inhabitants , but also for human benefit . The need to preserve our few remaining pockets of wetland in the Puget Sound region has reached urgent proportions . The denser our population becomes , the more we need , and the more we owe it to future generations to preserve , these places where people can observe the fascinating life cycles of our fellow creatures , learn about their habitats and nature ' s rhythms , and experience the tranquility that such areas impart . The Renton Heron Rookery area, because of its special beauty , its tranquility , and the fact that it already is home to a wealth of wetland life--including an impressively large flock of herons--is especially worthy of careful preservation . But experts who have reviewed the EIS for the proposed development have concluded that the development would have a critical effect on the area and would even cause the herons to leave . Audubon Society members who know the area in detail say the proposed buildings and parking areas will be too close to the heron rookery ; that herons and other wildlife , because of insufficient buffering , will be T., tr a disturbed by noise, glare , and movement ; and that much valuable habitat will be destroyed by paving . The EIS itself states that the proposed development will result in a "significant adverse impact that cannot be fully mitigated . " We urge, therefore , that the prospective developers be required to revise their plans in a way that would avoid such impact . A wildlife habitat of this is too rare and valuable for us risk its destruction . Sincerely yours , CP/A7 A J2.--7,4,--yieA Mary A . Kenney G . James Kenney , M.D. May 1 , 1990 25219 Lake Wild. C.C. Dr . S . E. Maple Valley, Wa. 98038 Mary Lynne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner PLANNING DIVISION Dept. Of Community Development CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wa, 98055 NW1990 RECENED Dear Ms . Myer , I am writing in regards to the Renton Heron Rookery (Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery) , I live in the Lake Wilderness area and have been walking along that lake for two years now. There used to be some active herons and eagles.Recently the cutting of trees for a housing development and the general hubbub of workers and their trucks seem toiiave disturbed the herons habitat and the nests I are no longer occupied. I am concerned that without buffering of the'buildings and parking area near the Renton Rookery we will s9disturb the birds that there too we will see them disappear.This rookery so uniquely situated near down town Renton is a wonderful educational tool for our children. I would not like to see wetlands completely paved and lose such a wildland habitat where other animals as well as herons live I hope the city will consider carefully the ' further building in this area and its effect on the wilflife. Sincerely, r az.,e_e Elizabeth Culbert • F/xg / w-f ir Mary Lynne Myer PLANNING DIVISION April 30, 1990 Senior Environmental Planner CITY OF RENTON Department of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South MN 2 1990 Renton, WA 98055 RECEIVED Madam: I am writing to you and your office to express my dire concern over the proposed development in the Black River Corporate Park area which is immediately adjacent to the Black River Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. Urbanized encroachment on this sensitive area will displace the sturdier species of fauna and will destroy those less adaptive species. Of course, the floral species won't survive under tons of concrete and asphalt, either. Full mitigation of this development's impact is impossible. Irreversible harm will make extinct this precious piece of ecosphere. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) states that "significant adverse impact" will result. Air quality, water quality, and other life "quality" will be degraded. I urge you and your office to re-evaluate this situation. A corporate office park can be developed almost anywhere - why here where it will destroy wildlife? It is said that a person who destroys something that is man-made is a vandal -- a person who destroys something that is God-made is a developer. We do not inherit this earth from our ancestors - we borrow it from our children. If Black River Corporate Park is allowed to further develop and encroach upon the forest and rookery, then the children will have to visit a zoo to see "examples" of what could have been. Your office has the authority to prevent environmental rape. Act now, before the memories fade away. William N. Christie, M.S. ..,21/9e;v:14--- Environmental Scientist 26611 198th Avenue S.E. Kent, WA 98042 630-1258 F,qxref 6./940 v %vs c May 30, 1990 PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner MAY 2 1990 Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South RECEIVE" Renton, WA 98055 Re: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery Dear Ms. Myer: This letter is in regards to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which was released concerning development of property near the heron rookery in Renton. This is my first letter to the City of Renton. Our feelings concerning this area are very ' strong, and we consider Renton fortunate to have such a habitat, and the proper conditions that invite the herons to nest here. My husband and I first saw this . nesting activity several years ago, before Oaksdale was a completed thru street, and we have driven and walked this area many times since. One Sunday evening we stopped to observe a pair of ducks at a pond just off of 7th Avenue near Oaksdale, and as we watched, a pair of quail and several rabbits appeared. Unique in that we , were only a few blocks from downtown Renton. I was born in Seattle, when the Smith Tower was the tallest building, and grew up in Bellevue; and my husband and.I have lived between Kent and Renton, on the East Hill since 1968. We have watched the valley gradually disappear, and the stagnant air gradually increase over the years.`Our son is still involved in farming on the south side of Kent, and to walk the fields and to see the beautiful soil, with no rocks, that the river deposited over the valley before the dam was built, is a real experience. Unfortunately much of it is now covered with asphalt and buildings, and the birds and wildlife are fast disappearing. We now have a chance to save a small part of this once beautiful valley. Developing this land will drive the herons out, as their.tolerance of humans is very low. They need room to hunt for food, and to feed their young, without outside interferences, but with people, cars, buildings and noise, they won't stand much of a chance. Not only will we lose the herons, but the small animals and birds that live in the field will also be doomed. As a side note, on my last field trip through the area, we observed a mature bald eagle roosting in a nearby tree,the highlite of our trip. Please consider your actions on this issue. Sincerely, %. / % / - p.,ca_„_. O-. 1--,4 4 - -•hn & Jul, cCone 10115 S.E. 07th Kent,WA 98031 (206) 852-0115 JA,-5-Ai 4-/9/*A 77-r ,ev `711/tai )1,14r, ,{)p_(�f Qul)jw-Ly,/t � PLANNING DIVISION o�0 U - ° �j{„ CITY OF RENTON w i l g a s S MAY 1 1990 adE EW D vv, Lb, t+A-A-t") AILL PLICC4 4 C-t om a,r A-P LkL- , J tiuc r—f-e_G-rEsL /Lc d_ ,_c;vtiu ram z cam-& 04_ a p-�-ce.iv,-/' 4"1 etirt-kA cam.. r -K z. .2 Auf,--6-1/1 /1-6--#3- 4A-r-u-e c( r-inA FeO]/.C..1—/7/a m 7-v1'S . - ./ ouLtre ,( . x)-6 6,4 ot, /to 4.-tir a,2 Yvv 4,1c,„,„_a( a.„,J _„2„„j70�� / 7 - 9 6 CL4 A7. E. c3g oit P ,KING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON v1AY 21990 2600 NW 56th St. #10 . ECE VED Seattle, WA 98107 April 30, 1990 Ms. Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Myer: I am writing in response to the En�ironmental Impact Statement issued on April 11th proposing development for the south side of the Blackriver Riparian (Forest and Heron Rookery. As an environmental professional and concerned local resident, I am writing to you to express my strong concerns with the proposed development of this site. According to qualified reviewers of the EIS, it is highly likely that if this site is utilized as planned to support an office park, the 24 to 30 nesting pairs of herons now present will be forced to leave. Not only are planned buildings and parking areas too close to the rookery, but the increased activity associated with the development will disturb the herons considerably. Other significant disruptions resulting from development will include loss of habitat for food for the herons as well as habitat for other wildlife. This tract of land represents one of the few remaining local havens for a range of species facing increasing pressure from development and population growth in the region, and once lost such habitat is irreplaceable. Considering the high degree of commercial and residential development already existing in the Puget Sound region, it is extremely important to preserve this unique ecosystem. I urge you to reject the proposal for development of this sensitive area . Sincerely, Peter M. Hudelson (SA /4A adir , 29 April 1990 Mary Lynne Myer Senior Environmental Planner PLANNING DIVISION Dept. of Community Development CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 MAY 1 1990 Subject: Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery H CE V D Dear Ms. Myer, A majority of my eleven year work life has been spent near the area of the Heron Rookery. In that time span many of my lunch hours have been spent observing the wildlife around the area in question. I used to walk the Burlington Northern railroad tracks and in and around the Earlington Golf Course. In those days it was hard not to disturb the herons while watching their behavior. These days I make use of Oaksdale Street to commute to work as well as for noontime walks. I observe the ducks, Canada geese, and heron from the sidewalks and bridge. What currently exists is a decent compromise between development and habitat preservation. While I appreciate the new road, the exposure of the Heron Rookery by the Blackriver development is deplorable. The construction and occupation activity and loss of privacy to the herons which this development will cause leaves me cold. It saddens me. At least my walks are momentary; the proposed buildings and parking lots would be permanent intrusions. The wildlife which use this area must be given the opportunity to exist and thrive. They need the space and conditions which currently exist in order exist and thrive. Allowing these lands to be paved and peopled will damage the habitat. The development will be too close to the rookery and cause the herons to leave. The development will take away nesting and burrowing areas from other wildlife, perhaps causing local extinctions. I strongly urge that the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery be set aside from development and preserved. Yours sincerely, i''''7fr 1/-1/7-/7 t J. A. Matter 2566 24th Avenue West Seattle, WA 98199 Work phone: 393-3918 -4z-a, 5/j/90 17-:1✓c5 71 dcY QS- '")' 4 171 • P - fr/ do id d --/ P 7LQV --f.d-14 4,1,1 -14 0 14 a 5- S d, 0C A 9 _ e -- CHI NH 53 ▪ „ • d V • • ..(6/0 d"?:":3 SZ' c4Y --)Ci (7/ / r)* .74/4" PLANNING DIVe0a=77 /(/ 47.e.p 7 0 ti 078eFfe:yNT01,..? e A14_, e-0;,s--,6 WY 2 1990,7/ _ ? . _ ,ITED (7--kr L-S /6: /1/4 LJ4LQ etz- e 7L-4 a ki-t- v. •.t_c a. 'If co _ / j 4L7 iJq//6. .7L crY it*Le7 e/ L1.1 1::? I 4 't) - •_ e ./ _14 c? e c-71-ecd„ e e k GU t: 67/ es* 6 -e- veYy /e z_ _ ,• . , , ,71-I;,e _s' /-a .1-1-Lo -0 'P de/e?,S A 6 ry 71-0 i-•( , ...r- di- 3-7, _. a( --ro en - '‘ Me _I-/e k 6 1--%-- .i.J._- .__._ _.1: __. =__ 0 ,c___,Z-___1_44-a_s_ ___-/---4,e s-. ef )-- / 1A4 1±-49___,-t- ye__/, _ c __es - - An._ec_4.2. ___4__________a <-__e____ /- 0 / v - . S'6. kk . ____C_______ k• ,e 01:__Lh_L_Li_j_ ____ / e' al -S" )_.q. 3-c_g=riz.) '' 1. ij k.,--a' _co .., ----- 7 ,f_ki___,/±„ 4).o k- )-• e et „f 1( 'iv -I-4 i_,..s*- ____,„ - 7— ___ PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF REN T O 1 AY, d 3 a ( Rq0 MAY 1 7990 RECEWED 7;: 71-tei L ki "My Y Sit r'o,r' gri v,`o'wt e4wto pia, Ai we r Sept 04 O- ,-`f ,De rape A v&14 " e , u/q -F,,► K1 i a rc-A ►`'s Par 0.41. Icf. 4'- Y►' cts Y1,441 r 41e- Re-rt.-Ant\ h-t115Y) Yr9c)Kly4 4-1-ti,GQ it VCCI.--pl hY-'- '-Fse b 1 rG'.s 4. Y1 e 11r\ u r6e141 cse7 1 . ��Ycxg k Y e_ Uy �J ,`S a YC et I d4,4 CAvt ive l G alp Syr es2 so ,'-I-- i .s o e 14-4° .r -JO reap rc_ 5-'1t cc r l� dice kr Fnk 9.1a/e0T plem cis AY. Kev t Wc+ . 9(PU3 a P� • e a -3lU3 Fmece, d /9a ;l. r s PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON MAY 1 1990 RECEIVED 816 S. 216th St., Apt. T-530 Des Moines, WA 98198 April 28, 1990 Mary Lunne Myer, Senior Environmental Planner Dept. of Community Development 200'Mill Ave. S Renton, WA 98055 • Dear Ms. Myer: PRESERVATION OF RENTCN HERON ROOKERY are We have enjoyed visits to the subject rookery, and/alarmed by dev- elopment proposals which would terminate it. These magnificent birds are sensitive to public encroachment, and deserve an ample buffer zone surrounding the Blackriver Riparian Forest and Heron Rookery. The EIS you are considering would not provide this. Accordingly, we urge the City of Renton to reject this development and thereby preserve this wildlife refuge. Sincerely, Mr/Mrs. T. W. Hau25 (870-8532) rim] C/2 JG h r 71117 . v a ., i .a. ..s +....v L. J. 1 , LJ r I-1 V I c I P9 la L C. 2575 Simms St. Lakewood, CO 80215 April 26, 1990 Mr. Norman Peck Hazardous Waste Section Department of Ecology Redmond ., WA Fax Delivery. to 206/867-7098 Dear Mr. Peck: I am requesting that the DOE Hazardous Waste Section investigate a potential hazardous waste site. I am also requesting that tests and any other measures necessary be performed to insure the safety of the site's ground water supply and the surrounding sensitive wildlife habitat. The site is located in Renton, WA. It is just 'upstream and to the south of the P-1 pump plant situated on the property of First City Development. Upstream of the site is• the Renton Heron Rookery, the Black River Forest, and a large drainage area including the Western Processing site. DOE Shorelines is currently active just above and north of this potential hazardous waste site. Attached is a map indicating the location. Following are the reasons why this may be a hazardous waste site and the reasons for bringing this issue. to your attention at this time. In 1984 , the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) enlarged the forebay of the P-l .pump plant for stormwater control and wildlife habitat enhancement. I was one of the two SCS inspectors on the site during this construction. This activity occurred in 1983 or 1984 . The forebay was enlarged to a twenty acre holding area encompassing the junction of Springbrook Creek and the remaining Black River channel . Part of this construction activity included dredging the P-1 pump plant' s original forebay. A large area was excavated to provide a place to put the materials from the dredging. A water dredge was used to dredge the original forebay. I remember seeing the water drain from the dredgings and taking on a metallic sheen as it occasionally overtopped the retaining berm and returned to the forebay. I do not believe this was the result of the presence of. iron oxides in the soil. No one that I discussed this with knew if this was hazardous and if it would be better to leave it in the forebay or to dredge it out of the existing water system. The soil, materials dredged from the forebay were primarily sands. After construction was finished, vegetation was reestablished on the site The area containing the dredged material appeared to harbor a monoculture of grass. r�Y.Ect, ��z/9., _ �.�� Construction was completed, vegetation was establ ' entire site creating what is now shed over the wildlife habitat area in the a widely recognized and important Puget Sound region. From memory, I estimate the excavated site to be from three to four feet deep, fifty feet wide, and- from three to four hundred . feet long. The sediment placed in the above section was removed from the forebay in roughly an area the size of nine feet deep over e entire original area of the entire original forebay area. the I did not realize that the potential for this site unt,i�, I reviewed the 'City ofwas so serious Grant Application for the Renton Centennial Clean Water Fund Project ' , dated February 21,$ 1990.Black Water Quality Management This application describes This judgement the Black River as highly degraded. ud ement reflects land use char industrial waste and the destruction of wetlands. Also, theementioneof d are the conditions in Springbroe,k Creek. The Western Processing Plant is located in this latter drainage and is an EPA superfund cleanup site along with. Mill Creek which has recently been accepted d by the EPA. High levels of turbidity, Ceotal phosphorous, solids, ammonia, and metal coaminationiistavailable from Metro's data on this system. Zinc concentrations in 'sediment samples were the second highest of all twenty samples taken in 1987 -88 in stream surveys by Metro. The P`1 pump plant forebay is mentioned as a possible problem site. My primary concern is that the area of dredged sediments could be highly toxic and, because of the sandy medium, may be contributiri concentrated toxxos to the Green/Duwam.ish River systems. g I am also concerned about possible 'construction of an office park, a recreational activities, degradation of wildlife habitat, and various other hazards. Currently, there is a draft EIS out for public comment on this site through the City of Renton. Two of the three alternatives propose construction of office buildings and parking areas oVer the potential hazardous waste site described above. The comment period ends May 11, 1990. I am concerned about the City of Renton issuing permits before this site is evaluated. I am requesting that you inform them of this problem and that you suggest that they halt the environmental/developmental process until such questions can be answered. This action maybe helpful to them by preventing the occurrence of dangerous conditions due . . any hazards presented by concentrated toxics in this area. I am available for future questions if needed. Please feel free to contact me. I Would like to be included in any mailings and updated on the progress regarding -these issues. Please keep me informed. Sincerely, 114AI 117. fir/ Mary M. Anderson 303/234-9365 cc: Don Erickson, City of Renton Bob Sieh, Edwards and Barbieri Susan Krom, Citizens for Renton Wildland Preservation Jerry Adams, Seattle Audubon Society 0.1 f I}7AiT/N 1".Vrtt4 X/J� - tQA- 4-r Y IoP F HIL Z- tO If)— ' • c 1kS ' lL 1 / P. _ (OFF FogcBAtZ4g.'1;661146" 0 PE iv-ra.d . }tERa1 F;QOKGR I_ E r!) Are"' \..- ' + BG C, k.1;As" fluJAYLEs - SfNYLt �� tA6A a.EVetaED I tin )1PhKK z •• Q c) APP x. LocArrotr fa 1 5 1 - Of DPEb6E.C. ii1GO01IYJEN T s 01A rcemL S ties Co rp- Ee. o . V A i ` � ' :14:: 0.4f ' . >�r1 THESE AkeCO1 :, R N1tJt1�N: s , 5lT6 D1°�,�y N I up 1-.VI €,.�FORe6A SA "-ci\1\\\ ci Z i _;;) feierRo 7._ ' - \ PC_ANT-s - IC\ .././), . • z'La cad mf. r 16 ,P6,eA T,aii-APP,eox La cArfof" • - - - _ - �, - . z- ri 1 NGLENN 6 P '- � $S Fdr7Nrf N,u; � �c ��. c�1� r`Ei-+3i t/� cOIC 7-hR . Fr1,4' G�Au7 }�i'r'►�,cA��o4v • $G�l t t u/,4r this grant proposal, is bounded roughly on the north by Empire Way S., on the west by the Green River, on the south by the Renton corporate limits, and on the east by Benson Road (see attached map). The project area is the downstream-portion of the larger East Side Green River watershed, located east and south of the Green/Duwamish mainstem within the cities of Renton, Kent, and Auburn and in unincorporated King County. It includes the historic remnants of the Black River, the Black River pumping station, Springbrook Creek (Renton), Panther Lake and Panther Creek, and various small tributaries, wetlands and small ponds. Significant upstream tributaries include Mill Creek (Kent), and Garrison Creek (Kent). Portions of Springbrook Creek have been altered by construction of a flood control channel (referred to as the P-1 channel) as part of the .U.S. .Soil Conservation Service's East Side Green River Watershed Project. Runoff from these tributaries enters the flood storage forebay at the Black River pumping station. This water is pumped through the Black River outlet channel to the Green/Duwamish River in ' the city of Renton. Background information Water quality in the Black River basin reflects the rapid conversion of landuse from predominantly rural, forest, and agricultural uses to urban, industrial, and commercial development. Residential construction in the ,valley and plateau areas .has created excessive erosion and sedimentation in essentially all tributaries. This has resulted in the filling of wetlands and choking of saimonid-spawning gravels. These• and other problems, including barriers to fish migration, are documented in the King County Basin Planning Program's Black River Basin Reconnaissance Report. Baseflow water quality samples have been collected by the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) on a monthly basis since 1979 at the mouth of Springbrook Creek (Station 0317) in .Renton. These samples have consistently demonstrated extremely poor quality and frequent standards violations for dissolved oxygen and fecal conform. For example in 1987-88, the most recent year for which data have been analyzed, eleven out of twelve samples did not meet state Class A water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen, and twelve out of twelve samples did not meet state criteria for fecal coliform. The relative lack of vegetative cover along the channel also results in high temperatures and occasional violation of temperature standards. Metro data also show consistently high levels of turbidity, conductivity, total phosphorus, Solids, ammonia, and metals contamination. Zinc concentrations in Springbrook sediment samples were the second highest of all 20 samples taken in 1987-88 by Metro in their stream surveys. Metro data also document a depauperate invertebrate biota. While coho salmon are known to return to the system, Metro speculates that tributaries, such as Garrison Creek, may provide spawning and rearing areas since the.conditions in Springbrook and Mill creeks are unsuitable. . Studies by the Department of Ecology suggest that some of the low dissolved oxygen problems may be due to the influx of low oxygen groundwater. In addition, the lack of gradient and minimal meandering in the constructed channel sections inhibit re- aeration. hie Western Processing recycling plant site is located upstream on Mill Creek (Kent). This site has been designated as an EPA Superfund site and will be the object of cleanup for several years. Recent data have documented high levels of zinc and cadmium contamination in sediments in Mill Creek. This contamination has resulted in the recent designation of the creek itself as a Superfund site from the Western Processing plant to the Kent-Renton city limits. Mill Creek is a major tributary to Springbrook, representing approximately a.third of the tributary drainage to the Black River basin. These high levels of upstream contamination represent a significant source of concern for the city of Renton, given that water- and sediment-borne contaminants do not stop at jurisdictional boundaries. Additional toxic contamination of water and sediments in the Black River basin may also be occurring as a result of industrial discharges, industrial spills and stormwater runoff within the valley. In the lower basin, where Springbrook Creek flows adjacent to the stables of Longacres Racetrack, high levels of fecal conform contamination have been observed. - Future growth in the basin is fikely to exacerbate these water quality problems. The 1989 Community Profile for the city..of Renton predicts a 23 percent growth in population for the Renton planning area between 1990 and 2000, and a 65 percent increase between 1990 and 2020. APR=`?r-98 FRI 14 = - CITY OF NOF'THGLEN 4 P - 08. J HLsti I r An additional problem in the basin is the hydrologic disconnection of valley wetlands from the channelized portions of the stream system. This disconnection means that pollutants entering the stream channels are not.being absorbed and/or biofiltered by the remaining wetlands as would occur in an undisturbed system. Given the already degraded water quality, it is important that the channel alternatives being considered for completion of the East Side Green River Watershed Project be designed to maximize the water quality benefits that can be gained from the inclusion of natural or constructed wetlands and biofiitration swales. Furthermore, the designs need to consider re-aeration potential. • A final problem area concerns the design and operation of the Black River pumping station and the flood storage forebay. Standard operation procedures allow the accumulation of significant runoff in• the forebay prior to discharge to the Green/Duwamish River. During this storage, pollutants such as oils and greases accumulate on the water surface and are flushed to the river in the initial pumping. These pollutants may contribute significantly to degraded water quality in the Green/Duwamish particularly during periods of low flow. Proposed Source Control Strategy The Green/Duwamish Watershed Nonpoint Action Plan recommends that a comprehensive and sytematio water quality management plan for controlling and improving the quality of surface waters in the Black River basin should be developed and • implemented to address the problems discussed 'above (Recommendation 52). Specific components of this recommendation include improvement in water quality throughout the Black River basin; a reduction in deposition and contamination of sediments throughout the basin; an improvement in fish passage and access throughout the tributary reaches; and the maintenance and enhancement of existing wetland areas, including the pump station forebay, for utilization as habitat by wildlife and water-birds. Additional components to be included in the overall surface water quality management of the Black River basin are Improved-operation and maintenance of the pumping station and forebay relative to water and sediment quality and the incorporation of water quality and fish passage considerations in the channel alternatives being considered in the flood water storage and conveyance designs for the East Side Green River Watershed Project. ,! UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON PLANNING O DIVISION CITY OF REIVTON SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98195 APR 2 6 1990 Institute for Environmental Studies RECEIVE.. Engineering Annex, FM-12 (206)543-1812 Donald K. Erickson April 25, 1990 Chief, Current Planning City of Renton 200 Mill Ave South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Erickson, I am writing about the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Blackriver Corporate Park Office Buildings tracts A and B as addressed in the Revised State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). There are several activities that have taken place on the land prior to this proposal that were illegal and should be fixed. Partial filling of the site has been done and all this fill should be removed since it fills part of the wetland. Since this has occurred on the land during the ownership by First City Development Corporation they should pay to restore the wetland to its original condition. Because the development site sits next to land regulated by the Federal government the National Environmental Policy Act should apply and the E.I.S. should be done under the federal act and not just under the State Environmental Protection Act . The Council on Environment Quality (C.E.Q.) supports the need of public involvement in their memorandum when they state " Public review is necessary,if the proposal is a borderline caste Le ,when there is a reasonable amnnt for preparation of an Ems,or when there is scientific or public controversy over the proposal.' This requirement alone should make NEPA apply to the present case. Further there is a question whether the Black River should be restored and salmon reintroduced. The present EIS does not address how the development could impact a salmon run. Some of the present development done illegally may harm the restoration. Because of the Back River runs in the area, the National Marine Fisheries Service could have interest in the area and this would mean that NEPA would apply. The present EIS does not address these federal interests. Moreover, there are serious problems with the conclusions drawn within the EIS statement concerning the heron rookery. Scientific evidence strongly indicates that the proposed development is likely to harm the heron rookery. Note that heron rookeries are no longer easily relocated because there is not other habitat for the birds to move to that is suitable. In the past birds could move because other area were available even if these areas were not as good as the site abandoned. However, if the birds move from the present site they will have lower reproductive success and many may die. ' fa Recycled Paper 'I The present habitat for the heron rookery is not ideal but all better sites have been lost to development. With the restoration of this wetland area the production of herons, waterfowl and other wildlife would be increased. The present E.I.S. does not consider the restoration of the wetland but this should be an important option for several reasons. First, over 90% of the wetlands in King County have already been lost. It is not in the public's interest to lose any more wetlands. This is an important wintering area for many resident birds and would be of more value, if the wetland had not been illegally filled. One option that should be considered is the restoration of the wetlands. If development was allowed, where could the birds move? The present site is one of the few wetland urban sites that birds can use for breeding and wintering so that the proposed development must be compatible with the heron rookery and use by shorebirds, waterfowl and birds of prey. The evidence suggests that the development is not compatible with the heron rookery and further, that wetlands will be lost damaging a variety of wildlife Development that reduces wetlands could be allowed in very unusually conditions that were in the publics interest but there is no evidence that this project has such redeeming value. Moreover, there are legal questions about whether this wetlands could be developed since federal law protects them. In sum, no evidence is presented that makes it in the public's interest to develop this site. In fact, there is evidence that the public interests, natural resources and wildlife will be harmed. The report points out that a disturbance free zone for the herons of 820 feet over land and 500 feet over water is needed. Many scientists would argue that this space is not enough. In any case, the proposed development does not meet the heron's minimum needs for protection. The goal is not to see if the heron can survive closer development but to protect the herons. The proposed development should meet the minimum requirements given in the USFWS Habitat Suitability Index model. Even if this standard is used the evidence on how easily herons are disturbed strongly suggests that this distance is likely to be inadequate. Buildings that are taller than the trees in the area may not be compatible with the rookery. The height of the proposed buildings are likely to be a problem for the birds. If the minimum buffer standards of 820 feet is used and development allowed to proceed it should proceed at the developer's risk. There should be several requirements with the permit. First, a monitoring study by scientists should be required and be conducted to assess whether the birds show any sign of desertion or the number of roosting pairs drops. If any adverse impacts can be quantified, all development permits would be immediately revoked and work permanently curtailed. Thus, if development is allowed it should proceed only as long as there are no adverse impacts on the herons. If there are adverse impacts, the developer should be required to halt development and immediately begin restoring the site to its original condition. The EIS states that there are not wetlands of significance on the site. As I have stated, this is not true. It is true that part of the wetlands have already been harmed. Serious consideration should be given to restoring • this site to its original condition i.e. to the condition before the developer or others filled and drained part of the site. As a wetland, the site has a storage function and further development may add drainage and runoff water to this wetland. The quality of this water from the development is not likely to be good. The increased runoff is likely to have petroleum products and even heavy metals, compounds that may damage the wetlands. The EIS should address these issues. This land is one of the last remaining urban wetland areas. As such NEPA should apply and the EIS should be reviewed by the federal agencies that would have interest in this habitat and area. These agencies include the Dept. of Commerce and the Dept. of the Interior and the Env. Protection Agency. Sincerely, P. Dee Boersma Professor, Institute For Environmental Studies and Department of Zoology Tom:, y frt «1,�,.r ' o a-of 9' .y/c:, fr, J• of- • eCItot-'21.--fr--- , - ,, , UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON CAP 4 J ~_ "1 U.S.!OSTAbL1F` Institute for Environmental Studies APR 25's0 'P ! ski` Engineering Annex, FM-12 n' 1�� a 2� 6ya J� i�6 N.�TEt Seattle, Washington 98195 IV A,... `3 2"8 L 17. ---0 p y, AIel 1C• e.p. rc/CS0ti (0., (, o (1-4) • / Z v o frri r /.l I ve Sd GO fit- i Er o s errF'-1491114.04,9 '' EA Wi er 23415 S �I•'th Maple Valley, WA 98038 - • CITY OF RENTON 200 Mill Avenue South Renton,WA 98055-2189 ETU 'Tc SE TO LOCATE AT BOEING '"I'.../E T-7.-:1(7,s,-,,ti .,!:.L.;1..!!",1.G LISI„— . . , i • • - . 4,-,\1 1-:.-c..._--. L--At,_'•\, /7;?.. \F7')-.F.,:ti7:5"..7-p,:2•-,7-i-7. -Z.1---,, Z...:•: ::,..1 .;_..,,.,,y__,., ‘4-' /• t..)ti :lot\ co DEC nf--0 '-7-1---',..'_•-• r; r•-,...„ ..,-V,i()-.:-.:.-1,-,-:,----.....--...- °) _ ,y_, 0 c-1 ,.----=;"1-.::-;-,--_.-.:-_ti . . '''''' _,,,..3:.4,1,A4,:‘.\--9.' . .. _. .-.::iii1=1,-----If":!..4.E:7[-;T :-..Z- k.,. ttr, i. . , --t--)t--_-_- :,-ill ,..;.,,,i....,1:fiET!,-1 :114,,,1 -..1 .•;;..,;'..7:-P4 DE n 1 • . ,. t_ laitr. I :,1.,,- •;•.TQ-4-.P,C:;*-1,' -;?' 7;::-.--f NG •- 1:--",• ,1„,_:-.-4,,-(...:'27 1:1N^Ivi NIMi••"•••;•-7.• '• ''''-'.. r ,..-,....-,-,.....,-,.:.1.-:L., 4: ,..•.:•!,...-._..,. ..,,,s,-:••• --"--, ::1 . f: ' 1 l• • i 11. i ,..,:, r,,:,,..„,..-.-sc,,E, , Sner 1/ Phil Lundahl ..(.,1. ,.: .T.z.1--,.n,:T.• :-.-.,:._-:-', F.IY..i%i-:7"..1.f4-iTiLz--i..7-.;.::•7-T.-, fi • ..'; G t".;,C.1117...:' ',4-(:!T IL77::'...:(.. IC, ;_{' f. •--4:4-....-:=.. .:-----,-.--,.-:::- . _.!...•;, , _.: i 0 ;.,,, il F`i..7-.EtS(DNIJ. 1--!,,!--T.. 1 , .--- -,- i----. - , .7-..,:'.1-;::::- li,:is'':-.3:1::::v',A1-!C_):i..C -C---7 ...?,%.-J'.--::'51 )P 11 i . _ #l'. r ,,t ..,.,.--i---;-,,,,•..-:-.,_-,,,,,,L.:-5-:,-,-L.-,•-,L-_,-..-c-•-_-_,_-;--•::-_. -.2.,....• il :i :)PLi-sikr.f. 7-1 CC.,',-`r;i.lr.:OT POST OFFICE BOX 1 li 1,,,?-\'-...:-...-.:;W;.ii,;-2.--:':',.,;. '7••3'.f..).e.":- -. -77-1CF..BOX 3! ; . 3 •I.STr-lEET Dr.).RE .--1 .ii.. . , , , .,._',3c2,7.-:... ..-.S ,, .. ,.: I, SS . EL ADDRESSMS F-..t.L.NAME L '- r,-...--• -TR----------- : ,... . .. . . ...........,„ - . _ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII • ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 SAY 0 y`-YLE-/� �A • CITY OF RE F:= + i& NTON ��� Ord, °. __ _ - �, "P O$ 200 Mill Avenue South �� ---_ F-..�`"'"� NT I,Cr) �i,_J i` IIJ� WA 98055-2189 a 30a F. .E�.;. _�--�- •=z IJ Renton, ,, i .i - C "- `t -- `1)1 , Lori Lev n - :S • Q3------\ \:---'\ sj 6K-2‘1 . - - -::, %:—.•:, 7,,c-.,-_.-,r-.0*,1,; i....1..01 ___-_,\--) . _ _ ^__ ...F-OP.MA{IC -1 1 ti t NOT S i`EE i ADDRESS sn NEED ADDRESSEES FULL N,4;v�E 'Ei f, OTHER ` CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM.071-88& ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date,of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton,Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, (::)01.14)t. Donald K. Erickson,AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON �.a,76:--, 9\��%: �J� p : �' ° \ r.t'' U.S.P csTFS �- Planning/Building/Public Works Department _-=-=' ;%.,5.'' . DEC 2 9! t� .- ` i=i - : li �',�,` r \i..,L''L '- '' ) z 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 .- - '`K .�- -IC ; �:;. ii,l s9 _ .- , T k ti t * . . UNA•r' ',IT Al EDEING `��5\ ❑'REA.. . !!_, :3 LIST �0���� G���,\Q� Q REF ? :•StiE ill0a �9 p, ❑ EOEi:._ ' .. ATTEMPT TOi'tDELIVE,, , - ... . Sheryl/, Phil Lundahl — 3r— ,4 XNEED COT.: ._.. ;::tail.STOP ''s FOR MATi, CORRECT 1 `'� OT STREET ^,i i = :, ❑ NEED ADDRESS:'= . :;L! r!L.;r J ❑ OMER___ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department _ • 2 Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ' - ,-q-,:Z:7 0;-::-.. T---•\i':-:-.?"--7-7.--`:-------.7"--,--=-7:-..-77---_--=-::<,.:-, _ rcY Li S PrISEL.SE)A,--F. 0 DO ;,.t aft% / \ -1 :.7.,--i ) _=--_.. ,,:_-_:9', I + 7K + CITY OF RENTON 0../) D:_:C 691 ,,ig-;:.-i) ,IE!,-,: 200 Mill Avenue South A\33j , , , ....,,,... ,,., ;.' Airco 1 / --,--, /, : r , ! Renton,WA 98055-2189 ,.....\‘`-'' , -.I/ i 'r,,,,,:--T E ii— ' ' A WAV6.1," I ' -PUT:MING.Di . , . CITY OF rrlENTON .. --T 1 Shelly/ Mary M. Anderson •:. : LUCLPCL- —rA6t,a—P_ i I 2575 simms St , ' Lakewood, Cr_D 50215 . -- v:-E: 2=3 r ni,f9-..1,91i. . '.-.. Y"'- .•COO t,dad C-11711-- t.-- ' \ - Ii .. -..4.:.3.,&' -..46..-^ ."0.,-".-, !AI:- •,,-,.',, -7,P-,;--,- ,,-7,;'-/-;,-..-,-,;1-1'—`liii,'413-::;,::',....s:.; if:.ie CZ.L. / s __ ___ ____ ,,,,,,•, ,,i, -i,‘„.-A,,,.4:4. ,--:•"'"4"4 • e,gtggicuep,— • --7-,.4.,-"•.-.'5-4,.-V,--,'14:7-45i-'1i1vAliii'r'eta-zPs.yiA--1 t.i iA r4„.ti.i.A:.4f-,:7:otir1.v4-y-•r5%':v'«4.S.,c..-`.t.L-.rII-e,--l-f.irs..,'-,-,'.'.p2-'..--...,-..k.,,,:-:p.!.--'..,';-.::ri.:l-rrisi..,,q4.r-.,-,:-•:I i ' -7 1 ..*eiaq2W lcE Rufv fi ? -r-,7-:..,-:"...A;,!-,T-;..-.zI,..„'4*:.-..I.f-1,%.,:i,)',Y...,,;,4'.:..4.;1,,'4;i-,,,,:0,1/„e0/-gA:ri,„:,;,t-.;Of.;.,,-.4;4'cr:.'•1e-,4Itl,.gX.,,..,'.t,4*;,--.- i.,.. . 1 - - -11,-0*.. s ,L-- .;.--'e'='1.- ±.'..*-'7... ''-'7't7 :'-'*i-Pr-"iliViki -Tb- c:ENMER :. 1; --1'_,,,,':'-itS.:,,":. 1 --...... ir.""siv.—..i.---, :-.4.):,s4-Tt. -.7.,-.'. c- ..,=,-; .-7-47;1.,'';'-7-...;•*4-,,e;-,-.7.f4''t.,.:-',:-;,-„eAi7,'g..., ..vr.,, .2.• _ ,:'',--"::r*-.)-'2,i),5,..--`,,i-::i-,- ::',`-;-,'-u,.:„;l'e''!l,'74-•:7,,--,0-1:',= „'wi.ii,''.,,,,1 :*'4,, •,r:-, f'''''''';:-''' ''''''''4A'',,,''-',04,4117,,•L''.....:',1" ..,,..4,r•':',...`"-,:', ,*;',-,,,', :,',r,'''''-;;A:14,t4;:;„,'f'J:' f..,.-t4',:-.',!: -,* ,e,„%A;',. , ',,,- - ' - '-,1' ,:,,,,=.--,, • ,1 .,‘;',-;;;:%.': C'*-'1:74.:. 4,4:Ae 4,.Alrr ,H3 _' "..-'i,• : ' - - 4'.1,/'.. 4.:.'---:"*.'','•'. ,..'1,V-,, 4..-'-'441:10,,4:::: .•,4.3.W:t-s"r44,414,-,-..,• -*-4.12taaat ' • •••' - - rivm -� h. CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88 & ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 I I � El:: \NTTp 200 Mill Avenue South • ! 5 9 6 �z`;,4 a Renton,WA 98055-2189 C \446h A II etlirSite- '',' / / Mark u 1 Ott - 39 1/ 2 E 105th • t‘ "11 ,' j Sc tie, 4A 98125 - CITY O.F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88& ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP • Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 I . . Traffic and Parking Estimates For: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-Phases VII& VIII 12/11/91 LU LAND USE Variable Quantity Formula Vehicle Code Trips In Out Average Weekday Trips Per Trip Generation, 4th Edition*: General Office** EIS Building Size Assumptions: 710 Total Phase VII 1000 gsf . 286.300 =EXP(0.751N(A)+3.77) 3,019 1,510 1,510 710 Total Phase VIII 1000 gsf 183.582 =EXP(0.75LN(A)+3.77) 2,164 1,082 1,082 Total-Both Phases 469.882 5,183 Proposed Building Sizes: 710 Total Phase VII 1000 gsf 286.300 =EXP(0.75'LN(A)-13.77) 3,019 1,510 1,510 710 Total Phase VIII 1000 gsf 128.000 =EXP(0.751N(A)+3.77) . 1,651 825 825 Total-Both Phases 414.300 4,670 Calculated by Building: 710 Phase VII-Bldg.D: 1000 gsf 91.550 EXP(0.751N(A)+3.77) 1,284 642 642 710 Phase VII-Bldg.E 1000 gsf 78.350 EXP(0.751LN(A)+3.77) 1,142, 571 571 710 Phase Vil-Bldg.F 1000 gsf 116.400 =EXP(0.75LN(A)+3.77) 1,537 769 769 Subtotals 286.300 • 3,964 .,. 710 Phase VIII-Bldg.B 1000 gsf 64.000 Exp(0.756'Ln(A)+3.765). ' 982 , 710 Phase VIII-Bldg.C 1000 gsf 64.000 =Exp(0.7561n(A)+3.765) 982 Subtotals 128.000 1,963 Totals 414.300 5,927 • *Trip Generation,4th Edition was used for the Blackriver Corporate Park EIS traffic studies. For consistency,this same basis should be used throughout the permitting process for data consistency. "City staff prepared estimates using Trip Generation,5th Edition,and assuming'office park'as the proposed use. Office Park assumes an office complex including supporting retail and restaurant facilities which generate additional traffic from offsite. Blackriver Corporate Park will not include support retail facilities;therefore,'general office'is more appropriate. Traffic and Parking Estimates For: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK-Phases VII& VIII 12/11/91 LU LAND USE Variable Quantity Formula Vehicle Code Trips In Out Average Weekday Trips Per Trip Generation, 5th Edition*: Office Park** EIS Building Size Assumptions: 710 Total Phase VII 1000 gsf 286.300 =EXP(0.8351N(A)a3.435) 3,493 1,747 1,747 710 Total Phase VIII 1000 gsf 183.582 =EXP(0.835'LN(A)+3.435) 2,410 1,205 1,205 Total-Both Phases 469.882 5,904 Proposed Building Sizes: 710 Total Phase VII 1000 gsf 286.300 =EXP(0.8351N(A)+3.435) 3,493 1,747 1,747 710 Total Phase VIII 1000 gsf 128.000 =EXP(0.8351LN(A)+3.435) 1,784 892 892 Total-Both Phases 414.300 5,277 Calculated by Building: 710 Phase VII-Bldg.D 1000 gsf 91.550 =EXP(0.835'LN(A)+3.435) 1,348 , 674 674 710 Phase VII-Bldg.E 1000 gsf 78.350 =EXP(0.8351N(A)f3.435) 1,184 592 592 710 Phase VII-Bldg.F 1000 gsf, 116.400 =EXP(0.835'LN(A)+3.435) 1,648 824 824 Subtotals 286.300 4,180 710 Phase VIII-Bldg.B 1000 gsf 64.000 =EXP(0.835'LN(A)+3.435) 1,000 710 Phase VIII-Bldg.C 1000 gsf 64.000 =EXP(0.835'LN(A)+3.435) 1,000 Subtotals 128.000 2,000 Totals 414.300 6,180 *Trip Generation,4th Edition was used for the Blackriver Corporate Park EIS traffic studies. For consistency,this same basis should be used throughout the permitting process for data consistency. "City staff prepared estimates using Trip Generation,5th Edition,and assuming'office park'as the proposed use. Office Park assumes an office complex including supporting retail and restaurant facilities which generate additional traffic from offsite. Blackriver Corporate Park will not include support retail facilities;therefore,'general office'is more appropriate. Transportation and Traffic Engineering PLANNING • DESIGN The Transpo Group \to Ott-ober 2, 1991 TG: 90380.50 Mr. Dean Erickson First City Washington, Inc. AT&T Gateway Tower, Suite 6000 700 - 5th Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 SUBJECT: BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK- PHASES VII AND VIII TRAFFIC MITIGATION FEES Dear Mr. Erickson: During the early phases of development of Blackriver corporate Park, First City Equities entered into agreements with the City of Renton to undertake the Grady Way Corridor Transportation Improvement Study. The study was carried out by The TRANSPO Group, and it was concluded with a report dated July 5, 1988. Since that time the city has adjusted the plan for street improvements and the mitigation fee assessment program, which resulted in an adopted fee program of$170 per daily trip generated. The mitigation fee program was to apply to Phase III and all subsequent phases of Blackriver Corporate Park development. While the study was in progress, First City Equities entered into an LID agreement with the city to share in the total cost of the Oakesdale LID #332. It was understood at that time that when the Grady Way study and assessment fee program was concluded, the fair-share contributions to the Oakesdale project plus all other road improvements in the transporta- tion benefit zone would be reevaluated and appropriate adjustments would be made. The Oakesdale LID #332 total cost was$4,113,609, of which First City Equities paid $2,908,526 on behalf of Blackriver Corporate Park Phases III and future phases (Phases I and II were developed prior to any transportation mitigation requirements under the Grady Way Transportation Benefit Zone (TBZ)); the other LID participants paid$1,205,083. According to the original intent of the Grady Way TBZ, 50 percent of the Oakesdale LID project cost was to be funded as part of the TBZ assessment program (now assessed at the rate of$170 per average weekday trip generated). The remaining 50 percent of the LID cost ($2,056,804) was to be funded directly by the property owners abutting the Oakesdale LID project as a direct local benefit. Since Blackriver Corporate Park abuts nearly all of one side of the Oakesdale LID project, its direct local share of the LID project cost would be $1,028,402 (one-half of the 50 percent local benefit share). LID credit due to the Blackriver Corporate Park applicant is $1,880,124 ($2,908,526 paid less $1,028,402 local share). Since adoption and application of the Grady Way TBZ, Blackriver Corporate Park has developed as follows: ac/ The TRANSPO Group,Inc. 14335 N.E.24th Street,Suite 201 Bellevue,Washington 98007 FAX:206/747-3688 206/641-3881 r ' Mr. Dean Erickson The December 16, 1991 Page 2 Transpo Group Average * TBZ Asmt Phase Floor Area Weekday Trips @ $170/trip III 70,036 1,050 $178,540 IV-A 74,915 1,105 187,790 IV-B 74,915 1,105 187,790 V 50,546 822 139,800 VI 71,057 1,062 180,480 VII 286,300 3,020 513,400 VIII 128,000 1,650 280,500 Totals 811,351 9,815 $1,668,300 Per ITE Trip Generation,4th Edition. The cumulative TBZ assessments for Blackriver Corporate Park Phases III thru VIII is,up to $1,668,300. Credit due the applicant for excess payment into the Oakesdale LID #332 is $1,880,124. Therefore, the Grady Way TBZ assessments for the current phases of Black- , river Corporate Park are covered by credit due the applicant for excess participation in Oakesdale LID #332. We trust that this information will provide a basis for agreement with the City of Renton that traffic impact mitigation for Phases VII and VIII has in fact been reasonably covered by prior contributions to LID #332. Very truly yours, The TRANSPO Group, Inc. 411P tdir/A4/4402e..- James W. MacIsaac, P.E. President JWM/gap UWM1903805L3 CITY OF RENTON ::F - � =-; -- : ' Planning/Building/Public Works Department PLANNING DIVISION 4 LE I ';- '- CITY OF RENTON DEC 2 9E 3 ~6:: ti l 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 "i �; ) _ DEC 1 '6 1991 lv,,-\ 'L-m :p-. r �y _ E; tr Fa Er�' ig,N, r (/- Shelly/ Mary M. ,Anderson �� � 2575 Simms St Pt Lakewood. CO 90215 1 M paw- ' ems ": CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 i;nd 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 111111111111111111,•91111P1111111111111111111r ,111=11111111111111111111111111r 111111.1111M 1 ) . \ - 1.(5-4-1\\ ,..:- S-fCci , 4e , + • CITY OF RENTON 1 _---F---------5;, ../L ' DEC 6 9! r-4 . .., 1 p.1 i.,) , 41- . . 200 Mill Avenue South 1 \ - ----, t• • ,-,: L -1,-. \1- . ,,,,,To i _ Renton,WA 98055-2189 ,-- Ems---,•ti../•• *-, , :, - \ DElk Marty Murphy PO Box 3070 Half Moon Bay, CA 9 4 0 1 9 PLAcir,NN'InIRtNi\c-ill'f:':4 DEC-, 4 6 1991 - ; eri, k tiuRN.i.fr., . .....,„0,0.-6.4,,,,, lbt-At 1211.1lcil . k . WiRWARBOttz. 'TIME.: EA:-Ii580 • r,-. .. tiliFPHY ' ililtjlr4 SZPINE.,(41,1>f Lt4 .. ttre.1,,Ire la raidtcsitt..ct,...• r,e,., ritt,70 .„,,,1 VTA P.F.TiirRti Ti •-gilSieXat , . t 40 CITY OF RENTON -INPlanning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88& ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89, The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of.Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator )M Mill Avanna Qrnith - Pentnn Wachinotnn cR1155 _ ___ . • U� ,s�1,�lte 1v'�i i3.�°n / `� �:Kif J.J.PCSTAGc1�� = .. * .0 CITY OF RENTON -��,-'s�i'° i {!! l = } a ''e' O� 200 Mill Avenue South C1 �) '� DEC. 6 9 i R-s __ I 1'? z "(I . . �'1V r --- • Renton,WA 98055-2189 a^ � n N�. ' ~ . , , — — — eP l ttis fl ,�i� � �' 4ti, ..—a n-- me L n /O�o <�1a,a`csb�w -- .- s�61" e}�S�a 'n I 0 . - Seo • t . Forbe- /�',Axe55 Mime e 0 0 31 •, — 11 6 o Seventh Ave 1,6� sg`.- to- sse . / , ,1chm•.nJi $ - OPales6 p,661 .18t6"' V h1, ? `�i C L1,�N: a`gSas�° sti O ,Ce • �// — — — ----' 0 eaT N°5u�P I VI aaaies 'to 9 Retusea 43 pa�e de5t�nk��u Oe..eas, �.. se \O/QL E r- .• . CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan,. Shoreline.Master Permit Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton"Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Qii)r. Donald K. Erickson, AICP • Zoning Administrator . 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ..„ • -s.f 't•- 0 • . / N. + wiRti 4' ,CITY OF-RENTON • • _ •eP— . - • 200 Mill Avenue South , • DEC'6 9 -4,Airro , .-----Q i ... L4 4, ;11 \ , • - • - Renton,WA 98055-2189-- . , , :=> \); i )1. -,. - i t •rm r-T:.-ii--' ' ••,......V,S1-2!:.-"*. \-: V. . . 1 • .) • U . S . Dept o,f Ecology . , Federal Buildino, 124w---1-91-2-- • i -Seattle, WA 98174 • , , . ) v000, PLAIAt'll - - ,,nc,N cit'l OF rk•E'l j 9 19,91 —4,,i's., R T,- D E.1_l':E R A E I_f.'•<--7:1----'-,-:------._4-1 t--'v cfc„ ,,,, 1 ,,...„ i As .,DE)BEss0 .--., __.1 , :( [,,:.,,, I'dNliBI.E TO FORYaRi, -"" 1-4_4 91,, 14 ‘v.,.., . 1 RETW-4N TO WRITER ,....-; . . CITY OF RENTON Ea Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date,of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, (Dlit. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 UN ; ��.� U.S.PCSTAGE �j _ _ k vt �_ • CITY OF RENTON r DEC'6 9! c, z' 'I• •:;""� �'� L I. e 200.Mi11 Avenue South_ I i 1 �'- :`' Renton,WA 98055-2189 t:�r sH• �_:''i 1 r:m E 7;62 * ,, 6 Kathy Wilkins 1 P�1��65`6�, 425'8 37th -Ave W p C li`��� rfoo Seattle. --WG 9,8199 1' Qrt� L - _--- - , F� Ht [ l . IR[T'.1PIN T 0 SENDER �:. .. i,„, I.a ,i G 11,1,i1„1,,,,Cfl,i„i,lm�l„fl v i . % CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, betore Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner,.wiil be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson,AICP • Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton Wachinutnn 9ROSS U.)' O� R %'vim . :�v. - • ID ♦ CITY OF RENTON '+ _ j U.S.rr Esr s f 200 Mill Avenue South 1 ^�= ! n ' �- Renton,WA 98055-2189 BECC Z, ! �`. ? ' 5 —0 / - </ PL��I !I�F®�YC9wON is -D n A 11 e n — — 1 Cb`��' 1455 S Puget Or, #F304 I DEC a .C191Renton . WA 98055 b}fat . - ,• ° L \,a ': F ' FF \ c! ` >:- CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88 &ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date,of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 • , ... . . . . 1 CITY OF RENTO N N 7( 200MllAvenueSouh . I .--•,.::-.7:—Tc:_:_---.4:;;j I 0---., ..1 , • -,,, Renton,WA 98055-2189 DEC .6 D i i E---.?..z. , i- U.1- •.'-1 r".) ° . ./ --1'dt i 1 h;;-..., - --• . ,,, ; , 11.1. . .. • • .,..- .i , 9.qii-2 1 6'2 * , •,-. • PLANNING DIVISION CITY OF RENTON . . . . Alicia S Da azma r --) rt, 1455 S Puget Or. #F304 C 11 .4 1991 Renton, WA 98055 I . . \- , k..J." , / , -7 —'."::!:".?`.-': :;,. '''" ''-...j-:.' .'- — • r-`;''''.:•':-KI l'ICY6:-Pd (0' ..i '":., "''11,g1NrCL'3' watztv 'cL431! watm, . , CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991,at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 • n�rv� 1`SY O . �� - .� : • -IL . •• CITY OF RENTON ='i ' " ` 5 'p� ��� rA98052189 lq 1 C- -n 'T ; :� — -PLANNIN A DIVISION Jennifer oyes . CITY r� P ;� a� 6203 S 23-th P1. #4102 • . I Kent, WA 8032 1331 G ,� - - �, N ��!NOT DELVERPF' - _ � . - 'AS ADDRESSE i- �`` 1 lEci m, ti?QBLE7n r� z_ ,f l ; . :: aE7[�# F� is ; .r;u_ ;, ,_1;; fl�lii!„1,f1 ll,,,i,li,li,l„i,,,l,ll,,;ll,.1,1 %0 T= CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88 &ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ' . . . cL NI-Oil-;\\ W"-'Z------z -' ,--7-;_•. : :: + !IR 4- CITY OF RENTON 200•Mill Avenue South • . . . 061X'V:: Renton,WA 98055-2189 . ' . ' • , • 1.---:-... ---- u.s.PcsrAGEA,--,--xs: :-. DEC 91 7,:, . y ti• ;: ' ••. E ';`9 \ ' • i )) ,.• -.:•'!'4 0.• • -• E:f.1), • t ,. * S'i...../. I-D.:W.1 6 z ," 61.071—'-----77 1 A 4? . ' ..V7 • /7- -P -4',/ .• . ,/-,,•; . . — • ..4,6,, .. . . ,,,, /_„,- e....}? ., % , S .-....... ...... •,e. , "„ e y: , 4.ael„..elt V ( _ csri vi, "- .. Bon.nie Scott • , ( 4,4„,,ezi•c312 NE-9th PI ,--,-, v,P, Renton, •-WA 98056_,• --- __ /' _ ..(2— ,- - . INOT DEL!',FERABLE<-:--- ES4CC:51 El ':•,\ 1 AS ADDRESSED '----" 1 i- „( , •UNABLE TO FORWARI.. — 14., , RETURN TO WRITER i 14,,, 14 d e-,..,) 1 nil 1 illhilliiilliiii1,1111 - 41\ rj ,, > -1;- ,7-- •----J, • ',...: 1 ,; _ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, I (:)441,4)r. � Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ' • • 1 . )_. . .;- .2:5-'2: =.1,-•-7.1---- •_,,,=-.;,:z: : ' 1 CY .c.) 7 _ A',--7-,-::- U.S.POSTAG ' 1 + TR + ' CITY OF RENTON : rEc l' 1 ' '. . 200 Mill Avenue South , ) A'4.1\TITO / -`;:11 i 1 Renton,WA 98055-2189 , • ..PiAsk___ s:-,-,-.,-,--7! ‘ 1-9,-2.-142162 * :- - • . • ,--- cf.' .Seattle. • . .,‘IsasPv!,..fr‘tik?"1 •,2 n ci ,-Ay e .' . 810 4 9 (--- ' .. . v3SC ' ____ _,_n,• ' : . •- i ',..1 ":7.-f••• V-2 01[1.5:'T' 1.10 1 itifkV ti • -.el(Lp V.,-,P (WE ': 1 7VA-".''. rl-i•'S.- 01411 Pffl...41 c:, . v.-t--- IN.'..,.„1. :).• .At. 'i= At 4.B • . . • • `%Fm CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88&ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - - - — I ip, i '..\‘•;-i:$,, ,-"-::::c-'S_,- \ jzi,,,--_-;„,:, LIS POSTAGLA .-:: r. k .±IFZ + CITY OF RENTON • DEC 6 9 ,,,--z.----,I ...'"• • l: ::' -.200 Mill Avenue Solith i Renton,WA 98055-2189 / • -,...... rezy — , ( Susan McClellan I 1 4 0 0 1 Northwest P1 NW Seattle, WA 98155 i - . PLANIVIIVr,3 DIVISION ,.._.L....__ _ CITY'OF RENT ,ON• DEC n I '.'''.=(..4 illitiliiimillikluldniliii ___ _ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 5, 1991 To All Interested Parties SUBJECT: Black River Corporate Park, Phases VII/VIII ECF;SA;SP;SSM-071-88 & ECF;SA;SP;SSM-109-89 The date.of Tuesday, December 17, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., has been set for a public hearing to review the Site Plan, Shoreline Master Permit, Special Permit (and the attendant Memorandum. of Agreement) for the above-referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. Copies of the staff report will be available from the Hearing Examiner's Office on December 11, 1991. If you have any questions, please call 235-2550. Sincerely, -)t4r, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - RPntnn Wach;ncrtnn oQncc CITY OF RENTON � N; g �� u.s.prrccF�,r Planning/Building/Public Works Department =_==s`� ' DEC 29! S ;'I rt-, -' V 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 4 ); ras NM� �l i�iQ �,• .1G2 ,, E CITY OF RENTON DEC 1 0 1991 Dan Allen ,* 1455 S Puget Dr. #F304 i Li Renton, WA 98055 'i ' _ T#4 t« , e %. CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator • December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 nd 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the'existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Dmit Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON = �� — �� r v�� 1,�:•:) /- t U.t.1CSTf�ci? �� Planning/Building/Public Works Department n.= ;i�,1 ( DEC 2 01 200 Mill Avenue. South -Renton, Washington 98055 C -') (); y`� 1 City of Seattle � 821 : 2nd Ave Seattle.. . WA 98104 ��zv�1 uPVI StOiv 2 ACC 1Up991 I1Oi DELIVERABLE �` I.aS ADDRESSED ` ' ; 1661 to 1JNABLE TO FCRWARD im i JAI 71 t3ESURN TO SENDER 3dy`v Iitiatltttt=.tliiitt=.a'its{=.1li!1i:::::;l.t=.�i:::aifl l 4 !.no. CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, C),frt e zit Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 :7� CITY OF RENTON l PI aNING DIVISION �' F k7)_ Planning/Building/Public Works Department C-Ng TO C j Ya 1/"4 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 `�i � r1/'_ F T F rc_; / L. ,,, .,' „;hil\ift. william. N.. Christie, M .S . Cnvironmentlll Scientist 26611 - 198tn . Ave SE Kent, WA 98042 ,. k'. €t fi P sxdf - f rVib c' E .:0 v2Iy eA N � 1 i 7 mw7,..„..„,,,zzi, � LE- ,, co-i CITY OF RENTON ` Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600:ind 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, C".. /te/it Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON -„� ,,, - �%�, - Planning/Building/Public Works Department �1.__L- ���} - :. 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 -= i l 1Sh35aron • clliott. Kin g -- �(Sr'J j 03 M. L � 1 Seattle. WA 981 78 Y S.. #A 401 I a'` -'cr ;ate F� � I uT�v ua �a - _ CITY OF RENTON '•� �` Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAG 197-11-600 nd 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City makiing,a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Sdrvices Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • • • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON 7-f:TUB. -a4 - J � ����ll.S.FpSTk^Eb s Planning/Building/Public Works Department v �= ; � a GEC 2 GI 1; ., : � i";I.',e. 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 1 ��„I l;� : 1I :: k?s , ;- t I-arr;P162 w ,, ., Lois Nordquist • 13503 Empire W,y . S. #301A D Se rtle. ' WA 98178 . • `siz.1,1" LELIVERAgI � �4`° . AS ADDRESSED F1 1661 A !UNABLE TO FOR'NAR,,_`-'''"`i r J�ti ), - } t 1 7 i F 1 1 1 i b 4�Jd-. .,, 11:=tti.11:=mtilinditt:::i:li ARE-.'- TO WRITER >q .3-V o CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600/and.625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. • Sincerely yours, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON ,; �jt�� -�_:r�--p ' '�'\ rti r . u 4 PcsTtiG ` Planning/Building/Public Works Department --' =�' JO DEC 291 ii r I . . ;r ;. 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 --�; , '• i) r Yr 1. kr,?S!a' r 1 ".R6,216 Z x ,. s I. LeAnn T . LaFond b� , 1411 .-Grant Ave S, #G103 a Renton, WA. 98055 korp' • A d �,tu I''.+ ' 1I SENDER j %axe CITY OF RENTON "LL '4P Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator II December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. f - As referenced In WAC 197-11-60d and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public Information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours,. Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON L---,'=.,,,,iL,s7-,:;•.-,`7. U.S.POSTAGE tA5)\-.-- Planning/Building/Public Works Department -47',W nn ( DEC 2 S 1 12.,E7:.-4T.T.. :It.,: -,,e, \ ,1' '-'.4.- •-• 1'.1,1 : 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 61---)2 1 6 2 ''' * ' r Katfty ..wilkir,,s • , ___ • , 4258 - 37th Ave W - .c.\ Seattle. WA 98199 . V . 1 _ . -s- .1- ,N U M BE Fi .-(---;1----1-) 1!1 cf. ,.:: :i 3LI !.Y • iiiiilituliiiiiiiiii 1RETURN -10 SENDER t .1i .3--NY .:i; . % � CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator J December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, xei4 Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON F 1 o�;-\ AG Planning/Building/Public Works Department cY U. .PCST+GFt._ DEC 2 91 / e_ , - N r.-)4 ,rg 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 k- ` ti 1C yt�4 ' :t WASH• ;:n1 : ! 9Eta2462 * a 4 • Burlington Northern. Inc. 1 208 Central 61dg 810 3rd 'Ave • Seattle. WA 98104 I \ • - __� INCH UEl-4vERA%� G '--> rr- , �' f!FC 5 !,::5 iAS ADDRESSED -t��n- s 1991 ` UNA$!_c TO FORWARDit 1, t t t t ti tt t tt Rf:i[JFy,�, 10 SANDER 1 dttittlnn-Hill; 3 1,11.=: c: T . CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 ind 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle • Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildiands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON bill Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-60d!nd 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 IIIIPMIIIIIIIIIIIIMPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIImkomkzmL-retk- ruripmpnruumi --„. . ,.. ,,,..........„ ., . . .. , CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department ,i, 7 -t .• ,,..,,,, \ ,.-.,A,F.-_,,,z.:7-: .0.11.!'0 imut--4. •.•!-,..r......:7--` co CI • 1. :,.-.7.tili:_;•-7.-7vr----- ----- t•-1.e.7.4..1:„:.i,--r•-•.'' • ' 3 KIC 2 LI i 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 (.,,,.\ i j . r...•;,;5...- -t-- ••:7,3 -=,-- i - :- 'i,..-1-i--------'"-7.-----.,ri ....,-- * -CO • RjlitAAfit'itiAA:41 : . QC. C 0 r— 1 Tii--------S . Dept df E. 0 V-4-0.4A11-04V'i i i 1 I GEC - 3 1991— Federal Building. Seattle .. WA 9817,-, 1 . 9, '1 •,, • -.,.I',.• • __________ ,/ ",,,,,...„,..„--- ,,-• bp , 1-- -- .1 ri VtZi 1;]0E BELITEP:ABLE -,;:"------->.------...._A-1 r z- RE •- ' ,EV ' • ', , lAS REED '' ,-,----1,-ii Lki . •Ib19 9 I :-: . • 111D.E.3i.E TO FGRWARD RITtio" TO SENDE.-9,.4 . .._ ,al i./ . • 11111.0:1 110.! !ii•ii!! !till" " I in 1•1- I "I • • 410 ' : CITY OF RENTON •mmaPlanning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Meilto Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON /ON 1-714>. \ Planning/Building/Public Works Department DEC 2 \ i 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 -_-_,11 ,-,:-_,!.-1/ ( r-:v1E-r 6•ri--- * * :. WV A . ` 7; ': r.930;2162 * r' I7c. ,.... p . Bonnie Scott . 2312 2312 NE 9th P1 015Y‘j Renton., WA, 98056 1 . -I •_________,I ' .y,Stim i AS ADDRESSED C,.1., ...I 11 t &ill iUNAELE TO FORWP co,P,.` ' V It ‘., I,1 d -: 1 ilduhlitilInthitlithiliiiimibmidi , . ' ' '• • tRETURN TO WRITER t% r CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Mit Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON ,-�� �,, 5` �-- V�J `J > :. U.S.PGSiA�C,,\ r` Planning/Building/Public Works Department =' i%�; DEC 2 9►. `F».`,, ;�. 1 ,/ -; 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 / ' J „)'' -=" 1 P4 r c�i ' kfkSl� �s.M .' \ 1yagF'w'162 * K aZ1C17 $1ZRiZ ^r— 1455 S Puget Dr; Renton. WA 98055 F304 ps I ;Lei K.. s {'.#.'�°�1'«• �.-t. . ,t ' % 4$ CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. v As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildiands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, frtelit Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 -1 ) CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department _, -71 �i� 4.7 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 E = �((I i_ ;E t li a s . r =?R6,2162 * r „ Amy Forrester 4702 Davis Ave S. #25-101 Renton . WA : 98056 i 14 x\519iNp c: _ CITY OF RENTON "/ 4',:a Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600r ind 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle • Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wiidlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC • 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - - CITY OF RENTON 7-,-':11.4Tai-,:-,• .s.v.W-7L,-----.--- ----,-----,---- , • Planning/Building/Public Works Department -1••• •• • 441 4 DEC 2 gt Y1;1=-tk' I.1.°L:2 i4 iN : 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 - i )) 0 7 i W fl 1 i a J . HeCkrm-----\1 23415 SE 264 1 Maple Valley, WA 98038 -------.1 .:..1 ADDRESSED L-C..-e 0 I 9 9 I ::::") .c: liall11!1111,,,,,illhd!li1 il .. _ ildiiitAtdillittilithialliA1141 ItniAAE TO FCRWARD . ; CITY OF RENTON "LL' ..`j' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-60d and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, extt ,to Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON � 1 � , - Planning/Building/Public Works Department = =' ,ii a oar, 2 51 � ..�,, ! ., , 'i�, F 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 € s U r� r'ME7ER" c * s IiASN/ _„ �1 r n&2?62 * .. r +U vl ,,Ye/4c10 — ri--(e- - ri\ • Francis Karboly ,06 Ste" �/ J5 211 .NW 7th St ��� Renton. WA _ 98055 Pejr: �'- ____14 rS y ' I1 1 1 itl 11 1 1 Iill I1 1 1 1 �;—,,1,t,� r Firms.. , 6 1 • Ilafalislltlis:isll.lull=.laleal1i11a11�aHllalaahi i • CITY OF RENTON eel '4'" Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-60d and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. • The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildiands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, CD Donald K. Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 r11117"' .._. -. CITY OF RENTON ,,ct , 4',. F.:- .----N,,,:::;.:Ij.f.i.PCS TAGEA.55• _:.-': Planning/Building/Public Works Department 1 DE 2 1 k 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 I i PAs.v„.., --.•-?.i."; r5.-.;g"?.:? ,.;, : ; :, ,_----- - -- • \ Mary M. Anderson i 13618 SE 180th , .Renton, WA 98058 i . , 1 -.., -;NOT OF LIVERABL E .e.-:------------ --I /4\-9 -/I'IN i 3;1:1S A AB Di ED RT OE SFSGERDw A RD ,e,......,...._ 1 . RETURN TO SENDER t / ,-1661 9 ..I-0 INV 0, litihilAilittilidillIhrhiil - -- 0:oierf CITY OE REN'T'UN =, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator • December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 r;nd 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald IC Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY OF RENTON - �� Planning/Building/Public ` �,, ` -u3.r-�;Sil;�r1�jr Works Department q DEC 2 9! 1 \,-z`v- 1 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 \\ /' =< %; ii f — -Marty-- Murphy -�------ - --- -- - - P0 Box 3070 Half Moon Bayr CA 94019 RE rb N .1 0.07;1'v. ± CITY OF RENTON "LL Planning/Building/Public Works Department Earl Clymer, Mayor Lynn Guttmann,Administrator December 2, 1991 To all Interested Parties: Since the issuance of the Black River Corporate Park Phase VII and VIII Final EIS (March 27, 1991) and the environmental mitigation document (May 27, 1991), a number of conditions on the site have changed. In response to these changes, an addendum to the FEIS has been issued and the mitigation document is hereby withdrawn and a new document substituted. { As referenced in WAC 197-11-600 and 625,the addendum, prepared prior to the City making a decision on the proposal, adds analyses or information about the proposal but does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. The Memorandum of Agreement (MCA) between the City of Renton, the applicant, Sierra Club, Seattle Audubon Society, Rainier Audubon Society, Citizens for Renton Wildlands Preservation and the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Sammamish Group, functions as an addendum to the FEIS and as a Mitigation Document for impacts from the proposal. Copies of the document are available at the public information counter (SEPA Information Center) in the Development Services Division, Third Floor, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Reading copies are available in the Renton Municipal Library at the above address. A public hearing covering environmental impacts of the project and mitigation for those impacts will be held on December 17, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions on the addendum or the public hearing please call Mary Lynne Myer at 235-2719. Sincerely yours, Donald K Erickson,AICP Secretary to the ERC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 `N-J :•; ERON ROOKER - t_ RIPARI�IJ EST PRESERVE , 1• 0,0111fliN\ 14.v 6 • 410^-44.2 ,•'" yit'1- /O. ift ' -..-;' .41' - -el 4 1 ', 010111 _ . Ay 4 4 00,4:... • ' -E, • � ►'i VACANT VII:- / - - �' i Ai r _\../17.>" \LW. `;.. I: ' •• ..41 OFFICE .4(11.:4160,,,r,',2-44.4 .411 • • • • • • • '.--•. • - • Ar' .44.4" : : l a r . ' . . " =+ 1 'r{ • . � tsJv4.' , Ls,7 ,-• P-1 DETENTION POND - Y1% , . O) s�. 1 -. !, l � •1 ` n a 4 -' _ et _- : ',.r-i., lik at , •' o ffii _ •- . ,a- '..•��_ _ _ • xf_ ��� 'gili ' i• • l :i , �.i►. -\ c . 1.\. , : ' • \ .P' ' -.• (..•) tk i t ( • •• 2 0 4 1-4'4.1e. Ali; ft'-:...",e.\\\\\k_;;;:-- ' vex 1 �p� ., �o ....,_\,,,' E. : r: ;,fix• �• v a�P�ryx' . g' `J% r 6. ft kip OFFICE l.‘ 41 • Lill'I-.;ietiiiiiiioik \ \\7.,14---j 4,,'',_.:'\\.:V.i/, • ..' V' PR\1 ' OPOSEDp / / /lot: .i.• ;,./ ti \,�`�y�\` ••6 �r :�N OFFICE /44 df*. \0 ,rr, . .. /' 1,a in v- Cs1 ` �°"N ti��-\l ,§ Lli...__. t) i ' ID i ).. / .I ' Woo 04.1i < o�,:¢, '@�t .: .�• es \'en eI mot'�I, / ` r'S' afr" �jl /� F r h� yam. �` '�►�' a+° f• f �► I': `B 1 c.<. �•? ) \� 1� le. _�p I �/ �•y, �� _ .4,1 �I5 5600Q N\ �� W r FFF a �Y } ,:�YfJ-j�I i++�,�j 3�jla •� _ :,' iro - Z�P \ ►+ .♦ `1►1 5P0 55ds f�•� a I.ys I,�i'_ i 6 .. • - m, CO ef, X� -e+ -e wig r s1- _ s.—s+ • / ♦ , tla% �4 y 1+C',. 4,ln O' y abai •:... A_"f_ n4r� _ �p it 14/ - I � �+\ I f_ \ N t�r+!'S� Sh '''CS� "lir 4� ✓',.,".. • 'i.T --Jr. �0. � • _ ® Sly s.. 1.0 .a_ .•..,:4� ...4• � �. ark 4. ` i• • _.\ �... `�`•`:,; 'v^� \lift"' -ao-a%� OFFICE 1 .P4 fir.;`- :( Gtf B^qu mp. ti• I �ANN , �';• 1 U• i ,... ..'...::..A,. .;.s • ' j `/ i 1 1.4'',.'.A fs�:` •'e• S "�\�•�` (OFFICE VICE ~�� t •� METRO SEWAGE ... I ti. '�j a s 2: ti TREATMENT PLANT =?� `- '•\•'L• rr_ i , •. •A��, . 1 —200