Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA14-000645_Report 1PROPOSED HOTEL RENDERING RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE ZONE: COR3 RMC 4-2-1208 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS UPPER STORY SETBACKS APPROVAL REQUESTED THROUGH MODIFICATION PROCESS PURSUANT TO RMC 4-9-2500 "JO~TEP ~O<ATEf"llSAJ..L:;w.o;USl-lll..E '"""-"£EJ1fRRM;:EoPACf ' 2 PROPOSED HOTEL BUILDING MASS ~JIW'-'.;P,<;\SS'>TE"'!El'.<;KF'ERZ,;tJI';:; = 0...:,.1.1:-00 ClcEPSE"B.'Cl<;TCEIITTR LES8""'-<Y >TWHERSW]E G"'-'TES MORE AATICUL•TIC<; OF FACADE aND "OOEU5'BlETERRM:ESl'A0amJ GOEH.'IOOI' ALLOWABLE BUILDING MASS PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK BUILDING MASS .. )· THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT --Souy1-1 r>onT RENTON, WASHINGTON $ 'f<" 111"\EluP•H,~T 1,~ MULVANNY .G2 .... ,,. _. ,"""' -··-··1 UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATION REQUEST 05.16.2014 PM DAVENPOIH DRA'M<BY WHITT'. UPPER STORY 'SETBACK MASS DIAGRAMS A950 E>:Jsn·.c =,~ == LAKE Vwl.SHINGTON OE\IELOFMEfff BUILDING ENVEt.OPE @ HOTI!L PER RMC 4-2-1208 @ PROPOSEDHOIB. SOLAR N:.CE5S STOOY ·O&JEClWE THS SOLAR ACCESS STOOY DEMONSTR.o.TES A~COMPAAES SOI.AR ACCESS CONOlncms CREA TEO ev OEVELOP ... ENT "' AHO DEVCLOPMf.NT ,0, OVER THE OPEN SHOREUNE ANO F'l..6LIC 0.CCESS EASEMENT AS SHOWN " .. " " ~ ~ EJ-'-"'"'" _ _,_,.,, ___ ""''"""'~'"'-"'" .Df .. LMOO,, .. Te••c•OUI.TE_T .. o.Lo,,:;OM'[•,.,/Lff'I.S5'C"<5''i .. << LEGEND D AREA VTOTH SOIJ.R ACCESS • AREA IN SHADE (NOS0l.ARACCESSi EkSTII.C .,..s·o.. ~,,m,.,wr.; ~~-- HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR A1 ACCESSANALYSIS DECEMBER 21-NOON -'MNTER SOLSTICE HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR A2 ACCESS ANALYSIS DECEMBER 21-9 AM -Vl/lNTER SOLSTICE " ~/ PROPOSED HOTEL UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR 81 ACCESS ANALYSIS DECEMBER 21 · NOON -ININTER SOLSTICE PROPOSED HOTEL UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR B2 AC.GESS ANALYSIS DECEMBER 21 · 9AM-'MNTER SOLSTICE , V THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT -SouT11 PonT RENTON, WASHINGTON ~ HW a,rqr.(>Pflll,U, I~~ MlJLVANNY .G2 ,,,...,_,,,,,..._,_, -~--1 UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATION REQUEST 05.16.2014 ()AA .... SY WHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY 'MNTER SOLSTICE A960 f.XISTISG =,~ """"""" LAKE WASHINGTON ""F;'ffiWfa'~+W,7"'24" · zihzz;Jp:.;r ,1 r'.-4-f),'if-?/("1:" 7 -f-Y""-_';·, .. -~ ::" ·-77"). ' ·/~. ' . / '/• ' // ,' /1 I DEVELOPMENT ' : BUILDING EHVEl.OPE : [UTlf,G ! @ HOTELPERRMC4-2-.120B ! :z.·,c;;,,,TS i @ PROPOSED HOl1!L i SOI.AR ACCESSS STIDY -OHJECf<IIE THIS S<JL ..... ACCESS SlLJOY 0.MOHS1AATES A>O COMPARES SOLAR ACCESS COIOTIONS CREATED ev DEVELOPMENT ,A•AND OEVELOPMENT,B OVER THE Of'EN SHOllELlNEA~DF'UBUC -.CCESS EASEMENr ASS>-OWN ·~ @ -~- "' " ~ El""'-'""'--··-·"-·"'-'-''""""'"'' .""""~-, .. -""""""""""" .... "'"""·"'"""''""''"· .. '~"''"' LEGEND D .... EAW1T1,SOU,RACCESS • ME/I IN Sf<AO. (NO SCl..ARACC~SS) _.,. ___ ,,· HOTEL PER RMC "2-120B UPPER STORY SETBACK LAKE WA5HINGTDN UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR A 3 ACCESS ANALYSIS MARCH 20 & SEPT 23-NOON· SPRING I FALL EQUINOX HOTEL PER RMC "2-120B UPPER STORY SETBACK ~~ ·----_ __./ UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR A4 ~~~~~s;:A~;:~ 5 2s -9AM -SPRING I FALL EQUINOX PROPOSED HOTEL --c:- --.. __ _ UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOL.AR BS ACCESS ANALYSIS MARCH 20 & SEPT 23 -NOON -SPRING I FALL EQUINOX PROPOSED HOTEL ~ ·---LAKE WAS><INGTDN -_ __./ UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR ACCESS ANALYSIS B4 .. ~crw .., .... "CCCT ..,., Oh •• cco,~,r., I Chi I Cf'll ll~lf'IY THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT --SoUTII POllT RENTON WASHINGTON $ SHII llC\'llllPMl,S? IH MULVANNY .G2 -· ~·'1 UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATION REQUEST 05.16.2014 PM DIIVENPC<ll DAA\M'-JB'/ WHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY SPRIFALL EQUINOX A961 EXiST'1G 00,1·,s ~,~ LAKE WASHINGTON ....,,,,."ff#~".1;0~'D{,V~~/!PY?RCF,j ,! r;:;~w""L/,·:;;~.~}'/fJ')'f:/7.;>?,...,7;;:;:;;;:Y? ·, ·/· /////./0',, /,·, './'·~ I ' DEVEl.OPMENT ' I : BU1l0INGENVELOPE : ~~: ! @ HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 ! ,PAA"MWTS i ® ""°""8EDH<>TEL_ i SOI..AftACCES!,TI.OV,OllJe<::TJ\IE ThlS ;QlAR ACCESS STlJDY DEMONSTR.o.TE5 AND COMPARES SOL'.R ACCESS COIOTI<'.ll'"' CREA TEO BY C>S~E~ENT A AND C,SVELOPMENT B OeERTI-E OPEN SHOREL ll<E AMDP1Jat.1CACCESS £ASEMENT AS 5t-f0,lli ® @ @ _,._ _,._ _,._ C::Jm"-••••-•-•e,.,_,_,,~,""m,m_, .""""""'""'""'''""""""''"'·""""""'·""'-""'m"'""''" LEGEND D AREA "'1TH SOI.AR ACCESS • AREA INS""'OE IND SOL'.H ACCESS I -- HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK LA~E WAS111NGTON I UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR AS ACCESS ANALYSIS JUNE 21 -NOON -SUMMER SOLSTICE ---" HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK LAKEWASHNCTON ~( II ,,;r-- UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR M ACCESS ANALYSIS JUNE 21 -8AM -SUMMER SOLSTICE PROPOSED HOTEL I - UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR BS ACCESS ANALYSIS JUNE 21 -NOON -SUMMER SOLSTICE PROPOSED HOTEL II .,--- ---" LAKE WASH"3TON _/ UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR OO ~~~:~~ ~:~ ~S~~MMER SOLSTICE :. ,•, 1\\.' -~ ' -~--•• > " ----~ --·" '- THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ----Soun1PORT RENTON WASHINGTON ~ SHtl D>:HIOP .. "T iH MULY/\NNY .G2 """"" ... '""" -.. ,-.. 1 UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATION REQUEST 05.16.2014 ""'OAVEN?OIH DRJ,Y,t,JBr WHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY SUMMER SOLSTICE A962 I I I I I I LAKE WASHINGTON -- ~ BOEING RENTON PLANT @ MASTER PLAN Minor Modlflcatoln l-..f 7 T J .f PUGET SOUND ENERGY ---- IO,,_ __ ""'"' __ _ *--·-------....... __ _ _ ... , -" .... ,,. ... -a" -~--" ---.... :::: ,.,_ ... -- ... -.. ·-- »O. ... LI -·" ·-- ;:::'S:'" -~· : '"I~:-UOhl -........ 16 __ r- 0 f/l -1-,--· 1-- -• 1H3U.IMI -Ol./l~IGI SOUTHPORT MASTER PLAN Minor Modification f "' . I .. ,t, '·. / '. .. , AlOO - '-c, I I (_ I I - I I I I I ;---._ -- I I --:~·~ \ \ LAKE WASHINGTON -- ,., -·-- - ' I I ,,,,_,,._,_,.._) ---- BOEING RENTON PLANT SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PlAN MINOR MOOIFICATION SC,lil 1"•1!1)'-11'" -~- / GENE COULON PARK A ------ FUTURE OFFICE BLOG 3 FUTURE OFFICE BLDG 2 FUTURE OFFICE BLDG 1' ""' ' "' - / I \, / / ./ .___; -~ PUGETSOUNDENERGY ~--=--'~'~" -·--- ~~---·--,--,-. .. ., ............ ,~ .............. _,.,,_,~ •1 @f , ,, ............. -. ..,,, .,_..,, _____ _ ,~.,,~-,.'""·"'-'"-·~ ~ o..Jw,,e;~~ .... -~ ,., '' I\·',:_',[ • . / / / ,( I /\· ··-------,,.--...- - ,o.,.,,.;..._.,., ... , -- ,,...-.,,.,._, ...... ""' -. ,,..,,,_,.._ ........... ---Sou u11>onT $ UCO nEVELOHH.NT. ISC MULV/\NNY ,G2 """"" ... _ ... ___ t O•!L<OI" WA''"'"' ----··· ... ,.,, ... ,, __ ,..,...,= --1 SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PlAN MINOR MODIFICATION 05.16.2014 .... ~~==-.:a: :F-M·OA\oENPORT l:f\O,YIN8Y\IMT'i 1 ,-, ·;· ,, '(,, I ) ,1 i_!f :! ·1· . ·r---,_ 7 ---~, ----._ \. l LAKE WASHINGTON \. :--:-:-.. s- ,:;-...___ -· -·-- LEGEND -.... ' I -'S::::: I ., -. ,,,,,,.......,._..,__J ~ -- BOEING RENTON PLANT PHASE Ill . /PHASE II PHASE I PROPERTY LINE PHASING BOUNDARY PHASJNG'··: KEY PLAN FIGURE I: MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION MAY 2014 SC,IU ''•-1(1"-(I' GENE COULON PARK FUTURE OFFICE BLDG 3 FUTURE OFFICE BLDG 2 FUTURE OFFICE BLDG 1 ·~ \~ -v.1 '\" .· \~'w1 .. ·.' "Vi• ,,_y l I jJ ~,~,~-,.,c', PUGET SOUND ENERGY Of 81 I . } ' ~-0Rlf'l"C$CJ,U, -"' 'ii '.;,)?",)~ .y / / [ .. . . ( i;~\ l\ ---Soun,POnT $ .,El() D[\FLOP .. LH. IH MULVANNY .G2 ... ,m'" •• ,.,,-1 OEllE''"''""'""" -----------''""'"""''.,...,_ .. ._o,<,)-1 FIGURE 1: MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION MAY 2014 05.16.2014 -~=--== :PM·OA\oVIPORT -·- Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC ""S, ,l t"; .,.~ -.. -. . Figure 2: View from Jiones Ave.(N .E. at 14th Street Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 3: Vie vy ~rprT) Gep.e 1C.oulon Park Docks 'r · 1 ' , f""ITV nr. rtJ:NTON Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 4: View fr6 rn Gene Coulon Park Playgroun ~,\' 1 6 CITY ,..,= TON Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 5 : View from°?l:c1!~ Ay e L f,A r. ' ' CITY <..J ON I :;,=:::-:..=--LMl W""""'°" ,,;;.,,:;:::. .. ...-~=-o•-· ; '· ·~ ~"-.... ----:...._~~l •i3~-a..ll51...,,;,:,1,ot1«.wo.."'1 _ ----- ; ' :O:,~Oo('ltl<'1'.>• ·,,·o .}O.)o,coe;n:,.,:a.;o;;: ,,00, o;;, 1~ ,.-,;,o,:;!'"')(~O(ao, 0'); ,.-,>-..1..r, , .. _ ; t' ·.,.. 0 •. .:.·•.:•"' .... ,., .~ ... ;,. " r •) , :. : ~. 'J....:.: .-.., ... ,_._ ; .. ·-• • ~ 'j •-.il -' -~j "•°;' . -., '"""" ~ --1r -~ 1-J-_ If"""""-""~, --\UJI ,; ~, .•• · I /" ~ f .· . __ : t I I 1 L OT 1 .,-i·i / 1 ff • I ----~~ ----II -···-II ~, -/.-q',, J_ ~--_··,. j' '1· ~;l-::~~L . l__ · 1 1 .._ -""'.:.., '·-~-.....,___,,11 -----,-,...~-----· ---- / "' ~J I SIT E PLAN SCALE ···•ii' o· OOCING RENTO'I Pl.ANT /. ' 1,, l / ~ ! ' ;., \ m ~ ~,/1 0 •~ p; HST ING Afi~fC:..":AU,;,NQS , i;::o ,.-.,.--' ,jl ;, -, "_' ,r"'_-_, • .,.~ n; .... _c""'"··· '""!' ·""""" .. ' . '' ,·· ~-;,<:'<!~I....,.. < /'1 @-';: -~ I /"" ' ).-,, ' u ,. -.~-t i . ' . .: -..... t ... L,• -· "' , .. ·-. .... .. ·~ . . -. ~ ;,·-·-· ,. l{ ' '-.._'-: ,rt:,, =mu--,-~,·~-~ ' ~ • ]: I ,...,,.........~_,_, ;Ji; "1-.::;:Ei ' --~ ~~,·: "'< I ··-·w-,-~--= -.--~----~l: .. ·:,~·z·<-~~-~~~'.,, ~~k/ i;- ~ • -t -• '.; 6~ ~ L•· ~ -=-. i ' , • ~ · ,,.iY, 'J -t ' • i, • ~ C "-' :t::<-"'' .,u-.u...__.t= '\:{ , ... ! ". C ~ • • " ' ' .r ----~ o,; :, ~: "t'" C '' .A ... v- ....... .(,. ,l ---- -!- i C (' C :. : (::,.\,/;;¢.' c'-...Ji-·,,., ( ....... , -c I ,"t!" .1 -' r ";' .1 .-' ' ' C '~r ( .. --:.:.-···-.. ~ SURFACE:PAR)(ING LOT ~,......,-C -~ ~ .' ' ' . ....-· ~TSOU,,.D ENmCY r'ROf'eRTY (,.-1 ', T~_; -~ ) !•cc; t c, ' ----~ ;t . ,.. .::... ........ . ,~ ,,.- f i ·i 1: ./ ~ 1i~ ~, ~ "@ 6 Iii ~ ~,. 1 CRAP1-1C SCALE -------·rl'N NE IG HBORHOOD D ETAI L MAP SIT E INFORMATION SITE AREA .OT1 11l7460 SF CONSTRUCTION ~E 16 OCCUf'ANCES R1 A B S i.lru = 101~ ,s,ia,s,. BUil.DiNO FOOTI"IIUNT: HOTEl. 75 570 SF LOT COYERAGEPCT. 156"i, CR~ fLOOR AREA (Gf AI ·~· "'~ LEVEL 1 75 ~70 Sf lEVEL2 2'ft,gft2SF LEVCL l :u.G15SF LEVEL 4 24 t10SF LE.vEL5 24.5eOSF LE\'EL & 24.5e0 SF LE\'EL 1 1'.5e0Sf LEVEL ! ·e.096Sf LE\~L 9 1!.096Sf LEVEL 10 18.096SF Lt'.vtl 11 18.096Sr LfVH12 1.IJ,096$1' 32:t~sr HOTH ~l flOO" A.REA ~ L.,.ej Ar..-. t[vtl 1 'tCVC:l2 5712SF LEVCLl tCVCL• 'U~SF 'LEVELS ''Ul1Sf 'tEVEL! '9,&31 SF 'tEVEL 7 'U96 S~ LEVEL e '3.9$2 s~ LEVEL 9 '4.,3'51 S~ iu ,vtL 10 '4,361 3)- I LEVl:L 11 '4,361 SI' LEVEL U '4.431SI' '5£> 195SF 'JJl:11.liCY.t.CUll.f OOlll.EO Use/f t.r<:t,o,, ~ Un,I F,c:to,-Subtotal H(11H w~s, ROOMS J5'.l II.FY 1 0 350 FM P1 O VFF S ir.;, Pi=R SOM 'l!J 101"'-. PAAKING SPACE REOLJ:REO f'~-0.~ · S1ANOAR0l9' X 19') COMP.-..C I (8 5')( 16'1 .,i.cccssrm.1:. VMIACCESSISl.E lOIAI.PNti<.N(; ~'Y p~~t%j )18 65.l,:, '58 32&,r. "~ .. , ACC U~tlf PA.11,,:,+G MINIMUM REQUIREC .t.Ot-!)00 ACCESSll:M..l;:_P~NC S1~-~p,-i;QPQSl:.O: ,.-.~~ -·-"""'"""ClriQI, ... ,c. .. Aklolhti . 91C f QE PAAAIJriG 10 ·.AL. 81CYC4.E l'AA.<ING Slolroll PROVIDE~ 50 SlZEOf'S.CYCLESTAL.L ?X< II (IHEII.IOII.P..itK!NC LOTLAHOSC"'f I IQlAl.lf,I TERIOR LMDSCAPE 9 110'JSJ JCOMPA.CTOR • THASh LEGE ND NOTES: <l=C'FI THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT -SouTltPOnT R ENTON, WA SHINGTON )HO 0 1!\ FlOf'Mtfl r l\t MVLVANNY .G2 ----_J S ITE PLAN 05 .16.201 4 P M [)AVfNP()RT DRAWN BY W HIT( SITJ PLAN CD :..:t.'IIIHf 0~•L -.,Alll...U .. U D '>~;,oc.,.>tOMfA PU -,f,£Mf , A,, :Sl~!'~i.Ff~'t1'o · . A 101 ---- CITY OF Ri:N lON fJLAM~ N JIV1SIO"i 1--~= , ....... ,_ .. "_ = z ~ ~ LOCAN ,._VE N .A ~{'ti < 7 -J w ·-l "' ~( ... ' ~ PARK i l, '\, ,. .,... .. "/,., 0 Al/£ ~ ~i ~ .,_~ o;, g b (IQ ~ ('1j '"j 0 .., N "'l(l>l~ PROPOSED PROJECT SITE (LOT 1 & LOT 4) ' LOT 4 ~. ·," -1-lj,' ~'\, 8<11) ' .' '\ .,,f-# "" ~g ·~ I~ I " " N \ \ \ ~"".re e ""4 s lltNcro N % \\~,:,~ ~1.•d. Of, ... ,~ \'*')olP:,v,i \t.0 ,00::> ,.o•0"',$'1"' ' i;o,-3.l~l.~3.LN\: ~\J.~o ,,¥' ,,. ' ~ RECEIVE! ~AfV 1 6 ·.,, .. ,v,A, • THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT -SouTMr>OnT RENTON, WASHINGTON S fCO O[\t Lo,w r r,,r I \C MULVANNY ~G2 ... ~,.2·, .......... Iii. J :IUll1!111t) j ... Lll "Lll_"O.f w..l,,O . ~ ...... ..,ll»l • ~""-1 SITE PLAN 05.16.2014 •:., .:.;:, .... .:.~. PM O A.\IENPORT ~','lof'l/8YIN'-llt: V ICINITY MAP A102 CITY OF RENTON p1 Al\li\Jl'\:C', D:v ,Si'):\ !I s, .. ,,,_,_ .. , . /lS1 ~·~ -:1 '' ,, 'I l !' ' 11 !: I ,. .. _ .. I -',fW"''"'""' ' ' .... :;;'""' .,, ~";' °' ' " , --· IJJ..~1:,1 l·-·ll HmHJ.IIJI ',:, Tl~f 1lc1· '0"'"\~-.. --------------~'~"}~-..--~uru "t'd;'."'»-I, .. , l -'' I: i" ·11 I I II 1:1:; ~ 11 II . [ : I· I 1 I : I : 11 11 I I t I IFF'fi II -bb:tddJ1 I 1 i 1 • T1J DI:Il1IDrk 1 ..... -J-l11f-r1 ff11'1. -... -;1 I- Ir I I i ,IF: '~ ~ .... l\''.;,·; .... '.':;:'; ..... n '.':'J .... -~ f '"'" ,.,,:1!1; ~; ~, -n ~ -'':'-f .... ~ $ ";:!-';:,.,, .I jali ";:"; ..... "~n"'- n I , I 'Y"" I I c.Ll..LLJ I I I ::I I I Li ::. "fL~ ~ ., .. ~ .. --'•"'i'! ... ··~ ' BUILDING SECTION -THROUGH WING G~&:.r.u; rw-.•.•.•.•.-.• ,;~- t,\ 1\V I b i,'1,-· ' ~ "· :,.,-; ~-' :1\_ THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT --SoUTOI PORT RENTON. WASHINGTON $ Hlll IHrEJUP>lrH l~C MULVANNY .G2 "'''"'"'"' .. '...-..1r1a "'-'·'""-w•,_.. ····~--l SITE PLAN 05 16 2014 PM OAVENf'ORT DRA,,....8Y WHITE N/S SECTION · WING A120 ~i ' ' ' I !, i' ,I ,, ,, 'I l !' ji !, ' I <;;""' ""-'" I -f~'""J -_ _:! _[~(' l'oo II'.::no 100 100 """''"'"'""""" I ? C ,, ~~-, .J tj LJ]~·,1 ~),. 11; E EZ ~ ,~1 !ii liti I w O 0 ! ·1 ii' t ggg g; il i:1 · DOD D ··· ·· oo·o '01, ;'.J"i' ~ jj I ;t;l;ftfJ f'.IW . . . ____ · ____ _.z.c " _/// BUILDING SECTION -THROUGH LOBBY rosc,\\':1 ~ ------------------m~s ,---::~~--.---~· '".:;,~ -/'a, •;;•; ..... ".';':SJ I'., ·~·," i. ' '.'i,"J..... ~ '~ ",1'; ..... ; i .... , ~ ! ":.:..... i ' ·c:·:~ '':'J. !I. THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT -SouTIIPOnT RENTON, WASHINGTON ~ SHH l!ffHl!PlltE~T. !H MULY/i.NNY .G-2 ~,-~··! SITE PLAN ";:) !! --.Jlf~;;;. =-----6 '~-',";}'~'"" ·-------······· "·, ' :\.'i b --' -.. ,. ... _, 05.16.2014 PM OAVE'W'ORT °"""""BY WHITIS NIS SECTION - LOBBY A121 ,-,-~,.,.. -1 l . .. "' . . ~'~~ -~ J~LJ_f ~[IlLJ~[J~L~~-~--~--·--~-~--~----·----------- Dl DDlDDlDlDI Dl DDlDDDD"I Dl DDlDDDlnJI f! ,.,-I DJ D Dl D D Dl D I . -lll>""~,'-------------+---DJ DD DD DD I !! DD [_] CTI DJ ci ci [] DJ D DI Ii DD D DJ D D D D D DJ c:::J1_I ,: DD ODD DDJDJDJOO! iii j • • ----~! DD .dilrHl,l;-,,f lf[[LCTIC]C] ' I 1111111111111111111111111111111!111111111111111111111111111111111111111 '"'~,;;";,.~ '"',~~ --· -;;-,~~--~ '~':iS l.\';I!';--'\. '-':'-;:' ·~ !',; '.';':'J.~ '':'~ ... '~ '':'t. /1,l~ ~ 3 ";}','. 1\,- , "!!f't""" '1''.."\'.l',i ' ''i:'i;.~ THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ---\OUTll POllT RENTON, WASHINGTON $ Sf(li DHf.lOPMr.H. l~C MULV/\NNY .G2 ---------........ ,_ '""'"'""' ~,.,~,-1 SITE PLAN , -i?F~J--~ :G'--. --~..;..·.e~~-=---1~ 1;=-=-~--;:-~.:::_·_'.]'~('ao----,.__,,n>,~;;. ' \ 1 l .' I.I 1 11' I 11--11 I Ill ~ ~I ~ ·rt·i'I--~ I I ,,"~'~('a, ~--" ;-,,, "'"./'· . , I . '•"'' • '·'"''" , ,,,, k..~,, .,\ -, ,, , BUILDING SECTION: BALLROOMS GAA~H,C !ICAI_E W ____ ... ., .... : ; ;:.. '\J 1-. .. 1_~\Y ,_ ~-! ,: ,:,._ i'-J 05.16.2014 PM OA~ENF'ORT DRA'M'IBY-!]' NIS SECTION · JR BALLROOM A122 " " ., " "' ;z.i 1? ;,:. " : ,:. -~ --------------------, -----__ TJ_ l J_ ~ J-1~J-L--~ ~---J-~ -1-k J-~1-1------~:~~-~~~ I I . I . . t . I . .,,. , '"' 111 II 11 1:11 llllI i... m I J 1: I 1:1 I ITII :r J I: I 1:11 rm~ Ir.ii. 1:111111:i: 1--' J \-- t I ''.!''J~ '~";!";.- "-'.\"f"" --IC m --------------f-l---HHHt-1~_,_1 .... --:-------------~-.. -.. ·111:r Lt _,_ ldRt ~------~~=-~~ 1111 , .. ,.,~ -~ ' '"'''"" 'II' f+---'- iHf'i 1H qJJrC . 1 ,, .. [. I :r ' ' ' I~ I I I ' ' ' ' L. I I, ' r1 i1111, :' '' ' m m t[:r 4 .. !i :,:·,,;,; ~ I ''ii'!"" 1, ''(J'~ ... l 1 :I 'W'i,.,, ~~~1-t· .I ffilRfBlffilliBfil ~1~U1~m~ul1fi~ l:1 .L. ... ,, ,,,.,· ,. , ...•. , ... ,. ' .,, ., ,, .. , ".... .... ... '.'. ., . , .. , ' ·•.,.' .·.•, _1 __ _ ~--· '''"'"'",; ·"°= ____ -~-'---..'c "._ -!,J'ESf'l;E~ EAST V\IEST SECTION OAAF'ti!C S,:.O,LE -----·a•a•a•a• "ii '·( r {i •._,-~ ~ ~-,·'r. ·.·1 / THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ---SouTMPODT RENTON, WASHINGTON $ s~rn DEHU,PM!~I. !H MULV/\NNY .G2 . ' ~--~-1 SITE PLAN 05.16.2014 PM DAVENPORT ,.l?f'A'M<BYw-lT!'. \FHW SECTION A125 -< s·· -~:--. --. ---"<-, ----. -----'t------------ I I -: --' ! j r---1 :-,.. : L ___ J • ! I I " I I / / / • - - • 111 ;LIJ L __ _ , • i ' • 0 ~ "' "' "' ... (~ ' I -- iD ,,[J C,, J ' i: lf I .. ~t ,,,, I •!; ''1:~~ ' -- • -: • - (J> Cj m " s; z ' • • ' • • • ' • • • --'!f ]- -- ' "' ' 0 I<!> ~ C me/ m" .. \ Om ,m ~6 -Z ,: ' ZS "• ~o ~m ! bz 'O u 0 ,r z ·~ :, -.. I ! i ' I V; J • ,p Ll . ~ 1.6.1 ,._·,: ~ u n ill i u\ '' lJ • • ' ! •<el ! ~~j • • il 0 "' ' "' =i ' m "' ! ~ " i '" ,. ------',------~--,-----. . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ------~-1-------,-----: ·.: • .. ~ ' • -"_Jr. .. • ~ ~ ~ ~ " ' ' -a I, ' 1 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' •· • J ./ • • ' I .. • • ii ~"'. • • • <!> .. < '. -I ' >a oo m h z" QO CZ o· z ' II ·, 4 "' j ' . :~ J "' 0 ~~ C: \ -< c, ,: :i!8 " ~~ 0 ~~ ::, -< • • ! ' ' I ,·· ~ (\ \_Y ' ~ ~ ,, 0 ~ H <,J w ii ~ z ,. ' 0 (/) a "' " ', • =i • .. ! "' m "' " ~ r;; .. z J-~-.~-.! -v. " r- ' , -----------i ------, : \ I ,· k • i . • • ; ~ • • ,' ' ' ' ' ; i '!I i . J L ' ~--9 _! J. !( > ---------· . J ', .. l ~~i ]-_____ : ___ ~ J • ',....._...J:1 ! .,. 0 ! ~ ~ ~H I<.'> ~ ! ~ : ~ l; Al C: ... ' "z ' . l z~ z: ' ! I, ~~ " z 0 :0 •. ... e ~:t ~ C rn C" ,o £~ "~ i ' ,, ,a.;.:,;foi ! ,1,~ /-, '" i\_ S7 ,1 ~.;;:,;~ § ' •I "••t 0 .;, ;i 0 ' e a ~ " w, ~ " I<!> Om :r, !' 0 <f> e; i:: ~ w• ... \ c, ~ Ci f~~ ~~ :i!~ "' ~ !! m ;1: ~ z, ,: 0 !i: ~ "' ~~ ~m .i:,. • !I "' .,, 1l_U .. or ' c1 !.: 0 0 '~ > ,. z z .. z ::, ... -""L" ' ,. -0 " 0 ~ " WI r H (J> I<.'> ~. ' Om )>! 0 Wm ... CI m ~ Cj ~Q N < ~z = ~ ;;; m z, 0 QO .. i3 PJ " ii "U "' (J'I ' "' lj; o· 0 ~:::i s; ,. '" z z .. z 0 ::, ... ' ,1 ~,,;:,i~ I ,11~ ( ,. ,1 . .,~ ' . v . ··~ ' \._ / § "' ,, ~ ~a:~~ •I 0 : ~ .,. 0 [Ls~ )> r !I 0 u, <!> • " m ·~ \ "' < !! ~ :a ~m ... CI 0 ~ l! -c,; m f Oz ,: :rs: • zc O> ' "' ,, ' QO 'O ~m r;; ' CZ •r > ;;::--< ':1 I o· 0 "~ z ,,_ z z ::, ... ; ! )> ~ ' ,, ~ H N m 0 r '!!;. -.J ' !~ a \; z ,1 «a;M3 ~~~~ ..t'.:' ,1 .. ,~ •I .• ,t I ! /~-----.. \ \_ y 0 "' "' " ~ .. o. ~. . . "' 0 13~ ; 0 ~ C: en . ' l<.'> ~· .. ~ ~6 :::; i ' ;~ m 0 ' ~o ,: "• ~m " f ' ;j-z " ,r r i! 0 ·~ )> z z ::, .. l \_: 0 ' !, ,. ,. ,. ;]." ~~ ~g ,, ,, ,, l@~ I ' I 1 . . f:n .I I ·,· } . i~i , .. " ' ~.,, I ' ' I ' ' ' ' ,, s / ~ ---1 ,,, I :al: . -,~ ~~~fl ,,1;;1~ i;; "' 0 ~~ :t> ~ !l 0 (/) <!> ~ C "' < l! "' Ca ~~ .. \ CI ~ ,m :t 8 0 Ji m -Z ,: • m ' z~ a, ' " .,, l QO .. c3 p:! > ,. 0 i;: ! o-z 0 ~:!'j z ,: z ' I z ::, .. i;; 0 (0 "·;;. , ,. ,· ,~·. ' !<!> ~ r !' rn < H ~ ~ ii 0 i5 ' ,. ~ z ~I -oll3 ·,. I ~§t~ 'il l::ll •Qij~ 1 : ,1 """§ ! ~;; 0 "' "' " ~ .. ,. ,, "' =i m ,, \;: z ~ ~ -I I -I ~ ~ ' ' ! ' ! ' ~ ~ ~ ' . - !! ' ' ' 0 i<!> "' 0 ~~ ~ C ~· ... ~ c, "rn :t 9 -Z ~ ZS QO ~ ll ~ ~-z 0 ~~ ~ ... ::::I -oli~ ~~f~ ·OI~~ "'"E ~ ~ !' lj ~ ~ :1 ~ " a ,. \; z I ' ' 0 ~ "' " c1 .. U) ::; m " i ,, ·:·;' ~ .,, ' " .,. 0 0 ~~ ; ' • = ! 'i '<.'> >a ~ \ CI l, i mm "~ az ,: -' za ; i ~ 00 ., ~m "' ,r ! -~ o· 0 "~ ih z ,. ~ ' ,, ' ,, !' )> :;; N < H ~ ~ li N C ' ,. s; z l;I: N-0,;:.ig ;;:,, ~.l~i'i~ ! ! 0 (f) ~ =a "' m "' " 'j; 0 ,: z -0 0 f C: ",' I<.~ \ Om "" ... c~ :!:~ :i ~ '" ,: ~ ; QO " ~m "' ,r O' 0 ·~ I, z " 0 ... J '1 " ' )> " 8 "' ' "' ' 0 ,; z r ' ' (~ "-- !' H li ,. ' ' ' ' ~---J D ·-.1 ;1_ J~-- - -r- I,., a "' "' =< "' m " " s; c1 " z ii! ' 0 ~ " ---ire-' . ' ~ ·o; ,0,: 0 .. i'ffl'I··.· . · .. ·-w - -------~;--- q~ . • J .,. 0 I<.'> ~ C w" ... ,m -Z = ~~ " z 0 " -... -·~ ' ' 8~ \ ~6 "• 8m ,r ·~ '. .. LI , LJ ! L_ -~ ,--~· ".le.-. _ _,, ~ ~ "' =i rn ~ z I " I I, ' ! s i ;: i'l -~----~,... <!> I I i ' ' . -·;.. ~ ,;-'-"', i ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ! . []' El EliEl ~ El El El EJiEl § ElElElEl EliEliEl;El El . ·- ~"' ' ~ El El LJ El EllEllEl El El ,-. QQQ . El El El,u EluEl El El EllEl .. El El El El El El!El QQQ id id idlid ~ ·-------' Ubl id id id I id ' El LJ El id id id I bl .. w id 611:JQ id : Q1 id I id id ,• I id ididQ id!Qir;;:J id bl ' id d id id id id id id id -~-------.~ "' ,,,,,r,'.,,'~,' ~,"e,·,~,"~~,e, ,_I :! !~ :~ :! :~ :~ i:~ !! -~] :~ :·1 • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -? !' i ~ 0 n 0 (/) ! f i I<!> f C: " ~ =i 0 0 ! '~ ! •" .. \ C N ,, '" m : ~ ~ ;;:~ ,: a '1l ~ l i za " ,_ "' r ~~ .. ~ ':1 :,, iii 0 0 " .. z z a ' :, .. J! I '~ ~ ,:: f , '.o .,. $'. ~ ,, 0 w !! 0 "' <.~ ~ C ~~ 0 " ~ =a >a -< \ m ;j m Wm ~6 "' ~ a, az ~ " ""(] '" "" ~ ,_ r QO 'O c15~ " 0 )> "' .: o· 0 ~~ 6 z z z = -< ! £_,_ i: ~ ! 0 (/) " ! m =i ~ " ' m ;;, m :;; I " "' ~ s: r " > 5 ,. z z blbltlibl ' . . ... I blblbl 1 D bl bl bllbl ·blblblbl bl bl bl bl ~~=o Did id id :J' bl id id ' bl id id . ..I ........................ . -0 ~ " <.'> w• ... Im _z = za QO CZ ., o· 0 z ::, ... ' ~:I'".""'' r . ,, .. ;;~---, -~·\1-. ·· .. CEM-01a CEM-Olb CEMENTITIOUS PANEL A CEMENTITIOUS PANEL B :.-.. -,_ ---:·:·~·· ··¢~. r,· -: ~- . ..._ 'ii- ---~ -~-----·~-~~ ~~-·----~------ ~-{-,:·~;;~::: -'~ ~~~1:~>-~--: .. ,;.'.~ }~·r, .. ~::~:· CON-01 CON-02 ~----.:- CAST IN PLACE CONC. PRECAST CONC. PANEL MTL-01 MTL-02 MTL-03 MAS-02 METAL PANEL CORRUGATED LOUVER BRICK THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ---SoUT1ll>OnT RENTON, WASHINGTON ~ - ---! SITE PLAN 5.16.2014 cw. ..... ~,""""' BUILDING ,x1ca10~ , M~TfRIM SP. (OIOR\ A405 li:11 1, ' ,,,--1 ,. ' i THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT --------"~ ·"·''" ---.-- '.1 '. ' ; :j ':: '• I l~i ]I '": 1-:i, •, :1 ;ii ~ , ,I I' \ L ,,I ,, ,, THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT --..J .-. ' 1 THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ' !,¢- ' /~h .. ~/ti ' " "' C ;5 c §~ § i~ ·~ ,;@ zc ' o-aI QI z§ I/ '/ ,! i ! [J) =i m 'Cl > z :IJ m :5 m ::1: THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ' ' ' ts'. '' ) ~I' . ' ·-! I rl, 1. -i··· . .(_. ' . .. L -- ' l i z, C ~a ii• '§ z~ ~:!: (/) ' ~rs =i .. zc z o• m aI o• "C z~ s;: z JJ m :5 m ~ THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT :~q :5Jc,, ! • ' I ) . -' • 'l • • l ' . • 'l :.>. /\ j' it . ""'-''• .~t'.ccc>cl.A~N~--\_J :,:-..,., ·"' l;' ----;'-,;c::::::;-,,·,;;·,,e/c'.~i'.-v .~ 1 j '[i] ~ ;,,,-,>"'"'··' ,-,-,-.u,.,_.,"'"' , j ''"··-' ''""·'""'"·'1"'"1-J ·,·, -~ 1 * \lt ,if~ el -~ ~:'/£ -oo. ~ 0 r "--- ·1 li,,,' ilFF~l -' 1 ,,, +;I (:_, __ ~CJc-·. '-~-~-- '" 11:-' ·-'_ _11 --f J j ,J a 1 i::: " u / · :_ rr) ,__ : , L "-,_ I \f '.ii L~ i 1] ~~- ' --~~= c; =""ffll8· ---I i -'!J,i •• J ,. I •s•,-5)•W_l1 --·-• -----·~ ,, 1j:' r:;1-!I t ""r:;, -§_ j ] C --_ -i ' J f ~, I- i' ., ,~,t ~ -I -~ ~ _J -·-~! ''-, ·~ ~, ', Ii -~ ='"'""----/ '' ~ \,. i \ I FI Jl Rfllllil ; '<i,(.1 ' ' 1· I 1 --1 !!If --~ .~ , ,/ ! r I U1 .. 'L_l I l@--1-'·~:·:.:fV'~ '---~;-:; :"--J i l\ T-=,-· c:1D c:riit --~·;· :;;; -·-i ---I '< i"' ] , j ·-··-·; -··"!.,.. tl I = ---' ' --H' ffi:, ' ' ---'"'•,, --';l I ---1 ' ' -0~' -1-= I ~-I _: /-'-""'--® ,:-l I ,~, -~ , ij :·t ·:~·---=-' ~J ---i-' -r __ ----_--, b-------~ --~ ® ! ---~ ~~ ! ~ '• ': ~i--'' l' [?Til -, ~ -----,-, -·-•-••--·, ,--, ,=l-a ,~ ~ I / 1 1 _;_:-_=L-j-:--< -f--l -. ::er__ t ± _ __j ~-_::, J _ II :,t:: i _ci----~ ,,:. ~ ,c.LII ~ ~2! C:TJJ_,, '"''''' 015:J CcLJ ~ ,-· --L __ , @ ... - t--- rnSJ.1iili!l.1 -fl • • ~'i'r '}7 ·::s:w !il:.""'E~,--1.::.;;i.;::,i.iz.&l#J!~-~ilLl..:.'i · i I, I ' (til +--- GltAPfflCSCALE I -~-- t::_~:.:.:; 111111111 ~ @] ['] Ii] Isl l'-'.';c ;,LANT SCHEDULE ;:::: {i:,'.;;_,~;,:'.'.:':'; 'W- rlARD~CP.PE SCHEDJLE Oa·le-c!~"S•s',•O• ~ """"'·'"' """''"'''''"'"" """'~ ~.,,_ .=.!-~ THE ~OTEL AT SOUllle'OHI Sounu,onT REWON WASHI\/STON ./ ~ ~/ S>C~ ~>Hl.<Jf~'-'T. l'C , ·i 1 tuLVA~~Y~G2 , '""'""'"""''"I "'"""" ~, ........ + '"'"''-'""'"""'""' _:_'Li -~berger ,,,-~ ""'" x~"'"'" -~'""''"''"" '"'"'""'·'"'"''"' SITE PLAN REVIEW 04.25.2014 . ·-- Pr,o ~ROWO~ U><Ai,~OY t.>,·~~ LANDSCAPE :>LAN L 101 ··~·· 1-' I j _ I l r ":c:.;:c::t;:~~~~",r,i ' ,i. •, ·~Ye:::·· f ·; ·• <,, ··w•••·••••• ' ·J ', II ~I 1'1 '"' ' ' ,, • ·"' I \:~)r l'CS,<><'.:T"'cS!C,.,. .... , '! I J!i~· ~~ l;,'::r/ l fi,:'),i ) ,1t /1 I/ 1(1 ,!1 I;; ',\I (·~·.··· ' ' j '.c ' .. ' Ir' ' I/;::( " , I =~"- •' p )' ' '.°'-.. , l,I I JJ·cv 1+ .J, I ii ~~-. •.:-. I\_,.~·-~'. .. l ,, 1 ·1;1 / I . •: P).cl 1,t~I 11 f,;,J/ r' L__7ir;· '\ ,,)=1:1~~'~-*-· ~"-·~"··-' '<0 ,,,,~~ ~ , __ , f;.,. ---r~~~°:,~?°_fTJ It\ ,~ l lli, i r,;< ·· ·· ·. · ~It~i l, II ' I I J I i I ' II 1 1 .1 I , I'-, ,,~ I .· l ' I ' l • \ I > L f I II II I I I I tO ,+-~I ....--,L---;,, l,~Lc::..}-..1,,,---\-,Lb-· b-,J -k-J.-,-',,,1 ~~== ,r~=c r I /i f ;/ ,, -· " ., l~' .. ~~\ .. 1.\i>':~Yr;; ·.i·\~.· . tn,Q! l'1:i:,' ;~,,w /{/I. /1 I /f i '· --·~ -·--. liil\.['.'ij ),.::, ~. ·-j,, I~'" ---:-.:--;. J1',: ,\ ,,;1\ ,..(i(:;; h11", ,:-L(,,. .111:_' 1·1 !i··~_-, ii'.':,, 11,, , I ii . ,; ,/ ;'/; 4' J l/ ',.--I{'~ 11 ·1 ·".:· :; '11•"1, 'I, 'I ' '.::, J 1.•.,,tl ,' /l;i' I :iY-.ll , !::j -~~ ,.n . --~.;;.:. n·· ' n /c. iL.-._ ,:,; ii '·t•,,; ,~) ~c::'cc'""& ·, . •.. ~<J · . Li ·..;:;;=."-~~ ........ ....-.~::o.=~-....... ---""'-~-~~~~ .. --=~~. --- G) ~E -~~EN TORY PLAN GRAP!<ICl<!AU I'! r LEGENC "''lif\lSE'f'"M iv', H,cCIUdL<,.,..,._."-' ~l5ll "'rn 1,t.-,,u;.-,01,w.; I Uc ;~. @D •. ~~ -"'= ',;i'-' THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ~-.._ S0un11>onT RENTON, WASHINGTON ~t.,. ~v HCO CHHLOflfEn IMC MULVANNY ,G2 ,.,.,,,,.,. •.. ~ .. ,,.,,, ... .,.,, \O.<UMCC -, """l '"''"'"""''' . .._..._, ..., . ...,.~-1 ~be'rger ·'"""'""' ,,__,..,_ SITE PLAN REVIEW 04.25.2014 ·---:i::.::.,~2" PMc!l/10WCa ORA\vt, ~'-'1tY!cl< TREE CUTTING/ VEGETATION CLEARING PLAN L102 r- ~ 0 0 ~I • :w ·, I ' ! ! ' el;;: ' l ~ ; ' ! 0 ... "' "' ~ 2 ... ';f ! l I I I ! i 2 "' =a § m ! '11' " r ' ,i ::e > ~ ~;~ z g ?> ',{/ ,, ,- m i~!r..,, ,:; 1~~8 "a m :, • / / ' l ' } L l -·---~ -t' !!' Hf l!! l •j '' !! jj J! H }---i; ,. ,. 'o " ... C ~ 0 = \ Denis Law Mayor Community & Economic Development C. E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator December 5, 2016 Amanda Roe Zoning Analyst 1300 South Meridian Avenue, Suite 400 Oklahoma City, OK 73108 Subject: Hyatt Regency Lake Washington, 1053 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Parcel Numbers 0523059075 and 08233059216 Dear Ms. Roe, This letter is sent in response to your request for a letter addressing whether or not the above properties comply with current zoning regulations and other land use regulations. The property is located within the corporate limits of Renton, Washington or more specifically within the Southport Planned Action Area. The current zoning of the site is "Urban Center" (UC), with primarily the same zoning adjacent to the parcels. Abutting property within the waters of Lake Washington is a City of Renton public park zoned Residential-1 (R-1) named Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park to the east. The properties are also located within the Commercial and Mixed Use Comprehensive Plan/Land Use Designation. I have attached a copy of the zoning map for this area. The Urban Center zoning use table lists "hotels," "eating and drinking establishments," "offices," "conference centers," and "parking garages" as outright permitted uses with the condition that the hotel and conference center uses are not allowed within one thousand feet (1,000') of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway, the parking garage and office uses are located within a mixed use structure, and eating and drinking establishments in the UC Zone have ground-floor commercial uses (RMC 4-2-060). The identified uses and activities are consistent with those described in the Planned Action EIS and Planned Action Qualifications. The project impacts have been mitigated by application of the measures identified in Ordinance #4804, and other applicable City regulations, together with any modification or variances or special permits that may have been required. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov Amanda Roe December 5, 2016 Page 2 The property was part of a Planned Action consistent with state law, RCW 43.21C.031. The Southport Development project is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999); the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM); subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008), and Minor Master Site Plan Modification (LUA14-000645 SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD dated September 23, 2014). Therefore, the Hyatt Regency Hotel and Conference Center with associated office space and structured parking would be considered to be permitted, legal uses in the Southport Planned Action Area and complies with all applicable local, state and/or federal laws and regulations. The property is also located within an overlay zone: Urban Design District C (RMC 4-3-100). This overlay does not affect the uses permitted in the UC Zone or impact the already approved buildings, but would apply certain design requirements at the point of any significant new construction or building replacement outside the Southport Development project vesting rights. Access to the site is currently from the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard N and Houser Way N. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. The applicant has not received Temporary Occupancy for the Hyatt Regency Hotel and the project is still under construction. Should you need to determine if there are any Fire Code violations, please submit a records search request to the Renton City Clerk's Office (425) 430-6510. I hope this letter meets your needs. Please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7289 if you have additional questions. Sincerely, oi~ (j,_ {)2,,,-·~ -- Clark H. Close Senior Planner Attachments: Zoning Map Zoning Use Table Ordinance #4804 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 • rentonwa.gov ® 256 0 128 256 WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere City of Renton (COR) Maps Feet Information Technology. GIS RentonMapSupport@Rentonwa.gov 12/05/2016 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and ls for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION legend City and County Boundary • ~-Other [:1 City or Renton Addresses Parcels Zoning II RC-Resource ConseNation ~ .:..:.i. R1-Res!dentlal 1 du/ac R4-Residentlal 4 du/ac R6-Resldentlal -6 DU/AC R8-Resk:lential a du/ac R10-Residential 10 du/ac R14-Residential 14 du/ac Ii RMF-Residential Multi-Family • RMH-Resldentlal ManUfactured Homes CN-Commercla! Nelghbolhood fl CV-Canter Village • CA-Commercial Arterial • UC-Urban center • CD-Center Downtown COR-Commerdal Office/Resldentlal II CO-Commerclal Office Jl-tndusbial -Light JM-lndustrial -Medium • IH-lndustrial -Heavy Overlay Districts Auto Mall A '--·' AuloMaUB CJ Employment Area Valley [] City Center Sign Regulation Area (2] Urben Design District A (SJ Urban Design District B 1053 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, WA Parcel Numbers 0523059075 and 0 CityofRentOfl€) Finance & IT Division Section 4-2-060 Page 1 of5 -4-2-060 Zoning Use Tabkt Uses Allowad In Zoning De!Wgm1tlomr RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS INDUSTRIAL I COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: R-1 1 R-4 1 R-6 1 R-s r RMH 'M I '" I CN I CV j CA RC R-10 R-14 RMF " CD ca COR UC A. AGAlCUL TURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Agricul!l.lra P35 Pa5 Home agriculture AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 AC35 Natural resourCfl H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H extraction/recovery Research -Scienlific (smaU p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p .~cale) 8. ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Beekeeping ,,c AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC Kannals A037 P37 P37 P37 Stables, commercial A037 AD37 C. RESIDENTIAL Delache<.l dwelling p p p p p p p Attached dWallings P73 P73 p P1B P73 P1B P3 P16 p P1B Manufactured Homes Manufac..'tured homes PSO PSO PSO PSO P50 p P50 PSO D. OTHER RESIDENTIAL., LODGING ANO HOME OCCUPATIONS AcceSSOl'y dw611ing unit A07 Af)7 A07 AD7 AD7 AD7 AD7 Adult family horna p p p p p p p p p p P3 Assisted living AO AO p p p P3 P<O p P96 Caretaker's residence AC AC AC AC AC AC AC Congregate rasirn\lncs AD p P3 Group hom9s l AD 1,3 Group homes II for 6 or less AO p p p p p p p p p P3 p Group homes 11 for 7 or mom H H H H H H H H p H H3 AO Home occupations (RMC il AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC QlQ.) Live-work urnt AD /ID AD E. SCHOOLS K-12 odwcalionat institution H9 Hg H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 Hg H H H H9 H9 ll9 H9 Hg H87 \public or private) Q(tier higher cducalion P29 P'9 P29 p p p P21 !1087 institution Schoolslstud1os, aru. and p '" P29 p p p p crat'.s rr,;de or vocational school p p H H "" F. PARKS P(lrks. neighbortiood p p p H p ,, p I' p p p p p p p ,, ,, p p Park<,, J"'!,lioriallcommllnily, p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p ex1"'1ing Parl<.s, regionalicarnrnunity, AO r,D AD AD AD AD AO AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD ,\D AD AO p cow G. OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITl[S Community Facolities ::ematary H II " H H H H H H H H H H H H H Rflligiaus institutions " H II " " " " H H H '' " " II II II II " II http://www.codepublishing.com/W AfRcnton/ 12/5/2016 Section 4-2-060 Page 2 of5 RE31DENTIAL ZONING OESIGNA TIONS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: RC R-1 R-4 ... R0 8 RMH IMO R-14 "'" IL IM IH CN CV CA CD co COR UC Sarvlee 1:111d SO(.ial H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H12 "" H82 organizations Public Facilities City government offlcl')!!, AO AD AD AO AO AO AO AO AO AO AO AO AD AO AD p AD AD City government fooll!!.18$ H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H Jail$, exi9Ung municip.31 p D!wl'llion facilrty and divitr.lion H71 H71 Interim aal\'lee raeiltty secure community transition H71 H71 laci!iliea Other government offices and H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H fadl!llea H. OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Conference canters P29 P29 P29 H P29 p p P21 P18 Mei:lical and dental officos p P2ll P29 P29 AO P112 p p p p P92 Officee, general p p p p AD P112 p p p p P92 Veterinary offlcesldlnlcs p p P29 P29 1,29 P112 p p P29 p PB2 I. RETAIL Adult retall usa (RMC ~ p p p p p p P12 !ili.i Big-box 11:1tall p p p P29 P79 Drive-in/drive-through, retaN AC80 AC60 AC80 AC60 AC61 ACSO AC61 AC62 Eating and drinking P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 A033 p p p p P22 p p p P12 P82 PB2 ntebllstlments Fast food restallrarrts P29 PB1 p PB1 pa, Hartleultural nurs811es, AO AO AO AO AO AD AO AD AO AO AO AO AO AO AD AO AO AO """"' Horticultural nUf'!lerias, new AD AD29 Marijuana retail {RMC :1:1: AD p AO P21 P82 "2) Retail sales A033 AD P29 P29 P29 P22 p p p P54 P21 PS2 Rfllllil aalM, outdoor P30 P30 P30 P15 P15 P15 P15 P10 TilYems AD P20 AD P21 pa, Vohfcla salos, large p p p P29 Vehicle sah!ls, smaN p p p P68 J. ENTERTAINMENT ,lo.NO RECREATION Eotertainment AduJt entertainment bm;iness p p p p p P12 (RMC !:J:Q1Q) Card room "' P52 P52 P52 Cultural facdihes H H H H H H H H H AO AD AD AD AO AO AD AO AD AO Dance dubs P29 P'9 P29 AD P20 AD P29 AD Danca halls P29 P29 P29 AO "'' AD P29 AD Gaming.',;iambling facili!iea. H29 H29 H29 H20 H29 not-for-profit Movie theaters P29 P29 P29 AD P20 p P12 l'B2 $parts aremm, audilariwns, P29 P29 P29 p,o p 1118 erllibllion haHs, indoor Sports arenas, auditOfiums, P29 P29 P29 AD20 H16 exhibilian halls. outdoor Recn:i1:1tion Golf courses {eidsLing) p p p p p I' p Gotr couniH, naw H p H fl II H H Marinas p P21 H Section 4-2-060 Page 3 of 5 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: RC R-1 R-4 R-6 R-8 RMH R-10 R-14 RMF IL IM IH CN CV CA CD co CCR UC Recreatlona! facililiaS, indoor, H P33 P29 P29 P29 p p p P54 P21 PS2 existing Recreattanal facilltlas, indoor, H P29 P4 p p PS2 P12 P21 "' ,- Recreational faciiLias, outdoor P29 P29 P29 H20 H29 K. SERVICES ServlOE<!ll, Ganeral 88d and breakf8SI hOUSl'l, AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD p aCCE1swry Bed and breakfast house, AD AD ADS AD p professional Hotel "' P29 P29 p P20 p p p P1B MotEII P29 P29 P29 p P20 Off-site seMcss p P29 P29 P29 P29 On-site servic&s AD33 p P29 P29 P29 P22 p p p P54 P21 P62 Drive-infdrlve-lhrough sentlce AC81 AC61 AC61 AC60 AC<1 ACOO AC81 AC-81 AC81 AC82 Vah1c!a rental, small p p p AD p,o Vehicle and equipment Amtel, P29 P29 P29 large Day Cara Services Aoult day ..are I AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC ' p p p p p p p p P100 Aoult day care II H H H H H H H p p p p p p p P12 P21 P100 Day care centers H25 H25 H25 1-125 H25 H25 H25 p p p p p p p p ?21 e,no Family day care AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC3 AC AC AC Healthcare Ser111ces Conv,.iJesa,nt centers H H H H p AD P3 P<O AD ADM Medical lnstiluijons H H H H H H H H "" H56 H56 H H H H P<O H H L VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Car washes p p p AD2 " E.llpross transportation AD p AD,O SElrviCIIS Fuel deal11n1 H59 p lnduslnal engine or P28 P28 P20 transmission rebuild Parlling garngs, 5\ructured, p p p p P,O P3 p p P92 Gommerr:ial or public Parking, surface, commercial P29 P29 P29 p,o P3 AD or public Park and nde. dedicated P107 P10'1 P10/ P10f f'107 P107 P107 P107 P;.rk and ride, sharer1.use p p p p p p p p p p P107 P109 P107 p P107 F!ailmad yards p Taxi shmd ' AD AD [ow rrucli. opernlionlfltrlo P36 H'9 p AD'.l6 1mpo1mdm(mt yard T1ans1l cc11tero H29 H29 H29 p H20 p H29 p Truck terminals I' Vet11de lueHng s!.atloris p p p p p P29 Vnhiclo f~nhng statrons, p p p AD p p "" existing leqal Vohicle serv= and repair. AD2 p p largo Vehicle service and repair. P2 P2 P2 AD2 AD2 AD2 s'Tlall Wrecking yard, auto HS9 H http://www.codepublishing.com/W NRenton/ 1215/2016 Section 4-2-060 Page 4 of 5 I RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS I INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: R-1 I R-4 I R-6 I R.S I RMH I R-10 I R-14 I RMf I " I CA I RC IM IH CN CV CD co CCR UC AlrTraMporta~on U\188 Airplane mal'Alfacturlng H59 P78 Ai-plane manufacturing, AC P76 accassory runctons Airplane sales and repair p Airport, munJcipal p Alfport-ralated or aviation-AC ralated uses Helipads F111 H29 H29 H29 H H H76 H&jlpa(ts, commao:lal H H76 M. STORAGE Hazardou, material storage, H24 H24 H24 on-site or off-site, including trsatrnent Indoor S1Dl'Bl!8' p p p AC11 AC11 AC11 AC11 AC11 AC11 Outdoor storage, existing P29 P29 P29 '" Outdoor atorag", new P29 P29 P64 Se!f-aervlcE! storage P29 P59 p H22 H22 Vehlde storage AD29 Warshous'1g p p p N. INDUSTRIAL !nduah1al, General Asssmbly and/or packaging p p p P66 --· Commfln::i:al laundl1es, P29 P20 P20 P4 existing Commert:llll laundries, new P29 P29 P20 Construc:tionlcontractor'a p p p '"'' Craft distilleries with tasting p p p p p p p rooms, small willefl69, and mlcro-brew\lriaa Industrial, hMV)' P14 tab-OratorK!'II: llghi P29 P29 P29 AD P20 P3 AD5' P66 manufact\1rlng Laboratories: r-arcti, P28 p p H P20 AD3 AD H P66 development and testing Manufacturing and fabrication, H59 P67 h=,y Manufacturing arnl fabrk:atfcn, p" P67 medium Manufacturirlg and fabrication, p p p p Hghl Solid Was!eiRecycling Recycling collection and P26 P28 P28 P29 processing center Recy,;ing co1ection station p p p p p p p p p Sew.ige d~poeal and H59 H ll'8lltmenl plants Wasto rec'jciing and transfer H59 p fadlltias 0 UTILITIES Cilmmunication broadcast H H H II H H H H H H29 H29 H29 H H H H H H and relay lowers Electrical power generation H H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 and c090neraHon Section 4-2-060 Page 5 of5 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS USES: RC .. , ••• ... ... ••• R-10 R-14 RMF IL IM IH CN CV CA CD co COR UC UUlltles, small P5 P5 PS P5 PS PS PS PS PS p p p p p p p p p p Utlll~&e, medium ADS ADS ADS ADS AD5 ADS AD5 AD5 AD5 AD AD AD AD AO AO AD AD AD AD UUlilies, large HS HS H5 HS HS H5 H5 HS H5 H H H H H H H H H H P. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Amateur radio antenna ADO ADO ADO AD8 ADO ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS ADS Camouflag.:x:t WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AO AD AD AD AD AD AD AO AD AO AD Concealed WCF AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD Major <lits rations to existing AD AD AD AO AO AO AO AO AD AD AD AD AO AD AD AO AO AD AD WCF .sttucturas. Minor altnr:atians to exis~ng p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p WCF sUl.Jctt!ras Monopole I support structures H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 M,:mopole II support str..,ctures H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 H47 Steallh towar AD AD AD AO AO AD AD AD AD AD AO AD AO AD AD AO AD AO AD Q. GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC 050 .iind as defiosd in chapter 4--11 RMC,wherenot otherwisa listed in Use Table R. TEMPORARY USES Model homes in an approved P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P1D P10 P10 P10 P10 resldcnllal llevaklpment: one model home on an e~!stlng lot Sales/msrlleting trailers, pn-P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 p,o P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 site Storage yards or buildin!J$ P10 P10 P10 P10 P1D P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 used for constn.11::tlon Temporal)' u-P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 Blank=Not Allowed P#=P8rmitted AO,.Administmtiva Condttional Use AC=Accassory U9e P=Perrn!!tAd Use provided condition can be met H"-'Hearing E,,;amlner Com:lttlom1I Use #"'Condltlan(s) Uses may be fur'.her restncled by: RMC 4-3-020 Airport R111ated Height and Use Restrictions; RMC 4-3-040C, Usu Permitted in the Renton Autornall Improvement District; RMC 4-3-050 Cntical Areas Rogulations: RMC 4-3-090 Shorollne Master Program Regulations [Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999: Ord. 4777, 4-19.1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Ord. 4802, 10-25-1999; Ord. 4803. 10-25-1999; Ord. 4627, 1-24-2000; Or<l. 4840, 5.S.2000; Ord. 4857, 8-21-2000: Ord. 4915, 8-27-2001; Ord. 4917, 9-17-2001; Amd. Ord, 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 5-10-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5001. 2-10-2003; Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003; Ord. 5027.11-24-2003; On1 5080, 6-14-2004; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004; Ord. 5124, 2-7-2005; Ord. 5190, 12-12- 2005; Ord. 5191, 12-12-2005: Ord. 5201, 4-17-2000; Ord. 5241, 11-27-2006; Ord. 5286, 5-14-2007; Ord. 5305, 9-17-2007; Ord. 5355, 2-25-2008; Ord. 5356, 2-25-2008; On:L 5381, 5-12-2008; Oro. 5387. 6-9-2008; Ord, 5392, 6-23-2008; Ord. 5403, 7·21-2008: Ord. 5407, 9-15-2008; Ord. 5437, 12-8-2008; Ord. 5439, 12-8-2008; Ord. 5450, 3-2-2009; Ord. 5466, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5469, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5473, 7-13-2009; Ord. 5519, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5520, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5522, 12-14-2009; Ord. 5577, 11-15- 2010; Ord. 5578, 11--15-2010; On.I. 5589, 2-26-2011; Ord. 5639, 12,-12·2011; Ord. 5B40, 12-12-2011; Ord. 564'1, 12--12-2011; Ord. 5675, 12-3-2012; Ord. 5676, 12-·3-2012; Ord. 5702, 12-9-2013; Ord 5707, 3-24-2014; Ord. 5744, 1-12-·2015; Ord. 5746, 1-12--2015; Ord. 5759 (i\tl A), 6-22-2015; Ord 5790 (Att-A), 4-25-2016; Ord. 5798, 4-25- 2016) Mobile Version http://www.codepublishing.com/W A/Renton/ 12/5/2016 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCENO. 4804 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON DESIGNATING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE SOUTHPORT SITE, APPROXIMATELY 17 ACRES LOCATED ADJACENT TO LAKE WASHINGTON AND BETWEEN GENE COULON PARK ON THE EAST AND BOEING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS ON TIIE WEST. WHEREAS,RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164, -168, and-172 allow and govern the application of a Planned Action designation; and, WHEREAS, in Resolution No .. 3379, the City indicated its intent to study and consider a Planned Action designation for the Shuffleton Steam Plant site, also known as the Southport site; and, WHEREAS, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) has been prepared for a portion of the Shuffleton Steam Plant site, entitled the Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and such document considers the potential environmental impacts of a phased mixed-use project on approximately 17 acres of prop¢)' within the City limits; and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4 7 9 6 the City has amended the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for the subject area from Employment Area-Industrial (EA-I) to Center Office Residential (COR); and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4 8 O O the City has amended the Zoning Map from Heavy Industrial (Ill) to Center Office Residential (COR) ; and, WHEREAS, this Ordinance would designate certain land uses and activities as "Planned Actions" which. would be consistent with the Center Office Residential (COR) designation and zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF RENTON DOES ORDAIN: SECTION I. Purpose. The City of Renton declares that the purpose of this ordinance is to: A. Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions within the subject site as "Planned Actions" consistent with state law, RCW 43.21C.031; and, B. Provide the. public with an understanding as to what constitutes a Planned Action and how land use applications which qualify as Planned Actions will be processed by the City; and, C. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process for this site by relying on completed and existing detailed environmental analysis for the subject site; and, 1 ORDINANCENO. 4804 D. Combine environmental analysis with land use planning. It is the express purpose of this ord~e that all til City's development codes be applied together with the mitigation framework described in section III of this Ordinance for the purpose of processing Planned Actions. SECTION II. Findings. The City Council finds that: A. The Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) addresses all significant environmental impacts associated with the Planned Action scenarios described in the SEIS for Plans A, B, and C as referenced therein; and, B. The mitigation measures: contained in. the Mitigation Document, Exhibit A ofthis Ordinance, together with the City's development standards, are adequate to mitigate the significant adverse environmental impacts of the Planned Action scenarios, Plans A, B, and C; and, C. The expedited perrnlt review procedure set forth in this Ordinance is and will be a benefit to the public, protects. the environment, and enhances economic development; and, D. Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and comments have been considered which have resulted in modifications to mitigation measures and Planned Action conceptual alternatives. SECTION III. Procedure and Criteria for Evaluating and Determining Projects as Planned Actions. A. Planned Action Site. The Planned Action designation shall apply to approximately 17 acres of property commonly referred to as the Shuflleton Steam Plan site, also known as the Southport site, and referred to in this Ordinance as the "subject site." The property is illustrated in Exhibit B, and legally described in Exhibit C. Additionally, the Planned Action designation shall apply to any oftsite improvements necessitated by the proposed development on the subject site; where the off-site improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS. · B. Environmental Document. A Planned Action designation for a site-specific permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) issued by the City on September 9, 1999. The Mitigation Document, Exhibit A, is based upon the analysis in the SEIS. The Mitigation Document, together with existing City codes, ordinances, and standards shall provide the framework for the decision by the City to impose conditions on a Planned Action project. Other environmental documents incorporated by reference in the SEIS may also be utilized to assist in analyzing impacts and determining appropriate mitigation measures. C. · Planned Action Designated. Uses and activities described in the SEIS, subject to the thresholds described in Section ill.D, and subject to the mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, are designated Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031. 2 ORDINANCE NO • ......:.4~80~4.:....--~- D. Planned Action Thresholds. I. Land Use. Subject to the. mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, the following land uses and development levels, together with their customary accessory uses and amenities described in the SEIS, are Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.03 l: a) Land Uses. The following uses are the primary uses analyzed l)Ilder the Proposed Action Alternatives identified in the SEIS: (I) Office (2) Retail commercial, including restaurants 0) Attached residential dwellings (4) Hotel b) Land Use Review Threshold. The Planned Action designation applies to future development proposals which are comparable to or within the range established by SEIS Proposed Action Plans A, B, and C as shown below: Use/Height Plan A Plan B Plan C Multifamily Residential Units 543 581 377 Retail Area in Sq. Ft. 38,000 38,000 30,000 Commercial Area in Sq. Ft. 500,000 750,000 500,000 Hotel Area in Sq. Ft. (rooms) NIA NIA 115,800 (220) If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. If proposed plans significantly change the location of uses in a manner which would negatively affect land use compatibility (for example, move commercial and office uses in such a manner that they would not buffer residential uses from the nearby manufacturing uses), additional SEPA review would be required. 2. Building Heights and Thresholds: Building heights shall not exceed the maximum heights allowed in the Center Office Residential (COR) Zone. The maximum building heights reviewed in the SEIS are as shown on Exhibit D. In comparison with the building heights reviewed in the SEIS, a proposed increase in height greater than 10% shall required additional SEP A review addressing aesthetics and shadows. 3. Building Setbacks; Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use and. Aesthetics/Light and Glare Mitigation Measures. 4. Open Space: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, and Parks Mitigation Measures. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 5. Transportation.: a) Trip Ranges: The range of trips reviewed in the SEIS -are as follows: Trip Generation Net New Trip~ Reviewed in SEIS Tim.e Range -Net New Trips AM Peak Hour 355~1,273 PMPeakHour 370-1,355 DailyTotal 2,898-ll,202 b) Trip Threshold: Uses or activities which would exceed the maximum trip levels shown above must complete additional SEP A review. c) Road Improvements: The Planned A.ction would require off-site road improvements at the P&k: Avenue/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the intersection located at the shared Site/Gene Coulon P&k: entrance and Lake Washington )3oulevard, and along Lake Washington Boulevard between the two identified intersections.. These road improvements have been anal~d in the SEIS. Significant changes to the road improvement plan that have the potential to significantly increase impacts to air quality, water quality, :fisheries r~ources, or noise levels beyond the levels analyzed in the SEIS would require addjtional SEPA review. · 6. Earth: A significant change in amount of grading assumed in the preliminary grading plans analyzed in the SEIS which bas the potential to adversely affect wllter quality or fisheries shall require additional SEP A review. 7. Air. Quality: A significant change in configuration, increase in. building heights, or significant decrease in setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses, which could affect localized air quality and. odor conditions would require additional SEJ,' A review. For the pmposes of air quality analysis: a) A significant change in configuration to the Planned Action scenarios (Plans A, B, or C) reviewed in the SEIS, would be. a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company; or, a 10% or greater change in setbacks between buildings. to be constructed on the subject site which have the potential to negatively affect building downwash. b) A significant decrease in the setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between residential uses and. the shared property line with The Boeing Company. 4 ORDINANCE NO, 4804 c) Significant building height changes would equal a 10% or greater increase in height above the maximum heights reviewed in the s,rs. 8. Water. The following changes to the Planned Action scenarios reviewed . in the SEIS would require additional SEP A review: a) Change in peak flows to Johns Creek significantly exceeding .the options reviewed in the SEIS. b) Increase in number of outfalls to Johns Creek or Lake Washington beyond proposals reviewed in the SEIS. 9. Fisheries Resources: In-water construction or in-water uses or activities shall require additional SEP A review. 10. Public Services and Utilities: A significant increase in the number of square feet or dwelling units beyond the maximum number reviewed in the SEIS would require additional SEPA review to address impacts to Fire, Police, Schools, Parks, Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, as applicable. · E. Planned Action Review Criteria. 1. The Director of Development Services, or the Director's designee, is hereby authorized to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.03!(2)(a), if the project application meets all of the following conditions: a) The project is located on the subject site as described in section III.A, or is an off-site improvement directly related to a proposed development on the subject site; and, b) The project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan adopted under RCW 36. 70A; and, c) The project's significant environmental impacts have been adequately addressed in the SEIS; and, d) The project complies with the Planned Action thresholds in section III.D of this Ordinance; and, e) The Director has determined that the project's significant impacts have been mitigated through the application of the Mitigation Document in Exhibit A, as well as other City requirements and conditions, which together constitute sufficient mitigation for the significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project; and f) The proposed project complies with all applicable local, state and federal regulations, and where appropriate, needed variances or modifications or other special permits have been requested; and, 5 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 g) The proposed project is not an esse~ public facility. F. Effect of Planned Action. 1. Upon designation by the Director that the project qualifies as a Planned Action, ihe project shall not be subject to a SEPA threshold determination, an environmental impact statement (EIS), or any additional review under SEP A. 2. Being designated a Planned Action.means that a proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with this Ordinance, and found to be consistent with the development parameters and environmental analysis included in the SEIS. 3. Planned Actions. will not be subject to further procedural review under SEP A. However, projects will be subject to conditions designed to mitigate any environmental impacts which may result from the project proposal, and projects "will be subject to whatever permit requirements are deemed appropriate by the City under State and City laws and ordinances. The Planned Action designation. shall not excuse a project from meeting the City's code and orrlir::rnce requirements apa.11 from the-SEP A process~ G. Planned Action Permit Process. The Director shall establish a procedure to review projects and to determine whether they meet the criteria as Planned Actions under State laws and City codes and ordinances. The procedure shall consist. at a minimum, of the following: 1. Development applications shall meet the requirements of RMC Chapters 4-8 and 4-9. Applications shall be made. on forms provided by the Department and shall include a SEPAchecklist or revised SEPA checklist [where approved through WAC 197~11-315{2)1 or such other environmental review forms provided by the Planning/Building/Public. Work Department. The checklist may be incorporated into the form of an application; 2. The Director shall determine whether the application is complete as provided in RMC Chapter 4-8. 3. If the project application is within an area designated as a Planned Action, the application shall be reviewed to determine whether the proposed. application is consistent with and meets all of the qualifications specified in section ill of this Ordinance. 4. Upon review of a complete application by the City, the Director shall determine whether the project qualifies as a Planned Action. If the project does qualify, the Director shall notify the applicant, and the project shall proceed in accordance with the appropriate permit procedure, except that no additional SEP A review, threshold determination, or EIS shall be required. 5. Public notice for projects that qualify as Planned Actions shall be tied to the underlying permit. If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit, the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a Planned Action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required. 6 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 6. If a project is determined not to be a Planned Action, the Director shall notify the applicant and prescribe a SEP A review procedure ~nsistent with the City SEP A procedures and state laws. The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the application that result in disqualification as a Planned Action. 7. Projects disqualified as a Planned Action may use or incorporate relevant elements of the environmental review analysis in the SEIS prepared for the Planned Action, as well as other environmental documents to assist in meeting SEP A requirements. The Environmental Review Committee may choose to limit the scope of the SEP A review to those issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the SEIS. SECTION IV. Time Period. This Planned Action Ordinance shall be reviewed no later than December 1, 2004 by the Development Services Director to determine its continuing validity with respect to the environmental conditions of the subject site and vicinity and applicability of Planned Action requirements. Based upon this review, this Ordinance may be amended as needed, and another review period may be specified. SECTION V. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between the Ordinance or any mitigation measures imposed pursuant thereto and any ordinance, or regulation of the City, the provisions of this Ordinance shall control, EXCEPT that provision of any Uniform Code shall supersede. SECTION VI. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or its application be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.. SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 25th day of __ o_c_t_ob_e_r __ ~ 1999. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 25th day of __ Oscc,._t..,o..,b..,e..,r'------'' 1999. 7 ORDINANCE NO. 480.4 --',."---- £~fora& · Lawi:enceJ. W~~ DateofPublication: 10./29/99 (Summary Only) ORD.813:10/13/99. 8 EXHIBIT A SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION l\!IITIGATION DOCUMENT Prepared By: City of Renton Economic Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department · With. Assi~tance By: Bucher, \Villis and Ratliff Corporation September 17, 1999 ~Ji? Jess·e Tanner, Mayor September 17, 1999 Dear Reader: CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Attached is a copy of the Mitigation Document for the Southport Planned Action, City of Renton, Washington. The proposed Southport Planned Action. considers potential redevelopment concepts for the redevelopment of approximately 17 acres located adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline. Redevelopment concepts review changes from the current industrial uses to a mixed use development including, residential, commercial, and office uses as well as recreational amenities, which will require a Comprehensive Plan Amenament/rezone, and several development permits. A Planned Action Ordinance is anticipated to be adopted for the proposal. The proposal is located adjacent to Lake Washington between Gene Coulon Park on the east and Boeing manufacturing operations on the west. Access is located from Lake Washington Boulevard. · A Planned Action designation by the City would. reflect a decision that adequate environmental review has been completed and further environmental review ·under SEPA, for each specific development phase, would not be necessary if It is determined that each phase .is consistent with the development levels specified in the PlannedAction Ordinance. . · ' . ,; -. , -:; .: ..... ' ,· . : .. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEfS) was required for the proposal under . 43,21C.030(2)(c) and RMC 4-9-070.' The Impacts· described in the Southport Development Planned Action SEIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for the proposal, Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty (20) day appeal period commences. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E, the adequacy of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and the Mitigation Document may be appealed. Appeals must: 1) state specific objections of fact and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. October 7, 1999; and 3) be accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be addressed to Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. If you would like additional information, please contact Sue Carlson, City of Renton, Economic Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department at 425-430-6591. For the .Environmental Review Committee, Wt1Mtl 2 /111~ Gregg zifrlne~ · Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works MITIGATION DOCUMENT SOUTHPORT PLM'NED ACTION' INTRODUCTION' AND PURPOSE The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires environmental review for project and non-proi.ect proposals thatmay have significant impacts upon the environment, In order to meet SEP A requirements, the Environmental Review Committee for the City of Renton issued a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Southport Development Planned Action on June 29, 1999, and a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on September 9, 1999. The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement are referenced collectively herein as the "SEIS". The SEIS has identified significant impacts that would occur with the future redevelopment of the subject site together \vilh a number of possible measures to mi ti gate those significant impacts. The purpose of this Mitigation Document is to establish specific mitigation measures, based upon significant impacts identified in the SEIS. The mitigation measures would apply to future development proposals which are comparable to the Proposed Action reviewed. in the SEIS, and which are located on the approximately 17 acre subject site (see the attached illustrative map). The mitigation measures may also apply to off-site improvements where analyzed in the SEIS. USE OF TERMS As several similar terms are utilized in this Mitigation Document, the following phrases or words are defined briefly: SEPA Terms The discussion or mitigation measures may refer to the words action, proposed action, or proposal, and for reference these terms are identified below. Since Planned Action may be confused with Proposed Action, these phrases are also explained below. • "Action" means projects or programs financed, licensed, regulated, conducted or approved by · an Agency. "Project actions" involve decisions on a spe~ific project such as a construction or management activity for a defined geographic area. "Non-project" actions involve decisions about policies, plans or programs. (see WAC 197-11-704) • "Planned Action" refers to types of project actions that are designated by ordinance for a specific geographic area and addressed in an EIS, in conjunction with a comprehensive plan or subarea plan, a fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or phased project. (see WAC 197-11-164) • "Proposal" means a proposed action which may be actions and regulatory decisions of an agency, or any actions proposed by applicants. (see WAC 197-11-784) Other Terms Utilized in Mitigation Document The subject site may be referenced as "Southport" or "site" or "subject site" in this document. Mitigation measures may also apply to off-site improvements analyzed in the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 2 Itiitigation Document This document includes mitigation measures which are tied to the a~oval of site plans, termed Level II or Level I site plans, Current City regulations require a "tnaster development plan" for development in Center Office Residential (COR) Zones (RMC.4-2-120.B and 4-2-120.C). Site plan regulations are found in RMC 4-9-200 and 4-9-210 and defined in RMC 4-8-120.D. The Proposed Action includes proposed code amendments which would consolidate permit procedures and clarify terminology. A Level II site plan is equivalent to, the "master development plan" or "master site plan." A Level I site plan. is equivalent to the current definition of"site plan." The mitigation measures that refer to Levell and Level ll site plans assume adoption of proposed code amendments that consolidate and clarify site plan procedures. General Interpretation Where a mitigation measure includes the words "shall" or "will" the requirement is mandatory. Where "should" or "would" appear the words convey the City's expectation and desires given circumstances presently known, with recognition that pertinent alternate or equivalent requirements may be imposed as more detailed design or reports are conducted consistent with the mitigation measures. Unless stated specifically otherwise, the mitigation measure requirements ro prepare plans, conduct studies, construct improvements, conduct maintenance activities, etc., are the responsibility of the future developer(s) to fund and/or carry out. SEl'A REQUIREMENTS State regulations (Washington Administrative Code 197-11) and local regulations (City ofRentori Title 4, Chapter 9) govern the development of mitigation measures to address identified environmental impacts. The primary regulatory chapters are cited below. As appropriate, key sections of those chapters are described. • WAC 197-11-060, titled Content of Environmental Review states in part, that agencies shall "carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term effects," including "those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal" or, in some cases, continue beyond the life of the proposal. • WAC 197-11-330, titled Threshold Determination Process requires, in part, that the responsible official take into account the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of a proposal when determining whether a proposal has significant adverse. impacts. In reaching a decision, SEP A states that the responsible official shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a . proposal outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather shall consider whether a proposal has any probable significant adverse environmental impacts. • WAC 197-11-448, title Relationship of EIS to Other Requirements states, in part, that SEP A "contemplates that the general welfare, social, economic, and other requirements and essential considerations of state policy will be taken into account in weighing and balancing alternatives and in making final decisions." The EIS provides a basis upon which the responsible agency and officials. can make the balancing judgment mandated by SEPA, because the. EIS provides information on environmental costs and impacts. • WAC 197-11-768 titled Definition of Mitigation. This section defines mitigation as; (I) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; Southport Planned Action 3 Mitigation Document (2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using approptiate technolosi\ or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; - (3) Rectifying the impact by repairing; rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life ofthe action; ·· · (S) Compensating. for the impa,;t by replacing;, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or (6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. • WAC 197·11-660(1) Substantive Authority and Mitigation. Decision-makers may impose mitigation measures designed .to mitigate the environmental impacts, subject to the following limitations: (a) Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies, plans, rules, or regulations formally designated by the agency; (b) Mitigation measures shall be related to specifi~, adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document on the proposal and shall be stated in writing by the decision maker; ( c) Mitigation.measures shall .be reasonablfl' and capable of being accomplished. ( d) Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be imposed upon an applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of its proposal. Voluntary additional mitigation may occur. ( e) Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified· significant impact. (g) · If, during project review, a jurisdiction's development regulations or comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or in other awlicable local, state or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the project action \Ulder RCW 43.21C.240, the jurisdiction shall not impose additional mitigation under this chapter. DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES Proposed Action The Proposed Action reviewed in the SEIS includes: • Adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance • Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments and concurrent Rezone (from Heavy Industrial to Center Office Residential) • Municipal Code Text Amendments • Preliminary Conceptual Master Plan approval Southl'ort Planned Action 4 l'rlitigation Document The City through Resolution 3379 identified the subject property as a site under consideration for a Planned Action designation pursuant to SEPA (J'/AC {97-11-168( c )\,·The Planned Action designation, when adopted by the City, would reflect a decision. that adequate environmental review has been completed and further environmental review under SEP A, for each specific development phase, would not be necessary if it is determined that each phase is consistent with the development levels specified in a Planned Action Ordinance. This process assumes that a final Master Plan (Level 1I Site Plans) and site plan (Level I Site Plan) for individual phases, as well as shoreline substantial development permit applications, will be submitted at a later stage as Planned Actions. Applications for construction-related permits from the City of Renton and other state and federal agencies, including U,S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404, 401 permits, stormwater discharge/NPDES, building and construction permits, etc., required for long-term redevelopment of the site would also be requested for approval subsequent to the adoption of the Planned Action ·Ordinance. Issuance of these and other required development permits is included within the .scope of environmental review for the Proposed Action. To facilitate the City's consideration of the· Planned Action designation and environmental review of implementation of the Planned Action, a preliminary Conceptual Master Plan for the site has been formulated. The Master Plan provides conceptual information on the· poientiaL rttlx of uses, buildh"lg density and height, access/circulation, recreation and open space opportunities .and other development features. The intensity of site development would fall within the range of development represented by Conceptual Master Plan scenarios A (Plan A), scenario B (Plan B) and scenario C (Plan C). Plans A and C represent the lower end of the development range, with Plan A consisting of 543 multifamily residential units, 38,000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of office space, and Plan C consisting of 377 multifamily residential units, 220 hotel units, 30,000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of office space (refer to Chapter 2 of the Final Supplemental EIS for a description of the Plan Alternatives). Plan B represents the upper end of the development range and would consist of 581 multifamily residential units, 38,000 square feet ofretail area, and 750,000 square feet of office space. Each plan calls for substantial public spaces and amenities including provisions for public access to Lake Washington. Summary of Alternatives Two alternatives to the Proposed Action are analyzed in the. SEIS: No Action• No Development Alternative -Under this alternative, the existing steam plant building would remain and storage use of the site would continue for the foreseeable future. No Action -Future Industrial Development • Under this alternative, industrial redevelopment of the site, consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Employment Area -Industrial and zoning classification of Industrial-Heavy (IH), is assumed. Industrial redevelopment under this alternative is assumed to consist of approximately 230,000 square feet of manufacturing (high bay style) space and approximately 70,000 square feet of associated office space. Applicability of Mitigation Document This mitigation document applies to the Proposed Action, Plans A, B, or C, analyzed in the SEIS. For the mitigation document to apply to future development proposals, they must be comparable to or within the range established by Plans A, B, and Gas shown below: Southport Planned Action 5 Mitigation Document Use/Height Plan A PlanB Plane ,_, Multifamily Residential Units 543 5811 377 Retail Area in Sq. Ft. 38,000 38,000 30,000 · Commercial Area in Sq. Ft. 500,000 750,000 500,000 Hotel Area in Sq. Ft (rooms) NIA NIA 115,800 (220) Residential Building Heights in Stories (feet)1 5 (50 ft.) 5 (50 ft.) 5 (50 ft.) Hotel Building Height in Stories (feet) NIA NIA 7 (75') Office Building Heights in Stories (feet) 8-10 (!05-125 ft) 10 (125 ft.) 8-10 (105-125 ft) 1 Res1denttal buildings would be 50 feet above finished grade and 5& feet above existing grade. If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. MITIGATION DOCUMENT Based upon the SEIS, this Mitigation Document identifies significant adverse environmental impacts that are anticipated to occur in conjunction with the development of the Proposed Action. Mitigation measures are hereby established under SEP A rules to address specific impacts identified in the SEIS, based upon the Proposed Action. As indicated in the SEIS, numerous state and local regulations will govern development of the subject site, and application of those regulations will also serve to mitigate certain significant adverse environmental impacts. Pertinent regulations will be applied to future specific development applications. Additional consistency review under the Planned Action, site plan review, shoreline permits, arid other permit approvals will be required for specific development actions under· the Proposed Action. Additional conditions may be imposed based upon the analysis of the proposal in relationship to code requirements or review criteria. Seco Development or another future applicant may request modifications to mitigation measures established herein, if appropriate and as a result of changed circumstances, in order to allow an equivalent substitute mitigation or removal of a mitigation requirement. Such modifications would be evaluated prior to adoption by the City, based upon SEPA Rules. As permitted under SEP A Rules (WAC 197-11-660), it is recognized that there may be some adverse impacts that are unavoidable because reasonable or feasible mitigation cannot be achieved for the Proposed Action. Provided below for each element of the environment analyzed in the SEIS for the Proposed Action are: (a) summary of significant environmental impacts (direct, indirect, and cumulative); (b) a summary of unavoidable adverse impacts; (c) mitigation measures established by this Mitigation Document; and (d) a list of federal and state laws and local policies/regulations on which mitigation measures are based. In combination, regulations applicable to each element of the environment and mitigation measures imposed by this Document will mitigate all significant environmental impacts caused by the Proposed Action, except for those impacts that are identified as "unavoidable adverse impacts." Southport Planned Action 6 Mitigation Document 1. EARTH a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to soils, geology, erosion conditions, and seismic conditions. A summary ofimpacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. • Clearing and grading operations during construction .could increase the erosion potential on the site. • Loose to soft soils underlying the site would. be susceptible to settlement under normal building loads, necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings, • Proposed buildings would be subject to liquefaction potential during seismic events, ·necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings. • Removal of existing underground features (including piles supporting the steam plant and utilities} could result in areas of soft soil or. ground depressions. • Based upon preliminary grading plans, areas of grading would extend into Gene Coulon Park. b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts~ Provided that reasonable mitigation measures are properly followed, no significant unavoidable impacts are anticipated. · c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIB. These measures are based upon the. proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS'. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the :future-developer(s): Erosion • A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC} and Stormwater PoI!ution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required to prevent and control erosion and discharge, according to City of Renton (RMC 4+030 and 4-6c030) and Department of Ecology standards. The Plan Review Supervisor shall determine appropriate standards in accordance with adopted requirements and the recommendations of the SEIB, To mitigate and reduce the sheet and channel erosion hazard potential on the Southport site under the Proposed Action, the TESC and SWPPP would include, but are not limited to the following measures: -Surface water and domestic discharge, either during or after construction, would not randomly daylight on the site. All temporary and/or permanent devices used to collect surface runoff shall be directed into tightlined systems that would discharge into an approved stormwater facility, unless the Plan Review Supervisor determines that an alternate measure providing equivalent control is permissible. -Soils to be used around the site during construction would be stored in such a manner to minimize erosion .. Protective measures·could include, but are not necessarily limited to, use of strawbales, covering with plastic sheeting or the use of silt fences. Southport Planned Action 7 Mitigation Document The majority of the site would be covered with impyrvious surfaces under the Proposed Action with roughly 15 percent of tho' site to consist'lpf landscaping and vegetated areas. Source control mitigation measures would be conducted for cleared areas. All ·exposed subgrades would be seeded, covered with plastic sheeting, or otherwise protected during inclement weather or the wetter, winter months. During construction, silt fences, or other methods such as straw bales, would be placed along the boundaries to Lake Washington, John's Creek, and Gene Coulon Park to reduce the potential of sediment-laden rurioff discharging into these areas. In addition, rock check. dams would be established along roadways during construction. Temporary sedimentation traps or ponds would be installed to provide erosion and sediment transport control during construction. • Details of the TESC and SWPPP shall be determined as part of the construction permit review process. • A qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall review the grading, erosion, and drainage plans prior. to final design. The geotechnical engineer shall be retained by the developer in order to further assist in mitigating erosion and sediment transport hazards during and after development. Additional erosion mitigation measures may be required at the time of final design in response to site-specific plans. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to finalization of construction permits. Seismic • Mitigation measures are required to reduce the risk of potential liquefaction on any proposed structures. In general, this would require utilizing a deepened foundation system as discussed under Geotechnical Engineering Considerations below. Geotechnical Engineering Considerations Potential geotechnical impacts would be adequately mitigated through characterization of surface and subsurface conditions, proper geotechnical engineering, structural design, and proper construction implementation of the design. The preliminary geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. (1999) addresses potential geotechnical mitigation measures. Such measures are presented below. As part of the building design process, additional, specific measures could be identified, or the measures below could be modified upon review and acceptance by the City Building Official, unless the measure is written as mandatory. Foundations • A deepened foundation would be required for support of the proposed buildings to reduce potential differential settlement and liquefaction impacts. • Floor slabs would be pile supported if settlement to the slabs would be a concern. • The necessity of a vibration monitoring program for structures on and off the site as a result of pile driving shall be determined by a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the Southport Planned Action 8 l\1itigation Document developer(s) during the design phase as more detailed information on construction techniques are finalized. The geotechnical engineet recommendatl~ns shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City Building Official, • If impact pile driving is proposed, the qualified geotechnical ·engineer retained by the developer(s) shall survey existing Structures surrounding the site, including buildings, surface improvements, bulkheads, and buried utilities, to determine if pile-driving vibrations pose a potential threat to any existing structures, as part of the building design review process. • If existing foundation piles are to be reused, the soundness of the piles shall be tested to the satisfaction of the geotecbnical and structural engineers retained _by the developer(s) and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official. If piles are not to be reused, they should be exposed, and cut off at an elevation to be determined by the geotechnical and structural engineers. Site Preparation • A m.foimnm of 12 inches of structural fill, compacted and proofrolled per the geotechnical engineer's recommendations, would be placed beneath the pavement, non-pile supported slabs, or structural fill areas to reduce potential settlement impacts. .Alternatively, the sub grade could· be chemically treated utilizing lime, kiln dust, or cement. The use of geotextile fabric or overexcavation·ofsoft soils and, replacement with structural fill could also be required to obtain a firm unyielding ·subgrade. The exact construction methodologies utilized would be dependent on final design plans. • Excavations to remove or demolish._below-grade structures could encounter ground water and require excavation shoring. and dewatering to reduce settlement hazards, Dewatering shall be conducted in a manner that would minimize potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity of water removed could be reduced along with the magnitude of the resulting settlement through proper design of the dewatering system and construction sequencing. In addition, proper disposal of dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the placement of utilities. Stn,ctural Fill • Up to 7 feet of fill would be required to support roadway areas, and in some cases, slab-on-· grade floors that are not a settlement concern. All structural fill shall be placed and compacted as recommended by the qualified geotechnica! engineer retained by the developer(s). Proper subgrade preparation and drainage control would be necessary for the roadways, utilities, or structural fill bodies. • The on-site sediments are moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. These sediments would require drying prior to their use in structural fills, and the use of these soils in structural fills would be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed in wet weather, or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, imported backfill consisting of free- draining granular material shall be required. • Some areas such as utility trenches, manholes, vaults, and heavy traffic roadways could still be susceptible to settlement under these soil conditions, and long-terrn maintenance of roadway areas is required. Southport Planned Action 9 Mitigation Document • Geotechnical oversight will be an integral part of the site;i design and construction process . Geotechnical reports prepared by future developers will require City review and acceptance. A geotechnical review of the design plans would be performed before the plans are finalized to assist in reducing potential geotechnical impacts. Construction monitoring will be required during the foundation and earthwork activities. In this manner, the adequacy of the foundation and earthwork would be evaluated as construction progresses, and appropriate responses to site conditions would be addressed in the field. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050); City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RlvIC 4-4-060); King County Stormwater Management Manual (adopted by the City of Renton, RMC 4-6-030); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 2. AIR QUALITY a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to air quality in terms of construction activities, generated traffic, and indirect air emissions and odors from adjacent property. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS. • Building demolition and grading would generate suspended particulate matter. • Removal of asbestos from the steam plant building would be required and would comply with EPA and PSAPCA regulations. • Site population could be exposed to air pollutants from the adjacent Boeing facility. Based on recent Boeing modeling analysis, Boeing emissions comply with PSAPCA's Acceptable Source Impact levels. Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed Boeing operations. • Air pollutants from the Boeing facility could enter HVAC systems of proposed office buildings. Adverse health effects within proposed buildings would not be anticipated under reasonably assumed operation. • Proposed office building could induce existing Boeing emissions to reach the ground more often (building downwash effect). Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed Boeing operations. • Odors from The Boeing Company operations could be perceived as a nuisance by site population. Modeling conducted by Boeing indicates potential odors would be below recognized thresholds. h. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts from construction or operation of future development on the site would result. Emissions from existing industrial sources in the area could potentially affect on-site locations and cause adverse impacts. Modeling completed by Boeing indicates that no adverse health impacts or significant odor effects would result under any reasonably assumed operations at Boeing facilities. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of Boeing to protect human health from harmful exposures to any air pollutant emitted at their Southport Planned Action 10 l\'litigation Document facility, as well as from nuisance impacts related to odors. Mitigatjon measures identified below would likely preclude significant adver~ impacts. "° ·\ . c, Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/ Appendix B of the. SEIS. These measures are based ilpon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified. in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): · · Construction· • Dust produced by construction will be reduced by using. a number of best management practices and techniques, exemplified in the remainder of this paragraph. Areas of exposed . soils such as storage yards and construction roadways could be sprayed with water or other dust suppressants. Soils carried out of the construction area by exiting trucks could be minimized by wheel washing and covering dusty truckloads. Finally, soil that does escape the construction area on exiting vehicles could be reduced with an effective street-cleaning. effort. Indirect Impacts The Air Quality analysis of the SEIS indicated a potential range of impacts in terms of indoor air quality impacts, ground-level air quality impacts, and odors. Modeling conducted by The Boeing Company concluded that air pollutant concentrations would not exceed allowed levels (either NAAQS or ASIL's), and would not exceed recognized odor thresholds. The modeling was based upon reasonably assumed Boeing operations. Under normal circumstances, impacts are not anticipated. To respond to the range of potential impacts, and because future operations may change, and because some recommended air quality mitigation. measures require consideration during design, the following measures shall be implemented by future developer(s): • Filters on. the roof HV AC systems shall be instalied. The filter system would need to filter particulates as well as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A synthetic fiber filter media would remove the particulate load while an activated carbon filter would remove most VOCs. Other filter types or technologies providing equal or greater protection may be approved for use upon authorization by the City. • HV AC systems shall be placed at a location where plumes from the Boeing facility would be less likely to reach the air intake vents. To accomplish this, a detailed study would need to be conducted by the developers, with Boeing's cooperation, to assess the optimum locations for intake vents .. As needed, the City will assist in efforts to obtain sufficient data from The Boeing Company. cl. Nexus: City of Renton Grading Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Ren ton Comprehensive Plan. 3. WATER a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to water quantity and quality. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 11 Mitigation Document b .. Surface Water Quantity • The proposal would eliminate the western ditch. • Potential for stream bank erosion along John's Creek could increase, requiring on site detention for this are'!, unless drainage from the on site John's Creek basin area is discharged to the Lake Washington system. Groundwater Quality • Shallow groundwater table could require dewatering during placement of utilities. No adverse impacts to the underlying aquifer would result. Surface \Yater Quality • Construction could increase potential for sedimentation and increased levels. of pH to John's Creek and Lake Washington. To preclude such impacts, Temporary Erosion Control Measures could be implemented. • Development of the preliminary conceptual master plan would increase the amount of area in vehicle-access surface (roadways and parking) increasing potential for stormwater-related pollutants to reach surface waters. • With the proposed water quality wet vault, stormwater discharge to Lake Washington would be within state standards, with the exception of zinc, lead, and fecal coliforms. Adequate dilution in the lake would be achieved to prevent significant impacts from these sources. • Widening of Lake Washington Blvd. would require lengthening of culverts passing John's Creek under .the roadway and increase roadway area subject to traffic. With water quality treatment, no significant water quality impacts are anticipated. • With potential future waterfront improvements subject to a separate permit process (to the dock at the west end and pedestrian improvements at the east end), no in-water work or dredging is assumed. .hnpacts would be limited to accidental spills during construction, localized increases in hydrocarbons from increased boat traffic and resuspension of sediments due to prop wash. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: "With implementation of mitigation measures, none are expected. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future deve!oper(s): Surface Water • Future developer(s) shall design, implement and maintain a stormwater control system which is consistent with City requirements and which achieves comparable stormwater control as the system analyzed in the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 12 Mitigation Document Groundwater • Groundwater may be encountered during construction of utility trenches or any other below- grade earthwork activities. Dewatering shall be conducted in a manner that would minimize potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity of water removed would be reduced along with the magnitude of the resulting settlement through proper design of the dewatering system and construction sequencing. Construction techniques such as reducing the length of trench open at one time could be required. The specific location, extent, and depth ofuti\ities would dictate the dewalering design, and in tum the quantity of water that should be removed. Specific recommendations shall be determined during the design phase once plans are finalized, as part of more detailed geotechnical evaluation. In addition, proper disposal of dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the placement· of utilities. \Valer Quality • A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared and implemented to prevent introduction of sediment, turbid water, construction waste, or accidental spills of hydrocarbons to Lake Washington or John's Creek during construction. Details of these plans shall be prepared during the construction permit review process with the City of Renton (RMC 4-4-030; 4-6- 030) and Department of Ecology (refer to the EARTH section for identification of possible TESC measures). The TESC plan shall include restricting mass grading to the dry. season, and if grading activities are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a grading plan for City review and approval that minimizes erosion. The plan shall also ·address capture and filtration of silted water before release, and prohibit on-site release of concrete wash-out, unless itis to temporary, lined ponds .. • The 1992 Department of Ecology (DOE) Manual standards for storrnwater quality treatment shall be utilized for treatment system design; these standards are more stringent than the 1990 King County Manual requirements that the City of Renton has adopted. Water quality treatment of surfaces routinely accessible to motor vehicles would be provided by wet vault(s} designed to the 1992 DOE standards. Or, upon City authorization or requirement, future developer(s) may utilize a future amended DOE manual for storrnwater quality or future adopted or amended City stormwater manual, with equal or greater standards. • Four inches of compost shall be tilled to an approximate depth of 6 inches under all landscaped areas to be lawn. This organic layer would: a) increase infiltration and water retention under the turf rooted zone, which would reduce leaching and enhance evapotranspiration; b) create organic binding sites for organic pesticides and metals; and c) create an organic substrate for microbial growth, which would biodegrade organic pesticides and reduce leaching of nitrogen through uptake and denitrification. · • If pesticides are to be used, they shall be selected from low-mobility products. • If (1) the ratio of roofi'walkway/fue lane to parking/roadway surfaces falls substantially below those identified for the Proposed Action in the SEIS, and if (2) there is a corresponding potential increase in average daily trips, then additional metals removal shall be required for Southport Planned Action 13 Mitigation Document discharge to Lake Washington. Additional removal could ,be achieved by use of a compost filter or other underground filter insert added to the wet va~-~ system for Lake Washington. • Native vegetation or locally adapted landscaping species shall be used, where possible, to avoid the need for pesticides. This shall be addressed in any required landscape plans. • Any plans for future construction of waterfront improvements shall be reviewed and approved by appropriate agencies, such as the City of Renton, Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Ecology and the US Army Corps of Engineers. • Water quality impacts from operation of a future guest dock would be limited as no permanent moorage, haul-out or fueling facilities would be allowed. Resuspension of sediments from prop wash would be mitigated by control of boat speeds near the dock and shore and other measures which would be identified at the time of a future application. d. Nexus: King County Stormwater Management Manual (adopted in RMC 4-6-030); Grading, Excavation, and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan, 4. FISHERIES & AQUATIC ANIMALS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SElS includes an examination of significant impacts to water quantity and quality. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/AppendixA of the SEIS. Fisheries • Site grading and filling of intake/return tunnels (Lake Washington) would increase potential sedimentation in Lake Washington and John's Creek. With proposed erosion control measures, impacts to fisheries habitat would not be significant. • The limited existing riparian vegetation ( consisting of exotic grasses and blackberry with little fisheries habitat value) along Lake Washington and John's Creek would be impacted by construction. • No new in-water or over water structures are proposed. However, the waterfront promenade would result in increased human activity and lighting near the Lake Washington shoreline. With proposed mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated. • Future waterfront improvements or enhancement of pedestrian connections on the east and west sides of the site could be made, subject to a separate permit process. Potential future improvements could increase over-water structures, impact water quality from increased boat traffic on a localized basis, and increase lighting levels, which could impact fisheries resources. • Widening of Lake Washington Boulevard would require lengthening of culverts passing John's Creek Pond habitat would temporarily be eliminated and could displace fish currently using that portion of the creek. Water quality degradation from sediments or turbidity could occur during construction. No permanent impacts would be anticipated. Southport Planned Action 14 J.\,litigation Document b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts:,' With implem.ititation of mitigation measures, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts would result. - c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIS, These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified, in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future deve\oper(s): · Fisheries The following mitigation measures are intended to minimize the potential for impacts ta fisheries resources from redevelopment of the site. • Directional lighting and shading provisions for all light standards along the promenade on the Lake Washington shoreline side shall be implemented. • The cooling water tunnel entrances shall be permanently sealed prior to backfilling the tunnel. The plug would consist of a pre-constructed structure.made of concrete or oiher nun- corrosive material and would be placed in the tunnel from above. • Native shrub and tree species shall be planted along the shoreline of John's Creek to replace the existiog blackberry bushes. Native· species such as sallal (Gaultheria shallon),. Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa), snowbeey ,(Symphoricarpos a/bus), salrnonberry (J/.ubus spectabi/is), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), willow (Salix sp.) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata) would be considered to provide some .additional benefit from allachthonous (non- native) contribution·and insect productivity to fisheries resources in the creek and Lake Washington. • · As part of the required Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a. Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), mass grading shall be limited to the dry season, and there shall be collection and treatment of turbid water, Or, if grading activities are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a grading plan for City review and approval that minimizes erosion. Additional water quality measures, identified in the EARTH and WATER sections of this Mitigation Document would also benefit fisheries resources·. Future Waterfront/Dock Improvements • The preliminary conceptual developrnent plans reviewed in the SEIS do not include plans for waterfront improvements on the west or east side. Such improvements shall be subject to separate, future applications sponsored by the City or the developer(s). Measures generally applicable to the minimization of impacts to fisheries resources from future potential waterfront improvements at the west side, and potential future access improvements to the Park on the east side, would be required at the time such improvements would be permitted. Dependent upon specific future applications, the following measures shall be considered and applied where appropriate: -Minimize over-water structure. Southport Planned Action 15 Mitigation Document Construct all walking surfaces to allow as much natural light penetration as possible. Remove unnecessary structures such "~s abandoned 'ir unused pilings, dolphins; finger piers, sheetpile, etc. Minimize vertical structures (e.g., pilings, walls) in the water column. Use light colored materials. Minimize structure in the nearshore area used by salmonids during migration. d. Nexus: King County Stormwater Manual {adopted by Renton in RMC 4-6-030); Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 5. NOISE Ai"ID VIBRATION · a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix C of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to noise and vibration. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. • Construction activities, including pile driving and use of heavy equipment, would generate noise through much of the 5 year construction period. These activities would generate maximum sound levels that would be higher than existing sound levels. • Pile driving activities have the potential to cause ground-borne vibration at nearby structures at the Boeing Plant. Nearby Boeing buildings are not anticipated to be impacted; however, the wastewater treatment plant could be susceptible to vibration impacts. Multiple pile driving at anyone time would be precluded to minimize the potential for impacts. • Residential areas east of the site could be affected by HV AC noise above allowable night- time noise levels, depending on the type and location of the HV AC units. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Redevelopment would increase sound levels at off- site locations as a result of pile driving and other construction activities.. The.rnlative impact of these increases would depend on the specific timing and the duration of noise events. If construction activities, including equipment start-ups and other noisy preparations are limited to daytime hours, and other reasonable mitigation measures are employed to reduce on-site production and off-site transmission of construction noise, off-site impacts related to construction noise would be minimized. Complying with the state noise rule limit restricting construction activities to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. would preclude construction noise impacts during legally defined nighttime hours. Other mitigation measures to reduce noise generation and/or off-site transmission of pile-driving, vibration from pile driving and other construction noise employed by construction contractors would reduce the potential for significant off-site impacts. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/ Appendix C. of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SE!S. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Southport Planned Action 16 Mitigation Document Construction Noise Although the conservative nature of the construction noise analysis likely overstates actual construction noise levels at nearby sensitivereceivers, there remains a potential for noise impacts from uncontrolled construction noise sources on-site. Because construction noise during daytime hours is exempt from the limits in Washington's noise rule, no mitigation is required in order to comply with the state or local noise limits. However, due to the potential for noise impacts., and because construction might take place over five years, the use of mitigation measures to reduce potential noise impacts is warranted. The following construction practices shall be used to help minimize potential noise impacts. • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.IIL and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on. Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where applicable. · • Properly sized and maintained mufflers, engine intake silencers, engine enclosures, and turning off idle equipment shall be required in construction contracts. • Construction contracts shall specify that all eqi!ipment and especially mufflers be maintained in good working order. Contracts shall further specify that engine enclosures be used on non- portable equipment when the engine is the dominant source of noise, and that stationary equipment shall be placed as far away from sensitive receiving locations as possible. Where this is infeasible, portable noise barriers shaU be placed around. the equipment with the opening directed away from the sensitive receiving locations such as Gene Coulon Park, or future on-site residential dwellings. which may be constructed prior to construction of other uses on-site. • To the extent feasible, the substitution of hydraulic: or electric models for impact tools such as jack hammers, rock drills and pavement breakers shall be required in construction contracts to reduce construction and demolition noise. • Construction contracts shall require, to the ·extertt feasible, that ambient-sensing vehicle back- up alarms meeting OSHA standards shall be used. Pile Driving Noise • Pile driving shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. No pile driving work shall be permitted on Saturdays or Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where applicable. • A grout injected pile system or other equivalent system which would not re@ire impact driving shall be evaluated. If the grout injected pile system or equivalent is not chosen, the following mitigation measure shall be applied to the impact pile driving activities. Southport Planned Action 17 Mitigation Document Where a grout pile driving system or equivalent syst.~ is not selected, and impact pile driving activities are conducted, at least one of the f'~llowing noise reduction measures shall be used to mitigate potential pile driving noise: Insert a wooden or plastic dolly between the pile head and the hammer. Apply a damping compound to steel piles to reduce the vibration/ringing. Silence exhaust gas pulsations from the engines of diesel-powered hammers. Remove any unnecessary hanging chains; fix any loose bolts, panels, or over-slack leader guides. Use a cushioned method in conjunction with a "heavy hammer-short drop" practice. This requires using interference fit guides to prevent kicking, rolling and vibration in the pile. While the overall sound level is not substantially reduced, the nature of the sound may be less annoying to people. Regular equipment service and maintenance. Use a Heesch Noise Abatement Tower. Pile Driving Vibration • As part of the detailed building design process, a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall survey existing structures in the surrounding area to more thoroughly determine the potential for vibration related impacts. In addition, a pile driving test near the western site boundary shall be conducted while vibration measurements are taken at the closest Boeing facilities. The City will facilitate cooperation/coordination between the developer and The Boeing Company as needed. • As stated previously, a grout injected pile system or equivalent system which would not require impact driving shall be evaluated. The geotechnical survey and test pile drive in the previous mitigation measure will determine whether a grout pile driving system or equivalent is warranted. If warranted, the grout pile driving system or equivalent shall be utilized for the area within 100 feet of the wastewater treatment facility to protect against potential structural damage, or within an alternate distance/area as recommended by the geotechnical engineer, upon acceptance by the City. • To reduce potential vibration impacts at the nearest Boeing facilities, multiple pile driving activities shall be precluded from occurring very near the western site boundary. The distance shall. be determined as part of the survey by the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s). Operational Noise • Specific studies on the potential for significant RV AC noise impacts shall be conducted by the developer as part of the building design process. If such studies indicate that RV AC equipment noise could cause noise impacts at the nearest residences overlooking the site, the Southport Planned Action 18 Mitigation Document following mitigation measures could be employed. The need for such measures shall be determined as part of the building permit process. '-\ Place noise barriers around the HY AC units. -Choose quieter equipment. Provide silencers on the air intake and exhaust d. Nexus: City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Comprehensive Ph,n. 6. LAND USE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to land use. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 oftheSEIS. • The Proposed Action would result in the permanent conversion of 142 acres of existing industrial land to office, residential and commercial retail land uses. • . The Proposed Action would result in a trade-off between industrial land and Center Office Residential (COR) lands in the city. A one percent reduction in total industrial land and an 11 percent increase in COR land would result. • The proposed building area wou1d be greater than the existing building area on the site, • Planned uses would provide a land use transition between industrial use to the: west and park/residential use to the east. Densities would be greater than nearby residential areas, however. • The proposed land uses would increase the level of human activity on the site: b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse· Impacts: Implementation of the Proposed Action would result in the intensification of development on the site, displacement of some existing industrial uses, and permanent conversion of industrial land to a mixed use redevelopment. A substantial difference in building scale between on-site development and Gene Coulon Park would result. c. Mitigation Measures: The. mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SE1S. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SE1S. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4.7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6 acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space which would. help offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site, approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground- level and outside of structures (i.e., excluding courtyards above parking structures). If future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal is consistent with City policies and standards. Southport Planned Action 19 Mitigation Document • Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building !i'~tbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake Washington would be a minimum of35 feet. d. Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 7. RELATIONSIDP TO PLANS AND POLICIES a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to relevant plans and policies. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • The Proposed Action, which includes needed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code, would be generally consistent with relevant City plans, policies and regulations. • In order to accommodate redevelopment under the Proposed Action, modifications to City parking and surface water regulations may be needed. Additionally, a variance could be needed from Land Clearing and Tree Cutting regulations if vegetation is removed within 25 feet of Johns Creek. Either a conditional use permit, variance, and/or an administrative deternrination of the Shoreline Master Program would be needed relative to setbacks for mixed use (residential and commercial) buildings if proposed as shown in Plans A or B. Plan C would not require special permits or authorizations related to shoreline setbacks. Other permits required for the proposal are listed in the Fact Sheet of the SEIS. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: No specific mitigation measures are warranted. See discussion of needed modifications, variances, and other pernrits . .,,d.,_. ----'N-"' c,.,xe:,u,,s:, Non-applicable. 8. a. b. POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT Significant Impacts: • Proposed residential use would increase the population by between 720 and 1,037 people, 5% to 8% of the City's population forecasted to be added between 1990 and 2010. Dwellings would help meet City's housing targets. The Proposed Action would add between 1,751 to 2,584 employees, 6% to 9.5% of City's 1990-2010 employment target. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No significant unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures would be necessary. Southport Planned Action 20 Mitigation Document =d·~-~N=ex=n=s: Non-applicable. 9. AESTHETICS, LIGHT & GLARE a. Significan,t Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to aesthetics and light and glare. A summarY of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Su!)Ullary Matrix For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • The visual character of the site would change from low density industrial use to higher density mixed use. • From distant viewpoints, site development wou1d appear as a continuation of the building mass of the Boeing Plant Office buildings would step-down in height, from west to east, and' would provide a height transition from Boeing to the proposed residential buildings and Gene Coulon Park lo the east. • From trie playground in Gene Coulon Park, residential Building B would significantly affect the visual character of the immediate area. • The optional fire lane along east side of Building C could encroach upon the drip line of certain trees along the west boundary with Gene Coulon Park. With implementation of arborist recommendations, no significant impacts to trees would be anticipated from the optional fire lane. • Proposed buildings would increase the amount of shade east over the Park playground. The greatest increase in shade would occur late in the· afternoon during the winter months -the time of year with lowest number of sunny days and. lowest park utilization. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts, The scale and height of buildings on the site would increase subsequent to redevelopment. Some increase in shading and glare conditions .at the adjacent Gene Coulon Park children's playground area would occur. Regarding identified impacts to Gene Coulon Park, additional mitigation considered could include increased setbacks, reduced heights, or stepped/graduated heights for Building B. These measures are not proposed as they could affect other b~ilding placements/heights as well as the achievement of sponsor objectives. However, the Proposed Action includes code amendments addressing building modulation and articulation for buildings immediately adjacent to public parks, open space and trails. This· measure could help to partially offset some identified impacts depending on specific building designs developed for site plan and building permit applications. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4.7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6 acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space and public amenities which would help offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground level and outside of structures (i.e. excluding courtyards and above parking structures). If Southport Planned Action 21 Mitigation Document future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the <;:ity shall detemrine if the proposal is consistent with the City's policies and standards. ··\ • Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake Washington would be a.minimum of 35 feet. • Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g., benches, gates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, handrail details) shall be compatible with the Gene Coulon Park design theme as detemrined by the City. • Modulation and articulation of buildings adjacent to or abutting public parks, open space or trails shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City, and where applicable, shall be consistent ,vith City regulations. • If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed, instead of providing emergency access via the Coulon Park parking lot drive aisle to the east as proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term survival of the trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the tree root zone (drip-line), minimizing the amount of fill within root zone areas, and possibly utilizing pervious paving materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E of the Draft SEIS for detail). d. Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City ofRenton Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090, Ord .. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 10. TRANSPORTATION a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to the transportation system. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed.discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS. • Plan A, Band C would generate between 9,367 and 11,202 net daily trips, including between 1,005 to 1,273 AM peak hour trips, and between 1,061 and 1,355 PM net peak hour trips in 2004. • The· number of new trips generated by Plans A and C would be less than the City's concurrency ordinance estimated annual average, and all plans would meet the 1999 trip bank forecasts. Plans A, B, and C would pass the City's concurrency test. • Without off-site roadway improvements, proposed development would result in decreased . LOS compared to 2004 background conditions at the following intersections: Park Drive/Garden A venue/Lake Washington Blvd. during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours; and Lake Washington Blvd./Site Access/Houser Way and N. 30ili Street/I-405 northbound ramps during the p.m. peak hour. Southport Planned Action 22 Mitigation Document Proposed roadway improvements would be provided at the Park Drive/Garden Ave/Lake Washington Boulevard and Lake Washington Bo~levard/Houser Way/Site Access Intersections to achieve acceptable levels of service. - • Vehicles exiting the site during the PM peak-hour would experience significant delay at the site driveway. • Proposed parking supply for residential and commercial uses does not meet City rates for Plans A and B. Proposed parking rates for the hotel use does not meet City rates in Plan C. • In terms of the parking demand analysis, proposed parking supply for retail uses in Plans A and B would be insufficient on weekdays. • If paid parking is implemented for office uses on the subject site, it could have a spillover effect on the free parking provided at Gene Coulon Park. • With increased traffic, additional conflicts could result for vehicles crossing at the existing railroad crossings (no impact to trains would be anticipated). The City and the developer(s) would work with BNSF and the WUTC during the design of improvements on Lake Washington Blvd. to determine the best railroad crossing solution (i.e., automatic gates and/or signals). ' • The Proposed Action would generate demand for area transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. On-site pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks, promenade, crosswalks and connections to existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be provided. Transit incentives could be provided as part ofa TDM program. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: The Proposed Action would increase the number of vehicles using area roadways. With implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impacts would be anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended . mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s); • A traffic/road improvement plan shall be prepared and approved prior to approval of a site plan (Level· I). Improvements shall be implemented at the time demand or safety warrants. The road improvements shall be consistent generally with the following features: -At the Park Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the existing channelization on the Park Avenue approach would be restriped to accommodate one shared through/right lane, one through lane, and two left-tum lanes. On the Lake Washington Boulevard approach, the approach would be restriped to accommodate one right-tum lane and two left.tum lanes. The westbound free right-tum lane from Park Drive to Lake Washington Boulevard would yield to the eastbound left-turning vehicles from Park A venue to Lake Washington Boulevard. -A signal would be provided at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Houser Way/Site Access intersection. Southport Planned Action 23 Mitigation Document The Subject Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access a~proach would be widened to three lanes (one left-tum, one right-turn and one entering lane). The section of Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the joint Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access would be widened by approximately 12 feet to accommodate two southbound lanes, one northbound left turn lane, and one northbound through lane .. To minimize the safety hazard from left-turns in and out of the Boeing parking lot, left turns may need to be restricted. One solution could be placement of a c-curb along the centerline of Lake Washington Boulevard just north of Park Drive to restrict left-turns into and out of the Boeing parking lot. Alternate parking lot access may be available from N I 0th Street. Prior to final design, coordination with Boeing shall occur to determine specific mitigation. The City shall assist with coordination efforts as needed. -The improvements shall be funded by the future developer(s), or through a City Local Improvement District. • Traffic impact mitigation fees shall be paid to the City of Renton at the rate of $75 per daily trip generated, consistent with the City ofRentoh Resolution No. 3100. Appropriate fees shall be determined in accordance with Resolution 3100 prior to approval of a site plan (Level II). Because the traffic/road improvements would also address traffic growth unrelated to the development of the subject site, the City will use all or a portion of the traffic impact mitigation fees to fund the portion of the traffic/road improvements required that the City determines will provide benefit to the public. • The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF railroad during the design of improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard to determine the ·most appropriate railroad crossing solution. Potential solutions could include signal pre-emption and cantilever-mounted flashing lights with or without gates. • The specific design of the internal intersection of the Site access driveway and the Gene Coulon Park access road shall be formulated prior to approval of Level I site plan(s) that necessitate the imptove·ments. The design shall minimize queue lengths within Gene Coulori Park. The design shall insure that traffic into both properties would not spill back onto Lake Washington Boulevard. • The future developer(s) shall prepare a parking management plan for review and approval hy the City prior to the issuance of building or construction permits. • Based upon any supplementary information during the preparation o(Level I site plans or the traffic/road improvement plan, "Children at Play" signs could be installed in and around the Gene Coulon Park access road and near the site's residential areas, and/or speed bumps could be installed on the internal roadways to encourage slower speeds and enhance overall safety. • A traffic monitoring plan shall be conducted for two years after full buildout.to determine if any modifications to traffic/road improvements are warranted based upon actual travel patterns. The monitoring would be conducted as part of the City's regular traffic count program. Where feasible, the road design shall consider potential contingency measures to Southport Planned Action 24 Mitigation Document ensure that road improvements will function as designe.~ to encourage traffic movements to the south of the project site. ,· \\ d. Nexus: City of Renton Parking Regulations (RMC 4-4-080); City of Renton Six Year Transportation Improvement Program; City of Renton Street Arterial Plan; City of Renton Traffic Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution 3100); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 11. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES a. Significant lmpacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to frre department services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. b. • The Proposed Action would generate additional fire protection and emergency service demands on the City of Renton Fire Department. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation me.asures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The. following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Per Resolution 2913, fire mitigation fees shall be paid to the City at the rate of $388 per multi-family unit, and $0.52 per square foot of commercial building area. Credit shall be given for existing structure square footage. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050); Fire Department Master Plan; Fire Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution 2913); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 12. POLICE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to police services. A summary of impacts is provided below.based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. b. • The Proposed Action would generate additional demands for police protection. • Due to the additional population, demand for police security in Gene Coulon Park could increase. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Southport Planned Action 25 Mitigation Document • Prior to the issuance of building permits, future develope,r(s) of the site shall coordinate with the Police Department to include on-site safety features tli~t would help lower the demand for service. =d~. --~N~e=x=u~s: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 13. SCHOOLS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to school facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Residential use would generate additional students in the Renton School District. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future · developer(s): • Prior to issuance of residential building permits, the future developer(s) shall coordinate with the school district to ensure safe and efficient bus transportation to and from the site. • Prior to issuance of residential building permits, adequate provisions shall be provided on-site for bus tum-around(s) or on Lake Washington Boulevard for a bus pull-out as applicable. =d~. --~N~e=x=u~s: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 14. PARKS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to parks and recreation facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Plans A, B, or C would increase the demand on nearby park and recreational facilities. Using the City of Renton's Parks level service standards, approximately 20 to 31 acres of parks and recreational facilities would be required to serve the site population. Residents would likely use nearby park and recreational facilities for active needs. • The Gene Coulon Park playground would experience higher levels of activity. • Increased level of activity at Gene Coulon Park could cause need for additional security in the Park. However, presence ofresident population could enhance perception of security at the park. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse park impacts would occur with implementation of mitigation measures. Refer to the Aesthetics section above regarding other unavoidable impacts. Southport Planned Action 26 l\ilitigation Document c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established ,below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based' upon the pro~sed · and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Subject to City approval, future site plans.(Levels II and I) shall include substantial on-site public and private recreational features, including public access to Lake Waslringt<:>.n, a waterfront promenade, public plaza areas and courtyards. The promenade shall serve as an extension of the trail in Gene Coulon Park and would provide an opportunity for a future connection to properties to the west and the Cedar River Trail. • The playground in Gene Coulon Park shall be redesigned to ensure that th.e pedestrian connection between the park and the subject site would not direct pedestrians into the playground area. A conceptual redesign shall be prepared by the developer(s) prior to approVli,l of a site plan (Level II) with oversight by the City. • Future developer(s) shall comply with the City's Park Mitigatiort Fee Policy (Resolution 3082), which allows a variety of approaches to mitigate impacts (e.g. dedication, fees, provision of on-site facilities). The impact fee is equai to $354.5 i per multi-family dwelling unit. The fee shall be determined and applied in accordance with Resolution 3082. • Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g., benches, grates, waste receptacles, . plant materials, lighting, handraH details) shall be compatible with the ·Gene Coulon Parle design theme, as determined by the City, to achieve an effective transition. • The property owner(s) and developer(s) as appropriate, shall dedicate, develop, and maintain a public recreation easement for physical access along the promenade· and shall dedicate a public recreation easement for physical access to and use of the dock to ensure long-term opportunities for public access to the shoreline. • If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed instead of providing emergency access via the Gene Coulon Park parking lot drive aisle to the. east as proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term .survival of the trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the trees' drip-line, minimizing the amount of fill within the drip-line area, and possibly utilizing pervious paving materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E in the Draft SEIS for detail}. d. Nexus: City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (ruv!C 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Parks Mitigation and Fee (Resolution 3082); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 15. WATERSUPPLY a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to water supply. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Development will result in additional domestic water demand. Southport Planned Action 27 Mitigation Document b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be',~xpected. c. Mitigatjon Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Redevelopment will require construction of a minimum 10-inch line looped through the site. This line would connect to the existing 6-inch line serving Gene Coulon Park. The 6-inch connection to Lake Washington Boulevard would be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line. These improvements would insure adequate water pressure and fire flow capacity for future development on the site. • Construction beneath Burlington Northern Railroad's tracks and in the public right-of-way will be required to install the new connection. The following mitigation measures shall apply: Construction plan review and scheduling with all affected utilities and the railroad shall be coordinated well in advance ofconstruction. Dependent upon final approved plans and methodologies, boring and jacking would likely be required for construction underneath the existing rail lines. • A minimum 15-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to water lines for maintenance/repair. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Comprehensive Water System Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 16. WASTEWATER a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to wastewater utility service. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Peak sanitary sewer flows would increase. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be expected, c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and reconunended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The existing 8-inch sewer line shall be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line to insure adequate capacity to handle the estimated flows. Southport Planned Action 28 Mitigation Document • Installation of the minimum 10-inch sewer line. will re<J.1,1ire construction beneath B1,1rlington Northern Railroad's tracks, as welJ as construction. in the\l)\lblic right-of-way. The following mitigation measures shall apply: Construction plan review and scheduling with alt affected utilities an.d the railroad shall be coordinated well in advance of construction. Dependent upon final approved plans and methodolgies, boring and jacking would likely be required for construction underneath existing rails. • A minimum 15-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to sewer lines for maintenance/repair. d. Nexus: City of Renton Long Range Wastewater Management Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 17. SOLIDWASTE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to solid waste services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Residential uses and commercial 1,1ses would generate additional tons of solid waste annually b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS.. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented ·by the future developer(s): • Future developer(s) shall develop a plan for waste reduction, reuse.and recycling both during construction and post-development to reduce solid waste disposal demands. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Solid Waste Utility prior to issuance of building and construction permits. ,,d,_. _ __,N..,_e"'x,.,u,..s,: Comprehensive Solid.Waste Management Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Southport Planned Action 29 Mitigation Document ADVISORY NOTES TO DEVLOPEWAP/?LICAi'ff .. '{ TJ,e following 110/es are supple111e11tal infor111atio11 provided ill co11ju11ction with tile Miiigatio11 Docnme,it, Because these 110/es are provided as illformation only, they are 1101 subject to the appeal process. The SETS did not list all potential applicable code requirements, but identified the key code requirements that would act to mitigate identified environmental impacts. · It is assumed that all applicable federal, state, and local regulations would be applied. The primary set of applicable local regulations is found in Title 4 of the Renton Municipal Code which addresses Administration and Enforcement, Land Use Districts, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, Property Development Standards, Building and Fire Prevention Standards, Street and Utility Standards, Subdivision Regulations, Permits and Decisions, Procedures and Review Criteria, and Non-conforming Structures, Uses and Lots. Specific code requirements identified in the SEIS that would act as mitigation include: EARTH Seismic • All proposed structures ,vill be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050) Geotechnical Considerations -Stuctural Fill • Final grading plans shall ensure that existing grades are met at the property line with Gene Coulon Park. (RMC 4-4-060.H.4) AIR QUALITY NOISE General -Construction and Operation • Rules and regulations as promulgated by Federal and State Clean Air Acts, the State DOE (RCW 70.94; WAC 173-400), and PSAPCA (RCW 70.94; PSAPCA Regulations I, II, and III) would apply to the Proposed Action as well as to activities of adjacent and abutting sites.·· Construction Noise • Washington's noise limits apply to construction noise during nighttime hours; therefore, construction activities could be limited to daytime hours to the extent practicable. This restriction could include all noisy start-up and preparatory activities such as starting engines before 7:00 a.m., which can disturb people trying to sleep. Noise from any work during nighttime hours (after IO p.m.) received in residentially zoned areas would be subject to the nighttime noise limits in the Washington Administrative Code. (WAC 173-60) • Maximum noise levels during construction would be required to comply with City of Renton Development Regulations for Grading, Excavation and Mining (RMC 4-4-060). Southport Planned Action 30 Mitigation Document TRANSPORTATION '\ • A Transportation Demand Management (IDM) program will be implemented. TDMis a tool for managing the amount of traffic a development generates. Through various TDM programs, traffic could be reduced overall or shifted to non,peak times of the day. The State of Washington's Commute Trip Reduction (CIR) program, implemented through the City's Commute Trip Reduction regulations in RMCI0-13, requires employers who have 100,or more employees commuting to a single location, between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., to implement TDM programs. Some TDM programs could include: -Transit incentives -Guaranteed ride home program -Flex-time hours -Telecommuting -Preferential parking for vanpools and carpools -Parking pricing -Secured bicycle parking -Financial ili..centives • , Haul Routes and Hours: A construction plan showing haul routes and hours will be required. (RMC 4-4'°30.C) FIRE SERVICES • Approved fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems will be installed throughout all structures. (RMC 4-5'°70) • City ordinances require a minimum of two access roadways into the project. An emergency access would be provided via the 45-foot wide pedestrian plaza located innnediately south of Building B with access from Gene Coulon Park's southern parking lot. Removable vehicle barriers would block ordinary vehicle traffic. (RMC 4-5-070) • Fire department apparatus access is required within 150 feet of all points on the building. The fire Janes along the secondary access, and along the south/southwest site perimeter, would meet fire department requirements by having widths of 20 feet. Roadways would be signed as fire lanes. If later proposals require access along the promenade for emergency apparatus, then the access shall meet applicable code requirements and ensure the access areas are distinguishable. (RMC 4-5'°70) A designated fire lane, to serve the eastern side of the development, would be provided by the existing drive aisle in the Gene Coulon Park parking lot to the immediate east. The park drive aisle would be signed as a fire lane. (RMC 4-5-070) Southport Planned Action 31 Mitigation Document SOUTHPORT VICINITY MAP '\ .. ./ J .· Gene Coulon Park Lake Washington Shoreline SOUTHPORT / c:, /. ,,,,,.~..-,·· .,.,. ,,._,,,,,..~ /_.,,.. 0 0 ~----, ! . ...-, \ ,,..-------\ \ Cs '. . I I \ \ Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning ED/'N/SP 0, Dennison 23 February 1999 EXHIBIT B 0 r----: z I I I I ILLUSTRATIVE MAP Site boundary 400 LJ 1 :4,800 800 EXHIBITC ' '\ LEGAL DESCRIPTION New Lot B of City of Renton Lot Line Adjust!llent No. 98-176-LLA, as recorded under King. County Recording No. 9902019014, Records of King County, Washington. Situate in Government Lots 1 and 2 of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M, City of Renton, King County, Washington. r---~--~--~--~--~--~--~--., I I I I I I Maximum Building Heights I I ' I I , t Southport Planned Action e Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning EXHIBIT D ED/N/SP L Grueter, 0. Dennban 10 Au"",t 1••• MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS IBITEJ • ffiffi] • 0 75' 125' 35' 58' @ 200 1:2,400 400 I Van Ness Feldman LLP Via email and US Mail Chip Vincent December 19, 2014 Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98057 Dear Chip: 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98i04-1728 206-623-9372 vnf.com I am writing on behalf of SECO Development to follow-up on your recent letter exchange with Boeing regarding SECO's hotel project at Southport. As you and I have discussed, the entire Southport hotel team believes that the City of Renton is on finn and solid ground having approved the Minor Modification and Administrative Site Plan Review (Level I) for the hotel as designed (LUA 14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD). SECO expects the City to honor those approvals and complete the pennitting for the hotel when SECO submits the final building permit applications later this year. SECO is concerned that your letter to Boeing contradicts prior positions taken and decisions made by the City with regard to the Southport site and wants to be sure that the City honors its prior positions going forward. That aside, SECO's overall goal is to be a good and productive neighbor to Boeing, and to build out the Southport site in a manner than meets the needs of SECO, Boeing, and the City. Toward that end, SECO intends to increase its outreach and discussions with Boeing as is moves ahead with the final office phase at Southport. l. Compliance with the Non-Opposition Agreement The main issue raised by your November 21. 2014, letter is the height of'the hotel. The City long ago resolved the height calculation issue for the Southport site when, in 200 I, it approved the Administrative Site Plan Review {Level I) for the office phase (LUA00-156). The plan sheets included with that approval, Exhibits 12 and 13 (Sheet Nos. A.3.1 and A.3.2), clearly show the methodology used to calculate the height of each of the three approved office buildings, which matches the methodology used in the hotel site plan approval. Each is shown as 125 feet as measured from the base datum. Boeing did not appeal. Perhaps more important in the instant case, Boeing did not challenge the building height as inconsistent with the Non-Opposition Agreement. Any such claim would be time barred at this point. Regarding the issue oflocation or intensity of the hotel use, SECO believes that those issues were also previously resolved by a combination of the Non-Opposition Agreement and the City's 2008 approval of the Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan (LUA-99-189, SA-A, Chip Vincent -2 -December 19, 2014 SM). First, the Non-Opposition Agreement docs not specify the size of the hotel. Instead, it provides only: (d) Building locations shall be generally as shown on Exhibit D (e) Building uses and occupancies shall be as shown in Exhibit D Non-Opposition Agreement, Section I. SECO and the City have honored these requirements. The location of the hotel is generally as shown on Exhibit D to the Non-Opposition Agreement. Wbile Boeing asserts that the footprint is larger than shown on Exhibit D, in fact, the footprint is simply modestly reconfigured. SECO altered the shape of the hotel from a trapezoid to a rectangle to incorporate a low-scale component with ballroom facilities, a loading dock, and mechanical equipment. The guest rooms and almost all other hotel functions remain in the same location on the property as shown 111 Exhibit D. This reconfigurntion is consistent with the long term phasing of the Southport development, as the parking garage underneath the office buildings, once constructed, will connect directly to the hotel's waterfront promenade level uses and indirectly to the main lobby and other public areas above. In short, the location is generally as shown and the uses and occupancies are consistent with the Non-Opposition Agreement. Further, the Non-Opposition Agreement does not include a general prohibition on increasing the density or intensity of development absent Boeing's consent. Instead, it provides only: (f) No change, expansion or intensification of use or of any building that could increase environmental impacts or the sensitivities to occupants and users of the Property shall be commenced or implemented without the prior written consent of Boeing and issuance of such Permits and Approvals as may be required by the City. Non-Opposition Agreement, Section 1. As part of approving the 2008 Minor Modification to the Master Plan, the City concurred that the proposed site plan modification authorizing up to 355 hotel rooms would not increase the environmental impacts of the hotel project over that anticipated in the Supplemental EIS. Letter from Neil Watts, Director of Development Services, Renton, to Bill Stalzer, February 4, 2008. Similarly, as part of the 2014 Master Plan amendment for the hotel approval, the City's Environmental Review Committee determined that the hotel as proposed is within the environmental thresholds of the original Master Site Plan and the Planned Action Ordinance for Southport, and consequently no additional SEPA was needed to the Administrative Site Plan Approval for the hotel. Administrative Site Development Plan and Report, Hotel at Southport, Sept. 23, 2014, Exhibit 7. Boeing could have, but did not, appeal either the 2008 Minor Modification or the 2014 Minor Modification and Administrative Site Plan approval. Moreover, Boeing has not asserted in any of its communications that it believes merely adding more guests has the effect of increasing "sensitivities to occupants and users of the Property." Adding guests may increase the number of users, but does not affect (upwards or downwards) their sensitivities to the Boeing facilities. Chip Vincent -3 -December 19, 2014 II. City Has a Duty to Honor the Permits It Has Issued to Date As you know, the City is obligated to honor the permits that it has issued -including the recent hotel site plan approval -and each of the prior approvals granted for the Southport development. Since Boeing had raised the issue of compliance with the Non-Opposition Agreement before the City issued the approvals, the City presumably made the determination that the hotel site plan does comply with that requirement prior to issuing the Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan and the Administrative Site Plan approval for the hotel. Furthermore, Boeing had substantial notice of the hotel project. Mr. Christ began reaching out to Boeing about this project -including the evolution of its design and height - dating back to 2012. Further, Boeing received notice of the City's Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan and the Administrative Site Plan approval concurrent with SECO. The decision plainly states the appeal period and process. Boeing chose not to appeal. The City is now bound by that decision and must process any subsequent permits needed to implement the hotel site plan. See Chelan County v. Nykreim, 146 Wn.2d 905, 933, 52 P.3d 1 (Wash. 2002). Furthermore, SECO has already given Boeing the covenant that it requested in its September 16, 2014, letter to the City. This issue was raised and resolved as part of the original negotiations of the Non-Opposition Agreement in 1999. The Non-Opposition Agreement provides in relevant part: The property immediately south of the Southport property is zoned for heavy industrial use, and is currently used as an aircraft manufacturing and final assembly plant. A variety of industrial activities occur on the property that may be inconvenient or cause discomfort to people using, working or residing at Southport. This may arise from aircraft manufacturing activities, including aircraft final assembly and painting, and a wastewater treatment plant, which may generate unpleasant and annoying odors, vibrations, noise, dust, and air emissions of hazardous and toxic air pollutants and volatile organic compounds. The City of Renton has established manufacturing and other heavy industrial use as priority uses on designated heavy industrial lands. Nearby property owners, residents, and users should be prepared to accept such inconveniences or discomfon from normal, necessary heavy industrial operations when performed in compliance with local, state and federal law. The owner of the property [described in Exhibit Al for itself, its successors and assigns, hereby waives to the extent permitted by law its right to protest or challenge any lawful heavy manufacturing operation or activity or the environmental impacts lawfully caused by the current aircraft plant or other heavy industrial use to the property described on Exhibit A or its owners, users or occupants. Emphasis added. Mr. Christ and SECO have honored this language from the Non-Opposition and have included it in every real estate document for the Southport Property since then. Consequently, anyone who offers to purchase, rent, lease or otherwise use the Southport property Chip Vincent -4 -December 19, 2014 is subject to the waiver. Thus, f3oeing has already received all that it has asked for. There is no need for an additional covenant because all users of the Southport property have already waived their claims against Boeing for its activities on its property. If there is something more that Boeing wants, they can only get it by asking SECO -not through the City, as Rocale Timmons correctly noted in her September 23, 2014, letter response to Paul Ledlum at Boeing. To date, Boeing has not approached SECO with this request. lll. Moving Forward Mr. Christ has been in discussions with Boeing about the hotel and office projects since 2012, and even earlier. In fact, SECO proposed many of the minor modifications to the hotel design -the increased room count and meeting facilities -directly in response to requests and/or suggestions from Boeing to meet their needs. SECO wants to help Boeing build airplanes in Renton, not hinder them. As SECO moves into the design of the final office phase, SECO wants to work with Boeing to ensure that those buildings and that overall project (roads, parking and other infrastructure) meet and are consistent with Boeing's needs. Toward that end, SECO intends to reach out to Boeing immediately to request a meeting and see what, if any, revisions or accommodations SECO can make as part of the third and tinal Southport phase to meet Boeing's needs. In the meantime, SECO believes that the City has no reason to be concerned. The City properly issued the Minor Modificaiion and Administrative Site Plan approval for the hotel and should feel confident proceeding to approve the construction permits needed to implement the approved plan. Delaying or denying those permits would expose the City to liability. Very truly yours, Molly A. Lawrence cc: Denis Law, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Warren, City Attorney Michael Christ, SECO Bill Stalzer, Stalzer & Associates Jessica Clawson, McCullough Hill Leary rt')._ BOEING July 16, 2007 Terry Higashiyama Tf:e Bo~cinfJ Crn11r:any P 0. Box 3707 Sf~nttle, Vi/:.. 9812-1-2207 Community Services Administrator City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Higashiyama: On behalf of the Boeing Company, I would like to thank you and the City of Renton for accepting the indefinite postponement of the Sam Chastain trail. While we understand the City's vision for this trail and the importance of this linkage between Coulon Park and the Cedar River trail, Boeing has security concerns regarding the proximity of a public trail to the 73 7 manufacturing operations at the Renton Plant. Security at our facilities is a high priority at Boeing and we appreciate the City's understanding and recognition of our security concerns. If, however, the Boeing Company ever ceases manufacturing operations in Renton and vacates the Renton Plant property, then, after our exit, we would provide the easements needed for the City to move forward and complete the trail in the scope and alignment discussed with our last communication on October 20, 2005. Once again, it was great to see you at The Boeing and Renton Leadership meeting and I look forward to seeing you again in the near future. Sincerely, Shaunta Hyde Shaunta Hyde, Manager Local Government Relations Manager The Boeing Company Cc: Jan Fedor, The Boeing Company Thomas Walther, The Boeing Company Jeff Adelson, The Boeing Company Jay Covington, City of Renton Mayor Keolker The Renton City Council Sabrina Mirante From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Comment Letter for the file Rocale Timmons Tuesday, September 23, 2014 4:11 PM Sabrina Mirante FW: Boeing Comment Letter re: the Southport Hotel Project -SIGNED SOUTHPORT LETTER.pd! From: Eklund, Nancy E [m<'lilto:naocy.e.eklund@.b.oeing.mm] Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:50 AM To: Roca le Timmons; Chip Vincent Cc: Ledum, Paul A; Uman, Jesse D; Kapica, John S; Bresslour, Gerald L Subject: FW: Boeing Comment Letter re: the Southport Hotel Project -SIGNED Good Morning Chip and Roca le - Attached is the Boeing comment letter on the Southport Hotel project sent yesterday, now signed by Renton Site Services Director, Paul Led um. A hard copy will be forwarded to the City under separate cover. Thank you. -Nancy Nancy Eklund, AICP Land Use Planner The Boeing Company Renton and West Corridor -Site Services Cell, 206/495-1443 From: Eklund, Nancy E Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 4:23 PM To: Roca le Timmons; Chip Vincent Cc: Led um, Paul A; Uman, Jesse D; Ka pica, John S; Bresslour, Gerald L Subject: Boeing Comment Letter re: the Southport Hotel Project Hi Chip and Rocale: Please find attached the final comment letter from Boeing regarding the Southport Hotel Project. A signed copy of the letter will be forwarded tomorrow as an email and as a hard copy. Please let us know if the City or Christ have any comments or questions about this letter. Thank you for your patience. Nancy 1 Current Planning 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA., • • So,:;,!1001tHote!: Renton, Tom WSP, to Greg Sabrina Mirante Subject: Start Date: Due Date: Status: Percent Complete: Total Work: Actual Work: Owner: LUA14-000645 POR Request Monday, June 02, 2014 Monday, June 02, 2014 Not Started 0% 0 hours 0 hours Rocale Timmons Can you please add the following person as a party of record for the Southport Hotel LUA14-000645 Yeh-Hee Hahn I Vice President CBRE I Brokerage Services 1201 Pacific Avenue Suite 1502 I Tacoma, WA 98402 T 253 596 0055 I F 253 596 0059 I C 253 230 2412 yeh-hee.hahn@cbre.com I www.cbre.com/yeh-hee.hahn Thank you so much. Rocale T 1 i. er City of, I . . •. r 1 sJJ: r, (_j _(J NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development {CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: May 28, 2014 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Southport One/ LUA14-0D0645, SM, SA-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise factlity, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North {UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning ciassification. However, the proposal 1s vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet In height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline jurisdiction. PROJECT LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Site Plan Review-Administrative, Shoreline Substantial Development, Parking Modification, and Master Site Plan Modification APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Greg Krape, 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N., Ste. 50, Renton, WA 98056 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on June 11, 2014. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7219. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: MAY 16, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 28, 2014 V RECEIVED JUN -3 2014 CITY OF RENTON PlANNING DIVISION If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No: Southport One/ LUA14-000645 SM, SA-A NAME, __ _.B.,_,,,_ .. _,,lc,"----~""-'"'-Ja.._..:>'-'+-__________________ _ MAILING ADDRESS, ( •BS" l,.ilcor. Wx\... V\vJ... C't l1 City/State/Zip: ~ .... J"<M. ,w A s 80 s-,. l.<t14 TELEPHONE NO.: (g :fD) 53 \ • 3 'Z. I (. DEPARTMENT OF COM,,nUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATIVE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REPORT & DECISION REPORT DA TE: Project Name: Owner: Applicant: Contact: File Number: Project Manager: Project Summary: Project Location: Site Area: September 23, 2014 Hotel at Soutport Michael Christ; 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Suite 50; Renton, WA 98056 Greg Krape; Hotel at Southport, LLC; 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Suite 50; Renton, WA 98056 Bill Stalzer; Stalzer & Associates; 603 Stewart St, Suite 512; Seattle, WA 98101 LUA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Roca le Timmons, Senior Planner The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Parking Modification, and Upper Story Setback Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to: the COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action SFEIS (September 17, 1999); the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA, SM); and subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback SO feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code and reduce the parking stall length required in code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. 1083 Lake Washington Blvd 11.12 acres Project Location Map City of Renton Department of Communit. _ conomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision WA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOO Report of September 23, 2014 I A. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Southport Report and Decision Exhibit 2: 2014 Master Site Plan Modification Plan Exhibit 3: Hotel Site Plan Exhibit 4: Landscape Plan Exhibit 5: Elevations Exhibit 6: Transportation Assessment prepared by TenW (dated May 13, 2014) Exhibit 7: Environmental Review Committee Memo (dated July 14, 2014) Exhibit 8: Drainage Report prepared by Coughlin Porter Lundeen (dated April 25, 2013) Exhibit 9: Geotechnical Report prepared by HartCrowser (dated April 18, 2014) Exhibit 10: Aerial Photograph Exhibit 11: Vested Commercial Office Residential -3 Development Standards Exhibit 12: Vested Shoreline Master Program Regulations -1999 Exhibit 13: Southport Planned Action Ordinance (#4804) Exhibit 14: Approved Southport Master Site Plan (LUA99-189/dated July 18, 2000) Page 2 of 30 Exhibit 15: Approved Southport Master Site Plan Minor Modification (dated February 4, 2008) Exhibit 16: Planned Action Designation (dated April 4, 2000) Exhibit 17: Southport FSEIS and Mitigation Document (dated September 17, 1999} Exhibit 18: Parking Analysis prepared by TENW (dated April 28, 2014) Exhibit 19: 2014 Photo View Analysis Exhibit 20: Lighting Plan Exhibit 21: Building Mass Study/Rendering Exhibit 22: Approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (April 7, 2000} Exhibit 23: Solar Study Exhibit 24: Lake Washington Existing Trail Condition Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Comm uni '"conomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 ! B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner(s) of Record: Z. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: 3. Zoning Classification: 4. Existing Site Use: 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. North: Lake Washington Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision .UAl4-000/i45, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Michael Christ 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Suite SO Renton, WA 98056 Urban Center North (UCN) -1999 Urban Center North-2 (UCN-2) Page 3 of 30 Vested to 1999 Commercial Office Residential-3 {COR-3} (Exhibit 11) Vacant/Gravel Parking Lot b. East: Multi-Family Residential {UCN-2 zone) c. South: Puget Sound Energy {UCN-2 zone) d. West: Boeing Renton Plant {UCN-2 zone) 6. Site Area: 484,281 square feet I C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Comprehensive Plan Zoning Annexation Planned Action EIS Master Site Plan & Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Minor Modification for the Southport Master Site Plan Administrative Site Plan Review (Bristol Apartments) Administrative Site Plan Review (Southport Office Bldgs) I 0. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities Land Use File No. N/A N/A N/A N/A LUA99-189 LUA99-189 LUAOl-144 LUA00-156 Ordinance No. 5099 5100 1791 4804 N/A N/A N/A N/A Date 11/01/2004 11/01/2004 09/09/1959 10/25/1999 04/07/2000 02/04/2008 02/22/2002 02/05/2001 a. Water: Water service would be provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 12-inch water main located within the internal access road for the adjacent properties east of the proposed Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Communil HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 ·onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision .UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Page 4 of 30 hotel, known as the Bristol Apartments, (refer to City project plans no. W-2882 and W-3291). The static water pressure is approximately 128 psi at ground elevation of 22 feet. b. Sewer: Sewer service would be provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8-inch sewer main in an easement on the site. c. Surface/Storm Water: There is a private storm drainage conveyance system and water quality treatment on site. 2, Streets: There are partial street improvements in lake Washington Blvd NE to accommodate the proposed use. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-120: Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Classifications (1999) (Exhibit 11) 2. Chapter 3 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-3-090: Shoreline Regulations (1999) (Exhibit 12) 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards S, Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria a. Section 4-9-200: Site Plan Review 6. Chapter 11 Definitions F. ADMINSTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The Southport Hotel Site Plan implements Phase Ill of the Southport Master Site Plan. The hotel project is located on lots 1 and 4 of the Southport development and includes 350 guest rooms, meeting rooms, an exercise facility, indoor pool and spa, restaurant, lobbies, administrative offices, support facilities, and a waterfront promenade with a pedestrian walkway connection to Gene Coulon Park. 2. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to the COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SFEIS) (September 17, 1999}; the Southport level II (Master Site Plan) and Shoreline Development Permit (lUA99-189, SA-A, SM/Exhibits 14 and 22); and subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008/Exhibit 15). 3. The FSEIS and mitigation document was issued for the Southport Planned Action in September 1999 (Exhibit 17). Ordinance #4804 was adopted by the City Council in October 1999 designating a Planned Action of the subject site (Exhibit 13). 4. The objective of the Southport Planned Action SFEIS was to complete the environmental review in advance of the overall conceptual Master Site Plan. Project applications and development phases are then allowed to proceed without additional environmental review provided the proposed development is consistent with the plan alternatives and level of development that was analyzed in the EIS process. Site Plan Repart City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 5 of 30 5. On April 4, 2000, the City determined that the Southport Master Site Plan was consistent with both the range of plan alternatives that were evaluated in the FSEIS and with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Oridinance (Exhibit 16). Any subsequent applications to develop the property consistent with the Master Site Plan would also be covered by the Planned Action and would not require additional SEPA review. 6. Since the 2000 Master Site Plan approval, the City has issued Site Plan approvals for two phases (of the three) of the Southport Development: Phase I, The Bristol, a mixed/use residential complex and Phase II, the three building office complex which is yet to be constructed. 7. The Southport Master Site Plan remains valid and effective through July 18, 2015. 8. The City approved a minor modification to the Master Site Plan on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15). As modified the Master Plan permitted two 50 foot tall multifamily residential buildings with a total of 383 units (currently constructed); three 125 foot tall office buildings with a total of 750,000 square feet of office space; and a 75 and 125 foot tall hotel with 355 rooms (212,502 square feet); 40,000 square feet of retail space, 30,000 square feet for general use retail and 10,000 square feet for restaurants; a promenade along the Lake Washington waterfront including a trail connection to Gene Coulon Park; and off-site transportation improvements. 9. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the Southport Development Level II (Master) Site Plan was approved on April 7, 2000 (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM/Exhibit 14). The requested Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is not intended to limit the use of the approved Shoreline Substantial Permit for the approved Southport Office Buildings. The requested permit is necessitated by changes to the height of the hotel and the review is limited in scope solely to height. 10. The proposed hotel is set back 50 feet from the shoreline and consists of two building elements: a lower section capped by a large terrace and a ballroom with large windows for views of Lake Washington and distant vistas and a (-shaped section that increases in height from 75 feet to 125 feet as it steps back from the SO-foot setback line. The break in height occurs at the 100 foot setback line as required by the COR-3 zoning. The taller section occupies approximately 50% of the width of the site. The terrace on the lower section of the hotel is located approximately 28 feet above the waterfront promenade is a wide, deep terrace enclosed by the two wings of the "C". The 75 foot high portions of the building are capped by two large terraces connected by a walkway. The 125-foot high portion of the building is oriented to the internal street shared with the 125-foot high office buildings in approved Phase II. 11. The existing waterfront consists of a concrete bulkhead across the entire site frontage along Lake Washington. The depth of the water at the bulkhead varies from approximately 6 feet at the eastern end to approximately 14 feet at the western end and the top of the bulkhead is 2 to 3 feet above the ordinary high water mark. 12. No work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of Lake Washington. 13. The building entrance is proposed along the southern facade of the building with an orientation to the interior surface parking area. The main entrance to the hotel is located at this level along the building's south fa~ade (Exhibit 5). 14. The building materials vary and are a combination of cement panels, cast in place concrete, corrugated metal paneling, glass/aluminum, and brick (Exhibit 5). 15. A pedestrian bridge is proposed connecting the two guestroom wings and their terraces. 16. Access to the site would be provided via an existing internal private street extended from Lake Washington Boulevard NE. Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Community onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 6 of 30 17. An interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces would be located on the site of the approved Southport Office Building Site Plan (LUA00-156). 18. RMC 4-4-080 requires the applicant limit the number of parking spaces based on the number of hotel guest rooms and number of employees. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to increase the number of stalls located on site from the 467 parking space allowance to 487 parking spaces for the restaurant. 19. RMC 4-4-080 requires the applicant provide a parking stall length of 20 feet. The applicant is requesting a parking modification to decrease the length of parking stalls from 20 feet to 19 feet. 20. There is an existing public promenade which connects Gene Coulon park (to the east) to the Boeing site (to the west) (Exhibit 3). 21. The applicant anticipates commencing construction in Fall of 2014. 22_ The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on May 16, 2014 and determined it complete on May 28, 2014. The project complies with the 120-day review period. 23. No agency comments were received during the 14-day comment period. A comment letter was received by The Boeing Company on September 16, 2014. 24. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. 25. The proposal requires a minor modification to the approved Master Site Plan (Level 1 Site Plan) as modified on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15). The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the minor modification to approved Site Plans criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200H.2: Tobie A: MINOR MODIFICATION TO AN APPROVED MASTER PLAN OR SITE PLAN Minor modifications may be permitted by administrative determination. To be considered a minor modification, the amendment must not: Involve more than a ten percent (10%} increase in area or scale of the development in the approved plan. Staff Comment: The requested modification to the approved Southport Master Plan (Exhibit 14) as modified on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 14) includes a reduction in the number of hate/ rooms from 355 to 350 raoms and a corresponding reduction in area designated to guest rooms and lobbies (Exhibit 2). It should be nated, the proposed Minor Modification represents a 1.5% increase in the scale/square footage of development from the 2000 Master Site Plan approval: .,,, Use 2000 Southport 2008 Southport Master 2014Southport Master Master Site Plan Site Plan Minor Site Plan Minor /Exhibit 13) Modification (Exhibit 14) Modification Multi-Family 394 383 383 Residential Units Multi-Family 383,488 321,776 321,776 Residential SF Retail /Specialty) SF 30,000 30,000 30,000 Restaurant SF 10,000 10,000 10,000 Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Comm unit HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT onomic Development Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 7 of 30 Hotel Rooms 220 355 350 Hotel SF 105,600 212,502 156,195 Commercial SF 720,205 750,000 750,000 Total Square Feet 1,249,293 1,324,278 1,267,971 Have a significantly greater impact on the environment and/or public facilities than the approved plan. Staff Comment: The development levels proposed under the requested Southport Master Site Plan Minar Modification would not follow development parameters af any single alternative action plan analyzed by the EIS documents {Exhibit 17}. However, the development levels are consistent with the maximum development parameters included in the full range af the three alternative action plans. The applicant submitted a trip generation analysis (Exhibit 6) far the ,/ requested reduction in hate/ roams/space and provides a comparison to the PM peak hour trip generation analyses documented in the Southport Master Site Plan approval {Exhibit 14} and the 2008 Southport Master Site Plan Minar Modification {Exhibit 15). The transportation assessment notes that that the PM Peak Hour trips generated by the uses in the proposed Minor Modification to the Southport Master Site Plan (1,314 trips) are less than the number of PM Peak Hour trips in the approved 2008 Minar Modification to the Master Site Plan due to a reduction in the number of hotel rooms. Additionally, the proposed number of trips is within the range af PM Peak Hour trips analyzed in the Planned Action (l,3SS trips}. As noted by TENW, the proposed Minar Modification to the Southport Master site Plan does require any mitigation measures beyond those required far the Level II Site Plan approved in 2000. The modification does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. ,/ Staff Comment: The boundaries in the approved 2000 Southport Master Site Plan (Exhibit 14) remain unchanged in the requested minor modification. 26. The proposal requires Site Plan Review. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with Site Plan Review decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200 E· .. Table B: SITE PLAN REVIEW a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE AND CONSISTENCY The site is vested (1999) to the Center Office Residential Comprehensive Plan land use designation. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 is in conformance with the elements and policies of the Comprehensive Plan (Exhibit 14). The requested Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14} as amended by a previous Minar Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15} and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). b. Zoning Compliance and Consistency: The proposal is vested to the Center Office/Residential 3 (COR-3) on the City's 1999 Zoning Map; RMC 4-2- 120B (Exhibit 11). The proposal is compliant with the following COR-3 development standards if all conditions of approval are met: Density: The maximum density of the COR-3 zone is 50 du/acre. N/A Staff Comment: Not applicable. N/A Lot Dimensions: Per RMC 4-2-1208 there are no minimum lot dimensions. Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Communic HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT anomic Development Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 8 of 30 Compliant if all conditions of approval are met Site Plan Report Staff Comment: Not applicable. Lot Coverage: Per RMC 4-2-120B the allowed lot coverage is 65 percent or 75% if parking is provided within the building or within an on-site parking garage. Staff Comment: The City has concluded the uses within the approved Southport Master Site Plan, specifically the hotel, to be in conformance with the lot coverage allowed in the vested COR-3 zoning classification (Exhibit 14). The requested Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14) as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15} and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). All buildings, including the proposed hate/, would have a building footprint of 367,084 square feet on the 620,640 square foot (upland} site resulting in a building lot coverage of approximately 59.14 percent. Setbacks: Per RMC 4-2-120B the COR-3 zone has not setbacks from property lines. Staff Comment: As part of the Southport FSEIS and Mitigation Document /Exhibit 17) a minimum building setback of 10-30 feet us required to be provided along the western boundary with an average setback of 20 feet. It appears the proposal complies with the minimum western property line setback. However, it is unclear if the proposal meets the average setback requirement of 20 feet. Therefore staff recommends as a condition of approval the applicant be required ta demonstrate compliance with the required aver western property line setback of 20 feet prior to building permit approval. Shoreline Setback: Per RMC 4-2-120B the COR-3 zone has a special shoreline setback of 50 feet. Staff Comment: The City has concluded the shoreline setback within the approved Southport Master Site Plan, specifically for the hotel, to be in conformance with the shoreline setback allowed in the former COR-3 zoning classification (Exhibit 14}. The requested Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 /Exhibit 14} as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 /Exhibit 15) and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). The proposed shoreline setback is 50 feet. Building Height: Per RMC 4-2-120B building height is 125 feet and restricted to 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM. Staff Comment: The City has concluded the heights within the approved 2008 Minor Modification to the Southport Master Site Plan, specifically for the hotel, to be in conformance with the height allowances in the former COR-3 zoning classification (Exhibit 15). The requested Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14} as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15} and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'}. The hotel consists of two 75-foot high guest room wings enclosing a wide, deep central terrace located approximately 28 feet above the Lake Washington promenade. As the building recedes from the promenade, 100 feet from the Lake Washington OHWM, the guest room wings step up in height to 125 feet above the datum point. The proposal complies with the height requirements of the zone. The combined maximum building height and site elevation would not exceed the maximum City of Renton Department of Communh -onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 9 of 30 Compliant if all conditions of approval are met Site Plan Report height of 179 feet above seo level, meeting current FM maximum height for structures. Screening: Outdoor storage is not permitted in the COR-3 zone. All mechanical equipment and outdoor service and storage areas shall be screened to reduce visibility, noise, and related impacts while allowing accessibility for providers and users. All roof-top equipment must be screened by public view. Staff Comment: Refuse and garbage containers would be located in the service area along the western property boundary and screened from public view. Hotel rooftop mechanical equipment would be screened by a screen wall covered by metal siding /Exhibit 5). It is unclear if all surface-mounted utility and mechanical equipment have been screened from public view. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant submit screening detail for all surface mounted utility and mechanical equipment to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Parking: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off-street parking stalls be provided for the proposed use. The code requires 1 space for each guest room or dwelling unit plus 2 for each 3 employees. Staff Comment: The proposed hotel contains 350 guest rooms, resulting in a code requirement for 350 parking spaces. The hotel would have 175 employees resulting in a code requirement for 117 additional spaces for hotel employees. The applicant is requesting a parking modification to increase the number of stalls located on site from the 467 parking space allowance to 487 parking spaces for the hotel. Additionally, RMC 4-4-080 requires the applicant provide a parking stall length of 20 feet. The applicant is also requesting a parking modification in order to decrease the length of a parking stall from 20 feet to 19 feet. Section 4-9-250 allows a grant of relief from the requirements of the code which permits construction in a manner that otherwise is prohibited, provided the modification meets the following criteria {pursuant to RMC 4-9-250.B.5}: o. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and b. Will not be injurious to other property/ies) in the vicinity; ond c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and d. Con be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The applicant submitted a parking analysis as part of the submittal for Site Plan Review prepared by TENW, dated April 28, 2014 {Exhibit 18). According to the parking analysis the estimated peak parking demand for guests and employees for a 350 room hotel is 315 parking spaces. The proposed 487 stall parking lot would serve as an interim lot until such time as future office buildings to be located on Lat 4 are constructed. Ultimately the parking needed ta serve the proposed hotel would be located in structured parking facilities shared by the hotel and the office complex. The applicant contends the additional 20 parking spaces beyond code would create an opportunity to provide public parking for people using the waterfront promenade and trail connection to Gene Coulon Park; visiting hotel guests; and/or non-hotel guests using the hotel facilities. With respect to the length of parking the stalls the current City parking standards, for the City of Renton Department of Comm uni HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT conomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 10 of 30 subject site, require the length of a standard parking stall be 19 feet. The applicant contends that closer conformity to Current City standards meets the purposes intended by the Code and is based on sound engineering judgment. Stoff concurs with the applicant's justification for the reduction of parking stall length in order to better comply with current City code. The requested reduction in stall length would not be injurious to other properties in the vicinity. However, staff is not supportive of the request for an increase in the number of parking stalls from 467 to 487 surface parking stalls. While Southport is on urban development with intense existing and planned uses, structured parking was originally envisioned os part of the hotel development. The proposed large parking area would have aesthetic impacts on surrounding properties despite its being temporary. The use of interior parking lot landscaping would improve the aesthetic quality ond soften the appearance of the proposed surface parking area. Compliance with the allowed number of parking stalls provides additional opportunities to incorporate interior parking lot landscaping in the large parking area until such time structured parking stalls are constructed. Therefore, the proposed parking modification to increase the number of allowed parking stalls is recommended for denial. Staff recommends the applicant be required to revise the site to eliminate at least 20 parking stalls and include additional intervening landscaping within the surface parking area to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager. The revised site and landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Unknown Signs: Site Plan Report Staff Comment: The applicant did not submit a signage package for the proposed hotel and therefore could not be reviewed at this time. The applicant would be required to comply with the signage requirements outlined in RMC 4-4-100 at the time of sign application. Critical Areas: Staff Comment: The proposal is subject to the Shoreline Master Program (Exhibit 12) due to the site's proximity to Lake Washington. The site is located within the Urban Environment. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit was issued for the Southport Master Site Plan in April of 2000 (Exhibit 22). However, the proposed hotel requires additional review under the Shoreline Master Program in order to account for changes included in the approved 2008 Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan (see Exhibit 15} and the proposed Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan (see Table A}. The proposal is compliant with the vested Shoreline Master Program (see detailed discussion in Table C: Vested Shoreline Master Program Regulations}. Modulation and Articulation: Incorporate building modulation to reduce the overall bulk and mass of buildings. Staff Comment: The proposed hotel building is adjacent to the Bristol Apartments, the Boeing Facility, and future office buildings. In order to create articulation and modulation and reduce the overall bulk and mass of the hotel building the applicant has proposed changes to the exterior materials on the building, vertical plane changes, changes in the color, superior window design, and contrast between solid wall panels and transparent glass areas. The applicant is proposing a variety of concrete wall panel exterior materials, including cast in place concrete and architectural concrete wall panels which vary in color and texture on Floors 1, 2 and 3. Floors 4 through 7 would have a combination of brick and cement panels City of Renton Deportment of Communil HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT anomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UAl4-00054S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 11 of 30 Site Plan Report similar in character to the neighboring Bristol Apartments. Proposed Floors 8 through 12 would also have cement panels similar in color to those used on the Bristol Apartments and proposed for use for the future office buildings (Exhibit 5). The applicant has designed exterior wall panels to create a plinth/platform for each change of material above. The concrete base would extend 6-8 inches from the face of the brick wall above and the brick would extend 4-6-inches from the face of the cement wall panels above. The applicant is proposing storefront windows on Floors 1-3 which serves to maximize views to the water and surroundings. All windaws on the upper stories are punched window style. The upper level window frames are flush with the cement wall panel exterior, recessed 4- inches from the exterior face of the proposed brick, and 6-8 inches within the concrete podium. The applicant has yet to select final colors for the proposed hotel but indicates the colors used would be similar to those used on the Bristol Apartments. Staff recommends, as a condition approval, the applicant provide a material/colors board to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to the building permit approval. The materials board shall demonstrate compatibility with the Bristol Apartments and future office buildings. The articulation and modulation of the hotel building facades is in keeping with the surrounding buildings in the neighborhood. Upper Story Setbacks: Per RMC4-2-120 Buildings or potions of buildings which exceed SO- feet in height which are located within 100 feet of the shoreline shall include upper story setbacks for the fa~ade facing the shoreline and for facades facing publicly accessible plazas as follows: The minimum setback for a fifth story and succeeding stories shall be 10 feet. Projects bot meeting the upper story setbacks may be approved through a modification process. Application may be made for modification of the upper story setback standards when superior design is demonstrated pursuant to RMC 4-9-250D. For a modification to be granted, the project must also comply with the decisions and design criteria stipulated in RMC 4-9-250D2 and D4. Staff Comment: The applicant contends that the proposed hotel offers a superior design solution as an alternative to the upper story setback requirement. Pursuant to RMC 4-9- 2500 the applicant has requested a modification to the upper story setbacks requirement found in RMC 4-2-120B. Section 4-9-250 allows a grant of relief from the requirements of the code which permits construction in a manner that otherwise is prohibited, provided the modification meets the following criteria: a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and b. Will not be injurious to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and f. In comparison to the standard upper story setbacks, the proposed building design will achieve the same or better results in terms of solar access to the public shoreline trails/open space and publicly accessible plazas; the building will allow access to sunlight along the public trail/open space system and plazas abutting City of Renton Deportment of Community HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT nomic Development Administrative Site Pfan Report & Decision 'A14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 12 of 30 the shoreline during daytime and seasonal periods project for peak utilization by pedestrian; and g. The building will create a step in perceived height, bulk and scale in comparison to buildings surrounding the subject property. As an alternative to providing multiple smaller steps beyond 75 feet in height the applicant is proposing a single step for the hotel structure. The applicant contends the single step better relates to the existing urban character of the site, in that upper story setbacks were not used on any other building in the vicinity. To the west, the Boeing Assembly Building is approximately 125 feet in height primarily a vertical wall without relief To the north, the existing waterfront promenade is used by pedestrians. To the east, the Bristol Apartments are approximately 75 feet in height, with window penetrations and balconies, but without stepping of the facade. To the south, the approved future office buildings would be built of flat metal wall panels and glass, rising to approximately 125 feet without upper story setbacks. To ensure compatibility with its surroundings, the applicant contends the building design responds to the Lake Washington waterfront and nearby structures. A majority of the north fa,ade along Lake Washington, and the pedestrian promenade, is approximately 28 feet in height. There are two major terraces; one over the grand ballroom, and the other located in between the two guestroom wings. On the east fm;:ade, the guestroom wing of the hotel is similar in scale to the Bristol Apartments by stepping from 75 feet up to 125 feet from north to south. The 125 feet height along the south fa,ade of the hotel would be similar to the scale of the Boeing facility and future office buildings (Exhibit 5). The taller portion of the hotel occupies approximately half of the width of the site along the Lake Washington frontage. The remaining width is the much lower terrace at approximately 28 feet in height. The applicant submitted a solar study (Exhibit 23) and a massing diagram (Exhibit 21} demonstrating o reduction in shade and shadows effects on the pedestrian walkway at noon during the spring and fall equinox. Additionally, the low west terrace and low terrace in the middle of the building allow more sunlight to reach the promenade during the summer solstice than does the code-required upper story setbacks design solution. Staff concurs that the proposed single step of the building is the most appropriate solution for a high-rise hotel. The proposed design solution creates less shade/shadow effects on the promenade and pedestrian walkway and achieves greater compatibility with its surroundings than does the use of upper story setbacks thereby conforming to the intent and purpose of the code. The hotel design would not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity and would likely offer benefits in the form two large water-oriented terraces at the 8th floor, offering inviting outdoor function spaces with unobstructed water views of the promenade, Lake Washington, and distant vistas. The single upper story setback would not be injurious or create adverse impacts to the other properties in the vicinity. c. DESIGN REGULATION COMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: Not applicable. d. PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT COMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: Staff Comment: The City's Environmental Review Committee determined that the proposal meets the criteria outlined in the Planned Action Ordinance (Ordinance #4804} and qualifies as a planned action, the proposal shall not require a SEPA threshold determination, preparation of an EIS, or be subject to further review pursuant to SEPA (Exhibit 7). e. OFF SITE IMPACTS: Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision . JA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 13 of 30 Site Plan Report Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site. Staff Comment: The City has concluded the heights within the approved 2008 Minor Modification to the Southport Master Site Plan, specifically for the hotel, to be in conformance with the height allowances in the former COR-3 zoning classification (Exhibit 15). The requested Hate/ at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14} as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15) and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). In addition to the minimization of the building mass to approximately 50% of the site width, the hotel would contain substantial modulation of major building elements and a 100 foot setback of the taller upper portion of the hotel from the ordinary high water mark. See additional discussion under Structure Scale. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties. Stoff Comment: Physical transition and linkage elements would be provided along the north, east and south property lines. Along the north frontage, the pedestrian walkway easement on Lots 1 and 4 extends the pedestrian route to the east property line providing a pedestrian and bicycling connection to Gene Coulon Park far the entire length of the Southport shoreline. The sidewalk on the east side of the hate/ provides a direct pedestrian route to the waterfront area. Along the south side of the hotel, the walkway and hard surface treatment of the hotel main entrance turnaround would provide a connection to the approved office buildings to the south as well as a direct link to the internal street which connects to Lake Washington Blvd NE. Similar vehicular links would be provided at driveways located along the east side of the hotel and at the southeast corner of the surface parking lot. Landscaped oreos are proposed along the east, south and west sides of the parking lat in order to provide a visual transition between the parking lat and surrounding uses. The SFEIS included mitigation measures requiring water access and trail connections from Gene Coulon Park to the Cedar River Trail by a dedicated public recreation easement /Exhibit 17). Three af the four required public recreation easements have been provided {Recording numbers 20051021000894, 20051021000895, and 20051021000896}. The fourth recreation easement over the flume/water adjacent ta Boeing property has yet to be recorded. The recreation easement should traverse north/south, and connect to existing east/west walkway easement for a future continuous trail connection from Gene Coulon Park to the Cedar River Trail (Exhibit 24). While the proposed hotel phase is not contingent upon the fulfillment of the SFEIS mitigation measure, the remaining public recreation easement will remain a requirement af the SFEIS. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties. Staff Comment: See Screening discussion above. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features. Staff Comment: The applicant has submitted revised view impacts studies from various points in the City (Exhibit 19}. Views depicting the redeveloped site from Mercer Island and north of City of Renton Deportment of Comm uni HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT anomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 14 of 30 Gene Coulon Park were not provided due to the distance from the site. Other than the residential uses constructed as part of the Southport Master Site Plan the proposal is not adjacent to residential uses or residential zoned property. While it is likely that views from areas of the City that are at higher elevations would be affected there would not be any views from residential areas or public areas obstructed. The maintenance of visual accessibility to Lake Washington is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14) as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15) and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between a development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project. Staff Comment: A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application /Exhibit 4). The landscape plan includes a general planting plan. The use of paving patterns, planting beds and site walls appear to reinforce the architectural elements of the proposed structure. It is unclear, without specific detail, if the proposed landscape planting plan provided a diverse mix of vegetation needed to meet the intent of the code. Staff recommends, as a condition of approval, the applicant submit a revised and detailed landscape plan complying with the following: a mixture af trees, shrubs, and graundcover. The revised detailed landscape plan, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior ta construction permit issuance. Underground irrigation systems are required to be installed and maintained for all landscaped areas. The irrigation system shall provide full water coverage of the planted areas specified on the plan. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets Staff Comment: The applicant provided a lighting plan as part of their submittal package (Exhibit 20). All exterior lighting would have full cutoff fixtures and be located to avoid excessive brightness or glare on adjacent properties and streets. Directional lighting and shading provisions for a/I light standards along the Lake Washington promenade is required to be implemented. f. ON-SITE IMPACTS: Site Plan Report Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation. Staff Comment: The requested placement of the propsoed hotel is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 (Exhibit 14) as amended by a previous Minor Modification approved on February 4, 2008 (Exhibit 15) and requested to be modified as part of the subject application (see Table 'A'). The entrance has a large porte cochere to provide both an architectural entry statement and weather protection for hotel guests, meeting attendees, and visitors arriving and departing by car, van, or tour bus. Location of the hotel's main vehicular and pedestrian entrance internally an the site is surrounded by buildings, serves pedestrian and vehicle needs, reduces naise impacts on surrounding uses, and retains privacy for hotel users and nearby uses. The building, specifically the terraces and hotel restaurant, would be oriented to views of Lake Washington City of Renton Department of Communh HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT onomic Development Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 15 of 30 Site Plan Report and distant vistas. Increased noise levels would be primarily associated with consstructian and would, therefore be temporary in nature. As part af the SFEIS the applicant is required ta conduct specific studies an the potential of significant HVAC noise impacts (Exhibit 17). Therefore staff recommends, as a conditan af approval, the applicant be required ta submit a noise impact study related ta potential HVAC equipment noise prior ta building permit approval. If studies indicate that HVAC equipment noise would adversely impact residential development an the site, mitigation can implemented consisting af noise barriers placed around the HVAC units, selection af alternative equipment with reduced noise levels, ar provision af silencers far air intake and exhaust. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs. The hate/ complies with the height standards in the COR-3 zoning. According to the mossing study provided {Exhibit 21), the hotel building uses much less of the development envelope than permitted by the COR-3 zone. The scale and bulk of the building is reduced through the use af differing materials an the building facades, building articulation and modulation. The building materials vary and are a combination af cement panels, cost in place concrete, corrugated metal paneling, glass/aluminum, and brick (Exhibit S). The proposed structure would not have a significant impact on light access or air movement an adjacent properties. The use af the project is not influenced by factors af light ar air. The location af the terraces an the north side af the building would provide protection from southerly prevailing winds and the design af the structure would not result in excessive shading of the property. The hate/ building mass occupies approximately 50% af the width af the site with the remaining portion devoted ta a large terrace. Ta avoid the impression af an oversized structure, the "C' shaped building contains considerable modulation including two "wings" each set back 50 feet from Lake Washington, with the lower 75 faat high portion capped by raaftap terraces, and the taller 125 faat portion set back an additional 50 feet from Lake Washington. The 125 foot high middle portion of the "C" is set back approximately 145 feet from the lake and includes a large terrace approximately 30 feet above the promenade. The applicant provided solar studies (Exhibit 23} which demonstrates the hate/ design maximizes the sun exposure for the terrace and the waterfront promenade area during the peak use times of the year. The use of trees in some of the perimeter landscaping and along the street would provide shading of sidewalks and parking areas with little, impact on adjacent properties. Staff has recommended the applicant provide a detailed landscape plan to be approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces. Staff Comment: The site consists of a gravel parking lot and little vegetation in the areas not taken up by the lot. None of the existing vegetation on the site is desirable natural landscape. Soil removal is not anticipated as the goal is ta balance cuts and fills on the site. Fifteen small caliper white birch trees along the northeast boundary of the development site ore being removed to be used at other locations in the Southport development. Due to the compact, urban nature of the hotel concept, the developed portion of the site will be primarily impervious surfaces. Pervious areas are planned to consist primarily of City of Renton Deportment of Communi HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT conomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UAl4-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 16 of 30 g. ACCESS: ,/ ,/ ,/ Site Plan Report perimeter landscaped buffers. Following complete build out the Southport Development is anticipated ta have impervious surface cover of approximately 85%. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. Staff Comment: See Landscaping discussion above. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties. Staff Comment: Access is provided via an internal private street connected to Lake Washington Blvd NE. Access to Lake Washington Blvd NE is coordinated with the Puget Sound Energy storage site and Gene Coulon Park but cannot be consolidated due to existing conditions. Adequate and safe vehicular access improvements ta and from the project site and neighboring properties have been completed or are planned for construction within the next year. Creation of a dedicated left-turn lane on Lake Washington Blvd NE has already been constructed. The applicant is proposing the addition of two lanes into Gene Coulon Park from Lake Washington Blvd NE and the signalization of the intersection. Additionally, the applicant is also proposing the installation af the railroad crossing arms at the entrance of the development. The planned improvements include channelization for turning movements to and from both Gene Coulon Park and Southport. The improvements would provide for better turning movements to and from Lake Washington Blvd NE. The major access point to the parking lot, which is at the southeast corner of the lot, is located as far away from the waterfront and as close to access to Lake Washington Boulevard NE as possible in order ta minimize parking conflicts between hotel guests, office tenants, ond residents. The internal street provides integrated access to street and parking facilities for both the hotel and the office buildings as well as a drop-off point for hate/ guests, visitors, and tour groups that is separate from other uses at Southport. The proposed development is expected to maintain the safety and efficiency af pedestrian and vehicle circulation on the site if all conditions of approval are complied with. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. Staff Comment: See discussion above under Circulation. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. Staff Comment: The loading and service area would be separated from the parking and pedestrian areas by locating off of the emergency access road along the west side of the property adjacent to the Boeing facility /Exhibit 2). Access to the service area would be provided via the ramp at the southeast corner of the parking lot and along the emergency vehicle access road along the south and west perimeter of the property. Views of the service City of Renton Department of Comm uni HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT conomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 17 of30 area itself would be screened from the hate/ entry area, terrace, and parking lat by a proposed planter screen wall with a trellis. The applicant would be required ta provide and have approved an irrigation plan prior ta construction permit approval. ,,,. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access. Staff Comment: Convenient transit service is not provided ta the area so no facilities are proposed. Although no carpool spaces have been provided, stalls have been provided far up ta 50 bicycles {Exhibit 3}. ,,,. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. Staff Comment: See discussion above under Circulation. h. OPEN SPACE: ,,,. Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site. Staff Comment: Approximately 3.2 acres of ground related opens space is planned far the entire Southport development. The hate/ has two large decks located an top of the east and west wings of the 75-faat high portion of the hate/. Each deck is approximately 2,800 square feet in size and open an three sides ta provide maximum sun exposure and territorial views. Bath decks are accessible ta hate/ guests from the elevators and corridors at this level. The applicant has achieved an attractive space that is inviting and comfortable far pedestrians. i. VIEWS AND PUBLIC ACCESS: ,,,. When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines. Staff Comment: See discussion above under Views. j. NATURAL SYSTEMS ,,,. Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. Staff Comment: There are no other natural systems located an site with the exception of shorelines. The proposed hate! and public opens spaces would be sited in order ta maximize shoreline access and views of Lake Washington. k. SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. ,,,. Police and Fire: Staff Comment: Pa/ice and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist ta furnish services ta the proposed development; if the applicant provides Cade required improvements and fees. The applicant would be required ta pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee. Currently this fee is assessed at $0.56 per square foot of new building area. Prior ta the issuance of the building permit, the applicant would be required ta coordinate with the Police Department ta include an-site safety features that would help lower demand far service. ,,,. Parks and Recreation: Staff Comment: The requested Hate/ at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the approved Southport Master Site Plan-2000 {Exhibit 14) as amended by a previous Minar Modification approved an February 4, 2008 {Exhibit 15) and requested ta be modified as part Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Comm uni HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT conomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report. & Decision .UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 18 of 30 ,/ ,/ Site Plan Report of the subject application (see Tobie 'A'). The subject sites proximity to Gene Coulon Park and the waterfront promenade provides on opportunity to create a public water-enjoyment or water dependent commercial space. Opportunities for passive recreation would be created through offering views of Lake Washington and access to active recreation opportunities at Gene Coulon Park. Drainage: Staff Comment: The existing 7.99 acre site consists of 2.5 acres of impervious surface area (asphalt and grovel) and 5.49 acres of pervious area (open grassy areas). A drainage report dated April 25, 2014 hos been submitted by Coughlin Porter Lundeen Engineering with the site plan application (Exhibit 8}. The proposed development is subject to full drainage review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and special requirements have been discussed in the report. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Existing Conditions. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin and within a U mile of Lake Washington. The project is meets the Direct Discharge Exemption. New flows created by the project would discharge directly into Lake Washington through a piped system. Runoff from the new parking lot would be routed through a wetvault before discharging into Lake Washington. Additional analysis may be required ot construction submittal. A surface water system development fee of $0.491 per square foot of new impervious surface would apply. The fee is payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. Transportation: Staff Comment: Vehicular access is provided from the closest public street, Lake Washington Boulevard NE, to the Southport development. Pedestrian access is provided along a portion of the streets adjacent to the Southport property. A continuous pedestrian system within the Southport development provides access to the waterfront and to Gene Coulon Park. The applicant submitted a trip generation analysis (Exhibit 6} for the requested reduction in hotel rooms/space and provides a comparison to the PM peak hour trip generation analyses documented in the Southport Master Site Plan approval (Exhibit 14) and the 2008 Southport Master Site Plan Minor Modification (Exhibit 15). The transportation assessment notes that that the PM Peak Hour trips generated by the uses in the proposed Minor Modification to the Southport Master Site Plan (1,314 trips) are less than the number of PM Peak Hour trips in the approved 2008 Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan due to a reduction in the number af hotel rooms. Additionally, the proposed number af trips is within the range of PM Peak Hour trips analyzed in the Planned Action (1,355 trips). As noted by TENW, the proposed Minor Modification to the Southport Master site Plan does require any mitigation measures beyond those required for the Level II Site Plan approved in 2000. As a result, no additional transportation analysis or traffic mitigation is anticipated. The measures identified in the Southport Planned Action Mitigation Document (Exhibit 17) mitigate the transportation impacts of the proposed hotel. The applicant is proposing the addition of two lanes into Gene Coulon Park from Lake Washington Blvd and the signalization of the intersection. Additionally, the applicant is also proposing the installation of the railroad crossing arms at the entrance of the development. The planned improvements include channelization for turning movements to and from both Gene Coulon Park and Southport. They also would provide for better turning movements to and from Lake Washington Blvd NE. However, additional queue length is needed in order to City of Renton Department of Community anomic Development Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 19 of 30 support left turns into and out of the proposed development. Therefore, staff recommends os a condition of approval the applicant be required to construct improvements ot the intersection of the site access/Coulon Park entrance and Lake Washington Blvd N per the approved construction drawings contained in 2/24/14 Agreement Between City of Renton and Hotel at Southport, LLC and Southport, LLC, (CAG 14-025). In addition, the applicant would be required to extend the Northbound left turn lone on Lake Washington Blvd N at the site access/Coulon Park entrance road to provide a total queue length of 145 feet. In addition, extend the Southbound left turn lane and the combined straight/left turn lane on Lake Washington Blvd N at the NE Park Drive intersection to provide a total queue length of 150 feet. The applicant shall construct the improvements prior to temporary occupancy of the proposed hotel. Traffic impact fees would be determined at time of building permit(s). Schools: Not Applicable. ,I' Water and Sewer: Staff Comment: Water and sewer service would be provided by the City of Renton. A minimum of a 10-inch looped water main within the proposed perimeter fire access road along the north, west and south property lines of the subject properties would be required. The new looped water main shall connect to the existing 12-inch water main located at the northeast corner and also at the southeast corner of the subject property. Staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant record a 15-foot wide utility easement to be dedicated to the City for the water main and appurtenances prior to temporary occupancy approval. A sewer main extension would also be required on site. I. PHASING: The applicant is not requesting any additional phasing request. 27. The proposal requires a Shoreline Substantial Development in order to account for the approved Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan and the proposed Minor Modification to the Master Site Plan (see Table A). The following table contains project elements intended to comply with the vested Shoreline Master Program Regulations, as outlined in RMC 4-3-090 (Exhibit 11): Table C: Vested Shoreline Master Program Regulations The subject site is located in the Urban Environment. The objective of the Urban Environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by providing public use, especially access to and along the water's edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. Use Regulations in the Urban Environment: Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are a limited resource, emphasis shall be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water oriented industrial and commercial areas. Priority is also given to N/A public visual and physical access to water in the Urban Environment. Identifying needs and Compliant planning for the acquisition of urban land for permanent public access to the water in the with original Urban Environment shall be accomplished through the Master Program (1999). To enhance Shoreline waterfront and ensure maximum public use, industrial and commercial facilities shall be Substantial designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities where practicable, and the various Development access points ought to be linked to non-motorized transportation routes such as bicycle and Permit hiking paths. Staff Comment: The proposal provides both commercial and residential uses in a mixed use format that is consistent with recently developed surrounding properties. A public enjoyment or water dependent commercial use, such as a hotel, was found to be Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community anomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 20 of 30 compatible, as part of the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22), with the other uses within the Southport development, the adjacent Boeing facility, the adjacent park, and the public waterfront promenade which abuts the hotel site. The restaurant and convention space would complement the existing uses in the area by drawing people from Gene Coulon Park or adjacent Boeing facility ta the pedestrian promenade. A hotel would create increased activity an the promenade and would serve as a signal that the space is accessible by the public. The propased hate/ would complement the existing an site and adjacent uses. Environmental Effects N/A Compliant with original Shoreline Substantial Development Permit N/A Compliant with original Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Compliant if all conditions a/approval are met Site Plan Report Pollution and Ecological Disruption: The potential effects on water quality, water, and land vegetation, water life, and other wildlife (including, for example spawning areas, migration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment: Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit far proposed hotel considered environmental aspects into its design (Exhibit 22). The proposed increase in hate/ height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with and implementation of the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22} as it relates ta the pollution and ecological disruption. Erosion: Erosion is to be controlled through the use of vegetation rather than structural means where feasible. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hate/ considered the control of erasion through vegetation into its design (Exhibit 22). The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates ta the erosion. The existing waterfront consists of a concrete bulkhead across the entire site frontage along Lake Washington which would not be altered. The depth of the water at the bulkhead varies from approximately 6 feet at the eastern end to approximately 14 feet at the western end and the tap of the bulkhead is 2 to 3 feet above the ordinary high water mark. No work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of Lake Washington. Geology: Important geological factors such as possible slide areas, on a site must be considered. Whatever activity is planned under the application for the development permit must be safe and appropriate in view of the geological factors prevailing. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hotel considered geolagicol factors into its design (Exhibit 13}. The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates ta the geology. A Geatechnical Report prepared by HartCrawser, dated April 18, 2014 was submitted as part of the Site Plan Review application /Exhibit 9}. The report states there is a risk of liquefaction during a significant seismic event through the upper 20-50 feet below grade. There are two potential foundation support alternatives. The first alternative is driven piles {precast or driven grout} however the report states this alternative would not address site City of Renton Department of Community anomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UAl4-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 21 of 30 liquefaction potential. The second alternative is to complete ground improvement using stone columns (Geopiers} across the entire site and construct spread footings. The geotechnical report includes specific recommendations in order to mitigate potential geotechnical impacts including: ground improvement verification. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the applicant be required to comply with the recommendations included on page 12 of the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report /Exhibit 7). Use Compatibility: The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, nearby, and possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: N/A Compliant with original Shoreline Substantial Development Site Plan Report View Obstruction: Buildings, smokestacks, machinery, fences, piers, poles, wires, signs, lights, and other structures. Staff Comment: The proposed design is more consistent with the vested Shoreline Master Program than the hotel design previously approved as part af the 2000 Substantial Shoreline Development Permit. The hotel would have a much lower presence along the waterfront and less af a view impact than the conceptual hotel envisioned in the 2000 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Instead of being o continuous 75 faot tall structure with 10 foot setbacks above the fifth story, o large terrace along the north frontage would be located approximately 28 feet above ground-level and occupy only 50% of the hotel's waterfront frontage (Exhibit 5/. The C-shaped partian a/the hate/ between 50 and 100 feet af the shoreline has twa 75-faat high wings separated by a large central terrace alsa approximately 28 feet above ground-level and topped by two large, 50 /oat deep rooftop terraces. The terraces provide visual access to the waterfront and territorial views. The wings of the 125-foot tall portion of the C-shaped building are set back 100 feet from the shoreline as permitted by the COR-3 zone while the central portion is set back approximately 145 feet from the shoreline. The 125 foot high portion of the hotel is oriented to an internal street shared with the office buildings and not to the shoreline side of the site. The applicant has submitted revised view impacts studies from various points in the City (Exhibit 19 }. Views depicting the redeveloped site from Mercer Island and north of Gene Coulon park were not provided due to the distance from the site. Other than the residential uses constructed as part of the Southport Master Site Plan the proposal is not adjacent to residential uses or residential zoned property. While it is likely that views from areas of the City that are at higher elevations would be affected there would not be any views from residential areas or public areas obstructed. The three approved office buildings to the south of the hate/ site (each 125 feet in height) impede views of the hotel, and of the shoreline, from Park Avenue. The Bristol 1 residential building prevents views from the playground in Gene Coulon Park. Trees would obstruct views of the development from Jones Avenue NE at NE 14'" St and the hotel would remain essentially indistinguishable from the tall office buildings in the view from the dock at Gene Coulon Park. Overall, the views from nearby surrounding areas are the same as for the approved Substantial Shoreline Development. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hotel provided mitigation for community disturbances (Exhibit 22). The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 22 of30 Permit Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates to community disturbances. See detailed discussion within Table B: Site Plan Review. Design Theme: Architectural styles, exterior designs, landscaping patterns, and other aspects of the overall design of a site shall be uniform or coordinated design, planned for the purpose of visual enhancement as well as for serving a useful purpose. Sta([_ Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development .,,. Permit for the proposed hotel provided a uniform and coordinated design (Exhibit 22). The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates to the design theme. See detailed discussion within Tobie B: Site Pion Review. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening shall be used to hide from public view any area that may impinge upon the visual quality of a site, for example, disposal bins, N/A storage yards, and outdoor work areas. Compliant with original Sta([_ Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Shoreline Permit for the proposed hotel provided screened visually unpleasant areas (Exhibit 13). The Substantial proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Permit Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 13} as it relates to visually unpleasant areas. See detailed discussion within Table B: Screening. N/A Outdoor Activities: Work areas, storage, and other activities on a site in a residential area Compliant shall be in enclosed buildings, as reasonably possible, to reduce distractions and other with original effects on surrounding areas. Outdoor activities of commercial and industrial operations Shoreline shall be limited to those necessary for the operation of the enterprise. Outdoor areas shall Substantial not be used for storage of more than minimal amounts of equipment, parts, materials, Development products, or other objects. Permit Sta[[_ Comment: Not applicable. Public Access: Where possible, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that trails, non-motorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may be developed providing greater shoreline utilization. Any trail system shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property rights. No property shall be acquired for public use without just compensation to the owner. Sta[[_ Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hotel considered public access into its design (Exhibit 22). The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22} as it relates to public access connections. The increase in height should not interfere with the public use of the shoreline. The hotel would be setback 50 feet. The public use of the shoreline would be enhanced by providing increased services, such as a restaurant, convention space, and a hotel. Staff has recommended the applicant record a public recreation easement to provide the final trail connection from Gene Coulon Park to the Cedar River Trail (see discussion within Table 8: Circulation}. Facility Arrangement: Where feasible shoreline developments shall locate the water dependent, water- related and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline and place all other Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 23 of 30 facilities inland. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hotel considered facility arrangement into its design (Exhibit 22}. The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates to the arrangement of facilities on the site. Hotel functions along the north side of the building ore located at grade with the waterfront promenade. Functions include exercise rooms, spa and o pool in the east wing; pre-function areas in the central section; and a large 2-level ballroom in the west wing. The ballroom has doors and large windows on the north fa,ade providing direct physical and visual access to the promenade and Lake Washington. The south half of this level is devoted to hotel administrative and bock of house functions. Landscaping: The natural and proposed landscaping should be representative of the indigenous character of the specific types of waterway (stream, lake edge, marshland) and shall be compatible with the Northwest image. The scenic, aesthetic, and ecological qualities of natural and developed shorelines should be recognized and preserved as valuable resources. Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Permit for the proposed hotel considered the scenic, aesthetic, and ecological qualities of natural and developed shorelines in its design (Exhibit 13}. The praposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 13} as it relates to landscaping. See discussion within Table B: Landscaping. Unique and Fragile Areas: Unique features and wildlife habitats should be preserved and incorporated into the site. Fragile areas shall be protected from development and encroachment. Staff Comment: Not applicable. Specific Use Regulations for Commercial Developments: Location of Developments: New commercial developments are to be encouraged to locate in those areas where current commercial uses exist. New commercial developments on Lake Washington which are neither water-dependent, nor water related, nor water N/A enjoyment, no which do not provide significant public access to and along the water's edge Compliant will not be permitted upon the shoreline. with original Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shareline Development Shoreline Substantial Permit for the proposed hotel considered the location of new commercial developments Development (Exhibit 22}. The proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Permit Substantial Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates to the location of new commercial developments. See discussion within Table B: Site Plan Review. N/A Incorporation of Public Recreational Opportunities: Commercial developments should Compliant incorporate recreational opportunities along the shoreline for the general public. with original Staff Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development Shoreline Permit for the proposed hotel incorporated public recreation opportunities (Exhibit 13). The Substantial Development proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Permit Development Permit, does not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 13} as it relates to the incorporation of public recreation Site Pion Report City of Renton Department of Community onomic Devefapment Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOO, MOO HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Page 24 of 30 opportunities. The subject sites proximity to Coulon Pork and the waterfront promenade continue to provide an opportunity to create a public water-enjoyment or water dependent commercial space that could enable people to enjoy views of Lake Washington. View Impacts: The applicant for a shoreline development permit for a new commercial development must indicate in his application the effect which the proposed commercial development will have upon the scenic view prevailing in the given area. Specifically, the ,/' applicant must state in his permit what steps have been taken in the design of the proposed commercial development to reduce to a minimum interference with the scenic view enjoyed by any significant number of people in the area. Staff_ Comment: See discussion above under View Obstruction. Setback: A commercial building should be located no closer than 50 feet to the ordinary N/A high water mark. Compliant Staff_ Comment: The City concluded that the approved Substantial Shoreline Development with original Permit for the proposed hotel met commercial setback along shorelines {Exhibit 22}. The Shoreline Substantial proposed increase in hotel height, necessitating the additional Shoreline Substantial Development Development Permit, would not prevent consistency with the approved Shoreline Permit Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22) as it relates to setbacks. See discussion within Table B: Shoreline Setback. G. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The Southport Hotel is consistent with the Minor Modification criteria to a Master Site Plan and therefore complies with the Planned Action thresholds. Z. The proposal complies with the Administrative Site Plan Review Criteria if all conditions of approval are met. 3. The proposal is consistent with the requested Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and would not prevent consistency with approved Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (Exhibit 22). 4. This requested permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. 5. 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. 6. This Shoreline Substantial Development permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the applicant fails to comply with any condition(s) hereof. 7. Construction permits shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. 8. The proposal is compliant and consistent with the plans, policies, regulations and approvals to which it is vested if all conditions of approval are met. Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 25 of 30 9. Staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties and uses as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. 10. The proposed use is anticipated to be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses as permitted in the UCN-2 zoning classification. 11. The scale, height and bulk of the proposed structure is appropriate for the site. 12. The proposed hotel offers a superior design solution as an alternative to the upper story setback requirement of the zone. 13. Safe and efficient access and circulation has been provided for all users if all conditions of approval are met. 14. The proposed structure would not block approved view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier. 15. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 16. Adequate parking for the proposed use has been provided and the proposal is compliant with all parking modification criteria if all conditions of approval are complied with. 17. The proposed site plan ensures safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and has mitigated potential effects on the surrounding area if all conditions of approval are complied with. 18. The proposed development would not generate any long term harmful or unhealthy conditions. Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use have been evaluated and mitigated if all conditions of approval are complied with. 19. Landscaping has been provided in all areas not occupied by the building or paving. ~ H. DECISION: The proposed Master Site Plan Minor Modification, Administrative Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Upper Story Setback Modification, and (stall length) Parking Modification for the Hotel at Southport, File No. LUA14-000645, SM, SA-A, MOD, MOD are approved. The Parking Modification (for an increase in number of stalls) is denied. The proposal is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures issued as part of the SFEIS, dated September 17, 1999 (Exhibit 17). 2. The applicant shall be required to demonstrate compliance with the required aver western property line setback of 20 feet prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall submit screening detail for all surface mounted utility and mechanical equipment to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager prior to primary building permit approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to revise the site to eliminate at least 20 parking stalls and include additional intervening landscaping within the surface parking area to the satisfaction of the Current Planning Project Manager. The revised site and landscaping plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit approval. 5. The applicant shall provide a material/colors board to the Current Planning Project Manager prior to the primary building permit approval. The materials board shall demonstrate compatibility with the Bristol Apartments and future office buildings. Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Community onomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Page 26 of 30 6. The applicant shall submit a revised and detailed landscape plan complying with the following: a mixture of trees, shrubs, and groundcover. The revised detailed landscape plan, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to construction permit issuance. 7. The applicant shall be required to submit a noise impact study related to potential HVAC equipment noise prior to primary building permit approval. If studies indicate that HVAC equipment noise would adversely impact residential development on the Southport site, mitigation can implemented consisting of noise barriers placed around the HVAC units, selection of alternative equipment with reduced noise levels, or provision of silencers for air intake and exhaust. 8. The applicant shall be required to extend the Northbound left turn lane on Lake Washington Blvd Nat the site access/Coulon Park entrance road to provide a total queue length of 145 feet. In addition, extend the Southbound left turn lane and the combined straight/left turn lane on Lake Washington Blvd Nat the NE Park Drive intersection to provide a total queue length of 150 feet. The applicant shall construct the improvements prior to temporary occupancy of the proposed hotel. 9. The applicant shall comply with additional recommendations included on page 12 of the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report (Exhibit 7). ~fJ,/)-fµ Jennifer Henning, Planning Directtf!= TRANSMITTED this 23'd day of September 2014 to the Contact/Applicont/Owner: Applicant: Greg Krape Hotel at Southport, LLC 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Suite 50 Renton, WA 98056 Owner: Michael Christ 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Suite 50 Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED this 2fd day of September 2014 to the Parties of Record: Yeh-Hee Hahn Bob Braaf CBRE Brokerage Services 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N, Ste 1201 Pacific Ave, Ste #1502 #C411 Tacoma, WA 98042 The Boeing Company PO Box 3707 Seattle, WA 98124-2207 Renton, WA 98056 TRANSMITTED this 23'd day of September 2014 ta the following: C.E. "Chip" Vincent CED Admini5tratar Steve Lee~ Development Engineering Manager Vanessa Dolbee~ Current Plonning Manager Fire Marshal Site Plan Report Date Contact: Bill Stalzer Stalzer & Associates 603 Stewart St, Suite 512 Seattle, WA 98101 Mike O'Hafloran 44204" Ave Renton, WA 98059 City of Renton Department of Community onomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Land Use Action Appeals, Request far Reconsideration, & Expiration Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Page 27 of 30 The review decisions will become final if the decisions are not appealed within 14 days of the decision date. Minor Modification to Approved Master Site Plan Approval Appeal: Appeals of the administrative modification to approved master site plan must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 7, 2014. Administrative Site Development Plan Approval Appeal: Appeals of the administrative site development plan review decision must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 7, 2014. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit: Appeals of the administrative site development plan review decision must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 7, 2014. Parking Modification Approval/Denial Appeal: Appeals of the parking modification decisions must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 7, 2014. Upper Story Modification Approval Appeal: Appeals of the parking modification decisions must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on October 7, 2014. SHORELINE APPEALS: Appeals of Shoreline Substantial Development Permit issuance must be made directly to the Shorelines Hearings Board. Appeals are made by filing a request in writing within the twenty-one (21) days of receipt of the final order and concurrently filing copies of such request with the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office as provided in section 18(1) of the Shorelines Management Act of 1971. All copies of appeal notices shall also be filed with the City of Renton Planning Division and the City Clerk's office. ALL OTHER APPEALS: An appeal of the decision(s) must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the $250.00 application fee to Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that a decision be reopened by the Administrator (Decision-maker). The Administrator (Decision-maker) may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the Administrator (Decision-maker) finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal timeframe. SHORELINE EXPIRATION PERIOD: Unless a different time period is specified in the shoreline permit as authorized by RCW 90.58.143 and subsection Jl of RMC 4-9-190, construction activities, or a use or activity, for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years of the effective date of a shoreline permit, or the shoreline permit shall terminate, and a new permit shall be necessary. However, the Planning Division may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed with the Planning Division before the expiration date, and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and the Washington State Department of Ecology. DEFINITION OF COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: the construction applications must be submitted, permits must be issued, and foundation inspections must be completed before the end of the two (2) year period. ALL OTHER EXPIRATION PERIODS: The Administrative Site Development Plan Review decision will expire two (2) years from the date of decision. A single two (2) year extension may be requested pursuant to RMC 4-9-200. THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Community HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 anomic Development Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-00064S, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Page 28 of 30 to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only~ they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 3. Commercial, multi-family, new single-family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 4. Pile driving (if applicable) shall be restricted to the hours between 7:00 am and 8:00 pm, Monday through Friday. No pile driving work shall be permitted on Saturdays and Sundays. Or the City of Renton may authorize alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where applicable. 5. As part of the building permit design process, a geotechnical engineer retained by the developer shall survey existing structures in the surrounding area to determine the potential for vibration related impacts. 6. All landscaping shall be irrigated by an approved irrigation system prior to final occupancy permits 7. Directional lighting and shading provisions for all light standards along the Lake Washington promenade is required to be implemented. Water: 1. A minimum of a 10-inch looped water main within the proposed perimeter fire access road along the north, west and south property lines of the subject properties will be required. The new looped water main shall connect to the existing 12-inch water main located at the northeast corner and also at the southeast corner of the subject properties. A 15-foot wide utility easement shall be dedicated to the City for the water main and appurtenances. 2. Installation of new fire hydrants will be required by Renton Fire Prevention. The number and location of the hydrants shall be determined based on the City's review of the site utilities and roadway plan. 3. Installation of fire sprinkler stub with a detector double check valve assembly (DDCVA) for backflow prevention will be required. The DDCVA shall be installed in an outside underground vault or in the building sprinkler room if it meets the conditions as shown on City's standard plan for the interior installation of a DDCVA. 4. Domestic water meter with a reduced backflow prevention assembly (RPBA) will be required. The RPBA shall be installed behind the meter and inside a heated enclosure ("hot-box") per City standard plan no. 350.2. Sizing of the meter shall be done in accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code meter sizing criteria. Meter size 3-inch and above shall be installed inside a concrete vault located outside of the building per City Standard Plan No. 320.4. The applicant/design engineer shall provide adequate room in the parking lot or in the landscape areas for the installation of the water meter(s) vault and fire sprinkler vault. 5. Installation of landscape irrigation meter and double check valve assembly (DCVA) may be required. 6. System development fees for water will be owed based on the size of the new domestic water meter, fire line and landscape irrigation meter that will serve the new building. Meter installation fees will be based on the size of each new meter. Sewer. 1. A sewer main extension will be required on site. 2. System development fees for sewer will be owed based on the size of the new domestic water meter(s) that will serve the new building. Meter installation fees will be based on the size of each new meter. 3. Grease interceptor shall be sized in accordance with the UPC and shall be reviewed and approved by the City's waste Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT onomic Development Administrative Site Pion Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Report of September 23, 2014 Page 29 of 30 water department. Surface Water: 1. A surface water system development fee of $0.491 per square foot of new impervious surface will apply. This is payable prior to issuance of the utility construction permit. 2. A drainage report dated April 25, 2014 has been submitted by Coughlin Porter Lundeen Engineering with the site plan application. The proposed development is subject to Full Drainage Review in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. The existing 7.99 acre site consists of 2.5 acres of impervious surface area (asphalt and gravel) and 5.49 acres of pervious area (open grassy areas). The engineer performed a Level 1 Analysis. All core and special requirements have been discussed in the report. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Existing Conditions. The site is located within the Lower Cedar River Basin and within a Y. mile of Lake Washington. The project is meets the Direct Discharge Exemption since the new flows created by the project will discharge directly into Lake Washington through a pipe system. Runoff from the new parking lot will be routed through a wetvault before discharging into Lake Washington. Additional analysis may be required at construction submittal. 3. A Construction Stormwater General Permit from Department of Ecology will be required if grading and clearing of the site exceeds one acre. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required for this site. 4. Paving and trench restoration will comply with the City's Trench Restoration and Overlay Requirements. Transportation: 1. Traffic impact fees will be determined at time of building permit. Fire: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 3,000 gpm. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 150-feet of the structure and two additional hydrants are required within 300-feet of the structure. A looped water main is required to be installed around the building and the site, maximum hydrant spacing in commercial areas is 300-feet on center. A minimum of a 12-inch main shall be extended throughout the site to accommodate future larger high rise office buildings. Off-site improvements required as well. 2. Approved fire sprinkler, fire standpipe and fire alarm systems are required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department. Direct outside access is required to the fire sprinkler riser room. Fully addressable and full detection is required for the fire alarm system. 3. Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150-feet of all points on the building. Fire lane signage required for the on-site roadway. Required turning radius is 25-feet inside and 45-feet outside. Roadways shall be a minimum of 20-feet wide. Roadways shall support a minimum of a 30-ton vehicle and 322-psi point loading. Minimum vertical clearance is 13-feet, 6-inches. Fire lane signage required per code. Maximum slope is 15 percent. 4. An electronic site plan is required prior to occupancy for pre-fire planning purposes. 5. All buildings equipped with an elevator in the City of Renton are required to have at least one elevator meet the size requirements for a bariatric size stretcher. Car size shall accommodate a minimum of a 40-inch by 84-inch stretcher. 6. The building shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall verify both incoming and outgoing minimum emergency radio signal coverage. If inadequate, the building shall be enhanced with amplification equipment in order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed amplification systems. 7. Applicant shall provide a completed Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the swimming pool area and generator fuel supply prior to building permit issuance. Use of City of Renton form or approved equivalent is required. 8. Separate plans and permits required for all kitchen hood fire suppression systems. 9. The project shall comply with all applicable high rise requirements of the International Building and Fire Codes, 2012 editions. 10. All high-rise buildings shall be equipped with an approved rescue air replenishment system. The system shall provide an adequate pressurized fresh air supply through a permanent piping system for the replenishment of portable life sustaining air equipment carried by Fire and Emergency Services Department, rescue and other personnel in the performance of their duties. Location of access stations, as well as installation and maintenance of the air replenishment systems, shall meet the requirements as determined by the Fire Code Official. A specifications document for the construction of air replenishing systems that conforms to the breathing equipment used by the Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department will be made available by the Fire Code Official. General: 1. Separate permits and fees for side sewer connection and storm connection will be required. 2. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. A licensed Civil Engineer shall prepare the civil plans. 3. Rockeries or retaining walls greater than 4 feet in height will be require a separate building permit. Structural Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community · onomic Development HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT Report of September 23, 2014 Administrative Site Plan Report & Decision UA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Page 30 of 30 calculations and plans shall be submitted for review by a licensed engineer. Special Inspection is required. 4. A tree removal and tree retention/protection plan shall be included with the civil plan submittal. Site Plan Report I I ' (_ I I I I ' ' I I I I ('--.' ------ / LAKE WASHINGTON --------- ~ j --~ _L\ ~-~~ 1 ~ I _j --~-l -I ~~~ ...,. ~~ ::.!MT :=-........ BOEING RENTON Pl.ANT EXHIBIT 2 SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION 8CM.E: ,·-~-v GENE COULON PARK ~ '¥} PUGET SOUND ENERGY 0/ @I I -·-..;;;;:;;;;;- ,_,_ ...... _ __,,, ··-#---· 0,..,,,,,-,.-, .. -'-""'",,. G ..... M.,OCAI.> ~ / / ,.,,,,_,_,.....,=:, ~ Souri,11>onT ~ ,r,:n J>r\tlnt111n1, 1,, MULV/\Nt '12 ...... ,1~•,j"' '"'°"'"" .. , .. .,.,,...,,_ ,,.,. ... ,~ .. ··--- ·-··-1 SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION 05.16.2014 ~""i';i!+.;....: .. ....,,., 1-11'1':~ : I J 0 !1'! I" '" § ii 111 I:, :. 1,1 i! It· 1Hf iii! 11 111111 •01&100• ~ .... 0 ~ .... c( I I 1,i ,,! i'' iri 111 ~ !! !i! '!! ! d I I j I !i! • , I ~ I l ~ B El B '. < i l M l:; al 1-1 ::c >< w I !81 ii {ij " - "l ~ ... rr 0 z <a'>; ~ t~ I -a: ;~ ,-~ ~ •I...,; ' _, ] ·1 ~ .; . b~ ~:?; I'!! ::. "' ;;; il -,, ... ~~ Ii ! ;!; ~~ :, ~ D l• ~ 0 ~ -ti "' Cl) r'_'s) (,', Oc d~-•-,: b o o 0 \ . ./ • 0 .. ' z Q ii 0 -~ <a*>i ' I l I z;;: " M ~ ~; 11 I -I :"iw 0 ~ -· N H< ~ . i lj a. -<D ,., UJ > liil ' w ~ >-w I 0 ..; l''• ' ~ :I -0: 1!:l I ~ ~ <f) 0 0 ~ ! -!!it I ~ ,.,. : ' " <tt: 0 z T <,~: ' I I .o ~o ~ .. ze I - i ~i oo -' -:z ~z o" ffiI ill Ia .. ~~ wo ~w :I 0 ~ -..,. I - €1.f' ,r-'' ' S· I I ~ I: I ' I . I I I I ~ 1' 11 'Iii · Ii I I I ii I' €: -,-----I,----' ----,----I ----, ----.----' i - I ! i! I i , I I ! "~! ® 1---'J.-J___j_ -J-_ L f L. -4-j I I, I I I I I p I i! I I I ! I -,-r-1,--r-;-i-: . I I, I I I I I • .. I I I I , I I I ---I+-----'----' --I-----.. ----1--_L__ ---1 i! ! I ! I I I i ! ,, : -- 1 LJ_J_J I I _J~J_ I I I I I I I ! i 1 I II I I I I I I I I I ~ r-~1~-~-rr~-~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 I I I I -r•-t---,--i-- 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I z s: '.)w a. - UJ > f-w iii 0: " 0 ~ "' ,ci " -------;-- ------§ - ,--------.. 1 ~ ~ I ·~ I j z 0 ~ u; 1;1 ! ~ lh w N lJ:i ' r 0 i1H " ! 0 ~ iJit 0 w .. ~h'. 0 z <,~: ' I I .o ul ~ ~ " Zr I -0~ . I b~ :I rZ ii I I~ .. ffiI wo 0: i ~m :I 0 ! . ..,.. i- I , 8 i--~i-++-1-1--t-+-t I I I > I I I I I I I I I I ' ' I I ' ' I ' I I l f I I ZS: '.'iw Cl. -w> >-w iii a: .,. 0 N <O .,; 0 ! !:i h! z !ii 0 ~ l1l I! i qi ~ <"l jifl w 0 1if/ l1 r :J: ~ ,i ' ~ c>L -·, .. z ~. 0 z <.~: · • I T z s: ~ 0 ~~ 0 w ~ wO ~ .. e I -:"iw 0 .~ ~ -· "! il > '.f~ :z z ilj "--111 w '-I" 'i' w> <D 1rn ~ .. 1 .... w 15i;:; w 0 wo -0'.'. .,; U!l ~~ e ::1: ~~ :I ~ Q") 0 ~ a w 0 ! . ~ ,,, ~---- ' - e , I I I I I I I I I I I I i ! I I I ! ! ! ! ! I -~-~i~-+-~~~~1~ I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I ! ! ! ! ! I ~~~----1-~-~~~-~1~~~ I I I I I I i , . I I I ! ! -,_ f---l ----1 + I -+-j ----+ "'"l-1:,,::,,,j. I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I -'--f---1----l-+,:-; -,I ' -I ! I~ I I I I ~I' I ~ I • I I I I I I 11 I ' . @ i l L iii ! ~ \) 'f' 'f ~I~ ! ,, '' "I " '" ~ j ~~ ,.;! i . I •c ~ ~:~ ~ 15"' ' .I. , . ~n,~i l ~ 8:' . "" ! I g; ;l;I: i ~~99 $9~9~ i i'.l ,.,,§ ~ ~Bg " Transportation Assessment DATE: May 13, 2014 TO: Bill Stalzer Stalzer Associates FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW ~TENW Transportation Engineering Northwest Entire Document Available Upon Request SUBJECT: Southport Transportation Assessment for Master Plan Minor Modification Request TENW Project No. 4838 The purpose of this document is to provide a transportation assessment of the current Minor Modification Proposal to the approved Southport Master Plan. This document includes a trip generation analysis of the revised land uses in the master plan for the Southport Development and provides a comparison to the results of the PM peak hour trip generation analyses documented in the Master Plan Minor Modification of 2008 and the Level 2 Site Plan (LUA99-l 89, SA-A, SM) of July 18, 2000. Description of Master Plan Minor Modification The current proposed Master Plan Minor Modification has the same land uses as those in the 2000 Level II Site Plan and 2008 Master Plan, but contains a slightly smaller hotel (350 rooms v. 355 rooms) than in the 2008 Master Plan, and larger hotel than the Level II Site Plan. The table below summarizes the land uses in all three Master Plans for the purposes of trip generation comparison. 7/18/2000 2/4/2008 Proposed Master Type Approved Approved Plan Minor Land Use Units Level II Site Plan Master Plan Modification Residential Units 395 383 383 Retail SF 30,000 30,000 30,000 Restaurant SF 10,000 10,000 10,000 Hotel Rooms 220 355• 350 Office SF 750,000 750,000 750,000 • Note: Uo to 50 rooms could be for residential use. I Trip Generation Comparison As stated previously, the Master Plan Minor Modification proposal has the same types of land uses as both previous Master Plans. Detailed PM peak hour trip generation calculations were developed for the the current Minor Modification Proposal, which are provided in the Attachment For purposes of comparison, it should be noted that the same version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (!TE) Trip Generation manual, 6th edition, was used to estimate trip generation for weekday PM peak hour conditions, Pass-by reductions for the nsportation Planning I Design I Traffic Impact & Operations EXHIBIT 6 ;E 8' Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office (425) 889-6747 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE MEMO APPLICATION NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: LUA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Hotel at Southport, LLC Southport Hotel The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to: COR-3 zoning classification as part ofthe Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999); the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit {LUA99-189, SA-A, SM); and subsequent Master Site Plan Modification {dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark {OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site {LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement {FSEIS} and mitigation document was issued for the Southport Planned Action in September 1999. Ordinance #4804 was adopted by the City Council in October 1999 designating a Planned Action of the subject site. The objective of the Southport Planned Action SEIS was to complete the environmental review outfront on the overall conceptual master site plan. Project applications and development phases are then allowed to proceed without additional environmental review provided the proposed development is consistent with the plan alternatives and level of development that was analyzed in the EIS process. On April 4, 2000, the City determined that the Southport Master Site Plan was consistent with both the range of plan alternatives that were evaluated in the EIS and with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Oridinance. The City approved a minor modification to the Master Site Plan on February 4, 2008. The City also determined that the modified Southport Master Site Plan (2008) was consistent with both the range of plan alternatives that were evaluated in the EIS and with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Oridinance. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: EXHIBIT 7 1083 Lake Washington Blvd ': City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Upon determination by the City's Environmental Review Committee that the proposal meets the criteria outlined in the Planned Action Ordinance (Ordinance #4804) and qualifies as a planned action, the proposal shall not require a SEPA threshold determination, preparation of an EIS, or be subject to further review pursuant to SEPA. The City's Environmental Review Committee has determined the proposed minor modification is consistent with the Master Site Plan which has been designated as a "planned action", pursuant to RCQW 43.21C.030, as it meets all of the following conditions: ,/ The proposal is located within the Southport Planned Action Area. ,/ The proposed uses and activities are consistent with those described in the Planned Action EIS and Planned Action Qualifications. ,/ The proposal is within the Planned Action thresholds and other criteria of the Planned Action Qualifications. ,/ The proposal is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and applicable zoning regulations if all conditions of approval are met. ,/ The proposal's significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified in the Planned Action EIS. ,/ The proposal's impacts have been mitigated by application of the measures identified in Ordinance #4804, and other applicable City regulations, together with any modifications or variances or special permits that may be required. ,/ The proposal complies with all applicable local, state and/or federal laws and regulations, and the Environmental Review Committee determines that these constitute adequate mitigation. ,/ The proposal is not an essential public facility as defined by RCW.36.70A.200(1). SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Public Works Department Date Mark Peterson, Administrator Fire & Emergency Services Date Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department Date C.E. Vincent, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development Date ' / DATE 04/25/14 / CLIENT MulvannyG2 Architecture / PROJECT South port Hotel / CONTENT Technical lnfonnalion Report Entire Document Available Upon Request COUGHLINPORTERLUNDEEN STRUCTURAL CIVIL SEISMIC ENGINEERING EXHIBIT 8 Entire Document Available Upon Request Geotechnical Engineerhig Design Study Southport Hotel Renton, Washington Prepared for Seco Development April 18, 2014 19014-02 EXHIBIT 9 -.. 0 256 0 128 256 Feet WGS _ 1984_ Web_Mercator _Auxiliary_ Sphere City of R-e11ton 8 Finance & IT Division Aerial Photo Addresses Parcels Information Technology. GIS RentonMapSuppart@Rentonwa.gov 7/14/2014 EXHIBIT 10 This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping sita and is fur reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or atheMise reliable. THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION 1:3 s. ~ p. j "' ~ "' .i:,. 4-2-1208 Entire Document Available Upon Request .RDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS ~ LO'f DIMENS(Of',IS Minimum Lot Size Minimum Lot Width Minimum Lot Depth LO'f COVERAGE Maximum Lot Coverage for Buildings None None None None for properties located within the "Downtown Core Area".15 For properties located outside the Downtown Core Area: 65% of total lot area or 75% if parking is provided within the building or within a parking garage. DENSl'fY (NetDensity .in Dwellir,g Units per Acre) Minimum Net Residential 125 dwelling units per net acre. Density The minimum density requirements shall not apply to the subdivision, short plat and/or development of a legal lot 1 /2 acre or less in size as of March 1, 1 995. Confllots: see RMC 4-1-080. EXHIBIT 11 25,000 sq. ft. None None 65%29 of total lot areaor75%29 if parking is provided within the building or within a parking garage. NA None None None 65% of total lot area or 75% if parking is provided within the building or within a parking garage. Where a development involves a mix of uses then minimum residential density shall be 16 dwelling units per net acre. When proposed development does not involve a mix of uses, then minimum res- idential density shall be 5 dwelling units per net acre. The same area used for commercial and office development can also be used to calculate residential density. Where com- mercial and/or office areas are utilized in the calculation of density, the City may require restrictive covenants to ensure the maximum density is not exceeded should the property be subdivided or in another manner made available for sepa- rate lease or conveyance. f- t)' ~ "' 0 0) . l 4-3-060 (Reserved) Entire Document Available Upon Request 4-3-090B SUMMARY: 4-3-070 (Reserved) 4-3-080 PUBLIC USE/"P" SUFFIX NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES: A. NOTICE REQUIRED: The owner of any property designated with a "P" suffix shall be required to give written notice to the owners of all property within a three hundred foot (300'} radius of the site involved, as well as all residents and/or businesses within a three hun- dred foot (3001 radius of the site or facility, at least sixty (60) days in advance of any of the fol- lowing: 1. A proposed change of use of the pre- mises; 2. A proposed change of the major tenant and/or tenant group using the premises if . such a change is determined by the Planning/ Building/Public Works Administrator or desig- nee to have probable major adverse impacts to the immediate surrounding area; or 3. Any proposed change of ownership of the premises. Such notice shall not be required if the proposed change has been identified in a Master Plan adopted pursuant to the site development plan re- view regulations in chapter 4-9 RMC. The notice shall also invite these neighborhood property owners, residents and/or business persons to at- tend an informational meeting in the area, hosted by the owner of the property or their representa- tive. {Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) B. NOTICE CONTENT: The notices shall indicate that a summary of the meeting shall be prepared by the owner or owner's agent at least thirty (30) days in advance of any of the above three (3) actions in subsection A of this Section, Notice Required. At least four- teen (14) days in advance of the information meeting, the owner, agency, or organization host- ing the meeting shall give general notice of the meeting in a local newspaper having broad circu- lation in the area. This meeting is intended to ex- plain the proposed changes and invite citizen : ... ~, .... EXHIBIT 12 .. __ ., .... a, y u, the meeting shall be mailed within seven (7) days of the meeting to the Development Services Division and to all in attendance who re- quest, in writing, to receive the summary as well as parties that do not attend the meeting but re- quest in writing to receive the summary. In addi- tion, the Development Services Division shall receive and keep the summary of the meeting in its preapplication files for future reference. D. SPECIAL HEIGHT ALLOWANCES FOR PUBLICLY OWNED STRUCTURES: Any publicly owned structures on property desig- nated with a "P" suffix shall be allowed to develop pursuant to the special height exceptions tor such uses contained in RMC 4-2-1100, Condition 9, 4-2-110H, Condition 21, 4-2-120C, Condition 20, or 4-2° 130B, Condition 13, as well as under the Master Plan review regulations. (Ord. 4523, 6-5-1995; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) 4-3-090 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM REGULATIONS: A. PROGRAM ADOPTED, The Shoreline Master Program, as issued and prepared by Ctty of Renton Planning Commis- sion, of which one printed copy in book form has heretofore been filed and is now on file in the of- fice of the City Clerk and made available for ex- amination by the general public, is hereby adopted as the Shoreline Master Program by the City of Renti:m. (Ord. 3758, 12-5-1983, Rev. 7-22-1985 (Min.), 3-12-1990 (Res. 2787), 7-16-1990 (Res. 2805), Rev. 9-12-1993 (Min.), Ord. 4716, 4-13-1998) The following is an excerpt from the officially adopted Shoreline Master Program. The com- plete Shoreline Master Program, including poli- cies, should also be consulted. (Ord. 4722, 5-11-1998) 8. AUTHENTICATION, RECORD OF PROGRAM: The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to duly authenticate and record a copy of the above mentioned Shoreline Master Program to- gether with any amendments or additions thereto, together with an authenticated copy of this Sec- tion. (Ord. 3094, 1-10-1977, eff. 1-19-1977) 3 • 20.57 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCENO. 4804 Entire Document Available Upon Request AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON DESIGNATING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE SOUTHPORT SITE, APPROXIMATELY 17 ACRES LOCATED ADJACENT TO LAKE WASIDNGTON AND BETWEEN GENE COULON PARK ON THE EAST AND BOEING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS ON THE WEST. WHEREAS, RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164, -168, and-172 allow and govern the application of a Planned Action designation; and, WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 33 79, the City indicated its intent to study and consider a Planned Action designation for the Shuflleton Steam Plant site, also known as the Southport site; and, WHEREAS, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) has been prepared for a portion of the Shuffleton Steam Plant site, entitled the Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and such document considers the potential environmental impacts of a phased mixed-use project on approximately 17 acres of property within the City limits; and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4 796 the City has amended the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for the subject area from Employment Area -Industrial (EA-I) to Center Office Residential (COR); and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4800 the City has amended the Zoning Map from Heavy Industrial (IH) to Center Office Residential (COR); and, WHEREAS, this Ordinance would designate certain land uses and activities as "Planned Actions" which would be consistent with the Center Office Residential (COR) designation and zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF RENTON DOES ORDAIN: is to: SECTION I. Purpose. The City of Renton declares that the purpose of this ordinance A Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions within the subject site as ''Planned Actions" consistent with state law, RCW 43.21C.031; and, B. Provide the public with an understanding as to what constitutes a Planned Action and how land use applications which qualify as Planned Actions will be processed by the City; and, C. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process for this site by relying on completed and existing detailed environmental analysis for the subject site; and, EXHIBIT 13 I Attachment C A. Level II Site Plan Review DECISION DATE: July 18, 2000 Project Name: Southoort Level II Site Plan Applicant: Michael Christ SEGO Development Southport, LLC 10843 NE 81h Street, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 Owner: Same as aoolicant Contact Person: Rex Allen SEGO Development 10843 NE 81h Street, Suite 200 Bellevue. WA 98004 File Number: LUA-99-189, SA-A. SM Project Manager: Elizabeth Higgins Entire Document Available Upon Request Project Description (revised): The applicant, SECO Development, requests Level II Site Plan Review. The Level II Site Plan for Southport proposes a mixed-use development consisting of six buildings. The development would include a 7-story, 220 room hotel above one level of parking (220 parking stalls), two residential buildings with 4-stories of residential units above two levels of parking (682 parking stalls) that include a total of 395 residential units, and three office buildings with ?-stories of offices above four levels of parking (1,855 parking staJls). The office buildings would include a total approximately 720,000 to 750,000 square feet. These development amounts are consistent with the Southport Planned Action Ordinance, Mitigation Document, and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement The proposal includes a promenade along the waterfront of Lake Washington. Public access to the promenade would be provided from Gene Coulon Park, a City park adjacent to the north of the subject site. Off-site improvements would consist of improvements to Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the project entrance, signal and channelization modifications at the Park. Drive/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, and signalization of the project entrance/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. On April 5, 2000, the Southport Level II Site Plan was deemed to be a Planned Action. On April 7, 2000, the City of Renton issued a Shoreline Substantial Permit for the Southport Level II Site Plan. These actions were not appealed before the proscribed appeal periods terminated. Following approval of the Southport Level II Site Plan, a more detailed, Level I Site Plan Review would be required for subsequent, individual, phases of the proposed master site plan. The Level I Site Plans must be consistent with the overall Level II site plan as approved. Building permits may not be issued until approval of the Level I Site Plans. Project Location: 1101 Lake Washinaton Boulevard North Proiect Location: 1101 Lake WashinQton Boulevard North Site Area: Aooroximately 17 acres EXHIBIT 14 rµk.-- ./ ~,,.·r~_:re,_,_ .. ·~ D,·1,1,· LJ~·. \1s;·or T _ T PlanningButlding.1'ublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E.~ Adminis•rafor /:·_'\·'r1.."'')·------------------------------ CIT) :.>F RENTON February 1. 2(~18 Bill Stalzer Entire Document Available Upon Request Stalzer .:ind As:scx:iare~ (,03 Stcv.an Street. Suite -119 Scartle. WA 9SIUI SLBJECT: .\II~OR .\lOOlflCATIO~ REQIEST FOR SOl'THPORT .\!ASTER PL\~ (FILE :S.O. LL\.99-189, Si\·A S.\IJ I am rn receipt of your letter and attachments of January 23. 2008. wherein you request approval of a minor mod1fica11on to the approved master plan for the Southport development. The request ;s summarized below. Request I. The office square footage is reduced from 780.000 square ieet lo 750.000 square· feet. consistent wilh the Level I Office Site Plan approved on Fehruary S. 200l. , The number of hotel rooms is increased from 220 rooms to 355 rooms. 55 of which could be residential units. This change increases 1he si,e of the hotel area devoted to guest rooms and lobbies to 2 l 2,502 square feet. 3, Thi.'. retail area 1s reduced in size from 33.000 square feet to 30.000 square feet. ..\. The resuurant size is increase in 51ze from 7.000 square feet to l0.000 square fecL Site Piao \fodilicatioo Criteria Ren1on ~1unicip3l Code. Section 4-9-200L allows minor adjustments 10 an approved master plan. provided: I. The adjusrmcnt does nol involi·e more rhtm a leH percent ( 10'7c) increase in areu or scale (l the de1-y/opment in the approvt'd site plan; or The adptsfJW!lll dot's nor have a sig11i/kantly grea1er impacr on the e,n·inmmenta! and fac1/ities !han 1he approved plan: or 3. The ad111st111ell/ does nor change the ho1111daric.1· n/thc originally approved plan, Aoalnis of Re9uest The master plan modifications requested and as shown in your January n. 2008. subminals have been compared to the master pl;m (Level II site plan) approved on July 18, 2000. Based on staff's analysis. l ha,, determined the proposed revisions \os. I through -I t:is dcscnbcd above) tdy \V2y -ReniotL \VashlngtL,n 9805 7 EXHIBIT 15 @ r~ ...,aper ooni..&ITT!, w~: .-e,:;yoe;Jrr~,a;-~te,."":<t;;cs.l.~'l'Tl4!'" -~ RENTON \ ;( J, \ \) i f· J •• !· ( ; ii\ : I I_ I I I J. '-.._ /!If ·.....,'-.._ ~ ~ I LAKE / WASHINGTON -- BOEING RENTON PLANT @ kJ1 , ! l"'~ibdl MASTER PLAN Minor Modiflcaloln ,f PUGET SOUND ENERGY ~~l'w,Om .. • w. .... __ '" ·----- ~~- .,........,( __ _ ~~-~~::: :-.::.~· --· ...... , .. w.1 , ...... ........ , ~:,;.,-:,·• ,..._ .. .. -., n,...,., ...... , w,,o..i I =-~-....... : __ _ --.......... --lWl•I ·-..... _w_ (,,; ~" 0 111 •• 10Hl . .» 1·:··-"iii./1iliii' SOUTHPORT MASTER PI.AN 1'11.nor .Modification I "f' . J Al.OD : : Attachment A DESIGNATION OF A PROJECT APPLICATION AS A PLANNED DECISION DATE: Aoril 4, 2000 Proiect Name: Southoort Level 2 Site Plan Applicant: Michael Christ SECO Development Southport, LLC 10843 NE 8th Street, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 Owner: Same as aoolicant Contact Person: Rex Allen SECO Development 10843 NE 81h Street, Suite 200 Bellevue. WA 98004 File Number: LUA-99-189, SA-A, SM Project Manager: Peter Rosen Entire Document Available Upon Request Project Description The applicant, SECO Development, requests approval of a Level II site plan and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the Southport Development. The Level II master site plan for Southport proposes a mixed-use development consisting of six buildings. The development would include a 7-story, 220 room hotel above one level of parking (220 parking stalls), two residential buildings with 4-stories of residential units above two levels of parking (682 parking stalls) that indudes a total of 395 residential units, and three office buildings with 7-stories of offices above four levels of parking (1,855 parking stalls). The off1ee buildings would include a total approximately ,720;200 sguare feet -:/ ") () I ()0 The proposal includes a promenade along the waterfront of Lake Washington. Public access to the promenade would be provided from Gene Coulon Park, a City park adjacent to the north of the subject site. Off-site improvements would consist mainly of improvements to Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the project entrance, signal and channelization modifications at the Park Drive/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, and signalization of the project entrance/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. A more detailed, Level I site plan review will be required for the individual phases of the proposed master site plan. The phases must be consistent with the overall Level II site plan. Building permits may not be issued until approval of the Level I site plan. - Project Location: 1101 Lake Washinaton Boulevard North Site Area: Annroximatelv 17 acres Planned Action Review Criteria. 1. The Director of Development SeNices, or the Director's designee, is authorized to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031(2)(a), if the project application meets a/f of the following conditions: EXHIBIT 16 a) The project Is located on the subject site as described In Section Ill.A., or is an off-site Improvement directly related to a proposed development on the subject site; and, Entire Document Available Upon Request SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION MITIGATION DOCUMENT Prepared By: City of Renton Economic Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department · With Assistance By: Bucher, \Villis and Ratliff Corporation September 17, 1999 EXHIBIT 17 ~TENW Transportation Engineering Northwest MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2014 TO: Bill Stalzer, Stalzer and Associates FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW SUBJECT: Parking Analysis for Southport Hotel TENW Project No. 4838 This memorandum documents the parking demand and proposed supply for the Southport Hotel in accordance with the requirements of RMC 4-4-080.F. IO "Number of Parking Spaces Required" for Hotels, Motels and Cabins in effect at the time of approval of the Southport development and consistent with the parking analysis methodology employed in the Southport Development Planned Action Final Supplemental EIS for a hotel. The parking analysis for a hotel is contained in Table 3 "Plan C Parking Summary" on page 2-5 of the Final SEIS. RMC 4-4-080.F. IO requires I space far each guest roam or dwelling unit plus 2 for each 3 employees. The proposed hotel contains 350 guest rooms, resulting in a code requirement for 350 parking spaces. The hotel would have 175 employees I resulting in a code requirement for I 17 spaces for hotel employees. Code Use Number Requirement Hotel Rooms 350 350 Employees 175 117 Total 467 The estimated peak parking demand for guests and employees for a 350 room hotel is 315 parking spaces based on the ITE 2nd Edition of the Parking Generation manual.2 This is the proposed number of parking spaces for the hotel. Since the number of spaces provided in the parking lot differs from the city code requirement, a modification request meeting the criteria in the city code is being proposed. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. You con reach me at schramm@tenw.com or 425-250-058 l. 1 Foolnole 2 to Table 3 "Plan C Parking Summary" page 2-5 of Southport Development Planned Action Final Supplemental EIS 2 Footnote l to Table 3 "Pion C Parking Summary" page 2-5 of Southport Development Planned Action Final Supplemental EIS. EXHIBIT 18 msportation Planning I Design I Traffic Impact & Operations SE 8• Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office (425] 889-6747 EXHIBIT 19 Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 2: View from Jones Ave . N .E. at 14th Street Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 3 : View from Gene Coulon Park Docks Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 4 : View from Gene Coulon Park Playground Southport Master Plan Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 5 : View from Park Ave 0 C 1/'.•.:AJ.::.•t\C".'.Jti ~.ll --~~ <>__ -----~:~:~=------_ _ ____________ . •, II J 80;;;.lf~(., fid,i (>I, ''\A'I ·• I l II I +,L ~~ .. , ~- r· ---\ --11:1,~ I ~. ·r:,', 1 \h,;,:}~ ~·-t I --- 0 ' '~ J !-' · ___ : I '. i .(' i f " i t It ii 't ~ ··1 c:rm 1_~1 ~:-~ i~: • 3 ,1--I·\ ,,': 1 r-.,· :· _)__ :::::i'>'.:I ' ~-_;__ t"" / 1: ! ~ . . --1-//: -== . --· '1 ' • .__ ·-... -·-~~-• '" -i-.J. "' I •' • r: f '· . • ,:• , . I•• t -.... •. • • ·r:-' ~ J '' LlJ : ' J .• r j ' • --'-'--~-~ r =t= . i /+-' t-'" _ SURFACE P~~KING _LO:.__ ! -------,~ ~.-. \ == ~~ =--a= \ Tc: .. --; ' 1= __c =i B . ~ .../-' ,_ -·---.,-, === ~ ~· --.','.r"I '; \ J t";:::;.J -71 1-:::; 1..:::~ .;:7-···~~ ~···· .. ~· .. ····· - .. ., I I rev.,, ,., .... ,;;i I t.i ;~(~Y l"~,l~f··•n.- . ,-- ~ p11+ -~ -~_.,,,-' l :c ... =cl (I. · -· "TIN G SITE PLAN EXHIBIT 20 ~~J J .J L., ' " • :; , ...... ir-fo @·:B, ' i ~ ~ ~, ; , 'f . 1 1, r .;-j / .. ,,;' .:·y / .-~ . . . ''.i, @ '" .. ti ......... o....-. ............ ...,.. . ...,._ __ ....,..,. ..... ~ ............ ....... ________ .....,.. ___ .,_.. .............. ~ ... ..... ____ ,...,....._ ._.'--._....... ...... __ .,.. .. _ ..... .. ...,...,_ ......... ...._ ... _ ..... __ ........... _ .. ,,_ .___ ... ...-....-.... . c---.-...... liflll-.. _,-la,I __ ......, __ ................... ~......-.4Jl!llli'lillll~-.... ..-., __ . ..._....,.._....,. __ ..._,,___.....,..._ ... ,..._,_ ,__,.... ____ _ .,._,,, l ,n h•wi "•"'-•!ii'l tm I -.....,-...,,.--r~~:.::r:[""-,-,--1 .. ..... , ... _______ __.._ ...... _._,I'>_ •UD•- L(C(NO o...-o •nao slllllit1L011 10..- 2~~l011LOttnm.l!llt.•l'OJ ~C..E !«AO PA,'a,;NG ~:in1Gt1· ~IXTJPL. l'1 PO.( + PECUT~ISCA...El'CU..OT.11 1M.1 l'~CNCY(L,..,0.~MQ..l'IIMO-_ALDt 'f'IA..J.Pi:a:s:s.£D$IDL.Qf1 'HAT[llr[A'1.Jl<EJ.XO<TUGK" O(IW'il,)G,tlU P(»l:l E~fli. 'f'IA....LO..INTE~SttaOE!:'SCCJr<:E ~ ~·~l,l()IJ,-TGR[EJIISCflUI,. Tl-IE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT lou!J RENTON . WASHINGTON MULVIINNY .G2 11-,,1111,1.,._ .. I IUl'lltoO tlU.lwt._,...,. ,..,...._..,,.n-o .. -- 1-WSP 600 I.Jf'M1S1l'J St., Su.tc 500 Si,.atUo. WA 98101 (206) 3'2-9900 www.wspg-oup.com/usa SIT E PLAt' -EVIEW 04.25.201 4 i=----=c=-... PM: MT ORAWNBY: 111 LIGHTING SITE PLAN L100 8 PROPOSED HOTEL R ENDERING RENTON MUNICIPAL CO DE ZONE:COR3 RMC 4-2-1208 DEVELOPME NT STANDARDS UPPER STORY SETBACKS APPRO VA L REQUESTED THROUGH MODIFICATION PROC ESS PU RS UANT TO RMC 4-9-250D EXHIBIT 21 NO Sf'EPQA0(.-,1' Et>DS,U.C1.','SUSAlllt E~O""ERR.t.CESP.ta:--- 0 PROPOSED HOTEL BUI LDING MASS ~ lrl'ASS STEPS l1IICI( PER ZONIHCi ~4-1-lzttl ----------- ALLOWABLE BU ILDING MASS PER RM C 4-2-1206 UPPER G STORY SETBACK BUILDIN G MASS THE HOTEL AT SOUTH PORT ~ ~OU T M l>Ol't ' RENTON, WASHINGTON ,1 .. ,uft, ...... (M,J'Nj-1 KULIIUl._,..., 11.B.•tUOOI> t 1QleQJeliil --· UPPER STORY SET BACKS MODIFICAT ION REQUEST 05.16.2014 ~-R~.:.:.;;::.~---- PM: OAVCNPORT DRA'NN BY WHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK MASS DIAGRAMS A9 5 0 Entire Document Available Upon Request CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: DATE RECE IVED: DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: DATE A PPRO VED: DATE DENIED: T YPE OF AC TI ON(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWNP-R WITHIN SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: shoreline permit.doc LUA99-189, SA-A, SM December 27, 1999 February 17, 2000 April 7, 2000 NA [ X ] Substantial Development Permit ( J Conditional Use Perm it [ ] Variance Permit SECO Development Southport L evel 2 Site Plan Attached separate ly to report. Section 8 , Township 23 North, Range 5 Ea st, W .M . L ake Washington City of Renton EXHIBIT 22 [>JS11NG BOONO """"'TV LAKE WASH INGTON DEVELOPMENT BUILDING ENVELOPE @ HOTEL PER R MC 4-2-120B @ PROPOSED H OTEL SOL.AA ACCESS STUOY · 00...CCTIVE ~~~~~~tJv~~N~w;:ESSOLAR OE.VELOPMENT@CIVEHTl'E Of>f.N SHORELlt.E ANO PUBUCACCESS EA&:YEN T AS SHOWN. 50...AR ACCESS STUDY -DETAIL KEV TABll.ATION 1-iif111111C..,_,D .. @ 8 @ 8 @ 8 @ 8 @ 8 ~ 8 G OC\41.0l'IIOO-IWCM.llt"'-10o'll«flULlllt!GUl',UCft,I.Pl'l')!5J'O!Y:ll1l,,IO,,Plill...:"1•7.e G (l('.ti.<n,o,T ...--..~.tl,.T(-TIV!M Ql..:.EN-t1C#fJ ;#,t,~r.O'rr~ LCGCND D f.REA WITH SOI.AA ACCESS • AA£.A tN SliADE (NO sot.AA ACCESS) ..J ""5000 OAISTC<. APAATJ,;E.'iTS HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK ~/ UPPER STORY S ETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR Q ACCESS ANALYS IS V DECEMBER 21 -NOON -WINTER SOLSTICE HOTE L PER RMC 4-2 -1 208 UPPER STORY SETBACK UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR . ACCESS ANALYS IS A2 . DECEM BER 21 • 9 AM -WINTER SOLSTICE PROPOSED HOTE L ~/ UPPE R STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR {s0 ACCESS ANALYSIS 0 DECEMBER 21 -NOON -WINTER SOLSTIC E PROPOSED HOTEL UPPER STOR Y S ETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR /s2' ACC ESS ANALYSIS V DECEMBER 21 -9 AM -WINTER SOLSTICE EXHIBIT 23 THE H OTEL A T SOUTHPORT ~ Sou TM Pon · RENTON, WASHINGTON ,,.,\l',.ll\la. ... t lU't1i .. !UU,1,J.JQCD f IOl•U:m --• UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATI O N REQUEST l 05.16.2014 ----.:::..-~. ---=-- PM: OAVC:NPORT DRA'NN BY 'MITC UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY WINTER SOLSTICE A960 LAKE WAS H INGTON r-V' i ,, (( ((, ((, ((,,,, ((,,,,,., ((,,. ,,,,, ""'11¥; ,oo,,c f'HOPOff1 @ H OTEL PER RMC 4-2-1 208 @ PROPOSED HOTEL S0LA.RA£CESS 8 TIJOY . OBJECTI~ THS S,OLAA: ACCESS sruov OE~STRATESANO ('.QMPARES SOlAR ~~E~~®~,~~~~g,~~ ~t:Jf ,,:~K: ACCCSS EASEMENT AS SHOWN. SOLARACC(SS ST\JOY • DE'TAIL KEY TABULATION @I 8 @ lit @ 8 @ 8 -"""· I -I @ 8 ~--- [:] O(V[lJ'..'i'<ot,rNt><......__..,.0..0,."""1:M(W,(;f~,<:#f,,.,..,,_S'o,t, 1,t....-;Ml'f.JllM'..•, 1~ m C..../1.l.Ct'Wl.~ l'lll!M~~J.,,_T.......,.IM,:I.JI.Dl,,Oji:.,,.<_~1~S'O'll':IC1'!,IICII, LEGEN D D AREA WITH SOLAR ACCESS • AREA IN SHADE ('IO SOLAR ACCESS) ErJSflM, BRISTO.. N>AATMENTS ~ '-. HOTEL PER RMC 4-2 -1208 UPPER STORY SETB ACK LAI<[ WASHINGTON ~/ UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELIN E P UBLIC TRAIL SOLAR 0 ACC ESS ANALYSIS AJ MARCH 20 & SEPT 23 ·NOON · SPRING I FAL L EQUINOX -- HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-120 8 UPPER STORY SETBACK L\KE W,\SIIINC.TOO -.....:.J UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR A4 ACCESS ANALYSIS MARC H 20 & SEPT 23 · 9M1 • SPRING I FALL EQUINOX PR OPOSED HOTEL '-·- ~/ UPPER STORY SETBACK, S HORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR @ACCESS ANALYSIS BJ MARCH 20 & S E PT 23 . NOON • SPRING I F ALL EQUINOX PROPOSED HOTEL 1111 ~ -L.AAE.','IA!SHINGTON ----:J UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHOR ELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR ACCESS ANALYSIS 84 ) MARCH 20 & SEPT 23 -9AM • SPRING I FALL EQUINOX THE HOT EL AT SOUTHPORT ~ Soun.a r,on · RENTON. WASHINGTON 111it tQlhA..IIII • 1 ...... -~ W.WVIA ...,1-.:,,. ~--~---· UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATION REQUEST 05.16.2014 1 ·,;-·~--,:2:::--::. PM. D AVENPQIH Ofi.A'IJNBY WHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY SPRIFALL EQUINOX A961 0 EXISTNG 90ENG ,sop,:sr, LAKE WASH INGTON DEVELOPMENT BUI LDING ENVELOPE ------- ® HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1206 @ PR OPOSED HOTEL 50lAA ACCESS STUDY· OBJECTIVE ~ci~i>i~~~~ .. :r~~i:v':.~:r~~~~ DeVElOPMENT@OVE~ THE oPEN SHORELit,.E ANO PUBLICACCl:SS E.ASE,..ENT ,-S $HOVJN SOLAA.ACCESS STUDY· OETA.L KEY TABUl.ATION ftW"tMS0.SIIC( I ..ex,, t @I 8 ~a-o 1,-1 @ 8 Sf-:. ,..._.co...,o_, I '°"" I @ 8 (3 8 @ 8 ~ 8 (!]oc,cu.y~.,..."'l'l<.....,__,11..1.o,."81..(1..0UJN,L¥.U'>1.~S'o;:i-S,.·e,,,u."1;11...:,,11,q [:] OCffl.OPWH'o'll'"lol-l)"LT(-fflllULilfoalt,','!,a,f,U"MIT~lr"l.'O. LEGEND D ,'R.'c/,W'ITHSOLARNX.ESS • ,'IREA IN SriACE (NO SOL/I.rt ACCESS) ~l DJSTL\IC BRISTOL .'.rAATMEKTS '--.......___.,. HOTEL PER RMC 4-2 -1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK LAKE VwAS-tJN<..TUN UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR 8 A CCESS ANALYSIS JUNE 2 1 -NOON -SUMMER SOLSTICE HOTEL PER RMC 4-2-1208 UPPER STORY SETBACK L.N<:E WA.SH,NGTON ·-'__/ • UPPER STORY SETBACK, SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR Q ACCESS ANALYSIS V JUNE 21 -8M1 -SUMMER SOLSTICE PROPOSED HOTE L ·-~TK'.,~Nrl,.~ L.M<..E: WASfllNGTOO '-. •._ -- ~ UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR Q ACCESS ANALYSIS \::_°/ JUNE 21 -N OON -SUMM ER SOLSTICE PR OPOSED HOTEL • __/ UPPER STORY SETBACK. SHORELINE PUBLIC TRAIL SOLAR 86 . ACCESS ANALYSIS JUNE 21 -8M1 -SUMMER SOLSTICE THE HOTEL AT SOUTHPORT ~ Sou TM Pon · RENTON , WASHINGTON 111,1U'ftl .. iC-lrll 1:M111 • M.&u:'4.11._,_.. oUi.46.lJOID f l"21 .. .flllt --• UPPER STORY SETBACKS MODIFICATI ON REQUEST 05.1 6 .2014 1=~~::_-___ --:a.::· PM. OAVCNPORT DRAWN BY: VIHITE UPPER STORY SETBACK SOLAR STUDY SUMM ER SOLS T ICE A 962 ~ .. CITY OF "RENTON ·~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Lease and Easement Work is Under Way · --·, • Boeing Easement • DNR Lease DNRPROPEm'Y • SECO Agreement LAKE WASHINGTON ONR PROPERTY ONR PROll£RTY ..... SECO PROPERTY ---aao oc --.... SIii,.....,,,. .... _..._ ... .-r,~.,Cll.c~•~ac. ------VN:AKr'toT 01r; '\I,,. • So;-1™PORJ l --L- }'w·f1.??rHt?: ~1~s,£..Nf2.r--tT' EXHIBIT 24 ,.n. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PUC Denis Law • --· -City of _ _:May:..or .....----~1•J3; r rill\ t l September 23,2014 Paul Ledlum The Boeing Company PO Box 3707 Seattle, WA 98124 Community & Economic Development Department C.E. 'Chi p"Vi ncent, Administrator SUBJECT: SOUTHPORT HOTEL COMMENT RESPONSE LcfTER LUA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Dear Mr. Ledlum: Thank you for your comments related to the Southport Hotel; dated September 16, 2014. In summary the comment letter contains a request for two conditions to be applied to any decision issued for the Southport Hotel. We understand these conditions are intended to ensure that the location and design of the project's air handling equipment, sound suppression, and setback from the west property line would not impact The Boeing Facility west of the site. Specifically you have requested the City: 1. Require the applicant to provide a copy of all building plans to The Boeing Company concurrent with the submittal to the City for review and comment. You have also asked to the City incorporate your comments and have outlined timeframes with which comments would be provided to the City. 2. Require a covenant to be recorded on the property regarding a release for odors or other air emissions emanating from The Boeing Facility. With respect to the first condition, the City agrees. We will provide a copy of all forthcoming buildings plans to the Boeing Company, as a courtesy for review and comment. Please note that_ we have an obligation for timely permit review. Those comments provided to the City within our review timeframes will be considered by the reviewing official prior to building permit issuance. ·- Unfortunately, the City does not have the legal authority to require the second condition request. While we understand your desire to negotiate private terms related to odor and emissions emanating from the Boeing Facility, the City is unable to condition the project as such. We encourage Boeing to continue to engage in discussions with SECO Development for the mediation of terms related to odor and Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov The Boeing Company Page 2 of 2 September 23, 2014 em1ss1ons. Please note the City is willing to convene a meeting to initiate this dialogue and will provide any support needed in order to come to a resolution. I hope this letter meets your needs and if you have any further questions please feel free to contact me at 425-430-7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, ~ \:··. . . V,~~--· = tcale Timmons ' Senior Planner ' ! • City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: r!]'f)"\fY]~/j\fi}f\ ~J{(__ COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 11, 2014 APPLICATION NO: LUA14-000645, SM, SA-A 1 DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 28, 2014 APPLICANT: Greg Krape, Hotel at Southport, LLC PROJECT MANAGER: Roca le Timmons PROJECT TITLE: Southport One Hotel PROJECT REVIEWER: SITE AREA: 484,281 EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N. PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback SO feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Aesthetics -Water Unht/Glore Plants Recreation ·-Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health .">< Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS AC(.5-C _.,4.e..(:__ Cl /fpchc/ /7~71//Q' ~YJ a,-?~ ~c"lnocvl'Jlbt/J ~<.._/ We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact tk or areas where ad itional information, · eded to properly assess this proposal. /' -3-11 ,i (o Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Please route: Leslie Betlach ··--····--····-----------······················· Kelly Beymer -------------·-··-············--·····-··········, ........... :::C,-,~ ......... Peter Renner ··--·--·-···············-······················-~r"'"'t.,.-:;,....-"'"'""'1 Kris Stimpson Please return ta Jennifer C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ft{{)? S,a Cl /Jr~f7 J7Zbr,?7t7JO//lda41,___-) a,nd Sv;r 7)o ci,/Yf1P11 fq I;~ We have reviewed this application with .. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 3, 2014 TO: Rocale Timmons, Sr. Planner ~ FROM: Leslie Betlach, Parks Planning and Natural Resources Directo~'t!f- LUA14-00064S, SM, SA-A, Southport One Hotel SUBJECT: Please find comments below and attached pertaining to this application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS 1. Ordinance 4804 passed by the Renton City Council on October 25, 1999 designated a Planned Action for the Southport site located adjacent to Lake Washington between Gene Coulon Park on the East and Boeing Manufacturing Operations on the West. Mitigation measures are contained in the Mitigation Document, "Exhibit A. Southport Planned Action Mitigation Document" of this Ordinance. Exhibit A identified six (6) mitigation measures to address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. (See attached Exhibit A, Mitigation Document, Pages 26 and 27, Article 14. PARKS). 2. Mitigation Measures specify water access and trail connections from Gene Coulon Park to the Cedar River Trail by a dedicated public recreation easement. Three (3) of the four (4) required Walkway Easement Agreements have been recorded (Recording numbers 20051021000894, 20051021000895, and 20051021000896). A companion document (recording number 200011170001232) also supports the three recorded documents. 3. The fourth Walkway Easement over the flume/water adjacent to Boeing property was not recorded. Walkway Easement traverses north/south, and should connect to existing east/west walkway easement for a future continuous trail connection from Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park to the Cedar River Trail. (See attached graphic titled "City of Renton, Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project-Existing Site Conditions". Missing Easement Area is highlighted with a red circle). 4. Attached is the Committee ofthe Whole Report dated March 10, 2003, authorizing the City for consultant services to complete Trail Design work from Gene Coulon Park to the Cedar River Boathouse (located at the mouth of the Cedar River on the Cedar River Trail). Attached is the March 10. 2003 PowerPoint Council presentation for the City of Renton. Lake Washington Trail h:\parks\parks planning & natural resources director\trails\sam chastain\southport connection\southport one hotel comments.doc • Roca le Timmons Page 2 of 3 June 3, 2014 and Habitat and Enhancement Project. Connecting and important Regional Trail System which preceded the authorization for design work. 5. Attached Community Services Committee Report dated March 17, 2003 names the trail connection from Coulon Park to the Cedar River Trail as the "Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail" which was formerly identified as the Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project in items 3 and 4 above). 6. The Trails and Bicycle Master Plan (adopted by Ordinance 4005 in 2009) identifies the "Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail" to make the connection from Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park to the Cedar River Trail (see attached Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail Project Sheet. page 138) 7. The Parks. Recreation and Natural Areas Plan (adopted by Ordinance 4123 in 2011) notes the importance of a waterfront connection between the Cedar River Trail and Gene Coulon Park (Attached Recommendations Section, City Center Planning Area, Pages 93-96). 8. The City Center Community Plan Adopted in 2011) identifies a connection from Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park to the Cedar River. (Chapter 4, attached map pages 88, map and page 91 Goal 7.2 9. Exhibit A identified numerous mitigation measures to address Surface Water Quantity and Quality particularly pertaining to erosion and sedimentation of Johns Creek and Lake Washington (See pages 11-14, Article 3. WATER). Measures also included the use of low- mobility chemical products. 10. Exhibit A identified numerous mitigation measures to address Fisheries & Aquatic Animals pertaining to potential sedimentation of John's Creek and Lake Washington (See pages 14-16, Article 4. FISHERIES & AQUATIC ANIMALS) 11. Exhibit A identified five (5) mitigation measures to address Aesthetics, Light & Glare (See Pages 21 and 22 from the attached Exhibit A, Mitigation Document, Article 9. AESTHETICS, LIGHT & GLARE). Mitigation measures specify that trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g., benches, gates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, and handrail details) shall be compatible with the Gene Coulon park design theme as determined by the City in addition to open space requirements and building modulation and articulation adjacent to public parks, open space or trails. 12. Exhibit A identified numerous mitigation measures to address Transportation impacts to Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park and the surrounding area (See Pages 22-25 from the attached Exhibit A, Mitigation Document, Article 10. TRANSPORTATION). h:\parks\parks planning & natural resources director\trails\sam chastain\southport connection\southport one hotel comments.doc . -- Roca le Timmons Page 3 of 3 June 3, 2014 13. Transportation improvements and mitigation shall also be in accordance with AGREEMENT CAG-01-172 entered into by the City of Renton and Southport LLC on October 12, 2001 (attached), subsequent to and further clarifying the Mitigation Document per Ordinance 4804. B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS There are not impact to parks. C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS There are not impacts to parks. Cc: Jennifer Henning, Planning Director Jan Illian, Plan Reviewer h:\parks\parks planning & natural resources director\trails\sam chastain\southport connection\southport one hotel comments.doc CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCENO. 4804 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON DESIGNATING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE SOUTHPORT SITE, APPROXIMATELY 17 ACRES LOCATED ADJACENT TO LAKE WASHINGTON AND BETWEEN GENE COULON PARK ON THE EAST AND BOEING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS ON THE WEST. WHEREAS, RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164, -168, and-172 allow and govern the application of a Planned Action designation; and, WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 3379, the City indicated its intent to study and consider a Planned Action designation for the Shuftleton Steam Plant site, also known as the Southport site; and, WHEREAS, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) has been prepared for a portion of the Shuftleton Steam Plant site, entitled the Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and such document considers the potential environmental impacts of a phased mixed-use project on approximately 17 acres of property within the City limits; and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4 7 9 6 the City has amended the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for the subject area from Employment Area -Industrial (EA-I) to Center Office Residential (COR); and, WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4 8 0 0 the City has amended the Zoning Map from Heavy Industrial (IH) to Center Office Residential (COR) ; and, WHEREAS, this Ordinance would designate certain land uses and activities as "Planned Actions" which. would be consistent with the Center Office Residential (COR) designation and zone; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF RENTON DOES ORDAIN: SECTION I. Purpose. The City of Renton declares that the purpose of this ordinance is to: A. Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions within the subject site as "Planned Actions" consistent with state law, RCW 43.21C.031; and, B. Provide the public with an understanding as to what constitutes a Planned Action and how land use applications which qualify as Planned Actions will be processed by the City; and, C. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process for this site by relying on completed and existing detailed environmental analysis for the subject site; and, 1 ORDINANCENO. 4804 D. Combine environmental analysis with land use planning. It is the express purpose of this ordinance that all the City's development codes be applied together with the mitigation framework described in section III of this Ordinance for the purpose of processing Planned Actions. SECTION II. Findings. The City Council finds that: A. The Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) addresses all significant environmental impacts associated with the Planned Action scenarios described in the SEIS for Plans A, B, and C as referenced therein; and, B. The mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Document, Exhibit A of this Ordinance, together with the City's development standards, are adequate to mitigate the significant adverse environmental impacts of the Planned Action scenarios, Plans A, B, and C; and, C. The expedited permit review procedure set forth in this Ordinance is and will be a benefit to the public, protects the environment, and enhances economic development; and, D. Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and comments have been considered which have resulted in modifications to mitigation measures and Planned Action conceptual alternatives. SECTION III. Procedure and Criteria for Evaluating and Determining Projects as Planned Actions. A. Planned Action Site. The Planned Action designation shall apply to approximately 17 acres of property commonly referred to as the Shuflleton Stearn Plan site, also known as the Southport site, and referred to in this Ordinance as the "subject site." The property is illustrated in Exhibit B, and legally described in Exhibit C. Additionally, the Planned Action designation shall apply to any off-site improvements necessitated by the proposed development on the subject site, where the off-site improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS. B. Environmental Document. A Planned Action designation for a site-specific permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) issued by the City on September 9, 1999. The Mitigation Document, Exhibit A, is based upon the analysis in the SEIS. The Mitigation Document, together with existing City codes, ordinances, and standards shall provide the framework for the decision by the City to impose conditions on a Planned Action project. Other environmental documents incorporated by reference in the SEIS may also be utilized to assist in analyzing impacts and determining appropriate mitigation measures. C. Planned Action Designated. Uses and activities described in the SEIS, subject to the thresholds described in Section 111.D, and subject to the mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, are designated Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031. 2 ORDINANCE NO. ~4=8=0=4~~- D. Planned Action Thresholds. 1. Land Use. Subject to the mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, the following land uses and development levels, together with their customary accessory uses and amenities described in the SEIS, are Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.03 l: a) Land Uses. The following uses are the primary uses analyzed under the Proposed Action Alternatives identified in the SEIS: (I) Office (2) Retail commercial, including restaurants (3) Attached residential dwellings (4) Hotel b) Land Use Review Threshold. The Planned Action designation applies to future development proposals which are comparable to or within the range established by SEIS Proposed Action Plans A, B, and C as shown below: Useffieight Plan A Plan B Plan C Multifamily Residential Units 543 581 377 Retail Area in Sq. Ft. 38,000 38,000 30,000 Commercial Area in Sq. Ft. 500,000 750,000 500,000 Hotel Area in Sq. Ft. (rooms) NIA NIA 115,800 (220) If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. If proposed plans significantly change the .location of uses in a manner which would negatively affect land use compatibility (for example, move commercial and office uses in such a manner that they would not buffer residential uses from the nearby manufacturing uses), additional SEPA review would be required. 2. Building Heights and Thresholds: Building heights shall not exceed the maximum heights allowed in the Center Office Residential (COR) Zone. The maximum building heights reviewed in the SEIS are as shown on Exhibit D. In comparison with the building heights reviewed in the SEIS, a proposed increase in height greater than I 0% shall required additional SEP A review addressing aesthetics and shadows. 3. Building Setbacks: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use and Aesthetics/Light and Glare Mitigation Measures. 4. Open Space: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use, Aesthetics/Light and Glare, and Parks Mitigation Measures. 3 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 5. Transportation: a) Trip Ranges: The range of trips reviewed in the SEIS -are as follows: Trip Generation Net New Trips Reviewed in SEIS Time Range -Net New Trips AM Peak Hour 355-1,273 PM Peak Hour 370-1,355 Daily Total 2,898-11,202 b) Trip Threshold: Uses or acl!v1hes which would exceed the maximum trip levels shown above must complete additional SEP A review. c) Road Improvements: The Planned Action would require off-site road improvements at the Park Avenue/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the intersection located at the shared Site/Gene Coulon Park entrance and Lake Washington Boulevard, and along Lake Washington Boulevard between the two identified intersections. These road improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS. Significant changes to the road improvement plan that have the potential to significantly increase impacts to air quality, water quality, fisheries resources, or noise levels beyond the levels analyzed in the SEIS would require additional SEP A review. 6. Earth: A significant change in amount of grading assumed in the preliminary grading plans analyzed in the SEIS which has the potential to adversely affect water quality or fisheries shall require additional SEPA review. 7. Air Quality: A significant change in configuration, increase in building heights, or significant decrease in setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses, which could affect localized air quality and odor conditions would require additional SEP A review. For the purposes of air quality analysis: a) A significant change in configuration to the Planned Action scenarios (Plans A, B, or C) reviewed in the SEIS, would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company; or, a 10% or greater change in setbacks between buildings to be constructed on the subject site which have the potential to negatively affect building downwash. b) A significant decrease in the setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between residential uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company. · 4 ORDINANCE NO, 4804 c) Significant building height changes wouW equal a 10% or greater increase in height above the maximum heights reviewed in the SEIS. 8. Water. The following changes to the Planned Action scenarios reviewed in the SEIS would require additional SEP A review: a) Change in peak flows to Johns Creek significantly exceeding the options reviewed in the SEIS. b) Increase in number of outfalls to Johns Creek or Lake Washington beyond proposals reviewed in the SEIS. 9. Fisheries Resources: In-water construction or in-water uses or activities shall require additional SEPA review. 10. Public Services and Utilities: A significant increase in the number of square feet or dwelling units beyond the maximum number reviewed in the SEIS would require additional SEPA review to address impacts to Fire, Police, Schools, Parks, Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, as applicable. E. Planned Action Review Criteria. I. The Director of Development Services, or the Director's designee, is hereby authorized to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031(2)(a), if the project application meets all of the following conditions: a) The project is located on the subject site as described in section III.A, or is an off-site improvement directly related to a proposed development on the subject site; and, b) The project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan adopted under RCW 36. 70A; and, c) The project's significant environmental impacts have been adequately addressed in the SEIS; and, d) The project complies with the Planned Action thresholds in section III.D of this Ordinance; and, e) The Director has determined that the project's significant impacts have been mitigated through the application of the Mitigation Document in Exhibit A, as well as other City requirements and conditions, which together constitute sufficient mitigation for the significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project; and f) The proposed project complies with all applicable local, state and federal regulations, and where appropriate, needed variances or modifications or other special permits have been requested; and, 5 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 g) The proposed project is not an essential public facility. F. Effect of Planned Action. 1. Upon designation by the Director that the project qualifies as a Planned Action, the project shall not be subject to a SEPA threshold determination, an environmental impact statement (EIS), or any additional review under SEP A. 2. Being designated a Planned Action means that a proposed project has been reviewed in accordance with this Ordinance, and found to be consistent with the development parameters and environmental analysis included in the SEIS. 3. Planned Actions will not be subject to further procedural review under SEP A. However, projects will be subject to conditions designed to mitigate any environmental impacts which may result from the project proposa~ and projects will be subject to whatever permit requirements are deemed appropriate by the City under State and City laws and ordinances. The Planned Action designation shall not excuse a project from meeting the City's code and ordinance requirements apart from the SEP A process. G. Planned Action Permit Process. The Director shall establish a procedure to review projects and to determine whether they meet the criteria as Planned Actions under State laws and City codes and ordinances. The procedure shall consist, at a minimum, of the following: 1. Development applications shall meet the requirements of RMC Chapters 4-8 and 4-9. Applications shall be made on forms provided by the Department and shall include a SEPA checklist or revised SEPA checklist [where approved through WAC 197-11-315(2)) or such other environmental review forms provided by the Planning/Building/Public Work Department. The checklist may be incorporated into the form of an application; 2. The Director shall determine whether the application is complete as provided in RMC Chapter 4-8. 3. If the project application is within an area designated as a Planned Action, the application shall be reviewed to determine whether the proposed application is consistent with and meets all of the qualifications specified in section III of this Ordinance. 4. Upon review of a complete application by the City, the Director shall determine whether the project qualifies as a Planned Action If the project does qualify, the Director shall notify the applicant, and the project shall proceed in accordance with the appropriate permit procedure, except that no additional SEPA review, threshold determination, or EIS shall be required. 5. Public notice for projects that qualify as Planned Actions shall be tied to the underlying permit. If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit, the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a Planned Action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required. 6 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 6. If a project is determmed not to be a Planned Action, the Director shall notify the applicant and prescribe a SEP A review procedure consistent with the City SEP A procedures and state laws. The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the application that result in disqualification as a Planned Action. 7. Projects disqualified as a Planned Action may use or incorporate relevant elements of the environmental review analysis in the SEIS prepared for the Planned Action, as well as other environmental documents to assist in meeting SEP A requirements. The Environmental Review Committee may choose to liruit the scope of the SEP A review to those issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the SEIS. SECTION IV. Time Period. This Planned Action Ordinance shall be reviewed no later than December 1, 2004 by the Development Services Director to determme its continuing validity with respect to the environmental conditions of the subject site and vicinity and applicability of Planned Action requirements. Based upon this review, this Ordinance may be amended as needed, and another review period may be specified. SECTION V. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between the Ordinance or any mitigation measures imposed pursuant thereto and any ordinance, or regulation of the City, the provisions of this Ordinance shall control, EXCEPT that provision of any Uniform Code shall supersede. SECTION VI. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or its application be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or its application to any other person or situation .. SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 25th day of October , 1999. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 2 5tb day of October , 1999. 7 ORDINANCE NO. 4804 ----- DateofPublication: 10/29/99 (Summary Only) ORD.813:10/13/99. 8 EXHIBIT A SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION MITIGATION DOCUMENT Prepared By: City of Renton Economic Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department · With Assistance By: Bucher, Willis and Ratliff Corporation September 17, 1999 ~" JesSe Tanner, Mayor September 17, 1999 Dear Reader: CITY OF RENTON. Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Attached is a copy of the Mitigation Document for the Southport Planned Action, City of Renton, Washington. The proposed Southport Planned Action considers potential redevelopment concepts for the redevelopment of approximately 17 acres located adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline. Redevelopment concepts review changes from the current industrial uses to a mixed use development including, residential, commercial, and office uses as well as recreational amenities, which will require a Comprehensive Plan Ameni:lmenVrezone, and several development permits. A Planned Action Ordinance is anticipated to be adopted for the proposal. The proposal is located adjacent to Lake Washington between Gene Coulon Park on the east and Boeing manufacturing operations on the west. Access is located from Lake Washington Boulevard. A Planned Action designation by the City would reflect a decision that adequate environmental review has been completed and further environmental review ·under SEPA, for each specific development phase, would not be necessary if it is determined that each phase is consistent with the development levels specified in the Plarined Action Ordinance .. .. A Supplemental Environmental lmpactStateriient (SEIS) was required for the proposal under 43.21 C.030(2)(c) and RMC 4-9-070. The impacts described in the Southport Development Planned Action SEIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for the proposal. · Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty (20) day appeal period commences. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E, the adequacy of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and the Mitigation Document may be appealed. Appeals must: 1) state specific objections of fact and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m. October 7, 1999; and 3) be accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be addressed to Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. If you would like additional information, please contact Sue Carlson, City of Renton, Economic DevelopmenVNeighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department at 425-430-6591. For the Environmental Review Committee, 9f11e44 2. 1111~ Gregg Zihtner~ · Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works 1055 South Grady Way -Renton,Washington 98055 ·. @ This paper coofalns s~o/o reC°icied mate~al, 20% post consumer MITIGATION DOCUMENT SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires environmental review for project and non-project proposals that may have significant impacts upon the environment. In order to meet SEPA requirements, the Environmental Review Committee for the City of Renton issued a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Southport Development Planned Action on June 29, 1999, and a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on September 9, 1999. The Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement are referenced collectively herein as the "SEIS". The SEIS has identified significant impacts that would occur with the future redevelopment of the subject site together with a number of possible measures to mitigate those significant impacts. The purpose of this Mitigation Document is to establish specific m1llgation measures, based upon significant impacts identified in the SEIS. The mitigation measures would apply to future development proposals which are comparable to the Proposed Action reviewed in the SEIS, and which are located on the approximately 17 acre subject site (see the attached illustrative map). The mitigation measures may also apply to off-site improvements where analyzed in the SEIS. USE OF TERMS As several similar terms are utilized in this Mitigation Document, the following phrases or words are defined briefly: SEPA Terms The discussion or mitigation measures may refer to the words action, proposed action, or proposal, and for reference these terms are identified below. Since Planned Action may be confused with Proposed Action, these phrases are also explained below. • "Action" means projects or programs financed, licensed, regulated, conducted or approved by · an Agency. "Project actions" involve decisions on a specific project such as a construction or management activity for a defined geographic area. "Non-project" actions involve decisions about policies, plans or programs. (see WAC 197 -11-704) • "Planned Action" refers to types of project actions that are designated by ordinance for a specific geographic area and addressed in an EIS, in conjunction with a comprehensive plan or subarea plan, a fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or phased project. (see WAC 197-11-164) • "Proposal" means a proposed action which may be actions and regulatory decisions of an agency, or any actions proposed by applicants. (see WAC 197-11-784) Other Terms Utilized in Mitigation Document The subject site may be referenced as "Southport" or "site" or "subject site" in this document. Mitigation measures may also apply to off-site improvements analyzed in the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 2 Mitigation Document This document includes mitigation measures which are tied to the approval of site plans, termed Level II or Level I site plans. Current City regulations require a "master development plan" for development in Center Office Residential (COR) Zones (RMC 4-2-120.B and 4-2-120.C). Site plan regulations are found in RMC 4-9-200 and 4-9-210 and defined in RMC 4-8-120.D. The Proposed Action includes proposed code amendments which would consolidate permit procedures and clarify terminology. A Level II site plan is equivalent to the "master development plan" or "master site plan." A Level I site plan is equivalent to the current definition of "site plan." The mitigation measures that refer to Level I and Level II site plans assume adoption of proposed code amendments that consolidate and clarify site plan procedures. General Interpretation Where a mitigation measure includes the words "shall" or "will" the requirement is mandatory. Where "should" or "would" appear the words convey the City's expectation and desires given circumstances presently known, with recognition that pertinent alternate or equivalent requirements may be imposed as more detailed design or reports are conducted consistent with the mitigation measures. Unless stated specifically otherwise, the mitigation measure requirements to prepare plans, conduct studies, construct improvements, conduct maintenance activities, etc., are the responsibility of the future developer(s) to fund and/or carry out. SEPA REQillREMENTS State regulations (Washington Administrative Code 197-11) and local regulations (City of Renton Title 4, Chapter 9) govern the development of mitigation measures to address identified environmental impacts. The primary regulatory chapters are cited below. As appropriate, key sections of those chapters are described. • WAC 197-11-060, titled Content of Environmental Review states in part, that agencies shall "carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term effects," including "those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal" or, in some cases, continue beyond the life of the proposal. • WAC 197-11-330, titled Threshold Determination Process requires, in part, that the responsible official take into account the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of a proposal when determining whether a proposal has significant adverse impacts. In reaching a decision, SEP A states that the responsible official shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a proposal outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather shall consider whether a proposal has any probable significant adverse environmental impacts. • WAC 197-11-448, title Relationship of EIS to Other Requirements states, in part, that SEPA "contemplates that the general welfare, social, economic, and other requirements and essential considerations of state policy will be taken into account in weighing and balancing alternatives and in making final decisions." The EIS provides a basis upon which the responsible agency and officials can make the balancing judgment mandated by SEPA, because the EIS provides information on environmental costs and impacts. • WAC 197-11-768 titled Definition of Mitigation. This section defines mitigation as: (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; Southport Planned Action 3 Mitigation Document (2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; (3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; (5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and/or (6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. • WAC 197-11-660(1) Substantive Authority and Mitigation. Decision-makers may impose mitigation measures designed to mitigate the environmental impacts, subject to the following limitations: (a) Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies, plans, rules, or regulations formally designated by the agency; (b) Mitigation measures shall be related to specific, adverse environmental impacts clearly identified in an environmental document on the proposal and shall be stated in writing by the decision maker; (c) Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being accomplished. ( d) Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be imposed upon an applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of its proposal. Voluntary additional mitigation may occur. ( e) Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant impact. (g) If, during project review, a jurisdiction's development regulations or comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or in other applicable local, state or federal laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse environmental impacts of the project action under RCW 43.21C.240, the jurisdiction shall not impose additional mitigation under this chapter. DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES Proposed Action The Proposed Action reviewed in the SEIS includes: • Adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance • Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments and concurrent Rezone (from Heavy Industrial to Center Office Residential) • Municipal Code Text Amendments • Preliminary Conceptual Master Plan approval Southport Planned Action 4 Mitigation Document The City through Resolution 3379 identified the subject property as a site under consideration for a Planned Action designation pursuant to SEPA ('NAC 197-11-168( c )). The Planned Action designation, when adopted by the City, would reflect a decision that adequate environmental review has been completed and further environmental review under SEP A, for each specific development phase, would not be necessary if it is determined that each phase is consistent with the development levels specified in a Planned Action Ordinance. This process assumes that a final Master Plan (Level II Site Plans) and site plan (Level I Site Plan) for individual phases, as well as shoreline substantial development permit applications, will be submitted at a later stage as Planned Actions. Applications for construction-related permits from the City of Renton and other state and federal agencies, including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404, 401 permits, stormwater discharge/NPDES, building and construction permits, etc., required for long-term redevelopment of the site would also be requested for approval subsequent to the adoption of the Planned Action ·Ordinance. Issuance of these and other required development permits is included within the scope of environmental review for the Proposed Action. To facilitate the City's consideration of the· Planned Action designation and environmental review of implementation of the Planned Action, a preliminary Conceptual Master Plan for the site has been formulated. The Master Plan provides conceptual information on the potential mix of uses, building density and height, access/circulation, recreation and open space opportunities and other development features. The intensity of site development would fall within the range of development represented by Conceptual Master Plan scenarios A (Plan A), scenario B (Plan B) and scenario C (Plan C). Plans A and C represent the lower end of the development range, with Plan A consisting of 543 multifamily residential units, 38,000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of office space, and Plan C consisting of 377 multifamily residential units, 220 hotel units, 30,000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of office space (refer to Chapter 2 of the Final Supplemental EIS for a description of the Plan Alternatives). Plan B represents the upper end of the development range and would consist of 581 multifamily residential units, 38,000 square feet ofretail area, and 750,000 square feet of office space. Each plan ca1ls for substantial public spaces and amenities including provisions for public access to Lake Washington. Summary of Alternatives Two alternatives to the Proposed Action are analyzed in the SEIS: No Action -No Development Alternative -Under this alternative, the existing steam plant building would remain and storage use of the site would continue for the foreseeable future. No Action -Future Industrial Development -Under this alternative, industrial redevelopment of the site, consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Employment Area -Industrial and zoning classification of Industrial-Heavy (IH), is assumed. Industrial redevelopment under this alternative is assumed to consist of approximately 230,000 square feet of manufacturing (high bay style) space and approximately 70,000 square feet of associated office space. Applicability of Mitigation Document This mitigation document applies to the Proposed Action, Plans A, B, or C, analyzed in the SEIS. For the mitigation document to apply to future development proposals, they must be comparable to or within the range established by Plans A, B, and C as shown below: Southport Planned Action 5 Mitigation Document Use/Height Plan A Plan B Plan C Multifamily Residential Units 543 581 377 Retail Area in Sq. Ft. 38,000 38,000 30,000 · Commercial Area in Sq. Ft. 500,000 750,000 500,000 Hotel Area in Sq. Ft. (rooms) NIA NIA 115,800 (220) Residential Building Heights in Stories (feet)1 5 (50 ft.) 5 (50 ft.) 5 (50 ft.) Hotel Building Height in Stories (feet) NIA NIA 7 (75') Office Building Heights in Stories (feet) 8-10 (105-125 ft) 10(125ft.) 8-10 (105-125 ft) 1 Residential butldmgs would be 50 feet above finished grade and 58 feet above existing grade. If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. MITIGATION DOCUMENT Based upon the SEIS, this Mitigation Document identifies significant adverse environmental impacts that are anticipated to occur in conjunction with the development of the Proposed Action. Mitigation measures are hereby established under SEPA rules to address specific impacts identified in the SEIS, based upon the Proposed Action. As indicated in the SEIS, numerous state and local regulations will govern development of the subject site, and application of tbose regulations will also serve to mitigate certain significant adverse environmental impacts. Pertinent regulations will be applied to future specific development applications. Additional consistency review under the Planned Action, site plan review, shoreline permits, and other permit approvals will be required for specific development . actions under the Proposed Action. Additional conditions may be imposed based upon the analysis of the proposal in relationship to code requirements or review criteria. 1 Seco Development or another future applicant may request modifications to mitigation measures established herein, if appropriate and as a result of changed circumstances, in order to allow an equivalent substitute mitigation or removal of a mitigation requirement. Such modifications would be evaluated prior to adoption by the City, based upon SEPA Rules. As permitted under SEPA Rules (WAC 197-11-660), it is recognized that there may be some adverse impacts that are unavoidable because reasonable or feasible mitigation cannot be achieved for the Proposed Action. Provided below for each element of the environment analyzed in the SE!S for the Proposed Action are: (a) summary of significant environmental impacts (direct, indirect, and cumulative); (b) a summary of unavoidable adverse impacts; (c) mitigation measures established by this Mitigation Document; and (d) a list of federal and state laws and local policies/regulations on which mitigation measures are based. In combination, regulations applicable to each element of the environment and mitigation measures imposed by this Document will mitigate all significant environmental impacts caused by the Proposed Action, except for those impacts that are identified as "unavoidable adverse impacts." Southport Planned Action 6 Mitigation Document 1. EARTH a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to soils, geology, erosion conditions, and seismic conditions. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. • Clearing and grading operations during construction could increase the erosion potential on the site. • Loose to soft soils underlying the site would be susceptible to settlement under normal building loads, necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings. • Proposed buildings would be subject to liquefaction potential during seismic events, ·necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings. • Removal of existing underground features (including piles supporting the steam plant and utilities) could result in areas of soft soil or ground depressions. • Based upon preliminary grading plans, areas of grading would extend into Gene Coulon Park. b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Provided that reasonable mitigation measures are properly followed, no significant unavoidable impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Erosion • A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required to prevent and. control erosion and discharge, according to City of Renton (RMC 4-4-030 and 4-6-030) and Department of Ecology standards. The Plan Review Supervisor shall determine appropriate standards in accordance with adopted requirements and the recommendations of the SEIS. To mitigate and reduce the sheet and channel erosion hazard potential on the Southport site under the Proposed Action, the TESC and SWPPP would include, but are not limited to the following measures: Surface water and domestic discharge, either during or after construction, would not randomly daylight on the site. All temporary and/or permanent devices used to collect surface runoff shall be directed into tightlined systems that would discharge into an approved stormwater facility, unless the Plan Review Supervisor determines that an alternate measure providing equivalent control is permissible. Soils to be used around the site during construction would be stored in such a manner to minimize erosion. Protective measures could include, but are not necessarily limited to, use of strawbales, covering with plastic sheeting or the use of silt fences. Southport Planned Action 7 Mitigation Document The majority of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces under the Proposed Action with roughly 15 percent of the site to consist of landscaping and vegetated areas. Source control mitigation measures would be conducted for cleared areas. All exposed subgrades would be seeded, covered with plastic sheeting, or otherwise protected during inclement weather or the wetter, winter months. During construction, silt fences, or other methods such as straw bales, would be placed along the boundaries to Lake Washington, John's Creek, and Gene Coulon Park to reduce the potential of sediment-laden runoff discharging into these areas. In addition, rock check dams would be established along roadways during construction. Temporary sedimentation traps or ponds would be installed to provide erosion and sediment transport control during construction. • Details of the TESC and SWPPP shall be determined as part of the construction permit review process. • A qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall review the grading, erosion, and drainage plans prior to final design. The geotechnical engineer shall be retained by the developer in order to further assist in mitigating erosion and sediment transport hazards during and after development. Additional erosion mitigation measures may be required at the time of final design in response to site-specific plans. Certification of the installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to finalization of construction permits. Seismic • Mitigation measures are required to reduce the risk of potential liquefaction on any proposed structures. In general, this would require utilizing a deepened foundation system as discussed under Geotechnica/ Engineering Considerations below. Geotechnical Engineering Considerations Potential geotechnical impacts would be adequately mitigated through characterization of surface and subsurface conditions, proper geotechnical engineering, structural design, and proper construction implementation of the design. The preliminary geotechnical report prepared by Geotech Consultants, Inc. (1999) addresses potential geotechnical mitigation measures. Such measures are presented below. As part of the building design process, additional, specific measures could be identified, or the measures below could be modified upon review and acceptance by the City Building Official, unless the measure is written as mandatory. Foundations • A deepened foundation would be required for support of the proposed buildings to reduce potential differential settlement and liquefaction impacts. • Floor slabs would be pile supported if settlement to the slabs would be a concern. • The necessity of a vibration monitoring program for structures on and off the site as a result of pile driving shall be determined by a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the Southport Planned Action 8 Mitigation Document developer(s) during the design phase as more detailed information on construction techniques are finalized. The geotechnical engineer recommendations shall be subject to review and acceptance by the City Building Official. • If impact pile driving is proposed, the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall survey existing structures surrounding the site, including buildings, surface improvements, bulkheads, and buried utilities, to determine if pile-driving vibrations pose a potential threat to any existing structures, as part of the building design review process. • If existing foundation piles are to be reused, the soundness of the piles shall be tested to the satisfaction of the geotechnical and structural engineers retained _by the developer(s) and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official. If piles are not to be reused, they should be exposed, and cut off at an elevation to be determined by the geotechnical and structural engineers. Site Preparation • A minimum of 12 inches of structural fill, compacted and proofrolled per the geotechnical engineer's recommendations, would be placed beneath the pavement, non-pile supported slabs, or structural fill areas to reduce potential settlement impacts. Alternatively, the subgrade could be chemically treated utilizing lime, kiln dust, or cement. The use of geotextile fabric or overexcavation of soft soils and replacement with structural fill could also be required to obtain a firm unyielding subgrade. The exact construction methodologies utilized would be dependent on final design plans. • Excavations to remove or demolish.below-grade structures could encounter ground water and require excavation shoring and dewatering to reduce settlement hazards. Dewatering shall be conducted in a manner that would minimize potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity of water removed could be reduced along with the magnitude of the resulting settlement through proper design of the dewatering system and construction sequencing. In addition, proper disposal of dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the placement of utilities. Structural Fill • Up to 7 feet of fill would be required to support roadway areas, and in some cases, slab-on- grade floors that are not a settlement concern. All structural fill shall be placed and compacted as recommended by the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s). Proper subgrade preparation and drainage control would be necessary for the roadways, utilities, or structural fill bodies. • The on-site sediments are moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. These sediments would require drying prior to their use in structural fills, and the use of these soils in structural fills would be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed in wet weather, or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, imported backfill consisting of free- draining granular material shall be required. • Some areas such as utility trenches, manholes, vaults, and heavy traffic roadways could still be susceptible to settlement under these soil conditions, and long-term maintenance of roadway areas is required. Southport Planned Action 9 Mitigation Document • Geotechnical oversight will be an integral part of the site's design and construction process. Geotechnical reports prepared by future developers will require City review and acceptance. A geotechnical review of the design plans would be performed before the plans are finalized to assist in reducing potential geotechnical impacts. Construction monitoring will be required during the foundation and earthwork activities. In this manner, the adequacy of the foundation and earthwork would be evaluated as construction progresses, and appropriate responses to site conditions would be addressed in the field. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050); City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); King County Stormwater Management Manual (adopted by the City of Renton, RMC 4-6-030); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 2. AIR QUALITY a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to air quality in terms of construction activities, generated traffic, and indirect air emissions and odors from adjacent property. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/ Appendix B of the SEIS. • Building demolition and grading would generate suspended particulate matter. • Removal of asbestos from the steam plant building would be required and would comply with EPA and PSAPCA regulations. • Site population could be exposed to air pollutants from the adjacent Boeing facility. Based on recent Boeing modeling analysis, Boeing emissions comply with PSAPCA's Acceptable Source Impact levels. Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed Boeing operations. • Air pollutants from the Boeing facility could enter HV AC systems of proposed office buildings. Adverse health effects within proposed buildings would not be anticipated under reasonably assumed operation. • Proposed office building could induce existing Boeing emissions to reach the ground more often (building downwash effect). Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed Boeing operations. • Odors from The Boeing Company operations could be perceived as a nuisance by site population. Modeling conducted by Boeing indicates potential odors would be below recognized thresholds. b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts from construction or operation of future development on the site would result. Emissions from existing industrial sources in the area could potentially affect on-site locations and cause adverse impacts. Modeling completed by Boeing indicates that no adverse health impacts or significant odor effects would result under any reasonably assumed operations at Boeing facilities. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of Boeing to protect human health from harmful exposures to any air pollutant emitted at their Southport Planned Action 10 Mitigation Document facility, as well as from nuisance impacts related to odors. Mitigation measures identified below would likely preclude significant adverse impacts. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Construction • Dust produced by construction will be reduced by using a number of best management practices and techniques, exemplified in the remainder of this paragraph. Areas of exposed soils such as storage yards and construction roadways could be sprayed with water or other dust suppressants. Soils carried out of the construction area by exiting trucks could be minimized by wheel washing and covering dusty truckloads. Finally, soil that does escape the construction area on exiting vehicles could be reduced with an effective street-cleaning effort. Indirect Impacts The Air Quality analysis of the SEIS indicated a potential range of impacts in terms of indoor air quality impacts, ground-level air quality impacts, and odors. Modeling conducted by The Boeing Company concluded that air pollutant concentrations would not exceed allowed levels (either NAAQS or ASIL's), and would not exceed recognized odor thresholds. The modeling was based upon reasonably assumed Boeing operations. Under normal circumstances, impacts are not anticipated. To respond to the range of potential impacts, and because future operations may change, and because some recommended air quality mitigation measures require consideration during design, the following measures shall be implemented by future developer(s): • Filters on the roof HV AC systems shall be installed. The filter system would need to filter particulates as well as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A synthetic fiber filter media would remove the particulate load while an activated carbon filter would remove most VOCs. Other filter types or technologies providing equal or greater protection may be approved for use upon authorization by the City. • HV AC systems shall be placed at a location where plumes from the Boeing facility would be less likely to reach the air intake vents. To accomplish this, a detailed study would need to be conducted by the developers, with Boeing's cooperation, to assess the optimum locations for intake vents. As needed, the City will assist in efforts to obtain sufficient data from The Boeing Company. d. Nexus: City of Renton Grading Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 3. WATER a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to water quantity and quality. A .summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/ Appendix A of the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 11 Mitigation Document b. Surface Water Quantity • The proposal would eliminate the western ditch. • Potential for stream bank erosion along John's Creek could increase, requiring on site detention for this area, unless drainage from the on site John's Creek basin area is discharged to the Lake Washington system. Groundwater Quality • Shallow groundwater table could require dewatering during placement of utilities. No adverse impacts to the underlying aquifer would result. Surface Water Quality • Construction could increase potential for sedimentation and increased levels of pH to John's Creek and Lake Washington. To preclude such impacts, Temporary Erosion Control Measures could be implemented. • Development of the preliminary conceptual master plan would increase the amount of area in vehicle-access surface (roadways and parking) increasing potential for stormwater-related pollutants to reach surface waters. • With the proposed water quality wet vault, stormwater discharge to Lake Washington would be within state standards, with the exception of zinc, lead, and fecal coliforms. Adequate dilution in the lake would be achieved to prevent significant impacts from these sources. • Widening of Lake Washington Blvd. would require lengthening of culverts passing John's Creek under the roadway and increase roadway area subject to traffic. With water quality treatment, no significant water quality impacts are anticipated. • With potential future waterfront improvements subject to a separate permit process (to the dock at the west end and pedestrian improvements at the east end), no in-water work or dredging is assumed. Impacts would be limited to accidental spills during construction, localized increases in hydrocarbons from increased boat traffic and resuspension of sediments due to prop wash. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: With implementation of mitigation measures, none are expected. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 31 Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Surface Water • Future developer(s) shall design, implement and maintain a stormwater control system which is consistent with City requirements and which achieves comparable stormwatei control as the system analyzed in the SEIS. Southport Planned Action 12 Mitigation Document Groundwater • Groundwater may be encountered during construction of utility trenches or any other below- grade earthwork activities. Dewatering shall be conducted in a manner that would minimize potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity of water removed would be reduced along with the magnitude of the resulting settlement through proper design of the dewatering system and construction sequencing. Construction techniques such as reducing the length of trench open at one time could be required. The specific location, extent, and depth of utilities would dictate the dewatering design, and in tum the quantity of water that should be removed. Specific recommendations shall be determined during the design phase once plans are finalized, as part of more detailed geotechnical evaluation. In addition, proper disposal of dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the placement of utilities. Water Quality • A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared and implemented to prevent introduction of sediment, turbid water, construction waste, or accidental spills of hydrocarbons to Lake Washington or John's Creek during construction. Details of these plans shall be prepared during the construction permit review process with the City of Renton (RMC 4-4-030; 4-6- 030) and Department of Ecology (refer to the EARTII section for identification of possible TESC measures). The TESC plan shall include restricting mass grading to the dry season, and if grading activities are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a grading plan for City review and approval that minimizes erosion. The plan shall also address capture and filtration of silted water before release, and prohibit on-site release of concrete wash-out, unless it is to temporary, lined ponds. • The 1992 Department of Ecology (DOE) Manual standards for stormwater quality treatment shall be utilized for treatment system design; these standards are more stringent than the 1990 King County Manual requirements that the City of Renton has adopted. Water quality treatment of surfaces routinely accessible to motor vehicles would be provided by wet vault(s) designed to the 1992 DOE standards. Or, upon City authorization or requirement, future developer(s) may utilize a future amended DOE manual for stormwater quality or future adopted or amended City stormwater manual, with equal or greater standards. • Four inches of compost shall be tilled to an approximate depth of 6 inches under all landscaped areas to be lawn. This organic laye.r would: a) increase infiltration and water retention under the turf rooted zone, which would reduce leaching and enhance evapotranspiration; b) create organic binding sites for organic pesticides and metals; and c) create an organic substrate for microbial growth, which would biodegrade organic pesticides and reduce leaching of nitrogen through uptake and denitrification. • If pesticides are to be used, they shall be selected from low-mobility products. • If (1) the ratio of roo£'walkway/fire lane to parking/roadway surfaces falls substantially below those identified for the Proposed Action in the SEIS, and if (2) there is a corresponding potential increase in average daily trips, then additional metals removal shall be required for Southport Planned Action 13 Mitigation Document discharge to Lake Washington. Additional removal could be achieved by use of a compost filter or other underground filter insert added to the wet vault system for Lake Washington. • Native vegetation or locally adapted landscaping species shall be used, where possible, to avoid the need for pesticides. This shall be addressed in any required landscape plans. • Any plans for future construction of waterfront improvements shall be reviewed and approved by appropriate agencies, such as the City of Renton, Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Ecology and the US Army Corps of Engineers. • Water quality impacts from operation of a future guest dock would be limited as no permanent moorage, haul-out or fueling facilities would be allowed. Resuspension of sediments from prop wash would be mitigated by control of boat speeds near the dock and shore and other measures which would be identified at the time of a future application. d. Nexus: King County Stonnwater Management Manual (adopted in RMC 4-6-030); Grading, Excavation, and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 4. FISHERIES & AQUATIC ANIMALS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to water quantity and quality. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. Fisheries • Site grading and filling of intake/return tunnels (Lake Washington) would increase potential sedimentation in Lake Washington and John's Creek. With proposed erosion control measures, impacts to fisheries habitat would not be significant. • The limited existing riparian vegetation ( consisting of exotic grasses and blackberry with little fisheries habitat value) along Lake Washington and John's Creek would be impacted by construction. • No new in-water or over water structures are proposed. However, the waterfront promenade would result in increased human activity and lighting near the Lake Washington shoreline. With proposed mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated. • Future waterfront improvements or enhancement of pedestrian connections on the east and west sides of the site could be made, subject to a separate permit process. Potential future improvements could increase over-water structures, impact water quality from increased boat traffic on a localized basis, and increase lighting levels, which could impact fisheries resources. • Widening of Lake Washington Boulevard would require lengthening of culverts passing John's Creek. Pond habitat would temporarily be eliminated and could displace fish currently using that portion of the creek. Water quality degradation from sediments or turbidity could occur during construction. No permanent impacts would be anticipated, Southport Planned Action 14 Mitigation Document b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: With implementation of mitigation measures, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts would result. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified-in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Fisheries The following mitigation measures are intended to minimize the potential for impacts to fisheries resources from redevelopment of the site. • Directional lighting and shading provisions for all light standards along the promenade on the Lake Washington shoreline side shall be implemented. • The cooling water tunnel entrances shall be permanently sealed prior to backfilling the tunnel. The plug would consist of a pre-constructed structure made of concrete or other non- corrosive material and would be placed in the tunnel from above. • Native shrub and tree species shall be planted along the shoreline of John's Creek to replace the existing blackberry bushes. Native species such as sallal (Gau/theria shallon), Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa), snowberry (Syrnphoricarpos a/bus), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), elderberry (Sarnbucus sp.), willow (Salix sp.) and western redcedar (Thuja plicata) would be considered to provide some additional benefit from allochthonous (non- native) contribution and insect productivity to fisheries resources in the creek and Lake Washington. • · As part of the required Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), mass grading shall be limited to the dry season, and there shall be collection and treatment of turbid water. Or, if grading activities are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a grading plan for City review and approval that minimizes erosion. Additional water quality measures, identified in the EARTH and WATER sections of this Mitigation Document would also benefit fisheries resources. Future Waterfront/Dock Improvements • The preliminary conceptual development plans reviewed in the SEIS do not include plans for waterfront improvements on the west or east side. Such improvements shall be subject to separate, future applications sponsored by the City or the developer(s). Measures generally applicable to the minimization of impacts to fisheries resources from future potential waterfront improvements at the west side, and potential future access improvements to the Park on the east side, would be required at the time such improvements would be permitted. Dependent upon specific future applications, the following measures shall be considered and applied where appropriate: -Minimize over-water structure. Southport Planned Action 15 Mitigation Document Construct all walking surfaces to allow as much natural light penetration as possible. Remove unnecessary structures such as abandoned or unused pilings, dolphins, finger piers, sheetpile, etc. Minimize vertical structures (e.g., pilings, walls) in the water column. Use light colored materials. Minimize structure in the nearshore area used by salmonids during migration. d. Nexus: King County Stormwater Manual (adopted by Renton in RMC 4-6-030); Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4 716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 5. NOISE AND VIBRATION a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix C of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to noise and vibration. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. • Construction activities, including pile driving and use of heavy equipment, would generate noise through much of the 5 year construction period. These activities would generate maximum sound levels that would be higher than existing sound levels. • Pile driving activities have the potential to cause ground-borne vibration at nearby structures at the Boeing Plant. Nearby Boeing buildings are not anticipated to be impacted; however, the wastewater treatment plant could be susceptible to vibration impacts. Multiple pile driving at anyone time would be precluded to minimize the potential for impacts. • Residential areas east of the· site could be affected by HV AC noise above allowable night- time noise levels, depending on the type and location of the HVAC units. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Redevelopment would increase sound levels at off- site locations as a result of pile driving and other construction activities. The relative impact of these increases would depend on the specific timing and the duration of noise events. If construction activities, including equipment start-ups and other noisy preparations are limited to daytime hours, and other reasonable mitigation measures are employed to reduce on-site production and off-site transmission of construction noise, off-site impacts related to construction noise would be minimized. Complying with the state noise rule limit restricting construction activities to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. would preclude construction noise impacts during legally defined nighttime hours. Other mitigation measures to reduce noise generation and/or off-site transmission of pile-driving, vibration from pile driving and other construction noise employed by construction contractors would reduce the potential for significant off-site impacts. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix C of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(sJ: Southport Planned Action 16 Mitigation Document Construction Noise Although the conservative nature of the construction noise analysis likely overstates actual construction noise levels at nearby sensitive receivers, there remains a potential for noise impacts from uncontrolled construction noise sources on-site. Because construction noise during daytime hours is exempt from the limits in Washington's noise rule, no mitigation is required in order to comply with the state or local noise limits. However, due to the potential for noise impacts, and because construction might take place over five years, the use of mitigation measures to reduce potential noise impacts is warranted. The following construction practices shall be used to help minimize potential noise impacts. • Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where applicable. · • Properly sized and maintained mufflers, engine intake silencers, engine enclosures, and turning off idle equipment shall be required in construction contracts. • Construction contracts shall specify that all equipment and especially mufflers be maintained in good working order. Contracts shall further specify that engine enclosures be used on non- portable equipment when the engine is the dominant source of noise, and that stationary equipment shall be placed as far away from sensitive receiving locations as possible. Where this is infeasible, portable noise barriers shall be placed around the equipment with the opening directed away from the sensitive receiving locations such as Gene Coulon Park, or future on-site residential dwellings which may be constructed prior to construction of other uses on-site. • To the extent feasible, the substitution of hydraulic or electric models for impact tools such as jack hammers, rock drills and pavement breakers shall be required in construction contracts to reduce construction and demolition noise. • Construction contracts shall require, to the extent feasible, that ambient-sensing vehicle back- up alarms meeting OSHA standards shall be used, Pile Driving Noise • Pile driving shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. No pile driving work shall be permitted on Saturdays or Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where applicable. • A grout injected pile system or other equivalent system which would not require impact driving shall be evaluated. If the grout injected pile system or equivalent is not chosen, the following mitigation measure shall be applied to the impact pile driving activities. Southport Planned Action 17 Mitigation Document -Where a grout pile driving system or equivalent system is not selected, and impact pile driving activities are conducted, at least one of the following noise reduction measures shall be used to mitigate potential pile driving noise: Insert a wooden or plastic dolly between the pile head and the hammer. Apply a damping compound to steel piles to reduce the vibration/ringing. Silence exhaust gas pulsations from the engines of diesel-powered hammers. Remove any unnecessary hanging chains; fix any loose bolts, panels, or over-slack leader guides. Use a cushioned method in conjunction with a "heavy hammer-short drop" practice. This requires using interference fit guides to prevent kicking, rolling and vibration in the pile. While the overall sound level is not substantially reduced, the nature of the sound may be less annoying to people. Regular equipment service and maintenance. Use a Heesch Noise Abatement Tower. Pile Driving Vibration • As part of the detailed building design process, a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall survey existing structures in the surrounding area to more thoroughly determine the potential for vibration related impacts. In addition, a pile driving test near the western site boundary shall be conducted while vibration measurements are taken at the closest Boeing facilities. The City ,vill facilitate cooperation/coordination between the developer and The Boeing Company as needed. • As stated previously, a grout injected pile system or equivalent system which would _not require impact driving shall be evaluated. The geotechnical survey and test pile drive in the previous mitigation measure will determine whether a grout pile driving system or equivalent is warranted. If warranted, the grout pile driving system or equivalent shall be utilized for the area within 100 feet of the wastewater treatment facility to protect against potential structural damage, or within an alternate distance/area as recommended by the geotechnical engineer, upon acceptance by the City. • To reduce potential vibration impacts at the nearest Boeing facilities, multiple pile driving activities shall be precluded from occurring very near the western site boundary. The distance shall be determined as part of the survey by the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s). Operational Noise • Specific studies on the potential for significant HV AC noise impacts shall be conducted by the developer as pgrt of the building design process. If such studies indicate that HVAC equipment noise could cause noise impacts at the nearest residences overlooking the site, the Southport Planned Action 18 Mitigation Document following mitigation measures could be employed. The need for such measures shall be determined as part of the building permit process. Place noise barriers around the HV AC units. Choose quieter equipment. Provide silencers on the air intake and exhaust. d. Nexus: City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 6. LAND USE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SETS includes an examination of significant impacts to land use. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • The Proposed Action would result in the permanent conversion of 14.2 acres of existing industrial land to office, residential and commercial retail land uses. • . The Proposed Action would result in a trade-off between industrial land and Center Office Residential (COR) lands in the city. A one percent reduction in total industrial land and an 11 percent increase in COR land would result. • The proposed building area would be greater than the existing building area on the site. • Planned uses would provide a land use transition between industrial use to the west and park/residential use to the east. Densities would be greater than nearby residential areas, however. • The proposed land uses would increase the level of human activity on the site. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Implementation of the Proposed Action would result in the intensification of development on the site, displacement of some existing industrial uses, and permanent conversion of industrial land to a mixed use redevelopment. A substantial difference in building scale between on-site development and Gene Coulon Park would result. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4. 7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6 acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space which would help offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site, approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground- level and outside of structures (i.e., excluding courtyards above parking structures). If future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal is consistent with City policies and standards. Southport Planned Action 19 Mitigation Document • Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake Washington would be a minimum of 35 feet. d. Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 7. RELATIONSHIP TO PLANS AND POLICIES a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to relevant plans and policies. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • The Proposed Action, which includes needed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code, would be generally consistent with relevant City plans, policies and regulations. • In order to accommodate redevelopment under the Proposed Action, modifications to City parking and surface water regulations may be needed. Additionally, a variance could be needed from Land Clearing and Tree Cutting regulations if vegetation is removed within 25 feet of Johns Creek. Either a conditional use permit, variance, and/or an administrative determination of the Shoreline Master Program would be needed relative to setbacks for mixed use (residential and commercial) buildings if proposed as shown in Plans A or B. Plan C would not require special permits or authorizations related to shoreline setbacks. Other permits required for the proposal are listed in the Fact Sheet of the SEIS. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: No specific mitigation measures are warranted. See discussion of needed modifications, variances, and other permits. ~d~. --~N~'e~x~u~s: Non-applicable. 8. a. POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT Significant Impacts: • Proposed residential use would increase the population by between 720 and 1,037 people, 5% to 8% of the City's population forecasted to be added between 1990 and 2010. Dwellings would help meet City's housing targets. The Proposed Action would add between 1,751 to 2,584 employees, 6% to 9.5% of City's 1990-2010 employment target. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No significant unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures would be necessary. Southport Planned Action 20 Mitigation Document ,,_d'--. _ _,N..:;e.,x,.,,ua,s: N on-app Ii cab le. 9, AESTHETICS, LIGHT & GLARE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to aesthetics and light and glare. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • The visual character of the site would change from low density industrial use to higher density mixed use. • From distant viewpoints, site development would appear as a continuation of the building mass of the Boeing Plant. Office buildings would step-down in height, from west to east, and would provide a height transition from Boeing to the proposed residential buildings and Gene Coulon Park to the east. • From the playground in Gene Coulon Park, residential Building B would significantly affect the visual character of the immediate area. • The optional fire lane along east side of Building C could encroach upon the drip line of certain trees along the west boundary with Gene Coulon Park. With implementation of arborist recommendations, no significant impacts to trees would be anticipated from the optional fire lane. • Proposed buildings would increase the amount of shade east over the Park playground. The greatest increase in shade would occur late in the afternoon during the winter months -the time of year with lowest number of sunny days and lowest park utilization. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: The scale and height of buildings on the site would increase subsequent to redevelopment. Some increase in shading and glare conditions at the adjacent Gene Coulon Park children's playground area would occur. Regarding identified impacts to Gene Coulon Park, additional mitigation considered could include increased setbacks, reduced heights, or stepped/graduated heights for Building B. These measures are not proposed as they could affect other building placements/heights as well as the achievement of sponsor objectives. However, the Proposed Action includes code amendments addressing building modulation and articulation for buildings immediately adjacent to public parks, open space and trails. This measure could help to partially offset some identified impacts depending on specific building designs developed for site plan and building permit applications. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4.7 acres (Plan A) to 4,6 acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space and public amenities which would help offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground level and outside of structures (i.e. excluding courtyards and above parking structures). If Southport Planned Action 21 Mitigation Document future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal is consistent with the City's policies and standards. • Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake Washington would be a minimum of35 feet. • Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g., benches, gates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, handrail details) shall be compatible with the Gene Coulon Park design theme as determined by the City. • . Modulation and articulation of buildings adjacent to or abutting public parks, open space or trails shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City, and where applicable, shall be consistent with City regulations. • If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed, instead of providing emergency access via the Coulon Park parking lot drive aisle to the east as proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term survival of the trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the tree root zone (drip-line), minimizing the amount of fill within root zone areas, and possibly utilizing pervious paving materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E of the Draft SEIS for detail). d. Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City of Renton Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090, Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 10. TRANSPORTATION a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/ Appendix D of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to the transportation system. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/ Appendix D of the SEIS. • Plan A, Band C would generate between 9,367 and 11,202 net daily trips, including between 1,005 to 1,273 AM peak hour trips, and between 1,061 and 1,355 PM net peak hour trips in 2004. • The· number of new trips generated by Plans A and C would be less than the City's concurrency ordinance estimated annual average, and all plans would meet the 1999 trip bank forecasts. Plans A, B, and C would pass the City's concurrency test. • Without off-site roadway improvements, proposed development would result in decreased . LOS compared to 2004 background conditions at the following intersections: Park Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Blvd. during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours; and Lake Washington Blvd./Site Access/Houser Way and N. 30th Street/I-405 northbound ramps during the p.m. peak hour. Southport Planned Action 22 Mitigation Document Proposed roadway improvements would be provided at the Park Drive/Garden Ave/Lake Washington Boulevard and Lake Washington Boulevard/Houser Way/Site Access Intersections to achieve acceptable levels of service. • Vehicles exiting the site during the PM peak-hour would experience significant delay at the site driveway. • Proposed parking supply for residential and commercial uses does not meet City rates for Plans A and B. Proposed parking rates for the hotel use does not meet City rates in Plan C. • In terms of the parking demand analysis, proposed parking supply for retail uses in Plans A and B would be insufficient on weekdays. • If paid parking is implemented for office uses on the subject site, it could have a spillover effect on the free parking provided at Gene Coulon Park. • With increased traffic, additional conflicts could result for vehicles crossing at the existing railroad crossings (no impact to trains would be anticipated). The City and the developer(s) would work with BNSF and the WUTC during the design of improvements on Lake Washington Blvd. to determine the best railroad crossing solution (i.e., automatic gates and/or signals). • The Proposed Action would generate demand for area transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. On-site pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks, promenade, crosswalks and connections to existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be provided. Transit incentives could be provided as part of a TDM program. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: The Proposed Action would increase the number of vehicles using area roadways. With implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impacts would be anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SETS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • A traffic/road improvement plan shall be prepared and approved prior to approval of a site plan (Level I). Improvements shall be implemented at the time demand or safety warrants. The road improvements shall be consistent generally with the following features: At the Park Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the existing channelization on the Park Avenue approach would be restriped to accommodate one shared through/right lane, one through lane, and two left-tum lanes. On the Lake Washington Boulevard approach, the approach would be restriped to accommodate one right-tum lane and two left-tum lanes. The westbound free right-tum lane from Park Drive to Lake Washington Boulevard would yield to the eastbound left-turning vehicles from Park Avenue to Lake Washington Boulevard. A signal would be provided at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Houser Way/Site Access intersection. Southport Planned Action 23 Mitigation Document -The Subject Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access approach would be widened to three lanes (one left-turn, one right-turn and one entering lane). The section of Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the joint Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access would be widened by approximately 12 feet to accommodate two southbound lanes, one northbound left tum lane, and one northbound through lane. To minimize the safety hazard from left-turns in and out of the Boeing parking lot, left turns may need to be restricted. One solution could be placement of a c-curb along the centerline of Lake Washington Boulevard just north of Park Drive to restrict left-turns into and out of the Boeing parking lot. Alternate parking lot access may be available from N l O'" Street. Prior to final design, coordination with Boeing shall occur to determine specific mitigation. The City shall assist with coordination efforts as needed. The improvements shall be funded by the future developer(s), or through a City Local Improvement District. • Traffic impact mitigation fees shall be paid to the City of Renton at the rate of $75 per daily trip generated, consistent with the City of Renton Resolution No. 3100. Appropriate fees shall be determined in accordance with Resolution 3100 prior to approval of a site plan (Level II). Because the traffic/road improvements would also address traffic growth unrelated to the development of the subject site, the City will use all or a portion of the traffic impact mitigation fees to fund the portion of the traffic/road improvements required that the City determines will provide benefit to the public. • The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF railroad during the design of improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard to determine the most appropriate railroad crossing solution. Potential solutions could include signal pre-emption and cantilever-mounted flashing lights with or without gates. • The specific design of the internal intersection of the Site access driveway and the Gene Coulon Park access road shall be formulated prior to approval of Level I site plan(s) that necessitate the improvements. The design shall minimize queue lengths within Gene Coulon Park. The design shall insure that traffic into both properties would not spill back onto Lake Washington Boulevard. • The future developer(s) shall prepare a parking management plan for review and approval by the City prior to the issuance of building or construction permits. • Based upon any supplementary information during the preparation of Level I site plans or the traffic/road improvement plan, "Children at Play" signs could be installed in and around the Gene Coulon Park access road and near the site's residential areas, and/or speed bumps could be installed on the internal roadways to encourage slower speeds and enhance overall safety. • A traffic monitoring plan shall be conducted for two years after full buildout to determine if any modifications to traffic/road improvements are warranted based upon actual travel patterns. The monitoring would be conducted as part of the City's regular traffic count program. Where feasible, the road design shall consider potential contingency measures to Southport Planned Action 24 Mitigation Document ensure that road improvements will function as designed to encourage traffic movements to the south of the project site. d. Nexus: City of Renton Parking Regulations (RMC 4-4-080); City of Renton Six Year Transportation Improvement Program; City of Renton Street Arterial Plan; City of Renton Traffic Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution 3100); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 11. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to fire department services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. b. • The Proposed Action would generate additional fire protection and emergency service demands on the City of Renton Fire Department. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Per Resolution 2913, fire mitigation fees shall be paid to the City at the rate of $388 per multi-family unit, and $0.52 per square foot of commercial building area. Credit shall be given for existing structure square footage. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050); Fire Department Master Plan; Fire Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution 2913); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 12. POLICE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to police services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. b. • The Proposed Action would generate additional demands for police protection. • Due to the additional population, demand for police security in Gene Coulon Park could increase. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): Southport Planned Action 25 Mitigation Document • Prior to the issuance of building permits, future developer(s) of the site shall coordinate with the Police Department to include on-site safety features that would help lower the demand for service. ~d=. -~N=ex=u~s: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 13. SCHOOLS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the S_EIS includes an examination of significant impacts to school facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Residential use would generate additional students in the Renton School District. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future · developer(s): • Prior to issuance of residential building permits, the future developer(s) shall coordinate with the school district to ensure safe and efficient bus transportation to and from the site. • Prior to issuance of residential building permits, adequate provisions shall be provided on-site for bus tum-around(s) or on Lake Washington Boulevard for a bus pull-out as applicable. ,,d=. -~N~'~ex=u=s: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 14. PARKS a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to parks and recreation facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Plans A, B, or C would increase the demand on nearby park and recreational facilities. Using the City of Ren ton's Parks level service standards, approximately 20 to 31 acres of parks and recreational facilities would be required to serve the site population. Residents would likely use nearby park and recreational facilities for active needs. • The Gene Coulon Park playground would experience higher levels of activity. • Increased level of activity at Gene Coulon Park could cause need for additional security in the Park. However, presence of resident population could enhance perception of security at the park. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse park impacts would occur with implementation of mitigation measures. Refer to the Aesthetics section above regarding other unavoidable impacts. Southport Planned Action 26 Mitigation Document c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Subject to City approval, future site plans (Levels II and I) shall include substantial on-site public and private recreational features, including public access to Lake Washington, a waterfront promenade, public plaza areas and courtyards. The promenade shall serve as an extension of the trail in Gene Coulon Park and would provide an opportunity for a future connection to properties to the west and the Cedar River Trail. • The playground in Gene Coulon Park shall be redesigned to ensure that the pedestrian connection between the park and the subject site would not direct pedestrians into the playground area. A conceptual redesign shall be prepared by the developer(s) prior to approval of a site plan (Level II) with oversight by the City. • Future developer(s) shall comply with the City's Park Mitigation Fee Policy (Resolution 3082), which allows a variety of approaches to mitigate impacts (e.g. dedication, fees, provision of on-site facilities). The impact fee is equal to $354.51 per multi-family dwelling unit. The fee shall be determined and applied in accordance with Resolution 3082. • Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g., benches, grates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, handrail details) shall be compatible with the Gene Coulon Park design theme, as determined by the City, to achieve an effective transition. • The property owner(s) and developer(s) as appropriate, shall dedicate, develop, and maintain a public recreation easement for physical access along the promenade and shall dedicate a public recreation easement for physical access to and use of the dock to ensure long-term opportunities for public access to the shoreline. • If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed instead of providing emergency access via the Gene Coulon Parkparking lot drive aisle to the east as proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term survival of the trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the trees' drip-line, minimizing the amount of fill within the drip-line area, and possibly utilizingpervious paving materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E in the Draft SEIS for detail). d. Nexus: City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Parks Mitigation and Fee (Resolution 3082); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 15. WATER SUPPLY a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to water supply. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Development will result in additional domestic water demand. Southport Planned Action 27 Mitigation Document b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be expected. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • Redevelopment will require construction of a minimum 10-inch line looped through the site. This line would connect to the existing 6-inch line serving Gene Coulon Park. The 6-inch connection to Lake Washington Boulevard would be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line. These improvements would insure adequate water pressure and fire flow capacity for future development on the site. • Construction beneath Burlington Northern Railroad's tracks and in the public right-of-way will be required to install the new connection. The following mitigation measures shall apply: Construction plan review and scheduling with all affected utilities and the railroad shall be coordinated well in advance of construction. Dependent upon final approved plans and methodologies, boring and jacking would likely be required for construction underneath the existing rail lines. • A minimum 15-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to water lines for maintenance/repair. d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Comprehensive Water System Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 16. WASTEWATER a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to wastewater utility service. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Peak sanitary sewer flows would increase. b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be expected. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future developer(s): • The existing 8-inch sewer line shall be replaced with a minimum JO-inch line to insure adequate capacity to handle the estimated flows. Southport Planned Action 28 Mitigation Document • Installation of the minimum I 0-inch sewer line will require construction beneath Burlington Northern Railroad's tracks, as well as construction in the public right-of-way. The following mitigation measures shall apply: Construction plan review and scheduling with all affected utilities and the railroad shall be coordinated well in advance of construction. Dependent upon final approved plans and methodolgies, boring and jacking would likely be required for construction underneath existing rails. • A minimum IS-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to sewer lines for maintenance/repair. d. Nexus: City of Renton Long Range Wastewater Management Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. 17. SOLID WASTE a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to solid waste services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SETS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS. • Residential uses and commercial uses would generate additional tons of solid waste annually b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated. c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in Chapter 3 of the SETS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented ·by the future developer(s): • Future developer(s) shall develop a plan for waste reduction, reuse and recycling both during construction and post-development to reduce solid waste disposal demands. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Solid Waste Utility prior to issuance of building and construction permits. ,,d"-. __ e;N,,e"x""us: Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Southport Planned Action 29 Mitigation Document ADVISORY NOTES TO DEVLOPER/APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided ill co11ju11ctiou with the Mitigation Document. Because these 110/es are provided as l11formation only, they are not subject to the appeal process. The SEIS did not list all potential applicable code requirements, but identified the key code requirements that would act to mitigate identified environmental impacts. It is assumed that all applicable federal, state, and local regulations would be applied. The primary set of applicable local regulations is found in Title 4 of the Renton Municipal Code which addresses Administration and Enforcement, Land Use Districts, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, Property Development Standards, Building and Fire Prevention Standards, Street and Utility Standards, Subdivision Regulations, Permits and Decisions, Procedures and Review Criteria, and Non-conforming Structures, Uses and Lots. Specific code requirements identified in the SEIS that would act as mitigation include: EARTH Seismic • All proposed structures will be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050) Geotechnical Considerations -Stuctural Fill • Final grading plans shall ensure that existing grades are met at the property line with Gene Coulon Park. (RMC 4-4-060.H.4) AIR QUALITY NOISE General -Construction and Operation • Rules and regulations as promulgated by Federal and State Clean Air Acts, the State DOE (RCW 70.94; WAC 173-400), and PSAPCA (RCW 70.94; PSAPCA Regulations I, II, and Ill) would apply to the Proposed Action as well as to activities of adjacent and abutting sites. Construction Noise • Washington's noise limits apply to construction noise during nighttime hours; therefore, construction activities could be limited to daytime hours to the extent practicable. This restriction could include all noisy start-up and preparatory activities such as starting engines before 7:00 a.m., which can disturb people trying to sleep. Noise from any work during nighttime hours (after 10 p.m.) received in residentially zoned areas would be subject to the nighttime noise limits in the Washington Administrative Code. (WAC 173-60) • Maximum noise levels during construction would be required to comply with City of Renton Development Regulations for Grading, Excavation and Mining (RMC 4-4-060). Southport Planned Action 30 :Mitigation Document TRANSPORTATION • A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program will be implemented. TDM 1s a tool for managing the amount of traffic a development generates. Through various TDM programs, traffic could be reduced overall or shifted to non-peak times of the day. The State of Washington's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program, implemented through the City's Commute Trip Reduction regulations in RMCI0-13, requires employers who have 100 or more employees commuting to a single location, between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., to implement TDM programs. Some TDM programs could include: -Transit incentives -Guaranteed ride home program -Flex-time hours -Telecommuting -Preferential parking for vanpools and carpools -Parking pricing -Secured bicycle parking -Financial Incentives • Haul Routes and Hours: A construction plan showing haul routes and hours will be required. (RMC 4-4-030.C) FIRE SERVICES • Approved fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems will be installed throughout all structures. (RMC 4-5-070) • City ordinances require a minimum of two access roadways into the project. An emergency access would be provided via the 45-foot wide pedestrian plaza located immediately south of Building B with access from Gene Coulon Park's southern parking lot. Removable vehicle barriers would block ordinary vehicle traffic. (RMC 4-5-070) • Fire department apparatus access is required within 150 feet of all points on the building. The fire lanes along the secondary access, and along the south/southwest site perimeter, would meet fire department requirements by having widths of 20 feet. Roadways would be signed as fire lanes. If later proposals require access along the promenade for emergency apparatus, then the access shall meet applicable code requirements and ensure the access areas are distinguishable. (RMC 4-5-070) A designated fire lane, to serve the eastern side of the development, would be provided by the existing drive aisle in the Gene Coulon Park parking lot to the immediate east. The park drive aisle would be signed as a fire lane. (RMC 4-5-070) Southport Planned Action 31 Mitigation Document '( ...... . .I ) SOUTHP_ORT VICINITY MAP Gene Coulon Park Lake Washington Shoreline SOUTHPORT Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning ED/N/SP 0. Dennison 23 February 1999 EXHIBIT B ILLUSTRATIVE MAP ~---·-----1 ' I 0 I L_ I I I Site boundary 400 800 1 :4,800 EXIIlBITC LEGAL DESCRIPTION New Lot B of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. 98-176-LLA, as recorded under King County Recording No. 9902019014, Records of King County, Washington. Situate in Goverrunent Lots 1 and 2 of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington. r-·-~--~--~--~--~--~--~---, I I I I I I Maximum Building Heights I I I I I I !{:\/:\l 7 5' • 125' ~ 35' • 58' @ Southport Planned Action 0 200 400 e Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning EXHIBIT D ED/N/SP L Grueter, 0. Dennison · 10 Augu,t t••• MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS 1 :2,40d (~~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Lease and Easement Work is Under Way - ---_._ ,-0. IJM Olitl/JJNll1 ............ ~ UIIIIIITMl:IIICIU'lirr~ ...... ~-.C _,._ OHR PROPERTY '--- BOEING PLANT LAKE WASHINGTON _.._ - • Boeing Easement • DNR Lease • SECO Agreement I ONR PROPERTY DNR PROP£RTY SECO PROPERTY r . '-' j jV OOOOC ~n V/ICAHT : I ._• -=::" 7 $ THPOR~ (r: H,.x,,Hq ~Pcs,E..N~r-JT ,.n. BREnnnn AIIOCIATEI. PUC cc: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE COMMITTEE REPORT March 10, 2003 APPROVED BY 'l CITY COU NCIL Date S-/0-~03 Lake Washington Trail and Habitat E nhancement Project (February 10, 2003) Jim Shepherd Les lie Betlach Bill Rasmussen · ESA Comofwhole report\ rev Oli02 bh :~( CITY OF REN"IIIN ~"'''' Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ J nt Project CONNECTING AN IMPORTANT REGIONAL TRAIL SYSTEM I.A. BREnnAn AUOCIATH. PIIC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project THE OPPORTUNITY OF A GENERATION TO RESTORE A CRITICAL SHORELINE IN RENTON ,.n. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC , ~ CITY OF REN'IAN ~ Lake Washingtdl'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ ,..,nt Project PROJECT CONTEXT Ballard Locks Lake Washington l 7)'1m~~~L Lake to Locks Water Trail Site Location Major Missing Link in Trail System Lake ~ Sammamish Lake Washington Cedar River Trail J.n. BREnnnn nuoc1ntu. Puc ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project PROJECT PARTNERS • City of Renton • DNR • Boeing • SEGO Development Inc. (Southport Development) • Puget Sound Energy • Regulators • Tribes • Salmon Recove ry Fund Board • I.A.C. and Other Funding Agencies • King County J.n. BR En nAn nUOCIATH. PUC ~ CITY OF REN-N ~ Lake WashingbWl'Trail and Habitat Enhance ... ent Project GOALS OF PROJECT • Complete Connections to Existing Trail Systems • Enhance Riparian/Fish Habitat • Provide Recreational Access to Shore • Enhance City of Renton Waterfront • Create Interpretive and Educational Opportunities , ..... BREnnnn RSSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS Lease and Easement Work is Under Way ---.. .,-......... --- I.AKE WASHINGTON • Boeing Easement • DNR Lease • SECO Agreement KCO-,Y , ..... RREnnnn nssOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF REN-N ~ Lake Washingt.,,,Trail and Habitat Enhance ... ent Project REGULATORY APPROACH • Several Successful Meetings Completed • Preliminary Design Criteria Established • Work Closely with Regulators in a Collaborative Approach • Schedule Implications of Permits ,.n. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project FISH / WILDLIFE HABITAT ENHANCEMENT • Removal of Flume and Naturalization of Sho re • Shallow Water Fine Mineral Substrate • Prey Production for Salmonids • Overhanging Vegetation • Native Trees and Shrubs in the Riparian Zone ,.n. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF REN.N ~ Lake Washingt Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ ~nt Project PERMITTING • Identify and Achieve Project Milestones • Work to Critical Permit Windows • Identify Schedule Busters • JARPA -Corps of Engineers -Department of Ecology - Water Quality Certification -Biological Assessment/Evaluation HPA • Shoreline Development • Renton Sensitive Areas • SEPA I.A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project OVERALL CONCEPT PLAN • 850 Lineal Feet (outer wall) of Flume Removed • 600 Lineal Feet of Enhanced Shoreline • 2 ,200 Lineal Feet of Trail CONCE PT PLAN I.A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES . PUC ~ CITY OF REN"'laN ~ Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ... Jnt Project SITE HISTORY & INTERPRETATION • Historical Context • Fisheries • Wildlife • A irplane Manufacturing I.A. BRERRAA ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project SOUTHPORT PROMENADE PLAN • Gate to Control Access at Night • Coordination of Boeing Easement • Eastern Boeing Easement Extension of 1 O' • Consideration of Gate to Boeing Plant (SECO & Boeing Interest) • SECO / Southport Easement (or Other Form of Agreement) -~·-· uf-111>' FtWa:./~ 10' Hl<'fH '£A, J.lALL, · _ J I I ' I I I ------- ~·._;:ho~ Qi I.A. BREnnA n ASSOCIATES. PUC :~t CITY OF REN"lllN ~~ Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ .J nt Project SECTION AT EAST BOEING EASEMENT/ SOUTHPORT IHHq<.. 9-\o,.\!-"f" n~""',._._ -(o~t-\. ta.&' en,,...,._.,.~"<>' 1l ~. r -----I.CM '-I.._....,,_ ; *--~~-r (>.' -~) I ; f"\1.+ '-'....,_ ~- I.A. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PllO -'· "'· CITY OF RENTON }'!': Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project BOEING WALL / FENCE Metal Screen Wall ~ ~ AUJM1j-.JVf-1 F&.1£.11-J&t W.1"1H DI"-~ t'fl'WL ~ '* A<-*11W&( I.A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES . PllC ~ CITY OF RENWIN ~ Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ -1nt Project PILOT HOUSE PAVILION ,.n. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project TERN BOEING / SOUTHPORT ,.n. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PUC .. ~t CITY OF REN"IIIN ,,:----1 Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ ~nt Project DETAIL PLAN OF DNR PARK AREA Landforms • Dra inage from Bo eing Property • Wetland Enhancement Opportunity • Views to.Boeing Controll e d ,/·--- • ·;i~Fr-f,riendly Shoreline Design ~, , , , 10 Wll:>l Q.W WIIIJTY ZONI: • 10' Cl ear-Zone Along Fence '"""""'·~~!1-!"--0ll~III ' • Security lss ~_ • Major Intimate G --erITTgAr-ea'§~'·"'~::-_..~~-·~---------~--------------,, __ • Emphasize Nati Pia ----- ... ,, ... --- ,.n . BREnnnn AUOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project COORDINATION WITH BOEING • Security • Aesthetics • Setbacks • Easement ,.n. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF REN"IIIN ~ Lake Washingtdll"Trail and Habitat Enhance ... ent Project NATURAL BEACH PLAN CIT'/ Of RENTON 1~1• lkll'lnR,. IUJOCUITfJ. N.tO IIIEROERl'MIAM a+GINCERS IHC rA'r\.0RA.$.$()QATUINC UJ<E W ASHINGTON TRAIL & HABITAT ENH ANCEMENT PROJECT ,.n. RREnnnn nssOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project SECTION AT TOMBOLO ,.n. RREnnnn nssOCIATH. PUC .i~t CITY OF RENllaN ~ .... -iJ Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ____ mt Proje ct BEACH SECTION A J.A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES . PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement P r oject BEACH SECTION B I .A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES . PUC /~~-CITY OF REN'laN '°"t Lake Washingtdll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ Jnt Project BEACH SECTION C I.A. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project OVER WATER TRAIL CONNECTION AT WING OVERHANG J.n. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PUC ~~t CITY OF REN"laN ·\. ' Lake Washingtdll"Trail and Habitat Enhance ... ..Jnt Project ', ' ' ', ' ',, \ ' ' ', ' .. I ', • Link to Boat House • Revised Boeing Easement Required Provisions for Emergency Boat Access • ADA Access to Park and Trail Boardwalk Connection Options at Wing Overhang ,.n. nREnnAn ASSOClnTES. PUC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project ELEVATION AT OVER-WATER TRAIL """'-"'L-C t , .... 2..0'-0'' 'S/a/os. I.A. BREnnAn ASSOCIATES. PUC -:·-\' CITY OF REN"laN ·t~f. Lake Washingtdll"Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ ~nt Project ';L.' SECTION AT O ER-WATER T AflE---t ~II ~\L- --~Hi\HU.OU!:> p~~- --Ft\.£ CAf' I.A. BREnnAn nJJOCIATES. PIIC ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project PROJECT COSTS -ESTIMATE A MOBILIZATION Total B UPLAND PARK ON DNR LEASE Total C PARK ON EAST BOEING EASEMEMT Tota l D PARK/DOCK ON SOUTHPORT Tota l E OVER WATER TRAIL (Boeing/ DNR Easement) Total SUB TOTAL 20 % CONTINGENCY SUBTOTAL Sa les Ta x (.089) TOTAL TASKS A-E F OPTIONAL ITEMS $107 ,1 23 .56 $886 ,006 .25 $203 ,490 .00 $54 7,625 .00 $505 ,350.00 $2 ,249 ,59 4.81 $449 ,918 .96 $2 ,699 ,513 .78 $240,256 .73 $2,939,770 .50 Depending on results of structural analys is of the existing sheet pile bulkhead one of the following items may be required Item Desc ription Replacement Bulkhe ad (eas t end) Shee t Pile Wall Repair ~ Unit 1 LS 1 LS Unit Costs 300 ,000.00 75,000 .00 Subtotal 300,000 .00 75,000 .00 I.A. BRERnnn nJJOCIATES . PUC ,>:'Ci , CITY OF REN-.N ~?1: Lake WashingtcJllll'Trail and Habitat Enhance ___ Jnt Project City of Renton 2003 2004 2005 Waterfront Trail Schedule Qt . 1 Qt.2 Ot .3 Ot .4 Qt . 1 Ot.2 Qt.3 Q t .4 Qt . 1 Qt .2 Ot .3 Ot .4 Concept DesiQn Site lnventorv Master Plan / Concept Plan ' , 80o/o In Water Desian ' , Stakeholder Meetina • • • Permittina P nnlts ~ueln SEPA/JARPA Appli c ation • J ly for IAC G1 ~nt Permit Revie w . . . .... ~-·> Aaencv Meetinas • • • Desian Phase 50°/o Desian 90°/o Desian ---~ 100°/o Desian ~ Final Revisions ... Biddina Phase Bid • Construction Phase Construction ' , HPA Window Jul. 16 -O c t. 3 1 -- HPA Window Nov. 15 -Dec . 3 1 ... ... ... 1.n. nREnnnn nssoc1ntu . Puc ~ CITY OF RENTON ~ Lake Washington Trail and Habitat Enhancement Project GRANT OPPORTUNITIES I lnteragency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) -Annual application . Next application date is March 3 , 2004. Must have CORP Permit by July 2004 in order to apply. Total funds available in 2003 were $2 ,000 ,000. Must match up to 50%, 20% of funds o nly for A&E services. II l~CE~::e~~~;!~c~t:i~~:~f7or~:~:i::!i;~ g:~~s~r;u~ ~:'7~:0~. (Having CORP Permit by application is favorable.) Total funds available <1,000 ,000. ,. Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA) G rants --Washington State Dept. of Natural Resources. Even year applic ation only. Letter of intent deadl ine due April 25 , 2004 , Application due June 1 , 2004. Awards up to $1 ,000,000. Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) $ -Round V Applications due September 2003. Awa rds up to $400 ,000. King County Community Salmon Fund -Pre-Proposal Due April 1, 2003, Up to $50,000 -Miscellaneous Community Grants -Due April 1 and August 1 , $5 ,000+ -Natural Resource Stewardship Network-Due April 15 and August 15, $2,000+ 1.n. BRERnnn nssoc1nTEs. Puc .. ~t CITY OF REN' N :,<---e Lake Washingt ___ Trail and Habitat Enhance Jnt Project SUMMARY • Create a Legacy Shorel ine Park for Renton • A Major Opportunity for Salmon Habitat Restoration • A Regionally Significant Trail Link • Efficiency in Permitting and Design Approach • Create a Waterfront of Great Beauty for the City of Renton ,.n. BREnnnn ASSOCIATES. PUC COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMlTTEE REPORT March 17 , 2 003 Naming of Trail Connection Referred March 10, 2003) APPROVED BY ·t Cil11 OO~NCJL i :3 / 11) JV0:3 -'i Date . r _ The Community Services Committee concurs with the Board of Park Commissioner's recommendation to name the planned waterfr.ont trail connection from the Cedar River Trail to Gene Coulon Memorial Ileach Park the "Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail" in memory of former Community Services Administrator, Sam Chastain. Jt fut1her authorizes staff to secure and post signage designating this section of the trail. Permanen(dedication plaques will be included in the final design of the trail. C: Jim Shepherd Sylvia Allen Leslie Betlach Ch astai1:Trail.rpt\ Rev 01 /02 bh MAP (s c a le vari es) Geno \\1c \ ]' _se-,·ices C;in:e 1 , Coulon \f "" L. ·I 11 ,. lj Z . • ·- 1 r . .1 l· . <, •• Par1: \\j l;,=;=:!~l!lJl)_SJ._j :;\. Ho~dll'W p ••• --MFi;;:;g~· ., ... ~ 1-0 ONR ••• •• ~ c-MO•Je -= ~ ----·~· ,,_, • ·· ·· ,\ , .Ji Nm,,; =!-• <i o 1 1 , , I "' •• ~ ,,. ., -~,__: :;:; I I• " ,\ • • < "'Pq -• -··--I I Ir '~ . . ~,, -~i'~ ~ Cou11 P3,~R . 1 I__::· :J / ( \S. ~ t , .! ~ C I 1~1Q-1i ; '/~ ___ J ,1 . /.A, . ,, . . -~ ~ • ~edar (uf1 ~i \. <( tJ"J~:-. ,~r..~0~,r ,-, ~\\ ,.e, \ · I /<1J . ··. Ji I• j1 - "'''[ Trail L J ~\ //J · II Highlands • ll · <C \ ·-;-•\ c 811<. &f/:rhooo Ct/ .• I -=• nij N8ihSt · ~~::=::__~~~., ,li)li)'g-,,.tn<'ds ·wr. -.= I \ j' ~ ~~er:t·eJa·<; ~ ~ ~" .~otnsj 2 :-'.:' ~ i \ <f--i~!--.~ ~ I ~- \\'i 3 Re--,o., z 'I< ;:::-<]' \ "'I [ . ··"· < 1 ,. , f'° I ~ MPrr,,,,a '? , 'I ' F. s~~o·, \. -gjf ~ I -'TC \" ("J Stao1uM< r r L -6 [d ,-nl or . I 0, C I -i~ Ir/ ; ~"II .;, 3[ a.11 _;_;, Cen·er ~ '.j) ti! W:r:<1SO( --9-RP ·-. I"• :2' c_ u;fiJ tiLilnJt u; "' li:,I H,lls Palk ..< ·" 101 JlL ~'b ~ .., '[~ur'' [~, ~;¥1. / ,-~~:Jt -~E _4ti,~t • • T~~~~~ lj r ,r b.rb k<l ft! ;f ""~v-l ___.~ r~ ~ PenmPter Rd '!l,.~;-l!l~"~. i ,~c'' '/, ~,<l, ':,\ ~ G,eenwood -a ~ 1 ) '"'% o -1-<"-~ 1 ~lemona ~ \• /' ... ,... _r -I,-.,;, 1 1 --=:;-,-,...--Parl< 1- -1>,~ ~·'' fl Henton ' l! 1fi,r" ·~' ,~i::iU,~, -Mt o•,vel . • J I , H<;~ \; If ,.. #(' ri )s Liberty Cemetery Ii (".,.\,,..,,... '/,,> "OJO .,/;/f.P.n~~ark.-=. , TYPICAL CROSS -SECTION{s) A V A I L ABL E PROPER T Y -/-y v-.l DT l-VA R IES '0 '-0'1 to 12 1-011 Project Status Origin and Destination Project Length Existing Condition Proposed Cross-section User Groups Connections Project Description Constraints and Considerations Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan Proposed ltt,prof/ett,ents SAM CHASTAIN WATERFRONT TRAIL PROPOSED Cedar Ri ver Trai l to Gene Coulon Park 0.7 mile Undeveloped Mu lti-use t ra il (boardwa l k), p aved t rai l ~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,· Ped estrian s Ge n e Cou lo n Pa rk, Lake Was hington Wate rfront, Ce dar Ri ver TRAILS: Ce dar River Trail A m issi ng link b et w e e n t w o of th e City 's most im- portant open spaces, and a long t he Lake Wash- i ngton shore line Pr operty owned by Boeing and Was hin gton Sta t e DNR; permitting c h a ll e n ges 138 5. RECOMMENDATIONS DESCRIPTION The core of Renton, the City Center Pla n ning Area incl udes the h isto r ic downtown as well as the t ransitioni ng an d industrial l ands north to the edge o f Lake Washington. Several signatu re Renton parks are located within City Cent er. including Gene Coulon Memor ial Beach Park, the Piazza and Cedar River Tra i l Park. The area also includes marry community facilities, including t hose owned by the City and two sites owned by t he Renton School District. The character of this area varies greatly from i ndustrial and airport uses to single family homes near downtown main streets to a new destination mixed-use center at the Landing. The current a nd planned density of this area, and the diversity of activities re quire a range of sites as well as flexi bl e use. With the City Center Pla n in place, the area is poised for population and eco nomic growth t hat w i ll increase the demands on the relatively limited ex i st1ng park spaces. Key improvements to increase access and capacity w ill improve the City Center's ability to serve as t he heart of Re nton. CITY CENTER Projects • Senior Activity Center Pro~rty Li berty Pa r k Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park • Corridor Acq uisition • Cedar Rive r Tra il Park Burnett Linea r Pa r k Philip Arnold Pa r k Community Garden/Gree nhouse Piazza & Gateway City Center Neighborhood Park 1 Boeing EIS Waterfro nt Par k • Veterans Memorial Park • Tonkin Par k • Jones Park • Sit In Pa rk PARKS. RECREAT I ON AND NATURAL AREAS P LA N I 9) RECOM MENDAT I ONS -._ :,_.::;~;:..-~--~ ... ·; r.'N,k--.. A'X . ' II?' ,,, fti1~"' ' l ........ ,.··\·e:.,.~.J . ..,'I, -........ ~ ~-.,,:,:_ ,• -· ' ~~ ....... "'!'• . -: ~~."'): ~- ~-,~ ·t - 9-4 I CITY OF RENTON Cedar River Trai l ~ction from City Center Community Pl an, 2010 R EC OMM END A TI ONS Expand and Redevelop Senior Activity Center Site: The City should relocate the shop facilities located between the Senior Activity Center and the Comm unity Garden {including t he greenhouse) t o allow for expansion of this site and a broader set of activities. A new master pl an for this park should be developed for integration with the Renton Senior Activity Center and the adjacent neigh borhood . With no na me existing for this entire site, it is identified as City Center Neighborhood Park lQ)in this pl an. This site should be designed for neighbo rhood scale activity, but r ecogn iz ing t hat this wi l be in t he heart of the city, near downtown and o n the Cedar River Tra i l. As a result, this park should be designed for higher intensity use. Enlarge and Enhance Existing Sites: The City should seek opportunities to exp and several sites w ithin the City Center community pla nni ng area. Additional land should be acquired to provide overflow parking for Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, w ith an improved connection between t he park and re sidential and commercial development at The Land i ng@ Burnett Linear Park shou ld be expanded north to the area currently us ed as parking, strengthening the link between this pa rk, Tonkin Park , the Pi azza and the Cedar River Trail. 0 Redevelopment around the Piazza and Gateway park site should be encouraged to include a p laza and o ther complementary o utdoor spaces allowing activities to extend beyond the existing park, creating a civic ce nter. Relocate the Cedar River Trail: The City shou ld consider acquiring additio n al p roperty above the river ba nk along the Cedar River© and r elocate the trail out of the 100 year flood zone and as outlined in the Shoreline Master Program and the City Center Community Plan. This proposed relocation will provide better access and allow for riverbank restoration, improving water quality and salmon habitat. Th e r elocated trail n eeds to maintain the strong connection between the Se nio r Center and Liberty Park. Secure Land for Future New Parks : In addition to the master plan for the site adjacent to the Sen ior Activity Center, the 2003 Boein g Renton Comprehensive Plan Amend m ent EIS i dentifies a 7S acre park provi ding a potential con nection to Gene Coulon ,, .:;.. ~ •Oll+tl'T .i w ..... ,·-··-,_-; 'j CITY CENTER -r ii"1i CITY CENTER PLANN I NG AREA c::I R•1ional PMk D Commun ity Park • N,lghborhood Park c:] N11tunil Area -Corridor • S~lal U" Atta I:.-Othor Jurlsdlctlon Park O R,d border lndlcatos undeveloped site fii't Park Recommendation \:.I Loca tion ~Linkage PARKS. R EC REAT I ON ANO NATURAL ARtAS P LA N I 9S RECOM MEN D ATI ONS II ~~II,:~(. I ~ .. ~~·· ·!: ',11 ,J" I -~·~·. ,·:~-J.:~. ......... "' ,:"',;. . --~~ ..... :~ • I wee 96 t CITY OF RENTON Memorial Beach Park and the Cedar River Trail. This improvement w i ll only occur if the Boeing Company should decide to surplus the existing manufacturing facilities. This w i ll be a truly rare opportunity for future park development, shapi ng the future of central Renton . Based on the priorities of the co mmunity in 2011, the most important land to secure within the current Boeing properties would be the waterfront between Cedar Rive r Trail Park and Gene Coulon Regiona l Park.©The exact configuration of this new site sh ould be carefully plan ned to furthe r economic and community development and improve connectivity between Coulon Park and the Cedar River Trail. Enhance the Cedar River: The Cedar River is the major natural feature in the City Center Planning Area and the rive r and salmon run are closely tied to Renton's identity. The City should develop an enhancement and stab ilization program along t he Cedar River. Stabilization should improve and protect the health of the trees that anchor the bank as well as control invasive species. Invasive species control will likely involve removal and treatments beyond this community planning area. Explore Creative Partnerships: The businesses and organizations t h at are located in Qty Center offer a wide range of programming possibilities. As part of the Recreation Programming Plan, the City should explore how to involve additional local businesses and com munity organ izations. One opportunity identified duri ng the plann ing process involves collaborating with t he Boeing Company's employee health program to identify walks and fitness opportunities in proximity to Boeing facilities for employees to participate in during lunch breaks or before/after work. Implement Tr i-Park Master Plan : See Cedar River Community Planning Area recommendations. CITY CENTER COMMUN ITY PLAN Adopted: June 6, 2011 Prepared by: MAKERS architecture and urban des,gn The Transpo Group Chapter 4 88 PARKS & GREEN SPACE /··, . ~ \ ~ i -Natural environment ("' Tn-Park Master Plan --Existing bike lane --Proposed bike lane -Existing tra il --Proposed trail Burnett Linear Park extension to Houser -, Bumett Linear Park north extension Greenway/promenade • • Complete trail ~nks BNSF corridor -·--~..i,;il,III""" Continue to - enhance the Lake Washington Loop Trail 1::.\ ---f· -~ S l tAlh & L As a long-term goal, provide natural shoreline on Cedar River and Lake Washington shoreline s f2t$1 Si ,kfli1"'Stn- .' j ,4_,..tklft St -' I "J 'I .. < t ~ ~-- J < • • I .?H : -i~! ~ l j • : ...,,.Ht "" ... \ .,, Extend Burnell -, Linear Parle north to Houser Way Sin the short term As a long-term goal. provide a trail connection to the Green River Trail .s,.i.#i~ ! \ \ \. l i i' f 0 600 1.200 -- I l J As a long- term goal, provide a trail connection between Coulon Parle and the Cedar River Improve Cedar River Trail Greenway/ promenade along N 1st St Increase bike connections -As a long· term goal. extend Burnell Linear Parle north to Cedar River Implement Tri-Park Master Plan Provide a trail on Houser Way from Burnett Ave S lo 1· 2-~I/° ... A 4os Ci t y of Renton P lan Elements -Parks . Op_en _~pace. and Recreation ,., . . {:Parks, Open Space, and Recreation Goal 7: Promote and pursue the expansion of, and improve access to, regional recreational trails in the City Center, and build on these key connections as an economic development strategy. 7.1 Continue to increase bike connections within the City Center and work to provide a trail connection between the Green River, Cedar River, and East Lake Washington Trails and implement overtime. Build upon the work done in the C ity's May 2009 Trai ls and Bicycle Master Plan and the February 2009 Lake -to-Sound Trail Study to create coordinated b ike connections throughout the City Center and to regional trail facilit ies. A separated trail between the Green R iver, Cedar River, and East Lake Washingto n Trails wou ld make Renton's City Center the hub of Puget Sound regional trails a nd bring hundreds of thousands of cycli sts through the C ity Center each year. 7.1 .1: Con ti nu e to wo r k w ith BNSF, K ing County, the Port of Seattle , a nd Th e B oeing Company t o en sure the B NSF cor ridor is preserved and even tua lly converted to a rail and trail corrido r. Add i1i0na1 Details: Th e C ity shou ld continue to work to implement the st rategies set forth in the Lake-lo-Sound Trail Feasibility Study. In the near term . the rail corridor within the C ity Center area is needed for use by The Boeing Company. Opportun ities to enhance the corridor may be sought, but should not interfere with Boeing's usage. The City should contin ue to work with BNSF. Ki ng County, Port of Seattle and ra il users to ensure that the corridor is preserved and can eventually be converted into a ra il and trail corridor. Responsible Party: Lead: Communrty Services, Tra nsporta tion ; Support : Plan ning , Economic Development Resources: $$$ Public Involvement: Primarily internal meetings with other public agencies. Timeframe: On-go ing . Long-term. Dependent on other public and private agencies. City Center Community Plan 89 Chapter 4 ~ BNSF corridor. 7.1.2: Continue to work w i th the Po rt of Seattle a nd King Coun ty on providing ra il and trail ac ce ss i n the n o rthern area o f the City Center, near Cou lo n Park and Lake Washington Blvd. Additional Details: Work ing w ith the Port of Seattle and King County, the City could continue to enhance the bicycle connection to the East Lake Washington Tra il. Responsible Party: Lead : Commun ity Services, Transportation; Support: Plann ing, Economic Development Resources : $$$ Public Involvement : Primarily internal meetings with other public agencies at this inrt ia l stage . T1meframe: Mid-term. Dependent on Port of Seattle and King Coun ty 7 .1.3 : Create a conceptual plan and implement a streetsca pe design f or a tra il o n Ho user Wa y fro m Burnett to 1-405. Additional Deta ils : The City should pursue interim steps to improve the connection between the Green River, Cedar River, and East Lake Washington Trails. Improving the streetscape with bike facilities on Houser Way wou ld improve the bicycle connection in the short-term . Responsible Party: Lead: Community Services; Support : Plann ing. Economic Development (Intergovernmental Re lations). Transportation Resources : $$$ Public In volvement Engage residents. busin esses , and property owners to provide feedback on the conceptual plan and streetscape design. Timeframe : Short -term. 7 .1.4: Implem ent the City's Trai ls and B icycl e Ma st er Pla n . See the Trails and Bicycle Master Plan for specific implementation details. City's Trails and Bicycle Mas ter Plan. 90 City of Renton ..,.- P l an Elements -Parks. Open Space, and Recreation 7.2 As a long-term goal, provide a connection between the Cedar River and Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park. 7.2.1 : Continue t o work with key property owners (The Boeing Company) to pursue opportunities to p ro vide a trail connection between Coulon Park and the Cedar R Iver Trail. Add itional Details: This connection would provide excellent public access to the waterfront as well as provide a key bike and pedestrian connect ion between the Cedar River Trail and Cou lo n Park. The C ity should cont inu e to work and coord in ate with The Boeing Compa ny on possi ble implementation in the future. Lake Washington shoreline al Coulon Park. Responsible Pa rty: Lead : Community Services; Su pport . Tra n sportat ion. Pla nning, Economic Development Resources : $$$$ Public Involvement: Key property owners . Timeframe: Long-term . Dependent on action s of key property owners. Goal 7 Summary: Promote and pu rsu e the expansi on of, and improve access to, regional recreational trails in the City Center, and build on these key connections as an economic de velop ment strategy. 7 .1 Continue to increase bike connections within the City Center and work to provide a trail connection between the Green River. Cedar River, and East La ke Washington Trails and implement ove r time. 7.2 As a long-term goal, provide a connection between the Cedar River and Gene Cou lon Memorial Beach Pa rk. Ci t y Center Community Plan 91 08/13/2001 10:27 FAX .426 430 7376 RENTON TRANS, SYS. T liJD02 CAG-01-172 AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into between the City ofReriton {Renton) and Southport LLC, a Washlngton limited liability company (Southport). ------cPmection-A-ct;-Suothport must satis en :on ra c Mitigation Fee Policy (ResoltrtionNo'. 3100) with respect to the project in part by paying a fee of $75.00 per daily vehicle trip generated (the ''Traffic Mitigation Fee"); and · Whereas, the Mitigation Document has established that since the traffic/road improvements will also address traffic growth·unrelated to the development of the subject site, Renton will use all or a portion of the traffic impact mitigation fees to furid the portion of the traffic/road · improvements required that Renton determines will prpvide benefit to the public (page 24); Whereas, Southport has requested that Renton allow it to construct certain transportation ·'. improvements of equal value of and in lieu of its payment of the Traffic Mitigation Fee; and Whereas, the Traffic Mitigation Fee would be deteimined by the scope offue project should Southport have chosen to pay the fee instead of performing certain improvements of equal . value; . "Whereas, S01,1thport, Renton, and the interest of the public would be benefited by joint plroming and execution of Southport's and Renton's respective items of work herein; and Whereas, it is advisable and necessary to document the terms and conditions under which Southport and Renton will carry out their respective responsibilities and construction activities, Now, therefore, Southport.and Renton do agree as follows: The Traffic Mitigation.Fee will be credited towards the cost· of the off-site road improvements based on the following: · 1. It is agreed that the required transportation improvements involve 50% public benefit and 50% private benefit. · · 2. Renton agrees to pay 50% of the public improvem,:nt costs exciusive of the grant-funded portion of the public railroad crossing up to a limit ofRenton's participation. of 100% of the Southport project iraffic mitigation fee. If10D% of the Southport project traffic mitigation :fue exceeds 50% of the project costs, then the ba,lance would be paid into the transportation mitigation fund.· If I 00% of the Southport project traffic mitigation fee falls below 50% ·of.. the project costs, _Renton's contribution would be capped at fue amount of the fee. 3. Renton agrees to contribute above and beyond the 50% agreement the·TEA-21 Railroad · Crossing Program (Section 130) grant amount of $180,000 toward the shoulder mounted_ . _cantilevers, sigriaI and gates on Lake Washington Boulevard ouly, provided that Southport: ' . ' AUG-13-2001 11'30 425 430 _?376 97% P.02 08/13/200110:27 Fil 425 430 7376 RENTON TRANS. SYS. T @004 -~~,,.. ... EXHIBIT A --------------------------------·-_____ ,, ______________ _ ··---·-·········-····-··0 ·-·····---~--------·----••• :Jis°'.fOF TR,11.FHCMFflBATION!'El:( ™------------c-- L At the Park Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington B oulevaro intersection, the existing channelization on the Park A venue approach will be restriped to accommodate one shared through/right lane, one through lane, and two left-tum Janes. · · · 2. On the Lake Washington Boulevard approac:h, "t];\e approach will be restr:iped to accommodate onerighUum lane and two foft-tuni.Janes. · · 3. The westbound free right-tom Jane from Park Drive to Lake Was~gton.Boulevard will yield to the eastbound Jeft-1:uming vehicles from Park Avenue to Lake Washington Boulevard. 4. A sigtlal will be provided at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Houser Way/Site Access/Park. Access intersection. 5. The. Subject Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access approach will be widened to four lanes (one left-tum, one right-tum'and two entering lanes). 6. The.section of Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the joint Site/Gene . Coulon Park shared access will be widened by approximately 12 feet to accommodate 'two southbound lanes, one northbound left turn lane, and one northbound shared through/left tumlane. 7. Left turns in and out of the Boeing parking Jot will need to be restricted in order to · minimize the safety.hazard. One solution could be placement of c-curb along the centerline of Lake Washington Boulevard just north of Park Drive to restrict left toms into and out of the Boeing parking lot. Alternate parking lot access may be available from North 101h Street, Prior to final design, coordination with Boeing shall occur to determine specific mitigation. Renton shall assist with coordination efforts as needed. 8. The two railroad crossings, the Burlington Northern· and Santa Fe mainline cin Lake Washl.ngton Boulevard and the spur line on the joint Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access road, will be improved to include shoulder mounted cantilevers, signal and gates at both crossings. AUG-13-2001 11'30 425 430 7375 · 97% P.04 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMO APPLICATION NUMBER: APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUA14-000645, SA-A, SM, MOD, MOD Hotel at Southport, LLC Southport Hotel DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 32S,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 {UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to: COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999); the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM); and subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and mitigation document was issued for the Southport Planned Action in September 1999. Ordinance #4804 was adopted by the City Council in October 1999 designating a Planned Action of the subject site. The objective of the Southport Planned Action SEIS was to complete the environmental review outfront on the overall conceptual master site plan. Project applications and development phases are then allowed to proceed without additional environmental review provided the proposed development is consistent with the plan alternatives and level of development that was analyzed in the EIS process. On April 4, 2000, the City determined that the Southport Master Site Plan was consistent with both the range of plan alternatives that were evaluated in the EIS and with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Oridinance. The City approved a minor modification to the Master Site Plan on February 4, 2008. The City also determined that the modified Southport Master Site Plan (2008) was consistent with both the range of plan alternatives that were evaluated in the EIS and with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Oridinance. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd LEAD AGENCY/RESPONSIBLE ENTITY:City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Upon determination by the City's Environmental Review Committee that the proposal meets the criteria outlined in the Planned Action Ordinance (Ordinance #4804) and qualifies as a planned action, the proposal shall not require a SEPA threshold determination, preparation of an EIS, or be subject to further review pursuant to SEPA. The City's Environmental Review Committee has determined the proposed minor modification is consistent with the Master Site Plan which has been designated as a "planned action", pursuant to RC~ 43.21C.030, as it meets all ofthe following conditions: ,/ The proposal is located within the Southport Planned Action Area. ,/ The proposed uses and activities are consistent with those described in the Planned Action EIS and Planned Action Qualifications. ,/ The proposal is within the Planned Action thresholds and other criteria of the Planned Action Qualifications. ,/ The proposal is consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and applicable zoning regulations if all conditions of approval are met. ,/ The proposal's significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified in the Planned Action EIS. ,/ The proposal's impacts have been mitigated by application of the measures identified in Ordinance #4804, and other applicable City regulations, together with any modifications or variances or special permits that may be required. ,/ The proposal complies with all applicable local, state and/or federal laws and regulations, and the Environmental Review Committee determines that these constitute adequate mitigation. ,/ The proposal is not an essential public facility as defined by RCW.36.70A.200{1). SIGNATURES: Mar Peterson, Fke & Eme,gel Se~c,, d_ .-c ... ~ c:.1--: ., / 14 ) 11 Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department 1/1'{/IL/ Date C.E. VincenBdministrator Department of Community & Economic Development ~ City of , iJ r sJJ .. [ CJI l NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: June 9, 2014 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Southport One/ LUA14-000645, SM, SA·A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) wning classification. However, th2 proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. PROJECT LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Site Plan Review-Administrative, Shoreline Substantial Development, Parking Modification, and Master Site Plan Modification APPLICANT /PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Greg Krape, 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N., Ste. 50, Renton, WA 98056 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on June 23, 2014. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7219. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: MAY 16, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 28, 2014 RECEIVED JUN 3 0 2014 CITY OF RENTON PLANN!NG D!VISION If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No: Southport One/ LUA14-000645 SM, SA-A NAME: 1'111<.r, O' ti A LUJIVI.N MAILING ADDRESS: 1-\41{) {JU '-tr,+ ,<le, TELEPHONE NO.: _L±J.<,,,~""-------'L=0...!..LI ------"'0--'q'-J,_,~.,,__ __ City/State/Zip: ... , ·' ' ·' ' ·, ... { CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC. REVELOPMEN1i1;ri>Jil,LJ1..!'INING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE'BY MAI UNG' :<'i!::,,\li!:i: ' ' :,(1 ,-: •/ii," On the 9th day of June, 2014, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application documents. This information was sent to: '',i ;)i!:(%>.:1r,;Jah~e':· <· ·:;~ :._'\_-_y_ri;-_ .. ,:_;•_F ~ ;,i/ =~f!!J'!l1ll!!J!IJl::lji!tw1illi:1::J;:,1:: ·+<:nn>;ti>:J<,iv 1-• , · ir:;i!ij1!1B,mi., B~p(eseriting ' ' ., " ' '' 'i .. '_,-_;,c.: See attached Parties of Record (Signature of Sender): "''''"' 11 1111, -----,---------------...a'.:,,..._ ...... "~ POl1,,~~111 rt~~"' IP''\ STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING / ; z ~ t .. ,c. o· ~ ',; C,.\; '\ "' ss . -y ,,,,,,,8.29.'I,... 0 '/. "',& ilhl"'\\'\\"'lo"-.,zfi' ~~ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Sabrina Mirante '< OF" wr,.sY'- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: ---'it1f"-'1""'//_..Jrc...· --+'1.,..i ... ,=::; ~O~I '/,_ Notary ( Print): ___ ----1H.'-':c'"l""l .,.,j1---.-'q'-)'"C...1')...,vc:.,£<a, rc.·· .. ;z5 _____________ _ My appointment expires: ,\ ,-, ,-:,. ,1'1,~J ~j yq1 ,y.ui I template -affidavit of service by mailing Easy Peelil tab-.lls Use Avery® Template 5160® .. , Paul Aasand 521 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Donna Berringer 429 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Beth Carver 550 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Charles Church 432 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Julia Oods 409 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Crystal Farnsworth 2307 NE 4th, F106 Renton, WA 98056 Tessie Gana ban 411 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 M/M Scott Harris 428 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Marlene Jensen 407 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Barbara Keaton 430 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Etiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160® I I I J. I I I ' . -Feed Paper - I Bend along line to 1 expose Pop-up EdgeTM l ,est Antin 508 Windsor Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Mark Blad ridge 426 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Helen Chodykin 508 Bronson Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Jim Crestanello 404 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Michael Doldeman 422 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Bob Fialla 510 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Clarence Gray 558 Windsor Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Margaret Helms 403 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Wayne Jensen 424 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Jeaneet Kelley 512 Harrington NE Renton, WA 98056 ... Sens de chargeJT!ent Repliez A la hachure afin de : reveler le rebord Pop-up111: J \j\ AVERY® 5160® l /M Stuart Avery 401 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Konnie Brand 574 Windsor PL NE Renton, WA 98056 Larry Christian 9850 Rainier Ave S Seattle, WA 98118 Jessie DeRossett 504 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Bob Fahl 1600 7th Ave, Rm 3211 Seattle, WA 98191 Kevin Fosnaugh 423 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Marlene Harper 574 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Donald Horton 512 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Sharon Jury 529 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Lawrence Krall 405 Gandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY I I I J. Easy Peel• Labels Use Avery® T~mplate 5160® Cynthia Landry 410 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Jackie Lewis 408 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Carrie Martinson 425 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Susan McKeeth 509 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Todd Morris 501 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Del Phillips 464 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Joseph Regan 562 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Joan Salo 430 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 M/M Mark Szender 506 Windsor Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Janette Waller 433 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Etiquettes faclles ii peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERv@ 5160® I I I • ' ' I ) .t. -Feed Paper- I Bend along line to 1 expose Pop-up Edge™ l ichael Laughlan 455 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Ricardo Lopez 552 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Veronica Maxey-Suhr 469 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Brenda Merriman 554 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Michael O'Halloran 4420 SE 4th St Renton, WA 98059 Frank Phillips 456 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 M/M Jeffrey Reich 478 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Robert Stephens 431 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Marian Tigner 355 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Tom Waltner 501 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 • Sens de ctiargement flepliez a la t,achure afin de I reveler le rebord Pop-up• j @ AVERY® s150® l _ nda Leathley 561 Bronson Pl NE Renton, WA 98056 Gerry Marsh 437 Williams N, 107 Renton, WA 98055 M/M Rick Mazzafero 454 Grandey wAy NE Renton, WA 98056 Terry Millsey 462 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Steven Passantino 434 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Sam Podness 458 Grandey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 May Ryan 410 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Tom Stephenson 408 Randey Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Robert Vinyard 427 Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Tom Williams 357 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY I I I .4. Easy Peel® Labels Use Av•ry® Template 5160® Ken Wong HO Windsor Way NE Renton, WA 98056 Etiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160® I I I • I I I J . -Feed Paper- I Bend along line to 1 expose Pop-up EdgeT"" l /M Dale Hall 468 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 • Sens de chargement Repliez a la hachure afin de I reveler le rebord Pop~upMC J @ AVERY® 5160® l sident 472 Bronson Way NE Renton, WA 98056 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY I I I .. rt.·. City of,.. . . . r·\ til'[(vil NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: June 9, 2014 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Southport One/ LUA14-00064S, SM, SA-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 {UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit [LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lot. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site {LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. PROJECT LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Site P!an Review-Administrative, Shoreline Substantial Development, Parking Modification, and Master Site Plan Modification APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Greg Krape, 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N., Ste. SO, Renton, WA 98056 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on June 23, 2014. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7219. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: MAY 16, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 28, 2014 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No : Southport One/ LUA14-000645 SM, SA-A NAME:------------------------------------ MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip: __________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- ',,;, ·1 _..,. ___ . ' -.4 I j (is. ·Denna f}erci.--.g~, 429 Winci~r V"ia.v NE Renter., WI, ,aO.se :,1r . .e flrz .. 3cau Har:is 428 1//ma:;i:;r ilay NE. R,:n!on. WA 980.53 t.ik. Ko1n i"o:;n;;,.ugh 423 W,ndsor Way NE Ren!or,, '/IA :3BG56 r }t.r. & Mrs. Merk Szer,der / ,,. EOG Windso, PiacH NE ,A · P.enton, WP. 98055 i Ms. Kcnn:e drnM 574 WinC:s-:ir Place NE Rr:;nton, 'ti A !'.18056 Ms. Ce-rrie M.:"rtinscn Mr. DJ Sweene; 425 W,MscrW::,y NE R!:!Jton. W/l. 98"0~6 Mr,. 8:irb2r.' K12e!on 435 Wir1Csor Wai NE fl.1.mton. WA 98055 l.iir. Robert Vinyard 427 Windsor W;;y NE Rernon, WA !:180.56 Mr. Del Phillips 4154 Bronson W<1y NC. Aentcn, WA 98056 7/19/00 . ._. ____ , Mr. Mark 8a!dri<!g6 Ms. Tina li.mdv 426 ;Nirlt!sor •Nay NE Renton, WA 9805S Mr. 'Na~ne jGilsen 424 Windsor Way NE P.entao, WP-. 98056 Ms. Jar;ette ',Valier ·~33 Windsor W.iy NE Renton, WA 98056 Mr. Emes~ A'"![;n SOB Wincsvr ::i;e{;c NE Renton, WA 98056 Ms. Linda !..eathley !3ti1 Branson P!ac~ NE Rcn!on, V'J A 9805? Ms. Jeanette Kel!i;,y 512 Harrins;tc-,, NE Ren!cn, WA 98056 r,fr S!en,n Pas:!ian!iro 434 Windsor Way NE Renton, 'IIA '?8'J5G Ms. Jackie lewis 40S Win~sor Way NE Renton, 'I/A 98056 Resident 472 ernnscn '/Jay NE Renton. WA 98056 PARTIES OF RECORD/LUA.99-189/SOUTHPORT "'""'· Mr. & .'Jlrs. Dale Hall 453 3~onso., \Vey t!E. Ren:D:j, WA 98055 <.:n•:,,·.,css1r Wc:.y NE ?.e,.tc:-,. ;Nt, SB056 Mr J1css:e DeRosse:t 5')4 'N--:so~ '.':c.1 NE Re-~::.-:. \-'/f... S9,)5$ Ma. C1afer:ce Gra:: 5Sa •,·,::,c:sw Pea~ NE .~e.,,:c.1. WA 98056 f.ls. Be'..'1 Carver '550 B:o:1son W;;y !\!E Ren:o.-,, W/J.. ?3056 Mr. Robert Stephe;-,s 431 ~·fr,c.scrWayNE Ren:1;~1. \'.'A 9S056 ~l.s. Jc,:;n Sa:,;;, _.;20 'IV,r.C'sor ,,.,';;;.y NE R£!nt1.m. 'tiA S3056 M·. Frar,~ ~n,::.;is 456 Bronso,-: Way NE R~nto!"'. WA SOOS~ Mr. Tom \-\' .'>:tt>.er 501 Bronsor Way NE Renton, W;. S-80~6 --·-rf-:o- --P \;t=;,, J3 ·· ... ~ .. ~;,-.: --~~1 "''~\ ~, -~;1 ?. Ms.."H<:!!en Chooykin Ms. 8r~r.da Me:ri.-r.an iA·. Joseph Rega~ ·J 5G8 Bronson PL NE 554 Bronson Way NE 5£2 Bro:iso~ \',;3.y :~E ' R;:;nJon. WA 96CS6 R,3rr:G~. WA 9eV~6 Renton, WA 98G55 I J l I ' f!,r. P~u: Aasand /.1r. /\fo:;ha<:1l. l2'...:';jl'1l2n t.lr. Cnarles Church G21 Bronson Way NE 455 Brar.son Wc.,y NE 432 8-:c:lSO'l \Vay NE Renton, WA 98056 Re,1!on. WA 98065 Rento.-:. WA 98C~C> Mr. [(en Wong Mr_ 3 Mrs. Rick f.'.::ns~e,o r.::. To::-: s:-.:;:i:l<?nso:i ·-j 41'2 Wind;;or Way NE 450:: Gra:ic"et 'fia'J NE 406 Gr;;.ciCey ~\lay 0!E ' Renton, w:,.. 98056 Rento.1_ \/,'A 53056 Re;1:cn, ';'.'A 960$6 Ms. Ma;tRyan Ms M2r1an T:i;ni::, ~.l;. &.1/:s. s:-iart Ave-:y C .;lo WiMscr Way NE 355 drc:iso., '/ia; ;\;E -~D1 G-a:-.;;!uy Way tE 'Ren!on, WA 98056 Renla.'l. '.VA 98055 ,;:;:Bn'.c:--:. \\'A 86056 M::.. rAargaret Me!ms Ms. Ma;IE-1e Jt2.'1S~'1 ~.1s Ju!:cl Doc'$ ·, 403 Gr2nde1 'Nay f·i'.: 407 Granr.:e, '.V':."J Nt 4~ G"1:-tdey Way NE I RE:ntcn. 'NA 98056 Renton. 'l'IA 98'J!:6 R,:n'.c.1_ "<::A 98056 l I Ms. Teo;sie Gane'.:lzn Mr. Sarn P;;octr.ess ~v To:n Wi:\:ams 411 Grande/ 'l'hfl NE 5_.5S Gr.indey 't:2.y NE 35-7 Bronscn Way NE. I Ren!O!"I, WA 95056 Rer,ton, WA 9$'056 R:er:o:,, WA 96056 I Mf. !..aw~:,nce Kr;:;IJ M:. & Mrs. Je'.'!re'j Reich Ms. Crystai Famsv.o:th 405_Gr.;;irde)' 11','ay NE 478 Gr;:mdey Wa1 NE 2307 NE..:.""·. F1t.'6 .Remon. WA 38056 Rento'1, WA 96C56 ',.~ Re!ltc,,. WA 99050 Mr. Todd Morris t..-1.s.. Veronicd Ma.xey•Su,':r Mr:·{n):ia:d Hor.c:i j s501 OrandeyWay NE -· 46SGra:--.deyWayNE 512 Gr.:!:-:C:1}' W~y NC Renton. WA 96066 Renton, WA 98056 Ren:o!':. WA sao5:.;: ' I ·,i Ms. S..isan McKeeth Ms. Sharon JU'Y ~k. B ... 'b Fi;;.113 i 50~ GrandeyWay Nf 529 Gra'1de;r Wa"J NE 510 Gr<!nciey Way NE R(1n!on, WA 96056 Ren\on. WA 98056 R.:n(.:m. WA 98056 7/19/00 PARTIES OF RECORD/LUA99-189/SOUTHPORT ~-- -~j ' l i J ' ' l l Mr."'P.Icardo Lepe.! '.)62 Bronson Wsy N~ Renton, WA 980S6 Mr. Jim Crestar.cl!o 404 G,.a:cde; v,•ay NE Rento.'1. VIP. 980S6 ~k G<,rrJ /tlars11 437 'lii!liz,,:, Ncrth, #10/ R'c.nlon. '//A 98055 7/19/CO Ms. Marh::me Harper ~74 BronSC(l Way N[: Ren!on, WA 98056 Mr. Tsrry M:llsey 402 GrnrrJe:,· Way ,"\E Rer.ion. \'1A 98056 44:i:J SE~,-Street r\•.ntc.-:, "!I.-:.. -at-::sg Mr. Michael Chr,st Scu1hpor1, U .. C 1CJ8<3 NC 8"' St., Su1:e 200 Be!!ev,;c, 'NA 3E004 PARTIES or REC0RD/LUA'J:1-189!S0UTHPORT ,'.ls. Cy:;thl.:i Landry :.10GrcrC~yWayNE R2r-:o~. WA 9805!: ;.,;,_ Be~ Fa.'1' ~s::.io-i'-' Av~nLle, ~',),:,:;i 32~ 1 ~~a!:;6, 'NA 2s1e1 :,~~-Larry Crr:st,a~ S25G R2:;,ier A·;~.:·;e S.:i .. ::: 3eat::e. \·'/A g2,,s ~ 'l!€f! t"C:.l \, .1 .Q .. 1 .. ::: • .-, t~-! 0 1---.1 (,c·\ ~:<., i.~~I ~ Flf"I·TPiift; 1a,_..,. z Ji ~h~hf ]~fi Hil i ~ i~H 0 ! Si:i"Hl]"j,;!!_lil~; i '; g::~~ l! "'! lh •;,i 1,:1!:~ ki.'l.. 1 l: •. Hi j:: O ~l~,at:iHhiH? ~-~ i J~H .-,, BA "-.. ~;:iHl:upj hi 1:a.li !!: ""' :{ ~ 5H=Jj !'°.H t_., ij J!l,, ~ u Ii ; r~ iiHlfi~1-iih' t~ ,i pt~ ~ -!; :,· ~},1,e~.:1.,. -~11'1! ~:; l ~q :: ....I _t "'-.n -hl"H.l!E,,. !: ~~ • E=~~ "' ., !"' ::ic~~--ai;~ -1 .•. '1! ~ ..... ,,,, 0 "' f-o • .,,, .. ~ i:11L~l"'i,~ Z _; 't ~1-~i .,._ ...._ Et: .r-.:" .,.:i;~-~"'=•" ~:i; i "'~~ Ii c.. ~-l! ~ nijt'5·~11·qn:J I~'! I qoi :::; li 3 [H~~lPs lr_!O g li] {K·{l-ci B .,,,. .q --;; .,,i:.t.,.:;;t..:i~,,n-,· ~ I 1 ..... ., ~i-Jt z ~ .::~ Ii c•oz.!!a.~-z;~ .. .,.A"ii ~ <!!. :'! .i:-t-· .. :ic u. ~.e1 1 11::~r:.qE}ihp1 ~ .. § i u1ti ~ ? L :-(!"'"'•i.,,•L~[·~ ., ~r ~ ,L1:~~ "'I' o 1; 1 H HlH;r;;~~~.H ij ~s i H 1"d i ~ 11 qh;~~f!;,:]:,~ "<h,., ~s.p ~ :1: w -:i . h~!;::1~1~!iHi ! iii:J c u ·.~~ I Hh.~!HH di~1~ ~ HHi ~ -" :, .;,o ""•=1,-::1-::z'>~.aj ;i: "':-" -, " I-iJ ; ! ,·,-,;: 3~=£.a;:. • .; i :-,!:.!: !t -'D-~~0 .. li!Lc• t-"j~J: ... o 1{1 ~ f HiJIHHH~H ~ H];i ~ Z .f_.~ lE >: J:!!d:"F::Ji""·H·U .;_ i .. ;;] !z'. ' ~-;-l' <5 t; -S.:t-q_li;:-~p;J!,P i.-~(.i ~ :: 1:0-" ~ '/l f:-:.r·P-·-].oa!;.iq~ ~ I il f ~ ~ ~~J ~ .r .c.HUHs.:ti!I~! f Hi. i .t I . ' ~ § I ! ~ 8 ' . 0 ~ E ~ i i1 i~ i:ll!J I~ ta§ ; lr i !• d !~ H~ gt :f ,~1H! l-;; ~ ::. I "; i-~ i i g "' ! ? ~ ~ ii ii 4 ! ~ h ~ t :s ~ !Ii ~ ~;:: z 0 B u. ~ w u +" C: QJ E ::, u 0 "O ~ 0 C: .0 0 "'> QJ +" .c: ~ +" QJ ... Cl. o e V) Cl. .~ '"C Cl. QJ 0 .0 u 'i:: ~j +" +" "'> .c: -" +" ~ ~~ :e C: QJ ~ u 0 > V) -" QJ QJ u ~ "' cu C. .c: "O OJ C: .':!' V> .::: 0 f- <.D z ::i:: ~ 5 LJ.. 0 LU OJ f- +" <( "' f-Cl V) V> V> OJ .c: +" ~ .E SJ 1;1 -> ~ "' +" 1-=1 ~ . > "O C: WI "' QJ vi! r2] 'S QJ .c: +" --. "' V) ..c :E. +" QJ OJ +" U .0 C C: 0 QJ ~ ~ E ·-·-:i > "O ~ QJ Q) ~ > bJJ C '-'"C ·-0 OJ OJ t:i -..c "' ,:: +" ... 0 C: -~ C ·- +" ""' "O "' u OJ V) "' C: OJ "O 0 > C ·-1 ctl t: ~ +" OJ o ~ E ,:: E ~ ~ 0 ::, V) Z ~ !:; 0 "' Cl. S2 ::.~ ~ "' V) Cl. .c: -- LJ.. 0 /:: z :::i 0 u +" .c: "O > +" C: ... "O "' +:, Q) V) ~ C: OJ OJ OJ) V) u vi ::i C: 0 +" OJ) C :2 V) "' 5 ... 0 ::;--- ~ "O OJ +" "' Cl n ~ ~ C ·.: "- i::" "' +" 0 z ~ vi OJ ~ Cl. X OJ ..._ :" '"···· ·:·,:+.; ,,<·!...;;.,,. . · .• · ... s.11voF RENTON . . .··•· . , > DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECO NOMI<: DEVEfiOPMENjl" ,itll.AIIINIIII~ DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING •; . .. On the 28 day of May, 2014, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Application documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Michael Christ Owner Greg Krape Applicant Bill Stalzer Contact See attached 300' surrounding properties (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ( ,, . ~ k \.. '{ f-'0,. ) Ss :_: )._o\; .... ,,,"'\\'H,,, i-<; -"<.. • ... .:-'\4::1,$104' ... ,,,, .... \. -,I' ~,t ,, ',s ~:~t:;t::t ~ 1 ~n:w or have sati:factory evidence that Sabrina Mirante 1 ~ (l ;:; lj . ~ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary ~r1;~1#'poses mentioned in the instrument. \1 q.; ,,-- ,,,, '!'..'-......... Dated: 'hJ~ ,18, ,;201~ ) ''"''""''" Notary (Print): ___ ___.,tfu.n"-'~"-"l·-J?.--'--'15'-L<""-"'-'' ... ?£~:5----------- My appointment expires: f a a O / ::i 'j"'>. ,9 ~ I 8231359055 · Resident 1131 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8406 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 80 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (211 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 80 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A406 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D307 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A408 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D113 Renton,WA 98056 u23059055 Resident 1135 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (109 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 90 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D414 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A205 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1135 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8407 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B302 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D212 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A405 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1131 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT E317 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D215 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 60 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1131 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D409 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8101 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C102 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (406 Renton, WA 98056 523059076, Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D405 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D112 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B205 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C204 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (103 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D407 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D309 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8301 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D101 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A301 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C407 Renton, WA 98056 .>23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8105 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D106 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A107 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D413 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A109 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C208 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B206 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076· Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT ClOl Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C302 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A310 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D105 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D208 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B409 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B204 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A408 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C103 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B407 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D313 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D314 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B301 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C311 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A409 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A102 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D403 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D205 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A305 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C301 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D408 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D416 Renton, WA 98056 523059076· Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D303 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A102 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C305 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C211 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C405 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B107 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C105 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D411 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A406 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B109 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A105 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B203 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D216 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D103 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C208 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A309 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C301 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A410 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D206 Renton, WA 98056 523059076· Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C205 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A407 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D207 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C310 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D406 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8110 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D301 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D114 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D310 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A309 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8102 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A203 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B408 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A407 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C207 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A207 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B105 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B310 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D214 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A204 Renton, WA 98056 523059076· Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C204 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D302 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A205 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C403 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1133 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 60 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C203 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A204 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D109 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D312 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A403 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A208 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D204 Renton, WA 98056 823059055 Resident 1131 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT E317 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C305 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D107 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C309 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B309 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 50 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D412 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C410 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D102 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C307 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A307 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B405 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A103 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B408 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C309 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (403 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B208 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A302 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C207 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A109 Renton, WA 98056 c,23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D311 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A103 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D410 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8409 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT CllO Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A106 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (307 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT AllO Renton, WA 98056 .,23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D115 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A106 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B405 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C203 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B406 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A302 Renton,WA 98056 523059076· Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A404 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C106 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT 30 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT CllO Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C206 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C302 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D415 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D116 Renton, WA 98056 _,23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D316 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A402 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B305 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D211 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A308 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B206 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D201 Renton, WA 98056 _,23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B207 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C409 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D306 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT Clll Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT (105 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A203 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B309 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B403 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B410 Renton, WA 98056 523059076' Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C411 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C210 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D315 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D111 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A405 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B102 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D110 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A307 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B110 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B403 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B310 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A207 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A101 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8204 Renton, WA 98056. 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A301 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C205 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D202 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A303 Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D203 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C408 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C409 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A208 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C202 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C407 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B101 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C411 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8106 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D305 Renton, WA 98056 S.23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B305 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A310 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D104 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B205 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A105 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT D213 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A206 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C311 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C108 Renton, WA 98056 -23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8307 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C303 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A401 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8109 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B303 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B209 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A108 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A206 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C405 Renton, WA 98056 3344500775 Resident 1201 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT B Renton, WA 98056 J23059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C107 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1085 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C107 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C201 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B203 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A303 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT C304 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A110 Renton,WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B410 Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT B107 Renton, WA 98056 3344500775 Resident 1201 Lake Washington Blvd N UNIT A Renton, WA 98056 523059076 Resident 1087 Lake Washington Blvd N APT 8208 Renton, WA 98056 Michael Christ Seco Development 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Ste. 50 Renton, WA 98056 ~23059076 Resident 1089 Lake Washington Blvd N APT A409 Renton, WA 98056 Bill Stalzer Stalzer & Associates 603 Stewart St., Ste. 512 Seattle, WA 98101 Greg Krape Hotel at Southport, LLC. 1083 Lake Washington Blvd, Ste. 50 Renton, WA 98056 NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED)-Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: June 9, 2014 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER, Southport One/ LUA14-000645, SM, SA-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, restaurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A. SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lat. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and Is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces an the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. PROJECT LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Site Plan Review-Administrative, Shoreline Substantial Development, Parking Modification, and Master Site Plan Modification APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Greg Krape, 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N., Ste. 50, Renton, WA 98056 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 p.m. on June 23, 2014. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7219. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION, MAY 16, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION, MAY 28, 2014 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No : Southport One/ LUA14-000645 SM, SA-A NAME:------------------------------------ MAILING ADDRESS: ________________ City/State/Zip:----------- TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- Denis Law Mayor May 28, 2014 Greg Krape Hotel at Southport, LLC Community & Economic Development Department C.E. "Chip"Vincent, Administrator 1083 Lake Washington Blvd. N, Ste .. 50 Renton,WA 98056 Subject: Notice of Complete Application Southport One, LUA14-000645 Dear Mr. Krape: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. You will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Roca le Timmons Senior Planner cc: Michae"I Christ/ Owner{s) Bil.I Stalzer/ Contact Re~ton City Hall • 1oss·south Grady Way , Renton,Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov r ¢2 City of r; 2,rrrr···.r1 ··-·--..,. :_J _._ NOTICE OF APPLICATION A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Oe\'elopment (CED) -Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: May 28, 2014 PROJECT NAME/NUMBER: Southport One/ LUA14-00064S, SM, SA-A PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Minor Master Site Plan Modification, Site Plan Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and a Parking Modification for the construction of a 325,500 square foot, 350 guest room hotel with. associated meeting rooms, exercise facility, spa, re.staurant, and support facilities. The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification as part of the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). The approximate 11 acre site is currently vacant and contains a gravel parking lat. The hotel would be setback 50 feet from the Lake Washington ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and would have an approximate height of 75 feet within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. The applicant is proposing an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the Southport Office Building site (LUA00-156) until such time the approved offices are constructed. Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. The applicant is requesting a modification from RMC 4-4-080 in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls allowed by code. Access to the site is proposed from Lake Washington Blvd via an internal road network to the overall Southport Development site. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. PROJECT LOCATION: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N PERMITS/REVIEW REQUESTED: Site Plan Review-Administrative, Shoreline Substantial Development, Parking Modification, and Master Site Plan Modification APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Greg Krape, 1083 Lake Washington Blvd N., Ste. 50, Renton, WA 98056 Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner, Department of Community & Economic Development, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 980S7, by 5:00 p.m. on June 11, 2014. !f you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager at (425) 430-7219. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: MAY 16, 2014 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 28, 2014 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED, Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. File Name/ No.: Southport One/ LUA14-000645 SM, SA-A NAME:---------------------------------- MAILING ADDRESS:------------------City/State/Zip:------------ TELEPHONE NO.: --------------- SECO DEVELOPMENT, INC. 1083 Lake Washington Blvd. N, Suite 50, Renton, Washington, 98056 Tel: 425.282.5833 Fax: 425.282.5838 www.secodev.com TRANSMITTAL COVER SHEET DATE: 5-14-14 TO: _T_i~bo~r_N~a_g=y ________ TEL NO: COMPANY: MulvannyG2 Architecture FAX NO: FROM: _G_r_e_g_K_ra~p_e _______ TEL NO: (425) 282-5833 ext. Tibor, please find attached the following information for our Site Plan submittal to the City of Renton: 1. 3 copies of a current Title Report for Lot 1 2. 3 copies of a current Title Report for Lot 4 3. 5 copies of the Pedestrian Walkway Easement Agreement at Lot 1 4. 5 copies of the Pedestrian Walkway Easement Agreement at Lot 4 5. 5 copies of the Legal Descriptions for Lot 1 & Lot 4 6. 5 copies of the Construction Mitigation Plan 7. 5 copies of the Geotechnical Report 8. 1 check for $3,296.00 made out to the City of Renton Note: I will be bringing the completed City of Renton Application Form with me on Friday for the intake. I need to get the form signed by Michael Christ and notarized. Additionally, I am waiting for the updated Transportation Report ..... which either Bill Stalzer or I will be bringing on Friday also. Thank you, Greg THANK YOU! ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS DEEMED RELIABLE; HOWEVER, NO REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY IS MADE AS TO THE ACCURACY HEREOF City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT MASTER APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER($) PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: NAME: Michael Christ Southport Hotel Site Plan ADDRESS: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd North, Suite 50 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd North CITY: Renton ZIP: 98056 Renton, Washington 98056 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 206-KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT 915-5179 NUMBER(S): Lot 1: 052305-9075 APPLICANT (if other than owner) Lot 4: 082305-9216 NAME: Greg Krape EXISTING LAND USE(S): Vacant COMPANY (if applicable): Hotel at Southport, LLC PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Hotel with parking lot EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP ADDRESS: 1083 Lake Washington Blvd North, Suite 50 DESIGNATION: Center Office/Residential CITY: Renton ZIP: 98056 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) Not applicable TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-282-5833 Ext. 308 EXISTING ZONING: COR3 CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): Not Applicable NAME: Bill Stalzer SITE AREA (in square feet): 484,281 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO COMPANY (if applicable): Stalzer & Associates BE DEDICATED: None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS ADDRESS: 603 Stewart Street, Suite 512 EASEMENTS: None CITY: Seattle ZIP: 98101 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) Not annlicable TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) 206-264-1150 bstalzer@seanet.com Not applicable r)L·,-·-····r.:,-l,-.. r--·-1 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING Dl<J1Ts'(if ·--L/ applicable): 'i1 i,v 1 h "l1 Not anolicable ·.' /-\ 1 ~ • t'. __ I , s. C:\Users\gkrape\Desktop\Renton Master Land Use Application Fonn Bill 050514-gjk.doc CITY PRO _CT INFORMATION (continu __ ) ~-~----~~----------~ NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): PROJECT VALUE: $88,134,360 None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): Not applicable IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): None SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 325,558 sq. ft. D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE D AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO D FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): Not applicable D GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. applicable): 156,195 sq. ft. (guest rooms and lobbies) D SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 77,055.8 sq. ft. NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): Not applicable D WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION __ , TOWNSHIP __ , RANGE __ , IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) Michael Christ President, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) _X_ the current owner of the property involved in this application or_ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ,,J:£1!:i:5:: !.. 1;. t 1 ,·-··--~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 2~~1=1 ~~~=e~IL' _P~--"('-''-h',-v-'·1'-'sC--'+ signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. v'""""''' ~~fl'NAQ ,,,, #' ~ -~'"'"'··~ ('.~ ,,,,. Dated Notary Date =o~,~~·· ~~ ff '<If f¥ +01~'-~1 ~ \ Notary (Print): _U_iJ_tl_,1~~1-a~· ~fl~· _tf._,/f~/~1~/:;_U_t_1f ____ _ , :ru .. •..... ~ J ~ i ,,,, ~ ~ \. '°"•"'(, -~ i j() .-1 3 --; 7 \ -,,.;•~o.23_ ,1..,-~~0 § My appointment expires -~---A--~------------- .-,,. ~ ... ,,""'~-~"' ,:: 111 O,: WAS~~ ~ ,,,,, ,.,, .. C \Uscrs gkrapc1Dcsktop\Rcnton M)..\\)~\'l Use Apphcat10n Fo1m 8111 050514-gJk doc -2 - Lot 1: HOTEL Parcel A: Lot l of City of Renton Short Plat No. LUA-99-134-SHPL, according to Short Plat recorded January 31, 2000 under Recording No. 20000131900006, in King County, Washington. Parcel B: Easements for ingress, egress and railroad crossings as established in recording Nos. 6201855, 6317510, 9902019014 and 20000131900006. Owner: Southport One, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company Lot 4: OFFICE Parcel A: Lot 4 of City of Renton Short Plat No. LUA-99-134-SHPL, according to short plat recording January 31, 2000, under Recording No. 20000131900006, in King County, Washington. Parcel B: Easements for ingress, egress, and railroad crossings as established in Recording Nos. 6201855, 6317510, 9902019014, and 20000131900006. Owner: Southport, LLC, a Washington Limited Liability Company PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITTAL WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: Plat Name Reservation 4 Preapplication Meeting Summary 4 Public Works Approval Letter 2 Rehabilitation Plan , . . Screening Detail 4 . ShoreHne Tracking Worksheet 4 . Site Plan 2 AND 4 Stream or Lake Study, Standard 4 . Stream. or Lake Study, Supplemental 4 Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan 4 . . . . . Street Profiles 2 Title Report or Plat Certificate, Topography Map, Traffic Study 2 . Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan 4 ;:?;/ ' ,7:> Urban Design Regulations Analysis 4 . Utilities Plan, Generalized, Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final 4 ,Z/7 Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Preliminary 4 l Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 w .. Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites ,ANDJ Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area , AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND, , . . . ·. . . . . . This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services PROJECTNAME: 7flc::. !PTEL (o t:b1-//'rfl'//C'r 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building DATE s Is /1=1 ' 4. Planning · H:\CEO\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\waiverofsubmitlalreqs 06/09 , PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APP LI CATIONS LAND USE PERMIT SUBMITIAL WAIVED MODIFIED COMMENTS: REQUIREMENTS: BY: BY: Calculations 1 Colored Maps for Display 4 Construction Mitigation Description 2 ANo 4 Deed of Right-of-Way Dedication . Density Worksheet 4 075 V Drainage Control Plan 2 . . Drainage Report 2 Elevations, Architectural 3 AND 4 . . Environmental Checklist 4 /~--:: Existing qovenants (Recorded Copy) 4 . . . Existing Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 Flood Hazard Data 4 ~ . . J . Floor Plans·3AND • -~ Geotechnical. Report 2 AND 3 . . ·. . · Grading Plan, Conceptual 2 Grading Plan, Detailed 2 Habitat Data Report 4 . Improvement Deferral 2 . Irrigation Plan 4 King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site 4 Landscape Plan, Conceptual, . Landscape Plan, Detailed 4 . . Legal Description 4 Map of ExisUng Site Conditions 4 Master Application Form 4 Monument Cards (one per monument) 1 Neighborhood Detail Map 4 Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis 4 . Plan Reductions (PMTs) 4 Post Office Approval 2 ·. . . This requirement may be waived by': 1. Property Services PROJECT NAME: ~,,c, 7t//lYT t/z,[E L 2. Public Works Plan Review . . . . . 3. Building DATE: __ ,_s-~/_s_-~/1~9_,__ ____ _ 4. Planning H: \C ED\Oata \Forms-T emplates\Self-H el p Hand outs \P Ianni ng\wa iverofsubmitta lreqs 06/09 .. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNl1 . AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS SITE PLAN REVIEW Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE: To assure the site plan is compatible with both the physical characteristics of the site and the existing and potential uses of the surrounding area. In addition, Site Plan Review assures the development is consistent with City of Renton plans, policies and regulations. FREE CONSULTATION MEETING: Prior to submitting an application, the applicant should informally discuss the proposed development with the Planning Division. The Planning Division will provide assistance and detailed information on the City's requirements and standards. Applicants may also take this opportunity to request the waiver of the City's typical application submittal requirements which may not be applicable to the specific proposal. For further information on this meeting, see the instruction sheet entitled "Submittal Requirements: Pre-Application." COMPLETE APPLICATION REQUIRED: In order to accept your application, each of the numbered items must be submitted at the same time. If you have received a prior written waiver of a submittal item(s) during a pre-application meeting, please provide the waiver form in lieu of any submittal item not provided. All plans and attachments must be folded to a size not exceeding 8Yz by 11 inches. APPLICATION SCREENING: Applicants are encouraged to bring in one copy of the application package for informal review by staff, prior to making the requested number of copies, colored drawings, or photo reductions. Please allow approximately 45 minutes for application screening. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL HOURS: Applications should be submitted to Development Services staff at the 6th floor counter of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, between 8:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. Monday through Friday. Please call your assigned project manager to schedule an appointment or call (425) 430-7200 extension 4 to reach the Planning Division. Due to the screening time required, applications delivered by messenger cannot be accepted. ADDITIONAL PERMITS: Additional permits from other agencies may be required. It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain these other approvals. Information regarding these other requirements may be found at http://apps.ecy.wa.gov/opas/ All Plans and Attachments must be folded 8 YzlJby 1111 APPLICATION MATERIALS: 1~ Pre-Application Meeting Summary: If the application was reviewed at a "pre- application meeting", please provide S copies ofthe written summary provided to you. 2.x Waiver Form: If you received a waiver form during or after a "pre-application meeting", please provide 5 copies of this form. ~ 5.J'@Y -~ Plat Certificate or Title Report: Please provide~ copies of a current Plat Certificate or Title Report obtained from a title company documenting ownership and listing all encumbrances of the involved parcel(s). The Title Report should include all parcels being developed, but no parcels that are not part of the development. If the Plat Certificate or Title Report references any record_ed do_cuments (i.e. easements, dedications, covenants) 5 copies ofthe referenced recorded document(s) must also be provided. All easements referenced in the Plat Certificate must be located, identified by type and ~ecording number, and dimensioned on the Si;te Pl<1n. Land Use Permit Master Application Form: Please provide the original plus 11 copies of the COMPLETED City of Renton Planning Division's Master Application form. Application must have notarized signatures of ALL current property owners listed on the Title Report. lfthe property owner is a corporation, the authorized representative mu-st attach proof of signing authority on behalf of the corpnratjon. The legal description ofthe property must be attached to the application form. Environmental Checklist: Please provide 12 copies of the Environmental Checklist. Please ensure you have signed the checklist and that all questions on the checklist have been filled in before making copies. If a particular question on the checklist does not apply, fill in the space with "Not Applicable". Project Narrative: Please provide 12 copies of a clear and concise description of the proposed project, including the following: '·.41)!2 !(>/~ • Land use permits required for proposed project ~ .il?Prl- • oning design at n of the site and adjacent properties • S,/;1j?/3LJ /v'C:: • • • • • Current use of the site and any existing improvements • /1A+SI?c7( S'1 /i!o Special site features (i.e. wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes) Statement addressing soil type and drainage conditions ~A/JM/A)Cj Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed development -- . - For plats indicate the proposed number, net density and range of sizes (net lot area) of the new lots · • tve£(dt'1Lj_cp[.,~e /, Access -/Y'h;, ;/!/"j .J/!'4ff' f.f1u,w,,_ • • • Proposed off-site improvements (i.e. installation of sidewalks, fire h.ydrants:=ru-n. sewer main, etc.) Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value of the proposed project -2 -08/12 H: \CE D\Da ta\F orms~ Temp I ates \Self-He Ip H a n d outs \PI an n i ng \sa. doc 1. D • Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed • Number, type and size of any trees to be removed • Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City • Any proposed job shacks, sales trailers, and/or model homes • Any proposed modifications being requested (include written justification) For projects located within 100 feet of a stream or wetland, please include: • Distance in feet from the wetland or-stream to the nearest area of work For projects located within 200-feet of Black River, Cedar River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and Lake Washington please include the following additional information: • Distance from closest area of work to the ordinary high water mark. • Description of the nature of the existing shoreline • The approximate location of and number of residentia.1 units, existing and potential, that will' have an obstructed view in_ the event the proposed project exceeds a height of 35-feet above the average grade level Rezone, Variance, Jlllodification or Conditional Use Justification: Please Contact the 'H r,s·r-=~ snt:. Planning Division to determine whether your project proposal triggers any additional ~ ()LA-,J land use permits. lf/o, additional information may be required. , r".J,=P"'cns<>n / . _ /?,fl{' /:'//ll'C, /a ::Jt-I _t .,;f,..Ct .fl ?.e , a.,,.,~r .-A,~r-/"'c<"/U".,;,,· SJ Draft Legal Documents: Please p;ovide 4 copies of any proposed street mrJ~s, \ restrictive covenants, draft Homeowners Association, or any other legal documents •· ,91/ol~ffe ) 10. ·. pertaining to the development and use of the property. Urban Center Design Overlay District Report: For any multi-family projects in the Center Downtown or Residential-Multi-family Urban Zones, please provide 5 copies of a statement addressing how the project meets the requirements of the Urban Center Design Overlay District. The statement shall address the following: • Pedestrian building entries • Transition to surrounding development • Location and design of parking • Vehicular access • Pedestrian circulation • Common space • Landscaping • Building character and massing, rooflines, and materials Construction Mitigation Description: Please provide 5 copies of a written narrative addressing each of the following: • Proposed construction dates (begin and end dates) • Hours and days of operation • Proposed hauling/transportation routes • Measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics -3 - H:\CE D\Data\Forms-T emplates\Self-Help Ha ndouts\Planning\sa.d oc ·Jl:ur., oj/,,,k( 08/12 • Any special hours proposed for construction or hauling (i.e. weekends, late nights) • Preliminary traffic control plan If your project requires the use of cranes, please contact the City's Airport Manager at (425) 430-7471 to determine whether Federal Aviation Administration notification will be required. 11. D Fees: The application must be accompanied by the required application fee (see Fee . , Schedule Brochure). Please call (425) 430-7294 to verify the exact amount required. . , ,-p) Checks should be made out to the City of Renton and can not be accepted for over the ~ total fee amount. $~Mv J_,"" f'L,p.,l/!EVICN' .. c / r" u-A .B / OD N,<75 ,',E/!_Si'T/EPU'rJ ;,.,,£) -r 39., " 3, I 7:]? L .r;,,M,W .fl .!,,N>•' .'Jrft)/!'£L.i/Vc ->1,18,;"Tt1Ali74L fEp-t!T . .,..... /u 3 -=="d.29,1-, 1(7\/11-ll De~sity ~orks_heet: Pfease submit 12 copies of a completed densi,ty worksheet for all -:,, I; . . res1dent1al projects. · · · .' §] .. L 0.JC.rn:rz'l',.,1,-,;p .·. · · . . . · · Neighborhoocl Detail Map: Please provide 12 copies of a map drawn at a scale of 1" = 100' or 1" = 200' (or other scale approved by the Planning Division) to be used to identify the site location on public notices and to review compatibility with surrounding land uses. The map shaHjdentify the subject site with a much darker perimeter line than surrounding properties and include at least two cross streets in all directions showing the location of the subject site relative to property boundaries of surrounding parcels, The map shall also show: the property's lot lines, surrounding properties' lot lines, boundaries of the City of Renton (if applicable), north arrow (oriented to the top of the plan sheet), graphic scale used for the map, and City of Renton (not King County) street names for all streets shown. Please ensure all information fits on a single map sheet. j'~~re STIEG7' Kroll Map Company (206-448-6277) produces maps that may serve this purpose or you may use the King County Assessor's maps as a base for the Neighborhood Detail Map. Additional information (i.e. current city street names) will need to be added by the applicant. "'·~verall Site Plan (Only for previously approved Master Site Plans): Please provide 5 \ fJ ~~pies of an overall site plan if the project has previously undergone a Master Site Plan Review. The overall site plan should detail how this specific phase of the project fits in ~---._ relation to the previously approved master site plan. ( 15.o Site Plan: Please provide 12 copies of a fully-dimensioned plan sheet drawn at a scale of 1"=20' (or other scale approved by the Planning Division). ·we preferthe site plan be drawn on one sheet of paper unless the size of the site requires several plan sheets to be used. If you are using more than a single plan sheet, please indicate connecting points on each sheet. The Site Plan should show the following: • Name of proposed project -4- H :\CED\Data\Fonns-T emp!ates\Se!f-Help Ha ndouts\Planning\sa.doc 08112 • Date, scale, and north arrow (oriented to the top of the paper/plan sheet) • Drawing of the subject property with all property lines dimensioned and names of adjacent streets • Widths of all adjacent streets and alleys • Location of all existing public improvements including, but not limited to, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, median islands, street trees, fire hydrants, utility poles, etc., along the full property frontage • • • • Location and dimensions of existing and proposed: 1. structures / A, ,i,,a,ii, vh--f 2. parking, off-street loading space, curb cuts and aisle ways 3. fencing and retaining walls 4. free-standing signs and lighting fixtures _ 5. refuse and recycling areas -;Aef71J-/0 Jµr,::e Z2f 6. utility junction boxes and public utility transforme~ 7. storage areas and job shacks/sales trailers/model homes Setbacks of all proposed buildings from property lines Location and dimensions of all easements referenced in the title report with the recording number and type of easement (e.g. access, sewer, etc.) indicated - Location and dimensions of natural features such as streams, lakes, required buffer areas, open spaces, and wetlands I • Ordinary high water mark and distance to closest area of work for any project located within 200-feet from a lake or stream 16. andscape Plan, Conceptual: Please provide 5 copies of a fully-dimensioned plan drawn at the same scale as the project site plan (or other scale approved by the Planning Division), clearly indicating the following: • Date, graphic scale, and north arrow • Location of proposed buildings, parking areas and access, and existing buildings to remain • Names and locations of abutting streets and public improvements, including easements • Existing and proposed contours at two-foot intervals or less • Location.and size of planting areas • Location and height of proposed berming • Location and elevations for any proposed landscape-related structures such as arbors, gazebos, fencing, etc. • Location, size, spacing and names of existing (to rt>main) and proposed shrubs, trees, and ground covers. Locations of decorative rocks or landscape improvements in relationship to proposed and existing utilities and structures • Trees to be retained and associated driplines • For wireless communication facilities, indicate type and locations of existing and new plant materials used to screen facility components and the proposed color(s) for the facility -5 - H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\P!anning\sa.doc 08/12 ~)-· / /3t41U//1V0 .e;?o.Sf' ftl:l?c,'NJ / 17. LJ Architectural Elevations: Please provide 5 copies, for each building and each building face (N,S,E,W), of a 24" x 36" fully-dimensioned architectural elevation plan drawn at a . scale of 1/4" = 1' or 1/8" = 1' (or other size or scale approved by the Planning Division). The plans must clearly indicate the information required by the "Permits" section of the currently adopted Uniform Building Code and RCW 19,27 (State Building Code Act, Statewide amendments), including, but not limited to the following: • Identify building elevations by street name (when applicable) and orientation i.e. Burnett Ave. (west) elevation • Existing and proposed ground elevations • • • • • • Existing average grade level underneath proposed structure Height of existing and proposed structures showing finished roof top elevations based upon site elevations for proposed structures and any existing/abutting structures Building materials and colors including.roof, walls, any wireless communication facilities, and enclosur_es Fence or retaining wall materials, colors, and architectural design Architectural design of on-site lighting fixtures Screening detail showing heights, elevations, and building materials of proposed screening and/or proposed landscaping for refuse/recycling areas • Cross section of roof showing location and· height of roof-top equipment (include air conditioners, compressors, etc.) and proposed screening ~ Floor Plans; Please provide 5 copies of a plan showing general building layout, proposed uses of space, walls, exits and proposed locations of kitchens, baths, and floor drains, with sufficient detail for City staff to determine if an oil/water separator or grease interceptor is required and to determine the sizing of a side sewer. 1"' ~ Topography Map; Please provide 5 copies of a plan showing the site's existing contour ~ lines at five-foot vertical intervals . .,~ Tree Cutting/Land Clearing (Tree Inventory) Plan: Please provide 4 copies of a plan, ~ based on finished grade, drawn to scale with the northern property line at the top of the paper if ANY trees or vegetation are to be removed or altered (if no trees or vegetation will be altered, please state so in your project narrative). The plan shall clearly show the following: • All property boundaries and adjacent streets • Location of all areas proposed to be cleared • Types and sizes of vegetation to be removed, altered or retained. This requirement applies only to trees 6" caliper "at chest level" and larger • Future building sites and drip lines of any trees which will overhang/overlap a construction line • Location and dimensions of rights-of-way, utility lines, and easements • Any trees on neighboring properties which are within 25-feet of the subject property and which may be impacted by excavation, grading or other . 6- H:\CED\Data\F orms-T emplates\Self-He Ip Handouts\Planning\sa.doc 08/12 improvements -~ Tree Retention Worksheet: Please provide 2 copies of a completed City of Renton tree ~ retention worksheet. -~ Landscape analysis, lot coverage, and parking analysis (For commercial/industrial properties only): please provide 5 copies of a landscape and parking analysis including: • Total square footage of the site and the footprints of all buildings • Total square footage of existing and proposed impervious surface area(s) • Square footage (by floor and overall total) of each individual building and/or use • Percentage of lot covered by buildings or structures • Number of parking spaces required by City code • Number arid dimensions of standard, compact, and ADA accessible spaces provided ' \ I\ /' • Square footage of parking lot landsca'ping (perimeter and interior) 2~ Wetland Assessment: Please provide 12 copies ofthe map and 5 copies of the report if . ANY wetlands are located on the subject property or within 100 feet of the subject property. The wetland report/delineation must include the information specified in RMC 4-8-1200. In addition, if any alteration to the wetland cir buffer is proposed, 5 copies of a wetland mitigation plan is also required. See RMC 4-8-1200 for plan content requirements. Standard Stream or Lake Study: Please provide 12 copies of a report containing the information specified in RMC Section 4-8-1200. In addition, if the project involves an unclassified stream, a supplemental stream or lake study is also required (12 copies). If any alteration to a water-body or buffer is proposed a supplemental stream or lake study (12 copies) and a mitigation plan (12 copies) are also required. See RMC 4-8-1200 for · ~al /Vl''(_ s .Di> /V rl72 /2ef-71 t/ 6: +-1/e f1( J>',P /PY?o .5:,, . plan content requyeme2. · _ . / 2d. ft1 -Habitat Data Report: If e project site contains or abuts a critical habitat per RMC 4-3-f P-OSOBSb, please provide 12 copies of a report containing the information specified in Section 4-8-1200 of the Renton Municipal Code. H» . ' Flood Hazard Data: Please provide 12 copies of a scaled plan showing the nature, location, dimensions, and elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, and drainage facilities. Also indicate the following: • Elevation in relation to mean sea level of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures • Elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure has been flood proofed • Certification by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood proofing methods criteria in RMC 4-3-050 have been met -7- H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\sa.doc 08112 • Description of the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development 27. / Utilities Plan, Generalized (sewer, water, stormwater, transportation improvements): ~ Please provide 5 copies of a plan drawn on 22" x 34" plan sheets using a graphic scale of 1" = 40' (or other size or scale approved by the Planning Division) clearly showing all existing (to remain) and proposed public or private improvements to be dedicated or sold to the public including, but not limited to, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, median islands, street trees, fire hydrants, utility poles, free-standing lighting fixtures, utility junction boxes, public utility transformers, etc., along the full property frontage. The finished floor elevations for each floor of proposed and existing (to remain) structures shall also i--:1b::~:c::;cal Report: Please provide. 5 copies of~ ;tudy prepared and stamped by a ~!tate of Washington licensed professional engineer including soils and slope stability · analysis, boring and test pit logs, and recommencjations on slope setbacks, foundation d ign, retaining wall design, material selection, and all other pertinent elements. -----,/ A--Or #.I t-J..l!Ct t 29. Grading Plan, Conceptual: This is required if the proposed .grade differential on-site will ____ ..., exceed 24" from the top of the curb or if the amount of earth to be disturbed exceeds 500 cubic yards. Please provide 12 copies of a 22" x 34" plan drawn by a State of Washington licensed civil engineer or landscape architect at a scale of 1" to 40' (horizontal feet) and 1" to 10' (vertical feet) (or other size plan sheet or scale approved by the Planning Division Plan Review Supervisor) clearly indicating the following: • Graphic scale and north arrow • Dimensions of all property lines, easements, and abutting streets • Location and dimension of all on-site structures and the location of any structures within 15-feet of the subject property or that may be affected by the proposed work • Accurate existing and proposed contour lines drawn at two-foot, orless, intervals showing existing ground and details of terrain and area drainage to include surrounding off-site contours within 100-feet of the site • Location of natural drainage systems, including perennial and intermittent streams and the presence of bordering vegetation • Setback areas and any areas not to be disturbed • Finished contours drawn at two foot intervals as a result of grading • Proposed drainage channels and related construction with associated underground storm lines sized and connections shown • Finished floor elevation(s) of all structures, existing and proposed General notes addressing the following (may be listed on cover sheet): • Area in square feet of the entire property • Area of work in square feet • Both the number of tons and cubic yards of soil to be added, removed, or relocated • Type and location of fill origin, and destination of any soil to be removed -8 - H: \CE D\Data \F o rms-T empl ates \Self-Help Hand outs \Plan n i ng \sa. doc 08/12 from site . A 9, / t:?"71 CJ r ~-,(._,,<_A,~ I . Drainage Control Plan: Please provide 4 copies of a plan drawn to scale and stamped by a Washington State licensed professional engineer and complying with the requirements of Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-6-030 and the King County Surface Water Management Design Manual, 2009 edition, as adopted and amended by the City 7enton. 31. ~ Drainage Report: Please provide 4 copies of a report complying with the requirements of the City of Renton Drafting Standards, Section 4-6-030 of the City of Renton Municipal Code, the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), 2009 edition, and the City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWDM, Chapters 1 and 2 as adopted by the City of Renton. The report (TIR) must be stamped and dated by a civil engineer and shall contain the following: • Table of Contents · • Technical Information Report (TIR) Worksheet • Section 1: Project Overview • Section 2: Conditions and Requirements Summary • Section 3: Offsite Analysis • Section 4: Flow Control and Water Quality Facility Analysis and Design • Section 5: Conveyance System Analysis and Design • Section 6: Special Reports and Studies • Section 7: Other Permit • Section 8: CSWPPP Analysis and Design • Section 9: Bond Quantities, Facility Summaries, and Declaration of Covenant \-:;;lT,a:, :,:::",:,:::::": :::,::;:,~,:~ ::::::, by a Sra<e of Washi,~oo ~ licensed professional engineer containing the elements and information identified in the City of Renton "Policy Guidelines for Traffic Impact Analysis of New Development" in sufficient detail to define potential problems related to the proposed development and identify the improvements necessary to accommodate the development in a safe and efficient manner. ;Jot_:># 1 {;fJ/ey afl.e.Y Plan Reductions: Please provide one 8 Yz" x 11" legible reduction of each full size plan sheet (unless waived by your Project Planner). The sheets that are always needed in reduced form are: landscape plans, conceptual utility plans, site plan or plat plan; neighborhood detail map, topography map, tree cutting/land clearing plan, critical areas plans, grading plan, and building elevations. These reductions are used to prepare public notice posters and to provide the public with information about the project. The quality of these reductions must be good enough so that a photocopy of the reduced plan sheet is also legible. The reduced plans are typically sent in PDF format toihe print shop and then are printed on opaque white mylar-type paper (aka rhino cover) to ensure legibility. If your reduced plans are not legible once photocopied, you will need -9 - H: \CED\Data\Forms-T emplates\Self-Help Handouts\Plan n ing\sa. doc 08/12 to increase the font size or try a different paper type. Illegible reductions cannot be accepted. Please also be sure the reduced Neighborhood Detail Map is legible and will display enough cross stre·ets to easily identify the project location when cropped to fit in a 4" by 6" public notice space. Once the reductions have been made, please also make one 8 Y," x 11" regular photocopy of each photographic reduction sheet. Some of the local Renton print shops that should be able to provide you with reductions of your plans are Alliance Printing (425) 793-5474, Apperson Print Resources (425) 251-1850, and PIP Printing (425) 225-9655. Nearby print shops are Digital Reprographics (425) 882-2500 in Bellevue, Litho Design (206) 574-3000 and Reprographics NW/Ford Graphics (205) 524-2040. Colored Maps for Display (DO NOT MOUNT ON FOAM-CORE OR OTHER BACKING): Please color 1 copy of each of the following full size plan sheets (24" x 35") or other size approved by the Planning Division) with a 1/4" or larger felt.tip marker for use in presenting the project to the Environmental Review Committee and at any required public hearing: • Neighborhood Detail Map --JJr,a::!/.-1-/.- • Site Plan ;;;;3, ,., ,, """' l'oM,-)f,--c,µ • Landscaping Plan • Elevations ·-[,:)J.u~eo t?U?V/Y7iJJ-v OMP-r The following colors are required: Red-North Arrow, outer property boundary. Proposed new lot lines (dashed). Do not color existing lot lines which are to be eliminated or relocated. Blue-Street names identified with lettering of at least 1" in height. Street names must be legible at a distance of 15-ft. Brown-Existing buildings (Please do. not color buildings which will be demolished or removed) Yellow-Proposed buildings Light Green-Landscaped areas Dark Green-Areas of undisturbed vegetation ~'1J?,0f01C v~,0 ~ All Plans and Attachments must be folded to 8Yz" by 1111 REVIEW PROCESS: Once a complete land use application package has been accepted for initial review, the Planning Division will post three notices of the pending application at or near the subject site and mail notices to property owners within 300 feet of the project site. The proposal will be routed to other City departments and other jurisdictions or agencies who may have an interest in the application. The reviewers have two weeks to return their comments to the Planning Division. Within approximately two -10 -08112 H: \C EO\Data\F om1s-T emplates\Self-Help Handouts\P!a nning\sa.doc weeks, the Planning Division will prepare a report regarding the proposal's compliance with applicable codes and the City's review criteria. All applications requiring environmental review will be presented to the City's Environmental Review Committee. The Environmental Review Committee is comprised of the Administrator of Public Works, the Administrator of Community and Economic Development, the Administrator of Community Services, and the Fire Chief. The Committee is responsible for determining whether the proposal will result in significant adverse environmental impacts. To do this, the committee will consider such issues as environmental health hazards, wetlands, groundwater, energy and natural resources and will then issue its decision (Environmental Threshold Determination). The Environmental Review Committee will either issue a: • Determination of Non-Significance (DNS)-Make a determination the proposal will have no significant negative environmental impacts, or· • Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance (DNS-M)-Make a determination the proposal, if modified, would have no significant negative environmental impacts, or • Determination of Significance (DS}-Make a determination the proposal will have significant adverse environmental impacts and require the applicant to submit an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS} prepared by a qualified consultant. Once the Environmental Review Committee has issued its Environmental Threshold Determination (provided an EIS is not required}, a public notice of the Determination is printed in the Renton Reporter and three notices are posted at or near the site. A 14-day appeal period commences following the publication date. At the discretion of the City, a separate and additional 15-day comment period may be added prior to the 14-day appeal period. In addition to issuing the Environmental Determination, the Environmental Review Committee is also charged with determining whether a public hearing should be required for those Site Plan proposals not automatically triggering a public hearing. The Environmental Review Committee will consider the departmental and public comments in determining whether or not a hearing should be required. This determination may be appealed within 14 days to the Hearing Examiner pursuant to Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-8-110. Projects exceeding the size limits listed in the Renton Municipal Code, Section 4- 9-200D3 and projects abutting or across the street from residential zones MUST have a public hearing. No variance from this requirement is possible. The remaind_er of the review process differs depending on whether a public hearing is required. Administrative Site Plan Review: A public hearing is not required. The Planning Division reviews the proposal for compliance with the requirements of RMC 4-9-200E, F in conjunction with the Environmental Review Committee decision and any staff or public comments prior to making a decision. The decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposal will be mailed to all persons listed on the Master Application and all parties of record. -11 - H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Setf-Help Handouts\Planning\sa.doc 08/12 Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and Review of Environmental Determination Appeals: A public hearing is required. After review of the proposal and any staff or public comments, the Planning Division staff will forward a report and recommendation and the Environmental Review Committee decision to the Hearing Examiner prior to the hearing. This report will be mailed to all persons listed on the Master Application and all parties of record. Notice of the public hearing will be published in the Renton Reporter at least 10 days prior to the hearing, the site will be posted again, and parties of record will receive notices of the hearing via mail. Applicants are strongly encouraged to attend the public hearing for their proposal. City staff will first make a presentation to the Hearing Examiner about the proposal. Either the applicant or citizens in support of the proposal will then give testimony. When giving testimony, names and addresses must be stated for the record. Following this, ind_ividuals with neutral or opposing comments will give their testimony to the Hearing Examiner. City staff or the applicant will address additional questions raised throughout the hearing. The Hearing Examiner will review the proposed application for compliance with the requirements of RMC.4-9-200E and F concurrently with any environmental appeals and issue a final decision(s) within 14 days of the hearing unless, at the time of the public hearing, the Hearing Examiner indicates additional time will be required for issuance of the decision. The decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposal will be mailed to all persons listed on the Master Application and all parties of record. The Examiner's decision on any environmental appeals will also be mailed. APPEAL AND RECONSIDERATION PROCESS FOR DECISIONS: Any person, including the applicant, aggrieved by the granting or denial of an application, may make a written application for reconsideration to the Reviewing Official within 14 calendar days of the date of the decision. Afterreview of the request, the Reviewing Official may take whatever action is deemed proper. The Reviewing Official's written decision on the reconsideration request will be mailed to all parties of record within 10 days from the date the request was filed. If any party is still not satisfied after a reconsideration decision has been issued, an appeal may be submitted within 14 days to: • The.Hearing Examiner for Administrative decisions • The City Council for Hearing Examiner decisions An appeal may be filed without first requesting reconsideration by the Reviewing Official; however, it must be filed within 14 days of the date when the original decision was issued. See Renton Municipal Code, Section 4-8-110 for furt_her information on the appeal process and time frames. BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT ISSUANCE AND INSTALLATION OF IMPROVEMENTS: In the City of Renton, a Building Permit must be obtained to build buildings and structures. A Construction Permit must be obtained to install utili_ty lines, transportation improvements and undertake work in City right-of-ways. Building and Construction Permits are separate permits. -12 -08/12 H:\C ED\Data\F orms-T emplates\Se!f-Help Handouts\Plan ning\sa. doc Applicants may apply for building and construction permits concurrently with their request for a land use application. However, the applicant should be aware any conditions of land use permit approval may create a need for revisions to other permit applications whereby additional fees may be charged. Refunds _of building permit charges are not available. If no appeals or reconsideration requests are filed within 14 days of the effective date of the decision to approve the application, the applicant may obtain building and construction permits. A construction permit for the installation of on-site and off-site utilities will be issued upon the review and approval of civil engineering drawings by the Division's Public Works Section and receipt of all applicable development and permit fees. A building permit will be issued upon the Building Section's approval of building plans and receipt of all applicable fees. DEFERRAL OF IMPROVEMENTS: If a developer wishes to defer certain on-site or off-site improvements (i.e. landscaping, curbs and sidewalks), written application.with full and complete engineering drawings must be submitted to the Planning Division. The application-should explain the reasons why such delay is necessary .. If approval is granted, security in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit, set-.aside fund, assignment offunds, certified check or other type of security acceptable to the City shall be furnished to the City in an amount equal to a minimum of 150% of the estimated cost of the required improvements. EXPIRATION AND EXTENSIONS: Once an application has been approved, the applicant has two years to comply with all conditions of approval and to apply for any necessary permits before the approval becomes null and void. The approval body that approved the original application may grant a single two- year extension. The approval body may require a public hearing for such extension. -13 -08/12 H :\CE D\Data \F orms-T emplates\Self-Help H andouts\Planning\sa. doc PREA LICATION MEETING FC SOUTHPORT HOTEL PRE 14-000252 CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division March 13, 2014 Contact Information: Planner: Roca le Timmons, 425.430. 7219 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Jan Illian, 425.430.7216 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT -----c~it-vo"';f-. -------------J<-~ f J t CJJ j 0 MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13, 2014 TO: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector Southport Hotel SUBJECT: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 3,000 gpm. A minimum of one fire hydrant is required within 150-feet of the structure and two additional hydrants are required within 300-feet of the structure. A looped water main is required to be installed around the building and the site, maximum hydrant spacing in commercial areas is 300-feet on center. A minimum of a 12-inch main shall be extended throughout the site to accommodate future larger high rise office buildings. Off site improvements required as well. 2. Fire impact fees are applicable at the rate of $0.56 per square foot. This fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 3. Approved fire sprinkler, fire standpipe and fire alarm systems are required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits required by the fire department. Direct outside access is required to the fire sprinkler riser room. Fully addressable and full detection is required for the fire alarm system. {4:i Fire department apparatus access roadways are required within 150- Yeet of all points on the building. Fire lane signage required for the on site roadway. Required turning radius are 25-feet inside and 45-feet outside. Roadways shall be a minimum of 20-feet wide. Roadways shall support a minimum of a 30-ton vehicle and 322-psi point loading. Minimum vertical clearance is 13-feet, 6-inches. Fire lane sign age required per code. 5. An electronic site plan is required prior to occupancy for pre-fire ,\J ~/\.". planning purposes. if'/' ) 6. All buildings equipped with an elevator in the City of Renton are required to have at least one elevator meet the size requirements for a bariatric size stretcher. Car size shall accommodate a minimum of a 40-inch by 84-inch stretcher. 7. The building shall comply with the City of Renton Emergency Radio Coverage ordinance. Testing shall verify both incoming and outgoing minimum emergency radio signal coverage. If inadequate, the building shall Southport Hotel Page 2 of 2 March 13, 2014 be enhanced with amplification equipment in order to meet minimum coverage. Separate plans and permits are required for any proposed ;,fC- amplification systems. 8. Applicant shall provide a completed Hazardous Material Inventory Statement for the swimming pool area prior to building permit issuance. Use of City of Renton form or approved equiviliant is required. 9. Separate plans and permits required for all kitchen hood fire suppression systems. 10. The project shall comply to all applicable high rise requirements of the lnternation Building and Fire Codes, 2012 editions. 10. 914.3.7 Air replenishment systems. All high-rise buildings shall be R-~ equipped with an approved rescue air replenishment system. The system e,.:., ;-\; shall provide an adequate pressurized fresh air supply through a permanent .,-f&, ,c., piping system for the replenishment of portable life sustaining air equipment carried by Fire and Emergency Services Department, rescue and other personnel in the performance of their duties. Location of access stations, as well as installation and maintenance of the air replenishment systems, shall meet the requirements as determined by the Fire Code Official. A specifications document for the construction of air replenishing systems that conforms to the breathing equipment used by the Renton Fire and Emergency Services Department will be made available by the Fire Code Official. 914.3.8 Fire equipment. A cabinet or other enclosed facility shall be provided in every stairwell, smoke tower or such similar structure on designated floors, commencing with the third floor, seventh floor and every '1~ fourth floor above the seventh floor for the storage of fire hose and related equipment. Facilities, cabinets, devices, hoses and related equipment shall \)Y be furnished by the building owner. All such equipment and the specific location thereof shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Code Official. These rooms will be inspected annually by the Fire and Emergency Services Department and equipment replaced by the building owner or his/her representative at the appropriate service life. h:\ced\planning\current planninglpreapps\14-000252.rocalelfire comments.docx DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M January 21, 2014 Rocale Timmons, Planner Jan Illian, Plan Review g,R-- Southport Hotel 052305-9025 and 080305-9216 PRE 14-000252 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non- binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision-makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above-referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre-application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. Water »J \21 1. The proposed development is within the City of Renton's Kennydale 320-pressure zone water service \X\, area. There is an existing 12-inch water main located within the internal access road for the adjacent k,Stl'-properties east of the proposed development, known as Southport Phases 1 & 2, (refer to City project C<Ii' plans no. W-2882 and W-3291). The static water pressure is about 128 psi at ground elevation of 22 feet. 0-The maximum flow capacity from the above 12-inch water main is limited to 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm) because it is fed through two existing 10-inch water lines (refer to water project plan no. W-0737 and W-2882) connecting to the existing 12-inch water main in Lake Washington Blvd N. (see plan no. W- 0145 and W-0327). tfa· Based on the project information submitted by the applicant for the pre-application meeting for the _ Southport Hotel only, the City's Fire Prevention Department has determined that the preliminary fire flow demand for the proposed development is 3,000 gpm including the use of an automatic fire sprinkler system. /4) A 12-inch looped water main within the proposed perimeter fire access road along the north, west 'ind south property lines of the subject properties will be required. The new looped water main shall connect to the existing 12-inch water main located at the northeast corner and also at the southeast Southport Hotel PRE 14-000252 Page 2 of3 March 11, 2014. corner of the subject properties. A 15-foot wide utility easement shall be dedicated to the City for the water main and appurtenances. 5. Installation of new fire hydrants will be required by Renton Fire Prevention. The number and location of the hydrants shall be determined based on the City's review of the site utilities and roadway plan. 6. Installation of fire sprinkler stub with a detector double check valve assembly (DDCVA) for backflow prevention will be required. The DDCVA shall be installed in an outside underground vault or in the building sprinkler room if it meets the conditions as shown on City's standard plan for the interior installation of a DDCVA. Fire service system development fee will be based on the size of the fire line. 7. Domestic water meter with a reduced backflow prevention assembly (RPBA) will be required. The RPBA shall be installed behind the meter and inside a heated enclosure ("hot-box") per City standard plan no. 350.2. Sizing of the meter shall be done in accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code meter sizing criteria. Meter size 3-inch and above shall be installed inside a concrete vault located outside of the building per City Standard Plan No. 320.4. The applicant/design engineer shall provide adequate room in the parking lot or in the landscape areas for the installation of the water meter(s) vault and fire sprinkler vault. 8. Installation of landscape irrigation meter and double check valve assembly (DCVA) may be required. 9. System development fees for water will be owed based on the size of the new domestic water meter, fire line and landscape irrigation meter that will serve the new building. Meter installation fees will be based on the size of each new meter. Fee sheet is attached. IMPORTANT NOTE: Additional off-site and on-site water mains improvements ·will be required for future development on the subject sites, such as for the proposed three office buildings, if the fire flow demand for the development exceeds 4,000 gpm. The extent and location of the water main improvements will be determined through a hydraulic fire flow analysis of the City's water system. The applicant ·shall obtain all required easements. permits, including railroad crossing permits, required for the installation of these improvements. Sanitary Sewer 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8-inch sewer main in an easement on the site. Extension of the sewer may be required to serve the hotel 2. System development fee for sewer is based on the size of the new domestic water to serve the new building. 3. If food preparation facilities (kitchen, cafe, restaurant) are proposed, a grease trap or grease interceptor will be required. A separate plumbing permit is required. Grease interceptor outside the building will be reviewed by the wastewater department. Storm Drainage 1. There is a private storm drainage conveyance system and water quality treatment on site. Southport Hotel PRE 14-000252 Page3of3 March 11, 2014. 2. A drainage plan and drainage report will be required with the site plan application. The report shall comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapter 1 and 2. All core and any special requirements shall be contained in the report. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Peak Rate Flow Control Standard, Existing Conditions. The drainage report will need to follow the area specific flow control requirements under Core Requirement #3. Enhanced Basic Water Quality treatment will be triggered for this project under Core Requirement #8. 3. A geotechnical report for the site is required. Information on the water table and soil permeability with recommendations from the geotechnical engineer of appropriate flow control BMP options designed in concert with the proposed site shall be submitted with the application. 4. A Construction Stormwater Permit from the Department of Ecology will be required if clearing and grading of the site exceeds one acre. 5. System development fee for storm is $0.491 per square foot of new impervious surface. This is payable prior to issuance of the construction permit. Transportation OQ\ b( ":JJ&;e Transportation fees will be owed for the hotel. Fees owing will be calculated based on the agre ment (CAG 01-172) until such time the vesting of the project expires in 2015. Fees will be owed a · e of building permit issuance. O'f_ ""\?.;,V {',(\o\J-<.1~ General Comments 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permit and fees will be required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection and storm water connection. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: March 13, 2014 TO: Pre-Application File No. 14-000252 FROM: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Southport Hotel General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property is located adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline and is identified as the Southport Redevelopment site. The applicant is proposing to construct the third phase of the Southport Master Plan -waterfront hotel. The proposed hotel would contain 355 hotel rooms, hotel restaurant, meeting and banquet facilities, administration offices, and support facilities. The hotel is setback 50 feet from the OHWM and is approximately 75 feet in height within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. Parking, in the amount of 500 parking stalls, is proposed temporarily within a surface parking lot on the office site until such time the approved offices are constructed (LUA00-156). Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. Access to the site is proposed via Lake Washington Blvd. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Current Use: Currently the hotel/office parcels are vacant. Zoning: The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification. The rezone, which occurred in 2005, was not intended to affect the vested applications for the proposed development. Hotels were a primary permitted use in the COR zone. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\14-000252.rocale\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 2 of S March 13, 2014 Development Standards: The comments below attempt to communicate as many of the requirements of the vested zoning classification and prior approvals. The applicant would be required to demonstrate compliance with the vested 1999 development standards of the COR- 3 zone (RMC4-Z-1ZO) in addition to the Southport Development Planned Action FSEJS (September 9, 1999), and the Southport Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM/ and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, ZOOS}. If applicable development standards are not being met, or have not been analyzed as part of the SE/S, the applicant would be required to modify/supplement existing applicable approvals. The following development standards con be found in the existing approvals or vested code. Staff has also prepared an informal spreadsheet (attached} of the applicable development standards to assist the applicant with their compliance analysis. • # Hotel Units • # Residential Units • Height • Restaurant Square Footage • Parking • Impervious Surface • Open Space/Landscaping • Setbacks • Lot Coverage • Building Modulation • Upper Story Setbacks Additional development standards to be considered: • Minimum Lot Size, Width and Depth -There were no mm,mum lot standard requirements for the vested COR-3 zone. The applicant is proposing to adjust the lot lines in order to accommodate the revised building envelopes for the proposed hotel \ and future office space. Staff understands the applicant is not interested in adjusting the lot lines through a Lot Line Adjustment in order to avoid the need to revise recorded lot lines which may impact financing. Pursuant to RMC 4-7-230 Binding Site Plans are an optional process for the division of land classified for industrial, commercial, or mixed use zones os authorized in chapters 58.17 and 64.34 RCW. This method may be employed as an alternative to the subdivision and short subdivision procedures. The standard binding site pion creates or afters existing lot fines, subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district. Lots, parcels, or tracts created through the binding site plan procedure are considered legal lots of record and are enforceable by the City. • Screening -Screening must be provided for all surface-mounted and roof top utility and mechanical equipment. The site plan application will need to include elevations and details for the proposed methods of screening. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\14--000252.rocale\14--000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc , Southport Hotel Page 3 of 5 March 13, 2014 H .. 0 2,. I Refuse and Recycling Areas -There were no specific sizing standards for refuse and recyclable areas within the vested code and/or vested documents. Staff encourages the applicant to comply with current standards. For commercial developments a minimum of 5 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 10 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a total minimum area of 100 square feet. Bicycle Parking: There were no specific bicycle parking standards for hotel uses within the vested code and/or vested documents. Please consider the inclusion of parking to accommodate bicycles. Currently we require bicycle parking based on 10% of the required number of parking stalls. Signage -Only one freestanding business sign (restricted to monument/ground signs only) is permitted per street frontage, however pole signs are not permitted within the UCN-2 zone. Each sign shall not exceed an area greater than one and one-half square /'feet for each lineal foot of property frontage that is occupied by the business. In no case shall the sign exceed a total of 300 square feet (150 square feet per face). The ground/monument sign is limited to 5 feet in height. In addition to the permitted freestanding sign, wall signs with a copy area not exceeding 20% of the fac;:ade, to which it is applied, are also permitted. Staff will consider the use of off-site signage which would require a Sign Variance in order to locate off-site. The applicant is encouraged to continue working the Department of Community Economic Development to provide off-site signage. Environmental Review The City determined that the Southport Master Plan qualified for coverage as a planned action under SEPA, and any subsequent applications to develop property consistent with the Master ~ Plan will also be covered by the Planned Action and will not require additional SEPA. The J,.} applicant would be required to demonstrate the proposal complies with the Mitigation 6J ef)\.~ Document (dated September 17, 1999} which outlines mitigation measures based on ~:; significant impacts identified in the SE/S. 5 f.f A C\\e.et:\t.s-\- V ),! If the proposal exceeds identified thresholds within the SE/S, the applicant would be required to supplement the existing SEIS. Permit Requirements The proposal would likely require a Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Minor Modification, Sign Variance, and Site Plan Review. And depending on the scope of the proposal a Supplemental SEIS and Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Major Modification may also be required ,l-T.e..,.t V.5 ~ r~ M."'.\- Note: The purpose of the Site Plan process is the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical characteristics ofa site and with the surrounding area. An additional purpose of Site Plan is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies General review criteria includes the following: a. Compliance and Consistency. Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\14-000252.rocale\14-000252 (ucn-2 south port hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 4 of 5 March 13, 2014 b. Off-Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. c. On-Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to the site d. Access and Circulation. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. e. Open Space. Incorporation of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site; f. Views and Public Access. Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. g. Services and Infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Signage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identification and management of sign elements -such as the number, size, brightness, lighting intensity, and location - to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and i. Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, if applicable. The Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Minor Modification application fee is $100 and the Site Plan Review application fee is $1,000. The application fee for the Sign Variance would be $1,200. There is an additional 3% technology fee at the time of land use application. If all that is required is a Minor Modification and Site Plan Review the applications can be reviewed concurrently in an estimated time frame of 8 weeks once a complete application is accepted. If the scope of the proposal exceeds existing thresholds or is inconsistent with existing vested documents additional processing time and fees would be applicable to the proposal. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction, building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the review of the land use permits, but cannot be issued prior to the completion of any appeal periods. Impact Mitigation Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. A Transportation Mitigation Fee • A Fire Impact Fee \C\~q • A Traffic Impact Fee • If residential units are constructed, School and Park Impact Fees would be applicable. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\14-000252.rocale\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 5 of 5 March 13, 2014 me applicant would be required to demonstrate the ability to ve~t to impact fees identified in e 1999 Master Site Plan Review/Planned Action. Otherwise the current Impact Fees would e applicable to the proposal. Expiration: The applicant has until July 18, 2015, the expiration of the Master Plan, to submit for Site Plan approval for the waterfront hotel. If the applicant does not submit the Site Plan and building permit before the 2015 deadline the proposal would be required to comply with the development regulations at the time of submittal. If the applicant pursues a binding site plan, approved as part of merged application with a site plan, the binding site plan shall lapse when the site plan expires unless submitted for recording prior to the date of expiration for the merged application. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\14-000252.rocale\14-000252 (ucn-2 south port hotel).doc - .. 1v1as1er ' Development ,' Plan/Shoreline Boeing Non- ·Standard COR-3/Code SEIS Substantial Permit Modification Opposition 2014 Proposal # Hotel Units N/A ' 220 220 355 NIA 355 None (Plans A and B consider additional units but with a decrease in Maximum Density of 50 office space and no No residential Residential Units du/net acre hotel) 0 55 units wlin 55 Restaurant Square FootaQe N/A 10,000 7,000 SF 10,000 SF Convention Space NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA 80,000 SF 220 stalls of structured 220 stalls with 2,657 parking (with 2,757 500 Surfac ParkinA 2683 Max stalls) NIA NIA Stalls Impervious None 85% 85% NIA NIA Unknown vvestern Property Line Setback 0 feet NIA NIA NIA 25 feet 5 feet When less than 50 feet the City can increase by 100%. HEX can approve 35 feet boardwalk with a Lake Washignton a variance for closer than 50-foot setback for the Setback 50 feet. site plan Range NIA NIA 50 feet Lot Coverage 75% NIA NIA N/A NIA Unknown Overall Open Space NIA NIA 4.2 -4. 7 acres N/A N/A Unknown 1 o stories or 125 feet. ~o Teet. 1 o Teet Buildings are restricted to within 100 feet 75 feet within 100 feet of of the Hotel Height the shoreline 7 stories 7 stories NIA NIA shoreline Special modulation to the Modulation break down the massing NIA NIA NIA NIA Unknown After five stories the next level shall be set back 10 feet from the preceeding Upper Story story or a modification can No upper story Setbacks be requested NIA NIA NIA NIA setbacks DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: March 13, 2014 TO: Pre-Application File No. 14-000252 FROM: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Southport Hotel General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first fioor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property is located adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline and is identified as the Southport Redevelopment site. The applicant is proposing to construct the third phase of the Southport Master Plan -waterfront hotel. The proposed hotel would contain 355 hotel rooms, hotel restaurant, meeting and banquet facilities, administration offices, and support facilities. The hotel is setback 50 feet from the OHWM and is approximately 75 feet in height within 100 feet of the OHWM and is 125 feet in height as it recedes from the shoreline. Parking, in the amount of 500 parking stalls, is proposed temporarily within a surface parking lot on the office site until such time the approved offices are constructed (LUA00-156). Permanent parking would be provided within shared use parking garages within the office buildings once constructed. Access to the site is proposed via Lake Washington Blvd. The site is located within the Shoreline Jurisdiction. Current Use: Currently the hotel/office parcels are vacant. Zoning: The property is located within the Urban Center North (UCN) land use designation and the Urban Center North -2 (UCN-2) zoning classification. However, the proposal is vested to COR-3 zoning classification. The rezone, which occurred in 2005, was not intended to affect the vested applications for the proposed development. Hotels were a primary permitted use in the COR zone. c:\main\data\project folders\seco\southport\hotel\2014\preapplication mtg\staff comments\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 2 of 5 March 13, 2014 Development Standards: The comments below attempt to communicate as many of the requirements of the vested zoning classification and prior approvals. The applicant wauld be required to demonstrate compliance with the vested 1999 development standards of the COR- 3 zane (RMC4-2-l20) in addition to the Southport Development Planned Action FSEIS (September 9. 1999), and the Sauthpart Level II Master Plan and Shoreline Development Permit (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM/ and the subsequent Master Site Plan Modification (dated February 4, 2008). If applicable development standards are not being met, or have not been analyzed as part of the SEIS. the applicant would be required to modify/supplement existing applicable approvals. The following development standards can be found in the existing approvals or vested code. Staff has also prepared an informal spreadsheet (attached} of the applicable development standards to assist the applicant with their compliance analysis. • # Hotel Units • # Residential Units • Height • Restaurant Square Footage • Parking • Impervious Surface • Open Space/Landscaping • Setbacks • Lot Coverage • Building Modulation • Upper Story Setbacks Additional development standards ta be considered: • Minimum Lot Size, Width and Depth -There were no m,rnmum lot standard requirements for the vested COR-3 zone. The applicant is proposing to adjust the lot lines in order to accommodate the revised building envelopes for the proposed hotel and future office space. Staff understands the applicant is not interested in adjusting the lot lines through a Lot Line Adjustment in order to avoid the need to revise recorded lot lines which may impact financing. Pursuant to RMC 4-7-230 Binding Site Plans are an optional process for the division of land classified for industrial, commercial, or mixed use zones as authorized in chapters 58.17 and 64.34 RCW. This method may be employed as an alternative to the subdivision and short subdivision procedures. The standard binding site plan creates or alters existing lot lines, subject to the development standards of the underlying zoning district. Lots, parcels, or tracts created through the binding site plan procedure are considered legal lots of record and are enforceable by the City. • Screening -Screening must be provided for all surface-mounted and roof top utility and mechanical equipment. The site plan application will need to include elevations and details for the proposed methods of screening. c:\main\data\project folders\seco\southport\hotel\2014\preapplication mtg\staff comments\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc ' . • Southport Hotel Page 3 of 5 March 13, 2014 • Refuse and Recycling Areas -There were no specific sizing standards for refuse and recyclable areas within the vested code and/or vested documents. Staff encourages the applicant to comply with current standards. For commercial developments a minimum of 5 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 10 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a total minimum area of 100 square feet. • Bicycle Parking: There were no specific bicycle parking standards for hotel uses within the vested code and/or vested documents. Please consider the inclusion of parking to accommodate bicycles. Currently we require bicycle parking based on 10% of the required number of parking stalls. • Signage -Only one freestanding business sign (restricted to monument/ground signs only) is permitted per street frontage, however pole signs are not permitted within the UCN-2 zone. Each sign shall not exceed an area greater than one and one-half square feet for each lineal foot of property frontage that is occupied by the business. In no case shall the sign exceed a total of 300 square feet (150 square feet per face). The ground/monument sign is limited to 5 feet in height. In addition to the permitted freestanding sign, wall signs with a copy area not exceeding 20% of the fa~ade, to which it is applied, are also permitted. Staff will consider the use of off-site signage which would require a Sign Variance in order to locate off-site. The applicant is encouraged to continue working the Department of Community Economic Development to provide off-site signage. Environmental Review The City determined that the Southport Master Plan qualified for coverage as a planned action under SEPA, and any subsequent applications to develop property consistent with the Master Plan will also be covered by the Planned Action and will not require additional SEPA. The applicant would be required to demonstrate the proposal complies with the Mitigation Document (dated September 17, 1999} which outlines mitigation measures based on significant impacts identified in the SEIS. If the proposal exceeds identified thresholds within the SEIS, the applicant would be required to supplement the existing SEIS. Permit Requirements The proposal would likely require a Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Minor Modification, Sign Variance, and Site Plan Review. And depending on the scope of the proposal a Supplemental SEIS and Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Major Modification may also be required Note: The purpose of the Site Plan process is the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical characteristics of a site and with the surrounding area. An additional purpose of Site Plan is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies General review criteria includes the following: a. Compliance and Consistency. Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: c:\main\data\project folders\seco\southport\hotel\2014\preapplication mtg\staff comments\14-000252 [ucn-2 southport hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 4 of 5 March 13, 2014 b. Off-Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. c. On-Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to the site d. Access and Circulation. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. e. Open Space. Incorporation of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site; f. Views and Public Access. Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. g. Services and Infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Signage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identification and management of sign elements -such as the number, size, brightness, lighting intensity, and location - to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and i. Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, if applicable. The Master Site Plan/Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Minor Modification application fee is $100 and the Site Plan Review application fee is $1,000. The application fee for the Sign Variance would be $1,200. There is an additional 3% technology fee at the time of land use application. If all that is required is a Minor Modification and Site Plan Review the applications can be reviewed concurrently in an estimated time frame of 8 weeks once a complete application is accepted. If the scope of the proposal exceeds existing thresholds or is inconsistent with existing vested documents additional processing time and fees would be applicable to the proposal. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction, building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the review of the land use permits, but cannot be issued prior to the completion of any appeal periods. Impact Mitigation Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. A Transportation Mitigation Fee • A Fire Impact Fee + A Traffic Impact Fee + If residential units are constructed, School and Park Impact Fees would be applicable. c:\main\data\project folders\seco\southport\hotel\2014\preapplication mtg\staff comments\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc Southport Hotel Page 5 of 5 March 13, 2014 The applicant would be required to demonstrate the ability to vest to impact fees identified in the 1999 Master Site Plan Review/Planned Action. Otherwise the current Impact Fees would be applicable to the proposal. Expiration: The applicant has until July 18, 2015, the expiration of the Master Plan, to submit for Site Plan approval for the waterfront hotel. If the applicant does not submit the Site Plan and building permit before the 2015 deadline the proposal would be required to comply with the development regulations at the time of submittal. If the applicant pursues a binding site plan, approved as part of merged application with a site plan, the binding site plan shall lapse when the site plan expires unless submitted for recording prior to the date of expiration for the merged application. c:\main\data\project folders\seco\southport\hotel\2014\preapplication mtg\staff comments\14-000252 (ucn-2 southport hotel).doc ., ·• I I Master I Devolopmont : I Plan!Shorellna l Booing Non~ . Standard , COR-3/Coda SEIS i Substantial Permit ! Modification Opposition 2014 Proposal # Hotel Units NIA 220 22Q 350 !NIA 355 I M--~----I --· - , -,.. .. ,1 i I None ~Pl,::s .. s r. ;;w:::l ..., 1 1 Gons1der ad(l't1cna; units I I but 'Nith a OBcrcase ir , 1 Maxirnum Density of 50 cf~1ce soace-and no 1 iNo rnsi:-.:,,nti:J:' . ( . . Rosldontial Untts au/r:e~ acre ----~-~-hoteJL _________ , ___ lO --------------· 55 ~'lits ·~·11\~.----55 ....... . Rostaurant Square . : . I FootaCJO ~.;IA 10,JOO .17,00G SF iO.OOD SF 1-==c=...-~----1==--------+,:.,=,.c.;.:.:.------~==-=-'------+c===-='----~-----~· ···~------···-Conve11t1011 Soace NIA IN/A ,NIA NIA \NIA 80,000 SF l--'--'-==-='-"----1.CC.----·--------··----1-----------·-------f--------------__ ._,,__ ·-c r-. --t220 stolls of structured : 220 s:ails wtt11 2,66/ )Da1king (w1tn 2.751 i 500 Surface ,· I Parkinl=! 266:J Max !stalls) N/.A 1NIA Stans lmoervlous None 86'% -----!s5% N/A !NIA Unknown -· vvestorn Property -I ·-1 I - Lino Setback O feet NIA In·,\ 1'NiA !25 teat 5 feet \Nher. ;uss tha:1 60 fee~ the _,_,, __ City can '.ncreasc b-y 1 OO')li. HE.X car, approve 35 feet bo.a;dwa'.k w1tr1 a Lake Washignton a vanance for ::::loser thari 50-foct setback for the l Sotback 50 feet sitep;an RHnge ! N/A . NIA 50 foe:t 1----------1------------· . -·--···--------' -·--·----'·------Lot Coverage 1~% N1A Nil\ !Nh\ IN/A Unknown ---------·---r ---i Overall Opan Space N/A i'~f.A. 4./~ -4.l ac::-es jNiJ.. !NIA Unknown 10 sto,ies or 125 reet. . -·--· --·-·---·-·--··-------·-··r I -· 2S"toel. 1~ tee, Bu•idings are restricted to I within 100 foot 75 feet w·thin 1QO feet cf : of the • I I Hotel Ho!ght frH: snoreline-(7 stones 7 stc:res rNll1. N/.A s!lOrolina __. ~ ----' I I . S:::ie:::ia! ':lQ:jt,!ation to tre i I I ~-~~ulation breaV. do•"lli tile Jilass·:rig !N/A ----~-r~--, NiA '\../A U~.~!.:_:)~v_,_, _ __, After fr•/e slcnies t/'1e next · !trvel st~a:1 be s1..;t back 10 , fee~ from tl"F.! pre,ceeding i Upper Story s.tO-i)' or ,;:1 r~1nd,1 ca 1 :on caq No upper story Setbacks l}e requesre;i .'{,'A ~4//\ N:'/.i, ;'\I/A sa,tbacks I li'rum: Rocalc Timmons. fR'I immrn1s@Rcnttmwn.2ovj ~eut: i\fon<luy, IVlan.:h 17, 2014 9.47 Arv1 PH,!_«~ I ,lf I 'f'o: 'Bill Stal1:er (hstal7cT(tgsc;11icl <.::(un)'; 'crnig.davc11port(~t111ulvnunyg2.con1'; 'gkrapc{,_1):,:ccl~dcv c,,ui', 'Jj,1nke(1ih,ccodcv.ctmt'; 'iibl)r. nagy({tjmulvanny g2..com'; 'mchri'>tifJJsccodc\·_ cum': ·sch rmnmfr,i:<tt·nw C()m' Cc: Corey V,,/ Thomas: Rick Lc.c; Jan Illian Suhjc.~f'I: RE: Southp(irt -PRFJ 4-000252 l·l;~Ji;:i ;,i: .. I -. ;:1 i :,iw· w:! !1,.F; 1 !1,• 0::,: •,lr'.,1:1:r.; I·, :;t;1·' ··r, s·I:,., <itl~c•.t;; rn iJ, \nv.'. fl· .. : t ·hr'H' i" '.h, • /;•;t t!ic;l' : V/·.1': ;1l,i0 TO f!;,:f fr,~-;,n~\·Jc"•i \1; ::1,,dX;i,·,p·;l c;<· ·,',\;Old ,I li!ifl\'f i.ic:<i1fi,·:,t]nr1 (Cl Ii-,· 1;1111:,;,_,,-,,J l'/:.a:,t(,1 ,;ik /'i,•ei ''·'.U':, ,j,., 'c· d p1:bh _(1,' /llr)J I. _l 11'. :r1<;t__p l'.-~1111_~,,.11 }.tl,?._(_1"i-i_1f .• 1,:;:~J)":.'..'. l"(i! _ _cr, _d_ (! \' ~fim,r;i;;J( .::l_ i'_.,~ ,· .- ····r r·("."· '•::i't [_,,_. 'i1<C!'~,ir,;:: 011 (!·,2 u\h~r ';u,:'..t;,_,11'.; thr('U~h·.;ut t:ic: 1.'.'<'.<'k. l·'!,•·,1,~, :'.·~ ,r,':: k,1,.1-.•1 ·: !.her, i:; ;.i1:v\hin;.; ci ,~·. ,!-· f!/!\1:ici:,, From: Roc:Qle Timmori'5 Sent: Thursd.ay, Maren 13, 2014 4:05 PM To: Bill Stal7e( (bstalzer@seanet.com); 'craig.davenpott(Q)mulvanny92.com'; 'gkrapecrusecodev.cam'; 'd jan ke@secodev.com'; 'bbor .nagy@mulvan nyg2 .com'; 'rnch1 ist(!llsecOOev .com'; 'sch I amm@)te11 w .corn' Cc: (Qrey W Thorn<1s; Rick leei Jan Illian Subject: Sou-thporl PRE14-D00252 llc•llo Bill /.ind all), It was a productive mect1nR toddV ~oth,mk you for coming iril!l lhe followir115 itern_., l will ht-fotlnwing up w!lh you un: Wh.it Shoreline PermiCT; will be ncedQd in order to ern:ro<H:h into the )0-foot setb.iat:k? I am thinking ;1 Shore-lh'lt' V,irianct! will bt.> nt~eded ;md if so this may bum11 all of the pPrmits to the !ie.annict lxammer. t}ut I will double check and P,:('t back to you. A copy of the COR-.'i development ~tundutds. • The revised standard5 for fire cabinets in stairwells from the Fire def)iHtrnent 5t.im!t1rd~ for the refme .irea outside of stJitwe!b frnrn the Building divhion. • Affirmation of a thret-phase plan (frnmdatfura, ~trur:t11r,1I, ,md interior) for the tmildinr, perm1t5 from the Building divlsion. /\~ information rorn~s in I will be "i('"nding it out, PINse fee! fr~ to rnntac.t OH.' ~h(lukl yot1 have ;ir1y ~ddition<1t questions and you will hC'ar from me soon. f°(ornle rimrnim~ City of Henton Curri:'.'nt Pl-c1rining :..enior Pl<1n11N 105S Si>uth Grady Way Kenton, WA 98.0)"/ Tl:'I: (4l5)4.'l0-7t19 f.,ix: (425) 430-1300 ( tj I tl 11~01"1~(!:_l fl,''_)(Oll'Nc~ f~'.-l_V f'i!t>-//( '. .\!\,foi n\Duta\Pl\ ii eel Foldcr~\SEC '.( )I.Sow hpon\l lotcl\2014\Pr't.::aJljllicatirn t \ 1lg\SW ff 1?\/2014 ' • tY and Associates PLANNING, LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVJCES Project Narrative Hotel at Southport Site Plan Project Name, size and location of site Project Name: Hotel at Southport Site Size: 484,281 square feet (11.12 acres) Site Location: 1083 Lake Washington Boulevard North Required Land Use Pennits Site Plan Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Zoning Designation of the site and adjacent properties Site: COR-3 Adjacent properties: UC-N2, UC-N1, R-1 Current use of the site Vacant land and gravel parking lot Special site features The portion within 200 feet of Lake Washington is in the Urban Environment Shoreline Designation Soil type and drainage conditions See attached "Geotechnical Engineering Design study, Southport Hotel, Renton, Washington, April 23, 2014, 19014-02" and Technical Information Report And Hydrology Analysis, Southport Hotel, Coughlin Porter Lundeen Project No. C140507-01, April 25, 2014 Proposed use of the property and scope of the proposed development 350 room hotel, waterfront promenade, and 487 stall surface parking lot. See Project Description for additional information. Access Access is provided via an internal private street connected to Lake Washington Boulevard NE. Proposed off-site improvements Existing off-site improvements include sidewalks, storm and sewer mains, water main connections, fire loop and fire hydrants. Additional off-site road and sidewalk improvements at the Gene Coulon Park intersection are scheduled for construction later this year. No additional off-site improvements are required for the hotel. Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value of the proposed project. Estimated construction cost is: $88,134,360 Estimated fair market value is unknown. Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed. No fill is proposed. Soil from excavation will be used on site. Crushed rock will be imported to establish areas for construction equipment and parking due to soft soils. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstatzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Narrt, May 16, 2014 Page 2 of 11 Number, type and size of any trees to be removed. Fifteen small caliper white birch trees along the northeast boundary of the development site are being removed to be used at other location in the Southport development. Three cottonwood trees will be removed along the northwest portion of the development site. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City No land is proposed to be dedicated to the Ctty. Any proposed job shacks, sales trailer, and/or model homes 12 construction trailers; no sales trailers or model homes. Any proposed modifications being requested within 100 feet of a stream or wetland. The site is not within 100 feet of a stream or wetland. Any proposed modifications being requested within 200 feet of Lake Washington. See the Hotel at Southport Site Plan for the improvements proposed within 200 feet of Lake Washington. Distance from closest area of work to the ordinary high water mark; Promenade construction will take place up to the existing bulkhead (see below). Description of the nature of the existing shoreline: The existing waterfront consists of a concrete bulkhead across the entire site frontage along Lake Washington. The depth of the water at the bulkhead varies from approximately 6 feet at the eastern end to approximately14 feet at the western end and the top of the bulkhead is 2 to 3 feet above the ordinary high water mark. The approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view in the event the proposed project exceeds a height of 35 feet above the average grade level: No existing or potential residential units will have a view of the shoreline obstructed by the hotel development. See the figures included with the Southport Master Plan Shoreline Substantial Development perrntt application. Project Description The Southport Hotel Site Plan implements Phase Ill of the Southport Master Plan. The hotel project is located on lots 1 and 4 of the Southport development and includes 350 guest rooms, meeting rooms, an exercise facility, indoor pool and spa, restaurant, lobbies, administrative offices, support facilities, and a waterfront promenade wtth a pedestrian walkway connection to Gene Coulon Park. An interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces is located on the stte of the approved Level 1 Office Building Site Plan (LUA00-156). A modification to the parking lot standards is being requested. When Phase II construction begins, the required number of parking spaces for the hotel is planned to be integrated with the office development. Because the hotel site is directly linked to the approved office stte plan (LUA00-156) via the shared internal diagonal street, the street grades, elevation of the street-level hotel functions, and the hotel building heights have been designed to function seamlessly with the office complex. Until the Phase II office complex begins construction, parking for the hotel is provided in an interim surface parking lot containing 487 parking spaces on the office stte (lot 4). When development proceeds on the office stte, parking for the hotel will be included in a shared-use parking garage. The hotel is set back 50 feet from the shoreline and consists of two building elements: a lower section capped by a large terrace and a ballroom with large windows for views of Lake Washington and distant vistas and a C-shaped section that increases in height from 75 feet to 125 feet as it steps back from the 50-foot setback line. The break in height occurs at the 100 foot setback line as required by the COR-3 zoning. The taller section occupies approximately only 50% of the width of the stte. The terrace on the lower section of the hotel is located approximately 28 feet above the waterfront promenade as is a wide, deep terrace enclosed by the two wings of the "C". The 75 foot high portions of the building are capped by two large terraces connected by a walkway. The 125-foot high portion of the building is oriented to the internal street shared with the 125-foot high office buildings in Phase II. 603 Stewart Street Sutte 512 Seattle, W-ington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Narr May 16, 2014 Page 3 of 11 Levels 1-3 and a portion of level 8 contain many special features and functions: Promenade Level (Level 1): Hotel functions along the north side of this level are located at grade with the waterfront promenade and at the same level as the parking lot. Functions include exercise rooms, spa and a pool in the east wing; pre-function areas in the central section; and a large 2-level ballroom in the west wing. The ballroom has doors and large windows on the north fagade providing direct physical and visual access to the promenade and Lake Washington. The south half of this level is devoted to hotel administrative and back of house functions. Main Level (Level II): The main entrance to the hotel is located at this level along the building's south facade. The entrance has a large Porte Cochere to provide both an architectural entry statement and weather protection for hotel guests, meeting attendees, and visitors arriving and departing by car, van, or tour bus. The main entrance opens into a large guest reception area that has a grand staircase leading down to the main ballroom and large windows on the north wall providing views of Lake Washington. The staircase is flanked by a hotel restaurant on one side and a lounge/cafe on the other side. Both areas contain large windows on the north wall for views of Lake Washington. The west wing is the upper portion of the 2-level main ballroom below. Terrace Level (Level 3): This level is characterized by two large outdoor terraces, a smaller ballroom, and banquet-related facilities. The terrace in the west wing is situated for maximum sun exposure and views of Lake Washington. It is accessible from the main entrance area as well as from the smaller ballroom. The ballroom also has large windows on the north and east facades providing Lake Washington and territorial views. The central view terrace is approximately 4,500 square feet in size and is protected from the weather on three sides by the building. The terrace provides direct views of Lake Washington and is accessible to hotel guests and function attendees from the adjacent banquet rooms and club room and from corridors leading to the elevators. The central banquet room is covered by a green roof on level 4. Guest rooms are located on levels 4-12 of the hotel. Deck Level (Level 8): This level is characterized by two decks located on top of the east and west wings of the 75-foot high portion of the hotel. Each deck is approximately 2,800 square feet in size and open on three sides to provide maximum sun exposure and territorial views. Both decks are accessible to hotel guests from the elevators and corridors at this level. SEPA By Ordinance 4804, the City designated the Southport Property as a Planned Action Site. In April 2000, the City designated the Level II Site Plan for the Southport property as a Planned Action pursuant to the process and criteria established in Ordinance 4804. In July 2000, the City approved the Level II Site Plan. The currently proposed modifications to the Level II Site Plan -are consistent with the approved 2000 Level II Site Plan. Consequently, consistent with Ordinance 4804 and the City's prior approvals of the Southport project, no additional environmental analysis is required as part of the current applications. Vesting of Development Regulations The subject applications are vested to the development regulations in effect in July 2000, at the time of the Level II Site Plan approval. Specifically, the attached letter from the Director of Development Services to Molly Lawrence, counsel for SECO, dated May 20, 2006, provides as follows: "As long as SECO makes application for Site plan approval for Phase Ill [hotel phase], and submits for construction permits for Phase II [office phase] before the Master Plan expires, those applications will be subject to the development regulations in effect at the time the City approved the Master Plan on July 18, 2000, and not any subsequent modifications to those standards." (Page 3 of February 20, 2006 letter) 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-11 SO email bstalzer@seanet.com • Hotel at Southport Project Narr; May 16, 2014 Page 4 of 11 Compliance with RMC 4-2-1208 Modulation and Articulation Requirements RMC 4-2-1208. 1 Incorporate building modulation to reduce the overall bulk and mass of buildings. Response: To reduce the overall bulk and mass of the hotel and in consideration of shade and shadow effects on the promenade, the tall portion of the hotel occupies approximately only half of the width of the site along the Lake Washington frontage. The remaining width is a much lower large terrace approximately 28 feet high that includes a window-enclosed ballroom recessed from the north facade. The tall C-shaped portion of the hotel consists of two 75 foot high guest room wings enclosing a wide, deep central terrace also located approximately 28 feet above the promenade. As the building recedes from the promenade, the guest room wings step up in height to 125 feet, consistent with the height of portion of the hotel that connects the two wings at the back of the "C" . The depth of the single step at 75 feet allows additional sunlight to reach the pedestrian walkway at the peak use times of the year as do the large west and central terraces (see the solar study included with the Upper-Story Setback modification request). The massing for the hotel also has been designed in response to the surrounding neighborhood of buildings. Surrounding buildings, including the Boeing facility and the future office towers to the south, use large moves in terms of materials and scale, creating an urban environment that reflects the height of the neighborhood .. RMC 4-2-120B.4 Provide building afticulation and textural variety Response: The articulation and modulation of the hotel building facades is in keeping with the surrounding buildings in the neighborhood, including the Bristol Apartments, the Boeing Facility, and the future office buildings. Changes to the exterior materials on the building, vertical plane changes, changes to the colors on the building, the design of the windows, and the contrast between solid wall panels with transparent glass areas create articulation and modulation that reduce the overall bulk and mass of the building. Details include:: 1. Exterior Material Changes: • Levels 1, 2 and 3 have a variety of concrete wall panel exterior materials, including cast in place concrete and architectural concrete wall panels. These vary in color and texture. • Levels 4 thru 7 have a combination of brick and cementitious panels, in keeping with the neighboring Bristol Apartments. • Levels 8 thru 12 have cementitious panels in colors that reflect the Bristol Apartments and future office buildings • Exterior metal panels, grilles, etc. are in a color to integrate with the Bristol Apartments and future office buildings. 2. Vertical Plane Changes: exterior wall panels are designed to create a plinth for each change of material above. The concrete base extends 6-8" from the face of the brick wall above, the brick extends 4-6" from the face of the cementitious wall panels above. 3. Color Variation: colors will be selected and refined to create a neighborhood of buildings with the Bristol Apartments and future office buildings. 4. Window Design: Windows in the lower three levels are storefront style to maximize views to the water and surroundings, windows in the guest room tower are punched window style, with a side vent that brings fresh air into the room. The upper level window frames in the cementitious wall panels are flush to the exterior face of the panel, the window frames in the brick walls are recessed 4" from the exterior face of the brick, and the window frames located in the concrete podium are recessed 6-8" from the face of the concrete. 5. Contrast of Solid Wall and Transparent Walls: The podium of the structure is designed to create modulation of glass transparent sections against solid concrete sections, creating a pedestrian scale environment along the promenade and internal street to the south. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstatzer@seanet.com • Hotel at Southport Project Narr • May 16, 2014 Page 5 of 11 Site Plan Review Criteria (RMC 4-9-200E and FJ Consistent with the approach in previous Southport Site Plan decisions and to avoid unnecessary duplication, some of the Site Plan Review Criteria in RMC 4-9-200E and F and the "Special Review Criteria for COR Zones Only" in RMC 4-9-200E.1.k were satisfied during the Southport Level II Site Plan Review of July 18, 2000 (attached) and when that is the case, this review notes the appropriate section of the Code and cites the corresponding section of the Level II Site Plan Review. 1. General Review Criteria a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to be in conformance with the elements and policies of the Comprehensive Plan (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 1). b. Conformance with existing land use regulations Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to be in conformance with land use regulations, Renton Municipal Code Section 4. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 2). c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to provkle adequate mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 3). Additionally, as documented in the responses to the Modulation and Articulation requirements, the hotel design is compatible with surrounding the uses on surTOunding properties. d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to provide adequate mitigation of impacts to the proposed site plan to the site. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 4). e. ConseNation of area-wide property values Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to conserve area-wide property values. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 5). Additionally, the hotel will be consistent with surrounding development, bring more people to the area, and at least preserve, if not increase surrounding property values. f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to provkle safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation systems. No change is proposed to the vehicle and pedestrian circulation systems. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 6). 603 Stewart Street Sutte 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com • Hotel at Southport Project Nam May 16, 2014 Page 6 of 11 g. Provision of adequate light and air Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to provide adequate light and air. Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 7). The portion of the hotel that is 125 feet tall is set back 100-200 feet from Lake Washington and the Upper Story Modification Request includes updated solar studies demonstrating that the hotel provides less shade and shadow impact than the upper story setbacks required by the COR-3 zoning. Additionally, two of the office buildings have been moved approximately 30 feet south thereby increasing the amount of light and air on the internal street separating the hotel from the 125 foot tall office buildings. h. Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions. Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the cri1eria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to provide mitigation of noise, odors, and other potential harmful or unhealthy conditions. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 8). i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the cri1eria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to have adequate public services and facilities available in order to accommodate the proposed uses. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 9). Existing water and sewer facilities are adequate to serve the increased number of hotel rooms. j. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the cri1eria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to have the potential for preventing neighborhood deterioration and blight. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 10). A hotel has always been planned for Phase Ill of the Master Plan. As documented in the responses to the Modulation and Articulation COR-3 zoning requirement and in the modification request to the Upper Story Setbacks zoning requirement, the superior design of the hotel represents a major effort to prevent deterioration in the neighborhood. Additionally, the amenities in the hotel and the waterfront promenade will bring additional people to the area which will aid in preventing deterioration in the area. k. Additional Special Review Criteria for COR Zones Only Response: The Hotel at Southport Site Plan is consistent with and implements the 2014 Southport Master Plan which meets the criteria for minor adjustments to an approved master plan (Level II Site Plan), which the City previously found to meet the Special Review Cri1eria for COR zones. (Reference LUA99-189, SA-A, SM, Attachment C; B, No. 4). The compact, urban design concept for the hotel and adjacent shoreline area contains the elements in the Special Review Cri1eria that are applicable to the hotel use and location. RMC 4-9-200F Additional review criteria for Level 1 Site Plans 1. Review of Impacts to Surrounding Properties and Uses a. Mitigation of undesirable impacts of proposed structures and site layouts that could impair the use or enjoyment or potential use of surrounding uses and structures and of the community 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Nam May 16, 2014 Page 7 of 11 Response: Site Layout The taller portion of the hotel is located away from the water and adjacent to the internal access road, the other side of which is approved to be developed with three tall (125 foot each) office buildings. Response: Building In addition to the minimization of the building mass to approximately 50% of the site width, the hotel contains substantial modulation of major building elements and a 100 foot setback of the taller upper portion of the hotel from the ordinary high water mark thereby ensuring that it will not impair the use and enjoyment of Gene Coulon Park. As documented in the response to the Articulation and Modulation zoning requirement, the hotel design is compatible with surrounding uses and structures .. b. Mitigation of undesirable impacts when an overscale structure, in terms of size, bulk, height, and intensity, or site layout is permitted that violates the spirit and/or intent of the Zoning Code and impairs the use, enjoyment or potential use of surrounding properties. Response: The hotel complies with the height standards in the COR-3 zoning. Additionally, as demonstrated in the building mass study on sheet A950 of the Upper Story Setbacks Modification Request, the hotel building uses much less of the development envelope than is permitted by the zoning. It definitely is not an "overscale structure" in the COR-3 zone, and the superior design of the hotel is consistent with the spirit and intent of the COR-3 zoning. c. Provision of a desirable transition and linkage between uses and to the street, utility, walkway, and trail systems in the surrounding area by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing and/or other buffering techniques in order to prevent conflicts and to promote coordinated and planned benefit from, and access to, such elements. Response: Physical transition and linkage elements would be provided along the north, east and south property lines. Along the north frontage, the pedestrian walkway easement on lots 1 and 4 extends the pedestrian route to the east property line providing a pedestrian and bicycling connection to Gene Coulon Park for the entire length of the Southport shoreline. The sidewalk on the east side of the hotel provides a direct pedestrian route to the waterfront area. Along the south side of the hotel, the walkway and hard surface treatment of the hotel main entrance turnaround provide a seamless connection to the approved office buildings to the south as well as a direct link to the internal street that connects to Lake Washington Boulevard. Similar vehicular links are provided at driveways located along the east side and at the southeast comer of the surface parking lot. Landscaped areas are proposed along the east, south and west sides of the parking lot provide a visual transition between the parking lot and surrounding uses. d. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration of structures on a particular portion of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the Zoning Code Response: Placement of the taller portion of the building away from the waterfront and near the approved three taller office buildings is consistent with the intent of the COR-3 zoning that the tallest buildings should be set back from the waterfront. e. Effective location, design and screening of parking and service areas in order to promote efficient function of such facilities, to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial, to promote ·campus-like" or •park-like" layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service areas or facilities Response: The major access point to the parking lot, which is at the southeast comer of the lot, is located as far away from the waterfront and as close to access to Lake Washington Boulevard NE as is possible on the property to minimize parking conflicts between hotel guests, office tenants, and residents. The internal street provides integrated access to street and parking facilities for both the hotel and the office buildings as well as a drop-off point for hotel guests, visitors, and tour groups that 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Nam May 16, 2014 Page 8 of 11 is separate from other uses at Southport. As discussed previously, parking lot perimeter landscaping provides a visual transition to adjacent areas and trees will provide a visual buffer for adjacent uses. The seNice area is located along the west side of the property by the Boeing manufacturing faciMy, as far away from the other uses at Southport as is possible. Access to the seNice area is via the ramp at the southeast comer of the parking lot and along the emergency vehicle access road along the south and west perimeter of the property. Views of the seNice area itself will be screened from the hotel entry area, terrace, and parking lot by a proposed planter screen wall with a trellis. f. Mitigation of unnecessary and unavoidable impacts of new construction on views from existing buildings and future developable sites, recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting •campus-like" or "park-like" settings in appropriate zones Response: Views of the hotel from existing buildings and future developable sites located offsile to the south would be obstructed by the three approved office buildings. The Boeing facility located to the west is essentially windowless, so no views from the building would be affected. Additionally, the mass of the Boeing building blocks views from the west. Views from the Bristol I and II would be mitigated by the modulation and architectural treatment of the hotel building. Distant views from the east and north would be unaffected, as the hotel would be virtually unnoticeable given the height and mass of the three office buildings. g. Provision of effective screening from public streets and residential uses for all pennitted outdoor storage areas (except auto and truck sales}, for surface mounted utility equipment, for rooftop equipment, and for all refuse and garbage containers, in order to promote a "campus-like" or "park- like" setting where appropriate and to preserve the effect and intent of saeening or buffering otherwise required by the Zoning code Response: Outdoor storage is not permitted in the COR3 zone. Refuse and garbage containers will be located in the seNice area. As discussed in criteria 1.e.above, they will be screened from views. Hotel rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened by a screen wall covered by metal siding. See sheets A220 Roof Plan, A120-A125 Building Sections, and A441-A444 Exterior Elevations. h. Consideration of placement and design of exterior lighting in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets Response: All exterior lighting will have full cutoff fixtures and be located to avoid excessive brightness or glare on adjacent properties and streets. See the Lighting Plan on Sheet L T100 Lighting Sile Plan. 2. Review of Impacts of a Proposed Site Plan to the Site: a. Building placement and spacing to provide for privacy and noise reduction; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities, to sunlight and prevailing winds, and to pedestrian and vehicle needs Response: Location of the hotel main vehicular and pedestrian entrance internally on the site surrounded by buildings serves pedestrian and vehicle needs; reduces noise impacts on surrounding uses; and retains privacy for hotel users and nearby uses. The building, specifically the terraces and hotel restaurant, will be oriented to views of Lake Washington and distant vistas. The location of the terraces on the north side of the building will provide protection from souther1y prevailing winds. b. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over concentration or the impression of oversized structures Response: The hotel building mass occupies approximately 50% of the width of the site with the remaining portion devoted to a large terrace. To avoid the impression of an oversized structure, the 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Narr, May 16, 2014 Page 9 of 11 "C" shaped building contains considerable modulation including two "wings" each set back 50 feet from Lake Washington, with the lower 75 foot high portion capped by rooftop terraces, and the taller 125 foot portion set back an additional 50 feet from Lake Washington. The 125 foot high middle portion of the "C" is set back approximately 145 feet from the lake and includes a large terrace approximately 30 feet above the promenade. c. Preservation of the desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal, insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development. Response: The site consists of a gravel parking lot and little vegetation in the areas not taken up by the lot. None of the existing vegetation on the site is desirable natural landscape. Soil removal is not anticipated as the goal is to balance cuts and fills on the site. d. Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary stormwater runoff, and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation Response: The existing topography, which is virtually flat, is being used to minimize undue filling and retaining walls. See the Grading and Storm Drainage Plan for additional information. e. Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces, where feasible, to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration Response: Because of the compact, urban nature of the hotel concept, the developed portion of the site will be primarily impervious surfaces. Pervious areas are planned to consist primarily of perimeter landscaped buffers. See the Grading and Storm Drainage Plan and the Drainage Report for additional information regarding stormwater runoff solutions. f Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicle or pedestrian movements. Response: Given the interim nature of the parking lot, planting areas in and around the parking lot have been designed with hardy plant materials to avoid damage from vehicle or pedestrian movements. g. Consideration of building form and placement and landscaping to enhance year-round conditions of sun and shade both on-site and on adjacent properties and to promote energy conservation. Response: To minimize shade and shadow impacts, the tall portion of the hotel occupies approximately only half of the width of the site along the Lake Washington frontage. A low terrace with a small ballroom is located on the remaining portion of the site width. As documented in the solar studies included in the Upper Story Setbacks Modification Request, the hotel design maximizes the sun exposure for the terrace and the waterfront promenade area during the peak use times of the year compared to the building envelope allowed by the zoning. The use of trees in some of the perimeter landscaping and along the street provide shading of sidewalks and parking areas with little, impact on adjacent properties. 3. Review of Circulation and Access: a. Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all properties Response: The following adequate and safe vehicular access improvements to and from the project site and neighboring properties have been completed or are planned for construction within the next year: 603 Stewart Street Sune 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Project Nam May 16, 2014 Page 10 of 11 Completed: Creation of a dedicated left-tum lane on Lake Washington Boulevard. Planned within the next year: Addition of 2 lanes into Gene Coulon Park from Lake Washington Blvd Signalization of the intersection Installation of RR crossing arms b. Arrangement and circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few points as possible along the public street, the points being capable of channelization for fuming movements Response: The planned improvements include channelization for turning movements to and from both Gene Coulon Park and Southport. They also will provide for better turning movements to and from Lake Washington Boulevard NE. c. Consolidation of access points with adjacent properties Response: Access to Lake Washington Boulevard NE is coordinated wtth the Sound Energy storage site and Gene Coulon Park but cannot be consolidated due to existing condttions .. d. Coordination of access points on superblock basis so that vehicle conflicts and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts are minimized Response: The existing configuration of properties and the characteristics of the surrounding area preclude a superblock in this waterfront area. e. Orientation of access points to side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets, when feasible Response: Access points to and from the hotel and the parking lot are provided along the internal street at Southport which in tum connects to an arterial (Lake Washington Boulevard NE). f. Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways Response: The location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, turnarounds, walkways and emergency access ways have been prepared in accordance with city standards .. g. Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas Response: The loading and service area has been separated from the parking and pedestrian areas by locating it off of the emergency access road along the west side of the property adjacent to the large Boeing building. h. Provisions for transit and carpool facilities and access where appropriate: Response: Convenient transit service is not provided to the area so no facilities are proposed. Although no carpool spaces have been provided, stalls have been provided for up to 50 bicycles. See sheet A 101 Stte Plan for the location of bicycle parking. i. Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstatzer@seanet.com • Hotel at Southport Project Narr May 16, 2014 Page 11 of 11 Response: Safe and attractive pedestrian connections have been provided at the following locations: • Walkway in the parking lot leading to a direct connection between the parking lot and level 1 of the hotel. • Walkway in the parking lot leading to a stairway up to a walkway around the vehicular drop-off entrance to the hotel • Sidewalk adjacent to the northeriy parking lot entrance connecting to a sidewalk leading to the waterfront • Sidewalk adjacent to the northeriy parking lot entrance connecting to sidewalks to the Bristol I and 11 and to Gene Coulon Park • Hotel vehicular drop-off entrance with a sidewalk leading to the waterfront and to sidewalks to the Bristol I and II and Gene Coulon Park All pedestrian facilities are illuminated by either parking lot lights, streetlights, or pedestrian scale lights. If you have questions about any of the information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, &Yf~rv Bill Stalzer For Hotel at Southport, LLC Attachments: May 20, 2006 Letter to Molly Lawrence regarding "Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development" Southport Level II Site Plan (LUA99-18-, SA-A, SM) Approval, Attachments A, Band C, July 18, 2000 Cc: Michael Christ, President, SECO Development Greg Krape, Development Manager, SECO Development Molly Lawrence, Van Ness Feldman LLP 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com • ,v <\:' 0 0~"\-A . :,.:, ·~ + ? -p.. Kathy Keolker, Mayo< ~lV1'0~ February '.!O. 2006 Molly Lawrence Buck & Gordon, LLP 2025 first Avenue, Suire 500 Seaule. WA 98117 CITY ( • REN'T'()N Planning/Duilding/Public Works l)epartmcnt Gregg Ummermao P.E., AdminidnUor Subject: Status of City of Renton Approvals for South1,ort Development Dear Ms. Lawrence: IL was good lo meet with you and Bill Stalzer earlier this week to discuss your client's (SECO Developmenl) Southport project. This letter is inrcndcd to memorialize our conversation and clarify the status of the City's approvals for the Southport Development located along Lake Washington between the Boeing industrial complex and Gene Coulon Park. Back ground The City of Renton approved a Level II Site Plan for the Southport Development on July 18, 2000.1 That approved Master Plan identified three (3) phases to the Southport Development: the Bristol and the Carling (a.k.a. the Bristol I!); a three (3) building office complex with restaurant; and a waterfront hotel. The City and SECO Development (SECO) completed SEPA review for the Southport Master Plan using SEPA's plan11cd action process. RCW 43.21C03J(2). Through Ordinance 4804. thc City reviewed 1he Soulhport Master Plan against the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Southport Development and concluded that the Master Plan satisfied each of the City's criteria for coverage as a planned aclion. Exhibit A to Ordinance 4804 se1s forth the full scope of SEPA mitigation required to develop the Southpo1t project pursuanl to rhc ~1astei Plan. Since the 2000 Master Plan approval, rhe Ciry has issued Site Plan approvals for two phases of the Southport Development: • Phase I: The Rrisrol. a mixed use/rcsidenrial complex, which was completed and occupied in 2002; and rhe Carling (a.k.a. the Bristol II), a mixed use/residential project for which SECO recently made huilding permit application; 1 In 2003, the Ciry modified its Municipal Code to rename Level I and Level II Site Plan approvals. Pursuam to Ordinance 502S, Level II Sire Pilns arc now reforred to as Masler Plans, and Level l Site Plans are now referred lo simply as Site Plans. In an effort to use currem terrnirtology when discussing rhe .Southport Development. l have referred 10 rhc Level JI Site Plan approval as the Master Plan. and any Level I Site Plans as simply Site Plans. 1055 South Grady Way-Rento,~ Washington 9R055 .-\ll~.;\iJ n,: THI C:l."ll\"F • !\·lolly 1_.a\vT~ncc Febmary 20, 2006 Page 2 of 4 • Phase II: The three (3) building office complex with restaurant. SECO has nor yet applied for Site Plan approval for Phase lll, the waterfront hotel. Current Status of Southport Master Plan The Southport Master Plan remains valid and in effect. Although the Renton Municipal Code limit, the duration of non-phased Master Plans to five (5) years. a similar limitation docs not apply lO phased Master Plans such as the Southport Master Plan. The Southport Master Plan will expire 15 years from the elate of origjnai approval. Thus, the Southport Master Plan wili remain valid and in effect through at least July 18, 2015. As long as the subsequent applications to develop the Southport property conform to the phasing pl,m identified in the Master Plan, the development regulations in effect at the time of the original Master Plan approval will continue to apply to the pem1itting and development of the outstanding/incomplete components of the project. Subsequent changes in the City's development regulations, including its critical areas ordinance and Shoreline Master Program, will not apply to applications to develop Southpo11 that arc consistent with the Master Plan. If, however, SECO proposes a modification to the Master Plan exceeding the criteria for a minor modification set forth in Ordinance 4802, Section XXIV, those modifications will he subject to the City's development regulations in effect al the time SECO makes application for those non- minor modifications. Further, because the City previously determined that the Southport Master Plan qualified for coverage as a planned action under SEPA, any subsequent applications to develop the property consistent with the Master Plan will also he covered by the Planned Action and will not require additional SEPA review (see Ordinance 4804, Section 111.D). Again, however, if SECO proposes a non-minor modification to the Master Plan that generates significant environmental impacts nol analyzed in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Srntcmen! prepared for the Southpo11 Development, then the City may require SECO to complete additional environmental review regarding such modifications. Consistent with Ordinance 4804 and WAC l97-11- 172(2)(b), any such future analysis would be limited in scope to the modification and would not require the re-review of any non-modified pmtions of the Southport project. Based on the above analysis, SECO has until July 18, 2015, to submit for Site Plan approval for Phase Ill identified in the Southport Master Program. If SECO docs not submit for Site Plan approval before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan anc.l/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications to develop Phase ill submitted after that date will be suhject to the Ciry's development regulations in effect ;it that time. ~folly Lawrence February 20. 2(X)6 Page 3 of 4 Status of Site Plan Approvals The Site Plans for both Phases l (the Bristol and the Carling (a.k.a. Bristol II) and II (office comple!i. with restaurJnt) are still valid and in effect. As noted above, SECO has completed the Bristol, and recently submitted the necessary applications to construct the C;1rling. Assuming the City approves those construction permit applications, the City's standard time frames for such pennits will apply to those approvals. SECO has not yet submitted constmction pennit applications for Phase II, the office complex ;md restaurant. The existing Site Plan approval for Phase II will remain valid for the tenn of the Master Plan. Thus, as long as SECO submits construction permit applications before July 18. 2015, those applications to complete Phase Il will be vested to City codes and development regulations in effect at the time of Master Plan approval. Finally, SECO has not yet submitted an application for Site Plan approval for Phase III, the waterfront hotel. SECO has until July 18, 2015, the expiration of the Master Plan, to suhmit for Site Plan approval for Phase UL TI1e City shall establish the duration of the Site Plan approval for Phase III at the time it approves that permit. As slated above, if SECO does not submit for Site Plan approval for Phase Ill before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan and/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications to develop Phase HI submitted after that date will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at that time. Effect of Recent Code Amendments As you know, the City amended its Shoreline Master Program and rezoned the Southpo11 property from COR 3 to UC-N2 m 2005. It wa5 not the City's intent that those changes would «ffect the Southport Mas:e:-Plan or any curren: er f':.1ture Site Plan approvals implementing the Master Plan. As stated above, the Southpo,1 Development is vested to the Southport Master Plan through at least July 15, 2015. As long as SECO makes application for Site Plan approval for Phase Ill, and submits for construction pennits for Phase II before the Master Plan expires, those applications will he subject to the development regulations in effect at the time the City approved the Master Plan on July 18. 2000, and not any subsequent modifications to those standards. Building permit applications will, however, be subject to any updates to the International Building and/or the International Fire Code. Similarly, all mechanical, plumbing and electrical permits will be subject to the technical codes in effect at the time SECO submits a complete application. This determination will be final unless a written appeal of this administrative detennination - accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee -is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision_ Molly Lawrence February 20, 2006 Page ,1 of 4 I hope this Jetter clarifies any questions regarding the status of rhc Southport Development and the cffecr of recently adopted co<lc amendments on the Southport Master Plan and implementing Site Plans. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments at (425) 430-7218. Neil Watts, Director Development Services Di vision cc: t\·tichae1 Christ, Presidcnl SECO Development, Inc. 1083 Lake Wash111gton Blvd., Suite 50 Renton. WA Y~056 Uill Stalzer Stalzer & Associates 603 Stewart .Street Seattle. WA 98101-1247 Washington State Department of Ecology PO Box ~7600 Olympia. WA 98504-7600 Jennifer Henning, Principal Planner Jill Ding. Associate Planner DATE: TO: FROM: o: 1 .1 n-Lcv<--1 J_:..- CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public MEMORANDUM April 4, 2000 ERCMembers Peter Rosen, Senior Planner Works SUBJECT: Southport Planned Action -Level 2 Site Plan (File No. LUA-99-189, SA-A, SM) Background A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) and mitigation document was issued for the Southport Planned Action In September 1999. Ordinance #4804 was adopted by the City Council in October 1999 designating a Planned Action for the 17-acre Southport site. The Ordinance outlines procedures and criteria for evaluating and detennining project actions within the subject stte as "Planned Actions·. The Director of Development Services has authority to designate a project application as a Planned Action. The project may then proceed in accordance with the appropriate pennlt procedure, except that no additional SEPA review, threshold detennination, or EIS shall be required. Essentially, a Planned Action designation by the Director reflects a decision that adequate environmental review has been completed and further SEPA environmental review for each development phase is not necessary if the phases are consistent with the development levels or parameters as specified in the Planned Action Ordinance. Planned Action Determination Jana Hanson, Director of Development Services, has designated the Southport Level 2 site plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) as a Planned Action. Attachment A evaluates the Southport application according to the Planned Action Review Criteria in Ordinance #4804. One of the criteria 1s lo ensure that the project proposal complies with the Planned Action Thresholds, as listed in the Ordinance. Attachment B analyzes the Southport level II site plan proposal according to the Planned Action Thresholds as established in the SEIS and the Planned Action Ordinance (#4804). While Planned Actions are not subject to further procedural review under SEPA, the project is subject to the measures of the Southport Planned Action Mitigation Document and other underlying permn requirements. The Planned Action designation does not excuse a project from meeting the City's code and ordinance requirements apart from the SEPA process. Shoreline Substantial Development Permit The proposal requires a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for areas of the project within 200 feet of the lake Washington shoreline. Shoreline pennits may not be issued until SEPA review is complete. The shoreline permit is proceeding because no additional SEPA review is required with determination of the proposal as a Planned Action. Site Plan Review -level II After designation of the proposed project as a Planned Action, the application proceeds according to the appropriate pennit procedure. Level II site plan review is required for all development in the Center Office Residential (COR) zones except as specifically exempted in the Site Plan Review Regulations, Section 4-9-200.C.2.c. A Level II site plan is a conceptual master plan prepared to show full development of the site and the phasing of construction. The Level II site plan shows the mix of uses, building density and height, access/circulation, recreatic.11 and open space, and other development ,eatures. The code states the Level II site plan indicates the physical and functional interrelationships between uses and facilities on the site, and allowing consideration and mitigation or potential impacts that could result from large scale site and facility development, can be approved and vested to current zoning without the /eve/ of detail necessary for Level I site plan approval. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has authority to detennine the necessity of a public hearing for Level If site plans under a Planned Action Ordinance. A hearing before the Hearing Examiner is required unless both of the following criteria are met: i. One or more public hearings were held where public comment was solicited on the proposed Planned Action Ordinance, and The City Council held a public hearing on the Southport Planned Action Ordinance on October 11, 1999. Prior public hearings were conducted on the scoping of the Environmental Impact Statement on the Southport Planned Action, as well as hearings on the Comprehensive Plan and code amendments. ii. 1he environmental impact statement for the planned action reviewed preliminary conceptual plans for the site which provided the public and decisionmakers with sufficient detail regarding the scale of the proposed improvements, the quantity of the various types of spaces to be provided, the use to which the structure will be put, and the bulk and general form of the improvements. The EIS for the Planned Action included conceptual plans for several plan alternatives. The plans show the mix of uses, building density and height, access/circulation, recreation and open space, and other development improvements. The level of detail was sufficient for environmental analysis. Staff has received a letter and pelttion from residents of Windsor Hills stating concerns regarding the Southport development. The petition includes 66 signatures. The primary concerns are as follows: • Improper notification of project to residents • Blocking of current views to Lake Washington • Depreciation of property values • Re-routing of air traffic to and from Renton Airport The residents request a public hearing on the proposed Southport development. I Attachment A DESIGNATION OF A PROJECT APPLICATION AS A PLANNED ACTION DECISION DATE: Anril 4. 2000 Proiect Name: Southnnrt Level 2 Site Plan Applicant: Michael Christ SECO Development Southport. LLC 10843 NE a"' Street, Suite 200 Bellevue. WA 98004 Owner: Same as applicant Contact Person: Rex Allen SECO Development 10843 NE a"' Street, Suite 200 Bellevue. WA 98004 File Number: LUA-99-189, SA-A, SM Project Manager: Peter Rosen Project Description The applicant, SECO Development, requests approval of a Level II site plan and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the Southport Development. The Level II master site plan for Southport proposes a mixed-use development consisting of six buildings. The development would include a 7-story, 220 room hotel above one level of parking (220 parking stalls}, two residential buildings with 4-slories of residential units above two levels of parking (682 parking stalls) that indudes a total of 395 residential units, and three office buildings with ?-stories of offices above four levels of parking (1,855 parking stalls). The office buildings would include a total approximately,728;200 sguare feet ~"}I) I 00 The proposal includes a promenade along the waterfront of Lake Washington. Public access to the promenade would be provided from Gene Coulon Park, a City park adjacent to the north of the subject site. Off-site improvements would consist mainly of improvements to Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the project entrance, signal and channelization modifications at the Park Drive/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, and signalization of the project entrance/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. A more detailed, Level I site plan review will be required for the individual phases of the proposed master site plan. The phases must be consistent with the overall Level II site plan. Building permits may not be issued until approval of the Level I site plan. - Proiect Location: 1101 Lake Washinaton Boulevard North Site Area: Annroximatelv 17 acres Planned Action Review Criteria. 1. The Director of Development Services, or the Director's designee, is authorized to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.031{2){a), if the project appl/catlon meets all of the following conditions: a) The project ls located on the subject site as described In Section Ill.A., or is an off-site Improvement directly related to a proposed development on the subject site; and, ,'he Southport Level 2 Site Plan applica, . .,n, (LUA99-189, SA-A), is located on the site described in Section Ill.A. of Ordinance #4804. This site is commonly referred to as the Shuffleton Steam Plan site. This site was analyzed by the EIS documents for the Southport Planned Action. b) The project Is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan adopted under RCW 36.70A; and, The City Council amended the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map for the subject site from Employment Area -Industrial (EAi) to Center Office Residential (COR) with Ordinance #4796, adopted October 25, 1999. The Southport Level 2 Site Plan is consistent with the COR Comprehensive Plan designation and policies, including the policy amendments adopted in 1999. c) The project's significant environmental Impacts have been adequately addressed in the SEIS; and, The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) is consistent with the development ranges analyzed for the plan alternatives under the EIS documents for the Southport Planned Action (See Attachment B, Planned Action Thresholds). Therefore, the significant environmental impacts associated with the Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) have been adequately addressed in the SEIS. d) The project complies with the Planned Action Thresholds in Section 11/.D of this Ordinance; and, The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) complies with the Planned Action Thresholds listed in Section 111.D of Ordinance #4804. Attachment B provides an analysis of the proposed project's consistency with the Planned Action Thresholds. e) The Director has determined that the project's significant impacts have been mitigated through the application of the Mitigation Document In Exhibit A, as well as other City requirements and conditions, which together constitute sufficient mitigation for the significant environmental Impacts associated with the proposed project; and, The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) is consistent with the Planned Action alternatives that were analyzed in the EIS documents. Therefore, the adopted Mitigation Documen~ as well as other City requirements and conditions constitute sufficient mitigation for the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project f) The proposed project complies with all applicable local, state and federal regulations, and where appropriate, needed variances or modification or other special permits have been requested; and, The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) complies with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. Needed variances or modifications have been requested. g) The proposed project Is not an ess .. __ jal public facl/lty. Decision The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) is not an essential public facility. The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) is designated as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW 43.21 C.031 (2)(a}, EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: SIGNATURES: I Janav, date AITACHMENTB Planned Action Thresholds. 1. Land Use. Subject to the mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, the fol/owing land uses and development levels, together with their customary accessory uses and amenities described in the SEIS, are Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031: s) Land Uses. The following uses are the primary uses analyzed under the Proposed Action Alternatives identified In the SEIS: (1) Offlce (2) Retail commen;fal, including restaurants (3) Attached residential dwellings (4) Hotel The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) includes office, retail commercial {including restaurants), attached residential dwemngs, and a hotel as primary uses. Therefore, the proposed primary uses are consistent with the primary uses that were analyzed under the proposed action alternatives in the SEIS on the Southport Planned Action. b) Land Use Review Threshold. The Planned Action designation applies to future development proposals which are comparable to or within the range established by SE/S Proposed Action Plans A, B, and C as shown below: Use/Heig_ht Plan A PlanB Plan C i Multifamilv Residential Units 543 581 377 Retail Area in So. Ft. 38.000 38.000 30,000 I Commercial Area In Sa. Ft. 500,000 750,000 500,000 Hotel Area in Sa. Ft. (rooms) NIA NIA 115,800 (220) If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. If proposed plans significantly change the location of uses in a manner which would negatively affect land use compatibllity {for example, move commercial and office uses in such a manner that they would not buffer resident/a/ uses from the nearby manufacturing uses), additional SEPA review would be required. The Southport Level 2 Site Plan application (LUA99-189, SA-A) proposes the following levels of development: Multi-family Residential Units -394 units RetailArea- R estaurant - Commercial Area (office) - Hotel Area - 30,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. 720,205 sq. ft. 220 rooms, 105,600 sq. ft. The development levels proposed under the Southport Level 2 site plan do not follow the development parameters of any single alternative proposed action plan analyzed by the EIS doruments. However, the development levels are consistent with the maximum development parameters included in the full range of the three alternative action pians, except as noted below. The Level 2 site plan proposes 30,000 square feet of retail and a , ll,000 square foot restaurant. Restaurants were included in the retail commercial component of the EIS alternatives with a maximum development level of 38,000 square feel The Planned Action Ordinance (#4804) states that supplemental environmental review may be required if proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed under the SEIS. However, the increase of 2,000 square feet represents only a 5% increase over the 38,000 square feet that was previously reviewed in the SEIS. The site plan ordinance uses 10% as a threshold for a major modification to an approved site plan. Similar1y, the Planned Action Ordinance frequently uses a 10% threshold of change. The 2,000 square foot increase in commercial building area would not result in additional environmental impacts from what was analyzed under the SEIS and is therefore considered a minor change that would not necessitate additional environmental review or revision of the proposed Level 2 site plan. The location of buildings shown on the Level 2 site plan is consistent with the building locations that were analyzed under the Southport Planned Action. Office and commercial retail uses are located along the west property boundal)I, buffering the proposed residential buildings from the Boeing manufacturing use adjacent to the west of the site. 2. Bui/ding Heights and Thresholds: Bulld1ng heights shall not exceed the maximum heights allowed in the Center Office Residential (COR) Zone. The maximum building heights reviewed In the SEIS are as shown on Exhibit D. In comparison with the building heights reviewed in the SEIS, a proposed Increase In height greater than 10% shall require additional SEPA review addressing aesthetics and shadows. COR3Zone The Center Office Residential (COR-3) zone allows a maximum building height of 10 stories and/or 125 feet, provided the master plan includes a balance of building height, bulk and density, and provided that in the COR 3 zone only. buildings or portions of buildings which are within 100 feet of the shoreline shall riot exceed a maximum height of 75 feet. The office buildings (Buildings 1, 2, and 3) have maximum building heights of 10 stories and 125 feet, complying with the maximum building heights allowed in the COR zone. The proposed Level 2 master site plan includes a balance of building height and bulk. The residential buildings (Buildings B and C) have a building height of 50 feet and the hotel (Building A) would be 75 feet. The hotel and residential buildings are within 100 feet of the shoreline and the maximum building height of 75 feet for the hotel building is consistent with the code standard. Airport Height Regulations Based on the current FAA approved Airport Layout Plan, the maximum structure height on the Southport site would be restricted to no more than 179 feet above_sea level. The maximum proposed building height for both the Southport Planned Action and the Level 2 site plan is the office buildings at 125 feet. The maximum elevation of the site is currently 26 feet Some filling of the site would occur for building and road construction (up to 7 feet according to the SEIS earth section). The combined maximum building height and site elevation would not exceed the maximum height of 179 feet above sea level. Supplemental EIS The residential buildings under all the plan alternatives was approximately 50 feet in height above finished grade (58 feet above existing grade) and six stories. The hotel building in Plan C would contain seven stories and would be approximately 75 feet in height The hotel building would "likely feature upper level setbacks, consistent with proposed amendments which call for softening of building scale in proximity to the shoreline: In Plan Alternatives A and B, the heights of the office buildings would vary, stepping down in height from northwest to southeast. Building 1, located closest to the Boeing facility would be the tallest at 125 feet and would contain 10 stories (six stories over four stories of structured parking). Buildings 2 and 3 would progressively step down in height, with Building 2 at nine sto11es (115 feet) and Building 3 at eig1" stories (105 feet). In Plan Alternative B, all the proposed office buildings were 10-stories and 125 feet in height. The Level 2 site plan for Southport proposes six-story residential buildings (4 residential levels above 2 garage levels) 50 feet in height The hotel building would be eight stories (6 hotel levels over a garage and retail level) and 75 feet in height The office buildings would all be 10 stories (6 office levels over 4 garage levels) and 125 feet in height The proposed office buildings in the Level 2 site plans do not step down in height as was considered Plan A and C. However, the proposed height of the office buildings is consistent with Plan B. The proposed building heights are consistent with the maximum range of the plan alternatives that were analyzed by the EIS. 3. Building Setbacks: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use and Aesthetics/Light and Glare Mitigation Measures. The Mitigation Document {Exhibit A) includes the following measure under Land Use as well as Aesthetics, Ught & Glare, related to building setbacks on the site: Along the subject site perimeter. minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site perimeter. the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks form Lake Washington would be a minimum of 35 feet. Building setbacks in the Level 2 site plan comply with the mitigation measure. The minimum building setback around the perimeter of the site is 15 feet, the residential building (Building B) in the northeast comer of the site. Building B maintains the required minimum building setbacks from the Gene Coulon Park property. Residential Building 8 in the northeast comer of the site is setback a minimum of 15 feet to 19 feet from the park boundary. Residential Building C is setback 30 feet from the park property. The proposed building setbacks also meet the minimum 35 foot setbacK from Lake Washington. The M~igation Document also indudes a measure under Aesthetics, Ught & Glare regarding modulation and articulation of buildings adjacent to or abutting public parks, open space or trails. The COR zone was amended under Ordinance No. 4802 specifying the building modulation/articulation that would be required for buildings that are adjacent to or abutting a public park, open space or trail. The proposal would be required to incorporate the building modulation/articulation as required by the code standard. This would be reviewed under the Level 1 site plan review for the individual phases of the development 4. Open Space: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use, Aesthetlcs/Ught and glare, and Parks Mitigation Measures. The Land Use and Aesthetics, Light & Glare sections of the Mitigation Document include the following mitigation measure: The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4. 7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6 acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space which could help offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site, approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and CJ to 3.0 acros (Plan B) would be located at the ground level and outside structures (i.e. excluding courtyards above parking structures). If future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal is consistent with City policies and standards. The Level 2 site plan indicates a total upland open space area of 324,796 square feet or 7.45 acres. It appears this area is inclusive of all areas on the site with the exception of the areas committed to the building footprints. The total landscaped area on the site is 69,700 square feet or 1.6 acres. -The Level 2 site plan appears generally identical to the Plan C incluo"d in the SEIS, It appears the amount of open space proposed is equal to the Plan C alternative_ 5. Transportation a) Trip Ranges: The range of trips reviewed in the SEIS is as follows: Trip Generation Net New nos Rev ewe n SEIS ~. i di Time Rang_e -Net New Tri~ AM Peak Hour 355-1,273 PM Peak Hour 370-1,355 I Dallv Total 2,898-11,202 I b) Trip Threshold: Uses or activities which would exceed the maximum trip levels shown above must complete additional SEPA review. Plan Review staff has estimated the number of traffic trips that would be generated by the development levels proposed under the Level 2 site plan, The estimate is based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Staff estimates a total of 10,671 new average daily trips would be generated with full development of the proposed project. This number of trips is consistent with the EIS analysis. A transportation mitigation fee of $75 per new average daily trip is a required measure in the Mitigation Document. c) Road Improvements: The Planned Action would require off~slte road Improvements at the Park Avenue/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the Intersection located at the shared Site/Gene Coulon Parle entrance and Lake Washington Boulevard, and along Lake Washington Boulevard between the two Identified intersections. These road improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS. Significant changes to the road Improvement plan that have the potential to significantly increase impacts to air quality, water qualff.y, fisheries resources, or noise levels beyond the levels analyzed in the SEIS would require additional SEPA review. Construction pennit plans have been submitted for staff review for the street and signal improvements that were analyzed in the SEIS. 6. Earth: A significant change In amou-nt of -grading assumed In the preliminary grading plans analyzed In the SEIS which has the potential to adversely affect water quality or fisheries shall require additional SEPA review. - An environmental checklist was submitted with the level 2 site plan. The environmental checklist estimates the project proposal would require excavation of approximately 19,600 cubic yards of material. Grading plans call for approximately 23,500 cubic yards of fill. Excavated material generated on the site would satisfy most of the fill requirements. Additional material may come from the demolition of the Steam Plant on the site or from an off-site excavation project. The amount of grading is similar to the preliminary grading plans analyzed in the SEIS_ 7. Air Quality: A significant change in configuration, increase in building heights, or significant decrease in setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses, which could affect localized air quality and odor conditions would require additional SEPA review. For the purposes of air quality analysis: a) A significant change In configur.n,vn to the Planned Action scenarios (Plans A, B, or CJ reviewed in the SEIS, would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company; or, a 10% or greater change In setbacks between buff dings to be constructed on the subject site which have the potential to negatively affect building downwash. The Draft Supplemental EIS indicates a 24-foot building setback along the site's west property line adjacent to the Boeing facility (page 3-127). The Rnal Supplemental EIS does not indicate a change in this proposed setback for the Plan C alternative. The Level 2 site plan indicates a 20-foot wide fire access separating the Office Building 1 and the west property boundary. Office Building 1 is setback approximately 40 feet from the west property boundary. This setback area is an increase in width from the setbacks evaluated under the EIS alternatives. b) A significant decrease in the setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks between residential uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company. The Level 2 site plan continues a design concept of buffering the residential uses from the Boeing manufacturing use with the placement of the office and hotel buildings. The Level 2 site plan does not decrease the residential building setback from the shared property line with the Boeing Company. c) Significant buffdlng height changes would equal a 10% or greater increase In height above the maximum heights reviewed in the SEIS. Building heights proposed in the Level 2 site plan are consistent with the maximum building heights that were evaluated under the EIS plan alternatives. 8. Water. The following changes to the Planned Action scenarios reviewed in the SEIS would require additional SEPA review. a) Change In peak flaws to Johns Creek significantly exceeding the options reviewed In the SEIS. The amount of impervious surface proposed with the Level 2 site plan has not changed from the project proposal analyzed under the SEIS. There have been no modifications changing the peak flows to Johns Creek. b) Increase In number of outfalls to Johns Creek or Lake Washington beyond proposals reviewed In the SEIS. · The proposed number and locations of outfalls remains the same between the proposed Level 2 site plan and the SEIS 9. Fisheries Resources: In-water construction or In-water uses or activities shall require additional SEPA review. The Level 2 site plan does not propose any in-water construction or in-water uses. 10. Public Services and Utilities: A significant increase in the number of square feet or dwelling units beyond the maximum number reviewed In the SEIS would require additional SEPA review to address impacts to Rre, Police, Schools, Parks, Water, Wastewater, Solid Waste, as applicable. The Level 2 site plan proposes a level of development that is consistent with the maximum range of alternatives evaluated in the SEIS. There is no increase in the number of square feet or dwelling units beyond the maximum range that was considered under the EIS alternatives. Attachment C A. Level II Site Plan Review DECISION DATE: Julv 18, 2000 ~ Project Name: Southoort Level II Site Plan Applicant: Michael Christ SEGO Development I Southport, LLC 10843 NE 8th Street, Suite 200 Bellevue, WA 98004 --~·------------ Owner: Same as aei:,licant ---·------ Contact Person: Rex Allen SEGO Development 10843 NE slh Street, Suite 200 Bellevue. WA 98004 - File Number: LUA-99-189, SA-A, SM Project Manager: Elizabeth Hiooins i i Project Description (revised): The applicant, SEGO Development, requests Level II Site Plan i Review. The Level II Site Plan for Southport proposes a mixed-use development consisting of six • buildings. The development would include a 7-story, 220 room hotel above one level of parking (220 parking stalls}, two residential buildings with 4-stories of residential units above two levels of parking (682 parking stalls) that include a total of 395 residential units. and three office buildings with 7-stories of offices above four levels of parking (1,855 parking stalls). The office buildings would include a total approximately 720,000 to 750,000 square feet These development amounts are consistent with the Southport Planned Action Ordinance, Mitigation Document, and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I The proposal includes a promenade along the waterfront of Lake Washington. Public access to the promenade would be provided from Gene Coulon Park, a City park adjacent to the north of the subject site. Off-site improvements would consist of improvements to Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the project entrance, signal and channelization modifications at the Park Drive/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, and signalization of the project entrance/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. On April 5, 2000, the Southport Level II Site Plan was deemed to be a Planned Action. On April 7, 2000, the City of Renton issued a Shoreline Substantial Permit for the _Southport Level II Site Plan. These actions were not appealed before the proscribed appeal periods terminated. Following approval of the Southport Level II Site Plan, a more detailed, Level I Site Plan Review would be required for subsequent, individual, phases of the proposed master site plan. The Level I Site Plans must be consistent with the overall Level II site plan as approved. Building permits may not be issued until approval of the Level I Site Plans. Project Location: 1101 Lake Washinaton Boulevard North Project Location: 1101 Lake Washinaton Boulevard North Site Area: Aooroximately 17 acres ' ---~--~ __ ,. ____ LUA,,,,-189, SA-A, SM Page2 of 10 Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment 'C' -------"--'=------------- 8. Level II Site Plan Review Criteria (with COR Review Criteria): Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-200E lists the criteria that the Reviewing Official is asked to consider, along with all other relevant information, in making a decision on a Level II Site Plan Review application. RMC 4-9- 200E.1.k includes, "Special Review Criteria for Center Office Residential (COR} Zones Only.' The Site Plan Review criteria includes the following: General Criteria: 1. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies: City of Renton Land Use Element -Centers The Southport Level II Site Plan conforms with the objectives and po/le/es of the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Element-Centers because the concept of the Center relies on creating a boundary to contain more Intensive uses and prevent them from encroaching on adjacent neighborhoods. However, within the boundary, greater freedom and flexibility of/and use is intended compared to traditional zoning c/assificattons. The Center Is intended to be an intense urban mixed use place which ts pedestrian oriented that provides a visual and physical focal point for the surrounding residential area. Centers should provide community focus for their surrounding neighborhoods. The Intense development envisioned for Southport would be contained within the boundaries of the proposed development City of Renton Land Use Element -Center Office I Residential The following are specific objectives and poficies of the Center Office / Residential designation within the Centers Element: Objective LU-U: Encourage projects throughout the designation which create cohesive, quality. and landmark developments integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to aeate a compact, urban development with high amenity values that is a gateway to the City. The Southport Level If Site Plan will create a unified development that will serve as a visual gateway to the City from the north. ft will result in a new "neighborhood" situated along Lake Washington, thereby capitalizing on the natural amenity of an urban shoreline. Policy LU-124: Primary uses should include complexes of offices or residential development, hotels, and convention centers, research and development facilities, and corporate headquarters. The Southport Level If Site Plan proposes a development of office.space, residential development (apartments), a hotel, retail shops, and restaurants. Policy LU-125: Commercial uses such as retail and services should also be permitted provided that they support the primary uses or the site and are architecturally and functionally integrated into the development. An exception to this limitation on commercial uses may occur if a major commercial use providing high economic value to the City is proposed with small-scale, multiple businesses. and is designed with the scale and intensity envisioned for COR. Because of the mix of primary uses proposed by the Southport Level II Site Plan, a wide variety of commercial uses would be appropriate. Policy LU-133: Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian oriented. Buildings will be accessed by a road that is located primarily on the perimeter of the project site. This road cuts diagonally through the site to provide access, from the rear, to buildings fronting on Lake Washington. Parking will be either In underground parking garages, or in a surface parking area located in the outer, southwest comer of the site. Therefore, pedestrian circulation Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment ·c· LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 3 of 10 is largely separated from vehicular traffic and Interlaced between the building complexes. The "emergency access only" road, between the lake and buildings will se,ve primarily as a public waterfront promenade. Policy LU-134: Vehicular access to each proposed development should be from a major street with the number of access points reasonably minimized. There will be a single, primary access road for vehicular traffic. Policy LU-135: A combination of internal and external site design features should be encouraged such as: • Public area plazas A centrally located, public, plaza has been planned for the developmen~ as well as a plaza along the waterfront promenade. • Prominent architectural features The mass and scale of the buildings will make a significant architectural statement. • Significant natural features Lake Washington, a spectacular natural feature, will provide a focus for the development • Distinctive focal features Public plazas and connections with the pedestrian promenade will provide design opportunities for human-scale focal features such as special paving and art work. Benches and landscape planters w/11 surround these focal points and complement the design. • Gateways The site is situated to se,ve as a visual "gat-y" to the City of Renton when entering from the north, either via fntetstate 405 or Lake Washington Boulevard North. • Structured parking Most of the parlcing wfll be accommodated In structured parlc/ng. Onesulface parking area will be located on the perimeter of the site. The Southport Level If Site Plan furthers the objectives of the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the community design policies Is to provide a vision for community identity and improvement of the aesthetic and functional quality of the City. The pof,cies of Community Design address issues such as: how the physical organization of development can create a more desirable place lo live; protect views; character of the streetscape; vegetation; gateways; architectural and urban design; and, community separators. Southport is envisioned as a vibrant mixed-use development located at an Important gateway to the City of Renton. Bustling streetscapes wfll be created, fined with shops and restaurants, to form an urban neighborhood environment. Objective LU-00: Provide for orderly growth of the city, while enhancing the downtown and neighborhood areas, and the City's natural features. The focus of the entry boulevard is a public piazza ringed with shops, housing, and offices, creating the essential core of this mixed use community. Policy LU-268: Improve the visual, physical, and experiential quality within the city. A pedestrian link through the center of the project will extend to the waterfront providing a visual and experiential connection to the office buildings at the interior. Office buildings at the Southport Level II Site Plan Review LUA""-189, SA-A, SM Attachment 'C' Page 4 of 10 ---------------------"----'-..c___-'--·--·-·-··-- interior will be the visual terminus of this link, anchoring the site to the waterfront and enhancing the gateway to the City. Policy LU-269: The City's unique natural features including land form, urban form, vegetation, and river should be protected and enhanced. The office development w/11 front on tree lined 'Southport Boulevard' and will offer views of Gene Coulon Park and Mount Rainier. Policy LU-270: The site design of developments should maximize public access to and use of public areas as well as shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a river, lake, stream, or wetland where such access would not jeopardize the environmental attributes of the waterbody. Public amenities wlll Include a promenade at the water's edge the full width of the proper(y that will offer opportunities for walking, outdoor dining, visual access to the lake and an extension of the lake walk at the acfjacent Gene Coulon Park. This connection wl/1 provide shopping and dining opportunities for park users, extending their experience further along the waterfront and Into the Southport neighbomood. Objective LU-PP: Provide physical and visual distinctions both within Renton and between edges of urban growth. High quality design w/11 create clear statements of area use and identity The intention of community separators within the City is to define neighborhoods. W/JJ1e these separators may be natural areas, they may also be elements of the built environment, such as building clusters, plazas, or urban parks. The intention of this project is to create a vital urban mixed use community with a variety of working, living, shopping, and dining opportunmes that will provide a rich experience of Lake Washington and the City of Renton. Policy LU-271: The function of community separators should be to: • Reinforr:e the character of the City's neighborhoods • Establish boundaries between the City's urban growth area and other areas • Separate high density urban land uses from areas of low density. semi-rural and conseNation uses, and • Protect environmentally sensitive or critical areas. Policy LU-315: Neighborhoods should be created which have human-scale featlTBs such as pedesfrian pathways and public spaces (e.g. parks or plazas), and which have discemab/e edges, entries, and borders. Special finishes, paving, and art work will greaUy enhance the pedestrian experience and integrate the various uses in to a unified whole. Policy LU-316: The design of pedestrian facilities should address safety as a first priority. Adequate separation of cars and pedestrians, reducing curb cuts, and providing adequate street crossings and lighting are appropriate methods. Pedestrian plazas and the waterfront promenade wlll be clearly marked and physically separated from vehicular streets and driveways. Conclusion: The Southport Level II Site Plan conforms with the elements and policies of Comprehensive Plan. Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment 'C' LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 5 of 10 2. Conformance with existing land use regulations: The project is regulated by Chapter 4 of the Renton Municipal Code. Section 4-2-1208 Includes development standards for the Center Office I Residential Zone 3 (Southport site). Lot dimensions: There are no minimum lot size, lat width, or lot depth requirements in the Center Office/ Residential 3 (COR 3) Zone. Lot coverage: Maximum lot coverage for buildings Is 75% of the site, when parking is within a parking garage. Residential density: The minimum residential density Is 16 dwell/ng units per net acre, where development involves a mb< of uses. The maximum density in the COR 3 Zone ls 50 du per net acre. Setbacks: There are no setbacks in the COR 3 Zone. Landscaping: There are no landscaping requirements In the COR 3 Zane. Extensive landscaping has been proposed however. 3. Mitigation of Impact to surrounding properties and uses; a) Mitigation of undesirable impacts of proposed structures and site layouts that could impair the use or enjoyment or potential use of surrounding uses and structures and of the community. Building setbacks of ten to thirty feet would be provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. The average setback from Gene Coulon Parle would be sixteen feet. b) Mitigation of undesirable impacts when an overscale structure, in terms of size, bulk, height, and intensity, or site layout is permitted that violates the spirit and/or intent of the Zoning Coda and impairs the use, enjoyment or potential use of surrounding properties. The proposed structures would not be overscale, but would have a greater impact on portions of Gene Coulon Park than the existing development. Modulation and articulation of buildings adjacent to Coulon Park would be provided (ta be reviewed at. Leve/ I submittal stage). c) Provision of a desirable transition and Hnkage between uses and to the street, utility, walkway, and industrial systems in the surrounding area by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing an/or other buffer techniques, in order to prevent conflicts and to promote coordinated and planned benefrt from, and access to, such elements. Crosswalks and the use of planters,. gates, benches; plantings, and handralls coordinated with the design of those at Coulon Park would promote a coordinated transition and linkage to the surrounding area. d) Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the Zoning Code. The primary naturalfeatures of the site are the shoreline access and views of Lake Washington. Structures and public open spaces would be sited to maximize these features. e) Effective location, design and screening of panting and service areas in order to promote efficient function of such facilities, to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial, to promote "campus-like" or "park-like" layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service area or facilities. Most parking and service areas will be located within buildings. Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attacnment 'C' LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 6 of 10 I) Mitigation of the unnecessary and avoidable impacts of new construction on views from existing buildings and future developable sites, recognizing the public benem and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting "campus-like" or "park-like" settings in appropriate zones. Views of Lake Washinglon from elevated areas of the City will be impacted by the new structures, but no views will be obstructed. Views from property located to the south are currently obstructed by the existing structure so new development wili have little net Increased Impact. g) Provision of effective screening from public streets and residential uses for all permitted outdoor storage areas (except auto and truck sales), for surface mounted utility equipment, for rooftop equipment, and for all refuse and garbage containers, in order to promote a "campus-like" or "park- like" setting where appropriate and to preseNe the effect and Intent of screening or buffering otherwise required by the Zoning Code. Outdoor storage is not permitted in the COR 3 Zone. All refuse, garbage, and recycle areas must be screened by fences or landscaping or a combination thereof. h) Consideration of placement and design of exterior lighting in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. Perimeter lighting will have "cut-off' features In order to prevent sp/11-over lighting off site. 4. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site; a) Building placement and spacing to provide for pfivacy and noise reduction; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities, to sunlight and prevailing winds, and to pedestrian and vehicle needs. A view come/or has been preserved through the·center of the site to Lake Washington. Approximately 3.2 acres of ground-related open space is planned. b) Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid over-concentration or the impression of oversized structures. Buildings are situated to preserve a view comaor, through the site, to Lake Washington. c) Preservation or the desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal, insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development. The site has been In its r;urrently developed state since the Shuffleton Steam Plant was constructed In 1929. Existing landscaping will be replaced. d) Use of topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary stonn water runoff, and to preseNe stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation. The site, which is already developed and would be redeveloped for this project, is almost level so the opportunity to use existing topography for mitigation Is minimal. Various temporary and permanent surface water collection and dispersal systems will be put in place prior to, during, and following construction. e) Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces, where feasible, to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration. Approximately fifteen percent of the site will be pervlous area consisting of landscaping and otherwise vegetated areas. ' • Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment 'C' LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 7 of 10 f) Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. Pedestrian routes wfll be clearly marked and situated to avoid "cutting through" planting areas. Vehicle streets and driveways will be curbed. g) Consideration of building fom1 and placement and landscaping to enhance year round conditions of sun and shade both on-site and on adjacent properties and to promote energy conservation. New structures would Increase the amount of shade at Ure Coulon Park children's play area. The greatest Increase In shade, however, would occur late In the afternoon during the winter monUrs, the time of yearwilh lowest number of sunny days and lowest park utilization. Building articulation, to be reviewed during the Level I Site Plan Review process, may reduce this impact 5. Conservation of area-wide property values: It Is anticipated that redevelopment of the Shuffleton property wlll greatly enhance property values within the City of Renton. 6. Safety and efficiency of vehide and pedestrian circulation: a) Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all properties. The extensive pedestrian circulation system Is largely separated from the vehicular streets and driveways, except on the perimeter, where separation is by means of a raised sidewalk and curb. b) Arrangement of the circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few points as possible along the public street, the points being capable of channelization for turning movements. There will be one primary access to the development, off North Parle Drive I Lake Washington Boulevard North. This single access (augmented by an emergency access that will be closed to general vehicular traffic) will allow strict control of traffic on the on-site perimeter road. c) Consolidation of access points with adjacent properties, when feasible. The City of Renton and the project developer have worked with The Boeing Company to coordinate Joint access Issues. - d) Coordination of access points on a superblock basis so that vehicle conflicts and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts are minimized. A hierarchy of streets and driveways (main access off North Park Drive I Lake Washington Boulevard North, perimeter road as secondary access, and individual driveways to structured parlclng and perimeter parking area) will minimize vehicle/pedestrian confficts. e) Orientation of access points to side streets or frontage streets rather than directly on to arterial streets, when feasible. The opportunities for non-arterial access to this site are limited, but access will be controlled by means of a redesigned Intersection at North Park Drive I Lake Washington Boulevard North. • Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment 'C' LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 8 of 10 f) Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. The design of the Internal circulation system w/11 be both efficient and safe for vehicles and pedestrians. g) Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. Delivery and loading areas are located at the rear of buildings, separated from pedestrian walkways and parking areas (which are primarily located within structures). h) Provisions for transit and carpool facilnies and access when appropriate. On-site pedestrian and bicycle faclli6es, Including sidewalks, promenade, crosswalks and connections to existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be provided. Preferential parlclng for vanpools and carpools and secured bicycle parlcing would be provided as part of the Transportation Demand Management program. i) Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. At the Lake Washington Boulevard approach to the project Intersection, the existing channelization would be restriped to accommodate shared lanes. "Children at Play" signs may be Installed near Gene Coulon Park. 7. Provision of adequate light and air; Buildings are proposed to be bu/It in clusters, with a corridor through the center that will allow views to and breezes from the lake. Public plazas and pedestrian circulation will be protected from south winds, which preva/1 during winter months, by the staggered placement of the three office structures at the south of the site. 6. Mitigation of noise, odors, and other harmful or unhealthy conditions; Increased noise levels would be primarily associated with construction and would, therefore, be temporary In nature. Construction noise levels and hours of both hauling and construction activities are regulated by the City of Renton as to hours and days of operation. Specific studies on the potential of significant HVAC noise impacts will be conducted by the developer as part of the building design process (following site plan review). If studies Indicate that HVAC equipment noise will adversely impact resldentlaf development on the site, mitigation can be Implemented consisting of noise barriers placed around HVAC units, selection of alternative equipment with reduce noise levels, or provision of silencers for air intake and exhaust Odors from The Boeing Company operations could be perceived as a nuisance by site population. Modeling conducted by Boeing, however, indicates potential odors would be below accepted nuisance thresholds. 9. Availability of public services and facilnies to accommodate the proposed use; and, Transportation Improvements will be funded by the developer or through a City Local Improvement District. A minimum rrtteen-foot wide utility easement will be granted to the City to access water lines. A minimum 10-lnch looped line will be constructed and connected to an existing 6-inch line that • • Southport Level 11 Site Plan Review Attachment 'C' --------- LUA,,9-189, SA-A, SM Page 9 of 10 serves Coulon Park. A 6,/nch connection to a line in Lake Washington would be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line. An existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line would be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line. 10. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight. The Shuffle/on Steam Plant has been operating at an Increasingly reduced capacity since the 1950's. Although It has been maintained, the proposed project would increase activity bath on the site and in the area. The redevelopment of the property would reduce the likelihood of neighborhood deterioration. 11. Special Review Criteria for COR Zones: a) The plan is consistent with the Planned Action Ordinance: The Level II Site Plan was found, on April 5, 2000, to be a Planned Action Project, consistent with Planned Action Ordinance 4804. b) The plan creates a compact, urban development that indudes a compatible mix of uses where appropriate: The plan creates a mix of residential, business (office, hotel, restaurants, and retail), and recreational (plazas and promenade) that Is compatible both within the site and with the suffounding neighborhood and community. · · c) The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally consistent, and harmonious with development on adjacent sites: Although the adjacent properties are significantly different in use and development, the Southport project Is compatible With its neighbors. Its highly urban plan reflects the historical development of cities with their more Intensive density and mix of various uses. · d) The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site, and/or to protect existing natural systems: The plan incorporates public spaces, both Indoors and outdoor, ground-related. Linkages to Gene Coulon Park have been designed. e) The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area where applicable: The buildings are situated so that a view corridor to Lake Washington bisects the site. f) Public access is provided to water and/or shoreline areas: The shoreline of Lake Washington is opened to the public, by means of a promenade, for the first time since the site was developed for the Shuff/eton Steam Plant In 1929. The promenade will be a continuation of a trail through Gene Coulon Park. - g) The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area plazas, prominent archltectural features. or other items: Numerous courtyards and plazas, with appropriate landscaping have been designed as focal points. h) The plan assures adequate access to public streets: Sidewalks and crosswalks will be provided as access to public streets, both on-site and approaching the project. i) The plan accommodates and promotes transit, pedestrian, and other alternative modes of transportation: Unkages to public transportation systems, incentives for alternate modes of transportation, and features such as secure bicycle parking and close-In parking for van pools and car pools will be included In Transportation Demand Management Plans with Level I Site Plan Review. • .. Southport Level II Site Plan Review Attachment ·c· C. Decision: LUA99-189, SA-A, SM Page 10 of 10 The Southport Level II Site Plan Review (LUA99-189, SA-A} is approved. EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECISION ON LAND USE ACTION: July 18, 2000. ~7f3fJ date Land Use Action Appeals APPEAL: This administrative land use decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within 14 days of the effective date of decision. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14 day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-660). An appeal to the Hearing Examiner is governed by Trtle IV, Section 4-8- 11.B, which requires that such appeals be filed directly with the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be made in writing on or before 5:00 PM on August 1, 2000. Any appeal must be accompanied by a $75.00. Specific requirements for the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's office. bit4ii SOUTHPORT HOTEL CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION PLAN (APRIL 23, 2014) CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Construction Dates & Milestones ........................................................................................................................... 2 II. Construction Hours and Days of Operation ..................................................................................................... 2-3 A. Standard Hours ................................................................................................................................... 2 B. Special Hours ..................................................................................................................................... 3 III. Construction Impact Mitigation Plan ..................................................................................................................... 3 A. Traffic & Pedestrian Control Measures ............................................................................................. 3 B. Erosion & Sediment Control Measures .............................................................................................. 3 C. Noise Control Measures .................................................................................................................. 3-5 D. Air Traffic Coordination Measures .................................................................................................... 5 IV. Delivery/ Haul Route ............................................................................................................................................... 5 V. Construction Parking Management ........................................................................................................................ 5 VI. Site Plan .................................................................................................................................................................. 6-7 Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 I. 2 Construction Dates & Milestones \'X7ith acquisition of the appropriate permits, site preparation activities are targeted to start .in August 2014. First occupancy is expected in November 2016. Major construction milestones important to this plan are described below. The general noise control measures outlined in the Construction Noise Management section of this plan apply to the following major construction phases. Additional methods specific to these phases of construction are included in the descriptions of the work. A. Site Grading & Foundations: Site grading & foundation activities are expected to occur from August 2014 to May 2015. Drilling and ground improvement with rock columns v,rill occur at approximately 60 feet from the closest receivers in neighboring commercial office & approximately 60 feet from the nearest neighboring residential building. Drilling and ground improvement work will occur between the hours of 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., Monday through Friday, and Saturday 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. There will be no pile driving on Saturdays per the SEIS. B. Concrete structure: The building structure is primarily concrete. A number of concrete pours will be required to build the structure. A pumping station will be established v.rithin the construction site boundaries. The concrete structure will be built bet\vcen May 2014 and December 2015. C. Steel erection: A portion of the building steel erection is expected to occur in July and August 2015. Steel erection will take place during standard construction hours listed. D. Interior Construction: Exterior closure will be completed in early February 2016, after which most activity on the site will be completing the interior finishes. E. Site Finishes: Site improvements are currently scheduled to occur in the summer of 2016, which will consist oflandscaping and hardscape finishes conducted during standard construction hours listed. F. Insta11ation of Furnishings: Hotel furnishings will be instaJled in September and October of 2016. II. Construction Hours and Days of Operation A. Standard Construction Hours 1. Standard Hours of Construction: The majority of construction activities v;.,jJl be during standard construction hours between 7 a.m. and 4-6 p.m. on non-holiday weekdays, and Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. Limited overtime and shift work is anticipated, which would occur between 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays and on Saturdays between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. Construction workers may arrive at the site prior to standard start times; however, noisy set-up activity will be prohibited prior to 7 a.m. on weekdays, 9 a.m. on Saturdays. Any necessary equipment warm~up prior to standard start times will be coordinated to not disturb neighbors. Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 III. 3 B. Special Construction Hours 1. Special Construction Hours: Special construction hours are not anticipated at this time, however the interior finish phase may require a second shift of work which could occur from 4 p.m. to 11 p.m. on weekdays and Saturdays. This work would occur after the building exterior fa~ade is complete to minimize construction noise. The work will facilitate completion of the interior finishes and installation of hotel furnishings. 2. Holidays: Work is not expected to occur on holidays, defined as: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, day after Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. Any listed holiday that falls on a Sunday shall be observed as a holiday on the following Monday. If any of the listed holidays falls on a Saturday, the preceding Friday shall be a regular workday. Construction Impact Mitigation Plan A. Traffic & Pedestrian Control Measures B. C. 1. Traffic Control Measures: Access to the construction site will be established on the southernmost end of the project site off Bristol Apartment's interior distribution road. This entry/ exit location will minimize construction traffic thereby reducing impacts to surrounding residential/ office pedestrian & vehicle circulation. In addition, signage will be positioned at the construction site entry/ exit. During specific activities requiring continuous work on or near the existing Bristol Apartment distribution roads, traffic control measures such as barriers, signage, and trained flaggers (if required) will be used to address pedestrian and traffic safety. 2. Public Access Easement: The public access easement along the northern boundary of the project may be closed periodically during construction. Proper signage, barriers, and trained flaggers (if required) will be used to address pedestrian safety. The public access easement will be open to the public as best as possible as construction allows. Erosion & Sediment Control Measures 1. Sellen Construction will coordinate with the project Civil Engineer & the City of Renton Development Services Division to develop a site Temporary Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (TESC) as addressed in the SEIS. Noise Control Measures Construction activities shall be conducted in such a manner as to conform to the permissible noise levels in the Noise Ordinance and to the construction noise and vibration management measures approved as part of this plan. Any variations shall be approved through the variance process in the Noise Ordinance. Sellen Construction will use the folluwing technjques to reduce or prevent construction noise impacts and vibration. Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 1. Timing Restrictions: a. Most activities will occur during standard construction hours, which are 7 a.m. to 4-6 p.m. on non-holiday weekdays. 4 b. Impact types of equipment like pavement breakers, jackhammers, and other impulse noise sources will only be used between 7 am and 8 pm weekdays and 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturdays. c. Noise and vibration levels from construction activity will be accomplished as much as possible during standard working hours. Quieter work will be performed during the evening shift, which includes but not limited to; progressive clean-up, small-medium sized material deliveries pre-stocking floors utilizing pallet jacks, taping & finishing GWB, installing insulation, or placing ACT panels. Any work occurring between 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. will be limited to activities that generate little noise (such as daily cleanup) and are within the 60 dBA limit of the Noise Ordinance. 2. Noise Reduction Construction Technologies: a. For large deliveries, Sellen will request select subcontractors and suppliers to outfit their trucks with "Broadband Sound Reversing Alarms" in lieu of "Smart Alarms", or coordinate delivery pathways such that backing up the truck is negated. Broadband Sound Reversing Alarms are preferred backup alarm devices over the Smart Alarms. b. Back-up alarms will not be allowed to operate from 8 p.m. to 7 a.m. on weekdays and before 9 a.m. on Saturdays. 3. Process Modifications: a. Reduce truck noise and audible backup alarms by using a one-way site traffic plan. b. Loud talking or any miscellaneous noisy activities are prohibited before 7 a.m. and after 8 p.m. on weekdays, and before 9 a.m. and after 8 p.m. on Saturdays. c. Sellen Construction will utilize any opportunities for pre-fabrication of construction assemblies at off-site locations that will help minimize on-site manpower and noisy activity. d. The concrete pumping station and concrete deliveries ,vill be located ,vithin the construction site boundary on the far side of the site away from the occupied buildings. All dump and concrete trucks will be queued and receive/ off load materials only within the construction site boundaries. e. A compliance statement for this Construction ~tigation Plan will be included in all subcontracts for this project. f. Structural steel erection may take place during daylight only between 7 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays, and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays. Typical steel erection noise generation levels will not exceed "continual" average hourly value of 75 dBa at SO' distance, but can expect intermittent spikes up to 92 dBa. Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 IV. V. D. 4. Noise Barriers Near On-Site Sources: a. Use of portable sound barriers around generators, compressors and other noise-producing machinery. b. Construction of noise barriers near fixed engines (i.e. pumps). Air Traffic Coordination Measures 5 1. The project requires the use of a tower crane that will be erected on site. Sellen Construction ,vill contact and coordinate erection and dismantle dates with the Ciry of Renton's Airport Manager. 2. Sellen Construction has confirmed that the FAA does in fact need to be notified of the tower crane do to the close proximity of the airport to the West. Sellen will coordinate all FAA notification and registration of the crane's location and period erected. Delivery/ Haul Route The goal of the project's site grading design is to achieve a balanced site, thus minimal soil export or import is anticipated. Whenever possible, excavated material will be stockpiled on site and reused as backfill. Major deliveries anticipated are construction materials to the job site like concrete, steel, mechanical & electrical equipment, exterior materials and furnishings. There is a high probability concrete will come from Stoneway Concrete's plant a few blocks away. Reference the delivery/ haul route from 1-405 to & from the construction site on page# 7 section# 1 (small inset map) of the site logistics plan. Below is a description of the route. Inbound Trucks: 1-405 to Exit 5 Washington 900 E/Park Ave North/Sunset Blvd NE. Head westbound onto NE Park Dr. Turn northbound onto Lake Washington Blvd First stop sign turn left, continue on Lake Washington Blvd to entrance on left to Southport development complex. Turn left into project site off Bristol Apartment interior distribution road. Outbound Trucks: Exit jobsite to right and continue to stop sign on Bristol Apartment distribution road. Turn right onto Lake Washington Blvd. continue to traffic light. Turn left onto NE Park Dr. continue to l-405 onramps. Construction Parking Management Construction personnel parking will be within the construction site boundaries. Reference attached Site Plan. Construction personnel will be prohibited from parking on-street & surrounding apartment/ commercial spaces. Carpooling and other high-occupancy-vehicle modes of transportation \\-rill be encouraged. Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 6 VI. Site Plan See last page # 7 for site logistics plan section #2. Southport Hotel Construction Mitigation Plan -April 23, 2014 <.·,··-~~i/ --,• './ \~,,,' , 0Y .J~--~~--- '/ (1 ~ il' {!) z i;; x \';' /--)' ·,> . ,• ,, , ,•?' r;·></ ,,6, . o-fj/' :<-;,,.(;IN(. :,~·, >--~~B ~~~TS. ®%-''!'\..,. ....... , .. ,. _,,._ f"1R.~ HYDRANT (EX) i , , i r '"---- ~~ATB 1; EXTENTS ,, " ,, ., r~ I' CONSTRUC i IGN 1-1:::.r,cc DUii [).t~G PAD b" G,~A'v'FI vvOR~: SURFACC:: Ll C:Vt,Tl:JN 21'-0" COl'<CRETE PUMP 1.;:1SEIS:S -""': < 00 ; .q CJ MANI.IFT "'"''=' -- ii' ATB EXTENTS . 'j i w u z w ~ L C ~ u ~ r ~ z -...._ ·· HGTEL 8 TO\NC:,1 ~ -------------~--------------~~--( -~--"'<'--""'-'-~"'----='-"--'-~~~~-~~~---.-: __ ,,-- "--EXISTING FENCE ,~, '1r CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT ~ .ti. Page -· .. 11 l.%1t§;11 >2T,,. __ N •o ""'""' ...... -.. ,0(! hl>Oo)611>-"""0 :..:J~21» ••••• SITHE"°" -El03DtGFENC£ POfOTA8LETOll.£T -_1 SIT[OFflCO lMJLCR '"""""""""" sw,..:; ==3 E"OSTIOO S...._,.,,G w e>.,STIOOLANl>SCAlt VHOEROROIJHOTAA•MeJ,, ,IB EJ<C,,W,liO!'<STOC"""-" o~ra""""'" SECO Development. Inc. Southport Hotel Site Logistics Plan --6675.()49 -04/1712014 ·-· ,, -· " SEL-0.01 ..-=ndk;atoo PLANNING, LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 16, 2014 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98055 Subject: Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification Request Dear Rocale: On behalf of Hotel at Southport, LLC I am requesting approval of the attached "Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification". Project Description The Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification includes two residential buildings, three office buildings, a hotel, specialty retail and restaurants, private streets, and a waterfront promenade with a pedestrian walkway connection to Gene Coulon Park. Development levels are:: • Three 125-foot tall office buildings with 7 stories of offices totaling 750,000 square feet above 4 levels of parking; • Two 57-foot tall (per UBC) residential buildings with 4 stories of totaling 383 units above 2 levels of parking; • A hotel 75 tall between 50 and 100 feet of the shoreline and 125 feet tall beyond 100 feet with 350 rooms; and • Specialty retail and restaurants totaling 40,000 square feet. The configuration of the hotel is modified from that shown in the 2008 Master Plan (see discussion of 2008 Master Plan Minor Modification below), with the result that two of the three office buildings have been moved approximately 30 feet south. The size of the office buildings remains unchanged, as does the amount of impervious surface since the entire area is occupied by the office complex in the 2008 Master Plan. The locational relationship of the hotel, office buildings, residential buildings, streets, and promenade remains unchanged from the 2008 Master Plan. Background 2000 Level II Site Plan (File No. LUA189-99. SA-A. SM) A Level II Site Plan is a conceptual master plan showing full development of the site and the phasing of construction. The Level II Site Plan application filed in December of 1999 included the following elements: • Three 125-foot tall office buildings with 7 stories of offices totaling 720,200 square feet above 4 levels of parking (1.855 stalls); • Two SO-foot tall residential buildings with 4 stories of units (a total of 395) above 2 levels of parking (682 stalls); • A 75 foot tall hotel with 7 stories of rooms (105,600 square feet and 220 rooms) above 1 level of parking (220 stalls); and • Specialty retail and restaurants totaling 40.000 square feet. On April 5, 2000 the Director of Development Services determined that the Level II Site Plan was a Plan~e)J Action (see SEPA discussion below). • .. :·,; 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor __ dification Request May 16, 2014 Page 3 of4 SEPA A draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Southport Development Planned Action was issued in June of 1999. A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (FSEIS) for the Southport Development Planned Action was issued on September 9, 1999. In October of 1999 the Renton City Council adopted: amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinance 4802 rezoning the Southport property to Center Office Residential (COR-3); and Ordinance 4804 designating a Planned Action for the 17-acre Southport site. The April 5, 2000 Planned Action designation of the Level II Site Plan is a decision that adequate environmental review was completed under the EIS and further SEPA environmental review of the Level II Site Plan is not required pursuant to WAC 43.21C.031 (2)(a) (letter of April 7, 2000 to Agency Staff from Peter Rosen, Senior Planner/Project Manager for the City of Renton). As noted in the letter and on page 1 of Attachment B to the letter, the development levels in the Level II Site Plan do not follow the development parameters of any single alternative proposed action plan analyzed by the EIS documents but are consistent with the range of plan alternative that were evaluated in the EIS. The conclusion of the City in its February 4, 2008 letter approving the 2008 Master Plan Minor Modification that the modifications "do not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved master plan" is a declaration that the 2008 Master Plan Minor Modification is consistent with the Level II Site Plan. Vesting of Development Regulations In 2006 the Director of Development Services clarified the status of the city's approvals for the Southport Development (see attached letter of May 20, 2006 to Molly Lawrence regarding "Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development"). Regarding development regulations the letter states: "As long as SECO makes application for Site Plan approval for Phase 111, and submits for construction permits for Phase II before the Master Plan expires, those applications will be subject to the development regulations in effect at the time the City approved the Master Plan on July 18, 2000, and not any subsequent modifications to those standards." (page 3 of February 20, 2006 letter) Site Plan Minor Modification Criteria The Master Plan Minor Modification request is made in accordance with the criteria in RMC 4-9-120.H "Minor Adjustments to an Approved Site Plan· in effect at the time of approval of the Level II Site Plan (now Master Plan) which provides that minor modifications may be permitted by administrative determination if the amendment does not: 1. Involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan; or 2. Have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved plan; or 3. Change the boundaries of the originally approved plan. Below is a response to each of the criteria: The modification does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site plan. The only change between the proposed 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification and the 2008 Master Plan that affects the scale of development is a slight reduction in the number of hotel rooms and a corresponding reduction in area devoted to guest rooms and lobbies. Most important, the proposed Minor Modification represents only a 1.5% increase in the scale of development compared to the Southport Level II Site Plan approved in July of 2000 (see Table 1 on the next page). 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor "'1odification Request May 16, 2014 Page 4 of 4 Table 1 Scale of Development Southport Master Plan Southport Minor Modification Southport 2014 Level II Site Plan 2/4/2008 (File No. Master Plan File No LUA99-189, SA-A, Minor Use LUA99-189, SA-A, SM SM) Modification Multifamilv Residential Units 394 383 Multifamily Residential sq.ft.(Units and Lobby) 383,488 321,776 Retail: Specialty sq.ft. 30,000 30,000 Retail: Restaurant sq.ft. 10,000 10,000 Hotel Rooms 220 355 Hotel =.ft. rnuest rooms and lobbies) 105,600 212,502 Commercial sf (office buildings) 720,205 750,000 Total Square Feet All Buildings 1,249,293 1,324,278 The modification does not have a significantly greater impact on the environment and facilities than the approved plan. The only change between the proposed minor modification and the 2008 Master Plan that impacts the environment and facilities is a reduction in the number of hotel rooms and corresponding traffic impacts. The attached traffic study prepared by TENW documents that the PM Peak Hour trips generated by the uses in the Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification are less than the number of PM Peak Hour trips in the 2008 Master Plan and are within the range of PM Peak Hour trips in the Planned Action. As noted by TENW, the 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification does require any mitigation measures beyond those required for the Level II Site Plan approved in 2000. The modification does not change the boundaries of the originally approved plan The boundaries in the "Southport Master Plan Minor Modification" are unchanged from the boundaries in the originally approved Level 2 Site Plan. Based on the information presented above and in the attachments, I request administrative approval of the "Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification". If you have questions about any of the information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, B~{/L~ For Hotel at Southport, LLC Attachments: Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification plan sheet 05.16.14 Southport Master Plan Minor Modification drawing A1 .00, 01/22/08 February 4, 2008 Letter from City of Renton Development Services Division approving Minor Modification Request for Southport Master Plan (File No. LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) May 20, 2006 Letter to Molly Lawrence regarding "Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development" 383 321,776 30,000 10,000 350 156,195 750,000 1,267,971 TENW Southport Transportation Assessment for Master Plan Minor Modifications Request, May 13, 2014 Cc: Michael Christ, President, SECO Development Greg Krape, Development Manager, SECO Development Molly Lawrence, VanNessFeldman 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com I L_ I I I --- I I I I I I I LAKE WASHINGTON --- r--.. --- --- GENE COULON PARK /~7. -. -~ , J It L -~ _{j j. . -~ -~ \" / '--.fllTURE OFFICE BLOG I j .. "-"' I..!{~ ~ . 7· I ··--. -..... ~ •• ~~J ::':,_ --------------~-,; " -~ --' I -·"· I BOflNG RENTON PLANT , I ~.' ~ ........ -:!) l J ~ SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION k:o\LI: l'•C.0- / _/ ·..._....-- PUGET SOUND ENERGY 1:::::~:,:w ~ .... , "~"·~·~·~··-----,~ .... c .. ,c ... c. .. c.,c .. ,c,,C.,,, ...... , .. ,,....:·,•• I '""''' ... .!.~""""'""'"'"'''"' •1 •1 --.~ --W• :~~:~::::.~•"•- '·=,- SoUTIIPOllT ,/'.,,. ~/ ·'·._/ H('OI '.JtH,"1~1.~f. 1'1 MULVAN NY jG2. -···""' SOUTHPORT 2014 MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION 05.16.2014 +=---~ J•-= e~ I """' I~ / I .· . I I I J. -----. /!If .;.,,,--.._ ~ '--rii------- 1 LAKE / WASHINGTON -._ ~ BOEING RENTON PLANT MASTER PLAN Minor Modlflcatoln ~ .f PUGET SOUND ENERGY .. ..... --...... "' .,_( __ _ --· ......... _ ....... _, ,..._ .. .... , .,..,,,,, :-:.:' ..... ., .... 1 ·-·' , ... , .. .,_,, "'""''' ,, ...... , ... -.. , ,._., 1:--··~-., -, ..... , --·· =-~-··------.:-..-,.....,. .. --,...,.,, rs 0 f/J .... 1001u.o, -01/U/U ~ SOUTHPORT MASTER PLAN Minor Modification j .. fl '·/ ALDO Fcbruar) 4. 2008 Biil Stalzer Stalzer and Assoc1a1t~s 603 Stewart Street, Suit<· 419 Seattle. WA 98101 St:RJECT: '.\11!'.0R MODfflC.-\ TIO'.'. REQl:EST FOR SOFfHPORT MASTER PL.-\'\' IF!LI·: '.'.O. LL-\-99-189. SA-A SM1 I am in receipt of your kner and attachments of Januai) 23, 2008, \.~··hc:-e:o }\>U r~qul!st a.ppn:_1vJI of a rnrnor modification u, :he approved master plan for the Southp,m <lev<:lopmcnt. T!J, rcqu,·s1 is summarized belO\\'. Request 1 The offi~c squa.r~ footage ts reduced from 780J)OO square feet to 750.000 square feet. con.si:stcm \!dlh the Le'l.'el I Office Site Plan approved on F~bruary 5. 200 l . ..., The numherofhotcJ roorn."i. is increased from 220 rooms to .~55 rooms. 55 of which could be residential units. This change in,rea,es 1he ,izc of the hod e1rca devoted to guest rooms and lobbies to 212.50~ square feet. 3. The retail area is reduced in sizt:! from 33.000-square feet to 30.000 ~quarc kct. 4. The restaurant siLe 15 in.;rease in stzc from 7,(XlO square feet to 10.000 :;quar, reet. Site Plan Modification Criteria Renton rvtunicipal Code .. Section 4-9-2001. allo"s minor adjustm~nts lo an approved master plan. provided: ) The adjuHmeflf doe:-. nol invohe more than a ten pen.:ent ( 10'7c} increase m area or sca!ii of the development in t)u.• approved site pla11; or ! '!1tr adjustment dot:?S 1101 ha.n~ a significa,u/..,-J)rn1.ter impart on rhc en,.-ironmt'!llLil .:md fiicilities than th,: approwd plan: or 3. 71ie adjustment does not change r}u boundaries of Lh-t: nrigina.lly approved plan. Analvsis of Request The masler plan m<,xiific;.,uons n:qut:s.ccd and as shown m your January 23. 2005, subminals '.lJ\·~ been compared to the master plan (Le,el Tl s.te plan) approved on July 18, 2000. Based or: staff's analysis, I ha,e determined the proposed re\'isions :--;os. l through 4 fas descnbed abo,·e) ---·-----~-. --·--- 1055 South (ir,;.dy Way, R:::n~ua, \\'3.5,i)intton 9S:G:'i"7 @ f~i:,.~t ·.;tP __ ,,.n~ :.Xrocy~ ..,,ah:5Ql, :ill"7o i'.1'* .:<;:Ol,,,11"'<!< ·.··~ l:ZENTON '\h>' .. ,,r, ,..,r ·;HL c~:,,'.'1-. ----------------------····-----.---•·----------···--·--·-·-····•······· H:d St;liL~f Fchru.1ry ~. !GU.' P.::~f') ;Y': .1. do not i1nolve tnorc than a 1(}1;{ chang~: do not have a s1gmf1cantly greater imp..ict on the env1ronmenl and facilities than the approved master platl'. nor dues it change the hound,'!.:-ie . .; ,)t the approved plan. The h;--qut~sted modifications are. therefore~ .:-ooSJ(icred !Ob~ ;ninOT Decision The proposed minor modificalion to the Southport master plan is appron,d. l'h1s determination wiU be. finai unie::;s a wriuen appc~tl nf ~~1i~ udminis~rJ.ti·d~ d,~i~rr.-:ir:{~r:cr. accompa1:ied by the required $7.'iJ~) fihng fee--is filed with the City's Hearing E.,amina \\tlt11:1 14 days of the date of this decision. Should you have any quesuons regarding this determination or the requirements discussed in this let1cr. picasc ..:omac:t Jennifer Henning. Current Planning Manager, at (425) 430-7286. Sincerely, . f ( ' , ! I \Jl(/\ I • ' ·- I f --r-1"- / / ! ' J .I 1 /,; I 11 {/1, I ~· i/ ,.._,._,, ,.,. I ;>;ell Wans. Director Dev~~lopmcnt S(~t'\. ices Di vl:,;ion ..:..:.. Je.r.nifer Hc1:.1dng~ C..i.i:'r~nt Pi.:mnir,_g M.anag~r P~r:it':::. of R~;;.or<l hie Copy· LLA-99-189. SA-A S\t Kathy Keolker, Mayor February 20, 2006 Molly Lawrence Buck & Gordon, LLP 2025 First Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98117 CIT~ 0F RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2006 BUCK & GORDON Subject: Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development Dear Ms. Lawrence: It was good to meet with you and Bill Stalzer earlier this week to discuss your client's (SECO Development) Southpmt project, This letter is intended to memorialize our conv"rsation and clarify the status of the City's approvals for the Southport Development located along Lake Washington between the Boeing industrial complex and Gene Coulon Park. Background The City of Renton approved a Level II Site Plan for the Southport Development on July 18, 2000. 1 That approved Master Plan identified three (3) phases to the Southport Development: the Bristol and the Carling (a.k.a. the Bristol II); a three (3) building office complex with restaurant; and a waterfront hotel. The City and SECO Development (SECO) completed SEPA review for the Southport Master Plan using SEPA's planned action process. RCW 43.2\C.031(2). Through Ordinance 4804, the City reviewed the Southport Master Plan against the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Southport Development and concluded that the Master Plan satisfied each of the City's criteria for coverage as a planned action. Exhibit A to Ordinance 4804 sets fo1th the full scope of SEP A mitigation required to develop the Southport project pursuant to the Master Plan. Since the 2000 Master Plan approval, the City has issued Site Plan approvals for two phases of the Southport Development: • Phase I: The Bristol, a mixed use/residential complex, which was completed and occupied in 2002; and the Carling (a.k.a. the Bristo11I), a mixed use/residential project for which SECO recently made building permit application; 1 In 2003, the City modified its Municipal Code to rename Level I and Level Jl Site Plan approvals. Pursuant to Ordinance 5028, Level II Site Plans are now referred to as Master Plans, and Level I Site Plans are now referred to simply as Site Plans. In an effort lo use current terminology when discussing the Southp011 Development, I have referred 10 the Level JI Site Plan approval as the Master Plan, and any Level I Site Plans as simply Site Plans. -~ --------ll-)5_5_S-.o-u-th_G_,r_a_d_y-\\-'a_y ___ R_c_n_tl)_n_, -\\-,.a-sl-,i-nb-_'i-Dn_9_8_0S-,----·---R E N T Q N. fi'I ,.,,"·''"··-·'"'"''·'°'·' •·•····•·'·-·,Oo•;o< W.•• co .-.• , "' 1111:,:\'...' (;;: T"}'.j: • .. _'. lv1olly Lawrence February 20, 2006 Page 2 of 4 • Phase IT: The three (3) building office complex with restaurant SECO has not yet applied for Site Plan approval for Phase III, the waterfront hotel. Current Status of Southport Master Plan The Southport Master Plan remains valid and in effect. Although the Renton Municipal Code limits the duration of non-phased Master Plans to five (5) years, a similar limitation does not apply tu phased Master Plans such as the Southport Master Plan. The Southport Master Plan will expire 15 years fron the date of onginal approval. Thus, the Southport Master Plan will remain valid and in effect through at least July 18, 2015. As Jong as the subsequent applications to develop the Southport prope1ty conform to the phasing plan identified in the Master Plan, the development regulations in effect at the Lime of the original Master Plan approval will continue to apply to the permitting and development of the outstanding/incomplete components of the project. Subsequent changes in the City's development regulations, including its critical areas ordinance and Shoreline Master Program, will not apply to applications to develop Southport that a.re consistcntwith the Master Plan. If, however, SECO proposes a modification to the Master Plan exceeding the criteria for a minor modification set fmth in Ordinance 4802, Section XXIV, those modifications will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at the time SECO makes application for those non° minor modifications. Further, because.the City previously determined that the Solllhp6rt Master Plan qualified for coverage as a planned action under SEPA, any subsequent applications to develop the property consistent with the Master Plan will also be covered by the Planned Action and will not require additional SEPA review (see Ordinance 4804, Section III.DJ. Again, however, if SECO proposes a non-minor modification to the Master Plan that generates significant environmental impacts tot 2.nrr!yzed in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Southport Development, then the City may require SECO to complete additional environmental review regarding such modifications. Consistent with Ordinance 4804 and WAC J97°1 l- l 72(2)(b), any such future analysis would be limited in scope to the modification and would not require the re-review of any non-motlificJ portions of the Southport project. Based on the above analysis, SECO has until July l 8, 2015, to submit for Site Plan approval for Phase III identified in the Southport Master Program. If SECO docs not submit for Site Plan approval before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan and/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications to develop Phase Ill submitted after that date will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at that time. A1olly Lawrence February 20. 2006 Page 3 of 4 Status of Site Plan Approvals The Site Plans for both Phases I (the Bristol and the Carling (a.ka. Bristol If) and lI (office complex with restaurant) arc still valid and in effect. As noted above, SECO has completed the Bristol, and recently submitted the necessc.ry applications to construct the Carling. Assuming :he City approves those construction permit applications, the City's standard time frames for such permits will apply to those approvals. SECO has not yet submitted constructi011 pem1it applications for Phase IL the office complex and restaurant. The existing Site Plan approval for Phase II will remain valid for the term of the Master Plan. Thus, as long as SECO submits consu-uction permit applications before July l 8, 2015, those applications to complete Phase II will be vested to City codes and development regulations in effect at the time of Master Plan approval. Finally, SECO has not yet submitted an application for Site Plan approval for Phase ITI, the waterfront hotel. SECO has until July 18, 2015, the expiration of the Master Plan, to submit for Site Plan approval for Phase III. The City shall establish the duration of the Site Plan approval for Phase Ill at the time it approves that pe1mit. As stated above, if SECO does not submit for Site Plan approval for PhaseIII before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan and/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications co develop Phase Ill submitted after that date will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at that time. Effect of Recent Code Amendments As you know, the City amended its Shoreline Master Program and rezoned the Southport prope1ty from COR 3 to UC-N2 in 2005. It was not the City's intent that those changes woulu affect the S0uthpo1t Master Plan or any cuD'ent or future Site Plan approvals implementing the Master Plan. As stated above, the Southport Development is vested to the Southport Master Plan through at least July 15, 2015. As Jong as SECO makes application for Site Plan approval for Phase III, and submits for construction permits for Phase II before the Master Plan expires, those applications will be subject to the development regulations in effect at the time the City approved the Master Plan on July 18, 2000, and not any subsequent modifications lo those standards. Building permit applications will, however, be subject to any updates to the International Building and/or the International Fire Code. Similarly, all mechanical, plumbing and electrical pennits will be subject to the technical codes in effect at the time SECO submits a complete application. This determination will be final unless a written appeal of this administ.rative determination - accompanied by Lh.e required $75.00 filing fee -is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. \1h)Ily-Lawr,i,:ncc February 20. 2006 Page 4·of 4 l hope this letter clarifies any questions regarding !he status of the Southport Dicvclopmcnl and the effect of recently adopted code amendments on the Southport Master Plan and implcmcming Site Plans. Please conlacl me if you have any questions or comrnellls at (425) 430-n IS. Sinccrelv, '.' ...... . \.~ .. 'i' ~ritl,tle.,i.vw\ A, I ·u ii ~ ~ l 1 ___J f/!v '"e,, i ,, 7 Neil W mts. Director Development Services llivisi,m cc: rvlic.hacl Christ, President S-ECO Dcvclnpmcnl. Inc. l083 Lake Wa.slring1on I31v1L Suite 50 Rtnton. \VA 98056 Bill Stalzer Stalzer & -~'S\lCiat~s 6-03 Stew;"lrl Street ScoLtle. WA 9Sl0t-l247 \V,1shington S1:uc Depanml!nt of Ecology PO !lox 47600 Olympia. WA 98504-76(Kl Jennifer Jknniiig. P, incip.11 Plaim~r Jill" Di'ng. Associate Plam1er ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest Transportation Assessment DATE: Mayl3,2014 TO: Bill Stalzer Stalzer Associates FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW SUBJECT: Southport Transportation Assessment for Master Plan Minor Modification Request TENW Project No. 4838 The purpose of this document is to provide a transportation assessment of the current Minor Modification Proposal to the approved Southport Master Plan. This document includes a trip generation analysis of the revised land uses in the master plan for the Southport Development and provides a comparison to the results of the PM peak hour trip generation analyses documented in the Master Plan Minor Modification of 2008 and the Level 2 Site Plan (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) of July 18, 2000. Description of Master Plan Minor Modification The current proposed Master Plan Minor Modification has the same land uses as those in the 2000 Level II Site Plan and 2008 Master Plan, but contains a slightly smaller hotel (350 rooms v. 355 rooms) than in the 2008 Master Plan, and larger hotel than the Level II Site Plan. The table below summarizes the land uses in all three Master Plans for the purposes of trip generation comparison. 7 /18/'lfXXJ 2/4/2008 Proposed Master Type Approved Approved Plan Minor Land Use Units Level II Site Plan Master Plan Modification Residential Units 395 383 383 Retail SF 30,000 30,000 30,000 Restaurant SF 10,000 10,000 10,000 Hotel Rooms 220 355• 350 Office SF 750,000 750,000 750,000 • Note: Uo to 50 rooms could be for residential use. I Trip Generation Comparison As stated previously, the Master Plan Minor Modification proposal has the same types of land uses as both previous Master Plans. Detailed PM peak hour trip generation calculations were developed for the the current Minor Modification Proposal, which are provided in the Attachment. Far purposes of comparison, it should be noted that the same version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Transportatio:--1 Planning j Design i Tr:::1f'ic l:,'poct & Opcrotior:s 11400 SE s~ Street, Suite 200. Bellevue. WA 98004 I Office [4251 889-67 47 Transportation Assessment Southport Minor Modification (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 5t11 edition, was used to estimate trip generation for weekday PM peak hour conditions. Pass-by reductions for the retail and restaurant uses were based on rates established in the ITE manual and are the same as previously calculated in the FEIS. Consistent with the methodology in the Southport FEIS, a 10 percent factor was used to estimate the internal "capture" of vehicle trips within the development due to the mix of land uses on the site. As shown in the Attachment, the current Master Plan Minor Modification Proposal is estimated to generate 1,314 net new PM peak hour trips. The 2000 Level 2 Site Plan (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM) with a smaller hotel was estimated to generate 1,252 net new PM peak hour trips. While the current Master Plan Minor Modification proposal would be estimated to generate about 5 percent more PM peak hour trips than the 2000 Level 2 Site Plan, the PM peak hour trip generation is still within the range of PM peak hour trips evaluated in the Southport FEIS (reference: Table 4, page 2-12). Additionally, the net new PM peak hour trip generation for the current Master Plan Minor Modification Proposal is less than the net new PM peak hour trips generated by the 2008 approved Master Plan (based on 5 fewer hotel rooms). Access Consideration Consistent with the criteria for a minor modification to an approved site plan, the boundaries in the approved Southport Master Plan remain unchanged in the minor modification proposal. The vehicle access and established mitigation measures identified in the Southport Mitigation Document remain unchanged related to this minor modification proposal. Summary and Conclusions While the current Master Plan Minor Modification Proposal would generate about 5 percent more PM peak hour than the 2000 Level II Site Plan, the PM peak hour trip generation falls within the range of PM peak hour trip generation evaluated in the Southport FEIS. As a result, no additional transportation analysis or traffic mitigation is anticipated. The measures identified in the Southport Planned Action Mitigation Document mitigate the transportation impacts of the current Master Plan Minor Modification Proposal. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this Transportation Assessment, please feel free to contact me at 425-250-0581or schramm@tenw.com. Attachments: Southport FEIS, Table 4, page 2-12 Southport PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Calculations TENW May 13, 2014 Page2 Transportation Assessment Southport Minor Modification ATTACHMENTS Because of the less than one percent difference 1n total trip generation between Plans C and A and the similar distribution patte,ns. the LOS analysis for Plan A presented ,n Tables 34 and 35 of Hie Draft Supplemental EIS is represent.:itivc of forecasted LOS cond1t1ons under Plan C. As inc!lcated in the Draft Supplemental EIS, with proposed roadway improvements, all ,ntcrsections would operate at acceptable levels of service in 2004, with the exception of the 1-405 at NE 44·.r r.orthbound ramp in the a.m. and p.m. peak-hours, 1-405 at NE: 44·1> southbound rarnp in the a.m. peak-hour, and the 1-405 at N 3ot·· St. northbound ramp in the p.m. peak-hour, which would operate at poor levels of service {LOS E or worse) Such conditions do or will exist at the NE 44" ramps with or w1thout Southport redevelopment. As under Plans A and B. vehicles ex:iting the site during the p.m peak·hour would experience s1gnif1cant delay at the Southport driveway. The level of delay under Plan C would be s1m1lar to tr.at under P!a;1 A and less than under Plan B. ---~-------- Table 4 SOUTHPORT TRIP GENERATION ---------- _ Net New Trips ______ Gr_oss Trips Alternative Entering Exiting Total Entering Exiting Total I A M Peak h'our Plan A 67'1 333 1 005 742 402 i 144 Plan [3 899 374 1 773 9l1 445 1 416 Plan C 715 297 1 012 779 369 1.140 P. M. Pf!ak Hour Pian A 397 664 479 l38 1.217 Plan 6 454 901 538 917 l 515 Plan C ~F3 685 448 755 1 203 Daily Tot<lf Plan A 4 684 4 583 9 367 5.604 5.503 11,207 Plan B :.501 5.601 11.202 6.5-13 6,:A3 n.G86 Plan C 4 722 4,721 9 443 5,586 5,586 11172 i S<.hJ'Ol E1t1anw. 19qg . _________ ,_J Southport Dev~lopmont Planned Action Final Supp/1H11enta/ EIS 2.12 Changes to Proposed Action Transportation Assessment Southport Minor Modification Southoort Trio Generation Estimate for Level II Site Plan (July 2000) PM Peak Hour 6th Edition Trips Generated fTE Direction Splits fTE Area/Land Use Area Units 1 LUC 2 In Out Trip Rate 2 In Out Proposed Uses RETAIL 30,000 GLA 814 43% 57% 2.59 34 44 Internal Trips 3 10% -4 -4 Pass-by 3 20% -7 -7 Subtotal= 23 33 QUALITY RETAURANT 10,000 GFA 831 67% 33% 7.49 50 25 JntemaJ Trips 10% -4 -4 Pass-by3 33% -11 -11 Subtotal= 35 10 APARlMENT 395 Units 2201230 67% 33% 0.58 153 76 Internal Trips 10% -12 -12 Subtotal= 141 64 HOTEL (83% occupied) 220 Rooms 310 49% 51% 0.71 64 66 Internal Trips 10% -7 -7 Subtotal= 58 60 OFFICE 750,000 GFA 710 17% 83% equation 156 764 Internal Trips 10% -46 -46 Subtotal= 110 718 Total Proposed Gross Trips= 457 975 Lass Total Internal Trips = -72 -72 Less Total Pass-by Trips = -18 -18 Total Proposed Net New P.M. Peak Hour Trips Generated = 367 885 Notes: 1 GFA is Gross Floor Area, GLA is Gross Leasable Area. 2 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, year 1997. 3 Pass-by percent and internal trip percent based on 1999 EIS. Total 78 -8 -14 56 75 -8 -22 46 229 -24 205 130 -13 117 920 -92 828 1,432 -144 -36 Transportation Assessment Southport Minor Modification Southoort Trio Generation Estimate for Master Plan Minor Modification Prooosal PM Peak Hour 6th Edition Trips Generated ITE Direction Splits ITE Area/Land Use Area Units 1 LUC' In Out Trip Rate 2 In Out Total Proposed Uses RETAIL 30,000 GLA 814 43% 57% 2.59 34 44 78 Internal Trips 3 10% 4 4 -8 Pass-by 3 20% -7 -7 -14 Subtotal= 23 33 56 QUALllY RETAURANT 10,000 GFA 831 67% 33% 7.49 50 25 75 Internal Trips 10% 4 4 -8 Pass-by 3 33% -11 -11 -22 Subtotal= 35 10 46 APARTMENT 383 Units 220/230 67% 33% 0.58 149 73 222 Internal Trips 10% -12 -12 -23 Subtotal= 137 61 199 HOTEL (83% occupied) 350 Rooms 310 49% 51% 0.71 101 105 206 Internal Trips 10% -10 -10 -21 Subtotal= 91 95 185 OFFICE 750,000 GFA 710 17% 83% equation 156 764 920 Internal Trips 10% 45 46 -92 Subtotal= 110 718 828 Total Proposed Gross Trips= 490 1,011 1,501 Less Total Internal Trips = -76 -76 -151 Less Total Pass-by Trips = -18 -18 -36 Total Proposed Net New P.M. Peak Hour Trips Generated= 396 917 Notes: 1 GF A is Gross Floor Area, GLA is Gross Leasab1e Area. 2 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, year 1997. 3 Pass-by percent and internal trip percent based on 1999 EIS. PLANNING, ;...A\D USE AND DE\/ELOVi"!ENT SER'JICES May 16, 2014 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 Subject: Sou1hport 2014 Master Plan Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Dear Roca le: -,,\' On behalf of Hotel at Southport, LLC I am requesting approval of a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) for the Southport 2014 Master Plan. Background SECO Development filed an application for a SSDP for a Level II Site Plan for the Southport Development on · December 27, 1999 (LUA99-189, SA-A, SM). The Level II Site Plan was designated a SEPA Planned Action by the City on April 5, 2000; therefore, no additional environmental review was required for the SSDP. The City issued the SSDP for the Level II Site Plan on April 7, 2000 and the Washington State Department of Ecology declared the official filing date as May 3, 2000 (SOP #2000-NW-40003). No appeals were filed. The SSDP required that the applicant record a public access easement for public access to the promenade along Lake Washington. Pedestrian Walkway Easement Agreements were recorded in King County on October 21, 2005 for Lot 1(Recording No. 20051021000894), Lot 2 (Recording No. 20051021000895) and Lot 4 (Recording No. 20051021000896). The Southport Level II Site Plan SSDP permits three 125-foot tall office buildings with 7 stories of offices totaling 720,200 square feet above 4 levels of parking (1,855 stalls); two 50-foot tall residential buildings with 4 stories of units (a total of 395) above 2 levels of parking (682 stalls); a 75 foot tall hotel with 7 stories of rooms (a total of 220 rooms and 105,600 square feet) above 1 level of parking (220 stalls); specialty retail and restaurants totaling 40,000 square feet; a promenade along the Lake Washington waterfront connected to Gene Coulon Park; and off-site transportation improvements. Portions of one of the residential buildings and one of the office buildings are located within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction, as is the hotel. The residential building has a staggered setback of 35 feet and 50 feet from the ordinary high water mark, and the hotel is set back 50 feet from the ordinary high water mark, both as required by the 2000 City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. The office building is set back over 50 feet from the ordinary high water mark, as required. The building setbacks comply with City Shoreline regulations, zoning requirements, and mitigation measures imposed as part of the SEPA Planned Action. 2008 Master Plan Minor Modification The City approved a minor modification to the Level II Site Plan (now Master Plan) on February 4, 2008. As modified, the Master Plan permits two 50 foot tall multifamily residential buildings with a total of 383 units; three 125 foot tall office buildings with a total of 750,000 square feet of offices; a 75 and 125 foot tall hotel with 355 rooms (212,502 square feet); 40,000 square feet of retail space, 30,000 square feet for general use retail and 10,000 square feet for restaurants; a promenade along the Lake Washington waterfront including a trail connection to Gene Coulon Park; and off-site transportation improvements. Building setbacks from the ordinary high water mark were unchanged from the 2000 Level II Site Plan SSDP. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport Master Plan Shoreline f antial Development Permit May 16, 2014 Page 2 of 6 Neither the City nor SECO identified at the time of the 2008 Master Plan Minor Modification the need to amend the SSDP for the Level II Site Plan. The purpose of this application is to update, through a new Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, the approval to capture the 2008 amendments to the Master Plan, as well as the additional modifications to the 2000 Master Plan currently proposed. Development Description There are two differences between the 2000 Level II Site Plan SSDP and the 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification SSDP: • The configuration of the hotel has been modified slightly resulting in two of the three office buildings being moved approximately 30 feet away from the shoreline, the result of which is that none of the three office buildings are within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. • The height of the portion of the hotel building that is between 100 feet and 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark has been increased from 75 feet to 125 feet as permitted by the COR-3 zoning. Review Criteria The City relies on the permit criteria set forth in the Washington Administrative Code (YJAC) in evaluating shoreline substantial development permits. The applicable criteria include: WAC 173-27-140 Review Criteria for All Development (1) No authorization to undertake use or development on shorelines of the state shall be granted by the local government unless upon review the use or development is determined to be consistent with the policy and provisions of the Shoreline Management Act and the master program. (2) No permit shall be issued for any new or expanded building or structure of more than thirty- five feet above average grade level on shorelines of the state that will obstruct the view of a substantial number of residences on areas adjoining such shorelines except where a master program does not prohibit the same and then only when overriding considerations of the public interest will be served. WAC 173-27-150 Review Criteria for Substantial Development Permits (1) A substantial development permit shall be granted only when the development proposed is consistent with: (a) The policies and procedures of the act; (b) The provisions of this regulation; and (c) The applicable master program adopted or approved for the area ..... (2) Local government may attach conditions to the approval of permits as necessary to assure consistency of the project with the act and the local master program. It is important to note and acknowledge that the City previously approved the Level II Site Plan SSDP under the same criteria and Shoreline Master Program as applies to this application. Consequently, while this application does review the consistency of the overall Master Site Plan (as modified) with the relevant SSDP criteria, this application also relies upon the prior SSDP for the rationale supporting all components of the Master Plan to support approval. The rationale set forth below focuses on the single project component not previously evaluated. In this case, the change is limited to an increase in the height of the hotel building in the area set back between 100-200 feet from the OHWM. Compliance with City of Renton Shoreline Master Program The Southport development is vested to the development regulations of July 18, 2000 which includes the City's Shoreline Master Program (see attached letter of February 20, 2006 regarding the status of approvals for the Southport Development). The Southport 2014 Master Plan is consistent with the following policies of the 2000 City of Renton Shoreline Master Program: 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport Master Plan Shoreline f' May 16, 2014 Page 3 016 antial Development Permit Economic Policy 4. 01. 02.A.5. Multiple use of shorelines should be planned where location and integration of compatible uses or activities are feasible. Response: The Master Plan integrates several uses, including the hotel (a water-oriented use) with residential buildings, offices, and retail uses, some of which are within the shoreline jurisdiction and some of which are upland of It. These uses are connected with a promenade and sidewalk system that links residential buildings, the hotel, offices, and retail uses to a waterfront pedestrian walkway that in turns connects to the adjacent Gene Coulon Park. Economic Policy 4.01.02.A.6. Aesthetic considerations should be encouraged when contemplating new development, extensive redevelopment of existing facilities or for general enhancement of shoreline areas. Response: Buildings on the Southport development site are subject to the Special Development Standards for buildings in the COR-3 Zone in RMC 4-2-120B and to the design criteria in RMC 4-9- 250D. Economic Policy 4. 02. 02.B. Existing and future activities on all shorelines of the state regulated by the City of Renton should be designed to minimize adverse effects on the environment. Response: The Master Plan has been designed in accordance with the City of Renton standards (see response to Economic Policy 4.02.02.A.6 above) and the mitigation measures in the Southport EIS to minimize adverse effects on the environment. Economic Policy 4.03.02.A Economic uses and activities which are not water--0riented should be discouraged. In those instances where such uses or activities are permitted, public access to and along the water's edge should be provided. Response: The waterfront promenade provides public access along Lake Washington for the office buildings and the multifamily residential buildings. Economic Policy 4.03.02.81 Economic uses and activities should locate the water--0riented portion of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. Response: The promenade, hotel, and one of the residential buildings are located closest to the shoreline, and the office buildings and second residential building are located inland. Economic Policy 4.03. 02. C Multiple use of economic developments on the shoreline should be encouraged to provide public recreational opportunities wherever feasible. Response: A promenade including a trail connection and fishing opportunities is provided along the entire length of the shoreline frontage and connects to the adjacent Gene Coulon Park. Public Access Policy 4. 04. E Public access from public streets shall be made available over public property or by easement. Response: Vehicular access is provided from the closest public street, Lake Washington Boulevard NE, to the Southport development. Pedestrian access is provided along a portion of the streets adjacent to the Southport property. A continuous pedestrian system within the Southport development provides access to the waterfront and to Gene Coulon Park. Public Access Policy 4.04.F Future mufti-family, planned unit developments, subdivisions, commercial and industrial developments shall be encouraged to provide public access along the water's edge. Response: See response to Economic Policy 4.03.02.A above. Public Access Policy 4.04.I High-rise structures in the shoreline jurisdiction generally should not be permitted, but could be permitted in the shoreline jurisdiction if: 1. Views of the shoreline would not be substantially obstructed due to topographic conditions, and 2. Some overriding considerations of the public interest would be served. Shoreline low-rise development should provide substantial grade level views of the water from public shoreline roads running generally parallel to the water's edge. Response: The City approved the 125-foot office use within the shoreline jurisdiction as part of the 2000 SSDP. Figures 17-20 in the City's May 3, 2000 letter (attached) to the Department of Ecology include a hotel 75 feet in height and office buildings 125 feet in height, and clear1y indicate that no 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport Master Plan Shoreline S May 16, 2014 1ntial Development Permit Page 4 of 6 views of the shoreline are obstructed by either the hotel or the office buildings south of the hotel. As the City noted in their May 3, 2000 response to the Department of Ecology's comments regarding view impacts: "there will not be any views from residential areas or public areas obstructed." The same is true with the proposed hotel. In its May, 2000 letter the city also noted numerous overriding considerations of the public interest that would be served by the Southport development including: • Conversion of a prior industrial use to a mixed-use development; • Provision of open space, a waterfront promenade and public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington; • A trail easement connecting to Gene Coulon Park; and • Creation of new jobs. Furthennore, the proposed design is more consistent with the SMP than the hotel design previously approved as part of the 2000 SSDP. Specifically, as currently proposed, the hotel will have a much lower presence along the waterfront and less of a view impact than the conceptual hotel envisioned in the 2000 Level II Site Plan SSDP. Instead of being a continuous 75 feet tall with 10 foot setbacks above the fifth story, a large terrace along the north frontage will be located approximately 28 feet above ground-level and occupy nearly 50% of the hotel's waterfront frontage. The C-shaped portion of the hotel between 50 and 100 feet of the shoreline has two 75-foot high wings separated by a wide deep central terrace also approximately 28 feet above ground-level and topped by two large, 50 foot deep rooftop terraces. The terraces provide visual access to the waterfront and territorial views. The wings of the 125-foot tall portion of the C-shaped building are set back 100 feet from the shoreline as pennitted by the COR-3 zoning while the central portion is set back approximately 145 feet from the shoreline. The 125 foot high portion is oriented to an internal street shared with the office buildings and not to the shoreline side of the site. Figures 2-5 included with this letter show the revised hotel inserted into current photographs taken from the same locations as in Figures 17-20. No views of the shoreline are obstructed by the increased height of the hotel. As in Figures 17-20, the three 125 foot high office buildings will block views of the hotel, and of the shoreline, from Park Avenue (Figure 5); the Bristol 1 residential building blocks views from the playground in Gene Coulon Park (Figure 4); trees obstruct views of the development from Jones Avenue NE at 14"' Street (Figure 1); and the hotel remains essentially indistinguishable from the tall office buildings in the view from the dock at Gene Coulon Park (Figure 3). Overall, the views from nearby surrounding areas are the same as for the Level II Site Plan approved in 2000. Finally, a hotel is a water-oriented use and the design and increased number of hotel rooms in the 2014 Master Plan compared to the hotel in the Level II Site Plan provide the following additional considerations of the public interest: • The increased number of guest rooms allow more people to use and enjoy the Lake Washington waterfront and Gene Coulon Park than the previous hotel • The large terraces on the waterfront side of the building enable the public and hotel guests to enjoy visual access to the waterfront year-round • A 350 room hotel creates more jobs than a 220 room hotel Public Access Policy 4.04.J Both passive and active public areas shall be designed and provided. Response: The pedestrian walkway and promenade provides both active and passive opportunities: a trail connection to Gene Coulon Park and seating areas. The hotel location provides opportunities for visual access to the shoreline, Lake Washington, and distant vistas. Public Access Policy 4.04.K In order to encourage public use of the shoreline corridor, public parking shall be provided at frequent locations. Response: Public parking is provided along the internal streets of the development and in the parking lot located outside of the shoreline jurisdiction. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport Master Plan Shoreline S antial Development Permit May 16, 2014 Page 5 of6 Public Access Policy 4.04.M In planning for public access, emphasis should be placed on foot and bicycle paths rather than roads, except in areas where public boat launching would be desirable. Response: Emphasis is on pedestrian and bicycle access to the shoreline via the sidewalk system, the pedestrian walkway connection to Gene Coulon Park, and building entrances. No vehicular access is provided to the shoreline except for emergency vehicles. Recreation Goal 4.05.01 Water-oriented recreational activities available to the public are to be encouraged. Response: The pedestrian walkway is a water-oriented recreational activity. Recreation Policy 4.05.02.A. 1. Accessibility to the water's edge should be improved. Response: The promenade provides access to the water's edge. Recreation Policy 4.05.02.A.4. Both passive and active recreational areas shall be provided. Response: The pedestrian walkway and benches provide both active and passive recreational areas. Circulation Goal 4. 06. 01 Minimize motor vehicular traffic and encourage pedestrian traffic within the shorelines Response: No public vehicular access is permitted along the shoreline and almost the entire vehicular circulation system including garage entrances are located outside of the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. Only pedestrian and bicycle traffic is allowed along the shoreline area. Circulation Policy 4. 06. 02. C Pedestrian and bicycle pathways, including provisions for maintenance, pertain and security, should be developed. Response: Maintenance and operation provisions are included in the pedestrian walkway easement. Circulation Policy 4. 06. 02. C. 1 Access points to and along the shoreline should be linked by pedestrian and bicycle paths. Response: The multi-purpose promenade connects to the pathway in the adjacent Gene Coulon Parle The Southport Master Plan meets the following General Use Regulations in the 2000 Shoreline Master Program: General Use Regulation 6. 03. 01 The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, nearby, and possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: Response: A. View Obstruction: The Southport EIS and existing SSDP analyzed view impacts. Also see the response to Public Access Policy 4.04.01 above. 8. Community Disturbances: The Southport EIS analyzed impacts and included mitigations as necessary related to air quality, water, noise, aesthetics, light, glare, and transportation. C. Design Theme: As noted in the Compatibility section of the Upper Story Setbacks Modification Request, the design of the hotel is compatible with the nearby Bristol I residential building, Boeing industrial building, and three office buildings). D. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Refuse areas are located within buildings and/or screened from view. E. Outdoor Activities: No outdoor activities are proposed. No outdoor storage areas are proposed within the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. General Use Regulation 6.04.01 IN/Jere possible, space and right-of-way shalt be left available on the immediate shoreline so that trails, non-motorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may be developed providing greater shoreline utilization. Response: The promenade area is available for use by pedestrians and bicyclists. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com Southport Master Plan Shoreline S May 16, 2014 Page 6 of6 1ntial Development Permit General Use Regulation 6.05.01 Where feasible, shoreline developments shall locate the water-dependent, water-related and water-enjoyment portions of their developments along the shoreline and place all other facilities inland. Response: The hotel, which is a water-related use, occupies over 50% of the width of the shoreline jurisdiction within the Southport development. A restaurant, which is a water-oriented use, is approved for part of the ground-level portion of one of the mixed-use residential/commercial buildings located within the shoreline jurisdiction. The other mixed use residential/commercial building and the office buildings are located outside of the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. General Use Regulations 6. 06 Landscaping Response: There is no landscaping proposed between the buildings and the shoreline. Specific Use Regulations 7. 05 Commercial Developments Specific Use Regulation 7.05.01.C. Commercial developments should incorporate recreational opportunities along the shoreline for the general public. Response: The promenade is an area located along the shoreline for use by the general public. Specific Use Regulation 7.05.01.D. The applicant for a shoreline development permit for a new commercial development must indicate in his application the effect which the proposed commercial development will have upon the scenic view prevailing in the given area. Specifically, the applicant must state in his permit what steps have been taken in the design of the proposed commercial development to reduce to a minimum interference with the scenic view enjoyed by any significant number of people in the area. Response: As noted in the response to the Modulation and Articulation requirement of RMC 4-2- 120B and the Upper Story Setbacks Modification Request, numerous steps have been taken in the design of the overall height and mass of the hotel to create a building of superior design that is compatible with its surroundings. Even though the hotel and shoreline are not visible to a significant number of people in the area, it will not interfere with the scenic views, nor will it obstruct views of the shoreline from residential or public areas. Based on the infonnation presented above and in the Attachments, I request that you approve a Shoreline Substantial Development Pennit for the Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification. If you have questions about any of the infonnation, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, b,;t/~ Bill Stalzer For Hotel at Southport LLC Attachments Figure 1: Southport 2014 Master Plan Minor Modification plan sheet 05.16.14 May 20, 2006 Letter to Molly Lawrence regarding "Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development" May 3, 2000 Letter from City of Renton to Department of Ecology and FSEIS Figures 17-20 View Figures 2-5 Cc: Michael Christ, President, SECO Development Greg Krape, Development Manager, SECO Development Molly Lawrence, VanNessFeldman 603 stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzer@seanet.com I I l_ I I ------ r---- ------I I I I I I I --~ATl'IU LAKE WASHINGTON ----------- ·-·-- ---- BOBNG RENTON PLANT FIGURE 1: MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION MAY 2014 IICl,l,,li: ,·~-.(I' GENE COULON PARK FUTURE OFFICE BL ~ -~ PUGET SOUND ENERGY •1•1 G-'ICl~AUI / / / /\ _,/ \~ ,/ ~._...-~ Sou nu>o n T ""~> ,, , o u" ru,e,u.• T. I" Ml/LVANNYjG2 . .....,,., .... ,,.1 FIGURE 1: MASTER PLAN MINOR MODIFICATION MAY 2014 05.16.2014 +- JmS=: F~'.::, Kathy KeoJker. Mayor February 20, 2006 Molly Lawrence Buck & Gordon, LLP 2025 First Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98117 CIT't_ 0F RENTON Planning/Building/PublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2006 BUCK & GORDON Subject: Status of City of Renton Approvals for Southport Development Dear Ms. Lawrence: It was good to mecl with you and Bill Stalzer earlier this week to discuss your client's (SECO Development) Southpo1t project. This letter is intended to memorialize our conversation and clarify the status of the City's approvals for the Southport Development located along Lake Washington between the Boeing industrial complex and Gene Coulon Park. Backgrotmd The City of Renton approved a Level II Site Plan for the Southport Development on July 18, 2000.1 That approved Master Plan identified three (3) phases to the Southport Development: the Bristol and the Carling (a.k.a. the Bristol II); a three (3) building office complex with restaurant; and a waterfront hotel. The City and SECO Development (SECO) completed SEPA review for the Southpo11 Master Plan using SEP A's planned action process. RCW 43.21 C.031 (2). Through Ordinance 4804, the City reviewed the Southport Master Plan against the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Southport Development and concluded that the Master Plan satisfied each of the City's criteria for coverage as a planned action .. Exhibit A to Ordinance 4804 sets forth the full scope of SEPA mitigation required to develop the Southport project pursuant to the Master Plan. Since the 2000 Master Plan approval, the City has issued Site Plan approvals for two phases of the Southport Development: • Phase I: The Bristol, a mixed use/residential complex, which was completed and occupied in 2002; and the Carling (a.k.a. the Bristol ill, a mixed use/residential project for which SECO recently made building permit application; 1 In 2003, the City modified its Municipal Code to rename Level I and Level II Site Plan approvals. Pursuant to Ordinance 5028. Level II Site Plans are now referred to as Master Plans, and Level I Site Plans are now referred to simply as Site Plans. In an effort to use current terminology when discussing the Southport Development, I have referred ro the Level II Site Plan approval as the Master Plan, and any Level l Site Plans as simply Site Plans. --------l0_5_5_S_o_ut_h_G_n_a-dy-.,-,-,a-y---R-c-nt-,,-n,-,-.V-a.-sh-,i,-,g-,,-_m_9_Sn-,5-,-------~ 1,fo\ly Lawn·.:nc~ February 20, 2006 Page 2 of 4 • Phase ll: The three (3) building office complex with restaurant. SECO has not yet applied for Site Plan approval for Phase III, the waterfront hotel. Current Status of ;,..9uthport Master Plan The Southport Master Plan remains valid and in effect. Although the Renton Municipal Code l1mits the duration of non-phased Master Plans to five (5) years, a similar limitation does not apply tu phased Master Plans such as the Southport Mastc,r Plan. The Southp01t Master Plan will expire 15 years fror.1 the date of original approval. Thus, the Southport Master Plan will remain valid and in effect through at least July 18, 2015. As Jong as the subsequent applications to develop the Southport property confmm to the phasing plan identified in the Master Plan, the development regulations in effect at the time of the original Master Plan approval will continue to apply to the permitting and development of the outstanding/incomplete components of the project. Subsequent changes in the City's development regulations, including its critical areas ordinance and Shoreline Master Program, will not apply to applications to develop Southport that arc consistent with the Master Plan. If, however, SECO proposes a modification to the Master.Plan exceeding the criteria for a minor modification set forth in Ordinance 4802, Section XXIV, those modifications will be subject to the City's devdopment regulations in effect at the time SECO makes application for those non- minor modifications. Further, because the City previously determined that the Southport Master Plan qualified for coverage as a planned action under SEPA, any subsequent applications to develop the property consistcn: with the Master Planwill·also be covered by the Planned Action and will not require additional SEPA review (see Ordinance 4804, Section III.DJ. Again, however, if SECO proposes a non-minor modification to the Master Plan that generates significant environmental impacts noran~iyzed in the .Supplemental Environr.1cntal Impact Statement pre·pared for the Southport Development, then the City may require SECO to complete additional environmental review regarding such modifications. Consistent with Ordinance 4804 and WAC l 97-l l- l72(2)(b ), any such foture analysis would he limited in scope to the modification and would not require the re-review of any non-modified portions of the Southport project. Based on the above analysis, SECO has until July 1 S, 2015, to submit for Site Plan approval for Phase III identified in the Southport Master Program. If SECO does not submit for Site Plan approval before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan and/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications to develop Phase III submitted after that date will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at that time. i\1olly L:1 ·.vrencc February 20, 2006 Page 3 cf 4 Status of Site Plan Approvals The Site Plans for both Phases I (the Bristol and the Carling (a.ka, Bristol II) and II (office complex with restaurant) are still valid and in effect As noted above, SECO has completed the Bristol, and recently submitted the necessary applications to construct the Carling. Assuming the City approves those construction permit applications, the City's standard time frames for such permits will apply to those approvals. SECO has not yetsubmitted construction pem1it applications for Phase IL the office complex and restaurant. The existing Site Plan approval for Phase II will remain valid for the te1m of the Master Plan. Thus, as long as SECO submits construction permit applications before July 18, 2015, those applications to complete Phase JI will be vested to City codes and development regulations in effect at the time of Master Plan approval. Finally, SECO has not yet submitted an application for Site Plan approval for Phase ITI, the waterfront hotel. SECO has until July 18, 2015, the expiration of the Master Plan, to submit for Site Plan approval for Phase III. The City shall establish the duration of the Site Plan approval for Phase III at the time it approves that pe1mit. As stated above, if SECO does not submit for Site Plan approval for Phase III before this 2015 deadline, and the City and SECO have not extended the duration of the Master Plan and/or entered into a development agreement effectively extending the duration of the Master Plan, then any subsequent applications co develop Phase Ill submitted after that date will be subject to the City's development regulations in effect at that time. Effect of Recent Code Amendments As youknow, the City amended its Shoreline Master Program and rezoned the Southport property from COR 3 to UC-N2 in 2005. It was not the City's intent that those changes would affect the S0uthpo1t Master Plan or any current or future Siie Plan approvals implementing the Master Plan. As stated above, the Southport Development is vested to the Southport Master Plan through at least July 15, 2015. As Jong as SECO makes application for Site Plan approval for Phase III, and submits for construction permits for Phase II before the Master Plan expires, those applications will be subject to the development regulations in effect at the time the City approved the Master Plan on July 18, 2000, and not any subsequent modifications to those standards. Building pennit applications will, however, be subject to any updates to the International Building and/or the International Fire Code. Similarly, all mechanical, plumbing and electrical pennits will be subject to the technical codes in effect at the time SECO submits a complete application. This determination will be final unless a written appeal of this administrative determination - accompanied by the required $75.00 filing fee -is filed with the City's Hearing Examiner within 14 days of the date of this decision. ),,folly-Lawrence February 20. 2006 Page:: 4.1._1f 4 I hope this letter clarifies any questions re.garding the status of the Southport Development and the cffoct of recently adopted code amendments on the Southport Master Plan and impkmcnting Site Plans. Please conrnc1 mo. if you have any ques1ions or comments at (425) 430-72 l S. Sincere\ y, . • , , ':. _ \ ~. ·, · i r 4 Gf.ti, l 1 ivvVV\ i::,, • , I '0 ii 'N \~ ll __) ! vV l'l0{ V ,, 7 Neil Walts. Director Development Services Di vision cc: ~·1ichael Christ. President SECO Dcve.Jopmcnt. lnc. l083 Lake \Va.shingwn I3h-'t.L. Sl1ltt 50 Renton. \-VA 98056 Bill Stalz.cr St.ilzcr &. A~soc.:iat~s 603 Stewart Street Scal!le .. WA 98101-1247 \Va·shington S1atc Department nf Ecok)gy PO Box 47600 Olympia.WA 98504' 7600 Je."nnifcf_ Hc;nning. Principal Plannei- Jill_Ding. ·Associate Planner May3,2000 K-Y Su Dq,aitmcnt of r;cology Northwest Regional Office 3190-160"' Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 Planning/Building/Public Works Departn1ent Gregg Zimmerman .P.E., Administrator Re: Southport Lc,•el 2 Site Plan, LUA99-189, SA-A Depamnent of Ecology Shoreline SDP #2000-NW-40003 Dear Mr. Su 'lliis letter is written in response to Ms. Marcia Gcidel's letter of May I, 2000, requesting additional infurmation. I trust that this correspondence will address her, and your, concerns regarding the Southport Shoreline SDP. The City of Renton has designated Southport is a Planned Action site (approved by the City Council October 11, 1999). Under RCW 43.21C.03 l, GMA cities may designate a "planned action." A Planned Action, by definition (WAC l 97-ll- 164(b),(bii), and (I)), has "had the significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an EIS prepared in conjunction with -· a master planned development ... and is cons/steni with a comprehensive plan adapred under chap/er 36. 70A RCW:" 'The Southport project meets the criteria of a Planned Action. · As you mow, the prima,y pmpose of a Plarux:d Action is to address lhe environmental impacts "llp front," during the planning process, rather 1han laler, at the penniJ: application stage. The puq,ose oflhis is to =re that detailed design reflects the environmental review. Additionally, the intention is to avoid jurisdictional duplication of review. The Southport project was extensively reviewed for environmental impacts in the "Southport Development Planned Action Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement," June 1999, and "Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement," September 9, 1999. It is my understanding that the Department of Ecology was invol.ved in that review. Tue City ofRen!On developed a Mitigation Document based on the Final SEIS. Neither the adequacy of the Mitigation Document nor the Final SElA were appealed and they have subsequently been adopted. · Both of the issues Ms_ Geidel ~d, setbacks and building height as it relates to views, were extensively studied in the SEIS. The.following is a. summary of those issues: 1. Setbacks from Ordinary High Water Mruk. Building 'B' is· intended for residential, relail, and parlcing uses_ The west side of the building. racing Lake W asbington, is within 1he setback area for commercial u=. The _location of the commercial use in Building 'B', however, is on the east side of the building, adjacent to the street, and therefore is beyond the minimum setback for commercial uses. The residential uses face the water. The thirty-five foot (35 ') setback fur this building exceeds the minimum setback for residential uses, twenty- five feet (25 '), and ensures that the coaunerciaVrctail use is beyond the commercial use setback area. ---------------·----··----- 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98055 G.'11. :__. • • . .. -- K-Y Su !Jellevue, WA 98008-5452 May J, 2000 Page2 2. BuJ!run&J:!.i:ig!!!. The City of Renton Shoreline Master Program specifically does !JPJ regulate buildings below seventy-five feet (75') in height (SMP 4.04.021). The defmition of "high-rise" building is, "a structutc exceeding seventy-five (75) feet in height" (SMP 9.20). Regardless, extensive view impact studies from various points in the city were completed as part of the SEIS (see attachments). 111e project is not adjacent to, nor near, residentially z.cmed areas or areas of current residential use (see zoning maps included herewith). While it is likely that views from areas oftbe city that are at higher elevations will be affected, there will 11.9\ be any vicwi;from residential areas or public areas obstructed. As an aside, it should be noted that the Shuffieton Plant that will be dt.'1Ilolishcd for this project, currently stattds at approximately 135' (with 90' building height). ·n.e City of Renton believes public benefits from this project arc many. The industrial nature of tbe property, now paved and void of landscaping, will be completely changed in character through its conversion from industrial use. 1be project will provide open space, a waterfront promenade, and public access to the shoreline of Lake Washington (the property has been closed to public access). The trail easement that will be provided by the Southport developer offers the opportunity to link the Gene Couloi, trail with a trail across the Boeing property to the west. Without this access the Lake Washington waterfront trail V'.'Otlld be discontinuous. The convcr~ion of the property from industrial use to job-generating and residential land uses would help, to a significaot degree, meet the City's employment and housing targets foe its forecasted population increases. I hope this letter has clarified the issues raised in Ms. Geidel's letter. Please contact me at 425- 430-7382, if you have additional questions. Sincerely ;:::/~~ Elizabeth River Higgins, AICP Senior Planner Enclosures Copy to: Ray Hellwig Gregg Zimmerman Sue Carlson I~ ~- 1 :;; Sou n.~: N.,ku10 Assuda tes Hucke/1/Weinman Associates, Inc. Southport Development Planned Acti on Figu.re 17 (corrected) View from Jones Ave. N.E. at 14th Street Plan B ,, S;>u rc t.. N ak.·1n11 >\~,,·•n, L ~t f'), Huckell!Weinman Associates, Inc . ~f}~:~<{:~1:{1~=:··.· ----------· -•. ,..,, S0uthp01t Developmc.~nt Planned Action Figure '18 ( co r rected) \ljew from Gen e Coulon Park Docks Plan B "' f f ' " " t ~ ~ I I l s: " I ,t! !. f ( i P: i ) / . t ·1.··.~· l/. f, ~~ 13'~ ···ffl ~.:1 ;r,i"' t~t-: ~,;.t; Source: N akano Associates Hucke/J/Weinman Associates, Inc. ..... -....... --.,.~-·--·----· ... ,...~ ... ·-·------------· -- Southport Development Planned Action Figure 19 (corrected) View from Gene Coulon Park Playground Plan B > .... :: CJ ... = :: 0... 0 0 ·---CJ f,.J ;... < ,:.i ~ "O t;.i .... = i.. 0 ... ... c..~ ..c :.. -::, 0 rJ) (,.) r:: -V)- Q) --~ !,.) 0 II) II) ~ r:.: c,:, ----·-<i) I ~ -· -~ -¥: I <.J :i: l Southport Master Minor Modification May, 2014 ' i::.~··· Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 2 : View from Jones Ave . N.E . at 14th Street Southport Master Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 3: View from Gene Coulon Park Docks Southport Master Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC ·~!7-:,¥). ~ ~ '"-·~"·i'..i,. ;;~:~~ Figure 4: View from Gene Coulon Park Playground .... ;; . ;~::..~ Southport Master Minor Modification May, 2014 Hotel at Southport, LLC Figure 5 : View from Park Ave PLANNING, LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES May 16, 2014 Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA 98055 Subject: Southport Hotel Parking Modifications Dear Rocale: On behalf of Hotel at Southport, LLC I am requesting approval of a two modifications to the Parking, Loading, and Driveway Regulations in RMC 4-4-080 in effect when the Southport Level II (Master) Site Plan was approved on July 18, 2000. Section K.2 "Modification of Standards" requires compliance with RMC 4-9-250D which in tum requires compliance with the following criteria: a. [Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and b. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; and c. Confonms to the intent and purpose of the Code: and d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impact to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The requested modifications and responses to each criteria are: Modification Request #1: Reduction in the length of a standard parking stall from 20 feet to 19 feet. Criteria: a. Meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainabilffy intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; Response: The current parking standards require that the length of a standard parking stall be 19 feet Since this is a city standard, it meets the purposes intended by the Code and is based on sound engineering judgment. b. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicindy; Response: The reduction in the length of a standard parking stall should have no impact on the adjacent Boeing, Puget Sound Energy, or Gene Coulon Park properties. nor to other properties in the vicinity. c. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; Response: Using the current standard for the length of a standard parking stall confonms to the intent and purpose of the Code. d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and sffuation intended; Response: Given thatthis is a parking for a new hotel, the standards should reflect current practices and not a standard that applied nearly 14 years ago. e. Will not create adverse impact to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: As stated above, the reduction in the length of a standard parking stall should have, no impact on the adjacent Boeing, Pugel Sound Energy, or Gene Coulon Park properties, nor to other properties in the vicinity. 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle. Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzcr@seanet.com Hotel at Southport Parking Modific May 16, 2014 Page 2 of3 Modification Request #2: Requests Provide more parking spaces than required by the city code and hotel parking demand. As shown on sheet A 101 Site Plan for the Hotel at Southport, 487 parking spaces are provided in a surface parking lot adjacent to the hotel. The lot is located on lot 4, which is the location of the approved Phase II office buildings. The lot will serve as an interim lot until such time as Phase II begins construction. Ultimately the parking needed to serve the hotel will be located in parking facilities shared by the hotel and the office complex. As the attached "Parking Analysis for Southport Hotel" prepared by TENW documents, the requirements of RMC 4-4-080.F.10 for "hotels, motels, and cabins" in effect in July of 2000 requires 467 parking spaces. However, as the TENW analysis also indicates, the peak parking demand for a 350 room hotel is only 315 spaces (It should be noted that the Southport Planned Action FSEIS estimated a peak demand of 198 spaces for a 220 room hotel (FSEIS, p. 2-5)). The provision of an additional 172 parking spaces until Phase II construction begins provides an opportunity to provide public parking for people using the waterfront promenade and trail connection to Gene Coulon Park; people visiting hotel guests; people using the hotel facilities such as the spa, hotel restaurant, or function rooms for weddings or other special functions; people attending meetings, retreats, or conferences; or people needing parking spaces during the Gene Coulon Park peak use times of the year. The demand generated by these non-hotel guest room related activities creates a need for parking spaces in addition to those for hotel guests and employees. The stated goal of the Parking Regulations is "the provision of sufficient off-street parking to meet the needs of urban development while not providing an excess surplus of spaces." Southport is a compact, urban development and the addition of a high quality hotel and upgraded waterfront area will make it an inviting place to visit. Given the absence of convenient transit faciltties nearby, vehicles will be the primary means for people to get to the area. Since there are few on-street parking spaces at Southport, the only location for people using the hotel facilities is the parking lot. W~h the increasing variety of amenities and uses at Southport and nearby, parking spaces are needed in addition to those provided for the hotel use. Criteria: a. Meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainabilfty intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; Response: The parking lot is designed consistent with city standards, as are the number of handicap and compact spaces. Additionally, stalls for parking up to 50 bicycles are provided. b. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinfty; Response: The increased number of parking spaces will not be injurious to other properties in the area. In fact, the increased number of stalls can serve some ofthe parking demand created by special events and peak use times at Gene Coulon Park, which is a benefit not only to the city park department but also to other properties in the area. c. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; Response: The number of spaces in the lot meets the needs of hotel guests and employees while not creating an excess surplus of parking spaces which is the stated goal of the city's parking standards. d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; Response: The number of parking spaces is justified given the parking demand created by the range of non hotel guest related amenities at the hotel, by the upgraded waterfront promenade area, and by special events and peak use times at Gene Coulon Park. e. Will not create adverse impact to other property(ies) in the vicinfty. Response: The location and design of the parking lot ensures that rt will not be injurious to the Boeing facility, Gene Coulon Park or the Puget Sound Energy storage yard. Sincerely, B_df~ Bill Stalzer · For Hotel at Southport, LLC 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle, Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 email bstalzcr@seanet.com • Hotel at Southport Parking Modific May 16, 2014 Page 3 of 3 Attachments: Requests "Parking Analysis for Southport Hotel" , TENW. April 28, 2014 Cc: Michael Christ, President, SECO Development Greg Krape, Development Manager, SEGO Development Jeff Schramm, TENW 603 Stewart Street Suite 512 Seattle. Washington 98101 Tel 206-264-1150 ~mail bstalzer(i}1seanet. com ~TENW Transportation Engineering NorthWest MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2014 TO: Bill Stalzer, Stalzer and Associates FROM: Jeff Schramm TENW SUBJECT: Parking Analysis for Southport Hotel TENW Project No. 4838 This memorandum documents the parking demand and proposed suppf; for the Southport Hotel in accordance with the requirements of RMC 4-4-080.F. IO "Number of Parking Spaces Required" for Hotels, Motels and Cabins in effect at the time of approval of the Southport development and consistent with the parking analysis methodology employed in the Southport Development Planned Action Final Supplemental EIS for a hotel. The parking analysis for a hotel is contained in Table 3 "Plan C Parking Summary" on page 2-5 of the Final SEIS. RMC 4-4-080.F. IO requires I space for each guest room or dwelling unit plus 2 far each 3 employees. The proposed hotel contains 350 guest roams, resulting in a code requirement for 350 parking spaces. The hotel would have 175 employees I resulting in a code requirement far 117 spaces far hotel employees. Cade Use Number Requirement Hotel Roams 350 350 Employees 175 117 Total 467 The estimated peak parking demand far guests and employees far a 350 room hotel is 315 parking spaces based an the ITE 2nd Edition of the Parking Generation manual.2 This is the proposed number of parking spaces far the hotel. Since the number of spaces provided in the parking lot differs from the city code requirement, a modification request meeting the criteria in the city code is being proposed. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. You can reach me at schromm@tenw cam or 425-250-0581. l F(X}tnole 2 to Table 3 ~Plan C Parking Summar/ p::ige 2-5 of Southporl Deveklpmenl Planned Aclion Final Supplemental E(S. 2 Footnote l to Table 3 ~Plan C Parking Summary· fX]ge 2-5 of Southport Development Planned Adion Final Supplemental EIS. l:a:.sportot.on ::i1ow1'.ng I Design I Traf'ic: irnpoct & Ooerorio:is 11400 SE s~ Street, Suite 200, Bellevue, WA 98004 I Office (425) 889-6747 ' Hotel at Southport Upper Story Setbacks Modification Request RMC 4-2-1208 Upper Story Setbacks requires that buildings in the COR-3 zone: To consider shade/shadow effects and encourage compatibility of buildings or portions of buildings which exceed 50 feet in height which are located within 100 feet of the shoreline, and shall include upper story setbacks for the fa~ade facing the shoreline and for facades facing publicly accessible plazas as follows: the minimum setback for a fifth story and succeeding stories shall be 10 feet minimum from the preceding story, applicable to each story. Projects not meeting the upper story setbacks defined above may be approved through a modification process as prescribed in RMC 4-2-120C which states: Application may be made for modification of the upper story setback standards when superior design is demonstrated pursuant to RMC 4-9-2500. For a modification to be granted, the project must also comply with the decisions and design criteria stipulated in RMC 4-9-25002 and 04. Superior Design In lieu of the upper story setbacks required in RMC 4-2-120B, the following superior design solution is proposed: Shade/Shadow Effects Instead of designing a building that occupies the entire width of the site and employs the required upper story setbacks, the tall portion of the hotel occupies approximately only half of the width of the site along the Lake Washington frontage. The remaining width is a much lower terrace approximately 28 feet high that includes a ballroom recessed from the fa~ade along the shoreline frontage. The resulting reduction in shade and shadows effects on the pedestrian walkway at noon during the spring and fall equinox is evident on the attached solar study sheet A961. Additionally, as demonstrated on solar study sheet A962, the low west terrace and low terrace in the middle of the building allow more sunlight to reach the promenade during the summer solstice than does the code- required upper story setbacks design solution. The proposed stepping of the building fa~ade is the most appropriate solution for a high-rise, 4-star hotel. The proposed step provides two water-oriented terraces at the 8th floor, offering inviting outdoor function spaces with unobstructed water views of the promenade, Lake Washington, and distant vistas. With a unique bridge connecting the two wings, these terraces will become iconic emblems of the development, sought after by individuals and families for parties, weddings, outdoor barbecues and by companies for retreats and training sessions. As clearly evident on the upper story setback mass diagram sheet A950, the extensive modulation of the taller portion of the hotel combined with the variety of large building terraces and the lower west terrace results in a visual solution that is superior to one that uses the upper story setbacks code standard. Compatibility To ensure compatibility with its surroundings, the building design responds to the Lake Washington waterfront and nearby structures. To the west, the Boeing Assembly Building rises to 125 feet in height, a vertical wall without relief. To the north, the waterfront promenade is1forped~slri!lmuse, and reflects the pedestrian scale. To the east, the Bristol Apartments rise to 75 feet in height, with window penetrations and balconies, but without stepping of the facade. To the sq14lh,: th!'; 'll'Woved Hotel at Southport Upper Sto1 Page 2 of 3 May 16,2014 itbacks Modification Request future office towers will be built of flat metal wall panels and glass, rising to 125 feet without upper story setbacks. Responding to these existing surroundings, the majority of the north fa,;:ade along the pedestrian promenade is limited to 28 feet in height with two major terraces -one over the grand ballroom, and the other in between the two guestroom wings. On the east fa,;:ade, the guestroom wing of the hotel respects the scale of the Bristol Apartments by stepping from 75 feet up to 125 feet from north to south. The 125 feet height along the south fa<;:ade will match the Boeing facility and future office buildings. Rather than provide multiple smaller steps at 75 feet and higher, a single step responds better to the urban context of the site, as it is a larger scale move rather than a smaller move that is not seen in any building in the area. RMC 4-9-250D2 Decision Criteria The proposed building design meets the following requirements in RMC 4-9-25002: a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment Response: As documented in the materials prepared by design and construction professionals and submitted with the Hotel at Southport Site Plan application, the hotel building meets the Code requirements for safety, function, and maintainability. As described in the preceding narrative relating to design, the hotel meets the code requirements for appearance. As documented in the SEPA Planned Action designation of the Southport Development, the hotel meets the objectives for environmental protection. b. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; Response: As described in the preceding narrative, the building design is compatible with the Boeing building to the west. The property to the south is in utility transmission and storage use; the hotel and surface parking uses will not be injurious to it. Gene Coulon Park is to the west of the hotel and the promenade and pedestrian walkway on the hotel site serve as an asset to the park by providing additional outdoor uses available to park users. c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code Response: The intent and purpose of RMC 4-9-120B Upper Story Setback is to "consider shade/shadow effects and encourage compatibility". As described in the preceding narrative and documented in the solar studies and mass diagrams on sheets A960-A962 and sheet A950, the proposed design solution creates less shade/shadow effects on the promenade and pedestrian walkway and achieves greater compatibility with its surroundings than does a solution using upper story setbacks. d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended Response: The approved Southport Master Plan includes a hotel use at this location. As described in the response to the superior design requirement, the design is justified and required for both the use and the situation: large outdoor terraces are appropriate for both hotel functions and visual enjoyment of the Lake Washington waterfront; building massing with the lower height portions along the Lake Washington frontage and taller height portions by the tall office buildings is appropriate given surrounding uses and light, air and view considerations for hotel users; and promenade-level rooms with large windows provide waterfront views for hotel users and an active pedestrian-friendly frontage for pedestrians and bicyclists on the promenade. Hotel at Southport Upper Ster_ itbacks Modification Request Page 3 of 3 May 16,2014 e. Will not create adverse impact to other property(ies) in the vicinity. Response: Combined with the mitigations required in the Southport Development Planned Action, the superior hotel design will not create adverse impacts to other properties in the vicinity. Additionally, the hotel use and design will be a benefit to other properties in the vicinity. RMC 4-9-250D4 Decision Criteria The proposed building design meets the following requirements in RMC 4-9-25004: a. In comparison to the standard upper story setbacks, the proposed building design will achieve the same or better results in terms of solar access to the public shoreline trails/open space and publicly accessible plazas; the building will allow access to sunlight along the public trail/open space system and plazas abutting the shoreline during daytime and seasonal periods project for peak utilization by pedestrians Response: See the discussion of Shade/Shadow Effects above in the superior design discussion and the response to criteria RMC 4-9-250D.2.c above. b. The building will create a step in perceived height, bulk and scale in comparison to buildings surrounding the subject property. Response: See the discussion of Compatibility in the superior design discussion above. Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment Face Page File No.: NCS-442034-WAl COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 1.--ot( First American Title Insurance Company, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagor of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of the Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment if preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." First American Title Insurance Company By: /iu ~-. President Attest: IJ1 u,l ,/._ ~ Secretary By: ~T ~ Countersigned First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment ,; A)H;,c 1 ~~ f' ~ - File No.: NCS-442034-WAl Page No. 1 First American Title Insurance Company To: National Commercial Se,vices 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 (206)728-0400 -(800)526-7544 FAX (206)448-6348 Mike Cooper (206)615-3107 mcooper@firstam.com Seco Development, Inc. 1083 Lake Washington Boulevard, Suite 50 Renton, WA 98056 Attn: Lisa Collins THIRD REPORT SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: March 26, 2014 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: File No.: NCS-442034-WAl Your Ref No.: Southport AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX Standard Owner's Coverage Proposed Insured: To Follow Easement Coverage $ To Follow $ To Follow $ To Follow $ 40.00 $ 3.80 3. The estate or interest in the land described on Page 2 herein is Fee Simple as to Parcel A and Easement as to Parcel B, and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: Southport One, LLC, a Washington limited liability company 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: File No.: NCS-442034-WAl Page No. 2 LOT 1 OF CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT NO. LUA-99-134-SHPL, ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 31, 2000 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20000131900006, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND RAILROAD CROSSINGS AS ESTABLISHED IN INSTRUMENTS RECORDED FEBRUARY 1, 1999, JANUARY 31, 2000 AND NOVEMBER 17, 2000 UNDER RECORDING NOS. 6201855, 6317510, 9902019014, 20000131900006 AND 20001117000535, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment SCHEDULE B -SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the Requirements to be complied with: File No.: NCS-442034-WAl Page No. 3 Item (A) Payment to or for the account of the Grantors or Mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (B) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. Item (C) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. Item (DJ You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS The Policy or Policies to be issued will contain Exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interest, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of person in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. E. (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (3) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records; (4) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, materials or medical assistance heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgages thereon covered by this Commitment. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-442034-WA! SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 (continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS Page No. 4 1. Lien of the Real Estate Excise Sales Tax and Surcharge upon any sale of said premises, if unpaid. As of the date herein, the excise tax rate for the City of Renton is at 1.78%. Levy/Area Code: 2100 2. For all transactions recorded on or after July 1, 2005: • A fee of $10.00 will be charged on all exempt transactions; • A fee of $5.00 will be charged on all taxable transactions in addition to the excise tax due. General Taxes for the year 2014. Tax Account No.: 052305-9075-04 Amount Billed: $ 74,805.60 Amount Paid: $ 0.00 Amount Due: $ 74,805.60 Assessed Land Value: $ 5,248,800.00 Assessed Improvement Value: $ 0.00 3. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements: Recorded: February 26, 1999 Recording No.: 9902264177 4. Restrictions, conditions, dedications, notes, easements and provisions, if any, as contained and/or delineated on the face of the Short Plat No. LUA -99 -134 -SHPL recorded January 31, 2000 under Recording No. 20000131900006, in King County, Washington. 5. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements: Recorded: November 17, 2000 Recording No.: 20001117000535 6. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: November 17, 2000 under Recording No. 20001117001232 In Favor of: City of Renton For: Public sidewalk Affects: as described therein. 7. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: October 21, 2005 under Recording No. 20051021000894 In Favor of: City of Renton For: Walkway Affects: as described therein 8. Any question that may arise due to the shifting and/or changing in the course of Lake Washington. Rrst American Title Insurance Company Form WA·S (6/76) Commitment File No.: NCS-442034-WA! Page No. 5 9. Right of the State of Washington in and to that portion, if any, of the property herein described which lies below the line of ordinary high water of Lake Washington. 10. Rights of the general public to the unrestricted use of all the waters of a navigable body of water not only for the primary purpose of navigation, but also for corollary purposes; including (but not limited to) fishing, boating, bathing, swimming, water skiing and other related recreational purposes, as those waters may affect the tidelands, shorelands or adjoining uplands and whether the level of the water has been raised naturally or artificially to a maintained or fluctuating level, all as further defined by the decisional law of this state. (Affects all of the premises subject to such submergence) 11. Evidence of the authority of the individual(s) to execute the forthcoming document for Southport One, LLC., a Washington limited liability company, copies of the appropriate resolution should be submitted prior to closing. 12. Title to vest in an incoming owner whose name is not disclosed. Such name must be furnished to us so that a name search may be made. 13. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personal property and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. 14. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 20130207001325 In Favor of: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. For: Storm Drainage Affects: as described therein. 15. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 20130207001327 In Favor of: Southport One, LLC, et al For: Affects: Access, Landscape and Utilities as described therein. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment ,--•·s--·---·---~---- ' INFORMATIONAL NOTES File No.: NCS-442034-WA! Page No. 6 ----- A. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder. B. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. C. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. Lot 1, SP No. LUA -99 -134 -SH PL, Rec. 20000131900006 APN: 052305-9075-04 D. A fee will be charged upon the cancellation of this Commitment pursuant to the Washington State Insurance Code and the filed Rate Schedule of the Company. END OF SCHEDULE B First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment , ;rd!,:: IC I ~ ~ (' ' ,, ~ First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations File No.: NCS-442034-WAl Page No. 7 1. The term "mortgage" when used herein shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment, other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act or reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclosure such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option, may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of Policy or Policies committed for, and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or ( c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the Policy or Policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of Policy or Policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by references, and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the Insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment The First American Corporation First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services PRIVACY POLICY We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Infonnation File No.: NCS-442034-WA! Page No. 8 In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal Information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use Information we have obtained from any other source1 such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal lnfonnation regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values1 a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and· • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Infonnation We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information Indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal infonnation listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, sud) as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the Information we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even If you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those individuals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Polley and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic1 and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. c 2001 The First American Corporation -All Rights Reserved First American Title Insurance Company _. .. -·:l :" . 1 ;;~~.RETURNm ~ 111111-111·--1--ll1--1-·1---1-·r11,----- --City ·of Renton ...... 200S Ii Ii fj . 1055' Socit~ Grjld.\'. _way • / CXTY 1021000894 '"/Renton_'WA 9&.055,-.(."'-" .... ia,Jf JH~f: ills 44.ee ';, •' ,/ ~, 21/~ 11:27 , .,.,,, -" <;ol.lfiTY, !.IA /\"f.·''./ ,~ \(• '·'-:.~ PEDll:STRIAN w ALKWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT · ... ,:: / .: .:· .: ..,. ·:;._ ' / 3' GRANTOR: C:. ~~RT QNE, LLC, a,·W.aihington limited liability . borµpally ' . .. > GRANTEE:. LEGAL D~SCRlPTION (Gry!.ntor Property): . ,•Assifsso.RS· tAi .... , · ' f,ARCEL ID)'.J(). (Gµm,tor Pfu~r_t)'.J: .i" / /,· / REFERENcENo\ .. / /: ···:·./ :: ........ ,,, ....... . CITY OF R,ENToN,.a \Vasb,ihgt.tj~ m.:uniclpal corp~~tion . ·' ··,,,,f? "•'• . . ./ Lot 1 of City ~·tRe~tgzi Shcirt .. Piii°N'o:'LUA~99'it3.f~SHPL, recorded under AFN°2000013I900006 . .-' / · ·-:: ·'. . ,. ... ,• Additional Legals on pp. 10-1'2 ........ ;, _f _) . .,· ,:· 052305-9075 ··' . •,:,.,, .. • · .. ,. ..~ .· TIIIS PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT ("Easement"), ¢fc:d'iv~ this ~ day of D,~ , 2005, is made by and between SOUTHPORT .cbNE, .µ;e, .. a Washington limited liability company (''Grantor"), and CITY OF RENTON, a /. Wash,i,µgton ip.unicipal corporation ("Grantee"). / .: :: ···•. . __ .. , .• RECITALS ···.... i Ai./ ~;br i# ¢';/:w,ie/ of..real_property located in King County, Washington lega,Jiy diist\rib~'il 01;{Exhib'4 A atii\;eb~1r'heretp (t!J.e "Grantor Property"). . B. •• ·,.. ~; ~te l Cri~~-~eJ;;;JJ~h Park, a municipal public park operated by Grantee, klocattxl n9rtheisterly" of tji¢' Giant~r PropeftY (the "Park"). The Park contains a public walkway, a porti'on 9f which i{alqtig the southern shorel!J!e of Lake Washington (the "Walkway''). · .,· ' ·. · / ...... ,.. ··· C. Grantee desires'.ti:J £1J~ tjt~.\valjc~ fr~m,,the:i~k across a portion of the Grantor PropeftY. D/'' ,,.Grantor has agreed to ;nt:im ~ascinent-~rd~s 't~~&~ of the brantor Property·depictedon Exhibit B attached her~ .. 1!:P.d·lega!Iy·desori~jn fylhibit c,kttached hereto(the "pase~t Area") for the purpose of operajing ,iind/inai~tajning a pµbli{walkway for pedestriari11Se silbject to the terms and conditions sef'forthhere.iii.) / / :' •' :. . :.'. ··, .... ,··· .. .,· .• AGREEMENT . b;\_.furth(;raµ6e of the Recitals set forth above, which are in~tted herein by ref<:rence, and . .iii ¢0nsjrlei'J:ltioii of the mutual promises and covenants set fortb below, and for other,,.good_ari.d ,·vall)iibl~coti'sidrt"atio~, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:,/ . ' . .. ·. •' I. ~t of ~~erti. 'Gt:iihtoi hciteby conveys and quitclaims to Grantee a perpetual, non-exclu'sive'easemept over,'across,-'anq'up,()n the Easement Area for the purpose of operating and maintaining. a publfo.walkway'for Jled~triaµ use. . . ··. i .. .: . •' .. This Easement shall iliciuii~ jhe tighf to ~cc~ss iby the Grantee (including its employees, agents and con1ractors) over the slitface,,ofthe Easlllllent.Atel!, as necessary for the Grantee to satisfy its maintenance and tepajr:obligatjtins .. .fui s~t forth in ~ection 6, including inspection at reasonable intervals. · · : · .,· ·' :· .... ,... ' 2. Reservation of Rights. Grantor reserves.the,right toilse,f¥e E~enf.Ai;tl/1 in order to construct, maintain, operate, or repair any of Grarit,c>r!s inJproyein~tli'arid!of uses on. the Grantor Property. This reservation shall include, but not be J#ni~'to, ~e'right_,to/ (aft6 maintain, inspect, repair, replace, and operate any below-ground utilities, lociated.l!o'W,or il.}~ 2 ,·,.,,. -~=1 ...... .. fµture within the Easement Area; (b) to temporarily block or interrupt access to the Easement ,Ai-ea ' f<_>r vehicle loading/unloading, deliveries, maintenance vehicles, and/or emergency /vehicles;·an4 (c) to block access to the Easement Area for up to 24 consecutive hours, or /: \ongc;t}Vith the prior written approval of Grantee, for special events on the Grantor Property, i )ncludiri:g, bui notJiprlted to, concerts, weddings, and conventions. The reservation set forth .:· inJubs¢cti9ri 2(c) above shall apply,qnly until the City or a third party designated by the City complftes-cghs~otipn of~}larn Qhastain Waterfront Trail extension trail between point A lirid pbinflf as !lfiown 01i 1*Jiibit_p,heryto,,~d only so long as such trail remains open to the public '¢dis rr#iint&ne~· ifi,a good,:ap/,ffunctj6~ condition. Grantor further reserves the right to use ·the "Jlasement ;<fre11; for)i,pyiother{j:hlrpo~ not inconsistent with the easement rights granted in 'S.ection .,t proviqeci l)iat suim. o'thlir uses do not unreasonably interfere with Grantee's use hf.the Easeme.iii ~-· • • :{ /._-·: ./ ./· .-::·' .( /•·"··,··1·., • .. ... :::·,:.. • • 3. L!IIl1tatfo:q~ on &@sement/ T4e easement. nghts granted in Section I above are further limited as follows: -···· A. The ease~~nttjghts Jan~··he;~b{ ~Y ~ ex~.r.1,,ised only during those hours whep Gene Coulon Park is openfo the pubJ.i,:;;,as may be-inodlfled from time iotime. ····· .. ·-'" .-. . .. -.. .. ., ' ll;. The easement rights gri,µi~ : her~in .• ;::·:·~ite<i ip· pf~estrian connectivity,,only.'<-;Such rights do not include any rights of assemb)y,}pee~h, demi>nstration, or petition/ariitl do~s not authorize exhibiting any placard, signs/or_ notic¢'s, ,disttibuting any circ\ilar, handpill, 'placard, or booklet, soliciting membership or contiibi.itioJ'!s, parading, picketing or lpiteriµg. • ... , ; :· . f / :, .,_,,...· 9( .. / The ciJs.ement rights granted herein do not inci~ltpiright to ingest, s~ll or distribufe a1cohofwithin the Easement Area. ·· ·,,. ' .. ' ' ·: D. ·.• Eitcep{ a{provi<led in Paragraph 6 below, Grantee shall not have the right to make any ~fi'ipo~ or pertpan~t improvements, including installing landscaping, benches, signage/-qr oth~t'a~ove.,igradb ~ifuctllltj, within the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the''Granf;Or. ,: . . ' 4. Improvement'ofEas~eni~ /,~oi::s~lbe responsible at its sole cost and expense for designing ruid,·6onstiuctlng an iit-grade-"'i:iedestrian walkway over the Easement Area. Grantor plans to construct iliif°pe<l,estnan waI.kway.ilYtwo phases. As of the date of this Easement, Grantor has alreadygotjstrucied"a ¥nP<>!'al'):'.,Pavedpedestrian walkway within the Easement Area (''Temporary W:BJk'l'lfliy")/ Granfor\ agr~ .to.,i:eplace this Temporary Walkway with a pennanent walkway ("f'en#ane!lt W~lky.,ay'.!) i{{conjtifiction with developing the Grantor Property consistent with fiinrre s~e pfan apptq~als .fo~. the', Griwtor Property. · · · ·· · · · ·· 3 _-_ 5. Restrictions on Easement Area Improvements. The parties agree that any hn.pr<iv:ements to the Easement Area, including both the Temporary Walkway and the /PermanciifWalkway, shall be designed to be consistent with Grantor's use of the remainder /" of tl1.tt.9rantor Property and any other properties owned by the Grantor or its affiliates ·' abl-!tting the Gra!)ror ,Property. ···.;..,:,........ . .: :" . .. .,' . . _.-·6. ---:_--· M;lintena°uce,.o{Easghent Area. Grantor shall maintain at its sole cost and ·-. expense.the Teni.porary.:--Whlkway'i'h a,goed_and functional manner. Grantor's obligation to rrumi.tairi the temporary Wal~,~~hll tefbaj~te upon the replacement of the Temporary Walkway w.ith the Per,rii.ID)ent )V.i'.l}fway ~-'l:b~iE~'ement Area. Foll~-wing·tknt~r's,i\:n~ctiAAi:fih~ ~ermanent Walkway on the Easement Area, Grantee shall assume respo.t\sibi\ity, l!f-its,sole.-cost.iw:d expense, f9r maintaining and repairing the Permanent Walk~ay,i"Thifrespbnsibilit,y ~hall ai.iio.includ¢' ~ obligation to replace the Permanent Walkway, as need¢d; protjded~t, Gi:!ll:11ee i,hall_~ritlt its schematic plans and construction details for any prq:ibsed rr,pl!!Cem~'.nt of all c>i in}y portion of the Permanent Walkway to Grantor at least sixty (6.0))lays before COlmllencing C,Oij$.truCtion, and Grantee must obtajP._ Grantor's prior written corisen(to aily_,SJlCh p~ /fud .. detaiis~fore cgb'to:)encing construct[oii>.,., . --. . ', • .,· --- ,-:dr~'smaintenance, repair and re;l;ceajenV obii~iaj~~ ~I ,-6e performed consistent .wi~ the[ollowing conditions and restrictions'./ " . --,· . .-> A. ,--The Grantee shall maintain the Perriili:nerit Walkw~ to a level co~istint \Yfth tj{~ quality.of other improvements on the Grantor Pr-0P¢)', _hut in no event $hall that.level tlilibelow th(!_standards for other pedestrian walkways iruimtalned by Grantee ;;i_ong the Lak~ Washjngt\>n shoreline and/or other parks owned or managed by Grantee. ' _., .,.. j. '. Qfanie. iihau ;;rlhrm all maintenance, repair and/or replacement work in a careful, wotkrnanlike Jij~e{.-·.rree of:clahn$ or liens. c:·-', ".,~~ ian ~~trrii aI{~teiiance, repair and/or replacement work in a manner so as not to lll®.asdlfublY.. inuirfeie with the TJst,, and enjoyment of the remainder of the Granter Property. · ' ' ·-,-·' '" i.----· -D. Grantee shall peifo~ ii1{m:µ~te.~;-,repaihiii:d/9r replacement work in a manner SO as not to unreasonably blocl(pedestJian ./Jr v~hiCµi!lf access to, from, and/or across the Easement Area by the Grantor, itls1.1:ct:ellsors{ assjgns/Ie~sees/ su\,ltl~ees, tenants, subtenants, invitees, employees, contractors or age~. / · · · · E. Grantee shall perform all maintenarice,.fepitlr a.rid/or repl~teaje~t ;ot1' in a manner so as not to block any views from the Grantor Pfop!,lrty o(Lake.',"!/ashingiiin · without first obtaining the prior written consent of the Granter. •-. -··-"''· ,- 4 ·=·-~··· •· • .. F. Grantee shall perfonn all maintenance, repair and/or replacement work fin.i pf.9llipt,and timely manner. Once Grantee has initiated any maintenance, repair and/or ./ r¢phu;l(pient ·,.work in the Easement Area, Grantee shall continue such work through "' com;pletion without!).llY unreasonable delay . . ·· . . .. ·· .. '''.,.,,, ... ,,,.,.,·· ;: ...... ,:' .:' ···:, ,,,··· •\\··::. : /The fore&~g shall,, ,iot pifo,ent Grantor from also maintaining portions of the .Easement.Area i(Grimtor «;lects t_,ti.fo s9.(hJJ.t without any obligation ofGrantor to do so). ·.. . l ,•' .... · · 7. ••. R,e16catjbn 6f fjw~$ri'kt ,Area/, 'qrantor shall have the right to relocate the Easement Area from/time tp/ti~ in c6pnebti1>h with a general improvement plan for the Grantor Propeny.;.ptovi~ed ~ thd ney., l~.e~tiQn of the Easement Area shall be no more than 20 feet from the location iet fot\h in'Eidiibi~ B and C, and shall be sufficient to serve the Grantee for the sam/puioses':an4/in .the $iune'mamier as tIJi;'°'lpcation designated in this Easement; and provided" furt)ler that /ihe .,Gran.tor shall: not bJQ¢k or close access to the Easement Area depicted and fegaJ-ly gesc~'b#f m.-·E~bi~ B}m{C until Grantor has opened the relocated easement area to 'the ,publfo .for µse as··a,;;pu,blic/walkway for pedestrian use. Grantor shall perfonn any such relocation ~ its sol.e cost l\rid eiipe¢e'.""Uppn such relocation, and at th~ reqµest of Gran tor, Grant or and (Jnmtee sbal!,.ameiid tfu~ .~lllent to ,~p~ify the newlocationof.theEasementArea. '.... ./ ..... ,· .,· ......... '" .... )' \ / i i~. /·Eas~ents Run with the Land. The ~t}f~~ foregi,)ing~~en"{ shall run with.The I.and and inure to the benefit and be binding upoii the successof/1 and assigns of Graritee and Grantor, respectively, and shall bind the Grantbr. .. P.roperty !IS ~ subservient tenemeµt and ben,tfit .the. Park as the dominant tenements, for so lqng' ~ th¢. Park remains open topie:;publil.,,.. · ., . . ,,.. •: . 9. .,.iBreacI{ It{ theieveijt of any breach or threatened breach of this Easement by the Grantotbt''Grantee, .the nt>n-defaitlting}arty shall have the right to sue for damages and/or for specific performanclanillor ,fo,.fnjoi11,5.uchJ,rea.ch or threatened breach . . , / .,· .,·' ·., -· ;: •,. IO. Ri~kofB~ges-t An~·ttse.~fthe ~tor Property, including the Easement Area, by Grantee, or its suc'i;essor~ .. assigns, Iesseeli, sublessees, tenants, subtenants, invitees, employees, contractors or ag~nts (thd}'Beiiefrted Parti¢s")shall be deemed to be at the risk of the person or entity using the·~;'~ Grantdr sha!L·notbe lial::>le or responsible for any damage to property or injury to persoit or i6ss:&f ]ffe t'hat_.l)'1llY rci,,iy.t.to Grantee, and/or the Benefited Parties, or any other person, except-to the exten,f ca'(ised by tht.gross negligence of the Grantor, or its agents or employees. bt~tee.and/or ;illy qfthe--Benefited Parties shall not commit waste or create or permit nuisances\m the &senienti~ ,Gr.anteiraccepts the Easement Area in its present condition, "AS-IS," artd.!;Jrantor shall Jiave no· duties t6 Grantee, except as provided in Sections 4 and 6 above, regardfog ~e C(:jnditloncQf the $sement.~a. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Section 10 shall not apPly with regilrd Jo !WY defect(s}J.n the Easement Area existing prior to the date on which the Grant'e(: ~sijmei\ reJ>poWlilfility.for 5 ... -~ .• , •. ~Iltaining and repairing the Permanent Walkway pursuant to Section 6 above, which are knqwnJo the Grantor, but not known to the Grantee and not disclosed by the Grantor to the /Grant'""{ · ·. . "" . , 11. .• Indempification. Grantee hereby releases, indemnifies and promises to defend .= and save hamtless ffiantor from··llll.d against any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, a¢orui and :<\lainµ;;._incIµdi~/~sts/lllld reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by Grantor in ,4efeil~e J'h!lteof/.asserted ir ari~g djrectly or indirectly on account of or out of acts or omi.efsioris 9f Gfan¥e in tile, exerc:'fs~,?f the Ij~~. granted herein and/or in connection with or arisingfron_i the use of'th~Eas~¢t Area;"i,r.ovid,ed however this paragraph does not purport to indemnify Grantqr'ag!ifnst;Jiabi!ity for)illlliiages arising out of bodily injuzy to persons or damage to property"caused t,f or i;esultjpg irol)J the gross negligence or willful misconduct of Grantor, or its agents o/ e~loy~s. / ,. ,.· . If a court of coiii'.~eteµt jur!sdic:~o!f ge~l'Il?,jp.es t/lat thi!i. liasement is subject to the provisions ofRCW 4.24.115,"'theparties agI\ie th!rt th!) inde~ty .. provisions in this Easement shall be deemed amended to conform :'to:' saicf statute/ and li£bilizy shall be allocated as provided U)~in. ··· .. , .. / ( \. ...... ,.. ,,/ •.. .-· ./····' ·"····•,,,,,. /•.,, d. ihsurance. Grantee and/or iJ COJ,l!J;ac'ci: e#iploy~:·~ ~ntf'(<;lfidng on the ~tor fropeity or Easement Area shall maintain,in full :furce_!!,Q~ effect qfuil)g the term of thjs E~m¢nt a: policy of commercial general liability ;md property/damag6 insurance rela¥d to_..the l!iasedi,ent Area and the City's use or occupancyJhereof in 1/foim _;icceptable to Gf!llltor .,iind With ,ii minimum limit of $5,000,000 per occurrence/under/which policy the G,iantoj'is lll,l addjtioµai'insµred. · · · · .. , ·:13·~ ,H@:argoUs:·M~terials. In no event shall the Grantee store, di~pose, release, or discharge from, i>r otherwise use .. any---'.\Hazardous Materials" or other wastes or substances on the Granto~ Property oi:dhe E!!Sement ~a. "Hazardous Materials" means any (a) petroleum products or by•procit16ts; ,.fy) a!J..··~ou~. J>r toxic substances, wastes or materials or pollutants, includi!/~ ~ous/subs~pes'as ;defined by §101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Resp<lrfse, Gompensation aiid Pab~lity_ Act of 1980, as amended, and/or the Washington State Model Tb,xic -Control Act/RCW §·70Jp5.010, as amended; and (c) any other chemical, pollutant ot\_materilii which is. regul~ed .bxany federal, state or local governmental agency or authotitf. under i,lny/e.nv.fro)Ul1enta! laws. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Hazardous Materials shall nbt be deffoeftoAncJude,fuel ·or"lubricants necessary for the operation of Grantee's maintellllll(:,i,, .-yehicles/ in,spectlon _yehicie.s or maintenance equipment, provided that such materials are'°~ 4i° accord11t1ce,with ~y and-all applicable Hazardous Material laws, and are handled in a reaso'pably prridep:t m.iinn\i .. ,/ ': 14. Termination. In the event Grantor has notbeg1Jn 4evei<>pm~f=t>£ thef. Gfmitor Property pursuant to final site plan approvals within fifteen (15) Y~S from the. date of this Easement, all rights granted by this Easement shall automaticaH)'" te'rmi.riate ~d .be of .. n9 6 furtlier force and effect. Upon such termination, Grantor may record notice thereof without thejciinder of the Grantee. ,· ,. .• 15. ·;, General Provisions . . -: ,_i _,:· _AS. I ·•Notices. _,..---·"•Any notice, request, approval, consent, or other __ cpmmtmiga®n n;q14ired;0r ~ttesf to be given by any party to any other hereunder shall be ,,_ih \V!'iting and shall be/d~ed,:~ci"haye-he~n duly given when delivered personally or by ovei:iught courier; /Or rectjved fgl!Qy$ing gepo~it as prepaid certified mail (return receipt requested) \.vith,tlri: Ui4te4" Statey' f ostal Silr\'.lbe;)md addressed to the appropriate party at its address set'f9rth beJd~, .ci"r afs~c~. other;:aq#es-6 as such party shall have last designated by notice to the oth6f(' / /.--:"" _i:-/ /:' ·--., .. cfl So_ri'titp6~ O~~-·LLC • . .-.- J083.Lili: W!isp1ngt(!µBl~t:I. North,:Suite 50 R~on,.W ashi.rigton··' 9$056. _-• .... . ;,:: :: .-. ,. ·:: .. ,• ,, _;: GRANTEE: City ofiehtoh 1055 S. Grady:Way .. --_ .. Renton, WashingtQ!J,_.98055 '""I•, ... l i. i 'JS.2' Attorneys' Fees. If any suit or 6thei-ptoctjxii9~ is ihstituted by any of the partie,s to _this pasement arising out of or pertaining to 'tl;iis Easement,,the;imbstantially pr~ailing pa#y shall be entitled to recover its reasonable atibrneys' feeS"ang all costs and e1('pens¢s in,curred fronr·-t4e substantially nonprevailing party, in'•llddftion/to such other _available,_telief. / ,, •' ' '··-·--___ .. /1,5.3 /',~niire .Agreement. This Easement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hen,ito witlf'respec{ to the '.l;)latters dealt with herein, and supersedes all prior correspt:mdence;_agreefuen~ .and/9r--understand.ings, both verbal and written, not contained in this Agreement. 'Qiis EljSenfent shall 'nQtbe modified unless done so in writing and signed by both parties. ·,,.,,_,... :' (, . ...-:,._.__ ·-., _.:' _/ ;····---,. _ 15-4 Governing Law'. 'This/Eas~ine11.t shaliJ>t:.governed by and construed in accordance with the laws ofthe"state ofWas)ungton,' .:" ',.·· ·-,,. 15.5 No Abandonment, gap.ure.to ,iict jjy ejther_party \mder this Easement shall not constitute abandonment of the Easement / · · · · · 15.6 Severability. The invalidity of any pi-0visi~n qf this-.Eai~ment as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, shall iri-po'way affebt ~''v~idify Pfillly other provision hereof. · · · . .-:. ·" f,· · .~. 7 ... , .. ,.,,..,· . . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Easement is executed by the parties, intending to be JegiliyJiound, effective as of the date first written above. GRANTEE: /GRANTORi ,:.· .:· .. ,··•\•,,. . •'sOlJTijl'OR.J:.O'f,ii(LL.C, a Wa.shillgton CITY OF RENTON, a Washington · limiteg lialiility co.mpany .. ../ · · municipal corporation Br.·'"" 9:,~~ ,.,-!fr;;~:;; .. ~~~ lf:.!::dt:-t-- /lts: Mayor .-.-.. ,/ ./''"--_::,-Attest: , ....... ,; •' alton; · · y,t:;l · , Q ....... , .. ,# .,. ' ,/'c-;: '•,. . .~.•.,_,,,r. 1 •• ~ .. ~ ' .... •• '··fl--· . "' ,. STATE OF WASHINGTON ;':. ,:t}.c( . \:: ~ ss.. .... ' .... ""' ' i" COUNTY?F KING ; ,,i i \,.· . ii ii / ... ,,. ·· .. ~· .... }'Q, ... ·~~~~/ t,6ertifyt~at I know or have satisfac;~ evi~hc:ith;i{Mi.~h~l·P} C)jrl~(j(j~~ who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged ,that said petso1i signed this instnuiient,/on oath stated that said person was autliopt.ed)o ex:ec'(lte the ihsttUment and acknowledied)t ~; the President of Seco Development, Inc} a Washington ,eorptiration, the M~ager,:of S())UTBJ>ORT ONE, LLC, a Washington limited liabi.lif¥ corii.J1ahy,,fo be the free at:14 volµntary'act ()f s~ch.party for the uses and purposes mentioned-~ the instrument. ., 'mt~tl)i~·,,,·· ... • ·[<3f day of Auq ~lr' ,2005. . . ... ,, 'f) c_p ?" ~ I .,,,.~··· ~6. ~ ••.. :.:\l,',!!li,l,i;,,,,, ··. ·····:·_. (~ignature of Notary) :. ~' C"' · IN · "" :·. • · · :,,,.,l V :t;;:&11.4 ~ ~-i' . ·. . L Co [ . ~~j'f~ ·· t~ ~ .. ,: : . · [ I hg. § ::if! otRr( ·i z ~ .. ~---+. -..... ----"---'C..::..------- : i" ~ _;,~' ~· TB: .,·• (~egi~Iy Print qr Stamp Name ofNotary) ~ \ Pita/ /~'j/ ~o~ .. ;· p. _ybIIi irifu,ldfot the state of Washington, ~~;;,·~':.~~,f, :r:s1,dmgat_"-_:·_./2P"""-':::.· Lf.LhR-"·,'-' .. , ... y,_ __ ------- ,., ~ OF ',Jill'< ,,, .. .. • .. "... • ·: .·· .,. / 2 g "' /' '11//IIIJlll\\11 . ,. ~y a~OI)itm~nt expires·· ·.· =y ' 1./ t;;:> .-... ,· / _: .. :: :: · .. 8 .. ,,, •. ,.,,,.··"' ~fr ATE.-OF WASHINGTON ,( /. Q()lJ_NTY OF KING ,,' .. :. ·,·,·.. ,• ss. . / _i ~rfi.fJ'ih~~iknow or Jiava-~;1tisfacto~ evidence that Ka.+ny K~o/Ker-k!hl!t!ler . 1~the perso~:whq,.appear,ed,~fore ll)t:, !llld SB1d person acknowledged that said person signed ··this irtstrtin1ent,,<m Qath :stined tha:f-taiq.pei;:,pn was authorized to execute the instrument and acknbw}edgedit as,the ,,·· "'-0,,ar/· / ,, of CITY OF RENTON, a Washington municipal e,orp6rationfto _\ie thi/ e1e ~d ;v~lu,itaiy act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned fa the instri.unent. _ _-· · ··... "--./ . s'M /~(f ~,, ~y:;~ . •:,.~.-· Dated this , 2005. -· (Sig1;1ltt~. ofNotafy) .-(.130~-~il ±./···r;Jo_l,fon 0,egibiY,l>ritit o:r'Stamj),Niilil,e of No~)'' NofilrY~uplic iri andlor·the'~ta~~ ot:Waiihington, residing aL _·-~e.&bfl i / i My appoin~~t ~_xpifes/ :I L fl ;.(Jo" •,, .. ' -· ·.:~ 9 EXHIBIT A TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT I ,egal Description of Onmtor Property ' Ll;i{ 1, City 6£ R~~toa Shi:lrt Plan,No:WA-99-134-SHPL. according to the Short Plat recorded J)inuazy 3J; 7<)00,_umler ,\FN,~1?1900006, in King County, Washington. :· ./ :· ;. _,..:' ::· :_. .:: ,,•"'I:_( ,.,,····"··,·-·.-• .. ,· )'.~.:'l':/ ,· . <t/ / "\~ ··"'··-, EXHIBIT B -LOT 1 TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ,,""·~·· LOT 2 ·:,. ,· ( ,,,,." .. i\/' '.i,. ··'· \. .,/'·,\ ao .. ...,. coi,c. IIIJIJ048AD ,. . ...... _, 4 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY EASEMENT SKETCH PREPARED FOR: SECO DEVELOPMENT; ING( .. .. SOUTHPORT PROJf!CT .. . . ~ ·, '"' EXHIBIT C • LOT 1 ... TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ., .... ,o,;, ,. ,,,; / . /DESCRIPTION .•.· PEDESTRIAN,-WAU<WAY EASEMENT . { ···'.. ,' .;' iHAf EbR1lQ.{ 0~ L~f l, ,t{r{ OJ'•iEliri'ON SHORT PIJI.T NO. LUA-99-134- SHPL, ··:!!ECORDE:P' UNDEI.!/ 'atcoRD!t)G ·Np/ 20000131900006, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY ,/WASHINGTON,}' LYIN.~ .. WJ,:THIN A STRIP OF LAND 12, 00 FEET IN WIDTH/'·'THE ·:NORTHWESTERL! CLI1'1E OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : " .: .: / . .,· ./ . COMMENCING AT ';fif MO~T J~R±~EiY/~~~;~~: OF ~/ 4, SAID SHORT PLAT, THENCE SOUTH 4t0 22.iOEi EAS-(7.0,l\FEEt AWNifTHE LINE COMMON TO SAID LOTS 1 AND 4 ·tel' THE T;RUJi POINT "OF ,,BEGINNING OF SAID LINE DESCRIBED HEREIN; {. :' :,• / ··-,,.:' . .: / .... . THENCE NORTH 46°35'54" EASThl0.13 >'EET; . . ./ ...... ,,. /'·. THENQE····~ORTH 46°56' 58" EAST 114\5f'l!'EE"l'; ;' ,· '•,, ...... \ / , THENCE NORTH 47°45'50" EAST 35.24. FEET/TO' TH£ NOR'l'HEA$TERLY .LI$ OF .SAID LOT: 1 AND THE TERMINUS or··sAit> I/i:NE.,'DESCJ\':tf3ED.HEMI.N AND FROM S.l\I.D TE/i<MINUS THE MOST WESTERLY CO!WER OF LO.T--2, stio . ..-sH~RT Pµ>.T, /BE1l.RS NORTH 40°13'28" WEST 7.00 FEET otszjllir} . ' .• .fHE l!~U'l'-~EAS;ERLY LINE OF THIS EASEMENT SHALL B1i, .... S9 SJfoi~ENJ!jp OR , LENGTHENED SO AS TO MEET AT ANGLE POINTS AND TEaMINAl'E IN THE SOIJTHWisTERLY''AND ·NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAID LOT 1· •. : SIT~A;E IN?;rHE .. •Cl;TY 't>F RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ·tYING IN 0'rHE SOU7'1!WESTiQUA.RTER OE .. SECTION 5 AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF sEitT:roN a/ TOWN;.ar~ z,•(NoR'i'H, RANGE 5 EAsT, w.M. ·, ·' ·' ,-.,,· SECO DEVELOPMENT, INC. SOUTHPORT JOHANN.G. WASSERMANN, P.L.S. ~RH-'JQB'•lllQ. 99036.11 :' MA!l,CH/ l O /,.2·(/. 0 5 _;: REVISED JULY •:13, 2005 .. .: .. k-q$H, /ROED &•"HJTCHINGS, INC • . : 2009 .MIN!)R }WE)i;IUE .: EJ\fo'l''"•· .... ~TcTLE/ WA 9fl04' _./ .. (206) 323~414.4 . ,,' .( :'· EXHIBIT D .,· . /" JO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ,.,,, ........ -··· Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment Face Page COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE Issued by File No.: NCS-346862-WAl FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY First American Title Insurance Company, herein called the Company, for valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagor of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of the Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment if preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six (6) months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned by an authorized officer or agent. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this commitment to be signed and sealed, to become valid when countersigned by an authorized officer or agent of the Company, all in accordance with its By-Laws. This Commitment is effective as of the date shown in Schedule A as "Effective Date." First American Title Insurance Company /'!}!-u ~-President By: Attest: IJ1 ,<,,t,,[ J:._ ~ Secretary By: ~T ~ Countersigned First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment i h~'iEJ.1 1 .... ~ ':', (·~, ::,~~" - File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Page No. 1 First American Title Insurance Company To: National Commercial Services 818 Stewart Street, Suite 800, Seattle, WA 98101 (206)728-0400 -(800)526-7544 FAX (206)448-6348 Lavonne Bowman (206)615-3269 lavbowman@firstam.com Seco Development, Inc. 1083 Lake Washington Boulevard, Suite SO Renton, WA 98056 Attn: Lisa Collins THIRD REPORT SCHEDULE A 1. Commitment Date: May 02, 2014 at 7:30 A.M. 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Your Ref No.: Southport LLC AMOUNT PREMIUM TAX Extended Mortgagee's Coverage Proposed Insured: To follow $ To follow $ $ 3. The estate or interest in the land described on Page 2 herein is Fee Simple as to Parcel A and Easement as to Parcel B, and title thereto is at the effective date hereof vested in: Southport, LLC, a Washington limited liability company 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment EXHIBIT 'A' LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL A: File No.: NCS-346862-WA! Page No. 2 LOT 4 OF CITY OF RENTON SHORT PLAT NO. LUA-99-134-SHPL, ACCORDING TO SHORT PLAT RECORDED JANUARY 31, 2000 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20000131900006, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND RAILROAD CROSSINGS AS ESTABLISHED IN INSTRUMENTS RECORDED JULY 11, 1967, FEBRUARY 1, 1999 AND JANUARY 31, 2000 UNDER RECORDING NOS. 6201855, 6317510, 9902019014 AND 20000131900006, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment SCHEDULE B -SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the Requirements to be complied with: File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Page No. 3 Item (A) Payment to or for the account of the Grantors or Mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. Item (B) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record. Item (C) Pay us the premiums, fees and charges for the policy. Item (D) You must tell us in writing the name of anyone not referred to in this Commitment who will get an interest in the land or who will make a loan on the land. We may then make additional requirements or exceptions SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 GENERAL EXCEPTIONS The Policy or Policies to be issued will contain Exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. A. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. B. Any facts, rights, interest, or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of person in possession thereof. C. Easements, claims of easement or encumbrances which are not shown by the public records. D. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by public records. E. (1) Unpatented mining claims; (2) reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (3) Water rights, claims or title to water; whether or not the matters excepted under (1), (2) or (3) are shown by the public records; (4) Indian Tribal Codes or Regulations, Indian Treaty or Aboriginal Rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. F. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, materials or medical assistance theretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance, construction, tap or reimbursement charges/costs for sewer, water, garbage or electricity. H. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgages thereon covered by this Commitment. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment 1. SCHEDULE B -SECTION 2 ( continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS General Taxes for the year 2014. Tax Account No.: 082305-9216-01 Amount Billed: Amount Paid: Amount Due: Assessed Land Value: Assessed Improvement Value: $ 84,604.72 $ 42,302.36 $ 42,302.36 $ 5,936,400.00 $ 0.00 2. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: March 14, 1968, Recording No. 6317510 In Favor of: City of Renton, a municipal corporation File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Page No. 4 For: Right of way for roadway and related utility purposes Affects: Refer to said instrument for exact location 3. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: July 26, 1984, Recording No. 8407260401 In Favor of: City of Renton, a municipal corporation For: Maintenance, testing and inspection of a fire main with the necessary appurtenances Affects: Refer to said instrument for the exact location on Parcel B 4. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: February 26, 1999, Recording No. 9902264178 In Favor of: Puget Sound Energy, Inc. For: Ingress, egress, gas and electric lines, utilities and maintenance Affects: A portion of Pa reel B 5. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: February 1, 1999, Recording No. 9902019014 For: Affects: Ingress, egress and utilities Portion of Parcel B 6. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements: Recorded: February 26, 1999 Recording No.: 9902264177 7. Restrictions, conditions, dedications, notes, easements and provisions, if any, as contained and/or delineated on the face of the Short Plat recorded January 31, 2000 under Recording No. 20000131900006, in King County, Washington. 8. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements: Recorded: November 17, 2000 Recording No.: 20001117000535 First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment 9. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: File No.: NCS-346862-WA! Page No. 5 Recording Information: December 5, 2002, Recording No. 20021205000523 In Favor of: Puget Sound Energy, Inc., a Washington corporation For: Right to construct, operate, maintain, repair, replace, improve, remove, enlarge, and use the easement area for one or more utility systems for purposes of transmission, distribution and sale of gas and electricity Affects: Northeasterly portion of said premises 10. A document entitled "Pedestrian Walkway Easement Agreement", executed by and between Southport, LLC, a Washington limited liability company and City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation recorded October 21, 2005, as Instrument No. 20051021000896 of Official Records. 11. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 20080630002054 In Favor of: City of Renton For: Drainage 12. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 20080630002055 In Favor of: City of Renton For: Sanitary sewer 13. Easement, including terms and provisions contained therein: Recording Information: 20080630002056 In Favor of: City of Renton For: Water utility 14. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Storm Drainage Easement Agreement" recorded February 7, 2013 as 20130207001325 of Official Records. 15. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Access, Landscape and Utilities Easement Agreement" recorded February 7, 2013 as 20130207001327 of Official Records. 16. Deed of Trust and the terms and conditions thereof. Grantor/Trustor: Grantee/Beneficiary: Trustee: Amount: Recorded: Recording Information: Southport, LLC, a Washington limited liability company First Financial Diversified Corporation First Savings Bank Northwest $5,000,000.00 April 21, 2014 20140421001363 17. Any question as to the true location of the lateral boundaries of the Lake Washington. 18. Right of the State of Washington in and to that portion, if any, of the property herein described which lies below the line of ordinary high water of Lake Washington. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) commitment File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Page No. 6 19. Rights of the general public to the unrestricted use of all the waters of a navigable body of water not only for the primary purpose of navigation, but also for corollary purposes; including (but not limited to) fishing, boating, bathing, swimming, water skiing and other related recreational purposes, as those waters may affect the tidelands, shorelands or adjoining uplands and whether the level of the water has been raised naturally or artificially to a maintained or fluctuating level, all as further defined by the decisional law of this state. (Affects all of the premises subject to such submergence) 20. Evidence of the authority of the individual(s) to execute the forthcoming document for Southport, LLC, a Washington limited liability company, copies of the current operating agreement should be submitted prior to closing. 21. Unrecorded leaseholds, if any, rights of vendors and security agreement on personal property and rights of tenants, and secured parties to remove trade fixtures at the expiration of the term. INFORMATIONAL NOTES A. Effective January 1, 1997, and pursuant to amendment of Washington State Statutes relating to standardization of recorded documents, the following format and content requirements must be met. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the document by the recorder. B. Any sketch attached hereto is done so as a courtesy only and is not part of any title commitment or policy. It is furnished solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises and First American expressly disclaims any liability which may result from reliance made upon it. C. The description can be abbreviated as suggested below if necessary to meet standardization requirements. The full text of the description must appear in the document(s) to be insured. LUA-99-134-SHPL Rec. 20000131900006 APN: 082305-9216-01 Property Address: 1101 Lake Washington Blvd North, Renton, WA 98056 D. A fee will be charged upon the cancellation of this Commitment pursuant to the Washington State Insurance Code and the filed Rate Schedule of the Company. END OF SCHEDULE B First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment c..,; ,1,, M f; k I ~ ~.I.¥ -First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services COMMITMENT Conditions and Stipulations File No.: NCS-346862-WAI Page No. 7 1. The term "mortgage" when used herein shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of a defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment, other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act or reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclosure such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option, may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of Policy or Policies committed for, and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or ( c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the Policy or Policies committed for and such liability is subject to the Insuring provisions, exclusion from coverage, and the Conditions and Stipulations of the form of Policy or Policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by references, and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any claim of loss or damage, whether or not based on negligence, and which arises out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the lien of the Insured mortgage covered hereby or any action asserting such claim, shall be restricted to the provisions and Conditions and Stipulations of this Commitment. First American Title Insurance Company Form WA-5 (6/76) Commitment The First American Corporation First American Title Insurance Company National Commercial Services PRIVACY POLICY We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Infonnation File No.: NCS-346862-WAl Page No. 8 In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our parent company, The First American Corporation, we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information which you provide to us. It does not govern the manner in which we may use information we have obtained from any other source, such as information obtained from a public record or from another person or entity. First American has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal information regardless of its source. First American calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values, a copy of which can be found on our website at www.firstam.com. Types of Information Depending upon which of our services you are utilizing, the types of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: • Information we receive from you on applications, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means; • Information about your transactions with us, our affiliated companies, or others; and· • Information we receive from a consumer reporting agency. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any nonaffiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to nonaffiliated parties except: (1) as necessary for us to provide the product or service you have requested of us; or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purpose, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. We may also provide all of the types of nonpublic personal information listed above to one or more of our affiliated companies. Such affiliated companies include financial service providers, such as title insurers, property and casualty insurers, and trust and investment advisory companies, or companies involved in real estate services, such as appraisal companies, home warranty companies, and escrow companies. Furthermore, we may also provide all the infonnation we collect, as described above, to companies that perform marketing services on our behalf, on behalf of our affiliated companies, or to other financial institutions with whom we or our affiliated companies have joint marketing agreements. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your information. We restrict access to nonpublic personal information about you to those indiViduals and entities who need to know that information to provide products or services to you. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and First American's Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. c 2001 The First American Corporation -All Rights Reserved First American Title Insurance Company PEDES'l'RIAN W~~A~ EAS&MENT AGREEMENT ···· .... / _;··· .. ,· /. .r ,,,· ·:=:. ,/ )' GRANTOR: GRANTEE: LEGALDESClUPTION (Grant9f Property).: .. -.:;. . .. / SOlfI'fil>Oki, LI,.e~.a Washi~ limited liability company ·-·.. _·. :. ,. ·: ;" :: :: ·.' ,:, . CITYP,F ~NTON, aW8$hington,muni"ipal coipo~on Lot 4 0: City~f·~:~tJh short'P!a/~c{L\f:299.114.~L, recorded unde/Ar1.f 2qQO(l,.13 ~960b06·--·· / ./ i Additional Legals on pp.10-1} ;. · .. ,,,_,..--.:~ ASSESS.ORS; TA){ _,,. i.iARc:t1 ID Not (aranior .. P,roperty):· ·. · ·· 082305-9216 REFERENCENo.~· ~"··J.::C>Os-O/J.G ·~;:,._,.,,, .. . THIS PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY EASEMENT AGREEMENT ("Easement"), effective th,i~ /S,:*, day of {)et:;,,J.w, 2005, is made by and between SOUTHPORT, LLC, a W~ngton-limited liability company ("Grantor"), and CITY OF RENTON, a Washington ,,fullllic\p,1!1 corporation ("Grantee"). { .. :. ·;. •' RECITALS ). ,/ / ,_{ ,.,.-·\·,_ ~: ;::.-.~./-) <. / _A. ; ;' Grilhtor is ~~;'owne_rof !'el!J.pr.pperty located in King County, Washington legally desctibedonExhlbit.A $ob,ed hef\ltp (fue "~tor Property"). -·.·-· ..... :· ~'.-=: .. ;, .... ,..... ../' _,-/ .:·.· .. .;./:./'"=.; /.,,} ./· ") B. 0 The G~ne Il Cqtilo1(Memo'¢al ·~ch Park, a municipal public park operated by Grantee, is lo~,·rtorth.eastefrly of th~ ~tor Property (the "Park"). The Park contains a public walkway, a portjbn Qf which i:i alcnig .t:fi.e southern shorelj,ne of Lake Washington (the "Walkway"). '< .... "/ _/ / ,-:-'. /: _/·····--··-·.,,._. _/···.\ C. Grantee desires 'to. ekten~ tb.~ \Val){IWy fh:\m.,the:Park across a portion of the Grantor Property. · · ,· · · · ,. ··,·,. D. /, Grantor has agreed to grant lUl ~~~~nt/~r.tiss ·'thi:it.--p<>rti~n of,•thti Grantor Property 1epicted·-op. Exhibit B attached hereto iu:iqJ~gaily d~ri'~ed,.in'.Exbibij C 1lftaslied hereto (the "Eii.semept Area") for the purpose of operating .#nd Jna,ihtainfo.g a ptibl}c ~kway for pedestriim ust\ is\ibject to the terms and conditions set forih hereiµ. .,.. . ;-/ .C • ·' .. .-.• :: .. .. .. . . AGREEMENT •R"'\:• lilfw"!beranc:eofthe n.~itals set forth above, which are incorpo~;tea:J1e,fein by reference, and * consider~fi?h o(.th~. mutual promises and covenants set forth below, .iind for other good and viui¢.,l~. c6ru,ide~atiotf; the ~ceipt,,of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: .... -· ;_ ' / ; ,.i :. 1. Grliit .. of ~efuenf: Gi:~to!-' hereby conveys and quitclaims to Grantee a perpetual, non-exclusive·'easeinen:t over, acl'()Ss, and \ipQp. the Easement Area for the purpose of operating and maintaining a pt1blic·w~ay for:ped¢ri~ us~. ·.":._ / .:· _.-:· / / i . ·::· This Easement shall incltide tli~ right io aebesSby the'~tee (including its employees, agents and contractors) over the surfaceiof the··Eas~erit Area. as n\bce~ for the Grantee to satisfy its maintenance and repair obligatiQp,s.·'al; set foith.fo ~ctio!1 6, irti;luding inspection at reasonable intervals. ·· : ·· ' · ·· · · _.,,·-"'•':· ... 2. Reservation of Rights. Grantor rese~erithe.rigl)t to'use"°the E;.ls1:me~t l\.r.ea in order to construct, maintain, operate, or repair any of Grantor's iinptovements -!!lid/or u:ses oitth~ Grantor Property. This reservation shall include, but not b~-lil)il~ to, $.e rigp.t)iq: (a:}'tci maintain, inspect, repair, replace, and operate any below-ground i:iti-lities lo<iate4. nchv or _in.the .. .. . ' : 2 tuJe within the Easement Area; (b) to temporarily block or interrupt access to the Easement Ateirfor•yehicle loading/unloading, deliveries, maintenance vehicles, and/or emergency vehicles; <111d·(c) ,to·blO<;k access to the Easement Area for up to 24 consecutive hours, or longer with the /prjbr wJtten approval of Grantee, for special events on the Grantor Property, including, but not ,/· limit¢ td, coticer,ts,,-.~ddings, and conventions. The reservation set forth in subsection 2( c) ··,,.,., · aboye $ill apply on!y.,until tpe·"G\ty or a third party designated by the City completes /constru¢tio1l'qfthe_SIWI C4astaµi Wat~nt Trail extension trail between point A and point Bas sf),6wn on _EJ!hibt{ D hertito/ and 9_fily s_~ 1011$ as such trail remains open to the public and is mainti\in~ fu a(go9(1 a~ fpnctior\aJ.jronditip'n(,,ptantor further reserves the right to use the Easement Af.ea for-' any ot!for pv,iip6ses n.6t·' ~bol,igistent with the easement rights granted in Section I, pr6v.ided tl:Jai: such Qfher'·uses dq,'nofwireasonably interfere with Grantee's use of the Easement Area>"·---· /' ._:-" / / t,./· _./ --,,_, 3. Limitatiohs Q~ Eas~meb:. ,-h~/:_;is·e~~ribights ~ted in Section 1 above are further limited as follows: -·-f / :-" A. The easem~;;-t ri~t~i~imt(# he~k;ma~ Jfe ex;e,rcised only during those hours when Qene Coulon Park is open to the i,ublib~as mayJfo mbdtned from,tirne !Qtm:ie. ···. -~-. . __ B> ___ The easement rights grarited.befuili ar4?'lin;ute;,t~ -~destri.µ1 1:9-fuiectivity only. Sµch rights do._ not include any rights of assembly{sp_eecl1'; de~trati_on,.-br petition, and does nqt authorize ~biting any placard, signs or notices, df11tril)utjn:g any Qircular, handbill, placard, or j:iookjet, s6.liciting membership or contributions, paraiµngipicketingor J6itering. --~ :. :i ,· •'·'.· , ...... ··:::: .:: :. •' / ,i , •C. / _Jhe''eru,ement rights granted herein do not inclril:le:\¥ right to ingest, sell ordistribute-alcoMb'iiithin the''~ment Area. ' ,,/ .. , .. -D. ( ,Exctipt a# p~vided in Paragraph 6 below, Grantee shall not have the right to make ariy temporafy gf pernµfuent improvements, including installing landscaping, benches, signage, or other ;~bove:gra¢e/strucrui'es, within the Easement Area without the prior written consent ofthe Grantw. ,· --,,-·, : ' - ·,:,.,, .. 4. Improvement cif &is'e:fuent Afea./Graiitor_,:~hitl!be responsible at its sole cost and expense for designing and constzycting,an.i\.t-grade.pedestr,ian ~ay over the Easement Area Grantor plans to construct the J)Mestrian Wlllk11fay Jn ,two ·'phases. As of the date of this Easement, Grantor has already construcl¢d a iempotary' paved;pedci°ml.iin. walkway within the Easement Area ("Temporary Walkway")."· Graptor,agrees Jo repla~Jhis Temporary Walkway with a permanent walkway ("Pennanent Walk~y'') qi conjumilioq'wi~ develpping_the Grantor Property consistent with future site plan approvals fodhe ,Gnu:itor fropfaty. _ --· . .. .. ' . . .: 3 .. . 5. Restrictions on Easement Area Improvements. The parties agree that any iqipr<ivei;nents to the Easement Area, including both the Temporary Walkway and the Pennanent Wa1kw~; shall be designed to be consistent with Grantor's use of the remainder of the Grantor /Propei;ty,_and any other properties owned by the Grantor abutting the Grantor Property. ·' -· .• .. .~--,-., ·· '• .... / . :,: 6.i . ,' Mainte~ce of f.asen}ent Area. Grantor shall maintain at its sole cost and / expen~ the' 'feml)O!'IVY \valkiay nv"'a good and functional manner. Grantor's obligation to ni,a.int\llll :thti Teiripo#m"YXWa!kwi~.f·'shajl "terminate upon the replacement of the Temporary Walkwaywith tile P¢n:naneht WalkJvay'm the;,~ment Area . . ·'.· .. .-:: \.. ··:·,:, .... / }/ /._:" ,_./·· .. ,;.(./' . {, .. ,:_,': ./' )1 Following Gr;tl'l.tor's CQnstru!;tion 9f,tjie.-.1'ennanent Walkway on the Easement Area, Grantee shall assum:~ re~onsibility; at jt~;s6le' ·~st and expense, for maintaining and repairing the Permanent Walkway. This respqnsi~iity/shalJ ... ~lso include4he obligation to replace the Permanent Walkway, as ij,eeded{ prqvide'd tl.l~t,,,Grantee shall ~bqiit its schematic plans and construction details for any proposed i:ep~'inent .. pf all or )my portion of the Permanent Walkway to Grantor at least siX:ty. (60)}law~~fon,:"cortw1dici.ng·construction, and Grantee must obtain Grantor's prior written consent Jo ;iny /such ptfuwi' ~ d,¢a.i.l~ before commencing construction, ·.,.,,, :.. · · ,.. ··· ·· '·•· Qrantee's'~ntenance, repair and replabem.enlobligatiol\S'S~;;{;::~: petfoqtieq:·~nsistent with the . .followjng conditions and restrictions: . . .. . if / A. : The Grantee shall maintain the Pennaneht Walkway' tcla level consistent wifu::ihe 9iiality· of either improvements on the Grantor Property,' buli:h ~6 ~en(shall that level falFbelo.w the s~a;dsTo:r, i;ither pedestrian walkways maintained by• Gl'/Ultee along the Lake Washington shoreline and/or other parks owned or managed by Grantee. .. . . -· . ..... -/B, / .<ira;'ltee ,slutllpetform all maintenance, repair and/or replacement work in a careful, workm~~ miinn~,.free of clan.us or liens. :, .. -,: C. C..,,., Gnylt~ s~il peifoi;,in a'll maintenance, repair and/or replacement work in a manner so as not to uiireas~nabiy ~!}terfere with the tis<). and enjoyment of the remainder of the Grantor Property. · .... ··... ·· " ·· ·· D. Grantee sb·~n p~rfQfm all $1in«:~~e, ~;ir and/or replacement work in a manner so as not to unreasonably block pedestriai:t' or,'vel;rlcutar aceess··to, from and/or across the Easement Area by the Grantor, lts . .siiccessor~, 8$signs, 1.e§sees, i sublessees, tenants, subtenants, invitees, employees, contractors or igi,rits/ · i' ·· ·· E. Grantee shall perform all maintenanc{ repairimd/b/rep~meilt Wo!'k in a manner so as not to block any views from the Grantor Property of Lake W11$!iington. without first obtaining the prior written consent of the Grantor. · · ' · · . . · · .:. ' ·.' 4 .,,,,.."••.,., .. F. Grantee shall perform all maintenance, repair and/or replacement work in a .prciriipt and timely manner. Once Grantee has initiated any maintenance, repair and/or ~ciplaceajent ~ork in the Easement Area, Grantee shall continue such work through completion .'without any unreasonable delay . . i .:· ... ·.,,,,. :: . 1$e fo;ego~"sh<l.11 not preveoJ Grantor from also maintaining portions of the Easement Area ifGranioielec.tsto do SQ,(liilt without any obligation ofGrantor to do so). < / , 7.' . :/ ru;{~cahonj 0-{;ast!,~nf'N~} Jlrantor shall have the right to relocate the Easem~ ~a fmm ti~ to'time iffutmeoti.6n:~th a general improvement plan for the Grantor Property, pr6yided th.?f· the ne~ fokation 'of tli~)?asement Area shall be no more than 20 feet from the locatfon,.set"fort,h in Exhibits ij llfjq'C,.and shall be sufficient to serve the Grantee for the same purposes and.fa ~ sai:n~ ~er al the location designated in this Easement; and provided further that the G~tor.:shalf nofblqek !)!''cloS<: access ,(ci'tpe Easement Area depicted and legally described in Eihibiti B lll!d C lll)fil Grantor !iii$ operi!.lditb.e relocated easement area to the public for use as a public .. "'.iilk\vay fo1{ped_e§m.an lise<' 'Qr.futtor shall perform any such relocation at its sole cost and expen*. TJ pcin sµch relocatirin, .lind at the request of Grantor, Grantor and Grantee shall amend this Eilse$en( to. specify th1{ ne)ef"iofatipn of the,Jlasement AreL -~ " .. 8;' .. E~~ents Run with the Land. T.!ie ~t oi tli& f~~~gofug liasefue¢ shall run with th¢'lan~°iin.d in~e to the benefit and be binding up6nJJie ~uccesso~ and~igns of Grantee and Giantoi, respectively, and shall bind the Gran tor Property\as fh.e sub~rvi~ntJenement and benefit thc(Parl(as t4e dominant tenements, for so long as the Pai'k,l'eniaiD;S oi:ien !O the public. ·. ... ... . . ' ' / 9; o' BNlich: , In the,event of any breach or threatened breach.ofpri{Easement by the ~tor or-'Clr3J!~i the,.nop.-defaulting party shall have the right to sue for damages and/or for specini:: perfo~ apo!o~to ejijo~ SlJRli breach or threatened breach. '''··,,,, ... ,,·· _·, _;':' , .. : .;· ...... ·::._ . 10. Ri~k of'Dfunag~. ~y-:µse 9f tbe Grantor Property, including the Easement Area, by Grantee, or lt,s succ~s~irs, Jssi~s,i le.iisee,s, sublessees, tenants, subtenants, invitees, employees, contractors.or agents (the "Beiiefjted Parties"') shall be deemed to be at the risk of the person or entity using the sarije, alld,(lrantor shail n<rt beliaJ,le or responsible for any damage to property or injury to person\ir loss 9f life that tjiay_:res.tifr '00 Grantee, and/or the Benefited Parties, or any other person, except.tdth¢' extent !)iiused by !@·gross negligence of the Grantor, its agents or employees. Grantee and/oi(any 'of tfie $en¢fi.tel! .. Parti~s .~l not commit waste or create or permit nuisances on the Easement _.f,\rea .. ' G;rilnt\'J~ a¢.cepts thc:"l;!asement Area in its present condition, "AS-IS," and Grantor sha!J.hav¢ no du~es ¥i Grantee, ~xcept as provided in Sections 4 and 6 above, regarding the conditiono(the/llaseineJit A;rea,,-~<lfwilru,tanding the foregoing, this Section 10 shall not apply with regar,tfo !Uiy defe¢t(s).'iri the Easei)lent Area existing prior to the date on which the Grantee asstune:{responsibility for•:~tajn.mg .~d repairing the Permanent Walkway pursuant to Section 6 above/ w4/ch .iir¢ knpWl) lo tl,ie Gratjiot;- but not known to the Grantee and not disclosed by the Grantor to ~,9~tee'.. , ·<.,/ .· ... 5 · 'JJ. Indemnification. Grantee hereby releases, indemnifies and promises to defend !!ftd·savi(hahnless Grantor from and against any and all liability, loss, damage, expense, actions .Jmci cliµms, itjpluding costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred by Grantor in defense .,./ ~reoi,' asserted o~ . .m;ising directly or indirectly on account of or out of acts or omissions of , ..... , i Grantee ih the· ex~;_,ise of the rig!J.ts .. gqmted herein and/or in connection with or arising from the fuse of ftie ~eme;;nt Ar~; Mf~ded)however this paragraph does not purport to indemnify • Qfl!lltq:t against liability f oti damlfges iµ:isi.ni out of bodily injury to persons or damage to propeey 9itu.sed ~y oj resµ.lfulg frortt !!)t'gross)hc:gl.igence or willful misconduct of Grantor, or its agents OJ' employees'. /. /. .,, ... ,/ ,_/ · .t··J /. l If a c:;,Ult···Of',..:;tt;e~h: j~sdiptit11· ;;t~ines that this Easement is subject to the provisions of RCW 4.24.115\ the partjes· agreef that the indemnity provisions in this Easement shall be deemed amendedt~ conlornr'to iraid staµitii'andJiability shall be allocated as provided therein. ··· · ... · ·· ·. · ' ,1···'=_: 12. Insurance. Grante~'an4tor.ttsibo*~torii;"Jm,1\I0Jes \W.~ agents working on the Grantor Property or Easement Area shall 1na.intaitl)1.1 full force \illd ,effec(diwng the,teJ.'.!}l of this Easement ~ pell[yy of commercial general liahpity' and:pnwe~ ~ 4is~ance/e1$d to the Easemen\Area aili:l,_the City's use or occupancy·th!:~fiµ a (o~.acsept/lJ>le t~ Gfiintgr and with a minimµm Jiptit ot$5,000,000 per occurrence under which policy tile Gnmtor..:is ~ additional insure<L' ·· ·. ·· ·· ·· · · '· ·' ... · · · ·· / / 13 .. i Hazatdous Materials. In no event shall the Giihrtee/sto~, ,dispo~e, release, or dischargif froni, or otherwise.use any "Hazardous Materials" or other \\'8$te{or substances on the CJr.fuitorP.ropertyc'o.t"the Easement Area. "Hazardous Materials" meafis,~y (a) petroleum products or by-pfu4uc!$-;"{o) alf hazardous or toxic substances, wastes or materials or pollutants, includ'ing_~~iis ~ubs#inc~ ~defio,ed by §101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa#o1r'anql,Jability Act of 1980, as amended, and/or the Washington State Model Toxic Control Act, F,CW §70JP5.0JO,as amended; and (c) any other chemical, pollutant or material which 'lszeglllatecd b)!' any fe4erll'l, stitte or local governmental agency or authority under any environmentlil' lawi;. N.otwithstan.dingthe,filregoing, Hazardous Materials shall not be defined to include fuel or fµbrforuits, ne<;esslfty for the operation of Grantee's maintenance vehicles, inspection vehicles o}~runtQ!fance i;i,iuiprtJ.ent; provilleq that such materials are used in accordance with any and all applicable Hiizardou~Ma,terial law's; and are handled in a reasonably prudent manner. ,· · ...... · .:" 14. Termination. In the event GriintQibtis nbt brigun.dffyelopm~µLpf the Grantor Property pursuant to fmal site plan approvals withip fifteeri (15) ~-from the d_ate of this Easement, all rights granted by this Easement shall autoinatfoaHy terinina/e an\i~ of:no :.l.'µrther force and effect. Upon such termination, Grantor may recor4 tioti\ie ~reofM'.ithout th~'joii,J.~jl.l' of the Grantee. · =' ··· · · · · ·· :,\,, ... ·.,:·,. 6 15. General Provisions. _ _ 15.1 Notices. Any notice, request, approval, consent, or other communication /required. _or permitted to be given by any party to any other hereunder shall be in writing and // sliali_be deem¢d tQ.haye been duly given when delivered personally or by overnight courier; or , . .-·· rece,!'ved,':fol\pw.ihg deposit as pi:wafd certified mail (return receipt requested) with the United J States -ebstal Servipe;,,andc:add.¢ssed td the appropriate party at its address set forth below, or at '-subh ofue~a&eslas suclipaity shiffi'bayeiastdesignated by notice to the other. -. -G~NT¢~:) c/oJaili{~r;i;r!{t''j ,___ .,./ / 11)83 Lake W~'gkln Blvd. North, Suite 50 ·· · _}lentoµ, W~gt.qn 98056 -· GRANTEE:/ City of~~ntbn ,,/ _./' · · '· 1()55 SfG~y_W;i.y .- Rcmt9h, Was~ngton ,,980~5 , 15.2 Attorneys' Fees. fr any suit9rother}fr:ceedjrig·i'~-irJ.stjtuted b§!l!).y of the parties to t_!iisBa.sement arising out of or pertalping to t)us,Easeinent;,t))e·subsiantiiµly ptevai!ing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable,_;1ttbrneys'.-f~s--and .. aiJ c~sts/ancr expenses incurreq Il'Oll:\Jhe Stib.stantially non prevailing party, in a4~ition Ul su"h.oPter lj,Vltjfab)e relief. ,• . ',·, . . ·::,_ •. ~· .. : .. . .,.. _,. -.· / 1$.3 ; Entire Agreement. This Easement constlu.ites·t~e eµtir¢a~ment of the parti6s hcieto --witl:l respect to the matters dealt with herem·;-·jlndi Sj,ipersedes all prior co.11esporiden~, agtet)meii'ts ~d/or understandings, both verbal and wr.ittezyriot-contained in this A/ireenient.···This·Easement shall not be modified unless done so in writing,l,!rid signed by both parti1,s. ,.-i _/ ,/ ·\ ••· ·· · '"" 15~4 ,:Go~~rnfug"°Law. Th.is Easement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with tii.e laws of~ii state·ofWai,hiu~on. 15.5 '1:;ro·~~w.dken:: Far'lim,io ~thy either party under this Easement shall not constitute abandonment of:._the Easei;nent / ·· .'.' 15.6 Severability:··1he:'invijidity o'f fuly p;o~sion of this Easement as determined by a court of competent juriS\iictioii; · shall ip no.--~y aff~cfthe_ validity of any other provision hereof. · .... · · ·· · 7 •J·,, .. , ...... . . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Easement is executed by the parties, intending to be legally'bound, effective as of the date first written above. GRANTEE: l(;RAN'fOR: ·• / s6v~Ri .LLC: a Wash.ingt9n.Jin1ited : liablllcy,:con:ip![lly . •. .. / / CITY OF RENTON, a Washington municipal corporation .;)3y: _f_J_ ~-w~ ..... .// Nrun;;zMy Keolker-Wheeler (,,._Its: Mayor Attest: {k,,,_..,,1 1,'J. ula~ ··· . Bonnie /I·,. Wal ton, 'cite• G:k~rJi'.·-.,,. STATE OF WASHINGTON .-,/ ,/ \ / !' J;~·::···:;:~<-;::·· .. ··j·· .a.;• ,.<C, •.. ···ss. / .,;: .,,,, .... _.,· . ~ u..i . •_f w -. i ~ COUNTY OF KING : ::' i ." .... , ... ,.,> '· o\i"" f,f) : ~ .,,, ... ,,. . ··... ·: .. ,,,.i':: .. ,.. _.,,. i ,,( '"\,., ~ ... \t .. I ~ify'~t I know or ?ave satisfac;dry,,~vi.~n9~ tilt!~ .~i~~~i.): ~~~-~~n who app¢ared before me, and said person acknowledged·that siµd person s1!;l]ed_this:1nstrument, on oath.~te.dt!iat said person was authorized to execute t!if itistrumen( am;l'!ick:nowledged it as the Presid~t ~f S~o Development, Inc., a Washington\ cdrporatiqil, ;the'.Manager of SOllfHPORT,LLc; a Washington limited liability company, tci'be .. the :fr¢e ~d voluntary act of SUC~party for,fue U$t:Sll00,P.prposeS mentioned in the instrument. \.,,_/ /. :: D~t~dtqis'/ .. ,·\ /'S.f-······.·.,. 'P dayof '-P~ ,2005. . .... ~,,,,1n11,,,,,.' ,. t/lM..L A-~ ~,, sP> L.-co ~,~ . fG~;!*i%····. (~i~~olTJn~ € ~ .:.;~.;., :.(.] . E (Legibly Priiii"or Stamp Name of Notary) \~ -i.euo · ~ §·' ·.: N.·.' ~tan' ... ·' pub_ .. · "lic···fu arid . .f,hthe state of Washington, ~ o · 0 ·~-os o. ~ -· · · din a..ot " 1 I ,,., """~ ........ (§ .$"'• ...... , .. ·· res1 . g l!t-,,,.:·_..fV-~~·~--~,.,,. ~~------ ,,, *ASHI~ ,,, ·: ••. ..·. .:'. / ··:· .. f 90 ,,,,,,111 111'' ·.·.My appompnent eipires ;': -l-.:7 · 0 lo 8 st:ATE.QF WASHINGTON . 'COUNTY OF-KING . . ...• ,,, .. ss . · , .... ~ /,· ;/ I.bertify .. tlurt.lioi:Qw or h_~ve-~sfa~ory evidence that Kafhy K:ol~r-kJ~eder !s _c'th<;-=person ~.o ap~ed befswy-me, ¥1-d said person acknowledged that said person signed this ,ip,stnunent; on Qalli ,stated ,,:that ~ ~rson. was authorized to execute the instrument and ~kn?~ledg¢d it~ ,the / /lj1a.yo:,; ;/ ) / of CITY OF RENTON, a Washington muruc1pal CQ!J)Oi'atiOn, ).ti b,¢ th~.~ and ,;vo!uptary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned irflhe ins1r\li'nent. / .{,. '\ "-./ . ·' . .: .. . . - Dated this 5ili_ . .=--;' / /day or_ .... O ..... e .... v ... "d-f.N"". ~,.___ ___ ., 200s. { ,:! ,,,,.···"····1., / '., . ·:"~}~1-:p;~ :. (S1gnatu.re of Notary) / _. .. " . " '.•. 1201.1"' it!!. tr. /• · i,;;; f +6n. , . .,v . ..... . • . w.•·I,,\, ,. (Legll,ly Prinfot·S~p N1hnl"ot'..Notary).c' / Notar/pubI1~ tri and fq/the iitafu'of :W~hinston, residing at ;::Rc:,J11f Q11· · · · My appointment ;xpifes \. ·.;i ..q/;UJod ·. .. . ·: 9 ~,, ., ",. ',.., EXHIBIT A TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT Legal Desmptioo ofGtantor Pmperty •' Loi 4, (!ity 9f Jti:~ton Shc,rt Plan _ _)llo;·I,.UA-99-134-SHPL, according to the Short Plat recorded J!liJulllo/ 3~; Z()OO,µru;ler ~~q1900006, in King County, Washington. .... ' .~ .. ,- EXHIBIT B -LOT 4 TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ••M""• •• .... ~. SITlJm IN TIE CITY OF .RMON, KING .k..m,./ WASl•IIITOH, LYING If m· &W, -V4, l$EC1ION 5' AND N.W. f/4, SECTIOll 8, TOWN$1P.23 NOR"" RANGE 6 EAST, W.M. ·•,,,, ,.:. . . PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY ·e,..·setvt_EN1 $,t<erc~- PREPARED FOR: SECO DEVELOPMENT, JN'Q. SOUTHPORT PROJECT .. . . ·:,, .. ·~·., ........ EXHIBIT C • LOT 4 .. IO EASEMENT AGREEMENT ,,·""",,,;,,, : . /,. ,/ DESCRIPTION / ': PIDESlRIAN WALKWAY EASEMENT "Tru(T POaTIOR oi t~T 4,'>o:rt~ ;;)R,llN',!:ON SHORT PLAT NO. LUA-99-134- SHPLi. RECORDEit> t/NDER/~ECORllliiltGi N(f, 20000131900006, RECORDS OF KING C.OUNTY, /WASHINGTON, LYil'/G WI.:i»:!IN A STRIP OF L71ND 12. 00 FEET IN WI0'I!~1 .-"1'HE_.c" NORTHl'ij!STERJfr/'LJ:NE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : ... ._c'" i,-.-_i ,/'·-,' ./ /i COMMENCING AT\~ MOS.'.!' wt;TBt\LyfC91iN.ER'<:)E' SAID,i~tr: 4 THENCE SOUTH 43°07'33" EAST 7.00 ;FEET 1\l,ONG' THE SOUTHWESTEP;l,Y, LINE THEREOF TO THE TRUE POINT OF at~I!'iNI_~G OFiSAID'.i.:lNE:: DE;,S~"!BED HEREIN; THENCE NORTH 49°00'13'1 EAST ,-22.'; 78 .. iFEET-;. / / .. THENCE NORTH 46°23'46" EAST.'6!i°.94'. FEET;""/ .. .,,····"··... . .. THENCE NORTH 46°35 '54" EASf 40., 39",J;:EE;T TOiTH!ii NCRTHEASTERLY i:'filE OF SAID. LOT 4 AND THE TERMINUS ':OF SAID:· LINE l)ESCl\!BEP fitREI\11' AND FROM SAID TERMINUS THE MOST NOR'FJUJRL¥/ CORNE;:R C).E\,SiID LO'l/ 4 ;BE}l'RS NOI'lTH 43°22'06" WEST 7.01 FEET DISTANT'. . ... ·· ri!E s6u'i>HEASTERLY LINE OF THIS EASEMENT !fuA!;,1, sf. so S}R')R.'tENED OR LEN¢HENED SO AS TO MEET AT ANGLE POINTS A!l!D TERMifATE J:N THE _.''soq:tHw;sTE~LY AND NORTHEASTERLY LINES OF SAI0'··ifu0T 4/ i S;tTUA:fE It{ .l'ffE Cr.t'Y, OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHI;(;'r~, iY!NG IN .,.... Tli&,-·SOUT_H1'!,€ST Q,UARtER OF SECTION 5 AND THE NORTHWEST Cl!JARTER OF '.,_SECTION .. :""8/ TQii'N~HIE!: 23 NOR'l'll, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M. SECO DEVELOPMENT, INC. SOUTHPORT JOHANN G. WASSERMANN, P.L.S, BRH JOB NO. 99036.11 MARCH 10, 2005 REV.tSE;D JULY 13, 2005 . ,• •:. Bfis1i Rif; }: HITCHINGS, 2009 M.INOR AVENUE; EAST .SEATT;f.;E, )IA 98102 . (206F 32.3-4;1:11--1 . INC. s . EXHIBIT D TO EASEMENT AGREEMENT .-:. RECEIPT EG00023675 BILLING CONT ACT SOUTHPORT ONE LLC 1083 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N, #50 RENTON, WA 98056 REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME --- LUA14-000645 PLAN -Modification - PLAN -Shoreline Substantial Dev Permits PLAN -Site Plan Review -Admin Technology Fee Technology Fee Printed On: 5/16/2014 Prepared By: Rocale Timmons TRANSACTION TYPE Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment Fee Payment .. ..z City of _ 1(~1JtDJJ Transaction Date: May 16, 2014 PAYMENT METHOD ·-~- Check #1050 Check #1050 ~heck #1050 ~heck #1050 Check #1050 - AMOUNT PAID -- $200.00 $2,000.00 $1,000.00 $60.00 $36.00 SUB TOTAL $3,296.00 TOTAL $3,296.00 11.:, y ('J:i,··cr··r· -'' ·-j' ,.) ~ Page 1 of 1