Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA85-0480.1 RENTON DISTRICT COURT i JW....... .. ..."" r4d) E.INTERNAL CEMETERY ROM.. i I1 ter- - RMORML RAROQ LNC<TIRRAL_ NN SLATS INCHAIN-LINK( SLATS TO MC.CO• I` - SNAi' 1 '/ THIS BE 1 REMOVED UPONPROJECT COMPLETI I 1 I I I 1 I1, I 1-PNABE 1 LMR 1PHASE 1 LL' 1 E SEE'EXCAVATION AND GRADING PLAN' 1+.1 LT EX.u LIR LINX FENCE 1 M l' I 1 VT' I L I T EXISTING DOCCL UNDERBRUSHFIRTREESANDERBRUSH T PROVIDE SCREENING IN THE SHADED AREAS 1 A1 PROJECT ENTRANCE I FOR BOTH PHASES 1 8 2) c M+ YJJ Y 1 30'SETBACKS—1.4+ 't'. 4( ,y rr•3,^sS r' y-r3-r r,,; Dr __ --- —— f "f•--r • A Ff , 4 3r 4`c' T •R ', T ; 5 v KING COUNTY SHOP FACILITIES E.CONC.S.M. EX.CONC.CMMOVT/CRNVENAT ARRW EX.CONC.WO AND CuTTER- MONROE AVE. N.E. NTEALL CMAI*LNNR PENCE(S'MISII MM.)CHIN RRIRI SLATS/N SIRS On.. OENCE TO N OBgNES 1n RIIOAICT WllISTIOD0 N i M.A.SEGALE,INC. OLO NANL PIT) PHASE 1 SITE PLAN i Gary Merlino Construction Co. oR 1.... """"`"'" Bk . D.•/ S/N SEATTLE, WASHINGTON GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT a RENTON, WASHINGTON o—N..".-R EXHIBIT NO. irgilirRENT9N LTiaing1V0. 0 ulbli April 20, 1981 Municipal BuildingMonday, 8:00 P.M. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF RICHARD M. STREDICKE, Council President; THOMAS W. TRIMM, EARL CLYMER, COUNCIL ROBERT HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMAN JOHN REED. CARRIED. Councilman Charles Shane arrived shortly. CITY OFFICIALS BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE DAN KELLOGG , Asst. City Attorney; MAXINE MOTOR, Deputy City Clerk, W.E. BENNETT, Acting Finance Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks Director; MIKE PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; DAVE CLEMENS, Acting Planning Director; DON PERSSON, Police Rep. PRESS GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, ADOPT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 1981 AS WRITTEN. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Chris Crumbaugh, PO Box 88050, Tukwila, Attorney representing Metro Sand and Gravel , requested the matter re appeal of Rainier Sand and Rainier Sand & Gravel Special Permit SP-099-80 be heard at Gravel-Special this time. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND STREDICKE,TO SUSPEND Permit SP-099-80 THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AND READ THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Appeal COMMITTEE REPORT AT THIS TIME. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee report was read affirming decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 subject to the following modifications of the conditions set forth in that decision: a) Condition No. 1 should be modified to confirm the hours of operation to between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Monday through Friday; b) Condition No. 3 should be modifed to read-the submission and execution of Restrictive Covenants providing for maintenance of a holding pond with sedimentation clearing, which covenants should be perpetual and run with the land until such time as this requirement is found to be no longer necessary, or an acceptable alternative method of securing sedimentation clearing is available, which decision should be made by the Land Use Hearing Examiner of th'e City upon application by the land owner or other interested parties after public hearing thereon pursuant to Section 4-3010 (A) 10) ; c) Condition No. 4 should be modifed that such hold harmless agreement should also hold the City harmless from any liability for damages sustained by persons holding water appropriation rights downstream from the subject property for interruption, diversion or any change in natural surface or subsurface drainage patterns from the subject property, and; d) Conditions No. 8 and 9 should be deleted in their entirety. Ted Gathe, 411 E. Madison, Seattle, Attorney for Mt. Olivet Cemetery, noted their concern re any change in the quality and quanity of natural spring water being interrupted to their property. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND SHANE, TO CONCUR IN THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Tiffany Park Delores Newland, 1668 Lake Youngs Way, commented on the publicPublicWalkwaywalkwayinTiffanyParkandwhatanuisanceithasbecome. (See previous letter submitted to Council April 6, 1981 . ) Lawrence Brown, 3108 SE 17th Ct. , and Vivian Sather, 1672 Lake Youngs Way, also commented on the walkway noting the problems they have encountered with vandalism and erosion of the path. The Mayor noted that the City's staff is investigating the problem now and hoped to have a full report back to Council shortly. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion, which follows the business matters included: y f Renton City Council 4/20/81 Page 2 Consent Agenda - Continued Appointment Letter from Mayor Shinpoch reappointing Human Rights andHumanRightsAffairsCommissionMembersfortwoyeartermstobeeffectiveandAffairsthrough• April 23, 1983-Marilyn Bingaman, Barbara Lansing, and Albert Talley. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Transfer of Funds Letter from Ted Bennett, Acting Finance Director, requestedCoulonBeachtransferoffundsfromCoulonBeachConstructionFundtoGO BondsConstructionFundRedemptionFundintheamountof $466,000.00, for interest payment pending receipt of property taxes. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Comdemnation Letter from Richard Houghton, Acting Public Works Director,SW 43rd St. requested ordinance to condemn properties on SW 43rd Street Improvement project. Joint Project Kent/Renton, East to West Valley Highway. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. (See Ord. #3533) Travel Request Letter from Fire Chief Geissler and Police Chief Darby requested authorization for Detective Kittelson (Police Dept.) and Ken Walls Fire Dept. ) to attend the Northwest Fire 6 Arson Seminar to beheldatPortland, Oregon, May 4-8, 1981 . Request for $400.00 advance travel . Council Concur. Bid Openi •ig- City Clerk presented bid opening 4/14/81 for Gene Coulon BeachGeneCoulonBeachPark, Contract #2, ten bids received. Refer to Park Board.Park,Contract #2- Renton Park Board recommended award of contract to the low bidderBidAwardFrankColuccioConstructioninthetotalamountof $3,101 ,922.Mayor and City Clerk authorized to sign. Council concur. Claims fo •Claims for Damages were filed by Washington Natural Gas Co. forDamages-Washington 1 ) alleged scraped 20" main at 725 S. 19th St.-cost of repairsNaturalGasCo. $44.66; 2) alleged broken 2" main at 2700 NE 23rd St.-cost of repairs $49.86; 3) alleged gouged 4" main at 4625 Duval Ave. NE- cost of repairs $109.91 . Refer to City Attorney and InsuranceCarrier. Claim for Damages- Claim for Damages filed by James A. Hamrick for alleged vehicleJamesHam:•ick damage when he ran off the end of roadway northbound on ValleyParkwaySW. Claim in the amount of $1 ,466.53. Refer to CityAttorneyandInsuranceCarrier. LID 325 Letter from Del Mead, City Clerk, presented petition forSouthofSW43rdroadwayconstructionLIDinareasouthofSW43rdSt. andandEastofSReastofSR167, filed by D. Connell . Petition certified as167100%. Refer to Public Works Department for preparation of preliminary assessment roll . LID 325. Appeal Mt. Olivet An appeal has been filed by Theodore Gath, Attorney for Mt.Cemetery, Inc. Olivet Cemetery, Inc. regarding Land Use Hearing Examiner'sSP-047-80 recommendation for approval with conditions of Special Permit SP-047-80 to expand cemetery. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consent Agenda MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND ROCKHILL, TO APPROVE THE CONSENTApprovalAGENDAASPRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS Annexation Letter was read from Renton Chamber of Commerce requestingGuidelinesCouncilreviewitsexistingannexationguidelinesandadopt a positive annexation policy for the City per the "Sphere of Influence" already adopted. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, TO REFER MATTER TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL GO ON RECORD FAVORING A PHILOSOPHY OF CONTROLLED GROWTH WITH REGARD TO FURTHER ANNEXATIONS. CARRRIED. EXHIBIT NOIf7 xF ITEM NO. Q June 4, 1982 OFFICE OF THE LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER tiTY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION, APPLICANT: M. A. Segale, Inc. FILE NO. SP-032-82 LOCATION: West side of Monroe Avenue N.E. approximately 330 feet south of the intersection with N.E. 4th Street. SUMMARY OF REQUEST:The applicant seeks approval of a special permit to fill an existing 70-foot deep gravel pit with approximately 1 ,100,000 cubic yards of material . SUMMARY OF DECISION: Building & Zoning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions . Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with restrictive covenants. BUILDING & ZONING The Building & Zoning Department report was received by theDEPARTMENTREPORT: Examiner on May 6, 1982. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Building & Zoning Department report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on May 13, 1982 at 9:33 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the RentonMunicipalBuilding. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner, and the application file was entered into the record as follows : Exhibit #1 : Application File including Building & Zoning Department report and other pertinent documents The Examiner advised receipt of a request for continuation from James Colt, Mt. Olivet Cemetery, and he invited Mr. Colt 's comments . Responding was: James Colt P.O. Box 547 Renton, WA 98057 Mr. Colt submitted two additional exhibits into the record which were entered as follows: Exhibit #2: Map designating water rights and water shed areas for Mt. Olivet Cemetery ; File No. SP-099-80, Rainier Sand & Gravel Co. Exhibit #3: U.S. Topographic Section Map indicating various permits for fill & grade and construction in the area of Mt. Olivet Cemetery Mr. Colt submitted a letter, dated May 13, 1982, to the Hearing Examiner from himself,entered as Exhibit #4, which addresses various concerns , and requests continuation of the hearing for at least two weeks to allow completion and submission of a study being prepared by the cemetery and the State Department of Ecology regarding the cumulative effects on water rights and watershed areas if the subject application is approved. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding whether the D.O.E. is officially involvedinthestudy, Mr. Colt advised that a letter should be transmitted from that department to the Hearing Examiner no later than Monday, May 17, 1982 , and would address concerns not necessarily from the subject application, but for the entire area in which water is currently causing destabilization of banks and falling trees adjacent to Maple ValleyHighway. The Examiner asked whether the applicant would object to a continuance in light of the information presented by Mr. Colt. Responding was: Chris F. Crumbaugh P.O. Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Crumbaugh strongly objected to a continuance due to lack of notice by Mr. Colt and prior knowledge by him of drainage problems in , oar a long period of time. He SP-032-82 Page Two noted that :he subject site is located approximately three-quarters of a mile from the cemetery , and would not have a contributive impact upon that facility. The Examiner determined that the staff report should be presented and testimony given by all interested parties prior to deciding whether the matter should be continued. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator , presented the Building & Zoning Department report , and entered the following additional exhibits into the record: Exhibit #5: Elevation Drawings designating existing gravel pit and other elevations on site Exhibit #6: Cross Section Drawings of pit and site Responding to the Examiner 's inquiry regarding whether N.E. 2nd Street is a dedicated public right-of-way , Mr. Blaylock stated that it is not ; however , the city has dedicated public right-of-way for Monroe Avenue N.E. and N. E. 2nd Street running to the east which will be improved jointly by the city and county to provide access to their new facilities. Referencing Section L.5 of the staff report which reviews allowable fill material , Mr. Blaylock indicated the city 's recommendation that any materials that are biodegradable be prohibited as fill , and use of such material requires a separate permit from King County. The Examiner noted that biodegradable material could be used if approved by the county unless a specific condition to prohibit its use is attached to permit approval . Mr. Crumbaugh advised that the applicant is the general contractor for the construction of SR-515 from Puget Drive to Carr Road, and the existing pit on the subject site will be used as a depository for waste material removed during preparation for that project. He discussed the urgency in the time frame of the project , and requested that approval of the special permit not be delayed. Responding to staff recommendations contained in the Building & Zoning Department report , Mr. Crumbaugh cited Section L.7 which denotes requirements of the Environmental Review Committee upon issuance of the DNS , specifically, that Monroe Avenue N.E. may be closed during construction and the applicant will require proof of pErmission to access onto a private roadway owned by King County. He advised that the applicant was approached in 1978 by city and county officials requesting donation of right-of-way for Monroe Avenue N.E. , and , in response, the property was donated at no charge and several agreements were reached with the city, one of which was that no late-comers charges would be imposed for utilities during future development of the site. He submitted a copy of the quit claim deed for the record: Exhibit #7: Quit Claim Deed from Segale to City of Renton, dated June 25 , 1978, containing agreements Mr. Crumbaugh stated the applicant 's intent to utilize Monroe Avenue N.E. as an exit from the subject site since it is a four-way signalized intersection; and entrance to the site is proposed from N.E. 4th Street on the county road. He also noted that to ensure maintenance of those roadways , the city has required an annual maintenance bond. The Examiner inquired if the applicant has permission to use the King County roadway. Mr. Crumbaugh stated that the county has allowed access to the applicant for many years , and if proof is necessary , a letter could be provided from the county; however , he requested that the decision not be conditioned upon approval of a county permit due to lengthy review and approval processes and the necessity for timely commencement of the project. His second concern related to the staff recommendation for a five year duration of permit approval since filling the large pit will potentially require ten years or more. He suggested instead that a requirement be imposed that would allow review by the Hearing Examiner after five years for compliance to initial conditions or additional concerns Hhich may have arisen. The burden and expense of acquiring new engineering studies after a five year period is objectionable, he stated, and he suggested that a ten year curation be imposed. Responding to Mr. Colt 's statements , Mr. Crumbaugh advised that an engineering report had been prepared by George S. Crawford, P.E . , and submitted with the application , which contains a section pertaining specifically to drainage. He noted that the project on the subject site was commenced subsequent to establishment of Mr. Colt 's water rights and excavation in the area has not impacted those rights in any way. He also indicated that the 'Fill project will not impact the cemetery property because water will continue to percolate through the fill material . He reiterated staff comments which state that upon completion of the filling on the site, a surface water plan must be prepared and siltation problems mitigated, and concluded by stating his objections to a continuan:e of the public hearing. Responding to the Examiner's request for additional comments , Mr. Colt stated the reason for requesting a continuance is due to difficulty in receiving notification of the public hearings and to allow sufficient time for Douglas J . Canning, Engineering firm, and the Department of Ecology to complete analyses of the existing situation. SP-032-82 Page Three The Examiner concurred in the request, and indicated that if the engineering reports are available to him by May 18, 1982 , the hearing would be continued to May 25, 1982. Otherwise, the hearing would be continued to no later than June 1 , 1982. Mr. Crumbaugh emphasized the importance of timing since a limited duration is allowed by the state for clearirg and removal of materials for the highway project. Since no further comments were offered, the hearing regarding File No. SP-032-82 was closed at 10: 15 a.m. and continued to either May 25, 1982 or June 1 , 1982 , dependent upon receipt of additional submissions. CONTINUANCE : The hearinc regarding this matter was reopened on June 1 , 1982 at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties not previously affirmed were asked to tEke the oath. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator , briefly described the proposal and the purpose of continuance of the public hearing to allow the opportunity to gather additional information from the State Department of Ecology regarding protection of water rights established on Mt. Olivet Cemetery property. The Examiner advised receipt of a cover letter and two reports frcm Mr. Colt , which were entered as follows into the record: Exhibit #8: Letter from James Colt , dated May 26, 1982 , and two reports by Douglas J. Canning, Engineering Firm He also entered a report filed by the applicant as follows: Exhibit #9: Report by GeoEngineers , Inc. for M.A. Segale, received June 1 , 1982 Responding to the Examiner' s inquiry regarding further information received from the Department of Ecology , James Colt stated that upon return of departmental staff from vacation , the D.O.E. will be performing an extensive study on the entire watershed area which serves Mt . Olivet Cemetery. Responding to information contained in Exhibit 9, Mr. Co t reviewed concerns relating to changes in the quantity and quality of runoff following illing of the subject site, runoff which now consists of ground water which is recharged by percolating into the lower level of the pit and flows into the aquifers which dire( tly contribute to Mt. Olivet Creek. He advised concern regarding the quantity o ' asphalt in the fill material , which may pollute the stream with oils , and clays and waste dirt , which are not permeable. He objected to provision of a ditch along the west side of the property to contain surface runoff, noting that water rights of Mt. Olivet require that runoff be directed to the southwest to continue to flow into the existing aquifers to recharge the ground water supply. Indicating that his engineers had not had an opportunity to review Exhibit #9, Mr. Colt advised that in response to information received by the D.O.E. and other interested parties , he is transmitting a request to the City Council to declare the entire 465 acres lying to the east of the cemetery an environmentally sensitive ,lrea. He addressed the specifics of the Declaration of Environmental Non-Significance previously issued by the Environmental Review Committee for the subject proposal , statin,a that the checklist requires c )n of of the storm water and siltation, and he expressed his opinion that plans for such control as well as an overall drainage pattern for ie entire watershed area sho id be formulated and approved by the Public Works Department prior to commencement of any filling or excavation within that area which would affect the path of the water, its ground flow, or interference by siltation in the ground water supply. Secondly , he pointed out that on page 3 of the checklist , it is indicated that the city felt that the proposal would have a major impact on water and on water courses , and at one point it stated that a request for more information was being contemplated. Mr. Colt advised that opposition to the proposal is supported by approximately 2800 individuals who have an interest in the water rights of Mt. Olivet Cemetery, and during the period of continuance over 800 signatures have been obtained from well-known familie in the area deeply concerned regarding all of the proposed projects in the surrounding vicinity and potential interference to the water rights. He submitted the following documents into the record: Exhibit #10: Certificates of Ownership, 1891 ; Rules and Regulations of Mt. Olivet Cemetery Mr. Colt f.ummarized by requesting the Hearing Examiner to assure preservation of water rights under code provisions to all of the families cited. The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Crumbaugh advised that u1•, receipt of the information entered as Exhibit #8, the applicant's engineering firm SP-032-82 Page Four had researLhed specific concerns , and a representative will respond later in the hearing. He stated that a large landfill project is currently in process on the cemetery property and large amounts of water are being discharged which have created mud flows filling the stream. Additionally, at times , fill material deposited in the cemetery were not in accordance with City of Renton ordinance requirements , thereby further degrading the environmental quality of that area. He then introduced his engineer, who responded as follows: John Koloski GeoEngineers , Inc. P.O. Box 6325 Bellevue, WA 98007 Mr. Koloski described his educational and professional background, and advised performance of a numbe- of investigations in the past two years of facilities in the area of the subject site, specifically relative to water quality and quantity for Mt. Olivet Cemetery. Based on those observations and review of the information contained in Exhibit #8 from Mr. Canning, it was his opinion that filling the subject mined out gravel pit on the subject site will not have any effect on the quantity or quality of water that occurs in Mt. Olivet Creek. The area is highly permeable in general , and most of the rainfall in the area d:)es infiltrate, and a very small amount reemerges as Mt . Olivet Creek. He felt it relevant to note that the fill material will contain only non-putrescible substances , and regardless of the permeability of those materials , the only significant factor is whether the water table is located below the floor of the pit ; and secondly, ground water contamination from solid waste disposal sites is less likely the further the distance from the project site to the point of water emergence , in this case, a distance of several thousand feet . By contrast , he noted, the distance from the waste disposal site at Mt . Olivet Cemetery is approximately 350 feet from the point of water extraction. The Examiner inquired if , in Mr. Koloski 's opinion, the use of broken concrete, asphalt, top soil and certain gravels would not impair nor impede the quality of water that now falls on the site and emerges in Mt. Olivet Creek. Mr. Koloski confirmed that was his opinion , and noted that if the backfill was 100% impermeable, water would run off of the backfill and into the adjoining , highly permeable areas and immediately infiltrate to the water table of the adjoining site. Except for the quantity of water which is specifically captured and diverted in some manner, the remainder will infiltrate around the creek. The Examiner requested a definition of waste dirt. Mr. Koloski defined waste dirt as that which is generated from excavation of construction projects and might include organic soil , broken concrete , or sandy silt material which is not particularly suitable for structural fill . The Examiner inquired regarding the contamination of waste dirt by metallic compounds or chemicals. Mr. Koloski indicated that he cannot testify regarding the quantity used in that factor , but the assumption is that the material being discussed is a nonorganic soil which is native glacial material . The Examirer requested testimony by city staff. Responding was: Bob Bergstrom Engineering Supervisor Mr. Bergstrom stated that in his opinion, filling and grading in areas upstream of Mt. Olivet 's civersionary dam does have a potential to change ground water resources in the Mt. Olivet Creek basin. When surface topography changes by backfilling of less permeable material , the potential exists for the operation of ground water flow to change. However, due to uncertainties involved in the numerous projects proposed in the general area of the subject site, it is very difficult to assess the extent of the impact. He discussed a proposed county project on Monroe Avenue N.E. which will include installation of a storm drainage <.ystem on the east margin of the site, noting the difficulty of predicting effects o' the construction and difficulty in placing a monetary value on ground water. However , based on current city water rates , the value would be approximately $15,000 per year for Mt. Olivet Cemetery's supply. Mr. Koloski emphasized that during the period of time the pit is being backfilled, until it reaches its finished configuration there will be zero runoff from the site, and no water can physically run off of that property until it is completely filled. Mr. Blaylock inquired if instead of diverting the water to a storm sewer, can ground water aquifers be recharged. The Examiner also noted that the Canning report indicated the possibility of utilizing injection wells . Mr. Koloski agreed that this is a practice that is not uncommon in a variety of areas in the country. The Examiner inquired if problems would occur upon development of the site when impermeable surfaces such as paving are installed. Mr. Koloski stated that at that point , site runoff may occur, and the conventional means of trapping oil and grease through mechanical devices in the storm sewer system could be employed; however , reinfiltration of water accumulating on site would be quite practical , particularly under the prevailing geological conditions on the subject site. 3ary Merlino Construction Co. 0 5 8 3 8 7IEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98108 DATE INVOICE NO. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DISCOUNT NET AMOUNT T1 L/ P., ,c es /p,00 kh-c_04-,(0..,/ 1 , 2e-c, a___?,,u SP-032-82 Page Five Mr. Crumbaugh further clarified that the project is designed so that upon completion of the fill operation, a ditch will remain on site for percolation of the water. At such time as development plans are submitted following filling, the applicant will concern himself with disposal of water. Mr. Colt stated that channelization of the storm water into a ground infiltration system to feed the aquifers and eventually the creek is the ultimate solution to the matter. However, he indicated concern that no assurances are being given by the city or the individual developers on all of the surrounding projectscitedintheletterfromtheD.O.E. regarding the protection of water rights to Mt. Olivet Cemetery. He requested that the Hearing Examiner review the cumulative effects of all of the projects , and require a unified acceptable drainage program which will assure protection of the water rights for at least another 50 years. Mr. Colt referenced a brochure published by D.O.E. which discusses channelization of water from natural sites into an urban environment, and indicates that urban runoff, unless placed in an aquifer, does not contribute to the quality or quantity of water which would normally be available, and further supports development of plans to assure that the aquifer will be recharged rather than diverting water into a storm system. Responding to Mr. Crumbaugh's comments relative to the fill project on the Mt. Olivet site, Mr. Colt clarified that the previously mined out cemetery property is being restored, and when the project is completed, the water rights will cover the entire 19.5 acre site, not just the existing cemetery, and water will be utilized to irrigate the entire property. In addition, the quality of water is being affected not just by the subject project, but also a previous application, File No. SP-099-80, Rainier Sand and Gravel , Inc. , for which a permit has not been issued because of disagreement surrounding the drainage ditch and water rights which have not been addressed to the satisfaction of all parties in the past 14 months. The Examiner inquired if Mr. Colt would object to utilization of the information submitted during the subject hearing for review of a request for reconsideration filed by him on the Emma Cugini special permit application as well . There was no objection. The hearing was subsequently closed at 9:45 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The applicant , M.A. Segale, Inc. , filed a request for special permit to fill and grade an existing gravel pit with approximately 1 , 100,000 cubic yards of material . 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the Building and Zoning Department report, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , RCW 43.21C , as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) , responsible official . 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by the impact of this development. 5. The subject property is located on the west side of Monroe Avenue N.E. approximately 330 feet south of N.E. 4th Street. 6. A 70-foot deep pit is located on the property as a result of past quarry activity which extracted gravel from the subject site. The site is approximately 15. 1 acres in area. There is no significant vegetation on the subject site. Some standing water covered by vegetation is located at the bottom of the existing pit. 7. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of public and quasi-public uses. 8. The site is zoned G-1 (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) . 9. While the site fronts on Monroe Avenue N.E. , the applicant has generally used a private haul road owned by King County for ingress to the subject site and proposes to continue ingress via this method. Egress would generally occur via Monroe to take advantage of the traffic signal for left turns. 10. Approximately 44,000 (Forty-four Thousand) one-way (88,000 round trips) will be required to import the 1 , 100,000 cubic yards of material necessary to fill the subject site. SP-032-82 Page Six 11 . The subject site serves as a recharge area for the aquifer which feeds the creek located southwest of the subject site. The extent of this role is not fully known. The creek for convenience has been called Olivet Creek. Precipitation falling on the site percolates into the subsurface and over periods of days and months , slowly recharges the water table. Some of the water eventually reaches the Cedar River by seeps located on the bluffs above the river. Some reaches the waters of Olivet Creek while most of the water presumably percolates through the substrata to the level of the Cedar River without visibly showing on any surface. 12. Filling the site to match the surrounding terrain will have some effect on the recharge of the underlying aquifer, but until the surface is brought up to grade, recharge will take place through the side walls of the existing pit. When the pit is entirely eliminated, surface accumulation of water will be diverted to a drainage system from which natural percolation will occur. Any diversion to a closed storm drainage system would change the aquifer recharge characteristics . 13. The types of material used to fill the pit would have some impact on the recharge and percolation rate but precipitation falling on the site would eventually percolate either through the side walls of natural material and through the fill material while the pit remains , or through the adjacent natural material via the drainage system. 14. The quality of the water would be minimally impaired by contaminated fill material the further the water flows through the aquifer. The distance from the site to where water is extracted by the cemetery for irrigation is such as to minimize potent al pollution. 15. The Mt Olivet Cemetery has a valid water right claim to 250 gallons per minute (gpm) or 72 dcre feet of water per year. According to the Department of Ecology, the claim s entitled to protection per RCW 90.03. The amount of water actually utilized by Mt. Olivet Cemetery was not indicated, but the total claim under the city's water utility fee structure would be worth approximately $15,000 per year. The cemetery currently utilizes its water rights to irrigate the cemetery and is not served by the city's water utility. 16. Because the area is growing , the city would like to reserve the right to review the impact of the truck traffic and other impacts of the fill on the general area. The Building and Zoning Department has recommended that the permit be limited to a five year period. 17. The Department of Ecology has indicated some concern for the relatively recent sloughs above the Maple Valley Highway and the new seeps appearing on the bluffs. These occurrences were probably related to the gravel quarries located on the bluffs. CONCLUSIONS: 1 . The special permit to fill and grade the former quarry pit appears to serve the public use and interest but certain provisions indicated below must be observed to assure the continued flow of Olivet Creek. 2. The pit has been observed to be an attractive nuisance by the Police Department. The subject site in its current state no longer serves a productive or useful purpose but with filling and grading can be restored to a level grade to serve eventually as a bui ding site. The fill and grade itself serves the purpose of providing a site for the d sposition of spoils of other construction projects such as the removal of excess earth materials from the SR-515 right-of-way. 3. The amount of fill material will require an extremely large number of round trips by trucks to and from the site. The arterial serving the site is heavily used durin3 the peak hours and therefore the applicant should limit the time period so as not to interfere with the peak hour traffic. Further, the route must be kept free pf debris so as not to interfere at any time with the arterial functions of N.E. 3rd and 4th Streets. The hours of operation should, therefore, be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. with no operations occurring on Saturday or Sunday. Further, if the hours of operation interfere with peak hour travel , they may further be limited by the city as necessary. The applicant will also have to post a cash bond to permit the Public Works Department SP-032-82 Page Seven upon request by any affected city agency to clear the streets of debris. The bond shall be a revolving fund with an initial bond of $3,000 and with further amounts as the funds are depleted. 4. While the city can authorize the grading and filling of the subject site, the city by such authorization does not empower the applicant to impair the private rights of adjacent property owners nor the water rights claims of such adjacent property owners. Any grading of the subject site is therefore conditioned on not interferingwiththewaterrightsclaimofMt. Olivet Cemetery. In order to safeguard the cemetery's claim, the applicant will be required to provide on site, a method which assures that all precipitation which now percolates naturally into the soils of the subject site will continue to do so. 5. The fill material should be such that contamination does not become a problem. The material should not contain any soluble poisons or other leachable compounds which could poison the creek water and damage the water rights of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. 6. The area in which the subject site is located is undergoing considerable growth. N.E. 3rd/4th Street is a major access arterial to the growing residential areas of the city. Commercial and business enterprises are also located in the general Highlands area north and east of the subject site. Therefore , the permit should be reviewed to further determine the impacts of the fill on the general area and the impacts on Olivet Creek and the stability of the bluffs above the Maple Valley Highway. The permit should, therefore, be for a period not to exceed five years. The applicant may secure continuous operation by applying for a new permit prior to the expiration of the current permit. DECISION: The special permit to fill and grade the subject site is approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . The permit shall be for a period not to exceed five years. 2. No trucks shall enter or leave the premises other than the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. , Monday through Friday. The hours of operation may be adjusted downward if the city determines that such further limitation is necessary to minimize interference with the arterial functions during the peak hours. 3. A cash bond in the amount of $3,000 shall be posted to provide for street cleaning if the applicant fails to clean the streets of debris generated by the operation. The amount shall be renewed at the city's option if the amount is exhausted prior to the expiration of the permit. 4. The execution of restrictive covenants requiring the installation of an on-site system for recharging the aquifer with natural precipitation. Such system shall provide that all natural precipitation be returned to the aquifer by percolation, injection wells or other reasonable means and such requirements shall apply whether the land remains undeveloped or is developed with on-site improvements. 5. No material may be incorporated into the site which contains soluble poisons or other leachable compounds which have the potential for contaminating the ground water. ORDERED THIS 4th day of June, 1982. Fred J. fman Land Use earing Examiner TRANSMITTED THIS 4th day of June, 1982 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record: James Colt , P.O. Box 547, Renton, WA 98057 Chris Crumbaugh, P.O. Box 88050, Tukwila, WA 98188 John Koloski , GeoEngineers, Inc. , P.O. Box 6325, Bellevue, WA 98007 Bob Bergstrom, Engineering Supervisor, Public Works Department SP-032-82 Page Eight TRANSMITTED THIS 4th day of June, 1982 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director David Clemens , Policy Development Director Members , Renton Planning Commission Ron Nelson, Building L Zoning Director Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before June 18, 1982. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure , errors of law or fact , error in judgment , or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may , after review of the record , take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting other specified requirements . Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department , first floor of City Hall . Invoice-No 3696 CITY OF RENTON 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WASH I NGTON 98055 STREET DEPARTMENT Department or Division Date MAY 13, 1985 r MERLINO CONSTRUCTION Please m ke checks 9125 10TH AVE. SOUTH payable to SEATTLE, WASH 98108 Finance Department City of Ren on GI os it 6002- 1 TO COVER THE COST OF CLEANING LINES ON MONROE AVE. N.E. AT THE PIT, APRIL 24TH. LABOR 3 MEN, 2 HOURS EACH 109.57 aqua tech, pumper 2 hours @ 60.00 120.00 pick up 2 hours @ 3.00 6.00 235.57 90 0 i2 :HIBIT NO. r' .M NO. sub,-o4't / Total Due $ 235.57 n 7a^ e)./4gv,n,73 0676/ 12vY zs uS 14 S'/Z+ N/.,,Z '?-4 - YH .1,1//Y/'/A yY>d 9` er,..WOW,.s- t A..,...7., 0.77 -=.,77 ro-,y "p ein/ T wH ap si 61, s,y wo//,7 npl s/.L'Z/ 7'' 'rO.O ,3**, s5 6' I I,a • • t271V09.97 000/Wn7Z2/ jZ v,*r MY,yx WI, .4y aPO/. EWA 77,44,3CY 1 :..-'.I T Ir\ , 4 790R6 mow ro[/r7)'ySE2 roB ppd f't. r./rx,1n+atl. . 7rrvsvcd 6..2 '' ' , r 1/S "-. 'osos-ssz ,7 7.t v br/.(0/Wam,," og-,....y J f.'Y+L tswn r%Win/VX, 1 w di Iii i Iliarirgrc.,' (7 4' . Il.drai]7:f[7 7/7.4v7,rrn 71v[6rX7sv dac f. OZE l7 7 I I l/E_73 Lt7 _ 1 I I' e7G l7 A'/,O1/J O7 QJ szv"9`` ' 7Z7.0"rart 1 71.W a6rM—.D 7panv 7d'?d/y SM I s0,,01h177'' A I I —--nam an=n of rev 773M.IdQ... nts._i-_rvv F._ r N I 1 T-'`—H - 1J7/'Od'd JO nOi19',AH07 Ap/n Il6 OES'I I MO/1077 1/Y7A Zd 4L 07 037377/W,OL 6/97Y1i_ _t7, -- - aw sarace3re..13.11ir77 ws ivrr9 I inward oxmn pm"gdmc 379kS4 o' 0377,d77 79 02 C',V 7`iTl• _I WWA',' oc'-c*'Z NOurAr7x7 Zuv/4115+3 4133W7d nD 07n/rtn07 Ja au.Pitt+/r7o :sQlch, 6b 7Y ?AO' 70d'NOIN I - 8 Io 0 T'-V aMarnGr re I--ILin, T .(lZarvxa ` I 1I _..-I---- oar II' aIIW j yet. 9bF I 6 I 6 I b I• 2t I 1 A 4 J' 4 1 II I N 11 zn s f.I P ° tea,, P\C\ 1 y s\ _- Vrj 1 .rl I i II .'/I 6 I I f1 V AI •II^p{I'^c=.z- L W 1 IfI I I/' // --- - I'It'i Tit 1 I 6, hY 1 1Y' II y 1 yle I y L i. yw '1'' F i 1 1 —.._/ z -4+ 11 i r ZfG vaP—i i I p R xN' I 0 W i 6 1 I I j 111 ./1kAle,X9 'WJ I I I I F p i I!< 0 JII i ii Ii; 1I I '' I R,Ot 4In p0 6 V i y may.LI I ptow_+ir lsb sf I I 1 I 1I I 1 qq L N N Oros I i 4 1 I 1 I I I I GREENWOOD CEMETERY MAINTENANCE SHOPS EX. RACE HERE le ABOLD THE SAME TC! 'l EX.GRME OF ADJACENT CEMETERY a Iti.+T2•ti• ` EX.CHAIN-LINE I[NC[EMICLL> 7. 4A,r : APPROX.PHASE 2 LIMIT I a-I 11 MOH SCOTCH BROOM AT THE TOP Cf SLOPE ALONG TE MST 4.A 1°•1 3.-yt SIDE a FENCE ADJACENT TO.TIE courc•ARTS PARCEL 7 I PROVIDES SITE SCREENING`vno THE COURT'APTS y:' T. INTERNAL PARCEL LINE ETYPICALS-••. ,, mot r• CEMETERY BOUNDARY- I: I '':"" , i!.. _ EAST LIMIT OF PHASE 1 L.„.,:.? EX,GRADE HERE IS 10.1 HIGHER MAN ME EX.TOE OF SLOPE IN ADJACENT CEMETERY ti t•••• VACANT LOT s R 3 EX.INTERNAL METER,ROADWAY PHASE 2 I SEE'EXCAVATION AND GRADING PLAN' xNEECT TO TIE EX. CUDcuT AT THE EAST R ED..MOM.AVE. R uUSED FORFon PHASE Ixc PROVIDE INGRESS/EGRESS To THE PHASE z PIT _ VACANT LOT I IN A 30'SETBACKS TA., 111',VIDE CEMETERY MAINTENANCE ROAO TO CHAIM-LIMA FENCE IN THIS ARE SITE SCREENING 30'` I EX-:,.,EATRI MAUW;EOY•, t I: (--) COMPLETION)ED UK. ———1 L RD,ECT E REMOVED 1/ FeEk BCOTCN BROOM LLOID NpITN ND[Oi PENCE EETREN MaE 2 POIIrte yC/° SCE e S S7y °^.T`e"6:'E.7'^ T PROVIDES am SCREENING Y. I.a^ee P°° rra-f e. '. •e•°° ° • p °e°°.° e°o°e° fWY I EXISTING EARNED LANDSCAPE AREA BETWEEN FENCE AND ONE CONTAINS?'TO IL.MIN DONNA.FIR AND NEON NM ON NICENTEM PLUS NATTERED NINESI T. EX.GRADE SET..THESE 2 PTS.IS VP-VON-) T_ __ _ A. r.._ _-. .-- 1 HIGHER THAN THE EX.TOE OF SLOPE IN THE ADJACENT CEMETERY NN.E.2ND ST. EX.°AE " i 1 EX.GRADE HERE IS ABOUT THE SAME AS THE EX.GRADE IN THE ADJACENT CEMETERY 3 LEISURE ESTATES' RENTON DISTRICT COURT CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.MAINTENANCE SHOPS PHASE 2 SITE PLAN Gary Merlino Construction Co.(DRAWN Ay DLM a Fve SEATTLE, WASHINGTON GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT OS RENTON, WASHINGTON a R'P.NNe. J I I Ex 2,0Ao i I .i4 I IlikLt: L.. 1 1•...-? 0 1 1 1 V L. V. Q' V 1 tit:"... I 1 I y r. r I 1 m 4 1/4 4ill j i I h°W q 9 It., 3 I !c ezr i 0 yo A 1 11 ii!111 7•k/Asre A/A7E.CfAt—— — `ao• srr_dA- Et to I SEE S/.E'RAN roc/6&5// I i 1 ix. jrSCLAas flfUCE t I t KJres: 0/1.4/w66 7U b. CONsw.NlG A•/•'.CorcNrY, E..c..Ee iburrea Tnee6r 1.M.T I o r'66 XEIe 'e 70 tis+e ,.vE.,- e of Reg :e.-" ' I t '• Ala NUsEs. m4. T.. Se E&2 C, n T.•PQ"5's IROs:.% CS UiCN .:0.;.S1TiON O/PCcIJ CT E. 2 ND -sr 4 E. o.TVA¢r fti/S.YEO o/ce OA3E0 Gcw>'cvlJ EL.iYO l Ea, PRorus I yL•tc./1w72•/WwsAF I Ex E•dc1 o I 1 MAMA%-/0 N.+.t Ole/AC EC Am,'_____' S441E'ter. .G Der WELL—I-I aer N.-•, 5.0-/000 Pr'014 X.C.Mc NW A8517d LE7Z/417 0 I fI fVRE A..ALII.f'oerM9RL r-t>97P IYwS/EMA/L I I 0'0a.lVtu-/Y.t:hY/F gy. pi . .. A.‘, 61+o Ei.!0 - i I — I I E57 fL 3/7•L1dt E32n E6'OP X/et.C4M.,4l'U! 7Lw OF EX/57/AC QAYLAYEe SECT/DPI/ f1-19 T.• 2C7f7 AI M/5/4 -op„,..` IIeOPG./C1../ASP j1' 0,...... KENNEr/.OYLER C;.EtL.S =55-50roE!•,q,• /4.-L• oAwNR. PO 22Sf SS i MUAV 95If. qq WALL 1' ' Ft';''' a G E ENwOOO CEMETERY F' E. t:Avo na./ AND GRAD/N6 4 hYwlti t PLAN woe /9af . to mot•/Ire P,/. Iwo --oss 4I17.r•Lo 84o/5 BEGINNING OF FILE ALE Tn„LE tatitticiattu gOliwaLE/D 1A1/27,tit) P-A-0As110/0 GREENWOOD CEMETERY - PHOTOGRAPHS NUMBERED FRJM ONE THROUGH FIVE IN ORDER FR,ari EAST BOUNDARY OF PROPOSED PHASE 2 GRAVEL PIT. To Wf,ST Ou,/Jt,ACY. ( tA)rlCA'rEP S/ SL Ar- L4NE6) PLACE SIDE BY `'IMF FOR PANORAMIC PHOTOGRAPH EXHIBIT #9a cf SP-048-85 Photogaphs taken by David L. Halinen, June 1985 a GREENWOOD CEMETERY - PHOTOGRAPHS NUMBERED FROM ONE TO FIVE IN ^afER FROM LEFT TO RIGHT INDICATE SOUTH BOJNDRY OF PROP^;ED PHASE 2 GilAVEL PIT (PHOTO #4) . EXHIBIT 9b of SP-048-85 Photographs taken by David L. Halinen, June 1985 I--a-A---4----• l---e(__ r NAME OF FILE : FILE NUMBER : TAKEN BY : DATE : v, v_ c H' ' ' 1 KK & . kt i, \ . k. • tR m < ( \ k, 1: \ - s i„ . k . r& 1\ . , , , , - t k\ As c N i r? iN ) N 4 \ \ ' ' qk k ( k. 1 , 1q \ Kr \ s, , 1 \ J. , ' t 1 i V), 1 _ . lk 1 ') N' ll c1\ I : 1)7- ' \\ 7, A!: k\) ) v 0 . ri ''\ f t t 1\ ). H\, 1 \ j_i.. ,: i:( t,: 1). , s.,, 444,, i\: i i 1 4__ , )--: 1 \ t-‘%'-'' k- e j a j 1 ki.\ d4 - tea s i i. 4-)) 4+, riZ : ')' 1 I \ Ms ‘ 1 4 IN c -\\-,- 7 N,,7\, 44-- ,...& rn') o i . it , \ jO - Lk \ 3 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Public NoticeAudreyDe;Joie , being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BEOELD BYVALLEYNEWSPAPERSSPAPERSTHERENTONLANDUSEHEARINGEXAMINERATHISREGULARMEETINGDailyNew:; Journal, Daily Record Chronicle, Daily Globe News IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THESECONDFLOOROFCITYHALL,"RE-Daily newspapers published six (6) times a week.That said newspapers NTON,WASHINGTON ON JULY 30,1985 are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOL-LOWING PETITIONS:months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published GARY MERLIN()CONSTRUCTION CO.in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King Application for special permit for fill and County, Washington. Valley Newspapers have been approved as legal grade to allow modification of Phase I granted(SP-019-84; 100,000 cubic yardsnewspaperstyorderoftheSuperiorCourtoftheStateofWashingtonforlefttobeexcavated)and to allow excava- King County. lion of 180,000 cubic yards of material forPhaseIIandtorefillthetwositeswith approximately 380,000 cubic yards of The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Daily News material, file SP-048-85; located at the southwest and southeast comers of Journal , Daily Record Chronicle X, Daily Globe News , (and Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401N.E. 4th Street.not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its SERVICE LINEN SUPPLY subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice a Application for conditional use permit to allow the expansion of a commercialNoticeofPublicHearingwaspublishedlaundry(light industrial use)in a B-1 zonedJuly19, 1985 R1018 district, and to allow the required parkingonforsaidexpansiontobelocatedwithin500feetofthelaundrybuilding,file CU-039-85;located at 903 South 4th Street. Legal descriptions of the files noted The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing Zoninve grep file in ontonBuildingandgggpublicationistheZoningDepartment. Sum Of $ 29•7O ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAIDPETITIONSAREINVITEDTOBEPRE-SENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 30, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M. TO EX-PRESS THEIR OPINIONS. Ronald G. Nelson ; Building and Zoning Director ' IPublishedintheDailyRecojdChronicleJuly19, 1985. R1018 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th day of July 19 85 . C-,ge- W' '' -'d CITY OF RENTO:J Notary Public for the State of Washington, r j ( I! / id i t residing at Federal Way, l I I L iKingCounty, Washington. AUG 2 6 1985VN87Revised1084 is BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. p. s i jj•J I f r Public Notice Public Notice NOTICE OF storefront buildings totalling 85,200 square ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION feet for office and warehouse use on a 6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COM- acre site, file SA-044-85; located on the MITTEE east side of Powell Avenue S.W. at the i RENTON,WASHINGTON 550-600 block. The Environmental Review Committee HOLVICK, deREGT, KOERING (ECF- ERC) has issued a declaration of non- 066-85) WASHINGTON TECHNICAL 1 significance for the following projects: CENTER—Phase 2B.Application for site T r T CITY OF RENTON,PARKS&RECRE- plan approval to allow the construction of a AF1' l A 1 ® P V BL; ATION DEPARTMENT gCF-073.85i one,two-story tilt-up concrete building and Panther Creek Mosquito Abatement — two, one-story tiit-up concrete buildings The subject project proposes aerial treat- totalling 60,300 square feet for office and ment of up to sixty-five acres of wetlands warehouse use file SA-045-85;located on Audrey DeJoie , being first duly sw for the purpose of mosquito abatement; the south side of S.W. 7th Street at the he/she is the Chief Clerk of the located east of the Valley Freeway (SR- 1100-1200 block. 167) and west of Talbot Hill, and in KEMPER MULLINS (ECF-043-85) Ap- between 1-405 to the north and S.W.43rd plication to rezone approximately 3.67 Street to the south in an area known as the acrea of property from G-1 to B-1 for future VALLEY IN EWSP Panther Creek Wetlands. commercial use,file R-026-85;located on CITY OF RENTON, PUBLIC WORKS the north side of N.E. Sunset Boulevard DEPARTMENT (ECF-074-85) Union Av- and approximately 116 feet east of Daily News Journal, Daily Record Chronicle enue N.E. Resurfacing — The subject Anacortes Avenue Northeast. project proposes approximately 4,000 line- Further information regarding this action Daily newspapers published six(6) times a wee al feet of roadway improvements including is available in the Building and Zoning are legal newspapers and are now and have installing curbs, gutters, sidewalks,storm Department, Municipal Building, Renton, sewers,and widening from two lanes to 44 Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of months prior to the date of publication referred t feet curb to curb; located along Union ERC action must be filed with the King in the English language continually as daily ne Avenue N.E. from N.E. Sunset Boulevard County Superior Court by July 22, 1985. County, Washington. ValleyNewspapers have to N.E. 25th Street. Published in the Daily Record Chronicle gGARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION July 8, 1985 RI000 newspapers by order of the Superior Court of the CO.'(ECF-072-85) Application for special King County. permit for fill and grade to allow modifica- tion of Phase I granted (SP-019-84; 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) The notice in the exact form attached,was pub ax 180,yardsandto of llow matereial forcavationPhaseof II and00otocubicllrefi Journal , Daily Record Chronicle Dail the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material, file SP-048-85; not in supplement form) which was regul located at the southwest and southeast subscribers during the below stated period. corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. SERVICE LINEN SUPPLY (ECF-061- 85)Application for conditional use permit to on allow the expansion of a commercial laundry(light industrial use)in a B-1 zoned district, and to allow the required parking for said expansion to be located within 500 feet of the laundry building,file CU-039-85; The full amount of the fee charged for said for located at 903 South 4th Street. HOLVICK, deREGT, KOERING (ECF- sum of $ 57.gL-. 066-85) WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER - Phase 3. Application for site plan approval to allow the construction of four, one-story tilt-up concrete and glass Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1 2 th day of July 19 85 V-0;21 Not ry Public for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, CITY OF 1V;0; King County, Washington. fl I'7VN#87 Revised 10/84 AU61985 BUILDING/G2iONfNG DEPT casts D co CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Ronald G. Nelson, Director July 7 , 1987 Greenwood Memorial Park 350 Monroe Ave. N.E. Renton, Wa. 98056 Attn: Bob Anderson SUBJECT: GREENWOOD SP-048-85 AND RELATED ANNUAL GRADING LICENSE Dear Mr. Anderson: My review of the SO-048-85 file shows Council action to be see attached) . That decision was made on October 28 , 1985 so, with that in mind and the decision being limited to two years , it appears that the present permit expires on October 28, 1987. In response to your question regarding appeals, yes, appeals are part of the process. You need to make your application see attached forms) and go through the process. Then, if differences arise from that process, you can appeal. Refer to Title 4, Chapter 30, Section 3016, Appeals. Normally the time frame to be heard by the Hearing Examiner is six to eight weeks but you should make every effort to get the application going as soon as possible. Mr. Don Erickson, from this office, would be glad to assist you with this. Hopefully this answers your questions. If not, please get back with us. Sincerely, Ronald G. Nelson Building & Zoning Director RGN:plp:pl. 028 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206) 235-2540 Greenwood Memorial Park July 7, 1987 Page 2 Enc: Copy of Council Minutes dated 10/28/85 Special permit for Grading and Filling Environmental Checklist Fee Schedule Masper Application cc: James Shelger, Vice President/Sr. Attorney Service Corporation International P.O.Box X-1010 San Diego, Ca. 92112 i v Kidder 10,01/ 114 Mathews Seg ner inc. Commercla •Industrial Realtors 12886 Interurban Ave.so. CITY OF RENTON Seattle,WA 98168 RcECEtIVED206)248-7300 Mt 41987 March 4, 1987 BUILDING / ZONING DEPT. Building and Zoning Department City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Gentlemen: Please include the undersigned as a party of record with respect to the following land use permits or files. We are interested in being informed regarding any activities, hearings, or city actions pertaining to these permits or properties : 1. Edwards/Segale SR099-80 & SR099-85. 2. M. A. Segale (Monroe Avenue) SP032-082. 3. Greenwood Cemetery SP-048-85. Also, please include us a party of record regarding the McMthon/Centron rezone application. Sincerely, KIDDER, MATHEWS & SEGNER, INC. William R. Kidder WRK:gjs 441 CCI\I Offices: Downtown Seattle • South Seattle • Bellevue Renton City Council 3/10/86 Page four Consent Agenda continued Bid Opening - City Clerk reported bid opening 2/28/86 for Neighborhood Center Neighborhood Improvements; five bids; Engineer' s estimate: 5302,000.00. Refer Center Improves. to Community Services Committee. Mother' s Park Finance Department requested appropriation in the amount of Appraisal 2,500 for appraisal of Mother' s Park property. Refer to Community Services Committee. King County Police Department requested approval of an agreement to establish Drug Enforcement a King County Drug Enforcement Fund from fines collected from Fund Agreement defendants convicted of drug violations. These funds would be limited to activities aimed at facilitating enforcement of state statutes and county or municipal ordinances relating to controlled substances. Refer to Public Safety Committee. LID 326 Final Public Works/Design Engineering Department requested hearing date Assessment be set for 4/7/86 to review final assessments on Local Improvement Roll District 326, roadway project on NE 4th Street between Monroe Avenue NE and Union Avenue NE. Council concur. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, CORRESPONDENCE FROM Metro Transit MICHAEL FLEMING, 11212-137TH SE, RENTON, OBJECTING TO LOCATION Center OF METRO TRANSIT CENTER NEAR ST. ANTHONY'S SCHOOL, BE REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS A status report regarding Suburban Cities meeting on 3/5/86 at Suburban Cities which King County Executive Tim Hill was guest speaker was presented by Council President Mathews. Mayor Shinpoch has been reappointed to the Regional Issues Advisory Committee, and Suburban Cities has appointed a delegation to meet with both Mayor Charles Royer and Executive Tim Hill . Volunteers are requested to serve on the King County Disability Retirement Board, King County Sewage Disposal Board, and the Jail Advisory Committee. Speaker for the next Suburban Cities meeting in Bellevue will be State Representative Rod Chandler. Planning and Planning and Develoment Committee Chairman Keolker presented a Development report indicating that the matter of proposed boundary adjustment Committee between Renton and Tukwila has been reviewed by the Committee. Renton-Tukwila A number of issues, i .e. tax revenue, assessed valuation, utility Boundary Issue service and improvements to SW 27th Street and SW 43rd Street, Referred must be examined further by Council . Therefore, the Committee 10/28/85) recommended referral of this matter to the Committee of the Whole for review by the entire Council . MOVED BY KEOLKER, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Site Plan Chairman Keolker also advised that the Planning and Development Review Ordinance Committee report regarding Site Plan Review Ordinance will be held one week until all Council members are in attendance. Public Safety Public Safety Committee Vice-Chairman Trimm presented a report Committee regarding the Merlino Construction Company Special Permit for Merlino Special fill and grade and associated truck traffic review (File No. Permit/Review SP-048-85) . A study conducted by the Traffic Engineering of Truck Traffic Department analyzing truck traffic on the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street on NE 3rd/4th corridor indicated that the Merlino site generates only 1 .9% SP-048-85 of the total truck and bus traffic volume of 3, 100 vehicles per day. The majority of the truck and bus traffic is being generated by activity in King County. Since measures to reduce truck impacts on that corridor must address all truck traffic , the Public Safety Committee recommended that the City Council determine that truck traffic can no longer be regulated by placing a limit on the number of truck trips per day as a condition of special permit approval ; and the City Council direct the Building and Zoning Department to release the annual grading license to Merlino Construction Company if the only remaining issue is truck traffic. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Renton City Council 3/10/86 Page five Old Business continued Public Safety On the second issue of whether truck traffic can be controlled Committee on the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street corridor, the Public Safety Committee Truck Traffic has determined that truck traffic cannot be solely controlled by on NE 3rd/4th limiting land use activities within the City limits since King Street County has not regulated truck traffic. Also, buses, delivery vans, and semi-trucks servicing the general population and commercial areas should not be limited. Commercial dirt haulers should be limited to non-peak hours. The Public Safety Committee has directed the Building and Zoning Department to contact King County to discuss and obtain comments concerning elimination of commercial dirt haulers on the NE 3rd/ NE 4th Street corridor from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday. A report is expected from the Building & Zoning Department by 3/27/86. 1 Councilman Stredicke questioned why the road could not be posted prohibiting truck traffic during peak traffic periods. He also cited concerns with accelerated deterioration of that roadway due to heavy use by trucks hauling fill from 1-90 project and others; and heavy congestion which will result when one lane of the road is closed to accommodate future signal project at Jefferson. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report Committee recommending the following ordinance for second & final reading: Ordinance #3978 An ordinance was read vacating a portion of SW 23rd Street for Seelig Street Martin Seelig, File No. VAC 003-85. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED Vacation BY TRIMM, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL VAC 003-85 AYES. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommending the following ordinance for first reading: SCS Grant for An ordinance was read providing for appropriation of a United Grady Way Project States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service SCS) Grant for the SW Grady Way Improvement Project in the amount of $500,760.00 from SCS Grant unto Street Forward Thrust Expenditure Budget. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL REFER THIS ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommending the following resolution for reading and adoption: Resolution #2638 A resolution was read authorizing the Finance Director to borrow LID 331 61 ,000 from the Insurance Fund for LID 331 , Smithers Avenue South Appropriation Sanitary Sewer Project between S. 21st and S. 23rd Street. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY TRIMM, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. Vouchers Ways and Means Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommending approval of Vouchers 13037 through 13673 in the amount of $1 ,169,852.12, having received departmental certification that merchandise/services have been received or rendered; Vouchers 13371 - 13379 machine voided. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, COUNCIL APPROVE THE VOUCHERS. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Referencing the Valley Rezone, portions of which were referred REPORT back to the Administration for further review on 3/3/86, Mayor Valley Rezone Shinpoch indicated that staff will require a few weeks to reappraise the proposal and make a recommendation to the Planning Commission on the matter of small lot zoning. Playtime Court Total cost of the legal battle on Playtime was $724,000-- Case 530,000 locally and $194,000 for the law firm in Washington, D.C. Original newspaper articles from the New York Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal sent to Mayor Shinpoch by her daughter will be donated to the Renton Historical Society for inclusion with scrapbooks of news clippings collected by the Citizens for a Quality Community Committee (CQC) . F _IC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPOP March 10. 1986 SUBJECTS: 1. MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY/SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND CRADE/SP-048-85/REVIEW OF TRUCK TRAFFIC The Council originally charged the ERC to analyze the truck traffic on the N.E. Third/Fourth Street corridor before the Building and Zoning Department reviews and i5sues the annual grading license. A study was conducted by the Traffic Engineering Civision. They found that the subject site generates (based on 60 vehicle trips per day) only 1.9% of total truck and bus traffic volume of 3,100 vehicles. The majority of the truck and bus traffic is being generated by activity in King County. Measures to reduce truck impacts on the N.E. Third/Fourth Street corridor must address all truck traffic not just those trips generated within the City limits. (A solution is proposed by the Public Safety Committee under Item #2 below.) Tie Public Safety Committee recommends that the City Council: 1. Determine that the limitation on number of truck trips per day is no longer an appropriate means of regulating truck traffic based upon the recent study. 2. Direct the Building and Zoning Department to release the annual grading license, if the only issue remaining is truck traffic. 2. TRUCK TRAFFIC ON THE N.E. THIRD/N.E. FOURTH STREET CORRIDOR The issue is how do we control truck traffic? At what times? What type of truck traffic? What are the costs? Truck traffic cannot be solely controlled by limiting land use activities within the City limits. King County has not regulated truck traffic. Buses, delivery vans, and semi-trucks servicing the general population and commercial areas should not be limited; however, commercial dirt haulers should be limited to non-peak hours. The Put lic Safety Committee has directed the Building and Zoning Department to contact King County to discuss and obtain their comments concerning the elimination of commercial dirt haulers on the N.E. Third/N.E. Fourth Street corridor from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and from 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. A report will be back from the Building and Zoning Department on Thursday, March 27, 1986. John Reed, Chairman Thomas Trimm, Vice-Chairman CGO&00 Earl Clymer s Renton City Council 2/17/86 Page three Correspondence continued Renton Loop Council President Mathews submitted letter from Gayle Dallas, Problems 325 Morris Avenue S. , and accompanying correspondence from Mayor Shinpoch to Mrs. Dallas and Police Chief Wallis. Mrs. Dallas complained of increased traffic through residential areas as a result of blockage of S. 3rd Street on Friday and Saturday nights to discourage cruisers. She also cited problems associated with the loop including loud noise, loitering, littering, vandalism and alcohol consumption by minors, and requested the City' s help in controlling this problem for the benefit of single family residents. Letter from Mayor Shinpoch explained efforts by police department to control "loopers," including 200 arrests in one weekend, $19,000 in overtime, and the aid of the State Patrol . The only positive result from these efforts was that the problem moved from one area to another. The letter stated that the Police Chief is currently devising a plan to aid residents impacted by loop activities, but in the meantime, any inappropriate behavior in the area of the loop should be reported to the Police Department via 911 . Truck/Bus Traffic Letter from Environmental Review Committee was submitted by on NE 3rd/NE 4th Councilman Reed regarding volume of truck traffic associated Street Corridor with fill and grade activity in the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street corridor between Sunset Boulevard NE and Monroe Avenue NE. The survey had been requested prior to next annual review of fill and grade permit for Gary Merlino Construction Company, File No. SP-o48-85. Of the average daily traffic of 21 ,500 vehicles (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) , 3, 100 or 14% are trucks and buses. This volume is approximately three times the average percentage of trucks and buses on an arterial . MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL REFER THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS Council President Mathews presented a Committee of the Whole Committee of report recommending concurrence in the policy direction the Whole by the Park Board and Park Department for non-motorized boating Renton Sailing activities including those of the Renton Sailing Club. Club/Non- Motorized Those policies are: work with small craft enthusiasts to Boating develop programs for sailing, rowing and canoeing; utilize Referred Coulon Beach Park facility and expand or improve if use level 11/11 /85) demands; work with other cities and King County to acquire land to develop small craft center on east side of Lake Washington; estimate funds required to provide a permanent small craft center,. and determine whether needs can be met by existing City property and other property acquired for that purpose; and explore alternatives for such programs in conjunction with the private sector. The Parks Department has implemented the following: Added rowing lessons to its Parks Program schedule; allowed use of boathouse at Coulon Beach Park for small craft use during off-season; coordinated sailing lessons with Renton Sailing Club through Renton Vocational Technical Institute for spring, summer and fall , 1986; bought two rafts for rowing and sailing programs at Coulon Beach Park; surveyed small craft centers and programs as well as potential sites on the east side of Lake Washington; and discussed with Seattle Parks Department potential use by Renton residents of Mount Baker Small Craft Center Program. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT REGARDING THE RENTON SAILING CLUB/NON-MOTORIZED BOATING POLICY AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PARK BOARD AND PARKS DEPARTMENT. CARRIED. Hiring Policy - Council President Mathews presented a Committee of the Whole Former Employees report regarding policy of hiring former employees as as Consultants consultants. This matter was referred on 12/16/85 as result of proposal by former finance director for financial advisory services. Related matter which was referred on 1/6/86 concerned application by retiring City employee to open position of Airport Manager. Following discussion, it was determined by the Committee of the Whole that no action would be taken on A If OF 0 Co BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 101 O MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 091T00 SE PSE O P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAY DR 1 1, =I' EE .MEMORANDUM _ f E B 1 71986 CITYOF i NIGNDATE: February 17, 1986 CITY COUNCIL TO: Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor City Council Members FROM: Environmental Review Committee SUBJECT: TRUCK SURVEY ON N.E. THIRD STREET The En aironmental Review Committee was charged by the City Council in the Gary Merlino Construction Company special permit, file SP-048-85, to consider truck traffic associal ed with the fill and grade activity during the next annual license review. The City Council was to review the ERC's recommendation, prior to the Building and Zoning Department taking action on the annual license. As part of the basic information provided to the Environmental Review Committee, the Traffic Engineering Division conducted a study of truck traffic on the N.E. Third/N.E. Fourth :itreet corridor between Sunset Blvd. N.E. and Monroe Avenue N.E. Attached is a copy of the study presented to the ERC. The EFC believes that this information would be important to the Public Safety Committee which is presently reviewing the issue of truck routes. Therefore, this study should t e referred as information to the Public Safety Committee's meeting scheduled for Thursday, February 20, 1986. The Environmental Review Committee cannot reach a decision on what the maximum number of truck trips should be for the specific special permit. It is impossible to obtain information showing what truck traffic actually exists within the City or is generated by projects outside of the City. The issue is whether to limit development in the City, while not having the ability to limit development in the County. The most effective method apparently is to establish truck routes and limit times of operations. This would affect all users, not just the citizens of the City of Renton. RJB:ss 2232Z s • A MEMORANDUM DATE: December 17, 1985 TO: Dick Houghton FROM: Gary Norris SUBJECT: Truck Survey on NE 3rd As requested, the Traffic Engineering Division conducted a study of truck traffic on the NE 3rd/NE 4th corridor between Sunset Blvd. NE and Monroe Ave. NE. The study was confined to the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. as it was determined that these are hours of most truck activity. The study was conducted during the first couple weeks of December on average weekdays i .e. Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday) . During this period of time the only pit in operation appeared to be Merlino's operation on NE 2nd. Also the City had construction projects on NE 4th and Monroe Ave. In talking with the City inspectors it was determined that truck traffic emanating from the City projects would not have been included at the site where the count was made. (NE 3rd St. & Blaine Ave. NE) The results of the survey are as follows: Average Daily Traffic (24 hour)= 25,000 vehicles per day Average Daily Traffic (6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. )= 21 ,500 vehicles per day Delivery Trucks and Buses @ 6% (6:00 am to 6:00 pm)= 1 ,300 vehicles Large Trucks and Semis @ 2% (6:00 am to 6:00 pm)= 500 vehicles Dirt Haulers @ 6% (6:00 am to 6:00 pm)= 1 ,300 vehicles Total Truck & Bus Volume = 3, 100 vehicles 6:00 am to 6:00 pm) This yields a total of 14% trucks and buses in the NE 3rd corridor (between 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. ) , which is approximately 3 times the average condition of trucks and buses on an arterial . Ac_ ( GAN:ad cc: Bob Bergstrom JN-VSD ZTJ IIP jarycfllerlino CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 9125- 10th Avenue South 762-9125 Seattle,Washington 98108 December 31, 1985 City of RentonCITY OF RENpON Building and Zoning Department f(( I P T On 200 Mill Avenue South D t Renton, WA 98055 DEC 311985 Attn: Mr. Ronald Nelson; Director RE: Greenwood Cemetary Fill and Grade Permit Dear Mr. Nelson: Enclosed for your files are four prints of the Phase I Site Plan as mod- ified to reflect the alternative project entrance location which we discussed at your office last Friday. The modification calls for relocations of the weigh scale from its current location near the current project entrance to a point near the southeast corner of the Phase I area. As you can see from the plan, this will leave much more than adequate room to provide a 100-foot long paved exit lane from the project. We are simultaneously applying to the Public Works Department for a permit to build the new concrete driveway apron, which the new project entrance will necessitate. Upon receipt of the permit we will immediately begin work on it, weather permitting. To provide us with a reasonable amount of time to build the new curb cut, pave the new project entrance road, and set up the scales in the new loca- tion, we hereby request permission to continue use of the current project entrance for ninety days. During this period,Gary told me that he would continue to have our water truck with an operator onsite during all periods of truck operation to clean the tires of exiting trucks before they leave the site. Please let us know if this will be acceptable. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. , INC. David L. Ha inen, P.E. Engineer Attachments (4 prints) OF J iv o THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR MAXINE E.MOTOR, 9.0 Co' CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 o P 9 TFD SEPSE O October 31, 1985 Mr. David L. Halinen Gary Merlino Construction Company 9125 - 10th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108 Re: Gary Merlino Construction Company Special Permit Appeal; File No. SP-048-85 Dear Mr. Halinen: At its regular meeting of October 28, 1985, the Renton City Council adopted the following recommendations: 1) Council affirm the Hearing Examiner on the maximum allowable truck trips of 60 per day; 2) The topic of maximum truck trips per day be referred to the Environmental Review Committee for review, as part of the next annual license renewal, with recommendation to the Council by the ERC; 3) Council reverse the Hearing Examiner and allow Phase II extraction to take place within the two year special permit subject to the limitation in the hours of operation of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. only; 4) Truck traffic is limited to the NE 3rd/NE 4th Street corridor unless deliveries are being made to a residential area and the travel on residential streets is limited to maximum extent possible. A copy of the Planning and Development Committee report, adopted by the Council, is attached for your files. Please feel free to contact the Building & Zoning Department if further information is desired. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner Building & Zoning Department w RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting October 28, 1985 Municipal Building Monday, 8:00 p.m. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF JOHN W. REED, Council President; NANCY L. MATHEWS, THOMAS W. COUNCIL MEMBERS TRIMM, EARL CLYMER, ROBERT J. HUGHES, KATHY A. KEOLKER, RICHARD M. STREDICKE CITY STAFF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE MICHAEL W. PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, City Clerk: JOHN McFARLAND, Personnel Director; LT. JOE PEACH, Police Department PRESS Tony Davis, Daily Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL APPROVE THE COUNCIL MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21 , 1985, AS WRITTEN. CARRIED. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Shinpoch declared the month of November, Free Enterprise 1985, as Free Enterprise Month in Renton, promoted by Renton Month High School 's Marketing and Distributive Education Program in recognition of an economic system in which natural resources, labor and capital are brought together to produce and distribute goods and services needed and desired by the people. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION. CARRIED. Renton High School students Tiffinie Nason and Lori Maez accepted the proclamation on behalf of DECA. Executive MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY KOELKER, COUNCIL CONVENE INTO Session EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. CARRIED. Time: 9:05 p.m. Council reconvened into regular session at 9: 14 p.m. ; roll was called; all members were present. AUDIENCE COMMENT David Halinen, 9125 10th Avenue South, Seattle, requested Advance to advancement to Planning and Development Committee report Old Business regarding Gary Merlino Special Permit appeal . MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE REGULAR ORDER OF BUSINESS AND ADVANCE TO OLD BUSINESS, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Stredicke presented Development a report regarding the appeal filed by Gary Merlino Construction Committee Company on Hearing Examiner' s decision regarding special permit Gary Merlino application for fill and grade; File No. SP-048-85, property Construction Co. located at 3401 NE 4th Street. Appeal The report advised that on 10/16/85, the appellant withdrew the appeal regarding hours of operation and agreed to limit operation in the Phase II project to no later than 3:00 p.m. since it is contiguous to residential housing. The appellant continues to appeal the denial of the Phase II special permit and the limitation on the number of truck trips. On 10/6/85, the Committee was informed that Phase I of the gravel extraction process would be completed six months early, approximately by 1/1/86, and that the appellant wished to move on to Phase II immediately. Phase II extraction would probably be completed within the two year scope of the recommended special permit. The appellant agreed to the condition that no access would be allowed to Monroe Avenue NE and other residential streets, and would use the NE 3rd/NE 4th (Cemetery Road) corridor for truck trips to the west, north or south. Residential streets would be used only on trips to the east to access delivery sites. Renton City Council 10/28/85 Page two Planning and Development Committee Report continued Planning and In light of the Building and Zoning Department recommendation Develop6ent that a maximum of 150 truck trips per day be permitted through Committee the Cemetery Road corridor and other fill and grade permits Merlino Appeal have been issued, this matter will be referred to the continued Environmental Review Committee for review. (See later action.) The Committee recommends that the limitation on the number of truck trips for this project be affirmed, and any change in truck trips requested during annual license process be referred to the ERC for review. The Committee also recommends that the denial of the Phase II permit be partly reversed and partly affirmed so as to permit gravel extraction in Phase II during the two year permit term. In all other respects, the Hearing Examiner' s decision is affirmed. The Committee found that the Hearing Examiner committed a factual error in separating Phase I and Phase II gravel extractions in treating them as separate operations rather than one continuous operation. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Council affirm the Hearing Examiner on the maximum allowable truck trips of 60 per day; 2) the topic of maximum truck trips per day be referred to the ERC for review during the next annual license renewal with recommendation by the ERC to the Council ; 3) Council reverse the Hearing Examiner and allow Phase II extraction to take place within the two year special permit subject to limitation in hours of operation to 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. only; 4) Truck traffic is limited to the NE 3rd/NE 4th corridor unless deliveries are being made to a residential area and the travel on residential streets is limited to maximum extent possible. Mr. Halinen, staff engineer for Gary Merlino Construction Co. , concurred in the Committee report. He submitted a letter from Michael Mastro, controlling interest in the apartment complex located adjacent to the Phase II development, which indicated there was no objection to any portion of the proposal . MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. First City William Jens, 1136 South 23rd Street, representing Victoria Developments Hills Homeowners Association, requested permission for Corporation representatives of the association to attend the Planning and Appeal Development Committee meeting which will address the First Victoria Hills) City Developments Corporation appeal of the Victoria Hills FPUD-042-85 Phase II FPUD, located south of South Puget Drive, west of Benson Road South and north of South 26th Street. City Attorney Warren advised that all Planning and Development Committee meetings are open to the public, and requested that one or two spokespersons be selected to represent the group. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing: Armstrong Claim Claim for damages in the amount of $388.44 filed by Robert S. for Damages Armstrong, 4343 167th Avenue SE, Issaquah, for damage to CL 51-85 motorcycle allegedly caused by improper road repair and absence of warning signs at Sunset Boulevard and Union Avenue NE 9/21/85) . Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Danielson Claim Claim for damages in an undetermined amount filed by Della M. for Damages Danielson, 2204 NE 24th Street, Renton, for severe reaction CL 52-85 incurred when diazanon was accidentally sprayed on her by City of Renton Park Department employee working in adjoining park (6/27/85) . Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Boyack Court Court Case filed by M. Wayne Boyack, Boyack & Ockerman, Case (Bonnie 1611 Pacific Building, Seattle, attorney representing Bonnie Fae Schrum) Fae Schrum, seeking $5,600 in damages to sidewalk, driveway, and mailbox at 306 Seneca Place NW allegedly caused by City workmen (8/17/82 and continuing - Claim for Damages File No. CL 31-85) . Refer to City Attorney & Great American Insurance Company. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT TO: Renton City Council October 17, 1985 FROM: Planning and Development Committee RE:Appeal of Gary Merlino Construction Company Special Permit No. 048-85 The appellant, by letter dated October 16, 1985, withdrew its appeal concerning the hours of operation. It also voluntarily agreed by that letter to limit any request for operation in Phase II of the project beyond 3 : 00 P.M. , because Phase II is contiguous to residential housing. Appellant continues to assert its appeal concerning the denial of the Special Permit for Phase II and the limitation on the number of truck trips. On October 6, 1985 the Committee was informed during the meeting that Phase I of the gravel extraction process would be completed six months early, approximately January 1, 1986 and that the appellant wished to Hove on to Phase II immediately. Phase II extraction would probably be completed within the two year scope of the recommended special permit. The appellant agreed that there would be no access to Monroe Avenue except when the appellant, who is also the successful bidder on the Monroe Avenue Street project, was actually working on it as part of that construction. The appellant also agreed that it would have no access to residential streets and would, to the greatest extent possible, use the N.E. 3rd, N.E. 4th (Cemetery Road) corridor for truck trips heading west, north or south. To the extent that the appellant would be hauling to the east, it would remain on the N.E. 3rd and N.E. 4th corridor to the greatest extent possible and would not use residential streets for hauling unless the delivery site was accessible only through residential streets and then residential streets would be used to the minimum extent possible. The Committee was also informed that the Building and Zoning Department had recommended to the Hearing Examiner that a maximum of 150 truck trips per day be permitted through the Cemetery Road corridor. The Metro Sand and Gravel operation, the Edwards pit and Cugini pit all are operating in this area. There was no testimony about the number of those truck trips per day taken by these other operations. Annual licenses are necessary for these operations and attention should be paid to the total number of truck trips during the annual license process. By separate report the Planning and Development Committee will request that the administration have the Environmental Review Committee review all of the annual licenses for environmental impact, particularly in light of the truck trip limitation recommended by the Building and Zoning Department. c 8, Because of this additional truck traffic and the undetermined number of truck trips involved with other mineral extraction operations in the area, the Committee has recommended that the limitation on the number of truck trips per day be affirmed. Construction will also be taking place on N.E. 4th and on Monroe Avenue over the next several months. Truck traffic is anticipated as part of that con- struction. The Committee recommends that the Council delegate to the Environmental Review Committee for study and recommendation any changes in the permitted number of truck trips on this particular project as part of the annual license process. The number of permitted truck trips may be increased by the City Council follow- ing recommendation of the Environmental Review Committee. The Planning and Development Committee, for the reasons stated above recommends that the limitation on the number of truck trips be affirmed and that the denial of the permit for Phase II be partly reversed and partly affirmed so as to permit gravel extraction in Phase II duringthetwoyeartermofthePermit. In all other respects the HearingExaminer' s Decision is affirmed. The Committee finds that the Hearing Examiner committed a factual error in separating Phase I and Phase II gravel extractions in treating them as separate operations rather than one continuous operation. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Council affirm the Hearing Examiner on the maximum allowable truck trips,per day. 1of(;o 2. The topic of maximum truck trips per day be referred to the Environmental Review Committee for review, as part of the next annual license renewal, with recommendation to the Council by theERC. 3. The Council reverse the Hearing Examiner and allow Phase II extraction to take place within the two year special permit subject to the limitation in the hours of operation to 9 :00 A.M. to 3: 00 P.M. only. 4. Truck traffic is limited to the N.E. 3rd, N.E. 4th corridor unless deliveries are being made to a residential area and the travel on residential streets is limited to maximum extent possible. j., ; ,f`' G MINVESTMENTS M.R. MASTRO October 24 , 1985 Renton City Council City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE : Gary Merlino Contruction Company Request for Special Permit File #SP-048-85 Dear Council Members : I have a controlling interest in the 399 apartment units located immediately east and northeast of the Phase 2 portion of the pro- posed sand/gravel mining operaiton. I have reviewed the proposal that the applicant submitted to the City and have no opposition to any portion of that proposal. Given the limited term of the permit request, I especially concur with the applicant that existing vegetation and topographic features along the east boundary of the proposal will provide adequate visual screening from the proposed operation. With the reasonable conditions that the applicant has proposed, extraction of the valuable sand/gravel should be permitted. I urge you to reverse the decision of the Hearing Examiner denying Phase 2 and allow the applicant to get started with it as soon as he is ready. Sincerely, M. R. Mastro 510 RAINIER AVENUE SOUTH, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 96144 [2061 323-5393 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT October 17 , 1985 TO: Renton City Council FROM: Planning and Development Committee RE: Recommendation of Environmental Review Committee review of Truck Traffic in the NE 3rd, NE 3rd (Cemetery Road) Corridor During the Hearing on the Merlino appeal the Committee was informed that the Building and Zoning Department thought a maximum of 150 truck trips per day was the maximum that the Cemetery Road corridor would absorb without unnecessary disrup- tion. Since there are several projects involving truck trips along that corridor, including Metro Sand and Gravel, the Edwards Pit and Cugini Pit and there is construction activity about to commence on N.E. 4th and Edmonds Avenue, it is requested by the City Council that the annual license for all of these operations be reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee to determine how many truck trips should be allowed through this corridor and to what extent the individual operations are contributing truck traffic to the corridor. M eV 7/7lL Gi C( i l({ /aft-d. 2 d it 1 9 eJ\.( aLtic_ OF RE 0 THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL NAL MUNICIPAL BUILDING • 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH • RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055• 235-2586 0 amm 09 am• 9 TE0 SEPjEO October 11 , 1985 APPEAL FILED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision, dated August 7, 1985, Gary Merlino Construction Company Request for Special Permit, File No. SP-048-85 To Parties of Record: The Planning and Development Committee has rescheduled review of the subject appeal to Wednesday, October 16, 1985, at 4:30 p.m. in the third floor conference room of the Municipal Building. • Enclosed for your information is a letter from the Hearing Examiner, Fred Kaufman, to the City Council . If you have any questions regarding this matter, please phone the Council secretary at 235-2586. Sincerely, 24L-ekx-i-d2 La?( Richard M. Stredicke, Chairman (4'4 Planning and Development Committee RMS:bd Enclosure OF R4,'1 ell CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILI AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 asU BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 09° O FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235-2593 co- 0 1„ RECEIVEDOctober10, 1985 OCT 101985 CITY OF RENTON Members of the Renton City Council CITY COUNCIL Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wa. 98055 SUBJECT: Appeal of Gary Merlino Construction Company Special Permit 048-85 Dear Council Mambers: I hope the following information can be utilized in your deliberations regarding the above entitled matter. The applicant seems intent on minimizing the predominently residential nature of Monroe Avenue N.E. between N.E. 4th Street and N.E. 12th Street. Except for the short segment adjacent to N.E. 4th, Monroe is primarily residential, and much of that is actually single family. The applicant also seems to stress the determination of the Traffic Engineering Division regarding the acceptability of Monroe Avenue as a haul route. Such reliance is misplaced. When asked to comment, the Traffic Engineering Division specifically declined to comment on the land use implications of using Monroe for a haul route. Traffic Engineering declined to comment about the route from a land use perspective indicating it was not their area of expertise. In other words, if land use issues were ignored, Traffic Engineering indicated the route would be acceptable. That recommendation, excluding land use impacts, does not carry sufficient weight to approve the route. The applicant also continues to misinterpret the determination of the ERC. That body did not, nor do they have the authority to determine that the subject proposal should be approved. They simply determine whether the environmental consequences are or are not significant enough to require a detailed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be published so the "decision maker", in this case the Hearing Examiner, has sufficient information to make an informed decision. They did not approve the project, but merely determined that an Environmental Impact Statement was not necessary and then suggested conditions which might mitigate the perceived environmental consequences of the project. I 4 Finally, the applicant indicates that matters outside the record ware utilized in the decision-making process. The law does not expect issues within the common knowledge of the trier of fact to be ignored. Nor can issues relating to laws, regulations and adopted plans be ignored. The Zoning Map is adopted law, and the various projects which have generated the traffic and changed the character of the N.E. 4th corridor have generally been based upon plans or zoning adopted by the City Council. This Office only relied on issues within the broad scope of permissible judicial knowledge. Further, the applicant does not refute or negate the impact of those projects on either the traffic or character of the ar 3a by trying to have them ignored as outside the scope of the hearing record. Again, I hope this information will assist you in your deliberation of this matter. Sincerely, btu--,a. YU---- FRED J. KFMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK/dk cc: Mayor Shinpoch Larry Warren, City Attorney C_, y CJ pF R THE RENTON CITY COUNCIL MUNICIPAL BUILDING • 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH • RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 • 235-2586 0 IMOD 0A CO, 0g4'0 SEP °.° September 19, 1985 APPEAL FILED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision , dated August 7, 1985, Gary Merlino Construction Company Request for Special Permit , File No. SP-048-85 To Parties of Record: The Planning and Development Committee of the Renton City Council will meet to review the subject appeal at its committee meeting of Thursday, October 17, 1985 , at 4:30 p.m. in the third floor conference room of the Municipal Building. You are welcome to attend. If you have any questions regarding this meeting, please phone the Council secretary at 235-2586. Sincerely, Richard M. Stredicke, Chairman Planning and Development Committee RMS :bd wi OF R 4 T o THE CITY OF RENTON r ,.. ,• MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER 9° FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235 -2593 0AO- SEPj P October 10, 1985 CITY OF RENTON OCT t i 1985 Members of the Renton City Council O f CITY CLERK'S OEFlCE Rentcn Municipal Building 200 N ill Avenue South U i Rentcn, Wa. 98055 SUBJECT: Appeal of Gary Merlino Construction Company Special Permit 048-85 Dear ouncil Mambers: I hope the following information can be utilized in your deliberations regarding the above entitled matter. The applicant seems intent on minimizing the predominently residential nature of Monroe Avenue N.E. between N.E. 4th Street and N.E. 12th Street. Except for the short segment adjacent to N.E. 4th, Monroe is primarily residential, and much of that is actually single family. The applicant also seems to stress the determination of the Traffic Engineering Division regarding the acceptability of Monroe Avenue as a haul route. Such reliance is misplaced. When asked to comment, the Traffic Engineering Division specifically declined to comment on the land use implications of using Monroe for a haul route. Traff.c Engineering declined to comment about the route from a land use perspective indicating it was not their area of expertise. In other words, if land use issues were ignored, Traffic Engineering indicated the route would be acceptable. That recommendation, excluding land use impacts, does not carry sufficient weight to approve the mute. The applicant also continues to misinterpret the determination of the ERC. That body did not, lior do they have the authority to determine that the subject proposal should be approved. They simply determine whether the environmental consequences are or are not significant enough to require a detailed Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be published so the "decision maker", in this case the Hearing Examiner, has sufficient information to make an informed decision. They did not approve the project, but merely determined that an Environmental Impact Statement was not necessary and then suggested conditions which might mitigate the perceived environmental consequences of the p 'oject. Finally, the applicant indicates that matters outside the record were utilized in the decisior-making process. The law does not expect issues within the common knowledge of the trier of fact to be ignored. Nor can issues relating to laws, regulations and adopted plans b3 ignored. The Zoning Map is adopted law, and the various projects which have generated the traffic and changed the character of the N.E. 4th corridor have generally been based upon plans or zoning adopted by the City Council. This Office only relied on issues within the broad scope of permissible judicial knowledge. Further, the applicant does not refute or negate the impact of those projects on either the traffic or character of the area by trying to have them ignored as outside the scope of the hearing record. Again, I hope this information will assist you in your deliberation of this matter. Sincere..y, FRED J. K FMAN HEARING EXAMINER FJK/dk cc: Mayor Shinpoch Larry Warren, City Attorney 1 Renton City Council 9/16/85 Page two Consent Agenda continued Human Rights Mayor Shinpoch appointed Mrs. Rose Raihala, 442 Burnett Affairs Avenue N. , to the Human Rights and Affairs Commission for Commission two-year term effective to September 19, 1987; Mrs. Raihala Appointment has participated in Renton Headstart Program Advisory Board, Renton Clothes Bank Advisory Board, Salvation Army, President of Earlington and Renton High School PTAs and participant of Renton PTA Council ; Helping Center volunteer tutor, Assistant Campfire Girls Leader, and Renton High 75th Jubilee Events Committee. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Metro Request Mayor Shinpoch submitted request from Metro for consideration to Extend Sewage of extension of the agreement for sewage disposal between Disposal Agreement Metro and City of Renton from current expiration date of July 1 , 2016 to July 1 , 2036 to extend term beyond maturity date of revenue bonds (2015) issued to finance Metro' s capital program. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Airpo-t Lease Public Works Department submitted staff proposal to change Matters airport lease rate renegotiations to a common date of June 1 , 1990; basic ground lease terms to five years; basic ground lease rental rates be standardized for each successive rate term, including City-owned buildings. Exceptions would apply to certain Boeing leases, FAA lease of Airport Tower Building, and restaurant lease. Refer to Transportation Aviation) Committee. Falcon Ridge Public Works Department submitted request from Norcon Road Franchise Developments, Ltd. to extend Falcon Ridge road franchise Extension from 30 year term to 35 year term to secure Federal National Request Mortgage Association (FNMA) financing for 30-year loans for new home sales. Refer to Transportation Committee. Taylor Avenue SW City Clerk transmitted recommendation from Public Works Maple Avenue SW Director to accept appraisal prepared by Lamb Hanson Lamb Street. Vacation Appraisal Associates for Taylor Avenue SW and Maple Avenue VAC 001-85 SW street vacation petitioned by Valley Office & Industrial Park, VAC 001-85, in the amount of $1 .75 per square foot or total payment of $50,400.00 (one-half of appraised value) . Council concur. Gary Merlino Appeal of Hearing Examiner' s decision filed by Gary Merlino Appeal Construction Company on Special Permit File No. SP-048-85; SP-048-85 property lcoated at 3401 NE 4th Street; modification of Phase I grade and fill under File No. SP-019-84. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consert Agenda MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT Adopted AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE Letter was read from R. E. Bockstruck, P.E. , District 1-405 "S" Administrator for Washington State Department of Transportation, Curve Project reporting open house to be held on Tuesday, September 24, 1985, between 1 :00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. at the Sheraton Renton Inn, for the purpose of displaying models of construction alternatives for 1-405 "S" Curve Realignment Project , including alternative preferred by interdisciplinary study team. Mayor Shinpoch agreed to contact Renton Hill Community Association president and newspaper to make sure they are notified of open house. Council President Reed noted WSDOT representatives will make a presentation on the same subject at Committee of Whole meeting, Thursday, September 19th at 7:30 p.m. , Council Chambers. OLD BUSINESS MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, LAW ARTICLE TRANSMITTED BY Zoning CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING ZONING ADMINISTRATION BE REFERRED TO Administration PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. PUD Ordinance MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, LETTER FROM HEARING Moratorium EXAMINER REGARDING MORATORIUM ON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Proposed PROCESS BE REFERRED TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. For. Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING tt 3=35 3 SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. City Clerk For Agenda Of 9/16/85 Meeting Date) Staff Contact Maxine E. Motor Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Consent XX Dec ision; Gary Merlino Construction Public Hearing Correspondence Company Special Permit; File No. Ordinance/Resolution SP- 048-85 Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. City Clerk's Letter Other B. Request for Reconsideration/Response C. Hearing Examiner's Report, 8/7/85 Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Refer to Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A Planning and Development Other Clearance Committee FISCAL IMPA:T: Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Required $ Budgeted $ Transfer Required $ SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) Attach additional pages if necessary. ) Appeal filed by David Halinen, representing Gary Merlino Construction Company, accompanied by required fee received on 9/6/85. PARTIES OF FECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: UBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. OF R4,1 y 0 THE CITY OF RENTON Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 nimIL rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR MAXINE E.MOTOR, 92..o o- CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 09gr D SEPSE. O September 10, 1985 APPEAL FILED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY RE : Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision, dated August 7, 1985, Gary Merlino Construction Company Request for Special Permit, File No. SP-048-85. To Parties of Record : Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision has been filed with the City Clerk, accompanied with proper fee of $75.00. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. The Council Secretary will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Committee meeting. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON 2""-er---ze--,-r-e 12-204- Maxine E. Motor City Clerk OF I S o THE CITY OF RENTON U ` © Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 oe BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR MAXINE E.MOTOR, 90 co' CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 0 SEP c_10 CERTIFICATE STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ss. MARILYN J. PETERSEN, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Renton, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of 21 and not a party to nor interested in this matter. On this 12th day of September, 1985, at 5:00 p.m. , your affiant duly mailed and placed in the United States Post Office at Renton, King County, Washington, by first class mail, to all parties of record, a true and correct NOTICE OF APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION FILED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY; File No. SP-048-85. Marilyn . PP . ersen, Deputy City Clerk SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me this 12th day of September, 1985. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing in Renton OF R4 o THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 0 sallrn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR MAXINE E.MOTOR, 9 o- CITY CLERK • (206) 235-2500 O91 TFD EPS'. September 10, 1985 APPEAL FILED BY GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY RE : Appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision, dated August 7, 1985, Gary Merlino Construction Company Request for Special Permit, File No. SP-048-85. To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 30, City Code, written appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision has been filed with the City Clerk, accompanied with proper fee of $75.00. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee and will be considered by the City Council when the matter is reported out of Committee. The Council Secretary will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Committee meeting. Sincerely, CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor City Clerk Y CITY OF RENTON No 12736 FINANCE DEPARTMENT RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 9,- 19 tls" jj 4 /iO3`t'/rRECEIVEDOFz, r 1 i /, M.1/ilii Afl u aL/rz. 'z.eJQ n) 1722/A./i Ca Sri i TOTALReceivedby z,e5 i i t i at' I y t i4 YiI, s x t ;txyi. Y` a 5. t t r i, Ft t r liti r^r 9 iy ` i 4 of e y - , r ,a §'' r WRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER' S DECISION/RECOMMENDATION TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL. APPLICATION NAME: FILE NO. 5 P --0 4 g Q,E Y /YE—L i m o Coss T',u c. -i o,v CO, CITY OF RENTON 5PEcI AL P e•+wr-r 4PftLic4--riot) SEP 6 198g The undersigned interested party hereby files 't • cine ':j.e : . the Decision or Recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Exam n F':I/,;E; 1 I-. 193_4-: r 1 . IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: REPRESENTATIVE ( IF ANY) • j Dirker EA /ev4- o4' Name:jQ7 /4/er/:o a,„4„,, - 7,` .., Ca. Name: GGLS ie.50 1 Prvz4v+ f Ko ,'4. 1 p/oc.r,Pac,' .,', 1'3..I'/CI h19 Address:rj/Z,-/Oi' Over . S, Address: 3 -d f Co (., L.,,b,' s Sea e_, wg 8iao Sez. /e , td 4 9 8/04- Telephone No. 7 Z.—,/aS Telephone No. ‘Z 3— 3S 7 7 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets if necessary SERE 4rr4c4ED "AJOT,cE of 4Pfre4 i- '' Set forth below are the specific errors or law or fact upon which this appeal is based: FINDINGS OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's Report) No. Error: Correction: CONCLUSIONS: No. Error: Correction: OTHER: No. Error: Correction: 3. SUMMARY OF ACTJQLL REQUESTED: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: Attach explanation, if desired) k SEE ,4T714C41 c,D /1/4'7, .E of APANE.4 Reverse the Decision or Recommendation and grant the following relief: Modify the Decision or Recommendation as follows: Remand to the Examiner for further consideration as follows: Other: 24.- 'Z. 44-1:1-1-J2---1 )KPT, 6 g--- gent Ape 4p7,4„,//4,410- A..r Mo./i.1e Ce.1s,. Ce , Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 30 of the Renton Municipal Code, and Sections 4-3016 and 4-3017, specifically (see reverse side of page) for specific appeal procedures. 4-3016:APPEAL: Unless an ordinance providing ` - review of decision of the caminer requires review thereof by the ; irior Court, any interested party aggriev0.4 oy the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Clerk upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with the Fee Schedule of the City. A) The written notice of appeal shall fully, clearly and thoroughly specify the substantial error(s) in fact or law which exist in the record of the proceedingsfromwhichtheappellantseeksrelief. B) Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. C) Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. D) No public hearing shall he held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council mayremandthemattertotheExaminerforreconsideration. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the appellant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. E) The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. IF If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to Section 4-3010(A) and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. G) If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to Section 4-3010(B) or (C), and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application pursuant to Section 4-3010(B) or (C). IH) In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall restwiththeappellant. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-3017:COUNCIL ACTION: Any application requiring action by the CityCouncilshallbeevidencedbyminuteentryunlessotherwiserequired by law. When taking any such final action, the Council shall make and enter findings offactfromtherecordandconclusionstherefromwhichsupportitsaction. Unlessotherwisespecified, the City Council shall be presumed to have adopted theExaminer's findings and conclusions. A) In the case of a change of the zone classification of property (rezone), the CityClerkshallplacetheordinanceontheCouncil's agenda for first reading. Final reading of the ordinance shall not occur until all conditions, restrictions or modifications which may have been required by the Council have been accomplished or provisions for compliance made to the satisfaction of theLegalDepartment. B) All other applications requiring Council action shall be placed on the Council'sagendaforconsideration. (Ord. 3454, 7-28-80) C) The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner, shall be final and conclusive, unless within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the action an aggrieved party or person obtains a writ of review from the Superior Court of Washington for King County, for purposesofreviewoftheactiontaken. (Ord. 3725, 5-9-83) BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF RENTON IN RE: FILE NO. SP-048-85 Application of Gary Merlino ) Construction Company for NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE Special Permit RENTON CITY COUNCIL The Applicant, pursuant to Title IV of the Renton City Code hereby respectfully requests that the City Council reverse and modify the decision of the Hearing Examiner as contained in the report and decision dated August 7, 1985, and the response to request for reconsideration dated August 23, 1985. The decision, findings and conclusions to which this appeal is directed are as follows: 1 . Conclusion No. 7 Regarding Denial of Phase 2. The conclusion that Phase 2 of the proposed excavation and fill operation should be denied is not supported by either findings of fact or by matters within the record of these proceedings. To the extent this conclusion is based on matters outside the record of these proceedings, the conclusion, and the decision based thereon to deny the permit for Phase 2, is arbitrary and capricious, violates standards of due process and Title IV, Section 3010 of the Renton City Code. The record discloses that on July 3, 1985, the Environmental Review Committee considered this special permit application, which consisted of both Phases 1 and 2 and determined that the proposal does not have a probably significant adverse impact on the environment. In its memorandum to the Hearing Examiner dated that same day, the ERC recommended that, subject to certain conditions, the requested special permit should be issued. The Building and Zoning Department' s preliminary report to the Hearing Examiner subsequently recommended approval of both requested Phases. As the hearing testimony summary in the Hearing Examiner' s report and decision indicates, the Building and Zoning Department reiterated this recommendation at the July 30, 1985 public hearing. No one testified in opposi- tion to either of the proposed Phases at the hearing, nor did anyone submit written opposition into the record. There are no facts in the record supporting a conclusion that Phase 2 should be denied. Notice of Appeal - 1 This conclusion, and the decision based thereon, are inconsistent with and contrary to prior special permits issued for much larger sand/gravel mining and filling activities in the immediate vicinity of the subject proposal for periods comparable to the total time period requested in this application. SP-099-80 dealt with in Exhibit 6 referred to in the Hearing Examiner' s report and decision, was issued in 1981 for mining 1 .6 million cubic yards from a site lying approximately 370 feet south of N.E. 3rd Street on the hill east of Mt. Olivet Cemetary. That permit, issued to Rainier Sand and Gravel with M. A. Segale' s Metro Sand and Gravel as lessee/operator, was presumably for the four-year term requested. SP-032-82 was issued in 1982 for filling an existing 70' deep gravel pit located directly across Monroe Avenue from the Applicant' s Phase 1 proposal , with 1 .1 million cubic yards of material . That permit was issued to M. A. Segale, Inc. for a five-year term. In contrast to those prior applications and permits, the subject application is for only 280,000 cubic yards of excavation and 380,000 cubic yards of re-fill . The requested time period for Phase 2, a comparable five years, should in fairness be approved. 2. Conclusion No. 2 and Condition No. 5 Relating to Number of Truck Trips. The decision to limit the number o daily truck trips to double the number of average daily truck trips indicated in the environmental checklist is without basis in the record. On the basis of the record, the only limitation which arguably should be imposed is the 150 truck trip per day limitation recommended in the pre- liminary report to the Hearing Examiner. The traffic estimates included in the environ- mental checklist describe the daily number of truck trips expected on average. A noted on page 3 of the preliminary report to the examiner, the average number of trips would only be about one-tenth of 1% of the total daily vehicle trips on the N.E. 3rd Street/N.E. 4th Street corridor. While the Buiding and Zoning Department did assert that increases of 10 to 20 times the estimated daily truck trip average could have a substantial impact on the arterial street system, the Department also made a specific recommendation (recommended condition 1) that up to 150 truck trips per day be permitted. The Applicant' s engineer contested this proposed limitation at the time of the hearings; there is no evidence in the record suggesting that the number of truck trips on peak days should be limited to less than 150. Notice of Appeal - 2 3. Finding No. 12 , Finding No. 13 , Finding No. 14 , Conclusion No. 2, Conclusion No. 5 and Condition No. 1 Relating to Hauling Hours, Haul Rates and Increases in Traffic in the Area. The decision to deny the requested hauling hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a .m. and 3: 00 p.m. to 4: 00 p.m. , Monday through Friday is erroneous. The problem stems from error in Findings 12 and 13, a lack of basis in the record for Conclusions 2 and 5, and failure to adhere to recent precedents in similar special permit cases related to mining and filling . Finding No. 12 is erroneous because it creates the misleading impression that City staff unanimously agreed that the hauling of materials to and from the site should not be permitted between 7: 00 a.m. and 9: 00 a.m. nor between 3 :00 p.m. and 4 : 00 p.m. This was only the position of the Building and Zoning Department, not the position of the City' s Traffic Engineer. The Traffic Engineer, Mr. Gary Norris, P.E. , testified during the hearing that from a traffic standpoint, the hauling between the project site and Interstate 405 via Monroe Ave. , N.E. 12th Street, and Sunset Boulevard during the 7 : 00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m./3 : 00 p.m. - 4 : 00 p.m. hours would not impact traffic. Finding No. 12 should reflect these facts. Finding No. 13 is erroneously misleading for two reasons. First, while it correctly mentions that north of N.E. 4th St. "Monroe Ave. is the subject of local improve- ments which will restrict traffic on the street, " this finding fails to point out that the Applciant' s engineer testified during the hearing that the Applciant would be willing to forego use of Monroe Ave. north of N.E. 4th Street during the requested ( 7: 00 a.m. to 9: 00 a.m. and 3: 00 p.m. to 4 : 00 p.m. ) hours while the improvements are being built. Second, while Finding 13 cites Building and Zoning Department staff concern about trucks using a street running through a residential neighborhood, the primary basis for that concern was the Department' s supposition that the trucks would have to use N.E. 7th Street (forcing trucks through residential access streets in a single family neighborhood) or N.E. 10th Street (forcing trucks through a residential access street for a multi-family residence neighborhood) to go from Sunset Boulevard to Monroe Ave. The Department appears to have made this supposition because it thought that a sight distance problem existed at N.E. Notice of Appeal - 3 12th and Monroe Ave. (See Preliminary Report, page 3 . ) However, as City Traffic Engineer Norris concurred during the hearing, the fact that the type of trucks that are used to haul sand/gravel materials place the driver up very high above the street eliminates the sight distance problem that ordinary passenger vehicles may have at N.E. 12th and Monroe. Because use of N.E. 12th Street in this area will not result in trucks being forced down a residential access street, the most pressing conflicts that the Department suggested will not materialize. These facts should be noted in Finding 13, along with the Department' s acknowledgment that the Applicant's proposal to route truck traffic on Monroe Ave . north of N.E. 4th only seemed "slightly incon- sistent with looking at the entire circulation pattern of the Northeast Quadrant of the City of Renton. " (Preliminary Report, page 3 . ) Finding No. 14 is erroneous because it has no basis in the record. No evidence was proffered by any party that changes have occurred in traffic and residential development during the past 4 to 5 years that are so sub- stantial as to absolutely preclude hauling during the 7 : 00 a .m. - 9: 00 a.m. and 3: 00 p.m. - 4: 00 p.m. hours. Because of the errors in Findings 12 through 14 , the Examiner has concluded in Conclusion No. 2, without basis from the record, that changes have occurred in the Highlands "in the last few years" that are of controlling weight in determining whether the 7 : 00 a.m. - 9: 00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4: 00 p.m. hours should be permitted. For the same reason, the Examiner' s decision in Conclusion No. 5 to bar hauling from 7: 00 a.m. - 9: 00 a .m. and 3: 00 p.m. - 4 : 00 p.m. is also without basis in the record. Not only is this decision to bar hauling during morning and afternoon hours without basis in the record, it also unfairly singles out the Applicant for such severe hauling restrictions. Only four years ago, Metro Sand and Gravel appealed the decision of the Examiner under SP-099-80 to bar hauling during the one hour period from 7 : 00 a.m. to 8: 00 a.m. Monday through Friday. The appellants argued that work in the construction industry starts at 7 : 00 a.m. in the morning and that their operation had not caused the City any traffic problems. (See attached Notice of Appeal from Metro Sand and Gravel, Inc. , SP-099-80 ) The Planning and Develop- ment Committee recommended that the Examiner' s decision be modified to permit the 7: 00 a .m. - 8:00 a.m. hour ( see attached copy of the Committee Report, SP-099-80, dated April 20, 1981) , and the full City Council concurred ( see Notice of Appeal - 4 attached copy of City Council Meeting minutes for April 20, 1981, Exhibit 6) . Subsequently, when M. A. Segale, Inc . applied for a Special Permit only 3 years ago to place 1 .1 million cubic yards of fill in the existing pit across Monroe Avenue from the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery, operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 3: 30 p.m. were granted. See page 7 of the Report and Decisions for SP-032-82, Exhibit 7 . ) These recent decisions support the subject Applicant' s requested hours. First, the subject Applicant faces the same construction industry operating hours as did the applicant under SP-099-80. Further, because the scope of work under the subject proposal is much smaller than the scope of work under the proposals considered under SP-099-80 and SP-032-82, the subject proposal should not have as large an impact upon traffic as the impacts contemplated under those permits. The fact of the matter is that the subject Applicant has tried to be even more accommodating to City staff concerns than the applicants involved in those permits. As discussed above, the subject Applicant worked out a reasonable route alternative with the City' s Traffic Engineer for the requested 7: 00 a.m. - 9: 00 a.m. and 3: 00 p.m. - 4 : 00 p.m. hours that would not impact the N.E. 3rd Street/N.E. 4th Street corridor, the only arterial link that he said would be impacted by the proposal . Unlike cases SP-099-80 and SP-032-82, where even that corridor, which was most likely to be impacted, was made available to the applicants' trucks from 7:00 a .m. - 9: 00 a.m. and from 3: 00 p.m. - 3 : 30 p.m. , the subject request would keep trucks from that corridor during those hours by use of the reasonable route of Sunset Boulevard to Monroe Avenue via N.E. 12th St. Considering all of these factors, fair treatment dictates that the Applicant should be granted the requested hauling hours of 7: 00 a.m. - 9: 00 a.m. and 3: 00 p.m. - 4: 00 p.m. in addition to the hauling hours specified in Condition 1. Respectfully submitted, CASEY, PRUZAN & KOVARIK By V ` • tiaet k. W. DirTcer Ehlert Of Attorneys for Applicant, Gary Merlino Construction Company Notice of Appeal - 5 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT APRIL 20, 1981 APPEALS FILED BY MARIO A. SEGALE AND ESTATE OF JOHN C. EDWARDS SP-099-80 Referred 4-6-81 ) The Planning and Development Committee has considered the appeal filed by Mario A. Segale from the decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, .1 81 and finding that Finding No. 20 and Conclusion No. 1 are in error in the limitation of hours of operation to those after 8:00 A.M. and further finding that Finding No. 16 and Conclusion No. 8 are in error in that the potential 5% loss of ground water as a result of the proposed excavation is not significant enough to require the sub- mission of releases from downstream owners pursuant to Section 4-2318 (4) , the Planning and Development Committee recommends the City Council modify the decision of the Hearing Examiner as set forth below. The Planning and Development Committee has further considered the appeal of the Estate of John C. Edwards of the decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 and finding that the requirement of a perpetual maintenance of the holdirg pond is not supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law or evi- dence submitted to the Hearing Examiner, and finding as a matter of law that the requirement of a dedication of properties to extend Edmonds Avenue N.E. as set forth in Condition No. 8 of the decision is not reasonably related to the permit applica- tion and is not necessary to make the application compatible with the environment and carry out the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, the Subdivision Ordinance and the Code and Ordinances of the City of Renton, the Planning and Development Committee recommends that the City Council modify the decision of the Hearing Examiner as follows: The decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 should be affirmed, subject to the modifications of the following conditions set forth in that decision. A. Condition No. 1 should be modified to confirm the hours of operation to between 7:00 A.M. and 3 :30 P.M. Monday through Friday. B . Condition No. 3 should be modified to read as follows: The submission and execution of Restrictive Covenants providing for maintenance of a holding pond with sedimentation clearing, which covenants should be perpetual and run •with the land until such time as this requirement is found to be no longer necessary, or an acceptable alternative method of securing sedimentation clearing is available, which decision should be made by the Land Use Hearing Examiner of the City of Renton upon application by the land owner or other interested parties after public hearing thereon pursuant to Section 4-3010 (A) (10) . Planning and Development Committee Committee Report April 2C, 1981 Page Two C. Condition No. 4 should be modified to include the following: Such hold harmless agreement should also hold the City of Renton harmless from any liability for damages sustained by persons holding water appropriation rights downstream from the subject property for interruption, diversion or any change in natural surface or subsurface drainage patterns from the subject property. D. Conditions Nos. 8 and 9 should be deleted in their entirety. Randy Rockhill , Chairman Earl Clymer John Reed OF R4,4/ 40 THE CITY OF RENTON p÷,MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 o V ° BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER O FRED J. KAUFMAN. 235 -2593O9 TEO SEPIE4‘0 P August 23, 1985 David I_. Halinen, P.E. Gary Merlino Construction Co. 9125 - 10th Avenue South Seattle, Washington, 98108 Re: . equest for Reconsideration Tile No. SP-048-85 - Gary Merlino Construction Company Dear N r Halinen: I have reviewed your request for reconsideration in the above entitled matter, and for the reasons indicated below see no reason to modify the decision. This O2fice is aware of the permits you cite. We are also aware of the fact that both permit:; were issued approximately 3 and 5 years ago. Conditions have changed in the intervening time, and further, this office will not necessarily be bound by earlier oversights. This office cannot help but take notice of the following changes in the residential growth patterns in just the immediate vicinity of the N.E. 4th Street Corridor since this office was tl-e review agency in most instances. The numbers (close approximations) of residential dwelling units constructed or approved for this area follows: Complex General Location of Units IAastro Apartments 4th and Monroe 240 Mastro Apartments South side of 4th 220 Renton Housing Authority N.E. 3rd 65 Crown Pointe N.E. 4th/Union 200 Terrace N.E. 4th/Edmonds 260 Schneider PUD N.E. 6th 150 F ernwood Additions Union 140 Mobile Home Parks Union 450 This ads up to approximately 1,725 new units and ignores a number of smaller additions along Union which consist of approximately 70 new housing units and other infill construction. In addition, there is the new Super Safeway Shopping Plaza and the expansion plans for RVTI v%hich will at least double the number of trips now generated by RVTI. This Office has not failed to recognize the importance of the gravel extraction industry, it has only imposed conditions allowing periodic review in light of the changing conditions in the Highlands, and in the City of Renton in general. It is not incumbent upon the City to approve long term operations which may interfere with the safe use of streets in a growing residential environment, nor uses which interfere with the reasonable residential use of properties. This Office distinguishes between the subtleties of a traffic analysis of the project and the land use implications of the project. While the Traffic Engineering Division indicated that Monroe could be used as a haul route, that Division did not say it should be used. That division particularly reserved judgement on the land use implications of that particular haul route. The EF;C's only determination, which is binding in this review, was that the project did not ha ie such an environmental impact as to require the preparation of an elaborate Environmental Impact Statement. They did not determine that the project should be approved. Again, this Office did not determine that Phase 2 will not be approved in the future. If there is a determined need for the use either to serve local or remote construction projects in the future than it could be approved. The decision only determined that rather than a3prove a project which may further compound growing traffic congestion and interfere with residential amenities at this time, the applicant reapply when the future existing conditions can be fully analysed. The applicant is not the only agency which must plan for its future. The denial of Phase 2 at this time only provides the City the latitude it may need if the area undergoes additional changes. If this iJffice can be of any further assistance, please give us a call. Sincere ly, tea FRED J. KAUFMAN HEARIVC EXAMINER FJK/dl4 cc: City Clerk City Attorney Building & Zoning Department Engineering Department jury( J1krlino CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 9125- 10th Avenue South 762-9125 Seattle,Washington 98108 August 21, 1985 RECEIVED Land Use Hearing Examiner Q G 1 t a City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South CITY OF RENTON Renton, Washington 98055 HEARING EXAMINER Re: Application of Gary Merlino Construction Co. File No. SP-048-85 Request for Reconsideration Pursuant to City Code Title IV, Section 3015, Gary Merlino Construction Co. requests that the Hearing Examiner reconsider certain findings, conclusions, and decisions contained in the Examiner's Report and Decision dated August 7, 1985. Specifically, we direct this request to the following items: 1. Conclusion No. 7 Regarding Denial of Phase 2 at This Time The conclusion that Phase 2 should not be approved at this time due to uncertainty as to developmental conditions in the Highlands three to five years from now is not supported by the record. By creating uncertainty as to whether Phase 2 will ever by permitted, this conclusion unfairly frustrates the Applicant's reasonable plan to mine the site's available sand and gravel resources in a systematic and uninterrupted manner. The record discloses that on July 3, 1985 the Environmental Review Committee considered this special permit application, which consisted of both Phases 1 and 2, and determined that the proposal does not have a probably significant adverse impact on the environment. In its memorandum to the Hearing Examiner dated that same day, the ERC recommended that, subject to certain conditions, the requested special permit should be issued. Without a hint of suggestion that the Phase 2 request is untimely, the Building and Zoning Department's Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner subsequently recommended approval of both requested Phases. As the hearing testimony summary in the Examiner's Report and Decision indicates, the Building and Zoning Department reiterated this recommendation at the July 30th public hearing. No one testified in opposition to either proposed phase during the hearing, nor did anyone submit written opposition into the record. The record is simply barren of any support for a conclusion that Phase 2 should August 21, 1985 Land Use Hearing Examiner page 2 of 5 be denied at this time. As to the concern that Phase 2 may be incompatible with future growth in the Highlands, it should be remembered that such growth will presumably create a demand right in the area for a sand/gravel source and an excess material deposit site. Such demand will cause trucking to and from such source/deposit site to local developments. Phase 2 will be a benefit over such outside-the-area source/deposit sites by reducing necessary haul distances. Further, denial of Phase 2 at this time frustrates the reasonable business planning of both the Applicant (by creating uncertainty as to sand and gravel supply availability from the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery) and the cemetery owner (by creating uncertainty both as to sand/gravel mining royalties and as to the timing of the Phase 2 area's availability for cemetery purposes) . Without a basis for denial of Phase 2 in the record, these denial-created uncertainties unreasonably militate against the Mining and Grading Ordinance's purpose of promoting"economic, systematic, and uninterrupted mining . . . activities within the City of Renton." See Renton Code Section 4-2301:2.D.) Not only are the creation of these uncertainties without basis in the record and contrary to the purpose of promoting economical mining, they are unfair in light of the fact that only 3 and 4 years ago Special Permits were issued for much larger sand/gravel mining and filling activities in the immediate vicinity of the subject proposal for periods comparable to the total time period requested in this application. (SP-099-80,dealt with in Exhibit #6, was issued in 1981 for mining 1.6 million cubic yards from a site lying approximately 370 feet south of N.E. 3rd Street on the hill east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. That permit, issued to Rainier Sand and Gravel with M. A. Segale's Metro Sand and Gravel as lessee/operator, was presumably for the four-year term requested. SP-032-82 was issued in 1982 for filling an existing 70-foot deep gravel pit, located directly across Monroe Avenue from the Merlino Phase 1 proposal, with 1.1 million cubic yards of material. That permit was issued to M. A. Segale, Inc. for a five-year term.) In contrast to those applications, the subject application is for only 280,000 cubic yards of excavation and 380,000 cubic yards of refill. The requested time period, a comparable five years, should, in fairnesq be approved. 2. Conclusion No. 2 and Condition No. 5 Relating to Number of Truck Trips The decision to limit the number of daily truck trips to double the number of average daily truck trips indicated in the Environmental Checklist is without basis in the record. On the basis of the record, the only limitation which arguably should be imposed is the 150 truck trip per day limitation recommended in the Preliminary Report August 21, 1985 Land Use Hearing Examiner page 3 of 5 to the Hearing Examiner. The traffic estimates included in the Environmental Checklist describe the daily number of truck trips expected on average. As noted on page 3 of the Preliminary Report to the Examiner, the average number of trips would only be about one tenth of one percent of the total daily vehicle trips on the N.E. 3rd St./ N.E. 4th St. corridor. While the Building and Zoning Department did assert that increases of 10 to 20 times the estimated daily truck trip average could have a substantial impact on the arterial street system, the Department also made a specific recom- mendation (Recommended Condition 1) that up to 150 truck trips per day be permitted. While the Applicant's engineer contested this proposed limitation during the hearing, nowhere in the record is there any suggestion that the number of truck trips on peak days should be limited to less than 150. 3. Finding No. 12, Finding No. 13, Finding No. 14, Conclusion No. 2, Conclusion No. 5, and Condition No. 1--Relating to Hauling Hours, Haul Rates, and Increases in Traffic in the Area The decision to deny the requested hauling hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday is erroneous. The problem stems from error in Findings 12 and 13, a lack of basis in the record for Conclusions 2 and 5, and failure to adhere to recent precedents in similar special permit cases related to mining and filling. Finding No. 12 is erroneous because it creates the misleading impression that City staff unanimously agreed that the hauling of materials to and from the site should not be permitted between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. nor between 3:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. However, this was the position of the Building and Zoning Department, not the position of the City's Traffic Engineer. The Traffic Engineer, Mr. Gary Norris, P.E. , testified during the hearing that from a traffic standpoint, the hauling between the project site and Interstate 405 via Monroe Ave. , N.E. 12th Street, and Sunset Boulevard during the 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m./3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. hours would not impact traffic. Finding No. 12 should reflect these facts. Finding No. 13 is erroneously misleading for two reasons. First, while it correctly mentions that north of N.E. 4th St. "Monroe Ave. is the subject of local improvements which will restrict traffic on the street," this finding fails to point out that the Applicant's engineer testified during the hearing that the Applicant would be willing to forego use of Monroe Ave. north of N.E. 4th Street during the requested (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. hours) while the improvements are being built. August 21, 1985 Land Use Hearing Examiner page 4 of 5 Second, while Finding 13 cites Building and Zoning Department staff concern about trucks using a street running through a residential neighborhood, the primary basis for that concern was the Department's supposition that the trucks would have to use N.E. 7th Street forcing trucks through residential access streets in a single family neighborhood) or N.E. 10th Street (forcing trucks through a residential access street for a multi-family residence neighborhood) to go from Sunset Boulevard to Monroe Ave. The Department appears to have made this supposition because it thought that a sight distance problem existed at N.E. 12th and Monroe Ave. (See Preliminary Report, page 3.) However, as City Traffic Engineer Norris concurred during the hearing, the fact that the type of trucks that are used to haul sand/gravel materials place the driver up very high above the street eliminates the sight distance problem that ordinary passenger vehicles may have at N.E. 12th and Monroe. Because use of N.E. 12th Street in this area will not result in trucks being forced down a residential access street, the most pressing conflicts that the Department suggested will not materialize. These facts should be noted in Finding 13, along with the Department's acknowledgement that the Applicant's proposal to route truck traffic on Monroe Ave. north of N.E. 4th only seemed "slightly inconsistent when looking at the entire circulation pattern of the Northeast Quadrant of the City of Renton." (Preliminary Report, page 3.) Finding No. 14 is erroneous because it has no basis in the record. No evidence was proffered by any party that changes have occurred in traffic and residential development during the past 4 to 5 years that are so substantial as to absolutely preclude hauling during the 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. hours. Because of the errors in Findings 12 through 14, the Examiner has concluded in Conclusion No. 2, without basis from the record, that changes have occurred in the Highlands have "in the last few years" that are of controlling weight in determining whether the 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. hours should be permitted. For the same reason, the Examiner's decision in Conclusion No. 5 to bar hauling from 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. is also without basis in the record. Not only is this decision to bar hauling during morning and afternoon hours without basis in the record, it also unfairly singles out the Applicant for such severe hauling restrictions. Only four years ago, Metro Sand and Gravel appealed the decision of the Examiner under SP-099-80 to bar hauling during the one hour period from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. Monday through Friday. The appellants argued that work in the construction industry starts at 7:00 a.m. in the morning and that their operation had not caused the City any traffic problems. See attached Notice of Appeal from Metro Sand and Gravel, Inc.) The Planning and Development Committee recommended that the Examiner's August 21, 1985 Land Use Hearing Examiner page 5 of 5 decision be modified to permit the 7:00 a.m. - 8:00 a.m. hour (see attached copy of the Committee Report dated April 20, 1981) , and the full City Council concurred (see attached copy of City Council Meeting minutes for April 20, 1981) . Subsequently, when M. A. Segale, Inc. applied for a Special Permit only 3 years ago to place 1. 1 million cubic yards of fill in the existing pit across Monroe Avenue from the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery, operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. were granted. (See page 7 of the attached Report and Decision for SP-032-82.) These recent decisions support the subject Applicant's requested hours. First, the subject Applicant faces the same construction industry operating hours as did the applicant under SP-099-80. Further, because the scope of work under the subject proposal is much smaller than the scope of work under the proposals considered under SP-099-80 and SP-032-82, the subject proposal should not have as large an impact upon traffic as the impacts contemplated under those permits. The fact of the matter is that the subject Applicant has tried to be even more accomodating to City staff concerns than the applicants involved in those permits. As discussed above, the subject Applicant worked out a reasonable route alternative with the City's Traffic Engineer for the requested 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. hours that would not impact the N.E. 3rd Street/ N.E. 4th Street corridor, the only arterial link that he said would be impacted by the proposal. Unlike cases SP-099-480 and SP-032-82, where even that corridor,which was most likely to be impacted,was made available to the applicants' trucks from 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and from 3:00 p.m. - 3:30 p.m. , the subject request would keep trucks from that corridor during those hours by use of the reasonable route of Sunset Boulevard to Monroe Avenue via N.E. 12th St. Considering all of these factors, fair treatment dictates that the Applicant should be granted the requested hauling hours of 7:00 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. in addition to the hauling hours specified in Condition 1. Respectfully submitted by: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. r- a- a \ David L. alienen, P.E. Proponent AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. County of King DOTTY KLINGMAN being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 7th day of August 1985, affiant deposited in the mails of the United States a sealed envelope containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. gal. Xas----3 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 7 1W'day of A(A30 s I-- 1985. t2,,,2„6 r) de,zza._ Notary Publi and for t e State of Washington, residing at therein. Application, Petition, or Case 4i: SPO48-85 - GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. The minutes contain a list of the parties of record.) 1051E August 7, 1985 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION. APPLICANT: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FILE NO. SP-048-85 LOCATION: 3401 N. E. 4th Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval of a special permit for fill and grade to allow modifications of Phase I granted under File SP-019-84 and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II to refill the subject site. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Building and Zoning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions. Hearing Examiner Decision: Phase I approved, with conditions. Phase II denied. BUILDING & ZONING The Building & Zoning Department Report was DEPARTMENT REPORT: received by the Examiner on July 23, 1985. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Building and Zoning Department Report, examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: The hearing was opened on July 30, 1985, at 9:05 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit #1 - Yellow file containing application, proof of posting and other documents pertinent to this application. Exhibit #2 - Phase I map showing Southwest corner. Exhibit #3 - Phase II map showing Southeast corner. Exhibit #4 - Document - Stipulated Judgment in case of Greenwood Memorial Park, Inc. vs. City of Renton, #835278. Exhibit #5 - Greenwood Cemetery Plat Map. Exhibit #6 - City Council Minutes of 4/20/81. Exhibit 07 - Hearing Examiner's Decision of 6/4/82. Exhibit #8 - Map showing site referenced in Exhibit Nos. 6 and 7. Exhibit #9 - Photographs taken in the Phase II area of the site. Exhibit #10 - Copy of billing from the City for street cleaning. The hearing opened with Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, reviewing the report to the Examiner. He advised that the applicant has taken over a previous Special Permit to grade and fill (SP-019-84). The site consists of two lots and is to be developed in two phases; is owned under one ownership (Greenwood Memorial Cemetery); 100,000 cu. yds. have already been removed from Phase I under the existing permit; property is 13 acres and both lots are zoned G-1. It was pointed out that the total volume of material to be excavated is 280,000 cu. yds., 380,000 cu. yds. will be brought back to the site, with a Phase I projected completion date of 1988 and Phase II date of 1990. GARY MERLINO CONSTF TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 2 Mr. Blaylock referred to the 7 criteria to be reviewed as contained in the Mining and Grading Ordinance. Development in the area consists of the cemetery to the north, apartments and vacant property to the east, public facilities to the south and a undeveloped gravel pit to the west. Continuing, it was suggested the site would generate approximately 30 vehicle trips per day for Phase I and 25 trips per day for Phase II for excavation. When looking at the N.E. 3rd and 4th Street corridors, these volumes represent less than 1/10th of 1% of the total volume, and because they represent one-time trips there has been no assessment made for participation in signalization and street improvements. The hours of operation and traffic patterns were discussed, and it was suggested that residential streets not be used as alternative routes due to the up-coming reconstruction of Monroe Avenue N.E. from N.E. 4th Street to N.E. 12th Street. A 30 ft. setback has been provided with natural landscaping with a chain link fence surrounding the entire property. It has been recommended by staff that no access be permitted on to N.E. 2nd Street thereby prompting the applicant to obtain access from Monroe Avenue N.E.. Mr. Blaylock advised that fencing needs to be in place to protect the children in the area from the potential hazards of the site. Traffic congestion, screening congestion, noise and dirt were discussed. The ERC has required the applicant to pave a 100 ft. approach to the site for the cleaning of vehicles, and due to the storm water drainage system and the utilization of dry wells, streets must be swept and not washed. Possible noise penetration into the residential areas during Phase II has prompted staff to suggest evening operating hours be from 7:00 - 10:00 P.M., in addition to the daytime hours proposed. A review was made by Mr. Blaylock of the 8 suggested conditions of approval including the posting of a $5,000. bond for street cleaning, suggested hours of operation, setback requirements, fencing and street cleaning. Comments from the various City departments were reviewed, and Mr. Blaylock stated based upon their information, staff is requesting approval of this project, subject to the 8 conditions outlined in the staff report. The Hearing Examiner called for testimony in support of this application by the applicant or his representative. Responding was: David Halinen, Staff Engineer Gary Merlino Construction Co. 9125 5th Avenue So. Seattle, Wa. 98108 Mr. Halinen commented on certain departmental recommendations such as the moving of the fence to the true property line: extension of the hours of operation to allow them to coincide with the local construction industry and to retain the hours of 7:00 PM to 11:00 PM as had been previously approved for this site. He stated to avoid traveling through the single family residential areas, they would limit their use to Monroe Avenue, north of 4th, connecting to Sunset from N.E. 12th Street. It was felt the concern by staff regarding limited sight distance at N.E. 12th should be dismissed as the height of the trucks used would enable them to see over the crest of the hill and sight lower approaching vehicular traffic. Three other sites of grade and fill, as well as their hours of operation, were discussed, and Mr. Halinen requested the early morning and later evening hours to allow them to compete with the rest of the industry. He stated he was not in agreement with the 150 truck trips per day limitation as he is not convinced the amount of trips would have any bearing on traffic problems. The trees suggested for the setback areas were deemed to be unnecessary by the applicant due to the way the existing topography and vegetation now exists at the site. The trees recommended for planting on the site will end up being below the existing vegetation and the slope and during the 5 year permit period they will not grow enough to make an efficient screen due to the slope of the property. Mr. Halinen continued by expressing concern over the suggested posting of a 5,000 bond for street cleaning. He stated the Phase I portion of this project when approved was only required to post a $500.00 bond, and to date there has only been one charge made for street cleaning by the City - said monies having been paid separately and not taken from the bond amount. He stated he felt the larger amount is too excessive and suggested the amounts of $500. or $1000. to be more appropriate. Calling for further testimony or comments, wishing to testify was: Gary Norris Public Works Department City of Renton GARY MERLINO CONSTF TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 3 Mr. Norris commented on the haul routes by stating the original decision by his department to deny the hours of operation outside of 9:00 A.M. - 3:00 P.M. was because of traffic problems at the N.E. 3rd and N.E. 4th corridor. When the applicant expressed his concern and offered an alternate route, it was felt there would no longer be an impact on traffic from the project. The Hearing Examiner asked Mr. Norris to relate the route suggested by staff, and Mr. Norris replied stating the route suggested by the Traffic Engineering Department would be Monroe Avenue to 12th and on to Sunset Blvd. Mr. Norris refrained from commenting on the land use aspects of the proposed haul route. Calling for further testimony, responding was: Daniel Holms 350 Monroe Avenue N.E. Renton, Wa. 98056 Mr. Holms explained since the City has no jurisdiction over how he landscapes the cemetery, any landscaping that is done on the east side will ultimately be removed for burial space, as would landscaping in other areas of the cemetery also. Calling for further testimony, there was none. The Zoning Administrator commented further on the recommended conditions of approval from staff. He referenced the proposed trips per day, setbacks and the requested bond. It was noted again that the bond was recommended by the ERC because of the dry wells on the site. There being no further testimony in support of, or in opposition to this proposal, and no further comments from staff, the hearing was closed at 10:05 A.M. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS 1. The applicant, Gary Merlino Construction Company, has requested approval of a Special Permit to excavate approximately 280,000 cubic yards of material from two locations and refill those sites. 2.The application file containing the application, the State Environmental Policy Act SEPA) documentation, the Building and Zoning Department Report, and other pertinent documents was entered in the record as Exhibit #1. 3. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.2IC, 1971, as amended), a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the responsible official. 4.Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all City departments affected by the impact of this proposal. 5.The subject site is located generally in the vicinity of 3401 N.E. Street, the address of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery. The two locations are along N.E. 2nd Street, with Phase 1 located near the corner of Monroe Ave N.E. and N.E. 2nd and with Phase 2 located at the southeast corner of the cemetery site, along N.E. 2nd. 6. The subject site was annexed into the City by the adoption of Ordinance 2249 in June, 1966. The site was automatically zoned G-1 (General: Single Family Residential; Minimum lot size - 35,000 sq ft), the classification it still retains. 7. Special permits for fill and grade have been issued for the subject site in the past. Special Permit 019-84 is still active for the western portion of the subject site. The latter permit allowed the extraction of approximately 100,000 cubic yards of material so that the actual refilling of the site will require approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material. 8. The subject site is approximately 13 acres in size. 9. The Phase 1 portion of the request covering the western site would be completed, that is, excavated and refilled by August, 1988. Phase 2 would be accomplished by August, 1990. The applicant has, therefore, requested that the permit cover a five year period. GARY MERLINO CONSTF TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 4 10. Traffic volumes along N.E. 3rd/4th streets now exceed approximately 25,000 vehicle trips per day. Information summited with the applicant's Environmental Checklist indicate the operations for Phase 1 would include approximately 30 truck trips per day during excavation, while refilling the site would require approximately 28 trips per day. Phase 2 would have approximately equal trips during excavation and refilling, that is approximately 25 trips per day. 11. A worst case scenario would increase the number of trips to 300 to 600 if the applicant's material were in great demand for one of the on-going Interstate Highway construction projects. Similarly, once excavated, a project might generate a large amount of spoils in a short time frame. Staff indicates that such a scenario would have tremendous impacts on the arterial street system. 12. Staff has indicated that the hauling of materials to and from the site should not be permitted during the morning peak hours (7:00 A.M. - 9:00 A.M.) or during the evening peak hours (3:00 P.M. - 7:00 P.M.). The applicant requested the ability to use Monroe Avenue betweeen N.E. 4th and Sunset Blvd. N.E. for hauling during the peak hours. 13. Monroe Ave is the subject of local improvements which will restrict traffic on the street. Monroe north of N.E. 4th traverses a single family residential zone north of N.E. 4th. The Building and Zoning Department indicated that as such, the heavy vehicles should not be permitted to use a street running through a single family area. They cite concerns regarding the conflict between passenger cars and heavy vehicles, as well as the noise and dust in that community. 14. Other special permits for gravel excavation have been issued in the past. Some of those permits were issued 4 to 5 years ago before the increase in residential uses in the area and the resulting increases in traffic in the area. 15. The applicant also requested permission to work the site till 11:00 P.M., at least the western site, which the applicant indicated is more remote from residential dwellings. The applicant stated the reason the expanded hours were necessary was that construction sites which either need or generate fill materials operated those hours. 16. The applicant has provided a 30 foot landscaped setback along Monroe Ave and along portions of N.E. 2nd. The applicant proposes a fence with slats to provide some buffering, along with the use of existing scotch broom as landscaping. Staff recommended greater landscape efforts to cut down on both noise and dirt emanating from the subject site and to screen nearby residential areas. Staff indicated a fence was necessary to protect the public, especially children, from the deep pits on the site. CONCLUSIONS 1. Subject to the conditions enumerated below, the Special Permit for fill and grade appears to serve the public use and interest. 2.The traffic and general growth in the Highlands area which has occurred in the last few years has substantially modified the character of the areas north and east of the subject site. Additionally, new development has also occurred or is occurring west of the site on the north side of N.E. 3rd/4th. These projects include the low income housing and the under construction Terrace complex. These changes have increased the traffic along all the arterial corridors of the Highlands and have increased the residential density. 3. While it may be premature to determine that gravel quarrying and extensive fill operations are no longer suitable neighbors for the intense development occurring in the areas surrounding the subject site, it is timely to review the nature of conditions necessary to protect the traffic flow and residential living conditions of the surrounding area. 4. While quarrying is permitted in any area in Renton, subject to public review and a special permit being issued, many communities do not permit extensive quarrying or fill operations in built-up areas. This is because of the noise, dust, and the heavy hauling traffic associated with moving large quantities of fill material either to the site of a fill or away from a quarrying operation. GARY MERLINO CONSTF___TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 5 5.Traffic Engineering has indicated that the heavy truck traffic is not suitable during the morning and evening peak hours along N.E. 3rd/4th. Building and Zoning indicated that such traffic is also not suitable in the residential community which fronts both sides of Monroe north of N.E. 4th. The potential traffic which might be generated by massive operations such as the construction of I-405 or I-90 projects would also be unsuitable for either the peak hour traffic or the residential community. Therefore, the hours of operation will be limited to the hours between 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 P.M. and from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M: Monday through Friday. Further, the permit will not allow the applicant to more than double the number of trips indicated in the Environmental Checklist without subsequent review. Preliminary information indicates that serving the larger construction projects could severely interfere with traffic along the N.E. 3rd/4th corridor. 6.This time limitation will mean that there will be no conflict with peak hour traffic and there will be no interference with the residential community. The request to operate till 11:00 P.M. on any portion of the subject site does not seem appropriate. Noise can carry great distances and residential dwellings are located east of the site and north of the site. Also monitoring such operations at that time of day (night) will be difficult for enforcement staff. 7. For some of the same reasons, the permit should not be granted for the 5 year time period requested by the applicant. The rate of growth in the area surrounding the subject site to the north, east and west is such that a permit for five years could be too long without subsequent City review. The permit for Phase 1 appears reasonable, but Phase 2 should not be approved at this time. This decision does not mean that such a permit should not or will not be issued after the completion of Phase 1, but that the issuance at this time is not warranted. Issuance should be after current information on traffic and growth is available. Quarrying, filling and hauling in this area must be sensitve to the growth of the residential population and the growth of the traffic in the area. It is possible that a quarry fill operation may be incompatible with the resultant development in the Highlands in the next 3 to 5 years. Approval of Phase 2 at this time is therefore premature. If the proposed operation is compatible, then the permit can be issued at that time. 8. In order to assure that the operation does not interfere with regular traffic in the area, the applicant will have to limit access to and from the site to one driveway located along Monroe Ave N.E. To assure, or at least minimize the amount of fill debris which is tracked off the site, the entry drive will have to be paved for 100 feet into the site. This will provide an area on-site where debris can drop off truck wheels. The applicant will also have to provide truck cleaning facilities on the subject site. 9.The site is located in an area where aquifer recharge is important in preserving the ground water supply. Storm water is not directed into a closed system. Rather, the area is served by dry wells to aid aquifer recharge. Because of this dry well system, streets with debris cannot be flushed with water. Flushing would clog the dry wells. Instead, the roads, if they are dirtied, must be mechanically swept. To assure that the roads are kept clean, the applicant will have to post a renewable cash bond with the City for the amount of $1000.00 to allow City crews to clean the streets when the applicant fails to do so. 10. If the fund is exhausted, or any other condition of approval is violated, the permit may be revoked by the Building and Zoning Department. 11. The site should be screened from adjacent development, but landscaping should only be utilized to soften the appearance of the site. Evergreen trees and shrubs, with the approval of the landscape architect, should be planted along the perimeter of the site. Such landscaping should be utilized to continue the appearance of the cemetery from all aspects. A fence around the site is necessary to keep persons from entering the site and its deep excavation. 12. While the applicant indicated that its competition has permits which allow different standards or imposed different conditions, that alone is not persuasive. The permits cited were issued a number of years ago and conditions in the area, particularly along the haul route, have changed substantially. Staff also indicated some of those permits are up for reapplication. As was indicated, there has been no analysis of whether quarrying operations in this area are totally unsuitable, but particular aspects of the subject proposal are unsuitable for such an area. The imposition of the conditions indicated above is a reasonable means of permitting quarrying, but not without some limitation which recognizes that the area has changed and that the unfettered operation of a quarry is no longer suitable in this area. GARY MERLINO CONSTF.__TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 6 DECISION The Special Permit for fill and grade is approved for Phase 1 subject to the following conditions: 1. Hauling to or from the site may only be allowed from 9:00 A.M.to 3:00 P.M. and from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M.; Monday through Friday. 2. The number of trips indicated in the Environmental Checklist may not be more than doubled without subsequent review. 3. No operations on the site shall be permitted after the hour of 10:00 P.M., and that may be shortened upon a determination by the Building and Zoning Department that even operations to 10:00 P.M. are incompatible with the area or neighborhood. 4. The applicant will have to pave the entrance drive for 100 feet into the subject site. 5. The applicant will have to clean debris off of trucks before they leave the site and the applicant will have to use mechanical means of cleaning nearby streets if debris is tracked off-site. 6. The applicant will have to post a renewable $1,000 Cash bond to permit the City to clean streets if the applicant fails to do so. 7. The applicant will have to provide landscaping along the perimeter of the subject site which softens the affect of the site, but does not have to totally screen the site from adjacent property. A perimeter fence shall be required. 8.The special permit may be revoked by the Building and Zoning Department if the conditions enumerated above are not complied with or the renewable bond is not maintained. ORDERED THIS 7th day of August, 1985. Q5‘.• FRED J. KAUF N HEARING E X A NER TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of August, 1985 to the parties of record: David Halinen, Staff Engineer Gary Merlino Construction Co. 9125 5th Avenue So. Seattle, Wa. 98108 Gary Norris Public Works Department City of Renton Daniel Holms 350 Monroe Avenue N,E. Renton, Wa. 98056 TRANSMITTED THIS 7th day of August, 1985 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Public Works Director Larry M. Springer, Policy Development Director Members, Renton Planning Commission Ronald Nelson, Building & Zoning Director Jim Matthew, Fire Marshal Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Renton Record-Chronicle GARY MERLINO CONSTF___ TION CO. SP-048-85 August 7, 1985 Page 7 Pursuant to Title IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before August 21, 1985. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. 0.•AliC.ce00 •auCCOO• 1 Z:OC•C•0 1") r---1 Single Family Commercial1 rihm3 1i l'iin::::. Nib AIIIIII IF: Low Density i 7_..., •• Multl-Family Office / Office Pa: 11.l i 7 Medium Density4,-, 000(300 0000000•- --- i.• li...•.. F. ' I 00...04,93.0.. 0.0.0. 00000.0. Public/Quasi-pub 1 . 1 . , t r_ High Density 14',.".'.-.':•: .,,:.Multi-Family Light Industrial iffl\ t.; i • ' N Recreation 1 Heavy IndustrialI. • • 4 1:1--...--_-- Manufacturing Paliv,.;:.•. C. -,.....7;•.e7..„..,_. 4ci5-1 ,1 Greenbelt ifT:rr.,•.7.....:.7;_ .....:.•-: 11T.... ••,.,.. .t;.,.•• • •. ^ ' 1•••• ..r. f>,-•'^'.''..'... 5,:i..!..4:V..'e:,•-t 1. .-. Scale 1 II= 2000'Ili Alba' A„,:._:.z..s......,... i::,,,.'..Z.,,•• Z.:,•:.: -,. . .:;:•:-...CI .0,-' 7•-•C••'''• 0.:.?,..:;:,;...;:. ....,,......(....„:, ... .......,..7100, IY......;::'7.••.; • - '7 MI r•.....0... 1 1 "0.000.000.0.000.00. ITAL . . t,,.,,,,, 1. 7:-.,,..,_.....-.•:,,....:::,:c.c. .11plimii r c, 00:::,-;:::..•::. 1.. iiii. :...•.;.:.:i.•:.11,...•.......::::‘...7. •',.....f.-7.. c_•;.11411= WMINII 000. .:.,:.:.:. :. .••:,...ii 5,. r..._ :,41i.i. 1 ki,.:.11.- pri,•,., maws.I..I, I.• iiiiiii ;Pligin c Tr) I , niesse ii......„,„„..< t coo. I 1118'411 i 11111111111111111 ,....-'1 .....,_i . . itie1111 ,...." 1 4 o i 00C00000AI _mimes 0 00.0000.0.r- - -.._,,,age iri? Ol.:...SI r IILL I IIIPIIIIL\. ANNA ,o, k maw .iliF•iiri 11111 11111 iii ::.:. ::-0---" 1, 0i Oca).°0•Ol,' ,,,,,, i.,•:,... 11.A fr 1 0000. 7-:;.• "C-1- 0000000. 0.000000• :‘ 4,4• 111•4•M'.1118, ... g11111 00.0. 0.00000.00.00.000.• .„;,,.. II 1\1 -. 1..._.1 1111111111MMIK 0000• IN Lc zio I 1 0.• ittfieT.:-. iiiL 1. v, 0.:001.09.0.1.000. 0. 0.00:4 111 ,it tiq eAteiSir-f:... i -_, mah,1 s. iiiii-:•:_..:.:.:•:.:.:.:•:....:•:•:.:•: wi s,1-1 c,,-.:-"•:0-' :t1 mnmn, r...11 i m..fr• 1+' 0 ,00 ...x.x....:...:....:.:-:-x.:.:-:-...i. gailm.411 I ri1•:•''.......'il.:11' ''''''' niraismeasi Si. 'h. f • . ... 6.. _ 6. - - - --CF r= oo• 1:11:11Inini 2.; :::::71riiii;i:Fri;.. iM;::j 1 0-- i.•:,:',:.•••."••-:•:•.,:,-.•,,:: i.-:..-,.-...,:•.. .•0o.00c.0...00...,0000, c, ?.....n00. 0.000-0%. vittr or : ::.:.::.:..:7 0; ). oc0000.. I . u. .0..000. i::::„::. i. El al••-,,,0,,.. 000000,00• .000 I H:,.:.::.r : : f3Y40!Lyot ••i • - -•., i ; 000. 111J00000.'00000. It 0 !-......: ,.... I0 5 ' f 11.., ki 0.• .6.0°0°. 0°0'; I ::..:.:::.::-.:.:.: J A I•000000.00V0000 0• .. ;.:.• :.:.:.:.:.:. 1.:ip 00630 4. '••:.••••••:•:•:•:•' P IIIIIII 1 1 04.,,,, 00000.• 4.:! ..••:•.•.• ..:.:•:, 1 h: fi , - .., , .r.'•^1•6_,••"..4., •••••••••••• 1;_.',-,;'-•-• '.• 0 --•,- :.:.:.:,:.:.:•:.:•:,:•• I.,.2,*9 1••''.•. ::•:::::•:.:.:•:•:.:.: t'.. . n I--"-. 1' •",,'',,. „3..-*; 2.;,'-,-.%?';,,,,:fil.,4;,•1.•A ............,. 6 4............. r -•-•.. -.3• .•0e3•'' •,1...1 •-' .• r..;, .' . :::::::::::•:•:•:•:•:.111111r00 '.,, s'd. 6• el,.1, ,.0•f,,••,9 c:19„ ', •a••,,,:, i j.i• '7 -::.;,.•,-;,'.,;•,,,-,":1' -,c.;:•-•• •"..•=1-,r,7.1:i• .•.•.•. ra.":.`,I., c,,4.i'C*• 1 i.;/,:f; r,, ,,, c. im, 1%.•;7,!-,ci.,,, 1 r, , 0'f:if,' q 3,..:::.,!....,,,,.,„.,...,,,,!,..., f.:7,..el,.- , -41.-,,„ ot.4t*,.., • -ec 4r6 4 - . rfl.';..(-..' L' i 1 i‘..,:,•• e.., AN OtIt.'C.'Cei -:::411k11111d. jr.",,..i.VW.,03:;•n''.t‘'„, e• , .. 1.?,,..,- ,':1',-`' '4/-..;`-i-`,i!lc.Ccv.••-6''''''; . --- II- -I-)- 1 Q''cl-t.,:;",j',A.,:::-.::•.4'-',„ CI. '. srtt? .,s.,. V.. _ fo ..„5",..ttf•-,g,' M ,0„,....,, • .:.e.„...•;,,., •..., Noo,-:-..,.A•A!•tl.! "• 0.1,,,n• -` (•;•:(''.'.:,P.':', g. 4,,,r.rd. LeKv*".',.--,:),-,., rJa•,ree.,,.•,..,i•,1'4/1-7 Cr..;"6.c. ' LI.,:_q., ''.,.,.••••3"',9t.?evi`,,,,, f:'-'0, 4 • • r.r. c.6411.,00" 2 rc..?,:,!.?,). .- ,-)''4.6•i..?•r9.••• •-4-, '1,;,•!'i'Zr--,9' m. r. o.... r.TOTct.,':-. 1,7 ,c.)V.,-.....',n7,'-?`%-.Y 4 .n•,.-• :',.•-n."-". SCsf-'''7' '-'6•).':'..t' ' i .,7, .•, I•• ''':: I.,-,.2t,,:j.!,/,',,,,V.2,-, ..---g'. 7'.t..l• •-''••••C.'••)•:"•',., '''e•3:, .,-,:k12 0,`:,',:.`..•.:',,.;!,/,.+,-,.!;,:..b?cic,,i,!',•:;:•1. 5)..::,.'41,-.'•n 7,-'•,,r.T.,' 1.1)::::,,.`;, „1-----...____'4., .,.. :. k:',,•.',,Y,;.`:t)- 1••°.•C • ' ,.. • 0 ,Ztfrt. 1,. ...._____.----- r. • . P;•Vp''...;' 'v,' 0\--.0.,(;;;:''.:,',0'e,,u.,C4.1 • • e:en-ri- ,,,,.• ..,- - . -0: .N,e,,,:-..- , - . ...vp. ..i...4 .. 1-. r ..,/•:. • , 14 . ••, fb•44 C3.%,.., • f.,,cs : T.,-",..., L.sit,...- . 1el , ,et.e,k,N, r,•0:. : , 4.C\ V.1.,_,, b.144?!..)., :4.`,. \ /I ,7 1 ,/Ii'''i kir _'-. ' I ..::. '''''''-':-.•101;1 i I - T R-3 I I B-1 I a-,mB-1 i i. fir ., I 1OLAIj ll.' TI ,' L II r yr- . L ,r1 ' I OREENWpOD r i1 G- 11,e, . ,',,_ oI w c- it f j 1 4 j1R_3 G4- 1 4„ 71 I 1 1 1 R-1 r. I.I Y 1 •ul 7, ! 2.,c :,. .,. ..4„;,...›---- ,) - I I1 r f1I , 1 i rr N 1 may •• iQ: 1 11 '•• .4Oo*6 I r A.;" ` • hlj D •• Q-`iu O,rA g, l). r r/ i/, t \'^'Ly.t 1, J ,:: 6.•••••\ t• yr•Nl rr r' I tt..; 11 Ih/ w;') \I1 rS.•.•,; jam , ,I r, ,j Il;o' r(.;. GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. GREENWOOD CEMETERY) SP-048-85 APPL I CANT GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO TOTAL AREA - 13.0 ACRES PRINCIPAL ACCESS MONROE AVENUE N.E. EXISTING ZONING G-1, GENERAL USE EXISTING USE CURRENTLY A GRAVEL PIT SITE PROPOSED USE CONTINUE MINING OPERATION AND UPON COMPLETION RESTORE THE SITEFOR FOR FUTURE ADDITIONAL GRAVESITES COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN PUBLIC/ QUASI-PUBLIC COMMENTS v. prlNI a1./.1/W.+r'C I 1Ys, 7nab. row •acr 22 AMC 1!S 77'I 0 ,...PS Pb1 .t1//P/1P/I i S: Pr.Q>N wrnr7 sw]] io is q , L. NN.•ap ® I{• 1 a7" ,''"'. r1 u. r,H-..,7 I, •-r • mil V/v,7 A'J ClHbr t,c,11 vrer7Ya 'a 1I/•/0'2. f Nir-2.. P.T.0 I •ty%- WW,WC. d'1L Wa,7 o00Pvr/332/ r 0l 7Y MEP cSany I i= .., r 1,Oib KriV ,00.7l OSl? ro9 pp -V r r,]. .f 1 \ 03OS-.15Z S7J 5' >97,42 c,417N/3 l ri/sit,P.YI(7, - '.rrylsvH t1.J ° tip' r• r,,,,v/RA~v.e r : . 1 c *s‘ N 1 f I N• l ! ltirv. V-d' ND/1J$' LI 461:' ' 1`N ' a7Ar7 Ar7J 71K67.vsvdat P {y 4I i I Y s7na/„Iv>OISYXyOdd ssr I1 777M-41T n/in an>',spofavj 7v.N Nvr 7war-.,w 771..r.raQ.7. rar+ol/vo7'+_-__ I 1 f } ice!—+S7 Tyr— 1J9/'07d/O P{+l3'NHO7 Warn M]] I r L 1_ I I P O,S077 lnlnl7d at 0?O77S2 #• at r92rr , _ i rt"r CTI'A Sa1Qv7lt/A771lP]!7 20, arl9 4II 1 q o ym.H j WAJ" e07C 37bvs/P n/ OW-MAW ib al orre b COXVI7' Z •,ours q Lx7O. v/Y/1S3 1,n% 44 i t79H_re eV O7MAfz#.G7 !Y at 75i'MPY70 :9tcN k n1 3%Y '?NI' 7OJ Q v 1 r g o t I 1 I e I P""ri It. 9 r P / 1 1 G ` y1 ,y p i I l'' I ice 1 H1J I 4 I• 1.1 kN L' a 4 1 1 , 1 s, 1 _......„, •,1 car. .___,,..r,...... K.Or[7b j a Metro Sand and Gravel, Inc. 18010 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY P.O.Box 88050 TUKWILA,WASHINGTON 98188 April 2 , 1981 Telephone: (206)575-3200 ', Honorable Mayor and City Council a,>\ City of Renton APR iy81MunicipalBuilding co 200 Mill Avenue South RECE1VEpRenton, Washington 98055 CIlyOf RENT„„ Attention: City Clerk CfER+10 OFFICE A,, yi8O i! . RE : Notice of Appeal - Hearing Examiner File No . SP-$W99- ` JJ Special Permit for Excavation of Sand & Gravel ; Metro Sand and Gravel , Inc . , Rainier Sand and Gravel , Inc. r Dear Sirs : Metro Sand and Gravel , Inc. is the lessee of Rainier Sand and Gravel , Inc. and the Estate of John Edwards for approximately seventy-six acres of land located south of Northeast 3rd Street on the hill south of the King County Sanitary Fill Facilities . As requested by the City, we have applied for a permit to complete our excavations on the site . We have been mining this site since the early 60 ' s . This property was annexed into the City and this is why we are now applying for a permit . Our request only seeks approval to continue the operations for four years , which is the end of our lease with the Edwards . 0 Please understand that our operation is not involved with the hillside down on the Maple Valley Highway, rather our operation is located further up above the crest of the hill . We have had no significant problems with our operation in all the years which we have been working the pit. We went through the Public Hearing process before your Hearing Examiner. He has granted us a permit to continue our operations for four years , subject to new restrictions . Requests for special permits for gravel mining do not occur that often and I am sure the Hearing Examiner did well under the circumstances . There are , however, two conditions which are proposed which we simply cannot live with in the continuation of our operation for the next four years . Therefore , I am appealing to you, the City Council , to modify the proposed conditions in two respects : 1 . Delete the requirement of the submission of a release from the downstream property owners . City Clerk April 2 , 1981 Page Two 2 . Allow hours of operations from 7 :00 a.m. to 3 : 30 p.m. rather than 8 : 00 a.m. to 3 : 30 p.m. I have attached to this letter specifics regarding these matters . I would like to say that if we are required to obtain releases from downstream property owners (whoever they may be) that it is quite possible that our project will not continue. This requirement seems to me to be quite unworkable for the many reasons stated in the attached summary. In regards to the hours of operation, our business requires that we commence work at 7 : 00 a .m. This is when the construction industry starts business . We have operated from 7 : 00 in the morning for many years and have not once caused a problem to the City from these hours of operation. I believe the requirement was conceived only because of hypothetical concerns which may arise in the future. I am willing to limit thehoursifaproblemshouldariseinthefuture , however, to fix these hours when there is no problem puts severe restraints on our operations . I respectfully ask that you favorably consider this request. I am available to meet with the council at any time to discuss this matter. Very truly yours , METRO SAND AND VEL, INC. Mario A. Segale President & Owner MAS :lpb Enc . i V PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT APRIL 20, 1981 APPEALS FILED BY MARIO A. SEGALE AND ESTATE OF JOHN C. EDWARDS SP-099-80 Referred 4-6-81 ) T^ The Planning and Development Committee has considered the appeal filed by Mario A.Segale from the decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 andfindingthatFindingNo. 20 and Conclusion No. 1 are in error in the limitation ofhoursofoperationtothoseafter8:00 A.M. and further finding that Finding No. 16andConclusionNo. 8 are in error in that the potential 5% loss of ground water asaresultoftheproposedexcavationisnotsignificantenoughtorequirethesub-mission of releases from downstream owners pursuant to Section 4-2318 (4) , thePlanningandDevelopmentCommitteerecommendstheCityCouncilmodifythedecisionoftheHearingExaminerassetforthbelow. The Planning and Development Committee has further considered the appeal of theEstateofJohnC. Edwards of the decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner datedMarch3, 1981 and finding that the requirement of a perpetual maintenance of theholdingpondisnotsupportedbyfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaworevi-dence submitted to the Hearing Examiner, and finding as a matter of law that therequirementofadedicationofpropertiestoextendEdmondsAvenueN.E. as set forthinConditionNo. 8 of the decision is not reasonably related to the permit applica-tion and is not necessary to make the application compatible with the environmentandcarryouttheobjectivesoftheComprehensivePlan, the Zoning Ordinance, theSubdivisionOrdinanceandtheCodeandOrdinancesoftheCityofRenton, the PlanningandDevelopmentCommitteerecommendsthattheCityCouncilmodifythedecisionoftheHearingExaminerasfollows: The decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 should be affirmed,subject to the modifications of the following conditions set forth in that decision. A. Condition No. 1 should be modified to confirm the hours mf operationtobetween7:00 A.M. and 3 :30 P.M. Monday through Friday. B. Condition No. 3 should be modified to read as follows : The submission and execution of Restrictive Covenants providingformaintenanceofaholdingpondwithsedimentationclearing,which covenants should be perpetual and run with the land until such time as this requirement is found to be no longer necessary, or an acceptable alternative method of securing sedimentation clearing is available, which decision should be made by the Land Use Hearing Examiner of the City of Renton upon application by the land owner or other interested parties after public hearingthereonpursuanttoSection4-3010 (A) (10) . Planning and Development Committee Committee Report April 20, 1981 Page Two C. Condition No. 4 should be modified to include the following: Such hold harmless agreement should also hold the City of Renton harmless from any liability for damages sustained by persons holding water appropriation rights downstream from the subject property for interruption, diversion or any change in natural surface or subsurface drainage patterns from the subject property. D. Conditions Nos. 8 and 9 should be deleted in their entirety. Randy Rockhill , Chairman Earl Clymer John Reed RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting April 20, 1981 Municipal Building Monday, 8:00 P.M. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara V. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF RICHARD M. STREDICKE, Council President; THOMAS W. TRIMM, EARL CLYMER, COUNCIL ROBERT HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCILMAN JOHN REED. CARRIED. Councilman Charles Shane arrived shortly. CITY OFFICIALS BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney;IN ATTENDANCE DAN KELLOGG, Asst. City Attorney; MAXINE MOTOR, Deputy City Clerk, W. E. BENNETT, Acting Finance Director; JOHN WEBLEY, Parks Director; MIKE PARNESS, Administrative Assistant ; DAVE CLEMENS, Acting Planning Director; DON PERSSON, Police Rep. PRESS GREG ANDERSON, Renton Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND HUGHES, ADOPT THE MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 1981 AS WRITTEN. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Chris Crumbaugh, PO Box 88050, Tukwila, Attorney representing Metro Sand and Gravel , requested the matter re appeal of Rainier Sand and Rainier Sand & Gravel Special Permit SP-099-80 be heard at Gravel-Special this time. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND STREDICKE,TO SUSPEND Permit SF-099-80 THE ORDER OF BUSINESS AND READ THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Appeal COMMITTEE REPORT AT THIS TIME. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee report was read affirming decision of the Land Use Hearing Examiner dated March 3, 1981 subject to the following modifications of the conditions set forth in that decision: a) Condition No. 1 should be modified to confirm the hours of operation to between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. Honday through Friday; b) Condition No. 3 should be modifed to read-the submission and execution of Restrictive Covenants providing for maintenance of a holding pond with sedimentation clearing, which covenants should be perpetual and run with the land until such time as this requirement is found to be no longer necessary, or an acceptable alternative method of securing sedimentation clearing is available, which decision should be made by the Land Use Hearing Examiner of th'e City upon application by the land owner or other interested parties after public hearing thereon pursuant to Section 4-3010 (A) 10) ; c) Condition No. 4 should be modifed that such hold harmless agreement should also hold the City harmless from any liability for damages sustained by persons holding water appropriation rights downstream from the subject property for interruption, diversion or any change in natural surface or subsurface drainage patterns from the subject property, and; d) Conditions No. 8 and 9 should be deleted in their entirety. Ted Gathe, 411 E. Madison, Seattle, Attorney for Mt. Olivet Cemetery, noted their concern re any change in the quality and quanity of natural spring water being interrupted to their property. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND SHANE, TO CONCUR IN THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Tiffany Fark Delores Newland, 1668 Lake Youngs Way, commented on the publicPublicWalkwaywalkwayinTiffanyParkandwhatanuisanceithasbecome. (See previous letter submitted to Council April 6, 1981 . ) Lawrence Brown, 3108 SE 17th Ct . , and Vivian Sather, 1672 Lake Youngs Way, also commented on the walkway noting the problems they have encountered with vandalism and erosion of the path. The Mayor noted that the City's staff is investigating the problem now and hoped to have a full report back to Council shortly. CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion, which follows the business matters included: Renton City Council 4/20/81 Page 2 Consent Agenda - Continued Appointrrent Letter from Mayor Shinpoch reappointing Human Rights and Human Rights Affairs Commission Members for two year terms to be effective and Affairs through April 23, 1983-Marilyn Bingaman, Barbara Lansing, and Albert Talley. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Transfer of Funds Letter from Ted Bennett, Acting Finance Director, requested Coulon Beach transfer of funds from Coulon Beach Construction Fund to GO Bonds Construction Fund Redemption Fund in the amount of $466,000.00, for interest payment pending receipt of property taxes. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Comdemnation Letter from Richard Houghton, Acting Public Works Director, SW 43rd St. requested ordinance to condemn properties on SW 43rd Street Improvement project. Joint Project Kent/Renton, East to West Valley Highway. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. (See Ord. #3533) Travel Request Letter from Fire Chief Geissler and Police Chief Darby requested authorization for Detective Kittelson (Police Dept. ) and Ken Walls Fire Dept. ) to attend the Northwest Fire & Arson Seminar to be held at Portland, Oregon, May 4-8, 1981 . Request for $400.00 advance travel . Council Concur. Bid Opening- City Clerk presented bid opening 4/14/81 for Gene Coulon Beach Gene Coulon Beach Park, Contract #2, ten bids received. Refer to Park Board. Park,Contract #2- Renton Park Board recommended award of contract to the low bidder Bid Award Frank Coluccio Construction in the total amount of $3,101 ,922. Mayor and City Clerk authorized to sign. Council concur. Claims for Claims for Damages were filed by Washington Natural Gas Co. for Damages-Washington 1 ) alleged scraped 20" main at 725 S. 19th St.-cost of repairs Natural Gas Co. $44.66; 2) alleged broken 2" main at 2700 NE 23rd St.-cost of repairs $49.86; 3) alleged gouged 4" main at 4625 Duval Ave. NE- cost of repairs $109.91 . Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier. Claim fcr Damages- Claim for Damages filed by James A. Hamrick for alleged vehicle James Hamrick damage when he ran off the end of roadway northbound on Valley Parkway SW. Claim in the amount of $1 ,466.53. Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Carrier. LID 325 Letter from Del Mead, City Clerk, presented petition for South o1 SW 43rd roadway construction LID in area south of SW 43rd St. and and East of SR east of SR 167, filed by D. Connell . Petition certified as 167 100%. Refer to Public Works Department for preparation of preliminary assessment roll . LID 325. Appeal Mt. Olivet An appeal has been filed by Theodore Gath, Attorney for Mt . Cemetery, Inc. Olivet Cemetery, Inc. regarding Land Use Hearing Examiner's SP-047-80 recommendation for approval with conditions of Special Permit SP-047-80 to expand cemetery. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consent Agenda MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND ROCKHILL, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT Approval AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS Annexation Letter was read from Renton Chamber of Commerce requestingGuideliresCouncilreviewitsexistingannexationguidelinesandadopt a positive annexation policy for the City per the "Sphere of Influence" already adopted. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND HUGHES, TO REFER MATTER TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECOND SHANE, COUNCIL GO ON RECORD FAVORING A PHILOSOPHY OF CONTROLLED GROWTH WITH REGARD TO FURTHER ANNEXATIONS. CARRRIED. March 3, 1981 OFFICE OF THE LAND USL .ILARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISIONS APPLICANT: Rainier Sand & Gravel FILE NO. SP-099-80 Estate of John Edwards) LOCATION: Approximately 370 feet south of N.E. 3rd Street on the hill east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. SUMMARY OF I;EQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a special permit for excavation in the amount of +1 .6 million cubic yards along an established gravel pit over the next four years. A lease agreement and court judgment have been executed between Metro Sand and Gravel , Inc. (lessee) and Rainier Sand and Gravel (lessor) . SUMMARY OF ACTION: Planning Department Recommendation: Approval with conditions and a bond. Hearing Examiner Decision: Approval with restrictive covenants , bonds and other conditions. PLANNING DEPARTMENT The Planning Department preliminary report was received byREPORT: the Examiner on December 16, 1980. PUBLIC HEAR NG: After reviewing the Planning Department report , examining available information on file with the application, and field checking the property and surrounding area, the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows : The hearing was opened on December 23, 1980 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wist.ing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.1; It was reported that the Hearing Examiner and the applicant had received and reviewed the Planning Department report . Steve Munson, Planning Department , presented the report, and entered the following exhibits into the record: Exhibit #1 : Application File containing Planning Department report and other pertinent documents Exhibit #2: Site Plan with staff comments Exhibit #3: Aerial Photograph of Subject Site Site outlined in red) The Examiner requested testimony by the applicant. Responding was: Chris F. Crumbaugh P.O. Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98188 Mr. Crumbaugh, legal counsel for the applicant, advised that although the official owners of the subject property are Rainier Sand & Gravel , Inc. and the estate of John Edwards , Metro Sand & Gravel has been the lessee since 1964, and M. A. Segale, Inc. is operating under the authority of Metro. He designated the proposed excavation project on the site plan, denoting the location of accesses to N.E . 3rd Street. Mr. Crumbaugh reviewed excavation activity in surrounding areas , and gave a brief history of the use of the property, noting that there have no complaints regarding noise from the gravel pit in the past 20 years . Although he stated that the site to the south has had several problems in the past , ccrrective measures are being planned by representatives of the City of Renton and the property owner, and the grading plan will be coordinated between the two projects although the operations will be independent. Mr. Crumbaugh designated the specific location of proposed excavation, noting that the southwest portion of the site is excluded even though it is included within the acreage of the special permit request. Referencing Section L. 1( of the staff report which recommends posting a bond in the amount of one and one-half tines the estimated cost of the rehabilitation, Mr. Crumbaugh clarified that although the site contains 76 acres, actual excavation will occur only on 20 acres of property. . S )9-80 Page Two Referencing Section L.5 regarding potential interference with water supply to Mt . Olivet Cemetery, Mr. Crumbaugh assured that the applicant intends to protect the water rights . He also advised that the recommendation from the Public Works Department for channelization of drainage water to the south into the Cedar River had been withdrawn subsequent to discussion with the applicant , and the proposal now directs drainage to the north towards N. E. 3rd Street . The Examiner stated that further clarification would be provided by a representative of the Engineering Division later in the hearing. Referencing Section L.8 which regards hours of operation, Mr. Crumbaugh indicated that current operation hours are from 7:00 a.m. to 3: 30 p.m. , no prior traffic problems have occurred, aid the nature of the industry requires delivery to construction sites as early in the morning as possible. Referencing Section L. 10 regarding posting of a bond, although he did not object to the bond, he felt that the amount should not be determined upon the entire 76 acre site, but should be left for review and coordination between the applicant , the Public Works Department and the Planning Department. The Examiner requested testimony in support of the application. Responding was: Lt . Don Persson Renton Police Department Lt . Persson indicated support of the project which will improve the appearance of the site. He indicated no objection to the applicant 's preferred hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. as long as trucks do not split the lanes at the intersection of N. E. 3rd Street and Sunset Boulevard N. E. , and advised that no complaints had been received regarding traffic flow from the operation in the past . Lt . Persson suggested that the applicant be required to participate in the installation of a proposed traffic signal if the realignment of Edmonds Avenue N.E. in the near future requires the access road to cross the subject property. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding prior traffic mishaps invalving the applicant 's vehicles , Lt . Persson advised that although accidents have occurred, none have involved the applicant 's trucks. The Examine - requested testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: Ted Gathe Attorney, Mt. Olivet Cemetery 457 Central Building Seattle, WA 98104 Mr. Gathe indicated concern regarding the continued quality and quantity of water supply to the cemetery which originates from springs located on the subject site. He advised that an exiting pump house located at the intersection of N.E. 3rd Street and Blaine Avenue N. E. at an elevation of 225 feet pumps water to the cemetery, and if the elevation of the subject property is excavated to that level , water flow to the cemetery will be sev.rely hampered. Mr. Gathe submitted a valid water right claim filed with the Department of Ecology in 1974 which specifies 250 g. p.m. as the quantity of water claimed. Tie document was entered by the Examiner as follows : Exhibit #4 : Water Right Claim Mr. Gathe also submitted a committee report from the Special Studies Committee of the Planning Commission , dated December 3, 1975, which conditions approval of the prior special pernit. The report was entered by the Examiner as follows : Exhibit #5: Special Studies Committee Report, December 3, 1975, regarding John C. Edwards Special Permit; File No. SP-752-74 Mr. Gathe referenced the first condition of the report which requires final Public Works Department approval of detailed drainage plans with suitable storm water retention facilities and erosion control methods to reduce impacts both on and off the site. He advised his concern that compliance with that condition had not occurred, and a study of the subject area indicates that the culverts , silted ponds and drainage plan have not been provided to ensure an uninterrupted water supply to Mt . Olivet Cemetery. Mr. Gathe then submitted the following letter into the record which was entered as follows : Exhibit #6: Letter to Mr. John Edwards from Dames & Moore, Geology Consultants , dated May 15, 1975 Mr. Gathe indicated concern regarding a recommendation listed on page 3 of the letter, which states that all exposed areas not being actively excavated or graded should be shaped to facilitate drainage and should be seeded with erosion-retardant vegetation SP-095 Page Three such as mixed grass or clover. Seeded areas should include the inner and outer slopes of sedimentation ponds . He noted that at one time the site was comprised of a number of small springs and marshy areas of which only one or two remain, and he felt they should be protected from any further excavation. Mr. Gathe then submitted a map of the existing drainage patterns on the site which was entered by the Examiner as follows: Exhibit #7: Drainage Map Mr. Gathe reiterated previous comments regarding the necessity for preparation of plans for siltation ponds , channelization and drainage facilities to assure continued existing quality and quantity of spring water. He noted that although the water is pure upon percolation from the springs, the holding pond for Mt. Olivet Cemetery is completely silted and has caused pumps to shut down in the past. Mr. Gathe discussed financial impact to the. cemetery owners if water supply is interrupted and conversion to city water is required noting that an amount of $3,000 per month or $20,000 per year would be expended. Rased upon that impact, he felt it imperative that a substantial bond be posted by the appl cant . The Examine • requested further testimony in opposition to the application. Responding was: Donald A. Hogan Civil Engineer 1703 Dexter Avenue N. Seattle, WA 98109 Mr. Hogan submitted a grading plan to illustrate the route of the drainage to Mt. Olivet Cemetery from the subject site. The plan was entered by the Examiner as follows: Exhibit #8: Grading Plan Mr. Hogan advised that the proposed grading will not interfere with the water sourceras much as water channelization. He noted that a request had been made to Mr. Segale to obtain the grading plan and photographs of the site to assist in identifying the channelizat on of the spring supply, but permission had been denied. Mr. Hogan felt that rather than the applicant making a statement that interference will not occur to the suppy, it would be beneficial to provide plans to protect channelization and locate proposed cuts at the lower elevation. He then supplied two letters to the Examiner which were entered as follows : Exhibit #9: Letter from D. A. Hogan to James A. Colt , Mt . Olivet Cemetery, dated October 21 , 1980, regarding Irrigation Supply Stream Exhibit #10: Letter from D. A. Hogan to James L. Colt , Mt. Olivet Cemetery, dated December 16, 1980, regarding Gauging for Quantity of Flow of Irrigation Stream Both letters discuss investigations of the site concerning water rights and potential impacts from the proposed operation. Testifying ' n opposition was: James L. Colt P.O. Box 547 Renton, WA 98055 Mr. Colt relterated previous testimony regarding water supply and potential expense incurred to the cemetery if interruption of the supply occurs. He noted that water supply and quality have been impacted several times within the past two years , but corrective measures had been taken by the applicant . Mr. Colt felt that consideration should be given to thc. fact that the cemetery has existed for the past 100 years and will continue for another 100 years, and the proposed project will be completed within the next four years . He concluded by requesting that the conditions of the special permit be met with assurances n the form of a bond to guarantee that the water supply will continue in quantity and quality by right granted by the State of Washington. The Examiner requested further testimony. Responding was: Don Monaghan Engineering Division Mr. Monaghar indicated that initial review of the proposal did not reveal that a water right claim existed on the site, and upon receipt of this information, reevaluation of the propose( flow was necessary to allow drainage to be channeled to the north rather SP-05_ Page Four than southerly to the Cedar River. He suggested that the Hearing Examiner approve the application subject to coordination of the drainage plans with the applicant and the Public Work Department. The Examinee requested further testimony. Responding was : Dick Causey Manager, Land Planning Puget Sound Power & Light Company Puget Power Building Bellevue, WA 98009 Mr . Causey noted that a transmission line easement and a BPA easement run through the site, and inquired if Puget Power had been notified of the impending project and if the lines are protected. Mr. Crumbaugh responded that approvals would be appropriately secured fron Puget Power if the easements are affected. He also concurred with Mr. Monaghan 's Suggestion that approval be granted subject to review of the drainage plans with the applicant , the Public Works Department and representatives of Mt . Olivet Cemetery to ensure that water rights are not interrupted. The Examiner requested further testimony. Mr. Gathe also concurred with the suggestion for coordinzted review of the plans , and indicated concern with the wording of the recommendation in Section L.5 of the Planning Department report which requires the applicant tc provide assurance to the Public Works Department that the proposed excavation vill not interfere or deprive Mt. Olivet of its rights. He felt that specific information is lacking for enforcement . The Examiner agreed that certain unresolved issues are apparent, and rather than delegate resolution to the parties involved, he preferred continuing the public hearing to Tuesday, Jaruary 20 , 1981 to allow the Public Works Department the opportunity to work with the applicant to ensure protection of state protected water rights . Since there was no objection, the hearing regarding File No. SP-099-80 was closed by the Examiner at 10:07 a .m. and continued to January 20, 1981 . CONTINUATION : The hearing was opened on January 20, 1981 at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, advised that the applicant required additional time in which to complete investigations on the'site. The Examiner subsequently continued the hearing to February 17, 1981 . CONTINUATION : The hearing was opened on February 17, 1981 at 9: 30 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. Roger Blaylock, Associate Planner, presented and reviewed the following exhibits which were entered into the record by the Examiner as follows : Exhibit #11 : Interoffice Memorandum from Don Monaghan, Engineering Division, to Fred Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, dated January 15, 1981 Exhibit #12: Supplemental Staff Report and Attached Memorandum Exhibit #13: New Vicinity Map showing ERADCO and Homecraft Proposals Exhibit #11 advised that the drainage for the subject proposal had been reevaluated and a determination made that drainage should flow to the northwest corner of the site. Exhibit #12 discusses the problem of traffic access and general circulation in the area, noting that a policy statement which was issued on February 5, 1981 , directly affects thedecisionontheRainierSandandGravelSpecialPermit , and recommends that an additional condition of dedication of public right-of-way for Edmonds Avenue N.E. by both RainierSandandGravel , Inc. and Mario Segale be included in the special permit approval . Mr. Blaylock noted that the Planning Department recommends that the ERADCO project to the south of the subject site be responsible for constructing the street but a portion of the access should be dedicated by Mario Segale. Regarding the previously discussed water rights, Mr. Blaylock indicated the Planning Department recommendation that the city notbeinvolvedinthemattersinceitisofprivateconcern. SF -80 Page Five the Examine - requested testimony by the applicant. Chris Crumbaugh indicated that discussion of water rights had occurred with representatives of Mt . Olivet Cemetery and the applicant had subsequently retained GeoEngineers, Inc. , a consulting firm, to investigate the matter and provide recommendations. As a result of the review, a report had been submitted to the city and representatives of Mt . Olivet along with revised plans incorporatiig the consultant 's recommendations. These were submitted and entered into the record )y the Examiner as follows: Exhibit #14: Revised Plan (Sheet 3 of 4) Exhibit #15: Geotechnical Report Regarding tie issue of provision of roadways contained in the supplemental staff report , Mr. Crumbaujh reviewed ownership of properties which the proposed roadway would cross, and noted that if dedication were required, M. A. Segale, Inc. , not Mario Segale, would be willing to Jedicate the roadway on the condition that cost of construction would not be incurred by that corporation and that the easement would be extinguished if the roadway is not constructed within five years. Responding in support of the application was : James Miller GeoEngineers, Inc. P.O. Box 6325 Bellevue, WA 98007 Mr. Miller, project engineer investigating the drainage on the subject site, reviewed the recommendations contained within Exhibit #15, Geotechnical Report. He indicated that if the borrow pit is enlarged there will be an increase in the rate of runoff as it exits the northwest corner of the site, and a recommendation had been made that runoff control systems with storage and controlled outlets be constructed so the rate of runoff does not exceed present conditions. Additionally, the firm recommended that a sedimentation facility be constructed to allow for sedimentation accumulation since no such facility exists within the borrow pit. He noted that the quantity of spring discharge feeding the creek will not be impacted since the total drainage basin area will not be affected or changed. Mr. Crumbaugh advised that the study had been submitted to representatives of Mt. Olivet Cemetery and it is his understanding that the Engineering Division staff will review and approve them. Responding in support of the application was: Don Braislin Bank of California Center, 40th floor Seattle, WA 98164 Mr. Braislin, representing Rainier Sand & Gravel and the estate of John Edwards, discussed the proposed roadway dedication which had recently been reviewed with Mrs. Anna McMahon, beneficiary of the estate, and noted that it appears the only involvement with Rainier Sand and Gravel property would consist of a small portion over an existing roadway. Mr. Blaylock clarified that the primary intent of the city is to provide a standard intersection. He explained that dedication would involve two pieces of property at the northern end of the subject site and a portion of the M. A. Segale, Inc. property which would be in line with Edmonds Avenue N.E. , extended. Responding to the Examiner' s inquiry regarding whether or not the city would have a dedicated right-of-way south of the Segale property or whether it would be a private easement , Mr. Blaylock stated that the city currently has no access on N.E. 3rd Street underneath FAI-405; however, more than sufficient access exists under the Maple Valley Highway for future expansion when Edmonds Avenue N.E. is linked to that roadway. He advised that the right-of-way to the south is presently just an easement from Mt. Olivet Cemetery property to the ERADCO site, and until plans are submitted for the ERADCO project , he assumed that it would remain a private street. Responding to the Examiner's inquiry regarding the willingness of Mrs. McMahon to dedicate the right-of-way, Mr. Braislin reviewed two of her requests : 1) that the roadway would be constructed at someone's expense other than her own within a reasonable period of time; and 2) tha she be allowed to clean up an area below the existing leased area which had been utilised for slumping of material . He noted her desire to sell the material since compliance with city regulations in the cleanup operation would cost approximately $85,000. Regarding Hrs. McMahon's response to dedication of a small piece across an existing right- of-way, Mr Braislin indicated that discussion with her would be required prior to providing o response to the city. The Examiner requested clarification of the width and length of the dedication at the north end of the roadway. Mr. Blaylock advised that the dedication would be 60 feet wide and the length would extend from 250 to 300 feet depending upon the ultimate design. SP-0 30 Page Six Mr. Crumbaugh indicated that he and Mr. Braislin are not adversaries, but clarification and discussion of the easement requirements had been necessary for both parties. He noted his understanding that the Engineering Division was not requiring dedication of property to Maple Valley Highway, but connection is a long range goal of the city. He advised that M. A. Segale, Inc. is an unrelated party to the proposal and the city could possibly initiate condemnation procedures in the future. Mr. Crumbaugh stated that two other projects are being proposed on N.E. 3rd Street for which the city is reviewing access and traffic impact , but the existing access to the applicant 's site is currently adequate for their needs and no problems will be created through approval of the request. Mr. Braislin confirmed that Rainier Sand and Gravel , Inc. and Metro are cooperative parties, and the position of Rainier is one of assistance to Metro in its plans. Lt. Don Persson, Renton Police Department, reiterated the opinion of the Police Department that the existing Segale operation has not caused traffic problems in the past. The Examiner requested testimony by representatives of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. Mr. Ted Gathe objected to Mr. Blaylock's comment during his presentation that water rights should be a private matter between parties, and referenced Condition No. 5 of the original Planning Department report which recommends that the applicant supply assurances to the Public Works Department that the proposal will not deprive water rights to Mt. Olivet. He advised that if that condition is attached to the special permit , Mt . Olivet would withdraw its objection. Mr. Gathe indicated that although the geotechnical report had been received from the applicant on February 12, their own engineer had not yet had an opportunity to review it, but if the plans are workable and water is supplied through all seasons, there would be no opposition if made part of the approval . Mr. Gathe referenced page 4 of tie report which states that a 900-foot ditchpond will act as a detention pond with sedimeit removed on a regular basis, and questioned maintenance of the pond following the four year period after completion of the Segale operation. Responding to the Examiner' s request for further testimony, Mr. James Colt, Mt . Olivet Cemetery, sibmitted a letter from his engineer and a copy of the geotechnical report with highlighted sections. These were entered into the record by the Examiner as follows: Exhibit #16: Letter to Mr. James L. Colt from D. A. Hogan & Associates, dated February 12, 1981 Exhibit 117: Geotechnical Report with Highlighted Sections Exhibit 1116 states that to date, no documents or specific information from Segale had been received. Hr. Colt stated that during the months of January and February of this year, sedimentation levels had been high in tests taken at sprinkler heads. He noted that he has not had an opportunity to review the report , Exhibit 1117, with his engineer, but if assurances of water quantity and quality are received and the city is satisfied with those assurinces , he would not object to approval of the project. The Examine - requested further comments in support or opposition to the application. There was nu response. He then requested testimony by the city's Traffic Engineer. Responding was : Gary Norris Traffic Engineer Mr. Norris ndicated the city' s concern regarding the available capacity at the intersection of N.E. 3rd Street and Sunset Boulevard N.E. since the westbound approach is the constraining factor in the operation of that intersection. He noted that traffic generation is currently at service level E which is the ultimate capacity of the intersection, and costs to widen the roadway by modifying the FAI-405 bridge supports would be exliorbitant. Mr. Norris advised the city' s overriding concern is the desirability of allowing future increases on N.E. 3rd Street which will severely impact that intersection, and in order to forestall the need to widen the road and remove the bridge, the city had sought alternative access which will give traffic the opportunity to circumvent hat intersection, one of which is access to Maple Valley Highway. He noted the city's -equest that Homecraft and ERADCO developments align their accesses from a safety and operational standpoint to avoid an offset "T" intersection which is more complicated costly and reduces safety of the environment, and will also result in installation of a single traffic signal at a logical extension of Edmonds Avenue N.E. The Examine - requested further comments . Mr. Blaylock indicated that is not the intent of the city to require dedication of access through Rainier Sand and Gravel property at this time since ultimate grades and development are yet unknown. He felt that other factors besides the subject project should be evaluated in determining impact and responsibility for Mt. Olivet Cemetery water supply and quality, and noted recent construction of a roadway across the canyon which may have caused a certain degree of erosion. SP- -80 Page Seven The Examiner requested final comments . Since none were offered, the hearing regarding File No. 5P-099-80 was closed by the Examiner at 10: 16 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION: Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1 . The request is for approval of a special permit to excavate and grade approximately76.2 ccres. 2. The application file containing the application, SEPA documentation, the PlanningDepartmentreport, and other pertinent documents was entered into the record as Exhibit #1 . 3. Pursuent to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 , R.C.W. 43.21 .C. , as amended, a Declaration of Non-Significance has been issued for the subject proposal by the Environmental Review Committee, resporsible official . 4. Plans for the proposal have been reviewed by all city departments affected by theimpactofthisdevelopment. 5. The subject property is located about 370 feet south of N.E. 3rd Street east of Mt. Olivet Cemetery. 6. The site was annexed into the city in June, 1977, by Ordinance No. 3143 and the current G (General ; Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) zoning was applied at that time. A special permit to extract material was issued in 1974 File No. SP-752-74) . That permit was to expire in December of 1980. The applicant submitted the subject application prior to the expiration of the old permit and thehearingprocessbeganinDecember, 1980. A series of continuances was granted in order to permit the submission of more information concerning storm water detention/ retention and natural drainage patterns in the area. 7. The subject site has been operating as a borrow pit for approximately 20 years. A borrow pit is a location from which material is "borrowed" for use in filling anotherlocation. The "borrowing" is generally permanent although reclamation in some manner may oc:ur. The applicant proposes continuing the operation for another four years. 8. The subject property is located in an area in which extensive excavation has occurred. Simila- pits exist to the south and west. The county has a gravel pit as well as a solid yaste facility east of the subject property. Similar operations were located north )f N.E. 3rd Street. Immediately to the west of the subject site is the Mt. Olivet Cemetery. 9. Mt. Olivet Cemetery has a water right claim for up to 250 gallons per minute (gpm)and an annual total useage right of 72 acre feet. The water is used continuously and serves both for irrigation and domestic supply. The water claimed by Mt. Olivet originates on the subject site and any change in the contours of the subject site can affect both the quantity and quality of the flow. Sections 4-2303(2) (B) (5) and4-2313 (4) require consideration of both surface water and drainage. Further, Section 4-2318 '(4) (B) requires a release by the downstream owner if the natural drainage patternisint'!rruped , changed or diverted. 10. The arl!a is generally undeveloped and there are no single family homes in the immediate area. The site is rather isolated. Access is via a haul road and the properly does not front directly on any public right-of-way. 11 . The zoning in the area is mixed. The cemetery is zoned GS-1 (General ; Single FamilyResidential ; Minimum lot size - 35,000 square feet) as is property north of the subjec site. The property just south of the cemetery is zoned R-3 (Medium Density Multifamily) and east of that R-4 (High Density Multifamily) . Directly south of the subject site is an S-1 zone (Single Family Residential ; Minimum lot size - 40,000 square feet) . Northwest of the subject site is an R-4 zone and north of the site is an L-1 (Light Industry) zone. 12. Southwest of the subject site a development is proposed for the ERADCO property consisting of approximately 425 units. Access for this development is proposed to the north via an easement over Mt. Olivet Cemetery. Northwest of the site is a proposed development of the Homecraft property consisting of about 285 units. Access for the: Homecraft development is currently undecided. SF 9-80 Page Eight 13. The current access road for the subject site is offset from the normal alignment of city streets north of the site. The Planning Department and the Traffic Engineering Division have recommended that the streets be aligned along the current location of Edmonds Avenue N.E. This would allow controlled entry of vehicles from the subject site and from the proposed ERADCO development to enter onto N.E. 3rd Street. A dedication of right-of-way is therefore necessary to carry out the alignment objective. M. A. Segale, Inc. has agreed to provide the necessary right-of-way on the property north of the subject site. The owner of the subject site (applicant 's lessor) has agreec to provide approximately 250 feet for right-of-way just south of the Segale property. 14. The applicant has no proposal for eventual reuse of the subject site although the plans call for recontouring portions of the site and leveling the uneven portions resulting from earlier operations on the site. The Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for recreational uses and low density multifamily uses. The Planning Department has recommended that a bond in an amount of one and one-half times the amount necessary to rehabilitate the site be postec to allow corrective measures if the operation is not proceeding according to approved plans. The amount of the bond has been calculated based on the area of the project and the type of rehabilitation necessary on a site of this nature. The Planning Department indicated that hydroseeding of the site would cost in the range of $1 ,000 per acre for the approximately 76 acre site and the bond would be in the area cf $114,000. 15. Mt. Olivet Cemetery pumps water from a base level of 225 feet. The proposed finished elevation of the pit is 227 feet. Water generally flows across the subject site towarc Mt . Olivet Cemetery in a northwesterly direction where the pipe conveys the water to the pump for use in the cemetery. Siltation along with a change in the rate of flow can affect the quality and quantity of the water reaching Mt. Olivet. 16. The water reaching Mt. Olivet is comprised of both a surface water component and a grounc water discharge component. During normal dry periods (summer) , the ground water component comprises approximately 100% of the flow. A surface water drainage area cf approximately 465 acres feeds the ground water component which is generally recharged by normal annual precipitation. Excavation is expected to result in a potential 5% loss of ground water. 17. The surface water component is currently fed by approximately 44 acres of land which generates about 7. 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) . This will gradually increase to the proposed 76 acres covered by the subject application. The flow will increase to about 11 .7 cfs , and will result in increased surface water runoff. Pursuant to Sectic,n 4-2909 of the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance, the increased flow must to provided for by the applicant in some suitable plan approved by the Public Works Department, such plan to assure that the receiving location will not be adversely affected either by excess volumes , siltation, diminution or diversion. 18. This “ pproximately 4. 3 cfs excess water must be detained while the normal runoff of about 7. 3 cfs may be released. A detention basin of approximately 24 ,000 cubic feet will to required to retain this excess runoff with an additional 4,800 cubic feet proviced to allow sedimentation buildup. Sediment will have to be periodically removed. 19. The projected life of the application is four years to excavate 1 .6 million cubic yards. The total number of trips required to remove the material , assuming 25 cubic yards of material per trip, will be approximately 64,000 vehicle trips. Eighty trips per dh,y over a two hundred work day year would be required to move the 1 .6 million cubic yards in four years. The applicant has not specified the precise quantity to be mooed in any one time period, as this depends on demand. 20. Because of the nature of the operation, hauling by large trucks, the heavy peak hour traffic demand on N.E. 3rd Street , and the steep grade, the Traffic Engineering Division has recommended that hours of operation be limited to 8:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. For similar reasons , the division has recommended the new alignment for the access road eventually to Edmonds to provide controlled flow (See Finding No. 13) . CONCLUSIONS: I . The excavation and grading operation proposed by the applicant appears to serve the public use and interest. Fill material is necessary to many construction efforts both in the City of Renton and in the surrounding area. As conditioned below, the operation should cause the least interference with the public health, safety and welfare and minimize the potential harm to neighboring properties. SP-0 30 Page Nine 2. The property does not directly abut a public street for access purposes, but currently uses an indirect route for entry to N.E. 3rd Street , a major arterial which has a large peak-hour demand. In order to lessen the impact of the subject property' s heavy truck traffic on the rush hour traffic, the hours of operation should be limited to between 8:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. The applicant can have as many as 80 one-way trips or 160 two-way trips based on only an estimate (See Finding No. 19) and this number could easily vary considerably upward during peak demand for fill material . 3. Further, the current route intersects N.E. 3rd Street on a steep grade and outside of the ordinary city street grid pattern. Current city projections would have Edmonds Avenue V.E. extended south to and across N.E. 3rd Street , thereby limiting the additional curb cuts and entry and exit points on N.E. 3rd, and thereby lessening the potential for vehicle conflict at numerous uncontrolled intersections. In order to meet the expected demand of both the subject property's traffic and other proposed development in the immediate area, the property to the north of the subject site and the lessor of the applicant have agreed to dedicate to the public, right-of-way for a future extension of Edmonds Avenue N.E. This dedication should be subject to a route selection review by the Planning Department and the Public Works Department . The route necessary will cross the M.A. Segale, Inc. property in alignmeit with the southerly extension of N.E. Edmonds Avenue and extend across the subject property for approximately 300 feet. 4. In order to assure reclamation of the site and to prevent unnecessary erosion, the site or parts thereof should be reclaimed as soon as possible. Hydroseeding should be the ninimum reclamation effort to maintain soil stability and help prevent excessive runoff. In order to assure that reclamation proceeds as required, a bond in an amount of 150% of the required costs and subject to inflationary factors should be posted. The amount is calculated to be approximately $114,000 to reclaim the 76.2 acres involved in the subject proposal . Additional rehabilitation shall be approved by the Planning and Public Works Departments and shall include reforestation in order to provide compatibility of the site to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The review should occur at the time of renewal of the annual license. 5. The water rights claim of the Mt . Olivet Cemetery must be safe§uarded by the applicant in carrying out the extensive excavation and regrading of the subject site. Mt . Olivet Cemetery's intake pipe for its pumphouse is located at an elevation of 225 feet. The finished grade of the pit is expected to be about 227 feet. The extensive grading will undoubtedly cause changes to the amount and quality of the ground .ater reaching the pump station. In order to assure the water rights claim, the applicant , subject to review by the Public Works Department , will have to provide as a storm water detention/retention system which meets as a minimum the following requirements : 1 ) a detention basin capable of holding the outflow to no more than the current level of 7. 3 cubic feet per second (cfs) , such system to minimally include a detention basin of 24,000 cubic feet with an additional holding capacity of 4 ,803 cubic feet to allow for sedimentation buildup; and 2) other filtering devices capable of maintaining the quality of the current flow. 6. The sedimentation must be periodically cleaned from the holding basin and this presents the more difficult situation. The license and special permit are for a projected period not to exceed four years, but sediment can be expected to extend beyond that period until the soils and reforestation effort have stabilized. Therefore, restrictive covenants will have to be filed providing for periodic cleaning of the sedimentation basin, and such cleaning shall be subject to review of the City of Renton. Further, the applicant and property owner shall sign a hold harmless agreement in favor of the city in the event the water rights claim of Mt. Olivet Cemetery is damaged or jeopardized. 7. While the exact nature of the lease, court action and ownership now tied up in an estate is unclear, it is the case that the property owner must have enjoyed some benefit by executing the lease, and, therefore, it is reasonable to require that the property owner be bound by certain of the necessary conditions of this approval . Further , without such assurance that rehabilitation, dedication and water rights claim protection can be satisfied, this special permit should not issue. 8. Section 4-2318(4) (B) requires that the property owner or authorized agent submit acceptable drainage releases from the downstream owner whenever drainage patterns are altered. The applicant will have to secure and submit such documentation as a condition of approval . SF 3-80 Page Ten DECISION: The special permit to allow excavation and grading on the subject property is approved subject to the following conditions : 1 . The hours of operation shall be confined to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 3:30 p.m. , Monday through Friday. 2. The construction of a storm water retention/detention system capable of maintaining a flow not to exceed 7.3 cubic feet per second and with the minimum water and sedimentation holding capacity as more fully described in the conclusions above. The system shall be subject to review and approval of the Public Works Department. The above system is the minimum necessary, and the Public Works Department may require a larger system if it so determines. 3. The submission and execution of restrictive covenants providing for perpetual maintenance of the holding pond with sedimentation clearing to occur upon request of the City of Renton. 4. The execution of a hold harmless agreement by the applicant and property owner in favor of the City of Renton in the event the retention/detention system fails of its purpose. 5. The hydroseeding of the subject site and reforestation and rehabilitation of the site cr portions thereof as soon as work in any portion has been completed subject to the approval of the Planning and Public Works Departments. 6. The pcsting of a bond in the amount of $114,000 to assure that rehabilitation can be effectively completed by the city, if necessary. 7. The pcsting of a bond in the amount of $2,000 to insure the cleaning of debris off the rcadway on a daily basis. 8. The dedication of those portions of property as the Planning and Public Works Departments determine is necessary to extend Edmonds Avenue N.E. in a southerly alignment starting from N.E. 3rd Street and extending to approximately 300 feet south of the subject property's property line where that property line would intersect with Edmonds Avenue N.E. , as extended. 9. The submission of a release from the downstream property owners as to the consequences of any change, diversion or interruption in the quantity or quality of the surface water reaching such downstream property. ORDERED THIS 3rd day of March, 1981 . Fred J. K man Land Use 14Aring Examiner TRANSt'iITTED THIS 3rd day of March, 1981 by Affidavit of Mailing to the parties of record : Chris Crumbaugh, P.O. Box 88050, Tukwila, WA 98188 Lt. Don Persson, Renton Police Department Ted Gathe, Atty. , Mt. Olvet Cemetery, e57 Central Bldg. , Seattle, WA 98104 Donald A. Hogan, Civil Engineer, 1703 Dexter Ave. N. , Seattle, WA 98109 James L. Colt , P.O. Box 547, Renton, WA 98057 Don Monaghan, Engineering Division, City of Renton Dick Causey, Puget Sound Power & Light Company, Puget Power Building, Bellevue, WA 98009 James Miller, GeoEngineers , Inc. , P.O. Box 6325, Bellevue, WA 98007 Don Braislin, Bank of California Center, 40th Floor, Seattle, WA 98164 Gary Norris , Traffic Engineer, City of Renton SP-C •8( Page Eleven TRANSMITTED THIS 3rd day of March, 1981 to the following: Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch Councilman Richard M. Stredicke Richard Houghton, Acting Public Works Director David Clemens, Acting Planning Director Michael Porter, Planning Commission Chairman Barbara Schellert , Planning Commissioner Ron Nelson, Building Official Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney ursuant to Tit e IV, Section 3015 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must Je filed in writing on or before March 17, 1981 . Any aggrieved person feeling that the Jecision of the Examiner is based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment , or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior heariig may make a written request for review by the Examiner within fourteen 14) days from the date of the Examiner' s decision. This request shall set forth the specific errors relied upon by such appellant , and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. 4n appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Section 3016, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk accompanying a filing fee of $25.00 and meeting Dther specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall , or same may be purchased at cost in said department. 1802Z-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE SECONC FLOOR OF CITY HALL, RENTON, WASHINGTON ON JULY 30, 1985 AT 9:00 A.M. TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING PETITIONS: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. Application for special permit for fill and grade to allow modification of Phase I granted (SP-019-84; 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material, file SP-048-85; located at the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. SJ=RVICE LINEN SUPPLY Application for conditional use permit to allow the expansion of a commercial laundry (light industrial use) in a B-1 zoned district, and to allow the required parking for said expansion to be located within 500 feet of the laundry building, file CU-039-85; located at 903 South 4th Street. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the Renton Building and Zoning Department. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS TO SAID PETITIONS ARE INVITED TO BE PRESENT AT THE PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 30, 1985, AT 9:00 A.M. TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS. PUBLISHED : July 19, 1985 Ronald G. Nelson Building and Zoning Director CERTIFICATION I, JEAN ETTE SAMEK-McKAGUE, HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THREE COPIES OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS WERE POSTED BY ME IN THREE CONSPICUOUS PLACES ON THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE AS PRESCRIBED BY LAW. ATTEST : Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing in jz\-)67Ui rJ on the 19th day of :uly, 1985. lLia ( OGs 2 SIGNED: r v 1803Z CITY OF RENTON LAND USE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JULY 30, 1985 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 A.M.: COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SECOND FLOOR, RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING The applications listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. Application for special permit for fill and grade to allow modification of Phase I granted (SP-019-84; 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material, file E P-048-85; located at the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. E ERVICE LINEN SUPPLY Application for conditional use permit to allow the expansion of a commercial laundry (light industrial use) in a B-1 zoned district, and to sallow the required parking for said expansion to be located within 500 feet of the laundry building, file CU-039-85; located at 903 South 4th Street. s 1817Z BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING JULY 30, 1985 APPLICANT: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FILE NUMBER: SP-048-85 A.SUMMARY & PURPOSE OF REQUEST: The applicant seeks approval of a special permit for fill and grade to allow modifications of Phase I granted under File SP-019-84 and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the subject site. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: Daniel E. Holms 2.Applicant: Gary Merlino Construction Co. 3. Location: Vicinity Map Attached)3401 N.E. 4th Street 4.Existing Zoning: G-1, General Use 5. Existing Zoning in the Area: G-1, General Use; R-3, Residential - Multiple Family; T, Trailer Park; and L-1, Light Industrial. 6.Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Public/Quasi-Public 7. Size of Property: 13.0 acres B.Access:Monroe Avenue N.E. 9. Land Use: The site is part of the existing Greenwood Cemetery and is currently being used for a gravel pit. 10. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Mortuary East: Greenbelt/Multiple Family South: King County District Court/ City of Renton Shops West: Undeveloped Property C.HISTORY/BACKGROUND: Action File Ordinance Date Annexation 2249 June 22, 1966 Special Permit Fill & Grade SP-051-80 July 11, 1980 Special Permit Fill & Grade SP-019-84 August 1, 1984 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: a. Water: Not applicable. b. Sewer: Not applicable. c. Storm Water Drainage: Percolates directly into soil which eventually goes into ground water to Cedar River. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. Transit: Not applicable. PRELIMINARY REPORT u THE HEARING EXAMINER GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO.: SP-048-85 JULY :!0, 1985 PAGE 2 4. Schools: Not applicable. 5. Recreation: Not applicable. E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4-704, General Use (G-1). 2. Section 4-732, Mining, Excavation and Grading. 3. Section 4-722(B), Special Permits. F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1.Northeast Renton Plan, City of Renton, Comprehensive Plan Compendium, January 1985, p. 55-60. 2. Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, Title 4, Chapter 23. G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1.The applicant, Gary Merlino Construction Co., is requesting a fill and grade permit to excavate a total of 280,000 cubic yards of material and replace it with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material over a five year period. The subject site is approximately 13 acres in the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery. The southwest corner was previously granted a special permit under file SP-019--84. However, since that original application, the excavators have changed. It has been determined that there is less material on-site than was originally anticipated. This permit application also includes the southeast corner which contains approximately 180,000 cubic yards of materials. The project is proposed in phases with the southwest portion of the site being Phase 1 and the southeast portion being Phase 2. Phase 1 will be completely excavated and refilled by August, 1988, while Phase 2 will be completed by August, 1990. Approximately 100,000 cubic yards of material has already been excavated from Phase 1 under the previous special permit. The Environmental Review Committee has issued a declaration of significance. The decision date was July 3, 1985, with publication on July 8, 1985. The appeal period expired on July 22, 1985, at 5:00 p.m. Under Section 4-2303(2) of the Mining and Grading Ordinance, a series of seven criteria are established to determine whether the excavating or filling operation is compatible with the existing future land uses. The following analysis demonstrates that the special permit should be granted if certain conditions are placed upon the proposal. a. SIZE AND LOCATION OF THE ACTIVITY: The 13 acre site with the accompanying excavation of approximately 280,000 cubic yards and fill of 380,000 cubic yards is not significant when considering the general excavation activities that have taken place in the area. Millions of cubic yards of material, primarily sand and gravel, have been excavated from this hillside which is a major resource base. It has been utilized in construction activities throughout the Puget Sound area. The site in relationship to adjacent uses does not appear to create any conflicts except along the eastern property line where it abuts an established multiple family residential complex and a mobile home park. To the north of the site is the existing Greenwood Memorial Cemetery with over 800 feet of lawn areas before buffering the nearest residential complex. To the south are industrial and public facilities including the city and county shops and the King County District Court facility. To the west is an undeveloped parcel that had been previously excavated and presently has a special permit to fill approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards. Only the interface along the eastern property line appears to be sensitive and will be discussed in details of noise and operation in the below comments. PRELIMINARY REPORT i u THE HEARING EXAMINER GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO.: SP-048-85 JULY 30, 1985 PAGE :3 b. TRAFFIC VOLUME AND PATTERNS: The title suggests two criterias. The first being volume of traffic and the second the actual pattern which can be associated both in time and place. In the addendum to the Environmental Checklist, the applicant has disclosed that Phase 1 excavation will generate approximately 30.3 truck trips per day while refilling will generate 27.8. The Phase 2 operation will generate 25 daily truck trips with refilling generating the same amount. The total number of truck trips is not significant when considering the total traffic volumes on the N.E. 3rd/4th Street corridor which exceeds 25,000 vehicles. The additional trips would only be adding less than a tenth of one percent to the total volume. Because these represent one-time trips, there have been no assessments for participation charges in the development of public streets or intersections. The actual participation charges have been assessed to the final development. The only issue dealing with volumes that arises is a shortening of the time period because of an off-site project demand. A good example would be the need to provide 200,000 yards of raw materials for the construction of an interstate freeway or the disposal of several hundred thousand yards of material from a building site. In that scenario, the time schedule is compacted and the results could be disasterious. Volumes could increase to 10 or 20 times what is presently anticipated. The traffic patterns are the other facet of the potential problem. The applicant has stated that they will utilize the N.E. 3rd Street/4th Street corridors between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and from 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. while utilizing the Monroe Avenue corridor between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. The City of Renton will be announcing within the next thirty days a bit proposal for the reconstruction of Monroe Avenue N.E. from N.E. 4th Street to N.E. 12th Street. This will either cause the delay or actual closure to truck traffic on Monroe Avenue N.E. for a period 6 to 8 months. ISSUE: Should truck traffic be diverted to a street under construction through residential neighborhoods between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.? The applicant's proposal seems slightly inconsistent when looking at the entire circulation pattern of the Northeast Quadrant of the City of Renton. The truck traffic would be diverted into residential areas of both single family and multiple family natures during the early morning rush hours. Even though there are controlled intersections, particularly critical intersections would include: (1) N.E. 12th Street and Monroe Avenue N.E.; (2) N.E. 10th Street and Monroe Avenue N.E.; and, (3) N.E. 7th Street and Monroe Avenue N.E. If N.E. 7th Street was utilized over to Edmonds, it would go through a single family area: utilizing the N.E. 10th Street it would go through more of a multiple family area; and the N.E. 12th Street intersection has a sight clearance problem which could result in potential traffic accidents. The Building and Zoning Department believes that residential streets should not be utilized for access and that the operational hours of 7-9 a.m. and 3-4 p.m. are not appropriate for the project proposal. In total, the Monroe Avenue N.E. route is not acceptable because of the impact upon residential areas. PRELIMINARY REPORT , THE HEARING EXAMINER GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO.: SP-048-85 JULY '_0, 1985 PAGE c. SCREENING, LANDSCAPING, FENCING, AND SETBACKS: The applicant has provided a thirty foot setback along the Monroe Avenue N.E. and a portion of N.E. 2nd Street adjacent to Phase 1 of the subject site. The 30 foot presently has some natural landscaping in it. An existing chain link fence surrounds the entire property. On approximately the east half of the southern property line along N.E. 2nd Street of Phase 1, the applicant is proposing utilization of chain link fence with slats and no landscaping to continue approximately 50 feet past the entrance to the City Shop site. The problem is that the Southlawn Mausoleum location precludes the placement of both an access roadway and landscaping. The Public Works Department and the Environmental Review Committee was concerned that no access be allowed on to N.E. 2nd Street, so the applicant is obtaining access from Monroe Avenue N.E. In Phase 2, the applicant is showing a 30 feet setback utilizing existing vegetation and chain link fence. The fencing seems appropriate because of constraints on the site. However, there is concern that if the 4-6 foot high Scotch Broom provides adequate buffering and landscaping to hide the operation of the site. ISSUE: To what degree should a mining and grading site be screened from adjacent uses? Or is it more important to control the methods of operation? The security of a site that could potentially be hazardous is critical and appropriate fencing and setbacks should be maintained. The issue of screening and landscaping is not only an issue of the present operation, but of the future use. In this case, the site will be utilized as a cemetery and it will provide open space. Creation of a 30 foot buffer is not necessary to screen the ultimate uses. A good comparison might be screening a construction site. Should the Columbia Center in downtown Seattle be screened by a 50 foot landscape screen or should the new 6th Avenue North Building in Renton be screened from the adjacent apartment complex. Both the construction activities and the mining and grading activities are intended to be short term. The are not the ultimate use of the ground and the intent of the Minind and Grading Ordinance is to provide specific rehabilitation and reuse plans. Therefore, the Building and Zoning Department believes that screening and landscaping become a greater concern when we are looking at a mining activity that will take more than 3 to 4 years in time. d. UNSIGHTLINESS, NOISE, AND DIRT The Environmental Review Committee has been specifically concerned about dirt upon the public streets and had required the paving of a 100 foot approach into the site for cleaning facilities. In addition, they have stated because of the storm water drainage system in this area utilizes dry wells, the streets cannot be washed, they must be swept and that a $5,000 operations bond shall be posted. This does not address the operations and dirt problems from the subject site as it relates to the adjacent residential uses. Both noise and dirt will be introduced into those areas along the pastern property line with the activities of Phase 2. The proposal, as submitted, violates the City's Noise Ordinance which prohibits the introduction of noises into residential areas after 10:00 p.m. Therefore, the approval should be conditioned upon limiting operating hours from 7-10 p.m. in addition to the daytime hours. The unsightliness and associated dirt that would be generated from the site could be partially affected by the introduction of a landscaped screen along the eastern property line. However, this will not eliminate all the dirt or noise from the adjacent residential areas. PRELIMINARY REPORT i u THE HEARING EXAMINER GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO.: SP-048-85 JULY : 0, 1985 PAGE i e. SURFACE WATER: The City of Renton is extremely concerned with this general area because it is part of the watershed for the City's water supply. The Public Works Department has noted that the fill material that is placed back into the site will have to be of a quality that does not create leachates or endanger the public wells. The applicant's plan, because they are digging a basin, shows that the refilling of the site will include a series of dry wells to allow percolation and aquifer recharge of the soil. The fill material will be a variety including clays, silts, but it does not include construction debris and is specifically not a sanitary landfill. f. LENGTH OF TIME THE APPLICATION OF THE EXISTING OPERATION HAS TO COMPLY WITH NONSAFETY PROVISIONS OF THIS ORDINANCE. The proposal does comply with the safety provisions and the specific requirements of the Mining and Grading Ordinance. This is not an enforcement action to correct an existing violation. g. USE OF SITE: The use of the site is another point of concern in the public hearing process. In this specific case, the site has been designated as a cemetery and shows upon official platting maps of the State. Cemetery plats are specifically exempt from City review. The City would review any proposals to modify mausoleums, columbariums, or mortuaries proposed to be placed upon the site. 4.The various City departments' comments have been included in the review of the above seven criteria. Specific concerns were related to the operation of the site and not the ultimate use. H. DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the above analysis, it is recommended that the special permit, file SP-048-85, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Filling or excavation cannot be accelerated to a point where more than 150 truck trips are generated per day. Hours of operation shall be limited from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. with the utilization of the N.E. 3rd/N.E. 4th Street corridor. (Use of Monroe Avenue N.E. shall be specifically prohibited.) The thirty (30) foot setback area adjacent to the eastern and southern property lines for Phase 2 shall be planted with three to five foot high evergreen trees in the fall of 1985. The fence on the southern property line shall be relocated to the true property line. One hundred (100) feet of paving from Monroe Avenue N.E. into the site shall be installed. E.Truck cleaning facilities shall be installed on the site. Street cleaning shall be limited to sweeping. No water can be used to wash down the streets. E.A $5,000 cash bond shall be posted for street cleaning. I r R•3 1 1 I : Bt..'' I 1 I R-3 I I s- I I l a„,..,.. , B 1 T m docpi,,,, .' II- 1 1 I Iw LHO)I J-.._' I 1L1. . . i• I I G RE ENwpOD LTEF?Y I 1R-3 G- 1 ! I R-3 G1-1A. A . , : i _. . ,,,,.... J: t=_ R-1 SV R—, 11,1:::,':ir."..:--..?„,..1,:l.:.. 1%. , ''.- .. I I 1 •11 '°an r j t O I - eq.: AZ' tili:,..St!•1 • r' rr e«trN : II\ „Iiu7,-, '! iI- j. „ kN, t4s.— V•7,/-'. . \ $ 6; '(37571:/•:.•. GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. GREENWOOD CEMETERY) SP-048-85 APPL I CANT GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO TOTAL AREA — 13.0 ACRES PRINCIPAL ACCESS MONROE AVENUE N.E. EXISTING ZONING G-1, GENERAL USE EXISTING USE CURRENTLY A GRAVEL PIT SITE PROPOSED USE CONTINUE MINING OPERATION AND UPON COMPLETION RESTORE THE SITEFOR FOR FUTURE ADDITIONAL GRAVESITES COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN PUBLIC/ QUASI-PUBLIC COMMENTS 4(7,),. 2 '- i7..1-4_t ' IN I ELEMENT i t Single Family 00000.1 1 Commercial 11111çi1 1 Low Dens'ity liI, ssie.:.........- Office / Office Pa: i t mom t. .,1:\) Multi-Family tS. Medium Density 00...0.0. owtp0-0.00. Public/Ouasi-Publ 0.0.00.. 1 High Density l ' 1 ' /Multi-Family ii. Light Industrial RecreationFA\ Heavy Industrial A 1 ..,;. .,..,„;-#. 7,..,..,t E:;••• •• Greenbelt...r fcc.... , ManufacturingPal,4. 1•...1:,..„:,....:-...,. , r:,.... AIM• T c••-e-,•••••icp..0•:,.-c.. • 4•:-.% -.-.) ,,,•:,•• Scale 1 ' 5 =20005 Aleillit- e.7,Y3',•;:::,•-•'`:''•e•‘:-.• r• . ".•:!'"--'i''''...:,.- 7•••• :-...--:....,-. 1 •;.: 1.-' s'•-''',, f,...--, 02..P-,..-...•,i-.-'4;7.-,‘ .1:,-).:-,,,,-' 7:',,;_•;__:--.•2,1:,-. ,.--,--cs,...c :,.. 7:!...,-... ..•• ;..*`,- 41,,,......_,„..,,,, i. .'C'''":'" 3:%.,'.-7• 0,. -j•.•,-.•.•,...•.'.., .1. 7 al V.:•r;•‘:;';, '... litir4;.00000000*t L Nz-_:,,, tlt$1400.009,00.00.000.0. L______._.%_,.. . fr..„'7,--•.1., r 1 0.0. vas,:i:/i,: la i lks, topel i 0' 4 i lair•11111111011111_,e•, 1• 11MOIL r a OC O.6.0.0 0• t 191'4 I I t ,RI In:k.,07.'.i !gr,pm, _c,12.1;411.-..-27.!"i .'• o°o°o°o°o'r . -:tic ... wiesi \„ 00110211 ,o, 00.... ...” I All 00000 Fr I IIIII Ililbull:all.:. i.i•i:.. ,,m:: Iog 1 000000 0.00000.•' 4; 6''" ' Imili 00000000 r4. i 9§1§:§WO. 10°00:0:0:0:0:;I I 9116bo. N. e...44 IIIIII 4'0ii 0.00.1111111111111111111U. a., 11. 0. 9"! .. 0.11 1111111Tli .11, o°o°Nobo°o°o°o°o° o oo•OE ct fre eik000.,INN'S g.000:et) 1: 11 i:•:•:.,• 4. T1 0 isI. :000:1 mik, ,..00. ..::::,::::.::.:::::.:,:.,,,„:„:„,:,:.,:.:.:,: .,- j 8111.1:1 ..::::::: i::::.:- ••••.... 4i.II VA n-. L.•• r 0 0 0 0 :: :.::::.:::::*::::::::, 1:: : . •••47.1.••••••; %, ;72i, i., iii :.,.:;.2::::::•::::i:I.' . . I PIO!la° gm' - -,„„...4- - t-. -•000000000• • ,.:::,..„ 1...,„; „,,,-- „.;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:.........,,,,,,, J........., 0.....0 . ..000.0.0000..00.00,. , givnitil Inn" :::::::::.::'. own - 0.0.......0.00.0000. 00.00,000...,0aucw, ,1111.1; . .,•i:::::i::::::::::::::*::::: :..CIvapa°, 9 0.0000%70% . 00.00000, ...c) 4 00„000.0-- • .:..H:•::..-. ---- . i:, : : ::i:]:::]::•. 000000000 • 0. ;,../,,, 70"''7°,-,°7g. °•,..:- - 000. Ht..,000Uo,000000 r o ...1 ..._0000 ,0000.. 00o. L.::. ..... t VIILI a o• .000 oo . ... ...:.:.. 0 i 1All .9V .o o• . ; : .•.•:::••:•::.Mysig/ 000•o o o.o..o.0c.00000 ,.:i .:1:::::::::.. H::;:::.: :- „0',,,,,c,j,,ke.":'rf,',. •;••:.1 :::::::::::•::::::::::: 71"-r-- '''' Ir.'-.c.;•i:...•Q.;;)',,,‘q• ':::•:•:.:•:.:•:•:::::: i•,, „ :,j.•,-:::"?',.;,i,'1,-,. 0,.,4..,•y.1;;;" -:•:.:•:•::::::::.:.:. E: 6.,,i-„`(1---- 7..1:ocrij.i>;,?.•,-• 1:,:',7).1.:',;;',,?%;.I1' •'•:, ••••:-:•::•:::::•:. cr.)9 .., , . J , 1 ri.7.I.c. ''•..... e,i.^''' '- :'c)::...'.. i•si,,)1.0'. a.*4 v.h.,. ••6•rjr;::,#.:' . • c•tj'e-• A 7-A 1'• r..- III• 7'0-7`•`'',(1. •,' if.. C'''Xi": : ..,;i_';:,.-.1./3`I'f.;i,.., NI __.32" .1 ilip•rs, .),.,?..'TL",•7,„1,--,',•:;_-'- rs, c.,-;11,..ay; ..- • ..,,(:,•,,1•:...'4, 4 •". ' •,` 7ey.vv.,kit, - e., .„,.,..;1.. Aiwilimi •IilaIcei,:if,c. f. ,..?. 111" .. s..- 4,., •-, . L1111111s).Y5Ii..4.' `'•'''L'I.i,,\'.s - Ly, _.4_ _____41.6r." r••• , .‘""e••• 3,.,. ,•:, •,-:,,,,,J...„ •si.t7... .•0 otNJ.,,3.!• 2:,-...,..!;:-, fi',.„;..`----- -.• Te'..,e- .6-. f.!,15f.-:. :_es. t,ri.,A4.. filliq >'.'D,ili;.*:3.-, i.:.2''4••:''?(- I,/..•'-''..! I 1•,,,c, ,,.,-,.,..;,•5`..( ,•:.:<., s !:''. ` 0,..:: ... r? , , t• ;•-... _.-.6 r`c,'-'... .ii.,.. i 7;:'.(f.-r:','5i•''''''V!7,01%;.•;.:".7 5)'• 17,3••• '-t),r,,-).,;-,.."',f>`;''.•,?• V4,r••Ae '..• S:C.,. . iCrl f.:;cftr.r ‘• .c 0-14"'''.--:.:'• e..-4,- °-.•:,Y.''?.-`0,'• .•;;f;.',.....2'..;-.C-4: v '-,*„'....,.'c.y.,`': ., 4 - - ., 4 . , Jo •,S.:<-4,,A.tiy.r.• . , .-4.3,:.':3. 0.. ...rl'.'.1,.‘f:'',,;-?:%'?.. 3 ,,.5C,;.'-i•/;14:; 5:,G?;r;;;;-t'.-1 ''4 NS‘'.. • i'i: ..,••• .. • •• *1 ',...4.-:%`.24, n=';''''''''.. r•'-5''':- .7.:;2'.1;:?.-..50-:`:.•;;' , ..?.. .t•',,'..7::;,•• ___ 0.•. P ..-.1,-;•••,...) s,-.; , ,..u.00..,-,,,t. f 6',"‘::snei i'V (4,?'.''''...••`.!is."” )-.'••b? .,:.,' T'c.1,-.),' ,•.)-'tly•,-,',!, ', 'a'" 3):O.,•,• AesTil .;1/4 . 4• ti cl(it;'.'-'‘`.';'‘',i t. •6 1 - ` d - cc.4.4.,.... •. ::•,.. . 7%: ' -, f; + ,..., 'c', 't•''. '-(3 '.V.'•..•••• S.t. *-'('ser.. ittg. C riF •••tikketki*t,, 4 10, .S1 I. I r 1„ 1,.••,„el.)'. •''•• C \ L'.1 A•;11,11:- \ 'I / 1 . 4 ---- Cr rS31.el Iir• . 4.• I-; Y"`=: • z cV LV 1 1,— •STRICT COURT N\•f JL 11..._:. r.71 j---------------- j. x..,..................., I I yI` I YTEYYY.WK.L.tTA_ l -T WRK\Ynrl fY.T -[[IfTW\CMAIFIfMt f\YCf lY I1 TYl\AK1A/10.frtTt\fll\MW\ (KAT\TO\! 1 11 - Y'lO.Oo• EHAI• 1 RCINVI\\u•YrY.'LCT corwnr\W E 1 Ifs1 —PNASE I LIMIT i 1 .r. PHASE 1 SEE'EXCAVATION AND GRADING PLAN' 1„=, iF• Y,;trIr- j Ea.cWnrna r_.rz II L e*,. i iZ ..` , --+--Efrnn000YGLEl,.. - .mr,yrOf uu5Y r.-:. I Fx r: PROJECT ENTRANCE I FOR BOTH PHASES 1&2)Lt• t . 30'SETBACKS--r5,0. e k 57 T{':-.ae ti' -% t'• i;?',T,2";_ t' U, s s . . FT f F-?lr. f ;."Fi,Q i rik *]`;ti,:'f 1%.yfi' i :fi'r%f :s• ` Yr;:i .„«fiM. ae f` 'spt , 4 ri , 3` I r rw: ZawTr sNOP FAC ILITIESAi., . "i `-".'iA rf ,,lr yM,3:1.: s' *adr t. r rz re.,, yF Je': . ...r `1id : Yu`i__—_ Ef.Cure...C...----.Ef.COM.CIMICYTAIMINIBI.E/\0Y Cf.C40.NM Ye•1mEA-/ MONROE AVE. N.E. i mamas.amm-to\owe.K•mew um.)WIIEY VIM.KAU roe M\momme a mom To M mom.vom modem amm.rr1010 z.a..._ M.A.'CGALE,INC. M.MAIM.PM PF-+:.S" 1 SITE PLAN Gary Merlino Construction Co. a W, KY SEATTLE. WASHINGTON GREENWOCC :IEMETERY GRAVEL PIT 4.-Aar RENTON,Vk ASHINGTON t w' I Ij . Iv AF,,701 4. 1t1 I 1 t I . I /YIS At/A y("+ g I I I i , •Imo/ tt Q t Iy t ItI.Q x yy m Ia. I t, t K:\.....4_,, i I/ `` m! l` C 1, ix. EwC.avnTi_ I I t 1 11 2 I Tq i d, 1 , Y - I I V' p ` ` t' bE 1 I I R e t I- I b I C 1 4.414L.., 1 1 1 v N=" ms.• PRA/NAM 7D FM CCMr7e7/Ne'O A/PlLPilrrf 4 4/ AST,AMMO E.CA orro• 20.4000 Co..YL' I,vO TO St l oE/rbe 7L. K.79CE YOREA./O A=/NNIND ACCIO y 1 6e.•or /o[ CE STbA!r/t.libriS- 4ZEA 7b AE /LESLEOco rD Plivewr a ar,W/ J•'--___ L------- 15_-_•---- ri Ea lE• OR^N CDrr/Lir3/ai P[OJEcr 1-,— y -- _,_. Gk i I I z-.CCLa/routs w srtccserrr.'tL vwaL AerA To br CUfD WET,/1. I at ZAamc.2.7.Eenla.L ILIIwASTtA4TLA'WfLL G.Its O.R'1fYASl'O cawrrxlr _'" --- --_ -- I I -Ca :e yyy SJT. EZ 3n.m{ 1` . t f. ., r 1 L TDP IJFEY/STJAK CLAY[AYL& f"1 e--I SECTADN A-A r e , - i Y M`/ 1 I t13/T! ' K.. 1. r are,c 2v7E../Au,sre 41.4 A......claw K uNEIT//OYLF.( G6 its ss:soco3.'.-, i q e:,.• C'Q tarot A - w.,w.rgrc/+r GG lAn, l P Bo. 2r50 le..n.! IOW., *dole R' . i. , r Qi rw., sKe •/OO)/r• A/C Ai.0 Ahy7 A*M/ > yt • a.° 1• P' 1- - %I 1rJ 1r, Zd ( 1_1 Acceszr Ei=D I'L>w. r/u. - .2, ny? t e tactw!a/wr.' On ti C2EFa/wOOo CBMi7GR1 1 i v to•• — y Z `, moo. rt r. p, e /r o. ' Le...,..CC vw t i C..n.- o .. E.G.v A ri L.tA/~ u Ga^c.vn Vri,L//7Y 1.I.41 s .. -. f/.S FT 7e.r x2' DelY nre+e• IA:. /aba Ioc:wv,M.../.IT.ar __-.- Es 2OA0 yL. fit.h ALF 1 i L1. v i 4,1 a 1 0 1 1 1 DEB. i.. T— 0r I 1 1 V i 1 1rI I Ii+ I h - 4_ 00, 1 ?,. 1.' (i) O. 1 —op , I i f4 4 y 6a,Es+ r,,,.•- 1 n\ I I I Y I e, !2Y I \ ® y0 I1 i V A A ;kW r.I. Li! 4, NA6F AEL/L — T - - S-e —, -- i I S/E'RAN cOe 46/IIf N nZ: DA./,:w6F 7v b. „r:wr p/dc cv. iX. -Q'SCcpae7 f1UCI jIIa r e..C..e4 F buT,.a- S.,tFFr L.I 1 o`T 76 LI;erEG;J F f°S ,.. te.ur /ca 4e•fnt._-• A,1..vrt. J E. 2 Nv -Cr u/Sr/ED P.Po/icF iicic.?w7t I.,Wwi/Y I 1_I I jX. PROFiaF I E000 aw M.4'Wok- /0 M•+. 'a /K 5 A,WA•73 AEPF/7[l7Gy SLarCr L7 rs/w.a tier WeLL-I.IrXTNeuS.lA •/V00 lra 0/C i.Cwfe*. I I.4- r- --- 1- iy.JM W.a57L.L71 I< A''vn' d"G^a 0 0.•.Neu-4.4 F4 Ya a+ _.+ ra 6Mi Ea f EST Ec.117.Gdi - Llc.'o.M,Fu LI+'X/r J moo,Ex/57,AG QA LA,cecC'' St.7"T/ae F,4a L'KCXr.. CPS/ASw may;,:—.. ,k4• C,.uvec. KFNI. ? 5! Pi.'. TLEo :.E[LS C55J9fD yY..v p Bo. Zea-oz.,'IAA.. 14J a_ . Gier n/iu i aeez.,vaOD CA. /ETERY EA'CAVAT/9N ANC C'Ao/UG I' 67Mr II I GREENWOOD CEMETERY MAINTENANCE SHOPS s i:•...,.1 ir. :K r t.,.Ki• K X..eGNAW HEREERIS 001 T.SAW qb EX.CHAIN-LINE FENCE I YPICAL1 11... I APPROX.PHASE 2 LIMIT I N 3..._ .- • ' Ea' Cx•RDw•i M TOP Y SLOPE ALONG TxE K[T LiL Ovix•rt cPEERT TORc •TPE coORr•.Prl P.Ral— _ THE COURT'APTS INTERNAL P.C.LINE<Tmuu. --. lt,.... .r• 521..• ii CEMETERY BOUNDARY- 4•1.---?"-----EAST LIMIT OF PHASE 1 I Ii I I Ea.GVAK MEPE 3 10•I xiG•iV rwN M[a.rOE M lL VL,N AWCERr CEK rLV, I 1 11 1 • VACANT LOT 1 E..INTERNAL CEMETERY ROAD., ME.i. PHASE 2 I SEE•EXCAVATION AND GRADING PLAN' MORE MADNESS!HALL rCONNECTTOMEx. CUR•Cvr•r THE EA! 1 IEDKa<NOxROC AVET 1 uxD cow PxATE I • I I I VACANT LOT I <c NiD[ a TER,NAIN AVNC[[ROAD TO FRY TM PVOriD[1.01.111....TTO T.PNAu E PIT i Is.' 1 c e•I 30'SETBACKS suet w r AEA TOO•m•LwaNI• 30•\ y I 1` Ea.•WII{A O IWItxEO[E•fDIATD M D[NFYDN•D YPOAT J —— I—— _— ', AL, I t PIgACT COt1LET•W 11jj// 1 —_— Ea.• xlCx SCOTCH••OON KONC WORM RIDE Or MCI GETOUT!MSL E rowT! I 1—yc ==N = rT+.r'Z^-_^r e"s—l'S—`^ r r poor.,SITE EERELUG U EXISTING•A•NED L.A.."(APEA IKTNEED rya An SIM COMM,T.TO I!'AI.AWRY rI•An FLCIOSOYS THEE!i!!'CPEN•PLUSENSTAMTED SHORE.KO I. EN.EVADE ACME*TAME PT!.II FO'-E!••$i moon.THAN rME[E.UN O/SLOPE DI1DCAD2.111,CEMETERY N.E.2ND ST. F.FAn . r -- — II'''' Ex.OVA!MERE IS••OD1 FIFE TAM AS Toe Ex.OWN IN MS EOA•ELNT CFNETEET i I i LEISURE ESTATES' III` I RENTON DISTRICT COURT CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.MAINTENANCE SHOPS PHASE 2 SITE PLAN 7 Gary Merino Construction Co. W, T••"' ^- N SEATTLE, WASHINGTON GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT A. RENTON WASHINGTON I . REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVITON : 7 t JCY APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS Ei NOT APPROVED se,"6„,d 56/14497„:441\1)%cie1-(48, frte740---c' c7"-1•4 -9-toe6( x-Ke 4.07, Aer7,e_ . DATE : 7/, ,g5— SIGNATURE OF DIREC' OR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 a2 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : F2t APPROVED IDAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED DATE: Ca — SIGNATUgOF DIR TOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVEAIVE REVISION 5/1982 F"rm 1R7 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : BL-D El APPROVED El APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS D NOT APPROVED Te uc kf S 44)(i D dU fi c[SG 0 5 Z S (-Lc fJ ,c)I yy.iz c U Ai dal ilk c d S 7 0 <J s DATE: SIGNATURE,OFy2RECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE r.,. iIILi, I, L1V1..1UIVi riAPPROVED RIi ROVED WITH CONDITIONS 0 NOT APPROVED IF. e KFIU_ 0441w1 i&& is CLeAit, D 12t ( wrr 04t Cbt cap., C 140 Ow c°'^.c. 0 se,244-c.$ colt. 1 a LS ,a't 4 l6 lr,( 7 1 Fc.u6Mcr- or- we“-- r`" 044. -! V 1416 e v . r a....... DATE ;__ -5 3NATIIRE OF D F _TOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : ry , it, i /, / t ,' / El APPROVED 0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS ri NOT APPROVED V 0 C C r) -,,-- -.{ (n' , a-- 1G JO G. / ,, , T• / 74. ,,c. 4/_ iii- , z4 • /- '2,_ ,:_,,_:,-- y-,_DATE : SIGNATURE CF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 n t. I, / 10, REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ; O4L , O4 s El APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED pr,reei- eX/Sti rtj dee'l Ste'' Ciro ir dtv-42.4 LIJ ON 1 C d i+ T-,s,1 ,rGsa¢5 r47)oactv Solis t n3 Lah LL tylow--) DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTO OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVIEWING PI/APPROVED DAPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED r 1P/23;,/t/421-5--40'DATE : SIG ATURE )F DIRE TIR O'IAUTaRIZED REPRESE TIVE REVISION 5/1982 REVIEWING ])EPARTMENT/DIVISION :/ TTAPPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS I NOT APPROVED L.1.25f--reW-‘:( 7 DATE : 61-7D SIGNATURE CF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 0759NqIII CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST NO.: ECF-072-85 APPLICATION NO(s).: SP-048-85 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for special permit for fill and grade to allow modification of Phase I granted SP-019-85: 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) and to allow excavation of 180.000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material. PROPONENT: Gary Merlino Construction Co. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Located at the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 235-2550 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination in writing to King County Superior Court no later than July 22, 1985. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. DATE OF DECISION: July 3, 1985 PUBLICATION DATE: July 8, 1985 V/ Ronald G. Nelson a y . S r nger Building and Zoning Director Policy Dev 1 pment ector Ri hard C. Houghton U Public Works Director OF RA,4 t$ © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR Z o 9 co MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0, 91TED SEPSti P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MEMORANDUM MAYOR DATE: July 3, 1985 TO: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner FROM: Environmental Review Committee % SUBJECT: Gary Merlino Construction/ECF-072-85/SP-048-85 Recommended Conditions The Environmental Review Committee under their substantive authority Section 4-2822(D) ) recommends to the decision-maker, the Hearing Examiner, that the special permit for fill and grade should be issued subject to the following conditions: 1 . The fence on the south should be relocated to the true property line. 2. There shall be 100 feet of paving at the entrance to the site on private property for dust and mud control . 3. Truck cleaning facilities shall be installed on site. 4. No water shall be used in street cleaning. The streets shall be swept only. 5. A $5,000 cash street cleaning bond shall be posted. Under Section 4-2822(D) , the decision-maker must accept these conditions as binding upon his ultimate decision unless he identifies in writing a substantial error in fact or conclusion by the Environmental Review Committee. The decision-maker then has the option of asking the Environmental Review Committee for reconsideration or revising the recommended conditions. RENT BUILDING & ZONING DEP, WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATIOI, NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TI1 LE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCFIPTION OF PROJECT : APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MO[ IFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N, E. 4th_ STREET. TO : n PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 ENGINEERING DIVISION n 1RAFFIC ENG, DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION I] FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT n POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICI' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ri OTHER; COMMENTS OF: SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 PM, ON JUNE 25, 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : FrAPPROvED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED l y f DATE : L 2 3 f ,J SIG ATURE i)F DIRE TOR O'; AUT ,iRIZED REPRESE TIVE REVISION 5/1982 RENT I BUILDING & ZONING DEP, MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT T] TLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARD`_; OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY Al 3401 N. E. 4th STREET. TO : n P• UBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 n ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG , DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION n F• IRE PREVENTION BUREAU n P• ARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT n BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT n POLICE DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT n OTHER COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P ,M, ON JUNE 25, 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : APPROVED n APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED E--e ,'" GU i; DATE : SIGNATURE CF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 Form 182 ti RENT I BUILDING & ZONING DEP, WENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT T: TLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DES(:RIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARD') OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY A - 3401 N. E. 4th STREET. TO : PUBL] C WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 El ENGINEERING DIVISION Ei TRAFFIC ENG, DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : ri UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARK: & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILIING & ZONING DEPARTMENT POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT El OTHERS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON JUNE 25. 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : y. ? I L` j. 4-1 E `'i- n APPRCVED 9PPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NleT APPROVED 65 v/ O CI-2-4 DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RENT BUILDING & ZONING DEP/ 'MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATICN NOBS) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY A- 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG, DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION El FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARK: & RECREATION DEPARTMENT I] BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT n POLI( E DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ROTHEFS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P M, ON JUNE 25. 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Poi?4C. LUG116S APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS n NOT APPROVED partp:4 „,„4,t,„ 5eu-e-v- Oro S IA/ difr°24'Ll-L I tet,Jed S a 1 46920 S,(+ T=s} r's t, ralo r.ce 5 fl i tsysaai nuec1TAJ0 J L ah DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTO OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/19 RENT I BUILDING & ZONING DEP, FMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET CITY OF RENTON ECF - 072 - 85 JUN 17 1985 APPLICATIO J NOBS) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) POLICY urvtL!)r111PNT !IPPT PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.D. 4th STREET. TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 l ] ENGINEERING DIVISION 11TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : I ] UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU l ] PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT I ! POLICE DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I ! OTHERS : COMMENTS CR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING , PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON JUNE 25, 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : F1cc( Oel/K/OP/YIENT— FiAPPRCVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS I ] NOT APPROVED e~.-e s'Zoi -gA-110/Aipov,;d.,PA -dte_._ 4 ret-(-e 44. S • DATE : SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE REVISION 5/1982 RENT I BUILDING & ZONING DEP, FMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATIO4 NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT : APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N. E. 4th STREET. TO : PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 ENGINEERING DIVISION r-] TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT r-] BUILEING & ZONING DEPARTMENT F-1 POLICE DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT n OTHEFS : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P . M. ON JUNE 25, 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : 12/2 6- L2 APPROVED 0 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS F-] NOT APPROVED DATE : r S( SIGNATUf2tNF DIR TOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE L/ REVISION 5/1982 RENT BUILDING & ZONING DEP, MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TI FLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT : APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MO)IFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N. E. 4th STREET. TO : n PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 Ell ENGINEERING DIVISION ri TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : n UTILITIES ENG , DIVISION n FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU n PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT n BUILBING & ZONING DEPARTMENT n POLICE DEPARTMENT El POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1OTHES : COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P ,M, ON JUNE 25. 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : r> L U APPROVED 111 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS El NOT APPROVED r- Te U. ‘S D OlJ&I- S 20•1-JGS CCc d 4T o AC) AR-= e N 4/9i41 J , DAT E : Z yePr- T SIGNATURE DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ci REVISION 5/1982 RENT( BUILDING & ZONING DEPA MENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(S) : SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERM1IT) PROPONENT : GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE :GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCR _PTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS ( F MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION : _ LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT :I401 N. E. 4th STREET. TO : LIII PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SCHEDULED ERC DATE : 6/26/85 0 ENGINEERING DIVISION n TRAFFIC ENG. DIVISION SCHEDULED HEARING DATE : LII U -ILITIES ENG . DIVISION r-] FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU r-] PARKS RECREATION DEPARTMENT ri BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT F-] POLICE DEPARTMENT n POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OTHERS COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING . PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M ON JUNE 25. 1985 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : FIAPPROVID I ' APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS I'' NOT APPROVED IF 30I u. NefA16n/At_ •S C t.eoN Diet ( w,-,7 of r cat; aele'S . C iJn 6,44 co,n.c. l"M'svte,rL S erC. 4/1.&I l6 IM Ta& lNFu.474..c d` wt - P'tc.' 64441"9 C 7 - eflY . c oat i vc. • AL_ 01.01154,44 wwt. 44- (JAW fictrj DATE : SIGNATIURE OF D 'F .TOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF RA,44 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT gyp' RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR z will ! `a: o 0 ' a MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09gT D SEPjc_k0 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH M,\YOR July 18 1985 Gary M3rlino Construction Co. 9125 10th Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108 Re: Application for fill and grade permit at Greenwood Memorial Cemetery, file SP-048-85; located at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. Dear Sirs: The City of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentioned application on June 17, 1985. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner has been scheduled for July 30, 1985. The public hearing commences at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The apc licant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. Sincere,y, Rogert Blaylo cklock Zoning ,administrator RJB:JMM:cl 1815Z OF RA BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENTC74.1$7_ z RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTORz 0 ammo "i MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 @ 235-2540 CO 0 SEPjE O P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH M WOR July 1E, 1985 Daniel E. Holms 3401 N.E. 4th Street Renton, WA 98056 Re: Application for fill and grade permit at Greenwood Memorial Cemetery, file 3P-048-85; located at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. Dear N r. Holms: The C ty of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentio led application on June 17, 1985. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner has been scheduled for July 30, 1985. The public hearing commeices at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any quE stions, please call the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. Sincerely, L/1,: r __ Roger .1. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:JNIM:c1 1815Z-5 OF Ii'4 A A iv f. BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT Z o RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR p ` ""` " MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 9,0 co' 09gTF0 3EPI0° BARBARA (. SHINPOCH M<YOR July 18, 1985 David L. Halinen 9125 10:h Avenue South Seattle, WA 98108 Re: Application for fill and grade permit at Greenwood Memorial Cemetery, file E P-048-85; located at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. Dear MI'. Halinen: The Ci:y of Renton Building and Zoning Department formally accepted the above mentiored application on June 17, 1985. A public hearing before the City of Renton Land Use HE aring Examiner has been scheduled for July 30, 1985. The public hearing commences at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you before the hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Building and Zoning Department at 235-2550. Sincerely, Tei:V.le CT-ex/ ..to.rile._ Roger J. Blaylock Zoning ,\dministrator RJB:JMv1:cl 1815Z 762-9125 GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. General Confracfing- 9125 - 10th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 July 15, 1985 fin,( f.O HNTO°l PIERCityofRentonT Building and Zoning Department ut 1 6 1285200MillAve. S. Renton, Washington 98055 BVALDJAvG,?, Attn: Mr. Roger Blaylock Re: SP-048-85 (Greenwood Cemetery Gravel Pit) Dear Mr. Blaylock: Gary Merlino Construction Co. hereby amends its special permit application as to requested hauling hours to and from the pit. The previously submitted project description proposed hauling hours between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition to those proposed hours, we now also request evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Such evening hours were authorized by the Land Use Hearing Examiner for the currently operating Phase I portion of the project under SP-019-84. These additional hauling hours are being requested because we have recently been called upon to supply sand/gravel material during the evening to contractors working on the Interstate 405 expansion as well as on other projects. We expect such requests for material supply during the evening to continue during the course of the project. Sincerely, GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. David L alkinen, P.E. Engineer cc: Mr. Jerry Lind City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 762-9125 4 GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. General Contracting- 9125 - 10th Avenue South Seattle, Washington 98108 July 15, 1985 CITY OF!INTC': o +` f fl ''' 12, City of Renton 11 J Building and Zoning Department JUL 161985 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, Washington 98055 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Attn: Mr. Roger Blaylock Re: SP-048-85 (Greenwood Cemetery Gravel Pit) Dear Mr. Blaylock: Gary Merlino Construction Co. hereby amends its special permit application as to requested hauling hours to and from the pit. The previously submitted project description proposed hauling hours between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. In addition to those proposed hours, we now also request evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Such evening hours were authorized by the Land Use Hearing Examiner for the currently operating Phase I portion of the project under SP-019-84. These additional hauling hours are being requested because we have recently been called upon to supply sand/gravel material during the evening to contractors working on the Interstate 405 expansion as well as on other projects. We expect such requests for material supply during the evening to continue during the course of the project. Sincerely, GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. c a c 4--4 16/1L1 fit, David L. alinen, P.E. I Engineer y/Cc: Mr. Jerry Lind City of Renton Building and Zoning Department OF RF A c; 6 0 °.z.c3TicE09q 094T fO SEP T „ c. City of Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner will hold a PUBLIC HEAR11110 in CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS , CITY HALL ON JULY 30. 1985 BEGINNING AT 9:00 A.M. P.M. CONCERNING: SP-048-85 REZONE From To 3 X ' SPECIAL / CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT To FILL &SRADEIIA THELLELECAVAILQUE18U09PHASE CL YDS, FO PHASE II, & FILL TIRO SITES WITH APPROX, 380,000 CU, YDS, SITE APPR VAL I ( SHORT PLAT/SUBDIVISION of Lots Li PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE FROM GENERAL LOCATION AND/OR ADDRESS: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N,E, 4TH STREET, LEGAL DESCRIPTION ON FILE IN THE RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT. ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION SIGNIFICANT gi NON-SIGNIFICANT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CALL THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING &ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 THIS NOTICE NOT TO BE REMOVED WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION 11100759N dB CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE ENVIRDNMENTAL CHECKLIST NO.: ECF-072-85 APPLICATION NO(s).: SP-048-85 DESCF IPTION OF PROPOSAL: Application for special permit for fill and grade to allow modification of Phase I granted SP-019-85: 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material. PROPONENT: Gary Merlino Construction Co. LOCA1 ION OF PROPOSAL: Located at the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. LEAD ,AGENCY: City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This inl ormation is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS Responsible Official: Environmental Review Committee City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055 Phone: 235-2550 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination in writing to King County Superior Court no later than July 22, 1985. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact City of Renton, Building and Zoning Department to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. DATE OF DECISION: July 3, 1985 PUBLICATION DATE: July 8, 1985 7j illl I 111 Ronald G. Nelson La y . S nger Building and Zoning Director Policy Devt 'Foment erector Ri hard C. Houghton C Public Works Director OF R 4. 0 BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 09 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0, 9gT D SEP E P BARBARA Y, SHINPOCH ME M O R A N DU M MAYOR DATE: July 3, 1985 TO: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner FROM: Environmental Review Committee SUBJECT: Gary Merlino Construction/ECF-072-85/SP-048-85 Recommended Conditions The Environmental Review Committee under their substantive authority Section 4-2822(D) ) recommends to the decision-maker, the Hearing Examiner, that the special permit for fill and grade should be issued subject to the following conditions: 1 . The fence on the south should be relocated to the true property line. 2. There shall be 100 feet of paving at the entrance to the site on private property for dust and mud control . 3. Truck cleaning facilities shall be installed on site. 4. No water shall be used in street cleaning. The streets shall be swept only. 5. A $5,000 cash street cleaning bond shall be posted. Under Section 4-2822(D) , the decision-maker must accept these conditions as binding upon his ultimate decision unless he identifies in writing a substantial error in fact or conclusion by the Environmental Review Committee. The decision-maker then has the option of asking the Environmental Review Committee for reconsideration or revising the recommended conditions. 0758N NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The EnvLronmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a declaration of non-significance for the following projects: CITY OF RENTON, PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT (ECF-073-85) Panther Creek Mosquito Abatement - The subject project proposes aerial treatment of up to sixty-five acres of wetlands for the purpose of mosquito abatement; located east of the Valley Freeway (SR-167) and west of Talbot Hill, and in between I-405 to the north and S.W. 43rd Street to the south in an area known as the Panther Creek Wetlands. CITY OF RENTON, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ECF-074-85) Union Avenue N.E. Resurfacing - The subject project proposes approximately 4,000 lineal feet of roadway improvements including installing curbs, gutters, sidewalks, storm sewers, and widening from two li nes to 44 feet curb to curb; located along Union Avenue N.E. from N.E. S Jnset Boulevard to N.E. 25th Street. G ARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. (ECF-072-85) pplication for special permit for fill and grade to allow modification of Phase I granted (SP-019-84; 100,000 cubic yards left to be excavated) and to allow excavation of 180,000 cubic yards of material for Phase II and to refill the two sites with approximately 380,000 cubic yards of material, file SP-048-85; located at the southwest and southeast corners of Greenwood Memorial Cemetery at 3401 N.E. 4th Street. SERVICE LINEN SUPPLY (ECF-061-85) pplication for conditional use permit to allow the expansion of a commercial laundry (light industrial use) in a B-1 zoned district, and to allow the required parking for said expansion to be located within 500 feet of the laundry building, file CU-039-85; located at 903 South 4th Street. HOLVICK, deREGT, KOERING (ECF-066-85) WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER - Phase 3. Application for site plan approval to allow the construction of four, one-story tilt-up concrete and class storefront buildings totalling 85,200 square feet for office and warehouse use on a 6.5 acre site, file SA-044-85; located on the east side cf Powell Avenue S.W. at the 550-600 block. HOLVICK deREGT, KOERING (ECF-067-85) WASHINGTON TECHNICAL CENTER - Phase 2B. Application for site clan approval to allow the construction of a one, two-story tilt-up concrete building and two, one-story tilt-up concrete buildings totalling 0,300 square feet for office and warehouse use file SA-045-85; located on the south side of S.W. 7th Street at the 1100-1200 block. NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION APPLI 3ATION NO. SP-048-85, ECF-072-85 PROPOSED ACTION APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADF TO ALl MODIFICATION OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CU, YDS, OF MAT`RIAL FOR PHASE II AND TO REFILL THE TWO SITES WITH APPROX, 380,000 CU, YDS, (SP-04E GENIERAL LOCATION AND DR ADDRESS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4TH ST. POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE E E.R.C. HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION EJDOES DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENV IRONMENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DWELL YIWILL NOT BE REQUIRED. AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH E ENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., JULY22, 19665 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION JVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW T REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Mt SSG AJ DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18. 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180.000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: parte4;(1 exisli'rt., de"! 5e4A-e-see C,rOSS fltiA/ 014‘144-44-i% sSN 1 C' zo d,( - 4- 4 -- T-44 cc.,s..t, r vl O ue' Sc tiS ram( t e • cleptweci 1 Z ah RECOMMENDATION: n DNS 1 MITIGATED DNS 1 EIS REVIEWED BY:4d011 60 / TITLE• DATE: FORM #14 CITY OF RENTON JVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW T JUN 17 Ti 85 POLICY DFVELOPMFNT nFPT. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: l t L Y `DF.=(1&(.n-60MF tir DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18, 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 _ 85 APPLIC/ TION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJEC1 TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF (iESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALL041 MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,)00 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATI(N: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MFMOUAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AFEA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) Fir 3) Vater 4) Flants 5) F nimals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 4;t` 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Fousing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare l// 12) Fecreation 13) Fistoric and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation Ofvf 15) Fublic Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: Z Ua49 f ) I14j 447-at-e- le,bee,4 if 4/ I.41 levej(am otedeV A rk4 7SvRECOMME'DATION: El DNS MITIGATED DNSL c I EIS REVIEWED BY: c Ge/OCA.eSC))'J TITLE: X5.5'154.,://(Yez4-1At,-*-- DATE: c>—c FORM #14 AVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW T REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: [i TIL i .1" /c` S DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18. 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ILLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180. 000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATI)N: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MFM( RIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE A2EA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) Air 3) Water 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) 'ublic Services 16) Jtilities COMMENTS: 111 110 . • ruAy/ 0- citu+. satx, 0,1 01?)-- A c 76u, A o. raistel fidic.44:41/3 saki4 he re_ 4,1, er_41,4ptt.)%iti' 1,sede.„ aly cm*0.4 -ezitote,444‘,ofvss-le.-5 tzylko (314c., 19*:"—) RECOMMENDATION: DNS MITIGATED DNS 1 1 EIS REVIENED BY: TITLE: Or/L/7"y ,EN /i DATE: T - I FC FORM #14 at C• IINVIRONMENTALCHECKLISTREVIEWET i Rtr.:n f t l i?1 prev;_•:r r-_u i. MCA :fv/11u REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: F- I . DATE CIRCULATED: JUJLF 18. 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 _ 85 UN T $ 7 9E7 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJEC- TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATII)N: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Larth 2) Air 3) ' ater 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) 3ublic Services V 16) Jtilities COMMENTS: RECOMlENDATION: DNS MITIGATED DNS EIS REVIEWED BY: TITLE: (4j i DATE:a v,-j° - r- FORM ##14 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Vc` L. C L DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18, 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 - 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJEC1 TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF (DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO A_LOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATII]N: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MFMCRIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) :Earth 2) Air 3) ,Hater 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: RECOIMIENDATION: r<r DNS 1 1 MITIGATED DNS 1 I EIS REVIEWED BY:c 7t1).-'e-r/Z 7 DATE: /6--/ FORM ##14 1VIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW :T REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: L__Aj C.- DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18, 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 0722 _ 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJEC1 TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF [!ESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,)00 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MFMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) hir 3) Dater 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) Public Services 16) Jtilities COMMENTS: RECO4tENDATION: 7 171 DNS MITIGATED DNS EIS VIEWED BY: TITLE:RE DATE:C2C FORM #14 AVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW :T REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Pa le v S DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18. 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 _ 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJEC1 TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF LESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO ALLOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180,)00 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) lair 3) hater 4) Plants 5) Animals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Lnvironmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Housing 10) Aesthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Recreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) transportation 15) Public Services 16) Jtilities COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: E DNS MITIGATED DNS EIS REVIEWED BY: 11419..totAill TITLE: f kDATE: jS FORM #14 AVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW anLLT REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: t faA c F ! DATE CIRCULATED: JUNE 18. 1985 COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 25, 1985 ECF - 072 _ 85 APPLICATION NO(s). SP-048-85 (SPECIAL PERMIT) PROPONENT:GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PROJECT TITLE: GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT FOR FILL AND GRADE PERMIT TO Al LOW MODIFICATIONS OF PHASE I GRANTED (SP-019-84) AND TO ALLOW EXCAVATION OF 180.000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FOR PHASE II AND REFILL OF SAID SITE. LOCATION: LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE GREENWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY AT 3401 N.E. 4th STREET. SITE AREA: 13.0 ACRES BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A IMPACT REVIEW ON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS ADEQUATE INADEQUATE 1) Earth 2) Pir 3) hater 4) Flants, 5) Pnimals 6) Energy and Natural Resources 7) Environmental Health 8) Land and Shoreline Use 9) Fousing 10) esthetics 11) Light and Glare 12) Fecreation 13) Historic and Cultural Preservation 14) Transportation 15) rublic Services 16) Utilities COMMENTS: Le-- 4 clae_- 01,_, v1 roe , ap LL RECOMMENDATION: DNS MITIGATED DNS EIS REVIEWED BY: y e,_, err. z v TITLE: DATE: S' / \c-' FORM #14 Y 0 ITY OF RENT( FILE NO(S): .10__ 0 i-IP-8,S E; 8 ':BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT CF- 0 I•) -8 , MASTER APPLICATION NOTE TO APPLICANT: Since this is a comprehensive application form, only those items related to your specific type of application(s) are to be completed. Please print or type. Attoch additional sheets if necessary.) APPLICANT I I TYPE OF APPLICATION NAME FEES Gary Merlino Construction Co. a REZONE*(FROM TO ADDRESS 9125 10th Avenue South SPECIAL PERMIT* CITY ZIP TEMPORARY PERMIT* Seattle, WA 98108 D CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT* TELEPHONE 1 1 SITE PLAN APPROVAL n SPECIAL PERMIT FOR GRADE AND FILL del..762-9125 No. of Cubic Yards: 280,000 1i VARIANCE* CONTACT PERSON From Section: NAME Justification Required David L. Halinen ADDRESS SUUBDDIVISIONS: 1912510thAvenueSouthI 1 SHORT PLAT CITY ZIP E] TENTATIVE PLAT Seattle, WA 98108 ED PRELIMINARY PLAT TELEPHONE Q FINAL PLAT 762-9125 WAIVER Justification Required) OWNER NO. OF LOTS: NAME PLAT NAME: Daniel E. Holms ADDRESS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: 3401 N.E. 4th 0 PRELIMINARY CITY ZIP a FINAL Renton, WA 98056 P.U.D. NAME: TELEPHONE 255-1511 I 1 Residential 0 Industrial 0 Commercial ED Mixed L O C A T I O N MOBILE HOME PARKS: PROPERTY ADDRESS 3401 T.E. 4th 0 TENTATIVE EXISTING USE PRESENT ZONING O PRELIMINARY FINAL Cemetery Cemetery PROPOSED USE PARK NAME: Removal of sand and gravel from currently NUMBER OF SPACES: undeveloped portions of the cemetery. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SQ. FT. ACRES pT AREA: TOTAL FEES IV 568,000 13.0 CITE u v i OE: RENTON STAFF USE ONLY -- ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSING DA j• I• " 114 O[ U ` M'APPLICATION RECEIVED BY: JUN 17 1985 APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE; EDAccepted 0 Incomplete Notification Sent On By: GUILDiNG/ZONING DEPT. Initials) DATE ROUTED ADDITIONAL MATERIAL RECEIVED BY: 1/( 9/85 APPLICATION DETERMINED TO BE: Accepted QIncomplete Notification Sent On By: Initials) ROUTED TO: al Building EM Design Eng. Fire Parks l 3 Police Policy Dev. Traffic Eng.Utilities Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet). Portions of Tracts A, B, C, D, H, and I of the Plat of Greenwood Cemetery, according to the plat thereof recorded in Volume 22 of Plats, page 35, records of King County, Washington. AFFIDAVIT Gary M. Merlino being duly sworn, declare that I am authorized representative to act for the property owner,Downer of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS 17th DAY OF June i 19 85 . NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON,RESIDING AT Na' • - a - ve of Notary Public)Signature of Owner) 6/c 7Z//- , 9125 10th Ave. S. Address) CI&W/Address) Seattle. WA 98108 City) State) (Zip) 762-9125 Telephone) Acceptance of this application and required filing fee does not constitute a complete application. Plans and other materials required to constitute a complete application are listed in the "Application Procedure." Form #174 CITY or RENTTO,N II 11) APPLICATION OF JUN 17 1985 GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT FOR BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. THE GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT Project Description and Justification Description This special permit is being sought to permit the removal of sand and gravel from the southwest and southeast corners of the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery. Upon removal of these materials, the site will then be refilled with excess soils and debris generated by Renton-area construction projects. Greenwood Memorial Cemetery then intends to develop the refilled areas for cemetery use. The excavation and refilling proposed at the southwest corner of the cemetery is defined in this application as Phase I. (See the Site Plan for Phase 1.) Removal of sand and gravel in a portion of proposed Phase I has commenced under Special Permit SP-019-84. Under that special permit, the Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner authorized removal of 200,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel in the south portion of proposed Phase I. On the grading plan included in the record for SP-019-84, the area from which the 200,000 cubic yards was to be removed was broadly delineated and was noted as "Phase I" as well. Phase I proposed herein encompasses a larger area than that "Phase I" of SP-019-84. However, because the removal of material to date has revealed that the sand and gravel deposit is shallower than anticipated when SP-019-84 was applied for (a thick clay layer underlies the sand and gravel at about elevation 317) , the entire volume of sand and gravel in now-proposed Phase I is still only 200,000 cubic yards, including the 100,000 cubic yards which will have been removed pursuant to SP-019-84 by September 1, 1985. The applicant requests that this special permit as it relates to Phase I supercede SP-019-84. The excavation and refilling proposed at the southeast corner of the cemetery is defined in this application as Phase II. (See the Site Plan for Phase 2.) When the special permit application for SP-019-84 was submitted to the City, an Excavation and Grading Plan for this area, as well as for the southwest area, was included with the application. As that plan for this southeast corner noted, a volume of 360,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel was then believed to be available there. However, a test hole dug in the existing small excavation in the Phase II area has revealed that sand and gravel only exists down to the same elevation as that within Phase I. (Clay exists below about elevation 317.) Because the depth of sand and gravel is shallower in the southeast corner than originally anticipated, the volume of sand and gravel now anticipated to be available for removal in Phase II is 180,000 cubic yards. Hauling hours from and to the pit are proposed to be 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. This compares to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. Monday through Friday permitted under SP-019-84. According to Mr. Gary Norris, P.E. , City of Renton Traffic Engineer, the severe traffic congestion on Cemetery Hill Road N.E. 3rd St./N.E. 4th St.) west of Monroe Avenue, especially the congestion at the bottom of the hill at this road's intersection with Sunset Boulevard, justifies a hauling restriction on this road during the early morning and late afternoon peak hours. The Land Use Hearing Examiner, in his SP-019-84 Report and Decision of August 1, 1984, based his decision to deny morning hauling before 9:00 a.m. and afternoon hauling after 3:00 p.m. upon this Cemetery Hill Road congestion problem. (See Conclusion 3 of the Examiners Report and Decision.) However, in my (the proponent David Halinen's) meeting with Mr. Norris at his office on June 3, 1985, he indicated that a hauling restriction directed only at the use of Cemetery Hill Road would be appropriate. He said 1) that it would be acceptable to restrict trucks travelling to and from the site on Cemetery Hill Road west of Monroe Ave. N.E. to the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. , and 2) that outside of those hours (i.e. between the proposed 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. hours) trucks would be limited to using Monroe Ave. N.E. north of N.E. 4th to travel between the site and I-405. Specific features of the proposal including access, setbacks, screening, and slopes are depicted on the Site Plans and Excavation and Grading Plans. Information relating to project impacts is contained in the Environmental Checklist. Justification The subject areas of the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery contain valuable deposits of sand and gravel. This sand and gravel logically should be removed and the site refilled prior to development of additional gravesites. The proposal would accomplish this. An existing commercial demand for the sand and gravel is demonstrated by the fact that at current sales rates, 100,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel will have been sold by September 1, 1985 for the proposed Phase I site pursuant to SP-019-84. In addition to the many private and municipal con- struction projects in the Renton area that call for such sand and gravel, the Washington State Department of Transportation anticipates that additional phases of the Interstate 405 High Occupancy Vehicle Lane project will be constructed during the next couple of years,* creating additional need for such sand and gravel. L c' June 14, 1985 Proponent: David L Halinen, .E. Date Gary Merlino Construction Co. According to Mr. George Leary, Construction Administrator for Washington State Department of Transportation District 1, during a June 14th telephone conversation with proponent David Halinen. 2 of 2 CITY OF RnEN TTON1O -Rz1 iqr .1/' r JUN 17 1985 U ECF: c/= 0 - 1 City of RentonLU:s ° -° c/'- s , z BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. T., Gomm ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST09 gTFD SEP1E1° Purpose of Checklist: Tne State Environmental. Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43,21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisioftc. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for allproposals with prooable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from yolir proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best descript on you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not appl'." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. S)me questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmar< designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. Tie checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them o) er a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional informal ion that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency I o which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide addition 31 information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impacts. Use of C hecklist for Nonproject Proposals: (Please Type or Print Legibly) Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answerej "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPR(JJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should b: read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Greenwood Cemetery Gravel Pit 2. N ame of applicant: GARY MERLINO CONSTRUCTION CO. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 9125 10th Ave. S. Seattle, WA 98108 Phone: 762-9125 Contact Person: David L. Halinen (same address & phone no.) 4.Date checklist prepared: June 14, 1985 5. A gency requesting checklist: City of Renton Building and Zoning Department 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): A portion of proposed Phase I is already being excavated pursuant to Special Permit SP-019-84. Excavation of proposed Phase I is scheduled to be completed by August 1, 1986. Refilling of Phase I is scheduled to be completed by August 1, 1988. Excavation of proposed Phase II is scheduled to begin when Phase I excavation nears completion. Phase II excavation is scheduled to be completed by August 1, 1988. Refilling of Phase II is scheduled to be completed by August 1, 1990. r • f 7.Do you have any p for future additions, expansions. _ further activity related. to or connected with this proposal? if yes, explain. No. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Environmental checklist submitted to the Building and Zoning Department on February 2, 1984 by a previous applicant who applied for and received a Special Permit (SP-019-84) for a portion of the filling and grading encompassed by this proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Annual filling and grading licenses to be issued by the Building and Zoning Department pursuant to the sought after special permit. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The thrust of the proposal is 1) removal of commercially marketable sands and gravels from the site; and 2) after such removal, filling the site back to approximately original grade with construction project-generated excess soil materials and debris. (Greenwood Memorial Cemetery plans to use the refilled areas for gravesites.) 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topography map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The proposal is located at the Greenwood Cemetery at the southeast and southwest corners of the cemetery's property. The cemetery's street address is 3401 N.E. 4th St. The proposal will involve portions of Tracts A, B, C, D, H & I of the Plat of Greenwood Cemetery, according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 22 of Plats, page 35, records of King County, Washington (being a portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northeast quarter, Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , the initial point for which Northwest corner of the plat is 30 feet south and 30 feet east of the north quarter post of Section 16.) B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Gently sloping b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? See addendum. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, caly, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Sands and gravels d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. 2 - e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. See addendum. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. Erosion problems are not expected because of the sandy/gravelly material and because the cut/fill grades will prevent surface runoff from flowing onto adjacent properties. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? None of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces upon completion of the project. However, the cemetery plans to use the refilled areas for future gravesites, and development of these areas for that purpose may entail extension of existing h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the asphalt earth, if any:access drives. No such measures are necessary because of this project's nature. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Dust and truck exhaust emissions will be generated by the excavation and filling operation. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission? Trucks enroute to and from the site will generate exhaust emissions. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Wetting down exposed soil areas that are being worked on during dry weather to reduce dust generation if unreasonable quantities of dust are geing generated. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. No. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. 3 - 4) Will the propusdi require surface water withdrawa1b or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximately quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and appaoximately quantities if known. The existing groundwater pattern will be substantially maintained by installation of dry wells required by the City of Renton Engineering Department. These dry wells are scheduled to be installed during the refilling of each phase. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Rainfall striking the site will continue to partially evaporate and partially absorb into the ground. (Apparently no runoff currently flows from the site.) 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. 4 - d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Drywells required by the Renton Engineering Department shall be installed during the refilling of the site to mitigate any impacts upon groundwater recharge. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: o deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other cc evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other cc Shrubs X grass o crop or grain o Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other o water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other o other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? The proposed Phase I area has had all vegetation removed in the past except for the douglas fir trees and underbrush in the proposed 30-foot setback areas. The existing grass covering the Phase II area will be removed. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Upon completion of the refilling of each phase, Greenwood Memorial Cemetery intends to establish lawn and other landscaping appropriate for gravesite areas. 5. Animals a.. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: Hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Unknown. S - d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Diesel fuel will be used to power the trucks and equipment used to excavate the sands/gravels and refill the excavated areas. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. 6 - 2) What types and levals of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. During excavation, noise will be generated by a front-end loader and dump trucks. During refilling, noise will be generated by a bulldozer and dump trucks. Noise would come from the site during the pit's hours of operation, which are proposed as 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: The fact that the excavation and refilling operation will be substantially below adjacent grade during all but the beginning of the excavation and the end of the refilling means that abutting properties will be substantially shielded from noise during most of the project's limited life. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? See addendum. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c:. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? G-1, general use f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Public/quasi-public g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A 7 - 1. Proposed measui-us to ensure the proposal is compa_....e with existing and ' projected land uses and plans, if any: Refilling of the areas to be mined will permit cemetery use of those areas. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. No structures are proposed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? See addendum. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: See addendum. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: N/A 8 - 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: N/A 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Monroe Ave. N.E. and N.E. 2nd Street abut the west and south boundaries of the proposal, respectively. Access for both Phase I and II is proposed at the existing curbcut/driveway apron on Monroe Ave. N.E. , which is currently providing access to the current excavation of Phase I pursuant to Special Permit SP-019- b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximately 84. distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe indicate whether public or private). No. 9 - e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vici _ of) water, rail, or • air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. See addendum. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: See addendum 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. N/A 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: le ect city, natural gas, water refuse servic e ephone, sanitary sewer septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. No utilities are proposed for the project. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: David L. Halinen, P.E. 10 - 176 11-8-84 Pr ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST GREENWOOD CEMETERY GRAVEL PIT) B.1.b. The steepest slope on the site is about 10%, except in the area where excavation has started pursuant to Special Permit SP-019-84 and except along portions of the south and east boundaries of proposed Phase II. The slopes in those two are estimated to be between 50% and 100%. B.1.e. The total amount of commercially marketable sands and gravels now estimated to have been available within the proposed phases is 380,000 cubic yards. It is estimated that by September 1, 1985, approximately 100,000 cubic yards will have been removed from the portion of proposed Phase I that is currently being excavated pursuant to Special Permit SP-019-84, leaving approximately 280,000 cubic yards total (100,000 cubic yards in Phase I and 180,000 cubic yards in Phase II) left to be excavated. Material that will be used to refill the site will be excess material taken from numerous construction projects within the general vicinity of the City of Renton. 8.a. The site itself is a part of the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery. To the west of Phase I, an exhausted gravel pit lies across Monroe Avenue N.E. To the south of Phase I, the King County Public Works Shop Facilities and the Renton District Court lie across N.E. 2nd Street. Adjacent to Phase II, "The Court" Apartments currently abut 213 feet of the north portion of the Phase II east boundary. The site north of "The Court" parcel contains the maintenance shops for the Greenwood Memorial Cemetery. Approximately the south 316 feet of the Phase II east boundary abuts two currently undeveloped parcels. The City of Renton Public Works Department Maintenance Shop facilities lie adjacent to the Phase II south boundary. The Leisure Estates" residential development lies south of the undeveloped parcels and east of the Public Works Department Maintenance Shops to the southeast of Phase II. 10.b. and 10.c. Most of the west edge of Phase I is already well-screened by a stand of douglas firs with underbrush that exists within the 30-foot slope setback. The west 255 feet of the south boundary of Phase I is similarly screened. The areas along the west and south Phase I boundaries that are not screened by this vegetation are proposed to be screened by slatted chain- link fencing. The only existing projects that have any potentially close views of the Phase II operation are "The Court" Apartments and the Renton Public Works Maintenance Shops. Along the Phase II east boundary with "The Court," the cemetery property grade currently varies from being the same grade as "The Court" parcel at the north end of the common boundary to about 10 feet lower than "The Court" parcel at the south end of the common boundary. A chain-link fence currently exists along the top edge of this slope with a dense strip of 4-foot to 6-foot high scotch broom on the cemetery side of the fence. This slope and scotch broom strip screens the proposed Phase II site from The Court's" existing adjacent parking lot and the lowest floor of "The Court's" nearest three-story apartment building. The top floor and probably the second floor of that building will be able to view Phase II operations, at least those occurring near the top of the excavation and subsequent refill. Most of the Phase II site already cannot be seen from the Renton Public Works Maintenance Shops because of the existing scotch broom along the Phase II site's south boundary. To provide screening along the west 100 feet of the Phase II south boundary, an area which does not have existing features that screen the site from the Maintneance Shops, slats in the existing chain-link boundary fence are proposed during the period of Phase II operation. 14.f. and 14.g. Because the "completed project" will simply be refilling the areas to be excavated back to approximately existing grade, no vehicular trips will strictly be generated by the completed project. However, the proposal will generate truck traffic associated with the proposed excavation and refilling operations. r ( ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ADDENDUM, PAGE 2 OF 3) r._ Such short term traffic generation can be conservatively estimated by making the following assumptions: 1) Each truck/trailer combination handles 18 cubic yards of material 2) During the excavation of either phase, each truck/trailer combination will arrive at the site empty and leave full. During the refilling of either phase, each truck/trailer combination will arrive at the site full and leave empty. This is a conservative assumption because in actuality, the refilling of a portion of the site will at times occur simultaneously with the excavation of another portion of the site. Thus, some of the incoming trucks will bring in refill material, leave it at the site, and then take out sand/gravel.) 3) The pit will only operate 200 days per year. Applying these assumptions to the proposed schedule in section A.6 and to the volumes of excavation and refill described in section B.1.e, the project's estimated average daily truck traffic generation is as follows: Phase I Excavation: 100,000 cubic yards 18 cubic yards per truck trip 1 X ( 200 operating days per year) (11/12 years) 30.3 truck trips per day Refilling: 200,000 cubic yards 18 cubic yards per truck trip 1 X ( 200 operating days per year) (2 years) 27.8 truck trips per day Phase II Excavation: 180,000 cubic yards 18 cubic yards per truck trip 1 X ( 200 operating days per year) (2 years) 25 truck trips per day Refilling: 180,000 cubic yards 18 cubic yards per truck trip 1 X ( 200 operating days per year) (2 years) 25 truck trips per day Because Phase I refilling is proposed for the same period as Phase II excavating, the average operation-day truck-trip generation for that period could be as high as 27.8 + 25 = 52.8 truck trips per day. However, as noted in assumption 2, above, to the extent that incoming trucks during this period bring in refill and leave with sand/gravel, the actual average truck-trip generation will be lower. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ADDENDUM, PAGE 3 OF 3) To mitigate the impact of truck-trip generation, during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. trucks heading for or leaving the site will not be permitted to use Cemetery Hill Road (N.E. 3rd St./ N.E. 4th St.) west of Monroe Avenue N.E. According to Mr. Gary Norris, City of Renton Traffic Engineer, this limitation will avoid detrimental impact upon the traffic congestion that occurs during those hours at the intersection of Cemetery Hill Road with Sunset Boulevard. Instead of using Cemetery Hill Road, trucks wishing to use Interstate 405 during those hours will use Sunset Boulevard (Exit 5) instead because it has less traffic congestion. ENDING OF FILE FILE TITLE A/IYACtl (56:*22& 6ROeM5 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE COPIES TO: AIRPORT o BUILDING/ZONING DEPARTMENT CITY ATTORNEY n 07- CITY COUNCIL 0 ENGINEERING v m FINANCE DEPARTMENT o, HEARING EXAMINER vi MAYOR PARK DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT o POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT o I PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CODIFIER INSURANCE CARRIER PETITIONER/APPLICANT I RECORD CHRONICLE (PRESS) / 09/IN/n/ 7 ,u1/ti9l vN V F,e>eS o F MCap